SPR Approval
a.
~~ '
't :~~/
City of Yelm
t:.:\ -t~, ",j';t'~
1 05 Yelm Avenue West
PO Box 479
Yelm, Washington 98597
(360) 458-3244
September 23, 1999
Mr Clem Heath
POBox 970
Eatonville, WA 98328
Re Site Plan Approval for Case # BSP-99-8241-YL
Dear Mr Heath.
The Site Plan Review Committee (SPRC) has completed its review of the above referenced
project. The, The SPRC finds that your project is consistent with City policy and development
standards provided the fqllowing conditions of approval are satisfied
~ ~y~{ ~
Enclosed is the Waiver of Protest (condition #2 under Transportation and Access below) that
must be signed and notarized prior to issuance of a building permit. All parties having interest
in the parcel shall be required to sign the Waiver of Protest. The applicant shall provide the
Planning Department a plat certificate along with the signed and notarized Waiver of Protest.
TRANSPORTATION AND ACCESS
.........
l;'~~'t'~_..; ._ "" ...
- Finding: The'site fronts on East Yelm Avenue. The Yelm Development Guidelines, Chapter
4, classifies East Velm Avenue as an "urban arterial"
~.~-;-;.~. \'\ ;\
/' ,
The access to the site is a shared access with the property to the northwest of the site
_ C ..,_,)\
~ !\l \
As proposed the deveiopment would generate a total of 12 new pm peak hour trips to the
transportation system The City has determined that the previously approved use of the
building was as a single family residence which generates 1 pm peak hour trip and shall be
credited against the 12 new trips generated by your project. The net new pm peak hour trips
are 11 The Concurrency Ordinance requires that impacts to the transportation sY9tem from
new traffic be mitigated through the Transportation Facility Charge of $750 00 per new pm
peak hour
Conclusion: The project creates an impact to the City transportation system through
increased automobile trips generated by the project. Street improvements along the property
frontage are necessary to ensure safe automobile access and pedestrian movement.
~,
;....
,
Conditions of Approval ., 1M
""Y~., :l~":.{f'\l( ~~o( ~
~ c~ _ 'r '';,\t''C?
1 - Consistent with City of Yelm Ordinance 580, Concurrency Ordinance, the proposed
development wil! generate 11 new pm p~ak hour trips The 11 new trips reflects a
> credjt for 1 pm peak hour trip generated by the site from its previous use as a
j residence~ The totaJ'TFC for the project is $8,250 00 The TFC is payable at time of
, building permit issuance.
2. The applicant shall be responsible for half-street improvements along the frontage on
East Yelm Avenue The frontage improvements include lane improvements, curb,
planter strip: sidewalk, landscape and storm drainage including a right-of-way
dedication of approximately six feet. The applicant may enter into an agreement with
the City for the deferral of improvements Enclosed is the Waiver of Protest for
improvement deferral.
ON-SITE PARKING AND LOADING AREAS
Findings: Chapter 17 72, Off-Street Parking and Loading, requires that establishments for the
sale and,consumption of food and beverages provide one parking stall for every 200 square
feet of gross floor area and one loading area for buildings less than 5,000 square feet. As
proposed the project site provides 10 parking stalls, including handicapped and one loading
area.
oIl''/.~{ 4
Conclusion: The project provides adequate parking and loading areas
Conditions of Approval
1 The applicant shall submit a parking lot stripping plan with civil plans and shall include
.._.~._minimum ADA ,requirements and van accessible signage
;'1(?i?"'!"" ~_ .:;::::(: i." -
WATER j'
\
j? ...~~,_1\\ /- .,..,'
Findings:;~/rhe propqsed site is currently served by the City's water system This site has one
existing ERU connection. Du~.to the nature of water use by restaurants they typically use
more than 240 gallons dfwater per day
"
Conclusic;>n: The project will likely have a need for additional water supply
Conditions of Approval
~' ;'
1 'Applicant will need to provide water calculations of anticipated usage to determine if
~ '" additional water capacity is required
, .
2. Water ERU's (equivalent residential units) are based on a consumption rate of 240
gallons per day and are currently charged at a rate of $1,OOO/ERU inside city limits
l' This fee is payable at time of building permit issuance Consumption will be monitored
for six months to determine if additional ERU's need to be purchased
Page 2 of 6
l 'I-
;'1'.' :.
.' '""1. t.
,,'- E '-~
!. '!
; ;:~~"~~ ;.!~,,;;(i~~,,:;'G .
3. t ~f~lf the ~P8licant )n,$.~~~!~<:a~ !{f,t&~~!~q,~y~tem an additional water meter may be installed
"",, ,~,? fp,~,1hepu,rpo,l?e, 9f)rngatlon:; ",l"r"J,)".~,,:~, <,
_ "~,,.: ;J~%~~;,t~~I~~~/}~5;;:;,i;X::i.~~~i-:"\:-;~~,~:~<, :,;L',
'SANITARY S'EWER::,)~ '''~~~~';;, ;~~f:,:,,,;'d:!'i'\
0. ,"'.. - ,k"~ ,J'-'
", "}1: t ,;~~' ~:~~{ ~. \
Fin~ings~ 1:iT.he project site is!n the Sewer Service Area and is currently served by the City's
STEP se~er'~ystem Th~ pr9perty currently has one existing ERU connection
\ "t" 'f l j' . ,i-~ ,~/ ~:-'
., .1-
Conclusion: ',Du~ ~o the nature of water use 'by restaurants they typically use more than 240
gaIl9l)~ .pf 'f{~l:rp,er d~y,t;!rherefor~, the project will likely have a need for additional sewer
;~ ,qapaclty ft~';:l;'~~~?E{I':t> '; ~~~~ ,t,
Conditions of Approval
, t.~.,
1. Applicant will need to provide water calculations of anticipated usage to determine if
,. additional sewer capa.city is required. Additional sewer capacity, beyond the existing
ERU, is charged at a rate of $2,480 00 per ERU The fee is payable at time of building
pe~mit issuance;,;;
.1.):-;~,i;.~:: ~~t~i?~/t;;{I\:f:;"~ 'l"~~;'{
2. -;,,:, Se~~'(ERU'S (eq~)yalent residentiall,lnits) are based on discharge of 240 gallons per
" " day and will b~ charged ~t the rate in ~ffect at the time of connection. Discharge will be
, mo,nitored for six, months to determine if additional ERU's need to be pur.chpsed
..i~ ~"~;;,~~~~m~~~:!f~~;~~~,~'~ t~4 j' J:r}':.'^ '. ~
3 ''''cr;Thetcurrent tank is shared with adjacent properties Based on daily consumption there
may need to be a'n increase in the STEP tank size This cost will be the responsibility of
" , 4' th~J~r()perty owner . :~
~ { ;~1}\ ;-~(\.:~J~t~;\ <rl~'h \.'~::;
,4,. -(;~&Ihe city's pre-trea'imemt ordinance requires installation of a grease trap for food service
, ," '." 'acilitle$.~,;;TQe. size:of ,the gr~a.se trap shall be based on daily water consumption
alculationsjifj;i , ':'h - <:.tf.I;' ;,
~~'&tY~~:i~,;*~~'i\ ," . 'i: ' 2i'f'~";
" STORMWATER~)f
", {,
F.i':1dings:~The :pomple~~d prdj\ect will increase impervious surfaces on the site and adjacent
,c,str~ets. Impervious surfaces create stormwater runoff When uncontrolled and untreated
s~ormVl(ater'r'unoff can create health and safety hazards. YMC requires all development to
complywit~ the City Stormwater Manual for the control and treatment of stormwater runoff
" ' ":i;'~~ ~~ti~~~i:'i',fc; J.:;",A!,>~;~" ;~" ,;'-'1:'
!,<~~~},Stqrmwat~,O.~cil.it,i13~,'r~qLilr~ qgn~iQ,q~,d maintenance to ensure they remain in proper working
-'~ ',~'.'" ~~~di!~~~kiZ;~~~~:';~~~~~?~;~':\f:~''-''':~~':' "\~~f?
Conclusion: To' prevent,ground w~ter pollution stormwater must be controlled and treated
-~ 'W~~~t;~l:~~t, ~~J~;~~~~~{t~~":11~~>?:,~~~:t}i~~~t:f~~r,;. ~~:-'r~ ~
Condiilo\ns 9f'Approval.'" .' "
\
Page 3 of 6
- :..- '-"-
.
,
~
DOE Storm Water Manual~\!~~ ~,dopted by the City of Yelm The applicant shall compile
a final storm water leport aI6Q!;J;wi,!p,ponstruction drawings The applicant shall collect
and dispose of all stormwater on site. A grading plan will be required
I,'
2. Best Management Practices (BMP's) are required during construction on the site
3 The applicant shall submit a storm water operation and maintenance plan at the time of
construction drawing submittal to the Public Works Department for approval The
stormwater operation and maintenance plan shall be re,corded at Thurston County
Auditor's Office.
FIRE
Finding: Fire protection is provided by the Thurston County Fire District #2. One of the
principal means of providing adequate fire protection is that fire hydrants meet minimum fire
flow standards
Conclusion: Minimum fire flow standards are required to ensure adequate water pressure in
th~ evef1t of. a fire."
Condition of Approval: The applicant shall submit fire flow calculations for existing hydrants
Hydrants shall mElet curr:ent city standards for this project.
.I ,'I,;! (
DESIGN STANDARDS
,
Findings: As a jurisdiction planning under the Growth Management Act, the City is required to
have adopted development guidelines which implement their Comprehensive Plan
;0'11.1'"
ConciiJ-sion:.Jhe'City's Development Guidelines are the adopted City standards for
development an~ construction which implement the City's Comprehensive Plan
Condition o(Approval: 'The applicant shall utilize the City's Development Guidelines as a
guide to develop project civil dr~wings
\. p~ \
LANDSCAPING and REFUSE AREA
Findings: Landscaping and screening are necessary to promote safety, to provide screening
between compatible land uses, to safeguard privacy and to protect the aesthetic assets of the
City Chapter 17 80, Landscaping, requires the applicant to provide on-site landseaping
As required by Chapter 17 80, the applicant has indicated on the proposed site plan the areas
designate~ for landscaping, the type of landscaping and location of the hose .spigot.
The site plan includes a refuse area, however it is unclear how the ~pplicant is proposing to
scree~}nd enclose the area, especially on the southeast side adjacent to the parking area.
Page 4 of 6
"
, ,'" . ,,,,,t~1~{'X c, '
Conclusion:'Asproposed theprojectmeets or exceeds the minimum standards of Chapter
'1- ,~~""''''''\..; t-' I ",~' .:~~~ ;Jljft~;;'-{;AI
.'. 17 SO, Land~.caplng~"<:':;, '''~~~'~'~~,f, "" ..
\' ',~L ,if' 'ir <:';"" ;",,,. ", " ~'l}>'<i.'~f;:'"
More detail reg,a'rding screening and the enclosure of the refuse area is needed to determine if
the area meets minimum standards.
,.k,-,. \ i:,"~~!i.ri':iL.:'~' .. :.~. ,;,
Condition of Ap'proval: Jhe applicant shall submit a detail of the refuse area and proposed
s'creening'~to th~ Y~Ir.n Pliirming Department for approval
):~,t ~\: ,I'"
".,.,.. e .
DESIGN GUIDELINES ..
\~ -:"
Findings: The project site is in the Design Guidelines Old Town District. The Design
Guidelines require developers to consider'
,lJ,i1,.~:: .)
'<
;,
1 ' !' i Site Planning - the location, orientation and relationships of buildings, parking
,
I'. .. .,Iots and other features.
,!il~Pedestrial1 Access - pedestrian circulation, safety and comfort.
V~hicl!lar A~ce~s an~t'p'arkin,g .,. location and size of driveways, access roads
. ' ' . - -. <( ~ f... .
,1':~and parking lo[';~~
'4 ;"''Building Design - design elements anc character of built structures
5.,:Site Design and Landscaping - character and qualities of landscaping, open
space and other site features.
-'':' ./t ,'" .'( oJ 'Y'f \
Conclusion:~The site layout, pedestrian access, landscaping and building design;meet or
exceed' minimum design guidelines. (No additional conditions are required
i~;~;': " . ;.~;;ij~:i\~"i\,;~~q~;:!,;':~.r~j,\, , '''r:,\:~;~:.f/';'(I..~;'' \\
THURSTON COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT
" ~~:t:'r' .,~. ;,~ .. ~'>_ -l,:' .
F;inding: The production and/or sale of food is regulated by the Thurston County
Envifo'nmental.Health Departments to ensure minimum food safety standards are meet.
',' 'I'
Conclusior1,~~h'e pro'po~ed restaurant will produce food for customers and is subject to
Thurston County EnVironmental Health Department standards.
;' .J)~ k;.:;,): I .;~?,'::': "~I' I I
. Condit"o~',~t~pproV~I:srhe ~pplicant shall meet Thurston County Environmental Health
}~,;~ standards' an~ shall prov[ce the City with a copy of the Food Service Establishment Operating
, .Permit issued by TDl,Irston County ,~;~:,;t~; ':'
:,' , ""'~M1~~ rs~~~\:J~f~ ;;~:lN.t" .', ;"
Finding: The applicant submitted an environmental checklist dated September 3, 1999 The
, City issued a Mitigated Determination of NonSignificance (MDNS) on October 14, 1999 The
comment period for the MDNS expired on October 2S, 1999
~;' ;'S(jt'~f';~;iti (' . ",~1~t%{!~?i\ ;~~'t.lt''1:;/t,,~ ~,d'i \, .
, Concl,u,siQn'::Jh~'~};vironrnental determination appeal period expired on November 4, 1999
without an appeal: "The MDNS is final.
~' .~.
(.. r
~"':;,
.~ )-'["
\'\."\1;
., : ..J~,
Page 5 of 6
It..
.3. ..
.F- _~:'1~ _:_ .~. ~ ._.;............~ _ _~
'J
.~\:: J
~.
~ ,t.
);:
:~:~ .l~' ,~},
1. _,' .;.~, .",:> ;...J"" ..,.,);(1':'- ?-:
I' j;j,(" f,,~.f /' . ~, ' '" : (..
" , Cc;mditio~ of A.PP'roval:~Jhe applicant shall 90mplete all mitigation required by the MDNS prior
1" ',' ".',........Ji;,'_''.1.j..,..,. - ;~1' :J- _ 4:': "' ~ .~.'-'1..~'i'i '.'f
to occupancy""""':;:: . , ,>,1; l.;.. 1 "'f:;rjl~,),."
, :' {,~' '~, ':i,;'~~"~r::.,
A site pla~ approval js a,J)p~ II Perrpit. An appeal of this decision can be filed within 14 days
from the date.5~0!1i~ lett~~, pu(sl.:laQ!.,to YMC,Chapter 15 49, Integrated Project Review
I: Process. (;The'site plan approval is valid for 18 months from the date of approval
',- ". \ iir!:~\~; ?}~ .h' I L;":- ::.~ '_.r .. :
If you have any questions or need further assistance please contact me at 458-8408
,..
~
Catherine Carlson
City Plann~r
1,
Enclosures J~~
<; , ,~.' tjf~i~;;j;~;'i;i"'l, "'"
&1#
I
.;
~
cc: Phil Kallsen
Shelly Badger '
Ken Garmann
,~, "Gary "Carlson
'\1
,uY/.. '
J' ..'
\.
i--
1'"
~.. \,
....l
c:{lJj,,~L:;:, :" : >:
F
" '" t~.~."f
, '~hi
:",;, ,'~
1-~
"7 .~
;;;" ~
?",,'," "',
.~
~r l"~
:" y '-I
q;~
"
I ,_
"I ~~;:.;;
,.
:t .~
'IJ
Page 6 of 6
\,
.,
~'.,