Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutR-2003-131 Larson Park Property Transfer (Noel Field)RESOLUTION NO. R-2003- 131 A RESOLUTION authorizing and directing the transfer of a portion of Larson Park to Yakima Valley Community College, and authorizing and directing the City Manager of the City of Yakima to execute all necessary documents with and in favor of Yakima Valley Community College necessary to transfer said property to Yakima Valley Community College. WHEREAS, on June 5, 2003, the Washington State Legislature passed Substitute Senate Bill 5401 and appropriated a total of $120,000 for the purchase by Yakima Valley Community College (YVCC") from the City of Yakima of a portion of Larson Park commonly known as "Noel Field" and located in the vicinity of South 16th Avenue and Arlington Street, Yakima, Washington; and WHEREAS, on June 5, 2003, the Washington State Legislature passed Substitute Senate Bill 5401 and appropriated a total of $230,000 to be provided "solely to the city of Yakima to replace and relocate Ballfields;" and WHEREAS, the Washington State Legislature conditioned the distribution of said $350,000 to the City of Yakima upon completion of the transfer of the Noel Field property to Yakima Valley Community College; and WHEREAS, the City and YVCC understand that distribution and payment of said $350,000 dollars to the City would constitute full value and consideration for the transfer of Noel Field to YVCC; and WHEREAS, the City Council deems it to be in the best interests of the City of Yakima to authorize the transfer of a portion of Larson Park commonly known as Noel Field to Yakima Valley Community College, and authorize and direct the City Manager of the City of Yakima to execute all necessary documents with and in favor of Yakima (1k)res/YVCC Noel Field 10-21-03.ptm Valley Community College necessary to transfer said property to Yakima Valley Community College, now, therefore, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF YAKIMA: 1. In consideration of a payment of $350,000 to the City of Yakima, the transfer of a portion of Larson Park commonly known as "Noel Field" and located in the vicinity of South 16th Avenue and Arlington Street, Yakima, Washington from the City of Yakima to Yakima Valley Community College is hereby authorized and directed. 2. The City Manager of the City of Yakima is hereby authorized and directed to execute all necessary documents with and in favor of Yakima Valley Community College necessary to transfer of said property to Yakima Valley Community College. The final form of such documents shall be subject to approval of the City Attorney. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this 21st day of October, 2003. ATTEST: City Clerk (lk)res/YVCC Noel Field 10-21-03.ptm /7%--( y Place, Mayor DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Planning Division 129 North Second Street Yakima, Washington 98901 Denise Nichols Phone (509) 575-6183 o Fax (509) 575-6105 Parks and Recreation NOTICE OF DECISION Compliance with the Washington State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) October 3, 2003 On September 10, 2003 the City of Yakima, Washington issued a Notice of Amended Application for Environmental Review regarding an Environmental Checklist submitted by the City of Yakima Parks and Recreation Division and Yakima Valley Community College. This application concerns the transfer of portions of Larson Park from the City to the College. The property under consideration is located south of Arlington Street and north of Yakima Valley Community College, between 12`h and 16th Ave, Yakima, WA. Parcel Numbers: City File Number 181325-23007 and 181325-23006 UAZO EC#17-03 Following the required 20 -day public comment period, and consideration of all comments received, the City of Yakima has issued the enclosed SEPA Threshold Determination and issuance of a (MDNS) Mitigated Deteimination of Nonsignificance. The SEPA Deteiuiination may be appealed within 15 days from the date of this mailing. Appeals must be in writing and on forms available from the City of Yakima Planning Division, 129 North 2nd Street, Yakima, Washington. The filing fee of $295.00 must accompany the Appeal application. For further infoiiiiation or assistance, you may wish to contact Bruce Benson, Supervising Associate Planner at (509) 575-6042 at the City Planning Division. Doug Maples Planning & Code Administration Manager Notice of Decision Mailing Date: October 3, 2003 Enclosures: SEPA Deteiiiiination of Nonsignificance and Vicinity and Mailing Maps Yakima 111- Uhl 1994 WASHINGTON STATE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT MITIGATED DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE CITY OF YAKIMA, WASHINGTON October 3, 2003 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Transfer of City of Yakima owned property to Yakima Valley Community College. PROPONENTS: City of Yakima and Yakima Valley Community College LOCATION: The property lying southerly of Arlington Street and northerly of Yakima Valley Community College between South 16th and 12th Avenues. CO -LEAD AGENCIES: City of Yakima, Washington. Yakima Valley Community College DETKRMINA-T-ION: The lead agency for this proposal,, after --reviewing the— Environmental Checklist and related information, has determined that the transfer of property does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. and an environmental impact statement (EIS) will not be required as provided under RCW 432 1 C.030(2)(c). This Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance (MDNS) is hereby conditioned upon the following mitigating measures, as authorized under WAC 197-11-660 and YMC 6.88.160 (B)5 as supported by these findings and policies: FINDINGS: 1. Certain transfers of real property are subject to the provisions of WAC 197-11- 800(5)(c); and thereby require that an environmental checklist be circulated for review prior to the issuance of a SEPA threshold decision. 2. The proposed land transfers are consistent with the Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan's Goals and Policies. 3. The site is zoned R-2, Two -Family Residential wherein colleges are a peuuitted Class (3) land. Class (3) land uses can only be expanded or modified by the hearing examiner following a public hearing on the proposal. 4. This Determination is based upon the land transfer and subsequent development proceeding in full compliance with all applicable regulations and standards. Deviation from established development regulations may result in a requirement for additional environmental review. 5. Transportation Capacity Analysis was not required for this land transfer, but will be a requirement for new facility construction. 6. Area -wide recreational facilities, affected by this transfer of property to the college, will be replaced by similar facilities at Kiwanis Park and Kissel Park. A soccer field will be added to the college where one does not now exist. POLICIES: 1. The City of Yakima's Parks and Recreation Five -Year Comprehensive Plan, adopted by the City Council on June 6, 2000, and included by reference in the Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan, references and plans for this transfer of real property. 2. The College's Master Plan references and plans for this transfer of real property, which has been made possible with support from the state legislature. MITIGATION MEASURES: 1. Additional project -level land use reviews will be required for future construction projects on the College campus. 2. SEPA review of college projects will occur at the time of application. Applications • will be reviewed for consistency with adopted City pians, and where appropriate, mitigation of impacts or modification to the project plans will be required to ensure consistency. These standards are acknowledged by this MDNS, but are not made conditional to this determination. 3. Noel Field shall remain open for public use as is stated in the YVCC Master Plan. UAZO EC #17-03 MDNS — City/YVCC Land Transfer 4. This.decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request. This MDNS is issued under WAC 197-11-355, Optional DNS process. There will be no additional comment period for this MDNS. APPEALS: This determination may be appealed pursuant to YMC §6.88.170 to the Yakima City Council, 129 North 2nd Street, Yakima WA 98901 in writing no later than fifteen (15) days after the date of mailing. Be prepared to make factual objections. Contact Bruce Benson, Supervising Senior Planner at (509) 575-6164 for more information. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIALS: William Cook, Director (509) 575-6113 129 North 2nd Street, Yakima, WA 98901 DATE: October 3, 2003 SIGNATURE/ `William Cook, Direetar'Commum & Economic Development, SEPA Res sible Official Linda Kaminsky, President (509) 574-4635 1107 S 16th Avenue, Yakima WA 98902 SIGNATURE;' /lei i da Kaminsky, President, Yakima Valley Community College, SEPA Responsible Official UAZO EC #17-03 MDNS — City/YVCC Land Transfer 1 a • I �e�MtK1aJ-1AN} --i ST -IEL ENS STREET ARLNGTON STREET E 1 591 W NOR HILL BLVD 'AAC LAHEN STREET ;vent ST 110.1. CITY OF YAKIMA, WASHINGTON VICINITY MAP FILE NO: UAZO EC#17-03 APPLICANT: CITY OF YAKIMA, PARKS & RECREATION REQUEST: ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW LOCATION VICINITY ARLINGTON & S. 16TH AVE. VIOL/5 AVt r Subject Property Yakima City Limits Scale —I in = 500tt 0 250 '0° EC -17-03 09/10/03 MACLAREN STREET DOONE AVENUE BLVD TOWARD LANE tra 1016.'11014 1016 111015 11032 11017 , 11018 11020 11019 1 28 . 11021 1 11022 025 11024 11023 ,n4_Q ,14535,;14524; 1-R14;a7z- 114534 14525 8 44954398 549453 :_l_4%.3 -145213-1i-31-4-516'4527 i 14 '14441 14. .14442!1 144 0 14449 1 14445 14448 14446 ; 14447' 11029 4550 4463 1 4462. 4461 4460 •4459' 122q�p122q57 �p4477a�� 5 TTEL ENS STRRET --2T460-468 `2_2�247H20 6 12244521142-42V458 : 22454 22469 122475. ;22487 12pgA3' 22465 ' 122476 -ZZ45�ZZ460 � , ,�471 ! `22aa63 X2495 2i5da.' !22455'122461! 122466!172472' ;2259311224841 122490"21496 N.21542 ARLINGTON STREET . 23 l 24521 '24533 24526 24520 ! 24535 : 24527' !+o 24528 ,1245291 124 23006 124531 24530 . 14400 :144 19 45t44111'4aa401 1441444 13 1 1440A402 I 141552 144144p4 111 4498 14497 ' 14487 • 1114499 14496 14488' 14495 14489 •I14500 '< 14494 14490 ,-, 14493 '14491 .14501 Z. 14492 124467; 24466 12 124468 i 124469 124471 22411001 '245921124473! ;245931: 24474 1 2444 245,145W4n ' 12444 24479 1 24478 1 24.45 1 24480 ' 24481 1 2445b ! 24483 124482 ! 244 24504585.85 4109\ W Prat i Ave Grant St 1 41001 41094 - 411131 41010 4, W NOS HALL BLVD 1, 32405 24521199 2 24502 1 24503 ' ! 24490 . 24505 ! 24504 .. 244 24, s° 8 24 98 488 1 32455255$1441647 1 3144N914 325631 ' ' :31442' 32550 1 34,4', 31595 is - 32553 `31595' ..31448 01443 32447324402443315801 ' 31576' -'-315711 32549 32441 PU601 AVENUE 436 ,ARNES SIRES- .EV TREE =EV S`RET BAKER STREET STEWART STREET al War raMC CITY OF YAKIMA, WASHINGTON FILE NO• UAZO EC#17-03 APPLICANT. CITY OF YAKIMA, PARKS & RECREATION REQUEST: ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW LOCATION. VICINITY ARLINGTON & S. 16TH AVE. PARCEL NUMBER(S)-18132523007 18132523008 Notified Property Owners within 500 Ft Subject Property eta Aad p i Scale -ILn=50011 0 250 5(H) EC -17-03 09/10/03 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Planning Divisio,r 129 North Second Street Yakima, Washington 98901 Phone (509) 575-6183 • Fax (509) 575-6105 DATE: September 10, 2003 TO: Applicants, SEPA Reviewing Agencies, Adjoining Property Owners and Parties of Record FROM: Doug Maples, Building Codes and Planning Manager SUBJECT: Notice of Amended Application for Environmental Review, UAZO EC #17- 03 NOTICE OF APPLICATION The City of Yakima Department of Community & Economic Development has received an amended environmental checklist from the City of Yakima Parks and Recreation Division and Yakima Valley Community College concerning the transfer of portions of Larson Park from the City to the College. This site is zoned R-2, Two-family residential, wherein both the park and college are approved land uses. These transfers are subject to the provisions of RCW 197-11-800 (5) (c); and thereby require that an environmental checklist be circulated for review and comment for 20 days prior to the issuance of a SEPA threshold decision. The file containing the complete application is available for public review at the City of Yakima Planning Division, 2nd floor City Hall, 129 North 2nd Street, Yakima, Washington. REQUEST FOR WRITTEN COMMENTS Your views on the proposal are welcome. All written comments received by September 30, 2003 will be considered prior to issuing the final SEPA determination on this application. Please mail your comments on this project to: Doug Maples, Building Codes and Planning Manager City of Yakima, Department of Community & Economic Development 129 North 2nd Street Yakima, Washington 98901. Be sure to reference file number or applicants name in your correspondence. NOTICE OF DECISION A copy of the decision will be mailed to you after the end of the 20 -day comment period. If you have any question on this proposal, please call Bruce Benson, Senior Planner at (509) 575-6042. Other Permits Required: None at this time. Encl.: SEPA Checklist Yakima t+d 15 September 2003 Doug Maples Building Codes and Planning Manager City of Yakima 129 North 2nd Street Yakima, WA 98901 RE: Amended Application Environmental Review, UAZO EC #17-03 SEP .l 6 200, p/14 The proposed replacement structure for Anthon and Glen Halls at three stories or 65 feet high will destroy the aesthetics of the neighborhood and is not in keeping with other structures and residences. The heig.lt of the building(s) should not exceed two stories. Lois Barnett 916 S. 17th Avenue Yakima, WA 98902 15 September 2003 Doug Maples Building Codes and Planning Manager City of Yakima 129 North 2nd Street Yakima, 'A 98901 RECeivFn SEP 1 7 2003 PLRNN Aa -'; 4 SUBJECT: Environmental Review Amended Application, UAZO EC #17-03. The proposed replacement structure for Anthon and Glen Halls will be in an R-2 zone. According to Table 5-1, Yakima Urban Area Zoning Ordinance, the mg:x:mum building height in an R-2 zone is 35 feet. The proposed replacement structure of a three story building at 65 feet should be denied as it exceeds code. The height of the building should not exceed 35 feet. larence arnett 916 S. 17th Avenue Yakima, WA 98902 RECEIVED SEP 30Z003 CITY OF PLANNING DIV, SEP ;' � zop3 GODS N'gWRIS`fRATION 1002 S 18 Ave Yakima, WA 98902 September 9, 2003 Doug Maples, Building Codes and Planning Manager City of Yakima, Dept of Community & Economic Development 129 North 2nd Street Yakima, WA 98901 UA2-D EC4 n---03 Dear Mr. Maples: I oppose the transfer, past or future, of any parts of our Larson Park to YVCC, which can grow just fine in other directions without taking our green space and recreational opportunities. Rose Larson left this park to all of us FOREVER in 1937. Just because the latest YVCC president and her supporters chose to rudely brush off this commitment as an impediment to their Grand Design doesn't mean the City of Yakima has to cave in and accommodate their arrogance. The Deccio-Kaminski steamroller has amazingly intimidated so many people at city hall into believing that this theft is the only way they can grow. Phooey. As recently as May, 2002, they had planned to replace Anthon and Sundquist Halls with one building on the present Sundquist site. (See attached) What happened to that plan? Sounds reasonable. They also have plans to remove all of the affordable housing between 12th Ave and Queen and Arlington and Prasch. That is a lot of land. (See attached) More than enough to build a replacement for Anthon and Glenn with parking. There is room on the current main campus to build a replacement for Glenn, Anthon and Palmer without disturbing any classes. And there would be even more green space than now. THEY DO HAVE MANY OTHER OPTIONS. No student is going to miss any opportunities because YVCC doesn't build on OUR ballfields — and YVCC knows it. This is not about education. This is about politics, egos and appearances. SEP 3 0 2003 I am once again submitting the names of over 70 neighbors I contacted /ANN/ � between city council meetings in November and December of 2002 who do N° 0'v ° NOT want to lose our public ballfields. You seem bent on establishing new parks on the edges of town while trying bit -by -bit to wipe out long-established, all-purpose Larson Park with the excuse that the facilities are old and we might as well give them away. There seem to be pots of money available to defend the Congdon Orchard decision and to pay off Union Gap residents in the stinky sewer plant lawsuit. I do not believe there is no money to upgrade and maintain Larson Park ballfields. If Daryl Parker had said NO, we would not be discussing this. The whole tone of the September 10 amended application memo is slanted toward the college. This resident and taxpayer resents it. One example% page 23, paragraph 2, "maintenance redundancy." The city has to mow lots of teensy little pocket parks all over town, like Portia, as well as Larson Park. If those aren't a problem, neither is Noel. Another example, same page and paragraph: "Continued use of Noel field, even if the City retains ownership, for leagues and tournaments, is unlikely." Well, sure, if that is your underlying plan in order to try to force people to give up, but it doesn't have to happen that way. YVCC wants this land, but does not need it. We need this greenspace and the recreational opportunities. Rose Larson gave it to us. A deal is a deal. Do not sell out the rest of our ballfields. incerely, Nancy Kendrick CITY OF YAKIMA Noel Field Land Transfer ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Environmental Checklist for Noel Field Land Transfer Proponent City of Yakima September 2003 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: Noel Field Land Transfer 2. Name of proposer: City of Yakima 3. Address and phone number of proposer(s) and contact person(s): Applicant (Proposer) Contact: Applicant (Proposer) Contact: Name Chris Waarvick Title Public Works Director Address 2301 Fruitvale Blvd Yakima WA Zip 98902 Phone (509) 575-6005 Name Linda Kaminski Title President, Yakima Valley Community College Address 1107 S 16t Avenue Yakima WA Zip 98902 Phone (509) 574-4635 4. Date checklist prepared: September 10, 2003 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Yakima, Department of Community & Economic Development 129 North 2"d Street Yakima, WA 98901 6. Proposed timing or Schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Approval of the land transfer by the Yakima City Council is scheduled for late 2003. Completion of the land transfer is scheduled for within 60 day of approval. 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. Yakima Parks and Recreation and the City of Yakima have no pians for future additions, expansions or further activity on the portions of Larson Park that have been used for tennis and softball except for the possible use of Noel field for adult softball league play while new fields are being constructed at Kiwanis Park. Environmental Checklist — City of Yakima/Yakima Valley Community College Page 1 Yakima Valley Community College's current Master Plan. completed in 1998, indicates that Noel Field will be retained as an open walk-on softbalUsoccer field throughout the Iife of their 20 -year plan. 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or would be prepared, directly related to this proposal. No further applications will be filed in conjunction with the change in ownership of Noel Field. YVCC is expected to complete an update of its 1998 Master Plan later this year. Adoption of the Plan will undergo SEPA review as a non -project action. The impacts of future construction projects on the transferred properties will be discussed as part of that review. Project -level applications were submitted as part of the development of the higher education center constructed by YVCC. Additional project -level applications will be submitted as required with any and all future proposals. Environmental analysis of those projects will occur at that time. 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. No applications are currently pending. Future land use or construction permit applications will be submitted when building projects are proposed by YVCC. List any government approvals or permits that would be needed for your proposal, if known. City Council approval of the property transfer is the only approval required. 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. This current proposal is the transfer of ownership of Noel Field from the City of Yakima to Yakima Valley Community College. Noel Field lies on the northwest corner of Larson Park. This is the third in a series of transactions called out in the Parks and Recreation Five -Year Comprehensive Plan adopted by the City Council on June 6, 2000, and included by reference in the Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan. In 1999, the City sold land to the college on which 12 City tennis courts and one softball field were located. At the end of 2002, the Yakima City Council approved transfer of ownership for Dunbar Field and Field #4 to YVCC. The total area transferred from the City to the college with the three actions is 12 contiguous acres. The current and past land transfers also support the College's Master Plan, first adopted in 1998 and now undergoing an update. YVCC, in conjunction with Washington State University and Central Washington University and with support from the state legislature, began a major campus expansion in 1998. The land transfers are intended to assist implementation of that program. Both the City's Park Plan and its Comprehensive Plan call for capital improvements to other park facilities in the community. New City ball fields are being constructed at Kiwanis Park on Fair Avenue to replace those transferred to Yakima Valley Community College. A 12 -court tennis campus has been included in 10. } Environmental Checklist — City of Yakima/Yakima Valley Community College Page 2 the construction of 17 -acre Kissel Park at Mead and 32nd Avenues. about a mile and a half west of Lar Park. YVCC plans to maintain softball fields on Dunbar and Noel and to add a soccer field on Noel F, The cumulative effect of the land transfer and other park development programs is a net gain in recreational of ___ ball fields and a replacement courts_ These effects were acreage, a decrease two vat► ticiu� one-to-one replacement of tennis __. _ _ anticipated in the Comprehensive Park Plan. Additional project -level applications will be required for future construction projects on the College campus, Environmental analyses of those projects will occur at the time of application. Applications will be reviewed for consistency with adopted City plans, and where appropriate, mitigation of impacts or modification to the project plans will be required to ensure consistency. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township,ajid r nge, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. The property under consideration lies south of Arlington Street and north of Yakima Valley Community College between South 16th and 12th Avenues on parcels numbered 181325-23007 and 181325-23006. Legal descriptions and maps follow at the end of this checklist. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. EARTH a. General description of the site (circle one): Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other. a. General description of the site (one): Ai Flat ❑ Rolling 0 Steep dopes a Mountainous 0 Hilly ❑ vher b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? Property is flat with no appreciable slope. c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. Subject soils are identified as Naches loam, typical of soil deposited by rivers and floods over time. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. There is no known history of unstable soils in this area. Environmental Checklist — City of Yakima/Yakima Valley Community College Page 3 The sites of projects included in the YVCC Master Plan would be reviewed for their topographic features during project -specific environmental review. b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? Property is flat with no appreciable slope. c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. Subject soils are identified as Naches loam, typical of soil deposited by rivers and floods over time. The property is in an urban setting. No farmlands are present. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. There is no known history of unstable soils in this area. e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. The change in possession, in and of itself, does not generate additions, expansions or further activity necessitating grading or filling. Use of adjacent land indicates the subject land will support construction and development. Additional fill is not expected to be needed for the sports fields. Local structural fill was installed for construction of the higher education building and parking lot on the initial portion of property transferred to the college in 1999. Projects proposed for the land will require local permits, which will be reviewed for their grading impacts during project -specific environmental review. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. The change in possession, in and of itself, does not generate additions, expansions or further activity necessitating clearing. It is expected Field #4 will be cleared when new construction begins. Erosion has not and is not expected to occur due to the flat and somewhat sheltered nature of the site. Projects proposed for the land will be reviewed for their clearing impacts during project -specific environmental review. g. About what percent of the site would be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? The change in possession, in and of itself, does not generate additions, expansions or further activity resulting in a change in impervious surface levels. Approximately 65 percent of the land transferred to the college in the first transaction was covered with impervious surface — about 15 percent more than before the original transfer. Environmental Checklist —City of Yakima/Yakima Valley Community College Page 4 Roughly 10 percent_ of Dunbar Field is covered. Field #4 and Noel Field will be left as is until constructir- begins on a portion of Field #4. The replacement facility is anticipated to cover approximately 15 perc of Field #4. This leaves 85 percent of that field in use for recreation or green space. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: d f r theland will be reviewed for their erosion impacts No special measures required. Projects proposed for during project -specific environmental review. Mitigation measurescould be required at that time, if necessary. 2. AIR a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile, .._.,r;, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. The change in pnceession, in and of itself, does not generate additions, expansions or further activity resulting in a change in air quality. As long as Noel Field, Dunbar Field and Field #4 remain as sports fields, the only anticipated emissions would be from field maintenance equipment and this would remain consistent with past practice. When Field #4 is developed, emissions associated with construction would result. Proposed projects will be reviewed by the Lead Agency for their air quality impacts. b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. None known. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: No special measures required. Projects proposed for the land will be reviewed for their air quality impacts during project -specific environmental review. Mitigation measures could be required at that time, if necessary. 3. WATER a. Surface: 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, and wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. No 2) Would the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the descr waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. Environmental Checklist —City of Yakima/Yakima Valley Community College Page 5 No 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. Not Applicable 4) Would the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100 -year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. No 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. No Ground: 1) Would ground water be withdrawn, or would water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. The change in possession, in and of itself, does not generate additions, expansions or further activity resulting in a change in groundwater discharges or withdrawals. Projects included in the YVCC Master Plan may withdraw or discharge to ground water. The impacts will be identified during project -specific environmental review. Should Yakima Valley Community College continue to use the property as an athletic field, it is safe to assume regular irrigation of the turf will continue. Irrigation of landscaped areas in other property previously transferred to the college occurs in accordance with landscaping standards. Current runoff in the vicinity is associated with the building and the parking lot. It is collected in catch basins and inlets and conveyed to infiltration trenches for discharge into highly permeable soils. 2) Describe waste material that would be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals...; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. Environmental Checklist —City of Yakima/Yakima Valley Community College Page 6 Waste materials will not be discharged into Noel Field or any of the other landscaped propert\ ref to in this checklist. City sewer hook-ups will handle waste materials from the restrooms at Dunbar 1- and in the higher education center. c. Water Runoff (including storm water): Describe soirce of runoff lincfnding etnrm water) anti method of cnidectinn and disposai, if j/LrJLr1lVL. the uvva�.r va •vuvwa `a v.r....+t, ..-... �. .. ��-.� ��� ..-�..� .�--__--__-__ ____ � any (include quantities, if known). Where would this water flow? Would this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. Storm water has been allowed to disperse into the sports fields' turf and ground except in the case of the building and parking lot, where run-off is collected in catch basins for retention in infiltration trenches. 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. No d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: None proposed beyond what has been mentioned before. Potential mitigation measures to control or reduce runoff will be addressed during project -specific environmental review. 4. PLANTS a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: deciduous trees: ❑ alder maple ❑ aspen Ai other: elm evergreen trees: ❑ fir ❑ cedar ❑ pine ❑ other: shrubs ❑ grass (cheat grass) AI grass (turf) ❑ pasture crop or grain wet soil plants: ❑ cattail ❑ buttercup ❑ bulrush ❑ skunk cabbage ❑ other: weeds water plants: ❑ water lily ❑ eelgrass ❑ milfoil ❑ other types of vegetation: b. What kind and amount of vegetation would be removed or altered? The proposed transfer of Noel Field is not expected to require removal or alteration of vegetation. The transfer of Dunbar Field did not create a need for that either. The first transfer of property called for removal of half a dozen mature elms to accommodate the new building and roadway. Turf on Field #2 was replaced with asphalt paving with landscaped islands. When development begins on Field #4, turf in that area will be removed. It is expected, as in the case of the parking lot, that new landscaping will help offset loss of green space. In addition, green space recovered by the demolition of two existing buildings will more than offset the loss of the 15 percent green space required by the replacement facility. (See Discussion, Section 12.b "Recreation") Environmental Checklist —City of Yakima/Yakima Valley Community College Page 7 List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site, if any: A number of plants in the Yakima Valley have been identified as threatened or endangered: Columbia Mill. - Vetch, Clustered Lady's Slipper, Basalt Daisy, Kalm's Lobelia. Hoover's Desert -Parsley, Pale Blue-Eed Grass and Hoover's Tauschia. Existence of these plants at this site has not been reported and is unlikely. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: Landscaping was included in the development of the new higher education center and parking lot and will be part of the site design for the new building that will use a portion of Field #4. The sports fields have been and will be left basically as is. 5. ANIMALS a. Circle any birds and animals, which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: 1. birds: 7 hawk 1 heron ` eagle "V songbirds NI other: pigeons, robins, crows 2. mammals: 1 deer . 1 bear . = elk ❑ beaver a other: skunk 3. fish: 7 bass 7 salmon/steelhead 0 trout/bull trout 11 herring L shellfish Other Inventories of existing species have been or would be developed during project -specific level environmental review. b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None known. There are a number of endangered or threatened species in the upper Yakima Valley: Bald Eagle, Ferruginous Hawk, Golden Eagle, Great Blue Heron, Prairie Falcon and Ring -Necked Snake in addition to varieties of salmon and steelhead. Larson Park and Yakima Valley Community College do not lie in identified breeding or communal roosting areas or in areas of observed presence. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. While it is possible a migrating bird might fly over Noel Field, Larson Park and Yakima Valley Community College, the site is no more part of a migration route than any other part of the City of Yakima. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: None proposed. Mitigation measures to preserve or enhance wildlife will be determined at the project level environmental review for future YVCC projects. Environmental Checklist —City of Yakima/Yakima Valley Community College Page 8 6. ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) would be used to meet trye completed prniert'c energy needs? Describe whether it would be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. ElElectricity is required on Noel Field as well as Dunbar Field, Field #4 and the parking lot for automated ectricity a....J ..Y-�.� irrigation and lighting for the parking lot, ball fields and concession facility. The higher education center requires electricity for interior and exterior lighting. It also uses gas for heating water and air. There will be a reduction in electrical needs when some lights are removed from Field #4 and Noel Field to accommodate the proposed soccer field. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. No c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List of other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: Lighting on Noel Field, Dunbar and Field #2 is the existing and outdated lighting that has been at the park for many years. The higher education center employs a DDC -controlled heating system selected on the basis of results of an energy life cycle cost analysis. A variety of methods have been employed to ensure electrical lighting efficiency for the building and parking lot. The proposed facility will be significantly more energy efficient than the rein Q tinnaterl facilitiPc hYPinc rPnhh Ced 7. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so describe. Generally speaking, environmental health hazards are not an issue associated with the proposed transfer of Noel Field and the previous property transfers to the college. 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. No special or unusual emergency services are anticipated. 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: None proposed b. Noise Environmental Checklist —City of Yakima/Yakima Valley Community College Page 9 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, aircraft, other? The change in possession, in and of itself, does not create noise impacts. Projects proposed for the land will require local permits, which will be reviewed for their noise impacts during project -specific environmental review. New YVCC buildings will be more soundproof that the existing facilities resulting in little or no noise impact. Traffic occurs on the streets, which border Noel Field and the other portions of what is and what used to be Larson Park. Given its urban setting, traffic noise levels are not considered significant. 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. Noise, other than that generated by ball games or ball field maintenance equipment, is not expected to be an issue as a result of the proposed transfer of Noel Field or the completed transfers of other portions of Larson Park. Construction noise was associated with the development of the higher education center built on the first portion of land transferred to the college. However, that building is ready for occupancy and noise that may occur now will be associated with vehicle and pedestrian traffic characteristic to community colleges and with chillers located on the building's exterior. A similar occurrence of construction noise can be expected with the development of a new building on Field #4 in future years. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: The college and the ball fields are and have long been bordered by busy arterials. Noise generated by construction or ball games is not significantly out of the character of that environment. No unusual measures are proposed to control noise. 8. LAND AND SHORELINE USE a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? Noel Field has long been used for softball, as have Dunbar and Fields #2 and #4. The college has utilized land on 12th Avenue, previously occupied by City tennis courts, for construction of a higher (four-year) education center. The two-story, 75,000 square -foot building houses distance education classrooms, computer laboratories, student services, video conference rooms, work areas, faculty offices and a working clinic as well as support rooms and public lobby space. It provides shared and joint use spaces for Central Washington University and Washington State University in addition to Yakima Valley Community College. Dunbar Field has been refurbished and now serves as a home field for the community college's women's fast pitch team. The intended usage of Dunbar Field is unchanged. To meet City code, land formerly occupied by Larson Park Field #2 has been converted into a 200 -space parking lot. A strip of land running Environmental Checklist —City of Yakima/Yakima Valley Community College Page 10 along the east side of Dunbar provides driveway access. The college plans to use Field #4 for replacers of two classroom facilities and part of a newly constructed soccer field. Noel Field will continue to be r. as a softball field and soccer field until approximately 2020. b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. This property was quit claimed to the City of Yakima for use as a recreational park 1937. Prior to that park in quit -�---__-_ the _ time, A.E. and Rose Larson owned it. The City does not know if the land was ever used for agriculture. c. Describe any structures on the site. There are no structures on Noel Field. It and Fields #2 and #4 have chain link fence. scoreboards and ball field lighting. Dunbar Field had a wooden grandstand with wooden bleachers, concession stand and storage room which have been refurbished and upgraded for the YVCC women's fast pitch program. The property transferred to the college in the first transaction had tennis courts, two storage buildings and a restroom. would any structures he demolished? If so, what? Noel Field has no structures to be demolished. The tennis courts, two storage buildings and restroom were demolished as a result of the first property transfer. Dunbar Field's structures will be retained and only 15 percent of Field #4 is expected to be used for construction of additional classroom space. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? Larson Park and that portion of the Yakima Valley Community College campus located north of Nob Hill Blvd. are currently zoned Two -Family Residential (R-2). Yakima Valley Community College is classified as an essential public facility by RCV•7 36.70A.200 (the Growth Management Act). As such, it may be located in any land use zone, subject to Class 3 land use permits issued by the City (YMC 15.15). f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? The current comprehensive plan designation for all of the Larson Park property is Medium Density Residential. a. The Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan, adopted in 1997, identified Kissel Park as a priority for the recreational development of parklands, second only to Chesterley Park. Acquisition and development of additional parklands was also cited as a priority. The 12 -court tennis campus at Kissel Park will replace those facilities eliminated at Larson Park; and the development of ball fields at Kiwanis Park would also be consistent with the Plan. The Yakima Parks and Recreation Five -Year Comprehensive Plan was adopted in June, 2000. It discusses: • the 1998 agreement to transfer Larsen Park to YVCC (Page II1-4) Environmental Checklist —City of Yakima/Yakima Valley Community College Page 11 �!• capital improvement projects planned or underway at Kiwanis Park (Page III -3). Kiwanis Park was identified as the preferred location for a "Major Sports Complex" (Page V-12) • the likely use of Kissel Park for replacement of tennis courts moved from Larsen Park. (Page III -10) Kissel Park was identified as the top priority for park development among the City's vacant land inventory (Page IX -3) g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? Not Applicable h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. No i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? People will not reside on the property under discussion. The higher education center will add space for 1,200 full-time equivalent students and for the staff required to support them according to estimates presented during the 1998 proposal for transfer of that property. Because the proposed construction for Field #4 is a replacement for existing buildings, a minimum number of additional people will work in the new facility. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? The long-term effect of the property transfer to YVCC greatly enhances, rather than diminishes, the number of people able to access the site for education. The transfer of the ball fields to the community college will displace 2,500 to 3,000 softball players who participate in Parks and Recreation leagues and tournaments. Tennis -playing members of the public and the Yakima Community Tennis Association were displaced by removal of the tennis courts. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any.: Ball fields now under construction at Kiwanis Park will provide new, upgraded home fields for the Parks and Recreation programs. A 12 -court tennis campus at Kissel Park replaces the Larson tennis courts displaced by the higher education building. In addition, a new restroom has been constructed in the remaining passive area of Larson Park to replace the one demolished to make way for the driveway entrance to the college's new parking lot (Field #2). Both Noel Field and Dunbar Field will remain available for public use. The proposed soccer field will also be available to the public. Environmental Checklist —City of Yakima/Yakima Valley Community College Page 12 1. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses a pians, if any: i and landscape architecture have provided compatibility with projected land Attractive structural landscape and design t---------� r uses, i.e. Yakima Valley Community College's Master Plan for an enhanced education facility. (An updated Master Pian is currently being developed). With regard to existing and previous land use, there are no proposals addressing compatibility beyond assurance Noel Field will be used as a sports field throughout the life of the college's current 20 -year Master Plan and the designation of Dunbar will be as a secured home field for the college's women's fast pitch program. 9. HOUSING a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? None b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low- income housing. None c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: None proposed. 10. AESTHETICS a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? The proposed transfer of Noel Field does not anticipate construction ofa structure. The tallest structures on the combined property previously transferred to the college are the recently completed two-story higher education building and the proposed replacement structure for Anthon and Glenn Halls, which will be three stories or 65 feet high. The exterior for both building will be brick veneer and glass and will provide a substantial aesthetic improvement over existing buildings. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? The higher education center has been added to local views and does not block views of skylines or scenic horizons for residents of and visitors to the area. The proposed replacement facility is not expected to alter or obstruct any views. The aesthetic impacts of the projects included in the YVCC Master Plan will be determined during project -specific environmental review. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: Environmental Checklist —City of Yakima/Yakima Valley Community College Page 13 YVCC has added and will add appropriate landscaping. The higher education center with its landscaped transition areas will enhance views. 11. LIGHT AND GLARE a. What type of light or glare would the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? The property transfer, in and of itself, will not produce light or glare. If the field continues to be used for softball, ball field lights may be used for evening games. The building's site lighting has been selected to prevent light from escaping the site. Its north entrance has two-story high lights that shine into the park and serve as a security benefit. Proposed projects for the land will require local permits which will be reviewed during project -specific environmental review for their lighting impacts. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? Unless the existing lighting is changed or altered, there should be no safety hazards or interference with views. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? None identified d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: Exterior lighting fixtures on the building and in the parking lot have been selected to prevent light from spilling onto neighboring properties or up into the sky. Future projects for the land will be reviewed during project -specific environmental review for their lighting impacts and potential mitigation. 12. RECREATION a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? The following recreational opportunities lie within a half -mile of Noel Field which is the subject for this proposed transfer: • Larson Park Field #4 lies immediately south of Noel Field. • The passive portion of Larson Park lies immediately east of Dunbar Field. • Parker Field. • McKinley Elementary School (outdoor basketball court, soccer field, three t -ball fields and playground). Additional and more comprehensive recreational opportunities lie further out. Within approximately a mile of the Larson Park neighbor -hood are these public facilities: Environmental Checklist —City of Yakima/Yakima Valley Community College Page 14 h, • Franklin Park £six tennis courts, outdoor pool and waterslide. play toys. picnic shelter. open grr space). • Franklin Middle School (baseball field, football/soccer field, outdoor basketball courts, track. and gymnasium). • Summitview Park (picnic tables). • McClure Elementary School (soccer field, outdoor basketball cou tt, softball field, gyn'.nasium) • Lions !ark (nrinnr qwimmirgpool, six tennis courts, horseshoe pits, basketball court, play toys, picnic tables). ® Davis High School (baseball field, soccer field, gymnasium, football/track). Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. Land transferred to YVCC in 1999 has already been developed int0 a higher education center and additional student parking. A second land transfer in 2002 deeded Dunbar Field and Field #4 to the college. Field #1 will soon be used to construct a new three-story replacement for two alder buildings scheduled for demolition. s iT n for byhe school's women's fast pitch team. ! ne College Field has been refurbished by YVCC use t� . indicates that Noel Field will be retained as an open softball field with the addition of an overlapping soccer field throughout the life of the college's current 20 -year Master Plan. The remaining land from Field #4, after construction of the three-story building, will be used for both a softball field and a new soccer field. Overall there will be a net increase in open green space when the site of the two demolished buildings is replanted to grass. Yakima Parks and Recreation and the City of Yakima have no plans for future additions, expansions or further activity on the portions of Larson Park that have been used for tennis and softball except for possible use of Noel field for adult softball league play while new fields are being constructed at Kiwanis Park. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: ball fields constructed at Ttiwanis Park on Fair Avenue to replace those transferred to New City Gall 11G1UJ are being au r.uiu.� i ---- Yakima Valley Community College. A 12 -court tennis campus has been included in the construction of 17 - acre Kissel Park at Mead and 32nd Avenues, about a mile and a half west of Larson Park. YVCC plans to 1 Noel a add field ��o� Field. 111 maintain softball fields on Dunbar and Noel and to add a soccer field on, Noel i ield. The following table shows the total recreational facilities at various parks and playfields as they existed prior to the first property transfer and after the final Larson Park transfer and improvements to Kiwanis Park and other facilities: Environmental Checklist —City of Yakima/Yakima Valley Community College Page 15 PUBLIC FACILITIES The cumulative effect of the land transfer and other park development programs is a net gain in recreational acreage and a one-to-one replacement of tennis courts and ball fields. For the college their will be a net gain in open green space following the replacement of Glenn and Anthon Halls by a new three-story building that will have a smaller footprint than the existing two buildings. _,i). HISTORIC AND CULTURAL PRESERVATION a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe. No b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site? There is a monument memorializing A. E. Larson, for whom the park was named, which sits on the northeast corner of Dunbar Field. In addition, a drinking fountain located just north of the juncture of Noel and Dunbar Fields memorializes fast pitch player Mickey McVey. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: Both of these monuments will remain. 14. TRANSPORTATION a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. ) Environmental Checklist —City of Yakima/Yakima Valley Community College Page 16 ACRES TENNIS COURTS BALL FIELDS SOCCER FIELDS Pre- Transfer Post Transfer Pre- Transfer Post Transfer Pre- Transfer Post Transfer Pre- Transfe r Post Transfer 1 Larson Park 16.5 4.4 12 4 2 Kiwanis Park 18.4 32.4 3 5 Kissel Park 17.0 12 Total 34.9 62.9 12 12 7 7 1 The cumulative effect of the land transfer and other park development programs is a net gain in recreational acreage and a one-to-one replacement of tennis courts and ball fields. For the college their will be a net gain in open green space following the replacement of Glenn and Anthon Halls by a new three-story building that will have a smaller footprint than the existing two buildings. _,i). HISTORIC AND CULTURAL PRESERVATION a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe. No b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site? There is a monument memorializing A. E. Larson, for whom the park was named, which sits on the northeast corner of Dunbar Field. In addition, a drinking fountain located just north of the juncture of Noel and Dunbar Fields memorializes fast pitch player Mickey McVey. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: Both of these monuments will remain. 14. TRANSPORTATION a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. ) Environmental Checklist —City of Yakima/Yakima Valley Community College Page 16 Larson Park is bordered by 12th Avenue on the east, Arlington Street on the north. 16th Avenue on t� west and the college campus to the south. Noel Field, subject of this checklist. is bordered by 16th Arlington. Motorists will access the parking lot via a driveway running south from Arlington. b. Is site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? Two Yakima Transit routes run east and west a block south on Nob Hill and two more run north and south on 16th. c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? The currently proposed transfer of Noel Field does not involve parking. However, the parking lot associated with the initial transaction added 189 parking spaces. d. Would the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). Again this proposal does not require street modifications. The construction of the parking lot driveway required curb cuts on Arlington just east of Dunbar Field. e. Would the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If generally describe. No a__. would i.. ,.ted by the completed project? If knnwn_ inriiente I. How many vehicular trips per day ,vouiu uc ycuciaacu by iu Lvu.l,■..... 1,,.,�.... s_ .--- ..--, when peak volumes would occur. The transfer of Noel Field will not generate additional vehicular trips. Transportation concurrency analysis is conducted on a project -specific basis. It will be the community college's responsibility to submit a transportation tion capa ity analysis application if it intends to pursue firrther development. transportation V t.Iuva.� ✓a✓ application Improvements that followed earlier property transactions have been estimated to generate 200 vehicular trips per day with peak volumes between 8 a.m. and 1 p.m., according to YAICC estimates, However, the proposed facility on Field #4 is a replacement for existing facilities and should produce no additional vehicular trips. g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: None are required. 15. PUBLIC SERVICES Environmental Checklist —City of Yakima/Yakima Valley Community College Page 17 Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe: Transfer of the ownership of the property does not increase the needs for public services. Development that has occurred as a result of past transfers may have created a slight increase in the need for fire and police protection. YVCC has hired additional security to respond to the security needs of the Deccio Higher Educational Center. Proposed projects for the land will require local permits, which will be reviewed during project -specific environmental review for their public service impacts. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. Measures to reduce or control impacts to public services would be identified at the project -specific level of environmental review. 16. UTILITIES a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer. septic system, other: Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the l general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity, which might be needed. Utilities are not required for the proposed transfer of Noel Field. Use of the field and the previously transferred property, however, will require utility services: Electricity/Pacific Power. Natural gas/Cascade Natural Gas. • Domestic water/City of Yakima. • Refuse service/City of Yakima. • Sanitary sewer/City of Yakima. • Telephone service/Qwest. Environmental Checklist —City of Yakima/Yakima Valley Community College Page 18 C. SIGNATURE The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lean agency is relying on them to make its decision. 0 �nn,0.t.at City Representative Signature: Cnr aarvick Public Works Director College Representative Signature: L Date submitted: 4 Z7 ski sident, Yakima Valley Community College Environmental Checklist —City of Yakima/Yakima Valley Community College Page 19 D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NON -PROJECT ACTIONS (do not use this sheet for project actions) Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in conjunction with the list of the elements of the environment. When answering these questions, be aware of the extent the proposal, or the types of activities likely to result from the proposal, would affect the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate than if the proposal were not implemented. Respond briefly and in general terms. 1. How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water; emissions to air; production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise? This proposed transfer of property will not produce any of these results. The YVCC Master Plan, still under development, will identify facilities to be constructed and/or renovated and remodeled. There would be some environmental impacts associated with these activities. • Additional impermeable surfaces, such as roofs, parking lots, sidewalks, access roads, and playgrounds could increase storm water runoff, which could enter surface or ground waters. • The HVAC system will produce some emissions. • Minor quantities of toxic chemicals will be stored in the nursing area of the building. • Vehicular and pedestrian traffic will result in some level of additional noise. • The chillers on the southwest corner of the building will be a source of noise in that area. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: A life cycle cost analysis and the desire to use the smallest quantity of fuel possible over the life of the building guided the selection of the HVAC system. Trained staff will monitor toxic chemicals. An acoustical enclosure to reduce noise from the chillers was installed during construction. 2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life? The proposed transfer of Noel Field and the earlier transfers of property as well as the subsequent development should not affect local plants, animal, fish or marine life. Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are: None are proposed 3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources? The proposal and subsequent development is not expected to deplete energy or natural resources. Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are: Environmental Checklist —City of Yakima/Yakima Valley Community College Page 20 Energy -effective HVAC and lighting systems have been employed. 4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated _de_ for governmental protection; such as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic (or eligible Or under study) ..,. 6,,.�......------ protection; - rivers, threatened or endangered specifies habitat, historic or cultural sites, wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands? >> .L. other The proposed transfer of Noel Field in addition to the earlier transfers of 12 tennis courts and three o he. ball fields significantly diminishes recreational huse ehiord ball fieldLarson aremain available for recreational use byk, of which only the passive area tns. he Two of the four ball fields and 85 percent o public. The proposed property transfer is intended to address budget and ma_ntenannce issues in the City's park system. Over the past five years, Parks and Recreation's diminishing fiscal and human resources have been challenged to meet the needs of existing park inventory. At the same time, an unusual set of circumstances involving large donations from a private foundation and • , development. The operating local groups have created the opportunity for substantial upgrades in capital development. budget, however, has not kept pace. Without the opportunity for continued public stewardship of public resources, which this partnership and property transfer offers, the City of Yakima will not be able to continue to maintain aging facilities as well as the newly developed ones. The erosion of Parks and Recreation's ability to manage a multitude of maintenance and recreF operations was noted in the Five -Year Comprehensive Plan published in 2000. The plan comments on loss of funding resulting from sagging sales and property tax collections and the voter -approved decrease in motor vehicle excise taxation. These revenue decreases cost Parks and Recreation $380,000 in 1999 alone; and led to significant cuts in its communityenrichment, bilingual and aquatics programs that year. The continued to and, operational cuts initiated since then, Parks economic environment has decline in spite of and Recreation faces additional shortfalls and budget cuts for 2003 and 2004. The property transfers referred to in this application will provide much needed assistance and ensure public facilities are retained and maintained for the public. Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: In line with both the City and College Master Plans, these transfers are to be offset by other improvements to lessen the overall impact on recreational opportunities for citizens. Approximately 4.4 acres of passive parkland remain. • Yakima Valley Community College will continue to use the much -improved Dunbar Field for its women's fast pitch program and has indicated a willingness to make it available to Yakima School District and various other organizations. • YVCC told the Yakima City Council it would continue to use Noel Field for softball and soccer throughout the life of the college's current 20 -year Master Plan. • Revenue from this property transfer has enabled the City of Yakima Parks and Recreation Division to fully develop 17 -acre Kissel Park 15 blocks to the west of Larson Park. Kissel's new 12 -court tennis campus replaces the deteriorating courts previously located at Larson. Environmental Checklist —City of Yakima/Yakima Valley Community College Page 21 3 Additional revenue associated with the transfer of this property to the college is enabling Parks and Recreation to begin construction in August, 2003, of three new premier. lighted softball fields with amenities at Kiwanis Park. These will replace the Larson Park Fields, which have been considered out- of-date and substandard for tournaments and other softball activities. • Many people view the community college's ability to construct a new higher education center, on the site of the abandoned tennis courts, as a reasonable offset to the possibility of four-year degrees in several disciplines on a local campus. YVCC's ownership of Dunbar Field enabled it to improve the field for the women's fast pitch program and to comply with Title IX mandates The balance of the property transferred to the school enables it to furnish much needed parking, to add a new soccer field and to begin planning the replacement of out-of-date facilities. The impact of this series of property transfers is felt most profoundly in the Larson Park neighborhood. Its impact on the city park system as a whole is less noticeable. In the past two years 17 acres of recreational parkland has been developed at Kissel Park and 12 more acres were developed at Chesterley Park. An additional 6.5 acres of parkland has been developed along the Powerhouse Carial Pathway. A combination of efforts on the part of local service groups and Parks and Recreation added 10.3 new acres of land to Kiwanis Park where softball fields are under construction now. The park system as a whole has experienced a significant net gain, not a loss, in newly developed recreation property in the past few years. Kissel Park's new tennis campus replaces the courts given up at Larson. Constructed many years ago, the Larson courts had been repaired a number of times and were in need of repair again. Filling the cracks costs $10,000 to $15,000. A complete overlay, the more desirable option, )would cost approximately $100,000. The Kissel courts represent an enhancement for the community as a whole When they were constructed, well over 50 years ago, the Larson ball fields were an enviable community asset., However, regular maintenance and periodic updates have not protected them from the passage of time The fields under construction at Kiwanis are designed according to current standards and will provide an enhancement for Yakima's softball community. While it appears giving up the fields at Larson Park is a loss for the neighborhood that may, in fact, not be the case. The fields have been used primarily for softball games and leagues for adults who drive to their sporting venues. The new fields at Kiwanis will be used for these games and leagues. In addition, the college has agreed to continue to make Dunbar Field available for high school and college students and to retain Noel and most of Field #4 as a recreational space for the foreseeable future Parks and Recreation staff has observed a few pick up games on the fields, usually involving people who have driven to the park. These people can continue their activities at other City parks or at various public schools in the neighborhood and area. Occasionally neighborhood children have been observed playing on the passive portion of the park and that opportunity will remain for them and for families who may be picnicking at the park. While the open green space has been somewhat reduced through the development of parking on Field #2, the retention of the passive portion of Larson Park, Dunbar Field, Noel Field, the addition of a soccer field on most of Field #4 and the return of open space on the land where existing YVCC buildings will be )demolished, more than mitigates the loss of Field #2. Environmental Checklist —City of Yakima/Yakima Valley Community College Page 22 In addition. the fiscal impact for the City is an element to be considered as part of the broad picture The t fields were developed at least 50 years ago and the tennis courts were nearly as old. They have become out- of-date heavier maintenance new and required maintenance than..�W fsilities developed according to modern standards and techniques. Property transfers to Yakima Valley Community College have not only allowed that institution haveprovided the City with the ability to develop new maintenance - to pursue its plan for the future but also ofn,ent recreation facilities which would not have been possible otherwise. l'llI VIOII3L ,vv. ...-.-.--- -- - ce ancy. YVCC crews will Finally, the City's continued possession of Noel creates Thiswouedld require City ball field ra;ntain Dunbar while Parks and Recreation would maintain Noe l. maintenance equipment to be either housed on site or transported to it as needed, an added expenSe in either case Locating multiple fields at a single location, as will occur at Kiwanis, is attractive from a maintenance Noel �..,a if the retains standpoint as well as from a programming aspect. Continued use of Noe. field, even City ownership, for leagues and tournaments, is unlikely. 5. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, including whether it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans? Not Applicable Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are: Not Applicable 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation utilities? i„ _ affect for transportation_ public services and utilities. The proposed and earlier transfer will not C1116M6 demands ��+. transpnrtation, public subsequent development may require additional fire and police protection. It is likely any additional transportation or utility demands can be met within current service levels. Land use applications filed for future development by the college will address these issues on a project -specific basis. to reduce .... respond to such demand(s) are: Proposed measures �_ or public services and Non Proposed 7. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. None Identified Environmental Checklist —City of Yakima/Yakima Valley Community College Page 23 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LARSON PARK TENNIS COURTS, FIELD #2 AND A STRIP ALONG THE EAST SIDE OF DUNBAR FIELD The east 288.15 feet of the south 250.00 feet, of the NW'/4, of the S W'/4, of the NW1/4. of Section 25, Township 13 North, Range 18, East, W.M., as measured perpendicular to and parallel with the south and east lines thereof; and the east 36.00 feet of the west 56.00 feet, of the NE'/4, of the SW'/4, of the NW'/4, of Section 25, Township 13 North, Range 18, East, W.M., as measured perpendicular to and parallel with the west and south lines thereof; and the south 215.00 feet of the NE'/4, of the SW'/4, of the NW'/4, of Section 25, Township 13 North, Range 18, East, W.M., as measured perpendicular to and parallel with the south line thereof, EXCEPT the west 56.00 feet thereof; and EXCEPT right-of-way for streets along the north and east sides thereof Situate in the County of Yakima, State of Washington. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: DUNBAR FIELD/LARSON PARK NO. 4 The west 337.78 feet of the south 250.00 feet of the NW 1/4, of the SW 1/4, of the Northwest '/4of Section 25, Township 13 North, Range 18, East, W.M., EXCEPT right-of-way for South 16th Avenue along the west side thereof. Situate in the County of Yakima, State of Washington. AND The west 20.00 feet of the NW 1/4, of the SW 1/4, of the NW 1/4; and the east 288.15 feet of the NW 1/4, of the SW 1/4, of the NW '/4 of Section 25, Township 13 North, Range 18, East, W.M. EXCEPT the South 250.00 feet AND EXCEPT right-of-way for Arlington Street along the north side thereof. Situate in the County of Yakima, State of Washington. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: NOEL FIELD The NW '/4 of the SW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Section 25, Township 13 North, Range 18 East, W.M., EXCEPT the south 250.00 feet and the east 288.15 feet thereof AND EXCEPT the rights-of-way for Arlington Street on the north and S. 16th Avenue on the west. Situate in the County of Yakima, State of Washington. •Ve• VV.- • e _ ummonammounumet,%...c.,_ *N--* •.41111114twi. itiu — vtErvw aAtz. TE. 1111111tValli •• aq_ •olilt• •%r4 Erilmilredr amear•mmuiros %teem') ill1111111x.111111151 '-'' : "•:,,:' i .4. % AIMILAL _ _747,-Az—vi:CONI". .,-, ....., .1.:....0E.....I -_•4'-:•r:Y. -iir . ,,...,1-'.e-• e :.. i. : P,:•.:.5g17,.1.-/1,6,".......:."::...a7'•... • rZ. .•.._-4,4:Pt'-'; ::s;s •,••-•--;-•••'•)'-az--4,1 , ,4 A- -t7:4,4-$-.: •tikt P .,, • t ":114_ - 9 Iiiiir :2';',... 4 fl-' ..: , '::'• . . , :"..,:.".* ...*:i ,J'"' ..— • *,,..‘ •••• ''•••—•,4,.. *' "'Al. /1••• • ...... -• r• ..- -.., , .3., , -1 kel•Ft." i :,.. :2 , t....* err , - ••••,. 2 e -,t r4 HAF7--)R ILLUSTRATIVE MASTER PLAN YAKIMA CAMPUS PREFERRED PLAN OPTION YAOAPS Sl Nttl DOONF AVENUE BLVD Grant SI IB — 5131l AV EV) ST -1P.ENS STRE 'u•�1c: E_i_ YA: Was', S'REE' t > z ARLINGTON STREET W NOB HILL BLVD !� M FUSER 51R:1— G-1,1,111 M., CITY OF YAKIMA, WASHINGTON VICINITY MAP FILE NO: UAZO EC#17-03 APPLICANT: CITY OF YAKIMA, PARKS & RECREATION EQUEST. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW LOCATION. VICINITY ARLINGTON & S. I6TH AVE. Subject Property Y• akima City Limits • Scale —tin = 500ft ®Zsr 0 250 500 EC -17-03 09/10/03 1 YACLARE4 STREET L 91110 :a1135110 LO:T ,71011 'i1012 11014 1016 11015 11032 11029 44536 ,.537 !11538 4549 14550 14463 :4462 4451 14.460 4454 11017 '11018 11020 11019 11021 11022 11024 11023 14535 14524 1411 14525 14,533_ .»`26 144461�445522g7 14441 14553 1e4q='-Ap 14449 14445 14448 14446 14447 LLA00 ACC N.Y.0 —224;82`1-4453247.468 L22.4,;214,4 2245].-22dS7--- 2241,4772469 ,22475 •22481 ' 22487 ? ' 22475 ,223 i .. -+`% 95 _ 22455'22461 22465 22472 22593 22484 22490 29495 23 1542 ARLINGTON STREET 22431 zTEI ENS STRE_' 144;91114a 440114051401 N ---7-4-11,3413 7 144%402 11/553 14144948404 14497 14487 14496 14488 14495 14489 14494 14490 14493'14491 14492 - 14498 }14499 14500 14501 419 Ns. 41094 41011 41010 141001 , W A Axe ,23007 W NOB HILL BLV • Yob Ono .24525 x24521 24533 ,24526 24535 24527 24528 " 24529 24531 ' 24530 24467 , 24466 24468 124469 24471 2!4840 24592124473 24593 24474 24b@l6g477 24479 24478 • 24480 24481 24.483 1 24482 2451444485 2 1711499 24502'24503 24490 24505122p455504 244 245%D942a606 32411,-0 -71' 32405 32550 32451256054%18447 1 3'144,i14 132563! 131442, a i i 3� 31 32553 ' 31448 >1.144,131594' 3z4473244632`444/1560 �t81571 32549 1 I 32441 436 VAC LA =TN ST-TIF� RAs5R 51 RE- STEWART STRE1 1 1 CTTY OF YAKIMA, WASHINGTON FILE NO: UAZO EC#17-03 APPLICANT: CITY OF YAKIMA, PARKS & RECREATION REQUEST: ENVIRONMENTAL REVI1-W LOCATION VICINITY ARLINGTON & S. 16TH AVE. PARCEL NUMBERS ):1813 2 52 3 0 0 7 18132523008 Notified Property Owners within 500 Ft Subject Property „ Scale -I 15 = 5000 0 250 500 EC -17-03 09/10103 BUSINESS OF THE CITY COUNCIL YAKIMA, WASHINGTON AGENDA STATEMENT Item No. For Meeting of: July 15, 2003 ITEM TITLE: Kiwanis Park Development — Additional Options SUBMITTED BY: Chris Waarvick, Director of Public Works Denise Nichols, Parks and Recreation Manager CONTACT PERSON/TELEPHONE: Denise Nichols, 575-6020 SUMMARY EXPLANATION: The State has appropriated $350,000 for Yakima Valley Community College (YVCC) to purchase Noel Field and for replacement and relocation of ballfields. The State 2003 Capital bill contains the following text: NEW SECTION. Sec. 147. FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY, TRADE, AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Yakima Ballfields (04-2-952) The appropriation in this section is subject to the following conditions and limitations: $120,000 of the appropriation is provided solely to Yakima Valley Community College for the purchase of Noel field from the city of Yakima, and $230,000 is provided solely to the City of Yakima to replace and relocate Ballfields. It is the intention of the legislature that no funds be distributed to the City of Yakima until the transfer of the Noel field property is complete. (Continued on next page) Resolution Ordinance Other (Specify) Contract _ Mail to (name and address ): Funding Source: State Appropr. 'on and possible City contributions APPROVED FOR SUBMITTAL: ��'� City Manager STAFF RECOMMENDATION: If City Council accepts the condition of the transfer of Noel Field to the State for YVCC Higher Education purposes, staff respectfully requests direction on the use of the property sale proceeds ($350,000). Staff observes that to most fully meet legislative intent for the $350,000 and immediately comply with local code provisions relating to paved parking lots, that Option 3 be selected and within that option Choice (b) is most workable to fund the shortfall BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: This will be available after the evening Parks and Recreation Commission meeting of July 14, 2003. COUNCIL ACTION: Kiwanis Park Options Agenda Statement July 15, 2003 Page 2 Appropriation: State Building Construction Account - $350,000 Prior Biennia (Expenditures) - $0 Future Biennia (Projected Costs) - $0 TOTAL $350,000 In consideration of this appropriation, staff directed Huibregtse, Louman Associates to include add-altemates in the Kiwanis Park Development Project. The Phase I Development can be accomplished within resources available ($2,360,049 in expenditure versus $2,362,375 in revenue; see Attachment 1 titled, Kiwanis Park Summary. Presented for your review are options for additional development at Kiwanis Park utilizing the $350,000 allocation. However, the readers' attention is again directed to Attachment 1 outlining the current state of the authorized bid and associated costs and revenues. As you can see, the $350,000 is not sufficient to construct a third ballfield with the required amenities. Therefore, a choice is necessary between staying within current resources, and if so, which of the "add altemates" should be included in the project. If Council wishes to add financial resources to the project, choices are presented including the addition of the third field. Option 1. Forgo the Third Ballfield and use the dollars to finish certain amenities for Phase 1. Pave Parking Lot $96,253 Picnic Shelter (24'X36) $90,846 Upgrade Plaza Area to Concrete $88,683 (versus asphalt) Upgrade to tile in Restroom (versus concrete) Total of Added Altemates 14.925 $290,707 (Leaves $60,000 available from $350, 000) Kiwanis Park Options Agenda Statement July 15, 2003 Page 3 This option provides upgrades to the current Phase 1 Development which will enhance the quality of the facility. It also will provide asphalt parking to make this project comply with codes immediately rather than at a future date. The advantage of this option is an upgraded facility; however, the disadvantage is that Kiwanis Park will have only two new premium Softball Fields and three current substandard fields (a total of five fields) and may not fully comply with state legislative intent. Council may wish to reject the options presented herein and select among the list of Ad Altematives, based upon available resources. Please refer to the complete list of Add Alternates below. The prices include engineering, inspection and sales tax. Alt. 1 — Picnic Shelter $ 90,846 Alt. 2 — North Parking Lot Paving $ 96,253 Alt. 3 — Concrete Plaza $ 88,683 Alt. 4 — Tile in Bathrooms $ 14,925 Alt. 5 — New Ballfield $432,600 Alt. 6 — South Asphalt Parking Lot $ 88,683 Alt. 7 — Add Cement Concrete Plaza $ 9,193 } Option 2: Build Third Ballfield $432,600 (Base bid price) This option includes construction of the third premium softball field with lighting, gravel parking lot, fencing, demolition of existing field and restroom/concession facility and construction of the asphalt plaza connection. It most closely follows the language of the legislative intent attached to the appropriation for the least additional cost. The advantage of this option is completion of three new ballfields to replace the four fields lost at Larson Park — leaving a net loss of only one field between Larson and Kiwanis Parks. The Kiwanis Park facility would then have three new -lighted fields, two currently lighted fields, and one currently unlit field (total of six fields). This option has an $82,600 shortfall. Council may wish to consider directing Parks and Recreation to engage a line of credit to cover the shortfall. The repayment would be $18,000 a year for 5 years and comes from currently known reoccurring re -sources. The point being that other traditional capital (or operational) efforts would be supplanted during the pay -back period. Option 3: Third Ballfield Pave South Parking Lot Pave North Parking Lot Build Third Ballfield and pave all parking $432,600 $ 88,683 $ 96,253 $617,536 Kiwanis Park Options Agenda Statement July 15, 2003 Page 4 This option certainly is the most aggressive for park improvement purposes; however, there is a $267,536 shortfall. Again, if Council wishes to consider a this option challenging financial choices within and/or outside the Parks budget would need to be made. Any of the following Choices (a through c) could fund the $267,536 shortfall: a. Use a line of credit at payback schedule of $59,000 per year for 5 years from the Parks budget from future established resources. b. Allocate a General Contingency Fund contribution of $140,000 and line of credit for approximately $130,000 at payback schedule from the Parks Budget of $28,000 per year for 5 years. c. Defer paving of parking lots until other loans and/or grants are obtained. Recommendation Staff observes that to most fully meet legislative intent for the $350,000 and immediately comply with local code provisions relating to paved parking Tots, that Option 3 be selected and within that option Choice (b) is most workable to fund the shortfall. Attachment 1 Kiwanis Park Summary Development Phase 2002/2003 Expenditures Design Phase: Master Site Plan Design & Construction Documents Subtotal $ 71,000 $ 258,000 $ 329,000 Construction Costs: Base Bid (2 Fields) Contingency (5%) Construction Oversite Subtotal $ 1,832,142 91,607 60,300 $ 1,984,049 Other: Site Clean-up Utilities (estimate) Subtotal $25,000 22,000 $ 47,000 Phase 1 Project Total: $2,360,049 2002/2003 Revenue Larson Park Net Proceeds 2002 State CTED Grant Interest (1) $ 793,000 1,239,375 330,000 Total Revenue $ 2,362,375 Third Ballfield Option 2002/2003 Expenditures Third Ballfield Base Bid (Includes const., admin. & contingency) Third Ballfield Total (2) 2002/2003 Revenue $ 432,600 $ 432,600 Additional State Revenue: (2003 State Capital Budget) $ 350,000 Total $ 350,000 (1) includes 3 years of interest on Parks Capital Accounts. (2) This price is valid if Third Ballfield development occurs during Phase 1 construction. 06/19/2003 Item No. 6 Comment Letters 0q/05/2003 17:04 5094527900 r FFE PAGE 01 ' DEPARTMENT OF COMMt7NIT}'AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Planning Division 129 North Second Street Yakima, Washington. 98901Cj Phone (509) 575-6183 • Fax (509) 575-6105 RECEIVED V('`46 AUG 0 6 2003 DATE: July 18, 2003 CITY OF YAKIMA PLANNING DIV. SEPA Reviewing Agencies, Applicant and Adjoining Property Owners 4779 r 1 : Doug Maples, Code Administration and Planning Manager SUBJECT: Notice of Application for Environmental Review, UAZO EC 417-.03 NOTICE OF APPLICATION The City of Yakima Department of Community & Economic Development has received an Environmental Checklist from the City of Yakima Public Works Department concerning the proposal to transfer Noel Field on the northwest corner of Larson Park to Yakima Valley Community College. The City of Yakima Department of Community & Economic Development is lead agency for this proposal under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), This site is zoned R.- 2, Two-family Residential. This proposal exceeds the City of Yakima's flexible threshold for SEPA, as established at Section 6.88.070 YMC, thereby requiring that an Environmental Checklist be circulated for review and comment. The file containing the complete application is available for public review at the City of Yakima Planning Division, 2nd floor City Hall, 129 North 2nd Street, Yakima, WA. REOI3EST FOR WRITTEN COMMENTS Your views on the proposal are welcome. All written comments received by August 7, 2003 will be considered prior to issuing the final SEPA determination on this application. Please mail your comments on this project to: Dong Maples, Code Administration and Planning Manager City of Yakima, Department of Community & Economic Development 129 North rd Street Yakima, WA 98901 Please be sure to reference the applicant's name or file number in your correspondence. of akhna Public Works Department - UAZO EC #17-03) NOTICE FDI<1CIS ON A copy ofthe SEPA Threshold Decision will be mailed to you after the end ofthe 20 -day comment period. If you have questions on this proposal, please call Mary Lovell, Assistant Planner, at (509) 575-6164. Other Permits Iteauired: None Encl.: Environmental Checklist, Site Plan, Mailing and Vicinity Maps Yakima '1111! 1994 08/05/2003 17:04 5094527900 FFE 1. Describe special emergency services that might be required. No special or unusual emergency services are anticipated, 2. Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards. None proposed b. Noise PAGE 02 1- What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment operation, other)? Traffic occurs on the streets which border Noel Field. However, sound will not affect the transfer of the fields ownership. 2_ What types and levels of noise would be created by or associ- ated with the project on a short-term or long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. Not applicable. 3. Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: None proposed. '8. Land and Shoreline TJse a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? 4iP The field and the land adjacent to it has been used for slowpitch softball. b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. This property was dedicated as part of Larson park in 1947. Prior to • that time, it was owned by A.E. and Rose Larson. We do not know if the land was used for agriculture. c. Describes any structures on the site. There are no structures of Noel Field d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? No. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? Noel Field is currently zoned Two -Family Residential (R-2), f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? The current comprehensive plan designation for Noel Field is Open SpacelPark, g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program desi g - nation of the site? Not applicable. h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area. If so, specify. No. Transfer of Noel Field to YVCC • Yakima Parks and Recreation • Page Spree Reserred for Agency Continents psfrici4 J 08/05/2003 17:04 5094527900 FFE b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, ar- - chaeological, scientific or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. There is u monument memorializing A. E. Larson .sirs ismAcilthe north- east of Dunbar Field. 1./ i I� If A amici, rr M$40Ai14Lr e,1 14 /Yi t oar c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if ��a//ny. ' None proposed.•ikk Y >f �(1't COO i -i IV ji1U�i cot/07 1) Ar PAGE 03 Space Reserved far Agency Comments 14. Transportation 2/ P.71 5rDit or 7748 jU /VL. Ivo op' „i) W /'11J94/?. Loc a. Identify public streets and highways servi gDthe site,and describe the proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. Arlington Street borders Noel Field on the north and 16th Avenue borders it on the west. b. Is the site currently serviced by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? Two Yakima Transit routes run east and west on Nob Hill, which lies a block south and two more run north and south on 16th. c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? Row many would the project eliminate? Parking is not an element of the transfer. d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improve- ments to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). No. e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail or air transportations? If so, generaIIy describe. No. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. Not applicable. g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: None proposed. 15. Public Services a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example; fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. No. TrurrVer of Noel Field to YVCC • Yakima Park and Recreation • Page 9 August 7, 2003 oso � h1�1�a M4••, � UA 116 IC g ic1•e3 1002 S 18th Ave Yakima, WA 98902 Doug Maples, Code Administration and Planning Manager City of Yakima, Dept of Community and Economic Development 129 North 2nd Street Yakima, WA 98901 Dear Mr. Maples: I oppose the transfer of Noel Field to YVCC. Despite the "Done -deal," "Let-YVCC-have- anything-they-want" attitude exhibited by too many people at city hall since the git-go, I am not giving up. You never know when you might encounter some rational person who sees this train wreck for what it is. Right after certain city officials tried to sneak through the sale of Dunbar and field #4 in November 2002, I went door- to- door in the area and gathered 73 signatures of residents who do not want our park paved over, fenced off, and built upon by YVCC. I have attached a copy of my petition. I gave copies to all the council members in December. I have the original because, frankly, given the mind -set at city hall I don't trust anyone there not to "lose" it. I'm sure I can get more signatures, but this list covers much of the map you sent us. We want our ballfields! Hundreds of people besides organized teams play there. Children should not have to make an appointment to play at a far -away ballfield and then have to figure out a way to get through the scary part of town. Rose Larson, who donated this land, did it so that people could have recreation in this area. YVCC does not need this land. Linda Kaminski first planned two buildings on fields 3 & 4. Now, she is down to one 64,000 sq ft extravaganza to replace Anthon, Glenn and Palmer. I looked at the blueprints for those three buildings in her office. The combined existing square footage is about 85,538 sf. If she puts the new building on the site of one of these other three - which she would have to do if Daryl Parker had said NO to the land grab- there would be even more green space on the main campus than there is now. And there is absolutely no valid reason why the new building could not be three stories with an attractive daylight basement with 16,000 sf per floor. Linda Kaminiski has also said in the past that the college's priority is not to disrupt the neighbors. Really? Then why is the college trying to buy every house between 12th and Queen and Arlington and Prasch? These people are on a mission tO totally disrupt the neighborhood. Map attached. YVCC is not going to dry up and blow away if they don't get OUR ballfield. Neither is Yakima. Despite Mr. Waarvick's answer to question #4 on pages 11 & 12 of the July 18, 2003, SEPA notice, YVCC's priorities should not be the overriding consideration. This parkland was left to the residents of Yakima for recreation and amusement and just because Linda Kaminski and her supporters chose to find one Larson family heir and persuade him to lift those restrictions, being careful to not include in the meetings anyone opposed to this fiasco, does not make it right. Can't we have one of OUR ballfields? Please do the right thing and oppose the transfer. Thank you. Sinc y, Nancy ' endrick L t P SP 014 Qt C h CNS KIM 10-0 Osz , en I'l L ZO (t kMAAANA AD Ito \--D t\r\ ci,vsn _Q\ac,_10,c1/4.4*-._,orti_J). ao)t.v) \th fife all \E1_s__ o mam .( \- , c4? va,t2te_ kVW c: 0,M \(A).) c .0):N ntkW__ \RUK. ay\k \),Ck\AW. NAKIvIo 0-5 t ►tau. 0,14 a..sS'" s CVU. Na� 4 ; ( vq; tyK4-‘2,11 - Q. "Tct;rrAv PoLicSO OS _ _ G Alt t; _IA s, `Fah}C.DY110- 11 LI 40-ai O Ws 5 / Q .4 /2 G-1:J'61GCt °11 s /i /? ,/7.LA- - 3, ( 5 C, V°—t1Citi C/61-02-0( 6/ [i f! 11 ,t 71 It 91 0 906 _S (G � _�r53 3 z5 :96C4 _._,S __.( _:f(‘ 9 7IZ 5-e, j_4 --1-7---J15) 5 (61 're-` A\,-(. 4 7 -`7 o C( .S .0, qn ka 5 (o00 US 1 4.90+J QF cuu).040 2an aVect ,cuao _I-- 00 10colz n _tP11-1ik 2aVie1d5 , +0 Julmo_ti)' tts ub (119Preeti-e.. the •1:etauttione,i Q617(10 itiSui1Ifleve..._ a Pi iatA0 5 b ui pis ,) u DC.. e. AnLi ta, _ OL_ 7_/c7 • 3ch Ira 1 25L /I ___7/0 g0 J - 1(, $ s --- 7P,). So. 1_ 42-- 5 /51frl (22 3 _ \ Sfh &6O¼ C -(L' -741: < •qt1) 19L- '273 To 5 (74 -- •7/& 56 /,4 - _ -6 tal g lilith. l' J-1 -LIQ lft _JOA)) 6 A 0AeL Waik-- O_UV _ _c;1Y.3- , k- k1/41\10 s, ko Anmu«n 00 k -i,), VQ\Q ctk0.t Ise cdfi)\-R, tc Gi,)_ Ana.hbtiQ.1 Ot) (A uul [ (m _a_kL 6 k 1D* wcov\ 0 See bu,k14.koci, ij\\M . PrS `1iChGYP r � y � ►°czrd_�_ cffitt — . / .1 C:,1". o _ (41 �--- / v- 4_2 _/.-6,y, L� .__E Aziz .50, 11 r'' (_./e S So 950 /417k7 3L 111 -7o`"' S Alm aty.t (Y �f b' c zz S- /6,/ (at/ 1/2 S 1q ay.( e /�z 1-7/ a.' vd: /././ ..j)15 osavvo_ _c)oz \.,\)t tkoiyt. a)0,11Dc- co Y;- 0Q 4Th (.1,a Cqi.n.hA tku,f) e_ \I) ulik_oCkt_QcoKwc1.. 0i) t.(t_ce t_ ok9, 0ii L-kcz.:s fv2, ---- i€D 02 "Y-281;., 1, YVCC talking expansion into Larson Park Among ideas floated: A swapft property," Kaminski said. The Larson Park softball n��'•r� o 'the neiehborhond " fields, Kaminski said. "That certalniy is about 91 acres In all, are as- . 'ot our priority." ' with land for sports complexsessed at $350,000, "which is way n acqu s t on of land south of rty.Manager Dick. 4 acre Kiwanis Park would drs- ' lace fewer people than a park xpansion to the north, where r sidents are pressuring the city t� rezone their residential prop- ty to commercial. The Larson Park ball fields are w considered "substandard" r softball, said Assistant City • anager Glenn Rice. "I don't see ,any losers in this," ice said. ' But it may not be that smooth. • ,Far.,the higher education center pecifically, .YVCC simply wants o buy land next to it§ campus, aminskl said. ",That's the only way we can do t," she said, explaining that a request to the Leglsiaturq for i ow," Yakima C By WES NELSON of the Her' d.Republle The city of Yakima wants a ball field. So does Yakima Valley ommunity College. • This mutual interest may never Eike it to first base, however. •- In the first of possibly several eetings, YVCC and city officials Het Wednesday to discuss a pos- ible transfer of Larson Park soft- 'p....ball fields,to the college to make f; sj,"•Foom'', for''a 4 38,000 -square -foot t2'11 igher education venter. I ;,, i The center, now in a pre -design i phase, is t part of a collaborative I I e ffort by; YVCC, ;Central Wash- ington University and Washington State University. YVCC President Linda Kamin- ski called the ball fields "very suitable" for the center, esti- . mated to cost as much as $7 rhil- , lion. r . ttd Building the center there would allow YVCC to keep Parker Field, the school's on-site baseball facil- _ ity on the southeast corner of the 30 -acre , campus, said ''Kaminski,' ° alluding' to opposition to an ear- lier proposal that would have re- moved Parker Field. "From ourf perspective, our concern Is to Just purchase the Zais said. The city, however, may want something more, such as land for a still -in -the -conceptual -stage sports complex south of Kiwanis .'• Park along interstate 82..h One possibility Is for YVCC to . buy land near Kiwanis Park, then swap it to the city for the Larson 's, Park ball fields, city orcials;said. , Such an arrangementWould , allow YVCC to avoid buying rest-•',' .dentia) property' near It! campus ; - and, consequently, displacing res- , idents. YVCC's master plan iden- tifies residential properties along' the college's eastern boundary as possible areas for expansion. I;''i "We're not anxious to.An 546,17 No. 2-155C. funding would include the cost of the land specifically for the cen- ter And some city officials aren't excited about giving up a part of Larson Park. .Councilman Clarence Barnett said he and otters who live nem' - by like their view just fine. Ile suggested YVCC should consider other sites in its master plan first "When they get all that devel- oped then they should come back to the city," he said. • "This is a big deal," Zais said. "It has not been determined which way we'll go," Kaminski said. YVCC's need to expand must be addressed, however, she said. "Essentially we're serving (3.000 students on acreage that WSIJ would reject for a branch campus to serve 2,000 students," Kamin- ski said. • Kaurp c#j d\16a )ckrv»sli'=o HASTINGS, MN LOS ANGELES-CHICAGO-LOGAN, OW HMCGREGOR, TX -LOCUST GROVE, GA U.S.A. Yoki c V Vale 0 (Communitycollegely Board of Trustees Sixteenth Avenue and Nob Hill Boulevard • Post Office Box 1647 • Yakima, Washington 98907 MINUTES SPECIAL MEETING—STUDY SESSION YAKIMA VALLEY COMMUNITY COLLEGE BOARD OF TRUSTEES 3:30 p.m., September 13, 2001 \jI)'il)aQlari, T\Of cat'h malt) plan: The Study Session was called to order at 3:30 p.m. Trustees present were Elmer Ward, Ann Miller, San Juana Gonzales, Douglas Peters, and Ricardo Garcia. Status of the 1997 Facilities Master Plan. Ms. Karen Judge, Vice President for Administrative Services, gave a report on the status of the 1997 Facilities Master Plan. Ms. Judge stated that the process used to develop the Master Plan in 1997 was collaborative, involving the college and its community. The architects, Mahlem and Nordfors, held six charettes—meetings open to anyone wishing to give input. The architects also reviewed program needs, building conditions, and campus traffic flow. The resulting document had been a working document. Two primary challenges were highlighted: The need to unify the north and south portions of the campus divided by Nob Hill Boulevard and to provide a strategy for short-- and long-term development. Vice President Judge distributed a list of the conclusions and recommendations of the study. Major recommendations included the need for more land, especially for long-term growth, the need for additional, centralized parking, building upgrades to accommodate modern technology, and centralization of student services. Ms. Judge said that when she had tallied the actions taken since 1997 against the recommendations, she was surprised at the progress the college had made. The college has purchased seven residential properties, a couple commercial properties, and partnered with CWU and WSU and obtained funding for the Higher Education Center, which will provide the space to centralize student services. She said that the college had increased the number of parking spaces ���(� h�� by 38%. All in all, she was very pleased with the progress the college had made toward the goals �` in the Master Plan. Q l g y c Vice President Judge stated that the college had been successful in purchasing property for k tilt) expansion both within the short-term and long-term footprint identified in 1997. She distributed a aha map showing the expansion properties that were in the plan. () Through a competitive bid and interview selection process, Harder Architecture had been identified to serve as college architect on all projects for the 2001-2003 biennium. The first project was to help the college prepare its capital project request for the 2003-2005 biennium. This will also require that the Master Plan be updated. The firm had already met with Now tt f G m on O vvouci-e) Ulf) IM nt adt nie ,lois a L1 ,itf4Ab• • : , , . • ;.-11: .`, i ' '; .' ' :'''r' I-. ti Iii • •I'',';' . .. , , ; ",,,... tt, tt.ittr , ,r. L., r • ir p:,,14,2,..,;.-:-. , • '•.t. '''',.-4.•• ' , — • ri t' * '—'I ' • ' '':.'4: ,, t •••I'$ r" *Ii0; i 14. tn.!. V.4.1' '"' ' V• "rt t',' tatt: 4t*,..“‘til,,r. • '.':74 ',"' '. i1'' gt 'Thi• 4" ', „ .• •',St •• ' 7 --it kn '. 'I fl i. F • ' , r ,• , . i,, 5 IFF 4,0, 1.,, i . ,,,•,-,••• 1„ 1 ,,,,c4i, , .. qr 1••••." :- I 1 • . .: L..1 • •;• .' , 4 :,• • I t--... f, ... . _ •:,.,..„),,trk , ,..k , r. . ' : - it ffr.,' ,"- 4'.'. ' tt:t ty. A ,..., . —, .• t.ei,L.!:. ,f • -• .• • " • ' ' • " 11, 1q • 444,1 4,t!;‘F r•• g 2 iLUV4`. ,,.,. • t Or. 4. I V t ) . 11. 2.4 • ' t" * . I Ir t 4,00 , • • . t ; e."tt•-•• .e , ?""'" • ir- , 4 • - r• 41“,, • r I 1 7 1 A -E ,tr r.,P.,"e ''.9...,2.,- .44‘.4,1..e .L! J: t•,,, ...-,, !,, .k•ti•,!. :i,*.#4.7! itL..., :.,... . . , - ,. .,.-; ...';.....„.., t....S........., .:'....1....2'''''d.t.r.:Z. z:,:tilk.:•-i.",:•.A... kff2; .:r`l g'..,+',r-.:i''i'---"=1:::':1-.`7--''''.-- . r''.........- . J. . i '..,,yi:,'. '..."...1,•..,,M,...•,i.,„ ..,,,•,;,,,,,r11 ;:•••;•...1,,‘" ,..'' •• • t- - ' •' •I- '4"` 'r ,,,,as,0,-,,v,irog..k.k.',4krr •Fl; or .11. :tr, ,-1-• -li„ i -; , , %...; .:,,. - - '-e• 4 , • ..,.. . '' ; 1111,,,V : 1 1 ....:,.:-.:7,,T,7-7- , •,,',". 4101P.AN!,..i:.:4',%k' -,t. . -",` • r tt S. F'''t•i `it. A.V- Ft ,tt. .A.,...:41g, X ':;'1,43".• „ '••• ;•• vi ‘4 4 V "41 ! - .. , ; .i. ..4., , ) ... b. ! 1- -- • ,'.741PiAltttf , t.r •:tb *IT .4•1,F • A4.4. 4.4 tub ; t t• r t .b, f*. 414 . E M t 17: ....,,. ,,' 77: • ,,,....,.,.--, ..yrt ( 1 ,* .., •.,:, ....,./. ' ' , :10 • -,,, 4." '''''.1,' '1! . V,. iiIrt ,:;;',1' ...• ., :, 4., . t ' •• '''. '' • N t.:Z.. • . r.>41j.fr'•ig, J - _ -IA 2431, k " ttachment C co)) Mthi h JilJtnh Qt, ImmtAnA Wh. 6r\-(.61 661- '01\ckfon -9 Rt)thoil— \ Abdth Wein Mkil - In\SL )) wthcalyM \(4)0\ U69A-ot hUDA ()J\ M21) 5) acs1:: It\ 04 CO) 7 awtt v3a. *HO- \o_Q.1,,p:u-e, 0(141 1(t9 ')-(tOb Ot_\) Ataiti3O\t\kd CL.AcLJ 14'" 0Wi Ohn,' 0)) GNOO 11), kap ,c6CPN DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT RECEIVED Planning Division 129 North Second Street Yakima, Washington 98901 Phone (509) 575-6183 • Fax (509) 575-6105 D _k4-(5(0 ti‘zyN DATE: July18,-2003 TO: AUG 0 7 2003 CODE ADMINISTRATIUtll 8603 - 1 SEPA Reviewing Agencies, Applicant and Adjoining Property Owners FROM: Doug Maples, Code Administration and Planning Manager SUBJECT: Notice of Application for Environmental Review, UAZO EC #17-03 NOTICE OF APPLICATION The City of Yakima Department of Community & Economic Development has received an Environmental Checklist from the City of Yakima Public Works Department concerning the proposal to transfer Noel Field on the northwest comer of Larson Park to Yakima Valley Community College. The City of Yakima Department of Community & Economic Development is lead agency for this proposal under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). This site is zoned R- 2, Two-family Residential. This proposal exceeds the City of Yakima's flexible threshold for SEPA, as established at Section 6.88.070 YMC, thereby requiring that an Environmental Checklist be circulated for review and comment. The file containing the complete application is available for public review at the City of Yakima Planning Division, 2nd floor City Hall, 129 North 2nd Street, Yakima, WA. REQUEST FOR WRITTEN COMMENTS Your views on the proposal are welcome. All written comments received by August 7, 2003 will be considered prior to issuing the final SEPA determination on this application. Please mail your comments on this project to: Doug Maples, Code Administration and Planning Manager City of Yakima, Department of Community & Economic Development 129 North 2nd Street Yakima, WA 98901 Please be sure to reference the applicant's name or file number in your correspondence. (City of Yakima Public Works Department - UAZO EC #17-03) NOTICE OF DECISION A copy of the SEPA Threshold Decision will be mailed to you after the end of the 20 -day comment period. If you have questions on this proposal, please call Mary Lovell, Assistant Planner, at (509) 575-6164. Other Permits Required: None Encl.: Environmental Checklist, Site Plan, Mailing and Vicinity Maps Yakima EvErd PSwAwv�ccs a11,J f A6e.e- -r/Row. j61k, REQUIRED ATTACI LENT: ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST �£:›1\-) STATE ENVIRONMENTAL ENTAL POLICY ACT (SEPA) 1? 4e2.44 - (AS TAKEN FROM WAC 197-11-960) CHAPTER 6.88, Y.AKIMA MUNICIPAL CODE (YMC) JRPOSE:"Or CIIE.CKLIST: .. to State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), chapter 4-3.2 IC RCW, requires all governmental agencies to consider the ,vironmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions. An environmental impact statement (EIS) must be epared for all proposals with probable significant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment. The• purpose of is checklist is to provide information to help. you -and -the agency identify impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or roid impacts from the proposal, if it can be done) and to help the agency decide whether an EIS is required. This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Governmental zencies use this checklist to determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant, requiring :eparation of an EIS. Answer the questions briefly, with the most precise information known, or give the best ascription you can. You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. In most cases, you could be able to answer the questions from your own observations or project plans without the need to hire experts. If ou really do not know the answer, or if a question does not apply to your proposal, write "do not know" or "does not pply". Complete answers to the questions now may avoid unnecessary delays later. Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark designations. answer these questions if you can. If you have problems, the governmental agencies can assist you. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental ffects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional nformation reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact. TR �•C IONS•:FOR APP.0 S U .T _ . PLYC USF OT. •1-IFCKTIZSTIOR'N0.101ZOMT`VR:O:POS'0-,��::��•�-���� Complete this checklist for non -project proposals, even though questions may be answered "does not apply." IN ADDITION, complete the SUPPLEIu1ENTA.L SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (part D). For non -project actions, the references in the checklist to the words "project," "applicant," and "property or site" should be read as "proposal," "proposer," and "affected geographic area," respectively. A. BACK �G RO iNDI NF TO�N:�( o��b c��nzpl eci'<b=j�;tli.e: appli�eant. .... . _ ..... ..... ,. , 1. NAME OF PROPOSED PROJECT (if applicable) Noel . Field Transfer 2. APPLICANT'S NAME &PHONE Chris Waarvick/public Works ( 509)575-6005 3. APPLICANT'S ADDRESS 2301 Fruitvale Blvd., Yakima WA 98902 4. CONTACT PERSON & PHONE sarne ( AGENCY REQUESTING CHECKLIST �� - ACity of Yakima 6. DATE TIFF. CHECKLIST WAS PREPARED July 18, 2003 7. PROPOSED TLYILNG OR SCHEDULE ( including phasing, If appiicable) 1 ikubm time -to -is ehJ tits1/4-eke- 1 Revised 10-&)8 pay.e 1 or 10 k BACKGROUND QUESTIONS 1. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansions or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. There are no plans for future additions or expansions of Noel Field by Parks and Recreation or the City of Yakima except for possible use of the field for adult softball league play while new fields are being con- structed at Kiwanis Park. k oct tri a o r. 2, List any environmental information you know that has been prepared or will be pre- pared directly related to this proposal. None known. 3. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered your proposal? explain. .---••••..�J .,,�._.. property covered by your i" -°'i'° -'i3 LEid If yes, ela�3it33.ii. None known. 4. List any governmental approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. None known. 5. Give a brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this check list that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information on project description.) This proposal is the transfer of ownership of Noel Field on the northwest corner of Larson Park from the City of Yakima to Yakima Valley Community College. kt ® L4 G A e ria V�i LAS r.oce. st LA -peso...) 6. Location of proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project including a street address, if any, and section, township and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. Noel Field lies on the southeast corner of the intersection of 16th and Arlington Avenues on Parcel Number 18132523007. Arlington Legal Description for 18132523007: NW1/4 SW1/4 NW1/4, also W 60 ft NE1/4 SW1/4 NW1/4, ex S 250 ft of E 348.15 ft thereof, & ex N & W str r/w B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS (to be completed by the applicant) 1. Earth a. General description of the site ("i one): ❑✓ Flat ❑ Rolling ❑ Steep Slopes ❑ Mountainous ❑ Hilly 0 Other • Yakima Parks and Recreation • Page 1 b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? Not applicable. Property is flat. c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. Like the rest of the floor of the Yakima Valley, soil at Noel Field is typical of that deposited by rivers and floods overtime. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. There is no known history of unstable soils in this area. e. Describe the purpose, type and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate the source of the fill. Not applicable. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction or use? If so, generally describe. No clearing is involved in the transfer. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or build- 004-Z‘5 uild- Q \5 —17(.305 g. � G�N.. e property will be transferred as is.j1; u ii�.v h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion or other impacts to the earth, if any. None needed. 2. Air a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is competed. If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known.,, Not applicable. b. Are there any off-site sources �f emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. Not applicable. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: Not applicable. 3. Wat 6t5tilk ,3, PANCRe— a. Surface: 1. Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity Space Reserved for Agency Comments Transfer of Noel Field to YVCC • Yakima Parks and Recreation • Page 2 of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwa- ter, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. No. 2. Will the project require any work over, in or adjacent to (within 2Q0 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. Not applicable. 3. Estimate the amount to fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of the fill material Not applicable. 4. Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diver- sions? Give general description, purpose and approximate quantities if known. Not applicable. 5. Does the proposal lie within a 100 -year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. No. 6. Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and antici- pated volume of discharge. r �� The property transfer will require no discharge of materials. b. Ground: 1. Will ground water be withdrawn or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose and approxi- mate quanti e wn. Transfer of the property will nground water nor the discharge of water into the group, .Should Yakima Valley Commu- nity College continue to use the p ►- . an athletic eld, it is safe to assume regular irrigation of the turf wi continue. 2. Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any. (For ex- ample, domestic sewage, industrial containing the following chemicals, agricultural, etc.) Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served, if applicable, or the number of animals or humans the system(s) is expected to serve. Not applicable. c. Water Runoff (including storm water): 1. Describe the source of runoff (including stormwater) and Space Reserved for Agency Comments Transfer of Noel Field to YVCC • Yakima Parks and Recreation • Page 3 method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters. If so, describe. Stormwater has been allowed to disperse into the turf and ground. 2. Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. No. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground and runoff water impacts, if any: Not applicable. 4. Plants a. Check (' 1) types of vegetation found on the site: deciduous trees: 0 alder Ti maple 0 aspen 0 other evergreen trees: 0 fir 0 cedar 0 pine 0 other: 5. 0 shrubs 0 grass (cheat grass) 0 grass (turf) 0 pasture crop or grain wet soil plants: 0 cattail 0 buttercup 0 bullrush 0 skunk cabbage 0 other: weeds water plants: 0 water lily 0 eelgrass 0 milfoil 0 other 0 other types of vegetation: b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Vegetation will not be removed as part of the property transfer. c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. A number of plants in the Yakima Valley have been identified as threat- ened or endangered: Columbia Milk -Vetch, Clustered Lady's Slipper, Basalt Daisy, Kalm's Lobelia, Hoover's Desert -Parsley, Pale .Blue -Eyed Grass and Hoover's Tauschia. Existence of these plants at this site has not been reported and is unlikely. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants or other measures to preserve enhance vegetation on the site, if any. None proposed. er /�t'RA �� Animals Space Reserved for Agency Comments a. Check ('/) any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or known to be on or near the site. Transfer of Noel Field to YVCC • Yakima Parks and Recreation • Page 4 1. birds: 0 hawk 0 heron 0 eagle 'songbirds ® other: duck, pheasant 2. mammals: u deer 0 bear Q elk 0 beaver 0 other: skunk 3. fish: 0 bass 0 salmon/steelhead 0 trout/bull trout 0 herring Cl shellfish 0 other b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None known. There are a number of endangered or threatened species in the __ V_7____ _ Valley: the upper l'aldrna Valley: Bald Eagle, Ferruginous hawk, Golden Eagle, Great Blue Heron, Prairie Falcon and Ring -Necked Snake in addition to varieties of salmon and steelhead. Noel Field does not lie in identified breeding or communal roosting areas nor in areas of observed presence. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. While it is possible a migrating bird might fly over Noel Field , the site is no more part of a migration route than any other part of the City of Yakima. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: None proposed. 6. Energy and Natural Resources a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? De- scribe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. . Not applicable. b. Would your project affect potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties. If so, generally describe. Not applicable. c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: Not applicable. 7. Environmental Health a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. No. Space Reserved for Agency Comments Transfer of Noel Field to YVCC • Yakima Parks and Recreation • Page 5 ( 1. Describe special emergency services that might be required. No special or unusual emergency services are anticipated. 2. Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards. None proposed. b. Noise 1. What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment operation, other)? Traffic occurs on the streets which border Noel Field. However, sound will not affect the transfer of the fields ownership. 2. What types and levels of noise would be created by or associ- ated with the project on a short-term or long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. Not applicable. 3. Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: None proposed. 8. Land and Shoreline Use a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? The field and the land adjacent to it has been used for slowpitch softball. b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, descri• . G137 This property was dedicated as part of Larson Park �G Prior to that time, it was owned by A.E. and Rose Larson. We ' . know if the land was used for agriculture. X'i WP6 e b to 1 fleVh c. Descn es any structures on the site. There are no structures of Noel Field. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? ,a, No. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? Noel Field is currently zoned Two -Family Residential (R-2). t� C# \T t y- veep u ‘mes, ReA40464, O f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? The current comprehensive plan designation for Noel Field is Open Space/Park..--'6M t srr<V51A4, 2-t vN 1 g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program desig- nation of the site? Not applicable. 061AMIVV004-11/1 C 0 h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area. If so, specify. No. -., PtiP Space Reserved for Agency Comments �� 0. 3-7I 0 (3L0rt N7,64)toeN v45-1 Transfer of Noel Field to YVCC • Yakima Parks and Recreation • Page 6 i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? Not applicable. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? None. J. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any. None proposed. 1. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any. None proposed. 9. Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any?indi- cate whether high, middle or low-income housing? None. b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle or low-income housing. None. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: None. 10. Aesthetics a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not includ- ing antennas. What is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? Not applicable. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or ob- structed? Not • applicable. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any. None proposed. 11. Light and Glare a. What types of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time t� wl of day would it mainly occur? The property transfer will not produce light or glare e field contin- ues to be used for softball, ballfield lights may be used for evening games. %� Space Reserved for Agency Comments P - 72i 17 Transfer of Noel Field to YVCC • Yakima Parks and Recreation • Page 7 b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? Unless the existing lighting is changed or altered, there should be no safety hazards or interference with views. c. 'What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? Not applicable. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any. None proposed. 12. Recreation - a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? The following recreational opportunities lie within a half mile of Noel Field: • Dunbar Field lies immediately east of Noel Field. Larson Park Field #4 lies immediately south of Noel Field. • The passive portion of Larson Park lies immediately east of Dunbar Field. • Parker Field • McKinley Elementary School (outdoor basketball court, soccer field, three t -ball fields and playground) b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. Transfer of ownership of Noel Field will place its future in the hands of the community college. At the July 15, 2003, City Council meeting its president indicated Noel Field would be used for softball and/or soccer until eCWE k`C2ileeSt f*A`T KtU STr c. IrtOposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any. New City ballfields are being constructed at Kiwanis Park on Fair Avenue to replace those relinquished to Yakima Valley Community College. 13. Historic and Cultural Preservation Le5.5 J Ps a. Are there any places or objects listed on or proposed for national, state or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe. No. (Pt eApJ ?Poe -- Space Reserved for Agency Comments UX1(-v (' -r(-cam (WO Transfer of Noel Field to YVCC • Yakima Parks and Recreation • Page 8 b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, ar- chaeological, scientific or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. There is a monument memorializing A. E. Larson sits outside the north- east ofDunbar Field '•f ilr►-rpt! t i Vet,- Le."—ceD 'eta M ♦ C. ..a -P Ve4d (t.) k c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, it any. None proposed. `� ` 0�-� 14. Transportation a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe the proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. Arlington Street borders Noel Field on the north and 16th Avenue borders it on the west. b. Is the site currently serviced by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? Two Yakima Transit routes run east and west on Nob Hill, which lies a block south and two more run north and south on 16th. Space Reserved for Agency Comments MIL40,440/14m co)ns c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? Parking is not an element of the transfer. d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improve- ments to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). No. e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail or air transportations? If so, generally describe. No. f. How many'vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. Not applicable. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: None proposed. g. 15. Public Services a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so,_generally describe. No. Transfer of Noel Field to YVCC • Yakima Parks and Recreation • Page 9 r 16. Utilities a. Circle utilities currently available at the si a ectncit atura1 gas, 'tary sewer, septic system, telephone, etc. b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. Utilities are not required for the transfer of the property. C. SIGNATURE (to be completed by the applicant.) The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on. them to make its decision. Signature: 00 4.0 r Chris Waarvick, Public Works Director Date Submitted: 1 I i g(03 wtae7I-S e4) Space Reserved for Agency Comments Transfer ofNoel Field to YVCC • Yakima Parks and Recreation • Page 10 D.SUPPLEMENTTAL SKEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (To be com- pleted by the applicant.) (Do not use the following for project actions.) Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in conjunc- tion with list ..len of the conjunc- tion the uJL of the elements eICVIlUIIII1eIIC. When answering these questions, be aware of the extent the proposal, or the types of activities likely to result from the proposal, would affect the item at a greater inten- sity or at a faster rate than if the proposal were not implemented. 1. How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water; emissions to air; production, storage or release of tozxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise? The transfer of property will not produce any of these results. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: None proposed. 2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish or marine life? kJelrL\64kr ‘71r"rkarictivk college has indicated will continue to use Noel Field as a sports field, the ownership transfer is not expected to affect plants or animals. There are no fish or marine life at the site. Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish or marine life are:( --/n t /435 None are proposed. i i Space Reserved for Agency Comments "iN4ht t tarePtfrb 3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources. The proposal is not expected to deplete energy or natural resources. Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy or natural resources are: None are proposed. 4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such as parks, wilderness, wild amd scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat, historic or cultural sites, wetlands, floodplains or prime farmlands. The transfer of Noel Field in addition to earlier transfers of 12 tennis courts and three other ballfields significantly diminishes Larson Park and the access to public recreation in this area. e9rtxriv t-, Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: multifaceted. • Approximately seven acres of passive park land remains. se • Yakima Valley Community College will continue to use Dunbar Field for its women's fastpitch program and to also make it available to Yakima School District and various other organizations. SVI 5\13 Transfer of Noel Field to YVCC • Yakima Parks and Recreation • Page 11 tn.,L.11 1 Urgv r s kon...r e� I V/ i £ iiA moi / t 11/41( est J� t-7seaReetzrC Ass. \A— r -VW [A -e act;'-rp4Pf1 old the Yakim so ball and = cer until 2020. • Reven - accorded to the City of Yakima as a result of this property tr' sfer enabled Parks and Recreation to fully develop 17 -acre Kissel 'ark 15 blocks to the west of Larson Park Kissel's new 12 -court tennis campus replaces the deteriorating courts previously located at Larson.. • Additional revenue associated with the transfer of this property to the college is enabling Parks and Recreation to begin construction in August, 2003, of three new premier, lighted softballfieldswith amenitities at Kiwanis Park to replace the Larson Fie . '� red out -a -date and substandard or tournaments and other so ball ! ctivities. • Whilethey do not reduce or avoid the loss of parkland, other factors, in many people's view, offset the loss. The community college's ability to construct a new higher education center on the site of the abandoned tennis courts brings opportunity for four-year degrees in several disci- plines to a local campus. YVCC's ownership of Dunbar Field allowed it to improve the field for its women's fastpitch program and to comply th ale IX mandates. The balance of the transferred property trans red to the ool.enables it to furnish much needed parking and t . egin --- planning additional classroom space and replac t of out-of-date facilities. e Noel Field for Space Reserved for Agency Comments 5. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, including whether it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans. Not applicable. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are: Not applicable. 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands of transportation or public services and utilities? The transfer of Noel Field ownership is not expected to impact transporta- tion, public services and utiltities. Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are: None proposed. 7. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. None identified. Arc AMAti3 50Pr Transfer of Noel Field to YVCC • Yakima Parks and Recreation • Page 12 1MACLARE N STREET y _1 _. E=d ffd I 2 fA N A4SARI LA fJ Ld [J ST HELENS STREET tii ARLINGTON STREET W Nei HA EWA CITY OF YAKIMA, WASHINGTON VICINITY MAP 11LE NO: UAZO EC#17-03 APPLICANT: CITY OF YAKIMA, PARKS & RECREATION REQUEST: ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW LOCATION: VICINITY ARLINGTON & S. 16TH AVE. NAMM AVE Subject Property Yakima City Limits Scale —lin = 4008 0 200 400 EC17-03 07/18/03 MACLAREN STREET — m — — W Q — — — — s — E LUMBARDIANE 5 AVENUE – //1' Aelr erc rgr rilrA AVp .iii/�/ '0 ref ..thy E I. 4yt YII. rz wrzl WC ET. ri'/� E z —LoF N 2 W /�.l 0, 7r/!�!IA� _vdvi 2 _ HELENS STREET r_s�3 pry ARLINGTON Fx- – _ - E - k to W NOB HILL BLVD W Nub Blvd HAMM AVE CITY OF YAKIMA, WASHINGTON FILE NO: UAZO EC#17-03 APPLICANT: CITY OF YAKIMA., PARKS & RECREATION REQUEST: ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW LOCATION: VICINITY ARLINGTON & S. 16TH AVE. PARCEL NUM13,ER(S):1.813 2 5 2 3 0 0 7 �j 0 Notified Property Owners within 500 Ft Subject Property N OL gQ 4]) ii)110 Ise Scale -lin = 400ft 200 400 EC17-03 07/18/03 'Uk' t 5 .ln I ► L , tu tis U t U It-Itep,<RAtet —LIAN6 L(ou egeelari 1‘14 , U,)P< cAR. -r2Lks- u t(k- r ... t %m L.:4w 1-ktkr.)els ($6)0Q, 4aPc 1)003i).*A-V(g,0 tom. ip4,1$1, tsGcoD \cl\i[k9 k- Obck: ARE You. mto,L U ©1•2 ORtom `''l1`tS - -- V'etegA-7 44tit (oc)c Mk(14(0 Ra>go 1202K! l�� ((z_ AtGvNA,(A 6ZuCTs(Lo- -1;itZD -kLtL f3L wtl .,ts• t✓K Prr---rtk eAbg---r kveKomiwe -rk v‘&6-1 v.xtike\N \c 4v0P LOUb -72410 boa CCI: . kiloevt 1444.0 qSq,03 A. John Nicholson 201 North 24th Ave. Yakima, WA 98902 (509) 575-4477 Date: August 6, 2003 RECEIVED AUG 0 7 2003 CITY OF YAKIMA PLANNING DIV. To: Doug Maples, Code Administration and Planning Manager, City of Yakima, De- partment of Community & Economic Development, 129 No, 2nd St., Yakima, WA From: A Member of the Public Who and Which was and is the Beneficiary of the 1937 Dedication of 20 acres of Property for Park Purposes, and known as Larson Park by and between the City of Yakima and public Benefactor Rose B. Larson who gave said property to the City for the enduring benefit of the public in perpetual memory of prom- inent Yakima citizen and benefactor A. E. Larson. Subject: City of Yakima Public Works Department - UAZO EC #17-03 - purporting to be an application for "Environmental Review" of an environmental checklist concern- ing a "proposed transfer of Noel Field [a part of the property dedicated as Larson Park} to Yakima Valley Community College. Dear Mr. Maples: - I would not have even been aware of the "Notice of Application" for a SEPA review, which was dated July 18, 2003, if my neighbor Marilyn Kukay, at 203 North 24th Avenue, had not brought the one she got to me to see if I could explain it to her because she did not understand it. She, who had been active in the wonderful tennis activities which had gone on for years at Larson Park, had been one of the many members of the public who had been very upset a few years ago when the City transferred the Larson Park property on which the tennis courts were located to YVCC which took out the tennis courts and replaced them with a building and unsightly park- ing lots. To her and to many, many others, this loss of that Larson Park recreational facility was very detrimental to the public, but as far as she knew she and the public had had no notices of public hearings of any kind, nor any real opportunity to oppose that transfer, let alone SEPA notices and reviews. I learned that out of Yakima's population of around 60,000 people, only about 300 re- ceived the present notice. This appears arguably insufficient in view of the real inter- ests of the totality of the citizens and general public, including youths and children, of the City of Yakima, who lost valuable park and recreation property when the tennis court property was transferred, and have been and are impacted by the City's and some of its officials' yielding to the importunings of YVCC representatives and certain government officials to make piecemeal transfers of property, dedicated in 1937 as Larson Park in its entirety for recreational pruposes, to YVCC for "higher education". A "public hearing" was held on December 17, 2002, concerning the proposed transfer of two pieces of Larson Park property known as Dunbar Field and Field #4, respect- ively. The City Council chambers and the hall outside were filled with interested citi- Mr. Doug Maples - August 6, 2003 - Page 2 zens, many of whom spoke publicly, on behalf of most of the people present, in oppos- ition to the irreplaceable loss of recreational park property and green space if Larson Park property were to be transferred to YVCC; I was one of those, and stated to the Council that the City's acceptance of Rose Larson's deed in 1937 completed the dedi- cation of the property, and imposed an enduring public trust upon it for use "forever" as a park for recreational purposes. The only people who spoke in favor of the City's transferring those properties to YVCC were representatives of YVCC, and certain public officials. At that time there was in existence a June, 2002 contract between the Washington State Department of Comm- unity, Trade and Economic Development and the City of Yakima, under the State's Job Creation and Infrastructure Program. That contract awarded to the City of Yakima up to $1.239 million on a reimbursement basis solely for "capital costs associated solely and specifically with capital improvements at the Yakima Ballfields (also referred to as the Kiwanis Park Ballfields) ... The Project also includes the conversion of Kiwanis Park, a 19.5 -acre park just southeast of the central business district, into an active community youth and adult sports park". Public statements addressed to the Council at that December 17, 2002 public hearing, particularly by State Senator Deccio apparently to certain of the Council's seven mem- bers, indicated that there had been private approaches to, and meetings with, the Senator which led him to state that whether the June, 2002, contract for capital im- provements at the Kiwanis Park said so or not, "everybody" understood that the college was to get a credit towards the purchase price of Dunbar Field and Field 4 [of the Larson Park property] as consideration for the transfers of those Larson Park fields to the YVCC. He angrily told the Council that he'd worked hard to get this money for those Kiwanis Park fields, and either they wanted it or they didn't. Nobody questioned whether the "Jobs Enhancement Act" capital improvement money could be so used, let alone that such use was not in - and was specifically excluded from - that June 2002 contract On the question of the 1937 dedication of Larson Park for recreation "park and amusement" purposes only, Tim Carlson, an attorney from a prominent Yakima law firm, was on hand to state that people interested in seeing Lar- son Park property transferred to YVCC for higher education purposes had approached his law firm to see if there wasn't some way to avoid those recreational use restrictions on the Larson Park property. Carlson stated that he and his firm had donated some $22,000 worth of legal services towards finding and carrying out a legally arguable way of getting rid of those use restrictions as mere "clouds on title". Carlson told the Council on December 17, 2002, that in connection with the transfer of the Larson Park tennis court property to the college, his firm had tracked down a man they believed, after much research, to be Rose B. Larson's sole heir, and he had given a quit -claim deed to any and all of his "reversionary" interest in the Larson Park prop- erty to the Foundation of Yakima Valley Community College (a Washington non-profit Mr. Doug Maples - August 6, 2003 - Page 3 corporation. Carlson further stated that when an attorney for the State questioned the legal efficacy of this, a title insurance company issued a title insurance policy which appeared to satisfy the State, and the transfer of Larson Park's tennis court property was done. No one on December 17, 2002 questioned the lack of any public hearings or SEPA reviews previously. As to the use restrictions, the City Attorney agreed with others that there could conflicting legal opinions which could prevail in court. To my knowledge, there were no SEPA reviews done or requested in connection with the proposed transfer of Larson Park properties known as Dunbar Field and Field #4. The current proposed transfer to YVCC of the Larson Park property known as Noel Filed appears to be the only one requesting SEPA review. A copy of Rose B. Larson's 1937 deed to the City is attached. As a retired lawyer and judge, having received my J.D. degree in 1952 and having had legal experience since 1948, I find it significant that in all the years since 1937 no one has sought to question Rose Larson's intent to dedicate, along with the City which she chose as an enduring entity, for public use and recreational benefit "forever", the 20 acres known as Larson Park What do you think? In about 1956 the YVCC wanted to erect what has come to be known as Shearer Gym on Larson Park property. After much open and good faith research and discussion, which included input from the public, it was agreed by almost unanimous consensus that such a gymnasium, which would be available for public as well as college use, fit the recreational "park and amusement use" intended by Rose Larson and the City at the time of the 1937 dedication of the park. I personally enjoyed the recreational use of Shearer Gym on my first moving to Yakima on February 17, 1958. I arrived in the morning, and was invited to play tennis that night "on the boards" at the Shearer Gym. Subsequently, my family and I joined the thousands upon thousands of men, women, youths and children who enjoyed the tennis and other facilities at Larson Park Had the YVCC or anyone else, for that matter, tried to acquire almost all of Larson Park for other than park and recreational purposes at one single time, the public wouldn't have stood for it - nor, I suspect, would have City Hall. New York's Central Park, Seattle's Woodland Park, and countless parks in much smaller communities all over the country have endured without being sacrificed to some "greater good". And, whether we like it or not, "Higher Education" is a business involving millions of dollars each year - and, in the case of YVCC, taxpayers' money at that. Why, when our children go lacking? It is significant that since 1937 until the mid -1990's, the City of Yakima's governing people refused to consider letting anyone use the dedicated Larson Park property for other that recreational"park and amusement" use. It begs the question to say that "higher education" is more important for Yakima's public, including children and youth, than Yakima's parks. I hope the SEPA review will find that the loss of park property plainly impacts the City's and its public's environmental and recreational needs - esp- ecially the needs of its families, youths and children. Indeed, at the July 15,2003 City Council meeting, that's what all the general public members present told the Council! / /A? /yse) KNOW A.i1 L"•.N ,- MESE PRESENTS That the grantor, Rose R. Lerstn, e widow of Yakima, Yakima County, WaaLington, hes given, granted, quit -claimed and conveyed, aro by these presents does hereby give, grant, quit-c:aim and convey, unto the CITY OF YAK261A, Ynkima Co:.nty, Washington, the following described real estate in Yakima, Yeklme Ocunty, i Washington, to -wit: 1 1 7be North Ralf (8*) of the Southwest Quarter (Swy) of the Northwert Quarter ")NW}) of Section Twenty-five (25), Township Thirteen (13) North, Range Eighteen (18) E.W.11., Together with all and singular, the tenements, hereditaments, and appurtenances thereunto belonging or in any wise appertaining. The Notvh Eighty (80) feet and the East Eighty (80) feet of said property is conveyed forever for Street purposes; and the remainder of eaid described property is conveyed forever for use by said grantee for public park and amusement purposes only. Aa This conveyance and the whole thereof is subject to the following conditions subaugpetiti T2i4L,°° Ilia. east) land shall be named and called "-iANIAN R8]12' in atepry:,ef, % :`'a'pmb shall forater maintain at the Ontrail�a 4- k� t �8;pimagant plane:,. pillar, tuonunt `m�.oi';;Btrttie,fl�s�"-� August 7, 2003 Doug Maples, Code Administration and Planning Manager City of Yakima, Community Development Department 129 North 2nd Street Yakima, WA 98901 SUBJECT: "NOEL FIELD TRANSFER" SEPA CHECKLIST; Dear Mr. s, RECD=_; ED � AUG -7 p 3 :34 PR- ¥AKRIA l,.1 i CLE UAZO EC 17-03 RECER IEC AUG 0 7 2003 C/Ty PANNING D MA I write to you in regard to the above -referenced State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Notice of Application and environmental checklist submitted by the City of Yakima's Public Works Department. The issues discussed herein were verbally summarized by me under the "Open Discussion for the Good of the Order" portion of the August 5, 2003, Yakima City Council meeting. As you may be aware, this notice occurs near the end of what has evolved into a five-year process. That process involves the systematic transfer of portions of Larson Park by the City of Yakima to the Yakima Valley Community College (YVCC). Specifically, I am referring to the 1999 transfer of Larson Park Field # 2 and the park's tennis courts, as well as the transfer earlier this year of Dunbar Field and Larson Park Field # 4. The most sinister aspect of this five-year process is that it appears to have been packaged so as to avoid the required environmental analysis and subsequent community -wide consideration of the cumulative effects of this loss of greenspace and park land. It also appears that this action may disproportionately affect low income and minority populations. Accordingly, this letter addresses the specific procedural and potential legal defects I discovered in this notice, and suggests a remedy to cure these defects. Defects First and foremost, under what rationale was an environmental checklist prepared for the transfer of Noel Field to YVCC and not the recently -approved transfer of Dunbar Field and the field known as Larson # 4 (approved by city council in January 2003)? Is this proposal somehow different than the earlier transaction? Which begs the question: Was a SEPA checklist prepared for the sale of Larson Park field # 2 and the park's tennis courts? Surely a SEPA checklist was issued prior to construction of the Deccio F igher Education Center; if so, what was the threshold determination? Per my comment regarding consideration of cumulative impacts, below, did the SEPA checklist and/or subsequent Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) or Mitigated DNS (MDNS) for the Higher Education Center specifically address the likely cumulative effects resulting from the loss of recreation areas and open space, in light of the college's known expansion plans? Regarding the answer to question 1 on page 1, the checklist fails to describe the interrelatedness of this transfer with the previously approved transfers described above (Larson # 4 and Dunbar, Larson # 2 and the tennis courts). Failing to describe and disclose the likely impacts of these known, related actions is a violation of SEPA. Specifically, SEPA requires that "Proposals or parts of proposals that are related to each other closely enough to be, in effect, a single course of action shall be evaluated in the same environmental document." WAC 197-11-060 (3)(b) This section of SEPA continues: "Proposals or parts of proposals are closely related, and they shall be discussed in the same environmental document, if they:... Are interdepedent parts of a larger proposal and depend on the larger proposal as their justification or for their implementation." WAC 197-11-060 (3)(b)(ii) Failing to describe the impacts of these interrelated impacts deprives H:\Temp\Noel Field SEPA.doc — 2 — August 7, 2003 Yakima citizens of the opportunity to evaluate the benefits and costs of a proposal with major implications for the long-term health of our city. At what time will a consistency analysis be prepared, as required by the Local Project Review Act? Specifically, how and when will the city determine consistency between the current comprehensive plan designation of this and other Larson Park parcels as Parks/Open Space, with the college's planned use of these parcels for buildings and parking lots? How will this inconsistency be reconciled? While there are no requirements for the documenting of consistency, cities are encouraged to analyze consistency early in the project review process (and this is a project, as noted below), and to document that process in order to provide support for the final permit decision. WAC 197-11-210 through -232; ROW 43.21G240; 36.70B.030 and -.040 In Section D of the SEPA checklist, the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions (page 11), has been completed. However, "[The] purchase, [sale], lease, transfer... " of publicly owned land is defined as a project action under SEPA. WAC 197-11-704(2)(a)(ii) This seemingly minor detail may have future implications for the processing of land use and building permits from the college. If the city's potential response to these questions is that this proposal is part of a phased review, then that needs to be stated as such in the July 18 SEPA notice. WAC 197-11-060 (5)(e) More to the point, phased review is not appropriate when, "it would merely divide a larger system into exempted fragments or avoid discussion of cumulative impacts." WAC 197-11-060 (5)(d)(ii) Item 7 of the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions states that the proposal has no identified conflicts with local, state or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. The city and college should be aware that given the social and economic makeup of the neighborhood to the north and east of the park and college, this proposal may disproportionately effect low income and minority populations. While there is no such "environmental justice" provision in SEPA, such effects must be disclosed for projects with a federal nexus (i.e., proposed by a federal agency, or receiving federal funds or requiring federal permits), and for which a National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) environmental analysis is required. Executive Order 12898 requires agencies to consider and address the impacts of projects which may have a "disproportionately high and adverse human health" or environmental effect on a minority population, low-income population, or Indian tribe. Remedies In conclusion, I would recommend that the Public Works Department withdraw this Notice of Application. An amended or completely rewritten environmental checklist should then be prepared which includes all parcels sold or otherwise transferred to YVCC within the last six years as part of the college's expansion plans. The revised checklist should specifically address the direct, indirect and cumulative impacts (as well as the potential benefits) to both the immediate neighborhood and the larger community of the loss of public park and recreation space. Perhaps more importantly, the revised checklist should also reflect the city's current knowledge of the college's future building plans, as promulgated by YVCC in the form of its January 1998 Master Plan, or more recent version if available. I would refer you specifically to the development themes depicted under Section VII, Dezelopn'nt Strategies. The Dezelopmmt Corxepts presented in Section VIII may be an useful reference as well. These two sections of the Master Plan will enable staff to model likely environmental effects of the proposed transfer of property to the college. I discussed the issue of SEPA lead agency with Dick Zais, Ray Paollela, and Bill Cook following Tuesday's council meeting. At that time it was suggested that we may wish to invite YVCC to assume lead agency, which I agreed was a possibility worth pursuing. However, after reviewing SEPA : — 3 — August 7, 2003 statutes, I believe it best if the city retains its lead agency status. The most appropriate course of action at this point may be to request that the college, as the project proponent and now titleholder to much of the Larson Park property, file a non -project SEPA environmental checklist based on the concepts presented in the 1998 Master Plan. Alternatively, the direct, indirect and cumulative effects of these land transfers could be made part of a project environmental checklist prepared by the college, due to pending building renovations and upgrades. Conclusion The wholesale tranfser of Larson Park lands to the community college began in 1999, before I began serving on the council in January 2000. An additional transfer came before the council in November 2002; since that time, I have only asked that the larger community be made aware of these transactions and the potential direct, indirect and cumulative effects of those transactions. I have asked that our citizens have an opportunity to review both the impacts and the benefits of replacing a city park with an expanded college campus. I now request that our citizens have the chance to express their values as to the appropriateness of these transactions over the last five years. I am less concerned with the outcome than I am with the process itself; my primary concern is that our neighbors be provided a venue for evaluating and discussing the costs and benefits of this major land use action. These property transfers have occurred in piecemeal fashion, in direct defiance of SEPA. The community has been deprived of the opportunity to weigh the benefits and costs of a truly monumental proposal. Personally, I am torn between these two issues: higher education and parks. It is apparent to me that a decision of such gravity, of such immense long-term consequence, needs to have a much more thorough— and legal— public involvement process. Sincerely, auris (Larry) C Mattson, AICP Yakima City Council, District 4 Cc: Yakima Busims Times Yakima Herald -Republic Yakima Valley Community College Jim Scoggins Scott Wilson BUSINESS OF THE CITY COUNCIL YAKIMA, WASHINGTON AGENDA STATEMENT Item No. 6 For Meeting of: October 21, 2003 ITEM TITLE: Consideration of Resolution Authorizing Sale/Transfer of Noel Field at Larson Park to Yakima Valley Community College/Washington State SUBMITTED BY: Chris Waarvick, Director of Public Works Denise Nichols, Parks and Recreation Manager CONTACT PERSON/TELEPHONE: Chris Waarvick, 576-6411 SUMMARY EXPLANATION: An amended SEPA checklist was sent out for public comment on September 10, 2003. Comment letters were received and reviewed for impact and relevance to the action. A Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance (MDNS) was issued on October 3, 2003, and on October 20, 2003 the appeal period for that determination expired. The required Public Hearing was conducted on July 18, 2003, Item No. 7. The amended SEPA Checklist and Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance (MDNS) are attached. The letters received in response to the amended SEPA checklist are included. Therefore, City staff respectfully requests Council approval of the attached resolution authorizing the sale and transfer of Noel Field at Larson Park to the State of Washington for Yakima Valley Community College purposes. (Continued on next page.) Resolution X Ordinance X Other (Specify) Various Documents Contract _ Mail to (name and address): Phone: Funding Source: APPROVED FOR SUBMITTAL : City Manager STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff respectfully requests Council approval of the attached resolution authorizing the sale and transfer of Noel Field at Larson Park to the State of Washington for Yakima Valley Community College purposes. BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: The Parks and Recreation Commission, at their July 14, 2003 meeting, approved this property sale and transfer. COUNCIL ACTION: The resolution was adopted as amended to include language suggested by John Nicholson used in a previous property transfer. RESOLUTION NO. R-2003-131 Noel Field October 21, 2003 Page 2 The 2004 proposed Parks Capital Budget incorporates the receipt of $350,000 contained in the State Capital Budget for 2003. Senator Alex Deccio was instrumental in providing these capital budget dollars for the Kiwanis Park project. The Budget also includes the $140,000 from the General Contingency Fund and $130,000 from a line of credit. Between the two budget years of 2003 and 2004 sufficient appropriation authority exists to fund the current project at Kiwanis Park. The following is the specific language from the State Budget Bill appropriation: NEW SECTION. Sec. 147. FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY, TRADE, AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Yakima Ballfields (04-2-952) The appropriation in this section is subject to the following conditions and limitations: $120,000 of the appropriation is provided solely to Yakima Valley Community College for the purchase of Noel Field from the city of Yakima, and $230,000 is provided solely to the city of Yakima to replace and relocate Ballfields. It is the intention of the legislature that no funds be distributed to the city of Yakima until the transfer of the Noel field property is complete. Appropriation: State Building Construction Account -State $350,000 Prior Biennia (Expenditures) $0 Future Biennia (Projected Costs) $0 TOTAL $350,000 These dollars ($350,000) will be combined with the additional $270,000 ($140,000 plus $130,000) to fully fund the third ballfield and pave both the north and south parking lots. (Council action on July 15, 2003, Item No. 8, Option 3b is attached.)