BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR THURSTON COUNTY

BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR THURSTON COUNTY In the Matter of the Application of ) NO. PLAT/PRDV 990912 ) Gemini Development ) ) FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS For Approval of a Preliminary Plat and ) AND DECISION Planned Unit Development ) ) SUMMARY OF DECISION A Preliminary Plat and Planned Unit Development are APPROVED, with conditions. The Applicant may subdivide and develop 38.1 acres into 171 single-family residential building lots, one lot for 102 multifamily units, a critical area tract, and 23 open space tracts. SUMMARY OF RECORD Request Rob Rice of Gemini Development (Applicant) requested a Preliminary Plat (Plat) and Planned Unit Development (PUD) to subdivide a 38.18-acre parcel located on the south side of 79 th Avenue Southeast, between Parkridge Drive Southeast and River Drive Southeast, Thurston County, Washington. The request was to subdivide the property into 171 single-family residential building lots, one lot for 102 multifamily units, a critical area tract, and 23 open space tracts. Hearing Date An open record hearing on the request was held before the Hearing Examiner of Thurston County on February 5, 2001. Testimony At the open record hearing the following individuals presented testimony under oath: Robert Smith, Development Services Scott Davis, Roads and Transportation Services

Bernadette Clemente, Roads and Transportation Services Jeff Pantier, Applicant Representative Dennis Reynolds, Legal Representative for Applicant Rob Rice, Applicant Mark Jacobs Tom Livingston Ken Valz Bob MacKenzie Bryce Brown Jack Fruitman Debbie Fruitman Jerry Farmer Sheryle Hutchison John Hansen John Miller Exhibits At the hearing the following exhibits were admitted: EXHIBIT 1 Development Services Department Report Attachment a Notice of Public Hearing Attachment b Zoning/Site Map Attachment c Preliminary Plat Application Attachment d Planned Unit Development Application Attachment e Preliminary Plat Map Attachment f Multi-family Lot Development Map Attachment g Revised Mitigated Determination of NonSignificance, issued December 7, 2000 Attachment h March 16, 2000 Comment Memorandum from Roads & Transportation Services Department Attachment i September 27, 2000 Comment Memorandum from Roads & Transportation Department Attachment j December 27, 1999 Comment Letter from Environmental Health Department Gemini Development, PLAT/PRDV 990912 Page 2

Attachment k February 16, 2000 Comment Letter from City of Tumwater, Development Services Department Attachment l December 4, 2000 Comment Letter from Tumwater School District Attachment m February 11, 2000 Comment Letter from Shanna Stevenson of the Thurston County Historic Commission Attachment n March 17, 2000 Letter from Applicant Responding to the February 16, 2000 Letter from the City of Tumwater Attachment o Multi-family Development Landscape Plan Attachment p Comment Letters from Other Interested Parties: 1. February 10, 2000 from Doug and Jackie Fennimore 2. February 12, 2000 from Joy Kawasaki 3. February 13, 2000 from Margaret McEwen 4. February 12, 2000 from John & Kathryn Savich 5. February 12, 2000 from Ferne and Harry Keller 6. February 11, 2000 from Ken Valz 7. February 13, 2000 from Beulah Nelson and Connie Nelson 8. February 15, 2000 from Allen Howard and Vera Gonzalez-Howard 9. February 15, 2000 from Greg and Holly Hudson 10. February 13, 2000 from John Adams 11. February 16, 2000 from Richard Stuffler 12. February 14, 2000 from Bob and Alicia Liston 13. February 16, 2000 from Krista Mullen 14. February 16, 2000 from Bryce Brown 15. February 16, 2000 from Doug and Kelli Smith 16. February 15, 2000 from Joel and Bonnie Myer 17. February 16, 2000 from Rebecca Schultz 18. February 14, 2000 from Lori Miller 19. February 14, 2000 from Terri Fulton 20. February 14, 2000 from Ralph and Chris Sanich 21. February 9, 2000 from John Fulton 22. February 10, 2000 from Daniel Zech and Patti Loveless Zech 23. February 3, 2000 from Bob MacKenzie and Anita Ideker 24. February 10, 2000 from James and Sondra Edwards 25. February 6, 2000 from Michael and Mitzi Leifer 26. February 7, 2000 from Joyce Hauk 27. February 7, 2000 from Kimberly Skoropinski 28. February 7, 2000 from Kim and Scott Howard 29. Undated from Keith and Sharon Hughes Gemini Development, PLAT/PRDV 990912 Page 3

30. February 13, 2000 from Parkridge Community Association 31. February 5, 2000 from Harry and Martha Desai 32. February 13, 2000 from Debra Adams 33. February 13, 2000 from Cindy Adkins 34. February 2, 2000 from Ken Valz 35. January 30, 2001 from Donald and Margaret Long 36. February 4, 2001 from David Schultz 37. February 2, 2001 from Katherine Hansen 38. Undated from Greg and Holly Hudson 39. February 5, 2001 from Marshall W. Taylor EXHIBIT 2 Preliminary Drainage and Erosion Control Report dated November 1, 1999 EXHIBIT 3 Comment Letter from City of Tumwater dated February 5, 2001 EXHIBIT 4 Letter to Richard Phillips from Dennis Reynolds dated January 16, 2001 EXHIBIT 5 Level II Traffic Analysis dated March 27, 2000 EXHIBIT 6 Level II Traffic Analysis Addendum dated May 17, 2000 EXHIBIT 7 EXHIBIT 8 EXHIBIT 9 Pocket Gopher Plan with Map identifying Gopher Protection Area Map of Neighborhood Documents from Parkridge Homeowner Association EXHIBIT 10 Comment Letter from Bob MacKenzie and Anita Ideker dated February 4, 2001 EXHIBIT 11 Roads and Transportation Traffic Mitigation Estimate dated September 20, 2000 EXHIBIT 12 Ordinance No. 10897 EXHIBIT 13 February 27, 2001 Letter from Scott Davis, Civil Engineer to Hearing Examiner EXHIBIT 14 February 27, 2001 Letter from Dennis Reynolds to Hearing Examiner regarding Statement of Applicant Upon consideration of the testimony and exhibits submitted at the open record hearing, the following Findings and Conclusions are entered by the Hearing Examiner: Gemini Development, PLAT/PRDV 990912 Page 4

FINDINGS 1. The Applicant requested a Plat and PUD for the subdivision of a 31.18-acre parcel of land located on the south side of 79 th Avenue Southeast, between Parkridge Drive Southeast and River Drive Southeast, in Thurston County, Washington. The Applicant proposes to develop the parcel into 171 single-family residential lots, one lot for 102 multifamily units, a critical area tract, and 23 open space tracts. Lot 172, the multifamily lot, which is 5.42 acres in size, is located in the northeast corner of the site. Lots 1-171 are located throughout the rest of the site. Exhibit 1, Staff Report, pages 1-2; Testimony of Mr. Robert Smith. 2. The subject property is located within the Tumwater Urban Growth Area and is zoned Multi-Family Medium Density Residential District (MFM). The MFM zone permits single-family and multifamily dwellings, Planned Unit Developments, and a combination of singularly permitted uses. Exhibit 1, Staff Report. 3. The MFM zone requires a minimum housing density of 9 dwelling units per acre and a maximum density of 15 dwelling units per acre. The density of the proposed is 9.29 dwelling units per acre. With the inclusion of the lot with the proposed 102 multi-family lots the density standards of the MFM zone are satisfied. Testimony of Mr. Rice. 4. Development of the project will occur in three distinct phases. As noted above, Lot 172, the multifamily lot, will be developed last. Testimony of Mr. Rice. 5. The proposed use, density, and lot sizes comply with the requirements of the MFM zone outlined in Chapter 22.14.050 of the Thurston County Code (TCC). As proposed and conditioned, the subdivision is consistent with the Thurston County Comprehensive Plan and the Thurston County-Tumwater Urban Growth Area Zoning Ordinance. The Hearing Examiner has no jurisdiction or authority to change the density requirements. Exhibit 1, Staff Report, pages 2-3, and 8; Testimony of Mr. Rice and Mr. Smith. 6. The smallest proposed single-family lot is 3,987 square feet in size and the average size is 4,166 square feet. As conceptually proposed, the multifamily lot will be developed with 102 units located within eight buildings. Each of the eight apartment buildings will contain 10 to 16 apartment units. Parking lots for the apartments are scattered around the buildings. The 23 proposed open space tracts, totaling 6.05 acres, are distributed throughout the project. Exhibit 1, Staff Report, pages 1-2; Testimony of Mr. Robert Smith. 7. The open space tracts will be used for landscaping, active recreation, storm drainage facilities, and wildlife habitat preservation. The total area of the open space proposed for the PLAT/PUD exceeds ten percent (10%) of the gross area of the site. Exhibit 1, Staff Report, pages 1-2; Testimony of Mr. Robert Smith. Gemini Development, PLAT/PRDV 990912 Page 5

8. Access to the site is to be provided by a mixed public and private road network that will be constructed throughout the site. The proposed internal road system will have two connections to 79 th Avenue along the north boundary of the project and will provide a stub-out to the westerly property line for future road extension. Exhibit 1, Staff Report, pages 1-2; Testimony of Mr. Robert Smith and Mr. Rice. 9. Stormwater will be treated and stored on-site in designated stormwater tracts within project boundaries. The Plat has been designed to control stormwater and to regulate release of the same in a manner that does not exceed the predevelopment stormwater flow. Exhibit 1, Staff Report, pages 1-2; Testimony of Ms. Clemente. 10. City of Tumwater domestic water and sewer utility lines will be extended into and through the development to serve all lots. Exhibit 1, Staff Report, pages 1-2; Testimony of Mr. Robert Smith. 11. In addition to the MFM zone the property is within the Airport Hazard Overlay zone (AH) (The Olympia Airport is located approximately a quarter mile to the west.). This zoning overlay permits uses allowed in the underlying zone but restricts these uses subject to certain circumstances. The proposed development would be consistent with the uses allowed in the AH. Testimony of Mr. Smith. The airport management did suggest that an aviation easement be recorded for the subdivision. This will notify future lot owners of the nearby airport and permit continued standard aircraft operations over the subdivision. Also, the Tumwater/Thurston County Joint Comprehensive Plan (pages 3-54) mandates that new homes be constructed with additional sound proofing to mitigate noise form aircraft. Exhibit 1, Staff Report, pages 1-4; Testimony of Mr. Smith. 12. The site is not within the jurisdiction of the Shoreline Master Program. Exhibit 1, Staff Report, page 2. 13. Topographically, the property is mostly level with a slight slope. The majority of the property has been cleared in the past but there are existing mature fir trees along a portion of the east and southerly fringes of the property. Younger fir trees are located along the north part of the east site. Most of the site can be described as open grasslands. There does not appear to be any developmental limitations of the site. Testimony of Mr. Smith. 14. Surrounding land uses consist of light industrial parcels, single-family residential developments, and commercial uses. The Trails End horse stable and event area is to the north. Single-family residential developments, Parkridge and Deschutes Ridge Subdivisions are to the east. An undeveloped residential parcel and some light industrial lands lie to the south. A light industrial use parcel and vacant light industrial lots lie to the west. Exhibit 1, Staff Report, page 2; Testimony of Mr. Rice and Mr. Smith. 15. Habitat for the Pocket Gopher has been identified on the subject property, which requires compliance with the Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO). The pocket gopher is a candidate Gemini Development, PLAT/PRDV 990912 Page 6

species for protection under the Endangered Species Act (the designation before threatened ) and is an important species according to the Thurston County CAO. The Applicant prepared a report on the occurrence and habitat of the pocket gopher on the subject property. Based upon this report, the plat has been designed to include a critical area tract, Tract U, to preserve pocket gopher habitat. Exhibit 1, Staff Report, page 6; The Coot Company Wetland and Wildlife Consulting Services Habitat Management Plan for the Western Pocket Gopher, November 2000; Testimony of Mr. Rice. 16. The minimum building setback from the east and southeast property lines is 20 feet for single story buildings and 30 feet for two story buildings [TCC 22.14.050(F)]. The proposed setback for the multifamily structures for the east property line is 60 feet, which complies with the setback stated above. The single-family residences to be placed on Lots 87-114 will be set back from the east and southeast project boundaries a minimum of 20 feet and 30 feet if the homes are two stories. Exhibit 1, Staff Report, page 3; Testimony of Mr. Rice. 17. The MFM zone requires that 10 percent of the gross site area be set aside and utilized as open space/park area for the use and enjoyment of future residents [TCC 18.47.040(3), TCC 22.14.050(H)]. This project includes 23 open space tracts, totaling 6.05 acres in size or 15.9 percent of the 38.18-acre site. Open space in residential developments needs to include at least one active recreation facility from the list contained in the TCC and at least one other facility for active/passive recreation. Tract P has been designed to comply with the active open space. Prior to final plat approval, the developer will submit to the Development Services Department, for review and approval, the proposed active and passive recreation facilities and landscaping. Once approved, the developer must install all landscaping and recreation facilities prior to final plat approval. Exhibit 1, Staff Report, page 3, Attachment e; Testimony of Mr. Rice and Mr. Smith. 18. The Applicant applied for Planned Unit Development (PUD) approval as part of this project. Approval of the PUD will exempt the development from the minimum requirements of the underlying zoning district, except for project densities, perimeter boundary setbacks, a limitation on lot coverage, allowable uses, and open space requirements (TCC 22.36.080). For this project, there will be no required minimum setbacks from interior lot lines. However, all building code and fire code setbacks and building separations will apply. Each single-family lot must have a minimum of two offstreet parking spaces. Setbacks along the exterior project boundaries are still required. Exhibit 1, Staff Report, page 4. 19. The design review guidelines apply throughout the unincorporated Tumwater Urban Growth Area to multifamily residential developments with more than 4 units and a density greater than 7.25 dwelling units per acre. The conceptual layout submitted by the Applicant appears to comply with building design criteria. The County reviewed the existing proposed layout and found that it complied with the requirements of TCC 22.43. Gemini Development, PLAT/PRDV 990912 Page 7

The Hearing Examiner has no authority to alter the design or location of the multifamily units. Exhibit 1, Staff Report, page 4; Testimony of Mr. Rice and Mr. Smith. 20. Multifamily housing requires 1.5 parking spaces per dwelling unit plus one guest parking space for every 10 units. Based upon these ratios, the 102-unit apartment complex requires 164 parking spaces. The Applicant depicts 183 parking spaces in the site plan. The Applicant has not submitted materials to justify an administrative increase of parking spaces therefore the number allowed for the multifamily development is 164. Singlefamily lots each require two off-street parking spaces. At the time of development, the builder must provide for two off-street parking spaces for the single-family lots. Exhibit 1, Staff Report, page 5. 21. Multifamily developments are subject to the landscaping requirements of TCC 22.47. Applicant submitted a landscape plan for the multifamily portion of the project. The proposed landscaping appears to comply with the minimum standards set out in the code. Exhibit 1, Staff Report, page 5. 22. The Applicant proposes to extend City of Tumwater domestic water and sewer lines into and through the development to serve all dwelling units. These utilities are available and the Applicant will comply with Tumwater requirements for extension of those utility lines. Exhibit 1, Staff Report, page 6. 23. The Applicant submitted a preliminary drainage and erosion control plan as part of the application. The plan proposes to collect stormwater and treat it in a series of wet ponds. The water will then be released into infiltration ponds. Tracts O and P are the storm drainage areas, Tract P being the natural low point of the site. The preliminary plan has been reviewed and approved. Exhibit 1, Staff Report, page 6; Exhibit 2, Storm Drainage Analysis; Testimony of Mr. Smith and Mr. Rice. 24. Pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), Thurston County was designated as the lead agency for the environmental review of this project. The County issued a Revised Mitigated Determination of NonSignificance (MDNS) December 7, 2000, which became final on December 22, 2000. No appeals of this environmental determination were filed. The MDNS conditions establish requirements for forestry activity, erosion control, stormwater requirements, critical areas protection, water supply, and traffic and school facility mitigation. Exhibit 1, Staff Report, page 3, Attachment g. 25. Development Review Services has reviewed all commenting letters. It received comments from Thurston County Roads and Transportation Services, Environmental Health Department, and Thurston County Historic Commission. There were no comments that would require amendment of the project as proposed. Exhibit 1, Staff Report, page 7. Gemini Development, PLAT/PRDV 990912 Page 8

26. Nolte v. City of Olympia, 982 P.2d 659 (1999) held that a city which had entered into a development agreement with a county regarding an urban growth area (UGA) located adjacent to, but outside the boundary of the city, lacked statutory authority to impose impact fees on the project for development of the property within UGA. Nolte prevents the City of Tumwater from setting impact fees upon the developer for local off-site transportation improvements. The Development Review Services Department identified specific traffic impacts that will result from this development. The Department determined that the intersection of 79 th and Old Highway 99 would experience minor deficiency in level of service from the proposed development and that a traffic signal was unwarranted. However, the Applicant has voluntarily agreed to provide additional striping at this intersection to mitigate traffic congestion. Exhibit 1, Staff Report; Testimony of Mr. Rice. A second intersection, Henderson Boulevard and Old Highway 99, was identified by the County as being impacted. The Applicant will pay its proportionate share of the cost of a new traffic signal at this intersection. Neither of the intersections lies wholly within the City of Tumwater's border, although most of both are within the City limits. The only portions not in the City limits are the 79 th Avenue and Henderson Boulevard legs. There are no other traffic impact fees being considered at this time. Impact fees for other intersections directly affected by the development may be imposed by the City of Tumwater after annexation, which is anticipated immediately after the Applicant applies for utility permits. Exhibit 1, Staff Report, page 7; Testimony of Mr. Smith, Mr. Bryce Brown, and Mr. Rice; February 27, 2001, Statement of Applicant, Gemini Corporation and letter from Dennis Reynolds, Attorney for Applicant to the Hearing Examiner; February 27, 2001, Thurston County Roads and Transportation Services letter to the Hearing Examiner from Scott Davis. 27. The specific traffic impacts evaluated by the traffic study did not include Trails End event traffic. Trails End is a riding academy. At the hearing, Trails End representative indicated that traffic will be increasing with the various events and recreational activities that will be promoted in the near future. This increase in traffic will be mostly on the weekends and will not impact AM peak hours. Testimony of Mr. Livingston, Mr. Smith, Mr. Jacobs, and Mr. Davis. 28. RCW 58.17.110 requires that safe walking conditions be provided for students. Provisions have been made for sidewalks in the project to provide a safe walkway for school children. A school bus stop will be provided at the development. The frontage improvements proposed by the Applicant for 79 th Avenue will provide sidewalks and a bicycle lane. This will provide safe conditions for pedestrians and bicyclists. The new internal road system will also have sidewalks and will be built to City and County standards. Exhibit 1, Staff Report, page 7; Testimony of Mr. Smith and Mr. Rice. 29. Pursuant to the Washington State Growth Management Act, the Applicant must mitigate the impact of additional students on schools serving the development. This project is within the Tumwater School District (District). In order to approve the subdivision, a finding must be made that there are adequate school facilities to accommodate the Gemini Development, PLAT/PRDV 990912 Page 9

students generated by the subdivision. The District has submitted a comment letter (attachment l) identifying mitigation necessary for school facilities. The mitigation fee total is $489,566.00 using the calculations set out in the Capital Facility Plan. In addition, the District letter states that a designated bus waiting area, acceptable to the District, shall be identified. A bus waiting area shall be shown on the final plat map. An agreement on mitigation fees has been reached between the Applicant and the District. Exhibit 1, Staff Report, page 8; Attachment l; Testimony of Mr. Rice. 30. Development Review Services received 39 comment letters (Attachments p1-p39) from neighboring property owners and several interested persons testified at the open hearing. Concerns expressed included: traffic impacts, sufficiency of the water and sewer system, impacts to schools, police and fire protection, groundwater protection, wildlife, property values, and the quality of life. The most prevalent concerns voiced at the hearing were the location of the multifamily units and increased traffic congestion. Exhibit 1, Staff Report, page 8; Testimony of the Audience. 31. Proper notice of the public hearing was sent to all property owners within 300 feet of the site and to others who had requested notice. Notice of the public hearing was published in The Olympian on January 26, 2001, at least 10 days prior to the hearing. Notice was posted on-site on January 23, 2001. Exhibit 1, Staff Report, page 2; Attachment a. CONCLUSIONS Jurisdiction The Hearing Examiner is granted jurisdiction to hear and decide applications for preliminary plats. This authority is set forth in RCW Chapter 36.70.970 and TCC 18.12.050. TCC 18.12.1309 requires the Hearing Examiner render a decision on the record within ten (10) working days of the close of the hearing. The decision must be consistent with the general specific criteria for review as set forth in Chapter 18.04 and Chapter 18.12 of the Thurston County Code. The Hearing Examiner is granted jurisdiction to hear and decide applications for Planned Unit Developments pursuant to TCC 22.36.050 in accordance to procedures set forth in Section 22.62.020C. Criteria for Review Standards for Preliminary Plats To be approved by the Hearing Examiner, the criteria for review as set forth in Thurston County Code 18.12.090 must be satisfied. The criteria include: a. Inquiry into the public use and interest proposed to be served by the establishment of the subdivision and dedication; and Gemini Development, PLAT/PRDV 990912 Page 10

b. Determination if appropriate provisions are made for, but not limited to, the public health, safety and general welfare for open spaces, drainage supplies, sanitary waste, parks and recreation, playgrounds, schools and school grounds, safe walking conditions for students who walk to and from school; and c. Whether the public interest will be served by the subdivision and dedication. RCW 58.17.110 requires that findings be made in order to approve a preliminary plat. Those findings are as follows: Appropriate provisions must be made for the public health, safety and general welfare and such open spaces, drainage ways, streets or roads, alleys, other public ways, transit strips, potable water supplies, sanitary waste, parks and recreation, playgrounds, schools and school grounds and all other relevant facts including sidewalks and other planning features that assure safe walking conditions for students that only walk to and from school. Criteria for Decisions Planned Unit Developments The Hearing Examiner's decision shall be based on at least, but not limited to, the following criteria: A. Substantial conformance to the Tumwater Joint Plan; B. The proposal's harmony with the surrounding area or its potential future uses; and C. The adequacy of the size of the project site to accommodate the contemplated developments. Conclusions Preliminary Plat Approval 1. The proposed development will serve the public use and interest by providing 171 new single-family housing units and eight apartment buildings that will provide 10-16 multifamily units each. With conditions and mitigation, the development will have no adverse impacts on the surrounding community. The development is consistent with Thurston County and Tumwater Urban Growth Area zoning, the development concepts of the Comprehensive Plan, and historical development in the area. The necessary utilities and development standards for subdivisions can be satisfied by the proposal. Findings of Fact Nos. 1-30. 2. With conditions, the preliminary plat application will meet the criteria for approval as established by the Revised Code of Washington and the Thurston County Code. Gemini Development, PLAT/PRDV 990912 Page 11

The proposed preliminary plat will include appropriate provisions for public health, safety, and general welfare (Findings of Fact Nos. 3, 5, 7, 9, 10, 16-19, 22, and 29); and for open spaces (1, 6, and 7), drainage ways (9 and 23), streets (8, 26, and 27), alleys and other public ways, sanitary wastes (22), schools (29) and other relevant factors. Open spaces will be provided and the identified critical area is subject to conditions and mitigation. Roads, drainage systems, water supply and sewage disposal will be provided in accordance with existing regulations. Mitigation fees and road improvements by the developer will offset the impact of new traffic generated by the development. The developer and the school district have reached an agreement on impact fees appropriate to mitigate the anticipated impact of the development on the school system. Findings of Fact Nos. 1-29. 3. With conditions, the proposed development substantially conforms to the Tumwater Joint Plan, is in harmony with the surrounding area, and can be accommodated by the project site. Given Thurston County-Tumwater Urban Growth Area density requirements and surrounding land uses, the proposed development balances the concerns of neighboring residential property owners with the County and City's vision of development. The development as proposed fits within the proposed site while providing more than the minimum open space required and a density that does not far exceed the minimum required. Findings of Fact Nos. 1-7, 11, 14, 26, 27, and 30. DECISION Based upon the preceding Findings and Conclusions, the requested Preliminary Plat and Planned Unit Development are APPROVED, subject to the following conditions: A. Prior to final plat approval, all requirements of the Thurston County Environmental Health Department comment letter (Attachment j) and the Thurston County Roads and Transportation Services memorandum (Attachment h) shall be met. B. Compliance with all conditions of the Revised Mitigated Determination of NonSignificance dated December 7, 2000 (Attachment g) must be attained prior to final plat approval. C. Prior to final plat approval, City of Tumwater municipal sewer and domestic water lines shall be extended to provide service to each dwelling unit. D. Street addresses shall be shown on the final map. E. Prior to final plat approval, the Applicant shall submit to the Development Services Department for review and approval, a plan for use of the open space tracts which proposes an active recreation facility and at least one other active or passive recreation Gemini Development, PLAT/PRDV 990912 Page 12

facility from the list in TCC 18.47.040(3)(b)(i)&(ii). Once approved, the facilities must be installed. F. Prior to final plat approval, the Applicant shall submit to the Development Services Department for review and approval, a landscape plan for open space Tracts A through C, E through N, Q through T, and V through X. Once approved, the landscaping shall be installed. G. Prior to final plat approval, the Applicant shall meet with Tumwater School District personnel to locate an acceptable bus waiting area, make any necessary improvements for the waiting area, and show the waiting area on the final plat map. H. Submit an agreement with the Tumwater School District which provides mitigation for the project s impacts to school facilities. If this agreement requires payment of mitigation fees or other actions after the final plat is recorded then such conditions shall be noted on the final plat map. I. If any items related to the historic Bush family homestead are discovered during site construction the contractor and/or developer shall immediately notify the Thurston County Historic Commission and give the items to the Henderson House Museum in Tumwater. J. Prior to final plat approval, an Airport Operations Easement shall be recorded. This easement shall notify property owners about the nearby airport grant the right for continued aircraft operations over this subdivision. K. The use of all open space tracts shall be noted on the final plat map. The open space tracts shall be dedicated to the lot owners and/or association on the final plat map. L. The following notes shall be shown on the final plat map: 1. This subdivision has been approved through provisions of the Multi-Family Medium Density Residential District and Planned Unit Development ordinances (TCC 22.14 and 22.36). 2. This subdivision is located in the vicinity of the Bush family homestead, a historical site. Any items discovered on the lots of this subdivision which relate to the Bush family shall be retained, reported to the Thurston County Historic Commission, and then given to the Henderson House Museum in Tumwater. 3. Lot 172, the multi-family lot, is approved for a total of 102 units. Prior to permit issuance for the structures the builder shall submit a Design Review application for review and approval. The site design and design of the structures shall Gemini Development, PLAT/PRDV 990912 Page 13

conform to design review requirements of the Thurston County Tumwater Urban Growth Area Zoning Ordinance (TCC 22.43). 4. Special building setbacks apply to Lots 87 through 114. The minimum rear yard for these lots is 20 feet, when a single-story home is built, and 30 feet when a two-story home is built. 5. A Type 1 buffer [TCC 22.47.050(A)] is required along the rear lot line of Lots 68 through 87. Prior to construction of homes on these lots, the builder and/or lot owner shall submit a landscape proposal for the Type 1 buffer. The buffer shall be installed prior to occupancy of the home. 6. This subdivision is located in close proximity to the Olympia Airport. Airport operations may cause noise that is disruptive to residents. Houses should be constructed with additional sound proofing to mitigate that aircraft noise. Decided this 13 th day of March 2001. K:\zoning.lu\DECISION\PLATS\990912.decision.doc James M. Driscoll Hearing Examiner for Thurston County Gemini Development, PLAT/PRDV 990912 Page 14