Mattawa examines CAD Homes development

MATTAWA — The nuts and bolts of government - development regulations, comprehensive land use, housing density, traffic impacts and control - was the subject of a lengthy workshop for the Mattawa City Council on Jan. 5.

Council members reviewed a proposed housing development agreement with Moses Lake-based CAD Homes and owner Drew Scott, covering details ranging from parking to financial responsibility for street development. The council requested a development agreement before making a decision on a request to annex 40 acres, known as the Brodero property, into the city limits.

Council member Brian Berghout used an example from his time on Mattawa’s planning commission, and a development in his own neighborhood, to demonstrate what he saw as the council’s job. The proposed development was a six-unit apartment across the street from his house.

“I had to look at that, and decide, ‘Am I going to look at this as a homeowner? Or what’s best for the city?’ I think it’s a tricky thing,” Berghout said.

Council Member Tony Acosta asked Berghot how Berghout had looked at the issue at the time.

“What’s best for the city,” Berghout responded. “Because (the) planning commission approved the apartments to go up across the street.”

Scott has proposed developing about 27 acres in five phases, with about 20 homes per phase. There’s no plan yet for the development of the remaining 13 acres.

The wide-ranging discussion covered housing density, both how many houses might be built per acre and whether or not duplexes could be allowed, the length of the agreement and the ultimate fate of the 13 acres. Council members tentatively decided on a five-year agreement to develop the first five phases with the option for two one-year extensions. City officials would review the extension requests. There will be further discussion over the housing density and the timing of submitting a plan for the 13 acres.

Parking and the effect of the new development on traffic in the existing neighborhood was the subject of a discussion that lasted about an hour.

The Brodero property is located on Saddle Mountain Drive next to Saddle Mountain and Mattawa elementary schools. Acosta lives in an area adjacent to the proposed development and said additional housing will complicate an already-existing problem.

“The traffic in that area is only going to get worse, and it’s not going to get better by adding more population, I can tell you that,” Acosta said.

“And it’s getting worse,” added council member Fabiola Hernandez.

Council members debated two options for a pre-construction evaluation of traffic and the impacts of the new development.

Acosta said a more detailed - and more expensive - study at the start of the project would not address the problem, in his opinion.

“I don’t see how it’s going to help us at the moment, I really don’t,” he said. “We have a traffic issue in that area. Short of having the developer, or the city, or somebody building another access point to Mattawa, there’s going to be a traffic jam in that area when people are coming into it.”

Council members ultimately opted for a less detailed study at the beginning and a more detailed one later.

Council member Sun Hwang brought up an example of the city’s challenges with parking from his own business.

“From my experience, I own a fourplex,” Hwang said. “Each two-bedroom unit, they have a minimum of three to five cars. I want you to consider the parking issue.”

He asked Scott to review the accommodation for parking at each house, but added that parking ultimately may be beyond the control of either developers or landlords, a view echoed by council member Wendy Lopez.

“The way Mattawa is structured, whether you get new housing or not within our city, we still have families that choose to live together. As you can see, over on Patchee Drive, there are new complexes in and there are already cars parked on the curb,” Lopez said.

Acosta said it’s the council’s job to analyze the project and try to provide maximum benefit to the community, if they decide to approve annexation, regardless of their personal preferences.

“My only personal thing would be the traffic,” Acosta said. “I don’t want that traffic in that area. But (Berghout) is correct - I’m here as a council member. As much as I don’t want it on a personal level, I see the good for the community.”

Cheryl Schweizer may be reached at cschweizer@columbiabasinherald.com.