General Information
-'Ill" \ -~\IlICJlVI;;.llJn t,:-- - '-"
D 4 13 ~1:3 -l ra~, ram ~
LEGAL DE:~RIP~IONS OF PARCEL~ ~91.
f'iJrccl ~ 1 l1f Shurt Subdivi::'lon # .~OI~S de'=ocfllJed as follow~
T-Jk~. ~'~.4,.II-lV"l':~( 6"t~- G)u.-.BQ..-r~ D
')1:;' T H l=' ___W v..:L.tL~~;>"0 l-_QI--.:l ~~.::__Q ~.!1w1,.,..:r..L::.&....~J.~ 0 A..:)~ J to
\"1 r0, ldL \: H +- R. A tJ G ~ .ll? A => T y ~. ,,,^ ,
~_~e,~l~G TI-l"';:f~-~;I="(L,-=,(V\ Tt-i\2. QL1.'_...1::'J-:-I -;3CluE~l.Er O~ 7J-1t:!::
I.~ f~ "'-.1 ~ 00 t= i,.,2:-f --7
G X.C GeL. I 1-/ L;: ~"'P""'" -("1-1
"
If Vf' 1 t:;L.,',\"",
I':'"
l- 'I. t r0G \.NG~ T
.... /'.:: ('""/6
":'~1~..r,.;.._~L- c... E ~;) A '_0
E f1s-r JoP J:::~~.v.r j AN 0
t. 3~:::> .-:: ee. r '=Cb~ () iA /.:!.dA> 7
b~-:";l Q~ I~' QA..)
_" t,;, ',(( G PI
THe~ \N~~T
t?oAO,
.- ---".'-" .......--...... ..--.,,--.......-. - ---..,....~-...._._._'.....'-_.---'-.-............-""""--'"-........---..........~
Parcel # 2 Df Short Subclivision # SS-CHf5 described as follows
..,_ ,.-\-2. ~I""\ 3. ~ r~~ r oP {~-/~ <--.e"L>1..1 rr-IWd"-"'17 ~C:;"~&.(ta~~~
Cl'-: (/.../(~, ;1/0grtd...l;y'~,';).T C?'IL~-- Ot.AI"'l/?_TG...t!. 0)-= Y/A~' s5'>Lc 7.f/ C~I*7~ L
D,v't;-6hA''''/2...7~~t, O/~ 1...c:./~qN--;.~ < '-// ,76{AI'N-W....P ~ 7 4/6../40 :6?..d/.r.Jt-,Cii
L t..f: ,If S Z" v/. 111,
/'~"'L --"c:7--" "'7-//,- ~ ~ ~:?' TL../.._' /..:-~....~ ~-,..--. r<:;;~ 1r
~" . _,(-;:;.. /' /tvG:::!__Lf:Z.!.i!!_o..~_L:a._<.)L22.,,_,~^_.~.~:.L.f-.__,~____ ;.~-.;-~----~~~-
6~X(.<-';;dT TH<d W0:-~T aD re:::,-~.5 -.&"'~ .ik.4A"R/l/7: ~O.-9.,t)~ p..vA
~~'<:i:;:&/ 7A(u:- ,50(..0 7# 3<->- """'=-6(.f' T /~-.J4' C!OU~T~ A.;J/i?.....Q
k{lJu/.J<"'v A ~ /",7 ,~/~7//L,J rPoX7,.CJ
Parcel # 3 of Short Subdivision # SS.-o 1,5 described as folloW5
77/6- ..5v47/7" 0C-'lt-J r~~ r 0/':- .li/~ ~s.T -30:,::.l ~d~r ~
/~/~ \.~Wu/Hl1/G'jT OA/~- Qu/1d.7'~'< CJJ~'//-?"'cr A/'Q,c.r//W657 OVc-~~r~..c
D/:::" /r/c:.- &&( T#&i-"? ~I c.wL~- -('~(.,"'liI/t.,r,-::1C 0/::.- 66<'-T/0I1.J z~ TOl/VN:i/1t!'P
I 7 Nu,C1i'~ /F,:9"vG,..:.E I e~?,ST, Vt./,/?7.
, ~
{;:.-K(..,~";#T<.,,-v~ 7(-(.J"i-1:.~ c.."Z~1 rllLf::5:- \,:'So",",,# 00 Fecl"F Pr.:;;yf'
C. ,:)LI,'" 7V ~4/..'/ K...vot't..J/V .4',5 .4-? -9..4-7<'/J./ 41V:!l-9.1
~-_._~_.- '-'-~-_.._.~~.._'~~--_.-
descri
,~
CERTIFll.A nON Of SURVEYOR OR TITLE COMPANY
It 15 hnrrllY c ~rll(lcd tth.lt thl~ fl~~Jul c1cc,cnplHJn i~ III cOlllpll~HlCC witll piJr;lO"~lph
22 (It UItJptl r H nf tlw Thurston County PliJllrns.J f SlJlldlvision On;lin<lIlCl~ ~1I174B.
Sut.mllled tld<.,___(\"~ of_
.~~I 19_
Pioneer National Titre Insurance Co.
Thurston County Office
514 Washington Street
Olympia, WaShington
\
\
\j_I_.A 2_ J r; I _
- --
J
9 4~);1 :J"~
Short Subdivision ~ S"S---=(JT=;~;-
SHORT SUBDIVISION MAP
F 0 JL lL\ "" H"f - l;> F' - \N A y
PI../'- P. ~o"'...S
.....\ATL..1-l12< D
An.~~ ~GP.I.!U3Y OG;DH___;"\'ie.O......o::> TI.ll.a..~b"('~....s LO~.,...aTy
/ '1.,
"
r.. <)
q: <XJ
0 r<)
n:
I
Sa -,IIJ>
~
t- 300'
1
(:
f! \
J 2 ~ 3 \
0
P ,...
N ~
,.J 0300' ,
~so - -- ;0
- _..,11I.&11 -
MA(l..~f-.J fL O.~ D
r"ri'lVrlrc. ..:>4.0
, ~Q6 Ir--
1\4 \2
.50u.\NWE~"1 ClNG.- Gh\A(L1G(l.. oP ,l-}l.; NOJl..T~WGS.T 04G.-Q","",AlVr~'
OF \~G. SI.:\,^\'\r)~P$~'1 DUG-Q.u.AILT~a.. Oi~ ~tZ.c.....T,ou 2..'--\ ,1-0~I\)~Hd'
Ii NOR.1'H \ AAf\.)~~ 1 \::..A~-I :) \N'1'-\ e.XL";PT R..OAD~.
)
CERTIFICATION OF APPROVAL
I hereby certify that this short sl~bdivI5i(')n compiles with the COr"ditluns a~t fcrth in
'::Z Thu:lZn County ~ubdi);}soon Code, Title la., one!, is appro".d this -11 . day of
'~. 8r1J . 19~. ~ubJect to recording With the Audl tor of ThurstOn County
arid und~(' the conditions set fonh in the attached Declaration of Short Subdivision
--<-J{, J..--:1~Q (- ., I' ~l~ jJ
::JI )nr ,,.,,... n,;onA"~n"\"''''~
\/;.! ,1
~ tiO
I () "7
'.
THURSTON COUNTr'
'Ol 'lNP I A, !.JA
a1. '07. '94 2 :34 PI'l
REQUEST OF: . "Gey
Sam S. Reed, AUDITOR
I;'II: SUE, DEF'UTtj'
:f;W.0C ORB
\10 22 i -+ Fage: 5:3:3
- Eo rJ':l ~ 941-:1 1 ~3~J.:::i266
CITY OF YELM
. ~ ------ - -
ORDINANCE NO. 484
-
.. - "-
_ .? . -: ~i ~ ~ l:=l C~ _ ~ =:' or::
AN ORDINANCE ANNEXING CERTAIN TERRITORY TO THE
CITY OF YElM, WASHINGTON.
WHEREAS, the record owners of at least sixty percent of the value of the
property described in the attached Exhibit A have petitioned for annexation to the City
of Yelm.
WHEREAS, the City Council and Planning Commission of the City of Yelm held
duly-noticed public hearings.
WHEREAS, the annexation has been returned by the Thurston County Boundary
Review Board to the City of Yelm for final action since the 45-day period of time
allowed for the jurisdiction of the Board to be invoked, pursuant to RCW 36.93.100,
has passed and no person or official entity allowed has filed such a request.
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that such annexation is consistent with and
conforms with the annexation requirements for code cities provided by RCW 35A. 14
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the annexation is consistent with and
conforms with the annexation policies and criteria found at Yelm Municipal Code 2.66
and the annexation procedures found at Yelm Municipal Code 17.64.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCil OF THE CITY OF YElM DOES ORDAIN
AS FOllOWS:
Section 1. The following described territory is hereby annexed and made a part
of the City of Yelm:
lEGAL DESCRIPTION - PLEASE SEE ATTACHED EXHIBIT "A"
Section 2. Said property shall be subject to the existing indebtedness of the
City of Yelm and to pay said indebtedness shall be assessed and taxed at the same
rate and on the same basis as other property within the City of Yelm.
C:\WP51 \57\ YE1..M\ORO-484.00C
\'!: _ 2:;:~; 1 r :===- 1 t:
:- ~ ~= '~I:l ~ 94~:1';:: 1 1 Ci~ 1 S
, .
Section 3. Said property, excepting the highway right-af-way, shall be zoned
as RA-5A as provided in Section 17 40 020(c) of the Yelm Municipal Code. Such
zoning designation shall remain in effect until further modified by master plan as set
forth herein.
Section 4. This Ordinance shall become effective on the 7th day of
December , 1993 being a date not less than five days following publication
Section 5 The City Clerk shall record a copy of this Ordinance in the Office of
the County Auditor and file a certified copy with the Board of County Commissioners.
;f4 .J!4
Kathy Woll, 'Mayor
ATTEST:
( )
Agn s P. Colombo, City Clerk
PASSED AND APPROVED. November 23 , 1993
PUBLISHED. Nisqually Valley News, December 2 , 1993
-HU~ : Tl:;r C : jr{,1
: ~;:- ; ~, ;J-..
_ .... ,...... '.' ~.", J
~~I ~~. j- ~:~: p~
.""-,< --.- -;-
';".Co:.:.:L:c'''::: _d- 'f '.':jI_,
;2ffi s. ~e~G; HUDITJF
- ~ .~ ,.i ;:' -,~;ll 'T'.
..:. j.t ... i"1j;Mfljc':.- of _',-, '_ , ,
$25 . ~3~= Ji"'.,L
l.:.j.~ ~~.:=lr;~ -=::re~ ..::::.i.~
: ~ _ -= ~(; 54 [:1 ~..;:.. ~=~ C1 . -; ::: ;.=;
1_ .. r
~214
r :::;r; ~ 5 =3 S:
~c J 94~:i 1 ~:i-;-G266
C:\WP51 \57\ YELM\ORO-484.00C
2
- - .-r -+ .. J_
-=-~_~" ..i... r" ==e c ~ r
..:; 94~:::1:;:: 1 1 r=i~ 1 0
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
CITY OF YELM ANNEXATION NO. 8100
ORDINANCE NO. 484
Sectlon 27, Township 17 North, Range 1 East.
All of Section 27.
Section 26, Township 17 North, Range 1 East.
West half of Section 26.
Section 23, Township 17 North, Range 1 East.
South half of Section 23, and the South half of the
Northeast quarter of Section 23;
Section 24, Township 17 North, Range 1 East.
The Southwest quarter of Section 24;
The South half of the Northwest quarter of Section 24;
That part of the East half of the Southeast quarter of Section
24, Townshlp 17 North, Range 1 East, W.M., and the Southwest
quarter of the Southwest quarter of Section 19, Township 17
North, Range 2 East, W.M., described as follows:
Beginning at a point on the West Ilne of the Southeast quarter
of said Southeast quarter of Section 24, a distance of 470
feet Northerly of its Southwest corner; running thence
Northerly along said West line 850 feet, more or less, to the
Northwest corner of said Southeast quarter of the Southeast
quarter; thence Easterly along the North line of said
subdivision, 1,040 feet, more or less, to the Easterly line of
Rice Street in Solberg's First Addition to Yelm, as recorded
in Volume 9 of Plats, page 31, extended South 370 56' West;
thence North 370 56' East, 90 feet, more or less, to a point
on the Southwesterly line of Mosman Street, said point being
South 370 56' West 170 feet, more or less, from the
Southwesterly boundary of said Addition; thence South 520 04'
East 400 feet, South 370 56' West 120 feet, and South 520 04'
East 85.29 feet, more or less, to the Northwesterly line of
Railroad Avenue, in said Addition extended Southwesterly;
thence Southwesterly along said Northwesterly line of Railroad
Avenue extended 40 feet, more or less, to the most Southerly
corner of tract conveyed to Lavera L. Case, by deed dated
February 26, 1949, and recorded under File No. 446474; thence
Westerly along the Southerly boundary of said Case Tract, 50
feet, more or less, to the East line of said Section 24;
thence Southerly along said East line of section 330 feet,
more or less, to the Northwesterly line of right-of-way of
Northern Pacific Railway Company; thence Southwesterly along
said Westerly line of right-of-way, 580 feet, more or less, to
City of Yel.
Ordinance No. 484 AHX 8100/SWYel.
Exhibit -A- Page 1
I _ -
'''; - '
.- - - -
l: ::- III
~~_rc_
. .
i .= ='= t
.315"
.Jo; S 4 ~:-i ~ ~ :=, ~:14 ~::=: ::=;
the Northerly boundary of tract conveyed to Vernon Oberg and
wife, by deed dated November 17, 1951, and recorded under File
No. 495635 i thence along said Northerly boundary of Oberg
Tract, Northwesterly 229 feet, more or less, and Westerly, 738
feet, more or less, to the point of beginning. EXCEPTING
THEREFROM that portion lying within Parcel B of Boundary Line
Adjustment No. BLA-1142 recorded December 11, 1991, under File
No. 9112110209.
Parcel B of Boundary Line Adjustment No. BLA-1142 recorded
December 11, 1991, under File No. 9112110209. In Thurston
County, Washington.
That portion of Berry Valley Road in the Southwest quarter of
the Northeast quarter of Section 24 and the followlng
described parcels in Section 24. (See attached Deeds)
.l,... ::'
.2.:;:.3:= ~ - -- -
"k:. S..:). D .;:=; ~ ~. ~~ ~ ~; ::=;
-... ;
City of Yet.
Ordinance No. 484 ANX 8100/SWYeu.
Exhibit -A- Page 2
"",
:)
~
~..,~;:,::
~-~ 'r~ \\
... THlJ?STCll COUNTY
~ ~ SErQl;"~'I\;:'~~H:S1
~ I ~ 1 Iioc.! -,],
~ c..~_:'{ L:..;;,~~J'Tr.,::
t': ~ cp( ')of~TT
,g I I io eer NJtioMI.Title Insurance Co. j
~ Thul~~,"r, CC'Jnty Offtce
a I 'I' I 514 Was~~lll:::.ton. Street
tii Olympia, Washington
~
.~-
pt
:~:~7J,,:~\' ;'~~~:,~j~ij~I;0~~
w'...,
~
t
j
III
=
i-
]
767532
"011" ~
~ '.,... Statutory Warranty Deed
THE CRA.-;TORS RIClARP B. LlTTu:ntl.D and E:1U:tN l.ITTu:ntLD, husband end ..He
lor atld iA COMid""C;OII 01 Ten Dollars" nd other valuable calsideration"
a r7J'-/1/ '6 0 } 00
iA Iw>d paid. alnwy' and "amnl, 10 CU:NN L. NE1Iol3Y and El.ENE H. IIEilI8Y, h4sband "nd ",He
tho lolIowin<< deocn~ rul .....l<. .;twuod in the Counly ul Thurston . Slat. <II
W uhin&'oa:
... - ,__, The NliIi of the swi of the SEt of Sec 24, T"'l'l7N, R u: 1II.Jr.. EXCEPT the North
1-,.(;,. (,; t 20 teet !:hereof for county road kno.... ,," I".artin Road; I ALSO That portion of the NEi
. . of the swt of the SEt of said Section 24, described ,,~rollows Beginning at the
~rpoint of intersection of the ~~st line of siid NE; of the Swt of the SEZ ",ith the
. . South line of said county road kno~ as r~rtin Road; thencs South, alalg said !~st
1~. .. line, 103 feet; thence E""t 25 reet; thencs North IG3 reet; thencs ~est 2S reet to
'T;:;:;; the point or beginning.
Above describBd propBrty hae a mortgage executed by grantors to ~ard Smith, Inc.
recorded November 4, 1965 under auditor's rile No. 727~74, records or Thurston
County which the granteee assume "nd agreed to pay. There is a present principal
balanca dUB a'l said mortgage of 514,457.52. ! , .., .,
1
). I t'
~'''''Sl'''> ",. \ < '"
" .~- ~. ~
~ ~ : ~
:J>z ~ '_ '
OIat,.Ut\Offllft
~:.;;~i... ~ !lu
f~A~-~ U ~~~.ft~.
Al.:h
.. _1 P' ta.!: ~ ~~ tell .u Pa1ti
IIY11f1//
"
!>or?l":)'
...,'
[laud thd
31st
.,", ....... ''''~ ,I
~L .~6::
STATE OF \\',-\SH':O;CTON. tsa.
C-r <II Thurston \
0. thia day ~Uy _rod bolon! "'"
Richard 9. Littlefield ~ Eileen Littlefield
10 _ ~ to be the indiv.dual s dacribed io atld who ';<cutod
ocUowltdged that thoy silM'l tho same u tho ir
_ &Ad ~ tboreio mmtionod.
Cl\"EN IoOdet my Iwld atld offici&1 ...1 tbis 31st
the witbio atld totqlJi~"i;s,.ru_l. ....
free aod ~'" Oct.~ dftd. I.. tllo
t... c..':.... .::..:.. CJ.-<c"'\
ugUlit :1957' ',,':::-i '
t.2t'", :::.'
\
VIlt 432 Ill".i 74
-..., - -.-
- - .
-----
- .-
r"" ;:'5;; ~ _=..:..;;
~::'~ 9 4 ~i 2 :;:. ~=I i:i 4 ~, ==
7241-/ 3D4 )0 j
-rIU rDr-rhtbt :YV;L(k:r ;-~ +-:~i 3JvJttasi %()[i{j(r 06 p<-c
<:so{)vjl1wt-st 1flffirf(I ei -1hL YJuj-tltClSf C{;tJil?lrF 06 ouridll
cJ1; fovJnShl{J n Norfh f Rtu7fJ( J ffls~ I /;U, (f)
'- ~.... .
'= ..,'1. o,~f.:j ,,-eC
~,::~~
~
:::""'9
~
~
~
,
........
:::>.~.
-i~~~_-r-. .",
.~..:~.. ~~~..~~. ~.
(0
1,(11"1"\
'f'-t't
(II i:J
" (0
'Ii ., J
rt'.l.
I'~~ I" d
GI
i,l) 'rr
;or! (T1
!.j
HI! ~l
! !'
_ Il,
/
/
,:).1-/7
-
IE
J~ i
~
659682
\iJI. :i J2 fi'.!I ~72
\.......
TREASURER'S DEED
Tnis indenture, Made this 18th
between Donald J. Boone
Wdshington, party of the first part, and
day of '-I a v A. D. ~
as Treasurer of Thurston County, State of
St~tp ~f W~~h1notnn
, 'oarty of -the second part, ..
WITNESSETH.. Tha t, Wnereas On".:! 1 rl Qnnnp Tr~a~urpr of
said Thurston County a~d Ex-0fficio Treasurer of the Velm Irrigation District,
a public corporation existing in said county and state, a~ being dissolved under
the provisions of R. C. W. 87 53 140, did, by virtue of the authority vested in
him by law,' and pursuant to notice given as by law required, on the 30th day of
",or A. D 19 61 ,between the hours of 10 o"clock A. M. and 3 0' clock
P. M. 's sell at publ.ic auction, according to th~ statute, in such cases provided,
to tate of WashIngton for the sum of none
Dollars, the following describea real estate situate in
ThurstoQ County, State of '~shington, tn~itt
-*,~ct- si'lt- S8- n~ 24-1?:l!:(T~.'<1I~.T" < n....rl 1117n)? "2..:-C~~
6. Part of:-SE1- s'r'fl. af ?Q _17_?C ly..ng C::F (".J ~~("~U~'IN;lIlTh"o :::.n..-l ~ Q ::;1 '0 W
les00 ft~\ striP-2.5o/~;res. .~ ~ "----
&, ~akenna Irr!' ate _~,;;;,l.ots 15 ~ in Block 2
and did thereupon issued to the said State of Washinqton
Treasurer's certificate of Sale for the said land # 47nA .nrl 47n7
a
And whereas, The said land described herein was sold for the assessment
levied aga inst it. .on the ,.,... dall of December
by the Board of County Commissioners of Thurston County, State of Washington,
pursuant to the provision R. C. W. B7.53.140 which said levy was made for
the purpose of paying the remaining bond and other indebtedness of the said
Yelm lrrigation District pursuant to the pro~isions of R. C. W. 87.53.140.
19~
AND 'MiEREAS. The time allowed by law for the redemption of said property
has expired without such reoemption ha~ing been made by ~y person.
I-lOW lHEREFCilE, The said Donald J. Boone Treasurer of said
Thurston County, State of Washington, and Ex-0fficio Treasuier of Yelm Irrigation
District, as the Party of the first part herein, by virtue of the said sale and purchase,
\ and in pursuance of the statutes of the State of Washington, in such cases made
and provided and for and in consideration of the sum of nnnp
Dollars, lawful money of the United States of
America, so bid aforesaid, the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledge, has
granted, bargained, sold, con~eyed and confirmed, and by these presents does
grant, bargain, sell, convey and confirm unto the said party of the second part,
and to 11.. heirs and assigns forever, the property sold as aforesaid
and as described in the said Certificate of Sale, situated in the County of
Thurston, State of Washington together with all and singular the tenements,
hereditaments and appurtenances thereunto belonging or in any wise appertaining.
TO HAVE AID TO HOlD. The said pr~mises and ap-JXir'tetl8nc.. theI'el.!ntobelonqlll9
unto the said party of the second part, He heirs and' assigns fore"er, as
fully and absolutely as said party of tile first part can, mayor ought' to by
~irtue of said "le and the statutes in such cases'llIaclf! and pr-ovi~d.
1962?iven under my!hana and seal of off~;e thl~
!lay
A. O.
.
'r
c.
"
1\
Treasurer of
~......
.',
~.q-
.=..~....:.
-.. ....p
... -~.
...~
.,
:.: !.
~. ...
, .
:. "\ -..
--, -..
#II 22"t) tti~
.
e. :...... _.
-
~.., -_.-
,
---'_.-::--:~-;:.--:-- .---.- ~-.-. -~.
.:. ~1" ~.. "" ·
..~- -.::--..~"",,:-::;-...---.:...:....:..- -~- ,!:._.-:.----..
)
,
"'--'
.
~
..
IiiiiiII
~
'i~~ ~n:~ ~'"'!'.}-. " ir:i..t:
I
I
($) ak .
BAFECDui~/ui'!."'.u.u~!! I!.L~ ~ ~ / b Jf t:
SAFECO TITLE INSURANce COUP/!4.NY
THtS SPACE RESERVEO FOR RECOROER'S use
t/
_.~.
-!:'"-,
/
'.....
~. ':
.:.~~.~'.i..;.:; -~
--.t;,.. ;__._....._
T- ;e:;::
:.::.f'l
,
FlIed fa< Record al Requ&!l of
38625- 5102
8307080044
, - .
,:_ :II
94 i-3 2 2 ::=: 1-:1 4:~3 ==:
NAME
ESTATE REALTI. INC.
Post Office Box 718
THURSTON OOUNTy
Ol YHrlA WASH.
JUL 8 I 5rdM '83
RfOU[ST 0- 7T r
.s~r:.-A!lDITOR'
- Otfill
ADDRESS
CITY AND STATE
Yelm. WA 98597
STATUTORY
WARRANTY DEED
THE GRANTORPUGET saJND NATIONAL BANK as Personal Representative of the ESTATE OF
PLVA P RADABAUGH, Deceased
for and in consid.ration of Ten Dollars and other good and valuable consideration
In hand paid, conv.Y' and warrant2ESTATE RF.ALTI. lNC" a Washington corporation Z
the following described real estate, situated in the County of
Washington:
11J1JRSTON
State of
SEE EXHIBIT "A" ArrAmED HEREI'O AND BY TIllS REFERENCE HADE A PART HEREOF 7
qiJ
1ft> ~() J. :--
I, 5:l~ -1.17--;::::-
on!<l.. (IO"'--
~,- 'l',,:.' 1/11()~
~. ,i toil." 0 1. / .
1'3C\,t~ .
,.~
19J}
-",..
Dated
Jtme 30,
Personal
Radahaugh
rust Off
reSloent
In,
\
STATE OF WASHINGTON
COUNTY OF Thurston
to me known ta be the individu.1 described In .nd who
executed the within and foregoing instrument. and Icknowi.
edged that
sig,'lt,d the slme IS
free .nd volunrary act ,nd dred. for the uses .nd purposes
therein mentioned.
On this 7th day bl !1tly
19 -8.3 before me, the undersigned, a. Noury Public i1i and
fOr the St.re of Washing1:on. duly ~,,;miitipneff and ,Wotn,
pe"onell.".woo...ed Ra 1 ph O;M;lclf... art~
Ni nr:t MrllIrpr . . .
a'fol!X
GIVEN undar my hand and official .eal thl.
_ davo! 19_
to me known to b4 the sst. e
and Assistant V ce re $.,...,..pec.....lyof
Puaet Sound National Bank, ~ N~t'nn~l
Bank Ihllt executed the foregoing in,tnJi'nent. and
Icknowtedged the lIid inurument to be tf'le free Ind volun-
tary act and deed ot uid corpOflt;on, tor the ure. ,nd Dur-
pose. therrin mentioned, Ind on olth stated thlt _
thpv ~rp. ,uthorized to execute the laid
inttrument ,od thlt the '!l1 afflxetl is the corporate leal of
Slid corpor.tion.
NOlary Public in and for the State 0' Withington, r..idlng
II
VOL 11 q 1 flCE 506
Tt, J 111 J~...~,___ .-____.__-.-
~ '-.--'-. ,..----...
- ~
-:-.-., - ~-
~..:- _= 1:-
&
..:::---.
~,.~" '1"::" " I ''-~''"'.' ~
fttf' .1'
l'p:F(". ;
j'~':(f'
l'~,'i ,:,'t
'; ?
,.
I
I
'i;<!'~_~~~j?3~'''' "I:~F::~~
J,
i
I
! "
~
~
E.XHIBIT "A"
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
8307080044
~
That part of the Northeast quarter of the Northwest quarter
Southe'st quarter of Section 4, Towns ip 17 North, Range 1
des crib d as folIo s
/ i .! I
Beg'inni g at the S utheast cor er dfith Northwest q arter of the
Northwe t quarter f the South st q~ar er of said 5 ction, th nee
Norther y along the North and S ~th con er line of t e Northwe t
quarter of the Sout east quarte of sai Section 24, 642 7S fe t
to,a poi t 2~ feet outh of the East and West center line of s id
Section 4, thence orth 890 11 S"East ;tnd parallel to the
said Eas and West cuter line 12 23 fe t, thence 50 theaster1.
and para~el to Yelm Avenue 177 3 feet, thence South ester1y an
atlright angles to Y 1m Avenue 6 0 42 fee to the I:;tst and! \Vest
ce~ter 1 ne of the N rthwest qua tor of t e Sbutheast q rter of
said Sect'oti 24, then e Westerly 1ang th said East and West '
celjter lil\e 414 feet \0 the point f begin' g EXCEPTING TJlERHR ~l
portion ly~g within ~ Northeast quarter of the Southeast quarter
of said Section
ttc/
)Jj'{~
:i
1
!i
,;
In Thurston County, Washington
l tf)J d~
d/72.:--/1?O/OO: . .J {I
f). ,~ 17 Ii) i 6Jun d&/11 (11 (i) -./ .A J)tJ.6 :r1U!1.J
r(7;r(,u' . Jj J C
No f3LA- /030 a6, lttorCl.Hl ~antlt't!J IS; /qq /
IA-ntUr J1-UCL/ for ~ JAie No q /0 J / gO 12 (}
a/72112:J/O!. ,
P;if0 ;2 !J Jho(f -J(/Lb~L~rJt6lm No 5~-d077
as ('i/ )raC4 A~jU~f ;)7J Ie; 05 !Al7dA AudlIDr5 ~{z
No, '8'50;3;270123 1in1 "07
I I I val ;; pm .... .
11 c217d? i.f'-llo/D'J- 4 .'
~ ParaJ 3.06 v~hu(f xSubdiviYcrrL)(o SS';2D77 ~L~
{(wrdL2l ~fU5+ el7 /155 ftnCUr /-tvLdlfDrs
(! I
j-IIL No gSOSJ70/J5.
I. : ... r
..- -:t--Ul:-
-=-.::..... .'=:1 =:=.: t-":::?-& :; .2 0
:it:; 94C~~ J::IJ..-i4_-=;;~:
~'f-< .-
,; :~~~~h~':
" l1~~:
:~~~. .2..
I
7dLjLj 20/ 03
)(eW cfc3cJ; .
Paw D r)e :31W1dcv:!J 0(;(11--- Urp <<0/ /Y11rr/f AJo
f3L A - j 03cJ (/1,6 //.L: or JLid ....Jan u Ctr71 /8/ I:;q / Uflt[vt
A/A.C!J!Dr3 :$i& No q I 01 18o/d9.~'
a
~--,
.....
~
~
..,/,.-
~ r'"''
SAFECo_J..:...
.' q7~1Jf
TH,S sP.....c~ .........
Filed fOt' Record 81 Request of
and return after re=rdi-ng to:
85100100Gs
NAME ROGER L. McKIBBIN
ADDRESS 15219 aer%'y-1[;!1J_e-Y-Bg_SE.__
TfIllRSTON COUNTY
at y~-' W\r~
OCT
REour
SA~.S Ht
2 59 ~H '8S
~
I DITOR
CITY AND STATE
Yelm. WA 98597
STATUTORY
WARRANTY DEED
THE GRANTOR , ESTATE ~TY, INC , a Washington Corporation,
lor and in consideralion of TEN DOLLARS and other valuable consideration,
in hand paid, convev. and wa",nts UGER L. McKIBBIN and BEVERLY K McKIBBIN, husband
and wife?./'
the followingdescri{);;d real estate, situated in the County of Thurston State at
Washington:
In
~
o
....
o
o
,..
~
~AJfCE 4 OF ~T SU~ISION NO -2077
1785 U ER UDIT~ FILE~O 8 8270
SUB ECT 0: DEED OF TRUST \ 0 JUNE 30, JULY 8,
1983 UNDER FILE NO. 8307080045, TO SECURE AN ORIGINAL
INDEBTEDNESS IN THE SUM OF $47,000.00, WHICH GRANTOR SHALL REMAIN
LIABLE FOR:
SUBJECT TO: DECLARATION OF SHORT SUBDIVISION AND COVENANTS
RECORDED ON AUGUST 27, 1985 UNDER FILE NO. 8508270123:
SUBJECT TO: PROHIBITION OF CONTAMINENTS WITHIN 100 FEET OF WELL
AS STATED IN COVENANT RECORDED UNDER FILE NO. 8508230042.
Dated SEi'T. "]?
19~
If_.,oI.~.'~~'4'"
~ ~.:-~ ;.;:--~ -'-"--.,..
:{ I -~.~.,...'c> ,..,
U~~l~f tI~ ,,- "
" f '
By
Stephenson
iJ..l'f ;,t
,'1 ~. l~ !."
(l:r l :.
..
- !
!~
~S.
STATE OF WASHINGTON
COUNTY OF Thurston
On this day personally appea(ed before me
On thi, :z (.-tb day 01 <:ae.'PT
19 M before me, the undersigned. a Notarv Public in .nd
for the State of Washington, duly commissiont'd and sworn,
personally appeared JOHN K. STEPHENSON
to me known to be the individua' described in and who
executed tne within and foregoing instrument. and ac:knowi..
edged th..t
signed the same as
free and votuntary act and deed. for the uses and purPOSl!$
therein mentioned.
WIU'~ J. STEPHENSON
and
to me known to be the SecretarY and Pf'e1ident
~XXy.x~xxxxxxxxXXXX~~M~~of
P.~r~te Realty. Inc.
the corporation that executed the foregoing instrument. Ind
acknowledged the ~id instrument to be the frei! and yoIun-
tary act and deed 01 !aid corporation, for the uses and pur..
poses therein mentioned. and on oath totated th.t ...he-
fA authorized to-execute ttle uid
instrument and that the seal atfi~...i~.l'!)e/~tP9rat. .....,01
said corporation. ; ~u...:J
,"
GIVEN under my hend and official seat this
_ day 0' 19_
Notary Public in and for the Stale of Washinqton. residing
at
145431 iP_{) Z~~(~J';::~c,)
,/tiJ~{ :f:;>'=-
Notarv Public in ana for the St~~ o1'Washincjtot\: rest
at fj/Ji(....(1 -fA' h
YCL t3 A pm ~1!l v -
,\t?:t...
/4 s<t ~J
-h 0
... ~_] p.:! ~?~ G~~1.~ ("'j
(;)UIl1y Tr~"'\.
Q. -~:r.,-.t J it ".....J
i.. .:.
- -
.=~ ~.:;.
:<4;.3~~:~'1-_~: :
--r' "'::t8;
....:::-...::....
.. ..:.:;-
;C J"
-......-. ~.;;r:~;..; h~';..... '"...-~., ~;,\~.....:,... g"
.~~...., I-- ...~ \:.:'::---- . ~~
",>>>7, "~~"':"\ ,,-
rf ~~~
'~ . t
G ..... \. -~
Q - \:; ," E;":
>- = lot e tE I ~l
t .... -. ..... ~I~
~ ,..... il I .: I. _. ' 0, b" ~I
1._..
~~ ~ ~ t: ~ "i
t:: ~.,~ ~ <i 0 8:
ts+-l N ~~L;~{::-!~~~' ~ ;:., ~I
St<b ~~ 0 ~ ~ I i
~~ . ~u ~ ,
i
~ 0 -== ~
,if I ~ .;;
:l
'l'IlUP.S'l'O!f ctlUllT g ..
= ~
Tr7~ C~:~:- ~';t :i
~ ~r.n 722818 ,-_7/-1 r,~- oX
'," ";:~,';~~,:~i.~~:~~~~;~l:
~;."_..",,.~
~~:.......
P_LH
~_,-,. 'I;_;.;,,,_...~~"l'l.t.. "";.-
f:'....~ I' ~ ., ~
.. (j I:' ~ ,~;Lt- -,-;,\- nu:fGK'A.~-iriRS-
Statutory Warranty Deed
.1JJlE3 C. JC liD{ .urn a.um.uu. .1. JC 1>>1, lIllabaDd aDd Wit..
lor &Ild III coasid<ration 0' n:II JJID 10/lOOt.hs DOLUllS .Qll orlI!Jl V.lU1AllU COEllDERUIOI.
.. lwld paid. con...,.. &Ild wamn" to XVUlEI"1' L. IlZIlDRIClSOK .IJlD ltJLLI1 L. lIElIIlll.Icx.soll, HllabaDd
and VUe,
Ill. fol1c:rw-U.c doocnbcd rnJ osu.... sitUAted in tho County .1 thant.oll . su.. 01
..... ashiJ1&t..:
J rl ()4L!2-0Z00
~:.:-~.r('.
I
/"'~
I'> I ('
,"'"
':be ..at. halt ot t.M northwest. quart.r ot the I1Orthvut. quart.r ot
the -=th..at. quarter ot S~~ion 24J...lClWllSb1P~-u.:~ac-_
~at. at VoX., ncmoo tliere~ Qorth 20 teet. tor count.,. road
iiiCiWii. aD Ih1&bes 3 tree t. or BerI7' Val.la7 Road.
.111 eas_nta and nstr1at.iona ot record, U &127.
DaLed 1.hia
6th
.J~al !:state Sa'.ea 1.'~ I'.ta 1'1C;-~
1 'i ;) 0 ""- I L I
.~..
;;~tJ)~r;:':A~t~~~;;:;~
Or ~._.__~ ~r'lHt~
r:~~.jfffilj" ~1m
;.;"i:r.:-,;':'.''M~t. . l~Z{.;~i!:i: fF:\
, 1.' ..: ' r':,~J'.....J .m. ,I 'I
\: -.. :4a..Q4~:"..
f iJ!'.fI;l~~r -',' ..-......'. -
+'. .~~.~ .~.-;;~.l
g~l96~
. /f1Kt:1 ("! . ~l
e. C. )IclI...
t3......-L- ._. - t:' )J? 5 ~Ll
1lazbara !. llcliw
STATE OF WASHISGTOS. t..
CllUllty of Pierce \
'-'
0. 1.hia cia)' pononaUy ownred 1><10<. '"", .1 llotary Publio,
-. ~ ,. 1'IcJIev, lIuabaDd aDd VUe.
nJ'JfIil! kllQWft to be tbrt indiy"duai' dncnhed in and who rteculN
a:kl>o..l<~ed ,bat they ,;~nod tho ...... OS their
:: _ aDd P1UJ"*S tllemo .....tioned.
~ -
" :? -= Ql'o"EN Dodot lilY lwld &Ild alfxial ...1 thi> 7 '"
)1 '.::::~.. _'
-:r_;'~
.1_s C. McNev aDd Barbara .1.
the wilbiD ..nd f~inc iQSlnammt. and
Ir.. &Ild volun..ry a<l &Ild -. I.. tbe
clay of .1~ 1965
~~A , :t]~ /
,....., .. ... /_ 14c SIal. ./ W......"....
ruNiar" ra_
YIl. 402 I'llGt 57
'-
...,~t
2~ ::: ~= ;- ::~::- ....::If-=-.::...
~C:; 3 4 (:i :2 ;;:.. ~=: J..:~ =-+ .~~ ==:
/
l' ".. E .. ,
..' "
, ~
, ~
~
8
Filed for Record .t Request of
Firat American Title Olympia
First Amencan Title
INSURANCE COMPANY
ThlaSp&Cc Reserved Foe- ~r'. Use:
\
'''~
THURSTIlN COUNTY
'JL '/1'lF li'h WA
04/2'3/92 1 Z : 135 pr'l
RF!UE"T OF 'TFAT
$.:.rti': ~.~l?d, AUD I TOR
BY I;H1. DEPIIT'/
:1:7.00 I,D
\'.:1 13-35 p:,:-~ 412
Fi1" II'J 3~042::::0120
AFTER RECORDING MAIL TO:
Name
Dononue Construction ComoElnv
Address
7JO 51 EATER KINNEY RIl SE
City. State. Zip lACEY VA 9850J
15792/34105
3
Fir" Am"richn \0'1'1.., Statutory Warranty Deed
Till~ 1, J,
TIlE GRANTOR TIM C B 1Jl,CMAN PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ESTATE OF KAGDELON E
BURGMAN, DECEASED
for and in consideralion oC TEN DOLlARS AND OTHER GOOD AND VALUABLE CONSIDERATION
in hand paid, conveys and warrants to DONOHUE CONSTRUCTION COMP AN'l, mc , A IlASHINCTON CORPORATION
the Collowing described real eSlale. situated in the County oC Thurston . State oCWashington:
TIlE IIEST KALF OF TIlE NORTIIIlEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHIlEST QUARTER OF TIlE SOUTIlEAST
QUARTER OF SECTION 24, TOUNSHIP 17 NORTH, RANGE 1 EAST, Il.M.
ill THURSTCN COJIrr'f, WASHINGrCN
SUBJECT TO:
RESERVATIONS CONTAINED IN DEED FROM THE STATE OF WASHINGTON
RECORDED UNDER NO 683498 RESERVING TO TilE GRANTOR ALL OIL
GASES, COAL, ORES, MINERALS, FOSSILS, ET , AND THE RIGHT OF
ENTRY FOR OPENING, DEVELOPING AND WORKING THE SAME AND
PROVIDING THAT SUCH RIGHTS SHALL NOT BE EXERCISED UNTIL
PROVISION HAS BEEN MADE FOR FULL PAYMENT OF ALL DAMAGES
SUSTAINED BY REASON OF SUCH ENTRY
l1B'll Ji:jlllilli 80joo 'I'ax Paid 1.61 r:p
~ceIPLNo,-:;OQ3)~ [Jfll/~U?2....:.1 >
Mleh MUJ'!')lY. Thlll1lU)1I I :,-" 'I'""..,
~ . ~ !~~,~
"'"
Dated tlUs
d.yoC April
06
, 1992
""
By Th!L.T;:,~s.!!);o~-9.t-,'1,!!!!,g!l_T;:,._!!!<,r.&.'!!!101]_ By
-..i.
BY?:;;;;;:U~~{(.::..&~)- By
Tim G B urgman/ersona1 Rep
STATE OF. VA~HTNr.TnN
COUNTY OF. T1l1l1l~TnN
} SS
I certily that I know or have satisfactory evidence lllat ~URr:Mb.N'
~ the person_ who appeared before me. and said person_.cknowledged that
.he..- signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be~ Cree and volunlary act for the uses and purposes
mentioned iIJ tl,1ls ~"I,o"..,,\,,\
Dated- .~- .r~7,.~,":j~.~~"),.
~~ ..:..~?-\ WA $-;; I ",};.h
:f~.' Ofi/106'''';'~
;~:~... Lr . - ~... ~l
:- - - z.- ~
r ~ ~. ~
~.~ ~. ~
i! (,pC ' \~'.;J
11'0 .1, M',~' ,<:...,.
1,,'4/1Y ul\\~\.'"".
\ I r__
\.."...............--
'I
,~___:4
/
v
/'
(
"
/0, //
~ / (
/
, I
Notary Public in and for the Stale of VASHI'lGTON
Residing at EUlA
Myappointmenle.pires: 3/10/91
LPB-l0
- -1.--,.
"
1
() I 7S2 LJ4L03QO
'-.
- - - -
"
--=- ~ ~- ~-
. -
_= -=-- w_
1::: 3 -+ j..:wi :;:.. ~ :=: ;..34- .:.:; ;=~
.I
,I
/
1
Address H400 S 8th Street Sui te 100
City Sl3lli' ZI (.~ 1evu"-;-~A 98004
,f..-/'
Escrow 0 931285
FIliSjMFRICAN 1~O
TITLE l.\ \"
"':'.;"-..:._.
:--"
Filed fur Record at Reques' of /
Ga ceway Escrow Companr""
AFTER RECORDING MAIL. TO:
/'
I'
Gacevav Escrnv Comuanv
Name
,::~,_,,""~~_,,",~~Wf,~I,
.............;,.
.. ~~J~.~J:~~~;::1~.~ir,{~:~~i.. ,~~~:~; ~.:~ . &
This spa<< ItCSCl'YCd for Recorder" Use:
\J ,0
't<;J \\ tjJ
-, iUF:ST8: J COUllT'.'
U~(I-1?I;;, I,l>;
J2/[:9: ~4 18 15 ~l'1
};:<::;.UE:" 7 OF 'TF" T
'~(l) S ....2-.?d, ':'UDITuP.
L I ;Uc, DEPUT'I
t:- .,,1,..1 ~Cr:
~:;:.z.9 ....33.:- 466
r i.:- lho' .?4t.32\.J3:':1(j::::9
QUIT CLAIM DEED
THE GRANTOR JESSE T HOFF"KAN \,fHO ACQUIRED TITLE AS JESSIE T HOFFHAN AND GAYLE
MARSHALL, EACH AS THEIR RESPECTIVE SEPARATE PROPERTY
for und in consideration of TO ESTABLISH A MARITAL GOIiJ1UNITY
conveys and quit claims to JESSE T HOFF"KAN JR AND CA YLE H HOFFMAN HUSBAim AND \,fIFE
the following described real es'ate, si'ualed in the Cnun,y of THURSTON
all aiter acquired title of the grantor(s) therein:
PARCEL NO 1 OF SHORT SUBDIVISION NO SS-0175 AS RECORDED SEPTEMBER 11 1975
UNDER AUDITOR'S FILE NO 946434
EXCEPT THEREFROM THE MOBILE HOME SITUATED THEREON
IN THURSTON COUNTY ~ASHINGTON
TIenl ~etn~ l\ales ~,pald n(l vu'q t1.
__.JJP~n~~DateL3. 7
__1".wl J/(i1Ul"JlJt 'l'hurrn Co. 'l'~'~n.:;.
;:.y \' \ Ut \;)CA"- Deouty
Dated Ja:::: 28, 19~
;;jr~
JESS HOFFl".AN
A~'70. 4J~"
GAYLVI1. HOfFHAtj -"l
Swre of \Vashing,lOn, together with
l cCrlify lhall know or have s:llisfaclory evidence tlm! J..E.S.S~lQ.E..2i.'ilL~:!l_C.A.Yt r. M Hnl:"~.'A ~
~ the person ~ whu ;lpflCarcll hcJnrc u'c. :,,,,, s.ai,J pcrson~"uC"I'\lJIi.lt"cdgcJ lh:u
..tIu:.X- .signed this inslrumenl and acknowledged it 10 tx:-tP.$i.!:.. free :mo vnhuuury a~(\~~~~;~~rtd..purpo..~
mentioned in '!tis~'ltr~'t\'i' ! / ..., ~ 'f ~""-"
Dated' ~ , f /; ~ \. 1"=
. tC .(,_....~ ;1-_
:~\;: "'",' jiS;
~ ~ "~ "" ,0::
-:;.~. i-o~"o" ~
...~, .),i...----..... ,...
"11 J;'~.'t'.1 .,,,\,\.'IO
nu....
. YPllbliCill~~llcuf\J^SIlINGTON
Residing at
My apllOllumcl1l cxpircs:---.b,4'yC\ ~
STATEOF. \/A<;HTNr.1'ml
COUNTY OF lONG
Lrll.12
-~-~. ~. ,,~....-_._.
} 5S
'-
1
""
..,
<:::>
<'-J
~
en
en
1
""
....
....
,
,
I
-~
J 11J4LJ JD5D I
(
- ~
- -=--c-
-=--.::- ._1':"_
- -
--
.~=:-.~-..
__ ~.__c:a--.
,:.): ~ --+ L1 ~:;:. ;=~ 4.=~ 4 ~~~ :::;
.. i?e&.... .J".# #", .J~~,~~:,~
"'~... ~ ~ ./ ->' .P-..","'-.;s
i'", "~",'.f"
-t:t ..:~l.\~....
..,. "J
't~~'- "
,
'"
',,"
, ,
, ',~
, ,"
~
,....
~
~
17J44'2C6D2
.".
r--
sz;!
a>
eN
a..
\,0./
V)
~
'.
...:.-!i
en
~
. .".
,.,
In
" Cl
.-
.,.J....
'"
.
; ~
0,
/'
,.
~J
Sw /JW S~
@
SAFECO
1053439
QUIT CLAIM DEED
Fil<ed.ot RltCOfd.t Requ.,t of
NAME~~
ADDRESS ~j:;) "1~ yfyc,
CITYANDSTATE o'12~ _A ~ ,14" fly517
ftM
.24
~I
/7
,/
-IE
$AFlECO TiTLE INSURANCE COMPANY ~
1
THIS SPACE RESERVED FOR RECORDER'S USE.
THURSTO
11~ Y/-jP'A~ ~~~~TY
SiP 29
,~ JUtS ( Ii
SA/( S Ii-'
. <,0, .IUD/ToR
--- DfPury
fot Ind in cDnsideruion of
THE GRANTOR . DAVID B CLEMENS, a single man,
property settlement pursuant to term~of Decree of Dissolu-
tion, KJ
MARY LOUISE CLEMENS, a aiRgL ~vuldR, ~'SC~ C ~ "ne.tt
Thurston \,~:;",a."'c \r Ma( CfC:>" c/
$\:(\(e Q~ &<=11 \'17 ~
NW lr: of~'f1e..of~ ~'5a..~~
as t. "M CU ~ c.\u.\ V"'\
Also xcept the 0 e.Q.~
for ro poses ~
c:onvcys and Quit cl.ims to
!leal Estate Sol. TllX Paid ~( ~ '
Receipt NE 9 5 9 3 1 C'".,~ ng.:.;2%
&sF' G, Hunter, Tt:urs"," CoUIl~: T.......
~, ~-?7?/// /11. j f1~
Dotod1;,4y1 ~
X ~ '/T7 ";:7~ A , A~ ~
tln(hvidu.aIJ
191E..
IInd..,duall
STATE OF WASHINGTON
COUNTY OF
On ,*,iI dlV personally .POI.tiKI before m.
DAVID B CLEMENS
to rrw known to be the indiwtdu.l described in .nd wno
.x~ the "",thin and fOl'90ing 'nltrutnlnt. Ind acknowi.
odQId IN. he
Ii9Md ","..me _ hi s
fne end wotuntafV act and deed. for the u... and purposes
tMnin mentioned.
GIVEN undo, my II nd Ind off;cil' ,,"I mi. ,;:(q-tJu
_ "'0' 19li
n.-' ... In.
.-,-
oi l'
"
JfM~':
pdfuJ d ~
Sep-/{m.ar //, / q 75
By
(President'
By
ls.c:,t.'rvl
(IL
IlL
STATE OF WASHINGTON
COUNTY OF
On mi. day of
19 _. before ml, the undlftsi9ned. . Not.ry Public in and
for m. St.te of Wuhington. duly commissioned and sworn,
penon.lIy aQQe.red
Ind
to me known to ~ U'll
Ind
Presidlnt
Secretary ,..pectjvIly. of
the lCOI1)OI'.tion that executed the forlQOinq instrument. Ind
acknowitdQlld the wid instrument to be the fr.e .nd yolun.
tItV act Ind dHd 0' laid eorporltion, for th. US" .nd Qur-
pos,n ther.in mentioned. .nd on olth sUt.d thll _
.utnorilld to execute thl Slid
imuum-nt and tl'l.t the M.l .ffiJled is thl corporal. ...1 of
uid corpor.tion.
Witneu my hand and offici,I...1 h.reto .ffixed the day .nd
yur fint abowe written.
Haury flublic in Ind fOt the SI,l. of W'lhi"91on. ,..idinc
..
... SSG '~l~ 5,)4
...~.~~~~;--~
l 1 . ...... ... _ "N
.t .. . \
.
-r(--""'t"""--:-- .-.......
., ~~
,
I
.,~--
, -
.~
,...
o
~
&
)
CO
U~I II"'
II] 1"
It I G)
- '-0
;~:: ,",]
~'J I,]
LL
I~:l
i.t) -r:f
n I'll
j
I! ! I
Ii.!
v
~
i
I'
... (
f ; ,
~
~
I r
I t
~ ,
,
!
0\
\0
JhoAi .Ju.l:tiltJIS1dfL ;1)0
ur7~ /tvd/7vr:s J/U ).)0
~~- O/75CIJ ./If.{DrM
q if f.t; '-/3 if,
.:---
v ., ".
~
r::
;) <-\ - \1- ),,~,
. ,-\c:r~
FIrst mencan-tlfJe /,/
InsurahreJ:2ompany'/
THl l~ Tilt( I :nur 1'1
-ill iF I...., ht
1~1'~. 1.:.. .;: F.r:
E'!;E 7 "F '7FT
~Ii, F..:--:-d, HIlI iT .iF
E I .l!E.! [iEF-IIT'.
l." In HI~
HIS SPACE PFlQYIOEO FOR AECOHOEH'S uSE;
p
Filed (or Record at Request of
Name Ronald D. Rothwell
Addre.. 15050 Longmire Street S E.
'/li
Fi i~
1 5=- :: F E1='.:- _ 0
HI = ='-:19~:S.:H1-;'4
City and Stat.
Yelm, WA 9U597
First American '\~ tJ
Till. (~
I
\
Statuto!)' Warranty Deed
THE GRANTOR
AMERICAN SAVI~ BANK f S.B.
lor and in consideration of TEN OOUARS (SlU 001 AND arnrn Vi\WAllIZ CONSIDERATION
ill hand paid. conveys and warrants to llONAill D. ROl1IWELL AND JODIE II OO[1~;ELI.. IIUSOANO
AND WIFE
the fullowing described real estate. situated in the County of Thurston ~ :v('3 StIlle of \\fashill~IOI\:
as v'
PARCEL J Of SHORT SUBDIVISIOO NO SS-017SVRECORDED( UND.rn fIlZ ID. 946434 l:lIr
\1I"l''M,E ~ Qf ~I-VV'" Dr "'T~. 'f'!J:C 19~ /
Slp-tm!7iA" /1 Ins
SUBJECT TO THOSE ITEMS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT "B" ATTACHED HERETO AND BY THIS
REFERENCE MADE A PART HEREOF
Roe'll E::tJu,. 8111"" '1'9'( P.ld.:li 6 ,10
R'''''''i'II,J\e((itl ~ CLJ-j {i
.fle1l~j J. MUI"UI
Rv i..iu.U,i.:Lt1llilL ~_. !" c-!
~
Daled Jill Y
1S'
W
t~)
,\meric:an savmqs Bank
r. ,.
"I
JU.. '
"
\1; \.
Sect
ST ,,'n: Of IV "SHlN(,'TON
STATE U'" W A~IIINGTON
COlINTY Of_----P;.e~fL_____},....
On ,hi. ~ 2nd dllyof Sept.. _. 19..~.?__
~CUf'. me, lh. U1kit'nilC.llf'd. II i'h'hlry I'uhli,' in iunl rut Ihp Sial.. ,r \\'u..hinr,lun. duly 'Ill'
mi..HlfJrdeIltJa.wurn..,pr:KJllAIlYOIpp..'ilrC'd -L.a..cry R _Jahnson....___
COUNTY Of
lu
On thi. da, (W!~a,. .pp"'and IH'fUf'. m.
10 PIC' klt.,.....n tu Ill!! lhe Indi\'i,ju.dlhlllf'M:nu~1 in IInd whu
,:"'PCLlh.,1 It... within tmd ruu'CuiuC in.lnlltlpnt. l\u.J
.11", _________. N_~.r!qy__~~, ~JJ ~Q!!" ___._
10 Ill. ..nu....n It> h", lht'_~P ~~~rd~lll.lltl ~~~.t ._. S.".'h'Ii.II\
"'....,"'..Iy, ur __i\J'1p.::lIC.AtLS..t'WI NGS-.llI1NK __. --
the curVO(lIUUU Ih.11 PJ.t'\'\rtt-d the (l,Kt1:oinll tnslrun",.nl. "RlI.,:lo.nm.d...I~,'d ,hI.' ~..lll\"'lll'
nu~nl '0 hit' lh(./rt:t: .lJd vt>tu'Jl.JttY ."1 alldd"rl.l ul'U,ul cor,,,lrUhun. iur Iht" 10",.,. ,111.1 p..rl'''''''''
Iher~1R 1nC'llllum'l.I, Aluhm ~I,h~tac..id that .-!:..~~~~E~!.__ __. - - -----
.lIlhvrilc..tJ IUC'It"C'L1111' I~ tolid Jl1:SlrUhoIt'AI alld thaltht' Jl~..lulfih"l iJlth~' c..r~"rrtll' _..1..1 ,".1
I.:urponllum. ( ,
Wilnus my tlltnd,;u1,orr\Ci.l.e.) tU:tt'lu a/fist'd tht' UII)' OInd YI,I,I( II..., ..b...... ",nlh'lI
~rY~':'. d ".h.'s,.~~~.:.;i;n'.' o-.(i:-"t""
~~'S':~" _ ____
-- t\"
",clU'H~wl"'llltl,lu that
_ It<<;nf'd th~ "''''It.
.. _ r~iI' and "'OIUOIII''1I1'''' .nd .1",,1.1,
Ill#' Ih.o u,.,." and purpo..alhcrtrin menUorwd.
GJ\'I-:N under my h,md and oniC'uol leal thi",
____dllyul ____.l~__.,
.s.......,. l'ublN.' in and lut the SlAl. 01 W.,.tur",on.. r....tdiIlC al
J.J'U. JU 16/B4)
,
--
a J1d1J..(10~D3
"
- - - -
.. "
"::'-~,="ee=
i- =5~ l:
1t_ t
s.; i-=i':;::'~~;J..34
(
-=J#=
- I_~
.I
,
/
"
4C 0 <;:
--'
(@ TICOR TITLE
~ INSURANCE
111I' .....~\ I J"lInln. U 10_ 11.161"'''. ,. "
THlIF:STW COLqlT'
flLYMPIA. I,':'
'-1:= '24/:::: [t~ :(1;3 j'l
F:EI,!UEST OF 'TF-Te
S;"ro, :. . Ro?o?,j, ;'~ID 1'1'-'F
B I '..HF.R IE, DEe lIT',
11 I u') -:E.
159 1 F':,~o:- 39"
N... := =:1.:1:: ~41.:)":1 1::
l.
~
FILED FOR RECORD AT REQUEST OF
...
WilEN RECORDED RETURN TO
".1
'1'.'.1
Fi lo?
Nam. "\' I C,O<:' \" \ ,I..-C
Addr." Po '2:,0)(. IO"'.C,
C9WC-f'\\'P-. ~""'&~<.~
Cily SIal.. Zip \
aiii:I
LPn.~~
.\N) OPTIONAL PROVISION NOT INITIALED Il) ,ILL PI'RSONS SI(iNINC, TillS CON'I RACT - -
IIII['TIII.R INDIVlI>lIALU OR AS AN Ol'-''-ICI:I{ OR M;J'NT - - IS NOT A PART 01' TillS
CONTRACT
REAL ESTATE CONTRACT
(RESIDENTIAL SHORT FORM)
:::="
1. PARTIES AND DATE. This Conlra.t is enlereo inlo on
August 9. 1988
FERDIE C JAY AND MARY H JAY, HUSBAND AND WIFE
as 'Sell.r .no
JEFFREY C PRICE AND REBEKAH S PRICE, HUSBAND AND WIFE
as 'Buyer.
2. SALE AND LEGAL DESCRIPTION. Sellera~rees to sell to Buyer.no Buyer agrees to purchase from Seller lhe
following oescribeo real eSlale in THUI<STDN Counly. Slate of Washington:
SEE EXHIBIT A ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE APART HEREOF BY TillS REFERENCE
Relll Estate Balea Tax PaId t,U 0 ~
ReceIpt No, I (,gD/ V Date ~{...-j?.i
MI(:h~w-tro/ Co. Tress.
l!y nopu~
N
...--!
o
o
<-=l
3. PERSONAL PROPERlY P."onal property. if any indud.d in Ihe sal. is as fullu....:
N/A
No part of the purchase pril.:c is altrihuh:u tu personal pruperlY
4, (a) PRICE. Duyer agrees 10 pay'
S 39,500 00 TOlalPrio.
L.ss (S 2,500 00 ) Down Paymenl
Less (S -0- ) Assumeo Obligalion (s)
Results in S 37,000 00 Amount Finaneeo by Seller,
(h) ASSUMED OBLIGATIONS, Buy.r agrees to pay the above Assumeo Obligalion(s) by assuming
ancJ agreeing 10 p.iI)' thilt certain I,.I....,...~. ~,,_ I... I..... (.........11 daled ,rccunJl"o as
AF # Sener w.HranlS the unp.lid hal<1lH:c ul \aiL.! oblig.lIiun is
S whieh is payableS on or hefore
the Jay of 19 1"...,,,.1 "('C-' inh:rcst at the rate of
% per annum on the declining halancc thereof: and a liKe amount on or hcforc the
J..y of <<:01\:11 ;'IIlU every '"'''7"''' h....' thcrc:lfter unlil p:lill in full.
NOle: Fill in the o~te in Ihe .oHowing two hnes only if Ihere IS an early eash out oate.
N01\\'ITIIST ANDlNp THE ABOVE. TilE ENTIRE DALANCE OF PRINCII'ALAND INTEREST IS DUE IN
FULL NOT LATER THAN 19
ANY ADDITIONAL ASSUMED OBLIGATIONS ARE INCLUDED IN ADDENDUM,
-----_..-.- .--------- .--.- ---- --_.-_..--'-~-- _..
.
:2J 7 Zt/J..j dD700
'--
-=- ..::-
..
- '-
~ ::.=.::.
---= -:-
~l_i t
- .::..
~4€i~2;=;f.:j4 3:=;
/.
..-
,
"
"
/
/
EXHIBIT A
,
That part of the Northwest one-quarter of the Southeast one-quarter of
Section 24, Township 17 North, Range 1 East W.M . described as follows
Beginning at a point 1,314 51 feet North and 1,527 04 feet West of the
Southeast corner of said Section 24, said point being the most Southerly
Southeast corner of 1 75 acre tract conveyed to Jennie Little by Deed
dated December 16. 1919 and recorded in Volume 100 of Deeds. page 16,
running North 37056' East 243 32 feet and North 52004' West 439 feet,
more or less. to the Easterly line of Tract conveyed to James L Sample
and wife by deed dated December 16. 1959 and recorded under File No 620827;
thence South 1004'20" East along said Easterly line of Sample Tra~t 450 feet
to its Southeast corner; thence North 89011'05" East 40 feet. more or less.
and North 89.06'52" East 141 15 feet to the point of beginning. EXCEPT roads
along Southerly and Southeasterly boundaries
v')! 1591 Pa9l? 997
File N,) ::::=:~3:=:~4~:::u:Il;)':=:
~..
-:.~-
.::-2';_;}~0=_=;=~':= ~4'~ CO
... ~ --.
... .'-
1
.~ . -'1'
.:,::?-.~~-.i-:-:-_.
,.
~O~
."'~
. .-.
. ., /
," 'l~ (6:,.,,~i~~~:;,.::~~.'~:,~fC;~'~. ;-:\,~':~::,-\~t:i~:
QV.)J- .):.fo-e '.:~ ~",.,; .:.t.::-;~,'i>.- \~~~:'-<'-'~--"
..""':.:.... ~.. _'~:."::' ,,:,.'::.,-: - ...-: . I _." r --_ .......~... ,--
~ ..~
~"1~:
<::)
'X>
~
.. 3-'"
liS SPACE ~OEO FOR AECORDER"S USE.: 'r
1123980
d) 7:Jt.J Lf {) D g DO
F1LEo AJ4\ REQ)PO AT MQUEST QtI'
WHEN RECORDED RETlIM TO
THURSTON COUNTY
OL YMPIA, WASH.
lIIr Z 3 III PH 'an
IftIlUT ;F
JoUt S. /tEfIJ. ,WOITh
DEPUTY
:>.:l
~
::>-
__..RONAUlJ-,-MVgq,P-f
-.1;;J.~).A8=~~_~S.
CIry,_Zlp._~~ qt~:1'7
/// 5-- c.~
jIlA~hCt:~ICA TITLE INSlJRAna!
Purchaser's Assignment of Confr'ad and Deed
THE GRANTOR S
VAL'IEll. A. GII.LEnE, JR., and DORnlA H. GII.I..E'I'rE.
his wi.fe
do berebr coavcy and quit ciaim 10
RONALD J LAUGHLIN AND LINDA L. LAUGHLIN, his vUe
. the pantce.
,..
,..
N
W
c=
00
Q
,)
COt" value rea:iYed
the CoDowing described real estate, situated in 1'RURSTOlI
County. Sbte of Washington,
togelltet with all after aa(u.i=i title of the panIOn:S) therein~
That part of the nortm,est qua.rter of the southeast qua.rter of Section 24,
Township 17 North, Range 1 East, V.M., described as follows Beginning at a
point described as being 1314.51 feet north and 1998 08 feet west of the
southeast corner of said Section 24 running thence along the boundary of
5 125 acre cract conveyed to Jennie Little by deed dated December 16, 1919
and recorded in Volume 100 of Deeds, .page 16, N 10 04' 20" W 642 75 feet,
N 890 11' 05" E 432 feet, more or less, S 370 56' W 161 feet, 1:lOre or less,
and S 10 04' 20" E 113 4 feet, more or less, to the northwest corner of
1.75 acre tract conveyed to Jennie Little by said deed; thence N 520 04'
W 60 feet, more or less. S lO 04' 20" E 450 feet and S 890 11' 05" V 290
feet to ehe point of beginning.
and do
3rd
he:eby assign. tr.m:IfenDd .a over to the gn,ntee that certain =1 estate contract dated the
day of June
,1980 betweeu RONALD.J. GILLIS AND MALESAK GII.LIS
o
,..~
.:;)
~
~
~
~
as seller and lii'AI.TER. A. GIUEI'IE. JR., AND DORTHA M. GII.LET'IE
IS purchaser for the sale and purc:lIno of lhe above described =1 estate.. The san1ee! hereby
3SSIIlDe and ~ to fulfill the conditions of said =1 estate contract.
'le~' d)e~q:~T"x P<lkPt h.!Jd!!:!? day of
,,", -< ~:",- -J;1:3'52....
. · ,- .~ Jz. ~- . .,~. ./~::::
q.- ~u '
STATE OF' HI . N:T "''''~
. . SL
County 0( Thurston
OCTOBER
,19 80
~./~~
~ //I ",,</,,/~
Thlr[},~ r'"'I l.llrprrp
",
On this cia,. penonally appc:ared before me Walter A. Gillette. Jr., and ))ortha H.
GilleCte
to me known to be the indmdual s described in and who eltealted the withiD and foregoins
iDslJurDont. and actnowledged that they signed the same as their free and yoluntaly
aa and deed, fo~ the uses and ptII'p02S themn mentioned.
~ unda~ band and official seal this hi- day 'Jt ~ctober ,~ 8~
'.7..~ _, ~..c-UA~"'-aJ
.... NourJ Pablic its ..d for the SI4U of kJaJurtt,;;n-
7CSidiItf- Olympia.. .10'...- . '1-'
lVUt ~:) f~ l't
'-
P_:C..W.,.,
1"'-' '_ICe. .....,
. -
_ .i. 1"
2.2::=;~= ;- ::.-~i:: -3:;:;'9
: _ J -.4'-1 -1 -C.= ,,-; .<4. ..~, l::':"
'4:".1 ~ P_ -=- -=- '_.1 r_~ ._J 2_
t
~
.......:
r,
~,
~
~
WARR6:~5Tl; DEED ~tJ
nw. Indenture, M." ".._...,~_._._u,"'., ..""","=-':l'1"____ ~i
. . . '~
m the ~~CT of .,..,. Lard aM thOWland nine hundred and__~xt.:r".__w.____________________ . I '.
lkn......n _ _._!!J..~~A~_. ~~__~~&.:i~r_~}.!!...!'!.~_t::?!'-__~~ __2:':!.E!!r J__tJ:~ ~~~'}sL !!:l_q_l"_tr e
LA '-\~~
'~"""L"""-""'~"''''-''''':l:'<'''-I
...... :--":".:::~~~~~ .'.J.. r.":,
:......:-... ;.\ _....~ -
'!
i
~ .
k
.~ <t....
.. .-"
l
~
\
36t1 ~!I[rU2
"'
- ------ -- -------- -- ..----------------------------------------. ------------------
tM pari..i.&a_ at tM ttr~t pari a7l.d..____..!l.r:Y-1;:L.L~--'d~Ar;:-.!I.-u:-.zlJ, .tl..Q.~.h3.a._~ar.
_~~_;~,,9__~;l_~~_r~~________________________________.___________, --------------------
'.
iiiiii:9
___________pari_..1..e.s.. of t.M -=-and pari:
Wiln~th. Th4t the .aid pcut_!_e_~_ at t.M !fr,t part. tar and in conndcation at tM zum of
__--'~!!.~J..l}s:J!~.!'Jl~_J.~5'_QQQ.L"..:.;~:.::..:.:---:.:.:.::-:::-:::-::-.-::-.-i::_:=.: POLURS
lau:tul mon~ of the United Statu, to.___~!_~_Jn 114M patd trv tM .aid part__!.!'__ ot tM ,~
pari, tM rrcdpt ~hlreof II hlrctrv ~l.t5f.ged. do______ trv t1l.ce preuntl\.r,:ant. bargain, ..a.
con<>ql aM ronttrm 1Into tM aajd pan_.!=-_ 01 tlu oeam4 part. aM to _____ .!-_1..!________ hetrl
aM a..19"'1. tlu foUofli'Jr~----' 1ot___ ar paI'Cd.--- of land. situate, !ymg lI1I4 bcTrlg in the
County of_______________.::..:::..'!E-____ Stote 01 Wa.shtngtQft. <md pa~l,
bo..n.ud aM ctucnbed Ga lolJmDI, to-vXt: :ee€1nn1l16 lot th.. 1ntersectlon o~ thf
_outt.f:r1~ 'tour.C:~' ofYellllJ,.yenue. 1nYelm. ti~h':l!.:t()n..'~' 'J,
5ortl:.~,,:,- t~l:.:".dlJ:r o~ :i~11"rg'll Flr!lt Addlt1on, d:lch ;:olr.t. 111
~tout L~ t"et Nortt.we~ter~ trom- the lbS~ l1ne c~ Sect10n 24,
.~~~t.~p 17 n. nhnge 1 ~;}~K.; thence Nortt.~e8terly &long tt.e
S'~"'I~,.enue extenced ol~O feet; thtonce ~outl.
~7 <:ecrf:u ~e JlI1n.....tes .....e&t 10~~ ~eet to ln1 t1bl po1nt. o:r tl.ll!
descr1ntlon; thence cor.t1nue1ng on 16Et ~~~d bee.r1ng 4e5 teet;
thence Sortt. 5~ degr~es ~O minutes ~O seconds hest ~76.F: teet;
thence North 1 degree 4 minutes ZO seconds ~est ll~.~ te..t; thence
~orth ~7 degrees 56 minutes Eaat Z96.eS ~f:et; thence Sout.h ~~ degrees
ZO m1nutE:s ~O seconds Lsst 450 ~eet to 1n1t1~1 po1nt. Conteln1ng
4.92 acre., more or Ie... L11ng 1n t.he 50rth halt o~ t~e Southeaat I
<;.uut.er o~ ee.Uo ~4,. ~.~. a;roulllentloned TownaUp and R~e. f:'ictptiflJ -1m t({)fY1 co~ntJ
: E>, ..."~' .., ~.... '"....~ .". c- dad at OJ(Jin~ au,1
Ii ~~,~ -, ~ 8 - - rtI' -f1U-.-
: . ~,!i. r. ,:-! (':~~,,~);o _~..~_. Date _~)( r ~~~ p'(/){)-(fn'1 oJJJ ?q
:;. - I -:.... ',,,,,,~p~.!,,- ..__.: J J;oo;;e. r:'=ston COUll:)' Tre.... C::f)~e.asf J iaeJCM1tJ..t<-(!j
By ~' , -. / ')ellU't7
'1'ogdhlr ~h fh.e aw~, to Nzw <md U, hold t.M axjd pr~ 1<'it1l the appurtnUJ1lca.
untoSGidpari_!!!..ofthuecqrujpan,a4tJh th-'!1r ~ ~ ~atara '"'"
IU.rlg1u far rwr
d nsp-j 1-1 JoqOo
::::::.
A1Id the ,aid PGrt_.!_!!'__ o( the tfrU plZrt, tar_the~~ll!______, ad 1or--!!!.!!:-
1leu1o. at;p'tor, or GdmblUtTatara ~____ bp ~ pramt:z. ~ <md agree to 4J1ld 1OU1l u..
$Ci~.J.!' ~ _ a( tM ,econd ~!_~_~~-!!l.s:;.., C<<V!orI or ~ lDId cw:igu, tJt.ct
______l_____Zat&f1IJJ' Idzft1 1ft I" nmpl.e abIol1d.c. of 11114 1ft all <md ~ t.M a.bow granted a4
<Wcribed premua a1Id tM ~; th4t.._t..~z.~__!...QOOd 4n4 141DftJl ngAt to IeIl ad
nmfq IM...me; t1l.a:t tJw _.,. trw frotr& GZZ Uru a4 ~~..!!!'.!..~1:___
a1Id i1l.a:t.__!.~!7.
Jlcrebtl W.aJUJrr _____.mod llli:ll DUVlD tAe _ tnma all l4Jt1frll
dabou JC~
ba Wim-. Tha-eol. n.. .ucr .parl.-Ua- ot 1M ttnt pan 1I.Ir1a.. AnftJLto Mt..-thA1z.___
114""-. aa4 -z...A. tJw d.tq a4 ,.. ttnt ~ -uta.
~1gMrL ~ ad DcUrned &r,~ of
/6'~
__L_':::7//" ~.-.:.. """"---'""
! -~ - U'1_ _._ _/.I J
Z---7~~~SE.u.}
_1~~~::2:.: .; _~...::._~~!.;.:., SEAL}
{ _________.._______lSUl.}
-J
____'n At]
_.I!d"/.?/ C'i7'~~~
...... __ ...--c....... _r:.-... ."...... _0 ~.._
.~- - '
...--"-
..... ~ ..-
. h ~-" .__~,..~ ~..
,......
".......
n
()
:11
'- -
- - - -
:' ;; , ,
~:-_ -=- _= 1:_
~ :: 9E 1I -:; :::=: ~3
J(i: 94 i-:i 2:2 :=,; }.:i 4 ::=: ==;
(
I; ~ \
Section 19, Township 17 North, Range 2 East.
The Southwest quarter of the Southwest quarter of Section
19, EXCEPT that part being Southeast of the Northwest
line of the Rainier-Yelm Highway, and ALSO EXCEPT that
part being Northeast of the Northeast line of Mosman
Street S.E. and its direct prolongation Southeastwardly
to the Northwest line of Rainier-Yelm Highway.
That portion of Mill Road in Section 19, Township 17
North, Range 2 East, W.M., lying South of Rainier-Yelm
Highway.
A portion of the Southeast quarter of Section 26, Township 17
North, Range 1 East, W.M., described as follows:
BEGINNING at the Southwest corner of said subdivision;
THENCE North 890 10' 47" East along the South line
thereof, 720.67 feet;
THENCE North 280 42' 32" East, 2,038.89 feet;
THENCE North 730 55' 14" West, 999.71 feet;
THENCE Northwesterly 953 feet, more or less, to the
Northwest corner of the Northwest one-quarter of the
Southeast one-quarter of said Section 26;
THENCE South 000 55' 01" East, 2,636 feet to the POINT OF
BEGINNING.
That part of the Southeast quarter of Section 26, Township 17
North, Range 1 East, W.M., described as follows:
BEGINNING at a point on the South line of said Section 26,
North 890 10' 47" East, 720.67 feet from the Southwest corner
of said Southeast quarter;
THENCE North 280 42' 32" East, 2,038.89 feet;
THENCE South 490 04' 03" East, 1,148.33 feet to the
Westerly margin of the Burlington Northern Inc., Railway;
THENCE South 350 44' 02" West along said railroad right-
of-way, 1,256.52 feet to the South line of said Section
26 ;
THENCE South 890 10'
1,113.23 feet to the
47" West along said South line
POINT OF BEGINNING.
That part of the North half of the Northeast quarter of
Section 25, Township 17 North, Range 1 East, W.M., described
as follows; and the SE 1/4 of Section 24, T 17, RIE, as
follows; Parcel A of Boundary Line Adjustment No. 1142
recorded December 11, 1991, under File No. 9112110209.
All situate in Thurston County, Washington.
, -
......l. t
:2 .2 -:=c;=
r :3::- ~
..-:::: ::: ..l
__tJ.__t ..;;;..
-
.. ---
'Jc!: ~ 4 L-; 2 ,;:.. ;=i i-:i 4~; =::;
City of Yel.
Ordinance No. 484 AHX 8100/SVYel.
Exhibit MAM Page 3
\:Q
f
(
,
(
CITY OF YELM
ORDINANCE NO. 484
AN ORDINANCE ANNEXING CERTAIN TERRITORY TO THE
CITY OF YELM, WASHINGTON.
WHEREAS, the record owners of at least sixty percent of the value of the
property described in the attached Exhibit A have petitioned for annexation to the City
of Yelm.
WHEREAS, the City Council and Planning Commission of the City of Yelm held
duly-noticed public hearings.
WHEREAS, the annexation has been returned by the Thurston County Boundary
Review Board to the City of Yelm for final action since the 45-day period of time
allowed for the jurisdiction of the Board to be invoked, pursuant to RCW 36.93.100,
has passed and no person or official entity allowed has filed such a request.
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that such annexation is consistent with and
conforms with the annexation requirements for code cities provided by RCW 35A. 14
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the annexation is consistent with and
conforms with the annexation policies and criteria found at Yelm Municipal Code 2 66
and the annexation procedures found at Yelm Municipal Code 17 64
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF YELM DOES ORDAIN
AS FOLLOWS.
Section 1. The following described territory is hereby annexed and made a part
of the City of Yelm.
lEGAL DESCRIPTION - PLEASE SEE ATTACHED EXHIBIT "A"
Section 2 Said property shall be subject to the existing indebtedness of the
City of Yelm and to pay said indebtedness shall be assessed and taxed at the same
rate and on the same basis as other property within the City of Yelm.
C:\ WP51 \57\YElM\ORD-484,DOC
9' ..~.
Section 3. Said property, excepting the highway right-of-way, shall be zoned
as RA-5A as provided in Section 17.40 020(c) of the Yelm Municipal Code. Such
zoning designation shall remain in effect until further modified by master plan as set
forth herein.
Section 4 This Ordinance shall become effective on the 7th day of
December , 1993 being a date not less than five days following publication.
Section 5. The City Clerk shall record a copy of this Ordinance in the Office of
the County Auditor and file a certified copy with the Board of County Commissioners
;(~ Jf~
Kathy Wol ,'Mayor /
ATTEST'
/ r
S P. Colombo, City Clerk
PASSED AND APPROVED: November 23 ,1993
PUBLISHED' Nisqually Valley News, December 2 , 1993
C:\ WP51 \57\ VRM\ORD-484.DOC
2
..,."'"
SW YELM ANNEXATION
LEGALD~SCRIPTION
CITY OF YELM ANNEXAT10N NO. 8100
EX ATS-IT-"A"
ORDINANCE NO. 484
Section 27, Township 17 North, Range 1 East
All of Section 27
Section 26, Township 17 North, Range 1 East
West half of Section 26
Section 23 Township 17 North, Range 1 East
South half of Section 23, and the South half of the Northeast quarter of
Section 23,
Section 24, Township 17 North, Range 1 East
The Southwest quarter of Section 24,
The South half of the Northwest quarter of Section 24,
The Southwest quarter of the Southeast quarter of Section 24,
The Southeast quarter of the Southeast quarter of Section 24, L~CEPT
that part being Northeast of the Northeast line of Mosman Street S E ,
The North half of the Southeast quarter of Section 24 lying West and
Southwest of the following described line
BEGINNING at the intersection of the South line of said North half and
the Northeast line of Mosman Street Southeast,
THENCE Northwestwardly along said Northeast line of said Mosman Street
Southeast and the Northwestwardly prolongation of said Northeast line to
its intersection with the Northwest line of Longmire Street Southeast,
THENCE Southwestwardly along said Northwest line to a point which the
following described Point "C" bears North 530 30' 30" West,
BEGINNING at a point which is the intersection of Southerly line of Yelm
Avenue and the Northwest boundary of Solberg's 1st addition to Yelm,
THENCE Northwest along the Southerly line of Yelm Avenue extended 875
feet,
THENCE South 370 56' West 620 00 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING,
THENCE continuing South 37. 56' West 76 5 feet,
THENCE North 530 30' 30" West 50 feet,
THENCE South 37. 56' West 415 feet to Point "C",
THENCE North 53. 30' ,30" West to Point "C",
THENCE North 37. 56' East to the East line of the Northwest quarter of
the Southeast quarter of aforementioned Section 24 and the terminus of
herein described line
That portion of Berry Valley Road in the Southwest quarter of the
Northeast quarter of Section 24
Jr,
Section 19, Township 17 North, Range 2 East
The Southwest quarter of the Southwest quarter of Section 19, EXCEPT
that part being Southeast of the Northwest line of the Rainier-Yelm
Highway, and ALSO EXCEPT that part being Northeast of the Northeast line
of Mosman Street S E and its direct prolongation Southeastwardly to the
Northwest line of Rainier-Yelm Highway
That portion of Mill Road in Section 19, Township 17 North, Range 2
East, W M , lying South of Rainier-Yelm Highway
A portion of the Southeast quarter of Section 26, Township 17 North, Range 1
East, W M , described as follows
BEGINNING at the Sou~hwest corner of said subdivision,
City of Yelm
Ordinance No. 484 ANX8100/SWYELM
Exhibit "A"
Pg. 1
EXHIBIT RAn
~~
.- .
THENCE North 890 10' 47" East along the South line thereof, 720 67 feet,
THENCE North 280 42' 32" East, 2,038 89 feet,
THENCE North 730 55' 14" West, 999 71 feet,
THENCE Northwesterly 953 feet, more or less, to the Northwest corner of
the Northwest one-quarter of the Southeast one-quarter of said Section
26,
THENCE South 000 55' 01" East, 2,636 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING
That part of the Southeast quarter of Section 26, Township 17 North, Range 1
East, W M , described as follows
BEGINNING at a point on the South line of said Section 26, North 890 10'
47" East, 720 67 feet from the Southwest corner of said Southeast
quarter,
THENCE North 280 42' 32" East, 2,038 89 feet,
THENCE South 490 04' 03" East, 1,148 33 feet to the Westerly margin of
the Burlington Northern Inc , Railway,
THENCE South 350 44' 02" West along said railroad right-of-way, 1,256 52
feet to the South line of said Section 26,
THENCE South 890 10' 47" West along said South line 1,113 23 feet to the
POINT OF BEGINNING
That part of the North half of the Northeast quarter of Section 25, Township
17 North, Range 1 East, W M , described as follows
BEGINNING at a point on the North line of said Northeast quarter a
distance of 213 feet North 890 45' 40" East of its Northwest corner,
THENCE South 000 25' 05" East 58~ 10 feet,
THENCE South 810 46' East, 773 07 feet, more or less, to the
Northwesterly right-of-way of the Burlington Northern Railroad, and the
TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING of this description,
THENCE Northeasterly along said railroad right-of-way to a point on said
right-of-way which is 150 feet Southwesterly of the intersection of said
right-of-way with the North line of said Northeast quarter,
THENCE running Northwesterly at right angles to said railroad right-of-
way, 122 31 feet, more or less, to the North line of said Northeast
quarter,
THENCE South 890 45' 40" West along said North line 1,123 77 feet, more
or less, to a point on the North line of said Northeast quarter which is
north 890 45' 05" East, 277 feet,
THENCE Westerly parallel with the North line of said Northeast quarter,
213 37 feet,
THENCE South 000 25' 05" East to a point which is North 810 46' West
from the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING,
THENCE South 810 46' East, 680 feet, more or less, to the TRUE POINT OF
BEGINNING
All situate in Thurston County. Washington
City of Yelm
Ordinance No. 484 ANX8100jSWYELM
Exhibit "A"
Pg. 2
CITy" OF YELM
r \ ' ,
I I i SW YELM 'ANNEXATION
~NNEXATION AREA
~~
~ V<<; A.{)~
O~ ~~
<( @'~
_~~C;I'22
~V28
I /000' I
SCALE
~
'~j:,il';~1' 'W:
I
: t I
I: :
, ,
" I
t ____;..__ ---_____.a-______J_I-____...__
----1.-----------____*"_______ I
. ,
J :
i i
, r
I . '.
. : I /
f ! 1
, l~ L
AlT 4
i~
'"
(j
Z
-
uj
a:
w
w
z
C;
z
W
~
z
5
::l
(I)
z
<3
z
w
~
<I:
:t
~
a:
<I:
CD
SW YEU1 ANNEXATION
LEGAL DeSCRIPTION
CITY OF YELM ANNEXATION NO. 8100
EXHII:U r A
ORDINANCE NO. 484
Section 27, Township 17 North, Range 1 East
All of Section 27
Section 26, Township 17 North, Range 1 East
West half of Section 26
Section 23 Township 17 North, Range 1 East
South half of Section 23, and the South half of the Northeast quarter of
Section 23,
Section 24, Township 17 North, Range 1 East
The Southwest quarter of Section 24,
The South half of the Northwest quarter of Section 24,
The Southwest quarter of the Southeast quarter of Section 24,
The Southeast quarter of the Southeast quarter of Section 24, EXCEPT
that part being Northeast of the Northeast line of Mosman Street S E ,
The North half of the Southeast quarter of Section 24 lying West and
Southwest of the following described line
BEGINNING at the intersection of the South line of said North half and
the Northeast line of Mosman Street Southeast,
THENCE Northwestwardly along said Northeast line of said Mosman Street
Southeast and the Northwestwardly prolongation of said Northeast line to
its intersection with the Northwest line of Longmire Street Southeast,
THENCE Southwestwardly along said Northwest line to a point which the
following described Point "C" bears North 530 30' 30" West,
BEGINNING at a point which is the intersection of Southerly line of Yelm
Avenue and the Northwest boundary of Solberg's 1st addition to Yelm,
THENCE Northwest along the Southerly line of Yelm Avenue extended 875
feet,
THENCE
THENCE
THENCE
THENCE
South 370 56' West 620 00 feet to the POINT
continuing South 370 56' West 76 5 feet,
North 530 30' 30" West 50 feet,
South 370 56' West 415 feet to Point "C",
OF BEGINNING,
THENCE North 530 30' -30" West to Point "C",
THENCE North 370 56' East to the East line of the Northwest quarter of
the Southeast quarter of aforementioned Section 24 and the terminus of
herein described line
That portion of Berry Valley Road in the Southwest quarter of the
Northeast quarter of Section 24
f',
Section 19, Township 17 North, Range 2 East
The Southwest quarter of the Southwest quarter of Section 19, EXCEPT
that part being Southeast of the Northwest line of the Rainier-Yelm
Highway, and ALSO EXCEPT that part being Northeast of the Northeast line
of Mosman Street S E and its direct prolongation Southeastwardly to the
Northwest line of Rainier-Yelm Highway
That portion of Mill Road in Section 19, Township 17 North, Range 2
East, W M , lying South of Rainier-Yelm Highway
A portion of the Southeast quarter of Section 26, Township 17 North, Range 1
East, W M , described as follows
BEGINNING at the Sou~hwest corner of said subdivision,
City of Yelm
Ordinance No. 484 ANX8100jSWYELM
Exhibit "A"
Pg. 1
-,
EXHIBIT "An
THENCE North 890 10' 47" East along the South line thereof, 720 67 feet,
THENCE North 280 42' 32" East, 2,038 89 feet,
THENCE North 730 55' 14" West, 999 71 feet,
THENCE Northwesterly 953 feet, more or less, to the Northwest corner of
the Northwest one-quarter of the Southeast one-quarter of said Section
26,
THENCE South 000 55' 01" East, 2,636 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING
That part of the Southeast quarter of Section 26, Township 17 North, Range 1
East, W M , described as follows
BEGINNING at a point on the South line of said Section 26, North 890 10'
47" East, 720 67 feet from the Southwest corner of said Southeast
quarter,
THENCE North 280 42' 32" East, 2,038 89 feet,
THENCE South 490 04' 03" East, 1,148 33 feet to the Westerly margin of
the Burlington Northern Inc , Railway,
THENCE South 350 44' 02" West along said railroad right-of-way, 1,256 52
feet to the South line of said Section 26,
THENCE South 890 10' 47" West along said South line 1,113 23 feet to the
POINT OF BEGINNING
That part of the North half of the Northeast quarter of Section 25, Township
17 Nortn, Range 1 East, W M , described as follows
BEGINNING at a point on the North line of said Northeast quarter a
distance of 213 feet North 890 45' 40" East of its Northwest corner,
THENCE South 000 25' 05" East 582 10 feet,
THENCE South 810 46' East, 773 07 feet, more or less, to the
Northwesterly right-of-way of the Burlington Northern Railroad, and the
TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING of this description,
THENCE Northeasterly along said railroad right-of-way to a point on said
right-of-way which is 150 feet Southwesterly of the intersection of said
right-of-way with the North line of said Northeast quarter,
THENCE running Northwesterly at right angles to said railroad right-of-
way, 122 31 feet, more or less, to the North line of said Northeast
quarter,
THENCE South 890 45' 40" West along said North line 1,123 77 feet, more
or less, to a point on the North line of said Northeast quarter which is
north 890 45' 05" East, 277 feet,
THENCE Westerly parallel with the North line of said Northeast quarter,
213 37 feet,
THENCE South 000 25' 05" East to a point which is North 810 46' West
from the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING,
THENCE South 810 46' East, 680 feet, more or less, to the TRUE POINT OF
BEGINNING
All situate in Thurston County, Washington
City of Yelm
Ordinance No. 484 ANX8100/SWYELM
Exhibit "A"
Pg. 2
SW YEll1 ANNEXATION EXHIBIT "A"
LEGAL_ DtSCRIPTION
CITY OF YELM ANNEXATION NO. 8100
ORDINANCE NO. 484
Section 27, Township 17 North, Range 1 East
All of Section 27
Section 26, Township 17 North, Range 1 East
West half of Section 26
Section 23 Township 17 North, Range 1 East
South half of Section 23, and the South half of the Northeast quarter of
Section 23,
Section 24, Township 17 North, Range 1 East
The Southwest quarter of Section 24,
The South half of the Northwest quarter of Section 24,
The Southwest quarter of the Southeast quarter of Section 24,
The Southeast quarter of the Southeast quarter of Section 24, EXCEPT
that part being Northeast of the Northeast line of Mosman Street S E ,
The North half of the Southeast quarter of Section 24 lying West and
Southwest of the following described line
BEGINNING at the intersection of the South line of said North half and
the Northeast line of Mosman Street Southeast,
THENCE Northwestwardly along said Northeast line of said Mosman Street
Southeast and the Northwestwardly prolongation of said Northeast line to
its intersection with the Northwest line of Longmire Street Southeast,
THENCE Southwestwardly along said Northwest line to a point which the
following described Point "C" bears North 530 30' 30" West,
BEGINNING at a point which is the intersection of Southerly line of Yelm
Avenue and the Northwest boundary of Solberg's 1st addition to Yelm,
THENCE Northwest along the Southerly line of Yelm Avenue extended 875
feet,
THENCE
THENCE
THENCE
THENCE
South 370 56' West 620 00 feet to the POINT
continuing South 370 56' West 76 5 feet,
North 530 30' 30" West 50 feet,
South 370 56' West 415 feet to Point "C",
OF BEGINNING,
THENCE North 530 30' ,30" West to Point "C",
THENCE North 370 56' East to the East line of the Northwest quarter of
the Southeast quarter of aforementioned Section 24 and the terminus of
herein described line
That portion of Berry Valley Road in the Southwest quarter of the
Northeast quarter of Section 24
/"
Section 19, Township 17 North, Range 2 East
The Southwest quarter of the Southwest quarter of Section 19, EXCEPT
that part being Southeast of the Northwest line of the Rainier-Yelm
Highway, and ALSO EXCEPT that part being Northeast of the Northeast line
of Mosman Street S E and its direct prolongation Southeastwardly to the
Northwest line of Rainier-Yelm Highway
That portion of Mill Road in Section 19, Township 17 North, Range 2
East, W M , lying South of Rainier-Yelm Highway
A portion of the Southeast quarter of Section 26, Township 17 North, Range 1
East, W M , described as follows
BEGINNING at the Sou~hwest corner of said subdivision,
City of Yelm
Ordinance No. 484 ANX8100/SWYELM
Exhibit "A"
Pg. 1
EXHIBIT "An
THENCE North 890 10' 47" East along the South line thereof, 720 67 feet,
THENCE North 280 42' 32" East, 2,038 89 feet,
THENCE North 730 55' 14" West, 999 71 feet,
THENCE Northwesterly 953 feet, more or less, to the Northwest corner of
the Northwest one-quarter of the Southeast one-quarter of said Section
26,
THENCE South 000 55' 01" East, 2,636 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING
That part of the Southeast quarter of Section 26, Township 17 North, Range 1
East, W M , described as follows
BEGINNING at a point on the South line of said Section 26, North 890 10'
47" East, 720 67 feet from the Southwest corner of said Southeast
quarter,
THENCE North 280 42' 32" East, 2,038 89 feet,
THENCE South 490 04' 03" East, 1,148 33 feet to the Westerly margin of
the Burlington Northern Inc , Railway,
THENCE South 350 44' 02" West along said railroad right-of-way, 1,256 52
feet to the South line of said Section 26,
THENCE South 890 10' 47" West along said South line 1,113 23 feet to the
POINT OF BEGINNING
That part of the North half of the Northeast quarter of Section 25, Township
17 North, Range 1 East, W M , described as follows
BEGINNING at a point on the North line of said Northeast quarter a
distance of 213 feet North 890 45' 40" East of its Northwest corner,
THENCE South 000 25' 05" East 582 10 feet,
THENCE South 810 46' East, 773 07 feet, more or less, to the
Northwesterly right-of-way of the Burlington Northern Railroad, and the
TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING of this description,
THENCE Northeasterly along said railroad right-of-way to a point on said
right-of-way which is 150 feet Southwesterly of the intersection of said
right-of-way with the North line of said Northeast quarter,
THENCE running Northwesterly at right angles to said railroad right-of-
way, 122 31 feet, more or less, to the North line of said Northeast
quarter,
THENCE South 890 45' 40" West along said North line 1,123 77 feet, more
or less, to a point on the North line of said Northeast quarter which is
north 890 45' 05" East, 277 feet,
THENCE Westerly parallel with the North line of said Northeast quarter,
213 37 feet,
THENCE South 000 25' 05" East to a point which is North 810 46' West
from the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING,
THENCE South 810 46' East, 680 feet, more or less, to the TRUE POINT OF
BEGINNING
All situate in Thurston County, ~ashington
City of Yelm
Ordinance No. 484 ANX8100jSWYELM
Exhibit "A"
Pg. 2
CITY OF YELM
RESOLUTION NO 302
WASTEWATER LAND APPLICATION,
REUSE, AND RECLAMATION
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
YELM ESTABLISHING THE CITY'S INTENT WITH REGARD
TO ITS DEVELOPMENT OF A WASTEWATER REUSE
SYSTEM,
WHEREAS, the City is beginning the process of developing a wastewater reuse
system as an alternative to direct discharge of wastewater from its Wastewater
Treatment Facility to either the Centralia Power Canal or the Nisqually River;
WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to express its support for the development
of such a system and its intentions as to the direction of such development,
WHEREAS, The Southwest Yelm Annexation presents the need to pursue
alternatives to the direct discharge of wastewater to the Nisqually River and the
Centralia Power Canal,
NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF YELM DOES HEREBY
RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS.
Section 1 The City Council is concerned about the water quality of the Nisqually River
and is committed to taking action to improve that important natural resource.
Section 2. The City Council intends to comply with the Growth Management Act
Section 3 The City Council intends to amend its Wastewater Facilities Plan to
provide for any new wastewater land application, reuse, reclamation or deep well
injection system and to provide for the necessary upgrades to the sewage treatment
facility
Section 4 The City Council acknowledges the adoption by the State Legislature of
the Reclaimed Water Act, at RCW 90.46. This Act gave authority to the Departments
of Health and Ecology to adopt standards, guidelines and regulations for the
reclamation and reuse of wastewater The Act also authorizes the Department of
C:\WP51\57\YELM\RESO-01.DOC
Health to designate pilot projects for the implementation of water reuse and
reclamation standards.
Section 5 The City Council acknowledges the adoption by the Department of Health
of the Water Reclamation and Reuse Interim Standards, effective May 1, 1993
These standards are the preliminary technical guidelines for the development of a
wastewater land application, reuse, reclamation or deep well injection system in the
State of Washington
Section 6 the City Council is committed to investigating the viability of the land
application, reuse, reclamation and deep well injection of wastewater and desires to
pursue a course of action that will demonstrate their viability
Section 7 The City Council desires to work with the sponsors ofthe Southwest Yelm
Annexation to pursue the land application, reuse, reclamation and deep well injection
of wastewater
Section 8 The City Council desires to seek funding from state and federal agencies
and from the private sector for feasibility studies, design and implementation of a
wastewater land application, reuse, reclamation or deep well injection system
Section 9 The City Council intends to fully comply with both the Reclaimed Water
Act and the Water Reclamation and Reuse Interim Standards in the development of
a wastewater land application, reclamation, reuse or deep well injection system The
City Council also supports an application to the Department of Health to become a
pilot project under the Reclaimed Water Act.
ADOPTED this 23rd day of November
, 1993
Ka~,t~
PASSED AND APPROVED: November 23 , 1993
C:\WP51 \57\YELM\RESO-01.DOC
2
CITY 0 F YELM
RESOLUTION NO 303
FUTURE AMENDMENT OF COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
FOR SOUTHWEST YELM ANNEXATION
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
YELM EXPRESSING ITS INTENT TO AMEND ITS
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONSISTENT WITH THE
SOUTHWEST YELM ANNEXATION
WHEREAS, the City Council has adopted an ordinance annexing the area known
as the Southwest Yelm Annexation area,
WHEREAS, the Optional Municipal Code requires that a city's comprehensive
plan be amended to accurately reflect actual circumstances RCW 35A 3 060 and
061
WHEREAS, the Yelm Municipal Code requires that a comprehensive plan be
prepared for each annexation and that a resolution to that effect be adopted by the
City of Council YMC 2 66 010(F)(4) and 17 64 01 O(K)
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF YELM DOES
RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS
Section 1 The City Council intends to amend its Comprehensive Plan to provide for
the Southwest Yelm Annexation
Section 2. Such Comprehensive Plan amendment shall be consistent with State Law
and Yelm ordinances.
Section 3, Nothing in this Resolution shall be construed to obligate the City of Yelm
to any particular form for such comprehensive plan amendment
C:\WP51 \57\YELM\RESO-02.DOC
1
ADOPTED this 23rd day of November
,1993,
>f'iJ :Jf4
Kathy W f, Mayor
ATTEST
f)), i /i )
es P Colombo, City Clerk
PASSED AND APPROVED. November 23 , 1993
C:\WP51\57\YELM\RESO-02.DOC 2
FINDINGS
CITY OF YElM CITY COUNCil
SOUTHWEST YElM ANNEXATION
November 23, 1993
The City of Yelm City Council has reviewed the Southwest Yelm Annexation and the
associated Annexation Agreement. After a series of public hearings and
worksessions, the Yelm City Council makes the following findings:
1 The City Council has fully considered the annexation of approximately
2,000 acres commonly referred to as the Southwest Yelm Annexation.
2.
Yelm.
The Southwest Yelm Annexation is in the public interest of the City of
3. The Southwest Yelm Annexation is consistent with the City of Yelm
ordinances 399, 419, and 429, codified at Yelm Municipal Code Sections 2.66 and
17.64
4 The Thurston County Boundary Review Board returned the annexation
to the City of Yelm for firm approval, reporting that no individual or entity involved
jurisdiction within the time allowed by RCW 36,93.100.
5. The City Council and Planning commission have held all the necessary
hearings and meetings on the southwest Yelm Annexation and all such hearings and
meetings were properly noticed.
6. The City Council has reviewed all the Final Environmental Impact
Statement associated with the Southwest Yelm Annexation and has determined that
it is adequate and complete.
7 The Southwest Yelm Annexation will result in no adverse impacts to City
services.
8. There is a proposal for a more intensive and elaborate use of the property
in the Southwest Yelm Annexation area. It is most appropriate that such an intensive
use be included within the City and not in the County.
9 An Annexation Agreement was prepared concurrently with this
annexation that provides that the costs of the impacts of the Southwest Yelm
Annexation be borne by the sponsors of the annexation in order to protect the
financial integrity of the City of Yelm
10. The Southwest Yelm Annexation is currently outside the Sewer Service
Area as designated in the Yelm Wastewater Facilities Plan and any extension of such
Area will require an amendment of such Plan, The city council will not approve such
an amendment to such Plan unless and until the City Council determines that it is in
the best interest of the City to do so.
11. Nothing in this annexation and the Annexation Agreement obligates the
City of Yelm to the extension of water or sewer service to the property in the
Southwest Yelm Annexation area.
12 The City Council will, to the extent allowable by state law, assist the
sponsors of the Southwest Yelm Annexation in obtaining reimbursement for the
reimbursable costs of the annexation.
2
CITY OF YELM
ANNEXATION AGREEMENT
SOUTHWEST YELM ANNEXATION
This Agreement is entered into on this)3tY day of NmJdm~f/) _p 1993 ,
by and among the City of Yelm (hereinafter referred to as "the city"); and Thurston
Highlands Associates (hereinafter referred to as "the Annexation Sponsors" or "the
Sponsors"),
Recitals
WHEREAS, the Sponsors are requesting annexation to the City of an area of
land comparable in size to the current City of Yelm,
WHEREAS, this request and the resulting annexation necessarily raise issues
regarding appropriate land use zoning, comprehensive planning, and municipal facilities
and services,
WHEREAS, the issues raised by a request of this significance and the resulting
annexation are not within the scope of the experience of the regular staff of the City
and present the City with expenses expected to be in excess of customary
annexations,
WHEREAS, the City has determined that it is necessary and in the best interest
of its citizens for the City to arrange for special assistance and to make special
expenditures to respond to this annexation,
WHEREAS, the City's need for such services and expenditures arises directly
from the annexation,
WHEREAS, in accordance with City policy, the Sponsors should bear the
expenses imposed upon the City of retaining such assistance and making such
expenditures, to the extent attributable to the Southwest Yelm Annexation;
C'\WP51\57\YELM\ANNEX-5 CON
WHEREAS, the City is bound by the terms of a settlement agreement requiring
it to develop alternatives to direct discharge of wastewater from its wastewater
treatment facility and such alternatives must conform with the Water Reclamation and
Reuse Interim Standards of the Washington Departments of Health and Ecology,
effective May 1, 1993 (the Interim Standards),
WHEREAS, the City intends to apply for pilot project status under the
Reclaimed Water Use Chapter, RCW 90 46 and to fully comply with the Interim
Standards;
WHEREAS, such settlement agreement also requires the City to upgrade the
wastewater treatment facility to advanced treatment if it wishes to exceed the current
rate of discharge for such reasons as providing sewer service to the Southwest Yelm
Annexation area,
WHEREAS, the wastewater discharge alternatives identified in the Water
Reclamation and Reuse Interim Standards will likely require the dedication of a
significant amount of land, an amendment to the City's Wastewater Facilities Plan,
and additional financing,
WHEREAS, in accordance with City policy, the Sponsors should bear the
expense of developing discharge alternatives and amending the necessary community
plans accordingly, to the extent attributable to the Southwest Yelm Annexation,
WHEREAS, the Growth Management Act establishes the goal that "those public
facilities and services necessary to support development shall be adequate to serve
development at the time development is available for occupancy without decreasing
current service levels below locally established minimum standards." RCW
36 70A,020(12),
WHEREAS, the City must begin the process of planning for the adequate
provision of services to meet the requirements of the Growth Management Act in
order to review future development proposals by the Sponsors,
WHEREAS, water and sewer service are in limited supply and any provision
thereof to the Southwest Yelm Annexation Area must be consistent with the
applicable plans, state law, City of Yelm ordinances and this Agreement, and
WHEREAS, the City of Yelm Planning Commission and City Council made the
following findings in approving the Southwest Yelm Annexation
1 The proposed Southwest Yelm Annexation is consistent with the
joint planning done by the City of Yelm and Thurston County for
the property within the proposed urban growth area of the City of
Yelm
C:\WP51\57\YELM\ANNEX-5 CON
2
2 The zoning proposed for the annexation area provides a variety of
uses and housing types, is complimentary to the existing
Comprehensive Plan for the City of Yelm, and would be in the
public interest if adopted by the City of Yelm
3 The utility and transportation plans to serve the annexed area
provide reasonable alternatives, consistent with the City's growth
management planning and utility planning The City is committed
to additional utility planning processes before any specific
development is approved, to assure that adequate capacity for all
necessary facilities is available concurrently with any proposed
development
4 The Southwest Yelm Annexation Final Environmental Impact
Statement adequately and accurately describes the project and is
determined by the Planning Commission to be adequate
5 The City of Yelm may annex the property consistent with its
annexation policies and provide a significant benefit to the City in
terms of a well-planned development area and not provide any
undue burden to the existing taxpayers of the City of Yelm
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and covenants
contained herein, the parties to this Agreement mutually agree as follows
Section 1. Annexation Aooroval
1 1 The City agrees to render a decision approving the Southwest Yelm
Annexation, ANX8100 The area to be annexed as the Southwest Yelm Annexation
is described as provided in Exhibit A herein and is hereinafter referred to as "the
Annexation Area"
Section 2. Zoning
2 1 Upon such annexation, the Annexation Area will be zoned, with the
exception of the highway right-of-way, as RA-5A as set forth at Section
17 40 020(C) of the Yelm Municipal Code
2,2. Such zoning designation shall remain in effect until a master plan is
approved for the Annexation Area according to the master planning process set forth
in paragraph 3 1 herein
C'\WP51\57\YELM\ANNEX-5 CON
3
Section 3. Master Plan
3 1 The City agrees to exercise its best efforts to amend its master planning
process substantially in the form found in Section 16 44 of the City of Lacey
Municipal Code in effect on the effective date of this Agreement
3 2 The Sponsors agree that the Annexation Area will be subject to the
master planning process provided in paragraph 3 1, herein
Section 4. Citv Services
4,1, The City will not approve any extension of water or sewer service to or
any change to City zoning for the Southwest Yelm Annexation Area, except in
compliance with the annexation ordinance and this Agreement
4 2 Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to obligate the City to
provide water or sewer service to any property within the Annexation Area, even if
and when the provisions of the annexation ordinance and this Agreement have been
satisfied and even if there exists either unused sewer or water capacity
4,3 The Sponsors shall submit and the City shall consider and process a
conceptual master plan and final master plan for the Annexation Area, in accordance
with the master planning process provided in paragraph 3 1 herein. Such plans must
be consistent with the applicable transportation plan, sewer plan, water plan,
comprehensive plan, and any other applicable community plan
Section 5. Financial ResDonsibilitv
5 1 The Sponsors agree to pay any and all of the City's costs of this
annexation, as identified in this Agreement and its attachments, and in the scope of
work, budget and contract schedule contemplated in paragraph 5 2 herein, including,
but not limited to the costs of preparing and processing the annexation petition,
obtaining approval of such petition, negotiating and preparing this Agreement;
complying with the obligations imposed by this Agreement, its attachments, the Yelm
Municipal Code and state law, amending, modifying and adopting the City's
ordinances and community plans as necessary, defending the City's actions in
administrative and judicial appeals, and all staff time necessary for all such activities,
including attendance at meetings, hearings and conferences as necessary
5 2 In order to fulfill the obligations expressed in paragraph 5 1 herein, the
Sponsors agree to develop a scope of work, budget and contract schedule, to the
satisfaction of the City, to provide for their payments to the City in a timely and
reasonable manner.
C'\WP51\57\yELM\ANNEX-5 CON
4
5 3 To the extent allowable by state law, the City agrees to support the
efforts of the Sponsors to seek reimbursement for the reimbursable costs identified
in paragraph 5 1 herein and the attachments hereto by adopting a utility cost
reimbursement ordinance (latecomers agreement ordinance), establishing a local
improvement district, or by implementing any other appropriate and legal financing
mechanism, and by assisting the Sponsors in obtaining reimbursement through such
mechanism It is acknowledged by the parties, however, that the State Legislature
has only adopted latecomer agreement statutes for certain types of improvements
(street, water and sewer) and for certain types of work associated with such
improvements (design, engineering and construction) To the extent that this
Agreement requires the Sponsors to perform certain tasks and pay for certain
activities that go beyond the limitations of state statutes, it is understood that the
Sponsors are solely responsible for those tasks and costs In order to avoid such
circumstances, the City would entertain the possibility of establishing a local
improvement district, but only to the extent allowed by state law
5 4 The provisions of the "Scope of Work Zoning and Planning" and
"Wastewater Reuse", attached hereto as Exhibits Band C respectively, are
incorporated herein by reference and made a part of this Agreement
5 5 The City shall enter into independent contracts with the consultants
identified in the attachments hereto to provide such services as are necessary to
assist and advise the City in accomplishing the tasks outlined in this Agreement and
its attachments Additional consultants may be added to the list identified in the
attachments hereto only with the express written consent of the Sponsors, such
consent not to be unreasonably withheld
Section 6. General Provisions
6 1 The Annexation Area shall be subject to the existing general obligation
indebtedness of the City of Yelm, which is currently in the amount of $225,181, and
to pay said indebtedness shall be assessed and taxed at the same rate and on the
same basis as other property within the City of Yelm
6 2, No party to this Agreement shall assign or subcontract any portion of this
Agreement or transfer any duty or assign any claim arising pursuant to this Agreement
without the written consent of all parties
6 3 The records and documents of the City, with respect to all matters
covered by this Agreement, shall be subject to inspection, review, and audit in
accordance with the laws of the State of Washington
6 4 This Agreement, including attachments incorporated by reference,
represents the entire agreement and understanding between the parties in relation to
this Agreement and any negotiations, proposals, purchase orders, or oral agreements
are intended to be integrated herein and to be superseded by this written Agreement
C'\WP51\57\YELM\ANNEX-5 CON
5
6 5, This Agreement is to be governed by, and construed in accordance with
the laws of the City of Yelm and the State of Washington
6 6, The signatories of this Agreement warrant that they have the authority
necessary to execute this Agreement and to bind the parties they represent to the
terms and conditions of this Agreement
Annexation Soonsors
City
THURSTON HIGHLAND ASSOCIATES
A Washington Limited Partnership
u9c.9AJ~
---
Robert Welcome, General Partner
CITY OF YELM
~~ Jf~L
Kathy w:;l; Mayor!
----
C'\WP51\57\YELM\ANNEX-5 CON
6
EXHIBIT B
SCOPE OF WORK: ZONING AND PLANNING
Yelm's annexation policies require that any costs incurred in connection with the
processing of an annexation petition, as well as all the resulting zoning, planning and
development reviews, shall be paid by the Sponsors of such annexation Thurston
Highlands Associates (hereinafter referred to as the "Sponsors") agree that the
services identified below are necessary for and proximate to the Southwest Yelm
Annexation, all planning, zoning and development reviews for such annexation area,
and the modification of community plans to accommodate the annexation
The City has determined that the annexation is in the public interest and should
proceed if the Sponsors can satisfy all requirements of the State, County and City that
apply to the annexation The City shall use its best efforts to process all applications
for planning, zoning and development review in accordance with the proposed
schedule, but the City cannot provide any guarantee as to the outcome of final
decisions Final decisions cannot be made until the factual showings required under
the City's codes and policies have been met and the statutory criteria under State law
have been satisfied
In order to satisfy the obligations imposed on the City, by various State laws, the City
will have to process, adopt, amend, or change the following documents to reflect the
proposals presented by the Sponsors
1 The City Comprehensive Plan,
2 The City Zoning Ordinance;
3. The City Sewer Plan,
4. The City Water Plan,
5, The City Transportation Plan,
6 The environmental review of the plans and processes discussed
above, and
7 The Urban Growth Management policies supporting the
application
Compensable activities shall include all activities necessary to complete the processing
of the identified activities including drafting, reviewing and publishing documents, and
preparation for and participation in meetings, hearings, and appeals, either
administrative or judicial
Yelm shall contract for or otherwise provide the services necessary to accomplish the
required changes and shall charge the Sponsors actual rates and charges, as provided
in the Agreement
C:\WP51 \57\ YELM\ANNEX-5.EXB
1
To the extent allowed by state law, the city will assist the Sponsors in obtaining
reimbursement of the above services and costs It is acknowledged by the parties,
however, that the State Legislature has only adopted latecomer agreement statutes
for certain types of improvements (street, water and sewer) and for certain types of
work associated with such improvements (design, engineering and construction) To
the extent that this Agreement requires the Sponsors to perform certain tasks and pay
for certain activities that go beyond the limitations of state statutes, it is understood
that the Sponsors are solely responsible for those tasks and costs Under such
circumstances, the City would entertain the possibility of establishing a local
improvement district, but only to the extent allowed by state law
The City shall retain consultants to perform such services as are necessary to assist
and advise the City in responding to and processing the above-listed documents, as
well as any other zoning, planning and development applications submitted by the
Sponsors or their agents pertaining to projects within the area known as the
Southwest Yelm Annexation Area
Authorized consultants to the City under this agreement shall include, but are not
limited to, Skillings-Connelly and Owens Davies Mackie, provided that they agree to
be bound by the terms and limitations of the Agreement between the City and the
Sponsors Other consultants may be added to the list with the express written
consent of the Sponsors, such consent not to be unreasonably withheld
City Staff, including but not limited to Shelly Badger, Gene Borges, Ty Peterson and
Lynn Haigh, shall be charged to the project for their time at the same rates charged
to State and Federal grant programs for the fiscal year in which the charge is made
(including direct and indirect costs) Other City staff may be charged to the project
with the express written consent of the Sponsors, such consent not to be
unreasonably withheld
Expenses shall be reimbursed as incurred at actual cost
C:\WP51 \57\ YElM\ANNEX-5.EXB
2
EXHIBIT C
WASTEWATER REUSE
The City of Yelm is in the process of constructing a wastewater treatment facility to
process wastewater for a service area that includes only the current City limits The
system is not designed to accommodate any new annexations. This means that the
Southwest Yelm Annexation Area must somehow be accommodated, for purposes of
sewage treatment, in some other manner Moreover, the Growth Management Act
requires that development only occur concurrently with the provision of adequate
services The City must begin planning for the additional sewage treatment needs of
the Southwest Yelm Annexation Area,
In addition, the City agreed to the terms of a settlement agreement in an appeal of a
Shoreline Substantial Development Permit and Conditional Use Permit for the
discharge of wastewater effluent to the Nisqually River and the Centralia Power Canal
The terms of that agreement require the City to actively demonstrate that it is
pursuing alternatives to such discharge points Also under the terms of the
agreement, the City must upgrade its wastewater treatment facility to an advanced
or tertiary treatment level in order to expand the capacity of its total outfall
The development of alternatives to the currently approved discharges to the Nisqually
River and Centralia Power Canal will be costly and time-consuming for the City of
Yelm To the extent that they are attributable to impacts resulting from the
Southwest Yelm Annexation, these costs should be borne by Thurston Highlands
Associates, the Sponsors of such annexation The costs and activities required to
develop and implement these alternatives are beyond the current staffing abilities and
expertise of the City of Yelm Therefore, the City must seek independent consultation
and assistance in developing these alternatives
The activities and costs required to develop alternatives to currently approved
discharges include, but are not limited to, the following
1 Review and modify the City of Yelm Wastewater Facilities Plan
2 Develop an engineering design for a water reclamation and reuse
system
3. Preparation, review and submission of an application for a Water
Reclamation and Reuse Permit to the Departments of Health and
Ecology pursuant to RCW 90.46 and the Water Reclamation and
Reuse Interim Standards, effective May 1, 1993.
4. Pursuing and obtaining alternative sources of financing, including
the State Legislature, Congress, federal agencies and State
agencies
C'\WP51 \57\ YELM\ANNEX-5,EXC
5 Implement the water reuse and reclamation system, including
construction of facilities, purchase of property for land application,
leases and licenses for land application, transportation, liability,
and the maintenance and operation of such a system.
The Sponsors shall be financially responsible for the above services and costs, to the
extent attributable to the Southwest Yelm Annexation It is understood by the parties
that some of the above costs are attributable to causes other than the Southwest
Yelm Annexation. It is also understood that some portions of the above costs will be
reimbursed with state or federal matching grant funds The Sponsors shall work with
and cooperate with the City of Yelm in the development of a detailed scope of work,
budget and contract schedule for the provision of the above services and costs,
including the apportionment of such services and costs to the Sponsors according to
their fair share
To the extent allowed by state law, the City will assist the Sponsors in obtaining
reimbursement of the above services and costs It is acknowledged by the parties,
however, that the State Legislature has only adopted latecomer agreement statutes
for certain types of improvements (street, water and sewer) and for certain types of
work associated with such improvements (design, engineering and construction) To
the extent that this Agreement requires the Sponsors to perform certain tasks and pay
for certain activities that go beyond the limitations of state statutes, it is understood
that the Sponsors are solely responsible for those tasks and costs. In order to avoid
such circumstances, the City would entertain the possibility of establishing a local
improvement district, but only to the extent allowed by state law
The City shall retain consultants to perform such services as are necessary to assist
and advise the City in accomplishing the above-listed tasks, as well as any other task
necessary to accomplish the objectives set forth herein
Authorized consultants to the City under this agreement shall include, but are not
limited to, Skillings-Connelly and Owens Davies Mackie, provided that they agree to
be bound by the terms and limitations of the Agreement between the City and the
Sponsors Other consultants may be added to the list with the express written
consent of the Sponsors, such consent not to be unreasonably withheld
City Staff, including but not limited to Shelly Badger, Gene Borges, Ty Peterson and
Lynn Haigh, shall be charged to the project for their time at the same rates charged
to State and Federal grant programs for the fiscal year in which the charge is made
(including direct and indirect costs) Other City staff may be charged to the project
with the express written consent of the Sponsors, such consent not to be
unreasonably withheld
Expenses shall be reimbursed as incurred at actual cost
C:IWP51157IYELMIANNEX-5,EXC
2
City of Yelm
YELM
WASHI~GTCN
.' ,
105 YelmAvenue West
POBox 479
Yelm, ff'ashingtoll 98597
(206) 458-3244
STAFF MEMORANDUM
"
February 1
1"993
To. Ye-Im Planning Corr\misslon-
From Tod~ Stamm tlty Planner
R~ Southwest Yelm Ann~~atlon,
IlllS memor,andum summarizes the comments received from, tne
Dub 1 ;j c a~d" agenc 1 es regar d 1 ng t he proposed southwes t Ye 1 m
Bnhexatlon the issves raised by the draft environmental
impactstatemeht (DEIS) and'the optlons aVailable to the
Commission
'COMMISSION OPTIONS
Recommend anneXatlon of the eht're proposed area
L Retommena annexatlon of a part of the proposed ~rea
~
F;ec:ommend conditional annexati,on tsubject 'to execu
,of an agreement oetween th~ Clt~ and one or .more 0
property owners)
lcn
the
4 Tabl~ the ques.tion unt~l s~ecifrled lnformatl'on -15
or-ovided
5 Table the question untll a speclfi~ event occurs
e P~commend ,denlal of the ~nnexatlon petitlon
PUBLIC riEARING COMMENTS
o
· Request from Mark Carpent8r ta add his proper,ty'to the
annexatlon
· ObJedtions ra'~ed by Rainier Schaal Dlstfict,- should
dl~trl~t boundaries be changed? How?
SWYA - Comments and Issues - 2/1/93
P,age
*
Recycled paper
._..~ _.__.._n...' ~_; 'I
. Few options are addressed in the DEIS for wastewater
disposal - reflecting an apparent presumption that
expanded discharge to the canal will be available
Reliability of cost estimates for sewage treatment
plant expansion questioned More detail needed
. Is releasing stormwater to wetland potholes viable?
What are the environmental impacts?
. Lack of cross references between transportation
improvement cost responsibilities and Yelm
Transportation Plan
WRITTEN COMMENTS
Nisqually Indian Tribe
. Partial annexation alternative should be analyzed
. A rural density alternative (1 unit per 2 acres) should
be analyzed
. Annexation without urbanization should be analyzed
. Increased volume of wastewater discharge to Nisqually
River will be opposed by Tribe
. Impact of income levels and lifestyles of new residents
should be considered
. Impacts to current low-income residents from increased
public service costs should be considered
Department of Community Development, Office of Archaeology
and Historic Preservation
. Supplement Yelm s historic structure survey with this
area
. Any areas of archaeological significance?
Department of Ecology
· Water rights are needed
Department of Transportation
. Failure to address traffic impacts outside Yelm's urban
growth area
. Need for concurrent construction of area-wide
improvements
SWYA - Comments and Issues - 2/1/93 - Page 2
Department of Wildlife
o Need to address protection of 'priority species
. Analyze opportunities to retain habitat diversity
Thurston County
· Golf course impacts on water quality?
o Clarification of wetlands section Possibility of
avoiding fill? Buffering consistent with expected
final Yelm wetlands ordinance?
o Consider electromagnetic radiation risks associated
with Centralia Power lines
o Population growth estimates questioned
o Failure to address traffic impacts outside urban growth
area
.
School demand forecast questioned
criteria should be determined
School siting
. Is expansion of sewer outfall to canal feasible?
(Cost permits, etc) Denslty without sewer?
· No discussion of historic resources
. County prefers alternative 3 if annexed
Rainier School District
. Need to transfer Section 27? Process? Alternatives?
Intercity Transit
. Alternative 3 (compact scenario) most supportive of
mass transit and pedestrian traffic
Joint Ventures
. Question commercial scale of village scenario
. Question traffic generation estimates for village
scenario
. Need for recreation for commercial areas should be
considered
SWYA - Comments and Issues - 2/1/93 - Page 3
. Infrastructure should not be included as a public cost
Permit fee and utility taxes should be included in
revenue estimates
Mary Lou Clemens
. Increased police and fire protection needs accurately
assessed?
. Table 19 - Capture Rate does not equal service area
growth rate, so public costs underestimated
National Food Corporatipn
. Need to protect existing chicken farm to south
Surrounding open space is needed for operation
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
See Ordinance 414 for general issues guidance Among the
major issues raised by the DEIS are:
. Unavoidable impacts listed at page 13 of DEIS
. Population projections higher than Thurston Regional
Planning Council estimates
. Mitigating measures outlined throughout DEIS - I
suggest a walk-through by the Commission to identify
those that are directly related to the annexation
decision and those which are development related
. Cdncurrency' revenue shortfall of approximately $8,000
per household Potential facilities savings may
result from implementation of compact alternative
. Lack of information regarding potable water supplies
SWYA - Comments and Issues - 2/1/93 - Page 4
~~~~~ -=.._^.....~~~~...._'--=.... .--
n\f'\', ., t . ... .
[ ,~~~~~...; J~' ~ ~ ',t {
, I
.......-....
".u ~_. _._.._"...u
.."._,~.,.."'.....
.......::.,~--~
.-... -"""""""
,
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, Jim 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 Jimenez, 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. Chamberlain
and AS,sociates, 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
Jim Brown
Tim Schlosser
Roberta Longmire
3 Year Term
Tom Gorman
George Knight
John Kenney
SW Yelm Annexation EIS 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 wished
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
participation, No objection was voiced. No audience objections 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 Hearing. 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 none 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 matte~ goes before the City Council.
YELM PLANNING COMMISSION 1/4/93
SWYA DRAFT EIS PUBLIC HEARING
PAGE 1
-------:-~',(' ;i:;,\''''
...lJJri
'y" '\"-
cP V.
-0 eJ
Additional copies of the Draft EIS were available at the meetlng. J. ~~ 0"0
\y 'C}.... 0 ), e
~ ~ 'yfj
Stamm distributed Ordinance No. 414 to Commission members defining ~0 ~0 ~~
City objectives and policies for annexations. v~~o~
.~
':> Y.J,
~.
Stamm pointed out corrections to the Draft EIS. On page 16 the
SEPA Process Chart should go from Preliminary Decislon to Boundarv
Review Board. On page 114/ paragraph 3/ discharge to the Centralia
Power canal is authorized by a contract with the City of Centralia.
The NPDES permit has not been issued. Stamm also pOlnted out that
the permits requested for Yelm's Sewer . System do not accommodate
the annexation or development of the property.
Stamm advised the Commission that they would be dealing with
annexation questlons only, any development issues would be resolved
at a later date. Based on available information the Commission
must determine and make a recommendation to the city Council to
either approve or deny the annexation request. If the Commission
feels it doesn't have adequate information to make a recommendation
the Commission has the option of requesting additional information
from the proponents,
Dennis Su, representing the proponents, explained that he was at
the meeting to clarify any questions the Commission or audience
might have. He introduced Bob Hazlett of S. Chamberlaln &
Associates and Robert Thorp and a staff member of R.W. Thorpe and
Associates. Mr. Thorpe indicated that he was there to respond to
any questions the audience or Commission might have and that any
written comments received would be given the same consideratlon as
comments made at the meeting.
The floor was opened to public comment.
Mark Carpenter - stated that he owned property adjacent to the
annexation and requested the inclusion of his property in the
annexation. Tim Schlosser indicated that It was loglcally possible
to include the property and questioned the legality of adding Mr.
Carpenter's property. Stamm replled that he would like a day or
two to examine the issue and stated that if included as part of the
annexation it would also have to be lncluded in the final EIS.
Dennis Su - proponent representative indicated that he would take
the matter under conslderatlon.
Peter Paulson - asked if Manke Road was included in the annexation
Tim Schlosser replled that Manke Rd was not included.
Bob Golphnee - Ralnier School District Superintendent, read a
letter to the Commisslon expressing concerns about the impact of
the proposed SW Yelm Annexation on the Rainier School District. He
stated that a portion of the annexation is located within Ralnier
School District boundarles and indicated that statute mandates each
incorporated city or town to be comprised in a single school
district. Exceptlons 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
~/;,.~,:,~t.~' :t:>,
;;~,~x/:;.. l~!~;:(+t;-;/, i~.;'::.'''.''
"'..... .. or..
-A_~~
"?i.']f.'~_.t;:;}i:';:;~7:;::'-
-,.~ ,~;-
,'" j~
'Mr ' Golphnee requested that Yelm declare if their intent is to
.. ch~nge 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 lndicate 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
district from the parcels falling within the proposed annexation.
Mr. Golphnee replied that he did not have that information.
Dennis Su indicated that the Rainier School District portion was an
isolated sector within the SW Yelm Annexation boundaries and that
no residences exist on the property, He added that when the state
drew school dlstrict 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 issue 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 Facility Section, in both
the Draft EIS and Appendices. Mr. Kenney indicated that it was his
belief 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 marginally 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, agencies have a problem with that level
of treatment, He stated that Yelm would have a lot of problems
trying to increase the amount of discharge 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. W. Thorpe and Associates, requested that Mr.
Kenney slow his presentation so notes could be taken of his
comments.
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 units @
$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 information 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
- 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 right
direction.
Tom Gorman inquired 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 immediate answer as the
final layout for the site had not been determined. It would depend
on wetlands use of open space etc. and probably would be
combination of all.
Tim Schlosser questioned the percentage of responsibility for
increased trafflc and road improvements.
Bob Hazlett stated that the amount of traffic reflected in the
document was that expected to be on the road if the development
scenario took place. Responslbility was addressed in the Yelm
Comprehensive Transportation Plan.
The Public Hearlng was closed at 7:50 P.M.
The audience was reminded of the 11 day period for wrltten 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.
Meetlng adjourned at 7:55 P.M.
Submitted,
l~'?7U yJ {!;/~~
YELM PLANNING COMMISSION 1/4/93
SWYA DRAFT EIS PUBLIC HEARING
PAGE 4
...-- .--
- ..-..-.- - .,.-,.-.....-.....,.-.-,......,....
~"'" ~-=:J @' ~., rl v' (' r"",
. '~\.-.:.:;.: : r..::," :l'J, : 'c;::J 'h ,,>;'.,..,
'D' ., I ~:;, If \" n::!'; i ". '
:i .~. "i~~/.,:}!,i(':3).,,~~,-,:,~:,--~::::"'~'7~~~J i i ~, ~ , '.' ,
"I' .~~' ..q~;~.~,:..)( ,1. _ " . f ., .
}~, ',': ',;} '1ti~;("-:; ,',5 laaO.c I If;, '1~,II' III N lsqually Indian Trl b, e
}:, fl'!! "I~~" J ~" ~ t
, ',"" , ~20 She-Nah-Num-Drive S.E.
I Iympia, Washington 98503
Phone: (206) 456-5221
January 15, 1993
Yelm Planning commission
City of Yelm
105 Yelm Avenue West
Yelm, Washington 98597
RE: Southwest Yelm Annexation
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Dear Commission Members,
The Nisqually Indian Tribe offers the following comments on
the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for the proposed
Southwest Yelm Annexation:
Alternatives - The alternatives discussed are so limited that
the DEIS is practically useless as a planning document for the city
of Yelm. Other than the No Action alternative, all the
alternatives considered serve the interest of the annexation
proponents. For the Final EIS, Yelm should require analysis of a
much wider range of alternatives.
First, the EIS and the Yelm Planning commission should
consider as an alternate annexation of only a portion of the
Southwest area. The EIS should evaluate the impacts of annexing
only the lands in sections 24 and 25, leaving sections 23, 26, and
27 under Thurston County jurisdiction. A second alternative that
should be evaluated would add section 23 to the annexed area. Yelm
is not limited to only the annexation area proposed by the
annexation proponents and, in fact, should evaluate alternatives
independently.
Second, the Final EIS should consider alternatives with a
substantially reduced number of residential units. The EIS, and
the Planning Commission, should consider an alternative of one
residential unit per two acres. This would be a 250% increase in
the number of residential units presently authorized, but would
reduce the inevitable impacts of the high number of residential
uni ts proposed in all the al ternati ves presently under
consideration.
As the Draft EIS states, this is a nonproject planning EIS and
does not have to examine every conceivable alternative.
" '~{;~~)~i) ~~:i;
'~'\:~~H!;t~~~{~~~:" '
~J':
r
"
.; -:'..':...:1:','
',;. t ';l' ~
t,,,'
1'"
~-
~..
Southwest Yelm Annexation EIS
January 15, 1993
Page 2
Nevertheless, to be legally sufficient, not to mention to be of use
to the citizens and elected officials of Yelm, the EIS must
evaluate real alternatives. The alternatives in the DEIS appear to
be contrived to avoid evaluation of alternatives of substance.
Finally, the No Action alternati ve is characterized in a
misleading manner. No Action does not require that the land remain
under Thurston County zoning and regulation. Yelm could annex some
or all of the Southwest area but is not obliged to change the
existing zoning of one unit per five acres; you could decide to
annex and retain the current zoning. The EIS should acknowledge
this alternative and the Planning Commission should evaluate more
fully its merits.
Wastewater - For the Nisqually Tribe, the primary impact of
the annexation and development proposed in the DEIS is generation
and disposal of wastewater. The DEIS states that the annexed area
will produce 1.26 million gallons/day and that discharge of this
wastewater will be into the Nisqually River. This is over a 400%
increase in the discharge proposed by the current Yelm wastewater
plan.
The Yelm Planning Commission should know that any increase
above the proposed 300,000 gallons/day proposed by the wastewater
plan is not acceptable to the Nisqually Tribe. The Tribe, as a
matter of federal law, has the right to fish unobstructed in the
Nisqually River and to have its homeland and reservation, including
its waters, free of pollution. We cannot allow Yelm to use the
Nisqually River, our reservation and homeland, for its wastewater
disposal. Because Yelm faced a serious threat to its drinking
water, the Tribe in 1990 agreed not to oppose Yelm's proposal to
develop a wastewater treatment facility for the town with discharge
to the river limited to a maximum of 300,000 gallons/day. Yelm
should proceed with an annexation plan only if it will not increase
discharge to the river above this 300,000 gallons/day cap.
The Final EIS should include housing density alternatives
and/or wastewater disposal alternatives that will not require any
increased discharge to the Nisqually River.
General Comments A dramatic impact of the proposed
annexation and vital element of the annexation decision is not
discussed in the DEIS, but should be an important part of the Yelm
Planning Commission's decision. This element is the quality of
life and image of the Town of ~elm. The annexation proposed to
increase the number will residences in Yelm from about 500 to 5,500
in ten years. All these new houses will be expensive houses (low-
cost housing is not generally built next to golf courses).
1_"',,-.
".'...'."1
.. ~~~:,:~\;
~t
---1;'1
I
",,'.
\;';:,:
Southwest Yelm Annexation EIS
January 15, 1993
Page 3
If the annexation goes through as proposed, in ten years it is
likely that the majority of Yelm's population will reside in the
Southwest area. The current citizens of Yelm will become a
minority in their own community, to be dominated by the relatively
wealthy new citizens of the Southwest area. Yelm has been the
Nisqually Tribe's neighbor for generations; we have gone to the
Yelm schools and have life-long friends in Yelm. We are concerned
that Yelm will no longer be the friendly small town where one can
recognize just about everyone; long-term residents may not even
feel welcome in their own town.
I
Further, the substantial increase in demand for services will
bring an increase in tax rates and service fees. Some of the
oldest of Yelm's citizens likely will be forced to sell their homes
and property. As a matter of policy, the Yelm Planning Commission
should require that the Final EIS evaluate and document the likely
and possible social and economic impacts of the annexation proposal
on the current citizens of Yelm. These impacts should be a major
element of the Commission's deliberations.
The Yelm Planning Commission, and the City of Yelm, have a
choice. It is not inevitable that Yelm must grow rapidly. The
Growth Management Act allows a community to choose and plan for a
modest pace of growth. You do not have to be a "captive" of the
developer's proposal or the limited alternatives for Southwest area
annexation. You can and must evaluate additional alternatives and
include as a viable option saying, "No!" to rapid urbanization.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the DEIS. Your
decision on this annexation proposal will in large part determine
the future quality of life of the Yelm area. We urge you to demand
a full and complete discussion in the Final EIS of a wide range of
alternatives; only in this way will you be able to make an
adequately informed decision on the proposed Southwest annexation.
S:;Z:):H
Dorian S. Sanchez
Tribal Chairman
f
~t~::~~~;~i:j~r~:~~jt\~~';\,,~ft4fJ;~Si!~
~~~._~..~;,tK;~I;:'~L:.,'..~,~~r:~{~~ '.
~~;i BAF:BA~..~OODING . , '."" ,'.'
,," i>;redO'~""'~p:<<~)rj,:l~; .
:i:'
\ ~...-----_.
.J1/
STATE OF WASHINGTON
I
J
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
OFFICE OF ARCHAEOLOGY AND HISTORIC PRESERVATION
111 21st Avenue S.W · P.O. Box 43843 . Olympia, Washington 98504-8343 · (206) 753-4011
December 28, 1992
· SCAN 234-4011
Mr. Todd stamm, city Planner
City of Yelm
105 Yelm Avenue West
Post Office Box 479
Yelm, WA 98597
Log:
Re:
121892-18-TN
Southwest Yelm Annexation, DEIS
Dear Mr. stamm:
The Washington state Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (OAHP)
is in receipt of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for the
Southwest Yelm Annexation action. From the project description, I
understand that this proposal entails the annexation of 2,000 acres to the
City of Yelm, for eventual development for residential, recreational, and
commercial uses. Location of the annexation is southwest of the present
city limits.
In response, OAHP recommends that the City of Yelm consider the impact of
the annexation upon the area's cultural resources including historic and
archaeological properties. This process should include the identification,
evaluation, and protection of such properties. Already, the City of Yelm
and Thurston County have conducted surveys for historic properties in the
Yelm area. To supplement this data, we recommend a survey be conducted to
identify archaeological properties within the proposed annexation.
Following this identification process, identified cultural resources should
be evaluated for significance. Those found to be significant should be
protected through various incentives and planning mechanisms. We recommend
these steps be coordinated with the Yelm Historic Preservation commission,
the Thurston County Historical Commission, and OAHP. Also, the final
environmental impact statement should acknowledge the potential for
historic and archaeological resources within the annexation and identify
steps to address these issues.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this annexation. Should you
have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (206) 753-9116.
i
I
I
l
Si~ere{)1a
G~ r A. iffith
comp~enSi e Planning Specialist
GAG:lms
cc: Shelly Badger
f
-
J, i'}:-;;';!;~;'i::"
___-- . ~t._n~-
~3
~'j
;\,;~"r ~': ~,'
-;:!'('.":O~:;~i.::,\jt!;~;~~~'ff;~~~~;;~";:;(J;;7.-
~,.
:~.....:r
.1 ~:';:
~~'
--.".-_..--~-
..E
STATE OF WASHINGTON
DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY
Mail Stop PV-11 .
Olympia, Washington 98504:S711 . (206) 459-6000
~
----=:~~ ~,\
~r2'e~? '\ :-i~--:Y' \ \
\ i ",\ \ r;',' -,,,"
\,\ '1 ,~.--"-'
i'l \ 'I' \1993
\\\ iJ ; 'h'" \ 5 \
: \ \ \ ~ .J. \, .
\, \1.\ ,
i t \ _.--.___~_4_'-
'\" \..y~,<_'__ _------J
\ ~---
;,_..-.......-------
January 13, 1993
Mr Todd Stamm
City of Yelm
PO Box 479
Yelm WA 98597
Dear Mr Stamm
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the draft environmental impact
statement (DEIS) for the Southwest Yelm Annexation proposed by Thurston
Highlands Associates We reviewed the DEIS and have the following comments
Any ground water withdrawals in excess of 5,000 gallons per day or for the
irrigation of more than one-half acre of lawn or noncommercial garden will
require a water right permit from Ecology
The Department of Ecology encourages the development of public water supply
systems, whether publicly or privately owned, to provide water to regional
areas and developments
If you have any questions, please call Ms Jill Van Hulle with the Water
Resources Program at (206) 586-5560
Sincerely,
---;?zit L/YL '-0'~ -~L;'ct;:,
M Vernice Santee
Environmental Review Section
MVS
92-7742
cc Jill Van Hulle, SWRO
Sarah Barrie, SWRO
{ <~;!
,.\I;~}i:~_ll"";l
.,:',. <,1-
,~:;..)j~h\~ '~~r;;.
r. ,f;t !\~~:t:}': "
, ;~::j~4;~;':ffit;,'1f;,;!?~~. ,.'
:"i
~
i7i
Washington State
Department of Transportation
Duane Berentson
Secretary of Transportation
District 3
Office of District Administrator
5720 Capitol Boulevard
POBox 47440
Olympia, WA 98504-7440
January 14, 1993
Todd Stamm
City of Yelm
Planning and Building Dept.
POBox 479
Yelm, W A 98597
151993
lth~
.....1 d 1
\ r
Southwest Yelm Annexation
SR 510, MP 15 5 Vicinity
E. C File No 93000- T
DEIS
l\~)\
...J
.<0- ~., ,,..,,..,.,-.~
L.__~~",,-
Dear Mr Stamm.
We have received. and reviewed the above proposal and have the following comments:
It is noted. that the proposed. Southwest Yelm Annexation as submitted. is 'non-project'
in nature Although the annexation in itself will not create any additional impacts to the
transportation system, the mtent IS to increase population densitIes to a level greater than
the existing transportatIon infrastructure can accommodate
The DEIS as submitted. does not address the impacts, as far as capacity or level of
service on SR 510 and SR 507 outsIde Yelm's UGA. The annexatIOn and subsequent
development of this proposal will have a SIgnificant adverse impact on the entrre length
of SR 510 and SR 507 from Old 99 in Tenino (MP 13 64) to the Fort Lewis Access
Rd.(MP 39 04) The traffic portion of the EIS should be expanded. to incorporate those
sectIons, identifymg l1llpacts and the appropnate mItIgations The Department requests
an opportunity to review and comment upon the reVIsions
The proposed. development of tills annexatIon relies heavily on the unprovements
outlined. m Yelm' s ComprehensIve TransportatIon Plan that are yet to be funded.,
Should tills EIS be used. or referenced, for the actual development of this annexation,
the Department requests that the constructIon of those improvements be m place
concurrent with the demand generated. by the proposal. No development shall be
allowed WIthout fIrst secunng full funding for the necessary roadway mitigatIons.
Thank you for the opportunity to reVIew the above proposal. If there are any questions
regarding our comments, please contact Fred. Tharp at (206)357-2667
Sincerely,
PAULA J HAMMOND P.B.
~1f7f:;;;;;~r
By: PASCO BAKOTICH, ill, P.B.
Asst. Trans, Planning Engineer ,,_-'"
DIStrict 3 'f':f~:,:;,j-: (~?~:;~vt
PJCH / PB'fot
cc N Williams
Bob Hazlett / S
File 93000- T
Chamberlain & ASSOCIates / P O.Box 3485 / Lacey, W A 985.0.
..J"
...,..;:",
~ ,:
"r
'c'
-'
CUIrrSMITCH
Director
STATE OF WASHINGTON
DEPARTMENT OF WILDLIFE
905 E, Heron A.-berdeen W A. 98520
Tel (206) 533-9335
I"-"._-"~,--,-_.._,-----..
,]anuar-y 8, 199::
~~, ' 2 1993
r1r-. Todd Stamm
Ci ty F'lC:l,nner-
City of Yelm
Pa 011 BON 479
Yelm, WA 98597
~-_.~.~-~._---_--.'
Re: Dr-aft Envir-onmental Impact Statement--Southwest
Ye 1 m Anne\:a. tion
Section 19, Township l7N, Range 02E and
Sections 23, 24, 26 and 27, Township 17N, Range OlE
Thur-ston County
Dear- Mr-. Stamm:
The Washington State Depar-tment of Wildlife (WDW) appr-eciates the
oppor-tunity to r-eview and comment on the above-r-efer-enced Dr-aft
Envir-onmentC:l,l Impact Statement (DEIS) on the anne;:ation of
C:l,ppr-o;:imC:l.tely 2,000 acr-es into the City of '{elm with a pr-oposed
deve 1 opment dwe 11 ing densi ty o'f 5.1 un i ts per- ac r-e \l-Ji th a ma:amum
of 5,000 developed units. After- r-eviewing the DEIS and the
Technical Appendices, our- agency has the following comments and
concer-ns.
As you know. the WDW is mandated to "pr-otect, pr-eser-ve and
per-petuate" Washington's w~ldlife, both game and non-game
species. With the -gr-owing concer-n of Washington residents.
counties and cities to pr-otect their- wildlife and to pr-event
e::tirpation and/or- possible listing o'f lrJildlife species, it is
essential that wildlife issues be adequately addressed. This
DEIS does not sufficiently addr-ess wildlife concer-ns, e.g.
protection for- pr-ior-ity habitats and species, wildlife cor-r-idor-s,
pr-oper- pr-otection for- wetlands and wetland-dependent species,
pr-otection of nest tr-ees (as r-equir-ed by RCW 77.16.120), and
mitigation. The statement on wildlife on page 42 that: "Most of
the wildlife and vegetation cur-r-ently occupying undeveloped land
would be displaced or- destr-oyed when development occur-s", shows a
1 ac k of concer-n for- Washing ton's wi 1 d 1 i fe. Since this anne::ation
would pr-ovide for- the increase in housing density fr-om the
cur-r-ent one house per- five acr-e designation by Thur-ston County,
to 5.1 units per acr-e and the lar-ge ar-ea (2,000 acr-es) which will
be affected, our- agency has the following concerns.
~3
-
/~
,::41":""'_;" .~.
~::'>-v
/
!'1r. Todd Stamm
Page :2
December 8, 1993
In the preceding paragraph, I have referenced priority habitats
and species. WDW has developed a Priority Habitats and Species
(PHS) program to identify the most important wildlife habitats
and wildlife species in order to assist counties, cities,
developers and others to ta~e a proactive approach to protection
of fish and wildlife. By ta~ing a proactive approach as opposed
to a reactive approach, this will help prevent future wildlife
losses and it will be much less costly to plan now rather than
recovering losses once they occur. Thurston County is one of
the leading counties in protecting our natural resources through
their Critical Areas ordinance.
The DEIS does not address protection for the priority species
[",hich are found in the Pt-oposed c"nne::ation 2l,rea. The following
lS a list of priority species which were 11sted 1n the DEIS but
were not ac~nowledged as priority species.
1. Pileated woodpec~er (Dryocopus pileatus) (Also a State
Candidate species)
r-,
"'- .
Western Blueblrd (SialLa me~icana)(State Candidate and
Federal Sensitive species)
":!'
-' .
Red-tailed Haw~ (Buteo jamaicensis)
4. Wood Duc~s (~L~ sponsa)
::" Columbian Blac~,-tailed deel~ (Odocoileus hemionus
columbianus)
6. Gre2l.t Blue Heron (Ardea hel~od ias) . There is a heron
rookerl located ln Section :20, township 17N, Range O:2E,
and thlS area, with its multiple wetlands and Thompson
Cree~, provide the herons with food, water, alternate
nesting sites, roosting and nursery areas.
7. Western Gray Squirrel (ScLurus griseus). This is also
a State Candidate species. Although there were no
sightings in the proposed area, there are ~nown squirrel
sightings in nearby areas. Therefore, the oak-conifer
r.\L(t;Yt~:~~!-:. ~';jY~Wti;~ iV, ?,0i~ltW~~*'~~t\.j,":,: j
..
.,
J,~~~l~i~
~.. .---...--..-------~~
",lfilrp."It~'.
/
/
l"1r. Todd Stamm
Page 3
December 8, 1993
habitat should be protected as a potential dispersal area
for the Western Gray Squirrel.
8. Elk (Cervus elaphus) (Possible use as a migration route).
This proposed area has diverse habitat types including forested,
open fields (which are important feeding areas for raptors),
stream corridor and varying types of wetlands. Numerous
wintering waterfowl species utilize the open water wetlands for
feeding and resting habitat. In addition, the wetlands and their
upland buffers are used to meet the life needs of numerous
wildlife species who reside in the local area.
With the anne::a.tion and heavy density development planned for the
area, these diverse habitats will be fragmented, destroyed and/or
rendered unusable by area wildlife result1ng in severely reduced
populations and/or local population die-offs, an increase in
animal damage by displaced wildlife, decreased recreational value
(e.g. wildlife viewing, hunting, etc.).
Wildlife is the property of the State and its citizens and
therefore it is important to properly address protection and
mitigation for fish, wildlife and their habitats.
Than~ you for the opportunity to review and comment on this
proposed anne::ation.
Sincerely,
~J
~ <S;)
DEBBIE D. CARNEVALI
Habitat Biologist
cc: Dave Gufler, WDW
Connie Iten, WDW
Paula Ehlers, Thurston Co. Planning
; : ;>i~ ..>.
1--,
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
George L. Barner, Jr
District One
Diane Oberquell
District Two
3 Linda Medcalf
J~N 2. G \99 District Three
_--.-.-.----.--- ~ANNING DEPARTMENT
THURSlON COUNTY
.\~""".I_ ......... _.....'8
SI:'CE III 52
---
-:--__.a--
Harold Robertson, AICP
Planning Director
January 15, 1993
Mr Todd Stamm, City Planner
City of Yelm
PO Box 479
Yelm, W A 98597
SUBJECT Southwest Yelm Annexation Draft EnvITonment Impact Statement
Dear Mr. Stamm,
We have revIewed the Draft EnvIronmental Impact Statement for the proposed
Southwest Yelm AnnexatIon and offer the followmg comments for your consIderatIOn,
NATURAL ENVIRONMENT
Groundwater Tills section does not specIfically address the Impacts of golf course
development on water quality Table 18 indicates that AlternatIves 2 through 4 would
devote 276 acres to golf courses, The envIronmental impacts of thIS use, partIcularly
the potential effects of fertilIzers, herbicIdes, and pestICIdes on the groundwater
proposed to be used as a public water source, should be addressed. If the development
project proceeds, we suggest that you reqUIre a groundwater momtoring and mtegrated
pest management for the golf course area.
Wetlands (Section B, 1 Water)
AdditIOnal work IS needed m the wetlands sectIOn. The report IS confusing and the
analysis is not objectIve. Confusion could be reduced by overlaymg the delineated
wetlands on the 3 different scenanos. EIS' are supposed to be written for the
JUTIsdictIOn as an objective analYSIS of the probable adverse envITonmental1ll1pacts of -
a proposal. Statements made ill the wetland analYSIS mdicate that the City IS assummg
that the filling of wetlands is not avoidable Filling wetlands is avoidable and should
be the fITst mitigatIOn tactic Adequate protectIve buffers should also be proposed, On
2000 Lakeridge Drive SW, Olympia, Washington 98502-6045 (206) 786-5554/ FAX (206) 754-4413
(i)
Recycled Paper
(,;;;,~=-'--'--~-==:.==-~
- ----.
/"
c '
- --..-----
''''''' II ..-....__ -
~DI.~.__. 1l~~'I:!:/l ~:\l'lIi!;!:_...-~ ...~""'._'''- -~~
,;
/
Mr Stamm
January 15, 1993
Page 2
page 32, a large forested wetland IS mentioned (identified erroneously as #16), and
described as needmg a 100 foot buffer If Yelm's Cnncal Areas Ordmance IS sImilar
to the Ecology Model Ordinance, then 100 feet is not an appropriate buffer width for
tlus type of wetland, There is also no other mennon of appropnate buffering for any
of the other 19 wetlands delmeated. We have several other comments regardmg the
wetland section and they include the followmg,
Figure 10 The "off-site wetland" noted near SR 507 appear~ to be
partially on-site
Pg, 32, first paragraph. Appears that you intend to use the wetlands as
pollutant filters Untreated stormwater should not be drrected to natural
wetlands
Pg, 32, 6th paragraph. How will wetlands be Impacted?
Pg. 34, last paragraph. It is also difficult to understand how the wetland
losses were calculated at less than one acre smce the analysIs dId not seem
that specIfic
Energy All three development alternanves (2-4) call for the relocatIOn of the Centralia
hIgh-voltage transmissIOn hne bIsecnng SectIOn 27 Smce Alternative 2 and 4 show
reSIdential development adjacent to the transmISSIOn hnes, the Issue of electromagnetIc
radIanon should be addressed.
BUILT ENVIRONMENT
Population GrowthlHousmg Demand. The Draft EIS esnmates for populanon growth
and housmg demand m the Yelm area are consIderably lugher than Thurston RegIOnal
Planmng Council's (TRPC) estImates
ConsIdering this large difference, the methodology and assumptIOns for the populatIOn,
housmg and sewer servIce demands should be reevaluated to ensure that they provIde
a reasonable basIs for assumptIOns supportmg the development alternanves described
m the Draft EIS and for related planmng m the area,
Natural Resource Lands All of the development proposals would result in the
urbanizanon of currently rural lands that support agnculture and forestry. If urban
development proceeds, the compact scenario, Alternative 3 appears to be most
compatible with the resource uses on adjoimng properties.
./'"
~
Mr Stamm
January 15, 1993
Page 3
Transportation, Tills section should address the impact of traffic generated by the
proposed alternatives on county roads and state highways beyond the immediate area.
These Include the Yelm Highway, ReservatIon Road, Rainier Road, Old Highway 99,
SR 507 and SR 510 Impacts on roadway capacity and any associated improvements
should be identified and discussed, In addition, we encourage you to coordinate with
Fort Lewis regardIng any anticipated opemngs of roads withIn the project vIcmity
Schools. It IS lIkely that any of the development alternatives will generate more
students than contemplated m the EIS, We suggest that the applicant work with the
Yelm School DistrIct to prepare an updated school demand forecast, consIdering the
likely housmg mix, demograplucs and eX1stmg school capacity, and alter the amount of
land devoted to school uses In the alternatIves accordmgly.
In addition, if the project proceeds, we suggest that consideration be gIVen to SIttIng
schools m close proxinuty to residential areas to enable access by foot and bicycles, to
reduce traffic and busmg, and to foster a greater sense of commumty
Wastewater FacilitIes, The Draft EIS IndIcates that m order to serve the entrre proposed
development a new NPDES permIt (and approval from Centraha Power) would be
needed to enable an Increased sewage outfall to the Nisqually RIver A determinatIon
should be made as to whether or not tlus IS possible or likely and generally what the
envrronmental Impacts would be If a permit for more outfall could be obtamed, a
determinatIon should be made as to whether or not the system can be cost-effectIvely
redeSIgned to accommodate the projected sewage flow from the proposed annexatIon
(and the remainder of the intenm growth area) within the lImIts estabhshed by the
eXIStIng permits Also, what would be the alternative denSIty of the annexation area if
sewer was not available?
GENERAL COMMENTS
There is no dIscussIOn regardmg historic resources.
Alternative 3 seems to have the least environmental impacts and appears to be the most
cost-effective to serve of the development alternatIves bemg considered, Therefore, If
the city eventually annexes thIS area, we urge the CIty to requrre thIS type of
development pattern.
/" ",'""J'F""'"
< ."~,,,~,;",;.',}' - ~" '
,.-..... I
/
Mr. Stamm
January 15, 1993
Page 4
Thank you for consIdenng our comments
Sincerely,
~~~
Paula Ehlers, Senior Planner
37:1gd
cc Thurston County Board of CommIssIOners
Tom Fitzsimmons, CAO
CIty of Yelm Planning CommissIOn
City of Yelm City Council
;;i',~
"'
,-'
'l~(., 7~~!r~1~1t1(;~ii::i5'~"f~jTf';:~~'" :". ."
l"..~'tnff';~ ',', ", ~ I' "
~~l~:;,}~U'T 'f-.];
~'y "{ Directors , ..:, ,
f;~;J fj ;\;,~,,' ~. t
Ni:(,;~r:
;~j~~:;
~~~~.I
Kt:NNETtI flART
Kt:NNETtI MARTIN
DON MARO!lI~
BETti WRIGLt:SWORTtI
NATt: TURNt:R
-:.1.
BOB D G9LPUt:NEE
Superintendent
RAMONA GARNER
Administrative Secretary
Telephone 206-446-2207
January 4, 1992
Planning Commission
City of Yelm
POBox 479
Yelm, WA 98597
RE. Southwest Yelm Annexation
Dear Members of the Planning Commission
As you are aware, a portion of the Southwest Yelm Annexation Site is located within the boundaries of
the Rainier School District No 307 Due to that fact and the fact that any development near the Rainier
School District will impact the District, on behalf of the Rainier School District, I wish to communicate to
you concerns about the proposed annexation.
First, I believe the Planning Commission must give serious consideration to RCW 28A.315.250, the statute
which addresses municipal and school district boundaries. Although that statute would not win an award
for clarity, it does establish the basic legislative mandate that each incorporated city or town is to be
comprised in a single school district. The exceptions to that mandate that are stated in the statute are
not applicable to the annexation under your consideration. Hence, the annexation under consideration
may well not be legally possible without invoking the jurisdiction of the State Board of Education as
described in RCW Chapter 28A.315.
Secondly, the Rainier School District requests the City of Yelm to immediately and specifically declare if
their intent is to change the property in question to the Yelm School District. The Environmental Impact
Statement may suggest this to be the intent.
If the jurisdiction of the State Board of Education is properly sought, I anticipate that the Rainier School
District would find it in its best interest to advocate that the property subject to the proposed annexation
remain in the Rainier School District. The potential concurrent jurisdiction of the State Board of
Education and other municipalities will make the issues surrounding the proposed annexation even more
complicated That brings me to another concern of the Rainier School District.
-
We believe that a number of the issues related to the proposed annexation could have been more refined
or eliminated had planning authorities been more cognizant of-the fact that the Rainier School District
would be significantly impacted by the proposed annexation The mitigating measures cited in the Draft
Environment Impact Statement are illusory if they are not impacted. The stated mitigating measures
were generated with little, if any, direct discussion with representatives of the Rainier School District.
!
r?5af1(V"'1 .~__....m
~~,
/.. .....c
.,.;....,n
~,
/..."
..
"
~~_'U1l'
;l:f[t~~it;~i1l!t~Cl(t(\ !'
The Rainier Schpol District had made request of the City Manager of Yelm to be fully informed of all
progress related to the annexation.
Further, the district requests that consultants to the city and/or agents of the developers of the
property, keep the district fully informed of all their actions and recommendations related -10 the
annexation.
Please be on notice that the Rainier School District No. 307 is very concerned about the impact on it of
the proposed Southwest Yelm Annexation. The District seeks your assurance that its interests will be
conscientiously considered and protected as the proposed annexation is further considered. State law
provides a very deliberate process when changes in school district boundaries are being considered The
legislature has recognized the need for such deliberative processes. City Planners must be equally
deliberative and conscientious when their actions involve the potential need for changes in school district
boundaries.
I trust that the City of Yelm's Planning Commission recognizes that the interests of the Rainier School
District must be taken into serious consideration if any phase of the proposed annexation is to go
forward At this point, the exact interests of the District are difficult to determine because changes in
school district boundaries have yet to be formally advocated. Once the intentions of the advocates are
known regarding changes in school boundaries, the interests of the Rainier School District will be better
subject to identification.
Very truly yours,
~J~/
,%~W~
., D Golphen~ .
Superintendent
BDG:lm
cc' Attorney Craig Hanson
'l"..,
.t
"
\, KENNITtI MRT. j
KENNITtI MARTIN
" DON MhRQ!JI~
BETtI WRICLE~WORTtI
NhTE TURNER
OOB D COLPtIENEE
~uperintendent
1Rafnf#r',~~~~~r;1:'
POBox 98"
Rainier W A 98576
RAMONA CARNER
Administrative Secretary
Telephone '206-446-'2'207
r.::::---~
I '" i2 /:0 r;::, r-,.. . -::J - ~
!f\\~.- €C;: ;:-:- ~ ~ '\ ' ~r::. ," i
; II J '~:::~,;<~_,t:::- L, - '_~J! "\ \ ;
pi..... -/ ",
i ! JAN I 4 19!13
, f
!.J t~;'! .
J;' I'
'V'"
~ V I
IIJ
January 13, 1993
.....,... ~
Planning Commission
City of Yelm
POBox 479
Yelm, WA 98597
RE. Southwest Yelm Annexation
Dear Members of the Planning Commission
On behalf of the Rainier School District I attended the January 4, 1993 public hearing regarding the
preliminary Environmental Impact Statement for the potential annexation Attached is a copy of the
prepared statement read at the hearing Our attendance and comments were brought forth because
Section 27 of the potential annexation lies within the boundaries of the Rainier School District.
For the record we present these further remarks.
1 Rainier School District, to date, has not been contacted by the property developers regarding
district interests. The property developers have contacted the Yelm School District officials
regarding the property within the Rainier School District property The Yelm School District
officials have been very forthright in communications with Rainier School District officials and it
is appreciated
2. The E!S developers requested a written ccrrespondence prim to the EIS Rough Draft. The EIS
does not reflect Rainier School District interests as expressed in the correspondence
3. During the January 4, 1993 meeting a representative of the property developers commented
that it appeared to be "an accident" that Section 27 was not originally in the Yelm School
District. We suggest this is speculation and likely a history of development of district lines may
suggest otherwise Further, the comment may suggest the developers desire for a school district
changeof the property
4 A minimum of fifteen (15) acres must be set aside in Section 27 as a future elementary school
- site Future potential growth would require an elementary school and this would be an ideal
neighborhood school.
.:~,. ,\"
.~
It is not the Rainier School Districts interest to support or oppose the annexation of the property by the
City of Yelm However, it is our paramount interest to support the interests of the Rainier School
District. This interest includes involvement and protection for all properties within itS legal boundaries.
On behalf of the Board of Directors these comments are given by
.v;t~.
, Superintendent
BDG:lm
attach
cc Craig Hanson, Attorney
.:1 t!--- ~
~ l Z1~_
-
';1. ~f~; t:},;. 'fEf,~j
',Iiijllllllllllllll/ / / / / / /
Intercity T ran
.
SIt
January IS, 1993
526 S. Pattison Street, Post Office 80,y 659
Olympia, Washington 98507,0659
(206) 786-8585
Todd Stamm
Director of Community Development
City of Yelm
POBox 479
Yelm, W A 98597
Dear~~~
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Southwest Yelm Annexation Draft
Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS)
We appreciate that public transportation has been mentioned throughout the DEIS and
that the transportation section identifies pedestnan-oriented features and transit as
mitigation options We hope that these mitigations will be Implemented regardless of
which alternative is ultimately settled upon.
We judged the alternatives on the following criteria.
. pedestrian-friendly orientation,
. connectivity of roads/ operational feasibility;
. residential densIty; and
. mixed-use development.
Alternative 3, the compact scenano, IS the most attractive alternative to IntercIty
Transit. This alternative, as conceptually designed appears to be the most pedestrian- '
friendly The bulk of the residences will be within 1/4 mile of the major corridor and
the commercial areas, increasing the likelihood that people will walk or bike to the
commercial areas and will access transit for travel either within or out of the
developments, Alternative 3 also provides the most efficient through access for transit
vehicles. Service to this area would likely involve vehicles runnmg northeast on 507
and up through the annexation area's main corridor, then out of the northeast section
into the City
The residential density within this scenario also makes it more likely to support
effective transit service than the other alternatives, While it does include limited
mixed-use development, our hope is that this can be increased, to provIde more on-site
employment opportunities,
m
.~.
:':-;'
, '
r~ ":',::- 1:.
{.f ~"'i
!'t:.
"
/
/'
.v..
.I:;,;r~
1;
:-~~
January 15, 1993
Page 2
~ !""}
;.,
Our observations and comments regarding the other alternatives are listed below:.
Alternative 1 (No Action) - If development is to occur in this area, I.T, prefers a higher
level of density than the one dwelling unit per five acres which development under this
scenario would allow
j..
Alternative 2 (Proponents Scenario) - This alternative is less attractive for several
reasons, Much of the housing will be located over 1 14 mile from the corridor
Generally speaking, people will not walk further than 1 14 mile to access bus service,
Operationally, this scenario poses problems for transit because of the looping roads,
potential dead-end streets, and other barriers to road connectivity. It should be noted
that this type of development is inconsistent with the Connectivity Policy called out in
the 1992 Yelm Comprehensive Transportation Plan,
Alternative 4 (Village Scenario) - While Intercity Transit does promote mixed-use
development, we have the same concerns with this alternative as listed in Alternative 2.
While this alternative offers more mixed-use development, it also lowers the residential
densities. It should be possible to maintain higher densities in some areas of the
development. It would also be helpful to know what levels of employment density are
anticipated with this alternative,
Thank you again for the opportunity to provide input. Please keep us apprised of the
progress of this proposal. If the annexation takes place, we would be very interested in
participating in future parcel- or project-specific planning efforts.
Sincerely,
Cla nw 0, +lacJ{/~
;lie D Haveri
Planner I Policy Analyst
copy: Rand Riness, Director of Planning
','
,"
;ll~';
r.;'i
". ;,~,r ,-~ \~...
-
-
January 15, 1993
l ~ J.
;
~ \
Jf\~ 2. 0 \993
\~! I
;'\\jJ \
--1v \
--1
SHAPIRO &
ASSca:IATES~
;
\,\\\\------
'!J ,...:-
Mr. Todd Stamm, Director of Corri~UI.!ity..Development
City ofYelm
P O. Box 479
Y elm, Washington 98597
Re: Southwest Yelm AnnexatIon Draft EIS
Washington Mutual Tower
Suite 1700
1201 Third Avenue
Seattle
Washington 98101
Tel 206(624. 9190
Fax, 206(624 · 1901
Dear Mr. Stamm:
Shapiro and Associates, Inc, represents Venture Partners, one of the two largest ownerships
within the annexation area. The Draft EIS is a comprehensive and well-written document covering
a non-project proposal. We support the proposed annexation and apprecIate the opportumty to
comment on the City's Draft EIS. The following are clarificatIons and questions we have
concerning the Draft.
1) It should be noted that neither the No ActIon Altemanve, the Compact Scenano nor the Village
Scenario meets Venture Partners' objectives. The ownership's objecnves are predicated on
market demand and are to develop a mix of smgle-family and mulnple-family reSIdences WIth a
neIghborhood commercial center designed to serve the project's residents,
2) We seriously doubt there IS a market for the 110 acres of commercIal and office uses
represented in the Village Scenario. This scenano raises the following questions: What IS the
future land demand for professIOnal servIce and government office uses, gIven the projected
populanon increases? Will there be a demand for approxunately 40 acres retail and 70 acres of
professional service and government uses in Yelm? If there is a demand, would it not be most
appropnate to consolidate those uses near the lnghway to help support eXIsting downtown
commercIal uses and reduce automobile dependent trIps.
3) We question the conclusion on page 36 that the Village Scenano would mtroduce lower
quantInes of pollutants mto the groundwater compared to the proposal. The Village Scenano
would have higher traffic levels associated with 70 additional acres of professional service and
government office uses and in turn would cause lngher groundwater pollunon levels than
would be expected by the proposal.
4) In response to Natural Resource Lands rmtlgatmg measures, Henry Dragt has receIved
complamts from nearby property owners about the smell from hIS darry. Further, potentIal
pollution from the farm and its impacts on groundwater quality decreases the farm's
desrrability TIns IS a common phenomenon and underscores the transInonal nature of a dairy
in close proXImity to urban uses.
5) We do not understand how the Village Scenario concept would generate only 130 more peak-
hour trIpS than the proposal when it would incorporate three times as much commercial and
office-designated land and only ten percent fewer residences,
6) The Draft EIS generally describes the Village Scenario as potentially having the same or less
impacts on public services than would occur under the proposal. Although the Village
Scenario would have approximately ten percent fewer reSIdences, resultmg m shghtly fewer
impacts on schools, we would expect that if the commercial and office land were built out, this
scenano would place a greater demand on police and fire services, We would also expect that
the employees on 70 more acres of professional ServIce and office developed land under the
~'ilF""_~i---
~~~'.,,~~.:::.:'t}~,j:(~~J~1Ii':.-.l\-''''~ ~':"-!~~1;."L~i... "': ,.-:t'L -.) "",~~,,,;I .....~\J"..,. ),'l'-,,"J~ 'l~ ..'"",'t.."- f',.h 1.1r.:',-..-,...~ ":,.,C]'~,E<t;~lH~
-.-
/
._-
..........
"'''U~_.D~~IIl.l':J"-
_u_""'",,'~
Village Scenario would require as much recreational opportunity as the occupants of the 500
more residences that might be developed under the proposal,
7) The fiscal impact analysis includes the impacts of infrastructure nnprovements in terms of
costs, These nnprovements would be paid for by the developer and do not represent costs to
the public, In addition, revenue from permit fees and utility taxes would help offset service
costs,
Again, we appreciate the opportunity to comment on the Draft EIS and welcome any questions or
c1arificanons you may have,
Sincerely,
S~IRO qClATES' 1Ne.
~
SHAPIRO &
ASSCO::~
,,': ,,;r~;.r.';:~j~1;_~\~(?~':;>
;,'
Mary Lou Clemens
15030 Longmire St. SE
Yelm, WA 98597
January 13, 1993
'i PD f"25- ~ r~ n \ \r; ff~;'.;:,~~;
[ ~ ') 'l5 "'"-' t..:; r t: . , l --.. t! '
i ~r---'~;o~'~~'---::~ill i ij
11\~1 JAN I 5 ~ III III
ill'\ ! liLJll
IW -''-- J~
I
;
~
Yelm Pla.nIl.u-rg Conl.l1wsion
RE. SOl.lth\y"est Yelm Annexation Proposal
Dear Plam:ili.1g Commission.
I Jla1re concern.s regarding tire Im.pact Statement':3 section OIL Police Protection for t1'.1e
pmposed "rlIJ.eY.ed "rea.. If it no"?! requires fi~!e ~.~i.ricles "Jl.d fi".re+ offir.ers to provide prc1tection for
740 acres and 1365 people 1 I fail to understand ho"" 'lire could expect o.ne more vehicle ~nd. \'7'iTO IT.lDre
officers to adeq 1J.ately prm1ide protection for 27 ~O acres arLd 13,865 people (5000 1.1nits 1. 2 5 persor~
per unit + exi3ting popu].a,tion} I realize the popula.tion increase "iTOuld not occur imIwdiately, l)11t
certainly t.he geogrephic area ~ro1Jld increase irrlm.ediatelv 11pon ~w.exation. tIlere by ca1Jsing ti.Le
apparent need for an incre8$e of more than one police car to pl3.trol annexed areas
T".t}e 19 - Estir.n.ated P1l'blic Se~,ri..ce Costs., pe,ge 126.. does !lot ~.deql.J.ately :address t~ eit.r..er
The 0031. by Population table uses a 10 4% increase figure 1 -::vrrictl :m.ay accu.vately re!1ect tllf. Yelrn
p..:rea. CaptlJ..-re rate of tiJ.e c.o1mty projec1inn. Have~Ter, does it ~.ccurately ret1ect tJ"...e ~.ctllel increase
'Within the Yelm City Limits? In 1994 .none, 247 ne~! hous~ l.:u:Uts WS11pposedly be built and
'.Tith an a\~~e occllpa,!l.cy of 2 5 persons/urtitJ tJlis 'll,701Jld result L'I"J. an Jr..crea.3e of approxima.tely 617
people '!'his figure represents a 54% iIlcre13ze in population. If the cost figures are computed on a
COSt per person basis t.r..en the projected dollar 3Jr1.ount.s lisied are substan1iaUy inadeq1.1.ate
I ~k jUU 10 please give further coroideration to the impact this 8J1I1.exation would have on the
safety of Yebn residents and tD be sure that accurate planni.ng in tJris area is addressed. r belielTe the
,arn.e coroideration needs to be given 10 the planning for Fire Protection also
TILank YOll for )10131 attentic,n.
~'~~
Mary Lou Clemens
1,:..;
~)..
:i
!'
:i~;
l',
i7 ".i, ,c
r;;:;.~~;""""";"._-_.--RI_,-----v-
;.""',-
-
--~.--~-
,.
--...---.----
~
j\jf~~!fr" ~.
or' 'Pf",ji,\".-"-:""
:'\t)j~:7. %~k~~i\~:':~;~~, ,,_" - '
~!~~~~'Ni!itioniil Food
.; i
r~<~... .
,-
. ( --=--
1'l -,.--.
: t /~ t~. -~,--
e
Corporation
/')/-
rr;?
I /992
206 - 546-6533 and 523-4900
Fax 206 - 542 0202
"~.1.',~.'::
l
PO Box 33745
16740 Aurora Avenue North
Seattle, Washington 98133
"""-...
December 17, 1992
Yelm Planning Commission
P.O. Box 479
Yelm, WA 98597
Re: Southwest Yelm Annexation
Ladies & Gentlemenl
We have received your Notice of Public Hearing regarding the
proposed annexation of 2,000 acres Southwest of the city and wish
to offer our written comment and opposition to the proposal.
This company operates a 300,000 bird egg layer farm which has
existed for nearly 30 years on approxiately 250 acres in Section
35, immediately south of the proposed annexation area. The proposed
annexation would convert substantial agricultural and timber land
to urban uses. Even though our property is not proposed to be
included, we would be severely impacted. It would not be realistic
to assume that we could continue our agricultural activity while
bordering an area of dense residential and commercial activity.
Agricultural activity such as ours is not compatible with such uses
being nearby. Furthermore, our operations require that significant
acreage of cropland or pasture land be available in close proximity
for utilization of chicken manure as fertilizer. This is becoming
increasingly important as government regulations are beginning to
impose specific requirements of available acreage for manure
utilization. Other agricultural operations in the immediate area
have similar requirements for available land.
Many people believe they can expand a city and engulf or border
farms, so long as they do not require them to discontinue
operat ions. Often times, the belief carries with it a good feeling
about preserving a rural environment. However, in this regard, a
dist inct ion must be made between "open spaces" and product i ve
farms. The farms which feed this country must be allowed to
operate in a true agricultural environment. The proposed
annexation cannot insure such continued operation.
Sincerely yours,
NATIONAL FOOD CORPORATION
.-- ~
~
Br an V. Bookey,
President
,
f,,;~,
-'
-;i" :'f:.!r<.:
,~ ~tf"':;, ;~'iT;~'_;~'~~~'{":I"
. " .".~ . -' , , :, '. , ,,", ..'
;~'V ,"-~
,j', )"'(" ,;,~ti:;;'~:h:~~,'.;:~/*1'
"
'~~:~4'j~~Uf ;~.~j~:
I!OI
'"1.'~i'
'-"0~~f~~;~~1~~~l~t~~~~~'~rc' ,-
~~:;f>:'" .'-::T-:::~~,i?./.h'~~:
Nfsqually River Council
Council McmbcrGhip'
j'lcm:- C\)\lllly
Thur!3lon County
l..ewie. County
Slale of Wu~hhl~I()l\:
Pl\rks and Recreation Com-
ml~\lllon
D'~pt. of Natural RC:JOUr<X-'f1
Del'\. of ^grlcultrno
!)(~pt. lit Ecology
D~!pt. of Fisheri!;!!!
Dcpl. of Wildlite
5(..:rClary o( Slale
U W Pack Expcrimcnllll
Fotest
U.S. Army, Fort Lcwils
Ni~qually Indian Tribe
Nlsquully National WildUf~~
Hcfugc
Gifford Pltlchol Na!itmal
POI'c91
Mount RaInier Nalillnlll Fark
TaromB City Light
T()\V11 of Yelm
Town of EatOlwillc
City of Roy
Cltlzcns ^dvlllOrY CommlUcc:
Three Citll:cn McmbcNl
~~~~~. ~-:
SHORELR-Nbs~'7T ". .
002
P.O. Box 1076
Yelm, Washington 98597
January 11. 1993
Todd Stamm
City Planner
City ofYelm
POBox 479
Yelm. WA 98597
Dear Mr. Stamm:
The Nisqually River Council respectfully requests that the
City ofYelnl grant the Council a two-week extension for
COll1nlel1t on the Southwest Yelm Annexation DEIS frmn
January 15th until January 29th. .
The Councll has not determ1ned whether or not it. wishes
to com Inent , 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, TI1ank you for your'attention.
Sincerely.
{)~O
Diane Oberquell
Chairman
DO:pcm
~
"23%.-- --
. King Ci
Lewisl
Masonl 0 I y\ n' rI III
Piercel Y !\ r I \.A . \"
Thurst
0.86%, I t-- " ( J
Fort Le I r, C\ Cl ':::::.l
I
:, Aff' \ l~J /9CL3
f I
I
I,
\ '
, I
)
-- \..tar::5 -lUl~U- UP' .,LCa.UUj 'CUI. OU.6J,::'VU.i.o "U~ ~~-:t'Vt.:ll..-....--~...<ut''"''''J.--'''''-''''.A'''''''''''''''--'''''----------_.-
night in a special lane set up on Jef- younger people. Usually, it's the older
ferson Street in front of the post office. people who want to file for an exten-
The lobby was also hectic as filers sion."
finished their forms and purchased It was quite an operation. The rear of
stamps. A band played Beatles stan- the building hummed with action as
dards while filers munched butter cQok- postal employees and machines sorted,
ies and sipped coffee - all compliments packaged and shipped tax refunds from
he said, "No problems."---
Ii President's taxes: The Clintons
pay more than $70,000 to the IRS, A2
Ii Business protest: South Sound
businesses target Tax Day to protest in-
creasing regulations, B7
Annexation brings growing con
. The reaction: A contractor
is excited and a Yelm citizen is
wary of the small city's growth.
By Frieda Bush
The Olympian
YELM- Wayne Erickson, a Yelm na-
tive of 27 years, was delighted Thursday by
the news that the City Council had ap-
proved an application for 2,000 acres
southwest ofYelm.
Erickson, a general contractor, said find-
ing building lots smaller than 11 couple of
acres has been tough.
"I've been waiting for this," he :;laid. "It's
much nicer to deal ~th the city building
d~partment than the county I'd like to see
a little traffic revision. One stoplight in
town is not enough,"
Ray Snyder is also concerned about traf-
fic. As he and his wife ate lunch at Jen-
nee~s Bar and Grill, traffic was stacking up
at the town's lone light.
"I think if they (annex) they better take
care of the traffic problems," he said.
The annexation application must go
through the Thurston County Boundary
Review Board before being returned to the
City oCYelm for final approval. If propo-
nents of the anne}Gltion have their way, the
new 'section of the city will be developed
into 1,600 homes sites, bringing new peo-
ple into the town of just over 1,300
"(Yelm) is changing fast, too fast,"
Snyder said. "I used to see the town get
together for picnics in the summer and the
lighting of the Chr:istmas tree. That will all
vanish."
-._-'I-I~I.c;QQ,"", ..:J"~I.I_",",' .....-...,...... -'.t'........-'....-..._.......-"'t"--~----
$10
mlncrease campsites with utilities from
$12to$14
III Increase boat moorage from $6 to $8
for boats under 26 feet and $9 to $11 for
boat over 26 feet.
III Add a boat launch fee of $5 per launch,
rns to Velm
Both the Nisqually Indian Tribe and the
Nisqually River Council had expressed
concerns about how the city would handle
sewage from 1,600 new residences.
The city decided not to decide, instead
approving the annexation of the area the
way it is now, said Shelly Badger, Yelm
city administrator The area presently in-
cludes 37 parcels of land, mostly vacant, a
dairy farm and scattered houses. Between
20 and 30 people live in the area.
Developers would be required to com-
plete another emironmental impact state-
ment before building, Badger said,
--..,
~.
.<~,:~:-:'
Index
"
An accidental creation,
LSD has 50th birthday
--.--.--A.-...............i.atad_P.ress
Blue Jays
outbat M's
Washington
Bridge column
Business
E5
86-7
C6-10
03
E7
!!I In the lineup: Who's who in a vintage
photograph of the Olympia Police
Mariner rookie I Department. ClI
John Cumm,ings Nation I Comics
-.-._,.._hl~ .
~ -.-.----...-.-a.-"T:h"'_"'i"'lcil.lroLls_bac~_ _ ----..Qrossword
Classified
r=~~~~~-;7'::-;;:;;;"'--''';;:::~_':li'"-'t.~'''''1O,;-.f:':::':::~~~l.,,.-,t,,,, ::J-~"ff'_..
I~ CITY OF
it.,. YElM
POBox 479
Yelm, WA 98597
I
I,
!
f. Date:
I
f
I:
r
!
~
~
I:
I. "jli!I, /1/1
., ", '{I?I
( I
I I
//11/9]
,
To:
/' I
(;7(/1#1'1'-
<..I- A ff (/(' ,
/1
/{il/
_70)""-
......-''''''':
~
City Hall
Phone 458.3244
Yelm Municipal Court
__ Phone 458.3242
Police Department
__ Phone 458.5701
../4 '(,; w-r-
J
~
,
!l
.1
1
I
1
j
J
1
/. I-'/I/d/O' /5 1
,I
/ /7/,9;;'7/~' i
./ F ~ '
i
/~/j'!, rA"-'/J
:)
1
1
ij
j
,
.-,>_ I
/ .1 t//.n'?
I ,7------
,
,See o/'-f'1 /(,.//("
I
/
St.I/ 7(> 7/~
/! tJ Ir-,"
/
F/I (..lb)(",1
-it, j
[
r
r
\
f
f
!
i
l
f
I'<"C-?/I/f'/ 1/ r ({II' "'/0
II (/ ,,5.-)/v )/.p )/1/
7i P /t/IJ j& 4/(7
f? ( -J /'11 S ,u;J)7
v-C;) (/ /,
/
) l' f,' .:" I P
(/'{,j-'5/t P1'4. Iv"
/-
) {. 0 f.d-z
I"
//9"" v of:} /l /
/
,;"'/I/.J ,? ,v M 1'1 (.1
j) C-) _)
;f~ j,-,J,' (?li/!I (I / //i;, /''lvC"''.f7,J'w/....'"
i
.~
.j
j
'j
I
j
1
~
__ ,.,.._ ~._..~.~,"~ _,,____ I
//'.J/ ,.--
~' /7
/tJ'
l
1
i
j
1
,I
"
.1
\
.j
,,/
:? ~~ -r;e
p' \-
r i 'j-.fl + ,j: I t I. j ! t
11 if
i l'lt ! '!-1' ;
i ! T
c,
T EJ-'<.IJ :=:,1\/1 I
I 1=llJ
~ II .4 ~ -4 4
F H ~n:: T T I U,
I r. T E ."~NI T Ilvl:G:
I T1 F. _~. T [ 111
[\:1 '1'10
r F\ -
-
F.E lilT
I I I ! I , I ! ! I I I , , I i I I I , I I , I
..
! t
1'1
It,
F E F' 1=1 F: T
, i
i '~ .1: t 1:1 t 't: Ii i
I I 1 1 r::- II r:1 II II F lVI
14
\-;. { [~I II
1 "
11 j j j I ! I I
"
j il I r I j j I
City of YellD
105 Yelm Avenue West
POBox 479
Y elm, Washington 98597
206-458-3244
FASCSIMILE TRANSMITTAL FORM
TO
COMPANY
ATTENTION
nFAX- NUMBER
FROM
COMPANY
INDIVIDUAL
,
I'
-FAX- NUMBER
7(;p/J /J)E/f OJ/4) /1114'90
/. , v
7JEItJI/.IM \~
(~j6 ) /'13 - 63 ?J-;
/)I~-,41 C If 1-1// L
A JVc"j r; !J /J1.6iJ
'( 206 ) 458-4348
'<l
NUMBER OF PAGES TO FOLLOW
IV
,
DATE
I/JS/tiJ
SUBJECT
\\TtiJ V ,t)
TIME SENT
6' tJ()
filS
C "/J1/J1~Vf; 5
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS /Us {v/l!/l./ 7RiJc ~ .JjJj } \SJ/I;J/~() - ;<',(J.J "
#' V'
/;- ~4f; 7J1/.fJiIAJ C P//JI/J - t./fJJ /' "lJ1}1- / fJJ / lJtlE- ~fJl J {!/EIiJIJ1EA1c5 - /IJI-
If your do not receive all copies or any copy is not legible,
please call (206) 458-3244 as soon as possible.
01 15 93 16 25 ~206 754 4462
.. \... -I7.'
T r Env Heal tll
141 001
T1-IURSTON COUNTY
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
FAX TRANSMrITAL SHEET
FROM'
fY\( 1ctld '~*V.-VVl VV\ ~ ~
jl ~ 0.(-- Ll v'Vt I [J 0 6\)\
~ \ if1I1 vJl1- OJ i:J 5'11
FAX PHONE ASPr-A~ S CONTACf PH01'-.TE: ~\~-3L-44
Jl)MiLL -Bhle v~ 6 Vl \ 01{ V ta Vl ~y
f --od
1\tlUK1DYLCmt.4t1tct- ? I Ctt1 vl i V1~ 'ocPlv+ VIlOJ t:
FAX PHONE, (~06) 754-4462 CONTAcr PHONE (206) 786--5554
TO
There are a total of
~
pages, mclUding thIS page.
COMMENTS:
IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL PAGES, CALL THE ABOVE CONTACT
PHONE NUMBER
III i':-I 1-1,1 c_"fM rll)
--~-t~ ~ -
..'!' _. 13 1/15/9 3 17 17
FAX 624 1901
SHAPIRO & ASSOC
l{f] 001
'"
"
FAX TRANSMITTAL
SHAPIRO &
ASSCIT:IATESi
FROM:
Lf-'IS-
I} OV"l Bif--e.r
~J) ~~~
clly 00 ve/~
\)(!a,hingwn Mutual Tll\\'el
Suice 1700
1201 Third Avenue
SC(lrtle
Washington 98101
Tel. 206/624 · 9190
F(lx: 206/624 · 1901
DATE:
~v"V'y I~, '~'1r
/ I
TIME:
TO:
FIRM:
PROJECT NAME:
~ R-lf-sY-B
'Sb.;tL<#5+ ~J""t Av,&4<!,/<-q-h~ €( s
FAX NO.:
PROJECT NO.:
, c::;;oo ~ D
TOTAL PAGES:
3
(INCLUDING
THIS COVER)
RE:
MESSAGE:
+b.s--J ~~y i." ~C;' J
SHOULD YOU HAVE PNY QUESTIONS/PROBLEMS WITH THIS TRANSMITIAL, PLEASE
CONTACT ROB OR MARY AT 206/624-9190
II 1 1 r - -J II ~j [- F- !','I 1 II 1
...
~
January 15, 1993
SHAPIRO &
ASScn:IATES~
Mr. Todd Stamm, Director of Community Development
City of Yelm
P.O. Box 479
Y elm, Washington 98597
Re: Southwest Yelm Annexation Draft EIS
Washington Muwal Tower
Suite 1700
1201 Third Avenue
Sea[tle
Washington 98101
Tel. 206/624. 9190
Fax. 206/624. 1901
Dear Mr. Stamm:
Shapiro and Associates, Inc. represents Venture Partners, one of the two largest ownerships
within the annexation area. The Draft EIS is a comprehensive and well-written docmnent covering
a non-project proposal. We support the proposed annexation and apprecIate the opportumty to
comment on the City's Draft EIS, The following are clarifications and questions we have
concerning the Draft
1) It should be noted that neither the No Action Alternative, the Compact Scenano nor the Village
Scenario meets Venture Partners' objectives. The ownership's objectives are predicated on
market demand and are to develop a mix of single-family and mulnple-family residences Wlth a
neighborhood commerclal center designed to serve the proJect's residents.
2) We senously doubt there is a market for the 110 acres of commercial and office uses
represented in the Village Scenario. This scenario raises the following questions: What is the
future land demand for professional service and government office uses, given the projected
population increases? Will there be a demand for approxunately 40 acres retail and 70 acres of
professional service and government uses in Yelm.? If there is a demand, would it not be most
appropriate to consohdate those uses near the highway to help support existing downtown
commercial uses and reduce automobile dependent trIps.
3) We question the conclusion on page 36 that the Village Scenano would mtroduce lower
quannties of pollutants into the groundwater compared to the proposal The Village Scenario
would have higher traffic levels associated with 70 additional acres of professional service and
government office uses and m turn would cause higher groundwater pollution levels than
would be expected by the proposal.
4) In response to Natural Resource Lands !Dltigating measures, Henry Dragt has receIVed.
complaints from nearby property owners about the smell from his dairy Further, potentIal
pollution from the farm and its impacts on groundwater quality decreases the farm's
desirability This is a common phenomenon and underscores the transitional nature of a dairy
in close proxmrity to urban uses.
5) We do not understand how the Village Scenario concept would generate only 130 more peak-
hour trips than the proposal when it would incorporate three times as much commerCIal and
office-designated land and only ten percent fewer residences.
6) The Draft EIS generally describes the Village Scenario as potentially having the same or less
impacts on public services than would occur under the proposal Although the Village
Scenario would have approximately ten percent fewer residences, resultIng in slightly fewer -
impacts on schools, we would expect that if the commeICIal and office land were built out, this
scenano would place a greater demand on police and fire seMces. We would also expect that
the employees on 70 more acres of professional SeIVlce and office developed land under the
i-11-11=-'::I_ 04 ,-_5F;i FII~
.., 11.
Village Scenario would require as much iecreational opportunity as the occupants of the 500
more residences that might be developed under the proposal.
7) The fiscal impact analysis includes the impacts of infrastructure improvements in terms of
costs, These improvements would be paid for by the developer and do not represent costs to
the public. In addition, revenue from permit fees and utility taxes would help offset service
costs.
A~ we appreciate the opportunity to comment on the Draft EIS and welcome any questions or
clarifications you may have.
Sincerely,
S~rRO~f;:i;i:ATES. INe.
~
SHAPIRO &
ASScrr~
iJ -!:::- j 114 ,-SF ~ FU3
. ..
January 15, 1993 Jp.,~ 7- Q \993, . I '
\\\~. ~V'\
'lJ~~~
Mr Todd Stamm, Director of Cotrlmumty~Development
City of Yelm J..---
P,Q. Box 479
Y elm, Washington 98597
Re: Southwest Yelm Annexation Draft EIS
SHAPIRO &
ASSarIATES~
Washington Mutual Tower
Suite 1700
1201 Third Avenue
Seattle
Washington 98101
Tel. 206/624. 9190
Fax 206/624. 1901
Dear Mr Stamm:
Shapiro and Associates, Inc. represents Venture Partners, one of the two largest ownerships
within the annexation area The Draft EIS is a comprehensive and well-written document covering
a non-project proposal. We support the proposed annexation and apprecIate the opportumty to
comment on the City's Draft EIS. The following are clarificatIons and questions we have
concerning the Draft.
1) It should be noted that neither the No ActIon Alternative, the Compact Scenario nor the Village
Scenario meets Venture Partners' objectives, The ownership's objectives are predicated on
market demand and are to develop a IlliX of smgle-family and multIple-family residences with a
neighborhood commercial center designed to serve the project's residents,
2) We seriously doubt there IS a market for the 110 acres of commercial and office uses
represented in the Village Scenario, This scenario raises the following questIons, What is the
future land demand for professional selVlce and government office uses, gIven the projected
population increases? Will there be a demand for apprOJumately 40 acres retail and 70 acres of
professional selVice and government uses in Yelm? If there is a demand, would it not be most
appropriate to consolidate those uses near the highway to help support eXIStIng downtown
commercial uses and reduce automobIle dependent trIpS,
3) We questIon the conclusion on page 36 that the Village Scenario would mtroduce lower
quantities of pollutants J1lto the groundwater compared to the proposal, The Village Scenario
would have higher traffic levels associated with 70 additional acres of professional selVice and
government office uses and m turn would cause hIgher groundwater pollutIon levels than
would be expected by the proposal,
4) In response to Natural Resource Lands rmtIgatIng measures, Henry Dragt has receIved
complaints from nearby property owners about the smell from hIS dairy Further, potentIal
pollution from the fann and its impacts on groundwater quality decreases the farm's
desirability Tlus is a common phenomenon and underscores the tranSItional nature of a dairy
in close proxlrmty to urban uses,
5) We do not understand how the Village Scenario concept would generate only 130 more peak-
hour trips than the proposal when it would incorporate three times as much commerCIal and
office-designated land and only ten percent fewer reSIdences.
6) The Draft EIS generally describes the Village Scenario as potentially having the same or less
impacts on publIc selVices than would occur under the proposal, Although the Village
Scenano would have approximately ten percent fewer residences, resulting in slightly fewer
impacts on schools, we would expect that if the commercial and office land were built out, this
scenano would place a greater demand on polIce and fire selVices, We would also expect that
the employees on 70 more acres of professional service and office developed land under the
Village Scenario would require as much recreational opportunity as the occupants of the 500
more residences that might be developed under the proposal,
7) The fiscal impact analysis includes the impacts of infrastructure improvements in terms of
costs, These improvements would be paid for by the developer and do not represent costs to
the public, In addition, revenue from permit fees and utility taxes would help offset service
costs.
Again, we appreciate the opportunity to comment on the Draft EIS and welcome any questions or
clarifications you may have.
Sincerely,
S~IRO qIATES, INC.
~
SHAPIRO &
ASSCO]A1ES~
o
,~ '
.illlllllllll////III// / / / / / /
Intercity r r a f)}
D
Slit
January IS, 1993
526 S. Pattison Street, Post Office Box 659
Olympia, Washington 98507-0659
(206) 786-8585
Todd Stamm
Director of Community Development
City of Yelm
POBox 479
Yelm, W A 98597
Dea:~~~
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Southwest Yelm Annexation Draft
Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS)
We appreciate that public transportation has been mentioned throughout the DEIS and
that the transportation section identifies pedestrian-oriented features and transit as
mitigation options We hope that these mitigations will be lmplemented regardless of
which alternative is ultimately settled upon.
We judged the alternatives on the followmg criteria.
. pedestrian-friendly orientation,
. connectivity of roads/ operational feasibility,
. residential density; and
. mixed-use development.
Alternative 3, the compact scenario, is the most attractive alternative to Intercity
Transit. This alternative, as conceptually designed appears to be the most pedestrian-
friendly The bulk of the residences will be within 1/4 mile of the major corridor and
the commercial areas, increasing the likelihood that people will walk or bike to the
commercial areas and will access transit for travel either within or out of the
developments, Alternative 3 also provides the most efficient through access for transit
vehicles. Service to this area would likely involve vehicles running northeast on 507
and up through the annexation area's main corridor, then out of the northeast section
in to the City
The residential density within this scenario also makes it more likely to support
effective transit service than the other alternatives. While it does include limited
mixed-use development, our hope is that this can be increased, to provide more on-site
employment opportunities.
/lJ
.t1
"
January 15, 1993
Page 2
Our observations and comments regarding the other alternatives are listed below:
Alternative 1 (No Action) - If development is to occur in this area, LT prefers a higher
level of density than the one dwelling unit per five acres which development under this
scenario would allow
Alternative 2 (Proponents Scenario) - This alternative is less attractive for several
reasons, Much of the housing will be located over 1 14 mile from the corridor
Generally speaking, people will not walk further than 1 14 mile to access bus service.
Operationally, this scenario poses problems for transit because of the looping roads,
potential dead-end streets, and other barriers to road connectivity It should be noted
that this type of development is inconsistent with the Connectivity Policy called out in
the 1992 Yelm Comprehensive Transportation Plan.
Alternative 4 (Village Scenario) - While Intercity Transit does promote mixed-use
development, we have the same concerns with this alternative as listed in Alternative 2.
While this alternative offers more mixed-use development, it also lowers the residential
densities. It should be possible to maintain higher densities in some areas of the
development. It would also be helpful to know what levels of employment density are
anticipated with this alternative.
Thank you again for the opportunity to provide input. Please keep us apprised of the
progress of this proposal. If the annexation takes place, we would be very interested in
participating in future parcel- or project-specific planmng efforts.
Sincerely,
ClarvLLl 0, .fktv~
;lie D. Haveri
Planner I Policy Analyst
copy' Rand Riness, Director of Planning
a\..._.._;__~___._~.
SINCE 1852
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
George L. Barner, Jr
District One
Diane Oberquell
District Two
93 Linda Medcalf
JAN 2 0 \9 District Three
.-----J './ "
: C_[.-,~~~,-----_~ANNING DEPARTMENT
THURsmN COUNTY
_...-~
-
Harold Robertson, AICP
Planning Director
January 15, 1993
Mr Todd Stamm, City Planner
City of Yelm
PO Box 479
Yelm, W A 98597
SUBJECT Southwest Yelm AnnexatIOn Draft EnvlIonment Impact Statement
Dear Mr Stamm.
We have revIewed the Draft EnvIronmental Impact Statement for the proposed
Southwest Yelm AnnexatIOn and offer the followmg comments for your conSIderatIOn.
NATURAL ENVIRONMENT
Groundwater Tlus sectIOn does not specifically address the Impacts of golf course
development on water qualIty Table 18 mdIcates that Alternatives 2 through 4 would
devote 276 acres to golf courses The environmental Impacts of thIS use, partIcularly
the potential effects of fertilIzers, herbIcIdes, and pestIcides on the groundwater
proposed to be used as a public water source, should be addressed. If the development
project proceeds, we suggest that you reqUIre a groun<.iwater HiOwtoring and integrated
pest management for the golf course area.
Wetlands (Section B 1 Water)
AddItlonal work IS needed in the wetlands sectIOn The report IS confusing and the
analysIs IS not objective Confusion could be reduced by overlaying the delineated
wetlands on the 3 dIfferent scenarios EIS' are supposed to be wntten for the
jUnSdIctIOn as an objectIve analysIs of the probable adverse envIronmental Impacts of
a proposal. Statements made in the wetland analysIs mdIcate that the City is assuming
that the filling of wetlands IS not avoidable Filling wetlands is aVOIdable and should
be the first mItIgatIOn tactIc Adequate protective buffers should also be proposed. On
2000 Lakeridge Drive SW, Olympia, Washington 98502-6045 (206) 786-5554/ FAX (206) 754-4413
(1)
Recycled Paper
Mr Stamm
January 15, 1993
Page 2
page 32, a large forested wetland is mentioned (identIfied erroneously as #16), and
described as needing a 100 foot buffer. If Yelm's CritIcal Areas Ordinance IS similar
to the Ecology Model Ordinance, then 100 feet is not an appropriate buffer width for
thIS type of wetland, There is also no other mention of appropnate buffenng for any
of the other 19 wetlands delineated. We have several other comments regardmg the
wetland section and they include the followmg
Figure 10 The "off-site wetland" noted near SR 507 appears to be
partially on-site
Pg. 32, first paragraph, Appears that you intend to use the wetlands as
pollutant filters Untreated stormwater should not be dIrected to natural
wetlands
Pg, 32, 6th paragraph How will wetlands be Impacted?
Pg, 34, last paragraph. It is also difficult to understand how the wetland
losses were calculated at less than one acre smce the analysIs dId not seem
that specific
Energy All three development alternatives (2-4) call for the relocation of the Centralia
hIgh-voltage transmissIOn line bisecting Section 27 Since Alternative 2 and 4 show
residential development adjacent to the transmissIOn lines, the Issue of electromagnetIc
radIatIOn should be addressed
BUILT ENVIRONMENT
PopulatIOn Growth/Housing Demand. The Draft EIS estimates for population growth
and housing demand in the Yelm area are considerably lngher than Thurston RegIOnal
Planmng Council's (TRPC) estimates
Considering thIS large dIfference, the methodology and assumptions for the population,
housing and sewer service demands should be reevaluated to ensure that they provide
a reasonable baSIS for assumptIOns supportmg the development alternatIves descnbed
III the Draft EIS and for related planmng m the area.
Natural Resource Lands All of the development proposals would result III the
urbanization of currently rural lands that support agriculture and forestry If urban
development proceeds, the compact scenano, Alternative 3 appears to be most
compatIble with the resource uses on adjommg properties,
Mr Stamm
January 15, 1993
Page 3
Transportation. This section should address the impact of traffic generated by the
proposed alternatives on county roads and state highways beyond the immedIate area,
These include the Yelm Highway, Reservation Road, Rainier Road, Old Highway 99,
SR 507 and SR 510 Impacts on roadway capacity and any associated Improvements
should be identified and discussed, In addition, we encourage you to coordinate with
Fort LewIs regardmg any antIcipated openmgs of roads withm the project vIcmity
Schools. It IS likely that any of the development alternatives will generate more
students than contemplated in the EIS We suggest that the applicant work with the
Yelm School District to prepare an updated school demand forecast, consIdering the
lIkely housing mIX, demographIcs and eXIstmg school capacIty, and alter the amount of
land devoted to school uses in the alternatives accordingly,
In addition, if the project proceeds, we suggest that consideration be gIVen to sittmg
schools in close proxImIty to residentIal areas to enable access by foot and bicycles, to
reduce traffic and busing, and to foster a greater sense of community
Wastewater FacihtIes, The Draft EIS indIcates that in order to serve the entrre proposed
development a new NPDES permit (and approval from Centraha Power) would be
needed to enable an increased sewage outfall to the Nisqually RIVer A determinatIOn
should be made as to whether or not tills is possible or likely and generally what the
environmental impacts would be, If a permit for more outfall could be obtained, a
determmation should be made as to whether or not the system can be cost-effectively
redesigned to accommodate the projected sewage flow from the proposed annexatIOn
(and the remainder of the interim growth area) wIthin the limits estabhshed by the
existing permits. Also, what would be the alternatIve density of the annexation area If
sewer was not aVailable?
GENERAL COMMENTS
There IS no discussIOn regarding hIstoric resources.
AlternatIve 3 seems to have the least environmental impacts and appears to be the most
cost-effective to serve of the development alternatives bemg consIdered. Therefore, if
the city eventually annexes thIS area, we urge the CIty to reqUIre thIS type of
development pattern.
Mr Stamm
January 15, 1993
Page 4
Thank you for considering our comments
Sincerely,
~~~
Paula Ehlers, Senior Planner
37:lgd
cc Thurston County Board of CommIssioners
Tom FitzsImmons, CAO
City of Yelm Planning CommIssion
City of Yelm City Council
..
i. _::-~.- r-:"" c<- "::-r.-=.:.;- ~ r r
q ;!::',C." "- "
Il~, ~G:::,] f "
'. t~...:k -.... ~.. '.....
i I Vi r--'c~'~-~. - . ..
'I~\l" 5. !!lid Nlsqually Indian T!lbe
~.I!' . _~ _ 1~~20 She-Nah-Num DrIve S.E.
~A ,I Olympia, Washington 98503
Phone: (206) 456-5221
January 15, 1993
Yelm Planning Commission
City of Yelm
105 Yelm Avenue West
Yelm, Washington 98597
RE: Southwest Yelm Annexation
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Dear Commission Members,
The Nisqually Indian Tribe offers the following comments on
the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for the proposed
Southwest Yelm Annexation:
Alternatives - The alternatives discussed are so limited that
the DEIS is practically useless as a planning document for the City
of Yelm. other than the No Action alternative, all the
alternatives considered serve the interest of the annexation
proponents. For the Final EIS, Yelm should require analysis of a
much wider range of alternatives.
First, the EIS and the Yelm Planning commission should
consider as an alternate annexation of only a portion of the
Southwest area. The EIS should evaluate the impacts of annexing
only the lands in sections 24 and 25, leaving sections 23, 26, and
27 under Thurston County jurisdiction. A second alternative that
should be evaluated would add section 23 to the annexed area. Yelm
is not limited to only the annexation area proposed by the
annexation proponents and, in fact, should evaluate alternatives
independently.
Second, the Final EIS should consider alternatives with a
substantially reduced number of residential units. The EIS, and
the Planning Commission, should consider an alternative of one
residential unit per two acres. This would be a 250% increase in
the number of residential units presently authorized, but would
reduce the inevitable impacts of the high number of residential
units proposed in all the alternatives presently under
consideration.
As the Draft EIS states, this is a nonproject planning EIS and
does not have to examine every conceivable alternative.
Southwest Yelm Annexation EIS
January 15, 1993
Page 2
Nevertheless, to be legally sufficient, not to mention to be of use
to the citizens and elected officials of Yelm, the EIS must
evaluate real alternatives. The alternatives in the DEIS appear to
be contrived to avoid evaluation of alternatives of substance.
Finally, the No Action alternative is characterized in a
misleading manner. No Action does not require that the land remain
under Thurston County zoning and regulation. Yelm could annex some
or all of the Southwest area but is not obliged to change the
existing zoning of one unit per five acres; you could decide to
annex and retain the current zoning. The EIS should acknowledge
this alternative and the Planning Commission should evaluate more
fully its merits.
Wastewater - For the Nisqually Tribe, the primary impact of
the annexation and development proposed in the DEIS is generation
and disposal of wastewater. The DEIS states that the annexed area
will produce 1.26 million gallons/day and that discharge of this
wastewater will be into the Nisqually River. This is over a 400%
increase in the discharge proposed by the current Yelm wastewater
plan.
The Yelm Planning Commission should know that any increase
above the proposed 300,000 gallons/day proposed by the wastewater
plan is not acceptable to the Nisqually Tribe. The Tribe, as a
matter of federal law, has the right to fish unobstructed in the
Nisqually River and to have its homeland and reservation, including
its waters, free of pollution. We cannot allow Yelm to use the
Nisqually River, our reservation and homeland, for its wastewater
disposal. Because Yelm faced a serious threat to its drinking
water, the Tribe in 1990 agreed not to oppose Yelm's proposal to
develop a wastewater treatment facility for the town with discharge
to the river limited to a maximum of 300,000 gallons/day. Yelm
should proceed with an annexation plan only if it will not increase
discharge to the river above this 300,000 gallons/day cap.
The Final EIS should include housing density alternatives
and/or wastewater disposal alternatives that will not require any
increased discharge to the Nisqually River.
General Comments A dramatic impact of the proposed
annexation and vi tal element of the annexation decision is not
discussed in the DEIS, but should be an important part of the Yelm
Planning Commission's decision. This element is the quality of
life and image of the Town of Yelm. The annexation proposed to
increase the number will residences in Yelm from about 500 to 5,500
in ten years. All these new houses will be expensive houses (low-
cost housing is not generally built next to golf courses).
Southwest Yelm Annexation EIS
January 15, 1993
Page 3
If the annexation goes through as proposed, in ten years it is
likely that the majority of Yelm's population will reside in the
Southwest area. The current citizens of Yelm will become a
minority in their own community, to be dominated by the relatively
wealthy new citizens of the Southwest area. Yelm has been the
Nisqually Tribe's neighbor for generations; we have gone to the
Yelm schools and have life-long friends in Yelm. We are concerned
that Yelm will no longer be the friendly small town where one can
recognize just about everyone; long-term residents may not even
feel welcome in their own town.
Further, the substantial increase in demand for services will
bring an increase in tax rates and service fees. Some of the
oldest of Yelm's citizens likely will be forced to sell their homes
and property. As a matter of policy, the Yelm Planning commission
should require that the Final EIS evaluate and document the likely
and possible social and economic impacts of the annexation proposal
on the current citizens of Yelm. These impacts should be a major
element of the Commission's deliberations.
The Yelm Planning Commission, and the City of Yelm, have a
choice. It is not inevitable that Yelm must grow rapidly. The
Growth Management Act allows a community to choose and plan for a
modest pace of growth. You do not have to be a "captive" of the
developer's proposal or the limited alternatives for Southwest area
annexation. You can and must evaluate additional alternatives and
include as a viable option saying, "No!" to rapid urbanization.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the DEIS. Your
decision on this annexation proposal will in large part determine
the future quality of life of the Yelm area. We urge you to demand
a full and complete discussion in the Final EIS of a wide range of
alternatives; only in this way will you be able to make an
adequately informed decision on the proposed Southwest annexation.
Sincerely,
JL/H
Dorian S. Sanchez
Tribal Chairman
~
Washingfl:@!l'il $fl:ai.1:e
DepCllIl''\1:mel!'\'l't @f "iJ'rialll'il$!p>@[[\tcal'ltD@U\)
!Duane lBerenllsoD'll
Secretary of Transportation
January 14, 1993
lDisllricll 3
Office of District Administrator
5720 Capitol Boulevard
POBox 47440
Olympia, WA 98504-7440
Todd Stamm
City of Yelm
Planning and Building Dept.
POBox 479
Yelm, WA 98597
JAN I 5 1993 I,
'\ 1'\)"
\ \ : ____IV \.
l~----~- ---1
....,r-::.~-...,.,""'-~
Southwest Y elm Annexation
SR 510, MP 15 5 Vicinity
E. C File No 93000- T
DEIS
Dear Mr Stamm
We have received and reviewed the above proposal and have the following comments
It is noted that the proposed Southwest Yelm Annexation as submitted is 'non-project'
in nature Although the annexation in itself will not create any additional impacts to the
transportation system, the intent is to increase population densities to a level greater than
the existmg transportation infrastructure can accommodate
The DEIS as submitted does not address the impacts, as far as capacity or level of
service on SR 510 and SR 507 outside Yelm' s UGA. The annexation and subsequent
development of this proposal will have a significant adverse impact on the entire length
of SR 510 and SR 507 from Old 99 in Tenino (MP 13 64) to the Fort Lewis Access
Rd.(MP 39 04) The traffic portion of the EIS should be expanded to incorporate those
sections, identifying impacts and the appropnate mitigations The Department requests
an opportunity to review and comment upon the revisions
The proposed development of tlns annexation relies heavily on the improvements
outlined in Yelm' s Comprehensive Transportation Plan that are yet to be funded.
Should thIS EIS be used or referenced, for the actual development of this annexatIOn,
the Department requests that the construction of those improvements be m place
concurrent with the demand generated by the proposal. No development shall be
allowed wIthout first securing full funding for the necessary roadway mitigations
Thank you for the opportunity to review the above proposal. If there are any questions
regarding our comments, please contact Fred Tharp at (206)357-2667
Sincerely,
PAULA J HAMMOND P E.
~ift7fjJl;in~r
By' PASCO BAKOTICH, ill, P E.
Asst. Trans Planmng Engmeer
District 3
PJCH / PB fot
cc N Williams
Bob Hazlett / S Chamberlain & Associates / P O.Box 3485 / Lacey, W A 98503-0485
File 93000- T
STATE OF WASHINGTON
DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY
Mail Stop PV-l1 0 Olympia, Washington 98504-8711 0 (206) 459-6000
January 13, 1993
--."-'-~",
___~~ ,~i
..::::~;-;-\--;;'r;:..::~\::)--' .. , -; ,\ \
\ f' ""' ~ r- \._..r-
. \<. -
\
.J~'N \ 5 \99'2>
Mr Todd Stamm
City of Ye1m
PO Box 479
Yelm WA 98597
--' ,--
-~. ---------
J
Dear Mr Stamm
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the draft environmental impact
statement (DEIS) for the Southwest Yelm Annexation proposed by Thurston
Highlands Associates We reviewed the DEIS and have the following comments
Any ground water withdrawals in excess of 5,000 gallons per day or for the
irrigation of more than one-half acre of lawn or noncommercial garden will
require a water right permit from Ecology
The Department of Ecology encourages the development of public water supply
systems, whether publicly or privately owned, to provide water to regional
areas and developments
If you have any questions, please call Ms Jill Van Hulle with the Water
Resources Program at (206) 586-5560
Sincerely,
7Jz,tluL~sJ4:L
M Vernice Santee
Environmental Review Section
MVS
92 -7742
cc Jill Van Hu11e, SWRO
Sarah Barrie, SWRO
~3
@
IvIary LOll ClemerlS
15030 Longrpjre St. ~E
Yelm, WA 96597
[r~ f~'0-i~:~ ~-;--~.-.
! I i\ , '"'_I ~J -.. .-, ...
l I ! I r'-~--""~~ ..-.~. ......
l~tl\~\\.~.1 JAW I 5 Hm ! \ I I
! " ~. [) ,
I ,jL J8Ji
L 1
Ja;nuacy 13, 1993
Yelm. Planniilg COl'J'l.liilision
RE SOllth\Yest Yelm Annexation Proposal
Deer Plai.uli:ng Commission.
I have concerns regarding tile Impa.ct Sta~ment's section on Police Pro~ction for tr.le
proposed a.rlIJ.exed !lree.. If it rID" requ.ires five. ..rehicles !1m fi".re+ officers to provid.e. prc1tection for
740 acres and 1365 people, I fail to understarl.d how 'liTe could expect one more vehil;le and tyro more
officers to adeq lJ.at.ely provide protection for 2740 acres arLd 13,865 people (5000 tWts x 2 5 persorlS
per unit + existing population) I realize the popu1a.tion increase would not occur imrnediately J but
certainly ti.l.e geographic a..rea 1lfCI1Jld incre~e irfJIT.l.ediately upon aw.exation, the:re'by causing tiLe
apparent rLeed for an increa.se of more than one police car 1:0 pa.trol ai1nexed areas
T~.b1e 19 - E~tirnated P1..\blic Selvice Cost! J page 126.1 does not !I.deq ue.tely addre,s t3m either
The Cost by Population table uses a 10 4% llLCree.se figure I "lllhictl may accurately reflect the Yelm
/1..rea. Capt1.1:re r~.te of tjre CCI1JI!1:y projectiorl. Ho~.,e.'er I does it accurately reflect tj'I..e er.ttJ.&l increase
within tj!e Yebn City Lirruts? Iu 1994 alolle J 247 new housing Ill1its will sllpposedly be built and
1l.1ith arl al.~rage occupa.ncy of 2 5 persons/mdt, this ,rolJId result in !ilL increase of approxima.tely 617
people Tl".ds figure represents a 54% irLCrea.se in population. If the cost figures are com.p11ted on 8.
cost per person basis then ti.J.e projected dollar arp.DlJILfslisted are SUbSf.arltiaJly ina.dequ.8.te
I I:i$K )IOu 10 plea.se give further considexation to the impact this annexation -vrould ha'.,re on the
safety of Yelm residents and to be sure that accurate planrring in t.bis area is addressed I believe ft.t.e
sarne consideration needs to be given to the planrdng for Fire Protection a.l3o
TILllI.nk YCI11 for }lCllJI attentic(!L.
Sir!f'prel"t'
;?h' ~ ~
Mary Lou Clemens
""'
Directors
BOB D COLPHENEE
~uperintendent
KENNETH HART
KENNETH MARTIN
DON MARQ!JI~
BETH WRICU:(\)WORTlI
NATE TURNER
i&atl1ltr..~~qIII'116itirt
n'_'.
PO Box9S<
Rainier W A 98576
RAMONA CARNER
Administrative &crelary
January 13, 1993
Ir ~-
fr\\ U' (C; -~-
,'.' '..:: """ r;:::l \" n r;:=.1 ,
11 D' ~'S: L~-:::' D .\ " !~? ,I~l
II , I~"--~<< < - __.J 1 'I
i I -- ~I' I
f '(' ~ !
:I"f\\,; JAN r 4191) Iii,:
;U LiL lUJ
L" ,,, .~.._,.~..~.~..,~~ .__J
Telephone '206-446.'2'207
Planning Commission
City of Yelm
POBox 479
Yelm, WA 98597
RE. Southwest Yelm Annexation
Dear Members of the Planning Commission
On behalf of the Rainier School District I attended the January 4, 1993 public hearing regarding the
preliminary Environmental Impact Statement for the potential annexation Attached is a copy of the
prepared statement read at the hearing Our attendance and comments were brought forth because
Section 27 of the potential annexation lies within the boundaries of the Rainier School District.
For the record we present these further remarks.
1 Rainier School District, to date, has not been contacted by the property developers regarding
district interests. The property developers have contacted the Yelm School District officials
regarding the property within the Rainier School District property The Yelm School District
officials have been very forthright in communications with Rainier School District officials and it
is appreciated
2. The E!S developers requested a written ccrrespondence piiOi to the EIS Rough Diaft. The EIS
does not reflect Rainier School District interests as expressed in the correspondence
3 During the January 4, 1993 meeting a representative of the property developers commented
that it appeared to be "an accident" that Section 27 was not originally in the Yelm School
District. We suggest this is speculation and likely a history of development of district lines may
suggest otherwise Further, the comment may suggest the developers desire for a school district
changeof the property
4 A minimum of fifteen (15) acres must be set aside in Section 27 as a future elementary school
site Future potential growth would require an elementary school and this would be an ideal
neighborhood school.
It is not the Rainier School Districts interest to support or oppose the annexation of the property by the
City of Yelm However, it is our paramount interest to support the interests of the Rainier School
District. This interest includes involvement and protection for all properties within its legal boundaries.
On behalf of the Board of Directors these comments are given by
~-/ '-lf~' <-
, AY./.?-: ~;t~.
I Bo D G51phene ,Superintendent
BDG:lm
attach
cc Craig Hanson, Attorney
Cpundl M('mb<nhip'
1'1\;1<;>: <,'v~U11 y
'lhurstOll County
Lcwb <-County
~;liIk of \""I>~hlll!;I,,',
P.u\r..s bfrd ReLrCaliUL\ CUJH'
ml;'RI,,"
D"I't. of NMuI'fil ){"':;Q\~n:<~;
Dc pi of Agl'lculllUl'
I )c>pt 01 l.l'lllt'&y
DI~pL of fi~l\('rl(>~
Dep!. of Wildlife
~;l~rNMY of Stale
lJ W f',,~l< E, pCdll\"lIt,,1
r:orl'~l
tl.5. Army, r~,rl Lcwi~
Ni~qlJilJl}' Indian TTlbc
Nis'lltull)' Nillloni11 Wi)dlik
l<dugc
",fIord Pinchol Ni\\IoDi\l
FOlC91
Mount 1\,;lill('t N,.,ionnl ]-'", K
'!'acoma lily Ugh'
T~)\\'ll of )'llIH
Town of E..l1ollv;lh,
City of n"y
Citizens Ady;s..ry COIlIlI1JlIl-.::
ThIel' CHi""" HL'llll.>o,!>
01 1133
16 11
SHOPELR~lDS
002
Nisqually River Council
P.O. Box 107G
Yelrn, Washington 98597
,J::t.uuary 11 1993
Todd Stamm
City Planner
City ofYelm
POBox 479
Yehn. WA 98597
Dear Mr. Stanun:
The Nlsqually }{tver Council respectfully requests t.hat the
City of Yelm grant the Council a two-week extension for
C01l1ment on the Southwest Yelm Annexation DEIS from
January 15th until.January 29Ul.
The Councll has not determined wheUlcr 01- not it. wishes
to comment. an~ will do so at its next me~Ung on Jal1ualY
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 St.aff COO1-dinator, Steve
Craig. at 459-6780 Thank you for your attenUon
Sincerely.
{) V)jvLV- O~(OJJ(
Diane Obenp.1cll
Chairman
DO pem
!II II
11'1 1 !-I}.i\'l
. F 1'1
a '~
..
cuY<r SMITCi-t
Director
STATE OF WASHINGTON
DEPARTMENT OF WILDLIFE
i
905 E. Heron <\berdeen. WA 98520
Tel (206) 533-9335
.] an Uc1.I"'y B, 199:;
f--
jG\\~. [2 ~.:! ;:----
II . Le::.. \l~ Ir
. 1 - .... ""'!
! qr"-- q
I/t//i
'!~L a 121993 ..
- ~---"""~~--_.",,-'"
I'll"'.. Todd St':-:\lTliil
Ci ty Flannel'.
City' elf '{elm
P.. 0.. Bo.( .q. 79
Yf2lm, I,\!A 9B597
'-
--0__,......_--
j
Re: Draft Environmental Impact Statement--Southwest
YE! 1 m ?inne~.(a tion
Section 19, Township 17N, Range u2E and
Sections 23, 24, 26 and 27, Township l7N, Range OlE
ThL\F'ston Cc.lunty
Deal'" l"fr.. Stamm:
The Washington State Department of Wildlife (WOW) appreciates the
opportunity to review and comment on the above-referenced Draft
Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) on the annexation of
~",.ppr.o;d.m<",.tely ::;':,llUO ac!'-es into tt'H-:? City of '{elm with ~3. pnJposE?d
development dwelling density of 5..1 units per acre with a maHimum
of ;5,000 dE?v~"loped units.. Ai'teF' n?view.ing the DEIS and the
Technical Appendices, our agency has the following comments and
concel'-ns ..
As you ~now, the WOW is mandated to "protect, preserve and
pel"petuate" Washington's wildlife!, both <;lame and non--game
species.. With the -growing concern of Washington residents,
counties and cities to protect their wildlife and to prevent
l,?;:tirpation and/ol'" possible list.irH] ot wildli'fe ~:;pE~cies, it. is
essent.ial that wildlife issues be adequately addressed.. This
DEIS does not sufficiently address wildlife concerns, e.g..
prot.ection for priorit.y habitats and species, wildlife corridors,
proper protection for wet.lands and wetland-dependent species,
protect.ion of nest trees (as required by RCW 77.16..120), and
mi.t:i..gCl.tion.. The statement on \.-\lildlifE' on page 4:;;': that: "I"lost of
the wildlife and vegetation currently occupying undeveloped land
would be displaced or destroyed when development occurs", shows a
lac~ of concern for Washingt.on's wildlife. Since this annelation
would provide for the increase in housing denslty from the
current one house per five acre designation by Thurston County,
to 5..1 units per acre and the large area (2,OUO acres) which will
be affected, our agency has the following concerns.
~3
!..'It-.. T od d S i- amm
t~' al;] E? :2
December 8, 199~
In the preceding paragraph, I have referenced priority habitats
and species. WOW has developed a Priority Habitats and Species
(PHS) program to identify the most important wildlife habitats
and wildlife species in order to assist counties, cl~les,
developers and others to take a proactive approach to protection
of fish and wildlife. By taking a proactive approach as opposed
to a reactive approach, this will help prevent future wildlife
losses and it will be much less costly to plan now rather than
recovering losses once they occur. Thurston County is one of
the leading counties in protecting our natural resources through
their Critical Areas ordinance.
The DEIS does not address protection for the priority species
whic h al'''e found in the proposed c:!nne::ation 2l.F'ea. The 1'011 owin(;;)
is a list of priority species which were listed in the DEIS but
were not acknowledged as priority species.
1. Pileated woodpecker (Dryacopus pileatus)(Also a State
Candidate species)
.,
..:.. p
Western Bluebird (Siali. mexic.na) (State Candidate and
Federal Sensitive species)
...
...1 :I
Red-tailed Hawk (Buteo jam.icensis)
4. Wood Ducks (~ix spans.)
5. Columbian Blac~.-.tailed deel~ (Odoco~leus hemionus
cO.ll...unbianus)
6. Gre21.t Blue I-Iel'''on (~I'-de<'3. herod.las). ThE~I~e is a her-em
rookery located in Section ~O, Township 17N, Fange u2E,
and this area, with its multiple wetlands and Thompson
Creek, provide the herons with food, water, alternate
nesting sites, roosting and nursery areas.
7. Western Gray Squirrel (Sciurus griseus). This is also
a State Candidate species. Although there were no
sightings in the proposed area, there are known squirrel
sightings in nearby areas. Therefore, the oak-conifer
.....
!'1r". Todd Sta.mm
Page ;:;
December 8, 199~
habitat should be protected as a potential dispersal area
for the Western Gray Squirrel.
8. EH. (Cervu~.;:; t.'?l.:<phu~;) (Pos!sible use as a migr'ation ,--clute).
This proposed area has diverse habitat types including forested,
open fields (which are important feeding areas for raptors),
stream corridor and varying types of wetlands. Numerous
wintering waterfowl species utilize the open water wetlands for
feeding and resting habitat. In addition, the wetlands and their
upland buffers are used to meet the life needs of numerous
wildlife species who reside in the local area.
Wi th the annE~;:aticm and heavy den~:;i ty c:le....'e I opmen t pI .::\nned for" t!,e
area, these diverse habitats will be fragmented, destroyed and/or
rendered unusable by area wildlife resulting in severely reduced
populations and/or local population die-offs, an increase in
animal damage by displaced wildlife, decreased recreational value
(e.g. wildlife viewing, hunting, etc.).
Wildlife is the property of the State and its citizens and
therefore it is important to properly address protection and
mitigation for fish, wildlife and their habitats.
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on this
proposed annexation.
Bincel--e I y,
~c;) ~J
DEBBIE D. CARNEVALI
Habitat Biologist
cc: Dave Gufler, WDW
Conn if:'? I tl-?n, WDIAJ
Paula Ehlers, Thurston Co. Planning
-'
. . ....,
j,p:
Direclors
BOB 0 COW"ENEE
~uperinlendent
KENNETtll1ART
KENNETH MARTIN
DON MARQ!Jkl)
I~ET" WRIGliEtl)WORTII
NATE TURNER
., ..'''''''''' , ""'-'-"',,-,.":..; "
lUtiUttf,&t"'yftnr'llnfricf
POBox
Rainier W A 98576
RAMONA CARNEQ
Administrative &crelary
Telephone 206-446-2207
January 4, 1993
Planning Commission
City of Yelm
POBox 479
Yelm, WA 98597
RE. Southwest Yelm Annexation
Dear Members of the Planning Commission
As you are aware, a portion of the Southwest Yelm Annexation Site is located within the boundaries of
the Rainier School District No 307 Due to that fact and the fact that any development near the Rainier
School District will impact the District, on behalf of the Rainier School District, I wish to communicate to
you concerns about the proposed annexation
First, I believe the Planning Commission must give serious consideration to RCW 28A.315.250, the statute
which addresses municipal and school district boundaries. Although that statute would not win an award
for clarity, it does establish the basic legislative mandate that each incorporated city or town is to be
comprised in a single school district. The exceptions to that mandate that are stated in the statute are
not applicable to the annexation under your consideration Hence, the annexation under consideration
may well not be legally possible without invoking the jurisdiction of the State Board of Education as
described in RCW Chapter 28A.315
Secondly, the Rainier School District requests the City of Yelm to immediately and specifically declare if
their intent is to change the property in question to the Yelm School District. The Environmental Impact
Statement may suggest this to be the intent.
If the jurisdiction of the State Board of Education is properly sought, I anticipate that the Rainier School
District would find it in its best interest to advocate that the property subject to the proposed annexation
remain in the Rainier School District. The potential concurrent jurisdiction of the State Board of
Education and other municipalities will make the issues surrounding the proposed annexation even more
complicated That brings me to another concern of the Rainier School District.
We believe that a number of the issues related to the proposed annexation could have been more refined
or eliminated had planning authorities been more cognizant of the fact that the Rainier School District
would be significantly impacted by the proposed annexation The mitigating measures cited in the Draft
Environment Impact Statement are illusory if they are not impacted The stated mitigating measures
were generated with little, if any, direct discussion with representatives of the Rainier School District.
.,;. .J \l
The Rainier School District had made request of the City Manager of Yelm to be fully informed of all
progress related to the annexation
Further, the district requests that consultants to the city and/or agents of the developers of the
property, keep the district fully informed of all their actions and recommendations related to the
annexation
Please be on notice that the Rainier School District No 307 is very concerned about the impact on it of
the proposed Southwest Yelm Annexation The District seeks your assurance that its interests will be
conscientiously considered and protected as the proposed annexation is further considered State law
provides a very deliberate process when changes in school district boundaries are being considered The
legislature has recognized the need for such deliberative processes. City Planners must be equally
deliberative and conscientious when their actions involve the potential need for changes in school district
boundaries.
I trust that the City of Yelm's Planning Commission recognizes that the interests of the Rainier School
District must be taken into serious consideration if any phase of the proposed annexation is to go
forward At this point, the exact interests of the District are difficult to determine because changes in
school district boundaries have yet to be formally advocated Once the intentions of the advocates are
known regarding changes in school boundaries, the interests of the Rainier School District will be better
subject to identification.
Very truly yours,
Bob D Golphenee
Superintendent
BDG:lm
cc Attorney Craig Hanson
(\,
v
o
BARBARJI_ GOO DIN G
Director
DEe 2 9 1992
STATE OF WASHINGTON
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
OFFICE OF ARCHAEOLOGY AND HISTORIC PRESERVATION
111 21st Avenue S.W .. PO Box 43843 .. Olympia, Washington 98504-8343 .. (206) 753-4011 .. SCAN 234-4011
December 28, 1992
Mr. Todd stamm, city Planner
city of Yelm
105 Yelm Avenue West
Post Office Box 479
Yelm, WA 98597
Log: 121892-18-TN
Re: Southwest Yelm Annexation, DEIS
Dear Mr. Stamm:
The Washington state Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (OAHP)
is in receipt of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for the
Southwest Yelm Annexation action. From the project description, I
understand that this proposal entails the annexation of 2,000 acres to the
city of Yelm, for eventual development for residential, recreational, and
commercial uses. Location of the annexation is southwest of the present
city limits.
In response, OAHP recommends that the city of Yelm consider the impact of
the annexation upon the area's cultural resources including historic and
archaeological properties. This process should include the identification,
evaluation, and protection of such properties. Already, the city of Yelm
and Thurston County have conducted surveys for historic properties in the
Yelm area. To supplement this data, we recommend a survey be conducted to
identify archaeological properties within the proposed annexation.
Following this identification process, identified cultural resources should
be evaluated for significance. Those found to be significant should be
protected through various incentives and planning mechanisms. We recommend
these steps be coordinated with the Yelm Historic Preservation Commission,
the Thurston County Historical Commission, and OAHP. Also, the final
environmental impact statement should acknowledge the potential for
historic and archaeological resources within the annexation and identify
steps to address these issues.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this annexation. Should you
have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (206) 753-9116.
S ifiere?J Jki
G~{rf A. :';fFi'iith
comp\jhensive Planning Specialist
GAG:lms
cc: Shelly Badger
~3
F
o
o
National Food Corporation
I j/..r- , ,
.J /~
! 1992
206 546 6533 and 523-4900
Fax 206 542-0202
PO Box 33745
16740 Aurora Avenue North
Seattle, Washington 98133
.......,
December 17, 1992
Yelm Planning Commission
P.O. Box 479
Yelm, WA 98597
Re: Southwest Yelm Annexation
Ladies & Gentlemen:
We have received your Notice of Public Hearing regarding the
proposed annexation of 2,000 acres Southwest of the city and wish
to offer our written comment and opposition to the proposal.
This company operates a 300,000 bird egg layer farm which has
existed for nearly 30 years on approxiately 250 acres in Section
35, immediately south of the proposed annexat ion area. The proposed
annexation would convert substantial agricultural and timber land
to urban uses. Even though our property is not proposed to be
included, we would be severely impacted. It would not be realistic
to assume that we could continue our agricultural activity while
bordering an area of dense residential and commercial activity.
Agricultural activity such as ours is not compatible with such uses
being nearby. Furthermore, our ope rat ions require that signif icant
acreage of cropland or pasture land be available in close proximity
for utilization of chicken manure as fertilizer. This is becoming
increasingly important as government regulations are beginning to
impose specific requirements of available acreage for manure
utilization. Other agricultural operations in the immediate area
have similar reqUirements for available land.
Many people believe they can expand a city and engulf or border
farms, so long as they do not require them to discont inue
operat ions. Often times, the belief carries with it a good feeling
about preserving a rural environment. However, in this regard, a
dist inct ion must be made between "open spaces" and product i ve
farms. The farms which feed this country must be allowed to
operate in a true agricultural environment. The proposed
annexation cannot insure such continued operation.
Sincerely yours,
NATIONAL FOOD CORPORATION
~~_o
Br an V. Bookey, ~P-
President
~
~~-----
-----
\ ~..-> 0
\
,
\
\
\
\ -1odc1 ~ _ ift1l~e
\ if AJ A/,) J))A'JP ,
(ivY' IJJf.vl!J,Jii1 (J1> ~.
/L~' I;T) po. U- ,.if. ~
-vw rJrf,( /~b 0. i 1) ~
c+j;/ 1/ Cfl {J eJYb
NV va-
~lluWl'7 1('
ih' C1J1' fl/:/506YC, DWI'U-
. . 1fJ~ I 4<ffV
dJa viii nt- tP U (
It II ~ ~D{ovJl'i5 ~
(/ (f1/1Cr
\
..
KENNETtI t!ART
KENNETt! MARTIN
DON MARQ!JI~
BETt! WRIGLE~WORT!1
NATE TURNER
BOB D GOLPtlENEE
~uperintendent
Directors
IUtfl1ltr......~rij!rnI.....miif(irt
RAMONA GARNER
Administrative ~ecrelary
Telephone 206-446.2207
January 4, 1992
Planning Commission
City of Yelm
POBox 479
Yelm, WA 98597
RE. Southwest Yelm Annexation
Dear Members of the Planning Commission
As you are aware, a portion of the Southwest Yelm Annexation Site is located within the boundaries of
the Rainier School District No 307 Due to that fact and the fact that any development near the Rainier
School District will impact the District, on behalf of the Rainier School District, I wish to communicate to
you concerns about the proposed annexation
First, I believe the Planning Commission must give serious consideration to RCW 28A.315.250, the statute
which addresses municipal and school district boundaries. Although that statute would not win an award
for clarity, it does establish the basic legislative mandate that each incorporated city or town is to be
comprised in a single school district. The exceptions to that mandate that are stated in the statute are
not applicable to the annexation under your consideration Hence, the annexation under consideration
may well not be legally possible without invoking the jurisdiction of the State Board of Education as
described in RCW Chapter 28A.315
Secondly, the Rainier School District requests the City of Yelm to immediately and specifically declare if
their intent is to change the property in question to the Yelm School District. The Environmental Impact
Statement may suggest this to be the intent.
If the jurisdiction of the State Board of Education is properly sought, I anticipate that the Rainier School
District would find it in its best interest to advocate that the property subject to the proposed annexation
remain in the Rainier School District. The potential concurrent jurisdiction of the State Board of
Education and other municipalities will make the issues surrounding the proposed annexation even more
complicated That brings me to another concern of the Rainier School District.
We believe that a number of the issues related to the proposed annexation could have been more refined
or eliminated had planning authorities been more cognizant of the fact that the Rainier School District
would be significantly impacted by the proposed annexation The mitigating measures cited in the Draft
Environment Impact Statement are illusory if they are not impacted The stated mitigating measures
were generated with little, if any, direct discussion with representatives of the Rainier School District.
The Rainier School District had made request of the City Manager of Yelm to be fully informed of all
progress related to the annexation
Further, the district requests that consultants to the city and/or agents of the developers of the
property, keep the district fully informed of all their actions and recommendations related to the
annexation
Please be on notice that the Rainier School District No 307 is very concerned about the impact on it of
the proposed Southwest Yelm Annexation. The District seeks your assurance that its interests will be
conscientiously considered and protected as the proposed annexation is further considered State law
provides a very deliberate process when changes in school district boundaries are being considered The
legislature has recognized the need for such deliberative processes. City Planners must be equally
deliberative and conscientious when their actions involve the potential need for changes in school district
boundaries.
I trust that the City of Yelm's Planning Commission recognizes that the interests of the Rainier School
District must be taken into serious consideration if any phase of the proposed annexation is to go
forward At this point, the exact interests of the District are difficult to determine because changes in
school district boundaries have yet to be formally advocated Once the intentions of the advocates are
known regarding changes in school boundaries, the interests of the Rainier School District will be better
subject to identification.
Very truly yours,
~r~
' . B D Golphen e '.
Superintendent
BDG:lm
cc Attorney Craig Hanson
....
1,'<~~~:;;r!~~~~1~~~i!i{~"?~~i~~~B~""1J~1""'SF~N'm :'~h1S'S:;~:~t~,,~,~;~;~~~~~~~<,~* ",
( "~"~'"'''''. ""-,, "'-",.""" t.a., ",",'''''''''"", ,....~. ,\,.,~ <<',4. '- ,,1;'. ,'_',_. ,_ ..,..~. -~-b."_.~,,,,,,_ .~""_~ ~"._ ,'_. A5"
~\ fH :f,,:;" 01"" ',-.. '",. ""'.""". ......., _. ..":"'." " . , . ....",..... ',. """'"'>'_'~ .__~"_""'" '... '.,... ,',...,
~~~;-- e ymplan", ",,q;;r,<:',,w~. "",.c;;."""".",.,. ,,,.. "+""~'" ." ''''., ..~<.,,~,""^,_. W"ll!"""'_~""_'" "''''''>!"'', " t~'" ~,,""_ '..'7':''''''~4""",'''~._.,.. . .
;;,~. r"",,~,':l; ,,'I'. L,,;,;-,:~, '-.=>' "-' . ','" '..I'''' '., '",." Ne'ws' abo'ut makIng' money f m So ta.; Sound t 'w Id m kets"'...r;:',~ .,.... ."-O:'~.'"-,.,~-:'''~ic'''' ", _ .
...~ ,,'... , .....""""", '" 'Il""" '-'" ,~,,,",'.."""',, . ,<< . _ ,'" u '. 0 or or ~'..., ." .,,=.......
.. " ", ," ....,. 'r,', '.'" ", ..~. ....~ .~. ..' .. H', e " , """..~.... ..,. .,' "'. .,_ "". ". ' , ~ '..._ ,,,,.., .,,'__.. _.. ,
't:.:-::,,-:.
-'-
~
,:,:"",-, ,...
':~~..'?2 'i~ g~:~~
~
.-::.<.-
.~....
,- - ~ .. ~ ~~ ~.... ~...., , '!.
~.
:z;:;.~
~,;;.
f
..
t
':\::
~):
f-i!:>;-
If~~~-'~;~~t(l.i,ct~~~~~~~~r~:'
~o~e c~ S,::"
1,,1 .' .~~
.~ l,~~i\'j~ -'~l~:te;~~~~a::FJ~--- -."
.~~~k~:~~~~~t~t~~~j';~?;~~~~
:iJt
t
., Pien:e !(
C~~~~Y: r
-.~~~~:~:: : ~"'
,~J~~~;; .~~
..-
D
o
Land Use & WCM
Development
Consultatlon
A Division of Kramer Chin & Mayo Inc
September 16, 1991
Yelm Planning Commission
PO Box479
Yelm, W A 98597
Attention. Tim Schlosser, Chairman
Subject:
Railroad Right-of-Way
Dear Yelm Planning Commissioners.
The Commission meeting last month covered the item on preserving the
Burlington Northern Railroad lines for either future transportation or recreational
uses.
As consultant to the Thurston Highland project, we would like to inform the
Commission that we are planning an entrance off Highway 507 along the south line
of Section 26 to connect with the 150 foot easement for ingress and egress purposes.
We were about to apply for railroad crossing permit when we learned about the
abandonment. We believe it will be to our mutual benefit H we know of the future
plan on that part of the right-of-way so that our landscape designer and road.
engineer will coordinate their design effort with your interests in mind.
Please keep us informed on the development of the future plan Thank you.
Sincerely,
~-
DS:sf
975-04
1917 First Avenue Seattle Washington 98101 (206) 443-3537 Fax (206) 443-5372
\
':i 'gIll 5'::1
F F":'tul("L..'= t1
i~
F'H'~E 001
~--,
( \ <"..
Post-It'" brand [ax tn"...",mittal memo 767i Ii i'\'p~ I>
To .
t-,1EMO'
Thurston Highland 1976-02
TO'
FROM.
SUBJECT
DATE.
File
~.:=m-~rli-
.... ___ _'!l40.. "'~-r.L"'"
Spetember 4, 19"1
b1?Af1",
vtwL ]ljJftlf1-
4 (/MU<<t4t.
Denms T SU
Sewer Treatment Piant/Meeting with Parametri.x
/
Meet11\g a ttended by' Mike Ollivant, Project Manager of Paramettix
Jon Potter, Planner for Venture Partners
Gene Borges and Agnes Colombo ot Yelm
Dennis T Su of Thurston Highland Associates
Gene brought MIke up to the current Urban Growth Boundary/Annexation
situation since the last Parametrix Sewer System study was done in January 1990 and
the boundary for sewer study shall be revised to covered the new areas.
The status of the WWTP as now stands has been approved by EP A along wIth
funding earmarked for the plant construction. It is up to Yelm to seek funding for
the collection system and Gene confirmed that it is in place. The design is for at Bas
with 450 Gal! Ac/Day V\'1.thin the existing CIty limit. Yelm is waiting for the letter
from Centralia Power to a.llow the outfall into the canal before releasing funds and
authorizing Parametrix to proceed with final design. Gene assured us that the letter
will be forth coming.
For Thurston Highland and other par:ties petitioning for annexation, now is the time
to prepare an Aluendrnent to the Parametrix's plan for City Council to adopt then
the City will forward to DOE for approval under the same process as the original
WWTP plan.
The amendment to upgrade Yelm's WWTP must be prepared to address all issues
related to WWTP design such as land size, receiving water, collection system, waste
strength, etc.. Mike estimated the document/study may take three months 4'\.nd the
DOE will need four months to review It will be too late for the current plant design
to wait because of the deteriorating ground water quality and the funding deadline
which requires the Yelm '^TWIT to be operational by November 1993 Parametrix
may have to proceed without the expanded systen1 to be approved by DOE
However, we will be able to provide basic data on VJaste strength, volume and ft.!t1.1.re
connection locations for design consideration.
Vie determined that Yelm will issue a Tech Memo to Parametrix to requf'st
upgrading the WWTP design as we di~c'.l5Sed. !-Iowe...-erf Y~lm n~ed& S0rne
commmittment from THA and other anIlex~ti(m petitioners to pay for the
additional construction costs on top d the current design like paying fOT the change
from 8 inches to 10 inches pip~;s. The EPA is only paying for a system to serve the
existing city limIt.
,', ~ "r, q lIe 'I F !VI F II 1
!/~ - _u
, =,E.;,F' 5 "31 Ie D[1
I '. '" ,... \- '"
/
F F' ,=, fl. f ,= fuj
o
PHI:iE [1[1~
o
Miko told us that DOE will not allow a second WWTP withi.- e,,1me region. As
fot ~9raying on the golf course, the onsite disposal U1U$t be nan 14,000 gal/day
and disinfected. Unless the volume is less than 3,500 gall,. / then the permit is
reviewed by the County Health Dept. only Area proposed for onsite disposal must
be identified and engineering study must supports the dumping of nutnents on the
grass during summer only as a means of saving water
Yelm's School District has JUst purchased a parcel outside the existing city limit that
needs to be annexed along with the adJ<lcent Forrester property The school must
annex in order to receive State funds and Yelm is asking the school to do exactly the
sante annexation procedure as iliA. Gene has arranged a meeting for us next week
to discuss how to joint force and devide up the tasks.
+ + T CI T H L F' H ':i E 0 [1 ~t, +
I II - II ", - '.1 j 1 ~ 7 FM F II L
\..)
o
-.
( )
u
Land Use & NCM
Development
Consultation
August 2, 1991
A Division of Kramer Chin & Mayo Inc
Gene Borges, City Administrator
City of Yelm
POBox 479
Yelm, W A 98597
Dear Gene:
Thurston Highland Associates has successfully negotiated the 150-foot wide RO W
for access from the Doyle and Bosequett properties.
Pioneer Title Insurance Company of Olympia is handling the escrow and will submit
the two transactions as a "lot line adjustment" application with Thurston County
Planning Commission. We are hoping Pioneer Title will be ready to submit later
this month
Given the importance ot access to Highway 507, we must have approval by the
Planning Commission on this strip of land
We would appreciate your assistance in giving us any direction to take in dealing
with the Planning Commission on this matter
Sincerely,
LAND USE & DEVELOPMENT CONSlJLTATION
Dennis T
DTS eve
Enclosure
c: Thurston Highland Assoczates
P S The attached article on "Fully Contained Communities" is for your informa-
tion. The County may apply some of these criteria to Thurston Highland.
1976-03
1917 First Avenue, Seattle, Washington 98101 (206) 443-3537 Fax (206) 443-5372
. A
o
o
,f
March 8, 1991
Land Use & WCM
Development
Consultation
A Division at Kramer Chin & Mayo Inc
By Facsimile and First Class Mail
Thurston County /Yelm Joint Plan Committee
c/o Mr Gene Boyes, City Administrator
City of Yelm
PO Box 479
Yelm, Washington 98597
Dear Committee Members.
As the consultant to the Thurston Highland project, we are excited about the good
prospects i.n the re-activation of the Joint Plan Committee to resolve the growth
boundary issue.
We appreciate the efforts Gene and his staff made to have the Thurston County
Commissioners meet with the Yelm City Council earlier this year to move forward
on this subject. As in the Yelm Planning Commission meeting that followed on
January 15, 1991, we fully support the Commission members' position in compliance
with SHB 2929
At this critical stage of finalizing Yelm's growth boundary, we would like to
emphasize the importance of considering the Fort Lewis property as the westward
growth boundary for the City We understand that in the past, the Thurston County
Planning staff has been using the west line of Sections 23 and 26 as the western edge
of the growth study This arbitrary line not only divides a single property that used
to belong to the Weyerhauser Company, it also left behind a land-locked parcel
between the City and the Fort's reservation. The attached proposed annexation area
map further illustrates the area discussed.
We appreciate your consideration in our request to include the whole Thurston
Highland property into Yelm's future growth area and stand behind your action in
this endeavor
Please feel free to contact us if we can be of any assistance.
Sincerel y,
LAND USE & DEVELOPMENT CONSULTATION
...--,
\ \ i
I
Dennis T
DTS:br
c Thurston Highland Associates
975-00
1917 First Avenue Seattle Washington 98101 (206) 443-3537 Fax (206) 443-5372
o
I
I
"0
-..,
- I
,-
'T1
~- rn
c:.!'
:S!~
-;~
EXHIBIT "B"
I'
I]
'lJ
I.D
PROPOSED
ANNEXATION
'.0
'_n
'_n
.4
T1
'lJ
,-,
~
~ ^~
v ~~
~' ~tf
<<0 fff
J~'il 22
<<-V2
-'" ----..---
~
!'..
.,
"
j'r
L,"; it,
.~
-
t,;
..
-
rh'
0::
W
LJj
:z
. c:s
:z
- ( ~ w
~
2
i=
~
C
(.;
u:
~
=
~ I]
a: I'
<t. 0*1
tC rn
1=1
I:;;)
r, ,
G'
.r
I r: ;-dJ
.J i 1 C7
" I ~
q~ ...c, 1 T
i It! I
,
\
'\
},,11 ,_
L. 1 T
"
t"
I
IT
~- E: F =1 F~ ~r
u
...:..l\,!
;..
14
u
'----
o
(J
Town of Yelm
105 Y6lm AV6nu6 Wast
P.O. Box 479
Yelm, Wa:lhington 98591
206-458-3244
FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL FORM
IlFAXIl
COMPANY k r IYl
INDIVIDUAL D~n()(sT .,SCL
NUMBER 44 ~- 5?J j'A
TO
IlFAX"
COMPANY tf~ ct Vp.
INDIVIDUAL O.M1L ~~d
NUMBER (206) 458- 348
FROM
NUMBER OF PAGES TO FOLLOW ~
DATE f,-;J--9/ TIME SENT II:;).) IJ7Y)
SUBJECT /JVI/ltrJ trJ'rr. &f2,t. fJM1lk2, ~U W/A1 Ol./
f -'5 . f}; /" tet0.6" {61 holcJr/3
COMMENTS' ~ \....
**** IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL COPIES OR ANY
COPY IS NOT LEGIBLE, PLEASE CALL (206) 458-3244
AS SOON AS POSSIBLE ****~... =-
u
l'i~'; 'i;
<0
a
J dlH.lar ':J :J, 19':J 1
F'apC'r'"
i.J f. P LI t ,;:, L.l y tJ <=1 C ~ 0:1- 0 a,: r e p i:\ r '_ 81 f .::. r ~:; d 1 ~~ t; his ~. P Y' 1 n D c::\ n \:1 '..1 n IVI d Y
10, 1 3':;0 d r t?p r'" e~"en tat 1 v\'~, CI f B,:,b WI'::.' 1 C ....cne, I~jd r J dn c:1 dn ,I l1~::i".:;' I'..
,:idtt-:.'S made LIS .;;In offer', .:.~fter'" b<=\r.\;;I<:Il.rilnu, we "\D'rt:~t-::'d t,::,. It 1,..1<:\::;
lE~a)"nE)d d f\:!w day<::; latel' thi::'\t this W<"~:5 th(,:.' bi:::\ginninD of S".,illc..trUrl\J
81C, .l.n Thurst,_,n C'a::Alnty. ThE~ development c<:::.rnp.':\ny uf Wt~l, OJllt.0
r'"epresentated by t rdmeY1 Chln and MaY'J,ln~" hdd dlyeddy pwrchdsed
the Sf:": t 1 on and a hc'.:d f ,.:' f Wey€:'r h,"leli~;,,::)r l.::\nd ne:/, t t ,_, U~:'. They
nel~dl".:d C'U( land to t:u:> int.-. ttH2 Yelrn city ll.llut<;;; cd. Uli","" Higtl
S'.:rl'':II::,l. AIs.::" ,;;It ttnS'. 5';:'\illt~ time":' thE'y WE.'l"e ccdling and asl. ing LIS
to Llr[le anyone .l.n thE.\ neighbe,rhood t,:, i:,iUn thl:: anrH~',."ltl.'"n pclj:Jf.?(!;:;
belng clrLuldted to JOln this land to the ~ity of Yelm.
Tunl:? w\?nt by, Spr'.l.f'lg turned into SLliflifli21' ,,':\1"11.:1 i"lu ",.,1"<,01.118" rht::.y
held inslstecJ thc.lt We: c.l:ltaln '" separdtf.1 pc:\i"'..el nUiiibl:::'i" f,.f' thl:::' bEl':: I.
<1-0. I found ()ut tJldt a "l.:lrDE.' lot ~jLlbdlYlSlOn" [H0('mit .:ost
.::\ilfJrO/,. ~70(J.OO. OLll'" Q(lfJindl '::\!J(E:'e':llIt:~nt ~:;t",\t.:::c:I ""..hut WIll not
cb:sume any e'"pE~nSI'",!:;; lncl.If'r-ed" Tht::'y neVf.:.'r ~.:;ent the $700. that
was ~uppused tu ha~e heen sent to us wlthin j4 c:lays fr-....rn May 10.
Wt:.? f Ol.ln d t hat 1 Ii cor r'" t?SiP cq.\d \:~n,: (;;> b t2t ...'eE~n ou r c:\ t t CI)" Ii t::Y ii:\n c:1 13,,\\" 1 Eln d
that trlell" 1'"lUhts had bt::~Qn d~:;~:.iSin<".\d tel Thur:::;t".,n Hi \;;lhl ,,:,nc:l,::;. 1'1"\"L::>
t.l.llle W<?ITt by, it Wd~.;; f\I..(UU~::;t 23, and W\:i' ultinkd,f.?J.y i'idrlb., 1.,,1_'ITl;,:;p::t
ar) att.:'r.nf?y to pyess;ure them into !::;2ndlf'l9 Ll~;j th<".' Ili'_IIII:;~> '.,11' tt:,,"ml-
liating the salt:.? as it was d v).,_,lation e,f th",..' ~3aJ.f.~ dC!(\',?E:'lllen'L.
/
ThLlrston Hiuhldnch:" Dl.::'nnis f.iu, WYCott:.~ Llf. <::\ntl S€:'ITt thE'~ ');7(H). wJ.th c:1
,:han\jl.=.' in the a9r.:j(2ill[:'nt all'eady (Tli::lde tl_' It:~nutt'II.:on thl~: p",\yoff
jJ2r .l.od. Ttll~:; Wt_~ did not agl't:.e tl..I. InUIC:' illcjdl'l'h,lflE.', ,,:\ft~::'r
toU .l.ng to::. th",:, COLlnty PlallnlnU1 fell-II'ld that .:., L:\(!.Jt,t 11ft
sul:;jd.l.V1SIOr, WE!=> not {it:?eded1 the ,';SSt7!'::;~,.'.lrs; OffJ.cf.:~ jLl;:;t c:(!::;~>l'::.iI.li2d d
nUIIIGI~)" to thdt pelrc""l.
Tht::"!n hedl"d nothing fOI' 2lwhile, we got ",tn'/,J.OLlS c:\nd wl'Ii::!n pi"l=.'~:ibE~c1 by
l I II:? l" e alE' '" tat <.:-: j,l f.'.\' .1 P 1 ~ , t h 1':2 Y \:, t d" t e d (j e L::\ y 1 II U t d I.. t :I. 1_ ~.. U f the
dQt (2)" flll rlat i 011 C, f wh.;:,\)" c: t hl~ l' oad \?C:I~;elh(0\I"1't ',.,lUll.]. cl \::!l.','. Wt:.' m",\\.h'
':;1(r':''\II~I~mC'nts to ll1E:et WJ.th D(.:.::.nnis, Sl..l dncJ w<i~nted th(.:~ 1"',.'""U t'l Le:-
i.; 1 <=11_ ed /111..11" ",. '_Ir- 1 \.~'"'~:; '..1 Y e r t h tJ 1::.'.; l S -L 11')9 )" 1..,lc:\cj W dY . Th t.;;' y ': <:\lllt..:' l.J.::I' I.
Wlttl two::. (JlCiJ"\,~ Llne'/,CE!ptdbl..~. r"_'d\.JW.:~y~::. ('...IrH:,: wo\..dcJ Clejli,.J.i~;;h d dr'dill
f i ~ 1 d an d t hpe c,t hE,\r' WOld d bE' t I:":' C l'::'~:;L:.:! t: 0 Da \i i cJ ' s h CoLI s,c.' e'\I"'1 cl
fen,_elint:2). L,,/l;l'::-(" tht~y ~'1ddt?d a.nother f'1:lacJbl,:..::~:, they had t'.1 h'::,\Yt?
a legCil discr1pti'-'If) of the rc,.::\cJ ed~.emeITl:. TI'us; W':Ei. WI',I,ttL,,'rl up.
Tht;!n t h c.lt was not lJ 1_' 0 e.! t~nQLlSlh I t \"1 <~ 1 (' ;::\ t t I:' (' r"ll;?Y c~r:1 Y i :;;t::'c:1 (, h E'i11 t h E:\t
1t ShOl..lld Lie S',urvt:?YE.)eL SUl'YE:,!y'..ll"".;; dl'e In 9(t,:::<"lt dt,'Ill,'\llcl <::II'IU a lurlU
W'::'lt1n9 lJt;;.'f lC1U1 dnd Wt~ W(';?r'"(:;:n't; d~JC,ut t,., p.:,y fur It dnc:l t~if:.'y
d 1 J II ' t wan t t ':' ",I i t h 1::: \" 1,..1 I. I E~ II t ,") 1 d l..I f t h ~ (: 0::, \::; t .
T, Jr t.LL1..~ In r,,(I";:" C"/l",p"ny fUl..lnd d _:.0 f,.,..t Lh..:/II..:d:l.l..Ill 1.,1 thE.'
':: 1 "1 n t y f Y 1..1 ill l., ,:" f u I'" t~ I..' c.' b ....' L.l 9 h t t h t:? P I' , 1 P E' r t y t h <:1 t d J, d Ii ' l. '., U I ,n r:? ',. t
\..ut'h <::In)' Y'.',::\C:"",::lY. W. '...(lnt<,:\I::tt:~I.1 ttl\','~ i'Jdnl. f,,( ,':\ DUlt '-ld.;lll D.,,? ,",\ d
;:,In,J ttl~: County Fubl:ll. L.J'...\'I,s, f,:.r.;:, If,!ttf::1r:;tc:\tin9 tl-\.,/ hdve no:::a
J.l'ltt:~rt-:'.,,;t. TrJ tt,t.' p(I,-,CeCi;S of '[;1-'11:::; ~::ialf.:: W',"~ h<'Hl t,.l pen, 1,/;".'..(:' ':'\ ()Ult
C.'J
."1'
o
"
Cldlill D\':~l':;ci 1 )'"1_'111 "" nt..'!lClhbor ,::\::i> th<,... cl::'unt.f hdLi put thE~ [h"\r l"y VdllE~y
Rc,<.:\cl in thee' wrCln~j plac"". /\l~:;o, he;\L! to fil,::! f',.lj" Dl.l.ll,:"t; Tltll,~ 1:1~::; dn
eryur on thu d~ed was typed 406 feet lnstedd uf 604 f0~tl
~"';e really the,uSlrit thf~ prclperty wf-Iul cj I_l';)~;e -"lbl...I\..d; Ch( 1 ~::;tllld~">t J illE',
but after days of walting, here it is New Years and we yeceJved a
tItle (t=jJ'..'l't -((om thf.-i!ir c,_,mpany 11'1 f;f.~attlt::!. Tht.:"y haYI','! jt'~I"I,\:;:!d Lib
arcluncl e'Ii.:fi' morl? and wci\nt t,::, tr.;;\de j:io';:' ilI.any ~:;;qual"(~ ft'-'I,::d; of P(I;:'pl';"'"-
t y way in the ba,: k Q f t ha t f)ar eel fill" dn \"-'o::\S;t~illen t: 60 f ("",?t Wl c/!;:.! t I..!
'o::I:Jr'cj Av,?nul:: dl~.J"" ThlS prol:J(?rty tfH?y aYE- wilJ.lfiD t,." tl"adt? thc-=y
hcl ven ' t even bl:'LIDh t Yl'?t. orh is;; is the 1 a~;t J. rl 0:\ I, ,l\"l\;.~ 1.1. r'lt'! '".I f hc:lflU
ups'
ThIS can be drawn out for a very long tIme dnd \Jet
e'l,pen~J.\;t= f,_,r them t,_, d,::;. the rJ.uht thlnU Hi bLlYlrlD ttlf.,~
they dnd we agreed to Ln May, 1990.
vel'" J'
pal"I._I~:'l
How do~s a small tlm~ landowner in a small town lile Yelm dedI
WJ th the big developers th.:d; ,_",m tdl,t:-' .:\11 thi'" t:J.IIll:~ dnJ It),'.'rlt':!y t,_,
close d bargaln and jerk yuu around lile they have done.
I) ')
lan(f !UWto-
.
/
"
"
o
o
-
PRESENTATION BEFORE YELM CITY COUNCIL
WEDNESDAY SEPTEMBER 26, 1990
FOR
THURSTON HIGHLANDS
I ReVIew Aenal Photographs--Present Site Charactenstlcs
a) Site has already been cleared
b) Access consideratIons.
c) Relative prOXimity to the downtown area of CIty and Fort LeWIS
II Exlstmg Zonmg
a) The SIte IS m an unmapped area Default denSIty IS five acre lots.
b) The 5-acre lot deSign would most likely result m one access road to project
c) Each SIte would mcorporate septIc systems.
d) Each Site would incorporate Its own separate well
e) Five acre denSity would vlftually guarantee urban sprawl by forcmg low denSity growth
to occur over a very large area With little contnbutlOn to mfrastructure
III Present Topographic Survey InformatIOn
a) Discuss topographic amenities to site
b) DiSCUSS senSitive areas on site
c) Wetland, Fort LeWIS buffer
IV HB2929
a) Reqwres for plannmg for growth for the next 20 years. (City should reqwre mmlmum 15
percent greater land area than necessary)
b) Growth Management Act reqUires planmng for future growth and plaCIng thIS growth
wlthm cItIes With suffiCient infrastructure to accommodate growth.
c) Plan reqwres that little or no growth occur outside CIty boundanes.
V Thurston Highland Associates have filed the following documents With the City
a) Letter of mtentfiled on June 13, accepted by City Council on July 11.
b) Envlfonmental documents suomltted to City staff on 9/19/90
c) Thurstqn Highlands has contemplated anneXIng entire 18DO-acre parcel from Its
conceptIOn m June With mput from Yelm
VI City Sewer System
a) Project would help defer cost of City sewage treatment plant and sewage faCIlities.
b) STEP system would be requued on project to mmlmlze environmental Impacts and sewage
treatment reqUirements.
c) Only project thiS size 1200+ acres---Is feasible to conSider new addluonal sewer treatment
plant
7-
o
o
VII City Water System
a) Project would incorporate extenSIOn of city hnes 10 order to obtalD service which would
help disburse the city water system costs.
b) Additional well sites could be placed on the property whIch would IDcrease CIty water
capacIty
c) PrehmIDary findings that the site has deeper and better water system per city staff
VIII Project and annexatIon Will have followlDg benefits to City
a) Long Term assistance to the school district.
b) ConstructIOn of champIOnship golf course.
c) ConstructIOn of a wide range of hOUSIDg IDcluding mIddle and upper end hO~SIDg types
consIstlDg maIDly of sIDgle f amtly residentIal homes.
d) A planned commuDlty would be allowed 10 accordance With City of Yelm cntena at
reasonable urban densIhes which would allow for the payments of and fair contnbuhon
for IDf rastructure constructIOn
e) A planned commuDlty would ehmIDate urban sprawl 10 thiS area (reference Puget Sound
Vls~on 2020) Puget Sound CounCil of Governments--Small Towns
IX. Benefits to City for Preparing a SIDgle AnnexatIOn PetItIon
a) Would result 10 a strong posllton from the city to the Boundary ReView Board
b) SlgDlficantly easier to process envuonmental review of entue 1800 acre site.
c) In accordance With planning obJectlves of HB2929 (Growth Management Act)
d) Would allow City to address annexatlon Issues one hme rather than multiple tImes.
o
o
i
PROJECT OVERVIEW
The 1,200 acres parcel is located in an unincorporated area of Thurston
County. approximately 1.5 miles west of the downtown area of the City of
Yelm. The City of Olympia is approximately 12 miles to the northwest of the
property, and the City of Tacoma is about 24 miles to the north.
The property consists of level to rolling topography with some steeper areas
in the south central portions of the propety. There is enough eleva~ion
change on the parcel that there are areas with territorial views of Mount
Ranier off to the southeast.
The northerly 240-acres of the property lying in Section 23, were harvested
approximately 8 to 10 years ago. This area is presently covered with an 8
to 10 year old Douglas Fir planation. The remainder of the property has
been harvested more recently and remain unplnated.
The primary access into the property is via George Road, which extends
wes~erly off Sta~e Highway 507, at a point abou~ one mile sou~h of the City
of Yelm. Ano~her access is via Longmire Road which connects to Sta~e
Highway 510 and on~o In~erstate Highway 5 ~hru Marvin Road.
Wi~h this se~~ingJ the proposed project will be the developmen~ of a
residen~ial communi~y wi~h commecial area, school, parks and two 18 holes
golf courses.
Golf Courses and club house 250 acres
Commercial area 50 acres
School ground 10 acres
Parks and recreation areas ~ acres
Residen~ial areas 875 acres
The density of housing unit will be based on one per half acre and under
the managed gro~h concep~, cer~ain areas will have higher density and
some areas will have less density. The overall development will consist
abou~ 1,600 units.
The housing areas will be developed in at least four phases ~o allow time
to adjust to the market demands on housing. Very likely ~he golf courses
will be ~he firs~ to be built to act as an anchor and at~rac~ion to ~he
new development. The houses will be ranging from middle to upper-middle
prices ~o mee~ the needs of both working couples and retired emp~y-
nesters.
All infrastructure will be provided with special attention to the surface
water drainage, underground water supply, sewer treatment system and
internal and external traffic circulation.
t. .~~,
T F H TT
11 '1 T
PEF-r:T
t i I IT \ i \ j t i i
."'"
Town of 'Yelm
105 Yelm Avenue West
POBox 479
YeIm, Washington 98597
206-458-3244
FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL FORM
"FAX"
COMPANY t/flll-h J--fe farfrJ-I~
INDIVIDUAL /(elf fJa/(s--frft...J
NUMBER .f:.17- /~&(p
TO
"FAX"
COMPANY ~ 1.- If' hn
INDIVIDUAL L'7.1~, ~~
NUMBER (206) 458-4348
FROM
DATE q-!;J- /7 D
TIME SENT
/
q :1-/0 f/ln
NUMBER OF PAGES TO FOLLOW
a7@ 'll)-
COPY IS NOT LEGIBLE, PLEASE CALL (206) 458-3244
AS SOON AS POSSlBLE ****
!i
i:l
t..
1
.;u;.:.~:-~ ---- ::-:-.;.._ .~;;;~:::._:~'::-_":::::.::-:-~ ..~:.~:.
Il ,. ':1 ..,..,
E ~ . "._ '\
.:........~iP~.~~:~f '
r' ki.':.\;,...+ .111:
: L .-" ""J:
~~ ~. V1ftonv.~
:ii : ~- --- =-~~
...... . t - - II;
: : ;: I: .__.._"_
. . ': I! ...................--- ,
. .. :... I' ~... ___.. . ':_-=__ __ ["." . ~.. '.
". . .... .,- ", 1 '.~
r......c--"f,-.-~. -- [-... ---- ~_..- ~(, \" I------T', " , /'>)/
. "::'. l I, '.\ !, ,,;.(t'
:~. 1lnl ", " ',' ....
. ..............; a:". "', , "
i "", . I ~,' \. _ i L_ ~:);.;,...."
, ~, n t......... .....'1& . , ~ ',' /.
. , .,.. , . -
~.....................~ .1'09 //, ~~~" ~,'" .
. S'o " :; ~~S~" , ,,'
--~; J ,',/, ~~&t-.6.: I ,,'...#
. r.. "..' "I' .'l-',\'_ ' , "
I: ~' /',' '-. ;,.Cj .~~:,' ',.' .,'
j .. '('%, ".....; q~ .y~. " I ~...,
. ,,,,-<-~ ""'., ~. .J .
III <# . --q, ~ !l.i~." _ __ _ /..r._:_:=-
. ^ r _'.' ~ ;! , ~ ~ , .
.............'.~.~'I.~. r: .". ~ ~ ", '<1" :
:/ / ".'''~ ,'\( E
.. ..... ,.......,...,
~~,,~ i'~ ~.. ~< ~., >'> _........ <~ :.
:<- "''l- ~+..':\..'~. -' -......, \:. , .,0 '-' ,lOOth W.ue....
.~ ."-,7>,,;,' /... . .- _..../ .""". r.~" ~;,'" .~"'~':.: .....
' ~~... .s).. ,"'~, "v ~, J0' . "- "... ... . .. ......__...__ ~.
. ';V~""q,'<.;"~ 'x- '" ~."... T' I. '... ~ .... .. .
~~ '''Q<'~''V_ '.... ...._~v~. ..... '.
~:.<s .. U'~ 'r- "'r>;;., ,s!,...... .... , . .
..-. ~.'i'., )'V""",-Y ;,..',. "',.'r~:-..' /~ ...." .' :
.~ 0, " . ~"'" ~ ~/ /~'" .. ,_c. ... :
'~;'2 y.... ,<. . '1''<' ..... ...~ .' ~
/.:0- )f >, ''X I' / ~ .~, .. ~ .........:
" ..'y' '~,' /- <C'. . "'. .. "
X ~ , "J~ ~ - 6-.... " ....~. .... _'\.. .103rd..^""nue SE
-4{ f'~l\ . u/u rh~f!'_'L."",,,~;?," ..';:~ ,.=~occ~'_ iI.......
-r--,' :/'I ~: .' ,.' ~.. ! '~''''
-..... . '1 . I.. A' . > '.'
,;~ ~ - ::' '\" : ~. \,
.<\'.~ ,~.":"::':'n;l..lli. ........ I
~h' j ""s;~':":~.... '.~. .............
-.; ~,?-, - ,-- -~ .'.! . : = ......
. , .
~ ...... j . ..'t>'~.~.~.t...... .
'. \
~'''''''l!. ."-..
, "-..
\
'\
,
'\
.-.~
,~
\!i
'~
~
.'';,;;..;. ~.
'q
,
.'
,
1:
.,
~,
.
~~
'$.s1
""'\.
~
~"'~...
,c
.! ~
L-
j...
Futunt Service
Area Boundary
~-
i
t--
l '
L
I
I
; !
'7;---:'-,----.-
w:
",'
I
~:
o
cr.:
_W:1
Iii
U!
~
I.'
i?
.i
ii'
!Q9!~ . S.tree!...?E
.J
j
,s/i 510.
,i:
(
~~
~
,,1:1'\
.;,"f-
h....llrrf
.\:
,.
-.--;;,....
,...-....
~ ~.,'-~,\>\
i:
j
/
,>
F;igure 8 3
\
\ '-
Legend
, -
2-a Lln..
.,~>
~\
()
-..,-
~..-
~,
.1'<"
ti">'
r,fi
"-....
,~
"
1.\
tl
,.
/:
-"--'."- 3"0 Un.
--- 4"12) Line
------ 8-0 lin.
-- S"'0-llne-.
.
10"'21 line
Air Release Valve
~
ILII
o 600 1200
Scale in Feet
j
.#-'
Collection System
Alternative, Existing
Service Boundary
STEP System Layout
....
~
) ~August6, 1990
\..
\
....,,~~\
....~
~
\:
REAL ESTATE WEEK
11
~
'(
'\
~
"
,
,l
;;.
,?
s
n~__""''''~-'''''''''''''-'~'''''''''''''''_'~~H>>.~''~_'~'~~~lJr!~)lf..l:!i' r_~'!Mn!RiI\___~ ..""'__
Last Projects For Awhile
LOS ANGELES - Colmer Develop-
ment Company signs Bassenian/
Lagoni of Santa Ana Heights as an
architect for a residential subdivision
in Sylmar, according to President
Wayne Colmer
_____ ~ The land for the unnamed project is
-.J in escrow Colmer says he hopes to
...../ start construction on 32 single-family
homes at the site in 1991 The homes
are expected to range from 1,500 to
2,000 square feet.
The developer has a project slated
to start in November of 199] in Santa
Maria. It is a 72-lot subdivision on 13
acres near Grant and Broadway The
homes are estimated to be from 1,300to
1,550 square feet.
Colmer says the credit crunch IS
forcing reevaluations on any future
deals.
"1 don't think I'll be looking seri-
ously at startmg any new projects in
this atmosphere," he SrlYS.
Colmer, a former executive vice
presIdent of Raznick & Sons, Inc., has
two more projects scheduled to break
ground this year II
Developer's Legacy
HENDERSON, Nev - Pacific Proper-
ties& Developmentplansanearly]99]
groundbreaking on a 300-unit condo-
minium development in Henderson,
near Las Vegas. The Legacy project
will be within the Green Valley master
planned community
~ The company must still go through
. \the city of Henderson for approvals,
'-../\...../says Tom Hall, project manager
Phase] will contain] 00 units priced
from $60,000 to $80,000 The develop-
ment will build out over two to three
years.
An architect will be chosen ata later
date General contracting wiII be
handled in-house.
Pacific Properties prepares to begin
construction on a rental condo project
within Green Valley Silver Springs
Condominiums will have 300-plus
units with one to three bedrooms.
Rental rates are expected to range from
$500 to $800 per month.
The project is sla ted to break ground
in October .
'\
/0
. laming
The Frontier
SCOTTSDALE - The Kobel Compa-
nks enters Scottsdale for the first time
with Scottsdale Crossing, a ]20,000-
squiHe foot retail project on the south-
east corner of Scottsd,i1e RO(ld and
Thom(ls RO(ld Groundbre(lking is
slated for lilte 1990 or eilrly ]991
The developer wlil teilr down Fron-
tier Town, an aging retail center thilt
has occupied the site since the 1950s.
The south Scottsdale location holds
several older centers that need filcelifts,
accord ing to Debbie Moore, marketing
promotions manilger
Albertson's, True Value Hardware,
ilm; Blockbuster Video are among the
tenants signed for Scottsdale Crossing.
De Revere Partnership will handle
design duties. A general contractor will
be chosen at a later date. .
Saddle Up At The Ranch
PHOENIX - Saddleback Homes Ltd.
acquired land within the master
planned community of Tatum Ranch,
which sits at the intersection of Cave
Creek and Tatum roads m north Phoe-
nIX.
Saddleback plans to build 123
single-family homes ranging in size
from 1,400 to 1,800 square feet on lots
tha tare 45 feet wid e, according to Larry
Kush, president.
The three- a nd four-bedroomhomes
will be targeted to first time buyers and
empty nesters, says Kush. They will be
priced from $86,000 to $99,000 II
Talkin' The Talk
OCEANSIDE-Columbia Group, Ltd
will begin construction on its first
project in San Diego County by the end
of the year if negotiations with major
tenants prove fruitful.
The Beverly Hills-based limited
partnership may be nearing agree-
ments with a major supermarket, a
bank and a drugstore for occupancy at
its Shadow Ridge Plaza, according to
Columbia spokesman Don Geisinger
"We're working on getting our
leases signed before we actually break
ground," he says. "We're also pretty
close on all of our entitlements and
building permits."
The 120,000-square foot center will
sit on an approximately 11.5-acre site.
r twas designed by MPR of Long Beach.
Columbia Group will bid the project
out to general contractors. II
Spotlight On SpOkane
;
"
t,
'I.
~
SPOKANE - Rebounding residential
growth and cheaper land arc spurring
retail projects. First Western Develop-
ment seeks at least two more sites in
the area while rolling ilhead with the
second phase of retail projects in Spo-
kaneand nearbyCoeurd' Alene,Idaho.
First Western Partner Mike Hess
likes the market's land costs, which are
about 20% lower than Seattle's. He
spots the low-end at $3 to $4 a square
foot compared to $5 in Seattle. Top
prepared sites run $9 or $10, where a
Seattle site would be $] 1 or $12 a foot.
Hess is negotiatmg with two cloth-
ing stores to anchor the next phase of
the Northpointe Plaza in Spokane at N
Newport Highway and E. Hawthorne
Road. Phase 2, due to start in the spring
of next year, will bring to 624,350 square
feet to the total buildout of the center
A second phase is planned next year
for Ironwood Plaza in Coeur d' Alene,
a planned] 62,000-square foot center at
u.s 95 and Ironwood Drive First
Western thinks there's room for one or
two more centers in Coeur d' Alene.
Among the latest in large retail
projects, Pnce Development Co has
closed on 1,Il1d for a rcgiona I center il t
Sullivan ROild and Interstate 90
The retail expansionin the Spokane
area takes ildvantilge of an upwilrd
trend in the job market. Boeing recently
began construction on a Spokane plant
that is expected to eventually employ
1,200 Seattle First National Bank has
plans to employ as many as 700 at its
Spokilne credit cilrd center These
moves have brought Spokane to the
attention of other potential employers,
according to Jim Carollo, past presi-
dent of the board of directors of the
Spokane Board of Realtors.
Home sales have gone from about
400 a month two years ago to 600 these
days, says Carollo About 30 projects
are under way in the 4- to 30-lot size.
Large tract developments are still in
the future.
Steve Gill, broker manager of
Spokane's Tomlinson Real Estate Ser-
vices, estimates that about 80% of new
homes coming on the market are
$]00,000 to $]50,000 This is in contrast
to the Seattle area, where starter homes
have crept up to about $2UO,000 II
"
I ~
,.
r:
I"
fi
if.
ii
,".
,Ii
~';
I:
F
I,
fi
f-:
I'
I
['
I
;
L
i!
Ii
Expansion Plan Solid As A Rock
1"
ti:
r
r.'t
They could be available by ]993 A
15,000-square foot conference center is
being contemplated for the site, adds
MiilIer
The residential end of the develop-
ment targets the second home or vaca-
tion homebuyer Homes are priced
from $200,000 to $750,000
Work on the golf course addition is
slated to begin in October, while work
on the hotel and conference center are
slated to begin next year .
i"
l::
~.: ,
Lr
Ii
i.i
"I
II
: {
'I'
l~
;1
fl
H
',I
1
I
SCOTTSDALE - Boulders Joint Ven-
ture plans to add a conference center to
The Boulders project in north
Scottsdale. The developer also will ex-
pand the golf course and resort hotel
"Another nine-hole golf course will
be added to the existing 27 -hole course
which will then be converted to two 18-
hole courses," says John Miiller, project
director
An additional 24 rooms will be
added to the 136-room resort hotel.
l'll~ftJHI~lIJ!I!.1l..
""~<__~..-..--.uno"li'ffJn'n"'-~~~'II:Rkmll'Q;f~
..._-_._~
j;
;;'1
lJ
f;1
jJ
:11
TEMNO
, _.
0-
DOUGLAS GARLAND c~ ,I~l'~~~ i Planned C .ty D 1 t
Garland & Associates '~ . (, it ;_, "';~~-i ommum eve opmen
17625 N E. 65th : ,\ , 'I ' f"H'J':'~ I FOR SALE in Thurston County, Ye!m
Redmond, WA 98073-9755 ~'~l / '~~ --p' Uti! WASHINGTON
206-885-1214 ,/, g~~~~~C:;!
206-869-0987 (FAX) JJ' ""'i"- T~j I
v' ~...- "nc".::".::>~'r::' . ,,;;~K: ~ \ ---'~ /-.J~ G
U\S~;'A~Kil ~(0~~' ~~_ ~~\~,~\1. - 2 COMPETmON 18-hole Golf Courses on 250 acres.
~:\)C'" )0Jj"K.\j/(iHJtSfJ1' n\\..\~;f) j\:- -1,610 Home Yz Acre Lot Sites.
Sf r r;;/ '\ ~~bo.~~~~ Ii J (~~~ll'\ \. - 50-Acre lIght commerCIal SIte
iFJ I~~ ~ r;,;.~~~>;-~jP,::.__Jg:!./- 'J~ - 1200 Acres total.
r{: -~.~ ~~":.. - \ >-__'[:::..:3 \ .A...,.;e.~~;iD~-/-"-~ IZ
\)\0/'..-- :.~.~-::;~ .:'S.~:;,~,~yy,t;)'-~~.......cY:." - Breathtakmg VIews of Mt. RaImer
Q" -V.'~':)l:.J~-E~~" "('''~i '.". ~'".I
\5'I'd~_~9~,::: ,PI! 1j)\;..'1r.:;i....:........_\~'<..:::.~ - 14 MIles from OlympIa, Washmgton.
,0 .?<;l=.;~i<o.,,,'"1l v / '/I(.';~""~n~ ~~~, 20 M'l f T
/?i <;70, f 'f 4"":... );'1::,':: ..::_'~ 'L/~ . -'1\ , ~ - I es rom acoma.
~ir<'?:'v":JL-!~\:s/?l '\ ~~~~~Jt~~ SALE PRICE. $12 M.II.
"-', ,/7( ~.,,/',8 _/; ~..I..o~, - t~L '~.' . I Ion SITE
"'1 II I Ii I ".. .<...Y /.' <.' -- I ~\..' - 'J
' J ) /1 i . ( -..;../ ......: /~/ \\ _A--'~__ '- - \~~\ ( ') . . . .
V~;~':::t!;i;1:;[~ ,~'~i:"lt\~~~\~~\~~~ ';l~'<~ 50% JOint-Venture Price: $6.5 Millio~
..,.. FALL CITY ".. .~,;- 'C' -.'_:"? __ AU9URN PUYAlLUP S n9Wlt Roy I ~.
-:'If, ...-----.---.-- CARNATION A c:; - .....,." pa y Y9/m \
.\ :::'E--:'-===== _. _. '/SJ9qullh ...., :J Psrlcl9nd MeChorrt R_
SUL~AH :=:::.:=lr-----,~.- _','- C.) KENT (-) FEDERAL. -AFB Fort Lewis
.....r:.... -:'._ ,.-" E9il1gatf, J!PfION. --- _ ::-~..';. WAY T.ACOMA-=--~.-..
~,,' __ _.REDMOND'-;:" - ''Mlll'Cllr'i:.,rU~lA- '=" -., '__ .:::", "-,;- :;.:,.. , . -,.... -:::-_ :=;~=,:='_
MONROE _.. '. _, BELLEV{jE lfir"d ,[;{..", .:IruRlEN -_ =-_,;;:...... SIBl/.Bc~m ~~c~.:=_-.,..
, ('). (o3Y.----"KIRK~N~"-',c.,.t;1 ,... .0 .",-. -.""'E. ~',-- -,
-- ~'. ---<. ~~BoiHELL'-- S~A>r+r~t,',!':a!-lnlleroJ( I -. ,...~, ~ ..'.".". ,_ LAC,€Y' - -.. ',:,'7-
SNOHOMISH '="~=-='::"'::';( ".. ..'-"'.~.......r~..rr,,,:~,,'e:' '-\ \fas/ron '." -GIG HARBOR 'no",
,"" ;:.:;::::.=~ i.9~:nFo::"Pii~,:-~,,,,.;f;, '--~:___ ".;~- SU;~~:';;h ---- - -..: ."... .~:: -- c?'~t,!~:,!JTViWWATER
'~'.. ...., I'frler Moun~dv.~~," --~, -__".",_ __ wo. .., (..,.- _ _
. _ "",-'....- , ,'. ;00 ,i.Y~NW(}OO ,.TerraCQ''f. -3 -"-"';4 - ~ 0 . -'.... '0...::.. -- 'OJ' ~::-- K C4m1 -."- ,<' ~ .
~~,"",,,,:,""__' '~.~>'.,.t?-. sou ~/~b.'."\......,~"::::_ .,-." _~ '_fIY ._er ""_.' i~."- __.-
, . - " "" ::.'.,....... . EO'1'r\*-!LfS ""r . . . ');ORT ORCHARD ~ _. -,'
.iV('(SIIIL E MUK}LTEO --.4.. ~-..'~--_ B~R-E- ERTQ"'- --.-' ':' -'- .......... "....-
, ~.. ~,.. ~. _'I- L _.. .,..,.., ...
l
l
I,.
~:
:
j
l
,
,
l
)0
,
/,
,.
I
Ii
-,~
\
/
,..-Fn
i
i
-I
'J
\
i
3
1
1
I
!
i
I
-/
.1
1
I
I
!
i
j,
I
i
.1
i
-~:
,
-~!
i
.\
-...(0-:
1
'I
\
I
,
'.
..
REAL ESTATE WEEK
Au~t 6, 1990
18
Who's Building.
Golf Developments
OREGON
Eagle Crest Partners L TO PERMITS Deschutes County SIZE. 650 acres.
CONSTRUCTION START 1992. ARCH. In-house. GC In-house STATUS &
FEATURES. Plans call for the sec-
ond ot two courses to start in 1992
on a SIte near the present Eagle
Crest development five miles
west of Redmond off Highway . Portland
126. (The first course is due to
start this year) The new phase -t( Salem
for Eagle Crest is to mclude
clubhouses and pools and 400 . Eugene
smgle-tanul y lots of a halt acre
each. CONTACT Bill Lyche,
dIrector of development (503)
923-0807 OREGON
Northwest General Inc
PERMITS Clatsop County
SIZE. 400 acres. CONSTRUC-
TION START To be deternuned. ARCH. To be determined. GC To be
determmed. STATUS & FEATURES. Multistage entitlement process involves
dune setbacks and other aspects of the project's 4,000-foot ocean frontage in
the Del Rey Beach area north ot Gearhart. The destination resort community
IS planned to mclude an IS-hole golt course (one of the first components to
break ground upon approvals), a hotel, single-family homes and condos.
CONTACT Dewey Youngblood, president (206) 828-3060
G If
Development
Conference
WASHINGTON
Bear Mountain Ranch. PERMITS. Chelan County SIZE. 1,500 acres. CON-
STRUCTION START 1992. ARCH. To be determined. GC To be determined.
STATUS & FEATURES. The landowner seeks a resort-developer partner
before filing for Bear Mountain Ranch, about five miles from the commul11ty
of Chelan. On the west side
of Highway 97 preliminary
planning calls for a 27-hole
golf club, a possible
resort hotel and
some 1,500 attached
patio homes The
west side land is
about half of the
overall 3,000 acres of
the Bear Mountain
Ranch mpc CON-
TACT Jerry Scofield,
president (206) 453-
1153
. Bellevue
· Seattle
. Tacoma
't( Olympia
Spokane.
How to Structure Financing
Construction & Operating Costs
Feasibility & Economics of Golf
Environmental Solutions
Find Out How to
Make Your Golf
Deal Work. . . !
WASHINGTON
Arnold Palmer Banc Florida Rees Jones
Golf Management Harry Nieman Rees Jones
Ed Bignon
Hale Irwin Golf AquaTurf
Morweg Development Services R. Kent Curley
Forest Fezler Patrick Fister
NTS Corporation
Anderson-Pacific Paul Dunn
Toby Davis e~,~
\ ' ') / American Golf
Club Operations k~, i~ Don Carpenter
& Property Mgmt.
William Horne Chapman, Coyle
~l\j: & Chapman
Realtec Consulting Barry Coyle
Mark Enderle
-~.:.... -_."~::-- Gunster, Yoakley
American International & Stewart
Golt Resorts THK Associates Paul Courtnell
Bran Fanning Dan Cunway
Textron
Chrysler Capital Golf Investment Don Rhodes
Gary Simmuns Advisors
Public Finilnce Al Bechtel Intergolf, Inc.
Allan Irwin, CCM
Maloney Golf Finance Edward Stolle Jr
Russ M.\lunL'y & Associates Johns Isl.lJld Club
Gilry Derck Tim Hiers
Call Now! For Reservations to the Golf Development Conference in
Orlando on September 12-13 (415) 382-2486 or (800) 443-8318.
There will also be a Golf Conference in Palm Springs on November 27-28.
Bear Mountain Ranch
PERMITS Chelan County
SIZE. 1,500 acres, CONSTRUC-
TION START 1993 or later ARCH. To be determined CC To be determined
STATUS & FEATURES. Preliminary planning calls for an IS-hole executive
golf course and some 1,000 single-tamily detached homes on half-acre lots on
the east side of Highway 97 The east SIde land isabout half ot the overall 3,000
acres of the Bear Mountam Ranch mpc about five miles from the community
of Chelan. CONTACT Jerry Scofield, president (206) 453-1153
Welcome Construction. PERMITS Thurston County SIZE. 1,200 acres.
CONSTRUCTION START Spnng 1991 (infrastructure) ARCH. Various, to
be determined CC Various, to be determined STATUS & FEATURES.
Welcome, plans a spring 1991 groundbreaking tor infrastructure at Thurston
Highlands in Yelm. The project will be made up of two gait courses, 1,600
residential units, 50 acres for commercial development, school grounds, parks
and recreational areas. No start dates have been determined on these compo-
nents. CONTACT Ken Mahmood or Doug Carland, (206) 885-1214
Coming August 20th
to the
DRAWING
BOARD:
Who's Building
Hotels, Motels &
Resorts
~
\
"""
f.}liiri~l'
o
Town of "elm
6-
105 Yelm Avenue West
POBox 479
Yelm, Washington 98597
206-458-3244
FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL FORM
"FAX"
v ~'
COMPANY 33alJhtUulp V t'/;r'MJi.-fu;] tile' nailS
INDIVIDUAL . ~UI fJ,eL-
NUMBER ,;(5 - 1ry
TO
COMPANY u~ 4 t.ek
INDIVIDUAL [/ 1~ ~cI~A~
!J
NUMBER (206) 458-4348
NUMBER OF PAGES TO FOLLOW ~
DATE c;: q -10 TIME SENT / / : _'15"
SUBJECT fl.11/7ul/lts -1jC:4r Jr&W Lo,AY/r'; I /l/lj -
Ui/~ M)A)f/! IM~~ ~p:rt~
lDD ITI~NAL cOMMkNTS .. f - e n -- - . ttlJ'lfctU-
tfh n ff},Jt, , ~ 'P a/) ml'/;- F ~ (~
hiN ~ ~ 4bW/2 r ~e &I .
"FAX"
FROM
**** IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL COPIES OR ANY
COPY IS NOT LEGIBLE, PLEASE CALL (206) 458-3244
AS SOON AS POSSIBLE ****
..
'/!~.
;~
I;l
o
o
CI:l
~rn
<( .~
Q)ro
0'0
.- c
;:: :J
Q)O
(f.)eD
~;I
CE)
co
Q)
....
:J
.21
I..L..
~I""r
tllsQ".II~
,;'"
"
"
'.
"
,
"
"
,~
.",
oJ'.,:!'
"'/
,~
'.."
~,
/:,c}
,q;?
","
v
~
/.
"
J
,f
//J
I
\,
~~.
.,'\,"
S!
'"
~
~.
\
UJ
~ I ,....
W g /.." .
U)~..lo........,".. ~ ..~.:
~ : ~ . .
~: ~ l' ...... :,
~~ t @
,... '., ~.. ..:.
'It.., ".,
"
'.
\.
'\
co'<-
.'
t::J-s,0
~.
~,tJ
f.l
I
\
I:
; ,
i
.........~'-
"
j-;
......
'"
\
"
"1
(
( ....
'.
'.
"
,\ ...
.............-------.
,
I
!
\ ./~\.
l....... ...~....~..
r:..
f> ~.
"1 .....
//
I \.~..... ......
I .....
, ,.~.~'.... .....~v.zo.J:<."'l
38 p80~ UO,04t;j l ' ,-, " "<t,
I i' /. '~v.
1 1 I', ,,,,~
Ii\". /. I , ~ .... ..'
1 i / <' :Ict.f'. '~"
i / : ....~
/ ,i 1..-
:-:::::';:: .u...-..y/ , ,~ ,,:: l' ~I'}v~ /... ~~: '"Fa-
'...... .'1 '''<i, ./ (' , ~ "L " 1:.::::" 'I:
........ VJ<<:~ ~~.s\' ,) ~ I:
...... l,,0t;.y :c(;~-;, ! ;r I:
... 'b......~ Kl.$l';' Irl
..' ~ y <1'",. . / '\ ; E' '
....... ~.; ~, /~"'I.'\
..... _0"" ',v -, ..'
U.:), <&"Il / ')>1 ,// .~ I:'
~7%> ' I~Q;" 1(0" ". I:
~ ,: /,," /;1,'';;:' ~...T........~-...
3S peOfJ 6uallnbf', .,o'l' ,j" .~if //,!' "'~ \., ,
... ,; ~.f .-:;;; ''\, '
, '., ,. " '1
,I /.' 0;:.. .:><:"
'~,~: ~ ~ ,
.... /.' ~ s:> I ,
"M'" I
:1.. .,
i( i\ ·
;...............i--~--
: ,
"
,:,-.
.
.
'\"
Iii
! !i
ALI..:.&=T.~:'O'~-
II I' :1 'Ill" I I
i 'i :1 i .~ 11 ! I
,i i1 :1 0 \ I
I lOr! :1 li~ I
: .....01.1"' . > ,I
:;J I II I
~.t~~~':"---- ....-__!
I!
"
..
..,-
..
3$ peotj 'IllSI:)
'-1'
UJ
III
~
Vi
~
~
,
I;
r
V-
I.
!
,-"!-
<S-.!'
,
.............:.;;.1
:.~........J .
"
.........
~l'
H
~~
, .
s e
.....
,"
'.
'.
........
.
.
....L... ...... ......:
,
\ p.'. \
\ :~. " .
V '<-:<.
. " ~.
. " ~. \
~ /"~, "'~. "\ .
,'/ ;,........ .~.
,~,/' \ ',,'~ ',,\ ...
. \"' ..... : i
~ \ '... .!.\\ ' :.:
~,,' " ..,...........a.a.r.a;&;4..,"
";;,Joa.a.r"",,,,"";;,Joo~-,'\..~S.\l~-"''''' \ I "-, ......"
. .,- .", .....,- \ ,~ ,,, .' ~
(~\. \' \ 'w \ \ \ \ \ ! \>.., ,t. I ~.! "........'!y /'" . r
"" 00"" \ \ \ . '. ''t<o . i ///1 ,'....
;\ ) "l, II \ \ f! l .....(~f' /(-,/} "'~.. "-
"':~'~~ l"\ \ \ \ '. ,1/" 'x../J~ / ,If
, 0'" 0" 0 N" · ....-F.'..
0,. ,,0" J ...J-.:l'_1 .' \ 0 ........'!-'I o' "I"'" 0 =,,,,,,. '1;
, ,:;.Io~ _ ' I ..... i<I...;.,...o....~'" I";!'; ......""0/ \"
o O' ,,;.' "" 0
\ ........ \ J.l . 1 I ~,/,Ji \
, \ ..... :"". . . ,. " " '
...~.... ,,$:1 ,,-'1& \ / '~/'1!"<o, *"~ \':.
....... , "'.. 1 · ,j' ,"C" ·
" l~' :; i" /./.i i' ""~'1ii::"'~:'-
, ;IS PQO\lQUQ\ln6..... ,>-...' I "~I' ;';"-<"'j 'I~:' ~ '
~ "-' I 1. ,I / '" . To" , ~'. ' '
, :_~/.,,{ '" /,'\ \:.,. ~ ""..\' ,
\ \ :.z..../J.'j" /ir %~ 1'::' ... \\
: .... A1 :'" _..'
. (.... ~. -..::::, ~
\ -"-' ~......' ."
, ' \. ;,' ' .
\!\ .)( ~\ ,\ .
, : ' \ ' '
, ' ..' \
,).-...... ................ . '
. ' .
(\'\ 1;': tl ~
,...... ' ~ \ 'l
'.... \/; ;~
..../: J ~
.::" "'\\
.......
oIIi 1'''"'
t11,p.\l ....
~
~ I
,
, \ j
o
it
..J.~
.r:
.
.,
J
I. ,"'.
-e
~
,..,
t.g ~
,,~
ioe
e.!'l
......
"
''"''
I'
I
v
Ii
,\
i :\
l"
~i:
1 :1\
.';'~;,\
~-A
. ;\
~1
-~
o
",
"1.,"'"
~
~
-0 ~ ~ ~
1 " " 5 c
e ., ., c ::.
Ql "' ::I ::. .) ? G '"
01 :' G " " " ~
.3 ... .. ~ '" ... c;(
\ \ I \
\
\ I
\ I .
\ \ \
I
\ \ \
\
\
,j>'~
~..,..;."
.,".
g
~!
~
".
o
.>,
,.).'.
;,1/
~
oJ>
(J'/
<;"(t~'r~,
.//\
\.
'f'l.,
~~\~;-
~./
f'\-~C='!i\\\ ../.....
. V;l . ~ .........
~: ~ ~ ii
, ". : \3
~. ~:. :'" ~ :..
~ 11\...... .-!
" ..........
",
,,'<-
,l'
\.i'"
\'"
l'lll..
'.
'.
'.
. )'
....
en :3
c:: 0
~"_ :;>0
~o;'Cro
Q) ._ tll-l
....)(.....
~u.l c E
f1) cP~~
c::~(l)<1l
0'- :;>0
.;:. --;, Q) f1)
oc.~c.
~ ~ ~u.l
o~Q)1-
Q4.f1)(/)
(t')
cO
Q)
::;
01
u:
............
...~
l?
.,
fJ
"......;..,
11"""01'"
i
\ /
.....~:--
.
.
.
.\1
,\ ....._..........~.;,..
-,'..
t'
~. ........... ......,
~,-
....-.......---~-' .-~-----\
\-
\
\
\
\
\
._...,-a.-..-----.........---. -,-1
.......... ..".
_ 3$ p~O\i "Jll\':)
\,
\
\
\
\
\
\. .~
\~
\
\
\
(
\
\
\
\
\
~
\
\
'.
~~'I
\'
\
\
\
\
\
'"
'"
-;
if.
~
)
.~
.-
,.
"9~
~
\~
.J
J
\/\
\'-----
SEC.
rr 1 7N,
1\ 1 I~ ,
W.M.
ZI-Clllo
11-0101
I II
SUB
......
..
,-.
21-01 )'
,I ~-OI!02
.'_0" ',,-
11__10'/''-
/
12-02
lI!-OJ
lJ-Ol!
It-Ol
lu-ou
11-01'
1...)
c
21-OG
o
c3) 0
11-0405
11-00
II-OS
11-04040
ll-oe
a-ol
18-0302
IS-OJ
14-01'
H n rSClK
HI-OS
/
./
B.~d~_
..
14-0201
H&r';ll\(
,~\!tf-toJfL_ __..__ .__._
~
,it
,)!.lllW
/;),
~ "-0'
Is-tO
HorSGX
. ....J!
G'~.'~II
.....oe "-DeDI
,~Ke. r ,b aJ(~v
tih 1111 Wi:;..t;
OK
41-03
<:ED
o
42-0101
~<;'+-o.ft
J2.~~I~.t
.
\
}
~I-OI
(}-
1J~
f.<.:Jat~""
..onJ1blAt fkNOIlI(~,~.~ _R~4.JJy--
..
,{
l.9-'
tl~
~
f r 41-0801
H OnV'rl11V1 (~;;~
____.0
S tL/ttJi)0 (y--
~ U_Ol\OSl-'-
(l!t:IhIt1{A(f Ktri1A will iJ\
"I-oe~
~
/ / ~ 3tJ()-
.t to, ~&J-
~
wtlSf/
PuEL"
I.~
'\J
E tfUJvJ,J
~
\
~
(
f;,b-
rpfL
!U-OI
~
Wi I ~ Ii fi?
;:Jf) R i Y'1-
~
r
..
E/~/VI.; lVe3W&
~
:6!/.~1.V ,.)
0/c.<J tv ,.)
-dt~!,
..
10
---
-----
'\
,
,,'~ ..,,>-...\_1....'
~~
RAINIER
EST A TES
~
"
'^-\STERPL.....~
C",,"C,IT; fO'
\
I
~'\ \\
~ II
~ \ \
'~> \ \
'\ I'
\, I I
, \ \
\ \ \
\ I
\ \
\ \
1\
\ \
\ \
2S~\
\ I
I
''''''
,~
'9\il!
\~
~\il\
,s~\
~
V E N \ U R E
p ~ R \ N E R S
YeI m I-tign s.:nooI
------- -" -- - - "" ""'~"'"','"',- - ------ - --
l<\~S\ERPL~" S\JMl<\~RY
~
------;--
~~<.~"
.\ "P-:: ,;~r
~
~U\\i-Fam'\'i
"...::!. o.u. .-. 11 ;1<: .. ,h d.\.l., ole
Zl} Wet\3ndS
\~ Gfeen'oe\t'S.
39 jtoadwa"s
Singlt faft'll\~
19 I.Lu. .;- \40 aC := ~ \~ d.o..
puh\\( Selvice..
, "lelg,'nb01'hOOd B\,1<;ine~~
,,) ~u\l\.FanH'~
GrO..... Den<i'\~
\11\ d.u."C' ::t'l4 aC:= .i-"4 d.\.1.-3'
~ s\n~\e f:J.lni.\~
,64 TO,."L "CReS
'-i-i:-
-:f~
,~
'0'~
, 4-
~-$I~
~~~
..,~
4" " '0"'"' .00
e
ENTRANCO
~n
-~~
~
-- '~N I 'SH33r\II~N3-DNu.lnSNO::> N3SnVH~HV8
---l
w' I' I
<Ii
uJ . I .
~ ";'"7 I
~. I I
~;:d]'_
~I I !
j'
~ i II~..:
It) (Ij
- (Ij
~%
~ (\C ..
"'0
1('
T-
c
w
en
o
a.
o
a:
a.
(
<C
w
a:
<C
Z
o
-
~
><
W
Z
Z
<C
f~:
'~w
0-1
o <t
AU
-en
.,
,
+0
~ ~~ (Ij
11t~> Q.~~:
~~o ~~
~
Q
"
(.>
~
o
~;t
__fti.~'",
n
n
III
JOINT PlAN ARIA
Ell_I
'"
/
IS'OUALLY
$,,,
I~ M
-
'0 /, I
01
a: / I I
c: I {
:0 1"1
D J
:: iJ
f 0 9.~~d Ave
" : i
V :
i
+- +
n
I
I
.-J
l-.j
J
!
I :
~
i
i
i
j
.1
iJ,. ~
11_11_IIIIi!IJ/IU_n.
c:==-:=~:.:c::;:_::=~:.... -"-r-
PLANNING AREA BOUNDARY
SPHERE OF INFLUENCE
CITY l!MITS
IMMEDIATE ANNEXATION AREA