-
OLYMPIA HEARING EXAMINER
DECISION
Community Planning & Development
601 4th
Avenue E. PO Box 1967 Olympia WA 98501-1967
Phone: 360.753.8314 Fax: 360.753.8087
[email protected] www.olympiawa.gov
June 9, 2015 Greetings, Subject: BAYAN TRAILS Case# 14-0139 The
enclosed decision of the Olympia Hearings Examiner hereby issued on
the above date may be of interest to you. This is a final decision
of the City of Olympia. In general, any appeal of a final land use
decision must be filed in court within twenty-one days. See Revised
Code of Washington, Chapter 36.70, for more information relating to
timeliness of any appeal and filing, service and other legal
requirements applicable to such appeal. In particular, see RCW
36.70C.040. Please contact the City of Olympia, Community Planning
and Development Department, at 601 4th Avenue E or at PO Box 1967,
Olympia, WA 98507-1967, by phone at 360-753-8314, or by e-mail at
[email protected] if you have any questions. Sincerely,
PAULA SMITH Assistant Planner Community Planning &
Development
-
BEFORE TilE CITY OF OLYMPIA HEARINGS EXAMINER
2 IN RE: ) HEARING NO. 14-0139 )
3 GOLDEN ALON DI~YELOPMENT, ) FINDINGS OFf ACT, LLC (BA YAN
TRJ\ll .. S) ) CONCLUSIONS Of. LAW
4 ) AND DECISION Applicant. )
5
6 APPLICANT: Golden Alon Development, LLC P. 0. Box I 068
7
8
9
10
II
11
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
10
11
22
23
24
25
Olympia, Washington 98507
REPRESENTATIVES:
Ross Jarvis, P.E. SCJ Alliance 8730 Tallon Lane N.E. Lacey,
Washington 98516
Ron Thomas, Architect Thomas Architecture Studio I 09 Capitol
Way N. Olympia, Washington 9850 I
SUMMARY OF REQUEST:
Jay Goldstein Attorney at Law 1800 Cooper Point Road S. W ., il8
Olympia, Washington 98502
Land use approval for construction of four senior apartment
buildings containing 167 units, ten townhome style apartment
buildings containing 70 units, for a total ol'237 residential
units, along with a 5,000 square fool community building, a 4,000
square foot pool building and associated improvements including a
public street network, parking, solid waste facilities, landscaping
and utilities. Construction is proposed to occur in six phases over
an estimated ten years.
LOCATION OF PROPOSAL:
607 and 709 Slcater-Kinncy Road N.E., Olympia, Washington,
98506. The project site encompasses two parcels: 118 17210100 and
11817210200.
SUMMARY OF DECISION:
The application is approved subject to modified conditions.
Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Decision - I
CITY OF OLYMPIA 1-II~ARING EXAM I NER 299 N. W. CENTER ST. I
P.O. BOX 939
CHEHAL IS, WASHINGTON 98532 Phone: 360-748-3386/Fax:
748-9533
-
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
II
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
2 1
, ... _,
24
25
BACKGROUND 607 and 709 Slcater-Kinney Road N.E. currently
contain two res idences on twenty acres
of mostly forested land with significant wetlands on the west
half. The Applicant. Golden Aeon
Development, LLC, proposes to convert the developable portion of
the site into high density
residential units. primarily lor senior citizens. The project
includes four senior citizen apartment
complexes containing 167 units, and ten townhome style apa
rtment buildings containing an
additional 70 units, ior a total of237 residential units along
with a 5,000 square foot community
building and a 4,000 square foot pool building. along with
public roads, parking and other
improvements. all within l 0.86 acres of buildable area. The
westerl y portion of the property" ill
remain in wetlands.
The project site ig bounded on the cast by Sleatcr-Kinncy Road
S.E. and the North
Thurston II igh School and Chinook Middle School campus. To the
south of the project is the
San Mar Vil las single-family residential neighborhood ("San Mar
Villas"). t\s curlier noted, the
westerly half of the project is wetlands, and further west is
the Chehalis Western Trail. To the
immediate north of the project is a most ly undeveloped
residential parcel, followed by more
single-family development rurther north.
The site is designated Residential Multifamily- 18 Units Per
Acre in the City's
Comprehensive Plan. The site's zoning designation is Residential
Multifamily- 18 Uni ts Per
Acre (RM-18).
The Application for Land Use Approval was received November
12,2014. The Site Plan
Review Committee (SPRC) conducted an initial review. On November
I 9, 2014, the SPRC
determined that the applica tion was appropriate for review by
the I Iearing Exam iner pursuant to
Finding.~ of Fact, Conclusions c~( Law and Decision - 2
CITY OF OLYMPIA IIEARINC EXAMINER 299 N. W. CENTER ST. I P.O.
BOX 939
CHEHALIS, WASHINGTON 98532 Phone: 360-7-tS-3386/Fax:
748-9533
-
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
II
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
24
25
OMC 18.60.080(C), which provides that the SPRC has the
prerogative to refuse to rule on a
proposed land use if it determines that the project is so
extraordinarily complex or presents such
significant environmental issues that it should be reviewed by
the Hearing Examiner and be the
subject of a public hearing. The SPRC determined that the
application was appropriate for
review by the Hearing Examiner based on issues related to
wetlands, storm drainage,
transportation impacts and groundwater.
Concept design review was completed January 22, 2015. The Design
Review 13oard
requested certain changes relating to site design and
landscaping and building design (Exhibit
I 0). These changes arc recommended as conditions or
approval.
On J\pril22, 2015. the 1\.pplicant submitted revisions to its
application as suggested by
the City. The SPRC rcconvcm:d on April 29, 2015 and recommended
approval or the proposal
subject to conditions. On May 5, 2015, the City Council approved
a Development 1\grcemcnt
(Exhibit 17) to ensure coordinated phasing of the
development.
Subject to the changes requested by the Design Review Board, and
the conditions
requested by the SPRC, the City recommends that the 1 rearing
Examiner approve the project.
The most noticeable controvcr~y regarding the project is th
-
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
II
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
24
25
Additional written and oral public testimony was received during
the hearing as described more
fully below.
A site review was undertaken prior to the public hearing.
The public hearing commenced at 6:30p.m., on Wednesday, May 20,
2015, in the City
Council Room in the City Hall. The City appeared through Cari
Hornbein, Interim Principal
Planner, and George Steirer, Consulting Planner. Other staff
present included Steve Sperr and
David Smith. The Appl icant appeared through its attorney, Jay
Goldstein, its architect, Ron
Thomas, and its civil engineer, Russ Jarvis. A verbatim
recording was made of the public
hearing and all testimony was taken under oath. Documents
considered at the time of the
hearing were the City Staff Report including all attachments
(Exhibits 1-17), all of which had
been received prior to the bearing. During the course of the
hearing several additional
documents were admitted as exhibits as identified on the List of
Exhibits attached hereto.
Ms. Hornbein and Mr. Stcirer of' Planning Staff provided brief
testimony regarding the
City Staff Report, relying primarily on the report itsel [for an
in-depth discussion of the project. The following is a brief
summary of the Staff Report and its recommendations:
Within the approximately ten acres of bui ldable area on the
site the Applicant proposes to
construct four senior housing apartments and ten multifamily
townhomc style apartments. The
four senior housing apartments wi ll be located in the center
and north portions of the site with
the townhome style apartments lining the south boundary. The
four senior housing units will
contain 167 units and the seven townhome apartment bui ldings
will contain 70 units, for a total
of237 un its. Centrally located within the development will be a
community bui lding and a
community pool. The project is proposed to be constructed in six
phases: Phase 1 would construct the first senior apartment building
in the northeast corner of the site; Phase 2 would
Findings of Fact. Conclusions of Law and Decision-../
C ITY OF OLYMPIA HEARING EXAM INER 299 N. W. CENTER ST. I P.O.
BOX 939
C HEHALIS, WASH INGTON 98532 P hone: 360-748-3386/Fax:
748-9533
-
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
I I
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
24
25
construct the second senior apartment bu ilding and the
community building; Phase 3 would
construct the remaining two senior housing apartment buildings
and the community pool; and
Phases 4. 5 and 6 would construct the townhome style apartments.
Construction is expected to
take several years with construction slowly working from north
to south across the site.
The City proposes that three public roads be constructed as part
of the project: (I) an extension of 6th Avenue N.E. extending west
from Sleater-Kinncy through the project site along its northern
boundary; (2) a north-south road extending from the north boundary
and running
along the edge of the wetland buffer to the west; and (3) a
second east-west road running across
the southern half of the project and connecting to
Sleater-Kinney Road to the east. The project will provide 299
parking stalls. It will incorporate existing sidewalks along
Slcater-Kinncy and G~lso provide internal sidewalks and walking
trai ls. The site will be serviced
by public water. sewer and stormwater l~tcilitics .
Signi ficanl effort has been made to save as many trees on site
as possible. 1\ buffer of
trees wi ll n.:main along Skater-K inney to provide screen ing.
A similar buffer of trees will be
maintained between the south boundary and the adjoining San Mar
Villas. All existing trees in the wetland buffer will be preserved
except those needing to be removed for stonnwater and
related purposes.
Access to the site is from Sleater-Kinncy N.E. As part of the
project modifications wi ll be made to Slcatcr-Kinncy in the areas
when,; the project's two entrances will be located. These
modifications include the installation or left turn lanes and the
removal of raised medians.
The project wi ll generate impact Ices to Lacey, Thurston
County, Olympia and the North Thurston School District. None of
these fees are in dispute.
The Staff Report contains a detailed analysis of the design
regulations pertinent to the
RM-18 Zone. As noted in the Stall' Report, the project is
consistent with the zone's permitted
Findings of Fact, Conclusiom of Law and Dec1sion - 5
CITY OF OLYMPIA HEARING EXAMINEr~ 299 N.W. CENTER ST. I P.O. BOX
939
CH EHALIS, WASHINGTON 98532 Phone: 360-748-3386/Fax:
7~8-9533
-
uses and complies with the required mix of dwelling units; with
the transitional housing
2 requirements; with ti1e general residential development
standards: with minimum lot size
3 requirements and witi1 Critical Areas Regulations, wetland
buffers, bicycle storage and parking
4 facilities.
5 The project has undergone review by the Design Review Board.
The Board
6 recommended approval subject to several conditions (Exhibit I
0). Detailed des ign review will
7 occur prior to or conjunction with ti1e building permit
application.
8 City Staff recommends approval of the project subject to
forty-two conditions. As curlier
9 noted, the proposed condition generating the most notoriety is
Condition No. 23, requiring the
10 construction of a local access street connection to San Mar
Drive within the San Mar Villas.
II Following the presentation by Ms. llornbein and Mrs. Steirer.
David Smith of City StarT
12 testified in further support or the City's request that the
project's road system be connected to San
13 Mar Drive. Mr. Smith explained that the City's Comprehensive
Plan and Development
14 Regulations strongly encourage such connections in order to
create social interaction and
15 promote multi-modal connections. Mr. Smith noted that the
proposed connection would not be
16 to encourage thru trallic (that is, an alternative to
Sleater-Kinney) but rather to better facilitate
17 traffic between the two neighborhoods. f-or example, the road
connection would provide greater
IS efficiency for mail and parcel delivery: public works
employees: garbage/recycling collection;
19 meter reading, etc. It \Vould also provide greater options
for emergency vehicles and would oflcr
20 an alternate route if Sleatcr-Kinney became blocked. At the
same time Mr. Smith believes that
2 1 the connector would not encourage thru-usc as the route
would be slowed by stop sign control.
22 Further. once thru traffic reached San Mar Villas it would
encounter curving. s low and somcwha
23 narrow roads with only indirect egress to Slcater-Kinney. In
other words, drivers might allcmpt
24 once to usc this as an alternate route but would soon
discover that it is a poor choice.
25
Findings of Fact. Conclusions of La II' and Deci.HOII - 6
CITY OF OLYMPIA HEARING EXAMINER 299 N.W. CENTER ST. I P.O. BOX
939
CHEHALIS, WASIIINGTON 98532 Phone: 360-748-3386/Fax:
748-9533
-
Following the City's discussion regarding the proposed road
connection, Mr. Smith as
2 well as Ms. Ilornbein addressed the project's need to "scale
down" the south end of tbe
3 town home bui ldings in order to transition the scale of this
development to the smaller scale of
4 the adjoining San Mar Vista residences. This requirement to
"scale down" arises from an earlier
5 Hearing Examiner Decision in 2008 involving an appeal of the
18th Avenue Estates land usc
6 approval, Case No. 08-0202 (Exhibit 25). That project which
involved a ~imilar difference in
7 scale between new development and an existing, smaller
residential neighborhood, required that
8 "any appearance of scale d iffe rences between project build
ings and existing neighborhood
9 buildings must be 'minimized' ... by stepping the height
ol"thc building mass, and dividing large
10 building facades into smaller segments." (l learing Examiner
Decision at Page 31). In response II to th is need the City and
Developer agree to mod i f"y the south end or the town homes (the
end
12 neares t San Mar Villas) to create a series or steps down in
the buildings' height ancl appearance,
13 giving the ends of the buildings a one/two story appearance
similar to that found in San Mar
14 Vi llas.
15 The City's presentation was completed by brief testimony from
Steve Spcrr from the City
16 Engineer's Oflice. Mr. Spcrr testified that the project, if
approved, will allow the project's water
17 mains to be connected to the San Mar Vi lla water mnins,
thereby better regu lating water pressure
18 and delivery throughout the area. Similarly. the project's
sewer mains will be stubbed at the edge
19 of San Mar Villas. This will provide an opportunity fo r at
least the northern portion of San Mar
20 Villas to connect to City sewer.
21 At the completion or the City's presentation the Appl icant
presented testimony in support
22 of the project. The project's architect, Ron Thomas, provided
a general overview. Mr. Thomas
23 explained that the project has been designed to leave as may
mature trees on the !-lite as possibk
24 incl uding buffers a long S lcater-Kinney nncl thc boundary
wi th San Mar Vi llas. These efforts to
25
Findings of Fact. Conclusions ofLall' and Decision - 7
CITY OF O L YMPIA HEARING EXAMI NER 299 N.W. CENTER ST. I P.O.
BOX 939
CH EHALIS, W ASHINGTON 98532 Phon e: 360-748-3386/Fax :
7~8-9533
-
preserve trees will require some deviations from road standards.
Mr. Thomas further explained
2 that the project hopes to retain many of the existing ponds on
the property as well as the
3 substantial wetlands, and provides for construction of an
outlook for wetlands viewing which
4 will be open to the public.
5 Mr. Thomas explained that the City's design regulations
mandated a certain percentage o
6 townhomes and that these needed to be located on the south
side of the project. The town homes'
7 height satisfies the s ite 's 35-foot limitation- the same
limitation imposed in San Mar Vil las. Mr.
8 Thomas explained that the townJ1omes have been designed to
mimic the look of homes within
9 San Mar Villas and have recently been redesigned so that the
south end of each townhome has
I 0 been scaled down to transition to the smaller scale of San
Mar Villas. Further attempts to scale
II the development to its adjoining neighborhood include
reduction of the community building to
12 one-story and location of much of the parking below the town
homes. Mr. Thomas also noted
13 that setbacks have been varied in their depth and exceed
minimum requirements in order to
14 create an adequate landscape buffer, and the townhomes have
been designed with very few
15 windows on their south ends so that the residents of San Mar
Villas cannot see the townhomes or
16 be seen from them.
17 Russ Jarvis, the project engineer, next spoke on behalf of
the Applicant. He explai ned
18 again how the proposed roads deviate from standards in order
to save as many trees on site as
19 possible. Mr. Jarvis testified that the project has been
designed to maintain the stabi I i ty of the
20 adjoining wetlands and to protect those wetlands by 120 foot
buffers from all development. In
21 addition, the wetlands will be cleaned of garbage and
historic homeless encampments wi II be
22 removed and shrubbery planted to discourage their return.
Trai Is wi II be constructed to provide
23 access to the wetlands, to the wetlands overlook and to the
Chehalis Western Trail beyond. The
24 Applicant is excited to work with the North Thurston High
School to allow its students to
25
Findings ofFacl. Conclusions of Law and Decision - 8
CITY OF OLYMPIA HEARING EXAMINER 299 N.W. CENTER ST. I P.O. BOX
939
CHEHALIS, WASHINGTON 98532 Phone: 360-748-3386!Fax: 748-9533
-
undertake wetlands studies as well as providing opportunities to
work with the elderly residents
2 of the senior citizens apartments.
3 Both Mr. Thomas and Mr. Jarvis spoke in opposition to the
proposed road connection to
4 San Mar Drive. Both felt that any benefit would be minor and
would be outweighed by its
5 burdens, and that none of the residents of San Mar Villas, nor
the public in general, support the
6 connection.
7 The Applicant's presentation was concluded by brief testimony
from its attorney, Jay
8 Goldstein. Mr. Goldstein cha llenged the City's claimed
benefits rrom the connection noting that
9 the amount of time saved by using the connection was miniscule
while the burdens upon the
10 neighborhood were significant, especially increased
pedestrian danger, and suggested that the
II requirement raised an issue of substantive due process. Mr.
Goldstein acknowledged that it
12 would be appropriate to establish a connection between the
two neighborhoods for
13 pedestrian/bicycle access but asked that the road connection
be denied.
14 Following the Applicant's presentation the hearing was opened
to public testimony.
15 Ronald Toliver, who resides in San Mar Villas, spoke in
opposition. Mr. Toliver views his
16 neighborhood ns "residential" but believes that the project
is "commercial" in its scale and scope. 17 Mr. Toliver does not
believe that its commercial scale should be allowed. I le fears
that it will
18 exacerbate tmnic backups on Slcatcr-Kinncy. lie is
particularly concerned with the proposed
19 street connection as San Mar's streets are already too narrow
and the connection wil l pose
20 significant safety risks.
2 1 Tony Jackson, a resident of San Mar Villas, testifi ed in
opposition to the tral1ic impacts
22 ofthe project Except for these concerns Mr. Jackson was not
opposed to the project. 23 Ron Eisman~ who resides in San Mar
Villas, spoke in opposition to the project. l-Ie is 2-l concerned
about the height of the adjoining townhomes but is particularly
concerned about the 25
Findings oj Fact, Conclusions vf Law and Dec:i.~ion - 9
CITY OF OLYMPIA H EARI NG EXAMINER 299 N.W. CENTEH ST./ P.O. BOX
939
CHEHALIS, WASH I NGTON 98532 Phone: 360-748-3386/Fax:
748-9533
-
proposed roadway connection. Mr. Eisman feels that the
additional traffic wil l pose a significant
2 risk, especially to children, and that traffic from the
project will use the connection to circumvent
3 backups on S leater-Kinney.
4 Dr. Brenda Hood, who resides in San Mar Villas, spoke in
opposition to the project. Dr.
5 llood first wished to voice her frustrations with City Staff
and its responses to her inquiries. Dr.
6 Hood felt that she and others were thwarted in obta ining
information from the City. Dr. Hood
7 felt that the Design Review Board had favored a continuous
fence along the common boundary
8 running al l the way into the wetlands. In other words, Dr.
Hood felt that the DRB approved
9 "walling ofr' the project from San Mar Vil las. Dr. Hood
supported the idea of preventing any
I 0 access, whether vehicular or pedestrian. from the project to
San Mar Villas. She believed that
II this access would increase the problem with vandalism
currently caused by juveniles coming
12 riom the apartment complexes west of the Chehalis Western
Trail. She believed that the
13 connection between the two neighborhoods, coupled with the
proposed trails through the
14 wellands, will only encourage juveniles to hang out in
wetland areas.
15 Dr. llood raised a number or other concerns regarding the
road connection. She noted
16 that San Mar Villas lacks streetlights and sidewalks, and
pedestrians and cyclists are required to
17 navigate around parked cars by walking in the middle ofthe
road , often in pitch black conditions.
18 The introduction of additional traffic from the project will
greatly worsen this problem. Dr.
19 Hood added that the proposed connection would invite the
project's residents as well as its
20 visitors to look for parking within San Mar Villas, further
worsening the existing pedestrian
21 di lemma. Finall y, Dr. Hood noted that it is presently not
possible for school buses to turn left
22 onto the San Mar roads if there is a vehicle at the
intersections, and so any additional vehicles
23 waiting at these intersections will only worsen this
problem.
24
25
Findings ojFacr. Conclusions qj'Law and Decision- 10
C ITY OF OLYMPIA HEARING EXAM INER 299 N.W. CENTER ST. I P.O.
BOX 939
CHEHALIS, WASHINGTON 98532 Phone: 360-748-3386/Fax: 748-9533
-
David Gibler, who resides in San Mar Villas, spoke in opposition
to the project. Mr.
2 Gibler supported the statements made by other neighbors and
added that the proposed trail
3 system in or near the wetlands wi II be underwater much of the
year.
4 Lynette Lindelof, who resides in San Mar Villas, spoke in
opposition to the project. Ms.
5 Lindelofhas two children attending Chinook Middle School and
testified to the current problems
6 with children going from the west side of Sleater-Kinney
across the road to get to school. Ms.
7 Lindclof is concerned that these problems wi ll only worsen
with additional development.
8 Stephanie Brodin, who resides in San Mar Villas, testified in
opposition. She opposes the
9 project because of its scale; because of the character of the
proposed development; and because
10 of its lack of compatibility with the adjoin ing San Mar
neighborhood. She notes that the new
I I development will have 230 units in the same amount of area
as San Mar Villas which contains
12 only 77 units.
13 Charlene T lunt, who resides in San Mar Villas, testified in
oppositio n. Ms. Hunt noted
14 thatthe speed limit along Sleater-Kinney is restricted
because of the school zone. She believes
15 that if the road connection is allowcJ it will encourage
drivers to circumvent the school zone
16 speed limits. She shared in the concern that San Mar Villas
had no sidewalks and that its
17 pedestrians and cyclists must interact w ith cars. This
problem will only worsen with the
18 proposed connection.
19 The owner of the property, Nina Sueno, and three of her
children, Carolyn Sueno Lee,
20 Michael Sueno and Paul Sueno, a ll testified in support of
the project. Collectively the members
21 of the Sueno Family explained that the development is
motivated by their desire to leave a good
22 legacy. They want a development that wi ll retain the site's
natural beauty and as much of its
23 serenity as possible. Their goals are to develop the site
responsibly, enhance the overall area and
24 be a credit to the local community. The project has been
designed to preserve as many trees as 25
Findings ojFacl, Conclusions ofLa~t~ and Decision- II
CITY OF OLYMPIA HEARING EXAMINER 299 N. W. CENTER ST. I P.O. BOX
939
CHEHALIS, WASHINGTON 98532 Phone: 360-748-3386/Fax: 748-9533
-
possible, protect the wetlands and develop the remaining portion
of the site in an
1 environmentally responsible way. The project is targeted to
"active and independent" seniors. 3 that is, individuals 55 and
older who will enjoy the walking trails, outdoor fitness area, pea
4 patches, swimming pool, and access to the Chehalis Western Trail.
The family is also excited to
5 develop a working relationship with the North Thurston School
system and allow the site to be
6 used for school projects. 7 Sam Hunt, who resides in San Mar
Villas, next spoke in opposition to the project. Mr. 8 llunl noted
that the site's wetlands arc, in 1:1ct a lake for len months of the
year. lie is concerned
9 that Lhe site's improvements will only add impervious surfltcc
and rurther threaten the quality of
10 the wetlands. Mr. llunt went on to explain the large scale
modifications about to be made to
II North Thurston Iligh School as well as the construction or a
new adjoining middle school, and 12 how these changes will impact
traffic along Sleater-Kinncy. Mr. llunt is worried about
growing
13 traffic problems and is particularly concerned about a road
connection with San Mar Vi llas.
14 Doug Brodin. who resides in San Mar Villas, spoke in
opposition. Mr. Brodin is
15 concerned that the project will interfere with the sense or
community currently enjoyed in the 16 neighborhood. Lie notes that
the project lacks support from its neighbors. He is also concerned
17 over the "lack of communication" by City Staff.
18 /\tthc conclusion of public testimony City Staff provided a
brief response to Brenda
19 llood's testimony regarding the position of the DRI3 and its
discussion as to whether boundary
20 fencing could be extended as Jar as the wetlands. During
those hearings Staff explained that
21 such fencing is prohibited by environmental regulations as it
would impair the movement of
22 wildlife. Staff reminded the DRB that critical areas are not
within its authority and, thus. the
23 ORB's recommendutions did not include a recommendation to
extend the fencing.
24
25
Findings ofFacl, Conclusions of Law and Decision - 12
CITY OF OLYMPIA HEARING EXAM INER 299 N.W. CENTER ST. I P.O. BOX
939
CH EIIALIS, WASHINGTON 98532 Phone: 360-748-3386/Fax:
7.t8-9533
-
At the conclusions of all testimony City Staff requested that
the hearing be kept open to
2 allow the City Attorney's Office to respond to the comments of
the Applicant's attorney, Mr.
3 Goldstein, regarding substantive due process. Pursuant to the
City's request the hearing was kept
4 open until Friday, May 29,2015 for briefing by the parties.
Within this timeframe the City
5 provided briefing on the substantive due process issue and the
Applicant responded.
6 ANALYSIS
7 A great many residents of San Mar Villas have conu11ented on
the project, and those who
8 have commented arc universal in their opposition. They have
justifiable concerns about the
9 intensity of its land use, its scale, its traffic and its
general impact upon their adjoining
10 neighborhood. But much of this hostility is directed not so
much at the specific project but at the
II City's 1995 decision to zone this property RM-18. The
neighbors would like the public hearing
12 to be a referendum on that earlier decision, but that is an
issue well outside the jurisdiction of the
13 Hearing Examiner.
14 The opponents to the project do not contest the iind i ng
that the proposed usc is a
15 "permitted" use within the RM-18 zone. As a permitted usc the
project is reviewed in a narrower
16 way than review of a conditional use, where neighborhood
impacts are given greater weight.
17 This review is focused upon whether the project is in
compliance with the Development
18 Regulations, Critical Areas Regulations and other regulations
that are applicable to the RM-18
19 zone. The Hearing Examiner is not allowed to consider whether
there is pub I ic support for the
20 project nor, again, the broader review applied to a
conditional use.
2 1 Pursuant to OMC 18.04.020(8)(8) the purpose or the RM zone
is "to accommodate
22 predominately multifamily housing, at an average maximum
density of eighteen units per acre,
23 along or near (e.g. one-four mi le) arterial or major
coJlective streets where such development can
24 be arranged and designed to be compatible with adjoining
uses; to provide for development with 25
Findings of Fact. Conclusions of Law and Decision - 13
---------
CITY OF OLYMPIA HEARING EXAM INER 299 N.W . CENTER ST. I P.O.
BOX 939
CH EHALIS, WASH INGTON 98532 Phone: 360-748-3386/Fax:
748-9533
-
a density and configuration that facilitates effective and
efficient mass transit service; and to
2 enable provisions of affordable housing." Opponents argue that
this project is not "compatible" 3 with the adjoining San Mar
Villas. The problem with this argument. however, is that the 4
project's compatibility is not measured by generalized standards,
but rather by the stricter 5 standard ofthe project's compliance
with the Development Regulations in Chapter 18.04 ofthe 6 Olympia
Municipal Code and other related chapters (Chapter 18.32; 18.38;
etc.). City StafT has
7 examined the project and has found it to be compliant with all
of the applicable development 8 regulations. Opponents have not
challenged these findings- they simply feel that the project is a 9
bad idea. ;\t the risk or repetition. it is not the !!caring l
~:
-
however, that the criteria listed in T3.20(l) of the former
Comprehensive Plan remain usefu l
2 guide I incs.
3 As noted earlier in the Background section, the City argues
that the street connection will
4 encourage social interaction, provide easier travel for mail
and parcel delivery and similar
5 neighborhood-to-neighborhood services. and wi ll provide an
alternate to Slcater-Kinncy if
6 necessary. These assertions. while true, fa il to recognize
that the amount or actual benefit is
7 quite small. Opponents to the connection argue that San Mar Vi
llas' roads are narrow and have
8 no sidewalks, [(lrcing pedestrians and bicyclists to travel in
the main roadway whenever there arc
9 parked cars. This problem is greatly worsened by the lack of
street lights and the serpentine
10 nature of the roads which reduces sight distance. Stated
somewhat differently, a car traveling
ll from Bayan Trai ls to San Mar Vi llas will suddenly enter
onto dark, narrow, curving streets
12 where pedestrians and bicyclists must interact with traffi c.
ln addition, the connect ion may
13 encourage unwanted usc of internal streets in an attempt to
circumvent school zone speed limits
14 and traffic queuing on Slcater-Kinney. The connection might
also encourage visitors and
15 residents of Bayan Trails to turn to San Mar Villas for
parking, further worsening the dilemma
16 for pedestrians and bicyclists. The opponents' concerns
regarding the connection arc legitimate
17 and they outweigh the bcneJits of the connection.
Accordingly, I am removing the requirement
18 for a street connection.
19 This decision renders moot the question of whether the
requested street connection was a
20 violation of substantive due process. Nonetheless, I conclude
U1at the connection, if it had been
21 imposed. would not have been a violation of substantive due
process righls.
22 EDDS 2.040(B)(3)(h) requires that iC the ! I caring Examiner
decides to not impose the
23 street connection that a neighborhood connector trail must be
constructed in its place. I would
24 require th is neighborhood connector trai l even if it was
not made mandatory. The trail will allow
25
Findings of Fact. Conclusions of Law and Decision - 15
CITY OF OLYMPIA IIEARING EXAM INER 299 N.W. CENTER ST. I P.O.
BOX 939
CH EHA L IS, WASHINGTON 98532 Ph one: 360-748-3386/Fax:
7-&8-9533
-
for social interaction, encourage outdoor activity and make the
wetlands outlook and other public
2 amenities within Bayan Trails available to residents of San
Mar Villas.
3 Accordingly, I make the following:
4 FINDINGS Of' FACT
5 I. The Applicant. Golden /\ion DcveJopmenl. LLC, requests Jand
usc approval for
6 construction of four senior apartment bui !ding containing 167
units and ten townhome style
7 apartment buildings containing 70 units. together with a 5,000
squnrc foot community building
8 and a 4.000 square foot pool building. Associated improvements
include public streets. parking,
9 solid waste facilities, landscaping and utilities. A 120-l'oot
wetland bufTer is proposed with
10 buffer averaging to offset the impacts of roads and trails
within the outer portion of the buffer.
II Construction is proposed over six phases over a multi-year
period.
12 2. The Findings of Fact contained in the foregoing
l3ackground and Analysis
13 sections are incorporated herein by reference and adopted by
the I h.:aring Examiner as his own
14 Findings of Fact.
15 3. The project is located at 607 and 709 Slcntcr-Kinncy Road
N.E .. Olympia. 16 Washington, 98506. The project site encompasses
two tax parcels: 11817210 I 00 and 17 11817210200.
18 4. The proposed site is designated as RM-18 in the
Comprehensive Plan and is
19 zoned RM-18.
20 5. Pursuant to the State Environmental Policy /\ct. the City,
as lead agency, issued a
21 Mitigated Determination ofNon-Signi ficancc (MDNS) on
April28, 2015. No appeals have been 22 filed.
24
25
Findings of Fact, Conclusions of/.au ancl Decision - 16
CITY Of OLYMPI A H EARING EXAM INER 299 N.W. CENTER ST./
J>.O. BOX 939
CJIEIIALIS, WASHINGTON 98532 Phone: 360-748-3386/Fax:
748-9533
-
6. Notification of the public hearing was mailed to the parties
of record, property
2 owners within 300 feet and recognized neighborhood
associations, posted on the s ite and
3 published in The Olympian in conformance with Olympia
Municipal Code 18.78.020.
4 7. The Design Review Board (DRB) convened on January 22,2015,
and
5 recommended approval of the concept design review subject to
certain conditions contained in
6 the Staff Report.
7 8. The Site Plan Review Committee (SPRC) convened on April
22,2015, and
8 recommended project approval subject to conditions contained
in the Staff Report. 9 9. On May 5, 2015, the City Council approved
a Development Agreement (Exhibit
I 0 17) to ensure coordinated phasing of the development.
II ] 0. The Staff Report. at page 3, contains Findings related
to the existing site 12 conditions and surrounding development. The
l tearing Examiner has reviewed those Findings
13 and adopts them as his own Findings of Fact.
14 11. The Staff Report, at pages 4 and 5, contains a detailed
description or the proposed
15 improvements. The Hearing Examiner has reviewed those
Findings and adopts them as his own
16 Findings ofFacl.
17 12. The City of Lacey has provided written comment on traffic
impacts on Sleater-
18 Kinney Road and the need to mitigate traffic impacts on the
Lacey transportation network. The
19 City's requested mitigation measures have been included in
the MDNS.
20 13. The North Thurston Public School District has commented
on school impacts and
21 the need to mitigate these impacts through mitigation fees.
The Staff recommends that the
22 requested mitigation fees be imposed as additional conditions
to the SEPA MDNS, and as a
23 condition ofpermit approval.
24
25
Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Decision- 17
CITY OF OLYMPIA HEARING EXAMINER 299 N.W. CENTER ST. I P.O. BOX
939
CHEHALIS, WASHINGTON 98532 Phone: 360-748-3386/Fax: 748-9533
-
14. The StaffReport, at page 7, contains Findings related to the
project's compliance 2 with the purpose of the RM-18 zone, OMC
18.04.020.8.8. The Hearing Examiner has reviewed
3 those Findings and adopts them as his own Findings of
Fact.
4 15. The Staff Report, at page 7, contains Findings
establishing that the proposed usc
5 is a "permitted use" within the RM- 18 district. The Hearing
Examiner has reviewed those
6 Findings and adopts then'l as his own Findings of ract.
7 16. The Staff Report, at page 7, contains Findings related to
the project's compliance 8 with OMC 18.04.060.N.l and the need for
a mix of dwelling types. The Hearing Examiner has
9 reviewed those Findings and adopts them as his own Findings
ofFact.
10 17. The Staff Report, at page 8, contains Findings related to
the project's compliance II with OMC 18.04.060.N.2 and the need for
transitional housing types. The Hearing Examiner
12 has reviewed those Findings and adopts them as his own
Findings of Fact.
13 18. The Staff Report, at pages 8 and 9, contains a listing of
residential development
14 standards and the project's compliance with these standards.
The Staff finds that the proposal 15 complies with the RM-18
development standards as set forth in OMC 18.04.080. Table
4.04.
16 The I Tearing Examiner has reviewed those Findings and adopts
them as his own Findings of
17 Fact.
18 19. The Stall Report, at page 9, conta ins a list of required
lot size requirements and
19 the Staffs findings that the project complies with the
requirements of OMC 18.04.080(D)( l)-20 Transitional Lots. The I
tearing Examiner has reviewed those Findings and adopts them as
his
2 1 own Findings of Fact.
22 20. The Staff' Report, at pages 9 and I 0, contains Findings
related to required setbacks
23 pursuant to OMC 18.04.080(0)(1) and the project's compliance
with these requirements. The 24 Hearing Examiner has reviewed those
Findings and adopts them as his own Findings of Fact.
25
Findings of Fact. Conclusions of Law and Decision - 18
CITY OF OLYMPIA I-IEARING EXAMINER 299 N.W. CENTER ST. I P.O.
BOX 939
CH EHALIS, WASI-IJNGTON 98532 Phone: 360-748-3386/Fax:
748-9533
-
21. ~n1c Staff Report, at page I 0, contains Findings related to
the wetlands found on-
2 site and that the site is therefore subject to the provisions
of OMC 18.32. The Hearing Examiner
3 has reviewed those Findings and adopts them as hi s own
Findings of Fact.
4 22. The Staff Report, at pages 10 and II. contains Findings
related to the project's
5 compliance with the general provisions of the Critical Areas
Regulations, OMC 18.32.1 OO(F).
6 These Findings note that a Wetland Report was prepared
(Exhibit 8), in compliance with OMC
7 18.32. 115(B). The I !caring Examiner has reviewed those
Findings and adopts them as hi s own
8 Findings of Fact.
9 23. The Staff Report, at page II , contains Findings related
Lo the project's compliance
I 0 with required mitigation pursuant to the Critical Areas
Regulations, OMC 18.32.1 OO(G) and (H).
II The Staff finds that the Applicant's Wetland Report provides
for adequate mitigation; that the
12 SEPA MONS also provides for mitigation fo r protection of the
wetl ands; and that the project is
13 appropriate for wetland buffer averaging subject to the
conditions set forth in the Staff Report.
14 The Hearing Examiner has reviewed those Findings and adopts
them as his own Findings of
15 Fact.
16 24. The Staff Report, at pages 12 and 13, conta ins Findings
related to the Appl icant's
17 Wetland Report. The Staff takes exception to the Wetland
Report's findings that the reduced
18 buffer from the street connection to the San Mar neighborhood
to the south "would result in a
19 significant impact to the wetland buffer in the southwestern
portion of the project site." The
20 Staff finds that the proposed road connection would not
result in a significant impact to the
2 1 wetland buffe r. The Hearing Examiner has reviewed the
Staffs proposed Findings and adopts
22 them as his own Findings of Fact recognizing, however, that
the street connection to the San Mar
23 neighborhood will not be imposed and, therefore, the street
connection wi ll not result in a
24 significant impact to the wetland buffer.
25
Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Lall' and Decision- 19
CITY OF OLYMPIA HEARING EXAM INER 299 N.W. CENTER ST. I P.O. BOX
939
CHEHALIS, WASH INGTON 98532 Phone: 360-748-3386/Fax:
748-9533
-
25. The Staff Report, at page 13, contains Findings with the
project's compliance with
2 the general provisions of OMC 18.32.135(8) and the need to
minimize unavoidable impacts to
3 Critical Areas. The Hearing Examiner has reviewed those F
indings and adopts them as his own
4 Findings of Fact.
5 26. T he Staff Report, at page 13, finds that Staff is unable
to determine whether
6 additional mitigation measures may be required until the
Applicant updates its Wetland Report
7 and its buffer averaging calculations based upon a street
connection to San Mar Drive. As the
8 Hearing Examiner is not requiring the street connection to San
Mar Drive the requested updated
9 Wetland Report and buffer averaging calculations are
unnecessary unless the neighborhood
I 0 connector trai l (imposed in lieu of the street connection)
is determined to encroach upon the
I I wetland buffer.
12 27. The Staff Report, at page 14, contains Findings related
to compliance with OMC
13 18.32. I 50. The Hearing Examiner has reviewed those Findings
and adopts them as his own
14 Findings of Fact.
15 28. The Staff Report, at page 14, contains Findings related
to the required wetland
16 buffer, and that this project requires a 120-foot buffer per
OMC 18.32.535. The Hearing
17 Examiner has rev iewed those Findings and adopts them as his
own Findings of Fact.
18 29. The Staff Report, at pages 14 ru1d t 5, contains Findings
related to wetland buffer
19 reduction based upon the findings of a Wetland Mitigation
Report (Exhibit 8), and the finding
20 that the report demonstrates that the wetland buffer's
functions and value would be protected if
2 1 the mitigation measures described in the report are
implemented. The Hearing Examiner has
22 reviewed those Findings and adopts them as his own Findings
ofFact.
23 30. The Staff Report, at page 15, contains Findings as to the
number of motor vehicle
24 parking spaces. These Findings establish that the project's
209 surface parking stalls and 90 25
Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Lcrw and Decision- 20
C ITY OF OLYMPIA HEARING EXAM INER 299 N.W. CENTER ST. I P.O.
BOX 939
CHEHALIS, WASHINGTON 98532 Phone: 360-748-3386/Fax: 748-9533
-
parking spaces in the townhouse style units, or a total of 299
parking stalls, will satisfy the
2 parking requirements establ ished pursuant to OMC
18.38.060(L). The Hearing Examiner has
3 reviewed those Findings and adopts them as his own Findings of
Fact.
4 31. The Staff Report, at pages 15 and 16, conta ins Findings
related to the project's 5 compliance with long term and short term
bicycle spaces. Sta ff finds that the project provides 36 6 long
term bicycle spaces in each of the four senior center apartment
complexes, and one long
7 term space in each garage of the 70 townhouse style units, for
a total of214 long term bicycle
8 spaces. satis fying the project's need for al leasl 207 long
term bicycle spaces. Staff also finds 9 that the project will
provide five short term bicycle spaces at each entrance of the four
senior
I 0 housing apartments and one short tenn bicycle space at each
entrance of the 70 townhouse style
II units, for a total of90 short term bicycle spaces, satisfying
the project's requirement for 21 short 12 term bicycle spaces. The
I !caring Examiner has reviewed those Findings and adopts them as
his
13 own findings of Fact.
14 32. The Staff Report, at page 16, contains Findings related
to the project's compliance 15 with OMC I 8.38.200 and the
requirement to locate surface parking lots behind buildings.
The
16 Staff finds that U1e proposed parking will enable interior
courtyards and encourage communi ty
17 gathering places but that additional information is needed to
demonstrate compliance with
18 deviation standards from other parking requirements. The I
learing Examiner has reviewed those
19 Findings and adopts them as his own Findings of fact.
20 ..,.., .) .) . The Staff Report, at pages 16 and 17, contains
Findings related to des ign review .
21 As noted in the Staffs recommended Findings, the south
elevations of the town homes have
22 recently been redesigned as identified on Exhibit 7 to
address the requirement that the ends of
23 these buildings are reduced in size and scale to provide a
better transition to the adjoining single-24
25
Findings of Fact. Conclusions of Low and Decision - 21
CITY OF OLYMPIA HEARING EXAMINER 299 N. W. CENTER ST. I P.O. BOX
939
CHEHALIS, WASHINGTON 98532 Phone: 360-748-3386/Fax: 748-9533
-
family residential neighborhood. With this additional
information the Hearing Examiner adopts
2 the Staffs proposed Findings of Fact as his own Findings of
Fact.
3 34. The Staff Report, at page 17, contains a discussion of the
project's compliance 4 with the Engineering Design &
Development Standards (EDDS), and that preliminary plans have
5 been reviewed and conceptually approved by engineering staff
for all improvements except for
6 transpo1tation, stormwater and an offsite sewer line. The
Hearing Examiner has reviewed these
7 proposed Findings and adopts them as his own Findings of Fact.
The Hearing Examiner does
8 not adopt, however, the Staffs proposed Findings relating to
the need for a local access street
9 connection south to San Mar Drive as noted earlier in the
Analysis section.
10 35. The Staff Report, at page 17, contains f-indings related
to the project's compliance II with transportation requirements
including the Applicant's request for deviations from the
street
12 standards. The Hearing Examiner has reviewed those Findings
and adopts them as his own
13 Findings of Fact.
14 36. The Staff Report, at pages 17 and 18, contains Findings
related to the project's 15 compliance with stormwater requirements
and finds that, as conditioned, engineering
16 improvements will comply with City standards but that the
Applicant must still complete a final
17 design, provide for monitoring of the stormwater system and
prepare a contingency plan. The
18 Hearing Examiner has reviewed those Findings and adopts them
as his own Findings of Fact.
19 37. The Staff recommends approval of the land use subject to
forty-two conditions set 20 forth in the Staff Report as modified
by suggested language changes identified in Exhibit 28.
21 Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact, the Hearing
Examiner makes the fo llowing:
22 CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
23
24
25
1. The Hearing Examiner has jurisdiction over the parties and
the subject matter. 2. The requirements of SEPA have been met.
Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Decision - 22
CITY OF OLYMPIA HEARING EXAM INER 299 N.W. CENTER ST. I P.O. BOX
939
C HEHALIS, WASH INGTON 98532 Phone: 360-748-3386/Fax:
748-9533
-
3. Any Conclusions of Law contained in the foregoing Background
section or and
2 Analysis section are incorporated herein by re ference and
adopted by the Hearing Examiner as
3 his own Conc lusions of Law.
4 4. Any Finding herein which may be deemed a Conclusion is
hereby adopted as
5 such.
6 5. The proposed use is a permitted use within the RM-1 8 zone.
7 6. The Hearing Examiner is granted authority to no t require a
street connection 8
between the project and the adjoining San Mar Villas, EDDS
2.040.B.3.h, but if a street 9
connection is not imposed a neighborhood connector trail must be
constructed to provide a paved 10
connection to the ex isting adjacent street. II
7. Good cause has been shown for not requiring a s treet
connection between the 12
13 project and San Mar Vi llas to the south , but a neighborhood
connecto r tra il will be required to
14 provide a paved connection to the existing San Mar Drive.
15 8. The project complies with the required mix or dwe lling
types. OMC
16 18.04.060.N.I
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
9. T he project complies with requirements for transitional
housing types. OMC
18.04.060.N.2.
10. The project complies with the residential development
standards set forth in OMC
18.04.080 Table 4.04.
II. The project complies with the requirements for lo t s ize
and setbacks for
transitional lots. OMC 18.04.080(0)(1).
12. The project is subject to the provisions ofOMC 18.32,
Critica l Areas Regulations.
Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Decision- 23
C ITY OF OLYMPIA HEARING EXAMINER 299 N. W. CENTER ST. I P.O.
BOX 939
C HEHALIS, WASHINGTON 98532 Phone: 360-748-3386/Fax:
748-9533
-
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
II
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
24
25
13. The project, as conditioned, is in compliance with OMC
18.32.1 OO(E),
18.32.1 OO(F), 18.32.115(B), 18.32.1 OO(G), 18.32.1 OO(l-1), and
18.32.135(A)(B) and (C) and is in
general compliance with the Critical Areas Ordinance. Chapter I
8.32 OMC.
14. The project must comply with OMC 18.32.150 - Notice on
Title.
15. The project, as conditioned, is in compliance with OMC 1
8.32.535.
16. The project, as conditioned, qualifies for wetland buffer
reduction pursuant to
18.32.535(1-I).
17. The project satisfies the vehicular and biking parking
requirements of OMC
18.38.100.
18. The project, as conditioned, satisfies the requirements of
OMC 18.38.200.
19. The project, as conditioned, satisfies the requirement that
any appearance of scale
differences between project bui ldings and existing neighbo
rhood buildings must be minimized
by stepping the height of the building mass, and dividing large
building sides into smaller
segments.
20. The project, as designed, has met the requirements for
compliance with the
Engineering Design & Development Standards.
21. The project, as conditioned, complies with the requirements
for transportation. If
requested deviations from street standards are not approved
modifications to the site plan may be
required to comply w ith transportation requirements.
22. The project, as conditioned, complies w ith engineering
requirements for
stormwater management subject to final design, monitoring of the
stormwater system and a
contingency plan.
Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Decision- 24
CITY OF OLYMPIA HEARING EXAM INER 299 N.W. CENTER ST. I P.O. BOX
939
CHEHALIS, WASH lNGTON 98532 Phone: 360-748-3386/Fax:
748-9533
-
23. The land use should be approved subject to conditions.
2 Now, therefore, having entered his Findings of Fact and
Conclusions of Law, the land us
3 application is approved subject to the following:
4 CONDITIONS
5 Changes from the Staff's recommended conditions are
italicized
6 I. This approval is based on the development being
substantially in conformance
7 with Exhibits l through 4, and as required to be amended by
the Conditions of Approval.
8
2. This approval is subj ect to the Deve lopmen t Agreement
entered into by the City 9
10 of Olympia and Golden AI on Development, adopted by
resolution and approved on May 5,
II 2015.
12 3. Building ! Ieight: Buildings shal l not exceed 35 feet in
height, measured per OM
13 18.04.080 Table 4.04.
14 4. Bicycle Parking- Location/Design: Final details regarding
bicycle parking on
15 the building and engineering plans shall be submitted; final
location and design shall be in
16 accordance with OMC 1 8.38.220.C.
17 5. Landscaping: A detailed landscape plan in conjunction with
engineering plan
18 shall be provided in compliance with OMC 18.36, wellhead
protection standards, and subject to
19 Detail Design Review conditions of approval.
20
21 6. Hours of Operation/Construction Noise: Pursuant to OMC
18.40.080.C.7,
22 construction activity is restricted to the hours between
7:00a.m. and 6:00p.m.
7. Impact Fees: Impact fees for transportation, parks, and
schools shall be paid prior
24 to building permit issuance.
25
Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law cmd Decision- 25
C ITY OF OLYMPIA HEARING EXAMI NER 299 N.W. CENTER ST./ P.O. BOX
939
CH EHALIS, WASHI NGTON 98532 Phone: 360-748-3386/Fax:
748-9533
-
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
II
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
2 1
22
24
25
8. SEPA: The development must comply with the Mitigated
Determination ofNon-
Significant issued on April 28,2015, which includes:
a. The project shall pay traffic mitigation fees to Thurston
County to mitigate
offsite impacts. These fees are collected due to the
Tramportation Impact Analysis. The
mitigation collected will.fimd designated transportation
improvement projects. The mitigation
fee shall be per the leflerjiom Kevin I lughes. Thurston County
Public Works, Dated May 12,
2015, to Dave Smith, Oty of Olympia (A IIachment 1 2).
b. ((contamination is suspected, discovered. or occurs during
the proposed
SEPA action, testing of the potentially contaminated media must
be conducted. lfcontamination
of.~oil or groundwater is readily apparent, or is revealed by
testing. Ecology must be not(/ied.
Contact the Environmental Report Tracking System ( 'oordinator
in the Southwest Regional
Offlc:e (SWRO) a/ (360) -107-6300. For assistance and
information about subsequenl cleanup
and to ident(fy the type o.ftesting that will be required,
contact Thomas Middleton with SWRO.
Toxic Cleanup Program a! the phone number given above.
c. The on-site sewer system shall be connected to the existing
8-inch sewer
main that is located approximately 380' north of the subject
property, in the Sleater-Kinney Road
right ofway.
d. The project shal l pay traffic mitigation fees to the City or
Lacey to
mitigate ofrsitc impacts. These fees arc collected according to
LMC 74.27 and resu lts of the
Transportation lmpact Analysis. The mitigation col lected will
fund designated transportation
improvement projects.
Findings ofFact, Conclusions of Law and Decision - 26
CITY OF OLYMPIA HEARI NG EXAM INER 299 N.W. CENT ER ST. I P.O.
BOX 939
CH EHALlS, WASH INGTON 98532 Phone: 360-748-3386/Fax:
748-9533
-
The mitigation fee will be determined at the date of payment for
issuance of the building
2 permit, unless otherwise noted. The fee shall be increased on
July I and each year thereafter in
3 an amount equal to the increase in the Engineering News Record
Construction Cost Index. The
4 estimate for the City of Lacey's traffic mitigation fees is
attached to this threshold determination.
5 The Applicant wi ll receive credits toward City of Olympia
transportation impact fees
6 based on trips generated, credits to be determined at the time
of building permit issuance.
7 e. Historic Preservation/ Archeology - Although the site is
not listed as
8
9 potential historic or cultural resources site, there is the
possibility that archaeo logical material
10 could be on-site. Therefore, should historic or
archaeological material be encountered during
l l ground disturbing activities or construction:
12 1. Construction shall be suspended immediately at that
location;
13 II. The contractor shall immediately contact the City of
Olympia at
14 (360) 753-8314 or Michelle Sadlier, Historic Preservation
Officer at (360) 753-8031 ; 15 111. A qualified professional
archaeologist shall be retained by the
16 Applicant to document and assess the discovery; 17
If the discovery involves potential Native American resources,
the IV. 18
Appl icant shall also contact the Washington State Department of
Archeology and 19
Historic Preservation (DAHP) and the affected tribe for
additional consultation; and 20
v. In no case should additional excavation be undertaken until a
2 1
22 protocol has been agreed upon by the above mentioned
parties.
23 9. Design Review: The following concept design review
conditions of approval
24 shall be met prior to or at the time of building permit
application. Said plans shall address the
25 Findings ofF act, Conclusions of Law and Decision- 27
CITY OF OLYMPIA HEARING EXAM INER 299 N.W. CENTER ST. I P.O. BOX
939
CHEHALIS, WASHINGTON 98532 Phone: 360-748-3386/Fax :
748-9533
-
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
II
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
2 1
22
23
24
25
fo llowing conditions of approval from Concept Design Review, to
be approved by a
subcommittee of the Design Review Board prior to permit issuance
(italics added for
clarification):
a. Context Plan:
1. Based on Staffs analysis of neighborhood scale and
character
under OMC 18.170.110, approve the context plan for the north,
west and eastern portions
of the site. ror the southern portion of the site, review recent
changes to the design
(Exhibit 7) to confirm that the changes satisfy the need to
improve neighborhood scale
and character between the townhome buildings and single-family
homes in San Mar.
b. Preliminary Site and Landscape Design:
I. Provide greater separation between walkways and building
for
greater privacy of the ground floor units. OMC 18.170.020
II. Increase the separation between the community and pool
building
and multifamily buildings for increased light , privacy of the
end unit, and sense of
comfort for residents. OMC I 8. 170. 020
111. Provide screening between parking areas and adjacent
streets to
reduce the visual impact on pedestrians and neighboring
properties. Screening shall
comply with landscape requirements in OMC 18.36, 18. 170.030,
and 18.36
IV . Variation of the fence along the south property l.ine shall
be
provided, with detai ls to be submitted at the time of Detail
Design Review. Allow the
fence to be extended as far west as possible under the City's
Critical Area Regulations,
OMC 18.32, 18. 170.50.
Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Decision - 28
CITY OF OLYMPIA H EARING EXAMI NER 299 N.W. CENTER ST. I P.O.
BOX 939
CHEHALIS, WASHINGTON 98532 Phone: 360-748-3386/Fax: 748-9533
-
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
II
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
v. Revise the landscape plan per design standards in OMC
18.170.060 and OMC 18.36 and submit at the time of Detail Design
Review. In
addition to comments made in the January 8, 2015 preliminary
land use rev iew, the
revised plan shall address the following:
1. Increase the width of planting beds a long the building
foundations for increased screening of blank wells (e.g., on the
east and west
elevations of the senior apartments where the depth o r the bed
is approximately
three feet).
2. Select plants to minimize head light glare into the
ground
floor units of the senior apartments.
3. Identify how the area between the community and pool
buildings will be used, e.g. , indicate whether outdoor seating
will be provided.
4. Clarify vegetation within the townhome auto courts;
indicate whether container plans/trellises are proposed.
5. Where evergreens are proposed, provide adequate
separation from building wall s.
c. Preliminary Building Design:
1. Move windows or adjust floor plans as needed to minimize
opportunities for residents from one unit to look directly into
other units. OMC
18.170.130
II. rurther study the use of materials and colors to better
define the
base, middle, and upper leve ls of the bui ldings. OMC I 8. I
70. 1-10
Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Decision- 29
CITY OF OLYMPIA HEARING EXAMINER 299 N. W. CENTER ST. I P.O. BOX
939
CHEHALIS, WASHINGTON 98532 Phone: 360-748-3386/Fax: 748-9533
-
111. Provide variation of material/color schemes throughout the
project. 2 OMC 18.170.140
3 IV. Modify the south elevati.ons of the townhome buildings to
improve
4 neighborhood scale and character (see discussion above under
Context Plan). OMC
s 18.170.110
6 10. If the application does not meet the minimum landscape
standards, an application
7 for the alternative landscape standards shall be provided in a
manner that meets the requirements
8 of OMC 18.36.
9
10 11. Prior to Phase 3, a lot consolidation to remove the
property line between the
II northern lot and the southern lot shall be completed in
accordance with OMC Title 17.
12 12. The development shall comply with the Bayan Trails
Wetland and Soils Report
13 and Mitigation Proposal dated April2015, prepared by SCJA,
including:
14 a. Existing trail systems in the wetland buffer shall be
maintained and
15 improved to ensure safe access for users.
16 b. In the buffer areas, invasive vegetation shall be removed
and replanted 17
with taller, denser native shrub and tree species. 18
c. Areas with temporary impacts from pipe and trench
installation sha ll be 19
restored and replanted with native vegetation, and the
construction area shall be surrounded by 20
21 silt fences and other appropriate erosion control devices
until all surfaces are stabilized and
22 restored to a native plant community.
23 d. All planting restoration areas shall be monitored over a
5-year period
24 fo llowing completion of vegetation community planting to
ensure that the native plant
25
Findings of Fact, Conclusions ofLaw and Decision - 30
CITY OF OLYMPIA HEARING EXAMINER 299 N.W. CENTER ST. I P.O. BOX
939
CHEHALIS, WASHINGTON 98532 Phone: 360-748-3386/Fax: 748-9533
-
community su rvives. Survival rates of 80% or development of 60%
or more canopy coverage of
2 native plant communities at the end of 5 years, and less than
15% cover from the targeted non-
3 native species (Himalayan blackberry and English ivy) shall be
required for the mitigation
4 planting to be cons idered successful.
5 e. A performance assurance device for all landscaping in the
wetland and
6 wetland buffer, in compliance with OMC 18.36.200(8). shall be
provided prior to any certificate
7 of occupancy.
8 f. Signs, in a manner and form to be approved by the City of
Olympia, shall
9
10 be placed every 50 feet along the buffer boundary describing
the area behind the sign as a natural
II area to remain in an undisturbed native vegetation
condition.
12 g. The surface around the level spreader stormwater trenches
in the wetland
13 buffer as well as the buried pipeline pathway shall be
revcgetated with native species.
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
h. All landscaping shall meet the requirements of OMC
18.36.200.
Water
13. The developer shall install water facilities in accordance
with the provisions of
Chapter 6 of the Engineering Design & Development Standards.
(EDDS), (2.050.8.) water. The
water system shall be designed to provide adequate domestic plus
fire flow at the required
residual pressure.
14. During Phase 3, extend an 8 inch water main, from the
intersection of Road B and
Road C, to the existing water main in the San Mar Dri vc right
of way located south of the
southern property line of the site, complete 'vvith required
easement if not within the public right
ofway. Road 8 and Road Care identified on Sheet RD-01 of Exhibit
3.
Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Lm1 and Decision - 3/
CITY OF OLYMPI A HEARI NG EXAMI NER 299 N.W. CENTER ST. / P.O.
BOX 939
CHEHALIS, WASHINGTON 98532 Phone: 360-748-3386/Fax: 748-9533
-
Sewer 2 15. The developer shaH install sewer facilities in
accordance with the provisions of 3
Chapter 7 of the Engineering Design & Development Standards,
(EDDS), (2.050.A.) sewer. 4
16. Extend an 8 inch sewer main south from sanitary sewer man
hole #6 shown on 5
Sheet 9 of the April 22, 20 15 civil plans to the sanitary sewer
clean out at the property line north 6
7 of San Mar Drive, complete with required easement if not
within public right of way.
8 Storm
9 17. This development shall comply with lhe Drainage Design and
Erosion Control
10 Manual for Olympia October 2009 (DDECM). 11 18. The proposed
Demolition & TESC plan is conceptually approved and further 12
details will be requi red with engineering permit application fo
llowing Land Use Approval. 13
19. The stormwater design for th is development shall take
measures to protect the 14
quality and function of the neighboring wetland. Wetland
protection shall be confirmed through 15
hydrologic modeling and requirements found in the DDECM prior to
construction of each phase. 16
20. 17
The stormwater design for the entire development must include a
contingency
18 plan, to be reviewed and approved prior to construction of
Phase I, for expanding the size of
19 infiltration faci lities should the post-construction
infiltration rate be less than the design rate.
20 2 1. Starting with Phase 2 of the development, infiltration
verification testing per the
2 1 DDECM must be performed on each constructed stormwatcr faci
lity utilizing infiltration for
22 stormwater mitigation to ensure compliance with the
DDECM.
23
24
25
22. The 2009 Drainage Design and Erosion Control Manual for
Olympia (DDECM)
does not provide guidance for the design and sizing
ofbioretention facilities for stormwater
Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Decision- 32
C IT Y OF OLY MPIA HEA RI NG EXAM INER 299 N. W. CENTER ST. I
P.O. BOX 939
C HEHALIS, WASHI NGTON 98532 Phone: 360-748-3386/Fax:
748-9533
-
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
II
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
mitigation. All bioretention facilities proposed for this
development shall be designed in
accordance with the most cmrent edition of the Washington State
Department ofEcology's
Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington.
23. Sufficient right of way shall be dedicated , and
construction of a neighborhood
connector trail south to the San Mar Drive on the south property
line, prior to Phase 3, to comply
with the EDDS 2.040.
24. A minimum of three elements ofthe site plan will require
Deviation Requests as
per the Engineering Design & Development Standard, (EDDS).
These must be reviewed and
approved as part of the Engineering Permit Application and
Approval process for Phase I of the
project. These three elements related to (1) tree protection and
the resultant meandering of
sidewalks inside and outside of the right-of-way (ROW), (2) use
of bioretention cells outside of
the right of way for street storm water treatment, and (3)
onsite street parking and lane width for
streets within the project limit.
25. If sidewalks are separated from the streetscape by more than
I 0 feet with street
trees adjacent to or between the sidewalk and streetscape, a
lighting analysis is required to
determine if additional lighting is required.
Solid Waste
26. The proposed apartments along the north half of the site,
and townhomes along
the south side, shall require a compactor for garbage, and
either a second compactor or loose-fill
drop box for recyclables and cardboard. Roll-off trucks need 70
feet of clear space in front of
the compactor/drop box (containers). If the containers are to be
under cover, the roof shall be J 4
Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Decision- 33
CITY OF OLYMPIA HEARING EXAMINER 299 N.W. CENTER ST. I P.O. BOX
939
CHEHALIS, WASHINGTON 98532 Phone: 360-748-3386/Fax: 748-9533
-
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
feet high and the lifting bale within 2 feet of the threshold.
Twenty-five feet of overhead
clearance is required for loading and unloading the box. The
enclosure shaH meet the conditions
of Engineering Design & Development Standards (EDDS),
including a minimum width of20 to
22 feet. Due to the location and orientation ofthe solid waste
area in relation to the roadway,
front-loading trucks shall not serve solid waste containers,
because they would be required to
back into traffic with significant blind spots.
27. During the construction of the multifamily buildings and
townhomes, garbage and
recycle containers shall be located in areas with adequate
access by collection vehicles in
accordance with the provisions of the EDDS. Containers and
collection vehicles may consist of
drop box, front-load and side load during the construction
phase.
Lighting
28. A street lighting plan shall be submitted and installed by
the Applicant for all
street light installations facilities in accordance with the
provisions of Chapter 4 Transportation
of the Engineering Design & Development Standards (EDDS),
transportation , ( 4F) Illumination.
The proposed street lighting represented on the civil plans is
conceptually approved and further
details shall be required, including an illumination study of
the existing street lights on Sleater-
Kinney Road to determine if the existing lighting is adequate
for safe vehjcle and pedestrian
movements and provide solutions for any deficiencies found. An
analysis for the entire project
shall be completed prior to construction of Phase 1.
Urban Forestry
29. The Applicant shall update the locations of all SAVE TREES
at time of
engineering submittal.
Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Decision - 34
CITY OF OLYMPIA HEARING EXAMINER 299 N.W. CENTER ST. I P.O. BOX
939
CHEHALIS, WASH INGTON 98532 Phone: 360-748-3386/Fax:
748-9533
-
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
II
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
30. Save Trees in questjon shall be site verified by Applicant's
Urban forester prior to
installation of fencing for tree protection. Installation of
Tree Protection Fencing shall be
inspected and approved by Applicant's Urban Forester and City
Urban Forester with each phase
prior to demolition or any clearing and grading. If a utility is
located within the Tree Protection
fencing (critical root zone), the Applicant's Urban Forester
shall inspect and consult with the
City Urban Forester on a course of action to save and protect
trees.
3 I. Tree Protection Fencing detail shall be added to the
Grading Plan and the
Demolition Plan for each phase.
32. Tree Density Calculations shall be updated prior to clearing
and grading of each
phase.
Fire
33. f-ire hydrants are required at 300 foot spacing. l lydrants
must deliver 2500 GPM
fire flow.
34. Access to roadways shall be 20 feet minimum unobstructed
width and meet
Olympia Engineering Design & Development Standards.
35. Requires addressable fire alarm system with communication by
point.
36. Requires NFPA 13-R fire sprinkler systems minimum. NFPA 13
systems may be
required depending on construct ion type and building size.
37. Standpipes arc required in the four senior housing
buildings.
38. Knox key boxes are required. Numbers and locations arc to be
determined.
Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Decision- 35
CITY OF OLYMPIA HEARING EXAMINER 299 N.W. CENTER ST./ P.O. BOX
939
CHEHALIS, WASHINGTON 98532 Phone: 360-748-3386/Fax: 748-9533
-
Other 2
39. The landscape deviation requests related to parking lot
islands and screening 3
requirements of OMC 18.36.080 B & C must be reviewed and
approved as part of the 4
Engineering Permit Application and Approval process for Phase 1
of the project. The 5
6 application shall be revised and resubmitted to demonstrate
compliance with the requirements,
7 including, but not limited to, how the proposed landscaping
exceeds the minimum standards.
8 40. The property owner shall record a notice approved by the
Director with the
9 Thurston County Auditor, regarding the wetland , per OMC
18.32.150. The notice shall provide
1 o documentation in the public record (i.e. the title) of the
presence of a critical area and its buffer,
I I the application of OMC 18.32 to the property, and the
limitations on uses and activities within or
12 affecting this area.
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
41. Additional information related to specific details of the
replanting (size, location,
species) and the buffer averaging calculations for the area
impacted by the street connection to
San Mar Drive shall be required , prior to issuance of any
building permit or a clearing and
grading permit, for analysis of mitigation.
42. As an additional SEPA mitigation Condition, authorized per
OMC 14.04. I 55, the
Applicant shall comply with the school mitigation requirements
in the letter from Mike Laverty,
of the North Thurston Public Schools, to the City of Olympia,
dated April 30, 2015 (Attachment
14.).
5 day of June, 2015. DATED this
Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Decision - 36
Mark . Scheibmeir City of Olympia Hearing Examiner
CITY OF OLYMPIA BEARING EXAMINER 299 N.W. CENTER ST. I P.O. BOX
939
CHEHALIS, WASHINGTON 98532 Phone: 360-748-3386/Fax: 748-9533
-
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
II
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
RECONSIDERATION/APPEAL
Trus is a final decision of the City. Any party may file a
Motion for Reconsideration within 10 days of service of this
decision in accordance with OMC 18.75.060. Appeals shall be made to
Superior Court pursuant to provisions of Chapter 36.70C RCW. The
filing of a Motion for Reconsideration is not a prerequisite for
seeking judicial review. lf a Motion for Reconsideration is filed ,
the time for filing an appeal shall not commence until disposition
of the Motion.
Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Decision- 37
CITY OF OLYMPIA HEARING EXAM INER 299 N.W. CENTER ST. I P.O. BOX
939
CHEHALIS, WASHINGTON 98532 Phone: 360-748-3386/Fax: 748-9533
-
Exhibit 18:
Exhibit 19:
Exhibit 20:
Exhibit 21:
Exhibit 22:
Exhibit 23:
Exhibit 24:
Exhibit 25:
Exhibit 26:
Exhibit 27:
Exhibit 28:
LIST OF EXHIBITS
Email from Lawrence Hanna to Ian Colby dated November
19,2014.
Petition presented by residents of San Mar Villas dated May 17,
2015.
Letter from Beverly Huether.
Letter from Barbara Huether elated May 19, 2015.
Letter from Doug and Stephanie Brodin dated May 19, 2015.
Petition signed by additional residents of San Mar Villas.
Letter from Jay Goldstein.
Copy of the Decision entered in In Re 18th Avenue Estates, Case
No. 08-0202.
Excerpt from the City's Comprehensive Plan.
Copy of the Applicant's PowerPoint presentation.
Proposed language changes to the Staff's recommended Conditions
of Approval.
Cover LetterBinder1Part 1 - HEX Final Decision ReducedPart 2 -
HEX Final Decision Reduced
Blank Page