YMCA_response_to_public_comments
YMCA OF GREATER SEATTLE
909 4th Avenue, Seattle, WA 98104
P 206 382 5000 F 206 382 7283 seattleymca.org
October 5, 2021
Ms. Lee Napier
Director, Lewis County Department of Community Development
2025 NE Kresky Ave.
Chehalis, WA 98532
Dear Ms. Napier:
The YMCA of Greater Seattle appreciates the opportunity to respond on the record to comments submitted by
local residents regarding our application for a change to the Lewis County Comprehensive Plan to provide a
master-planned resort overlay on a portion of the property we have acquired adjacent to Mineral Lake.
Our review of the comments makes it clear that local residents are keenly interested in our project and we look
forward to working with you and with them to continue addressing their questions throughout the permitting
review and approval process. We also appreciate their desire to preserve the natural beauty of the site, and we
believe that our project can not only accomplish that objective, but also represents the best way to ensure that
the majority of the property will be sustained in its natural state into the future.
Here are our direct responses to some of the more commonly mentioned and/or significant concerns:
11 comments mentioned concerns regarding drinking water supplies to serve the camp, whether
water supplies for local residents would be impaired, and/or wastewater treatment concerns.
Response: While initial studies are encouraging, detailed studies will have to be completed and demonstrate
that the water supply at the site is sufficient to serve the camp without negatively impacting the water supply
for local residents. These studies will be included as part of a future Binding Site Plan application and
environmental checklist that will be submitted when the comprehensive plan amendment is approved. A
detailed plan for wastewater treatment will also be developed and approved by local and state regulators
9 comments mentioned concerns about traffic volumes and/or the capacity of local roads.
Response: The majority of campers and staff will come to and leave the camp in school buses, helping to
mitigate vehicular traffic in the area. Additionally, a complete traffic study and mitigation plan, including
identification of any required improvements to local roads, will be completed as part of the binding site plan
application.
7 comments mentioned the role of the Nisqually Tribe in the acquisition of the property and whether
the Tribe is looking to increase its land holdings or create new hunting opportunities that will
negatively impact options for local residents.
Response: The Nisqually Tribe has provided financial resources that have helped the YMCA acquire the first
parcel of the site, but they do not have an ownership interest in that property. The YMCA’s plan to work with
the Tribe in providing Tribal members access to the land for cultural and traditional uses is not expected to
negatively impact the local community.
7 comments mentioned impacts on wildlife and/or aquatic habitat.
Response: The majority of the total site would remain in its current state for the practice of sustainable
forestry. The proposed master-planned resort overlay would impact less than a quarter of the total site, and the
actual camp facilities are expected to utilize approximately one-quarter of that acreage. The eventual site plan
Page 2
will comply with all required setbacks from the lake. Additionally, campers would not be using any powered
watercraft, resulting in minimal impact on fish and other aquatic habitat compared to the impacts of motorized
fish boats and other recreational craft currently used on the lake.
6 comments mentioned the YMCA’s non-profit status, tax treatment of the property, and/or impact
on local residents’ tax bills.
Response: After reviewing its options, the YMCA has publicly stated that it does not intend to file for a property
tax exemption on the camp property at this time. Additionally, the YMCA intends to practice sustainable forestry
on the majority of the total site, which would result in the generation of timber tax revenues. With no change in
tax status of the property, there should be no negative tax impact on local residents.
6 comments mentioned fire protection and emergency response and whether the current volunteer
fire department is equipped to handle additional demand for service generated by the camp
Response: The YMCA’s 2 existing overnight camps are also located in rural areas, and solutions have been
found to provide appropriate emergency response coverage for those camps, including trained YMCA staff
serving as additional volunteers for local agencies. To ensure that an appropriate plan is established for the
Mineral Lake property, the YMCA has offered to fund a consulting contract with Modern Volunteer Fire Service
Consulting, LLC, to work with Lewis County Fire District #9 leadership to identify equipment and other needs in
serving the camp. A detailed fire protection plan will have to be agreed upon as part of the binding site plan
before any development or construction can begin.
6 comments mentioned potential restrictions on the public’s use or enjoyment of the lake.
Response: The number of campers participating in water-related activities at any one time will be limited by
the number of canoes/kayaks available and the need to maintain appropriate lifeguard-to-swimmer ratios.
Because of these limitations, camp-related lake usage will be confined to a fairly small area adjacent to the
camp itself, keeping most of the lake available for public recreation. Despite the fact that the YMCA would own
additional land abutting the lake, it has neither the intention nor the authority to dictate how those areas of the
lake are used.
5 comments mentioned a perceived lack of notice and/or public meetings regarding the project.
Response: Public meetings and other communications will occur in compliance with the county’s established
land use review and permit approval processes. In addition, although not legally required to do so, the YMCA
has already held two public meetings with the local community and plans to continue offering opportunities for
additional dialog with the public throughout the comprehensive plan amendment and future Binding Site Plan
permitting process.
2 comments questioned the appropriateness of the land for development, noting the failure of past
development proposals.
Response: The YMCA proposal is fundamentally different from past development proposals, which focused on
building large lot waterfront housing. The proposed camp represents a much lower impact project that would
maintain more of the shoreline in an undisturbed state.
2 comments mentioned safety and security and asked how many full-time residents the YMCA
expects to have on site.
Response: This is a programmatic decision more appropriately addressed during the review of the future
binding site plan application.
Page 3
1 comment expressed confusion on the acreage involved in the project, whether the total was
2,000+ or 463 acres.
Response: While the total property the YMCA hopes to acquire exceeds 2,000 acres, the proposed area to be
designated for the master-planned resort overlay is 463 acres. The YMCA intends that the balance of acreage
acquired remain undeveloped or as timber harvest lands.
Thank you once again for the opportunity to provide this additional information for the record. If you have any
questions, please contact me or Dan Penrose at SCJ Alliance.
Sincerely,
Meredith Cambre Gwen Ichinose Bagley
Senior Executive Director Youth Development Officer
Camping and Outdoor Leadership Youth Development Center of Excellence