Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutR-2007-026 Yakima Air Terminal Public Agency & Utility Exception (re: service road around runways 4 /22 )RESOLUTION NO. R-2007- 26 A RESOLUTION approving the Hearing Examiner's recommendation to approve, with conditions, the request of the Yakima Air Terminal for a "public agency and utility exception" under the City of Yakima's Critical Areas Ordinance to allow construction of a 20 -foot -wide service road around Runway 4/22 within the critical areas of Wide Hollow Creek, and authorizing the Mayor to direct staff to issue the appropriate Critical Area Substantial Development Permit. WHEREAS, on May 16, 2002, the Runway Safety Action Team of the Federal Aviation Administration issued a report recommending that a vehicle service road be constructed at the Yakima International Airport to increase safety by reducing or eliminating the need for pedestrians and vehicles to cross active Runway 4/22; and WHEREAS, the creation of such a service road near Runway 4/22 would entail construction within "critical areas" near Wide Hollow Creek as defined by the City of Yakima's Critical Areas Ordinance, Y.M.C. Chapter 15.27; and WHEREAS, on September 25, 2006, the Yakima Air Terminal submitted an application, CAO #2-06, for a "public agency and utility exception" under the Critical Areas Ordinance, Y.M.C. 15.27.540, in order to allow construction of a 20 -foot -wide service road near Runway 4/22 and within the critical areas of Wide Hollow Creek; and WHEREAS, pursuant to SEPA, the City reviewed the Air Terminal's application and on November 22, 2006, issued a Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance, finding that the Air Terminal's proposal would not adversely impact the critical areas of Wide Hollow Creek if appropriate mitigation measures were observed and requiring six specific mitigation measures; and WHEREAS, on January 25, 2007, the Hearing Examiner held a public hearing to consider the Air Terminal's application for a "public agency and utility exception" to the Critical Areas Ordinance; and WHEREAS, on February 8, 2007, the Hearing Examiner issued his recommendation approving the proposed "public agency and utility exception" subject to two conditions as stated on page 12 of the Hearing Examiner's Recommendation, specifically: 1 1) The applicant shall comply with the mitigation measures required by the Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance issued for this proposal and any other conditions imposed as a condition of a Critical Areas Development Permit that may be issued for the proposal. 2) If the course or banks of the Wide Hollow Creek change in the future so as to render the service road unstable or unsafe, the road shall either be abandoned or relocated further to the southwest if authorized through CAO procedures after the extension of Runway 22/4 or other changes that permit such a relocation, and shall not be repaired or reconstructed in its same location. Now, therefore, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF YAKIMA, WASHINGTON: The proposed "public agency and utility exception" to allow construction of a transverse roadway around Runway 4/22 at the Yakima Air Terminal within the critical areas of Wide Hollow Creek is hereby approved subject to the two conditions stated on page 12 of the Hearing Examiner's Recommendation dated February 8, 2007, and the Mayor is hereby authorized to direct staff to prepare and issue the appropriate Critical Area Substantial Development Permit in accord with the Hearing Examiner's recommendation. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this 6th day of March, 2007. ATTEST: City Clerk 2 ITEM TITLE: BUSINESS OF THE CITY COUNCIL YAKIMA, WASHINGTON AGENDA STATEMENT Item No. For Meeting Of: March 6, 2007 Closed record hearing to consider a resolution to approve a request from the Yakima Air Terminal for a public agency and utility exception of certain setback and buffer requirements under the Yakima Critical Areas Ordinance (YMC Chapter 15.27) for the construction of a transverse roadway around nway 4/22. SUBMITTED BY: 4lliam R Cook, Director of Community and Economic Development CONTACT PERSON/TELEPHONE: Doug Maples Codes Administration & Planning Manager / Jeff Peters Assistant Planner SUMMARY EXPLANATION: The Yakima Air Terminal applied to the City of Yakima for a critical areas development permit under the Yakima Critical Areas Ordinance (YMC Chapter 15.27) to construct a transverse roadway around Runway 4/22. As part of that permit process, the Yakima Air Terminal requested that the City grant a Public Agency and Utility Exception allowing adjustment of certain critical area setback and buffer requirements. On January 25, 2007, and in accordance with YMC 5.27.540, the City hearing examiner held an open public hearing regarding this request. Subsequently, the hearing examiner issued a formal Hearing Examiner's Recommendation on February 8, 2007, in which the hearing examiner found that the criteria of YMC 15 27.540 for approving a Public Agency and Utility Exception for the proposed transverse roadway were satisfied and recommended that the public agency exception request be approved with conditions by the City Council. A copy of said Hearing Examiner Recommendation and a resolution approving the Yakima Air Terminal's request for a public agency exception for the proposed project are attached for City Council consideration. Resolution X Ordinance_ Contract _ Other Hearing Examiner's Recommendation Funding Source APPROVAL FOR SUBMITTAL: /44.1 City Manager STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Accept the hearing examiner's recommendation; adopt the resolution approving a public agency and utility exception for the proposed transverse roadway project and direct staff to issue the appropriate Critical Areas Substantial Development Permit. BOARD RECOMMENDATION: The Hearing Examiner recommended approval of the Public Agency and Utility Exception with conditions on February 8, 2007. COUNCIL ACTION: Resolution adopted. Resolution No. R-2007-26 YAKIMA AIR TERMINAL EXHIBIT LIST City Council Public Hearing March 6, 2007 Applicant: Yakima Air Terminal File Number: CAO #2-06 & SEPA #29-06 Site Address: 2400 West Washington Ave Staff Contact: Jeff Peters, Assistant Planner Table of Contents CHAPTER AA Hearing Examiner's Recommendation CHAPTER A Staff Report CHAPTER B Maps CHAPTER C Site Plan CHAPTER D DST (Development Services Team) Comments CHAPTER E SEPA (State Environmental Policy Act) CHAPTER F Application CHAPTER G Public Comments CHAPTER H Notices xa er's' eciammenctati6n o :EXHIBIT- .. ,_rly a ;: ` ;Ir.: < .i, a lrt t.� "< DOCU NT - { h DA , A=1= "=-:. I3earing-.Exainiiners 'Recommendation2/8107.. , f . , • ±.. �•>ir-' R x " Y } " %y aa' ' rr, ..4. ': - rv' ..' ..,r _ .. .. �.9.ii� ' .. -, .. _ .. • . . City of Yakima, Washington Hearing Examiner's Recommendation February 8, 2007 In the Matter of Application for a Critical Areas Ordinance Public Agency Exception Submitted by: Yakima Air Terminal To Allow for Construction of A Twenty -Foot -Wide Vehicle Service Road between the End Of the Runway 22 Safety Area And Wide Hollow Creek CAO #2-06 SEPA #29-06 Introduction. The Hearing Examiner conducted a public hearing on January 25, 2007 and has issued this decision within ten business days thereof. Assistant Planner Jeff Peters recommended approval of the application requesting a public agency exception to allow for the construction of a proposed new service road within the Critical Areas Ordinance buffer and setback areas for Wide Hollow Creek Yakima Air Terminal Assistant Manager Jerry Kilpatrick testified as to the mitigation measures and the lack of reasonable alternatives for the proposal. A representative of the Yakima Countywide Flood Control District, Joel Freudenthal, expressed concern for the future structural integrity of the proposed service road due to the movement and expansion of the channel of Wide Hollow Creek that he expects to occur in coming years and suggested that the road be as far from the creek as possible. The owner of a business in the area, Frank Glaspey, suggested that City staff has a conflict of interest because of the City's interest in the Air Terminal, indicated that he has never seen an exception of this Yakima Air Terminal Vehicle Service Road SW. of Wide Hollow Creek CAO #2-06; SEPA #29-06 1 DOC. INDEX is # I nature and suggested that the route of the needed service road should instead cross Wide Hollow Creek into the parking area rather than remain on the southwest side of the creek. Testimony relative to these points indicated that City staff.solicited input from many outside agencies in order to arrive at its recommendation, that an exception of this nature was granted for the new SR 24 bridge across the Yakima River, that crossing Wide Hollow Creek would require an exception to disturb areas on both sides of the creek and areas that would be closer to the creek than what is being requested, and that a route through the parking area is neither needed nor desired by the applicant. Summary of Recommendation. The Hearing Examiner recommends approval by the Yakima City Council of this request for a public agency exception to reduce the City's Critical Areas Ordinance stream and wetland buffer and setback requirements to 25 feet on the southwest side of Wide Hollow Creek where necessary for construction of the new service road southwesterly of the creek. Basis for Recommendation. Based upon the Hearing Examiner's view of the site without anyone else present on January 24, 2007; his consideration of the staff report, application, exhibits, testimony and other evidence presented at an open record public hearing on January 25, 2007; and his review of the City's Critical Areas Ordinance; the Hearing Examiner makes the following: FINDINGS Applicant. The applicant is the Yakima Air Terminal, 2400 West Washington Avenue, Yakima, Washington 98903. Yakima Air Terminal Vehicle Service Road SW. of Wide Hollow Creek CAO #2-06; SEPA #29-06 2 —DOC: INDEX .. #�}— Location. The location of the service road would be within 25 feet of the ordinary high water mark of Wide Hollow Creek on the southwest side of the creek northeast of the FAA required Runway Safety Area for the approach end of Runway 22. Application. This application requests approval of a public agency exception from the City's Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO) buffer and setback requirements along the southwest side of the Wide Hollow Creek so as to allow the City to issue a Critical Areas Development Permit for the construction of a new 20 -foot -wide service road that would eliminate the need for pedestrians and vehicles to cross an active runway and would reduce or prevent runway surface incidents or incursions in a manner recommended by the FAA. Notices. Although the City's Critical Areas Ordinance does not require notice of a public hearing to consider an application for an exception to CAO buffer and setback requirements for a public agency, notices were nevertheless provided in the following manner: Posting of hearing notice on property Mailing of application and hearing notice Publishing of hearing notice in newspaper October 26, 2006 October 26, 2006 October 26, 2006 Environmental Review. A Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance for this proposal was issued on November 22, 2006. The appeal period expired on December 7, 2006 without any appeal being filed. Applicable CAO Provisions. The proposed service road would be built within Yakima Air Terminal 3 Vehicle Service Road SW. of Wide Hollow Creek DOC. CAO #2-06; SEPA #29-06 INDEX # ¢1--- 25 feet of the ordinary high water mark or southwestern bank of the Wide Hollow Creek which is a Class II stream and a "critical area" under the City's Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO). The creek crosses beneath West Washington Avenue to enter the airport property. It flows southeasterly around the northeast side of the Cub Crafters building and leaves the airport property by crossing under South 16th Avenue. It is a perennial creek about 10 to 15 feet wide contained in a narrow riparian corridor composed mainly of nonnative vegetation. The stream banks rise sharply from the ordinary high water mark on both sides. The areas adjacent to the stream have been severely impacted by the industrial development of the Yakima Air Terminal. High water tends to spread out more north of West Washington Avenue than on airport property due to the creek's higher banks on the airport property. The proximity of the proposed service road to Wide Hollow Creek places it well within the jurisdiction of the City's Critical Areas Ordinance and also within the 100 -year floodplain of the creek. A CAO Development Permit is required for the proposed service road under Section 15.27.500 of the CAO. Section 15.27.421 of the CAO establishes a development buffer of 100 feet from the ordinary highwater mark of the creek and an additional 20 -foot setback for all structures beyond the 100 -foot buffer. Subsection 15.27.412(A) of the CAO also provides for an additional 100 -foot wetland buffer for Category II Wetlands of High Intensity Use and a 20 -foot setback for all structures beyond that buffer. Since the proposed service road would involve grading to create the needed structural roadbed and other temporary impacts within these buffer and setback areas, a public agency exception would be required under Section 15.27.540 of the CAO to allow issuance of a CAO Development Permit for the service road. Section 15.27.249 of the CAO defines public agencies to include local governments such as the City and County which own the Yakima Air Terminal. Under Subsection 15.27.540(B) of the CAO, the Hearing Examiner is obligated to Yakima Air Terminal Vehicle Service Road SW. of Wide Hollow Creek CAO #2-06; SEPA #29-06 4 DOC. INDEX # ���� review the application and supporting documents and make a recommendation to the City Council based upon specific criteria separately addressed below. History of Proposed Service Road. On May 16, 2002, the FAA Northwest Mountain Region Runway Safety Action Team issued a report recommending that a vehicle service road be constructed to reduce incursions of people or vehicles onto Runway 22/4. The recommendation was to construct the service road when the end of Runway 4 is extended southwesterly in the future because visual inspection led the team to assume there was not enough room for the road between the runway safety area and Wide Hollow Creek. The Air Terminal thereafter reviewed FAA's design criteria for roadways, reviewed the dimensions of the runway protection zone and surveyed the end of Runway 22. The Air Terminal determined as a result of that process that there is sufficient area for the road, that the cost of extending the runway would cost significantly more than installing the road without the runway extension and that a delay in constructing the road until the runway can be extended would result in loss of the funding for both proposed projects which expires in early 2007. On June 7, 2006, the Air Terminal contacted the Washington State Department of Ecology and conducted a site visit regarding the service road. DOE Wetlands and Shorelands Specialist Catherine Reed formally commented on the proposal by letter dated September 18, 2006 stating in part: "...It is my understanding that the roadway will be inside the fence on Airport property, and that the surface of the roadway prism will be sloped so that water runs off away from the creek area. Because your roadway will be placed in an existing impacted buffer area of Wide Hollow Creek (a non-native grassy area inside the fence) Ecology does not have a problem with the project as long as storm -water is routed away from the Creek and properly treated before it is allowed to enter the Creek." Yakima Air Terminal Vehicle Service Road SW. of Wide Hollow Creek CAO #2-06; SEPA #29-06 5 DOC. INDEX # k On September 13, 2006, the Washington State Department of Fish & Wildlife reported the result of its investigation of the proposed service road by an e-mail stating: "The provided plans for constructing the service road are fine with the WDFW, provided: The road grade/elevation matches the existing ground elevation and road runoff flows in the landward, not streamward, direction." On December 20, 2006, State Aviation Planner Mary Vargas for the FAA's Northwest Mountain Region, Seattle Airport Division Office, responded to the City's inquiry regarding the FAA's position on the service road by letter stating in part: "...The number one priority for the FAA is safety. The service road around Runway 22 operation areas is considered a safety project. We encourage the airport to proceed with this project as soon as possible." On November 22, 2006, the City of Yakima issued a Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance which determined that the proposed service road will not significantly impact the environment adversely if enumerated mitigation measures are followed before, during and after construction. Additional information regarding this proposal is set forth in the record of this matter in the form of Assistant Planner Jeff Peters' staff report presented on January 25, 2007 and the following exhibits to that staff report which are incorporated herein as additional. support for this recommendation even though it is impractical to include the information in any greater detail than is set forth here: Joint Aquatic Resources Permit Application Form (DARPA) submitted by the Yakima Air Terminal (September 25, 2006); SEPA Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance (MDNS) submitted by the City of Yakima (November 22, 2006); Federal Aviation Administration Runway Safety Action Team (RSAT) Evaluation Yakima Air Terminal /McAllister Field (May 16, 2002); Federal Aviation Administration Yakima Air Terminal 6 Vehicle Service Road SW. of Wide Hollow Creek DOC. CAO #2-06; SEPA #29-06 INDEX )) YAT service road letter of clarity and support (December 20, 2006); Washington State Department of Ecology letter of project assessment (September 18, 2006); Washington State Department of Ecology e-mail regarding erosion control (October 30, 2006); and Washington State Department of Fish & Wildlife e-mail of project assessment (September 13, 2006). CAO Public Agency Exception Review Criteria. Section 15.27.540 of the CAO requires the Hearing Examiner to review an application for a public agency exception and to make a recommendation to the City Council as to whether the following criteria to be considered are in fact satisfied: 1. Subsection 15.27.540(B)(1) of the CAO: There is no other practical alternative to the proposed development with less impact on the critical areas. Even though Sections 15.27.412 and 15.27.421 of the CAO allow the Director of the Department of Community and Economic Development to reduce the width of required wetland and stream buffer areas by up to 50 percent under certain circumstances, the undisputed evidence presented at the hearing was to the effect that such a reduction in buffer areas would still not be sufficient to allow the proposed service road to be constructed. The evidence presented was that grading needs to occur within 25 feet of Wide Hollow Creek in order to construct the roadbed. Because of the location of Runway 22 and its runway protection zone, there is no alternative that would allow the service road to be constructed further than 25 feet from Wide Hollow Creek or without a public agency exception to the CAO buffer and setback regulations. Alternatives to the current design for the new service road were studied over the last several years. The early designs and recommendations were rejected because they did not recognize the possibility of constructing the service road prior to extending Runway 22/4 and did not take into account a cost -to -benefits analysis for each alternative. Yakima Air Terminal 7 Vehicle Service Road SW. of Wide Hollow Creek "DOC. CAO #2-06; SEPA #29-06 INDEX # 64-1 Because of the cost exceeding one million dollars of extending the Runway 4 end of Runway 22/4 to the southwest and the delay of at least 3-5 years that would be involved in waiting for that runway extension before constructing a service road, that alternative would allow an unnecessary and imprudent safety hazard to continue for several years. Because that alternative would allow an unsafe condition to continue for several years, it is not a practical alternative. Safety is a paramount concern, not to mention the fact that a delay of that nature would result in a loss of funding in the amount of about $100,000 which is currently available to construct the road without further delay at this time. The alternative suggested by Mr. Glaspey of crossing the creek and constructing the road through the parking area northeast of Wide Hollow Creek would require a greater relaxation of the CAO buffer and setback areas than here requested. A bridge would require a complete elimination of the buffer and setback areas on both sides of the creek rather than their reduction to 25 feet on one side of the creek. Under the testimony presented in response to that suggestion, such a route would also be more circuitous, expensive and less desirable from the Air Terminal's standpoint. In conclusion, under the evidence presented here, there is no other alternative, including the "no action" alternative, which would be a practical way to have less impact on the critical areas and still provide the type of benefits by way of enhanced public safety within the near future which the proposed service road in the proposed location would provide. 2. Section 15.27.540(B)(2) of the CAO: The proposal minimizes the impact on critical areas. As shown in the applicant's State Environmental Policy Act Checklist and the City's Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance, the final design of the project has been developed using avoidance/minimization strategies, Yakima Air Terminal Vehicle Service Road SW. of Wide Hollow Creek CAO #2-06; SEPA #29-06 8 DOC. INDEX # AA --I with the input of federal, state and local agencies and the general public. To minimize impacts to critical areas, best management practices will be used during construction. Required MDNS mitigation measures will include: 1) Restoration with all disturbed areas to be returned to their original conditions or better by reseeding and/or additional plantings within thirty days from completion of the proposed service road; 2) Erosion control measures installed to Washington State Department of Ecology Stormwater Standards prior to any clearing, grading or construction. These control measures must be able to prevent soil from being carried into surface waters (including storm drains) by stormwater runoff; and 3) The road grade/elevation shall match the existing ground elevation (as certified by a licensed engineer) and road runoff shall be designed to flow in a landward, not streamward direction; 4) No structure shall exceed the approved seventy-foot setback line under any circumstances unless approval is granted by the Yakima City Council under Section 15.27.540, the Public Agency and Utility Exception of the Yskima Municipal Code. 5) A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (Erosion Sediment Control Plan) is required for all permitted construction sites. These plans and control measures shall be reviewed and approved by the City of Yakima Engineer prior to construction. 6) Stormwater facilities shall be designed in accordance with the Washington State Department of Ecology's Eastern Washington Stormwater Manual and FAA Wetland Mitigation/Detention Facility requirements. 3. Section 15.27.540(C) of the CAO: There is a mitigation plan indicating how the proposal will minimize the impact on critical areas. Although this is one of the listed criteria for consideration, it is not mandatory and it does not appear to apply to a public agency exception. The exact wording of this provision in Section 15.27.540(C) is that "A mitigation plan may be required from the utility indicating how the proposal will minimize the impact on critical areas." In any event, there is a mitigation plan requiring impact avoidance /minimization practices such as designing the road so that runoff will flow in a Yakima Air Terminal 9 Vehicle Service Road SW. of Wide Hollow Creek DOC. CAO #2-06; SEPA #29-06 INDEX # -t )) landward rather than streamward direction and revegetation of impacted critical areas. The City will finalize mitigation requirements when and if it issues the required critical areas Development Permit under Section 15.27.500 of the CAO. 4. Section 15.40.540(D) of the CAO: There is a clear showing that the proposal will protect the public health and safety or repair damaged critical areas where use of category I and II wetlands or their buffers providing habitat for endangered or threatened species will be allowed. There are a number of species of salmonids and other species listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) within Wide Hollow Creek. Besides the applicant's environmental checklist, several letters and e-mails of project assessment, recommendation and support were submitted by several different resource agencies to ensure ESA values, including impact avoidance and mitigation mechanisms that have been incorporated. NOAA Fisheries, the federal agency charged with implementing the ESA for the threatened salmonids at issue, was notified by submission of the SEPA checklist to the Environmental Protection Agency. As of the end of the SEPA comment period on November 15, 2006, and the end of the SEPA appeal period on December 7, 2006, NOAA did not comment formally or informally on the proposed project. However, the Washington Fish and Wildlife Service, also charged with the protection of threatened or endangered species, has approved the location of the proposed service road so long as its grade/elevation matches the existing ground elevation and road runoff flows in the landward rather than streamward direction. Those conditions have been incorporated into the service road plan and design. Substantial mitigation for temporary impacts caused during construction will also be required by the SEPA MDNS and revegetation will minimise or eliminate impacts to threatened species and critical area habitat. Yakima Air Terminal 10 Vehicle Service Road SW. of Wide Hollow Creek 'DOC. CAO #2-06; SEPA #29-06 INDEX Consistency of the Proposed Use with Development Regulations and the Comprehensive Plan under the Criteria Required by Subsection 16.06.020B of the Yakima Municipal Code is determined by consideration of the following factors: a) The types of land uses permitted at the site include the service road which is an accessory safety improvement for the approved airport use. b) The density of residential development and the level of development, such as units per acre or other measures of density, would remain the same. c) The availability and adequacy of infrastructure and public facilities is not an issue here. A service road is infrastructure rather than a use requiring same. The service road would constitute a safety improvement for the public facilities in the affected area. d) The characteristics of the development are consistent with applicable development regulations, including the recommended exception to Critical Areas Ordinance buffer and setback regulations. CONCLUSIONS 1. The Hearing Examiner has jurisdiction to make recommendations to the Yakima City Council regarding applications for a public agency exception to the City's Critical Areas Ordinance buffer and setback requirements. 2. Although there are no specific public notice requirements for the public hearing before the Hearing Examiner to consider an application for a public agency exception to the City's Critical Areas Ordinance requirements, public notice of the hearing was given by mailing, posting and publishing. 3. This project was reviewed under the State Environmental Policy Act. On November 22, 2006, a Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance was issued by the City which was not appealed. 4. The evidence presented at the open record public hearing satisfied the criteria for approval of a public agency exception to the Critical Areas Ordinance Yakima Air Terminal Vehicle Service Road SW. of Wide Hollow Creek CAO #2-06; SEPA #29-06 11 DOC. INDEX # ��-I }) buffer and setback requirements so as to reduce same to 25 feet for the sole purpose of accommodating the proposed construction of the new service road. RECOMMIENDATION The Hearing Examiner recommends APPROVAL of the Yakima Air Terminal's application for a public agency exception reducing the City's Critical Areas Ordinance wetland and stream buffer and setback requirements to 25 feet where necessary for construction of the new service road southwesterly of Wide Hollow Creek in the location and manner described in the materials submitted with UAZO CAO #2-06 and EC #29-06, subject to the following conditions: 1) The applicant shall comply with the mitigation measures required by the Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance issued for this proposal and any other conditions imposed as a condition of a Critical Areas Development Permit that may be issued for the proposal. 2) If the course or banks of the Wide Hollow Creek change in the future so as to render the service road unstable or unsafe, the road shall either be abandoned or relocated further to the southwest if authorized through CAO procedures after the extension of Runway 22/4 or other changes that permit such a relocation, and shall not be repaired or reconstructed in its same location. DATED this 8th day of February, 2007. Gary M. Cuillier, Hearing Examiner Yakima Air Terminal 12 Vehicle Service Road SW. of Wide Hollow Creek DOC. CAO #2-06; SEPA #29-06 INDEX MA AIR TERMINAL EXHIBIT LIST YIAETER A Staff Report: EXHIBIT # A-1 --DOCumENT .Staff Report. DATE 1-25-07 ° , 5, City of Yakima, Washington Division of Environmental Planning PUBLIC HEARING January 25, 2007 Application by: )UAZO CAO #2-06 & EC#29-06 The Yakima Air Terminal ) Staff Planner For a Public Agency Exception To Certain Critical ) Assistant Planner, Jeff Peters Area Setback and Buffer Requirements ) 575-6163 Coupled with an Environmental Review. ) Staff Report The Yakima Air Terminal, proponent of construction of a proposed transverse roadway that parallels Wide Hollow Creek, a Class II stream, has applied to the Department of Community and Economic Development for an exception to the 20 foot setback and 100 foot buffer requirements of the City's Critical Areas Ordinance that would otherwise prohibit the proposed road. Specifically, the Yakima Air Terminal seeks application of the Public Agency and Utility Exception, YMC § 15.27.540, to allow issuance of a critical areas development permit under YMC § 15.27.500. In the absence of this exception, a critical areas development permit cannot be issued for the project as it will not comply with the above referenced setback and buffer requirements. The Department has reviewed the materials submitted in support of this application and has provided its analysis of this application below. In summary, the Department concludes that the proposed transverse roadway meets the required elements of the Public Agency Exception, as there are no practical alternatives to the proposed development, the proposal minimizes impacts on critical areas, comprehensive mitigation activities are an element of the project and the proposed project will substantially improve public safety and alleviate certain environmental concerns. The following documents are included with this Staff Report for consideration by the Hearing Examiner: 1. Joint Aquatic Resources Permit Application Form (JARPA) submitted by the Yakima Air Terminal (September 25, 2006) [Tab A] 2. SEPA Mitigated Declaration of Nonsignificance (NLuNS) othenai«ed by die City of Yakima (November 22, 2006) [Tab B d 1 Hearing Examiner EXH#Date 1 -Z5 -b7 File # CA047-o(? 2'1-0(9 3. Federal Aviation Administration Runway Safety Action Team (RSAT) Evaluation Yakima Air Terminal / McAllister Field (May 16, 2002) [Tab C] 4. Federal Aviation Administration YAT service road letter of clarity and support (December 20, 2006) [Tab D] 5. Washington State Department of Ecology letter of project assessment (September, 18 2006) [Tab E] 6. Washington State Department of Ecology Email regarding erosion control (October 30, 2006) [Tab F] 7. Washington State Department of Fish & Wildlife Email of project assessment, (September 13, 2006) [Tab G]. Background Summary The Yakima Air Terminal (YAT) has proposed to build a 20 -foot wide vehicle service road upon environmentally sensitive property identified by the City of Yakima's Comprehensive Plan Critical Area Map as containing a protected Class II stream (Wide Hollow Creek). If constructed, the proposed service road would be allowed to encroach into the 100 -foot protective critical area stream buffer of Wide Hollow Creek to within 25 feet of the ordinary high water mark, as described in the above documents. The design and development of the YAT's proposed vehicle service road has a history, which dates back to May 15, 2002. During a two-day review of the YAT, the Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA) Northwest Mountain Region Runway Safety Action Team (RSAT) performed a review of the YAT's ongoing efforts to reduce runway incursions. A runway incursion is defined by the FAA "as any occurrence at an airport involving an aircraft, vehicle, person or object on the ground that creates a collision, hazard or results in a loss of separation with an aircraft taking off, intending to take off, landing, or intending to land." The reduction of these incursions is important because they are necessary to improve public safety and minimize adverse environmental impacts to YAT property. During the FAA's RSAT review several areas of concern were noted, one of these being the addition of a vehicle service road around the approach end of Runway 22. The RSAT stated "The Runway Safety Action Team recommends that a vehicle service road be included in the planning for the approach end of Runway 22, when a project is undertaken to extend the Runway 4 end in the future." During initial project review, both the recommendation of the FAA's RSAT requesting an extension of Runway 4 / relocation of the runway threshold and the proposal of the YAT were considered. However, after initial review, the YAT rejected the RSAT's recommendation for delaying construction of the proposed service road until Runway 4 was extended. 2 DOC. INDEX # A -t The YAT rejected the report as it was based upon the RSAT's visual inspection of the airport and a general assumption that there was an insufficient amount of property between the proposed road, "salmon bearing stream" (Wide Hollow Creek) and the runway safety area. In addition, the costs of the runway extension and threshold relocation were considered in comparison to the existing proposal. The result revealed that the runway extension proposal was significantly higher. Additionally, it was also found that delay of construction would cause the YAT to lose funding for both proposed projects as the Airport Passenger Facility Charge Program moneys, which currently fund the proposed airport safety improvement, are scheduled to expire in early 2007. Following review of the RSAT's findings, YAT officials reviewed both the FAA's design criteria for roadways, the dimensions of the runway protection zone and surveyed the end of Runway 22. The results of the YAT's findings revealed that there currently exists sufficient space for the construction of the transverse roadway. On June 7, 2006, the YAT contacted the Washington State Department of Ecology and conducted a site visit regarding placement of the transverse roadway within the Critical Area buffer of Wide Hollow Creek. Catherine D. Reed Wetland and Shoreline Specialist from the Washington State Department of Ecology formally commented on the proposal in her letter dated September 18, 2006 stating, "...It is my understanding that the roadway will be inside the fence on Airport property, and that the surface of the roadway will be placed in an existing impacted buffer area of Wide Hollow Creek (a non-native grassy area inside the fence). Ecology does not have a problem with the project as long as storm -water is routed away from the Creek and properly treated before it is allowed to enter the Creek." The YAT also contacted the Washington State Department of Fish & Wildlife who responded on September 13, 2006 stating, "The provided plans for constructing the service road are fine with the WDFW, provided: The road grade/elevation matches the existing ground elevation and road runoff flows in the landward, not streamward, direction." The City of Yakima following public notice of the proposed project contacted the FAA to reaffirm that the proposed transverse roadway project was supported by the above agency. Mary Vargas State Aviation Planner for the FAA's Northwest Mountain Region Seattle Airport Division Office responded on December 20th, 2006 stating "...The number one priority for the FAA is safety. The service road around Runway 22 operation areas is considered a safety project. We encourage the airport to proceed with this project as soon as possible." The City of Yakima is designated as the lead agency of the project for the purpose of assessing compliance with the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). On November 22, 2006, the City of Yakima issued a Mitigated Determination of Non -Significance (MDNS) for the Project. The MDNS constitutes a finding that the project will not 3 DOC. INDEX adversely impact the environment provided certain mitigation measures contained in the MDNS are followed by the YAT before, during, and after construction. On September 26, 2006, the YAT filed with the City its application for review under the State Environmental Policy Act and Critical Areas Substantial Development Permit, called a "Joint Aquatic Resources Permit Application Form" or "JARPA Application". Notice for the hearing and application was provided in accordance with the UAZO requirements in the following manner: Mailing of notice October 26, 2006 Posting of property October 26, 2006 Legal Ad published October 26, 2006 The City is in the process of reviewing these applications and, with regard to the Critical Areas Development Permit, must find that the project is in compliance with the City's Critical Areas Ordinance. As described below, the YAT's project will not comply with several buffer and setback requirements in the CAO. This noncompliance will preclude issuance of a critical areas development permit unless a public agency exception, which is akin to a variance, is issued. The public agency exception would allow the City to issue a Critical Areas Development Permit for the project. Critical Areas, Setbacks and Buffers The YAT's transverse roadway project will be built within 25 feet of the ordinary high water mark of Wide Hollow Creek, which is designated as a Class 2 stream and "critical area" under the City's Critical Area Ordinance. The City's critical area jurisdiction over this project extends from Wide Hollow Creek's southern bank or ordinary high water mark three hundred feet to the south. Consequently, the transverse roadway project will require permits under the CAO as the project falls well within the three hundred foot CAO jurisdiction. As stated previously, Wide Hollow Creek in this location is a Class 2 stream, which predominantly flows from the northwest to southeast. The stream enters airport property as it crosses beneath Washington Avenue and then flows around the northeast side of the Cub Crafters building and exits the airport property as it crosses beneath S. 16th Ave. The creek itself can be described as a perennial creek approximately 10 to 15 feet wide, encompassed in a narrow riparian corridor primarily composed of nonnative vegetation. The stream banks rise quickly from the Ordinary High Water mark on both sides and the areas adjacent to the stream have been severely impacted by the industrial development r the v_i_�._ ♦ Terminal. of the Yakima i-ur 1 erminal. The 100 -year FEMA floodplain extends between approximately 240 and 100 feet from the southeast bank of Wide Hollow Creek and therefore leaves the proposed development well within the 100 -year floodplain. 4 DOC. INDEX # - I The City of Yakima's Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO) YMC 5.27 requires a structural setback and vegetative buffer of undisturbed soil and native vegetation for streams and wetlands, based on their official classification. Wide Hollow Creek at the location of the proposed project is considered a Class 2 Stream and, as such qualifies as a wetland. Generally, according to YMC § 15.27.510, a development buffer of 100 feet has been established, as measured from the ordinarily high water mark of the stream or, if not discernable in the field, from the top of the bank. In addition, a 20 -foot minimum setback from the edge of the buffer has been established for all structures. The YAT's transverse roadway would not comply with this buffer or setback requirement. The CAO, at YMC § 15.27.412.A, provides for an additional 100 -foot wetland buffer for Category II Wetlands of High Intensity Use, and a 20 -foot setback for all structures measured from the upland edge of the wetland buffer. The transverse roadway will also not comply with the above buffer and setback requirements. If these buffer requirements are strictly applied, the YAT's project cannot proceed. The transverse roadway as currently proposed would lie well within the 100 -foot buffer and 20 foot setback of Wide Hollow Creek. Grading will occur within these setback and buffer areas to create the structural bed necessary for the proposed road, and temporary impacts to setback areas will occur during construction. All environmental impacts will be mitigated by either avoidance and minimization or repair of wetlands near the roadway. Nevertheless, in the absence of a procedural mechanism allowing noncompliance with the buffer and setback requirements, the YAT's transverse roadway project cannot be permitted under the CAO. Public Agency Exception to CAO Standards According to YMC § 15.27.740, if the application of CAO development standards, including setbacks arid buffer requirements, would prohibit a project proposed by a public agency or public utility, the agency or utility may apply to the Director of Community & Economic Development for an exception to these standards. Public agency is defined at YMC § 15.27.4139 to include local governments, state and federal agencies and tribes. The application for this exception is to be heard by the Hearing Examiner, who shall review the application and supporting documents and make a recommendation to the City Council based on the following criteria: 1. There is no other practical alternative to the proposed development with less impact on the critical areas, and 2. The proposal minimizes the impact on critical areas. A mitigation plan may be required indicating how the proposal will minimize the impact on critical areas. 5 INDEX # A -I In addition, as described in YMC § 15.27.740.D, the public agency exception "shall not allow the use of those category I and II wetlands or their buffers providing plant associations of infrequent occurrence or habitat for federal or state endangered or threatened species or species needing special protection or for utilities including regional retention/detention facilities except where there is a clear showing the facility will protect public health and safety or repair damaged critical areas." A. Application of the YMC § 15.27, Part Four, and specifically the CAO's setback and buffer requirements, would prohibit development of the Airport Transverse Roadway Project. Design plans for the proposed transverse roadway necessarily include activities that will take place within the 120 foot combined setback/buffer areas applicable to the transverse roadway project. YMC § 15.27.510.D provides that in certain circumstances, the Director of Community and Economic Development may reduce the buffer by up to 50%. However, a 50% reduction in buffer and setback requirements is still insufficient to allow the proposed roadway construction to proceed. In sum, the strict application of the setback and buffer requirements will prohibit development of the transverse roadway project. B. There is no other practical alternative to the proposed transverse roadway project with less impact on the critical areas and the proposal minimizes the impact on critical areas. Alternatives to the current design for the new transverse roadway have been studied over the last several years. These early designs and recommendations were rejected as inconsistent, as the proposed recommendations and plans were not based upon factual evidence, and did not take into account a cost to benefits analysis of each proposal. In addition, delay of the proposed project's construction would cause the YAT to lose funding for both alternatives as the Airport Passenger Facility Charge Program that is to fund this project is scheduled to expire in early 2007. The loss of funding and a delay in construction would also prevent the construction of the transverse roadway, thus exposing the users of the YAT to a continual unsafe air hazard. Alternatives that may have had less impact on critical areas, mainly the extension of runway 4/22 were also rejected because they failed to address the immediate public safety concerns as identified by the FAA's RSAT, and would allow a currently unsafe condition to stand for a yet undetermined amount of time. As shown in the applicant's State Environmental Policy Act Check List and City of Yakima issued Mitigated Determination of Non -Significance (MDNS), the final design of the project has been developed using avoidance / minimization strategies, with the input of federal, state, local agencies and the general public. 6 DOG. INDEX # -1 To minimize impacts to critical areas, best management practices will be used during construction, as described in the MDNS for this project, [Tab B]. Mitigation measures will include: (a) Restoration with all disturbed areas to be returned to their original conditions or better by reseeding and/or additional plantings within thirty days from completion of the proposed transverse road; (b) Erosion control measures installed to Washington State Department of Ecology Stormwater Standards prior to any clearing, grading or construction. These control measures must be able to prevent soil from being carried into surface waters (including storm drains) by stormwater runoff; and (c) The road grade/elevation shall match the existing ground elevation (as certified by a licensed engineer) and road runoff shall be designed to flow in a landward, not streamward direction. In addition, the MDNS also includes mitigation for all elements of the project and concludes that the project would not cause adverse environmental impacts provided certain mitigation measures are implemented by the YAT before, during, and after construction. The Yakima Air Terminal has committed to these measures, which include in part: 1. No structure) shall exceed the approved seventy-foot setback line under any circumstances unless approval is granted by the Yakima City Council under Chapter 15.27.540 Public Agency and Utility Exception of the Yakima Municipal Code. 2. A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (Erosion Sediment Control Plan) is required for all permitted construction sites. These plans and control measures shall be reviewed and approved by the City of Yakima Engineer prior to construction. 3. Stormwater facilities shall be designed in accordance with the Washington State Department of Ecology's Eastern Washington Stormwater Manual and FAA Wetland Mitigation/Detention Facility requirements. The mitigation package and other conditions will be finalized when and if the permits are issued under the JARPA application. I YMC 15.02: Structure means anything constructed or erected which requires location on the ground or attached to something having a location on the ground. 7 DOC. INDEX # A -I C. The Project includes a comprehensive mitigation plan to address impacts to Critical Areas. Although a mitigation plan need not be provided in all cases where the Public Agency exception is authorized, the YAT's transverse roadway project does include a comprehensive mitigation strategy, as discussed above. As noted, the primary requirements of the mitigation plan are impact avoidance/minimization practices (i.e. road runoff shall be designed to flow in a landward, not streamward direction) and revegetation of impacted critical areas. The City will finalize mitigation requirements and other conditions when and if it issues the required critical areas development permit under § 15.27.700 of the CAO. D. The Project avoids and mitigates for potential impacts to ESA threatened species and there is a clear showing that the facility will protect public health and safety. There are a number of species of salmonids and other species listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) for the affected critical area. As included with the applicant's environmental checklist, several letters and email's of project assessment, recommendation and support [Tabs D, E, F & G], have been submitted by several different resource agencies to ensure ESA values, including impact avoidance and mitigation mechanisms, have been incorporated. NOAA Fisheries, the federal agency charged with implementing the ESA for the threatened salmonids at issue, was notified via issuance of the SEPA checklist to the Environmental Protection Agency. As of both November 15, 2006, the end of the SEPA comment period, and December 7, 2006, the end of the appeal period, neither agency has commented formally or informally on the proposed project. However, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, also charged with the protection of threatened or endangered species, has commented on the proposed application, approving the location of the proposed roadway with conditions [Tab G]. The conditions required by the Washington State Department of Fish & Wildlife in the email of project assessment have been incorporated into the YAT transverse roadway project plan and design. Accordingly, substantial mitigation for temporary impacts caused during construction will be provided, as stated in the City of Yakima issued SEPA MDNS (File: EC#29-06) [Tab B]. In addition, as described in preceding sections above, revegetation will act to minimize and eliminate impacts to threatened species and critical area habitat. Conclusion & Recommendation For the reasons listed above, the Department of Community & Economic Development has concluded that the YAT transverse roadway project meets the criteria of the Public Agency Exception. 8 DOC. INDEX # -1 TAB A Agency Reference #: Date Received: ) (local govt or agency) AGENCY USE ONLY Circulated by: JOINT AQUATIC RESOURCES PERMIT APPLICATION FORM (JARPA) (for use in Washington State) PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT IN BLACK INK. TO FILL IN ELECTRONICALLY, USE F11 TO MOVE THROUGH THE FORM 0 Application for a Fish Habitat Enhancement Project per requirements of RCW 77.55.290. You must submit a copy of this completed JARPA application form and the (Fish Habitat Enhancement JARPA Addition) to your local Government Planning Department and Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife Area Habitat Biologist on the same day. NOTE: LOCAL GOVERNMENTS — You must submit any comments on these projects to WDFW within 15 working days. Based On the instructions provided, I am sending copies of this application to the following: (check all that apply) Q Local Government for shoreline: DSubstantial Development ❑Conditional Use ❑Variance ❑x Exemption ❑Revision ❑Floodplain Management ❑x Critical Areas Ordinance (YMC 15.27.540 & .216) ❑ Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife for HPA (Submit 3 copies to WDFW Region) 0 ❑ Washington Department of Ecology for 401 Water Quality Certification (to Regional Office -Federal Permit Unit) Washington Department of Natural Resources for Aquatic Resources Use Authorization Notification Corps of Engineers for: ❑ Section 404 ❑ Section 10 permit ❑Coast Guard for: ❑ General Bridge Act Permit ❑ Private Aids to Navigation (for non -bridge projects) For Department of Transportation projects only: This project will be designed to meet conditions of the most current Ecology/Department of Transportation Water Quality Implementing Agreement SECTION A - Use for all permits covered by this application. Be sure to ALSO complete Section C (Signature Block) for all permit applications. 1. APPLICANT Yakima Air Terminal — McAllister Field -- Attention: Jerry G. Kilpatrick, Assistant Manager MAILING ADDRESS 2400 West Washington Avenue, Yakima, Washington 98903 WORK PHONE 509-575-6149 E-MAIL ADDRESS : I HOME PHONE 'erry.kilpatrick @ yakimaairterrninal.com FAX # 509-575-61 5 If an agent is acting for the applicant during the permit process, complete #2. Be sure agent signs Section C (Signature Block) for all permit applications 2. AUTHORIZED AGENT MAILING ADDRESS Same WORK PHONE I E-MAIL ADDRESS HOME PHONEFAX # 3. Relationship of applicant to property:I 0 OWNER ❑ PURCHASER 0 LESSEE ❑x Employee 4. Name, address and phone number of property owner(s) if other than applicant: City and County of Yakima. Washinaotn 5. Location (street address, including city, county and zip code, where proposed activity exists or will occur) On airport property at the approach end of Runway 22 approximately 600' SW of intersection of S16th and West Washington Avenue. Local govemment with jurisdiction (city or county) City of Yakima Waterbody you are working in Wide Hollow Creek Is this waterbody on the 303(d) List** YES ❑x NO 0 If YES, what parameter(s)? 1, 2 and 5 **For 303d List, htto://www.ecv.wa gov/orograms/wo/303d/index html YSection Section SE 35 Township Range Govemment Lot 13 18 I Trihiitar;, of Ahtanum Creek/Yakima River vv RIA # 99 Shoreline designation Zoning designation CBDS DNR stream type if known DOC. INDEX # / -I 1 Latitude and Longitude: Tax Parcel Number 1335-31001 ECY 070-15 (Rev. 11/04) JARPA Contact the State of Washington Office of Reaulatory Assistance for latest version or call 360/407-7037 or 800/917-0043 Describe the current use of the property, and structures existing on the property. Have you completed any portion of the proposed activity on this property? ❑ YES ❑x NO For any portion of the proposed activity already completed on this property, indicate month and year of completion. The property is utilized as a commercial service airport and is classified as an essential public facility. Is the property agricultural land? ❑ YES ❑x NO Are you a USDA program participant? 0 YES ❑x NO 7a. Describe the proposed work that needs aquatic permits: Complete plans and specifications should be provided for all work waterward of the ordinary high water mark or line, including types of equipment to be used. If applying for a shoreline permit, describe all work within and beyond 200 feet of the ordinary high water mark. If you have provided attached materials to describe your project, you still must summarize the proposed work here. Attach a separate sheet if additional space is needed. The airport proposes to construct a service roadway outside of the FAA required Runway Safety Area (RSA) on the approach end of runway 22. The roadway's location is `fixed by function' and can not be located further from the creek and still meet FAA design criteria. It is designed to enhance protect public health andsafety. Drawing is attached. The roadway would be considered as Critical Facilities under 15.27.216 and fall under the Public Agency and Utility Exception under 15.27.540. PREPARATION OF DRAWINGS: See sample drawings and guidance for completing the drawings. ONE SET OF ORIGINAL OR GOOD QUALITY REPRODUCIBLE DRAWINGS MUST BE ATTACHED. NOTE: Applicants are encouraged to submit photographs of the project site, but these DO NOT substitute for drawings. THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS AND COAST GUARD REQUIRE DRAWINGS ON 8-1/2 X 11 INCH SHEETS. LARGER DRAWINGS MAY BE REQUIRED BY OTHER AGENCIES. 7b. Describe the purpose of the proposed work and why you want or need to perform it at the site. Please explain any specific needs that have influenced the design. This service road will eliminate the need for vehicles to cross an active runway and reduce and/or prevent Runway Surface Incidents or Runway Incursions by pedestrians and/or vehicles. The construction of this surface road is highly recommended by the Federal Aviation Administration to enhance aviation safety. The proposed construction is shown on and is in compliance with the FAA approved Airport Layout Plan. 7c. Describe the potential impacts to characteristic uses of the water body. These uses may include fish and aquatic life, water quality, water supply, recreation and aesthetics. Identify proposed actions to avoid, minimize, and mitigate detrimental impacts and provide proper protection of fish and aquatic life. Identify which guidance documents you have used. Attach a separate sheet if additional space is needed. None. No work will be done within 20 feet of the normal high water mark of the creek. All storm water drainage from the proposed service road will follow the natural terrain and will drain away from the creek preventing any surface water from entering the creek. 7d. For in water construction work, will your project be in compliance with the State of Washington water quality standards for turbidity WAC 173.201A-110? 0 YES 0 NO (See USEFUL DEFINITIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS) 8. Will the project be constructed in stages? YES 0 Proposed starting date: Spring, 2007 Estimated duration of activity: 30 days 9. Check if any temporary or permanent structures will be placed: ❑ Waterward of the ordinary high water mark or line for fresh or tidal waters AND/OR ❑ Waterward of the mean higher high water for tidal waters? NO x❑ /iII fill material (rock, fill, bulkhead, or other material) be placed: ❑ Waterward of the ordinary high water mark or line for fresh waters? If YES, VOLUME (cubic yards) / AREA (acres) ❑ Waterward of the mean higher high water for tidal waters? -DOC. INDEX # y -I 2 If YES, VOLUME (cubic yards) \REA (acres) :j ; I ECY 070-15 (Rev. 11/04) JARPA Contact the State of Washington Office of Regulatory Assistance for latest version or call 360/407-7037 or 800/917 11. Will material be placed in wetlands? fl YES Ox NO If YES: A. Impacted area in acres: B. Has a delineation been completed? If YES, please submit with application. j YES 0 NO C. Has a wetland report been prepared? If YES, please submit with application JJ YES 0 NO D. Type and composition of fill material (e.g., sand, etc.) E. Material source: F. List all soil series (type of soil) located at the project site, and indicate if they are on the county's list of hydric soils. Soils information can be obtained from the natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). G. WILL PROPOSED ACTIVITY CAUSE FLOODING OR DRAINING OF WETLANDS? J YES Q NO If YES, IMPACTED AREA IS ACRES OF DRAINED WETLANDS. NOTE: If your project will impact greater than of an acre of wetland, submit a mitigation plan to the Corps and Ecology for approval along with the JARPA form. NOTE: A 401 water quality certification will be required from Ecology in addition to an approved mitigation plan if your project impacts wetlands that are: a) greater than acre in size, or b) tidal wetlands or wetlands adjacent to tidal water. Please submit the JARPA form and mitigation plan to Ecology for an individual 401 certification if a) or b) applies. 12. Stormwater Compliance for Nationwide Permits Only: This project Is (or will be) designed to meet ecology's most current stormwater manual, or an Ecology approved local stormwater manual. 0 YES J NO If YES — Which manual will your project be designed to meet? If NO — For clean water act Section 401 and 404 permits only — Please submit to Ecology for approval, along with this JARPA application, documentation that demonstrates the stormwater runoff from your project or activity will comply with the water quality standards, WAC 173.201(A) 13. Will excavation or dredging be required in water or wetlands? 0 YES 0 NO If YES: A. Volume: (cubic yards) /area (acre) B. Composition of material to be removed: C. Disposal site for excavated material: D. Method of dredging: 14. Has the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) been completed 0 YES (]x NO Submitted to City 9/25/06 but not completed. SEPA Lead Agency: City of Yakima, Washington SEPA Decision: DNS, MDNS, EIS, Adoption, Exemption DNS Decision Date (end of comment period) Under Review. SUBMIT A COPY OF YOUR SEPA DECISION LETTER TO WDFW AS REQUIRED FOR A COMPLETE APPLICATION 15. List other Applications, approvals or certifications from other federal, state or local agencies for any structures, construction discharges or other activities described in the application (i.e. preliminary plat approval, health district approval, building permit, SEPA review, federal energy regulatory commission license (FERC), Forest practices application, etc.). Also, indicate whether work has been completed and indicate all existing work on drawings. NOTE: For use with Corps Nationwide Permits, identify whether your project has or will need an NPDES permit for discharging wastewater and/or stormwater. TYPE OF APPROVAL SEPA Review ISSUING AGENCY IDENTIFICATION NO. DATE OF APPLICATION DATE APPROVED COMPLETED? City of Yakima 9/28/06 DOC. INDEX # A -I 3 16. Has any a ency denied approval for theNO ac IfYES ac ' you're applying for or for any activity di- •ily ted to the activity described herein? ❑YES, explain: Both Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife and the Washington State Department of Ecology hav( had an opportunity to view the site and have stated that they have no objections as long as storm water drainage is directed away from the creek. Topography in the area currently is sloped away from the creek and the proposed roadway will follow current topography. ECY 070-15 (Rev. 11/04) JARPA Contact the State of Washington Office of Regulatory Assistance for latest version or call 360/407-7037 or 800/917-0043 DOC. INDEX # A - I 4 SECTION B - Use for Shoreli or. Corps of Engineers permits )h, 17a. Total cost of project. This means the fair market value of the project, including materials, labor, machine rentals, etc. $125,000 17b. If a project or any portion of a project receives funding from a federal agency, that agency is responsible for ESA consultation. Pleas indicate if you will receive federal funds and what federal agency is providing those funds. See instructions for information on ESA.* FEDERAL FUNDING El YES 0 NO If YES, please list the federal agency. 18. Local government with jurisdiction: City of Yakima 19. For Corps, Coast Guard and DNR permits, provide names, addresses and telephone numbers of adjoining property owners, lessees, etc. - Please note: Shoreline Management Compliance may require additional notice - consult your local government. NAME - - - - - ---- ADDRESS e PHONE NUMBER SECTION C - This section MUST be completed for any permit covered by this application 20. Application is hereby made for a permit or permits to authorize the activities described herein. I certify that I am familiar with the information contained in this application, and that to the best of my knowledge and belief, such information is true, complete, and accurate. I further certify that I possess the authority to undertake the proposed activities. I hereby grant to the agencies to which this application is made, the right to enter the above-described location to inspect the proposed, in -progress or completed work. I agree to start work ONLY after all necessary permits have been received. SIGNATUR-PLICA SIGNATURE OF AUTHORIZED AGENT DATE DATE I HEREBY DESIGNATE TO ACT AS MY AGENT IN MATTERS RELATED TO THIS APPLICATION FOR PERMIT(S). I UNDERSTAND THAT IF A FEDERAL PERMIT IS ISSUED, I MUST SIGN THE PERMIT. SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT DATE i SIGNATURE OF LANDOWNER (EXCEPT PUBLIC ENTITY LANDOWNERS, E.G. DNR) THIS APPLICATION MUST BE SIGNED BY THE APPLICANT AND THE AGENT, IF AN AUTHORIZED AGENT IS DESIGNATED. 18 U.S.0 §1001 provides that: Whoever, in any manner within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States knowingly falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, or device a material fact or makes any false, fictitious, or fraudulent statements or representations or makes or uses any false writing or document knowing same to contain any false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or entry, shall be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned not more than 5 years or both. tyres-wi _.:r - - _ rfi�?..=;ccv..au�Y,t-r.,lt:kF3=3A%E.'F i rtg nd Tn e' -tial ?ski •, _ ;aa lsfiudfieiftiriTavtt _--�_:;:- _ -- - -- �U-�:>.�;-1��" ELS et_€zatt G i fL is _ :nrti i i '- 711 1$17 - _ These Agencies are Equal Opportunity and Affirmative Action employers. For ECY 070-15 (Rev. 11/04) JARPA Contact the Statcial e of Washation ington Office of Regulatory Assistance for test version ds, please contact the appropriate agency in the ,or b I 6 r�W380/407-7037 or 800/917-0043 INDEX # A --I 5 NV. r JO l r. y Runway Safety Action Tr Ev, .ition Yakima Air TerminaVMcAlI r Pk May 6 1 2002 , John also suggested the placement of "unofficial" signs on the buildings of Cub Crafters and the McAllister Air Museum warning pilots and pedestrians of the impermissibility of walking from that particular ramp to the airport restaurant while remaining within airport boundaries. Dave Adams Dave is the FAA Air Traffic Manager at the Spokane Hub. Since Yakima is now a contract tower, FAA provides administrative and regulatory oversight through Spokane Hub. DXSCUSSXONS,r cs, CONCLUSIONS & ACTION ITEMS Runway 22 and Taxiway A & B intersection; Runway 22's threshold is relocated in accordance with AC 150/5300, Airport Design. (Note; relocated thresholds are included in FAA regulations They are defined as an area where "the,portion ofpavernent behind a relocated threshold is not available for takeoff or landing. It may be available for taxiing of aircraft. ' j The threshold was moved to comply with runway safety area requirements for runway 22. Evidently, the approach end of Runway 22 looks like a continuation of the ramp to some pilots, even though it is clearly marked as taxiway and is clearly signed and marked to prevent entry. This is the area of the majority of surface incidents at YKM. It was again stated by airport personnel that pilot training and/or penalties against the pilots committing the offenses would aid in solving the problem. Taxiway B (in front of Cub Crafters' ramp) and Taxiway C (between Runway 22 and Taxiway Alpha) are nom movement areas by Letter of Agreement (LOA) with the airport. This brought out the need to change either the tower -airport LOA or the markings on the boundary between Cab Crafters' ramp and Taxiway Bravo. The Runway Safety Action Team recommends that a vehicle service road be included in the planning for the approach end of Runway 22, when a project is undertaken to extend the Runway 4 end in the future. Because of the proximity of the salmon -breeding stream just outside of the runway safety area, there is not enough space to allow for a road there now. When the approach end of Runway 4 is extended, it could be extended sufficiently to allow a service road to be built around the Runway 22 end. Airway Facility discussion: Jerry confirmed that there is no way for Airways Facilities (AF) personnel to access their work without crossing a taxiway. Mark Gavin painted out that the airport needs to know when AF people are going to be on the field because, ultimately, Yakima Air Terminal is responsible: "We don't want you to be blind -sided if we cause a problem on your field." However, the airport does not feel it is necessary for AF personnel to contact the airport prior to entering the field. "AF personnel receive the same vehicle operators' training as airport employees and there has never been a surface incident involving AF personnel at YKM. The notification would be unduly burdensome to all parties," according to Jerry. Page 8 of 10 DOG. INDEX REQUIRED ATTACHMENT: ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST STATE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT (SEPA) (AS TAKEN FROM WAC 197-11-960) CHAPTER 6.88, YAKIMA MUNICIPAL, CODE (YMC) 111:410r The State Environmental Policy 43`:;ihA •";' Act (SEPA), chapter .2 IC RCW, requires all governmental agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions. An environmental impact statement (EIS) must be prepared for all proposals with probable significant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to provide information to help you and the agency identify impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid imjacts from the .ro.osal, if it can be done) and to hel. the a:enc decide whether an EIS is re• rte+,. y ,� aired. ...I-4 /'t I'�_ ,.@' ®�11�'r t..,� Da i. y'� 4�' "' .r• .�, ryr 'f+ ;,5 • . 1 '„' ,1.. J+r,•...,yJ W' a 1, YnFr '�1 + • ,? "J �Y• :; .......,,..r+awd" ' ,r".lY'«• 7 -x?.?'f 7• • F f r"',. •H...;Y':� r --1'',.00',V F'�.*fsr lam; c �;�•�r."'x`•�F This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your mer agencies use this checklist to determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are signal Govrenmentgl preparation of an EIS. Answer the questions briefly, with the most precise information known, or give thes of cant, yrequiring description you can. You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. In most cases, you should be able to answer the questions from your own observations or project plans without the need to hire experts. If you really do not know the answer, or if a question does not apply to your proposal, write "do not know" or "does not apply". 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 on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonabl related to determmin if there 'tin ..�v�be sia.'ficant adverse impact. - - ti a e. .�' • 4,r; ya + R Da xJ v. ° �' �Gf Dorf' lf"" rt r ''1�, Irj :"r' x f ''° •tri " p„r.• y.,. . r.. ,;d e O "', ' ;w~' %�� .,:0•11. r'rid Complete this checklist for non project proposals, even though questions may be answered snot apply." INY ADDITION, complete the SUPPLEMENTAL 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 " osal " " �,,,,,,, �, x y�ro� ,= rooser, and "affected �eo a a�hic area," respectively. „�' �� g' °�� C fi• ^1i °",,c�^e +' "i. f5d F �1a v u. oi::-�•: t of H:'"� ,�may5 ;; �r'."_",`..y,��,� �:'-' crr y;:,.�Y,•�; :;y:•; v� �• "?7 Cirf.�hsG Y�.( , .0.4, r,"a.r"� rL,r7�. f r,...'.: •. •w;,.;,'�; 'nv; 1. NAME OF PROPOSED PROJECT (if applicable) Runway 22 Service Road 2. APPLICANT'S NAME & PHONE Yakima Air Terminal, 509-575-6149 3. APPLICANT'S ADDRESS 2400 West Washington Avenue, Yakima, Washington 98903 4. CONTACT PERSON & PHONE 509-5 5-6149trick Assistant Manager, 5. AGENCY REQUESTING CHECKLIST City of Yakima 6. DATE THE CHECKLIST WAS PREPARED September 25, 2006 -, .PROPOSED TIMING OR SCHEDULE (including phasing, if applicable) Construction, Spring 2007 Revised 8-04 DOC. INDEX # ... page 1 of 10 BACKGROUND QUESTIONS (Attach if Lengthy) 1. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal't If yes, explain. No. 2. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. This project has been reviewed by Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife and Washington State Department of Ecology. Neither agency had a concern about the project as long as the drainage from the proposed service road was away from Wide Hollow Creek. The project is categorically excluded from FAA environmental regulations in accordance with FAA Order 5050-4A, Environmental Handbook, Section 23, Categorical Exclusions, paragraph a(5), which states that "Construction, relocation or repair of entrance and service roadway" projects are categorically excluded from FAA's environmental process unless there are extenuating circumstances. There are no such extenuating circumstances. 3. 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. 4. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. JARPA, City of Yakima 5. 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. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information on project description.) The project proposes to construct a 20' wide vehicle service road outside of the runway safety area of runway 22 (between the end of the safety area and Wide Hollow Creek) at the Yakima Air Terminal. The airport has had several runway surface incidents and runway incursions in the area because of vehicles and pedestrians crossing at the approach end and safety area of the runway without Air Traffic Control (ATC) clearance. During a FAA Runway Incursion Action Team survey on May 15, 2002, FAA requested that the airport construct a service road outside of the protected safety area of the runway to prevent further surface incidents or runway incursions. The roadway is designed to enhance public health and safety under YMC 15.27.216, Critical Facilities. DOC. INDEX .I Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your pro- posed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. The roadway will be located along the south west side of Wide Hollow Creek in the vicinity of South 16th and West Washington Avenue. A map is included with this application. 'Yy.D•i' 1. Earth Fa r k.011 a. General description of the site (✓ one): ® flat 0 rolling ❑ hilly 0 steep slopes 0 mountainous 0 other N/A b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? Approximately 2% 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. Silts, type ML under the Unified Soil Classification System, Group FG -4 (Information from 1995 runway pavement evaluation, soils analyses) d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. No. e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. Grading and filling will be required for construction of the roadway. Fill material will be clean aggregate from local sources capped with asphalt pavement. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use'? If so, generally describe. The natural topography gently slopes away from Wide Hollow Creek. Construction will only occur during the dry months minimizing the potential for erosion. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project page 2 of 10 Space Reserved for Agency Comments DOC. INDEX construction (for example, a„. ..1a1t or buildings)? Will increase the airpuri's impervious services by less than Vi of 1%. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: Construction will occur only during dry months. Terrain gently slopes away from Wide Hollow creek. 2. Air a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. Minimal dust during excavation. b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. No. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: Contract requires contractor to control dust. 3. Water a. Surface: 1. Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. Yes. The roadway will parallel the south side of Wide Hollow Creek for approximately 300 feet and will be within 25 feet of the normal high water mark of the creek. 2. Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. There will be no work over or in the water. Construction will occur within 25 feet of the high water mark of Wide Hollow Creek. 3. Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or re moved from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. None. 4. Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No. page 3 of 10 Space Reserved for Agency Comments DOC. INDEX # -I 1 i 5. Does the proposal lie within a 100 -year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. Yes. 6. Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. No. b. Ground: 1. Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No. 2. Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals...; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. None. c. Water Runoff (including storm water): 1. Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. Storm water runoff will be directed to the grassy area south of the roadway and dispersed into the surrounding infield. All drainage will be designed to drain away from the creek. . 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: Design the service roadway to drain away from the creek. 4. Plants: a. Check (✓) types of vegetation found on the site: deciduous tree: ❑ alder ❑ maple ❑ aspen 0 other evergreen green: ❑ fir 0 cedar 0 pine 0 other 0 shrubs grass ❑ pasture crop or grain wet soil plants: 0 cattail 0 buttercup 0 bullrush 0 skunk cabbage 0 other water plants: ❑ water lily 0 eelgrass ❑ milfoil 0 other other types of vegetation: page 4 of 10 Space Reserved for Agency Comments DOC. INDEX A -I b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Grasses will be removed during excavation. c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None known. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: None. 5. Animals: a. Check (V) 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: ® hawk ® heron 0 eagle ® songbirds 0 other 2) mammals• 0 deer 0 bear 0 elk 0 beaver 0 other 3) fish: 0 bass ❑ salmon ® trout 0 herring 0 shellfish 0 other b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. No. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: Grading will be accomplished within the guidelines established by Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife and Department of Ecology. 6. Energy and Natural Resources a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. None. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. No. c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: None. 7. Environmental Health page 5 of 10 Space Reserved for Agency Comments DOC. INDEX 1 a. Are there any environments_ lealtu hazards, including exposure to toxic cuemiLais, risk of fire and explosion,spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. None. 1. Describe special emergency services that might be required. None. 2. Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: None. b. Noise 1. What types of noise exist in the area, which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? Heavy equipment noise during construction. 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. Construction would be short term, approximately three weeks, and occur during daylight hours only. 3. Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: None. 8. Land and Shoreline Use a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? Commercial Service Airport. b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. No. c. Describe any structures on the site. 8' Airport Security Fence north of the proposed roadway between the proposed roadway and creek. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? None. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? CBDS f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? Arterial Commercial. g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? N/A h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so specify. Yes. Wide hollow Creek is designated as a Type 2 stream/Critical Area. i Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? None. Page 6 of 10 Space Reserved for Agency Comments DOC. INDEX # I"1 j. Approximately how many p,..,iple would the completed project displace? none: k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any N/A 1. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: In compliance with Airport Master Plan and Airport Layout Plan. 9. Ho- urine a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. N/A b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. N/A c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: N/A 10. Aesthetics a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structures, not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building materials proposed? N/A b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? None. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: None. 11. Light and Glare a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? None. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? N/A c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? None. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: None. 12. Recreation a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? J. M. Perry Soccer Field is approximately 200 feet north of the proposed work area. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. No. page 7 of 10 Space Reserved for Agency Comments i c. Proposed measures to reduc.. ,t control impacts on recreation, including recreauon opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: None. 13. 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 important known to be on or next to the site. None. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: None. 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. Project is in vicinity of 16th and West Washington Avenue. There is no street access to the site. Access to and at the site is strictly controlled under Yakima Municipal Code 1.92.050, Airport Ground Control and Security. b. Is site currently serviced by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? Yes. Public Transit is provided on West Washington Avenue directly north of the proposed construction site. c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? N/A d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). No. e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. Project is on airport property and is designed to enhance public health and safety. The roadway is a critical facility under YMC 15.27.216 and a Public Agency and Utility Exception under YMC 15.27.540. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. N/A g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: Will enhance aviation safety. DOC. INDEX I # I► _ page 8 of 10 15. Public Services Space Reserved for a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services(forAgency Comments I example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe: No. 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. None. 16. Utilities a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other. N/A 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. None. 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: Because theseuestions are very q ry 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 • ro .osal, would affect the item at a i eater intensi or at a faster rate than if the . o . osal were not ' ..demented. 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? Space Reserved for Agency Comments ooc. iNoExn, # n page 9 of 10 } Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: 2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life? Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are: 3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources? Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are: 4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat, historic or cultural sites, wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands? Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: 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? Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are: 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services and utilities? Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are: 7. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. Space Reserved for Agency Comments DOC. itsIDEX # I page 10 of 10 TAB B DEPARTMEA iF COMMUNITYAND ECONOMIC Di gLOPMENT William R. Cook, Director Doug Maples, CBO, Code Admin. and Planning Manager Planning Division 129 North Second Street, 2nd Floor Yakima, Washington 98901 (509) 575-6183 • Fax (509) 575-6105 NOTICE OF DECISION Compliance with the Washington State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) November 22, 2006 On September 25, 2006, the City of Yakima, Washington issued a Notice of Application and Environmental Review regarding an environmental checklist application submitted by the Yakima Air Terminal. This review concerns the Environmental Review of the construction of 20 -foot wide vehicle service road upon environmentally sensitive property identified by the City of Yakima's Comprehensive Plan Critical Area Map as containing a protected. Class II stream (Wide Hollow Creek). The subject property is located at 2400 West Washington Ave., Yakima, Washington. Parcel Number(s): 181335-31001 City File Number: EC #29-06 Following the initial 20 -day public comment period, and consideration of all comments received, the City of Yakima has issued the enclosed SEPA Threshold Decision. For further information or assistance, you may wish to contact Jeff Peters, Assistant Planner at (509) 575-6163 at the City Planning Division. Doug Maples Planning & Code Administration Manager Notice of Decision Mailing Date: November 22, 2006 Enclosures: SEPA Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance, Site Plan, Vicinity Map, and Mailing Map www.ci.yakima.wa.us DOC. INDEX Yakimr } WASHINGTON STATE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT MITIGATED DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE CITY OF YAK MA, WASHINGTON November 22, 2006 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This application involves Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) and Critical Area Review and approval under Yakima Municipal Code 15.27.540 Public Agency and Utility Exception. Approval of this application will also effectively allow the construction of a 20 -foot wide vehicle service road upon environmentally sensitive property identified by the City of Yakima's Comprehensive Plan Critical Area Map as containing a protected Class II stream (Wide Hollow Creek). PROPONENT: Yakima Air Terminal LOCATION: 2400 West Washington Ave., Yakima, Washington PARCEL NUMBER: 181335-31001 LEAD AGENCY: City of Yakima, Washington. FILE NUMBER: UAZO CAO #2-06, and EC #29-06. DETERMINATION: The lead agency for this proposal, after reviewing a completed environmental checklist, public and agency comments, and other related information, has determined that the project will not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment, and an environmental impact statement (EIS) will not be required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c), provided the measures listed below are taken to mitigate potential adverse impacts. The information relied upon in reaching this determination is available to the public on request at the City of Yakima Planning Division. This MDNS is issued under WAC 197-11-355, Optional DNS process. There will be no additional comment period for this MDNS. IDENTIFIED ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES: This Mitigated Determination. of Nonsignificance (MDNS) is hereby conditioned upon the following mitigating measures. Substantive authority to require mitigation is derived from WAC 197-11-660, Yakima Municipal Code YMC 6.88.160, and the Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan, which contain goals, policies, and regulations, which provide substantive authority to require mitigation under the State Environmental Policy Act. DOC. INDEX # -`C This action is not exempt from the State Environmental Policy Act under WAC 197-11-800 Categorical Exemptions as this action involves the construction of a proposed service road within a City of Yakima designated Critical Area and will require environmental review. Mitigation: 1. Critical Area Construction Requirements: The one hundred foot buffer for Wide Hollow Creek shall be reduced to fifty feet from the ordinary high water mark with a twenty foot building setback from the .buffer itself for a total of seventy feet provided the conditions below are met. (a) No structure) shall exceed the approved seventy foot setback line under any circumstances unless approval is granted by the Yakima City Council under Chapter 15.27.540 Public Agency and Utility Exception of the Yakima Municipal Code. (b) The road grade/elevation shall match the existing ground elevation (as certified by a licensed engineer) and road runoff shall be designed to flow in a landwarcly not streamward direction. (c) Erosion control measures shall be installed to Washington State Department of Ecology Stormwater Standards prior to any clearing, grading or construction. These control measures must be able to prevent soil from being carried into surface waters (including storm drains) by stormwater runoff f: 2. Storm Water: Prior to any construction, the Washington State Department of Ecology shall be contacted to determine if a NPDES stormwater construction permit is required (a) A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (Erosion Sediment Control Plan) is required for all permitted construction sites. These plans and control measures shall be reviewed and approved by the City of Yakima Engineer prior to construction. (b) Stormwater facilities shall be designed in accordance with the Washington State Department of Ecology's Eastern Washington Stormwater Manual and FAA Wetland Mitigation/Detention Facility requirements. 3. Restoration: All disturbed areas shall be returned to their original conditions or better by reseeding and/or additional plantings within thirty days from completion of the proposed transverse road In addition, should the proposed project be completed during the months of October - February then planting shall be delayed until the next growing season (March - September). 1 YMC 15.02: Structure means anything constructed or erected which requires location on the ground or attached to something having a location on the ground. DOC. INDEX 4. Dust Control: A Dust Control Plan must be submitted to, and approved by, the Yakima Regional Clean Air Authority prior to any phase of work. 5. Other Governmental or Agency Permits: Any other state or local governmental permits not herein mentioned or required must be complied with in their entirety. 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 to the Yakima Urban Area Hearing Examiner, 129 North 2nd Street, Yakima WA 98901 in writing no later than 5:00 p.m. on December 7, 2006. Be prepared to make factual objections. CONTACT PERSON: Contact Jeff Peters, Assistant Planner (509) 575-6163 for more information. SEPA RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: William Cook POSITION / TITLE: Director Community & Economic Development TELEPHONE: 509 / 575-6113 ADDRESS: 129 North 2nd Street, Yakima, WA 98901 DATE: November 22, 2006 SIGNATURE• DOC. INDEX # A -I IRE a C5 z z a -J + + • INDEX # 1 1I 415111371. -n CITY OF YAK MA, WASHINGTON VICINITY MAP FILE NO: SEPA #29-06 APPLICANT: YAKIMA AIR TERMINAL REQUEST: AIRPORT SERVICE ROAD PROJECT LOCATION: 2400 W WASHINGTON AVE DOG. INDEX I # • Subject Pro; t Yakima City Limits Scale —lin = 700ft 0 350 700 aepa2906 09/28a iii• CITY OF YAKIMA, WASHINGTON FILE NO: SEPA #29-06 APPLICANT: YAKIMA AIR TERMINAL REQUEST: AIRPORT SERVICE ROAD PROJECT n LOCATION: 2400 W WASHINGTON AVE PARCEL NUMBER(S): 1 8 1 3 3 5 310 01 Notified Property Owners within 500 ^/ Subject Site 1,;(I4 0 Scale —lin = 700$ 350 700 sepa2906 09/28) TA C JUL. 31. 2006 1:50PM AIRPORTS -FAA To: Jerry Kilpatrick Company. YKM Phone: (509)575-6149 Fax (509)575-6185 From: Lynn Deardorff Title: Airport Certification Safety Inspector Date: July 31, 2006 Pages w/cover 11 RE: RSAT Evaluation May 16, 2002. Sincerely, Lynn Deardorff Airport Certification Safety Inspector NO. 1362 P. 1 Federal Aviation Administration Airports Division, ANM-621 1601 Lind Ave SW, Suite 315 Renton, WA 98055 T425-227-1621 F 425-227-1600 Lynn.DeardorfTf faa. gov Facsimile DOC. INDEX . JUL. 31. 2006 1:50PM AIRPORTS -FAA NO. 1362 P 2 Runway Safety Action Team (RSAT) Evaluation Yakima Air Terminal / McAllister Field May 16, 2002 INTRODUCTION On Wednesday, May 15, and Thursday, May 16, 2002, the Northwest Mountain Region Runway Safety Action Team (RSAT) convened an evaluation meeting in the administration building, control tower, and maintenance building at Yakima Air Terminal/MaAllister Field (YKM). The following individuals were present at one or more sessions of the RSAT evaluation: Mike Bridenback Yakima Air Terminal Airfield Maintenance Specialist Bob Clem Yakima Air Terminal, Manager Mike Heironimus Yakima Air Terminal Airfield Maintenance Specialist Jerry Kilpatrick Yakima Air Terminal, Assistant Manager Clay Root Yakima Air Terminal Airfield Maintenance Specialist Ronald Schwartz Serco, Inc., YKM Tower Manager Dave Adams FAA/Spokane Air Traffic HUB John Black FAA/Spokane Flight Standards District Office Don Bringinann FAA/Regional Air Traffic Division, Operations Branch Mark Gavin FAA/Regional Airway Facilities Division Jim Greene FAA/Regional Runway Safety Program Manager Tim Strangeway ' FAA/AP/Columbia Basin SSC Manager Mark Taylor FAA/Regional Airports Division Jennifer Thompson FAA/AF/ Columbia Basin SSC -YKM Mary Vargas FAA/Seattle Airports District Office Pat Fletcher Crown Consulting/Management Analyst Harold Handke Crown Consulting/Senior Analyst, Airports BACKGROUND' Yakima Air Terminal/McAllister Field operates as a private, independent corporation through an agreement with Yakima City and Yakima County. The airport is governed by the Yakima Air Terminal Board, an agency of the City of Yakima and Yakima County. It is located on 809 acres three miles south of the city. The airport has a 7,603 -foot main runway and a 3,835 -foot crosswind runway. Its Federal Contract Tower operates from 6 a.m. to 10 p,m. 'Information Compiled from: Yakima, Washington QrttpJ/members,aoLcam/Gibson0817/yakima.htm>, Washington State, Department of Transportation, Aviation Division, Economic Impacts of Airports <httpJ/www wsdot wa.govJaviation/Plannin.g/EoonlmpactsOfAirport /PDFs/SouthCentraIYakima.pdt5, Yakima Chamber of Commerce <http://www.usachamber.coo/yaIdma/urigation.asp>, Museum of Flight <httpJ/www.museumofflight.org/collections/craftdisplay.htm1?ID=69>, Cub Crafters, Inc. <http://www.cubcraftexs.cotn/cc/>, Washington State Fish and Wildlife Commission <http://www.wa.gov/wdfw/com/minutes/ju12000,btca>, gmiths Aerospace <hrtp://www.dowty,com/>.DOC. INDEX JUL. 31. 2006 1:50PM AIRPORTS -FAA Runway Safety Action Tear. . 'aluation Yakima Air Terminal/McMJ ste. add NO. 1362 P. 3 May 16, 2002 Members of the Lewis and Clark expedition stopped in the Yakima valley in 1805. Fifty-five years later, the first permanent United States settler arrived. Yakima County was established in 1865. In 2000, the population of the city was 71,845, almost one-third of Yakima County's 222,581 inhabitants. With 4,200 farms in the valley, agriculture is the largest employer, The 20 businesses located within Yakima Air Terminal's boundaries employ more than 200 people. In 2000, the Washington State Fish and Wildlife Commission approved the sale of the Yakima Hatchery to the airport for $383,000. This was in conjunction with Phase I of the Runway 27 Safety Area Improvement Projebt that provided for an increased width to the Runway 27 Safety Area in compliance with FAA standards. Total land acquired was 628 Acres. The Yakima Readiness Center, for training and supporting National Guard soldiers, will comprise 62,661 square feet. Current aviation -related tenants at Yakima include McAllister Flying Services, Noland Decoto Flying Service, and Cub Crafters, Inc. Charlie and Alister McAllister acquired their first airplane, a standard J1, in 1925, and a year later, established McAllister's Flying School in Cioodman's Pasture. This pasture became McAllister Field and, later, Yakima Air Terminal. The flight school operated for 73 years until Charlie's death in 1999 marked its transformation into the McAllister Museum of Aviation. In 1941, Boeing asked Ray, Henry, and Roy Decoto, owners of a Yakima auto repair shop, to build parts for the B-17 flying fortress bomber. Decoto Aircraft moved to the Yakima Air Terminal in 1953. Sold in 1979 to the Dowty Group, which includes the British company Smiths Aerospace, they are part of Smiths' Actuation Systems Division. Their work has included components for the F-22, the F-18, the Boeing 777, and the Cessna Citation 10. Cub Crafters, Inc., has been rebuilding and restoring Piper Super Cubs at the airport since 1980, and custom builds the new PA18-180 "Top Cub." Yakima had a total of 86,4512 commercial boardings in calendar year 2000. There are 135 aircraft and 2 helicopters based at the airport. The total combined annual economic benefit from on -airport tenants plus general aviation and commercial service visitors was $43,484,870.2 In January 2001, Yakima Air Terminal Manager Bob Clem said that, in the last five years, "we have about doubled our operations, and we recently completed a multi-million dollar expansion of the terminal to accommodate the growth."3 The airport currently is in the engineering phase of a project to make safety area improvements to the approach end of Runway 27, In October, 2001 "United Express ceased service to the Yakima Air Terminal. The airline accounted for a third of the airport's enplanements, said Bob Clem. The airport's income has dropped as much as 40 percent overall since the terrorist attacks, while its expenses have jumped 110 percent, he said." At the same time, Horizon Air reduced service to the airport! 2 FAA DOT/TSC CY 2000 ACAIS Database 3 Washington CEO, January 2001 aritpJ/www.wasbl gtonceo.com/archive/feb01/transportation.hmib. 4 The Seattle lanes, October 4, 2001, `Port budget to get $20 million trim" <httpJ/seattletimes,nwsotwce.com/html/locabaews/134349477 airport04mO.html>. DOc Page 2 of 10 INDEX JUL. 31.2006 1:5IPM AIRPORTS -FAA NO. 1362 P. 4 Runway Safety Action Teaa..�valuation Yakima Air Terminal/McAllistez .•field PROCEEDINGS May 16, 2002 Wednesday, Mav 15, 2002 At 10:30 a.m., the Northwest Mountain Region Runway Safety Action Team met with Bob Clem Manager of Yakima Air Terminal, Jerry Kilpatrick, Assistant Manager of Yakima Air Terminal, Serco personnel from the Yakima Airport Traffic Control Tower, and FAA Airway Facilities personnel from the Columbia Basin Systems Service Center (SSC) to review the purpose of an RSAT evaluation and the status of Yakima's on-going efforts to reduce runway incursions. Yarn Tours Jerry took the Team on the afternoon and evening circuits of the airfield for evaluation of the movement area signs, markings, lights, and inspection of the known areas on the airport movement area that have been the location of surface incident problems in the past During the tours, the Runway Incursion Device (RID) in the tower could be heard whenever the controller keyed the microphone, Thursday, May 16, 2002 Other Yakima Air Terminal operations personnel joined the Runway Safety meeting at 8:30 am. The morning started with a round of self -introductions. Tun Greene Jim explained the goals of the RSAT evaluation then gave a presentation on the national runway safety situation, and ended with a focus on the local problems and local .solutions at Yakima. Jim showed slides of the Yakima Air Terminal taxi diagram with a description of each surface incident and runway incursion explained and charted, from 1998 through the ciurent date, and asked the RSAT participants to be alert for common denominators in the history of surface incidents at Yakima. Jim praised the airport for its innovative restricted area markings (below). All rnarkings were crisp and clear. Tim said that all presentations will be on the website before the end of the month. Page 3 of 10 v. INDEX # A-1 . , JUL. 31. 2006 1:51PM AIRPORTS -FAA NO. 1362 P. 5 Runway Safety Action Tean..,valuation Yakima Air Terminal/McAlliste, r'eld May 16, 2002 Yakima Air Terminal Incident History IV/ PD ®P D E Jerry Kilpatrick Jerry said that Yakima's driver training is very restrictive about "who gets through the fence" There is no recurrency requirement for badging because they do not certify many drivers and the airfield is not complicated. The airport escorts new airport employees for one full season before they get badged for full access to the movement area. Any vehicle on the airside must have a rotating beacon, and, if operating within or in close proximity to a movement area, two-way radio capability with the Yakima tower. Also, the operator must have a valid Vehicle Operators Permit issued by the airport. Yaldrna Air Terminal does enforce their rules. For example, the driver who crossed the approach end of Runway 22 (June 4, 2000) received 90 days of house arrest and a $250 fine. The pilot, who drove around an aircraft onto Taxiway B (VNMTYI{M01001), had his driving privileges suspended for 90 days. Both parties were pilots. Airways Facilities personnel have free movement on the field after completing airport -specific training. All city firemen go tutu airport driver training because any of them may be on duty at the airport at any moment. When one fire truck from YKM responds to a structural fire in the city, the main ARFF truck is still on the field. ' Page 4 of 10 nn INDEX J JUL. 31.2006 1:51PM AIRPORTS -FAA NO. 1362 P. 6 Runway Safety Action Team ?valuation Yakima Air Terminal/McAllister 1 ietd Mays 6; 2007 Jerry expressed exasperation about the pedestrian crossings between. Cub Crafters / McAllister's & the terminal / restaurant. The pedestrian deviations in 2000 and 2001 occurred after the airport installed signs like the one below. Airport staff pointed out that ALL runway incursions and surface incidents have involved pilots. Jerry suggested that FAA should explore penalties against pilots who create incursions or surface incidents, and, that additional pilot training about surface movements at commercial service (Part 139) airports should be given to general aviation pilots. Those are the ones committing the offenses. The GA pilots typically come from an environment where walking down taxiways oi across runways is an acceptable practice. These are usually cmall community airports that do not have the restrictions, as do the larger commercial service airports. Jerry mentioned that one problem the airport has is with the current location of the Runway Visual Range monitor (RVR). Because the RVR is at the approach end of Runway 27, which is 50 feet lower than the approach end of Runway 9; the whole runway may be unavailable for commercial operations because of fog. Pilots report that they can see three-fourths of the runway or more, but they cannot land because the one RVR reports the runway fogged -in. A RVR in the touchdown zone (TDZ) and roll-out zone of runway 9 would enhance operations and reduce delays and flight cancellations. DOC. Page 5 010 INDEX JUL. 31. 2006 1:51PM AIRPORTS -FAA NO. 1362 P. 7 Runway Safety Action Teas. evaluation Yakima Air Terminal McAllister e'leld May 16, 2002 ao Mr: FED BEV 1 w.us,«s AMAX E CMNCE Gift/ oho 1 COMM Jam wrotTa fare INAtypMING =OWIAEA -i Jim MN NPR Pa is, 1W2 IMAM aVrMIIwoSnozmaa *Re CX111Oft IE/YFA10 RINWAT EAMICE Of AU. POWAY HOMO 145311:11014 IEGUIED.1 TEcOmi AIM 01x1 1ULU 217J it ons 12/ 011 721.9 4 Ron Schwartz Ron said the Airport is very helpful, and he has no complaints about their policies ox stafL The tower training emphasizes scanning, and the RID is used even when vehicles are near the runway area. Until September 1 l . new firemen training included a trip to the tower for the controllers' "big picture" view. The airport and the tower hope the Transportation Security Administration will permit them to regain that training tool. He stated that the one hot spot at Yakima is where Taxiway Alpha and Bravo intersect the Runway 22 approach area Mark Gavin Mark's presentation explained that Airway Facilities (AF) is different from the other FAA organizations on the temp because it does not regulate or control airport sponsors. The airport sponsor regulates AP activities and its 1,050 Northwest Mountain Region employees, primarily through airport -specific driver training for the local staff. This is because AF personnel can cause or contribute to a runway incursion. Mark described the proactive measures AF uses to limit the number and severity of surface incidents. Jeny commented that, for construction, the airport provides escort for AF contractors if FAA cannot provide enough personnel for that. DOC. Page 6 of 10 INDEX A I . JUL. 31. 2006 1:52PM AIRPORTS -FAA NO. 1362 P. 8 Runway Safety Action Tear: Jhaluation Yakima Air Terminal/McAllister klfield May 16, 2002 Mark also showed the corporate structure and task division within Airways Facilities. This explained why Tim Strangeway, the Columbia Basin Systems Service Center Manager (SSCM), is the person the airport should call to start requests for additional resources — a new Runway Visual Range monitor, etc. Yakima Air Terminal also should contact the SSCM if the airport staff has a concern with any AF work or procedures. Don Bringrnann Don briefly explained Airport Traffic Control Tower (ATCT) roles and responsibilities and discussed the reasons for air traffic errors which result in operational errors or deviations (OE/Ds). He also showed the consequences of six OE/Ds and described what air traffic is doing to correct the problems. There has been only one recorded OE at YKM. Mark Taylor Mark said his main emphasis in an RSAT is ensuring the airport sign plan fits the signs on the airport and conforms to applicable Advisory Circulars. He said, "Your markings are outstanding. Your signage and beading are awesome. You have met or exceeded my expectations." He also complimented the airport on its obviously good relationship with its tower and tenants, and said that the new service road on the north side (parallel to Taxiway A) is a good addition for the airport and its tenants.. John Black John discussed the. Flight Standards side of runway safety in lieu of RSAT member Chuck Cox. John and other members of the Spokane Flight Standards District Office are in Yakima frequently. John Phillips gave a mechanic safety meeting on February 20th where maintenance personnel were made aware of runway safety issues. John Black presented a Wings Weekend program, including air traffic participation, to 34 pilots on April 27-28. During a safety meeting held in Yakima on May 8, John Black emphmsi led runway safety issues focusing on new charts and airport layouts newly available to pilots and other airport users. FAA is trying to include full-page taxi diagrams in the Airport Facility Directory (AF/D), John is familiar with Noland Decoto, a small (14 CFR) Part 141 school, and one freelance instructor, Lenny Krueger, They have reported no particular problems at the airport. The Runway Incursion Information & Evaluation Program (RIIEP) for inadvertent or unintentional surface incidents may or may not be extended. This was an effort by FAA to track the root causes of pilot deviations_ As Jelin sees i� "Tn 2006, with the trend extrapolateri there will be no more runway incursions, so the Runway Safety, Program will be out of business." It should be noted this was a "tongue in cheek" remark delineating the danger of extrapolating off the end of the graph with no known inclusive data points supporting the data. DOC. Page 7 of 10 INDEX # A - I JUL. 31.2006 1:52PM AIRPORTS -FAA NO. 1362 P. 9 ii Runway Safety Action Teat,. 2valuation Yakima Air Terminal!McAllistc. May 16, 2002 John also suggested the placement of "unofficial" signs on the buildings of Cub Crafters and the McAllister Air Museum warning pilots and pedestrians of the impermissibility of walling from that particular ramp to the airport restaurant while remaining within airport boundaries. Dave Adams Dave is the FAA Air Traffic Manager at the Spokane Hub. Since Yakima is now a contract tower, FAA provides Aiiministrative and regulatory oversight through Spokane Hub. DISCUSSXONS, FINDXNGS, CONCLI7SIONS & ACTION ITEMS Runway 22 and Taxiway A & B intersection: Runway 22's threshold is relocated in accordance with AC 150/5300, Aix' port Design. (Note: relocated thresholds are included in FAA regulations They are defined as an area where "the portion of pavement behind a relocated threshold is not available for takeoff or landing. It may be available for taxiing of aircraft. '9 The threshold was moved to comply with runway safety area requirements for runway 22. Evidently, the approach end of Runway 22 looks like a continuation of the ramp to some pilots, even though it is clearly marked as taxiway and is clearly signed and marked to prevent entry. This is the area of the majority of surface incidents at YKM. It was again stated by airport personnel that pilot training and/or penalties against the pilots committing the offenses would aid in solving the problem. Taxiway B (in front of Cub Crafters' ramp) and Taxiway C (between Runway 22 and Taxiway Alpha) are non -movement areas by Letter of Agreement (LOA) with the airport. This brought out the need to change either the tower -airport LOA or the markings on the boundary between Cub Crafters' ramp and Taxiway Bravo. The Runway Safetv Action Team recommends that a vehicle service road be included in the planning for the approach end of Runway 22, when a project is undertaken to extend the Runway 4 end in the future. Because of the proximity of the salmon -breeding stream just outside of the runway safety area, there is not enough space to allow for a road there now. When the approach end of Runway 4 is extended, it could be extended sufficiently to allow a service road to be built around the Runway 22 end. Airway Facility discussion: Jerry confirmed that there is no way for Airways Facilities (AF) personnel to access their work without crossing a taxiway. Mark Gavin pointed out that the airport needs to know when AF people are going to be on the field because, ultimately, Yakima Air Terminal is responsible: "We don't want you to be blind -sided if we cause a problem on your field." However, the airport does not feel it is necessary for AF personnel to contact the airport prior to entering the field. "AF personnel receive the same vehicle operators' training as airport employees and there has never been a surface incident involving AF personnel at YKM. The notification would be unduly burdensome to all parties," according to Jerry. DOC. Page 8 of 10 JUL. J1. 2006 1:5JYM AIKIOXIS-FAA NO. 1362 P. 10 Runway Safety Action Tea. ,valuation Yaldmia Air Terminal/McAllist Mield May 16, 2002 Airport Security: John. Black mentioned that when he arrived at the airport on Wednesday, the secretary in Noland Decoto saw his vehicle, and flipped the gate open without knowing who was in it. Jerry said Noland has an outstanding letter of reprimand on the subject already, and another one will be sent to the company before the end of the day. Dave Adams suggested that the remote gate release be disconnected with the second known infraction. ATCT Hours: The airport and tower personnel agree that closing the tower at 10:00 p.m. can be critical to safety because the last commercial flight arrives about midnight This is especially true in the winter, when the runway must be plowed, but it can be critical even during the summer months when there is construction. Someone should be in the tower to monitor if there is an aircraft inbound. The NOTAM system doesn't work By the time a NOTAM is issued and it is disseminated, the runway work is finished and the NOTAM needs to be cancelled. On one occasion, the pilot did not get the NOTAM before he took off; and he almost landed on the plow. The plow driver was monitoring CTAF but the pilot was using UNICOM. That is a runway safety issue. On other occasions, the pilot received the NOTAM and landed at another airport after Yakima cancelled it. That is money out of the airport's pocket The tower does not want to give people the idea that the tower is open, unless indeed the tower hours can be extended until 12:00 p.m., but at a minimum both the tower and airport stated they would like for a controller to be able to stay in the tower to protect aircraft operations and provide positive air traffic control to the aircraft, the snow plows and/or construction workers who are working until the last commercial air carver flight arrives. The contract tower schedule and the air carrier schedule do not match because FAA did not contract to keep the tower open past 10 p.m. Dave Adams replied that contract towers are not the only ones with this problem. Except in the case of emergency or significant operational need, requests for extensions of tower hours are only accommodated if the FAA is compensated by the requestor. One alternative is to have summer and winter hours, but then you have controllers standing around when there is no snow to plow. ANM-540 handles contract towers, and if the airport or airline is willing to pay for the controller, then that is the branch to contact ANM-540 uses a formula, but Yakima probably does not meet the requirement's, even with miscellaneous general aviation flights from Boeing Field. Further study would determine if the formula would justify changing extending tower hours. Holding Bay Markings and Taxiway C: During a period of increased pilot training, an instructor requested a holding bay where he could give lengthy instruction to students about run-up procedures, etc. The airport placed it along Taxiway C between Taxiway A and Runway 9/27. Thic vino rhngen herame Taxiway r whish ncnrt tn hP a nmwav ie whip Pnn»ah tn allnw for this use, and because Taxiway C is not used for intersection take -offs on 9/27 and is rarely used to depart the runway. Now, however, the Team thinks the offset taxiway lines are confusing. They were painted over 15 years ago and had been reviewed many times by FAA Certification Inspectors. Moreover, Mark Taylor said that putting a holding bay next to an active Instrument Landing System (ILS) Page 9 of 10 JUL. 31.2006 1:53PM AIRPORTS -FAA NO. 1362 P. 11 Ranviay Safety Action Teak.)valuation Yakima Air Terminal/McAllist, field May 16, 2002 • Runway Safety Area (RSA) is a poor choice, even though it was marked well enough to prevent runway incursions. It should be further away from the runway, and probably would not be a problem on Taxiway C between Taxiway A and Runway 4/22. It was suggested that Jack Scott, the regional markings expert, look at the situation.. Jerry said Jack had previously reviewed the markings after they were painted. It is a unique situation at YKM that is not covered in the ' advisory circulars. When Jim proposed researching a solution as an action item and Mark Gavin concurred because it world be good for "lessons learned," Mark Taylor said the markings are a problem for airport certification, not an RSAT evaluation. Jerry added that, with the drop-off in training since the downturn in general aviation, there's no real need for the holding area now. The Airports District Office, the Airports Region Office, and Yakima Air Terminal will solve the problem outside of the RSAT process. Consequently, the line in question was removed on 5/21/02 and new taxiway edge markings were painted as agreed. Action Item Z: 1. Action: Produce a "High Alert Intersection" brochure for Runway 22 at Taxiway A&B a. Include an aerial photo b. Stock it in Region FBOs c. Make matching "High Alert Intersection" posters d. Have "High Alert Intersection" signage on the side of the Museum buildimg and at Cub Crafters to alert pedestrians not to cross the approach end of Runway 22. 2. Responsible Offices: Jerry Kilpatrick will approve the wording for Yakima Air Terminal; Chuck Cox for the Flight Standards Division and Mark Taylor for the Airports Division will verify the technical aspects; Jim Greene for the Runway Safety Program will produce the brochure. 3. Yakima Air Terminal will pay for the signage on the Museum; the Runway Safety Program will pay for production and distn'bution of the brochures and posters. 4. Expected Start Date: 20 May 2002 5. Expected Completion Date: 11 August 2002 Action Item Iz: 1. Action: Delineate properly between the Movement Area and non -Movement Area at the boundary between the Cub Crafters / McAllister Museum of Aviation ramp and Taxiway Bravo. a. Issue a NOTAM to clarify the current situation until the changes are made. b. Either the marking line must be changed or the LOA must be changed c. Clean up the language in the LOA — take out "hold harmless" which is inappropriate and will be ineffective if needed d. Check the relationship of the markings with the Taxiway OFA. e. Insert appropriate information into the planning process and master plan for future decisions on this area 2. Responsible Offices- Jerry Kilpatrick for Yakima Air Terminal and Mark Taylor for the Airports Division will collaborate; Ron Schwartz for the Serco-Yakima ATCT and Don Bringmann for the Air Traffic Division 3. Expected Start Date: 20 May 2002 4. Expected Completion Date: 31 August 2002 DOC. Page 10 of 10 INDEX # I_.I NOV-01-2006 08:37 "TIMA AIR TERMINAL SKAGIT COUNTY, WASH. FILED 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 26 1 ND/ 3o2O0l 15095756185 P.03/08 Hon. James Snohomish County Superior Court Presentation Hearing: November 28, 2001 (1:00 Judge) PHYLLIS C001E-McKEEHE ca. CLERK $y Deputy IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF BE STATE OF WASHINGTON FOR SKAGIT COUNTY PORT OF ANACORTES, a Washington Municipal Corporation, Plain'txf ,, and ELIZABETH I. ROCKWELL, a single woman, Additional Plaintiff/ Party Whose Interests may be Affected. v. CITY OF ANACORTES, a Washington Municipal Corporation, Defendant, and SANDRA. KRALJEVICH, a sine woman; K. and DONALDand BEVERLY F. KALANL and the marital community composed thereof, Additional Defendants/ Parties Whose Interests May be Affected. No. 01-2700834-2 , ORDER GRANTING AND DENYING MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON PREEMPTION RECEIVED NOV 0 2 ZOOS CITY OF YAKIMA PLANNING DIV. This matter came on for hearing in open Court before the undersigned visiting Judge of the above entitled Court upon -the Motion of the plaintiff the Port of Anacortes, joined in by plaintiff Elizabeth Rockwell, for Summary rudg nentt ;, thc issue of federal and state preemption and the Court reviewed the following: ORDER GRANTING AND DENYING MOTION - FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON TREE Tza�; �is,v • ,,. . -.� PRESTON GATES a EL LIS 11..E mr rum ptn,E sEATTIA W SOrar�n DOC. FA �'� 1 l INDEX ,NDV-01-2006 08:37 •TIMA AIR TERMINAL 15095756185 P.04/08 1 1. Port's Motion for Sums Judgment grncnt on Preemption, 2 2. Aff davit of Dan Stahl, 3 3. Affidavit of Carlton J. South, 4 4. Declaration ofJohn Bjorktnan, 5 5. City's Response to Port's Motions Thr Summary Judgment, 6 6. Port's Reply to City in Support of Port's Motions for Summary Judgment on 7 Scrivener's Error and Preemption, 8 7. Additional Affidavit of Cynthia A.'Kcnricdy, 9 8. City's Moron for Summary Judgment, 10 9. Port's Response to City's Motion for Summary Judgment, and I I 10. City's Reply on Motion for Summary Judgment, 12 and the Court heard the oral anent of Counsel on October 2, 2001. 13 NOW, therefore, the Court renders the followin g opinion for purposes of'the above Summary 14 Judgment Motions: 1$ OPINION: 16 Federal and state law preempt City laws in the fields of aircraft and . airport operations, safety 17 and noise, as hereafter defined. Operations preemption relates to fsgues in the air and on the ground, 18 including takeof, lauding,flight p patterns, air traffic corridors, volume of air traffic, altitudes of air •19 traffic, flight schedules, types, sizes and purposes of aircraft, and related issues. Safety preemption 20 relates to issues in the air and on the ground, including the placement of taxiways, runways, air 21 navigation facilities, airport design, runway protection areas, and related issues. Noise preemption 22 relates to abatement of aircraft noise and emissions, in the air, during takeoffs and landings, and on 23 the ground, including regulations on aircraft design and size, types of aircraft peunitted. a= particular 24 airports, curfews an flight operations, and other related issues. These preempted fields extend .to 25 ground facilities and airport siting and design to the extent that such projects relate to the issues of 26 operations, safety and noise. Th; City's powers must be exercised harmoniously with the Port's * 74Ad esr,Rrim's PeAzeP6�D /rs- 2,¢Crsiaw4s is ? /E Srr fe r1.+tJ'f 3, tacvr- /4Cr s'Eiro/N6 € c5/,'W 0.004.o c4re.v_ ORDER GRANTING AND DENYING MOTION : 4 l fly russtoN�„cA a s a gu u,r FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON P MPTION- + arra s eucq,us Y111.. 5�. 9� io�.wir �'( COv15 �1 ddi.7.lea •-,.-. » 'w` *� " i n , e, -.,1 C Rbn,,e rJ oma. 1 •NOV-01-2006 08:38 '""'IMA AIR TERMINAL 15095756185 P.05/08 } 1 own powers, and not infringe in any respect on airplane ar airport operations, safety or n( 2 emissions. 3 The City may not be able to stopregulate or airplane or airport operations, safety design 4 features, or noise emissions_ However, the City can use its police powers, particularly its land use 5 controls, to anticipate, abate, mitigate and otherwise respond to the effects of having an airport in 6 its jurisdiction_ Examples of the City's authority would include berms, buffers, nuisance abatement 7 structures on the site, and control of incompatible uses on and off the site. The preemption doctrine 8 does not affect a Local goveriunent's• ability to enforce reasonable permitting and mitigation 9 requirements. If the Port's zoning restrictions relating to "airport hazards," pursuant to Ch. 14.12 10 RCW, and the City's zoning restrictions relating to the same thing, conflict, the more stringent 11 limitation shall.prevaiL 'Conditional use permit requirements for development on airport property 12 on a case by case basis are rIL t inherently illegal under any preemption doctrine, provided such 13 permits are issued in a timely manner. There has to be a balance drawn where the Port is given 14 preemptive authority over issues relating to operations, safety and noise emissions, but the City' 15 authority is honored with respect to other land use concerns. 16 The Open Public Meetings Act, Ch. 42,30 RCW, allows City and Port committees to meet 17 privately for negotiation and planning purposes, as long as said committees have not been created by 18 formal action delegating to theni binding decision-making authority on their own.. No appearance of 19 urifairneas could arise if a delegation from the Port were.to privately meet with a delegation from the 20 City on Iegislative matters, although the City nay decline do so atter a public hearing has been held 21 and before the decision is rendered. Such meetings may proceed without limitations. 22 NOW, therefore, it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED; 23 L The Port's Motion for Summary Judgment an Preemption is GRANTED, in Part, 24 and DENIED, in part, as follows: • 25 26 ORDER GRANTING AND DENYING MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON PREEMPTION- 3 Ir►+eiUS r•1,111 i 1 i rot,� i+ T Dpi, INDEX ».zSTQN GATES & ELLIS LLP 7111 IIRM Aver= MMArna W AM»loton vi164.707I Voce: C4) a- pACSIM11 (te2 4 2 • ,NOV-01-2006 08:38 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 2.5 26 —TIMA AIR TERMINAL 15095756185 P.06/08 A. Paragraph 6.1 of the City's May 21, 2001 Ordinance #2557, Attachment A, the City's precondition concerning the definition of "comrnuni ty-oncnted aviation facility," is STRICKEN; B. The last sentence of Paragraph 6.1.1 of the City's May 21, 2001 Ordinance #2557, Attachment A, the City's condition concerning the location of airport security fencing, is STRYCKEN, C. Paragraph 6.1.2 of the City's May 21, 2001 Ordinance X2557, Attachment A, The City's condition concerning the adoption of a definition of a "communi&-orierted aviation facility," is STRICKEN; D. Paragraph 6 the City's May 21, 2001 Ordinance . #2.557, Attachment A, the City's conditional use process, is RESTRICTED as follows: L The City's conditional use process is limited to the imposition of performance standards. ii. The City is preempted from using its conditional use permit process to address issues relating to airport or airplane operations, safety design features, or noise •emissions. Because navigation facilities, airplane hangars, airport terminals, runways and taxiways are 'all fimda rental airport operations, the City is preempted from using its conditional use process to consider the necessity, the number, or the existence of those facilities. To the extent that the location and siting of those facilities raise operational, safety or noise emission issues, the City is preempted from considering the same. However, other location and sitingdeterminations eterminations are within the City's jurisdiction to the extent that they may abate, mitigate or otherwise respond to the effects of such facilities on property inside or outside the arport. The City is preempted from regulating the location and type of security fencing at the airport. ORDER GRANTING AND DENYING MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON K1�s�7�0 stc ria DOC. ciPINDEX PRESTQN CATS c BLLLS LLP 701 FWD! IU; SURE MN iR .7'�t , W 11104 F 0.0: (MI ac7.7I . .NOV-01-2006 08:38 1 )KIMA AIR TERMINAL 15095756185 P.07/08 iv. The City's conditional use process may address the type, location 2 width of vegetative buffering adjacent to neighboring gh nag p=opeztJes, provided that it does not 3 preclude airport Ci operations. The conditionaluseprocess is P ��'s subject, however, to the 4 "Airport Zoning Act," Ch. 14.12 RCW, which permits the Port to do its own zoning for the 5 purpose of avoiding airport "hazards," and if any such 'vegetation creates a hazard-tu aircraft 6 operations or safety, the jurisdiction with the strictest standards shall prevail. 7 v. The City's conditional usecess Pm may regulate manufacturing antes 8 and structures on the airport which are operated by tenants engaged in businesses not 9 fundamental to airport operations, unless there are collateral effects on airport operations or 10 safety.. 2. The Port's Summary Judgment Motion on Preemption is not yet ripe in two regards; 12 (1) whether the City's zoning ordinance is inconsistent with the Growth Management Act ("GMA"), • 13 RCW 36.70A.200; (2) whether the City's denial of an LM rezone for the Part's four acre parcel 14 known as the "Rockwell parcel" was unconstitutional. The Court defers both of these issues u 15 after the Growth Management Hcarings Board ("Board") has issued its decision on the Port's related 16 appeal. 17 3. . 1] The Court retains authority to consider all preemption issues raised by the Port, not 18 merely the GMA issues being decided by the Board, when this matter comes back before the Court- 19 ourt19 The Court also retains jurisdiction to hear this case as an appeal from the Board's decision, if such an appeal is her filed_ DATED this'sy of November, 2001, 20 21 22 23 24 23 26 r. rate ' lendoerfer Snohomish County Superior (visiting Judge sitting by designation) Presented by: ORDER GRANTING AND DENYING MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON PREEMPTION- 3 11d17 Uc5 Jcn r us ••ter, .....• ..DOC. '' 1NDEX PRESTON GA= s & ELLLS Ll.P 701 sIPPllAVL*IUs IUrrg soon saA*rt.E, WA MKTON uIa.7osi TELEPHONE. MEId07-TsW Bost 07+403:1 :NOV -01-2006 08:38 —1KIMA AIR TERMINAL 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 15 26 Preston Gates & Ellis LLP By, ynthia A. y, WSBA 12 Eric S. Laschever, WSfA 1 ISS John Bjorlmaan, visa* is 1306 Attorneys for PIaintif Port of Anacortes Approved as to form, notice of ' presentation waived: CITY ATTORNEY OF ANACORTES By IanMuunce, wssA>r 127 .� Attorneys for Defenda t City of Anacortes BRICKUN & GENDLER, LLP By David S. Mann, WSEA #a 1 obs Attorneys for Irnavenors, CCARE ORDER GRANITNG AND DENYING MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON IIEEM EReit7n DOC. INDEX 15095756185 P.08/08 PftEs r1�I 0&."123 * =It U.P NI Prix AMAX SUM Scao SSA TL4 WARIDNITON Dr1 i.7cn TILQPHONE: ME) •22-731a rACtimIL6.(sum 43:6 70= TOTAL F. TAB D U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Aviation Administration December 20, 2006 RECEIVED DEC 2 er.f 2006 CITY OF YAKIMA PLANNING DIV. Mr. Jeff Peters Assistant Planner City of Yakima — Planning Department 129 North 2nd Street Yakima, WA 98906 Dear Mr. Peters: Northwest Mountain Region Seattle Airports District Office 1601 Lind Avenue S.W., Suite 250 Renton, Washington 98057-3356 We appreciate the opportunity to clarify the objective of Yakima Air Terminal's service road project. The FM has been placing increased emphasis on reducing runway incursions. Reducing incursions requires a variety of initiatives, including education, marking, signage, and providing an alternative to vehicles crossing a runway. A road around Runway 22 operational surfaces is necessary to help reduce/eliminate vehicular runway crossings. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) also requires that fueling trucks, fixed -base -operator employees, airport personal, and others who drive on the airport, operate outside the runway safety area (RSA). Consequently the road must be located outside Runway 22 safety area. Next we would like to address the FM's Runway Safety Action Team (RSAT) recommendation to shift Runway 4/22 prior to constructing a service road. Initially it was believed there was not enough space to construct a service road around Runway 22 safety area. The report recommended extending Runway 4 to sufficiently allow a service road to be built around the RSA. Our intent was to maintain runway length by extending the west end of the runway and shortening the east end. Subsequently, Airport management surveyed the east end of Runway 4/22, and determined they could construct a road outside the RSA. The number one priority for the FAA is safety. The service road around Runway 22 operation areas is considered a safety project. We encourage the airport to proceed with this project as soon as possible. If you have any further questions on this matter please contact our office, (425) 227-2660. Sincerely, /21 ,6lo/Ter..4 Mary Var as State Aviation Planner cc: Max Tidwell, Runway Safety Action Team, AJS-4NM Jerry Kilpatrick, Assistant Airport Manager Cayla Morgan, Seattle -ADO Environmental Specialist TA E STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY 15 West Yakima Avenue, Suite 200 • Yakima, Washington 98902-3452 • (509) 575-2490 September 18, 2006 Jerry G. Kilpatrick • Yakima Air Terminal 2400 West Washington Avenue Yakima, WA 98903 RE: Traverse Way Road Project next to Wide Hollow Creek Dear Jerry, This letter serves to document our site visit on June 7, 2006. We toured the area adjacent to the fence near Wide Hollow Creek to discuss wetland, riparian and water quality issues. It is my unuderstanding that the roadway will be inside the fence on Airport property, and that the surface of the roadway prism will be sloped so that water runs off away from the creek area. Because your roadway will be placed in an existing impacted buffer area of Wide Hollow Creek (a non-native grassy area inside the fence) Ecology does not have a problem with the project as long as storm -water is routed away from the Creek and properly treated before it is allowed to enter the Creek. After consulting with Gary Graff (Ecology) regarding your erosion concern and question regarding stream bank restoration along portions of Wide Hollow Creek, I am changing my recommendation from the use of a fascine (which requires some excavation into the stream bank to situate the structure) to individually dibbled -in plants (you can use rebar or other way to make a skinny long hole for the plant stems to go M. Start with the bottom row of plants and work your way up to the top of the stream bank.) Use live stakes of willows and red osier dogwood that are about dime size diameter at a density of one every square foot if you have enough stakes. Fit the diameter of the dibble hole as closely as possible to the diameter of the live stake. I would also suggest that you talk to Eric Bartrand about what he recommends for riparian restoration - you might have to get an IPA from him anyway to do the stream restoration work. It might help your project go through the review process faster or easier if there is a restoration / improvement component to your project, although I understand that the riparian area outside the fence near your project site has to be kept short due to your security needs. You may also be able to get assistance for a bank restoration project through programs at the North Yakima Conservation District. DOC. INDEX Jerry G Kilpatrick September 18, 2006 Page 2 of 2 Please call me at (509) 575-2616 if you have additional questions. Thanks again for the time you took today to allow me to become more familiar with airport operations. Sincerely, aed Catherine D. Reed Wetlands and Shorelands Specialist CR:jt060915 DOC. INDEX TAB F Page 1 of 1 Peters, Jeff From: Reed, Catherine D. [CRAJ461@ecy.wa.gov] Sent: Monday, October 30, 2006 4:53 PM To: Peters, Jeff Cc: jerry.kilpatrick@yakimaairterminal.com Subject: recent Airport letter Per our telephone conversation today, my letter (dated September 18, 2006) to Jerry Kilpatrick regarding construction of an access road includes the following language, which is ONLY ADVISORY. "After consulting with Gary Graff (Ecology) regarding your erosion concern and question regarding stream bank restoration along portions of Wide Hollow Creek, I am changing my recommendation from the use of a fascine (which requires some excavation into the stream bank to situate the structure) to individually dibbled -in plants (you can use rebar or other way to make a skinny long hole for the plant stems to go in. Start with the bottom row of plants and work your way up to the top of the stream bank.) Use live stakes of willows and red osier dogwood that are about dime size diameter at a density of one every square foot if you have enough stakes. Fit the diameter of the dibble hole as closely as possible to the diameter of the live stake." Jerry had asked Ecology's opinion on some erosion that was occurring near the fence line along the Creek, and asked for our advice as to possible fixes. Catherine D. Reed Wetland and S6eoretandsSpecialist `Washington State Department of EcoGwo 15 West •YakimaAvenue, Suite 200 Yakima, WA 98902 (509) 575-2616 10/31/2006 DOC. INDEX TAB G Jerry G. Kilpatrick From: Eric Bartrand [bartrelb@DFW.WA.GOV] Sent: Wednesday, September 13, 2006 2:04 PM To: jery.kilpatrick@yakimaairterminal.com Subject: Service Road Jerry... The provided plans for constructing the service road are fine with the WDFW, provided: The road grade/elevation matches the existing ground elevation and road runoff flows in the landward, not streamward, direction. Eric Bartrand WDFW Area Habitat Biologist Yakima, Franklin, and Benton counties 1701 So. 24th Avenue Yakima, WA 98902-5720 (509) 457-9310 1 DOC, INDEX ft � r LMA AIR TERMINAL EXHIBIT LIST CHAPTER B Maps ' EXHIBIT # ' . DOCUMENT ' . .DATE. B-1, Maps 9-28-06 1 CITY OF YAKIMA, WASHINGTON VICINTfY FILE NO: SEPA #29-06 APPLICANT: YAKIMA AIR TERMINAL ?QUEST: AIRPORT SERVICE ROAD PR LOCATION: 2400 W WASHINGTON AVE Scale —lin = 700ft 350 700 sepa2SO6 09/28/06 W WASHINGTON AVE 21004 CITY OF YAKIMA, WASHINGTON FILE NO: SEPA #29-06 APPLICANT: YAKIMA AIR TERMINAL REQUEST: AIRPORT SERVICE ROAD PROJECT LOCATION: 2400 W WASHINGTON AVE PARCEL NUMBER(S):18133531001 DOC. INDEX Notified Property Owners within 500 Ft Subject Site 1 Scale —1 in = 700ft•�fi0° 0 350 700 sepa2906 09/28/06 0 SEPA #29-06 YAKIMA AIR TERMINAL AIRPORT SERVICE ROAD PROJECT x400 W WASHINGTON AVE IN' Subject Property City Limits 1-1. SR Suburban I m R -I Single•Fanuytlesia�_.ial R-2 Two -Family Residential R.3 Multi -Family Residential B2 Profrssional Business ® B-2 Local Business IID Historical Business SCC Small Convenience Cotter LCC Large Convenience Cotter - CBD Central Business District CBDS CBD Support M-1 Light Industrial ® M-2 Heavy Industrial ISM REM repkile 1 �i�■earl.. ■ �.. r a inwiLCRfib,b awlw� ■4: � ty, Scale –I in = 700ft 350 +144906 700 INDEX City of Yakima, Washington# September 28, 2006 SEPA #29-06 CITY OF YAKIMA, WASHINGTON Information Services - GIS FILE NO: SEPA #29-06 APPLICANT: YAKIMA AIR TERMINAL REQUEST: AIRPORT SERVICE ROAD PROJECT LOCATION: 2400 W WASHINGTON AVE DOC INDEX NSubject Property Yakima City Limits , , 11, tEX-HIBIT,,s, .:,. '.,, ' .` ';::- .,. '-'.',- ..: ' ,. .,,. ,,,, ..,-,.. ,„..- „ ,, -: . - ..,--.,,", .q,,,,,- , -- •'-. , -,,, ,,,--,,,i, , .-. „;-, 7: ,., -,-,,,;, -.-...- -:. 'z-,,,,.':, ,,, -,,,,,, ,:,--- ,,- -- ,.- ':: - , -...',4-5.. ''''2,;,,- .--. '-*-,..i.' ' .;" ',-,:::',,I:„:!..:/--,:;„ ',.. - .-:.', '..'-'-'.. ...,:".-Y.,- '::, 7.-i-,', ; ,,, , -,-,,, , --.,,•,„.4- ' .--,,i :-.. '',', ',. C, :4,- ‘''''''''''.'. ''''!' ''' :-."-'-','",'''' ':' ''''" . - ' '''''' :;'-''-- ''''-'-.1. ''' •Sliel'ilaii ' s'':':'-.';;::., ' .'.:-.:,);:.... :::;--';',:-::',,': .::•,',.-,:.,-'-'-'),- . . . :::::': ', ..4::,66.'k'''''''' ' , ' ;"0:- ' ' "`- :':-.,;.'"-i ,1,," 1 ;:. : '''' ••:,,,'YZ;;;;., ',,::: , ;," -,'''':,' ," ' " . , ,:',' ''',..',; -', .::,,' .-,,i1,-,- - ,,' -:,::,,,,„11- -.; • , ': .,:, ;',..'". ' , .. -- ,',4,,,,,. - . ' , „ , - ,..:;.' ,,,,"' ' ,, ".:, , , ',,,, , • -,,," 7 ..",,,;1'. , ",- .1 - ,,,' „,""..,„, H , ".:',.%,;'2,,l',',Z,;' ..";?:', :-: ' -:,',;:-. ' ' ' '"' ',I. - ' :: '' '''.:*":'-. " . ,,r,..":'' '2 .; ..".-;;T: ? ,;'''',,:' r,', 1, '"... ::. . ';:. 'I^ ..:`,.'','' ' ' -,;; ' ,::"'." ,,,,,' !P:',.. '«:.., ',! '',,,' ,.''. ,' .- . ; ' ' " ' " ; "1: ': ' . , . , . , ' ' ' . , ., ,:, , ,,,„ 4, ,.,64.. „ ,:, ":„ •.;,,, 1, : toz,,, , ,, ,,,,,,, .',;,-;; - . ,i" ,.,',; " - ' " ' = 7 . ,4g,,.„1:, • ' '`-.,., .,,,,,,,. i-, 2 .;. ,:,::: . _`, .,, ;','":;' ^.: - : `,;;:::: : ,;:' ' ' , t;'' ? - , -7,..; ,,,-;,,,,,"":!:.;;;',::'; , - T , .,,,",,,,I,, !; ,', . - S.: „,'..,: ,- ' -.7',.:" ' -1;;FY,'.',' , .,;, :,,7,,,;,."" ' ,ri- :., 4- .'"; ,.-',';?" : ,-.' ' ' ' „;':: • ' ' . ! '..',;-',.,...-k::,,,--,..,,,- ''',.;=,'" z.",,,;-4,4?' ' ' '::,.';-' ''''";; F ''..t-: ,;.'..' ''-'- ';'; ,.'" - ...' :';': ,-,:,--:;'''' ''''' ',.:'',-!ee•-: --i- ' --''..-''''''':.": -,.... ',:,;,5., ''';'' .,,:i'f'-'. .1, . ', :'" 4,,,,,';4'''''' ';,;,?..yr.' '',.,,"'?,. `,:°; e ": -; "2. . XJ -4: .J."; ,, v", ;‘,:- :,;,, ",ff,,;4 " ;; ''. ':, Y..; ;--.,;7 V...;,,,,°' ,g, y ,„ -:'.;:" ,', ';;;-., ''..,'i'.....-'..,'• c... -',. '.'''''," - '''' „: .:' '-'''''''' C —.. ., ..''' ..:- :, '!;''''!'.'q.'',7'...',1" : -,." ' r s.-. : -.-:',.. .c.,.. , ..-,,. ' 'Y''', 5 ': ,..- •,',, • ' f' ! e.-:'..-.•.-- •.,,e ,....~-,e-- f -7' • .,.' - - -. - — - .-.'",- ..' i-,-;:;,:, , . ., -,,..1-: ..:',3.-' ''- -- =',..: -: ''"--": t' .•'- .-.:'',''''...' t2,' , '+'`d . 4 '',,,.-17 • . '" -='- , ', , A, ,... :0: ,- -. 1 ,,..- :...- T , ...::. ' , :,..;1- s „ r:,;". ' ' ••:'"— f':" ...J•J,,-: " .•:,".--, 1 ' - , „, 4,.-.. ...,4,-., ,, ,", • , ::'4 ,iv $ :, , ' e * . ,e *' , .-j• , 'r r•". .?.'";•'' r "-", n '," ,,'„','.:.',•,,„.i'';.t" t-',' , ...-' ..;` ,. ' T -..„..,,',. ,,:- ,' ,-,, , :,'• ,,! . 4' '' ' -. ' ' :.v4". 7-", ' ' ' :, .-±".',..':: 4'' .4 - ,. , , t ' ;',''' ,,:":•";,,,-"`' s ,-:.' , ', --": ', j';';'' , P"‘ ''''','v''''',' ' ''' = :"." '''''''' , ' ',.-,:,,,- t„„ irVrr 4 ' ' . • '' ''' ' r: ...—,'':.,...-", 4 fV'- , ,''' t!;1'.;„,,- , , '' 1 -•-••;:,i :--4 '' .3-'''''''' :''' :.= -•''' - , ,...- -,,,..,-. L ' 1-4 3. N'4'44,,:r -, .-..,,...- ,,., ,.= --' --:•;,..,,,, ',,, ..i..--,..-. „ :;,':''„4., :/t,•.ii,.4-",','•-,'1:,:,,:.,-v„'.','.:;-,:,;1::.:.;:r:'.‘.,, :. .%.:; , .,'../., , ,..-',''';', If ";.:,-;•1::f1 , -'"':- -:'"fi"''1'' •,, ' '':"'. •;:,-...'''..., ' '-:17 :: ,:•,.Y.1;,-4,- ” z."..` . . Y.,.:4 .-,, -! .. ,,:'-, ' '..8 4-.:- ' '.'ri .,. . ' - '''L'.:,- ,r1t.,';t. I% `:ri., l'';:7=-- ' ,..,- ' '.:'::;',, : • ' Z "^—,-..'4 •'' `r . -' : -) • ".; r ` --, ;';`;.„j1•A•;„,.,,:,:„,,,:','”,„•:1- . 4 ,i':it, ',.'-.,-,-, .\.,-,,., 'I, .,', f"' rt''',- " '1 •;' ' ..,:'., :z.-,.„".:,.,;.: '-•_..,?, ''',•,'-''•,,,';"'„",:V•,,, •.•,,,: -".'', ' ,i, ,-;-,:--.,"'.', ...'--',1C;.'-,-i,f"Y,,,,''r-,,,-,1, .-,-,-', ,-., -4" =t;'•,c---'," '"',.,," " ,"'• ..'' 4...,,.'." '",' .,,,,,,,"Z,i': ', -,,, ' -''-; 44'' ,'•,','','1'"' 1, -''k:r” ,-','.',',,,.,,.,`,.,' ';••,- ,714 ,;' :,r'',,i'.1 ,4, ',,6"--'14- "..,;" "5;,':',i„, •44 48 -,",; ''g,.'.", • ;"',,,, " 7 ,'., P '''' ''', , , 4 ''' ' '"t-, :_.,-"'.. '' -,"%''.7:"."',4''.""'..'" 2.' ,.. '',- : ' -•": , , ,,, :,k'.'',‘ '''''":''''1'7•''•g:;''"!--.".. ;'r-, 41 ':,-,* ';:':2:k. A, i: ,4.l' , , ,,::::": • :,,.:* • ,„ ,e„,; ;`, . A -C A :.:4`. ', :t'''.'• ','.: '..".' ,''',,, ; '".'.'".: ' ;' ',;,. .`, ' ' ? ' - -',',',.:",; •-• ;:", '''... ''.; .;`; :; S' ,.: ",-, ,.'‘.4,''' 2 ...:7''''' ' ,..'," ' ''. ',". ., -';; ','.1 "';' .' ' t. -, ",,, :.:',' '' : ,,,, " ' " ''.,'"•nt ''', ' " ‘, 4.,'". r ,i,,,.; _._ ' 4.:, .., I,,' ''''' .,,,,, ,.-. : ,,, , 44:'-,-- ..... 4-.. ',,.'=' 4 '4' '',,. ', ",, ,4 -1-',,73. - ' . 1!"..',‘ ,„ ..., -•„, , • " :-. ,' - - ',.;'' '''f I& ' "' 3', ';''Ll' -:,,'1;',v;',.., ,..- :'.'s,.'.'.,-... INDEX .. C gs ge FIGURE NO. 1 I0 Jerry G Kilpatrick September 18, 2006 Page 2 of 2 Please call me at (509) 575-2616 if you have additional questions Thanks again for the time you took today to allow me to become more familiar with airport operations. Sincerely, Oat 6 igeeeP7 Catherine D. Reed Wetlands and Shorelands Specialist CR:jt060915 DOC. INDEX CITY OF YAKIMA REQUEST FOR COMMENTS DEVELOPMENT SERVICES TEAM October 2, 2006 TO: City of Yakima Development Services Team FROM: Jeff Peters, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: UAZO EC# 29-06 and Critical Area Ordinance Review #2-06. Yakima Air Terminal PROPOSAL: Environmental and Critical Area Review for construction of a service roadway outside of the FAA required Runway Safety Area (RSA) on the approach end of runway 22. The runway's location is fixed by function and cannot be located further from Wide Hollow Creek and still meet FAA design criteria. The road is designed to enhance and protect public health and safety. LOCATION: Approach end of Runway 22 upon Yakima Air Terminal property at 2400 W. Washington Ave., Yakima, WA PARCEL NUMBER: 181335-31001 Please review the attached site plan and prepare any written comments you might have regarding this proposal. This project will come up for discussion at the weekly DST meeting to be held October 11, 2006 at 9:30 a.m. As always, should you have comments, but find you are unable to attend please submit your comments prior to the meeting.. My _ _e-mail _address - is jpeters@ci.yakima.wa.us and the Planning Department's fax number is (509) 575-6105. Should you have any questions, or require additional information, please call me at (509) 575-6163. COMMENTS: Contact Decent / Agency INDEX DST PACKETS DISTRIBUTION LIST UAZO# C40 it 2-4 4 sc. it 21-66 Applicant: y�J„� A; r d ern-, na I Date of Meeting: Jo- Jo -JI -c3, City of Yakima Divisions / Yakima County Planning & Public Works: Doug Maples _�c� r ffic Engineering Joan Davenport Other Agencies: 24 Nob Hill Water ( C. ° WA State Department of Ecology Ii1A,{ r. M(•,-7t4rY-'�1,; 28 Pacific Power & Light Co. 30 Cascade Natural Gas Co. '41 32 West Valley School District #208 Preston Shepherd Gwen Clear Mike Paulson 6111 Tieton Dr. 98908 1147,777:1'..-147712M.1": ?c. 15 W. Yakima Ave. Suite 200 98902 500 No. Keys Rd. 98901 -Ja: Sheila Ross Peter Ansingh 701 S. 1st Ave. Yakima, WA. 98902 8902 Zier Rd. 98908 ounty Clean Air Authority Lawrence Odell 6 S. 2nd St. Rm 1016 .T -7-7F _177S"_--`e.� Al Brown 111 S. 18th St. 98901 38 Yakima County 911 Wayne Wantland epartment of Wildlife 1701 S. 24th Ave. 98902 WSDOT(Department of Transportation) Salah Al-Tamimi 44 Yakama Indian Nation Bill Beckley 2809 Rudkin Rd. Union Gap, WA 98903 P.O. Box 151 Toppenish, WA 98948 Paul Edmondson WSDOT, Aviation Division John Shambaugh 313 N. 3rd St. Yakima, WA 98901 3704 172nd St. NE, Suite K-2 Arlington, WA 98223 DOC. INDEX CITY OF YAK MA REQUEST FOR COMMENTS DEVELOPMENT SERVICES TF "M October 2, 2006 TO: City of Yakima Development Services Team FROM: Jeff Peters, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: UAZO EC# 29-06 and Critical Area Ordinance Review #2-06. Yakima Air Terminal Mike Antijunti Engineering PROPOSAL: Environmental and Critical Area Review for construction of a service roadway outside of the FAA required Runway Safety Area (RSA) on the approach end of runway 22. The runway's location is fixed by function and cannot be located further from Wide Hollow Creek and still meet FAA design criteria. The road is designed to enhance and protect public health and safety. LOCATION: Approach end of Runway 22 upon Yakima Air Terminal property at 2400 W. Washington Ave., Yakima, WA PARCEL NUMBER: 181335-31001 Please review the attached site plan and prepare any written comments you might have regarding this proposal. This project will come up for discussion at the weekly DST meeting to be held October 11, 2006 at 9:30 a.m. As always, should you have comments, but find you are unable to attend please submit your comments prior to the meeting. My e-mail address is jpeters@ci.yakima.wa.us and the Planning Department's fax number is (509) 575-6105. Should you have any questions, or require additional information, please call me at (509) 575-6163. COMMENTS: —114-cs P�u�to?e-t��'r f v4=1- -e- _ '71.A-ts p'EszE=-=Pr-te-re-3C- \..th ( -1' Contact 'Esq G t a1€€ oJ� Departt./ Agency INDEX ProMr- RFC!IVED OCT 0 6 ZOO CITY OF YAKIMA REQUEST FOR COMMENTS Gil t YAKIMA DEVELOPMENT SERVICES TEAM PLANNING DIV. October 2, 2006 City of Yakima Development Services Team Jeff Peters, Assistant Planner FRarl: Wastewater SUBJECT: UAZO EC# 29-06 and Critical Area Ordinance Review #2-06. Yakima Air Terminal PROPOSAL: Environmental and Critical Area Review for construction of a service roadway outside of the FAA required Runway Safety Area (RSA) on the approach end of runway 22. The runway's location is fixed by function and cannot be located further from Wide Hollow Creek and still meet FAA design criteria. The road is designed to enhance and protect public health and safety. LOCATION: Approach end of Runway 22 upon Yakima Air Terminal property at 2400 W. Washington Ave., Yakima, WA PARCEL NUMBER: 181335-31001 Please review the attached site plan and prepare any written comments you might have regarding this proposal. This project will come up for discussion at the weekly DST meeting to be held October 11, 2006 at 9:30 a.m. As always, should you have comments, but find you are unable to attend please submit your comments prior to the meeting. My e-mail address is jpeters@ci.yakima.wa.us and the Planning Department's fax number is (509) 575-6105. Should you have any questions, or require additional information, please call me at (509) 575-6163. COMMENTS: WASiidkrYJ2 17- 0/ / 1XES Nerr A/AV'e- /445/ wIAST6 iVATM loA ieE12vS Rey AtZI t)U -tib- P/ZoyoSED T'izosECT Contact •I 4si- UAT6& Dept5tdent / Agency INDEX aid= a Regional Clean Air Authority October 5, 2006 Jeff Peters, Assistant Planner City of Yakima Development Services Team 129 N 2nd St Yakima, WA 98901 Six An SPCnnfi At Suite 1(116 Yakima WA 984M Phone: (509) 834-2050, Fax: (509) 834-2060 http://www.co.yakima.wa.us/cleanair RECEIVED OCT 0 9 Zoos CITY op YArMA PLANNING DIV. RE: Yakima Air Terminal Critical Area Ordinance Review #02-06, 10/2/06 Dear Mr. Peters: Thank you for providing the Yakima Regional Clean Air Authority (YRCAA) the opportunity to review and comment on the Yakima Air Terminal Critical Area Ordinance Review #02- 06, 10/2/06. Following review, the YRCAA offers the following comments: Contractor(s) working on this project will be required to file a dust control plan with YRCAA. Thank you for the opportunity to connect with the city's continued support -in -protecting the air quality in Yakima County. Best B�ggards C. Stansel PI ner 'DOC: INDEX S:\FTP FILES\PERMITTING\SEPA\CITY_OF_YAKIMA\PETERS_UAZO_YAKAIRTERMINAL_EC2906_050CT06.DOC Page 1 of 1 Peters, Jeff From: Clear, Gwen [GCLE461 @ecy.wa.gov] Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2006 4:56 PM To: Peters, Jeff Subject: UAZO EC 29-06 Yakima Air Terminal Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the notice of application for Runway 22 Service Road, proposed by the Yakima Air Terminal [EC29-06).We have reviewed the application and have the following comment. Water Quality An NPDES Construction Stormwater General Permit from the Washington State Department of Ecology is required if there is a potential for stormwater discharge from a construction site with more than one acre of disturbed ground. This permit requires that the SEPA checklist fully disclose anticipated activities including building, road construction and utility placements. Obtaining a permit is a minimum of a 38 day process and may take up to 60 days if the original SEPA does not disclose all proposed activities. The permit requires that Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (Erosion Sediment Control Plan) is prepared and implemented for all permitted construction sites. These control measures must be able to prevent soil from being carried into surface water (this includes storm drains) by stormwater runoff. Permit coverage and erosion control measures must be in place prior to any clearing, grading or construction. More information on the stormwater program may be found on Ecology's stormwater website at: http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/wq/stormwater/construction/ . Please submit an application or contact Ray Latham at the Dept. of Ecology, (509) 575-2807, with questions about this permit. Sincerely, Gwen Clear ERTS & SEPA Coordinator WA State Dept of Ecology Central Regional Office - Yakima 509.575.2012 10/20/2006 DOC. INDEX # D-� WETLAND MITIGATION/DETENTION FACILITIES Cayla Morgan, FAA - Seattle ADO (425) 227-2653 Mike Linnen, USDA -Wildlife Services (360) 753-9884 Background FAA Advisory Circular (AC) 150-5200-33, "Hazardous Wildlife Attractants on or Near Airports," dated 5/1/97 provides guidance on locating land uses that may potentially attract hazardous wildlife onto or in the vicinity of public -use airports. The AC provides examples of land uses that may be compatible with safe airport operations and those that have been deemed incompatible. Siting criteria for the noncompatible uses is defined and notification requirements are provided. Siting Criteria FAA recommends that wildlife -attracting land uses be located beyond the following distances from an airport's aircraft movement areas, loading ramps, or aircraft parking areas: • 5,000 feet for airports serving piston powered airc,-raft. • 10,000 feet for airports serving turbine -powered aircraft. e, 5 statute miles if the attractant causes hazardous wildlife movement into or across the approach or departure airspace. Examples of such incompatible land uses include putrescible-waste disposal operations, wastewater treatment facilities, artificial marshes, wastewater discharge and sludge disposal, and wetland mitigation that provides habitat for hazardous wildlife (particularly waterfowl). Some land uses may be compatible with safe airport operations provided they are designed appropriately. Examples of these uses include enclosed waste facilities, recycling centers accepting non-food items, composting operations, construction and demolition debris landfills, water detention or retention facilities, landscaping, golf courses, and agricultural crops. To insure that any of these uses are safe with airport operations, we recommend that the FAA's Airport District Office (ADO) be notified of the proposal. The ADO will then work closely with the United States Department of Agriculture's, Wildlife Services Division (USDA -WS) with whom the FAA has a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) for assessing and reducing wildlife hazards. The recommended notification procedures are outlined below as well as some general design guidelines for detention facilities. FAA Notification On Airport Proposals FAA recommends that these proposals go through the 7460 process. This involves filing the completed Form -7460 with attached drawings of the proposal with the Seattle Airports District DOC. INDEX p' Office. At the same time, a copy of the form and the preliminary design and drawings should also be forwarded to Mike Linnell, USDA -WS. Off -Airport Proposals FAA recommends that the Seattle ADO be notified of proposals by other municipalities or developers. FAA will then work with USDA -WS to either change the location or achieve a compatible design. General Design Recommendations — Detention Facilities • Minimize the surface area of standing water. • Increase the depth of the facility and make it more linear to achieve capacity without increasing surface area. • If a two -chambered design is necessary, there should be at least a V2-1 percent gradient from the upper to lower pond, making sure that the outlet/control structure is at the absolute lowest point. • Place rip rap or quarry spalls on the sides and bottom of the ponds (similar to a French drain) to prevent waterfowl from feeding on emergent vegetation. • If vegetation is required for water treatment, a uniform mix of forest or shrub/scrub vegetation should be established at a density such that areas of standing water are eliminated or minimized by the vegetative canopy. • If an erosion mix is needed, use a vegetative mix that is not an attractive food source for waterfowl or other flocking birds. • Netting or overhead wires can be used for short term construction projects such as sediment catch basins, but waterfowl and birds can still see the open water and may come to investigate the area. A word of caution — Endangered Suedes As outlined in Section 2-4(2)(b)(2), exceptions to locating mitigation activities outside the separation criteria may be considered if the affected wetlands provide unique ecological functions, such as critical habitat for a threatened or endangered species or ground water recharge. With the recent listings of salmon, there may be additional requirements to mitigate for such impacts. Again, the best way to proceed is to work closely with the FAA and USDA -WS. -DOC-2 INDEX i"c_7 Page 1 of 1 Peters, Jeff From: Woehler, Kerri [WoehleK@WSDOT.WA.GOV] Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2006 11:42 AM To: Peters, Jeff Cc: Pribble, Marilee; Shambaugh, John E.; Maples, Doug; jerry.k iIpatrick@yak imaairterminai.com; cayla.morgan©faa.gov Subject: Yakima Air Terminal Proposed Service Road Jeff, Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the proposed construction of a service roadway at Yakima Air Terminal. WSDOT Aviation supports the project. We recommend that the city review support materials guiding development of stormwater facilities adjacent to airports and encourage you to contact Cayla Morgan at FAA or Mike Linnell at USDA -Wildlife Services for assistance. Program information and contact phone numbers are included in the attachment, which was provided by the FAA. Thank you again for the opportunity to comment. Please give me a call at 360.651.6312 if you have any questions or if I can be of assistance with aviation issues. Kerri Woehler Aviation Planner WSDOT Aviation Division 360.651.6312 www.wsdot.wa.aov/aviation 10/20/2006 akima Regional Clean Air Authority October 30, 2006 j RECEIVED NOV 0-2 2006 CITY�M1'OF�J YAKIMA Six Sn SAnnnr1 St Slli1N[IINgin (a WA cunni Phone: (509) 834-2050, Fax: (509) 834-2060 http://www.co.yakima.wa.us/cleanair Doug Maples, Code Administration and Planning Manager City of Yakima, Department of Community & Economic Development 129 No 2nd St Yakima, WA 98901 RE: Environmental Review for Yakima Air Terminal Service Road, City of Yakima UAZO CAO #2-06 and EC #29-06, 10/26/06 Dear Mr. Maples: Thank you for providing the Yakima Regional Clean Air Authority (YRCAA) the opportunity to review and comment on the Environmental Review for Yakima Air Terminal Service Road, City of Yakima, UAZO CAO #2-06 and EC #29-06, 10/26/06. Following review, the YRCAA offers the following comments: The contractor(s) doing excavation, grading or construction work on this project will be required to file a dust control plan with YRCAA. Thank you for the opportunity to connect with the city's continued support -in -protecting the air quality in Yakima County. C . Stansel P anner DOC. INDEX # S:\FTP FILES\PERMITTING\SEPA\CITY_OF_YAKIMA\MAPLES_UAZO_COA 206_EC2906_19SEPT06.DOC November 15, 2006 Public Services 128 North Second Street • Fourth Floor Courthouse • Yakima, Washington 98901 (509) 574-2300 • 1-800-572-7354 • FAX (509) 574-2301 • www.co.yakima.wa.us VERNM. REDIFER, P.E. - Director Doug Maples, Codes and Planning Manager City of Yakima Planning Division 129 N. 2"d Street Yakima, WA 98901 RECEIVED NOV 2 0 2006 CITY OF YAKIMA PLANNING DIV. RE: SEPA Comments on Yakima Air Terminal development in floodplain (UAZO CAO #2-06 // EC #29-06) Dear Mr. Maples: Thank you for the opportunity to review the environmental checklist on the above project. We offer the following comments. The road is to be located within 25 feet of Wide Hollow Creek, and requires a public agency and utility exception from the City of Yakima's CAO. It would be advisable to locate the road, especially in the area shown as an existing SSMH. The Creek in this area is rapidly incising with very unstable banks due•to the. movement of the creek bed and the lack of perennial vegetation. Expected continued movement of the creek will likely endanger or damage the road prism at some point where it lies parallel to the creek. Stabilization of that channel after the road is endangered would be very difficult since the channel is incised and the bank material is very fine and erosive. Based on the current channel pattern, the road would be in a much safer location if it can be moved away from the creek, 25 more feet would probably be sufficient, but even 12 feet would greatly reduce the potential for structural damage to the roadway. If you have questions about these comments or would like to discuss options, please contact Joel Freudenthal, of our Surface Water Management Division. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this environmental determination. Sincerely, DEAN PAT'1'ERSON Planning Division Environmental and Natural Resources Manager G•\Development Services\Useis\DEANP\MISCIREVIEWS\Yak AirTennFP.doc RFc�� Dov o, Fig O/732006 YAKIMA AIR TERMINAUN,,�,,4,1 McALLISTER FIELD °'y 2400 West Washington Ave. • Yakima, Washington 98903 • (509) 575-6149 • (509) 575-6185 Fax November 1, 2006 Jeff Peters, Assistant Planner City of Yakima Planning Department 129 North Second Street Yakima, Washington 98901 Subject: Airport Traverse Way. Dear Mr. Peters: Per your email of October 31st, here is additional information in reference to YMC 15.27.540 and the airport traverse way: - '7 • Runway design criteria is mandated by'Federal Aviation Administration Advisory Circular 150/5300-13, Airport Design. Dimensional criteria for runways and their associated Runway Safety Areas (RSA)' and Obstacle Free Area (OFA) are determined by the most critical aircraft using the runway. In the case of Runway 22, the critical aircraft is the Horizon Dash -8 which is classified as a design group B -III aircraft. A B -III requires a RSA extending 600 feet from the end of the runway and 300 feet wide. The OFA for the runway is 800 feet wide and extends 600 feet beyond the end of the runway. Chapter 3 of the Advisory Circular, Runway Design, Paragraph 305a(4) states that a Runway Safety Area shall be "free of objects, except for objects that need to be located in the runway safety area because of their function". Paragraph 307, Runway Object Free Area states "The runway object free area (OFA) is a two dimensional ground area surrounding the runway. The runway OFA clearing standards precludes parked airplanes and objects, except objects whose location is fixed by function". Since this roadway will be utilized by aircraft ground support vehicles (fuel trucks, tugs, etc.) to prevent runway and runway safety area crossings, and to prevent runway incursions, FAA design criteria would preclude it from being located in the RSA or OFA. DOC. INDEX # From the runway end to the security fence along the creek it is approximately 660 feet, therefore, to meet the Federal design criteria there is a 60 foot strip between the outer edge of the RSA/OFA and the security fence. This is the only area this roadway can be built and meet FAA design criteria. When the FAA's Runway Safety Action Team evaluated the Runway 22 safety area in May of 2002, they were under the mistaken impression that there was not sufficient room to build the roadway and be out of the RSA/OFA. They suggested that the runway be extended to the south-west so the threshold could be relocated to a position allowing for the construction of the roadway. Upon further study, however, it was determined that there was indeed room to build the roadway and meet Federal standards under the current conditions. Funding is also an issue on this project. We will be utilizing the Airport's Passenger - Facility Charge program to fund the project. The PFC program is authorized by the FAA under 14 CFR Part 158, Passenger Facility Charge Program. The airport has earmarked it's 2005, 06 and 07 FAA Airport Improvement Program funds to a similar project on Runway 27, the airport's primary Instrument Landing System (ILS) runway, therefore that makes the PFC program the only practical funding source at this time. Currently, South 16th Avenue is within the runway 27 safety area and we have been mandated by the FAA to relocate South 16th out of the RSA. After South 16th is relocated, a similar service road will be built around the safety area of that runway. The airport's PFC program is scheduled to expire early in 2007, therefore, we will be required to submit an application to the FAA prior to the end of the year to impose an additional PFC for the construction of this roadway. It takes approximately 4 months to get approval from the FAA to impose a new PFC after the application is submitted to them and we do not want the PFC collections to lapse. The airport receives approximately $11,000 per month from PFC collections, therefore, a lapse in the program could have a severe impact on our ability to fund needed projects. In conclusion, and to answer your question about other practical alternatives, in order to maintain a level of safety consistent with Federal regulations, to implement safety recommendations made by the FAA's Runway Safety Action Team, and to adequately fund the project, this is the only practical alternative. If you need further information, please don't hesitate to call. Sincerely, Jerlg (. Kilpatrick Assistant Airport Manager DOC. INDEX # D-1.0 11/10/94 AC 150/5300-13 CHG Chapter 3. RUNWAY DESIGN 300. INTRODUCTION. This chapter presents standards for runways and runway associated elements such as shoulders, blast pads, runway safety areas, obstacle free zones (OFZ), object free areas (OFA), clearways, and stopways. Tables 3-1, 3-2, and 3-3 present the standard widths and lengths for runway azid runway associated elements. Also included are design standards and recommendations for rescue and firefighting access roads. M new airports, the RSA and ROFA lengths and the RPZ location standards are tied to runway ends. At existing constrained airports, these criteria may, on a case-by-case basis, be applied with respect to declared distances ends. See appendix 14. 301. RUNWAY LENGTH. AC 150/53254 and airplane flight manuals provide guidance on runway lengths for airport design, including declared distance lengths. The computer program cited in appendix 11 may be used to determine the recommended runway length for airport design. 302. RUNWAY WIDTH. Tables 3-1, 3-2, and 3-3 present runway width standards which consider operations conducted during reduced visibility. 303. RUNWAY SHOULDERS. Runway shoulders provide resistance to blast erosion and accommodate the passage of maintenance and emergency equipment and the occasional passage of an airplane veering from the runway. Tables 3-1, 3-2, and 3-3 present runway shoulder width standards. A natural surface, e.g., turf, normally reduces the possibility of soil erosion and engine ingestion of foreign objects. Soil with turf not suitable for this purpose requires a stabilized or low cost paved surface. Refer to chapter 8 for further discussion. Figure 3-1 depicts runway shoulders. 304. RUNWAY BLAST PAD. Runway blast pads provide blast erosion protection beyond runway ends. Tables 3-1, 3-2, and 3-3 contain the standard length and width for blast pads for takeoff operations requiring blast erosion control. Refer to chapter 8 for further discussion. Figure 3-1 depicts runway blast pads. 305. RUNWAY SAFETY AREA (RSA). The runway safety area is centered on the runway centerline. Tables 3-1, 3-2, and 3-3 present nmway safety area dimensional standards. Figure 3-1 depicts the runway safety area. Appendix 8 discusses the runway safety area's evolution. Chap 3 a. Desien Standards. The nmway safety area shall be: <1) cleared and graded and have no potentially hazardous ruts, humps, depressions, or other surface variations; (2) drained by grading or storm sewers to prevent water accumulation; (3) capable, under dry conditions, of supporting snow removal equipment, aircraft rescue and firefighting equipment, and the occasional passage of aircraft without causing structural damage to the aircraft; and (4) free of objects, except for objects that need to be located in the runway safety area because of their function. Objects higher than 3 inches (7.6 cm) above grade should be constructed on low impact resistant supports (frangible mounted structures) of the lowest practical height with the frangible point no higher than 3 inches (7.6 cm) above grade. Other objects, such manholes, should be constructed at grade. In no Q. should their height exceed 3 inches (7.6 cm) above grade. b. Construction Standards. Compaction of runway safety areas shall be to FAA specification P-152 found in AC 150/5370-10. 306. OBSTACLE FREE ZONE (OFZ). The OFZ clearing standard precludes taxiing and parked airplanes and object penetrations, except for frangible visual NAVAIDs that need to be located in the OFZ because of their fimction. The runway OFZ and, when applicable, the inner -approach OFZ, and the inner -transitional OFZ comprise the obstacle free zone (OFZ). Figures 3-2, 3-3, 3-4, and 3-5 show the OFZ. a. itunwav OFZ. The runway OFZ is a defined volume of airspace centered above the runway centerline. The runway OFZ is the airspace above a surface whose elevation at any point is the same as the elevation of the nearest point on the runway centerline. The runway OFZ extends 200 feet (60 m) beyond each end of the runway. Its width is as follows: exclusively: (1) For runways serving small airplanes DOC. INDEX #_O-'° 21 AC 150/5300-13 CHG 4 11/10/94 1 (a) 300 feet (90 m) for runways with 1 lower than 3/4 -statute mile (1 200 m) approach visibility 1 minimums (b) 250 feet (75 m) for other runways serving small airplanes with approach speeds of 50 knots or more. (c) 120 feet (36 m) for other runways serving small airplanes with approach speeds of less than 50 knots. (2) For rumways serving large airplanes, 400 feet (120 m). b. Timer -approach OFZ. The inner -approach OFZ is a defined volume of airspace centered on the approach area. It applies only to runways with an approach lighting system. The inner -approach OFZ begins 200 feet (60 m) from the runway threshold at the same elevation as the runway threshold and extends 200 feet (60 m) beyond the last light unit in the approach lighting system. Its width is the same as the runway OFZ and rises ata slope of 50 (horizontal) to 1(vertical) from its beginning c. )neer-transitional OFZ. The inner - transitional OFZ is a defined volume of airspace along the sides of the runway OFZ and inner -approach OFZ. It applies only to runways with lower than 3/4 -statute mile (1 200 m) approach visibility minimums (1) For runways serving small airplanes exclusively, the inner -transitional OFZ slopes 3 (horizontal) to 1 (vertical) out from the edges of the runway OFZ and inner -approach OFZ to a height of 150 feet (45 m) above the established airport elevation. (2) For runways serving large airplanes, separate inner -transitional OFZ criteria apply for Category (CAT) I and CAT II/III rtmways. (a) For CAT I runways, the inner - transitional OFZ begins at the edges of the runway OFZ and inner -approach OFZ, then rises vertically for a height "H", and then slopes 6 (horizontal) to 1 (vertical) out to a height of 150 feet (45 m) above the established airport elevation. 1) In U.S. customary units, = 61 - 0.094(S"„) - 0.003(F ). 2) In SI units, H„."„ = 18.4 - 0.094(S.,.) - 22 3) S is equal to the most demanding wingspan of the airplanes using the runway and E is equal to the runway threshold elevation above sea level. (b) For CAT 11/III runways, the inner - transitional OFZ begins at the edges of the runway OFZ and inner -approach OFZ, then rises vertically for aheight "H", then slopes 5 (horizontal) to 1 (vertical) out to a distance "Y" from runway centerline, and then slopes 6 (horizontal) to 1 (vertical) out to a height of 150 feet (45 in) above the established airport elevation. 1) In U.S. customary units, H,.. = 53 - 0.13(S..) - 0.0022(E.) and distance Y., = 440 + 1.08(S.) - 0.024(E, .,). 2) In SI units, = 16 - 0.13(8..0- 0.0022(13.„ and distance Yom.„ = 132 +.1.08(S„,.,) - 0.024(E..). 3) S is equal to the most demanding wingspan of the airplanesusing the runway and E is equal to the runway threshold elevation above sea level. Beyond the distance "Y" fromrunway centerline the inner -transitional CAT 111111 OFZ surface is identical to that for the CAT I OFZ.. 307. RUNWAY OBJECT FREE AREA. The runway object free area (OFA) is centered on the runway centerline. The runway, OFA clearing standard requires clearing the OFA of above ground objects protruding above the runway safety area edge elevation. Except where precluded by other clearing standards, it is acceptable to place objects that need to be located in the OFA for air navigation or aircraft ground maneuvering purposes and to taxi and hold aircraft in the OFA. Objects non-essential for air navigation or aircraft ground maneuvering purposes are not to be placed in the OFA. This includes parked airplanes and agricultural operations Tables 3-1, 3-2, and 3-3 specify the standard dimensions of the runway OFA. Extension of the OFA beyond the standard length to the maximum extent feasible is encouraged. See figure 2-3. 308. CLEARWAY STANDARDS. The clearway (See figure 3-6) is a clearly defined area connected to and extending beyond the runway end available for completion of the takeoff operation of turbine -powered airplanes. A clearway increases the allowable airplane operating takeoff weight without increasing runway length. DOC. INDEX j Chap 3 AC 150/5300-13 CHG 4 11/10/94 Table 3-1. Runway design standards for aircraft approach category A & B visual runways and runways with not lower than 3/4 -statute mile (1200 m) approach visibility minimums 24 ITEM DIM L1 AIRPLANE DESIGN GROUP I J I II I III IV Runway Length A - Refer to paragraph 301 - Runway Width B 60 ft 60 ft 75 ft 100 ft 150 ft 18 m 18 m 23 m 30 m 45 m Runway Shoulder Width 10 ft 10 ft 10 ft 20 ft 25 ft 3 m 3 m 3 m 6 m 7.5 m Runway Blast Pad Width 80 ft 80 ft 95 ft 140 ft 200 ft 24.m 24 m 29 m 42 m 60 m Runway Blast Pad 60 ft 100 ft 150 ft 200 ft 200 ft Length 18 m 30 m 45 m 60 m 60 m Runway Safety Area C 120 ft 120 ft 150 ft 300 ft 500 ft Width 36 m 36 m 45 m 90 m 150 m Runway Safety Area P 240 ft 240 ft 300 ft 600 ft 1,000 ft Length Beyond RW End 21 72 m 72 m 90 m 180 m 300 m Obstacle Free Zone - Refer to paragraph 306 - Width and Length Runway Object Free Area Width Q 250 ft 75 m 400 ft 120 m 500 ft 150 m 800 ft 240 m 800 ft, 240 m Runway Object Free Area R 240 ft 240 ft 300 ft 600 ft 1,000ft Length Beyond RW End j,/ 72 m 72 m 90 m 180 m 300 m 1/ Letters correspond to the dimensions on figures 2-1 and 2-3. 2/ These dimensional standards pertain to facilities for small airplanes exclusively. 3/ The runway safety area and runway object free area lengths begin at each runway end when stopway is not provided. When stopway is provided, these lengths begin at the stopway end. DJC. INDEX Chap 3 YAKIMA AIR TERMINAL EXHIBIT: LIST CHAPTER D DST members and other Agencies EXHIBIT # -DOCUMENT, ,DATE D-1 Letter4o Jerry G. Kilpatrick from Catherine. D:. Reed' > '` 9/18/06 • D-2 Request for Comments from DST and Agencies 10/2/06 _ D=3' Agencies Contacted 10/2/06 -4' K ' Comments from Michael Antijunti, City•'ofrYakima, ' ' �EngineeririgDepartment 10/2/06 . D=5 - Comments from Scott Schafer,. City .of'Yakima Wastewater . . ; • . . . Department 10/6/06 •.. D-6 • Comments from C.M. Stansel, Yakima Regional Clean Air ' ' - q Authority 10/5/06 D-7 ; Comments from Gwen Clear, WA State Dept of Ecology, 10/10/06 D-8'Comments from Kerri Woehler WSDOT, Aviation Division-- . . 10/11/06 -D-9 Comments from C.M. Stansel, Yakima Regional Clean Air - - Authority ' 10/30/06 D-10 Comments fromJerry G: Kilpatrick, Yakima Air Terminal - 11/1/06 D-11 , Comments from Dean Patterson, Yakima'County 11/15/06 -44 EX-il"B-,.IT,'.#;'r"*., ', r''.,-'-_, ,...,7'.;-.,-;,,,',.. 'i,.. :,::;..,.,.:,,':':..,.DOC,..VN;,..gNT..,„.: , :-,'',,.',•:„., .,,. ,,,'-'v,,,..:-...-, .-.0:',-.. ., ': .-„,., ,,,,!...::',..-:".ti.: "::.•J.:,',.:-...,-.'. , , ..DATE - :.!-, ....• .„sr'.,--,-,- . t:IV--4,';';',: ''s::, .,,z,,,. ,1""‘,.."4,44. . • ' ..'..:°-.,:''1.:';',.:.."'- '-'.':'.7:':=i ..- --'.','..,.: ' --ciSEPA-.Checkltst.-,7;',',,,..::,1- ' :.:..,,, ---:,,,..,-,- .:".':;-.. ,.,' ..,,! , .:,-...' ,,; ,4 '4'''' '-• ,"4:,''''",;,;-• -,• ' t ', ' ,.,--:- .',4,.--,`: ,,,:l. J.,- . J. ""- -; -.,-,-,`,...„'",.,,-,.,---:,„ .,:v:", .4z ,n ;44 • • ". 4"-, ..";*" ,''',. .5 ...."1k --,-i,f;-;/25/06,;,. =„): .:, ; • :'"-,. t,", '-'1,:. : :'-' „.'''' . i -"A , .."-,"„ • ,-, 4*, 4,.- * „ '4•- ''' •;•• ' '' '4'... ' '4...44- :;•,, .;;Aa :;,-. . '4, ‘ '-' -' , -4. • ' - • ' '' 7' " .-' -•"- "• ' -i' '., " '''• „V.'„ ' • - " r ".„ ' ' "!".:"1,4.4,;.,,,. " ,,, ' 7 4•••1-, "4,-‘, 45' " 4" •44••, "..,,`". ""'"' " :,•!..,,,, , ''"" "'.2.n ' • ,,,..." .a, ""•;„ ', 4 ,; :k'4;•,,..t"".5;*,"•;A-•::"4r' ",;,*A,""".;"t";',,-" .;,":.•" ;425 ,.„..."1" .s" 94 .*45'„,;,*.;,.,,-,:•,"2.5..A:2,P...,-!, •--.0,: ,4..Z:::., "; *- •"',-,',"i';;;-,, ,':4 .•...,„',; 7. ..-.*","..4',,•'.'"`,•„".*...,...,,P,,,,,,n,,,",: 4 A - "1,4'..'* ;*-;„„;:`•; 4";•'1',!. --..,'.. " ..,•-"-, ,-..-"n'''"'',;"r'* 4 ."..•.-' ..,'.'..' .-,,n„","': ".:, 1:.-,"S ;. ;2.,." .„,'‘,...'",,V.'• ",-r St. ' „ 4 ;.- • s.:'" "....,:t ": - " ;;-, .F, ',...' J' - 447- • ,nr, 4,'" "• ••• 4.1. ' ' ..., •:* ,, '..4 „,-,.;,?.,, „=. !",s.: .:, 4. -.'. - - , ' .., *• .2" ' ,17.,-, =, .","..,.,? .-3,A " e 44'". a „, .2".;,,'', 4‘; ',!•' i'4,4,,4,,.."*.":„..".• .,";-,tf. 4:7-•17.:V ' --'" -, ,q,"...= ,''' v,-- "1 ..i; --,i - - :,. .-' :',,, ,,:, .,-, 4 •„ ""4'.4', • ' ;5°.• 4".1.4"'" 4"" ,,, •',".,.•• ,",,;i"l,'2;?',",.., ,",,7." "•'"-.;,..".'' , , 7.4' .ai4. .4 ":,:...-•%-„,-,":'.'7,.; ., ,, ‘ ,,,,.-., rr,-.A„ 2, -a ..,- ,.4 "n.1 .4„ ,,V,r, "•.,'.. ,.,' ...:,..'S„. .4 '''''''''''',-;;•":kr'::irtil " 7. ?4,J.;',. 1;•• :-.. ' - ' ';••-• "k: ' '•"" " •3-;"..2 ;•••'-' '--;.. S. • -447 , • ' '',:• . ".".e...•;.„:"."4"•,*• •;• ,r5•.".' "" " : ' ..3.- . " '. "i5r ,..f'4•4... ,. , A , A 4. A. :"." 4,4'.."„." '245." ' 44- ' 7"""k."44•".4' " ' . ... .. , .' ' ::r" ' •..2"; '"4 , • sk A '4 1" "" ' 4 „ "- 4 . 4i_4; Y.1'.. ,,,,..5.4"4"„,•••4 :2.f ,•.:.; n:474:;•"4".•".", 4.;.;",•. .,14,4.<,.. ... ..2.* ' • .4, ":•,4".... ,44. ,;.tt,l.';`,1,":-4' .i7. ...t ' *" '0''''j,*.;, ..4*•; "A,,,14•44,_,".• ' ,".. r , 4.`" 4,-4' ' '• V., , . .4*". 4,`" " ,;44,,,„4""; , ,,,a ' ' •• ....."..A.V2 4":";"• ":4 • . 6,4.,,`,1*,,* ,- t ,., . . + *, -' ".„ , :,-- '''''',t, ,' , ',`;' ,7. *''' . ,,' Z .': 1- ., : t..f. = - '''' '' " ' .,, '.."::,..kr... - - 4.' , ,„," ;:..;' , .;''t'; ' i ,4. '`-',, 1.`; 7. 'F, z, -,--"'" -r- ,-,:„ 1. : :„‘!_:. 1;.4--`. i %,,<NI, , ''.e.'„7„;..-"',, i "..---„-, • ".,, "...-..,'.1".1.',T...4-.f.%, ,, ,,"'", . - ' e, „ .."',.-1j1 '' - ,"tis. '."• ': - ' , s. .4",AI,' ':,. .• .•, ''"''" "'' '* .,:,.'.4.•:;..;"-.:;1''""?„ t.... 'n4 ".• '.. ,,1,4•". 1:, „, ,.; ',.. 2 • .1.2.;2:,""2„4."•• , ... 1,...,...„ t r * "n" ."."'". ,, '', , ,.:"."4:-4';`"4/4,', •.41!-"C"'""k-•,. r•..-4.:4 ...". ; -. 4,t*, ' ,,. •"4 ; ' "r• 48 „n*.." s 4.4 '' ..," `„,11,. . ' 4 k" ' 7. 44 •;:: ".*:'•-•„" ..- ..".. ." " f•-• :, • ,.* ., •,';' 7. A , " "4' 4 ' ; 4.:7.-57"‘... •-• A: • '• ' '' ..,'"""' '.‘""•; " '4.44V"4 -4-..": ''-'*••"-", ' '34-;.4".,4.'",.. 4 ", '',',"-', '•.;;••••', .7.r •' ,i ' , A. ' "4", .,V,1,".,..: A "" . , ' Z"!:"..",' k• '4"'" . • •::"..3".:..4 "' :4 "" - '‘• ' ' !•4 ":".., "" ' 3' "',.. 24. ": "...""...1.. '", "" 4.'"" ' • / n"2 .. A ' • ...‘,. "* a -• , ' 42" C"" ' .. "-A` •:4v 'n.„•.•rrr•, .V. •••,7"" •., , - .,„.„ ,. Ail 4 •" '4" "" "'•"2:: -"'-' - - -."..„';-.• "'S . - '"' "-.--'•'".4 -2."":".,:.". ,:"..,"i*"."'" ''''. ' :*/*2" ,, 1,,"..,l'i* -, ,,. .'-‘, 4' , , ,, ' .",,, , 4 .., .,' '' ., ,,,, _::', '' ''' ,f ::: '•,: ',:., 14 ,,,..“ ' , ' ; *5.i.:".": ; S. ",',1*," •'• ."-- ".5,:, , ". , ' i ' /,' .. !. ,,,''., ' ';'. 2.4 .r'' ', "s -f..-',', ... . ''' 't ,,,, t- ' ' -'1-', ' ,," 1--'' ,-.•*: -,,`„, t --*-; , 1". :`•: - :-...,, ':,, ,..., - --„,.... 1,,,-..,,,, - - ;,:r-.,,. .4 ".., ..... , -",'S.,..'"4'• , .,. 4.,, ,, ,1!'" .,,.;,-0,-.','": "I• . -",.*.t;, ."..""*."'" 4.'"i" ;;;::- '.•.. IV 4, * 4;4' ; .4...17. "; , ,, , 4, ::-.,,,,, ,-.\.,„,,,,,,..' ',';„: -,.":" ' ''"'; ',„ V ' tt; ',.-,,',4 4•";',' •k..", s".4- ..'„,' "4" •''q':': ' (4,:;:,,,2-: 4-44,,7', , :44 ./". ,"..,--;,:-I.,•4;• k. 4 '•'"' ' 7-;;"4.'i • "4" ";::,..15 `.... ".•;"" ' -,Cf1,,"' .2..".," ' .",r''•4:•42.4"'"*i' -.V4'4 4." 2" . , ','....",s.:,t•r". 1,,a•Y f: * A • i : .."2.7, .,.- :.. .... • -4 -,. '-' ';;.: •'' . 7 ,.'":::". ' ' 4,"..4•;..",'.,.„_. -„, , „.,.2; , .; ,...1..;i",•, *,4, *02 ," • ,4 , .....V4'..„ i4;,',"..,-,4 ..,--; ''',;-1'-',,, ;, ' ',' * - '1 :' . - q,- .t. '' , - **;'', '',. 't^* ' ' 'r . '''.'-'-'' ';...7:‘ '-', * . t ' REQUIRED ATTACHMENT: ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST STATE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT (SEPA) (AS TAKEN FROM WAC 197-11-960) CHAPTER 6.88, YAKIMA MUNICIPAL CODE (YMC) to .1,„,dr,-T�,:W K.;. . :.,>e �se;r. •'aac+c'r• :�¢:.. .:. ;dtkl &:'�,,. :,A;4e The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), chapter 43.2 IC RCW, requires all governmental agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions. An environmental impact statement (EIS) must be prepared for all proposals with probable significant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to provide information to help you and the agency identify impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid • ... acts from the pro • osal, if it can be done) and to hel . the a: enc decide whether an EIS is re • uired. This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal Governmental agencies use this checklist to determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an EIS. Answer the questions briefly, with the most precise information known, or give the best description you can. You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. In most cases, you should be able to answer the questions from your own observations or project plans without the need to hire experts. If you really do not know the answer, or if a question does not apply to your proposal, write "do not know" or "does not apply". 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 on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determinin: if there ma be si: •. cant adverse impact. Complete Ps checklist for non -project proposals, even though questions maybe answered "does not apply." INADDITION, complete the SUPPLEMENTAL 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 "•ro•osal," "•ro•oser," and "affected :eoa a.hic area," res. -ctivel 1. NAME OF PROPOSED PROJECT (if applicable) Runway 22 Service Road 2. APPLICANT'S NAME & PHONE Yakima Air Terminal, 509-575-6149 3. APPLICANTS ADDRESS 2400 West Washington Avenue, Yakima, Washington 98903 Jerry G. Kilpatrick, Assistant Manager, 4. CONTACT PERSON & PHONE 509-575-6149 5. AGENCY REOUESTING CHECKLIST City of Yakima 6. DATE THE CHECKLIST WAS PREPARED September 25, 2006 17. PROPOSED TIMING OR SCHEDULE (including phasing, if applicable) Construction, Spring 2007 Revised 8-04 page 1 of 10 L— ) BACKGROUND QUESTIONS (Attach if Lengthy) _I 1. Do you have any plans for futureadditions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal . If yes, explain. No. 2. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. This project has been reviewed by Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife and Washington State Department of Ecology. Neither agency had a concern about the project as long as the drainage from the proposed service road was away from Wide Hollow Creek. The project is categorically excluded from FAA environmental regulations in accordance with FAA Order 5050-4A, Environmental Handbook, Section 23, Categorical Exclusions, paragraph a(5), which states that "Construction, relocation or repair of entrance and service roadway" projects are categorically excluded from FAA's environmental process unless there are extenuating circumstances. There are no such extenuating circumstances. 3. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting tl- property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. No. 4. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. JARPA, City of Yakima. 5. 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. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information on project description.) The project proposes to construct a 20' wide vehicle service road outside of the runway safet-r area ofy ranway 22 (between the end of the safety area and Wide Hollow Creek) at the r -�� C Yakima Air Terminal. The airport has had several runway surface incidents and runway incursions in the area because of vehicles and pedestrians crossing at the approach end and safety area of the runway without Air Traffic Control (ATC) clearance. During a FAA Runway Incursion Action Team survey on May 15, 2002, FAA requested that the airport construct a service road outside of the protected safety area of the runway to prevent further surface incidents or runway incursions. The roadway is designed to enhance public health and safety under YMC 15.27.216, Critical Facilities. DOC. INDEX Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your pro- posed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. The roadway will be located along the south west side of Wide Hollow Creek in the vicinity of South 16th and West Washington Avenue. A map is included with this application. page 2 of 10 1.7 . Earth a. General description of the site (✓ one): ® flat ❑ rolling ❑ hilly ❑ steep slopes ❑ mountainous ❑ other N/A b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? Approximately 2% 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. Silts, type ML under the Unified Soil Classification System, Group FG -4 (Information from 1995 runway pavement evaluation, soils analyses) d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. No. e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. Grading and filling will be required for construction of the roadway. Fill material will be clean aggregate from local sources capped with asphalt pavement. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use'? If so, generally describe. The natural topography gently slopes away from Wide Hollow Creek. Construction will only occur during the dry months minimizing the potential for erosion. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project Space Reserved for Agency Comments DOC. INDEX 1) construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? Will increase the airport's impervious services by less than V2 of 1%. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: Construction will occur only during dry months. Terrain gently slopes away from Wide Hollow creek. 2. Air a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. Minimal dust during excavation. b. Arethere any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. No. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: Contract requires contractor to control dust. 3. Water a. Surface: 1. Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. Yes. The roadway will parallel the south side of Wide Hollow Creek for approximately 300 feet and will be within 25 feet of the normal high water mark of the creek. 2. Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. There will be no work over or in the water. Construction will occur within 25 feet of the high water mark of Wide Hollow Creek. 3. Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or re moved from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. None. 4. Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No. page 3 of 10 Space Reserved for Agency Comments DOC. INDEX # -� ) 5. Does the proposal lie within a 100 -year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. Yes. 6. Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. No. b. Ground: 1. Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No. 2. Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals...; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. None. c. Water Runoff (including storm water): 1. Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. Storm water runoff will be directed to the grassy area south of the roadway and dispersed into the surrounding infield. All drainage will be designed to drain away from the creek. 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: Design the service roadway to drain away from the creek. 4. Plants: a. Check (/) types of vegetation found on the site: deciduous tree: 0 alder ❑ maple ❑ aspen ❑ other evergreen green: ❑ fir ❑ cedar ❑ pine ❑ other ❑ shrubs ® grass ❑ pasture crop or grain wet soil plants: ❑ cattail ❑ buttercup 0 bullrush ❑ skunk cabbage ❑ other water plants: 0 water lily 0 eelgrass 0 milfoil ❑ other other types of vegetation: page 4 of 10 Space Reserved for Agency Comments DOC. INDEX b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Grasses will be removed during excavation. c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None known. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: None. 5. Animals. a. Check (✓) 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: ® hawk ® heron 0 eagle ® songbirds ❑ other 2) mammals- 0 deer ❑ bear 0 elk ❑ beaver O other 3) fish: 0 bass ❑ salmon ® trout 0 herring ❑ shellfish O other b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. No. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: Grading will be accomplished within the guidelines established by Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife and Department of Ecology. 6. Energy and Natural Resources a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. None. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. No. c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: None. 7. Environmental Health page 5 of 10 Space Reserved for Agency Comments DOC. INDEX y a. Are there any environmental ealtu azards, including exposure to toxic cn)mit-is, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. None. 1. Describe special emergency services that might be required. None. 2. Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: None. b. Noise 1. What types of noise exist in the area, which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? Heavy equipment noise during construction. 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. Construction would be short term, approximately three weeks, and occur during daylight hours only. 3. Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: None. 8. Land and Shoreline Use a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? Commercial Service Airport. b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. No. c. Describe any structures on the site. 8' Airport Security Fence north of the proposed roadway between the proposed roadway and creek. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? None. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? CBDS f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? Arterial Commercial. g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? N/A h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so specify. Yes. Wide hollow Creek is designated as a Type 2 stream/Critical Area. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? None. Page 6 of 10 Space Reserved for Agency Comments DOC. INDEX # E -I ) ) ) ) j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace?) k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any N/A 1. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: In compliance with Airport Master Plan and Airport Layout Plan. 9. Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. N/A b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. N/A c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: N/A 10. Aesthetics a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structures, not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building materials proposed? N/A b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? None. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: None. 11. Light and Glare a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? None. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? N/A c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? None. ,a• Proposed measures to reduce yr control light Q-lu glare LlliallJ, if any-. None. 12. Recreation a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? J. M. Perry Soccer Field is approximately 200 feet north of the proposed work area. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. No. page 7 of 10 Space Reserved for Agency Comments DOC. INDEX c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreauon opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: None. 13. 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 important known to be on or next to the site. None. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: None. 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. Project is in vicinity of 16th and West Washington Avenue. There is no street access to the site. Access to and at the site is strictly controlled under Yakima Municipal Code 1.92.050, Airport Ground Control and Security. b. Is site currently serviced by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? Yes. Public Transit is provided on West Washington Avenue directly north of the proposed construction site. c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? N/A d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). No. e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. Project is on airport property and is designed to enhance public health and safety. The roadway is a critical facility under YMC 15.27.216 and a Public Agency and Utility Exception under YMC 15.27.540. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. N/A g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: Will enhance aviation safety. Doc. INDEX page 8 of 10 15. Public Services L) 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. 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. None. 16. Utilities a. Circle utilities currently available at -the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other. N/A 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. None. Space Reserved for Agency Comment 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 itsis relying 7k5A- on them 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 ro • osal, would affect the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate than if the .ro • osal were not ' is demented. 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? Space Reserved for Agency Comments DOC. INDEX # E `If page 9 of 10 lProposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: 2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life? Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are: 3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources? Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are: y 4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat, historic or cultural sites, wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands? Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: 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? Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are: 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services and utilities? Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demands) are: 7. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. Space Reserved for Agency Comments DOC. INDEX # page l0 of 10 EXHIBITDOCUMENT # = , DATE F-1 Application 9/25/06 . .ry . ^ . _ ', ' •._ tt , o ., .. a ,cr _ ,'44 r 'e , , RECEIVED SEP 2 5 2006 YAKIMA AIR TERMINALcazGAOIVA McALLISTER FIELD 2400 West Washington Ave. • Yakima, Washington 98903 • (509) 575-6149 • (509) 575-6185 Fax September 25, 2006 Jeff Peters, Assistant Planner City of Yakima, Planning Department 129 N. Second Street Yakima, Washington 98901 Subject: JARPA and SEPA Applications for Airport Service Road Project. Dear Mr. Peters: Attached please find the completed JARPA and SEPA applications for the proposed aiT service road project (traverse way). Also attached is check for the application fee of $535.00 made payable to the City of Yakima. As we have discussed, this roadway is designed to prevent runway incidents and incursions and it's placement is dictated by Federal Aviation Administration design standards. I feel it falls under YMC sections 15.27.216, Critical Facilities and possibly under 15.27.540, Public Agency and Utility Exception. Being the roadway has to be out of the Runway Safety Area and meet the Part 77 height standard criteria, this is the only place the roadway could be built and it is designed to enhance public health and safety. We have had personnel from the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife and the Washington StateDepartment of Ecology review the proposed roadway in relationship with the creek. Neither agency had a problem with the proximity to the creek as long as we design the roadway to match existing terrain and all storm drainage will flow away from the creek. This is being incorporated into the design of the roadway. Documentation is attached from both departments. Please let me know if you need any further information to process this request. Sincerely, Je' ' patri k Assistant Airport Manager Hearing Examin r EXH # - IUate 9/25/0(0 File #CA D42 `0(oISE1211-1 *261j 0(0 CITY OF YAKKItvJA LAND USE APPLICATION DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 129 NORTH SECOND STREET, 2ND FLOOR YAKIMA, WASHINGTON 98902 VOICE: (509) 575-6183 FAX: (509) 575-6105 questionscompletely. youany questions about this form or the application process Answer all letel . If comhave call, come in person or refer to the accompanying instructions. This application consists of four parts. PART I - GENERAL INFORMATION AND PART IV — CERTIFICATION are on this page. PART II and III contain additional information specific to your proposal and MUST be attached to this page to complete the application. Remember to bring all necessary attachments and the required filing fee when the application is submitted. The Planning Division cannot accept an application unless it is complete and the filing fee paid. Filing fees are not refundable. 1. APPLICANT 2. APPLICANT ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER 3 . APPLICANT' S INTEREST IN PROPERTY NAME Yakima Air Terminal — McAllister Field STREET 2400 West Washington Avenue CITY Yakima STATE WA ZIP 98903 PHONE 509-575-6149 MESSAGE 4. PROPERTY OWNER (IF OTHER THAN APPLICANT) CHECK ❑ OWNER ® OWNER REPRESETATIVE ONE 0 CONTRACT PURCHASER 0 OTHER 5. PROPERTY OWNER'S ADDRESS AND PHONE (IF OTHER THAN APPLICANT) NAME City and County of Yakima STREET CITY STATE ZIP PHONE 6. ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER FOR SUBJECT PROPERTY: 18-13-35-31001 7. EXISTING ZONING OF SUBJECT PROPERTY: CBDS 8. ADDRESS OF SUBJECT PROPERTY: 2400 West Washington Avenue MESSAGE 9. TYPE OF APPLICATION: (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY) ❑ Class (2) Use ❑ Class (3) Use O Rezone ❑ Variance O Home Occupation ❑ Administrative Adjustment X Environmental Checklist (SEPA) ❑ Modification to Approved Class (2) & (3) Uses O Appeal ❑ Non -Conforming Structure/Use ❑ Preliminary Subdivision O Short Plat ❑ Right -of -Way Vacation ❑ Short Plat Exemption ❑ Shoreline ❑ Utility Easement Release ❑ Interpretation by Hearing Examiner ❑ Other — Comp Plan Amendment 10. SEL .t•t l 1 ACHED SI—METS `vrl:if';'1i4 j';3 • 11. I certify that the information on this lication and the required attachments are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. IGNA Revised 9-98 'ThT4' FOR ADMINISTRATIVE USE ONLY Ban tO-L Sao r)(15. 6c) INDtX , FILE No# /9&PS NO. /g/4 HEARING DATE JOINT AQUATIC RESOURCES PERMIT APPLICATION FORM (JARPA) (for use in Washington State) PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT IN BLACK INK. TO FILL IN ELECTRONICALLY. USE F11 TO MOVE THROUGH THE FORM 0 Application for a Fish Habitat Enhancement Project per requirements of RCW 77.55.290. You must submit a copy of this completed JARPA application form and the (Fish Habitat Enhancement JARPA Addition) to your local Government Planning Department and Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife Area Habitat Biologist on the same day. NOTE: LOCAL GOVERNMENTS — You must submit any comments on these projects to WDFW within 15 working days. 1 Based x ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ on the instructions provided, I Local Government for shoreline: Washington Department of Fish Washington Department of Ecology Washington Department of Natural Corps of Engineers for: Coast Guard for: ❑ General For Department of Transportation Ecology/Department of Transportation am sending copies of this application ■Substantial Development ❑Floodplain Management and Wildlife for HPA (Submit 3 for 401 Water Quality Certification Resources for Aquatic Resources ❑ Section 404 Bridge Act Permit projects only: This project will Water Quality Implementing ❑Conditional x copies to the following: (check all Use ['Variance Critical Areas Ordinance (YMC to WDFW Region) (to Regional Office -Federal Use Authorization Notification ❑ Section 10 permit ❑ Private Aids to Navigation be designed to meet conditions of Agreement that x Permit (for the apply) Exemption 15.27.540 Unit) non -bridge most current "Revision & .216) projects) SECTION A - Use for all permits covered by this application. Be sure to ALSO complete Section C (Signature Block) for all permit applications. 1. APPLICANT Yakima Air Terminal — McAllister Field -- Attention: Jerry G. Kilpatrick, Assistant Manager MAILING ADDRESS 400 West Washington Avenue, Yakima, Washington 98903 WORK PHONE 509-575-6149 E-MAIL ADDRESS : jerry.kilpatrick@yakimaairterminal.com HOME PHONE FAX # 509-575-6185 If an agent is acting for the applicant during the permit process, complete #2. Be sure agent signs Section C (Signature Block) for all permit applications 2. AUTHORIZED AGENT MAILING ADDRESS Same WORK PHONE E-MAIL ADDRESS HOME PHONE FAX # 3. Relationship of applicant to property: ❑ OWNER ❑ PURCHASER ❑ LESSEE x Employee 4. Name, address and phone number of property owner(s) if other than applicant: Citv and County of Yakima. Washinaotn 5. Location (street address, including city, county and zip code, where proposed activity exists or will occur) On airport property at the approach end of Runway 22 approximately 600' SW of intersection of 516th and West Washington Avenue. Local govemment with jurisdiction (city or county) City of Yakima Waterbody you are working in Wide Hollow Creek Tributary of Ahtanum Creek/Yakima River WRIA # 99 Is this waterbody on the 303(d) List** YES If YES, what parameter(s)? 1, 2 and 5 x NO ❑ **For 303d List, tpJ/www.ecv.wa.gov/programs/wa/303d/index.html Shoreline designation t4 Zoning designation CBDS Section SE Section 35 Township 13 Range 18 Govemment Lot DNR stream type if known J ` DOC. I..-►.., �- - 1 Latitude and Longitude: Tax Parcel Number )1335-31001 ECY 070-15 (Rev. 11/04) JARPA Contact the State of Washington Office of Reoulatory Assistance for latest version or call 360/407-7037 or 800/917-^n43 6. Describe the current use of the property, and structures existing on the property. Have you completed any portion of the propose, activity on this property? ❑ YES x NO For any portion of the proposed activity already completed on this property, indicate month and year of completion. The property is utilized as a commercial service airport and is classified as an essential public facility. Is the property agricultural land? ❑ YES x NO Are you a USDA program participant? ❑ YES x NO 7a. Describe the proposed work that needs aquatic permits: Complete plans and specifications should be provided for all work waterward of the ordinary high water mark or line, including types of equipment to be used. If applying for a shoreline permit, describe all work within and beyond 200 feet of the ordinary high water mark. If you have provided attached materials to describe your project, you still must summarize the proposed work here. Attach a separate sheet if additional space is needed. The airport proposes to construct a service roadway outside of the FAA required Runway Safety Area (RSA) on the approach end of runway 22. The roadway's location is `fixed by function' and can not be located further from the creek and still meet FAA design criteria. It is designed to enhance protect public health andsafety. Drawing is attached. The roadway would be considered as Critical Facilities under 15.27.216 and fall under the Public Agency and Utility Exception under 15.27.540. PREPARATION OF DRAWINGS: See sample drawings and guidance for completing the drawings. ONE SET OF ORIGINAL OR GOOD QUALITY REPRODUCIBLE DRAWINGS MUST BE ATTACHED. NOTE: Applicants are encouraged to submit photographs of the project site, but these DO NOT substitute for drawings. THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS AND COAST GUARD REQUIRE DRAWINGS ON 8-1/2 X 11 INCH SHEETS. LARGER DRAWINGS MAY BE REQUIRED BY OTHER AGENCIES _ 7b. Describe the purpose of the proposed work and why you want or need to perform it at the site. Please explain any specific nee( have influenced the design. This service road will eliminate the need for vehicles to cross an active runway and reduce and/or prevent Runway Surface Incidents or Runway Incursions by pedestrians and/or vehicles. The construction of this surface road is highly recommended by the Federal Aviation Administration to enhance aviation safety. The proposed construction is shown on and is in compliance with the FAA approved Airport Layout Pian. 7c. Describe the potential impacts to characteristic uses of the water body. These uses may include fish and aquatic life, water quality, water supply, recreation and aesthetics. Identify proposed actions to avoid, minimize, and mitigate detrimental impacts and provide proper protection of fish and aquatic life. Identify which guidance documents you have used. Attach a separate sheet if additional space is needed. None. No work will be done within 20 feet of the normal high water mark of the creek. All storm water drainage from the proposed service road will follow the natural terrain and will drain away from the creek preventing any surface water from entering the creek. 7d. For in water construction work, will your project be in compliance with the State of Washington water quality standards for turbidity WAC 173.201A-110? ❑ YES IN NO (See USEFUL DEFINITIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS) 8. Will the project be constructed in stages? YES ❑ NO x Proposed starting date: Spring, 2007 Estimated duration of activity: 30 days 9. Check if any temporary or permanent structures will be placed: ❑ Waterward of the ordinary high water mark or line for fresh or tidal waters AND/OR ❑ Waterward of the mean higher high water for tidal waters? 10. Will fill material (rock, fill, bulkhead, or other material) be placed: ❑ Waterward of the ordinary high water mark or line for fresh waters? DOC' If YES, VOLUME (cubic yards) / AREA (acres) INDEX ❑ Waterward of the mean higher high water for tidal waters? 2 If YES, VOLUME (cubic yards) 'j1REA (acres) Y 070-15 (Rev. 11/04) JARPA Contact the State of Washington Office of Regulatory v Assistance for latest version or call 360/407-7037 or 800/917-0043 11. Will material be placed in wetlands? ❑ YES If YES: A. Impacted area in acres: B. Has a delineation been completed? If YES, please C. Has a wetland report been prepared? If YES, please D. Type and composition of fill material (e.g., sand, etc.) E. Material source: F. List all soil series (type of soil) located at the project can be obtained from the natural Resources Conservation G. WILL PROPOSED ACTIVITY CAUSE FLOODING If YES, IMPACTED AREA IS ACRES OF DRAINED x submit site, OR NO with application. YES submit with application YES 0 and indicate if they are on the county's list of hydric Service (NRCS). DRAINING OF WETLANDS? 0 YES x WETLANDS. NO NO soils. Soils information NO NOTE: If your project will impact greater than Ya of an acre of wetland, submit a mitigation plan to the Corps and Ecology for approval along with the JARPA form. NOTE: A 401 water quality certification will be required from Ecology in addition to an approved mitigation plan if your project impacts wetlands that are: a) greater than Yz acre in size, or b) tidal wetlands or wetlands adjacent to tidal water. Please submit the JARPA form and mitigation plan to Ecology for an individual 401 certification if a) or b) applies. 12. Stormwater Compliance for Nationwide Permits Only: This project is (or will stormwater manual, or an Ecology approved local stormwater manual. If YES — Which manual will your project be designed to meet? be) designed to meet ecology's most current • YES 0 NO If NO — For clean water act Section 401 and 404 permits only — Please submit to Ecology for approval, along with this JARPA application, documentation that demonstrates the stormwater runoff from your project or activity will comply with the water quality standards, WAC 173.201(A) 13. Will excavation or dredging be required in water or wetlands? 0 YES If YES: A. Volume: (cubic yards) /area (acre) x NO B. Composition of material to be removed: C. Disposal site for excavated material: D. Method of dredging: 14. Has the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) been completed 0 YES completed. SEPA Lead Agency: City of Yakima, Washington x NO Submitted to City 9/25/06 but not SEPA Decision: DNS, MDNS, EIS, Adoption, Exemption DNS Decision Date (end of comment period) Under Review. SUBMIT A COPY OF YOUR SEPA DECISION LETTER TO WDFW AS REQUIRED FOR A COMPLETE APPLICATION 15. List other Applications, approvals or certifications from other federal, state or local agencies for any structures, construction discharges or other activities described in the application (i.e. preliminary plat approval, health district approval, building permit, SEPA review, federal energy regulatory commission license (FERC), Forest practices application, etc.). Also, indicate whether work has been completed and indicate all existing work on drawings. NOTE: For use with Corps Nationwide Permits, identify whether your project has or will need an NPDES permit for discharging wastewater and/or stormwater. TYPE OF APPROVAL ISSUING AGENCY IDENTIFICATION NO. DATE OF APPLICATION DATE APPROVED COMPLETED? SEPA Review City of Yakima 9/28/06 DOC. , INDEX is 3 16. Has any agency denied approval for the ac J' you're applying for or for any activity directly ❑ YES ❑x NO If YES, explain: ,ted to the activity described herein? Both Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife and the Washington State Department of Ecology had an opportunity to view the site and have stated that they have no objections as long as storm water drainage is directed away from the creek. Topography in the area currently is sloped away from the creek and the proposed roadway will follow current topography. ECY 070-15 (Rev. 11/04) JARPA Contact the State of Washington Office of Reaulatory Assistance for latest version or call 360/407-7037 or 800/917-0043 DOC. INDEX 4 SECTION B - Use for Shoreline a). 'Corps of Engineers permits only J17a. Total cost of project. This means $125,000 17b. If a project or any portion of a indicate if you will receive federal funds FEDERAL FUNDING ❑ YES the fair market value of the project, including materials, labor, machine project receives funding from a federal agency, that agency is responsible for and what federal agency is providing those funds. See instructions for rentals, etc. ESA consultation. Please information on ESA* x NO If YES, please list the federal agency. DATE %/�67e p, 18 Local government with jurisdiction: City of Yakima 19 For Corps, Coast Guard and DNR permits, provide names, addresses and telephone numbers of adjoining property owners, lessees, etc. - Please note: Shoreline Management Compliance may require additional notice — consult your local government. NAME ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER I HEREBY DESIGNATE TO ACT AS MY AGENT IN MATTERS RELATED TO THIS APPLICATION FOR PERMIT(S). I UNDERSTAND THAT IF A FEDERAL PERMIT IS ISSUED, I MUST SIGN THE PERMIT. SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT DATE F �•; ."!..h. SIGNATURE OF LANDOWNER (EXCEPT PUBLIC ENTITY LANDOWNERS, E.G. DNR) THIS APPLICATION MUST BE SIGNED BY THE APPLICANT AND THE AGENT, IF AN AUTHORIZED AGENT IS DESIGNATED SECTION C - This section MUST be completed for any pe 0. Application is hereby made for a permit or permits to authorize the activities described herein. I certify that information contained in this application, and that to the best of my knowledge and belief, such information accurate. I further certify that I possess the authority to undertake the proposed activities. 1 hereby grant this application is made, the right to enter the above-described location to inspect the proposed, in -progress agree to start work ONLY after all necessary permits have been received. I am familiar with the is true, complete, and to the agencies to which or completed work. I �� DATE %/�67e p, SIGNATOR PLICA - DATE SIGNATURE OF AUTHORIZED AGENT I HEREBY DESIGNATE TO ACT AS MY AGENT IN MATTERS RELATED TO THIS APPLICATION FOR PERMIT(S). I UNDERSTAND THAT IF A FEDERAL PERMIT IS ISSUED, I MUST SIGN THE PERMIT. SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT DATE F �•; ."!..h. SIGNATURE OF LANDOWNER (EXCEPT PUBLIC ENTITY LANDOWNERS, E.G. DNR) THIS APPLICATION MUST BE SIGNED BY THE APPLICANT AND THE AGENT, IF AN AUTHORIZED AGENT IS DESIGNATED .•" yP''��;�y'�wT ::CJ �"" C: %+ '�+.,. ,C'x: ® ! Lr: -F F 4�. 18 U.S.0 §1001 provides that: Whoever, in any manner within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States knowingly falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, or device a material fact or makes any false, fictitious, or fraudulent statements or representations or makes or uses any false writing or document knowing same to contain any false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or entry, shall be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned not more than 5 years or both. �-.Ha - :�6. • '®o_®j i' . '.�'C` N"4,i.. F. •-' '[' .. L'.....,-........ �....o.. C.CC ..e.......Y.�:i ma '.'. R= . `C F �•; ."!..h. dii,-="r"';',_:--.7,..'"1,: '.:'e�•��}..o. .'9 ^'s ..:iC.�C��'ii. .•" yP''��;�y'�wT ::CJ �"" C: %+ '�+.,. ,C'x: ® ! Lr: -F F 4�. ` s i Edi ...,'-' atm . is. a 9r e l.'r1 l]� a _ �:. W `:5. ' : '- ne 'Et -eco o 1'dI.`1f1 r +u ' tr.3.. a e'a '.e.', .. . aA. -:.0 a tuP el C . R11iht' rea .... — .. YVa �r E ,1 . n eac "Nr y, { i .. ria "'�. .tau.- ' 'Salt :4•s r0 c'.re a ' e .4. .'S C : i,as:accr'..ei o :'-erce .11 ii I E*[dw .an' a # i AI :y ck .' '.•.. _sty.. it' jJc a.i�•.:'� 9i E - 1 �i�: .4 � ..G�1E+� li['= E ' •ra 9.� :.. rtd � W : W . �a �":. .p I}�.., ... ... ' .n:.3ii:c r?+':� SC e..�..{ ItI .. �., E'.: ; '7,1{: :! • .x�.�. .: - _ A .. �!'Cd:. , .}.C�t . :.::. _r r.: Xiri3. i. Yea � t_:�., .a :_.�..��+:`1:,,.a�`'Lt!: h li tre elate � .�t� t'�y '-�- ......:. �; .-- r�: �1�at��7M ,�.. ' 'Ti'',�-=','"' �'b 'Lk�� a : ..I:h.�.2 9.11 .:.:� . c •'sift:' '. e ui1S(d-='�I17- i. ,t'. a —f, r C::_ a :`• C.� W�.i�" L_ �:a.'-"- '.!-='�a,_.,_ CI'i ..ttt,,,,i 1 •:. :-ed:l:ulfdin 1 : _ trtiet. se e'..1 : �:..• 1 .11x.1.: . ti ��1!• _� lif ....: �.�.:�� •,_., i!:.:: , � "r.>r:Fl+ . �+e �0 6:!. : i : nu : tfel rel t1al {rt I LSr a .:���Y'c., �.. ... i� �•: h- F.H.,:1:`.....,'S r11:�E:a�: � :�_;_.,_.�k� i� . ' . r: •. f ..+ •.. y : Iii' _,C.,,.i++;_:.. �.. �:. 'C�CC.�CW. •a:''l�W,"��'.�G';m-:.'® ' g'. exde.. :a et _La-: ;1 :: :___ r:•V- tom:! �!ii:�!� i:r �_:�1"•t�t:�-" !:.:+ - ..*: E - ' I�.Stll'i' i:� � Sii. Q�k� 'l� ��1 j-'.�. �:�: � ��I;.''. 14TH �.'i.:. '�7e ': a".. •::7" 7R ';-�rF. - '` ! � yo{�}t �at ". 0„1T •'^.r'iii .:Y..Ri•7•'l�r• E•:iia , t to .l 'r:: :i :' �� t:. SC.:�:r• irir t .:. :: iii: :+C :i, " .. ; a, - ._� °. e s:: £ Vela.': ' �-o- . � �. :1 gt ti .ii0b 'rS.r, . . •F Y;e �[� IabS�GUC.� £� :..t�T.. } :. t r�ttz;:lcf�+:_1'91t3e y;'_,,-1;4;`,�-"t ; . � ,yy ,-ru{• �. 4�'i ". •'�-+ :... •'9Y.. ,•C,pq��:•:l; .6•:- CC . 'I a s �.. _. at 1.•11.1... � p • C7, r- E•: ;a ''@.' _ rt:a�.:�.{�tE .� .. ; ; . � �': .:j:::. '.. . ,. ' : 111 It sa=or ::ena : ce. e ' 6� : .... a _ �+ . �_r., �� ' , t � tx� �t[IL;t``atp�o�l;��xi�i. ��b � �-,;; —:�. . I. � _ .c,.rt �Jj - :, =±�.. �k1j�,�_�(E�{��:_�` � �t�C {[, U� � �: i. U �. .•F y. , : 4' f+1i'+ .'L 1 L 1:.. : 44 '• �_ +'._.t:ri # yl � ,':� I+�:��#`� -�1�++� These Agenc es are Equal Opportunity and AffIrmatroe Action emp oyers. For special accommodation needs, please contact the appropriate agency in the instructs ECY 070-15 (Rev. 11/04) JARPA Contact the State of Washington Office of Regulatory Assistance for latest version or la /407-7037 or 800/917-0043 IND_ EX # F-fi 5 ol1 z a. En z LU 0 zId 2 2 INDEX # F Jerry G. Kilpatrick From: Eric Bartrand [bartrelb@DFW.WA.GOV] Sent: Wednesday, September 13, 2006 2:04 PM To: jeny.kilpatrick@yakimaairterminal.com Subject: Service Road Jerry... The provided plans for constructing the service road are fine with the WDFW, provided: The road grade/elevation matches the existing ground elevation and road runoff flows in the landward, not streamward, direction. Eric Bartrand WDFW Area Habitat Biologist Yakima, Franklin, and Benton counties 1701 So. 24th Avenue Yakima, WA 98902-5720 (509) 457-9310 1 .JUL. 31. 2006 1: 52PM AIRPORTS -FAA NO. 1362 P. 9 Runway Safety Action Team Ev. .tion Yakima Air Terminal/McAllister Pk ) May 16, 2002 John also suggested the placement of `unofficial" signs on the buildings of Cub Crafters and the McAllister Air Museum warning pilots and pedestrians of the impermissibility of walking from that particular ramp to the airport restaurant while remaining within airport boundaries. Dave Adams Dave is the FAA Air Traffic Manager at the Spokane Hub. Since Yakima is now a contract tower, FAA provides administrative and regulatory oversight through Spokane Hub. DISCUSSIONS, DNDINGS, CONCLUSIONS & ACTION ITEMS Runway 22 and Taxiway A & B intersection: Runway 22's threshold is relocated in accordance with AC 150/5300, Airport Design. (Note: relocated thresholds are included in FAA regulations. They are defined as an area where "the portion of pavement behind a relocated threshold is not available for takeoff or landing. It may be available for taxiing of aircraft. ") The threshold was moved to comply with runway safety area requirements for runway 22. Evidently, the approach end of Runway 22 looks like a continuation of the ramp to some pilots, even though it is clearly marked as taxiway and is clearly signed and marked to prevent entry. This is the area of the majority of surface incidents at V.K.M. It was again stated by airport personnel that pilot training and/or penalties against the pilots committing the offenses would aid in solving the problem. Taxiway B (in front of Cub Crafters' ramp) and Taxiway C (between Runway 22 and Taxiway Alpha) are non -movement areas by Letter of Agreement (LOA) with the airport. This brought out the need to change either the tower -airport LOA or the markings on the boundary between Cub Crafters' ramp and Taxiway Bravo. The Runway Safety Action Team recommends that a vehicle service road be included in the planning for the approach end of Runway 22, when a project is undertaken to extend the Runway 4 end in the future. Because of the proximity of the salmon -breeding stream just outside of the runway safety area, there is not enough space to allow for a road there now. When the approach end of Runway 4 is extended, it could be extended sufficiently to allow a service road to be built around the Runway 22 end Airway Facility discussion.: Jerry confirmed that there is no way for Airways Facilities (AF) personnel to access their work without crossing a taxiway. Mark Gavin pointed out that the airport needs to know when AF people are going to be on the field because, ultimately, Yakima Air Terminal is responsible: "We don't want you to be blind -sided if we cause a problem on your field" However, the airport does not feel it is necessary for AF personnel to contact the airport prior to entering the field. "AF personnel receive the same vehicle operators' training as airport employees and there has never been a surface incident involving AF personnel at YKM. The notification would be unduly burdensome to all parties," according to Jerry. Page 8 of 10 10E7( # =-1 15.27.216 Critical facilities. 1 Title 15 YAKIMA URBAN AREA ZONING ORDINANCE Chapter 15.27 CRITICAL AREAS 1 Page 1 of 1 15.27.216 Critical facilities. "Critical facilities" means those f8'cilities necessary to protect the public health, safety and welfare which are defined under the occupancy categories of essential facilities, hazardous facilities and special occupancy structures in the Uniform Building Code, Table No. 23-K (1988). These facilities include, but are not limited to, schools, hospitals, police stations, fire departments and other emergency response facilities, and nursing homes. Critical facilities also include sites of hazardous materials storage or production. (Ord. 98.67 § 1 (part), 1998). 15.27.540 Public agency and utility' exception. Title 15 YAKIMA URBAN AREA ZONING ORDINANCE Chapter 15.27 CRITICAL AREAS Page 1 of 1 15.27.540 Public agency and utility exception. A. If the application of this chapter would prohibit a development proposal by a public agency or public utility, the agency or utility may apply for an exception pursuant to this section. The public agency or utility shall apply to the director and shall be heard by the hearing examiner for any development proposals not qualifying under Part Four of this chapter. The public agency or utility shall prepare a report to the examiner and shall incorporate other required documents such as permit applications, special studies and SEPA documents. B. The examiner shall review the applications pursuant to the provisions of current ordinances, regulations and procedures and make a recommendation to the council based on the following criteria: 1. There is no other practical alternative to the proposed development with Tess impact on the critical areas; and 2. The proposal minimizes the impact on critical areas. C. A mitigation plan may be required from the utility indicating how the proposal will minimize the impact on critical areas. D. This exemption shall not allow the use of those category I and II wetlands or their buffers providing plant associations of infrequent occurrence or habitat for federal or state endangered or threatened species or species needing special protection or for utilities including regional retention/detention facilities except where there is a clear showing the facility will protect public health and safety or repair damaged critical areas. Wetlands shall not be used for retention/detention facilities other than for regional facilities. (Ord. 98-67 § 1 (part), 1998). DOC. INDEX # �r I.. REQUIRED ATTACHMENT: •• YA �,,, ' ,h ', !' > f ti ru ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST STATE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT (SEPA) (AS TAKEN FROM WAC 197-11-960) CHAPTER 6.88, YAKIMA MUNICIPAL CODE (YMC) qq P1I.SY , jKL 9p 5�Y`', ,¢t. ��''/to tf it�x.,StNi{..1. The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), chapter 43.2 IC RCW, requires all governmental agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions. An environmental impact statement (EIS) must be prepared for all proposals with probable significant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to provide information to help you and the agency identify impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid im. acts from the pro . osal, if it can be done) and to hel • the a • ency decide whether an EIS is re • uired. �f CY �.L ' al Fr�t I a %" 9 1 `. - a"' �L° '. + 4� 2F` .' z+al `• r , -.` t" . 4 5.'t i lc • r` rte' .. f,.. -.� •1. --„ ..i" Y p' ` } ` id „ ",!r �, t re f� X •YT'.' „r..y, 4ti i•''I" k� d r w .,,..r+.a-rt.•?i,�"'l a This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Governmental agencies use this checklist to determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an EIS. Answer the questions briefly, with the most precise information known, or give the best description you can. You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. In most cases, you should be able to answer the questions from your own observations or project plans without the need to hire experts. If you really do not know the answer, or if a question does not apply to your proposal, write "do not know" or "does not apply". Complete answers to the questions now may avoid unnecessary delays later. Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark designations. knswer 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 on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be si i. ' • cant adverse im. act. °�,,,3 ado M. .'3 a,�',.G�i1,, r al' ane '� ',i\,a- s ., i i aro c.,Z 1.�j.�o- :.:, }r• e+'�' : a tP, . -? ''r' apt ' f, 3' r:'f' . tr= r h. t... 'u.-... F� i ^iw. �x�. _ .., -, £:;.;is' ...� z ?.?x �t.::'� Complete this checklist for non -project proposals, even though questions may be answered "does not apply." IN ADDITION, complete the SUPPLEMENTAL 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 " ro . osal," "proposer," and "affected geo a a • hic area," respectively. ' '9 �,96,� 71g4', �1 4 , t� o o as a -- _ .. ... H, a �T -•i1- .. �i Y 5...•� . 3 'Y +.'r •+ ;j. '. �, ;'s,.; a '4;-,--t- �, �' , ' " _.•�� a 1. NAME OF PROPOSED PROJECT (if applicable) Runway 22 Service Road 2. APPLICANT'S NAME & PHONE Yakima Air Terminal, 509-575-6149 3. APPLICANT'S ADDRESS 2400 West Washington Avenue, Yakima, Washington 98903 Jerry G. Kilpatrick, Assistant Manager, 4. CONTACT PERSON & PHONE 509-575-6149 5. AGENCY REQUESTING CHECKLIST City of Yakima - DATE THE CHECKLIST WAS PREPARED September 25, 2006 7. PROPOSED TIMING OR SCHEDULE (including phasing, if applicable) Construction, Spring 2007 DOC. Revised 8-04 INDEX - page 1 of 10 BACKGROUND QUESTIONS (Attach if Lengthy) 1. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal. • If yes, explain. No. 2. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. This project has been reviewed by Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife and Washington State Department of Ecology. Neither agency had a concern about the project as long as the drainage from the proposed service road was away from Wide Hollow Creek. The project is categorically excluded from FAA environmental regulations in accordance with FAA Order 5050-4A, Environmental Handbook, Section 23, Categorical Exclusions, paragraph a(5), which states that "Construction, relocation or repair of entrance and service roadway" projects are categorically excluded from FAA's environmental process unless there are extenuating circumstances. There are no such extenuating circumstances. 3. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting tl property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. No. 4. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. JARPA, City of Yakima. 5. 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. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information on project description.) The project proposes to construct a 20' wide vehicle service road outside of the runway safety area of runway 22 (between the end of the safety area and Wide Hollow Creek) at the Yakima Air Terminal. The airport has had several runway surface incidents and runway incursions in the area because of vehicles and pedestrians crossing at the approach end and safety area of the runway without Air Traffic Control (ATC) clearance. During a FAA Runway Incursion Action Team survey on May 15, 2002, FAA requested that the airport construct a service road outside of the protected safety area of the runway to prevent further surface incidents or runway incursions. The roadway is designed to enhance public health and safety under YMC 15.27.216, Critical Facilities. DOC. INDEX 6. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your pro- posed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. The roadway will be located along the south west side of Wide Hollow Creek in the vicinity of South 16th and West Washington Avenue. A map is included with this application. 1. Earth X9.7 nr a. General description of the site (✓ one): ® flat 0 rolling ❑ hilly ❑ steep slopes 0 mountainous 0 other N/A b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? Approximately 2% 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. Silts, type ML under the Unified Soil Classification System, Group FG -4 (Information from 1995 runway pavement evaluation, soils analyses) d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. No. e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. Grading and filling will be required for construction of the roadway. Fill material will be clean aggregate from local sources capped with asphalt pavement. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use'? If so, generally describe. The natural topography gently slopes away from Wide Hollow Creek. Construction will only occur during the dry months minimizing the potential for erosion. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project page 2 of 10 Space Reserved for Agency Comments DOC. , NDEX construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? Will increase the airport's impervious services by less than 1/2 of 1%. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: Construction will occur only during dry months. Terrain gently slopes away from Wide Hollow creek. 2. Air a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. Minimal dust during excavation. b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. No. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: Contract requires contractor to control dust. 3. Water a. Surface: 1. Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. Yes. The roadway will parallel the south side of Wide Hollow Creek for approximately 300 feet and will be within 25 feet of the normal high water mark of the creek. 2. Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. There will be no work over or in the water. Construction will occur within 25 feet of the high water mark of Wide Hollow Creek. 3. Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or re moved from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. None. 4. Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No. page 3 of 10 Space Reserved for Agency Comments Doc. 5. Does the proposal lie within a 100 -year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. Yes. 6. Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. No. b. Ground: 1. Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No. 2. Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals...; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. None. c. Water Runoff (including storm water): 1. Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. Storm water runoff will be directed to the grassy area south of the roadway and dispersed into the surrounding infield. All drainage will be designed to drain away from the creek. . 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: Design the service roadway to drain away from the creek. 4. Plants: a. Check (V) types of vegetation found on the site: deciduous tree: ❑ alder 0 maple 0 aspen ❑ other evergreen green: 0 fir ❑ cedar D pine ❑ other 0 shrubs ® grass 0 pasture crop or grain wet soil plants: 0 cattail ❑ buttercup 0 bullrush 0 skunk cabbage 0 other water plants: 0 water lily 0 eelgrass ❑ milfoil 0 other other types of vegetation: page 4 of 10 Space Reserved for Agency Comments DOC. INDEX b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Grasses will be removed during excavation. c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None known. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: None. 5. Animals: a. Check (V) 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: ® hawk ® heron ❑ eagle ® songbirds ❑ other 2) mammals. ❑ deer ❑ bear ❑ elk ❑ beaver ❑ other 3) fish: ❑ bass ❑ salmon ® trout ❑ herring ❑ shellfish ❑ other b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. No. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: Grading will be accomplished within the guidelines established by Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife and Department of Ecology. 6. Energy and Natural Resources a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. None. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. No. c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: None. 7. Environmental Health page 5 of 10 Space Reserved for Agency Comments DOC. INDEX a. Are there any environmental healtll iazards, 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. None. 1. Describe special emergency services that might be required. None. 2. Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: None. b. Noise 1. What types of noise exist in the area, which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? Heavy equipment noise during construction. 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. Construction would be short term, approximately three weeks, and occur during daylight hours only. 3. Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: None. 8. Land and Shoreline Use a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? Commercial Service Airport. b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. No. c. Describe any structures on the site. 8' Airport Security Fence north of the proposed roadway between the proposed roadway and creek. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? None. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? CBDS f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? Arterial Commercial. g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? N/A h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so specify. Yes. Wide hollow Creek is designated as a Type 2 stream/Critical Area. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? None. Page 6of10 Space Reserved for Agency Comments DOC. INDEX j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? None. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any N/A 1. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: In compliance with Airport Master Plan and Airport Layout Plan. 9. Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. N/A b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. N/A c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: N/A 10. Aesthetics a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structures, not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building materials proposed? N/A b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? None. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: None. 11. Light and Glare a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? None. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? N/A c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? None. u. E1) )Lxu 1.1.1c & U1 w icuucc vi wuuui uguL auu giatc uupacLz, 11 any. iluuc. page 7 of 10 12. Recreation a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? J. M. Perry Soccer Field is approximately 200 feet north of the proposed work area. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. No. Space Reserved for Agency Comments DOC. INDEX c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: None. 13. 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 important known to be on or next to the site. None. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: None. 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. Project is in vicinity of 16th and West Washington Avenue. There is no street access to the site. Access to and at the site is strictly controlled under Yakima Municipal Code 1.92.050, Airport Ground Control and Security. b. Is site currently serviced by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? Yes. Public Transit is provided on West Washington Avenue directly north of the proposed construction site. c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? N/A d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). No. e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. Project is on airport property and is designed to enhance public health and safety. The roadway is a critical facility under YMC 15.27.216 and a Public Agency and Utility Exception under YMC 15.27.540. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. N/A DOC. INDEX g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: Will enhance aviation safety. page 8 of 10 I15. 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. 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. None. 16. Utilities a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other. N/A 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. None. Space Reserved for Agency Comments 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 Date Submitted: Gj/9,4, Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in conjunction with the hst 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 •ro.osal, would affect the item at a y eater intensity or at a faster rate than if the .ro.osal were not im.lemented. P LT t1 . 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? Space Reserved for Agency Comments DOG' INDEX # F' page 9 of 10 IProposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: 2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life? Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are: 3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources? Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are: 4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat, historic or cultural sites, wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands? Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: . 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? Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are: 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services and utilities? Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are: 7. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. Space Reserved for Agency Comments DOG. INDEX page 10 of 10 DEPARTMEP'"')OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC T -yELOPMENT William R. Co...., Director Doug Maples, CBO, Code Admin. and Planning Manager Planning Division 129 North Second Street, 2nd Floor Yakima, Washington 98901 (509) 575-6183 • Fax (509) 575-6105 December 01, 2006 Mr. Frank Glaspey 100 North 60th Ave. Yakima, WA 98908 Dear Mr. Glaspey: Thank you for your letter regarding Yakima Air Terminal UAZO CAO #2-06 and EC #29-06. The City of Yakima Codes Administration and Planning Department notes the concerns in your letter dated November 22, 2006, and will include your letter as part of the public record for the Public Hearing scheduled on January 25, 2007. In regard to your question as to why an environmental determination was issued prior to the January 25, 2007 hearing date, -the answer lies within the Yakima Municipal Code (YMC) under Chapter 15.27.540(A). This portion of the YMC states "...The public agency (the City of Yakima) or utility shall prepare a report to the Examiner and shall incorporate other required documents such as permit applications, special studies, and SEPA documents." The process for this application then proceeds as follows: 1. The Hearing Examiner will hold the scheduled public hearing and considered all pertinent information and documents, including any environmental information that is associated with that consideration. 2. Based upon his assessment of that information, the Hearing Examiner will make a recommendation to City Council within ten business days following the public hearing. 3. A closed record public hearing will then be held before the City Council who will make the final decision on this request. 4. Any aggrieved party may appeal the action taken by the City Council with respect to the proposed application within the designated appeal period. As a commenting party to this application, you will be mailed a copy of the Hearing Examiner's recommendation and will receive notice of the closed record public hearing before the Yakima City Council. Very truly yours, ezzu J- : Peters Assistant Planner www.ci.yakima.wa.us DOC. INDEX Yakit 'SII 199• FRANK L. GLASPEY JR 100 NORTH 60m AVENUE YAKIMA, WA. 98908 November 22, 2006 DOUG MAPLES -PLANNING MANAGER CITY OF YAKIMA 129 N. 2ND STREET YAKIMA, WA. 98901 Re: Yakima Air Terminal UAZO CAO #206 and # 29-06 Dear Doug; I am in receipt of the notice of application, Environmental Review and Public Hearing Dated October 26,2006 for the above named request. This document sets an Open Record Public Hearing January 25, 2007 but the November 22, 2006 notice of Non Significance places notice of appeal must be made by December 5, 2006. It would seem the decisions will all have been made before the Public Hearing. I have a serious concern that your office has a "Conflict of Interest" in deciding this issue. The City of Yakima which is making an environmental decision without a full Environmental Impact Statement on an issue involving the Yakima Airport of which the City of Yakima is part owner. The testwould be if the decision would be the same if a applicant from the private sector were making this application. Would the decision be the same? I have some experience in set backs from waterways. If I were making this application I would receive it about the same time that the gates of hell would freeze over. Even if the airport service road was not in the Runway Safety Area. There is an airport service road across the West end of the airport outside the runway safety area. I see no evidence this road, which would provide access to the south side of the airport was considered to mitigate the intrusion onto wide hollow creek. It is difficult to determine the distance from runway 22 threshold to Wide Hollow Creek. On page 8 of the application the "Runway Safety Action Team" recommends that a service road be included in the planning for the approach end of runway 22, when a project is undertaken to extend the Runway 4 end in the future. Is runway 22 going to be shortened and the runway 4 be extended before the service road is built ? While outside of the present proposal where is the service road going to be placed in relation to runway 27 and 16 th Avenue if the service road is to be extended to the south part of the airport. If 16th Avenue were closed would that road area be used as a airport service road ? On January 25, 2007 a public hearing will be held before a hearing examiner. What is to be determined by the hearing examiner and is his decision final or a recommendation to the city council. The November 10, 2006 newspaper article indicates the Yakima City Council must approve the closing of 16t Avenue. In this case what does closure mean. Is it for a period of time and of a temporary nature, as closure of a road or bridge? Does the City of Yakima retain ownership of 16th Avenue under the closure or would title and control be given to another entity? FRANK L. GLASPEY JR. C4 cc: Flower & Andreotti 100 N. 60th Avenue #9 Yakima, Wa. 98908 Phone: 248-4778 Fax: 575-2230 -DOC: INDEX MA AIR TERMINAL EXHIBIT LIST CHAPTER G Mc Comments .-EXHIBIT #` DOCUMENT DATE""' -1. •' " : Comment from Frank L. Glaspey Jr. _ •. ' 11/22/06• = = G-2 ' Letter from Jeff Peters ,to Frank L. Glaspey Jr..- 12/01/06 . 1 ... ' ' , ., • • • •s a ,n ys' F.. ,I `'g j$s,.f 'p _ `L. `. • ., L' it-1�- J `' ' .•�..4 ., ' ', .7 .. . • :YAKIMA AIR TERMINA�I CHAPTER I " Notices EXHIBIT # DOCUMENT DATE H-1 , i Notice.Ot Application,• Envirommnental.Review and Public - , . . Hearing' ' �. 10/26/06 • H-2 ' Affidavit of Mailing 10/26/06. H-3. i Property Owners and Agencies Notified 10/26/06 . 11-4; . : Land Use_Action,• Installation` Certificate ° .- .:10/26/06 '^ H-5- 5Legal Notice . '10/26/06 ' H-6 .Press Release ._ - 10/26/06 11-7 . ' Notice of Corrected Date of Public:Hearmg- , 10/31/06 , - 11-8 • Legal Notice 11/22/06 H-9' Press Release. ," '11/22/06 H-10 •Notice of Decision. -" 11/22/06 H-11 Affidavit of Mailing - 11/22/06 r H-12 , _ Property Owners and. Agencies Notified 11/22/06 H=13 Hearing Exan_ niner's -Agenda,' ;1/25/07 - H-14 r Hearing Sign -in Sheet1/25/07 H-15 Notification of Hearing Examiner's Recommendation to a- : Yakima City,C.ouncil;" .. .. • 2/9/07 ° 11=16 :.. • Parties of Record Notified : 2/9/07 H-17 Affidavit of Mailing - 2/9/07 .. H-18 • , '. Posting of Hearing Examiner's Recommendation on;City of . - - ..Yakima -website;... .. . • . : , 2/9/07 . Effect of Approval: Provided these applications are approved under the City of Yakima's Critical Area Ordinance Pubic Agency and Utility Exception (YMC 15.27.540), the proposed service road would be allowed to encroach into the 100 -foot protective critical area stream buffer of Wide Hollow Creek to within 25 feet of the ordinary high water mark as proposed by the applicant. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The City of Yakima has reviewed the proposed project for probable adverse environmental impacts and expects to issue a mitigated determination of nonsignificance (MDNS) for this project. A copy of the subsequent threshold determination may be obtained on request and may be appealed pursuant to YMC 6.88.170. The optional process in WAC 197-11-355 is being used. This may be your only opportunity to comment on the environmental impacts of the proposed project. Comment due date: November 15, 2006 REQUEST FOR WRITTEN COMMENTS Agencies, tribes, and the public are encouraged to review and comment on the proposed applications and their probable environmental impacts. All written comments received by November 15, 2006 will be considered prior to issuing the final SEPA determination on this application. Please mail your comments on this proposal to: Doug Maples, Code Administration and Planning Manager City of Yakima, Department of Community & Economic Development 129 North 2nd Street Yakima, WA 98901 Please be sure to reference the applicant's name or file number in your correspondence. (Yakima Air Terminal, UAZO CAO #2-06 and EC #29-06). The following conditions have been identified that may be used to mitigate the adverse environmental impacts of the proposed project: 1. This action is not exempt from the State Environmental Policy Act under WAC 197-11-800 Categorical Exemptions as this action involves the construction of road within a designated Critical Area of the City of Yakima and will require environmental review. 2. This action falls within a Critical Area as defined by the City of Yakima's Comprehensive Plan Critical Area Map and Ordinance 15.27 and is identified as Wide Hollow Creek, which runs through a portion of the Yakima Air Terminal's property within the City of Yakima. Wide Hollow Creek is classified as a type 11 Stream, which requires a 120 -foot setback from the ordinary high water mark. 'DOC: r ,. INDEX 3. Wide Hollow Creek is a fish bearing stream and therefore the proposed roadway will be required to be sloped away from Wide Hollow Creek in accordance with the recommendations of the Washington State Department of Ecology and Fish & Wildlife. 4. As the proposed area surrounding the creek at this location has been significantly impacted by past development stream bank restoration may be required in accordance with the recommendations of the Washington State Department of Ecology. Required Permits — The following local, state and federal permits/approvals are needed for the proposed project: Grading permit, City of Yakima Critical Areas Review and Department of Fish & Wildlife HPA Permit. Required Studies: None Existing Environmental Documents: None Preliminary determination of the development regulations that will be used for project mitigation and consistency: City of Yakima Critical Area Ordinance YMC 15.27 and City of Yakima Title 6.88 Environmental Policy Act Review. NOTICE OF DECISION A copy of the SEPA threshold determination will be mailed to you after the end of the 20 -day comment period. The file containing the complete application is available for public review at the City of Yakima Planning Division, 2nd floor City Hall. If you have any questions on this proposal, please call Jeff Peters, Assistant Planner at (509) 575-6163 or e-mail at jpeters@ci.yakima.wa.us. NOTICE OF "OPEN" RECORD PUBLIC HEARING Pursuant to Yakima Municipal Code 15.27.540, Public Agency and Utility Exception, an open record public hearing will be held before the Hearing Examiner on Wednesday, January 25, 2007 at 9:00 a.m. in the Yakima City Council Chambers, 129 North 2nd Street, Yakima, WA. If you have any concerns regarding this proposal, you can mail your comments to City of Yakima, Department of Community & Economic Development, Planning Division, 129 North 2nd Street, Yakima, WA 98901. The Examiner's decision will be mailed to all parties of record within three -business days after receipt of the decision. If you have questions on this proposal, call Jeff Peters, Assistant Planner at (509) 575-6163. Encl.: Joint Aquatic Resources Permit Application Form, Site Plan, Narrative, Envirotunental Checklist, Mailing and Vicinity Maps CITY OF YAHIMA NOTICE OF APPLICATION, ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AND PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING A REQUEST FOR A CRITICAL AREA PUBLIC AGENCY AND UTILITY EXCEPTION DATE: October 26, 2006 TO: SEPA Reviewing Agencies, Applicant and Adjoining Property Owners FROM: Doug Maples, Code Administration and Planning Manager SUBJECT: Notice of Application and Environmental Review concerning property located at 2400 West Washington Ave., Yakima, Washington. NOTICE OF APPLICATION Project Location: 2400 West Washington Ave., Yakima, Washington Project Applicant: Yakima Air Terminal File Number(s): UAZO CAO #2-06, and EC #29-06. Date of application: September 25, 2006 Date of determination of completeness: October 20, 2006 Tax Parcel Number(s): 181335-31001 Project Description: The City of Yakima Department of Community & Economic Development has received two related land use applications from the Yakima Air Terminal. These two applications request: 1. Critical Area Review and approval under Yakima Municipal Code 15.27.540 Pubic Agency and Utility Exception, to allow the construction of a 20 -foot wide vehicle service road upon environmentally sensitive property identified by the City of Yakima's Comprehensive Plan Critical Area Map as containing a protected Class II stream (Wide Hollow Creek). 2. Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) review of the proposed project in its entirety and any associated environmental impacts. DOC. INDEX STATE OF WASHINGTON CITY OF YAKIMA AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING Re: UAZO CAO#2-06 AND EC#29-06 Yakima Air Terminal 2400 West Washington Ave I, Susie Lorance as an employee of the Yakima City Planning Division, have dispatched through the United States Mails, a Notice of Application and Public Hearing. A true and correct copy of which is enclosed herewith; that said notice was addressed to the applicant; SEPA reviewing agencies and all property owners of record within a radius of 500 feet of subject property, that said property owners are individually listed on the mailing list retained by the Planning Division, and that said notices were mailed by me on the 26th day of October ,2006. That I mailed said notices in the manner herein set forth and that all of the statements made herein are just and true. Susie Lorance Planning Specialist -DOC. iNDEX 10D -RG, SEPA Reviewer Army Corps 13ox c-3755 .tle, WA 98124 Sheila Ross ' Cascade Natural Gas 701 S. 1St Ave ' Yakima, WA 98902 Chamber of Commerce 10N9th St. Yakima, WA 98901 • Dept. of Transportation Planning Engineer 2809 Rudkin Road Union Gap, WA 98903 Environmental Protection Agency 1200 6th Ave. MS 623 '-attle, WA 98101 •FAA 2200 W. Washington Yakima, WA 98903 Mr. Steven Erickson Yakima Co Planning 128N2nd St. Yakima, WA 98901 Mr. Vern Redifer Yakima Co Pub. Services 128 N 2nd St., 4th Floor Yakima, WA 98901 Mr. Bill Bailey Yakima Cnty Dev. Serv. Ctr. 128 N. 2nd St. 4th Floor Yakima, WA 98901 . Philip Rigdon j--Yakama Indian Nation PO Box 151 Toppenish, WA. 98948 ' Dept. of Natural Resources 713 Bowers Rd Ellensburg, WA 98926 Dept of Soc/Health Service Capital Programs Ofc. Bldg#2 MS OB -23B Olympia, WA 98504 Dept. of Health Michelle Vazquez 1500 W. 4th Ave. St. 305 Spokane, WA 99204 Tom McAvoy Q -West 8 S. 2nd Ave. Room 304 Yakima, WA 98902 Yakima Co. Commissioners 128 North 214 Street Yakima, WA 98901 Yakima Co Health Dist Art McKuen 104 North 1St St. Yakima, WA 98901 Department of Ecology Environ Review Section PO Box 47703 Olympia, WA 98504-7703 WA State Emergency Mgmt. Div. Mitigation, Analysis & Planning Supervisor - Building 20 Camp Murray, WA 98430-5122 Cultural Resources Program Johnson Meninick, Mgr Yakama Indian Nation ' PO Box 151 Toppenish, WA 98940 Transportation Planner YVCOG 6 S. 2nd St. Suite 605 --�0C' • • . Yakima, WA 98901 INDEX } Mr. Greg Griffith Div. of Archeol & Hist. Pres. PO Box 48343 Olympia, WA 98504 WA State Attorney Gen. Office 1433 Lakeside Ct. Ste102 Yakima, WA 98902 City of Union Gap PO Box 3008 Union Gap, WA 98903 Lawrence Odell Clean Air Authority 6 S. 2nd St., Room 1016 Yakima, WA 98901 Mr. John Daly Dept. of Agriculture 406 Gen. Adm Bldg. MS AX -41 Olympia, WA 98504 Gwen Clear Dept of Ecology 15 W. Yakima Ave. St. 200 Yakima, WA 98902 Nob Hill Water Co 6111 Tieton Drive Yakima, WA 98908 Pacific Power Mike Paulson 500 N. Keys Rd Yakima, WA 98901 Dept. of CTED Growth Management Services PO Box 42525 Olympia, WA 98504-2525 Mose Segouches Yakama Indian Nation Environmental Protection Prog. PO Box 151 Toppenish, WA 98948 Mr. Doug Mayo Wastewater Treatment Plant WSDOT Aviation Division John Sambaugh 3704 172' St. N.E. Suite K-12 Arlington, WA 98223 Soil Conservation Dist Attn: Ray Wondercheck 1606 Perry St Suite F I Yakima, WA 98902 Martin Humphries Yakima Valley Museum 2105 Tieton Drive Yakima, WA 98902 Yakima School District ' Attn: Ben Soria 104 N. 4`a Ave Yakima, WA 98902 Federal Aviation Administration Cayla Morgan, Airport Planner Seattle Airports District Office 1601 Lind Ave. S.W. Renton, WA 98055-4056 Lavina Washines, Chairman Yakama Tribal Council PO Box 151 Toppenish, WA 98940 ' Donna J. Bunten Critical Areas Coordinator D.O.E., Shorelands & Environ. PO Box 47600 Olympia, WA 98504-7600 Mr. Scott Nicolai Yakama Indian Nation -Fisheries PO Box 151 Toppenish, WA 98948 Yakima Greenway Foundation 111 S. 181 St. Yakima, WA 98901 Environmental Coordinator Bureau of Indian Affairs PO Box 632 Toppenish, WA 98940 Mr. Marty Miller Office of Farm worker Housing 1400 Snmmitview #203 Yakima, WA 98902 Eric Bartrand Dept. of Fisheries 1701 S. 24t Ave Yakima, WA 98902 Mr. Buck Taylor Yakima Airport 2400 W. Washington Ave Yakima, WA 98903 WV School District Attn: Peter Ansignh 8902 Zier Road Yakima, WA 98908 181336-32010 ANNE LINDEMAN 2105,S 16TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98903 181336-32009 ) ANNE OLSEN 2105 S 16TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98903 181202-12001 AUDREY CATLETT 2406 S 16TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98903-1217 181336-23405 CHARLIE STEPHENSON 1812 S 15TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98902 181336-23406 DAVID A FLATHERS 1814 S 15TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98902 18133.5-2400 GERALD I P O B YA 98909 181335-13008 J M PERRY INSTITUTE 2011 W. WASHINGTON AVE. YAKIMA, WA 98903 181335-140 J M PER INSTI - E 2011 . WASHI = ON AVE. YA , WA -:903 181335-24016 JERE IRWIN 4509 SCENIC DR YAKIMA, WA 98908 181336-32008 JERRY L & SHARON K RANK 2017 S 16TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98903 181336-32003 LEUNG VAN &. WAY MING LAU 1502 W WASHINGTON AVE YAKIMA, WA 98903-1238 181336-23407 NANCY CRAWFORD 1501 W WASHINGTON AVE YAKgMA, 'WA 9.8903-1237 181202-12007 AUDREY M PUALANI 1008 S 6TH ST YAKIMA, WA 98901 181335-33Q01 CONGDON DEVELOPMENT CO LLC PO BOX 2725 YAKIMA, WA 98907-2725 181336-23404 FLORENE COLLEEN WOODCOCK 1810 S 15TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98902-5758 181335-13017 HEATH BUILDING LLC 1320 N 16TH AVE #A YAKIMA, WA 98902 181335-1 4 J M PE INST UTE 201 . WAS GTON AVE. YA IMA, WA 98903 181335-14 J M PE INS 2011 YAK T TE . WASH GTON AVE. MA, WA 98903 181335- '16 JERE ••WIN 45'- S.CEN DR KIMA A 98908 181336-23413 JUDY G HARRIS 1811 S 16TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98902 181336-32002 MICHAEL R & DONNA J WALKER 6717 OCCIDENTAL AVE YAKIMA, WA 98903-9647 181335-23007 NOLAND-DECOTO FLYING SERVICE INC 2810 W WASHINGTON AV YAKIMA, WA 98903 181335-14012 ATLANTIC RICHFIELD -DEL CORP PO BOX 5015 BUENA PARK, California -x.62; 181335-24008 BOLM LIVING TRUST 1808 S 24TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98902-5722 181336-23412 CRESCENCIO & MARIA ELISA MOI 1813 S 16TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98902 181335-24003 GERALD IRWIN P 0 BOX 10668 YAKIMA, WA 98909 181202-12006 HELEN V CATLETT 2406 S 16TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98903-1217 181335-140 J M PE INSTIT 201 WASH ON AVE. YAKIMA, WA 98903 181203-13002 JAMES ROBERT DECOTO 3205 AHTANUM RD YAKIMA, WA 98903 181335-2 JERE IN PO OX 10 Y KIMA, 4CA 98909 181336-23409 JUSTIN .M JOHN 1821 S 16TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98902 181336-32007 MICHAEL R HAMPTON 2015 S 16TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 989OG. INDEX-- -_- # 14- 181336-23403 RAMONA YESENIA MEDINA 1808 S 15TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98901 181336-23410 RICARDO M. CORTEZ 1819 S 16TH AVE YT"TMA, WA 98902-5714 ) 181336-23408 ROBERT A. ROYSE 1503 W WASHINGTON AVE YAKIMA, WA 98903-1237 181335-24031 SMITHS AEROSPACE ACTUATION SYST PO BOX 9907 YAKIMA, WA 98909 181202-12002 VERDELL BURDINE RUTHERFORD 2406 S 16TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98903-1217 181336-23015 WILSON REAL ESTATE LLC 1104 E MEAD AVE YAKIMA, WA 98901 181203-12 YAKIMA R TERMI 2300— WASHING —_AVE 3' YAKI , WA 9 0-1246 1b..536-330 YAKIMA A TERM AL 2300 W SHIN ON AVE YAKIMA,_ 98903-1246 181336-23411 TELENNA K VIPOND 3401 JEFFERSON AVE YAKIMA, WA 98902 181202-120 VERDELL RDINE R iERFORD 2406 16TH AV -YAKIMA, WA 98903-1217 • Jerry Kilpatrick 181202-21004 YAKIMA AIR TERMINAL 2300 W WASHINGTON AVE YAKIMA, WA 98903-1246 181336-23415 RONALD C & THERESA A DINGMAN 1807 S 16TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98902-5714 181336-23414 TERESA ZAMBRANO 1809 S 16TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98902 181202-12003 VIVA RUFFIN 2406 S 16TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98903-1217 181203- 01 YAKI AIR TERM L 2 W WASH ON AVE YAKIMA, WA 98903-1246 181335-440 181336-330 _ YAKIMA TERMI L YAKIMA TERM 2400 WASHIN N AVE 2300 WASHI ON AVE YAKI WA 9 903-1134 YAKIMA, WA 98903-1246 181335-23900 181335-249 YAKIMA AIR RMINA CALLISTER F YAKIMA 2008 S 16 AVE 2008 S 6TH E YAKIMA, WA 98903 YAKIMA, WA 98903 _ 181335-31900 181335-3 03 181335-42'9 YAKIMA AIR TERMINAL/MCALLISTER F YAKI IR TE NAL/MCALLISTER F YAKIMA TERM /MCALLIST 2008 S 16TH AVE 200 S 16T VE 2008 16TH A YAKIMA, WA 98903 Y IMA, WA 98903 AL/MCALLIST YAKIMA, WA 98903 181335-4290 1.81335-42903 181335-429 4 YAKIMA AI ERMI /MCALLISTER F YAKIMA AIR MINAL/M ISTER F YAKIMA TE AL/MCALLIST 2008 S TH AV 2008 S 1 AVE 2008 16TH VE YAKIMA, WA 98903_ YAKI , WA 98903 YAKIMA, WA 98903 181335-42 5 YAKIMA R TERM 2008 16TH A YAKIMA, WA 98903 ASI TY ./2ND YAKIMA, WA 98901-2613 181335- 008 L/MCALLISTER F YAKI CITY 129 2N T YAKIMA, WA 98901-2613 181335-24,P128 YAKIMA 129 N XND S VTTrT/.RT T.TT nnnn• 181335-24 YAKIMA 129 N /l ND S YAKIMA,_ WA 98901-2613 181335-2 8 YAKIM ITY 129 N 2ND YAKIMA, WA 98901-2613 181335-2 8 YAKI TY 129 2.N T YAKIMA, WA 911et2613 INDEx 181335-20208 18133 YAKI IT YAK C Y 129 -2N ST 139 N 2ND ST 181335-240 YAKIMA CI 129 N 2 ST YAKIMA, WA 98901-2613 181335-3 YAKIMA 129 rV , A� T YAKI A 98901-2613 ) 181335- YAKI 129 2N ST YAKIMA, WA 98901-2613 181335-3100 YAKIMA CI 129 N 2I�1LPf ST YAKIMA, WA 9'8901-2613 181335-3 01 YAKIMA ITY 129 N ND YAKIMA, WA98901-2613 181335- YAKI 129 fid' YAK MA,, Wk A 98901-2613 181335- 001 YAKI CIT 129 2N ST YAKIMA, A 98901-2613 181335 YAKI) CIT 12 N 2ND T YAKIMA, A 98901-261.3 181335 YAKI 129N 2ST YAKIMA, WA 98901-2613 181336- YAKI 129 2 ST YAKIMA,A 98901-2613 .88 labels printed for map sheet-epa2906 181335-310 YAKIMA 129 DY 2ND YAKIMA, W2 98901-2613 181335- 01 YAKI CIT 129 2N ST YAKIMA, WA 98901-2613 181335- 001 YAKI 129N 2N7 ST YAKIMA, WA 98901-2613 181335-3-2001 YAKI 12 3/N 2ST YAKIMA, WA 98901-2613 4PP/i2a v /9 La, Cindy Noble NFRD 5609 W. Arlington Ave Yakima, WA 98908 CITY OF YAKIMA LAND USE ACTION INSTALLATION CERTIFICATE Project Number: C40 112- a6 Date of Installation: Site Address: 2411 (,v Location of Installation (Check One) V Land Use Action Sign is installed per standards described in YUAZO § 15.11.090(C). Land Use Action Sign is installed in an alternate location on the site. Note: this alternate location (if not pre -approved by the Code Administration and Planning Manager) may not be acceptable by the Code Administration and Planning Division and is subject to relocation (at the owner's expense) to a more visible site on the property. The alternative location is: I hereby testify that the sign installed fully complies with the Land Use Action sign layout specifications and installation standards, and that the sign will be maintained until a decision has been rendered. Applicants Name (please print) A I& g ri'd he ck Date /'-2( —06 Applicants Signature /9i� Telephone Number of Applicant 5e9 S75_ 6ltq The required comment period will begin when the Code Administration and Planning Division have received the Land Use Action Sign Installation Certification. The date of installation certificate receipt will begin the notice period. Failure to post a Land Use Action sign and return this form in a timely manner will cause a delay in the application review. Please remit the above certification and deliver; FAX at 509-575-6105; or mail to: City of Yakima, Code Administration and Planning Division, 129 North Second Street, Yakima, WA 98901. _.DOC INDE REOUEST FOR WRITTEN COMMENTS Agencies, tribes, and the public are encouraged to review and comment on the proposed applications and their probable environmental impacts. All written comments received by November 15, 2006 will be considered prior to issuing the-final SEPA determination on this application. Please mail your comments on this proposal to: Doug Maples, Code Administration and Planning Manager City of Yakima, Department of Community & Economic Development 129 North 2nd Street Yakima, WA 98901 Please be sure to reference the applicant's name or file number in your correspondence. (Yakima Air Terminal, UAZO CAO #2-06 and EC #29-06). The following conditions have been identified that may be used to mitigate the adverse environmental impacts of the proposed project: 1. This action is not exempt from the State Environmental Policy Act under WAC 197-11-800 Categorical Exemptions as this action involves the construction of road within a designated Critical Area of the City of Yakima and will require environmental review. This action falls within a Critical Area as defined by the City of Yakima's Comprehensive Plan Critical Area Map and Ordinance 15.27 and is identified as Wide Hollow Creek, which runs through a portion of the Yakima Air Terminal's property within the City of Yakima. Wide Hollow Creek is classified as a type II Stream, which requires a 120-foot setback from the ordinary high water mark. 2. Wide Hollow Creek is a fish bearing stream and therefore the proposed roadway will be required to be sloped away from Wide Hollow Creek in accordance with the recommendations of the Washington State Department of Ecology and Fish & Wildlife. 3. As the proposed area surrounding the creek at this location has been significantly impacted by past development stream bank restoration may be required in accordance with the recommendations of the Washington State Department of Ecology. Required Permits — The following local, state and federal permits/approvals are needed for the proposed project: Grading permit, City of Yakima Critical Areas Review and Department of Fish & Wildlife HPA Permit. Required Studies: None Existing Environmental Documents: None Preliminary determination of the development regulations that will be used for project mitigation and consistency: City of Yakima Critical Area Ordinance YMC 15.27 and City of Yakima Title 6.88 Environmental Policy Act Review. NOTICE OF DECISION A copy of the SEPA threshold determination will be mailed to you after the end of the 20-day comment period. The file containing the complete application is available for public review at the City of Yakima Planning Division, 2nd floor City Hall. If you have any questions on this proposal, please call Jeff Peters, Assistant Planner at (509) 575-6163 or e-mail at jpeters@ci.yakima.wa.us. INDEX NOTICE OF "OPEN" RECORD PUBLIC HEARING Pursuant to Yakima Municipal Code 15.27.540, Public Agency and Utility Exception, an open record public hearing will be held before the Hearing Examiner on Wednesday, January 25, 2006 at 9:00 a.m. in the Yakima City Council Chambers, 129 North 2nd Street, Yakima, WA. If you have any concerns regarding this proposal, you can mail your comments to City of Yakima, Department of Community & Economic Development, Planning Division, 129 North 2nd Street, Yakima, WA 98901. The Examiner's decision will be mailed to all parties of record within three -business days after receipt of the decision. If you have questions on this proposal, call Jeff Peters, Assistant Planner at (509) 575-6163. PLEASE PUBLISH ONCE ONLY ON THURSDAY, OCTOBER 26, 2006 Mail Invoice and Affidavit of Publication to: Account#11002 City of Yakima, Planning Division 129 N. 2nd St. Yakima, WA 98901 LEGAL NOTICE CITY OF YAKIMA NOTICE OF APPLICATION, ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AND PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING A REQUEST FOR A CRITICAL AREA PUBLIC AGENCY AND UTILITY EXCEPTION DATE: October 26, 2006 TO: SEPA Reviewing Agencies, Applicant and Adjoining Property Owners FROM: Doug Maples, Code Administration and Planning Manager SUBJECT: Notice of Application and Environmental Review concerning property located at 2400 West Washington Ave., Yakima, Washington. NOTICE OF APPLICATION Project Location: 2400 West Washington Ave., Yakima, Washington Project Applicant: Yakima Air Terminal File Number(s): UAZO CAO #2-06, and EC #29-06. Date of application: September 25, 2006 Date of determination of completeness: October 20, 2006 Tax Parcel Number(s): 181335-31001 Project Description: The City of Yakima Department of Community & Economic Development has received two related land use applications from the Yakima Air Terminal. These two applications request: 1. Critical Area Review and approval under Yakima Municipal Code 15.27.540 Pubic Agency and Utility Exception, to allow the construction of a 20 -foot wide vehicle service road upon environmentally sensitive property identified by the City of Yakima's Comprehensive Plan Critical Area Map as containing a protected Class 11 stream (Wide Hollow Creek). 2. Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) review of the proposed project in its entirety and any associated environmental impacts. Effect of Approval: Provided these applications are approved under the City of Yakima's Critical Area Ordinance Pubic Agency and Utility Exception (YMC 15.27.540), the proposed service road would be allowed to encroach into the 100 -foot protective critical area stream buffer of Wide Hollow Creek to within 25 feet of the ordinary high water mark as proposed by the applicant. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The City of Yakima has reviewed the proposed project for probable adverse environmental impacts and expects to issue a mitigated determination of nonsignificance (MONS) for this project. A copy of the subsequent threshold determination may be obtained on request and may be appealed pursuant to YMC 6.88.170. The optional process in WAC 197-11-355 is being used. This may be your only opportunity to comment on the environmental impacts of the proposed project. Comment due date: November 15, 2006 DOC. INDEX # :3 NOTICE OF "OPEN" RECORD PUBLIC HEARING Pursuant to Yakima Municipal Code 15.27.540, Public Agency and Utility Exception, an open record public hearing will be held before the Hearing Examiner on Wednesday, January 25, 2006 at 9:00 a.m. in the Yakima City Council Chambers, 129 North 2nd Street, Yakima, WA. If you have any concerns regarding this proposal, you can mail your comments to City of Yakima, Department of Community & Economic Development, Planning Division, 129 North 2nd Street, Yakima, WA 98901. The Examiner's decision will be mailed to all parties of record within three -business days after receipt of the decision. If you have questions on this proposal, call Jeff Peters, Assistant Planner at (509) 575-6163. REQUEST FOR WRITTEN COMMENTS Agencies, tribes, and the public are encouraged to review and comment on the proposed applications and their probable environmental impacts. All written comments received by November 15, 2006 will be considered prior to issuing the final SEPA determination on this application. Please mail your comments on this proposal to: Doug Maples, Code Administration and Planning Manager City of Yakima, Department of Community & Economic Development 129 North 2nd Street Yakima, WA 98901 Please be sure to reference the applicant's name or file number in your correspondence. (Yakima Air Terminal, UAZO CAO #2-06 and EC #29-06). The following conditions have been identified that may be used to mitigate the adverse environmental impacts of the proposed project: 1. This action is not exempt from the State Environmental Policy Act under WAC 197-11-800 Categorical Exemptions as this action involves the construction of road within a designated Critical Area of the City of Yakima and will require environmental review. This action falls within a Critical Area as defined by the City of Yakima's Comprehensive Plan Critical Area Map and Ordinance 15.27 and is identified as Wide Hollow Creek, which runs through a portion of the Yakima Air Terminal's property within the City of Yakima. Wide Hollow Creek is classified as a type II Stream, which requires a 120 -foot setback from the ordinary high water mark. 2. Wide Hollow Creek is a fish bearing stream and therefore the proposed roadway will be required to be sloped away from Wide Hollow Creek in accordance with the recommendations of the Washington State Department of Ecology and Fish & Wildlife. 3. As the proposed area surrounding the creek at this location has been significantly impacted by past development stream bank restoration may be required in accordance with the recommendations of the Washington State Department of Ecology. Required Permits — The following local, state and federal permits/approvals are needed for the proposed project: Grading permit, City of Yakima Critical Areas Review and Department of Fish & Wildlife HPA Permit. Required Studies: None Existing Environmental Documents: None Preliminary determination of the development regulations that will be used for project mitigation and consistency: City of Yakima Critical Area Ordinance YMC 15.27 and City of Yakima Title 6.88 Environmental Policy Act Review. NOTICE OF DECISION A copy of the SEPA threshold determination will be mailed to you after the end of the 20 -day comment period. The file containing the complete application is available for public review at the City of Yakima Planning Division, 2nd floor City Hall. If you have any questions on this proposal, please call Jeff Peters, Assistant Planner at (509) 575-6163 or e-mail at ipeters @ci.yakima.wa.us. DOC. INDEX PRESS RELEASE CITY OF YAKIMA NOTICE OF APPLICATION, ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AND PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING A REQUEST FOR A CRITICAL AREA PUBLIC AGENCY AND UTILITY EXCEPTION DATE: October 26, 2006 TO: SEPA Reviewing Agencies, Applicant and Adjoining Property Owners FROM: Doug Maples, Code Administration and Planning Manager SUBJECT: Notice of Application and Environmental Review concerning property located at 2400 West Washington Ave., Yakima, Washington. NOTICE OF APPLICATION Project Location: 2400 West Washington Ave., Yakima, Washington Project Applicant: Yakima Air Terminal File Number(s): UAZO CAO #2-06, and EC #29-06. Date of application: September 25, 2006 Date of determination of completeness: October 20, 2006 Tax Parcel Number(s): 181335-31001 Project Description: The City of Yakima Department of Community & Economic Development has received two related land use applications from the Yakima Air Terminal. These two applications request: 1. Critical Area Review and approval under Yakima Municipal Code 15.27.540 Pubic Agency and Utility Exception, to allow the construction of a 20 -foot wide vehicle service road upon environmentally sensitive property identified by the City of Yakima's Comprehensive Plan Critical Area Map as containing a protected Class II stream (Wide Hollow Creek). 2. Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) review of the proposed project in its entirety and any associated environmental impacts. Effect of Approval: Provided these applications are approved under the City of Yakima's Critical Area Ordinance Pubic Agency and Utility Exception (YMC 15.27.540), the proposed service road would be allowed to encroach into the 100 -foot protective critical area stream buffer of Wide Hollow Creek to within 25 feet of the ordinary high water mark as proposed by the applicant. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The City of Yakima has reviewed the proposed project for probable adverse environmental impacts and expects to issue a mitigated determination of nonsignificance (MDNS) for this project. A copy of the subsequent threshold determination may be obtained on request and may be appealed pursuant to YMC 6.88.170. The optional process in WAC 197-11-355 is being used. This may be your only opportunity to comment on the environmental impacts of the proposed project. Comment due date: November 15, 2006 DOC. INDEX #_ Applicant: City File Number: Parcel Number: Address: Notice of Corrected Date of Public Hearing Yakima Air Terminal CAO #2-06 & EC #29-06 181335-31001 2400 W. Washington Ave. The corrected date of the Public Hearing for consideration of the Yakima Air Terminal's Public Agency and Utility Exception to the City of Yakima's Critical Area Ordinance is Thursday January 25, 2007. Date of mailing October 31, 2006 'DOC,' INDEx 1 PLEASE PUBLISH ONCE WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 22, 2006 Mail Invoice and Affidavit of Publication to: Account# 11002 City of Yakima, Planning Department 129 N. 2nd Street Yakima, WA 98901 LEGAL NOTICE WASHINGTON STATE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT MITIGATED DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE CITY OF YAKIMA, WASHINGTON November 22, 2006 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This application involves Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) and Critical Area Review and approval under Yakima Municipal Code 15.27.540 Public Agency and Utility Exception. Approval of this application will also effectively allow the construction of a 20 -foot wide vehicle service road upon environmentally sensitive property identified by the City of Yakima's Comprehensive Plan Critical Area Map as containing a protected Class II stream (Wide Hollow Creek). PROPONENT: Yakima Air Terminal LOCATION: 2400 West Washington Ave., Yakima, Washington PARCEL NUMBER: 181335-31001 LEAD AGENCY: City of Yakima, Washington. FILE NUMBER: UAZO CAO #2-06, and EC #29-06. DETERMIINATION: The lead agency for this proposal, after reviewing a completed environmental checklist, public and agency comments, and other related information, has determined that the project will not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment, and an environmental impact statement (EIS) will not be required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c), provided the measures listed below are taken to mitigate potential adverse impacts. The information relied upon in reaching this determination is available to the public on request at the City of Yakima Planning Division. This MDNS is issued under WAC 197-11-355, Optional DNS process. There will be no additional comment period for this MDNS. IDENTIFIED ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES: This Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance (MDNS) is hereby conditioned upon the following mitigating measures. Substantive authority to require mitigation is derived from WAC 197-11-660, Yakima Municipal Code YMC 6.88.160, and the Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan, which contain goals, policies, and regulations, which provide substantive authority to require mitigation under the State Environmental Policy Act. This action is not exempt from the State Environmental Policy Act under WAC 197-11-800 Categorical Exemptions as this action involves the construction of a proposed service road within a City of Yakima designated Critical Area and will require environmental review. Mitigation: 1. Critical Area Construction Requirements: The one hundred foot buffer for Wide Hollow Creek shall be reduced to fifty feet from the ordinary high water mark with a twenty-five foot building setback from the buffer itself for a total of seventy-five feet provided the conditions below are met. DOC::.,, INDEX H (a) No structure shall exceed the approved seventy-five foot setback line under any circumstances unless approval is granted by the Yakima City Council under Chapter 15.27.540 Public Agency and Utility Exception of the Yakima Municipal Code. (b) The road grade/elevation shall match the existing ground elevation and road runoff shall be designed to flow in a landward, not streamward direction. (c) Erosion control measures shall be in installed prior to any clearing, grading or construction. These control measures must be able to prevent soil from being carried into surface waters (including storm drains) by stormwater runoff. 2. Storm Water: Prior to any construction, the Washington State Department of Ecology shall be contacted to determine if a NPDES stormwater construction permit is required (a) A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (Erosion Sediment Control Plan) is required for all permitted construction sites. These plans and control measures shall be reviewed and approved by the City of Yakima Engineer prior to construction. (b) Stormwater facilities shall be designed in accordance with the Washington State Department of Ecology's Eastern Washington Stormwater Manual and FAA Wetland Mitigation/Detention Facility requirements. 3. Restoration: All disturbed areas shall be returned to their original conditions or better by reseeding and/or additional plantings within thirty days from completion of the proposed transverse road. In addition, should the proposed project be completed during the months of October - February than planting shall be delayed until the next growing season (March - September). 4. Dust Control: A Dust Control Plan must be submitted to, and approved by, the Yakima Regional Clean Air Authority prior to any phase of work. 5. Other Governmental or Agency Permits: Any other state or local governmental permits not herein mentioned or required must be complied with in their entirety. 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 to the Yakima Urban Area Hearing Examiner, 129 North 2nd Street, Yakima WA 98901 in writing no later than 5:00 p.m. on December 7, 2006. Be prepared to make factual objections. CONTACT PERSON: Contact Jeff Peters, Assistant Planner (509) 575-6163 for more information. SEPA RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: William Cook POSITION / TITLE: Director Community & Economic Development TELEPHONE: 509 / 575-6113 DOC, INDEX PRESS RELEASE WASHINGTON STATE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT MITIGATED DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE CITY OF YAKIMA, WASHINGTON November 22, 2006 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This application involves Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) and Critical Area Review and approval under Yakima Municipal Code 15.27.540 Public Agency and Utility Exception. Approval of this application will also effectively allow the construction of a 20 -foot wide vehicle service road upon environmentally sensitive property identified by the City of Yakima's Comprehensive Plan Critical Area Map as containing a protected Class II stream (Wide Hollow Creek). PROPONENT: Yakima Air Terminal LOCATION: 2400 West Washington Ave., Yakima, Washington PARCEL NUMBER: 181335-31001 LEAD AGENCY: City of Yakima, Washington. FILE NUMBER: UAZO CAO #2-06, and EC #29-06. DETERMINATION: The lead agency for this proposal, after reviewing a completed environmental checklist, public and agency comments, and other related information, has determined that the project will not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment, and an environmental impact statement (EIS) will not be required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c), provided the measures listed below are taken to mitigate potential adverse impacts. The information relied upon in reaching this determination is available to the public on request at the City of Yakima Planning Division. This MDNS is issued under WAC 197-11-355, Optional DNS process. There will be no additional comment period for this MDNS. IDENTIFIED ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES: This Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance (MDNS) is hereby conditioned upon the following mitigating measures. Substantive authority to require mitigation is derived from WAC 197-11-660, Yakima Municipal Code YMC 6.88.160, and the Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan, which contain goals, policies, and regulations, which provide substantive authority to require mitigation under the State Environmental Policy Act. This action is not exempt from the State Environmental Policy Act under WAC 197-11-800 Categorical Exemptions as this action involves the construction of a proposed service road within a City of Yakima designated Critical Area and will require environmental review. Mitigation: 1. Critical Area Construction Requirements: The one hundred foot buffer for Wide Hollow Creek shall be reduced to fifty feet from the ordinary high water mark with a twenty-five foot building setback from the buffer itself for a total of seventy-five feet provided the conditions below are met. DOC. INDEX # (a) No structure shall exceed the approved seventy-five foot setback line under any circumstances unless approval is granted by the Yakima City Council under Chapter 15.27.540 Public Agency and Utility Exception of the Yakima Municipal Code. (b) The road grade/elevation shall match the existing ground elevation and road runoff shall be designed to flow in a landward, not streamward direction. (c) Erosion control measures shall be in installed prior to any clearing, grading or construction. These control measures must be able to prevent soil from being carried into surface waters (including storm drains) by stormwater runoff. 2. Storm Water: Prior to any construction, the Washington State Department of Ecology shall be contacted to determine if a NPDES stormwater construction permit is required (a) A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (Erosion Sediment Control Plan) is required for all permitted construction sites. These plans and control measures shall be reviewed and approved by the City of Yakima Engineer prior to construction. (b) Stormwater facilities shall be designed in accordance with the Washington State Department of Ecology's Eastern Washington Stormwater Manual and FAA Wetland Mitigation/Detention Facility requirements. 3. Restoration: All disturbed areas shall be returned to their original conditions or better by reseeding and/or additional plantings within thirty days from completion of the proposed transverse road. In addition, should the proposed project be completed during the months of October - February than planting shall be delayed until the next growing season (March - September). 4. Dust Control: A Dust Control Plan must be submitted to, and approved by, the Yakima Regional Clean Air Authority prior to any phase of work. S. Other Governmental or Agency Permits: Any other state or local governmental permits not herein mentioned or required must be complied with in their entirety. 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 to the Yakima Urban Area Hearing Examiner, 129 North 2nd Street, Yakima WA 98901 in writing no later than 5:00 p.m. on December 7, 2006. Be prepared to make factual objections. CONTACT PERSON: Contact Jeff Peters, Assistant Planner (509) 575-6163 for more information. SEPA RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: William Cook POSITION / TITLE: Director Community & Economic Development TELEPHONE: 509 / 575-6113 DOC. INDEX This action is not exempt from the State Environmental Policy Act under WAC 197-11-800 Categorical Exemptions as this action involves the construction of a proposed service road within a City of Yakima designated Critical Area and will require environmental review. Mitigation: 1. Critical Area Construction Requirements: The one hundred foot buffer for Wide Hollow Creek shall be reduced to fifty feet from the ordinary high water mark with a twenty foot building setback from the buffer itself for a total of seventy feet provided the conditions below are met. (a) No structure) shall exceed the approved seventy foot setback line under any circumstances unless approval is granted by the Yakima City Council under Chapter 15.27.540 Public Agency and Utility Exception of the Yakima Municipal Code. (b) The road grade/elevation shall match the existing ground elevation (as certified by a licensed engineer) and road runoff shall be designed to flow in a landward not streamward direction. (c) Erosion control measures shall be installed to Washington State Department of Ecology Stormwater Standards prior to any clearing, grading or construction. These control measures must be able to prevent soil from being carried into surface waters (including storm drains) by stormwater runoff f: 2. Storm Water: Prior to any construction, the Washington State Department of Ecology shall be contacted to determine if a NPDES stormwater construction permit is required (a) A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (Erosion Sediment Control Plan) is required for all permitted construction sites. These plans and control measures shall be reviewed and approved by the City of Yakima Engineer prior to construction. (b) Stormwater facilities shall be designed in accordance with the Washington State Department of Ecology's Eastern Washington Stormwater Manual and FAA Wetland Mitigation/Detention Facility requirements. 3. Restoration: All disturbed areas shall be returned to their original conditions or better by reseeding and/or additional plantings within thirty days from completion of the proposed transverse road In addition, should the proposed project be completed during the months of October - February then planting shall be delayed until the next growing season (March - September). ' YMC 15.02: Structure means anything constructed or erected which requires location on the ground or attached to something having a location on the ground. DOC. INDEX H jO 4. Dust Control: A Dust Control Plan must be submitted to, and approved by, the Yakima Regional Clean Air Authority prior to any phase of work. 5. Other Governmental or Agency Permits: Any other state or local governmental permits not herein mentioned or required must be complied with in their entirety. 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 to the Yakima Urban Area Hearing Examiner, 129 North 2nd Street, Yakima WA 98901 in writing no later than 5:00 p.m. on December 7, 2006. Be prepared to make factual objections. CONTACT PERSON: Contact Jeff Peters, Assistant Planner (509) 575-6163 for more information. SEPA RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: William Cook POSITION / TITLE: Director Community & Economic Development TELEPHONE: 509 / 575-6113 ADDRESS: 129 North 2nd Street, Yakima, WA 98901 DATE: November 22, 2006 SIGNATURE• NOTICE OF DECISION Compliance with the Washington State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) November 22, 2006 On September 25, 2006, the City of Yakima, Washington issued a Notice of Application and Environmental Review regarding an environmental checklist application submitted by the Yakima Air Terminal. This review concerns the Environmental Review of the construction of 20 -foot wide vehicle service road upon environmentally sensitive property identified by the City of Yakima's Comprehensive Plan Critical Area Map as containing a protected Class II stream (Wide Hollow Creek). The subject property is located at 2400 West Washington Ave., Yakima, Washington. Parcel Number(s): 181335-31001 City File Number: EC #29-06 Following the initial 20 -day public comment period, and consideration of all comments received, the City of Yakima has issued the enclosed SEPA Threshold Decision. For further information or assistance, you may wish to contact Jeff Peters, Assistant Planner at (509) 575-6163 at the City Planning Division. i Doug Maples Planning & Code Administration Manager Notice of Decision Mailing Date: November 22, 2006 Enclosures: SEPA 1Vfitigated Determination of Nonsignificance, Site Plan, Vicinity Map, and Mailing Map WASHINGTON STATE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT MITIGATED DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE CITY OF YAKIMA, WASHINGTON November 22, 2006 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This application involves Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) and Critical Area Review and approval under Yakima Municipal Code 15.27.540 Public Agency and Utility Exception. Approval of this application will also effectively allow the construction of a 20 -foot wide vehicle service road upon environmentally sensitive property identified by the City of Yakima's Comprehensive Plan Critical Area Map as containing a protected Class II stream (Wide Hollow Creek). PROPONENT: Yakima Air Terminal LOCATION: 2400 West Washington Ave., Yakima, Washington PARCEL NUMBER: 181335-31001 LEAD AGENCY: City of Yakima, Washington. FILE NUMBER: UAZO CAO #2-06, and EC #29-06. DETERMINATION: The lead agency for this proposal, after reviewing a completed environmental checklist, public and agency comments, and other related information, has determined that the project will not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment, and an environmental impact statement (EIS) will not be required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c), provided the measures listed below are taken to mitigate potential adverse impacts. The information relied upon in reaching this determination is available to the public on request at the City of Yakima Planning Division. This MDNS is issued under WAC 197-11-355, Optional DNS process. There will be no additional comment period for this MDNS. IDEN'17H'1ED ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES: This Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance (MDNS) is hereby conditioned upon the following mitigating measures. Substantive authority to require mitigation is derived from WAC 197-11-660, Yakima Municipal Code YMC 6.88.160, and the Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan, which contain goals, policies, and regulations, which provide substantive authority to require mitigation under the State Environmental Policy Act. DOC. INDEX STATE OF WASHINGTON CITY OF YAKIMA AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING Re: UAZO EC#29-06 Yakima Air Terminal 2400 West Washington Ave I, Susie Lorance as an employee of the Yakima City Planning Division, have dispatched through the United States Mails, a Notice of Decision of Compliance with the Washington State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). A true and correct copy of which is enclosed herewith; that said notice was addressed to the applicant; SEPA reviewing agencies and all property owners of record within a radius of 500 feet of subject property, that said property owners are individually listed on the mailing list retained by the Planning Division, and that said notices were mailed by me on the 22"d day of November ,2006. That I mailed said notices in the manner herein set forth and that all of the statements made herein are just and true. 4.1,0V,I, Susie Lorance Planning Specialist Doug Mayo tewater Treatment Plant WSDOT Aviation Division 1 John Sambaugh j 3704 172°d St. N.E. Suite K-12 Arlington, WA 98223 Soil Conservation Dist Attn: Ray Wondercheck 1606 Perry St Suite F Yakima, WA 98902 Martin Humphries Yakima Valley Museum 2105 Tieton Drive ' Yakima, WA 98902 Yakima School District Attn: Ben Soria 104 N. 4`s Ave ima, WA 98902 } Federal Aviation Administration Cayla Morgan, Airport Planner Seattle Airports District Office 1601 Lind Ave. S.W. Renton, WA 98055-4056 Lavina Washines, Chairman Yakama Tribal Council PO Box 151 Toppenish, WA 98940 Donna J. Bunten Critical Areas Coordinator D.O.E., Shorelands & Environ. PO Box 47600 Olympia, WA 98504-7600 Mr. Scott Nicolai Yakama Indian Nation -Fisheries PO Box 151 Toppenish, WA 98948 Yakima Greenway Foundation 111 S. 18t St. Yakima, WA 98901 Environmental Coordinator Bureau of Indian Affairs PO Box 632 Toppenish, WA 98940 Mr. Marty Miller Office of Farm worker Housing 1400 Snmmitview #203 Yakima, WA 98902 Eric Bartrand Dept. of Fisheries 1701 S. 24th Ave Yakima, WA 98902 Mr. Buck Taylor Yakima Airport 2400 W. Washington Ave Yakima, WA 98903 WV School District Attn: Peter Ansignh 8902 Zier Road Yakima, WA 98908 OD -RG, SEPA Reviewer Army Corps PO Box c-3755 Seattle, WA 98124 Sheila Ross ' Cascade Natural Gas 701 S. 12` Ave Yakima, WA 98902 Chamber of Commerce 10N9th St. Yakima, WA 98901 Dept. of Transportation Planning Engineer 2809 Rudkin Road I Union Gap, WA 98903 Environmental Protection Agency 1200 6th Ave. MS 623 Seattle, WA 98101 FAA 2200 W. Washington Yakima, WA 98903 Mr. Steven Erickson Yakima Co Planning 128 N VI St. Yakima, WA 98901 Mr. Vern Redifer Yakima Co Pub. Services 128 N 2nd St., 4th Floor Yakima, WA 98901 Mr. Rill Bailey Yakima Cnty Dev. Serv. Ctr. 128 N. 2nd St. 4`h Floor Yakima, WA 98901 Mr. Philip Rigdon Yakama Indian Nation PO Box 151 Toppenish, WA 98948 Dept. of Natural Resources 713 Bowers Rd ' Ellensburg, WA 98926 Dept of Soc/Health Service Capital Programs Ofc. Bldg#2 MS OB -23B Olympia, WA 98504 Dept. of Health Michelle Vazquez 1500 W. 41 Ave. St. 305 Spokane, WA 99204 Tom McAvoy Q -West 8 S. 2nd Ave. Room 304 Yakima, WA 98902 Yakima Co. Commissioners 128 North 2nd Street Yakima, WA 98901 Yakima Co Health Dist Art McKuen 104 North 12' St. Yakima, WA 98901 Department of Ecology Environ Review Section PO Box 47703 ' Olympia, WA 98504-7703 WA State Emergency Mgmt. Div. Mitigation, Analysis & Planning Supervisor - Building 20 Camp Murray, WA 98430-5122 Cultural Resources Program Johnson.Meninick, Mgr Yakama Indian Nation PO Box 151 Toppenish, WA 98940 Transportation Planner YVCOG 6 S. 2nd St. Suite 605 Yakima, WA 98901 DOC. INDEX Mr. Greg Griffith ��— Div. of Archeol & Hist. res. PO Box 48343 Olympia, WA 98504 WA State Attorney Gen. Office 1433 Lakeside Ct. Ste102 Yakima, WA 98902 City of Union Gap PO Box 3008 ' Union Gap, WA 98903 Lawrence Odell Clean Air Authority • 6 S. 2nd St., Room 1016 ' Yakima, WA 98901 Mr. Lee Faulconer Dept. of Agriculture PO Box 42560 Olympia, WA 98504 Gwen Clear Dept of Ecology 15 W. Yakima Ave. St. 200 Yakima, WA 98902 Nob Hill Water Co 6111 Tieton Drive Yakima, WA 98908 Pacific Power Mike Paulson 500 N. Keys Rd Yakima, WA 98901 Dept. ofiL ED Growth Management Services PO Box 42525 Olympia, WA 98504-2525 Mose Segouches Yakama Indian Nation Environmental Protection Prog. PO Box 151 Toppenish, WA 98948 181336-23410 RICARDO M. CORTEZ 1819 S 16TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98902-5714 181335-24031 SMITHS AEROSPACE ACTUATION SYST PO BOX 9907 YAKIMA, WA 98909 181202-12002 VERDELL BURDINE RUTHERFORD 2406 S 16TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98903-1217 181336-23015 WILSON REAL ESTATE LLC 1104 E MEAD AVE YAKIMA, WA 98901 1: 203 003 YAK 2300 AS TON AVE YAKIMA, WA 98903-1246 1. i.-330 YAKIMA 2300 W YAKIMA, IN AL N AVE • 181336-23408 ROBERT A. ROYSE 1503 W WASHINGTON AVE YAKIMA, WA 98903-1237 181336-2 TEL A OND 3401 a ERSON AVE YAKIMA, WA 98902 181336-23415 RONALD C & THERESA A DINGMAN 1807 S 16TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98902-5714 18 202 - VER. LL BU•'I RU -_FORD 2406 6TH E YAKIMA, WA 98903-1217 98903-1246 Jerry Kilpatrick 181202-21004 YAKIMA AIR TERMINAL 2300 W WASHINGTON AVE YAKIMA, WA 98903-1246 181'35-4::.1 YAKI AA R 2400 ASHI ON A YAKIMA, WA 98903-1134 181 35 2 00 YAK AIR 2008 "16TH YAKIMA, WA 98903 181336-23414 TERESA ZAMBRANO 1809 S 16TH AVE YAKIMA, WA. 98902 181202-12003 VIVA RUFFIN 2406 S 16TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 9890.3-1217 1=1203- 1001 YA IMA A • TE I 23.0► W.WAS' .'-TON AVE YAKI r•, WA 98903-1246 1: 336 004 YA'v MA AI TE INA 230. WASH 'GTON AVE YAKIMA, WA 98903-1246 18335 900 LISTER F YAK 2Q08 16TH -•E YAKIMA, WA 98903 18 335-31:00 18133 -31•• 181 35-4 YA A RMI AL/' _ -LISTER F YAKI •' Al" T:.' - AL A ISTER F YAKI • R NAL/M LLIST 20.08 1 T 2008 S . H A 2008 6TH AVE YAKIMA,_ A__98903.____ ____ _YAKIMA,__ A 98903.__. _ YAKIMA, WA 98903 LIST 181335-4290 1813'5-429 YAKI AIR A •MIN' /MCALLISTER F YAKI AI 2008 S 6T AV 2008 S - H+AVE YAKIMA, ^ 98903 YAKIMA, WA 98903 181335- 2905 18 335-2.!08 YAKIMA A RMI / CALLISTER. F YA MA 'IT 2008 S 16TH AVE 129 ND ST YAKIMA; WA 98903 18135-24006 Y `. TY 1 2N S Y1,_ .•�A , WA 8 9 01_2 613 _ 181335-2402 -YAKIMA 129 N 2NST VAKTMa WA Ooon1_,c1, YAKIMA, WA 98901-2613 1813 -2:'18 YAKI •. • T 129 N 2ND ST _YAKIMA, WA 98901-2613 1813 5-24 YAKI C Y 129 N 2'. ST 181 5- 9.4 LISTER F YAKI .' •IR :u 2008 S 16TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98903 L/MCALLIST 1813'5 2-118 YAKI r•. ' I T 129 N 2ND ST YAKIMA, WA 98901-2613 181 35- 18 YAK CIT 129 N 2ND YAKIMA, W. 181335- YAKI 129 1=.2613 ND ST 181336-32010 ANNE LINDEMAN 2105 S 16TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98903 181202-12001 AUDREY CATLETT 2406 S 16TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98903-1217 181336-23405 CHARLIE STEPHENSON 1812 S 15TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 989'02 181336-23406 DAVID A FLATHERS 1814 S 15TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98902 181335-24 GE •• D I• I' P 0 n•X 10.6 YAKIMA WA 181335-13008 J M PERRY INSTITUTE 2011 W. WASHINGTON AVE. YAKIMA, WA 98903 181335- 2011 YAKIMA, 009 Y NS ITUT WAS GTON AVE. WA 98903 181335-24016 DERE IRWIN 4509 SCENIC DR YAKIMA, WA 98908 181336-32008 JERRY L & SHARON K RANK 2017 S 16TH AVE YAKIMA_ WA gAonr 336-32.03 L 1502 YAKIMA, AY M .'G L AVE A 98903-1238 181336-23407 NANCY CRAWFORD 150.1 W WASHINGTON AVE YAKIMA, WA 98903-1237 181336-32009 .ANNE OLSEN 2105 S 16TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98903. 181202-1200.7 AUDREY M PUALANI 1008 S 6TH ST YAKIMA, WA 98901 181335-33001 CONGDON DEVELOPMENT CO LLC PO BOX 2725 YAKIMA, WA 98907-2725 181336-23404. FLORENE COLLEEN WOODCOCK 1810 S 15TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98902-5758 181335-13017 HEATH BUILDING LLC 1320 N 16TH AVE #A YAKIMA, WA 98902 1:1335 014 J PE :-Y •T 'UTE 2011 WAS GTVE. YAKIMA, WA 98903 18133'- 4422 J PRR • I T ' 'E 201 . WA INGTON AVE. YAKIMA, WA 98903 18 . 35 40 JER I N 4509 YAKIMA, W 989 181336-23413 JUDY G HARRIS 1811 S 16TH AVE YAKIMA, 1" 1A 98902 181336-32002 MICHAEL R & DONNA J WALKER 6717 OCCIDENTAL AVE YAKIMA, WA 98903-9647 181335-.14012 /ATLANTIC RICHFIELD -DEL CORP PO BOX 5015 BUENA PARK, California 5,0622 181335-24008 BOLM LIVING TRUST 1808 S 24TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98902-5722 181336-23412 CRESCENCIO & MARIA ELISA MOL] 1813 S 16TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98902 181335-24003 GERALD IRWIN P 0 BOX 10668 YAKIMA, WA 98909 181202-12006 HELEN V CATLETT 2406 S 16TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98903-1217 1:1335-1400 J PERRY N T TE 2011 W '.HIN •N AVE. YAKI WA 98903 181203-13002 JAMES ROBERT DECOTO 3205 AHTANUM RD YAKIMA, WA 98903 1813 24017 ERE I` IN OX •6 YAKIMA, WA 98909 181336-23409 JUSTIN M JOHN 1821 S 16TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98902 181336-32007 MICHAEL „A HAM.�,?,TON 2015 S 06013103 YAKIMA, ;16 181335-23007 NOLAND-DECOTO FLYING SERVICE INC 2810 W WASHINGTON AV YAKIMA, WA 98903 181336-23403 RAMONA YESENIA MEDINA 1808 S 15TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98501 181335-24'33 YAKIMA CITY 129 N 2ND ST YAKIMA, 98901-2613 ,'181335-31001 YAKIMA CIT 129 N 2ND T YAKIMA, W 98901-2613 181335-3 001 181335-3'001 YAKIMA C TY YAKIMA C4TY 129 N 2NJ ST 129 N 2 D ST YAKIMA, A 98901-2613 YAKIMA, WA 98901-2613 181335-3 001 YAKIMA CITY 129 N 2N ST YAKIMA, A 98901-2613 181335 31001 YAKIMA CITY 129 N '•ND ST YAKIMA WA :98901-2613 181335-31001 181335 31001 YAKIMA 'ITY YAKIMA CITY 129 N 2 D ST 129 N ND ST YAKIMA, WA 98901-2613.1_ __ ___ YAKIMA WA 98901_2613 - 181335-:4001 181336 33002 YAKIMA ITY YAKIMA CITY 129 N 2 D ST 129 N ND ST YAKIMA, WA 98901-2613 YAKIMA WA 98901-2613 _abels printed for map sheet epa2506 f(e 31t i3 181335-31001 •YAKI CITY 129 N 2ND ST YAKI WA 98901-2613 181335-31001 YAKI CITY 129 N +ND ST YAKIMA WA 98901-2613 181335-1001 YAKIMA ITY 129 N 2 D ST YAKIMA, WA 98901-2613 181335- 2001 YAKIMA ITY 129 N 2 D ST YAKIMA, WA 98901-2613 Aky Ce o7C OC C4 s -r i'2. it/Da-/06, Cindy Noble NFRD 5609 W. Arlington Ave Yakima, WA 98908 Filed Hearing Exam EXH # - 12 Date File#2-oce CITY OF YAKIMA HEARING EXAMINER AGENDA Thursday, January 25, 2007 Yakima City Hall 9:00 am Council Chambers I. CALL TO ORDER II. INTRODUCTION III. PUBLIC HEARING A. YAKIMA AIR TERMINAL Planner Assigned: Jeff Peters File Number: CAO #2-06 & SEPA #29-06 Location: 2400 West Washington Ave Request: Construct a proposed transverse roadway B. LARRY & KIMBERLY LOVELESS Planner Assigned: Vaughn McBride File Number: PRE PLAT #2-06, EC#30-06 Location: 7200 Englewood Ave. Request: 23 single-family residential lots IV. ADJOURNMENT If you are unable to attend the hearing, you may submit your comments in writing prior to the hearing. You may also submit written testimony at the hearing. CASE #: CAO #2-06 & SEPA #29-06 PRE PLAT #2-06 EC#30-06 NAME: HEARING SIGN -IN SHEET CITY OF YAKIMA HEARING EXAMINER YAKIMA CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS HEARING DATE: January 25, 2007 APPLICANT: Yakima Air Terminal Larry & Kimberly Loveless PLEASE PRINT ADDRESS: SITE ADDRESS: 2400 West Washington Ave 7200 Englewood Ave ZIP: -II-2/L&t/Gc��g i o l l eiLv (Ai 11 iviralvlA 96 go NOTIFICATION OF HEARING EXAMINER'S RECOMMENDATION TO THE YAKIMA CITY COUNCIL February 9, 2007 On February 8, 2007 the City of Yakima Hearing Examiner rendered his recommendation on a CAO #2-06 & SEPA #29-06 submitted by Yakima Air Terminal. The Applicant is requesting to construct a twenty -foot -wide Vehicle Service Road between the end of the runway 22 safety area and Wide Hollow Creek. The application was reviewed at a public hearing held by the Hearing Examiner on January 25, 2007. A copy of the Hearing Examiner's Findings and Recommendation is enclosed. The Hearing Examiner's Recommendation will be considered by the Yakima City Council in a public hearing to be scheduled. The City Clerk will notify you of the date, time and place of the public hearing. For further information or assistance you may contact Jeff Peters, Assistant Planner at (509) 575-6163 at the City Planning Division. Doug Maples Code Administrator & Planning Manager Date of mailing: February 9, 2007 Enclosures: Hearing Examiners Recommendation 'DOC: INDEX Parties of Record Jerry Kilpatrick 2400 West Washington Ave Yakima, WA 98903 DOC. INDEX 1 STATE OF WASHINGTON CITY OF YAKIMA AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING Re: CAO#2-06 & SEPA #29-06 YAKIMA AIR TERMINAL 2400 WEST WASHINGTON AVE I, Susie Lorance as an employee of the Yakima City Planning Division, have dispatched through the United States Mails, a Notice of Hearing Examiner Recommendations to City Council. A true and correct copy of which is enclosed herewith; that said notice was addressed to the applicant, and parties of record, that said property owners are individually listed on the mailing list retained by the Planning Division, and that said notices were mailed by me on the 9Th day of February ,2007. That I mailed said notices in the manner herein set forth and that all of the statements made herein are just and true. Q,(A.4-u aiLii-a Susie Lorance Planning Specialist Page 1 of 1 Lorance, Susie From: Peters, Jeff Sent: Friday, February 16, 2007 11:37 AM To: Lorance, Susie Subject: RE: Can you send me something that says you posted Yakima Air Terminals Recommendation on the web -site? Thanks The Yakima Air Terminal Decision was posted on the Web on 2-09-2007. From: Lorance, Susie Sent: Friday, February 16, 2007 10:47 AM To: Peters, Jeff Subject: Can you send me something that says you posted Yakima Air Terminals Recommendation on the web- site? Thanks DOC. INDEX #- r, 2/16/2007