Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/01/2008 06 Sarg Hubbard Park Reflection Pool Improvements YMC 15.27 Amendments BUSINESS OF THE CITY COUNCIL • YAKIMA, WASHINGTON AGENDA STATEMENT Item No. For Meeting Of: July 1, 2008 ITEM TITLE: Closed record hearing to consider a resolution to approve a request from the Yakima Greenway Association 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 pathway, cantilevered fishing piers and other associated amenities around Sarg Hubbard Park's Reflection Pond. SUBMITTED BY: William R Cook Director of Community and Economic Development CONTACT PERSON/TELEPHONE: Jeff Peters Assistant Planner, 575 -6163 SUMMARY EXPLANATION: The Yakima Greenway Association 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 pathway, cantilevered fishing piers and other associated amenities around Sarg Hubbard Park's Reflection Pond. As part of that permit process, the Yakima Greenway Association requested that the City grant a Public Agency and Utility Exception allowing adjustment of certain critical areas setback and buffer requirements. On April 24, 2008, 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 May 8, 2008, 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 pathway, fishing piers and amenities 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 Greenway Association'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: ��� 8 City Manager STAFF RECOMMENDDATION: Accept the hearing examiners recommendation; adopt the resolution approving a public agency and utility exception for the proposed project and direct staff to issue the apprgpriate Critical Areas Substantial Development Permit. .BOARD ,Rg QMMENDATION: The Hearing Examiner recommended approval of the Public Agency and Utility Exception with conditions on May 8, 2008. COUNCIL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: Recommended for full Council consideration 0 and approval by the Council Economic Development Committee on February 6, 2008. COUNCX ACT)9N: 40 , RESOLUTION NO. R -2008- — A RESOLUTION approving . the Hearing Examiner's recommendation to approve with conditions, the request of the Yakima Greenway Foundation for a Public Agencv and Utility Exception under the City of Yakima's Critical Areas Ordinance (YMC 15.27.540) to build a pathway, cantilevered fishing piers and other associated amenities within the critical areas of Sarg Hubbard Park's Reflection Pond located at 206 S. 18 Street, Yakima, Washington, and authorizing the Mayor to direct staff to issue the appropriate Critical Area Substantial Development Permit. WHEREAS, on April 24, 2008, the Hearing Examiner held a public hearing to consider ' the application of a Public Agency and Utility Exception to the City of Yakima's Critical Areas Ordinance to allow the construction of a pathway, cantilevered fishing piers and other associated amenities within the associated critical areas of Sarg Hubbard Park's Reflection Pond located at 206 S. 18 Street, Yakima, Washington, submitted by Al Brown, Yakima. Greenway Foundation Manager, City File No. CAO #2 -08; and WHEREAS, on May 8, 2008, the Hearing Examiner issued his recommendation approving the proposed Public Agencv and Utility Exception subject to the descriptions and 0 conditions contained within the City assigned file numbers UAZO CAO #2 -08 and EC #11 -08; and WHEREAS, as this Public Agencv and Utility Exception comes before Council for review each member declares that he has had no contact with either the applicant or opponents of the proposed application; now, therefore, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF YAKI.MA, WASHINGTON: The proposed Public Agencv and Utility Exception recommended by the City's Hearing Examiner for construction of a pathway cantilevered fishing piers, and other associated amenities within the associated critical areas of Reflection Pond located within Sarg Hubbard Park at 206 S. 18 Street, Yakima, Washington, is hereby approved and the Mayor is hereby authorized to direct staff to prepare the appropriate Critical Area Substantial Development Permit. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this 1st day of July, 2008. David Edier, Mayor ATTEST: III City Clerk 1 1 YAKIMA GREENWAY FOUNDATION CAO #2 -08, EC #11 -08 ' City Council ' Closed Record Public Hearing July 1, 2008 EXHIBIT LIST 1 Applicant: - Yakima Greenway Foundation File Number: CAO #2 -08, EC #11 -08 Site Address: 206 South 18 Street Staff Contact: Jeff Peters, Assistant Planner 1 Table of Contents CHAPTER AA Hearing Examiner's Recommendation 1 CHAPTER A Staff Report CHAPTER B Maps CHAPTER C Site Plan CHAPTER D DST (Development Services Team) Comments CHAPTER E SEPA Review CHAPTER F Application CHAPTER G Notices CHAPTER H Comments and Site History 1 1 1 1 YAKIMA GREENWAY FOUNDATION 1 CAO#2-08, EC#11-08 EXHIBIT LIST 1 CHAPTER AA 1 Hearing Examiner's Recommendation EXHIBIT ,-; AA-1 Hearing Examiner's Recommendation 5/08/08 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 RECEIVED MAY 0 8 2008 Gary M. Cuillier CITY OF YAKIMA ATTORNEY AT LAW PLANNING DIV. 314 N. SECOND STREET YAKIMA, WASHINGTON 98901 (509) 575-1800 1 FAX: (509) 452 -4601 May 8, 2008 1 Yakima City Planning Division Attn: Rosalinda 129 North Second Street Yakima, WA 98901 1 Re: Hearing Examiner's Recommendation Yakima Greenway Foundation and the City of Yakima, Critical Areas Ordinance #02 -08, EC #11 -08 Dear Rosalinda: Enclosed is the Hearing Examiner's Recommendation regarding the above - entitled 1 matter. The hearing was on April 24, 2008 and this decision has been issued within ten business days. 1 If you have any questions, please give me a call Very truly yours, ' GARY M. CUILLIER GMC: bvv Enclosure cc: Vicki Adams, Yakima County Planning Department, w/ Enclosure Pat Spurgin, City of Yakima Pro Tem Hearing Examiner, w/ Enclosure D , INDEX 1 # - RECEIVED 1 MAY 0 8 2008 CITY OF YAKIMA PLANNING DIV. City of Yakima, Washington Hearing Examiner's Recommendation May 8, 2008 1 1 In the Matter of Application for a ) Critical Areas Ordinance Public ) 1 Agency Exception Submitted by: ) Critical Areas Ordinance #2 -08 ) EC #11 -08 Yakima Greenway Foundation) And the City of Yakima ) ) To Allow for Construction of a ) Pathway and Two Fishing Piers ) Along the West and the South ) Sides of Reflection Pond ) 1 Introduction. The Hearing Examiner conducted a public hearing on April 24, 2008 and has issued this recommendation within ten business days thereof. Assistant Planner Jeff Peters presented a thorough staff report which 1 recommended approval of this request for a public agency exception to allow for the construction of a pathway around the west and the south sides of Reflection 1 Pond in Sarg Hubbard Riverside Park and for the construction of two cantilevered fishing piers in that same area. The facts in the staff report are adopted herein by 1 this reference to avoid the need to repeat all of them in detail here. No one other than Jeff Peters testified at the public hearing. No written comments were submitted in opposition to the requested exception. 1 Yakima Greenway Foundation 1 1 And the City of Yakima CAO Public Agency Exception Pathway along Reflection Pond UAZO CAO #2 -08; EC #11-08 D D INDEX "1 1 RECEIVED • MAY 0 8 2008 ' CITY OF YAKIMA PLANNING DIV. Summary of Recommendation. The Hearin g Examiner recommends that the ' Yakima City Council approve this request for a public agency exception to eliminate the Critical Areas Ordinance wetland buffer and setback areas that ' would otherwise prevent the construction of a pathway and two cantilevered fishing piers along the west and the south sides of Reflection Pond in Sarg \' Hubbard Riverside Park. Based Examiner's view Basis for Recommendation. ased upon the Hearing xamme s vie of the 1 site without anyone else present on April 22, 2008; his consideration of the staff report, application, exhibits, testimony and other evidence presented at an open 1 record public hearing on April 24, 2008; and his review of the City's Critical Areas Ordinance; the Hearing Examiner makes the following: 1 FINDINGS 1 I. Applicants. The applicants are the Yakima Greenway Foundation, 111 South 18 Street, Yakima, Washington and the City of Yakima, 129 North 2nd Street, 1 Yakima, Washington. r T he proposed pathway and fishing piers would be located along II. Location. pop p y g p g the west and south sides of Reflection Pond in Sarg Hubbard Riverside Park at 206 South 18 Street, Yakima, Washington. The parcel numbers are 191320 -13007 ' and 13009. Yakima Greenway Foundation 2 And the City of Yakima ' CAO Public Agency Exception Pathway along Reflection Pond D O C . UAZO CAO #2 -08; EC #11 -08 INDEX 1 _ MAY 0 8 2008 1 CITY OF YAKIMA 1 PLANNING DIV. III. Application. This application for a Critical Areas Substantial Development Permit, called a "Joint Aquatic Resources Permit Application Form" or "JARPA Application," was filed with an application for State Environmental Policy Act 1 (SEPA) review on February 19, 2008. A public agency exception from the City's Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO) buffer and setback requirements is needed to 1 allow for issuance of a Critical Areas Substantial Development Permit for the following reasons: 1 1) The Yakima Greenway Foundation wishes to build a ten - foot -wide pathway that would be 840 feet long around the west and south sides of Reflection 1 Pond. The Greenway Foundation also wishes to build two cantilevered fishing piers over the pond - one on the west side and one on the south side of the pond. The improvements would be within six feet of the ordinary high water mark of the pond. 2) Reflection Pond is identified on the City's Comprehensive Plan Critical Area Map as a pond with associated Category IV wetlands. The pond is between one and two acres in size and is treated as a depressional wetland. Wetland areas containing vegetation such as pacific willow, coyote willow, reed . canary grass, 1 cattails and willow herb exist in an "L" shape around the west and south edges of the pond. 3) The desired construction cannot be allowed unless a public agency exception under Section 15.27.540 of the CAO is allowed so that a Critical Area Development Permit can be issued under Section 15.27.500 of the CAO. The City's CAO jurisdiction extends 300 feet in all directions from the edge of identified wetlands. According to Section 15.27.412 of the CAO, a 25- foot -wide development buffer of undisturbed soil and native vegetation from the edge of the 1 wetlands has been established for areas like parks where there is a high intensity land use. In addition to that, an additional 20- foot -wide structure setback beyond that exists around the pond. The buffer area was administratively reduced to 12.5 feet, but even the reduced 32.5 -foot combined buffer and structural setback allowed pursuant to Section 15.27.412(A) of the CAO would prevent the construction of the proposed improvements due to the limited room around the pond for the improvements. Grading would have to occur within these buffer and setback areas to create the structural bed for the pathway and temporary impact to the buffer and setback areas would occur during construction. Even though all Yakima Greenway Foundation 3 And the City of Yakima CAO Public Agency Exception Pathway along Reflection Pond 7 0 0 UAZO CAO #2 -08; EC #11-08 INDEX - ___ AA- RECEIVED • MAY ®8 2008 ' CITY OF YAM,. A PLAINIMING DIM environmental impacts would be mitigated by either avoidance, minimization or repair of wetlands near the path and the water's edge, the improvements could not be permitted without a public agency exception to the CAO buffer and setback ' requirements. 1 IV. Background. The background of this application may be summarized as follows: 1 1) Environmental review for the construction of Sarg Hubbard Riverside Park was conducted in early 1984 by Yakima County in cooperation with the City of Yakima, the Yakima Greenway Foundation and other citizens groups. The area was originally a landfill from the early 1940s until 1965 when it was abandoned. Reflection Pond was originally a gravel pit which ceased operation m about 1976. ' 2) When the pond was originally constructed, it became evident by the appearance of an oil slick on the pond that contaminants were leaching into the pond due to oil entering groundwater from an asphalt batch plant west and south ' of the pond. A cleanup order was issued by the Department of Ecology (DOE) in 1991. A protective membrane that is also called a contaminant barrier or an impermeable liner was installed between the contaminated soil and the pond. The 1 site was capped with concrete to prevent further contamination and fenced to prevent human disturbance. 3) During the following years, there has been a problem with the public breaching the fence and disturbing the contaminated area. In many places, the slope between the contaminant barrier has been eroded, vegetation has been trampled or destroyed, and m one place the contaminant barrier has been exposed so as to make it prone to damage or destruction. 4) On November 30, 2007, Catherine Reed of the Department of Ecology r indicated in writing after a site visit that Reflection Pond is "associated" with the Yakima River and has primarily a water quality and hydrologic support function; that the area for a pathway is quite limited, particularly on the west side of the pond; that a smaller buffer is needed for a water quality and hydrologic support function than for a habitat protection function; that public access to the shoreline is a preferential use under the Shoreline Management Act; that the park area is already in an Urban shoreline setting; that the public is already using the pond and there are trampled footpaths within several feet of the pond; that placement of an ' asphalt pathway higher on the slope above the pond with designated access paths to the shoreline or to fishing platforms would improve the situation; that Yakima Greenway Foundation 4 And the City of Yakima ' CAO Public Agency Exception Pathway along Reflection Pond COOL UAZO CAO #2 -08; EC #11-08 INDEX • MAY 0 8 2008 1 CITY OF YAKIMA PLANNING DIV. specifically an asphalt pathway would protect the impermeable liner, funnel the public to specific areas of the pond banks and help prevent erosion; and that the placement of an asphalt pathway within the setback buffer around the pond is therefore for these reasons acceptable to DOE. 5) After the Department of Ecology issued a close out order on the remediation of the contaminated area, Robert Swackhammer of DOE's Toxic Cleanup Program approved the proposed pathway in writing on January 30, 2008 so long as "construction and use of the path shall not result in exposure to hazardous substances remaining at the site." He detailed his understanding that the pathway would be asphalt on a gravel subgrade; that pedestrians, baby strollers and bicycles would be allowed on the path; and that small motorized vehicles operated by Greenway maintenance workers would be the-only motorized vehicles allowed on the path. V. Notices. Notices of the public hearing were provided in the following manner: Posting of notice on property March 6, 2008 Mailing of notice March 6, 2008 Publishing of notice in newspaper March 6, 2008 1 VI. Environmental Review. The City as lead agency under SEPA issued a Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance (MDNS) for the proposal on March 27, 2008. The MDNS became final without an appeal. The MDNS constitutes a fmding that the proposal will not have likely significant adverse impacts on the environment so long as enumerated mitigation measures are followed before, during and after construction. VII. CAO Public Agency Exception Review Criteria. Section 15.27.249 of the CAO defines a public agency to include local governments such as co- applicant City of Yakima. The Examiner is required by Subsection 15.27.540(B) 1 of the CAO to review an application for a public agency exception and to make a Yakima Greenway Foundation 5 And the City of Yakima CAO Public Agency Exception Pathway along Reflection Pond D C i UAZO CAO #2 -08; EC #11 -08 INDEX rsck.;mivtu I MAY 0 8 Z008 CITY OF YAKIMA PLANNING DIV. recommendation to the City Council as to whether the following criteria to be considered are in fact satisfied: 1 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. 1 Even though Subsection 15.27 of the CAO allows the Director of the Department of Community and Economic Development to reduce the width of ' required wetland buffer areas by up to 50 percent under certain circumstances, which was done for this application, 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 pathway and fishing piers to be constructed. The evidence presented was that grading would need to occur within the reduced 32.5 '1 foot buffer and setback areas and that construction of the pathway and the fishing piers would have to occur within those areas. There is not sufficient room around the pond to construct the pathway more than 32.5 feet from the pond. Construction of fishing piers that distance from the pond would defeat their purpose. Construction of the pathway would also need to be within the buffer and setback area in order to protect the contaminant barrier that is located within the ' buffer and setback areas. In short, the evidence presented at the hearing was undisputed to the effect that there is no practical alternative to locating the ' proposed pathway and fishing piers within the reduced CAO buffer and setback ' areas. - 2) Subsection 15.27.540(B)(2) of the CAO: The proposal minimizes the ' impact on critical areas. The proposal utilizes avoidance and minimization strategies and best management practices to minimize the impact on critical areas. 1 Yakima Greenway Foundation 6 And the City of Yakima ' CAO Public Agency Exception Pathway along Reflection Pond DOC. UAZO CAO #2 -08; EC #11-08 iNDEX MAY 0 8 2008 1 CITY OF YAKIMA' PLANNING DIV. The MDNS requires specific mitigation measures to minimize the impact on ' critical areas which include the following: i) No construction shall take place within the approved 32.5 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; 1 ii) The proposed pathway shall be sloped away from the pond in accordance with the recommendations of the Washington State Department of Ecology; , iii) 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 stonnwater runoff; iv) All wetlands and their buffers shall be avoided as much as possible; v) Where wetland or wetland buffer disturbance occurs native wetland plants shall be replaced with native wetland species utilizing a 3:1 ratio; vi) The Yakima Greenway Foundation shall install native vegetation between the new paved trail and the pond in order to stabilize the bank and protect the wetland from sedimentation; vii) During construction high visibility fencing shall be required to be installed to mark the limits of disturbance to protect the various sensitive areas; 1 viii) Prior to construction the applicant shall submit building plans for the _two _ fishing _piers which meet Section 1895.4_of _the _International _ Building Code by a certified engineer. In addition, each plan page and the structural calculations shall also be stamped and signed by the engineer. ix) Prior to any construction, the Washington State Department of Ecology shall be contacted to determine if an NPDES stormwater construction permit is required; x) All disturbed areas shall be returned to their original conditions 1 or better by reseeding and/or additional plantings within thirty days from completion of the proposed pathway; and xi) A Dust Control Plan must be submitted to, and approved by, the Yakima Regional Clean Air Authority prior to any phase of work. Yakima Greenway Foundation 7 And the City of Yakima CAO Public Agency Exception Pathway along Reflection Pond UAZO CAO #2 -08; EC #11 -08 DO fPrDD DECEIVED MAY 8 2008 ' CITY OF YAKI ;A PLANNING D V. 3) Subsection 15.27.540(C) of the CAO: There is a mitigation plan • indicating proposal critical . Although this is how one the of the listed will criteria for minimize consid eration , it is not on mandatory and ' it does not appear to apply to a public agency exception. The exact wording of this provision in Subsection 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 indicating how this proposal will minimize the impact on critical areas as detailed in the MDNS. As previously noted, for example, impact avoidance /minimization practices such as requiring pathway drainage to flow landward rather than waterward and revegetation of impacted crirical areas will mitigate the impact on . critical areas. The City will finalize mitigation requirements and other conditions when and if it issues the requisite Critical Areas Development Permit under Section 15.27.500 of the CAO. 1 4) Subsection 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 1 critical areas where use of category I and II wetlands or their buffers providing habitat for endangered or threatened species will be allowed. Even though the environmental checklist indicates that there are a number of species listed as endangered or threatened under the Endangered Species Act in the Upper j Yakima Valley, all listed species would benefit from the installation of the pathway. The pathway would reduce human disturbance within the affected areas around the pond, and the installation of native vegetation would enhance the ' surrounding buffer area so as to provide new habitat for various species. All environmental agencies charged with implementing the ESA for the endangered or Yakima Greenway Foundation 8 And the City of Yakima ' CAO Public Agency Exception Pathway along Reflection Pond D UAZO CAO #2 -08; EC #11-08 INDEX 1 # .®A- / MAY 0 8 2008 1 CITY OF YAKIMA PLANNING DIV. threatened species at issue were notified as part of the SEPA process. No agency other than DOE commented formally or informally on the proposal. Even so, substantial mitigation for temporary impacts caused during construction, 1 revegetation steps after construction and other measures required by the MDNS to minimize impacts upon endangered or threatened species and critical area habitat 1 would protect the public health and safety or repair damaged critical areas. 1 VIII. 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 1 the following factors: 1) The types of land uses permitted at the site include the proposed 1 pathway and fishing piers if, as is the case here, the criteria for a public agency exception are satisfied so as to allow those improvements within the CAO buffer and structural setback areas. 2) The density or level of development would still be within applicable and acceptable limits after the construction of a pathway and two fishing piers to facilitate public access to the shoreline of Reflection Pond which is a preferential use under the Shoreline Management Act. 3) The availability and adequacy of infrastructure and public facilities 1 is not an issue here. The proposed pathway and fishing piers would be constructed within an existing park and would not require additional infrastructure or public facilities. 111 4) The characteristics of the development would be consistent with applicable development regulations, including the recommended exception to Critical Areas buffer and setback regulations as discussed m detail above. CONCLUSIONS 1 Based on the foregoing findings, the Examiner reaches the following conclusions: Yakima Greenway Foundation 9 ■ And the City of Yakima CAO Public Agency Exception Pathway along Reflection Pond UAZO CAO #2 -08; EC #11-08 L1 INDEX AA CiG VGI V L.; ' MAY 0 8 2008 1 CITY OF YAKIMA PLANNING DIV. 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 buffer and setback requirements. 1 2) Public notice was given by mailing, posting and publishing notice of the hearing. 3) A Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance was issued on March 27, 1 2008 and was not appealed. 4) The undisputed evidence presented at the open record public hearing on April 24, 2008 satisfied the criteria for approval of a public agency exception to the Critical Areas buffer and setback requirements so as to allow construction of the proposed pathway and fishing piers along the west and south sides of 1 Reflection Pond m Sarg Hubbard Riverside Park. RECOMMENDATION The . Hearing Examiner recommends that this request for public agency g q P g y exception to the Critical Areas buffer and setback requirements in order to allow construction of a athwa and two fishing piers along the west and south sides of p y gP g 1 Reflection Pond in Sarg Hubbard Riverside Park as described in the documentation assigned file numbers UAZO CAO #2 -08 and EC #11-08 be - 1 APPROVED by the Yakima City Council. 1 DATED this 8 to day of May, 2008. 1 Gary M. Cuillier, Hearing Examiner 1 Yakima Gieenway Foundation 10 And the City of Yakima 1 CAO Public Agency Exception Pathway along Reflection Pond . - �. UAZO CAO #2 -08; EC #11-08 �' `' 1 1 Yakima Greenway Foundation 1 EXHIBIT LIST 1 CHAPTER A Staff Report 1 EXH IBIT` A IMg '' 7 t ' k sw�..,"" r2w; e ;+s a a'. .�r ( N€ Yr7 �, s } '`a 7 r v• fit � j 414.-j.; a a fi ..y o ,s^3h-• �#., }:. s ,� 47a sJ � : $ ..#`< w YiG q, 5 4 � ,;,F.i:` r a ., z .:. � ,?�� ., s ..� � d�a : �ayM �?.;wrc,»;.3° u2sf'" � a� �a4r -:� �� « F ,.: '.fit si e . �4,+. t`"�' tee '� A -1 Staff Report 4/24/08 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 City of Yakima, Washington • Division of Environmental Planning 1 PUBLIC HEARING April 24, 2008 Application by: )UAZO CAO #2 -08 & EC #11- 08 The Yakima Greenway Association / City of Yakima) Staff Planner 1 For a Public Agency Exception To Certain Critical ) Assistant Planner, Jeff Peters . Area Setback and Buffer Requirements ) 575 -6163 Coupled with an Environmental Review. ) 1 Staff Report The Yakima Greenway Association / City of Yakima, proponent of construction of a proposed pathway which parallels Reflection Pond, and its associated Type IV Wetlands within Sarg Hubard, have applied to the Department of Community and Economic Development for an exception to the 20 foot setback, and 12.5 foot reduced buffer requirements under YMC § 15.27.412.A of the City's Critical Areas Ordinance. Specifically, the Yakima Greenway Association seeks application of the Public Agency and Utility Exception, YMC § 15.27.540, to allow issuance of a Critical Area Development Permit under YMC § 15.27.500. In the absence of this exception, a Critical Area 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 pathway 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 t element of the project, and the proposed project will substantially improve public safety and alleviate certain environmental concerns. 1 The following documents are included in the Hearing Examiners packet for consideration: • 1. Joint Aquatic Resources Permit Application Form (JARPA) submitted by the Yakima Greenway Association (February 19, 2008) 1 1 1 1 • 2. SEPA Mitigated Declaration of Nonsignificance (MDNS) issued by the City 1 of Yakima (March 27, 2008) 3. Yakima County Parks and Recreation Department's Sarge Hubbard Park — 1 Environmental Assessment (January 30, 1984) 4. Sarge Hubbard Riverside Park Phase — II Preliminary Construction Plan submitted by the Yakima Greenway (August 20, 1987) 5. Washington State Department of Ecology Toxics Cleanup Program, Letter of Superior Asphalt Beech Street, Facility Site ID# 488, Institutional Controls 1 Needed to Close Out Order No. 91TC -C444 from Robert Swackhammer (September 11, 2006) 6. Washington State Department of Ecology Toxics Cleanup Program, Letter of t' Yakima Greenway Pond Access Path consideration from Robert Swackhammer (November 19, 2007) 7. Washington State Department of Ecology Email of project assessment from Catherin Reed (November, 30 2007) 8. Washington State Department of Ecology Toxics Cleanup Program, Close Out Order Letter No. 91TC -C444 from Donald W. Abbot (January 3, 2008) 9. Washington State Department of Ecology Toxics Cleanup Program, Letter of Yakima Greenway Pond Access Path Plans Satisfy Restrictive Covenant from Robert Swackhammer (January 30, 2008) Background Summary • The Yakima Greenway Association (YGA) has proposed to build a 10 -foot wide X 840 foot long pathway, and two cantilevered fishing piers upon environmentally sensitive property identified by the City of Yakima's Comprehensive Plan Critical Area Map as containing a pond (Reflection Pond), and associated protected Category IV wetlands. If constructed, the proposed pathway would be allowed to encroach into the reduced 32.5 - foot combined critical area buffer and setback of Reflection Pond's associated Category IV wetlands to within six feet of the ordinary high water mark, as described in the above documents. 1 The design and development of the YGA's proposed pathway has a history, which dates back to approximately 1984 when Yakima County in cooperation with the City of Yakima, the Yakima River Greenway Foundation and other citizens groups started the environmental review for the construction of Sarge Hubbard Park. On January 30, 1984, the Yakima County Parks and Recreation Department issued an Environmental Assessment (EA) for the construction of Sarge Hubbard Park which included the follow phases of construction: 1 2 1) f C. INDEX 1 1 1. On -site paved parking for 90 ares, .5 miles of interior paved pathway, .67 miles of asphalt jogging path, a 20' X 40' restroom structure, picnic sites, a commemorative 1 column, 2 -3 acres of lawn, irrigation system /well, connection to City of Yakima sewer and water and miscellaneous tree and shrub plantings. 2. Observation platform, picnic shelter, bus shelter, heritage art display, community green and additional lawn totaling 8 -10 acres. I 3. Reflection Pond, water fall /fountain, boat launch, and .44 miles of asphalt jogging path. The EA identified that the existing park was originally a landfill during the early 1940,s — 1965 when it was abandoned, and that the small lake, that is now called Reflection Pond was originally a gravel pit, which ceased operation about 1976. 1 The EA also disclosed that no significant adverse environmental impacts from the construction of the park were identified. 1 Following environmental review /permitting, construction of phases one thru two, and various portions of phase three, including construction of Reflection Pond of the proposed park. It became evident that contaminants were leaching into the pond from the • surrounding ground. The site was listed by the Washington State Department of Ecology (WSDOE) as a browns field and a cleanup order was issued on October 31, 1991 under Order No. 91TC -C444. The pond was cleaned in accordance with the WSDOE's order. A protective membrane was installed in between Reflection Pond and the contaminated soil. The site was capped with concrete to prevent further contamination and fenced to prevent human disturbance. 1 Throughout the following years, and despite preventative measures such as fencing of the contaminated area, the public has continued to breach the fence, and disturb the contaminated site. In many places the slope between the contaminant barrier has been ' eroded, vegetation has been trampled or destroyed, and in one location the contaminant barrier has been exposed making it prone to damage or destruction. In late 2007, the WSDOE issued a close out order on the remediation of the contaminated area. Following the above close out order, the YGA contacted Robert Swackhammer from the WSDOE's Toxics Cleanup Program and Cathy Reed of the WSDOE's Shoreline and Environmental Assistance Program to ascertain the likely hood of being able to complete the remainder of Phase 3 (840 lineal feet of pathway, two fishing piers and other associated amenities) of the original Sarge Hubbard Park Plan. Mr. Swackhammer responded in writing on January 30, 2008, stating that based upon his review of the 1 submitted engineering and surveying information that the project is in compliance with the requirement of the restrictive covenant and that the project is approved, subject to the fulfillment of the following condition: 1 3 r,� G -. : _. 11"1 r._., X 1 1 "Construction and use of the path shall not result in exposure to hazardous substances remaining at the site." Following a site visit to the location of the proposed pathway on November 30, 2007, 1 Cathy Reed responded stating "...The wetland ponds are "associated" with the Yakima River even though they are outside of the 200 -foot distance from the River. They are influenced by the River and they have an influence on the River by their capacity to treat stormwater and provide open water off channel habitat for some waterfowl. The upper pond has much less habitat function than the lower pond and the upper pond has primarily a water quality and hydrologic support function. A shoreline permit for the project may be needed if there is work within or over the pond(s). The physical setting of the site and existing location of structures (including existing pathway and cyclone fence line) make it difficult to increase the existing buffers in this area. There is only a small area to work within, especially on the west side of the pond. Fortunately, protection of water quality improvement and hydrologic support functional values require a smaller buffer than that which is needed to protect habitat functions. In addition, because public access to the shoreline is a preferential use under 90.58 RCW (the Shoreline Management Act) and the Park area is already in an Urban shoreline setting, placement of a asphalt pathway within the setback buffer around the upper pond is acceptable to Ecology in order to facilitate /control public access to the pond. 1 The public is already using the pond and there are trampled footpaths within several feet of the upper pond. Placement of an asphalt pathway higher on the slope above the pond, with designated T- access paths to the shoreline or to a fishing platform would improve 1 the situation...." On February 19, 2008, the YGA 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 ". 1 Notice for the hearing and application was provided in accordance with the UAZO requirements in the following manner: Mailin g of notice March 6, 2008 Posting of property March 6, 2008 1 Legal Ad published March 6, 2008 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 March 27, 2008, 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 adversely impact the environment provided certain mitigation measures contained in the MDNS are followed by the YGA before, during, and after construction. 1 4 nn Lp..._ INDEX A- 1 1 1 • ■ 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 YGA's project will not comply with several buffer and setback requirements in the City of Yakima's Critical Areas Ordinance (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 YGA's pathway project will be built within six feet of the ordinary high water mark of Reflection Pond, which contains associated Type IV wetlands and is considered a "critical area" under the City's Critical Area Ordinance. The City's critical area jurisdiction over this project extends 300 feet in all directions 'from the edge of the identified wetlands. Consequently, the proposed pathway will require permits under the CAO as the project falls well within the three hundred foot CAO jurisdiction. As stated P reviously, Reflection Pond contains Type IV wetlands. The wetland areas around the creek can be described as an "L" shaped feature along the west and south edges of the pond. The pond itself is only 1 -2 acres in size and treated as a depressional wetland. Vegetation within the wetland area consists of pacific willow, coyote willow, reed canary grass, Cattails, and willow herb. ' The City of Yakima's Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO) YMC 15.27 requires a structural setback and vegetative buffer of undisturbed soil and native vegetation for streams and 1 wetlands, based on their official classification. Reflection Pond's wetlands at the location of the proposed project are considered Type IV wetlands and, as such qualify for a buffer of either 10 or 25 feet with a 20 foot building setback as identified below. ' Generally, according to YMC § 15.27.412, a development buffer of 25 feet has been established, as measured from the edge of the wetland for area like parks where there is 1 a high intensity land use. In addition, a 20 -foot minimum setback from the edge of the buffer has been established for all structures. The YGA's pathway would not comply with this buffer or 'setback requirement. If these buffer requirements are strictly applied, the YGA's project cannot proceed. The . pathway as currently proposed would lie well within the reduce 12.5 -foot buffer under YMC § 15.27.412 A and 20 foot setback of Reflection Pond's wetlands. Grading will occur within these setback and buffer areas to create the structural bed necessary for the proposed path, 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 path and waters edge. Nevertheless, in the absence of a procedural mechanism allowing noncompliance with the buffer and setback 1 requirements, the YGA's pathway project cannot be permitted under the CAO. 1 5 D Ni Dr l • 1 Public Agency Exception to CAO Standards ■ According to YMC § 15.27.540, if the application of a CAO development standards, including setbacks and 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 § 15.27.249 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 1 review the application and supporting documents and make a recommendation to the City Council based on the following criteria: 1 1. There is no other practical alternative to the proposed development with ' less impact on the critical areas, and 1 2. The proposal minimizes the impact on critical areas. A mitigation plan may be required indicating how the proposal will minimize the impact 1 on critical areas. In addition, as described in YMC § 15.27.540.A, the public agency exception "shall not 1 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 Yakima Greenway • Association's Pathway Project. Design plans for the proposed pathway necessarily include activities that will take' place within the reduced 32.5 foot combined setback/buffer under YMC § 15.27.412.A. YMC § 15.27.412 A 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 pathway construction to proceed. In sum, the strict application of the setback and buffer requirements will prohibit development of the pathway project. 1 B. There is no other practical alternative to the proposed pathway project with less impact on the critical areas and the proposal minimizes the impact on critical areas. Due to past contamination of the site, restrictive protective covenants as a result of the clean up, high levels of human disturbance, and limited area between the proposed . ' athw and adjacent. wetlands, there are no other alternatives which will minimize the p impacts on the critical area. 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 1 of the project has been developed using avoidance / minimization strategies, with the input of federal, state, local agencies and the general public. I To minimize impacts to critical, areas, best management practices will be used during • construction, as described in the MDNS for this project. Mitigation measures will • include: 1. The proposed pathway shall be sloped away from the pond in accordance . with the recommendations of the Washington State Department of 1 Ecology; . • 2. Erosion control measures shall be installed to Washington State 1 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 1 • stormwater runoff; 1 3. All wetlands and their buffers shall be avoided as much as possible; .. 4. Where wetland or wetland buffer disturbance occurs native wetland plants 1 shall be replaced with native wetland species utilizing. a 3:1 ratio; 5. The applicant (Yakima Greenway Foundation) shall installation native 1 vegetation between the new paved trail and the pond in order to stabilize • the bank and protect the wetland from sedimentation; • 1 6. During construction high visibility fencing shall be required to be installed to mark the limits of disturbance to.protect the various sensitive area; and 1 . 7. All disturbed areas shall be returned to their original conditions or better by reseeding and/or additional plantings within thirty days from I completion of the proposed pathway 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 I certain mitigation measures are implemented by the YGA before, during, and after construction. The Yakima Greenway Association has committed to these measures, 1 which include in part: I 7 ; • IN!�_- 1 # �.._A.. ._ .__ 1 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. Prior to any construction, the Washington State Department of Ecology shall be contacted to determine if a NPDES stormwater construction permit is required; 3. A Dust Control Plan must be submitted to, and approved by, the Yakima Regional Clean Air Authority prior to any phase of work; and. 4. Prior to construction the applicant shall submit building plans for the two fishing piers which meet Section 1805.4 of the International Building Code by a certified engineer. In addition, each plan page and the structural calculations shall also be stamped and signed by the engineer. 1 The mitigation package and other conditions will be finalized when and if the permits are issued under the Joint Aquatic Resource Permit Application. 1 C. The Project includes a comprehensive mitigation plan to address impacts to Critical Areas. 1 Although a mitigation plan need not be provided in all cases where the Public Agency exception is authorized, the YGA's pathway project does include a comprehensive mitigation strategy, as discussed above and identified in the City's MDNS. As noted, the primary requirements of the mitigation plan are impact avoidance /minimization practices (i.e. site drainage shall be designed to flow in a landward, not waterward) and re- vegetation 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 § 15.27.500 of the CAO. 1 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. 1 There are a number of species listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) for the affected critical area, as specified in the applicant's environmental checklist. However, all listed species will benefit from the installation of the pathway as human disturbance within the affected areas will be reduced around the pond and the installation of native vegetation will enhance the surrounding buffer area provided new 1 habitat for various species. All environmental agencies charged with implementing the 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. 8 • 1 ESA for the threatened and endangered species at issue were notified via issuance of the SEPA checklist. As of both March 26, 2008, the end of the SEPA comment period, and I • April 10, 2008, the end of the appeal period, no agency besides the WSDOE has commented formally or informally on the proposed project. Although no agency has formally commented aside from the WDDOE substantial mitigation for temporary impacts caused during construction will be provided, as stated in the City of Yakima issued SEPA MDNS (File: EC #11 -08) In addition, as described in 111. preceding sections above, re- vegetation 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 YGA pathway project meets the criteria of the Public Agency Exception. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 • 1 1 1 9 rrr1, INNA 1 Yakima Greenway Foundation EXHIBIT LIST CHAPTER B Maps 1 s r 'ry " r 4,t �� �kTE� � -3" ry ei ae r 511' 1 B - Maps 2/22/08 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 r r w i— --------- co i co I STNUT STREET ' • • 1 • 1 w LU i EST . CC • / • 2 1 . ; U 'A I .... • . ill -� na6ESTa6EC—__ 1 F - 1 \ E i IST U r i i lit -.*. • X 0 1. N CITY OF YAKIMA WASHINGTON VICINITY MAP : *N � •• s 1 FILE NO CAO #2 -08; EC #11 -08 0 i, o Subject Property APPLICANT: Yakima Greenway Foundation REQUEST: Construct pathway (approx 840 lineal ft) Yakima City Limits 1 along west and south of Reflection Pond. t Scale -lin = 400ft LOCATION: 206 South 18th Street 0 200 400 Greenway 02/22/08 1111 iNCI. Y • W I ct I cn H co N I cn co N STNUT STREET 2400 1 ' 1 24003 ,3006 24004 ` _ 13001 zaaao zaoto H 24009 t :::" ST x] 3007 : J I N 1 Q 2444A 1 . U 24441 ,3oos' / 1 13007 24433 i Mn 244 ,3010.' �� 31436 31433 1 i W \ / N 3190 ' g 1 1 42001 ' 1. 1 CITY OF YAKIMA, WASHINGTON I ! Property Notices 1 FILE NO: CAO #2 -08; EC#1 1-08 APPLICANT: Yakima Greenway Foundation A REQUEST: Construct pathway (approx 840 lineal ft) ®� Subject Site along west and south of Reflection Pond. eo 4°4 N LOCATION: 206 South 18th Street e „ �i`L`�� e S0 Afee See 5 PARCEL NUMBER(S):1913 2 013 0 0 9 19132013007 Scale —1 in = 400ft `? Ire 0 200 4€ 1 n r Q1 02/22/08 1 I' I # 21._k ______ 1 .,.. •..., .,, • ,, _% ,.www. rr w rte.* w '0 e c N i lr i , i t . T � Mf 1 STN UT S r .... �� i •°-: ; '' • t_ �— • t 1 J N LU rt. RIVERSIDE sr . � _ , * !� 41 L ; ♦ 4 i , ,,,,, ....,..; F ,� �'� t . 7, ,.. .. 1 t 4 3 t its, r e 1 :. �k ' , Z r r+ • _ t d a. gx 3 A or • � a � 5 ,. , ; , . ,�i. .• e � e l j. � _:� 1 r t �: " - .. . '. { � .� 1 k L .a r :1 f .. ter' (i • ..r J' r Jam- bT .._ f ir . 7775 _ • - r d�' r— 1 illa t .1 - 11 ra• J A p t l!: � li r h,�4 t i � _ . �i' • . i +all' i ' a N I CITY OF YAKIMA, WASHINGTON Scale -1 in = 400ft Information Services - GIS 200 400 FILE NO: CAO #2 -08; EC #11 -08 ' 1 APPLICANT: Yakima Greenway Foundation N Subject Property REQUEST: Construct pathway (approx 840 lineal ft) Yakima City Limits i\ii 1 along west and south of Reflection Pond. LOCATION: 206 South 18th Street [O '..;c,¢e,ti, 02/22/08 ' IivuGA # 'l, -1 1 CAO#2-08; EC#11-08 SR Suburban Res •al i R -1 Single-Family , ulential along 7;::: ounaton (approx 840 lineal ft) R 3 Multi - Family Residential ! f B -1 Professional Business . 206 South 18th Street - - west and south of Reflection Pond. ®B 2 Local Business ► -- mi ffB Historical Business •0. -�\ . 1 , SCC Small Convenience Center ME LCC Large Convenience Center \ 7 Subject Property MB CBD Central Business District f ,' CBDS CBD Support 1i 1, I ® City Limits 1 I M -1 Light Industrial `\i,ini-iN _ . MIN M-2 Heavy Industrial w w CC H a) I cn co 1 1 TNUT STREET 1 — - - - -- - - -- f f { H w 1 v) RIVERSIDE ST _- CZ cn 1.4 w 1 U J r _ ` a w V r -- — Op TA A - JyIAAl €SIREET_-- f -._.._ - - I 1 fP I I y lJ I - 1 E E± L f � I Q � cn 1 -' Q L . t g 1 i n1 Scale -tin = 400h 0 of YOGI City of Yakima, Washington e , .- /. 1 0 200 400 11111 f,. V ° G � �� 5 February 22 2008 e o n .. f a . � _ _ -- 1 - - - _ -- — , - _ - -- J Current �— — Yakima 1 Zoning N o Water &Sewer .. _._I [---- _ oo �te. t1r — i CURRENT ZONING l . N Water Lines SR Suburban Residential 1 1- R 1 Single-Family Residential F° N Sewer Lines w .. - LEI _RIVERSIDE 6T °,1 s. °i af' , • +�� : i ti ; gi R-2 Two-Family Residential o o Irrigation Main • jta zoo +, 1 2 0 0 N x1 ; A ":` '' II R-3 Multi- Family Residential ;, o I w i (li;i _ ;,,,;,,, B I Professional Business _ 3 , ,� _ ■ B-2 Local Business I 5 • 1 3.6 ;'il a o - i� ,,. HB Histo rical Business SCC Small Convenience Center 1 +';' _ __ ,' I ,a;i ji4: MI LCC Large Convenience Center A L€ s orir! — h1ApL €STREET 58 wt — — II CBD Central Business District \ \ i CBDS CBD Support CP 1 f �� -- I M 1 Light Industrial - I M-2 Heavy Industrial rn moo \ W Subject Site a — N ` 1 i 1 I FILE NO: CAO #2 -08; EC #71 -06 a , \ APPLICANT: Yakima Groan way Foundation I ,fr'fh..7 , , tn ' Future Er 4 Digital 1 Land Use s Orthophoto e p: M - Mosaic of Digital 1 .. r. Orthophotography 002 flown 08/01!2002 ,yf. 4 r • , N Subject Property . r _ = r Y-. 1 11 ,. • . ''..1--".., \ � FUTURE L LAND US E �_ , c" 1 _ w �ti`c, � � � ' � j Y .. � t H r {{ {` RIVERSIDE 6T — Low Dens Residential - p N i p , to , [ •. r �� 1 EC Medium Density Residential p t ¢ } ' : i �r ' fl w ll High Density Residential r . 1 r 1 9 till i �./ • . .. , ► P � It' a T 1: 4't = Professional Office 'jilt ' . �• till!! '1 r r . .... • , a t � 1 V III d U Y' 1 )knUkAIFO ‘_ Nei hborhood Commercial h Neighborhood r,.. itvv»w.�. . Large Convenience Center , ' - Arterial Commercial ,, 111 i " CITY OF YAKIMA — anApLE -St — CBD Core Commercial DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPEMENT __ ` A _ Industrial It ' • f r E ^ 1 I Urban Reserve �-� j ` _ 129 North Second Street _ F \ >t16, :., c ' t r Yakima, Washington 98901 -- - _ W \ Subject Site j ` Phone: (509)575 -6113 rc 4. w S T'i �I n i Fax: (509)575-6105 �� X • e t .�_ illk ' 1414 .:- - , ,, . s - *yr r l 0ft --1 n page Atlas: greenway One ° Created: February 22, 2008 1 Yakima Greenway Foundation 1 EXHIBIT LIST CHAPTER C Site Plan 1 �, y ..,7v b }} h Y 4S 1 N k "airy.. EXIiIB D�tDCL Ik EDA►Tz r �` "� t ., v . c. �.�� c,�' wt,,arip* >} � r�:ti �`'"�"'' " .` -? i <t�'s '4 + �.� d'f .." . C -1 Site Plan 2/19/08 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 , Yakima County Ci1S Page 1 of 1 1 Yakima County - Washington JPrint Mari' s Land Information Portal [Prim Maol Yakinin . 13492 Oil PT B 12404 7 )O ]• 1 1 N 37 1 N 39 2.5 84 277 L Y 4.�271� l� l ., 40 1 k ___..., ,„,. =kV-1 fewp 2 1 . . 2�9Q3 13006 �•. 4 13001 • 1 2i 2i929 '!CENO3053369 �- :� - . ∎ • _ ."s ,` � II d \ M ki �. i u' rte' I ii j Ss ,,t,e4 .a .1 r lr O A R` \ i 13009 a 3 \ Cri6LMERS GARDE , , 4.',":, s n rM ��r " . 1.80 x � , ; � -" ,- -x 4` TRACTS t �� ± s� � a 2 5 ,t x t 0.75.. 1 Crikk , , 24433 1 301 0 °t 24442 2 3Z /I 0.64 13007 ' i 0.53 p d' lk 10 . *Pa 1043 i ' ;' f ' ; . !; : SI • fti'VW.,A,...VAXIV.r.W/o4f,s'f:*:f 5 1M" ' !" g 3 f r y .; �y, a a. ' 'k.f C 3F it - \ 4 ,Yt ' 0 - GAR s 9 ` , ,F& , ` ', i } \ ` ` \31411 �iT� � 411 1 I 4 ' : h d Map Center: Range:1 9 Township:1 3 Section:20 1 .q.� k; N „, j t E1 . � a VVVVVU.YAKlMAP.COM 1 1 Cit Limits RECEIVED Yakima County GIS \' I 1; ,, = Sections 128 N 2nd Street � r Yakima, WA 98901 � FEB 1 2008 (509)574 -2990 s z "' k One Inch = 300 Feet , 4,,F4 , ,,.:, ,,-. :%- � * , ' CITY OF YA LL..' PLANNING DIV. Feet 200 400 • MAP AND PARCEL DATA ARE BELIEVED TO BE ACCURATE, BUT ACCURACY IS NOT GUARANTEED; THIS IS NOT A LEGAL Copyright (C) 2006 Yakima County 1 DOCUMENT AND SHOULD NOT BE SUBSTITUTED FOR A TITLE SEARCH, APPRAISAL, SURVEY, FLOODPLAIN OR ZONING Printed On' /?a08 9:24:36 AM VERIFICATION` }, , • INDEX 1 # c. http:// yakimap. com /servlet /com.esri.esrim ?name= YakGISH &Cmd =PrintMap &... ' 2/19/2008 1, -SHOP AREA- I EL EL 6 CHAINUNK FENCE I a �i o a I ASPHALT PATH SLIDING GATE---1 - / I DRAIN uD / 1 1 i - STORAGE - / � . ' ;° // o \ // / or - POND.. 6' CHAINUNK FENCE\ '\! %( f W 30' PLASTIC GRATE PIPE / , \I/ � / / �' 4 CHAIN �� X1 ; � A Ir o I .. , p ' LINK FENCE Iii! pp I 1 2 I I I I / :' : I I I 1 I l I { :,.- 1 I -� EXCAVATION LIMITS i s \ ; I 11116 i � 1 1 1 1 Ia ~ I 11 I 1 I 1 1 i ` II 1 N PROPOSED PATH EDGE OF GEOTEXTILE MEMBRANE I 1 1 1 1 il,�f. l lv� W i l i _� 1`a1' I Im/ III 1 EDGE OF WATER I 1 ?..'�I Iz , � 1 6 CHAINUNK FENCE /I I I I I P, .-POND - II 1 II - _ I IPI � �1 ';I I+ I 1 ! ' I I 1 I I .-POND - i 4, I A' � I 'kit!' 1I 1 ■ ■' -ti i I , 1 _I i --EDGE OF GEOTEx11LE MEMBRANE Mill I Ti I ;Ili It , 000 i i H:, 11 SECTION A -A i I S \�\� A' 1 1 I r 1 i <P, I1 I I ,1I 1 2 01 I..:l; I iPI 12 X 10 FISHING PIER N / A ;k �I t i 1J I�� .i.v: I? j -POND- ' 6 CHAINUNK FENCE \ A• ,/;.,,.. ' I 1 p � '\ , \ • EDGE OF GEOTEXOLE MEMBRANE \ �\\ *.- , 12, X 10 FISHING PIER ' ' , -PONDS - \� ,:_`.V -` �'1.� i °' g [[ jFTC _(F� �[y�Lamps 1 I , ..PON D,- :F Z ■ I 1 W tlEL — ELI 49 E \~� % 5.,. �..SAI 1 SIGN I , -0 1 ti a---- - a STEEL PADDLE STRUCTURE 9 \ _ n / '-----, ...„ .... . ° ,:tAt,. - - - :- --- _,:1 - < - — „V. --:.---- ---=, I- 77: ---- 7.-- 1 ,,, `` � � \ 1 6 iA1 NL1NK F�'ENCE — � 1 ', ,,.\ ) ,\....,„. • ' CHAINLINK FETICE � �����AKI �Wn ^ �y DO Vp 6 CHAINLINK FENCE — — / - � 1 , - WEEDS & BFIUSM- / / FND�T�P DIE DIRT BERM / // / g I / I / / // POND CONSTRUCT BRIDGE / PROPOSED NEW FENC , � �.� r / NIERPRETIVE SIGN ESTIMATED LOCATION OF / / � // �o �y ; ENGBdEE SURVEYING— PLANNNG GEOTEXTILE MEMBRANE / / �° ,,,/ `-‘4' L Y AK IMA , WASMNGTON 1 CHAINUNK FENCE / / j / (509 575 6990 I PAT HWAY COMPL ETION+ T.LB. i / O F SARGE HUBBARD PARK DAIS 1 - T4 - OS I j / O — PREPARED FOR JON NO. 07287 YAKIMA GREENWAY FOUNDATION SHEET "D DOG. 1 OF 1 INDEX 1 # fel m/ . • • • INII NM 111111 = IIIIIII MB IIIMI MI I • I • MI MO • • NATURE ---""".".."".. to • AREA 43 ��' .rJr AS II� �. :i ti k, I I ',1 . yr� yt • g�. PCATFORNt � aa ,.,;,;,-;:: ',1;-::- ..6-... f j / , PHASE /. ; ex rv r� •i c ,; �. atfie •'E II r J!1 //// � ".... k o 6z� ; r AN 0 j j' PEDEST-• , „it-4 �� ` % �{ r y � -.17 ° , '.' x . , ., / \ ' , i' '' . ,.. , /".'- ----'‘%! ' ' .,i":441■ , 1 ,./ T .,''!".. " . -----'''..?-- - ''' ..lif. , ,,.. '-',...** 1 e [aver ,gr . nrz +++ jiY' ,, l � i w - rEk * 4 . 'pe.I ..; 'S TAG E ; ?' 1 HAS tNG 1t_ PIER -H 1 �mYPfH - � S \ - ,. \J ' . PHASE II � - '7�^ • f / , . W r :.'— J AL. = - C 'POW int Z. • a s I VAULT _ I TG ! \ . ExISTaN \ QQ \STANDARDS � \ G N' � f. , , TE S AERE'Q. LIGHT`. ., ; \ 1WSTRCSt>4rs PPHASE -. ' At / � '' � I ` � C ,O __ - 5 O :.l= i= L ECTION ` I POND FOUNTAIN 1; ' R r © EXISTING IA ' P 1 XISTING PHASE 11 1. q BENCHES f REFLE CTION PONT; t t it EXISTING ALI v ATF aL'r . I � .. 'CIS G PIER r PAVED TOT LOT HIN ";-`. -EXISTING , PHASE II / PATH. WAIT L j PICNIC SPIEL E i / 1 �X:STIN, 'elk e x i TI NC, F c 70 r .' PHASE 11 --e, — _ . TRANSFORMER � _� r2Lf ,o iEt7 err oT! I, PARK , a, , tea —_ r. : U EXISTING rr ^� s A .. - r n - - BOUNDARY > u 1 COMMUNISM GREEN PATHWAYS, ROADS 1 x x x x • • y 16 I' EXISTING I 0 : ,\� a �. . .. ♦ i ENTRANCE „ • ,, , 1 D.C1 �i mine ■ XISTING SIGN lir ! ~ + �. N OB 1 PARK OFFICE FITNESS COURSE � iON ' PHASE II �'�� ) -- - - s� ' �r �Cf1 IT- 1RTH G9RFFT FxISTING' 'III 1 1 Yakima Greenwa y Foundation EXHIBIT LIST CHAPTER D Development Services Team (DST) EXHIBIT # DOCUMENT RATE ° . • D -1 Request for Comments 3/03/08 D -2 DST Members and Agencies Notified 3/03/08 D -3 Comments from Sandy Cox, Code Division 3/04/08 r D -4 Comments from Scott Schafer, Wastewater Division 3/10/08 1 D -5 Comments from Hasan Tahat, Yakima Regional Clean Air 3/14/08 Authority D -6 Comments from Hasan Tahat, Yakima Regional Clean Air 3/17/08 Authority D -7 Comments from Randy Meloy, Engineering Division 3/19/08 1 D -8 Comments from Mike Antijunti, Engineering Division 3/20/08 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 .1 CITY OF YAKIMA REQUEST FOR COMMENTS • ' I DEVELOPMENT SERVICES TEAM . March 3 2008 1 TO: City of Yakima Development Services Team FROM: Jeff Peters, Assistant Planner I SUBJECT: UAZO EC# 11 -08 and Critical Area Ordinance Review #2 -08. Yakima Greenway Foundation 1 ' PROPOSAL: 1. Critical Area Review and approval under Yakima Municipal Code 15.27.540 Pubic Agency I and Utility Exception to allow the construction of a 10 -foot wide X 840 foot long pathway within the required 25 foot protective buffer around the west and south sides of Reflection • Pond within Sarg Hubbard Park and the construction of two cantilevered fishing piers; and 2. Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) review of the proposed project in its entirety and any associated environmental impacts. 1 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 pathway and fishing piers would be allowed to encroach into the 25 -foot protective critical area wetland buffer of Reflection Pond to 1 within six feet of the ordinary high water mark as proposed by the applicant. LOCATION: 206 18 Street, Yakima, Washington . PARCEL NUMBER(S): 191320 -13009 & 13007 I 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 March 19, 2008 I 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 1 . information, please call me at (509) 575 - 6163. COMMENTS: 1 . — --,-_ : - -" 0c�°_� - ^; . ? #. ^ ; ..: t 1 ,f' % .% `-. 1 C niact Department / Agency - �"` DOC, • - K .r- INDEX I o_ r Peters, Jeff r From: Meloy, Randy Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2008 10:16 AM 1 To: Peters, Jeff Subject: UAZO EC# 11 -08 and Critical Area Ordinance Review #2 -08. Yakima Greenway Foundation 1 Jeff I am going to require them to install curb and gutter and to have several catch basins and a large bio- infiltration 1 pond. Just kidding. From a drainage standpoint, there is a band of vegetation between the proposed path and the pond that will help treat any runoff heading towards the pond. I spoke with Al Brown and Jeff Brantner about the path and the path will drain away from the pond, which will also help. The City owns the property on the other side of the pond so there are no worries about any runoff going off site. The Greenway has also been in contact with the Department 1 of Ecology about the path and they have DOE's buyoff. I do not have any concerns with stormwater runoff for this project. Randy Meloy, PE 1 Surface Water Engineer City of Yakima 509 576 -6606 rmeloy ©ci.yakima.wa.us 1 1 • 1 1 1 1 1 r DOC. INDEX 3/21/2008 # MAR i 7 CITY ®F `� ' • '' �f:; -i akie»a i#eg►iOnal Si So. Second St., Suite 1016, Yakima, WA 98901 Clean Air Authority Phone: (509) 834 -2050, Fax: (509) 834 -2060 http : / /www.co.yakima.wa.us /cleanair 1 March 14, 2008 1 Mr. Bruce Benson Acting Planning Manager I Planning Division 129 North Second Street, 2 Floor Yakima, WA 98901 I RE: UAZO EC #11 -08 and Critical Area Ordinance Review #2 -08 Yakima Greenway Foundation ' Dear Mr. Benson: - Thank you for providing the Yakima Regional Clean Air Authority (YRCAA) the opportunity to I Review and comment on the Yakima Greenway Foundation. UAZO EC #11 -08 and Critical Area Ordinance Review #2 -08 Following review, the YRCAA offers the following comments: 1. Contractors doing demolition, excavation, clearing, construction, or landscaping work must file a ' dust control plan with YRCAA, and; 2. Because the property is located within the Urban Growth Area of Yakima, no burning is allowed • on or off the site. Thank ou for the opportunity to connect with the city's continued support-in- protecting the air quality in Y pp Y Yakima County. r Best regard g �Il Hasan M. a :t, ' h.D. I Engineering, Planning & Monitoring Division Supervisor Cc: File r DOC. INDEX 1 = -- -_ • a ta6iegiOreal Six So. Second St., Suite 1016, Yakima, WA 98901 1 � Autho rity Phone: (509) 834 -2050, Fax: (509) 834 -2060 http ://www.co.yakima.wa.us /cleanair RECEIVED March 12, 2008 MAR 4 2008 CITY OF YAKIMA PLANNING DIV. Mr. Jeff Peters Assistant Planner Planning Division 129 North Second Street, 2 Floor Yakima, WA 98901 RE: UAZO EC #11 -08 and Critical Area Ordinance Review #2 -08 Yakima Greenway Foundation 1 Dear Mr. Peters: 1 Thank you for providing the Yakima Regional Clean Air Authority (YRCAA) the opportunity to Review and comment on the Yakima Greenway Foundation - UAZO EC #11 -08 and Critical Areal Ordinance Review #2 -08 Prior to starting the renovation work, the following is required: 1 1. Vegetation on the site which needs to be removed cannot be burned either on or off the site because the property is located within the Urban Growth Area for the City of Yakima; and 2. Contractors doing clearing, grading, construction, paving, or landscaping work must file a dust control plan with YRCAA. Thank ou for the opportunity to connect with the city's continued support-in-protecting the air uali Y PP tY tY quality in Yakima County. -t re. 411111 MP. Hasan . T. Ph.D. Engineering, Planning & Monitoring Division Supervisor Cc: File 1 1 1NDLX MAR 1 0 2008 CITY OF YAKIMA 1 = CITY OF Y DIV. PLANNING DIV. REQUEST FOR COMMENTS DEVELOPMENT SERVICES TEAM March 3, 2008 City of Yakima Development Services Team Jeff Peters, Assistant Planner . SUBJECT: UAZO EC# 11 -08 and Critical Area Ordinance. Review #2 -08. Yakima Greenway Foundation 1 PROPOSAL: 1. Critical Area Review and approval under Yakima Municipal Code 15.27.540 Pubic Agency ' and Utility Exception to allow the construction of a 10 -foot wide X 840 foot long pathway within the required 25 foot protective buffer around the west and south sides of Reflection Pond within Sarg Hubbard Park and the construction of two cantilevered fishing piers; and 1 2. Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) review of the proposed project in its entirety and any associated environmental impacts. 1 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 pathway and fishing piers would be allowed to encroach into the -foot protective critical area wetland buffer of Reflection Pond to within six feet of the ordinary high water mark as proposed by the applicant. LOCATION: 206 S. 18 Street, Yakima, Washington PARCEL NUMBER(S): 191320 -13009 & 13007 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 March 19, 2008 ' 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 1 information, please call me at (509) 575 - 6163. COMMENTS: 1 -17/C UASIi:tATE}'[_ vsvzS2.11 ToES A/0i NAUC ANY i■JATEI.JATrn coAKEndUS R- WlDTrJt, - fN1 1 Fb%P ? o3ELT 1 ` lev \ tat L &J4-7-6-:14.'ATIi? 1 Contact Department / Agency DOC. INDEX D- __ Peters, Jeff 1 From: Cox, Sandy Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2008 3:40 PM 1 To: Peters, Jeff • Subject: UAZO EC# 11 -08 and Critical Area Ordinance #2 -08 for Yakima Greenway Foundation 1 Building plans for fishing piers shall be designed to meet Section 1805.4 of the 2006 International Building Code by an engineer. Each plan page must be stamped and signed by that engineer along with structural calculations submitted with the plans. Our Engineering Division may wish to review plans for the walking surface.....Sandy Cox, Plans Examiner II, City of Yakima. 1 1 1 1 • 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3/6/2008 INDEX 1 DST Distribution List 1 Applicant yA•k) rovA C9 reek " - ✓ File Number. ii4z: EL'* lit- o8 cm) >f 2 4g (-.....--- / Date of DST Meeting: 3, 14— 0f Assigned Planner. Sat Pe4c .rS ' of Yakima Divisions and Yakima Court i Public Services I S"�,+�. �'� � t at'�t s ai«�'�,Y k ""bds "k 3,.]�f'$ 3t"h.��� , -��.' ,'�'�t` ,� %� ` s�' '�+' '�, � tip },`�'.`= r i"'.`r��{�.d'�. }a "' K '� pa h'r. " 3 + `,�" �• d ,A, `X '` ^` A,Vfy'( M;egi i� , ,p4 Tk `e ':. i�ablf - eo aii-P.z r+' .2c"e iNtii, a '14;: aa �. r`. Y,.� , ,,-4 , -„v44A Y �•cv� �. �+'b�:+F fic't+f�'+ � .��•L -^4r1� `l.h .. ;. 3-N rna4 CYf�l n � - i v"." ', ^ r�: Codes Joe Caruso , Traffic Ent • eerm; D o _ Joan avenp rt .;{' ! '(r v'*i**,� -j ^A . ' r 7 ^ 'vy °.- t'�t ' �f4e - A' ,�', ' t � . r ar° . o . a -,.,a.k..." :ti. • 4:4, aw.: f2'r'r;,`,�. ' .e�1 �.:.� �.- n.�'R...�x*n:nd .. "}� .�, � 5. �� �s �.��'scrw ..�7.4,KF �.r�l�'.�`�`�.���L� ". .... - `y „ . es Carolyn Belles : Parks and Recreation Denise Nichols ''gg��>>Cd _ 7p'�' ���',rrn''¢ k o@``' -:-.Du `*r .s:. ri v �, r ' * 3 x , yT '+�� Y { �"11a+���'�� F � -1 R'* -j',.1 1 t. y v e � L.R `;” -k U,'�. 0' r"F - t-em1+ „ ' #4i,r .T-wa.k �<r�+R,�? .`^t aai, +4, t-»t i _..r' im �t `R' L , Mike Anti uni Transit G Pira • • Ent eerm t 1 dry it. -i �.. . i ,`•� 1..�„ ,, i �. :a .t `i . .. - a s a i in ! itei e s d -ms' z ''t :t'�e' �' }!"Ut 5 � � e.w � , =.�1 �'� -r+�., �,da"�` ',.x"7'�'� �z," ^me+r- .+. �:a.;'§'?.MZ�e §�.� >, �� Stormwater En eer + y �� +y lic De •artment Greg Copeland t n 1 6 ». 4. . P It ill , Ld — Vs' ,,-,,,,,,,,- "•=t, , ...._;:f - . -- Yakima County Pub Svcs V m Redifer t a * s . ': " r i ' ; :. , s� S '��i " o ! i ie' ' y'r "'',l r,, t f t' Ji a� F • t f ,° 7. % _ z ?t u } i, 4 ;: • . - 4_. .r t- L...-�a ., ,...— r , ? n-, , , ...A .� ., a a m ' 1 F Other A encies � ,„...,,,,,4,...,,, A 1" „ ` ,1..* 1/4 t f t ! Y t r , , ,y�, `F � , , Y g f .-.., i ! .. C t f i �3 .' Ash f 7." ...- 5 . . , .� i,..›A �n n .. � . . ,.e.^A �t �w9 � t 't.Q nee � L .:.m.� 5 `°" #. I 22 Committee Mana ;er CDY _Sean Hawkins P.O Box 881, Yakima 98901 ft`- s -t*°u . ' _� ! i ur' ' ` }e ht.4tt. 4,.,, a n V : .g �, c.�.';` i r ...g... ,;a! ' e ,4 �a . " t o 24 Nob Hill Water Preston Shepherd 6111 Tieton Drive Y 98908 Y ' rf -' h 3 `"'"''f. w.a ?*.. s t " ,.. a , ,. .. ... r i ' "' �' ...� ' :4,,..;44 a'c c I c qt { i 4 , - . -,,,, 4k. f c ,L ,„ ,:. ., t ` "` " -S , c " 5 t T 3 �t . 4,i t r t 4..4.-4.- . .,+ 4. ,, .,.,.. 4.-.... ! - 4 . '' ` W A State De • a r tm ent o Eco1 ; Gw Clear 15 W Yakima Ave Ste #200, Yakima 98902 .. r i w U i r : u 'rP',r n ` ?'',ra -4a �, � r '� ' am . � w 4 r Vi a, - .. 28 Pacific Power and Li. ht Co P I Mace aulson 500 N. Ke R Yakima 98901 _ a k x, a s t, ° +� rte �ti r, • i � . at `n '' ,2,rr�' "a ���^ r L .+R e '' � , • - t4 W eV t..�....M. E6- ;S '` t . e :ii .a t- .T i 'r �'i-;. �?.,r�dit..*'i,f. 4 dt'?..- . ,"e. _ y 30 Cascade Natural Gas Co. Sh e i la Ross 701 South 1 °t A Yakima 98902 1 32 West Valle School District #208 Peter Ansingh 8902 Z R Yakima 98908 _ _ z _ Co un Clean Air Authori G Pruitt 6 South 2nd Street Rm1016, Yakima 98901 I � � a�"�*t t�i e� r" tW _- ��,» -., + ` :: �.:.i�.� °`.��.`��� ,std,.,: ¶__'. r'�',Z , �.� e ���ri�- ��",a.� .. lga 2. 4 . • - ;� Y �. fii " akima Greenwa Foundation rown 111 th Stre 9 0 Al B Sout a et, Yakima 98 1 �'�`+ y y ,�. E `�,' ''� .p ^ :a sEr t, ,v 4 Z , ! ' RW AY t : . �; . 3. �n k£ J F � t i , .Jt �,..1 +.� .,*4.-0 = : -h. ,t-. g l. j i i £ - , l M , s 1 R :1. R �.",4' !i'w4.:..,. �..d� ! im 38 Yakima oun 911 Wayne Wantland YPD „- n pF,er '6S a{ M.,`�� 4 Vie: a':$,ai it�ss $_ ,, . , t � y • t, e t rt Z ° ; De • arlment of Wildlife 1701 South 24 Ave, Yakuna 98902 I r � -`sv yj� �Tritl = _ •+'S,m .'�.�-.:�J .' E v- ;. i' b • : ' SiL a:•, .t .n • "A;" - .:. - -Madr ._° 4 .d, Union +4 .`'�,°... 't$:ef.. r a-� 42 . WSDOT (De . t of Trans • . ortation) Salah Al Tamimi 2809 Rudkin Rd, Union Ga • 98903 � +: t '!.;�i 4 tr .. ^ 2 .. _..ta, ea- - �'- ` . 9 k : - �t•'.v , ,-, ... ,., se _ 'r r •... v c t , E ; _ >F - „ �' 44 B Yakima Indian Nation ill c P.O. Box 151 To .. enis 98948 Beckley Bo r „' _ 9 t. { 4 i Ev:k .ti .., , y'X4e-,t ,a.,- t '.. ' .�. tt .1 : n' _ r.. • ' ....a°,.,.:., 46 Trolleys Paul Edmondson 313 North 3� Street, Yakuna 98901 s f ..��,**,,,�33 « ,.: . .�, rt , ..�. „,,, , kx t : 1 �� ? �� , y . a a Aa � aw- s 4 ° y W sue.. t J '4 �", „' ' ,t w; iv, ' F� @1 It ? d ` ? � � i t 1! !, I _ -. c. ` _.¢ " y �r fit @ — 1 '— ». ,Fi, ' I .r:a '. __.,.f ?, r , 0, _ . gy _ - n�� _ , ? SL: 48 WSDOT, Aviation Division John Shambaugh 3704 172nd St NE Ste #K -2, Arlington WA 9S223 :� M re s a� 4: 4';'... , " -1 . 4- `° f ,: t ,� ° L. ii- s .., w' � r 4 i� F � ; , .; a, F ' •� s E r L .n t a b ��`e� :, • DO';, Updated as of 2/22/08 INDEX I \Upollo\ \jpeterslDST Packets Distribution List_ template.doc # ?-1 1 CITY OF YAKIMA REQUEST FOR COMMENTS DEVELOPMENT SERVICES TEAM March 3, 2008 TO: City of Yakima Development Services Team 1 FROM: Jeff Peters, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: UAZO EC# 11 -08 and Critical Area Ordinance Review #2 -08. Yakima Greenway Foundation PROPOSAL: 1. Critical Area Review and approval under Yakima Municipal Code 15.27.540 Pubic Agency and Utility Exception to allow the construction of a 10 -foot wide X 840 foot long pathway 1 within the required 25 foot protective buffer around the west and south sides of Reflection Pond within Sarg Hubbard Park and the construction of two cantilevered fishing piers; and 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 pathway and fishing piers would be allowed to encroach into the 25 -foot protective critical area wetland buffer of Reflection Pond to within six feet of the ordinary high water mark as proposed by the applicant. LOCATION: 206 S. 18 Street, Yakima, Washington PARCEL NUMBER(S): 191320 -13009 & 13007 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 March 19, 2008 at 9:30 a.m. As always; should you have comments, but find you are unable to attend please submit your 1 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. 1 COMMENTS: 1 1 1 Contact Department / A e ' 1 INDEX 1 1 Yakima Greenway Foundation EXHIBIT LIST CHAPTER E 1 SEPA Review ' EXHIBIT # DOCUMENT , � u E -1 SEPA Check List and Addendum to SEPA Checklist 2/19/08 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 , REQUIRED ATTACHMENT: I - ° Y- �'`''� RECEIVED t•• .. ... ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST l r 31 STATE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT (SEPA) FEB 1 9 2008 (AS TAKEN FROM WAC 197 -11 -960) CITY OF YAKIMA J4 '1,1). ti�4F .. o�nreo . ' j:7 PLANNING DIV. " Mr --1 i I CHAPTER 6.88, YAKIMA MUNICIPAL CODE (YMC) -e we ,p+ cx. °° �, 'N,k�,:: tr 'i r ,r3ID'�x'r 'b+'y `a' "S y�, "�'' PU RPO,SE FL "HEC *7 i °' .,i 3 ' s ' s i � .�' z�, �x1 � . 'r rs�, a i `*i r. � r.tti _ � � �� ,#u4#Y?.; o* , u teams �'$n,. , �,eb. ,n �?i� �, ,. & . �,���, The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), chapter 43.2 IC RCW, requires all governmental agencies to consider the I 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 I avoid impacts from the proposal, if it can be done) and to help the agency decide whether an EIS is required. / �x.]�� �i i ,. � �� y ,� � _ , yg� : ir r � ., y � up « 4 �t '� ., ,��+. y,, .c b, ux+ fit § .A% ,gyp This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Governmental I 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. I 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 I 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 I information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact. " U • SE: O t T+. lO PI C JE� �'.R `'" i eer, `�.` .' �` � , v �« '' R« Complete this checklist for non - project proposals, even though questions may be answered "does not apply." IN I 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 proposal, "proposer," and "affected geographic area," respectively. yy bx� � v 3 A IF q.B i rrJ !t :� a .�i Fb '� �/`p�` � '�`T�d: .NL � � K� E '�'A"° �� � � x 1 , . • • :10,01 Ai;l ,F NF,; ] a#40 T a ample ,ode .1, . P16 ) � „ s � « f W ��. >.� i. NAME OF PROPOSED PROJECT (if applicablel Zirkle Fruit Pathway I NAME & PHONE Greenwav Foundation /City 2. APPLICANTS Yakima Green v Fou / y of Yakima (509)453 -8280 1 3. APPLICANT'S ADDRESS 111 S, lath St /129 N. Ind St Yakima, WA 96901 I 4. CONTACT PERSON & PHONE Al Brown (509) 453 - 8280 5. AGENCY REQUESTING CHECKLIST City of Yakima , I 6. DATE THE CHECKLIST WAS PREPARED 1 7. PROPOSED TIMING OR SCHEDULE (including phasing, if applicable) Spring 2008 construction DOC` 1 Revised 8 -04 INULX page 1 of 10 1 • 8ACKGROLND QUESTIONS iAttach if Lengthy) I Do you have am. plans for future additions. expansion. or further acti\it,; related to or •,:onnected with this proposal" 1 [f yes. explain. No • • 1 2 List any en.ironrnental tnr nnation you know, about that has been prepared, or will be prepared. directly related to this proposal 1 Wetlands Delineation /Biological Report • • • 1 • • 3 Do you know whether applications are endin for governmental approvals of other pending p = pp o her prop osals directly affecting property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. No 1 1 4 List any go' ernment approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. 1 .;ity of Yakima Shoreline Buffer Reduction - Critical Area Review Yakima Clean Air Authority - Construction Dust Abatement SEPA Review 1 • . 5 Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. 1 • • There are se\eral 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.) Construction of approximately 840 lineal feet of 10' wide pathway along the west and south side of Reflection Pond as planned in the 1986 Sarg Hubbard Park plan. Project includes two (2) fishing piers and a small bridge structure. Plan includes additional fencing to protect a wetlands south of project site, installation of interpretive signage and native vegetation plantings to stabilize the bank. In addition, to allow the pathway to continue at its originally planned.location the Yakima Greenway is utilizing the City of Yakima's CAO Public Agency utility exception to allow placement of the path within 6 feet. (See Public Agency & Utility Exception Request) 1 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. Ha proposal would occur o. .r a - range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description. site plan, \.icinity 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. 1 Location is the southwest corner of Sarg Hubbard Park, specifically the west and sot'?:h sides of Reflection Pond. The park is located on South 18th Street, Yakima Wsi.: ton, tax parcel numbers 19132013009 and 19132013007. 1 DOG. INDEX page 2 t o, 1 -; 3,?� 1 ' 1. c' N 4 { k"- ik'i4� 'N�CkY@ f.> '� F 1 ..1 1 vtao.NMENTAT ttott ,tsoo b �oaapleted l j�.>r erg taws y v; >,; L �r - as , om I Space Reserved for I. Earth Agency oxvt tottx I a. General description of the site (✓ one): CITY OF � EC ❑ flat ❑ rolling ❑ hilly © steep slopes •❑ mountainous FEB 1 2008 ❑ other ' N/A I . b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? PLANNING DIV I 60% • 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. Sand, Gravel and Rock fill d. Are t here surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If • • so, describe. 1 N/A e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading I proposed. Indicate s of fill. . . Grading will occur to construct pathway bed. It is anticipated . that no material will be removed from the site. Gravel will be I imported to form base for asphalt pathway. f. Could erosion•occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. . • 1 w ill . Erosion could occur during construction. A debris /erosion fence be installed per BMP's. g. About what percent of the site will be covered. with impervious surfaces after project • 1 construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? • Less than 10% ' h Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or.other impacts to the earth, if any: • Installation of construction debris fence. Upon completion, I planting of native -type vegetation to stablize slopes. 2. Air • I 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. Dust during construction. None when completed. b. Are there any off -site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, • 1 generally describe. • No DOC. .1 c.. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: INDEX B1` Control dust during construction by use of water. # .,J 1 page 3 of I 0 f Space Reserved or 3. Water Agency Comments RECEIVED 1 a. Surface: FEB 1 9 2008 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, CITY of YA describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows PLANNING DI V. into. Yes, Class III Wetland based upon Wetland Biology Report as attached. 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. Yes, see attached plans 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 1 No 4. Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general 1 description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No 1 5. Does the proposal lie within a 100 -year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. No 6. Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. N/A 1 b. Ground: 1. Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give 1 general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No 1 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. No c. Water Runoff (including storm water): 1 1. Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and DOG disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this INDEX water flow into other waters? If so, describe. E -( page 4 of I 0 1 o Reserved 2. Could waste materials enter ground or surface . ace waters? It so, g enerally describe. Space Res e d for Agency Comments No d. .Proposed measures to reduce or control surface. around, and runoff water impacts, if RECE ito I any: FEB 1 9 2000 NO CITY OF I t. Plants: PLANNING Div. I a Check (✓) types of vegetation found on the site: deciduous tree: ❑ alder ❑ maple ' ❑ aspen © other Cottonwood, Pacific, Willow evergreen green: ❑ fir • ❑ cedar ❑ pine ❑ other ❑ shrubs 1 jgrass . • ❑ pasture crop or grain . • wet soil plants: © cattail ❑ buttercup ❑ bullrush ❑ skunk cabbage 1 El other w ater plants: ❑ water lily ❑ eelgrass ❑ milfoil ❑ other • other types of vegetation: reed canarygrass, willowherb I b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Cheat Grass I c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. Columbia Milk - Vetch, Clustered Lady.'s Slipper, Basalt Daisy, Kalm's I Lobelia, Hoover's Desert - Parsley, Pale Blue -Eyed Grass and Hoover's Tau � ch r o p osed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: I Revegetation with native specis. I 5. Animals: a. Check ( ) any ob served ✓) an birds and animals which have been obse on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: • 1) birds: ® hawk ® heron ® eagle ® songbirds ❑ other I 2) mammals: © deer ❑ bear ❑ elk © beaver ❑ other I 3) fish: ❑ bass ❑ salmon ® trout ❑ herring ❑ shellfish ❑ other I not in pond b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site, None Known. There are a number of endangered or threatened species in the Upper . I Yakima Valley: Bald Eagle, Ferruginous Hawk, Golden Eagle, Great Blue Heron, Prairie Falcon .and. Ring- DJ Snake and varieties of salmon, steelhead. c. Is t e site part o a migration rote. it so, exp atn. Pond is in migration route for geese. I DOG. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: INDEX Install fence and interpretative signage to secure and educate at # I South Pond, see plans . - I paae 5 of 10 • 6. Energy and Natural Resources Space Reserved for Agency Comments a. What kinds of ener y (electric. natural gas, oil, wood stove. solar) will be used to meet RECEIVED the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. • FEB 1 9 2008 1 None CITY of YAK,. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent propenies? If so, PLANNING A 1l M 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 En ironmental H a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk 1 of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous Waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. Yes 1 1. Describe special emergency services that might be required. • None 1 2. Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: The verticle liner at the site of a remediated haz —tox spill will be • preserved and public exposure to possible hydro — carbos will be reduced or $liiged subject to WDOE close —out order. ' 1. What types of noise exist in the area, which may affect your project (for example: 1 traffic, equipment, operation, other)? • • None 2. What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short -term or a long -term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. 1 None. • 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? It is a "Brown Field" • b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. No • c. Describe any structures on the site. Asphalt lot and fence d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? DOG. 1 No INDEX e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? SR Page 6 of I0 1 f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? Space Reserved for Low density residential Agency Comments I g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? RECEIVE ) I h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so specify. FEB 1 9 ZOf CITY OF y • Yes, Class 3 Wetlands AKIfidA 1 i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? PLANNING D 0 j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? I 0 k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any . I N/A I. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: I Yakima City Parks Plan indentifies this area as a community park. Proposal is consistant with that plan. 9. Housing I a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low- income housing. I 0 b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low - income housing. I 0 c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: I 0 • 10. Aesthetics , a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structures, not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building materials proposed? 1 Ground level b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? I 0 c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: None • I 1 1. Light and Glare I a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? No lights I b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? No I c. What existing off -site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? DOG: None INDEX d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: # —. I None page 7 of 10 12. Recreation Space Reserved for Agency Comments a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? RECEIVED 1 Sarg Hubbard Park b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. FEB 1 9 7008 No CITY OF YAKIMA c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation PLANNING DIV. opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: Pathway will reduce impact on wetland by the use of shoreline by humans. 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. None known b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or 1 cultural important known to be on or next to the site. None known - 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 - 1 the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. 18th Street b. Is site currently serviced by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? 400 feet to nearest transit stop 1 c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? 1 None - None d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or 1 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. 1 No f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If 1 known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. None DEC. g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: INDEX None 1r ----- page 8 of 1 0 I 1 15. Public Services Space Reserved for Agency DII Commen I a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire RECEIVED protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe: 1 No EE8 1 MI' OF YAK figA pd.�4h�1+ V. I 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. 1 None 1 16. Utilities a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse 1 service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other. None ' 1 b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, I and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity, which might be needed. None 1 1 C .8101.1TA >�lR 'fi'o adilipleted iViii , suite nt , . t s ,44i, y ,- f ; , 15.a_ 444 , * ; �.� . The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on I them to make its decision. Signature �, Q Date Submitted: Z (e) 1 Itii„ l �� , � . I 0 R 0 ' ` t04 , T $; o befiamplited bt h i pi'C�'1~ ` 4 a 1 ri DO Yl i151!� Z tirirtrw.iil�, oi4; � ,: ' s $. iR ' , i i' k a ,0�5� u I 1 4; a� ,. � .; Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in conjunction with the list of the elements of the environment. 1 When answering these questions, be aware of the extent the proposal, or the types of activities likely to result from the proposal, would affect the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate than if the •roposal were not implemented. � �.5- r '!*Y4 v gs'¢gi '. ,,t , ' a , `�,'` xi+�': , „t'y?- #'itu`a3,, r ,. � r , -� �'L�M�� .�F� �, ..; 9 � �����,_ �i-e�;l4� i, . :�. �`bL�. :.. '� y .k, w :"� °; ' .nx �.7',r , � � � .. �ai4'Ga)!'i_ :..#Lim= �' s_ .f. '� 5 a ,.; ll 1.. w the ro osal be likel to increase dischar e to water; emissions to air• S ace Reserved for How would proposal likely g p production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise? Agency Comments 1 DOG. INDEX I _ page 9 of I 0 Space Reserved for Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: Agency Comments RECEIV 2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life? FEB 1 9 2008 CITY op Yq Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are: ivMINCa D l y " • 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: 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: 1 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services 1 and utilities? 1 Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are: 1 7. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. • 1 • 1 DO - INDEX 1 page 10 of 10 ` 1 ' Addendum to SEPA checklist; Yakima Greenway Foundation, Zirkle Fruit Pathway, Sarg Hubbard Park City of Yakima Code 15.27.540 Public Agency and Utility Exception The Yakima Greenway Foundation is requesting that the City of Yakima exercise provisions of the above referenced code to reduce the required buffer area on the west and south side of Reflection Pond, Sarg Hubbard Park for the purposes of constructing approximately 840 lineal feet of pathway as originally planned in the master plan for this park. The plan also includes the construction of two cantilevered fishing piers and a small bridge over the outlet to the pond to connect with existing pathway apron. The underlying property is owned by the City of Yakima. Historically, this property and the location of the pathway have been heavily and negatively impacted by human actions for many years. It is the site of a man-made ' excavation that resulted in the pond itself. Shortly after construction of the pond, an oil slick was noted on the pond. Investigation revealed that oil was entering the ground water from an asphalt batch plant to the immediate west and south. In late 2007, Washington State Department of Ecology issued a close out order on the remediation of the spill with some stipulations. The property and shoreline essentially became a Brownfield with little or no development potential. While the area has been fenced to protect the public from residual contaminants and protect mitigation structures that are in place, the public has repeatedly circumvented attempts to prohibit access. The over o steepened bank has been eroded by random access. There have been limited amounts of vegetation destruction caused by the access. At one place, erosion has exposed the buried containment barrier. Ecology has tentatively approved a plan to place a cap over the containment barrier in the form of a pathway, thus assuring that the previously installed mitigation measure is 11 preserved. The containment barrier is, in places, within 6 feet of the ordinary high water mark. The plan, as submitted, also calls for additional fencing to protect a wetland that lies south of the proposed site and the installation of interpretive signage to educate the people about the value of the wetlands. Such fence will be armored by the inclusion of 1111 appurtenances designed to keep people from going over the fence. The proposal reduces existing human impact on the critical area by channeling people to a pathway designed to protect the hydro - carbon mitigation structure from erosion or destruction. If the property is left in its current state, erosion will continue to occur and the structure will be negatively impacted. Additionally, if the property is left in its current state, degradation of the critical area will continue due to unchannelized and unwanted use by random human access. r E - I 1 The Greenway has previously installed control fencing, only to see it cut, dug under or otherwise circumvented by unwanted human access. The pond is heavily used by the public and is stocked with trout several times a ear b Y Y the Department of Fish and Wildlife and is designated as a juvenile/handicapped fishing pond. 1 The Washington State Resource guide, document ECY #97 -608 (revised March 2006), produced in a cooperative effort of the Washington State Department of Ecology, 1 Washington State Community Trade and Economic Development and Region 10 of the United States Environmental Protection Agency states "Brownfields cleanup and reuse (emphasis added) are priorities for the State of Washington and USEPA." This project 1 meets that priority by providing a public use of a Brownfield while at the same time, reducing continuing impacts by human action to the shoreline. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 �� D) O INDEX 1 1 Yakima Greenway Foundation 1 EXHIBIT LIST CHAPTER F Application 1 • EXHIBIT DOCUMENT rDATE -�.� 'c. �.� .. .,.•. .. � .. :. �i ... :. ,., .. ._ .. ,. -. ...,+ .. ..�. Yid .. _.. 1 1 ^* F -1 JARPA Application 2/19/08 1 F -2 Wetland Biology Report 2/19/08 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I - RECEIVED EIVED 1 FEB 19 2008 WETLAND BIOLOGY REPORT CITY OF YG PLANNING DIV. I Yak Greenway Foundation • Barg Hubbard Park Trail Expansion Project Yak Wash �Y 15 `mac s M it , z •r Y+ , ' r s { T .,�...„ r , v ',,-.:::5,',.7,-,,,,•!.. r Ay S". : : _ „-. �." `��'� -�' a Y'� : "}I. � r�. ��5. -`t '�r' a � i 1-9 - L ,= # �' ; K 4 i.-g � 4 ` ,...�.. ..".".7447- A ; ` '�t' i � d L • „Vi'.. a • �.Y r .. . ' nSb A -!: . ,. -> � K'"- ` ;1 fC F f .'iaa.c "tr • . ' 3 i t "'S S ,£x 7... R -, ry 'c � S.^ n 1 y k i Sr..]:,-." � "�' � m� .��* .�- �'3',t r "'- 5� �r' � � x' c - i°"` �.+1�' sTr� Y , 'I , 2it.. .X. n- ' ( . - .^ -.v tit r9 :, , a. T.. a a ti r r as 7 wit ' r ? r ?e i x '',1. - . i Al.: s ",". -� � ,4 *.t'4"'' r„'_ s-.' y: r �� aw Hr - rr u y �„a� , ..: Yg� 1 �' =� �' ,���� �k , l - sae &' §� �' �' - `��t� � • `+27'*�. a: �. "� ` �Y ; � '. i - ; i C ; ''74^79='--.71-:' ; r s AA `fi t r ^1.`' 411, ' �. ;.0 :4 • '�� �.�`a` �vp a ry i4 g c",.:,•7 . V ' � 3" ,e . , x,q .P - ., T rr.. V. r F'r ` i ti3` � 1 - s L�.• a dx +,�9, + '. 'sr s. v t y� .a .. SSA .�. «� A ' aysr< 4 ." w 't { F id s � -. � 7 ti r • ^�' y .v r 4 ...f- • _ 1 e ..;44, 4, ,/,,,,;1,1- L " A ',. i .- .-,,N f "h. /‘ Ik •C i s , '? \ r , t� .. a � Y •., . 0 ., •• t •.,y s • �. '` t ' - §'•'6# ti » - t ". 5 g 'a + , 7,1 S t ' t ..'° M k , gad : -, - - K ' , t $ q ' 5 - x.751 {na�r •�a S.. �`f� �s•, 5 s-" a s ?.s r u 4 �...- 1 ^� 4 --.� 0. = 1 • y "L • t s y'. ; 1 __ `. S., 4 2 1.. 3 1 ,-, ti !d.3 1, > . . A - t. .-. S '! -'t �- np ].e'�. y .. r^ c ate, q - - , .2 Y ''',..V.`-^:".• 4 t om '.' , t r • "ro . d c ' . i F '4 1-, SI , . } .. y� _ 1,2.... om � - e . 4 1 ( 5 \ s. s 3 t 1 •7 .i 1 k " `J L nt �.. y • ' ' ' • x ■ r..,;; a 1 - ti -c i +'^i•«Eil .„ ryt� •a. r .., ,,n �,t - r *,t < • 4 , `£7• s _ '; ' til r '4� h�-r ,.r xz5�.�45 'Y "-• ` r- :i° 4 �' • d� °' - _ t ` t r . t '", f . t, i '- t f 4 , -- t • r ftf t E s - • _.- ".124" ; Prepared by: i Thomas Environmental Services 5708 W. Walnut Street #1 I Yakima, WA 98908 (509) 965 -1547 February 2008 - I DO C. • INDEX - 1- 1 # r -2 •1 Table of Contents Table of Contents ...2 INTRODUCTION 3 PROJECT INFORMATION 3 I Location 3 Description 3 EXISTING CONDITIONS 3 Land Use 3 Geology and Topography 3 Soils 4 1 Vegetation 4 METHODS 4 Wetland Identification, Delineation, and Classification 4 RESULTS 5 Wetlands and Buffers 5 1 Wetland Functions and Values 5 Buffers 6 IMPACTS 6 RECOMMENDATIONS 6 REFERENCES 7 1 Appendix A — Site Map Appendix B — Delineation Form Appendix C - Rating Form Appendix D — Photos 1 1 1 1 1 1 D0C• INDEX 2 # E -Z ' RECEIVED FEB 1 9 2008 CITY OF YAKIMA INTRODUCTION PLANNING DIV. The Yakima Greenway Foundation proposes to expand its existing system of trails within Sarg Hubbard Park in Yakima, Washington. The project will add 1400 feet of trail around a pond in the southwest comer of the park. The purpose of this report is to identify wetlands within or near the project to assist with avoidance or minimization of impacts to wetlands during project construction. Should avoidance and /or minimization not be possible, this report provides data necessary to apply for environmental permits and to address mitigation requirements. . PROJECT INFORMATION I Location • The project is located in the city of Yakima in Yakima County, Washington. The specific location is south of Terrace Heights drive, and between Interstate 82 and the Yakima River. The project i is in the Lower Yakima (36) Water Resource Inventory Area (WRIA) and in Section 19 of Township 12N, Range 18E WM (tax parcel # 19122013007). Description The primary goal of this project is to expand recreational access in Sarg Hubbard Park. This . project goal will be achieved with the following objectives: • Install a paved trail approximately 10 feet wide and 1400 feet long where none currently exists along the south and west edges of the pond. 1 , • Install dense woody vegetation between the pond and the trail in areas where vegetation is sparse or non - existent. The trail and vegetated areas would be maintained in perpetuity by the trail maintenance staff for the Yakima Greenway. EXISTING CONDITIONS ' The purpose of this section is to describe baseline conditions of the environment within the study area including information on land use, local geology, topography, soils, vegetation, and aquatic resources. The study area includes the project vicinity and all adjacent areas within range of potential impacts. Land Use 1 Land use near the study area is primarily recreational and industrial. Sarg Hubbard Park and the associated pond are utilized for various recreational purposes including, bird watching, 1 fishing bicycle riding, and educational /community events such as the Yakima Greenway Rivers Festival. Southwest of the study area is a large parking lot and a commercial cement operation. The parking lot is paved within 50 feet of the pond and a chain -link fence separates the pond area from the parking lot and industrial property. Geology and Topography 0 Geologically, the area is located in the Yakima Fold Belt, which consists of a series of anticlinal 1 ridges and synclinal valleys covering approximately 3.5 million acres in the western Columbia Basin. The ridges are composed of Yakima Basalt, which comprises the higher elevations, and the Ellensburg formation, which is composed of older siltstone, sandstone, claystone and 1 DOC. INDEX _ 3 _ 1 # � 2 conglomerate. Pleistocene age floodplain and alluvial fan deposits underlie the valley floor. 1 Holocene age silt, sand and gravel alluvium from the Yakima River and loess consisting of windblown silts overlay the Pleistocene flood deposits in portions of the valley (Alt & Hyndman 1984). 1 Soils Natural Resources Conservation Service soil survey data identifies the Weirman Series throughout the project area, which are typically found on low terraces and floodplains (USDA 1985). The soils in this series are somewhat excessively drained and relatively deep, and were formed in alluvium. Effective rooting depth of plants is usually limited by a seasonally high water table that is at a depth of 36 to 60 inches from April to November. Vegetation . The plant community in the site is fairly consistent throughout. The upland areas consist 1 - primarily of black cottonwood, black locust, and cheat grass. The wetland areas consist of reed- canary grass, willows, cattails, and some willowherb. Aquatic Resources �. The floodplain has a variable groundwater table caused by hyporheic flow from the Yakima River through cobble substrate. The floodplain undulates topographically due to earth moving activities associated with historic flood events and flood management. East of the study area, a large berm separates the pond from the Yakima River, although the pond is likely within the hyphoreic zone of the river. METHODS The methods used for delineating, classifying, and rating the wetlands in the project area are 1 consistent with the requirements of the City of Yakima. Wetland Identification, Delineation, and Classification Wetlands were delineated using the Routine Determination Method outlined in the Washington State Wetland Identification and Delineation Manual (Ecology 1997). Wetlands were then classified according to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) classification system (Cowardin et al. 1979). The wetland adjacent to the project area was delineated and classified. In general, wetland delineation consisted of two main tasks: (1) assessing vegetation, soil, and hydrologic characteristics to identify areas meeting the wetland identification criteria, (2) marking wetland boundaries. The City of Yakima requires use of the Washington State Wetland Rating System for Eastern Washington, developed by the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology, 2004) for characterizing wetlands. This system places wetlands into four hierarchical categories based on specific attributes such as rarity, sensitivity to disturbance, functions, and the developer's ability to replace them. It incorporates consideration of the wetland hydrologic and geomorphic conditions into the system by assigning wetlands a hydrogeomorphic classification. This allows for a more 'accurate rating of how well the wetland functions based on its position in the landscape, water source, and the flow and fluctuation of the water once in the wetland. The Ecology classification hierarchy ranges Category I wetlands, which exhibit outstanding 1 features to Category IV wetlands, which have the lowest levels of function and are often heavily disturbed (Hruby 2004). 1 DOC. 1 INDEX - 4 - # RESULTS Wetlands and Buffers 1 The site was evaluated for the presence of wetlands in September 2007. One wetland was identified in the project area adjacent to the pond (see site map appendix A). The wetland is essentially the vegetated fringe of the large pond in the southwest corner of the park. The wetland contains forest, shrub, and emergent plant communities, and generally provides low levels of biological, chemical, and physical functions. Appendix C contains field delineation forms for the wetland. A detailed description of the wetland is provided in this section. • Sarg- Hubbard Park Pond- Fringe Wetland This wetland is an "L" shaped feature along the west and south edges of the pond. The pond is only 1 -2 acres in size so the wetland does not meet the criteria for Lake -Fringe according to the • Ecology Wetland Rating System (Ecology 2004). Therefore it is treated as a Depressional wetland while functioning like a Lake- Fringe wetland. Soils Soils analysis was difficult on the project site due to the cobbly and rocky substrate. The pond is an excavated area probably resulting from mining operations for fill material when Interstate 82 was constructed to the west of the site. The soils did not match the mapped soil unit but does support a hydrophytic plant community and is saturated sufficiently throughout the year. to facilitate the development of distinct hydric characteristics. The soil within,the wetland area did• show faint redoximorphic features in some areas and a positive wetland determination was 1 - made due to the hydrology and vegetation and the intermittent presence of redox concentrations and a low matrix chroma. Detailed soil descriptions are available in the attached data sheets (appendix C). Hydrology The wetland exhibited saturation of soils within 12 inches of the surface at the time the study was done in late September. These findings demonstrate that the area has sufficient saturation ' during the growing season to satisfy the wetland hydrology criterion. Vegetation The dominant tree in the wetland is pacific willow, coyote willow, and reed canarygrass. Cattails, and willowherb were also present. Because the wetland indicator status of these • species are all facultative or wetter, the hydrophytic plant criterion is met. Wetland HGM Cowardin Ecology City of Yakima Classification Classification Rating Required Buffer Sarg- Hubbard Park Depressional Palustrine Emergent 111 '25 feet P Pond Fringe Wetland alustnne Scrub -Shrub Wetland Functions and Values • Following the guidance provided in Wet /ands in Washington State — A Synthesis of the Science t (Ecology 2005), also known as "best available science," wetland functions can be divided into three general areas: Water quality, hydrologic, and habitat functions. The function of this wetland is evaluated generally under these three areas. 1 Water Quality The pond in the project area performs water quality functions at low to moderate levels overall: The main function that this wetland has the opportunity to provide which contributes to water quality is sediment removal. Hydrologic The wetland offers a low level of hydrologic function. The wetland has the opportunity to DOC. INDEX ' -5,- # �,2 provide flood flow alteration at moderate to high levels based on its size connection to similar 1 ponds to the south, which offer flood relief the Yakima River. Habitat The wetland provides general habitat suitability and native plant richness at some level. Also, the wetland provides bird and small mammal habitat because of the vegetation types and moderate interspersion of habitat types. Parking is available at the site, which makes it valuable for educational opportunities. The uniqueness and heritage value of the site is low. The following table provides a summary of the wetlands function. The quantitative values presented here were drawn from the wetland rating forms (Appendix C). Functions Provided by Wetlands Functions (Maximum Score) • Wetland Water Quality Hydrologic Habitat Total (32) (32) (36) (100) Depressional 12 0 24 36 Buffers 1 In general, the buffer in the study area functions poorly. Habitat for small mammals and migratory songbirds is available in the buffer due to the presence of sapling and mature trees such as cottonwoods and black locust. However, the existing trees and shrubs provide little screening from human disturbance, which has severely impacted the vegetation in the wetland. IMPACTS ! The project, as proposed, will not impact the wetland. There may be up to 1/3 acre of permanent impacts within the wetland buffer however this will be mitigated through installation of native vegetation between the proposed trail and the pond, which will improve the overall function of the buffer beyond the function that it currently provides. RECOMMENDATIONS To avoid and minimize impacts to wetlands, vegetation, streams, and fish and wildlife habitat, the following measures are recommended: 1. Use of silt fence adjacent to the pond during construction to avoid release of sediment and construction waste into the pond. 2. Avoid wetlands and their associated buffers wherever practicable. 3. Avoid equipment and material from entering the river as much as practicable during any construction activities. 4. Install native vegetation between the new paved trail and the pond in order to stabilize the bank and protect the wetland from sedimentation through erosion. 5. Use high visibility fence to mark the limits of disturbance and to protect sensitive areas during construction. DOC. INDEX - 6 - # e -2 il 1 1 • 1 REFERENCES Alt, D.D. and D.W. Hyndman. 1984. Roadside Geology of Washington. Missoula, Montana: 1 Mountain Press Publishing Company. Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of wetlands and 1 deepwater habitats of the United States. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers wetland delineation manual. Technical Report Y -87 -1, Environmental Laboratory, Department of the Army, Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MI. 1 Granger, T., T. Hruby, A. McMillan, D. Peters, J. Rubey, D. Sheldon, S. Stanley, E. Stockdale. • April 2005. Wetlands in Washington State - Volume 2: Guidance for Protecting and Managing Wetlands. Washington. State Department of Ecology. Publication #05 -06 -008. Olympia, WA. Hruby, T., W.E. Cesanek, and K.E. Miller. 1995. Estimating relative wetland values for regional 1 planning. Wetlands 15 (2): 93 -106. Kollmorgen Corporation. 1994. Munsell soil color charts. Kollmorgen Corporation, Baltimore, 1 MD. Lenfesty, C.D. and T.E. Reedy. 1985. Soil Survey of Yakima County Area. USDA, Soil. 1 Conservation Service. Reed, P.B. Jr. 1988. National list of plant species that occur in wetlands: Washington. 1 Biological Report NERC- 88/18.47 for National Wetlands Inventory, Washington, D.C. Sheldon, D., T. Hruby, P. Johnson, K. Harper, A. McMillan, T. Granger, S. Stanley, and E. T Stockdale. March 2005. Wetlands in Washington State - Volume 1: A Synthesis of the Science. Washington State Department of Ecology. Publication #05 -06 -006. Olympia, WA. 1 U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 1996a. Field indicators of hydric soils in the United States. Version 3.2, July. U.S. Department 1 of Agriculture, Natural Resource Conservation Service, Washington, D.C. U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 1996b. The PLANTS database. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resource Conservation Service, National Plant Data Center, Baton Rouge, LA. 1 1 DOC. INDEX - 111 F - U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 1997. 1 Hydric soils of the United States. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resource Conservation Service in cooperation with the National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils. World Wide Web Site (http: //www.statlab.iastate.edu /soils- info /hydric/homepage.html), last updated May 15, 1997. U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), Soil Conservation Service (SCS). 1985. Soil Survey of 1 Yakima County Area Washington. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resource Conservation Service, Washington, D.C. nt of Ecology (Ecology). 1997. Washington State Departure ogy ( gy) ton state wetland g identification and delineation manual. Publication #96 -94. Washington Department of Ecology, Olympia, WA. 1 Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology). 2000. Methods for Assessing Wetland Functions Volume I: Riverine and Depressional Wetlands in the Lowlands of Western Washington (Part 1 and Part 2) and Volume II: Depressional Wetlands in the Columbia Basin of Eastern Washington (Part 1 and Part 2). Publications #99- 115, #99- 116, #00-06 - 47, #00- 06-48. Washington Department of Ecology, Olympia, WA. 1 Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology). 2004. Washington State wetland rating system for western Washington — Revised and eastern Washington — Revised. Publication # 04 -06 -025 and # 04- 06 -15. Washington State Natural Heritage Program (WNHP). 1997 Endangered, threatened, and sensitive plants of Washington. Washington State Department of Natural Resources, Washington Natural Heritage Program, Olympia, WA. 1 1 1 1 1 1 DOC. INDEX _ 8_ # F- Z - 1 . x 4 - (.....) L1.1 ,..---, 4,-.,FNr•Virz,1Worw4,71,'We "r'74-1." P :r i r yi r RIV X M"el .'5 - 474 !:'' 1: 1 51 ':;r4-FI,F.Z ' .; ,1..-11,... , P : 4 7 1 1 , 1 71 1 rkekv „II,. r. . .z,lf:, , .'e.- ,:;44*.frAfA„,,'0•9,:, - • - -k - <''-'i , :'',J -, - -,. -,-.'2 , " '''' ."-:. ,:,*, ':. -‘.h...tt5.1":-.1A:1:1,,p*:=Wilirvo4figt,4?-,.te,,,""-:19"7":',17', - 'Ntlr — rtl 0 a 'r;X ••••.Y'f..:1; :.:a.',-''At=n*-,:,W4vi,filar-101;i1/7';'''";AN; kl' 1 '. " I ; L ! . .'' '''' .' f "..:',S ',Is V 74, -, , , ,1 : 5;...ri:V;;;;;:,..7 . • A D z qt 1:-.' - •4;•:. 1 .1';: . . • ''• '-`...1.11 - 1 ---- '..' i.>4',^'' ,V43:$;:,10,4,4*4i616:4 : ■ :4 11' :I" -;'. .,'"-." 'f."'.:', . . 7 i 4.':* gt ;:' '' ' ';'." :', i , • i;14 t r i VA ' Ii ,' - , , ' .. ...TPCre.'1•;*.', • :.. , •-,...414.,,,k,,-.:,-11.-4::44.privvit.*4-,!44.,4,1.:„.:4 U. ,".,;= ...t,.":t.tg t ,01 " .0 ; „ .. 4f111. 4' , '4 : 4:1.*T .t. ",- Vi„. i?..t.:::, ? -;'... • 4.31 • - .• .: '' ''.,4-.'.. ',,,,,vtirtOmieri..‘,%:T:-.10V'ts,JcV:1:240.;?->.;,l'.4.4',.ie.-4.:;.-5': -1$'-'''' r:; ,' "tr-: ftit,::.;.-t.'r,VF*4*V'Vftl*C,;'..04:tfrf0.;'..*Wil''-'!;',4":'",Pio-4•P'4:;';1--C':*fAtttf.h.'fat",nVO,4f1.,Jitr1, ,*_,,„. ,r,41,.. - . ixiv , ,:,.- - .4. '.4 '-."....4.1 .,:...- .-. . • ' .4 ,:,,,.,;;,4,6.-: -...ifils.,,„1.40.,,,:;:„AftmAii-,,,it,Qp..:1„.=i4:41,44.;:.;,„,_...-viril.,9,,#,.. ,,rAr4:41cPclv-•'-• r,;,:o..T - . r4. . -..:• ., m, Ati.44 '... ' c V. .ks.t.;i A ttL. v gu4*itAtffoNol%q.-oi:i..Ar..,/' , ".i'''-Y*Vilt.t4,47,1A-..6.1E'' ' 4i 4fMii,'., ,, f; , '...: , -:':_i4.4 , *0 Y1',*Kt..M P :11 CI. I ,, t.V. ,i1 • 7.r .„."''.; ' ' :' 44:"...;:-"'r.+1,-......114,14,±24h'.„..,..,' ' -#.6tzw.c't;,:ig:1-#Zr.A,M0i.Etiii-2?,1;t:.-..-.41e4p,:vii,y/410`. RS r,1:: 00: ,x, - . 4.' r ',4,;; : 10%. *:40.1041741tAkt0'4744,74,-; .* 'tf, , g.,, -.:pr, - :.,.,;0 - .- -,,m4 <- ..1,.:7, 7.4 ..i tt.. t . ,' ...- . ..,, : - .-":t-':•-..f,19 110-."- ' it.: . - . . i .. - ;..''., : -1'41 C . ","4;-'^,.-","11. '-:;411.4fr.44:tz,. ` ..:. 1 - •- , .w.c ,,, ',1t- ....... . •'‘-`-..: .*.: .. ),:,...:" . il ::1. 7: ,,, , :f..P-A,v4 . .;..D.F . c.1. 3 " ,;',.,;.. ' -;'..., ' -,..'... • ki.,', 1-7.4'1V-e.:A-ditin.-.7k-' '.7..p.'" 2 ';t2e 4, ,;t: --'. .'. ,., ., :41.` : .." . ' - :7 , E.r"..1 - 1.2 . , ,.;,. i , „ 7,,illiVkr 41 ri.eV'Sir-','. - 4 - 170.,,: ; ,4 1 , ,,, : ,,,,.. i a4:410;:12t.41.# i .4 , . "..4.1 "'l''' ) - •e1 '17 10 " 7 -'4.1, i.. r1/4.4:4* -,-, :*- - 7.: , qc ,:...„..4..t,,,,,t...„,4wit v t‘.4 0 MS (1) c -a 3 il.4 . a i ,t,14 1/244, , ., 74P4 vtitvt:-. , ,!:•,.:', • 0 ., . ,..,.,41.t., ,, 4,t: .., , 1 „.....,,, ..1:2 ( 7, eL ' ''' ) Ati.i •: .,i-....r.' ‘="-0 ". ..LY% AI .:! 04s "ki. 14::,1 41) 0 , .-7.45,..4w, t , , ‘- 0 ..c . 't . :. , -:44 - 4,.,:-.', , , ,, ,, 4 ,,, 0.4.-.9-• .,,.. :,.. , , ,-. „ L., 4.,;.. +,.., 1 , tt k. , (dgigrO=t:11/at";• ...-, ; ..-' L. 0 ■ 4 .1 ' , 44:',' • ', .mt. plf • - A ' ( * ''.. ':,',3• 4 7.A ''''.. k ' WetWit" . 'CO r, - 1:3 .."'. cu C (13 , . kit1,1".0374510,1 ' • /.7404474: 41,....i t r• ' - ' ''' . ' 0 i ''' !'..-:: W .,2,,, 7,..ip'e.e.'' '' .: .* 4..liti . , ,, :' *, `' . (I) .,..„.— a2 ,..,.T.I., ,--„ .,k ,-- ..,0 -, ':; - *It1/2‘ , .. , ,; : t . .,- , ..% , , g ,: , . f. .0 V: iflAs:tci:iice: , • ' '";.V. f as . . ...., .. ,".. :!...i'e .,!. _. . . • ' y , `.4".•,■":3'er iY - ''., - , 4 i2, ,„, ,ga..L:l. ,..,, o ,.;;..,,-,, A ...V.: Pkri. • .,- -. r .-.-; 1. 4° , :.':$ ' ..' . - • '4 s , =', -- - ■'.-Aegi.i.k:',W,,O.:: '' 'i'' ,.: J a a), a 44 -,'. ''.%,z, , - ;,-,W ,:' al kJ I 0 - --' - 1 1 -.., .,:2",......i. ---;,•• • . . - ' .. -- - 4 . : 1,-. - . .5 . --7. 4,-,., i.k.-44 (1.) .... i... .A. -- ---g., ,, ,-t " %kl;". 1 -....;:' VAil.':';',44'1.V3.■:,jj.';',;4.:e..14;...,i,.-/.1.1":"R'1%. 2, .. ' Z . ) CD • ... , ,,,,,„...-44.,iese .1'4A' r,..J,t4b..12,%, l''::,,frii....,1. - 1, t- i.0." . - ._ , .., . .„. . , .. m.,t1,.:,,..z.d.-.?.. 4.1, 2 41 '41 • ,i, s • ',...-, ' Z ..,-., A , .. - 4 - ... .. 1'. - .. " ...",; ,..v.fr.,. .;.. ,-:-... • .. ' : -: :7, '-',T 0 .:att,:., t-1,4Y45iI7,4:;:',.AA:,41.:,.444-'"-:'‘::.'''':::-.7:1.;1'- ' ":"'''''': :".4::-::' b ' 4 +1L - ,,,,,:.,:''''', - '.'...' . „.,,„ ".,,-- . ,..'-',,- ixiA7A6"47C7144.4,.4"4:;:'.....-i.;1.--:" 1 I ,•-.44-Yi::-:");:t.."31? ; - 4 - '," tit; " , 'reFt' .." ,..,•-='" nlf, ‘ ',.',... ..: sit i., .....V. . ,.''. '• ',..:',,,"" ' , ' .0 - - ..- • •-, itril.M1t,,..X1*-4,11,.pm, fit ,44 :..., 4 -.: ,.;',. ...il: fr''''',7 i; 4•'27,0;* ,..PP * ' ' "-V * ' ..l,'-"- ,:-." ,t,.,,, ,:'. ,,„,,,,, v., . . ,.,...;-. iitiyotAz',..4,..4,,v,t,,et.it .. • ,,,c--.- •• - , . ,, - ... - : . :',,,', .1, ,,,,,,, , . ,..._ , . , . , , ,, ,,,, .,4754 2 V ,j,. ..,1164Vi y, ... v. ..;V,A3',6" .4., • - . ' ".. . : -. • .. ... ......4... , . • 4034' fp , i «41-1., '..'5'. t..4:::,:-....; itt" 4 i',...r 1 -1.,',:;,,, V ■ " . - . ' ' ,',=*,:' '. i ;. ' . ..' ' ' "*,://,. - 4. 'Ai i'j, . '' -, - 1. 0 ,:t''''.' , ..",:. JO' ...,.' - 4' , .,,''`AL' , .'''.- - . ' ''' - :"'"- • X • 5'4'404441 .?.•, , .., . . . ,.,... .-....., .";..,..•„1_,. .V?" ' . ' . . .,, . ..,.... ';'. ..,,l'''''' 4-W", ' WV*, •.1 .'" • • .", . • '. ;" ... 4 Ti n . , +. 1 411 - 44*,iO4.4 , ::;„ .„..., - .,. .„...,.".„ ,,,,.....„,- .. ,,-.... •,..... 0 _ .... .. .. ,..,,,..,:-;:v..,,I,lw-,, iV, - , `‘.' i., • . . • Mlle NM alli °l a am sew VA OMB NM Ma 11.1 MI MN • MN NM OMB all Mi l 1.11/ 1 Appendix B . Routine Wetland Determination I DATA FORM 1 (Revised) WA Stae eanen Manual or 1987 Corps Wetland Delineation Manual) • Project/Site: Sarg Hubbard Park - Pond Date: 9/28/07 I Applicant/owner: Yakima Greenway Foundation County: Yakima I Investigator(s): Robert Thomas, Thomas Environmental Services State: WA S/T/R:19/12N/18E Do normal circumstances exist on the site? ZI Yes ❑ No Community ID: I Is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation)? ❑ Yes Transect ID: ❑ No Plot ID: Is the area a potential problem area? ❑ Yes ® No .1 Explanation of atypical or problem area: VEGETATION (For *strata, indicate T = tree; S = shrub; H = herb; V = vine) 1 Dominant. Plant *Stratu % Indicat Dominant Plant *Stratu % Indicat Species m cover . or Species m cover or . Pacific willow tree 20 fac . 1 Coyote Willow shrub 20 obl Reed Canarygrass herb _ 40 facw 1 1 HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION INDICATORS: % of dominants OBL, FACW, & FAC: 100% 1 Check all indicators that apply and explain below: L ❑ Physiological /reproductive adaptations ® Visual observation of plant species Wetland plant database 1 growing in areas of prolonged ❑ Personal knowledge of regional plant communities inundation /saturation ❑ Morphological adaptations ❑Other (explain) 1 Technical Literature Hydrophytic vegetation present? ® Yes ❑ No Rationale for decision /Remarks: 100 % of dominant species are fac or wetter. HYDROLOGY I Is it the growing season? . Yes ❑ No Water Marks: ❑ Yes ❑ No Sediment Deposits: ❑ Yes on ❑ No • Based on: ❑ Soil temp (record temp) Drift Lines: ❑Yes ❑ No Drainage Patterns: ❑ Yes ❑ No Other (explain) I D Depth of inundation: inches Oxidized Root (live roots) Local Soil Survey: ❑ Yes . Channels <12n.: X Yes ❑ No ❑ No Depth to free water in pit: inches FAC Neutral: . Yes ❑ No Water- stained Leaves: ❑ Yes ❑ No I Depth to saturated soil: 6 inches DOC. INDEX # . t Check all that apply & explain bE v: Other (explain): A ❑ Stream, lake or gage data . • ❑ Aerial photographs , ❑ Other 1 Wetland hydrology present? X Yes ❑ No Rationale for decision /remarks: Saturated soils within 12 inches of surface in areas supporting 1 hydrophytic vegetation. . SOILS 1 Map Unit Name (Series and Phase) : Weirman Drainage Class series 181 Field observations confirm mapped type? ❑ Yes ® No 1 Taxonomy (subgroup) Profile Description 1 Depth Matrix color Mottle colors Mottle abundance Texture, concretions,' Drawing of soil profile (inches) Horizon ( Munsell moist) (Munsell moist) size and contrast structure, etc. (match description) 0 -6 A 10YR 3/2 none n/a Sandy loam 1 6 -16 A -1 10YR 3/2 10/YR 4/6 Few faint redox Sandy loam • features 1 Hydric Soil Indicators: (check all that apply) ❑ Histosol ® Matrix chroma 2 with mottles ❑ Histic Epipedon ❑ Mg or Fe Concretions ❑ Sulfidic Odor ❑ High Organic Content in Surface Layer of Sandy Soils ❑ Aquic Moisture Regime ❑ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils ❑ Reducing Conditions ❑ Listed on National /Local Hydric Soils List ❑ Gleyed or Low - Chroma ( =1) matrix ❑ Other (explain in remarks) Hydric soils present? ® Yes ❑ No Rationale for decision /Remarks: Low matrix chroma, few, faint Fe concentrations Wetland Determination 1 Hydrophytic vegetation present? ® Yes ❑ No Hydric soils present? ® Yes ❑ No Wetland hydrology present? ® Yes ❑ No • Is the sampling point within a wetland? ® Yes ❑ No Rationale /Remarks: A wetland is present in the study area but the overall function of the wetland is low. Hydric soils were difficult to locate and it took over 100 soil probe samples to locate redox features. NOTES: 1 1 1 DOC. 1 INDEX r-_2 �__1 1 Appendix C , WETLAND RATING FORM — EASTERN WASHINGTON Wetland Name: Sarg Hubbard Park Pond Date: 9/28/07 Location: SEC:19 TWNSHP: 12N_ RNGE :I8E_ (attach map with outline of wetland to rating form) Person(s) Rating Wetland: Robert Thomas Affiliation: Consultant Date of site visit: 9/28/07 I SUMMARY OF RATING ® Category based on FUNCTIONS provided by wetland I II - III a IV Category 1 = Score > 70 Score for "Water Quality" Functions 12 Category II = Score 51 - 69 Score for Hydrologic Functions 0 I Category III = Score 30 — 50 Score for Habitat Functions 24 Category IV = Score < 30 TOTAL Score for Functions I Category based on SPECIAL CHARACTERISTCS of Wetland g 1 II III Does not apply a Final Category (choose the "highest" category from above ") III Check the appropriate type and class of wetland being rated: Wetland Type ,Wetland.Cllass 1 Vernal Pool Depress anal Alkali Riverine Natural Heritage Wetland Lake - fringe • I Forest Slope • Forest None of the above . I Does the wetland being rated meet any of the criteria below? • If you answer YES to any of the questions below you will need to protect the wetland according to the regulations regarding the special characteristics found in the wetland. I Check List for W etlands that Need Special Protection, YES NO and That are Not Included in the Rating A 1. Has the wetland been documented as a habitat for any Federally listed. Threatened or I Endangered plant or animal species (T /E species)? For the purposes of this rating system, "documented" means the wetland is on the appropriate state or federal database. I A2. Has the wetland been documented as habitat for any State listed Threatened or Endangered plant or animal species? For the purposes of this rating system, "documented" means the wetland is on the appropriate state database. I A3. Does the wetland contain individuals of Priority species listed by the WDFW for the state? A4. Does the wetland have a local significance in addition to its functions? For example, the, wetland has been identified in the Shoreline Master Program, the Critical Areas Ordinance, or . in a local management plan as having special significance. I To complete the next part of the data sheet you will need to determine the Hydrogeomorphic Class of the wetland being rated. I The hydrogeomorphic classification groups wetlands into those that ftinction in similar ways. Classifying the wetland first simplifies the questions needed to answer how it functions. The Hydrogeomorphic Class of a wetland can be determined using the key below. See p. 20 for more detailed instructions on classifying wetlands. DOC. INDEX . rz Classil ion of Vegetated Wetlands for Eastern % pington 1 Wetland Name: Sarg Hubbard Park Pond Date: 9/28/07 1. Does the wetland meet both of the following criteria? 1 The vegetated part of the wetland is on the shores of a body of open water (without any vegetation on the surface) where at least 20 acres (8 ha) are permanently inundated (ponded or flooded); At least 30% of the open water area is deeper than 3 m (10 ft)? NO — go to 2 YES — The wetland class is Lake - fringe (Iacustrine fringe) 2. Does the wetland meet all of the following criteria? The wetland is on a slope (slope can be very gradual). 1 The water flows through the wetland in one direction (unidirectional) and usually comes from seeps. It may flow subsurface, as sheetflow, or in a swale without distinct banks. The water leaves the wetland without being impounded? NOTE: Surface water does not pond in these types of wetlands except occasionally in very small and shallow depressions or behind hummocks (depressions are usually <3 ft diameter and less than I foot deep). NO — go to 3 YES — The wetland class is Slope 3. Is the wetland in a valley, or stream channel, where it gets inundated by overbank flooding from that stream or river? In general, the flooding should occur at least once every ten years, on the average, to answer "yes ". The wetland can contain depressions that are filled with water when the river is not flooding. NO — go to 4 YES — The wetland class is Riverine 4. Is the wetland in a topographic depression, outside areas that are inundated by overbank flooding, in which water ponds, or is saturated to the surface, at some time of the year. This means that any outlet, if present is higher than the interior of the wetland. NO — go to 5 YES — The wetland class is Depressional 5. Your wetland seems to be difficult to classify. For example, seeps at the base of a slope may grade into a riverine floodplain, or a small stream within a depressional wetland has a zone of flooding along its sides. Sometimes we find characteristics of several different hydrogeomorphic classes within one wetland boundary. If you have a wetland with several HGM classes present within its boundaries use the following table to identify the appropriate class to use for the rating system. NOTE: Use this table only if the class that is recommended in the second column represents 10% or more of the total area of the wetland being rated. HGM Classes Within One Class to Use in Rating if Area of this Class Delineated Wetland Boundary > 10% Total Slope + Riverine Riverine Slope + Depressional Depressional Slope + Lake -fringe Lake -fringe Depressional + Riverine Depressional ( riverine is within boundary of depression) epressrona + Lake-1 Inge Depressional If you are unable still to determine which of the above criteria apply to your wetland, or you have more than 2 HGM classes within a wetland boundary, classify the wetland as Depressional for the rating. 1 • 1 1 D0. 1 INDEX �- _ 1 1 D . Depresslonsl 4i00._1F4t We*nds , _ M _ :. x Points.: WATER QUALITY FUNCTIONS.— Indicators that wetland functions to improve water quality. D 1.0 Does the wetland have the potential to improve water quality? (see p.32 in text) I D 1.1 Characteristics of surface water flows out of the wetland: • Wetland has no surface water outlet points = 5 1 • Wetland has an intermittently flowing, or highly constricted, outlet points = 3 .' Wetland has a permanently flowing surface outlet points = 1 D 1.2 The soil 2 inches below the surface is day, organic, or smells. anoxic (hydrogen sulfide or rotten eggs). 0 YES points = 3 NO points = 0 D 1.3 Characteristics of persistent vegetation (emergent, shrub, and/or forest): • Wetland has persistent, ungrazed vegetation for > = 2/3 of area points = 5 I • Wetland has persistent, ungrazed vegetation from 1/3 to 2/3 of area points = 3 5 • Wetland has persistent, ungrazed vegetation from 1/10 to < 1/3 of area points = 1 • Wetland has persistent, ungrazed vegetation < 1/10 of area points = 0 D 1.4 Characteristics of seasonal ponding or inundation: This is the area of ponding that fluctuates every year. I Do not count the area that is permanently ponded. NOTE: See text for indicators of seasonal and permanent inundation/flooding. • Area seasonally ponded is > 1/2 total area of wetland points = 3 0 • Area seasonally ponded is 1/4 to 1/2 total area of wetland points = 1 • Area seasonally ponded is < 1/4 total area of wetland points = 0 I Total for D 1 Add the points in the boxes above I 6 D 2.0 Does the wetland have the opportunity to improve water quality? (see p. 38) Answer YES if you know or believe there are pollutants in groundwater or surface water coming into the wetland that would otherwise reduce water quality in streams, lakes or groundwater downgradient 1 from the wetland? Note which of the following conditions provide the sources of pollutants. _ Grazing in the wetland or within 150 ft x Wetland intercepts groundwater within the Reclamation Area Untreated storniwater flows into wetland _ Tilled fields or orchards within 150 ft. of wetland _ Water from a stream or culvert flows into wetland that drains developed areas, residential areas, farmed fields, roads, or clear -cut logging Multiplier Residential, urban areas, golf courses are within 150 ft. of wetland I • - - Other 2 YES multiplier is 2 NO multiplier is 1 • TOTAL — Water Quality Functions Multiply the score from D1 by D2. Record score on table on p. 1 1 12 I HYDROLOGIC FUNCTIONS — Indicators that wetland functions to reduce flooding and stream erosion. D 3 Does the wetland have the potential to reduce flooding and stream erosion? (see p.39) D 3.1 Characteristics of surface water flows out of the wetland: • Wetland has no surface water outlet points = 8 0 I • Wetland has an intermittently flowing, or highly constricted, outlet points = 3 • Wetland has a permanently flowing surface outlet points = 0 D 3.2 Depth of storage during wet periods. Estimate the height of ponding above the surface of the wetland (see text for description of measuring height). In wetlands with permanent ponding, the surface is the lowest I elevation of "permanent" water). • Marks of ponding are 3 ft. or more above the surface points = 8 • The wetland is a "headwater" wetland (see p. 46) points = 6 0 • Marks are 2 ft. to 3 ft. from surface points = 6 I • Marks are 1 ft. to 2 ft. from surface points = 4 • Marks are 6 in to < 1 ft. from surface points = 2 • No marks above 6 in. or wetland has only saturated soils points = 0 Total for D 3 Add the points in the boxes above I 0 I D 4 Does the wetland have the opportunity to reduce flooding and erosion? (see p. 42) Answer NO if the major source of water is groundwater, irrigation return flow, or water levels in the wetland are controlled by a reservoir. Answer YES if the wetland is in a location in the watershed where the flood storage, or reduction in water velocity, it provides helps protect, downstream property and aquatic resources I from flooding or excessive and/or erosive flows. Note which of the following conditions apply. Wetland is in a headwater of a river or stream that has flooding problems. Wetland drains to a river or stream that has flooding problems Wetland has no outlet and impounds surface runoff water that might otherwise flow into a river or Multiplier stream that has flooding problems Other 0 YES multiplier is 2 NO multiplier is 1 • 1 TOTAL — Hydrologic Functions Multiply the score from D3 by D4; then record score on p.1 of field form.' 0 I III 1 DOG, . INDEX R Riyerine,Wetlands , ., , , .... _ .r_._ . w ,..s , . _. ... '..' Prints `; 1 WATER QUALITY FUNCTIONS – Indicators that wetland functions to improve water quality. R 1 Does the wetland have the potential to improve water quality? (see p.45) R 1.1 Area of surface depressions within the riverine wetland that can trap sediments during a flooding event: I • Depressions cover > 1/3 area of wetland points = 6 • Depressions cover > 1/10 area of wetland points = 3 • Depressions present but cover < 1/10 area of wetland points = 1 • No depressions present points = 0 R 1.2 Characteristics of the vegetation in the wetland: • Forest or shrub > 2/3 the area of the wetland points =10 • Forest or shrub 1/3 – 2/3 area of the wetland points = 5 • Ungrazed, emergent plants > 2/3 area of wetland points = 5 • Ungrazed emergent plants 1/3 – 2/3 area of wetland points = 2 • Forest, shrub, and ungrazed emergent < 1/3 area of wetland points = 0 Total for Rl Add the points in the boxes above I J R 2 Does the wetland have the opportunity to improve water quality? (see p. 46) Answer YES if you know or believe there are pollutants in groundwater or surface water coming into ' the wetland that would otherwise reduce water quality in streams, lakes or groundwater downgradient from the wetland? Note which of the following conditions provide the sources of pollutants. — Grazing in the wetland or within 150 ft Wetland intercepts groundwater within the Reclamation Area Untreated stormwater flows into wetland _ Tilled fields or orchards within 150 ft. of wetland Water flows into wetland from a stream or culvert that drains developed areas, residential areas, farmed fields, roads, or clear-cut logging Residential or urban areas are within 150 ft. of wetland _ The river or stream that floods the wetland has a contributing basin where human activities have Multiplier raised levels of sediment, toxic compounds or nutrients in the river water above water quality _ standards. I Other YES multiplier is 2 NO multiplier is I • TOTAL – Water Quality FunctionsMultiply the score from RI by R2; then record score on p.1 of field form. ( 1 Comments: 1 1 HYDROLOGIC FUNCTIONS – Indicators that wetland functions to reduce flooding and stream erosion. R 3 Does the wetland have the potential to reduce flooding and erosion? (see p. 47) R 3.1 Amount overbank storage the wetland provides: Estimate the average width of the wetland perpendicular to the direction of the flow and the width of the stream or river channel (distance between banks). Calculate the ratio: width of wetland / width of stream. • If the ratio is 2 or more points =10 • If the ratio is between 1 and 2 points = 8 • If the ratio is 1/2 to <1 points = 4 • If the ratio is 1/4 to < 1/2 points = 2 • If the ratio is < 1/4 points = 1 I R 3.2 Characteristics of vegetation that slow down water velocities during floods: Treat large woody debris as "forest or shrub ". Choose the points appropriate for the best description. • Forest or shrub for more than 2/3 the area of the wetland points = 6 • Forest or shrub for > 1/3 area OR emergent plants > 2/3 area points = 4 • Forest or shrub for> 1/10 area OR emergent plants > 1/3 area points = 2 • Vegetation does not meet above criteria points = 0 Total for R3 Add the points in the boxes above' ' R 4 Does the wetland have the opportunity to reduce flooding and erosion? (see p.50) Answer NO if the major source of water is irrigation return flow or water levels are controlled by a reservoir. Answer YES if the wetland is in a location in the watershed where the flood storage, or reduction in water velocity, it provides helps protect downstream property and aquatic resources from flooding or excessive and/or erosive flows. Note which of the following conditions apply. There are human structures and activities downstream (roads, buildings, bridges, farms) that can Multiplier be damaged by flooding. P — There are natural resources downstream (e.g. salmon redds) that can be damaged by flooding Other YES multiplier is 2 NO multiplier is 1 • TOTAL – Hydrologic Functions Multiply the score from R3 by R4. Record score on p.1 of field form. _ Comments: DOC. INDEX # F_z I L Lake friin W etlands Points ;::. WATER QUALITY FUNCTIONS — Indicators that wetland functions to improve water quality.. L 1 Does the wetland have the potential to improve water quality? (see p.52) I L 1.1 Average width, of vegetation along the lakeshore: • • • Vegetation is more than 33 ft. (10m) wide points = 6 • Vegetation is more than 16 ft.(5m) wide and <.33 ft wide points = 3 • Vegetation is 6 ft. (2m) wide to < 16 ft wide points = 1 L 1.2 Characteristics of the vegetation in the wetland: (choose the appropriate description that results in the I highest points, and do not include any open water in your estimate of coverage). In this case the herbaceous plants can be either the dominant form (called emergent class) or as an understory in a shrub or forest community. I o Herbaceous plants cover > 90% of the vegetated area points = 6 • Herbaceous plants cover > 2/3 of the vegetated area points = 4 • Herbaceous plants cover > 1/3 of the vegetated area points = 3. • Other vegetation that is not aquatic bed in > 2/3 vegetated area points = 3 • Other vegetation that'is not aquatic bed in > 1/3 vegetated area points = 1 I • Aquatic bed cover > 2/3 of the vegetated area points = 0 Total for L 1 Add the points in the boxes above I L 2 Does the wetland have the opportunity to improve water quality? (see p.53) I Answer YES if you know or believe there are pollutants in the lake water, or surface water flowing through the wetland to the lake is polluted. Note which of the following conditions provide the sources of pollutants. _ Wetland is along the shores of a lake or reservoir that does not meet water quality standards Grazing in the wetland or within 150 ft I - Untreated stormwater flows into the wetland Tilled fields or orchards within 150 ft. of wetland - R esidential or urban areas are within 150 ft. of wetland _ Powerboats with gasoline or diesel engines use the lake Multiplier P arks with grassy areas that are maintained, ballfields, golf courses (all within 150 ft. of lake I . shore) Other YES multiplier is 2 NO multiplier is 1 • TOTAL — Water Quality Functions Multiply the score from L1 by L2. Record score on p.1 of field form I , I Comments: I . I HYDROLOGIC FUNCTIONS — Indicators that wetland functions to reduce shoreline erosion. L 3 Does the wetland have the potential to reduce shoreline erosion? (see p.54) L 3.1 Average width and characteristics of vegetation along the Lakeshore (do not include aquatic bed): (choose the highest scoring description that matches conditions in the wetland) I • 3/4 of vegetation is shrubs or trees at least 33 ft. (10m) wide points = 6 • 3/4 of vegetation is shrubs or trees at least 6 ft. (2m) wide. points = 4 • 1/4 of vegetation is shrubs or trees at least 33 ft. (10m) wide. points =.4 • Fringe vegetation is at least 6 ft. (2m) wide points = 2 • Fringe vegetation is less than 6 ft. (2m) wide points = 0 L 4 Does the wetland have the opportunity to reduce erosion? (see p. 55) Are there features along the shore that will be impacted if the shoreline erodes? Note which of the following conditions apply. There are human structures and activities along the shore behind the wetland (buildings, fields) that can be damaged by erosion. Multiplier _ There are undisturbed natural resources along the shore (e.g. mature forests, other wetlands). behind the wetland that can be damaged by shoreline erosion. Other Y ES m ultiplier is 2 NO` multiplier is 1 • TOTAL — Hydrologic Functions Multiply the score from L3 by L4. Record score on p.1 of field form., I 1 Comments: . • 1 1 DOG. INDEX I . . S Slope Wetlands' _ ` .' • Points 111 WATER QUALITY FUNCTIONS — Indicators that wetland functions to improve water quality. S 1 Does the wetland have the potential to improve water quality? (see p.56) S 1.1 Characteristics of average slope of wetland: • Slope is 1% or Tess (a I% slope has a 1 ft. vertical drop in elevation for every 100 ft. horizontal distance) points = 3 • Slope is between 1% and 2% points = 2 • Slope is more than 2% but less than 5% points = 1 • Slope is 5% or greater points = 0 S 1.2 The soil 2 inches below the surface is clay, organic, or smells anoxic (hydrogen sulfide or rotten eggs). YES = 3 points NO = 0 points S 1.3 Characteristics of the vegetation in the wetland that trap sediments and pollutants: Choose the points appropriate for the description that best fits conditions in the wetland. Dense vegetation means you have trouble seeing the soil surface. • Dense, ungrazed, herbaceous vegetation > 90% of the wetland area points = 6 • Dense, ungrazed, herbaceous vegetation > 1/2 of area points = 3 • Dense, woody, vegetation > 1/2 of area. points = 2 • Dense, ungrazed, herbaceous vegetation > 1/4 of area points = 1 • Does not meet any of the criteria above for herbaceous vegetation points = 0 S Total for S 1 Add the points in the boxes above ' II Does the wetland have the opportunity to improve water quality? (see p. 58) Answer YES if you know or believe there are pollutants in groundwater or surface water coming into the wetland that would otherwise reduce ,water quality in streams, lakes or groundwater downgradient from the wetland? Note which of the following conditions provide the sources of pollutants. Grazing in the wetland or within 150 ft Wetland is a groundwater seep within the Reclamation Area Untreated stormwater flows through the wetland Multiplier T illed fields, logging, or orchards within 150 ft. of wetland _ R esidential, urban areas, golf courses are within 150 ft. upslope of wetland Other YES multiplier is 2 NO multiplier is 1 • TOTAL — Water Quality Functions Multiply the score from SI by S2. Record score on p.I offield form. 1 I Comments: 1 HYDROLOGIC FUNCTIONS — Indicators that wetland functions to reduce flooding and stream erosion. 1 S 3 Does the wetland have the potential to reduce flooding and stream erosion? (see p.59) S 3.1 Characteristics of vegetation that reduce the velocity of surface flows during storms: Choose the points appropriate for the description that best fits conditions in the wetland. • Dense, uncut, rigid vegetation covers > 90% of the area of the wetland: Stems of plants should be thick enough (usually > 1/8 in.) or dense enough to remain erect during surface flows ' points = 6 • Dense, uncut, rigid vegetation> 1/2 — 90% area of wetland points = 3 • Dense, uncut, rigid vegetation > 1/4 — 1/2 area. points = 1 • More than 1/4 of area is grazed, mowed, tilled, or vegetation is not rigid points = 0 S 3.2 Characteristics of slope wetland that holds back small amounts of flood flows. The slope has small surface depressions that can retain water over at least 10% of its area. YES = 2 points NO = 0 points Total 'for S3 Add the points in the boxes above S 4 Does the wetland have the opportunity to reduce flooding and erosion? (see p. 61) Answer NO if the major source of water is irrigation return flow (e.g. a seep that is on the downstream side of a dam or at the base of an irrigated field. Answer YES if the wetland is in a landscape position where the reduction in water velocity it provides helps protect downstream property and aquatic resources fro flooding or excessive and /or erosive flows. Note which of the following conditions apply. Multiplier — Wetland has surface runoff that can cause flooding problems downgradient Other YES multiplier is 2 NO multiplier is 1 • TOTAL — Hydrologic Functions Multiply the score from S3 by S4. Record score on p.1 of field form. i Comments: 1 INDEX # F - 1 I These questions apply to wetlands !f a. 'GM classes - _ ;;. - Points HABITAT FUNCTIONS – Indicators that wetland functions to provide important habitat. H 1 Does the wetland have the potential to provide habitat for many species? I H 1.1 Vegetation structure (see P. 62): Check the types of vegetation present if the type covers more than 10% of the area of the wetland or 1/4 acre. Aquatic' bed I x Emergent plants 0 -12 inches high (0 -30cm) x Emergent plants >12 – 40 inches high (30 – 100cm) 2 Emergent plants > 40 inches high ( >100cm)) — x Scrub /shrub (areas where shrubs have > 30% cover) I Forested (areas where trees have > 30% cover) Add the number of vegetation types that qualify. If you have: 4 –6 types points = 3 2 types points = 1 3 types points = 2 1 type points = 0 I H 1.2 Is one of the vegetation types "aquatic bed ?" (see p.64) 0 YES = 1 point NO = 0 points H 1.3 Surface Water (see p. 65) - 1-11.3.1 Does the wetland have areas of "open" water (without emergent or shrub plants) over at least I 1/4 acre or 10% of its area during the spring (March – early June) OR in early fall (August – end of September)? Note: answer YES for Lake fringe wetlands. 3 YES = 3 points & go to B 1.4 NO = go to H 1.3.2 H 1.3.2 Does the wetland have an intermittent or permanent stream within its boundaries, or along one I side, that has an unvegetated bottom (answer yes only if H 1.3.1 is NO)? YES = 3 points & go to H 1.4 NO = go to H 1.3.2 H 1.4 Richness of Plant Species (see p. 66) Count the number of plant species in the wetland that cover at least 10 ftZ (different patches of the same I species can be combined to meet the size threshold) You do not have to name the species. Do not include Eurasian Milfoil, reed canarygrass, purple 1 loosestrife, Russian Olive, Phragmite, Canadian Thistle, Yellow flag Iris, and Salt Cedar (Tamarisk) If you counted: > 9 species points = 2 I 4 – 9 species points = 1 < 9 species points = 0 # of species 6 H 1.5 Interspersion of Habitats (see p. 67) I Decided from the diagrams below whether interspersion between types of vegetation (described in H1.1), or vegetation types and unvegetated areas (can include open water or mudflats) is high, medium, low, or none. \ I CD E*D one 0 p oi.n *s Low = ;point Modzrate = 2 points 1 _ : i ` �,sa�° z?, 3 } 9 I N I [riparian braided cif mrteis ] High = 3 points Note: If you have 4 or more vegetation types or 3 vegetation types and open water, the rating is always "high ". I H 1.6 Special Habitat Features (see p. 68) Check the habitat features that are present in the wetland. The number of checks is the number of points you put into the next column. Loose rocks larger than 4" or large, downed, woody debris (> 4 in. diameter) within the area of surface ponding or in stream x Cattails or bulrushes are present within the wetland _. Standing snags (diameter at the bottom > 4 inches) in the wetland or within 30m (100 ft) of the 3 edge I - x Emergent or shrub vegetation in areas that are permanently inundated /ponded. The presence of "yellow flag" Iris is a good indicator of vegetation in areas permanently ponded. x Stable steep banks of fine material that might be used by beaver or muskrat for denning (> 45 degree slope) OR signs of recent beaver activity Invasive species cover less than 20% in each stratum of vegetation Maximum score possible = 6 H 1 TOTAL Score – potential to provide habitat Add the scores in the coYeIfabove r ' INDEX 1 # —.�-z ._ II 2 Does the wetland have the oppor to provide habitat for many species? H 2.1 Buffers (see P. 71): Choose the description that best represents condition of buffer of wetland. The highest scoring criterion that applies to the wetland is to be used in the rating. See text for definition of "undisturbed". 330 ft (100m) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water > 95% of circumference. No developed areas within undisturbed part of buffer (relatively undisturbed also means no grazing). points = 5 330 ft (100m) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water > 50% circumference points = 4 170 ft (50m) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water > 95% circumference points = 4 330 ft (100m) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water > 25% circumference points = 3 170 ft (50m) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water for > 50% circumference points = 3 If buffer does not meet any of the three criteria above: No paved areas (except paved trails) or buildings within 80 ft (25m) of wetland > 95% circumference. Light to moderate grazing or lawns are OK points = 2 No paved areas of buildings within 170 ft (50m) of wetland for > 50% circumference. Light to moderate grazing or lawns are OK points = 2 Heavy grazing in buffer points = 1 Vegetated buffers are < 6.6 ft wide (2m) for more than 95% of the circumference (e.g. tilled fields, paving, basalt bedrock extend to edge of wetland) points = 0 x Buffer does not meet any of the criteria above points = 1 H 2.2 Wet Corridors (see p. 72) H 2.2.1 Is the wetland part of a relatively undisturbed and unbroken vegetated corridor at least 1/4 mile long with surface water or flowing water throughout most of the year (> 9 months /yr ?) (dams, heavily used gravel roads, paved roads, fields tilled to edge of stream, or pasture to edge of stream are considered breaks in the corridor). YES = 4 points (go to H 2.3) NO = go to H 2.2.2 H. 2.2.2 Is the wetland part of a relatively undisturbed and unbroken, vegetated corridor, at least 1/4 4 mile long with water flowing seasonally, OR a lake- fringe wetland without a "wet" corridor, OR a riverine wetland without a surface channel connecting to the stream.? YES = 2 points (go to H 2.3) NO = go to H 2.2.3 H. 2.2.3 Is the wetland within 1/2 mile of any permanent stream, seasonal stream, or lake (do not include man -made ditches)? YES = 1 point NO = 0 points Comments: 1 1 1 1 1 1 DOS-. 11 INDEX I H 2.3 Near or adjacent to other p .itv habitats listed by WDFW (see p. 74): Which of the following priority habitats are within 330 ft. (100m) of the wetland? (See text for a more detailed description of these priority habitats.) I x Riparian: The area adjacent to aquatic systems with flowing water that contains elements of both aquatic.and terrestrial ecosystems which mutually influence each other. Aspen Stands: Pure or mixed stands of aspen greater than 2 acres. _ Cliffs: Greater than 7.6m (25 ft) high and occurring below 5000 ft. 1 • _ Old - growth forests: (east of Cascade Crest): In general, stands will be >150 years of age, with 10 . trees /acre that are >21 in dbh, and 1 -3 snags /acre > 12 -14 in. diameter. _ Mature forests: Stands with average diameters exceeding 21 in dbh; crown cover may be Tess than _ Prairies and Steppe: Relatively undisturbed areas (as indicated by dominance of native plants) where grasses and /or forbs form the natural climax plant community. I _ Shrub - steppe: Tracts of land consisting of plant communities with one or more layers of perennial 2 grasses and a conspicuous but discontinuous layer of shrubs. _ Talus: Homogenous areas of rock rubble ranging in average size 0.5 — 6.5 ft), composed of basalt, andesite, and /or sedimentary rock, including riprap slides and mine tailings. May be associated with I cliffs. _ Caves: A naturally occurring cavity, recess, void, or system of interconnected passages. Oregon white Oak: Woodlands stands of pure oak or oak/conifer associations where canopy I coverage of the oak component of the stand is 25 %. Urban Natural Open Space: A priority species resides within or is adjacent to the open space and uses it for breeding and /or regular feeding; and /or the open space functions as a corridor connecting other priority habitats, especially those that would otherwise be isolated; and /or the open space is an I isolated remnant of natural habitat larger than 4 ha (10 acres) and is surrounded by urban development. Aspen Stands: Pure or mixed stands of aspen greater than 0.8 ha (2 acres). ' if wetland has 2 or more priority habitats = 4 points If wetland has 1 priority habit = 2 points No priority habitats = 0 points H 2.4 Landscape: Choose the one description of the landscape around the wetland that best fits. (see p. 76) I . • The wetland is in an area where annual rainfall is less than 12 inches, and its water regime is not influenced by irrigation practices, dams, or water control structures. (Generally, this means outside boundaries of reclamation areas, irritation district, or reservoirs.) points = 5 I • There are at least 3 other wetlands within 1/2 mile, and the connections between them are relatively undisturbed (light grazing in the connection or an open water connection along a 5 lake shore without heavy boat traffic are OK, but connections should NOT be bisected by paved roads, fill, fields, heavy boat traffic or other development. points = 5 I • There are at least 3 other wetlands within 1/2 mile, BUT the connections between them are disturbed. points = 2 • There is at least 1 wetland within 1/2 mile points = 1 Does not meet any of the four criteria above points = 0 H 2 TOTAL Score — opportunity for providing habitat Add the scores in the columns above I 24 H 3 Does the wetland have indicators that its ability to provide habitat is reduced? I H 3.1 Indicator of reduced habitat functions (see p. 75) Do the areas of open water in the wetland have a resident population of carp (see text for indicators of the presence of carp)? Note: This question does not apply to reservoirs with water levels controlled by 0 dams, such as the reservoirs on the Columbia and Snake Rivers. 1 YES = I point NO = 0 points • Total Score for Habitat Functions • Add the points for H 1, H 2 and H 3; then record the result on p. 1 I 24 1 1 Comments: DC„. . INDEX I # r' ? ______ • CATEG IZATION BASED ON SPECIAL CHARA( RISTICS Please determine if the wetland meets the attributes described below and circle the appropriate answers and Category. NOTE: A wetland may meet the criteria for more than one set of special characteristics. Record all those that apply. Wetland Type - Check off any criteria that apply to the wetland. Circle the Category when the appropriate criteria are met. SC1 Vernal pools (see p.79) Is the wetland less than 4,000 ft and does it meet at least two of the following criteria? Its only source of water is rainfall or snowmelt from a small contributing basin and has no groundwater input. _ Wetland plants are typically present only in the spring; the summer vegetation is typically upland annuals. NOTE: If you find perennial, "obligate", wetland plants the wetland is probably NOT a vernal pool. The soil in the wetland are shallow (<1 ft. deep (30cm) and is underlain by an impermeable layer such as basalt or clay. Surface water is present for less than 120 days during the "wet" season. YES = Go to SC 1.1 NO not a vernal pool SC 1.1 Is the vernal,pool relatively undisturbed in February and March? YES = Go to SC 1.2 NO = categorize based on functions SC 1.2 Is the vernal pool in an area where there are at least 3 separate aquatic resources within 0.5 miles (other Cat. II wetlands, rivers, lakes etc.)? Cat. III YES = Category II NO = Category I11 SC2 Alkali wetlands (see p.81) Does the wetland meet one of the following two criteria? The wetland has a conductivity > 3.0 mS /cm. The wetland has a conductivity between 2.0 — 3.0 mS, and more than 50% of the plant cover in the wetland can be classified as "alkali" species (see Table 2 for list of plants found in alkali systems). If the wetland is dry at the time of your field visit, the central part of the area is covered with a layer of salt. OR does the wetland meet two of the following three sub - criteria? Salt encrustations around more than 80% of the edge of the wetland. More than 3/4 of the plant cover consists of species listed on Table 2. A pH above 9.0. All alkali wetlands have a high pH, but please note that some freshwater Cat. I wetlands may also have a high pH. Thus, pH alone is not a good indicator of alkali wetlands. YES = Category I NO categorize based on functions SC3 Natural Heritage Wetlands (see p. 82) Natural Heritage wetlands have been identified by the Washington Natural Heritage Program/DNR as either high quality undisturbed wetlands or wetlands that support state Threatened, Endangered, or Sensitive plant species. SC 3.1 Is the wetland being rated in a Section /Township /Range that contains a natural heritage wetland? (This question is used to screen out most sites before you need to contact WNHP /DNR.) S /T /R information from Appendix D or accessed from WNHP/DNR web site YES Contact WNHP/DNR (see p. 79) and go to SC 3.2 NO SC 3.2 Has DNR identified the wetland as a high quality undisturbed wetland or as a site with state threatened or endangered plant. species? Cat. I YES = Category 1 NO 1 1 DOC. 1 INDEX. ! r " 2__..__._, I SC4 Botts (see p. 82) ' Does the wetland (or part of the wetland) meet both the criteria for soils ano vegetation in bogs? Use the key below to identify if the wetland is a bog. If you answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland based on its functions. I SC 4.1 Does the wetland have organic soil horizons (i.e. layers of organic soil), either peats or mucks, that compose 16 inches or more of the first 32 inches of the soil profile? (See Appendix B for a field key to identify organic soils.) 1 YES ='go' to SC 4.3 NO = go to SC 4.2 SC 4.2 Does the wetland have organic soils, either peats or mucks that are Tess than 16 inches deep over bedrock or an impermeable hardpan such as clay or volcanic ash, or that are floating on top of a lake or pond? YES = go to 4.3 NO = Is not a bog for rating I SC 4.3 Does the wetland have more than 70% cover of mosses at ground level AND other plants, if present, consist of the "bog" species listed in Table 3 as a significant component of the vegetation (more than 30% of the total shrub and herbaceous cover consists of species in Table 3)? Cat. I Y ES =.Ca tegory I bog NO = go to question 4.4 I NOTE: If you are uncertain about the extent of mosses in the understory you may substitute that c riterion' by measuring the p of the water that seeps into a hole dug at least 16;' deep. If the pH is less than 5.0 and the "bog" plant species in Table 3 are present, the wetland is a bog. I SC 4.4 Is the wetland forested (> 30% cover) with sitka spruce, subalpine fir, western red cedar, western hemlock, lodgepole pine, quaking aspen, Englemann's spruce, or western white pine, WITH any of the species (or combination of species) on the bog species plant list in Table 3 as a significant component of the ground cover (> 30% coverage of the total shrub/herbaceous cover)? - Cat. 1 I YES = Category 1 bog NO = categorize based on functions SC5 Forested Wetlands (see p. 86) Does the wetland have an area of forest (you should have identified a forested class, if present, in question H 1.1) rooted within its boundary that meet at least one of the following three criteria ?. I The wetland is within the "100 year" floodplain of a river or stream. . Aspen (Populus tremuloides) are a dominant or co- dominant of the "woody" vegetation. (Dominants means it represents at least 50% of the cover of woody species, co- dominant means it I represents at least 20% of the total cover of woody species.) There is at least 1/4 acre of trees (even in wetlands smaller than 2.5 acres) that are "mature" or "old- growth" according to the definitions for these priority habitats developed by WDFW (see p. 83). YES = got o SC 5.1. NO = categorize based on functions 1 SC 5.1 Does the wetland have a forest canopy where more than 50% of the tree species (by cover) are slow growing native trees? Slow growing trees are: western red cedar (Thuja plicata), Alaska yellow cedar • (Chamaecyparis nootkatensis), pine spp. mostly "white" pine (Pinus monticola), western hemlock (Tsuga I heterophylla), Englemann spruce (Picea engelmannii)? Cat. 1 YES = Category 1 NO = go to SC 5.2 • SC 5.2 Does the wetland have aspen (Populus tremuloides) as a dominant or co- dominant species in the category of woody species? Cat. I I - YES = Category I - NO = go to SC 5.3 wetland have a forest canopy where more than 50% of the tree species (by cover) are fast growing species? Fast growing species are: Alders — red (alnus rubra), thin -leaf (A. tenuifolia); Cottonwoods — narrow -leaf (Populus angustifolia), black (P. balsamifera); Willows — peach -leaf (Salix amygdaloides), Sitka (S. sitchensis), Pacific (S. lasiandra), Aspen — Populus tremuloides), Water Birch (Betula occidentalis) Cat. II YES = Category II NO = go to SC 5.5 SC 5.5 . Is the forested component of the wetland within the "100 year floodplain" of a river or stream? Cat. I1 L.: • NO = categorize based on functions Category of wetland b on Special Characteristics Choose the "highest" rating if wetland falls into several categories, and record on p. 1. , If you answered NO for all types enter "Not Applicable" on p. 1 1 . 1 DOC. INDEX 1 1 A D — Photos 1 • 9 < _ ,. -. � 4 ° � - R � rF 4 ; `IA A 'r . `" -- -. -- Y II _ `�7 ' �Y J ,.-, m t ..fig ,� ,t n a; k ,r _ ' i akT' �' x','2., v'li. -'i. ' ' �. s'C ' ,•,'" 4 •* � s. __ �� mfif 11rr .vim s' � r S .. ,w C f d -c h . 1 '/ \' 11f `� ,: i cy j 4 '11 r T � w J 4' g r A' �; -- # x " 3 ` ` � gl S � . 4 t j f f y . r y ' ° F w y a mrx �l.,\. �'` k> � � ,E ,y � r n t ', llp_� 4 / • ° .i - ,i --,0 '!' , .F a t* Ty "'�„ fi 4 . �� ' '` '.. { .� le a g � .^ �' ; i �" ''a� , -.. 41 , 'Z . . � 1' � + f �I 1 u` y 2 , .F f r 1 4 ti -- A .'' c p 11 f .c C y r r .m s t � :k . } {, : „ . 't,-,,,f,2, "' 's�'} - i�d f { 1 3 . E ' 1 m - � { Y < > t < - . . _ � �$ �w.k.'a .- ,. . �`'' � s u s ,-4,A, ., ..... . 5 - :f', �' y..-° ` ,: ' �S,i , a • " , � k , r t t- , , - .w. T�� v."R `'z ,',374. , ` - i r j;"'n f . ( ; - —� a .. 1 '`, r ' f ' l . . ----,--'--K--,c._,, <', .,j - _-i e '', gr. a--€ *y ter" '� / , 4 �' e, zc r s, r � ,, -• a ns r A c r p t c : } y� r � a. fi C : tt s t xr �� f �� '`"� A r„ � � �" *', �,�t •F.t's r t � > ti �-�;; 'elk -' y . .: ... � „e`'.'"�r't�z'' } q � - ^ r Cna "' c'+s t '".�'� < 1 7 '. � '�' ''''':-:':'5, ` �stu , ' , s � .� - ax p -9 , ^ t i - . �i� w r 1:: leovaseve reed ca e a teas colts rises a Iti h n r of w land v' o n u ... 1 h ..,.. >T . - .,.. -z --.-N t '� 1 �£ r dr . ,_ --------- , , S-L, y _ f c. -•"' Sri r x +y f ».� b ', } . • , F __. �" ' a '` 0 `` ,_ -`a - - ' -' t•o- L'� �_ ` £ -rte. a. - s ' a a g �= " `} ih� 33 x • a 1 ' + 33Z , a ` - � .. - t i ` '` } , std �- ' � .-�� x c !..„,,a, # ¢ -, a * - x -.� , ', ,, _ 0. Z-•• -, �- .�'" s s u•. Sri1 ...` 3� . °. {� Ae`' tizs , x- +' - - -t, ,- h , .-- -. c 4C 1' a S� -��� • '' "t'r ".F .+2S:4�gv i' ( rg 'nffi k Y W ^.tfV i � , � ` '''-'4"'-±--$1.,----: 4 L-. a ,' --1 . t ,, ,.a-tyrc k.. p , , v �'' a & S ' f- , - 4= � • ,t • � ' 9-L l '4"` ` 1V _. F*c ` , 1:: .' S .�p. ' 4 - "�$ t s°• "4 >r . ' - .X. ' t �� - ie• - � • }- 3� R X y. �' w „ C' ' `- . x- "i W .,' rx "-. r * ' y'` " i dl Y S �, , .,,r f , ,,, y,` . 7 r �'� - r. . - Y . P ` "-- f . y y. , '�i.,• '�- - s : I'' '' 14. f r 41.::1 �, � '5 'al k l k, , - ` 74 °x.` - - i -r,;,b g t t y ; ,< _ s . } � . 4 . , - ;s , ' .,�' ` 03`.� ,,�a, . r' . � _ V �� � r� „ -•x`�, � . 4- '?" i . �' r `I': ' , * u a '' i � : g�' i�ei t r t ' K +`. . „.,. T 1 < � •- F ..., � q ."'. - ,. c k' ,.. rr, �. - I, fix, - _: 2. Narrow band of we vegetatiion on the edge o the pond. Notice disturbed area along the slope associated with heavy foot traffic. Installing a paved trail higher up the slope will deter foot traffic below. DOC. 1 INDEX w_1 7 . i • t :.. -42:.;,-.; .:p' ';:"� F •!iY. ;' _ '_"_ ' `. i ._ :' „�. •'� .s. 4 �.t '. - 4-�,t�,c 5. ,. 3- 1 B'r F,^ F'h► ""r� ',1','�q o,� �X' I k ` a r • ,>- C . • 1 v 1"•. rsr.. ' 4,N fi x ' J e' :. -ts , i ''''' °` f a - •E,Ze ■ r. a - 4 — tr G• _ x y r ; ny 7r * , e 1 d � .". ` . u. -- , S4 Y' / 4 i , .,e x --- � .e . A ,. 4 t .era . t - ., .0 '‘•. � + ! 'ra-7.?. / `Y Jr `". k '`. , 1, � A; ....,•,r d _ ,I 5 •C'.. 1-,!..',..-rt "`" ` t 'c. •' 4 � . X. +. �°• F W x 6 , s p t r 't - y �� ol ` w „, .,.,. '. - s; r r ; r e °< ' Z w 1 •. „' = ;'. ∎. . ; 'C a 4,- �r Ns.' �S .+ e - +"v' ■ a . o w s - `5 ” r �_ € 6 � e �'. :ii)' - _ L F c- ' ' r - 44 • .3 1 6 �Y k +n T f '" jam n ,. . r . _ „c, � - _ 4 . . t * r _ +y F , ¢ � -- '4 p,� ` [d 4f ° ' .-.'4 ' i� a w - ( . 1. { ` d ^1, t . ', ` - ..tee r te ° - -, - ' A*t' 4,, ' _ t.. , 7A ti .� e ¢ i „.. '+� { d" - 4 .d'"X AY 4 ef '-'1.1,0-',. �w t r te` � . �... Y � .. �: n. , - '6,� t ' . 's ue . �' ' Vd m+' �` g r' H ,t.4 ! ; AL g _ ' c`d '*r a �. .. q 2 Y `.." : '' 4 ; F4 n; .64' ' .,, .e. - x F r y ^ 1 .: , " 9 ® Zw: �'-- .e',xe•.., 3. Cottonwood saplings in the wetlan b uffe r . C willow are closer to the av r a within the wetland boundary. e AA a :5X. r Sr) y �, � i f D - _ • ,, - - 4 ; ,,, • , e, ' xw . � �. � - 4 ' ' t r ' i"y �2 ' -- ---R„t e- s 1 : $ 1 E C.-T,11,....,,,' 1'a.. "fi ts r -''',..17.,,.„--.,' L e' - _ • " ^ yr " % N 4r0,04'^ , - ' . , 4 yf 0 s� �! t . t -r ' , rr7 1 - —4-: 'ia ` tz �• 3 rV'v 7 � s r,, u � „ ` �� �"s r t �" � r e yr . ms �,i{ ir � 4 � t X {i yy . (,. x F•3 1" i a§ ' 7 l . • z � z � , t - • G . I � w � E tik �' t , 0 1 v F F' i .E 1 F ,' 4 " .+ t , ! 1'i b'y' � , � ate , ..4..A.4" -:. I..„...,,,::, .,A - -CA ' :-7', 4 ' - t , : , .,- ( 5:: t , w° .� 3 -S' ' '` t ' 'W y . 3�t s t ' � �` P , . "f.rr r t +p:. s . f ' -r' t , Y' ', r 7 , �,jj 1 h " r b : . 2 g # S . •nc .: ; ' , .m r •y -.+ I A r . 4,1`- l L T "f-55 sac 'Y_ ��, s , < 3 - `3' - , } t x wry' s t r S x n . - i 1 , d , / 1 - , "NV .,- 4 11;f44AA,egt . A a _ 1 A 7 'fit` - a ' fs e f .c.." - T , p aw p {a . 1 47 l " 1 q , _,,,e-rt,e,...r. ' .(: ��c- �a'3'.� °7' .�i Y ...:.. = � 4. In this location near the northwest corner of the pond, the wetland cons l ess than a five -f band of vegetation. As demonstrated by the vegetation break between willows i o f I . and cottonwoods. DOC. INDEX . 1 # F - 2 - --- - -- CITY OF YAKIMA �,t 1 ,, ti f 1. �r�%, LAN USE AP PLICATION ; . � , FEB 1 9 2 Cil a U t \ II DEPART OF COMiM AND EC DEVELOP 8 Nair; y' 129 NORTH SECOND STREET, 2 FLOOR PLA OF YA,l �\ ' ,, ;.. 4 a� ; � ; � D .„ ., YAKIMA, WASHINGTON 98902 � Dt �`.__z _ -'" VOICE: (509) 575 -6183 FAX: (509) 575 -6105 g 3 z vim' t. �.a„ -s4 rfi 5- s s.. - s;i V:. tY ;� �- i'�Y?s�r �i ;r.� 3. 5 P y l[NSTitt.70 ONS , JP.LEASE RE. ID, 'IIi,ST =wPlease type or p n tyo r an wers'dearI vms i *;! ,,,.„ . `• Pea Answer all questions completely. If you have any questions about this form or the application process 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. w �?�� � �� =�E�IE: iM��Q..n r:. :�,_ ao.nz25a�.,'�?'dt,, . L, . .E ... M o lrO n i.• t#4 V., a er . x . _ : ' 1. APPLICANT NAME Yakima Greenway Foundation /City Of Yakima 2. .APPLICANT ADDRESS STREET 111 S. 18th Street /129 N. 2nd Street CITY Yakima AND PHONE NUMBER STATE WA ZIP 98901 PHONE (509)453 -8280 MESSAGE Same 1 3. APPLICANT'S CHECK ❑ OWNER ❑ OWNER REPRESETATIVE INTEREST IN PROPERTY ONE ❑ CONTRACT PURCHASER ® OTHER Co- Sponsors 4. PROPERTY OWNER (IF OTHER THAN NAME City of Yakima APPLICANT) 5. PROPERTY OWNER'S STREET 129 N 2nd Street CITY Yakima ADDRESS AND PHONE (IF OTHER THAN ' STATE WA ZIP 98901 PHONE (509)575 -6000 MESSAGE APPLICANT) 6. ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER FOR SUBJECT PROPERTY: 19132013009 19132013007 7. EXISTING ZONING OF SUBJECT PROPERTY: SR 1 8. ADDRESS OF SUBJECT PROPERTY: 206 S. 18th Street 9. TYPE OF APPLICATION: (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY) 1 ❑ Class (2) Use X Environmental Checklist (SEPA) ❑ Right -of -Way Vacation ❑ Class (3) Use ❑ Modification to Approved Class (2) & (3) Uses ❑ Short Plat Exemption ❑ : Rezone ❑ Appear_. ❑ Shoreline ❑ Variance ❑ Non - Conforming Structure/Use ❑ Utility Easement Release ❑ Home Occupation ❑ Preliminary Subdivision ❑ Interpretation by Hearing Examiner ❑ Administrative Adjustment ❑ Short Plate: © Other - Comp Plan Amendment Critical Area ,PART. U -„SU PL" .E hrtoAPP ... C.kTJ[ON AND, PART Q . _. ° r : , 6_ C d ' .. '` . , . 10. SEE ATTACHED SHEETS s �� ® (j�.� !�.g�;,�ry��" �'� `p's� a '� €z���.,� � N r a� �c iy�,��� � � a ' n n�: x . . .. r .. PART IV- C ; I�8 0 WIS s .�.4i Y.Ww,.,2.!T 'kj a 2t� ° d4 'ftNi a i � e r '4 e. i] r W4 av'Sa.. M{ i 11. I certify that the information on this application and the required attachments are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. c Z(108 I SIGNATURE DATE r1 n Revised 9 - 98 FOR ADMINISTRATIVE USE ONLY 1 IDEX 1 FILE N(); # F - 1 DATE FEE PAD (0 1 1 i U D R E J ' E B16 D O -- LP .,� • HEAR7FTT,"[J _ III • 1 .:VCY USE ONLY - - --- ' i . Agency Reference W: . Date Received: - • Circulated by: (local govt. or agency) • 1 JOINT AQUATIC RESOURCES PERMIT. APPLICATION FORM (DARPA). w, (for use.in Washington State) 11112t • PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT IN BLACK INK. (D- . pp�� `' TO FILL IN ELECTRONICALLY, USE F11 TO MOVE THROUGH THE FORM ��rt+�0 V E® Q 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 Govemment FEB q � po4 Planning Department and Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife Area Habitat Biologist on the same day. r GD U • I NOTE: LOCAL GOVERNMENTS — You must submit any comments on these projects to WDFW within 15 working days. CITY OF Y� �(� ��� • Based on the instructions provided, i am sending copies of this application to the following: (check all that apply) PLANNING DI V. ® Local Government for shoreline: QSubstantial Development 0Conditional Use DVariance 0Exemption ORevision QFloodplain Management ®Critical Areas Ordinance I Q Washington Department of and Wildlife for HPA (Submit 3 copies to WDFW Region) - Q Washington Department of Ecology for 401 Water Quality Certification (to Regional Office - Federal Permit Unit) O Washington Department of Natural Resources for Aquatic Resources Use Authorization Notification Q Corps of Engineers for Q Section 404 Q Section 10 permit I o Coast Guard for. Q General Bridge Act Permit 0 Private Aids to Navigation (for non -bodge projects) Q. 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.- . I 1. APPLICANT Yakima Greenway Foundation /City of Yakima MAILING ADDRESS. I 111 S. 18th Street /129 N. 2nd Street Yakima, W' 9801 WORK PHONE I E -MAIL ADDRESS HOME PHONE FAX # (509)453 -82801 al @yakimagreenway.org (509)453 -0318 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 I 2. AUTHORIZED AGENT • MAILING ADDRESS 1 WORK PHONE E -MAIL ADDRESS HOME PHONE FAX # 3. Relationship of applicant to property: Q OWNER Q. PURCHASER Q LESSEE Q I 1 4. Name address and phone number of property owner(s) if other than applicant: .city of Y akima 129 N. 2nd Street Yakima, WA '98901 (509)575 -6000 5. Location (street address, including city, county and zip code, where proposed activity exists or will occur) , I 206 S. 18th Street Yakima, WA 98901 Local government with jurisdiction (city or county) City of Yakima Waterbody you are working in RPf1Prrinn Pond Tributary of WRIA # Is this waterbody on the 303(d) List** YES Q NO I If YES, what paramete Shoreline designation N /A. For 303d List, nttp:// www. ecy. wa .goviprograms /wgi303d /index.html Zoning designation SR Y. Section Section Township Range !Government Lot I 20 13 19 1 13007 DNR stream type if known- N/A . Latitude and Longitude: „ 46 0 ' S9 634 "Lot. Tax Parcel Number 19132013007 ` — 120 ° 28'35 . 24 1 " Long I ECY (110-15 (Rev. 11/04) JARPA Contact the State of Washington Cffice of Regulatory Assistance for latest version or call 360/407 -7037 or 800/917-0043 i 1. 1 1 • . . . . )c ,.<\.!, i „ X . .' r-Lit 1 6 Describe the current use of the property and structures .ig on the property Have you completed any portion of tr. Ised activity on this property? YES a NO For any portion of the proposed activity already completed on this property. indicate month.and year of completion. Property is currently a brownfield as a result of petroleum spill • • to west and south of site. Remediation and clean up have been completed and ecology has signed close out order on property. The • HIV only structure on property is chain link fence. Is the property agricultural tend? 0 YES 2 NO Are you a USDA program participant? 0 YES p NO 7a Describe the proposed wcrk•that needs aquatic permits: Complete plans and specifications should be provided for all work waterward FEB 1 g 7008 • of the ordinary high water mark or line, including types of equipment to be used. If applying for a shoreline permit, describe alt work within and beyond 200 feet of the ordinary high water mark. If you have provided attached materials to describe your project, you still ��Y� O F Y� must summarize the proposed work here Attach a separate sheet if additional space is needed K! MA PLANNING DIV. This project will not work on the water side of the OHW. The project will involve the grading and installation of a loft wide walking path and 2 elevated fishing piers that are cantilevered over water body. PREPARATION OF DRAWINGS: ee 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 oholograpns.of the project site. Out 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. The pond is heavily used, 'attracting walkers and juveniles who fish the restricted waters. While there are fences in place to keep people off the west and south shoreline, the public •1 persist in entering the area. Erosion of the bank and degradation of plant life is occuring as a resut of the illegal uses. By.putting in' • a path, we can limit damage to other places, as well as protect the - ' " '-s �' ' ' °' W aquatic life, water quality, 7c. D-cnbe the potential impacts o chars enstic u es o - er•so•y Th- - -s - n• . - 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. • The pond is a human made pond which is used as an appurtenance to an urban park. The pond is stocked with trout and is a handicap and juvenile fishing only facility. • 7d. For in water construction k, will your project be in compliance with the State of Washington water quality standards for turbidity WAC 173.201A -110? YES n NO (See USEFUL DEFINITIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS) 8. Will the project be constructed in stages? YES 0 NO l Proposed starting date Spring 2008 • Estimated duration of activity: 60 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 above • the OHW, not in the water Waterward of the mean higher high water for tidal waters? 10 Will fill material (rock, fill, bulkhead. or other material) be placed: No Waterward of the ordinary high water mark or line for fresh waters'? If YES. VOLUME (cubic yards) / AREA (acres) 0 Waterward of the mean higher high water for tidal waters? . • If YES. VOLUME (cubic yards) • / AREA (acres) ECY 070 - 15 (Rev 1 1104) JARPA Contact the State of Washington :Ace of Requlaiory,•>_istanc a for latest version or call 360/407.7037 or 800/917 -0043 • • 2 • • • • 1 1 • 1 NDD. • 111. Will.material be placed in wetlands? 0 YES NO • If YES: A. Impacted area in acres: . B. Has a delineation been completed? If YES, please submit with application. ® YES 0 NO I C. Has a wetland report been prepared? If YES, please submit with application ® YES 0 NO D. Type and composition of fill material (e.g., sand, etc.) E. Material source: �E�. 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). We irman Series G. WILL PROPOSED ACTIVITY CAUSE FLOODING OR DRAINING OF WETLANDS? 0 YES ® NO �pp8 If YES, IMPACTED AREA IS ACRES OF DRAINED WETLANDS. . • NOTE: If your project will impact greater than 4 of an acre of wetland, submit a mitigation plan to the Corps and Ecology for approval along with the JARPA form. CITY I 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 '4 acre in size, PL ANN Rp' YA K I MA • or b) tidal wetlands or wetlands ad to tidal water. Please submit the JARPA form and mitigation plan to Ecology for an individual 401 certification if a) or b) applies. p 117, p 1 N G• Div. 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 E] NO ' I 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) I 13. Will excavation or dredging be required in water or wetlands'? 0 .YES NO If YES: . 50 A. Volume: (cubic yards) /area . (acre) • B. Composition of material to be removed: I C. Disposal site for excavated material: D. Method of dredging: 14. Has the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) been completed L YES 0 NO • SEPA Lead Agency: City of Yakima I SEPA Decision: DNS, MDNS, EIS, Adoption, Exemption Decision Date (end of comment period) 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, . I 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 IDENTIF /CATION DATE OF APPLICATION DATE APPROVED COMPLETED? 1 . NO.. . 1 . 16. Has any agency denied approval for the activity you're applying for or for any activity directly related to the activity described herein? 0 YES NO • I If YES, explain: 1 ECY 070 -15 (Rev. 11/04) JARPA Contact the State of Washington C•ffice of Requlatory Assistance for latest version or call 360/407 -7037 or 800/917 -0043 ' 3 1 • 1 ll��r . DOC. • 1 . . . • INDEY • . # • • SECTION B - Use for Shoreline and Corp_ Engineers permits only:, ! RECEIVE rrs� 17a. Total cost of project. This means the fair market value of the project, including materials, labor. machine rentals, etc. D $125,000 'FEB . 9 2008 17b. If a project or any portion of a project receives funding from a federal agency, that agency is responsible for ESA consultation. Please Il indicate if you wit receive federal funds and what federal agency is providing those funds. See instructions for information on ESA.* FEDERAL FUNDING O YES [5i NO If YES, please list the federal agency. CITY OF.YAKIMA • PLANNING DIV. II 18. Local govemment 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. I Deleted: _ —_ • NAME ADDRESS .PHONE NUMBER t 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 start work ONLY after all necessary permits have been received. - • Cs"^, DATE SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT 2-1 A(013; I 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 NATURE OF APPLICANT • . DATE 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.. COMPLETED BY LOCAL OFFICIAL ' 1 A. Nature of the existing shoreline. (Describe type of shoreline, such as marine, stream, lake, lagoon, marsh, bog, swamp, flood plain, floodway, delta; type of beach, such as accretion, erosion, high bank, low bank, or dike; material such as sand, gravel, mud, day, rock, riprap; and extent and type of bulkheading, if any) B. In the event that any of the proposed buildings or structures will exceed a height•of thirty -five feet above the average grade level, indicate the approximate location of and number of residential units, existing and potential; that will have an obstructed view: C. If the application involves a conditional use or variance, set forth in full that portion of the master program which provides that the proposed use may be a conditional use, or, in the case of a variance, from which the variance.is being sought: These Agencies are Equal Opportunity and Affirmative Adion employers. For special accommodation needs. please contact the appropriate agency in the instructions 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 4 1 • 1 • 1 • - .l `� C. 1 Yakima County GIS Page 1 of 1 Yakima County - Washington JPrint Map l Land Information Portal JCbose Maps -.. 1 - * .i:[a r'- ;tyr: ; Iht - :; - E: ' g t xu & •'tee $ qi * t : s , t $ ��.. , S 7 Y k zcY a '3 i sa ts` tu ' aver { .1 :3x S �'�' , ,Jt4 .$ * E 3'"e "• t ' 1 fr2: ,, P {r •"�" .:�.. " �"x•'. z •zr t '• "iti b • :. a ...,.,,ten e ! ..: Y l .. t7 ;rr -t ) ;:• 7 � 4�,. ''.s � � t max. �. F ,� -. I � -, `�� ��""'�`� c r"'•'e4 qy� ? -. .YY`�' .� _ v.. tY .t.. - .' 4' q - iesf..'" '� s ^tai r7 . z fit- m '1 ,' ,' `tom '. 3� . `".Yqc .usYy -�k4 , I &�' �F r �@�$ "` , {a � `` '"x1'3tiae+= n i 1' �+.. �a �=^ @ 5`' ?�'`�j .`F�`° s ? c � '1 G :V..a .esd"` �'.,.` C.t3' ^ j �`on?•: . i� ; r rK. `a4 ? gv fit& ':�4 P"k d ar �k ; ;1: :: kT-,_, : f w " v � ""r �® i,. '' .""ry�'` ke k�-i :: :: ,, 3F - °:• x, ;ate '',` t'^ a f r t a ,# +� ❑ h �2 " S'a g - «r^ '31i �' * 4aa '4 ... ' 'iw #$ "• , y ' " ''...l� 4° ' `..as. A ' } a .c ..,.4 rat`✓': ��' fi`..s. ;.`L: • t k RECEIVED WWW.YAKIMAP.COM (City Limits Yakima County GIS Y w I +� L Sections C 128 N 2nd Street r EB 9 2008 Yakima, WA 98901 fir* s� (509)574-2990 r .. y CITY OF YAKIMA PLANNING DIV. " Mapscale: lin = 18632ft MAP AND PARCEL DATA ARE BELIEVED TO BE ACCURATE, BUT ACCURACY IS NOT GUARANTEED; THIS IS NOT A LEGAL Copyright (C) 2006 Yakima County 1 DOCUMENT AND SHOULD NOT BE SUBSTITUTED FOR A TITLE SEARCH, APPRAISAL, SURVEY, FLOODPLAIN OR ZONING Printed On: VERIFICATION �t �l, :NrDEX 1 http://yakimap. com/servlet/com. esri.esrimap.Esrimap ?name = YakGISH &Cmd= PrintMap &... 2/19/2008 Y alcima County ci15 Page 1 of 1 I ) Yakima County - Washington in 'Print WO Information Portal jCIDSeMapj -,411. rllrILIMIIIIII ® ® r USIF 1 Nkii, .- ,,, Ilt x.:,-.n, C 'Ll1.77-ri '' l El 'i P VIII .--,,,,„,,,f,r-'`.-N.-\\T.,.; -, ‘,...,-.- i , - 4 , - ' w trilik i ] , ,.,,,,,b,,,,,,, ijs -,.. � _ l o '' - lit . \XXVIII TN- ..--:'s --a- '''''''' A -.7rt,,:-..Z.Ibratem...,,, 4.-...:'-3 ---,.,='-'. ,,,,,,,,.. r 1 III III6 ``!i pttlEPl(Ift� t : n °, '® _ t� 4 ;® ..ssoni..-fiatrozwpWi 411, �i5t a' Eat g aa � a i� @r'..- ,� ,,Erb" f .,. y �,. # a �-. :°� 3� t;� ® .E tl< III ® 1 L 'tea , , k Ir M ri 7 ,z \ te a _ Eli '' v - �' a , m { lexcn -.-I - i '- 11 4.e t Td a 1 1 _ p s. -ate mi Y 1 t , „ , ms ' � t . _' k d ' , ' . „" 0.a. -` z• ', s��F ��„a E °°, I �� Q. l t i em00411., , • ' rte ..! krulei S{®� 0 m i 3 ' '' ; -� 1 I 6 � -7 i � 1IT5 E ° ryq �� �� V � ® � ® � ®1 =max � a t;i �� 1 YE2. 9 1 ' 1 �89� ` lf9 ` b l a 'P C pl ` 1 4 y � k E(ate :;� .. a tl , . ' g��q�j - F` Y 7 F` E` ._ R y \si --- , x•,. p t l �tr l oft by_ = � il tA i �� ow, s s , ra m x- � . ,. 9E ft i ce. i � � � ,i ....z � t a \\tos:w4: E E IEv� �` p � ® Illl .. �' `� h. .% 1 \\ Eat ' {� i ga c� R ' - � z °� X � V s tss s 4 : - ®' , I� � � a, fir. r -.. a' ,t ° g , ^" ';4 x` - ° ,.7,4,,b,„___ 1 f ',..-1--6,.,.. !-a,- i..t .fit t'£,' y i . . # � + E'q Y n .F - r - -: ,,...._,- ,v,,, i rlam t , lm ‘.. :.,,.,--„:„.„: 1 , r, i a Map Range:19 Townshi 13 Section: 20 a: 20 t � a " � WWW.YAKIMAP.COM N t } I (City Limits RECEIVED Yakima County GIS I Sections 128 N 2nd Street: w y '' e - .. , Yakima, WA 98901 '.--.,,, � a 5,,i (509)574 2990 s FEB 1 9 2008 legMk",.: , , ++�1 A� . . O Inch = 1000 1200 Feet 1500 2000 ` Feet 00 ` • � �: � � CITY ®F Y AKIMA PLANNING DIV. MAP AND PARCEL DATA ARE BELIEVED TO BE ACCURATE, BUT ACCURACY IS NOT GUARANTEED; THIS IS G Copyright (C) 2006 Yakima County DOCUMENT AND SHOULD NOT BE SUBSTITUTED FOR A TITLE SEARCH, APPRAISAL, SURVEY, FLOODPLAIN OR NOT ZONING Printed On: 2/19/2008 9:22 AM I VERIFICATION DOC. INDEX f `. http:// yakimap. comiservleticom .esri.esrimap.Esrimap ?name = YakGISH &Cmd =PrintMap &... -2Tr972008 . Yakima Greenway Foundation 1 EXHIBIT LIST I CHAPTER G Notices . # � ' » * � > ��� •� _ ws :� '� 'tDOCUMNT � �4h' ` �• � ,, � �- ��< � -� ��� �- �k ��.� � � .. �: a • �' x a / � T � � I :4 DATE ,. G -1 Determination of Application Completeness 3/03/08 1 G -2 Land Use Action Installation Certificate 3/06/08 G -3 Notice of Application, Environmental Review, and Public 3/06/08 I Hearing G -4 Legal Notice: Notice of Application, Environmental Review, 3/06/08 and Public Hearing I G -5 Press Release: Notice of Application, Environmental Review, 3/06/08 ; and Public Hearing= G -6 Parties and Agencies Notified 3/06/08 1 G -7 Affidavit of Mailing: Notice of Application, Environmental 3/06/08 Review, and Public Hearing I G -8 Notice of Decision of Mitigated Determination of Non 3/27/08 Significance (MDNS) G -9 Legal Notice: MDNS 3/27/08 1 G -10 Press Release: MDNS 3/27/08 G -11 Parties and Agencies Notified 3/27/08 1 G -12 Affidavit of Mailing: Notice of Decision of MDNS 3/27/08 G -13 Hearing Examiner Packet Distribution List 4/24/08 I G -14 Hearing Examiner Agenda 4/24/08 1 G -15 Hearing Examiner Public Hearing Sign -In Sheet 4/24/08 G -16 Notification of Hearing Examiner's Recommendation to the 5/12/08 I City Council G -17 Certified Mail to the Applicant 5/12/08 I G -18 Applicant and Parties of Interest Notified of Hearing 5/12/08 Examiner's Recommendation: G -19 Affidavit of Mailing: Notice of Hearing Examiner's 5/12/08 Recommendation G -20 Letter of Transmittal: City Council Public Hearing, Parties 5/28/08 and Agencies Notified, and Vicinity Map I G -21 Agenda Statement for Set Date of City Council Public 6/03/08 Hearing G -22 Notice of City Council Public Hearing 6/13/08 1 G -23 Resolution and Agenda Statement for Public Hearing 7/01/08 1 RESOLUTION NO. R- 2008 - A RESOLUTION approving the Hearing Examiner's recommendation to approve with conditions, the request of the Yakima Greenway Foundation for a Public Agencv. and Utility Exception . under the City of Yakima's Critical Areas Ordinance (YMC 15.27.540).to: build a pathway, cantilevered fishing piers and other associated amenities :within the critical areas of Sarg Hubbard Park's Reflection Pond located at 206 S. • 18 Street, Yakima, Washington, and authorizing the Mayor to direct staff to issue the appropriate Critical Area Substantial Development Permit. WHEREAS, on April 24, 2008, the Hearing Examiner .held a public hearing to consider 111 the application of a Public Agency and Utility Exception to the City of Yakima's Critical Areas Ordinance to allow the construction of a pathway, cantilevered fishing piers and other I associated amenities within the associated critical areas of Sarg Hubbard Park's Reflection Pond located at 206 S. 18 Street, Yakima, Washington, submitted by Al Brown, Yakima Greenway Foundation Manager, City File No. CAO #2 -08; and WHEREAS, on May 8, 2008, the Hearing Examiner issued his recommendation 1 approving the proposed Public Agency and Utility Exception subject to the descriptions and conditions contained within the City assigned file numbers UAZO CAO #2 -08 and EC #11 -08; and WHEREAS, as this Public Agency and Utility Exception comes before Council for review each member declares that he has had no contact with either the applicant or opponents of the proposed application; now, therefore, 11 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF YAKIMA, WASHINGTON: The proposed Public Agency and Utility Exception recommended, by the City's Hearing Examiner for construction of a pathway cantilevered fishing piers, and other associated 1 amenities within the associated critical areas of Reflection Pond located within Sarg Hubbard Park.at 206 S. 18 Street, Yakima, Washington, is hereby approved and the Mayor is hereby authorized to direct staff to prepare the appropriate Critical Area Substantial Development Permit. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this 1st day of July, 2008. D avid Edler, Mayor 1 ATTEST: City Clerk DOC. INDEX 1 1 BUSINESS OF THE CITY COUNCIL YAKIMA, WASHINGTON AGENDA STATEMENT Item No. For Meeting Of: July 1, 2008 ITEM TITLE: Closed record hearing to consider a resolution to approve a request from the Yakima Greenway. Association 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 pathway, cantilevered fishing piers and otherr associated amenities around Sarg Hubbard Park's Reflection Pond. SUBMITTED BY: William R Cook Director of Community and Economic Development CONTACT PERSON/TELEPHONE: Jeff Peters Assistant Planner SUMMARY EXPLANATION: The Yakima Greenway Association 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 pathway, cantilevered fishing piers and other associated amenities around Sarg Hubbard Park's Reflection Pond. As part of that permit process, the Yakima Greenway Association requested that the City grant a Public Agency and Utility Exception allowing adjustment of certain critical areas setback and buffer requirements. On April 24, 2008, 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 May 8, 2008, 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 pathway, fishing piers and amenities 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 Greenway Association'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: City Manager STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Accept the hearing examiner's recommendation; adopt the resolution • approving a public agency and utility exception for the proposed project and direct staff to issue the appropriate Critical Areas Substantial. Development Permit. 1 BOARD RECOMMENDATION: The Hearing Examiner recommended approval of the Public Agency and Utility Exception with conditions on May 8, 2008. COUNCIL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: Recommended for full Council consideration and approval by the Council Economic Development Committee on February 6, 2008. COUNCIL ACTION: 1 DOC. INDEX 1 YAKIMA CITY COUNCIL NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Critical Area Public Agency and Utility. Exception Yakima Greenway/ City of Yakima NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Yakima City Council will conduct a closed record public hearing to receive public comment on the Hearing Examiner's recommendation to approve with conditions the request of the Yakima GreenwayFoundationfor a Public Aoencv and Utility Exception to the City of Yakima's Critical Area Ordinance (YMC 15.27.540) submitted by Bill Cook, City of Yakima Department of Communityand Economic Development. This project is to build a pathway and cantilevered fishing piers •within the associated critical areas around Reflection Pond. This project is located. at 206`' South .l8 Street; Yakima, Washington. The public hearing will be held on Tuesday, July1, 2008, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council 1 Chambers at Yakima City Hall, 129 North 2" Street; Yakima; WA: Any citizen wishing to comment on this request is welcome to attend the public hearing or contact the City Council in the following manner: 1) Send a letter via regular mail to °Yakima City Council, 129 N. 2 Street, . Yakima, WA 98901; or, 2) E -mail your comments to ccounciLcLyakima.wa.us. Include in the e-mail subject line, "Yakima Greenway." Please also include your name and mailing address. Dated this 4 day of June, 2008. Deborah J. Moore City Clerk 111 Mailed Friday, June 13, 2008 1 1 1 DOC. INDEX 1 CITY OF YAKIMA, PLANNING DIVISION LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL • I, Rosalinda Ibarra, as an employee of the City of Yakima, Planning Division; have transmitted to: Debbie Moore, Yakima City Clerk, by hand delivery, the following. documents: 0 1 1. Mailing labels for Yakima Greenway Foundation (CAO #2 -08, EC #11=08). Including all labels for adjoining property owners within 500 feet of subject. property, agencies and parties of record. 2. One black and white vicinity map. . P 3. I have also transmitted to Debbie Moore, Yakima City Clerk, by e -mail, a Legal Notice which was published for the Hearing Examiner public hearing. This will supply information to be included in the Clerk's legal notice of the City Council Public Hearing. 1 Signed this 28"' day. of May. 2008. • n / Q(A alinda Ibarra Planning Specialist 1 Received By: at _l? O 1 Date: S 2 -8/0 g 1 DOC. INDEX 1 -, -- rage i ori Ibarra, Rosalinda From: Ibarra, Rosalinda Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2008 10:12 AM 1 To: Moore, Debbie Subject: Yakima Greenway Legal Notice Attachments: Notice of Application and Hearing = Greenway_legal notice.doc Attached is the "Hearing Examiner Public Hearing" legal notice for Yakima Greenway, which is scheduled for a public hearing on n 2 �fore the City Council. The mailing labels and vicinity map are on their way. Thanks! J Po a b® 7 Rosalinda Ibarra Planning Specialist City of Yakima Planning Division p: (509) 575 -6183 ribarra@ci.yakima.wa.us 1 I - t 1 000. INDEX #. 1 5/28/2008 191 20- 2 01 191320 -31434 ' 191 20 -31433 •BLT GRA EL TR T ci:Xi4 . BL LITTL . TRUST BL NW CO ST . PO X 17 PO BOX 5 PO OX ARIV , Arizona 85601 ' ARI C Arizona ,5601 ARI , Arizona 85601 • :191320 -24001 191320- 24433 191320 -24009 Ir OB HALL'S HOLDINGS LLC CECIL E & E PATRICIA FITCHETT • CENTRAL WASHINGTON STORAGE LLC O BOX 1262 290 PERRY WAY 111 S 33RD ST #100 AKIMA, WA 98907 -1262 YAKIMA; WA YAKIMA, WA 98901 -1471 1 p - 191 20 -24010 191320 - 24443 191320 24404 CEN RAL WA ING N STORAGE LLC GINGER-L SPARKS JEWEL & ELLA RIDER 11 11 33 ST #10 301 CHALMERS ST 206 S 18TH ST AK2 WA 98901 -1471 YAKIMA, WA 98901 YAKIMA, WA 98901 i 1 .91320 -24439 191320 -24405 191320 -24441 .. J WEL & A RI R JOYCE EVANS SNIPE JULIO ARREOLA 2 6 S TH. 3211 RIVERHURST DR 702 E NOB HILL BLVD II A WA 98901 I FAYETTVILLE, North Carolina 2830 - YAKIMA, WA 98901 91320 -24444 II 191320 -31436 191320 -24442 EIL &-NANCY ROOT ROBERT. L & EULA L NORMAN ROY & DIANE BEAMAN 03 CHALMERS ST 503 POWELL ST 1140 SCHULER GRADE YAKIMA, WA 98901 YAKIMA, WA 98901 -2123 YAKIMA, WA 98908 -8841 191320 - 31902 191320 -24003 1 1320 - 24004 0 UPERIOR ASPHALT CONCRETE WAL MART REAL ESTATE BUSINESS TR W MART REA TATE USINESS I/ 0 BOX 10268 PO BOX 8050 PO OX 80 AKIMA, WA 98909 -1268 BENTONVILLE, Arkansas 72712 -8050 BENTO LLE, Arkansas 72712 -80 • 1 19 20 -24440 191320-13001 . 191320-13006 +SAL • RT R E , EST E BUS ''ESS TR KIMA C Y IMA C�3ITY 'Ir �^ � O Be :o 1 D S T 12 I ENTONVILLE, Arkansas 72712 -8050 YAKIMA, WA 98901 -2613 YAKIMA, WA 98901 -2613 • • 11 31320 -13007 191320 -13007 191320 -13009 n Y KIMA CITY • IMA CITY 129 N 2ND ST 1 N 2 12 2ND I IKIMA, WA 98901 -2613 I YA , WA 98901- 3 1 YAKIMA, A 98901 -2613 Yakima Greenway Foundation 1Iii1 13.010 Attn: Al Brown MA CITY 111 South 18th Street • l2 N 2ND ST f K -2613 Yakima, WA 98901 I I • labels printed for map shee greenway i 1 4/ DOC. . INDEX t # —P- OD -RG, SEPA Reviewer Mr. Greg Griffith Army Corps Dept. of Natural Resources Div. of Archeol & Hist. Pres. PO Box c -3755 713 Bowers Rd PO Box 48343 I Seattle, WA 98124 Ellensburg, WA 98926 Olympia, WA 98504 , Sheila Ross 1 Cascade Natural Gas Dept of Soc/Health Service WA State Attorney Gen. Office 701 S. 1 Ave Capital Programs Ofc. Bldg #2 1433 Lakeside Ct. Ste102 1 Yakima, WA 98902 MS OB -23B Yakima WA 98902 Olympia, WA 98504 ' Chamber of Commerce Dept. of Health City of Union Gap 1 Michelle Vazquez 10 N 9 St. PO Box 3008 Yakima, WA 98901 1500 W. 4 ,i, Ave. St. 305 Union Gap, WA 98903 Spokane, WA 99204 Gary W. Pruitt Dept. of Transportation Tom McAvoy Clean Air Authority 1 Planning Engineer Q -West 6 S. 2 " St., Room 1016 2809 Rudkin Road .8 S. 2 11a Ave. Room 304 Yakima, WA 98901 Union Gap, WA 98903 Yakima, WA 98902 i Environmental Protection Agency Yakima Co. Commissioners Mr. Lee Faulconer 1200 6 Ave. MS 623 128 North 2 Street Dept. of Agriculture Seattle, WA 98101 Yakima, WA 98901 PO Box 42560 Olympia, WA 98504 FAA Yakima Co Health Dist Gwen Clear 1 Art 2200 W. Washington McKuen Dept of Ecology Yakima, WA 98903 1210 Ahtanum Ridge Drive 15 W. Yakima Ave. St. 200 Union Gap, WA 98903 Yakima, WA 98902 Mr. Steven Erickson Department of Ecology 1 Yakima Co Planning Environ Review Section Nob Hill Water Co "a 6111 Tieton Drive 128 N 2 St. PO Box 47703 Yakima, WA 98908 1 Yakima, WA 98901 Olympia, WA 98504 -7703 Mr. Vern .Redifer Chuck Hagerhjelm Pacific Power Yakima Co Pub. Services WA State Emergency Mgmt. Div. Mike Paulson 1 128 N 2 " St., 4"' Floor Mitigation, Analysis & Planning Mgr 500 N. Keys Rd Yakima, WA 98901 , Building 20 Yakima, WA 98901 Camp Murray, WA 98430 -5122 Cultural Resources Program Mr. Bill Bailey Johnson Meninick, Mgr Dept. of CTED Yakima Cnty Dev. Serv. Ctr. Yakama Indian Nation Growth Management Services 128 N. 2 " St. 4 Floor , PO Box 42525 Yakima, WA 98901 PO Box 151 Olympia, WA 98504 -2525 Toppenish, WA 98948 1 Mose Segouches Mr. Philip Rigdon Transportation Planner Yakama Indian Nation Yakama Indian Nation YVCOG Environmental Protection Prog. PO Box 151 311 N. 4 Street STE 202 PO Box 151 t 1 Toppenish, WA 98948 Yakima, WA 98901 L Toppenish, WA 989. EX 11 . Federal Aviation Administration Environmental Coordinator Mr. Doug M Cayla Morgan, Airport Planner Bureau of Indian Affairs Wastewater Tre atment Plant Seattle Airports District Office p0 Box 632 1601 Lind Ave. S.W. Toppenish, WA 98948 Renton, WA 98055 -4056 11. WSDOT Aviation Division Lavina Washines, Chairman - Mr. Marty Miller • John Sambaugh Yakama Tribal Council Office of Farm Worker Housing 1 3704 172n St. N.E. Suite K -12 PO Box 151 1400 Summitview #203 Arlington, WA 98223 Toppenish, WA 98948 Yakima, WA 98902 11 Soil Conservation Dist Dept. of Archaeology & Historic Eric Bartrand Attn: Ray Wondercheck Preservation Dept. of Fisheries 1606 Perry St Suite F PO Box 48343 1 701 S. 24 Ave I Yakima, WA 98902 Olympia, WA 98504 -8343 Yakima, WA 98902 I Martin Humphries Mr. Scott Nicolai Mr. Buck Taylor Yakima Valley Museum Yakama Indian Nation - Fisheries Yakima Airport 2105 Tieton Drive PO Box 151 2400 W. Washington Ave Yakima, WA 98902 Toppenish, WA, 98948 Yakima, WA 98903 Yakima School District Yakima Greenway Foundation WV School District II Attn: Ben Soria 111 S. 18`" St. Attn: Peter Ansingh 104 N. 4 Ave Yakima, WA 98901 8902 Zier Road Yakima, WA 98902 Yakima, WA 98908 • 1 1 1 1 1 - 1 DOC. INDEX # x -420 v W N Z • n co co • ,STNUT STREET - - • _ . • 1 W u, -BLVEH k 51 ec v) W C C V i T Ricw c� • • CP . • 1 H N Q g J ST i..... L. • 0 t. N CITY OF YAKIMA, WASHINGTON sCs a . VICINITY MAP o 'u� $ e4 A FILE NO: CAO #2 -08; EC #11 -08 6e APPLICANT: Yakima Greenway Foundation Subject Propert REQUEST: Construct pathway (approx 840 lineal ft) Yakima City Limits along west and south of Reflection Pond. i g Scale —] in = 400ft LOCATION: 206 South 18th Street . 0 200 4110 Greenway 02/22/08 °P Ii Int Y . . # 0 -2 O 1 � { AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING STATE OF WASHINGTON 1 CITY OF YAKIMA RE: CAO #2 -08, EC#11-08 Yakima Greenway Foundation 206 South 18 Street I, Rosalinda Ibarra, as an employee of the Yakima City Planning Division, have 1 dispatched through the United States Mails, a Notice of Hearing Examiner Recommendation. A true and correct copy of which is enclosed herewith; that said notice was addressed to the applicant by certified mail, 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 12th day of MAY, 2008. 1 That I mailed said notices in the manner herein set forth and that all of the statements made herein are just and true. 1 7 L2C)jbaaAa ' j Rosalinda Ibarra Planning Specialist 1 DOC. INDEX z1 • 1 Applicant and Parties of Interest Notified for NOTIFICATION OF HEARING EXAMINER'S '1 RECOMMENDATION dated May 12, 2008. Applicant: Yakima Greenway Foundation II File: CAO #2 -08, EC #11 -08 1 [Certified Mail] Yakima Greenway Foundation o Al Brown 111 South 18 Street Yakima, WA 98901 1 1 1 • 1 Dayana Sanchez City Legal Bill Cook Codes Director, CED DECISIONS ONLY Mike Antijunti Carolyn Belles City Clerk II Engineering Codes DECISIONS ONLY Sandy Cox Sam Granato Charlie Hines Codes Police Chief Fire Chief DECISIONS ONLY 1 Joan Davenport Office of Neighborhood Binder File I J p g od mde / e /Mail Traffic Engineering and DECISIONS ONLY Development Services 1 Jerry Robertson - 111 Codes DOC. Q INDEX # _ II 1 111 a ss �� u,a� �^ Lrl -0 CsE 3TIF�E ®. lVl , , . 4 . x p q-E A ' 1 Jo Insurance Covera ,r uin, 0, �. E rg Lr1 ,(Domestic M a►I Only X us stcomi - a, C3 . '.o rdeliveryonfo rm abortm __ --„_, _ e"at ,,,_„ P . 1 M IA Postage rjIIIIIIIII i O C3 Certified Fee Postmark Here i t� Rs Receipt Fee • 2 (Endorsement Required) C3 Restricted Delivery Fee I r_ (Endorsement Required) _._. - N ,,n yakima.:Greenway Foundation ° Al Brown - - - - -' - - -- 1 r- 111 S. 18th St, 98901 for .... _._,yam. _..... .`_. 1 s�'4a t rs. e a -".'Ac - .- A� 'Y"'�a. �+ ee'� �'[ €• -z.ex _ SEND COMPLETE -Vvq, ' ., COMP TE s Tlo VERY , F { art ::,. 4 � " ut., .� . � .,� .a�.. . ;`_ = II 1 a Complete Items 1, 2, and 3 Also complete • A. Signature 4 I i n o Agent .. Item 4 Restricted; Delivery s is deired.. L • ��ee m Print your name and address on the reverse ` `. so that we can return the card to you B, Received by (Printed Name) C. Date of Delive I I Attach this card. the back`of the mailpiece, / / i / 3 G� o r on the front if . ace permits: D. s del =ry address different from Item f? 0 Yes 1., Article A dd r ess ed to: If YES, enter delivery address below: O. No Yakima.Greenway Foundation Attn: Al Brown 111 South 18th Street 3. Service Type Yale 3na, WA :98901 `Eernfi d Mall • 0 Express Man 1 0 ' eturn Receipt for Merchandise _ 1 0 Insured Mail 0 C.O.D. 4: Restricted Delivery? (Extra Fee) 0 Yes 2. ArticleNumber • 7005 2570 0000 1372 0515 . (Transfer from service GOO PS F or m 38 February 2004 D omestic Return Receipt' 102595-02-M-1540 1 DOC. INDEX 1 11 1 11 NOTIFICATION OF HEARING EXAMINER'S 11 RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL May 12, 2008 On May 8, 2008 the City of Yakima Hearin g Examiner rendered his recommendation on UAZO EC #11 -08, CAO #02 -08. The applicant is requesting a public agency exception to eliminate the Critical Areas Ordinance wetland buffer and setback areas for the 1 construction of a. pathway and two cantilevered fishing piers along the west and south sides of Reflection Pond in Sarg Hubbard Riverside Park. The application was reviewed at a public hearing held on April 24, 2008. 1 A copy of the Hearing Examiner's findings and Recommendation is enclosed. The Hearing Examiner's Recommendation will be considered by the Yakima City Y Y 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 of Yakima, Planning Division. Jeff Peters Assistant Planner 11 Date of Mailing: May 12, 2008 Enclosures: Hearing Examiners Recommendation 11 1 DOC. 11 INDEX — /(P HEARING SIGN -IN SHEE.�' CITY OF YAKIMA HEARING EXAMINER YAKIMA CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 1 HEARING DATE: April 24, 2008 CASE FILE # APPLICANT SITE ADDRESS A. RJW VAC #1 -08 Loveless & Johnson (CONTINUED; Vicinity 74 Ave & Englewood B. CAO #2 -08 Yakima Greenway Foundation 206 South 18` Street EC # #11 -08 1 PLEASE WRITE LEGIBLY! Please indicate which proposal you are interested in: kor B. CASE NAME ADDRESS ZIP. CODE 14- i -A•IL4 rm cs, /0 I) oS r(A Gf VuA 1 t o 1 1 DOC. INDEX # 0 -! 5 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Planning Division s .-. a $04: i ¢ r x h i i 1 }% 129 North Second Street 2nd Floor Yakima Washington 98901 VZI 4 *1 (509) 575 -6183 • Fax (509) 575 -6105 • www.ci.yakima.wa.us I '11 �1 Y d ± _� • ,1 1 ,-4'� • e,1 F¢¢4 - CITY OF YAKIMA I HEARING EXAMINER AGENDA e Yakima City Hall Council Chambers Thursday, April 24, 2008 9:00 a.m. 1 I. CALL TO ORDER ' II. INTRODUCTION - . III. PUBLIC HEARING II A. LOVELESS & JOHNSON (continued from 4/10/08) R/W VAC #1 -08 Planner Assigned: Vaughn McBride Address: Vicinity 74` Ave & Englewood Request: Vacate of portion of right of way B. YAKIMA GREENWAY FOUNDATION. (2/19/08) CAO #2 - t Planner Assigned: Jeff Peters EC #11 - Address:: • 206 South l8` Street Request: Construct pathway along West and South Sides of Reflection Pond IV. ADJOURNMENT I If you are unable to attend the hearing, you may submit your comments in writing prior to the hearing. I You may also submit written testimony at the hearing. 1 0 1 " 11 Yakima DDv. >_.ry «A .. ne acnr 1 INDEX 1111 r $ ea — Pi 1994 in flearing Examiner Packet Phil Lamb Ken Crockett 'Distribution List 311 North 3 Street Mike Brown AGENDA ONLY Yakima, WA 98901 Comm. Relations ' KIT -KATS Radio Yakima Assoc. of Realtors 4010 Summitview, Suite 200 Gov. Affairs Committee Sam_Granato ' Yakima, WA 98908 2707 River Road Police .Chief Yakima, WA 98902 -1165 1 KARY Radio KCYU -FOX 68 Charlie Hines • 1200 Chesterly Dr. #160. David Okowski Fire Chief 1 Yakima, WA 98902 3804 Kern Way #B Yakima, WA 98902 KIMA TV Pacific Power P.O. Box 702 Mike Paulson Debbie Moore 98907 500 N. Keys Rd. City Clerk I YrnaTA Yakima, WA 98901 KNDO TV Office of Rural FWH , 1608 S. 24` Ave Marty Miller Carolyn Belles Yakima, WA 98902 1400 Summitview #203 Codes Yakima, WA 98902 I Yakima Herald- Republic Ben Soria KBBO -KRSE Radio Yakima School Dist. #7 IP.O. Box 9668 104 North 4` Street 1200 Chesterlye Dr. St. 160 Yakima, WA 98909 Yakima, WA 98902 Yakima, WA 98902 Business Times VIVA Patrick D. Spurgin .O. Box 511 Bruce Smith 411 N. 2 St. IToppenish, P WA 98948 P.O. Box 2052 Yakima, WA 98901 Yakima, WA 98907 'Dave Zabel] Yakima Valley.C.O.G. • KAPP'TV 4th Paul. Gary: Assistant City Manager: 311 N. 4 Street STE 202 1 Yakima, WA 98901. P.O. Box 40208 Yakima, WA 98909 -1208 • !Dick Zais Gary Cuillier City Manager Codes Bulletin Board 314 N. 2" Street Yakima, WA 98901 1 ry 1 # __ 6 -!0 _ 1 Hearing Examiner Packet AGENDA, STAFF REPORT, SITE City Legal Department Engineering 1 PLAN AND MAPS Mike Antijunti Yakima County Planning Doug Maples Bill Cook. County Courthouse Codes and Planning Manager CED Director 1 Bill Cobabe Binder .Copy DON'T FORGET TO. SEND ONE ONDS Manager TO THE APPLICANT .. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 INDEX 1 1 1 AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING STATE OF WASHINGTON 1 CITY OF YAKIMA Re: EC #11 -08 Yakima Greenway 206 Sc uth' 18` Street I, Rosalinda Ibarra,. as an employee of the Yakima City. Planning Division, have dispatched through the United States Mails,: a Notice of..Decision (SEPA), A 1 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 27th day of March ,2008. That I mailed said notices in the manner herein set forth and that all of the 1 statements made herein are just and true. ■ Rosalinda lbarra 1 Planning Specialist 1 1 1 1 DOC. INDEX 191320 -42001 1913 • -31434 )1'1320 -3 433 b 1 . BLT GRAVEL TRUST :LT LTTLE a RUST B NW •, TRUS' PO BOX 517 • "0 :OX 51 PO BOX 1 ' ARIVACA, Arizona 85601 ARIVACA, Arizona 85601 AR V•'A, A zona 85601 11 191320 -24001 191320 -24433 1 320 -2'40• BOB HALL'S HOLDINGS LLC CECIL E & E PATRICIA FITCHETT CE TRAL AS•ING . ORAGI/L] PO BOX 1262 290 PERRY WAY 111 S 3RD S' •100 YAKIMA, WA 98907 -1262 YAKIMA, WA 58901 YAKI'•, WA 98901 -1471 191320 -24010 191320-24443 111320- 4404 CENTRAL WASHINGTON STORAGE LLC GINGER L SPARKS J :WEL • LLA - DER 111 S 33RD ST #100 301 CHALMERS ST 20. 18.H YAKIMA, WA 98901 -1471 YAKIMA, WA 98901 YA A, W• 98901 • 11 191320 -24439 191320 -24405 191320 - 24441. . JEWEL & ELLA RIDER .JOYCE EVANS SNIPE JULIO ARREOLA 206-S 18TH ST 3211 RIVERHURST DR 702 E NOB HILL BLVD II YAKIMA, WA 98901 . FAYETTVILLE, North Carolina 2830 YAKIMA, WA 98901 II 191320 -24444 191320 -31436 191320 - 24442 NEIL & NANCY ROOT ROBERT L & EULA L NORMAN ROY & DIANE BEAMAN 303 CHALMERS ST 503 POWELL ST 1140 SCHULER GRADE YAKIMA, WA 98901 YAKIMA, WA 98901 -2123 • YAKIMA, WA 98908 -8841 II 3) 191320 -31902 191320 -24003 91320 -2'004 SUPERIOR ASPHALT CONCRETE WAL MART REAL ESTATE BUSINESS TR 'AL A ^EAL STATE BUSI SE PO BOX 10268 PO BOX 8050 •• B•' . 805: YAKIMA, WA 98909 -1268 BENTONVILLE, Arkansas 72712 -8050 B.A..•ONVILLE, Arkansas 727 ., E 191320 -24440 1 -13001 91320 -.3006 WAL MART ` AL ES ATE :US.NESS TR YAKI , CITY , AKI , •ITY II PO ':OX :054 12' 21/41 T 1 9 1 2N. BEN • tILLE, Arkansas 72712 -8050 YAKIMA, WA 98901 -2613 Y MA, WA 98901 -2613 II 1 '1320 -13007 191320 -13007 19 320-13009 Y'.KIMA iITY YA I • CIT YA IM ITY 1.9 2 ' S • 129•N L' ST 12 2 YA - A, WA 98901 -.2613 YAKIMA, WA 98901 -2613 YAKIMA, WA 98901 -2613 11 191320 -13010 Y'i IMA 12' N , D 'T YA WA `:`11 -261 II 25 labels printed for map sheet greenway M t� N S /,jZ av -rz t , 11- i3 INDEX 4aa S 1 1481 1 14n 0 S TIT # ` II uorpppunoj drivaaag Puipm . 1 OD -RG, SEPA Reviewer Mr. Greg Griffith rmy Corps Dept. of Natural Resources O Box c -3755 De 713 Bowers Rd Div. of Archeol & Hist. Pres. cattle, WA 98124 Ellensburg, WA 98926 PO Box 48343 . Olympia, WA 98504 'Sheila Ross Cascade Natural Gas Dept of Soc/Health Service WA State Attorney Gen. Office , 701 S. 1 Ave Capital ProgramsOfc. Bldg #2 1433 Lakeside Ct. Ste102 Yakima, WA 98902 MS OB -23B Yakima, WA 98902 Olympia, WA 98504 • /Dept. of Health City of Union Ga Chamber of Commerce y Gap ,�, Michelle Vazquez 10 N 9 St. m PO Box 3008 1500 W. 4 Ave. .St. 305 'Yakima, WA 98901 Spokane, WA 99204 Union Gap, WA 98903 Gary W. Pruitt ' Dept. of Transportation Tom McAvoy Clean Air Authority Planning Engineer Q -West • 6 S. 2 St., Room 1016 2809 Rudkin Road 8 S. 2 Ave. Room 304 Yakima, WA 98901 1 U nion Gap, WA 98903 Yakima, WA 98902 E nvironmental Protection Agency Yakima Co. Commissioners Lee Agr c ultu 200 6 Ave. MS 623 128 North 2' Street Dept. of Agriculture Seattle, WA 98101 Yakima, WA 98901 PO Box 42560 Olympia, WA. 98504 AA Yakima Co Health Dist Gwen Clear , 200 W. Washington Art McKuen Dept of Ecology akima, WA 98903 1210. Ahtanum Ridge Drive 15 W. Yakima Ave. St. 200 Union Gap, WA 98903 Yakima, WA 98902 "'Mr. Steven Erickson Department of Ecology gy Nob Hill Water Co Yakima Co Planning Environ Review Section 1128 N 2 ° St: PO Box 47703 6111 Tieton Drive akima, WA . 98901. Olympia, WA 98504 -7703 Yakima, WA 98908 I r. Vern Redifer Chuck Hagerhjelm Pacific Power akima Co Pub. Services WA State Emergency Mgmt Div. Mike Paulson 128 N 2n St., 4 Floor . Mitigation, Analysis & Planning. Mgr 500 N. Keys Rd 'Yakima, WA 98901 Building 20 Yakima, WA 98901 Camp Murray, WA 98430- 5122 Cultural Resources Program 1 1r. Bill Bailey Dept. of CTED Johnson Meninick, Mgr akima.Cnty Dev. Serv. Ctr. Yakama Indian Nation Growth Management Services 128 N. 2 St. 4"' Floor PO Box 42525 Yakima, WA 98901 PO Box 151 Olympia, WA 98504 -2525 ' Toppenish, WA 98948 t r. Philip Rigdon Transportation Planner Mose Segouches akama Box Indian Nation YVCOG 311 N. 4 Street STE 202 Yakama Indian Nation 0 Box 151 Environmental Protection Prog. Toppenish, WA 98948 Yakima, WA 98901 PO Box 151 Toppenish, W g 18 A , 1 Federal Aviation Administration Environmental Coordinator Cayla Morgan, Airport Planner II Mr. Doug Mayo Bureau of Indian Affairs Seattle Airports District Office Wastewater Treatment Plant PO Box 632 1601 Lind Ave. S.W. Toppenish, WA 98948 Renton, WA 98055 -4056 WSDOT Aviation Division Lavina Washines, Marty er Chairman Mr. M Mill 1 John Sambaugh Yakama Tribal Council Office of Farm Worker Housing . 3704 172 St. N.E. Suite K -12 PO Box 151 1400 Summitview #203 II Arlington, WA 98223 Toppenish, WA 98948 Yakima, WA 98902 Soil Conservation Dist Donna J. Bunten Eric Bartrand ` 1 Attn: Ray Wondercheck Critical Areas Coordinator Dept. of Fisheries 1606 Perry St Suite F D.O.E., Shorelands & Environ. 1701 S. 24 Ave Yakima, WA 98902 PO Box 47600. Yakima, WA 98902 Olympia, WA 98504 -7600 Martin Humphries Mr. Scott Nicolai Mr. Buck Taylor 1 Yakima Valley Museum Yakama Indian Nation- Fisheries Yakima Airport 2105 Tieton Drive PO Box 151 2400 W. Washington Ave Yakima, WA 98902 Toppenish, WA 98948 Yakima, WA 98903 1 Yakima School District WV School District Yakima Greenway Foundation Attn: Ben Soria Attn: Peter Ansingh 104 N. 4` Ave 111 S. 18 St. 8902 Zier Road 1 Yakima, WA 98902 Yakima, WA 98901 Yakima, WA 98908 1 Dept. of Archaeology & Historic Preservation PO Box 48343 Olympia, WA 98504 -8343 1 1 1 I . 1 I DOG. 11 INDEX -1l 1 1 1 Press Release 1 WASHINGTON STATE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT MITIGATED DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE CITY OF YAKIMA, WASHINGTON March 27, 2008 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 effectively allow the construction of a ten- foot wide .X 840 foot long pathway and the construction. of two cantilevered fishing piers upon environmentally sensitive property (Reflection Pond):, .. identified by the-City of Yakima's Comprehensive Plan Critical Area Map as containing protected Class-IV Wetlands. PROPONENT: Yakima Greenway Foundation / City of Yakima LOCATION: 206 S. 18 Street, Yakima, Washington PARCEL NUMBER(S): 191320 -13009 & 13007 LEAD AGENCY: City of Yakima, Washington. FILE NUMBER: UAZO CAO #2 -08, and EC #11 -08. 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. 1 This action is not exempt from the State Environmental - Policy Act under WAG_197 - 11 -800 Categorical Exemptions as this. action involves the construction of a proposed service—road -within . a City of Yakima 1 designated Critical Area and will require environmental review. Mitigation :: Critical: Area Construction Requirements: I. The twenty -five foot buffer for Wide Hollow Creek shall be reduced: to .12.5 feet from the ordinary high water mark with a twenty foot building.setback from the buffer itself for a total building setback of 32.5 feet provided the conditions below are meta: a. No structure' shall exceed the approved 32.5. 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; 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 1 b. The ro osed pathway shall be sloped away from the and in accordance P P P Y P Y pond the recommendations of the Washington State Department of Ecology; 1 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; d. All wetlands and their buffers shall be avoided as much as possible; e. Where wetland or wetland buffer disturbance occurs native wetland plants shall be replaced with native wetland species utilizing a 3:1 ratio; f The applicant (Yakima Greenway Foundation) shall installation native vegetation between the new paved trail and the pond in order to stabilize the bank and protect the wetland from sedimentation; g. During construction high visibility fencing shall be required to be installed to mark the limits of disturbance to protect the various sensitive area; and h. Prior to construction the applicant shall submit building plans for the two fishing piers which meet Section 1805.4 of the International Building Code by a certified engineer. In addition, each plan page and the structural calculations shall also be stamped and signed by the engineer. 1 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 JI 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 pathway 1 4. Dust Control: (a) A Dust Control Plan must be submitted to, and approved by, the Yakima Regional Clean Air Authority prior to any phase of work. (b) Vegetation on site which needs to be removed shall not be burned on or offsite. 5. Noise: During project construction all contractors shall adhere to the City of Yakima noise regulations regarding hours of construction. (YMC 6.04.180) 6. 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. April 10, 2008. 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 1 TELEPHONE: 509 / 575 -6113 ADDRESS: 129 North 2nd Street, Yakima, WA 98901 1 DOC. INDEX 1 ;1 10 RECEIVED Ail AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION aV STATE ENVIRONMENTAL APR ►3 U 2008 „ -: O f\ v L rED.DETERMINA7IDN`OF N ONSIGNIFICA HI CITY OF YAKIMA OF YAKIMA, WASHINGTON STATE OF WASHINGTON,) Maronz7 2ooe;, ) • PLANNING DIV. I DESCRIPTION This application =involves COUNTY OF YAKIMA ) ,,•tal•PolIcy Act (SEPA) and Cntical Area -Re- ! approvall, under Yakima; Municipal• ,Code • AI Public Agency and Utj(y:Exceotion,:Appro- . A. sa ppiicationwrll= effectrvelyallow,theconstruc- 'DEBBIE MARTIN, being first duly sworn on oath deposes and says that Jra ten foot wide X 890 foot Jong pafpway and the t iidtionoflwocantrieveiedfishingplers upedehli she/he is the Accountant of Yakima Herald - Republic, Inc., entally sensitive property (Refiei Pond) rderlti- a daily newspaper. Said newspaper is a legal newspaper approved by the. Superior Court of the State of Washington for Yakima by;the City - of Yakrma's Coo nsweplan Criti= • ts rea Map as contamirjg of Februar O Class 1V Wet - 9PANENT Yalnma G • Foundation /' C i ty • o County under an order made and entere on . the .13th day y, II: TI e ti �i, 1968, • and it is now and has been for more than six months prior ON 206 5 ;18th Street Y '1', a Washington - EL'J ilmogB(S):191321 - Isoo9 13007 k to the date of publication hereinafter referred to, published .AGEt it OCAO im e wa'shington+7, in the English language continuall as a daily 1dUMBERi ER: -13AZ0 CAotg 08 an F,�it� p9 y il y ne wpaper in cERMINAT$014 Tfieleadagercyfo(thisproposal Yakima, Yakima County, Washington. Said newspaper is now and has reuiajnt * completed e nvironmental erieokiist, be during land agency comments 'artd.ofhp#rslated,infor- g all of said time printed in an office maintained n; has determined that #heto /ect�wlll not have a . at the aforesaid place of publication of said newspaper. ble adygrss �mpacton the anviron- rt an ap engtrpr))pelt$j lmpadt$ta ement .gis .will e 'required under r- ,tow9emr oapp (e) provided ggasuresjrsf ,d'be4 %are! a`k`e` 'to,liiitigat ioten- dvgrse impacts �Tne'3gformation7e1iedupon in That the annexed is a true copy of a: iriti hi dettrMIrtailc#n is1a. altable10 ih�„ public on slat3heCity „ofa'aki >a;>amm�gDivislon WASHINGTON STATE ENVIRONMENTAL, MANS is issued undet'- AC 1,7x 1 3 A ptional i to Tiler's w kifik 544. bona) 9m� t pen h"IPPS `! 44t a it was ublished in re IFIED NVIRONMENTAy:IMpACTS�iNDMITI• p regular issues (and not in supplement form) ME ,.' of said newspaper once each DAY and for a �q d,. 'DttriMil ionss�t"K lonsignificanc period of 1 i� §)'S -he on igne upbrt the" ato Ari miti- DAY (S) to-wit; on I 0*Ts r - o f s'ta iu ^a lho)•i)S!'to equ`�re m�ti- -d .r1d 4Wy4f97 ��'1146 �lYakrma'Murnc- Ylul fy86.16(I a or akim l}rk4tiwoo hansive vuhtohSCO g oa't $ �fipolinies and the 2 7th day o f MARCH 2 0 0 8 1p�s. w`h`ich, proYi 11)))'s'tanfly' authbnt re= y io' t mltt i attio undeYh r g f` * entai ` , Polrey � z� .i ioplorb:ty exempt, o �ihas#04..rwronrrental r 7 8' as hie C o rinvOly,,p t .c9nsituGliortaof a dive urcg ti inAx.0. , 51 Y ekime' l designat= )041.1'43140.r i f"iequ'1Yie'ra yr on -ntai review lim, n i s „ ; , _ N "i a Areaicoheiru ion'Requ rernents n� i"i hoer u i i fiR de hollowGieek • rei�uced to ,2S.4aet f�on'1hg$rdinary high wa= erj. '»r7Ll ii >~wen Moot budding seibage from the Its elfio„ai.7otdt uiltngs,Gtb0_ckil kt:i etzpro con lf!onebe)orvare rnet ' ri''1y A ;' :,. . t r iTcttire"'sha1l'"d ` xceed The approved 325 <foot ii ei af erfcurr stances unless approval + heWa . " 7- )'Y>r�trncif 00/04F4#10.10. y" ► T scw alt - iiis ) .bfhe 004ni010alaiO4e ' I ,3. A mon : roposed,,pathway_shaQ es)9D way fair 14+nn=acco #danc w ith i re toppendatioli of 0,0 tateDepar e K ;. us -p$4(,�,9gteg+wnaf"er lr r> io rit i a i eas s g�xmradin ons and the such newspaper g 'itFO7rSneasules r{w iaz prevent sod paper was regularly distributed to its subscribers gcarnadvfi t h#i during. all of said period. That the full amount of the fee charged stormwatetrunolGi, 5,0 /airds and then bu ers shat! be avoided.as for the foregoing publication is the sum of possible :ter` ,..' i'exf ' r $341.85 re,avetlano or wet/e miff rdigiib nce occurs . tl p/ah OViiirk010piaced.,Wifi native wet 4 nt 'Yakrma��GreenFo af ive vegetation,4etweep Yh paved / ► the pond m,or - #010, laiillize Nlif nkand pia we � Filei tint high visibiIf 1encm 07,ii re e t •: o Accountant i nstafle`d'3o'mar)r theliimite of disturbance to vanods sensitive area; and ogstructior ; the applicant shall submit build- . s fo #wo is>)rng piers which riieet Section. ?f the 'nte>n'atlggaj Ruitdln.0 Code_by a certified nadd/tion, each pla page and the sbuctural shall ado be stamped and sjgned by trre SUBSCRIBED AN D SWORN t o be f e me this 27th day o March, 2 008 ater priot4: any-,can the Nash- /) tat - Department.ofEcojogy4all st pe x ontacted � nine, fa iif 4$ stp0:0ter cdribbhor per. �'` � I on .Ail.disitid a areas'ha7)beretumed to NOTARY PUBLIC i and for the a t ngs to rt dam f rom cpm o sed.pathwa � +� °�= .f `'�`� �:. State of Washington, ��� • . residing at Yakima. INDEX t x01 tr' c St onto/ E lan must roe sYlamrtleddD and ap- e Yakima Aegiona/ Glean AirA>rtfionk pn, • Se of avork; c ; N u r nsonsiiemvbich�ieed1obe P ibgar . tezUsft�i imp ti,i • `7- 1 1 1 NOTICE OF DECISION Compliance with the Washington State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) March 27, 2008 On March 6, 2008, the City of Yakima, Washington issued a Notice of Application and 1 Environmental Review regarding an environmental checklist application submitted by the Yakima Greenway Association. This review concerns the construction of a ten -foot wide X 840 foot long pathway and the construction of two cantilevered fishing piers upon environmentally sensitive property (Reflection Pond) identified by the City of Yakima's Comprehensive Plan Critical Area Map as containing protected Class IV Wetlands , as more filly described in the attached Mitigated Determination of Non - Significance. The subject property is located at 206 S. 18 Street, Yakima, Washington. A full legal description of this location can be obtained on request from the City of Yakima. Yakima, WA Parcel Number(s): 191320 -13009 & 13007. City File Number: UAZO EC #11 Following the initial 20 -day public comment period, and consideration of all comments received, the City of Yakima has issued the enclosed Preliminary 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. ruce Benson, Acting Planning Manager Notice of Decision Mailin g Date: March 27, 2008 Enclosures: SEPA Preliminary Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance, Site Plan, Vicinity Map, and Mailing Map 1 DOC. INDEX 1 1 STATE ENVIRONMENTAL P WASHINGTON S ONME LICY ACT O MITIGATED DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE 1 CITY OF YAKIMA, WASHINGTON March 27, 2008 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 effectively allow the construction °of a ten- foot wide X 840 foot long pathway and the construction of two cantilevered fishing piers upon environmentally sensitive property (Reflection Pond) identified by the City of •Yakima's Comprehensive Plan Critical Area Map .. as containing protected Class IV Wetlands. PROPONENT: Yakima Greenway Foundation / City of Yakima LOCATION: . 206 S. 18 Street, Yakima, Washington PARCEL NUMBER(S): 191320 -13009 & 13007 LEAD AGENCY: City of Yakima, Washington. 1 FILE NUMBER: UAZO CAO #2 -08, and EC #11 -08. DETERMINATION: The lead agency for this proposal, after reviewing a completed 1 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. Doc. INDEX 1 1 Mitigation: 1 Critical Area Construction Requirements: 1. The twenty five foot buffer for Wide Hollow Creek shall be reduced to 12.5 feet from the ordinary high water mark with a twenty foot building setback from the buffer itself for a total building setback of 32.5 feet provided the conditions below are met. a. No structure' shall exceed the approved 32.5 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 proposed pathway shall be sloped away from the pond in accordance with the recommendations of the Washington State Department of Ecology; 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; d. All wetlands and their buffers shall be avoided as much as possible; e. Where wetland or wetland buffer disturbance occurs native wetland plants shall be replaced with native wetland species utilizing a 3:1 ratio; The applicant (Yakima Greenway Foundation) PP ( y ) shall installation native vegetation between the new paved trail and the pond in order to stabilize the - bank and protect the wetland from sedimentation; 1 g. During construction high visibility fencing shall be required to be installed to mark the limits of disturbance to protect the various sensitive area; and 1 h. Prior to construction the applicant shall submit building plans for the two fishing piers which meet Section 1805.4 of the International Building Code by a certified engineer. In addition, each plan page and the structural calculations shall also be stamped and signed by the engineer. 2. Storm Water: Prior to any construction, the Washington State Department of Ecology shall 1 . be contacted to determine if a NPDES stormwater construction permit is required 3. Restoration: All disturbed areas shall be returned to their original conditions or better by 1 reseeding and/or additional plantings within thirty days from completion of the proposed pathway 4. Dust Control: (a) A Dust Control Plan must be submitted to, and approved by, the Yakima Regional Clean Air Authority prior to any phase of work. 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 1 (b) Vegetation on site which needs to be removed shall not be burned on or offsite. • 5. Noise: During project construction all contractors shall adhere to the City of, Yakima noise . regulations regarding hours of construction. (YMC 6.04.180) 6. 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 April 10, 2008. 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 ,1 p` DATE: March 27, 2008 SIGNATURE: 111% NMI 1 1 1 DOC, INDEX f 1 1 AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING STATE OF WASHINGTON CITY OF YAKIMA 1 Re: EC #11 -08 CAO #2 -08: Yakima Greeway.:.Foundation 1 206 South 18'h Street.: 1 I, Rosalinda Ibarra, as an employee of the Yakima City Planning Division, have dispatched through the United States Mails, a Notice of Application and Public 1 Hearing with Environmental Review. 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 1 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 6th day of March ,2008. 1 That I mailed said notices in the manner herein set forth and that all of the statements made herein are just and true. 1 1 Rosalinda Ibarra Planning Specialist 1 1 1 1 1 INDEX 11 191320-42001 91320; -3143 D 191320 -31433 BLT GRAVEL TRUST • B T L I I 0 RUST 1 B T NW COR UST PO BOX 517 PO 5 7 P BOX 5 ARIVACA, Arizona 85601 ARIVACA, Arizona 85601 AR , Arizona 85601 1 191320 -24001 191320 -24433 191320 -24009 11 BOB HALL'S HOLDINGS LLC CECIL E & E PATRICIA FITCHETT CENTRAL WASHINGTON STORAGE LL( PO BOX 1262 290 PERRY WAY 111 S 33RD ST #100 YAKIMA, WA 98907 -1262 YAKIMA, WA 98901 .YAKIMA, WA 98901 -1471 11 . . 191 20- 24010 191320 -24443 191320 -24404 CEN RAL WA IN TON STORAGE LLC GINGER L SPARKS JEWEL & ELLA RIDER 11 111 33 ST # 0 301 CHALMERS ST 206 S 18TH ST YAKI A 98901 -1471 YAKIMA, WA 98901 YAKIMA, WA 98901 1 191320 -24439 I 191320 -24405 191320 -24441 J EL & ELLA RIDER JOYCE EVANS SNIPE JULIO ARREOLA 20 S 1 ST 3211 RIVERHURST DR 702 E NOB HILL BLVD I A M , WA FAYETTVILLE, North Carolina 2830 YAKIMA, WA 98901 • . . I 91320_24444 191320 -31436 191320 -24442 EIL & NANCY ROOT • ROBERT L & EULA L NORMAN ROY & DIANE BEAMAN. . 303 CHALMERS ST 503 POWELL ST 1140 SCHULER GRADE YAKIMA, WA 98901 ' YAKIMA, WA 98901 -2123 YAKIMA, WA 98908 -8841 1 • 11 91320-31902 • 191320 -24003 19 320 -24004 UPERIOR ASPHALT CONCRETE WAL MART REAL ESTATE BUSINESS TR WA MART EST BUSINESS 0 BOX 10268 PO BOX 8050 PO 0 YAKIMA, WA 98909 -1268 BENTONVILLE, Arkansas 72712 - 8050 BENTONVILLE, Arkansas 72712 -80 I 191320 -24440 191320 -13001 1 1320 -13006 11 A MART RE E TE BUSINESS TR YAKIMA CITY RYA MA CITY . _ 0 BOX 0 1 . N 2 ND 129 2ND E VILLE, Arkansas 72712 -8050 YAK 9 8901 -2613 YAKIMA, WA 98901 -2613 '1320 -13007 191320 -13007 19 320 -13009 YAKIMA "Y AKIMA CI YA MA CIT IF : N /ND T 9 N 2 S 129 2 ST k P WA 9 =901 -2613 YA , WA 98901 -2613 YAKIMA, WA 98901 -2613 Yakima•Greenway Foundation 320 -13 Al Brown IMA c Y 111 South 18th Street 129 N 2 ST Yakima, WA 98901 I KI , WA 98901 -2613 • ` • S Q% labels�••' r map sheet greenw 1 6 0.110 c \ \ A codp • 31 �I r' EEOC, il • . . INDEX f 1 OD -RG, SEPA Reviewer Army Corps Dept. of Natural Resources Mr. Greg Griffith PO Box c -3755 713 Bowers Rd Div. of Archeol & Hist. Pres. I PO Box 48343 Seattle, WA 98124 Ellensburg, WA 98926 Olympia, WA 98504 Sheila Ross 1 Cascade Natural Gas Dept of Soc/Health Service WA State Attorney Gen. Office 701 S. 1 Ave Capital Programs Ofc. Bldg #2 1433 Lakeside Ct. Ste102 Yakima, WA 98902 MS OB -23B Yakima, WA 98902 1 Olympia, WA 98504 Chamber of Commerce Dept. of Health City of Union Ga 1 �, Michelle Vazquez y p 10 N 9 St. PO Box 3008 Yakima, WA 98901 1500 W. 4 Ave. St. 305 Union Gap, WA 98903 1 Spokane, WA 99204 Gary W. Pruitt Dept. of Transportation Tom McAvoy Clean Air Authority 1 Planning Engineer Q -West 6 S. 2 St., Room 1016 2809 Rudkin Road 8 S. 2 " Ave. Room 304 Yakima, WA 98901 Union Gap, WA 98903 Yakima, WA 98902 1 Environmental Protection Agency Yakima Co. Commissioners Mr. Lee Agri r 1200 6 Ave. MS 623 128 North 2 Street Dept. of Agriculture Seattle, WA 98101 Yakima, WA 98901 PO Box 42560 Olympia, WA 98504 1 FAA Yakima Co Health Dist Gwen Clear 2200 W. Washington Art McKuen . Dept of Ecology 1 Yakima, WA 98903 1210 Ahtanum Ridge Drive 15 W. Yakima Ave. St. 200 Union Gap, WA 98903 Yakima, WA 98902 1 Mr. Steven Erickson Department of Ecology gy Nob Hill Water Co Yakima Co Planning - Environ Review Section 6111 Tieton Drive 1 128 N 2 " St. PO Box 47703 Yakima, WA 98908 Yakima, WA 98901 Olympia, WA 98504 -7703 Mr. Vern Redifer Chuck Hagerhjelm Pacific Power 1 Yakima Co Pub. Services WA State Emergency Mgmt. Div. 128 N 2 ❑d St., 4 Floor Mitigation, Analysis & Planning Mgr Mike Paul son s y g g 500 N. Keys on s Rd Yakima, WA 98901 Building 20 1 Camp Murray, WA 98430 -5122 Yakima, WA 98901 Cultural Resources Program Mr. Bill Bailey Johnson Meninick, Mgr Dept. of CTED Yakima Cnty Dev. Serv. Ctr. Yakama Indian Nation Growth Management Services 128 N. 2 St. 4 Floor PO Box 42525 Yakima, WA 98901 PO Box 151 Olympia, WA 98504 -2525 Toppenish, WA 98948 1 Mr. Philip Rigdon Transportation Planner Mose Segouches Yakama Indian Nation YVCOG Yakama Indian Nation 1 PO Box 15 311 N. 4 Street STE 202 Environmental Protection Prog. Toppenish, WA 98948 Yakima, WA 98901 PO Box 151 Toppenish, WA 4' 8 INDEX 1 ' f Federal Aviation Administration Environmental Coordinator 1 Mr. Doug Mayo Cayla Morgan, Airport Planner Bureau of Indian Affairs Wastewater Treatment Plant Seattle Airports District Office PO Box 632 1601 Lind Ave. S.W. Toppenish, WA 98948 Renton, WA 98055 -4056 WSDOT Aviation Division Lavina Washines, Chairman Mr. Mart. Miller ,- Y John Sambaugh Yakama Tribal Council Office of Farm Worker Housing 1 3704 172 St. N.E. Suite K -12 PO Box 151 1400 Summitview #203 Arlington, WA 98223 Toppenish, WA 98948 Yakima, WA 98902 Donna J. Bunten Soil Conservation Dist Critical Areas Coordinator Eric Bairtrand� Attn: Ray Wondercheck D.O.E., Shorelands & Environ. Dept. of Fisheries 1606 Perry St Suite F 1701 S. 24"' Ave PO Box 47600 Yakima, WA 98902 Yakima, WA 98902. Olympia, WA 98504 -7600 1 Martin Humphries Mr. Scott Nicolai.. Mr. Buck Taylor Yakima Valley Museum Yakama Indian Nation- Fisheries . Yakima.Airport • 2105 Tieton Drive PO Box 151 2400 W. Washington Ave Yakima, WA 98902 Toppenish, WA 98948 Yakima, WA 98903 Yakima School District Yakima Greenway Foundation WV School District I Attn: Ben Soria Attn: Peter Ansingh 111 S. 18 St. 104 N. 4 d, Ave 8902 Zier Road Yakima, WA 98902 Yakima, WA 98901 Yakima, WA 98908 1 Dept. of Archaeology & Historic I Preservation PO Box 48343 Olympia, WA 98504 -8343 1 11 11 1 1 1 1 . DDC. INDEX Interoffice Distribution List 1 Bill Cook 1 Dayana Sanchez City Legal Director, CED Codes DECISIONS ONLY 1 Mike Antijunti Carolyn Belles City Clerk 1 Engineering Codes DECISIONS ONLY i Sam Granato Charlie Hines Sandy Cox Police Chief Fire Chief Codes .: DECISIONS ONLY 1 Joan Davenport Binder/ File /Mail Office of Neighborhood and Traffic Engineering Development Services DECISIONS ONLY Jerry Robertson Codes 1 1 1 1 1 1 DOC. INDEX 4 1 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: March 6, 2008 TO: SEPA Reviewing Agencies, Applicant and Adjoining Property Owners FROM: Bruce Benson Acting Planning Manager SUBJECT: Notice of Application and Environmental Review concerning .property located at 206 S. 18` Street, Yakima, Washington. NOTICE OF APPLICATION Project Location: 206 S. 18 th Street; Yakima, Washington Project Applicant: Yakima Greenway Foundation / City of Yakima File Number(s): UAZO CAO #2 -08, and EC #11 -08. Date of application: February 19, 2008' Date of determination of completeness: February 29, 2008 Tax Parcel Number(s): 191320 -13009 & 13007 Project Description: The City of Yakima Department of Community & Economic Development has received two related land use applications from the Yakima Greenway / City of Yakima. These two applications request: S 1. Critical Area Review and approval under Yakima Municipal Code 15.27.540 Pubic Agency and Utility Exception to allow the construction of a 10 -foot wide X 840 foot long pathway within the required 25 foot protective buffer around the west and south sides of Reflection Pond within Sarg Hubbard Park and the construction of two cantilevered fishing piers; and 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 pathway and fishing piers would be allowed to encroach into the 25 -foot protective critical area wetland buffer of Reflection Pond to within six 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 maybe appealed :pursuant to YMC 6.88.170. The optional. DNS 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: March - 26, 2008 Agencies, tribes; and the public are , encouraged to review and comment on the proposed project and its probable environmental impacts. All written comments received by March 26, 2008 will be considered prior to issuing the final SEPA determination-on this application. The following conditions have been identified that may be used to mitigate the adverse environmental impacts of the proposal: INDEX 1 1. This action is not exempt from the State Environmental Policy Act under WAC P Y 197 - - 800 Categorical Exemptions as this action involves the construction of a pathway within a designated Critical Area of the City of Yakima and will require environmental review and a Critical Area Development Permit. 2. The wetlands surrounding Reflection Pond as identified in the wetland biology report prepared by Thomas Environmental Services titled Yakima Greenway . 1 Foundation Sarg Hubbard Park Trail Expansion Project classifies the site as containing Category IV wetlands. Category IV wetlands require a 25 -foot setback from the edge of the ordinary high.: watermark of the identified wetland. 1 Construction of the proposed pathway within six feet of the ordinary high watermark will require application of the Public Agency and Utility Exception. 3. Reflection Pond is a stocked fish- bearing pond and therefore the following 1 protective measures will be =required a. The proposed pathway will be required to be sloped away from pond in accordance with the recommendations of the Washington State Department of Ecology; b. A silt fence will be required adjacent to the pond during construction to avoid release of sediment during construction; c. All wetlands and their buffers shall be avoided as much as possible; and d. Where wetland or wetland buffer disturbance occurs native wetland plants shall be replaced with native wetland species utilizing a 3:1 ratio. 1 4. The proposed area surrounding the pond at this location has been impacted by human disturbances and some restoration may be required which includes: a. Installation of native vegetation between the new paved trail and the pond in order to stabilize the bank and protect the wetland from sedimentation. 5. During construction high visibility fencing will be required to be installed to mark the limits of disturbance to protect the various sensitive areas. 6. The proposed project involves grading, site preparation, construction, and/or landscaping work. Therefore, a dust control plan must be filed with the Yakima Regional Clean Air Authority. 7. The proponent will be required to contact Department of Ecology prior to construction to verify if Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan and NPDES permits are required, and obtain permits if necessary. 8. During project construction all contractors will be required to adhere to the City of Yakima noise regulations regarding hours of construction. (YMC 6.04.180) Required Permits — The following: local, :state, and federal permits /approvals are needed for the proposed project: Grading permit, City of Yakima Critical Areas Review. Required Studies: None Existing Environmental - Documents: Wetland Biology Report: Yakima Greenway Foundation Sarg Hubbard Park Trail Expansion. Project Yakima, Washington: Prepared by Thomas Environmental Services. 1 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. 1 1 DO C,. INDEX 1 REQUEST FOR WRITTEN COMMENTS Agencies, tribes, and the public are encouraged to review and comment on the proposed 1 applications and their probable environmental impacts. All written comments received by March 26, 2008 will be considered- :prior to issuing the final SEPA determination on this application. Please mail your comments on this proposal to: 1 Bruce Benson, Acting 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 Greenway Foundation, UAZO CAO #2 -08, and EC #11 -08). 1 NOTICE OF DECISION A copy of the SEPA threshold determination will be mailed to you after the end of the 20 -day comment period. 1 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 1 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 April 24, 2008 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 1 questions on this proposal, call Jeff Peters, Assistant Planner at (509) 575 -6163. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 r .' INDEX 1 ' OF s' 1 ,: ICATION, ENVIRONMENTAL 'REVIEW AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION RECEIVED .FARING REGARDING A REQUEST . ACALAREAPUBLIC AGENCY AND . f UTILITY EXCEPTION ADD 2008 1 ?r 6 2008.. , APR OlRevlewing.Ageniiie* 1ppUCantaand Aiknip- STATE OF WASHINGTON, ) rs. , Owne i ,:. Bruce. Benson Acting Planning Manager ) CITY OF YAKIMA ,JECT: Notice of Application • and Environmental COUNTY OF YAKIMA ) ,view concerning ;property located at 206 S. 18th P LA N f N G D I �/, I • treat Yakima, Washington QTPCE OF APPLICATION gotf.ocation 206;5 18th Street, Yakima Wash DEBBIE MARTIN, being first duly sworn on oath deposes and says that roject :Applicant: Yakma'- reenway Foundation / she /he is the Accountant of Yakima Herald - Republic, Inc., ityof Yakima • a daily newspaper. Said newspaper is a le le Numper(s) UAZO_CAO tit 08 and EQ #11 - 06. legal newspaper approv atepfap pebru by the Superior " Court of the State of Washington for Yakin e of dete of completeness F 29, County under an order made and entered on the 13th day of February, )08 , areelNumber(s) :::i i 0 1300 9 &13007 ixP 1968, and it is now and has been for more than six months r oject Description The Ciy of Department pri Community,& Economic Oeveiopment received to the date of publication hereinafter referred to, publish eenw y C of Yakima Thesw two aappiicationsrre in the English language continually as a daily newpaper in les Yakima, Yakima County, Washington. Said newspaper is now and has Critical Area Aeylew.and approval under Yakima Mu= been during all of said time printed in an office maintaine' lotion to allow the construction'of a 10 -foot wide X at the aforesaid place of publication of said newspaper. t0'foot longypathway within th@,�equjed 2;i foot pro-. ctive buffer around1he south sides of :fte- iction Pond Sar Hubbard Park anif the con= . ruotion.at:two canfii fishln piers an 7 x Environmental Policy Pct (SEP.A) review of.ihe pro- That the annexed is a true copy of a: )sedprolept in its entirety and any associated environ- entaL,mpac3s x 4 , -;, Tact of Ap Provided th ap a re CITY OF YAKIMA NOTICE OF APPLI , iproved under the City of Nakimaa Critic Area Orth- Trice Pubic AOeiit ; and Uti Ex ceotion (Y 1.27„540) 'the propos pathw a fis pi it was published in regular issues (and not in supplement form uldbeaUowedtoettbroach - tntohe25$ootprotective of said newspaper once each DAY and for a period of 1 itical iraae,yetlaild4iuffebnl L Reflection Pond 10 wthin e a e I f eant nary lir h r rnar Fasprooppsed by DAY (S) t o —wi t ; on PP .. r VVIRONME REVIEV ' i • to City of Yekiikpes reyiewe the Rosed pr aect r robafile advers igRaots an ic the 6th day o f MARCH, 2008 ts to issue' a tntti ed tletemilnaaftioniiormonsi ifi- nee firatttis,pro7i:oti A copyAttie subse- lent tttresholdkletermina�E om b$btained litre,,: rt,t a ,„"a a a7 lai MB 7 gp ie_ I ass in A 97A.1 ,j-21- Ping . ed. Thfs may be7iour.�.onl oPportunitylto.acom- ent onthe anwronmenta'1 tmpaots of the roposed mmeotiJue date Mar lr 28;1008 '�-A*. "�t 5 : iencip..,Vntie5,ranc the:p titic'"are ertcouraged:to re-. • aw-:and com ment on the proposed,,prnoect and its. • ob i ppacts. All wntfer omments eived `by^March 26, 2008,wiil be,considergd pror to. uirigRhe inal'SEPAide`terminafion on9his application:' ie:fotlo 4 g.00nditions`Faaye been icYe rd01.tha1 may used to.mitigale'the�advers rtyironmental im pacts. the ro osaP;. s e _;a 7 rObs,5 Kiln p7l f fro o men r biictrutder 91YAG` -8 p0 }lrategor�c nptions•aS` this action;mvolves th"eoristructiori of: a: thWa wittiiia a deslgnated Cntititriaea dtthie City of ikini and will require �envrranmer fal're3lew and a itidifid aiDeyelopmeritierm t Tlieavellandssurroundttig,i efleobon Pond as idanti d "in the wetland biology tepori prepared b"y Thomas° MionmentarServlani4itled-Na ite'*reenway Foun`. tionSar Hubbard Peii�=�Tau>xoaheinl Ptejectclas and the such newspaper was regularly distributed to its subscriber festhesiteas <contaimngCateopowwetlahhfs Cate. during all of said period. That the full amount of the fee char ell ry IV `wetlands require: a 25doot etback'froni - the g ge:of the Ordinary high watermark of theadentified for the foregoing publication is the sum of $432 .15 tiand Const of. the propo path within feet oflfte ordinary high watermark will require appli tion'of the Putilic Agency and Utility Exception . Reflection Pond is a locked fish - bearing pon A d and t. a rerata the f011owmg protective measures will be re- • la.4-1:'' iredr, „464S-F:,_ r 44 v , Tti'e"" proposed ppatway will be_regwred ay -frorn pond. 7n accordance with the •recommenda - Accountant 1s o31he Washington State Dapartrnent of Ecology A siltfe - 6.i.. ilibe required adiacentlo the pond du r- cstruction' to avoid release Of sediment during ng 1Strietion r AIt vetlandsand ttteirbuffers shall be avoided as ch as possttile Arid ' 4'- , t ', Wherewetland�or wetland buffer disturbance occurs ive ,beTepiac -. SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to befo n m this lth day March, 2008 �e f i species n lim p :4 t t r "ratio - ^ 7 W � Re priSpsee ar auroi�n�ing'The pond at this toca t has been ampacted e human ....... disturbances and ; 0�, 71 ri restoration maybe r equired which includ _ " • Installation of native vegetation between the new _ ed`trail andlhe pond in order tostabilize the bank. _ NOTARY PUBLIC in and for the 1 protect = ihew5tiand from sedimeritah -s - �+ OurNg construction high visibilit ; fencing will bare- State of Washington, DO�I. . edtobeinstalledto 'marklhelimitsOfdisturbanceto - residing at Yakima. INDEX test the various sensitive areas__, -he, proposed project involves grading site .prepara- conso p stlandscapingwork. �� __ • ust::contrntroT` plan .Mu must be filled with the Yakima Re- � tal Clean, Air Authority, -- he :proponent will be required to contact Depart 1 CITY OFx °YAKIMA NOTICE OF APPLICATION,-ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AND PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING A .REQUEST-FORA CRITICAL AREA PUBLIC AGENCY AND UTILITY''EXCEPTION DATE: March 6, 2008 TO: SEPA Reviewing Agencies, Applicant and Adjoining Property Owners 1 FROM: Bruce Benson Acting Planning Manager I SUBJECT: Notice of Application and Environmental Review concerning property . located at 206 S. 18 Street, Yakima, Washington. NOTICE OF APPLICATION Project Location: 206 S. 18 Street, Yakima, Washington Project Applicant: Yakima Greenway Foundation / City of Yakima 1 File Number(s): UAZO CAO #2 -08, and EC #11 -08. Date of application: February 19, 2008 Date of determination of completeness: February 29, 2008 P Y Tax Parcel Number(s): 191320 -13009 & 13007 Project Description: The City of Yakima Department of Community & Economic 1 Development has received two related land use applications from'the Yakima Greenway / City of Yakima. These two applications request: 1 1. Critical Area Review and approval under. Yakima Municipal Code 15.27.540 Pubic .Agency and Utility Exception to allow the construction of a 10 -foot wide X 0840 foot long pathway within the-required 25 foot protective buffer around the west and south sides of Reflection Pond :within Sarg Hubbard Park and the construction of two cantilevered fishing piers; and 1 2. Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) review of the proposed project in its entirety and any associated environmental impacts. ' DOG. INDEX • # P l 1 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 pathway and fishing piers would be allowed to encroach into the 25 -foot protective critical area wetland buffer of Reflection Pond to within six 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 °toYMC 6.88.170. The optional DNS 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: March 26, 2008 1 Agencies, tribes, and the public are encouraged to review and comment on the proposed project and its probable environmental impacts. All written comments received by March 26, 2008 will be considered prior to issuing the final SEPA determination on this application. 1 The following conditions have been identified that may be used to mitigate the adverse environmental impacts of the proposal: 1 1. This action is not exempt from the State Environmental Policy Act under WAC 197 - - 800 Categorical Exemptions as this action involves the construction of a pathway within a designated Critical Area of the City of Yakima and will require environmental review and a Critical Area Development Permit. 2. The wetlands surrounding Reflection Pond as identified in the wetland biology report prepared by Thomas Environmental Services titled Yakima Greenway Foundation Sarg Hubbard Park Trail Expansion Project classifies the site as 1 containing Category IV wetlands. Category IV wetlands require a 25 -foot setback from the edge of the ordinary high watermark of the identified wetland. Construction of the proposed pathway within six feet of the ordinary high 1 watermark will require application of the Public Agency and = Utility Exception. 3. Reflection Pond is a stocked fish- bearing pond and therefore the following 1 protective measures will be requited: a. The proposed pathway will be required to be sloped away from pond in accordance with the recommendations of the Washington State Department of Ecology; b. A silt fence will be required adjacent to the pond during construction to avoid release of sediment during construction; c. All wetlands and their buffers shall be avoided as much as possible; and UJ(J . 1 INDEX 1 d. Where wetland or, wetland buffer disturbance occurs native wetland plants shall be replaced with native wetland species utilizing a 3:1 ratio. 1 , 4. The proposed area surrounding the pond at this location has been impacted by human disturbances and some restoration may be required which includes: 1 a. Installation of native vegetation between the new paved trail and the pond in order to stabilize the bank and protect the wetland from sedimentation. 5. During construction high visibility fencing will be required to be installed to mark the limits of disturbance to protect the various sensitive areas. 6. The proposed project involves grading, site preparation, construction, and/or 1 landscaping work. Therefore, a dust control plan must be filed with the Yakima Regional Clean Air Authority. 7. The .:proponent will be required to contact Department of Ecology prior to construction to verify if Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan and ..NPDES permits are required, and obtain permits if necessary. 1 8. During project construction all contractors will be required to adhere to the City 1 of Yakima noise regulations regarding hours of construction. (YMC 6.04.180) Required Permits — The following local, state, and federal permits /approvals are needed 1 for the proposed project: Grading permit, City of Yakima Critical Areas Review. Required Studies: None Existing Environmental Documents: Wetland Biology Report: Yakima Greenway Foundation Sarg Hubbard Park Trail Expansion Project Yakima, Washington: Prepared by Thomas Environmental Services. Preliminary determination of the development regulations that will be used for 1 project •mitigation and consistency: City of Yakima Critical Area Ordinance YMC 15.27 and City of Yakima Title 6.88 Environmental Policy Act Review. 1 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 1 by March-:26, 2008 will be considered prior to issuing the final•. SEPA determination on this application. Please mail your comments on this proposal to: 1 Bruce Benson, Acting Planning Manager City -of Yakima, Department of Community & Economic Development 1 129` North °-2" Street Yakima, WA 98901 DOC. INDEX # C -3 Please be sure to reference the applicant's name or file number in your correspondence. 1 (Yakima Greenway Foundation, UAZO CAO #2 -08, and EC #11 -08). NOTICE OF DECISION A copy of the SEPA threshold determination will be mailed to you after the tend 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._- 1 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 beheld before the Hearing Examiner on April-24, 2008 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.: Environmental Checklist, Joint Aquatic Resources Permit Application Form, Narrative, Site Plan, Wetland Biology Report, Vicinity and Mailing Maps. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 DOC. 1 INDEX (_3 . - -� 1 ,1.•, 1 a � •J ,, ,, R ,,. ,� ,,,' CITY OF YAKIMA I LAND USE ACTION INSTALLATION CERTIFICATE 1 Project Number: Ci $Lo c40# Z_caS Date of Installation: 3 v( .-0,(3 1 Site Address: 2 06 S. ON Ave Location of Installation (Check One) I 1 Land Use Action Si is installed . per standards described in YU Sign P AZO § 15.11.090(C). Land Use Action Sign is installed in an alternate location on the site. Note: this 1 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: 1 I hereby testify that the sign installed fully complies with the Land Use Action sign I layout specifications and installation standards, and that the sign will be maintained until a decision has been rendered. I Applicants Name (please print) Date AL 6 ro;.," rl 3 -o6 - 0 6 . 1 Applicants Signature Telephone Number of Applicant g The required comment period will begin when the Code Administration and Planning I 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 1 review. Please remit the above certification and deliver; FAX at 509-575-6105; or mail to: I City of Yakima, Code Administration and Planning Division, 129 North r 6F.ond Street, Yakima, WA 98901. INDEX s t , 4 Il rAKI M I I\ H C UMM UNITY AND ECONOMIC DE LOPMENT ' ' i A William R. Co( K, Director 1 $ k ' s Doug Maples, C'BO, Code Admin. and Planning Manager 4+ Planning Division 1 , + " sf° re o e 129 North Second Street, 2nd Floor Yakima, Washington 98901 (509) 575 -6183 0 Fax (509) 575 -6105 Date: March 3, 2008 To: Yakima Greenway Foundation 1 Al Brown 111 S. 18 Street Yakima, WA 98901 1 Subject: Determination of Application Completeness for requested State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Review EC# 11 -08 and Critical Area Ordinance Review (CAO) CAO #2 -08. 1 Proposal: Environmental review of construction of a pathway located upon property designated as a critical area associated with Reflection Pond within property owned by the City of 1 Yakima. Location: 206 S. 18 Street, Yakima, Washington 1 Parcel No(s). 191320 -13009 & 13007 Your application was initially submitted the week ending February 23, 2008. Following additional information received February 28, 2008 your application has been determined to be complete for further processing as of March 3, 2008. 1 Continued processing of your request will include, but is not limited to, the following actions: 1. A Notice of Application is to be sent to all property owners within 500 feet of your site. This notice I will include a request for public comments during a 20 -day comment period as is required by the City of Yakima. Notice of Application is scheduled to be issued on March 6, 2008 and the comment period will end on March 26, 2008. 2. Following the comment period a SEPA threshold determination will be issued after March 26, 2008. This is followed by a 14 day SEPA Appeal period that will ends approximately April 15, 2008. If not appealed a staff report will be prepared by the Planning Division, which will include a recommendation to the hearing examiner as well as any recommended conditions of approval. 3. An open record public hearing is scheduled before the City of Yakima's hearing examiner for April 24 tY g 2008 at 9:OOAM in the City Council's hearing chamber at City Hall. The hearing examiner will then issue his decision ten businesses days following the conclusion of the public hearing. 1 You may contact me at (509) 575 -6163 if you have any questions regarding this matter. 1 Vey 14 truly yours, 1 P-de" Ass Peters tant Planner 1 °aFirss4 DQC. L � k -Ciro . INDEX t lll W 34'W. cl.Vakl a. 44'a.us [[ir 1 1 Yakima Greenway Foundation EXHIBIT LIST 1 CHAPTER H Comments and Site History i EXHIBIT # n DOCUMENTS' t r F .r ,X'� t _ 3 Y �' r �t ,{, ! d �. 4r* �' ti � a � Li +'" $ � MMV2 4 kn� �sd.�f . H -1 Letter: Yakima County Parks and Recreation Department 1/30/1984 1 H -2 Letter from Mr. Robert D. Swackhamer Dept. of Ecology to 09/11/2006 Mr. Bill Hammett, Superior Asphalt and Concrete H -3 Letter from Mr. Robert Swackhamer, Dept. of Ecology to 11/19/2007 Mr. Al Brown, Greenway Foundation H -4 E -mail from Catherine Reed, Dept. of Ecology to Jeff Peters, 11/30/2007 1 Assistant Planner H -5 Letter from Mr. Donald Abbott, Dept. of Ecology to Mr. Bill 01/03/2008 Hammett, Superior Asphalt and Concrete H -6 Letter from Mr. Robert Swackhamer, Dept. of Ecology to 01/30/2008 Mr. Al Brown, Greenway Foundation 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 • + s STAZe O 4 4 .. s : 7 y s • E 1 WED `t 7869 C' STATE OF WASHINGTON EEi 0 I 2008 DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY ITV LEGAL DEPT. 15 West Yakima Avenue, Suite 200 • Yakima, Washington 98902 -3452 • (509) 575 -2490 January 30, 2008 1 Mr. Al Brown Executive Director Yakima Greenway Foundation I 111 South 18th Street . Yakima WA 98901 RE: Yakima Greenway Pond Access Path Plans Satisfy Restrictive Covenant Dear Mr. Brown: Thank you for the drawing by PLSA Engineering and Surveying and the information you provided me verbally during your January 17, 2008, visit to this office regarding the proposed extension of l the access path along the west and south shore of the pond in Sarg Hubbard Park. Your verbal information included the facts that the thickness of the asphalt will be three inches and that the asphalt will be placed atop a gravel subgrade that also will be three inches thick. Motorized I vehicles operated by the public will not be allowed on the path (just pedestrians, baby strollers, and bicycles) although Greenway maintenance workers will operate small motorized vehicles on the path. Ecology previously had received a letter from Brad Card on October 30, 2007, regarding the'path extension. I responded with a letter to you November 19, 2007. Jeff Cutter, Randy Baer, you and I also met at the site on October 17, 2007, to discuss the same topic. I Ecology's Toxics Cleanup Program is involved because a cleanup conducted by Superior Asphalt and Concrete Company in the area included a restrictive covenant that requires Ecology approval for changes. Based on my review, I am pleased to inform you that I find the project to be in compliance with the requirements of the restrictive covenant. Accordingly, the project is hereby approved, subject to • the fulfillment of the following condition: Construction and use of the path shall not result in exposure to hazardous substances remaining at the site. r) (- r INDEX f Mr. Al Brown January 30, 2008 Page 2 1 This approval does not relieve the Greenway of its obligation to comply with all other federal, state, and local requirements. My telephone number is (509) :454 -7840 if you have questions or comments on matters contained in this letter. Sincerely, 1 Robert D. Swackhamer, PE Environmental Engineer Toxics Cleanup Program cc: Randy Baer, Baer Testing and Consulting 1 Brad Card, PLSA Jeff Cutter, City of Yakima Legal Department Cathy Reed, Ecology Shorelands and Environmental Assistance Program ' 1 1 1 1 1 1 , 1 INDEX JAN ! e 4 2008 STATE OF WASHINGTON CITY LEGAL DEPT ' DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY 15 West Yakima Avenue, Suite 200 • Yakima, Washington 98902 -3452 • (509) 575 -2490 1 January 3, 2008 CERTIFIED MAIL 7006 0100 0002 8191 7495 Mr. Bill Hammett Superior Asphalt and Concrete 2000 East Beech 1 PO Box 10268 Yakima, WA 98909 RE: Superior Asphalt Beech Street, Facility Site ID # 488, Order No: 91TC-C444 Has Been Satisfied Dear Mr. Hammett: On October 31, 1991, Ecology issued Order No. 91TC -C444 to Superior Asphalt and Concrete 1 Company ( "Superior ") regarding clean up of the site at 2000 East Beech Street in Yakima following discovery of a petroleum seep into an adjacent park pond. On October 20, 1997, Ecology issued Amendment No. 1 to Order No. 91TC -C444. On June 6, 2000, Ecology issued Amendment No. 2 to Order. No. DE 91TC-C444. Section VI. of Order No. 91TC-C444 states: "The provisions of this Order shall be deemed satisfied 1 upon Superior Asphalt's receipt of written notification from Ecology that Superior Asphalt has completed the remedial activity required by this Order, as amended by any modifications, and that all other provisions of this Enforcement Order have been complied with." The Department of Ecology hereby determines that Superior erior As halt and Concrete Py y p p Company has satisfied the requirements of Order No. 91TC -C444 and its two amendments. Superior Asphalt and Concrete Company has completed the remedial activity required by the Order. All other provisions of the Order also have been complied with. 1 Background Superior completed an interim action in 1994 by placing a liner and product collection system downgradient of the affected area. From 1998 through 2002, Superior conducted cleanup activities that included removal of equipment from the site associated with asphalt: batch. plant operation, excavation of petroleum contaminated soil down to and below seasonal; low groundwater elevation, removal of petroleum product floating on ground water, and restoration of the site to surrounding grade while maintaining the liner and product recovery system installed in the interim action. The excavated petroleum contaminated soil was transported to the location of the new Superior plant • DOC. INDEX 1 Mr. Bill Hammett 1 January 3, 2008 Page 2 near Selah, where it was incorporated into new asphalt being produced. At the Beech Street site, a small amount of petroleum contaminated soil remains east of the lined interception trench. The contaminated -soil from this small area was not excavated in order to minimize damage to the existing wetlands and ponds and to maintain the integrity of the trench liner. 1 In a June 24, 2003, letter, Site Manager Norm Hepner of Ecology approved a modification of the "Alternate Ground Water Monitoring Plan, Superior Asphalt Enforcement Order DE 91TC-C444" submitted by Herrera Environmental Consultants on behalf of Superior. On June 7, 2006, Ecology received "2005 Annual Ground Water Monitoring Report" submitted by Herrera Environmental Consultants on behalf of Superior Asphalt and Concrete Company on monitoring conducted in accordance with the alternate monitoring plan. The document reports on sampling events for diesel and heavy oil -range hydrocarbons on eight dates from 4/18/03 to 1/9/06. In 49 of the 50 individual results, the constituent analyzed for was not found above the reported detection limit. The one instance in which a constituent was detected showed a diesel concentration of 0.37 mg /kg, which is below the MTCA Method A cleanup level of 0.5 mg/kg. That sample came from the earliest (4/18/03) round of sampling covered in the report. The last remaining requirement from Order DE 91TC -C444 was satisfied when a restrictive covenant was recorded placing conditions on the property for the purpose of prohibiting activities that may interfere with the integrity of the cleanup or result in exposure to hazardous substances. Ecology again thanks Superior Asphalt and Concrete Company for pursuing this cleanup. Please call Bob Swackhamer at (509) 454 -7840 if you have questions or comments on matters contained in this letter. 1 Sincerely, lit /i 1 Donald W. Abbott Section Manager Toxics Cleanup Program Central Regional Office: 1 cc: Randy Baer, Baer: Testing and Consulting Al Brown, Yakima Greenway Aaron Davis, Superior Asphalt and Concrete Charles Flower, Flower & Andreotti Peter Jowise, Herrera Environmental Consultants Pete Matheson, Granite Northwest, Inc. Ray Paolella, City of Yakima Drl 11 INDEX Peers, Jeff From: J — - - - - - -- - -- From: Reed, Catherine D. (ECY) [CRAJ461 @ecy.wa.gov] Sent: Friday, November 30, 2007 5:59 PM To: Peters, Jeff Cc: Swackhamer, Robert D. (ECY); Lewis, Jeff (ECY) Subject: Proposed Yakima Greenway path extension around upper pond in Sarg Hubbard Park Thanks for arranging a site visit to Sarg Hubbard Park (Park) today. Ecology has the following comments about the wetland issues associated with this preliminary project proposal: The wetland ponds are "associated" with the Yakima River even though they are outside of the 200 -foot distance from the River. They are influenced by the River and they have an influence on the River by their capacity to treat stormwater and provide open water off channel habitat for some waterfowl. The upper pond has much Tess habitat function than the lower pond and the upper pond has primarily a water quality and hydrologic support 01 function. A shoreline permit for the project may be needed if there is work within or over the pond(s). The physical setting of the site and existing location of structures includin g existing pathway and ( g g p y cyclone fence line) make it difficult to increase the existing buffers this area. There is only a small area to work within, especially I on the west side of the pond. Fortunately, protection of water quality improvement and hydrologic support functional values require a smaller buffer than that which is needed to protect habitat functions. In addition, because public access to the shoreline is a preferential use under 90.58 RCW (the Shoreline Management Act) I and the Park area is already in an Urban shoreline setting, placement of a asphalt pathway within the setback buffer around the upper pond is acceptable to Ecology in order to facilitate /control public access to the pond. The public is already using the pond and there are trampled footpaths within several feet of the upper pond. Placement of an asphalt pathway higher on the slope above the pond, with designated T- access paths to the shoreline or to a fishing platform would improve the situation. The placement of the asphalt pathway provides some benefits to balance against its intrusion into the buffer area. Those benefits include additional protection of the impermeable liner and a mechanism for funneling the ongoing fishing activities of the public to specific areas of the pond banks. Those benefits should help prevent erosion, especially if additional thorny native plants (like roses and hawthorns) are planted in buffer areas in between the pathway and the pond where you do not want the public to go. Extension of the cyclone fence along the south end of the upper pond (north end of the lower pond) should help prevent the public from accessing the lower pond, which has a higher habitat value. I checked with Bob Swackhamer (Ecology Toxic Cleanup program) about whether it was OK to plant trees or shrubs over the liner. He said that trees may be a problem, but that shrubs probably would be OK. If you need to take trees down (like the Russian olive tree adjacent to the upper pond) in order to install the pathway or to simply remove a non -native plant, you could plant native replacement trees in another location to avoid the liner area — maybe next to the lower pond. I would encourage the Greenway Foundation to plan a pathway location which allows for as big a densely planted buffer as makes sense for the design restrictions. Inexpensive native plants are typically available from the North Yakima Conservation District if you order them ahead of ti Thank your for the opportunity to review your project early in your planning phase to weigh in on the wetland issues. Please let me know if you have additional questions. 11 1 Catfierine , D.'ed 91 ctfandandSfiorerzndsSpeciarut 11 asliington State , Department of'Ecofogy 15 '(1 est Yakima Avenue, Suitc 200 � L rl r 4/2/2008 i ^• ►DUX. c 'dTATF • c 4. 's cc r m 1989 STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY 15 West Yakima Avenue, Suite 200 • Yaki,na, Washington 98902-3452 * (509) 575 -2490 1 November 19, 2007 1 Mr. Al Brown 1 Executive Director Yakima Greenway Foundation 111 South 18` Street Yakima WA 98901 RE: Yakima Greenway Pond Access Path Dear Mr. Brown: Thank you for the letter from Brad Card of PLSA Engineering & Surveying on behalf of the Yakima Greenway Foundation regarding the proposed extension of the access path along the west and south shore of the pond in Sarg Hubbard Park. Ecology received the letter from Mr. Card on October 30, 2007. Jeff Cutter, Randy Baer, you and I also met at the site on October 17, 2007, to discuss the same topic. 1 Ecology's Toxics Cleanup Program is involved because a cleanup conducted by Superior Asphalt and Concrete Company in the area included a restrictive covenant that requires Ecology approval for changes. - During the on -site meeting we discussed two general path routes. One would leave the remaining 11 contaminated soil protected by a fence and go around the fence up into the parking lot. The other one closely follows the shore and is proposed in Mr. Card's letter. As I said at our meeting; the option leaving the contaminated soil protected .bya fence could be approved. without. Ecology . becoming too closely involved in the details. Your proposed route along the shore requires more scrutiny. I can say at this point thatpaths over 11 contaminated soil have been approved elsewhere and I am not aware of a reason,the concept would not work here. Mr. Card's letter does describe the proposed path in words, but does not .contain the construction details that would enable Ecology to provide the concurrence he seeks. DOC. 1 • INDEX 11 _____ -- -- --� - Mr. Al Brown November 19, 2007 Page 2 There also are wetlands issues that must be considered along the entire route of the new path, not 1 just the portion that coincides with the Superior Asphalt cleanup liner. I have spoken with Cathy Reed of this office, who told me that it is best for wetlands impacts to be considered from •the very beginning in designing the project. She is willing to visit the site and discuss wetlands issues, although such discussions with Ecology do not take the place of you retaining an experienced specialist to work on the project. The phone number for Cathy Reed is (509) 575 -2616. My telephone number is (509) 454 -7840 if you have questions or comments on matters contained in this letter. Sincerely, F Robert D. Swackhamer, PE Environmental Engineer Toxics Cleanup Program cc: Randy Baer, Baer Testing and Consulting Brad Card, PLSA Jeff Cutter, City of Yakima Legal Department Cathy Reed, Ecology Shorelands and Environmental Assistance Program 1 1 DAY, INDEX # _ii : - ___ I 1SVtil„ STATE OF WASHINGTON 1 • DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY • 15 West Yakima Avenue, Suite 200 • Yakima, Washington 98902 -3452 • (509) 575-2490 September 11, 2006 CERTIFIED MAIL 7005 1820 0006 5952 7849 Mr. Bill Hammett Superior Asphalt and Concrete • 2000 East Beech PO Box 10268 • Yakima, WA 98909 RE: Superior Asphalt Beech Street, Facility Site II) # 488, Institutional Controls Needed to Close Out Order No. 91TC -C444 1 Dear Mr. Hammett: On October 31, 1991, Ecology issued Order No. 91TC -0444 to Superior Asphalt and Concrete Company ( "Superior") regarding clean up of the site at 2000 East Beech Street in Yakima following discovery of a petroleum seep into an adjacent park pond. On October 20, 1997, Ecology issued Amendment No. 1 to Order No. 91TC-C444. On June 6, 2000, Ecology issued Amendment No 2 to Order No. DE 91TC-C444. Superior completed an interim action in 1994 by placing a liner and product collection system downgradient of the affected area. From 1998 through 2002, Superior conducted cleanup activities that included removal of equipment from the site associated with asphalt batch plant operation, excavation of petroleum contaminated soil down to and below seasonal low groundwater elevation, removal of petroleum product floating on ground water, and restoration of the site to surrounding grade while maintaining the liner and product recovery system installed in the interim action. The excavated petroleum contaminated soil was transported to the location of the new Superior plant near Selah, where it was incorporated into new asphalt being produced. At the Beech Street site, a small-amount of petroleum contaminated soil remains east of the lined interception trench: The contaminated soil from this small area was not excavated in order to minimize damage to the: existing wetlands and ponds and to maintain the integrity. of the trench liner: In a June 24, 2003, letter, Site Manager Norma Hepner of Ecology approved a modification of the "Alternateu 1 Ground Water Monitoring Plan, Superior Asphalt:Enforcernent Order DE 91TC -0444" submitted: by Herrera Environmental Consultants on behalf of Superior. On June 7 2006 Ecology received "2005 Annual.Ground: Water Monitoring Report" submitted by Herrera Environmental Consultants on behalf of SuperiorAAsphalt and Concrete Company on monitoring =conducted in accordance with the alternate monitoring plan. ;.The =document reports on sampling events for diesel and heavy 1 oil- range hydrocarbons on eight dates from 4/18/0310 1/9106. In 49 of the 50 individual _results; the constituent analyzed for was not found above the reported limit. The one instance in which a constituent was detected showed a diesel concentration.o£ 037 mg/kg, which is below the MTCA Method A cleanup level of 0.5 mg kg. That sample came from. the earliest (4 /1 8/03) round of sampling covered in the :. - report. DG. INDEX • _it - ? .____. 1 1 Mr. Bill Hammett September 11, 2006 Page 2 • The monitoring report also contains the following request `Based upon WAC 173 - 340 -720, Superior Asphalt _ and Concrete Company requests that no further action be designated for this site." 1 Section VI. of Order No. 91TC-C441 states: "The provisions.ofthis Order shall be deemed satisfied upon Superior Asphalt's receipt of written notification from Ecology that.Superior Asphalt has completed the remedial activity required by this Order, as°amended.byany- modifications, and that all other provisions :. of this • Enforcement Order have been complied with." Ecology is motivated to close out order No. 91TC -C444 but believes that there is one issue that requires 1 resolution before Ecology can determine that Superior Asphalt and Concrete Company has satisfied the requirements of Order No. 91 TC -CA44 and its two amendments: That issue is institutional controls. I Institutional controls, as described in WAC 173 - 340 -440, are measures to limit activities that may interfere with the integrity of a cleanup. A restrictive covenant, executed by a property owner and recorded with the register of deeds to run with the property, is the usual way to implement institutional controls. For this site, I believe the logical institutional controls would be a prohibition on disturbance of the interception trench, liner, or soil cover that would allow migration of co ntamination without prior notification' , to and approval by Ecology or its successor agency, physical measures such as fencing to prevent access to the 1 small area where contaminated soil remains, a prohibition on residential use, and a prohibition on conveyance of title or other interest in the property without complete provision for continued compliance with the institutional controls. I also would be okay with the (slightly longer) list of institutional controls contained in the Stage 3 Cleanup Plan prepared by Herrera Environmental Consultants and dated April 14, 1999. Ecology thanks Superior Asphalt and Concrete Company, your consultants, and you personally for your persistence in pursuing this cleanup. My telephone number is (509) 454 -7g40 if you have questions or comments on matters contained in this letter. Sincerely, of • 1 RobertD: Swackhamer, PE Site Manager 1 Toxics. Cleanup Program • cc: Randy Baer, Baer Testing and Consulting • Al Brown, Yakima Greenway • Aaron Davis, Superior Asphalt and Concrete Charles Flower, FIower & Andreotti Peter Jowise, Herrera Environmental Consultants Ray Paolella, City of Yakima 1 DX, INDEX .,r; ) ■ ., YAKIMA , . t . � PARKS AND R E �.� . �CREATI ®N S 1000 AhcaAilm Road , i� Yakima, Waahingtiiii 9 ii., 41`.'*:: t ¢ /^P j/[�T T / 803 g x `; nom ' D •E At 1 ! MEN.! ) - . , . Y' i .f'���'' 6I ., ,,y , i' ,,,„ _ January 30, 1984 Interagency Committee for Outdoor Recreation 1 ATTN: Ron Taylor 4808 Capitol Blvd., EP -11 Tumwater, WA 98504 RE:' Sarg Hubbard Park - Environmental Assessment Dear Mir. Taylor: Enclosed is the required Environmental Impact Assessment for the Sarg Hubbard Riverside Park just East of Yakima. The assessment provides II a project description, description of the environment, environmental impact of the proposal, floodplain analysis, and maps. The assessment disclosed no significant adverse environmental impacts II from the proposal, • For those environmental concerns that have been identified, mitigating measures have been incorpoI;,/.-; into site design to reduce the potential impacts. We therel,,. con ;u..de, th, :t the project does not result in significant adverse' environmental impacts and recommend the National Park Service issue a Finding of No Significant impact (FONSI) for the project. Finally, in compliance with public notice requirsmetitc, of environmental II assessments involving floodplain/wetland areas, the Yakima County Planning Department will incorporate notice of the availability of the assessment when advertisements for the required ShorelinPgme Permit are published. This will allow further public invovement in II •'°.e overall development design and der_..ision making process as required by National Park Service rules. Those notices will be published within the -next -two weeks. Should any questions arise concerning this environmental rolmental assessment, please contact this office at (509) 575 - 4 Sincerely, . • 1 CHARLES BUTLER Na l. Parks and Recreation Director • , 14. i4-1 Al_ PHONE (508) 575 -4383 '1tp•e1G.,.✓.W •, 'der.. - • n - ; 7'f "":w ?T, .. .., .. «. - ... 1 1 II Description of Project Yakima County, in cooperation with the City of Yakima, the Yakima River Greenway Foundation, and many other private citizens and organizations, proposes to construct the Sarg Hubbard Riverside Park, II a multi -use public park on approximately 37 acres along the west bank of the Yakima River. The site is located 1/2 mile east of the Yakima . 1 city limits on the east side of South 18th Street about 700 feet south of Terrace Heights Drive (see maps). . 1 The development of Sarg Hubbard Riverside Park is part of an on- going effort to make available more recreationally- oriented uses within . II the Yakima River Regional Greenway, a 9.5 mile stretch of the Yakima River and its adjoining environs from Selah Gap to Union Gap. The Greenway II was designated as a state conservation corridor by the Washington State Legislature in 1979 following preparation of a master plan in 1976 1 which detailed conservation and development concepts for the Greenway's various segments. II Sarg Hubbard Park will be the third construction project within the Greenway. Of all planned projects, it will be the most significant since II the park's location, size and features will provide, a focal point for the overall Greenway project.. The park will include: • 1 . Phase I On -site paved parking for 90 cars, .5 miles of interior 1 • paved roadway, .67 miles of asphalt jogging path, a 20' x 40' restroom structure, picnic sites, a I commemorative column, 2 =3 acres of lawn, irrigation 'system /well, connection to City of Yakima domestic sewer and water systems and miscellaneous tree and shrub 1 plantings. • II 1 `l ._ INDEX 1 Ff -( Phase II Observation platform, picnic shelter, tot lot, bus 1 shelter, heritage art display, community green and • additional lawn totaling 8 -10 acres. 1 Phase III Reflection Pond, waterfall /fountain, boat launch, and . .44 miles of asphalt jogging path. Each phase is anticipated to be completed within two years after commencement of construction.. Phase I construction has been funded and construction is scheduled to begin in April, 1984. Description of the Environment Land Use - The 36 acre site is physically divided into three distinct 1 areas: a) The river and natural floodway area east of the dike comprising 11.2 acres, b). the pond and the adjoining banks comprising 7.5 acres, and 1 c) the landfill and property bordering South 18th Street which includes • about 17 acres. The majority of park improvements will be located in - 1 area "c ". The ro'ect site was used by Yakima County residents as a landfill P J Y Y since the early 1940's. Its use as a sanitary.landfill was abandoned in 1965. Since 1965, materials dumped on the site have been limited to snow, leaves and tree trimmings by the City of Yakima. All other city refuse is • disposed at the County sanitary landfill in Terrace Heights. The small • 1 lake on the was created from gravel mining completed about eight years ago. The river dike now supports a recently constructed bicycle/ 1 pedestrian path as part of the Greenway project. Lands lying easterly of the dike within the river floodway remain in their natural state. A mixture of commercial, single family residential and mining activities border the park -site on the other three sides. The Central Pre -Mix and Superior Asphalt operations lie south of the park'with two major car dealerships to the west. Land immediately north is vacant. • • -2- 1 INDEX 1 • 1 Transportation /Access The site is served by South 18th Street, ' a paved access road which intersects with Terrace Heights Drive 700 1 feet to the_north. This.intersection received major improvements including an underpass and access ramps when a new Terrace Heights bridge was built in 1980. Terrace' Heights Drive is a' four lane arterial connecting Yakima 1 with unincorporated Terrace Heights and also serves as Yakima's primary freeway interchange to Interstate 82. A secondary access route to the 1 park will be from Southeast Yakima via the Beech Street underpass, Chalmers Street, and Riverside Road which connects to the south.end of 1 ' 18th Street. 1 The site is also accessible from the south via the new bicycle/ pedestrian path along the Yakima River dike. Access by boat or.raft from II the river is also anticipated. Fish and Wildlife - Irrigation practices and high recreational demand for the fisheries has reduced fish populations of the Yakima River significantly in recent years. Renewed efforts to improve fish runs by both public and private 'organizations bring hope that future fish populations can meet public demand. Currently, however, this reach II of the Yakima River does not provide an adequate fish. population. The pond on the site is too shallow to be stocked. II Wildlife has been severely limited by the refuse dumping activities on Y Y P g the site over the past years. The only resident species known to exist on the site include quail, cottontail and various urbanized songbirds. II Vegetation - Because of landfill operations, the portion of the site west Of the dike is,' with the exception of cheat grass, generally void of vegetation which accounts for the limited wildlife population. There are a few willows starting along the banks of the pond. The area on the II river side of the dike does support some riparian vegetation and will . remain undisturbed. . II -3 II . . . . . DOC INDEX 1 4 1 Geology and Soils - The underlying soil type is Weirman Sandy Loam common to Yakima Valley bottomlands. The subsurface is quite gravelly and well drained. Limitations to development include flood potential (see floodplain analysis). A variety of medium size tree species can_success- fully adapt to the Weirman soil providing a fair to good wildlife habitat. Irrigation, would most likely be necessary. • 1 Mineral Resources - Mineral resource potential of the project site 1 would be limited to river run gravels. This potential is evidenced.by • the pond on the site formed after gravel was removed and by other nearby 1 excavation operations.- No other significant mineral resources are known in this area. 1 Air and Water Quality - Regional air quality is fair to good. Seasonal problems occur with temperature inversions common to the Yakima . II Valley. These inversions, combined with heavy wood burning stove use and seasonal orchard heating, tend to deteriorate air quality for short 1 periods of time. The project site will have slightly better air quality during these periods due to the gentle breezes that occur adjacent to 1 • the river. Yakima River water alit is poor to fair in this reach. Y P h. Upstream irrigation diversions and agricultural discharges into the river impact water quality. Because of urban drainage, river water quality deteriorates significantly downstream from the Sarg Hubbard Park site. Water Resources /Hydrology - The Yakima River drains a 6000 square mile area east of the Cascade Range into the Columbia River. River flow -is 1 derived from snowmelt and rainfall on the eastern slopes -of theCascades'. The river gradient upstream of Union Gap (including the project site) ranges 1 from 11 to 19 feet per mile with discharges generally between 3,000, and cfs. The average peak discharge of the Yakima River at Parker - (about six miles downstream of project site) is approximately 16,200 cfs. Flood damage in the valley can .be anticipated during discharges of over -4- 1 • ;N.)[_1, 1 • 12,000 cfs which on the average occurs every other year. Significant - diking projects and irrigation flow control dams and reservoirs have reduced flood threats to the Yakima Valley over the past 50 years. The Yakima River is considered a high sediment transport system. Most of the sediment transported is sand, but in flood the river is capable of carrying rocks with diameters greater than two feet. The river channel 1 meanders significantly throughout the Greenway reach with floodplain widths consistently in the 1 1/2 mile range, now significantly reduced by 1 diking. Other human activities in the floodplain have altered natural meandering of the river including roads, bridges, gravel pits, and farming. Historic /Archaeologic Resources - There are no unique or historically significant features known to exist on or near the project site. • Environmental Impact of the Proposed Action Land Use - The project site will be transformed from an abandoned landfill into a public park consistent with the Yakima Urban Area Plan and local zoning codes. The project is also consistent with the Washington ' State Shorelines Management Act. Impacts on adjoining lands will be primarily related to traffic (see Transportation /Circulation). Existing 1 auto dealerships will benefit by additional "drive -by" traffic. Trespass onto adjacent gravel mining operations may increase. 1 Fish and Wildlife /Vegetation - Project development would have a 1 limited impact on the Yakima River fisheries. Excepting the boat launch in Phase III, no development will occur near the water. Increased public access to the river" - will, however, tend to invite increased fishing activity . and hence an increased demand on the fisheries of the river. Other Greenway Foundation projects will also result in increased public access and 1 may increase pressure to improve Yakima River fish runs. -5- • DOC. • INDEX • . • 1 Washington State Department of Game officials have conducted an on -site investigation of the project and concluded that project construction would have an insignificant impact upon wildlife. Interim wildlife impacts will be limited to those quail, rabbits, and other small rodents that now find shelter in the piles of tree trimmings and leaves that have been discarded on the site. Planned landscaping will improve vegetative canopies for a variety of wildlife, and will enchance game habitat over the long term. In addition to landscaping, game officials indicate that other planned 1 improvements such as feeders, perches, variations in lake shoreline, etc., will attract not only urban bird species now frequenting the property, but 1 other raptors common to the Greenway. Geology and Soils - Project development will result in alterations and disruptions to the present site topography. Slopes of the bank of the lake will be graded and flattened to provide a more gentle grade into the water. Some land leveling will also be necessary on the east side of the community green. No significant impacts on geology or soils will 1 occur from these grading activities. 1 Concern has been raised about the likelihood of methane gas generation by the old landfill. Environmental Protection Agency and Department of Ecology officials have investigated the potential hazards of the site and concluded that there is no demonstrated environmental hazard at this time. Recommendations provided by the Department of Ecology to minimize future environmental risk upon site development include: 1) Avoid excess water application to the soil to prevent water percolating through the fill and into groundwater; 1 2) Stabilize the sides of the fill, including seeding, to prevent erosion; 1 3) Maintain the overall integrity of the fill; and 4) Avoid locating any covered structures within the landfill area to prevent potential trapping of methane gas. 1 1 r " r ii i, • H'�. _ • • These recommendations have been incorporated into project plans and designs and will be used to maintain the current "no hazard" status of 1 the site. Mineral Resources - Project development will preclude future use of the small pond as a gravel source and will result in the need to extract • gravel from other sources available in the Yakima area. Air and Water Quality - Project construction activities will cause short term air quality problems by increasing dust levels. The project will be. coordinated with the Yakima Clean Air Authority and the construction contract will require regular watering to minimize the impact. Water qualityin the pond will be disturbed during sloping and con- struction work. Since this pond supports little or no fish and wildlife, impacts will be minor. These same construction impacts, to a lesser degree, 11 will also apply to the Yakima River during site improvements for the raft launch. 11 Water Resources /Hydrology - The park will not impact the hydrology 'I of the Yakima River. Anticipated impacts on the fisheries of the river were discussed earlier in this section. Historic /Archaeological Resources - With no unique or historic features known in the project area, park development will not impact these resources. 11 Transportation /Circulation - Park development will impact area trans- !! portation facilities. However, major reconstruction and widening of Terrace Heights Drive about three years ago has mitigated this impact. Anticipated 11 traffic loads can easily be accommodated by this arterial. I , The secondary access via the Beech Street underpass will experience• • slightly higher traffic counts. This route will also experience an increase in bicycle traffic from urbanized residential areas of Yakima 'I to the new park. "Caution -Truck Traffic" signs may be required at points of potential cement truck /pedestrian /bicycle conflicts. • • DOC. • -7- INDEX ILL '. Floodplain Analysis II The most recent floodplain study prepared by the Federal Insurance Administration (FIA) as part of the National Flood Insurance Program indicates the Riverside Park property lies within the 100 -year floodplain II of the Yakima River. Although not officially adopted by FIA, this study is used by state and local officials in administration of floodplain and 1 shoreline management regulations as the most current floodplain data. The FIA study further shows the Yakima -River floodway contained within the river's westerly bank dike. The-park has .been designed with this in 1 mind, as the only improvement proposed on the river side of the dike is the boat launch /landing area. Study profiles show that the 100 -year flood elevation ranges from 1031.7 feet MSL at the northwest corner of the park property to 1026.7 II feet MSL at the southeast corner. Since the property has been.used as a landfill site over the past few years, a significant amount of the property 1 has been raised well above the 100 -year floodplain elevation. The attached map.(Figure 3 ) shows the property and its relationship to the Yakima 1 River floodplain. Excluding the floodway area east of the dike and the Reflection Pond, only about 33 percent of the land area of the park would actually be inundated by a 100 -year frequency flood. The only park improvements located within the 100 -year floodplain II area will be the 20' x 40' restroom structure, parking and roadway areas. a portion of the jogging course, and the Sarg Hubbard commemorative column. 1 The nature of these improvements are such that none will necessitate a significant amount of fill. Also, structural. designs will include proper 1 anchoring to prevent dislodging and other 'flood proofing features. Con- sequently, virtually no impact upon the floodplain regime of the Yakima - II River will occur as a result of park development. • Additionally, recreationally-oriented uses are encouraged in flood- II Y Y g plain areas by regulations of all governmental levels. Park uses, -8- PO': _d . __1 II �I such as the proposed Sarg Hubbard Park, require few improvements that obstruct flood water flow. The proposed park is consistent with goals I 1 and policies of the Washington State Shorelines Management Act, State floodplain regulations, local zoning and the Greenway Master Plan. Permit requests for park development are now being processed by various 'f state and local agencies. 11 10 II 111 10 III III III rll 10 III DOC INDEX III -9- It _, _ ....-- • ,e \ 1 1 e --. % A • xi . • . - 4 ■ • • ” 4. . fa 2 . 'I ,...: i . ! , _ 37 • 1 11 N - 39 4 . it 8 . I . \ 1 I . \ :'. ' .0 I I , . J.994) I • Sarg Hub • 1 • '1. 11 clijfri ba • Colunin 23 x ",__./ 4184,0..a 1■11 \ 4 4 i 1 \ . y.,4 1211f"Kr stroom 0 Re • I.. 4...:: . - r . 1 400 Picnic Shelter , ( \ _•!._ rd ' .% I • -e - 0 - 1 ' I ■.. I • ■ I ONE A g e 1 \ ' ' c i t # # - 8 0 , t 1 1 3 3 . • - : . 1 , Vs...Tot Lot i t i 44- -tIch /IIN -2-1„. 1 JAIIMENIII • 1 -Il i, P 11 ...j • . i a.......m.......mmi . WM./ .! . C. HA L MN.' 1341tImu 0 \••../ 0• .. lA 81/ 01 - i co cn 0 V k v TRACTS 0 . . c a ( ARMIN ( A E7J9 92 ' 1...: [ ! k \ \ tf) --- ok Lu I 30 ,,-, • ■ \n---- cP si t,-) ( Ikkiii . ii . . • I 0 i I - Beech St ,eet • . v nder •ass • L...... ■ . . 7,11! ma 111 . . . ,s - 7 i Ilk: II / 2 .. _.. • ; . 211 D .1 0 I I . 1 I . _______:_. _ 1 • , .. .,.. SUBJECT P R 0 P E R TY I. woovaftvgveLwIalimai.. :) .f!.,:: . .' 4.1.•''. SCALE I = 400 I . • 0 !... .x EC FIGURE 1 .. . 1 . _ .....n . 4 NU .11 -r o•o•l is .: .. k� I ---,... _ -,•..-...• ': j I W // / l-) 1-1..1 \,.. . ..:7.- .••• _ ' ' , 41 rig - It ■ - ' - ' • * /*' . 7 - -s- \,.. 2 _ . , ...„,...___.___ 4. _ T ! _ �f� :a.{� l 1 in (� '� , Z 9 3 /l a 311ne ,r/ I 1_82 7"""": \i- `11, . . , NN i _! I M.P. i 1 N ust4EL), ( n /' =_=____I \ , ,_, _ 4., ‘, 11 , ;;; A , NE 1 4° k4f — w i �1 ` 1� ,.., 1.6" --. . - L,.. -° - - A r s....., t•L \ 1 t r , 'LA 100 .0. s° N • \ ■F 1 \ ` ' e Li r tt Id/ _ 44011000.1 ve... Mt It v `\ \ ` \ \V .... ` � \ —® xv i i "1�� � _ v11 r_�; ,/*. Ala ' 7 1111 ! 1 >09� 1101 \ 0\i i �rli • ., VA i1 ,'411111=4 AIME Ni III 9 o w . � � ® V \., L I ® I.0 v I \ 1414,! 0:kvi&N! 11 ff I— ® Si 41 7 ' CPI. 5 c) ccs , G7...\41\ 3A 9i 91 \ `�14; , 61 1 \ �� U 101".... Um 1 f • J1. 1 INV a i •�• .. � 11 •11 ®1i WA \ \ \Emmy, \z=iff ® wpm Ems wpm Ylve � �. / ' te r.. -/ t 1� Te.aGe / 1� w A 4 • . A W -37 I I 'I 1 R I N -39 1 1. 4L • \ 6 0 1 � I ��_ T_ 1 11W/M111111 1 2 I'AI1K 7 0 1 . . :: t LIOVIV00.17,-- 1 ///M111 _ • (1, iii � ° � 4 � • r aid W �� lir � r, 1 0,• � iiiiiiiii7 -eo .4::,./:;.:,,i, 0 ,,,5„:„:7,„,„,,,,„:„,„,,,,v,7„,,,„„., r �: 11 ` //� R r su•�NItISI: • C FIALtdElt. aAltuc f i ll( { 1 \ L N. (AR DEN • ASAP[ E(J992 - 2 0 , ��® '� .'"'''..4'....‘,',::" . \ _ , • l - \ . `� ... L tu ( . . r-- . r - , . i I M.�::M I I` \C'rs 1 / \ • A 4 5 7 11 / 2 II, / 0 80-214 i / 1 8 C 0 . I / SUBJECT PROPERTY 1, MILVANSILIEILNIMILIVIIIVOSAS .t SCALE I � = 4 0 0 a 1 .. FIGURE 3 ` EC 108 -1983 • 4 • ►k "(. r.- 11.