Public Hearing

AGENDA Public Hearing Meeting 11:00 AM - Tuesday, April 15, 2025 200 East Scott Avenue - Woodland, Washington Page I. CALL TO ORDER II. PUBLIC HEARING A. WLD-2024-023 Lewis River Townhomes 2 - 26 Item-25-0034 Supporting Packet - Pdf III. END MEETING City of Woodland is inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting. Topic: Public Hearing Time: Apr 15, 2025 11:00 AM Pacific Time (US and Canada) Join Zoom Meeting https://zoom.us/j/95136471912?pwd=jRaRN6iUItcE8S1yoyXDJaQrHtay12.1 Meeting ID: 951 3647 1912 Passcode: 734767 Dial by your location • +1 253 205 0468 US • +1 253 215 8782 US (Tacoma) • +1 346 248 7799 US (Houston) • +1 669 444 9171 US • +1 305 224 1968 US Find your local number: https://zoom.us/u/anOjqzX8K Page 1 of 26 Agenda Item Report Meeting Date: Public Hearing - 15 Apr 2025 Department: Heading: PUBLIC HEARING Subject: WLD-2024-023 Lewis River Townhomes Summary Statement: The applicant proposes to subdivide a 5.56-acre lot in the floodplain into 39 residential lots with 4 additional tracts. The 39 residential lots are proposed to be developed with townhomes. Tract A will hold stormwater, Tract B will be open space with stormwater, sewer upgrades, and a trail to the river, Tract C will be reserved as a vegetative buffer tract, and Tract D will provide flood control access. The proposal also involves new streets with sidewalks, utilities (stormwater, sanitary sewer, water, electrical, gas, TV, internet), driveways, patios, porches, stormwater outfall, a pump station, fire hydrant, and 18,000 cubic yards of fill and grade. The project page can be found at: https://www.ci.woodland.wa.us/commdev/project/720-sandalwood- lewis-river-townhomes Financial Impact: Cost of Item: $0 Amount Budgeted: $0 Bars Code description: Unexpended Balance: $0 Attachments: WLD-2024-023 Staff Report 040825 Page 2 of 26  Community Development Department Building | Planning | Code Enforcement (360) 225-7299 www.ci.woodland.wa.us Staff Report & SEPA DNS Lewis River Townhomes – Shoreline Substantial Development Permit & SEPA Determination of Non-Significance Land Use Application No.: WLD-2024-023 (Shoreline Substantial Development Permit – Type III) Applicant: Sterling Design, Inc. Joel Stirling 2208 E Evergreen Blvd Vancouver, WA 98661 Property Owners: Woodland T/H 2021 LLC Bill Huyette 5107 NE 94th Ave Vancouver WA 98662 Site Location: 720 Sandalwood Parcel: 50492 Shoreline Environmental High Intensity Designation: Zoning: Medium Density Residential Water Body: Lewis River Application Received: May 3, 2024 Application Deemed June 12, 2024 Complete: Notice of Application: June 14, 2024 Staff Report Issued: April 8, 2025 DRC Recommendation: Approved with Conditions Public Hearing Date & Time: April 15, 2025 @ 11:00 A.M. Page 3 of 26 I. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL The applicant proposes to subdivide a 5.56-acre lot in the floodplain into 39 residential lots with 4 additional tracts. The 39 residential lots are proposed to be developed with townhomes. Tract A will hold stormwater, Tract B will be open space with stormwater, sewer upgrades, and a trail to the river, Tract C will be reserved as a vegetative buffer tract, and Tract D will provide flood control access. The proposal also involves new streets with sidewalks, utilities (stormwater, sanitary sewer, water, electrical, gas, TV, internet), driveways, patios, porches, stormwater outfall, a pump station, fire hydrant, and 18,000 cubic yards of fill and grade. II. REVIEW AUTHORITY Per WMC 19.08.030, Shoreline Substantial Development Permits shall be approved, approved with conditions, or denied by the Hearing Examiner who will issue a decision. This staff report is a recommendation by the Development Review Committee (DRC) to the Hearing Examiner. III. FINDINGS – SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM Impact Fees | WMC Title 3 WMC 3.40, 3.41, and 3.42 include regulations for impact fees related to schools, fire, recreation, and transportation. Finding 1: The applicants will be required to pay impact fees during the building permitting process (see Condition 2). Impact fees will be paid at the rates applicable at the time of building permit issuance. Conclusion: As conditioned, the proposal will comply with this standard. Streets and Sidewalks | WMC Title 12 Title 12 regulates street and sidewalk improvements that the proposal shall meet. Finding 2: The street frontage along E CC Street is incomplete and will require construction of frontage improvements, including attached sidewalk, curb and gutter, landscaping, and street lighting consistent with City of Woodland Engineering standards (Standards) and applicable Woodland Municipal Code (WMC). Private roads are not allowed except through the PURD process, see WMC 16.22. Current plans detail 26-foot-wide roads which is the minimum width for private streets. The proposed development must meet the City’s T-27 Local Access Road standards which requires 32-foot minimum road width (curb to curb) with frontage improvements Lewis River Townhomes – Staff Report and Recommendation WLD-2024-023 Page 2 Page 4 of 26  including attached sidewalk or detached sidewalk, curb and gutter, landscaping and street lighting. A condition is added that all improvements in the public right-of-way shall be completed in accordance with the Standards and WMC. Additionally, dedication of Right-of-Way shall comply with the standards and WMC. Sidewalks shall be 6-feet wide per City of Woodland Standard Detail T-07. (See Condition #3) Conclusion: As conditioned, the project can comply with this standard. Water and Sewage | WMC Title 13 Title 13 includes regulations for water and sewage that apply to the proposed development. Finding 3: An existing 6-inch water main is available to tie into on the south side of E CC Street. Existing water mains 6-inches in diameter must be preplaced with minimum 8- inch diameter water mains along the frontage of new developments. Minimum 8-inch diameter water mains must be installed throughout the proposed development. Gravity Sewer does not exist in this area of the city. The City’s primary sewer force main collects all sewage from the city and conveys it to the Waste Water Treatment Plant (WWTP) adjacent to the proposed development. The design Engineer should consider:  Connecting to the existing sewer force main;  Connecting directly to the WWTP:  Connecting to Lift Station #4;  Connecting upstream of Lift Station No. 4 to existing gravity sewer. An analysis should be completed discussing alternatives and providing justification for a recommended alternative. Additionally, Lift Station No. 4’s location may move in the future due to impacts of the City’s Exit 21 improvements project. This should be carefully coordinated between the applicant and the city. (See Condition #4 through #7) Finding 3a: It should he noted that the project is near the City of Woodland Wastewater Treatment Plan. This proximity means there are likely to be odors and activities associated with the normal operation of the plant that could affect this development. As a result, Condition 48 has been added requiring that notes be placed on the face of the plat informing owners and occupants about the plant and recognizing the right of the city to operate the plant as it deems necessary and accepting that noise, light and smells from the plant may on occasion affect the residents of this development. Lewis River Townhomes – Staff Report and Recommendation WLD-2024-023 Page 3 Page 5 of 26  Finding 4: The fire mains shall be public mains with a 15-foot-wide easement to the city. The layout of these utilities shall meet the requirements of the Engineering Standards and WMC. (See Condition #8) Finding 5: Water and Sewer Assessment Fees: connection charges and assessments for water and sewer will be assessed in accordance with the applicable rate schedule. (see Condition 9). Conclusion: As conditioned, the proposal will comply with this standard. 2021 IBC Requirements | Title 14 Finding 6: Due to the presence of fill, as part of the building permit process the applicant shall provide a geotech /soils report based on 2021 IBC requirements. It will need to be site specific for the Lewis River Townhouse Subdivision. Finding 7: 2. The structural design for each townhouse is required to meet the requirements outlined in the geotech / soils report. Finding 8: 3. A separate building permit is required for the retaining wall at the northwest end of the development if it is over 4-feet, or if under 4-feet and it carries a surcharge. Provisions for Flood Hazard Reduction | WMC 14.40.050.A.4 Subdivision proposals shall comply with the following standards: A. All subdivision proposals shall be consistent with the need to minimize flood damage; Finding 9: All lots will be in the floodplain but out of the floodway. Along with the proposed subdivision, the applicants plan to complete clearing and grading work that will elevate the lots over one foot above the base flood elevation. The applicant will be required to provide elevation certificates and complete floodplain reviews as part of the building permit process unless a Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) or similar FEMA documentation is provided at the time of building permit submission. (See Condition #13.) Conclusion: As conditioned, this project can comply with this standard. B. All subdivision proposals shall have public utilities and facilities such as sewer, gas, electrical, and water systems located and constructed to minimize flood damage; Lewis River Townhomes – Staff Report and Recommendation WLD-2024-023 Page 4 Page 6 of 26  Finding 10: As part of the final engineering process, the applicant will need to show how the utilities will be constructed to minimize flood damage. The final engineering plans shall include a note regarding utility flood resiliency. (See Condition #14.) Conclusion: As conditioned, the project can demonstrate compliance with this standard. C. All subdivision proposals shall have adequate drainage provided to reduce exposure to flood damage; and Finding 11: Drainage has been reviewed by the City Engineer. (See below.) The proposed stormwater outfall will be required to obtain a Flood Development Permit with a no-net rise analysis before that work can commence. Conclusion: The proposal will comply with this standard. D. Where base flood elevation data has not been provided or is not available from another authoritative source, it shall be generated for subdivision proposals and other proposed developments that contain at least fifty lots or five acres (whichever is less). Finding 12: Base flood elevation data is available from FEMA’s datum maps. As part of the final plat review, applicants will be required to provide base flood elevation data on the face of the plat. (See Condition 15.) Conclusion: The proposal will comply with this standard. Environment | WMC Title 15 The proposal was reviewed for compliance with applicable environmental regulations as outlined in the sections outlined below. Shoreline Master Program (SMP) | WMC 15.10 Use Specific Regulations | SMP 4.9.2.J Single-family residential development is a preferred use. All residential uses should minimize the need for shoreline stabilization. New multi-family development projects with more than 4 units shall provide public access. Finding 13: The proposal is residential and a preferred use, which has more than 4 units. The project will provide public access in the form of a recreation tract that will include an easement for public access. (See Conditions #36 & 38.) Conclusion: The project complies with this standard. Lewis River Townhomes – Staff Report and Recommendation WLD-2024-023 Page 5 Page 7 of 26 Shoreline Modifications | SMP 4.10.2.D Fills and excavation should be located, designed, and constructed to protect shoreline ecological functions and ecosystem-wide processes including channel migration. Finding 14: The proposal includes 18,000 cubic yards of fill and grade. All clearing and grading will occur outside the shoreline buffer and setback. Conclusion: The project complies with this standard. No Net Loss of Ecological Function | SMP 6.1 All development shall have a no net loss of shoreline ecological functions. Mitigation shall occur in the following prioritized order: avoidance, minimization, rectification, preservation, compensation, and monitoring. Finding 15: As outlined in the critical area report and enhancement plan, the proposal uses mitigation sequencing for avoidance, minimization and mitigation. The proposal includes enhancement and monitoring for impacts from the development that offset ecological functions on and near the site which more than offset impacts due to the functional isolation of the habitat as discussed in the report. Conclusion: The project complies with this standard. Archaeological Resources | SMP 6.2 If historic, cultural, or archaeological sites or artifacts are discovered in the process. of development, work shall be stopped immediately in accordance with provisions of federal, state, and local laws; the site secured; and the find reported as soon as possible to the city. The property owner also shall notify the Washington. Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation and affected tribes. Tribal contacts will be provided by the city. The city may require a site investigation by a qualified professional and may require avoidance or conservation of resources in coordination with appropriate agencies. All shoreline permits shall contain a special provision notifying permittees of this requirement. Failure to comply with this requirement shall be considered a violation of the shoreline permit and shall subject the permittee to legal action as specified in Section 8.12, Enforcement, of this Program. Finding 16: A condition of approval has been added to ensure this regulation is followed. (See Condition 17.) Lewis River Townhomes – Staff Report and Recommendation WLD-2024-023 Page 6 Page 8 of 26  Conclusion: The project complies with this standard. Flood | SMP 6.4 Development shall be consistent with WMC 14.40. New residential development, including subdivisions, would be prohibited if it would require structural flood hazard reduction measures in the channel migration zone or floodway over the life of the development. Structural flood hazard reduction measures are defined as dikes, levees, and floodwalls intended to contain flow within the channel, channel realignment, and elevation of structures consistent with the National Flood Insurance Program. Finding 17: The subject site is within the floodplain but outside of the floodway and channel migration zone. Applicants will be required to comply with WMC 14.40. (See Condition 13 and 15.) Conclusion: The project complies with this standard. Public Access | SMP 6.5 Residential development with more than four units shall provide public access that complies with the standards of this section. The standards include that the path shall start from a public street, meet ADA requirements, have signage, and be recorded by easement. Finding 18: The applicants have proposed a public access tract for recreation purposes. This tract will not be dedicated to the city. Finding 19: A condition of approval has been added to ensure the path complies with these standards. (See Conditions 36 & 38.) Conclusion: The project will comply with this standard. Vegetation Conservation | SMP 6.6 Vegetation clearing in shoreline jurisdiction shall be limited to the minimum necessary to accommodate approved shoreline development. Finding 20: Conditions of approval will be added to ensure vegetation is only removed to accommodate approved development. The buffer tract will be planted as provided in the critical areas report dated (February 18, 2025) and that will include removal of non-native species and planting of native species. Maintenance for these mitigation measures shall be the responsibility of the developer, and or their heirs, assigns, or successors. (See Conditions 19 & 20.) Lewis River Townhomes – Staff Report and Recommendation WLD-2024-023 Page 7 Page 9 of 26  Conclusion: As conditioned, the project will comply with this standard. Water | SMP 6.7 All shoreline development shall comply with the applicable requirements of the city’s Comprehensive Stormwater Plan, Comprehensive Plan, and best management practices to prevent impacts to water quality and stormwater quantity that would result in a net loss of shoreline ecological functions and/or a significant impact to aesthetic qualities or recreational opportunities. Infiltration facilities are encouraged to be located in the shoreline jurisdiction in association with development also allowed in shoreline jurisdiction. Finding 21: The applicant has proposed stormwater plans that will comply with the city stormwater standards, the implementation of which will meet this standard. Conclusion: The project complies with this standard. Use | SMP 7.1 Multi-family residential developments are a permitted use in the High Intensity Shoreline Environmental Designation. Finding 22: The proposal is a permitted use. Conclusion: The project complies with this standard. Setbacks | SMP 7.1 The site has a 10-foot setback measured landward from the end of the buffer. Per SMP Appendix B Section 4.8, a limited number of activities are allowed in the setback. Finding 23: No development is proposed in the setback aside from the outfall and public access path both of which are permitted to encroach all the way into the buffer. Conclusion: The project complies with this standard. Residential Regulations | SMP 7.2.11 All new residential uses and development, including subdivisions, shall be designed such that no shoreline stabilization measures are necessary, shall be located and designed to Lewis River Townhomes – Staff Report and Recommendation WLD-2024-023 Page 8 Page 10 of 26 minimize view obstructions to and from the shoreline from other properties, shall be prohibited in, over, or floating on the water, and shall be prohibited in floodways and channel migration zones. Finding 24: The bank of the subject property is an engineered structure placed prior to the adoption of the Shoreline Management Act. The proposed development does not propose to modify the bank except for an outfall which will need to be permitted. Therefore, there should be no need to provide shoreline stabilization for this project. Finding 25: As discussed below, the CC Street bridge is upstream from this site. It is more likely to be the cause for bank protection measures because it is an essential public facility that would need to be protected from erosion and failure. Any such measure, either as an emergency or by design, would need to consider possible erosion events on this site that warrant bank protection. But this would be true whether the site is developed or not. Therefore, this project appears to meet this standard. Finding 26: No homes are proposed in, over, or on the water. Finding 27: The subject site is outside of the floodway and channel migration zone. Conclusion: The project complies with this standard. Shoreline Modification | SMP 7.3.3 Fill may be placed in flood hazard areas only when is demonstrated in a hydrogeological report prepared by a qualified professional that adverse impacts to hydrogeologic processes will be avoided. Finding 28: The applicant’s critical area report discusses the presence of an engineered shoreline bank on the site created when horseshoe lake was created, and both the airport and Interstate 5 were created. Staff opines that development on top of the engineered bank should not affect the hydrogeologic forces on the bank that occur in the water and that the project is not in a hazard area. The location of the site downstream of the CC Street Bridge means that damage to this site would only occur when there is an upstream failure of the banks and bridge abutments, which is not a foreseeable hazard that a Geotech review would consider. Such review is not reasonably proportional, and it has questionable nexus for the proposed development. Additionally, the purpose of such analysis would only be for the purpose of formulating mitigation and protection measures raising additional nexus or proportionality arguments. Finally, if the bridge were in danger, there are four agencies (the city, two Lewis River Townhomes – Staff Report and Recommendation WLD-2024-023 Page 9 Page 11 of 26  counties and WSDOT) that would likely take preventative actions before full failure and collapse of the bridge were to occur. Therefore, the formulation of mitigation measures or preventative actions by the applicant would not be reasonable given that the agencies mentioned would likely act before the applicant would be given permission to preemptively act. Therefore, this section is determined not applicable. Conclusion: The minimal placement of fill for grading is not affected by this standard. Approval Criteria | SMP 8.6.3 This section requires that projects within the shoreline must comply with WMC Title 17 zoning regulations in addition to regulations within the SMP. If a non-water-oriented use is approved, the decision maker shall enter specific findings documenting why water-oriented uses are not feasible. Finding 29: See above for the finding which have a detailed analysis of the project’s compliance with Title 17. Conclusion: The project complies with this standard. Mitigation Requirements | SMP Appendix B 4.3 The applicant shall avoid all impacts that degrade the functions and values of a critical area(s). Compensatory mitigation will be required for unavoidable alteration to a critical area or buffer resulting from a development proposal, in accordance with this Program. Finding 30: Conditions of approval have been added to ensure vegetation is only removed to accommodate approved development. The buffer tract will be planted as provided in the critical areas report dated (February 18, 2025) and that will include removal of non-native species and planting of native species. Maintenance for these mitigation measures shall be the responsibility of the developer, and or their heirs, assigns, or successors. (See Conditions 19 & 20.) Conclusion: As conditioned this development complies with this standard. Mitigation Sequencing | SMP Appendix B 4.4 Applicants shall demonstrate that all reasonable efforts have been made to avoid or minimize impacts to critical areas. When alteration to a critical area is proposed, Lewis River Townhomes – Staff Report and Recommendation WLD-2024-023 Page 10 Page 12 of 26 such alteration shall be mitigated in the following order of preference: avoid, minimize, repair, restore, preserve, compensate, and monitor. Finding 31: The Voluntary Enhancement and Monitoring Plan as laid out in the Critical Areas Report & Enhancement Plan dated February 18, 2025, addresses sequencing and with the implementation of this plan, the project will meet this standard. (See Conditions 19 & 20.) Conclusion: The report’s mitigation sequencing complies with this section. Notice on Title | SMP Appendix B 4.7 Notice of the existence of a critical area and/or buffer on a site shall be recorded on the property title. The restriction shall state that limitations to development may exist due to the presence of a critical area and/or buffer. Finding 32: A condition of approval has been added to ensure applicants adhere to this standard. The applicant shall submit a copy of the recorded deed restriction prior to final plat approval. (See Condition 21.) Conclusion: The proposal will comply with this standard. Setbacks | SMP Appendix B 4.8 Buildings and other structures shall be constructed outside of the setback area unless otherwise allowed by this section. Finding 33: Per SMP Appendix B Section 4.8, the setback is 10 feet. Setbacks will be added to the face of the plat. (See condition 16.) Finding 34: The proposal is outside of this area. Conclusion: The proposal complies with this standard. Frequently Flooded Areas | SMP Appendix B 7 Development within frequently flooded areas shall not cause further limitation of channel migration and shall include appropriate protection of ecological functions. Findings 35: As stated in the critical areas report, staff agree that the site is functionally isolated and the placement of fill in 2007 further complicates the problem. However, because the site is mapped as a flood zone, conditions of approval will be added to ensure that the development will be protected from flood damage. (See Conditions 13 through 15.) Findings 36: The presence of a mapped flood Channel Migration Zone (CMZ) is mitigated by the presence of an engineered bank and the bridge abutments Lewis River Townhomes – Staff Report and Recommendation WLD-2024-023 Page 11 Page 13 of 26  north of the site. These engineered structures preexisted the SMMP which recognizes that the CMZ was set as the shoreline boundary by default because there was a lack of any CMZ information at the time the SMMP was adopted. Staff therefore finds that the proposed project poses no new identifiable limitation to the CMZ. Conclusion: The proposal complies with this standard. Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas | SMP Appendix B 9 This chapter outlines regulations for Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas (FWHCA) and begins by outlining what areas are considered a fish and wildlife conservation area. This section outlines requirements for both temporary and permanent markers of FWHCA buffers. Finding 37: Applicants will be required to install temporary silt fencing along the perimeter of the buffer before any construction activities begin. (See Condition 26.) Finding 38: Applicants will be required to install permanent signs made from durable material and mounted on a metal post every 50 feet along the boundary of the buffer. The owner of the property shall be responsible for the maintenance of the signs. (See Condition 27.) Finding 39: Applicants will be required to install and maintain split rail fencing at the boundary of the buffer. (See Condition 28.) Conclusion: As conditioned, the proposal complies with this standard. Land that is located entirely within a habitat conservation area or its buffer shall not be subdivided. Buffer areas shall be identified on the face of subdivision maps and shall be protected in perpetuity with conservation covenants, deed restrictions, or other legally binding mechanisms. Land that is located partially within a habitat conservation area or buffer may be divided provided an accessible portion of each new lot is located outside the conservation area or buffer and each established new lot can be reasonably developed within intrusion into the standard habitat buffer. A lot may be subdivided into lots outside the conservation area or buffer and a lot entirely within the buffer area, so long as the lot within the conservation area or buffer area is designated as not developable on the final plat. Finding 40: The project proposes placing the buffer area into a tract the maintenance of which has been conditioned. Fencing along this tract shall be limited to split rail fencing as conditioned. Conclusion: As conditioned, the proposal complies with this standard. Lewis River Townhomes – Staff Report and Recommendation WLD-2024-023 Page 12 Page 14 of 26 Shoreline Buffers | SMP Appendix B, 9.4.D The riparian habitat width on the subject site is 150 feet. Unless otherwise allowed, all structures and activities should be outside this area. Areas which are functionally separated from a riparian habitat area due to preexisting roads, structures, or similar circumstances, shall be excluded from buffers on a case-by- case basis subject to a critical area report and review as determined by the Director. Finding 41: As discussed in the Critical Areas Report & Enhancement Plan dated February 18, 2025, staff concurs that the shoreline buffers are functionally isolated under WMC 15.08.730-D.11. The applicant has proposed a voluntary buffer tract that will be protected from development and enhanced as outlined in the report. Conditions have been attached to ensure this occurs. Considering this, the buffer has been reduced to a varying width between approximately 10 and 42 feet. No development is proposed within this reduced buffer aside from the shoreline public access path and stormwater outfall which are explicitly allowed in the buffer per SMP Appendix B 9.4.D.6.a since they are water-dependent uses. Conclusion: The proposal complies with this standard. Erosion Control | WMC 15.10 Applicants are required to install and maintain erosion control measures per the Best Management Practices as outlined in the 2012 version of the Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington during site excavations and grading. An NPDES permit from the Department of Ecology is required where more than one acre is being disturbed. Finding 42: A condition of approval is added to meet all erosion control requirements of WMC 15.10 and follow the Woodland Design Standards for erosion control as part of the final engineering submittal. Additionally, a Fill and Grade permit is required. (See Conditions #10, 11 & 26.) Conclusion: As conditioned, the proposal will comply with this standard. Stormwater | WMC 15.12 Finding 43: The applicant will be required to submit a stormwater TIR addressing the following comments. Note: A stormwater report and/or calculations were Lewis River Townhomes – Staff Report and Recommendation WLD-2024-023 Page 13 Page 15 of 26  not reviewed for this NOD as they were not part of the applicant’s submittal documents. • Per Woodland Municipal Code 15.12, the City of Woodland follows the 1992 Puget Sound Manual. If the applicant chooses to utilize the design practices and guidelines in the newer versions of the SWMMWW, all elements of the design for this project must meet the current Ecology manual. • Ensure the contents of the TIR includes all information as outlined in Section 15.12.180 of the WMC. • Provide conveyance calculations for all storm pipes. The City of Woodland requires the closed storm conveyance systems to be designed for the 25-year storm event. • Infiltration testing completed by a geotechnical engineer will be required. The seasonal high groundwater must be determined as a part of the geotechnical investigation. Vertical separation from bioretention/infiltration facilities must be addressed. (See Condition #12) Conclusion: As conditioned, the project can comply with this standard. Zoning | WMC Title 17 The proposal was reviewed for compliance with zoning regulations as outlined in the sections outlined below. Use | WMC 17.20.020 Townhouses on individually owned lots are a principal permitted use. Finding 44: The proposal is for townhouses on individually owned lots. Conclusion: The proposal complies with this standard. Property Development Standards | WMC 17.20.070 This section sets forth standards for the MDR zone. Many are superseded by the next code section which includes standards specific to single-family homes. Only codes that are not superseded are included below. A. Maximum Density: The maximum development density is 25 dwelling units per acre. Finding 45: The proposal’s density is about 7 dwelling units per acre. Lewis River Townhomes – Staff Report and Recommendation WLD-2024-023 Page 14 Page 16 of 26  Conclusion: As proposed, the development complies with this standard. F. Maximum Building Height: The maximum building height is 35 feet. Finding 46: A condition of approval has been added to ensure that no buildings are above 35 feet in height. (See Condition 16.b.) Finding 47: The applicant and City will continue coordination of an acceptable maximum building elevation and type of street lighting allowable based upon proximity to the Woodland Airport. The applicant should contact the Washington Aviation Administration and/or Federal Aviation Administration as required. (See Condition 29.) Conclusion: As conditioned, the project will comply with this standard. H. Minimum Street Frontage: The minimum street frontage is 30 feet. Finding 48: Zero lots have a street frontage of at least 30 feet. As outlined in WMC 17.20.080.B (Finding 91), the minimum lot width is 24 feet. While lot width and street frontage are not the exact same standard, they are related, and the current requirements work against each other. It would not be possible for a lot with a 24-foot width to have 30 feet of street frontage. Staff finds that because these two codes conflict, the code specific to the use of townhomes on individually owned lots supersedes given the statement at the beginning of WMC 17.20.080 that states, “the following standards supersede the related standards given in Section 17.20.070.” Conclusion: The project does not need to comply with this standard. Standards for Townhouses on Individually Owned Lots | WMC 17.20.080 A. Minimum Lot Size: The minimum lot size is 1,900. Finding 49: All lots are proposed with lot sizes above 1,900 square feet. Conclusion: As proposed, the project complies with this standard. B. Minimum Lot Width and Depth: The minimum lot width is 24 feet and the minimum lot width is 80 feet. Finding 50: All proposed lots have widths of 24 feet or more. Lot dimensions will be verified as part of the final engineering and platting processes. Conclusion: As proposed, the project complies with these standards. Lewis River Townhomes – Staff Report and Recommendation WLD-2024-023 Page 15 Page 17 of 26 C. Minimum Setbacks: The front yard setback is 10 feet for local access street and 20 feet from collector streets. Garages are required to be setback at least 20 feet from front property lines. The rear setback is 10 feet and parking is not allowed in the rear yard. The side yard setback is 5 feet and 10 feet for street side yards. Finding 51: All building footprints are 20 feet away from any front parcel lines. Finding 52: All rear yards are well over 10 feet wide. A condition of approval has been added to ensure no parking is allowed in the rear yard. (See Condition 16.b.) Finding 53: Per WMC 17.08.795, "Street" means a public or recorded private thoroughfare which affords primary means of access to abutting property. While lots 11 & 12 have a turnaround space for the private road, this space is not considered part of the street and therefore the north side property line is considered an interior side lot line. All building footprints are located outside any interior or street side setbacks. Conclusion: As proposed and conditioned, the proposal will comply with these standards. D. No townhouse building shall contain more than ten townhouses. Finding 54: The most townhouses one building will have is 7. Conclusion: The project complies with this standard. E. Maximum Lot Coverage: The maximum lot coverage by a residential structure is 60%. Finding 55: All townhouses are proposed with 60% or less lot coverage. Conclusion: The project will comply with this standard. Parking | WMC 17.56.050.E Multi-family dwelling units must provide 1.5 off-street parking spaces per 1 and 2- bedroom units, and 2 off-street parking spaces for 3 or more-bedroom units. Finding 56: A condition of approval has been added to ensure the project complies with this standard. (See Condition 16.b.) Conclusion: As conditioned, the proposed development will comply with this standard. Lewis River Townhomes – Staff Report and Recommendation WLD-2024-023 Page 16 Page 18 of 26  Signs | WMC 17.52 This chapter outlines requirements for signs. Finding 57: A condition has been added to require all signs to comply with these standards (See Condition 23). Conclusion: As conditioned, the proposed development will comply with this standard. IV. PUBLIC COMMENT A public comment period was held from June 19, 2024, through July 19, 2024. Three comments were received before the comment period deadline. One follow-up comment was received after this window. Meghan Tait with the Washington Department of Ecology provided comments on June 17, 2024. (See Attached.) The Washington Department of Ecology also provided comments from Matt Gerlach and Derek Rockett on July 18, 2024. (See Attached.) Finding 58: All living spaces will be required to be one foot above the base flood elevation. Review of a Flood Development Permit will be required for each building permit. The stormwater outfall will require a no-net rise analysis as part of this review. (See Conditions 13 through 15.) Conclusion: As conditioned, the proposed development will comply with this standard. David Ison, Aviation Planner for WSDOT, submitted a comment on March 1, 2023, regarding the desire for the project to avoid impacts to the airport. This included concerns about airspace and the encroachment of residential uses on the airport. Finding 59: Staff and the applicant have communicated with WSDOT and considered the land use compatibility program guidelines for development. The staff has identified the airspace zones on the subdivision map and modified their proposal to ensure that all residential structures are outside the identified airspace zones. Finding 60: Staff have considered the concerns raised and has attached conditions that reflect appropriate mitigation warranted in this case. These include: Finding 60a: Streetlight alternatives. Given the location of the proposed realigned Sandalwood, the streetlights will be at the end of the airport runway. The use of standard streetlights will place tall poles in the approach and takeoff airspace. Staff recognizes that this is not a desirable condition and will therefor Lewis River Townhomes – Staff Report and Recommendation WLD-2024-023 Page 17 Page 19 of 26  work with the applicant to select an alternative lighting method that will remove the potential conflict posed by standards light poles. This will be negotiated during the final engineering process. (See Condition 45.) Finding 60b: Landscaping trees along the proposed Sandalwood. Street trees present additional hazard to the airport airspace like that of the streetlights. Therefore, an alternative to street trees will be negotiated during the final engineering process. (See Condition 46.) Finding 60c: Airspace intrusions. The applicant shall ensure that there is nothing greater in height than the fence located on the berm around the adjacent city facility. The applicant will need to survey this elevation and add a note to the face of the plat regarding the maximum height for structures in this subdivision. Such a limitation will ensure that all structures are consistent with existing structures in the airport’s airspace. These limits should be transmitted to the FAA as soon as practicable so they may evaluate potential conflicts. (See Condition 47.) Finding 61: The presence of the airport in close proximity to this development is likely to cause future conflicts due to the presence of active aircraft operations. It should be made clear to future owners and occupants of these residences, that these conditions existed prior to construction of the subdivision and that these activities will continue to occur without warning, or limit, into the future, and that occupancy of the subdivision recognizes and accepts that such activities will continue to occur and that abatement of these activities due to the potential for such disturbances is not to be expected. (See Condition 48.) Conclusion: As conditioned, the proposed development should address the concerns raised. comply with this standard. The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife provided comments on July 19, 2024 and August 28th, 2024. (See Attached.) Finding 62: Staff has reviewed the letters submitted and concurs with the applicant that the buffer is functionally isolated. There is evidence in the record that such determinations have been made within Cowlitz County before and the presence of the airport and the areas obvious manmade design characteristics further support that opinion. The presence of the shoreline bank with the shape and straight defined character, plus the hardscape presence of the bridge immediately upstream from this site, makes staff hesitant to substitute environmental design concerns for the underlying engineering design concerns that created the existing conditions. Lewis River Townhomes – Staff Report and Recommendation WLD-2024-023 Page 18 Page 20 of 26  Staff is further concerned that strict environmental centered enhancement considerations like tree planting and revegetation of the bank could serve to undermine the stability of the bank. That coupled with the concern that typical environmental mitigation efforts like habitat enhancement via tree planting, will inevitably lead to tree intrusion into the airspace of the airport. This would be directly in conflict with the life safety concerns raised by such an effect. Finding 63: Given this, staff declines to reconsider the functionally isolated riparian habitat interpretation for the reasons outlined above and declines to prioritize vegetation preservation over public safety, while still recognizing that the applicant is obligated to preserve and enhance the riparian functions as outlined in the attached critical area report. (See Condition 49.) V. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The lead agency for this proposal has determined that it does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request. This Determination of Non-significance (DNS) is issued after using the optional DNS process in WAC 197-11-355. There is no further comment period on the DNS. VI. RECOMMENDATION Per WMC 17.81.180, the Development Review Committee recommends APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS on the above application based on the criteria and standards outlined in Woodland Municipal Code (WMC). See section VII for conditions of approval. VII. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. Construction is limited to the project as described in this staff report. No changes may be made without reapplication to this department. 2. All lots are subject to impact fees for parks, fire, schools, and traffic. Impact fees are calculated and paid at the time of building permit issuance. 3. All improvements in the public right-of-way shall be completed in accordance with City of Woodland standards per Title 12. Dedication of Right-of-way is required. Standard sidewalk width shall be 6-feet per current City of Woodland Standard details. 4. Construct proposed utilities in accordance with applicable WMC requirements. 5. Comply with water supply backflow and cross-connections requirements of WMC 13.28. 6. Prepare a report analyzing sewer construction alternatives and providing a recommendation. Coordinate with the City’s Exit 21 Improvement project. Lewis River Townhomes – Staff Report and Recommendation WLD-2024-023 Page 19 Page 21 of 26 7. Developer shall upsize proposed water main within its frontage to 8-inch. 8. The fire mains shall be public mains within a 15-foot-wide easement to the city. 9. Water and Sewer Assessment fees will be due and payable as part of the building permit approval process. 10. Include an erosion control plan with the final engineering submittal. 11. Apply for a fill and grade and NPDES permit. 12. Submit a stormwater TIR and geotechnical engineering report for review. 13. Flood reviews are required for all buildings in the proposed subdivision and structures must demonstrate compliance with WMC 14.40. 14. Final engineering plans must include a note regarding utility flood resiliency. 15. Base Flood Elevation (BFE) information shall be shown on the face of the final plat. Elevation measurements should be shown on the survey wherever necessary to facilitate subsequent building permit reviews using a floodplain review process in lieu of a full floodplain permit for each unit. A note regarding flood elevation information, similar to the one below, describing each BFE marker shall be required on the face of the plat. 16. The following notes shall be placed on the face of the plat: a. Construction on each lot will be subject to review under the City’s flood hazard reduction standards. An elevation certificate will be required with all building permit applications. b. Development on all lots shall be reviewed at the time of building permit approval to determine if they meet the following: Front yard setback in feet: 20 Front yard setback for garages in feet: 20 Rear yard setback in feet: 10 Interior side yard setback in feet: 5 Street side yard setback in feet: 10 Maximum building height in feet: 35 Maximum lot coverage: 60 percent Required off-street parking spaces: 1.5 per 1 and 2-bedroom units, 2 per 3 or more bedroom units. No parking shall be allowed in the rear yards of any lot. 17. An Inadvertent Discovery Plan (IDP) meeting requirements established by the Washington Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation should be prepared and provided to the City and all interested tribes before any ground-disturbing activities commence. The plan should include the methods utilized to ensure any archaeological and/or cultural resources found during construction are reported promptly to the Department of Archaeological and Historic Preservation and all interested tribes. 18. DELETED 19. The proposed shoreline and critical area mitigation plan as proposed in the Voluntary Enhancement and Monitoring Plan starting on Page 11 of the Critical Areas Report & Enhancement Plan dated February 18, 2025, shall be fully implemented and monitored as proposed in the plan. Lewis River Townhomes – Staff Report and Recommendation WLD-2024-023 Page 20 Page 22 of 26 20. CC&Rs shall include provisions for maintenance responsibilities of all tracts for this development. Dedication of any of the tracts will be accepted by the city. Covenants shall ensure that disturbance of riparian vegetation is prohibited and that ecological functions within the tract are preserved. They shall also cover the applicable conditions of approval as outlined within this project’s approval. 21. The applicant shall provide proof of delegation of the responsibilities outlined in Conditions 19 and 20. 22. Construction activities shall commence, or where no construction activities are involved, the use or activity shall commence within two (2) years of the effective date of a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit and shall terminate after five (5) years after the effective date of a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit (the date the Hearing Examiner’s Decision is filed with Ecology). 23. Applicant must obtain building permits before initiating construction. No building permits shall be issued until the appeal period of this approval has ended. This includes permits for any signs. 24. For any work that does not require a building permit, the applicant must wait until the appeal period has ended and any appeals are resolved before initiating construction. 25. Applicant must comply with requirements for federal, state, or local permits/approvals. It is the applicant’s responsibility to determine which permits are necessary and to obtain them. Such permits may include, but are not limited to, a Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife Hydraulic Project Approval, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Section 401 and/or Section 10 permit, and/or a Washington State Department of Ecology Short-term Water Quality Modification Permit. 26. Applicants will be required to install temporary silt fencing along the perimeter of the buffer before any construction activities begin. 27. Applicants will be required to install permanent signs made from durable material and mounted on a metal post every 50 feet along the boundary of the buffer. The owner of the property shall be responsible for the maintenance of the signs. 28. Applicants will be required to install and maintain split rail fencing at the boundary of the buffer. Fencing shall not interfere with species migration and shall be installed in a manner that minimizes habitat impacts. 29. The applicant and City will continue coordination of an acceptable maximum building elevation and type of street lighting allowable based upon proximity to the Woodland Airport. Applicant should contact the Washington Aviation Administration and/or Federal Aviation Administration as required. 30. A geotech /soils report based on 2021 IBC requirements shall be submitted to the City. It will need to be site specific for the Lewis River Townhouse Subdivision. 31. The structural design for each townhouse is required to meet the requirements outlined in the geotech / soils report. 32. A separate building permit is required for the retaining wall at the northwest end of the development if it is over 4-feet, or if under 4-feet and it carries a surcharge. 33. Once final approval is given to print the final plat, signatures on two copies of the plat, shall be collected in the following order: a. The owners in fee simple; Lewis River Townhomes – Staff Report and Recommendation WLD-2024-023 Page 21 Page 23 of 26  b. Notary public in and for the state; c. Professional land surveyor registered in the state; d. Public Works Director; e. Cowlitz County treasurer; f. Cowlitz County Auditor. 34. The plat shall be filed with the County Auditor and shall not be deemed approved until so filed. One hard copy and one electronic copy of the approved subdivision plat (after recorded) shall be submitted to the Community Development Department. 35. A final plat application shall be required. The final plat application shall be accompanied by the necessary fees and shall contain the information required under WMC 16.10 and that information necessary to determine that the project meets these conditions of approval. An electronic copy of all final plat application material shall also be required. 36. The public access tract shall include split rail fencing at the top of the bank. In addition, the tract shall include two benches and three recreation stations included in the public easement. Public Works should be consulted to review the bench and station design for durability. 37. A general condition of Cowlitz County is that all newly created lots must indicate the addresses provided by the city, for all lots on the face of the plat. Addresses will be provided during final civil review. 38. An easement must be recorded for the open space tract at the time of final plat approval. 39. The public access path shall meet the standards of SMP 6.5.B. This includes but is not limited to meeting ADA requirements, having clear signage in easily visible locations indicating the public’s right of access, and hours of access, and being connected to the nearest public street. 40. Vegetation clearing in shoreline jurisdiction shall be limited to the minimum necessary to accommodate approved shoreline development. 41. Notice of the existence of a critical area and/or buffer on a site shall be recorded on the property title. The restriction shall state that limitations to development may exist due to the presence of a critical area and/or buffer. Applicant shall submit a copy of the recorded deed restriction prior to final plat approval. 42. No parking is allowed in any rear yard. 43. All signs must comply with WMC 17.52. 44. All grading and filling of land must utilize only clean fill. All other materials may be considered solid waste and permit approval may be required from your local jurisdictional health department prior to filling. All removed debris resulting from this project must be disposed of at an approved site. Contact the local jurisdictional health department or Department of Ecology for proper management of these materials. 45. Streetlight alternatives along the proposed realigned Sandalwood Street, shall be selected in coordination with the City as part of the final engineering process to address the concerns of Finding 60. 46. Landscaping trees along the proposed Sandalwood shall be selected with the concerns of Finding 60 in mind. Landscaping alternative selections shall be negotiated during the final engineering process. Lewis River Townhomes – Staff Report and Recommendation WLD-2024-023 Page 22 Page 24 of 26  47. Airspace intrusions. The applicant shall ensure that there is nothing greater in height than the fence located on the berm around the adjacent city facility. The applicant will need to survey this elevation and add a note to the face of the plat regarding the maximum height for structures in this subdivision. Such a limitation will ensure that all structures are consistent with existing structures in the airport’s airspace. 48. Notes regarding the preexisting nature of the airport and the City of Woodland Waste Water Treatment Plan and warning all future owners and tenants of the hazards of residential uses in such proximity, shall be added to the face of the final plat. 49. Applicants shall implement the critical area enhancement plan as outlined in the February 18, 2025 submittal including the creation of a tract, proposed enhancement, and completion of the mitigation monitoring. VI. APPEALS Per WMC 19.080.030, this staff report shall serve as a recommendation to the Hearing Examiner who will issue the final decision. Any person aggrieved by the Hearing Examiner’s decision on the Shoreline Substantial Development Permit may seek review from the Shoreline Hearings Board by filing a petition within 21 days of the filing of the decision with the Washington State Department of Ecology per RWC 90.58.140. Per WMC 19.080.030, the Hearing Examiner’s decision on the Site Plan Review and the Subdivision may be appealed to Cowlitz County Superior Court within 14 days of the date the Hearing Examiner issues the decision. All applicable administrative appeals shall be exhausted prior to initiation of judicial review. All judicial appeals shall be made to the county superior court in accordance with RCW 36.70C. Staff Contact: Travis Goddard, Community Development Director City of Woodland P.O. Box 9 230 Davidson Ave Woodland WA 98661 goddardt@ci.woodland.wa.us Date: 4/8/25 Signature: Travis Goddard Travis Goddard, Community Development Director Attachments A: Site Plan Lewis River Townhomes – Staff Report and Recommendation WLD-2024-023 Page 23 Page 25 of 26 CC Applicant Owner Mayor File Parties of Record City Website Front Counter WA Department of Ecology Lewis River Townhomes – Staff Report and Recommendation WLD-2024-023 Page 24 Page 26 of 26