SEPA Record
, .. r
p-
ADDENDUM
TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT FOR
THE SOUTHWEST YELM ANNEXATION
.'
City of Yelnl
July 11, 1994
Proposal:
Amendment to 1985 Comprehensive Plan for the City of Yelm to include
the Southwest Yelm Subarea.
Proposal:
Conceptual Master Plan Approval for Southwest Yelm Subarea.
In February of 1993, the City of Yelm published an Environmental Impact Statement
(EIS) for the annexatlon of approximately 2,000 acres southwest of the then Inuits of the
City of Yelm. That EIS considered the I'impacts associated with the annexation Proposal
and various conceptual development scenarios within lhe proposed annexation area. II The
EIS also dIscussed the relatlOnship of the Propos;tl Jo the requirements of the Growth
Management Act then in effect.
The current Proposal is twofold' The adoption of a Subarea Comprehensive Plan for the
Southwest Yelm Annexation area and the approval of a Conceptual Master Plan for the
same area. This Proposal is a continuation of the Proposal inittated with the annexation.
Because this Proposal is a continuation of the Proposal reviewed by the earher EIS, it is
appropriate and efficient to use the existing environmental documentatlon.
The following changes have been made since the issuance of the 1993 ElS:
A. Changes to the Proposal (See Current Conceptual Master Plan Submittal,
Exhibit B).
1. Additional detail as to potential SIte uses and impacts.
2. Proposal to accommodate corridor for proposed Y-l htghway.
3. Properties abutting the Proposal are rezoned to accommodate more
appropriate uses along the proposed access road
The overall density, composition, land use, and impacts are substantially the same
as the original annexation Proposal and the speCIfic impacts of that Proposal and
the development alternatives were identified in the original EIS. The Proposal and
C'\~I\J2\JHIl\ADDl!NDUM.IlIS
''^ .
its associated changes pose no significant potential for environl1lentallmpact. The
land uses are substanhally the same as considered at the tlme of annexation. The
proposed Y -1 corridor does not presuppose the constructIon of the Y -1 highway,
but merely provides a potential location should State agencies decide to construct.
Detalled environmental review of the Y-I corndor would be done in connection
with the State's corridor location and project studies process.
'Q
B. Current .Planning Projects Affectmg the Proposal.
]. Comprehensive Water Plan.
The City of Yelm is currently circulatmg and considering for adopl1on an
update to its Comprehensive Water Plan The Southwest Yelm Subarea is
withm the service area of the existIng Comprehensive Water Plan. The
proposed Master Plan and Comprehensive Plan Amendment are both
consistent with the proposed Watcr Plan. In order to finalize the Water
Plan, including the Southwest Yelm Subarea, the land use planmng being
performed under the Conceptual Master Plan and Comprehensive Plan for
the Southwest Yelm area is necessary. Eventually, the final, adopted
Comprehensive Plan must be consistent with the land use element applIcable
to the Southwest Yelm area. It is important to note that the ComprehenSIve
Water Plan affects the entire City of Yelm and that all environmental
review of such plan will be performed in conjunction with the adoption of
the Comprehensive Water Plan.
2. Wastewater.
The City of Yelm's existing Wastewater Facilities Plan, adopted in 1990,
does not include in its service area the Southwest Yelm Subarea. In order
to plan for the accommodation of wastewater in the Southwest Yelm
Subarea, the City initiated a wastewater reuse program. On
December 6, 1993, the CIty applied for pilot project status for its
Wastewater Reuse Program from the Department of Health. On
January 11, 1994, the City was granted pilot project status by the
Department of Health. The City has prepared a scope of work for the
planning necessary under its Wastewater Reuse Program and applied for a
centennial clean water grant from the Department of Ecology. The CIty
was awarded the grant and will begin its planning pursuant to the scope of
work in August of 1994. The outcomc of the Wastewater Reuse Program
will be the eventual adoption of a Sewer Comprehensive Plan and
Wastewater Reuse Studies document. Ultimately, the City will implement
a program of wastewater reuse that WIll, among other things, allow the City
to include the Southwest Yelm Subarea in its sewer service area.
-'
C;\WP~1~'2\JH8,^ODENDUM.HlS
-2-
,t'll
The original EIS for the Southwest Yelm Annexation Area required the
approval of a sUltable wastewater disposal program before any development
would be approved The Wastewater Reuse Program and the associated
scope of work for wastewater reuse specifically mc1ude in the planning area
the Southwest Yelm Subarea, thereby addressing the issues raised in the
original EIS.
.'
The Conceptual Master Plan Submittal and Comprehensive Plan
Amendment are important to identify and facilitate utllity planning,
including wastewater planning. The City lOtends to proceed with utility
planning on a CitY-WIde basis and all final environmental review of such
planning wIll be done in conjunction with the adoption of a City-wide
Sewer Comprehensive Plan. Any specific land use approvals or project
deveJopment in the Southwest Yelm Subarea must be consistent with any
adopted wastewater plan.
The Conceptual Master Plan is still in the preliminary approval phase. The final review
phase will mclude greater detail in the identification of land uses, phasing, and utility
extension. Such a plan cannot be deveJoped until the City completes its Comprehensive
Sewer and Water Plans, which cover the affected service area
Specific development issues may require further environmental review at the Master Plan
stage, once utility plans for the CIty have been fuIly established.
The SEPA rules provide that existing environmental documents may be used by issuing
an addendum where such an addendum "adds analysls or information about a proposal
but docs not substantially change the analysis of significant impacts and alternatives in the
existing environmental document. " WAC 197-11-600(4)(c). An addendum shall "clearly
identify the Proposal for which it is written and the environmental document it adds to
or modifies 11 and "shall be circulated to the recipients of the final EIS."
WAC 197-11-625(1) & (4). This document is intended to comply with those sections of
the SEP A Rules
This Addendum adds additional information and analysis to the existing EIS. Because
that additional information and analysis are contained in several documents, those
documents must be incorporated by reference into this Addendum. The following is a
list of the documents incorporated herein by reference and made a part of this Addendum.
These documents are adopted by reference to the extent they are apphcable to the
Southwest Yelm Subarea. All such documents are avaIlable at the City of Ye)m and are
available for public review during normal business hours, 8'00 a m. to 5:00 p.m.
"
1. Pilot Project Application for Wastewater Reuse
2. Scope of Work for Wastewater Reuse.
C:\Wl'51\52\JMB\AODT!NOUM.llIS
-3-
" .
3. Future (not yet adopted) Sewer Comprehensive Plan (expected
to be available the week of July 18, 1994).
4. Proposed ComprchenslVe Water Plan (amendment to existmg
1990 ComprehensIve Water Plan).
The SEPA Responsible Official for the City of Yelm, the Mayor, has determined that the
changes identified in the pending Proposal are substantially wIthin the scope of the project
contemplated In the original EIS and that no new or additional information IS reqUIred at
this time except as Identified above. AddltlOnaIly, the Responsible Official has
determmed that, accordIng to the SEP A Rules, no further environmental determinatIOn
is necessary.
Finally, the Responsible Official has determmed that the mformation contained herein and
the documents incorporated by reference arc appropriate to distribute as an Addendum
to the February 1993 EIS.
This Addendum will be distributed to the dIstributIOn list for the Final EIS on the
Southwest Yelm Annexation. The distrihutlOn lIst is attached as ExhIbit A.
There is no comment period on thIs Addendum. The Plannmg Commission is scheduled
to hold a public hearing to consider the Proposals on July 18, 1994. The CIty Council
will schedule heanngs to conslder adoption later In July or in August 1994. Comments
on environmental issues are appropriate at all public hearings.
Contact Person' Shelly A. Badger (206) 4SR-8405
Responsible Official'
Kathryn M. Wolf
Posi tionfTi tIe:
Mayor
Phone' (206) 458-8401/3244
Address' P.O. Box 479
Yelm, WA 98597
Date.
~/// I fl[
I
Signature:
~n) 777 Jtc1t
C:\~1\.52\J}{8IAODnNDlJM.21S
-4-
DISTRIBuTION LIST
FEDERAL AGENCIES
Federal Communications Commission
Region 10, Environmental Protection Agency
Soil Conservation Service
U S Department of Housing and Urban Development, Region 10
U.S. Department of Interior
U S. Fish and Wildlife Service
STATE AGENCIES
Department of Agriculture
Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation
Department of Community, Trade & Economic Development
Department of Ecology (2)
Department of Emergency Services
Department of Fisheries & Wildlife
Department of Natural Resources
Department of Social and Health Services
Department of Transportation
Office of Governor
Washington Environmental Council
Washington State Energy Office
Washington State Patrol
THURSTON COUNTY DEPARTMENTS
Thurston County Department of Health
Thurston County Department of Public Works
Thurston County Department of Water Quality and Resource Management
Thurston County Fire District No.2
Thurston County Parks and Recreation Department
Thurston County Planning Department
Thurston County Sheriff's Department
LOCAL AGENCIES AND MUNICIP ALmES
Army Corps of Engineers
Centralia Power and Light
Economic Development Council of Puget Sound
Intercity Transit
Olympic Air Pollution Control Authority
Puget Power
Puget Sound Regional Council
Puget Sound Water Quality Authority
Rainier School District
Thurston County Economic Development Council
Thurston Regional Planning Council
Town of Rainier
Yelm School District
J
EXIllBIT A
MISCELLANEOUS ORGANIZATIONS
Audubon Society
City of Yelm Public Library
Fort Lewis Military Reservation
Nisqually Indian Tribe
Nisqually River Council
Nisqually Valley News
South Thurston County Chamber of Commerce
The Olympian
Thurston County Public Library - Olympia
cmZENS
Ed Kenney
1.Z. Knight - Ramtha Dialogues
10n Potter, Shapiro & Associates, Inc.
Mark Carpenter
Mary Lou Clemens
National Food Corporation
.'
.
.
,.J' SW YELM CONCEPTUAL
MASTER PLAN SUBMITTAL
prepared by
Thurston Highland & Assoaates
wIth Venture Partners
,
--
May 1994
EXliIHIT B
.
- .
.' /.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Textural Informahon
E;~Ib1t A - LIst of Property Owners wIthm Annexed Area
ExhIbIt B - LISt ot Property Owners wIthm 1000' ot Annexed Area
ExhibIt C - Legal DescnptlOn and Tax Parcel Number
EnvIronmental ChecklIst (SEP A)
Supporhng ivlaps
ViCInIty Map
EXlStmg Zorung Map
Topographrc Map
Forest Cover ivlao
>.
School DIstnct Map
Conceptual Plan
Full SlZe pnnt attached
SOUTHWEST YELlVI CONCEPTUAL ZONING PLAN
(A) APPUC.-\J."'{T Thurston Highlands Assoclates
t 9 t 7 First Avenue
Sattie, Wa. 98 to t
Contact: Denrns T Su, A.I.A. - (206) 443-3537
(B) 'lAMES, AQDRESSES, ZIP CODES & TELEPHONE NUMBERS OF ALL L-\l~DO\v"NERS
WITP.lN TP.E SOUTH\VEST YELM .~"'fi'[E."'C.-\.TION ARE-\..
See E.'<lubrr A
(C) NAl'YfES AND ADDRESSES OF ALL PROPERTf O\VNERS \VIT'rlIN ONE
THOUSAl~D FEET OF THE SOUTII\VEST Y"ELM A.l"\iNE."X.-\.TION ARE.-\.
See ExhibIt B
(D) r.tiE LEG.-\L DESCRlPTION A.I.'-lTI TA-X PARCEL NillvIBERS OF THE SO L1H\VES7 YC:I...\-l
Ai"\iNEXATION ARE-\..
See ExhibIt C
(E) THE E.."XISTING ZONING AND PL\.L"\( DESIGNATION ON THE SOuTn'\VEST YEL.\I
Ai'fNEXATION ARE-\..
EXIsnng Zomng - Rural Resldennal Zone
E:Qsnng Plan Deslgnanon - Rural (Pe: Thuman County Comprehe:-..sIve P!;l.'1)
One UIDt per Five Acres
(F) THE TOTAL ACRE.-\.GE CONTAINED VITmIN TIlE PROPOSED MASTER PL\N ..\REA.
THE ;HJr"lBER OF DWELLING UNITS PER.i\t1ITfED AND PROPOSED ~"\[D Tr-:E
Nu1vIBER OF DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE OF L-\.'ill PE~\;IITfED AND PROPOSED
Southwest Y eim _~exanon Are:r.
Acre:lge: 1. 860
Number of DweHmg Umrs Pemuned: 372
Number of Dweilmg Umrs Proposed: 5.000
Number of Dweilmg Umrs per Acre Permmed. 0.2 (One Umt pe:- Five .-\cres)
Number of Dweilmg Umrs per Acre Proposed: 2.7
(G) THE TOTAL ACREAGE OF NON RESIDENTIAL USES PERMITIED ..\ND PROPOSED
BY lIPE OF USE.
Pemuned NODreSldennal Use Acre:r..ge: All (1.360 acres)
Proposed CommercmL 40 acres (NelghbomoodlArtenal)
Proposed Open Space: 330 acres (Sc::nsmve Are:lS, Golf Course\ s), Buffers)
.-
(H) APPLICABLE SCHOOL DrSTRlCTS. FIRE DISTRlCT, .~'lD OTHER SPECgL PCRPOSC:S
DrSTRlCTS
School DIsmcr: IUlmer School DIsmc: #307, Y ~ School DIs!r.c:
Fire DIsmc:: (It V ofYe!m. Thurston Count'. Fire DIsmct #2
SpecIal P'Jrposes DIsmcts: None Known
(I) THE 'v{E..\~S BY \VHICH THE PROPOSED CONCEPTUAL MASTER PLAN \IEITS THE
OBJECTIVES OF SECTION I Of THE YEL.\-l 'vfASTER PL\N REVIE~." ORD[\JA:--JCE.
SEC 1 - .l.". Tne conceptual m:lSter pl:lr1 h:lS been prcp:lfCd In accord::...;c: WIth che goals of
che Cm ofY dm s plannmg poliCIes mQ regulatIons Tne C:Cy of l' ~!m wlil :mc~d
chelr comprehenSIve pl:lr1 co Incorpor.ltC the Southwest Ye!m -\rJnc:xatIcn :.rea ::....,d
escbllsh a zonmg map based on the Concepru:ll 'v1:lStcr P!:.n .lS uium:ltc:\
approved b\ rhe Cm ofY dm S Pl:uulIng CommISSIon ~d C:[\' Cuunc:i
'I"EX'Il.lA-L U..n:: 0 RMA- 'Il 0 N
,
l
SEe loB
SEe I-C
SEe i-D
SEC 1 - E.
SEe I-F
SEe I-G
SEe 1 - H.
~
The Conceprual Master Plan Ulcorporates a full r.lr1ge of l<lrld uses: commercIal
(neIghborhood and arrenal), smgle furnily, multI-family (medium to hIgh densm),
and open space (golf courses. sensmve :lI'eas, and buffers) The comprenensl\'e
plan for the Clt\' ofYe!m will be aIl1ended to UlcorpOr.lle the Southwest" Ydm
Anne~tlon are:!. as a result of the Conceptual Master Plan ;lpproval process and
"",il! be the !e:ld document 10 the subsequent (and moce de~lled) master plan
approval process.
The Conceptual Master Plan as submmed allows for preserv:ltIon of cntlcal are:lS
and large blocks of open space combmed WIth planned commuruty concepts that
will enhance the qUalIty ofHfe for the Southwest Yelm A.nnex:lIlOn are:l's fumre
reSIdents.
The conceptual master plan mcorpor.ltes bv reference the tde:miied !mO:lcts md
rruogatIon optIons for necessary tniTasrrucrure and publIC ser'l1ces ldenniie::i tn the
draft and final Southwest Yelm A.nnexaoon EnvIronment.:li Imoac: S t.:lte:ne=:.rs
(Dated December 1992 and March 1993) [Refinement of ~trucrure ~d?
s~n1ce_I:!eeds-\\lU-0CC1:lr-as-the-Masrer-Plan-ap P rovaiJ.i1a 5U bs equentspecu] Cl..
.trrojecrproposals\VlrniIHne annexed ar~:lgo_thioug.;1-the_eit}::....ofY elm re':le'\ md 1
IpJ[bJIc.he:J.nng-process.~
The land use panern Ulclic:lted on the ConcepruJl ~'faster Plan map allows for an
orderly tr...nsmon to and from the vanous smgle fanulv, multI-farrulv, commerc:a.L
and open space areas. NeIghborhood commerCIal SlIed ue sued wuhm the
resldennal commurutIes and arre:1al commerc:al property IS proposed along t.~e Y-
1 comdor separaong the Thurston Highlands AsSOCIates and Venrure P:mne:s
ovmershrp's. PrOVISIOns for pedesrnan and bIcycle access to the commerc:ai
cemers will be made at the orne project specrnc applic:l!lons are processed and
approved. Tne road nemork as proposed (see the concepru.al master plan map)
will allow resIdent, V1sItOr, and semce traffic to utilize several route opoons m
enter and le3.ve the anne:mnon are:l. InduslOn of the Y -1 alIgnment, basIc:t.ih
through the center of the SIte, allows for the incorporatIon of tr.lIlSl! facilmes m
conJuncnon \\1th the menal commerCIal and muln-fanulv poruons of the SHe.
Tne deSIgn,. quaIlrv, and character of the proposed plan mil ma.'<.lffilze the sense or
commUnIty '.'.1.thm the mnexanon are:J.. Cnnd and sensmve :lI'e:lS, WIth
appropnace buffers, will be ma.tn.t:lU1ed as perm:ment open space. ActIve:::r.d
pasSIve recre:ltlonal opporrumnes will be available V1a a proposed park_ prooosed
golf course, and recre:ltlonal trail system. The layout IS deSIgned to alIo\\
resIdents to fulfill theIr basIC recre:mona.l, shopplOg and servIce needs from \\1thm
the commuru!'\ \\1.thout compenng WIth the City ofYelms commerc:Jlcore.
The Conceptual ;Y{aster Plan does not UlcorpOr.lte an\ proposed lOdusrnal uses
The sIte lavout .does, where practIcal and appropnate, prOVIde m1ple tr...nSlUon
benveen slOg!e family, muln-famil\' and commercIa! zones through the use or
open space, lUlruro fe:lrures. buffers and roads.
cEommercIarbuildUigaesl~~ ul cn:if.lCter~mthlfie rielgfio"ochooCiStfie\]
serve. All proposed commercial structures \\ill-meet tile rules, regulations. =.nd
codes applicable bv the my :It the ume of subnu!t:l1.
(J) PROPOSED A~rDlDA TORY LANGUAGE FOR THE--:;'PPLlCABLE SUBAREA PL.-\~
To be supplied b\ Ciev ofYdm staff.
(K) -\NT1CIP ~ TED PHASING OF DEVELOPllytE~T
PhasIng \vl11 ge:1enih be In J.ccord.:mce WIth the tndIc:.ted numb~rs on the
Conce?tUal 'v1:l.Ster Pbn map
2
(L) GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF OPTIONS FOR SOURCE(S) OF WATER SUPPLY
METHOD(S) OF SEVlAGEDISPOSAl, METM:ODS OF STOIZi'v{ WATER CONTROL Al"ID
MEA.l'fS TO HANDLE HAZ.-\RDOUS MA TERlALS AND HAZARDOUS WASTE IF
AP P LI CAB LE.
Tne Southwest Ye!m Annex.:mon are:l will rely on the Crv orYe!rn far wate: ::l.nd
SaIDt:lrV sewer sCr'l1ce. Thurston High1:mds .-\.ssoclates. o\\rne: at 12..10 acres at
the overall annexanon, has appl1ed to the Washmgron State De;:;arrme:::r of
Ecology for perrrussIon (0 dnil two test weils for (muruclpal) pOODle consumpnon
....> and one teSI: well for Imganon purposes Warer ngnrs for 4,000 gallcr.5 pe:
rmnme (domesnc.'muruclpal) wl11 be applIed for sUDseque:H to sansi::lc:orv testlng
of the two test weils. The weils would be turned ove: 10 t..l-te Cit\ oiY;e1m and.
\l,lth addmonai smrage, plpe :md appurtena.!1CeS, corUle:::e:i to the eXIs::r.g elr',
system.
The Cry orYe!m IS curre:1.dy pursumg gr:mr mone', from vane us gove:T'.me:1t
agenc:es to smd, pian, deSlg:I1. :md uiumareb, bUlid:l water re:.:.se fuc:l:t\. Tms
would reqUIre :m upgrade of the eXIStIng sewage tre:lllnen.t piam to sansi\ :l
standard for "class A re::!auned wacer" Th.ts redauned warer would ilien oe
utiltzed for Imganon or golf COUr3es, parks, and open space wltiun the c:rv's
Ide::mned Urban Growth Boundarv Tnursron Highlands Assocmres and Venture
, Parmers. who own 1,240 acres and 264 acres respecnve:v )\1Uun the :mne."t:l!1Oo.,
have an agreement ),i1th the CIrv to parnclpate In and fund the:r furr share or dle
casIS and lIl1provemenrs asSOCIated w1th theIr Iffipac:s. The e:asnng sewage
tre:l!ment planr will be requIred to add to It's current tre:lanent CDac:ry III order to
serve the :mne.unon are:l.. Tne facihrv \\oil! the:e:::or be lllc~mg Its c:::paCltV :md
level of treannent at the same nrne.
Infrasuucrure for the coral "wasre.warer reuse" proJe::: )\1illllciude a S 1.E.P
System., graV1rv and pressure Imes, iIft sunons to pump effiuent md tre::u:ed ware:.
STorage faclimes, tre:mnent plant upgnde. along \'l"th Imganon fadlr:.es.
Storm wate: \\ill be coilected and tre:J.ted on a proJec: or phase basIS V,ml1lIl dle
Master Plan arc.. F "-ciimes \\oill be constructed per Crr.... oiYelm sr.w-:dard.s to
prOVIde adequare tre::mnent and storage. wuh d.1sc~:t.rge eIther VIa rn:filtr.:mon. pomr
or spre:uier to mamt:lUl J. balanced aqUlfer, as weil as stre:4"I1 ;md we:.lznd flows
Specl1J.c deSIgns will Incorporate eroslOn control me:lSures, blO-filt:r::lCon sw:ties
and metered flows to "-pproXlffiate pre-deveiopment c::mdinons :lS appropnace.
While the Conce;Jtuai Master Plan does not mcorporate lIght or he,,;.- mdusmai
use zones, haz:l.rdous matenais md/or waste conr::wunem pi:ms ma :...dmes
would be deSIgned as necessarv on a project basIS. If the need 1S Iden.t.lne::i
conrammem ponds, berms and m effecnve response plan wouid be re::lUlre:1.
...
(M) IDDiTIFY POT2'ITL~L 'rL-VOR A.NTICIP<\TED ADVERSE ~V1RONME:-iT -\L [~IP-\CTS
AND G2IER..-\L vllTIGAmG MEASURES. fNCLUDrNG OFF-Srrc: IMPROVE:.ID"iS
\VtllCH vIA Y BE INCORPORATED fN A StJBSEQUENT \1ASTER PLA~ BY
SCB~HTITNG .\N ~V1RON~1E:-lTAL CHECKLIST AS REQL1RED BY \\ A.C 19i-i l-: t5
An E:1vlrorune~ol ChecklIst mil be submmed WIth thIS :lpphc:.uon. The C::::~~lI~:
mil :lddress Items th<lc have been C~J1lged as <l result or candmcns .:::n::1mst.:.nc:s
or through rJ:e IIltroduc:Ion or new lnIorm<ltlOn SInC~ t..1e soutb\cst Y:=:m
.1.nne:-::mon E:1\,'IrOnmenol [mpa~t SC:lcemcnc (F:n:ll~'''t:J.rch 1993) was iSSUcC.
~
~
11
II
' "
-
i1
in 1
~
2
11
'I 3
1 4
] 5
1
6
j
7
-:l
1 8
t
9
,'i" ,
,,2, '~~"1:" i
fvfailing L1St
EXHIBI"T- 'A'
Final Annexahon Petihon
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
1
11
Burlmgton Or+.hem, Inc.
PropertY Semce De?t.
Honeywell Cente:, #290
304 Inverness Wav S
E..'1glewood, CO 80n2
Attn. Ray Durbala
J effrev Price
128 SvV Longrmre St.
Yelm, W A 98597
Ronald Laughlin
15132 Longrrure St. SE
Yelm, W A 98597
Ele..'1e M. Newby
15105 Longmire St SE
Yelm, W A 98597
Washmgton Public Lands
Pubhc Lands Building
Olympia, W A 98504
Charles Brown (14 pc)
POBox Q
Yelm, W A 98597
John Purvis
14504 Berry Valley Rd. SE
Yelm, W A 98597
Jerry Bosequett
14409 Hwy 507
Yelm, W A 98597
David Doyle
14045 George Rd.
Yelm, W A 98597
J Paul Steadman
1801 W Day Island Blvd,
Tacoma, W A 98466
10
Thurston Highland Assoc. (5 pc)
1917 First Avenue
Seattle, W A 98101
12
Roy Gibson
14940 Berry Valley Rd. SE
Yelm, W A 98597
Robert Overton
14636 Berry Valle'! Rd. SE
Yelm, W A 98597
iYlilton Butle:
14630 Berry Valley Rd. SE
Yelm, W A 98597
He..T'lIY Dragt
14848 Longnure St. SE
Yelm, W A 98597
William Parke:
14947 Longmire St. SE
Yelm. W A 98597
Marvin Wagner
15234 Longmire St. SE
Yelm, W A 98597
Es ta te Realty
c/o Jon Stephense..'1
POBox 718
Yelm. W A 98597
Roger McKibben
15219 Berry Valle'! Rd. SE
Yelm, W A 98597
20 Everett and Mollie Hendrickson
10535 Berry Valley Rd. SE
Yelm, W A 98597
21 Donohue Construction
730 Sleate!-Kinney Rd. SE
Lacey, W A ~98503
21 Jesse HotI.w.lan
9910 Durant St. SE
Yelm, W A 98597
'?'"' Marv LOUIse Clemens
-~
15030 Longmrre St. SE
Yelm, W A 98597
24 Ronald Rothwell
15050 Longnure S t. SE
Yelm, W A 98597
25 DavId Baker
14549 Berry Valley Rd. SE
Yelm, W A 98597
26 Dan Schaefer
14538 Berry Valley Rd. SE
Yelm, W A 98597
'?- John Harmon
_/
14610 Berry Valley Rd. SE
Yelm, W A 98597
28 John She!fey
Box 774
Yelm, W A 98597
29 Barbara Soeteber
14505 Berry Valley Rd. SE
Yelm, W A 98597
30 LIla Willuweit
14812 Berry Valley Rd. 5E
Yelm. W A 98597
31 Tneodore Fontd
14:502 Berrr Valley Rd. SE
Yelm, W A 98597
~'?
-J_
33
....J.
.;)-
~~
.;)::J
36
37
2
EXHI81T 'A"
Ernest Burnell
14507 Berry Valley Rd. S1::
Yelm, W A 98597
Neal Soetebe!
14503 Berry Valley Rd. S1::
Yelm. WA 98597
Mark Soeteber
14503 Berry Vallev Rd. 51::
Yelm, W_~ 98597
Elame Eorsak
HS-!8 Be!7}' Valley Rd. S1::
Yelm, WA 98597
Oarlene and Virg'J Baker
14501 Berry Vallev Rd. 51::
Yelm, WA 98597
David PurvIS
1 ,~:.~ .~ Be!7Y Vallev Rd. 51::
Yelm. W A 98597
:/1, / -; /"~ ,,;,
;;z_--,----pu-----,---d" " ,if 'C. ' ~: '., :--
\ I'I ::- / ~9.-"'-~t~';:-T\\\\--'-i;"(<::!---'-:'-~ W:----.:-~----\-----;--..--\
i' ' ,\ lr: ,. t q~; J;.\., ~,,/I~ .,. '" t ~ \ .
~\\ : : ~? '1":'\ ; \\~' <-:";~. , 1;::;:\,', ..,.'; - ".. , ~
o :j<:l ~ ~:(j)~ \i~'-il' I - -,lL '- - \ ~'~G
0" _ z. 0 ~ ;" \\'11 ",,!,,,,' \ M " ': \ ~ ".
-----,' /if' '- ':0:> q ; '" I'" \ ~ " t ' "-
\ \ ~ ~. ~ : r I \ - -i:\ - -\ \ ~ I ~
~ \' l: ~ "In . __ t \, ~ =~" ~f :j:\ ~ ~ \~'~ j- '" I '
",!iII 7/ " \ ," - l'; · .' - · .. ,- I
>;.~ " ' . ~, _ _,,, 11 ' r'~^,-:'--- 1
~ J..-4 ~\ : > \ '" ! j \, t. ' \ ~ ';' 1\ c ~
- ~_--'- - "j - - 1.1 'I ..,..
\- -,,- -~' --------- - = .-
i1 '~/I . I f, \."~. 'I' u " -----------~------ -'
, ~'. \_ ~ ' ,'j \ :tT~\ Ill' ..-- ...' .-'--- \ \ .'\ .
, .~ - ,~' , I
"Ii ., ~ - ,
~~<;;i 1 ~ ~' ~ ~;. \ ~ : ~ \' .
'iII/' \ I - -
'M%'! l' -~ <-,. \
n.'< : '" _ Ij '" F -
~\ ~ "'. \ "'- \ 16',L,d - '-"\ ~ \ --;-; ;---- 1\~ ---------.-~--.---~'
~ 4 ~ ~ I \'f)1."~ '~\ ::: · ' '
~' '\. -L _... ~ ~, \ - \ - l . I - \ ' \
---,I ___----.-..--.---l>" ___ __ ' '0
l · -~,' --------------------;------------------- ,~
! ~. ~ J~~~~ ~;; \ a ~, ~
\1 _' \'~ ,1~ \
,I ' ' ,\
'-:~ . \- ~ \ I - -
~ _ ~ ~_ . ",.' . ' r-l' ',- ~
. "' ,_ _.I.....-.~-f N ~ /: ",\ ,
-1\; '" \ ~\~,;...,.-: M . ; l,
. ,-,<.,., ,,,. <",' - " \ ~
~ \ \l-<:'^' \
., --
---
" .,,\ , '" _ _' v \
.-:; ;.-
\ '^' /': <;;"
!.
::'__ \ ______ _______~J~;j-=--=------L~~-~.--~ \ , \----
_ \ ~ ~.,-~~-' :;;._==----=-- J:
\: .:" __.' ~ 0..--- '_ N-
o .' I : ,----------
h :\' I : \
", .,_ 1 '" I ' '
"::'r.:-~ '. '\ \ <<, ~ ~, \'uso,
\ \ 0 j ./ ,\
~~f:\-----~--'\~--,\---\--~-----------~----------~
-:,;t~i l I \ II ' ·
- :\. X ""k _-~~' \ \ ';'
'-
--- --r
MA,{-i9-94 THU 08:01
2:72 31.. ~OOOO
21. i zabe th .trl,,~:lt;=
20 30x 1406
Yelm, WA 98597
42172 3.; 20000
Thurston Highlancs Assoc
1917 1st 'P--ve
Seattle, WA 98101
!'
.'
7 2172 41 30400
E~::1est.i!!.e Gray
1007 W Yelm Ave
Yelr:1, Wll. 9 AS; 7
\0
2172 41 30800
2-
2172 31 30000
Thur~ton Highlar-d A~Eu~
191.7 1st Ave
Seattle, WA 98101
S
2172 41 30300
Steve Rothwell
1a1~ W Yelm Ave
Yelm, ~..lA 98597
8 2172 41 30500
11 D 2d.....ards
920 3 Bay Dr NE ~3d30~
Olympi~, WA 90~OG
Pr.:J.~ia:z: Li'am:..J." !,L(l Ptnrshp
PO So x 18 () 9 --
Yelm \-lA 98597
II
2172 4: 31.000
J Cu.'11e ~ ~am.i r t; z
fO Box 936
Yelm, WA 98597
13
2172 42 10500
S~heol Distric~ ~2
PO Sox 47t=i
Y.:!l.:n, WA 98597
rtC
2172 42 20200
Recer':: Yodc~
?O 30x 38
Yelm, WA 98597
11
21.72 42 30102
Dav:d Baker
14544 Berry Valley Rd
Yelrr'., r,'lA' 98597
~..,
;,..-
2172 42 30200
8ar~ara Soeteber
14505 Be=~i Valley ~d SE
'felm, WA 98597
1.5
2172 ~2 30700
Sr::'E:l:Jt: Bunnell
14507 Berry Valley
'(elm, ~'lA 98597
ZS
2172 4:! .;0:00
!II','" i':,II'jI.'tL
L494J ~e=~! Vall~y
[ C 1:'" . \'1.'\. 0 C S C) j
r. H ( 13 ''3 <1 :: 8::
I 14
2172 42 1.0600
.s.aymond Ross
710 'lelm Avo:;
Yelm WA 98597
17
2172 42 30~OO
DC:. 'J 1. d Purvi s
14444 Ber~f Valley Road
5'2:
Yelm, WA 98597
~ 2172 ~2 30103
John Rar:non
SE 14610 Eerrj Valley Rd SE
Yelm, WA 98597
2.3
2172 42 .1 ('l'inn
Theodore ::oreid
14502 Berry Valley Rd
Yelm WA 98597
z"-
2172 42 30aaO
Neal Soeceber
Rd SE 14507 Berry Valley Rd S'C
Yel::1, ilA 98597
-2.1
211'2 42 40201
!;.obe ~": OV~l.'~uLl
Rd $2 ~402~ ~er~l Va~ley Rd Sc
':.-::lLll, ....;., ~l;I::l:l /
EXHIBIT 'B'
P. 02JiJ8
3
2172 31 4a~o~
~(J~ln h-urtji r;
14504 Berry Valley Rd SE
'{elm, HA 98597
(0
2172 41 30302
Jarr.es Davis J-:::.
1502 W Yelm Ave
Yelm, WA. 98597
u, "
rr_....
CJ 21.72 4: 30700
- --
:,.eea .:.r:'~41ons
55.09 4 ith Ave E
T""-'-:.JllIa W.:l.. 984~~
J2
2172 42 1040:
John 3ich.!.ez:-
PO Sex 1.45
Yel:;1., WA 98597
/S"
2:72 42 20000
Ca.::::-2- Scrsa:-c
1.~=";'8 -='t:.!.or::y Val:ey xC :::i::.
Yel::t, l?lA 98597
10...,..,..,') ;1" ~0~01
_~ 1 _ .... .,:; _ _
JO!'Jl &. Tammy Ccok Jr
14538 Berry valley Rd SC:
Yelm, HA 98597
;::1
21.72 42 3010'i
3a=bar;;. Sher:sy
90 Bo:<: 774.
Yelffi, WA 98397
'24-
.7.177. '1 30601.
Vi==-i.l 8aY:3::'
1~5a1. 3er.i Valley Rc S~
Y~l:n, 'r'iA 98597
~
!:27
2172 42 30900
Har'-( Soe~~~er
:1503 ;~~r: Vall~y ~d s:
Yel~, ~']A 98597
......
20
2'-""
_1_
42 -10202
t-1:.1c~:: ~uc:':::!:"
14630 8~==~ Va:l~'
. .
Ye.!..~, ~';i\ 98307
Rc. 5':::
P':;Ii~ ':0:
,11AY- t 9-94 TEU 09: 02
31
2172 42 40400
Lila Hilluweit:
14812 8errf Valley Rd S2
Yal::t r 'IlA 9 as 97
24-
2~72 44 ~0900
1vf2~"in Waaner
15234 Lon~ire St 5E
v 1 r-A -98507'
..e....m, N J ..
'31
2172 44 20200
Sancra Niccoli
c/o Mollie Ee~dric~son
?O Box 434
Yel:n, 'NA 98597
40
2172 44 20502
Ma~/ Louise Clemens
15030 Longmire St SZ
Yelm, WA 98597
43
2172 014 20800
Rcnalc. Laughlin
15132 Longmire St SE
Yel:n, TtlA 98597
40
217& ~4 40200
Char 1 e s Ero\'ffi
l?O 3cx Q
Yelmr WA 98597
4'1
2172 51 20200
Sherill Mac~aughton
15009 Stace Route 507 S2
Yel.rn, WA 98597
5'2.
2172 61 00000
Marian McKenzie
1441Q George Rd
Y'elmr ~ 98S97
r'1A'r t.3 · 94
9 03
'~' ;~;l
32-
2172 43 20000
Henry Dragt
14848 Longmire St: S3
Yelm, WA 913597
35
2172 44 20101
Estate Realty Inc
?O Box i18
1el!I1r WA 98597
38
2172 44 20300
Donohue Cocstructicn Co
i30 Sleater Kinney Rd Sc
Lacey, WA 98S03
41
2172 44 20503
Ronald Rethi'lell
15050 Longmire S~ sz
1e1m, WA 98597
44
2172 44 30100
Elene Newby
1510S Longmire St SE
Yelm, WA 98597
47
2172 51 11300
M=~k & Linda Carpenter
PO Box 171
Mck=rma, WA 98558
G'D
2172 52 2010l
Robert Eggert
14646 G€orge Rd
Yelm, WA 98597
53
2172 31 10300
William Hagara
14447 93rd Ave SE
Yelm WA 98597
.#"
EXHIBIT 'S'
P 03106 .
33
2172 43 40000
Willie-In Parker
].4947 Lor:sni=e SC SE
Yelm, ';.J';:" 98597
-sC:,
2~72 4", 20103
Reger ~,rcKibbi:l
PO =cx 131i
Ye l:n , ~'lA 9 8 =: 9 7
;q
2172 44 20501
Jesse S-===:na~ ur
9910 Durant Sc S~
~~l=-:1,
......
...~
ca:::::'""7
_ 'o,J<oJ -' J
4';..
2~72 4.~ 20700
Jeffrey ?r:.ce
15122 LQn~re St
1e1m, WA 9RS97
S=:
45
2172 44 ::0400
Was~-~'~l~~ La==s
PO 2cx 47014
Olympia, ~A 98504
4g
2172 51 1130:
Stea~~an Li~tec
1801 W Say Island
Tac=ma, ~A 98~66
-==..,....,... ~ Q."'"
---.....~._-
:=: ~...d
51
2~72 52 20200
Sara Molyneaux
14530 George Rc
'!e1:n, WA 98S:?!
? H"::
-,,-
..; ~ 4
I
MAY-l9-94 THU 16:43
~
2172 31 10000
Elizabeth Hunter
PO Box 1406
Y~lm, TNA 98597
2172 31 20100 4
Gerald Dallas
14119 93rd Ave, S2
Yelm, WA 98597
'1
2172 31 20500
T:!:'acey Ccope:::
PO Box 792
Rainie~, WA 98576
\0
2172 31 20701
Davie P:::-osser
1~207 93rd Ave SE
Yelm, WA 98597
2172 32 10301 11
Ma !:'c....:.~ McNew
PO Box 135
Grah~u, WA 98338
1(,-"
2172 32 10'100
~4rga:::-eC ~arki~son
13945 93rd Ave $2
Yelm, WA 98597
l4
2172 32 10403
Milvan Amidon
13937 93rd Ave SB
Yelr:l, WA 98597
2172 32 10700 ~2
Jan~t Wilson
16507 74t.h Ave. E
Puya11up, WA 98373
~$'
2172 32 40100
Ronino Fo!:'tuno
52~2 Filbert Ln SW
T3coma, WA. 98499
Zo
2172 61 COOOO
Marian Mc.Kenzie
1~410 GccrS"e Rd
Yo:l:n, 'IlA 98537
r~~( 13 '3<1 16.43
2.
2~72 3J. 10200
Lisa Endert
14305 93rd Ave S8
Yelm, WA 98597
~
2172 31 20300
B~rbara Allen
14127 93rd Ave SE
Yel.ll1, WA 98597
2172 31 20600
Teresa Faulkner
14131 93rd Ave S8
Yelrn, WA 98597
5
EXHIBIT 'S'
P.02l04
\l
2172 31 30000
Thurston Higbl~~d AEsoc
1917 1st Ave
Seattle, WA 98101
l~
2172 32 10302
Ja:nes hunter
13913 93rd Ave SE
Yelm, WA 98597
Ii
21.72 32 10401
Ha.rvin Lucas
13943 93rd Ave S8
"!elm, WA 98597
1-0
2172 32 10500
Kevi:l Wilson
13811 93rd Ave SE
Yelm, WA 98597
2172 32 10800
Sylvia Shaw
PO Box 296
Yelm, WA 9S597
'23
:3
21.72 31 20000
Fawntella Ra~hbcne
1412~ 93rd Ave SE
Yelm, i'lA 98597
2172 31 20400 ~
Jee Huddlest::)n
14129 93~~ Ave S~
Yelm, WA 98597
q
2172 31 20601
James & Vivian ~adac~
:;0 Eox 381
Tainier, WA 98576
lz..
2172 32 10200
Charles Pc;.;e:!.:!.
PO BOA 551
Yel:a, ~ilA 98597
2172 32 10303
lS"
2172 32 40200
Kerri Lidster
PO 30x 1821
Yelm, WA 98597
2&
~ha=d SaS'en
13919 93rd Ave SE
Ye2.m, WA 96597
2172 32 10402
I~
1.1
2172 62 00000
Tr.~=ston Highlar~s Assoc
19'1.7 1st. Ave
Se~t~le, WA 98101
Melanie Crace
13941 93rd Ave SE
Yelm, WA 98597
2172 32 10600
Rcbere Slyce=
13815 93rd Ave
Yelm, WA 98597
'2(
C:'"
_.s::.
-z.lf
2172 32 ~OOOO
T::C::i3.S S rcc..?hl
Est: :sire
1609 Di~~ond Lcc9 S2
Lacey, WA 98=03
'1-1
2:72 32 40300
S:can 3::)c!:':..c'<
C:c.::.:..=_=- I::r: ;:s
2601 ~ Alee:: S::
Tac~m31 W~ :3407
?- 3E 2~j:
~j.. -
KAY-19-94 THU 16:43
-
~
-~ ;,';,J' ~
-- ~. -- ~.---------------
EXHIBIT 'S' P.03/C4
r. ~'~.,
0-;-:
<!
~
~ -I-
I
__...,_.:::..k-....~~._- .=-
~-' -.' . ( - .., .-.. ....,~;:).~.
..- I
I
!
I
I
!
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
I
\
(
I
I
I
!
r
I
I
I
_________ I
------T----------
!
I
I
\
\-:::
I
\
I
I
I
_____ I
----
I ------
I
I
I
,
~ I
~ I
I
[___._:......'" I I
~....,- ......~~~::J..- .--
',.t $.. ~ & - I( ~ - - -. . -.- - - . ;-::-.-.~-:.-;"-.L...-- ::-~::.l..-~~=.,...--:...-=.----- -
..... .. 1 ~ ' - r--~
........ ;. I I
r~..,-~::.'7.,_.l 1----\j, ~~ ,---- ---It\ -------~---
......,.. .J~{'l'" I
....... ....., I
a ..\..,..... ..'7.......\ ;
,- -
---
6
o
!@
@ !
10 I
I
~ol
1-
~
\1
J
~
~
..
..
~ ~
~ .:
t" ~
-- ~
~
I"'A,' 19 '94 L6:4':'
\D
-
\
r
\
(\.I'
N
"2
C
~
\j
'....
Vi
......-
-',.j-
..
...~ ~
8 =
"-'0. \'~. ......."".-..? - ~~... .~--:: t- ...:--=-=~:==_..
_, tt'-:: - =
:
;:
% ~
~\(\
:
-
-
@J-
o
~ r
./-.
~
..-.~
~
~
\r.
~
1
~
I
:
---
-
~
J;
? ":'l~::
EXrHerr 'e"
?G4/G~
, \1PN-'t9-94 lHU \8:44
l(\
~
;t"'f'l
~~- --- ----- -. -- \ --
_.T~ ~ -- ---- -----. .-
~\ M I
~\ _,. I
. ....--A";.-. I
, ...- ...
I
.
, \ ' \ < \
1 J. \
\ ~~ II \
~ ~\ uj
I I \ s 11-;
\ ' . - \'
: \' 'I
\ . t ~
\ - - - - - - - - - -' - - - ~ . \ ~
, -----------------~------------'
I ~ '
\ \ \
I t \
\ ~ \ \
\ ~ ~ \
'\ ~ \
~ \
I I \
\ : \
~ \
. \
t--------
,
\
,
\
I
\
\
0" \ --~""~~/
t I
--->------------
~
~\
I
\
I
I
I
\
\
\
I
I
-t"
I
I
I
\
I
I
~~y tS 'S4 16'44
'"Z.
o
t
\U
\!\
/'
\
\
\
\
t
1-
\
\
\
\
p~G2. ~O~
Si." y:::.-~ ANNC:::C.:,,-r:CN
EXHIBIT 'C'
FeR r.~?~~OM HIGnL~~D ASSaC~\T~S
Dece=ber 10, 1990
s~c=~o~ 27 rouns~i? t7 No~~~. Rang~ 1 ~~s~
All of 5ec:ion 27
Sec~:.or. 25 !ovnsh!.? 17 Nor:::: ?an;e 1 E305:::
~cs::: h3ol= of Sec:ion 26
i
1
,.'
St!c:::":j~ 23 ~o~~sh_;: 17 ~ror-:::. ?...ar:ge
So~~~ ~at; of Scc=_=n 2; a~c
Sec:_on 23,
1 Eas:::
~~e Scc=~ ~a~~ of
-'-"
1-...._
~o=~~eas~ q~=~2=
Sec:i.:::- 26.. 7c'..;r.sh_? 17 ~ot'~":, ?a~fe 1 E3os:::
~~e So~:~~es~ qua=~=r 0: Scc=:..on 2~.
~~= Sa~:~ ~~l= of =~e No=~~~es~ qL4=~~~ oc Sac~~o~ 2~
1
1
T:~e Sou:~~es::: quar:::ar at :~e Sou:::~eas::: quar:::ar of Sec:_or. 24
~ne Sou~":eas::: quar:::ar at ~":e Sou:::::eas::: cuar:::ar of Sec:ion 14, ~C::~
t:::at: ?3.r::: being N'or::::eas: of c:...":e Nor~":a.as::: J.i.::e of :-!OS=''1. S=::aec S E.,
1
1
r~e Nor~": half of ~":e Sou~":east: qua=:::ar of Sec:::~on 24 lyi::g ~es::: and
Sou:::::~es::: of c:...":e foLlowi::; ~esc=~=ed line
1
.3 EG::ZiNI~rG at: ~~e i:lC:a!'sec ::.on of t....~e Sout:::. l_=e 0 t saic ~or-=.~ ::'0.1': cL-,..:
:::~e Nor~":eas::: 1i::e of :-!os~an Sc::ae::: Sou:::::eas:::,
T:.-:=::.rcz ~ror-:::'''..lesC'..:ar::.17 alan; said Mor~~eas:: l_:;.e of said ~osca'C 5.:=~~c
So~c~eas::: and ~~e ~or~":~cs~~a=~17 proLonga:::~on of saLe Nor~eas= l-::e :~
i~s i:::::a=secc~on ~ic~ ~":e ~or~~~es::: 1i::e of Longoi=~ S~::ae::: Sou~~eas:::>
T:~~ICZ Sou~~~es~ar~17 aLong said Mor~~~es::: li~e :::0 a ?oi::: ~n~=~ ~=e
foilo~i~5 ~escribee 20i~::: Me. bears Nor~~ 53" 30' 30. ~es:::,
1
1
]
.aEG:NNI~IG at: a point: l'Jhic~ is t:~e inc:~rsec::':Jn of Sou=-~2:!.7 l_::.e of ~:!.b.
Aver:ue ar::i ~':e N'or::::.~es::: bour.d.a.=-J of Sol.::er;" s 1s::: J.e::.i::::'on Co ":al.:'
T:-i~rcz ~lor,,:::...es::: al.ong ~~e Sou:::::.er!.y li::e of YeL:1 Avenue e::t::ancie-i g75
fee ':
J
1:-:~cz SOUl::: 3i. 56 Iles: 6Zr.:l 00 fee::: :::0 ~~e POL.'IT OF 5E:G::rn-ctG.
1:.~Cw conc~~ui::g Sou:: 37. 56' wes:: 76.5 feet:;
T:-i2rC~ ~ort:..'1 53. 30' 30. ~es:: 50 feel:.
T:-:z::rcz SQUQ. Ji. 50' \lese 4.15 fee!: co :oi::: MC-,
I
T:-:2TCZ ~ror:::: 53. 30' 30. t;es::: co Point: .C.,
T:-i~rCZ Nor:::: Jr 56' Ea5: Co :::::e E~s::: l!.::e of c:...":e N'or:::::~es~ qua=:::a= of
t:~e Sou::::.easc quar:er of aforemenc_oned Sec:ion 24 ~"d ~':e :::e~~us of
here::':: c:esc=ibed li::e
l
T:~at: por=~on of Be~l Valley Road i:: c::e SQuc:...":~esc qua==e= of ~":e
&or-:::::ea.s:: quar::er of Sec:ion 2'"
r
1
Sec::~on 19. !o'-mshi? 17 eror~~. ?ange 2 E.;.st:
T:~e Souc~~es::: quar::~r at ~":e Sou~~~es::: quar::er of Secc:on 19, ~C::~
:::~al: par': being Sou:::..':eas::: of :::::.e Nor~~,..es::: line at :::e :I..:1i.~ier-':a~
Hi~h~av ~nd ALSO ~~CZ?: :~ac par": bei~g ~or::~eas::: of ~~e ~or~,,:e4S::: l_=~
of ~osrnan SC=~ec S E. ane ~::~ di=ecc ?roLon;at:~on Sou~~ea~~~ar~~7 :0 ~e
~or':::~es': li:1e of Rainier Ye~ Hi;n~ay
i
Tha.: ?or-=:.:m of ~iE ?.oa~ b Sec::::.on 19. 7ovnshi? _, :ro:--;'~. Ra.-::~:! :
Eas::, ~ ~ , lying Sou:::~ a: ~ainier"1el~ Hi;h~ay
.
i
A por:::..on of ~":e Souc:...~e3s: quar:::a= Ot Sec::~on 25. 7.:1wr.sh_= 17 ~ror:''':, :..;r.~e :
Eas::, ''; ~ , descr:.:-ed as to llo'..s
i
3E.::::r~n:rc at: c.":e SQu::~',,:o!s: c=t"":1er at sa.id suodi-:",-~:"n,
3637 n7
1 _
EXHIBIT · C'
'I':.-::::XC::: Nor":~ 39. 10' l:..7" E:.=.S": a,1..cr:; ene Souc::. !..1..::e c::.e!':of, 720 5"7 =aec:,
T:.:::~C::: Nor~:: 23. 42' 32'" ~asc, 2,038 89 tee=:.
L.-::::)i"C::: Nor":~ 73. Sj' lL." ~ese, 999 71 f:ec,
T:.-:::::TC::: Nor-:::.....escarly 953 f:ec:, :nore or less, C:J C::e Nor-:::....esc cor::ez: of
c~e Nore::.wesc one-quarea!' of c::e Soue~easc one-q~ar":er of saie See::~cn
70::
--,
"
S~uc:: 00. 55'
01'" E:asc,
2.,536
:aec
co
~::e
=aI~ c:-
3EG~Rrr~;G
T:-:=::rc~
L~a~ ?a=~ of c~e Sou=~eas~ qua=~~= of S~c=~on 25,
::asc r,.; ~ , desc:::~bec. as :::11:'0'...s
Tc~~s~i? 17 ~or~~,
~ -~-o ,
"'~"'..:,- ....
3=::::m::,G at: a poL:::: on ::::e Sou::::' li::e of said See:::..:::n 25, No:--::: 39" lO'
L..7~" :::~S::, 7:0 57 fa~c f:::r:. t:::e SOt..:..=::1';J'eS~ cor-::.e= of sa.ic Sc-...:.::::e.a.s=
q__a=::a=,
T::=::.rcz Nor::~ 2g~ ~2' 32..... Easr::, 2,038 89 fa~c,
T?2:TC::: Souc:: 49" OL.' 03'" Ease, l,lL.d 33 f:ec co c::e wesca!'ly ::.ar;~::. of
e::.e ourli..=gcon Nore::er:: Inc , Railway,
T::~TCE Sou=~ 3S~ 6.4' 02'" west: a.long said rail=oac. =:..~hc.of"...a:.;, 1,255 52
fee c: Co t:..~e Souc::. li:le of said Scc::ion 16,
L.-::::NC::: Souc~ 89" 10' 47M ~es~ al.ong said Sou~:;. li::e 1, llJ 23 faet: C::l C::e
POI~r: OF EEGL.'1NING
~.ae: pa~e of c~e ~or~~ hal= of t:..~e Nor~easc quar~ar of Sec::~on 2S, rOw~~~?
17 Nor~~, Rang'3 lEase, q:! , desc~:..:::ed. as ':0110",5'
BEGI~ING a.e a poine on c~e Nor~~ line of said
d.~st:anc~ of 213 faec ~or-:..~ 89. L.5~ L.O"" East: of
L-':~'TC::: Souc:::. 00" 25' 05'" Eas~ 582.10 faet:;
~:-~~lC::: Sou~~ 81" 46' Ease, 773 07 faec, ~ora
Nor~~~esce!'17 r~ghe-of-~a,y of C:::e Burllngc::ln
T?!JE POI~ OF BEGL'1N~~G of t:..~is desc=i~c:..on,
T:~~~C::: Nor-:..~east:a~17 along said railroad ri~ht:'of-way :0 a poi:lc on said
ri~hc-of-~ay which is 150 faee: Sou~~wesear17 of t:..~e incarsec:ion of said
rignc:-of.~ay T..rit:..":. t~e Nor~::' liZle or said Nor-::::.ease quar~a=;
T:~:::NC::: ~~iZlg ~or-:..~wesearly at: right: angles co said railroad ri;hc-of-
'ilay, 122.31 feet, ~ore or less I co c:..l;.e Norc..":. liZle of said ~or=easC
quar~ar;
T:~~TCE Sout:..":. 89" L.5' 40" west: along said
or less, co a. paine on t..":.e Narc..":. line of
nor~~ 89" 4.S~ OS.... East, 277 fe.et:;
T:-.:2rc::: r";est:arly parallel '..ric::. t:..":.e Norc-I;. line of said Nor-:.::.ease qu.a.=t:~r,
213 ]7 feet:,
T"c2TC::: Souc:~ 00" 25' OS'" Ease co a. pobe '.ol'hich i.s N'ort:~ 31. 46' wes~
from c~e TRUE ?OI~IT OF BEG~~ING,
:~2:IC::: Souc~ 81" 46' Ease, 6aO fee!:, ~ore or less, co ce ~.U::: ?CI~r: OF
BEGI:;TNI~jG
Nor~~easc qua=~a= a
ics Nor~west: co~er.
or less, to t..~e
Norc..~e~ ?~~l=oae,
ar:c.
~~e
N'or-=::. li::.e 1,113 77 feec:, =or:
said Norc..~eas~ quar~:r ~hicn is
,.,
All si~~ca i~ ~~ur~t:on C~u=~!, ~asn~~geon.
??OJZC':"
Dece::i:: e r
y:::~~ P!--\.."lliEJ CG~~'"NI:-: 0 E'"'iE:.a p~~rr
10, 1990
3637 07
Ii
......
,I' .
.::;: IIn _,'"
'-..' ,,' ... I'\.
,t
'''/ 84.40.045/RCW 84.40.040
EXHIBIT 'C'
I 2SSC?5sed value 15 100"'.:, of true and fair value.
OA TE MAILE0-u 7/ .3v / ~ J
~ TAX YEAR 1. ':;~
LAND VALUE
BUILDINGS ETe VALUE
REAL P::\ClPc;TY
'IIOUS True & FaIr Value
.J t.l:,: 1. feGC
:-'c .,I.;4lt..:... ire"
., True & Fair Value
7~,.::::t.
'fIOUS Current Use Value
PA;:;CE:.....21 i2J~2__ J_
./ C;.Jrrent Use Vaiue
APCCAISE.=. _ i
C~(CL=.. : j _ ::
:; ';ODRESS OR
:3CR1PTION 2..1- _ ;' -:..::
.,
"'(..
s::
2.....7.:3~2
~172~::~'':C;;g .
. '1::"-:11.'
Il.'::l ~. Ihl'l~h'I"'11
011 . ~::.::'ln=UI"
11 "'JII,;"l :t...'
tfi:
-,V 84.40.045/RCW 84.40.040
'9 assessed value IS 1 OO"~ of true and fair value.
OA TE MAILE)- ; 7 / '3... / ; j
:: R TAX YEAR 1; -; "1'
L~NO VALUE
BUILDINGS. ETC. VALUE
ri.=.....L ?qC?~RT'(
9'/IQUS True & Fair Value
....04 ~ ~.".
Q.-,.....\,. '..J
C oj R ~ I;: ti T I..i S C
f\ c: oj ;. L .; J-O T r G~.
'i True & Fair Value,
.; 0 , l'J tJ
'a'lIous Current Use Value
,"V Current Use Value
3,17:.;
PARCE:... 21 72 J 1..3': -: .J ..
4 -,...
- ,.,..:: -
APCRAISE;:;. :.. 7
C'(C~E .. :5 .. .::
,TcAOORESSOR L.,.S:3 .::ki\'f IJ':'LL~Y i'.u SE:
~3CRIPT10N ~.3-1.7-1.= s,,~ Ni::..,. eX N 2JF CC RC
Y =!...I\1
-;F.5';7
21i'ZJd
21723UJ::':C
i r1URS Tl..:; H rGriL)':.~ ...oS :ice
L'1L7 Fi:K~T ;l.\J:.
SEATTLE ".... ~81_L
PLEASE SEE REVE.qSE s,'DE FOR IMPORT ANT FlUNG DA TE AND SPECIAL TAX RE!..JE? PRCGfiA,\1S
j. ' 1 :::~. It M.::a II 6
'I' .' ;:"'-:'11"
'Io'l =:"'JII:1 ~1.. _."" I .1
, .1:. :f:",l,r,':::t "..l1n-n-=-.
:Ill. :1. ...-,.. .,.. ::III;Y . ~ .
;;-~rv 84.40.045/RCW 84.40.040
EXHIBIT · C.
The assessed value IS 100o{, of true and faIr value.
OA TE MAllED:'..1 7/3.~ / '1..3
=CR TAX YEAR l-}c..,.
L..;;ND VALUE
BUILDINGS STC VALUE
REA... ?RC?~KTY
;~ev,ous True & Fair Value
i:=~y]i...::
Kc:V),Ll.ATIG.'.4
New True & FaIr Value
",S6,\2G:J
i
I ~ - 7 -. - -.'- .-
j P4RCE~ L..:.. "- 0 ~ - \.,.... - .J
!
:'evlous Current Use Value
I .
I! .
I
I
ApCCAISE.~. 2. 7
eye...=. ~ 5 <.J C
\lew Current Usa Value
~i7::: ADDRESS CR
CESC:=;IPTION 20-17-1'::...2.
,,- ..--
__/.:.c..;._
if.
!~'I:~r.il::2.:,Jl. l:::::lh' ."~I:ll
., "4,:"' .. . '.'::"-:1..
'N 84.40.045/RC'N 84.40.040
~ne assessed value IS 1 OOo~ of true and fair value.
OA TE MAI1.5D:'- 7 / :; -I.., ~
::.:~ T AX YE.~R L':: q..,.
LAND VALUE
BUILDINGS ETC VALUE
P E;. L P K;..j':: ::;;. T '(
::'e.'1I0US True & Fair Value
c7~,6JJ
~::.'JAL...,..T~C1
'PW True & Fair Value.
- .. ') , -
.,--:...,...1-0
')'--- .-.-
PARCEL'" - I";' /...,'~ '- ~ ~...
::'eVIOUs Current Use Value
\Jew Current Use Value.
APP,CjAISE.~, .. 7
CYCL2'..J 5\.; C
~iT= ADDRESS OR
.JE~.::r;IPTI(lN ")7-17-1 r- .lJ I r-;: ,~rT;-:-J
, . ., , ., (i; 1
._~~IIlIr1::a'16
.... .'. \.. I. ~ :'..iJ'"
.. ll,'I
. - ON 84.40.045/RCW 84.40.040
ihe assessed value IS 100o{, of true and fair value.
OA TE MAILE):'J 7/ j... I '7 ~
JR TAX YE.A.R. 1. 9 1':"
LAND VALUE
BUILDINGS. ETC VALUE
i'.E~L pQC? ,:,=1. TY
':~e'Jlous True & FaIr Value
"tvC,J':G
",c.'; ;'LU':' i r::::~
:'Jew True & Fair Value
""Y'_' ..;;JO
, , . 7 - "1 "1. -.-..
1 PARC:=:'" '- ~ ~.J_V'-\J"""'''';
I
::'e'/Icus Current Use Value
.::w Current Use Value
~ APPCAISE.=. : 7
C"re:....=. _ SC 0 ;
_.7': ADDRESS OR
CESCrilPT1QN 2J-;.7-1.= S..
z ~ 7 23 3C
"'172J~~:':G:
l'H~K$farl M r:;;.-LA:.O S :'SSl.C
19l.7 .I.sr A'JE
, ::. "" -r '1"! =. _ .\ ~ .J t ..,
-"
.'
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
...
CITY OF-YELM
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
A. BACKGROUND
1. Name of proposed proJect, If applicable: Southwest Yelm Conceprual Zomng Plan.
2. Name of applicant: Thurston Highland _,c\ssocIates
3. Address ana phone number of applicant and contact person:
1917 First Avenue (206) 443-3537
Se::urle, Wa. 98101 Contact: Denrus T Su~ A.LA.
4. Date checklist prepared: Mav 24, 1994
5. Agency reqUIring checklist: CIty oiYelm
6. Proposed timmg or schedul.e (induding phasingt if applicable).
The Conceprual Master Plan IS scheduled for reVIew and approval m June and Julv of 1994 The
approval will COnsIst of a CIty oiYelm comprehensIve plan amendmem and zomng map
amendment, but only effecuve upon the subsequent Master Plan approval. Smce mal or
development aCUVIues Wlthm the Southwest Yelm Annexatlon area are ued to upgrades of the
CIty'S water~ SanItary sewer and road systems, the proponents will be unung submmal of the
Master Plan WIth slgmficant m.frastrucmre desIgn milestones. It IS antICIpated that the Masrer
Plan will be subrmtted to the CIty somenme betWeen September 1994 and March 1995 Wbile each
major property owner will be mdicatlng a probable phase scenano on the Conceptual Master Plan,
Thurston Highlands AsSOCIates will be the likely lead developer In order to proVlde goff course
land for the City's waste water reuse program and addmonal wells and storage to supplement the
eXlsnng CIty water system. Proposed phasmg IS graprucally depIcted on the Conceptual Master
Plan map
7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activIty related to
or connected with thIS proposal? If yes, explain.
It IS likelv that total build-out of the Southwest Yelm AnnexatIon area will be over the next 20+
years. The actIVItIeS of mdiVIdual property owners will COInCIde WIth mfrastructure upgrades,
semce capacIty and market demand. The actIVItIeS assocIated '\-lth future development of the
annexatIon depend on future expansIOn of water, sarutary sewer and roads to serve mdlvldual or
phased actIVItIes.
8. List any envIronmental infonnation you know about that has been prepared, or will
be prepared, dire~tJy related to thIS proposal.
A Draft EnVIronmental Impact Statement (Dated December 1992) and a Final EnVlronmental
Impact Statement (Dated March 1993) that addresses a broad r.mge of Issues :md unpacts
assOCIated wuh the Southwest Yelm A.nnexatIon :md subseq~ent development has been adopted
by the CIty ofYelm. Addluonal project specIfic environmental mform:ltlon \\,11 be developed m
conjunctIon WIth the City ofYeIrn's waste water reuse proJect. Y-l :md Y-2 b....pass route. :md
water system upgnde. 1111s checklist will onlv address new mform:lt1on or Impacts that have
become known smce the final E.I.S was prepared. Reference to the final E.I S \\111 be made on
all checklist [terns for wruch no new mform:lt1on IS known or aV:l1iable.
9. Do you know whetber applications,:afe pending {or governmental approvals of other
proposals dinctty affecting the property covered by your proposal? IfYe3~ explain.
Apphc:mons are pending for pemusslOn to drill test weils (2 domesne and 1 irrigatIon) on the
Tnurston Highlands ..\ssot::ates PropertY Water right appl1c:l!lons have been apphed for from t.'J.e
WashIngton Scate Departmen! ofEcolo~, Dependent on test weU results, v.;rnch would be turned
over to the CltV ofYdm at some furore pom! In the development process. The Citv ofYelrn has
applled. for gran! momes to help derra... costs assoclated. mID srudvmg and deslgrung a \vaste '.vater
reuse proJect.
.
. .
10. L1S! any governmental approvals or permIts that will be needed for your proposal. If
kn own"
Tne roilowmg \5 a lIst or go..-e:T.ment approvals necessar. for uinmare bui1d-ou! of the Southwest
y eLm ~exat1on :J.re:l.
t Conceptual 'v{aster P l:m approval ~ Y dm
2. Yiaster Plan Approval ~ Y dm
;) ?relurunar..; Platt 5) - Yelm
4. Buildmg Perrmrs ~ Ye!m
5 Test Weil(s) - \Va. Swe D O.E.
6 Water RIghts - Wa. State D O.E.
7 Waste water Lmd Apphcanon - Wa. State D a.E.
8 Water syste.'!l approval - YeLm, D a .E.. D O.H.
9 Wetiand (Nanonv',1de Pemut) - Yelm. U.S ArTIlv Corps of E:J.gm~rs
LO Storm warer discharge. Ydrn., Wa. Scate D a.E.
11 Gradmg Pemurs - Y dm.,
12. Road.., Storm. Samt.a.r\ Se'.ver. & Water Plans - Ydrn
· Addinonal pernutS ma\ be necessarY as dle proposal becomes more refined...
11. Give bnef, complete description of your proposal, mcluding the proposed uses and
SIZe of the project and sue. There are sever:ll questIons later In thIS cheddist th:lt
ask you to detJde cerum aspects of your proposal. You do noc need to repeat those
answers on this page.
The proponems are subnnmng a Conceptual Master Plan for reVIew and approval by the City or
Ye!m. The Conceptual Master Plan.. wh.1ch encompasses the ennre Southwest Yelm AnnexatIon
are:l, IS a broad deplcuon of proposed land uses. major road netWorks. and Identrfied
enVIronmentally senstnve are:lS. The ennre SIte IS 1.360 acres 1Il SIZe. Proposea1and uses and
approx.unate acre:lge's are as follo\,,-s:
CommercIal. 40 acres Single Family' ..13.6.. acres
Medium DensIty Muln-Familv' 116 acres Park Site: 5 acres
High DensIty Muln-F:unih ~8acres School SIte: 15 acres
Golf Courses (one e:tlStl11g) 410. acres Open Space: 420 acres
The Concepru.ai Master Plan. once approved. Wlll be used JS the basIS for a City ofYelm
comprehensIve plan amendment and zonmg map amendment. These amendmentS Wlll become
effeC".lve after the renneq Master Pian 1S approved.
-'
12. Locatlon of the proposal. Give suffiCIent mfonnatIon for a person to undersund the
preCIse loc:Jtlons of your proposerl project. mduding :l street address, if any, and
section, township :lOd r.Inge, If known. If:1 proposal would occur over :l r:mge of
area. provide the range or boundanes of the slte(s). ProvIde a leg:Il descnpnon. SIte
plan. VICInIty map. :md topographic map, If reasonably aV:J.ii:Jble. While you are not
reqUIred to duplicate maps or det.ailed plans submitted WIth :my pernut :Ippiicauons
related to thIS ched<list. (AtUch complete legal descnption If available..)
Refer to the ~cb.ed legal descnpaon and map for 'the Southwest Yelm AiIne:anon JIe:l..
.,
...
TO BE COJ\trPLETED BY APPLICANT:
EVALUATION FOR
AGENCY USE ONLY
B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS
1. Earth
a. General des9J-P1i9n of the site (cIrcle one):
Flat, rolling".h.ill.Y, steep slopes, mountamous,
otlfer ".
b. What IS the steepest slope on the sIte (apprOXImate percent slope)?
There are sever:!.l small are:!. thar compnse slopes of 25 to 35 percent.
c. \-Vhat general types of soils are found on the sIte (for example: clay, sand.
gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the daSSIfication of agncultural soils.
speCIfy them and note any prIme farmland.
The general soil types found on the sIte COnsIst of sand, grave!, and sand~ gra\"elly sods
A complete soils map and classrficanon can be found In the Draft EnVlronrnemnl Imp:!.c:
S tatemem for the Southwest Yelm Annexanon .-\rea (December 1992)
d. Are there surface mdications or hIStory of unstable soils m the ImmedIate
vicinIty? If so, describe.
There are no ImO\\1I unstable sails on the sIte or muned.1ate V1CUUt\
e. Describe the purpose, type, and apprOXImate quantlties of any filling or
grading proposerl. Indicate source of fill.
There are no proposed fillmg or gradmg acnvmes as a part of tL1e Conceprual y{asrer
Plan submmal and approval process
f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction. or use? If so.
generally describe.
No actlvltles that could cause erOSlOn are proposed as a part of the Conceprual Masrer
Plan subnuttal and approval process
a
O'
About what percent of the SIte will be covered WIth impervIOUS surfaces after
project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)?
ApproXlII1arely 25 to 30 percent of the SHe wIll be covered b\ Impemous surraces wne:1
the sIte IS completely built out. No unpervIous surraces \vilI be constructed J.S a parr ur'
tlus apphc:mon.
.J
h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erOSIOn. or other Impacts to the
earth. if any:
No me:l.Sures to reduce or comrol erosIOn wlil be requIred for ConceiJnI:!.l \!J.src:- Pl:l.n
:!.pproval. Subsequent proJecr speCIfic Jpphc:!.tlons WIll meet J11 reqUlrCme:1ts for e,OSlon
comrol.
..
.)
2. AIr
.;.. :"
a. 'What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (Le.. dust,
automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the
project is completed? If any, generaJIy descrIbe and give apprOXImate
quantities If known.
The proposed Conceprual Master Plan does noc Include aC!lVlCleS chat \\111 produce any
emISSIOnS Subsequent project specIfic proposals may reqUIre mmgaong me::r.sures co
reduce dust, exhaust, odors, etc.
,;,
.'
b. Are there anv off-site sources of emISSIons or odor that mav affect vour
. . .
proposal? If so, generaJIy describe.
The sIte abuts the Fort Lems ReservatIon, S.R. 507 and che C1t:' ofYelm, willc:: are
sources of off-SIte emISSIOns These sources are not belIeved ro adverseh we:;: ~b.e SHe
c. Proposed me:15UreS to reduce or control emIssions or other Impacts co :l1r. If
any'
No measures are necessary at dus ClIne.
3. Water
a. Surface:
1.
Is there any surface water body on or m th~ Immediate vIcimty of the
SIte (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes.
ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and prOVIde names. If
approprIate, state what stream or river It flows mto.
A sue wetland analYSIS, report and maD IS mcluded m the Draft and Final
EnVIronmental Impact Statement for me Southwest Yelm AnnexatIon.
2.
Will the project reqUIre any work over, In or adjacent to (wIthm 200
feet) the described waters? If yes. please describe and attach available
plans.
No work m or neJI \....etlands or bodles of water IS proposed m thIs applrc:mon.
3.
Estimate the amount of fiU and dredge materIal that would be placed
in or removed from surface water or wetlands and mdicate the area of
the site that would be affected. Indic:1te the source of fiU m:1tena1.
Not ApplIcable.
~.
Will the proposal reqUIre surface water WIthdrawals or diversIOns?
Give general deSCrIptIon. purpose. and apprOXImate quantIties If
known.
Not Applicable.
.::
Does the proposal lie wlthlD a 100 year flood plaID? If so. note
locatIOn on the SIte plan.
No, chIS propem IS loc:lCed ~nCIrc!\ oumde of Jl1\ 100 \"e:u- deed p!:lm ::lc;:oramg
co the FE:YtA maps.
4
6. Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface
waters? If so, describe the type of waste and antIcIpated volume of
discharge.
No
b. Ground:
1. Will ground water be wIthdrawn, or will water be dischargerl to
ground water? Give general deSCrIptIon, purpose, and appro~{]mate
.... quanntles If known.
No ground water WIll be "mhdra\'YTI or dIscharges to ground w~ter made :lS a pan
of thIS appl1c::mon. ThurSIon Highlands ASSOCIateS has appl1ed for three test well
pemuts from the WashIngton State Deparonem ofEcolo~ (wHh subsequem
water nghts subject to test results and studv) on their propem The em ofYdm
\\111 be conductmg (\Vlm proponem parnclpanon) Addmonal studIes on the SHe
III conjunctIOn WIth the Wastewater Reuse Project proposed co aHevlate surface
water dIscharge mto the Nisquallv R1ver Basm.
2. Describe waste materIals that will be discharged into the ground from
septic tanks or other sources, If any (for example: Domestic sewage,
industrml, conummg the followmg chemIcal...; agncultural; 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
ammals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve.
See B-1 above.
c. Water Runoff (induding storm water):
1. Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and the method
of colleCtlon and disposal. if any (induding quantities. If known).
Where will thIS water flow? Will this water flow mto other waters? If
so, describe.
The proposed Conc~p!Ual Master Plan will not gener:lte addInonal swrm flows
Subsequem submmals will address specIfic subbasIn flO\vs (ex.rstmg and proposed
rmnganons) as the proposal becomes more refined (Master Plan and preiumnaI\
plat stages) Addmonal analvsls IS mciuded m the Draft and Final EnVIronmental
Impact Statement for the Southwest Yeim Annexation.
2. Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so,
generally deSCrIbe.
No waste matenals will enter ground or surface waters m conjUnction \Vlth thIs
apphc:mon.
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface. ground. and runotT water
Impacts. If any:
Not applIcable at thiS phase
5
..... .. ,t'"" " '."
.., -,., . ~;~~ l,jd
4. Plants
a. Check or cIrcle types of vegetation found on the sIte:
.l deciduous tree: alder: maole. aspen, other cottonwood
.l evergreen tree: fir: cedar. pme. other
-2L shrubs
l grass
l pasture
.l crop or gram
l wetsoil plants: cattail: buttercuo. bulrush: skunkcabba2e: other In E.LS.
_ water plants: water lily, eel grass, mil foil, other
_ other types of vegetatIon - descrIbe
b, \Vhat kmd and amount of vegetatIOn will be removed or altered?
?'Io veger:mon wIll be remoyed or altered:lS a pan: of thIS applIc:mon.
c. LIst threatened or endangered specIes known to be on or near the sIte.
No threarened or endangered species are knO\vn to eXIst on or ne:lI the SIre.
d. Proposed landscapmg, use of natIve plants, or other measures to preserve or
enhance vegetatIon on the site, If any:
Nor apphcable for Conceprual Master Plan approval.
5. Ammals
a. Circle any birds and ammals which have been observed on or near the sIte:
Birds: hawk. heron. eagle, songbirds. other crow and marrow
Mammals: deer. bear, elk, other skunk. coyote. raccoon. rodents. etc.
Fish: bass, salmon, trout, herrmg, shellfish, other
b. LIst any threatened or endangered speCIes known to be on or near the SIte.
No threarened or endangered speCIes are knO\vn to be on or ne:lr the sIte. see the Draft
and Final E. 1. S for the Southwest Yelm Annexatlon for a compiete sIte spe:::es lIst.
c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so.. please e:tplam.
\Vh.ile there IS seasonal vanatIon m bIrd speCIes. the SIte IS not knO\\TI to be a part af:J.
major nugranon route.
d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife If any'
Not applIcable for Conceptual Master Plan approval.
6. Enerzv :lnd :"fatural Resources
a. \Vhat kmds of energy (electnc. natural gas. oil. wood stove. solar eneq~n '" Iii
be used to meet the completed proJect's energy needs? Descnbe whether It
wiiI be used for heatIng, manufactUrIng, etc.
The Conceptual Master Pbn WIll not gener:lte addItIonal c:1er~ ne~ds P"OlC::t spe::::1c
deSIgns. subsequent to \lasrer Plan approval. \\011lItkeiy uuiIze :J.c:lve :J.Ila ;JJ.Sslve sobr
energ: decmcItv, OIL wood stoves. md g:lS.
6
--J
....
b.
,
j
c.
~
Would your project affet:t the potential use of solar energy by adjacent
properties? If so, generaUy describe.
No
What kinds of energy conservatIon features are mcluded m the plans of thIS
proposal? LIst other proposed measures to reduce or control energy
Impacts, If any'
Not apphc:lble.
1
.'
7. Environmental Health
a.
]
..;
~
I
b. NOise
"
I
Are there any envIronmental health hazards. induding exposure to tOXIC
chemIcals, rIsk of fire and explOSIOn, spill. or hazardous waste. that could
occur as a result of thIS proposal? If so, descnbe.
:-To
1.
Describe specl::l1 emergency servIces that might be required.
None are reqUlred.
2.
Proposed measures to reduce or control envIronmental health
hazards, if any:
None are reqUired.
1.
What types of nOise eXIst in the area WhICh may affect your project
(for example: traffic, eqUIpment, operation, other)?
The pnmary source of nOIse on the sIte WIll be from the Fort L;;\\lS MihraI\
Reservanon. The milItary reservanon borders the ThurS!on Highlands Assoc::lres
ov.llersrup on the west SIde of the Conceprual Master Plan are:l. See the Draft
E. 1. S for the South\vest Y dm AnnexatIon for specl!lc field meo.suremems md
cllScu5s1on,
2.
What types and levels of nOIse would be created by or assOCIated WIth
the project on a short-term or a long-term baSIS (for e:campie: traffic.
constructIon~ operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would
come from the site.
No nOise \vill be generated as a part of Conceptual. Master Plan approval.
..
3. Proposed measures to reduce or control nOise Impacts. If :lny"
None are proposed at thIS tIme.
8. Land ::lnd Shoreline Use
:1. What IS the current use of the sIte and adjacent propertIe5~
The m:lJon!v of the SIte (west) has been clc~red wlthm the bst ten ye:m 0'" J. tlmbe~
company Other parcels wIthm the sIte arc used as farms. golf courses md smgle
f:lmtlv dwellmgs. Approxlm:ltelv one half of the SIte IS surrounded b\ the Fort L~'\ IS
\ltht:J.I"\ Reser\';:mon (0 the northwest. The rcm:ltnlng portlons abut the C ('. of Y ~:r:1.
l~rge undeveloped parcels md SR-507
7
c.
!
.- ~>
b.
Has the SIte been used for agriculture? If so, describe.
The SHe has been used for tunber productlon. da1ry and cattle production. as well as
luruted crop productlon.
Describe any construction on site.
Tne maJonry of the SHe IS vacant. There are smgle fannl;. resIdences, barns and
our buildmgs scartered on parcels ill the central and eastern portIons of me SIte
d.
Will any structures be demolished? If so, what?
No strucrures will be demoltshed as a result of Conceprual Master Plan approval.
e.
\Vhar IS the current zoning classification of the sire?
The SIre IS zoned "rural reSIdentIal" and allows a denSIty. no greater than one Unl! per
five acres
f.
\Vhar IS the current comprehensive plan designation of the site?
The current Thurston County comprehensIve plan mwc:l!es the sIte as an unmarred are:.
\"1th a rural desIgnanon. The SIte was annexed IntO the CIty of'telrn m late 1993 The
current Conceptual Master Plan submIttal, when approved.., will result 10 a c:rv
comprehensIve pian and zonmg map amendment, but only effeCTIve upon a subsequent
Master Plan approval.
g.
If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program deSIgnatIOn of the
SIte?
Not appltcable.
h.
Has any part of the site been classified as an "envIronmentally senSItIve"
area? If so, speclfy.
There are areas \\1r.hm the annexatIon area, pnrnanh on the western and cenrral poruons.
that meet wetland cnrena. Refer to the Draft and Final E. L S for me Southwest Yelrn
.-\nnexanon are:l for a comprehenSIve wetland analvsls \\1th accompammg map
1.
ApprOXImately how many people would reSIde or work in the completed
proJect?
The Conceprual Master Plan antlCIpates approxmtatei: 5 000 housmg umts at ultlInare
build-out, wlm a prOjected populatIon of up to 11,640 people. The empio\ment base or
the sIte WIll be deterrnmed by the extent of commerCIal and golf course development.
J.
ApprOXimately how many people would the completed project displace?
Not apphcable.
k.
Proposed measures to aVOid or reduce dIsplacement Impacts. If ::my:
~ot apphc:lble.
I.
Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible With e:'(Isrmg :md
projected land uses and plans. If any:
Development of the SIte WIll be In conformilIlce WIth applIcable C 1[\ orY dm ordInances.
zomng, and comprehenSIve plan.
8
9. Housmg
a. Approxunately how many units would be provlded, if any? Indicllte whether
hIgh, mIddle, or Iow-mcome housmg.
ApproX1I11are!: 5 000 dweHmg umts will ultImately be provIded on the sIte Ir]$
anacIpared that a mIX ofhousmg types carenng to a broad range of buyers (firS! tune.
retIrement, lugh end) wIll be aVaIlable on the SIte. SpecIfic categones and pnce ranges \vill
be analyzed at the nme of Master Plan approval and as dnven by marke~ demand.
.'
b. ApprOXImately how many UnIts" If any, would be elimmated? Indicate
whether hIgh, mIddle, or Iow-mcome housmg.
Not applIcable.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing Impacts, If any:
:-;ot applIcable
10. Aesthencs
a. \Vhat IS the tallest heIght of any proposed structure(s), not mdudmg
antennas; what is the prmclpal extenor building mlltenal(s) proposed"
There are no proposed strucrures as part of thts apphc:mon. Future development mil
adhere to the Cit\' ofYelm zorung requirements ill place at the tlme.
b. \Vhat views m the immediate vicmIty would be altered or obstructed?
No! applIcable.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts. If any:
Future development mIl utIlIze extensIve buffers, landscapmg and open space to reduce
aesthenc unpacts as much as possible
11. LIght and Glare
a. \Vhat type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What tlme would It
mainly occur?
Not applIcable at thIs tune.
b. Could light or glare from the fimshed project be a safety hazard or Interfere
Wtth VIews?
Not apphcable at thIs tune.
c. \Vhat existIng off-SIte sources of light or glare may affect your proposalry
Mmor off-slt:e glare sources \...111 not affect the SHe.
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control lIght and glare Impacts. If :lny'
"iot Jophcable at thIS tIme
9
12. Recre:ltion
a. \Vhat designated and informal recreational opportunIties are in the
Immediate VICInIty?
Currently, there IS an 18 hole golf course and publIc park III the unrnedIace V1clmty
b. \VouLd the proposed project dispLace any e:ustmg recreatIOnal uses? If so,
descnbe.
No eXlstmg,.recreanonal uses \'<111 be d1splaced as a result of dus applIc:mon.
!
c. Propo-serl measures to reduce or control impacts on recre::1tlon, mdudmg
recreatIon opportumties to be prOVIded by the project or applIcant, If any"
~o unpacts will result from thIs applIcaoon.
13. Histone and Cultural PreservatIOn
a. Are there any places or objects listed on. or proposed for~ nanonal. state. or
local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so,
generally describe.
There are no known places or objects lIsted on, or proposed for nanonal, state or local
preservaoon regJSters adjacent to or v.mhm the sIte.
b. Generally describe any landmarks or eVIdence of histonc, archaeoLogIcaL
sCIennfic, or cultural Importance known to be on or next to the sIte.
The McKenzle house, offofS.R 507, IS regIstered ill the Washmgcon Slate a.A.H.p
\\,thm the current CIty ofYelm count, there are a number of strUcrures Idenniied ill the
"1989/90 TO\'<l1 ofYelm .Histonc Buildmg Inventory" as havmg local hIStOne slgrunc:lIlce.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control Impacts, If any:
)lot reaUlred.
14. Transuortatlon
a. IdentIfy public streets and highways servmg the slte~ and describe proposed
access to the existing street system. Show on sIte plans, If any.
The Southwest Yelm Annex<loon area WIll be served b'\ two roads from the east, Long!I1lre
Scree:: and Berry Valley Road S.E. Both streets WIll be upgraded and realIgned subject to
City ofYelm approval, and \'<;11 prOVIde pnmarv mgress/egress east to west to the
proposed Y -l ahgnrnent m the central pOr1lon of the sIte. The Y -1 b'\ -pass route from
S R. 5 IO IS alIgned north to south and IS artoclpated to be ne:lr the common propem
lme ofVenrure Parmers and Thurston Highlands A.ssocIates Thurston Highlands IS
proposmg a loop boulevard from Y-l through theIr ownershIp to S R. 507 Re:e:- ~o ':.J.l:te
Conceprual Master Plan for a gnpruc representJ.Clon.
-
b. Is SIte currently served by public transit? If not. what IS the approxImate
distance to the nearest transit stop and where IS It?
[merCHV tr:l.!1Slt IS eurrenth servIng dO\vnto'\vn Y dm VIa S R. 510 The Southwest Y dm
\rmexatJon area wIll be served bv a route extenSion :IS the road e:-"1:e:1SlOnS :md popui:mon
base \Varnnt.
10
c. How many parkmg spaces would the completed project have? How many
would the project elimmate?
The Conceprual Master Plan does not requIre parkmg spaces Subsequent project speCIfic
submIttals will meet or exceed City ofYelm zorung and parkmg reqUIrements.
d. Will the proposal reqUire any new roads or streets, or Improvements to
e:nstmg roads or streets, not mcluding dnveways? If so, generally descnbe
(indicate whether public or prIvate).
No new roads v,ill be constructed m conjUnctIOn \Vlth the Conceprual Master PI:m
a~provaL. See seenon A. above for a descnpnon of the major mtenor road network
proposed to serve the sIte. Refer to the Conceprual Master Plan for a gr.lphlc
represenuilon of the road alIgnments
e. Will the project use (or occur In the ImmedIate VICInIty of) water, rail, or :lIr
transportatIon? If so. generally descnbe.
An eXIStlng pnvate air park 15 loc::lted sevenl rrules e:lSt of the :mnexatlon are:l off
S.R.507 Tne railroad tr.lck along S.R. 507 was removed m 1992/93
f. How many vehicular tnps per day would be generated by the completed
proJects? If known, indicate when peak volume would occur.
Refer to the traffic analvsIs secnons of the Draft and Final EJ.S for the Southwest Ye!m
Annexatlon, dated December 1992 and March 1993 Pe:J.k hour mps would occur be!'see::l
6 30 a.m. and 8.30 p.m. and 4 30 p.m. and 6.30 p.m. Tne tr.:tific analvsls and srud," \\lil
be updated WIth the Master Plan subrmttaL.
g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation Impacts, If any:
TransportaTIon Impacts v..-ill be readdressed Ul conJunctlon \\lth the Master Plan subrrurr..aL
when project specIfic phasmg IS refined. Refer to the Draft and Final E.I.S for the
Southwest Yeim Annexanon area for IdentIfied unpacts and ffimganon.
15. Public Ser-rlces
a.
Would the project result in an increased need for public ser-rlces (for
example: fire prote{:tlon, police protedlon, he:llth care, schools, other)? If
so, generally describe.
The Conceptual :.-{aster Plan will not result III an mcre:lSed need for publIc servlces
PublIc servlces \\;11 need to be mcre:lSed concurrent WIth project speCIfic deSIgn and
development. The Dmft and Final E. L S for the Southwest Yeim Annex:mon (see publtc
sef'llces sectlon) IdentIfies publtc servlce needs, unpactS and mmganons for the developed
condmon.
j
b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services. If
any:
A large portIon of the direct Impacts WIll be offsctb\ the ne\\ ta."\. base cre::.red '0'1, prolec:
bulld~ut.
11
, V;;":
16. Utilities
a. Circle utilitIes currently available at the SIte: Electncrtv, natural gas, water.
refuse service. teleohone, sanItary sewer, septIc system, other
b. Descnbe the utilitIes that are proposed for the proJect, the utilIty prOVIding
the service, and the general constructIon actIVItIes on the site or III the
Immediate VIcinIty WhICh mIght be needed.
The Clt\' ofYelm will be proVldmg water and sarutarv se\"v.er semce to the Soum\vest
Yelm .-\nnexatlon area. The current capacIty of the CIty'S water and samtarv se\ver
system IS nor suffiCIent to accommodate development wrrhm the :mnexed area.
The CIty ofYelm IS currentlv undermkrng a wastewater reuse studv pendmg an av.ard
of state gram: mone'l, to upgrade the eXlstmg sewage treatment plant to dIscharge
efilue:lt to a -class ft Aft standard.
The class ., A" treated water \vill be reused through vanous land use, Imganon and
rndusmai appl1catlons. Tms will elumnare rhe current outfall to the Nisquaily RIver.
reduce water pulled from the aqmfer and md ill aqmfer recharge. Thurston Highlands
ASSOCIates \,;ill prOVIde a golf course far wastewater reuse ImgatlOn as well as and area
far reuse storage, along mID other appurtenances
Thurstan Highlands ASSOCIates has app l1ed to rhe Washmgton S rate Depamnent of
Ecology for perrmsslOn to drill t\vo test wells for domestlc!mumclpal consumpnon, WIth
\vater nghts far 4,000 gallons per mmme. The proponent mtends to turn over the
producmg \veils and '.";ater nghts to the Cltv ofYelm for mciUSIon ill theIr system. It IS
likelv that land for at least one storage tank \\111 be prOVIded on the Tnurston Highlands
property, togemer \Vlth pIpe, fire hydrants, valves and pressure reductlon system(s) as
requIred bv sue speCIfic deSIgn.
Upon approval of me annexatlon., the proposed unlmes and purvevors are lIsted as follows
1
..,
Sev....er.
Water
Power
Natural Gas:
Telephone:
Cable TV
City ofYelm.
City ofYelm.
Power will be prOVIded by Puger Sound Power and Lrght.
Not Available.
Tdephone will be prOVIded bv Yeim Telephone.
2 alternanve campaIlles w111 pronde servIce Via fiber OptiC [meso
~
4
5
6
SIG~ATURE
The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I
understand thac the lead agency IS relying on them to make It'S det:1Slon.
----.-:; I I.. (' t . ,) i
S t I ; ~ 't--.. ) 'j\
igna ure: __-- II' I \ ~
.'" .
Denms T. Su ~
Date Submltted:
....... ...'
-}./ -
.-
\ 1-=-
I , I
o. ~t. Word\EN~''X.DOC'.5.94
1:2
Q .
- .
I .
I ,
.',
SUPPORTING MAPS
-'
(fl
0
s
('l
!l'.
c~
(flQ)
Q-
\ (fl<g.
~~
Q) <.II
-o<1l
\ <.II :::l
(')
0
:::l
<.II
~
5"
lQ
rn
:::l
<Cl
5'
(ll
~
'!'
5"
~
ClII@!
~ ~
~ ~. ~ ...
.-!'! '
~
I "l '" In _ """.::..od/ J ~ 1\ W. \;"
'~/I_ 1-"f')IC1\{C-Y- ../ j(;~ '3 '"
\\} -..J \::; \.. Jl\) /",\ )( 0- 0_ ::l
~"_ ~ ,_ _ ",," w '"
: _~__' " "r-'''- "'" ·
, ,--~3:~ ,_,'''_''\ ' J~ 0 w
___ ~.. /::: ;" ,'01 I,''i, 0)/ I ~ \ '
~ -.._/ \ ) ~_ / \.J) \\'.... ....-//
_ 1-<-.-1I~) I ,le'l ,,-;:~~ '_I >-
,__ \ (-\'--J\.-..(. \ "I (_ 'J' I';' / c ,j ;;\I@
, ,,'iC::" ,,~ I " I ~ - ' \" ,. I
Iv r; \. \_ ,.-:3.' _--:::'_,,' -~) '-,"",' \.~I _I ~ '
r -. - ---::: _\ _"I.... '"'- , \ / I ,
( I ") l/ "\ ..... ')U I \ ~~.:::::- /
\1$ '4r'~ \. ((\v, ~\ 'S;)r:O::"::- ((
':!J fj-" I '::' c-' '(:;J - ~~ ) -;'-, ,\ \ I \
{'f-, - '1//) j ) "0, \ r>. ~ V\~../ --~ ( ))
l~ -4P - I' ;yk~~ ,I ~ 1//(1
,o,ll" \ \ \/ -If~' I,) If, I
") \ \ I '0IrC- ,\ \j/ -
'- ,,) /" /_) } ~.0~ ~':~'"'J )J ( () ((/ fd":::---"-"
~~ I )),.::::. _ ./-~~ .../(1/ ..-J ( I r':\ -" ---- "-..
,r~~7r--" "' -'" (\' I~ c--...
,(I l#.;/~-~5'~/~ ',,<<&6 <.. \,,,I~I (, ~'-::----
, '-<<HJ (1"'(1 r" ,I "",-,_\ ' -
.(//II' ~ ,,-~'- 'l\!'--' ' - -.n)-'
~S:. \. \\,111//" \ '-) ",_:>;--:;''--' ~'~r , '--' '( '-''; ,.'> ,
"" ':::;.JIJ/I \ 1 r _~l ......--)....... \\1..:) ""--) ~ (.-::
/ ""-J' I r ;-'~~ 1((- ,,/ ,) ,/,,-j' I
-r->' \ (- 1 \,'\//1;;-$) -~ (' '- ,
':.~-t" ;1 \ \.11\ (Jliif:'-'\) \ ~)_<,-(>r-/=-,-------
___ 3"0 \...\ \ ~~\":.;.P/) L~ '\\ -' - \ I /~()'-./ \' "
~ __ ,\ ~((';'--. - '" \ I I (" I' (' I
r- ,..J",-:::"~'/'--) ~'f"J\\{\ \. ) ~ \\ '--~ J k ~ )
\~ '-"____-" '\\\ \~ \ '"' \. /' -,.. ./f ../"'"
\~ ~;::.~ \ \ /) fi;:)\ '\"-.1 l) \ -) -.:::::- -- 'r: ( \"
,~, 1/ 'I " '-'EJ ~J, ~~, / ( /;;{,-,rf.J__lol'-
>"'-2YI;) / )1 r--------"', T-- ~ "', \ -,\
..,,""-' (' _, I ' (\ '-, '- Cc:-z-..\ ,1.0 \ I 1'''
" \ I ,-/ '- ,>'" \ l\.:o-~ \'." I~)'
'-.) I -, _l\"- \~ l ~ \ I ..::::~-: 0_\" '\ (
I ./ ,) 'J; ",," r_,~
I _r\. ;- // _/ c~) \ - , -I'~J
I ' I l '- ~- ,
J () d~~~~\1
, \ / r-'''- (J''-..r;. er1
'" . I I - - ,~.
...~. ,,-0 U r~::: <' Y-'-
.),- _""' ,_ '/ r"' (
(--..../" ! ( "''\ /_' ./ --.../'........1
I Jt/ \r\" '-.....~ r .../r--.__/. I
, I \\ -- _--=-=-- -.J:{ .,..~.:-/- ~ L.- r
\~: ?:~:r:~=:;\ ~{(~~~tl\.!.~...
( ) ;; \ ," ( ~Ol\:,ti
..,;_. /_ rJ ,:,) .. J,@-'-J -~,"~ ~,'~
\./'~( \. (-' (\. ~ (_\. .\t....l.'t....'.'..'.'.'.t...
I r \.J ) t 'J) ..." .'. .)......1,...(."........'..:;,.. '
./ ) -?'t, '" $''.;
/\ "\ I c:-. 'r"( t 0... . ..:
.. ( \ t<,,')\ .::;:'.:
r- -" - ~... -.,...,..',1'" ,-
~ C,) / -/ / '> .
.. -' r/'-..r .;'1 ,.t '));'+.
\ (( l...' I~. -{ ,';<,
./ I ) ~~i: .'
':' )"J .' . 'I,
.....
r-
1
@
0
!
;;;
>>
-
<.
;>
.... ,."..-
....
"
"
.-
@
.~.
, ~
) . '@',"
~ ,'" cc~ ~
.,,;.' . "
~ ~~
.,,-
............,.
.1,.....,.,.,..,..-..
..~..
ThOfpe", ~ ...~SS<2~~~t~~, Inc. ~,~:"~
----~
\)
. "
0 - -- r- ~
I 1=7 ~ ,:'jI r-r. ,.-r. e':lI ~ ~ ~ ~ I!lI!5 - .. -
> .
-l ....J --.I. " ... ...... - - - -- - .. -- .. .....
,
,
::~~:-?, \ .
_fr_?ooY_/ I "
f'" /.....". "Jj~l'~ ".~~ ....-/
~~~~1~f
/~>,{; I. ~ ... /;"
....{~....{~...." ~ ..~;.z....~{
I'_/J_";:"/ "';I1.~/~/"'/I'
f/~ ....,,~....I' \ ...."'"'-'1 --:.t!...-" \ ,,'/\
.... ,~~ (~'\J~~J~;-/~;-/~)/~'>;~~~' ;-~~;",
".....~""...:' ...{.t....."t....I'~.....l'l" \ J;~fl' \....),
""-<::..~/..../I....//~./I:/I~J./...*'I'';- \.;> ,;-
~/\...../\ ....l'l....I\.../l~~\"'.... \ ... 1/.....\'
V,, "\. '\,," '.~' 1,,..1,...."...
1 ~....\'....~/...../I~.-'}t:/!~:/I~/J~
l '%);"I\.r.'~'/~"~'
~?y~~
-----:, ~
,r- \ . ........... .;......,,/
I ',~_.' .~~ "-.. J
I' ~..! f..- (j!. .. ~"l"
"" ~ _..-.~:""""~ ~
"II' ,,-.,..--..~....-_.,.
.: J'i
. -i= ~I
, .
.
"
./
I
~
.
~ . ~ I
i i P
i !
q . r
I: q
~ I ~
...
H
e; ~
q ~
i ~
t>
3:
3:
c:
c:
;:;
;;;
II'
-.
....,
l
i
!
i
:J
~'
_ il
~~j JD~~! ~ \l
. 1..#",... ..... ". r .. '
-~-~~~-~~~~--~~~~~~~-~
" i'
~
~.._ I
,,'
-.-.~ .,-,., ""-
,t., "-...
, -
;'
~ -
-'
: ::'"
.'
J'
.
.-
.
.
- - ---
..~..-..'"
,
,
.
I
,
I
"
~
~~
\
...
l
.
,
",. ..~~l
.. ""J
, ' ~/~~~~~1
t . 1.../1...../1
\~ ...,....,_......... ._~..._......I._,1_,,1 \.; / \."-,1,,.
../).... ;'" t" :..'r'/':..:t' ,,'/'
",,')-J';';;' ....I\~.../~....-,,~.......
'{..../~....-.,~4..... /~'t;l~/ I~~J~.
/1'-' /..../}../ ,.....I''''....I'{....".........
:"t:--"/~..../~~~ ~/~~':..//~.../:j
~.... J~' I~' /l:/ /,...~~....,/t....,~...
.......~..../\....,\.;oo../l ..//-<.'-",'....,'
"" 1 '-J'"...'r1 Jj !'~"'/:.,.... ,,1 ....'"';.z....-
,:'/t".'"';'....'";.\ \...." ~\/~l/~/"~...I'
'....,' ),' )'/f'/'I'" -:.:,....~~.......t...I'\,-,
")~....'~....--;.~~r~....'t... ..~....~~~:~~~~/~{/~.
/I'/I'?/J,/'..../I' ""':'{h. I"...."'....'l
;~'{.....-." -",yl...-;'t ....-;, " I....~/_~J~/".... /'.
... '.... './ ':J '........ '\. ,"\, ".,....I'"....^i,........l...."\....-:-
~~,t~""){...~~-:.~~~~~.... 4"'" \~~~/~\J:."/~)'/~,>,':
~~ ~~?l~~:.:~~ ~~ ~~ ~\~~~'~~-;Z~,~;{i;~,\~~)I\;~,
'- ...."...."" '\.... ...", ~ ...., ...., '", ...-?
:;~-;~~--;;~-;~~,~/~\'~\'~)~~,~,'I'.:.},~.1 '\1 ffi'\W!'
~~gt~:t~ttf-r~tt<<~ft2~~1 .\\\ I\\\\\\\\\I\\\I~\I
\ - ..../'...~/..../J...../I /,......,'1., '.... '/ '\~ J
,...,.t..../~.....-'\.....I'\ ...."i..."l......... \ ...H/..... ~/..... \K\~ I
,';. " ,;- ....:>' '\." :,.....::.,......:,....,,~/... .
~~-:~l:{'/~;~~/~~-;~~~~~~)-;~~~)~;im~.mn/m\l --
. I 'iilIIIWIUI, u
\
"
'....
~
'~
(
~..r..".-"
H
II
i
I
t
I ~l\l'
I 1.< I
I ! I ~
~~n! ~
il... ~ ~
rti .,
~
.,
r-----7@=-
1
'.E:CETATlOH MAP
T!<URS TOH "'CIl-atlOS
'fElY, THURS lON COUNTY, WASltING.TON
~"J
.- .~-.-~." .=.- ~
.~o
<<:.
I, .
. ,~
~
\
I
"
.
~
Pierce
County
- ___,CENSUS TRACT BOUNDARY
I
I
l.__~
-
CITY OF YaM
.
.
. .
.. .-
..
.
.
.
.
.............
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
~
~
_.j
f--
,
~
~..;
,I
..
-.
..
:x
CITY OF
RAINIER
I
..,
'--, i--'
~_____ _..... I
PROPOSED ANNEXATION AREA
I
.~. :
~ :
-~
. I
\ 2
L 1
..~ N,s .--l
'\:.._.qUiilly
~ RIver
YELM SCHOOL DISTRICT BOUNOAR~:"J''''~
...
Thurston
County
.
.
.
':)01
#'
.....~
: .
.
.
.
:~'":r...'I't
..
.'
..
..
'I
:I
of
:I
01
:I
..
..
:l
. oJ
:...A1
NT S.
.- I
.. ~
.......,---.. ~
bOu~'~es i \}J)
RAINIER SCHOOL
DISTRICT BOUNDARY
):
. .
..........
, R. W. Thorpe & Associates, Inc. s-no,..........-..
Q, H J:l 7 nd Avenue Seattle WA 8' ~ t:"Olll s,. ~:!~
~cnool Istnct
Census Tract
SOUTHWEST YELM ANNEXATION
.. ~
.,
~o).
~ ' .
. ~.iNI-' .. -~..
~~ 1
_.! "OR' -
,~._. ~OPER~ sou . -
"",""'" J ' .' ,N 01'" .
T ,..,i!.. .~,pESlGNAnOH I _.
,... . 1 I
~J '.~ I .- -
r-~" ,wen:..;.' .. .. ~
~" ___ .", D IIOlJNOAAV' ' .- :.
:u. .. ~.-'.~I~ 1'- I I ~~~
""'" ....- ~,.._ ROAD ,.,'"
,::",..' ..1 . I ~~
.. ... " I -" ~. .
"'" ': ' " ::l
.. I I _..- "'''1
~ u_,,_, ;_. ,~
I I -. "
, _ ". -L.,' I .. ,r'
"..u ;;
,-- ~
, '1
. '.c .. - . "
, ' ,_u , "
. .. ,. ."
.. ~
~ J
, 1
. ~ .. ,..,
'~"~
, ~
: " ..,
. ...~
".... ".
.. " ,-
.f':' " .
.
=J:Ln! .
= ,",,,!. '
.G~'" =- !.,. ..
, -r"'!"~ !
.-J.- ,...,.'
! I ~ I ""ST 1
_ _ -. -'- ,,,,,,,,'
.. ' '.. COIIIlSl! .~
~
."
C#
C ~ .
.., ...., .'
:.~.. .";,.~" I
.' ';C' ..'
~.;; ~';:'f I '
. _ 1'1&J
.of-" '.
~. , . J
;iJ~' :7 !
~.' I
...". .;t " "
",,'\.... ~. .
~ '
, .. '
. - - ..
'~f.. "
-.... .
~.~ - ~
, .' ' -
. '
'., "
, ", .
,...\., -,' '
..~,., .~." ! .. .,
,.. llla..- , L-' ,I I
~"'~ 11'1 ,,~.,. ~ '- ; , .
,"'!P' ' ,-,,; ,--
"'...."'. . . " " ....... ......Y. ; . .. I .~.."
I' '. u ,.'if ...,. ,'~."' '4'! f' _.) SINGLE "AM' ! .J .
..... ~_ ._, I .. ;LY ,
..... .. _'" ' '3' I I
;~, .-~~.. wi" -~ .~. ' ' ..
."""" ' .- , ,- ~.' .. ' .
. .'...~. ....e:.:i.- eM / .' ,.C'''''r' . I i'J i
,"" ,_,,! ! '" ' ..
OTS I ' .:~.. r'
. ._ t . . :" I "
. ". .' ' ., -1" r ";.1
_ _.. _ I _'~ . . 1" I
I [ SOUTHWEST YEW .'. :'.: . .-f--
CONCEPTUAL ~H
1,lt15/ERPLAN
:'J(,.t.;'~fW-'
~f~'M
;...h.... -
:h~it.. I
~~r,(. i
...~h~ IL
T ,.,
i~.. '>'
it, . '.~
~i"f ~. "..
:~ ,"'.
r .,:.r..,...
C ~,-
4. ~ \'
~. .!-!~
:.r ~!
--
--
---_..
1 .
..': ,"
,.
~lk.;,
~.~ ~..
.\; ~:;f
.'
~.~
~
'.. ,. 1=. ~
"'-" tuI..._ 2I".~" <<,,_to,,", ..._11". ~'..',1
i . ~
-i.
~.~.::"
.-...,......
-~.
~
n.
City of Yelm
TO
FROM
105 Yelm Avenue West
P 0 Boy 479
Yelm Washillgroll 98597
(206) 458-3244
YELM
WASHINGTON
FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL FORM
COMPANY
()-c/IY/
trY) fj[UfYAi! Ii--
0; '13-& /:{'t)
C:t(sof '!{/~
f/ltt1 ()t4c,~?
I J
(206)458-4348
INDIVIDUAL
FAX NUMBER
COMPANY
INDIVIDUAL
FAX NUMBER
NUMBER OF PAGES TO FOLLOW d>
DATE I, y/CfL! TIME SENT :J;;Jr;- PJ11
/ '
SUBJECT It3 /he)yJ0P cl ,
I /
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS
********IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL COPIES OR ANY COpy IS
NOT LEGIBLE, PLEASE CALL (206)458-3244 AS SOON AS
POSSIBLE
@
ReC\'ckd paper
GENE BOKGES
STEVE GILBERT
PAR).\METRIX
P O. BOX 460
SUMNER WA 98390
~,ARRY KAAR
PUGET POWER & LIGHT
P.O. BOX 486
IE LM vJ..4.. 9 8 5 9 7
THURSTON CO PUBLIC WORKS
ATTN BILL TURNER
2000 L.i:!..KERIDGE DR SH
JLYMPIA WA 98502
DEPT OF ECOLOGY
ENVIRO~~ENTAL REVIEW SECT
ATTN BARBARA RITChIE
tvlAIL STOP PV-ll
OLYMPIA WA 98504-8711
~ICHAEL VAN GELDER
PLANNING COORDINATOR
INTERCITY TRANSIT
P O. BOX 659
OLYMPIA WA 98507
jJ
~tP
.r~
( ~~' Z
\. bD
f-f) D \ J b
,<i\b)): \ 0& Q4'
\ ~\ Otu
~~.
GLENN DUNNAM
Ct),,?; p )J L/J ,t(/ E /J
/);.Il,LCl> // ~ /t.;Z-
THURSTON CO FIRE
ATTN BILL STEELE
P O. BOX 777
YELM WA 98597
DEPT
YELM
ATTN
P.O.
YELM
TELEPHONE CO
GLENN MCCARTEN
BOX 593
WA 98597
WASHINGTON NATURAL GAS
ATTN CHUCK WILLIfu~S
3120 MARTIN WAY EAST
OLYMPIA WA 98506
DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY
ATTN PAT LEE
MS LU 11
7272 CLEANWATER LN
OLYMPIA WA 98504-6811
THURSTON CO PLANNING
2000 LAKERIDGE DR SW
OLYlvlPIA \VF-. 98502
ATTN JOHN SONNEN
THURSTON CO, COMMUNICATION
2000 LAKERIDGE DR SW
OLYMPIA WA 98502
OAPCA
ATTN JAMES A. WILSON
909 SLEATER KINNEY RD SE
SUITE 1
LACEY WA 98503
WA ST DEPT OF TRANSP
DISTRICT 3 HEADQUARTERS
P.O. BOX 47440
OLYMPIA WA 98504-7440
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DEPT
AT TN PHIL BRINKER
2000 LAKERIDGE DR SW
OLYMPIA WA 98502
NISQUALLY INDIAN TRIBE
ATTN GEORGE WALTERS
4820 SHE-NA-NUM DR SE
OLYMPIA WA 98503
NISQUALLY RIVER COUNCIL
ATTN STEVE CRAIG
P O. BOX 1076
YELM, WA 98597
D .lI. VE
YELM
P O.
HOUGHTON
COMMUNITY SCHOOLS
BOX 476
WA 98597
YELM,
THURSTON CO ROAD DIVISION
9700 TILLEY ROAD
OLYMPIA WA 98502
~~r-~B>/ #'h 1HJ6"
()L y. 9~o/)/
?
? 5( .
}
1;~ /
~I;
vi
~ 14f11"~I"(, J
[OJ; G .. rl/'f\- ~
~/bIIU~16P
flV"
~1"'/f$P
COMP PLAN EIS MAILING LIST
PG 2
MAILED /11 t; I 1(2--
YELM-TIMBERLAND LIBRARY
PO BOX
YELM, WA 98597
COMMANDER
I CORPS & FT LEWIS
ATTN AFZH-DEQ/JERBIC
FT LEWIS WA 98433
YELM CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
PO BOX 444
YELM WA 98597
DEPT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOP
COM PRES & DEVELOPMENT
OFFICE OF ARCHEOLOGY
AND HISTORIC PRESERVATION
MAIL STOP KL-ll
OLYMPIA WA 98504
WASHINGTON DEPT OF WILDLIFE
ATTN GORDY ZILLGES
600 CAPITOL WAY NORTH
OLYMPIA WA 98504
,
\
\
ALEXANDER W MACKIE
OWENS DAVIES MACKIE
PO BOX 187
OLYMPIA WA 98501
CATHY A JERBIC
I CORPS & FT LEWIS
921 LAKERIDGE D
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
THURSTON CO EDC
KATHY COMBS EX DIR
721 COLUMBIA SW
OLYMPIA WA 98501
DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE
JOAN HAYS
TAXPAYER ACCT ADMIN
GENERAL ADMIN BLDG
MS AX-92
OLYMPIA WA 98504
WASHINGTON DEPT OF FISHERIES
ATTN CONNIE lTEN
GEN ADMIN BLDG MS AX-II
OLYMPIA WA 98504
COLONEL CARROLL DICKSON
GARRISON COMMANDER
HHQ I CORPS & FT LEWIS
FT LEWIS WA 98433-5000
THURSTON CO ENVIRON HLTH
GREGG GRUENFELDER
921 LAKERIDGE DR RM 113
OLYMPIA WA 98502
DENNIS SU
KRAMER CHIN MAYO
1917 FIRST AVENUE
SEATTLE WA 98101
JON POTTER
SHAPIRO & ASSOC INC
WASH MUTUAL TOWER
SUITE 1700
1201 THIRD AVENUE
SEATTLE WA 98101
lJi
COMP PL~N - ~ MAILING LIST
MArLEu: II / ~ / t?Z
DEPARTMENT OF FISHERIES
115 GENERAL ADMIN BLDG
MAIL STOP AX-II
OLYMPIA WA 98504
LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS
1063 CAPrrOL WAY
OLYMPIA WA 98501
DEPARTMENT OF WILDLIFE
MAIL STOP GJ-11
OLYMPIA WA 98504
TED GAGE
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIV
DEPT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOP
MAIL STOP GH-51
OLYMPIA WA 98504-4151
MIKE MCCORMICK ASST DIR
DEPT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOP
MAIL STOP GH-5I
OLYMPIA WA 98504-4151
THURSTON ASSESSOR
2000 LAKERIDGE DRIVE SW
OLYMPIA WA 98502
THURSTON CO COMMISSIONERS
BUILDING 1
2000 LAKERIDGE DR SW
OLYMPIA WA 98502
NISQUALLY INDIAN TRIBE
ATTN KIM CRAWFORD
4820 SHE-NAH-NUM DR SE
OLYMPIA WA 98506
MARY POOCHEY
WA DEPT OF AGRICULTURE
406 GENERAL ADMIN BLDG
MS AX-41
OLYMPIA WA 98504
CITY OF LACEY
ATTN BOB PATNICK
PO BOX B
LACEY WA 98503
US DEPT OF INTERIOR
FISH/WILDLIFE OLY FLD OFF
2525 PARKMOUNT LN SW-B2
OLYMPIA WA 98504
OOH'-'SW DRINKING WTR OPERATIONS
PO BOX 47823
OLYMPIA WA 98504-7323
SOIL CONSERVATION SERVICE
EVERGREEN PLAZA BLDG
711 CAPITOL WAY
OLYMPIA WA 98501
BILL CUMMINGS
CENTRALIA CITY LIGHT DEPT
1100 N TOWER AVENUE
CENTRALIA WA 98531
NISQUALLY PINES COM CLUB
PO BOX 669
YELM WA 98597
THURSTON CO BLDG DEPT
BUILDING 1
2000 LAKERIDGE DRIVE SW
OLYMPIA WA 98502
POSTMASTER
YELM POST OFFICE
YELM WA 98597
DEPT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
ATTN DAVE DIETZMAN
CHERBERG BLDG MS-LB-13
OLYMPIA WA 98504
MIKE WELTER
THURSTON CO PARKS/REC
529 WEST 4TH
OLYMPIA WA 98502
CITY OF ROY
ATTN PENNY BARLOW
PO BOX 700
ROY WA 98580
HAROLD ROBERTSON, DIR
TRPC
2404 B HERITAGE CT SW
OLYMPIA WA 98502-6031
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
MAIL STOP AX-41
OLYMPIA WA 98504
US ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
SEATTLE DISTRICT
REGULATORY FUNCTION BRANCH
PO BOX C-3755
SEATTLE WA 98124
JEFF DICKISON
SQUAXIN INDIAN TRIBE
SE 70 SQUAXIN LANE
SHELTON WA 98584
SIERRA CLUB-~ GRlJP
2929 S CENTRAL
OLYMPIA WA 98501
CINDY CECIL
UCBO
PO BOX 446
YELM, WA 98597
LEMAY INC
PO BOX 44459
TACOMA WA 98444-0459
SENATOR MIKE KREIDLER
425 CHERBERG BUILDING
OLYMPIA WA 9850$
TOWN OF RAINIER
PO BOX 258
RAINIER WA 98576
PIERCE CO PLANNING
2401 S 35TH STREET
TACOMA WA 98409-7490
,
,
'R.W. THORPE & ASSOC.,INC.
:ATTN: JEFF BUCKLAND
I
I 705 SECOND AVE
I SUITE 910
i SEATTLE, WA. 98104
~---~~-~- - - - ~-- - - -~--
NO. 2 I TH. CO. FIRE DIST. NO. 2
IATTN: GENE COULTER
I P.O. BOX 777
, YE LM , W A . 9 8 5 9 7
GENE
R.W. THORPE & ASSOC.,INC.
ATTN: JEFF BUCKLAND
705 SECOND AVE
I SUITE 910
, SEATTLE, WA. 98104
I TH. CO. FIRE DIST.
ATTN: GENE COULTER
P.O. BOX 777
YELM, WA. 98597
I NISQUALLY RIVER COUNCIL
I ATTN: STEVE CRAIG
P.O. BOX 1076
YELM, WA. 98597
CITY OF CENTRALIA
POWER & LIGHT
ATTN: WILLIAM CUMMINGS
1100 BLACK N. TOWER AVE
CENTRALIA, WA. 98531
HENRY DRAGT
14848 LONGMIRE ST. SE
YELM, WA. 98597
TH. CO. PLANNING DEPT.
ATTN: PAULA EHLERS
2000 LAKERIDGE DR. S.W.
i OLYMPIA, WA. 98502
STEVE GLOVER
I CORPS & FT. LEWIS
ATTN: AFZH EHP-P
FT. LEWIS, WA. 98433-5000
RAINIER SCHOOL DIST.
ATTN: BOB GOLPHENEE
P.O. BOX 98
RAINIER, WA. 98576
GENE
i NISQUALLY RIVER COUNCIL
: ATTN: STEVE CRAIG
P.O. BOX 1076
I YELM, WA. 98597
i CITY OF CENTRALIA
I
POWER ,& LIGHT
ATTN: WILLIAM CUMMINGS
I 1100 BLACK N. TOWER AVE
! CENTRALIA, WA. 98531
HENRY DRAGT
i 14 84 8 LONGM IRE ST. SE
! YELM, WA. 98597
I TH. CO. PLANNING DEPT.
I
I ATTN: PAULA EHLERS
; 2000 LAKERIDGE DR. S.W.
I OLYMPIA, WA. 98502
~- I-
I
i
, STEVE GLOVER
I I CORPS & FT. LEWIS
ATTN: AFZH EHP-P
i FT. LEWIS, WA. 98433-5000
RAINIER SCHOOL DIST.
ATTN: BOB GOLPHENEE
P.O. BOX 98
RAINIER, WA. 98576
GENE
R.W. THORPE & ASSOC. ,INC.
ATTN: JEFF BUCKLAND
705 SECOND AVE
SUITE 910
i SEATTLE, WA. 98104
i TH. CO. FIRE DIST. NO. 2
I ATTN: GENE COULTER
P.O. BOX 777
YELM, WA. 98597
NISQUALLY RIVER COUNCIL
ATTN: STEVE CRAIG
P.O. BOX 1076
YELM, WA. 98597
CITY OF CENTRALIA
POWER & LIGHT
ATTN: WILLIAM CUMMINGS
1100 BLACK N. TOWER AVE
CENTRALIA, WA. 98531
,
--,- ~- --~
I
I
HENRY DRAGT
14848 LONGMIRE ST. SE..
YELM, WA. 98597
TH. CO. PLANNING DEPT.
ATTN: PAULA EHLERS
2000 LAKERIDGE DR. S.W.
OLYMPIA, WA. 98502
STEVE GLOVER
I CORPS & FT. LEWIS
ATTN: AFZH EHP-P
FT. LEWIS, WA. 98433-5000]
RAINIER SCHOOL DIST.
ATTN: BOB GOLPHENEE
P.O. BOX 98
RAINIER, WA. 98576
I
WA. DEPT. -OF-TRANSPORTATION II! ~A. ~~~EPT ~ --O-F --T~ANSPORTATIO~-rl W~ ~ D~P~. OF TRANSPORTATIO i
ATTN: BOB HOLCOMB I ATTN: BOB HOLCOMB ATTN: BOB HOLCOMB
DIST. 3 : DIST. 3 , DIST. 3
OLYMPIA, WA. 98504-7440 i OLYMPIA, WA. 98504-7440 OLYMPIA, WA. 98504-7440
PUGET POWER
ATTN: LARRY KARR
P.O. BOX 486
YELM, WA. 98597
WILLIAM PARKER
14947 LONGMIRE ST. S.E.
YELM, WA. 98597
ENTRANCO
ATTN: JON POTTER
10900 NE 8th STREET
SUITE 300
BELLEVUE, WA. 98004
-- ~--J-
I
I
JOHN PURVIS
14504 BERRY VALLEY RD.
YELM, WA. 98597
I
i
I
S. EI.
I
!
YELM COMMUNITY SCHOOLS
ATTN: i3'ERALD 8IIHIDTKE
P.O. BOX 476 -:JO\,V\ ~pZv I<-t i
YE LM , W A . 9 8 5 9 7 Ilnomse VI I
- -=- Con-~oH~ -JV1[l .- -
SKILLINGS & CHAMB,RrrkFN
ATTN: TOM SKILLINGS
P.O. BOX 5080
LACEY, WA. 98503
TH. CO. PLANNING DEPT. I
ATTN: JOlIN :30NNENf~cl ~Ot<::fttl'\ I
2000 LAKERIDGE DR. S.W.
OLYMPIA, WA. 98502
TODD
PAUL STEADMAN
1801 W. DAY ISLAND BLVD.
TACOMA, WA. 98466
DENNIS T. SU
1917 FIRST AVE.
SEATTLE, WA. 98101
PUGET POWER
ATTN: LARRY KARR
P.O. BOX 486
YELM, WA. 98597
WILLIAM PARKER
14947 LONGMIRE ST. S.E.
YELM, WA. 98597
ENTRANCO
ATTN: JON POTTER
10900 NE 8th STREET
SUITE 300
BELLEVUE, WA. 98004
JOHN PURVIS
14504 BERRY VALLEY RD. s.El
I
YELM, WA. 98597
YELM COMMUNITY SCHOOLS
ATTN: GERALD SHMIDTKE
P.O. BOX 476
YELM, WA. 98597
SKILLINGS & CHAMBERLAIN
ATTN: TOM SKILLINGS
P.O. BOX 5080
LACEY, WA. 98503
,
i
, -
TH. CO. PLANNING DEPT.
ATTN: JOHN SONNEN
2000 LAKERIDGE DR. S.W.
OLYMPIA, WA. 98502
PUGET POWER
ATTN: LARRY KARR
P.O. BOX 486
YELM, WA. 98597
WILLIAM PARKER
14947 LONGMIRE ST. S.E.
YELM, WA. 98597
ENTRANCO
ATTN: JON POTTER
10900 NE 8th STREET
SUITE 300
BELLEVUE, WA. 98004
JOHN PURVIS
14504 BERRY VALLEY RD. S.E
YELM, WA. 98597
1.
i
YELM COMMUNITY SCHOOLS
ATTN: GERALD SHMIDTKE
P.O. BOX 476
YELM, WA. 98597
SKILLINGS & CHAMBERLAIN
ATTN: TOM SKILLINGS
P.O. BOX 5080
LACEY, WA. 98503
TH. CO. PLANNING DEPT.
ATTN: JOHN SONNEN
2000 LAKERIDGE DR. S.W.
OLYMPIA, WA. 98502
,
,
.c
TODD
PAUL STEADMAN
1801 W. DAY ISLAND BLVD.
TACOMA, WA. 98466
_L
DENNIS T. SU
1917 FIRST AVE.
SEATTLE, WA. 98101
TODD
PAUL STEADMAN
1801 W. DAY ISLAND BLVD.
TACOMA, WA. 98466
DENNIS T. SU
1917 FIRST AVE.
SEATTLE, WA. 98101
+-
I R.W. THORPE & ASSOC.,INC.
ATTN: ROBERT W. THORPE
705 SECOND AVE.
SUITE 910
SEATTLE, WA. 98104
MARK TEITJEN
P.O. BOX 258
RAINIER, WA. 98576
NISQUALLY TRIBAL COUNCIL
ATTN: GEORGE WALTERS
4820 SHE-NAH-NUM DR. S.E.
OLYMPIA, WA. 98503
ROBERT WELCOME
1917 FIRST AVE.
SEATTLE, WA. 98101
R.W. THORPE & ASSOC.,INC.
ATTN: ROBERT W. THORPE
705 SECOND AVE.
SUITE 910
SEATTLE, WA. 98104
MARK TEITJEN
P.O. BOX 258
RAINIER, WA. 98576
NISQUALLY TRIBAL COUNCIL
I ATTN: GEORGE WALTERS
I 4820 SHE-NAH-NUM DR. S.E.
i OLYMPIA, .WA. 98503
I ROBERT WELCOME
1917 FIRST AVE.
SEATTLE, WA. 98101
I
I
- -i
I
R.W. THORPE & ASSOC.,INC.
ATTN: ROBERT W. THORPE
705 SECOND AVE.
SUITE 910
SEATTLE, WA. 98104
MARK TEITJEN
P.O. BOX 258
! RAINIER, WA. 98576
NISQUALLY TRIBAL COUNCIL
ATTN: GEORGE WALTERS
4820 SHE-NAH-NUM DR. S.E.
OLYMPIA, WA. 98503
ROBERT WELCOME
1917 FIRST AVE.
SEATTLE, WA. 98101
--I
--I
t
~r
i
~
'I
DISTRIBUTION LIST
~
I
"
H
IS ~
FEDERAL AGENCIES 1/,(. ~~.. I':? ;1
Anny Coq>S of EngIDeers .-- ~~ ~
Department of Defense - .. . . n -Jll-~~ ~~~ PI.., J i~
I&tFederalCommunicationsCommission tJM/IIe/lJ~ ~~Wl t.(Jf./J 3'd~ /9:1nd A- SE)6etlevlt~ 98'~!
lilt Region 10, Environmental Protection Agency I ~/) /) Sl~+h,A-1I-i 5ea.-f+le q ~ 16} CArV' -#rda./) ~
Soil Conservation Service .' 1
"'U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Region 10 ~ (8;1./ Seccf\c:J. Ave. Sea:J:i:l~ !
u.s. Fish and Wildlife Service ~ V'l()/ i
I
i
I
J
,
I
I
f
I
I
I
!
i
I
I
i
t,
a
1,
I
r
,;
:f
I
,-
I
STATE AGENCIES
Department of Agriculture
Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation
Department of Community Development
Department of Ecology (2)
~DepartmentofEmergencyServices% DqI'lJf~I)\~.1).eV" E')'kc!Y'q.~. "0;'" "l~O l!. M.a.r-h~ W.
Department of Fisheries Ol..t.j'&f'ilS'{j'/_ 8',,/41) PT-!!
Department of Natural Resources
~Department of Social and !fealth Services M.a.il S,J"p 0 6 - 4/ l./ OL~. q esc 1./
Department of Transportation '
Department of Wildlife
Nisqually River Council
IIfOffice of Governor L~i,.'4-h',,~'"8t~,/1G5-/3J aL~ .Q8StJ4f
,..,.,Washington Environmental Council f l O~3' ~tfV' tV~ CScJ' q 7i~ tJ/
/f(Was~ngtonStateEnergyOfficey~q Le~;m tJ~5'~, F'A-1J,OL . Q8!d'/-/J./1
""'Washmgton State PatrolG~t\. Mm;" 61.J1J A" I" "" . q o~ Ll
. a""l') ,.- IIA I tJ L,<<c1' (J rJ(J"T - <Jf4/:J.
THURSTON COUNTY DEPARTMENTS
Office of Thurston County Commissioners
Thurston County Department of Health
Thurston County Department of Public Works
Thurston County Department of Water Quality and Resource Management
Thurston County Parks and Recreation Department
Thurston County Planning Department
Thurston County Sheriffs Department
I
r
i
,
LOCAL AGENOES AND MUNICIP AUTIES
City of Centralia
Olympic Air Pollution Control Authority
Puget Power
,""Puget Sound Regional Council' 01/" I S"" A lJ~ S. 5ea.f+l ~ q 8 M ~
4lilPuget Sound Water Quality Authority y.~. i.oX141aQtm I Ot.-'1. q95~~-d9dd
Rainier School District
JItBouth Puget Environmental Education Gearing House
Thurston County Economic Development Council
Thurston County Fire District No.2
,wThurston Housing Authority 505 W es--I: ~ A-ve. Oh ~.q 8~/
Thurston Neighborhood Group [. ~hbrlt! beJo/?J -:J
Thurston Regional Planning Council
Town of Rainier
Yelm School District
~
U
132
r
1\
-SPt't'th- (MYnpJdl6ef)
1r~~
(p 3'-19-
-'
-llIIiI,j:j~.'(
-1----=~~ iB.lll:i6J.&Illa ~~'
-
~ g
.1, q
'~Jl'!
~:1...i:: ~;
0,_ ,
j". .~
'j
, ,
I -
MEDIA
Nisqually Valley News.
~amtha Newsletter 1) l oJ&<3L.<.e S'" P. ~.'eaX' 1:21 0 ~ l/ elm
/;fb'facoma Tribune
The Olympian
.
,
'I
I
'i::
"
.f
,-
f:.
.~
MISCELLANEOUS ORGANIZA nONS
......AudubonSociety~ Sf -~ ~ gr.l .-l.~ 7 f/,- ?()).tJ
bfM:ity of Yelm Public Library
Nisqually Indian Tribe
Nisqually River Council
N1Sierra Club
M'timberland Library, Ydm EFancR aM Olympia Branch
b4fI Yelm Chamber of Commerce
Ol~
p,{J. -</~~ qgS-O?
U
:~
\
\
133
I
I
I \
\
II
1
II
\
'-I
.... .
';~', '
t~.
t;t~r~
~f,:
'.
I
"
I
iJ
ta'
I :~
- ,,\
tiP ~ /-1191>-,9 j)~J,.JV;Pd#!J
M :: 1J1~/I.GtJ
DISTRIBUTION LIST
FEDERAL AGENCIES
Army Corps of Engineers M
Department of Defense - Fort Lewis Military Reservation'" {Ill
Federal Communications Commission Nl
Region 10, Environmental Protection Agency M
Soil Conservation Service M.
V.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Region 10 M
V.5. Fish and Wildlife Service fr\
STATE AGENCIES
Department of Agriculture N\
Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation fr1
Department of Community Development M
Department of Ecology (2) 1-1 f)
Department of Emergency Services flit
Department of Fisheries I1l
Department of Natural Resources N\
Department of Social and Health Services JIfI
Department of Transportation ... PI J,., J
Department of Wildlife Nt)
Nisqually River Council f'I\
Office of Governor flit
Washington Environmental Council fIA
Washington State Energy Office jill
Washington State Patrol f4.
I
U
THURSTON COUNTY DEPARTMENTS
Office of Thurston County Commissioners IIi)
Thurston County Department of Health IJ 0
Thurston County Department of Public Works HD
Thurston County Department of Water Quality and Resource Management 110
Thurston County Parks and Recreation De~ent ND
Thurston County Planning Department H f)
Thurston County Sheriffs Department /;/.f)
LOCAL AGENCIES AND MUNICIP AUTIES
City of Centralia M
Olympic Air Pollutio:1 Control Authority II/)
Puget Power M
Puget Sound Regional Council flA
Puget Sound Water Quality Authority Jl/Io
Rainier School District HO
South Puget EnviromnentaI Education Gearing House M
Thurston County Economic Development Council 11 /)
Thurston County Fire District No.2 /II\.
Thurston Housing Authority fA
Thurston Neighborhood Group
Thurston Regional Planning Council H 0
Town of Rainier II P
Yelm School District M
:+1vn;JtJ.U? 11IA""TT ~ HD
132
l'2i#-
Illllf..;,
.4.o1.-"dD1iS
MEDIA
Nisqually Valley News UP
Ramtha Newsletter i"\
Tacoma Tribune JVt
The Olympian H!)
MISCELLANEOUS ORGANIZATIONS.. .
Audulx>n Society j\A
City of Yelm Public Library H D
Nisqually Indian Tribe II!)
Nisqually River Council M
Sierra Club M
Timberland Library, ~lm BrM\m aDd Olympia Branch H D
Yelm Chamber of Commerce tI D
A~Ed
. o1l
YELM HAILING LIST
DEPARTMENT OF FISHERIES
, 115 GENERAL ADMINISTRATION BLDG
MAIL STOP AX..-ll
OLYMPIA WA 98504
U S DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR
I
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
OLYMPIA FIELD OFFICE
2525 PARKMOUNT LANE
SW , B-2
OLYMPIA WA 98504
MR HAROLD ROBERTSON, DIRECTOR
v THURSTON COUNTY REGIONAL PLANNING
?,0'80}1~ERI:i5GEr DR SW
7~ /r Xp r -
OLYMPIA WA 98502
?
(J JJ.,p'l'"...7 LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS
../
/ dtJ C/lfJ 4JJJ 1
I07 W UNION
OLYMPIA WA 98501
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
MARINE LAND DIVISION
MAIL STOP EX-12
OLYMPIA WA 98504
/ ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH PROGRAMS
JJ6f1- $W DJ-V-I-S-ION-OE- DRINKING WATER C>/)8C1I1//p..r
SOUTHWEST OPERATIONS
p~ 3J.t' Y7frl(3
MAIL STOP LD-11
OLYMPIA WA 98504
/ DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
MAIL STOP AX-41
OLYMPIA WA 98504
v DEPARTMENT OF WILDLIFE
MAIL STOP GJ-11
OLYMPIA WA 98504
SOIL CONVERSATION SERVICE
EVERGREEN PLAZA BUILDING
711 CAPITOL WAY
OLYMPIA WA 98501
U S ARMY COPRS OF ENGINEERS
SEATTLE DISTRICT
REGULATORY FUNCTION BRANCH
POBOX C-3755
SEATTLE WA 98124
DEPT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT MAIL STOP KL-11
COMMUNITY PRESERVATION & DEVELOPMENT
OFFICE OF ARCHAEOLOGY AND
HISTORIC PRESERVATION
OLYMPIA WA 98504
MR PHILLIP BRINKER 2000 LAKERIDGE DR SW OLYMPIA WA 98502
THURSTON COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT
OLYMPIA AIR POLLUTION CONTROL 120 E STATE ST OLYMPIA WA 98501
AUTHORITY
DEPARTMEHNT OF ECOLOGY MAIL STOP PV-11 OLYMPIA WA 98504
..; MR BILL CUMMINGS 1100 N TOWER AVE CENTRALIA WA 98531
CENTRALIA CITY LIGHT DEPARTMENT
./ SQUAX..IN ISLAND ~IBAL CENTER WEST~,-~HIGHWAY 108 SHELTON WA 98584
II-fflt~ tI~&~ ICItIJ()N V ~"'--
NISQUALLY INDIAN TRIBE 4820 SHE-NAH-NUM DR SE OLYMPIA WA 98503
b P. () 'r. .,. fV1] /hd1J '/!JIJVG 4/7 I J V.
v P ft>>7 C"",~ un;,? I?'''f/''~
A .,-,": T,pcl619'E
Lt
/ A- 1"r~, /JIII/(.{J /I1e (~I</fUe 1(" AS5T.. /lilt.
/h IJ/I.. S T~r
-ff1 . ~. 6'-/.:1
(;I=I-S-/
dLy
?IY()~- YIJ'i
... \
II
04-01-~1 01 36FM POI
___' _, 0"4_"
"Au. .
--.--------:,:;:::=:::;:::..::=,;:-.=..-""....
.._..._.,_._.__...- .~n,_.,._.___.
~---.-'.-"".F.T -..,,',"'''':, '~;:-e'. - j.""~1~'S~3i87'75a';~\~ff~GE.:~::~ 0 2;:;~~~:f~f1j~.:iX:
l-~----
SEP 25 '90 14.24
** TOTAL PRGE.002 **
---'--~
",.. - .....-lfllr'~...N.l~~11
ii~~;;S"'J;"~~t;"'"'';;:'illit''''~1:,::it''1.~':':';'ir;iili.i~.;'~'r'~~''>>'::""'~iI~fj'hriW:J;". ~'f'-."~""'" "-.u. UlIif" -~. '.~...."
,~,~ .. If".\, R":'~ji.,iJa;UiJ-,,.jlllft~'~~i':~~~.~*,~L, ~J~~?1f:f~1
1': ~~.i,,,,,~~(1i1l-j(~),,;;;i .~"'-" ',',,';;" ""'4~~~j
THE HONORABLE RON LAWTON
POBOX 479
YELM WA 98597
NISQUALLY PINES COMMUNITY CLUB
P.O BOX 669
YELM VIA 98597
SIERRA CLUB-SASQUATCH GROUP
~eK, 'fOQtI or YEU1
2929 S CENTRAL
OLYMPIA VIA 98501
-
.--.... _._.-------~
-;c".7-':';"~ ,~~"~""",_",,-"~,,,,-~~'~1~i:ii-#~-"jji;f;~~1,~-;ir".:;;.::~:~~t~:;;'1~~a~'i~~~f,~"""':-
,.
EXHIBIT A TO CERTIFICATE OF MAILING
Skillings & Chamberlain
Attn Perry Shea
PO Box 5080
Lacey, W A 98503
Department of Ecology
Environmental Review Section
Attn Barbara Ritchie
Mail Stop PV-11
Olympia, WA 98504-8711
v Thurston County Assessor
2000 Lakeridge Dnve SW
Olympia, WA 98502
Thurston County Auditor
2000 Lakeridge Drive SW
Olympia, WA 98502
Don Barnard
City of Yelm
PO Box 479
Yelm, WA 98597
Thurston Co Building Dept
Building 1
2000 Lakendge Dnve SW
Olympia, WA 98502
Thurston County
Boundary Review Board
2000 Lakendge Drive SW
Olympia, WA 98502
/ UCBO
Attention Cindy Cecil
PO Box 446
Yelm, WA 98597
./
County Commissioners
Building 1
2000 Lakeridge Drive SW
Olympia, W A 98502
v
Thurston County
Communications
Building 3
2000 Lakeridge Drive SW
Olympia, WA 98502
Chief Glenn Dunhnam
Yelm Police Department
PO Box 479
Yelm, WA 98597
City of Yelm Fire Department
Attn Bill Steele
PO Box 777
Yelm, WA 98597
Judge Tom Huff
Yelm Municipal Court
PO Box 479
Yelm, WA 98597
Tim Peterson
City of Yelm
PO Box 479
Yelm, WA 98597
Thurston County
Public Works
Attn Bill Turner
2000 Lakeridge Drive SW
Olympia, WA 98502
Thurston County
Road Division
Attn Jim Bachmeier
9700 Tilly Road
Olympia, W A 98502
Yelm Telephone Co
Attn Tom Gorman
PO Box 593
Yelm, WA 98597
Randall Walker
PO Box 0
Yelm, WA 98597
,.( Postmaster
Yelm Post Office
Yelm, WA 98597 - 9998
Thurston County Planning
2000 Lakeridge Drive SW
Olympia, WA 98502
Puget Power
PO Box 486
Yelm, WA 98597
Department of Revenue
Attn Joan Hays
Txpyr Acct. Administration
General Administration Bldg
MS AX-02
Olympia, WA 98504
Thurston County Elections
Attn Steve Homan
2000 Lakeridge Drive SW
Olympia, WA 98502
Washington Natural Gas
Attn Jim Chartrey
3120 Martin Way East
Olympia, WA 98506
Daisy Lawton
City of Yelm
PO Box 479
Yelm, WA 98597
/ LeMay, Inc
PO Box 44459
Tacoma, WA 98444-0459
Thurston Regional
Planning Council
Attn Harold Robertson
2000 Lakeridge Dnve SW
Olympia, WA 98502
Nisqually Tribal Council
Attn George Walter
4820 She-Nah-Num Drive SE
Olympia, W A 98506
./ Nisqually Indian Tribe
Attn Kim M Crawford
4820 She-Nah-Num Drive SE
Olympia, W A 98506
v Squaxin Tribal Council
Attn Jeff Dickison
SE 70 Squaxin Lane
Shelton, WA 98584
Nisqually River Planning Council
Attn Steve Craig
4820 She-Nah-Num Drive SE
Olympia, WA 98506
Olympic Air Pollution Control Authority
Attn Charles E. Peace
120 East State Ave
Olympia, WA 98501
I Washington Dept. of Wildlife
Attn Gordy Zillges
600 Capitol Way North
Olympia, WA 98504
v' Washington Dept. of Natural Resources
Attn Dave Dietzman
John Cherberg Building
MS - LB-13
Olympia, WA 98504
I
Washington Dept. of Fisheries
Attn connie Iten
General Administration Bldg
MS AX-11
Olympia, WA 98504
Yelm School Distnct
404 Yelm Avenue W
Yelm, WA 98597
Washington Dept. of Transportation
Attn George Simms
Transportation Building
Olympia, W A 98504-7329
Representative Jennifer Belcher
323 Maple Park Ave SE
Olympia, WA 98501
Representative Karen Frasier
6710 Sierra Drive SE
Lacey, W A 98503
Senator Mike Kreidler
I 425 Cherberg Building
Olympia, W A 98504
Washington Dept. of Agriculture
Attn Mary Poochey
J 406 General Administration Bldg
MS AX - 41
Olympia, WA 98504
Thurston County
I Parks & Recreation Dept.
Attn Michael Welter
529 West 4th
Olympia, WA 98502
Town of Rainier /lfJ (A 5$
j 102 Rochester Street W
Rainier, WA 98576
City of Lacey
/ Attn Bob Patnlck
PO Box "B"
Lacey, W A 98503
City of Roy
/ Attn Penny Barlow City Clerk
PO Box 700
Roy, WA 98580
Pierce County Planning Dept.
I 2401 South 35th Street
Tacoma, WA 98409-7490
Intercity Transit
Atln Randy Riness/Michael VanGelder
PO Box 659
Olympia, WA 98507
/ Timberland Library
105 Yelm Avenue W
Yelm, WA 98597
Mr Don Miller
Nlsqually Valley News
207 Yelm Avenue W
Yelm, WA 98597
State of Washington
Dept. of Community Development
Atln Mike McCormick
Growth Management Division
101 General Administration Bldg
Olympia, W A 98504
Michael Van Gelder
PO Box 659
Olympia, WA 98507
Greg Griffith
Community Development
Archaeology /Hlstorlc
MS KL-11
Olympia, WA 98504
Alexander W Mackie
VOWENS DAVIES MACKIE
PO Box 187
Olympia, WA 98507
John & Patsy Purvis
14504 Berry Valley Road SE
Yelm, WA 98597
Ute Allen
17010 Smith Prairie Road SE
Yelm, WA 98597
Donald Anderson
8540 93rd Avenue
Yelm, WA 98597
Gene Borges
Yelm City Hall
PO Box 479
Yelm, WA 98597
Eleanor Brand
12401 Bronson Street SE
Tenino, WA 98589
Jim Brown
10823 Morris Road SE
Yelm, WA 98597
Norman Buckholz
29630 11th Ave SW
Federal Way, WA 98023
Steve Craig
Dept. of Ecology
MS PV-11
Olympia, WA 98504
Councilman A. Drogseth
Yelm City Council
PO Box 273
Yelm, WA 98597
Tom Gorman
PO Box 593
Yelm, WA 98597
Joe Huddleston
14129 93rd Avenue SE
Yelm, WA 98597
,~
Cecelia Jenkins
Dir Community Education
PO Box 476
Yelm, WA 98597
Councilman Rick Kolilis
Yelm City Council
1512 Yelm Ave West
Yelm, WA 98597
Councilman Amos Lawton
PO Box 1182
Yelm, WA 98597
Carol Lewis
PO Box 925
Yelm, WA 98597
\Rio~rd Molter
8~ 11 Aspen Ct. SE
!Ye,m, WA 98597
Vernon Staack
11740 Cook Road SE
Yelm, WA 98597
The Olympian
PO Box 407
Olympia, WA 98507
Mayor Bob Sanders
PO Box 141
Yelm, WA 98597
Zachary Smith
1210 N Puget
Olympia, WA 98506
Judy Nettleton
PO Box 217
McKenna, WA 98558
Kathy Wolf
PO Box 966
Yelm, WA 98597
Representative Randy Dorn
House of Representatives
House Office Building
Olympia, WA 98504
Representative Marilyn Rasmussen
House of Representatives
33419 Mountain Hwy E.
Eatonville, WA 98328
Colonel Carroll Dickson
Garrison Commander
,j HDOTRS I CORPS & FORT LEWIS
Ft. Lewis, WA 98433-5000
Commander
/ Corps & Ft. Lewis
Attn AFZH-DEOj JERBIC
Ft. Lewis, WA 98533
~C~hY A. Jerbic
Commander
! Corps & Fort Lewis
Attn AFOH - DEO
Fort Lewis, WA 98433
/ Thurston County Environmental Health
Attn Gregg Gruenfelder
921 Lakeridge Drive, Room 113
Olympia, WA 98502
Yelm Chamber of Comrilerce
Attn Kathy Gilliam, E~Gulive Dlredul
PO Box 444
Yelm, WA 98597
j Thurston County Economic Development Council
Attn Kathy A. Combs, Executive Director
721 Columbia S W
Olympia, WA 98501
jKCM
Attn Dennis Su
1917 First Avenue
Seattle, WA 98101
Jon Potter EXHIBIT B TO CERTIFICATE OF MAILING
Entranco Engineers, Inc.
1 0900 N E. 8th Street, Ste 300
Bellevue, WA 98004
,
City of YelDl
105 Yelm Avenue West
POBox 479
Yelm, Washington 98597
206-458-3244
January 22
1993
Kramer Chin and Mayo Inc
1917 First Avenue
Seattle WA 98101
Attn Denn1s Su
Subject SW Yelm Annexation Hearing
Dear Mr Su
Enclosed for your review 15 the draft of the minutes from
the Yelm Planning Commission s special meeting of January 4
1992 The Commission is scheduled to adopt these minutes on
Monday January 25 Thus, if you have any comments or
corrections please let me know as soon as possible (If you
do not rece1ve this letter by Monday corrections may still
be made at a later meeting)
As you know the Commission will be discussing the Southwest
Yelm Annexation at its next work session on Monday. February
I urge you to attend that meeting
Sincerely
-. /
-/. -'-
/ c;>~ )A~:$;?;'~~
Todd Stamm
City Planner
Enclosure
1/4/93 draft minutes
P S While I appreciated your offer to purchase dinner at
Doug s the other evening my conscience has gotten the
better of me Therefore, enclosed you will find my
poersonal check for $5 00 reimburs1ng your costs I m
sure you will understand that th1S is not meant to
reflect on your generosit~ but is meant merely to
correct my error 1n violating City policy
~;.
CITY OF YELM
PLANNING COMMISSION
SW YELM ANNEXATION DRAFT EIS PUBLIC HEARING
JANUARY 4, 1992, 7:00 P.M., CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
Tim Schlosser, Planning Commission Chair, opened the meeting at
7:00 p.m.
Members Present: Tim Schlosser, Jlm Brown, Jim Keyes, George
Knight, John Kinnee, Roberta Longmire, Joe Huddleston, Tom Cundy
and Tom Gorman.
Guests Paul Steadman, Jon & Mary Lou Clemens, Ken Hofferber,
Elene Newby, Bob Golphenee of the Rainier School District, Ed
Kenney, Ronald Laughlin, Michael Ci trak, Mark Carpenter, John
Graver, John Tokarezyk, Kat Ravter, Charles Brown, Fred Enslon,
Michael Jlmenez, Brad Barrett and Genevieve Glassy Patsy Purvis,
David Purvis, Jess & Gayle Hoffman, Rhonda Eilers, Pepper Iverson,
Peter Paulson, LeRoy Bendien, Tom Cline Amy Healy and Bev Kolilis.
Dennis Su of Kramer Chin and Mayo, Bob Hazlett of S Chamberlaln
and Associates, Robert Thorpe of R. W. Thorpe and Associates.
Staff present: Gene Borges, Shelly Badger, Todd Stamm and Agnes
Colombo.
By lot, the following staggered new terms were selected for
Commission members (all terms will be three years following this
current term.
1 Year Term
Jim Keyes
Tom Cundy
Joe Huddleston
2 Year Term
Jlm Brown
Tim Schlosser
Roberta Longmlre
3 Year Term
Tom Gorman
George Knlght
John Kenney
SW Yelm Annexation Ers Public Hearing was opened at 7: 05 p.m.
Chair Tim Schlosser explained the purpose of the Public Hearing.
All speakers were requested to identify themselves prior to
speaking and to add their names to the sign-in sheet if they wlshed
to speak or be included on the mailing list for future mailings of
Public Hearings concerning the annexation. Commissioner Joe
Huddleston identified himself as a neighbor of the proposed
annexation and asked if anyone present objected to his
partlcipation. No objectlon was voiced. No audience objectlons to
any Planning Commission members participation was voiced. No
members had received information, other than staff reports, prior
to the public hearing.
Todd Stamm, Yelm Planning Department, gave a brief overview of the
Public Hearlng. He explained that the annexation would include
approximately 2,000 acres belonging to 38 property owners. Stamm
indicated that the property could be developed outside the City,
possibly at 1 dwelling per 5 acres. Options available to the
Commission are recommending annexation of all, part or no~e of the
property. The Commission may also recommend conditions to be
attached to the annexation.
The closing date for written comments is January 15, 1993. Comment
will also be accepted when the matter goes before the City Council
YELM PLANNING COMMISSION 1/4/93
SWYA DRAFT EIS PUBLIC HEARING
PAGE 1
Additional copies of the Draft EIS were available at the meeting.-
Stamm distributed Ordinance No. 414 to Commission members defining
City objectives and policies for annexations.
Stamm pointed out correctlons to the Draft EIS. On page 16 the
SEPA Process Chart should go from Prelimlnary Decision to Boundary
Review Board. On page 114, paragraph 3, discharge to the Centralia
Power canal lS authorized by a contract with the City of Centralia.
The NPDES permit has not been issued Stamm also pointed out that
the permits requested for Yelm's Sewer System do not accommodate
the annexation or development of the property.
Stamm advised the Commisslon that they would be dealing wlth
annexation questions only, any development lssues would be resolved
at a later date. Based on available information the Commlssion
must determine and make a recommendation to the Clty Council to
either approve or deny the annexation request If the Commission
feels It doesn't have adequate informatlon to make a recommendation
the Commission has the option of requesting addltlonal information
from the proponents
Dennis Su, representing the proponents, explained that he was at
the meeting to clarify any questions the Commlssion or audience
might have He introduced Bob Hazlett of S Chamberlain &
Assoclates and Robert Thorp and a staff member of R.W. Thorpe and
Associates. Mr. Thorpe lndicated that he was there to respond to
any questlons the audlence or Commlssion might have and that any
written comments received would be glven the same conslderation as
comments made at the meeting.
The floor was opened to publlc comment.
Mark Carpenter - stated that he owned property adj acent to the
annexation and requested the inclusion of his property in the
annexation Tim Schlosser indicated that it was logically possible
to include the property and questioned the legality of adding Mr,
Carpenter's property. Stamm replied that he would llke a day or
two to examine the issue and stated that if included as part of the
annexation it would also have to be included in the final EIS.
Dennis Su - proponent representative indicated that he would take
the matter under consideratlon.
Peter Paulson - asked if Manke Road was included in the annexation.
Tim Schlosser replied that Manke Rd was not lncluded.
Bob Golphnee - Rainier School Distrlct Superlntendent I read a
letter to the Commission expressing concerns about the impact of
the proposed SW Yelm Annexation on the Rainier School District. He
stated that a portlon of the annexation is located within Rainler
School Dlstrict boundaries and indicated that statute mandates each
incorporated city or town to be comprised in a single school
district. Exceptions may require invoking the jurisdiction of the
State Board of Education as per RCW 28A.315.
YELM PLANNING COMMISSION 1/4/93
SWYA DRAFT EIS PUBLIC HEARING
PAGE 2
\
Mr. Golphnee requested that Yelm declare if their intent is to
change the property in question to the Yelm School District. He
requested that the interests of the Rainier School District be
considered and that the district be kept fully informed of all
progress related to the annexation.
Jim Keyes requested that Mr Golphnee indicate on the map which
property was within the Rainier School District. Mr. Golphnee
indicated "Section 27"
Tom Gorman asked the percentage of total assessed value for the
dlstrlct from the parcels falling within the proposed annexation.
Mr. Golphnee replled that he did not have that information.
Dennis Su lndicated that the Ralnier School District portion was an
isolated sector within the SW Yelm Annexatlon boundaries and that
no residences exist on the property He added that when the state
drew school district boundaries for some reason Section 27 as well
as part of Ft. Lewis was placed In the Rainier School District.
Gene Borges added that the lssue of school district boundaries had
been discussed one to two years ago. The annexation proponents
were aware of the issue and had been in contact with the Yelm
School District.
Ed Kenney - Commented on the Wastewater Facillty Section, In both
the Draft EIS and Appendlces. Mr. Kenney indicated that it was his
bellef that sewer was not feasible as presented on page 114 (EIS)
much less with the projected five-fold increase. He stated that
the NPDES Permit was still being sought and that regulatory
agencies considered Yelm's plan to be marglnally acceptable for
Yelm's current population He stated that the proposed lagoon would
treat just 65% of the sewage and that most individuals, fishing
groups, citizen's groups, agencles have a problem with that level
of treatment. He stated that Yelm would have a lot of problems
trying to increase the amount of dlscharge going into the canal. He
suggested that the entire section be reworked and stated that a lot
of the figures didn't add up.
Robert Thorpe, R.
Kenney s low his
comments.
W. Thorpe and Assoclates, requested that Mr.
presentation so notes could be taken of his
Mr. Kenney then addressed the concurrency portion of the
document, Table 18 (pg. 125) in the back of the EIS, he stated that
it was very brief, and that he (Mr. Kenney) didn't think it was
very well figured out. He questloned the figure of 5,500 unlts @
$1800/unit = $9,900,000 and stated that he didn't believe it was
fair to laymen to not identify what a unit actually is. He asked
if a unit was an onsite step system that goes to the main plant?
He thought there would be a lot more detailed informatlon in the
documents.
Tim Schlosser asked If there were any additional comments from the
audience or Commissioners.
YELM PLANNING COMMISSION 1/4/93
SWYA DRAFT EIS PUBLIC HEARING
PAGE 3
/
Ed Kenney - asked if anyone wanted to respond to his questions.
Robert Thorpe stated that Dana Mower was not able to attend this
evening. Thorpe thought that he understood Mr. Kenney's questions
and that a graphic showing systems may be necessary. He will
provide a draft to Mr. Kenney to see if he is headed in the rlght
dlrection.
Tom Gorman lnquired about stormwater drainage (page 119) He had
been on the property and asked which of the alternatives appealed
to the proponent as a lot of surface water doesn't run-off into
Thompson Creek; it accumulates in depressions where it eventually
evaporates or runs-off
Dennis Su stated that he dld not have an lmrnediate answer as the
final layout for the slte had not been determined. It would depend
on wetlands use of open space etc. and probably would be
combination of all.
Tlm Schlos ser questioned the percentage of responsibility for
increased traffic and road improvements.
Bob Hazlett stated that the amount of traffic reflected ln the
document was that expected to be on the road if the development
scenarlO took place. Responsibility was addressed in the Yelm
Comprehensive Transportation Plan.
The Public Hearlng was closed at 7:50 P M.
The audlence was reminded of the 11 day period for written comment
The Planning Commission wlll follow up on this issue at their
February 1, 1993 work session at 4:00 p.m., in the Yelm City Hall
Council Chambers.
Meeting adjourned at 7.55 P.M.
Submltted,
-,/j ,/;/}/
Ci$, II U ~ L ilIff} &)
YELM PLANNING COMMISSION 1/4/93
SWYA DRAFT EIS PUBLIC HEARING
PAGE 4
1~
Council Membership:
Pierce County
Thurston County
Lewis County
State of Washington.
Parks and Recreation Com-
mission
Dept. of Natural Resources
Dept. of Agriculture
Dept. of Ecology
Dept. of Fisheries
Dept. of Wildlife
Secretary of State
V W Pack Experimental
Forest
V.S. Army, Fort Lewis
Nisqually Indian Tribe
Nisqually National Wildlife
Refuge
Gifford Pinchot National
Forest
Mount Rainier National Park
Tacoma City Light
Town ofYelm
Town of Eatonville
City of Roy
Citizens Advisory Committee:
Three Citizen Members
Nisqually River Council
P.O. Box 1076
Yelm, Washington 98597
. )}
v<r'v'
~ (
- c.
..,
January II, 1993
Todd Stamm
City Planner
City ofYelm
PO Box479
Yelm, WA 98597
Dear Mr Stamm'
The Nisqually River Council respectfully requests that the
City of Yelm grant the Council a two-week extension for
comment on the Southwest Yelm Annexation DEIS from
January 15th until Janum)' 29th
The Council has not determined whether or not it wishes
to comment, and will do so at its next meeting on January
15th Given the current deadline, we would not be able to
offer meaningful comment unless we receive an extension
Please convey your response to our Staff Coordinator, Steve
Craig, at 459-6780 Thank you for your attention
Sincerely,
{)~O
Diane Oberquell
Chairman
DO:pcm
~ M;4~
9.yal!~X~!!~~W!t
o
YELM, WASHINGTON 98597
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION
STATE OF WASHINGTON
County of Thurston
D R Miller
That the annexed is a Irue copy of
Hearing SW Yelm Annexation Draft EIS
as il was published in regular issues (and nol in supplemenl form) of said
newspaper once a week for a period of 2
17
day
consecutive weeks, commencing on Ihe
December 92
of , 19 _, and ending on the I
24 day of December ,19 92 I
both dates inclusive and thaI such newspaper was regularly distributed I:
to its subscribers during all of said period. Thallhe full amount of Ihe !:
I
00 ;:
, I
fee charged for the foregoing publication is the sum of $ 234
which amounl has been paid in full.
b I ()" ~~/'-
~y-~'~ 7~/...~
. '/- /"'~ -
'.~~--,-~
NOlary P.~bliC:~1,!.i,"d:l6i-th9 Slate of Washington,
- -.;:--.1........... ---_
~ -;::/>::-~ --'- -resiOin~i Yelm, Washington.
~~-:: "\.".---~
.~~ -..
This form o"ici~li;sanction..id by the
Washington NewspaperPUbiishers' Association
-'-
-------
---~
- ~ ---..
--.-----.
~".."'-""""""',$..
1)
o
COl
(fJOJ
(j)~
(fJ'g.
~~
OJ (fl
" <l>
(fl :J
'() \ f "'::::-'l~~ \ " r _~:!tV ~~V J
c \\(S C1IlJ))\...~\)\1 c-~~-"'./
o ,\,,- ,:::J '-='~ ,,~)( t, ( n
~ ...... - ............-;;;.~ \ \\'-'-
:"-::::: ~~ t~~ ~:::.~:::::: (~\ '--"'\\(---,.. -\ '\
~ ~ -'>;. -.. ,~)'-JI r)\,\\, C-;J)/Ij
~~_/ \ ,~ / \) '\' ./
-., 1~2"'" '^!./") ) " /r-\/ \ '-~...-=--~--- '-
",--' , ( <; l ~/ ,. ~_./
- \ (\;:-)'s;:-( \ . ( '\ ~ / ~~/
<; " ~ ,,~,\ \,~,( I r0 '\ (:J ()" l ') "-
lr/ ( ~ ,.....J) --......:....., \ ~((, '---___..---. \./ '
~ \ I ,'---/ "'-- ~ ~ (, ' '------- L _/ ./
o () '') J/ I ........ '\, --'0 I \'~~~--..... ./ I
g )(0 1tf\' \ rr\,\ \~......",-) I ",e)=-::::::-~- / /(
(fl IV' II ~ \1 \ J, '......' "" \~,,-:::y.. (/
~ .J~ i;"'\ll \ ~ ) '--.j"':; ~ ) --... '-... \ I (
5' '(> l' I)}) ~ r- '1~~-./~ ,,) \
<0 \,)}(' ~jl(,/ ~,~\ '" <:'\(? v\~J, ", :-~ ( ))
m ~ _"J// f I / j(/) If ............/', )//n
,5 '-- \Ojf ((J I \ '(/ jl) 1'\ (:'J~ 1(,/ I
5' h) \ \ ( II.;:-..r~(,dl ~ 'I \IJ./,> 'J'( /
<l> '-) ~(()\ v. -"/..........(
<l> /', ./-) ) '>.~ ~-::.--. J I !,,/ '::......
.Ul _-"oq, I ) 1:'-=::- - c;:::;'?=-i:: -./(0 / ) _.J (II) r\('" /\) ~::>......
5' r ./ ,/w~--./ :::--\~ .oIl 0. (, '- /.....................
o ./" '1 (' /.o'l~//-----=---6C))')':) \(((~ / lIS (-........... '...........
( \ \../.:W// ...-,(;i \ '-'" I '\ ,'--,;-...1 .... \ :..... ,
',~\ ~I/ --- ____ ~'l \ " ......
~ l \ /1/' - --;\ \ --/ '- 0 \..: / '- ~'I'T(./ ""- '.
~ ~?:!J;;/I I I,.J '(":':~1 \ ~-.::::.~\ )\\~ ( --....~'\. i) C"; (I,; I
- ~'-)~( If(~/3"q----.\ I~\\\~//__~J) ~ /\~~./"" -' I
\.. "'..) ;1 \ (//-----/ (- '....... I
"".......0 \ I \\ \11 Jr(f;-<\/ \ ) ./"-~\' 1"./""-
'~~:, l \ \\\\\;1_~ <-_~~ \\ \ 1 <~~ \ ~~\ I <
, ' '..." "" ) \\~ (~'/ ' ," ) (I ( , J I ("-
\' ~.:::-::::~\~\ '-' \\\~J\II '-" ) ~'\ ( -'::-''< / I ,--t j i
'I' ,,-~ II II @\I \ I,," J........---.- ,
~ ;;~) I) ) J \ I ~ 1\.....1 Ij I ,/ __) 'v-~ - j 1[' ( \"i
~~//. I) I) \--::, '-~'- ~ (' @\J~I;J ~ iJl'
.:>""-// J ,.________ =-- N " -~-~
~'=-- ./(:> I ".... ( --....'-;:W~ \\ "', I '1\
~./ \~' _ '- '\ '" ('\",\'\.\.,~ \ ~ f,'\
\"J I r (,- '\\;\'I!I\~--,\\~'~ t-J\
I \ ' \ (" t I :~ \ " - ~\ \ '\ )
I ~-'"\ ./) ) '--J ) '~~<i~aJ........\'--.....I-J \
I / //" ---./ c::-,"':::..) \ \ ~I',-J
I \~' ( \,'-:- I
J \) d ",", l, "'\ I
; ! ,/' ,- - )BO~ ~ \. '''-J,--:.J L-~.
; \. ./ .... ...) '\ />
L/l ---- ~ -.... P
---..../....1 ) r~\ ','-,':.c-,,/.-'/
\ ...( \ /- '\ / ../--/.
I ]11 V \ \ '- -... f ,"- ~ L I
J/ )\ ,--_,=--=-~J-::::::-G~
\. C~ " ,\ (-;--- __ l
\ __/// j';~O ~~) '\(;.
---./ '--:- -;;~. y....... (?f" -
//' ( I oJ ,--
- /, /----'", ( ~ '
c{i- !~'- / r---" J) (~ I(
( / / '7
-,L, __!::.' r j:;) /'
L---"r- ( \. ( (
I,.) \J )
Ii"
J / (~ l I
I ) /
~} /
'J -'
. ' /'---L 10/'-)
(f\ / I'
II \
'-'
~jJ ~ [;
20 0 to
m'U -; <0
xO 6 ::l
';J>(fJ 2 R-
::! 0 (fJ
o
2,
)>
Ri I rN\
)> I ~
I
I
'r
'...
I ,~
\.
,@
, I
"
N
'~
!,.. -
R.W. Thorpe & Associates, Inc. SulIl.'Ane"o,...
110 tlo e Bulldln 705 2nd Avenue Seallle, WA 98104. (206~ 624 6239
SOUTHWEST YELM ANNEXATION Topography and Sections
DID YOUR NEIGHBORS RECEIVE THIS NOTICE? PLEASE PASS THE WORD ALONG
0. .
City of~YelDl
105 Yelm Avenue West
POBox 479
Yelm, Washington 98597
206-458-3244
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
SOUTHWEST YELM ANNEXATION
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT AVAILABLE
The Yelm Planning Commission will hold a special meeting and a
public hearing at 7 00 p m on Monday January 4 1993 to receive
comments on a proposal to annex approximately two thousand
(2.000) acres lYing southwest or the city between State Highway
507 and Highway 510 See the accompanying map for a description
or the area to be annexed Annexation of thls area would enable
urban development of the area over the next twenty years
Including 5,000 or more housing units and supporting commercial
lands
A draft environmental impact statement (DEIS) has been prepared
for thls proposal and may be reviewed during regular hours at
Yelm City Hall and the Yelm Timberland Library Copies of the
DEIS and accompanying technical appendices may be purchased at
Yelm City Hall Additional information may be obtained by
contacting Todd Stamm, City Planner at Y~lm City Hall (206)
458-8408 Comments regarding the proposal and the DElS will be
accepted at the public hearing
The hearing will be held at Yelm City Hall 105 Yelm Avenue W .
Yelm Washington All interested parties are invited to attend
Written comments should be directed to the Yelm Planning
Commission and may be mailed to POBox 479, Yelm WA 98597 or
delivered to City- Hall Wri~ten comments must be received prior
to 5.00 p m Fr i day January 15, 1993, to be cons i dered by the
Commission The Commission's decision will be in the form of a .J
recommendation to the Clty Council which will also be holding ~.>~
:~:~i:s:::::ngDecember 14, 1992 ~ ~ '
r~S~ ~. /; b$/ t\\~ ~tl~
Todd Stamm /1 tJN /
C i t y Plan ne r ----D-;;--N~-;-;,-U~-L-I__;H--B_;L-;W--T_;;I_;,-_;.~_;.~---)rY J
Published: Nisqually Valley News, Thursday, December 17/24, 1992
Posted in Three Places and at Site' 1992
Mailed to property owners within 300 feet
Mailed or hand-delivered to agencies'
1992
1992
GENE BORGES
LARRY KAAR
?UGET POWER & LIGHT
? 0 BOX 486
'[E LM W A 9 8 5 9 7
~
THURSTO~ CO PUBLIC WORKS
ATTN BI~L TURNE
:::000 LAKE'~DGE R SH
SLYMPIA w~ 8502
11ICHAEL VAN GELDER
PLANNING COORDINATOR
INTERCITY TRANSIT
? O. BOX 659
OLYMPIA WA 98507
t
.
cJLENN DUNNAtil
IQ
THURSTON CO FIRE
ATTN BILL STEELE
P.O. BOX 777
YELM WA 98597
DEPT
WA :INGTON NATURA GAS
ATTN CHUCK WILL-A~S
3120 _ ARTIN WAY AST
OLYMPI. WA 985 6
ATTN
DE? ARTMEl
ATTN
MS LU 11
7272 CLEANW
OL YMP 1.21. WA
THURSTON C
2000 LAKER
OLYMPIA
SECT
THURSTO CO COMMU IC.~TION ~,
2000 L'KERIDGE DR S-
OLYMPIA WA 98502
Ja.,~,.J
l';'II('(J
/I
--:p
OAPCA
ATTN JAMES A. WILSON
909 SLEATER KINNEY RD SE
SUITE 1
LACEY WA 98503
YELM
.~.TTN
P O.
YELM
TELEPHONE CO
GLENN MCCARTEN
BOX 593
WA 98597
WA ST DEPT OF TRANSP
DISTRICT 3 HEADQUARTERS
P.O. BOX 47440
OLYMPIA WA 98504-7440
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DEPT
ATTN PHIL BRINKER
2000 cLAKERIDGE DR SW
OLYMPIA WA 98502
NISQUALLY IN[IAN TRIBE
AT TN GEORGE WALTER
4820 SHE-NA-NUM DR SE
OLYMPIA WA 98503
NISQUALLY RI/ER COUNCIL
ATTN STEVE CRAIG
P O. BOX 1076
YELM, WA 98597
DAVE
YELM
P O.
YELM,
HOUGHTON
COMMUNITY SCHOOLS
BOX 476
WA 98597
THURSTON CO ROAD DIVISION
9700 TILLEY ROAD
OLYMPIA WA 98502
o
o
\
THE HONORABLE RON LAWTON P 0 BOX 479 YEI11 WA 98597
vI~ISQUALLY PINES COMMUNITY CLUB P 0 BOX 669 YEI11 WA 98597
hERRA CLUB-SASQUATCH GROUP 2929 S CENTRAL OLYMPIA WA 98501
MAYOR, TOWN OF YEI11
o
o
DISTRIBUTION LIST
1//"
FEDERAL AGENCIES
Army Corps of Engineers
Department of Defense - Fort Lewis Military Reservation
Federal Communications Commission
Region 10, Environmental Protection Agency
Soil Conservation Service
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Region 10
U.S Fish and Wildlife Service
STATE AGENCIES
Department of Agriculture
Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation
Department of Community De~ent
Department of Ecology (2) ~
Department of Emergency Services
Department of Fisheries
Department of Natural Resources
Department of Social and Health Services
t'Department of Transportation
~epartment1lJWildlife
...--c~isqually River Council
Office of Governor
Washington Environmental Council
Washington State Energy Office
Washington State Patrol
THURSTON COUNTY DEPARTMENTS
I Office of 1i'l yl1'\ County Commissioners ...
. Thurston C_rty Department of Health - &'A"'~ ~/UI6N'-/JI-IJ~~
'Thursto.n~DepartmentofPublicWorks - PAlV' /)411#./4> ~
* Thurston ~~Department of Water Quality and Resol1!ce Managemen~ I. , ~ a.1
Thurston County Parks and Recreation Department - ~.t.e 17 - 1+ I'V ~ o'"'V
\ Thurston~PIanningDepartment - F~c(J KIVIS'".4N
Thurston ~ Sheriffs Department _ 1 %~CJr
LOCAL AGENOES AND MUNICIP AUTIES
City of Centralia
Olympic Air Pollution Control Authority
Puget Power
Puget Sound Regional Council
Puget Sound Water Quality Authority
Rainier School District
South Puget Environmental Education Gearing Ho~ ~ _
~urston ~ Economic Development Council \j \). - \)\ \J
Thurston County Fire District NO.2\)
Thurston Housing Authority GJ. 1f (JI",/ A' \J .
Thurston Neighborhood Group __1-1AIt()W f,tJlJ .~/,.. -"k1AA Gr-f- ')~
~urston~~1 PlanningCounciI --r-~' ;;..4:0t/ A- ,....-rrf7~ (S ,
Th~~~er ~)'
Yelm School District / Y
,'" ~
~ .J
e
\
...j~
~~
,J:-~
132
!
I
o
DISTRIBUTION LIST
'.
.~
r'_,,~
;g
~!t
",
fEDERAL AGENCIES
Army Corps of Engineers
Department of Defense - Fort Lewis Military Reservation
Federal Communications Commission
Region 10, Environmental Protection Agency
Soil Conserva tion Service
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Region 10
U.s. Fish and Wildlife Service
1,\
'.~
'!'~
ill
Ii
c"
J)
STATE AGENCIES
Department of Agriculture
Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation
Department of Community Development
~ Department of Ecology (2) ~.p.':.. 4 - T !5" If /l Y
Department of Emergency Services
Department of Fisheries
Department of Natural Resources
Department of Social and Health Services
Department of Transportation
--? Department of Wildlife r I ;t1
Nisqually River Council
Office of Governor
Washington Environmental Council
Washington State Energy Office
Washington State Patrol
o
H/JI'-'o /JELI//&;Z
----
1 ~ 'i ~ ,,{/~r
~ rfrV/~
THURSTON COUNTY DEPARTMENTS
( Office of Thurston County Commissioners
,Thurston County Department of Health
\ Thurston County Department of Public Works
* Thurston County Department of Water Quality and Resource Management
Thurston County Parks and Recreation Department
Thurston County Planning Department
Thurston County Sheriffs Department
r~
;,
LOCAL AGENOES AND MUNICll' AUTIES
City of Centralia IJ~
-? Olympic Air Pollution Control Authority - ,*,1 RIll
~ Puget Power
Puget Sound Regional Council
Puget Sound Water Quality Authority
---, .,Rainier School District
South Puget Environmental Education Gearing House :1/6.-
4 Thurston County Economic Development Council ~ -
~ Thurston County Fire District No.2
Thurston Housing Authority
Thurston Neighborhood Group
--7 Thurston Regional Planning Council - J-fc.l1'~ 841' -- r/~
~Town of Rainier
-+ Yelm School District
132
-~.
-- /I~
/... It 1<;
_ -r~r '7
~
MISCELLANEOUS ORGANIZATIONS
Audubon Society
~ City of Yelm Public Library
-.. Nisqually Indian Tribe C ~&.1;J ~ k-..c.r.rlt)-
~ly 'R;"e!' ~om.~il
Sierra Gub
-4 Timberland Library, Yelm Branch an
Yelm O1amber of Commerce
MEDIA
-7 Nisqually Valley News
Ramtha Newsletter
Tacoma Tribune
-7 The Olympian
\'
iR~5 d I/A ~
1"" flP15
~ 7:2 yo /J1;t~TIA/ wAy
133
- Ie "7
MEDIA
Nisqually Valley News
Ramtha Newsletter
Tacoma Tribune
The Olympian
MISCELLANEOUS ORGANIZATIONS
Audubon Society
City of Yelm Public Library
Nisqually Indian Tribe
Nisqually River Council ~ . /I ~
Sierra Oub & ~ ~
Timberland Library, Yelm Branch and lympi~ ~
Yelm Chamber of Commerce ."
133
o
D
\\
\'
,~
~
~
'f'
i ~
~~
~
~~"""'Illll<
\
GENE ~S
OLE~M
o~~
THURSTON CO FIRE
ATTN BILL STEELE
P O. BOX 777
YELM WA 98597
-"
YELM
.?:..TTN
P O.
YELM
TELEPHONE CO
GLENN MCCARTEN
BOX 593
WA 98597
LARRY KAAR
PUGET POWER & LIGHT
? 0 BOX 486
YELM WA 98597
DEPT
SE
THURSTON CO COM~UNICATION
2000 LAKERIDGE DR SW
OLYMPIA WA 98502
NISQUALLY RIVER COUNCIL
STEVE CRAIG
O. BOX 1076
WA 98597
MICHAEL VAN GELDER
PLANNING COORDINATOR
INTERCITY TRANSIT
P.O. BOX 659
OLYMPIA WA 98507
/1//
DAVE HOUGHTON
Y2LM COMMUNITY SCHOOLS
P O. BOX 476
YELM, WA 98597
THURSTON CO ROAD DIVISION
9700 TILLEY ROAD
OLYMPIA WA 98502
.s lJ'y/t j
JIIu7l" f "(,4,pP
1 ~
'\
fl/Di1d
of'1
"
o
()
DISTRIBUTION LIST
H/j/VO /l1Z/Vbll
----
FEDERAL AGENCIES
Army Corps of Engineers
Department of Defense - Fort Lewis Military Reservation
Federal Corrununications Commission
Region 10, Environmental Protection Agency
Soil Conservation Service
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Region 10
U.S Fish and Wildlife Service
ST ATE AGENCIES
Department of Agriculture
Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation
Department of Corrununity Development "A A iN 1. LSON
Department of Ecology (2) ~.....",,~ - TI5A;, OJ>..~~ JAMES lZlNNfS RD
Department of Emergency Services i AT; S LE ATE R
Department of Fisheries "~9 01. <j;B 1 8503
Department of Natural Resources S~ CE'{ IN? _ 9
Department of Social and Health Services Ll~
Department of Transportation
~ Department of Wildlife
Nisqually River Council
Office of Governor
Washington Environmental Council
Washington State Energy Office
Washington State Patrol
-
rIM
~
THURSTON COUN1Y DEPARTMENTS
( Office of Thurston County Commissioners
,Thurston County Department of Health
\ Thurston County Department of Public Works
~ Thurston County Department of Water Quality and Resource Management
Thurston County Parks and Recreation Department
Thurston County Planning Department
Thurston County Sheriffs Department
LOCAL AGENOES AND MUNICIP AUTIES
City of Centralia Irr
-? Olympic Air Pollution Control Authority - 1+1 IIf~
~ Puget Power
Puget Sound Regional Council
Puget Sound Water Quality Authority
~ Rainier School District
~uth Puget Environmental Education Gearing H~e 1/6-
~ Thurston County Economic Development Council ".
~ Thurston County Fire District No.2
Thurston Housing Authority
Thurston Neighborhood Group
-:p Thurston Regional Planning Council .. I-fCilI"~ IJ 4..()' - r //z,
~,. Town of Rainier
-+ Yelm School District
SE
-I/~
132
,
Lit' J<t;t
-.........
(!
~
o
o
MEDIA
=;; Nisqually Valley News
Ramtha Newsletter
Tacoma Tribune
~ Th~ Olympian
_ "fer rr
~
MISCELLANEOUS ORGANIZA nONS
Audubon Society
~ City of Yelrn Public Library
~ Nisqually Indian Tribe (,ej)";j f/ ~Ii(.rd'~)-
~Il~ R;,zef &tmeil
Sierra Club
~ Timberland Library, Yelm Branch an
Yelm Chamber of Commerce
11
'R~J I) vA. r#
",. f/~e
::-----7;2 ro A1IfQIA/ WA,Y
133
-
- I ef'7
~DEPARTMENT OF FISHERIES
115 GENERAL ADMINISTRATION BLDG
vi U S DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
OLYMPIA FIELD OFFICE
./ KR HAROLD ROBERTSON, DIRECTOR
THURSTON COUNTY REGIONAL PL~NING
./ LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS
v/ DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
MARINE LAND DIVISION
/} ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH PROGRAHS
- DIVISION OF DRINKING WATER
t
SOUTffilEST OPERATIONS
~DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
'i DEPARTMENT OF WILDLIFE
\/(SOIL CONVERSATION SERVICE
. EVERGREEN PLAZA BUILDING
YELM MAILING LIST
MAIL STOP AX-ll
2525 PARKMOUNT L~E
SW , B-2
2000 LAKERIDGE DP SW
107 IJ UNION
MAIL STOP E..,{-12
~1AIL STOP LD-11
MAIL STOP AX-41
MAIL STOP GJ-11
711 CAPITOL WAY
IUS ARMY COPRS OF ENGINEERS
\ SEATTLE DISTRICT
REGULA.TORY FUNCTION BRANCH
;' DEPT OF COMMUNIT"{ DEVELOP~IENT MAIL STOP r::L-ll
COMMUNITY PRESERVATION & DEVELOPMENT
OFFICE OF ARCHAEOLOGY AND
HISTORIC PRESERVATION
POBOX. C - 3755
MR PHILLIP BRINKER~ 2000 LAKERIDGE DR SIJ
THURSTON COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT
/
OLYMPIA AIR POLLUTION CONTROL'/
AUTHORITY
DEPARTMEHNT OF ECOLOGY/
MR BILL CUMMINGS .(
CENTRALIA CITY LIGHT DEPARTMENT
V SQUAXIN ISlAND TRIBAL CENTER
\~ISQUALLY INDIAN TRIBE
120 ESTATE ST
MAIL STOP PV - 11
1100 N TOWER AVE
WEST 81, HIGHWAY 108
OLYMPIA WA 98504
OLYMPIA WA 98504
OLYMPIA \JA 98502
OLYMPIA WA 98501
OLYMPIA WA 98504
OLYMPIA WA 98504
OLYMPIA WA 98504
OLYMPIA \JA 98504
OLYMPIA WA 98501
SEATTLE \.JA 98124
OL1~PIA WA 98504
OLYMPIA WA 98502
OLYMPIA WA 98501
OLYHPIA \.JA 98504
CENTRALIA WA 98531
SHELTON WA 98584
4820 SHE-NAH-NUM DR SE OLYMPIA WA 98503
MEDIA
-7 Nisqually Valley News
Ramtha Newsletter
Tacoma Tribune- fY
-7 The Olympian --r~
MISCELLANEOUS ORGANIZA TrONS
Audubon Society
~ City of Yelm Public Library
~ Nisqually Indian Tribe (~&~~, H,.A'"r.rIt,)-
~lly "R':ze!' e!otWI~il
Sierra Club
~ Timberland Library, Yelm Branch an
Yelm O1.amber of CommerCe
\1
''Re-S ~ vA if
,N' f/glf
~ 7;2 yo /t11f~TIA/ WitI'
gP-
:]:11 'ter~ } 7
IIMN's ;-
v
133
- Ter7
..-r:~-.,,"
. 5~~.;,~OO'7; ~- - -,-
~., :
o
'DISTRIBUTION LIST
~ fEDERAL AGENCIES /'
Army Corps of Engineers V
6epartment of Defense - Fort Lewis ~i1itary Reservation
Federal Communications Commission
Region 10, Environmental Protection Agenq,
Soil Conservation Service, V
U.S, Department of Housing and Urban Development, Region 10
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service V
STATE AGENCIES
DeRartment of Agriculture~' V _ /
Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation
Department of Community Development
Department of Ecology (2) ~.p..l., ~ - T !5 /I /l. ~
Department of Emergency Servic~.. '
Department of Fisheries ~ V ./
Department of Natural Resources V
Department of Social and Health Services
Department of Transportation
--} Department of Wildlife
Nisqually River Council V
Office of Governor
Washington Environmental Council
Washington State Energy Office
Washington State Patrol
rl fr1
o
~
----
!ffi. ~
1 ~ 'I Q I-(Ijo/r
~ ;o1A fl' ~tt
-
THURSTON COUNTY DEPARTMENTS
( Office of Thurston County Commissioners
I Thurston County Department of Health
\ Thurston County Department of Public Works
~ Thurston County Department of Water Quality and Resource Management
Thurston County Parks and Recreation Department
Thurston County Planning Department
Thurston County Sheriffs Department
LOCAL AGENOES AND MUNICIP AUTIES
City of Centrali~, V 111'
-? Q!~pk Air Pollution Control Authority - A-/",II
~ Puget Power
Puget Sound Regional Council-
Puget Sound Water Quality Authority
---.I) "Rainier- School District
South Puget Environmental Education Gearing H~e ;[!6
~ Thurston County Economic Development Council
~ Thurston County Fire District No.2
Thurston Housing Authority ,-
Thurston Neighborhood Group:'
---T Thurston Regional Planning Council - J-fCil 11'~ 81../)' -- r / ~
~Town,of,Rainier
. 'l
-.. Yelm Scilool District
132
~I/~
,
Lltl<y"
-
/
"'
(~~f,"
~,#il'
/'pi" of fml}IfJQhC~ r)/Ci'/J'
~uJj.Qc\ [2~ lq- q 2-
mCL~ M6SvnCvVl
C\d-3-Lrr:r\
" ,"--
~, ,-' ~-)
{\ V C 0lfY1 ~(rrf q}1 5 W
o V1 vJf Ctfi'1fl\ ·
/
15. Explain any other significant local accomplishments or efforts
urrleJ:way to irrprove the cormnunity's overall quality of life that
will be furthered (direct1y or indirectly) by the proposed project.
Q
3
o
105 Yelm Avenue West
POBox 479
Yelm, Washington 98597
206-458-3244
City of YellD
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
SOUTHWEST YELM ANNEXATION
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT AVAILABLE
The Yelm Planning Commission will hold a special meeting and a
public hearing at 7:00 p m on Monday, January 4, 1993 to receive
comments on a proposal to annex approximately two thousand
(2,000) acres lying southwest of the city between State Highway
507 and Highway 510 See the accompanying map for a description
of the area to be annexed Annexation of this area would enable
urban development of the area over the next twenty years
including 5,000 or more housing units and supporting commercial
lands
A draft environmental impact statement (DEIS) has been prepared
for this proposal and may be reviewed during regular hours at
Yelm City Hall and the Yelm Timberland Library Copies of the
DEIS and accompanying technical appendices may be purchased at
Yelm City Hall Additional information may be obtained by
contacting Todd Stamm, City Planner, at Yelm City Hall, (206)
458-8408 Comments regarding the proposal and the DEIS will be
accepted at the public hearing
The hearing will be held at Yelm City Hall, 105 Yelm Avenue W ,
Yelm, Washington All interested parties are invited to attend
Written comments should be directed to the Yelm Planning
Commission and may be mailed to POBox 479, Yelm, WA 98597 or
delivered to City Hall Written comments must be received prior
to 5:00 pm, Friday January 15, 1993, to be considered by the
Commission The Commission's decision will be in the form of a
recommendation to the City Council, which will also be holding a
public hearing
DEIS Issued. December 14, 1992
DEIS Issued By:
Todd Stamm
City Planner
-------------------------------------
DO NOT PUBLISH BELOW THIS
Published: Nisqually Valley News, Thursday,
Posted in Three Places and at Site:
Mailed to property owners within 300 feet:
Mailed or hand-delivered to agencies.
LINE
December 17/24, 1992
1992
, 1992
1992
C{)? '(
Da\e~!-LL!~
OldelNO ~
lffPJPHICS
Time ReqUired:~
Originated BY:~
pertormed By' ~
IbS __ Charge:--
No of pacKages: ~
~~
~~/
/'
0;;:)
r .~
10
~
DELIVERY RECEIPT
contents
Date:fr-/J!- /~
/ 'U5' ~ 'I
lime: ~ p.M N:!Y
- -
Pnn\ Name (j, IJt; 5 f./' ~.J
- - -
spedal
Instructions
-----.~
7' ~)
[,\' \"l
~ y. ~ (t \
)
J
1l
Land Use & NCM
Development
Consultatlon
A Division of Kramer Chin & Mayo Inc
December 10/ 1992
Todd Stamm, Director
City Planner
City of Yelm
PO Box479
Yelm, W A 98597
DEe I I 1992
\,J)'
" ~ '
, - .~-~--~~ J
Subject
S. W. Yelm Annexation
Dear Todd.
Enclosed is a list of the property owners within the S W Yelm Annexation area.
They have been notified that the DEIS is available at the City Hall for them to pick-
up
Please forward this list to the City staff assigned to distribute the copies and ask them
to mark the name of the person requesting the DEIS on the list. Thank you.
Sincerely,
nON
~ Dennis T Su, A.LA.
Project Manager
Enclosure
c: Central Files
DTS'jad
1976-05
1917 First Avenue, Seattle, Washington 98101 (206) 443-3537 Fax, (206) 443-5372
~J:Q:~---_'C
'~~
\1... Roy Gibson 'E~,:rvv
14940 Berry Valley~Rd SE
~ Yelm, WA 98597
\~ ~\t~i~~~;~-Valley Rd SE
Ye1m, ViA 98597
/! P/l.~ LL
\~ Mil~on Butler
14630 Berry Valley Rd SE
Yelm, wA 98597
.-
4J)
TeffrJy Price
) 128JLongmire St
Yelm, WA 98597
%
Ronald Laughlin
~ 15132 Longmire St. SE
Yelm, WA 98597
3 ~~:~clUL~.
15105 Longmire St SE
"Ie1m, WA 98597
f> \i:"ashi~4?~
\?ublic"LandS~ui1ding
~UC WA 98504
r
S Charles Brown 1t4 fC)
POBox ~ l.
"Ielm, WA 98597
10_~l 11,\ 1Lt)1-0
l~wA
to John Purvis
14504 Berry Valley Rd SE
"Ielm, WA 98597
7 Jerry Boseque~t
'4409 Hwy 507
elm, WA 98597
/} David Doyle
1/1
14045 George Rd
Yelm, WA 98597
~ J Paul Steadman
. 1801 W Day Island Blvd
Tacoma, WA 98466
\9' TGurston Highland AssoS;
~ ~:; ~~.~~r~ ~ A ;:~-g~- (? ~)
\\ "B>~~ ~~ ,r~,-,
\~ ~vtlU v2q.>"t.
~~ CA.t.t-~.l~O
~D4 ~~v:J5.
~ ' U9 ."BJIl"L
~\,\ ~ ~ pv~~lO\- I
~
~J Lila willuweit
14812 Berry Valley Rd SE
l'1 Roger '1cKibbin Ye1m, wA 98597
15219 .Berry Valley Rd SE.~ . -A-L{dJuz:t
Yelm, 'iA 98597 i ~ ( '- 1?eodore-:fori~d
I': Ko.ll J I 14502 Berry Valley R SE
~ Everett'Hendr~ckson ! Yelm, ViA 98597
10535 Berry Valley Rd SE !h'a'v~
!b1m, 'WA 98597 i ~'\- Ernestl\Burnell
Oo)(..6~~tl(J\,-,... ; 14507 Berry Valley Rd. SE
'"'L-\ ~c;-F. Burgman 7'2.10 ~(u.~ - Yelm, 10104 98597
-P.O. BOA J276. . ~lll\~ (U;L~ ~? .
Lacev 'WA 98503 V ~eal Soeteoer
. , 9~10 V~+5€- 14503 Berry Valley Rd SE
2'i- Jesse Hoffman 1/ · \ ' Ye1m, ViA 98597
tl5J8 ~:h1jj-Rrl. =s~v -
Yelm, 'WA 98597 ~~ ~ark Sqeteber
14503 Berry Valley Rd. SE
Yelm, 'WA 98597
'~
~7 ~ Horsak
J
I 14848 Berry Valley Rd SE
! Yelm, .'r!l / 9.8~,97
~I O~~y~~...
:~'C"~~r~,~ [SV(L~
I f
~l
I
!
ll) Henry Dragt (iJ~v)
14848 Longmire St SE
Ye1m, wA 98597
\{p
William Parker
14947 Longmire St
Yelm, ViA 98597
SE
\'':)(91,/
~:> 'f tJith )\L~ "
~ David Baker ~
\ 14541 Berry Valley Rd SE
, Yelm, ViA 98597
...../J ~c...LI'IQ~ - 1
~'Dan & Julie~R~~
14538 Berry Valley Rd SE
- Ye1m, ViA 98597
1--1 R.J.r:1@~':- -':6=1 )~ ~~~MC,~J
14610 Berry Valley Rd. SE
Ye1m, 'WA 98597
I
~
"
L~' John Sherfey
Box 774
Yelm, \orA 98597
1.1
Marvin 'Wagner
15234 Longmire St
Yelm, wA 98597
SE
Barbara Soeteber
14505 Berry Valley Rd
Ye1m, ViA 98597
2.t)
SE
\0
~
Estate Realty
~Jon -S"te.phensen
POBox 718-----
) Yelm, wA 98597
,"
~~Mary Louise Clemens
15030 Longmire St. SE
Ye1m, wA 98597
'24 Ronald Rothwell
15050 Longmire St
Yelm, WA 98597
SE
",
~'tl t'\JA.. \)~
l~iQV)1.. .~~
C)6PP)f
City of YellD
105 Yelm Avenue West
POBox 479
Y elm, Washington 98597
206-458-3244
December 4, 1992
Subject
Southwest Yelm Annexation
Draft Envlronmental Impact Statement
Greetings,
Attached is the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS)
for the proposed annexatlon to the City of Yelm of nearly
2000 acres west and southwest of the city This DEIS
addresses the broad range of issues identified ln the Scope
of Environmental Impact Statement letter issued on December
3, 1991 The proposal envisions annexation of the area and
urbanization consistent with one of the three scenarios
described in the DEIS
This proposal and its DEIS will be the subject of a public
hearing to be held by the Yelm Plannlng Commission at Yelm
Ci ty Ha 11 at 7' 00 pm. on Monday, January 4, 1993
Written comments will be accepted at Yelm City Hall until
5.00 pm, Friday, January 15, 1993
Please contact me if you have any questlons or need more
information
Sincerely,
Tc-4/s~
Todd Stamm,
City Planner
/J!ysJifr
pt ! ~ It! ;Jz/}f P
.~--~
~
J ~ ~J ,/~"/ bvr"~ "";/'
fve-"//~/ ~ #" J
~
(J r ~/ljp
~o_~
--------------- - ------
P 1
Date: j I / ! '1-/ CZ z....
I L
1: 2.'5"
FAX Co~er sJ~et
Time'
To.
+;>.
, l
C d..v () { [fez.., iv1
Y'~~ I i
I I
'-/5"( - '/iY-I
I
I
!
I
I
!
[
I
I
Firm.
City l State :
FAX prorel1LlII1i:er.
PrOject Name & Number:
Transmittal Description:
vklS~ Jl~~ ~
! y)
I
'Y'"
I
i
J) fi,1 t
I
I
,Lo""6~;"'V-(,Y ~/r&/Vl~+
I !
I ,
. }, ; I
We are ITa. nsmitting L/ Pfges, ncludfng this cover' page. 1ft transmission. :5 not complete, please call
(206) 624-6239 an.d ask for the op ratD whose name appears below I '
, , I
I I
I I
,
I :
Ccrru-relJs' \ ~ ~ C/\s.~l ~ ~^: ./ ,vJ s
~t~~ ~<:'~,~f:~::~~/::::: ~j:~o t!:;J ~~.:~ r7~'
I! I i
L! i
: ' , ~
~.
I.
Note
mail rES
NO 0
R.W. THORPE & AS$OCIATES, INC.
.:-..) 70S S~c~nd AV1... nu. [SUil.905 S..tll., W..hinglon i98!04 (2M) 62...239 Fa< 1206) 625-0930 'H
; I
. I
7
NcwJ i
-r\~\<v ~
~
{. j. r I
I' i ',~ j
$16;300,120. This estimat ass~es a constant tax ~te and .0 change in value over the 20 year period.
Thus it should be ~p~liej, ~~ ca~tion and it is utilized fete as an indication of potential revenue
amounts rath1 ~ a ,deI' ' tiv I projeCtion of the exact reveilles to be g~nerated.
A breakdown of how the . 1"0 rty taxes are spent is provi~ in Table 24, below. This table indicates
the amounts of revenue tieD d be expected from the est:4nated $76..320,120 total above, per different
servic~. , " r ' 'I
It should be noted ilia~ th~rev~.'lUe estimate does not inc1ud~ 0, ther sources of potential revenue such as
revenue generated fro~ 1~a1 inP'eases in employment durin& construction, additional goods and services
demanded by future resid nts, : nd various taxes that may ~ associated with the:purchase of goods and
services. TIris review also doe . not attempt to deal WIth p~seO development. It is acknowledged that
future development ~th~ the ,proposed aMexation area v.jould likely occur in phases, However, the
specific land areas and,: nUf',' ,er 'Of commercial and residenti~ 10, ts per Phas,' e IS not known, therefore thIS
analysis is presented as an . ve ,'ew of costs and revenues un/der full development.
,: , I ,!
Table 23. ~tential Revenue for Lots (Re5id~ntial and Recreational Uses)
Estimated develor','i ! v11,',. ue with service C 05t5 added ~ $40))00 to $60,000 per lot
( ssume average::: $50,000 pelt lot)
! ' ~
I
, 150,000 ;(S)XI() lots' = $2504000
$250,000,000 + $lO'~'f (estunated value at l8-hOlj golf course) = $260,000,000
$260,000,000 .,. 11 x 1 i"6731 ftax rate per $1000 of issed value) ~ 53,815,006
53.811,1lO6 r 20 year development Peri1 = $76,300.120
, I
I I
I i
/fable 24. "elm Milla e RatdBJeakdown
I ! I
r~1on of ?vfil]a~e Rate I Percenta~e
: l
I
i 21.2
3.3029 I 22.6 $17,243,827.12
2.1586 14.7 $11,216,117.64
.4894 3,3 $2,517,903.96
5.2180 ! 35.6 $27,162,842.72
I
.1057 ! 07 $534,100.84
i
,2879 I .1.2 $1.449.702.28
14.6731 i ! 1QO.0 $76,300,120.00
Source: R.W Thorpe &. SOltes, Inc.-Thl~rslon County rsessors Office/October 1992
I I
Sel'V'k~
Estimated Re....enue
City or roads
State schools
3.1106
$16,175,62544
Medic One
Library
School
Cemetery
Port
.1
,1
rOTAiL
124
- ..1 iJ r- t:: C F r(l
- 1., ~si f'1~ ~hvE~- rvJU'J~ ~~-~--i .
I I AjI\J',Jf.' ~ I '!
f1since this analyJis ineludes tile assumption that lots! would ~ developed in association with propo5ed
1ecre~tion and ~~erifa~li " ~e value oi each lot: is relate~ to the value of living adjacent to those
:assocated a:merotieS. r ~*y i may not be the caSCr dependmg on future development proposals and
,the effect of this'uncepaln on. ojected revenue should be nPted. For example, a building lot adjacent
,to an is-hole golf coUrse w u1d enerally command a greate~ value than a lot where such amenities do
inot existr given; that ,other~hYS cal characteristics are equa1.l
,;, ,I
I ( ,/
In order to proyide an,ind cati4n of this differenc~ in '1alm1 an~ its ~pact on the potential revenue
generated by the propqs ann[fftion, the same procedure ;outlmed In Table 23 above was followed
usmg the estimated ilv~ra~ v ,e of a lot without adjacent iamenities. Based. on local values of such
lots it was determined;.: th~~ an . average value of $.10,00) to.' $15,000 per lot for these lots would be
appropriate. The medliln l~lue 'of $12,500 per lot was selected for this approach wluch is presented in
Table 25, below. The. resul~' inf" <<:ate that potential revenue fr.., om this approach would be substantially
less than thaI: from lots; wi ~an,associated amenity value. I
! ' :
~ , Table: 25. fotential Lot Revenue (assunies; no amenity value)
Estimated de~e!01r yJe with service costs added :;:..1_ $10,000 to $15,OCXJ per lot
f (median = $12,500 per lot) !
: i. $$12,500 x. 5,000 lots::; $62,500,p00
. ~ I
'I :
$62,sOO~OOO + 1000 14'r31 (tax rate per $1000 of asrssed value) = $917,068.75
$917,c. ,75 r 20 year development perie<f ;0; $18,341.375
., - I
' '
. t . .
/ : ,I I , I
I ' r
[ .
Another component 9f p,tential revenue to be considere~ is that of sales tax revenue. A limited
estimate of P<)tentt.'al S(l}e5tax. e~: was prepared to provide a~ mchcation of theIr contribution as a future
revenue source. -:p,e city ~fei ;00 approximately $205,452.~ in sales tax reve..'r'\ue m 1991. This amount
was divided by 10,poo, t1}~ eS ,'mated commercial market population for Yelm, to yield a per capita
sales tax amount of $20'1~' ~s amount was then mul~plied by the estimated populanon of the
annexation area at build1i.tt, , proxllnately 21,632 persons,.. to obtain the estllnated potential revenue
trom sales tax. of approximatel $444,321.28. This approac~ is outlined in the table below'
I i
Table 26. iJs .! ,'ed Sale. Tax ~u. froL the Proposed Annexation
I, ~ I
; ; ,1991 Sales Tax Reienue = r05/452.66
: .lO,Or = Estimated. Commercial ~rket Population
! .
$205 452.~ + 10,000 = $20.54 "" estima ed per capita sales tax
~S~1: apnexation area population atluture build-out;: 21,632
211632.' Sf54 ~ $444,321.28 = estimated po~ntial revenue from ,ales tax
, t .
. t
I [
I i
The 7stima~ed sales tax ~Jv~xfe and the potenti~l revenu~ fi?u~e from abo~e were then combined tOJ
prOVIde a fmal total com.,p ans.p n of the results of the two '. rOJections. For this comparison the hIghest
estunated costs and revelues ,re shown. These results are $ummarized in. the follOWIng table:
. I !
I '
I
I
125
;". ~ r:?M
F '.'e
I:
r
T~
i
I
t~#
!
I
I
i
I
f
I
I
'1"abfe 27. Swn:mary of Project Ccmr and Revenues
~ Estimatef Revenues
. 2,O~O,OOO Pro~rty Tax
,310,460 Sale" Tax
116,170,460 Total
i ~ f
: ~ I
Alternative 3: Compa~ S 'n~o :
Impacts would be similar to the Proposal, in that a si~lar density of development is expected.
i Reductions in ~astrnctu~e anf service requirements would. lower potential costs associated mth this
: scenario to between appr' *, inui,telY $92 million and $105 nlillion dollars. The cost analysis indicates
that this scenario would h ve the lowest potential costs as~ated with it. This approach is exoected.
to result in revenue amou ' , siblar to that of the propose9 scenario. The undeveloped land r~venue
estimate considered land ill, e~ by acres identified on the I conceptual site plans in this document.
Although the Compact sCinari~ utilizes less land area thanlthe Proponent's alternative, it is expected
: to result in approximateIy\the same number of residential units by allowing development at a higher
density. Therefore, the a:h, OU~,t of revenue generated und~I' this approach IS not expected to differ
greatly from the proponen1is alfroach. i
I! Alternative 4: Vi11age$cE!jt1.ari~ I
The lower density expect · unqer this approach CQuld result in the need for fewer service facilities. It
! would still reqUIre that inf ast'rJcture be in place prior to opening new buildings. Due to the potentIal
differences in developm "t afproaches between this alt~mative and the other alternatIves, the
estimated infrastructure a p. senrice costs associated with tflis approach are expected to be less than
the proposed. scenario, but are Jstimated to be greater than ,hose of the Compact alternative. Because
of the potential increase j: I cOfmercial area this approacl1 is expected to result in greater revenue
amounts than those of the ~01ent's scenario. I
I I
! i:.. I
Mitiiatini Measures
Developer impact fees co !d ~ asse~sed ror providing soine service Or facility extensions, and/or
improvements to the pro Tnexaoon area. !
I --~:T ~~F--m
<7J~'
I:
I.' Estimated Costs
, Infrastructure
i Services
! Total
$76,300,120
$ 444,321
$76,744,441
126
-=--'7-d.:...
! <=
:: =1 ~
~,<;?~ 9..1
~~~,
$76,300,120. This estimate assumes a constant tax rate and no change in value over the 20 year period.
Thus it should be applied with caution and it is utilized here as an indication of potential revenue
amounts rather than a definitive projection of the exact revenues to be generated.
reCti /;7-,qL)~
lr~'~'~ ~
A breakdown of how the property taxes are spent is provided in Table 24, below. This table indicates
the amounts of revenue that could be expected from the estimated $76,320,120 total above, per different
services.
It should be noted that the revenue estimate does not include other sources of potential revenue such as
revenue generated from local increases in employment during construction, additional goods and services
demanded by future residents, and various taxes that may be associated with the purchase of goods and
services. This review also does not attempt to deal with phased development. It is acknowledged that
future development within the proposed annexation area would likely occur in phases. However, the
specific land areas and number of commercial and residential lots per phase is not known, therefore this
analysis is presented as an overview of costs and revenues under full development.
7
NQNJ
-f\\--\ q", ew
~
Table 23. Potential Revenue for Lots (Residential and Recreational Uses)
Estimated developed value with service costs added = $40,000 to $60,000 per lot
(assume average = $50,000 per lot)
$50,000 x 5,000 lots = $250,000,000
NO\! I 8 1992
$250,000,000 + $10,000,000 (estimated value of 18-hole golf course) = $260,000,000
$260,000,000 + 1000 x 14.6731 (tax rate per $1000 of assessed value) = $3,815,006
$3,815,006 x 20 year development period = $76,300,120
Table 24. Yelm Millage Rate Breakdown
Service
Portion of Millage Rate Percentage
3 11 06 21.2
3.3029 22.6
2.1586 14.7
4894 3.3
5.2180 35.6
1057 07
.2879 1.9
14.6731 100.0
Estimated Revenue
City or roads
State schools
Medic One
Library
School
Cemetery
Port
$16,175,625 44
$17,243,82712
$11,216,117.64
$2,517,903.96
$27,162,842.72
$534,100.84
$1,449.702.28
$76,300,120.00
TOTAL
Source: R. W Thorpe & Associates, Inc -Thurston County Assessors Office/October 1992
124
r v ~ ~ (le.wJ J sO\.~'" -4-.~ ~~~ 14U\~
~ ') p1'-,(l. ~ 0 Co rvJ~J~
t.....l'i> ./"
^"'^ ,
0:ince this analysis includes the assumption that lots would be developed in association with proposed
recreation and other facilities, the value of each lot is related to the value of living adjacent to those
associated amenities. This mayor may not be the case, depending on future development proposals and
the effect of this uncertainty on projected revenue should be noted. For example, a building lot adjacent
to an 18-hole golf course would generally command a greater value than a lot where such amenities do
not exist, given that other physical characteristics are equal.
In order to provide an indication of this difference in value and its impact on the potential revenue
generated by the proposed annexation, the same procedure outlined in Table 23 above was followed
using the estimated average value of a lot without adjacent amenities. Based on local values of such
lots it was determined that an average value of $10,000 to $15,000 per lot for these lots would be
appropriate. The median value of $12,500 per lot was selected for this approach which is presented in
Table 25, below The results indicate that potential revenue from this approach would be substantially
less than that from lots with an associated amenity value.
Table 25. Potential Lot Revenue (assumes no amenity value)
Estimated developed value with service costs added = $10,000 to $15,000 per lot
{median = $12,500 per lot}
$$12,500 x 5,000 lots:;: $62,500,000
$62,500,000 + 1000 x 14.6731 (tax rate per $1000 of assessed value) = $917,068.75
$917,068.75 x 20 year development period = $18,341,375
Another component of potential revenue to be considered is that of sales tax revenue. A limited
estimate of potential sales taxes was prepared to provide an indication of their contribution as a future
revenue source The city received approximately $205,452.66 in sales tax revenue in 1991 This amount
was divided by 10,000, the estimated commercial market population for Yelm, to yield a per capita
sales tax amount of $20.54. This amount was then multiplied by the estimated population of the
annexation area at build-out, approximately 21,632 persons, to obtain the estimated potential revenue
from sales tax of approximately $444,321.28. This approach is outlined in the table below.
Table 26. Estimated Sales Tax Revenue from the Proposed Annexation
1991 Sales Tax Revenue = $205,452.66
10,000 = Estimated Commercial Market Population
$205,452.66 + 10,000 :;: $20.54 = estimated per capita sales tax
Estimated annexation area population at future build-out:;: 21,632
21,632 x $20.54 :;: $444,321.28 = estimated potential revenue from sales tax
The estimated sales tax revenue and the potential revenue figure from above were then combined tOJ.
provide a final total comparison of the results of the two projections. For this comparison the highest
estimated costs and revenues are shown. These results are summarized in the following table:
125
T~\" ~ v
~"...t ~
<jJ
rJcvvJ
Table 27. Summary of Project Costs and Revenues
Estimated Costs
Infrastructure
Services
Total
$62,050,000
$54,370,460
$116,170,460
Estimated Revenues
Property Tax
Sales Tax
Total
$76,300,120
$ 444~21
$76,744,441
Alternative 3: Compact Scenario
Impacts would be similar to the Proposal, in that a similar density of development is expected
Reductions in infrastructure and service requirements would lower potential costs associated with this
scenario to between approximately $92 million and $105 million dollars. The cost analysis indicates
that this scenario would have the lowest potential costs associated with it. This approach is expected
to result in revenue amounts similar to that of the proposed scenario. The undeveloped land revenue
estimate considered land area by acres identified on the conceptual site plans in this document.
Although the Compact scenario utilizes less land area than the Proponent's alternative, it is expected
to result in approximately the same number of residential units by allowing development at a higher
density Therefore, the amount of revenue generated under this approach is not expected to differ
greatly from the proponent's approach.
Alternative 4: Village Scenario
The lower density expected under this approach could result in the need for fewer service facilities. It
would still require that infrastructure be in place prior to opening new buildings. Due to the potential
differences in development approaches between this alternative and the other alternatives, the
estimated infrastructure and service costs associated with this approach are expected to be less than
the proposed scenario, but are estimated to be greater than those of the Compact alternative Because
of the potential increase in commercial area this approach is expected to result in greater revenue
amounts than those of the Proponent's scenario.
Mitigating Measures
Developer impact fees could be assessed for providing some service or facility extensions, and/or
improvements to the proposed annexation area.
126
R. w. THORPE~ & ASSOCIATES, INC.
_ .:..:. Planning . Landscape . Environmental . Economics .:..:.
PRINCIPAL:
Robert W. Thorpe, AlCP
ASSOCIA TES:
)eff Buckland
Stephen Speid~li ASLA
Len Zickler, ASLA
Le,tter of Transmitta.l
Date: November 13, 1992
Job Number/Project: SW Yelm DEIS (#110192)
TO' Todd. Stamm
City of Yelm
We are sending you.
Date
Descri ion
11/92 Revised Draft EIS
1 Marked co of revious draft
These are transmitted as checked below.
For your use: XX
As requested.
For your approval.
For review and comment:
Approved as noted.
Returned for corrections.
Comments:
'Enclosed is th~ revised draft of the annexation DEIS and your marked copy as
requested As I mentioned to you or). the phone, we have respon~ed to the
comments in the first review and have made a -number of changes in this text.
While tl1e present document still combines elements of both non project and project
documents, I believe some effic;iency can be achi~ved if it is viewed as forming the
background to project analysis for subsequent, environmental rev,iew of potential
development phases within the annexation area. Let me know if you see any
significant changes that may' ,still be needed, otherwise. I win look forwarq to
coordinating with you on the printing time for this document.
Signed.
R. W Thorpe & Associates, Inc
cI~p~
Jeff Buckland
Environmental Planner
.:..:. 705 SecoIl~ Avenue Suite 910 Seattle, Washington 98104 (206) 624-6239 Fax (206) 1625-0930 .:..:.
o . ()
R. W. {HORPE &; ASSOCIATES, INC.
.:..:. Planning
. Landscape . Environmental . Economics .:..:.
PRINCIPAL:
Robert W Thoq><!, ArC!'
November 4, 1992
AssociA TES:
Jeff Buckland
Stephen Speidel, ASLA
Len Zickler, ASLA
T?dd Stamm, Direc,tor of Community Devel,o, pment _,'__,_', _ ~
CIty of Yelm ,,~\ fF:!. @ r~1j 0 \, _~ I
105 Yelm Avenue W. ' \ ,;...::::.........--:::::,----.-----~ ,
PO Box479 I1V(' ". I .' AI
Yelrn, Washiilgton 98597 ,:: : ~ : 5 1992 \, \ 'I r
. :',~\\!. ,,- j~'\
Re: S.W Yelm Annexation DEIS (RWT / A #110192) :::J
Dear Todd.
I am sending you this copy of the draft Facility Planning and Concurrency element
for the annexation EIS. I would appreciate your review of this section in advance of
the revised Draft EIS, since it is an element you have expressed particula,r int~rest in.
I received your letter of October 19, c;lnd I am making final corrections to the DEIS.
The revised draft is largely complete except for the transportation element which we
should have from Chamberlain Associates next week.
You will note that the cost and revenue estimate is sOl;newhat limited in detail.
Short of requesting a, complete fiscal impact study we have taken a broader
approach. Your review ~hould indicate whether this analysis will suffice, or if a
fiscal impact analysis is required. If a fiscal impact study is needed it will be
necessary to have another consultant provide this work. D~nnis Su at KCM, Inc.
has indicated his concern about publishing the Draft HIS as soon as possible
(preferably before the end of this month) To involve another consultant for the
fiscal study would probably eliminate the possibility of meeting this,schedule,
therefore I would suggest we avoid that requirement if possible However, I
understand the need for the City to feel comfortable with this section and the final
decision rests with you.
Your prompt review of this material is req\lested. By reviewing this material now,
we can respond to your comments while you are looking at the rest offhe
document. If many revisions to this element are not needed, I will incorporate your
comments into the revised draft prior to sending it to you. Either way, it would be
helpful to have an indication from you concerning arty additional considerations
this element should include.
Sincerel y,
R W Thorpe and Associates, Inc
~~
Jeff auckland
JJf 51,IvP-F1/ (J}I
~ I _ TI "I,t>.
I /fI1'V 17
N#,f)~ (I/Il-
cc: Dennis Su, KCM, Inc.
.:..:. 705 Second Avenue Suite 910 Seattle, Washington 98104 (206) 624-6239 Fax (206)625-0930 .:..:.
o
o
11
9. Facility Planning and Concurrency
Existing Conditions
One of the key elements of the 1990 Growth Management Act involves the issue of
concurrency, or concurrent delivery of public services. The main idea expressed by
concurrency is that the infrastructure necessary to support new development should
be in place by the time development is completed, or it must be funded or scheduled
for installation, in order to prevent reducing the present service~ to local residents.
This may require development impact fees based on the level of proposed facilities
and existing service availability.
The language of the GMA requires counties and cities to prepare regulations which
would prohibit development if it results in traffic level of service standards that
would fall below the standards adopted in the transportation element of the
comprehensive plan. If transportation improvements or strategies were, however,
made concurrent with development then an exception to this rule would be
granted. Concurrency is defined two ways. a) in place at the time of the
development or, b) a financial commitment is put into place to complete the needed
improvements within 6 years time.
This concept has been further extended to include other facilIties and services
associated with development. Section 2 of the GMA states that public faCilIties and
services must be "adequate to serve the development at the time the development
is available for occupancy and use without decreasing current service levels below
locally established minimum standards." Section 3 of the GMA defines public
faCilIties as including transportation-related facilities, water, storm and sanitary
sewer systems, parks and recreation faCIlities, and schools. Section 3 defines public
services as including fire protection and suppression, law enforcement, public
health, education, recreation, environmental protection, and other governmental
serVices Typically, densities of two to four units per acre or higher would require
urban levels of facilities and services according to the State Department of
Community Development.
The designation of Urban Growth Areas is designed, in part, to help jurisdictions
achieve concurrency. By concentrating the location of development, resources such
as utilities and services can be provided in a more tightly defined area. Thurston ?
County has a goal of achieving orderly, efficient, and cost effective extension of
services This goal recognizes that the greatest efficiency can be achieved where
growth can be guided to existing developed areas la d where an excess of service
capacity already exists Under this concept it i believed hat the costs of creating ?
new infrastructure can be lowered, the extent of service areas can be reduced, and \
service costs for residences and businesses can also be lowered by greater utilization
of facilities that may currently be under-utilized.
Presently, the annexation area is not well served by public services or utilities.
Annexation would require expansion of wastewater, storm drainage, and water
;.',_., I
o
o
supply systems. It would also require roadway improvements and additions to
police and fire services in order to serve the new development within this area.
Impacts to individual facilities and services, along with potential mitigating
measures, are discussed under specific elements of this document.
Impacts of the Proposal and Alternatives
Alternative 1: No Action
The area would not be annexed and no immediate new demands on the provision
of local services would occur. New development would take place under Thurston
County regulations and, under provisions of the Growth Management Act, would
still be required to locate only in those areas where services could be provided.
Smce it is expected that growth without annexation would be less than under the
other alternatives, this approach would not be expected to result in great changes to
the local utility providers ability to meet service needs.
Alternative 2: Proponent's Scenario
Annexation would require additional services, and provisions for establishing those
services would be needed prior to development. This would require future
development to secure facility extensions, or assure payment for such extensions,
prior to completion of project construction. Services and utilities would be
available locally, however, some have not contemplated service to the proposed
annexation area. While this alternative would provide area for new development,
the ability of prospective developers to meet concurrency requirements would help
determine the rate at which growth occurs within that area.
A general review of costs and revenues was prepared to determine potential
expenses for service provisions to the area and potential income from land values
associated with the projected development scenarios. Estimated results from this
)
review are shown in the following tables. Table _ shows infrastructure costs and
Table _ provides public service cost projections.
The tables above represent projected service costs under the potential annexation.
Table _ provides a general estimate of costs for services after annexation. These
cost projections were arrived at by reviewing 1991-92 budget information and
examining total costs by each of two methods. The first method divides the current
budget for various services by the current land area for the city This yields a cost per
acre for these services The cost per acre is then multiplied by 2000 acres to
determine a projected cost of adding the proposed area of annexation.
In the second approach the various budgets are multiplied by the projected average
annual population capture rate (see Population/Housing element of this document)
to determme the cost per year of provldmg these services to the projected
annexation population. This figure is then multiplied by the twenty year
annexation period to yield an estimated total cost by population. The land area
s&t
~L~~~ 2
l'tOposed pe~elopment
Residential ~
Cornrnercial ~
l'ublie -
Golf Course -
M'; ). &J.'U 'OJ'-,].!. v t 3
compact
Residential -
cof(\11\erdal -
l'ublie -
Golf Course ~
(f.YJ he.
40 he.
20 he.
276 he.
975 he.
35 he.
20 he.
276 he.
1 Roads
a 20,000 Lr N\ain "Blvd.
@ $4OO/Lr :: $8,000,000
b. 90,000 U' Collecto' / aCCess ,0adS
@ $2OO/LF :: $18,000,000
1 Roads
a 20,rPJ Lr N\ain "Blvd.
@ $400/Lr :: $8,rPJ,OOO
b. 120,000 1.F CollectO' / access ,oads
@ $200/Lr :: $24,rPJ,rPJ
2 Sewer .
a 110,000 Lr Sewer N\a1ns
(8" _ 18") @ $ffJ/1.F (...,age)
:: $6,600,rPJ
b. Lift StatiOns - 4 @ $150,000 ~
$600,000 .
e. 'treatment Plant E)t1'a~S10n
4500 units@$1800/U1\1t::
$8,100,000
2 Sewer
a 140000 Lr Sewer N\ains
(8<10", 12" , 15" &. 18") @
$ffJ/1.F (a..rage) ~ $'0,400,000
b. 1.ift StatiOns - 5 @ $15Q,ooo.
$750,000 .
e 'treatment Plant 1:;)l.1'a1'\510n
. 5500 units@$18oo/unit:;:;
$9,900,000
'3 water .
a 110,000 Lr water N\a1ns-
(~' ~ 12") @$50/Lr ::
$5,500,000
b. Storage 'farU<> - 2 ""llion gallOns
@ $21 gallon :: $4,000,000
'to'thL:: $50,800,000
'3 water .
a 140,rPJ Lr water N\a1ns-
(8" , 10" , 12") @ $50/Lr ::
$7,000 ,000
b. Storage 'farU<> - 2 ""Uion gallOns
@ $21 ga\\on :: $4,OOO,rPJ
'tarhL::: $62,050,rPJ
\
. h wn in this document.
. cost based 0. ",.ceptu.t,rte plan" 0
. . I _ october 1992
SO""," Borg"- Con,"ltmg Eng""'''' ",.
900 he.
110 he.
20 he.
276 he.
o
2 Sewer .
a 12.8,000 Lf Sewer N\a1nS
(8" to 18")@$60/Lr
:: $7,680,rPJ
b. 1.tlt Stalions - 6 @ $15O,()llQ.
$900,000 .
e 'treatment Plant 'E"".1'ans\on
. 5C'fJJ units@$1800/unit::
$9,000,000
o
'3 water .
a 128,000 Lr Water N\a\nS ~
(~' to 12")@$50/Lf::
$6,400,000
b. Storage 'farU<> - 2 rni\lion gallOns
@ $21 gallon :: $4,oOO,f$:IJ
'to't hL :: $57,180,000
TABLE _
ESTIMATED PUBLIC SERVICE COSTS OF PROPOSAL IN 1992 DOLLARS
I
f;
f
1:-
SERVICES COST BY LAND AREA COST BY POPULATION
YELM SCHOOL DISTRICT $19,670,263 + 740 ac. = $26,581 43 per acre Average annual capture rate Yelm area = 10.4%
$19,670,263 Budget 1992-1993 2000 acres to be annexed x $26,581 43 = $19,670,263 + 1,365 persons = $14,410.45 per person
$53,162,872 = total additional cost for school
service by land area $19,670,263 x 10.4% = $2,045,707.30 per year
20 years x $2,045,707.30 = $40,914,146 = total
additional cost per projected population
POLICE SERVICE $339,175 + 740 ac. = $458.34 per acre $339,175 + 1,365 persons = $248.47 per person
$339,175 = 1991 Appropriated Budget 2,000 acres x $458.34 per acre = $916,680
$339,175 x 10.4% = $35,274,20/per year increase
20 years x $35,274.20/year = $705,484.00
FIRE $47,300 + 740 acres = $63.91 per acre $47,300 +1,365 = $34.65 per person
$47,300 1991 Appropriated Budget 2000 ac. x $63.91 per acre = $127,820 $47,300 x 10.4% capture rate = $4,919.20/year increase
20 years x $4,919.20 = $98,384
P ARKS AND RECREATION $60,346 + 740 ac. = $81.55 per acre $60,346 + 1,365 = $44.21 per person
$60,346.16 Budgeted 2000 acres x $81.55 per ac. = $163.100 $60,346 x 10.4% = $6,275.98 per year increase
20 years x $6,275.98 = $125,519.60
Yelm - Land Area = 740 acres
1991 Population = 1,365 persons
Source: R. W Thorpe & Associates, Inc. October 1992
o
o
o
o
approach may best apply to possible fire and police service costs, while the
population approach is more reliable for cost associated with schools and parks.
Both of these approaches represent simplified techniques for arriving at cost
approximations for services. They are limited by the assumption that budgets
would remain constant ( or at least closely resemble current amounts) over the life
of the annexation period. If the figures in Table _ are added fo those in Table_
then total potential costs can be obtained for each scenario. Separate totals are
provided for services derived from the land area method and from the population
method as outlined above.
Table_. Summary of Total Estimated Costs for Infrastructure and Services under the Proposed
Development and Alternatives
ALTERNATIVE 2 Proposal
ALTERNATIVE 3 Compact
ALTERNATIVE 4 Village
$62,050,000 Infrastructure
$54,370.460 Services (by land
area)
$116,170,460
$50,800,000 Infrastructure
$54,370.460 Services (by land)
$105,170,460
$57,180,000 Infrastructure
$54,370,000 Services (by land)
$111,550,000
$62,050,000 Infrastructure
$41.843.533 Services (by
population)
$103,893,533
$50,800,000 Infrastructure
$41,843,533 Services (by pop.)
$92,643,533
$57,180,000 Infrastructure
$41.843,533 Services (by pop.)
$99,023,533
Potential costs represent the price of services for the proposed annexation area.
Development within this area would also supply money for the city A limited
projection of new revenue to be expected is provided in Table -' Estimated Land
Revenues This table represents estimated land revenues if annexed with the
master plan and no development. The numbers in this table were derived from
local property values and the tax rate on residential and commercial land.
Century 21 Realtors provided background information on recent residential sales for
both single and multi-family properties These sales prices were then averaged to
obtain a representative cost per acre for all residential property This number was
then multiplied by the estimated residential land area for each alternative The
Thurston County Assessor's Office was contacted for the 1992 tax rate on land, and
this figure was applied to the total residential value in order to estimate potential
tax revenue from this land. Finally, the tax revenue was multiplied by the twenty
year annexation period to determine a potential total for residential property
A similar approach was followed for commercial property A recent article in the
Olympian (dated October 11, 1992) indicated that commercial land in Thurston
~......,'~>
'f"IlL. _ "n ~'o p",,"LO?M.j;N'f, U<19~'2. pOLL!\.RS
~f)0\"f\ON SCf.~A.R\OS j\.r..v~'"
,-"NO 1l."j;NU.1l5'f\W-n;, v;1111 p.r' ~~ -
~ ~ ~ __' ,", ,.,."",' $16,1" p".d<' $14,512,,",
~ ~.. m"''' "I " <</>''''''' ,,6,'" p" ""'. ,",67S,l1JIl - 12.5,,,1.."1 ·
~ 3 Sing'" ,...'Y 1",,,,,"" ",,,,,,,,.35 "", >old ." . '" ~ 9 ,75 "" "~", · $14l~6l-2' ",,512""'3 ..,;, ... 1~ - $14P 0
RE "'" '" 675,l1J1l' 1~' p . $212," ~
$'!P>,l1JIl . rr ,,_ >o'd ." · "'''' " $595, '
, ".,"'''''''Y ?",I""''' ",,, ,". $'" ,'62.24 , 20 y"" . $2.8>,;...80 $212,9<>36 , :lll Y"" · $<.15l',861.:lll
$308 r;j$) SF tot31 21 acre5
59 ' OQQ }Af total ~
~ ",\a' "''' ?"'" 56 ,,\a' ."'"
cr for residetltial
."/S!>,"'" . 56 ."'" . $'6,1" · · v"," "", .... ,
land
""1.6125 ner acre '"
__\ 975 residential acres: 975 acres)l. ~, r
VroPO~'" .
$15,721.,875 total potetlt1al value
7)1.1.4 6731. n992 ta)l. rate per $1000 of
'15,1l,~75' ,"'" :.~;5~i',1. ~;.,,',., """""d """.'
assessed value) ",.,~,' r-
. $4 61.317280'" total
. .".,....... ,20 Yf: ~:::.;:.:;;:: . , ' . ,,>G,l1JIl , 110 -. $14"",,l1JIl
". "",,,,, """,,,., 0 · ,>G "'" ' ,0 "", · $5 %,,l1JIl .
. "".""" (0",,"" .' >G,"'" m ' .14,>00 "'" · 1"'" · $14,>00
. _ "",ObI< c"" p" "" '0< "'~~' F'O~ ;;" '" "'" · ,,,,,,. $5,2",.00 ,\<.6"1 · $76,>00.12' 0
=-- $5OO,l1JIl1"''''''' IO'>",,?"'" ,0 $5,2 , $\<,>00' 1~,"1 · $209,8'l5.35
" 1 '1.00 12 20 years'" $1.p26,OO2AO
"-1."-0 ~ ~"d< to< "", "'. .76" . ' 0 "-A 196 "-06 60
"".,",' . ,~, _ $209 ~"3' ,2 Y"""~' " .
. "-1."-0""" ....er acre '" $4,725,000
35 acres cottlfl'ctC\al use )I." " ,IN" r-
~ .. _< ,,,.."111996 to' "" p" .'''''' ...,,,d
$4,725,r;j$) ... 1.1N" '" .,..,1 ~
value) '" $69;330.39
"'1. 'lQ6 607 90 '" total estirt\ated re\'etlue lor
69,33039 )I. 20 years"''' ",0' .
co{l'\1't\ercial . d
. -",um" ".."", "" "to oj ,0 Y'" 1"'"
S .. W r1"'~' & ^""'''''', 1"" - ",lOb" ""
OUTCe. ". ' r
\
o
o
County is valued at between $130,000 and $500,000 per acre. After speaking with
Century 21 Realtors about recent commercial sales, the lower number was used as a
conservative estimate for commercial land in the Yelm area. The current tax rate
was then applied to this figure and multiplied by the twenty year period to obtain a
total estimate for commercial land revenues.
Each of these approaches represent minimum revenue projections They are
limited in part, by the assumptions of a constant tax rate and- constant property
values. This projection also does not attempt to include additional potential sources
of revenue that are recognized as being associated with land within the annexation
area. These sources would include such items as sales taxes, permit fees, and
development impact fees. The total estimated undeveloped land values are shown
in the table below
Table _Total Estimated Undeveloped Land Revenue
Alternative 2 Proposal Alternative 3 Compact Alterna ti ve 4 Village
Residential Land $4,613,772 $2,839,244 $4,300,000
Commercial Land $1.386,607 $1.526,002 $4.196.506
TOTAL $6,000,379 $4,365,246 $8,496,506
To further identify potential revenues from land within the annexation area the
development value of the land was estimated as shown in Table_ below In
determining this potential value, fees associated with engineering, design, permits,
management costs and other development costs were considered as important
influences on value It was estimated that this value would be equal to
approximately $40,000 to $60,000 per proposed residential building lot. The value of
an 18-hole golf course, with a future potential of 36 holes, was estimated at
approximately $10,000,000 based on the value for other golf courses. It was assumed
that $50,000 per residential lot would be an acceptable average amount, and this
figure was multiplied by the total number of potential lots under the proponent's
scenario. The total of $250,000,000 was then added to the golf course value to arrive
at a total value of $260,000,000
The total value of $260,000,000 was multiplied by 14.6731 (the tax rate per $1000 of
assessed value) to yield the estimated potential revenue of $3,815,006 This
estimated revenue figure was then multiplied by the 20 year development period to
arrive at a final estimated revenue total of $76,300,120 This estimate assumes a
constant tax rate and no change in value over the 20 year period. Thus it should be
applied with caution and it is utilized here as an indication of potential revenue
amounts rather than a definitive projection of the exact revenues to be generated.
o
o
Q A breakdown of how th milJage rat is spent is provided in the table below. This
table indicates the amounts 0 revenue that could be expected from the estimated
$76,320,120 total above, per different services.
It should be noted that the revenue estimate does not include some additional
sources of potential revenue such as revenue generated fron:'- local increases in
employment during construction, additional goods and services demanded by
future residents, and various taxes that may be associated with tl!e purchase of goods
and services. This review also does not attempt to deal with phased development.
It is acknowledged that future development within the proposed annexation area
would likely occur in phases. However, the specific land areas and number of
commercial and residential lots per phase is not known, therefore this analysis is
presented as an overview of costs and revenues under full development.
TABLE _ TOTAL POTENTIAL REVENUE (Residential and Recreational Uses)
$50,000 X 5,000 lots = $250,000,000
,
~~f
"'- (\\
~ ~
, I..
\" ~ {II
\.J ~QJ \4'('1
~ ~ ~~ ~\
Sv f\
Estimated developed value with service costs added = $40,000 to $60,000 per lot
(assume average = $50,000 per lot)
$250,000,000 + $10,000,000 (estimated value of 18-hole golf course) = $260,000,000
$260,000,000 + 1000 x 14.6731 (tax rate per $1000 of assessed value) = $3,815,006
$3,815,006 x 20 year development period = $76,300,120
TABLE _ YELM MILLAGE RATE BREAKDOWN
Service Portion of Millage Rate Percentage Estimated Proposal Estimated
Revenue Annualized Revenue
(l/20th)
City or roads 31106 21.2 $16,175,62544 $808,781.27
State schools 3.3029 22.6 $17,243,82712 $862,191.35
Medic One 2.1586 14.7 $11,216,117.64 $560,805.88
Library 4894 3.3 $2,517,903.96 $125,89519
School 5.2180 35.6 $27,162,842.72 $1,358,142.13
Cemetery 1057 0.7 $534,100.84 $26,705.04
Port .2879 1.9 $1.449.702.28 $72.485.11
TOTAL 14.6731 100.0 $76,300,120.00 $3,815,006.00
Source: KW Thorpe & Associates, Inc -Thurston County Assessors Office/October 1992
()
o
o
Alternative 3: Compact Scenario
Impacts would be similar to the Proposal, in that a similar density of development is
expected. Reductions in infrastructure and service requirements would lower
potential costs associated with this scenario to between approximately $92 million
and $105 million dollars. The cost analysis indicates that this scenario would have
the lowest potential costs associated with it.
This approach is expected to result in revenue amounts similar to that of the
proposed scenario. The undeveloped land revenue estimate considered land area by
acres identified on the conceptual site plans in this document. Although the
Compact scenario utilizes less land area than the Proponent's alternative, it is
expected to result in approximately the same number of residential units by
allowing developoment at a higher density Therefore, the amount of revenue
generated under this approach is not expected to differ greatly from the proponent's
approach.
Alternative 4: Village Scenario
The lower density expected under this approach could result in the need for fewer
service facilities. It would still require that infrastructure be in place prior to
opening new buildings The infrastructure and service costs associated with this
alternative are expected to be less than the proposed scenario, but are estimated to be
greater than those of the Compact alternative Because of the potential increase in
commercial area, this approach is expected to result in greater revenue amounts that
the Proponent's scenario
Mitigating Measures
Developer impact fees could be assessed for providing some service or facility
extensions, and/or improvements to the proposed annexation area.
"1\
\'l)
o
City of YellD
~--
105 Yelm Avenue West
POBox 479
Yelm, Washington 98597
206-458-3244
October 19, 1992
R W Thorpe and Assoc , Inc
The Hoge Building
705 Second Avenue - Suite 910
Seattle, WA 98104
Attn Jeff Buckland
Subject: Southwest Yelm Annexation DEIS - staff review copy
Dear Jeff,
I understand that you are nearing the point of submitting a
revised preliminary draft of the Southwest Yelm Annexation
EIS To assist you in assessing whether all revisions
discussed at our meeting on August 3, 1992, have been
addressed I have enclosed my mark-up of the preliminary
draft discussed at that meeting I hope it is of use to
you Since this is my only copy, please return this copy
with the next preliminary draft so I may use it to evaluate
the intervening changes
I look forward to reviewing the next draft
Sincerely,
/4~
Todd Stamm,
City Planner
PS. I trust that you too found the conference regarding the
relationship between GMA and SEPA to be of interest and
extremely informative At your convenience, I'd be
pleased to discuss the implications of this subject for
the southwest Yelm annexation
Enclosure: SWYA preliminary DEIS - 6/30/92
copy: Dennis Su, KCM, 1917 First Ave, Seattle, WA 98101
. '3~ 10 :9 PluJ TH:iF:F'E20t,t,2::o'330
Fax Transmittal M~mo Q
D R. W. Thorpe & AS8oci~tes, Inc. .-
Ph: 624-6239 Fa; 62$-0930
!
I
i
I
i
"if
'3EF' 1:
r'~
I
,\../",
d'''
To: ;;JJ S~,..,
Company: G~ f>{ of YeJ r"l
Comments: fJ~ A-H. 3-
Fax#: 4'5Y- 1Jf(r
F' 1
Da.te: 11 Iq1 z... No. of pages:
From. y~tv~ 1
(
P f ~ CPn?;"'''''' -f<-..+ -fe...~) "'^ ~ ,/0 v"" de.) "111.
I I -I - ! c- --1
Cf/'t
1)/; l
(1(1_00 oliff
(f ~(t
----- -- ------------
-----.~. .---------
~_._-------_._---
,'"
('
\
,
~L------
r'
\
__i
o
~
(!l
?
0..-
\,1 ~ ~i~t\
~ _".::, iii; "",,~"1
~ 0: Ui\ . <:.". "",."".;;,,,
~ 0 0:\ '1{ ..",,"',"
~ ~ ~ ~ ~\\ ; \,\',{i" j;(:.':.~~1.t.},.,,;
'" . 0;:; '" 0"""" ".."
C'l 4. ..J <:!. 0:>'\ .- t,' i .. " . ~\
..; ..J l/J..J"; E, ~\,'" I"~ 'IT"-' ' '..:-'" '. .'
.... . ? \ ~ f'" .......' ..,.""." ,r ,'. " ,I '\'
'3. ~ ~ ..J\ [I (<~:}~,.. ,i: ':," ,~, ..'0" ,,:;;, f, :;; ..: ,I
",l/J- A' ",I" " _ ",:,':~.,.~,~::""/';~ .J" 'I ~\
'tS - ,..,..... - """ ,', " .,: ",." . " '", .
<. -a ~ ~ r.. 2.. ,.,"" ;'.. /' . ,.,' '." ~.,;-:'.-' ,." .. '1 "
0- ~ tt -- 0\\ t.,""" .. /' ,. ... ,> ., ,"
<f) 0 w a: r' . ,..'.'\ '" ," ".'" .. ,..,'I .. \
..,. <.) ~ <:( \\. 'f ;,,: '{;~, '",..), ..,<~.., '" ,.,' (h >,
-,,-~:z. ~'t'.""" ""'"'' "".,,' ," ,.;:-, .'
W .-l co \ G) I ".... .''': N:'.. '" .. ". c; """'~" ','I, .. .." "
l>- g ~ \ \'_ ,',.<">, I" ''''. " ,,/,' ,,\. ," , "\I - ,
O. l>- ,,:i' \ " ",'."tlC' '\.. ." . '.' .' ,'" ".~ , ' ,
,i: ~,,,,:;:-': '"' '" ';;'- ~ -,:; '" ~^"';; ~... .. !
~,~l C':11:>';;'~l & :< _-"'"--------0--- ~ ;\',
\\!" . \ " 0
;'" .~ <;.\-- ,,~, "'''-''' "3>''''''" ,""",,," -~~
'Z 3~"~-"\ \.....1 \"'\~ 11 ~b' ;, "d3S
~,.,eqq('~ ob".'~~ ,,0 '0.. ...<"'"
:....~b<-=--_- ~-=--- ______~ .r--/
to
........
........
........
....
C"l <i
0
':1 <l:
<l: 0 0
0
l- t!> <'
{)
\ 4. :i ..J
0..- 4.
~ ()
0 l- ce.
\ 0 fu u.l
\ 0 ~
\ 0 (h :z.
u.l 0
\ ~ a: ()
\ QG
"
\II
-'
<.)
<l:
o
C'l
/'
-1 ~______~-------------
~
o
City of Yelm.
105 Yelm Avenue West
POBox 479
Y elm, Washington 98597
206-458-3244
FASCSIMILE TRANSMITTAL FORM
TO
COMPANY
ATTENTION
nFAX- NUMBER
FROM
COMPANY
INDIVIDUAL
-FAX- NUMBER
/f. Iv, T /7VIf "if
t!6~r ;J()C!U",9i</O
( 20& ) h 2) -() ;lYeJ
y EL /'1
/b lJl? )" ;1JJ/'J /l4
206 ) 458-4348
<-
NUMBER OF PAGES TO FOLLOW
DATE
f/;; /'2
I
TIME SENT yJ c/
LJ "I' "7
r/pP'f /H/ S C 'il~/PI,5 TI/E c,t?/"?"/9c T
(' ()/,;C,.-3!"/ - L r5"5 V;rILI1,/,//ftPA/.? Le;:".A.-fR' /'i?/(
t/ )vII
SUBJECT
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS
If your do not receive all copies or any copy is not legible,
please call (206) 458-3244 as soon as possible.
Note
o
1 f
I' /1
II
o
~ ~~ '"
LEGEND
If
COMPACT ALT. 3
D
1/1
RESIDENTIAL
800 AC
II
--/1
If
~
~.
. . .
. .
COMMERCIAL
40 AC
PUBLIC
20 AC
OPEN SPACE 1,000 AC
(GOLF COURSE, WETLANDS, PARKS,
All Acreages Are Preliminary
r r;;~;- ~.:;.:;~~~:;: .=;~~ ~
t-fl~-'...I J" ).JJ_"";~ ;.1":) -:,JJ -.I:....4.r jJ "....-i_ - -' ';';"""'.l
l)f,_"J."".~ ;--.-::..J",;.;'; .J..)_~"",J--.~/ . .).: _' '. J' .
~ t" ~ ~ , " )) ..' ,
1":).:./ ,'-.J':-'-"
'-', ' )
CJ) I r -; :(;> , -:,.>"
w J:7'./ ~ J ~... .'~. r:
z It":~' -',.;".;
:J 7:/,' ~~:~~~;!6
ffi I F ~::; i~(;~~/
5: 11- .(~ :~ /c.; 'j
o I r:) ; ~'';,'-''
CL : J ,-
S3 I (=,:~
~ IL/
o :)
o I fJJ
g I '~.J/
I f,"'<
. t5:~{:, <,', ,CJ,'i~~".' I~ft {}
''':, -'-J""" ~'!l"
-tf.7-:-""L.J I\J~~
I '~f~ J,'<, (\-t,jv\;)~
Il" '~':'- 'l
Il{~~!'~~)
I r:,~:::~{~, :
II:, t~~j' ,>~?'.'?:(::) .:- -!C";' "" '..'
, "":J--.,..;..'~J ", -,. ).. w<.: '.J..J....J);.;.;{.....
I Ii -.1 '_f":)'''' ,~~,/"~:/'~~/'~;:'i' :';~,.~~t::5J. j.~)~ ~ : .
t .......).':"....., \\- -\ ..;J....,-~ ,J1,_., r'.... .~ ;"....,...,...,..::.1-1 .....
~S ,~,~.,;j ,- '<~ ~-..' .~.". "\ _..:,"' l~ ..:~~'~'~.."~~ :; J~.~' j;_ ),~ j.,~'~~., ~J~~,:": J" i _ ~"
L:' = .;...~;~?~-~~-..;~~.;. ;.::~~~~~~~'~
II
I I
I
--I
<:
f-
Z
LU
f-
a
CL
j
I
I
/~
2-' ,I
" ,
, ,
~ -,
/"
SOURCE
R W Thorpe & Associates, Inc IDe sign Team
~ i7 _tu
~~..'.!~""~~;rn-~~$il!~"""","_'i"';a.~</:~.,,,,~ -;~:
~~~~i~];:7;f~~;;;~:~. '-~~"-;-.
'~-,."
'. ~.,..... 4
I" ...
i I"
. , .
, '
,
." ,
/ ,
I
1
I
i
I
~
!(O
W
. I a.
. & C1, i~
Z
m
1 '
."
" "
;"to'
, ,[
,'"
\~,~
c:J OF YELM U
I
I
I
,.. .
111[ij!lliJI~~:~:;ill! 11 f,!, ~','
II
. ,I
-------.
i'~;p
, "~
I Il~'
~<p, !i
,j! ,
E ~1)11 i
" j
,..l .HI
..
-
N
~
-- ~
y.. ...
C
."
---
~~.
i
r
.....
a>
i'
l
: ,
"
~ r
., .
~
"!:
I
I
I .
I ,
I .~
i I
! .
.
\
Ii
---1 "
----1
r
t
il
II I I, t
n..\--"
:~ ..
, lfj',:1/;l,,i!
,t. ~..
______._ :. .1.+ ...
. I ,.
, .~~
t
it:
, r
I
/
.I
) \ ., #-
II ~
R.W. Thorpe & Associates, Inc.
~ 1\1 H()~ 81lridloo (OS 2nd Aven\l( Seattle, WA 98104
Soalllt! I An<.hora9o/Denvel
(206) 624 6239
. 1"\&......
. Lar>deol r.
.l"Ylr~'.'
.toOft04lllkla
dm KE
I
~0192 ~/2/92
Revised 4/10/92
Revised 8/25/92
Fiaure 7
SOUTHWEST YELM ANNEXATION
Compact- Conceptual Land Use Plan
Alternative 3
seeJ''t;1' L\~MO.J8 ueq.Jn pue Uoqexeuu\f
NOI1\fX3NN\f V'Jl3J... lS3MHlnos
6El9 _ vl9 (90l) vmS6 VM 'allleas anuaNv' pUl <;OL - UlPHns a OH 0 ~ 6
oO""","V/>"'>>S -:>UI 'saleposs" ~ adJOlU. "MOB
l6/V l6~O~~[
alep qo,
. e
P)!::l UJp
e::>lwouO::>3 .
18lU8WUOJIAU3 ·
ed8::>8PU8"
8UIUU8Id'
CI)
<l-'
ct1
E
'x
o
....
a.
a.
<(
<l>
<
III
,~
~
"0
c:
::s
o
co
~
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
o
.'
o
.
.
.
.
.
i.
i.
l.
!.
'.
'.
.
.
.
t... .. II, ~..' ................. ~
.
.
.
.
"
.
.
."
.
.'
..
()
I'-
o
\()
..;-
..y
.~/
.'
..
.
..
.
r
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
,
.
~
CIl
~
Q)
..J
'J
.
'"
--.:
--:
'.;
,.
--..:
--:
'=
'"
:{
~
~
'..:
,.
"-:
'"
--=
~
'-Ii
'"
~
~
.
.
.
.
..
........... ....'..
': ......
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
\ .
. . .. .,.,.,.,.~".
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
,
...-
...
o
u...
~'
ell
ell
...
+'
c:
Q)
U
~~~:a-
10 0::> O!\O"uo::> .~
()
I
.
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
.
J
I
I
I
I
~ I
~ ,I
~~.~~-~~ ~~~~- '
Q)
:>
<(
"0
...
('I)
C1>
<..~
J
z
o
~~
(/)'X
OW
WZ
(/)Z
0<(
O-~
0-1
a:W
0-)-
CIl
~
Q)
..J
CIl
~
Q)
..J
+'
...
o
u...
...-
...
o
u...
Z
<(
-I
0-
r-<(
Zw
Ocr:
-:><(
~::r:
-Ir-
W~
~O
Za:
O~
r-Z
~<(
:JCO
p~ "\
&., \
J ! ~
,{; "' 1.1 ~
S ~..>'
.. ~ () 0./'
... ~ ~ ,.'
rt5 J ~
\~ ~-1 ""
~\-= ~ ~s
.-.-10
0-
~
SEP 0'3 . '3c 14 56 F:U TW'F:F'E2C16b25C1'3~:C1
P 1
To: r;,J. S fAM~
D~ y~
Fax Transmittal Memo ~
OR. W. Thorpe &: Assoqales, Inc. \ D
Ph:62~9 Fa:62~30
I
!
Date:
'1(, /17-
J$ $~d<LJ.
No. of pages; I
Company: ("'i Itt
\
C04Ullents: \
Fax #.
I
'I~K-<!J'Ir'
From.
R. W. THORPE & ASS1&OCIA TES, INC.
-c..:- Planning . Landscape . El'lvil'onm~nt;Jl
. Economics.;....
PR1NC1l'AI.;
Robcod W Thorpe, Ala>
ASSOC1ATfS:
'eff B,,<:klomJ
$Ie-phon SpeJdel, ASLA
Len Zldder, A$LA
September 9, 1992
Todd Stamm
Director of Commumty Development
105 Yehf!. A venue West
P.O. Box 749
Yelm, Washington 98597
Re: Southwest Yelm Annexatlon DEIS (RWI / A #110192)
~ear Todd
J have noted the need f()T" .('\rtrr~ '"efinement Vi "J
~.2pl;::!HIJCL 2 We would like to comptetc these
would appreciate It if you could mark the sIte plan
drawn, and send It to me by tax (our fax number,
your drawmg to avoid any further Itguesswork" c:;' ·
spoke to you about receivIng a current copy of ihe (j~:,
fis('.~ ,na1ysls and -;till have not received th;:!t tr) I )'
coulu send uS a C(>pv of that UlformatlOn <1,> SOt)1
t ,our letter of
,J(lssible, so I
lei llke to have it
\' f:: h'l11 then copy
uId look. Also, I
J work on the DBIS
,l ppreo.ltc: it if you
l
Sincerely,
R W Thorpe
y'/tJ!;?
6.
~J
In, rf ~, oar -0 q7
ty JI' 01 l ~
~ 517 SiC'V01ft -
_ _ ,iJdd
". / ) uv
Jeft Buckland
EnvirOll.nl.l:.'lItal Plannt:'r
--'
I,.
.:..:- 705 Sewnd Av~n1.1e Suile 910 Seattle, Washington 98104 CWo) 624-b239 Fax (206) 625-0930 v.:,
1-1-\ 11 -I
~ F lvI
Fill
o 0
City of YellD
105 Yelm Avenue West
POBox 479
Yelm, Washington 98597
206-458-3244
FASCSIMILE TRANSMITTAL FORM
TO
COMPANY Jlfr h/. 7 /Io/ffP;:
ATTENTION /P~/:::-;J uC j; L/9.1-.tJ
RFAX- NUMBER <.20&) G2S- ~o9'Yo
FROM
COMPANY
C/77
OF )/,e"<:::~
INDIVIDUAL
76?.t?p7 57/1~J11
-FAX- NUMBER
206 ) 458-4348
NUMBER OF PAGES TO FOLLOW !
DATE
;/2/9'2-
TIME SENT 2~:Y 0 ~~
SUBJECT
;/G/S ~
s < j/v-, y E LOA /T /l-.-,... d--'>;-
,
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS
If your do not receive all copies or any copy is not legible,
please call (206) 458-3244 as soon as possible.
o
o
City of YellD
105 Yelm Avenue West
POBox 479
Yelm, Washington 98597
206-458-3244
September 2, 1992
Jeff Buckland
R W Tho~pe and Assoc , Inc
705 Second Ave Suite 910
Seattle, WA 98104
Subject Southwest Yelm Annexation DEIS
Dear Mr Buckland
This following comments are provided in response to your
letters of August 19 and August 28, 1992 In genera 1 1 t
appears that my crltique of the working draft was understood
However, there are a couple of pOlnts on which I would like
to elaborate
· I want to reemphasize the importance of significantly
improving the fiscal analysls This informatlon is a
key element in the City s declsion whether and under
what condltlons to annex this property
· I have discussed the populatlon tables with Rhoda BllSS
of Mundy and Associates and believe that an improved
analysis wlll result
· The scattered urban pattern shown ln your map of
alternative #3 of August 28 is not compact withln the
lntent of thlS alternatlve I believe it does not
sufficiently focus urban development nearer the existing
City center to result in any meanlngful cost savings
The urban area should be further consolidated toward the
northeast to lndlcate whether a significant reduction in
needed capital facillties can be realized
I encourage you to contact me to dlSCUSS this draft as it is
prepared
~cor~ly/
/~/~ ~
Todd Sta~~ ~
City Planner
copy
Dennis Su, KCM
'~. w. 9HORPE ~ ASSOCIA TQS, INC.
.:..:. Planning · Lands~pe . Environmental
· Economics .:..:.
August 19, 1992
ASSOCIA TES:
Jeff Buckland
_ Stephen Speidel, ASLA
rf?f: ~;;jrrr
EIlL .1 Uj
PRINCll'AL:
Robert W. Thorpe, AICP
Todd Stamm
Qirector ,of Community Development
105 Yelm Avenue West
PO ]3ox 749
Yelm) Washington 98597
Re. Southwest Yelm Annexation DEIS (R\.VT /A #110192)
Dear Todd.
I am writing to summarize our August 3 meetil).g regarding the working draft. for
the Southwest Yelm Annexation Environmental Impact Statement. ThIS letter wm
confirm our unders~anding of the changes yoil requested and the preliminary
schedule f()r ,our response.
Imtially we discussed your view of the four potential audiences for this document.
You expres?ed the Cityis desire that the document address the concerns of each of
these ,audiences. Since the EiS is a non-project actfon you indicated that it .must
reflect impacts of annexation and morecclosely discuss impa<:ts in terms of the effects
of urb~nization. You would like to reduce the project-orienta,tion of the current
draft and have it focus more on the annexation in a somewhat broader sense In
addition we discussed a number of changes in this draft. These are outlmed briefly
as follows.
1 The summary and introductory material for the proposed annexation
should include a more visual presentation. Toward that end, you would like
to see a summary matnx prepared 'for ea~y <<.:ornparison of relative impacts and
mitigating measures for each alternative. Tab1e.s should be added for the
potential build-out populations under each alternative.
2~^ The overall bulk of the present document should be reduced by
eliminating technical explanations or descriptions related to development that
are better left in the appendices or'discussed as part of future environmental
review for project proposals. It was suggested that the do<:ument be edited to
remove thIS material and thereby reduce the total number of pages It was also
proposed to print the appendices separately and that the published EIS must be
printed on recycled paper '
3 The site plans for Alternatives 3 and 4 should~e revIsed a~d simplified to
better meet your objectives for these approaches, including lower density on
.:..:. 705 Second Avenue Suite 910 Seattle, Washington 98104 (206) 624c6239 Fax (206) 625-0930.:..:.
o
o
the north and west edges. Alternative 3 should lower the density on the west
portion of the annexation area and transfer it to the .east. This would allow
more open space remote from the city's present location. Alternative 4 should
be changed to sho,w more of an employment base focusing on office space,
however, it is not necessary to lower the overall residential density as now
presented.
Some consist~ncy in style should be provided among each plan. This could
require using the same pattern for each site plan. A table should also be
included on each site plan providing estimated acreages for each of the land
uses shown. The possibility of pr9viding a pen and ink perspective drawing, or
air photo, for the annexation area was also discussed.
4. A fiscal analysis should be provided to compare relative costs of public
utilities under each approach This would require estimating costs of suth
things as water lines, sewers, roads etc. and providing rough estimates for costs
and the potential revenue each alternative would generate. This could be done
in an estimated format without employing a specific model, but tl1.e
methodology should be clear
5 Mitigation measures need to be reviewed, and revised to provide only
those measures that pertain to annexation. Project-oriented measures -should
be deleted andlor avoided. 'Mitigatlon should only discuss what can be done by
the City at the point of annexation to reduce or avoid impacts. This migl1t
include measures such as ordinances, policies, master plans, development
tlming,etc.
In addition to these primary changes, we discussed a number of issues that need to
be clarified. The EIS needs to re,solve die issue of 'whether the power line that
crosses the site can be relocated or buried. More specificaily it must be icientified
whether burial would be allowed. The noise element should include data from'Fort
Lewis on' firing impacts and their effect on the proposed annexation area
Background information on previous logging activity on the ,site ,was requ~sted
The water element should define the existing quality of water within the area either
through well logs or test wells. Thompson Creek fisheries information should be
obtained if possible, and discussed in the EIS. Flow records on the local water bodies
should be updated.
You indicated that Parametrix would. review some of the public service 'information
provided by Barghausen Engineers You would like to discuss the population tables
with Mundy and Associates, as there are questions about how they were derived.
Transportation analysis has been reviewed with Skillings and Chamberlain and
some changes were requested to traffic graphics intended for use in the DE IS
Changes in the site plans may also result in some changes to previous analysis
where differences in impacts could result.
,
.:..:. 705 Second Avenue Suite 910 Seattle, Washington 98104 (206)624-6239 Fax (206) 625-0930.:":.
.
o
o
Regarding the schedule for completion of the DEIS, it was stated that publication of
the Draft be targeted for September I have met with Dennis Su to discuss these
changes and to secure authorization to proceed with this work. It is my
understanding that the City would like to have a copy of the QEIS by September 8 for
publication approximately one week later, on September 15 We are attempting to
meet this schedule. .
In order to achieve this goal, it is expe,cted that the next submittal of this document
will be met with the intent to publish the DEIS and resolve any remaining questions
about that document ih the Final EIS This would mean that the September
submittal would be treated as a "camera-ready" document not subject to review as a
working draft, Thus It is important that you contact us at once if any additional
Issues. anse 'before that time, if they are to be reviewed in the Draft EIS Oth~rwise, if
you feel additional review IS necessary, it will result in changes to the schedule
discussed above.
Sincerel y,
R W Thorpe and Assocuites, lnc
~15~
Jeff Buckland
Environmental Planner
.:..:. 705 Second A venue Suite 910 Seattle, Washington 98104 (206) 624-6239 Fax (206) 625-0930 .:..:.
/)
o
o
o
Town of Yelm
105 Y Qlm AVQnU6 W ~:il
P.O. .Box 479
YQ!m, W~hinCJlon 98591
206-458-3244
YJI;LW
........-"-~
,....
FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL FORM
TO COMPANY JlrJf)f} f)fJOC
INDIVIDUAL A r{/tJ y /fj/Vb
,
"FAX" NUMBER ;20C, - fr21- :;y?'/
FROM COMPANY C I T'/ c;,c )".EL/!
INDIVIDUAL ~ pIJ Sm/'1 A
N FAX" NUMBER (206) 458-4348
NUMBER OF PAGES TO FOLLOW Y
DATE 7ft t/ 'l2- TIME SENT Y"'O?J IPJ
SUBJECT //It/R5To"V' /;II ~H?,4A/O .r S&-C;~/Ntp ~~r) c E
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS
--.- IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL COPIES OR ANY
COpy IS NOT LEGIBLE, PLEASE CALL (206) 458-3244
AS SOON AS POSS1BLE ...-
~
L::::::.L
~
,/';(J'/oJt1/! Z:::,uIJIS
( { ,. - ~
...c / :''''!/ ,.. -/
~
'-4
City of YelDl
105 Yelm Avenue West
POBox 479
Yelm, Washington 98597
206-458-3244
December 3, 1991
Thurston Highlands Associates
Attn Dennis Su
1917 First Avenue
Seattle, WA 98101
RE. Scope of Environmental Impact Statement
Dear Mr Su,
This letter outlines the required scope of the environmental-impact statement (the e IS)
for annexation of and general land use and circulation plans for that property descnbed
In the scoping notice of October 22, 1991 The following instructions regarding the scope
of the e i.s are provided to you, the proponent, by the City pursuant to WAC 197-11-08
As the proponent, you are responsible in all respects for ensuring that an adequate e i s
is prepared in accordance With this letter and other applicable standards
The following summary of reasonable alternatives, probable adverse Impacts and
mitigation measures represents a required minimum scope of the e i s At your discretion
you may include such other information as you deem appropriate including beneficial
environmental impacts In all respects the e.i s to be submitted shall conform With the
requirements of this letter and with the State Environmental Policy Act (Chapter 43 21 C
RCW), administrative regulations promulgated thereunder (Chapter 197-11 WAC), and
adopted policies and procedures of the City of Yelm
'-
"
Mr Su
December 3, 1991
Page 3 of 8
proposal should not substantially exceed a total of 3400 housing units and 60 acres of
commercial development.
Alternative 3 - The Compact Proposal
The "compact proposal" shall be a modified version of the proposal incorporating the
following features:
Additional open space will be provided in the vicinity of environmentally sensitive
areas, productive natural resource lands, and the Fort LewIs Reservation
Proposed residential areas will have higher densities of development.
The urban area will be approximately one-half the size of that in the proposal with
more intensive utilization of the proposed urban area.
The compact proposal will include the same number of housing units and the
same size of commercial area as the proposal with the same rate of development.
Alternative 4 - The Village
The "village" alternative shall be a modified version of the proposal incorporating the
following features.
The "village" may incorporate features of the "compact version" alternative The
"village" shall include more extensive commercial development and higher levels
of on-site employment than the proposal.
The "village" will include commercial land uses within the Property which provide
additional employment opportunities focusing upon commercial and government
offices and similar non-industrial land uses.
Commercial enterprises within the Property will meet most needs of Property
residents for daily or convenience goods and services, but will be generally limited
to a size and type meeting the demands of residents of the Property
The land use pattern will provide opportunities for non-automobile modes of
transportation.
o
o
Mr Su
December 3, 1991
Page 4 of 8
ADVERSE IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
The significant impacts of each alternative shall be analyzed and reasonable mitigation
measures discussed. At minimum, the e i.s. should include a comparative analysIs of the
following subjects. In accordance with WAC 192-11-444, the order and combination of
these environment elements is at the reasoned discretion of the e.i.s. preparer
Air Quality
The e i.s. shall describe the air quality within the vicinity of the Property and analyze
impacts to such air quality resulting from development of the Property under each
alternative In addition, impacts upon general air quality in the region shall be addressed
Various impact mitigation measures, including minimization of vehicular hydrocarbon
emissions and limitations upon wood fuel use, shall be considered within the e i s
Water Quality and Quantity
The e i.s. shall describe the current quality and quantity of the hydrologic system Within
and In the vicinity of the Property and the locations of all associated streams, ponds or
lakes, and aquifers. Anticipated impacts upon both quality and quantity of ground and
surface water shall be analyzed and various mitigation measures addressed
Critical Areas
The e.i.s. shall identify, categorize and analyze the impacts upon wetlands, cntlcal aqUifer
recharge areas, fish and wildlife habitat, frequently flooded areas, and geologically
hazardous areas as defined in the Growth Management Act and regulations promulgated
pursuant thereto. All such areas located within or in the vicinity of the Property should
be included. Pending plans and ordinances of the City of Yelm or Thurston County
should be utilized in identification of such lands. The e i.s. shall set forth various means
of mitigating impacts upon such critical areas.
o
o
Mr Su
December 3, 1991
Page 5 of 8
Open Space Corridors
The e.Ls. shall include an analysis of open space corridors appropriate for recreation,
wildlife habitat, trails, and critical areas associated with each alternative and various means
of preserving each type of corridor. Such corridors may be located within or between
urban growth areas.
Energy Conservation
The e Ls. shall include an estimate of anticipated energy consumption for each alternative
This estimate shall include off-site transportation as well as on-site consumption. Energy
supply sources to be analyzed should include natural gas, petroleum, coal, nuclear and
hydroelectric power, solar, wood fuel and other feasible sources. Various mItigation
measures should be analyzed with an emphasis upon conservation
NOise
The e.Ls. shall describe the noise anticipated to be generated by development of the
Property- under each alternative and the likely receptors of such noise The e i s shall
also describe the current level and timing of noise generated by adjacent land uses and
likely receptors Within the Property. In particular, a noise reception analysis shall be
required for weapons testing activities conducted upon the Fort Lewis Reservation
including, if possible, empirical sampling of such noise at a variety of locations Within the
Property and for comparison in the vicinity
Population Growth
-
The e.i s. shall include a forecast and analysis of the need for urban development within
the annexed area based upon the reasonably anticipated population growth of Yelm for
the next twenty years. Forecasts issued by the Office of Financial Management and
Thurston County pursuant to the Growth Management Act should be considered In
preparing the e i.s.. The analysis shall address impacts upon urban and rural population
growth in the vicinity and the region.
o
o
Mr Su
December 3, 1991
Page 6 of 8
Urban Area
The e i.s. shall address the annexation in conjunction with the appropriate size of the
urban area of Yelm and alternative urban growth area boundaries in the vicinity of the
Property as prescribed by the Growth Management Act. Analysis of urban area
boundaries should include examination of the relationship to the existing urbanized area
and the feasibility of serving proposed urban areas with urban services as defined in the
Growth Management Act. All such analysis shall be integrated with ongoing
environmental assessment by the City of Yelm of its entire proposed urban growth area.
Affordable Housing
The statement shall include a summary of affordable housing available within and in the
vicinity of the City of Yelm and an analysis of the impacts of each alternative upon such
housing supply The statement shall include various means of mitigating any adverse
impacts.
Natural Resource Lands
The e i s. shall identify, categorize and analyze the impacts upon agnculturallands, forest
lands and mineral resource lands as defined in the Growth Management Act and
regulations promulgated pursuant thereto which are within the Property and, at minimum,
within 300 feet of the Property Pending plans and ordinances of the City of Yelm or
Thurston County should be utilized in identification of such lands The e i.s shall set forth
various means of mitigating impacts upon such lands in the vicinity of proposed urban
development.
Transportation
The e i.s. shall include a description of the existing transportation system in the vicinity of
the Property, including all modes of travel. An analysis of impacts upon this system and
internal circulation of traffic within the Property shall be prepared for each alterative
Particular locations and timing of anticipated traffic congestion shall be identified, along
With facility improvements required to alleviate such congestion. Vanous means of
mitigating traffic and transportation impacts shall be addressed, including mass transit and
transportation demand management strategies. This transportation study and analysis
01
o
Mr Su
December 3, 1991
Page 7 of 8
shall be coordinated with the on-going transportation study and planning effort of the City
of Yelm and shall include an integratable data format. Any transportation and traffic
studies conducted by the Washington Department of Transportation and/or Thurston
County shall also be considered.
Public Services. Facilities and Utilities
The e i s shall include an inventory of existing public services, facilities and utilities
available to serve the Property within and in the vIcinity of the City of Yelm The demand
for each service and facility resulting from development of the Property and various
means for meeting such demand shall be analyzed. At minimum, facilities and services
to be considered must include public schools and education (K-12), fire protection, police
protection, Sidewalks, streets and highways, parks and public recreation, electricity supply
systems, telephone communications, emergency response communications, water supply
and distribution systems, wastewater collection and treatment systems, stormwater
collection and treatment systems, solid waste collection, recycling, and disposal systems,
and natural gas distribution. Substantial detail should be provided with respect to the
Impact of urban development within the property upon school, fire protection, water
supply, wastewater, and stormwater facilities. Where applicable, such analysis shall
Include the demand placed upon personnel, operations and management,
communications, vehicles, and/or buildings of the City of Yelm. Alternatives for mitigating
such demand to be considered should include phasing of development. Alternative
locations for siting such facilities associated with development of the Property shall be
Identified.
Concurrent Delivery of Public Services
The e i.s shall include an analysis of means of achieving and financing concurrent
construction of public facilities and delivery of public services In accordance with the
requirements of the Growth Management Act. Such analysis shall address the current
revenue and expense budget of the City of Yelm, and clearly identify various means
available for timely funding of facilities and services required as a result of development
of the Property and as a result of other development associated with the proposal, such
as "spin-off" commercial development. In particular, the e i s. should analyze appropriate
amounts and payment timing of impact fees.
.. .
Of
o
Mr Su
December 3, 1991
Page 8 of 8
CONCLUSION
Consistent with the intent of the State Environmental Policy Act and regulations
promulgated thereunder, the proponent is directed to focus the e i s upon those areas
where significant environmental impacts are anticipated. The City has identIfied
compliance with the Growth Management Act, transportation, concurrent construction and
delivery of public facilities and services, urban boundaries and population growth as areas
requiring special attention
The staff of the City of Yelm will be available for regular and periodic consultation With the
pre parer of the e i s. to refine the scope of the e i.s. and to ensure compliance with thiS
letter
Very truly yours,
City of Yelm
r~
Gene Borges, Manager
')
KCM
A Division of Kramer Chin & Mayo Inc
July 9, 1992
Todd Stamm
Director Community Development
City of Yelm
105 Yelm Avenue W
PO Box 479
Yelm, W A 98597
Subject:
SW Yelm Annexation Status
Dear Neighbors,
As you know, the Thurston Highland project is entering the third year of the
development process. We are pleased that our planning efforts have been moving
along just fine, much like Yelm's new sewer facility and the State funded
comprehensive transportation plan.
For the last six months we have been working to complete the Draft Environmental
Impact Statement (DEIS) for the proposed annexation. When this document is
officially submitted to and approved by the City, we will be ready for the annexation
process.
At this stage we would like to present to you our findings on the environmental and
physical aspects of the entire site and preliminary land use concepts of the Thurston
Highland site before we finalize the DEIS documents.
Tentatively, we have planned a gathering for all property owners on Thursday,
July 16th in the Yelm High School Cafeteria, starting at 7:00 PM. in the evening
I hope all of you can come and share your ideas and comments. As one of the thirty
six property owners within the annexation area, your participation in the process is
important to us.
Sincerely,
LANQ
~_.-...~-_.--
Dennis T Su,AI
General Manager
DTS.jad
1976-04
1917 First Avenue Seattle, Washington 98101 (206) 443-3537 Fax. (206) 443-5372
t;}l
I
,:t.
~ '
JUH c':3 ":Jc 15 5E,
",
F F' 1=1 tl f 1= tu]
F'HI3E 001
Land Use & roCM
Development
Consultation
Via Facsimile' 458-4348
A CH......'SIO:'1 of Kramer Gh4n ~, M:3Y:..; lnr
June 29, 1992
Todd Stamm, Director
City Planner
City of Yelm
P.O. Box 479
Yelm, WA 98597
Subject S.W Yelm Annexation Tentative Schedule
Dear Todd:
We are writing to let you know that the Draft 5 W. Yelm Annexation EIS will be
ready for review later this week.
However, your June 8, 1992 letter informed us that th~ urban growth boundary will
not be finalized by the County's Urban Growth Management Subcommittee until
later this fall. We were wondering if this boundary issue has any affect on the
overall schedule of the annexation.
In light of recent development such as this, please mark up the attached schedule
with your understanding of the sequence of events and the related dates. Your help
in this matter will make the planning on our side an easier and more manageable
job
Smcerely,
KRAMER, CHIN & MAYO, INe.
DTS-jad
Enclosure
1976-02
1917 First Avellue Seallle Wa::;tllngwr1 98101 (206) 443-3537 Fax: (206) 443-5372
III'-_'-I-q~ 114 UclfM fll)
J U Ii ~ '3 . g ~ 1 5 5 -;'
F F' '=1 n f., ,= [1
c:t>.
b
.--.
"
~
~
Month of June, 1992
Week ot June 8, 1992
wednesday, June 10, 1992
Wednesday, June 24, 1992
Monday, June 29, 1992
Wednesday,\~~lY 1, -199~
Monday, .July 13, 1992
Wednesday, July 29, 1992
~,q-v ~1 Cf)Mf-
~
F'HI:iE [leE
Per agreement with Thurston county,
Yalm to oomplAte environmental
assessment of proposed urban growth
boundary.
Yelm publishes notice of council
hearing (iO-day lead).
Plannin9 commi~sion holds public
hearin9 RE: zoning and plan
amendments. (Decision within 90
days RCW 35. 6~ .120) . (All
hearings to be within 15- to 50-day
window after D.E.I.S. issued - (WAC
197-11-535(3)).
'ielm City council D.E.I.S. public
hearing (ORD 399).
Close of D.E.I.S. standard oomment
period (30 days) (WAC 197-11-
455(F)).
Deadline for Thurston County to
adopt "count.y-w ide U qrowth
management poliei~s (SHB 1025 ~2),
Close of extended D.E.I.B. comment
period (45 days) (WAC 197"11-
455(f)).
Target date for city to issue final
E.t.S. (dQadlin~ is 60"clay maximum
after comment closure) (WAC 197-11-
460(6)1.
Annexation De~1sion , hnoeals
Wednesday, August 3, 1992
Wednesday, August 5, 1992
Monday, August 10, 1992
.....Ill\)'dl.~ MtI
Fir$t day for council action (7 days
minimum after F.E.I.S. issued. (WAC
197-11-460(5)). 1f approved,
appli~ant instructed to submit
annexation petition (YCC
17.64.010(H)). IO~
00/"
Applioant submits ^ petition (yce
17.64.010(1) RCW 36.93.090)
(tarqet dat~).
Yelm validates signatures and issues
final notice of intention annex to
Boundary Review Board (tarqet date).
2
IIh-~,,-',j_ "4 II ,IFNI Fu_
JUt1 ~'3 . '3~ 1 S S7
F F' 1:11"1 ~,. I: r-1
I'S-
<>
---
Thurad~YI September 24, 1992
~
G~~~~
v 0'- \.
Friday, January 22, 1993
Week of January 25, 1993
Monday, February 1, 1993
wednesday, February 3, 1993
r-...
Week of February 8, 1993
Week of February 8, 1993
Week of March 8, 1993
ThUrSday,\JUIY 1, l?~~JL
...........
-'''''''''1... tdI
F' H I~ E [1 [1 3
Deadline to
jurisdiotion
36.9:3.100) .
BRB public hearing (30 days. notice)
RCW 36~93.160(1)).
invoke
(45 days)
B.R.B.
CReW
Deadl ine for BRB decision '4 O-day
maximum aft~r final h~Aring (ReW
36.9) .160 (4 n ),20 day maximum after
jurisdiotion invoked CReW
36.93.100(4)).
Yelm publishes notice of counoil
public hearing (10-day minimum lead)
Deadline to appeal BRB decision to
Superior Court (lO-day maxi~um after
decia10n - RCW J6.93.160(50)).
ConCllusio.n
council public h~aring and decision
(YCC 17.64.010(K)).
Yelm amends plan and publishes
anne~ation and zoning amendment
ordinance - Qffective 5 days aftar
publioation (YCC 17.64.010(K)).
Yelm publish~s official SEPA notice
of appeal period.
Deadline to appeal SEPA iS$ues to
Superior Court (30 days after
official notice is published) (WAC
197-11-680(4) (C)).
Deadline for Y01~ to Sub~it GMA
Comprehensive plan {ReW 3G.70A.040}
(up to laO-day extension possible -
SHB filS)
3
tt TOTHL PRGE 0[13 tt
UI- ==I-~~ 11411llFM FII_
o 0
City of Yelm.
105 Yelm Avenue West
POBox 479
Yelm, Washington 98597
206-458-3244
FASCSIMILE TRANSMITTAL FORM
TO
COMPANY If;- 11/', 7/1-0/1/ r
ATTENTION t/P~/:::-,6' t/C j; L/9,j--~
"FAX- NUMBER
(..70& )
G2S- ~o9'.3o
FROM
COMPANY
C/77
OP )/,Ec.~
INDIVIDUAL
7b'.t?p7 57/9~J11
-FAX- NUMBER
206 ) 458-4348
NUMBER OF PAGES TO FOLLOW !
DATE
;/2/C!1-
TIME SENT 2:- j/ 0 ~/'l
SUBJECT
P'!;/5' ~
S' ,}/v-, yE L',/tt M A,...-...- .c~
,
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS
If your do not receive all copies or any copy is not legible,
please call (206) 458-3244 as soon as possible.
o
o
City of Yelm
105 Ye1m Avenue West
POBox 479
Y elm, Washington 98597
206-458-3244
September 2, 1992
Jeff Buckland
R W Tho~pe and Assoc , Inc
705 Second Ave Suite 910
Seattle, WA 98104
Subject Southwest Yelm Annexation DEIS
Dear Mr Buckland
This following comments are provided ln response to your
letters of August 19 and August 28. 1992 In general lt
appears that my critique of the working draft was understood
However, there are a couple of pOlnts on which I would like
to elaborate
. I want to reemphas-Ize the lmportance of signiflcant ly
improving the fiscal analysls This lnformation is a
key element in the City s decision whether and under
what conditlons to annex this property
. I have discussed the population tables with Rhoda Bliss
of Mundy and Associates and belleve that an improved
analysis wlll result
. The scattered urban pattern shown ln your map of
alternative #3 of August 28 is not compact withln the
1ntent of thlS alternative I believe it does not
sufficlently focus urban development nearer the existing
City center to result in any meaningful cost savings
The urban area should be further consolidated toward the
northeast to 1nd1cate whether a significant reduction in
needed capital facilities can be realized
I encourage you to contact me to discuss this draft as It 1S
prepared
~~lY/
/'~"~ ~
Todd Starnrr(~
City Planner
-==-
copy:
Dennis Su, KCM
~. w. YHORPE ~ ASSOCIA TQS, INC.
.:..:. Planning · Lands~pe . Environmental . Economics .:..:.
August 19, 1992
ASSOCIA TIS:
Jeff Buckland
iiW~ @ rn.o'~"f~ii:
II~ \I AUG2 ,,992111/1
lU~I.. ---1 U1
PRINCWAL:
RobertW. Thorpe, AICP
Todd Stamm
Director of Community Development
105 Yelm Avenue West
PO :Box 749
Yelm) Washil1gton 98597
Re. Southwest Yelm Annexation DEIS (RvVT lA #110192)
Dear Todd.
I am writing to summarize our August 3 meeting r.egarding the working draft. for
the So:uthwest Yelm Annexation Environmental Inlpact Statement. This letter will
confirm our understanding of the changes you requested and the preliminary
schedule for our response.
Initially we discusseq your View of the four potential audiences for this document.
You expressed the City's desire that ,the document address the concerns of each of
these "audiences Since the EIS is a non-project action you indicated that it ,must
reflect impacts of annexation andmorecclosely discuss impa<,:ts in terms of the effects
of urbanization. You would like to reduce the project-orienta,tion of the current
draft and have it focus more on the annexation in a somewhat-broader sense In
addition we discussed a number of changes in this draft. These are outlined briefly
as follows.
1 The, summary and mtroductory material for the proposed annexation
should include a more visual presentation. Toward, that end, you would like
to see a summary matrix prepared for easy comparison of relative iinpacts and
mitigating measures for each alternative Tables should be added for the
pote'ntial build-out populations under each alternative.
2~' The ,overall bulk of the present document should be reduced by
eliminating technical 'explanations or descriptions related to development that
are better left in the appendices or discussed as part of future environmental
reVieW for project proposals It was suggested that the document be edited to
rer'nove this material and thereby reduce the total number of pages. It was also
proposed to print the appendices separately and that the published EIS must be
prmted on recycled paper
3 The site plans for Alternatives 3 and 4 should be revised aI\d simplified to
better meet your objectives for these approaches, including lower density on
.:..:. 705 Second Avenue Suite 910 Seattle, Washington 98104 (206) 624~6239 Fax (206) 625-0930.:":.
o
o
the north and west edges Alternative 3 should lower the density on the west
portion of the annexation area and transfer it to the -east. This would allow
more open space remote from the city's' present location. A.1ternative 4 should
be changed to sho,w more of an employment base focusing on office space,
however, it is not necessary to lower the overall residential density as now
presented.
Some consistency in style should be provided among each plan. This could
require using the same pattern for each site plan. A fable should also be
included on each site plan provIding estimated acreages for each of the land
uses shown. The possibilIty of providing a pen and ink perspective drawing, or
air photo, for the annexation area was also discussed.
4. A fiscal analysis should be provided to compare relative costs of public
utilities under each approach This would require estimating costs of such
things as water iines, sewers, roads etc. and providing rough estimates for costs
and the potential revenue each alternative would generate This could be dOl1e
in an estimated format without employing a specific -model, but the
methodology should be clear
5 Mitigation measures need to be reviewed, and revised to provide only -
those measures that pertain to annexation. Project-'Oriented mea1?uresshould
be deleted andlor avoided. ' MitigatIon should only discuss what can be done,by
the City at the point of annexation tq reduce or avoid impacts This might
include measures such as ordinances, policies, master plans, development
timing, etc.
In addition to these primary changes, we discussed a number of issues that need to
be clarified The EIS need's to resolve the issue of whether the power line that
crosses the site can be relocated or buried. More specifically it must be identified
whether burial would be allowed. The noise element should include data from'Fort
Lewis on' firing impacts and their effect on the proposed annexation area
Background information on previous logging activity on the site was requ~sted.
The water element should define the existing quality of water within the area either
through well logs or fest wells Thompson Creek fisheries information should be
obtained if possible, and discussed in the EIS. Flow records on the local water bodies
should be updated.
You indicated that Parametrix would review some of the public service information
provided,by Barghausen Engineers You would like to discu1?s the population tables
with Mundy and Associates, as there are questions about how they were derived.
Transportation analysis has been reviewed with Skillings 'anp Chamberlain and
some changes were requested to traffic graphics intended for use in the DE IS
Chan,ges in the site plans may also result In some changes to previous analysis
where differences in iinpacts could result.
.
.:..:. 705 Second Avenue Suite 910 Seattle, Washington 98104 (206)624-6239 Fax (206) 625-0930.:":.
..
o
o
Regarding the schedule for completion of the DEIS, it was stated that publication of
the Draft be targeted for September I have met with Dennis Su to dis<;uss these
changes and to secure authorization to proceed with this work It is my
understanding that the City would like to have a copy of the DEIS by September 8 for
publication approximately one week iater, on September 15 We are atfempting to
meet this schedule.
In order to achieve this goal, it is expected that the next submittal of this document
will be met with the intent to publish the DEIS and resolve any remaining questions
about that document ih the Final EIS This would mean that the September
submittal would 'Qe treated as a "camera-ready" document not subject to review as a
working draft, Thus it is important that you contact us at once if any additional
Issues arise before that time, If they are to be reviewed iri the Draft EIS Otherwise, if
you feer additional review is necessary, it will result in changes to the schedule
discussed above.
Sincerel y,
R W Thorpe and Associates, Inc
,A; j;~
Jeff Buckland
Environmental Planner
.:..:. 705 Second Avenue Suite 910 Seattle, Washington 98104 (206) 624-6239 Fax (206) 625-0930.:":.
11
/)
o
o
Town of Yelm
YELW
-....--....~
105 Y.,lm AVClnu6 W.,lil
P.O. .Box -&79
Yulm, W4#hinqlon 98591
206--&58-32i4
".".
FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL FORM
TO
COMPANY
/Ir//1tJ .f)fJdC
INDIVIDUAL A4/tI y J(/N&
,
"FAX" NUMBER ;20(P - ?f21- JYf?'/
FROM COMPANY CI T'/ C),.C" /.EL/l
INDIVIDUAL ~ PI/ S;?J/'1 ;"11
"FAX. NUMBER (206) 458-4348
NUMBER OF PAGES TO FOLLOW Y
DATE ~ 1/'1 :2 TIME SENT Y~Op 117
". SUBJECT 7/7t/I?.fT OA./ #/6.H?AArO J" Jc.-~I"'/N(p #,rl c. E
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS
.... IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL COPIES OR ANY
COPY IS NOT LEGIBLE, PLEASE CALL (206) 458-3244
AS SOON AS POSSIBLE ....
/',fi /, .,J <7 / t
( (, /'
~----, ~
L-:::., ,u l); '" '- t.{
o
City of YellD
~ 7',/
;'
105 Ye1m Avenue West
POBox 479
Ye1m, Washington 98597
206-458-3244
December 3, 1991
Thurston Highlands Associates
Attn Dennis Su
1917 First Avenue
Seattle, WA 98101
HE: Scope of Environmental Impact Statement
Dear Mr Su,
This letter outlines the required scope of the environmental impact statement (the e IS)
for annexation of and general land use and circulation plans for that property described
In the scoping notice of October 22, 1991 The following instructions regarding the scope
of the e i s are provided to you, the proponent, by the City pursuant to WAC 197-11-08
As the proponent, you are responsible in all respects for ensunng that an adequate e I s
is prepared in accordance with this letter and other applicable standards
The following summary of reasonable alternatives, probable adverse Impacts and
mitigation measures represents a required minimum scope of the e i s At your discretion
you may include such other information as you deem appropnate including beneficial
environmental impacts In all respects the e i s to be submitted shall conform with the
requirements of this letter and with the State Environmental Policy Act (Chapter 43 21 C
RCW), administrative regulations promulgated thereunder (Chapter 197-11 WAC), and
adopted policies and procedures of the City of Yelm
o
o
Mr. Su
December 3, 1991
Page 2 of 8
AL TERNA TIVES
The e.Ls. shall analyze the proposal by way of comparative evaluation with the three other
reasonable alternatives described below. Each of the four alternatives shall be presented
and analyzed as required by WAC 197-011-440(5). Each alternative shall Include
identification of the location and scale of land uses, transportation corridors, utility
corridors, recreation sites, school sites, wastewater treatment sites, stormwater collectIon
facilities, and any solid waste disposal sites. Each alternative shall be analyzed for
conformance with the Comprehensive Plan of Yelm, the Thurston County Comprehensive
Plan, and the proposed Yelm I Thurston County Joint Plan Each alternative shall be
refined during preparation of the e i s. and described in detail within the e j s
Alternative 1 - No Action
The "no action" alternative shall include the following features
No part of the Property will be annexed to Yelm except those areas identified for
"immediate annexation" in association with the proposed Yelm I Thurston County
Joint Plan.
The land use zoning of the Property wilLremain as currently zoned by Thurston
County or as such zoning is amended by Thurston County during preparation of
the e.i s.
The Property will be developed in accordance with the Thurston County
Comprehensive Plan and county zoning to the extent reasonably anticipated over
a twenty-year period. Reasonably anticipated amendments to county plans and
regulations may be considered in describing anticipated development.
Any lands required by law to be reserved for rural uses or preserved for
environmental reasons shall be assumed to remain in their current use, any
forestry lands shall be assumed to be replanted for timber production
Alternative 2 - The Proposal
The "proposal" alternative shall describe the proponent's proposal including a reasonably
anticipated schedule of development. The proposal shall be substantially as set forth at
the scoping meeting but may be refined and modified as the e i.s. is prepared The
----------------------- ~-_/
/ \]
I! u), rt?vr ~ ~-
" /~' ~
7' ~J;, r~ ' '5i<J'tp.- ~
~r t:C ofl~ p~ J!-v-7Iff
1)~ :d;~~7<L pe~h~j /-'-rft/ ~ ~,
~ /10 I q:J, I g' u
') .l tJU~ a.v (Ld ~ f: ~ .
I t,/.-t- ~ ~ LY', r:~-;j p1,_ o1~, /J f) :ffi II ,~/ ::;- jl;TS I
~11/~r ~," ~,~~
tU'--t/ (;<.-~rl- ;;15 V~ rJ7
g : Iv ~:'--1 -;d.. A ,~ '
d- '1M fl ~- U.,. , 1/ ~- .~/ l_poO
o . A J -:it-.;:z. I :;:: .-< "'1r' J)
@ td 'v<-<jJ~ !P't:<. / ,'A/'O /J. ~ A I ,I 21tJit;,
c:r-: ",A> / ~ ~-/ / I~- if' ~!
'1,1 ~- /
4 / '1" ,.d /I f?,.~ /- aso"~,J?
a1 ,.,LJ -ft~?-~ :::- I~' .- r II ,~
(i)~ kvv d l' 0.." I Q.Jl ~.1u ,.--,-- ,
'r/r;:. . 1- ISOD atL-f ~ / IJ r (/"...1.
{yV- / 0 1': , I :3 €' ",,'" ~ (4n.
o oJ);Jd/~ ;;L~ ~ ( eP~ frf~ I 1
i /,)~ J!'.f .
_ () . _ ,_,' .,.._ ~ ,.a:r;;t:~ rV-
~ t-1!-"- ~ ~- - f) - ,.. / \
.$ a;J r:; ._1 -C;.r-.J~ ;J.:./J ~~ I ~ 71-"-"'-'
fzh-u ~ d ~ 71. j) PJ'), ~ ~
,~I r'~ IV'- ::J: ~ ~ tr"- ~ /'~.
. ../. V--"" ~'I j) . ,. I /Y. .. p ..
w-- .' !.r:A' i.u / q q 3. {/-/ J- "'ti'.-.....--
~. IO';~ th<<-;,t I ~ lad fY~ fl/~ tt.
~ ~ :4-'-1a-~ ~.l!2 d C/~ ~/ sEt Va. 2
( SI= .;2-30) r;;.J d I,,) 3 ~ 7 ,
f-~~L(j
tv q- b - ft if ,.;.. I-
/.) -t. ' _.J' o.J~ -,/#>
{;V,L- aA..... ~' iL- ~ r!.-~ ~
qr 'P P- / 1 ,.,v --:t:.t. /!Jat/ . / a 'IL:> '2y
,~~
. ;t'k' - J ~ .f-tUU -zl!.. f#'
II ;//7~, Y>V J! /:"1:, ~ tYt:4-- ~~
-tf-r~ '-ft'o-A- ~</ ~
~ .~J-.~'
cJ
- ---~-- ----- --/-------- - ---
..~~
---------
b 0
~r ~~ '~7< ~ -- i'~}'f7>'-~'
~~ fiO Ju-..c./d.ft ~ at- ~j'
,.;11 ~ 1~~ ~~ P' ~ :# :;k 4 Cl.-P'-'"
m !*4pvJ ~ 7tA- p r~ IrP'rfi{ ;6 <l ~
~. ~;L _' /2Ufi ~ ~ 4rrf" t, -4>
'}~ ~Q""-, ~,~ ~.c
~ cL J ~r: 1 '~~- Jr-4n
{Jp.A- ~. ~ '....0 '?J:-~ . :::.'tf..k &'-j~ "vp4.--e-
~ 02- ~ ~r;;o-" ' '"T ,if
~i'.~"1 4./~./ --- /J-L t:h ~ ~ ~o~l
~~'7~t;;::-: ~ ~ ~ ~
fr~~ ~~~. .
W.L ~ ~? ~ dJ ~(!.0 ~ d2t,LkU
d ~ ~ ~ a-U _ ~ ~) Tt. a~A,~
YO<JO lu4~ ~I ~ ';i ~ ~
. '; cUI d/~~J~
~.~~/ t~~ ~ ffi ~.z
r.vr~~ . ·
9><- ~ ~ ~.e ~ iz, ~ 7k:P. 50 '7"
;5 ~ ~h> ~ E /Y'lS e.~
\.- ._~~._-_._---_.---------------~_.
~
o c1
R. W. 'THORPE & ASSOCIATES, INC.
.:..:. Planning . Landscape . Environmental . Economics .:..:.
PRINCIPAL:
Robert W Thorpe, AICP
ASSOCIATES:
Jeff Buckland
Slephen Speidel, ASLA
Len Zickler, ASLA
March 2, 1992
Thurston County Fire District No 2
Mr Gene Coulter
POBox 777
Yelm, Washington. 98597
RE Southwest ),elm Al111exatlO1l Draft E1lvlrol1me1ltal Impact Statement
mVTIA.. #11n192
Dear Mr Coulter'
R,W Thorpe and Associates, roc is preparing a Dratt Environmental Impact Statement for the
proposed annexation of approximately 2,000 acres southwest of the City of Yelm. The proposal would
include a rezone of the site to accommodate future development, in five phases over the next 20 vears,
including approxImately 4,000 high denSIty, medium density, and low density residential dwelling
Ul1lts, along 'v\lIth commerCial, publIc serVIces and recreatIonal U5CS. Up to three IS-hole golf courses are
planned and the annexatIOn area would mc!ude roads, open space and landscaped buffer areas. The
proposal would also mclude an area of approximately 15 acres to be used as a future elementary or
middle-school sIte
AlternatIves to the Proposal mclude a design that shows the proposed urban area as being
approximately one-half the size of the Proposal and including more intensive utIlization of urban
spaces. This "Compact Alternative" would mclude the same number of housing units and the same size
commercial area as the Proposal and would occur at the same rate of development with additIOnal open
space proVIded around environmentally senSItive areas
The second alternatIve, referred to as the "Village Concept", '.\'ould incorporate some features of the
"Compact AlternatIve" but would include more extensIve commercial development and higher levels ot
on-SIte employment than the Proposal The proposed commercial uses, mcludmg additional otfice
space, would be expected to meet the needs of on-sIte reSidents tor daily and convemence goods and
serVIces, but would generally be limIted to a SIze and type that would largely serve only these
reSIdents. Potential reSIdential development would be reduced to acconlmodate commerCial uses
Additional upportumties tor non-automobile modes ut transportation might also be included within the
proposed land use pattern of thiS alternatIve A vlCimty map showmg the locatIon of the project site
and a prehmmary conceptual SIte plan of the PropOSed are enclosed
This letter concerns existmg fire servIce in the project area and potential impacts the proposed
development mIght ha\ e on thIS servIce We have the followlI1g questions regardll1g eXlstmg
condItIons
What IS the SIze and break-down by duty of your statf?
.
How many vehICles, and at what type, currently serve the project area?
.
How many fire stations are near the SIte and do you have mutual aId agreements With
other jurisdictions?
.:..:. 705 Second Avenue Suite 910 Seattle, Washington 98104 (206) 624-6239 Fax (206) 625-0930.:..:.
o
r'"
U
,I
. Approximately how many calls for service in the project area were responded to over
the last year?
. What IS the average response time to calls In this area?
· Is 24 hour service provided to the site area?
· On calls for serVICe, it a fire call came in from the project Site, what number of personnel
and types of equipment would actually respond?
· Does the district have a forecasting standard used in determining the need for
additional personnel and equipment?
How would you assess the potential impacts of this annexation on the District's ability to provide
emergency services to the City of Yelm? How would these impacts differ for each of the alternatives?
Additionally, are there any mitigating measures you would recommend to reduce these potential
impacts? Response at your earliest convenience would be greatly appreClated Please feel free to call us
If there are any additional questions we can answer Thank you for you time and help in providing this
information
Sincerely,
R v: Thofpe & Associates,
d~V:~
Gareth V Roe
land Use Planner
Inc
.:..:. 705 Second A venue Suite 910 Seattle, Washington 98104 (206) 624-6239 Fax (206) 625-0930.:":.
o
o
City of Y~lm
105 Yelm Avenue West
POBox 479
y eIm, Washington 98597
206-458-3244
----.Jvr'f~--5-.'-199Z. ,---., --.
Denn i =. ~,.l -.t:,,-.-I.......;A-,....~_.-..
Kramer Ch i n and Mayo ~r!?lr>:-----._.
1917 First Avenue
Seattle WA 98101-1027
RE- Southwest Yelm Anneyation
Dear Dennis
I have reviewed the draft of Mundy and Associates'
demographic report provided by YOU on June 3 1992 This
cursory review revealed what I believe to be significant
weaknesses in the report
~ The report presents statistical information only i0 the
form of tables and text No graphic representation is
included Basic charts would greatly enhancement
public understanding of Mundy's growth forecasts and
permit ready comparison with the Thurston Regional.
Planning Council forecasts
> There is no explanation of the methodology linking
employment forecasting and population forecasting And
despite including Thurston County employment "trends ..
Pierce County forecasts are not included (Does the
development in the vicinity of Frederickson have no
import for Yelm?)
· The summary of military demand includes no discussion
of later dispersion of military residents following
relocation Note that the sewer system will not be on-
line during the 1993 "wave Nor is there even a
mention of the possibility of future base relocations
and closures that could effect Ft Lewis
· Military retiree data for Thurston County should be
available from the census As should Yelm's commute to
emoloyment data but neither is included
---'-"'-,~ ------.----
o
o
.,\1'
T.h~ ,..$("l.P.l::tQr t j rw exp l.~n,at ion for a 13 4%.,c~pture
percEfnta,ge rath.er _th..an 10.% seems to me 't.o l:te ':_end-
product" driven, as the summary explanation of factors
does not seem to account for a three digit level of
significance in the capture percentage A historic
trend analysis would be helpful as would a more
detailed analysis with the contributing share of each
factor
I hope these comments are helpful to you Please do not
hesitate to contact me for a further explanation I look
forward to the next draft
Sincerely
/o-#~
Todd stamm,
City Planner
TS:ts
cc: R W Thorpe and Associates
Mundy and Associates
j i,
/ ; !:l~( ;(!, ~
. .11 .'~. l,.
i
,.;.1
1,
o
o
Kramer, Chin & Mayo, Ine. KCM
June 3, 1992
T odd Stamm, Director
Community Development
City of Yelm
POBox 479
Yelm, W A 98597
,
~
Subject: SW Yelm Annexation
Dear Todd.
Enclosed are pages of the demographic report that we have been waiting for These
pages contain information beyond the published County brochures and represent the
expert opinion on the growth proJection.
Please review and let us know of your comments before we incorporate the report
into the Environmental Impact Statement. We plan to publish the DE IS by the end
of June.
Sincerely,
c=::--
---.--
Dennis T Su, A.LA.
Project Manager
DTS.pa
1976-02
1917 First Avenue, Seattle, Washington 98101-1027 (206) 443-5300 Fax (206) 443-5372
o
1
o
INTRODUCTION
Purpose of the Report
The purpose of thIS report IS to analyze the demographIcs of Thurston County and to translate
employment and populatlon forecasts mto housmg demand for the proposed annexatIon of
approXImately 1,900 acres mto the Cuy of Yelm.
Identification of the Property
The area under consIderatIon for annexatIon IS approXImately 1,900 acres located southwest of the
CIty of Yelm m southeastern Thurston County The annexation propertIes consist of four mam
ownershIps a 1,240-acre SIte owned by Thurston Highlands ASSOCIates, a 264-acre SIte owned by
Venture Partners, the 90-acre Nisqually Valley Golf Course, and add1tIonal parcels under separate
ownershIps, totalrng approxImately 306 acres.
The 1,240-acre Thurston Highlands SIte is a clear cut property that IS currently cnss-crossed by old
loggmg roads. Current access to the property IS from State Route 507 through two adjacent farms.
The property rIses above the surrounding terrain and IS rollmg to somewhat rugged in some
locations. Some of the upper portIons of the property provide VIews of the mountains and the
surround1ng temtory
Research Participants and Time Frame
ThIS study was prepared for Thurston HIghlands Associates by Mundy & ASSOCIates under the
supervisIOn of Bill Mundy, Ph.D, CRE, MAL Rhoda BlIss, M.A. and Semor Analyst,
performed the analysis and \\Irote the report. The data was collected and analyzed and the report
was wntten between February and Apnl1992.
NEIGHBORHOOD DATA
i
, 0
The subject property IS located southwest of the City of Yelm in east central Thurston County (See
Figure 1, SIte Location Map) The CIty of Yelm is located near the county's eastern border WIth
PIerce County, approxImately twelve rmles southeast of Lacey and eighteen rmles southeast of
OlympiafI'umwater. The City of Yelm is located in the rural southern portion of the county Other
towns in south Thurston County include Raimer, approxunately seven miles southwest of Yelm,
Tenino, ten miles southwest of Raimer, and Bucoda, five miles south of Temno These four CItIes
make up the rncorporated areas of southwestern Thurston County.
The 1990 populatIon for the City of Yelm was 1,455 persons. There are 555 housing umts located
WIthin the city lumts. Housing in Yelm is predominantly m the low to moderate value range.
There IS commercIal space frontIng on the two main artenal streets, and a ISO-acre mdustrial area
that is rail served located northeast of downtown. The center of town IS the intersection of State
Routes 507 and 510 SR 510 provides access between Yelm and Lacey and SR 507 provides
access to RaImer, Tenmo, and Interstate 5, approximately 30 miles to the west. Fort Lewis
generally surrounds the Yelm area on three SIdes, to the east, north, and west. The Burlmgton
Northern RaIlroad tracks extend through the City of Yelm rn a southwest to northeasterly direction
The area surrounding the subject property is predominantly rural in nature, WIth farms, forested
areas, and large acreage reSIdential development
L
L_
MUNDY & ASSOCIATES
SEA mE . PORTU\ND . ANCHORAGE
92.-304 Wclcomcllb'"P"
. - ~.. . ~.. -. "_._~,~....:..::,...:-~ . ~-.~,
2
o
Figure 1
Location Map
't/"
Fort Lewis
!
L
l
,--
\
........ ...-o~
, .
1
Table 8
Historic Demographic Trends: Employment, Population & Housing
Thurston County, Washington
1980-1990
1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 Avg,
Employment
Total Employment 50,200 49,800 49,600 55,800 57,300 60,800 64,300 68,100 70,800 74,200 79,176 47%
Unemployment 4,603 5,595 6,828 6,826 5,875 5,215 5,591 5,363 5,084 4.485 4,520 -0.2%
% Unemployment 8.4% 10.1% 12.1% 10.9% 9.3% 7.9% 8.0% 7,3% 6.7% 57% 54% -4,3% 0
Local Labor Force 54,803 55,395 56,428 62,626 63,175 66,015 69,891 73,463 75,884 78,685 83,696 4,3%
Commuting Factor 7.0% 7.0% 7.0% 7.0% 7.0% 7.0% 7.0% 7.0% 7.0% 7.0% 7.0%
Total Labor Force 58,928 59,564 60,675 67,340 67,930 70,984 75,152 78,992 81,596 84,608 89,995 4,3%
Population
Total 124,264 129,100 131,300 133,500 136,200 139,500 142,200 145,500 149,300 155,100 161,238 2.6%
Laboc forcclPopulation 0.474 0.461 0.462 0.504 0.499 0.509 0.528 0.543 0.547 0.546 0.558 1.6%
VI
Housing
Dwelling Units 49,734 55,301 56,487 57,576 58,698 59,666 60,749 62,391 64,055 65,844 66.464 2.9%
Occupied D.U 46,375 48,471 49,594 50,730 52,068 53,651 55,020 56,637 58.467 61,104 62,150 3.0%
Vacant U.V 3,359 6,830 6,893 6,846 6,630 6,015 5,729 5,754 5,588 4,740 4,314 2,5%
Vacancy Rate 6.8% 12.4% 12.2% 11.9% 11.3% 10.1% 94% 9.2% 8.7% 7.2% 6.5% -0.4%
Pop./Occup.DU 2.680 2,663 2.647 2.632 2.616 2.600 2.585 2.569 2.554 2.538 2.594 -0.3%
Starts/l 000 Pop. 12.78 919 8.29 8.40 711 776 11.55 1144 11.98 16.36 17.24 3.0%
Housing Starts (1) 1,588 1,186 1,089 1,122 968 1,083 1,642 1,664 1,789 2,538 2,780 5.8%
1,586 0
Thurston County Population Projections 1990 Actual. 161,238
Mediwn Growth Scenario 139,500 157,618 2.5%
High Growth Scenario 139,500 160,844 2,9%
Low Growth Scenario 139,500 154,910 2.1%
Source: Thurston Regional Planning Council and Mundy & Associates.
.-.---
\'~_.
,---- .-
\
------
'fable 9a
, Ii 'frends' l\U\~IOyU\enl, fo~nl.lion & lIonsing
PrO)e.cted uen\ograp \C. '
'fhurston County, "Wasb\ngton
199()-2()()()
\9% \991 \99R \999 '2000 A.v~,
\993 \994 \995
\990 \99\ \<)9'2
95.04a 91.1&0 \00,555 103.311 \06,'2'21 '2.9%
'EnWlO)'1\lent &9.1\6 9'2,360
19.600 &'2,059 &4,565 &1.\\1 5,3\9 5,41'2 5.6'2& 5,1&5 5,945 3.3%
'fota1 ErnP\oytnent 4.593 4;133 4,&16 5.0'21 5,169 5.3% 5.3% 0
U1\e1\lp\o)'mcnt 4,('f)6 5.Yi'0 5.3% 5.3% 5.3% 5.3%
5.4% 5.3% 5.310 5.3% \03,'253 \06,\&'2 \<1),\56 \\'2,\12 3.0%
% unemployment 86.65 \ 89,'291 9\,993 94;131 91,5'29 \00,36& &.Yi'o 84%
LoCa\ 'LabOr force &3.696 1110 1.8% 8.0% &.\%
1.0% 1\% 1.'2% 14% 1.5% \ 1'2,\&5 \ \ 5,56& \\9.015 \'2'2.5'25 3\%
commuting factor 99 ,'291 \0'2,4'2\ \05,6\1 \0&.&66
'f otal 'LabOr force \\9.995 93.'244 96.'23&
\&1,05'2 \9\,4\5 \95.al1 '200,'255 104 ,1'2.3 '2.4%
'Popu\at\on \1&,452 \&'2,130
161.13& \65.\1.91 \10.0Y~ \14.'2\9 0.536 0.590 0.594 0.59& ,.....
'fotal 0.514 0.51& 0.5\\'2 ,0'-
\.,abOl' {Q1'Ce[pOpu\ation 0.55\\ 0.56'2 0.566 0.510
11,& \\ 19,645 \\\,505 \\3,39\ &5.303 '2.5%
\1ous\n% 16.005
66,464 6&.664 10.154 1'2,416 14.'2.'26 15.410 11,455 19.461 S \,505 '2.1 ero
Dwe\\in& Units 69,680 11,532 13.51'2
6'2,150 64.\53 65,965 61.&08 4.\15 4.050 3.9'14 3.19& _\.3%
occupied D.U 4.1&9 4.66& 4.546 4,4'23 4,300 6.4% 6.3%
'I acant D U 4,3 \4 451 \ 6.4% 6.4% 6.4%
6.5% 6.5% 6.5%
6.5% 6.6% 6.5% '1.545 2..536 '1.5'1& 2..52.0 1.5 \'2
'I aCl\1\c)' Rate 2..51'& 2..569 2..561 2..553 9.95 \\ .'1\
2.594 '2..5&6 \0.\4 \0.05
pop.pee\1P. D.U \0.49 \0.4\ \0.3'2 \0.'23
\1.'24 \3.2.6 \0.66 \0.5\1. \,95& \,9&5 '2,0\2. 1.03& 2.030
S\jU\S!\ 000 pop. \,'&\'2. \.M3 \,&12 \.90'2. \.930
\\oUSin& Demand 2.1\1.0 2.200 0
, \91.160 '2.3%
\\ Th\Us\On CountY 1'01'\1\at\on proiect\ons \16,&99
~ 2'10,61'2- 3.'1%
\"~ Medium Growth Scenario 151.6\8 \&,&,314 \,9%
" \U&h GrOwth scenario \60,&44- \86.4&1
\ \69,'291
LoW O<o",lh 50<",,'0 \5,,9\0 .
soo<<<' """,,'00 .",on" ?_'O' C_it "'" _oY .. "_,,,0<,
, '" \ "11"""'" ", "'" """",h ,.. ",,,,,,
Nol<' \l ""0""1"""".'" fod 99 \ " "" ,,"""''' "" 00 '
c-~
r-,
\
\
---~
r-'" .-'t
.
,.---
~~c~ .
l 'Popu\ation & l\OUS\o{!,
\'fojecled uet1\o~r.~I\ie 'frendS: F,t1\~I01t1\e~,
~\lurslon county, V'J as\\\o{!,lon
2000.2010
1M\\ 1()()9 1()\() f>-'l'"
1()l.)4 1()()5 1()()6 1(j\1
1()OO 1()()\ 1M1 1(j\1
\31,41B 1'36,151 140,\5\ l,B%
11\,%55 115.11\ \1%.19\ 1.%44 1.B%
EmplOyment 1\1.100 1\5;323 \ \%,540 1,10% 1,411 1,610 0
\06,7.'1.1 109,\69 6.B'1.0 1.0\1 5:3<10
'fota\ EmP\oymcnt 6.\10 6,'1.19 6,454 6.634 5 Y10 5.3% 5,3'10 5.3'"ro '1..?,cro
\lnctnp\OymC1lt 5.945 5 :3110 5.y10 5 :Ylo \43,111 141.994
S.Yl'o S.3% \37..'1.&'1. \35.999 \39.B'1.9
% \lnctn\>\oymcnt 5.Yfo \'1.\,111 \15,\15 \'1.\\.615 9.9% 10'\% \O:Yl'o ....
1\7.,11'2- \15,'1.19 1\\\,4\\0 9.310 9.5lfo 91q'0 164,9BB 3.0lfo -.l
LoCal 'LabOr force 9.0% 9110 \59.916
\\ AlJ'0 \\.6% %.%% 14\,9\4 146,193 150,611 \55.\93
Co1tUt\Uting factor 131.115
\ 1'1.7.,5'25 \16.\5\ 1'2.9.%'f') \33;11'2.
'f ota\ 'La\JOl' force
" '2.45.'1.39 '1.50.967. '251.\05 '1..3%
7.7.\\ ,991 134.16'1. '2.39,614 0.64'2.
\'o\1u\1\t\01\ '1.\4.04'2. '1.\%.%9'2. '2.'2.3,%15 0.6'2.\\ 0.633 0.631
104 ,1'1% '2.09.3'2.1 0.6\5 0.6'1.0 0.6'1.4
'fota\ 0.59\\ 0.603 0.601 0.6\\
'LabOr {orceWO\lu\ation \01,516 '2..310
\00,\44 \ 01,530 \ 04 ,990
\\ous\n~ 9\;2.%1 93,403 95,5%7. 91.%'1.9 \00,19\ \0'2.\',60 \05,1\9 '2..6%
\\5.303 '61.239 %9;2.33 91.651 95,0%9 91,60\ \ .'601 _1.'1.%
Dwe\1iny, \lnits %1,993 90;2.%% '1..339 1,\30
%\,505 '63,604 %5;166 '1.,930 7.,139 1,543 6.\%
()ccu\>icd D.\). 3,461 3.'1.94 3.\15 6,'2.10 6'\% 6'\%
3.19% 3,635 6.7.10 6.1% 1.43'1.
'I acant D \l 6.3% 6.310 6.?ffo '2..456 '1..44% 1.440
6.3110 6.3% 1.480 7..41'2. 1.464 \0.64 1\ \7. \0.31
'I acancy Rate 1.504 1.496 1.4%% 10.40 \0,48 \0.56
fop.fOcCup, D.\l '2..5\1 \0.\0 10.\1 \0.15 10.33 '2..5%9 1,610 1,\\59 1;3%1
(,' 9.95 10.03 1,431 '2.,5\'2. 0
\ SU1f\S/\oOO "po\>. '2..(f)9 '2..\61 1.111 1;2.95 '2.;365
\ \lousing Demand '2..03\\
\\
')
~ '2.61,06'2. 1.910
:\ Thurston Coun~ \,opu\ati.on \"fOic.cti.ons 116;3 \ 9 37.0,9%4- 3.\\10
.:\
'?,i """... Q<oWth S,,,,,,," \91,1<11 '2.11.150 233.356 '2..3%
....\ If h (fluwth 5<"'''' tl1\,612 101.()()\
., \f, . \%64%1
\p" O<owth 5"",,'0 . ' C ., "" ","",,1 &. p,-'~'"
Sou"" 'Il>U""'" R'."'''' PI""'''. -,
,---.
\
r---
,
o
21
o
r~
\
!
Mend1an Campus, a 1,150-acre property was annexed into the CIty of Lacey on April 6, 1992.
The proposed plan 10cludes approximately 2,500 dwell10g umts, as well as commercIal, lIght
industnal, and retaIl development. The property IS bemg developed by Weyerhaeuser Real Estate
Company and the first phase of reSIdential and light industrIal will be ready for development by fall
of 1992 The first phase of residential WIll include 132 s10gle farmly lots at 9,000 to 10,000
square feet each. The project also mcludes plans for a golf course WhICh will be developed 10
1993 Plans mclude s10gle farruly home lots on the golf course.
Further north along 1-510 south PIerce County, near Dupont, Weyerhaeuser Real Estate Company
IS developmg the 3,OOO-acre Northwest Land1ng whIch will include approxImately 5,500 dwellIng
umts, 431 acres of rmxed use office, resIdenoal and retail, 958 acres of IndustrIal and 110 acres of
town center
Hawks Prame Planned Commumty is adjacent to Menman Campus, just north of Lacey, and is in
Thurston County The project was approved almost five years ago by the county for a horse
rac10g facility and residentJ.al development on 1,100 acres. The project is currently on hold
because the horse racmg facIlIty was never approved and the property it was to be built on is m
bankruptcy court The Vicwood Group has purchased the remainder of the property with the Intent
of developIng residentIally and are currently negotiatIng WIth the county for approval to begin
development In 1993 The county WIll reV1ew the master plan In August 1992, and the current
pel1l1lt exprres rn October
Ind1an Summer Golf Course and Country Club is located south of Lacey in Thurston County. The
project WIll include approxImately 250 single family homes, many of them located on the golf
course, and 150 multIfamily homes, some of whIch will be located on the farrways. The lots at
Ind1an Summer are m the upper price ranges and are not seen as drrect compennon WIth the subject
project.
Deschutes RIdge Golf Club and Estates was being proposed south of Tumwater, next to the
Deschutes River near 79th Avenue Southeast. Plans for the project mcluded 121 single-fanuly
homes. Portions of the property, however, are outside the urban growth boundary and WIthIn the
nver shore conservanon area. The developers are go1Og forward WIth Phase I for 40-50 resIdennal
units, but the remaInder of the project is on hold.
Silver Hawk Country Club was proposed as a publIc golf course with 320 homes. The project,
which was be10g proposed by Fortune Development Company, IS currently on hold since the
property has reverted to the origmal owner
Military Demand for Housing
L
Dunng the next several years, the milItary and ciVIlian personnel stationed at Fort LeWIS and
McChord IS projected to increase by approxImately 8,800 people through transfers from Fort Ord
In CalIforma and other personnel moves and changes. During 1992, an esnmated 500 add1tJ.onal
personnel WIll be employed at the two military bases. In 1993 another 7,000 will be added and In
1994, 1,200 new personnel will be added. We have estImated that approximately 5% of the new ~,' 1:11
personnel will frnd housmg 10 the Yelm area ill 1992 and 1993 and that the demand will mcrease to
7% in 1994 and 10% in 1995, as housillg becomes less avaIlable and more expensive In areas
located closer to the bases.
As a result of the addItional nulItary demand for housmg in the area, we estimate demand for~.
hOUSIng In Yelm from milItary sources to be 25 umts in 1992,350 umts m 1993,84 ill 1994, and .
10 dwellIng umts in 1995, for a total of 469 umts of demand generated by new military personnel'
over the next four years.
oJ
~,f)
f'
\"
q
MUNDY & ASSOCIATES
SEAffiE . PORTlAND. ANCHORAGE
92-304 Welcan:lTh"1'"
o
o
22
Retirement Housing
The number of people In the 6O-and-above age category wIll Increase by 16,343 In Thurston
County between 1990 and 2010, or approxImately 817 per year (See Table 11, Age DIstribunon,
Thurston County) In addition, there are military personnel stationed at Fort LewIs and McChord
who retIre each year Accorchng to mformanon from the Pubhc ServIces Office, they are haVIng
approxImately 25 retirement ceremonies per month for people retinng from the post. This
translates into approxImately 300 people per year Of these numbers, not all will remaIn in
Thurston County Some will move to warmer cl1mates or to areas that are closer to theIr children
or other famIly members. We have estrmated that a well designed retIrement golf-course
commumty In Yelm can attract a segment of the retIrement hOUSIng market for Thurston County
As of the 1990 Census, there were 16,534 people in the 65-and-above age category reSIdIng in
Thurston County In addmon, there are currently 16,000 retIred rmhtary personnel hVIng WIthIn
50 rmles of the bases. Some of the retIred people reSIdIng In Thurston County may be retrred
milItary personnel so there may be some overlap in the figures.
We estimate that mInally approXImately 58 umts of retIrement housmg could be absorbed per year
at the Thurston Highlands golf course commumty 111 Yelm. 11ns demand will Increase to 60 umts
per year from 1995 to 2000, 69 umts per year from 2000 to 2005, and 94 umts per year through
the year 2010 Tlus esnmate IS based on the assumpnon that the renrement communIty will be well
designed with semor actIVIty centers, golf course clubhouse, lots adjacent to or near the golf
course, and umts that cover a broad pnce range, inc1udmg a large propornon In the moderate pnce
range
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
r-
I
L
Housing Demand
Table 12 (Housing Demand Summary, Yelm Area), shows estImated hOUSIng demand for
Thurston County and for the Yelm area by year through the year 2013 Beginning in 1993, when
the fIrst of the lots would be scheduled to come on line at the subject property, there will be
estimated demand for some 592 dwellmg umts in the Yelm area. Demand WIll decrease to 336 ill
1994, 273 In 1995, and 272 In 1996. After 1996, demand IS esnmated to increase each year
through the forecast penod to 602 umts in 2013 Dunng the 20-year penod 1993 through 2013,
an estimated 8,732 umts could be absorbed In the Yelm area. These projections are based on the
assumption that a broad range of housing will be offered In the Yelm area dunng the forecast
period, In terms of pnce, hOUSIng type and size, lot SIze, and amemnes.
Yelm Area Population Projections
Table 13 (Populanon Projecnons, Yelm Area, Thurston County) shows population increases by
year in the Yelm Area through the year 2013 The Yelm area includes Census Tract 124 (see
Figure 4, Thurston County Census Tract Map) County projecnons are for the Yelm area to
account for approxImately 10% of the county populanon growth through 2010 Our projections
are for the area to capture 134% of the county population growth, from 1993 through 2013, based
on several major factors
L
.
The proVISIon of expanded sewer facilIties in the Yelm area will allow the area to
accommodate lngher denSIty development
Expansion of personnel at Fort LeWIS and McChord AIr Force Base will add to Yelm's
share of county populanon growth.
I
L
.
MUNDY & ASSOCIATES
SEA mE . PORTIAND . ANCHORAGE
92-304 Wclc:ar<:/Thapc
?
/" ...
i
,i' ,.
V\) 0"
tJlI tl~ /,
I 6 9- ..J.I
nY~\y ,\Y'
o 1."'(;
~\~
Table 12
Housmg Demand Summary
Yelm Area, Thurston County, Washington
1993-2013
Total %Yelm Yelm Area Military %Yelm Yelm Area Retirement %Yelm Yelm Area Total Yelm Cumulative
Year County Area Demand Increase. Area Demand Population Area Demand Area Demand Demand
1993 1,843 100% 184 7,000 50% 350 1,159 50% 58 592 592 0
1994 1,872 10.3% 194 1,200 7.0% 84 1,159 5.0% 58 336 928
1995 1,902 10.7% 203 100 10.0% 10 1,196 5.0% 60 273 1,201
1996 1,930 11.0% 213 1,196 50% 60 272 1,473
1997 1,958 114% 222 1,196 50% 60 282 1,755
1998 1,985 11 7% 232 1,196 5.0% 60 292 2,048
1999 2,012 12.0% 242 1,196 5.0% 60 302 2,350
2000 2,038 12.4% 252 1,385 5.0% 69 322 2,671
2001 2,099 12.7% 267 1,385 5.0% 69 336 3,007 tv
2002 2,162 131% 282 1,385 5.0% 69 352 3,359 ~
2003 2,227 134% 298 1,385 5.0% 69 368 3,727
2004 2,295 137% 315 1,385 5.0% 69 385 4,111
2005 2,365 141% 333 1,878 50% 94 427 4,538
2006 2,437 144% 351 1,878 5.0% 94 445 4,983
2007 2,512 14.8% 371 1,878 5.0% 94 465 5,448
2008 2,589 151% 391 1,878 5.0% 94 485 5,933 0
2009 2,670 154% 412 1,878 50% 94 506 6,439
2010 2,859 15.8% 451 1,878 50% 94 545 6,984
2011 2,913 16.1% 470 1,878 5.0% 94 564 7,548
2012 2,969 16.5% 489 1,878 5.0% 94 583 8,130
2013 3,025 16.8% 508 1,878 5.0% 94 602 8,732
Totals 39,755 131% 5,216 8,300 5.3% 444 26,493 5.0% 1,325 6,984
... Includes Fl. Lewis and McChord.
Source: Mundy & Associates Forecasts.
o
25
o
Table 13
Population Projections
Yelm Area, Thurston County
1993-2013
Yelm Area
County County Capture R2.te Yelm Area** Yelm Area** Yelm Area**
Year Population * Increase of County Pop. Increase Population Housing Units
1993 184,206 14,451 100% 1,445 9,504 3,895
1994 192,124 7,918 10.3% 819 10,323 4,231
1995 198,359 6,236 10.7% 666 10,989 4,503
1996 204,393 6,033 11.0% 665 11,654 4,776
1997 210,455 6,062 114% 689 12,342 5,058
1998 216,546 6,091 117% 713 13,055 5,350
1999 222,667 6,121 12.0% 737 13,792 5,652
2000 229,005 6,337 12.4% 785 14,576 5,974
2001 235,454 6,450 12.7% 820 15,397 6,310
2002 242,023 6,569 131% 858 16,255 6,662
2003 248,718 6,695 134% 897 17,152 7,029
2004 255,547 6,829 137% 938 18,090 7,414
2005 262,945 7,398 141% 1,042 19,132 7,841
2006 270,481 7,535 144% 1,087 20,218 8,286
L 2007 278,162 7,682 14.8% 1,134 21,352 8,751
2008 285,997 7,835 151% 1,183 22,535 9,236
2009 293,996 7,999 154% 1,235 23,770 9,742
2010 302,424 8,428 15.8% 1,330 25,100 10,287
2011 310,954 8,530 16.1% 1,375 26,475 10,850
2012 319,590 8,636 16.5% 1,421 27,897 11 ,433
2013 328,335 8,745 16.8% 1,469 29,366 12,035
Annual Average Increase:
2.9% 7,551 134% 1,015 5.8% 5.8%
*Note: The figures in this column reflect population increases from outside the county as well as the
employment generated increases in Tables 9a and 9b.
** The Yelm Area includes Census Tract 124
L Source: Mundy & Associates Projecuons.
f
r-
1
L
I
!~
o
27
o
.
Yelm will be the fIrst town in the south county area to have a 20-year comprehensIve
transportation plan for local traffic improvements.
.
The growth management act will restrict growth in areas outsIde designated urban areas
thereby increasing the share of population growth that is captured by urban areas.
The development of a wider variety of housing by quality, pnce range and style, will attract
a greater share of the population to the Yelm Area.
.
P.
.-l f) "
",If l~
It.~ .1
~ Y r(1
rrV v~1" ~
lr fk ~.l1S
0.'"
7
y~l ~
~tf rJv fVpi
~o ~/; (/; 1ft
f ''/ ~$ S ..,J
o rl'~ ,11 r'
~ "r
vJl
MUNDY & ASSOCIATES
SEA TTl.E . PORTlAND . ANCHORAGE
92-304 Wclc:aIll:/lllape
. . ". ~ - - ~-=....-.-=~_. ~~~ ",._'-~-'-~~----;:":;i::. ;.; ~;-:-.-:: ..._~ .---~.:_:_.::':.~;.-~ '~"';"'~~~"",",,:-,...~.~.:.;-_ _':~'.
'...
o
City of YellD
105 Yelm Avenue West
POBox 479
Y elm, Washington 98597
206-458-3244
June 8 1992
Attn: Jeff Buckland
R W Thoroe and Associates Inc
705 Second Avenue
Seattle WA 98104
Dear Jeff
Enclosed for your information is a map showing the most
recent version of the Yelm urban growth area proposal being
considered by the Yelm Planning Commission The "pink" line
depicts the area currently being used by the staff to
prepare an environmental assessment to be presented to the
County Commissioners along with planned residential
densities It is anticipated that this proposal will be
forwarded to the Urban Growth Management Subcommittee of the
Thurston Regional Planning Council for their review and
comment prior to adoption by the Commissioners Thus we may
not have a final urban growth boundary until early fall
Please call if your have any ouestions regarding the
location or proper name of this proposed boundary
Sincerely
r~5r-~~
Todd Stamm
City Planner
Enclosure
cc: Dennis Su KCM
.
f
;;
J
,
i
i
i
f
t:
>
!
U'-
r-
8
..,
'-
~~'7:.
"
"
- .~\\
,.
1
\
,
"
r
,
),
"
R. w. MORPE & ASSOCIATBQ INC.
.:..:. Planning . Land~cape · Environmental . Economics .:..:.
Re: Southwest Yelm Annexation Draft EIS (RWT / A #110192)
ASSOCIA TES:
Jeff Buckland
Stephen' ~peidel, ASLA
Len Zi~kler, ASLA
PRINCIPAL:
Robert W Thorpe, AICP
.May 14, 1992
Todd Stamm, Director of
Community Development
City ~f Yelm
105 Yelm Avenue W
Yelm, Washington 98597
D &@&UW&m
.'5/992 M
Dear Todd.
I am writing to update the status of our progress on the Southwest Yelm Annexation Draft
Environmental Impact Statement. I am enclosing a copy of th~ EIS outline to provide you~ith an
, element-by-element summary of the progress to date. We have resolved some of the recent concerns
among the consultants worki~gon the DE IS and are continuing to proceed with the document.
Yesterday we met with Dennis Su and mos.t of .the subconsi1ltants to discuss the project and ~dditional
work to be done. As you can see from the outline, many of the elements have been responded to and we
are close to ,assembling a document for your review However, there is also much work remaining in
terms of editing subconsuItant reports into a single document. Before this is possible, each report must be
completed and submitted to R.W Thorpe and Associates, Inc. for editing. Subconsultants have agreed to
provide us with their reports on, or before, June 3 We are hoping to edit those reports and provide you
with a copy of the working draft by June 15.
In reviewing the DE IS work to date, there are two areas of concern where your help would be
appreciated. We received the preliminary population and housing demand report from Mundy and
Associates Inc. last week and I have begun to review this material for analysis of the Urban Growth
Areas element. In discussing -this element, it was suggested that I contact you for a copy of the most
recently adopted urban growth boundary around Yelm.. I amel)closing a copy of the boul}dary I have
been using from the Thurston-Yelm Joint Plan and would like to request an update on this map as I'have
been told tJ:le Joint Plan line is not correct. It would also be helpful if you could direct me to informqtion
about the specific assumptions that were made in determining where to place this line.
Another area where your assistance would be helpful is in obtaining a response to our request for data
from the.Yelm Police Department. We sent a letter to Glenn Dunn'ilID in early April regarding existing
conditions and potential impacts of the proposed annexation, and have not received' a reply If you
could remind him that this information is necessary for the Draft EIS, and that we would appreciate a
response b'y June 3, it may help to facilitate his reply
Thank you for your attention to these details, w,e will continue preparation of this document. Upon
completion of your review of the working draft, we will coordinate with you regarding a meeting with
the Technical Advisory Committee and cooperation with TJlurston County prior to publication ot the
Draft EIS. Although it may take somewhat longer to complete the DBIS in this manner, this
involvement should help resolve some issues and honor th~ commitment to include Thurston County
staff in the review process.
SinCerelY~
~~nd
Environmental Planner
.:..:. 705 Second Avenue Suite 910 Seattle, Washington 98104 (206) 624-6239 Fax (206) 625-0930.:":.
o
o
Southwest Yelm Annexation
DEIS Status
DEIS Element
Current Status
I. Introduction (RWT/A)
Complete
Fact Sheet
Complete
Table of Contents
List of Figures
List of Tables
50% Complete:
Need to integrate
final reports
Summary
Impacts of the Proposal and Alternatives
Mitigating Measures
Incomplete:
Need final document
II. Description of the Proposal and Alternatives (RWT/A)
1). Conceptual Site Plans and Proposed Development
2). General Site Description
Complete
Complete
III. Natural Environment
1). Air Quality (RWT/A)
Existing Conditions
Impacts of the Proposal
Impacts of the Alternatives
Mitigation
Complete
2). Water
A). Water Quality (Barghausen)
Existing Conditions
Impacts of the Proposal
Impacts of the Alternatives
Mitigation
B). Surface Water (Barghausen and IES)
Existing Conditions
Impacts of the Proposal
Impacts of the Alternatives
Mitigation
90% Complete
Requires word process-
ing and final review
80% Complete:
Coordiating with IES
wetlands study
o
o
0. WetIands (IES Associates)
Existing Conditions
Impacts of the Proposal
Impacts of the Alternatives
Mitigation
D). Aquifer Recharge Areas (Robinson & Noble)
Existing Conditions
Impacts of the Proposal
Impacts of the Alternatives
Mitigation
E). Frequently Flooded Areas & Runoff/Absorption (Barghau.) 80% Complete:
Existing Conditions Coordinating with
Impacts of the Proposal Venture Properties
Impacts of the Alternatives
Mitigation
75% Complete:
Need to finish covering
annexation area
Complete
3). Open Space Corridors (RWT/A)
Existing Conditions
Impacts of the Proposal
Impacts of the Alternatives
Mitigation
Complete
4). Natural Resource Lands Complete
Agricultural, Forest and Mineral Resource Lands (RWT/A)
Existing Conditions
Impacts of the Proposal
Impacts of the Alternatives
Mitigation
5). Environmental Health
A). Noise (RWT/A)
Existing Conditions
Impacts of the Proposal
Impacts of the Alternatives
Mitigation
Complete
IV. Built Environment
1). Population Growth (RWT/A & Mundy Associates)
Existing Conditions
Impacts of the Proposal
Impacts of the Alternatives
Mitigation
90% Complete:
Some revisions to popu-
lation tables requested
2). Urban Area Boundaries (RWT/A)
Existing Conditions
Impacts of the Proposal
Impacts of the Alternatives
Mitigation
80% Complete:
Need to finalize per
Population data
o
o
3). Affordable Housing (RWT/A)
Existing Conditions
Impacts of the Proposal
Impacts of the Alternatives
Mitigation
4). Energy Conservation
Energy Sources and Consumption (RWI'/A)
Existing Conditions
Impacts of the Proposal
Impacts of the Alternatives
Mitigation
5). Transportation
A). Traffic Analysis (Skillings and Chamberlain)
Existing Conditions
Impacts of the Proposal
Impacts of the Alternatives
Mitigation
6). Public Services
A). Schools (RWT/A)
Existing Conditions
Impacts of the Proposal
Impacts of the Alternatives
Mitigation
B). Police (RWT/A)
Existing Conditions
Impacts of the Proposal
Impacts of the Alternatives
Mitigation
C). Fire (Barghausen Engineers)
Existing Conditions
Impacts of the Proposal
Impacts of the Alternatives
Mitigation
D). Parks and Recreation (RWT/A)
Existing Conditions
Impacts of the Proposal
Impacts of the Alternatives
Mitigation
E). Water Supply Systems (Barghausen Engineers)
Existing Conditions
Impacts of the Proposal
Impacts of the Alternatives
Mitigation
F). Wastewater/Stormwater Collection Systems (Barghaus.)
Existing Conditions
Impacts of the Proposal
Impacts of the Alternatives
Mitigation
Complete
50% Complete.
Need Input from Puget
Power
40% Complete:
Coordinating impacts
and mitigation with
Compo Plan analysis
Complete
30% Complete
Need input from Yelm
Complete
90% Complete.
Needs word processing
and final review
90% Complete
Needs word processing
and final review
o
o
(Barghaus.) 80% Complete.
Coordinating with
Parametrix study
G). Solid Waste Collection & Recycling Systems
Existing Conditions
Impacts of the Proposal
Impacts of the Alternatives
Mitigation
H). Natural Gas Distribution (Barghausen Engineers)
Existing Conditions
Impacts of the Proposal
Impacts of the Alternatives
Mitigation
I). Concurrent Delivery of Public Services (Barg. & RWT/A)
Existing Conditions
Impacts of the Proposal
Impacts of the Alternatives
Mitigation
v. Distribution List
VI. Appendices
Complete
50% Complete:
Need to coordinate
with Barghausen
analysis
Complete
Incomplete:
Need all subconsultant
reports
-~-_-,..~ -- -~ --':-<l-~.~
o
City of YelDl
105 Yelm Avenue West
P.O Box 479
Yelm, Washington 98597
206-458-3244
April 2, 1992
. .
Dennis T Su, AlA
Kramer Chin and Mayo
1917 First Avenue
Seattle, WA 98101
Dear Dennis,
I apoligize for the delay in responding to your Fax
regarding the Bothell annexation question & answer document
The following information is identified by question number
on the Canyon Park document and is for your use in preparing
the e i s, etc
(2) Yelm has five council members and a mayor -- all
elected at large Yelm is examining the question of
having council members elected by district
(3) City advisory committees include the Planning
Commission, the Historic Preservation Commission, Parks
Advisory Committee, and the Recycling Committee
(4) Property taxes in Yelm are 40 cents per $1,000 lower
than in the county, due to lack of paying Fire
District, County road, and Library District property
taxes.
(5) Not applicable
(6) Council meeting are bi-monthly; police department and
city hall hours are 8 to 5 weekdays; fire department is
volunteer Police response time in emergencies is less
than five minutes. Station is on Mosman Street City
will continue to contract for fire protection with Yelm
Fire District
(7) City utility tax is 4 percent Garbage service is by
contract with Lemay, Inc., at $8.20 to $17 95 per month
per household.
-.
;'.r.
, ~~~&:f~~!~~~;~i~
'~l-":~"';{~~f~f.~/
.r -,;.';:'" ',0:.
o
'" .;;;.,~..,
....,. '
I.',,'j.
(8}ec"Water and sewer service (in 1994) would be available
without a non-resident surcharge
(9) You should be able to list proposed public facilities
in SWYA area better than we can.
(10) Garbage service is weekly at curbside by LeMay, as is
recycling pick-up.
(11) Transportation planning in progress
(12) Land use and zoning will change to u~ban patterns from
current 5-acre zoning Changes may be phased over
twenty-year period.
(13) Yelm has a residential-agriculture zone which permits
farm animals. Others may be "grandfathered" but should
be noted upon annexation to avoid questions later
(14) Yelm requires that businesses, including home
occupations, obtain a business license. The initial
fee is $30, followed by a $10 annual renewal fee
Conditions: I know of no request to expand advisory board
memberships upon annexation Of course consideration would
be given to appointing residents of the area to such boards
Sincerely,
'--
Todd Stamm,
City Planner
--1 ~..
~ ~ . i :J
TS:ts
.... .........
;;.i. ;.. '.r (,.:.
:........ -.
~,.
\ -
;,
I...;' ~~. d ~.; \ _. -; 1..~;
~:1. 'L
........
,'.:,
, ~.
.~
.1 ~~_....., ".r N\.
'..
...!....:.
~ '~;~~,.. "i"'1~ "
'f...t.~~:"r )'.'~.~
.~ ~":~~:.d~~. ;~~' -*;::i'
:.,
~ '~i;~.>~~t"~,~4~:f::~~':}'~';1'-
. .'
~ -
...~. ~~:f,;'~-.
'~'.f{' ;~.
:.:..;1;
t1 H F - ~ ~..,
~J:
r'!-r.~ 15 =1.
::::~ ILL:(!-jC_
C H(jl E E F L H I
.,
F . C. :I.
!,. - .,<::
()
SKJl . l
2'a;>;'S.-FL....~~.,.0i'S-$t!l'?~ntwS :.t.i2~c<;"f Blt>. $.F..' l.-J::..., W,..~~O: J
~"Iot...~~WB~~u..~~~.MW.d'" -~~~~:!M-..c.".~~~....Ul*~-<1~
F ,\~ .~.![\1! 1 J<. 'fRi\t'bt\B'lTAL FOH.M,
1'0
~ \
, 't-
, . . ri, C. "-
/' { (){/' ..J
1_ Ll'f
\ ;'-.'1
\ tV
.~ ~<tYV
v'
CO\lPANY
L-:> \. ,,'r.~'.fA ~ f.." .- (V"
f-~ IN . 'r, ~. r--- '-... \
_...:,~",_...::../._~~ ,,_~_ _d....~__~.....,_ ,
\ f"" I"~ ......-., ,. ,..1 "".J .'-.
) N D tVi DrAL _,__.. _,~~_e~_:!~_..~.~,:'tj~?:>~':'-l. _ :::1.. ).~,~,\!,A.{.-
~FA.X:~ NUi\IBEH:
/
,_?:':'~~:f~~~::-~;; -~~~Y~??~____,~$f-..,_.?~~//~~1!-3
t; ,Jl.-:-
FRO r,j ~
1 NO!\' I DUAL
J~~i?_ .t..i02:~'le:li~~__._ _ ~
OUR ^~-AX^ NlJMBER
'"0''' 'Ql "gl'7
~~".~~ --~___. i-. __~At~Jl' L_..:.tL...;.....:~h_t! _
NlJMBE,R OF P4J.ES TO FOLLOW
~.:?
._-----~_.- ...-:::...:~~~~-'--
I ,
DATL '?)/?'::.)l;l2~ Tli'\lE SENff
-----4..,.,..- i.... "._-~.-.._.._~. '- ..~.......~
(.':1--2' /'1,t11 , I') ~~_ -
30B ,'{''1\:lBP{ I ,_c' TVl<'f(\U N,\i\IE ; ,~"'i.~.,};." . 1::;..1;._'
~J -- ;. \,.}" 1 .. l"j-'" ....'"_ ~..~__-"-._._~h_~~ V ~~,.l,r j. I.. ,oj __~ ______..........-___.,........___.................._....... ':-----4
(( f I
I .'1' f -(: 1"'(..1. (1 ,) ,
~{mJFC-T
<"e ,p A +fv.. rJ;,:<./".J..
, A
f/V'M.....(?
f ::0
4DDrnONAL CO;Vi?,TENT."l
, ! (' / OF DO :\0]' RECEIVE ,\.LL COPIES OH .\N")' COPi f~ NOT LEt.1HLE
PLEASE CALl (206) 491.J3Y9 AS SOON .\S POSSH3LEHU
." - / ' 'i . . " I .
: fILS Jlit-WI !.t! (r(mm!l.~J/u(1 (al/i/. or (OC'mltillJ aCtOH/pall,rmg It) may contmn ~~onJl( fll(ir.((
/IFml1 Won be/ongUli; (0 a sC'lder H/IICI! l,. protected by the conwltanf.cl1ent pnvi!e~e 'The
{ 'I('/ton IJ mtf:nded '1Illy for the an i)f the md/Vidual or emir}' nanlcd above If you are not
iIli!llded reCIpient, }'Ol.l are hlJeb~' notified fhat allY dl<jcfosure, cOpylf/lJ; distnbutwn Of the
,g of (lny cellon In rpihll/t (:' 0/1 the coment,\, of trlis infurmatIon 13 strictly pro/llolred. If you
/!.( {'I\'. r{ f!l,S fIlt!!.\/iIi_\\I. ! Iii i n(i?, {II U,\'! lllinl,-dlt!/el}! JI!llIfi' llj by II"/ephmlt In f/!!(/llse fOt
retHrn vr (lie {/O('lilili!ut'il
I
Ii '11 r '/1 }. i 1
t1 H F- - ?: 0 - :3 ~ t1 0 ~~ 1 '5 ~ 1
_ ~ I L L'I' t~ C; _
C HOt1 E E F- L H I
F_O~
-...
o
r~~ i to'...:.
.'#
..
:l~\ILUNVr., &
CHAr~1LJ[t~LP\iN. iNL
CONSUl WlG WGINHRS
:'021 uv.ey t''':;\..'!i..:"I.':1rJ ~,E.
i.n( 21 Via:::.hHlq!ll'f\ Mc..::n
I ;.1("(~Y ?CEi .:1'~1 jSjr~
FA. lOr; ;49i :-'1.i-j~.,
MEMORANDtJ?o.1
'1'0
Jdf Bu, k!and
lAX
R \V Thorpe & Associates
206i62'i -O\)~O
('upy 1"0
Dl.'lllllS Su - KCM Consultlflg Engmcers
fAX 206/443-5372
Il"~ I"~
I odu StanllH C It)' of Y dill PLHlfl<.'f
FAX 206/458-4348
FRn~'I
DATE
Mar~h 30, 1992
SUBJbcr
RUllh' LO\..aliuIL<; IiiI' Y.l .l1l,1 Y ::: A\!.:enatlVC's
Ydm Comprehensive Transportation Plan
Thl<; pdsl Thursday, Jl.lar,,;,h 26, 1992, the Yclm TranspOliatlon Advisory Committee (fAC) developed
1I!!l'fUVLfIl~I1\ (1I1d \...)ltn~~l.lInii <il!'::fIl,ill\(''.; IUl ~,luJy ii, PM! (,f the ~'\lil1prdlrnsiv\: Iranspmj,lllOtl 1'1.111
1\,'_lllllIlH;:nd.\lil}li:", kddk.J lO lilt: :::'oulllw~ ,t \ dm AlllllX,jlt,)i\ Ihi..'fL ;llt' theL': .iltl'rn.l1ivi.::''.; {hat wdl
hav~- the greatest ill1pacts to the prc-scnt planning proce.ss
y.] A principal arterial be-twt't'n SR-51 0 and SR 507 outside the southwest
4U<lurant of the oty, \\.ould involw realignment of SR-510 north of
93rd Avenue NE to the pre..(;,enl Burnett Road alignment that would
r\~wrn to the prt"'ent ';R-51O al1gnmcnt In a general vkmity north of
Br,ld"llJ'N i(\),l\1 l'lL1)' hie a " lalh. .Jfleri d wili of '1';\(' to keep
({)mmercial dcvdopment olt thiS "bypt1'.s aligrlf\lcill
Y-2 A principal arterial between the junction of SR-S07 and Y-I
ahcrnatlve and the flw-Corncrs mter<;ection, may be a 5-lane arterial,
Will of TAC to keep commer~ial development off this "bypass"
al ignment
i.? Uesagnalion of Berry Valley Road dS the "prinCipal city of Yelm
connection" betwe.cn the SOllthwest Yelrn Annexation area and SR-
'i to, (dllfi!1g tnG TAr ~1.>,';Slllll the wml11iltee thought that Longmire
\,i\Jllfd b~ the li[m.ip,\l en !lll'UHHI. hulllpOIl furtlwr discu<;slOns with
City :\lafl, it was dt't\.,llllllleJ l,hal Bell)' Valky was the hclter
conne~lion)
AHachl:d to thiS map, I've attached two maps The first summarizes all alternatives being studH;~~l by
tht.: 'lAC The semnd is a sketch showing, without any JelailcJ stud), the potential alignment of Y-l
Y _.: ;lI1d 'r (ihrliugh lh~ prupus('d Ydill ,wn, X.;,llllil IlfOI\(;rlll~S if YUlJ have any queqinl\S. pkilS\~
(i\1 nol hu;it;l\\- Lu l }lil.l\,i, mt Ildok f\lt'ward to Hl<:'l'llng with lhl' stlll1y t,;Hll on Wt'JIll~,\d'\y
I i I Hf"ii-i:.Jt' )fn!"\ lie'! EJ ''/jj.:ur~VJN I-\L SU}WL '~Nh l\t~O LJ:~T !-JL.6\t.1t,.[
i -1 l 1 I
~0
3~
__---- ~-----~---- _"_" 4 ,. C~~-
" .:> H ,"5' "- "- ~" L L- , H G'~ } C H "" " " EO" L- "" >
O -- ----.----'\
-"--~ -., '
~ '~ ~\ t"1 i\'~<~ ~\'-\~ \---=---=\r \
~' "'-' \." . ~_._ \ _' rn \
10~' '::.~ ,~ ' ;';~. ^
V"" ...,.,-., , - \SI
rt~: · ". \~\
o
~\:}'\~
N~
\~'
.;
r\~
----<
,
P
"7
B
(]J
~
)>
-p
--<:,
c'
o
,
....
(;>
()
c:
;:.l
(j)
rn
1;)
C
t!J
r~
c;
o
~
~
,-
g
.^
-<.
(/!
~
.c..
('-
~
(1
o
~
~
rn
J)
(l
"
,.
o
1011
'::;;
-n
(\I
~J
if'
()
5
o
to'
III
<J)
.,\
(n
en
~
(f'
S
-u
rn
1/'
--n
=fl
~,
c
----<
F
~
-<
~
Gi
-:r.
r
{TI
'Z-
!Jl
;;
-<l
?
rn
o
~
~-
C
.r.
-<-.
-:;.
o
!'T1
Z
u;
.~
-<
.,.,
t
"
c
(i;
-z
0-
.
-<l
~,
~
".
"
~
!
'1)
r1\
v-
B
(11
-z
.,
u'
e"
o
s::
}>
('
q
~
2
Is
c
U1
p\
j,
"
C
-.
"
y
r-
,
'i
'%
<f
N
1>
(}
~
50
"
'"
-1
\
i
-'
-\
\
,
\... .... .... ....
.---------- ..
~ llo ~
.\
\
\
"" 1-\ e ii..sc,O~'0\CS \nC ~".", "",.",..,nC1h
.., " )Of \l " "" .. ,. ....,,' -.' -." '" '1""
p. . ... ...' .......... ..... ,. .. ,_' ,," . p,,o
)" ,-",.::;:" _,' _'" ""';'\' M 'f\ l>-\\'~v A'\'\()"\ l\'1e rp)\J,-,,;\'II. LO\lCf;f1ll1i-\\ L(\{\\} s<<
en\ r\' ""1'".1 Yf, n" ".^ .' .,,,,,,,.. ·
)...j"-..-' r'....~
\
\~ -~ -'~,
-'
." <,
,-
~h~
- \~
\
\\1\
,
I
..\lJ.~\~.J~...
;J
.
\./
\
;
!
1 ';~.~. ~\r'\ ~
,~ 't<';'_. \
.. ~ H1X' )\ "2J,1~!'..~(:.
H"'\:"':'\""I{ 'oC)
i\, ~,~" .\' ~,
\,~, -
1"~
\~
t(r,
.~_'_ -t:-
. \
\" '
",\. :"" \-" \,
II.\'! '.
,'/' \f' '
, '\"....
.....4 .......... I
\ \ -i "
'-::
-~~-- -------~j--;-~"
-----
,,,,,~\..'
o
~~r"{,;'
\
\ ,/
\ '
i\l\-JP-~
\\ 1
.\ \ ':'!;'!...... "
\ \--~
, I
:\ \\
\ \
i.,' _ ,.,. ,.,
Il\''--~~
\
\
\
~_dl
f <....~-_.-
"
"
\.
~
~
()
,
~
,
~
~
ffl
~
\
~
i
~
~
~
-J, ~(L
Cb ~ d.,
f;' 'i1 \) ~ 'ir \<' ", -fit t; \ ~ ~ ~ ~ b.'
>'i.. _~~ ~~~) '" ~~'1h1
t~~~~~~ ~l~' ~-t~t~:
o'? ' .~ ~ ~ '\1 1 " '1l 0, V1
c. 3 & -' ',\? iX' ,..,'1> ~
. Ii - \~ ~ ". ~ \
..... '~\ \ ~,
.:. C" f' "
9 T \.;
, '\
/""'............\
,(\ "
:I.'
\~
\;
\1>
\
,
.. ~j!J~ t'1
\
I
\
\
\i
\.
\~
\"
\
\\
\'
",,,...~\
, .
~~
\ \'\, ~
\ 4' __......... _~~ ..r----
\ \. \ \
- -- ~ \ \
"
"
/.
.....
~
--,
..,
"-".
"',
"
-"
~-T-'!'-----
.~~
I'
\\
""
\\
)
i
/
J-,
..,(
_J
\
'f~
....,1..
.1.
\
,'...
\
lJ.)
tj
'!
\I
)'i!'
..'
h-
, "' ., ,,", " " "' "' C' _ ~ "H I .,." '" =,.,;. I H 0 " "t -" "- -
o
Town of elm
105 Yelm Avenue West
POBox 479
Yelm, Washington 98597
206-458-3244
FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL FORM
COMPANY ~O/)rU17-ttr(X 1 Vile. .
INDIVIDUAL Y'!pJ(o/ t)/ l,v(;rf1/t JS~ hlbVtT
NUMBER <4 ~- DqL/(fi /
6?-r fJV~
INDIVIDUAL b;t1U- ~
(206) 458-4348
NUMBER OF PAGES TO FOLLOW ~
TO
"FAX"
FROM
COMPANY
"FAX"
NUMBER
DATE 3- ;)[J~2. , TIME SENT 9.:3D ,lJ1YJ .
SUBJECT 1117. (j;)I/J( J/ (I Aift'fJ bf-1711:O -t?J ~
~MJt; $ PY}/KL.
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS
**** IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL COPIES OR ANY
COpy IS NOT LEGIBLE, PLEASE CALL (206) 458-3244
AS SOON AS POSSIBLE ****
03- .20. 1992 13 00 FRCJ1J
BHRCiHHUSEt'l Et.1G I tEEF'S TO
1.20S4584J48 P ~1
o 0
BARGHAUSEN CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC.
aLand Planmng. Survey, and Design Specialists"
March 20, 1992
Mr. Gene I3orgess, City Manage1;'
Town of Yelm
105 Yelm Avenue West
P.O. Box 479
Yelm, W A 98597
Post-lt'" brand fa;.: transmittal memo 7671 ti ~~ ..
~ /' r? F""", ..,..
(~<.A.i- \..)~! "s
o.c.....
Dept.
I
~..I'(
~'~
i
.
j
_,J
co.
Pho",,1t
Fax"
Gc'
~~...)
1=8XI'
RE: Request for Proposed Sewage Trea_1Ptmt~6Oi1as Reblret u,I'''th;~:':@A~~'''~~J,.''~' ~~
West Yelm Annexation
Our Job No. 3687
Dear Gene
As you are aware, we are in the process of preparing the utility anatysJ~ portion of !.he
Environmental Impact Statement as related to the proposed 2,OQ()..acre West Yelm annexation.
Several months ago we IDet with representatives from Panunet.rix Inc. to discuss the :-tatus of
tbe fiml engineering desigm fot" 1be new Town of Ye.m sewage ttea~ plant. At that tune
Parametrix Ine was ill the process of completing their preliminary designs and anticipated begtnnmg
their final designs shortly
1 recently spoke with Mr. SIeve Gilbert of Paramettix Inc. as pan of our utility analysis for the
EIS Steve infonned me that he anticipates the final design to begin some lime within the nex.t few
weeks on the sewage treatment plant. He also indicated that a final agreement had been worked out
with regard to the allowable discharge rate and points of discharge for the proposed sewage treatment
plant WIth the City of CentraJia, and other stale agencIes.
The Environmental Impact Statement will analyze an ultimate build-out of the annexed area of
apprOXImately 4,500 dwelling units of which approximately 4,300 will be detached singh~-family
residential urnls and approximately up to 200 will be multi-fumily andIoc town house residential ut:dts
On this hasis, we are requesting 1bat you have either your staff Of Pararnetri~ Inc analyze the following
information and prOVlde us with this information so we can i~dte it into the text of the as
1 We understand the primary outfal.l from the proposed sewage treatment fucihty will be
into the City of Cellttalia's powet canal at approx.imately 1he Wilkensen Street
intersection. A seoondaty disc;harge point will be directly into the Nasqually Rive,r
located east of the primary discharge point.
After reviewing P3ramem Inc. 's design report, it appears that the primary and
secondary discharge poillCS have or will be sized to accommodate approximately 2,600
units Becau...;e an additional 4,500 writs wiJl be added to this upon ultimate build-out
of the annexation area. we request that Parametrix Inc. rea,nalyze tht~ size of the
discharge and the capaCIty of the discharge at the primary and secondary disdUlrge
Home Office: 18215 72nd Avenue Sooth . Kent. Washington 98032. (200) 251-6222 . Fax (206) 7-51-818::':
Cafffomia Office 4612 Rosevifle Road. Suite #103 · North Highlands, California 95660. (916) 348-3057. F?x (8" S) 348-0953
',..1-" C:U' 1 ="='.::. 1 _, U 1 r- t-'U1 I
J::Hk:LiHHU~::)t:.tj I::JJb lIH::.I::.r- =, I U
1~Ub4~~4~4~ ~ U.::.
o
o
Mr. Gene Borgess, City Manager
TQWI1 of Yehn
-2-
Marrh 20 1992
points to make sure 1bat tbe pipe size is adequate and that the maximwn agreed upon
discharge ta~ imo the primary and secondary discharge points are also m accord~Ul~.e
with the agreemeut recently reached with the Ci1;y of Centr'~ja and state agencie~
2 Please analyze, or have Parametnx Inc. analyze, die pipe upsizing requirements for the
two main pre5.'mI'e lines which. would serve the southern portion of the Thurston
Highlands project, as wen as the portIon of the annexation .:;losest to the existmg City
limits near the golf COIJtSe (Venture Partners pr~es and other properties) In
discussing this situation with Parametrix Inc., they indicated that they felt the UpsllUlg
of these mamtine pipes. would not require substamiaI effort or expense. Nso the
Up5lZlng of these lines would rot affect any of the secondary 01'" tertiary line sizes \vhich
would serve the remainder of the City
Probably one of Ibe most significant questiom which needs to be studied by your stiff
or Parametrix 1 DC. is the po1ential upsizing of the 8eW3ge treatment plant to
acconunoda1e the fuDy bailt-<7Ut annenbon area. We UDdersta,nd that the sewage
treatment and coUectiQo system will incorporate die use of as T.E.P system whJch
will be a pre...~ure sanitary sewer collection systeIn. The S T.E.P system suhstanoally
reduces the solicb and lherefore the treatment teqUireme~ (and ultimately the size of
the sewage treatment facility) are smaller than would otherwise be the case for a typical
graVIty collection ~ sewage treatment facility.
Based on dle anticipated additional living 1ID11S which could ultimately be constructed
within the annexed area, Ihe overall concept of the sewage treatment plant may change
The options as [ disc\IsSed with Parametrix Inc. are as folloW5:
a. Proceed fonvani with the comtruction of 1be sewage treatment pbnt as
approved and preliminarily designed. 0Iice the annexati<m IS completed,
sallltary sewer service availahle at that time would be sold to reslden~ of Yelm
on a first come, first serve basis.
b Construct 1be sewage treatment station as preliminarily desIgned with the
capability of doubling capacity by creating e~ble treatment ponds. ThIS
according to P3rametnx Inc.. would increase construction costs by
appCOXJ.IDately $SOO,(OO. However this additional capacity could be reserved
by ~ owners widnn the area to be annexed as long as the necessal)
agreements are in place within a relatively short peooo of nrne.
c Redesign the. entire sewage treatment facility to either be able to e'-p'<Uld llf to
be able to accomtOOdate at the time of construction the ultimate sewage flnws
from both the City, as well as the annexed areas. This would not only require
a complete rede9gn of the preliminary design concept) but would be
substaotiaDy more expensive ~ CQ4Sttuct initially.
03/2D,1992 13 02 FROf'l
BHRGHHUSEll EI J[,l I lEER'::. TO
120b45~4~4~ r u~
,.
o
o
Mr. Gene Borgess, City Manager
Town of Yelm
-3-
March 20 J 992
Please let me know when you. believe you could baYe this information available to us Again,
we will utilize this information to oudine the various development scenarios in the annexation as so
that all pos...<tible i.mpacts to the proposed sewage coUectiOD and treatment facility can be adequately
outlined and reviewed by inleresltd patties.
If you have any fur1her quesdom regatding this matter, please do not hesitate to call me
~relY,
( Uc-;3 #f~--
Oana B Mower, P.E.
Vice President
DBM/ps
3687C 001
CC~ Mr _ Dennis Su, KCM
Mr Paul Liao, KCM
Me Bud Welcome, Welcome Construction Company, Inc.
Me Jeff Buckland, R. W. 'Ibotpe & Associates
Mr Doug Conyers. Bargbausen COIi$UIting Engineers, Inc.
Me Bruce K Creager. Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc.
T1JTGI_~ 0:'\
o 0
YEIM PARKS ADVISORY a:MfiTl'EE
Tuesday, 17. March, 1992
Special Session
7 pm, Yelm City Hall
PARKS CCHITl'TEE:
Dick Carrig, Chairman
Marlou Allen, Secretary
Lisa Hills
Cecelia Jenkins
Bill Miller
Bill West
Patti Wheeler
Martha Parsons, City Council Liaison
Shelly Badger, City Clerk
CITY OF YE[M
present
present
present
present
present
present
absent
present
present
1. CALL TO ORDER:
By chairman Dick Carrig at 7:00 pm.
2. INl'ROIXJCTIONS:
Randy Cluck and Rick Keller, Nisqually Basin Little League.
3. ROLL CALL:
quorum present.
4. RHOTON/CANAL ROAD PARK PROPERTY DEVELOPMFNl':
Since it was found that this County owned property was too small by itself to accommodate
a full multi-purpose sports and recreation facility, efforts have been under way
to acquire the adjoining 4-plus acre State DoT property. Chairman Dick Carrig contacted
DoT about the acquisition and found that the agency must legally charge for this
property, but is willing to sell. Department of Transportation will submit a formal
proposal to this effect to the City of Yelm by Thursday, 19. March, 1992. Price
is approximately $28,000.00, with a do,vn payment of l~/o required, and the total to
be paid over a span of 20 years. If City Council is able to accept this proposal
efforts will then continue toward the acquisition of the adjoining County property.
Mr. Randy Cluck stated that County is favorably inclined
toward a 99 year lease of the Rhoton/Canal Road property, however wants a commitment
that maintenance be provided by the City of Yelm and not by volunteer effort. Mr.
Cluck stated that scale drawings of the whole area will be needed neJ~t.
Informal discussion continued and included a suggestion of
renting concession booths with the income to go toward the hiring of a maintenance
contractor. Mr. Cluck feels there may be some opposition to this idea from within
the Little League organisation.
Suggestion from Lisa Hills ,vas to arillex both properties to
the City of Yelm at the earliest opportunity.
The Parks Advisory Committee wants to assure City Council of
its commitment and willingness to expend every effort toward the goal of a much needed
multi purpose sports and recreation facility for the citizens of the Yelm area.
5. R. W. THORPE LETI'ER: Re: EIS for Thurston Highlands
Discussion centered on a reply to a letter from R.W.Thorpe & Associates, Inc. to
Chairman DiCk Carrig of 2. March, 1992, requesting information on Yelm's recreation
facilities. Consensus ,vas that there are currently no City operated recreational
facilities of any type available to the public other than a small children's play
ground in City Park. Public school sports and recreation facilities, although in
principle available to the public, are stressed to the extreme and are consistently
fully and often double booked by the local schools. --- Formal methods used to determine
the amount of required recreational acreage ranges from a barely adequate 7.5 acres
for every 1,000 people, to a more acceptable 10 acres per 1,000 people. Space
requirements for parks and recreation in rural areas is greater due to the lack
..
o
o
~
Land Use & WCM
Development
Consultation
A Division of Kramer Chin & Mayo Inc,
March 2, 1992
Mr Todd Stemm, City Planner
City of Yelm
PO Box 479
Yelm, W A 98597
Subject:
Thurston Highland Annexation
Dear Todd.
Thank you lor your letter dated 2-13-92 regarding the importance of communication
with the annexation property owners.
As the official annexation proponent, we are in the process of preparing an
information packet for all of the thirty-seven or so property owners within the
proposed annexation boundary
Meanwhile, we have been working with the major land owners on preparing design
data for the draft EIS along with our consultants in transportation, land use,
population growth and other technical subjects. At this early stage, the development
plans are based on a lot of assumptions that need to be refined. When a feasible site
plan is developed, we shall distribute to the property owners for comments and
inputs.
The ElS team of consultants are experienced and are preparing the documents for the
entire annexation area as a whole with input from all property owners.
The attached organization chart will clarify the organization of the annexation
petitioners. For future correspondence, the city shall either mail to Thurston
Highland & Associates and other signed up parties or to all thirty-seven property
owners. Please call if you have any questions regarding this arrangement.
Sincerely,
DTS.sf
Enclosure
c: Bud Welcome, WiLliam FIsher, Henry Draget, John Purvis, Paul Steadman, Jon
Potter, Dana Mower, Robert Thorpe
1917 First Avenue, Seattle, Washington 98101 (206) 443-3537 Fax (206) 443-5372
"
o
o
I SOUTHWEST YELM ANNEXA nON
CITY OF YELM
Robert Sanders, Mayor
Gene Berges, City Administrator
Todd Stemm, City Planner
Thurston Highland Associates
Partnership
Dennis T. Su, AlA
Representative
.
I
Thurston Highland Associates Venture Partners Property Owners
Robert W Thorpe, Jon Potter, clo THA
R.W Thorpe Associates Entranco and Other P Steadman
w jBaughausen Consulting Engineers Subconsultants J Purvis
Skillings & Chamberlaine D Doyle
Robinson & Noble J Bosequett,
IES & Associates Etc.
Weisman Design
William Overdorf, Golf Course Architect
& Other Subconsultants
o
~L
Volume 5, Number 2
February, 1992
Projections of Growth
Density overtakes Sprawl in Growth Planning
When the State of Washington
passed its Growth Management Bill in
1990, many of the general public may
have envisioned a halt or substantial
slowing of growth in their neighbor-
hoods. Recently, the Washington State
Office of Financial Management (OFM)
issued growth projections that will shift
the emphasis from arguments over the
status quo versus more development to
the more appropriate question of where
our projected growth must go.
(
Under the Growth Management Act,
OFM is responsible for predicting what
growth is expected in each of the State's
counties. In response to that informa-
tion, each County is charged with plan-
ning to accommodate its share of the
projected growth. While OFM does
project growth in less populated areas of
the state, the projections show that much
of the expected growth follows the
patterns that have evolved naturally in
recent years.
OFM has presented the following
figures for the Puget Sound corridor
County
4/1191 2010 Projected
Popuwtion Popuwtion
King
Pierce
Snohomish
1,542,300
603,800
484,000
1,833,133
792,179
693,125
King County's elected officials have
until July 1, 1992, to come up with
general policies to guide them in plan-
ning for this growth and apportioning
exactly where the additional 291,000
people will go. They will be assisted in
the formulation of policies and assign-
ment of urban growth areas by the Puget
Sound Regional Government (formerly
PSCOG).
On January 11, a Growth Manage-
ment Planning Council, comprised of
elected officials of King County, Seattle,
Bellevue and the more than 30 other
Existing Housing Units and Dwelling Unit Capacity for
New Development Under Existing Zoning
Capacity of Existing Plans (Vacant and Redevelopment)
-Incomplele dala: 26 of 30 cilies r
"Incomplele dala: 16 of 30 cilie
46,S 09 ~ Fe
v 47.706
74, 864
V
250, 31 210, 48 174, 85
l'
--;r- '---:r-
400
350
300
., 250
"0
c
~ 200
::J
o
.c
t:. 150
100
50
o
eporling
r eporli ng
~
development
Capacity
D
acant Land
Capacity
D
Existing
ousing Units
Suburban Cities Unincorporated
Urban Areas
Developed by King County Planning and Comt1llUlity Development Division, Parks.
Planning and Recreation Department
Seattle
municipalities within King County, met
for the first time in Bothell to begin
dealing with the population increases
predicted by OFM. The group has met
twice since, and will continue to meet
until they have decided the distribution
of King County's share of the growth.
In preparation for these negotia-
tions, each jurisdiction in King County
undertook a study of its current zoning
and its capacity for handling more
residential growth. Each jurisdiction
looked both at the capacity of vacant
land and the maximum capacity of
redeveloping property already developed
residentially
Starting with data from the King
County Assessor's mes, jurisdictions
reviewed their zoning to come up with
capacity figures. In calculating the
potential capacity for development,
jurisdictions took into consideration land
that might be unsuitable for development
because of physical constraints and land
needed for rights-of-way and public
uses. In calculating the redevelopment
capacity, jurisdictions subtracted the
number of current units, discounted
property developed in non-residential
uses and made adjustments for market
feasibility Preliminary results are
reflected in the chart. In mid-March, all
of the King County jurisdictions will be
undertaking similar surveys of their
capacity for commercial development
Most King County Council mem-
bers are approaching the process as an
opportunity to provide more density in
housing and therefore more affordable
housing. The recently adopted Soos
Creek Community Plan is an example of
the trends that are likely under the new
wave of Growth Management thought
Cynthia Stewart, King County Council-
member, urged the County Council to
Continued on page 6
o
'EVELOPMENTS. FEBRUARY, 1992
Projections.. .
Continued/rom page 1
mcrease housing density in one area of
[he p~an as such increased density in a
sm"Il~r area would decrease the overall
cffcr:t of urbanization. Since growth is
In'2VItable, promoting density in already-
ieve10ped urban areas also offers the
prospect of increased use of future rapid
L.l-anSIt systems.
The numbers reflected in the chart
do not mc1ude a major factor that will
gUide apportionment decisions - public
acceptance. Many of the results of this
research are likely to jar public precun-
ceptIons about what the Growth Man-
ugement Act means in practical terms.
Tn King County, the ftrst cut ftgures
indicate that the capacity for additional
concentration of hving units is predomi-
nantly in redevelopment areas in the City
,f Seattle or in vacant land in unincorpo-
r .iled King County (see chart).
The Growth Management Act
encourages counties and cities to focus
Only $6000 a year will bring you Develop-
ments, a monthly repOrt on land use and
construction legislation in Seattle, King
County and Bellevue. Send your check
for $6000 payable to The Write Hand,
1509 N. 145th Sl. Seattle, W A. 98133
Name:
Company/Org..
Address:
City.
State:
Zip:
growth in areas that are already urban in
nature. Other factors, such as transporta-
tion planning for employment concentra-
tions and the costs of providing infra-
structure, will also influence planning.
With the ftgures now available, officials
are likely to look to the City of Seattle to
accept much of the growth expected in
King County Ironically, the urban areas
in which development capacity is high
are those areas in which public interest
~" iJ}D"" ~e.:;...\.lopmeDts
B1 ~.." ,,',,', '\,,::' \".. .
1509 N. 145th St.
Seattle, Washington 98133
""....
Dated Material - Please Deliver Promptly
o
r
('
if1~ments
IspubIishedmOllth1ybyClarice, K~gaIl>
The Write HaIl<,l. ,'@ 1992. All rights reo.
~, DuplicatiOll U:twM}e orin part
f()r ptiblicationis encoUi3&ed, but only
withpemrlssiortof The Write Hand.
I>hot6copyingfotptiIp()Ses of sharing in-
fonnationwithin asubscribiligbtganiia-
tionorcompanyis permitted Subscripc
tions~ $60 for one YE:ar(12issues). ,All
in'lWrlciandcomments. shotildbe
llddressedto Clilo<=e Keegan, The WritE:
Hand. 1509N.145thSt.. Seattle, Wash-
jJ1gion, 981:3~ '(2~f:362c5~59
in redevelopment remains low Elected
offtcials will have to assess whether
current trends toward suburban living
can be reversed and whether the public
will accept higher levels of residential
density in existing urban areas.
For more information on the King
County Planning Council, call Michael
A. Quinn, King County Planning and
Community Development, 296-8664
BULK RATE
U S POSTAGE
PAID
SEATI1...E, W A.
PERMIT NO 3389
-.~
FEE 19 '9~ 17 1~ PW THOPPE2066250930
P 1
o
o
,>",
Date: '-( !tt
Time. '1."2..$
FAX Cover Sheet
:-:~
FAX fhJrenunie:
-:r;d. J :; -1-1.h-.~
G~~f at Y~/,.".
l
y~ I tvJ J I.,.) A
I
'i 5 %'-1./34(
To.
Firm.
City J State.
PrOject Name & Number:
fh,/(,~ 4v-, l-lJ crt.... w~ 6.1> if 1/'0 /1 L.
~/.J.q -"' p &-4--. IA~ COVQ,A/
Transmittal Description:
We are transmitting + pages, mcluding this cover page. It transmission is not complete, please call
(206) 624-6239 and ask for the operator whose name appears below
Op2rotor ;
::r;
C<:nTrents '
- ~ote. Origwal is b!ing sent by mail YES 0
NO )8/
R. W. THORPE &: A SSOCIA TES, IN C.
-:--:- 70S Second Avenue Suite 905 Seattle, Washington 981040 (206) 624-6239 F..x (206) 625-0930 .:..:.
ii .1:.1 q...... U4.'1 FM Fill
FEE 1 '3 . 92 17' 13 Pll THC1RF'E2066250'330
P .:.
R. ,,0 THORPE & ASSOCIMES, INC.
-:-0} Pla1\.nin~ · LandsCilpe . Environntent.al · Economics ~+:-
PRINCIPAL:
Roll.ut, W, TMfPC, AlCP
ASSOC1A TES;
Jeff ll'udd"",ej
Slepll.<)J\ Speidel, ASlA
Len Zli:lc.l<~f, ASlA
Letter of Transmittal
Date' 2/19/92
Job Number /Proje~: Yelm. Annexation DillS.
RWTJA# 110192
TO; Todd Stamm
City oE Yelrr.
lOS Yelm Ave. W
P 0, Box 479
Yelm, WA 98597
We are sending you.
XX Attached
eo.,lf$ D,at~ D~lltion
1 2/19 Dra.ft Con<:eptualSite Plan for Annexation PropoS<1.l
1 2/19 Written Description of Proposal and Alternatives
1 2/19 Draft Cover for DEIS
TheSe are transnutted as ch~ked below;
FOl:" your use:
As requested.
For your approval.
For review and comment: XX
Approved as noted.
Returned tor corrections.
Comments:
Tqdd:
Enclosed are three draft items fOT the AnnexatIon EIS~ Please review the proposal site plan
and description and provide any comments. Also review the cover and note the new name for
entire project area, ~ is this acceptable ot' should we use something else? Finally I would
appreciate it if you could provide addresses for the following conta<;ts 011 the ElS Local Fire
District, Public Utility District, Parks and Recreation, '(elm School District, Rainier School
Distrlct, Fort Lewis Military Reservation, Nisqually Indian Tnbe, Nisqually River Council.
Signed:
R. W Thorpe & Associates, Inc
#!t7JlJ3~
Jeff Buckland
cc: Dennis Su -KCM
Jon Potter, Entranco
+.:. 705 Second Avenue Suite 910 Seattle, WashIngton 9&104 (206) 624-6239 Fax (206) 625.0930.;":.
\- .....2.J~1 - CL."::___n J.__.i..-:._'F_1.".,._Ln~-:'
DRAFT
ell
r-
LEGEND
lIIIIJ lOW DENSITY (RESIDENTIAL)
IillIn MEDIUM DENSITY (TOWNHOUSE)
rr.;e:]
~ COMMUNITY SERVICE f COMMERCIAL
r:'~:;J
I ~~~~~..~~~~ RESORT COMMERCIAL
I ~~ ~ ~ ~ :1 PUBLIC (SCHOOLS FIRE, UTILITY)
l}i?,~j GOLF COURSE
~ PARKf BUfFER! STEEP SLOPES
~~~ OPEN SPACE (WETLANDS)
Il.
..
......._-~_.
, : RURAL m::SID~NTIAL
:,
.0>.1'1
g-~I
g :1'1
< N,
~~I
== ~\!
': (",I
"'-'I
. 'I
011
Ell
~,
(J) <IIi
<1> ~II
..... .,'
roOtI
---I!
., O~I
O~'I
(/) Ii
(J) II
<ell
'I
~~Ii'l
___I =1
<J) , Ii
0.1'
~I
0,
..c ~ll
..... II
31(1
a:~il
"
Ci
en
1]"1
ISI
u-'
"0 I a:
ILl w
'LI ~
CS) 0
r'J 0-
W
Il.
(t
0
I
f-
~
Et
rn
.......
["-
.......
I.'J
cr,
cr,
.......
p:J
W
It...
_______ ___1
r-- --
- I
^""~T"
]
.
I
r-
i
-.-- ~
-- I
, r.:
-r t-.-- [
I I I~~I
rMLLUrf//////1- I I
! 1/21 N
_O~b_1I8_21' ~--_.-":~~~~n
"1
~I
..
i
!
:
':'
~
'""'
)
.".
'C/,
"
0-'
1
J)
"
o
FEB 1'3 "3::: 17 16 Pl,J THOPPE206625~j'3:::0
P 4
DRAFT 0
Southwest
Yelm
Annexation
DEIS
o
Working Notebook
February 1992
R W Thorpe & Associates, Inc
I :-lY-92 IJ4 4JFM FJ4
FEE 19 . ':32 17' 16 F'lJ THIJRPE206t"2':U?'30
P ~
o
o
DRAFT
DESCRIPTION OF mE PROPOSAL AND AL TERNA TIVES
Alternative 1. No Action
The proposed annexation would not occur. Only those areas previously identified for "immediate
annexation" in association with the proposed Yelm/Thurston County JOint Plan would be considered for
annexation. Under this option, land use would remain as now zoned by ThurstOn County. The proposal
site could be developed in accordance with Thurston County Comprehensive Plan guidelines under the
present zoning. Thus future development would be expected to occur consistent with existing regulations
over a twenty year period, Lands reserved for rural use or preserved for environmental reasons would be
assumed to remain in their current use. Forest lands would be assumed to be replanted for timber
production.
Al~emative 2. The Proposal
The Proposed Action is for the annexation ot approximately 2,000 acres southwest of the C.lty of Yelm.
Under the Proposal, land uses on the annexation site would include a mixture of residential,
recreational, and commercial uses, The annexation propertIes consIst of three mam ownershIps: A 1,240
acre site owned by Thurston Highlands Associates, a 264 acre site owned by Venture Partners, and
additional parcels under separate ownership, totallIng approximately 366 acres. Development on the
annexation properties is described below and a generalized land use plan for the annexation is shown by
Figure _'
Proposed land uses under the Thurston Highland Associates ownership would include up to three 18-
hole golf courses and related facilities, approximately 2,320 residential units, community services
space, a school site reserve, conference center/resort area, park area, open space, and roads and
circulation. Residential dwelling units would be developed in at least five phases from 1993 to 2005
Development phasing is anticipating an absorption rate of about 150 housing units per year The
proposed development would occur over areas shown in the tables below.
TABLE ____
ALTERNATIVE2.TREPROPOSAL
Land Use
Wetland/Open Space
Golf Course 3 x 18 holes
Greenbelt/View Corridor
School Site Reserve
Community Services
Conference Center/Resort
Park
:Roads and Circulation
Subtotal
Area
100 Acres
450 Acres
50 Acres
15 Acres
22 Aexes
10 Acres
8 Acres
45 Acres
700 Acres
Residential
High Density Lots @ 8 Du/l kre
Medium Density Lots @ 4 Du/l Acre
Low Density Lots @ 1 Du/l Acre
Subtotal
100 Acres (800 unlts @ 5,000 SF/unit)
360 Acres 0440 units @ 10,000 SF/unit)
80 Acres (80 units @ 43,000 SF/unit)
540 Acres
Total Land Area
1,240 Acres
:_-13-Y: 04.4-FM Fu5
FtB----r3-,-9~ 17 16 F:f<j TH':'RPE2D6625C1'3BD
P 6
o
o
DR fA FT
TABLE ____
PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL PHASING
Year High Density Medium
Phase Completed Density Low Density Units
Phase I 1993 150 units 288 units 15 muts 453 units
Phase II 1996 150 units 288 units 15 umts 453 units
Phase III 1999 200 units 288 units 20 units 508 units
Phase IV 2002 150 units 288 UlUts 15 units 453 units
Phase V 2005 150 units 2?lR units 15. units 453 units
800 units 1440 units 80 mll ts 2320 units
Development of the 264 acre Venture Partners site would include a combination of multifamily and
single family uses, and a small neighborhood commercial area. This portion of the annexation site
would include approxnnately 1,150 units with 570 single family residential homes and appro)(imately
580 multifamily dwelling units. A community service area for the possible location of a fire station
would be provided. Landscaping, parking and greenbelt area would also be included as a part of this
proposed development plan.
Under conditions of the annexation the additIonal property ownerships could be annexed for potential
development at a density of up to 4 dwelling units per acre. An existIng golf cour~ on approximately
130 acres would be allowed to continue in its present use after annexation. The exact number of potential
dwelling units in the other areas that would choose to develop at the higher density has not been
determined. Therefore, for the purpose of analysis in this environmental impact statement It has been
assumed that 70% of the remaining annexation area would adopt the 4 dwelling units per acre zonin~
while 30% of these areas would retain the existing zoning of 1 dwelling unit per aCre. Thus, 256.2 acres
(366 x .70) at 4 dwelling units per acre would be equal to 1025 resldential units. It is expected that
actual development may differ from this amount, however, this figure is intended to represent a higher
density scenario. Thus the proposed annexation could result In a potential range of approximately 4,200
to 4~OO residential units.
Alternative 3: Compact Site Plan
This alternative would modify the proposed land uses to lower the area to be built upon. Under this
approach additional open space would be provided around environmentally sensitive areas, productive
natural resource lands and adjacent to the Fort Lewis Military Reservation. Proposed reSIdential areas
would have higher densities of development. The proposed urban area would be approximately one-
half the size of the proposal and include more intensive utilization of urban space. In this manner the
Compact Alternative would include the same number of housing units and the same si:re commercial
area as the Proposal and would Occur at the same rate of development.
02-1'"-9:: 114 4HM PJi:
FEB-r'3-'-'3~ 17' 1 7' p~~ THOFPE2066250'a30
P 7'
o
o
DRAFT
Alternative 4: The Village Concept
This option would incorporate some features of the Compact Alternative but would mclude more
extensive commercial development and higher levels of on-site employment than the Proposal.
Commercial lands on the site would provide additional employment opportumties and would focus On
providing commercial and government offices and similar non-industrial land uses. The proposed
corrunercial uses would be expected to meet the needs of on~sHe residents for daily and convemence goods
and services, but would generally be limited to a size and type that would largely serve only these
residents. Potential residential development would be reduced to accommodate commercial uses.
Additional opportunities for non-automobile modes of transportation would also be induded within the
proposed land use pattern of this alternative.
U_-19-9~ 04 4 PM F07
FROM THURSTON REG PLNG
TO
206 458 4348
FEE 19, 1992 3 42PM ~551 P 01
o
o
THURSTON REGIONAL
PLANNING COUNCIL
FAX TRANSMITTAL SHEET
TO:
/
jt~t )-") -; /' I
(~" ~ I't.- /
FAX PHONE
CONTACT PHONE
FROM:
1/ )J ~,
{:/ /((11..)[(/,70',
()
FAX PHONE: (206) 754-4413
CONTACT PHONE: (206) 786-5480
There are a total of
,.-)
( , pages, includmg this page.
COMMENTS'
IF' YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL PAGES, CALL THE ABOVE CONTACT
PHONE NUMBER
U_--l ~-::l~ It ~ ~FlvI Fill
1--I\.Un-~1 nOp.;::.::n OI~-f'l\.c.l..J-r-CI'4U
10.
c.V-JD-'+-;::'O-'-+~'-'+D-rt:J:J-l ~>J. ~~2-.s -4::'PIYj-H551-P-02-
o
o
AGENDA
Thurston Regional Planmng Council
Staff Meeting
Friday, February 21, 1992
Room 152, 8:00 a.m.
1. Olympia-Thurston ColIoint Planning. Linda Donaldson
2. Issue Updates/Information SharingfPublication~
a. Thurston County
. Current
. Advance
b Olympia
- Current
- Advance
c, Lacey(rumwater
d Administrati ve
- Accounting
. Graphics
- Secretarial
e. Regional
Tentative Topics for Upcoming Meetmgs.
Date Time
Peb 28 8-00
Mar 6 8{)O
Mar 13
Mar 20 8:00
Mar 27 8:00
08:kh
Room Topic
280 Percival Creek/lndlan Moxlie Basin Plans-Joanne Richter, Andy
Haub (City of Olympia)
152 Issue Updates/Infonnation Sharing/Publications
No Meetmg- TRPC Meeting
152 Issue Updates/Information Sharing/Publications
280 Issue UpdateslInfonnation Sharing/Publications
cc Linda Hoffman, Community and Environmental Programs
Bob Patrick, City of Lacey
Doug Baker, City of Tumwater
Dave Burns, City of Lacey
Todd Stamm, City of Yelm
Ci':'-l~-d_ Ui c':'FM FO':'
~;---- '~--"'--------<..--y"''t... -..~ ~
o
o
YELM ANNEXATION EIS CONTACTS
LOCAL FIRE DISTRICT
THURSTON CO. FIRE DISTRICT #2
ATTN: GENE COULTER
P.O. BOX 777
YELM, WA 98597
PUBLIC UTILITY DISTRICT
PUGET POWER
ATTN: LARRY KARR
P.O. BOX 486
YELM, WA 98597
PARK AND RECREATION
YELM PARKS ADVISORY COMMITTEE
ATTN: DICK CARRIG
13315 118TH AVENUE SE
RAINIER, WA 98576
YELM SCHOOL DISTRICT
YELM COMMUNITY SCHOOLS
ATTN: GERALD SCHMIDTKE
P.O. BOX 476
YELM, WA 98597
RAINIER SCHOOL DISTRICT
RAINIER SCHOOL DISTRICT
ATTN: BOB GOLPHENEE
P.O. BOX 98
RAINIER, WA 98576
FORT LEWIS MILITARY RESERVATION
STEVE C. GLOVER
I CORPS & FORT LEWIS
FACILITIES ENGINEER OFFICE
ATTN: AFZH-EHP-P
FORT LEWIS, WA 98433-5000
NISQUALLY INDIAN TRIBE
NISQUALLY INDIAN TRIBE
ATTN: GEORGE WALTERS
4820 SHE-NA-NUM DRIVE SE
OLYMPIA, WA 98503
NISQUALLY RIVER COUNCIL
NISQUALLY RIVER COUNCIL
ATTN: STEVE CRAIG
P.O. BOX 1076
YELM, WA 98597
THURSTON CO. PARKS & RECREATION
MICHAEL WELTER
THURSTON CO. PARKS & RECREATION
2000 LAKERIDGE DRIVE SW
OLYMPIA, WA 98502
CENTRALIA POWER & LIGHT
CITY OF CENTRALIA
POWER & LIGHT
ATTN: WILLIAM CUMMINGS
1100 BLACK N. TOWER AVE
CENTRALIA WA 98531
"
,:
I:,:
Yelm Community Schools \,
ATTN: GERALD SHMIDTKE r
\ P.O. Box 476 ~
l__~~~~,~_~a. 98597 ,I
1 - -----. -'--'--- --'-----,.,,";
~ ~:
, .
Th. Co. Fire Dis t. No. 21 Skillings & Chamberlain ;
ATTN: GENE COULTER ATTN: TOM SKILLINGS I
P.O. Box 777 P.O. Box 5080 ;
, Yelm, Wa. 98597 ,Lacey, Wa. 98503 I
,------------------- -- ----{ ------- -- - --- .---- ---------, ~
Nisqually River Council I Th. Co. Planning Dept.
ATTN: STEVE CRAIG I ATTN: JOHN SONNEN
P.O. Box 1076 2000 Lakeridge Dr. SW
..___~_Yelm, Wa. 98597 11----Olym2ia, Wa. 98502
Henry Dragt
14848 Longmire St. SE ~ TODD
, Yelm, Wa. 98597 ~
I ~
bf~_'....~_..":lIo.:">__,.__-_.._ ___'_ _ _ _...._ _ ~ ____ _.__ _.___ '-
I
I
J
I
J
I
I
I
I
~,-------,,_._""-- - - -- - - -i _. - - - - - -'-'~+- ------------ ----
STEVE GLOVER I
I
I Corps & Ft. Lewis I
ATTN: AFZH EHP-P I
I
Ft. Lewis, Wa. 98433- :
') 0 QO_ i
-----!
q
Q
,
~
u
~
I!
'-"---'....... - "-'- -"- - _.~ ~- - ---'-'_-..~,_ _-_ _ _ .!ii.
.
,
~,
Rainier School Dist. R.W. Thorpe & Assoc., Ind
ATTN: BOB GOLPHENEE ATTN: ROBERT W. THORPE ~
P.O. Box 98 705 Second Ave. t
· ' S' I
I Rainier, Wa. 98576 t;! ulte 910 ,
---- --'--------~- -Ii- ___.SE.cU- j- .J.EL _ JrJE_. _ _.Q Jl 1.0 LI. ___ ~
, I,
Wa. Dept. of Trans. [
'I
ATTN: BOB HOLCOMB Mark Teitjen R
Dist. 3 \ P.O. Box 258 :,
Olympia, Wa. 98504-7440: Rainier, Wa. 98576 ::
........,......-.....----.-- ----.--.---"'-- --).. - - -"-.........: - - - --~~'""-- - - --~-- -"'-" - ~.
I I:
j'
II'
i!
.'
I
I
I:
I
THURSTON HIGHLANDS
E.I.S.
MAILING LIST
GENE
i_
................~..........-..-._-_._-------_.- -'-
R.W. Thorpe & Assoc., Inc
ATTN: JEFF BUCKLAND
705 Second Ave.
~_,__~\!-i t~ _~:LQ..__ _ ____.__ __ ___
Th. Co. Planning Dept.
ATTN: PAULA EHLERS
2000 ~akeridge Dr. SW
Olympia, Wa. 98502
William Parker
14947 Longmire St. SE
Yelm, Wa. 98597
C]( ~~~~~n~~N POTTER
~ 10900 NE 8th Street
hl S' 30
lL_...,_~l_~e.. ___0_____
\
01
I
I
I
\
\
-f
i~'
II
Jl
II:
S1'
r,
II
Ii
-, - - - -, -,-,--,----'-,---'--- -,--,---,-,--,~,
John Purvis
14504 Berry Valley Rd.
Yelm, Wa. 98597
)
I
-------"'""""'.
~
~
,
~
Blvd. :
,
~
I
Paul Steadman
1801 W. Day Island
Tacoma, Wa. 98466
Dennis T. Su
1917 First Ave.
Seattle, Wa. 98101
~--~-
''-:'-_. ~; ~"'.~.';:"~"':::"::;;:',=:;::!;.;;:,;..~-.-.., ..~.-.:.~..-, ..+.-
Nisqually Tribal Council
ATTN: GEORGE WALTERS
4820 She-Nah-Num Dr. SE
0_'1__ .."....-.:---_T.1__~O_O_r::_o_"")
\ FEE 13 "32 17 13 Rf,J T(.;:...'~\,F'E2l]bE,250'33l] .~!/)L/l'~. /05 7/QZ-
-/ ,,':! V U'
R. W. THORPE & ASSOCIATES, INC.
P 2.
>)(> Planning . L.mdscape . Environtnental . Economics ~~
PRlNCIPAL:
Roo-art, W, Thorv-:. AICP
ASSOCI.... 112S;
Jeff lluckl.m(j
Slepl\~n Spei(jel. ASLA
L.cn Zrcld"t, AS LA
Letter of Transmittal
Da.te' 2/19/92
Job Number/Project: Yelm Annexation DES
RWT/A# 110192
TO: Todd Stamm
City of Yelm
105 Yelm Ave. W
p O. Box 479
Yelm, WA 98597
Weare sending you.
xx
Attached
CDpie:i D3.le D=iption
1 2/19 Draft Conceptual Site Plan for Annexation Propos.:'ll
1 2/19 Written Description of Proposal and Alternatives
1 2/19 Draft Cover for DEIS
These are transnutted as che<:ked below;
Fo!:, your use:
As requested.
For your approvaL
For revIew and comment: XX
Approved as noted.
Returned for corrections.
Comments:
Todd:
Enclosed are tpree draft items for the Annexation IDS. Please review the proposal site plan
and deScription and provide any comments., Also review the cover and note the new name for
entire project area,..:.... is this acceptable or should we use somethmg else? Finally I would
appreciate it If you could provide addresses for the following contacts on the ElS Local Fire
District Public Utility District, rPar.K:!nlnCd-Recreano!!2J Yelm School District, Rainier School
District, (For-t-1.ewisJvHUtar:}LReseryatiori', 'Nisqually Indian Tribe, Nisqual1y River Council.
Signed.
R. W Thorpe & Associates, Inc
d?#lJ3~
Jeff Buckland
cc ~s SU -KCM
Jon Potter, Entranco
.:..:. 70S Se<:ond Avenue Suite 91.0 Seattle, Washington 9&104 (206) 624-6239 F;jx (206) 625.0930.;";.
.-J"
R. WqHORPE & ASSOCIA~S, INC.
~~sO'~ [g
ASSOCIATES:
Jeff Buckland
lephen Speidel, ASLA
Len Zickler, ASLA
PRINCIPAL:
Robert W Thorpe, AICP
Letter of TranSffil
a
Date' 2/19/92
Job Number/Project: Yelm Annexation DEIS
RWT/A# 110192
TO' Jon Potter
Entranco Engineers
10900 NE 8th Street, Suite 300
Bellevue, Washington 98004
We are sending you.
XX Attached
Co ics
Dale
Desai lion
1 2/19 Draft Conceptual Annexation Site Plan
1 2/19 Written Description of Proposal and Alternatives
1 2/19 Draft Ownershi ma
These are transmitted as checked below'
For your use:
As requested.
For your approval
For review and comment: XX
Approved as noted.
Returned for corrections
Comments:
Jon:
Enclosed are draft copies of the DEIS Site Plan, Description, and Ownership map Please
review and let me know if the boundaries or other inforniation will require any reVision for your
site before we finalize.
Signed
R. W Thorpe & Associates, Inc
dt13~
Jeff Buckland
cc: Dennis Su - KCM
~, City of Yelm \
.:..:. 705 Second A venue Suite 910 Seattle, Washington 98104 (206) 624-6239 Fax (206) 625-0930.:":'
L,J
o Cl
R. W. THORPE & ASSOCIATES, INC.
'-'"
.:..:. Planning . Landscape . Environmental . Economics .:..:.
PRINCIPAL: ASSOCIA TES:
Robert W Thorpe, AICP Jeff Buckland
Slephen Speidel, ASLA
Len Zickler, ASLA
Letter of Transmittal
Date' 2/19/92
Job Number/Project: Yelm Annexation DEIS
RWT/A# 110192
TO' Dennis Su
KCM, Inc.
1917 First Avenue
Seattle, W A 98101
We are sending you
xx
Attached
Copies
Dale
Desaivlion
1 2/19 Dratt Conceptual Annexation Site Plan
1 2/19 Written Description of Proposal and Alternatives
1 2/19 Draft DEIS outline of Contents
These are transmitted as checked below'
For your use:
As requested.
For your approval.
For reVIew and comment: XX
Approved as noted
Returned for corrections.
Comments:
Dennis.
Please review the draft site plan and description and let me know if you have any comments.
have also included a table of contents tor the DE IS for your information.
Signed
R W Thorpe & Associates, Inc
~~13~
Jeff Buckland
cc: Jon Potter, Entranco
C!odd Stam~Y-0_Y..elm-7
.:..:. 705 Second Avenue Suite 910 Seattle, Washington 98104 (206) 624-6239 Fax (206) 625-0930.:..:.
/
~>
o 0
, TOWN OF RAINIER
~"t -
Town Hall
Municipal Court
Police Dept.
446-2265
446-2744
446-2245
102 Rochester St.
P O. BOX 258
RAINIER, WASHINGTON 98576
City of Yelm
PO Box 479
Yelm. EA 98597 '
.~;'!
, . . "J.~ r
~I;',(: ~.._ . _ '.. l .t~~;:'7Jr ~..-
Re: ,Scope' of 'Environnental. Irn:>act:'Statement';:' Thurston Highlands
\ ~ -
,~::;Project , ,e; . . '" ,. "-
. .".,..:...~'~.....,..,....;,,~.f,~.-':,',<,.;..:...'...-.....::.,.'...;~.'.~.....:..".~.~..,~.~,-.J".;..~.:,~,..:,..,.'..,.....,:.~,.:~,: :... ,'::
Dear t'r. Borge~. ...... '. '. .,..e~ '.
Thank you for notifying US of'the recent, meeting (1/16/92) of
the TAC for the EIS on the Th..rston Highlands annexation to Velma We
wish to be involved throughout the process as we are concerned as to
the ilT1PaCts this project will have pn otrcorrm..nity and what the
developer is doing to help mitigate ~he;irrpacts. As pointed out
during the meeting we rave a ~ 01: <:xrICet}.lS" some of which are:
'~i,~;~~~,k~'~E~;.~~~1~;./~~~fi~~~~;~~:-t~
2)Transportation impacts within 0Lr a...rrent boundaries as well
as our proposed Urban Growth BoLndaries.
3)Aouifer impacts. both the quality and the quantity. underlying
the proposed arnexation which is possibly the same aquifer from which
the Town of Rainier draws its drinking water.,
4)population growth forecasts for our Urban Growth Area. as a
result of this project. and how it will tie in with 0Lr Comprehensive
Plans. .
.":'. ~!';~ft'::'i.~-...;;/\:-ej~.;:.~ ";-~('
Attn: Mr.. Gene ~s. 'Mat ager->
f..~'.}~j.
We would like to request that these issues as well as others
that may be identified later, be addressed in the EIS and that we are
contacted by R. W. Thorpe to discuss these. Once again thank YOU for
keeping us apprised of the project. We wish the City of Yelm and
Thurston Highlands Associates a successful project.
Sincerely.
{A~
Charlene Logan. Mayor
cc: Mayor Robert Sanders, City of Yelm
Diane Oberque 11. ThL.rston Countr",,~orrrnissioner
, Th..rstOll County Bounda::,Y Review:=~arcLt '
~ . ,~.~. ~"'!. -0:' -11..?;::.--<;i :"";''':,' .,.;-~'.
Th..rston Regional Plarning CculciJ!:;:
... . ,l,'~ ". l'
Dennis Su. Th..rston. Highlands ,~iat~s. ,'..'
R. W. l1iorpe & Associates.,"" ?X:'~,~~~h~\:~t1:~\~~;~{Y~~Jjf ,t "'
Steve Charrt:lerlain. Skillings and Charril:5erlain
'l-.~"
"
u
o
ENTRANCO
ENGINEERS . SCIENTISTS . PLANNERS . SURVEYORS
10900 NE 8TH STREET SUITE 300
BELLEVUE, WA 98004
(206) 454-5600
FAX, (206) 454-0220
February 3, 1992
Todd Stamm
Director of Community Development
City of Yelm
POBox 479
Yelm, Washington 98597
Re Thurston Highlands Annexation
Entranco Project No, 91806-05
Dear Todd
Please add my name to the City's mailing list for upcoming E I S coordinating
meetings, Transportation Committee meetings, and all other meetings which will
influence the annexation and eventual development of the property within Thurston
Highlands annexation
We represent key properties in this annexation and desire to be extensively involved
in this very important planning process We are concerned that we are not active
participants in the Transportation Committee since most roads that will go to
Thurston Highlands must go through our property Entranco has a wealth of
resources available to contribute to this planning study We would like to contribute
to the city consultant meetings to ensure a unified joint proposal is achieved rather
than relying on public participation to express our views Several important policy
decisions are being considered, such as development phasing and road locations,
which will have significant impacts on our proposal We hope that you will consider
our future involvement in upcoming meetings We also request your consideration of
providing regular status memos to be circulated to keep all interested parties
apprised of the agenda, decisions, progress and future meeting dates Thank you
for your consideration of our request.
.TRANC~ ~
l3 0 6 II /ill c L-C
.. ,,;/ Jo'/v ;7V
f~ tl<# /I~'~3- //f7
Pt-~
.A- /1 S
,<r7'n II tl'J;vP
~yJ !f}./) (0 ;liP tf r /1rFI!
7/'- !1P IV {~("t r
. 1fJ [tlvl! VI >pRf t LJ I
IJJ1II fil; /II (YI rr(/; 1#
Sl C
Sincerely,
JPjdc
I
Iv!
WASHINGTON . ARIZONA . CALI
/J IJ-~'!~J
7r1l?/V piLE r~U ;(~r//'" ,.~?'I -
\ II
~_.~. _0- _ _, ~
...,. --,-
JHrJ .::.~:
p '3~ 1~ 01 p~..J THI=IPPE20bt,250~r:::o
I"' "t.~ 'a
tF"",
(j
o
{(v? i~ f;;.
~C^ J
1
F' 1
.'
I
I
Datc;-.!J-2-o/ ~
Time ~1!:./5..~
F A:X C:over Sheet
.------- --
- --
-
~,~...
-.--.......i~
f"irm.
~
~vfd ~/ f).
(), TiJIYJ/n.' II.
e'l A tf-! J J., IVl/'!
~}fd r,-JC; 0 _1~L~____,~.
I U A. q t /:'- a "I
n1+ v,(T
('-, . L,f5$3 - y..:; ':1: ~)
To
_,ii.(e
FAX FllOf1eI1lllnber:
/ r
Project Name & Number: ~. .
Tra'l1sulHtal Description:
1111 .<::.r- ( ,
if \.-\ 'C'"( 1:' i . 6,
__L\""'J
!:; el S
(Ru.5t/A .. II D19 z. )
I
i
1
-...-J
. We are transmItting J pagesf welt/ding thIs cover page. If transmission IS not complete, please call
'206) 624-6239 and ask for tht! OpCfator whose ;rame appears below
l
Ofeatul' C^"I? f\i5'
CorrurailS '_._~ {1~_~l s,( i~(_".1~~~l
I
c _,-Ji~,M.s_
-- Sf;f( 3.udd11.-Id
L
...... -~._-----.................~
(-)
Note' OI:.iZ!:,nal is being sent bY.J.IWil YES .
NO ()
1
R.W. THORPE & ASSOCIATES, INC.
.:":.705 Second Avenue Suite 90S Seattle, Washin8~on 98104 (20ti) 624-6239 FilX (206) 625-0930 .:--:.
III - ~
1 I L' .",M
F I-I 1
.....
i i
JHrl :=.:::
'9:::' 1:=' C11 PlJ THI=tFPE2C1SS25C193C1
l)
, ()
t~
F' :=.
v
...
,.
H.~ W. THORPE & ASSOCIATES, INC.
.:~ .:. Planning . l.;mdsciI pI:' . en III l'(llllllent.;l! · Eell n,")mic~ .:..:.
Thurston Highlands DEIS
l:\'1eeting Notes for Technical Advisory Cornrrlittee Meeting of 1-16-92
ASSOCIATES:
Jeff Bud<l"ll.:!
SI~l'hetl SpeIdel, ASLA
Len Zkkl<:t, ASti\
PRn~CO'At~
nobo:at W, Thorpe, AICP
Location' Yelm City FIalL
At the request of the City of Yelm a Techmcal Advisory Committee (TAC) has been
orgamzed to assist RW Thorpe and Associates, Inc. (RvVT! A) with the preparation
of the Draft Env!tnnrn.Pntl1 Impact St-atement for th\~ proposed Thurston Highlands
;JT"'i't''l2Yritionr('o Y'~;Ln.i T}r€<:;(.:-rtf- at ~~l'\() _(l~"L~' 'i'Y"dje~..h"",-", c.r. +l.,l':- U,'.I\1'I7"'.. Tt\f6'I"'~t ...h~l. t"Jl'Yb1;"'1A'
~..,",:,,,_,~~ ~....... _. __ !.-....... "r _ - ,,-~f.\- .l1,,~_.;;:>!,. l,.{..l,O;:;. !~A.l..I,& _',~ \.1.1- :J (,....'......t....i..' yv.......~.'\:.... t...ll.. :'..I..l,~IVyVJ.J.\.6
mdIvIduals
Cera ide Shrnldtke, \. elrn CCll1l!l"lunity.3chools
Doug Bloom, Town or Ramler
Mark Tletjen, Rainier Council
Tom Skillings, Skillings and Chambetlam.
Todd Stamm, Yelm Commuruty Developrnent Dl.rectot
Gene Borges, Yelm City ~er ftJ.
Demus SUr Thurston Highlands }'~SSOci3.tlOn
Robert 'iN Thorpe, R.Vl. Thorpe and Assooates, Inc,
Jeff Buckland, R W. Thorpe and ASSOCIates, Inc.
" IT~ . j' (-)' '('l '" '" i ,., '- . ~ ''-,1 '.' - ;- ..t -, ~ ~ ,- ~Q . . t n lV' d _...J . ~ -, f.. -, -.. ~. ;' .- '} A ('
r~6cnCleS ,I,6c,,,,Z"'t.l0n~,), .0\ Ht ~......~eI".(GIJ.ll..'~ D\.l '_0.."11 .J~1.E:CI. rne1l1L.1<:::1t> vI ell'::: .., ,.-
Thurston County ~ Plannmg &,if
Nisqually Tribal Community
r+rh.Ufst:)n CC)llfi,j''./ l:;\lre T)lstri(t l'Jrj .~
Fort Lev..'ls Military ReselValll)1\
Nisqually River CounCIl
Ram~er Slhooi Dlstnct
'vVashmgtol'. DepaI trnent of Transportation
The meetIng opened vnth a short statement by Todd Stamm regardlng the purpose
of the commIttee Irlltlally It \,vas noted that the group was bemg fOnTl.ed to prOVIde
technical assistance to the EIS bemg pr~pared by R\VT I A Todd stated that the EIS
was pnn:\arily reqUIred to conSIder th~ questions of whether the Oty shl)uld annex
and where such annexation should occur He suggested the TAC would help
facilItate communicatlOn arnong mterested groups and agenCIes, and prOVIde
wforrnatlOn to aS$lst efficIent preparatiol' of the EIS
Two future meetings of the TAC were suggested as being appropnate. one to dlSCUSS
a prelimmary working draft and suggest any additional information that would be
useful to mclude, and a final meeting to provide mput on the workmg draft pnor to
.;..;. 705 SccGnd Avenue SUjl(~ 910 Se;JlIle, Washingtt.ll'l 98104 (206) 624.6239 Filx (206) 625-0930 ....:.
II I ~ ~ - I
1 1 ~~' .hil
F II ~
p -.- JA~I "
- -"-,- '--"'-~
. '3~ lc. O~ FlJ TH:PF'E20SS2509-:::0
()
P 3
()
publicatiOn and JistnbutlOll A schedule fOf EIS preparation Vias provIded .:li1Cl
identified as bemg tentatlve.
Robert Thorpe was introduced and provided background information on R\VT/ A
and the firm's involvement in similar EIS projects. Subconsultant members of the
EIS ~~am were Identified as follows: Barghausen Consulting EngllteerSJ Skillings
and Chamberlain, Robmson and Noble! and Independent Ecological ServIces He
noted that the document was being prepared for the Clty of Yelm, and as such was to
be~he City's document. It would be a full-disclosure document and would comply
with State En'vironmentul Policy ..A.ct guidphne'; It was further ernphasized that the
.....-5 . . b . , ,- , ...) . T' 1 t r
.1::.1 wouw "e a. non~pr(;j!.::('t \ programmanc} (,j..xnl1"i?nJ rw., som(~ e en.v~U.$ or
diScussion would be less detalled than may be found In project-oti.e,nted
environmental impact statements
Bobb stated that partidpatlOn of the TAC was welcomed and menhoned that related
elements of the enVIronment from the DEIS wou.ld be sent to commIttee nlenl.bers
for review and comment. He indicated that Jeff Buckland would manage the EIS
and questIOns on status and coordmatwn of informatlOn would be handled b) Jeff
It "vas mentIoned that the CIty of Yelm would also be able to screen techmcallssues
and deternl1ne their slgmficance regardmg discusslOn In the EIS Todd made a
rl~r,;ir.ir4;i;t'i \;." -;..'- -.... .....f~h L~-. ,L . 'T!-' ,1".,. ~r!,.,~ ,,~..J>.,t- ,'r"y ~~Il*"7\"l-..1?(,t.1""" ~ re 'l':\tln~ T'(:i n ~/.>rF'''r....t~.; ~
........w;.), ~l,,~~t_(,IL ~l) ItUt::. 1.1tCli.j \'\ 1\1).1;'. J...:t.Lt.ll..,,;;..Otl. .t.,,<?)i....\..I,'t...A..~ I."'.I.,.,)....O(..A.~ J...t ;,~-'l?; \._.1 :,~ t:L...... .~
majOrIty of property ovvners/ thepropo',E:d anneXa.tlon l11volved a group of prOpi?rty
owners and the EIS would include all propertIes Involved,
Elements of the environment to be analyzed for the EIS were Identlfied as those
J
contained w the scopmg notIce The proposed alternahves ~'\'ere n?Vl€t"lI~d briefly
In adchtloH, It was stated that the EIS would also cover cumulative impacts and
potential secondary irnpacts of the proposed deveiopment The meetIng was then
opened for discu<::;s;on 01 mdi vIdual <t.i.eas of concern as representpd. by the agenCles
a.nd orgamzatlOns in attendance
Todd began by Identifying IsSueS believed to be considered Important by Thurston
County ~l Plannm,g as follows'
.) Level of demand for urbamzatlOn and the appropnd.teness of th(:~ proposed
urban boundary
{II Conslstency WIth 'Thurston County lruban growth bou.ndanes,
· Sewer systern capaclty for Yelrn and potential outfalllocatio111
Q Groundwater contarninatlOn and the pattern of movenlent of local
groundwater,
e Transportation as It appHes to the entire sub-county regional area
Gerald Shmldtke presented the Yelm School District concerns:
o Transportation related to bus serVice to and from the annexation area,
'" Tht": rate of ~::.row'h resultmg from the DfOlJOSZil and hO\\I qUIckly the district
~ ~ L 1
would need to respond to Hus gm\.\. th,
:..:. 70S SC(Qnd AWllue Suik 910 Seattle, Wa~hinSI(\n 98104 CW6) 6 Z:H:> I. 39 [;1): CWo) 61S-0Y30 :..;.
II] -
I.. 11 "Jvj
,- ,~-~":"....."":. .
Q
I.
{l\i ~
~\~
{U
r !
: s;
;lt~
~,;
,
,
\
",
g,
~~J,
t:;
;~,
~,.
,~
,
.'
~
i
t
~
u
~
.~
JHn ~3
"3~ 1~ D:3 F~l..J THr:iPF'E2Di:,i:,,::5D'33D
o
F' <4
()
(
III Additional rooms and facilities needed to meet State program requirements;
. Demand m terms of new students per unit produced by the proposed
developmen t,
flIo Type and location of any child-care facUlties to be located on the proposed
annexatIOn development.
Tom Skillings presented engineering and transportatIon concerns for the City of
Ye IIn,
Ii Relationship of the proposal to storm drainage manual policIes bemg
prepared by the city;
III Consistency with boundaries in the ComprehensIve \Vater Program and the
6tV'5 reVl(>'yV of rJotentlal11e'w wa tet' sources and stC)f<.'lge areas;
Q Traffic inCreaSE'S ~l;..cl ~t!)J.1,1i.y of loe;;!1 tran:7portatlO!l netw'ork ro provH:le for
addltlOnal traffic;
,'f'J
t ,
t~ ~l
'}~
c~
j? tt
,t{~ ,~\
;:'t~'~'~
~X m1
~J: .
f',
~.
N
If,
~l~l
t~,
1;;/
t
~~
/1:1
k
~ l J
I' ,~
"
y.
U
} ,;~
)' c'
I ': ~
( p. ,
[. l:~.g,
J ~} ti
.'1, i.~
f'
d'
/.'i-
\ t
'[." i _t ~ .' 1ft' ''l' 1
Q Im1ng ni propo:;~~\<. Oi:'V€lq,llTl ".nt pnl!:;<:~::' emG WCf kFll10n;;..np to pro[JO$("(.
CIty utility improvt:ments
Doug Bloom Identified the City of Rainierls mterests'
$ School dlStrict impacts are of primary concern/ especIally the new demand
for school faclhtv::,s created bv plltential n~sident]<Jl deveh)1)lYlF'IYt In the
" .1. ~
an.nexatl{)TI area
I1J Transportation impacts in terms of traffic volume mcreases in Rainier
resultmg from proposed development,
<Ill Impacts on the water system and determination of direcHon of aqmfer flow:
does ground\vat(~r fknv from Yelfn. to y.,',ainier and \vhat v\,;:der qu;:;hty / quantity
. f' ~ ,,' rl ,,~:.. r<:_ ~ <1-'- ,,,, - c'" c~ " '1' 'I,. ", ·
lfnpfic.;:, ! (il.ll,.,- t:u I:,':: llon1 t l\;' H.1;';:A.'lLlC,n ((,v'e[\)eJnt~lt:"
a Recharge impacts on aquifer sensitlve areas;
Todd identified the followmg potenhal issues from some members of the TAC .who
were not present:
Nisqually Tribe. Primary area of concern would be stormwater runoft where
water is to be taken ironl and where it would be discharged tal and potential impacts
on local stream::. and flshenes.
Nisqual1y River Council- ~ame areas or concern as Nlsqually Tnbe and
relationship to Nisqually RIver Plan urbamzatIOn policies,
Fort LewIs MIlitary Reservahon NOIse nnpacts of Fort actIVIties on
annexation area, relatIonship 1,0 nOlse policy statenl.ents developed by the FortI and
,.l . C ,. [ . , I , ~ , .
li.iH'ltlHcatlOn 01 potential tfeSfJ(~S':r nSKS Hom 1..u'CarUZdllc!rL
)
j'
!
J,
\
i'
1.
. ,
I ~
j.t
ft
[I
(
I
I'
, I
. L~
A brief discussion of the wOIk to be done and the propo::.ed schedule followed. After
it v.,ras acknowledged that the EIS was to be the product of cooperative efforts,
members of the TAC "den~ than!<;:;d for their attendance 'lnd the meeting was
conduded
.,
\
I
)
?
,
"'; >~
, ~
.:..;. 70S Se('/)l1d A "enue Suile 91 0 S..att!~'1 W,lshing:oll 9$104 (206) 62'H,239 F",x: (206) 625.0930 .:..:.
.' 0
,\
"
. ,....~
!
L
,11 ..
F 1,'1
J 11"\
1 '
/
(~
i'"1
()
City of YellD
105 Yelm Avenue West
POBox 479
Y elm, Washington 98597
206-458-3244
January 22, 1992
Harold Robertson, Executive Director
Thurston Regional Planning Council
2000 Lakeridge Drive SW
Olympia, WA 98502
Dear Mr Robertson
As you are aware, the City of Yelm is requiring that Thurston
Highlands Associates prepare an environmental impact statement
regarding the proposed annexation of approximately 2000 acres to
the City of Yelm Given that Thurston County is an agency with
jurisdiction relative to this proposal, and that it would be in
the best interest of all parties concerned to receive an e.i s
which thoroughly analyzes all the issues surrounding
urbanization of this area, I suggest the following procedure
(1) Copies of all drafts of the e i s and related materials
received by the City would be forwarded to the county's
environmental review officer for review and comment by
your staff
(2)
The City would provide at least 7 days for
review, would give due consideration to any
received, and would forward all comments
consultant preparing the e i s
any such
comments
to the
(3) At the invitation of the City, County staff, and staff of
other agencies compose a technical advisory committee
charged with assisting the City in review of the e i s
during its preparation I anticipate that up to three
meetings would be required
(4)
The Ci ty
regarding
e i. s.
would regularly
all substantive
consult with your staff
issues with regard to the
(5) The City would continue to be responsible for all
procedural and final substantive decisions with regard to
the e.i.s.
D
b
(
In addition, given the burden such a process would impose upon
your staff, the City would support and urge Thurston Highlands
Associates, the proponent, to enter into an independent fee
arrangement or services contract wi th Thurston County to help
defray the County's expenses.
I look forward to your considered opinion and response to this
proposal
Sincerely.
r cd/s~
Todd Stamm
City Planner
~
o
0,t(Y (j;"'J !j / t6 fl)ff,I.IIJ IS .su.
~) /,;j/Zfl Yj
City of Yelm.
105 Yelm Avenue West
POBox 479
Yelm, Washington 98597
206-458-3244
December 3, 1991
Thurston Highlands Associates
Attn Dennis Su
1917 First Avenue
Seattle, WA 98101
RE: Scope of Environmental Impact Statement
Dear Mr Su,
This letter outlines the required scope of the environmental impact statement (the e is)
for annexation of and general land use and circulation plans for that property descnbed
In the scoping notice of October 22, 1991 The following instructions regarding the scope
of the e i s. are provided to you, the proponent, by the City pursuant to WAC 197-11-08
As the proponent, you are responsible in all respects for ensuring that an adequate e I s
is prepared in accordance with this letter and other applicable standards
The following summary of reasonable alternatives, probable adverse Impacts and
mitigation measures represents a required minimum scope of the e i s At your discretion
you may include such other information as you deem appropriate including beneficial
environmental impacts In all respects the e i s. to be submitted shall conform with the
requirements of this letter and with the State Environmental Policy Act (Chapter 43 21 C
RCW), administrative regulations promulgated thereunder (Chapter 197-11 WAC), and
adopted policies and procedures of the City of Yelm
o
o
Mr Su
December 3, 1991
Page 2 of 8
AL TERNA TaVES
The e.Ls. shall analyze the proposal by way of comparative evaluation with the three other
reasonable alternatives described below Each of the four alternatives shall be presented
and analyzed as required by WAC 197-011-440(5). Each alternative shall include
identification of the location and scale of land uses, transportation corridors, utility
corridors, recreation sites, school site.s, wastewater treatment sites, stormwater collection
facilities, and any solid waste disposal sites, Each alternative shall be analyzed for
conformance with the Comprehensive Plan of Yelm, the Thurston County Comprehensive
Plan, and the proposed Yelm / Thl.lrston County Joint Plan Each alternative shall be
refined during preparation of the e Ls. and described in detail within the e i s
Alternative 1 - No Action
The "no action" alternative shall include the following features
No part of the Property will be annexed to Yelm except those areas identified for
"immediate annexation" in association with the proposed Yelm / Thurston County
Joint Plan~-
The land use zoning of the Property will remair'1 as currently zoned by Thurston
County or as such zoning is amended by Thurston County during preparation of
the e.Ls.
The Property will be developed in accordance with the Thurston County
Comprehensive Plan and county zoning to the extent reasonably anticipated over
a twenty-year period. Reasonably anticipated amendments to county plans and
regulations may be considered in describing anticipated development.
Any lands required by law to be reserved for rural uses or preserved for
environmental reasons shall be assumed to remain in their current use, any
forestry lands shall be assumed to be replanted for timber production.
Alternative 2 - The Proposal
The "proposal" alternative shall describe the proponent's proposal including a reasonably
anticipated schedule of development. The proposal shall be substantially as set forth at
the scoping meeting but may be refined and modified as the e i s is prepared The
"0' ~,,,,,'" '''(~t:, >I:
,,)..-~: .....1
~.,;"",
o
r,.
t---
.Jr- ( I '~
>: ..;:
Mr. Su
December 3, 1991
Page 3 of 8
..::
,I;
,.r '""~
proposal should not substantially exce.ed Cl total of 3400 housing units and 60 acres of
commercial development. ~..
,;".,
Alternative 3 - The Compact Proposal.
The "compact proposc:ie' s.halLbe a modified version 'of the proposal incorporating the
following features: " .
Additional open space will be provided in the vicinity of environmentally sensitive
areas, productive natural resource lands, and the Fort Lewis Reservation
.~ '.'
Proposed residential areas will have higher densities of development.
(_ .:1.'0...
, ...~
The urban area WilL be approximately one-half the size of that in the proposal with
more intensive utilization of the proposed urban area.
~ ~-.
The compact proposal will include the same number of housing units and the
same size of commercial area"as,t~e proposal with the same rate of development.
, 'Alternative 4 - The Village
The "village" alternative shall be a modified version of the proposal incorporating the
following features.
,.
The "village" may incorporate. features of the "compact version" alternative The
"village" shall include more extensive commercial development and higher levels
of on-site employment than the proposal,
'.... ,-<
The "village" will include commercial land uses within the Property which provide
additional employment opportunities focusing upon commercial and government
offices and similar non,.industrial land uses.
j>' } ~f
\'
Commercial enterprises within the Property will meet most needs of Property
residents for daily or convenience goods and services, but will be generally limited
to a size and type, meeting the dem~Qds of resid,ents of the Property.
.;~. -1
The land use pattern will "'provide opportunities for non-automobile modes of
transportation, .
o
o
Mr Su
December 3, 1991
Page 4 of 8
ADVERSE IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
.... /'
The significant impacts of each alternative shall be analyzed and reasonable mitigation
measures discussed. At minimum, the e.Ls. should include a comparative analysis of the
following subjects. In accordance with WAC 192-11-444, the order and combination of
these environment elements is at the reasoned discretion of the e Ls, preparer
Air Quality
The e Ls. shall describe the air quality within the vicinity of the Property and analyze
impacts to such air quality resulting from development of the Property under each
alternative In adqi~ion, impacts up<;?n g~f1eral air quality in the region shall be addressed
Various impact mitigation measures, including minimization of vehicular hydrocarbon
emissions and limitations upon wood fuel use, shall be considered within the e i s
Water Quality and Quantity
The e Ls. shall describe the current quality and quantity of the hydrologic system within
and in the vicinity of the Property and the locations of all associated streams, ponds or
lakes, and aquifers. Anticipated impacts upon both quality and quantity of ground and
surface water shall be analyzed Cinct, ",arious mitigation measures addressed
Critical Areas
The e Ls. shall identify, categorize and ,analyze the impacts upon wetlands, critical aqUifer
recharge areas, fish and wildlife habitat, frequently flooded areas, and geologically
hazardous areas as defined in the Growth Management Act and regulations promulgated
pursuant thereto. All such areas Iqcated within or in the vicinity of the Property should
be included. Pending plans and ordinances of the, City of Yelm or Thurston County
should be utilized in identification of such lands. The e Ls shall set forth various means
of mitigating impacts upon such critical areas.
O'
- .L':,;.~t.
f.,.~:.,,:
o
Mr. Su
December 3, 1991
Page 5 of 8
Open Space Corridors
The e.Ls. shall include an analysis of open space corridors appropriate for recreation,
wildlife habitat, trails, and critical areas associated with each alternative and various means
of preserving each type of corridor. 0 Such corridors may be located within or between
urban growth areas ' r.
Energy Conservation
The e i s. shall include an estimate of anticipated energy consumption for each alternative
This estimate shall include off-site transportation as well as on-site consumption Energy
supply sources to be analyzeq should include natural gas, petroleum, coal, nuclear and
hydroelectric power, solar, wood fuel and other feasible sources. Various mitigation
measures should be analyzed with an emphasis upon conservation
Noise
The e i s. shall describe the "noise anticipated to be generated by development of the
Property under each alternatiye and the likely receptors of such noise The e i s shall
also describe the current level and timjng of noise generated by adjacent land uses and
likely receptors within the Property In" particular; a noise reception analysis shall be
required for weapons testing activities conducted . upon the Fort Lewis Reservation
including, if possible, empirical sqmpling of such nQise at a variety of locations within the
Property and for comparison in the vicinity
Population Growth
The e Ls. shall include a forecast and analysis of the need for urban development within
the annexed area based upon the reasonably anticipated population growth of Yelm for
the next twenty years. Forecasts issued by the Office of Financial Management and
Thurston County pursuant to the Growth Management Act should be considered in
preparing the e Ls. The analysis shall ~ddress impacts upon urban and rural population
growth in the vicinity and the region.
o
~;,;""~r :""t::..:'. :i,:,;,::".
o
Mr Su
December 3, 1991
Page 6 of 8
"
Urban Area
The e Ls. shall address the annexCitiol1 in conjunction with the appropriate size of the
urban area of Yelm and alternative urban growth area boundaries in the vicinity of the
Property as prescribed by the Growth Management A9t. Analysis of urban area
boundaries should include examination of the relationship to the existing urbanized area
and the feasibility of serving .propo~,ed urb,an areas with urban services as defined in the
Growth Management Act. All such analysis shall be integrated with ongoing
environmental assessment by the City of Yelm ofJts entire proposed urban growth area.
" .., '" ..
Affordable Housing
The statement shall include a summary of Ciffordable housing available within and in the
vicinity of the City of Yelm and an analysis of the impacts of each alternative upon such
housing supply The statement shall include various m(3ansof mitigating any adverse
impacts. .'
...."-...
Natural Resource Lands
The e i s shall identify, categorize and. analyze the impacts upon agnculturallands, forest
lands and mineral resource lands as defined in the Growth Management Act and
regulations promulgated pursuant thereto which are within the Property and, at minimum,
within 300 feet of the Property Pending plans and ordinances of the City of Yelm or
Thurston County should be utilized in identification of such lands The e Ls shall set forth
various means of mitigating impacts upon such lands in the vicinity of proposed urban
development.
Transportation -
The e Ls. shall include a description of the existing transportation system in the vicinity of
the Property, including all modes of travel. An analysis of impacts upon this system and
internal circulation of traffic within the Property shall be prepared for each alterative
Particular locations and timing of anticipated traffic congestion shall be identified, along
with facility improvements required to alleviate such congestion Various means of
mitigating traffic and transportation impacts shall be addressed, including mass transit and
transportation demand management strategies. This transportation study and analysis
i ",'
.()
~jh
Mr Su
December 3, 1991
Page 7 of 8
i i
'>:,,~>!~.
1.1-.
(.
o
shall be coordinated with the on-going transP9rtation study and planning effort of the City
of Yelm and shall include an integratable data format. Any transportation and traffic
studies conducted by the Washington Department of Transportation and/or Thurston
County shall also be considered.
Public Services. Facilities and Utilities
The e Ls shall include an inventory of exi,sting public services, facilities and utilities
available to serve the Property within and in the vicinity of the City of Yelm The demand
for each service and facility resulting from qevelopment of the Property and various
means for meeting such demand shall be analyzed. At minimum, facilities and services
to be considered must include public schools and education (K-12), fire protection, police
protection, sidewalks, streets and highways, parks and public recreation, electricity supply
systems, telephone communications, emergency response communications, water supply
and distribution systems, wastewater collection and tr.eatment systems, stormwater
collection and treatment systems, solid waste collection, recycling, and disposal systems,
and natural gas distribution. Substantia! detail should be provided with respect to the
Impact of urban development within the property upon school, fire protection, water
supply, wastewater, and stormyvater .facilities, Where applicable, such analysis shall
Include the demand placed upon personnel, operations and management,
communications, vehicles, and/or buildings of the City of Yelm. Alternatives for mitigating
such demand to be considered should include' phasing of development. Alternative
locations for siting such facilities associated with development of the Property shall be
identified ' t -'^' -
Concurrent Delivery of Public Services
The e Ls shall include an analysis of means of achieving and financing concurrent
construction of public facilities and delivery of public services in accordance With the
requirements of the Growth Management Act. Such analysis shall address the current
revenue and expense budget of the City of Yelm, and clearly identify various means
available for timely funding of f?cilities a[ld services requirecj as a result of development
of the Property and as a result of other development associated with the proposal, such
as "spin-off" commercial development. In particular, the e i s. should analyze appropriate
amounts and payment timing of impact fees
o
o
Mr Su
December 3, 1991
Page 8 of 8
CONCLUSION
Consistent with the intent of the State Environmental Policy Act and regulations
promulgated thereunder, th,e proponent is directed to focus the e i s upon those areas
where significant environmental impacts are anticipated. The City has identified
compliance with the Growth, Management Act, transportation, concurrent construction and
delivery of public facilities and services, urban boundaries and population growth as areas
requiring special attention
The staff of the City of Yelm will be available for regular and periodic consultation with the
preparer of the e i s. to refine the scope of the e.Ls. and to ensure compliance with this
letter ' ' "..
Very truly yours,
City of Yelm
r~
Gene Borges, Manager
o
J
c;
Mailed copy of 12/3/91 letter to Thurston Highlands Associates from
Gene Borges regarding Scope of Environmental Impact Statement on
12/4/91 to the following:
Jon Potter
Entranco Engineers, Inc.
10900 N.E. 8th st., Ste. 300
Bellevue, WA 98004
Department of Ecology
Environmental Review Section
Attn: Barbara Ritchie
Mail stop PV-11
Olympia, WA 98504-8711
Ms. Paula Ehlers
Environmental Review Officer 11
Thurston County Planning Depart1bmenQ
2000 Lakeridge Drive SW I
Olympia, WA 98502-6045 !
f /
/
o
o
OWENS DAVIES MACKIE
A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CORPORATION
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
FRANK J. OWENS
ARTHUR 1... DAVIES
JOHN V I..YMAN
AI..EXANDER W. MACKIE.
RICHARD G. PHII..I..IPS. JR
BRIAN 1... BUDSBERG
MICHAEL W. MAYBERRY
ROBERT F HAUTH P,S,
926 - 24TH WAY S,W
POST OFFICE BOX 187
OLYMPIA, WASHINGTON 98507
(206) 943-8320
BURTON R. JOHNSON (1970)
JON E, CUSHMAN
KIRK M VEIS
TODD M STAMM"
CYNTHIA D. I..ABRANCHE
-ALSO AOMITTm IN WASHINGTON, Q,C.
-ALSO AOMITTED IN ICAHO
TEI..ECOPI ER
(206) 943-6150
TELECOPY /FAX TRANSMITTAL COVER SHEET
TO
Dennis Su
DATE
December 3, 1991
Thurston Highlands Associates
FAX NO 443-5372
FROM Todd M Stamm
OUR CLIENT City of Yelm
NUMBER OF PAGES
8
(cover sheet not included)
DOCUMENT(S) SENT Letter from Gene Borges, City of Yelm, regarding scope of
environmental impact statement
SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS This letter has been approved by Gene Borges He IS
signing the original and mailing it to you
If you do not receive all copies, or if any are not legible, please call Linda Feldtman at
(206) 943-8320
OUR FAX NUMBER IS (206) 943-6150
o
City of Yelm
105 Yelm Avenue West
POBox 419
Yelm, Washington 98591
206-458-3244
December 3, 1991
Thurston Highlands Associates
Attn Dennis Su
1917 First Avenue
Seattle, WA 98101
RE: Scope of Environmental Impact Statement
Dear Mr Su,
This letter outlines the required scope of the environmental impact statement (the e is)
for annexation of and general land use and circulation plans for that property described
in the scoping notice of October 22, 1991 The following instructions regarding the scope
of the e i s are provided to you, the proponent, by the City pursuant to WAC 197-11-08
As the proponent, you are responsible in all respects for ensuring that an adequate e i s
is prepared in accordance with this letter and other applicable standards
The following summary of reasonable alternatives, probable adverse impacts and
mitigation measures represents a required minimum scope of the e i s At your discretion
you may include such other information as you deem appropriate including beneficial
environmental impacts In all respects the e i s to be submitted shall conform with the
requirements of this letter and with the State Environmental Policy Act (Chapter 43 21 C
RCW), administrative regulations promulgated thereunder (Chapter 197-11 WAC), and
adopted policies and procedures of the City of Yelm
o
o
Mr Su
December 3, 1991
Page 2 of 8
ALTERNATIVES
The e i s shall analyze the proposal by way of comparative evaluation with the three other
reasonable alternatives described below Each of the four alternatives shall be presented
and analyzed as required by WAC 197-011-440(5) Each alternative shall Include
identification of the location and scale of land uses, transportation corridors, utility
corridors, recreation sites, school sites, wastewater treatment sites, stormwater collection
facilities, and any solid waste disposal sites, Each alternative shall be analyzed for
conformance with the Comprehensive Plan of Yelm, the Thurston County Comprehensive
Plan, and the proposed Yelm / Thurston County Joint Plan Each alternative shall be
refined during preparation of the e i s and described in detail within the e I s
Alternative 1 - No Action
The "no action" alternative shall include the following features
No part of the Property will be annexed to Yelm except those areas identified for
"immediate annexation" in association with the proposed Yelm / Thurston County
Joint Plan
The land use zoning of the Property will remain as currently zoned by Thurston
County or as such zoning is amended by Thurston County during preparation of
the e i s
The Property will be developed in accordance with the Thurston County
Comprehensive Plan and county zoning to the extent reasonably anticipated over
a twenty-year period Reasonably anticipated amendments to county plans and
regulations may be considered in describing anticipated development.
Any lands required by law to be reserved for rural uses or preserved for
environmental reasons shall be assumed to remain in their current use, any
forestry lands shall be assumed to be replanted for timber production
Alternative 2 - The Proposal
The "proposal" alternative shall describe the proponent's proposal including a reasonably
anticipated schedule of development. The proposal shall be substantially as set forth at
the scoping meeting but may be refined and modified as the e i s is prepared The
o
o
Mr Su
December 3, 1991
Page 3 of 8
proposal should not substantially exceed a total of 3400 housing units and 60 acres of
commercial development.
Alternative 3 - The Compact Proposal
The "compact proposal" shall be a modified version of the proposal incorporating the
following features
Additional open space will be provided in the vicinity of environmentally sensitive
areas, productive natural resource lands, and the Fort Lewis Reservation
Proposed residential areas will have higher densities of development.
The urban area will be approximately one-half the size of that in the proposal with
more intensive utilization of the proposed urban area,
The compact proposal will include the same number of housing units and the
same size of commercial area as the proposal with the same rate of development.
Alternative 4 - The Village
The "village" alternative shall be a modified version of the proposal incorporating the
following features
The "village" may incorporate features of the "compact version" alternative The
"village" shall include more extensive commercial development and higher levels
of on-site employment than the proposal
The "village" will include commercial land uses within the Property which provide
additional employment opportunities focusing upon commercial and government
offices and similar non-industrial land uses
Commercial enterprises within the Property will meet most needs of Property
residents for daily or convenience goods and services, but will be generally limited
to a size and type meeting the demands of residents of the Property
The land use pattern will provide opportunities for non-automobile modes of
transportation
o
o
Mr Su
December 3, 1991
Page 4 of 8
ADVERSE IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
The significant impacts of each alternative shall be analyzed and reasonable mitigation
measures discussed At minimum, the e i s should include a comparative analysIs of the
following subjects In accordance with WAC 192-11-444, the order and combination of
these environment elements is at the reasoned discretion of the e i s pre parer
Air Quality
The e i s shall describe the air quality within the vicinity of the Property and analyze
impacts to such air quality resulting from development of the Property under each
alternative In addition, impacts upon general air quality in the region shall be addressed
Various impact mitigation measures, including minimization of vehicular hydrocarbon
emissions and limitations upon wood fuel use, shall be considered within the e i s
Water Quality and Quantity
The e i s shall describe the current quality and quantity of the hydrologic system within
and in the vicinity of the Property and the locations of all associated streams, ponds or
lakes, and aquifers Anticipated impacts upon both quality and quantity of ground and
surface water shall be analyzed and various mitigation measures addressed
Critical Areas
The e i s shall identify, categorize and analyze the impacts upon wetlands, critical aquifer
recharge areas, fish and wildlife habitat, frequently flooded areas, and geologically
hazardous areas as defined in the Growth Management Act and regulations promulgated
pursuant thereto All such areas located within or in the vicinity of the Property should
be included Pending plans and ordinances of the City of Yelm or Thurston County
should be utilized in identification of such lands The e i s shall set forth various means
of mitigating impacts upon such critical areas
o
o
Mr Su
December 3, 1991
Page 5 of 8
Open Space Corridors
The e i s shall include an analysis of open space corridors appropriate for recreation,
wildlife habitat, trails, and critical areas associated with each alternative and various means
of preserving each type of corridor Such corridors may be located within or between
urban growth areas
Energy Conservation
The e i s shall include an estimate of anticipated energy consumption for each alternative
This estimate shall include off-site transportation as well as on-site consumption Energy
supply sources to be analyzed should include natural gas, petroleum, coal, nuclear and
hydroelectric power, solar, wood fuel and other feasible sources Various mitigation
measures should be analyzed with an emphasis upon conservation
Noise
The e i s shall describe the noise anticipated to be generated by development of the
Property under each alternative and the likely receptors of such noise The e i s shall
also describe the current level and timing of noise generated by adjacent land uses and
likely receptors within the Property In particular, a noise reception analysis shall be
required for weapons testing activities conducted upon the Fort Lewis Reservation
including, if possible, empirical sampling of such noise at a variety of locations within the
Property and for comparison in the vicinity
Population Growth
The e i s shall include a forecast and analysis of the need for urban development withIn
the annexed area based upon the reasonably anticipated population growth of Yelm for
the next twenty years Forecasts issued by the Office of Financial Management and
Thurston County pursuant to the Growth Management Act should be considered in
preparing the e i s, The analysis shall address impacts upon urban and rural population
growth in the vicinity and the region
o
o
Mr Su
December 3, 1991
Page 6 of 8
Urban Area
The e i s shall address the annexation in conjunction with the appropriate size of the
urban area of Yelm and alternative urban growth area boundaries in the vicinity of the
Property as prescribed by the Growth Management Act. Analysis of urban area
boundaries should include examination of the relationship to the existing urbanized area
and the feasibility of serving proposed urban areas with urban services as defined in the
Growth Management Act. All such analysis shall be integrated with ongoing
environmental assessment by the City of Yelm of its entire proposed urban growth area.
Affordable Housing
The statement shall include a summary of affordable housing available within and in the
vicinity of the City of Yelm and an analysis of the impacts of each alternative upon such
housing supply The statement shall include various means of mitigating any adverse
impacts
Natural Resource Lands
The e i s shall identify, categorize and analyze the impacts upon agricultural lands, forest
lands and mineral resource lands as defined in the Growth Management Act and
regulations promulgated pursuant thereto which are within the Property and, at minimum,
within 300 feet of the Property Pending plans and ordinances of the City of Yelm or
Thurston County should be utilized in identification of such lands The e i s shall set forth
various means of mitigating impacts upon such lands in the vicinity of proposed urban
development.
Transportation
The e i s. shall include a description of the existing transportation system in the Vicinity of
the Property, including all modes of travel An analysis of impacts upon this system and
internal circulation of traffic within the Property shall be prepared for each alterative
Particular locations and timing of anticipated traffic congestion shall be identified, along
with facility improvements required to alleViate such congestion Various means of
mitigating traffic and transportation impacts shall be addressed, including mass transit and
transportation demand management strategies This transportation study and analysis
o
o
Mr Su
December 3, 1991
Page 7 of 8
shall be coordinated with the on-going transportation study and planning effort of the City
of Yelm and shall include an integratable data format. Any transportation and traffic
studies conducted by the Washington Department of Transportation and/or Thurston
County shall also be considered
Public Services. Facilities and Utilities
The e i s shall include an inventory of existing public services, facilities and utilities
available to serve the Property within and in the vicinity of the City of Yelm The demand
for each service and facility resulting from development of the Property and vanous
means for meeting such demand shall be analyzed At minimum, facilities and services
to be considered must include public schools and education (K-12), fire protection, police
protection, sidewalks, streets and highways, parks and public recreation, electricity supply
systems, telephone communications, emergency response communications, water supply
and distribution systems, wastewater collection and treatment systems, stormwater
collection and treatment systems, solid waste collection, recycling, and disposal systems,
and natural gas distribution Substantial detail should be provided with respect to the
impact of urban development within the property upon school, fire protection, water
supply, wastewater, and stormwater facilities Where applicable, such analysis shall
include the demand placed upon personnel, operations and management,
communications, vehicles, and/or buildings of the City of Yelm Alternatives for mitigating
such demand to be considered should include phasing of development. Alternative
locations for siting such facilities associated with development of the Property shall be
identified
Concurrent Delivery of Public Services
The e i s shall include an analysis of means of achieving and financing concurrent
construction of public facilities and delivery of public services in accordance with the
requirements of the Growth Management Act. Such analysis shall address the current
revenue and expense budget of the City of Yelm, and clearly identify various means
available for timely funding of faCIlities and services required as a result of development
of the Property and as a result of other development associated with the proposal, such
as "spin-off" commercial development. In particular, the e i s should analyze appropriate
amounts and payment timing of impact fees
. .
o
o
Mr Su
December 3, 1991
Page 8 of 8
CONCLUSION
Consistent with the intent of the State Environmental Policy Act and regulations
promulgated thereunder, the proponent is directed to focus the e i s upon those areas
where significant environmental impacts are anticipated The City has identified
compliance with the Growth Management Act, transportation, concurrent construction and
delivery of public facilities and services, urban boundaries and population growth as areas
requiring special attention
The staff of the City of Yelm will be available for regular and periodic consultation with the
preparer of the e i s, to refine the scope of the e i s and to ensure compliance with this
letter
Very truly yours,
City of Yelm
Gene Borges, Manager
"\
o
o
OWENS DAVIES MACKIE
A F'ROFESSIONAL SERVICES CORF'ORATION
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
FRANK J. OWENS
ARTHUR L. DAVIES
JOHN V LYMAN
ALEXANDER W. MACKIE'
RICHARD G. PHILLIPS. JR
BRIAN L. BUDSBERG
MICHAEL W MAYBERRY
ROBERT F HAUTH P S,
926 - 24TH WAY S W.
POST OFFICE BOX 167
OLYMPIA, WASHINGTON 98507
(206) 943-8320
BURTON R. JOHNSON (970)
JON E. CUSHMAN
KIRK M VEIS
TODD M. STAMM'.
CYNTHIA D, LABRANCHE
-ALSO AOfl4ITTE:D IN WASHINGTON, O.C.
-ALSO ADMITTm IN IDAHO
TELECOPI ER
(206) 943-6150
TELECOPY /FAX TRANSMITTAL COVER SHEET
TO
Gene Borges
DATE
December 2, 1991
City Manager, City of Yelm
FAX NO 458-4348
FROM Todd M Stamm
OUR CLIENT City of Yelm
NUMBER OF PAGES
8
(cover sheet not included)
DOCUMENT(S) SENT
Draft of letter to Dennis Su
SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS
For your review Please call with comments
If you do not receive all copies, or if any are not legible, please call Linda Feldtman at
(206) 943-8320
OUR FAX NUMBER IS (206) 943-6150
o
City of Yelm
105 Yelm Avenue West
POBox 479
Yelm, Washington 98597
206-458-3244
December 2, 1991
Thurston Highlands Associates
Attn Dennis Su
1917 First Avenue
Seattle, WA 98101
RE: Scope of Environmental Impact Statement
Dear Mr Su,
This letter outlines the required scope of the environmental impact statement (the e is)
for annexation of and general land use and circulation plans for that property described
in the scoping notice of October 22, 1991 The following instructions regarding the scope
of the e i s are provided to you, the proponent, by the City pursuant to WAC 197-11-08
As the proponent, you are responsible in all respects for ensuring that an adequate e i s
is prepared in accordance with this letter and other applicable standards
The following summary of reasonable alternatives, probable adverse impacts and
mitigation measures represents a required minimum scope of the e i s. At your discretion
you may include such other information as you deem appropriate Including beneficial
environmental impacts In all respects the e i s to be submitted shall conform with the
requirements of this letter and with the State Environmental Policy Act (Chapter 43 21 C
RCW), administrative regulations promulgated thereunder (Chapter 197-11 WAC), and
adopted policies and procedures of the City of Yelm
"'-- --
o
o
Mr Su
December 2, 1991
Page 2 of 8
ALTERNATIVES
The e i s shall analyze the proposal by way of comparative evaluation with the three other
reasonable alternatives described below Each of the four alternatives shall be presented
and analyzed as required by WAC 197-011-440(5) Each alternative shall include
identification of the location and scale of land uses, transportation corridors, utility
corridors, recreation sites, school sites, wastewater treatment sites, stormwater collection
facilities, and any solid waste disposal sites Each alternative shall be analyzed for
conformance with the Comprehensive Plan of Yelm, the Thurston County Comprehensive
Plan, and the proposed Yelm / Thurston County Joint Plan Each alternative shall be
refined during preparation of the e i s and described in detail within the e i s
Alternative 1 - No Action
The "no action" alternative shall include the following features
No part of the Property will be annexed to Yelm except those areas identified for
"immediate annexation" in association with the proposed Yelm / Thurston County
Joint Plan
The land use zoning of the Property will remain as currently zoned by Thurston
County or as such zoning is amended by Thurston County during preparation of
the e i s
The Property will be developed in accordance with the Thurston County
Comprehensive Plan and county zoning to the extent reasonably anticipated over
a twenty-year period Reasonably anticipated amendments to county plans and
regulations may be considered in describing anticipated development.
Any lands required by law to be reserved for rural uses or preserved for
environmental reasons shall be assumed to remain in their current use, any
forestry lands shall be assumed to be replanted for timber production
Alternative 2 - The Proposal
The "proposal" alternative shall describe the proponent's proposal including a reasonably
anticipated schedule of development. The proposal shall be substantially as set forth at
the scoping meeting but may be refined and modified as the e i s is prepared The
o
o
Mr Su
December 2, 1991
Page 3 of 8
proposal should not substantially exceed a total of 3400 housing units and 60 acres of
commercial development.
Alternative 3 - The Compact Proposal
The "compact proposal" shall be a modified version of the proposal incorporating the
following features
Additional open space will be provided in the vicinity of environmentally sensitive
areas, productive natural resource lands, and the Fort Lewis Reservation
Proposed residential areas will have higher densities of development.
The urban area will be approximately one-half the size of that in the proposal with
more intensive utilization of the proposed urban area.
The compact proposal will include the same number of housing units and the
same size of commercial area as the proposal With the same rate of development.
Alternative 4 - The Village
The "village" alternative shall be a modified version of the proposal incorporating the
following features
The "village" may incorporate features of the "compact version" alternative The
"village" shall include more extensive commercial development and higher levels
of on-site employment than the proposal
The "village" will include commercial land uses within the Property which provide
additional employment opportunities focusing upon commercial and government
offices and similar non-industrial land uses
Commercial enterprises within the Property will meet most needs of Property
residents for daily or convenience goods and services, but will be generally limited
to a size and type meeting the demands of residents of the Property
The land use pattern will provide opportunities for non-automobile modes of
transportation
o
o
Mr Su
December 2, 1991
Page 4 of 8
ADVERSE IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
The significant impacts of each alternative shall be analyzed and reasonable mitigation
measures discussed At minimum, the e i s, should include a comparative analysis of the
following subjects. In accordance with WAC 192-11-444, the order and combination of
these environment elements is at the reasoned discretion of the e i s pre parer
Air Quality
The e i s, shall describe the air quality within the vicinity of the Property and analyze
impacts to such air quality resulting from development of the Property under each
alternative In addition, impacts upon general air quality in the region shall be addressed
Various impact mitigation measures, including minimization of vehicular hydrocarbon
emissions and limitations upon wood fuel use, shall be considered within the e i s
Water Quality and Quantity
The e i s shall describe the current quality and quantity of the hydrologic system within
and in the vicinity of the Property and the locations of all associated streams, ponds or
lakes, and aquifers, Anticipated impacts upon both quality and quantity of ground and
surface water shall be analyzed and various mitigation measures addressed
Critical Areas
The e i s, shall identify, categorize and analyze the impacts upon wetlands, critical aquifer
recharge areas, fish and wildlife habitat, frequently flooded areas, and geologically
hazardous areas as defined in the Growth Management Act and regulations promulgated
pursuant thereto All such areas located within or in the vicinity of the Property should
be included Pending plans and ordinances of the City of Yelm or Thurston County
should be utilized in identification of such lands The e i s shall set forth various means
of mitigating impacts upon such critical areas
o
o
Mr Su
December 2, 1991
Page 5 of 8
Open Space Corridors
The e i s, shall include an analysis of open space corridors appropriate for recreation,
wildlife habitat, trails, and critical areas associated with each alternative and various means
of preserving each type of corridor Such corridors may be located within or between
urban growth areas
Energy Conservation
The e i s shall include an estimate of anticipated energy consumption for each alternative
This estimate shall include off-site transportation as well as on-site consumption Energy
supply sources to be analyzed should include natural gas, petroleum, coal, nuclear and
hydroelectric power, solar, wood fuel and other feasible sources Various mitigation
measures should be analyzed with an emphasis upon conservation
Noise
The e i s shall describe the noise anticipated to be generated by development of the
Property under each alternative and the likely receptors of such noise The e i s shall
also describe the current level and timing of noise generated by adjacent land uses and
likely receptors within the Property In particular, a noise reception analysis shall be
required for weapons testing activities conducted upon the Fort Lewis Reservation
including, if possible, empirical sampling of such noise at a variety of locations within the
Property and for comparison in the vicinity
Population Growth
The e i s shall include a forecast and analysis of the need for urban development within
the annexed area based upon the reasonably anticipated population growth of Yelm for
the next twenty years Forecasts issued by the Office of Financial Management and
Thurston County pursuant to the Growth Management Act should be considered in
preparing the e i s The analysis shall address impacts upon urban and rural population
growth in the vicinity and the region
o
o
Mr Su
December 2, 1991
Page 6 of 8
Urban Area
The e i s. shall address the annexation in conjunction with the appropriate size of the
urban area of Yelm and alternative urban growth area boundaries in the vicinity of the
Property as prescribed by the Growth Management Act. Analysis of urban area
boundaries should include examination of the relationship to the existing urbanized area
and the feasibility of serving proposed urban areas with urban services as defined in the
Growth Management Act. All such analysis shall be integrated with ongoing
environmental assessment by the City of Yelm of its entire proposed urban growth area.
Affordable Housing
The statement shall include a summary of affordable housing available within and in the
vicinity of the City of Yelm and an analysis of the impacts of each alternative upon such
housing supply The statement shall include various means of mitigating any adverse
impacts
Natural Resource Lands
The e i s, shall identify, categorize and analyze the impacts upon agricultural lands, forest
lands and mineral resource lands as defined in the Growth Management Act and
regulations promulgated pursuant thereto which are within the Property and, at minimum,
within 300 feet of the Property Pending plans and ordinances of the City of Yelm or
Thurston County should be utilized in identification of such lands The e i s shall set forth
various means of mitigating impacts upon such lands in the vicinity of proposed urban
development.
Transportation
The e i s shall include a description of the existing transportation system in the vicinity of
the Property, including all modes of travel An analysis of impacts upon this system and
Internal circulation of traffic within the Property shall be prepared for each alterative
Particular locations and timing of anticipated traffic congestion shall be identified, along
With facility improvements required to alleviate such congestion Various means of
mitigating traffic and transportation impacts shall be addressed, including mass transit and
transportation demand management strategies This transportation study and analysis
o
o
Mr Su
December 2, 1991
Page 7 of 8
shall be coordinated with the on-going transportation study and planning effort of the City
of Yelm and shall include an integratable data format. Any transportation and traffic
studies conducted by the Washington Department of Transportation and/or Thurston
County shall also be considered
Public Services. Facilities and Utilities
The e i s. shall include an inventory of existing public services, facilities and utilities
available to serve the Property within and in the vicinity of the City of Yelm The demand
for each service and facility resulting from development of the Property and various
means for meeting such demand shall be analyzed At minimum, facilities and services
to be considered must include public schools and education (K-12), fire protection, police
protection, sidewalks, streets and highways, parks and public recreation, electricity supply
systems, telephone communications, emergency response communications, water supply
and distribution systems, wastewater collection and treatment systems, stormwater
collection and treatment systems, solid waste collection, recycling, and disposal systems,
and natural gas distribution Substantial detail should be provided with respect to the
impact of urban development within the property upon school, fire protection, water
supply, wastewater, and stormwater facilities Where applicable, such analysis shall
include the demand placed upon personnel, operations and management,
communications, vehicles, and/or buildings of the City of Yelm Alternatives for mitigating
such demand to be considered should include phasing of development. Alternative
locations for siting such facilities associated with development of the Property shall be
identified
Concurrent Delivery of Public Services
The e i s shall include an analysis of means of achieving and financing concurrent
construction of public facilities and delivery of public services in accordance with the
requirements of the Growth Management Act. Such analysis shall address the current
revenue and expense budget of the City of Yelm, and clearly identify various means
available for timely funding of facilities and services required as a result of development
of the Property and as a result of other development associated with the proposal, such
as "spin-off" commercial development. In particular, the e i s should analyze appropriate
amounts and payment timing of impact fees
o
o
Mr Su
December 2, 1991
Page 8 of 8
CONCLUSION
Consistent with the intent of the State Environmental Policy Act and regulations
promulgated thereunder, the proponent is directed to focus the e i s upon those areas
where significant environmental impacts are anticipated The City has identified
compliance with the Growth Management Act, transportation, concurrent construction and
delivery of public facilities and services, urban boundaries and population growth as areas
requiring special attention
The staff of the City of Yelm will be available for regular and periodic consultation with the
preparer of the e i s to refine the scope of the e i s and to ensure compliance with this
letter
Very truly yours,
OWENS DAVIES MACKIE
By. Todd Stamm
o
o
jft-V'r"
;~
November 27, 1991
Thurston Highlands Associates
Attn Dennis Su
1917 First Avenue
Seattle, WA 98101
RE: Scope of Environmental Impact Statement
Dear Mr Su,
This letter outlines the required scope of the environmental impact statement (the e is)
for annexation of and general land use and circulation plans for that property described
in the scoping notice of October 22, 1991 The following instructions regarding the scope
of the e i s are provided to you, the proponent, by the City pursuant to WAC 197-11-08
As the proponent, you are responsible in all respects for ensuring that an adequate e i s
is prepared in accordance with this letter and other applicable standards
The following summary of reasonable alternatives, probable adverse impacts and
mitigation measures represents a required minimum scope of the e i s, At your discretion
you may include such other information as you deem appropriate including beneficial
environmental impacts In all respects the e i s, to be submitted shall conform with the
requirements of this letter and with the State Environmental Policy Act (Chapter 43 21 C
RCW), administrative regulations promulgated thereunder (Chapter 197-11 WAC), and
adopted policies and procedures of the City of Yelm
ALTERNATIVES
The e i s shall analyze the proposal by way of comparative evaluation with the three other
reasonable alternatives described below Each of the four alternatives shall be presented
and analyzed as required by WAC 197-011-440(5) Each alternative shall include
identification of the location and scale of land uses, transportation corndors, utility
corridors, recreation sites, school sites, wastewater treatment sites, stormwater collection
facilities, and any solid waste disposal sites Each alternative shall be analyzed for
conformance with the Comprehensive Plan of Yelm, the Thurston County Comprehensive
o
o
Mr Su
November 27, 1991
Page 2 of 7
Plan, and the proposed Yelm / Thurston County Joint Plan Each alternative shall be
refined during preparation of the e i s and described in more detail within the e i s
Alternative 1 - No Action
The "no action" alternative shall include the following features
No part of the Property will be annexed to Yelm except those areas identified for
"immediate annexation" by the proposed Yelm / Thurston County Joint Plan
The land use zoning of the Property will remain as currently zoned by Thurston
County or as such zoning is amended by Thurston County during preparation of
the e i s
The Property will be developed in accordance with the Thurston County
Comprehensive Plan and county zoning to the extent reasonably anticipated over
a twenty-year period Reasonably anticipated amendments to county plans and
regulations may be considered in describing anticipated development.
Any lands required by law to be reserved for rural uses or preserved for
environmental reasons shall be assumed to remain in their current use, any
forestry lands shall be assumed to be replanted for timber production
Alternative 2 - The Proposal
The "proposal" alternative shall describe the proponent's proposal in detail including a
reasonably anticipated schedule of development. The proposal shall be substantially as
set forth at the scoping meeting but may be refined and modified as the e i s is prepared
The proposal should not substantially exceed a total of 3400 housing units and 60 acres
of commercial development.
Alternative 3 - The Compact Proposal
The "compact proposal" shall be a modified version of the proposal incorporating the
following features
Additional open space will be provided in the vicinity of environmentally sensitive
areas, productive natural resource lands, and the Fort Lewis Reservation
Proposed residential areas will have higher densities of development.
o
o
Mr Su
November 27, 1991
Page 3 of 7
The urban area will be approximately one-half the size of that in the proposal with
more intensive utilization of the proposed urban area,
The compact proposed will generally include the same number of housing units
and the same size of commercial area with the same rate of development as the
proposal
Alternative 4 - The Village
The "village" alternative shall be a modified version of the proposal incorporating the
following features
The "village" will include commercial land uses within the Property which provide
employment opportunities and meet most daily product and service needs of
residents
Commercial enterprises providing daily or convenience goods and services will be
limited to a size and type meeting the demands of residents of the Property
The land use pattern will provide opportunities for non-automobile modes of
transportation
The employment opportunities will focus upon commercial and government offices
and similar non-industrial land uses,
The "village" may incorporate many features of the "compact version" alternative,
but is to include more extensive commercial development and higher levels of on-
site employment.
ADVERSE IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
The significant impacts of each alternative shall be analyzed and reasonable mitigation
measures discussed At minimum, the e i s, should include a comparative analysis of the
following subjects, In accordance with WAC 192-11-444, the order and combination of
these environment elements is at the reasoned discretion of the e i s preparer
o
o
Mr Su
November 27, 1991
Page 4 of 7
AIR QUALITY
The e i s shall describe the current air quality within the vicinity of the Property and
analyze impacts to such air quality resulting from development of the Property under each
alternative In addition, impacts upon general air quality in the region shall be addressed
Various impact mitigation measures, including minimization of vehicular hydrocarbon
emissions and limitations upon wood fuel use, shall be included within the e i s
~,.A--~ Go.f&. ,....)iT ~
WATER QUALITY AND QUANTITY~~ d;...tl'_-'..~.;r.-r
~~ ""7*T...-S
The e i s shall describe the current quality and quantity of the 1i:ct;::ystem within
and in the vicinity of the Property and the locations of all associated streams, ponds or
lakes, and aquifers, Anticipated impacts upon both quality and quantity of ground and
surface water shall be analyzed and various mitigation measures addressed
CRITICAL AREAS
The e i s, shall identify, categorize and analyze the impacts upon wetlands, critical aquifer
recharge areas, fish and wildlife habitat, frequently flooded areas, and geologically
hazardous as defined in the Growth Management Act and regulations promulgated
pursuant thereto which are located within or in the vicinity of the Property Pending plans
and ordinances of the City of Yelm or Thurston County should be utilized in identification
of such lands, The e i s. shall set forth various means of mitigating impacts upon such
critical areas
OPEN SPACE CORRIDORS
The e i s shall include an analysis of open space corridors appropriate for recreation,
wildlife habitat, trails, and critical areas associated with each alternative and various means
of preserving each type of corridor Such corridors may be located within or between
urban growth areas
ENERGY CONSERVATION -Joe
") J1--<. 1f.IV",^" VII 7 wrv tfV /
The statement shall include a summary ofAlffordable housing available within and in the
vicinity of the City of Yelm and an analysis of the impacts of each alternative upon such
I
I
/
o
o
/
Mr Su
November 27, 1991
Page 5 of 7
housing supply The statement shall include various means of mitigating adverse
impacts upon such critical lands
NOISE
The e i s, shall describe the noise anticipated to be generated by development of the
Property under each alternative and the likely receptors of such noise The e i s shall
also describe the current level and timing of noise generated by adjacent land uses and
likely receptors within the Property In particular, a noise reception analysis shall be
required for weapons testing activities conducted upon the Fort Lewis Reservation
including, if possible, empirical sampling of such noise at a variety of locations within the
Property and for comparison in the vicinity
POPULATION G~WTH /. ~.;~ ~d4;^-' ~
,v~ '^-'&1y..",,,..,ilVvrTl-,.
J "'N~~~ ;"'~~/'~
The e i s. shall forecast and analyze th . reasonably anticipated population growth rate of
Yelm for the next twenty years Forecasts issued by the Office of Financial Management
and Thurston County pursuant to the Growth Management Act may be considered in
preparing the e i s, The analysis shall address impacts upon urban and rural population
growth in the vicinity and the region
tt.vk ~/,,~;-"
1~7:fIN~ I,IV ~_ r"",..'T'
C,v4".;l1- ".,"';V~ .
URBAN AREA _ ~ ~y;T'-I;" r4V-'
/kc.- "''#~K",7i;-J 1-- t:nV~)p0bV'/ ~r"'''~ ~A'S'
The e i s, shall addressJthe appropriate size of the urban area of Yelm and alternative
urban growth area boundaries in the vicinity of the Property Analysis of urban area
boundaries should include examination of the relationship to the existing urbanized area
and the feasibility of serving proposed areas with urban services as defined in the
Growth Management Act. .~~
AFFORDABLE HOUSING
c-
p..,ed6y c, A4PR..-l9-rl' ""_
The e i s shall include an estimate of anticipated energy consumption for each alternative
This estimate shall include off-site transportation as well as on-site consumption Energy
supply sources to be analyzed should include natural gas, petroleum, coal, nuclear and
o
o
Mr Su
November 27, 1991
Page 6 of 7
hydroelectric power, solar, wood fuel and other feasible sources Various mitigation
measures should be analyzed with an emphasis upon conservation
NATURAL RESOURCE LANDS
The e i s, shall identify, categorize and analyze the impacts upon agricultural lands, forest
lands and mineral resource lands as defined in the Growth Management Act and
regulations promulgated pursuant thereto which are within the Property and, at minimum,
within 300 feet of the Property, or of the Property Pending plans and ordinances of the
City of Yelm or Thurston County should be utilized in identification of such lands The
e i s shall set forth various means of mitigating impacts upon such lands in the vicinity
of proposed urban development.
TRANSPORTATION
The e i s, shall include a description of the existing transportation system in the vicinity of
the Property, including all modes of travel An analysis of impacts upon this system and
internal circulation of traffic within the Property shall be prepared for each alterative
Particular locations and timing of anticipated traffic congestion shall be identified, along
with facility improvements required to alleviate such congestion Various means of
mitigating traffic and transportation impacts shall be addressed, including mass transit and
transportation demand management strategies, This transportation study and analysis
shall be coordinated with the on-going transportation study and planning effort of the City
of Yelm and shall include an integrable data format. Any transportation and traffic studies
being conducted by the Washington Department of Transportation and/or Thurston
County shall also be considered
PUBLIC SERVICES. FACILITIES AND UTILITIES
The e i s shall include an inventory of existing public services, facilities and utilities
available to serve the Property within and in the vicinity of the City of Yelm The demand
for each service and facility resulting from development of the Property and various
means for meeting such demand shall be analyzed At minimum, facilities and services
to be considered must include public schools and education (K-12), fire protection, police
protection, sidewalks, streets and highways, parks and public recreation, electnclty supply
systems, telephone communications, emergency response communications, water supply
and distribution systems, wastewater collection and treatment systems, stormwater
o
o
Mr Su
November 27, 1991
Page 7 of 7
IW / y)..utJ 7z.e. ~.
,/9 ".., ~"'/ ,;y...
<r'-< ,.,-,,/ (.j j ",
I INPZ"Y~ . / ~
", /l}'pA''-
collection and treatment systems, solid waste collection, recycling, and disposa
and natural gas distribution Substantial detail should be provided with respect t school,
fire protection, water supply, wastewater, and stormwaterfacilities, Where applicable, such
analysis shall include the demand placed upon personnel, operations and management,
communications, vehicles, and/or buildings of the City of Yelm' Iternatives for
mitigating such demand~ Alternative locations for siting such fa ities associated with
development of the Pro rty shall be identified _ -
:;J_V /";"v'...4"""",_-~"'/,,"'4::> .
~in _~"T)""/;'''~,,,-v, . . #../--I't~~"~$
~el! $$-*>; ~/e1vv'~CS H'..-I7'4 IN''''''^'' "" fW...'NV....1' ...... I .
- f ,.-,,/,,4~ /~I..r
CONCURRENT DELIVERY OF PUBLIC SERVICES f:rs v~~~::~)
G t!)6,/A.". 1.11.
The e i s shall include an analysis of means of achieving and financing concurrent
construction of public facilities and delivery of public services in accordance with the
requirements of the Growth Management Act. Such analysis shall address the current
revenue and expense budget of the City of Yelm, and clearly identify various means
available for timely funding of facilities and services required as a result of development
of the Property and as a result of other development associated with the proposal, such
as "spin-off" commercial development.
CONCLUSION
Consistent with intent of the State Environmental Policy Act and regulations promulgated
thereunder, the proponent is directed to focus the e i s, upon those areas where
significant environmental impacts are anticipated The City has identified compliance with
the Growth Management Act, concurrent construction and delivery of public facilities and
services, transportation, urban boundaries and population growth as areas requinng
special attention
The staff of the City of Yelm will be available for regular and periodic consultation with the
preparer of the e i s to refine the scope of the e i s, and to ensure compliance with this
letter
Very truly yours,
OWENS DAVIES MACKIE
By' Todd Stamm
NOV 26 '91 16 47
FROM KCtvl
o
o
PAGE 001
MEMO
Kramer, Chin &: Mayo, me
Date:
November 26, 1991
Job NO.t
1976-02
To:
Todd Stemm
Owen Davies Mackie
FAX NO. 1-206-943-6150
From:
Dennis Su, AIA, KCM Inc,
Subject
Thurston Highland Annexation
EIS Seoping Letter 11/25/91
c:
Thurston Highland Associates, Gene Borges
Upon reviewing the draft copy of the EIS seoping letter, the following are my comments:
1 The preferred name of the proponent is Thurston Highland Associates.
2. Our understanding on the EIS is for annexation application to the County
only. The zoning of the entire area will be dealt with at a later date thru the
City of Yelm. We also understand that if EIS is needed for the Thurston
Highland Master Planned Community, the EIS will be pretty much the
same.
3. The four impact alternatives outlined are slightly different than the four
suggested at the October 22 meeting. Those were: Alt, 1, no action, no
development; Alt, 2, development under county without annexation,
Alternate 3, the proposal, Alternate 4, intensive development with offices
and employment center In the draft letter, more explanation is needed to
distinguish the Alternate 3, the Compact from Alternate 4, the Village.
4. Items under "Adverse Impacts" shall be in the standard EIS sequence that
we follow from the draft form to the finished version. Description for
"Affordable Housing" should be for "Energy Conservation."
5. Item not mentioned therefore is Affordable Housing.
6. Under "Public Services, etc ," I think the utilities portion should 00
separated out specially wastewater collection and treatment system and
stormwater collection and treatment system. Other utilities such as
electricity, gas, telephone are relatively low impact and can be addressed
together.
7. I've talked to Gene after our conversation and he told me the good news.
Now I understand what you were hinting, Welcome aboard.
KCM · 1917FUst.Avenue · Seattle WA 98101-1027 · (206)443-5300- Fa:I:(206)443-!S3'?2
-' '......r.. 11W _ _ ~ I ......J.
o
o
,.RANK.) OW"NS
....RTHUA Lo. OAVllt&
.JOHN V LoVM.AN
AI..CXANOCR W IoIACt<IC"
RICHARO Q PHll.L.IPS. .JR,
ORlAN Lo. .UCSl!l~AG
MICMAI:L W. MA....BERRy
AOall:I'tT ,. t1AUTH, "',$.
OWENS DAVIES MACKIE
A PROF't:S$IQNAI.. 5e:AVIC~S CORPORATION
ATTORN~Y$ AT LA.W
ga~ . :;:41''' WAY S W
!>OST O""Cf: aox Il!!l7
OL.YMPIA, WASHINGTON saS07
la06\ 943-6:)2.0
.URTON R. .JOMNljON (l~701
.,ION It, CUSHMAN
KIRK M ItltlS
TOPO M lilT"""",,"
C;YNTrlIA O. l.AeJ'lANCHE:
-"'1.10 OoOhllnlO IN W.u"'N010N. Q,C,
"AI."JO Al)1"IITT~ IN IO"HQ
TEI..CCOl>. e::A
(20el il-4.3-&150
TELECOPY/FAX TRANSMITTAL COVER SHEET
TO
Gene Borges
DATE'
November 26, 1991
City of Yalm
FAX NO 458-4348
FROM Todd Stamm
OUR CLIENT City of Yelm
NUMBER OF PAGES
7
(cover sheet not included)
Draft of letter to Dennis Su regarding Scope of Environmental
DOCUMENT(S) SENT'
Impact Statement
SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS
If you do not receive all copies, or if any are not legible, please call Linda Feldtman at
(206) 943-8320
OUR FAX NUMBER IS (206) $43-6150
__ """""'_ I V~
o
o
November 25, 1991
Thurston Highlands
Attn. Dennis Su
1917 First Avenue
Seattle, WA 98101
o~J~~~"\
RE; Scope of Environmental Impact Statement
Dear Mr. Su,
This letter outlines the required scope of the environmental impact statement (the e,j S )
for annexation and zoning of that property described in the seoping notice of October 22, ,1
1991. The following instructions regarding the scope of thee i.s. are provided to you) the ~i
proponent, by the CIty pursuant to WAC 197-11-08. As the proponent, you are
responsible in all respects for ensuring that an adequate e Ls is prepared in accordance
with this letter and other applicable standards
The following summary of reasonable alternatives, probable adverse impacts and
mitigation measures represents a required minimum scope of the e.i.s At your discretion
you may include such other information as you deem appropriate including beneficial
environmental impacts In all respects the e i s to be submitted shall conform with the
requirements of this letter and With the State Environmental Policy Act (Chapter 43 21 C
RCW), administrative regulations promulgated thereunder (Chapter 197-11 WAC), and
adopted policies and procedures of the City of Yelm
ALTERNATIVES
.,;l
,
l~
The e i s shall analyze the proposal by way of comparative evaluation With the three other
reasonable alternatives described below Each of the four alternatives shall be presented
and analyzed as required by WAC 197-011-440(5) Each alternative shall Include
identification of the location and scale of land uses, transportation corridors, utility
corridors, recreation sites, school sites, wastewater treatment sites, stormwater collection
,
.J ......6- ,"u VV.6- I VV
o
o
,,\l~~1
f ....
Mr. Su
November 25. 1991
Page 2 of 7
';
~.
"I/1Alcilities, and any solid waste disposal sites, Each alternative shall be analyzed for
" ; ..iponformance with the Comprehensive Plan ofYelm, the Thurston County Comprehensive
.. ,'i" Plan. and the proposed Yelm / Thurston County Joint Plan. Each alternative shall be
..'fI'" refined during preparation of the e Ls and described in more detail within the e i s
'J
\\
: . "\1
Alternative 1 - N,9 Action
"
The "no actionU alternative shall include the following features
No part of the property will be annexed to Yelm except those areas identified for
"immediate annexation" by the proposed Yelm / Thurston County JOint Plan
The land use zoning of the Property will remain as currently zoned by Thurston
County or as such zoning is amended by Thurston County during preparation of
".~ the e i s.
;
.)
'\
1f";'''~1:,.
.J. ":
Bi'~~~:i
, 'tl'
.'
The Property will be developed in accordance with the Thurston County
Comprehensive Plan and county zoning to the extent reasonably anticipated over
a twenty-year period. Reasonably anticipated amendments to county plans and
regulations may be considered in describing anticipated development.
;"'<;1\
to,
Any lands required by Jaw to be reserved for rural uses or preserved for
environmental reasons shall be assumed to remain in their current use, any
forestry lands shall be assumed to be replanted for timber production
,
i.
~
I
I,
.~
I
"
j
'~
Alternative 2 - The Proposal
The "proposal" alternative shall describe the proponent's proposal in detail including a
reasonably anticipated schedule of development. The proposal shall be substantially as
set forth at the scoping meeting but may be refined and modified as the e i s is prepared
The proposal should not substantially exceed a total of 3400 housing units and 60 acres
of commercial development.
Alternative 3 - The Compact PrOPQsal
t_. I
,
The "compact proposal" shall be a modified version of the proposal incorporating the
following features
Additional open space in the vicinity of environmentally sensitive areas, productive
natural resource lands, and the Fort Lewis Reservation
.
I
r
J'
\i
~
, .
~..
" "'
~ '! ,
f,~,~
':,i!:
, ,~\l
~._'~~
o
DRAFT
o
.~
"'I
Mr Su
November 25. 1991
Page 3 of 7
I 1 - c. I' - ~I 1 U '~I ~ 4 AM F 114
Higher densities of development in proposed residential areas
An urban area approximately one-half the size of that in the proposal with more
intensive utilization of the proposed urban area.
Generally the same number of housing units, the commercial area, and the same
rate of development as the proposal
Altern~tiv~ 4 - The VillaQft
The "village" alternative shall be a modified version of the proposal incorporating the
following features
A land use mix and pattern within the Property designed to provide employment
opportunities and meet daily product and service needs of residents.
OpportunitIes for non-automobile modes of transportation
Employment opportunities which focus upon commercial offices and Similar non-
industrial land uses
Enterprises providing daily or convenience goods and services which are limited
to a size and type meeting the demands of residents of the Property
The 'Village" may incorporate features of the "compact version" alternative
.,.r'
",,,: ~
,.i;VERSE IMPACTS AND MITIC,ATIQN M!;I\SUI3ES
t.f;~;"',',
......-...).}t'....:-r
.... "1'.1...<<,. ''''','
,.iiil"''';,.' e significant impacts of each alterative shall be analyzed and reasonable mitigation
,; ;'::"'{,. .~'measures discussed. At minimum, the i e s, should include a comparative analysis of the
; "'~~,~f: following subjects.
'-.'~~i;' ~t.lr.
URBAN AREA
~;>
.~
The e.Ls. shall address the appropriate size of the urban area of Yelm and alternative
urban growth area boundaries in the vicinity of the Property Analysis of urban area
boundaries should include examination of the relationship to the existing urbanized area
d the feasibility of serving proposed urban areas with urban services as defined in the
o
'I~UVG';:l.l
;:l ...J...J I~U VVL r V-J
J..) n \0 J. L- V I In...... ,...... J. L-
DRAFT
Su
'ember 25, 1991
e 4 of 7
Growth Management Act. All such analysis shall be integrated with ongoing
environmental assessment by the CIty of Yelm of its entire proposed urban growth area,
POPULATIQN GROWfH
The e,l.s shall forecast and analyze the reasonably anticipated population growth rate of
Yelm for the next twenty years Forecasts issued by the Office of Financial Management
and Thurston County pursuant to the Growth Management Act may be considered in
';eparing the e Ls. The analysis shall address impacts upon urban and rural population
'Nth in the vicinity and the region
PUBLIC SERVICES. FACILITIES AND UTILITIES
The e i s, shall include an inventory of existing public services, facilities and utilities
available to serve the Property wIthin and in the vicinity of the City of Yelm. The demand
for each service and facility resulting from development of the Property and various
means for meeting such demand shall be analyzed At minimum, facilities and services
to be considered must include public schools and education (K-12), fire protection, police
protection, sidewalks, streets and highways, parks and public recreation, electricity supply
systems, telephone communications, emergency response communications, water supply
and distribution systems; wastewater collection and treatment systems, stormwater
collection and treatment systems, solid waste collection, recycling, and disposal systems,
and natural gas distribution.! Where applicable, such analysis shall include thfUiem.aLld_
placed upon personnel, operations and management,_c.ommunicatron~, vehIcles, andLor
,bUITaln s of the City of Yelm and alte.r.oatrves for mitigating such demand, Alternative
. locations for sling such facilities associated With development of the PropertY shall De
~
CONCURRENT DELIVERY QF PWBLlQ $ERVICE$
I
The e.i.s shall include an analysis of means of achieving and financing concurrent
construction of public facilities and delivery of public services in accordance with the
requirements of the Gromh Management Act. Such analysis shall address the current
revenue and expense budget of the City of Yelm, and clearly identify various means
available for timely funding of facilities and services required as a result of development
The e.l.s. shall identify, categorize and analyze the impacts upon agricultural lands, forest
lands and mineral resource lands as defined in the Growth Management Act and
> regulations promulgated pursuant thereto which are within the Property and, at minimum,
;;\' wIthin 300 feet of the Property, or of the Property. Pending plans and ordinances of the
~. City of Yelm or Thurston County should be utilized in identification of such lands The
e,l.s. shall set forth various means of mitigating impacts upon such lands in the vicinity
of proposed urban development.
';".~- .
.I,
ij.
-I ~;
"
"
! '
f.
~
~f
--to
)
,
-4\
~
"
,
:.,
l'U Y ....V, -'.I. -' VV I,U VV':"" I VV
o
o
Mr. Su
November 25, 1991
Page 5 of 7
DRAFT
of the Property and as a result of other development associated with the proposal, such
as "spin-off" commercial development.
NATURAL RESOURCE LANDS.
CRITICAL AREAS
The e i s. shall identify, categonze and analyze the impacts upon wetlands, critical aquifer
recharge areas, fish and wildlife habitat, frequently flooded areas, and geologically
hazardous as defined in the Growth Management Act and regulations promulgated
pursuant thereto which are located within or in the vicinity of the Property pending plans
and ordinances of the City of Yelm or Thurston County should be utilized in identification
of such lands. The e.i.s. shall set forth various means of mitigating impacts upon such
critical areas
QPEN SPACE CORRIDQRS
"
The e Ls shall include an analysis of open space corridors approprrate for recreation,
wildlife habitat, trails, and critical areas associated with each alternative and vanous means
of preserving each type of corridor Such corridors may be located within or between
urban growth areas,
''\
t
AFFORDABLE HOUSING
>,i
l
I'
..
i!
The e Ls shall include an estimate of anticipated energy consumption for each alternative
This estimate shall include off-site transportation as well as on-site consumption Energy
supply sources to be analyzed should include natural gas, petroleum, coal, nuclear and
l.-
I
~
o
"", "':' q.y v 6 ' ,",.1.
,;:..) y.... .ltiU VVL. ,I . Y.I
''f!~
Mr Su
November 25, 1991
Page 6 of 7
Uj{At:~f
hydroelectric power, solar, wood fuel and other feasible sources Various mitigation
measures should be analyzed with an emphasis upon conservation
AIR QUALITY
The e Ls, shall describe the current air quality within the vicinity of the Property and
analyze impacts to such air quality resulting from development of the Property under each
alternative. In addition, Impacts upon general air quality in the region shall be addressed
Various impact mitigation measures, including minimization of vehicular hydrocarbon
emissions and limitations upon wood fuel use, shall be included within the e is.
WATER QUALITY AND QUANTITY
The e.Ls. shall describe the current quality and quantity of the hydroelectric system within
and In the vicinity of the Property and the locations of all associated streams, ponds or
lakes, and aquifers Anticipated impacts upon both quality and quantity of ground and
surtace water shall be analyzed and various mitigation measures addressed
NOISE
The e I s, shall describe the noise anticipated to be generated by development of the
Property under each alternative and the likely receptors of such noise. The e i s shall
also describe the current level and timing of noise generated by adjacent land uses and
likely receptors within the Property In particular, a noise reception analysis shall be
required for weapons testing activities conducted upon the Fort Lewis Reservation
including, If possible, empirical sampling of such noise at a variety of locations within the
Property and for comparison in the vicinity
I.RANSPORT A TION
The e.i s shall include a description of the existing transportation system in the vicinity of
the Property, including all modes of travel An analysis of impacts upon this system and
internal circulation of traffic within the Property shall be prepared for each alterative
Particular locations and timing of anticipated traffic congestion shall be identified, along
with facility improvements required to alleviate such congestion Various means of
mitigating traffic and transportatIon Impacts shall be addressed, including mass transit and
",,'~'" ';:;:r~'f?I'7~''l;.
I'tU V ........,;:).1. ;:J...J....J l'iU VV":::' I V0
o
o
;
Mr. Su
November 25, 1991
Page 7 of 7
DRAFT
transportation demand management strategies. This transportation study and analysis
shall be coordinated with the on-going transportation study and planning effort of the City
of Yelm and shall include an integrable data format. Any transportation and traffic studies
being conducted by the Washington Department of Transportation and/or Thurston
County shall also be considered.
CONCLUSION
Consistent with intent of the State Environmental Policy Act and regulations promulgated
thereunder, the proponent is directed to focus the e i s upon those areas where
significant environmental impacts are anticipated The City has identified compliance with
the Growth Management Act, concurrent construction and delivery of public facilities and
services, transportation, urban boundaries and population growth as areas requiring
special attention
The staff of the City of Yelm will be available for regular and periodic consultation with the
preparer of the e I.s. to refine the scope of the e,l.s. and to ensure compliance with this
letter.
Very truly yours,
OWENS D~S MACKIE
Q~~
By Todd Stamm
'lal\\ll\\i~lm'oop.4Il\1
c~
c8
OWENS DAVIES MACKIE
A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CORPORATION
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
FRANK J, OWENS
ARTHUR L. DAVIES
JOHN V LYMAN
ALEXANDER W. MACKIE-
RICHARD G. PHILLIPS. JR
BRIAN L. BUDS BERG
MICHAEL W. MAYBERRY
ROBERT F HAUTH p,S.
926 - 24TH WAY S W.
POST OFFICE BOX 187
OLYMPIA, WASHINGTON 98507
(206) 943-8320
BURTON R. JOHNSON (970)
JON E. CUSHMAN
KIRK M. VEIS
TODD M STAMM..
CYNTHIA D LABRANCHE
-ALSO ADMITTED IN WASHINGTON, O.C.
-A'-SO ADMITTED IN IDAHO
TELECOpl ER
(206) 943-6150
TELECOPY /FAX TRANSMITTAL COVER SHEET
TO
Gene Borges
DATE
November 26, 1991
City of Yelm
FAX NO 458-4348
FROM Todd Stamm
OUR CLIENT City of Yelm
NUMBER OF PAGES
7
(cover sheet not included)
DOCUMENT(S) SENT
Impact Statement
Draft of letter to Dennis Su regarding Scope of Environmental
SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS
If you do not receive all copies, or if any are not legible, please call Linda Feldtman at
(206) 943-8320
OUR FAX NUMBER IS (206) 943-6150
.- ,
CO
00
OWENS DAVIES MACKIE
A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CORPORATION
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
FRANK J, OWENS
ARTHUR L. DAVIES
JOHN V LYMAN
ALEXANDER W. MACKIE*
RICHARD G PHILLIPS JR.
BRIAN L. BUDSBERG
MICHAEL W. MAYBERRY
ROBERT F HAUTH P S.
9Z6 - Z4TH WAY S.W
POST OFFICE BOX 187
OL.YMPIA. WASHINGTON 98S07
(206) 943-8320
BURTON R JOHNSON (19701
JON E. CUSHMAN
KIRK M VEIS
TODD M STAMM"
CYNTHIA D, LABRANCHE
-ALSO AOMITTEO IN WASHINGTON, C.C.
-ALSO AOMITTE:O IN ICAHO
TELECOPY /FAX TRANSMITTAL COVER SHEET
TELECO PI ER
IZ061 943-61S0
TO
Dennis T Su
DATE
November 25, 1991
FAX NO 443-5372
FROM Todd M Stamm
OUR CLIENT City of Yelm
NUMBER OF PAGES
8
(cover sheet not included)
DOCUMENT(S) SENT
cover letter
Draft of letter re Scope of Environmental Impact Statement and
SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS
If you do not receive all copies, or if any are not legible, please call Linda Feldtman at
(206) 943-8320
OUR FAX NUMBER IS (206) 943-6150
c~
00
OWENS DAVIES MACKIE
A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CORPORATION
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
FRANK.J OWENS
ARTHUR L. DAVIES
.JOHN V LYMAN
ALEXANDER W MACKIE'
RICHARD G PHILLIPS .JR
BR]AN L. BUDSBERG
MICHAEL W MAYBERRY
ROBERT F HAUTH P S
926 - 24TH WAY S W
BURTON R. .JOHNSON (1970)
.JON E. CUSHMAN
K]RK M VEIS
TODD M' STAMM"
CYNTH]A D LABRANCHE
POST OFFICE BOX 187
OLYMPIA, WASHINGTON 98507
(206) 943-8320
*ALSO ADMITTED IN WASHINGTON, D.C.
uALSO ADMITTED IN IDAHO
TELECOPIER
(206) 943-6]SO
November 25, 1991
VIA TELEFAX 443-5372
Dennis T Su, AlA
1917 First Avenue
Seattle, WA 98101
RE Thurston Highlands Annexation
Dear Mr Su
Accompanying this letter is a draft of the environmental impact statement
scoping letter being prepared for the Thurston Highlands annexation and
zoning to Yelm This draft is provided as a courtesy to assist in your
selection and contract arrangements with a statement preparer You may
comment on this draft as you see fit. We expect to issue the final scoplng
letter within the next two days
Should you have any comments or questions, please do not hesitate to
contact me directly
Very truly yours,
OWENS DAVIES MACKIE
/4:54
~
By Todd Stamm
TS/lf
Enclosure
stamm\su25.1et
00
00
November 25, 1991
Thurston Highlands
Attn Dennis Su
1917 First Avenue
Seattle, WA 98101
Q\l~~"\
RE: Scope of Environmental Impact Statement
Dear Mr Su,
This letter outlines the required scope of the environmental impact statement (the e is)
for annexation and zoning of that property described in the scoping notice of October 22,
1991 The following instructions regarding the scope of the e i s are provided to you, the
proponent, by the City pursuant to WAC 197-11-08 As the proponent, you are
responsible in all respects for ensuring that an adequate e i s is prepared in accordance
with this letter and other applicable standards
The following summary of reasonable alternatives, probable adverse impacts and
mitigation measures represents a required minimum scope of the e i s, At your discretion
you may include such other information as you deem appropriate including beneficial
environmental impacts In all respects the e i s to be submitted shall conform with the
requirements of this letter and with the State Environmental Policy Act (Chapter 43 21 C
RCW), administrative regulations promulgated thereunder (Chapter 197-11 WAC), and
adopted policies and procedures of the City of Yelm
ALTERNATIVES
The e i s, shall analyze the proposal by way of comparative evaluation with the three other
reasonable alternatives described below Each of the four alternatives shall be presented
and analyzed as required by WAC 197-011-440(5) Each alternative shall Include
identification of the location and scale of land uses, transportation corridors, utility
corridors, recreation sites, school sites, wastewater treatment sites, stormwater collection
~! t:rveJ II/cd sf /
Jo
r
-.JIA..
74,veo! Irf~)r/
hLy~
08
00
Mr Su
November 25, 1991
Page 2 of 7
~~~
09.r
facilities, and any solid waste disposal sites. Each alternative shall be analyzed for
conformance with the Comprehensive Plan of Yelm, the Thurston County Comprehensive
Plan, and the proposed Yelm / Thurston County Joint Plan Each alternative shall be
refined during preparation of the e i s and described in more detail within the e i s
Alternative 1 - No Action
The "no action" alternative shall include the following features
No part of the Property will be annexed to Yelm except those areas identified for
"immediate annexation" by the proposed Yelm / Thurston County Joint Plan
The land use zoning of the Property will remain as currently zoned by Thurston
County or as such zoning is amended by Thurston County during preparation of
the e i s
The Property will be developed in accordance with the Thurston County
Comprehensive Plan and county zoning to the extent reasonably anticipated over
a twenty-year period Reasonably anticipated amendments to county plans and
regulations may be considered in describing anticipated development.
Any lands required by law to be reserved for rural uses or preserved for
environmental reasons shall be assumed to remain in their current use, any
forestry lands shall be assumed to be replanted for timber production
Alternative 2 - The Proposal
The "proposal" alternative shall describe the proponent's proposal in detail including a
reasonably anticipated schedule of development. The proposal shall be substantially as
set forth at the scoping meeting but may be refined and modified as the e i s is prepared
The proposal should not substantially exceed a total of 3400 housing units and 60 acres
of commercial development.
Alternative 3 - The Compact Proposal
The "compact proposal" shall be a modified version of the proposal incorporating the
following features
Additional open space in the vicinity of environmentally sensitive areas, productive
natural resource lands, and the Fort Lewis Reservation
08
00
DRAfT
Mr Su
November 25, 1991
Page 3 of 7
Higher densities of development in proposed residential areas
An urban area approximately one-half the size of that in the proposal with more
intensive utilization of the proposed urban area.
Generally the same number of housing units, the commercial area, and the same
rate of development as the proposal
Alternative 4 - The Village
The "village" alternative shall be a modified version of the proposal incorporating the
following features
A land use mix and pattern within the Property designed to provide employment
opportunities and meet daily product and service needs of residents
Opportunities for non-automobile modes of transportation
Employment opportunities which focus upon commercial offices and similar non-
industrial land uses
Enterprises providing daily or convenience goods and services which are limited
to a size and type meeting the demands of residents of the Property
The "village" may incorporate features of the "compact version" alternative
ADVERSE IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
The significant impacts of each alterative shall be analyzed and reasonable mitigation
measures discussed At minimum, the i e s should include a comparative analysis of the
following subjects
URBAN AREA
The e i s shall address the appropriate size of the urban area of Yelm and alternative
urban growth area boundaries in the vicinity of the Property Analysis of urban area
boundaries should include examination of the relationship to the existing urbanized area
and the feasibility of serving proposed urban areas with urban services as defined in the
cr:J
00
DRAfT
Mr Su
November 25, 1991
Page 4 of 7
Growth Management Act. All such analysis shall be integrated with ongoing
environmental assessment by the City of Yelm of its entire proposed urban growth area,
POPULATION GROWTH
The e i s, shall forecast and analyze the reasonably anticipated population growth rate of
Yelm for the next twenty years, Forecasts issued by the Office of Financial Management
and Thurston County pursuant to the Growth Management Act may be considered in
preparing the e i s, The analysis shall address impacts upon urban and rural population
growth in the vicinity and the region
PUBLIC SERVICES. FACILITIES AND UTILITIES
The e i s, shall include an inventory of existing public services, facilities and utilities
available to serve the Property within and in the vicinity of the City of Yelm The demand
for each service and facility resulting from development of the Property and various
means for meeting such demand shall be analyzed At minimum, facilities and services
to be considered must include public schools and education (K-12), fire protection, police
protection, sidewalks, streets and highways, parks and public recreation, electricity supply
systems, telephone communications, emergency response communications, water supply
and distribution systems, wastewater collection and treatment systems, stormwater
collection and treatment systems, solid waste collection, recycling, and disposal systems,
and natural gas distribution Where applicable, such analysis shall include the demand
placed upon personnel, operations and management, communications, vehicles, and/or
buildings of the City of Yelm and alternatives for mitigating such demand Alternative
locations for siting such facilities associated with development of the Property shall be
identified
CONCURRENT DELIVERY OF PUBLIC SERVICES
The e i s shall include an analysis of means of achieving and financing concurrent
construction of public facilities and delivery of public services in accordance with the
requirements of the Growth Management Act. Such analysis shall address the current
revenue and expense budget of the City of Yelm, and clearly identify various means
available for timely funding of facilities and services required as a result of development
cr:J
00
Mr Su
November 25, 1991
Page 5 of 7
RAFT
of the Property and as a result of other development associated with the proposal, such
as "spin-off" commercial development.
NATURAL RESOURCE LANDS
The e i s, shall identify, categorize and analyze the impacts upon agricultural lands, forest
lands and mineral resource lands as defined in the Growth Management Act and
regulations promulgated pursuant thereto which are within the Property and, at minimum,
within 300 feet of the Property, or of the Property Pending plans and ordinances of the
City of Yelm or Thurston County should be utilized in identification of such lands The
e i s, shall set forth various means of mitigating impacts upon such lands in the vicinity
of proposed urban development.
CRITICAL AREAS
The e i s, shall identify, categorize and analyze the impacts upon wetlands, critical aquifer
recharge areas, fish and wildlife habitat, frequently flooded areas, and geologically
hazardous as defined in the Growth Management Act and regulations promulgated
pursuant thereto which are located within or in the vicinity of the Property Pending plans
and ordinances of the City of Yelm or Thurston County should be utilized in identification
of such lands The e i s shall set forth various means of mitigating impacts upon such
critical areas
OPEN SPACE CORRIDORS
The e i s shall include an analysis of open space corridors appropriate for recreation,
wildlife habitat, trails, and critical areas associated with each alternative and various means
of preserving each type of corridor Such corridors may be located within or between
urban growth areas
AFFORDABLE HOUSING
The e i s shall include an estimate of anticipated energy consumption for each alternative
This estimate shall include off-site transportation as well as on-site consumption Energy
supply sources to be analyzed should include natural gas, petroleum, coal, nuclear and
cr:J
00
Mr Su
November 25, 1991
Page 6 of 7
D~(Af1T
hydroelectric power, solar, wood fuel and other feasible sources Various mitigation
measures should be analyzed with an emphasis upon conservation
AI R QUALITY
The e Ls. shall describe the current air quality within the vicinity of the Property and
analyze impacts to such air quality resulting from development of the Property under each
alternative In addition, impacts upon general air quality in the region shall be addressed
Various impact mitigation measures, including minimization of vehicular hydrocarbon
emissions and limitations upon wood fuel use, shall be included within the e i s
WATER QUALITY AND QUANTITY
The e i s, shall describe the current quality and quantity of the hydroelectric system within
and in the vicinity of the Property and the locations of all associated streams, ponds or
lakes, and aquifers, Anticipated impacts upon both quality and quantity of ground and
surface water shall be analyzed and various mitigation measures addressed
NOISE
The e i s shall describe the noise anticipated to be generated by development of the
Property under each alternative and the likely receptors of such noise The e i s shall
also describe the current level and timing of noise generated by adjacent land uses and
likely receptors within the Property In particular, a noise reception analysis shall be
required for weapons testing activities conducted upon the Fort Lewis Reservation
including, if possible, empirical sampling of such noise at a variety of locations within the
Property and for comparison in the vicinity
TRANSPORTATION
The e i s, shall include a description of the existing transportation system in the vicinity of
the Property, including all modes of travel An analysis of impacts upon this system and
internal circulation of traffic within the Property shall be prepared for each alterative
Particular locations and timing of anticipated traffic congestion shall be identified, along
with facility improvements required to alleviate such congestion Various means of
mitigating traffic and transportation impacts shall be addressed, including mass transit and
cr:J
00
Mr Su
November 25, 1991
Page 7 of 7
DRAFT
transportation demand management strategies This transportation study and analysis
shall be coordinated with the on-going transportation study and planning effort of the City
of Yelm and shall include an integrable data format. Any transportation and traffic studies
being conducted by the Washington Department of Transportation and/or Thurston
County shall also be considered
CONCLUSION
Consistent with intent of the State Environmental Policy Act and regulations promulgated
thereunder, the proponent is directed to focus the e i s, upon those areas where
significant environmental impacts are anticipated The City has identified compliance with
the Growth Management Act, concurrent construction and delivery of public facilities and
services, transportation, urban boundaries and population growth as areas requiring
special attention
The staff of the City of Yelm will be available for regular and periodic consultation with the
pre parer of the e i s, to refine the scope of the e i s, and to ensure compliance with this
letter
Very truly yours,
OWENS D~~S MACKIE
Q~~
By Todd Stamm
stamm \yelmscop.stm
o
o
~I /1 1''; ,,:;
/' l; , ~ "I'"
" " 111V
-~'" . hJ,c , II \
/1' i._liS
I
Duane Berentson
Secretary of Transportation
""
~
Washington State
Department of Transportation
District 3 Headquarters
5720 Capitol Boulevard KT-11
Olympia, Washington 98504-7440
(206) 357-2600
November 14, 1991
Gene Borges
City of Yelm
105 Yelm Avenue W.
P.O. Box 479
Yelm, Wa. 98597
SR 507 MP 27 Vicinity
Yelm Annexation
E.C. File No. 91647-T
Dear Mr. Borges:
We have received your request for review of the above proposal and offer the following
comment:
While the annexation alone does not have a significant impact on traffic, development
of this area will have an impact on both SR 510 (the main link to Olympia, Lacey and
1-5) and SR 507 (the main link to Fort Lewis East Gate). The Department would
appreciate the opportunity to review this proposal in more detail as the annexed
portion becomes developed.
Thank you for the opportunity to review this prop'osal. If there are any questions regarding
our comments, please contact Mike Hoffman at (206) 357-2644, ext,473.
Sincerely,
PAULA J. HAMMOND, P.E.
Transportation Planning Engineer
District 3
~oI~
By: DEAN W MOBERG, P.E.
Local Programs Manager
District 3
PJCH/DWM:mrh
MRH
o
o
f elm
105 Yelm Avenue West
POBox 479
Yelm, Washinqton 98597
206-458-3244
November 20, 1991
}'aLlla liCiffilnOnd, P. E.
Transportation Planning
5720 Capitol Boulevard,
Olympia, WA 98504-7440
Engineer, District 3
KT-11
Dear Ms. Hammond:
In response to your letter of November 14 and your request
that DOT have the opportunity to review the annexation
referred to in your letter as SR 507 MP 27 Vicinity Yelm
Annexation E.C. File No. 91647-T, Gene Borges requested
tha t I inform you that he plans to include you in
meetings and will contact you at the appropriate time.
Sincerely,
{lgAitd iJCJfr< i.
Agnes P. Colombo
Deputy City Clerk
o
o
AGENDA
THURSTON HIGHLANDS ANNEXATION
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
SCOPING MEETING
7:00 p.m. - Wednesday, November 13, 1991
City Council Chambers - Yelm City Hall
Presiding Official - Gene Borges, City Administrator
(1) Statement of Meeting Purpose - Gene Borges, City Administrator
(2) Description of Proposal - Dennis Su of Land Use & Development Consultation for
Thurston Highlands Associates
(3) Summary of Alternatives and Impacts Identified by City - Todd Stamm, City Attorney
(4) Comment Period - Opportunity for public and agencies to address proposed scope
of environmental impact statement.
stamm \yelm.agn
C<)
) '-l
City of YellD
105 Yelm Avenue W~sfJ) ~ ~ fi n \\'),~ r',
PO.Box479 If\(' .,~ _t.
Yelm, Washington 98S..9~' fL~ I
206-458-3244 no V 1 2 1991 ;.;;;.p
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
,. 7.
1,.
) 8.
9.
AGEWA OWENS DAVIES MACKIE
CITY' OF YEIM REGUI..AR a:xJOCIL MEE'!'IN;
WEDNESDAY, NJVEM3ER 13, 1991, 7:30 EM, YEIM CITY HALL COON::IL OIAMBERS
Call to Order
Roll Call
Selection of Mayor P:ro-TeIIlfOre for November 13, 1991
Additions/Deletions to agenda
Agenda approval
Approval of minutes of October 23, 1991 Regular Council Meeting
Approval of vouchers numbered:
Thurston Highlands Annexation "Scoping" Meeting (7:00 EM, November 13)
City of Lacey - City of Yelm Sister City Signing Ceremony
NEW BUSINESS:
a. Sale of Surplus Property
b. Structure on city owned property on Railroad Street
c.
10. OLD BUSINESS:
a. City of Yelm/Centralia Agreerrent for Power Canal/Yelm Sewage
Treatment Facility
b. Yelm Planning Carmission items of 10-22-91:
1. Putt-Putt Golf Course proposal
2. Gordon Kampfer - Use of alley
3. Erranuel Lutheral Church - Use of alley
c.
11. REroRTS:
a. Yelm Parks Advisory Coomittee Meeting of 11-5-91 re: Christmas
in the Park
b. Yelm Historic Preservation Comnission rreeting of 11-6-91
c. Growth Managerrent WJrk update
d.
e.
12. CORRESPONDENCE:
. a. Letter from Ed Kenney
b. Viacan Cable correspondence
c. Viacan holiday video taping
d. Timberland Regional Library Board of Trustees Meeting 9-25-91
e.
13. ADJOURN
NEXT REGULAR MEETINi OF 'llIE YEIM CITY a:xJOCIL
TUESDAY, KlVEM3ER 26, 1991, 7:30 EM
0 ,~ 0
- ...,;
.'
/l P(Il, 1!- rJvq /, i.lJjA4~j I!].:J--.:.-Ib!fi IU1/}{/h (rzJo/J~
--- /flj'J6'xdft/J- {Jtnh(}({LO l!&
-- G:hJL Ct2yrLLftr aU?!if,Ft/m <<OS-rn:
L'l2tJ, I77s v ()I7JYt I t? k' --1:1. ~ ~ 17 IJ7-
~ 110 WIilff-2:d:;dLci~-JJ-1ULC-~~6=
t(J]L!LL~ . . '
-
_&vb - ~ w/-l:x Ci/I/) zifL /tc~LL c(
-- ~t(r;/&uLG/ eJ;,Q Od:Jf70 9u7 () Oh5ui f7?/~
~ 2M, t'f;O-h;I/?t:-/)1T~~ , fh ~
, IL>& r fwJ'C{ yJ-j2e Ct.-all ~L ' ~mf t.md'l5>0
7t-X -;t-0',t-~~YL~ ) ;d~vw/ r-tP7~C0~-
---U2~'L J '" '//!7S ltl,-/l 'fj ~ {Yl <,t>,
tL~.
D' .~, 115,?Lm /YLe d il~m '1 (J(!Y!6:1/L/LlCv/J 0-
_ ., .{LlJj()12-
~~ - ~lAlorsnOc/ q~Yl( /)60
- It i/tJ-{t7 tzd au C77 I
'J _
Jr~J2 L~1Iat1tS,a
~ YJnF <5~ u t'(14<LC Wu:WU :i!&;'712!ojd t:2ll1'6t LZZI7
aJrU~hCV1~ ib
-~~~~<c.s - &i~{)~_pcJl{ u I_#n
'"
O -~
,- ~~
o
- Ihvu Q/u., Ci/C:LU.I-L~_' !.f/){L!L2/) LG~C:.C \)
. I
- Jnfp,&~l-;{/l1a. err; . ./~ICIJITz~
1)/7 / 1'11L~l(/ !Wili~,
c_ Wcb_c.{xl./ O~C0.- /A/?t1ank:0 &/2(/1 rC77 ---
. /
m U/J tliu./7 A 17 5/17 I/t- /' -rv // / . AL j /' j
~ U/---L- p_~ ,-:g-l.Lc..J/-UI':"'(..::J/!-Ldd~.
B/41112 ~W;/) (, J11Ct,LA.l?bl TaL
-- ~v'~ _J!kJt/){2<'--/d ~~1c7'?/J/).elv! u//l/-
/ ~----:1- _0.1.... 1- 7 ,
. '1& k.~ae:!17 d a iXJ'? 7 ~ ft:'f= 4Ct&L~A t7Jl/!S~_
lQ/Jel Ul VA ~ liUN . eLm ;;tc?:; - .
- ib L-rf-kJ ()/ ~ ~atqr- ~-P-s-dv~0 ~;f I
al-r~-tUvti{)-p-{2J~1I/L ~
, ~yce .
_J;1 L4/l LdfAA/ t~~ ,J-L~mt5 fi &tv f;1.5. ~_
. /IV!-~~Ud~ f C0u-~tk4i~12 '0-0
..::Dl ad _a{;tka~/Y, ~ I. -
~5
7~
! 7r- t2 I /L{2{)
-gfff '.~
.r*
-rwlGu
VV _ /
~'ej\(Y-fnh?:vC f-o/eJ ul Ct.a~7-
..~.tI/MJ-Ln%~lM2.;;lS-
L--
-~14 pt1lfA _ / !/t1!1!/1/w !<2M7fu.Jl.<> JcuJ/ t/tt1.t.A - p(UYJPU-?[.?t/Y<J
, . ..f!:t.l'?l ~ l.iJ'i;;l'M.uCk yL1/at,
~t~{;lJif .~ (Sf / )22c7L. (If7/! IHbTL7./.-Qj Jut,y.C/)/LP~
l!;~J.--1)~ -.%. Aomf/2':J nil , -:J.dL C. I u/;J~/}~el.~~'
v CJ!:1'r-fl? pjj " ~,~ ?-/!t:u (:.0 ~ . ()/ --"- .
nf..L .1/116 j 0 /77. k ,,,-,C - JDh ~ / r "~, f/h.{//7J - 8-c0:hc.--l.;.. ,
-~li~:t -b-r-I./t)}:r-Y-?":7.V-1 0. 6d:U:U'~tLL--"<-7 ," ~f
v~e/~ ~/
,,[It'" tf/J
j@ '~-~, 0 CdLL'5~ 1&/
~v10uf2- -/10 ~~ 11/7-
~ /' 5' 0ud,4U2~ /fl0~ 6~/-vcuu! b-?04/:tId/tJpmf:.~r
/J~5 7-
- . fl(;. !25:tr&_l;l! !u6.7!lcufi_j2&!c:i.trtftl 2 ~sZh.?
_ _ !..~Jifl3;_I---LTh~tz6L ~~ MIf hifZkMLJ ,
-7ic14. )
~ --- Ar:tdf- /' ~") ~d3~~~ /'
~
C>
..
o~'
u
- \
_ FR~M! THURSTON CO PLANN I NG () TO
~~ ~! - ~
205 458 4348
NOlJ /) 1991 8 35AM 1:1057 P 01
\,
THURSTON COUNTY
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
FAX TRANSMITTAL SHEET
TO:
( ,\ ,-.-- ".)
~ \.. r, '\ ", ')
-~, .. \ r-)~\ ,(. . J
, __). ~ ' \ Q -' ., ) ,\ ~_. ;OJ- -
" -,' \
"-\ II (\,\ - \\.- {\\\
'\ . \. J.J \1-., . <' . \, L ,\ (\ .: - 1.- ~j ).,
, \
,\
FAX PHONE: t -\ c_)r~(_ I. \ )},r'iCONTACT PHONE..
FROM'
i2 ~~1 \_\j.~;<\ (-, ". \r\\" (I. ~ ' < "
FAX PHONE: {206) 754-4413 CONTACT PHONE: (206) 786-5554
111ere are a total of , ~.~~~.... ~ pages, including this one.
~ \L\X-', \ <: \
, , :;. . , ." ," '. '\, ( 'c , I.
" '., \ \\;\ . - \. -\,-~., \., '.~ \" I'. ).,
, \
,
,,\ Q_ c-\....i,..
.\\- ) ~ \ \ (\ \.i \' k
,,j
\ 0, 1'\ ~." \ . \ ~- \
J
\ \ \ \ ~-l \ r ~ ,
\ \ \ \ "') \ '':\ \ ~
\ ,. \ \
\ ': . ~ \, \ \ \. " '\ '~")- J _ \ .
s... 'h _ '\ t' 1\. ,il.__ \-( 1.'~I\ \-~
, j
,.\ \ (
C-'_.5'l"l: )"\ \.', ;..,c,- v ... 'Q
- ". \
. ~.....
~ '." . '.
., ,\...... r~
,,-,_" I."
--\ I"~ " ~,\ ,,\ -" ~
~\\ \ '\
\\"''''-\(,) C\\-',-"\.
\ i
. ".
-f , ( ,,,"}, >.
~ ,.. (
\. \ - \ ",. ("'\.., \
,
'\
IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL PAGES~ CALL THE ABOVE CONTACT
PHONE NUMBER.
I)-I-irell IU 1J,:"JvI Ful
FROM THURSTON CO PLANNING
OTO
206 458 4348
NOU () 1 g~~ _ 8 35AM tt0~~^ ~ P 0~
George L Barner, Jr
District One
Piflne 01,tnlllel1
Di5trict Two
Le.'i Eldridge
District Three
,/
THURSTON COUNTY
~1INIlJ1_"~_"'''''~
Sl NeE ISH
PLANNING DEPARTMEN1'
':'12II1II&
November 13, 1991
Harolel Rohertson, AleI'
PIClnning Dil'e\~tnl'
Gene Borges
City of Yelm
105 Yelm Avenue
P.O. Box 479
Yelm, W A 98579
Dear Mr. Borges.
SUBJECT Thurston Highland Annexation, Environmental Impact Statement (EIS),
SCOpl ng Comme.nts.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the scope of the EIS for the proposed
Thurston Highlands annexatIOn. Thurston County agrees with the areas identified for
analysis in the ETS, and commend you for such a thorough idc,ntlfication of issues. We
trust that this thoroughness will set the stage for a complete environmental analysis that
wlll clearly analyze the potentIal environmental effects due to this annexation A solid
environmental analysis should provld6 declslOnrnakers with the necessary mformatlOn
on which to judge the merits of the annexatIOn proposal.
As you have discussed with our staff, Thurston County is interested in playing an active
role, In helping Yelm prepare the ElS. We believe the most appropriate way to
accomplish that objective would be for Thurston County to be (o-lead agency on the EIS
as allowed in WAC 197-11-944 of the SEPA Rules, wIth the CIty of Yelm actmg as the
nominal lead agency. The County's role would be to participate in the agency meetings
WIth the applIcant and/or theIr consultants, to review and comment on the scope of work
and all drafts of the studies to be incorporated into the EIS, and to review and comment
on all drafts of the EIS itself. The desued re$ult IS for the city's EIS to be supportable
by Thurston County. As nominal lead, however, the City of Yelm will have the final
say on any areas of dispute with the county
Acting as co-lead agencies on this EIS provides a number of oppoJ1Unittes for both the
City of Yelm and Thurston County. A few of these are outlined as follows:
2000 Lakeridge Drive SW, Olympia, \Vashingwn 98502-6045 (206) 786-5'>54
<I
fl,:'('Y"l~rl Ph!",,,
11-1 -'-II 11111"..\1,/[ Fllw
FROM THURSTON CO PLANNING
o TO
206 458 4348
NOlJ ;'-\ 1991 8 36AM l:t057 P m
'\J
/
~
Mr. Borges
Page 2
November 13, 1991
1) Thurston County and the CIty of Yelm will be able to maintalO and foster a
cooperative working relationshIp as encouraged by the Growth Management Act.
2) Thurston County has experience in preparmg EIS' for planned communities (Le.,
Hawks Prairie and Meridian Campus planned communities) Approved
annexations and master plans have resulted.
3) Thurston County has worked closely with many of the agencies, orgamzations,
and tribes that would have an interest in this proposal. Having the County as a
"team participanf' could make negotiations with these interested parties proceed
more smoothl y.
4) Finally, the EIS would be a document supported by Thurston County due to the
active partIcIpatIOn in the preparatlOn process.
As co-lead agency on preparation of the document, the County expects that the applicant
would provide full compensation for staff tnne. The staff persons assigned to this
project are Paula Ehlers, Environmental Review Officer, and John Sonnen, Associate
Planner. They both can be reached at 786-5554.
We look forward to your reply.
Sincerely;
Harold Robertson, AICP, Planning Director
37:lb'lkb
cc: Board of County CommIssIOners
Tom Fitzsimmons
Fred Knostman
Paula Ehlers
John Sonnen
\ \ 1 -,~ 1 I I II" }',['.I\ F II
--~...~...-~_.- --
------
i
... ~. "~OM THURSTON CO PLANN] NGC :=) TO 99435150
NOU 01991 5 11PM t:l055 P 01
o
THURSTON COUNTY
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
FAX TRANSMITTAL SHEET
TO
~AA~ ~ !fur 1:-1'<2--
FROM.
FAX PHONE: 9117 - () (50 CONTACT lP'~01\TF
C-~.)
j- tUA.~ ~ l:~~
FAX PHONE (206) 754-4413 CONTACT PHONE: (206) 'Z86~5554
There are a total of
pagesj including thIS one.
./J,'l ;:;ayTJ
t~,A #- A./ (/ II 1-?
te; ttd -n ~ 7?/.-- 'I M,I I ~
ry/( u / 'ft1- ! FIV' /
COl\'iMENTS:
IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL PAGES, CALL THE ABOVE CO~TACT
PHONE NUMBER. I
<
(
a 0 19~~ _ 5 .1.1:~ .."0~~ ,:,~~
George L Barner, Jr
[)istl'ict Ol\l'
[)i~Ull Obc.rquell
Disuict T WI.)
LC5 Eldridge
District Three
THURSTt1N COUNTY
.\...~I__~"ILlJ'-"'.
81 r-;cr I8Sl
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
l::I..j~
Harold Rohertson, AICP
Planning l1irectllr
November 13, 1991
Gene Borges
City of Yelm
105 Yelm Avenue
P.G Box 479
Yelm, W A 98579
Dear Mr. Borges:
SUBJECT Thurston Highland Annexation, Environmental lmpac~ Statement (EIS);
Scoping Comments
Thank you for the opportumty to comment on the scope of the EIS for the proposed
Thurston Highlands annexation. Thurston County agrees with the areas identified for
analysis in the EIS, and commend YOll for such a thorough identification of issues. We
trust that this thoroughness will set the stage for a complete environmental analysis that
will clearly analyze the potenttal environmental effects due to this annexatIOn. A solid
environmental analysis should provlde decisionmakers with the necessary informatIon
on which to judge the ments of the annexation proposal.
As you have dIscussed wlth our staff, 111Orston County is interested in playing an active
role, in helping Yelm prepare the EIS. We believe the most appropriate way to
accomplish that objective would be fOf Thurston County to be co-lead agency on the EIS
as allowed in WAC 197-11-944 of the SErA Rules, with the City ofYelm acting a~ the
nominal lead agency The County's role would be to participate 111 the agency meetlrlgs
with the applicant and/or their consultants, to review and comment on the scope of work
and all drafts of the studieS to be mcorporated into the EIS, and to review and comment
on all drafts of the EIS itself. The deSired result is for the cIty's EIS to be supportable
by Thurston County. Ar:: nominal lead, however, the City of YeIm will have the final
say on any areas of dispute with the county
Acting as co-lead agenCIes on this EIS provides a number of opportunities for both the
City of YeIm and Thurston County A few of these are outlined as follows
2000 LakeriJge Drive SW, Olympi.\, Wa~hingwn 98502-604'> (206) 7Hf).SSS4
&}
Recycled 1"'1""
~
<l
~ROM THURSTON CO PLANNING ~ TO 99436150
NOl) 0 1991
o
5 11PM ~056 P 03
Mr. Borges
Page 2
November 13. 1991
1) Thurston County and the City of Yelm will be able to mamtam and foster a
cooperative working relationship as encouraged by the Growth Management Act.
2) Thurston County has experience m preparing EIS. for planned communities (i,e"
Hawks Prume and Meridian Campus planned communities). Approved
annexations and master plans have resulted.
3) Thurston County has worked closely wIth many of the agencies, organizations,
and tribes that would have an interest in this proposal. Having ahe County as a
"team participant" could make negotIatIOns with these mterested parties proceed
more smoothly
4) Finally, the EIS would be a document supported by Thurston County due to the
acti ve participatIon in the preparatton process
As co-lead agency on preparatIon of the document, the County expects that the applIcant
would provide full compensation for staff time. The staff persons aSSIgned to tlus
project are Paula Ehlers, Environmental Review Officer, and John Sonnen, Associate
Planner. They both can be reached at 786-5554.
We look forward to your reply
Sincerely,
Harold Robertson, AICP, Planning Director
31:1b\kb
cc: Board of County CommiSSIOners
Tom Fitzsnnmons
Fred Knostman
Paula Ehlers
John Sonnen
o
-\-\0 ~/.
")
WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF
Natural Resources
Gene Borges, City Administrator
City of Yelm
PO Box 479
Yelm WA 98597
.,
(9;;
Wor_ ~0V ~
q rOF is ,MOV\ 0
CA /6 Pt ~ ,. ~ -et1 J 0 oe-dJ
w 0 (~":1- W j'-Y0- }j (J lA-
CVV\- d. ~ ~ OV\ Y1'-..G
't'(AVI+ rro~
Scvv~ct~
( -)
November 1, 1991
4t>y
SUBJECT:
Proposed Annexation to the City of Yelm
(T17N ROlE 523,24,26,& 27)
We've searched the Natural Heritage Information System for information on rare
plants, high quality native wetlands and high quality native plant communities
in the vicinity of this proposed annexation We have a record of a high
quality native wetland and bog system in Sections 26 and 27, Township 17
North, Range 01 East This wetland system should be considered for protection
in the city's planning process
The Natural Heritage Information System is a cooperative effort between the
Department of Natural Resources' Washington Natural Heritage Program and the
Department of Wildlife's Nongame Program The Washington Natural Heritage
Program is responsible for information on the state's endangered, threatened,
and sensitive plants as well as high quality native plant communities and
wetlands The Nongame Program manages and interprets data on wildlife species
of concern in the state For information on animals of concern in the state,
please contact the Nongame Program, Washington Department of Wildlife,
Mail Stop GJ-ll, Olympia, WA 98504
The Natural Heritage Information System is not a complete inventory of
Washington's natural features Many areas of the state have never been
thoroughly surveyed There may be significant natural features in your study
area that we don't yet know about This response should not be regarded as a
final statement on the natural features of the areas being considered and
doesn't eliminate the need Oi~ responsibility for detailed on-site surveys
I hope you'll find this information helpful
Sincerely,
SO"-'Jcr I\~
Sandy Norwood, Environmental Review Coordinator
Washington Natural Heritage Program
Division of Land & Water Conservation
Mail Stop EX-13
Olympia, WA 98504
(206) 753-2449
SN'st
cc Dave Dietzman, DNR SEPA Center
Equal Opportunity / Affirmative Action Employer
(
en
c
a
'"
Q
CT
<I>
0.
'"
'"
0.
'"
==
o
:;
o
~ 10
<I>
3
<I>
~
::r
~.~
0' ur
"'0
z~
'CD 3
~sa.
~ff
c~
'-,"<
~Xl
a'"
:-.n
;8'
CD'"
'iil ~
')>!l
~s-
"_.,m
ei
o'
.~:.::I
~..~
0.
'Ill
,<,
.0
"f"~'I-
..,. ..'.:.'-f,
"j' ,.
s-
CD
co
c
.3
sa.
.'~,f:!'f't
l-'
I\)
W
==ct
::rCD
o' n
::r::r
"''''
gcg
I: Q.
::>-
-0
::r~
"'-
"'::r
aCD
CD-
CI) Q
::> CD
~~.
-'::>
c.ro
S'~
_I:
5..2:
C-[
o'
::>
.r
~ ~ Iv..> So
$' ';;j 1-1-
",0.
c '"
~i
~. 5'
gu
~ c
co '"
c. <'
c CD
~.~
::> '"
roc.c.
e.-'"
oS"<
_",0
Xl~-
_. ::r
ia: ?? Cl)
~~ ~ ,1'>= ~
....i "l
~.., -,
- ==.
s-Ill ,<
..'~
_CD
'c ro
-=1:'"
Q.1"g; ~
;;i. g~(D
cO.
~"; ~ 1\0 .0
o ,.",:i..~ - U ~ '.:)
9 ~__K.e- 5: -
c>> 8: "5- c.
c1) ~
'"
::>
0.
CD ."...,
'"
0.
S'
ro
n
o
::>
'"
CI)
n
?? ~.
'"' CD
o ==
8' lE
"l ""
.'"
el ~ ;!
~. ~ ei
'" f-'. s-
'" ...., CD
"0 f-'.
c () '"
g ~ 5
~ () ~
~ ro ~
~. g; iii'
Jg 0. D)
c: tj ~
~ ro g
_. ..0
1Il r:: n
c CD .g
CI) (J) '<
'" M
~ . 0
,~ 0' -
~ '1
S ()
-, 0
1-1- .; ~
-6 ro
~g
3 (J)
CD
;a
0'
~
t?
::0
l?
M
ro'
~
5'
III
M
f-'.
o
;:J,
o
d,,:,>
tl> :::;: () "0 ::;: 0-"0 0 0
- _.0 c: _."'C m - ~
s-~~.g~Q:S-S-
CDO:Jooo.(I)CDc.
a ~ ~ ~.:E ~ ~ ~~
Q ~~g ~ g,JgJJ g
~c.el"'Q.S-!!l.~$
_.a.Q)~::TG>::I=
o.S:~"'~(I)CD'<O::l
"2. 5' II> ~. cr;g ~ ~ 5-
~~ ~a~ ~-g a;=~
G> ='< CD ::J 0'''0,< '<
a2.~@Q;;;~:
-gXl~ct3g::>==~
0--'"0'" 0 ~c..wVl-
:: C. l>> .., ""_. ;:r C/J
~ =,,'1il ~ ~ :: el '" ~
-3~-::r::r ==_
g' : 5"~O ~ en g ~ ~
o '" ;! -g !!!. 8 ~ ~ iii'
- en c: C" ,x c: l>>
'8l11 iil i%' 3 ;a"O a: s-
o: a' g .s.g ~"a~ CD cr
~ E.()~~;:E ~-g ~ ~.
~ 5' g ::"0 -~ c. ~ /-1._ co
"C Q) ::I =r ~'.::r ~ .., M
~ :).~.Q) Q ';:+" 1>> -; ~
~ g:: ~o Cir <D'~
~'~~.'~]~ ;;
3 S' ::rc.'g a: ~
.~'5'~;~,;~.~ ~
g..'" 'g s,'~"O~
'" '" ","- ",.@l '0
~ '&. ~ :f:;:s.. ~ Ep
y:::
':~,
::>
CI)
::;:
'"
"0
'"
"0
~
o
::>
n
..
'"
==
'"
CI)
."..
n
o
3
3
CD
::>
n
S'
ro
o
::>
Q
.'"
"0
~
8:
OCfl
0....
c)>
~rri
s'!il
;!~
5;)>
"'Cfl
OJ:
"'-
Z
Gl
-i
o
Z
a
w
.....
...2-
'",
I!t
0.
3:
f-"
I-'
I-'
ro
'1
~~
'0.
.c
-<
~.-(/)
::;:
o
.:03
,0
~;::::I
i'Q~E~M'ltiir.~tiiO~}1ffEiS::~I;i';;iFtr;;tc,"" ; . '''''6,~!,.,~'''-'' :~'("
IFICANCE'AND REQUESTf.OR~actlonfdevelopment c;>Uheproperty'" ...,......,;,.,~t"t,. ';,:;,;i.f,;"" 'I' .
OMME,NT~ ,ON .SCOPE.OI;Iu;~1!lri'accor(jahce ,with 'cuirent,zOning~cP~OPosEO;-:",~,;~"'''r'':f';ti;":'~''+r,
N,VI~ONM,ENTAl.il, M'p,~CT~c'anneX!l!IO, "" a,nd zO(!lng'as .Pil:>P<?s, - ed,.'':',',~,,'', E?CA:,:no, N, ;'R:;,E, A~ ~L:: :0 :':,
,:,n_Jii~J~~~ro~~{~~~li;n"~~;:~~~'~~ci:r~~:re~~~~~~;~~~id~~,:;~ ~,;J~;t~: '" 4,,\t ~;8~"
, on to.the Clty.oIYelm;.1,870 acres<,m'ent'hicludingcomnierclal offjces!.' -::.,. ". ",,< ..:......:: , ,;:';.:L,~'
'f;'Ylng'soutl)w~steDyolthe Eurrent ci"o;,1den!i1ied lmpactst();~discu~sed '~?;;i~" ,;.'tJp.~~ "1r+it",
ti.ty IImits,!n all or pa,rts '?f!>e.stlon~23,)Jncl\,de urban"area. re,xP.I!Ds!on;'",'4:S ~o~-;{::, .. .' " .
t24, 26, a~d 27.C>1 TowrisliiP.17;!'Io~~,. ,'pop~lat iongro,:"th~ 'tren,qs;xa~,,~..I'~ '.l;
lRange'1.East'.Wi!ljlmell~ 'Me:idli'n:~ t1clp~tedde.ma,,~s;, lor. "p.~bIIE ;~~".;.
.,(See 'accompanying map;)' COncur,r!laclllt,es .'and!servlces,lncl.u9lng' ,.",<<'"
lrent amendments io the compreJie~ri,f!~chools; lire and r;>olice protection, .',. \,
~'slve 'p!'an 01 theflty"ol;Y!,imare1llso;. roads" parks 'and ,public ,recreation,
~pr()posed,'Propose'd zoning. lor the utilitles;,water supply and distribu';,,~
,i'"a'rEi;j.to'be"annexed wouid'accom- tion,and systems 01 utilities, solid .,~:
fmodate3,400 'residences ,and 60 waste collectiori'ari,( disposal and
r~cjes ~of...~co";.r:niriercial pevelnpment, ,stormwater and. wastewater collec'
~plus'supportlng public ,and redrea- tion and treatment;'improvements re,
lional laclllties. " ? :quired and linancing necessary to ,at, ..~,
Proponent. ThuistonHighl~nds tain "concurrency," "I such public .,
Associates, 1917 First Avenue, Seat- lacllities as required ,by the State
:' tie, WA 98101, Bud Welcome, Manag, Growth Management Act; loss 01 and
';'ing Partner " "interlerence with productive lorestry,
F' Location 01 Proposal. Sectlon~ 23, mineral Tesouiceand agricultural
i.-,24, 26 and 27 01 Township 17 N6rth, lands; inventory and analysis of sen,
'Range1 East W,M., all lying sitive' and critical areas including
~So.uthwesterlY 01 the City 01 Yelm, wetlands, Iloodplalns, geologically
,,"Washington. ' unstable areas, streams and bodies
l' Lead.- agency 'City 01 Yelm, 01 water plant and animal habitat,
€:~~ashing~on. ..~~ _.-~ and aquifer recharge areas; 'lden-
:.:,..EIS required:The lead agency and tilication of open space corridors; af,
j.,the 'applciarit have 'agreed that this lordable housing supply' energy con,
rproposal Is likely to have a signili, servation; air quality' noise genera.
beant adverse Impact on the envlron- ticn and reception; traffic and cir
:' ment. An environmental impact culatian Including public transit; and
t.statement (EIS) is required under eflects' upon rural and urban popula.
t'RCW 43,21C,03O(2)(c) and will be tion projections and growth areas.
'l"prepared. Materials Indicating likely Scoping, .Agencles, affected
environmental ,Impacts can be tribes, and members of the public are
rreviewed at our offices. .; invited to comment on the scope of
~ The lead agency has identified the the EIS. You many tomment on alter.
; following ar~as for discussion in the ".allves. mitigation measures,. pro-
;..
)> f
"T1
~ -< ~
C rn
)> r- "
.f:. "-
< r-
::j ~ ~
)> ~
0 C/l
"T1 :I:
." Z " , ,~ ',( ...,.,~ -.) .4'
r;)
C ....
aJ 0
r z
0 Cl) i!l~..(,C9
0>
)> U1 ',if
,Cl)
~ ...,
0
.Z
}.
:f
,
"
1
J
l
f
,," ,;:,~!~;i.~!~~~~~};li
-..., .r,.-..". 'I ,'- I ..t::11~' '1 L",. .1,
,:,;.~:-~~-::-)r: ':i?" ."'f-:-(~' '-,~. :~. _-~:_,'. '~l "".\.: i
=~"~L'. ."~' I. .L >'2- .- ,., ",',lUo,. ;"j
[EtTI '!,~:~ji~;Ii'
bable signilicantadverse impacts 'E.I.S, Scoplng Meetlng"',to be'held at
and licenses or other approvals thai LOO p.m, on .Wednesday 'November.;"
may be required. The"method and 13, 1991 i~ the COuncil Chambers al"
deadline lor giving ,us 'your com, City Hall:. 105 )'eim Avenue West,
ments is: ..' IYelm',;Washington. '
cOmments must be received at Ci. Responsible official. Gene Boiges
ty Hall in Yelm, Washington on or,. Position/title .Clty administrator
before WedneSday November 13", Address: c:::ity 01 Ye!m, 105Yelm
1991 .and should be addressed to Avenue W., P.O Box 479,"Yelm'
Gene Borges, City Administrator at ,Washington, (206) 458-3244. '
the address stated below Written ' Dated:, October 22, 1991
.' and verbal comments will also be ac. Published Nlsqually Valley News
'~,cepted at the "'Thurston Highland 'Thursday, October 31, 1991,
!
-';it
~~
2;
j;
'~.
o
.5
o
0~
OWENS DAVIES MACKIE
A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CORPORATION
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
FRANK .J, OWENS
ARTHUR L. DAVIES
.JOHN V LYMAN
ALEXANDER W MACKIE.
RICHARD G PHILLIPS .JR
BRIAN L. BUDSBERG
MICHAEL W. MAYBERRY
ROBERT F HAUTH P.S
926 - 24TH WAY S W
BURTON R. .JOHNSON (970)
.JON E. CUSHMAN
KIRK M VEIS
TODD M STAMM"
CYNTHIA D LABRANCHE
POST OFFICE BOX 167
OLYMPIA, WASHINGTON 98507
(206) 943-8320
-ALSO AOhUTTEO IN WASHINGTON, C.C.
-ALSO ADMITTED IN IDAHO
October 25, 1991
TELECOPIER
(206) 943-6150
Gene Borges
City of Yelm
PO Box 479
Yelm, WA 98579
Dennis T Su, AlA
1917 First Ave
Seattle, WA 98101
Jon Potter
Entranco Engineers, Inc
10900 N E. 8th St., Ste 300
Bellevue, WA 98004
Dear Gene, Dennis and Jon
Enclosed is a draft of the proposed agenda for the Thurston Highlands scoping meeting
Please review and offer your comments In particular, notice that Dennis Su would be
responsible for describing the applicant's proposal, including annexation boundaries and
conceptual land use and zoning plans, As you know, this meeting will set the stage for
a very comprehensive environmental analYSIS
I anticipate that this meeting will be well attended by residents of the area and agency
representatives I suggest that the pnnclpal participants meet early in the week of
November 13 to clarify any questions relating to process or the purpose of the meeting
Please contact me as soon as possible with your thoughts regarding this agenda.
Very truly yours,
OWENS DAVIES MACKIE
7d/JC---
By Todd Stamm
TS/lf
Enclosure
..
o
()
DRAFT
AGENDA
THURSTON HIGHLANDS ANNEXATION
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
SCOPING MEETING
7:00 p.m. - Wednesday, November 13, 1991
City Council Chambers - Yelm City Hall
Presiding Official - Gene Borges, City Administrator
(1) Statement of Meeting Purpose - Gene Borges, City Administrator
(2) Description of Proposal - Dennis Su of Land Use & Development Consultation for
Thurston Highlands Associates
(3) Summary of Alternatives and Impacts Identified by City - Todd Stamm, City Attorney
(4) Comment Period - Opportunity for public and agencies to address proposed scope
of environmental impact statement.
stamm \yelm.agn
.....
WEDNESDAY,
n MINUTES 0
()~t~~{)F YEI.M REGULAR roJrCIL MEETm:; n
OC'ID-----J 23, 1991, 7:30 1M, YEIM CITY HALL CL~~IL CW\MBERS
The rreeting was called to order by Mayor Sanders at 7:30 FM. Councilrnembers
present: Kathy Wolf, AIros Lawton, Arnold Drogseth, Martha Parsons and Rick
Kolilis. Staff: Gene Borges, Glenn Dunnam, Shelly Badger and Sandy Mackie
(().yens Davies Mackie). Visitors: Greg Kirsch, Chuck Hall, Cindy Cecil,
Judy Slater, Dennis Su and Leslie Taggesell.
The minutes of the October 9, 1991 Regular Meeting were approved on a rrotion
by Martha Parsons, second by AIros Lawton. Motion carried.
The agenda was approved as amended by Martha Parsons, second by Arnold
Drogseth. Motion carried.
Payroll for the rronth of October 1991 was approved on a rrotion by Rick
Kolilis, second by Martha Parsons. Motion carried.
The following voucher was approved on a rrotion by AIros Lawton, second by
Martha Parsons. Motion carried.
Community Development Block Grant $345.65
Chuck Hall, Superintendent, Yelm Community Schools and Greg Kirsch, Deputy
Superintendent, Yelm Comnunity Schools were present to discuss the
District's Strategic Planning process which will be used t<;> create the
future for our children. The planning process will help to identify the
functions, objectives and strategies of the District and develop action
plans to achieve the goals. On November 15-17, 1991, Yelm Comnunity Schools
will sponsor a 2~-day retreat where educators and comnunity rranbers will
forrralize a strategic plan for the next 3-5 years. Action teams will be
formed to implerrent the plans and to assign the responsibility of action to
individuals within the school system. Gene Borges stated that the City has
been rreeting with the District to discuss long-range growth and planning.
Cindy Cecil, UCBO Executive Director, was present to inform the Council of
her research regarding the use of CDBG Housing Rehabilitation funds to
obtain a shelter for the corrmunity. Departrrent of Corrmunity Development
will allow the use of Yelm's Housing Rehabilitation CDBG (Carmunity
Development Block Grant) funds to rrove a shelter to the chosen UCBO
Comnunity Services Center site, however, the City must notify the public of
their wishes to use the renaining CDBG funds (approximately $7500 00) to
rrove a house to be used as a shelter, hold a Public Hearing for input fran
the comnunity and rrake the decision whether the rroney will be granted or
loaned to the UCBO. Cindy informed the Council that she has found other
funding sources for rehabilitation, operation and maintenance of the
shelter. MCYI'ION: Kathy Wolf rroved to authorize staff to initiate the
public process for use of CDBG Housing Rehabilitation funds for a shelter
for the UCBO, second by Martha Parsons. Motion carried.
Mrs. Cecil informed Council that a Community Mental Health officer will be
in Yelm 2-3 days per week beginning November 20, 1991. .After the new
Community Services Center is open, they may be able to supply Yelm with a
full-time officer.
Mayor Sanders reported on the rronthly Mayor's Meeting of October 23, 1991 at
the Port of Olympia. Discussed was the need for sewer systems in Tenino,
Rainier and Bucoda. The Olympia Air Service Team asked for support from the
cities for an airIx>rt in the Olympia area to reduce traffic at the SeaTac
Airport. The Comnittee is looking into an alternate site for an airport and
the Olympia area is a consideration due to its ideal location between
Portland and Seattle. Mayor Sanders will provide Counci1.rrembers with the
necessary infonnation to write letters of support.
Resolution No. 227 stating the City's opposition to Initiative 559 (property
tax rollback) was approved on a rrotion by Rick Kolilis, second by Kathy
Wolf. Motion carried.
Sandy Mackie, City Atto:rney, briefed the Council on the upctming November
13, 1991 Thurston Highland Envirorurental Impact Staterrent "Seoping" Meeting
at 7:00 FM. The invitation to corrrrent on the scope of the EIS was made
available to the Public on October 23, 1991. Citizens, agencies and
affected tribes may comment on alternatives, mitigation measures, probable
signific.'1nt i:ldverse irnracts and licenses that may be required prior to the
November lJr'-'eeting or they rray attend the rreetinr-----, 7 00 FM to give their
comnents il"-..,../kv/"""o\. After the "Seoping" meeting.US'.----..~ing Letter will be
issued to ThW:\.,/1 Highlands stating the elements t'Y...)e included in the
Environmental ImPact Statement.
,r
YeJm Library Report for October 1991: Leslie Taggesell was present to give
the report. OVerall circulation shows a 9% increase through September 1991-
As of January 1. 1991. Yelm Timberland Library will no longer be rrailing out
holds to patrons. After that date. YeJm will be holding the books for the
patrons at the library for them to pick up, thus increasing the arrount of
traffic in the library. However, a tremendous savings will be realized by
the Timberland Library system in postage.
./
YeJm Planning Commission Meeting of October 15. 1991 and Special Meeting of
October 22, 1991: Councilrrembers were given copies of the minutes of the
October 15, 1991 Public Hearing on the J.C.H. Developement Co. rezone
request to rezone 12.5 acres on the west side of Crystal Springs St. NW fran
Residential/Agricultural to Residential. Mr. Mackie will be present at the
November 19, 1991 Planning Commission meeting to discuss options for action
on the rezone and the preliminary plat application.
Council action on the request to lease or purchase city property to
construct a miniature golf course was tabled (rrotion by Kathy Wolf, second
by Arros Lawton, rrotion carried) until rrore inforrration can be Obtained from
legal counsel on the lease of city property and engineers regarding location
of sewer rrains, pump stations, etc. Planning Coomission recomnended
approval of the situation of a miniature golf course in a commercially zoned
area.
On a rrotion by Kathy Wolf, second by Arros Lawton, Council tabled action on
the Kampfer and Emanuel Lutheran Church requests for use/vacation of alleys
until rrore inforrration can be obtained fran legal counsel, the engineer
regarding location of sewer rrains and a recomnendation fran the Planning
Coomission. Motion carried.
Rick Kolilis rroved to accept the 10% annexation petition submitted by Yelm
Comnunity Schools for annexation of property (approx.irrately 85 acres)
situated east of Hwy. 507 and west of Mill Road and allow YeJm Comnunity
Schools to comnence annexation proceedings. Second by Aroos Lawton. Motion
carried. Thurston County has no objection to adjustment of imnediate
annexation boundary lines to confonn to this annexation request.
YeJm Police Report: Chief Dunnam presented the Council with a written
briefing regarding his feelings on options for a jail facility in YeJm. He
updated Council on the meetings of the TOGE'IHER group and their success in
obtaining grants for our area. YeJm. in conjunction with YeJm Comnunity
Schools, has applied for a OCD Law Enforcement Drug Education Program grant
in the arrount of $18.075.00 to be used for a canputer for- DARE Program use
and a second DARE officer to teach DARE to the 8th grade students. The YeJm
Police Department is participating in various testing and other programs at
YeJm schools to increase visibility and improve officer/student
rela tionships.
Gene Borges and Glenn Dunnam will meet with Attorney Sandy Mackie to discuss
future planning issues.
The YeJm Municipal Court report will be tabled to the November meeting.
Street/Water Report: Water main leaks frem October 19, 1991 have been
repaired. Maria Kramer was hired to fill the water meter reader position
with the City. Maria is a current part-time city employee (Police Reserve)
and will be \'larking 40 hours per rronth for the water department.
YeJm has received an "infonnal" approval on a $40.000 grant fran Department
of Transportation to conduct the Comprehensive Transportation Study.
Sewer Project: Council received a letter fran Bill DaVee, City Manager,
City of Centralia. regarding the draft agreement on the City of Centralia
Power Canal/Yelm Sewage Treatrrent Facility. After agency approval (OOE,
EPA), the agreerrent may be formalized by approval of both City Councils and
signatures. Centralia is ready for that action, pending agency approval of
the docurrent.
Cene Bor<]cs reported on his trir with reprcsentCltlves from FClnnrT'S Harre
-..
Administration (~Ow the Loon Lake, Washington s'V~cQtion system.
The trip was v, )valuable, with much learned regardi~lthe combination of
STEP tanks for fn.proved. efficiency and cost savings. Fai:rrer's Home and Yelm
discussed the possibility of future additional grants for low income, senior
citizens, etc. if needed.
Yelm Parks Advisory Corrmittee Meeting of Q::tober 16, 1991: Based on the
reconmendation of the Yelm Parks Advisory Corrmittee and Council Liaison
Martha Parsons, Kathy Wolf !TOved to allow use of the remaining $4,000 in the
1991 budget (in City Park/Cochrane Park line iteIffi) for purchase of
rraterials for new bathrooms in City Park and the purchase of a nguaranteed"
living Christmas Tree for Yelm City Park (tree to be ordered and erected
prior to the December 7 "Christmas in the Park" celebration). Motion was
seconded by Martha Parsons. Motion carried with Arras Lawton and Arnold
Drogseth opposing the motion.
Arnold Drogseth moved to change the Regular Council Meeting of Noverrber 27,
1991 (Thanksgiving Eve) to Tuesday, November 26, 1991, second by Martha
Parsons. Motion carried. Staff will publish the required notification.
A Special Meeting of the Council for the purpose of conducting a ~rk
session on the 1992 Preliminary Budget was scheduled for Tuesday, October
29, 1991, 5:00 PM, Yelm City Hall Council Chambers.
The Viacan annual holiday comrercial message will be taped on Wednesday,
November 13, 1991 at 6:00 PM, Yelm Council Chambers. All staff and
Councilmembers are encouraged to attend.
A letter was received fran Leland J. Pledger regarding the U.S. West
proposal to construct a 150 foot antenna support tower in Thurston County.
Arnold Drogseth agreed to represent the City Council at the "Children of the
Green Earth" tree planting ceremony on Yelm Creek on Saturday, November 9,
1991 at 10 00 AM. Attendees will gather at Yelm Prairie Christian Center.
With no further business, Martha Parsons rroved to adjourn at 9 15 PM, second
by Kathy Wolf. Meeting adjourned.
ATTEST:
Shelly A. Badger
City Clerk
Robert A. Sanders
Mayor
q
G~
00
,
OWENS DAVIES MACKIE
A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CORPORATION
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
FRANK.J OWENS
ARTHUR L. DAVIES
.JOHN V LYMAN
ALEXANDER W MACKIE'
RICHARD G, PHILLIPS, .JR.
BRIAN L. BUDSBERG
MICHAEL W MAYBERRY
ROBERT F HAUTH, P.S
926 - 24TH WAY S W
POST OFFICE BOX 187
BURTON R, .JOHNSON (970)
.JON E. CUSHMAN
KIRK M. VEIS
TODD M. STAMM"
OL.YMPIA. WASHINGTON 98607
(206) 943-8320
-ALSO A.OMITTEO IN WASHINGTON. D.C.
.-ALSO ADMITTED IN IOAHO
TELECOPI ER
(206) 943-6150
TELECOPY /FAX TRANSMITTAL COVER SHEET
TO
Shelly Badger
DATE
October 23, 1991
City of Yelm
FAX NO 458-5741
FROM Todd Stamm
OUR CLIENT City of Yelm
NUMBER OF PAGES
1
(cover sheet not included)
DOCUMENT(S) SENT Determination of Significance and Request for Comments on
Scope of Environmental Impact Statement, Thurston Highlands Annexation, Corrected
Notice
SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS
Also being sent via U S Mail today
If you do not receive all copies, or if any are not legible, please call Linda Feldtman at
(206) 943-8320
OUR FAX NUMBER IS (206) 943-6150
)..
j\. 0 t:)"'. :=..:=.. 'g 1 1 4 4 :=..
/" .....
/-----
",;1""'-'"
--
FRObO
~,.
00
~~~~~~nt vrM:
Consultation JI.~'0
F'HI::iE DD 1
A Ohtislon of K(amer Ch!f1 & Mayo. I(le
FAX TRANSMiTTAL
TO
DATE: ~JtV t.,01
:~ ~~-~~
1 - <::J~4;~01i=)O
~~ ~ ~--T. >-Ld
==rH6t~ON rtLGrH lA+-AO
o
FAX f.!O
FROM
SU13.JECT/PftOJtCT
TOTAt PAGES
\
MESSAGE :
~ \7 iHf" <;1'f~ YLMJ 'fCJV1 CAN 1Aff:- ,
Z'DH ~Nlo 1I~ 17 ~N I
~ ft'l2- I7F:) ~.nLo(~: LOTff\-l- ~ \<.,
~tT 4 ~70 1ru (b
(
-rH~ l;; vN.I=- ~~.L tl'i weT*ftJf TI?N
t fY lll1~ f?11' N Sf..eJT -10 Ilt'7 l'l( iZvz.~d
l)~F- GET u) ~bihl .N~ ~ffu)
~. N~t7 ~M C1S fcrYL ~ i'lc>{ 17~
4&&(IN6T 0eEmt---tcr-~
lKfrN ~ v
1917 First Avenue. Seattle. Washington 98101 (206) 443~3537 Fax: (206) 443-5372
rn-....-
.. .
--------~~
f P\.\\\O\\
0.7
o
o
1 :: 'Sll l~ ~~
;.-
I~OPOSE~
.
~~Ne.)(~l\O~'
.
/A.~~~
"f"
. \~
rscA\..f:
{fqJ
J1~/),: .it
;;;~
~. ~~
~-If
~-i1'~
~~
,
.t',
i<~;~'
t>
L
* 't' 11) 1 H L P H \~ E '0 \
-------~
PHI;E
o [f'2.
OCT
, '31
14
4~
O'I)n Ie 1=1"1
o
00
".J
"
..:..c..
\,
'~
I I
I t
\ :
I I
: .so I
I ~...-..;
l __..........~ Clot
I ..- - - I
I I I
! ;1 I CJr-
I .. I 1_
__________-----~---------~-----\r-~-~t-~- ---~--t---t--
l
t
t
I
I
1
f
''''''''~_=_~-..-.c::>o~
,
I
I
t
J
-~+--
I
I
J
-~
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
----+--
I
I
I
"
_=c:>....
J
i
\
'S.
~
I
I
I
___---L
I
I
I
I
1
I
,
,
-~..::>-~...,......~
=
~;~~
_~-,
ALl ~
-h
1J
(!;
~
~
@S
lWl
m
~
j
lliill
(@
(g "<a
~ I
~ !
~ ~
d~
;E g
~ ,;:
fI!/{) ~
~~ Jl
g
s
~ l
~ ~
OO~
<~l
.......... f c.c.
f!t:f'-"":
~
;::1J J.:.j. .:.j..:.j.
r- "VI'I KLr'-l
PROPOSED
ANNEXATION
o
o
#
.$f ~o~
~ ~,.
~o ~
_ -Llf:t;i; 22
~28-
o
o
1>
PAGE 1383
.:,:. ;....-'
I 1000' I
SCALE'
----
~
...
.....
3435
I
I
,
i "
- I
_--_L- _ _ 25
ALT:- -36
** TOTAL PAGE 883 **
..
00
00
DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE
AND REQUEST FOR COMMENTS ON SCOPE OF
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
THURSTON HIGHLANDS ANNEXATION
CORRECTED NOTICE
Description of proposal. AnnexatIon to the City of Yelm of 1,870 acres lymg southwesterly of the current CIty
limIts m all or parts of Sections 23,24,25,26, and 27 of Townslnp 17 North, Range 1 East W,M., and SectIon
19 of Township 17 North, Range 2 East W.M, (See accompanymg map.) Concurrent amendments to the
Com prehensIve Plan of the City of Yelm are also proposed, Proposed zorung for the area to be annexed would
accommodate 3,400 resIdences, and 60 acres of commercIal development, plus supportmg public and recreatIOnal
facilitIes,
Proponent. Thurston Highlands ASSOCIates, 1917 First Avenue, Seattle, WA 98101, Bud Welcome, Managmg
Partner
Location of proposal. SectIOns 23, 24, 25, 26, and 27 of Townslnp 17 North, Range 1 East W.M, and SectIon
19 of Townslnp 17 North, Range 2 East W.M., alllymg southwesterly of the City of Yelm, Waslnngton.
Lead a!!ency. City of Yelm, Waslnngton,
EIS Required The lead agency and the applicant have agreed that tins proposal IS likely to have a SIgnificant
adverse unpact on the enVironment. An enVironmental impact statement (EIS) IS reqUIred under RCW
43.21C.030(2)(c) and will be prepared, Matenals mdicatmg likely enVIronmental unpacts can be reViewed at our
offices,
The lead a!!ency has identified the followiDl! areas for discussion in the EIS. AlternatIves are to mcludes: no
actIOn, development of the property In accordance With current zorung, annexatIon and zorung as proposed, and
annexatIOn and zomng to accommodate more mtenSIve development mcluding commerCIal offices. IdentIfied
unpacts to be discussed lllclude urban area expanSIOn, populatIon growth trends; antIcIpated demands for public
facilitIes and servIces, mcluding schools, fire and police protectIOn, roads, parks and public recreatIOn, utilitIes,
water supply and distributIon and systems of utilitIes, solid waste collectIon and disposal and storm water and
wastewater collectIOn and treatment; unprovements reqUIred and financmg necessary to attaIn "concurrency" of
such public facilItIes as reqUIred by the State Growth Management Act; loss of and lllterference With productIve
forestry, mllleral resource and agnculturallands; lllventory and analYSIS of senSItIve and cntIcal areas lllcluding
wetlands, floodplallls, geolOgically unstable areas, streams and bodies of water, plant and anImal habttat, and
aqUifer recharge areas; IdentIfication of open space COrrIdors; affordable hOUSlllg supply; energy conservatIon;
arr quality; nOise generation and reception; traffic and circulation including public tranSIt; and effects upon rural
and urban populatIon projections and growth areas.
Scoping. AgenCIes, affected tribes, and members of the public are InVited to comment on the scope of the EIS.
You may comment on alternatives, mItIgatIon measures, probable SIgnificant adverse unpacts, and licenses or
other approvals that may be reqUired, The method and deadline for giVing us your comments IS:
Comments must be received at City Hall III Yelm, Washlllgton on or before Wednesday, November 13, 1991,
and should be addressed to Gene Borges, City AdmlllIstrator, at the address stated below Wntten and verbal
comments will also be accepted at the "Thurston Highland E.I.S. SCOplllg Meetlllg" to be held at 7:00 p.m. on
Wednesday, November 13, 1991, in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 105 Yelm Avenue West, Yelm,
Washlllgton,
Responsible official. Gene Borges
Address.
City of Yelm
105 Yelm Avenue W
PO Box 479
Yelm, WashIngton
Phone: (206) 458-3244
Position/title. City adminIstrator
Date /1/:2 ~ I'll
, ,
SIgnature 6~. ,t?,,/~t' f
1/
if ?; // .5;f- / 4"''''''7
""
00
'~
.~) o~
~~ r(
ClJ';:;~~ ~
" ~~ ~IS'
011
00
:I>-U
~~
m"
.x.o
~cn
_m
00
z
. "i~
..\'1'\~
. .:
~
;:
.j
,
CIl]_
~O
f;i~
. :~t
i
i I
Ii
I
i
I
I
j
.
I--
I I
I
I
I I
I
f---~---
--
~
wi f.) :
4)l2! ~__ :
(,.) (,.) . ---_...l..____
"'0
I. _
/
or;; 0 o~&u/ h 1~3/t;
Ijetht/ //tAl r k
DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE i/ - r
AND REQUEST FOR COMMENTS ON SCOPE Ato /11
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
THURSTON HIGHLANDS ANNEXATION
CORRECTION
The lead agency, City of Yelm, has identified the following facts with respect to the
proposal as outlined in that determination of significance issued on October 22, 1991
Area Proposed for Annexation
Additional study by the proponent reveals that the area proposed for annexation as
shown on the map accompanying the original declaration of significance and as
reproduced with this correction includes approximately 1870 acres. not 2058 acres as
originally stated in the declaration of significance and request for comments on scope of
E I S and upon the original map
Further, as showl') on the map, portions of the area proposed for annexation Ire within
Section 19 of Township 17 North, Range 2 East W M and Section 25 of Township 17
North, Range 1 East W M , in addition to those sections described in the original notice
Except as stated above, the area proposed for annexation remains as described in the
declaration of significance and scoping notice
Responsible official.
Gene Borges
Address.
City of Velm
105 Velm Avenue W.
PO Box 479
Position/title.
City administrator
Velm, Washington
Phone (206) 458-3244
Date.
Signature
~1~'ULn1 /If/m rL/
-;'~ e:.:c~ftr~!.-:~~~t2~~~:~::~~:~r~i?~"('c'_~"<~l~' c. ,_ ,~,^~'e ,~;;..:-..",,~~:~~::~G/_8:~1:i~lJ~,.'~:r~~,~~:~~~~~~~j:~\~~;
~"""~'l'~J;'g'.'<f ""~~;.,:,,.,jf;il\~,>iJ~~d~,,":::i i,~;i;},'&i';;;::l\~-i1."'1b~~'!:i~'Y'i?,,"W\;ji,"";;1J: '~.<l~N~:'y",~ ~ /0 ;)W~ F~''l-,'~'1I~l
'i..,";~O~;~*~~},,;.':'!~t~~~~~~~.~}iFi~~~J~~*~\~~~~!i',,_,,;:~~~~,.~;..',~1~'}>~T.."i;):~~t"iSl~~., ~ih-~~~!~'i;.:r..,.J}~?!ti)fte~~ l 1 . ~ ~-: A'. :~r~~'. V; :
U l.. i 2 L 1991 . . ' , " "'c' - ~ ~ ','.
:..., '~,--"."".'" ... I,. + ~., ,..- -<1.11 ',; ""'~"'~ : ;..,.
DF~;;,~~ME;\!"i~',t, E,c~l\~l::' DETERMINATION OF <SiGNIFIC~.& , .r::1IJ } -- '
h\ltWN "e:','''" '\L\I.lv AND REQUEST FOR COMMENTS ON S( ~V_
E~RONMENTALIMPACTSTATE~
Deserintlon of nronosal. Annexation to the City of Yelm of 2,058 aeres lyin_ ~.___~__________u_...-.....y
limits in all or parts of Sections 23, 24, 26, and 27 of Township 17 North, Range 1 East Willamette Meridian,
(See accompanying map,) Concurrent amendments to the ComprehenSIve Plan of the City of Yelm are also
proposed. Proposed zoning for the area to be annexed would accommodate 3,400 residences, and 60 acres of
commercial development, plus supporting public and recreational facilities.
Prononent. Thurston Highlands Associates, 1917 First Avenue, Seattle, WA 98101, Bud Welcome, Managing
Partner
Location of nroDosal. Sections 23, 24, 26, and T7 of Township 17 North, Range 1 East W,M., all lying
southwesterly of the City of Yelm, Washington,
Lead aeency. City of Yelm, Washington,
EIS RequirruJ. The lead agency and the applicant have agreed that this proposal is likely to have a significant
adverse impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement (EIS) is required under RCW
43.21C,030(2)(c) and will be prepared, Matenals indicatmg likely envIronmental impacts can be revIewed at our
offices.
The lead aeenev has Identified the followine areas for discussion in the EIS, Alternatives are to includes: no
action, development of the property in accordance with current zonmg, annexation and zonmg as proposed, and
annexation and zoning to accommodate more intensIVe development including commercial offices, Identified
Impacts to be discussed include urban area expansion; populatIon growth trends; antiCIpated demands for public
facilities and services, including schools, fire and police protection, roads, parks and public recreatIon, utilities,
water supply and distribution and systems of utilities, solid waste collection and disposal and storm water and
wastewater collection and treatment; improvements required and financing necessary to altain "concurrency" of
such public facilities as required by the State Growth Management Act; loss of and interference WIth productive
forestry, mineral resource and agricultural lands; inventory and analysis of sensitive and critical areas including
wetlands, floodplains, geologically unstable areas, streams and bodies of water, plant and animal habitat, and
aquifer recharge areas; identification of open space corridors; affordable housing supply; energy conservation,
air quality; noise generation and reception, traffic and circulation including public transit; and effects upon rural
and urban population projections and growth areas,
Scoping. Agencies, affected tribes, and members of the public are mVlted to comment on the scope of the EIS.
You may comment on alternatives, mitigation measures, probable significant adverse impacts, and licenses or
other approvals that may be required, The method and deadline for gIVIng US your comments IS:
Comments must be received at City Hall in Yelm, Washington on or before Wednesday, November 13, 1991,
and should be addressed to Gene Borges, City Administrator, at the address stated below Wnlten and verbal
comments will also be accepted at the "Thurston Highland E.I.S. Scopmg Meetmg" to be held at 7'00 p.m, on
Wednesday, November 13, 1991, in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 105 Yelm Avenue West, Yelm,
Washington,
Responsible official. Gene Borges
City of Yelm
105 Yelm Avenue W
PO Box 479
Yelm, Washington
Phone: (206) 458-3244
Address.
Position/title. City admmistrator
Date/C>-d'~-7J
S;..aln'e r-<
7-/~~
<>
4;'$-~'
{-'.=11
. J~_
;1 ,)
,
('\ -' J' '-"'" ~ "'. . " /~~_.,-__,-"'-''''_., _ """"~";>,.'.f""r.;
)'.,~. ,,:J:~~l:;:_)' 'f~ ~~'h.\,.~~.~,~,IJt ~~':~'1-~~~..;~/ow:?r:.; ~~~ ". .... -,. ~. W'~~~~,~t~; ,J:?~':~~\~~~~1~!::t~t,~~. J~J~'f;~.t:.~~.~~
;\.d.......: It " ~ j " . ~,,,,."\ .~: ::'" '\:~, l;; . 't' "J . .....~." , . ....~ . '>;-;'.' >.. .
, ,'.', 1.r',~~.i1J\
t.~ 'i:~~~
I;". ~,,'''''.
~~. 2--
~:~,.<~
~ ~ ~\S'
~O
~
,"G)'
'. ;... '71:4'... .
, "tJ(i~J"t 'c,
m~'''' Uf(i:.
X 0;,
~ CJ)'
~ m-
OO
z
cn]_
no
.0
ro
I':l .
. :~~
N ...
'l~
, "
0-.
.
I
j
I
I-
I
i
I
~ r-------
~
. ~
Ii
,:
---t---.
I
.1
BARGHAUSEN CONSULnNG_E~GIN~ERS.INC.
..
GJ
c'J
DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE
AND REQUEST FOR COMMENTS ON SCOPE OF
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
Description of proposal. AnnexatIon to the City of Yelm of 2,058 acres lying southwesterly of the current city
limits in all or parts of SectIons 23, 24, 26, and 27 of Township 17 North, Range 1 East WillameUe Meridian.
(See accompanying map.) Concurrent amendments to the ComprehensIve Plan of the City of Yelm are also
proposed, Proposed zomng for the area to be annexed would accommodate 3,400 resIdences, and 60 acres of
commercial development, plus supporting public and recreational facilities,
Proponent. Thurston Highlands Associates, 1917 First Avenue, Seattle, WA 98101, Bud Welcome, Managmg
Partner
Location of proposal. SectIOns 23, 24, 26, and 27 of Township 17 North, Range 1 East W.M" all lymg
southwesterly of the City of Yelm, Washington.
Lead al!encv, City of Yelm, Washington,
EIS Required The lead agency and the applicant have agreed that thIs proposal is likely to have a signIficant
adversc Impact on thc envrronmcnt. An environmental impact statement (EIS) IS required under RCW
43.21C,030(2)(c) and wIll bc prepared. Matenals indicatmg likely envrronmcntallmpacts can be revIewed at our
offices.
The lead agency has identified the following areas for discussion in the EIS. AlternatIves are to includcs. no
actIon, development of the property III accordance with current zoning, annexatIOn and zomng as proposed, and
annexatIon and zoning to accommodate more IntenSIve development includmg commercial offices, IdcntIficd
Impacts to bc discusscd include urban arca expanSIOn; population growth trends; antIclpatcd demands for publIc
facilities and scrvices, including schools, firc and police protection, roads, parks and public recreatIon, utilitIes,
water supply and distribution and systems of utilities, solid waste collection and disposal and storm water and
wastewatcr collectIon and treatment; Improvements requircd and financIng necessary to attam "concurrency" of
such pubhc facilities as required by the State Growth Management Act; loss of and lOterference WIth producttve
forestry, mineral resource and agnculturallands, mventory and analYSIS of senSItIve and cntical areas mcludmg
wetlands, floodplams, geologically unstable areas, streams and bodIes of water, plant and ammal habitat, and
aqUifer recharge areas; identIfication of open space corrrdors; affordable housing supply; energy conservation,
atr quality; noise generatIon and reception; traffic and CIrculatIon mcludmg public tranSIt; and effects upon rural
and urban populatIon projectIons and growth areas.
Scoping, AgenCIes, affected tribes, and members of the publIc are InVIted to comment on the scope of the EIS
You may comment on alternatIves, mItIgatIon measures, probable significant adverse impacts, and licenses or
other approvals that may be reqUired. The method and deadline for g1VIllg us your comments IS:
Comments must be received at City Hall in Yelm, Washmgton on or before Wednesday, Novembcr 13, 1991,
and should be addressed to Gene Borges, City Admllllstrator, at the address statcd below Wntten and verbal
comments Will also be accepted at the "Thurston Highland E.I.S SCOpIng Meetmg" to bc held at 7:00 p.m. on
Wednesday, Novembcr 13, 1991, m the Council Chambers at City Hall, 105 Yelm Avenue Wcst, Yelm,
Washmgton,
Responsible official. Gene Borgcs
Address,
City of Yelm
105 Yelm A venue W
PO Box 479
Yelm, Washington
Phone: (206) 458-3244
Position/title. City admInIstrator
Date/t".-~~ - fl
Signature
a~~
V
~
. :..-/.4' __
3'
,
~~
~ ~.p~
~ ~~
<<.0 $'
jP;i, 22
~V28m
15. 14
22123' .. _ i~l~l1J~
, M
PROPOSED
ANNEXATION
AREA
\j
'-I
I fOOO',
SCALE:
~~
~
ti
z
co
Ul
II:
W
W
Z
<:J
z:
WI
<:J'
Z
5
;:)
Ul
Z
o
()
z
w
~
~
:I:
<:J
II:
<(
co
.ll
"
08
00
..
OWENS DAVIES MACKIE
A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CORPORATION
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
FRANK.J OWENS
ARTHUR L. DAVIES
.JOHN V LYMAN
ALEXANDER W MACKIE.
RICHARD G. PHILLIPS, .JR
BRIAN L. BUDSBERG
MICHAEL W MAYBERRY
ROBERT F HAUTH P,S
926 . 24TH WAY S W
POST OFFICE BOX 187
OLYMPIA, WASHINGTON 98S07
(206) 943-8320
BURTON R. .JOHNSON (1970)
.JON E. CUSHMAN
KIRK M, VEIS
TODD M. STAMM.'
-ALSO ADMrne:O IN WASHINGTON, D.C.
.-ALSO ADMITTEO IN IDAHO
TELECOPIER
(2061 943-6150
TELECOPY /FAX TRANSMITTAL COVER SHEET
TO
Dennis Su
DATE
October 22, 1991
FAX NO 443-5372
FROM Todd M Stamm
OUR CLIENT City of Yelm
NUMBER OF PAGES
1
(cover sheet not included)
DOCUMENT(S) SENT DRAFT Determination of Significance and Request for Comments
on Scope of Environmental Impact Statement
SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS
at phone number above
Any comments - call Doreen Milward or Todd Stamm
If you do not receive all copies, or if any are not legible, please call Linda Feldtman at
(206) 943-8320
OUR FAX NUMBER IS (206) 943-6150
00
~", 0"'\ ~ \";;;'
. ~ ._,
;~ L;, ..' :'" :!,7:.
j ';' ,.!; 'M';' ,
:~Y!.~;~ ~ ~ 't~
',.\: ." f'~# ;';;;""'''',' ',""""" .
;'f ""f'~
k\i\~
t~
f!
DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE
AND REQUEST FOR COMMENTS ON SCOPE OF
E~RONMENTALIMPACTSTATEMENT
Description of proposal. AnnexatIOn to the City of Yelm of 2,058 acres lyrng southwesterly of the current CIty
limIts m all or parts of Sections 23, 24, 26, and 27 of Township 17 North, Range 1 East Willamette Mendian.
(See accompanyrng map.) Concurrent amendments to the ComprehenslVe Plan of the City of Yelm are also
proposed, Proposed zomng for the area to be annexed would accommodate 3,400 reSIdences, and 60 acres of
commerCIal development, plus supportmg public and recreational facilitIes.
Proponent. Thurston HigWands AssocIates, 1917 First Avenue, Seattle, WA 98101, Bud Welcome, Managmg
Partner
Location of nronosal. Sections 23, 24, 26, and 27 of Township 17 North, Range 1 East W.M., all lymg
southwesterly of the City of Yelm, Washmgton.
Lead agency, City of Yelm, Washmgton.
EIS Required. The lead agency and the applicant have agreed that this proposal is likely to have a sIgmficant
adverse impact on the enVironment. An enVironmental Impact statement (EIS) IS reqUired under RCW
43.21C.030(2) ( c) and will be prepared, Matenals mdIcatmg likely enVironmental Impacts can be revIewed at our
offices.
The lead agency has identified the foIlowinl! areas for discussion in the EIS. Alternatives are to mcludes: no
action, development of the property m accordance with current zoning, annexation and zorung as proposed, and
annexatIOn and zonmg to accommodate more mtenslVe development mcluding commerCial offices. Identified
rmpacts to be discussed mclude urban area expansion, populatiOn growth trends; antiCIpated demands for publIc
facihtIes and serVices, mcludmg schools, fire and police protection, roads, parks and public recreatIon, utilIties,
water supply and fhstributlOn and systems of utihtIes, sohd waste collection and dIsposal and storm water and
wastewater collection and treatment; Improvements reqUired and financmg necessary to attam "concurrency" of
such pubhc facilities as reqUired by the State Growth Management Act; loss of and mterference WIth productive
forestry, mmeral resource and agrIcultural lands, mventory and analYSIS of senSItIve and cntIcal areas mcludmg
wetlands, floodplams, geologIcally unstable areas, streams and bodies of water, plant and ammal habItat, and
aqUifer recharge areas, IdentificatIOn of open space corndors; affordable housmg supply; energy conservatIOn;
air qUalIty; nOise generation and receptIOJ?; traffic and CIrculatIon mcluding public tranSIt; and effects upon rural
and urban populatIon projections and growth areas.
Scoping. AgenCIes, affected tribes, and members of the public are inVited to comment on the scope of the EIS
You may comment on alternatIves, mItIgatIon measures, probable sIgmficant adverse Impacts, and licenses or
other approvals that may be reqmred. The method and deadline for glVlng us your comments IS.
Comments must be receIved at City Hall m Yelm, Washmgton on or before Wednesday, November 13, 1991,
and should be addressed to Gene Borges, City Admlmstrator, at the address stated below Wntten and ve;bal
comments will also be accepted at the "Thurston Highland E.I.S. SCOpIng Meeting" to be held at 7:00 p.m. on
Wednesday, November 13, 1991, m the Council Chambers at City Hall, 105 Yelm Avenue West, Yelm,
Washmgton.
Responsible official. Gene Borges
Address,
City of Yelm
105 Yelm Avenue W
PO Box 479
Yelm, Washmgton
Phone: (206) 458-3244
Position/title. City admID1strator
Date
SIgnature
I "-../
iSk/ltj"" IO/.2:;z)9/.
~,: ~k n;qhJa4>ds
-- G---
(j)p~ -pa+ AsA P cd-
~ 5~(;' eAtl'frdJna4-~
I b jte
10 rwLMlL- htue- f'L'bc. r:,kid
! ~f\? (SLVvf- (D'Pti 0{-
cpvw u~ &-r\ (\vc ~ l-e)
(ha;yzkS I
DOLQ~
9.1f3-E3;2D
o
o
DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE
AND REQUEST FOR COMMENTS ON SCOPE OF
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
DescriDtion of DroDosal. Annexation to the City of Yelm of 2,058 acres lying southwesterly of the current city
limits lD all or parts of Sections 23, 24,26, and 27 of Township 17 North, Range 1 East Willamette'Mendian.
(See accompanymg map,) Concurrent amendments to the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Yelm are also
proposed. Proposed zorong for the area to be annexed would accommodate 3,400 resIdences, and 60 acres of
commercial development, plus supporting public and recreatIonal facilities.
ProDonent. Thurston Highlands AsSOCiates, 1917 First Avenue, Seattle, WA 98101, Bud Welcome, ManagIng
Partner
Location of DrODosal. SectIons 23, 24, 26, and 27 of Township 17 North, Range 1 East W.M" all lymg
southwesterly of the City of Yelm, Washington.
Lead al?ency, City of Yelm, Washmgton.
EIS Required. The lead agency and the applicant have agreed that thiS proposal IS likel)' to have a significant
adverse Impact on the enVIronment. An enVIronmental impact statement (EIS) IS reqUired under RCW
43.21C,030(2)( c) and will be prepared. Matenals mdicatmg likely enVIronmental Impacts can be reviewed at our
offices,
The lead a!!ency has identified the Collowin!! areas for discussion in the EIS. AlternatIves are to mcludes: no
actIon, development of the property III accordance WIth current zomng, annexal10n and zonmg as proposed, and
annexatIon and zoning to accommodate more mtensIve development mcluding commerCial offices, Idenl1fied
impacts to be discussed mclude urban area expansIOn; populatIOn growth trends; antICipated demands for publtc
facilities and services, including schools, fire and police protectIon, roads, parks and public recreatIon, utilities,
water supply and distributIon and systems of utilities, solid waste collection and disposal and stormwater and
wastewater collection and treatment; Improvements reqUired and financmg necessary to altam "concurrency" of
such public facilities as required by the State Growth Management Act, loss of and mterference WIth productive
forestry, mmeral resource and agncultural lands; mventory and analYSIS of sensll1ve and cntIcal areas mcluding
wetlands, floodplainS, geologtcally unstable areas, streams and bodies of water, plant and animal habItat, and
aqUIfer recharge areas; Identification of open space corndors; affordable housmg supply; energy conservation,
air quality; nOise generation and reception; traffic and cITculatlon mcluding public transit; and effects upon rural
and urban populatIOn projections and growth areas.
Scoping. Agencies, affected tribes, and members of the public are inVIted to comment on the scope of the EIS.
You may comment on alternatives, mitigation measures, probable slgmficant adverse impacts, and licenses or
other approvals that may be reqUIred. The method and deadline for giVIng us your comments is:
Comments must bc received at City Hall in Yelm, Washmgton on or before Wednesday, Novembcr 13, 1991,
and should be addressed to Gene Borges, City Admlmstrator, at the address stated below Wntten and verbal
comments will also be accepted at the "Thurston Highland E.I,S, Scoplng Meetmg" to be held at 7'00 p.m. on
Wednesday, November 13, 1991, m the Council Chambers at City Hall, 105 Yelm Avenue West, Yelm,
Washington.
ResDonsible official. Gene Borges
Address.
City of Yelm
105 Yelm Avenue W
PO Box 479
Yelm, Waslungton
Phone: (206) 458-3244
Position/title. City administrator
Date/~-dot-lJ
Signature
e~
f/
~
' -z ./~_
..~.
.:. ..
.I'
I
, .
15. 14 ,3Rd AVEHUE S
22123/-" . ~ , ~ n'_ t/:
PROPOSED
ANNEXATION
AREA
, ~
o
~~
~~ O~
~V ~~
Oq;. ~~
<< @-
_~~1 22
~ 281'17
I 1000' ,
SCALE
'''-I
~-
~
u
z
o
U1
a:
w
w
Z
.,
Z
WI
1.')'
Z
5
;,
U1
Z
o
()
z
w
~
<:
:t
I.')
a:
<::
CD
~
o
o
DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE
AND REQUEST FOR COMMENTS ON SCOPE
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
THURSTON HIGHLANDS ANNEXATION
CORRECTION
~"NrJ 'JJ
The lead agency, City of Yelm, has identified the following..f.aet5 with respect to the
proposal as ootline8}n that determination of significance issuecron October 22, 1991
JtS.ai be." J7 ~ Cif, i y,/~
Area Proposed for Annexation
Additional study by the proponent reveals that the area proposed for annexation as
shown on the map accompanying the original declaration of significance and as
reproduced with this correction includes approximately 1870 acres. not 2058 acres as
originally stated in the declaration of significance and request for comments on scope of
E.I S land upon the o~inal map .
~"'"IJ',r~~ l,rll'l()/,/
Further, as shown on the map, portions of the area proposed for annexation lie within
Section 19 of Township 17 North, Range 2 East W M and Section 25 of Township 17
North, Range 1 East W M , in addition to those sections described in the original notice
;t:.e ,P'v~ ~ t}/ J/;r-n p" ;K. "'" 7 He,,")-oII,
1:Jccept as 3tDtcd Dbo , the area proposed for annexation remain)' as escrieoojr'( the ~
#1'1J.;...i declaration of significance and scoping notice
Responsible official.
Gene Borges
Address.
City of Yelm
105 Yelm Avenue W.
PO Box 479
Position/title.
City administrator
Yelm, Washington
Phone' (206) 458-3244
Signature
rvr
\J^ ~.
~ 1.
I
~ y~~
~~
t(
o
o
DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE
AND REQUEST FOR COMMENTS ON SCOPE OF
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
DescritJtion of vroDosal. Annexation to the City of Yelm of 2,058 acres lying southwesterly of the current city
limits in all or parts of SectIons 23, 24, 26, and 27 of Townslup 17 North, Range 1 East WilIamette Meridian.
(See accompanying map.) Concurrent amendments to the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Yelm are also
proposed. Proposed wrung for the area to be annexed would accommodate 3,400 residences, and 60 acres of
commercial development, plus supporting public and recreational facililles.
ProDonent. Thurston Highlands Associates, 1917 Frrst Avenue, Seattle, WA 98101,.Bud Welcome, Managmg
Partner
Location of proDosal. Sections 23, 24, 26, and 27 of Township 17 North, Range 1 East W.M., all lymg
southwesterly of the City of Yelm, WashIngton.
Lead al!encv. City of Yelm, Washmgton.
EIS Required The lead agency and the applicant have agreed that this proposal IS likely to have a slgmficant
adverse Impact on the enVIronment. An enVIronmental Impact statement (EIS) is reqUIred under RCW
43.21C.030(2)(c) and will be prepared. MaterIals mdicatmg likely enVlronmentallffipacts can be reVIewed at our
offices.
The lead al!ency has identified the followine areas for discussion in the EIS. AlternatIves are to mcludes: no
actIon, development of the property 10 accordance With current zonmg, annexatIon and zonmg as proposed, and
annexatIon and zoning to accommodate more mtensIVe development mcludmg commercial offices. Identified
Impacts to be discussed mclude urban area expansIOn; populatIon growth trends; antIcipated demands for public
facilities and services, including schools, fire and police protectIon, roads, parks and public recreatIOn, utilIties,
water supply and distribution and systems of utilities, solid waste collection and disposal and storm water and
wastewater collection and treatment, Improvements reqUired and financing necessary to altam "concurrency" of
such public facilities as required by the State Growth Management Act; loss of and interference With productIve
forestry, mineral resource and agrIcultural lands; inventory and analYSIS of sensItive and CrItical areas mcluding
wetlands, floodplams, geologIcally unstable areas, streams and bodies of water, plant and ammal habitat, and
aqUifer recharge areas; Identification of open space corndors; affordable housmg supply; energy conservation,
air quality; nOise generatIon and reception; traffic and mculatIon mcluding public transit; and effects upon rural
and urban population projectIOns and growth areas.
Scoping. AgenCies, affected tribes, and members of the public are IDVlted to comment on the scope of the EIS.
You may comment on alternatives, mitIgation measures, probable significant adverse Impacts, and licenses or
other approvals that may be reqUired. The method and deadline for giving us your comments IS:
Comments must be received at City Hall in Yelm, Washmgton on or before Wednesday, November 13, 1991,
and should be addressed to Gene Borges, City Admmlstrator, at the address stated below WrItten and verbal
comments will also be accepted at the "Thurston Highland E.I.S. Scopmg Meetmg" to be held at 7:00 p.m on
Wednesday, November 13, 1991, 10 the Council Chambers at City Hall, 105 Yelm Avenue West, Yelm,
Washmgton.
ResDonsible official. Gene Borges
Address.
City of Yelm
105 Yelm Avenue W
PO Box 479
Yelm, Washmgton
Phone: (206) 458-3244
Position/title. City admInIstrator
Date /L'-,;? of - 7J
SIg.nature
c2~
r/
.~~~
~/..,.,."
.......
c-
#
~ &-o~
~ ~~
<(0 ~
_ ~f:i122
~ 28
I 1000' I
SCALE'
18
D::::::::m11)
.....................
......................
...................
.....................
.....................
....................
...................
....................
.....................
....................
......................
....................
......................
.......................
...................
....................
-....................
-....................
....-".................
...-...............
...-.................
"ffim~mWm
.....................
;(::;:::::::::::
.....................
.......u.......
...................
....................
...................
....................
~:::::;:::::::::
....................
_.................
...................
.....................
~TII~"tllllillllll
PROPOSED
ANNEXATION
o
~
o
J)
3435
--------~..~---------~-~~
~ nt((~;~ ~
F osfPd I~'--c' {'f ~(! c~ ,: ~ > "~A
4
0,- /:) ~
k-:- e~ ~
/. ~e-- /!d, (I.d '-I!t1Jit GlJ-::J
L. q3@ 71ve- ar ~. S,c4 or 510
'=2~ () UrAlj a2/.. \ C ~,' II {~
':=" :J- (f (] U-.( ; ~ '1 rei l0' ..). ,-J"'''' 7;. JI 0
J-j. dtJr((nl~ fd. @ OIl)
r:- '; (
J' I) n i) k<CZ I\.. ()
L I' '
f/: I '/.1' r" ./' '/1 \'/ )7od-J J '/"1 /7/
r ' ~V'" i' . [ 0. t / /;: / ,. X
: '- i/
J} 'V'f110C~~
~.
'.A?
,'I
'0(. \ j ., :" J . .' . ".;-- -'~ /'
, :,~ .r --~. I C l,.o J ~ Ii i ~ i .::: f( --
(/,J) v>' . /F12 /c':JV
<" C d'['"
! '
~
f.
DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE
AND REQUEST FOR COMMEJI,'TS ON SCOPE OF
E!\'V1ROJl,?1EJI,'TAL IMPACT STATEME!\T
.~ ~
Descrintlon or nroDosnl Annex.atiol! to the Cit), of ") dm of 2,058 acres lying 5OUlhwcSIc.rly of the current city
limils in all or part' of Sectioll5 23, 24, 26, and 27 of TOYo'llship 17 North, Range 1 East WiJlamelle Meridian.
(See accompan)ing map.) Concurrent arr.endmen15 10 the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Yelm arc. also
proposed. Proposed zoning for the area 10 be annexed would accommodate 3,400 residences, and GO acres of
commcrcial development, plus supporting public and recreational facililies,
..1-
~1~
---"-
r .,
h )
.~ Thurston Hig."Jands ksooales, 1917 First Avenue, Seattle, WA 98101, Bud Welcome, Managing
Partner,
Locatinn of Droo05al. Sed ions 23, 24, 26, and 27 of Township J7 North, Range 1 East W.M" all lying
southwesterly' of the City of Yelm, Wa3hington.
Mild ."eno'. City of Yelm, Washington.
, ,
LIS Requirr4 The lead agency and the applicant have agreed thallhis propos.1 is likely to have a .ignificant
adverse impad on the environment. An environmental impad slalemenl (ElS) is required under RCW
43.2IC.030(2)(c) and will be prepared. Materials in<licating likely environmental impact. can be reviewed at our
offiecs.
The lead 81!t'nc\' has identified tile foll(""inl! a~ for discussion in lIle EJS. All~rnalives arc. to includes: no
8dion, development of tbe properly in accordance with current l.oning, an~exatioD and zoning as proposed, and
I annexation and wning to accommodate morc inle:ns.jyt development. including commercial 'offices, ldcntilied
impacts to be di~cU5SCd include urban area expansion; population gro\l,.1b trends; anticipated demanw for public
facilities and services, including schools, rlfC and poIicc proteclion, road!., parh and public recreation, utilities,
watcr supply and distribution and s)'Slems of utiliUe., solid wasle collection and disposal and storm"'aler and
wa.or,lc,",'ater collection and-treatment; imprcwcment5 required and financing necessary to aHain .concurrency" of
such public facilities as rcquired by the Slale GrOl'tb Management Act; loss of and inlerfe,encc ",ilh produclive
forestry, mineral resource and agricullural lands; iJr..."Cnlor)' and analysis of sensitive anQ aitic.al areas including
","ellands, noodplains, geologically unslablc areas, 5lreams and bodies of water, planl and animal habitat, and
aquifer recharge areas; identification of OJ'Y'"....D spact corridors; affordab1e- housing ~upply; energy rons('_ryalion;
air qualil); noise generation and reception; lraffic and circulation including public transit; and effects lJpon rural
and urban population projections and gfOv..'th arus-.
,\
:1
''1
?Ii
')
Swping. Agencies, affected tribes, and members 01 the public arc imilcd to comment on the s-copc of the EIS.
You may comment on altcrnalivcs, mitif,tl!ion m~urcsl prohable si!,"lliflcant adverse impacts, and licenses or
other apP"l'"als thai may be required. Tho meth:>d and deadline for giving us your comments is:
CommcnlS must he received at City Hall in ') c1u:, \\.as.hinglon on OJ before \\'cdnesday, November 13, ]991,
and should be addressed to Gene Borgc." Cit}' Ac:ninislrator, allhe address stated below \\ rillen and vcrbal
commcnls ",ill also be accepted at thc 7huT>ton Hifhland E.LS, Scoping Mecling 10 be held al 7:00 p.m. on
\\'cdncsday, Novemher 1:\ 1991, in Ihe Counci: Clambers at City Hall, 105 ) elm Avenue. V.'CM, )'elm,
\\'asllinglon.
Rf~flon~ilJlf pITidlll. Gene Borges
~
Cit}' of.., elm
105 Yelm Avenue W
PO Box 479
Yelm, \Va~h:nglon
Phone: (2D6) 455.3244
\;,
rt,~ili(ln!tillc. Cityadmini!.trator
D;'LcJL'_~~": - fj
SionoluTc a,.... ~
r7 (;-/A'_
BboRGk&VSEN CONSULTlN~..E""Ct"'HRS.INC.
I
t
I"
1
I
,'''1":"
~ ..
. .
~05 Yelm AVeIl1.~e West
, ,. P O. Box 479
Yel.n1, WashiIlgton. 98597
206-458-3244
TO:
Sandy Mache
DennIs T,Su,~
Jon Potter
Gene BorRes
Shelly BadRcr
Thomas ~killlOgS Il,E.
Perry She,ll. I) ,E~
f:.'"
FROM: crry OF YELM
Date: October 2, 199t'
.;.'~'
RE: Ar,cndll. for O<<;tobcr flth Mc~ting
" ,
.'lJu~ ilf:c:odJl f(,r the: Illec:tlfl/: Jlt Q~ J.I/JII OR October 8th JS It:5/cd bdow. Plc3Se Jr.VICW Ihe l/ell1.5 Mil c,ml3d
GClle jJo'l{CS 31 43ll--.1244 should IhCfC be ;JJ!V ",dlil/Jolls or com,"CllOI1S~
'DISCUSS Inp Scope of Wod .'JIJd~'dJl:rltllr.fof Il1e 00':1: I ranspor/3lJOII Sludy.
-1JISCUSS Ihe worl: pro/VillI/for /hc: .}9,:J.9 Cmwln M3n3jJ("IJJl~1I1 p!.vJJ Md Inc: Jr.131Ion.5nIpS loIn'.'
Em-'J/VIIIJlr.:tJI:JI ,Assr.ssIIJelll rcqu(rc:-d,f(1( tne proposr.d M/lC.Y3/"U! .iIld lor. {fj-b3/1 Crowto
nOllod;uy
-DIscuss /JJe dt~dopnJ(::11I olll1e. 'SCOl'lIlg If, J{'f IheJiilVI.f'l'JJJJlr.:t,I//.1 Jiof'//cI Stllt('.Jll('.Jl/ for 'torusloll
Iughl.'iJlds. (Scaf!e I" bcp.n;parc:d b)' SoIIIldy Mad:u~)
.. .oIS(..//.$.S' co/;/n'/Jutlao /f:r.::5J{'f qly if SCfY((:C:S 3ml wor,(- effort.
.' (,;.,
"?"~~
o
o
Skillings & Chamberlain
Attn Perry Shea
PO Box 5080
Lacey, WA 98503
Department of Ecology
Environmental Review Section
Attn Barbara Ritchie
Mail Stop PV-11
Olympia, WA 98504-8711
Thurston County Assessor
2000 Lakeridge Drive SW
Olympia, WA 98502
Thurston County Auditor
2000 Lakeridge Drive SW
Olympia, WA 98502
Don Barnard
City of Yelm
PO Box 479
Yelm, WA 98597
Thurston Co Building Dept.
Building 1
2000 Lakeridge Drive SW
Olympia, W A 98502
Thurston County
Boundary Review Board
2000 Lakeridge Drive SW
Olympia, WA 98502
UCBO
Attention Cindy Cecil
PO Box 446
Yelm, WA 98597
County Commissioners
Building 1
2000 Lakeridge Drive SW
Olympia, W A 98502
(\,
u
o
Thurston County
Communications
Building 3
2000 Lakeridge Drive SW
Olympia, WA 98502
Chief Glenn Dunhnam
Yelm Police Department
PO Box 479
Yelm, WA 98597
City of Yelm Fire Department
Attn Bill Steele
PO Box 777
Yelm, WA 98597
Judge Tom Huff
Yelm Municipal Court
PO Box 479
Yelm, WA 98597
Tim Peterson
City of Yelm
PO Box 479
Yelm, WA 98597
Thurston County
Public Works
Attn Bill Turner
2000 Lakeridge Drive SW
Olympia, WA 98502
Thurston County
Road Division
Attn Jim Bachmeier
9700 Tilly Road
Olympia, WA 98502
Yelm Telephone Co
Attn Tom Gorman
PO Box 593
Yelm, WA 98597
Randall Walker
PO Box 0
Yelm, WA 98597
n
U
o
Postmaster
Yelm Post Office
Yelm, WA 98597 - 9998
Thurston County Planning
2000 Lakeridge Drive SW
Olympia, WA 98502
Puget Power
PO Box 486
Yelm, WA 98597
Department of Revenue
Attn Joan Hays
Txpyr Acct. Administration
General Administration Bldg
MS AX-02
Olympia, WA 98504
Thurston County Elections
Attn Steve Homan
2000 Lakeridge Drive SW
Olympia, WA 98502
Washington Natural Gas
Attn Jim Chartrey
3120 Martin Way East
Olympia, WA 98506
Daisy Lawton
City of Yelm
PO Box 479
Yelm, WA 98597
LeMay, Inc.
PO Box 44459
Tacoma, WA 98444-0459
'Thurston Regional
Planning Council
Attn Harold Robertson
2000 Lakeridge Drive SW
Olympia, WA 98502
n
U
o
Nisqually Tribal Council
Attn George Walter
4820 She-Nah-Num Drive SE
Olympia, WA 98506
Nisqually Indian Tribe
Attn Kim M Crawford
4820 She-Nah-Num Drive SE
Olympia, WA 98506
Squaxin Tribal Council
Attn Jeff Dickison
SE 70 Squaxin Lane
Shelton, WA 98584
Nisqually River Planning Council
Attn Steve Craig
4820 She-Nah-Num Drive SE
Olympia, WA 98506
Olympic Air Pollution Control Authority
Attn Charles E. Peace
120 East State Ave
Olympia, WA 98501
Washington Dept. of Wildlife
Attn Gordy Zillges
600 Capitol Way North
Olympia, WA 98504
Washington Dept. of Natural Resources
Attn Dave Dietzman
John Cherberg Building
MS - LB-13
Olympia, WA 98504
Washington Dept. of Fisheries
Attn Connie Iten
General Administration Bldg
MS AX-11
Olympia, WA 98504
Yelm School District
404 Yelm Avenue W
Yelm, WA 98597
o
o
Washington Dept. of Transportation
Attn George Simms
Transportation Building
Olympia, WA 98504-7329
Representative Jennifer Belcher
323 Maple Park Ave SE
Olympia, WA 98501
Representative Karen Frasier
6710 Sierra Drive SE
Lacey, WA 98503
Senator Mike Kreidler
425 Cherberg Building
Olympia, WA 98504
Washington Dept. of Agriculture
Attn Mary Poochey
406 General Administration Bldg
MS AX - 41
Olympia, WA 98504
Thurston County
Parks & Recreation Dept.
Attn Michael Welter
529 West 4th
Olympia, WA 98502
Town of Rainier
102 Rochester Street W
Rainier, WA 98576
City of Lacey
Attn Bob Patnick
PO Box "B"
Lacey, WA 98503
City of Roy
Attn Penny Barlow, City Clerk
PO Box 700
Roy, WA 98580
o
o
Pierce County Planning Dept.
2401 South 35th Street
Tacoma, WA 98409-7490
Intercity Transit
Attn Randy Riness/Michael VanGelder
PO Box 659
Olympia, WA 98507
Timberland Library
105 Yelm Avenue W
Yelm, WA 98597
Mr Don Miller
Nisqually Valley News
207 Yelm Avenue W
Yelm, WA 98597
State of Washington
Dept. of Community Development
Attn Mike McCormick
Growth Management Division
101 General Administration Bldg
Olympia, WA 98504
Michael Van Gelder
PO Box 659
Olympia, WA 98507
Greg Griffith
Community Development
Archaeology /Historic
MS KL-11
Olympia, WA 98504
Alexander W Mackie
OWENS DAVIES MACKIE
PO Box 187
Olympia, WA 98507
John & Patsy Purvis
14504 Berry Valley Road SE
Yelm, WA 98597
n
U
o
Ute Allen
1"1010 Smith Prairie Road SE
Yelm, WA 98597
Donald Anderson
8540 93rd Avenue
Yelm, WA 98597
Gene Borges
Yelm City Hall
PO Box 479
Yelm, WA 98597
Eleanor Brand
12401 Bronson Street SE
Tenino, WA 98589
Jim Brown
10823 Morris Road SE
Yelm, WA 98597
Norman Buckholz
29630 11th Ave SW
Federal Way, WA 98023
Steve Craig
Dept. of Ecology
MS PV-11
Olympia, WA 98504
Councilman A. Drogseth
Yelm City Council
PO Box 273
Yelm, WA 98597
Tom Gorman
PO Box 593
Yelm, WA 98597
Joe Huddleston
14129 93rd Avenue SE
Yelm, WA 98597
o
o
Cecelia Jenkins
Dir Community Education
PO Box 476
Yelm, WA 98597
Councilman Rick Kolilis
Yelm City Council
1512 Yelm Ave West
Yelm, WA 98597
Councilman Amos Lawton
PO Box 1182
Yelm, WA 98597
Carol Lewis
PO Box 925
Yelm, WA 98597
Richard Molter
8411 Aspen Ct. SE
Yelm, WA 98597
Vernon Staack
11740 Cook Road SE
Yelm, WA 98597
The Olympian
PO Box 407
Olympia, WA 98507
Mayor Bob Sanders
PO Box 141
Yelm, WA 98597
Zachary Smith
1210 N puget
Olympia, WA 98506
Judy Nettleton
PO Box 217
McKenna, WA 98558
Kathy Wolf
PO Box 966
Yelm, WA 98597
o
o
Representative Randy Dorn
House of Representatives
House Office Building
Olympia, WA 98504
Representative Marilyn Rasmussen
House of Representatives
33419 Mountain Hwy E.
Eatonville, WA 98328
Colonel Carroll Dickson
Garrison Commander
HDQTRS I CORPS & FORT LEWIS
Ft. Lewis, WA 98433-5000
Commander
Corps & Ft. Lewis
Attn AFZH-DEQjJERBIC
Ft. Lewis, WA 98533
Cathy A. Jerbic
Commander
I Corps & Fort Lewis
Attn AFQH - DEQ
Fort Lewis, WA 98433
Thurston County Environmental Health
Attn Gregg Gruenfelder
921 Lakeridge Drive, Room 113
Olympia, WA 98502
Yelm Chamber of Commerce
Attn Kathy Gilliam, Executive Director
PO Box 444
Yelm, WA 98597
Thurston County Economic Development Council
Attn Kathy A. Combs, Executive Director
721 Columbia S W
Olympia, WA 98501
KCM
Attn Dennis Su
1917 First Avenue
Seattle, WA 98101
o
Q
CERTIFICATE OF MAILING
I, Linda Feldtman, certify under penalty of perjury that a copy of the
DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE AND REQUEST FOR COMMENTS ON SCOPE OF
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT and a proposed annexation area map was sent
by United States Mail, postage prepaid, at Olympia, Washington to the parties listed on
the attached Exhibit A on the 22nd day of October, 1991, and to the party listed on
Exhibit B on the 23rd day of October, 1991
DATED this 23rd day of October, 1991
6fJu-/0~
Linda Feldtman
\
\
\
\
o
Skillings & Chamberlain
Attn Perry Shea
PO Box 5080
Lacey, WA 98503
Department of Ecology
Environmental Review Section
Attn Barbara Ritchie
Mail Stop PV-11
Olympia, WA 98504-8711
Thurston County Assessor
2000 Lakeridge Drive SW
Olympia, W A 98502
Thurston County Auditor
2000 Lakeridge Drive SW
Olympia, WA 98502
Don Barnard
City of Yelm
PO Box 479
Yelm, WA 98597
o
Thurston Co Building Dept.
Building 1
2000 Lakeridge Drive SW
Olympia, WA 98502
Thurston County
Boundary Review Board
2000 Lakeridge Drive SW
Olympia, WA 98502
UCBO
Attention Cindy Cecil
PO Box 446
Yelm, WA 98597
County Commissioners
Building 1
2000 Lakeridge Drive SW
Olympia, WA 98502
o
EXHIBIT A TO CERTIFICATE OF MAILING
o
o
Thurston County
Communications
Building 3
2000 Lakeridge Drive SW
Olympia, WA 98502
Chief Glenn Dunhnam
Yelm Police Department
PO Box 479
Yelm, WA 98597
City of Yelm Fire Department
Attn Bill Steele
PO Box 777
Yelm, WA 98597
Judge Tom Huff
Yelm Municipal Court
PO Box 479
Yelm, WA 98597
Tim Peterson
City of Yelm
PO Box 479
Yelm, WA 98597
Thurston County
Public Works
Attn Bill Turner
2000 Lakeridge Drive SW
Olympia, WA 98502
Thurston County
Road Division
Attn Jim Bachmeier
9700 Tilly Road
Olympia, WA 98502
Yelm Telephone Co
Attn Tom Gorman
PO Box 593
Yelm, WA 98597
Randall Walker
PO Box 0
Yelm, WA 98597
o
o
Postmaster
Yelm Post Office
Yelm, WA 98597 - 9998
Thurston County Planning
2000 Lakeridge Drive SW
Olympia, WA 98502
Puget Power
PO Box 486
Yelm, WA 98597
Department of Revenue
Attn Joan Hays
Txpyr Acct. Administration
General Administration Bldg
MS AX-02
Olympia, WA 98504
Thurston County Elections
oAttn Steve Homan
2000 Lakeridge Drive SW
Olympia, WA 98502
Washington Natural Gas
Attn Jim Chartrey
3120 Martin Way East
Olympia, WA 98506
Daisy Lawton
City of Yelm
PO Box 479
Yelm, WA 98597
LeMay, Inc
PO Box 44459
Tacoma, WA 98444-0459
, Thurston Regional
Planning Council
Attn Harold Robertson
2000 Lakeridge Drive SW
Olympia, WA 98502
o
o
Nisqually Tribal Council
Attn George Walter
4820 She-Nah-Num Drive SE
Olympia, WA 98506
Nisqually Indian Tribe
Attn Kim M Crawford
4820 She-Nah-Num Dnve SE
Olympia, WA 98506
Squaxin Tribal Council
Attn Jeff Dickison
SE 70 Squaxin Lane
Shelton, WA 98584
Nisqually River Planning Council
Attn Steve Craig
4820 She-Nah-Num Drive SE
Olympia, WA 98506
Olympic Air Pollution Control Authority
Attn Charles E. Peace "
120 East State Ave
Olympia, WA 98501
Washington Dept. of Wildlife
Attn Gordy Zillges
600 Capitol Way North
Olympia, WA 98504
Washington Dept. of Natural Resources
Attn Dave Dietzman
John Cherberg Building
MS - LB-13
Olympia, WA 98504
Washington Dept. of Fishenes
Attn connie Iten
General Administration Bldg
MS AX-11
Olympia, WA 98504
Yelm School District
404 Yelm Avenue W
Yelm, WA 98597
o
o
Washington Dept. of Transportation
Attn George Simms
Transportation Building
Olympia, WA 98504-7329
Representative Jennifer Belcher
323 Maple Park Ave SE
Olympia, WA 98501
Representative Karen Frasier
6710 Sierra Drive SE
Lacey, WA 98503
Senator Mike Kreidler
425 Cherberg Building
Olympia, WA 98504
Washington Dept. of Agriculture
Attn Mary Poochey
406 General Administration Bldg
MS AX - 41
Olympia, WA 98504
Thurston County
Parks & Recreation Dept.
Attn Michael Welter
529 West 4th
Olympia, WA 98502
Town of Rainier
102 Rochester Street W
Rainier, WA 98576
City of Lacey
Attn Bob Patnick
PO Box "B"
Lacey, WA 98503
City of Roy
Attn Penny Barlow, City Clerk
PO Box 700
Roy, WA 98580
o
o
Pierce County Planning Dept.
2401 South 35th Street
Tacoma, WA 98409-7490
Intercity Transit
Attn Randy Riness/Michael VanGelder
PO Box 659
Olympia, WA 98507
Timberland Library
105 Yelm Avenue W
Yelm, WA 98597
Mr Don Miller
Nisqually Valley News
207 Yelm Avenue W
Yelm, WA 98597
State of Washington
Dept. of Community Development
Attn Mike McCormick
Growth Management Division
101 General Administration Bldg
Olympia, WA 98504
Michael Van Gelder
PO Box 659
Olympia, WA 98507
Greg Griffith
Community Development
Archaeology/Historic
MS KL-11
Olympia, WA 98504
Alexander W Mackie
OWENS DAVIES MACKIE
PO Box 187
Olympia, WA 98507
John & Patsy Purvis
14504 Berry Valley Road SE
Yelm, WA 98597
o
o
Ute Allen
17010 Smith Prairie Road SE
Yelm, WA 98597
Donald Anderson
8540 93rd Avenue
Yelm, WA 98597
Gene Borges
Yelm City Hall
PO Box 479
Yelm, WA 98597
Eleanor Brand
12401 Bronson Street SE
Tenino, WA 98589
Jim Brown
10823 Morris Road SE
Yelm, WA 98597
Norman Buckholz
29630 11th Ave SW
Federal Way, WA 98023
Steve Craig
Dept. of Ecology
MS PV-11
Olympia, WA 98504
Councilman A. Drogseth
Yelm City Council
PO Box 273
Yelm, WA 98597
Tom Gorman
PO Box 593
Yelm, WA 98597
Joe Huddleston
14129 93rd Avenue SE
Yelm, WA 98597
o
o
Cecelia Jenkins
Dir Community Education
PO Box 476
Yelm, WA 98597
Councilman Rick Kolilis
Yelm City Council
1512 Yelm Ave West
Yelm, WA 98597
Councilman Amos Lawton
PO Box 1182
Yelm, WA 98597
Carol Lewis
PO Box 925
Yelm, WA 98597
Richard Molter
8411 Aspen Ct. SE
Yelm, WA 98597
Vernon Staack
11740 Cook Road SE
Yelm, WA 98597
The Olympian
PO Box 407
Olympia, WA 98507
Mayor Bob Sanders
PO Box 141
Yelm, WA 98597
Zachary Smith
1210 N Puget
Olympia, WA 98506
Judy Nettleton
PO Box 217
McKenna, WA 98558
Kathy Wolf
PO Box 966
Yelm, WA 98597
o
o
Representative Randy Dorn
House of Representatives
House Office Building
Olympia, WA 98504
Representative Marilyn Rasmussen
House of Representatives
33419 Mountain Hwy E.
Eatonville, WA 98328
01
Colonel Carroll Dickson
Garrison Commander
HDQTRS I CORPS & FORT LEWIS
Ft. Lewis, WA 98433-5000
Commander
Corps & Ft. Lewis
Attn AFZH-DEQ/ JERBIC
Ft. Lewis, WA 98533
Cathy A. Jerbic
Commander
I Corps & Fort Lewis
Attn AFQH - DEQ
Fort Lewis, WA 98433
Thurston County Environmental Health
Attn Gregg Gruenfelder
921 Lakeridge Drive, Room 113
Olympia, WA 98502
Yelm Chamber of Commerce
Attn Kathy Gilliam, Executive Director
PO Box 444
Yelm, WA 98597
Thurston County Economic Development Council
Attn Kathy A. Combs, Executive Director
721 Columbia S W
Olympia, WA 98501
KCM
Attn Dennis Su
1917 First Avenue
Seattle, WA 98101
o 0
Jon Potter EXHIBIT B TO CERTIFICATE OF MAILING
Entranco Engineers, Inc
10900 N E. 8th Street, Ste 300
Bellevue, WA 98004
"
_or' .1-,/......_..- -;.:.ot.......~.--...~ll''W ---~
Depart:nent of Ecology
Environmental Review Section
Mail Stop m,._.. 11. i'~~~~.~.~~"'":';-'
c Y' ..~.~'f.:'>t.."'-....
Olynpia, WA;f9SS0:i::S711.
,-':'<~ .. i~~~I~"
,J~. ~~1~iJi.~~i~T~'
THURS'rON CO ASSESSOR
2000 LAKERIDGE DR SW
OLYMPIA WA~:, 9_~?~Q2-'
':c'~~fSs~~~{';.:
"",.....-- ~-- - .
;---~
rTHU~ Co AUDI~~:: ,
2000 LAKERlDGE DR SW
OLYMPIA WA. 98502
.<-' :~}.<:;/t.'!' ~"..\..
~ '~~~;:yj{y-'"
----'- -
WARNARD ;.;,
>': - .j..
OF YELM
:> PO BOX 479<
YELM WA 98597
THURSTON CO BLOG DEPT
BLOG 1
2000 LAKERIDGE DR SW
OLYMPIA WA 98502
THURSTON COUNTY
BOUNDARY REVIEW BOARD
2000 I..AKERIDGE DR SW
OLYMPIA WA 98502
UCBO
ATTN CINDY CECIL
P.O. BOX 446
YELM WA 98597
~
II
P
J
~
t <
r"'\
'I"-. _/LSTON CO FIRE DEPI'
ATfN BILL STEELE
P,O. BOX 777
YELM WA 98597
,
I
I .
I . JUDGE TOM HUFF
I < YELM MUNICIPAL COURT
I P,O, BOX 479
I YELM WA 98597
\
I
l . ':g!1.YETERSON
I ~ OF YELM
\ PO BOX 479
~. YELM WA 98597
. THURSTON CO PUBLIC WORKS
. ATTN BILL TURNER
2000 LAKERIDGE DR SW
. OLYMPIA WA 98502
THURSTON CO ROAD DIVISION
ATTN JIM BACHMEIER
9700 TILLY RD
OLYMPIA WA 98502
YELM TELEPHONE CO.
P.O. BOX 593
YELM WA 98597
. '
RANDALL WALKER
P,O, BOX 0
YELM WA 98597
COUmY COMMISSIONERS
BLDG 1
2000 LAKERIDGE DR SW
OLYMPIA WA 98502
THURS'ION CO COMMUNICATIONS
SLOG 3
2000 LAKERIDGE DR SW
OLYMPIA WA 98502
CHIEF GLENN DUNNAM
YELM POLICE DEPARTMENT
P.O. BOX 479
YELM WA 98597
I:
f~.
-----~ '.,
.t
tt
. t.!
t'
~_.
.~ ~,
I
j
I
. YELM POST OFFICE
. YELM WA 98597-9998
THURSTON CO. PLANNING
2000 LAKERIDGE DR SW
OLYMPIA WA 98502
PUGET POWER
. P.O. BOX 486
YELM WA 98597
~r,
II
\1
~
~ ,..-
-WI .
~-
I
I
I
-1-
I
I
I
,
--~
fJ
"
o
:1
DEpT OF REVENUE
ATTN: JOAN HAYS
TXPYR ACCT ADMIN:I:STRA'rI.ON_
G'EN-ERAL'--ADi~IN-'B'L6G I
MS AX-02
OLYMPIA WA 98504
1 ~
~
THURSTON CO ELECTIONS
A'ITN STEVE HOMAN
2000 LAKERIDGE DR ~v
OLYMPIA WA 98502
WASHI~TON NATURAL GAS
3120 MARTIN WAY EAST
OLYMPIA, WA 98506
DAI SY LAWTON
CITY OF YELM
P.O. BOX 479
YELM, WA 98597
__--..J
_LEMAY, INC.
P.O. BOX 44459
TACOMA I WA 98444-0459
.
-
Department of.. ECQlbgy .'~
Environmental Review'Section'~
Mail Stop PV-ll ~
Olympia. WA 98504-8711 . ,J
~~1=1iii'i:~'."r,:>.~(;;:i.';'.\il'f-iiir~.:;;'~, ""-'" '.:.:..t....: .;...... '<i.iL~~_..
THURSTON CO ASSESSOR
2000 LAKERIDGE DR SW
OLYMPIA WA 98502
_0- _~__ _~
~THURSTON CO AUDITOR
2000 LAKERIDGE DR SW
OLYMPIA WA 98502
'''- .----~.....: -'
DON BARNARD
TOWN OF YELM
PO BOX 479
YELM WA 98597
,;~.......,.,.i_.....--ol
THURSTON CO BLDG DEPT
BLDG 1
2000 LAKERIDGE DR SW
OLYMPIA WA 98502
10
I'
I,
I
-~ _.--I~,
~', ;~~ ,\.!;.- ,""",....c _, ,.............~"..........""'.,... .... ......."~>..< _ '0"
,',,:. i~., <}'~~"~'j ';',' "~'~~',j_' """~I1iIo.",~,,';'<i....r~""i,;;;; "'~'':.:'~''~ ~-~""'i""~
CJRSTON CO FIRE DEPT
ATI'N BILL STEELE
P.O. BOX 777
YELM WA 98597
I
I
I ~
I JUDGE TOM HUFF
I YELM MUNICIPAL COURT
I P,O, BOX 479
I YELM WA 98597
DEPT OF REVENUE
ATTN: JOAN HAYS
_,_T X P XIL~,~~'J'_.l\l?k1JJ'llS_T.Rb-'I.~,r,Q~L
GENERAL ADMIN BLDG
MS AX-02
OLYMPIA WA 98504
~---~---<
i
i
I TIM PETERSON
i "
I TOWN OF YELM
\. PO BOX 479
~ i YELM WA 98597
THURSTON CO PUBLIC WORKS
ATI'N BILL TURNER
2000 LAKERIDGE DR SW
OLYMPIA WA 98502
_,_........___._"__~ . ___ b..,.olI ~.<bd :....LI If. ----od
THURSTON CO ROAD DIVISION
ATI'N JIM BACHMEIER
9700 TILLY RD
OLYMPIA WA 98502
--..... ';":"'. -~.~------~--- - - ----- ......_'----
THURSTON COUNTY
BOUNDARY REVIEW BOARD
2000 LAKERIDGE DR SW
OLYMPIA WA 98502
UCBO
ATI'N CINDY CECIL
P.O. BOX 446
YELM WA 98597
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BLDG 1
2000 LAKERIDGE DR SW
OLYMPIA WA 98502
THURSTON CO COMMUNICATIONS
BLDG 3
2000 LAKERIDGE DR SW
OLYMPIA WA 98502
CHIEF GLENN DUNNAM
YELM POLICE DEPARTMENT
P.O. BOX 479
YELM WA 98597
I
----~
~l
w
r"'- "
f
~
i!
Ii ",-,-.,:..;~
----,-,-,-- -~f;"""
!~;
f!
I
I. ~-~._>.-
...,_....." t:"
11'(;
} J
Pi
\ .'
i
YELM TELEPHONE CO.
P,O. BOX 593
YELM WA 98597
~~-' --.. '.........
'" 1
RANDALL WALKER
P,O. BOX 0
YELM WA 98597
--'--~------._>-
, YELM POST OFFICE
YELM WA 98597-9998
THURSTON CO ELECTIONS
ATI'N STEVE HOMAN
2000 LAKERIDGE DR ~J
OLYMPIA WA 98502
WASHINGTON NATURAL GAS
3120 MARTIN WAY EAS'I'
OLYMPIA, WA 98506
--.----..
-,--~._---'.---'-
I
I
I
....--1,-
I
DAI SY LAWTON
CITY OF YELM
P.O. BOX 479
YELM, WA 98597
--,------,-.---
LEMAY, INC.
P . 0 . BOX 4 4 4 5 9
TACOMA, WA 98444-045<
THURSTON CO. PLANNING
2000 LAKERIDGE DR SW
OLYMPIA WA 98502
. PUGET POWER
P,O, BOX 486
YELM WA 98597
~'j I
~. ('l
t".'l
:.'1. "'.l
i'.ri
l ,~
;,~' J
:",
~. ,>,
MICHAEL VAN
PO BOX 659
OLYMPIA WA
HOWARD J. ALEXANDER SR
PO BOX 206
YELM WA 98597
ELIZABETH KIRK ALLSMAN
11148 BALD HILL RD SE
YELM WA 98597
KELLY & RICHARD ARNOLD
16307 WOODBROOK LN SE
RAINIER WA 98576
BARBARA BAKER
PO BOX 407
YELM WA 98597
JOANN BAKER
PO BOX 343
YELM WA 98597
GERALD BANGHART
PO BOX 44
YELM WA 98597
ERNEST RALPH BARKER
9021 BURNETT ST SE
YELM WA 98597
STEVE BARTLETT
11805 HARRIS RD SE
YELM WA 98597
c=JLIZABETH BARTLETT
PO BOX 1377
YELM WA 98597
DR ROBERT BASHAM
116 PT FOSDICK CIRCLE NW
GIG HARBOR WA 98335
ROBERT BEAL
8710 MT VIEW RD SE
YELM WA 98597
M. MADELEINE BONGIORNO
21636 ELBOW LK RD
YELM WA 98597
TRENA M BRADLEY
PO BOX 1349
YELM WA 98597
RONALD & DEBBIE CARL
9021 BURNETT RD SE
YELM WA 98597
LESTER CLARABEAU
14103 89TH SE
YELM WA 98597
STEPHEN COLE
PO BOX 1292
YELM WA 98597
HELEN CURETON
14812 FOX HILL RD
YELM WA 98597
MARGARET CURRIE
5939 VAIL LP RD SE
RAINIER WA 98576
C=>as & ROSIE DARLING
11909 VAIL RD SE
YELM WA 98597
FRANK J EVANCICH
4337 EAST C ST
TACOMA WA 98404
LYN EVANS
15120 88TH AVE SE
YELM WA 98597
ESATEYS
554 EVANS RD
TOLEDO WA 98591
ELIZABETH FALKINBURG
PO BOX 47
YELM WA 98597
R. & L. FANKHAUSER
9123 KILLION RD SE
YELM WA 98597
RUTH K FORD
483 SALMON CR DR
MOSSYROCK WA 98569
SARA & ROBERT FOSTER
13810 48TH AVE SE
YELM WA 98597
FAY GOODSON
35403 8TH AVE S
ROY WA 98580
BARBARA GRIFFITH
YELM WA 98597
YELM ZONING
D:\ZONING.YLM
Page 1 of 6
C E GIMMETT
11831 BALD HILL RD SE
YELM WA 98597
P. MCCOSHEEN-GUDGELL
PO BOX 594
YELM WA 98597
HEDRICK W HARRIS
15215 133RD AVE SE
YELM WA 98507
PHYLLIS J HAYES
1023 S ADAMS #159
OLYMPIA WA 98501
BONNIE HEIKES
8710 MT VIEW RD SE
YELM WA 98507
DONALD L HENKSEN
8743 CULLENS RD SE
YELM WA 98597
JUDY HOLSINGER
PO BOX 563
RAINIER WA 98576
JOSEPH M HORN
PO BOX 420
YELM WA 98597
JOAN JOHNSON
6030 SEWARD PARK AVE S
SEATTLE WA 98118
BOBBY & LUCILLE JONES
10029 GREEN ACRES LN SE
YELM WA 98597
C'RISHA KEENAN
17904 OVER LAKE CT
YELM WA 98597
ALEXANDER MACKIE
OWENS, DAVIES, MACKIE
PO BOX 187
OLYMPIA WA
J. Z. KNIGHT
14507 YELM HWY SE
YELM WA 98597
MICHAEL SCHUBART
PO BOX 192
MCKENNA WA 98558
STEPHEN R KLEIN
11840 SHAMBALA LN SE
YELM WA 98597
MAGGIE MATHEY
18981 COOK RD
YELM WA 98597
JEAN D KNIGHT
27045 10TH AVE S.
KENT WA 98032
ORREN PEUGH
PO BOX 1103
EATONVILLE WA 98328
JACK PEUGH
15405 DES MOINES
MEMORIAL DR
SEATTLE WA 98148
MARIAN LANCASTER
PO BOX 21
RAINIER WA 98586
O. C. MCCLAUGHLIN
8710 MT VIEW RD SE
YELM WA 98597
KITTY MCKIM
305 RAILROAD
YELM WA 98597
NEVA R MCMONIGLE
17231 HANNUS RD SE
YELM WA 98597
SARAH G MCRAE
15838 VAIL LOOP RD SE
RAINIER WA 98576
JAMES R TOMLINSON
DAVIES PEARSON, PC
PO BOX 1657
TACOMA WA 98401
JERRY MAHAN
27607 10TH S.
FEDERAL WAY WA 98003
MICHELE MARIE
PO BOX 322
YELM WA 98597
WILLIAM 0 MASON
11324 VAIL RD SE
YELM WA 98597
CARL & ZELLA MA'FHEWS
8741 CULLENS RD SE
YELM WA 98597
JOHN & SUZANNE MAURER
YELM WA 98597
YELM ZONING
D:\ZONING.YLM
PAGE 2 OF 6
ELAINE MICKELSON
16302 143RD AVE SE
YELM WA 98597
OVID & PHYLLIS MOORE
11337 BALD HILL RD SE
YELM WA 98597
BARBARA MORANDO
20011 NEAT RD
YELM WA 98597
HELENA & FREDERICK MOTT
15240 88TH SE
YELM WA 98597
MARC MILLER
11805 HARRIS RD SE
YELM WA 98507
HUBERT A NIEHLING
8832 RATHBUN RD SE
YELM WA 98597
RON & MARGARET NIXON
RT 1, BOX 7162
SPANISH FORK UT
DIAN PARKER
6435 OLD OLYMPIC HWY SW
OLYMPIA WA 98502
W. PIEPER
BOX 226
MCKENNA WA 98558
ANN POLLOCK-GOMES
PO BOX 1426
YELM WA 98597
.---
~bHN & PATSY PURVIS
14504 BERRY VALLEY RD
YELM WA 98597
M. REYNOLDS
8710 MT VIEW RD SE
YELM WA 98597
PATRICIA RICHKER
14436 93RD AVE SE
YELM WA 98597
RICK HALVORSEN
PO BOX 1533
TACOMA WA 98401
RODNEY ROBINSON
11321 BALD HILL RD SE
YELM WA 98597
MELISSA ROSE
19245 COOK RD
YELM WA 98597
SHARON ROSENBURGER
PO BOX 701
YELM WA 98597
MR & MRS ROTHWELL
8735 MT VIEW RD SE
YELM WA 98597
VICKI RUNYAN
PO BOX 1444
YELM WA 98597
KAREN & KEN SARTAIN
9121 KILLIO STREET SE
YELM WA 98597
C~RRY SCHMIDT
tiT 1 BOX 138T
EATONVILLE WA 98328
JANICE L SEATON
8623 RAINIER RD SE
OLYMPIA WA 98502
MARY A SILVIS
ISABEL H HAY
16330 RAILWAY ROAD SE
YELM WA 98597
GREGORY SIMMONS
PO BOX 1329
YELM WA 98597
TERI SIMPSON
15140 FOX HILL RD
YELM WA 98597
JANIS AND DIANNA STIEBR
JANIS AND ZELMA STIEBRS
PO BOX 132
YELM WA 98597
HEINZ AND EDITH STOLZ
PO BOX 700
YELM WA 98597
DOROTHY STOREY
PO BOX 693
YELM WA 98597
T BRUCE THOMAS
PO BOX 1444
YELM WA 98597
ClARE WADE
115 CREEK ST SE
YELM WA 98597
YELK ZONING
D:\ZONING.YLM
PAGE 3 OF 6
NORMA WAKATSUKI
PO BOX 1440
YELM WA 98597
TANI WALKER
11428 VAIL RD SE
YELM WA 98597
RICHARD A WANAMAKER
17904 OVERLAKE CT
YELM WA 98597
MR & MRS WEIDINGER
11025 VANCIL TD SE
YELM WA 98597
JOHN & ANN HILL
10945 VANCIL RD
YELM WA 98597
KAREN WULFUKUHLI
8743 CULLENS RD SE
YELM WA 98597
BETH YOUNGBLOOD
11148 BALD HILL RD
YELM WA 98597
KAREN YULE
14637 LAWRENCE LK RD
YELM WA 98597
JUDI ZIMMERMAN
9243 MT VIEW RD
YELM WA 98597
SPE-Ak-fOR":',
MELVIN HOUSEHOLDER
8646 CANAL RD SE
YELM WA 98597
(bHN GOOD
PO BOX 892
TACOMA WA 98407
TIM ABBEY
9434 BRIDGE RD SE
YELM WA 98597
RICHARD SLAUGHTER
11875 HARRIS RD SE
YELM WA 98597
MARGARET CURRIE
11859 HARRIS RD SE
YELM WA 98597
SHARON ROSENBERGER
14915 FOX HILL RD SE
YELM WA 98597
KEN BRAGET
18815 MOUNTS RD SE
YELM WA 98597
LARRY HANSON
16819 RAILWAY RD SE
YELM WA 98597
MAC WOOD
15708 109TH AVE SE
YELM WA 98597
MICHAEL CITRAK
663 SANDRA LEE STREET SE
OLYMPIA WA 98503
TOM TURNER
211 MOSMAN ST SE
YELM WA 98597
elM RAMIREZ
11511 HARRIS RD SE
YELM WA 98597
MICHAEL GRECO
93RD AVENUE
YELM WA 98597
TANJA WOOD
15708 109TH AVE SE
YELM WA 98597
RONNA HARVEY
STEVE BARTLETT
11805 HARRIS RD SE
YELM WA 98597
TERRY SIMPSON
15140 FOX HILL
YELM WA 98597
GINGER HILL
17036 HOLLY ST
YELM WA 98597
BOB GRIMBY
15725 109TH AVE
YELM WA 98597
SARA STEINBERG
14520 119TH WAY SE
YELM WA 98597
JOHN WOMBOLD
13701 93RD ST
YELM WA 98597
YELM ZONING
D:\ZONING.YLM
PAGE 4 OF 6
ELLY NEWIE
15105 LONGMIRE SE
YELM WA 98597
BOB FOSTER
13810 148TH ST SE
YELM WA 98597
KRISTIN KESTER
PO BOX 5010
YELM WA 98597
MARLIN NAMONVITCH
11242 BALD HILL RD
YELM WA 98597
form 1
LYN EVANS
15120 88TH AVE SE
YELM WA 98597
FREDERICK & HELENA MOTT
15240 88TH AVE SE
YELM WA 98597
CHESTER & ALICE ROTHWELL
8735 MT VIEW RD SE
YELM WA 98597
ILEE
8710 MT VIEW RD SE
YELM WA 98597
ROBERT BEAL
8710 MT VIEW RD SE
YELM WA 98597
GREG EYOLFSON
15120 88TH AVENUE
YELM WA 98597
KEN & KAREN SARTAIN
9121 KILLION ST SE
YELM WA 98597
OV. MCLAUGHLIN
8710 MT VIEW RD SE
YELM WA 98597
RONALD LEE CARLSON
9021 BURNETT RD SE
YELM WA 98597
BETTY SHEPHERD
9045 BURNETT RD SE
YELM WA 98597
ELENE H NEWBY
15105 LONGMIRE ST SE
YELM WA 98597
MICKEY & ESTELLA CRUMLEY
202 LONGMIRE ST SE
YELM WA 98597
'*
KATHERINE DUPERLY
9819 GROVE RD
YELM WA 98597
OLIVER & EDITH STEVENS
16919 CANAL RD SE
YELM WA 98597
TOM HUFF
16411 RAILWAY RD SE
YELM WA 98597
LESLIE SWENDSON
16843 CANAL RD SE
YELM WA 98597
G R HOUX
16626 CANAL RD SE
YELM WA 98597
ADRIAN NICKELL
17009 CANAL RD SE
YELM WA 98597
QNDRA HANSON
16819 RAILWAY RD SE
YELM WA 98597
BILLY J NORRIS
16608 RAILWAY RD SE
YELM WA 98597
TIM LOPER
16713 CANAL RD SE
YELM WA 98597
VERA NICHOLS
16722 CANAL RD
YELM WA 98597
EMETTE AVEY
10230 GROVE RD SE
YELM WA 98597
RICHARD & LYNN HAGH
16947 103RD AVE
YELM WA 98597
BRIT & LYNN COLEMAN
16947 CANAL RD
YELM WA 98597
VESTA ZIMMERMAN
16549 RAILWAY
YELM WA 98597
ANDREW MCCLOUD
PO BOX 147
YELM WA 98597
FLERMANN L. HAAG
10022' GROVE RD SE
YELM WA 98597
YELH ZONING
D:\ZONING.YLH
PAGE 5 OF 6
RUTH E MAAG
10022 GROVE RD
YELM WA 98597
o
o
SHARON TYLER
9819 GROVE RD
YELM WA 98597
YELK ZONING
D:\ZONING.YLK
PAGE 6 OF 6
10-22-91
n___ ---- --- f-:.-'----------'----------u
;",\
10 20AM FROM CITY Or~lLM
P02
-~:--"I'l
, ,,'I , .'.I....?"!. 'I. ~.I ."1 Ifi.:)( .t'~.t"'''''; .\
'i~i 'JQin t P.lanning Commi tte~';
," M~ets; ~st J19nc;l~y M9Pl;:n
. 5; OQ <;R\tA~-h~ .J!l}rrAW$1Iit.~~!. '..
I . '."""','-'1<.",...'..".:::'::_,,, .., 'l>
"':WI .~ ,t'~~'~""'\1 ~ ~.~~'~'f~tl~~'firl""'~~~w.r..tNtfi"":~'" '.".".~
';..f: -':U"i'", : . :.':...~~;.:It.,:l'~,~\l ,;i- ':' .~J
t .~ \ ~ \', ...it. t,\ ,'::
UTE ALLEN I
17010 SMITH PRAIRIE RD SE
YELM WA 98597
I
I !
i--'__ --- - I
I:ONALD ANDERSON
8'140 93RD AVE
YELM WA 98597
I~ GENE BORGES
, YELM CITY HALL
I
I
.I P.O. BOX 479
YELM WA 98597
, 1
ELEANOR BRAND
12401 BRONSON STREET SE I
TENINO WA 98589
i
,
-II
JIM BROWN
10823 MORRIS ROAD SE
YELM WA 98597
r-
I
I
I
,
I
IDR-1AN BUCKHOLZ
29630 11th AVE SVJ
FEDERAL WAY WA 98023
)
'lr
o
JOE HUDDLESTON
14129 93RD AVENUE SE
YELM WA 98597
'TODD STAMM
THURSTON CO. PLANNING
-2000LAKERIDGE DR SW BLOG
OLYMPIA WA 98502
"-.....~_ P"'llI
CECELIA JENKINS
DIR. CG1MUNI1Y EDUCATION
PO BOX 476
YELM WA 98597
KATHY WOLF
P . O. BOX 966
YELM WA 98597
. CX>UNCILMAN RICK KOLILIS
. YELM TCMN COUNCIL
1512 YEI.M AVE WEST
YELM WA 98597
REP JENNIFER BELCHER
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
323 MAPLE PARK AVE SE
OLYMPIA WA 98501
-,
...4_.............-
__...L- ---"
L
CX:UCILMAN AMOS LAW'ION
PO BOX 1182
YEI.M WA 98597
REP RANDY OORN
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
HOUSE OFFICE BUILDING
OLYMPIA WA 98504
CAROL L'E.WIS
PO BOX 925
YELM WA 98597
RFP MARILYN RASMUSSEN
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
33419 MOUNTAIN HWY E
EATONVILLE WA 98328
RICHARD MOLTER
8411 .~PEN cr SE
YELM WA 98597
SENATOR MIKE KREIDER
425 JOHN CJ-JERBERG BLIX;
OLYMPIA WA 98504
\
I
I
I
VERNON STAACK
11740 COOK ROAD SE
YELM WA 98597
------
COLONEL CARROLL DICKSON
GARRISON CG1MANDER
HIX)TRS I CORPS & FORT LEI
FT LEWIS WA 98433-5000
S'T'F" TS mLE
PO BOX 1292
YEIM WA 98597
r
L"
STEVE CRAIG
DEPT OF ECOr..cx:;y
MAIL STOP PV-ll
AT y-MDTJI. W1I. an"lQ4_R'1~l.-_
<XX.JNCIUJ1AN A. DRCX;SETH
'{ELM 'lU<lN CXXJNCIL
PO BOX 273
YEIM WA 98597
~
TOM GORMAN
P.O. BOX 593
Ar."""
THE OLYMPIAN
~. ?iIIIi!. -- --......---a-
P,O. BOX 407
OLYMPIA WA 98507
C<:MMANDER
mRPS& IT LEWIS
ATTN. AFlH-DEQ/JERBIC
FT LEWIS WA 98533
MAYOR 808 SANDERS
~P.M, B~t 1Ms97
Cathy A. Jerbie
Commander
I Corps & Fort Lewis
A'ITN: AFQH - DEQ
Fort Lewis, WA 98433
ZACHARY SMITH
1210 N. PUGET
OLYMPIA WA 98506
NISQUALLY INDIAN TRIBE
KIM M. CRAWFORD
487.0 SHE-NA-NUM DR SE
OLYMPIA WA 98503
'JUDY NETrLETON
. P.O. BOX 2 1 7
MCKENNA WA 98558
~ "_0___"__---,-
Nisqually Indian Tribe
George Walters
4820 She-Na-Num Dr. 5E
.;;
:PI
---
i
1
TO:
FHOM:
, 0:::"--::'" -l."":,'i#';,,, '~,'" ,;~-,;.
"
"""(--""'0
~'\' ,i".~'
IVlif.W ~:j, :/. r.i9 J
Gene:J BtH'''~JE~S.
, "
Neil Aaland
SUBJECT;
t:nvi n::Hl/lH:inlt:,al ,Chf.u:: I" 1. i !:;17. .-. rhUI".~,,;t:.nn 1,.,li Qh]' o;\nd!:o
. - 1 . .
I have reviewed thw ~he~kli~~ an~ cQmpared it to my prevlou5
comment.s <mf.:~rnCl to ytJl..\ dl:\ter.;P"(J(~:.t',(:Jbl~:I"'21, t99o}. Ba!;Hc:",;\11y, t.h~,\y
have t~ken CAre of my pr~vi9u~ ccnC.rn~" The rhecklist lS in
pr'etty qClC)(j ~fhi;:\P(7': to pr'pct::~,r:;s +c:w the <:1\t'H'If,1')' f.<\tl em, i;,\nd d DI\I~::; c:t::ll..ll d
be;~ i.f,:~~~~,\f,"d at. t:rlil;i pc)i.nt blr:lli:H;~dDn tl-I(!~ chec:kl.i,1"d:. ""'rid ~>\.~pplC?flH::~nt,:~l,
information euppliwd. Thm'Nonproject Action maction is qUite
good and ~rovideB a lo~ of information.
I d CI t-l f:~VI~) ~:;c::JmE~ mi. n or- cI:lIntlle:~l'i t. ~ii n r.:rt('~d b tii1l, 1:;1\1\1 ~ i t Wr.:H..Il, cl btit <:,-;I r.:H;~d :i. +
tl"l€:!y W81'--l'i.l 1::;I"lcll"1~}(H:1 t)y t_h!:p,,-'.\ppl:i C~~\I"lt::~, bLd;, l,jtl'Hi:lr"WJ. ~::it~ Y<::~l,\ (::;oul d ,umt:
n(:)t:.€~ t.hem on t.hf!') Y':i(J~1t.""'t"li:;mc:l 1iHl:h", t:l'f the d'lf,~c:~;l~.~;d.: l..mdf:H'"
"EvCnll \..\r.id';,:i. em f 01" A~lf.H'\I:::Y U'f.;~~ 'qli 1 Y It .
J. .
') "
.<...
'7t,}
_l (6f! ;'11>
~b\
~.
.;..~
4.
c!'
..J.
P(~ge 7~ #7 (b) (2): lkH~)T';; t:he ,..H.d,nt plan I~t{>)quin,,~ rhL.ln:~t.(.)n
C(~)'-lnty t.D rn\CC~r-,;1pt "H'lnr-:'>>:t~t,j.ClrHi('\ If HiCl~ ill:; tlHi~ joint plil-lll :i,n
effect yet~ The chwc~list re5ponee Y1Y~S thi5 imprsDsion.
Page 8~ #8 (i): Se~ond sant~nce mu~t b~ a typo~ if not, a
s i l.lfl j, of i ~ f,H') t f.~r"l'. ell'" . J. t: \;:;,,:\ Y"i "Bf'1l:: ~,:\l..l !!:;t:~ t t"l p ~~ on j. n~) W J. 11 UJ;~t" be
est:C\b1.i!;;.tll:i~c1 <;;\'l~ tl"IP tirn~~ of i':tnnp){at.j.Dn" \I f::h,H:i1fftE; tu ml't~ th!~
1'.nnE~H;::\tiOI'1 c:ll-clj,n<;\I"le:e~ ';:;I"lclulrj i:3.nc:l w:l.lJ l;:;p~::,)c:ify ?~c:)l"l:i.n~;l thE~t
becomes effectivm upon annexation. Do LhM proponent. think
the town will just ann.~ property without ~on1ng it?
Thr~'t .:::\1 ~')O ~;tti\tli: thE~ rlum!::l(i';w' clf ~.t~_I?~.LJj"ru~.".J"\'!Jj"t,,~?.. pl"'t;)P(::l~",c'!.~d,
r.at:hel~ t.hcH1 tilE! numt.lf'W o-f H..E.!.1!.H..lJi!., t.h",d:,ro':'1Y r'~\HI:i.df.:' hel'''f.:f. A
r DI,~~JI"I est. j, mf:~t.('~ :i. c:.."-f i n€~ ~ I;;)ut th (,~y ~:ill~H,ll. \;:1 i:~ddl''' (-~S;f.i; t: h 1. ~!i.
PagE~ 8,., t~9U';\) = Tt'\E1Y i::;t.ji,\t.f.'? it lbf'IOt, pOl5"5iblec! t,(:) de:~t:.er'miI'H!.1
number ~)f housing units; yet, en B (1) above thMY state B
p('_)tential (::Ii' 1600c.1wc"111in9 ul"\it.\i1la Tht:~y f'lf':.f.;1(:i tel ~5pf.H:::i.+y and
bl': r.:;ansi. stliH1t..
f:i\..'pplenH?nt-r.;\1 Sheet for NClnFwCJ :1 fiH" ( (.ktion\o>!, F'i':\glf: :L, 4H ~ fl"\17.!Y
state tlieY"E~ wi), 1 b~~ 1'1c) f;~nv:i, r'onrnenlt:d, j Hlp.;;\c::ts II... l':lXC:f.~P~'; t:,L1
ty"ansff!w plwfJpHr"t,y t'.i::\Xc'\uttlDr'i.t.y 'tu t.I"H.! C:i.t:.y l::l-f Yf-~lm." "II
Thi6 1s s~m.nticdl. but transfgrring LdX authority i5 not an
ftJ)_'t~~r':'I~:lf!!.!.~~Dj;.l~~1, i mp <:~c. -t:...
-,
f.~)l.App1f'..:'rn(-':'ntf.:\]. Bhf.~et +cw Nc:)npr"C)'i~',~r;t:. {4c:titHHii. ~!::l (b) ,i.~t:. butt:C'.HTI
(J-f Pf.l.~:I€ii' 1: 'nlt~~Y ,mr.il{E~ i t ~1fC:IUn(j ]. :i, ~::(;:" t~..U.~..'t., wj,:I. l be t'''€~ql.d. J"'t:~
ef f J, c:: ;i f=n t w~1(Jd,!5 t ClVE'!S ~ t~t~..!t~,y', w:l:l.]' i. n:l t. i ,:~ t~ (;;~ t.:lt..ll'" n b""n f;;;, C:\n d
~.!J_.~::Y" w i. 1 1 j, n j, t j, cd: E~ ~~ III j, f.i'>!,;;i () n C (::11)'(:, n::ll r" e q 1..\;, I'" e:l III e 1"\ ,\:, i~ ,,: 01'-
V e h i. I.: 1. f~ 1;;; . I rl ",\ V I:!~ n C.l p r- CI b 1 f;,l JTl wit 1'\ t, rl Ii;) f1l ~;r) t. i;\ t. :i. II 1,:1 t '''' t:il ~'l t"' <A ;;,
r5
'jJ.
'''!'''.4''j, ''';':;:':1;',-
iO
mitlgaticn~, but th~x shauldn't rHMlly make It sound like
it's th~ir measures'
6. Supplement.l ~heat, p.ge 2, #~ (b); Perhaps I ~m 6hcwing my
own l.c~ of infcrmation~ but 1M th_re ~uCh a thing as
.. E:"1l1fi~r' qy'~'e'f -f i c i t+!nt p:l. umb:i. nq "?
7" Fi,scal {,'nalY!::tis, fj,l"'st 'fl..,d,l pi:.\r"r::l.tJr'i:\ph: T'ht;d.I'" !if.tat:elnt-ilnt:
f.i1:lt.1ut C\\1:;,!\:,es'=,f,~t.:l Viid Ud'\':, 1. t1rl :i, r.,f I::; (:In f L.\\5i nq. ". .. .,ttH!.' CL,\,'I'''..'1nt
p I~ 0 P t:~ r" t_ Y ,~.r:t,_,~~,:;_~:?,!:.~..?~,~Jf,t~t_.._~1~,t__,_~",...Y..f~lJAt::,~.t,t9!1 c! f (il. P p~. ()) ( i (T\ ,i~ t f,',~ 1. Y
"'\5~:i, u~:8. 64.. ~ ." 1: IJt:~l i f.*V~~ t:\'H'.~y 1lI1ir),iiln H')lT:d: .,. i qun::: i li-:; t:,hQ :t.~',f.L
r:'s::.:Y.JtJ.l~L~, of 1''' Cl m t 1"1 (~l pI'" D pel''' '\:;. i. 4;'~ ~;;, '.,1
8. F:i.~~C:id. Ani;.-d.ysiiir::., fj,r'~i\t. pii:lge; J't. wpuld bf:'~ h~dp-f\..\l, i,: t,hl;,)
budget informatin" w~s pr..ented in tabular form for quick
f' (.~'f &11'" f"m r.: f:~"
9. Fi.sc\;:,l. (-\nal. y\;:,i, \iii, ~.!\i,~r.:oncl pr.>.ga, j;:;t~C:::[Jn(.:1 \ii.ent.t:~r'\t'::f::! ~ T'h i E; y..t!').;~th~
". . . it ,J, w .iH'ltici pat.eq",,;~-;h<;~t. tl-1E'I'''f.~' wi 11 tH,~ n~l""'t,i Yl:!l y 1. i. t;,t 1 e
j,mpf.i\(:t to th~:1 pcd.iC:f:'~, 'i;j,!,\f:'l, i:;\ncl n.I.:,ld l:-.IL\(j9(:'~tf.i;".. II It weJuld
bE.' ~IEdpf\.,ll j,'\; tl'1f.-~Y Pl"'t:lv1.ded in'fcll'''mc:\tiun t.e:! bi:lck '\~.I'I.r;.t
5t.cit:,f~mEmt up. Fell" f.;)~.:;;;Irnp;l.t:!~ tJH.~Y r.::cH..d.d -t~ii;\I.H..d.f.,\-l.e1 poli.f,::,,)/'I'ir€~
(.~""llt.; tndc1e to the aY"E~a ch..wing UU"':' pn;;.)vinuc5 'f(7~(:;'Ir', c:.md pl'''o1f:'!ct:.
whether there ~culd ~a any changes after ~nnexatIQn.
Call me if you haY~ any questions At 459-6868.
pt\~I"'t-time~ rr"n(;~l}Lllar t'H,'.lI..'n;;. L.\1'1tj,l l'1i::\y 1$ 1::II:':.'l.-.::\\..ll:H.-':'
o \..I r' bi::-\by (::In Apr'il 27~ "He"s ~ 9....11::.1 boy; mc)t:.t'lf:!~I/"p
;arE! ':111 dt~:ing <':':P~"~i::~t" '
1 iIHll WOY'- k i. n 9
my wlfe .nd I h~d
of\T;\t.ht::~I''' i~nd IJf..lhy
;,P
'\
" ;(
",,","1..
~ ~,. k
. .
o
o
CITY OF YELM
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
OUR JOB NO, 3687
A. BACKGROUND INFORMATION
1. Name of proposed project, if applicable:
Thurston Highland Annexation
2. Name of Applicant:
Thurston Highland Associates
3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person:
1917 First Avenue
Seattle, W A 98101
(206) 443-3537
Contact: Denrns T Su, AlA
4. Date checklist prepared:
January 28, 1991
5. Agency requesting checklist:
City of Yelm
6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable):
The developer has completed the 10 percent annexatIon subrrnttal to the City of Yelm.
Currently, the developer IS completmg the 75 percent subrrnttal package wmch mcludes
approximately 2,033 acres of unincorporated Thurston County property to be annexed mto the
city of Yelm m 1991
7, Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or
connected with this proposal? If yes, explain.
The proposed annexatIon IS approxImately 2,033 acres m Size. Much of tms area will most
likely be deSIgnated as a smgle family reSidential use With a combmatlOn of lot denSItIes wmch
Will reflect constramts mcludmg the foIlowmg'
a. DIstance from the central bus mess dlstnct.
b Utility availabihty
c. Proxlrrnty to sensItive areas such as wetlands, steep slopes, etc.
d. Road mfrastructure.
e. Quality of housmg proposed.
f Market demand.
SpecIfically, a prelimmary proposal for approXimately 1600 dwellmg urnts on the westerly-
most 1200 acres of the proposed annexation has been discussed With the City by Thurston
Highlands ASSOCiates, the largest smgle landowner wlthm thiS annexatIon. This particular
proposal would be a master planned commuruty and, although would pnmarily consist of an
average of 1/2 acre smgle farmly residential lots. the proposal would also mclude possible Sites
for school, commumty service area, as well as some commercial areas to serve the needs of
the planned reSidential commumty
The zomng for the remammg areas to be annexed would need to be planned by the City staff
and reviewed thoroughly from both an environmental and zorung perspective. Separate SEPA
determmatlOns will need to be filed and public comments soliCited on each property as the
zonmg IS estabhshed, as well as for each proposed development as It occurs on each separate
property
3687 001
-1-
o
o
8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared,
or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal.
To our knowledge, there has been no environmental information that has been
prepared directly relating to this proposal
9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of
other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If
yes, explain.
To our knowledge, there have been no applications filed or pending governmental
approvals that would directly affect this property However, there are several
eXlstmg single-family residences, farms, etc , that may have at one time
submitted an environmental checklist and review to Thurston County
10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your
proposal, if known,
Currently, the 10 percent annexation petition notice has been filed and
completed Presently, the developer is proceedmg with the 75 percent petition
which requires a SEP A review, public meeting before the City Council, and once
the proposed annexation IS passed by the City of Yelm, it will be forwarded to
the Thurston County Boundary Review Board for theIr reVIew and approval
Further permits and governmental approvals and zonmg designation Will be
required when the undeveloped property IS submitted for site-specific design such
as Planned Commumty Development
11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed
uses and the size 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. (Lead agencies may modify
this form to include additional specific information on project description,)
The developer IS proposmg to annex approximately 2,033 acres of mostly
undeveloped Thurston County property into the city of Yelm A Conceptual
Planned Commumty Development has been prepared, which mcludes smgle-
famIly development, three golf courses, a school Site, park Site, and a
commercial center
The smgle-famIly homes have been conceptually designed with an average density
of one per one-half acre ThiS EnvIronmental ChecklIst IS bemg prepared for the
annexatIOns Site-specific deSign wIll be processed through another SEP A review
at the next phase
12. Location of the proposal Give sufficient information for a person to under-
stand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street
address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal
would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the
site(s), Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic
map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by
the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans
submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist.
For the exact area to be proposed for annexation, please see attached Annexation
Map and Legal Descriptions
3687 001
-2-
o
o
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
EV ALUATION
FOR AGENCY
USE ONLY
B. ENVIRONMENT AL ELEMENTS
1, Earth
a. General description of the site (circle one): Flat, rollin!!, hilly, steeD sloDes,
mountainous, other __________________
b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)?
There is a small portIOn on the east of the site which exceeds 20 to 30 percent
slope
c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for exam pie, clay, sand,
gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils,
specify them and note any prime farmland.
The general soils types found on the site appear to consist of sand, gravel, sandy
gravelly soils with some top soIls and silts The sOils types, as classified by the
Agncultural Soils Conservation Maps for Thurston County, mdlcate that the site
consists of sandy, gravel matenal These soIls are generally classified as
moderate to severe erosion hazard
d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate
vicinity? If so, describe.
Because of the relatively flat slope on site, it appears that there are no unstable
sOils m the immediate VICID1ty
e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or
grading proposed, Indicate source of fill.
There IS no proposed filling or grading as part of this annexatIOn
f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so,
generally describe.
The proposed annexatIOn wIll not cause any erosIOn However, dunng the slte-
speCific design as a result of this annexatIOn, specific requirements from the City
of Yelm will be Implemented to control and mitigate erosIOn
g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after
project construction?
Other than the eXisting Improvements, there will be no ImpervIOUS surfaces
constructed at this annexatIOn phase Approximately 25 to 35 percent of the site
will be covered with ImpervIOus surfaces upon completIOn of the plat ThiS wIll
Include asphalt for roads, buildmgs, rooftops, and driveway areas
h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the
earth, if any
No measures are requIred as part of thiS proposed annexatIOn to control erosIOn
because no Impacts at thiS time wIll occur However, all the City of Yelm
reqUirements for erosIOn control will be Implemented as part of the site-specific
design and indiVidual development submittals are being reviewed
3687 001
-3 -
o
o
2 Air
a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i,e., dust,
automobile odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the
project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quan-
tities if known.
At this time, the proposed annexation will not produce any emissions However,
during the construction phase of indivIdual site-sDecific projects, an increase In
dust, automobile exhaust, odors, etc , wIll be prevalent However, at that time,
the site-specific SEP A reviews and mitigation will be reqUired
b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your
proposal? If so, generally describe.
The proposed annexatIOn abuts the Fort LewIs reservation, SR-S07, and the CIty
of Yelm, which are sources of off-site emissions However, these sources Will
not adversely affect our proposal
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if
any,
As part of thIS annexatIOn, no measures are required
3. Water
a. Surface:
1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the
site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes,
ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names, If
.appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into,
Because of the size of the proposed annexatIOn, there are vanous topo-
graphical constramts as well as surface water basins As part of the site
revIew and analysis of aenal topographic information, there are several
areas wlthm the 2,033 acres which appear to have seasonal streams,
ponds, and potential wetlands
2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200
feet) the described water? If yes, please describe and attach available
plans.
Not applIcable
3) Estimate the amount of fill 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. Indicate the source of fill material.
Not applIcable
4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions?
Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities, if
known.
Not applIcable
5) Does the proposal lie within a lOO-year floodplain? If so, note
location on the site plan.
No, thiS property IS located entIrely outSide of any lOa-year floodplain
accordmg to the FEMA maps
6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface
water? If so, describe the types of waste and anticipated volume of
discharge
No ThiS annexation IS to mcorporate 2,033 acres (approXimate) Within
the corporate city I1mlts of the City of Yelm No new site-specific
deSigns have been proposed nor reViewed However, there are a few
eXisting mdlvldual septic systems and dralnfield areas mstalled under the
JUriSdictIOn of the Thurston County Health Department and the City of
Yelm Publ1c Works Department
3687 001
-4-
o
o
b, Ground:
1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to
ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate
quantities, if known.
As part of this annexation, no groundwater will be withdrawn or
discharged
2) 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,
See Item a(6) above
c, Water Runoff:
1) Describe the source of runoff (including stormwater) and method of
collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known), Where
will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so,
describe.
The proposed annexation area of 2,033 acres vanes topographically due to
its size There are portions of the site that dram into pothole areas which
will be preserved in theIr entirety Storm dramage water wIll continue to
be discharged into these areas to maintam the eXlstmg groundwater
elevatIOns and the dead storage currently avaIlable Other portIOns of the
site drain VIa sheet flow mto dramage ditches and corridors 10 the area
Generally, the storm dramage runoff rates for the post-developed site Will
be ltmlted to that of the pre-developed property Upon completion of the
annexation and zonmg for the property, a full subbasm analysis Will be
prepared analyzmg eXlstmg flows wlthm each subbasm area Storm
dramage Impacts from the development would be mitigated entirely by
either percolatmg stormwater mto the ground aquifers or by provldmg
detention facilities which will limit the post-developed runoff rate to that
of the pre-developed site
2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so,
generally describe.
It IS anticipated that eXisting and future stormwater would be collected by
on-site storm dramage systems which would melude oIl/water separators
and catch baSinS and eventually be conveyed through grass-ltned swales to
further mitigate contaminants to the ground to surface water
d, Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water
impacts, if any.
Not appltcable at this phase
4 Plants
a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site,
-X- deciduous tree, alder, maole, aspen, other
-L evergreen tree' fir, cedar, Dine, other
-L shrubs
-L grass
-L pasture
_ crop or grain
-L 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?
At thiS annexation phase, no vegetation wIll be removed or altered
3687 001
-5-
o
o
c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site.
The proposed annexed area consists of clear-cut forest (1,200 acres), farmland,
and homestead sites To our knowledge, there are no known threatened or
endangered species on or near the site
d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or
enhance vegetation on the site, if any.
Not apphcable under this annexation The proposed Planned Commumty
Development wIll have extensive landscaped areas such as golf courses, parks,
boulevards, and other areas as requIred by zoning
5 Animals
a. Circle any birds an animals which have been observed on or near the site or
are known to be on or near the site:
-X- birds: hawk, heron, eagle, sont!hirds, other crow, sparrow, etc
-X- mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other skunk, raccoon, small rodents,
etc
_ fish, bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish,
other
b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site.
To our knowledge, there are no known threatened or endangered species known
to be on or near the site
c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain,
To our knowledge, the site 1S not part of a major migratIOn route
d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any.
N one are requIred as part of thiS annexatIOn
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
>
-~<."" --"
1. ~
The proposed annexatIOn will not requIre the use of energy at this time
However, dunng site-specific des1gns, electricity, power, and gas wIll be used
for heating and IIghtmg needs Currently, there are several lOd1vldual slOgle-
famIly homes scattered along the northeast sectIOn of the annexatIOn which
currently utIhze electnc1ty, oIl, wood stoves, and natural gas for energy needs
b, Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent
properties? If 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
Not applIcable
7 Environmental Health
a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic
chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could
occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe.
No
1) Describe special emergency services that might be required.
None are requIred
3687 001
-6-
o
o
2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards,
if any.
N one are required
b. Noise:
1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project
(for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)?
The prImary source of nOise Within the area wIll be associated with the
Fort LewIs Military Reservation located along the north, northwest, and
south property lines Occasional military uses create an IDcrease in noise,
along with aIrplane nOise associated With Fort LewIs Other minor nOises
withlD the area are from SR-507 and traffic nOises assocIated With the city
of Yelm. However, 10 our opinion, these Impacts would not affect thiS
proposal
2)
What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with
the project on a short-term or long-term basis (for example: traffic,
construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would
come from the site.
---./
No nOise wIll be created from the proposed annexation However, once
the annexatIon has been accepted by The City of Yelm and Thurston
County, IDdlvldual development of thiS site-specIfic design wIll IDcrease
the nOise levels, ie, traffic, constructIOn, etc
3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any
None are proposed as part of thiS annexation
8. Land and Shoreline Use
a, What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties?
The majorIty of the site has been cleared wlthlD the last several years by a
lumber company Other adjacent parcels are used as a dairy farm, golf courses,
single-famIly dwell lOgs and farm homes
ApprOXimately one-half of the site IS surrounded by the Fort LeWIS MIlItary
ReservatIon to the northwest The other remaIDIng portIOns abuts the city of
Yelm, large IDdlvIdual tracts of land, and SR-507 For exact informatIOn of
adjacent properties, please see the attached Annexation Map
b, Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe
The majorIty of the site was used as lumber-producIng forest and agrIculture
AdditIonally, there are some small farms located on and near the site
c. Describe any structures on the site,
The majorIty of the site is vacant However, there are indiVidual SIngle-famIly
homes and farm structures located on a few subdivIded parcels
d, Will any structures be demolished? If so, what?
As part of thiS annexation, no structures wIll be demolIshed
e. What is the current zoning designation of the site?
Thurston County has establIshed a "rural reSidentIal zone" WithIn the area to be
annexed ThiS zone requIres a denSity of no greater than one UOlt per five acres
f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation for the site?
The current Thurston County ComprehenSive Plan IDdlcates that thiS IS an
unmapped area With a rural deSignatIOn The rural deSignatIOn would require one
SIngle-famIly reSidential UOlt per five acres Upon completion of the annexatIOn
to the City of Yelm, It IS anticipated that one UOlt per half acre denSity would be
allowed, based on Planned ReSidential Community ThiS would IDclude a
thorough revIew of the deSign plans for the project to insure that the facllitIes are
constructed in accordance with the agreements as set forth by the City of Yelm
3687 001
-7-
o
o
g, If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the
site?
Not applicable
h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive"
area? If so, specify.
To our knowledge, no portion withlO the site has been classified as
envIronmentally sensitive However, there may be areas which will need specific
attention 1D regard to mltlgatlOg any potential Impacts as a result of this
annexation Specifically, IOdividual site development plans are proposed withlO
areas of seasonal drainage courses, seasonal draInage ponds, etc , and particular
mItigation may be requIred at that time
i.
Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed
project?
~---
The total annexation area is approximately 2,033 acres 10 size Because the
zoning WIll not be established at the time of annexation for the properties to be
annexed, the specific densities cannot be projected at this time Once the
annexation is -completed and zoning placed on the property, further specific
IOformation relative to development denSities wIll be provided under separate
SEP A determInations There are 1,600 dwelling UDl ts proposed for the western
1,200 acre portion
J. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace?
The proposed annexatIOn does not anticipate displacing any people or reSidents at
this time
k, Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any,
Not applIcable
I. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and
projected land uses and plans, if any
The latest revision of the "Y elm/Thurston County JOInt Plan" mandates that the
proposed annexatIOn will be reVIewed by the City of Yelm as well as Thurston
County The projected land use shall be based on the polIcy and intent of the
final j OlOt plan
9 Housing
a, Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether
high, middle, or low income housing,
/'
Because the specific zonlOg densities WIll not be establIshed as part of the
annexation, it is not pOSSible to determlOe the number of high, middle, or low
income hOUSIng which could be provided However, these conSiderations will be
analyzed 10 detaIl at the time zODlng is placed on the property under a SEP A
determinatIOn
b, Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate
whether high, middle, or low income housing,
Not applIcable
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any.
There will be no Immediate impacts on housing as part of this annexatIOn
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?
There are no proposed structures as part of thiS annexatIOn Future development
wIll adhere to the City of Yelm zonlOg reqUIrements 10 place at that tIme
b What views 10 the Immediate viClOity would be altered or obstructed?
Not applIcable
3687 001
-8-
o
o
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any,
Not apphcable at this time However, the clear-cut area of 1,200 acres Will
become a Planned Community Development
11. Light and Glare
a, What type of light or glare will the proposals produce? What time of day
would it mainly occur?
Not apphcable
b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere
with views?
Not applicable
c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal?
There are mIDor off-site sources of light and glare which abut into the proposed
annexation These sources would include vehicular, street, buIldIDg lighting, etc
However, these sources of light, 10 our opinion, will have no affect on thiS
proposal
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any
Not applicable
12. Recreation
a. What designation and informal recreational opportunities are in the
immediate vicinity?
Currently, there is the 18-Hole Yelm Golf Course, Yelm High School and other
schools, and a city park 10 the Immediate viCIDlty
b. Would the proposed project displace any eXisting recreational uses? If so,
describe
The proposed annexatIOn will not displace any eXlstlDg recreatIOnal uses
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including
recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any
As part of thiS annexatIOn, no Impacts will result
13 Historic and Cultural Preservation
a, Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state or
local preservation registers to be on or next to the site. If so, generally
describe,
To our knowledge, there are no known places or objects listed on, or proposed
for, the national, state, or local preservation registers wlthlD the proposed
annexed area
b
Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological,
scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site.
\
There is the McKenZie house off SR-507 regIstered 10 the WashIDgton State
OAHP WithlD the current city count, there are a number of structures Identified
10 the" 1989/90 Town of Yelm Hlstonc BUlldlDg Inventory" as havIDg hlstonc
sIgDlficance
c Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any.
Not requIred
3687 001
-9-
o
o
14. Transportation
a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed
access to the existing street system. Show on-site plans, if any.
The proposed annexatIon property abuts several existing streets and roadways
The sIte abuts SR-507, as well as LongmIre Street and Berry Valley Road S E
Please see Site Plan
b, Is site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate
distance to the nearest transit stop?
There IS no public transit system serving the city of Yelm
c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many
would the project eliminate?
As part of the annexation, there IS no projected number of parkmg spaces
However, the site-specIfic deSigns for future development Will adhere to the CIty
of Yelm zoning and parkmg requirements
d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to
existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe
(indicate whether public or private)
ThiS annexation requires that no new roads be dedicated However, during site-
specific design, new or Improved existing roadways will be provided to serve
indiVidual projects
e, Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air
transportation? If so, generally describe.
The project site IS adjacent to the Northern Pacific Railroad track which IS under
consideration to be removed Several mIles east of the proposed site off SR-507
IS an eXlstmg, private air park
f, How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed
project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur,
A traffic analYSIS at thIS time has not been completed However, as part of the
site-specific deSign of mdivldual parcels and projects, traffic will be analyzed
g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any,
At this time, there are no proposed measures required as part of the annexatIOn
As part of the Conceptual Planned CommuDlty Development, there wIll be studies
on the extension of Longmire Street and connectIOns to SR-507 and SR-5l0 At
that time, the Washmgton State Department of TransportatIOn, District 3, traffic
plannmg wIll be mcorporated
15 Public Services
a, Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for
example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If
so, generally describe.
As a result of this annexatIOn, on a short-term baSIS, a need for fire protection,
police protectIOn, etc , wIll be reqUired for the eXlstmg reSidents wlthm the
annexed area Additionally, as mdlvldual projects are developed and constructed,
further need for public serVIces will be increased accordingly
b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if
any.
See attached fiscal analYSIS prepared by Barghausen Consultmg Engmeers, Inc
16 Utilities
a, Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water,
refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other.
3687 001
-10-
o
o
b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utilities providing
the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the
immediate vicinity which might be needed,
Upon approval of the annexation, the proposed utIlities and purveyors are listed
as follows
1 Sewer' See attached report prepared by KCM
2 Water See attached study
3 Power Power will be prOVided by Puget Sound Power and
Light
4 Natural Gas Not available
5 Telephone Telephone wIll be provided by Yelm Telephone
6 Cable TV Not avaIlable
C. SIGNATURE
The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge I understand the
lead agency is relying on them to make its decision,
/'
( / j ,
Signature. ~-~~~~---~~-------:i~~~/~~
L 1-'- Date
3687 001
-11-
o
o
DO NOT USE THIS SHEET FOR PROJECT ACTIONS
D. SUPPLEMENT AL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS
Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in conjunction with the
list of the elements of the environment.
When answering these questions, be aware of the extent the proposal, or the types of activities
likely to result from the proposal, would affect the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate
than 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, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of
noise?
This phase of the annexation petition will not result in any additional environmental
impacts to either the County or City of Yelm except to transfer property tax authority
from Thurston County to the City of Yelm. Because much of the 2,033 acres is
currently undeveloped, those existing portions of the proposed annexation which are
developed will require the same level of public services such as fire protection, other
emergency services, schools, utilities, etc However, several of these properties are
already served by the City of Yelm public services.
/~
Until the zoning densities are established and the actual properties are developed in the
future phases with new environmental studies, it is not possible to determine what the
environmental affects due to the increased discharge to water, emissions to the air,
production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances, or the production of
noise would have on the surrounding community However, general statements can be
made concerning ultimate development on the 2,033 acres as follows:
a. Discharge of Water" The discharge of storm drainage water into the
surrounding drainage basins will be mitigated through the design and
construction of grasslined swales, preservation of existing storm drainage
retention areas, construction of detention and retention facilities on the site
which will limit the post-development storm drainage flows and quantities to
that of the pre-developed site or less, etc
b Emissions to the air should be limited to those normally associated with the
production of hydrocarbons via vehicle operation or air emissions related to the
use of wood burning stoves.
C It is anticipated that there will be no production, storage or release of toxic or
hazardous substances on any of the properties represented by the approximate
2,033-acre rezone None of the property scheduled for annexation would
include zoning which would allow any type of industrial manufacturing
processes to occur
d. The production of noise would increase as a result of ultimate development.
However, it is not anticipated that the noise levels would be increased
significantly above ambient noise levels in the area.
Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are:
a. The design, implementation and construction of storm water detention and
retention facilities to protect existing retention areas, construct biofiltration
swales to promote water quality, etc
b Emissions to air will be mitigated by requiring efficient wood burning stoves ../"
and implementing burning bans when atmospheric conditions are not conducive
to burning. Car emissions would be mitigated via federal emission control
requirements for vehicles.
3687 002
-1-
o
o
c. The creation of additional noise on the project would be mitigated by creating
open spaces/buffer areas, throughout the entire area and between the individual
sites.
2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life?
The annexation would not affect existing plants, animals, fish or marine life within the
approximate 2,033-acre previously clear-cut area. However, upon ultimate
development those impacts normally associated with the construction of low density,
single family units, as well as some multi-family and/or commercial developments
would occur
Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are:
Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are
Implement storm drainage water quality measures in the form of grass lined
swales/biofiltration and other sensitive areas on the individual sites. Also provide
buffers and open space areas which would conserve plants as well as animal populations
throughout the area
3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources?
The annexation would have no significant affect on the depletion of energy or natural
resources However, upon ultimate development energy would be required for the
construction activities for development of the properties as well as on an ongoing basis
to heat and light homes on properties as they are developed.
Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are:
a. All buildings will be designed and constructed in accordance with Washington
State Energy Codes
b
Incorporate energy-efficient plumbing and electrical fixtures throughout new
construction.
_/
/
4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas
or areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such
as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species
habitat, historic or cultural sites, wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands?
The proposed annexation area does not have any known environmentally sensitive areas
or other areas designed for governmental protection. However upon ultimate build out,
areas such as parks, wilderness, historic, or cultural sites, or farmlands would be
preserved in accordance with the rules and regulations required through the City of
Yelm as well as Thurston County Any development within the area to be annexed will
be strictly controlled by federal, state, city and county rules, regulations and
requirements. This would also pertain to steep slopes and/or other sensitive areas on
the site
It should be recognized that most of the area to be annexed has already been cleared,
especially the westerly 1200 acres of the annexation. Therefore, the preservation of
forest and/or habitat related to forests In this area is not applicable Revegetation and
relandscaping, however, would be part of ~,ach proposed development.
Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are:
a.
Provide 100 percent retention of sensitive areas along with building setbacks
with native growth protection areas.
b
Provide landscaped open space between subdivisions, in addition to the
construction of three IS-hole golf courses
c
Provide buffers and native growth protection areas as appropriate around the
property perimeters
3687 002
-2-
o
o
d. Provide additional landscaping buffers in public areas.
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?
The annexation would not affect land and shoreline use in the area. However, upon
ultimate development individual properties would be designed and constructed in
accordance with federal, state, county and city rules and regulations pertaining to
development. This would require the strict compliance with land use codes, property
densities, infrastructure mitigation for roads, water, sewer, storm drainage system, etc ,
in accordance with all appropriate rules and regulations.
Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are:
a. Provide land development densities upon zoning which are appropriate for each
individual lot based on infrastructure, location and utility locations.
b Concentrate higher density developments toward the central
commercial/community district and near those areas which can easily
accommodate higher growth due to existing utilities and roadways.
c. Provide adequate buffers and open space to provide "green areas" on each
development.
d. Preserve existing sensitive areas on each site
6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public
services and utilities?
The annexation would not affect demands on transportatIon or public services and
utilities. However, upon ultimate development of the approximate 2,033 acres,
demands on transportation or public services and utilities could be substantial. Separate
individual analyses will need to be completed and will include traffic studies, sewer
extension studies, water extension studies, storm mitigation studies, geotechnical
reports, etc These studies will need to be prepared in a detailed form to address the
specific impacts of each property as it is developed.
Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are:
a. Prepare detailed individual studies for traffic, water, sewer, storm drainage,
land use, preservation of sensitive areas on each site as they are developed.
b Prepare demographic studies and fiscal impact study to determine timing of
construction for proposed mitigation measures.
c Provide comprehensive plans for roads, water, sewer, storm drainage, etc , to
accommodate future growth
d. Implement new rules, regulations and ordinances further protecting sensItive
areas
7. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal
laws or requirements for the protection of the environment,
The annexation will not conflict with local state or federal laws or requirements for the
protection of the environment. Also, because each property, as it is developed, will be
designed to conform with all federal, state, county and city rules, regulations and
requirements, sigruficant conflicts with these codes wIll not occur
3687 002
-3-
o
o
FISCAL ANALYSIS
Our Job No 3687
FOR
PUBLIC SERVICES
Approximately 2033 acres will be annexed to the City of Yelm under this proposal
Based on the 1991 property evaluatIon for the 2033 acres which make up this annexatIon, according to
Thurston County records the current property is assessed at a valuation of approximately $55,03964 on 66
separate tax parcels which make up this annexation. The tax parcel ownerships of 66 separate tax lots are
independent of the total nwnber of actual legal lots or total number of ownerships involved in the annexation.
As part of response to this question, a copy of the 1991 City of Yelm Budget is attached for reference
/
::----
Generally the additional direct expenses to the City can be anticipated In three main areas These are 1)
police protection, 2) fire protection, and 3) road maintenance and construction. Water and sewer costs are
not considered to be applicable because the City does not yet proVIde sewage collection or treatment,
although this will be provided in the future Also, it is anticipated that new wells will be developed within
the annexed area to serve the future water needs of properties as they develop The specific effects on the
fiscal impacts on each department are summarized as follows
1 The total Yelm Police Department protection alone for 1991 is $339,175 The approxImate
$55,33964 addition to the City General Revenue represents approximately 1623 percent of the total
Yelm Police Department budget.
2 The single biggest area of direct impact to the City will occur immediately and be In the area of fire
protection. The total Yelm Fire Department fire suppression budget is approximately $47,300 The
additional property taxes represent approximately 116 36 percent of thiS budget.
3 The total city street budget for the City in 1991 IS projected as $79,671 The additional property tax
Increase represents approxImately 69 08 percent of this budget. For purposes of this analYSIS, the
arterial street budget of approximately $104,200 is not included as future roads will be constructed
by each property owners as properties are developed. There are few improved existing streets
within the annexation area Therefore, the street maintenance budget should not be impacted
substantially New streets will be developed in the future by private property owners through the
development process These new streets, if they are dedicated to the City, will require future
maintenance whIch Will be paId for by Increased property taxes
Of the three main affected areas (tire protection, police protection, and street maintenance) the total
additional revenues through property taxes represent'> approxlInately 11 24 percent. The total budget ill these
areas is protected at $489,593 for the tiscal year 1991
Approximately 10 percent of the property to be annexed IS already Improved in some way Because the City
of Yelm, from a practical standpoints, offers police and fire protection for much of the proposed annexation
3687 003
-1-
o
o
urea even though they are outside the city limits, it is anticipated that there will be relatively little impact to
the police, fire, and road budgets for the City of Yelm. The properties which are already developed are
generally those properties closest to the City of Yelm downtown area. Most of these properties are within
one to two miles of the existing city center
Based on the 1991 City of Yelm Budget and the anticipated additional property tax revenues of approximately
$55,039 64, it appears that the City of Yelm will easily be able to accommodate the additional annexed area
with the necessary public services which will be required to complete the annexation process.
Once the properties are annexed to the City and development proposals are considered (some of which may
be approved and built in the future) property valuation will increase based upon future improvements.
Additional tax revenues generated from the higher property values will be used to pay for additional public
services (mainly fire, police and street mamtenance) which will be reqUired at that time
In conclusion, the City of Yelm is already providing most or all of the public services necessary to support
the properties which are already developed wlthm the approximate 2,033-acre annexation. The additional
revenues which will be realized through property taxes of the current developed and undeveloped properties
will be substantial relative to the existing City budget and appear to be adequate to provide additional
necessary public utilities after the annexation process has been completed.
4/12/91
3687 003
-2-
,'';
o
o Vl1-:\:
-.,
TOWN OF YELM - ANNEXA nON
W ASTEWA TER DISPOSAL ALTERNATIVES
Based on information presented in ''Town of Yelm Wastewater Facilities Plan,
January 1990/" the proposed facilities for wastewater management:
\~))\jV,- WM AJ: it-U,~~)
~') ~ \
~/ ~~ /)
~
WlM-\ c:Y
c:uJ ~ / m'tfL
~cJ~1 ~~.~U-~
~\71 ~'dDj
" Uq -It.. aM,., ~ r
2. The proposed annexation area has about 2/058 acres and is expected to have 1/600
household in the next 10 to 15 years. The projected population is 1600 x 3 + 4/800
The design parameters for the proposed annexation area are listed below' 2, 7:.1/3.:( 0
1
a. Served population 2,750 (by year 2010)
b. Design flow
Wet/dry season average
o 14 mgd
Peak hourly
0.35 mgd
c. STEP sewer system
d. Aerated lagoon
e. Aerated facilitative lagoon
f. Chlorine contact basin
g. Polishing pond
a. Total served population. 4/800
b. Design flow based on criteria used in Facilities Plan with STEP <S.eptic Iank
liffluent Eumping) system
Wet/dry season average
0.244 mgd
0.611 mgd
Peak hourly
3. Alternatives for wastewater disposal for the proposed annexation area.
Based on design flow and served population, the wastewater generated from the
proposed annexation area is 75% higher than those from the current Eown of
Yelm. The following will discuss the viable alternatives for wastewater disposal
for the proposed annexation area.
Alternate A - Expand the proposed STEP and lagoon system to accommodate
sewage flow from the proposed annexation area. The proposed annexation area
l, ).
o
6
will be provided with STEP system and transport STEP to the proposed lagoon for
the Town of Yelm.
Ad vantages:
1 Same sewer system and treatment facility for the entire served area
2 Minimize O&M cost
3. Easier to manage
4. The expanded wastewater treatment facilities will be funded by various
agencies. This funding will benefit the proposed annexation area.
Disadvantages:
1 Town will have to amend the facilities plan.
2 Delay the design and construction of the facilities.
3. Phased construction will be needed and this may affect the funding.
Alternate B - Provide STEP system and separate treatment facilities for the
proposed annexation area.
Advantages:
1 The proposed facilities for Yelm can go ahead as per implementation
schedule.
2 The funding for the proposed facilities for Yelm will not be affected by the
proposed annexation area.
Disadvantages:
1 Need land acquisition for the separate treatment facilities.
2 It is more costly to manage two treatment facilities at two locations.
3. It is expected that funding for the separate treatment facilities will be more
difficult.
Based on this analysis, Alternate A is more cost effective than to manage the
wastewater generated from the proposed annexation area. This requires
coordination between the proposed STEP system and the new system in the annexed
area in the city
"\>
o
o
riFE r I !\IG 1\10 rES
THURSTON HIGHLANDS/VENTURE PROPERTIES
TUESDAY, DECEMBER 18, 1990
YELi"1 C I T'{ H('~LL
PF(E~;ENT :
Dennis Soo (Thurston Highlands Associates)
Jon Potter, Entranco Engineers (Venture Properties)
Gene BOI'-ges
Shell V BadgE~Ir"
NEd I {~I ;::d, <':1.1"1 d
MAJOR DISCUSSION POINTS
L::_ (ir.:!2 I',J t:.h,__f~9.!_:!,D.sLs~L:_:{___"r:~,:h~~,~~,t}__,_,y.€:1.._!~!}l,It1.,!=,\_r,:,2J_fJ..D",_..,r;.9_~;,!!.lt,:t:,
Jon mentioned a discussion with Judith Runstad, attorney and
member of Governor's Growth Strategies Commission. She
believes if cities and counties cannot agree on a boundary,
the state Department of Community Development <OCD> has the
authorit; to arbitrate. There is some uncertainty whether
DCD can merely arbitrate or actually impose a decision.
[NOTE TO GENE/SHELLY: I will try to do some chec~ing on that
point..]
;~'~M' ;~.~;;!.J::.~.L1fb~1:M:Y.":......r~;.~~.~{.i t:?..~........~.~}"@"'~:J;L._...L!2 R R:..~....._.f~.t~:..Q.f.;..f1-:1.~:EN
The discussion centered around what is li~elv to occur at
the BRB state of the anne; ation process. The assumption is
t,I"',at jur:i,sdiction ~,L,Lt tJf? invCJ~ .?"-.d, pl'''ohabI7' by ThurstCJn
County. rhe Town of Rainier is li~ely to support the
anne ation, and Tenino and Bucoda may also..
A 1984 decision was discussed where Lacey s proposed
anne ation of the Haw~s Prairie Planned Communities was
denied. The basis for denial WAS primarily the uncertainty
of development; the BRB felt it was premature since it was
uncertain the properties would be developed in the mAnner
<-:\nt.icipatE~d.
Another issue, although a secondary one, was the fiscal
impC':\cts upon city ~;"2r"'/icE~S.. (.:)1"1 ecor'lclmic impact ::;tudy clone
hi Lacey showed that the property would be a net drain for
appro :imat.f:?l y :~~O yealr"s c\ftf?lr" anne::ation. Then, :if some
development had occurred, it would become a net revenue
gain. This mal have been a factor in the denial..
Based on this discussion, Jon said the BRB should probably
be given fiscal information up front. He said he loo~s at
tr'le BF:B a~::; C':\ 1I CHi"=~ ':::-hot dE~,,:\l":, c\nd if it 1 C)o~ s I i ~; e the BF,:B
may be heading for a denial, he will consider havlng Venture
Properties be anne:ed alone. [His implication is that the
BRB may loo~ more favorably on just anne:ing Venture, since
'"
..
()
o
it is closer in proximity to current city limits; he could
be correct in that assumption.] He wants to have an
"i I'''oncl ad pt-Opof:~i::\l" fOlr the BnB that the'f ~.Ji 11 hdve a hdrd
ti me (r'e 'i{;?c-l:::i. ng.
2,~,. r:;;;.!J.:{.i..c,i;:[L@_~f.J._t0_L.J;.t~@,~;LIj._E!!~t
Several points about the environmental chec~list were
discussed. Development of the properties should be
discussed under the 1 unit per 5 acre zoning, since the
future development capability of the land is uncertain until
detailed environmental review occurs. A question arose
about the other parcels included in the anne: ation but not
part of the development proposal. These should be addressed
under the 1/5 zoning, since there is no way of ~nowing what
will occur with them.
Jon as~ed about including the Town's position on the joint
plan in the environmental chec~list. Neil said probably
not, since the joint plan is not adopted by any turisdiction
and is a subject of disagreement.
It was also decided not to mention anything about 1600 units
in the chec~list, since the development potential is un~nown
(as discussed above). These numbers need to wait until
detailed EIS is completed.
Tro'l e iTIE)(et. 1 n I:;] a.ci j C) f...t r n E.~c:J at:. i::\P p 1.... C)";~ i m(:\ t. E,) I}' 3: '~;(J A
/
"
D
o
o
TO:
GENE BORGES, CITY OF YELM
nw Ivl :
I\IE I L AALAND
F;~ E:~ :
F~E\J I Ev.J OF THE EI\I\J I EONI'1ENT AL CHECI.:'L I ST FOF~ TI-.IE
THURSTON HIGHLAND ANNEXATION
OCTOBER :.:.:7, 199()
I have reviewed the Thurston Highland Annexation Environmental
Chec~list and have determined that the following items need
revision, correction, or additional information:
f.~~t.lf:~f.~AL~..J;~Qt1t.!fJ:rr S
L
There is no nonproject action sheet.
,...,
.&._ U
Throughout, there is a conflict in how the questions are
answer'ed. Some answel'-s n:~f€;!y- only to the anne:::aticm; ot.hey-s
give some det.ails of a proposed future development..
Consist.ency is important., since int.erest.ed parties (cit.izens
and other agencies) may want. t.o review t.he checklist. The
only time t.he fut.ure development should be discussed with
any specificit.y are question A (7) and the nonproject action
sheet. 1"11 point out. some specifics as I go through page-
by.'-page.
~[~.~b.~H:::.IG._.._G Ot!.t!,~,NI8.
P,:3.ge 1:
L A.7. ".. .no -fut.urE? addit.ions, E?::pa.nsions!1 t.o this
anne::ation". This is a mi'sl(~ading anSV,Jer bec:au::::,E~ the
que::~t.i on al'50 as~ 5 about. lI.fut-ther' act. i vi t. y r€;!l ated t.o
t.hi s pl~oposal.". II Thi s is an i nst<::1.I1c:e v."helr-e t.h~~y DO nE~ed to
discuss the proposed development.
2" A II l()u CoY"r'ect. II ThL\r"st.CJri CCjt.Jrlty E{OCl.F'd (:Jf Adj l.lstfoents II to
"Thunst.r.m Count y Boundar-y Revi. E~W Boal'''d''.
Page 7:
1. B.8.e. The applicable zoning designation has now been
modi f: i eel by Thuy"ston Count.y and Chanl,;,IE!d .fl,...om "Unmapped Use
Distr'lc:t" to "F:L.wal r':;:(~sldential _.. One Urni'.: per 5 Acres".
I>
o
o
2ft B"aniu/B~9ua~ The statement in Bu8.oiu regarding
approximately 16uu single fanrily units conflicts with B.9.a.
whel'-e it. states "thet.'e are no pr'o i ected numbers of si n~~l e
fi:~mi 1 y uni ts. .. .. " TI....ese two anst'..Jet-s .need to be ccmsi stent; I
suggest not discussing number of proposed housing units here
but. me:.:>nt.:i.on:i.ng t.hem in A.7.. (p<::\(;:~e 1) Of" in the nonproject
act.ic.1I'1 section..
F';;:\gr.~ 8::
B..12..a.. Correct typo:
"designated"..
"Des:i,gnatic.1I'1" should n::.:>ad
Page 1(l:
1.. B.15..b.. SIGNIFICANT CONCERN -- need more information on
fiscal impacts to the city
20
E{u16ubn5a
Telephone is Yelm Telephone, not U..S.. West
?.. B..16..b..1. SIGNIFICANT CONCERN --need more details on
whether it is truly feasible to hoo~ into the proposed
STP, or, if not, need more information on impacts of onsite
SeW2\ge di sposal
4.. B..16..b..2. Does Yelm have capacity to provide water to the
area~ This may be a more appropriate question for an EIS
written later on the development, but will need to
demonstrate this prior to issuing building permits as
required by Growth Bill..
QJ1:":!tLLlt!.EJ.iIf:l EJlli..__EJ.J.I!J.B,l;.__;;lI1.lP I ~;$..
To help with future review, here is a summary of the commitments
for studies made by project proponents:
1.. FILL SUBBAE3IN ANALVSIS.. "Upon compl(;?tion of the anne:~aticll'1
and zoning ,for the proper'ty, a .fill (did they mean a
"full"r',) subbasin analysis It'Jill be pr.epan::~d analyzing
e ;:i.!::.ting flows w:i.th:if'l E!ach subbasin al'-e,,~.." (page 4, c. L;'
::-,2.. TRANSPORT A rr ON STUDIES.. "(-IS part of the concept.ual PI cl.rlm'?d
Community Development., there will be studies on the
e: tension of Longmire Street and connections to SR-507
a.nd SF~-'51u.." [P~-.;1,l;Je:.:> 9, 14.. (g..)]
~ ~- -.-r--- ~--:- ____~
A.
3678 04
o
o
CIlY OF YELM
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
OUR JOB NO, 3678
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
~~c
~~. ~~
~~ ./~ ~
.~ <0 {9J3 '
~~V
1. Name of proposed project, if applicable:
Thurston Highland Annexation
2. Name of Applicant:
Thurston Highland Associates
3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person:
1917 First Avenue
Seattle, W A 98101
(206) 443-3537
Contact: Dennis T Su, AlA
4, Date checklist prepared:
September 5, 1990
5, Agency requesting checklist:
City of Yelm
6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable):
The developer has completed the 10 percent annexation submittal to the City of Yelm.
Currently, the developer is completing the 75 percent submittal package which includes
approximately 2,033 acres of unincorporated Thurston County property to be annexed
into the city of Yelm at the end of 1990.
7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or
connected with this proposal? If yes, explain.
At this time, we do not have any plan for future additions or expansions to this annexa-
tion.
r
8, List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be
prepared, directly related to this proposal,
To our knowledge, there has been no environmental information that has been prepared
directly relating to this proposal.
9, Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other
proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain.
To our knowledge, there have been no applications filed or pending governmental
approvals that would directly affect this property~ However, there are several existing
single-family residences, farms, etc., that may have .at one time submitted an
environmental checklist and review to Thurston County
10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if
known.
Currently, the 10 percent annexation petition notice has been filed and completed.
Presently, the developer is proceeding with the 75 percent petition which requires a
SEP A review, public meeting before the city council, and once the proposed annexation
is passed by the City of Yelm, it will be forwarded to the Thurston County Boundary of
Adjustments for their review and approval.
Further permits and governmental approvals and zoning designation will be required
when the undeveloped property is submitted for site-specific design such as Planned
Community Development.
-1-
o
o
11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the
size 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, (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional
specific information on project description,)
The developer is proposing to annex approximately 2,033 acres of mostly undeveloped
Thurston County property into the city of Yelm. A Conceptual Planned Community
Development has been prepared, which includes single-family development, two golf
courses, a school site, park site, and a commercial center
The single-family homes have been conceptually designed with the density of one per
one-half acre or larger This Environmental Checklist is being prepared for the
annexations. Site-specific design will be processed through another SEP A review at the
next phase.
12. Location of the proposal, Give sufficient information 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, If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide
the range or boundaries of the site(s), Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity
map, and topographic map, if reasonably available, While you should submit any plans
required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans
submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist,
For the exact area to be proposed for annexation, please see attached Annexation Map
and Legal Descriptions,
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
EVALUATION
FOR AGENCY
USE ONLY
B, ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS
1. Earth
,I
a. General description of the site (circle one): Flat. rollin!!. hillv. steep slopes.
mountainous, other
b, What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)?
There is a small portion on the east of the site which exceeds 20 to 30 percent slope.
c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat,
muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any
prime farmland,
The general soils types found on the site appear to consist of sand, gravel, sandy
gravelly soils with some top soils and silts. The soils types, as classified by the
Agricultural Soils Conservation Maps for Thurston County, indicate that the site
consists of sandy, gravel material. These soils are generally classified as moderate to
severe erosion hazard.
d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If
so, describe,
Because of the relatively flat slope on site, it appears that there are no unstable soils in
the immediate vicinity
e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading
proposed. Indicate source of fill,
There is no proposed filling or grading as part of this annexation.
3678 04
-2-
o
o
f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally
describe,
The proposed annexation will not cause any erosion. However, during the site-specific
design as a result of this annexation, specific requirements from the City of Yelm will
be implemented to control and mitigate erosion,
g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project
construction?
Other than the existing improvements, there will be no impervious surfaces constructed
at this annexation phase. Approximately 25 to 35 percent of the site will be covered
with impervious surfaces upon completion of the plat. This will include asphalt for
roads, buildings, rooftops, and driveway areas.
h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any,
No measures are required as part of this proposed annexation to control erosion
because no impacts at this time will occur However, all the City of Yelm requirements
for erosion control will be implemented as part of the site-specific design and individual
development submittals are being reviewed.
2. Air
a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e" dust, automobile
odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed?
If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known,
At this time, the proposed annexation will not produce any emissions. However, during
the construction phase of individual site-specific projects. an increase in dust,
automobile exhaust, odors",etc" will be prevalent. However, at that time, the site-
specific SEP A reviews and mitigation will be required.
b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If
so, generally describe.
The proposed annexation abuts the Fort Lewis reservation, SR-507, and the town of
Yelm, which are sources of off-site emissions. However, these sources will not adversely
affect our proposal.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any,
As part of this annexation, no measures are required,
3. Water
a. Surface:
1) Is there any surfa<;~ water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site
(including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)?
If yes, describe type and provide names, If appropriate, state what stream or
river it flows into.
Because of the size of the proposed annexation, there are various topographical
constraints as well as surface water basins. As part of the site review and
analysis of aerial topographic information, there are several areas within the
2,033 acres which appear to have seasonal streams, ponds, and potential
wetlands.!
2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the
described water? If yes, please describe and attach available plans,
Not applicable.
3) Estimate the amount of fill 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. Indicate the source of fill material.
Not applicable.
3678 04
-3-
o
o
4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general
description, purpose, and approximate quantities, if known,
Not applicable.
5) Does the proposal lie within a lOO-year floodplain? If so, note location on the
site plan,
No, this property is located entirely outside of any lOO-year floodplain according
to the FEMA maps.
6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface water?
If so, describe the types of waste and anticipated volume of discharge,
No. This annexation is to incorporate 2,033 acres (approximate) within the
corporate city limits of the City of Yelm. No new site-specific designs have
been proposed nor reviewed. However, there are a few existing individual septic
systems and drainfield areas installed under the jurisdiction of the Thurston
County Health Department and the City of Yelm Public Works Department. v
b. Ground:
1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water?
Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities, if known,
i
As part of this annexation, no groundwater will be withdrawn or discharged.
2) Describe waste material that will be discharged iIlto 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,
See Item a(6) above.
c. Water Runoff:
1) Describe the source of runoff (including stormwater) and method of collection
and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known), Where will this water flow?
Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe.
The proposed annexation area of 2,033 acres varies topographically due to its
size. There are portions of the site that drain into pothole areas which will be
preserved in their entirety Storm drainage water will continue to be discharged
into these areas to maintain the existing groundwater elevations and the dead
storage currently available. Other portions of tM site drain via sheetflow into
drainage ditches and corridors in the area. Generally, the storm drainage runoff
rates for the post-developed site will be limited to that of the pre-developed
property Upon completion of the annexation and zoning for the property, a fill
subbasin analysis will be prepared analyzing existing flows within each subbasin
area. Storm drainage impacts from the development would be mitigated entirely
by either percolating stormwater into the ground aquifers or by providing
detention facilities which will limit the post-developed runoff rate to that of the
pre-developed site.
2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally
describe.
It is anticipated that existing and future stormwat,er would l'>e collected by on-
site storm drainage systems which would includeoil/water separators and catch
basins and eventually be conveyed through grass-lined swales to further mitigate
contaminants to the ground to surface water
';
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, ,and runoff water impacts, if
any.
Not applicable at this phase,
3678 04
-4-
~.~
o
o
4. Plants
a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site:
L deciduous tree: alder. maple. aspen, other
L evergreen tree: fu:, cedar. pine. other
L shrubs
L grass
L pasture
_ crop or grain
L 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?
At this annexation phase, no vegetation will be removed or altered,
c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site,
The proposed annexed area consists of clear-cut forest (1,200 acres), farmland, and
homestead sites. To our knowledge, there are no known threatened or endangered
species on or near the site.
d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance
vegetation on the site, if any,
Not applicable under this annexation. The proposed Planned Community Development
will have extensive landscaped areas such as golf courses, parks, boulevards, and other
areas as required by zoning.
5 Animals
a. Circle any birds an animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known
to be on or near the site:
L birds: hawk, heron, eagle, son2birds. other crow, sparrow, etc.
L mammals: deer. bear, elk, beaver, other skunk, raccoon, small rodents, etc.
_ fish, bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish,
other
b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site.
To our knowledge, there are no known threatened or endangered species known to be
on or near the site.
c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain,
To our knowledge, the site is not part of a major migration route.
d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any.
None are required as part of this annexation.
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,
The proposed annexation will not require the use of energy at this time. However,
during site-specific designs, electricity, power, and gas will be used for heating and
lighting needs. Currently, there are several individual single-family homes scattered
along the northeast section of the annexation which currently utilize electricity, oil,
wood stoves, and natural gas for energy needs.
b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If
so, generally describe. '
No.
3678,04
-5-
o
o
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,
Not applicable.
7 Environmental Health
a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk
of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this
proposal? If so, describe.
No.
1) Describe special emergency services that might be required,
None are required.
2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any,
None are required,
b. Noise:
1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for
example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)?
The primary source of noise within the area will be associated with the Fort
Lewis Military Reservation located along the north, northwest, and south
property lines. Occasional military uses create an increase in noise, along with
airplane noise associated with Fort Lewis. Other minor noises within the area
are from SR-507 and traffic noises associated with the city of Yelm. However,
in our opinion, these impacts would not affect this proposal.
2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the
project on a short-term or long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction,
operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site,
No noise will be created from the proposed annexation. However, once the
annexation has been accepted by The City of Yelm and Thurston County,
individual development of this site-specific design will increase the noise levels,
Le., traffic, construction, etc.
3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any
None are proposed as part of this annexation.
8. Land and Shoreline Use
,.
a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties?
The majority of the site has been cleared within the last ~everal years by a lumber
company Other adjacent parcels are used as a dairy farm, golf courses, single-family
dwellings and farm homes.
Approximately one-half of the site is surrounded by the fort Lewis Military Reservation
to the northwest. The other remaining portions abuts the city of Yelm, large individual
tracts of land, and SR-507 For exact information of adjacent properties, please see the
attached Annexation Map.
b. Has the site been used for; agriculture? If so, describe,
The majority of the site was used as lumber-producing forest and agriculture.
Additionally, there are some small farms located on and near the site.
c. Describe any structures on the site.
The majority of the site is vacant. However, there are individual single-family homes
and farm structures located on a few subdivided parcels.
3678 04
-6-
'\
o
o
d, Will any structures be demolished'! If so, what?
As part of this annexation, no structures will be demolished,
e. What is the current zoning designation of the site?
As designated by Thurston County, the site is an unmapped area. This means that the
default zone is one single-family residential unit per five acres.
f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation for the site?
The current Thurston County Comprehensive Plan indicates that this is an unmapped
area with a rural designation. The rural designation would require one single-family
residential unit per five acres. Upon completion of the annexation to the City of Yelm,
it is anticipated that one unit per half acre density would be allowed, based on Planned
Residential Community This would include a thorough review of the design plans for
the project to insure that the facilities are constructed in accordance with the
agreements as set forth by the City of Yelm.
g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site?
Not applicable.
h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so,
specify,
To our knowledge, no portion within the site has been classified as environmentally
sensitive. However, there may be areas which will need specific attention in regard to
mitigating any potential impacts as a result of this annexation. Specifically, individual
site development plans are proposed within areas of seasonal drainage courses, seasonal
drainage ponds, etc., and particular mitigation may be required at that time.
i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project?
The project calls for the development of approximately 1,600 single-family units on the
1,200 acre parcel. Assuming a maximum of 2.7 individuals per single-family residence,
the project, upon ultimate build-out, would house approximately 4,320 residents.
Population on the remaining 800 + acres cannot be estimated at this time.
! ~
j, Approximately how many people would the completed project displace?
II
The proposed annexation does not anticipate displacing any people or residents at this
time.
k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any,
Not applicable.
:1,
,
1. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected
land uses and plans, if any,
The latest revision of the "Yelm!Thurston County Joint Plan" mandates that the
proposed annexation will be reviewed by the City of Yelm as well as Thurston County
The projected land use shall be based on the policy and intent of the final joint plan.
9 Housing
a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any?, Indicate whether high,
middle, or low income housing. !i
At this time, there are no projected numbers of single-family units that would be
provided as part of this 2,033 acre annexation. However; the developer has prepared a
Conceptual Planned Community Development on approximately 1,200 acres, which
would include single-family)lots of various sizes with golf courses, school site, park site,
and commercial area.
b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high,
middle, or low income housing,
Not applicable.
3678 04
-7-
o
o
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any,
There will be no immediate impacts on housing as part of this annexation.
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?
There are no proposed structures as part of this annexation. Future development will
adhere to the City of Yelm zoning requirements in place at that time.
b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed?
Not applicable.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any,
Not applicable at this time. However, the clear-cut area of 1,200 acres will become a
Planned Community Development.
11. Light and Glare
a. What type of light or glare will the proposals produce? What time of day would it
mainly occur?
Not applicable.
b, Could light or glare from t"e finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with
views?
Not applicable.
c, What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal?
There are minor off-site sources of light and glare which abut into the proposed
annexation. These sources would include vehicular, street, building lighting, etc.
However, these sources of light, in our opinion, will have\ no affect on this proposal.
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any.
Not applicable.
12. Recreation
a. What designation and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity?
Currently, there is the Yelm 18 Hole Golf Course, school, and other city facilities in the
immediate vicinity
b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe,
The proposed annexation will not displace any existing recreational uses.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation
opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any,
As part of this annexation, no impacts will result.
13. Historic and Cultural Preservation
p
a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state or local
preservation registers to be on or next to the site. If so, generally describe,
To our knowledge, there are no known places or objects listed on, or proposed for, the
national, state, or local preservation registers within the proposed annexed area.
3678 04
-8-
if
o
o
b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or
cultural importance known to be on or next to the site.
There is the McKenzie house off SR-507 registered in the! Washington State OAHP
Within the current city count, there are a number of structures identified in the
"1989/90 Town of Yelm Historic Building Inventory" as having historic significance.
c, Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any.
Not required.
14. Transportation
a, Identify public streets and highways senring the site, and describe proposed access to
the existing street system, Show on~site plans, if any,
The proposed annexation property abuts several existing streets and roadways. The site
abuts SR-507, as well as Longmire Street and Berry Valley Road S.E. Please see Site
Plan.
b. Is site currently senred by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to
the nearest transit stop?
There is no public transit system serving the city of Yel~.
c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the
project eliminate?
As part of the annexation, there is no projected number of parking spaces. However,
the site-specific designs for future development will adhere to the City of Yelm zoning
and parking requirements.
d, Will the proposal require a,ny new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads
or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or
private),
This annexation requires that no new roads be dedicated. However, during site-specific
design, new or improved existing roadways will be provided to serve individual projects.
e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air
transportation? If so, generally describe,
The project site is adjacent to the Northern Pacific Railroad track which is under
consideration to be removed. Several miles east of the proposed site off SR-507 is an
existing, private airpark.
f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If
known, indicate when peak volumes would occur,
A traffic analysis at this time has not been completed. However, as part of the site-
specific design of individual, parcels and projects, traffic will be analyzed.
)i,
g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any,
At this time, there are no proposed measures required as part of the annexation. As
part of the Conceptual Planned Community Development, there will be studies on the
extension of Longmire Street and connections to SR-507 and SR-51O. At that time, the
Washington State Department of Transportation, District 3, traffic planning will be
incorporated.
15. Public Senrices
a, Would the project result in an increased need for public I;~enrices (for example: fire
protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe,
As a result of this annexation, on a short-term basis, a need for fire protection, police
protection, etc., will be required for the existing residents within the annexed area.
Additionally, as individual projects are developed and constructed, further need for
public services will be increased accordingly
3678 04
-9-
o
o
b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any,
Because of the size of the proposed annexation, the revenue from projected property
taxes will provide funds for the City of Yelm for specific public services to meet the
specific site designs at that time.
16. Utilities
a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse
service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other,
b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utilities providing the
service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity
which might be needed,
Upon approval of the annexation, the proposed utilities and purveyors are listed as
follows:
1.
Sewer
2. Water
3, Power'
4 Natural Gas:
5 Telephone:
6. Cable TV
C. SIGNATURE
Sewer will be provided through the City of Yelm. The City of
Yelm will either expand its currently proposed sanitary sewer
treatment facility to include a gravity and forcemain sewers
through this project (utilizing a S.T.E.P system), which will
substantially reduce the sewage flows from the project below
those normally anticipated for a standard gravity-type of sanitary
sewer system, or as an alternative, the site could be designed
with the sanitary sewer septic systems, because the lot sizes will
be approximately one-half acre in size or larger The soils on
the site appear to be acceptable for percolation purposes, but
protection will be provided to prevent contaminating the
aquifer
Water will be supplied by the City of Yelm. Water line
extensions will be paid for bv the property owner
Power will be provided by Puget Sound Power and Light.
Not available.
Telephone will be provided by US West Communications.
Not available,
The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge, I understand the lead agency is
relying on them to make its decision,
Signature:
Date
3678 04
-10-
~I\
/\ot): ~\.9~
t+~f(-\J
~~\V'~
~~. May 7, 1990
1
~
fJ" h l cf;, v\J
)-1 ,I)
~1~
{.\~
1/
3
J&f;~ 4
w
5
o
Q
POTENTIAL IMPACTS TO YELM
! Traffic and Access
jA
LB
Onsite impacts
vehicle trips
Offsite impacts likely that most traffic, whether heading to
Olympia or to Ft Lewis, will go through downtown Yelm -
heavy impact to main intersection
access onto state highway, large numbers of
2
Drainfields - impacts on groundwater
Density probably won't be great enough to be cost-effective for
sewer
Groundwater withdrawals - is there enough water for 1600 dwelling
units?
-
Public Services - serious concern This one development will more
than double Yelm population Need additional fire, police,
school, park, etc services
Clearing/clearcutting - aesthetics of removal of 1200 acres of
ground - buffers for viewing, nearby neighborhoods
6 Environmentally sensitive areas - any wetlands, sensitive animals
(nearby bald eagles?), etc ?
GENERAL THOUGHTS
o Will require large commitment of time from Yelm
o Must do EIS - very significant project
o There are ways to have developers cover staff costs
-charge them fees for staff review time (as TRPC does)
-give lead agency status for SEPA to Ecology
o Will need large public involvement component - many public
meetings throughout process, be sure town residents know what is
happening
/
l