Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council approves Fallon Drive townhomes preliminary plat and shoreline permit for 39-unit project
Summary
Council granted final approval to a 39-lot preliminary plat and an associated shoreline substantial development permit for the Fallon Drive Townhomes, concluding closed-record hearings after staff recommended conditions and mitigation.
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The West Richland City Council voted unanimously on Aug. 19 to approve the preliminary plat and the related shoreline substantial development permit for the Fallon Drive Townhomes, a proposed multifamily subdivision north of Fallon Drive adjacent to the West Richland Golf Course.
Alicia Ransom, the city planner, told council the applicant, Nicole Robinson, proposes a two-phase development on a roughly 4.4-acre parcel containing 39 lots. Ransom said the application included a SEPA checklist, a wetland report and a shoreline-submittal because lots 32 through 39 fall inside the city’s shoreline jurisdiction.
“Staff recommends that the city council approve the preliminary plat as presented with the conditions of approval and findings of fact as shown in the staff report,” Ransom said.
Ransom summarized public comments and staff responses: traffic and noise concerns will be mitigated through traffic-impact and park-impact fees and capital projects in the city’s six-year Transportation Improvement Program; a condition requires the developer to construct frontage improvements and a pathway along Fallon Drive; stormwater must be collected and treated on-site with emergency overflow where required and not allowed to discharge off-site; an HOA will be responsible for maintenance of private stormwater facilities and private drives; and the wetland will be placed in a dedicated tract with a buffer and enhancement plan.
Neighbors spoke at the hearing. Gail Brown of Chelan Drive said the neighborhood is concerned about density, privacy and impacts to existing streets and sidewalks. “Paula's wife, she can't sunbathe anymore because they're looking at her yard,” Brown said, urging the council to consider rezoning options for better transitions between multifamily and existing single-family areas.
The developer’s engineer, Caleb Stromstad of Acterra, described a long collaboration with city staff and offered to answer technical questions. Ransom and staff said the proposal meets the multifamily zone’s lot-dimension requirements and the comprehensive plan’s goals encouraging a mix of residential densities.
Council members pressed staff on several technical items before voting. Council member Blue asked whether the HOA responsibilities have safeguards if an HOA becomes defunct; staff and the city attorney said property owners retain responsibility for maintenance and the city’s enforcement options would be legal and civil in nature. Council members also questioned grading and building height in shoreline lots; staff said homes in shoreline jurisdiction will be limited to a maximum height of 35 feet and that finished grade establishes height measurement.
On wetland and cultural-resource concerns, staff said the site’s history (former ball fields and imported fill) reduced the likelihood of intact archaeological resources; the city accepted an inadvertent-discovery plan rather than a preconstruction archeological survey. The wetland buffer and a wetland buffer enhancement plan are required as conditions of approval.
After deliberation, council member (motion maker) moved to approve the preliminary plat (Plat No. 008-2025) “based upon the findings of fact, conclusions of law, and conditions of approval as recommended by the planning commission.” The motion passed unanimously. Council then adopted the findings and conditions for the shoreline substantial development permit (SHRL-001-2025) with a unanimous vote.
The approvals are subject to the conditions of approval in the staff report, which require permits (grading, building, stormwater), payment of mitigation fees, construction of frontage improvements and the wetland-buffer and enhancement measures.
Speakers and parties of record included the applicant and engineer; neighbor comments were heard and recorded during the closed-record hearings.

