Marian Meadows - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

CHMELIK SITKIN & 0AVtS rs Jonathan K. Sitkin ATTORNEY rl jsitkinochm6lik.com\l:-0f\t\') Ai I \tv The District is addressing the impacts that would be caused by the Marian Meadows development, The County approved, and lhe Developer accepted, a condition that requires agreement with the District. Your letter suggests a broader agreement with the County and/or legislative process prior to such an agreement. Although the Distdct would cerlainty entertain such an approach, the District presumes your client is not interested in waiting tor inat legislative Process to oocur and wishes to seek a resolution now; at least that is what you previously conveyed when we spoke earlier this year, The District only has capabilities to rescue and fire attack from a 24' ladder and recommends that structures be limited to 24' in height as a mitigating condition of development. This is an appropriate use of SEPA to "fill in the gaps" of regulations and is appropriate to consider in a plat approval to assure that "appropriate provisions" are made for public safety and welfare (RCW 58' 17.1 10). Due to the lack of a fire ladder truck and associated apparatus, the District emergency responders are not able to access from above or at high points in a structure should those occupants require evacuation or emergency care in a fire event. These are nscessary and appropriate review considerations by a regulatory agency when considering what conditions to impose, either through the SEPA process or as a condition of plat approvai The District does not oppose this condition District-wide on multi-family and commercialdevelopments. Your letter indicates over 70 homes have been built within the District in the last five years.i The District is not aware of 70 homes being built nor any "new" plat development within the last five years. Certainly, new structures and remodeled structures have been built on pre-existing parcels or lots of record in this rural area; however, nol at a rate of 70. Please forward ihe source data and mapping that supports your assertion that 70 new homes have been built within lhe District boundaries in the last five years. The District recognizes that your client has agreed to install sprinklers in single-family homes. To clarify, it is the District's view that the fire suppression sprinklers must be installed in all developmenl structures, including the RV storage areas,lownhomes, commercialstructures, etc. The District certainly understands that impact fees are not to be assessed for fire operations, as you note; and the District certainly understands that Kittitas County does not have impact fees. Thus, frorn a technical perspective, RCW 82.02.100 does not apply as impact fees are not assessed in this case. Yet, consislenl with the intenl of RCW 82.02.100, the impacts of the Marian Meadows development are, as noted in our prior letter, largely impact the delivery of emergency response services, which are public safety issues, not primarily property protection issues. Property protection is addressed by fire sprinkler suppression systems. ln addition, the proposed mitigation fees are primarily based on capital necessary for emergency response services. I Your letter implies that the City of Cle Elum is wilhin lhe District. The City of Cle Elum is not within the Oistrict nor served by the District. Page 2