Document Kennewick_doc_850eeb81b4

EXHIBIT A-1 Page 1 of 7 Staff Report Date: March 4, 2013 Public Hearing Date and Location: March 11, 2013, Kennewick City Hall Report Prepared By: Wes Romine Development Services Manager Report Reviewed By: Gregory McCormick, AICP Planning Director Summary Recommendation: The City of Kennewick RECOMMENDS that Preliminary Plat 12-09 be APPROVED with conditions. Summary of Proposal: A Preliminary Plat for a subdivision on a parcel approximately 32.6 acres in size that is proposed to be divided into131 lots for single family homes. Proposal Location: North of Ridgeline Drive, west of Clodfelter Road and east of W. Clearwater Avenue. Parcel Nos. 112882013386006, 112882013386007, 112882013386008, and a portion of 112882013386009. Legal Description: Lots 6, 7, & 8 of Short Plat 3386 according to the survey thereof as recorded in Volume 1 of Short Plats, Page 3386 Records of Benton County Washington. And that portion of Lot 9 of said Short Plat 3386 described as follows: Commencing at the northwest corner of said lot 9; Thence along the west line thereof South 00’09’09” east for 386.93 feet to an angle point in the west line of Lot 9 and the true point of beginning of said description; Thence north 90’00’00” west for 170.00 feet; Thence south 00’09’09” east for 100.01 feet; Thence north 90’00’00” east for 170 feet; Thence north 00’09’09” west for 100.01 feet to the true point of beginning of said description. Property Owner: Victor Johnson 1500 Clodfelter Road Kennewick, Washington 99338 Applicant: Matt Smith Tri Cities Development Co., LLC 15 S.W. Colorado Avenue Bend, Oregon 97702 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND COMMUNITY PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO THE HEARING EXAMINER FILE NO: PP 12-09/PLN-2012-04024 ---PAGE BREAK--- EXHIBIT A-1 Page 2 of 7 Engineer: Sean Comstock WH Pacific 123 S.W. Columbia Street Bend, Oregon 97702 Surveyor: Richard Russum Worley Survey Services, Inc P.O. Box 6132 Kennewick, Washington 99336 Approval Criteria: 1. Comprehensive Plan – Land Use 2. KMC Title 18 – Zoning 3. KMC Title 17 – Subdivisions 4. KMC Section 5.56 – Public Works Construction Standards 5. Washington State Environmental Policy Act Preliminary Plat Key Application Processing Dates: Pre-Application/Feasibility Meeting NA Application Submittal December 28, 2012 Determination of Completeness Issued January 7, 2013 Notice of Application Mailed January 7, 2013 Property Posting Sign February 21, 2013 City Department Review Meeting January 23, 2013 SEPA Threshold Determination Issued February 14, 2013 Date of Published Notice of Public Hearing February 24, 2013 Date of Mailed Notice of Public Hearing February 22, 2013 SEPA Appeal Period Ends March 7, 2013 Public Hearing Date March 11, 2013 Exhibits: A-1 Staff Report A-2 Application A-3 Notice of Application/Mailing List A-4 Vicinity Map A-5 Preliminary Plat Drawing A-6 Preliminary Grading Plan A-7 SEPA Determination A-8 City Department Comments A-9 Outside Agency Comments A-10 Neighborhood Comment A-11 Applicant’s Attorney Letter Staff Analysis of Proposal & Discussion: The proposed Preliminary Plat (PP 12-09) is a request for a 131 lot subdivision on approximately 32.6 acres for single family homes with lots ranging in size from 7,513 square feet to 17,157 square feet and an average lot size of 8,900 square feet. The project is located north of Ridgeline Drive and west of Clodfelter Road. The site is zoned Residential Low Density (RL) which allows between 3 and 4 units per acre and a minimum lot size of ---PAGE BREAK--- EXHIBIT A-1 Page 3 of 7 7,500 square feet. The proposed preliminary plat is located in an area that had previous approval for a 35 lot preliminary plat (PP 11-01). The preliminary plat was approved by the Hearing Examiner decision on May 19, 2011; however the preliminary plat was abandoned so the applicant could short plat the land to create a parcel to be sold to a church. A Preliminary Plat (KMC 17.10) is the first step in subdivision process for subdivisions with more than nine lots and is an approval for overall lot layout and compliance with land use regulations. A Final Plat is required to create lots for preliminary plats and is the last phase in the subdivision process, and must be recorded prior to the creation of individual lots. Final plat approval is based on the Preliminary Plat conditions of approval. A civil permit with a detailed review of street, utility and stormwater construction standards, and street and utility construction or bonding for incomplete work is required prior the final plat approval. Property History: 1. The subject parcel was annexed into the City in August of 1995 with a Commercial Community (CC) zoning designation (Ord. 3647). The annexation ordinance was amended in October of 1995; however the zoning designation for the subject parcel remained Commercial Community (CC) (Ord. 3658). 2. In August of 2001 the zoning designation was changed from Commercial Community (CC) to Business Park (BP)(Ord. 3981). 3. December of 2010 City Council approved a Comprehensive Plan Land Use amendment from Commercial to Low Density Residential (Ord. 5329). 4. February of 2011 the zoning designation was changed from Business Park (BP) to Residential Low Density (RL) (Ord. 5347). 5. A Preliminary Plat (PP 11-01) for a 35 lot subdivision on a 10.1 acre portion of the currently proposed preliminary plat area was heard by the Hearing Examiner at the May 9, 2011 public hearing and subsequently approved by the Decision issued on May 19, 2011. 6. The preliminary plat (PP 11-01) was abandoned and Short Plat 3386 was approved and recorded in December of 2012 to create a parcel to be sold for construction of a church and 4 single family lots. Density/Lot Size: Per the Table of Residential Development Standards (KMC 18.12.010 A.2) the Residential Low Density (RL) zoning district requires a minimum density of 3 units per acre and a maximum density of 4 units per acre. The proposed project has 131 dwelling units on 32.6 acres with a density of 4 dwelling units per acre. The RL zoning district requires a minimum lot size of 7,500 square feet. The smallest lot is proposed to be 7,513 square feet. STAFF COMMENT: The preliminary plat as proposed meets the Residential Development Standards contained in KMC 18.12.010(A.2). Traffic: The City’s traffic engineer has determined that this project meets concurrency for transportation and the proposed project will generate 1346 average weekday vehicle trips per day. To mitigate traffic impacts to the intersections of Ridgeline Drive/Clodfelter Road and the future 5 Corners roundabout solution the applicant is required to pay $86,914 in traffic mitigation fees. The City’s traffic engineer has also identified potential problems with speeding traffic on the future residential neighborhood streets because there are streets ---PAGE BREAK--- EXHIBIT A-1 Page 4 of 7 over 600 feet long with no curvature. The applicant will be required to provide traffic calming on those streets that will be included in the street design for final plat of the project. The Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) commented on the project and had concerns about the Level of Service (LOS) at the exit 109 interchange along Interstate 82 (I-82). WSDOT has cited 5 projects, 1 change of zone and 1 City of Richland Urban Growth Expansion, all in the County and 1 City of Kennewick project in the area where they failed to obtain traffic mitigation for exit 109, which seems to be the primary reason they feel the LOS at the exit 109 interchange is failing. They have not provided any traffic delay times, number of vehicle trips at exit 109 or other data to confirm the LOS will fail. To remedy the problem WSDOT is asking the applicant to “extend the second southbound lane of Badger Road approximately 1,000 feet from the westbound ramp terminal to a point opposite of the eastbound ramp terminal”. The City’s traffic engineer and applicant’s traffic engineer have reviewed the request and questioned whether or not the LOS will actually fail and whether or not extending the southbound lane of Badger Road is the appropriate solution or will help solve the problem. Because there was not enough data submitted by WSDOT to back up their assertion the City made the decision to leave WSDOT requirements out of the SEPA Determination and require WSDOT to appeal the SEPA Determination rather than put the burden of a SEPA appeal on the applicant. Storm Water: The City stormwater standard for residential subdivisions is to be designed to retain and dispose of a 25-year, 24 hour event for the developed state and the 10-year 24-hour event for the natural pre-developed state. Prior to Final Plat approval the applicant will be required to submit detailed civil engineering drawings for review and approval to the City’s Public Works department. This submittal will include a stormwater plan that will need to meet City standards. A comprehensive storm plan needs to be approved by the city for the entire plat prior to phase 1 construction plans. Streets & Utilities: A separate permit will be required from the Department of Public Works prior to construction for driveways, sidewalks, wheelchair ramps and utility extensions (water, sewer, street, storm drainage, street lights, fire hydrants, etc.). Full street improvements for residential streets within the subdivision will be required per KMC 5.56.270 and be required to be constructed per Kennewick Standard Detail 2-1, sheet 2 of 4. City staff is currently processing an alternate residential street detail with curb tight sidewalks that will be an option for the developer if City Council approves the detail prior to final plat. Half street improvements on Ridgeline Drive will be required per City standard detail Drwg 2-3, sheet 2 of 2 and be required to be constructed concurrent with the third phase. An existing 8-inch waterline is available from the north end of Honeysuckle Street. An 8-inch sanitary sewer line is also available from north end of Honeysuckle Street. A comprehensive sewer plan needs to be approved by the city for the entire plat prior to approval of phase 1 construction plans. Parks: Based on the adopted Mitigated Determination of Non-significance (ED 12-89), park fees in the amount of $46,353.10 are required to be paid to mitigate impacts to park zone 7W – 5 ---PAGE BREAK--- EXHIBIT A-1 Page 5 of 7 Corner. Fees will be required to be paid prior to final plat based on a percentage of lots being final platted. Schools: Per a memo from Doug Carl dated February 27, 2013 of the Kennewick School District, the schools that will serve the subdivision are Cottonwood Elementary School, Desert Hills Middle School and Kamiakin High School. The proposed preliminary plat is in a bussing zone for all three schools. All new residential streets within the subdivision and Ridgleline Drive where it abuts the subdivision will be required to have 5-foot wide sidewalks. Surrounding Property: The surrounding property is a mix of residential densities with some commercial uses to the west. Adjacent property to the north is in the County but in the City’s Urban Growth Area and has larger lot single family homes with the lots ranging in size from approximately a half acre to 2 acres in size. To the south and across Ridgeline Drive is property zoned Residential Medium Density (RM) with plans for a 642 unit apartment complex. To the east and across Clodfelter Road is undeveloped property that is in the county, but in the City’s Urban Growth Area. The City’s Southridge Sub Area plan shows this area to be developed as medium and low density residential at some time in the future after annexation. And to the west is property zoned Business Park which is anticipated to be developed as light commercial uses. Staff Comment: It is staff’s opinion that the proposed Preliminary Plat will be harmonious with the surrounding properties. Provisions for Public Health, Safety, and Welfare: Staff Comment: It is Staff’s opinion that appropriate provisions have been made for, but not limited to, 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 the proposed subdivision has considered all other relevant facts and other planning features that assure safe walking conditions for students who walk to and from school. Comprehensive Plan: Staff is of the opinion that this request is consistent with and generally conforms to the City’s Comprehensive Plan, and it will implement, goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. Particularly the following: URBAN AREA POLICY 3: “Promote new growth consistent with the Comprehensive Land Use Map, the Capital Facilities Plan and the Capital Improvement Plan.” Staff Comment: Single-Family housing is a permitted use within Residential Low Density (RL) zoning. The subject property can be served by City utilities. RESIDENTIAL GOAL 1: “Guide the design of new residential developments to be compatible with adjacent residential areas.” ---PAGE BREAK--- EXHIBIT A-1 Page 6 of 7 Staff Comment: The proposed Preliminary Plat is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Land Use and development standards for Residential Low Density (RL) zoning. 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.” Staff Comment: The proposed Preliminary Plat has a density of 4 units per acre. RESIDENTIAL GOAL 4: “Encourage residential development only in urban areas where services can be provided.” Staff Comment: City water and sewer is available from at the end of Honeysuckle Street and with future half street improvements on Ridgeline Drive. RESIDENTIAL POLICY 5: “Provide provisions for parks, schools, drainage, transit, water, sanitation, infrastructure, pedestrian, and aesthetic considerations in new residential developments.” Staff Comment: The proposed Preliminary Plat provides the above provisions. HOUSING GOAL 1: “Support and develop a variety of housing types and densities to meet the diverse needs of the population.” Staff Comment: The project contains single family housing in a medium price range. CRITICAL AREAS AND SHORELINE GOAL 3: “Regulate or mitigate activities in or adjacent to critical areas or the shoreline to avoid adverse environmental impacts”. Staff Comment: Per the City’s critical area maps have there are no critical areas on or adjacent to the site. The City of Kennewick hereby RECOMMENDS that Preliminary Plat 12-09 be APPROVED with the following conditions: 1. 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. Construct residential streets per City of Kennewick Standard Detail 2-1, sheet 2 of 4. However, if City Council approves a new City Standard street detail with curb tight sidewalks prior to signing the final plat mylar, curb tight sidewalks may be used. 4. Development shall be in conformance with the plat drawing dated February 7, 2013, (Exhibit A-5). 5. A landscape plan must be submitted for approval for any common areas, including Arterial Streetscaping and Arterial street fencing. The landscape plan shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect or licensed landscape installer drawn to a legible scale with sizes and species of plants. Landscaping is required to be installed or bonded for prior to final plat of the phase it is in. 6. Execute a written agreement to the satisfaction of the City Attorney which will allow the City to make arrangements for maintenance of any common areas, open spaces, private roads, and landscape areas (including streetscape on Ridgeline Drive) should the Homeowner’s Association fail or refuse to maintain these areas. ---PAGE BREAK--- EXHIBIT A-1 Page 7 of 7 7. All landscaped areas to be irrigated with an automatic sprinkler system or drip irrigation system. Xeriscape landscaping is encouraged. 8. Remove cell tower on lot 35 prior to the final plat of phase 2 or create a tract of land around the cell tower with not lots within 100 feet of the cell tower. 9. Comply with the Public Works memorandum dated January 28, 2013 (Exhibit A-8). 10. Comply with Traffic Engineer memorandum dated February 14, 2013 (Exhibit A-8). 11. Per the Traffic Engineer comment address traffic calming elements for streets that exceed 600 feet in length with no curvature. Prior to submittal of the DPW permit provide a traffic calming plan to be reviewed and approved by the City’s Traffic Engineer. 12. Comply with Benton PUD requirements for easements and power services for the plat. 13. Comply with Kennewick Irrigation District letter dated February 19, 2013 (Exhibit A-9). 14. Comply with Kennewick Fire Department comment memorandum dated January 23, 2013 (Exhibit A-8). 15. Geo-Tec reports are required for each lot at the time of building permit submittal. With prior approval a blanket geological report may be accepted as long as all applicable codes are met regarding soil bearing capacity. 16. Comply with Department of Ecology comments dated January 18, 2013 (Exhibit A-9). 17. Provide dust control method(s) such as hydroseeding for all areas of the site that are disturbed. Re-hydroseeding may be required. 18. In lieu of dedication of park land and based on the “Park Fee Determination Process” calculation, pay park fees in the amount of $46,353.10 for impacts to Park Planning Zone 7W-5 Corner . Park fees will be collected prior to signing the final plat mylar as a percentage of lots in each final plat phase. 19. Pay Traffic Mitigation Fees in the amount of $86,914.00 for impacts to the intersection at Ridgeline/Clodfelter and adding a new roundabout at 5 the Corners area. Fees will be collected prior to signing the final plat mylar as a percentage of lots in each final plat phase. Report Prepared By and Contact Person: Wes Romine Development Services Manager [EMAIL REDACTED] [PHONE REDACTED] ---PAGE BREAK--- EXHIBIT A-2 Page 1 of 2 ---PAGE BREAK--- EXHIBIT A-2 Page 2 of 2 ---PAGE BREAK--- EXHIBIT A-3 Page 1 of 7 ---PAGE BREAK--- EXHIBIT A-3 Page 2 of 7 ---PAGE BREAK--- EXHIBIT A-3 Page 3 of 7 ---PAGE BREAK--- EXHIBIT A-3 Page 4 of 7 ---PAGE BREAK--- EXHIBIT A-3 Page 5 of 7 ---PAGE BREAK--- EXHIBIT A-3 Page 6 of 7 ---PAGE BREAK--- EXHIBIT A-3 Page 7 of 7 ---PAGE BREAK--- 800 ft 1 : 9600 1in : 800ft This plan is suitable for informational use only. City of Kennewick accepts no liability for any error whatsoever. Produced by CITY\wesr 13:30 1/7/2013 Vicinity Map EXHIBIT A-4 Page 1 of 1 Project Location PP 12-09 ---PAGE BREAK--- EXHIBIT A-5 Page 1 of 1 February 7, 2013 ---PAGE BREAK--- SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx EXHIBIT A-6 Page 1 of 1 ---PAGE BREAK--- EXHIBIT A-7 Page 1 of 22 ---PAGE BREAK--- EXHIBIT A-7 Page 2 of 22 ---PAGE BREAK--- EXHIBIT A-7 Page 3 of 22 ---PAGE BREAK--- EXHIBIT A-7 Page 4 of 22 ---PAGE BREAK--- EXHIBIT A-7 Page 5 of 22 ---PAGE BREAK--- EXHIBIT A-7 Page 6 of 22 ---PAGE BREAK--- EXHIBIT A-7 Page 7 of 22 ---PAGE BREAK--- EXHIBIT A-7 Page 8 of 22 ---PAGE BREAK--- EXHIBIT A-7 Page 9 of 22 ---PAGE BREAK--- EXHIBIT A-7 Page 10 of 22 ---PAGE BREAK--- EXHIBIT A-7 Page 11 of 22 ---PAGE BREAK--- EXHIBIT A-7 Page 12 of 22 ---PAGE BREAK--- EXHIBIT A-7 Page 13 of 22 ---PAGE BREAK--- EXHIBIT A-7 Page 14 of 22 ---PAGE BREAK--- EXHIBIT A-7 Page 15 of 22 ---PAGE BREAK--- EXHIBIT A-7 Page 16 of 22 ---PAGE BREAK--- EXHIBIT A-7 Page 17 of 22 ---PAGE BREAK--- EXHIBIT A-7 Page 18 of 22 ---PAGE BREAK--- EXHIBIT A-7 Page 19 of 22 ---PAGE BREAK--- EXHIBIT A-7 Page 20 of 22 ---PAGE BREAK--- EXHIBIT A-7 Page 21 of 22 ---PAGE BREAK--- EXHIBIT A-7 Page 22 of 22 ---PAGE BREAK--- To: Wes Romine, Development Services Manager From: John Deskins, Traffic Engineer Date: February 14, 2013 Re: Traffic Engineer’s Comments Project: PP 12-09 Canyon Ranch Phases 1-4 Conditions Based upon review of the proposed development site plan, existing traffic conditions, the average weekday traffic volumes generated by similar types of developments (per current ITE Trip Generation Manual), traffic flow and safety, proximately to the intersection adjoining property access and in conformance with Kennewick Administrative Code (KAC) Chapter 13-46 “Highway Access Management”, the conditions are as follows: 1. A primary concern with this proposed pre-plat is the need to provide for at least one full-access entrance for daily use to the residential development. The access at Honeysuckle Street was established during the construction phase of short plat 12-05. The requirement was to provide a limitation on left-turns out of Honeysuckle Street at this point due to potential for sight distance limitations (to the west) in the future. To accomplish this there was some extruded curb and a median island placed to limit the left-turns. a. So far the extruded curb has had some concerns about visibility for drivers. Apparently the curb has been, or is being removed in order to fix a different problem with the discussion. Instead of replacing the extruded curb as before, the city has identified a better curb and delineator solution (Pexco FG300 Curb system or approved equal) that seems like it will serve the purpose better. It can be replaced with the current project (SP 12-05) or it can wait to be placed concurrent with the roadway construction for Phase 1 of PP 12-09. Other problems are drivers potentially turning from Honeysuckle from the wrong side of the raised median. There will need to be some minor striping and/or additional curbing placed concurrent with Phase 1 of PP 12-09 in order to further limit this potential. b. If phase 1 is constructed first, then Phase 2 must be the next phase constructed. This is in order to gain a true full access intersection for the development at Fescue Street. Similarly, Phase 5 or Phase 7 must be MEMORANDUM Traffic Engineering Division EXHIBIT A-8 Page 1 of 8 ---PAGE BREAK--- PP 12-09 Page 2 of 3 constructed prior to the construction of Phase 5. The required half-street improvements on Ridgeline Drive (using City of Kennewick Standard Drawing 2-3, Sheet 2 of 2) will be required concurrent with the third phase to actually be constructed, regardless of which phase number the third phase of construction is. 2. When developing the Civil Plans for Review, the engineer shall provide a single drawing with curb lines to the Traffic Engineer or Designee for layout of the signing and street lighting design. The plan sheet shall cover all eight phases. The reason is that the placement of street light poles and traffic signs are integrated. The City will provide the placement of street lights and signage so that the engineer can proceed with final design. 3. There shall be a one foot no access easements placed on lots 43, 44, 50 and 51 preventing direct access to Ridgeline Drive. 4. A Trip Generation and Distribution Letter shall be required and include the following elements: a. Project description, including proposed use; b. Site plan with vicinity map; c. Number of residential units; or building size noted in square feet and number of parking stalls; d. Proposed and existing access points, site circulation, queuing and parking locations, as applicable; e. Project phasing, expected opening year and completion year (for phased projects); f. An estimate of trip generation for the typical weekday AM and PM peak- hour conditions. Supporting calculations and data sources shall be shown. Any adjustments for transit use, pass-by trips, and/or diverted trips shall be clearly stated. A preliminary distribution pattern for traffic on the adjacent street network, shown in a graphical format; and, g. Address traffic calming elements for streets that exceed 600 feet in length with no curvature. It is expected on tangent (straight) streets 600 feet or longer that operating speeds will be between 5 and 13 mph over the posted residential speed limit of 25 mph. h. Based on the trip generation and distribution by the Traffic Engineer, the developer shall contribute $86,914 towards the construction of roundabout solutions at 5-corners (Steptoe/Hildebrand/Clodfelter/10th) and at Ridgeline Drive and Clodfelter Road. These fees can be paid on a per lot basis at each Final Plat. i. The Trip Generation and Distribution Letter shall be sealed, signed and dated by the Engineer licensed within the State of Washington qualified to perform traffic engineering. EXHIBIT A-8 Page 2 of 8 ---PAGE BREAK--- PP 12-09 Page 3 of 3 TRAFFIC MITIGATION FEE BASIS Project Trip Generation: TYPE OF PROJECT PROJECT SIZE AVERAGE WEEKDAY TRIP GENERATION (vpd) Single Family Detached Housing (Land Use 210) 131 1346 Average Weekday Trip Rate determined from the 9 th Edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Manual. Mitigation Cost Calculations: Specific Mitigation Project(s) Mitigation Cost Estimate Main Street ADT Minor Street ADT Project Trips Percent of Trips using Mitigation Project Trips using Mitigation Percent Respons- ible Cost Ridgleline (Leslie & Clodfelter Road Roundabout $ 300,000 2,254 2,645 1,346 60% 808 14.2% $ 42,456 5-Corners Roundabout (Clodfelter/Steptoe/10th/ Hildebrand) $ 300,000 2,530 2,112 1,346 60% 808 14.8% $ 44,458 Total Costs 600,000 $ 86,914 $ Note: These ADT's are based on 2012 counts. Project Calculation Method: Formula: Project Trip Generation multiplied by the percent of trips using the intersection divided by sum of Main Street and Minor Street Average Daily Traffic (ADT) plus project trips using mitigation and then multiplied by the cost of the mitigation measure equals the project incremental traffic mitigation fee. EXHIBIT A-8 Page 3 of 8 ---PAGE BREAK--- EXHIBIT A-8 Page 4 of 8 ---PAGE BREAK--- Municipal Services Department 210 W. 6th Avenue * PO Box 6108* Kennewick, WA 99336 [PHONE REDACTED] * [PHONE REDACTED] Fax To: Wes Romine, Development Services Manager From: Fernando Garcia, Utility Coordinator Date: January 28, 2013 Re: Public Works Consolidated Comments Project: Pre-Plat 12-09/PLN-2012-04024 1. Construct public roads, sidewalks, streetlights, storm drainage and designate sidewalk and utility easements. The land Developer will be required to construct the sidewalk in conjunction with the street construction per City of Kennewick (COK) Detail 2-1 sheet 2 of 4. 2. Where adjoining steep grades would provide driveways steeper than 20%, The City Engineer will recommend to the Community planning director , that the sidewalks be placed adjoining the curb in the identify areas per COK Detail 2-1 sheet 2 of 4, note 3. 3. Unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer, the maximum grade on local streets shall be twelve percent (12%) per Kennewick Municipal Code (KMC) 5.56.275(1). 4. Due to project phasing, any temporary dead end street 150-ft or greater from the street intersection will require construction of a temporary 53’ radius cul-de-sac constructed with 6-inches of base rock and 2-inches Hot Mix Asphalt (HMA) or an Alternate Turn- Around pre COK detail 2-1 sheet 4 of 4. 5. 8-inch waterline is available from the north end of Honeysuckle Street. Developer will be required to loop all water mains to avoid the buildup of stagnant water and be able to assist in minimizing bacteria re-growth and also taste and odor concerns associated with stagnant water. All proposed extensions must conform to the adopted master plan, as amended and all proposed extensions of water mains must conform to an overall program for a grid system, with provisions made for extensions or looping for circulation where at all possible. Per KMC 14.10.010. MEMORANDUM Engineering Division of Municipal Services EXHIBIT A-8 Page 5 of 8 ---PAGE BREAK--- Municipal Services Department 210 W. 6th Avenue * PO Box 6108* Kennewick, WA 99336 [PHONE REDACTED] * [PHONE REDACTED] Fax 6. Provide Hydraulic calculations to assure the proposed water mains can provide fire protection per KMC 14.10.050: Size compliance with Standards. 7. A comprehensive water plan needs to be approved by the City for the entire plat prior to approval of phase 1 construction plans. Comprehensive Plan can be submitted with the Preliminary Civil plan review. 8. 8-inch sanitary sewer is available at the north end of Honeysuckle Street. 9. A comprehensive sewer plan needs to be approved by the city for the entire plat prior to approval of phase 1 construction plans. Comprehensive Plan can be submitted with the Preliminary Civil plan review. 10. Residential sub-divisions shall be designed to retain and dispose of the calculated difference between a 25-year 24-hour event for the developed state and the 24-hour event for the natural pre-developed state. Detention ponds (control outlet) may be used only where it can be clearly demonstrated that infiltration, or retention, are not feasible per COK Standard Specifications section 5-9.02. 11. A comprehensive storm plan needs to be approved by the city for the entire plat prior to approval of phase 1 construction plans. Dedication of storm easement will be required for any storm ponds outside the Preliminary Plat boundaries prior to acceptance of the utility permit. 12. As part of all residential development construction plans, there shall be a separate schematic drawing which at a minimum, shows the power source(s), wiring diagram street light pole spacing and street permanent signing per COK Standard Specifications 6-.02 and Specifications 7-10. Combine Signing, Striping, and Illumination Plans onto the same drawing with other elements left off. 13. Include the existing utilities on Short Plat drawing installed with the construction of Canyon Ranch PH1 (water, sewer, power) per KMC 17.13.050 14. A separate permit is required from the Department of Public Works (DPW), prior to construction, for driveways, sidewalks, pedestrian ramps and utility (water, sewer, street lights, storm drainage, fire hydrants streets, etc.) 15. Before granting a (DPW) permit for a private contract to construct a street or make street improvements, connect to existing water, sanitary sewer and storm drains on existing or pending public right-of-way, the perrmitee must provide an estimate of quantities which must be certified by a registered engineer licensed to practice within the State of Washington, per KMC 5.56.290 KMC 5.56.440 and KMC 5.56.500 16. Property owners as well as their contractors, subcontractors, builders, suppliers, and other representatives shall follow all KMC’s regarding storm water management, erosion sediment control, and illicit discharges. Failure to meet City Code can result in approval delays, fines, and a hold on permits per the following KMC’s: EXHIBIT A-8 Page 6 of 8 ---PAGE BREAK--- Municipal Services Department 210 W. 6th Avenue * PO Box 6108* Kennewick, WA 99336 [PHONE REDACTED] * [PHONE REDACTED] Fax a. KMC 14.29: Illicit Discharge b. KMC 18.72: Clearing and Grading c. KMC 17.20: Design and Construction d. KMC 18.75 and KMC 18.78: Residential & Commercial Design Standards. 17. Note: Engineering will not accept civil drawings for preliminary review until the Pre- Plat has been approved by the Hearing Examiner. EXHIBIT A-8 Page 7 of 8 ---PAGE BREAK--- Fire Department Comments: To: Wes Romine, Development Services Manager From: Joe Terpenning, Captain Date: January 23, 2013 Re: Canyon Ranch ‐ Preliminary Plat Application The following two conditions apply to the Canyon Ranch preliminary plat submittal in accordance with the International Fire Code and the Kennewick Municipal Code, 2009 Edition. 1. Install fire‐flow (1,000 GPM at 30 psi) and fire hydrants in accordance with IFC Appendix B and C, and City standards. Structures in excess of 2,600 square feet shall meet fire‐flow quantities in accordance with IFC Table B105.1. Fire hydrants shall be installed at intersections and spacing not to exceed 500 feet between hydrants. 2. In accordance with Kennewick Municipal Code, Section 17.20.010 Item2(C)(I) a residential development that is served by a single City standard street over 600 feet in length (as measured from the point where two required access streets are not present) must have a second City standard street. As submitted phases 1, 2 and 3 do not appear to meet this standard. EXHIBIT A-8 Page 8 of 8 ---PAGE BREAK--- EXHIBIT A-9 Page 1 of 28 ---PAGE BREAK--- EXHIBIT A-9 Page 2 of 28 ---PAGE BREAK--- From: Gonseth, Paul To: Wes Romine Cc: Subject: Canyon Ranch Date: Thursday, February 14, 2013 12:36:46 PM Attachments: I-82, exit109 comment letters.pdf Wes, WSDOT does not recommend you omit our requirements. Should you do so, we have no alternative other than through the appeal process of which we will follow. Our revised letter, postponed the improvement until a future phase. It included the provision, “if the developer disagrees, he can perform a traffic impact analysis.” Because the proposed project crosses the LOS threshold, your opinion that improvement is more than the proponent’s proportionate share is no longer valid. The pro-rata concept has been our position through-out the development within this area. See the attached response letters. Do not disregard our comments. EXHIBIT A-9 Page 3 of 28 ---PAGE BREAK--- Washington State Department of Transportation Paula J. Hammond, P.E. Secretary of Transportation September 29, 20 II Benton County Planning Deparhnent P.O. Box910 Prosser, WA 99350 Attention: Subject: Michael Shuttleworth, Planning Manager SUB ll-02/EA 11-32- Cottonwood Commercial Plaza I-82 Exit I 09 vicinity, Right We have reviewed the proposed project and have the following comments. South Central Region 2809 Rudkin Road, Union Gap P.O. Box 12560 Yakima, WA 98909-2560 [PHONE REDACTED] TTY: 1-[PHONE REDACTED] www.wsdot.wa.gov • The proposed project is adjacent to Interstate 82. I-82, including the ramps, is a fully-controlled limited access highway with a posted speed limit of70 miles per hour. In addition, WSDOT has acquired all access right along Badger Road from 300 feet south ofthe eastbound on-ramp to 300 feet north of the westbound off-ramp. No direct access to I-82, or the section of Badger Road mentioned above, will be allowed. • I-82 is an existing facility and the proponent should be aware they are proposing development in an area with existing traffic noise. As an essential public faci1ity, T~82 may need to he expanded to accommodate future traffic growth. They should expect traffic noise may continue to grow. It is the developer's responsibility to dampen or deflect any traffic noise for this development. • Stormwater and surface runoff generated by developments must not be allowed to flow onto nearby WSDOT right-of-way. • Any proposed lighting should be directed down and towards the site, away from I-82. • Any outdoor advertising or motorist signing considered for this project will need to comply with state criteria. Please contact Rick Gifford of the WSDOT South Central Region Traffic Office at (509) 577-1985. • We are not opposed to the proposed subdivision; however, we do have concerns with the cumulative impact of developments on the interchange and Badger Road. At some point, development will create the need to widen Badger Road and expand the interchange. We recommend the County require all future developments in this area contribute to the future widening of Badger Road and other capacity improvements. Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on this proposal. If you have any questions regarding our comments, place contact Jacob Prilucik at (509) 577-1635. Sincerely, Paul Gonseth, P.E. Planning & Materials Engineer PG: liP cc: File SR 82 Rick Gifford, Traffic Engineer Tom Lenberg, Area 3 Maintenance Superintendent p:\planning\devrev\Cottonwood Commercial Plaza- Longplat.docx EXHIBIT A-9 Page 4 of 28 ---PAGE BREAK--- - Washington State Department ofTransportation Paula J. Hammond, P.E. · Secretary of Transportation April 8, 2011 Development Services Division City of Kennewick PO Box 6108 Kennewick, WA 00336 Attention: Michelle Dellinger Subject: Re: Site Plan 11-13/PLN-2011-00799 Edward Rose - 642 Unit Apartment Complex South Central Region 2809 Rudkin Road, Union Gap P.O. Box 12560 Yakima, WA 98909-2560 [PHONE REDACTED] TTY: 1-[PHONE REDACTED] www.wsdot.wa.gov We have reviewed the proposed project and have the following comments. 1. The project is adjacent to Interstate 82. I-82, including its ramps, is a fully- controlled limited access highway with a posted speed of 70 miles per hour. No direct access to I -82 will be allowed. 2. In the absence of a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA), WSDOT has determined that 20% of the project daily traffic will access the interstate. The added project traffic (80 trips in the peale hour), causes the westbound ramp terminal to fail (LOS The current City project constructing a multi-lane roundabout at Leslie/Badger Road merges two southbound lanes directly opposite the westbound ramp terminal. The second southbound lane is required to be extended to eliminate the operational conflicts of the merge and weave created immediately south of the roundabout on Badger road. WSDOT requires the proponent extend the second southbound lane 1000 feet to a point opposite the eastbound ramp terminal. (see attached aerial and cost estimate) If the developer disagrees with the assessed requirement for traffic mitigation, we recommend the City require, at the proponent's expense, a traffic impact analysis (TIA) be performed by a licensed traffic engineer and be submitted to the City and WSDOT for review and comment. · 3. The preliminary site plan suggests removing the right-of-way fence adjacent to the interstate and constructing a landscaped berm. Due to the terrain and the proposed residential project, the proponent is required to construct a minimum six-foot tall, solid barrier fence along the property line ofl -82, in accordance with the WSDOT Design Manual chapter 560.04. The WSDOT right-of-way fence typically lies one-foot inside our right-of-way and must not be altered or moved. 4. Stormwater and surface runoff generated by this project must be retained and treated on site, and not be allowed to flow onto WSDOT rights-of-way. EXHIBIT A-9 Page 5 of 28 ---PAGE BREAK--- Development Services Division, City of Kennewick- Re: Site Plan 11-13/PLN-2011-00799 April 8, 2011 Page2 5. Any outdoor advertising or motorist signing considered for this project will need to · comply with state criteria. Please contact Rick Gifford of the WSDOT South Central Regional Office at (509) 577-1985 for specifics. 6. 1-82 is an existing facility and the proponent will be generating more noise- sensitive land uses. The proponent and future residents should be aware that they are. proposing residential development in an area with traffic noise. They should also expect that traffic noise may continue to grow into the future, and, as an essential public facility, 1-82 may need to be expanded to accommodate future traffic growth. It is the developer's responsibility to dampen or deflect any traffic noise for this development. 7. Any proposed lighting should be directed down towards the site, and away from Interstate 82. Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on this proposal. If you have any questions regarding our comments, contact Rick at (509) 577-1633. Sincerely, Paul Gonseth, P.E. Planning and Materials Engineer PG: cc: File #3 , SR 82 Tom Lenberg, Area 3 Maintenance Superintendent Rick Gifford, Traffic Engineer p:\planning\devrev\sr82\cityof kennewick_ edward roSe EXHIBIT A-9 Page 6 of 28 ---PAGE BREAK--- Washington State Department of Transportation Paula J. Hammond Secretary of Transportation March31, 2011 Benton County Planning & Building Department P. 0. Box 910 Prosser, WA 99350-0910 Attention: Michael E. Shuttleworth, Planning Manager Subject: ZC 11-02/EA 11-07 ; South Central Region 2809 Rudkin Road, Union Gap P.O. Box 12560 Yakima, WA 98909-2560 (509} 577-1600 TTY: 1-[PHONE REDACTED] www.wsdot.wa.gov Zone change from Agriculture to Light Industiral and Interchange Commercial Interstate 82, Exit 109 (Badger Road) Vicinity The proposed zone change is in the vicinity of the Interstate 82 - Badger Road (Exit 1 09) interchange. For future development on any of the properties within this proposed zone change, we would like to make the following comments: 1. Access to the State highway system from these properties will most likely be via the Badger Road (Exit 1 09) interchange. I-82 and its ramps are a fully contolled limited access facility. Additionally, Badger Road is a fully controlled limited access road from 300 feet southerly of the east bound on ramp to 300 feet northerly of the west bound off ramp. No direct access to the State Highway system will be allowed within the limited access areas. 2. I-82 is an existing and expanding facility. The proponent should be aware that they are proposing development in an area adjacent to the new highway aligmuent. They can also expect traffic noise will continue to grow into the future. If the proponent is concerned with traffic noise affecting this development, it is the developer's responsibility to dampen or deflect any traffic noise affecting the development. 3. Storm water and surface runoff generated must be retained and treated on site, and not be allowed to flow onto adjacent rights-of-way. 4. Any proposed lighting should be directed down towards the site, and away from I-82. 5. Any outdoor advertising or motorist signing considered for this project will need to comply with state criteria. Please contact Rick Gifford of the WSDOT South Central Region Traffic Office at (509) 577-1985 for specifics. 6. We are concerned with the cumulative impact of developments on the interchange and within the boundaries of our access control. Future developments are required to mitigate their significant impacts, including those to the state transportation system. We specifically call attention to Badger road between Wiser Parkway and Leslie Road. As with other recent developments in this vicinity, we recommend that the developers EXHIBIT A-9 Page 7 of 28 ---PAGE BREAK--- - - - - - - Mr. Michael Shuttleworth- Cottonwood Commercial Plaza- Zone Change March31,2011 Page2 contribute to future improvements to the I-82 Exit 109 interchange in proportion to their impacts to this interchange. Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on this proposal. If you have any questions concerning our comments, please contact Rick at (509) 557-1633. Sincerely, Paul Gonseth, P.E. Materials and Planning Engineer PG rh/dje. cc: File SR 82 (20 11) Rick Gifford, Traffic Engineer Tom Lenberg, Area 3 Maintenance Supervisor p:\459005\devrev\sr82\bentco_ Cottonwood Commercial Plaza- Zone Change.docx EXHIBIT A-9 Page 8 of 28 ---PAGE BREAK--- Washington State Department of Transportation Paula Hammond, P.E. Secretary of Transportation January 6, 2011 Benton County Planning Department P.O.Box910 Prosser, WA 99350 Attention: Clark Posey, Senior Planner Subject: Cotton Wood Springs RV Resort I-82- Exit 109 Rt, Badger Road Vicinity South Central Region 2809 Rudkin Road, Union Gap P.O. Box 12560 Yakima, WA 98909-2560 [PHONE REDACTED] TIY: 1-[PHONE REDACTED] www.wsdot.wa.gov We have reviewed the proposed project and have the following comments: 1. The proposed project is in the vicinity of the Interstate 82 Exit 109 interchange., I-82, including the ramps, is a fully controlled limited access facility. The proposed project will be accessed via the Wiser Parkway/Badger Road intersection. In our October 20, 2009 letter we encouraged the County to construct the intersection an appreciable distance away from the ramp terminal to avoid future operational problems. This intersection has since been built immediately outside the limited access boundaries of the interchange. · The applicant has indicated that the proposed RV park would generate 67 PM peak hour trips ( 46 inbound and 21 outbound) at the Badger Road/Wiser Parkway intersection. The County should investigate whether this additional traffic will require a right turn lane in the south bound direction of Badger Road to Wiser Parkway now. 2. Any outdoor advertising or motorist signing for this project will need to comply with state criteria. Please contact Rick Gifford of the WSDOT South Central Regional Office at (509) 577-1985 for specifics. 3. Any proposed lighting should be directed down towards the site, and away from I-82. Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on this proposal. If you have any questions concerning our comments, please contact Rick at 577-1633. Sincerely, Paul Gonseth, P.E. Planning and Materials Engineer BP: rh/jh cc: File SR 82 Tom Lenberg, Area 3 Maintenance Superintendent Rick Gifford, Traffic Engineer P:\459005\DEVREVISR82\BentCo_CottonWood Springs RV Resort_ Wiser Pkwy.doc EXHIBIT A-9 Page 9 of 28 ---PAGE BREAK--- ~~soiith-ctioitralntiogion- Washington State Department of Transportation Paula J. Hammond Secretary of Transportation January 29, 2009 Benton County Planning & Building Department P. 0. Box 910 Prosser, WA 99350-0910 Attention: Michael E. Shuttleworth, Senior Planner Subject: EA 08-30; City of Richland 2809 Rudkin Road, Union Gap P.O. Box 12560 Yakima, WA 98909-2560 · (509) 577-1600 TTY: 1-[PHONE REDACTED] www.wsdot.wa.gov Expand UGA area near Badger Road Interchange (178 acres) Interstate 82, Exit 109 (Badger Road) Vicinity We have reviewed the proposed project and have the following comments. 1. The proposed UGA expansion is in the vicinity of the Interstate 82- Badger Road (Exit I 09) interchange. Access to the State highway system from this property will most likely be via the Badger Road (Exit 109) interchange. I -82 and its ramps are a fully contolled limited access facility. Additionally, Badger Road is a fully controlled limited access road from 300 feet southerly of the east bound on ramp to 300 feet northerly of the west bound off ramp. No direct access will be allowed within the limited access areas. 2. It appears that Benton County plans to build a public intersection to Badger road that would serve this UGA expansion areajnst outside the limited access area of the ramp Gust over 300 feet southerly of the ramp). The WSDOT would encourage the County and the City to coordinate the construction of the intersection further south of the ramp terminal to avoid operational problems. This new intersection will be a major access to Badger Road and there is plenty of undeveloped land for this to be accomplished. Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on this proposal. If you have any questions concerning our comments, please contact Rick at (509) 557-1633. Sincerely, Bill Preston, P Regional Materials and Planning Engineer BP rh/dje cc: File SR 82 Tom Lenberg, Area 3 Maintenance Supervisor p:\459005\devrev\sr82\City of Richland_ Expand UGA area- Badger IC area.doc EXHIBIT A-9 Page 10 of 28 ---PAGE BREAK--- Washington State Department of Transportation Paula J. Hammond Secretary of Transportation January 26, 2009 Benton County Planning & Building Department P. 0. Box 910 Prosser, WA 99350-0910 Attention: Michael E. Shuttleworth, Senior Planner Subject: EA 09-01; Kennewick Cottonwood Elementary School Construction of a new Elementary School (51,000 sq. ft.) Interstate 82, Exit 109 (Badger Road) Vicinity South Central Region 2809 Rudkin Road, Union Gap P.O. Box 12560 Yakima, WA 98909-2560 (509) 577-1600 TTY: 1-[PHONE REDACTED] www.wsdot.wa.gov We have reviewed the proposed project and have the following comments. 1. The proposed construction is in the vicinity of the Interstate 82 - Badger Road (Exit 1 09) interchange. Access to the State highway system from this property will most likely be via the Badger Road (Exit 1 09) interchange. I-82 and its ramps are a fully contolled limited access facility. Additionally, Badger Road is a fully controlled limited access road from 300 feet southerly of the east bound on ramp to 300 feet northerly of the west bound off ramp. No direct access will be allowed within the limited access areas. 2. It appears that Benton County plans to build the public intersection to Badger road just outside the limited access area of the ramp Gust over 300 feet from the ramp). The WSDOT would encourage the County to construct the intersection an appreciable distance from the ramp terminal to avoid future operational problems. There is plenty of undeveloped land for this to be accomplished easily, and it would allow enough spacing between intersections for channelization and any road widening for a County road with a 50 MPH speed limit. 3. Any proposed lighting should be directed down towards the site, and away from Interstate 82. 4. We are concerned with the cwnulative impact of developments on the interchange and within the boundaries of our access control. Future developments are required to mitigate their significant impacts, including those to the state transportation system. As with other recent developments in this vicinity, we recommend that the developer contribute to future improvements to the I-82 Exit 109 interchange in proportion to their impacts to this interchange. EXHIBIT A-9 Page 11 of 28 ---PAGE BREAK--- Mr. Michael Shuttleworth- Kennewick Cottonwood Elementary School January 26, 2009 Page2 Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on this proposal. If you have any questions concerning our comments; please contact Rick at (509) 557-1633. Sincerely, Bill Preston, P Regional Materials and Planning Engineer BP rh/dje cc: File SR 82 Rick Gifford, Traffic Engineer Tom Lenberg, Area 3 Maintenance Supervisor p:\459005\devrev\sr82\bentco _ Kennewick Cottonwood Elementary School. doc EXHIBIT A-9 Page 12 of 28 ---PAGE BREAK--- - Washington State Department of Transportation Paula J. Hammond Secretary ofT ransportation January 29, 2008 Benton County Planning/Building Department P.O. Box 910 Prosser, WA 99350-0910 Attention: Michael E. Shuttleworth, Senior Planner Subject: Steve Westermeyer- 13 Mini Storage Buildings EA 07-101 I -82 Badger Road Interchange, MP 109 Vicinity South Central Region 2809 Rudkin Road, Union Gap P.O. Box 12560 Yakima, WA 98909-2560 (509) 577-1600 TTY: 1-[PHONE REDACTED] wvvw.wsdot.wa.gov We have reviewed the proposed project and have the following comments. 1. The proposed project is adjacent to Interstate 82. I-82, including the ramps, is a fully-controlled limited access highway with a posted speed limit of 70 miles per hour. No direct access will be allowed to I-82, access to the site will be via Reata Road. 2. The applicant does not identify the expected total number of vehicle trips per day. The ITE Trip Generation Manual estimates that 13 Mini-Storage buildings (Land Use 151) containing 22 storage units each would generate 80 to 400 vehicle trips per weekday and 10 to 46 trips in the P.M. peak hour. This amount of trips could have an adverse effect on the I-82/Badger Road Interchange. We request that the County assess a pro rata share contribution from the developer for improvements to I-82 and the local road system in proportion to their impacts to the interchange and/or intersections. 3. Storm water and surface runoff generated by this project must be retained and treated on site, and not be allowed to flow onto WSDOT rights-of-way. 4. Any proposed lighting should be directed down towards the site, and away from Interstate 82. EXHIBIT A-9 Page 13 of 28 ---PAGE BREAK--- - - Benton County Planning Department- Steve Westermeyer- Mini-Storage Buildings January 29, 2008 Page2 5. Any outdoor advertising or motorist signing considered for this project will need to comply with state criteria. Please contact Rick Gifford of the WSDOT South Central Region Traffic Office at (509) 577-1985 for specifics. Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on this proposal. If you have any questions, please contact Rick at (509) 577-1633. Sincerely, Bill Preston, P Regional Plauning Engineer BP: cc: File SR 82 Tom Lenberg, Area 3 Maintenance Superintendent Rick Gifford, Traffic Engineer P:\459005\DEVREVISR82\BentCo _Westermeyer_ Mini Storage. doe EXHIBIT A-9 Page 14 of 28 ---PAGE BREAK--- October 2, 2007 Benton County Planning/Building Department P.O. Box 910 Prosser, WA99350-0910 Attention: Michael E. Shuttleworth, Senior Planner Subject: Cottonwood Estates- 24 Lot Subdivision SUB 07-09/EA 07-93, Badger Properties II, LLC I-82 Badger Road Interchange, MP 109 Vicinity We have reviewed the proposed project and have the following comments. 1. The proposed project is not adjacent to Interstate 82 but will utilize the I-82/Badger Road Interchange. I-82, including the ramps, is a fully-controlled limited access highway with a posted speed limit of70 miles per hour. 2. The proposed land use of 24 residential lots will produce an estimated 230 daily vehicle trips based on the ITE Trip Generation Manual. This amount of trips could have an adverse effect on the I-82/Badger Road Interchange. WSDOT has responded to previous developments in this area including the Cottonwood Springs Development and Badger Mountain Planned Development and we are concerned with the cumulative impacts to the Interchange area. We request that the County assess a pro rata share contribution from the developer for improvements to I-82 and the local road system in proportion to their impacts to the interchange and/or intersections. Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on this proposal. If you have any questions, please contact Jeff Sommerville at (509) 577-1632. Sincerely, Bill Preston, P Regional Planning Engineer BP: jls/jmh cc: File #16, SR 82 Tom Lenberg, Area 3 Maintenance Superintendent P:\459005\DEVREV\SR82\BentCo _Cottonwood Estates Subdivision. doc EXHIBIT A-9 Page 15 of 28 ---PAGE BREAK--- - - - March 7, 2006 Planning & Building Department Benton County P. o: Box 910 Prosser, WA 99350-0910 Attention: Michael E. Shuttleworth, Senior Planner Subject: SP 6-7; J & B Construction and Landscaping Co. Construct 4,000 SF Warehouse & Office Building About 500 Feet South ofl-82, Exit 109 (Badger Road I/C) EB Ramps We have reviewed the proposed project, and have the following comments. 1. The project site is not adjacent to Interstate 82, but is in the immediate vicinity of the I-82 Exit 109 (Badger Road) interchange. I-82, including the ramps, is a fully- controlled limited access facility with a posted speed limit of 70 miles per hour. The limited access boundaries extend south along Badger Road (see attached right-of-way sheet). Access to the site is located approximately 500 feet south of the I-82 eastbound ramps, and is outside the limited access boundaries. 2. It is the applicant's responsibility to keep and maintain I-82 free of any of their debris. Any spilled material shall be cleaned up at the applicant's expense. 3. Any outdoor advertising or motorist signing considered for this project will need to comply with state criteria. Please contact Rick Gifford of the WSDOT South Central Regional Office at (509) 577-1985 for specifics. 4. I-82 is an existing facility. The proponent should be aware that they are proposing· development in an area with traffic noise. They should also expect that traffic noise may continue to grow into the future, and, as an essential public facility, I-82 may need to be expanded to accommodate future traffic growth. If the proponent is concerned with traffic noise affecting this development, it is the developer's responsibility to dampen or deflect any traffic noise for it. 5. Any proposed lighting should be directed down towards the site, and away from I-82. EXHIBIT A-9 Page 16 of 28 ---PAGE BREAK--- - - - - - - Michael Shuttleworth, Benton County Planning Dept. - J & B Construction Office March 7, 2006 Page2 6. WSDOT has a pavement restoration project programmed for the I-82 Exit 109 (Badger Road Interchange) in 2007. The scheduled ad date for this project is February 2007. WSDOT responded to the Badger Mountain Planned Development, the Cottonwood Springs Long Plat, and other developments in this area indicating that they are having significant adverse impacts to Exit 1 09, and that they need to mitigate their impacts to the WSDOT highway system. The Badger Mountain Planned Development was required to restripe the crossroad and install conduit at the ramp terminals at Exit I 09. Also, we recommended that the Cottonwood Springs development contribute to the necessary improvements, including signalization, to the Exit 109 interchange in proportion to their impacts. We recommend that any future developments on this property contribute to the necessary improvements to Exit 109 in proportion to their impacts as well. Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on this proposal. If you have any questions, please contact me at (509) 577-1630. Sincerely, Bill Preston, P Regional Planning Engineer BP: rh/jjg cc: File SR 82 Rick Gifford, Traffic Engineer Mike Kukes, Area 3 Maintenance Superintendent p:\planning\devrev\sr82\bentco _j & b const_officc.doc EXHIBIT A-9 Page 17 of 28 ---PAGE BREAK--- EXHIBIT A-9 Page 18 of 28 ---PAGE BREAK--- EXHIBIT A-9 Page 19 of 28 ---PAGE BREAK--- EXHIBIT A-9 Page 20 of 28 ---PAGE BREAK--- EXHIBIT A-9 Page 21 of 28 ---PAGE BREAK--- EXHIBIT A-9 Page 22 of 28 ---PAGE BREAK--- EXHIBIT A-9 Page 23 of 28 ---PAGE BREAK--- EXHIBIT A-9 Page 24 of 28 ---PAGE BREAK--- EXHIBIT A-9 Page 25 of 28 ---PAGE BREAK--- EXHIBIT A-9 Page 26 of 28 ---PAGE BREAK--- February 27, 2013 Wes Romine Development Services Manager City of Kennewick 210 W. 6th Ave. Kennewick, WA 99336 Wes, This memo is written in regards to your request for the Kennewick School District #17 to address capacity questions in regards to the proposed Canyon Ranch Preliminary Plat. The school district has been asked to identify the boundary schools for this development and state if each of the schools were within walking zones or receive bussing. The boundary schools for this development are Cottonwood Elementary (Bussing Zone), Desert Hills Middle School (Bussing Zone) and Kamiakin High School (Bussing zone). 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 within our preferred enrollment numbers. The Kennewick School District has the capacity to add students at all levels and at the three schools mentioned in this letter. Forecasted growth in additional boundary areas of the Kennewick School District makes it difficult know if any redistricting could result because of the Canyon Ranch proposed development. Sincerely, Douglas M. Carl Director of Capital Projects 622 N. Kellogg Street Kennewick, WA 99336 (509) 222-7667 Fax (509) 222-5057 [EMAIL REDACTED] EXHIBIT A-9 Page 27 of 28 ---PAGE BREAK--- From: Kathy McMullen To: Wes Romine Subject: RE: Preliminary Plat - Canyon Ranch PP 12-09 Date: Tuesday, January 08, 2013 1:35:11 PM Please provide pedestrian and bicycle access to surrounding streets so that people can walk or bike to transit services. This looks very closed off from the transportation network. Kathleen McMullen Service Development Manager Ben Franklin Transit [PHONE REDACTED] From: Wes Romine [mailto:[EMAIL REDACTED]] Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2013 10:52 AM To: Kathy McMullen; Dick Ciccone; Benton Clean Air Authority; Benton Franklin Health Dept; Benton PUD; Benton PUD; Benton PUD; Benton PUD; Benton PUD; Cascade Natural Gas; Charter Communication; CID; Dept of Fish & Wildlife; Dept of Fish & Wildlife; Frontier; Frontier; Frontier; Kenewick Irrigation District; Kennewick School District; Mike Blatman Subject: Preliminary Plat - Canyon Ranch PP 12-09 Attached is a preliminary plat application for a 131 lot subdivision located north of Ridgeline Drive and west of Clodfelter. Please send any comments by January 24, 2013. Thank you, Wes Romine Development Services Manager City of Kennewick 210 W. 6th Avenue Kennewick, WA 99336 (509) 585-4558 EXHIBIT A-9 Page 28 of 28 ---PAGE BREAK--- From: Mary Blomberg To: Wes Romine Cc: [EMAIL REDACTED] Blomberg Subject: Canyon Ranch Subdivision Date: Monday, February 25, 2013 12:53:55 PM Dear Mr. Romine, I am writing to ask that restrictions be made on construction activities. The lower part of this area was cleared for building in the later part of last year. We heard construction equipment from early in the morning to midnight most days. Please put limits on hours of construction activity. I can understand 6:00 am, but not late nights. Thank you, Mary Blomberg 1218 S Tranquility PR SE Kennewick, WA 99338 EXHIBIT A-10 Page 1 of 1 ---PAGE BREAK--- Telquist Ziobro McMillen Attorneys at Law February 14, 2013 Rick Washington State Department of Transportation 2809 Rudkin Road Union Gap PO Box 12560 Yakima, WA 98909-2560 WesRomine Development Services Manager City of Kennewick 210 W. 6th Ave. Kennewick, WA 99336 Re: January 24, 2013, Letter - Canyon Ranch Dear Mr. and Mr. Romine: I represent Tri-Cities Development, LLC. I am responding to Mr. Byrd's letter to the City of Kennewick dated January 24, 2013 and Paul Gonseth's follow up letter dated February 11,2013. My client filed a previous plat application for 35 lots at the same site which generated no comments from WSDOT. With this current application which is 131 lots, WSDOT is now requesting my client to construct approximately 1,000 feet of roadway at a cost estimated at $300,000.00. WSDOT's letter references facts below that I encourage you to review in reconsidering this request. l. Recent projects completed by both City and County created additional operational conflicts within the limited boundaries ofI-82. 2. The cumulative impact of recent City and County developments (Cottonwood Commercial Plaza SUB 11-02, Cottonwood Elementary School EA 0901, Edward Rose Apartments PLN 2011-0079, and others) are requiring the construction of second southbound lane between George E. Telquist· John S. Ziobro • Robert G. McMillen Richard D. Whaley· Benjamin H. Rascoff 1321 Columbia Park Trail· Richland, WA 99352 (509) 737-8500 • Toll Free (877) 789-LAWI • Fax (509) 737-9500 • www.tzmlaw.com EXHIBIT A-11 Page 1 of 3 ---PAGE BREAK--- Page 2of3 To: Mr.Byrd Date: February 14,2013 the eastbound ramp and terminal. WSDOT's letter makes the point that independent of this project there is an existing substandard condition. My client is not responsible for fixing an existing substandard condition. Benchmark Land Company v. City of Battle Ground, 146 Wn. 2d. 685 (2002). Benchmark is widely cited by both the Court of Appeals and the State Supreme Court. As recently as 2010, the Court of Appeals provided analysis to similar situation as follows: Douglas contends that the Hearing Examiner's decision effectively requires it to alleviate preexisting regional problems and it is not legally required to do that. In Benchmark, the City conditioned plat approval on offsite road improvements that address a pre-existing deficiency. A road did not meet the City roadway standards even before the proposed development and the expenditure of the improvement was not tied to the traffic generated by the proposed development. The Supreme Court held that plat condition must be directly related to the generation of traffic by the proposed development. Lanzce v. Douglas, Inc., v. City of Spokane Valley, 154 Wn. App. 408, 423 (2010). WSDOT confirms an existing substandard condition and that it failed to request mitigation during the above referenced development but now asks my client to bear 100% of the cost irrespective of its contribution to the condition. This clearly exceeds any authority that WSDOT or the City has to impose as a condition of this plat approval. Equally important, even if an offsite street improvement was justified either WSDOT or the City is required to show a nexus between this project and possible impacts caused by the plat application and that the requested remedy or mitigation is roughly proportionate to the impacts which may be caused by the application. Benchmark, 146 Wn. 2d. at 692. WSDOT's letter clearly fails to address the specific impacts created by this application and what share, if any, my client is responsible to contribute towards. Additionally, it appears WSDOT is attempting to pass the burden on to my client to determine what their proportionate share will be. WSDOT is also failing to acknowledge that the improvements they request are outside of the City limits and it's urban growth area. Nolte v. City of Olympia, 96 Wn. App. 944 (1999) unequivocally demonstrates the City cannot impose mitigation outside its jurisdiction. [a]n impact fee must be imposed by an entity with development-approval authority, or, in alternate terms, by an entity with authority to approve or disapprove a change in the use of the land on which the project will be built. Because a City lacks statutory authority to approve or disapprove a change in the George E. Telquist· John S. Ziobro • Robert G. McMillen Richard D. Whaley· Benjamin H. Rascoff 1321 Columbia Park Trail 0 Richland, WA 99352 (509) 737-8500 0 Toll Free (877) 789-LAWI 0 Fax (509) 737-9500 0 www.tzmlaw.com EXHIBIT A-11 Page 2 of 3 ---PAGE BREAK--- Page3 of3 To: Mr. Byrd nate: February 14, 2013 use of land beyond its borders-that authority generally rests with the municipality in which the land is located, which here is the County - RCW 82.02.050 - .090 does not authorize a city to impose impact fees on land outside its borders. RCW 58.17.110 does not grant more authority than RCW 82.02.050 - .090. Even if the City has authority to impose mitigation outside its jurisdiction through SEPA, adopting WSDOT's proposed mitigation raises additional issues. First, the City must make a threshold determination on whether there is a probable significant adverse environmental impact. It is not within WSDOT's authority to sununarily declare an impact and require a Traffic Impact Analysis if Tri-Cities Development disagrees with WSDOT's requirement. The determination of impact must be made by the SEPA official. This has not occurred. To date, the City nor WSDOT has provided any form of statistical analysis that quantifies or supports a threshold determination of a significant probable impact. Second, no authority exists for WSDOT or the City to impose 100% of the mitigation irrespective of the phase that mitigation is triggered. To the contrary, a methodology is required to calculate a mitigation payment. City of Federal Way v. Town & Country Real Estate, LLC 161 Wn. App. 17,52, (2011). Finally, WSDOT's follow-up letter of February 11,2013, proposes a traffic study after Phase 3 for "review and comment" by the City and WSDOT. Without a specified process that allows for an open record review, hearing, and appeal procedure, after Phase 3, this proposal provides no assurance that Tri-Cities Development can utilize any lawful procedure to seek relief from unjustified expenses imposed by WSDOT. This proposal should be rejected unless a process exists that safeguards Tri-Cities Development's right to contest WSDOT's proposed improvements whether in total or in part. For these various reasons, the City should reject WSDOT's request. Very truly yours, George E. Telquist· John S. Ziobro • Robert G. McMillen Richard D. Whaley' Benjamin H. Rascoff 1321 Columbia Park Trail' Richland, WA 99352 (509) 737-8500 • Toll Free (877) 789-LAWI • Fax (509) 737-9500 • www.tzmlaw.com JS7)mlc Enclosures cc: Matt Smith Lisa Beaton, Attorney File EXHIBIT A-11 Page 3 of 3