Document Kennewick_doc_4bb2f3f69d

Findings, Conclusions, and Decision Kennewick Hearing Examiner Fountain Hills III PP 11-04 page 1 of 16 BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR THE CITY OF KENNEWICK In the Matter of the Application of ) PP 11-04 ) ) Gregory Markel ) Fountain Hills Phase III Fountain Hills Northwest, LLC ) ) FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, For a Preliminary Plat ) AND DECISION ) SUMMARY OF DECISION The request for preliminary plat approval to subdivide 27.5 acres located between Grandridge Boulevard and N. Pittsburg Street, north of W. Klamath Avenue in Kennewick, Washington, in order to create 110 single-family residential lots is APPROVED subject to conditions. SUMMARY OF RECORD Gregory Markel (Applicant) requested preliminary plat approval to subdivide 27.5 acres located between Grandridge Boulevard and N. Pittsburg Street, north of W. Klamath Avenue in Kennewick, Washington, in order to create 110 single-family residential lots. Request On September 12, 2011, the City of Kennewick Hearing Examiner conducted an open record public hearing on the request. During the course of testimony, the record was held open for submission of specific additional evidence in accordance with a schedule memorialized in a post- hearing order issued September 13, 2011. The identified evidence was timely submitted on September 22, 2011 and the record closed on that date. A second post-hearing order, issued October 3, 2011, added previous City of Kennewick approvals related to the Fountain Hills project to the instant record and extended the decision date to allow for their consideration. Hearing Date At the open record hearing, the following individuals presented testimony under oath: Testimony Wes Romine, Kennewick Development Services Manager John Deskins, Kennewick Traffic Engineer Keith Goldsmith, Goldsmith and Associates, Applicant Representative Brian Fields, Goldsmith and Associates, Applicant Representative Lisa McKinney Kevin Husted Mark Hevland Peter Cartmel Jeff Short ---PAGE BREAK--- Findings, Conclusions, and Decision Kennewick Hearing Examiner Fountain Hills III PP 11-04 page 2 of 16 Tom Patterson Jim Tatum Peggy Hevland Richard Pierson Roger Markell Brad Friehauf Carol Short The following exhibits were offered and admitted in evidence: Exhibits 1. Kennewick Community Planning Department Staff Report to the Hearing Examiner, dated September 5, 2011 2. Application, received/paid July 27, 2011 3. Affidavit of Mailing for Notice of Application, dated August 24, 2011; Notice of Application Mailing List; and Notice of Application 4. Vicinity Map 5. Preliminary Plat Map, dated August 25, 2011, with attached (reverse) conceptual Grading Plan 6. SEPA Mitigated Determination of Non-Significance, issued August 15, 2011, with Environmental Checklist and notice of MDNS 7. City Department and Outside Agency Comments, as follows: a. Kennewick Public Works consolidated comments, dated August 15, 2011 (2 pages) b. Kennewick Traffic Engineer's comments, August 12, 2011 (2 pages) c. Benton PUD comments, dated August 3, 2011 (1 page) d. Kennewick Irrigation District comments dated August 22, 2011 (1 page) e. Washington State Department of Ecology comments, dated August 25, 20111 f. Kennewick School District comments, dated August 11, 2011 8. Public comment letters, as follows: a. Email from Mark Hevland, dated August 30, 2011, with attached email from Mark Hevland dated August 29, 2011 b. Email exchange between "Kris" (no last name, 1402 N Nevada Ct.) and Wes Romine, date range August 26 through August 30, 2011 c. Email from Stan and Nancy Schweissing, dated August 28, 2011 1 Only the first page of this document was offered and admitted, although in review the Examiner notes there is no signature line and it is likely a multiple page document. ---PAGE BREAK--- Findings, Conclusions, and Decision Kennewick Hearing Examiner Fountain Hills III PP 11-04 page 3 of 16 9. Preliminary Restrictive Covenants, dated March 23, 2004 10. Staff's PowerPoint presentation (17 full page color slides) 11. Comment letter from Bob and Carol Hutchinson, undated 12. Comment letter from Mark and Mitzi Hadley, dated September 12, 2011 13. Comment from Diana Minard, dated September 12, 2011 14. Comment from John Hoffhines, dated September 12, 2011 15. Comment from Jeff and Carol Short, dated September 11, 2011 16. "Current Residents of Fountain Hills Petition of Concerns", dated September 12, 201, consisting of the following parts (14 pages total): a. Two page letter b. Ten pages with signatures c. Letter from Jason Celski, Celski Law Firm, to Greg Markel, dated May 24, 2011 (1 page) d. An 11x17 copy of the plat map with portions highlighted in yellow to show green spaces required under the 1997 plat approval that are removed from the current proposal, according to Richard Pearson (1 page) 17. Memorandum from John Deskins containing a detailed a written description of the traffic analysis conducted by the City, dated September 15, 2011 18. Applicant's Response to Exhibit 17, dated September 22, 2011 19. Comments from the Kennewick School District, dated September 21, 2011 20. City of Kennewick Resolution 98-02 (4 pages), approving Fountain Hill Preliminary Plat (PP97-01) with attachments:2 a. Public Works comments, dated November 17, 1997 ("Exhibit C" to RES-98- 02, 5 pages) b. Plat Map (1 page) c. Phasing Plan (1 page, "Exhibit E" to RES-98-02) d. Traffic Fee calculations, dated November 17, 1997 (1 page, "Exhibit F" to RES-98-02) 2 Exhibits 20 and 21 were submitted by Planning Staff in response to the October, 3, 2011 Second Post-Hearing Order, in which the Examiner exercised the authority in Hearing Examiner Rule 9.8.g(1) to reopen the record during deliberations for information necessary to a complete review of the pending matter. Staff submitted the information at Exhibits 20 and 21 timely on October, 5, 2011 and it is admitted. No party was offered an opportunity to comment on these items, which are previous City approvals related to Fountain Hills developments. ---PAGE BREAK--- Findings, Conclusions, and Decision Kennewick Hearing Examiner Fountain Hills III PP 11-04 page 4 of 16 21. City of Kennewick Resolution 00-21 (4 pages), approving Fountain Hills II Preliminary Plat (PP-00-03) with attachments: a. Memo from Rick White to City Council, dated July 5, 2000 (3 pages) b. Supplemental Site Information (1 page, undated, Exhibit A-1 to 7/5/00 memo) c. Recommended conditions of approval (3 pages, undated, Exhibit A-2 to 7/5/00 memo) d. Approved elevations (six drawings, "Exhibit B" to RES-00-21) e. Plat Map f. Public Works comments, dated May 23, 2000 (2 pages, "Exhibit G" to RES-00-21) g. Fire Department comments, dated May 21, 2000 (1 page, "Exhibit H" to RES-00-21) h. Planned Development Permit 00-02, Fountain Hills II, approved July 18, 2000 (3 pages) i. Letter to Greg Markel from Kennewick Community and Economic Development Department, dated July 14, 2000 (1 page) j. Applicant Acknowledgement of Conditions, POP-00-02, dated July 25, 2000 (1 page) The record also includes the September 13, 2011 Post-Hearing Order and the October 3, 2011 Second Post-Hearing Order. Upon consideration of the testimony and exhibits submitted, the Hearing Examiner enters the following findings and conclusions in support of the decision and recommendation: FINDINGS 1. Gregory Markel of Fountain Hills Northwest, LLC (Applicant) requested preliminary plat approval to subdivide 27.5 acres in Kennewick, Washington, in order to create 110 single-family residential lots.3 Exhibit 1, pages 1, 3; Exhibit 2, Application; Exhibit 5, Site Plan. 2. In June 1970, the subject property was annexed into the City with a Residential (R-1) zoning designation (Ordinance No. 1494). In September 1972, the City adopted a new zoning code, which repealed the R-1 zoning designation and designated the subject property a Residential Low Density (RL) (Ordinance 1594). Exhibit 1, page 4. 3. For nearly twenty years, some configuration of development known as Fountain Hills has been under consideration on-site. In 1992, a preliminary plat and planned development permit (PDP-92-02) for a project entitled "Fountain Hill" were approved by the City Council. The project was awarded a ten percent density bonus, which resulted in the approval of 277 units on 62.5 acres.4 3 The legal description of the subject property is a portion of the west half of Section 31, Township 9 North, Range 29 East, W.M, in Benton County, Washington, also known as Assessor's Parcel #131992000010003. Exhibit 1, page 1; Exhibit 2. The original PDP granted lot size and road design flexibility in consideration of open spaces including fountains provided and design 4 Without the density bonus, only 250 units could have been approved on the 62.5 acres. Exhibit 21.a, page 1. ---PAGE BREAK--- Findings, Conclusions, and Decision Kennewick Hearing Examiner Fountain Hills III PP 11-04 page 5 of 16 guidelines that applied throughout the entire 62.5 acre-project. Approval was conditioned on the developer extending Pittsburg Street to connect with Grandridge Boulevard prior to development of Phase 2. The developer built portions of Fountain Hills Phase 1 and then stopped developing the project. Pittsburg Street was not extended. PDP-92-02 expired. The property was sold to a new owner. Exhibit 20; Exhibit 21.a. 4. In July 1997, the new owner (who is the present Applicant) submitted a new application for a planned development permit to continue developing a portion of the original Fountain Hills project. However, the Planning Commission denied the 1997 PDP, and the Applicant did not appeal the denial to City Council. Subsequently, the Applicant submitted a proposal that complied with the RL zoning standards, and the preliminary plat of Fountain Hills (PP-97-01) was approved without a planned development permit on January 6, 1998, subdividing 28 acres into 101 lots. Exhibit 1, page 4; Exhibit 20. 5. In July 2000, the City Council approved the preliminary plat of Fountain Hills II (PP-00- 03), which created a three-phase project based on planned development permit PDP-00- 02. As approved, Fountain Hills II divided 53 acres into 195 lots containing a mix of detached and attached single-family units and open space tracts. Phases 2 and 4 were at least partially developed. Pittsburg Street was extended to Grandridge Boulevard. Exhibit 21; Exhibit 21.a; Pierson Testimony. 6. All land use approvals that allowed subdivision of the 27.5 acre-property that is subject to the instant application expired without development on-site. The property has remained vacant to the present. Exhibit 1, page 4; Exhibit 20; Romine Testimony; Exhibit 10, Slides 6 and 7. 7. The instant plat application was submitted on July 27, 2011and determined to be complete on the same day. Notice of the application was provided by mail and by posting on July 28, 2011. Exhibit 1, page 3; Exhibit 2; Exhibit 3. 8. Topographically, the site is primarily flat with some rolling hills and slopes of up to approximately nine percent. Geographically the site is located between Grandridge Boulevard and N. Pittsburg Street, north of W. Klamath Avenue and south of W. Quinault Avenue. All adjacent properties share the site's RL zoning designation and are developed with single-family residential development with similar lots sizes and at similar densities to that proposed. South of W. Klamath Avenue is an area zoned Residential Medium Density (RM), which is developed with a multifamily apartment complex. East of W. Grandridge Boulevard, there is property zoned Commercial Office (CO), developed with banks, medical and dental offices, and other commercial uses. Costco is among the commercial establishments in the area, northeast of Grandridge. Exhibit 1, pages 3, 5; Exhibit 4; Exhibit 5; Romine Testimony. 9. The purpose of the RL district is to establish areas for low density, single-family, residential buildings, to stabilize and protect residential districts, and to promote and encourage a suitable environment for family life in an urban setting. Kennewick Municipal Code (KMC) 18.03.040.2. Uses allowed in the zone include single-family ---PAGE BREAK--- Findings, Conclusions, and Decision Kennewick Hearing Examiner Fountain Hills III PP 11-04 page 6 of 16 residential development, typical residential accessory structures, home occupations, and other typically residential uses (including daycare and nursing home facilities subject to certain types of review). KMC 18.12.010.A.1. 10. Per the Kennewick Municipal Code's table of residential development standards (KMC 18.12.010 A.2), the RL district requires a minimum density of three units per acre and allows a maximum density of four units per acre. The RL zoning district requires a minimum lot size of 7,500 square feet and a minimum lot width of 60 feet. Building heights are limited to 30 feet. Minimum setbacks from boundaries are: 15 feet from streets, except for garages or carports which must be setback 25 feet; 15 feet from rear lot lines; and five feet from side lot lines. Exhibit 1, page 3; KMC 18.12.010.A.2. Exhibit 1, pages 3-4; KMC 18.12.010.A.2. 11. Development of Fountain Hills 3 would occur in two segments, identified on the plat map as Division 1 (45 lots) and Division 2 (65 lots) with an overall density of four units per acre. The smallest proposed lot would be 7,571 square feet, and the average lot size would be 8,766 square feet. As proposed, each lot satisfies the minimum 60-foot lot width. Compliance with bulk dimensional standards, including setbacks and building heights, would be reviewed at the time of building permit. All portions of the proposal were designed to comply with the RL zoning standards; no design flexibility was proposed or approved via a planned development permit process. Romine Testimony; Exhibit 1, page 3; Exhibit 5; Romine Testimony. 12. The proposed lots would access the existing public street grid at Metaline Avenue (in the southwest corner), at N. Montana Street (in the northeast corner), and at W. Rio Grande Avenue in the north central portion of the plat. Proposed new internal Roads A, B, C, D, and E would connect to each lot. Exhibit 5. 13. The new road network would include several long tangents (greater than 600 feet) with gentle curves. In order to reduce speeds, several potential measures are proposed. First, a Mini-Roundabout traffic circle would be required at the intersection of Metaline and Road A. Also, speed humps or other speed reducing measures (including but not limited to potential alterations in lot layout) may be required on the long sections of the internal road network for traffic calming purposes. Exhibit 7b; Deskins Testimony; Exhibit 5. 14. After reviewing the preliminary plat design, the City's traffic engineer determined that several project intersections have the potential to have sight distance issues resulting from their locations on curves. The intersection of Road B at Metaline would not have sight distance issues; all other intersections would be reviewed for compliance with KMC Title 13.12 and applicable road standards. Sight distance easement would be required for lots that interfere with vehicle sight distance. Exhibit 7b; Deskins Testimony. 15. If any street segment 150 feet or longer is built that would temporarily result in a dead end , due to phasing, a temporary cul-de-sac would be required to provide emergency vehicle turnaround consistent with City road standards. Exhibit 7.a. ---PAGE BREAK--- Findings, Conclusions, and Decision Kennewick Hearing Examiner Fountain Hills III PP 11-04 page 7 of 16 16. Based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) trip generation manual, the project is anticipated to generate 1,153 new daily vehicle trips, with 114 PM peak hour trips. Forty-five percent of the new traffic is anticipated to access the plat at Road A (which would intersect with Pittsburg Street across from Rio Grande), 25% at Metaline Avenue, and 30% at Montana Street. Using 2008 traffic counts for the roads and intersections in the vicinity and trip distribution estimates based on experience with development in the neighborhood, the City's traffic engineer examined the project's impacts on area intersections. The traffic engineer concluded that the intersection of W. Grandridge Boulevard and N. Pittsburg Street would be the intersection most impacted by the project's new traffic. The City's traffic engineer performed an unsignalized intersection analysis of the Grandridge/Pittsburg intersection, which showed that the project traffic would not cause the intersection's level of service (LOS) to fall below the City's identified mitigation threshold of LOS E. No mitigation was required. Exhibit 7b; Deskins Testimony; Exhibit 17; Exhibit 18. 17. Pursuant to the Kennewick Administrative Code (KAC) 13-08-030(5)(c), the City's traffic engineer reviewed the proposal for impacts to neighborhood livability to see if the project is required to provide traffic calming measures to the existing off-site roadways. Given concerns from neighboring property owners regarding cut-through traffic on both Pittsburg and Klamath Streets, the City traffic engineer reviewed the proposed new traffic volumes and trip distribution. The project would add approximately 20% of existing volumes to the Metaline and the Montana/Quinault access routes. The traffic engineer concluded that the projected volumes of added trips did not trigger off-site traffic calming along those routes because the project would add less than 250 trips. The project is anticipated to result in 635 new trips on Pittsburg Street between Road A and Grandridge Boulevard, which increase could trigger off-site traffic calming requirements. However, the City's Traffic engineer noted that the potentially affected portion of Pittsburg is already designed and constructed as a collector, with a raised median, separate left turn lanes, and no direct residential access. No further traffic calming measures would be required on that segment of Pittsburg pursuant to applicable regulations. Deskins Testimony; Exhibit 17; Exhibit 18. 18. Per City of Kennewick development standards, stormwater runoff from the new impervious surfaces must be controlled. The project would be required to provide stormwater management facilities sufficient to control the 25-year, 24-hour storm. Prior to final plat submittal, the Applicant must submit a stormwater management plan including detailed engineering plans for review, which must meet with City approval. In addition, the project may require a national pollution discharge elimination system (NPDES), administered by the Washington State Department of Ecology (DOE), which would require development and implementation of an erosion and sediment control plan for the construction phases of the project. Exhibit 1, page 4; Romine Testimony; Exhibit 7.e; Exhibit 7.a. 19. Municipal water and sewer service are available to the project. Existing eight-inch water lines from Zones 2 and 3 are available for extension into the site from Metaline, Rio Grande, and Montana. Existing eight-inch sewer lines can be extended into the site, to ---PAGE BREAK--- Findings, Conclusions, and Decision Kennewick Hearing Examiner Fountain Hills III PP 11-04 page 8 of 16 each lot, from the same three locations. Exhibit 1, page 5; Romine Testimony; Exhibit 7.a. 20. The subject property is located within the Kennewick Irrigation District (KID) boundaries. KID notes that the site is classified as non-irrigable land; however, the District has requested that an irrigation easement be provided along the frontage of each lot. Exhibit 7.d. 21. The project is required to mitigate impacts to Park Planning Zone 1W (Sunset) through the payment of park fees. Park fees would be collected as each phase of the project builds out, based on the percentage of units in the phase for which final plat approval is sought. Exhibit 1, page 5; Exhibit 10, Slide 13. 22. Portions of the plat would be landscaped and maintained in common by the owners of the lots. One such area is the short segment of the site that abuts Grandridge Boulevard. Another open space area would be located adjacent to the existing off-site open space area between Payette Court and Nevada Court along the site's northeastern boundary, which would connect by a proposed pedestrian walkway to an existing off-site pedestrian walkway that connects to Montana Street. Planning Staff recommended conditions of approval requiring that both a landscape plan and a maintenance agreement be submitted for review and approval by the City before final plat review. Such a maintenance agreement must be recorded against the property for management of all common areas in perpetuity; it could be part of or in addition to a homeowners association agreement. Exhibit 1, pages 5, 7; Romine Testimony. 23. The Applicant proposed to adopt or to join the existing Fountain Hills Homeowners Association (HOA). As an example, an existing amended declaration of covenants, conditions, and restrictions (CC&Rs) from previous Fountain Hills development was submitted. Exhibit 9; Goldsmith Testimony. 24. Fountain Hills 3 would be served by Sunset View Elementary, Desert Hills Middle School, and Kamiakin High School. The subject property is within the identified walk zone for Sunset View Elementary, while middle and high school students would be bused to their respective schools. Regarding impacts of the proposal on Kennewick School District facilities, the District indicated that it has capacity to add students at all levels and at the three schools that would serve the proposed plat. Exhibits 1, page 4;Exhibit 7.f; Exhibit 19. 25. The Kennewick Fire Department reviewed the proposal and recommended approval subject to conditions that would ensure fire code is satisfied at every stage of phased development. Planning Staff incorporated the Fire Department comments into the recommended conditions of approval. Exhibit 1, page 7; Romine Testimony. 26. Planning Staff identified the following Comprehensive Plan policies as applicable to the proposal: ---PAGE BREAK--- Findings, Conclusions, and Decision Kennewick Hearing Examiner Fountain Hills III PP 11-04 page 9 of 16 Urban Area Policy 3 : Promote new growth consistent with the Comprehensive Land Use Map, the Capital Facilities Plan and the Capital Improvement Plan. Residential Goal 1 : Guide the design of new residential developments to be compatible with adjacent residential area. Residential Goal 3 : Promote a variety of residential densities with a minimum density target of 3 units per acre as averaged throughout the urban area. Residential Goal 4 : Encourage residential development only in urban areas where services can be provided. Residential Policy 5 : Provide provisions for parks, schools, drainage, transit, water, sanitation, infrastructure, pedestrian, and aesthetic considerations in new residential developments. Housing Goal 1 : Support and develop a variety of housing types and densities to meet the diverse needs of the population. Staff submitted the position that, as conditioned, the proposal would effectuate the goals and policies of the City's Comprehensive Plan. Exhibit 1, page 7; Romine Testimony. 27. The City of Kennewick acted as lead agency for of the proposal for compliance with the requirements of the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). After reviewing and amending the Applicants' environmental checklist, the City's Responsible Official issued a mitigated determination of non-significance (MDNS) on August 15, 2011. The MDNS requires mitigation of impacts on City parks and also requires the Applicants to apply for and comply with a Washington Department of Ecology NPDES permit and to implement erosion control measures prior to clearing and grading. The SEPA appeal period closed September 5, 2011; no appeals were filed. Exhibit 1, page 2; Exhibit 6; Romine Testimony. 28. Notice of public hearing was mailed to surrounding property owners on August 24, 2011 and published on August 28, 2011, consistent with the requirements of the City Code. Exhibit 1, page 3; Exhibit 3; Romine Testimony. 29. Prior to and at hearing, the City received public comments on the proposal. The concerns expressed fall into the following categories: • High density of proposed development; • Impacts from the new project's traffic on already congested off-site streets, specifically as folks travel to Costco and other retailers in the area: • Speeding, cut-through traffic, and congestion on Pittsburg, Klamath, and Hood; • Conflicting homeowners' association bylaws leading to degradation of property values in adjacent subdivisions; • Dust and weeds resulting from clearing at the beginning of phased development; ---PAGE BREAK--- Findings, Conclusions, and Decision Kennewick Hearing Examiner Fountain Hills III PP 11-04 page 10 of 16 • Alignment of property boundaries with existing off-site lot lines; • Allegations of impropriety regarding the adoption and implementation of the existing Fountain Hills CC&Rs; • Future management of the open space area between off-site Payette Court and Nevada Court; • A request to maintain the existing southern pedestrian access (trail) near 8600 W. Klamath Avenue; • Concerns over date and breadth of public notice; and • Potential redistricting of schools to address the project's students. Neighbors opposed the fact that the present plat is not being restricted to the number of lots and the green space configuration that were approved in previous Fountain Hills iterations. Neighbors are concerned that the instant proposal may construct housing that does not match the architecture of the previously built portions of Fountain Hills (described as Mediterranean style stucco with tile roofs), and that the difference will detract from home values and a sense of community. Several neighbors expressed the request that with this project, the Applicant be required to address existing traffic safety concerns on Pittsburg due to speeding and congestion that have arisen since Pittsburg was connected to Grandview as part of the previous Fountain Hills approvals. Exhibit 8.a; Exhibit 8.b; Exhibit 8.c; Exhibit 11; Exhibit 12; Exhibit 13;Exhibit 14; Exhibit 16 McKinney Testimony; Husted Testimony; Mark Hevland Testimony; Cartmel Testimony; Jeff Short Testimony; Patterson Testimony; Tatum Testimony; Peggy Hevland Testimony; Pierson Testimony; Roger Markell Testimony; Friehauf Testimony; Carol Short Testimony. 30. In response to public comment regarding traffic volumes, Staff reiterated that current traffic volumes do not exceed the capacity of the roadways in the area and that the project's new vehicle trips would not cause increases in delays at area intersections that would trigger mitigation. In addition, there is a planned road project that would extend existing principal arterial Steptoe Street (recently opened south of Gage Boulevard) between Clearwater Avenue and Center Parkway within the five year horizon. Currently, Grandridge experiences PM peak hour spillover traffic from Columbia Center Boulevard. When the Steptoe Street connection is completed, existing volumes on Grandridge are anticipated to decrease as traffic diverts onto Steptoe. This would reduce delays at the Grandridge/Pittsburg intersection. Deskins Testimony; Exhibit 17. 31. The City's traffic engineer offered additional testimony in response to public comment regarding off-site traffic calming requirements. Staff acknowledged that the proposal's new vehicle trips would generate increased trips on surrounding roadways; however, only one segment of the surrounding road network is project to experience more than 250 additional trips from the proposal: Pittsburg north of Road A. The traffic engineer noted that the affected segment of Pittsburg has already been built to collector standards and that no additional mitigation is required on that segment by City regulations. Deskins Testimony; Goldsmith Testimony; Exhibit 17; Exhibit 18. ---PAGE BREAK--- Findings, Conclusions, and Decision Kennewick Hearing Examiner Fountain Hills III PP 11-04 page 11 of 16 32. Regarding public comment about possible redistricting that could result from development in the area, the District submitted the following comments in response to the first post-hearing order: The Kennewick School District has a Ten-Year Plan in place that forecasts future growth. It is impossible to know exactly where pockets of growth may occur, but the district works closely with the City of Kennewick and Benton County to make sure that we own property near projected areas of growth. Having property near potential growth areas allows us to add schools where the students are living, and to avoid additional bussing or redistricting of our boundaries. That being said, we do occasionally have to redistrict to keep our schools without our preferred enrollment numbers. The Kennewick School District has the capacity to add students at all levels and at the three schools [in question]. Forecasted growth in additional boundary areas of the Kennewick School District makes it difficult to know if any redistricting could result because of the Fountain Hills 3 proposed development. Exhibit 19. 33. Regarding the differences between previous iterations of Fountain Hills 3 and the current proposal, Planning Staff noted that all previous approvals for development of the site have expired. The current application would result in development that is consistent with current zoning standards. The Applicant noted that the layout is different, in part, because of the requirement to comply with current road standards, which require planter strips, and the minimum lots size of the RL zone, which the previously approved project did not have to meet through approval of the PDP. Romine Testimony; Goldsmith Testimony. 34. Planning Staff noted that the City of Kennewick lacks authority to require new development to abide by aesthetic guidelines applicable to existing adjacent development or to align new lot boundaries with existing adjacent lot boundaries. Staff also noted that disputes between neighbors and their existing homeowners' association are private civil matters over which the City has no authority. Staff acknowledged that the recommended condition of approval requires the new project to form or join an existing homeowners' association; however, Staff did not endorse or specify the current Fountain Hills HOA. The Applicant can create a wholly separate agreement for the purposes of satisfying the common area maintenance requirement. Romine Testimony. 35. According to neighboring property owners, the site generates significant dust in its current condition. One neighbor whose property abuts the site said her pool fills with dust regularly. However, many people testified that clearing of the site to prepare for construction that would happen in phases would generate additional dust. Regarding dust management, the Applicant representative testified that site grading would be done at one time, to conserve resources and to allow soil excavated on-site to be used in other portions of the site. It is intended that the project would undergo two separate final plat reviews; the two phases would be designed simultaneously, with a single clear and grade ---PAGE BREAK--- Findings, Conclusions, and Decision Kennewick Hearing Examiner Fountain Hills III PP 11-04 page 12 of 16 permit, and built sequentially. Planning Staff noted that any disturbed area would be required to be hydroseeded and potentially rehydroseeded during the pendency of construction. The project would also have to implement erosion control measures as part of an NPDES permit, as required by DOE. Carol Short Testimony; Mark Hevland testimony; Peggy Hevland Testimony; Pierson Testimony; Goldsmith Testimony; Romine Testimony. 36. Regarding the existing green space managed by off-site homeowners between Payette and Nevada Courts, the Applicant representative testified that the project seeks to maintain on-site portions of the open space in a consistent manner with how it's been managed to date by others. However, if agreement is not able to be reached between the instant project and off-site property owners as to use and maintenance of the area, the Applicant may be willing to deed the on-site portion of the existing green space to adjacent property owners or the existing Fountain Hills HOA. Goldsmith Testimony. 37. Regarding notice, public comment had indicated that neighbors along Hood Avenue had not been mailed notice of hearing and that the notice sent was post marked August 24, with comments required by August 30th. McKinney Testimony. Planning Staff noted that the comment deadline was for comments that would be included in the staff report analysis, but was not a deadline for submission of comments and that residents along W. Hood Avenue were outside the code-required mailing radius. No comments submitted by members of the public were excluded. Romine Testimony. 38. Regarding the request that the existing pedestrian path along the site's southeastern boundary that connects to sidewalks at approximately 8600 W. Klamath, the project would retain that pedestrian access in an easement between proposed Lots 9 and 10 in Division 2. Additionally, the sidewalks of proposed Division 1 would connect to existing sidewalks on Metaline and Pittsburg that provide continuous paved pedestrian access to Sunset View Elementary southeast of the subject property. Romine Testimony; Exhibit 10, Slide 4. 39. Upon completion of review, and considering evidence offered at hearing, Planning Staff recommended approval of the plat with the conditions as proposed in the staff report and as modified based on testimony. Exhibit 1, pages 6-7; Romine Testimony; Exhibit 10. / / / / / / / ---PAGE BREAK--- Findings, Conclusions, and Decision Kennewick Hearing Examiner Fountain Hills III PP 11-04 page 13 of 16 CONCLUSIONS The Hearing Examiner has jurisdiction to hear and decide applications for preliminary plat pursuant to KMC 4.02.080(b)(ii) and 17.10.080. The Hearing Examiner has jurisdiction to hear and decide applications for planned development permits pursuant to KMC 4.02.080(b)(iv) and 18.45.060. Jurisdiction Pursuant to KMC 17.10.080(1), an application for preliminary plat may be approved only when the record demonstrates conformance with the Comprehensive Plan, comprehensive water plan, Preliminary Plat Criteria for Review utilities plan, the Comprehensive Park and Recreation Plan, and when the record demonstrates that appropriate provisions will be made for the public health, safety, and general welfare, for open spaces, drainage ways, streets or roads, alleys, public sidewalks, utility easements and other public ways, transit stops, potable water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks and recreation areas, playgrounds, schools and school grounds, and shall consider all other relevant facts and other planning features that assure safe walking conditions for students who only walk to and from school. In considering preliminary plats, pursuant to KMC 17.10.080(4), the City may impose any conditions necessary to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the property users, both within and adjacent to property to be subdivided. Such conditions may include, but are not limited to, the following: relocation of lots, streets, sidewalks, pedestrian walkways and utility easements and other plat features; regulation of lot sizes; regulation of street width; dedication and improvements of public access to public parks, playgrounds, open spaces, and schools; City review of maintenance agreements, any restrictive covenants, and homeowner's association and bylaws; and such other conditions as will make possible development of the City in an orderly and efficient manner, and in conformity with this code and the Comprehensive Plan. 1. As conditioned, the proposed plat makes adequate provision for the public health, safety, and general welfare. The project would create 110 lots and an internal road network consistent with current RL zoning and City of Kennewick Road Standards. consistent Park impacts would be mitigated through the payment of fees. The Kennewick School District facilities that would serve the plat have capacity to accept the anticipated students from the project. New internal sidewalks and connection to existing pedestrian paths would ensure safe walking for students who would walk to Sunset View Elementary; middle and high school students would be bused to school. Conditions would ensure that a stormwater management plan, designed to control runoff from the 25-year 24-hour storm, is submitted and meets with City approval prior to issuance of construction permits. The plat would provide three access points to the public street network. Conditions would ensure that sight distance easements are provided where required on the proposed curving internal road system. The project would connects municipal water and sewer to each lot; the municipal utilities have capacity to serve the project. Anticipated traffic volumes, based on industry standard ITE Trip Generation Manual calculations, would not cause in delays at area intersections that would lower any intersection's level of service past the threshold at which mitigation is required. Trip Conclusions Based on Findings ---PAGE BREAK--- Findings, Conclusions, and Decision Kennewick Hearing Examiner Fountain Hills III PP 11-04 page 14 of 16 distribution projections were reviewed to determine if off-site traffic calming is required as a result of the project's new vehicle trips. The off-site analysis showed that no segment of the local roadway would receive enough project traffic to trigger off-site traffic calming mitigation except for Pittsburg north of Road A. The affected portion of Pittsburg is already built to collector standards. No off-site traffic calming is required. On-site, a Mini Roundabout would be required at the intersection of Metaline and Road A for traffic calming purposes Conditions would require erosion control and dust control through best management practices including hydroseeding. The proposal was reviewed for compliance with SEPA and an MDNS was issued. No appeals were filed. Findings 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 24, 25, 27, 30, 31, 32, 33, 35, 38, and 39. 2. As conditioned, the proposed plat would be consistent with applicable goals and policies of the City of Kennewick Comprehensive Plan. Single-Family housing is a permitted use in the RL zone and in the Low Density Residential land use designation. The proposed density of four units per acre, proposed lot sizes, and proposed open spaces are consistent with the zoning and land use designations of the site. All previous land use approvals have expired. The City has no authority to require the instant project to be developed with homes that match the appearance of homes already developed in the area. The City has no authority to enforce or engage in any private disputes between neighbors and their homeowners' associations. The instant approval would not require this project to join the existing Fountain Hills HOA, nor require the HOA to admit the instant plat into its association. The conditions of approval do require a maintenance agreement for management of this plat's common open spaces that is recorded against the plat and deemed acceptable by the City Attorney. Findings 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 22, 26, 33, and 34. DECISION Based on the preceding findings and conclusions, the requested preliminary plat subdividing 27.5 acres located between Grandridge Boulevard and N. Pittsburg Street, north of W. Klamath Avenue in Kennewick, Washington, in order to create 110 single-family residential lots is APPROVED subject to the following conditions: 1. All development of the project shall comply with City of Kennewick regulatory controls, policies and codes, including the Single-family Residential Design Standards. 2. All fees required by the City shall be paid prior to the approval of the final plat. 3. Construction of the proposed residential streets shall be consistent with City of Kennewick Standard Detail 2-1, sheet 2 of 4, which includes a planter strip between the curb and sidewalk. 4. The project shall provide a mini roundabout at the T-intersection of W. Metaline Avenue and Road A (as shown on the plat drawing). ---PAGE BREAK--- Findings, Conclusions, and Decision Kennewick Hearing Examiner Fountain Hills III PP 11-04 page 15 of 16 5. Development shall be in conformance with the plat drawing plotted August 25, 2011, (Exhibit 6. Prior to final plat approval, the developer shall submit a landscape plan for approval of all common areas, open spaces and rights of way not left in a natural state, listing the number, location and species of trees, sizes of plant materials and ground cover. The landscape plan shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect or licensed landscape installer drawn to a legible scale. 7. All landscaped areas shall be irrigated with an automatic sprinkler system or drip irrigation system that meets the requirements of the Critical Area Report. Xeriscape landscaping is encouraged. 8. A Homeowner’s Association must be formed prior to final plat approval or incorporate the proposed subdivision into the existing Fountain Hills Homeowners Association. 9. The Applicant or successors in interest execute a written agreement to the satisfaction of the City Attorney which will allow the City to make arrangements for maintenance of the common areas, open spaces, private roads, access driveways, and landscaped areas should the Homeowner’s Association fail or refuse to maintain these areas. If the proposed subdivision is incorporated into the existing Fountain Hills HOA, the existing maintenance agreement can be amended to include the proposed subdivision. The arrangement must be recorded prior to the first building permit being issued. 10. Construction shall comply with the Public Works memorandum dated August 15, 2011 (Exhibit 7.a). 11. Construction shall comply with Traffic Engineer memorandum dated August 12, 2011 (Exhibit 7.b). 12. Construction shall comply with Benton PUD letter dated August 3, 2011 (Exhibit 7.c). 13. Construction shall comply with Kennewick Irrigation District letter dated August 22, 2011 (Exhibit 7.d). 14. The developer shall submit a water, sewer and storm comprehensive plan for the entire site. The comprehensive plan needs to be approved by the City prior to approval of Phase 1 construction plans. 15. The project shall provide a temporary cul-de-sac or hammer head turnaround at the end of each road at the end of phase one construction built to Fire Department and Public Works standards. 16. Fire lanes over 150-feet in length shall be provided with an approved area for turning around a fire apparatus. ---PAGE BREAK--- Findings, Conclusions, and Decision Kennewick Hearing Examiner Fountain Hills III PP 11-04 page 16 of 16 17. The project shall install fire hydrants and looped water mains in accordance with City engineering standards. Fire hydrants shall be installed at intersections and maximum 500-foot spacing. 18. The project shall provide dust control method(s) such as hydroseeding for all areas of the site that are disturbed. Re-hydroseeding may be required. 19. In lieu of dedication of park land and based on the “Park Fee Determination Process” calculation, pay park fees in the amount of $98,802.40 for impacts to Park Planning Zone 1W (Sunset). DECIDED October 7, 2011. By: Sharon A. Rice City of Kennewick Hearing Examiner