Elk Plain Crossing Hearing – April 9, 2019

The development of the former county road shop in Elk Plain is having a public hearing at the Graham Advisory meeting on April 9, 2019. Please come out and provide your input to this large housing development across from the Fred Meyer in Elk Plain.

Here is the 23 page document on the development. Elk Plain Crossing PDD PP IPR GAC-RJ



April 9, 2019 at 6:30 p.m.

Graham Fire & Rescue, Station 94, 23014-70th Ave. E., Graham, WA

Public comment will be limited to 3 minutes per speaker. If possible, please have a spokesperson for people with similar views.


Rezone/Planned Development District/Preliminary Plat/Site Plan Review/Environmental:

Elk Plain Crossing   (224th, old county road shop)

Applications: 898393, 896277, 896267, 896281, 896280

Applicant:     Elk Plain LLC

Planner:        Robert Jenkins, rob.jenkins@piercecountywa.gov

Request:       Rezone and Planned Development District (PDD) approval of 56.41 acres of the 60.90-acre parcel; Preliminary Plat approval for a 347-lot single-family detached and 16-lot zero-lot-line single-family subdivision with six future commercial lots; and Site Plan Review to deviate from selected architectural design standards for urban single-family residential developments. Located at 23101 Mountain Highway East, Spanaway, in the Mixed-Use District zone and the Graham Community Plan area, in Council District #3.





8 Comments Add yours

  1. Robin J Griffin says:

    Well at least they are calling it Elk Plain

  2. Yolanda Markle says:

    I will be out of town….another ridiculous development!


  3. Mark says:

    why do you think we live out there in Elk Plain ??? to stay away from all the over crowded neighborhoods and developments. if this passes i will be relocating to stay away from over crowding

  4. Lincoln says:

    I, too, am glad it is not called “Bethel Station” anything. I am just concerned that this area was rural reserve except for the commercial strip on the highway. It was considered not a place to build houses and suddenly they are platting houses on it instead. Seems like it was not grandfathered for that use and should be REJECTED.

  5. Victoria Pitkanen says:

    We don’t have the room in our schools right now for the housing developments we currently have. To add more housing, then the next school bond that gets put forth better pass with no objections to accommodate with the growth

  6. James Hecker says:

    I am concerned about the ‘zero lot line’.
    This is usually and indication that the homes are built as close as possible to each other and literally your neighbors house is your ‘fence line’. Typicaly these developers are using cheap materials to maximize profits and create a neighborhood that depreciates quickly, due to functional obsolescence. Also the architectural style would not be in keeping with the standard Pacific Northwest looking homes.
    This could end up being another cluster of homes far too close to each other driving all values in the sorounding neighborhoods down and attracting crime (think the houses by wal-mart).

    1. Lincoln says:

      The developer did not provide any architectural pictures of the duplexes or zero lot line units in the data handed out. The question was raised by a community member at the LUAC meeting. He flashed a brief picture on the screen, so no real information was provided.

  7. She Jankens says:

    The roads and schools, fi r and police protection cannot support what we have. Now the HUGE apartment complex is coming in line at 8 th Ave. Traffic will be unmanageable! More trash houses and crime. What’s wrong with these people? Tax write off?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s