HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/05/2014 07 Crown Pointe, Phase 1, Final PlatBUSINESS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
YAKIMA, WASHINGTON
AGENDA STATEMENT
Item No. 7.
For Meeting of: August 05, 2014
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
ITEM TITLE: Public meeting and resolution for approval of the Final Plat for
Crown Pointe Phase 1
SUBMITTED BY: Joan Davenport, AICP, Community Development Director
(509) 576-6417
Jeff Peters, Supervising Planner (509) 575-6163
SUMMARY EXPLANATION:
Cottonwood Partners LLC has submitted the final plat for Crown Pointe Phase 1, consisting of
28 single-family residential lots located at the southwest corner of Coolidge Road and South
80th Avenue. The requirements specified in the preliminary plat approval for Crown
Pointe Phase 1 have been completed and the final plat is now being presented for your
consideration and approval.
Resolution: X Ordinance:
Other (Specify):
Contract: Contract Term:
Start Date: End Date:
Item Budgeted: Amount:
Funding Source/Fiscal
Impact:
Strategic Priority:
Insurance Required? No
Mail to:
Phone:
APPROVED FOR
SUBMITTAL:
RECOMMENDATION:
Improve the Built Environment
City Manager
Staff recommends your approval of the final plat of Crown Pointe Phase 1 and the adoption of
the accompanying resolution authorizing the Mayor to sign the plat.
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Upload Date Type
Resolution - Crown Pointe Phase 1 '7/25/2014 Resollutlion
Staff Report - Crown Pointe Phase 1 7/25/2014 Backup Materliall
Complete Record - Crown Pointe Phase 1 7/25/2014 Backup Materliall
RESOLUTION NO. R -2014-
A RESOLUTION approving the final plat of Crown Pointe Phase 1 and authorizing the
Mayor to sign the final plat.
WHEREAS, the preliminary plat of Crown Pointe, is a 61 -lot subdivision of which Phase
1 constitutes 26 Lots, which was submitted by Cottonwood Partners, LLC to Yakima County
Public Services (County File Numbers SUB 06-0162, PRJ 06-01817, and SEP 06-062) while
the subject property was in the County; and,
WHEREAS, the subject property was annexed into the City of Yakima on April 8, 2007;
and,
WHEREAS, on July 5, 2007, the Hearing Examiner held a public hearing to consider the
preliminary plat; and,
WHEREAS, on July 19, 2007, the Hearing Examiner issued his Recommendation for
approval of the proposed plat subject to conditions;
WHEREAS, at its public meeting on May 13, 2008, the Board of Yakima County
Commissioners determined by motion that the Recommendation of the Hearing Examiner
should be affirmed and adopted; and
WHEREAS, the City Engineer has approved and accepted all plans and designs for the
improvements required in the conditions of approval of the preliminary plat, and the applicant
has constructed or financially secured all such improvements; and
WHEREAS, as this final plat comes before City Council for review, each member
declares that he has had no contact with either the applicant or opponents of the final plat, now,
therefore,
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF YAKIMA:
The proposed final plat Crown Pointe Phase 1, consisting of three sheets depicting a
subdivision located at the southeast corner of Coolidge Rd. and S. 80th Ave., is hereby
approved and the mayor is hereby authorized to sign the final plat. The applicant shall file the
final plat of Crown Pointe Phase 1 for record in the Yakima County Auditor's Office immediately,
or as soon thereafter as possible, and the applicant shall be responsible for all filing fees.
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this 5th day of August, 2014.
ATTEST:
David Edler, Mayor
City Clerk
City of Yakima, Washington
Department of Community Development
Planning Division
Final Plat Staff Report
City Council Public Meeting
August 5, 2014
Final Plat Application ) Final Long Plat (FLP#001-14)
For a 26 -lot subdivision ) Staff Contact:
Known as Crown Pointe Phase 1 ) Jeff Peters,
Supervising Planner
) (509) 575-6163
BACKGROUND AND SUMMARY OF REQUEST
Crown Pointe is a 61 -lot subdivision of which Phase 1 constitutes 26 lots of record that was
recommended for approval by the Hearing Examiner on July 19, 2007. The Board of County
Commissioners held a public hearing on May 13, 2008, to review the preliminary plat and the
Hearing Examiner's recommendation. The plat was approved by the Board of County
Commissioners by Resolution (RESO 477-2008) on November 18, 2008. (Yakima County
Planning assigned file numbers: SUB 06-0162, PRJ 06-01817, and SEP 06-062).
The City Engineer's office has reviewed and approved all necessary designs and engineering
and indicates that the required improvements are installed and inspected or that the required
financial security is in place to secure their installation. The City Engineer has signed the plat in
affirmation of this fact. The Planning Division has similarly reviewed the final plat and found it
to be in substantial conformance with the terms and conditions of the preliminary plat approval.
The Planning Manager has signed the final plat. Staff, therefore, recommends acceptance of
the final plat and the adoption of a resolution authorizing the Mayor to sign the final plat.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
The approved preliminary plat required the applicant to complete all site improvements listed as
conditions in the Hearing Examiner's Recommendation of July 19, 2007 (see attached). The
conditions that must be met before the final plat can be approved consist of the following
matters:
General
1. The proposed boundary line adjustment must be finalized prior to final plat approval.
Status: Achieved
2. Final lot dimensions and lot area must substantially conform to the preliminary plat.
Substantial compliance includes and permits reconfigurations to the plat that do not
significantly modify required standards, conditions of approval, or result in new or additional
significant adverse impacts. Whether a change requires a preliminary plat amendment will
be determined by the Subdivision Administrator.
Status: Achieved
3. Prior to construction, the applicant shall submit a Construction Stormwater General Permit
to the Department of Ecology, as required in SEPA Mitigation Measure Al of SEP2014-011.
1
Status: Achieved
4. A Drainage Plan shall be submitted to and approved by the County Engineer prior to final
plat approval. All stormwater generated by the plat shall be retained on-site as required by
YCC § 14.48.100 and SEPA Mitigation Measure A2 of SEP2014-011.
Status: Achieved
5. A Grading Plan prepared by a licensed professional engineer must be sub-mitted to the
County Engineer for review and approval, and a grading permit must be issued prior to any
clearing, grading, filling or excavation. Engineer certification that compaction of fill areas
meets residential building requirements must be provided upon completion of grading as
required by YCC § 14.48.100.
Status: Achieved
6. A method of dust control for grading or other construction that disturbs soil stability shall be
submitted to and approved by the Yakima Regional Clean Air Agency, as specified by the
YRCAA. A copy of the dust control plan and any other required permits shall be submitted
to the Planning Division prior to construction. The applicant shall submit a letter, or other
documentation, to the Yakima County Planning Division demonstrating that the
development will comply with air emission requirements and meet the National Ambient Air
Quality Standards (NAAQS) for 24 hours average, as required by the Yakima Regional
Clean Air Agency.
Status: Achieved
Potable Water
7. All lots must be served with public water from the Nob Hill Water Association prior to final
plat approval. All applicable fees must be paid, easements provided, and lines installed to
each of the lots prior to final plat approval. Construction must be according to the
requirements of the water provider. Written verification from the Nob Hill Water Association
confirming that this condition is met must be provided to the Planning Division prior to final
plat approval.
Status: Achieved: Nob Hill Water Associate provided a letter dated June 25, 2014,
certifying that the plat is served with potable water.
Sanitary Disposal
8. All lots must be served with public sewer via the Yakima Regional Waste -water system. All
applicable fees must be paid, easements provided, and lines installed to each of the lots
according to the requirements of the sewer service provider prior to final plat approval.
Written verification from an authorized representative for the Yakima Regional Wastewater
sewer system confirming that this condition is met must be provided to the Planning Division
prior to final plat approval.
Status: Achieved: The City of Yakima Engineering Division certified all required
construction for the plat of Crown Pointe on June 26, 2014.
2
Irrigation
9. The proposal is within the Ahtanum Irrigation District. Even though the property does not
have water rights, coordination with the Ahtanum Irrigation District is required. The District's
certificate and approval is required to be shown on the face of the final plat in accordance
with RCW 58.17.310, YCC § 14.24.010(14)(b) and YCC § 14.48.045.
Status: Achieved: Irrigation approval on the face of the plat was achieved on July 8, 2014.
Streets
10. Monuments must be placed at street intersections and curvature points as specified in YCC
§ 14.32.020 and RCW 58.09. The monuments must be protected by cases and covers as
approved by the County Engineer.
11. The applicant shall improve South 66th Avenue from Ahtanum Road north to the north
radius return of the proposed access with a RS -4 modified (28 Foot) roadway section. No
sidewalks or street lights will be required. The applicant will be required to improve South
66th Avenue from the north radius return north to the north property line with a 20 -foot -wide
Class A BST roadway section. Both roadway sections shall be designed by an Engineer
and be submitted to the County Engineer for review and approval.
12. Clear site triangles that are 30 feet by 30 feet must be provided at all intersection corners,
unless engineering analysis is made to support an alternative that still maintains the
minimum sight distance standards. Such analysis must be submitted to and approved by
the County Engineer. The site triangles must be right-of-way for public roads. The vision
clearance triangle must also meet the requirements of YCC § 15A.05.040(a).
13. Unless adjusted or otherwise approved by Public Services, Transportation Division, the
interior public roadway must be designed to Yakima County RS -3 public road standards so
as to include all required improvements and so as to provide public right-of-way of a width
specified by the County Engineer that must be dedicated to Yakima County prior to
recording the final plat.
14. The plans for all road improvements shall be designed to Yakima County standards,
prepared by a licensed professional engineer, and approved by the County Engineer prior to
construction. These plans must incorporate provisions for stormwater drainage facilities to
accommodate runoff generated within the plat -- from both road improvements and the lots
themselves.
15. The developer shall submit a road name application form for the roads within the plat to the
Public Services Department. The name Woolsey Drive would be the same as, or similar to,
the name of a gravel roadway which currently extends westerly from South 66th Avenue
north of Ahtanum Road which is named Woolsey Drive in the Yakima County Road Atlas
and which at this time is designated on a private sign as Woolsey Lane. The road name
must be reviewed and approved by Public Services prior to final plat approval in accordance
with YCC § 14.28.020(15).
16. The developer shall obtain a Road Approach Permit from the Yakima County Transportation
Division for the approach onto South 66th Avenue.
17. The developer shall obtain a Road Approach Permit and any other necessary permits from
the City of Yakima and comply with all applicable standards associated with the approach
3
onto South 64th Avenue. A copy of all required permits shall be submitted to the Planning
Division prior to final plat approval.
Status: Achieved: All public roads within the plat of Crown Pointe were built to the County
road standards specified above and required by the applicant's preliminary plat. The City of
Yakima Engineering Division certified all required construction for the plat of Crown Pointe
on June 26, 2014, and the City of Yakima Engineer has signed the Final Plat in affirmation
of this fact.
Utilities
18. Proposed and existing easements shall be shown on the final plat in accordance with YCC §
14.24.010(4).
Status: Achieved: All proposed and existing easements are shown on the face of the plat
as specified by the applicant's title report and preliminary plat decision.
19. Public utility easements shall be provided to the lots, located adjacent to interior access
easements and rights-of-way, and as specified by the utility providers. The utility
easements shall be 8 feet in width. Utility easements that are not adjacent to an access
easement or right-of-way are required to be 15 feet in width or as specified by the County
Engineer. Minimum width for utility easements that are also utilized for irrigation water
purposes is generally 15 feet and all other irrigation facilities will be as specified by the
Ahtanum Irrigation District in accordance with RCW 58.17.310 and YCC § 14.48.090(i).
Status: Achieved: All proposed and existing easements are shown on the plat as specified
by the applicant's title report, preliminary plat decision, and certified by the Ahtanum
Irrigation District's signature on the face of the final plat.
Fire Protection
20. To reduce the potential for fire hazards, vacant lands shall be maintained to prevent
start/growth of weeds, brush and trees that contribute to fire start and spread in accordance
with SEPA Mitigation Measure B1.
Status: Achieved
21. Maximum fire flow is required for the proposal. Fire suppression main lines and hydrants
must be in place, operable and accessible during the construction phase of the project in
accordance with SEPA Mitigation Measure B2.
Status: Achieved
Miscellaneous
22. When developed, the large B-2 zoned lot shall be developed in accordance with regulations
as applicable at the time of the development since it was not reviewed as part of this
project.
23. Sitescreening and landscaping shall be installed prior to occupancy, and as a condition of a
Certificate of Zoning Review (YCC § 15A.07.100) as proposed. This includes Sitescreening
Standard C along the north property line (a 6 -foot -high view -obscuring fence) and
Sitescreening Standard B (a 3 -foot -wide planting strip that will create a living evergreen
screen that is at least 6 feet in height within 3 years) along with a 4 -foot -high chainlink fence
along South 66th Avenue where it abuts the plat, and along the east property line where the
4
plat abuts South 64th Avenue. The balance of the plat, along the proposed east property
line of the plat, will also be designed with Sitescreening Standard B where it abuts the
adjoining 6.31 -acre vacant lot. Sitescreening shall also be maintained in accordance with
YCC § 15A.07.110.
24. The applicant shall submit a Parking Circulation Plan for the multi -family parking lots. The
required off-street parking shall be designed in a manner that eliminates a need for backing
and maneuvering from or onto streets, sidewalks, pedestrian ways or bikeways in order to
exit a property or maneuver out of parking spaces, and room for garbage removal. The
parking areas for each unit shall be constructed in accordance with YCC § 15A.06.110
standards:
(a) They shall be paved with 2 -inch -thick asphaltic surfacing on an aggregate
base;
(b) Grading and drainage shall be provided as part of the approved engineered
design;
(c) Any parking abutting a street shall be provided with a curb at least 6 inches
in height at least 2 feet from the street property line;
(d) All parking spaces shall be marked by durable painted lines at least 4 inches
wide. All accessible parking spaces shall be marked and signed in compliance with the
currently adopted International Building Code; and
(e) Accessible Parking shall be provided in accordance with the Inter -national
Building Code.
25. Subdivision signs or entry monuments, bus shelter and mail kiosks are permitted whether or
not they comply with front setbacks provided that:
(a) They must be constructed in accordance with the vision triangle requirements
of YCC § 15A.05.040;
(b) The County Engineer must authorize structures within public road rights-of-
way; and
(c) Signs must comply with the requirements of the YCC Chapter 15A.08.
Status: Achieved: The requirements above will be applied to any future development upon the
aforementioned 8-2 zoned lot.
Timing
26. All property taxes and special assessments for the entire tax year must be paid, together
with any required pre -payment amount prior to final plat approval.
Status: Achieved
27. If the developer elects to escrow or bond for the required road improvements and fails to
complete the improvements in the time specified in the escrow or bond agreement, the
County Engineer shall have the authority to suspend issuance of building or occupancy
permits until the required road and drainage improvements are accepted as satisfactorily
completed. The County Engineer may issue building permits on a lot -by -lot basis when it is
determined that building construction will not interfere with utility and roadway construction.
Status: Achieved
28. The total project must be completed and the final plat submitted within the maximum seven
(7) -year time period prescribed by RCW 58.17.140 as amended by Substitute Senate Bill
5
6544 filed on March 17, 2010. Any extension beyond the seven (7) -year time period is
subject to the provisions of YCC Chapter 14.24.
Status: Achieved
Plat Notes
29. The lots shall be subject to the following notes which must be placed on the face of the plat:
(a) The owners shown hereon, their grantees and assignees in interest hereby
covenant and agree to retain all surface water generated within the plat on-site,
unless an approved Stormwater and Drainage permit is in place.
(b) Yakima County has in place an urban and rural addressing system. Street
names and numbers for lots within this plat are issued by the Yakima County
Public Services Transportation Division upon issuance of an approved Building
Permit.
(c) Yakima County has no responsibility to build, improve, maintain or otherwise
service any private road for this plat. Any right-of-way dedicated to the public by
this plat shall not be opened as a county road until such time as it is improved to
county road standards and accepted as part of the county road system.
30. RCW 58.17.170 and YCC § 14.24.040 require that the final plat conform to conditions
imposed on the approved preliminary plat. If it does not, a revised preliminary plat is
required to be approved through the plat alteration process in RCW 58.17.215.
Status: Achieved: All applicable plat notes are shown
FINDINGS
1. The preliminary plat was reviewed, processed and approved by Yakima County.
2. The final plat is in general conformance with the preliminary plat and conditions of approval.
3. The applicant has built or financially secured the construction of the required improvements
necessary for final plat approval.
RECOM MENDATION
The City of Yakima, Department of Community Development's, Planning Division, recommends
that City Council accept the final plat of Crown Pointe Phase 1 and pass a resolution
authorizing the Mayor to sign the final plat.
6
COTTONWOOD PARTNERS LLC
"Final Plat of Crown Pointe — Phase 1"
FLP#001-14
EXHIBIT LIST
City Council Public Meeting
August 5, 2014
Applicant: Cottonwood Partners, LLC
File Number: FLP#001-14
Site Address: Vicinity of 7602 Coolidge Road
Staff Contact: Jeff Peters, Supervising Planner
Table of Contents
CHAPTER A Resolution
CHAPTER B Staff Report
CHAPTER C Hearing Examiner's Recommendation
CHAPTER D Vicinity Map
CHAPTER E Final Plat — "Crown Pointe Phase 1"
COTTONWOOD PARTNERS LLC
"Final Plat of Crown Pointe — Phase 1"
FLP#001-14
EXHIBIT LIST
C PTER A
Resolution
%444
uc
119,
Til /%% ;%/lii //x:7/,,,r %i
-, r,,. � ri/ ✓/��� i;;/ /„ �
i / �I�O �i� ��� / � � �
A-1 Agenda State a t: City Council Set Date of Public Meeting Final Plat of Crown Pointe Phase 1
07/15/2014
A-2 Proposed Resolution — Crown Pointe Phase 1
08/05/2014
RESOLUTION NO. R -2014-
A RESOLUTION approving the final plat of Crown Pointe Phase 1 and authorizing the
Mayor to sign the final plat.
WHEREAS, the preliminary plat of Crown Pointe, is a 61 -lot subdivision of which Phase
1 constitutes 26 Lots, which was submitted by Cottonwood Partners, LLC to Yakima County
Public Services (County File Numbers SUB 06-0162, PRJ 06-01817, and SEP 06-062) while
the subject property was in the County; and,
WHEREAS, the subject property was annexed into the City of Yakima on April 8, 2007;
and,
WHEREAS, on July 5, 2007, the Hearing Examiner held a public hearing to consider the
preliminary plat; and,
WHEREAS, on July 19, 2007, the Hearing Examiner issued his Recommendation for
approval of the proposed plat subject to conditions;
WHEREAS, at its public meeting on May 13, 2008, the Board of Yakima County
Commissioners determined by motion that the Recommendation of the Hearing Examiner
should be affirmed and adopted; and
WHEREAS, the City Engineer has approved and accepted all plans and designs for the
improvements required in the conditions of approval of the preliminary plat, and the applicant
has constructed or financially secured all such improvements; and
WHEREAS, as this final plat comes before City Council for review, each member
declares that he has had no contact with either the applicant or opponents of the final plat, now,
therefore,
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF YAKIMA:
The proposed final plat Crown Pointe Phase 1, consisting of three sheets depicting a
subdivision located at the southeast corner of Coolidge Rd. and S. 80th Ave., is hereby
approved and the mayor is hereby authorized to sign the final plat. The applicant shall file the
final plat of Crown Pointe Phase 1 for record in the Yakima County Auditor's Office immediately,
or as soon thereafter as possible, and the applicant shall be responsible for all filing fees.
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this 5th day of August, 2014.
ATTEST:
David Edler„ Mayor
City Clerk
DOC.
INDEX
# A-
gll�lll�i 0w
i�i�t�V0�I9'1IVIu�ww
Ili�l��«���b�I
BUSINESS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
YAKIMA, WASHINGTON
AGENDA STATEMENT
Item No. 5.A.
For Meeting of: July 15, 2014
ITEM TITLE: Set date of August 5, 2014 at 10:30 a.m. as the date for a public meeting
to consider the final plat of Crown Pointe
SUBMITTED BY: Joan Davenport, AICP, Community Development Director (509) 576-6417
Jeff Peters, Supervising Planner (509) 575-6163
SUMMARY EXPLANATION:
The final plat of Crown Pointe, a 61 lot subdivision, has been submitted for your approval. You are herein being
requested to set August 5, 2014 as the date for a closed record public meeting to consider this plat. The
preliminary plat was approved by Yakima County on November 18, 2008 by Resolution No. 477-2008.
Resolution: Ordinance:
Other (Specify): Set Date
Contract: Contract Term:
Start Date: End Date:
Item Budgeted: Amount:
Funding Source/Fiscal Impact:
Strategic Priority:
Insurance Required? No
Mail to:
Phone:
APPROVED FOR
SUBMITTAL:
RECOMMENDATION:
City Manager
Set August 5, 2014 as the date for a public meeting to consider fianl plat approval for Crown Pointe.
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
No Attachments Available
Upload Date Type
DOC.
INDEX
# A_ R
Page 1 of 1 Friday, July 25, 2014
COTTO OOD PARTNERS LLC
"Final Plat of Crown Pointe — Phase 1"
FLP#001-14
E IBIT LIST
C • PTER B
Staff Report
B-1
St Report
08/05/214
City of Yakima, Washington
Department of Community Development
Planning Division
Final Plat Staff Report
City Council Public Meeting
August 5, 2014
Final Plat Application
For a 26 -lot subdivision
Known as Crown Pointe Phase 1
Final Long Plat (FLP#001-14)
Staff Contact:
Jeff Peters,
Supervising Planner
(509) 575-6163
BACKGROUND AND SUMMARY OF REQUEST
Crown Pointe is a 61 -lot subdivision of which Phase 1 constitutes 26 lots of record that was
recommended for approval by the Hearing Examiner on July 19, 2007. The Board of County
Commissioners held a public hearing on May 13, 2008, to review the preliminary plat and the
Hearing Examiner's recommendation. The plat was approved by the Board of County
Commissioners by Resolution (RESO 477-2008) on November 18, 2008. (Yakima County
Planning assigned file numbers: SUB 06-0162, PRJ 06-01817, and SEP 06-062).
The City Engineer's office has reviewed and approved all necessary designs and engineering
and indicates that the required improvements are installed and inspected or that the required
financial security is in place to secure their installation. The City Engineer has signed the plat in
affirmation of this fact. The Planning Division has similarly reviewed the final plat and found it
to be in substantial conformance with the terms and conditions of the preliminary plat approval.
The Planning Manager has signed the final plat. Staff, therefore, recommends acceptance of
the final plat and the adoption of a resolution authorizing the Mayor to sign the final plat.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
The approved preliminary plat required the applicant to complete all site improvements listed as
conditions in the Hearing Examiner's Recommendation of July 19, 2007 (see attached). The
conditions that must be met before the final plat can be approved consist of the following
matters:
General
1. The proposed boundary line adjustment must be finalized prior to final plat approval.
Status: Achieved
2. Final lot dimensions and lot area must substantially conform to the preliminary plat.
Substantial compliance includes and permits reconfigurations to the plat that do not
significantly modify required standards, conditions of approval, or result in new or additional
significant adverse impacts. Whether a change requires a preliminary plat amendment will
be determined by the Subdivision Administrator.
Status: Achieved
3. Prior to construction, the applicant shall submit a Construction Stormwater General Permit
to the Department of Ecology, as required in SEPA Mitigation Measure Al of SEP2014-011.
DOC.
INDEX
R 1
1
Status: Achieved
4. A Drainage Plan shall be submitted to and approved by the County Engineer prior to final
plat approval. All stormwater generated by the plat shall be retained on-site as required by
YCC § 14.48.100 and SEPA Mitigation Measure A2 of SEP2014-011.
Status: Achieved
5. A Grading Plan prepared by a licensed professional engineer must be sub -miffed to the
County Engineer for review and approval, and a grading permit must be issued prior to any
clearing, grading, filling or excavation. Engineer certification that compaction of fill areas
meets residential building requirements must be provided upon completion of grading as
required by YCC § 14.48.100.
Status: Achieved
6. A method of dust control for grading or other construction that disturbs soil stability shall be
submitted to and approved by the Yakima Regional Clean Air Agency, as specified by the
YRCAA. A copy of the dust control plan and any other required permits shall be submitted
to the Planning Division prior to construction. The applicant shall submit a letter, or other
documentation, to the Yakima County Planning Division demonstrating that the
development will comply with air emission requirements and meet the National Ambient Air
Quality Standards (NAAQS) for 24 hours average, as required by the Yakima Regional
Clean Air Agency.
Status: Achieved
Potable Water
7. All lots must be served with public water from the Nob Hill Water Association prior to final
plat approval. All applicable fees must be paid, easements provided, and lines installed to
each of the lots prior to final plat approval. Construction must be according to the
requirements of the water provider. Written verification from the Nob Hill Water Association
confirming that this condition is met must be provided to the Planning Division prior to final
plat approval.
Status: Achieved: Nob Hill Water Associate provided a letter dated June 25, 2014,
certifying that the plat is served with potable water.
Sanitary Disposal
8. All Tots must be served with public sewer via the Yakima Regional Waste -water system. All
applicable fees must be paid, easements provided, and lines installed to each of the lots
according to the requirements of the sewer service provider prior to final plat approval.
Written verification from an authorized representative for the Yakima Regional Wastewater
sewer system confirming that this condition is met must be provided to the Planning Division
prior to final plat approval.
Status: Achieved: The City of Yakima Engineering Division certified all required
construction for the plat of Crown Pointe on June 26, 2014.
DOC.
INDEX
2
Irrigation
9. The proposal is within the Ahtanum Irrigation District. Even though the property does not
have water rights, coordination with the Ahtanum Irrigation District is required. The District's
certificate and approval is required to be shown on the face of the final plat in accordance
with RCW 58.17.310, YCC § 14.24.010(14)(b) and YCC § 14.48.045.
Status: Achieved: Irrigation approval on the face of the plat was achieved on July 8, 2014.
Streets
10. Monuments must be placed at street intersections and curvature points as specified in YCC
§ 14.32.020 and RCW 58.09. The monuments must be protected by cases and covers as
approved by the County Engineer.
11. The applicant shall improve South 66th Avenue from Ahtanum Road north to the north
radius return of the proposed access with a RS -4 modified (28 Foot) roadway section. No
sidewalks or street lights will be required. The applicant will be required to improve South
66th Avenue from the north radius return north to the north property line with a 20 -foot -wide
Class A BST roadway section. Both roadway sections shall be designed by an Engineer
and be submitted to the County Engineer for review and approval.
12. Clear site triangles that are 30 feet by 30 feet must be provided at all intersection corners,
unless engineering analysis is made to support an alternative that still maintains the
minimum sight distance standards. Such analysis must be submitted to and approved by
the County Engineer. The site triangles must be right-of-way for public roads. The vision
clearance triangle must also meet the requirements of YCC § 15A.05.040(a).
13. Unless adjusted or otherwise approved by Public Services, Transportation Division, the
interior public roadway must be designed to Yakima County RS -3 public road standards so
as to include all required improvements and so as to provide public right-of-way of a width
specified by the County Engineer that must be dedicated to Yakima County prior to
recording the final plat.
14. The plans for all road improvements shall be designed to Yakima County standards,
prepared by a licensed professional engineer, and approved by the County Engineer prior to
construction. These plans must incorporate provisions for stormwater drainage facilities to
accommodate runoff generated within the plat -- from both road improvements and the lots
themselves.
15. The developer shall submit a road name application form for the roads within the plat to the
Public Services Department. The name Woolsey Drive would be the same as, or similar to,
the name of a gravel roadway which currently extends westerly from South 66th Avenue
north of Ahtanum Road which is named Woolsey Drive in the Yakima County Road Atlas
and which at this time is designated on a private sign as Woolsey Lane. The road name
must be reviewed and approved by Public Services prior to final plat approval in accordance
with YCC § 14.28.020(15).
16. The developer shall obtain a Road Approach Permit from the Yakima County Transportation
Division for the approach onto South 66th Avenue.
17. The developer shall obtain a Road Approach Permit and any other necessary permits from
the City of Yakima and comply with all applicable standards associated with the approach
3
onto South 64th Avenue. A copy of all required permits shall be submitted to the Planning
Division prior to final plat approval.
Status: Achieved: AI! public roads within the plat of Crown Pointe were built to the County
road standards specified above and required by the applicant's preliminary plat. The City of
Yakima Engineering Division certified all required construction for the plat of Crown Pointe
on June 26, 2014, and the City of Yakima Engineer has signed the Final Plat in affirmation
of this fact.
Utilities
18. Proposed and existing easements shall be shown on the final plat in accordance with YCC §
14.24.010(4).
Status: Achieved: All proposed and existing easements are shown on the face of the plat
as specified by the applicant's title report and preliminary plat decision.
19. Public utility easements shall be provided to the lots, located adjacent to interior access
easements and rights-of-way, and as specified by the utility providers. The utility
easements shall be 8 feet in width. Utility easements that are not adjacent to an access
easement or right-of-way are required to be 15 feet in width or as specified by the County
Engineer. Minimum width for utility easements that are also utilized for irrigation water
purposes is generally 15 feet and all other irrigation facilities will be as specified by the
Ahtanum Irrigation District in accordance with RCW 58.17.310 and YCC § 14.48.090(1).
Status: Achieved: All proposed and existing easements are shown on the plat as specified
by the applicant's title report, preliminary plat decision, and certified by the Ahtanum
Irrigation District's signature on the face of the final plat.
Fire Protection
20. To reduce the potential for fire hazards, vacant lands shall be maintained to prevent
start/growth of weeds, brush and trees that contribute to fire start and spread in accordance
with SEPA Mitigation Measure B1.
Status: Achieved
21. Maximum fire flow is required for the proposal. Fire suppression main lines and hydrants
must be in place, operable and accessible during the construction phase of the project in
accordance with SEPA Mitigation Measure B2.
Status: Achieved
Miscellaneous
22. When developed, the large B-2 zoned lot shall be developed in accordance with regulations
as applicable at the time of the development since it was not reviewed as part of this
project.
23. Sitescreening and landscaping shall be installed prior to occupancy, and as a condition of a
Certificate of Zoning Review (YCC § 15A.07.100) as proposed. This includes Sitescreening
Standard C along the north property line (a 6 -foot -high view -obscuring fence) and
Sitescreening Standard B (a 3 -foot -wide planting strip that will create a living evergreen
screen that is at least 6 feet in height within 3 years) along with a 4 -foot -high chainlink fence
along South 66th Avenue where it abuts the plat, and along the east property line where the
4
Ilb
IIIII
lkop
Lin"
IIIII�
OP
inomunnnnnnnnlonno
plat abuts South 64th Avenue. The balance of the plat, along the proposed east property
line of the plat, will also be designed with Sitescreening Standard B where it abuts the
adjoining 6.31 -acre vacant lot. Sitescreening shall also be maintained in accordance with
YCC § 15A.07.110.
24. The applicant shall submit a Parking Circulation Plan for the multi -family parking lots. The
required off-street parking shall be designed in a manner that eliminates a need for backing
and maneuvering from or onto streets, sidewalks, pedestrian ways or bikeways in order to
exit a property or maneuver out of parking spaces, and room for garbage removal. The
parking areas for each unit shall be constructed in accordance with YCC § 15A.06.110
standards:
(a) They shall be paved with 2 -inch -thick asphaltic surfacing on an aggregate
base;
(b) Grading and drainage shall be provided as part of the approved engineered
design;
(c) Any parking abutting a street shall be provided with a curb at least 6 inches
in height at least 2 feet from the street property line;
(d) All parking spaces shall be marked by durable painted lines at least 4 inches
wide. All accessible parking spaces shall be marked and signed in compliance with the
currently adopted International Building Code; and
(e) Accessible Parking shall be provided in accordance with the Inter -national
Building Code.
25. Subdivision signs or entry monuments, bus shelter and mail kiosks are permitted whether or
not they comply with front setbacks provided that:
(a) They must be constructed in accordance with the vision triangle requirements
of YCC § 15A.05.040;
(b) The County Engineer must authorize structures within public road rights-of-
way; and
(c) Signs must comply with the requirements of the YCC Chapter 15A.08.
Status: Achieved: The requirements above will be applied to any future development upon the
aforementioned B-2 zoned lot.
Timing
26. All property taxes and special assessments for the entire tax year must be paid, together
with any required pre -payment amount prior to final plat approval.
Status: Achieved
27. If the developer elects to escrow or bond for the required road improvements and fails to
complete the improvements in the time specified in the escrow or bond agreement, the
County Engineer shall have the authority to suspend issuance of building or occupancy
permits until the required road and drainage improvements are accepted as satisfactorily
completed. The County Engineer may issue building permits on a lot -by -lot basis when it is
determined that building construction will not interfere with utility and roadway construction.
Status: Achieved
28. The total project must be completed and the final plat submitted within the maximum seven
(7) -year time period prescribed by RCW 58.17.140 as amended by Substitute Senate Bill
5
6544 filed on March 17, 2010. Any extension beyond the seven (7) -year time period is
subject to the provisions of YCC Chapter 14.24.
Status: Achieved
Plat Notes
29. The lots shall be subject to the following notes which must be placed on the face of the plat:
(a) The owners shown hereon, their grantees and assignees in interest hereby
covenant and agree to retain all surface water generated within the plat on-site,
unless an approved Stormwater and Drainage permit is in place.
(b) Yakima County has in place an urban and rural addressing system. Street
names and numbers for lots within this plat are issued by the Yakima County
Public Services Transportation Division upon issuance of an approved Building
Permit.
(c) Yakima County has no responsibility to build, improve, maintain or otherwise
service any private road for this plat. Any right-of-way dedicated to the public by
this plat shall not be opened as a county road until such time as it is improved to
county road standards and accepted as part of the county road system.
30. RCW 58.17.170 and YCC § 14.24.040 require that the final plat conform to conditions
imposed on the approved preliminary plat. If it does not, a revised preliminary plat is
required to be approved through the plat alteration process in RCW 58.17.215.
Status: Achieved: All applicable plat notes are shown
FINDINGS
1. The preliminary plat was reviewed, processed and approved by Yakima County.
2. The final plat is in general conformance with the preliminary plat and conditions of approval.
3. The applicant has built or financially secured the construction of the required improvements
necessary for final plat approval.
RECOMMENDATION
The City of Yakima, Department of Community Development's, Planning Division, recommends
that City Council accept the final plat of Crown Pointe Phase 1 and pass a resolution
authorizing the Mayor to sign the final plat.
6
COTTONWOOD PARTNERS LLC
"Final Plat of Crown Pointe — Phase 1"
FLP#001-14
EXHIBIT LIST
CHAPTER C
Hearing Examiner's Recommendation
,eon „(a., %iii/j���/ i�o
�% %,%��/ .iii �/%/// r i/O//
Lk ��i�i
,,%�� o%�//////�//%
C-1 Yakima County Hearing Examiner's Recommendation
C-2 Yakima County Hea. ` g Examiner's Recommendation
C-3 Ya gra County Hearing Examiner's Recommendation
C-4 Ya a County Hearing Examiner's Recommendation
Dated
07/19/2007
Dated
07/31/2007
Dated
04/21/2008
Dated
05/12/2008
BOARD OF YAKIMA COUNTY COMA/IISSIONERS
1N THE MATTER OF APPROVAL OF
PRELIMINARY PLAT NO. SUB 06-0162/
SEP 06-062/PRJ 06-01817 KNOWN AS
"CROWN POINTE"
Resolution No. 477-2008
WHEREAS, according to Yakima County Ordinance No. 10-1974 relating to platting,
subdivision and the dedication of land adopted pursuant to RCW 58.17, a public hearing was held on May
13, 2008 for the purpose of considering Preliminary Plat No. SUB 06-0162/SEP 06-062/PRJ 06-01817
lalown as "Crown Pointe"; and,
and,
WHEREAS, testimony was taken from those persons present who wished to be heard;
WHEREAS, due notice of the hearing was given as required by law, and the necessary
inquiry has been made into the public use and interest to be served by such platting; and,
WHEREAS, the Board of Yakima County Commissioners has considered the preliminary
plat and finds that the 9 lot layout is in compliance with the Hearing Examiner recommendation; and,
WHEREAS, the Board of Yakima County Commissioners has considered elements of
public health, safety and general welfare pertaining to the preliminary plat; now, therefore,
BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Board of Yakima County Commissioners that the
findings and recommendation for conditional approval of the Hearing Examiner for Preliminary Plat No.
SUB 06-0162/SEP 06-062/PRJ 06-01817 designated as "Crown Pointe", be adopted as attached hereto.
Done this 18th day November, 2008_
Ronald F. Gamache, Chairman
CaltiaL
J. RanElliott, County Commissioner
Mi . el D. s , County Commissioner
Constituting the Board of County Commissioners
for Yakima County, Washington
DOC.
INDEX
= r
COUNTY OF YAKIMA, WASHINGTON
HEARING EXAMINER'S FINAL DECISION RE
REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION
May 12, 2008
In the Matter of Application for
Preliminary Plat Approval
Submitted by:
Cottonwood Partners, LLC
For a 61 -Lot Subdivision to be
Known as "Crown Pointe" which
Involves a SEPA MDNS Appeal
FILE NOS. SUB06-162
SEP06-062
PRJ2006-1817
Introduction. The Examiner issued a SEPA MDNS appeal decision on April 21, 2008.
The Examiner received the City of Yaldma's Request for Reconsideration of Hearing
Examiner's Decision & Recommendation in SEPA Appeal on April 30, 2008. An
Interim Decision was issued on May 1, 2008 which allowed the parties five business days
to respond to enumerated issues. The Examiner received responses from Yakima County
SEPA Responsible Official Steven Erickson and the applicant's attorney James Carmody
on May 8, 2008 and from Senior Assistant Yakima City Attorney Jeff Cutter on May 9,
2008. The Request for Reconsideration, the Interim Decision, the three responses and
Cottonwood Partners, LLC
"Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat
Final Decision re Reconsideration
Coolidge Rd. & So. 80' Ave.
SUB06-0162; SEP06-062
1
DOE.
INDEX
this Final Decision regarding the Request for Reconsideration will be added as additional
exhibits in the record of this SEPA appeal.
Final Decision on Request for Reconsideration. After considering the City of
Yakima's Request for Reconsideration and the information provided in response to the
Examiner's Interim Decision regarding the City's Request for Reconsideration, the
additional arguments and facts presented have led the Examiner to find and conclude as
follows in regard to said request:
1) The Examiner's SEPA appeal decision adopted the most important details of
the SEPA Responsible Official's recommendation in this matter. Section 16B.06.070 of
the Yakima County Code entitled "Appeals of SEPA Determinations" provides in
subsection (E)(4) that "The determination of the responsible official shall carry
substantial weight" The disputes as to the appropriate street improvement requirements
for this preliminary plat arise in part as a result of vesting provisions in an interlocal
agreement between the City of Yakima (City) and Yakima County (County). The
agreement provides that preliminary plat applications will at the option of the applicant
continue to be processed under County procedures and County regulations if completed
applications are submitted to the County before the property is annexed into the City. In
those instances, as here, the County's SEPA Responsible Official is responsible for
prescribing SEPA traffic impact mitigation measures consistent with the County's
procedures and regulations even though the property is within the City and even though
the County's procedures and regulations in that regard are different from the City's
procedures and regulations.
2) The Examiner's April 21, 2008 SEPA appeal decision upheld the County
SEPA Responsible Official's agreement to support a revised voluntary agreement which
he had solicited from the applicant and believed was reasonable. In his recommendation
of March 28, 2008, SEPA Responsible Official Steven Erickson stated that "Mr.
Carmody has indicated that his clients are willing to make good their offer, but want to be
compensated for legal costs and the traffic analysis." Mr. Carmody confirmed in his
letter of April 7, 2008 that his clients' proposal was "to accept the original voluntary
Cottonwood Partners, LLC
"Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat
Final Decision re Reconsideration
Coolidge Rd. & So. 80th Ave.
SUB06-0162; SEP06-062
2
DOC.
INDEX
agreement less all costs and expenses incurred in preparation of the engineering study
and addressing the appeal issues." He indicated that the offer was accepted insofar as
"Mr. Erickson advised that that proposal was reasonable and would be supported by
Yakima County."
3) The only detail in the Examiner's decision that differed from the SEPA
Responsible Official's recommendation was the suggested mechanism for deducting the
costs and expenses incurred in preparation of the engineering study and in addressing the
appeal issues. The Responsible Official recommended that "You may direct the parties
to resolve whether and how to resolve the costs of the traffic analysis and legal fees; that
is beyond the scope of the MDNS." The Examiner directed the applicant to submit
itemized statements for those costs and fees to the SEPA Responsible Official with proof
of payment or verification that they will be paid since "those costs are what they are" and
"They have already been incurred and have probably already been paid." The Examiner
allowed that reimbursement to be accomplished within the MDNS context because of the
simplicity and efficiency of that approach when compared with other procedures that the
parties could be directed to pursue outside the SEPA process to achieve the same result
4) The original voluntary agreement was to pay $550 per lot as required by the
MDNS Mitigation Measure B-2. The applicant is also required to dedicate the right-of-
way needed for future street improvements described in the MDNS Mitigation Measure
B-3. The SEPA Responsible Official did not believe the per lot amount was proportional.
It was based on a calculated share of agreed road improvement costs for other plats. So
far as the Examiner can determine, it appears that the comparative analysis on page 4 of
Mr. Carmody's May 8, 2008 response states that the deduction of the costs and fees per
his clients' proposal would reduce the amount in Mitigation Measure B-2 from $550 per
lot to $252.86 per lot ($15,424.69 divided by 61 equals $252.86). If that is the correct
amount, costs and fees of $18,125.31 ($297.14 per lot) would be deducted from the
original agreed $33,550 ($550 per lot) contribution to arrive at that amount. Whatever
amount is substantiated, additional deductions for future similar costs and fees related to
any future appeals will not be allowed unless ordered by a future decisionmaker. The
revised voluntary agreement should speak as of the time of its acceptance by the
Examiner absent a decision otherwise by a future decisionmaker.
5) Insofar as the analysis on page 4 of Mr. Carmody's May 8, 2008 response may
be interpreted to indicate that the $126,500 [sic. $126,650] value of the right-of-way
dedications required by Mitigation Measure B-3 would also be deducted or that the right-
of-way dedication requirements in that mitigation measure would be eliminated, the
Cottonwood Partners, LLC
"Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat
Final Decision re Reconsideration
Coolidge Rd. & So. 80'h Ave.
SUB06-0162; SEP06-062
3
DOC.
INDEX
a G- LI
terms of the applicant's revised voluntary agreement proposed after receipt of the traffic
impact analysis as represented to the Examiner by both the SEPA Responsible Official
and the applicant did not include a deduction of that value or elimination of that
requirement. According to the evidence submitted in that regard, the revised voluntary
agreement which the applicant proposed, which the SEPA Responsible Official agreed
was reasonable and would be supported by Yakima County, and which the Examiner
adopted, only required deduction of the traffic impact analysis and appeal costs from the
original voluntary agreement amount. It did not require deduction of the value of the
right-of-way dedications required by SEPA Mitigation Measure B-3 or eliminate those
dedication requirements.
6) The applicant's argument that the evidence in the record does not support more
than a $13.61 per lot contribution without any dedication of right-of-way overlooks or
minimizes the applicant's reasons for communicating its proposal for the revised
voluntary agreement to the SEPA Responsible Official. More specifically, whatever
those reasons were, that argument overlooks or minimizes (i) the appellant City's
arguments critical of the traffic impact analysis and in favor of a greater contribution; (ii)
the SEPA Responsible Official's concerns about the traffic impact analysis; (iii) the fact
that there is value in achieving the type of certainty for planning purposes that can be
achieved by a voluntary agreement; and (iv) the fact that the Board of Yakima County
Commissioners on appeal or the Examiner on remand would have the authority to request
additional information such as a traffic impact analysis from the City which could
contradict the traffic impact analysis submitted by the applicant if there were a need to
determine those issues raised in this appeal which the revised voluntary agreement
otherwise renders irrelevant. On the other hand, the appellant City's argument that the
evidence in the record does not support a deduction of the applicant's traffic impact
analysis cost and legal costs for the appeal from the original voluntary agreement's per
lot contribution amount overlooks or minimizes the fact that (i) the deduction of those
costs was a requisite component of the revised voluntary agreement solicited by the
SEPA Responsible Official and proposed by the applicant after receipt of the traffic
impact analysis and (ii) the expenditure of those costs by the applicant in connection with
the SEPA appeal resulted in factual information and expert opinions supporting the
applicant's position to the effect that absent a voluntary agreement otherwise the $550
per lot contribution should be reduced to $13.61 per lot without any right-of-way
dedications in order to satisfy the applicant's proportional SEPA traffic impact mitigation
obligations for all likely direct traffic impacts of the plat on the plat's frontage roads.
Cottonwood Partners, LLC
"Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat
Final Decision re Reconsideration
Coolidge Rd. & So. 80b Ave.
S13B06-0162; SEP06-062
4
DOC.
INDEX
7) The Examiner's adoption of the applicant's revised voluntary agreement which
the SEPA Responsible Official determined was reasonable and worthy of support made it
unnecessary to determine some of the issues that would otherwise need to be determined
in this appeal absent such a voluntary agreement. For example, the proper treatment of
frontage property dedications did not need to be determined because the revised
voluntary agreement did not affect them. The traffic impact analysis, the information
from the parties submitted after the traffic impact analysis and the Examiner's review of
pertinent court cases subsequently cast sufficient light on the relevant issues included in
the Examiner's August 20, 2007 decision to allow for a meaningful review of the SEPA
Responsible Official's determination that the revised voluntary agreement was reasonable
and worthy of his support. The fact that some of the issues raised in this matter remained
disputed and that some of them have not been definitively answered by court cases did
not prevent the Examiner from deciding the limited number of issues that were relevant
to the SEPA Responsible Official's decision to support the revised voluntary agreement.
8) The Examiner's April 21, 2008 appeal decision gave substantial weight to the
SEPA Responsible Official's determination as required by Subsection 16B.06.070(E)(4)
of the Yakima County Code. The negotiation process between the SEPA decisionmaker
and the applicant to mitigate probable significant adverse environmental impacts was
termed "eminently sensible" in the case of Hayden v. City of Port Townsend, 93 Wn.2d
870, 880, 613 P.2d 1164 (1980). The case of Victoria Partnership v. City of Seattle, 59
Wn.App. 592, 603, 800 P.2d 380 (1990), stated the quite basic principle that mitigation
measures are only required to make the project as a whole acceptable and are not required
to eradicate all adverse environmental impacts. The Examiner's April 21, 2008 decision
upholding the County SEPA Responsible Official's agreement to support the revised
voluntary agreement was not issued in disregard of the facts and issues in this matter.
The revised voluntary agreement preserves traffic impact mitigation requirements by way
of per lot contributions and right-of-way dedications that are well in excess of what
would be required under the facts and expert opinions expressed ssed in the traffic impact
analysis. Although those facts and expert opinions have been questioned and criticized,
the record is lacking facts and expert opinions in support of any specific traffic impacts
that would require any specific per lot contributions or right-of-way dedications in excess
of those requirements preserved by the revised voluntary agreement. The fact that the
County's procedural and regulatory means for exacting street frontage improvements are
more limited than those of the City does not change the fact that the County's SEPA
Responsible Official must act within the parameters of the County's procedures and
Cottonwood Partners, LLC
"Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat
Final Decision re Reconsideration
Coolidge Rd. & So. 80th Ave.
SUB06-0162; SEP06-062
5
DW
INDEX
# Git„„„„„„,
-
regulations in that regard. The adequacy of the traffic impact mitigation measures in the
revised voluntary agreement had to be evaluated in the context of existing County
procedures and regulations rather than those of the City. The applicant's requirement that
any voluntary agreement after receipt of the traffic impact analysis include a deduction of
those costs and the legal fees related to the appeal did not make the agreement
unreasonable. The deduction of those costs and fees represents a comparatively small
decrease in the total traffic impact mitigation requirements if the $126,650 value of the
right-of-way dedication requirement in Mitigation Measure B-3 is added to the new per
lot contribution amount. Even if the amount of the per iot contribution in the revised
voluntary agreement is considered alone, the revised amount would be roughly midway
between the original $550 amount and the $13.61 amount suggested by the traffic impact
analysis if the per lot contribution amount is to be reduced from $33,550 to $15,424.69 or
to some similar substantiated amount. These factors allowed the Examiner to decide this
SEPA appeal without having to resolve issues that would only need to be resolved if
there were no voluntary agreement. These factors also convinced the Examiner that the
revised voluntary agreement for this preliminary plat is within the range of rough
proportionality under the evidence presented in this matter and that the SEPA
Responsible Official acted reasonably within the parameters of the County's procedures
and regulations in agreeing to support the revised voluntary agreement.
9) Since there has been no opposition to approval of this preliminary plat other
than the dispute involving the SEPA traffic impact mitigation measures, the Examiner
expressed the hope in his July 19, 2007 decision, which is expressed by Mr. Erickson and
by Mr. Carmody in their May 8, 2008 responses, that the Board of Yakima County
Commissioners might consider approving this preliminary plat prior to a final
determination of the SEPA appeal. Mr. Erickson's May 8, 2008 response indicates that
the Examiner's recommendation regarding this preliminary plat is currently scheduled
before the Board of Yakima County Commissioners for a closed record public hearing on
May 13, 2008. The time period for appeal of the Examiner's SEPA appeal decision to
the Board will not have expired by that date. Thus any approval of the preliminary plat
should be subject to the additional condition that the applicant comply with the final
determination regarding the SEPA MDNS traffic impact mitigation measures prior to
requesting final plat approval. The MDNS could not be changed by the Board to add a
Mitigation Measure for the Board to retain jurisdiction similar to B-4 in the Examiner's
July 19, 2007 decision until after a further SEPA appeal to the Board is filed, and that
type of additional mitigation measure would not be necessary if the Board has already
Cottonwood Partners, LLC
"Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat
Final Decision re Reconsideration
Coolidge Rd. & So. 804 Ave.
SUB06-0162; SEP06-062
6
DOC.
INDEX
# C-
approved the preliminary plat subject to the recommended condition before considering
the possible future SEPA appeal. That condition is also advisable due to the fact that
appropriate plat provisions for streets, sidewalks and other planning features that assure
safe walking conditions for students who walk to and from school would only be satisfied
by compliance with the final SEPA MDNS appeal determination prior to final plat
approval because the SEPA MDNS is the sole mechanism that was utilized by the County
to impose the street frontage improvement requirements for this plat.
10) The Examiner's April 21, 2008 SEPA appeal d isiori may be the subject of
further appeals by either party or both parties regarding the propriety of the determination
on the part of the SEPA Responsible Official and the Examiner to adopt the applicant's
revised voluntary agreement. The Examiner will be conducting further MDNS appeal
proceedings in this matter in the future if further SEPA MDNS appeals to the Board of
Yakima County Commissioners and possibly to the courts result in a reversal of that
determination or in a remand to the Examiner for farther proceedings. At that time, the
decision requested of Yakima County by Mr. Cutter's May 9, 2008 response can be made
as to whether a replacement Examiner should be selected to conduct those proceedings.
11) The Examiner's decision of April 21, 2008 provides that it is subject to appeal
within 14 days of the date when the SEPA Responsible Official mails notice to the parties
of the new per lot contribution amount. Mr. Carmody's May 8, 2008 response seems to
reveal a $252.86 pe o \contribution amount if Mr. Carmody's reference to $15,424.69
for street contributions in that response is the amount remaining after deduction of the
traffic impact analysis and appeal costs from the original $33,550 amount and if the
procedure specified in the Examiner's April 21, 2008 SEPA appeal decision for
determining the new per lot contribution amount confirms that amount. Whatever
amount is substantiated, the amount of the new per lot contribution amount determined
by the SEPA Responsible Official by that procedure and mailed to the parties will not
change in the future unless a future decisionmaker changes the amount. The right-of-way
dedication requirements of MDNS Mitigation Measure B-3 were not affected by the
Examiner's April 21, 2008 decision adopting the revised voluntary agreement.
DATED this 12th day of May, 2008.
Cottonwood Partners, LLC
"Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat
Final Decision re Reconsideration
Coolidge Rd. & So. 80th Ave.
SUB06-0162; SEP06-062
7
Gary M. Cuillier, Hearing Examiner
DOC,
INDEX
# C'�
April 25, 2008
Public Services
128 North Second Street • Fourth Floor Courthouse • Yakima, Washington 98901
(509) 574-2300 • 1-800-572-7354 • FAX (509) 574-2301 • www.co.yakima.wa.us
VERN M. REDIFER, P.E. - Director
TO: Cottonwood Partners, LLC & Parties of R
FROM: Steve Erickson, Planning Official
RE: Hearing Examiner Decision/Recommendation -- File Nos. SUB06-0162/SEP06-062
On April 21, 2008 the Yakima County Hearing Examiner issued his decision on SEP 06-062 and a
recommendation on SUB 06-0162. The Examiner's decision/recommendation is`enclosed.
The Hearing Examiner decision regarding SEP 06-062 the may be appealed to the Board of County
Commissioners for consideration at a closed record public hearing. Appeals must be filed in the office of
the Yakima County Public Services Department — Planning Division, 4th Floor County Courthouse, by
4:30 p.m. on May 9, 2008. The filing fee is $320.00. If you have any questions on the decision or the
appeal process, please contact Carol Faith at 574-2300.
Encl.: Hearing Examiner Decision
Cy.• Parties of Record
H; IDevelopr, ni Service3'1SUBD!V!S!OMHEARING EXAMINERLSUB 06-0162 Crown Pointe;HE Ltr APL.doc
U
111110 11111111
II•
2014
011111111111101
BOARD OF YA IMA COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
NOTICE OF CLOSED RECORD PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Board
record public hearing on Tuesday, May 13, 2008
B-33 of the Yakima County Courthouse,, to con
Hearing Examiner for the following proposal:
JUN
of Yakima County Commissioners will hold a closed
at 10:30 a.m., or as soon thereafter as possible in Room
siderthe— ecornmendation issued by the Yakima County
FILE NOS.: SUB 06-0162/SEP 06-062/PRJ 06-01817
PROPONENT: Cottonwood Partners, LLC
PROPOSAL: To subdivide approximately 17 acres into 61 single-family residential
lots entitled "Crown Pointe". The property is located on the southeast
comer of Coolidge Road and South 80th Avenue within about the 7700
block of Coolidge Road. Parcel Nos. 181332-33436.
The .complete application may be reviewed during normal County business hours at the Yakima County
Public Services, Planning Department, on the 4th Floor of the County Courthouse. If you have any
questions on the proposal, please give Carol Faith, Senior Project Coordinator, a call at 574-2300.
Dated this 22nd day of April, 2008.
Publish:
2008
Bill: Acct. #10826, Planning
0 IMPS
HAND DELIVERED
Gary M. Cuillier
ATTORNEY AT LAW
314 N. SECOND STREET
YAKIMA, WASHINGTON 98901
April 21, 2008
Vicki Adams
Yakima County Planning Division
128 North Second Street Room 417
Yakima, WA 98901
Public Services./
APR 2 1 2008
Vern._Gary_-._. Ban._._ Steve._..
B1ll.Dave__.Lisa _Carmen
_
(509) 575-1800
FAX: (509) 452-4601
I
1111111111111'
MW'�
Jim � ' �� 1,4
UNIT DEVELOPAI
Re: Hearing Examiner's Decision & Recommendation
Cottonwood Partners, LLC, FILE NOS. SUB06-162, SEP06-062 PRJ2006-1817
Dear Vicki:
Enclosed is the Hearing Examiner's Decision & Recommendation regarding the
above -entitled matter. The hearing was held on July 5, 2007 and was left open until the
last letter was received on April 7, 2008.
If you have any questions, please give me a call.
Very truly yours,
43,_.1 C.
GARY M. CUILL]ER
GMC:bvv
Enclosure
cc: Rosalinda Ibarra, w/ Enclosure
Pat Spurgin, Yakima City Pro Tem Hearing Examiner, w/ Enclosure
C.
IND
G--3
Public Services
APR 2 1 1005
Vern_,Gary Don Stevr:___
COUNTY OF YAKIMA, WASHINGTON- oaye�tr�5a Carr:.;.
HEARING EXAMINER'S DECISION & RECOMMENDATION
April 21, 2008
In the Matter of Application for
Preliminary Plat Approval
Submitted by:
Cottonwood Partners, LLC
For a 61 -Lot Subdivision to be
Known as "Crown Pointe" which
Involves a SEPA MDNS Appeal
FILE NOS. SUB06-162
SEP06-062
PRJ2006-1817
Introduction. The history of this matter may be summarized as follows:
1) The Hearing Examiner conducted an open record public hearing on July 5,
2007. Yakima County Planning Division Project Planner Scott Stiltner presented the
staff report that recommended approval of the proposed preliminary plat with conditions.
Yakima County SEPA Responsible Official Steve Erickson testified in favor of the
proposed preliminary plat and explained his reason for changing the SEPA Mitigated
Determination of Nonsignificance (MDNS) road frontage improvement requirements.
County Transportation Engineering Manager for Yakima County Public Services, Kent
McHenry, explained the origin of the per -lot fee amount offered by the applicant for road
frontage improvements. City of Yakima (City) Mayor Dave Edler, City Code
Administration and Planning Manager Doug Maples and City Senior Assistant City
Attorney Jeff Cutter were not opposed to approval of the preliminary plat, but presented
evidence in support of the City's appeal of the SEPA MDNS by emphasizing the need for
the applicant to contribute its fair or proportional share toward road frontage
improvements. The applicant's representatives, James Carmody of the law firm of
Velikanje Halverson P.C., Bill Hordan. of Hordan Planning Services and Rich Hochrein
of Cottonwood Partners, LLC, testified in support of the proposed preliminary plat and
Cottonwood Partners, LLC
"Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat
Coolidge Rd. & So. 80th Ave.
SUB06-0162; SEP06-062
1
DOC.
INDEX
# C--3
presented testimony to the effect that the MDNS requires the applicant to contribute more
than its fair or proportional share of street frontage improvements.
2) No one testified in opposition to the proposed preliminary plat.
3) The Hearing Examiner issued a-SEPA Appeal Decision requesting additional
information and a Preliminary Plat Recommendation dated July 19, 2007. The Summary
of Decision and Recommendation stated:
"The Hearing Examiner revises the MDNS to allow the preliminary plat process to
proceed and this appeal hearing to be continued to adjust the MDNS amount of the
applicant's share of road frontage dedications and/or improvements if a different
share is shown to be fair and proportional through a traffic impact analysis
prepared by a transportation engineer or traffic consultant to be provided by the
City, the applicant and/or the County as may be directed by the SEPA Responsible
Official and recommends that the Board of Yakima County Commissioners
approve this proposed preliminary plat subject to that possible adjustment through
this appeal process and the other conditions stated in the modified MDNS and in
this recommendation."
The SEPA appeal decision stated in part:
"It is important to the Examiner that a determination of the applicant's fair and
proportional share of road frontage improvements not delay the processing of this
preliminary plat. Therefore, the MDNS is merely revised to request the additional
information that may lead to a possible future adjustment of the required amount
of property dedication and/or per lot payment by either an agreed dismissal of this
appeal or by a final decision in this appeal without affecting any aspect of the
MDNS other than the applicant's future dedication and/or monetary contribution
obligations. The additional mitigation measure will therefore read as follows:
`Mitigation Measure B4: The above -referenced MDNS amount of the
applicant's share of road frontage dedications and/or improvements may be
reduced or increased to reflect the fair and proportional share thereof as
determined by the SEPA Responsible Official or Hearing Examiner in the
pending SEPA MDNS appeal process after consideration of a traffic impact
analysis prepared by a transportation engineer or traffic consultant to be
provided by the City, the applicant and/or the County as may be directed by
the SEPA Responsible Official. The dedication and payment obligations
set forth herein or as adjusted shall be made as provided for to the
satisfaction of the County prior to final plat approval.' "
The procedure to finalize the decision was specified as follows:
"The Hearing Examiner will retain jurisdiction over this SEPA MDNS appeal for
the limited purpose of performing such hearing functions as may be requested and
Cottonwood Partners, LLC
"Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat
Coolidge Rd. & So, 80th Ave.
SUB06-0162; SEP06-062
2
DOC.
INDEX
# G -3
scheduled by the SEPA Responsible Official with notice to the parties to this
appeal. Jurisdiction will be retained until such time as this appeal is either
dismissed by agreement of the parties or the issues as to dedication of property and
payment of funds for road frontage improvements are finally determined."
4) On July 30, 2007, the City submitted a Request for Reconsideration containing
a comprehensive discussion of many points and authorities involved in this appeal.
5) On July 31, 2007, the Examiner issued an interim Decision inquiring as to
whether SEPA Responsible Official Steve Erickson or the applicant's attorney James
Carmody would be addressing the issues raised in the Request for Reconsideration_
6) On July 31, 2007, a letter from Mr. Erickson advised of the applicant's
agreement to provide a traffic impact analysis by a traffic engineering consultant
acceptable to the County Engineer.
7) After receiving a letter from Mr. Carmody dated August 3, 2007 and a letter
from Mr. Cutter dated August 7, 2007, the Examiner issued his Decision re Request for
Reconsideration of SEPA Appeal Decision dated August 20, 2007 which listed 12
disputed and/or unclear issues raised by the SEPA appeal that \\required further
information to answer. Besides affirming the need for additional information by way of a
traffic impact analysis, that decision regarding the request for reconsideration held that a
further SEPA appeal was not required until after issuance of a future final decision
regarding the exact amount required to be paid for road improvements.
8) By Mr. Carmody's letter dated February 5, 2008, a traffic impact analysis
prepared by Sunburst Engineering, P.S. was submitted to Mr. Erickson and the Examiner.
By a follow-up letter from Mr. Carmody dated February 21, 2008, Mr. Carmody
indicated that he was unclear on the procedure to be followed and suggested that the
Examiner could review the materials and issue a modified recommendation. By a letter
dated February 25, 2008, Mr. Cutter argued that the traffic impact analysis had several
shortcomings and that the applicant's demand for reduction of the mitigation should be
denied. By letter dated March 13, 2008, Mr. Carmody addressed Mr. Cutter's objections
to the traffic impact analysis and argued that the contribution based on that analysis
should be $13.61 per lot with no required right-of-way dedication.
9) By letter dated March 28, 2008, SEPA Responsible Official Steve Erickson
indicated that the County Transportation Division had some questions about the
methodology and findings of the traffic impact analysis which arguably supported only a
total of $13,61 per lot toward road improvements because the Sunburst team did not
consult with the County Transportation Division as directed in the preparation of the
analysis. Mr. Erickson also pointed to issues raised by Mr. Cutter and the City's tacit
agreement not to pursue greater mitigation payment than the original amount offered by
the applicant. Mr. Erickson finally indicated that the applicant is still willing to make
Cottonwood Partners, LLC
"Crown Pointe' Preliminary Plat
Coolidge Rd. & So. 80th Ave.
SUB06-0162; SEP06-062
3
good its offer, but with a reduction for its legal and traffic impact analysis costs. Based
on these factors, Mr. Erickson asserted that the applicant's original offer set forth in
MDNS Mitigation Measure B2 should be required and that the Examiner may direct the
parties to resolve the legal and traffic impact analysis costs. .
10) By letter dated April 7, 2008, Mr. Carmody disputed the assertions of SEPA
Responsible Official Steve Erickson. Specifically he indicated that returning to the
original MDNS is not fair, reasonable or supported by applicable law or fact; that
Sunburst Engineering did in fact consult with the County Transportation Division and at
that Division's direction consulted with the City's comparable Division because the area
has been annexed; that the study's methodology complies with all applicable traffic
engineering standards in all respects; that the applicant has incurred the expense of the
traffic study, incurred expenses with respect to the appeal, has been delayed in the
construction of the project, faces significantly higher construction and development costs,
and faces deteriorated market conditions (including the mortgage market) for total losses
exceeding $100,000; that Mr. Erickson's letter did not support the applicant's "middle
ground" proposal to accept the original voluntary agreement less all costs and expenses
incurred in preparation of the engineering study and addressing the appeal issues; and
that a decision should be issued immediately and the matter should be scheduled for
hearing before the Board of County Commissioners.
11) No continued hearing has been requested or scheduled for the Examiner per
the procedure specified in the July 19, 2007 decision and recommendation. The parties
seem to be requesting the Examiner to make a final SEPA appeal decision without a
continued hearing or any further clarifying information. This SEPA appeal decision and
preliminary plat recommendation is therefore being issued within ten business days of the
last letter in this matter which was from Mr. Carmody dated April 7, 2008 because it is
still important to the Examiner that a determination of the applicant's fair and
proportional share of road frontage improvements not delay the processing of this
preliminary plat.
12) Since the preliminary plat recommendation of July 19, 2007 was not submitted
to the Board of County Commissioners for decision pending determination and payment
of the exact per lot contribution of the MDNS prior to final plat approval, the same
preliminary plat recommendation is repeated here.
Summary of Decision and Recommendation. Since all parties seem to be asking
the Examiner to issue a final SEPA appeal decision without having answers to all the
questions in his decision regarding the request for reconsideration dated August 20, 2007
Cottonwood Partners, LLC
"Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat
Coolidge Rd. & So. 80th Ave.
SUB06-0162; SEP06-062
4
DOC.
INDEX
and without having information to clarify some of the assertions submitted since then
which could be obtained by means of a continued hearing or additional submittals, the
Examiner will issue his final SEPA appeal decision and reissue his preliminary. ;plat
recommendation which may both be summarized as follows:
1) The Examiner will, accept the applicant's statements as to the need to avoid
further delay and the applicant's description of its "middle ground" proposal relayed to
Mr. Erickson. That proposal was "to accept the original voluntary agreement less all
costs and expenses incurred in preparation of the engineering study and in addressing the
appeal issues." Since Mr. Erickson recommended determining the amount of costs and
expenses to be deducted in some manner separate from the MDNS process and since Mr..
Carmody's final letter characterized that detail, as showing lack of support for the
proposal, the amount to be deducted will be determined as part of the SEPA process by
submittal of itemized statements of the costs and expenses described by Mr. Carmody to
SEPA Responsible Official Steve Erickson for deduction of same from the original
voluntary agreement.
2) The Examiner recommends that the Board of Yakima County Commissioners
approve this proposed preliminary plat subject to that revision of the MDNS and the other
conditions stated in the MDNS and in this recommendation.
Basis for Decision and Recommendation. Based on a consideration of the staff
report, exhibits, sworn testimony and other evidence presented at the open record public
hearing on July 5, 2007; views of the site on July 17, 2007 and prior to that date with no
one else present; the written evidence submitted and decisions issued since the decision
of July 19, 2007 which are summarized above in the introduction and which shall be
additional exhibits in the record of this matter; the applicable SEPA MDNS review
requirements; the applicable subdivision requirements; the applicable comprehensive
plan provisions; the applicable zoning ordinance requirements; the applicable
development standards; and the requisite consistency criteria; the Hearing Examiner
makes the following:
Cottonwood Partners, LLC
"Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat
Coolidge Rd. & So. 80th Ave.
SUB06-0162; SEP06-062
5
DOC.
INDEX
FINDINGS
I. Anplicant/Property Owner. The applicant and property owner is Cottonwood
Partners, LLC, P.O. Box 8353, Yakima, Washington 98907.
II. Applicant's Representatives. The applicant's representatives are James Carmody
of the law firm of Velikanje Halverson P.C., 405 East Lincoln Avenue, Yakima,
Washington 98901 and Bill Hordan of Hordan Planning Services, 410 North 2"d Street,
Yakima, Washington 98901.
III. Location. The proposed preliminary plat is located on the southeast comer of
Coolidge Road and South 80th Avenue within about the 7700 block of Coolidge Road and
the parcel number is 181332-33436. The property was annexed into the City on April 8,
2007, but the subdivision will continue to be processed to completion by Yakima County
under County laws at the applicant's request as allowed by an interlocal agreement
between those two municipalities.
IV. Proposal. The proposed preliminary plat would divide about 17.04 acres into 61
single-family residential lots ranging in size from 8,001 square feet to 12,726 square feet
and averaging 8,992 square feet. The subdivision itself is proposed to be accomplished in
two phases. Phase 1 is proposed to consist of 33 lots and Phase 2 is proposed to consist
of 28 lots. The proposed lots are intended for future single-family residential
development that will be served by extended existing utilities including public water and
sewer. Proposed access is from South 80th Avenue (one driveway) and Coolidge Road
(one driveway).
Cottonwood Partners, LLC
"Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat
Coolidge Rd. & So. 801 Ave.
SUB06-0162; SEP06-062
6
DOC.
INDEX
# (,- 3
V. Project Descrintion. - Currently the project site is an alfalfa field. The project site
is relatively flat with a slope of approximately 0 to 2%. There are no designated critical
areas on or immediately adjacent to the site, but the property is located within the Wide
Hollow Creek Watershed which is a floodprone basin per the Yakima County Engineer.
VL Jurisdiction, A preliminary plat is classified and processed as a Type IV review.
The Hearing Examiner conducted an open record public hearing regarding this
preliminary plat application pursuant to Title 16B of the Yakima County Code and has
formulated this SEPA MDNS appeal decision that may be appealed to the Board of
Yakima County Commissioners and this preliminary plat recommendation that will be
considered by the Board of Yakima County Commissioners at a closed record public
hearing. RCW 58.17.110(2) provides:
"A proposed subdivision and dedication shall not be approved unless the city,
town, or county legislative body makes written findings that: (a) Appropriate
provisions are made for the public health, safety, and general welfare and for such
open spaces, drainage ways, streets or roads, alleys, other public ways, transit
stops, potable water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks and recreation, playgrounds,
schools and schoolgrounds and all other relevant facts, including sidewalks and
other planning features that assure safe walking conditions for students who only
walk to and from school; and (b) the public use and interest will be served by the
platting of such subdivision and dedication."
VII. Notices. Notices were given in the following manner
Mailing of Notice of Completeness & SEPA review:
Publication of Notice of Completeness & SEPA review:
Mailing of Notice of Preliminary MDNS:
Publication of Notice of Preliminary MDNS:
Mailing of Notice of Final MDNS & Hearing:
Publication of Notice of Final MDNS & Hearing:
Posting of Notice of Hearing on Property:
Cottonwood Partners, LLC
"Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat
Coolidge Rd. & So. 80th Ave.
SUB06-0162; SEP06-062
7
December 13, 2006
December 16, 2006
February 14, 2007
February 18, 2007
May 23, 2007
May 26, 2007
June 20, 2007
DOC.
INDEX
VIII. Environmental Review and SEPA MDNS Anneal. The Examiner's findings
relative to the County's environmental review under the State Environmental Policy Act
which is the subject of the City's appeal are as follows:
1) The County as lead agency determined that the environmental impacts
associated with Phases 1 and 2 of the proposed preliminary plat -warrant mitigation for
significant and nonsignificant impacts derived from WAC 197-11-660, Section 16.04.230
of the Yakima County Code (YCC) and the policies contained in the Urban Area
Comprehensive Plan and Plan 2015. A preliminary MDNS was issued on February 13,
2007 which required stormwater mitigation measures and the following transportation
mitigation measure:
"Mitigation Measure B1: Street improvements are required for the proposed
development. The developer shall improve (or Bond) both Coolidge Road and S.
80th Avenue along the property frontage. The requirement i for a Collector
Arterial road per County Roadway Section No. 2 including sidewalk and street
illumination (70' right-of-way). Accompanying stormwater facilities must also be
provided."
2) By letter to the County SEPA Responsible Official dated April 3, 2007,
applicant's attorney James Carmody argued that full road frontage improvements could
not be required of the applicant for four reasons:
"(1) the mitigation is improperly imposed to correct pre-existing road deficiencies;
(2) the exaction violates constitutional mandates and limitations; (3) mitigation
violates RCW 82.02.020; and (4) imposition of the off-site improvement
requirements is inconsistent with prior practice."
3) SEPA Responsible Official Steve Erickson was advised by Yakima County's
Corporate Counsel Terry Austin that Mr. Carmody's position is correct, but Mr. Erickson
does not recall any legal advice or discussion with Mr. Austin regarding proportionality.
4) The SEPA Responsible Official accepted the applicant's offer to dedicate
14,900 square feet of frontage along Coolidge Road and South 80`h Avenue to allow the
roads to be widened to County standards in the future and to also pay $550.00. per lot
toward the cost of improving the Coolidge Road frontage in the future to the County
urban road standard which was adopted for that road in 2003.
Cottonwood Partners, LLC
"Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat
Coolidge Rd. & So. 801 Ave.
SUB06-0162; SEP06-062
8
DOC.
INDEX
# C-3
5) The County's final SEPA MDNS issued on May 22, 2007 contains the
following findings and mitigation measures:
"Stormwater (Ground and Surface water)
The 61 proposed lots in Phases 1 & 2 are located within' the Wide Hollow Creek
Watershed, which has been determined by the Yakima County Engineer to be a
flood -prone basin. On-site stormwater retention is required on the development to
prevent adverse impacts to surface water. Excavation, site development,
subsequent lot layout and stormwater management needs to be done in a manner
so drainage facilities and adjacent property owners are not negatively impacted by
stormwater runoff.
Based on a variety of information, depth to seasonal groundwater and soil type,
character and depth all have a direct influence on stormwater system performance
and design, and can effect the plat layout. Given the variability in local subsurface
geology, depths to groundwater, and infiltration capacities of Yalama County
soils, it is recommended that this data be obtained prior to preliminary plat. They
should be determined prior to final lot layout and design in order to ensure that
adequate space (above ground or below ground) is provided for stormwater
facilities, including long-term inspection and maintenance Public stormwater
facilities are reviewed and approved by County Roads.
Depth to seasonal groundwater and soil type, character and depth all have a direct
influence on stormwater system design and potentially the preliminary plat layout.
Given the observed variability in local subsurface geology, depths to groundwater,
infiltration capacities of Yakima County soils, the type and depth of geological
matrix, depth to groundwater, and infiltration capacity should be determined prior
to final lot layout and design in order to ensure that adequate space (above ground
or below ground) is provided for stormwater facilities, including allowances and
easements for proper long-term inspection and maintenance by private or public
entities.
Please consult the Stormwater Management Manual for Eastern Washington
(Ecology, September 2004), the recently revised Underground Injection Control
(UIC) Program rule (Chapter 173-218 WAC), and Ecology's draft document
entitled Determination of Treatment and Source Control for UIC Well in
Cottonwood Parsers, LLC
"Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat
Coolidge Rd. & So. 80th Ave.
SUB06-0162; SEP06-062
9
DOC.
INDEX
# -3
Washington State (Ecology, July 2005). The information contained in these
documents will aid the designer in choosing the appropriate stormwater facilities
and/or treatment facilities for the particular project.
Please note: Operators of the following construction activities are required to be
covered under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) and
State Waste Discharge General Permit for Stormwater Discharge Associated with
Construction Activity (Ecology, November 2005): Clearing, grading and/or
excavation which results in disturbance of one or more acres, and discharges
stormwater to surface waters of the state; and clearing, grading and/or excavation
on sites smaller than one acre which are part of a Larger common plan of
development or sale, if the common plan of development or sale will ultimately
disturb one acre or more, and discharges stormwater to surface waters of the state.
Mitigation Measure Al: To adequately control post -construction surface water
runoff, a Stormwater Management Plan, meeting the design standards below, shall
be submitted for review by Yakima County Public Services prior to grading the
property, any road development, or approval of building permits.
1. Full retention of runoff for the 25 year design storm event is required.
2. The stormwater management plan shall describe existing conditions, including
drainage facilities, surface water features, soil types, geotechnical conditions,
infiltration rates and seasonal high groundwater depth.
3. A professional engineer registered in the State of Washington shall design all
drainage facilities and components using best management practices. Plans,
drawings and geotechnical information shall be sealed, signed and dated by a
professional engineer.
4. All Underground Injection Control (UTC) devices must be designed in
accordance with the Department of Ecology UIC guidelines.
5. For public stormwater facilities, allowances and access shall be made for
proper long-term inspection and maintenance, to be provided to the County.
Mitigation Measure A2: Because this development exceeds one acre of
disturbed land, it is likely that stormwater will cause erosion and other surface
water problems during the course of construction. To address such issues, the
proponent must submit a Construction Stormwater General Permit application to
the WA Dept. of Ecology, obtain appropriate reviews or approvals and provide
evidence of DOE's approval to the Building Official prior to construction.
Cottonwood P. w ers, LLC
"Cro Pointe" Preli Plat
Coolidge Rd. & So. 80th Ave.
SUB06-0162; SEP06-062
10
INDEX
# G-3
Transportation
The property is bordered on the north by Coolidge Road and South 801 Avenue on
the west. Both are now city -maintained paved (BST) roads built to rural standards
with side ditches. Access to the plat is proposed from both roads. The federal
funding functional classification of the roads changed from rural to urban
standards in 2003. County -wide Planning Policies, both adopted Urban Area and
County comprehensive plans and development standards specify the need for
urban standards (which in this case would mean curbs, gutters, sidewalks and
streetlights for local access streets and collector arterials serving an urban
subdivision).
Both roads in their current condition are inconsistent with adopted urban
standards. Yakima County comprehensive plan policy provides that projects
requiring improvements in advance of the TIP are responsible for providing those
improvements concurrent with development. While the addition\of 610 additional
vehicle trips per day would not bring traffic levels of service below adopted
standards, a probable significant adverse impact to air quality and road
maintenance will likely result from the project if adopted urban standards are not
required concurrent with this development, as well as from increased construction
and maintenance costs arising from the shift of a private cost to the public sector
and increased costs arising from deferral of the requirements.
The total cost of frontage improvements was estimated by Yakima County to be
$2,723 per lot. However, relevant court decisions preclude requirement of
frontage improvements given the circumstances of this project. The applicant has,
however volunteered to contribute $550 per lot toward the future upgrading of
Coolidge Road. This amount constitutes an approximate proportional fair share of
twenty (20) percent of the costs of the project.
Mitigation Measure Bi: Street improvements are required for the proposed
development. The developer shall improve each access onto Coolidge Road and
South 801 Avenue -with curb, gutter and sidewalk and any stormwater drainage
facilities through the radius of the intersection.
Mitigation Measure B2: The developer will contribute to future upgrading of
Coolidge Road to an Urban Standard with curb, gutter and asphalt surfacing. The
C •nwood P. ' vers, LLC
"Crown Pointe" Pre' Plat
Coolidge Rd. & So. 806 Ave.
SUB06-0162; SEP06-062
4
11
DOC.
INDEX
# C 3
applicant has voluntarily agreed to pay $550.00 per lot toward the improvement of
Coolidge Road due by final plat approval.
Mitigation Measure B3: The developer shall dedicate the appropriate right-of-
way to accommodate curb, gutter, sidewalks, stormwater facilities and streetlights
along the full frontage of the subdivision. Coolidge Road right-of-way dedication
shall be based on County Collector Arterial built to County Urban Roadway
Section No. 2 or the closest equivalent City of Yakima Standard. South 80th
Avenue right-of-way dedication shall be sufficient to meet County Local Access
street requirements, including curb, gutter and sidewalk or the closest City of
Yakima Standard."
6) On June 5, 2007, the City of Yakima appealed the SEPA MDNS to the Hearing
Examiner. The hearing regarding the appeal was held at the same time as the hearing
regarding the preliminary plat.
7) The City claimed in its appeal and testimony that changing the MDNS to
accept the applicant's offer relative to frontage improvements is contrary to the rough
proportionality requirement although the City was not prepared to say what percentage
short of a requirement for full frontage improvements would satisfy the rough
proportionality test. The City emphasized the need for developers to pay their fair share
of needed street improvements. The City indicated that this is a subdivision which will
directly impact two substandard rural streets with increased vehicle and pedestrian traffic,
particularly students walking to and from school, in a rapidly growing portion of the City.
The City asserted that the mitigation measures required by the County in the preliminary
MDNS are appropriate and mandated to preserve the public safety and welfare for
developments within the City that are subject to the rapid urbanization currently
occurring in the Crown Pointe area. The Examiner was unable to confirm by site visits
where or if school busses pick up school children in the vicinity of the proposed
preliminary plat.
8) The applicant's attorney agreed with the obligation of developers to pay their
fair share or rough proportionality of needed street improvements, but claimed that the
applicant has offered more than its fair share in the form of right-of-way dedication
allegedly having a value of $126,650.00 and $550.00 per lot ($33,550.00). He reached
this conclusion by reliance upon the City of Yakima transportation capacity standard for
urban roads of 800 vehicle trips per peak hour per lane in Subsection 12.08.020(G) of the
Yakima Municipal Code. He argued that since this subdivision will only generate a
maximum peak hour traffic addition of 62 trips, the applicant should only be required to
contribute 62/800 of the estimated street frontage improvement costs ($211.03 per lot
Cottonwood P. 'vers, LLC
"Crown Pointe" Prelimi Plat
Coolidge Rd. & So. 80th Ave.
SUB06-0162; SEP06-062
12 DOC,
INDEX
# L'
rather than the $550.00 per lot offered or the $2,723.00 per lot total cost). That figure
does not include right-of-way acquisition which Mr. Carmody valued at $8.50 per square
foot for a total of $126,650.00 based on the estimated value of a building site rather than
raw land.
9) County Transportation Engineering Manager for Yakima County Public
Services, Kent McHenry, testified that he has not addressed the proportionality issue
relative to this subdivision. He indicated that the $550.00 per lot amount that Cottonwood
Partners were required to pay on two other subdivisions to upgrade the gravel segment of
Coolidge Road to the west of this subdivision was not based on a proportionality
analysis, but was rather based on the number of lots that would ultimately share in the
expense for that upgrading that was not covered by the contribution required of the Apple
Tree development, a totally different situation than this subdivision. He did not have
information regarding current traffic counts on Coolidge Road or South 80th Avenue, but
indicated that they currently operate at level of service (LOS) A or B and would not
operate below the acceptable LOS C as a result of this subdivision.
10) The County's SEPA Responsible Official testified that he determined that the
applicant's $550.00 per lot payment would be about 20% of the total cost To reach that
conclusion, he subtracted the $24,500.00 sidewalk and streetlight costs for South 801
Avenue from the total $190,600.00 estimated road frontage improvement costs on both
streets based on his understanding that those improvements would likely be on the other
side of that street. He changed his findings relative to the need for the applicant to
provide full road frontage improvements per the preliminary MDNS based on the legal
advice he received from the County's attorney relative to the points asserted in Mr.
Carmody's letter, but, as previously noted, he recalls no discussion as to proportionality.
11) Without deciding whether Mr. Carmody's method of determining
proportionality was correct or incorrect, the Examiner noted in his July 19, 2007 SEPA
appeal decision that in other SEPA appeals he had been provided information regarding
the likely traffic impacts of proposed subdivisions and the road improvements that should
be required as a result. He further noted that most MDNS mitigating measures for road
improvements become final without an appeal before the preliminary plat hearing and
that there are therefore differences in how SEPA is applied under the individualized
approach that is required in such reviews. But when there is a dispute about what road
improvements should be required as a result of a SEPA MDNS appeal, the Examiner has
had the assistance of expert opinions and facts such as current vehicular and pedestrian
traffic counts and characteristics for the impacted streets to compare with the likely
traffic impacts of the proposed subdivision on those streets. A traffic impact analysis
(TIA) has been prepared either by a transportation engineer or traffic consultant that has
expertise in determining the extent of likely direct traffic impacts and the fair and
Cottonwood P r ers, LLC
"Cro Pointe" Preliminary Plat
Coolidge Rd. & So. 80t Ave.
SUB06-0162; SEM -062
13
DOC.
INDEX
proportional amount that should be paid or the land that should be dedicated as a result.
This is not necessarily an exact science and only rough proportionality is required. But
here it appeared that the applicant's offer had been accepted without that type of traffic
impact analysis. The Examiner therefore held that where, as here, there is a dispute as to
whether the offer is more than required or less than required to be fair and proportional, a
TIA from the City, the applicant and/or the County as directed by. the SEPA Responsible
Official should be required. That would help him address proportionality with appropriate
facts, figures and opinions. It would also help both the applicant and the public be
assured that a fair and proportional road frontage improvement obligation is imposed for
the direct impacts of the subdivision. Requesting additional information for that purpose
is authorized by Section 16.04.090 of the YCC which adopts by reference the following
mandatory language in WAC 197-11-335:
"The lead agency shall make its threshold determination based upon information
reasonably sufficient to evaluate the environmental impact of a proposal."
Revising an MDNS to request additional information is also within the authorized
functions of the Hearing Examiner which are detailed in Subsection 16B.06.070(E)(5) of
the YCC:
"The Hearing Examiner may affirm, modify or reverse the determination of the
responsible official and may issue a revised DS, DNS or MDNS. The Hearing
Examiner may also request additional information pursuant to WAC 197-11-335."
12) The July 19, 2007 SEPA appeal decision therefore suggested the following
approach for processing this preliminary plat application:
"12) It is important to the Examiner that a determination of the applicant's fair
and proportional share of road frontage improvements not delay the processing of
this preliminary plat. Therefore, the MDNS is merely revised to request the
additional information that may lead to a possible future adjustment of the
required amount of property dedication and/or per lot payment by either an agreed
dismissal of this appeal or by a final decision in this appeal without affecting any
aspect of the MDNS other than the applicant's future dedication and/or monetary
contribution obligations. The additional mitigation measure will therefore read as
follows:
Cottonwood P_. ,. ers, LLC
"Cro , Pointe" Prer inary Plat
Coolidge Rd. & So. 80th Ave.
SUB06-0162; SEP06-062
14
DOC.
INDEX
# C-3
`Mitigation Measure B4: The above -referenced MDNS amount of the
applicant's share of road frontage dedications and/or improvements may be
reduced or increased to reflect the fair and proportional share thereof as
determined by the SEPA Responsible Official or Hearing Examiner in, the
pending SEPA MDNS appeal process after consideration of a traffic impact
analysis prepared by a transportation engineer or traffic consultant to be
provided by the City, the applicant and/or the County as may be directed by
the SEPA Responsible Official. The dedication and payment obligations
set forth herein or as adjusted shall be made or provided for to the
satisfaction of the County prior to final plat approval.'
"13) The Hearing Examiner will retain jurisdiction over this SEPA MDNS appeal.
for the limited purpose of performing such hearing functions as may be requested
and scheduled by the SEPA Responsible Official with notice to the parties to this
appeal. Jurisdiction will be retained until such time as this appeal is either
dismissed by agreement of the parties or the issues as to dedicatiRn of property and
payment of funds for road frontage improvements are finally determined."
13) On July 30, 2007, the City submitted a Request for Reconsideration. On July
31, the Examiner issued an Interim Decision inquiring as to whether SEPA Responsible
Official Steve Erickson or the applicant's attorney James Carmody would be addressing
the issues raised in the Request for Reconsideration. On that same date a letter from Mr.
Erickson advised of the applicant's agreement to provide a traffic impact analysis by a
traffic engineering consultant acceptable to the County Engineer. After receiving a letter
from Mr. Carmody dated August 3, 2007 and a letter from Mr. Cutter dated August 7,
2007, the Examiner issued his Decision re Request for Reconsideration of SEPA Appeal
Decision dated August 20, 2007 which listed 12 disputed and unclear issues raised by the
SEPA appeal that required further information to answer. Besides affirming the need for
additional information by way of a traffic impact analysis, that decision regarding the
request for reconsideration held that a further SEPA appeal to the Board of Yakima
County Commissioners was not required until after issuance of a future final decision
regarding the exact amount required to be paid for road improvements.
14) By Mr. Carmody's letter dated February 5, 2008, a traffic impact analysis
prepared by Sunburst Engineering, P.S. was submitted to Mr. Erickson and the Examiner.
By a follow-up letter from Mr. Carmody dated February 21, 2008, Mr. Carmody
questioned the procedure to be followed after submission of the traffic impact analysis
and suggested that the Examiner could review the materials and issue a modified
Cottonwood Pers, LLC
"Cro Pointe" Preliminary Plat
Coolidge Rd. & So. 80th Ave.
SUB06-0162; SEP06-062
15
DOC.
INDEX
# c-
recommendation. By a letter dated February 25, 2008, Mr. Cutter submitted arguments
critical of the traffic impact analysis, suggested that it would be inappropriate and wrong
to rely on the report, emphasized the inadequacy of SEPA to provide for the appropriate
development of an urban residential subdivision, and opposed any reduction in the
applicant's agreed voluntary mitigation amount. By letter dated March 13, 2008, Mr.
Carmody defended using the minimal peak hour trips along the frontage of the
subdivision to arrive at $13.61 per lot with no required right-of-way dedication rather
than using the number of such trips to and from the subdivision because the access points
are at opposite ends of the subdivision, and argued that Mr. Cutter's other criticisms of
the traffic impact analysis are unjustified and inappropriate.
15) By letter dated March 28, 2008, SEPA Responsible Official Steve Erickson
indicated that the County Transportation Division questioned the methodology and
findings of the traffic impact analysis which arguably supported only a total of $13.61 per
lot toward road improvements because the Sunburst team did not consult with the County
Transportation Division. He indicated that despite the issues that City and County staff
have with the traffic impact analysis, no public purpose would be served by delaying this
project to allow further study. He referred to the City's tacit agreement not to pursue
greater mitigation payment than the original amount offered by the applicant and the
applicant's willingness to make good on its offer if compensated for legal and traffic
analysis costs. He recommended that the original MDNS should stand as written and that
the Examiner may direct the parties to resolve whether and how to resolve the legal and
traffic analysis costs which are beyond the scope of the MDNS.
16) By letter dated April 7, 2008, Mr. Carmody disputed some of the assertions of
SEPA Responsible Official Steve Erickson. Specifically he indicated that Sunburst
Engineering did in fact consult with the County Transportation Division and at that
Division's direction consulted with the City's comparable Division because the area has
been annexed; that the study's methodology complies with all applicable traffic
engineering standards in all respects; that the voluntary agreement was not intended to
apply in the event of an appeal; and that the applicant has incurred the expense of the
traffic study, incurred expenses with respect to the appeal, has been delayed in the
construction of the project, faces significantly higher construction and development costs,
and faces deteriorated market conditions (including the mortgage market) for total losses
exceeding $100,000. He also asserted that Mr. Erickson's letter improperly disclosed the
applicant's "middle ground" settlement proposal because Mr. Erickson did not
recommend acceptance of the proposal. Instead of recommending the "settlement
proposal to accept the original voluntary agreement less all costs and expenses incurred
in preparation of the engineering study and addressing the appeal issues," he
recommended imposition of the original MDNS requirements with a possible unrelated
Cottonwood P ers, LLC
"Cro Pointe" Preliminary Plat
Coolidge Rd. & So. 801 Ave.
SUM -0162; SEP06-062
16
DOG.
INDEX
# G 3
process to be prescribed by the Examiner for resolving whether and how to resolve legal
and traffic analysis costs. Mr. Carmody's letter further indicates that Mr. Erickson
initially solicited the applicant's consideration of a "middle ground" which would be
acceptable to Yakima County in an effort to resolve the matter and subsequently advised
that the proposal was reasonable and would be supported by Yakima County. Mx.
Carmody's letter finally asserted that since Mr. Erickson's letter did not include support
for the "middle ground" settlement proposal, it should not have disclosed the settlement
proposal as a statement of position, and the required contribution should therefore be
$13.47 per lot without any dedication of property.
17) Even though no continued hearing has been requested or scheduled for the
Examiner per the procedure specified in the July 19, 2007 decision and recommendation,
the parties seem to be requesting the Examiner to make a final SEPA appeal decision
without a continued hearing or further information. This SEPA appeal decision and
preliminary plat recommendation is being issued within ten business days of the last
letter in this matter which was from Mr. Carmody dated April 7, 2008 because it is still
important to the Examiner that a determination of the applicant's fair•and proportional
share of road frontage improvements not delay the processing of this preliminary plat.
All delays to this point have been the result of the need for additional information and
arguments from the parties to the appeal and from the SEPA Responsible Official to
determine the issues presented by the SEPA appeal. The traffic impact analysis and
subsequent information and arguments presented by the parties and by the SEPA
Responsible Official failed to definitively or authoritatively answer most of the
Examiner's 12 specific questions listed in his August 20, 2007 decision regarding the
request for reconsideration. Nevertheless, the Examiner is willing to accommodate the
desire of the SEPA Responsible Official and the parties to have a decision from the
Examiner based on what information is available.
18) One thing that is clear in this record is that the SEPA Responsible Official
took the initiative to solicit from the applicant a "middle ground" which would be
acceptable to Yakima County in an effort to resolve this matter. Another thing which is
clear in this record is that the applicant took the initiative to offer a middle ground
settlement proposal. Since the SEPA Responsible Official did not respond to the April 7,
2008 characterization of the settlement proposal, it is undisputed that the offer was "to
accept the original voluntary agreement less all costs and expenses incurred in
preparation of the engineering study and addressing the appeal issues." It is further
undisputed that "Mr. Erickson advised that that proposal was reasonable and would be
supported by Yakima County." Without deciding whether it was improper to disclose
that settlement proposal if it was not being recommended, the Examiner agrees with the
SEPA Responsible Official that under the circumstances and the time constraints here
Cottonwood P _ s ers, LLC
"Cro r Pointe" Prelimi Plat
Coolidge Rd. & So. 801 Ave.
SUB06-0162; SEP06-062
17
DOC.
INDEX
# G-3
presented the proposal was reasonable and worthy of support. Since the SEPA
Responsible Official suggested that the Examiner may direct the parties whether and how
to resolve the legal and traffic analysis costs of the SEPA appeal in a process separate
from the MDNS appeal, Mr. Carmody correctly asserted that that suggestion differs from
the settlement proposal he described. But the Examiner will implement that suggestion in
a way that does not differ from the settlement proposal he described. Specifically, the
Examiner suggests that those costs are what they are. They -rave already been incurred
and have probably already been paid. They cannot be changed now after the fact. The
itemized statements for the applicant's traffic impact analysis costs and legal expenses to
address the appeal issues should merely be submitted to the SEPA Responsible Official
with proof of payment or verification that they will be paid. The $550.00 per lot
voluntary agreement amount in SEPA MDNS Mitigation Measure B2 should be reduced
by 1/61 of those costs and expenses. The time period for further appeal by any party of
the SEPA appeal to the Board of Yakima County Commissioners should be within 14
days after notice is mailed of the new per lot amount in SEPA Mitigation Measure B2
that reflects the middle ground settlement proposal amount unless the parties sooner
advise the SEPA Responsible Official of a decision not to further appeal the matter.
Mitigation Measure B4 used to request additional information in the July 19, 2007 SEPA
appeal decision should not be included in the final MDNS.
19) Since the preliminary plat recommendation of July 19, 2007 was not
submitted to the Board of County Commissioners for decision pending determination of
the exact per lot contribution required by the MDNS prior to final plat approval, the same
preliminary plat recommendation is here repeated for consideration by the Board of
Yakima County Commissioners.
IX. Appropriate Subdivision Provisions for Public Health, Safety and General
Welfare Through Zoning and Land Use Requirements for the Site and
Adiacent Properties. The proposed preliminary plat makes appropriate provisions for
the public health, safety and general welfare insofar as it satisfies the intent and minimum
lot size requirements of the Single -Family Residential (R-1) zoning district and is
compatible with adjacent land uses. The surrounding uses are residences on lots ranging
from 0.25 acres to 2.6 acres immediately to the north and south. The lots immediately to
the south are in a conventional subdivision with urban -level services. Property to the east
Cottonwood Pers, LLC
"Cro c Pointe" Preli a r_ Plat
Coolidge Rd. & So. 80th Ave.
SUB06-0162; SEP06-062
18
DOC.
INDEX
# C-3
is orchard and a single family residence on a large lot. To the west is orchard. The
property is within the City of Yakima as a result of recent annexation, but this proposed
subdivision will continue to be processed subject to the provisions of the Yakima Uxban
Area Comprehensive Plan and the Yakima Urban Area Zoning Ordinance (Title 15A of
the Yakima County Code) because an applicant may elect under the interlocal agreement
to continue the subdivision to completion under the County's direction and subject to
existing County development codes when a completed subdivision application is
submitted to the County prior to annexation. The property and surrounding area is
designated as Low Density Residential under the Comprehensive Plan. Low Density
Residential is primarily planned for single-family, detached residences. Net residential
density before considering roads and rights-of-way is less than 7 dwelling units per acre,
which is considered the lowest residential density to efficiently support public services.
The Low Density Residential comprehensive plan designation is implemented by the
UAZO which designates the subject area as a Single -Family Residential (R-1) zoning
district. The intent of the R-1 zone is to provide a variety of residential lifestyles with
densities generally ranging from 2 units per net residential acre to 7 units per net
residential acre. The higher densities are permitted when public water and public sewer
systems are used.
X. Appropriate Subdivision Provisions for Public Health, Safety and General
Welfare Through Development Standards and Requirements. The lot
configuration of the proposed preliminary plat allows for development consistent with the
following development standards and requirements that have been established to promote
the public health, safety and general welfare:
Cottonwood P x ers. LLC
"Cro Pointe" Pre]' Plat
Coolidge Rd. & So. 80th Ave.
SUB06-0162; SEP06-062
19
DOC.
INDEX
#' __ .
1) Density/Lot Size: The proposed lots are larger than the minimum size required
in the R-1 zoning district where public water and sewer services are utilized as proposed
here. Subsection 15A.05.030(b) of the UAZO provides that the "Maximum Number of
Dwelling Units Permitted per Net Residential Acre" within a single subdivision and other
types of residential developments allow no more than 7.0 units per net residential acre.
The specific minimum residential lot sizes are dependent on the applicable zoning
designation and various situations. Within the R-1 zone, the minimum lot size for a
situation where a public or community water system and the regional or an approved
community sewer system is available is specifically set at a minimum 7,000 square feet
per lot under Table 5-2 of the UAZO. The smallest proposed minimum lot size is 8,001
square feet which complies with the 7,000 square foot minimum requirement for
individual lots. Calculations based on parcel information and dimensions shown on the
preliminary plat indicate an overall density of 3.51 units per acre which is about half of
the maximum density of 7 units per acre.
2) Setbacks: In accordance with Table 5-1 in Chapter 15A.05 of the UAZO, the
required front yard structural setback from Coolidge Road is 65 feet `from the right-of-
way centerline. For lots abutting South 80th Avenue, the setback will be 65 feet from
centerline. For lots that abut interior streets, the setback will be 50 feet from centerline.
The minimum structural setback requirement for side yards not bordering a street is 5
feet. A setback of 10 feet from the property line is required for side yards that border a
right-of-way. A setback of 20 feet from the property line is required for rear yards not
bordering a street. Any rear yards bordering a street will have the same setback
requirement as the front yard. The proposed preliminary plat will have large enough lots
to accommodate all front, rear and side structural setbacks with normally -sized residential
dwellings. Even though adjustments to standards are sometimes granted and the
standards themselves could always change, these standards may be required to be shown
on the final plat.
3) Lot Coverage: The Lots are of such a size that normally -sized residential
structures with accessory buildings can be constructed on the lots without exceeding the
45% maximum lot coverage in the R-1 zoning district. The estimated maximum lot
coverage proposed as a part of SEPA environmental review for this proposal is 35%.
4) Lot Dimensions: In addition to the required minimum lot area as described
above, minimum lot width within the R-1 zone is 50 feet provided the lots are served by a
public or community water system and the regional sewer system. The preliminary plat
indicates all proposed lots exceed 50 feet of width. All of the proposed lots will have
frontage and access by way of the interior roads. The easements are being proposed to
provide for both access and utilities. The proposed dimensions of the lots comply with
Chapter 15A.05 of the UAZO required in the R-1 zoning district.
Cottonwood P iers, LLC
"Crown Pointe" Preli Plat
Coolidge Rd. & So. 80th Ave.
SUB06-0162; SEP06-062
20
DOC.
INDEX
5) Site Screening: Site screening is not proposed or required for the proposed
plat. Table 7-1 in Chapter 15A.07 of the UAZO generally does not require sitescreening
for this type of proposal.
XI. Appropriate Subdivision Provisions for Open Spaces. Provisions for
common open space, as may be required by Section 15A.09.030 of the UAZO, are not
deemed necessary for this proposed preliminary plat. The evidence submitted at the
hearing indicates that the proposed preliminary plat contains sufficient lot sizes and is in
an area that has sufficient open spaces without dedication of land for open space, public
park or recreational purposes. The requirement in Section 14.28.070 of the YCC to
dedicate up to five percent of a proposed subdivision area for either private or public
parks or recreational areas or to contribute funds for park purposes, is not typically
invoked by the County unless there is a significant lack of open space within a
development or to replace a park or recreational area that will be lost due to development.
As proposed, the project density of the subject development is 3.51 lots per acre which is
much lower than the 7 lots per acre allowed in the R-1 zone. The proposed subdivision
will have a maximum lot coverage of 45% and will not displace any known recreational
land or recreational use. Therefore, additional land for open space or for replacing parks
and recreational areas will not be necessary.
XII. Appropriate Subdivision Provisions for Drainage Ways. All stormwater
runoff will have to be retained on site. Section 14.48.100 of the YCC requires an
acceptable drainage plan. The County has determined that potentially significant adverse
impacts could be caused by the development unless storm and ground water is properly
managed. Mitigation measures Al and A2 of the MDNS have been required in order to
ensure the proposed plat adequately provides for suitable drainage without causing undue
Cottonwood P « ers, LLC
"Cro Pointe" Prel. Plat
Coolidge Rd. & So. 80th Ave.
SUB06-0162; SEP06-062
21
DOC.
INDEX
# _3
adverse impacts. Erosion control measures, an NPDES stormwater construction permit
and a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan are Department of Ecology requirements that
may take 45 to 60 days to process.
XIII. Appropriate Subdivision Provisions for PotableWater Supplies. Section
14.52.130 of the YCC requires a plat to be connected to an existing municipal public
water system or a large Group A water purveyor when available. The proposal is to
utilize water provided by the Nob Hill Water Association. The proposed water system
will comply with public water system requirements although there is no verification that
the Nob Hill Water Association is able to serve this subdivision. The Department of
Ecology commented that the purveyor of water is responsible for ensuring that the uses
are within the limitations of its water rights.
XIV. Appropriate Subdivision Provisions for Sanitary Wastes. Section
14.52.130 of the YCC requires on-site sewage disposal systems for all new lots unless
municipal or public sewer service is available. Section 15.20.032 of the YCC requires
that development connect to public sewer service where available. The proposed source
of sewage disposal is through the Yakima Regional Wastewater Facility (YRWWF) in
accordance with City of Yakima standards. As proposed, connection to the YRWWF
will comply with sewage disposal requirements of the YCC and the Yakima urban area
development standards, but verification of service availability to this subdivision has not
been confirmed.
XV. Appropriate Subdivision Provisions for Public Ways. Sidewalks and
other Planning Features for Children who Walk to and from School. Title 10
Cottonwood Partners, LLC
"Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat
Coolidge Rd. & So. 80th Ave,
SUB06-0162; SEP06-062
22
DOC.
INDEX
and Title 14 of the YCC provide minimum street standards and requirements for
subdivision development including those for project site and fire access, interior and
frontage improvements, right-of-way standards and other necessary transportation
elements. The 61 new lots of Crown Pointe are proposed to access Coolidge Road and
South 80th Avenue through two individual driveways. Transportation impacts identified
for Crown Pointe are also applicable to environmental impacts attributable to the
subdivision and are substantively incorporated as Mitigation Measures B 1, B2 and B3,
including the revision to the $550.00 per lot figure in B2 as a result of this SEPA appeal
decision. Compliance with the conditions of approval and the mitigation measures
described within the final revised MDNS will satisfy required criteria for transportation
and public safety standards applicable to this project.
XVI. Appropriate Subdivision Provisions for Transit Stops, Playgrounds,
Schools and Schoolgrounds. Under the evidence presented at the hearing, the size,
location and nature of the proposed preliminary plat do not require special provisions for
these other features required by RCW 58.17.110(2) to be considered such as transit stops,
playgrounds, schools or schoolgrounds.
XVII. Appropriate Subdivision Provisions for Other Features of the Proposal.
Other features of the proposed preliminary plat that are provided in the interest of public
health, safety and general welfare include the following:
(a) FIRE PROTECTION: Section 13.09.070 of the YCC and the International Fire
Code specify fire flow and hydrant requirements which are required for new
development. It is standard practice for the Nob Hill Water Association to coordinate fire
hydrant locations with the Yakima County Fire Marshall.
Cottonwood P.:_. ers, LLC
"Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat
Coolidge Rd. & So. 80`' Ave.
SUB06-0162; SEP06-062
23
DOC.
INDEX
# c-3
(b) IRRIGATION: Section 14.48.045 of the YCC requires that provisions be made
for irrigation water. The subject property is within the Yakima-Tieton Irrigation District
and the applicant proposes to provide irrigation water from that District to all 61 lots.
(c) DUST CONTROL: The Yakima Regional Clean Air Authority has submitted
comments indicating that the developer must file and gain approval for a dust control
plan prior to commencing any construction or grading activities: .
(d) TOXIC SUBSTANCES: The Department of Ecology has submitted comments
recommending that soils be analyzed for lead, arsenic and organochlorine pesticides and
that potential buyers be notified if they are found in concentrations exceeding MTCA
clean up levels.
(e) ELECTRICAL, TELEPHONE AND GARBAGE SERVICE: Electrical service,
telephone service and garbage service are available in the area. Installation of the power
and telephone facilities must be completed, or contracted with the provider to be
completed, prior to final plat approval.
XVIII. Consistency Analysis under Section 16B.06.020 of the Yakima County
Code. The following analysis involves the application's consistency with applicable
development regulations, or in the absence of applicable regulations, the adopted
Comprehensive Plan as mandated by the State Growth Management Act and the Yakima
County Code. During project review, neither Yakima County nor any subsequent
reviewing body may re-examine alternatives to, or hear appeals on, the items identified in
these conclusions except for issues of code interpretation:
. a) THE TYPE OF LAND USE CONTEMPLATED BY THE PROPOSAL (a residential
development) is permitted on this site so long as it complies with the zoning ordinance,
subdivision ordinance, building codes and other applicable regulations.
b) THE LEVEL OF DEVELOPMENT (lot size, contemplated density, population,
transportation, etc.) will not exceed the allowable limit in the R-1 zoning district.
c) THE AVAILABILITY AND ADEQUACY OF INFRASTRUCTURE AND PUBLIC
FACILITIES allow the proposed preliminary plat to be approved. Adequate infrastructure
and public facilities such as water, sewer, garbage, telephone and electricity are available,
or will be available at the time of development.
d) THE CHARACTER OF THE PROPOSAL, as conditioned, will be consistent with
the development standards for residential subdivisions.
Cottonwood P •, ers, LLC
"Cro Pointe" Prel' i Plat
Coolidge Rd. & So. 8011' Ave.
SUB06-0162; SEP06-062
24
DOC.
INDEX
# C -3
CONCLUSIONS
Based on the above findings, the Examiner•reaches the following conclusions:
1. The Hearing Examiner has jurisdiction to decide SEPA MDNS appeal issues
and make recommendations regarding applications for preliminary plat approval.
2. The SEPA MDNS for this proposal should be revised without delaying the
processing of this preliminary plat to reduce the $550.00 per lot figure in Mitigation
Measure B2 by 1/61 of the amount of the applicant's traffic impact analysis costs and
legal expenses to address the appeal issues.
3. After inquiring into the public use and interest proposed to be served by the
establishment of the subdivision and dedication, the Hearing Examiner recommends that
the Board of Yakima County Commissioners approve the preliminary plat of "Crown
Pointe" with the conditions detailed in this recommendation which make appropriate
provisions for the public health, safety and general welfare and for open spaces, drainage
ways, streets or roads, alleys, public ways, potable water supplies, sanitary wastes,
sidewalks and, to the extent necessary, other requisite statutory considerations such as
transit stops, parks and recreation, playgrounds, schools and schoolgrounds and other
planning features that assure safe walking conditions for students who only walk to and
from school, and which conditions also ensure that the public interest will be served.
4. The preliminary plat of "Crown Pointe" can be adequately conditioned by the
SEPA MDNS requirements as revised by this decision and the plat conditions set forth in
this recommendation so as to ensure compatibility, compliance and consistency with the
provisions of the zoning district and with the goals, objectives and policies of the
comprehensive plan and so as to satisfy all the applicable County and State plat law
requirements.
5. The SEPA MDNS decision herein may be appealed to the Board of Yakima
County Commissioners within 14 days after the parties are mailed notice of the. revised
per lot contribution amount in Mitigation Measure B2 unless parties sooner advise the
SEPA Responsible Official that there will be no further appeal of the SEPA MDNS.
Cottonwood P ers, LLC
"Cro Pointe" Preliminary Plat
Coolidge Rd. & So. 80t Ave.
SUB06-0162; SEP06-062
25
DOC,
INDEX
DECISION & RECOMMENDATION
The Hearing Examiner affirms the SEPA Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance
as revised by this decision and recommends to the Board of Yakima County
Commissioners that the preliminary plat of "Crown Pointe" described in the application
and in the related documents assigned file numbers SUB06-162, SEP06-062 and
PRJ2006-1817 be APPROVED, subject to compliance with the following conditions:
General
1. Compliance with the SEPA Final Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance dated
May 22, 2007 (with the $550.00 per lot contribution amount set forth in Mitigation
Measure B2 reduced by the amount required by this decision) shall be required. The
Determination and the Mitigation measures thereof are hereby adopted and
incorporated herein by this reference.
2. All proposed lots must be provided with adequate fire flow in accordance with the
adopted fire code prior to final plat approval.
3. Unless construction is concurrent or incorporated into other approvals and dust
control requirements of Crown Pointe, a method of dust control for the construction
phase of phase 1 and phase 2 shall be submitted to and approved by the Yakima
Regional Clean Air Authority. A copy of the approval must be submitted to the
Public Services Department Planning Division prior to any construction activities.
4. Monuments must be placed at street intersections and curvature points as specified in
Section 14.32.020 of the Yakima County Code. The monuments must be protected by
cases and covers as approved by the County Engineer.
Streets
5. Interior and dead-end streets may be constructed with rolled mountable curbs. The
curb radii at all intersections and interior comers shall be constructed with barrier
curbs from the property lines of the comer lots. (YCC 14.52.100 C).
Cottonwood P. '_:ers, LLC
"Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat
Coolidge Rd. & So. 80th Ave.
SUB06-0162; SEM -062
6. The plans for all public road improvements must be designed to Yakima County
standards, including applicable standards and mitigation measures of the revised
MDNS herein, prepared by a licensed professional engineer and approved by the
County Engineer prior to construction.
7. Dedicated 30 -foot by 30 -foot clear sight triangles must be provided at all intersection
comers within the plat. Equivalent alternative plans supporting a reduction in
distance may be submitted to the County Engineer for approval.
8. Street names shall be reviewed and approved by the Public Services Department prior
to final plat approval. Street signs are required for this development. The signs will
be installed by Public Services prior to acceptance of roads and all costs associated
with supplying and installing the signs must be reimbursed to Yakima County by the
developer.
Utilities
9. All public and private utilities located within interior easements or rights-of-way must
be constructed prior to any road construction.
10. Installation of power and telephone facilities must be completed, or arranged with the
provider to be completed, prior to final plat approval.
11. All public and private utilities must be located underground with the exception of the
standard telephone box, transmission box and similar structures.
12. Public utility easements must be provided for the two proposed shared interior access
easements. If the easement is 50 feet or less, the utility easements shall be 10 feet in
width or as specified by the utility providers. Minimum width for utility easements
that are also utilized for irrigation is generally 15 feet.
13. All lots must be served with public water from the Nob Hill Water Association
system. No new individual domestic or irrigation wells shall be permitted for any of
the lots. Prior to final plat approval, written verification must be provided to the
Public Services Department Planning Division demonstrating the ability to. provide
domestic water, demonstrating that any necessary easements are provided for and
demonstrating that all associated fees have been paid.
Cottonwood P. ers, LLC
"Cro Pointe" Preliminary Plat
Coolidge Rd. & So. 80th Ave.
SUB06-0162; SEP06-062
27
DOC.
INDEX
# -,3
14. All lots shall be provided with public sewer service from the Yakima Regional
Wastewater system. Prior to final plat approval, written verification from the City of
Yakima must be submitted to the Public Services Department Planning Division
demonstrating that the system will serve all lots within the subdivision, that any
necessary easements have been established, and that any required fees have been paid.
Plat Notes
15. Yakima County has in place an. urban and rural addressing system. Street names and
numbers for lots within this plat are issued by the Yakima County Public Services
Department upon issuance of an approved Building Permit.
16. The owners shown hereon, their grantees and assignees in interest hereby covenant
and agree to retain all surface water generated within the plat on-site.
17. All lots of this subdivision have been provided with public sewer. 'All lots have been
provided with public water connections.
Timing
18. All property taxes and special assessments for the entire tax year must be paid,
together with any required pre -payment amount prior to final plat approval.
19. Prior to recording the final plat or issuance of building permits, either:
(a) All required plat improvements, i.e. streets, sidewalks, utilities and drainage
facilities, must be in place; or,
(b) An escrow account must be established or a bond provided in an amount and with
conditions acceptable to the Yakima County Engineer to assure installation of all
remaining required improvements.
If the developer elects to escrow or bond for the required roadway improvements, and
fails to complete these improvements in the time specified in the escrow or bond
agreement, the County Engineer shall have the authority to suspend issuance. of
building or occupancy permits until the required road and drainage improvements are
accepted as satisfactorily completed. The County Engineer may issue building
permits on a lot -by -lot basis when it is determined that building construction will not
interfere with utility and roadway construction.
Cottonwood P. ' ers, LLC
"Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat
Coolidge Rd. & So. 80th Ave.
SUB06-0162; SEP06-062
28
DOC.
INDEX
# C-3
20. The total project must be completed and the final plat submitted within the maximum
five-year time period prescribed by Section 58.17.140 of the Revised Code of
Washington. Any extension beyond the five-year time period is subject to the
provisions of Chapter 14.24 of the Yakima County Code.
DATED this 2151 day of April, 2008.
Cottonwood P. a,ers, LLC
"Crown Pointe" Prel- ry Plat
Coolidge Rd. & So. 80th Ave.
SUB06-0162; SEP06-062
29
Gary M. Cuillier, Hearing Examiner
DQE.
INDEX
COUNTY OF YAKIMA, WASHINGTON
HEARING EXAMINER'S INTERIM DECISION RE REQUEST
FOR RECONSIDERATION OF SEPA APPEAL DECISION
July 31, 2007
In the Matter of the SEPA
MDNS Appeal regarding the
Preliminary Plat Submitted by:
Cottonwood Partners, LLC
For a 61 -Lot Subdivision to be
Known as "Crown Pointe"
FILE NOS. SEP06-062
PRJ2006-1817
& SUB06-162
Introduction. The Hearing Examiner received a document dated July 30, 2007 entitled
"City of Yakima's Request for Reconsideration of Hearing Examiner's Decision in SEPA
Appeal" submitted by the legal representative of appellant City of Yakima, Jeff Cutter,
Senior Assistant City Attorney. It was served on N. Burger for the applicant's legal
representative, James Carmody, on that date. The Examiner is desirous of knowing
whether Mr. Carmody and/or SEPA Responsible Official Steve Erickson intend to
address the points raised in that document and, if so, how much time is needed for that
purpose.
Cottonwood Partners, LLC
SEPA MDNS Appeal
Interim Decision re Reconsideration
"Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat
Coolidge Rd. & So. 80th Ave.
SEP06-062; SUB06-0162
1
Interim Decision re Request for Reconsideration. The Examiner requests a
written indication from Mr. Carmody and Mr. Erickson as to whether they wish to
request an opportunity to respond in writing to the City's request for reconsideration and,
if so, how much time they request to do so. This information should be submitted to the
Examiner by 5:00 p.m. on this Friday, August 3, 2007. A copy of each response should
be provided to the other two individuals mentioned herein who represent the parties to
this appeal. If the County's attorney should become involved in this SEPA MDNS
appeal proceeding, he should also be added to the list of persons to receive a copy of any
correspondence or submittals to the Examiner in this matter.
DATED this 31. st day of July, 2007.
Cottonwood Partners, LLC
SEPA MDNS Appeal
Interim Decision re Reconsideration
"Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat
Coolidge Rd. & So. 80th Ave.
SEP06-062; SUB06-0162
2
4.-1 h-, .
Gary M. Cuillier, Hearing Examiner
J VED
t9
.Irl,
CITY OF
PLA JN!NG oti;
COUNTY OF YAKIMA, WASHINGTON
HEARING EXAMINER'S DECISION & RECOMMENDATION
July 19, 2007
In the Matter of Application for
Preliminary Plat Approval
Submitted by:
Cottonwood Partners, LLC
For a 61 -Lot Subdivision to be
Known as "Crown Pointe" which
Involves a SEPA MDNS Appeal
FILE NOS. PRJ2006-1817
SUB06-162
SEP06-062
Introduction. The Hearing Examiner conducted an open record public hearing on July
5, 2007 and this recommendation has been submitted within ten business days of the
hearing. Yakima County Planning Division Project Planner Scott Stiltner presented the
staff report that recommended approval of the proposed preliminary plat with conditions.
Yakima County SEPA Responsible Official Steve Erickson testified in favor of the
proposed preliminary plat and explained his reason for changing the SEPA Mitigated
Determination of Nonsignificance (MDNS) road frontage improvement requirements.
County Transportation Engineering Manager for Yakima County Public Services, Kent
McHenry, explained the origin of the per -lot fee amount offered by the applicant for road
frontage improvements. City of Yakima (City) Mayor Dave Edler, City Code
Administration and Planning Manager Doug Maples and City Senior Assistant City
Cottonwood Partners, LLC
"Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat
Coolidge Rd. & So. 80th Ave.
SUB06-0162; SEP06-062
1
DOC.
INDEX
Attorney Jeff Cutter were not opposed to approval of the preliminary plat, but presented
evidence in support of the City's appeal of the SEPA MDNS by emphasizing the need for
the applicant to contribute its fair or proportional share toward road frontage
improvements. The applicant's representatives, James Carmody of the law firm of
Velikanje Halverson P.C., Bill Hordan of Hordan Planning Services and Rich Hochrein
of Cottonwood Partners, LLC testified in support of the proposed preliminary plat and
presented testimony to the effect that the MDNS requires the applicant to contribute more
than its fair or proportional share of street frontage improvements. No one testified in
opposition to the proposed preliminary plat.
Summary of Decision and Recommendation. The Hearing Examiner revises the
MDNS to allow the preliminary plat process to proceed and this appeal hearing to be
continued to adjust the MDNS amount of the applicant's share of road frontage
dedications and/or improvements if a different share is shown to be fair and proportional
through a traffic impact analysis prepared by a transportation engineer or traffic
consultant to be provided by the City, the applicant and/or the County as may be directed
by the SEPA Responsible Official and recommends that the Board of Yakima County
Commissioners approve this proposed preliminary plat subject to that possible adjustment
through this appeal process and the other conditions stated in the modified MDNS and in
this recommendation.
Basis for Decision and Recommendation. Based on a consideration of the staff
report, exhibits, sworn testimony and other evidence presented at the open record public
hearing on July 5, 2007; views of the site on July 17, 2007 and prior to that date with no
one else present; the subdivision requirements; the applicable comprehensive plan
Cottonwood Partners, LLC
"Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat
Coolidge Rd. & So. 80th Ave.
SUB06-0162; SEP06-062
2
DOC.
INDEX
# ;.; j
provisions; the applicable zoning ordinance requirements; the applicable development
standards; and the requisite consistency criteria; the Hearing Examiner makes the
following:
FINDINGS
I. Applicant/Property Owner. The applicant and property owner is Cottonwood
Partners, LLC, P.O. Box 8353, Yakima, Washington 98907.
II. Applicant's Representatives. The applicant's representatives are James Carmody
of the law firm of Velikanje Halverson P.C., 405 East Lincoln Avenue, Yakima,
Washington 98901 and Bill Hordan of Hordan Planning Services, 410 North 2"d Street,
Yakima, Washington 98901.
III. Location. The proposed preliminary plat is located on the southeast corner of
Coolidge Road and South 80th Avenue within about the 7700 block of Coolidge Road and
the parcel number is 181332-33436. The property was annexed into the City on April 8,
2007, but the subdivision will continue to be processed to completion by Yakima County
under County laws at the applicant's request as allowed by an interlocal agreement
between those two municipalities.
IV. Proposal. The proposed preliminary plat would divide about 17.04 acres into 61
single-family residential lots ranging in size from 8,001 square feet to 12,726 square feet
and averaging 8,992 square feet. The subdivision itself is proposed to be accomplished in
Cottonwood Partners, LLC
"Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat
Coolidge Rd. & So. 80th Ave.
SUB06-0162; SEP06-062
3
two phases. Phase 1 is proposed to consist of 33 lots and Phase 2 is proposed to consist
of 28 lots. The proposed lots are intended for future single-family residential
development that will be served by extended existing utilities including public water and
sewer. Proposed access is from South 80th Avenue (one driveway) and Coolidge Road
(one driveway).
V. Project Description. Currently the project site is an alfalfa field. The project site
is relatively flat with a slope of approximately 0 to 2%. There are no designated critical
areas on or immediately adjacent to the site, but the property is located within the Wide
Hollow Creek Watershed which has been determined by the Yakima County Engineer to
be a floodprone basin.
VL Jurisdiction. A preliminary plat is classified and processed as a Type IV review.
The Hearing Examiner conducted an open record public hearing regarding this
preliminary plat application pursuant to Title 16B of the Yakima County Code and has
formulated this SEPA MDNS appeal decision that may be appealed to the Board of
Yakima County Commissioners and this preliminary plat recommendation that will be
considered by the Board of Yakima County Commissioners at a closed record public
hearing. In accordance with RCW 58.17.1 X0(2), "A proposed subdivision and dedication
shall not be approved unless the city, town, or county legislative body makes written
findings that: (a) Appropriate provisions are made for the public health, safety, and
general welfare and for such open spaces, drainage ways, streets or roads, alleys, other
public ways, transit stops, potable water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks and recreation,
playgrounds, schools and schoolgrounds and all other relevant facts, including sidewalks
and other planning features that assure safe waking conditions for students who only
Cottonwood Partners, LLC
"Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat
Coolidge Rd. & So. 80th Ave.
SUM -0162; SEP06-062
4
walk to and from school; and (b) the public use and interest will be served by the platting
of such subdivision and dedication." The subdivision standards and conditions of a
subdivision approval are intended to ensure appropriate provisions are made for all of the
above items.
VII. Notices. Notices were given in the following manner:
Mailing of Notice of Completeness & SEPA review:
Publication of Notice of Completeness & SEPA review:
Mailing of Notice of Preliminary MDNS:
Publication of Notice of Preliminary MDNS:
Mailing of Notice of Final MDNS & Hearing:
Publication of Notice of Final MDNS & Hearing:
Posting of Notice of Hearing on Property:
December 13, 2006
December 16, 2006
February 14, 2007
February 18, 2007
May 23, 2007
May 26, 2007
June 20, 2007
VIII. Environmental Review and SEPA MDNS Appeal. The Examiner's findings
relative to the County's environmental review under the State Environmental Policy Act
which is the subject of the City's appeal are as follows:
1) The County as lead agency determined that the environmental impacts
associated with Phases 1 and 2 of the proposed preliminary plat warrant mitigation for
significant and nonsignificant impacts derived from WAC 197-11-660, Section 16.04.230
of the Yakima County Code (YCC) and the policies contained in the Urban Area
Comprehensive Plan and Plan 2015. A preliminary MDNS was issued on February 13,
2007 which required stormwater mitigation measures and the following transportation
mitigation measure:
"Mitigation Measure Bl.: Street improvements are required for the proposed
development. The developer shall improve (or Bond) both Coolidge Road and S.
Cottonwood Partners, LLC
"Crown Pointe" Preliminary Nat
Coolidge Rd. & So. 8011` Ave.
SUB06-0162; SEP06-062
5
80th Avenue along the property frontage. The requirement is for a Collector
Arterial road per County Roadway Section No. 2 including sidewalk and street
illumination (70' right-of-way). Accompanying stormwater facilities must also be
provided."
2) By letter to the County SEPA Responsible Official dated April 3, 2007,
applicant's attorney James Carmody argued that full road frontage improvements could
not be required of the applicant for four reasons:
"(1) the mitigation is improperly imposed to correct pre-existing road deficiencies;
(2) the exaction violates constitutional mandates and limitations; (3) mitigation
violates RCW 82.02.020; and (4) imposition of the off-site improvement
requirements is inconsistent with prior practice."
3) SEPA Responsible Official Steve Erickson was advised by Yakima County's
Corporate Counsel Terry Austin that Mr. Carmody's position is correct, but Mr. Erickson
does not recall any legal advice or discussion with Mr. Austin regarding proportionality.
4) The SEPA Responsible Official accepted the applicant's offer to dedicate
14,900 square feet of frontage along Coolidge Road and South 80th Avenue to allow the
roads to be widened to County standards in the future and to also pay $550.00 per lot
toward the cost of improving the Coolidge Road frontage in the future to the County
urban road standard which was adopted for that road in 2003.
5) The County's fmal SEPA MDNS issued on May 22, 2007 contains the
following fmdings and mitigation measures:
"Stormwater (Ground and Surface water)
The 61 proposed lots in Phases 1 & 2 are located within the Wide Hollow Creek
Watershed, which has been determined by the Yakima County Engineer to be a
Cottonwood Partners, LLC
"Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat
Coolidge Rd. & So. 80th Ave.
SUB06-0162; SEP06-062
6
mwIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIpN11114Ntltltluuuuuuuuuuuuu111111llllllllllllllllllE1111QIll
flood -prone basin. On-site stormwater retention is required on the development to
prevent adverse impacts to surface water. Excavation, site development,
subsequent lot layout and stormwater management needs to be done in a manner
so drainage facilities and adjacent property owners are not negatively impacted by
stormwater runoff.
Based on a variety of information, depth to seasonal groundwater and soil type,
character and depth all have a direct influence on stormwater system performance
and design, and can effect the plat layout. Given the variability in local subsurface
geology, depths to groundwater, and infiltration capacities of Yakima County
soils, it is recommended that this data be obtained prior to preliminary plat. They
should be determined prior to final lot layout and design in order to ensure that
adequate space (above ground or below ground) is provided for stormwater
facilities, including long-term inspection and maintenance. Public stormwater
facilities are reviewed and approved by County Roads.
Depth to seasonal groundwater and soil type, character and depth all have a direct
influence on stormwater system design and potentially the preliminary plat layout.
Given the observed variability in local subsurface geology, depths to groundwater,
infiltration capacities of Yakima County soils, the type and depth of geological
matrix, depth to groundwater, and infiltration capacity should be determined prior
to final lot layout and design in order to ensure that adequate space (above ground
or below ground) is provided for stormwater facilities, including allowances and
easements for proper long-term inspection and maintenance by private or public
entities.
Please consult the Stormwater Management Manual for Eastern Washington
(Ecology, September 2004), the recently revised Underground Injection Control
(UIC) Program rule (Chapter 173-218 WAC), and Ecology's draft document
entitled Determination of Treatment and Source Control for UIC Well in
Washington State (Ecology, July 2005). The information contained in these
documents will aid the designer in choosing the appropriate stormwater facilities
and/or treatment facilities for the particular project.
Please note: Operators of the following construction activities are required to be
covered under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) and
State Waste Discharge General Permit for Stormwater Discharge Associated with
Construction Activity (Ecology, November 2005): Clearing, grading and/or
Cottonwood Partners, LLC
"Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat
Coolidge Rd. & So. 80th Ave.
SUB06-0162; SEP06-062
7
excavation which results in disturbance of one or more acres, and discharges
stormwater to surface waters of the state; and clearing, grading and/or excavation
on sites smaller than one acre which are part of a larger common plan of
development or sale, if the common plan of development or sale will ultimately
disturb one acre or more, and discharges stormwater to surface waters of the state.
Mitigation Measure Al: To adequately control post -construction surface water
runoff, a Stormwater Management Plan, meeting the design standards below, shall
be submitted for review by Yakima County Public Services prior to grading the
property, any road development, or approval of building permits.
1. Full retention of runoff for the 25 year design storm event is required.
2. The stormwater management plan shall describe existing conditions, including
drainage facilities, surface water features, soil types, geotechnical conditions,
infiltration rates and seasonal high groundwater depth.
3. A professional engineer registered in the State of Washington shall design all
drainage facilities and components using best management practices. Plans,
drawings and geotechnical information shall be sealed, signed and dated by a
professional engineer.
4. All Underground Injection Control (UIC) devices must be designed in
accordance with the Department of Ecology UIC guidelines.
5. For public stormwater facilities, allowances and access shall be made for
proper long-term inspection and maintenance, to be provided to the County.
Mitigation Measure A2: Because this development exceeds one acre of
disturbed land, it is likely that stormwater will cause erosion and other surface
water problems during the course of construction. To address such issues, the
proponent must submit a Construction Stormwater General Permit application to
the WA Dept. of Ecology, obtain appropriate reviews or approvals and provide
evidence of DOE's approval to the Building Official prior to construction.
Transportation
The property is bordered on the north by Coolidge Road and South 80th Avenue on
the west. Both are now city -maintained paved (BST) roads built to rural standards
with side ditches. Access to the plat is proposed from both roads. The federal
funding functional classification of the roads changed from rural to urban
standards in 2003. County -wide Planning Policies, both adopted Urban Area and
County comprehensive plans and development standards specify the need for
Cottonwood Partners, LLC
"Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat
Coolidge Rd. & So. 80th Ave.
SUB06-0162; SEP06-062
8
urban standards (which in This case would mean curbs, gutters, sidewalks and
streetlights for local access streets and collector arterials serving an urban
subdivision).
Both roads in their current condition are inconsistent with adopted urban
standards. Yakima County comprehensive plan policy provides that projects
requiring improvements in advance of the TIP are responsible for providing those
improvements concurrent with development. While the addition of 610 additional
vehicle trips per day would not bring traffic levels of service below adopted
standards, a probable significant adverse impact to air quality and road
maintenance will likely result from the project if adopted urban standards are not
required concurrent with this development, as well as from increased construction
and maintenance costs arising from the shift of a private cost to the public sector
and increased costs arising from deferral of the requirements.
The total cost of frontage improvements was estimated by Yakima County to be
$2,723 per lot. However, relevant court decisions preclude requirement of
frontage improvements given the circumstances of this project. The applicant has,
however volunteered to contribute $550 per lot toward the future upgrading of
Coolidge Road. This amount constitutes an approximate proportional fair share of
twenty (20) percent of the costs of the project.
Mitigation Measure Bl: Street improvements are required for the proposed
development. The developer shall improve each access onto Coolidge Road and
South 80th Avenue with curb, gutter and sidewalk and any stormwater drainage
facilities through the radius of the intersection.
Mitigation Measure B2: The developer will contribute to future upgrading of
Coolidge Road to an Urban Standard with curb, gutter and asphalt surfacing. The
applicant has voluntarily agreed to pay $550.00 per lot toward the improvement of
Coolidge Road due by final plat approval.
Mitigation Measure B3: The developer shall dedicate the appropriate right-of-
way to accommodate curb, gutter, sidewalks, stormwater facilities and streetlights
along the full frontage of the subdivision. Coolidge Road right-of-way dedication
shall be based on County Collector Arterial built to County Urban Roadway
Section No. 2 or the closest equivalent City of Yakima Standard. South 80th
Avenue right-of-way dedication shall be sufficient to meet County Local Access
Cottonwood Partners, LLC
"Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat
Coolidge Rd. & So. 8e Ave.
SUB06-0162; SEP06-062
9
DOC.
INDEX
street requirements, including curb, gutter and sidewalk or the closest City of
Yakima Standard."
6) On June 5, 2007, the City of Yakima appealed the SEPA MDNS to the Hearing
Examiner. The hearing regarding the appeal was held at the same time as the hearing
regarding the preliminary plat.
7) The City claimed in its appeal and testimony that changing the MDNS to
accept the applicant's offer relative to frontage improvements is contrary to the rough
proportionality requirement although the City was not prepared to say what percentage
short of a requirement for full frontage improvements would satisfy the rough
proportionality test. The City emphasized the need for developers to pay their fair share
of needed street improvements. The City indicated that this is a subdivision which will
directly impact two substandard rural streets with increased vehicle and pedestrian traffic,
particularly students walking to and from school, in a rapidly growing portion of the City.
The City asserts that the mitigation measures required by the County in the preliminary
MDNS are appropriate and mandated to preserve the public safety and welfare for
developments within the City that are subject to the rapid urbanization currently
occurring in the Crown Pointe area. The Examiner was unable to confirm by site visits
that the proposed subdivision is less than one mile from the West Valley Middle School
by way of existing roads or where school busses pick up school children in the vicinity of
the proposed preliminary plat.
8) The applicant's attorney agreed with the obligation of developers to pay their
fair share or rough proportionality of needed street improvements, but claimed that the
applicant has offered more than its fair share in the form of right-of-way dedication
allegedly having a value of $126,650.00 and $550.00 per lot ($33,550.00). He reached
this conclusion by reliance upon the City of Yakima transportation capacity standard for
Cottonwood Partners, LLC
"Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat
Coolidge Rd. & So. 80th Ave.
SUB06-0162; SEP06-062
10
DOC.
INDEX
#"
urban roads of 800 vehicle trips per peak hour per lane in Subsection 12.08.020(G) of the
Yakima Municipal Code. He argued that since this subdivision will only generate a
maximum peak hour traffic addition of 62 trips, the applicant should only be required to
contribute 62/800 of the estimated street frontage improvement costs ($211.03 per lot
rather than the $550.00 per lot offered or the $2,723.00 per lot total cost). That figure
does not include right-of-way acquisition which Mr. Carmody valued at $8.50 per square
foot for a total of $126,650.00 based on the estimated value of a building site rather than
raw land.
9) County Transportation Engineering Manager for Yakima County Public
Services, Kent McHenry, testified that he has not addressed the proportionality issue
relative to this subdivision. He indicated that the $550.00 per lot amount that
Cottonwood Partners were required to pay on two other subdivisions to upgrade the
gravel segment of Coolidge Road to the west of this subdivision was not based on a
proportionality analysis, but was rather based on the number of lots that would ultimately
share in the expense for that upgrading that was not covered by the contribution required
of the Apple Tree development, a totally different situation than this subdivision. He did
not have information regarding current traffic counts on Coolidge Road or South 80th
Avenue, but indicated that they currently operate at level of service (LOS) A or B and
would not operate below the acceptable LOS C as a result of this subdivision.
10) The County's SEPA Responsible Official testified that he determined that the
applicant's $550.00 per lot payment would be about 20% of the total cost. To reach that
conclusion, he subtracted the $24,500.00 sidewalk and streetlight costs for South 80th
Avenue from the total $190,600.00 estimated road frontage improvement costs on both
streets based on his understanding that those improvements would likely be on the other
side of that street. He changed his findings relative to the need for the applicant to
Cottonwood Partners, LLC
"Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat
Coolidge Rd. & So. 80th Ave.
SUB06-0162; 5E1306-062
11
DOC.
INDEX
#
provide full road frontage improvements per the preliminary MDNS based on the legal
advice he received from the County's attorney relative to the points asserted in Mx.
Carmody's letter, but, as previously noted, he recalls no discussion as to proportionality.
11) Without deciding whether Mr. Carmody's method of determining
proportionality is correct or incorrect, the Examiner finds at this point that it is different
from what he has been provided in other SEPA appeals regarding the likely traffic
impacts of proposed subdivisions and the road improvements that should be required as a
result. The Examiner's experience is that most MDNS mitigating measures for road
improvements become final without an appeal before the preliminary plat hearing and
that there are therefore differences in how SEPA is applied under the individualized
approach that is required in such reviews. But when there is a dispute about what road
improvements should be required as a result of a SEPA MDNS appeal, the Examiner has
had the assistance of expert opinions and facts such as current vehicular and pedestrian
traffic counts and characteristics for the impacted streets to compare with the likely
traffic impacts of the proposed subdivision on those streets. A traffic impact analysis
(TIA) has been prepared either by a transportation engineer or traffic consultant that has
expertise in determining the extent of likely direct traffic impacts and the fair and
proportional amount that should be paid or the land that should be dedicated as a result.
This is not necessarily an exact science and only rough proportionality is required. But
here it appears that the applicant's offer has been accepted without that type of traffic
impact analysis. Where, as here, there is a dispute as to whether the offer is more than
required or less than required to be fair and proportional, a TIA from the City, the
applicant and/or the County as directed by the SEPA Responsible Official to help him
address proportionality with appropriate facts, figures and opinions would help both the
applicant and the public be assured that a fair and proportional road frontage
Cottonwood Partners, LLC
"Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat
Coolidge Rd. & So. 80th Ave.
SUB06-0162; SEP06-062
12
DOC.
INDEX
improvement obligation is imposed for the direct impacts of the subdivision. Requesting
additional information for that purpose is authorized by Section 16.04.090 of the YCC
which adopts by reference the following mandatory language in WAC 197-11-335:
"The lead agency shall make its threshold determination based upon information
reasonably sufficient to evaluate the environmental impact of a proposal."
Revising an MDNS to request additional information is also within the authorized
functions of the Hearing Examiner which are detailed in Subsection 16B.06.070(E)(5) of
the YCC:
"The Hearing Examiner may affirm, modify or reverse the determination of the
responsible official and may issue a revised DS, DNS or MDNS. The Hearing
Examiner may also request additional information pursuant to WAC 197-11-335."
12) It is important to the Examiner that a determination of the applicant's fair and
proportional share of road frontage improvements not delay the processing of this
preliminary plat. Therefore, the MDNS is merely revised to request the additional
information that may lead to a possible future adjustment of the required amount of
property dedication and/or per lot payment by either an agreed dismissal of this appeal or
by a final decision in this appeal without affecting any aspect of the MDNS other than the
applicant's future dedication and/or monetary contribution obligations. The additional
mitigation measure will therefore read as follows:
"Mitigation Measure B4: The above -referenced MDNS amount of the
applicant's share of road frontage dedications and/or improvements may be
reduced or increased to reflect the fair and proportional share thereof as
determined by the SEPA Responsible Official or Hearing Examiner in the pending
Cottonwood Partners, LLC
"Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat
Coolidge Rd. & So. Sot Ave.
SUB06-0162; SEP06-062
13
DOC.
INDEX
SEPA MDNS appeal process after consideration of a traffic impact analysis
prepared by a transportation engineer or traffic consultant to be provided by the
City, the applicant and/or the County as may be directed by the SEPA Responsible
Official. The dedication and payment obligations set forth herein or as adjusted
shall be made or provided for to the satisfaction of the County prior to final plat
approval."
13) The Hearing Examiner will retain jurisdiction over this SEPA MDNS appeal
for the limited purpose of performing such hearing functions as may be requested and
scheduled by the SEPA Responsible Official with notice to the parties to this appeal.
Jurisdiction will be retained until such time as this appeal is either dismissed by
agreement of the parties or the issues as to dedication of property and payment of funds
for road frontage improvements are finally determined.
IX. Appropriate Subdivision Provisions for Public Health, Safety and General
Welfare Through Zoning and Land Use Requirements for the Site and
Adjacent Properties. The proposed preliminary plat makes appropriate provisions for
the public health, safety and general welfare insofar as it satisfies the intent and minimum
lot size requirements of the Single -Family Residential (R-1) zoning district and is
compatible with adjacent land uses. The surrounding uses are residences on lots ranging
from 0.25 acres to 2.6 acres immediately to the north and south. The lots immediately to
the south are in a conventional subdivision with urban -level services. Property to the east
is orchard and a single family residence on a large lot. To the west is orchard. The
property is within the City of Yakima as a result of recent annexation, but this proposed
subdivision will continue to be processed subject to the provisions of the Yakima Urban
Area Comprehensive Plan and the Yakima Urban Area Zoning Ordinance (Title 15A of
the Yakima County Code) because an applicant may elect under the interlocal agreement
Cottonwood Partners, LLC
"Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat
Coolidge Rd. & So. 80th Ave.
SUB06-0162; SEM -062
14
DOC.
INDEX
to continue the subdivision to completion under the County's direction and subject to
existing County development codes when a completed subdivision application is
submitted to the County prior to annexation. The property and surrounding area is
designated as Low Density Residential under the Comprehensive Plan. Low Density
Residential is primarily planned for single-family, detached residences. Net residential
density before considering roads and rights-of-way is less than 7 dwelling units per acre,
which is considered the lowest residential density to efficiently support public services.
The Low Density Residential comprehensive plan designation is implemented by the
UAZO which designates the subject area as a Single -Family Residential (R-1) zoning
district. The intent of the R-1 zone is to provide a variety of residential lifestyles with
densities generally ranging from 2 units per net residential acre to 7 units per net
residential acre. The higher densities are permitted when public water and public sewer
systems are used.
X. Appropriate Subdivision Provisions for Public Health, Safety and General
Welfare Through Development Standards and Requirements. The lot
configuration of the proposed preliminary plat allows for development consistent with the
following development standards and requirements that have been established to promote
the public health, safety and general welfare:
1) DensitvlLot Size: The proposed lots are larger than the minimum size required
in the R-1 zoning district where public water and sewer services are utilized as proposed
here. Subsection 15A.05.030(b) of the UAZO provides that the "Maximum Number of
Dwelling Units Permitted per Net Residential Acre" within a single subdivision and other
types of residential developments allow no more than 7.0 units per net residential acre.
The specific minimum residential lot sizes are dependant on the applicable zoning
Cottonwood Partners, LLC
"Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat
Coolidge Rd. & So. 80th Ave.
SUB06-0162; SEP06-062
15
designation and various situations. Within the R-1 zone, the minimum lot size for a
situation where a public or community water system and the regional or an approved
community sewer system is available is specifically set at a minimum 7,000 square feet
per lot under Table 5-2 of the UAZO. The smallest proposed minimum lot size is 8,001
square feet which complies with the 7,000 square foot minimum requirement for
individual lots. Calculations based on parcel information and dimensions shown on the
preliminary plat indicate an overall density of 3.51 units per acre which is about half of
the maximum density of 7 waits per acre.
2) Setbacks: In accordance with Table 5-1 in Chapter 15A.05 of the UAZO, the
required front yard structural setback from Coolidge Road is 65 feet from the right-of-
way centerline. For lots abutting South 80th Avenue, the setback will be 65 feet from
centerline. For lots that abut interior streets, the setback will be 50 feet from centerline.
The minimum structural setback requirement for side yards not bordering a street is 5
feet. A setback of 10 feet from the property line is required for side yards that border a
right-of-way. A setback of 20 feet from the property line is required for rear yards not
bordering a street. Any rear yards bordering a street will have the same setback
requirement as the front yard. The proposed preliminary plat will have large enough lots
to accommodate all front, rear and side structural setbacks with normally -sized residential
dwellings. Even though adjustments to standards are sometimes granted and the
standards themselves could always change, these standards may be required to be shown
on the final plat.
3) Lot Coverage: The lots are of such a size that normally -sized residential
structures with accessory buildings can be constructed on the lots without exceeding the
45% maximum lot coverage in the R-1 zoning district. The estimated maximum lot
coverage proposed as a part of SEPA environmental review for this proposal is 35%.
Cottonwood Partners, LLC
"Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat
Coolidge Rd. & So. 80th Ave.
SUB06-0162; SEP06-062
16
4) Lot Dimensions: In addition to the required minimum lot area as described
above, minimum lot width within the R-1 zone is 50 feet provided the lots are served by a
public or community water system and the regional sewer system. The preliminary plat
indicates all proposed lots exceed 50 feet of width. All of the proposed lots will have
frontage and access by way of the interior roads. The easements are being proposed to
provide for both access and utilities. The proposed dimensions of the lots comply with
Chapter 15A.05 of the UAZO required m the R-1 zoning district.
5) Site Screening: Site screening is not proposed or required for the proposed
plat. Table 7-1 in Chapter 15A.07 of the UAZO generally does not require sitescreening
for this type of proposal.
XI. Appropriate Subdivision Provisions for Open Spaces. Provisions for
common open space, as may be required by Section 15A.09.030 of the UAZO, are not
deemed necessary for this proposed preliminary plat. The evidence submitted at the
hearing indicates that the proposed preliminary plat contains sufficient lot sizes and is in
an area that has sufficient open spaces without dedication of land for open space, public
park or recreational purposes. The requirement in Section 14.28.070 of the YCC to
dedicate up to five percent of a proposed subdivision area for either private or public
parks or recreational areas or to contribute funds for park purposes is not typically
invoked by the County unless there is a significant lack of open space within a
development or to replace a park or recreational area that will be lost due to development.
As proposed, the project density of the subject development is 3.51 lots per acre which is
much lower than the 7 lots per acre allowed m the R-1 zone. The proposed subdivision
will have a maximum lot coverage of 45% and will not displace any known recreational
Cottonwood Partners, LLC
"Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat
Coolidge Rd. & So. 80`'` Ave.
SUB06-0162; SEP06-062
17
use. Therefore, additional land for open space or for replacing parks and recreational
areas will not be necessary.
XII. Appropriate Subdivision Provisions for Drainage Ways. All stormwater
runoff will have to be retained on site. Section 14.48.100 of the YCC requires an
acceptable drainage plan. The County has determined that potentially significant adverse
impacts could be caused by the development unless storm and ground water is properly
managed. Mitigation measures A 1 and A2 of the MDNS have been required in order to
ensure the proposed plat adequately provides for suitable drainage without causing undue
adverse impacts. Erosion control measures, an NPDES stormwater construction permit
and a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan are Department of Ecology requirements that
may take 45 to 60 days to process.
XIII. Appropriate Subdivision Provisions for Potable Water Supplies. Section
14.52.130 of the YCC requires a plat to be connected to an existing municipal public
water system or a large Group A water purveyor when available. The proposal is to
utilize water provided by the Nob Hill Water Association. The proposed water system
will comply with public water system requirements although there is no verification that
the Nob Hill Water Association is able to serve this subdivision. The Department of
Ecology commented that the purveyor of water is responsible for ensuring that the uses
are within the limitations of its water rights.
XIV. Appropriate Subdivision Provisions for Sanitary Wastes. Section
14.52.130 of the YCC requires on-site sewage disposal systems for all new lots unless
municipal or public sewer service is available. Section 15.20.032 of the YCC requires
Cottonwood Partners, LLC
"Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat
Coolidge Rd. & So. 80th Ave.
SUB06-0162; SEP06-062
18
that development connect to public sewer service where available. The proposed source
of sewage disposal is through the Yakima Regional Wastewater Facility (YRWWF) in
accordance with City of Yakima standards. As proposed, connection to the YRWWF
will comply with sewage disposal requirements of the YCC and the Yakima urban area
development standards, but verification of service availability to this subdivision has not
been confirmed.
XV. Appropriate Subdivision Provisions for Public Ways, Sidewalks and
other Planning Features for Children who Walk to and from School. Title 10
and Title 14 of the YCC provide minimum street standards and requirements for
subdivision development including those for project site and fire access, interior and
frontage improvements, right-of-way standards and other necessary transportation
elements. The 61 new lots of Crown Pointe are proposed to access Coolidge Road and
South 80th Avenue through two individual driveways. Transportation impacts identified
for Crown Pointe are also applicable to environmental impacts attributable to the
subdivision and are substantively incorporated as Mitigation Measures 131, B2 and B3
plus the revision to add 134as a result of this SEPA appeal decision. Compliance with the
conditions of approval and the mitigation measures described within the final revised
MDNS will satisfy required criteria for transportation and public safety standards
applicable to this project.
XVI. Appropriate Subdivision Provisions for Transit Stops, Playgrounds,
Schools and Schoolgrounds. Under the evidence presented at the hearing, the size,
location and nature of the proposed preliminary plat do not require special provisions for
Cottonwood Partners, LLC
"Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat
Coolidge Rd. & So. 80th Ave.
SUB06-0162; SEP06-062
19
these other features required by RCW 58.17.110(2) to be considered such as transit stops,
playgrounds, schools or schoolgrounds.
XVII. Appropriate Subdivision Provisions for Other Features of the Proposal.
Other features of the proposed preliminary plat that are provided in the interest of public
health, safety and general welfare include the following:
(a) FIRE PROTECTION: Section 13.09.070 of the YCC and the International Fire
Code specify fire flow and hydrant requirements which are required for new
development. It is standard practice for the Nob Hill Water Association to coordinate fire
hydrant locations with the Yakima County Fire Marshall.
(b) IRRIGATION: Section 14.48.045 of the YCC requires that provisions be made
for irrigation water. The subject property is within the Yakima-Tieton Irrigation District
and the applicant proposes to provide irrigation water from that District to all 61 lots.
(c) DUST CONTROL: The Yakima Regional Clean Air Authority has submitted
comments indicating that the developer must file and gain approval for a dust control
plan prior to commencing any construction or grading activities.
(d) TOXIC SUBSTANCES: The Department of Ecology has submitted comments
recommending that soils be analyzed for lead, arsenic and organochlorine pesticides and
that potential buyers be notified if they are found in concentrations exceeding MTCA
clean up levels.
(e) ELECTRICAL, TELEPHONE AND GARBAGE SERVICE: Electrical service,
telephone service and garbage service are available in the area. Installation of the power
and telephone facilities must be completed, or contracted with the provider to be
completed, prior to fmal plat approval.
Cottonwood P ers, LLC
"Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat
Coolidge Rd. & So. 80th Ave.
SUB06-0162; SEP06-062
20
DOC.
INDEX
XVIII. Consistency Analysis under Section 16B.06.020 of the Yakima County
Code. The following analysis involves the application's consistency with applicable
development regulations, or m the absence of applicable regulations, the adopted
Comprehensive Plan as mandated by the State Growth Management Act and the Yakima
County Code. During project review, neither Yakima County nor any subsequent
reviewing body may re-examine alternatives to, or hear appeals on, the items identified in
these conclusions except for issues of code interpretation.
a) THE TYPE OF LAND USE CONTEMPLATED BY THE PROPOSAL (a residential
development) is permitted on this site so long as it complies with the zoning ordinance,
subdivision ordinance, building codes and other applicable regulations.
b) THE LEVEL OF DEVELOPMENT (lot size, contemplated density, population,
transportation, etc.) will not exceed the allowable limit in the R-1 zoning district.
c) THE AVAILABILITY AND ADEQUACY OF INFRASTRUCTURE AND PUBLIC
FACILITIES allow the proposed preliminary plat to be approved. Adequate infrastructure
and public facilities such as water, sewer, garbage, telephone and electricity are available,
or will be available at the time of development.
d) THE CHARACTER OF THE PROPOSAL, as conditioned, will be consistent with
the development standards for residential subdivisions.
CONCLUSIONS
1. The Hearing Examiner has jurisdiction to decide SEPA MDNS appeal issues
and make recommendations regarding applications for preliminary plat approval.
Cottonwood Partners, LLC
"Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat
Coolidge Rd. & So. 80`h Ave.
SUB06-0162; SEP06-062
21
2. The SEPA MDNS for this proposal should be revised without delaying the
processing of this preliminary plat to add a Mitigation Measure B4 which provides that
the specified MDNS amount of the applicant's share of road frontage dedications and/or
improvements may be reduced or increased to reflect the fair and proportional share
thereof as determined by the SEPA Responsible Official or Hearing Examiner in the
pending SEPA MDNS appeal process after consideration of a traffic impact analysis
prepared by a transportation engineer or traffic consultant to be provided by the City, the
applicant and/or the County as may be directed by the SEPA Responsible Official.
Mitigation Measure 4 should further provide that the MDNS dedication and payment
obligations set forth in the MDNS or adjusted through the pending appeal process shall
be made or provided for to the satisfaction of the County prior to final plat approval.
3. After inquiring into the public use and interest proposed to be served by the
establishment of the subdivision and dedication, the Hearing Examiner recommends that
the Board of Yakima County Commissioners approve the preliminary plat of "Crown
Pointe" with the conditions detailed in this recommendation which make appropriate
provisions for the public health, safety and general welfare and for open spaces, drainage
ways, streets or roads, alleys, public ways, potable water supplies, sanitary wastes,
sidewalks and, to the extent necessary, other requisite statutory considerations such as
transit stops, parks and recreation, playgrounds, schools and schoolgrounds and other
planning features that assure safe walking conditions for students who only walk to and
from school, and which conditions also ensure that the public interest will be served.
4. The preliminary plat of "Crown Pointe" can be adequately conditioned by the
SEPA MDNS requirements as revised by this decision and the plat conditions set forth in
this recommendation so as to ensure compatibility, compliance and consistency with the
provisions of the zoning district and with the goals, objectives and policies of the
Cottonwood Partners, LLC
"Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat
Coolidge Rd. & So. 80th Ave.
SUB06-0162; SEP06-062
22
comprehensive plan and so as to satisfy all the applicable County and State plat law
requirements.
5. The SEPA MDNS decision herein may be appealed to the Yakima County
Board of County Commissioners within the timeframe and in the manner required by
applicable County ordinance provisions.
DECISION & RECOMMENDATION
The Hearing Examiner affirms the SEPA Mitigated Determination of
Nonsignificance as revised by this decision and recommends to the Board of Yakima
County Commissioners that the preliminary plat of "Crown Pointe" described in the
application and in the related documents which are assigned file numbers PR12006-1817,
SUB06-162 and SEP06-062 be APPROVED, subject to compliance with the following
conditions:
General
1. Compliance with the SEPA Final Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance dated
May 22, 2007 as revised by this decision shall be required. The Determination and
the Mitigation measures thereof are hereby adopted and incorporated herein by this
reference.
2. All proposed lots must be provided with adequate fire flow in accordance with the
adopted fire code prior to final plat approval.
3. Unless construction is concurrent or incorporated into other approvals and dust
control requirements of Crown Pointe, a method of dust control for the construction
phase of phase 1 and phase 2 shall be submitted to and approved by the Yakima
Cottonwood Partners, LLC
"Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat
Coolidge Rd. & So. 80th Ave.
SUB06-0162; SEP06-062
23
DOC.
INDEX
Regional Clean Air Authority. A copy of the approval must be submitted to the
Public Services Department Planning Division prior to any construction activities.
4. Monuments must be placed at street intersections and curvature points as specified in
Section 14.32.020 of the Yakima County Code. The monuments must be protected by
cases and covers as approved by the County Engineer.
Streets
5. Interior and dead-end streets may be constructed with rolled mountable curbs. The
curb radii at all intersections and interior corners shall be constructed with barrier
curbs from the property lines of the corner lots. (YCC 14.52.100 C).
6. The plans for all public road improvements must be designed to Yakima County
standards, including applicable standards and mitigation measures of the revised
MDNS herein, prepared by a licensed professional engineer and approved by the
County Engineer prior to construction.
7. Dedicated 30 -foot by 30 -foot clear sight triangles must be provided at all intersection
corners within the plat. Equivalent alternative plans supporting a reduction in
distance may be submitted to the County Engineer for approval.
8. Street names shall be reviewed and approved by the Public Services Department prior
to final plat approval. Street signs are required for this development. The signs will
be installed by Public Services prior to acceptance of roads and all costs associated
with supplying and installing the signs must be reimbursed to Yakima County by the
developer.
Utilities
9. All public and private utilities located within interior easements or rights-of-way must
be constructed prior to fmal plat approval.
10. Installation of power and telephone facilities must be completed, or arranged with the
provider to be completed, prior to final plat approval.
11. All public and private utilities must be located underground with the exception of the
standard telephone box, transmission box and similar structures.
Cottonwood Partners, LLC
"Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat
Coolidge Rd. & So. 80th Ave.
SUB06-0162; SEP06-062
24
m��
EX
12. Public utility easements must be provided for the two proposed shared interior access
easements. If the easement is 50 feet or less, the utility easements shall be 10 feet in
width or as specified by the utility providers. Minimum width for utility easements
that are also utilized for irrigation is generally 15 feet.
13. All lots must be served with public water from the Nob Hill Water Association
system. No new individual domestic or irrigation wells shall be permitted for any of
the lots. Prior to final plat approval, written verification must be provided to the
Public Services Department Planning Division demonstrating the ability to provide
domestic water, demonstrating that any necessary easements are provided for and
demonstrating that all associated fees have been paid.
14. All lots shall be provided with public sewer service from the Yakima Regional
Wastewater system. Prior to final plat approval, written verification from the City of
Yakima must be submitted to the Public Services Department Planning Division
demonstrating that the system will serve all lots within the subdivision, that any
necessary easements have been established, and that any required fees have been paid.
Plat Notes
15. Yakima County has in place an urban and rural addressing system. Street names and
numbers for lots within this plat are issued by the Yakima County Public Services
Department upon issuance of an approved Building Permit.
16. The owners shown hereon, their grantees and assignees in interest hereby covenant
and agree to retain all surface water generated within the plat on-site.
17. All lots of this subdivision have been provided with public sewer. All lots have been
provided with public water connections.
Timing
18. All property taxes and special assessments for the entire tax year must be paid,
together with any required pre -payment amount prior to final plat approval.
19. Prior to recording the final plat or issuance of building permits, either:
Cottonwood Partners, LLC
"Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat
Coolidge Rd. & So. 80th Ave.
SUB06-0162; SEP06-062
25
DOC.
INDEX
(a) All required plat improvements, i.e. streets, sidewalks, utilities and drainage
facilities, must be in place; or,
(b) An escrow account must be established or a bond provided in an amount and with
conditions acceptable to the Yakima County Engineer to assure installation of all
remaining required improvements.
if the developer elects to escrow or bond for the required roadway improvements, and
fails to complete these improvements in the time specified in the escrow or bond
agreement, the County Engineer shall have the authority to suspend issuance of
building or occupancy permits until the required road and drainage improvements are
accepted as satisfactorily completed. The County Engineer may issue building
permits on a lot -by -lot basis when it is determined that building construction will not
interfere with utility and roadway construction.
20. The total project must be completed and the final plat submitted within the maximum
five-year time period prescribed by Section 58.17.140 of the Revised Code of
Washington. Any extension beyond the five-year time period is subject to the
provisions of Chapter 14.24 of the Yakima County Code.
DATED this 19th day of July, 2007.
Cottonwood Partners, LLC
"Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat
Coolidge Rd. & So. 80th Ave.
SUB06-0162; SEP06-062
26
Gary M. Cuillier, Hearing Examiner
tilimilimimimimig1111111111111111111111111111111111.1
COTTONWOOD PARTNERS LLC
"Final Plat of Crown Pointe — Phase 1"
FLP#001.-14
D-1
EXHIBIT LIST
CHAPTER D
Vicinity Map
,„ %/////ii%/ii///ii,,,,�//
✓, � iii/,.
Vicinity
07/25/2014
Project Vicinity Map
FLP#001 -14
Related Projects:
Applicant: COTTONWOOD PARTNERS LLC
Location: 7602 COOLIDGE RD
Friday - 07/25/2014 - 04:30:35
Contact City of Yakima Planning Division at 509-575-6183
City of Yakima - Geographic Information Sevices
Pa
0
\\:::10,000
' tiN
mai R7
+.uw• Cal W.
f.
IJe•ta, t
h'1.1.d+rra..4
A M T A N U N
Sources: Esri, DeLorme, NAVTEQ, TomTom, Intermap, increment P Corp.,
GEBCO, USGS, FAO, NPS, NRCAN, GeoBase, IGN, Kadaster NL,
Ordnance Survey, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), swisstopo,
and the GIS User Community
Proposal: Final plat approval for Crown Pointe, consisting of subdividing approximately 17 acres into 61 single-family residential lots
in the R-1 zoning district.
DOC.
IND
.��tt �)
Map Disclaimer: Information shown on this map is for planning and illustration purposes only, The City of Yakima assume�iio inha=r� P-t'emerB
omissions. or inaccuracies in the information provided or for any action taken, or action not taken by the user in reliance upon any maps or
information provided herein.
COTTONWOOD PARTNERS LLC
"Final Plat of Crown Pointe — Phase 1"
FLP#001-14
EXHIBIT LIST
CHAPTER E
Final Plat "Crown Pointe — Phase 1"
E-1
0011
Plat — Cr
,
08/05/2014
1 1— ---- ----
LP) IM 1-tF'
Located In The S.W. 1/4., Sec. 32, T. 13 N., R 18 E. W.M.
- - ----- - --- ---
_
COOLIDGEAVENUE—
\
10
20
le
IT
I
I 1 if
0
Scale 1" = 60'
10 30 0 60 130 110
ACCEPTED
437 WYMAN
15.0.1330.30,133034
e opAruez
VICINITY MAP
City of Yakima
oya
Sheet Index
1. Cover Shoot
2. Grading Shml
3. Street & Storm Orsinege Plan
4. Water Sewer Pion
a. CrestlIold Sleet & 8.70th Avenue a
3. 76111 Avon= Profile
1. Wags Wells Street & S. TOM Avenue &
S. Tith Avenue Profile
T. Irrigation Plan
& WrIgaton Wane
2, Illumination Plan
<Dv/nor/Develop.
Cetronwood Partners LSO
PO P0110351
Yeddma, WA MPS
GEXERAL NOYES
A minimum et two Waimea day. Oat Iv
Deghtrft constnictlort theC�SeCx101al�O
Bit (May 01010) 20010103011 locaton Emit cd eedatitv
Storm sower. krtgatbo system °ensembles,
me..., and workmanshlp shall confect" to 0,0
simulants end pmelices of the Yakima County, Ma
2696 Standard Specfications for Road, Bridge
010 000.64,5 Consinstke. and the details ord
wt. Mown In thts pian tdt.
Sanitary 000201 011001, 51103016.1, and
watkrnanxhip ettel conform la &a standards and
practices of the Qty of Yakima, Ite .2C038
Standard SpecificatIons tot Road, Bridge end
Municipal Construction', and Na dates at natas
.2.0200 11 this plan sal.
Tha ettnbsator Waal Ite responsible for doveMeins
and maketattIng a dust control plan. Osecos5s1
004 be in notantancawit all local manatee..
P31110801 21140 provde cu.( pkin(s)
smolder:at Met the Mama! 00U,2.,0txTtaffs
Control Otrefeets (235000)20 1351413 by Yakima
Pdar to anasteadian the conknattat ralst ached*,
kpreaottabuttlat meeting nelh Yakima Com*,
DOC.
INDEX
masoMirr.iluM oenC•
01
0133S0431t
ARP
lIPAY0t
01032033t
.107
WALE
V. At
AVG 1206
IMO
--t-T1
SITE
.
s A
VICINITY MAP
City of Yakima
oya
Sheet Index
1. Cover Shoot
2. Grading Shml
3. Street & Storm Orsinege Plan
4. Water Sewer Pion
a. CrestlIold Sleet & 8.70th Avenue a
3. 76111 Avon= Profile
1. Wags Wells Street & S. TOM Avenue &
S. Tith Avenue Profile
T. Irrigation Plan
& WrIgaton Wane
2, Illumination Plan
<Dv/nor/Develop.
Cetronwood Partners LSO
PO P0110351
Yeddma, WA MPS
GEXERAL NOYES
A minimum et two Waimea day. Oat Iv
Deghtrft constnictlort theC�SeCx101al�O
Bit (May 01010) 20010103011 locaton Emit cd eedatitv
Storm sower. krtgatbo system °ensembles,
me..., and workmanshlp shall confect" to 0,0
simulants end pmelices of the Yakima County, Ma
2696 Standard Specfications for Road, Bridge
010 000.64,5 Consinstke. and the details ord
wt. Mown In thts pian tdt.
Sanitary 000201 011001, 51103016.1, and
watkrnanxhip ettel conform la &a standards and
practices of the Qty of Yakima, Ite .2C038
Standard SpecificatIons tot Road, Bridge end
Municipal Construction', and Na dates at natas
.2.0200 11 this plan sal.
Tha ettnbsator Waal Ite responsible for doveMeins
and maketattIng a dust control plan. Osecos5s1
004 be in notantancawit all local manatee..
P31110801 21140 provde cu.( pkin(s)
smolder:at Met the Mama! 00U,2.,0txTtaffs
Control Otrefeets (235000)20 1351413 by Yakima
Pdar to anasteadian the conknattat ralst ached*,
kpreaottabuttlat meeting nelh Yakima Com*,
DOC.
INDEX
masoMirr.iluM oenC•
01
0133S0431t
ARP
lIPAY0t
01032033t
.107
WALE
V. At
AVG 1206
IMO