Document Kennewick_doc_d5d869becf

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT/PLANNING DEPARTMENT PO BOX 6108 ▪ 210 W. 6 TH AVENUE, KENNEWICK, WA 99336 PHONE: (509) 585-4558 FAX: (509) 585-4442 CITY OF KENNEWICK HEARING EXAMINER Sharon Rice, Hearing Examiner AGENDA MONDAY, APRIL 11, 2011 @6:00 PM KENNEWICK CITY HALL, COUNCIL CHAMBER 210 W. 6TH AVE, KENNEWICK, WA 99336 I. CALL TO ORDER II. PROCEDURAL INFORMATION III. PUBLIC HEARING A. Planned Development Permit (PDP 10-01) and Preliminary Plat (PP 10-02) is a request for a 38 lot gated community subdivision located at 6100 W. 25th Ave on an approximately 50.27 acre parcel. IV. ADJOURN ---PAGE BREAK--- EXHIBIT A-1 Page 1 of 9 Public Hearing Date: April 11, 2011 Applicant: Jose & Tammy Steele-Chavallo 102 N. Lincoln Street Kennewick, WA 99336 Engineer: Paul Christensen, P.E. Oasis Development Corporation P.O. Box 6132 Pasco, WA99302 Soils Engineer: Michael Black Columbia Engineers & Constructors 1806 Terminal Drive Richland, WA 99354 City of Kennewick Staff Contact: Wes Romine, Development Services Manager Parcel Number & Legal Description: 108894011681005; Lot 5, Short Plat 1681, according to the survey thereof recorded under Auditor’s File No. 90-3102, records of Benton County, Washington, TOGETHER WITH that portion of all canal right of way located in the Southeast quarter of the Southeast quarter AND that portion of the Northeast quarter of the Southeast quarter, lying South of the Division 4, Kennewick Irrigation District Main Canal, all in Section 8, Township 8 North, Range 29 East, W.M., in Benton County, Washington. Site Information: Project Location 6100 W. 25th Avenue, extension of W. 25th Avenue and W. 26th Avenue west of the Panoramic Heights Neighborhood. Includes a portion of “Thompson Hill”. Property Size 50.27 acres. 36 lots are located on 24.07 acres at the lower portion of the hill. Lot 37 is 6.1 acres at the middle of the hill and Lot 38 is 20.1 acres at the top of the hill. Existing Zoning Residential Suburban (RS) Comprehensive Plan Designation Low Density Residential at mid and lower part of hill. Open Space at top of hill. Topography Hilly to Steep Slopes, A large portion of the site is 0-20% Slope however an area at the middle of the hill has slopes that are over 40%. Utilities Water and Sewer is available at the end of W. 25th ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND COMMUNITY PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO THE HEARING EXAMINER FILE NO: PDP 10-01/PLN-2010-04491 PP 10-02/PLN-2010-04492 ---PAGE BREAK--- EXHIBIT A-1 Page 2 of 9 Avenue & W. 26th Avenue, water is not available above the 810 elevation. Surrounding Comprehensive Plan, Zoning & Land Uses: North: Comprehensive Plan – Low Density Residential Zoning – RS Existing Land Uses – Single-family residences South: Comprehensive Plan – Low Density Residential Zoning – RL Existing Land Uses – Undeveloped East: Comprehensive Plan – Low Density Residential Zoning – RL Existing Land Uses – Single-family residences West: Comprehensive Plan – Low Density Residential/Open Space Zoning – RL and Agriculture (A-40) Existing Land Uses – Undeveloped, and 1 Bed & Breakfast at the top of Thompson Hill. PDP Key Application Processing Dates: Pre-Application/Feasibility Meeting Application Submittal October 15, 2010 Determination of Completeness Issued November 19, 2010 Notice of Application Mailed November 23, 2010 Site Plan Review Committee Meeting December 15, 2010 SEPA Threshold Determination Issued March 21, 2011 Date of Published Notice of Public Hearing March 27, 2011 Date of Mailed Notice of Public Hearing March 24, 2011 Public Hearing Date April 11, 2011 SEPA Appeal Period Ends April 11, 2011 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 Deviation Request A-7 Critical Area Report A-8 SEPA Determination A-9 City Department and Outside Agency Comments A-10 Neighborhood Comment Staff Analysis of Proposal & Discussion: The proposed Planned Development Permit (PDP 10-01) and Preliminary Plat (PP 10-02) is a request for a 38 lot gated community subdivision located on an approximately 50.27 acre parcel. ---PAGE BREAK--- EXHIBIT A-1 Page 3 of 9 A Preliminary Plat (KMC 17.10) is the first step in property subdivision with more than nine lots and is an approval for overall lot layout and compliance with land use regulations, and is required prior to Final Platting. The Final Plat is the last phase in the subdivision process and involves a detailed review of street, utility and stormwater construction standards. Recording of the signed Final Plat drawing is required prior to the creation of the individual lots. Approval of a Planned Development Permit is required prior to approval of the Preliminary Plat application since deviations from the City’s Codes are requested. The purpose of Planned Developments (KMC 18.45) is to provide the opportunity for flexible design concepts warranting deviations from normal development standards. Deviations may be approved if the proposal better accommodates the physical conditions of the property and represents an equal or superior product than if applicable sections of the Code were strictly followed. Deviations Requested: For the Planned Development Permit the following five deviations are required to be granted for the Preliminary Plat to be approved: 1. Per KMC 17.20.010(4)(e) all residential lots shall abut a dedicated street for at least thirty (30) feet. The applicant is requesting a deviation from this standard because he is proposing a gated community without public access and is proposing to use private streets to access all lots. 2. The proposed gates to the subdivision will form a dead end at the end of W. 25th Avenue and W. 26th Avenue and will required a vehicle turnaround area. Per the City’s standard residential street detail 2-1 sheet 3 of 4, the standard turnaround diameter for emergency vehicles is fifty three (53) feet. The applicant has requested the turnaround diameter be reduced to forty (40) feet. Per the City’s Fire Department this is not a required emergency vehicle turnaround. 3. Per Residential/Neighborhood street detail 2-1, sheet 2 of 4, streets are to be crowned in the center with a 2% slope to each side of the street. To help minimize grading the applicant has requested that the center crown be eliminated and the streets sloped 2% from the uphill side to the downhill side of the street. 4. Per Residential/Neighborhood street detail 2-1, sheet 2 of 4, sidewalks are separated 5-feet from the inside face of curb to the sidewalk. The applicant has requested the sidewalks be placed adjacent to the curb to minimize vehicle bottoming out problems from curb to garage. 5. The subject property is zoned Residential Suburban and a minimum density of 3 units per acre is required per the Table of Residential Development Standards (KMC 18.12.010 A.2). The proposed density for the project is .76 units per acre. Footnote 2(b) to the Table of Residential Development Standards allows the minimum density to not be applied if it can be demonstrated that due to environmental and/ or physical constraints on the property the minimum density cannot be achieved. RM Zoning District PDP Modification Requested Minimum Lot Size 10,500 sq. ft. No Modification Requested Max. Density (Units/Acre) 3 No Modification Requested ---PAGE BREAK--- EXHIBIT A-1 Page 4 of 9 Min. Density (Units/Acre) 3 .76 Units per acre Min. Lot Width 60-feet No Modification Requested Min. Structure Street Setback 15-feet No Modification Requested Min. Garage Street Setback 25-feet No Modification Requested Min. Side Yard Setback 5-feet No Modification Requested Min. Rear Yard Setback 15-feet No Modification Requested Max. Building Height 30-feet No Modification Requested Property History: 1. The subject parcel was annexed into the City in 1974 (Ord. No. 1754) with a Residential Suburban (RS) zoning designation. 2. The Southridge Sub-Area plan was adopted in April of 2005 which changed the Comprehensive Land Use designation at the top of the hill from Low Density Residential to Open Space. The portion of the parcel at the lower part of the hill remained Low Density Residential. 3. Although the Comprehensive Land Use was changed with adoption of the Southridge Sub-Area plan the zoning remains RS and is inconsistent with the land use at the top of the hill. 4. In August of 2005, City Council approved the Panoramic Heights #4 preliminary plat (Res. 05-31) to allow 45 single family lots on the subject parcel. The property was sold to the applicant before the lots were created through the Final Plat process. 5. In December of 2008 an application for the development of 27 lots was submitted by the current owner/applicant. A pre-decision meeting was conducted by the Kennewick Planning Commission on October 19, 2009 and there was a recommendation that City Council approve the project. 6. City Council conducted a Public Hearing on November 17, 2009 and continued the item until the next meeting without making a decision on approval or denial. The applicant withdrew the application before Council made a decision. Critical Area: The subject parcel contains “Steep Slope” critical areas which includes portions of the site with greater than 15% Slopes. “Shrub Steppe” critical areas exist on the adjacent parcel to the west, but do not exist on the subject parcel. Since “Steep Slope” critical areas exist on the site a Critical Area report is required per KMC 18.58.140, and additional requirements of KMC 18.62.060 for Geologically Hazardous areas must also be met. The City’s Critical Area Ordinance addresses the control of slope stability and erosion and is not an ordinance to prohibit building on slopes unless the slopes are greater than 40%. A Critical Area Report for the project has been submitted by a registered engineer, which includes a Geotechnical Investigation report and Mitigation Plan. The conditions of approval require compliance with the Critical Area Report and Mitigation Plan for final plat approval and construction on individual lots. Requirements of the Mitigation Plan addresses items such as the design of retaining walls to consider “global stability to ensure the slope below the retaining wall(s) remain stable”, review of individual lot “site grading and drainage plans” by a licensed engineer or construction of homes and swimming pools, and control of irrigation and stormwater so the ground does not become saturated. Density: ---PAGE BREAK--- EXHIBIT A-1 Page 5 of 9 Per the Table of Residential Development Standards (KMC 18.12.010 A.2) a minimum density of 3 units per acre is required. The proposed density for the project is .76 units per acre. Footnote 2(b) to the Table of Residential Development Standards allows the minimum density to not be applied if it can be demonstrated that due to environmental and/ or physical constraints on the property the minimum density cannot be achieved. It is staff’s opinion that there are environmental and physical constraints that make it difficult to apply the City’s minimum density requirements. A large portion of the site contains a “Steep Slope” Critical Area with a portion exceeding 40% slope which makes that portion of the site unbuildable. The sloping land also creates more stormwater runoff and by increasing the density it will increase the amount of impervious surface which makes stormwater a more difficult issue to address. Also, at this time City water cannot be provided to areas that are higher than the 810 elevation and over half of the site is above the 810 elevation. And finally, there have been concerns expressed about traffic impacts on the existing Panoramic Heights neighborhood. If the density were increase to 3 units per acre there would be roughly 4 times as many vehicle trips generated from the project. Traffic: The City’s traffic engineer has estimated that the proposed project will generate 364 vehicle trips per day or 38 PM peak hour trips, and has stated that this project meets Concurrency for Transportation. As part of the mitigation for the SEPA Determination the developer will be required to contribute $20,000 for traffic calming measures in the Panoramic Heights neighborhood that can include up to four speed humps or a traffic circle. Storm Water: The City stormwater standard for residential subdivisions is that they are designed to retain and dispose of a 25-year, 24 hour developed state storm with allowance for the continuous overflow, or a 10-year 1-hour storm if proposed pond(s) have and infiltration system. 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. The permit will be conditioned to require proof of ownership for any off site property used for stormwater retention. Streets & Utilities: Private streets are proposed for the project which will be built to City standard with the exception of the above minor deviations requested. Easements will be required over utility lines to allow access to utilities. Water and sewer is available by the extension of the existing utility lines in W. 25th Avenue and W. 26th Avenue. Water is not available above Zone 4 water service (810 elevation) which includes portions of lots 1 through 9 and all of lots 37 & 38. If lots 37 & 38 are developed prior to City water available at those lots, water wells will need Health Department approval. For lots 1 though 9, individual booster and pressure storage tanks will be required for all homes with a floor elevation of 810 feet or higher. Parks: Based on the City’s “Park Fee Determination Process” form, which uses land value and density of living units for the calculation it has been determined that for the 38 dwelling unit project the applicant will be required to pay $20,691.72 to mitigate impacts on park zone 6W (Southridge). Park fees will be collected as the project builds out based on a percent of units in the phase of work that a building permit is applied for. Applicable Regulations: ---PAGE BREAK--- EXHIBIT A-1 Page 6 of 9 Planned Development Permits are regulated by KMC 18.45. The following two sections are important to consider when deciding on approval or denial of a project: KMC 18.45.020(2), “The City may approve deviations from certain standards of this Code if the proposal better accommodates the physical conditions of the property and represents an equal or superior product than if applicable sections of the Code were strictly followed, but there may be no deviations from the street standards contained in KMC Titles 5 and 17. The City may reduce required walkways if adequate, safe, pedestrian routes are otherwise established.” It is staff’s opinion that by approving the requested deviations that the proposal will better accommodate the physical conditions of the property and represent an equal or superior product than if applicable sections of the code were strictly followed. KMC 18.45.040: Findings: A Planned Development Permit may be approved only when the following findings are made: The planned development generally conforms to the Comprehensive Plan and zoning district for use, density, open space, circulation, public facilities, and the standards of development set forth therein; The planned development generally conforms with the zoning district uses; The planned development forms an integrated whole of sufficient unity to justify exceptions to the normal regulations of the Kennewick Municipal Code; and The residential development will produce a desirable and stable residential environment in harmony with the surrounding property; or The Commercial development will have proper traffic circulation and parking and should have no adverse effects upon surrounding property; or The industrial development conforms with the applicable performance standards, railroad or truck access and necessary storage, and should have no adverse effects upon surrounding property. It is staff’s opinion that the above findings can be made for proposed project as conditioned. Other regulatory controls and policies include:  City of Kennewick Comprehensive Plan  KMC Title 5, 17 & 18  City of Kennewick Single-Family Residential Design Standards, KMC 18.75  Critical Area Ordinance, KMC 18.58 and KMC 18.62  Washington State Environmental Policy Act 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.” Single-Family housing is a permitted use within Residential Suburban (RS) zoning and Low Density Residential land use. The RS zoning at the top of Thompson Hill is inconsistent with the Open Space Comprehensive Land Use, however that portion of the site has minimal development proposed. ---PAGE BREAK--- EXHIBIT A-1 Page 7 of 9 CRITICAL AREAS AND SHORELINE GOAL 3: “Regulate or mitigate activities in or adjacent to critical areas or the shoreline to avoid adverse environmental impacts.” A Critical Area report with a mitigation plan has been prepared for this project. By allowing the requested deviations it will give the applicant more flexibility in dealing with some of the environmental issues associated with the site. RESIDENTIAL GOAL 4: “Encourage residential development only in urban areas where services can be provided.” City water & sewer is currently available at W. 25th Avenue and W. 26th Avenue. If lots 37 & 38 are developed prior to City water being available above the 810 elevation, Health Department approval will be required for well water. HOUSING GOAL 1: “Support and develop a variety of housing types and densities to meet the diverse needs of the population.” The City of Kennewick hereby RECOMMENDS that Planned Development Permit #10- 01 and Preliminary Plat 10-02 be APPROVED with the following conditions: 1. Comply with City of Kennewick regulatory controls, policies and codes, including the Single-family Residential Design Standards unless otherwise amended by this PDP approval. 2. Comply with the provisions of the Critical Area Report, including requirements of the Mitigation Plan. 3. All fees required by the City shall be paid prior to the approval of the final plat. 4. Development shall be in conformance with the plat drawing date stamped November 19, 2010, Exhibit A-5. 5. A landscape plan must be submitted 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 prior to final plat approval. The landscape plan shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect or licensed landscape installer drawn to a legible scale. 6. All landscaped areas to be irrigated with an automatic sprinkler system or drip irrigation system the meets the requirements of the Critical Area Report. Xeriscape landscaping is encouraged. 7. Color of retaining wall material to blend with the existing natural landscape. 8. Areas of the plat with slopes exceeding 40% must be protected with an easement and labeled on the Final Plat drawing as unbuildable areas to be undisturbed and left in a natural state. 9. A Homeowner’s Association must be formed prior to phase 1 final plat approval. Each phase must be incorporated into the Association. 10. The Homeowner’s CC&Rs must be amended to include all items of the Critical Area Mitigation plan. ---PAGE BREAK--- EXHIBIT A-1 Page 8 of 9 11. 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. The arrangement must be recorded prior to the first building permit being issued. 12. Comply with the Public Works memorandum dated December 16, 2010 (Exhibit A-9). 13. Lots above the 810 foot elevation cannot be served by City water. If those lots are developed prior to City water being available, Health Department approval will be required. If floor elevations on lots are higher than the 810 foot elevation, individual booster and pressure storage tanks may be required. 14. Submit a storm comprehensive plan for the entire site. The comprehensive plan needs to be approved by the City for the entire Plat prior to Phase 1 construction plans. 15. Provide proof of land ownership for land used for stormwater runoff retention if it is located off site. 16. The Geotechnical Engineer shall review and sign the plat construction drawings to ensure they meet the intent of the recommendations contained in the geotechnical report. 17. Sewer service to lots on the north side of W. 25th Avenue and W. 26th Avenue may require a pressure pump to each house. If a pressure pump is required, as determined by the City’s Public Works Department, a note will be required on the construction drawings and Final Plat that these lots may require individual sewer pumps. 18. New sidewalks at the private road shall connect to existing sidewalks at W. 25th Avenue and W. 26th Avenue. Gates may be installed to control access. 19. A permit or notification letter is required from Northwest Natural Gas prior to issuing a DPW permit for civil infrastructure construction for gas line crossing inspection. 20. 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. 21. Fire lanes over 150-feet in length shall be provided with an approved area for turning around a fire apparatus. 22. Install Knox brand electronic key switches at the two access gates for emergency access. 23. Provide emergency vehicle access easements on new private streets. 24. Install fire hydrants and looped water mains in accordance with City engineering standards. Fire hydrants shall be installed at intersections and maximum 600-foot spacing. ---PAGE BREAK--- EXHIBIT A-1 Page 9 of 9 25. Provide dust control method(s) such as hydroseeding for all areas of the site that are disturbed. Re-hydroseeding may be required. 26. Provide a $20,000 letter of credit or escrow account to the City to be drawn by the existing Panoramic Heights HOA for their installation of up to 4 speed humps per City Standard or a single traffic circle per City Standard for traffic calming measures as deemed necessary by the Panoramic Heights HOA in conjunction with City approval. 27. In lieu of dedication of park land and based on the “Park Fee Determination Process” calculation, pay park fees in the amount of $20,691.72 for impacts to Park Planning Zone 6W (Southridge). The amount can be paid in phases based on a percentage of dwelling units being developed in each phase. Report Prepared By and Contact Person: Wes Romine Development Services Manager [EMAIL REDACTED] [PHONE REDACTED] ---PAGE BREAK--- w lô{e ?ú"il âCtC -3 4q42- PDp tÈo I / tôL^)-eoþ - Ò4,1q I CITY OF KENNE\ryICK ö 4[Ð DEPARTMENT OF COMMTINITY AND ECONOMIC DEYELOPMENT APPLICATION FORM Please complete and return to the I)epartment of Community and Economic Development, P.O. Box 6108, Kennewick' WA 99336, along with the application fee. (See fee Schedule) Attach a copy of the checklist for the land use application you are submitting. The application submittal must contain all of the information requested on the checklist in order to be processed. Incomplete applications will not be accepted. check one of the following for the type of application you are submitting: Site PIan Tier I [ ] Tier II [ ] Tier III Binding Site plan [ I Short Plat [ ] Conditional Use Add Animals Orher: Planned I)evelopment Name: Jose Chavallo and Tammy Steele-Chavallo Address: 102 North Lincoln S Kennewick, WA 99336 Tel ep h o n e :_599J35-0525 Cell phone: [PHONE REDACTED] Property Owner (if other than applicant): Address: Telephone: SITE INFORMATION Parcel #(if assigned): Area of Parcel: Acresz 22.9 Parent Parcel # 1-0889-401- Zoning: LDR vl'aìfh Address of properfy: Extensio n oi 25h Avenue and 26h Avenue, west of South Kellogg Street. Ãæ. Legal description of property: Portion of Lot 5 Short plat 168l No. of Parking spaces: N/A Present use of property: Vacant Does the proposal meet the conditions of the present zoning? yes Size of existing structure: N/A sq. ft. Size of proposed addition: N/A sq. ft. Height of buÍlding: 45 Feet Cubic feet of excavation: TBD I)eveloped Current assessed value: Cost of new construction: Proposal requested: Preliminqr fþ189vlew of planned Development lot Cost: TBD. I, the undersigned, do hereby certify that, to the best of my knowledge, the information provided above is true and correct.PAID 1 5 201{l Signature of owner or owners authorized t's Signature , I ICK RePresentative Date: to llsl t¡ r'r\ EXHIBIT A-2 Page 1 of 2 ---PAGE BREAK--- ?r)P lD =Ò I -Ðir)4r6lo =c!+ql "tc lÒ-ÒL ,?LtJ Qctg-^ OU44a-- T CfSÓ Date: Name Or Number Of Plat: General Location: Parent Parcel Numbers: Applicant Name: Address: City, State, Zip'. Phone Number: Owner's Name: Address: City, State, Zip: Surveyor's Name: Address: City, State, Zip: Engineer's Name: Address: City, State, Zip'. Area Of Plat: 5O.21 Min. Lot Size: 11 , b8€ sts. Proposed Land Use: City Of Kennewiek Preliminary Plat Application DÒ tP . â54^ fur", C ,ínoêL É.srnr-¿s e-yréNstê þú .9 z îrH t zb'* Ave. V q R ¡ p- S.e ¡.rcy r ¿f Fe*.ri¿€s o. bo r 6l=l K.nvre-k-r\q(¿ S- gq33 Ø \r-ls. 9 q 3o z Zoning: yritsìf; #/Lots: 3b Average Lot Size: ZLl r5 5O eç . LI"lt"Ç Plat Will Be Served By: Telephone Co: Water System: Sewer System: Natural Gas: Cable Tv: (Check Those Which Apply) Verizon_ Well Septic Yes X Yes X city L Citv No No Private lrrigation District: Ke.^vle,¡:,2 1 , gt. Power: prOBS¡Lf EXHIBIT A-2 Page 2 of 2 ---PAGE BREAK--- NOTICE OF APPLICATION Map on Back Proposal: An application for a Planned Development Permit and Preliminary Plat has been submitted by Jose and Tammy Chavallo, 102 N. Lincoln Street, Kennewick, WA 99336). The site is located at 6100 W. 25th Avenue, west of the Panoramic Heights neighborhood. The site consists of a 50.27 acre parcel that is proposed to be subdivided into 38 lots for a residential gated community. The site is currently zoned Residential Suburban District (RS). The Comprehensive Plan designation is Low Density Residential, with the exception of a portion of the parcel at the top of the hill with an Open Space designation. The file number is PDP 10-01/PLN-2010-04491 and PP 10-02/PLN-2010-04492. Open Record Hearing: The City of Kennewick Hearings Examiner will conduct an open record hearing at 6:00 p.m. on April 11, 2011 in the Council Chambers in Kennewick City Hall at 210 W. 6th Avenue, Kennewick, WA 99336. Testimony will be taken at this meeting. The Hearings Examiner is expected to make a decision following this meeting. Public Comment Period: You may submit comments at any time until April 11, 2011, before 4:30 p.m. Comments submitted on or before March 30, 2011 will be included in the Hearings Examiner meeting packet. If you have questions on the proposal, contact Wes Romine, Development Services Manager at (509) 585-4558 or via e-mail at [EMAIL REDACTED]. Environmental Documents and/or Studies Applicable to this Study: Environmental Determination No. 10-56. A Mitigated Determination of Non-Significance was issued for this project on March 21, 2011. The time for appealing SEPA issues is twenty-one (21) days from the issue date. Contact Gregory McCormick, City of Kennewick Planning Director, to request procedures for SEPA appeals. Determination of Completeness: The application was declared complete on November 19, 2010 for the purpose of processing. Project Permits Associated with this Proposal: None Preliminary Determination of Regulations Used for Project Mitigation: Title 18 (Zoning), Title 17 (Subdivision) of the Kennewick Municipal Code and the land use policies contained in the Kennewick Comprehensive Plan. Estimated Date of Decision: April 11, 2011 To Receive Notification of the Decision and/or the Environmental Determination: Contact the Development Services Division at 210 W. 6th Avenue, Kennewick, WA 99336 or via telephone at (509) 585-4280. Appeal: Any person aggrieved by the decision of the Kennewick City Hearings Examiner on this proposal may appeal to the Superior Court of Benton County within twenty-one (21) days of the date of decision. Wes Romine, Development Services Manager 210 W. Sixth Avenue / PO Box 6108, Kennewick WA 99336 The City of Kennewick welcomes full participation in public meetings by all citizens and does not discriminate on the basis of disability, pursuant to the requirements of the American with Disabilities Act of 1990, pub. L 101-336. No qualified individual with a disability shall be excluded or denied the benefit of participating in such meetings. If you wish to use auxiliary aids or require assistance to comment at this public meeting, please contact the City of Kennewick, Wes Romine, Development Services Department at (509) 585-4558 or TDD (509) 585-4425 or through the Washington Relay Service Center TTY at #711 at least ten days prior to the date of the meeting to make arrangements for special needs. EXHIBIT A-3 Page 1 of 5 ---PAGE BREAK--- KMK NOTIFICATION OF MAILING cop¡es of N ^JI Mailed as shown on the attached list. l0 7tlv q ^ PP 10-02IPLN-201 0_04492 PDP 1 0-01 /PLN-201 0_04491 61oo w. 2srH AVE. CITADEL ESTATES JOSE & TAMMY CHAVALLO (rtÊ EXHIBIT A-3 Page 2 of 5 ---PAGE BREAK--- Laser Mailing Labels Jam-Proof 37 1 -0889-1 05-0000-028 STEVEN P & PATRICIA A KESSIE 6108 W. 2OTH AVE KENNEWICK, WA 99338 37 1 -0989-302-0006-007 JOHNR&GINAMLAWSON 5901 W. 26TH AVE KENNEWICK, WA 99338 37 1-0889-1 02-0000-114 RICHARD P GENONI 6002 W 2OTH AVE KENNEWICK, WA 99338-1 502 37 1 -0889-1 02-0000-117 RONALD B KOESTER 6020 W. 2OTH AVE KENNEWICK, WA 99338-1502 37 1 -0889-1 02-0000-120 MARLENE KAY MUCHA 6038 W. 2OTH AVE KENNEWICK, WA 99338-1502 37 1 -0889-1 02-0000-123 RANDY A CANNON 6056 W, 2OTH AVE KENNEWICK, WA 99338-I502 37 1 -0889-1 02-0000-126 GARRI KAFIYEV 6033 W. 2OTH AVE KENNEWICK, WA 99338 2,7 1 -0889-'1 02-0000- 1 29 DEAN A & MARJORIE L KUNIGISKY 6015 W. 20ÏH AVE KENNEWICK, WA 99338 37 1 -0889-1 02-0000-132 5935 W. 2.1sr PL KENNEWICK, WA 99338-1 503 Cor porat:' , c r :i r E Expres'; 37 RICK RUSSUM WORLEY SURVËYING, INC 121 S. ELY ST KENNEWICK, WA 99336 37 I -0889-1 05-0000-025 SPENCER D & ROBIN L MONTGOMERY 6,114 W, 2OTH AVE KENNEWICK, WA 99338 37 1 -0989-303-0000-01 0 CHARLESF&ROBINLSTONE 2638 S. KELLOGG ST KENNEWICK, WA 99338 37 1 -0889-1 02-0000-1 1 5 RALPHE&JOLENËMBROZ 6008 W. 2OrH A:rlE KENNEWICK, WA 99338 37 1 -0889-1 02-0000-1 I 8 CLIFFORD B LUCAS 6026 W. 2OTH AVE KENNEWICK, WA 99338-1502 37 r -0889-1 02-0000-121 JACK D & MAR-IHA F VARNADO 6044W.20rH AVE KENNEWICK, WA 99338-1 5C2 1-0889-1 02-00AA424 DAVID R WHITEIvIARSH 6047 W.20rH A:VE KENNEWICK, WA 99338-1502 a7 1-0889-1 02-C000-1?_7 6027 W.20rH AVE KENNEWICK, WA 99338.1502 1 -0889-1 02-0000-1 3c GEORGE F & WENDY L CìICOTTE 6009 W. 2orq At/E KENNEWICK, WA 99338 a-7 1-0889-102-0C00-1 33 GARY WADDCT]PS 5929 W. 21-' PL KENNEWICK, WA 99338-15C3 Use template CEG03. Compare to Avery AVE5' 37 1 -0889-l 02-0000-1 37 GABRIEL & DEBBIE GOMEZ 59005 W. 21sr PL KENNEWICK, WA 99338 37 '1-0989-300-001 1-004 CREEKSTONE COMMUNITY ASSOC 2839 W. KENNEWICK AVE UNIT 393 KENNEWICK, WA 99336 37 1-0889-'102-0000-1 1 3 JAMEST&LILLIANFSTOWE 5926 W. 2OTH AVE KENNEWICK, WA 99338-151 1 37 1 -0889-1 02-0000-1 1 6 STEVENR&MARYCBIEHN 6014 W. 2OTH AVE KENNEWICK, WA 99338 Q7 1 -0889-1 02-0000-1 1 I ALLAN & RUTH SANDERS 6032 W. 2OTH AVE KENNEWICK, WA 99338-1502 37 1 -0889-1 02-0000-122 DAVIDJ&VALERIESOTTO 6050 W. 2OTH AVE KENNEWICK, WA 99338-1502 1 -0889-1 02-0000-125 STEVEN&BEULAHEDYE 6039 W. 2OTH AVE KENNEWICK, WA 99338-1 502 e'7 1 -0889-1 02-0000-128 JUSTINR&DESIREELGOOD 6021 W. 2OTH AVE KENNEWICK, WA 99338-1502 37 'l -0889-1 02-0000-1 31 CURTIS & ERICA SMITH 5941 W. 21sr PL KENNEWICK, WA 99338 .5 I 1 -0889-1 02-0000-1 35 AARON R & GINNY GRUNDMEIER 5917 W 21sr PL t ( KENNEWTCK \ /A 99338-1503 i.888.CE TODAY (238.6321 Corpo rate Express. co m a n C www.eway, co EXHIBIT A-3 Page 3 of 5 ---PAGE BREAK--- Laser Mailing Labels Jam-Proof 37 1 -0889-1 02-0000-1 36 TODD & JAIMI MARDEN 5911 W. 2lsr PL KENNEWICK, WA 99338 37 1 -0889-1 02-0000-1 39 JACKJ&BARBARASSTRAIT 5910 W. 21sr PL KENNEWÍCK, WA 99338-,1 503 37 1 -0889-1 02-0000-145 DOUGLAS S & CLAUDINE E FURNISS 2OO7 S. KELLOGG ST KENNEWICK, WA 99337-,18I0 37 1 -0889-1 05-0000-003 61 14 W. 2OTH AVE KENNEWICK, WA 99338-1509 37 1 -0889-1 05-0000-020 6107 W. 2OTH AVE KENNEWICK, WA 99338 37 1 -0889-301 -3081 -001 KEN & NANCY HAYS 2701 S. SHERMAN ST KENNEWICK, WA 99338 L7 1 -0889-401 -1681-002 SANFORD P & CONSTANCE WORIVINGTON 6015 W. 26TH AVE KENNEWICK, WA 99338-1918 37 1 -0989-300-001 1 -003 NNP CREEKSTONE LLC 16701 SE MCGILLIVRAY STE 150 VANCOUVER, WA 98683 i-ogeg-eot -0266-oo3 DANIEL P & RETTA R WAREHIME 2630 S. KELLOGG ST KENNEWICK, WA 99338 ?7 '1-0989-302-0003-01 1 WALLACE L & SHARON A HOUSER 6000 w. 2s1H AVE KENNEWICK, WA 99338 37 I -0889-l 02-0000-l 37 KRISTINA N ROBERTS 5905 w. 21sr PL KENNEWICK, WA 9933S 37 1 -0889-1 02-0000-140 LARRY A & BERNARDITA M RUFFIN 591ô W. 21ST PL KENNEWTCK, W A 99338_1 503 37 1 -0889-1 02-0000-l 46 ROGER D & L.'TNNE M FREEMAN 2013 S. KELLOGG AVE KENNEWICK, WA 99338-1810 37 't -0889-1 05-0000-01 83 DARRELL G & SHERRY A STEWARI' 6203 W. 2OTH AVE KENNEVy'ICK, WA 99338-1 S0B 37 I -0889-1 05-0000-021 DAWNA L LOPEZ JON JUETTE 6101 W. 2orï AVE KENNEWICK, WA 99338 37 1 -0889-400-0004-000 JASON W GOFFARD 3601 W. 36TH LP KENNEWICK, \A/A 99337 37 I -0889-401 -1 681 -003 RICHARD L & T\ARLA K O ¡.4ALLEY 6014 W. 26TH AVE KENNEy/iCK, WA 99338_1918 ót 1 -0989-301 -0766-0C1 GARY & SANDI A SIVII'i-H TOD 2617 S. KELLOG'J ST KENNEWICK,WA 99338 1 -0989-302-00c3..009 RICHARD J & PALJLA D LOCKWOOD s9o6 w. zsr' AvE KENNEWICK, WA 99338-1907 37 1-0989-302-0C03-01 2 DAVID G & V-IRGiI..I¡A CHRISTENSON 6006 w. 25'- AVE KENNE\¡itCK, u1A 99338-1 908 Use template CEG03. Compare to Avery AVE5' 37 I -0889-1 02-0000-1 38 MARK WILLIS 5904 W. 21ST PL KENNEWICK, WA 99338-1 503 37 1 -0889-1 02-0000-141 WALTER H & DEBRA S MORRISON 5925 W. 2OTH AVE KENNEWICK, WA 99338-151 1 37 I -0889-1 05-0000-001 JOHN & JENNIFER ANDREATTA 6102 W. 2OTH AVE KENNEWICK, WA 99338-1 509 37 I -0889-1 05-0000-01 I RAYMOND M ERBEZNIK 6113 W. 2OTH AVE KENNEWICK, WA 99338-1509 37 I -0889-301 -2693-001 JACOBL&LARUAGROTH 216 N JOHNSON ST KENNEWICK, WA 99336-2928 37 't -0889-401 -1 681 -001 JAMES R & ALICE JEANNE FOSTER TRUST 6009 W. 26TH AVE KENNEWICK, WA 99338 ,5t 'l -0889-401 681 -004 DONALD E & ELENNA W GALE TRUSTEES 6008 W. 26TH AVE KENNEWICK, WA 99338-1 91 8 37 'J-0989-301 -0766-002 ROBERT B & CHRISTINE A WATTS 2623 S. KELLOGG ST KENNEWICK, WA 99338 1 -0989-302-0003-0 1 0 GREGORY E & CLAUDINE K MULVIHILL PO BOX O KENNEWICK, WA 99336 ót 1 -0989-302-0004-001 MARIA O MENDOZA 2502 S. KELLOGG ST KENNEWTcK wA ee337 l"l" 1 .BBB.CF TO D,AY (238.6 Ð_ wr.,rlw, eo r p o rate Exp ress. co m a n rJ +tww, er.nta y, ec f\ Corporate \Z Express" Gù.!ÁllJRi: EXHIBIT A-3 Page 4 of 5 ---PAGE BREAK--- Laser Mailing Labels Jam-Proof 37 I -0989-302-0004-002 REGINALD G & SHEILA UNTERSEHER 6002 W. 26TH AVE KENNEWICK, WA 99338 37 1 -0989-302-0005-003 DON N & CHRISTINE E BARNES 2616 S. KELLOGG ST KENNEWICK, WA 99338 37 I -0989-302-0006-007 RICHARD E & RUTH A MATHEWS 5025 W. CLEARWATER AVE KENNEWICK, WA 99336 37 I -0989-302-0007-008 BRUCEM&JANICEMBOYUM 5908 W. 26TH AVE KENNEWICK, WA 99338 37 I -0989-303-0000-001 GLENA&JOLENECLARK 2635 S. KELLOGG ST KENNEWICK, WA 99338 37 1 -0989-303-0000-007 JAYS&SHARONLDECKER 2719 S.IRVING ST KENNEWICK, WA 99338 1 -0989-303-0000-01 0 SCOTTS&LISAWMARKO 2638 S. KELLOGG ST KENNEWICK. WA 99338-1930 2,7 MILO BAUDER 2495 MORENCY DR RICHLAND. WA 99352 56 37 1 -0989-302-0005-001 WENDELL R & MARSI{A R KNORE IRUSTEE 6003 W. 26TH A.VE KENNEWICK, WA 99338 37 1 -0989-302-0005-005 CR&JENNIFERLWHITNEY 2624 S. KELLOGG ST KENNEWICK, WA 99338 37 1 -0989-302-0006-008 JOHN C & DELLA E BLESSING TRUSTEES 2611 S. KELLOGG ST KENNEWICK, WA 99338-1930 37 1 -0989-302-0008-001 MICHAEL W RADER 2503 S. KELLOGG ST KENNEWICK, WA 99338-1929 37 1 -0989-303-0000-002 DOUGLASW&ELENAWBROWN 2639 S. KELLOGG ST KENNEWICK, WA 99338-1930 .7 I I -0989-303-0000-008 BRIAN J PRESZLËR 2716 S !Rvhic ST KENNEWICK, WA 99338-1962 .tt 1 -0989-303-0000-01 I CHARLS PAUL & BEVERLY JOI-INS TORELLI 3314 S. DENNIS CT KENNEWICK, WA 99337 37 1-1789-100-0C01 -004 SHIRLEY ANN FOSTER 4513 W. QUINAULT AVE KENNEWICK. WA 99336.1534 37 KENNETH ERICKSON PANORAMIC HEIGHTS HA 57OO W 25TH AVE KENNEWICK, WA 99338 Use template CEG032 Compare to Avery AVE5l 37 1 -0989-302-0005-002 CHARLES E & LINDA J WILLINGHAM JR 2608 S. KELLOGG ST KENNEWICK. WA 99338 37 1 -0989-302-0006-00ô CHARLES R & MOLLY E HAMAKER-TEALS 5815 W.26TH AVE KENNEWICK, WA 99338 37 I -0989-302-0007-007 WILLIAM J MD & REBECCA SIMMONS 5902 W. 26TH AVE KENNEWICK, WA 99338 37 1 -0989-302-0008-002 CHARLES&PATICIAGKOPP 5901 W. 25TH AVE KENNEWICK, WA 99338 37 1 -0989-303-0000-006 ROGER T SCHATZ 2713 S.IRVING ST KENNEWICK, WA 99338 ót 1 -0989-303-0000-009+ PETER M JACKSON TRUSTEE 2710 S.IRVING ST KENNEWICK, WA 99338 3t 1 -0689-200-0002-001 OVERLOOK HOMES LLC PO BOX 51 I GRESWELL, OR 97426 ót 1-1789-100-0002-000 SOUTHRIDGE TRI-CITIES DEV 8205 N. SPOKANE, WA 99208 lprl 'l .88B.CE TODAY (¿38.63; wwriv, Co rporate Expres:.com a n d www, e,iva\/, c, A Corporate V Expiess' \ê.iaRÈ EXHIBIT A-3 Page 5 of 5 ---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 10:15 11/24/2010 Vicinity Map EXHIBIT A-4 Page 1 of 1 Project Site PDP 10-01/PP 10-02 ---PAGE BREAK--- PRELIMINARY PLAT OF THE PLÁA/N/[D UNIT DEVELOPMENT CITADEL ESIAIES poRToN sE t/4 SECTION I 7' A R 29 E. W.M KENNEWCK. BENÏON COUNTI. WASHINCTON PARENT TAX PARCEL ID: 1 -æ69-10t -t6At -OO5 DESCRIPTION LOT 5. SHORT PLAT 1681. ACCORDINC TA THE SIJRVEY THEREOF RECORDED UNDER AUDITOR'S FILE NO, 90-3102, RECORDS OF AENIOÑ COUNU WASHING7ON TOGETHER WITH lHAf PORTION OF ALL CANAL RICHÌ OF WAY LOCAi tN THE SOUTHEASI OUARTER; AN7 THAT POF\ON OF rHE NORTHEA QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST AUARTER, LYìNC SþUTH OF THE DIVISION 4, KENNEWICK IRRIGAfION DISTRICI MAIN CANAL, ALL IN SECTION 8 'TOWNSHIP 8 NORIH, RANGE 29 EAST. ç'1.M.. JN 8ÉNION COUNTY, WASHINGTON OWNER ctÌ/ÐA!-E ESTATES LLC 102 N. LINCo¿N S'IREET KENNEIIICK WASHINGTON 993 APPLICANT CIIADALE ESTAIES LLC JOSE CHAVALLO r02 N. L/NCO¿N S7REE7 KENNEWICK, WASHINGTON 993J6 ENG/NEER PAUL CHRISTENSEN OASIS DEVELAPMENT CORPOR¡ANA\ P.O BOX 4766 PASCO. WA 99J02 (509) 460-1202 LAND SURVEYOR RICHARD S. RUSSUM WORLTY SURVEYNA SEFViCE, /NC,, PS P.O. BOv 6132 KENNEWICK. WASHINGTON 99JJ6 509-5A2-6716 LAND USE SUMMARY TOTAL AREA GROSS TOTAL AREA NEf AREA /N NUMAER OF LOTS AVERAGE LOf SIZE NET ¿r'.RGEST LOf SIZE SMALLES7 LOf SIZE WATER Sll,YfR ELECTRICAL SERVICE IRRIGAT]ON WAIER CABLE TELTVISION NOTE t. ELEVATION DAIUM: NGVD 1929 PARCEL 10EA93012693003 40 ACCESs EASEMEM rqo o loo 2oo 3oo GR¡PHIC SOÀLE - FEET EXISTING 75'KID EASEJT{EN¡ 50' KID EASEMENT PlRCEL 10889301 JOAI 00t PARCÂL 1 0889 [PHONE REDACTED] 50 27 ACRES 17-90 ACRES J 34 ACRES 38 21550 S.F. 20 ACRES t7648 S F. CIIY OF KENNEWCK CIlf OF KENNEWICK BENTON COUNIY P U.D. NO. 1 KENNEWCK IRRIGATION DISTRICT CHARÍ ER COM M U NICAT I O NS l.J UJ \ o !t¿l x lgro'g,? PARCEL 1 0989J07 07A60A3 to'tRñ PARCEL 1 0989 JO JOOÕOOO7 913Ø.1 ÃJæ.6t sE coRvEF sEcrþN a G-æ) FM) 8FÁSS C¡P sl/1 coRNER SECÍtOit I (8-29) FNO ARÁSS C¡P PMCEL I t7891000001003 PARCEL 1178914OO001004 WORLEY SURVEYING SERVICE. INC. P PO. BOX 6132 KEN,VEII/CK. WASHINGTON 99336 509-542-671 6 -o co l\te Êl EXHIBIT A-5 Page 1 of 1 ---PAGE BREAK--- l. 2. 5. 4. Citadel Estates City of Kennewick Municipal Code Deviations Citadel Estates proposes to be a true gated community. To facilitate the capability to close the roads from public access, the road system must be developed as private roads. The City's emergency services will have access through the gate system without community personnel assistance. The diameter of the access tum-around is modified from the standard three-foot radius to a forty-foot radius. Should larger trucks or emergency vehicles need to be turned around, they can obtain access and moved through the development from the entrance on26ú Avenue to the exit on 25tr Avenue. The cross slope of the street section is modified from the standard center crown section to a mono-slope section. This will better accommodate the hillside development of the lots. Drainage structues will be located only on the lower section of the roadway. Sidewalks will be located adjacent to the curb. This will better accommodate the hillside development and driveway accesses. The utility easements will be located behind the sidewalk areas. nf\ q a. c}.å,ô!-lt Signature of Applicant EXHIBIT A-6 Page 1 of 2 ---PAGE BREAK--- PRIVATE ROAD CROSS SECTION: SCALE l":10' 10' 40' ROW 10' UTILITY ESMT. 38, ROADWAY UTILITY ESMT. PRIVATE ROAD CROSS-SECTION DESIGNED FOR: FRED CHAVALLO TAMMY STEELE-CHAVALLO OASIS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION POBOX4766 PÆCO. WASHINGTON 99302 PHONE: (5O9) 492-5495 FAX: (509) 492-4136 EMAIL: PDCH RISTENSEN @CHARTER.NET EXHIBIT A-6 Page 2 of 2 ---PAGE BREAK--- Columbia Engineers & Constructors, LLC October 15,2OIO Jose Chavallo 102 No. Lincoln Kennewick, WA 99336 subject: Addendum to critical Areas report for citadel Estates References: 1. Black, M.T,, Geotechnical lnvestÌgotion for Panoromic Hts' 4, SE % Section 8' TgN' R29E' Kennewick, WA, Group, lnc, August 2L' 2007 ' Black, M.T., criticql Areas Report for citodel Estates, sE section 8, TgN, R29E, Kennewick, WA, Columbia Engineers and Constructors' LLC' July' 1' 2009' E-mail of L2oct10, Paul christenson to Jason Cushing; attachment drawing showing updated site plan with 36 lots, no date, no subject' Dear Jose: Reference l served as the basis for presentation of the critical Areas Report provided to you in Reference 2. Reference 2 also provided a "Citadel Estates conceptual grading plan"' prepared by paul Christenson, P.E., Oasis Development Corporation, no date your Engineer-of-Record' After conversations with Mr. Christenson, we were advised that the spot elevations on the electronic drawing, Reference 3, represented planned elevations in accordance with what will bethe Site Grading Plan. Usingthese data, we plotted 5 sections (attached)and lexamined them for possible impact to Reference 2' Based on the data herein, and assuming the final grading plan is representative of our sections' I find that the conclusions of Reference 2 remain valid' RespectfullY Yours, Michael Black, P'E' COLUMBIA ENGINEERS 2 3. 1806 Terminal Ddve Richland, Washington 99354 Phone: [PHONE REDACTED] Fax: [PHONE REDACTED] A Certified SDVOSB EXHIBIT A-7 Page 1 of 48 ---PAGE BREAK--- Proflle Vlê* of I 420 û0 800 c0 740 00 7ó0 0c f4aca 720 0c 700 00 640 0c 660 00 640 0c t0+ 00 00 a2û 00 800 00 780 0û 76C 00 I4CAO 1?0Ctc 700 ú0 640 00 660 U0 640 00 1 +00 0û 0+0t 00 ¡+0û 00 2+00 Û0 3+00 00 4+00 00 5+00 00 6+00 00 Proflte Vler oÊ 2 7+00 00 8+00 00 9100 0c 900 00 880 00 860 00 840 00 8e0 00 80û 00 780 00 760 00 f40a0 ?20t4 700 00 680 00 660 û0 640 00 -t+00 00 0+00 00 l+00 c0 2+00 00 3+00 00 ! +00 00 5+00 00 Profite Vlew oÊ 3 ó+00 00 7+00 00 8+00 00 9+00 00 900 00 880 00 8óû 00 840 00 820 00 800 00 780 00 760 00 t40 00 720 00 700 00 680 0û 660 00 640 0c t0+00 00 900 00 880 00 860 00 840 00 820 00 800 00 7A0 00 760 00 740 00 7¿0 00 700 00 680 00 ó60 00 640 00 -ì+00 00 900 00 a80 00 8ó0 00 840 00 820 00 400 00 780 00 760 00 740 00 f?ao0 700 û0 ó80 00 660 00 ó40 00 r0+00 00 0+0000 l+0000 e+0000 310000 4 +00 00 5+00 00 6+00 00 Proflte V¡eç oF 4 7+00 00 8+00 00 9+00 00 840 00 a60 00 840 00 420 00 600 00 7a0 00 760 00 740 00 720 00 700 00 680 00 660 00 ó40 00 l+00 00 l+00 00 2+00 00 3+00 00 4+00 ô0 5+0C 00 6+00 00 7+00 Û0 8+00 00 Prof¡te V¡er of 5 880 00 860 00 840 00 420 00 400 00 740 00 760 00 74000 l?o0a 700 00 ó80 00 660 00 640 00 I 0+00 00 880 00 860 00 840 00 a20 00 80û 00 780 00 760 00 740 00 720 00 700 00 680 00 660 00 640 00 l+00 00 0+00 00 l+û000 e+OOOO 3+0000 4+00Û0 5+0000 6+0t00 7+0000 8+0000 9+0000 880 00 8ó0 c0 84000 820 00 800 00 740 00 760 00 740 00 f?oa0 700 00 640 00 660 00 640 00 l0+00 0C -.li: NOIES: 1 PROTILES INTERPRETED FRAM SPOT ELEVATIONS IN ELECTRONIC DRAWING FROM E-MAIL SENT BY P CHRISItr/VSF/V TOJ CUSH/,\G 1 12/10. SECI/ONS AND BOREHOLE LOCAIIO/VS ADDED TO OASIS DEVELOPMENT DRAWING WHILE MINOR CHANGES TO THE LOT LAYOUTS MAY OCCUR ,ryO S/G/V/F/CAIVI CHANGIS TO THE GRADING ARE EXPECTED il ,,tt !O)tû UIÍl zO (n È I-Íõ \ þ é tnz (n t¡JE ( r.i i-rY o- Øs JV =9 l.rñtr) oõIìo Y Ll^) IUÐ ^Ø lo, x l-u xSds -ØtrJ n l¡,J : ìeF^ì rl,rv Oc\ Oo N I -r lr j LJÈÈ SHEET 10F1 EXHIBIT A-7 Page 2 of 48 ---PAGE BREAK--- Columbia Engineers & Constructors, LLC Critical Areas Report for Citadel Estates, SE I /4 , Section 8, T8N, R29E Kennerrvick, WA Prepared for: Jose Chavallo .l02 No. Lincoln Kennewick, WA 99336 July l, 2009 Prepared By: Michael Black, P.E. Columbia Engineers and Constructors, LLC I 806 Terminal Drive Richland, WA 99354 1806 Terminal Drive Richland, Washington 99354 Phone: [PHONE REDACTED] Fax: [PHONE REDACTED] A Certifred SDVOSB EXHIBIT A-7 Page 3 of 48 ---PAGE BREAK--- Chavallo, Citadel Estates (CAR) - luly l, 2009 lntroduction This report provides our critical area assessment for the proposed residential development. The site is currently undeveloped land. The site lies west of the current developed land at Panoramic Heights. The east boundary of the site lies west of the term ination of 25'h and 26'h avenues, The enclosed topographic map shows the general location of the site. Scope of Work The Kennewick Municipal Code, Chapter I 8, Zoning contains requirements for "Critical Areas" contained in the following sections: o Critical Areas-Ceneral Provisions (l 8.58) o Critical Areas- Wetlands (l 8.59) o Critical Areas- Critical Aquifer Recharge Area (.l8.60) . Critical Areas- Frequently Flooded Areas (l 8.6l ) . Critical Areas- Geologically Hazardous Areas (.l8.62) . Critical Areas- Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas ( t 8.63) This assessment specifically addresses Sub-sections 18.60 and I8.62 with the companion Sub-section of I8.58 that is common to all sub-sections. The remaining sub-sections have been addressed as not applicable in the SEPA checklist prepared bY others. Summary Conclusion We find no impediments to complying with sub-sections .l8.60 and .l8.62 within the framework of the ordinances. Sub-section .l8.60 does not require any action, while Sub-section I8.62 does require sorne m¡tigation via engineering structures and operational I i rnitations' Assessment Proposed DeveloPment Christensen'shows 27 lots along with a proposed finish floor elevation for the main floor of each home. Access to the development will be served by a looped road tying in with Kellogg Street. The drawing is enclosed with this report. This development does contain existing slopes steeper than I 5%that drives the need for an assessment per COK Ordinance 18 -62. Using the axiom that water runs downhill and settles in a low spot, the development is near the base of "Thompson Hill" so COK Ordinance I8.60 is considered as well. ' Christenson, P.D., Citadel Estates, Conceptual Grading Plan, 5/29/09, Oasis Development Coryoration Page 2 of 8 EXHIBIT A-7 Page 4 of 48 ---PAGE BREAK--- Chavallo, Citadel Estates (CAR) - luly l, 2009 Surface Condition s This site is located on the Southeast base of Thompson Hill andcontains north sloping terrain with mostly desert shrub \./egetat¡on. The extreme north end of the site contains som e fill and cut areas associated with home construct¡on to the east and canal for the Kennewick lrrigation District (KlD). The attached USCS topographical map shows the approximate site location with¡n the site general topograP hY. Regional StratioraPhv Most of the geologic features in this area consist of sedimentary deposits overlying Tertiary volcanic tredrock. The bedrock has been moved, and is cont¡nuing to move, by a general north-south compress ion of the basalt flows forming anticline structures (long rìarrow hills) with an east-west general bearing. This movement includes Thompson Hill. The site is located on the north flank of Thompson Hill. These structures are still moving in the upward direction at an imperceptibly slow rate. Another sma.ller anticlinal fault, alon g the south flank of Thornpson Hill has been mapped2. Local Stratiqraphy Black3 provided a geotechnical investigation for the site with the following comments on stra,tigraphy from the starti ng at the surface: o Recent Aeolian (wind deposited) silt and fine sand. . The Touchet beds consisting of silt with fine sand or fine sand with silt with various deg rees of cementation fro rn calcium carbonate. We also found cemented gravel with calcium carbonate cementthat is locally referred to as "caliche." These deposits occur in beds as they settled from the waters of the Lake Missoula floods. . The lce Harbor Member of the Saddle Mountains basalt occurred in borehole numbers 1,2, and4. The basaltis haslargely eroded awa.Y. . The Levy lnterbed occurred below the lce Harbor basalt and the Elephant Mountain basalt below. This interbed contained primarily lean clay or elastic silt soil and resulted from sedimentatíon between the time the Elephant Mountain basalt was deposited and the successive lce Harbor flow. ' Reidel, S. and K. Fecht. (1994). Geologic Map of the Richtand 1:100.000 Quadrangle, Washington. Olympia, WA:Washing Division of Geologyand Earth Resources. 1:100,000. 3 Black, M.T., Geofec hnical lnvestigation for Panoramic Hts. 4, SE Section B, TîN, R29E, Kennewick, WA, August 21,2007, Group, lnc., Page 3 of B EXHIBIT A-7 Page 5 of 48 ---PAGE BREAK--- Ch avallo, Citadel Estates (CAR) - July I , 2009 No evidence of g roundwater or seasonal groundwater was found in any of the 5 boreholes. We also submitted results frorn four piezometers for past workdone by Black for the KID i n the general area and downgradient from the canal. The results and elevations of the data are conta¡ned in the table below. Approximate Upper Elevation s of Major Soil/Rock Horizons NE= not encountered Surface No. EL (ft.) BHl 739 BH2 734 BH 3 772 BH 4 780 BH 5 816 S&W-BH -690 1 or- 10) DWR PZ1 592 DWR PZ2 613 DWR PZ3 614 DWR PZ4 612 Flow top or bottom of Layered silt basalt and gravel 73O NE 727 NE NE NE 753 NE NE 811 NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE Bottom Gemented Hard older EL (ft.) Silt and gravelor silt and sand gravel sandy silt Gravel 710 Surface 734 722 731.5 714 Surface 729 736.5 738 Surface 769.5 758 NE 760 Surface 756 751.5 NE 796 Surface NE 801 NE 643.5 Surface NE 665 578 NE NE 592 591 Surface NE 604.5 602 Surface NE 602 598 Surface NE 603 NE NE NE NE NE The Ceotechnical lnvestigation found lean clay at depth of around 20 ft. deep in theGeotechnical lnvestigation. lnBoreholeNo. l,at20ft.deepthe clay,generally falls in the "low to medium" expansion range. The sample from Borehole No. 3, at 19.5 ft. deep shows a "high to very high" range with the exception of The"% passing the 200 sieve," "plastic limit," and colloid criteria. The sarnple from borehole No.3, at 25 ft. deep shows mostly "very high" potential with the exception of lhe"?6 passing the 200 sieve" criteria. These are not "fat clays" which often exhibit severe expansion potential. However, ¡t is prudent to carefully plan and construct the development to minimize water saturat¡on of the soil column. Much of Kennewick and Richland are covered with silt and fine sand in various proportions of each. "Silt is inherently unstable, particularly when mo¡sture ¡s increased, with a tendency to become quick when saturated. lt is relatively impervious, difficult to compact, highly susceptible to frost heave, easily erodible and subject to p¡ping and boiling, Bulky g rains reduce compressibility; flaky grains, i.e. micã and diatoms, increase compress ibility and produce 'elastic silt'."'The silt o US Department of Agriculture (Natural Resources Conservation Service). (1999). Agricultural Management Fìeld Handbook, Chapter 7-Geologic and groundwater considerations, Appendix 78, Table l-1. Page 4 of B EXHIBIT A-7 Page 6 of 48 ---PAGE BREAK--- Chavallo, Citadel Estates (CAR) - July I, 2009 deposits from slow settling water and windblown silt tend to be bulky grained and subject to collaps e under load. The elastic silts most likely were produced by degraded volcan ic ash. The low permeabi lity for water and the red uction in strength, when wetted, requires special ca.re for this development. The Geotechnical Investigation also exarn ined slope stability of existing topography in the developme nt. The results are discussed below: . For an unsaturated condition, the factor of safety (FOS) is 8.5. Normally a I .5 FOS is considered satisfactory for most residential developments. . For a satura.ted condition, with near surface failure, the FOS: 3.47 o For a saturated condition, with deep seated failure, the FOS: 2.9 The slopes for shallow sloughing or face sliding were evaluated, which is a near surface phenome na, where a shallow sheet slides. Dependent on the direction of water seepage g. 90' is vert¡cal and 0" i s horizontal) the FOS changes dependent on the depth of the slide considered. The slide potential in 0.5 ft. increments down to 3.5 ft. deep resulted in the following results o Avertical or 90" seep affords a FOS exceeding 2 in all cases. o A horizonxal or 0o seep affords a FOS: 0.86 in all cases or failure. o A 26.6'seep has a FOS= 2.9 at 0.5 ft. deep and I .4 at 3.5 ft. deep. o A 60" seep affords a FOS: 1.7 in all cases. We found no evidence of seeps. Paul Christenson, P.E., stated that all stormwater runoff, including retaining wall drainage truater, would be incorporated into the site stormwater syste rn that discharges the water on another property both downgrade and to the north concr usions None of the slope boreholes showed existing or seasonal groundwater fluctuations. Therefore, the site does not impact a "Critical Aquifer Recharge Area" (.l8,60). The site does contain hazards associated with "Ceologically Hazardous Areas" (18.62). The hazards considered are erosion, landslides, and seismic areas. These items are discussed below, based on the premise that development will not only concentrate storrnwater due to impermeable surfaces, but irrigation will add water beyond what the normal rainfall produces. Erosion Hazard Areas The surficial silt and fine sand layer is hig hly erodible and subject to erosion. The existing vegetation currently protects the soil, and mitigation measures will be required during construction. Page 5 of 8 EXHIBIT A-7 Page 7 of 48 ---PAGE BREAK--- Chavallo, Citadel Estates (CAR) - July l, 2009 Landslide Hazard Areas Based on the ana.lysis discussed above, the entire site, in the native condition, is stable unless con siderable water is introd uced to the soíl column. The site will require grading for the home lots and sig nificant elevation differences will require retaining walls to maximum lot sizes. Th e weight of the retaining walls will add loads to the slope and storm or irrigation water, if allowed to penetrate the soil column at depth, will add additional loads. Therefore, it is crucial that the retaining walls receive proper design and construction consideration and water entering the soil column be lirnited. Seismic Hazard Areas The aforementioned slope stability analysis considered seismic loads. Althogh we judge that the se i smic hazard is low, seis rnic loading must be considered for the ãesign of the retaining walls that includes the global stability of the wall and the slope below. Mitigation Requirements COK Critical Areas-General Provisions (l 8-58) dírects mítigation of hazards. lmportant elements, to this project, follonr: o MitiÇarion requirements (t 8.58.16O)- As this is to be a residential developme nt, alteration of the geol ogichazards is required due to grading requirements for home sites, Properly designed and constructed retaining walls, along with water intrusion control to the soil column, will not only mitigate, but reduce geologic hazards. o MitiÇarion sequencing (18.58.170)- The first consideration (l ) requires "avoid the impact" which would require leaving the land in its natural stateand not doing the development. This is not viable. The second consideration addresses critical recharge areas and wetlands that do not apply to the s¡te. The third considerat¡on requires "Minimizing or eliminating the hazard by restoring or stabilizing the hazard area through approved engineering or other meth ods." Engineering will be used to reduce the geologic hazards present in the natural state. Mitigation Plan Black3 provides su bstantial recommendations for mitigation of geologic hazards. ln addition to the geotechnical report, the following mit¡gat¡on measures are required: . The design of all retaining walls shall consider global stability to ensure the slope below the retaining wall(s) rernain stabile. lt is not necessary to design Page 6 of 8 EXHIBIT A-7 Page 8 of 48 ---PAGE BREAK--- Chavallo, Citadel Estates (CAR) - July l, 2009 the retaining walls for an elevated groundwater table given the recom me n dations that fol low. . Each lot shall provide a "site grading and drainage plan" along with the request for a building permit. The plan should be stamped by aregistered professional engineer. As part of the plan, stormwaterdischargetothe developme nt's stormwater pond shall be detailed. ln general, ¡t ¡s important that water not pond adjacent the homes or infiltrate into the soil column. . lf swímmin g pools or water features are to be installed, a registered professional engineer should review and approve the plans to ensure consistenc¡/ with the "site grading a.nd drainage plan." . Based on rny experience, the most important feature to ensuring stabilíty of the slopes and retaining walls, witlr the consequent stability of the homes, is positive cor'ìtrol of irrigation. lnsofar as practicable, Xeroscape landscaping should be ulsed. Drip irrigation poses less risk that pressurized irrigation. Each prope rty should install a sprin kler controller that can be programmed for weather conditions, slopes, and soil type (E.9. "WeatherTrac). The setting of the sprin kler controller should be reviewed by a third party to maintain no water saturation below 24 inches deep. . During con struction, the Excavation Safety Standards (Part N) from the Washington State Department of La.bor will protect the workers from injury and the slo pes from failure. The Washington State Departrnent of Ecology requires a "Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan and a permit (see publication #99-37, October 2008) - Adherence to these req uirements will mit¡gate erosion hazards during construction. . Last, the geotechnical engineer sha.ll review the plat construction drawings to ensure the¡z meet the intent of the recommendations contained in the geotechnica.l report, and to ensure maximum isolation of the lean clay layer. The enclosed drawings show the preliminary planned elevations vs, existing topograph¡2. ln most cases the daylíght basement of each home will be at or above existing grade. ln a few cases the basement will cut into the surficial soil no closer than l5 ft, above the lean clay layers. At this point, in the preliminary stage, the separat¡on is sufficient to inhibit sliding or heaving of the clay laYer. Limitations It is important that the limitations of our rn¡ork and this report are understood. The recommendations and conclusions docurnented in this report have been prepared for specific application to your project based on the scope, budget, and schedule constraints. Further, these recommendations and conclusions have been developed in a manner consistent with the level of ca.re and skill normally exercised by members of the engineering profession. This report is prepared for the use of the CLIENT, design and construction professionals senzing the CLIENT, and appropriate regulatory agencies. Columbia Page 7 of 8 EXHIBIT A-7 Page 9 of 48 ---PAGE BREAK--- Chavallo, Citadel Estates (CAR) - luly I, 2009 Engineers and Constructors, LLC assumes no liability except to the CLIENT and this report remains tl're property of Columbia Engineers and Constructors, LLC Use of this report by th i rd parties, without our written authorization, is proh¡bited. Please contact o.Jr office should you have questions or comments, and thank you for your confidence in Columbia Engineers and Constructors, LLC Page 8 of 8 EXHIBIT A-7 Page 10 of 48 ---PAGE BREAK--- 'I : I , , i = L; I i ll;jl -N46"-1 -N46cl .4.Visla Fietd V¡sI t4 \ /esl Highlânds , 9ên rtstef ,**rrv, ir i K N46'-4 Canyon 1000 aOOO Cit¿ 1 I I I I ,r'ì"ioJ j i -r j ' i -l , t!Ø rti f- l i,i-. .t I \I irIr tt\; l,cpp¡oxrmate Stte Locatl del;Estates Jun \ 2009 y_on L¿kes, -t l, li lr i. i il iii = lti' ,ì i. t_ I "oo ^s oo l6c ii .j I , o*ou, ^oli I % ø 3-D @ 1999 DeLorme Yarmouth, ME 04096 H1500 ft Scale: I : 46,875 Detail: l2-t Datum: WGS84 TopoQuads EXHIBIT A-7 Page 11 of 48 ---PAGE BREAK--- CITYOF KENNEWICK l¡o\/ 1 e 2010 Geotechnical lnvest¡gation for Panoramic Hts. 4, SE 1/4, S€ct¡on 8, T8N, R29E Prepared By: Michael Black, P.E. Croup, lnc. 5803 W. Metaline Ave. Kennewick, WA 99336 Kennewick, WA August 21 ,2007 Prepared for: Jose Chavallo 102 North Lincoln Kennewick, WA 99336 EXHIBIT A-7 Page 12 of 48 ---PAGE BREAK--- Chavallo, Panoramic Hts. No. 4 - August 2t, 2007 lntroduction This report provides our findings and recommendations for the proposed residential development. The site has been undeveloped land prior to our investigation. The site lies west of the current developed land at Panoramic Heights. The east boundary of the site lies west of the termination of 25,h and 28,n Àvenues. The enclosed topographic map shows the general location of the site. Scope of Work our investigat¡on included drilling, soil classification, soil testing, and measurement of groundwater elevations. Our design recommendations, covered by this report, include the allowable soil bearing pressures, cut and fill recommendations, sub-grade preparation, seismic design information, and stormwater desi g n param eters. Summary Conclusions This site contains mostly windblown sand and silt overlying gravel or remnants of a basalt flow bottom below. This lithology is normally relatively thin as compared to the elastic silt ¡nterbed below. The only exception was Borehole No. 5 that conta¡ned a fairly thick layer of fine sand and silt. For most of the site, slope stability and foundation bearing, with conventional footings, is not an íssue. However, excessive water introduced into the soil can cause soil heave and near surface sliding. Therefore, irrigation and stormwater management is a crucial element of the site design and each constructed home. The ponion of the site near Borehole No. 5 (southeast corner) will require special consideration for slope stability and soil collapse. However, this can be accommodated by deep foundatíons and careful control of írrigation and stormwater. lnvestigation Reqional Stratiqraphv Most of the geologic features in this area consist of sedimentary deposits overlying Tertiary volcanic bedrock. The bedrock has been moved, and is continu¡ng to move, by a general nofth-south compression of the basalt flows forming anticline structures (long narrow hills) with an east-west general bearing. This movement includes Thompson Hill. The site is located on the north flank of Thompson Hill. These structures are still moving in the upward direction at an imperceptibly slow rate. Page 2 of 14 EXHIBIT A-7 Page 13 of 48 ---PAGE BREAK--- Chavallo, Panoramic Hts. No. 4 - August 21, 2007 The enclosed Ceneralized Stratigraphy' provides details for the major individual stratagraphic units. Local Stratigraphy Referring to the Ceneralized Stratigraphy enclosure, we encountered the following general geologic units starting at the surface: . Recent Aeolian (wind deposited) silt and fine sand . The Touchet beds consisting of silt with fine sand or fine sand with silt with various degrees of cementat¡on from calcium carbonate. We also found cemented gravel with calcium carbonate cement that is locally referred to as "caliche." These deposits occur in beds as they settled from the waters of the Lake Missoula floods. . The lce Harbor member of the Saddle Mountains basalt occurred in borehole numbers l, 2, and 4. The basalt is fairly thin on this site and has largely eroded away. . The Levy lnterbed occurred belowthe lce Harbor basalt and the Elephant Mountain basalt below. This interbed contains primarily elastic silt soil and resulted from sedimentation between the time the Elephant Mountain.basalt was deposited and the successive lce Harbor flow. Site Ceotechnical Findinqs The field of geotechnical engineering sometimes used esoteric terms and the following two tables present a definition of major descriptions explained in layman's terms. Soil and Rock Strenqth Descripti I Washington State University, T.-C. (Department of Environmental Engineering). (2006). Groundwater as a sot)rce for smattflow drinking water in Benton County, WA,PrqecI Report, M. T. Black, P.E., trans. tren an scnDUons Geotechn ical Description Lavman Description Very loose Very weak soil that generally requires special treatment or foundations Loose Weak soil that generally can only support light loads and may settle when saturated Compact Supports most loads without soil replacement or deep foundations. Heavy loads generally require relatively large soread footinqs Dense Suoports most heaw loads Verv Dense Near the support capability of a medium strength bedrock Massive Basalt Very hard and competent basalt capable of supporting just about anv load without settlement. Page 3 of 14 EXHIBIT A-7 Page 14 of 48 ---PAGE BREAK--- Chavallo, Panoramic Hts. No. 4 - August 21, 2007 A number of soil classification systems have been put into seryice over the years. ' The "Unified Soil Classification System2" (USCS) is concise and used by engineers but it is not "layman friendly" nor does the description include the detail offered by some other systems. We generally use the Burmister Soil Classification System for our field descriptions. The following table, present¡ng the system, provides a more detailed, yet layman friendly, description of the soil. Burmister Soi I Classification System Essential Features and Com son U nified Soil Classification Svstem" Burmister Designation Burmister Visual Criteria Boulder (>12-inch) Boulder Creater than I ft. along longest axis. Cobble (3-12-inch) Cobble Creater than 3-inch and less than I ft alonq lonqest axis. C ß/4 to 3-inch) Coarse Cravel GC) Upper limit size of billiard ball. Lower limit size of qolf ball. c (no medium class) Medium Cravel Olive or marble sized qravel. c k3/4 to %-inch\ Fine Gravel fC) Upper limit raisin and lower limit a BB. S (<1/4 t0 I /l 0-inch) Coarse Sand GS) Less than size of BB and greater than table salt. S(28 >35 >63 (Che Rockv Mountain Area) Correlations w irh Sr¡il TestS {Lhen. KO Prnhahle eroansion Swell¡ns Potential -o/o Þassing #2QQ¡æYS Liquid Limit <30 95 >60 >ì0 rich often exh¡b¡t severe expanslon lly plan and construct the development to mn. Much of Kennewick and Richland are covered with silt and fine sand in various i.e. mica and diatoms, increase compress litY for water and the reduct¡on in are for this develoPment' A slope stab¡lity analyses for the entire development ¡s included in the attached sketches based on borehore numbeis r , 3 and' 4. The section is shown on the artached Orawint. f ãamined three scenarios using GSLOPETM V' 4'03 by Mitre Software. The results are discussed below: o For an unsaturated condit¡on, the factor of safety (Fos) is 8'5' Normally a l '5 Fos is .oni¡ãur.d satisfactory for most residential developments o US Depadment of Management Table 1-1 . Agriculture (Natural Resources Conservation Service) fiãt¿ Uandøoo( Chapter 7-Geologic and groundwater . (1999). Agricultural Waste considerations, APPendix 78' PageT of 14 EXHIBIT A-7 Page 18 of 48 ---PAGE BREAK--- Chavallo, Panoramic Hts. No. 4 - August 21, 2007 . For a saturated condition, with near surface failure, the FOS = 3.47 . For a saturated condition, with deep seated failure, the FOS:2.9 I also analyzed the slopes for shallow sloughing or face sliding, which is a near surface phenomena where a shallow sheet slides. Dependent on the direction of water seepage (e.9. 90'is vertical and 0'is horizontal) the FOS changes dependent on the deep of the slide considered. lchecked the slide potential in 0.5 ft. increments down to 3.5 ft. deep. The following points summarize the results shown in the attached graph: o A vertical or 90" seep affords a FOS exceeding 2 in all cases ¡ A horizontal or 0o seep affords a FOS = 0.86 in all cases or failure o fi 26.6" seep has a FOS:2.9 at 0.5 ft. deep and 1.4 at 3.5 ft. deep o A 60' seep affords a FOS : 1.7 in all cases Concl usions and Recommendations Building on a hillside carries an inherent risk as the soil and rock moves, over time and settles in a low spot. Water added to the soil both exacerbates and accelerates this process. Particularlywith the relatively impermeable soil and rock layers near the surface, homeowner negligence with irrigation and outside water use can cause significant damage to their home and the homes below. However, with reasonable design and construction practices, along with homeowner cooperation, these risks can be largely mitigated to prevent damage during the life of the homes. It is my understanding that at least three retaining walls will be installed to provide level lots. The potential for sliding can be largely mítigated during the design and construction of the retaining walls. The following general recommendations apply to this site. Sub-orade Preparation and Protection For a general guide, the following criteria are appropriate: . Remove all roots and organic material from all areas to receive foundations or any structural covering (gravel or asphalt). We expect the duff to be 4 to 8-inches thick. The duff may be used for landscaping fill only. . The very loose, Aeolian (windblown silt and fine sand) should be excavated, water conditioned, and compacted to prevent foundation and pavement failures. This layer is generally no more than 4 ft. thick and is lacking across a significant poftion of the site. The north 1/3 of the site or so has these Aeolian deposits. . The final sub-grade should be scarified to a depth of at least 4-inches, moisture conditioned and compacted with at least six passes of a I 0,000 lb. PageSofl4 EXHIBIT A-7 Page 19 of 48 ---PAGE BREAK--- Chavallo, Panoramic Hts. No. 4 - August 2l, 2007 vibratory roller. The Geotechnical Engineer, or Civil Engineer of Record, should witness the initial process for compact¡ng the sub-grade and approve the process or make alterations as required. This provides a "proof roll" verification as well. As the site may encounter two different types of soils, compaction equipment recommendations are provided. Fine sand or silt material is water sensitive (it becomes plastic and pumps when over wetted) and highly erodible. Therefore, construction should proceed during the dry season to prevent excessive moisture accumulation, which prevents proper soil compaction. Furthermore, the soil should be water conditioned to l-2%below optimum moisture as excessive moisture causes pumping and requires soil dry before compaction can begin. A "kneading" rather than a vibration and force method most efficiently compacts this soil. Either a padded drum (e.9. Cat CP-433C) or tamp¡ng foot (e.9. Cat 8ì 5F) will best compact this soil. Gravel -The final sub-grade should be scarified to a depth of at least 4- inches, moisture conditioned and compacted with a medíum sized (say 10,000 lb.) vibratory roller imparting at least 350 lbs. dynamic force per inch of drum (e.9. EssickVR-72-T; Ray-Co 300 or Dyna-Pac CA-25T) to an unyielding condition. As an alternative to the unyielding condition the number of passes and water content may be adjusted to provide a sub-grade strength of 40 kips per inch or a modulus of rigidity of at least 995 psf. The Ceotechnical Engineer, or Civil Engineer of Record, should witness the initial process for compacting the sub-grade and approve the process or make alterations as required. This provides a "proof roll" verification as well. Positive drainage away from the pavement sub-grade should be designed and constructed throughout the project. Anticipate 25-35% shrinkage for fine-grained soils and 15-20% for gravelly soils. Structural Fill Requirements - Structural fill is any fill that supports structures (e.9. homes, driveways, roads). Native soils may be used for structural fill if properly moisture conditioned and compacted. The soil 2 ft. or more below finish sub-grade should be compacted to 92% of Maximum Dry DensiÇ using the Modified Proctor (ASTM D-l 557). The upper 2 ft. shall be compactedto 95% of Maximum Dry Density. All select (crushed gravel from off-site) fill or base coarse should be compacted to at least 95% of maximum dry density per ASTM D1557. Page9ofl4 EXHIBIT A-7 Page 20 of 48 ---PAGE BREAK--- Chavallo, Panoramic Hts. No. 4 - August 21, 2007 Fine sand and silt or elastic silt should be compacted in no more than 8-inch deep loose lifts. We also recommend using a soil moisture all-2% below optimum to avoid pumping. cravel should be compacted in no more than l2-inch deep loose lifts at the optimum soil moisture. Water Table depth Frost depth Foundations buried at least 2 ft. deep (note basalt and calciche sub-grades controlled by IRC minimum footing size, min. I ft' wide continuous and 2 by 2 spread footings) Bearing pressure increase allowed for short-term loads Settlement (with recommendations) Not Encountered 2 fï. I,600 lb/fr' 33% <5/8-inch 1/2 of total settlement 242lb/ft' 38 53 -90-l l0 0.42-gravel; 0.3O-sand; 0.2 5 silt s. Low General Design Criteria @ Anticipated differential settlement (flexible) Passive Lateral Earth Pressure above water table Active Lateral Earth Pressure above water table At-rest lateral Pressure Near surface soil weight Sliding friction coefficient Soil Profile TyPe Liquefaction Potential Foundation Sub-qrade Preparation and Sizing Grades have not been selected for the site and the foundation sub-grade recommendationi are necessarily general. For discussion, the soils are broken into Pagel0ofl4 EXHIBIT A-7 Page 21 of 48 ---PAGE BREAK--- Chavallo, Panoramic Hts' No' 4 - August 2l ' 2007 four basic categories; basalt. bedrock or cemented gravel' silt and fine sand mixtures with densities exceedi.;öõib/t ,,-Pl sirt ãnã fine sand mixrures with ääniii¡.t less than 90 and elastic silt' Basalt bedrock and cement ades possess exceptional bearing capacity and little : lce potential excavation related settlement, loose g ould be removed from the sub-grade. A "leveling layer" re placed and compacted w¡thã hoe-pack or vibratory compactor' Sittandfinesandmixtureswithdensitiesexceeding90 collapsible when wãtieO and the foundation sub-grade conditioned and compacted with a vibratory t data show that densities increase with depth and the c near surf".. .oiJi¿ti"tion' Each home's excavated foc for a minimum äänrì.v or go in at least four pla< foundations. sitt and fine sand mixtures with densities less than 90 tb/ft'are potentially corapsibre and require some foundation pre-treatr.nt. îwo options are available as follows: . Flood the foundation excavation with approximat allow the water to saturate the collapsible s.oils to deep. on.. tttà iurface has dried sufficiently' con o over excavate 2 ft. deep and ì ft. beyond the four compacr tf,äãxc"uaied'soil io 92% oi maximum dry densiry per ASTM D- 1557. Elasticsilt generally is not collapsible, but it carries a relatively low allowable bearing pressure and becom., ,nit.ble when wetted' Strong measures are required to keep üi.; away from tf.'à founOation su'-graOeãn elastic silt sub- grades. Mixed soil subgrade sites possess the risk of unaccepta For example, a hot" siteà on 5O% basalt bedrock and suffer no settlemãnt outt the basalt and up to 5/8-inch ;;;ùi.;can be i.ig.iv mitisated.bv some soil replacer withfinesand,etc.Removenon-basaltorcementedgr inches bel and I ft. beyond the found ' Amoco 2044) to prevent gravel from migrating il, ino back fill with 5/8-inch minus compacte Page1l ofl4 EXHIBIT A-7 Page 22 of 48 ---PAGE BREAK--- Chavallo, Panoramic Hts. No. 4 - August 21, 2007 The most positive approach to protecting the foundations is to eliminate or mitigate water from reaching the foundat¡on subgrade. This is accomplished from gooã site grading, properly iompact¡ng the soil against the exter¡or stemwall, ãvoiding over-wa-tering from irrigation, and maintaining irrigation and domestic pressure pipes and irrlgation heads. The following subsection addresses this crucial item in further detail. lrriqation & Stormwater and Erosion Control Civen the potent¡al geometry of the lot (slopes), it is imperative that the negative effects of excessive irrigation and Storm water be mitigated to protect sloþes, water from entering the homes, and foundation damage due to water saturation. Negligent pract¡ces from upgradient homeowners will not only impact their hõmls, but potential water-related damage would geometrically increase as excessive groundwater moves to the north. The attached "preventing Subsurfacõ Water Damage" should be read thoroughly and applied for this project. Crushed Cravel Fill lmported gravel shall meet the following requirements: ecifi Crushed Gravel Base Spec¡f¡catlons Sieve Size Percent Passinq ì -l /4-inch r00 I -inch 80-r 00 3/4-inch 50-80 1/2-inch 5 0-80 No.4 25-45 No.40 3-r 8 No. 200 7.5 max. %fracture 75% min. Sand equivalent 40% min. Floors Slab-on-grade floors may be supported on re-compacted fill materials free of debris and forJþn material. Provide a firm and stable sub-grade. Over excavate and replace lobse and yielding soils. lnstall at least 6-inches of free draining material (less than 5% fines) directly beneath the slab' Pavement Structures The adequacy of the site pavements responds to the adequacy of the sub-grade. lf native toìl ¡t to be used for fill under the pavement sections, the sand should be placed in maximum lifts of 8-inches at least 92% of the Modified Proctor dry density. We recommend the following pavement sect¡ons: Page 12 of l4 EXHIBIT A-7 Page 23 of 48 ---PAGE BREAK--- Chavallo, Panoramic Hts. No. 4 - August Zt, 2007 1 loaded areas (parkíng and driveways). 2-inches of Asphalt Concrete (AC) over 4_inches of Crushed Rock Base (CRB), or 2-inches of AC over 3-inches of Asphalt Treated Base (ATB) material b Heavily Loaded Areas (e.g. garbage truck traffic) 3-inches of AC over 6-inches of CRB, or- 3-inches of AC over 4.5-inches of ATB Stormwater Manaoement There is little opportunity for the use of drywells, exfiltration trenches, etc. for this evices may be used if properly located and mes. The relatively thin layer of silt and uld provide an exfiltration rate of about 'exfiltration surface per hour in the annon and Wilson borehole log, this soil is te, which is also the lowest. Use an exfiltration rate of about 0.04 ft3 of stormwater per square foot of exfiltration surface per hour in the vertical direction. The efiective porosity of this soil is about 0'-4? ft' water pgll' of soil. Expect near-term water retention (up to three months) of about 0.33 ft'/ft3. This means that successive storms will reqüi* ,p to 6.25 ft3 of soil per ì ft' of stormwater. Depending on the amount of stormwater requiring management, the northeast corner could suffer saturated soil, at depth, and a hiih groundwater table. For example, a successive storm of 2,000 ft, of water would require 12,500 ft' of soil. This is a 40 ft. diameter area I o ft. deep. while stormwater management can be accommodated on-site, with caution, I understand that the city of Kennewick has a stormwater management system that can be used ¡f the water is piped to their system. This may be the most economical alternative. ultimately, one large downgrade pond may provide the best solution. Weather Conditions It is important to recognize that any geotechnical recommendation assumes that weather conditions are suitable for construction. Excessively hot, cold, or wet conditions can create unsatisfactory conditions for construction. Construction planning must include a consideration of weather related construction difficulties. Limitations It is important that the limitations of our work and this report are understood. The recommendations and conclusions documented in this reþort have been prepared for specific application to your project based on the scope, budget, and schedule constraints' Further, these recommendations and conclusions hãve been developed Pagel3of14 EXHIBIT A-7 Page 24 of 48 ---PAGE BREAK--- Chavallo, Panoramic Hts. No. 4 - August Zt, 2007 in a manner consistent with the levet of care and skill normally exercised by members of the engineering profession. This report is prepared forthe use of the CLIENT, design and construct¡on rropriate regulatory agencies. Ashley_ (cept to the CLIENT and this report oup, lnc. Use of this report by third is prohibited. Please contact our office should you. have questions or comments, and thank you for your confidence in Ashley-Ber-tsch Grouþ, lni. Pageì4of14 EXHIBIT A-7 Page 25 of 48 ---PAGE BREAK--- I F U E È a € C : È 3 5 5 F.t :NCHit¡,v s retNGS M :M ! Sâ s:AÍt,\:- rLur¡s s:cuãrJa: Sax,rÁ.\Å S::U:Na: U^.\Â'ví3 lo,/r.u; tJ\Èrtuv ¡Low- - u.1!aMÃo HlcH.u. HíG I Âi L5Ås; Jaiñ I t- ¿ v?¿5L SCË.C c il l0 srQATlGQApHlc Noñ\E.NcLATuRi o- uñrrs p:NLTeATeD TH- pAsco BAsrN AND Ge oilYDaoLoGY lNTeRpBer¡.r,c*' = uNcoNFrNe.D AaurFLR SC = SL¡,II-CONFINED AOUIFE.R C = CONíIN¿D AOUIFER s_¡:-i:r¡rF' Figure 4. Generalized Stratigraphy EXHIBIT A-7 Page 26 of 48 ---PAGE BREAK--- Ê t =õ Ë t Ø iG 'o Ø oE -to d>lol JI Êlal tso Gô È o e (J bo¿ Ø o..t ot kt ABG. Inc. Boring Log No. B-1 Panaramic Hts. No. 4 Location: West of panoramic Hts. t91npler; Standard Sptit !9t9oeptn (ftI2e_ Sampled by: M. Black, p.E. Dr¡ll Date: 06128107 Logged by: M. Black, p.E. T o SPT. blow/ft i Soil Description Moisture % i 20 40 6oi Notes Firm, dry, Qßy, light yellowish biowr¡ WITH FINE SAND. Strong HCL reaction I I '23142129 se, dry, (2.5Y, 6/3 lrl- /i N to COARSE GRAVEL. Calcium carbonate coating : T;1 t+1 _l r +rì ïrï change damp, CALCRETE/CALICHE. Strono reaction to HCl. îÏi dark grey, calcium 1/18', 50 blows for 5" carbonate coating, 1/4 in. chips and grey dust from drill rio. 10 T FLOW BO dark grey, calcium carbonate coating, .l/4 in. chips and grey dust from drill rig Some redish from vesicules , dry, (2.5Y ,6/3 tighr brown sandy silt. LL=46, Pl=10; Hydrometer shows 48.8 % clay sized material and 48.9% sand. ¿J completed at depth of Ze.o Ít. ThE is intebeð material between basalt flows._No HCL reaction Plate 'l EXHIBIT A-7 Page 27 of 48 ---PAGE BREAK--- Eo o= qì3ì Ø Eo, o Ø N oo Øl È o ö o c) oo F or oo o Ø r ABG, Inc. Boring Log No. B-2 Panaramic Hts. No.4 Ground EL: 734 Location; West of panoramic Hts. lhod: DHH-Mob¡te B-S7 Sampler: Standard Split Spoon (tb): 140 G.W.T. @ Drilling (ft): not enc Hole de!_th lttl, z9_ ed by: M. Black, P.E. Driller: Ethan Hageman Drill Date: 06128107 - _l_fqggeq M Btack, p.E. E lgiF 30 l# ã Soil Description i I SPT. blow/ft 1 O Moisture % l0 20 40 60 Firm, dry, (2.Sy, 6/3ttight yeilowish WITH FINE SAND. Strong HCL reaction Loose, dry, (2.5Y, 6/3) tignt yãtow'rsñ brown nìedium to COARSE GRAVEL. Calcium carbonale coat¡no T il recovery 9/18; 50 blows @ 4" Very Hard, 2 5 Y (6/3) tignt yeilowr'sh brown change damp, CALCREIE/CALtCHE. Strono reaction to HCl. - dark grey, 10 dark grey, t N Boringcompleteoat@ pick-up some greenish staining (near interbed?) z3 30 T FLOW BOTTOM- dãrk gret;ãtcium carbonate coat¡ng, 1/4 in chips and grey dust from ï FLOW BOTTOM- Oark grey,ì¡ilingüs faster; starting to pick up some silt in drill return. Some calcium carbonate sta¡n¡no. emarKS: 35 Plate 2 EXHIBIT A-7 Page 28 of 48 ---PAGE BREAK--- E I a 'ì Ø Ë o Ø Èè N o/qt @l Êl Øt ts o @ Ðo F o G (J o0 Ø ABG, Inc. Boring Log No. B-3 Panaramic Hts. No. 4 Ground EL:772 tion: West of Panoramic Hts. Sampler: Standard Split Spoon Hammer w_eight (tb): 140 G.W.T. @ Drilling (ft): not Hole depth (ft): 34 Sampled by: M. Black, P.E. irm, dry, (2.5Y, light brown, SILT WITH FINE SAND. Strong HCL reaction. ght orown \ 29ts0t50 change damp, CALCREIE/CALICHE Strono reaction to HCl. recovery 4118". Dense, (6/3) light yellowish brown CALCRETE/CALtCHE. Gravet changes from coarse to med¡um gravel. Strong react¡on to HCI 50 blows for 3.5' 1O _ dry,2.5Y, (6/6) tight 2t18t21 2t21t27 SILT. Brown motiling. recoverl S/18" 15 Very hard, dry, SY, (7/3tpaþ ),eilow recovery 18i18' 20 LL=74; PL=59. Silt accounts for 44.9 and clay accounts tor 48.70/" of the samole Very hard, dry, sy, (73Þ-ãiã yeilow zc ELASTIC SILT. LL=74; pL=59. Sand accounts for 48.9 and clay accounts for 4g.6% of the samole Very Stiff, dry, 2.5y e¡¡y!5¡6*o 50 blows for 5.5". i '12150+ SILT WITH SAND (Ringotd). Plate 3 EXHIBIT A-7 Page 29 of 48 ---PAGE BREAK--- Ø e @ì otr:to ci oo Ë F o ó ö o ñ o ñ o J Ø trI Èo oË q-ì ' ABG, Inc. Boring Log No. 84 Panaramic Hts. No. 4 WO#:0-237.7 Ground EL: 780 Sampled by: M. Black, p.E. Driller: Ethan Drill Date: 06128107 o-1(o õ tõ c) n I unll pate: _ I Logged by; M. Black, p.E. soirDescription I ãÏ,il,T:i"t i ruo,.. U l0 20 40 , dry, Q.5Y, O/S) Orown Srt_ WITH FINE SAND. Strong HCL reaction Hard,2.5 Y (6/3) tighl ish brown change damp, CALCRETEiCALTCHE Strong reaction to HCl. drilling is very slow Hard, dry,2.SY, sh brown SILT WITH SAND. Brown mottling. t3 to wet, , (5t4) WITH SAND. of 20.0 ft. 20- ¿c 25 30 dry,2.5Y, (6/6) tight vçry ildfu, (lry, ¿.cy, (b/b) yellowish brown ELASTIC StLT WITH SAND. Brown motfling. : West of Panoramic Hts. Sampler: Standard Split Spoon !3¡11:I.9'g¡!!!I' t¿o G.W.T. @ Dritting (ft): not en Plate 4 EXHIBIT A-7 Page 30 of 48 ---PAGE BREAK--- f E ez o Ø- = è-o ñ o ê Ø È o o -9ño G o o o q o I Eo ¿ = (¿ÌìÌ ABG. Inc. Boring Log No. B-S Panaramic Hts. No.4 tNO#:0-237.7 _ Ground EL: 816 Hammer weight (lb): 140 G.W.T. @ Driiling (fr): not encoun Sampler: Standard Sptit Spoon I Orop (in): 30 !9e depqEI2_9_ by: M. Black, p.E. Driller: Ethan Hageman Drill Date: 06129107 o)o 0 loiL Elb õ l(e d' g å s l Øi oØiri J Logged by: M. Black, p.E. Soil Description ¡ SPT. blow/ft O Moisture % I 20 40 60 Firm, dry, (2.Sy, ght brown, WITH FINE SAND. Strong HCL reaction. recovery 14/18". Hit gravel at bottom of sample 10 15 at depth of 20 ¿c ¿3 30 2ñ FINE SAND and CEMENIED GRAVEL. Most deposits are 6 to l8 inches thick. Layers mosily consist of silt with fine san0 , 2.5 Y (613) light yeilowish changedamp, CALCRETE/CALICHE. Strono reaction to HCl. tï+ T+i ' 1+t f+1 +l Plate 5 EXHIBIT A-7 Page 31 of 48 ---PAGE BREAK--- GRÀTN STZE TESÎ DÀT.è, C]-i-ent: Project: Project ABG # 0-249.7 Panoramic #4 Nu.mber: 2OOO7B0O025 Sa.mpJ-e Data Source: panoramic #4 SanpJ-e No.: RLSO7O04g Elev. or DepÈh: BH_1, G 20, I.ocation: Description: Sandy sil_t Date: J /5/Oj pL: 36 USCS C].assificaÈion: ML Testingr Remarks: Length (in. /cn. ) : pf: 10 Classification: flonl vvH e SampJ.e LL: 46 .âÀsHTO Mechanical Ànal srs Data fnitial Dry sa:ap1e and tare= iOO. OO Tare =ônô Dry s:'nF¡J.e weigrht = fOõ.OO After wash 100.00 0. 00 100. 00 I'tinus #2OO from wash= 0.0 z cr:muJ.ative weighi rera5.ned= . O0 Sieve Cu¡nul . Wt. percent #B J! i. tt l_o # 30 ^äâ5 0 lëroo # 200 retained 0. 00 47.70 44 .00 45 0 4-t .40 48.90 finer 1nrl ^ ¿vv.U q^ ô J4. J 32.6 lt I Percent -#fO base. comF,.ete sample= 1OO.O å:î::i_::^"1*:1:rer.s.ampre: 125.0 100.0 lr¡_. ldeniscus correction onJ.y= O Specific grawity of sotias= 2.6 -Specific A'rawity correctiãn factor= I . OI2 Hydrometer tlpe: I52H Effective depth L= 16.294964 0.164 x Rm 7 z/-o¡ Percent finer 49 .4 49 .4 aq 41 .3 35.6 J¿T. I QUAITTY TNSPECTTON SERVICES, rNC. EXHIBIT A-7 Page 32 of 48 ---PAGE BREAK--- Fractional Coaponents t medir¡m = 32.5 t fine = 4.1) D85= 1.93 D6O= 7.24 DsO= A.A4 QUAr.rry rNspEcTroN SERVrcEs, rNc. EXHIBIT A-7 Page 33 of 48 ---PAGE BREAK--- LIQUID AND PLASTIC LIMIITS TEST REPORT 30 X t¡Joz õ F_ ct) 5 fL 10 7 4 50 LIQUID LIMIT Dashed líne indicates the approximate upper timit bound ary for n"trrriråìil =i ML or OL uH 1r ox sgtl DArA Panoramic #4 RLS070049 BH-t,@20' eurD AND plAsrc QUALITY INSPECTION Client: ABC # O_Zqm Project: panoramic #4 EXHIBIT A-7 Page 34 of 48 ---PAGE BREAK--- Pafticle Size Distribution Report 100 90 lÉ. 12 Itr Lt2 LU fY uJ 50 40 Sample No.: RLS070049 Location: Source of Sample: panoramic #4 Date: 7/5/07 Elev./Depth: BH-t,@20, % COBBLES % GMVEL SIZE rnm 00 CRS. FINF CRS. % FINES 0.0 00 [ttrutuM SILT 0.0 11a I Z- ' 32.s Á1 l CLAY 2.5 48.6 Soil Description Sandy silt PL= 36 Pgs= I's¡ ?30= uu= USCS= ML W Coefficients i13= uc= Pl= I0 pso= o.o:ll u10= AASHTO= Remarks #8 #16 #30 #5U #t00 #200 lno specifi cation provided ) QUALITY INSPECTION gERVtcEs, tNc. Client: ABG # 0-249.7 Project; panoramic #4 EXHIBIT A-7 Page 35 of 48 ---PAGE BREAK--- eRÀrN srzn C1ient: ABG # 0-249.1 Panoramic #4 Number: 2OOOI 800025 Project,: Project Æ Source: panora¡ni_c #4 SanFIe No.: RLSOTOOSO EIev-.or Depth: BH-3, G 19.5, Depth LocaÈion: Description: Elastic si-l-t Date: 1 /70/01 PL: 59 USCS C].assification: MH Testing' f,arn.¡¡tçs; LI,: -7 4 Sarup]-e Length (j.n. ) : Pf : 15 .àASHTO Classification : Mechanj.cal Àna1ysis Data ;3."*r1e and rare= -'irtälåo *.ïlrîããn Dry saup:.e weishr ,13:33 , oo Minr¡s *2oo from wash= o. ã"a 125. 00 lare for cr¡muJ.atiwe weighi retained,= . OO Siewe Cr:mu]. . I,It. percent :ned finer ).00 100. o .50 98. B .30 n.4 .80 96.2 .50 94.8 .00 q?  'yctrometer À'alysis D_È. SgPafation siarra iâ .¡r1^ Separation sieve is #10 :onplete s¡rnF1er= 1 OO . O l'ï;. l3; composire correcrion .i=;;tå:Ï " = o È'leniscus eorrection onJ-y= 0 Specific gravity of soJ-lds= 2.6 Specific aravity correction factor= I.OI2 HydromeÈer tl¡>e: 752H Effectiwe depttr 16.294964 _ 0.164 x Rm E]-apsed Temp, Actua]- Cor¡ected K R¡¡r time, min deg C readi¡g. reading, 2.00 23.9 60. o 5.00 23.9 60.0 15.00 23.9 60.O .æ-aì ^n . Æfl. uu 24.4 60.0 Gg^^ uu 25.6 57. O 250.00 23.3 43.0 43.1 0.0133 43.0 Eff. Di¡neter depth @ 6.5 0.0237 6.5 0.0150 6.5 0. 0087 6.5 0.0061 6 .9 0 .0044 9.2 0.0026 Percent finer 49 .3 49 .3 AO ? 49 .4 41 .4 A QUÀI,rTY INSPECTTON SERVrcEs, rNc. EXHIBIT A-7 Page 36 of 48 ---PAGE BREAK--- Elapsed Ter¡p, Àctual time, urin deg C rea.tinq 1440 .00 23:3 42 . Corrected K Rm reading 42.1 0.0133 42.0 Eff. depth 9.4 Diarrretef @ 0.0011 Percent finer 34 .6 _ clpef,/Sand l¡ased on Sand/Fines based on Fractiona]. ComponenÈs #4 #200 T GRA\IET, = t COBBLES = t SAIiID = 6.4 o Èrc¡rttt, : o.4 (t coarse = o. 3 t SfLT = 44.g * cr.Àv _ Ao 8 CLÀY = 48.'7 t medir¡.m = 2.g D85= 0. 06 D6O= O . 04 DSO= O. 03 I fine = 3.3) 9UALITY TNSPECTION SERVTCES, INC. V EXHIBIT A-7 Page 37 of 48 ---PAGE BREAK--- Particle Size Distribution Report E € ;q lÉ. t2 Itr IF z. I,IJO É. t¡J 40 (no specifi carion provided) Sample No.: RLS070050 Location: Source of Sample: panoramic #4 Date: 7/tO/07 % COBBLES % GRAVEL LJKAIN SIZE - MM - .I,toÑ?--- % FINES cRS. FINE 0.0 0.0 0.0 I rlEerum I FINE u.i t ) P r - )1 SILT CLAY 449 487 #8 #16 #30 #50 #l 00 #200 Soil Description Elastic silt PL-- 5e Pgs= o.oo¡z :30= uu= USCS= MH Agerberq Limits LL= 74 Pl= 15 Bff= o ottt Elev./Depth: BH-3, @ QUALITY INSPECTION sERVtcES, tNc. Client: ABC # 0_249.7 Project: panoramic #4 EXHIBIT A-7 Page 38 of 48 ---PAGE BREAK--- LIQUID AND PLASTIC LIMITS TEST REPORT LIQUID LIMIT x UJ z. Lgo c)tr U) -JÀ Dashed line indicates the approximate upper timit bound ary f or n"irr"r .åìi"' rul 1r ol MH qr OH Panoramic #4 RLS070050 H-3, @ te. LIQUID AND PLASTIC LIMITS TEST RÈffi QUALITY INSPECTION Client: ABC # O-Zqg.t Project: panoramic #4 E/tz. EXHIBIT A-7 Page 39 of 48 ---PAGE BREAK--- GR.ilrN STZE TES; C.lient: Project: Project ABG # 0_249.1 Panoramic #4 Nt¡nber: 20OO1BOO025 Source: panoramic #4 Samp1e No.: RLSO7OO51 31.r:.or Deprh: BH_3;@ 25, Location: Description: Sandy el_astic srl_t Date: '7/4/Ol uscs ctassificarion, Iï 45 Testing Re'¡arks: Sanp].e Length (in. /se. ¡ . LL : 96 ÞT . q..1 ÀASHTo Classifi""tiorr-,-' Mechanical Ana]-ysis Data Dry sample and tare= Tare :ight retained,= . OO t. Wt. percent retained finer #B J! 1- #30 Go 1@t^^ lç¡r uu # 200 0. 00 4r.70 44 .00 45 0 41 .40 49, on Jb.U 54.3 52.6 51 1 t'er Àrral.ysis Data Separation sieve is #10 compJ.ere sa,rrFle= 1 o o . o CaJ.cuJ-ated l¡iased weightË-t 25 . OO AuÈoma.tic ¡arn¡.errature correction Composite correction at 20 deg C = O 072 Effective deptl- L= 16.294694 _ 0.164 x Rm QUAI,TTY TNSPECTTON sERVrcEs, rNc. EXHIBIT A-7 Page 40 of 48 ---PAGE BREAK--- Fractiona]. Grave1/Sand based on #4 Sand,/Fines based on *iOO tËtr_T'nã, t SILT = 1.5 DBS= 1.93 D6O= t GR.AIÆI, = coarse = IZ.3 t CLå,Y = 49.6 I.24 DsO= 0. 04 t me¿lir¡¡ = 32.5 t (T CI,AY COIIOTDS = fine = 4.1) 4e .2t QUALITY TNSPECTTON sERVrcEs, rNc. 72¡-t r EXHIBIT A-7 Page 41 of 48 ---PAGE BREAK--- LIQUID AND PLASTIC LIIVIITS TEST REPORT 30 x [rJoz F o- F_ Jo- LIQUID LIMIT Dashed line indicates the approximate upper timit bound ary for n"iurrr iåìi. ltl/ 4 I / /t I I /l l.ì I I ML Jr oL MH or OH Panoramic #4 RLS07005 I BH-3,@2s' LIQUID AND PLASTIC LIMITS TEST REPORT . QUALITY INSPECTION Client: ABG # O_24g.7 Project: panoramic #4 7-Zøz EXHIBIT A-7 Page 42 of 48 ---PAGE BREAK--- 7- zl-n- EXHIBIT A-7 Page 43 of 48 ---PAGE BREAK--- Non -Lood Floor Slob or _T Vories I _T 1 Foot Min. Bockfill LEGTND: Beddine Ill tÞrE ffiffiE ffi @ Aspholi or concrete povement or concrete Froor Srob Eose Moteriol or Bose Rock Eockfill; compocted on-site soil or lmported Select Fill M0tenot os Describe.d .in the Site prepcirotion ol [hã Cänerot [orthwork Section of the nttoðir-e¿ Rãlrort iext. Bed.ding Moteríol; M-otqri.or Iype Depends on Type of pioe ond lglilg conditionó. Bedding _sFório'conforr' t,í'tr.'r'uåÅäocturers Hecommendotions for the-Iype of pipe Seleòirj. - Mínimum PercentoSe of lIoximum Loborotory Drv Densitv os Determined bv AS.l1'{ Tesr Mèthó¿ D -i5b}:7s iúrãiilä''Råito¿, untess otherwise Specified ¡À trã Ãttåãñá¿ 'R"roïäîri. ' TYPICAL UTILITY TRENCH CONSU LTANTS FILL AND FLOOR SIÀB REQU IREMENTS lEvons I 0-28- Fig. 3 EXHIBIT A-7 Page 44 of 48 ---PAGE BREAK--- 22.0 Degree Slope Stability Against Shallow Sloughing or Face SI¡d¡ng ito rts (E Ørho Lo (EII 10.00 8.00 6.00 4.00 2.00 0.00 - 0 degree seep * 26.6 degree seep 60 degree seep * 90 deqree se 0.5000 1.5000 2.5000 3.5000 Depth to Failure Surface-Feet I T I @ w EXHIBIT A-7 Page 45 of 48 ---PAGE BREAK--- Silty fine sand Gravel Cemented Gravel BA flow bottom Elastic silt Gamma C pcf psf 115 0 130 0 140 200 175 500 1 10 200 Phi deg 29 34 38 45 30 Piezo Surf. 1 1 1 1 1 Ru 0 0 0 0 0 DWR Consultants lnc. - pasco. WA Chavallo Panoramic No. 4 08/1 5/05.55s _ _7 240 - 850 - 800 - 700 - 650 - 600 550 L657 I _ þ.4s3 I 850 - 800 - 750 - 700 - 650 - 600 - 550 - 500 8 12:33:t1 PM c:\wlNDows\DESKToAGEoTEc-1\cHAVALLo.GsL DwR consuttants tnc. - pasco, wAr.ÆÍ.- 3.470 e _L,u, I ll r rrl "rjo' ' l ,ojo, ttt r tt, ,ujn, ,tt t ttt,"l^, t ttl trt _r r tl t rt r t l 600 - 500 Note: layers below elastic silt not shown 800 1000 1200 EXHIBIT A-7 Page 46 of 48 ---PAGE BREAK--- Silty fìne sand Gravel Cemented Gravel BA flow bottom Elastic silt Gamma C pcf psf 115 0 130 0 140 200 175 500 1 10 200 Ph¡ deg 29 QA 38 AE 30 Piezo Surf. 1 1 1 1 'l Ru 0 0 0 0 n DWR Consultants lnc. - Pasco. WA Chavallo Panoramic No. 4 08/15/03 313 'rtl'al i __6215 850 - 800 - 750 - 700 - 650 - 600 - 550 - 12:34:03 PM owR consunants rnc. - p.rsco.w{þ2s06 Note: layers below elastic silt not shown - 850 I _ _ iz-æs__ :_V.boo _:12.226 F = 2.906 - [PHONE REDACTED] EXHIBIT A-7 Page 47 of 48 ---PAGE BREAK--- DWR Consultants lnc. - Pasco, WA Chavallo Panoramic No. 4 - 850 - 800 750 - 700 - 650 - 600 550 - 500 850 - 800 - 750 - 700 - 650 - 550 - 500 _ ! I I I I I l "rjo" l I I I I l'rjn, l ll I l t I I I I t I t l t l I I I I i I I I r I I I 400 200 600 \ rrry12:31:s3PMci\wNDOws\DEsKroP\GEorEc-1\CHAVÀLLo.GsL owRlconsurants rnc. - pascô. wlls-50i Note: layefs below elastic silt not 800 1200 EXHIBIT A-7 Page 48 of 48 ---PAGE BREAK--- ED# t0-56 March 21,2011 Jose & Tammy Chavallo 102 N. Lincoln Street Kennewick, WA 99336 Dear Mr. & Mrs. Chavallo: Enclosed is a Mitigated Determination of Non-Significance #10-56 for PP #10- 10-01 located at 6100 W. 25th Avenue, west of the Panoramic Heights neighborhood. This Determination means no Environmental lmpact Statement if required in order for the City to continue the processing of your application. Please notice that several changes have been made to your Environmental Checklist. Three conditions have been added. The City of Kennewick has determined that as mitigated, this proposalwill not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An Environmental lmpact Statement (ElS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.030(2Xc). This decision was made after review of a completed Environmental Checklist, and will be available to the public on request. lf you should have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Enclosure: CC: Dept of Ecology Dept. of Fish & Wildlife - Perry Harvester, 1701 S. 24rh Ave., Yakima, WA 98902 Dept. of Fish & Wildlife - Mark Teske, 201 N Pearl, Ellensburg, WA 98926 Yakima Nation, 815 Sanford Ave., Richland, WA 99352 CTUIR - Carey Miller, P O Box 638, Pendleton, OR 97801 SEPA File PDP 10-01/PP 10-02 File K 210 W. 6'n Avenue o P.O. Box 6108 ¡ Kennewick, WA 99336-0108 (509) 5854200 ¡ Fax (509) s85-4445 EXHIBIT A-8 Page 1 of 20 ---PAGE BREAK--- ED# 10-56 CITY OF KENNEWICK MIT¡GATED DETERMINATION OF NON.SIGNIFIGANGE Description of Proposal: Planned Development Permit /Preliminarv Plat for 38 lot qated communitv for a sinqle familv residential subdivision. Proponent: Jose & Tammv Chavallo s, if any, 6100 W. 25ü Avenue, extension of 1[ the Panoramic Heiohts neiqhborhood. Lead Agency: Citv of Kennewick Mitigation Required for Potentially Significant Adverse lmpacts: According to KMC 18.42.040(1), the City may impose any condition necessary to protect the health, safety, and welfare or otherwise bring a proposed development into compliance with the purpose and intent of thís Title. For this proposal, PP No.10-02IPLN-2010-04492 & PDP No. 10-01/PLN-2010-04491, conditions include the mitigation fee for the impacts of a 38 lot subdivision on park zone 6W (Southridge) in the amount of $20,691 .72 in lieu of dedication of park land. Conditions also include traffic mitigation fees for a maximum amount of $20,691 .72 and are to be collected as a percentage of lots in each phase of development. For this proposal, PP No. 10-02/PLN-2010-04492 & PDP No.10-01/PLN-2010-04491 conditíons include mitigation for traffic impacts on the existing Panoramic Heights neighborhood in the amount of $20,000 for traffic calming devices. X This Mitigated DNS is issued under 197-1'l-340(2). The City will not act on this proposal for fifteen (15) days from the date below. Comments must be submitted by_4ß!!!1 . After the review period has elapsed, all comments received will be evaluated and the DNS will be retained, modified, or wíthdrawn as required by SEPA X regulations. Changes, modifications and /or additions to the checklist have been made on the attached Environmental Checklist Review. This MDNS is subject io tfre attached conditions. Responsible Officíal: Gregory McOormick Position/Title: Planning Director Address: 210 West 6'n Ave., P. O. Phone: (509) 585-4473 3t21t11 Signa According to KMC 4.08.430, this determination may be appealed to: Hearing Examiner City of Kennewick 210 W 6rh Ave., P.O. Box 6'1 08 l l0 \1 6"'Avemr.- r P.O Flo.r ói08 . Kc¡nr-'.r.rrk. \\jA crv.llrr-ll 10.1 (-iÙ9),i3)'lli"-J " .L-.rr\ -.ti -++ii EXHIBIT A-8 Page 2 of 20 ---PAGE BREAK--- ED# 10-56 The time for appealing SEPA issues is twenty-one (21) days after notice (WAC 197-11- 680(5)(a). You should be prepared to make specific, written factual objections. Contact Gregory McCormick to read or request the procedures for SEPA appeals. CITY OF KENNEWICK ENVIRONME NTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW E.D. File # l0 - 56 Action: PP #10-02/PDP #10-01 Reviewby:þ-@i4 Date: Ma¡ch 21.2011 The City of Kennewick has reviewed the checklist and has made changes on it. Please note the following condition(s): Parks For this proposal, PP 10-O2IPLN-2010-04492 & PDP '10-01/PLN-2010-04491, conditions include the mitigation fees for impacts for the addition of 38 single- family dwelling units in Park Planning Zone 6W - Southridge. ln lieu of land dedication fees are required to be paid to Park Planning Zone 6W - Southridge in the amount of $20,691.72 as calculated per the City's Park Fee Determination Process form. This fee must be paid as a percentage of the total amount based on the number of units to be built in each phase of development. Traffic For PP 10-02/PLN-2010-04492 & PDP 10-01/PLN-2O10-O4491, The developer will be required to provide a $20,000 letter of credit to the City to be drawn upon by the HOA for their installation of up to 4 speed humps per city standard or a single traffic circle per city standard. These traffic calming measures will be constructed within the existing Panoramic Heights neighborhood specifically located to mitigate the impacts of increased traffic caused by the proposed development. Location and selection of traffic calming rneasures will be made by the Panoramic Heights Homeowner's Association (HOA) in accordance with KAC 13-40 and subject to the approval by the City. lf said mitigation measures are not started within 5-years of final plat approval; the developer will be released of this obligation. These comments apply to the initíal 38 lots proposed. Additional structures or development or any change of use that increases the traffìc by more than 20 percent may require additional mitigation measures. The baseline for comparison is 364 daily trips or 38 PM peak hour trips. The measures are required as a result of long tangent sections (greater than 1000 feet) within the proposed development and between the development and the fìrst collector/arterial access point. Water Quality ' An NPDES Construction Stormwater General Permit from the Washington State Department of Ecology is required if there is a potential for stormwater discharge from a construction site with more than one acre of disturbed ground. This permit requires that the SEPA checklist fully disclose anticipated activities including building, road construction and utility placements. Obtaining a permit is a minimum of a 38 day ll0 ó'n Arenuc ¡ P Box 6ll8 r Kennc,,,ick \\',4.)9.1-ló-(llirS a ) _i8 \ .J.lri( ¡ i;.rrr ( jrlc.r; j\-i.I i. l-i EXHIBIT A-8 Page 3 of 20 ---PAGE BREAK--- ED# 10-56 process and may take up to 60 days if the original SEPA does not disclose proposed activities. Erosion control measure must be in place prior to any clearing, grading or construction. These control measures must be able to prevent soilfrom being caried into surface water (this includes storm drains) by stormwater runoff. A stormwater construction permit from Washington State Dept. of Ecology may be required if there is a potential for discharge from a construction site larger than one acre. A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (Erosion Sediment Control Plan) is needed for all permitted construction sites. Please contact Ray Latham, at the Dept, of Ecology, (509) 575-2807, to determine if your site needs such a permit. Water Resources The water purveyor is responsible for ensuring that the proposed use(s) are within the limitations of its water rights. lf the proposal's actions are different than the existing water right (source, purpose, the place of use, or period of use), then it is subject to approval from the Department of Ecology pursuant to Sections 90,03.380 RCW and 90.44.100 RCW. lf you have any questions concerning the Water Resources comments, please contact Breean Zimmerman at (509) 454-7647. 2lL) W Avc-nuc: . P,O. Box 6108 ¡ Kenneir,ìck. 99-.11ó t:5û9) 58-i-41ûC " Ijax (5ùq I -5¡ì-s 414-s EXHIBIT A-8 Page 4 of 20 ---PAGE BREAK--- Éò lÒ-5b For non-project actions, the references in the checklist to the words "projecf', "applicant", and "property or site" should be read as "proposal", "proposer", and "affected geographic area", respectively. A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: Citadel Estates 2. Name of applicant: Jose Chavallo and Tammy Steele-Chavallo 3. Address and phone number of applícant and contact person: ' 106 South Lincoln Street 4. Date checklist prepared: / September 14,2010 5. Agency requesting checklist: ' CiÇ of Kennewick Planning Depañment 6. Proposed timíng or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): First Phase construction to begin spring 2011, Second Phase summer 2012 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with thís proposal? lf yes, explain. Yes, lot 38 is being proposed as a commercial development site. L List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to thÍs proposal. - Geotechnical Slope Stab¡l¡ty Study within critical slope area will be completed with design of roads and grading plan 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the properÇ covered by your proposal? lf yes, explain. Yes, rezoning of the area of lot 38 10. List any government approvals or permíts that wíll be needed for your proposal, if known. City of Kennewick EIWIRONMENTAL AND SALMOMDS CFIECKLIST 10-20-010.K4C 3/9s Page2 EXHIBIT A-8 Page 5 of 20 ---PAGE BREAK--- 11. Gpe a brief, complete descriptíon of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the síze of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on , this page. 36 lot gated residentialsubdivision, and I commerclaltract Residential lots are approximatelY l/3 acre. 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient ínformatíon for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. lf a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the. range or boundar-ies of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably avaílable. While you should submit any plans req.u.ired by thã agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted wÍth any permit applications related to this checklist. / Extension ol25t Avenue and 26th Avenue, west of South Kellogg Strcet. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS l. Earth a. Generaldescription of the site (circle one): Flat, rolling, steep slopes, mountainous, other ,roximate percent slope?) ed is somewhere in the 2oolo raî$e or flatter. l"re site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? lf you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. / Warden Silt Loam (WdDO and Shano Silt Loam (ShF), from USDA Soil Survey of Benton County l97l d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? lf so, describe. No e, Describe the purpose, type and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. lndicate Site grading will be required to build street and house pads. f . Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction or use? lf so, generally describe? / Yes, wind and water erosion during construction. ENVIRONMENTAL AND SALMONIDS CFIECKIIST 10-20=010.K4C 3/95 Pase 3 EXHIBIT A-8 Page 6 of 20 ---PAGE BREAK--- g. About what percent of the site will be covered wíth ímpervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? . 22o/o ¡oads and Buildings h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: . Exposed areas will be watered for dust control during construction. Soil erosion fencing will be used as needed. Disturbed areas will be hydro-seeded when construction is completed. 2. At¡ a. What types of emissíons to the air would result from the proposal dust, automobile, odors, índustrialwood smoke) during constructíon and when the project is completed? fi any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. / Dust during construction. b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may effect your proposal? lf so, generally describe. No c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, íf any: / Exposed areas will be watered during construction. Disturbed areas will be hydro-seeded when construction is completed. 3. Water a. Surface ls there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year- round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? lf yes, describe type and provide names. lf appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. No Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? lf yes, please describe and attach available plans. No Estimate the amount of fíll and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected, lndicate the source of fill material. None EI.{VIRONMENTAL AND SALMONIDS CHECKLIST 1O-20-O1O.KAC 3/95 PAgE 4 EXHIBIT A-8 Page 7 of 20 ---PAGE BREAK--- Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. 'No Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? lf so, note location on the site plan. .No Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? lf so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. tNo b. Ground W¡ll ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known' / No Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals; agricultural; etc.) Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. Storm water maybe discharged to the groundwater with the use of dry wells and infiltration trenches. c. Water Runoff (including storm water) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? lf so, describe. Storm water to be collected by catch basins and discharged to dry wells and infiltration trenches. Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? lf so, generally describe' Yes, through dry wells and infiltration trenches. d. Proposed measured to reduce or control surface, ground and runoff water impacts, if any: - Storm water collection system. ENVIRONMENTAL AND SALMONIDS CHECKLIST 1O-20-O1O.KAC 3195 PAgE 5 EXHIBIT A-8 Page 8 of 20 ---PAGE BREAK--- 4. Plants a. Check or círcle the types of vegetation found on the site: deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other - SHRUBS grass pasture crop or grain wet soil plants; cattail, buttercup, bulrush, skunk cabbage, other water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Aal lots will be graded. General shrub grass will be removed within the development. c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: ' Residential home landscaping. 5. Animals a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other NONE fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None c. ls the site part of a migration route? ls so, explain. The entire Columbia Basin is part of a mitigation route. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: t None ENVIRONMENTAL AND SALMONIDS CHECKLIST l0-20-010.K4C 3/95 Page 6 EXHIBIT A-8 Page 9 of 20 ---PAGE BREAK--- 6. Energy and Natural Resources a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. Residential homes. Electric heating and lighting. We are discussing with the Gascade Natural Gas to extend service to the area. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? lf so, generally describe. -No c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: Energy efficient construction of the homes. We would like to investigate small individual home solar and wind energy projects. 7. Environmental Health a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosíon, spíll or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? ls so, describe. No Describe special emergency services that might be required. ' Standard CiÇ emergency services for residential homes. Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: - None required. b. Noise What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffìc, equipment, operation, other)? ' None What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the proiect on short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffíc, construction, operation, other)? lndicate what hours noise would come from the site. / Construction noise for site and home construction. Proposed work hourc 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. ENVIRONMENTAL AND SALMONIDS CI{ECKLIST 10.20-O1O.KAC 3/95 PAgCT EXHIBIT A-8 Page 10 of 20 ---PAGE BREAK--- Proposed measures to redr¡ce or control noise impacts, if any: d. e. r. g. h. a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? Residential and vacant land. b. Has the site been used for agriculture? lf so, describe. /No c. Describe any structures on the site. / None Willany structures be demolished? lf so, what? No What is the current zoning classification of the síte? Residential Suburban lf applicable, what is the current shorelíne master program designation of the site? / ntr Has any part of the site been cJassífied as an "environmentally sensitive" area? lf so, specify. / Critical Slope Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? 37 residential homes Approxímately how many people would reside or work in the completed area? t tro k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: /we I ENVIRONMENTAL AND SALMONIDS C}IECKLIST l0-20-0l0.KAc 3/95 Page 8 EXHIBIT A-8 Page 11 of 20 ---PAGE BREAK--- t. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any; Meets Gity Zoning Codes 9. Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? lndicate whether high, middle or low-income housing. 37 High-lncome housing b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? lndicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. ¿ None c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: N'A 10. Aesthetics a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? Three sto ll be daylight first floor. Wood, stucco, brick, and rock exteriors. b. what views i cinity would lbe altered or obstructed? None c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: / N/A 11. Light and Glare a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? / None b. Could light or glare from the finished projec't be a safety hazard or interfere with views? /No c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? / None ENVIRONMENTAL AND SALMONIDS CI{ECKLIST 1O-20-O1O.KAC 3/95 PAgE 9 EXHIBIT A-8 Page 12 of 20 ---PAGE BREAK--- d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any? / None 12. Recreation a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? t Clty parks and schools. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational use? lf so, describe, /No c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be províded by the project or applicant, if any: / None 13. Historic and Gultural Preservation a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? lf so, generally describe, No b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. None nrpacts, if any: ldentiff public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existÍng street system. Show on site plans, if any. Extension ol 25ü Avenue and 26Û Avenue, west of South Kellogg Street. Subdivision will be a gated communit¡t with no public access. ls site currently served by public transit? lf not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? No, approximately one mile. a. b H\N/IRONMENTAI AND SALMONIDS CI{ECKLIST r0-20-010.KAC 3/95 Page 10 EXHIBIT A-8 Page 13 of 20 ---PAGE BREAK--- c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? / None etiminated. Minimum 2 per lot, sr*2 = 74 residentlal parking. d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not'íncluding Ariue*ãys? lf so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). Extension oÍ 25h Avenue and 26h Avenue, west of South Kellogg Street d communitY with no Public access' e, in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? lf so, generallY describe. No Í. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? lf known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. / 4.5 per residential site. Approrimaloly 170 trips. g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: / None 15. Public Services a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protåctíôn, health care, schools, other)? lf so, generally describe' . City services will be required to meet the needs of the new 37 lot residential development b. proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. / None 16. Utilities a. Circle utílitíes currently available at the site: electriciÇ, natural gas, water, refuse selvice, / telephone, saniúary sewer, septic system, other. ENVIRONMENTAL AND SALMONIDS CHECKLIST 1O-20-Ol O.KAC 3/95 PAgE 11 EXHIBIT A-8 Page 14 of 20 ---PAGE BREAK--- b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service,- and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicínity which might be needed, ElectriciÇ - Benton PUD Water & Sanitary Sewer - C¡ty of Kennewick Telephone - Verizon Refuse - Waste tlanagement Gas - Gascade Natural Gas C. SIGNATURE The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the City is relying on them to make its decisions. Signature Telephone Number: DateSubmitteo: lollS I lo ENVIRONMENTAL AND SALMONIDS CHECKIIST l0-20-010.K4C 3195 Page 12 EXHIBIT A-8 Page 15 of 20 ---PAGE BREAK--- D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS Because these questions are very general, it may be hetpful to read them in conjunction with the list of the elements of the environment. When answering these questions, be arvare of the efent the proposal, or the types of activities like[ tõ result fiom the proposal, would affect the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate thán if the proposal were-not implemented. Respond briefly and in general terms' 1. How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water; emissions to air; production, stoågé, or release óf tox¡c or hazardous substances; or production of noise? / lncreased impervlous area will increase storm drainage discharge. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: / On-site cotlection system with dry wells and infittration trenches. 2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life? / Non" proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are: one 3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources? / Development of 37 new residential homes. proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are: / Homes to have energy efficient construction. 4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect envíronmentally sensitive areas or areas designated (or eligible or under ltuOy¡ for governmental protection; such as parks, wildãrness, wild and scenic rivers, ttlreatened or endangered species habitat, historic or cultural sites, wetlands, floodplains or prime farmlands? / N/A proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: / None 5. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, including whether it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans? ' N/A ENVIRONMENTAL AND SALMONIDS CI{ECKLIST 1O-20-O1O.KAC 3/95 PAgC 13 EXHIBIT A-8 Page 16 of 20 ---PAGE BREAK--- Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are: / Non" 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services and utilities? / Development of 37 new residential homes. Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are: ¿ Gonstruction of associated streets and utilities. T. ldentiff, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. / None ENVIRONMENTAL AND SAIMONIDS CFIECKIIST 1O-20-O1O.KAC 3/95 PAgE 14 EXHIBIT A-8 Page 17 of 20 ---PAGE BREAK--- ESA LISTED SALMONIDS CHECKLIST The Listed Salmonids Checklist ís provided in order that the City can identify a project's potential impacts (if any) on salmonids that have been listed as "threatened" or "endangered" under the Federal Endangered Species Act (ESA). A salmonid is any fish species that spends part of its life cycle ín the ocean and returns to fresh water. Potential project impacts that may result in a "taking" of listed salmonids must be avoided, or mitígated to insignificant levels. Generally, under ESA, a "taking" is broadly defìned as any action that causes the death of, or harm to, the listed species. Such actions include those that affect the environmental in ways that interfere with or reduce the level of reproduction of the species. lf ESA listed species are present or ever were present in the watershed where your project will be located, your project has the potential for affecting them, and you need to comply with the ESA. The questions in this section will help determine if the ESA listing will impact your project. The Fish Program Manager at the appropriate Department of Fish and Wildlife (DFW) regional offÌce can provide additional information. Please contact the Dept. of Fish and Wildlife at 1701 S. 24th, Yakima WA 98902-5720, Phone No. [PHONE REDACTED]. 1. Are ESA listed salmonids currently present in the watershed in which your project will be? / YES X NO_ Please Describe. Columbia River Watershed 2. Has there ever been an ESA listed salmonid stock present in this watershed? / YES X NO_ Please Describe. Golumbia River Watershed NOTE: Kennewick is located in the upper Mid-Columbia watershed. Salmonoids are present in the watershed - questions no. 1 and no.2 already answered "yes". Questions A-1 and A-2 are also answered. PROJECT SPECIFIC: The questions in this section are specific to the project and vicinity. /A1. Name of watershed: Uoper Mid-Columbia /A2. Name of nearest waterbody: Columbia River ,43. What is the distance from this project to the nearest body of watel? lguM!þg Ofte¡ a -uffer bétween the project and a stream can reduce the chance of a negative impact to flsh. 44. What is the current land use between the project and the potentially affected water body / (parking lots, farmland, etc.) Residential and Gommercial Developments ENVIRONMENTAL AND SALMONIDS CHECKLIST 10-20-010.KAC 3195 Page 15 EXHIBIT A-8 Page 18 of 20 ---PAGE BREAK--- 45. What percentage of the project will be impervious surface (includÍng pavement & roof / areal? 22o/o ¡oads and buildings FISH MIGRATION: The following questions will help determine if this project could interfere with migration of adult and juvenile fish, Both increases and decreases in water flows can affect fish migration. 81. Does the project require the withdrawal of / a. Surface water? Yes No X Amount Name of surface water body_ Ground water? Yes No X Amount From Where Depth of well /B,2. Will any water be rerouted? YES NO tf yes, will this require a channel-change? il /illthere be retention ponds? YES-NO X lf yes, will this be an infiltration ponclor a suffice discharç r a municipal storm a ^ t¡O @ 83, Willthere be retention ponds? YES water system or a surface water body? lf to a surface water discharge, please give the name of the waterbody. 84. W¡ll this project require the building of new roads? (lncreased road mileage may atfect the timing of water reaching a stream and may, thus, impact fish habitat.) Yes 5. Are culverts proposed as part of this proieú? Yes No X /P¡6. Are stormwater drywells proposed as part of this project? Yes X No ¿ 97. Will topography changes affect the duration/dírection of runoff flows? Yes X No lf yes describe the changes. Reduction of stopes will increase duration time, thus reduced runoff impact. / Bg. Will the project involve any reduction of a floodway or floodplain by filling or other partial blockage of flows? Yes NoX lf yes, how wilf the loss of flood storage be mitigated by your proiect? E}WIRONMENTALANDSALMONIDSC}IECKLIST IO-20-OIO.KAC 3/95 Page 16 EXHIBIT A-8 Page 19 of 20 ---PAGE BREAK--- WATER QUALITY: The following questions will help determine if this project could adversely impact water quality. Degraded waier qualíty can affect listed species, Water qualiÇ can be rå¿r worse by runoff from impervious surfaces, altering water temperature, discharging contaminants, etc. C1. Will your project either reduce or increase shade along or over a waterbody? . yEs NO X (Removat of shading vegetation or the building of structures such as docks or floats often result in a change in shade.) C2. W¡ll the project increase nutrient loading or have the potentialto increase nutríent loading or / contaminants (fertilízers, other waste díscharges, or runoff) to the waterbody? YES NO X C3. W¡ll turbidity (dissolved or partially dissolved sediment load) be increased because of - constructioñ of the project or during operatíon of the project? (ln-water or near water work will often increase turbiditY.) YES--ilo x C4. Will your project require long term maintenance, i.e., bridge cleaning, highway salting, / chemical sprays for vegetation management, clearing of parking lots? YES NO X Please Describe. Vegetation: The following questions are designed to determine if the project will affect riparian vegetation, which can impact listed species. D1. Will the project involve the removal of any vegetation from the stream banks? / YES NOX lf yes, please describe the existing conditions and the amount and type of vegetation to be removed. D2. fi any vegetation is removed, do you plan to re-plant? YES-X--NO lf yes, what types of plants will you use? Residential landscaping E. SIGNATURE The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand the City is relying on them to make its decision. tl rolr5 llp Date 10-20-010.K4C 3/95 Page 17 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SALMONIDS CI{ECKLIST EXHIBIT A-8 Page 20 of 20 ---PAGE BREAK--- MEMORANDUM Englneerlng of Publlc Works To: Wes Romíne, Development Services Manager From: Fernando Garcia, Utility Coordinator Date: December 16,2010 Re: Public Works Consolidated Comments Project: PDP 10-01/PLN-2010-04491 -PP 1O-O2IPLN-201O-O4492 1. Provide construction of private road, sidewalks, streetlights, storm drainage and designate sidewalk and utility Easements all in conformance with City of Kennewick Standard Drawíng 2-1 Sheet 2.Narrower easements may be considered if sidewalks against to the curb are approved and the utility companies allow. 2. Permit or notification letter will be required from Northwest Natural Gas before issuing a DPW permit for civil infrastructure construction for gas line crossing inspection. 3. Provide a paved temporary cul-de-sac, or hammer head turn around with 2" HMA and 6" of crushed rock at the end of the phase one street construction or pave the complete looped street to provide a minimum width of 2O-feet. Private Street to be constructed per City of Kennewick Standards per KMC 18.45.020 4. Private Streets shall be designed with a maximum 12o/o slope for safe driving per KMC 18.45.020 and KMC 5.56.275, Some deviation may be allowed bythe City Engineer; however, it appears that the proposed street may be excessively steep. 5. Water and sewer service to the lots along 25th and 26th Avenue will be made by extension from existing utility lines in Panoramic Heights to the east of the proposed plat. Portions of Lots 1 through 9 are above 810' Zone 4 service elevation. An individual booster and pressure storage tanks shall be required for all homes with a floor elevation of 810 feet or more. 6. Water is available near the end of existing 25th Avenue and 26th Avenue. A 1O-ft water line easement will be required for mainlines and on fire hydrant runs and 5- Municipal Services Department 1O1O S. Ghemlcal Dr. * PO Box 6108* Kennewick, WA 99336 [PHONE REDACTED] * [PHONE REDACTED], Fax EXHIBIT A-9 Page 1 of 14 ---PAGE BREAK--- ft past the fire hydrants, These easements will be required on the plat to extend the water in the private road, or change the Private Street designation to Private Street, Access and Utility Easement. 7. Sanitary sewer is available at the end of existing 25th Avenue, and 126-ftwest of Kellogg on 26th Avenue, a 1S-ft sanitary sewer èasement will be required on the plat to extend the sanitary sewer in the private road, and or over the proposed sewer main alignment, or change the Private Street designation to Private Street, Access and Utility Easement. 8. Sewer service to lots on the north side of 25h and 26ft may require a pressure pump at each house. A note will be required on the construction drawings and Final Plat that these lots may require individual sewer pumps. lf a pump is required for a house service, the pressure line will connect to the gravity flow service stub, no pressure lines will be approved to connect to the sewer main. 9. Submit storm comprehensive plan for the complete site. Comprehensive plan need to be approved by the city for the entire Plat prior to approval of Phase 1 construction plans. 10. Storm runoff design shall be per City of Kennewick Standards Specifications Section 5-9,01. Commercial sites and private streets shall be designed to retain and dispose of a 1O-year 24-hour storm on-site. Drywells, perforated pipe systems and other means of infiltration may be used, where there is no potential for groundwater contamination. Design calculations, bearing a registered professional engineer's stamp, are required for all storm drainage designs 11. Provide proof of land required to install storm runoff system. 12. Note: Engineering will not accept civil drawing for preliminary review, until the Preliminary Plat has been approved by Development Services. Municipal Services Department 1010 S. Chemlcal Dr. * PO Box 6108* Kennewick. WA 99336 [PHONE REDACTED] * [PHONE REDACTED]- Fax EXHIBIT A-9 Page 2 of 14 ---PAGE BREAK--- Traffic Comments: t2/L6/LO - The requested code deviations are acceptable to Traffic Engineering. See Permit PLN-2010- 04492 for Traffic Comments L2/20/LO - The project meets Concurrency for Transportation. The developer will be required to construct up to 4 speed humps per city standard or a single traffic circle per city standard. These traffic calming measures will be constructed within the existing Panoramic Heights neighborhood specifically located to mitigate the impacts of increased traffic caused by the proposed development. Location and selection of traffic calming measures will be made by the Panoramic Heights Homeowner's Association (HOA) ín accordance with KAC 13-40 and subject to the approval by the City. The developer will be responsible for the installation of the approved traffic calming measures, or provide 520,000 letter of credit to the City to be drawn upon by the HOA for their installation of the aforementioned traffic calming (mitigation) measures. lf said mitigation measures are not started within S-years of preliminary plat approval; the developer will be released of this obligation. These comments apply to the initial 38 lots proposed. Additional structures or development or any change of use that increases traffic by more than 20 percent may require additional mitigation measures. The baseline for comparison is 364 daily trips OR 38 PM peak hour trips. Fire Department Comments: The following three items shall apply to the proposed development in accordance with the Kennewick Municipal Code and the lnternational Fire Code, 2009 Edition. L. lnstall fire hydrants and looped water mains in accordance with City engineering standards. Fire Hydrants shall be installed at intersections and maximum 600 foot spacing. 2. lnstall Knox brand electronic key switches at the two access gates for emergency apparatus access. rFc 503.6 3. Verifythatthe inside and outsideturning radiusforthe proposed turn-around meet minimum city standards (24fioot inside and 44fool outside). Joe Building Department Comments: Geo-tec reports required for each individual lot. EXHIBIT A-9 Page 3 of 14 ---PAGE BREAK--- Wes Romine From: Sent: To: Subject: John Deskins Monday, Ma¡ch 21,2011 11:00 AM Wes Romine Citadel Estates Traffic Comments - revised The developer will be required to provide a $20,000 letter of credit to the City to be drawn upon by the HOA for their installation of up to 4 speed humps per city standard or a single traffic circle per city standard. These traffic calming measures will be constructed within the existing Panoramic Heights neighborhood specifically located to mitigate the impacts of increased traffic caused by the proposed development. Location and selection of traffic calming measures will be made by the Panoramic Heights Homeowner's Association (HOA) in accordance with KAC 1340 and subject to the approval by the City. lf said mitigation measures are not started within 5-years of final plat approval; the developer will be released of this obligation. These comments apply to the initial 38 lots proposed. Additional structures or development or any change of use that increases the traffic by more than 20 percent may require additional mitigation measures. The baseline for comparison is 364 daily trips or 38 PM peak hour trips. The measures are required as a result of long tangent sections (greater than 1000 feet) within the proposed development and between the development and the first collector/arterial access point. John Deskins, PE, PTOE Traffic Engineer City of Kennewick, Washington (509) 585-21400 (509) 585-4451 Fax EXHIBIT A-9 Page 4 of 14 ---PAGE BREAK--- Wes Romine From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Attachments: Wes Dan Kaufman Thursday, March 31,2011 3:38 PM Wes Romine Fernando Garcia FW: Citadel Estates Citadel Estates requested deviations.pdf The deviatíons are acceptable to Public works ( MS). Daniel Kaufman, PE City Engíneer From: Wes RomÍne Sent: Thursday, March 3t,20lL 3:27 PM To: Dan Kaufman Subject: Citadel Estates Dan, ls Public Works ok with the requested deviations for the Citadel Estates Planned Development permit? Wes EXHIBIT A-9 Page 5 of 14 ---PAGE BREAK--- Wes Romine From: Joe Terpenning Sent: Friday, April 01 ,2011 4:01 PM To: Wes Romine Subject: RE:CitadelEstates Wes, Deviation #2 does not compromise the fire departments ability to access the development and is therefore approved. Joe From: Wes Romine Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2011 3:40 PM To: Joe Terpenning Subject: Citadel Estates Joe, Can you look at the deviations requested for the Citadel Estates Planned Development Permit and let me know if you are ok with the deviations. Deviation #2 looks like it applies to the Fire Department in particular. Thank you, Wes Romine Development Services Manager City of Kennewick 21OW.6th Avenue Kennewick, WA 99336 (509) 585-4558 EXHIBIT A-9 Page 6 of 14 ---PAGE BREAK--- December 10,2010 'Wes Romine City of Kennewick Development Services Division PO Box 6108 Kennewick, WA 99336 iCITY OF KENNEWCK DEC i, z Z0I0 COMMUNITY PI.ANNINO DEPARTMENT Subject: Review Comments for a Planned Development Permit PDP 10-01/PLN-2010-04491 - Preliminarv Plat I 0 -02 IPLN-20 I 0- 04492 Dear Mr. Romine: This letter provides Kennewick Irrigation District (KID) review comments on Planned Development Permit No. 10-01/PLN-2010-04491and Preliminary Plat No. 10-02/PLN-2010- 04492. The property is located west of the Panoramic Heights neighborhood; west of South Kellogg Street with the extension of 251h and26ù Avenues (1-0889-401-1681-005). The property identified on the proposed preliminary plat is located within the KID boundaries. The property within this preliminary plat was originally classified as non-irrigable land by the United States Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) meaning that KID water cannot be delivered to irrigate the land until the subdivided land and proposed irrigation system meets KID and USBR Specifìcations. In 2009, KID granted a water allocation to this property but that water allocation does not allow for irrigation water delivery from KID until the final proposed subdivision plan meets the KID and USBR Specifications for irrigable land and irrigation systems. Due to potential geotechnical slope stability issues, the Citadel Estates Planned Development is currently under geotechnical review by the USBR for consideration of public safety. The USBR holds title to the KID Main Canal below the proposed subdivision and the slope stability issue could potentially result in a canal breach and subsequent loss of life and property. Once KID receives the geotechnical review from the USBR, the decision will be made by the KID Board of Directors and the USBR whether KID can deliver irrigation water to the proposed Citadel estates development. If the USBR geotechnical analysis allows KID irrigation water to be delivered to the Citadel Estates Planned Development, KID will have the following conditions of approval by the legislative authority for R.C.W. 58.17.310: 1) The following are KID easement requirements: a. Dedicate to KID an irrigation easement 10 feet in width via a recorded deed to match any existing irrigation system centered on an existing water line. b. Dedicate to KID an irrigation easement 10 feet in width, five feet in width if adjacent to a utility easement, along the road frontage of all lots. L2 W. Kennewick Ave., Kennewick, WA 99336, (509) 586-91.71, fax (509) 586-7663, www.kid.org EXHIBIT A-9 Page 7 of 14 ---PAGE BREAK--- 2) The property owner or developer is required to install an irrigation system that conforms to the most recent edition of the KID Standard Specifications pursuant to Resolution 86- 15-4. This includes providing distribution pipelines and infrastructure improvements adequate to provide individual pressurized irrigation services to each lot within the plat. 3) The property owner or developer is required to submit an irrigation plan designed by a professional engineer for review and approval by the KID. The plan may be hand drawn or computer drafted. The plan shall be accurate and to a scale not to exceed I inch: 50 feet. This is a vital step of the approval process. After approval of the plan, completion of all the facilities is required prior to district signature of the plat. Please contact me at 586- 9111 for more information regarding this irrigation plan. 4) The KID must inspect any new irrigation system installations or modifications. The property owner or developer shall contact the KID to anange an inspection at least 48 hours in advance of the desired inspection date. 5) The current year's (2010) remaining assessment of All Final plat reviewed after May 31 or reviewed prior to May 31 but submitted for signature after June 15, must pay the next year's estimated assessment at arute of l25o/o of the current year's assessment rate. Next year's (2011) estimated assessment (53,266.36) for parcel number 1-0889- 401-1681-005 must be paid prior to KID signature on the Final Plat. 6) The following fees for review and inspection also must be paid prior to KID signature on the Final Plat: a. A Final Plat review fee of $400.00. b. An inspection fee of $680.00 ($300 for the first 20 lots plus $20 per lot after 20 lots). This preliminary plat consists of 38 lots and one tract. c. Total for review and inspection fees: $1,080.00 7) An electronic file (AutoCAD 2004 format) and hard copy (6-mil mylar, sealed by a professional engineer) of construction as-builts must be provided to KID. 8) As of May 12,2010 all subdivisions of land are required to be approved by the KID Board of Directors during a KID Board Meeting. KID Board Meetings are regularly scheduled on the first and third Tuesdays of each month. All conditions must be completed prior to submittal to KID for final approval. The submittal for final approval must be received by KID a minimum of two weeks prior to a regularly scheduled Board Meeting in order to be considered atthat meeting. This change can potentially extend the approval process by a minimum of two weeks. 12 W. Kennewick Ave., Kennewick, WA 99336, (509) 586-9L1L, fax (509) 586-7663, www.kid.org EXHIBIT A-9 Page 8 of 14 ---PAGE BREAK--- If you have any questions regarding those commertts, please contact me aI the address/phone number listed below. Sincerel¡ Ben Woodard Staff Engineer BW\rs C: LB\correspondenee\File: [8-8-29] R:\Developmøt\Citâdal Estatos L2 W. Kennewick Ave., Kennewick, WA 99336, (509) 586-9777, fax (509) 586-7663, www.kid.org EXHIBIT A-9 Page 9 of 14 ---PAGE BREAK--- Wes Romine From: Sent: To: Subject: Wes, Gregory McCormick Wednesday, March 02,2011 11:43 AM Wes Romine FW: Proposed Citadel Estates Subdivision FYl. l'm not sure what this means for the development? Greg. From: Ed Everaert fmailto: [EMAIL REDACTED]] Sent: Wednesday, March 02,201t 10:55 AM To: Gregory McCormick Cc: Scott Revell; Charles Freeman Subject: Proposed Citadel Estates Subdivision Greg: I am forwarding the information below to you regarding the proposed Citadel Estates subdivision for your records. At this time, the Bureau of Reclamation and KID cannot approve the delivery of irrigation water to this proposed subdivision due to the geo-technical issues stated below. ln addition, the historical geo-technical investigations for the proposed Citadel Estates subdivision recommend xeroscape landscaping due the instability of the soil and potential slide areas on Thompson Hill when irrigation water is applied to the land and the unreliability of 24 hour irrigation monitoring required if irrigation water were to be applied at strictly scheduled rates and amounts for all lots within the proposed Citadel Estates. Mr. Chavallo and his engineers have been provided with the information below from the Bureau of Reclamation. lf you have any questions regarding this information, please call KlD. Best Regards, Ed Everaert, PE KID Engineering/Operations Manager 586-9111_ From: Regilski, Christopher R Sent: Friday, February tL,20lL 3:18 PM To: Helberg, Carron C Cc: Link, Richard A; Dean, James R Subject: RE: Geotechnical Review on the Citadel Estates Project Hello Carron, Based on the information presented, I cannot recommend approving this project for the following reasons: ln the provided documents, there are no analyses for enclosing the canal through the development, i.e. method of enclosure, settlement from backfill, differential settlement over different subsurface conditions, loading on the proposed enclosure, waterbreaks in the backfill, proper bedding, etc. 2. The location of the canal is not identified in the drawings or in the slope stability analyses. 3. The slope stability analyses appears to be inadequate. a. There are no non-circular failure analyses. EXHIBIT A-9 Page 10 of 14 ---PAGE BREAK--- i. For non-circular slope stability analyses, the Spencer method should be used. The slope stability program, Gslope, used by the consultant does not appear to have this capability. b. Some of the slope stability analyses show the crítical slip surface going through the basalt which appears to be unlikely. These critical slip surfaces should be reevaluated. c. The deletion of thin layers of elastic silt that are not continuous between borings for simplification is not conservative, The consultant should add these thin layers and estimate where they pÍnch out. d. While the consultant notes that infiltration of water should be limited through drainage and landscaping, it would prudent for some of their analyses to include wetted surface soil by irrigation and rain events. e. Also, it would be prudent to evaluate the effect of leakage from the proposed canal on the slope stability, 4. The soil propert¡es were chosen from low book values. The consultant should use correlations with blow counts or Atterberg limits to determine values when possible. 5. The consultants properly used zero cohesion values for drained conditions in their slope stability. Zero cohesion is standard practice in the industry and should not be consider overly conseruative. Despíte all my reseruations, the project design may be adequate but without the above information it is hard to determine its level of safety. I am available if you need me to expound on any of the comments above or to discuss any other issues regarding the project. Thank you, Christopher Regilski, P.E., G.E. Gvil Engineer Bureau of Reclamation Pacific Northwest Re gion 1150 Nonh C.u¡tis Road, Suite 100 Boise, Idaho 83706-1234 Arrn: PN 3234 [PHONE REDACTED] (work) [PHONE REDACTED] (fax) EXHIBIT A-9 Page 11 of 14 ---PAGE BREAK--- November 29,2010 City of Kennewick Attn: Wes Romine P.O. Box 6108 Kennewick, WA. 99336 Re: Citødel Estates Dear Wes: Please forward this letter to the Developer/Owner of this property. This letter is a follow up to your request for electrical service to your new project. Thank you for deciding to build in our service area. There are several items we will need from you to begin the electrical design for your project. These items include: a) A complete set of detailed plans b) Detailed Site Plan c) Electrical panel schedules d) One-line diagram showing the electrical layout e) Service address Ð Contact person for this project, including mailing address for all correspondence g) Type of heating/cooling system (heat purnp, forcecl air, gas, etc.) h) Proposed start date of project or date service is requir-ed. Ð Legal description of property, including the tax parcel identihcation number. j) AutoCAD drawing of the project. Our desígn process wíll not begin untìl we høve received all of the above ítems. Upon receipt of these items, we will use them to plan an electrical design to serve your project. After completion of the design, a packet will be mailed to the designated contact person. Any items requiring follow up (such as fees, application for service, easements, and developer's agreement, etc.) will be included in this packet. If one or more of these items are required, we will need the item(s) returned to us before the job is scheduled. Design of large projects can take up to six weeks. Construction on these projects may take up to twelve weeks. The delivery of materials for the project can take six months. úr some cases system outages are required and construction periods may be restricted to certain times of the year. Thank you again for your inquiry. If you have further questions, please call me at (509) 582-127I. Sincerely, Rickv L. Sunford EXHIBIT A-9 Page 12 of 14 ---PAGE BREAK--- Field Engineer RLS: EXHIBIT A-9 Page 13 of 14 ---PAGE BREAK--- Wes Romine From: Sent: To: Subject: Wes, Columbia lrrigation District [[EMAIL REDACTED]] Wednesday, December 01, 2010 10:28 AM Wes Romine PDP 10-01/PLN-2010-04491 - PP 10-O2IPLN-201 0-04492 This project is not within the boundaries of the Columbia lrrigation District. We have no comment. Thank you, etbLw Broww, o{fLce Ma wa Øer Columbia lrrigation District ao e KewwewLcþ. Avewue KewwewLcl¿, wA 99336 Phowe: (5o9 5gb-6LLg Foxi (sog) Sgb-o+s5 e - a LL : rb r ow n @ c oLuvwbL aLr rL a atL o w. c o n't â? EXHIBIT A-9 Page 14 of 14 ---PAGE BREAK--- Page 1 of I Dave Randall From: "DaveRandall"<[EMAIL REDACTED] Date: Wednesday, March 30,2011 12:48 PM To: "[EMAIL REDACTED]." Subject: Chavallo development in Panoramic Heights I have only one concern regarding this proposed development of 38 lots at the west end of 25th Avenue and that is the increased traffic that will occur with no increased access. These are obviously going to be upscale homes with likely two cars per household. Add to that service vehicles that will visit daily and you can easily add 100 cars a day to traffic that accesses Panoramic Heights via the lrving roundabout and 25th Avenue. Has this even been cons¡dered? An if so what steps are being taken to mitigate the increase in traffic? David Randall 5806 W. 25th Ave 539-0684 For some reason I can't email this to you, I get a message saying this isn't a valid email address so wíll rely on regular mail. RECEIVED CITYOF KENNEWCK ]'JAR 3 1 '¿Üi1 COMMUNITY PLANNING DEPARTMENT 3t30/20t1 EXHIBIT A-10 Page 1 of 1