Hearings examiner approves expansion of Woodland Fire Station No. 29 with conditions

The City of Woodland hearings examiner on May 6, 2025 approved a conditional use permit for a roughly 10,500-square-foot addition to Fire Station No. 29 at 250 E. Scott Avenue, saying the application meets the applicable approval criteria and subject to the conditions set out in the staff report.

The examiner, Joe Turner, opened the public hearing, explained the process and the narrow legal standard he must apply, and said he would issue a written decision within about two weeks. Turner said the hearing combined review of the site plan, the conditional use permit under Woodland code and the SEPA determination of non-significance that staff adopted.

Travis Goddard, the city's Community Development Director, summarized staff findings and said the site—about 1.45 to 1.62 acres pending a boundary line adjustment—is in a public/quasi-public institutional (PQPI) zone and that fire and police stations are permitted uses. Goddard said the consolidated review showed the project meets setback, height, parking, landscaping and fire-hydrant-spacing standards and recommended approval with conditions that address construction impacts and site improvements.

Hillary Harris, a senior planner at Harper Hoff Peterson Regellas representing the fire district, described the proposed work as an addition to the existing apparatus bays and the replacement of a temporary living/office building. "The improvements will include a 10,500 square foot building area, off-street parking lot that will include ADA and electric vehicle parking stalls," Harris said, and she noted a future shop footprint is being reserved on the north side of the lot. Because the final north-side footprint is not yet fixed, the applicant requested flexibility up to about 78% lot coverage to accommodate a future design.

During the hearing a nearby property owner, Jim Aryan of LKE Corporation, urged the city to ensure stormwater controls would be adequate. "My primary concern is a storm water runoff," Aryan said, describing historic ditches and recent hard surfacing on upstream properties that he said now direct runoff across his property.

Harris replied that the site plan shows a stormwater detention facility in the northeast portion of the parcel and that it has been designed for full build-out, including the potential future addition. She and staff noted that under city and state rules the project must not increase or concentrate stormwater runoff but is not required to remedy preexisting off‑site drainage problems: "They aren't required to fix any existing runoff issues," Turner said as he explained the limits of the hearings examiner's authority.

The examiner concluded that the application complies with the applicable approval criteria and approved it subject to the staff-recommended conditions, including any conditions tied to site improvements shown on the final engineering plans. Turner said he will issue a written final decision within about two weeks and the city will notify parties of record. The hearing then concluded.

Procedural note: the hearing was briefly interrupted by an obscene audio feed from an online participant; staff muted the participant and the session resumed.

What happens next: the examiner's written decision will be issued to the city and mailed to parties of record; any appeal to the city council must identify issues with sufficient specificity and be filed within the local appeal time limits.