HomeMy WebLinkAbout06. Heritage-DEIS-w - comments - Draft Jan 2023
NEW HERITAGE
DRAFT
NON-PROJECT
ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT
STATEMENT
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
Project Title
Proposed Action
Project Location
Implementation Date
Amendment to the City of Pasco's Comprehensive Plan
Adoption of an Amendment to the City of Pasco's
Comprehensive Plan. This Draft Environmental Impact
Statement (DEIS) is being prepared to comply with the
Washington State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) to address
potential impacts and mitigation measures related to an
Amendment to Pasco's Comprehensive Plan to allow a change
of the current Medium and Light Industrial designations to
Mixed Commercial-Residential. This DEIS addresses land use,
urban design, transportation, capital facilities, government
services and utilities, and environmental policy. The following
three land use alternatives are evaluated in this document.
Preferred Alternative - Mixed Commercial-Residential with
an average density of approximately 8.7 housing units per
acre and 5 acres of community business.
The adoption of this proposed action would result in the future
development of 196.31± acres of mixed-uses; including: 176±
acres in residential (approximately 1,354 homes and/or units),
including open spaces, roads and utilities; 5± acres in
community business (retail and office); and a 15± acre
elementary school site.
Medium Density Alternative - Mixed Commercial-
Residential with an average density of approximately 5.8
housing units per acre and 4 acres of community business.
This alternative would also result in the development of 196.31±
acres of mixed uses; including: 177± acres in residential
(approximately 1,028 homes and/or units), including open
spaces, roads and utilities; 4± acres in community business
(retail and office); and a 15± acre elementary school site.
No Action Alternative
This alternative assumes that no permits will be issued for
residential development and the area will remain industrial.
City of Pasco
____________ 2022
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
Lead Agency
Responsible Official
Contact Person
Approvals or Permits
Required
Principal Contributors
Issue Date for the Draft
EIS
Comments Due on
Cost of Document
City of Pasco
City of Pasco Planning Department
Rick White, Community Development Director
Community Development Department
P. O. Box 293
Pasco, WA 99301
(509) 585-4276
Jacob Gonzalez
Planning Manager
City of Pasco
Community Development Department
P. O. Box 293
Pasco, WA 99301
(509) 585-4276
The Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan will require
public hearings, the recommendation of the Planning
Commission, and approval and adoption by the City Council. In
the future, other permits related to the development of the
property may also be issued under this EIS including permits for
grading, utility development, subdivision approval, and building
permits.
Land Strategies
141 S 17th Street, #119
Independence, OR 97351
(Primary Author)
J-U-B ENGINEERS, Inc
3611 S Zintel Wy,
Kennewick, WA 99337
(509) 783-2144
(Transportation, Utilities, Natural Habitat, New Heritage)
September 23, 2022
December 14, 2022
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
Note: This Draft EIS has been prepared under the revised rules of WAC 197 -11-235.
Consequently, this DEIS should be reviewed as a single document with the Draft Amendment
to the City’s Comprehensive Plan (Volumes I and II). Additional supporting documents are
available from the City of Pasco.
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
CITY OF PASCO
NEW HERITAGE AMENDMENT TO CITY’S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
NON-PROJECT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 What is the Non Project EIS? .......................................................................................... 1
1.2 What is the process?......................................................................................................... 1
1.3 How will future environmental reviews be handled? ...................................................... 2
1.4 How does this amendment to the city’s comprehensive plan and the Pasco
comprehensive plan relate? .............................................................................................. 2
1.5 What are Pasco’s requirements for an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan? ............ 2
2 LOCATION ............................................................................................................................. 5
3 DESCRIPTION OF EIS ALTERNATIVES ........................................................................... 7
3.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 7
3.2 How the alternatives were developed .............................................................................. 7
3.3 The alternatives ................................................................................................................ 7
3.3.1 Preferred Alternative - Mixed Commercial-Residential ....................................... 7
3.3.2 Medium Density Alternative - Mixed Commercial/Residential ......................... 12
3.3.3 No Action Alternative ......................................................................................... 14
3.4 Comparison of Alternatives ........................................................................................... 14
4 MAJOR ISSUES AND AREAS OF CONTROVERSY ....................................................... 16
4.1 Land Use ........................................................................................................................ 16
4.2 Traffic ............................................................................................................................ 16
4.3 Loss of Employment ...................................................................................................... 16
5 COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVES ................................................................................ 17
5.1 Comparison to Pasco Comprehensive Plan Goals and Policies..................................... 17
6 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT, ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION
MEASURES .......................................................................................................................... 21
6.1 Earth ............................................................................................................................... 22
6.1.1 Affected Earth ..................................................................................................... 22
6.1.2 Potential Impacts ................................................................................................. 24
6.1.3 Mitigation Measures ............................................................................................ 24
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
6.2 Air Quality ..................................................................................................................... 25
6.2.1 Affected Environment ......................................................................................... 25
6.2.2 Potential Impacts ................................................................................................. 25
6.2.3 Mitigation Measures ............................................................................................ 25
6.3 Utilities ........................................................................................................................... 26
6.3.1 Affected Environment ......................................................................................... 26
6.3.2 Environmental Impact ......................................................................................... 28
6.3.3 Mitigation Measures ............................................................................................ 33
6.4 Land Use ........................................................................................................................ 35
6.4.1 Affected Environment ......................................................................................... 35
6.4.2 Potential Impacts ................................................................................................. 41
6.4.3 Mitigation Measures ............................................................................................ 44
6.5 Population, Housing, and Employment ......................................................................... 46
6.5.1 Affected Environment ......................................................................................... 46
6.5.2 Potential Impacts ................................................................................................. 49
6.5.3 Mitigation Measures ............................................................................................ 52
6.6 Public Services ............................................................................................................... 53
6.6.1 Affected Environment ......................................................................................... 53
6.6.2 Potential Impacts ................................................................................................. 54
6.6.3 Mitigation Measures ............................................................................................ 55
6.7 Parks and Recreation...................................................................................................... 55
6.7.1 Affected Environment ......................................................................................... 55
6.7.2 Potential Impacts ................................................................................................. 57
6.7.3 Mitigation Measures ............................................................................................ 58
6.8 Environmental Health .................................................................................................... 59
6.8.1 Affected Environment ......................................................................................... 59
6.8.2 Potential Impacts ................................................................................................. 60
6.8.3 Mitigation Measures ............................................................................................ 60
6.9 Transportation ................................................................................................................ 62
6.9.1 Affected Environment ......................................................................................... 62
6.9.2 Potential Impacts ................................................................................................. 63
6.9.3 Mitigation Measures ............................................................................................ 68
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
7 Heritage Conservation ........................................................................................................... 72
7.1 Affected Environment .................................................................................................... 72
7.2 Potential Impacts ............................................................................................................ 72
7.3 Mitigation Measures ...................................................................................................... 72
TABLES
Table 1 - Summary of Proposed Land Uses Proposed Action Medium Density Alternative ......... 9
Table 2 - Summary of Proposed Land Uses Medium Density Plan Alternative .......................... 12
Table 3 - Comparison of Alternatives Land Use Acreage ............................................................ 14
Table 4 - Comparison of Alternatives to GMA Goals .................................................................. 17
Table 5 - SEPA Elements of the Environment ............................................................................. 21
Table 6 – Preferred Alternative Projected Sewerage Volumes .................................................... 28
Table 7 – Preferred Alternative Proposed Water Demand with Irrigation ................................... 29
Table 8 – Medium Density Alternative Projected Sewage Volumes ........................................... 29
Table 9 – Medium Density Alternative Proposed Water Demand with Irrigation ....................... 29
Table 10 – Impervious Surfaces ................................................................................................... 33
Table 11 – Existing Land Use in the UGA ................................................................................... 36
Table 12 – Amendment Area Vicinity Land Uses ........................................................................ 38
Table 13 – Preferred Alternative Land Use Changes ................................................................... 42
Table 14 – Medium Density Land Use Changes .......................................................................... 43
Table 15 – Population Projections ............................................................................................... 47
Table 16 – Pasco UGA Housing ................................................................................................... 48
Table 17 – Projected Employment ................................................................................................ 51
Table 18 – Student Enrollment ..................................................................................................... 54
Table 19 – Pasco Park Standards .................................................................................................. 58
Table 20 – Comparison of Trip Generation .................................................................................. 68
Table 21 – Comparison of Traffic Mitigation............................................................................... 69
FIGURES
Figure 1 – Site Location Map ......................................................................................................... 5
Figure 2 – Vicinity Map .................................................................................................................. 6
Figure 3 – Soils ............................................................................................................................ 23
Figure 4 – Critical Areas and Resource Lands ............................................................................. 24
Figure 5 – Comprehensive Plan Land Uses .................................................................................. 37
Figure 6 – Vicinity Land Uses ...................................................................................................... 39
Figure 7 – Pasco Street Systems ................................................................................................... 63
Figure 8 – Preferred Alternative Intersection Control Evaluation ................................................ 65
Figure 9 – Preferred Alternative Roadway Volume to Capacity Ratios ....................................... 66
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
APPENDICES
Appendix 1 City of Pasco Determination of Significance and Scoping Notice ........................... 73
Appendix 2 Public Comments Received from Scoping Notice .................................................... 74
Appendix 3 Traffic Analysis ......................................................................................................... 75
Appendix 4 EIS Comment Matrix ................................................................................................ 76
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
1
1 INTRODUCTION
On June 7, 2022, the City of Pasco issued a Determination of Significance and Scoping Notice
(See Appendix 1) that a Non-Project Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) is being required to
address potential impacts and mitigation measures related to an Amendment to Pasco's
Comprehensive Plan. The proposed amendment is to allow a change of the current Medium and
Light Industrial designations to Mixed Commercial-Residential. The following responds to
questions that have been raised concerning the SEPA process (WAC 197.11) and this approach.
1.1 What is the Non Project EIS?
A non-project EIS addresses issues at a program, plan or policy level, analyzing impacts in a city
or area wide context rather than the site-specific analysis provided in a project EIS. Therefore,
site-specific information is not normally discussed in the document. In some instances, more
specific quantifiable measurements of impacts are available and are included in the analysis. A
Non-Project EIS addresses the types of environmental impacts that can be expected under each of
the alternatives and recommends mitigation to either reduce environmental impacts or make the
alternatives more viable. Future environmental review and more detailed analysis is required only
where the level of information provided is insufficient or substantial changes have occurred that
have not been addressed.
1.2 What is the process?
First, the Responsible Official of the City determined that an Environmental Impact Statement
(EIS) was required. Once that occurred, the City issued a Scoping Notice to request public input
on the scope of the document, including issues to be addressed, alternatives to be evaluated and
the level of detail (See Appendix 1). Once a final scope of work had been determined based on
public comment , this draft document was prepared for public review. The public is now being
requested to comment on this draft document. A public hearing will also be held to solicit public
input. Once comments from the public have been received, a Final Environmental Impact
Statement (FEIS) will be prepared. This document will contain all of the corrections, responses
and public comments received. It will be this document that is used by the City Council to make
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
2
their final decision on the adoption of the New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive
Plan.
1.3 How will future environmental reviews be handled?
If the Amendment is approved, any future development applications will be reviewed by the City
to determine if the proposal results in any significant changes that were not reviewed under this
SEPA process. If there are significant changes, then additional SEPA analysis may be required.
1.4 How does this amendment to the city’s comprehensive plan and the Pasco
comprehensive plan relate?
The City of Pasco' Comprehensive Plan was updated on June 7, 2021. It is intended that this
Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan would modify and be incorporated into the Pasco
Comprehensive Plan upon adoption by the City Council. Because of this, this DEIS clearly
identifies those goals contained in the current Pasco Comprehensive Plan which will be added to,
changed or modified.
As part of the June 7, 2021, update, the City prepared a Final EIS that identifies impacts and
mitigation measures related to the expansion of the Broadmoor Urban Growth Area. Because of
the relationship of this proposed amendment to the Pasco Comprehensive Plan, this DEIS will also
include many of the Broadmoor impact mitigation measures. Copies of both the June 7, 2021,
update and Comprehensive Plan Final EIS is available from the Pasco Planning Department.
1.5 What are Pasco’s requirements for an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan?
For the proposed amendment to be approved, the Pasco Planning Commission must make the
following specific findings to the Pasco Council (PMC 25.210.060):
1) After completion of an open record hearing on a petition for reclassification of property, the
Planning Commission shall make and enter findings from the records and conclusions there
of which support its recommendation and find whether:
a) The proposal is in accord with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan;
b) The effect of the proposal on the immediate vicinity will be materially detrimental;
c) There is merit and value in the proposal for the community as a whole;
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
3
d) Conditions should be imposed in order to mitigate any significant adverse impacts from
the proposal;
e) A concomitant agreement should be entered into between Pasco and the petitioner, and if
so, the terms and conditions of such an agreement.
2) The Planning Commission shall render its recommendation to approve, approve with
modifications and/or conditions, or reject the petition based on its findings and conclusions.
The Commission's recommendation, to include its findings and conclusions, shall be forwarded
to the Pasco Council at a regular business meeting thereof. [Ord. 3354 § 2, 1999; Code 1970
§ 25.88.060.]
Additional approval requirement under Section 25.215.020 of the Pasco City Code, include:
The City may approve [the] Comprehensive Plan amendments if it finds that:
(8) (c) Approval Criteria. The City may approve Comprehensive Plan amendments
if it finds that:
(i) The proposed amendment bears a substantial relationship to the public
health, safety, welfare, and protection of the environment;
(ii) The proposed amendment is consistent with the requirements of Chapter
36.70A RCW and with the portion of the City’s adopted Comprehensive
Plan not affected by the amendment;
(iii)The proposed amendment corrects an obvious mapping error; or
(iv) The proposed amendment addresses an identified deficiency in the
Comprehensive Plan.
(9) Additional Factors. The City must also consider the following factors prior to
approving Comprehensive Plan amendments:
(a) The effect upon the physical environment;
(b) The effect on open space and natural features including, but not limited to,
topography, streams, rivers, and lakes;
(c) The compatibility with and impact on adjacent land uses and surrounding
neighborhoods;
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
4
(d) The adequacy of and impact on community facilities, including utilities,
roads, public transportation, parks, recreation, and schools;
(e) The quantity and location of land planned for the proposed land use type
and density and the demand for such land;
(f) The current and projected project density in the area; and
(g) The effect, if any, upon other aspects of the Comprehensive Plan
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
5
2 LOCATION
The New Heritage sub-area contains approximately 196.31± acres and is bounded on the north by
East A Street, on the east by an existing warehouse development, on the west by vacant industrial
land (that has City of Pasco ownership and private ownership) and an undeveloped public right-
of-way, and on the south by a Burlington Northern Rail Road spur. (See Figure 1Figure 1 and
Figure 2Figure 2). Section 33, Township 9 North, Range 30 East.
Figure 1 – Site Location Map
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
6
Figure 2 – Vicinity Map
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
7
3 DESCRIPTION OF EIS ALTERNATIVES
3.1 Introduction
Based on the responses to the Scoping Notice, this DEIS presents three alternatives for future
growth in the sub-area under the Mixed Commercial/Residential Proposed Action. The three
alternatives are used in this DEIS as a way of comparing potential impacts under different land use
scenarios and showing the similarities and differences of those impacts. Therefore, the EIS
alternatives provide framework for analyzing impacts and making comparisons among the
alternatives.
3.2 How the alternatives were developed
Broetje Orchards LLC, principal owner of the New Heritage Amendment area, submitted a vision
report and analysis for the 196.31 ± acres which describes intended uses if the proposed
amendment is approved. It is this original vision that is being used by the proponent as the
Preferred Alternative. A second alternative assumes that the property would be developed at a
lower, medium density, but also under the Medium Density Residential Classification. The No-
Action Alternative is required under SEPA, primarily as a base point for comparison, assumes that
no approvals or changes are made, and that the property remains as a mix of Light and Medium
Industrial. It was determined that within this range of options there was adequate latitude to
address a sufficiently wide range of impacts.
3.3 The alternatives
The following generally describes the three alternatives, including the No Action Alternative as a
comparative base.
3.3.1 Preferred Alternative - Mixed Commercial-Residential
The Preferred Alternative has an average density of approximately 8.7 housing units per acre, 5
acres of community business and a site for a 15-acre elementary school.
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
8
The following New Heritage "Vision" describes the basic approach used in developing the
Preferred Alternative. Detailed designs, in conformance with this vision, would be developed as
part of the City's future permitting process.
The site is being proposed as a mixed residential
and commercial area that would be developed
using the “New Urbanism” concept. This
concept moves away from traditional, single-use
development to a community oriented new-
urbanism design with an emphasis on walkable
blocks and streets, housing, shopping and
employment opportunities in proximity,
accessible public spaces, and school facilities near those being served.
New Heritage envisions a mixed-use development
accentuating a neighborhood that is compact,
pedestrian-friendly and where many of the activities of
daily living (shopping, access to green-space, work,
schools, etc.) are within walking or biking distance.
New Heritage indicates that the project will seek to
borrow from successful developments that have
incorporated the use of retail and office spaces on
lower floors with residential above, and will serve
nearby employment centers that will provide job
opportunities to the families living here beyond service and retail.
New Heritage states that diversity is crucial to its vision as a hallmark of a healthy community. It
indicates that the development will pay tribute to the variety of cultures found in our community
in its architecture and landscape. Further, they indicate that they will encourage housing and
services that welcome all, creating a diverse community.
Source: Skibba Illustration
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
9
New Heritage has proposed that this area will be a place that transcends buildings in order to
facilitate connections between the residents who live and work there. It states that communities
need gathering places that are neither work nor home, where individuals can feel a sense of safety
and belonging and, which provides the opportunity for relationships between individuals to form.
New Heritage indicates that the site will offer community centers and the like to help facilitate this
sense of ‘being’ and connection. They indicate that promoting civic engagement and advancing
the well-being of those who are there is a significant goal.
Table 1Table 1 below summarizes the size and percentage of area for each of these land uses.
Table 1 - Summary of Proposed Land Uses Proposed Action Mixed UseMedium Density
Alternative
Acreage by Land Use Acres Percentage
Residential 176.31 90%
Community Business ±5 3%
Elementary School ±15 7%
Total Acreage ±196.31 100%
Maximum Average Residential Density per Gross Acre ±8.7
Source: Land Strategies/JUB
The following outlines each of the major land use elements that would be included in the New
Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan under the Mixed-Use Alternative:
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
10
Residential
Overall gross density would average about 8.7± units per acre,
including the open space, roadways and utilities. Based on this,
there will be up to 1,354 units within the sub-area. Within the
approximately 8.7± units per acre, specific densities will vary
widely. The Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan
would allow densities of up to 18± units per gross acre adjacent
to business and high amenity areas, with adequate public
services, to a low of 4± units per gross acre for single-family
detached residences.
Community Business
This alternative would allow a 5± acre community business area containing up to 76,000± square
feet depending on the specific retail and office uses that occupy the site. The Community Business
will consist of a central community gathering space as well as retail and office uses to serve the
local east Paso community. Retail uses would be limited to such uses as: grocery store, beauty
shop, barber shop, drugstore, cafe, and similar stores. Office and public service uses would be
limited to legal offices, accounting, real estate, medical offices and other professional services.
Parks and Open Space
The park and open space system will be
distributed throughout the development and will
meet City of Pasco park requirements. This
alternative envisions one primary park site
together with an open space network
interconnecting each neighborhood, school and
businesses. Approximately 20 acres of City
owned property is adjacent to the proposed New
Heritage development. If access is available, the
proposed parks and open space could be
Source: Moule & Polyzoides
Architects and Urbanists
Source: SVPVPA
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
11
connected to the adjacent City Sports Complex. In addition, entryways, storm water facilities,
easements and school park facilities would also be used as open space.
Easements/Circulation/Roadways
Easements will be required for utilities and roadways. These could be used as both open space and
for circulation, including bikeways and trails. Other easements would be required for storm water
detention.
Vehicle access to the property is currently via East A Street on the north. This alternative would
provide two primary access points on East A Street (See Figure 1) to serve the future development
on the site and anticipates that future development of any collector roadways and residential access
streets would meet current City of Pasco Standard Specifications (See Section 6.9). Bicycle and
pedestrian circulation would be along, or adjacent to, proposed roadways and, where applicable,
in designated open space corridors. Public transportation would serve the area at designated
intersections and bus stops.
Utilities
Utilities such as sewer, water, power and telephone would be provided in conformance with City
of Pasco requirements and the standards of the specific utility companies.
Schools
The Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan would provide space for one elementary
school. The elementary school site would contain up to 15± acres, including nearby park space.
In the event the Pasco School District elects not to construct a school on the site, this land use
would revert to residential under the same standards and requirements as the other residentially
designated land use areas, but the total number of units would not increase.
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
12
3.3.2 Medium Density Alternative - Mixed Commercial/Residential
The Medium Density Alternative proposes and average density of approximately 5.8 housing units
per acre, 4 acres of community business, and a 1 0 acre elementary school site with a 5 acre park
nearby.
This alternative would also allow a mix of commercial and residential land uses but at a lower
density than the Preferred Alternative would allow. It would not follow all of the "Vision”
definitions outlined above, but would meet all of Subdivision Requirements of the Pasco Zoning
Code. Table 2Table 2 below summarizes the size and percentages for each of the major land use
under this alternative.
Table 2 - Summary of Proposed Land Uses Medium Density Plan Alternative
Acreage by Land Use Acres Percentage
Residential 177.31 91%
Community Business 4 2%
Elementary School 15 7%
Total Acreage ±196.31 100%
Maximum Average Residential Density per Gross Acre ±5.8
Source: Land Strategies/JUB
The following outlines each of the major land use elements that would be included under this
alternative:
Residential
Based on this, there will be approximately 1,028 housing units with and average density of 5.8
units per acre; although specific densities will vary widely. This alternative would allow densities
of up to 18± units per gross acre adjacent to high amenity and business areas, with adequate public
services, to a low of 4± units per gross acre for single-family detached residences.
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
13
Business Park
This alternative would allow a 4± acre community business area containing up to 65,340± square
feet depending on the specific retail and office uses that occupy the site. The Community Business
will also consist of a central community gathering space as well as retail and office uses to serve
the local east Pasco community. Retail uses would be limited to such uses as: grocery store,
beauty shop, barber shop, drugstore, cafe, and similar stores. Office and public service uses would
be limited to legal offices, accounting, real estate, medical offices and other professional services.
Parks and Open Space
The park and open space system would be based on the Pasco Subdivision Code and other Pasco
requirements for approval. Parks and open space will be distributed throughout the development
and will meet City of Pasco park requirements. This alternative envisions one primary park site
together with an open space network interconnecting neighborhoods, school and businesses.
Approximately 20 acres of City owner property is adjacent to the proposed New Heritage
development. If access is available, the proposed parks and open space could be connected to the
adjacent City Sports Complex. In addition, entryways, storm water facilities, easements and school
park facilities could be included in open space.
Easements/Circulation/Roadways
Easements will be required for utilities and roadways. These could be used as both open space and
for circulation, including bikeways and trails. Other easements for storm water detention will be
put in place, as needed.
Vehicle access to the property is currently via East A Street on the north. This alternative would
also provide two primary access points on East A Street to serve the future development on the
site and anticipates that future development of any collector roadways and residential access streets
would meet current City of Pasco Standard Specifications.
Bicycle and pedestrian circulation would be along, or adjacent to, proposed roadways and, where
applicable, in designated open space corridors. Public transportation would serve the area at
designated intersections and bus stops.
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
14
Utilities
Utilities such as sewer, water, power and telephone would be provided in conformance with City
of Pasco and the standards of the utility companies.
3.3.3 No Action Alternative
The No Action Alternative is intended to act as a benchmark for evaluating the impacts of the
Proposed Action (Preferred Alternative) and the Mixed-Use, lower density alternative. This
alternative assumes some industrial development will occur and, although the Pasco Zoning Code
allows nearly any non-residential use in the Medium and Light Industrial Zone, it is reasonable to
assume that the most likely uses that would choose to locate here are warehousing and light
manufacturing. It is assumed that any industrial development would meet Pasco’s Zoning Code
requirements and the City’s Goals and Policies.
3.4 Comparison of Alternatives
Table 3Table 3, below compares the basic elements of the three alternatives in relation to acreage,
number of units, population and square footages.
Table 3 - Comparison of Alternatives Land Use Acreage
Acreage by
Land Use
Preferred
Alternative
Medium Density
Alternative
No-Action
Alternative
Acres Percentage Acres Percentage Acres Percentage
Industrial 0 0% 0 0% 196.31 100%
Residential 176.31 90% 177.31 90% 0 0%
Business/Service 5 3% 4 2% 0 0%
School 15 8% 15 8% 0 0%
Totals 196.31 100% 196.31 100% 196.31 100%
Source: Land Strategies/JUB
If the Preferred Alternative is approved, all existing code requirements would have to be met and
any approved mitigation measures identified under this EIS would have to be implemented. This
can include the requirement for a concomitant agreementGMA Development Agreement to assure
future compliance. The Medium Density Alternative and the No-Action Alternative would also
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
15
have to meet Pasco's code requirements and any requirement identified under SEPA. This report
is for a non-project EIS and development standards have not been identified at this time. At the
time of development, it is anticipated that a GMA Development Agreement will be created to
identify specific project elements identified in Section 21.60.010 of the Pasco Municipal Code.
Additional SEPA review will be required at the time of development, as well.
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
16
4 MAJOR ISSUES AND AREAS OF CONTROVERSY
The following paragraphs discuss major issues and potential areas of controversy identified during
the preparation of this Draft EIS. Possible measures to mitigate the impacts related to these issues
and controversy are proposed under Section 6.
4.1 Land Use
The proposed amendment would change the land uses on the proponent’s site from industrial to
mixed housing and business/office uses. As a mitigation, the proponent has proposed a "Vision"
on the site provides increased amenities. Currently, the City of Pasco does not have the codes and
policies in place to assure the implementation of this approach. The mitigation measures identified
under this DEIS and the approval of the Developer Agreement is intended to address this issue.
Concern has also been expressed that the proposed amendment, if approved, could lead to other
industrially zoned properties requesting changes to residential uses.
4.2 Traffic
The proposed amendment would increase traffic from residences and business/office uses.
Mitigation measures identified under the Traffic Section of this DEIS is intended to provide
mitigation. In addition, if approved, once specific permits are applied for, additional traffic studies
and mitigation could be required.
4.3 Loss of Employment
Concern has been expressed that the proposed amendment, if approved, could result in a reduction
of future employment. Actual employment loss would depend on the specific future industry
located on the site. This could range from warehousing (low employment) to manufacturing (high
employment). Historically, this area has attracted a mix of warehousing and distribution industries
which could, potentially lead to a reduction of future employment.
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
17
5 COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVES
5.1 Comparison to Pasco Comprehensive Plan Goals and Policies
The Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA) requires Cities and Counties to develop
general goals and policies in their Comprehensive Plans consistent with GMA goals (RCW
34.70A.020). Because this Amendment must also be in conformance with these general GMA
goals, Table 4Table 4 compares the GMA goals to the three alternatives.
Table 4 - Comparison of Alternatives to GMA Goals
GMA Goals
(RCW 36.70A.020)
Alternative 1:
Preferred
Alternative
Alternative 2:
Mixed
UseMedium
Density
Alternative
Alternative 3:
No-Action
Alternative
1. Urban Growth: Encourage
development in urban areas
where adequate public
facilities and services exist or
can be provided in an efficient
manner.
Adequate public
facilities currently
exist with
mitigation
Adequate public
facilities currently
exist with
mitigation
Adequate public
facilities currently
exist with
mitigation
2. Reduce Sprawl: Reduce
inappropriate conversion of
undeveloped land into
sprawling, low-density
development.
The Amendment
area is
undeveloped. An
8.7 UPA Density is
proposed that
exceeds City
averages.
The Amendment
area is
undeveloped. A
5.6 UPA Density is
proposed that
exceeds City
averages.
The site would be
developed in
industrial uses.
3. Transportation: Encourage
efficient multi-modal
transportation systems that are
based on regional priorities and
coordinated with county and
city comprehensive plans.
A multi-modal
transportation
center is proposed,
and bike and
pedestrian access is
enhanced.
Bus stops would be
along public
streets. Pedestrian
and bike access
would be public
sidewalks and
streets as required.
Depending on the
industry, bus stops
could be required.
Bike and
pedestrian access
would be per
Pasco code.
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
18
4. Housing: Plan for and
accommodate housing
affordable to all economic
segments of the population of
this state, promote a variety of
residential densities and
housing types, and encourage
preservation of existing
housing stock.
Provides a variety
of affordable
residential densities
close to
employment
centers.
Provides some
mixture of
residential
densities near
employment
centers under the
Medium Density
Zoning
classification.
Does not provide
residential land
uses.
5. Economic Development:
Encourage economic
development throughout the
state that is consistent with
adopted comprehensive plan,
promote economic opportunity
for all citizens of this state,
especially for the unemployed
and for disadvantaged persons,
promote the retention and
expansion of existing
businesses and recruitment of
new businesses, recognize
regional differences impacting
economic development
opportunities, and encourage
growth in areas experiencing
insufficient economic growth,
all within the capacities of the
state’s natural resources,
public services and public
facilities.
Provides for 5 acres
of retail and office
employment and
supports nearby
industry’s need for
employee housing.
Provides for 4
acres of retail and
office employment
and supports
nearby industry’s
need for employee
housing.
Provides 196.31
acres of industrial
space.
6. Property Rights: Private
property shall not be taken for
public use without just
compensation having been
made. The property rights of
landowners shall be protected
from arbitrary and
discriminatory actions.
No Impact to
property rights
No Impact to
property rights
No Impact to
property rights
7. Permits: Applications for
both state and local
Developer
Agreement and
Pasco Subdivision
and Zoning Codes
Pasco Zoning
Codes would
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
19
government permits should be
processed in a timely and fair
manner to ensure
predictability.
Pasco Codes and
Policies would
provide permit
predictability
would provide
permit
predictability
provide permit
predictability
8. Natural Resource Industries:
Maintain and enhance natural
resource-based industries,
including productive timber,
agricultural, and fisheries
industries. Encourage the
conservation of productive
forestlands and productive
agricultural lands and
discourage incompatible uses.
Existing
undeveloped land
would be converted
to residential and
commercial.
Existing
undeveloped land
would be
converted to
residential and
commercial.
No impact to
natural resources.
9. Open Space and Recreation:
Retain open space, enhance
recreational opportunities,
conserve fish and wildlife
habitat, increase access to
natural resource lands and
water, and develop parks and
recreation facilities.
Provides 8% to
10% of site as open
space. Includes bike
and pedestrian trail
system.
Provides open
space as required
by Pasco's codes
and requirements
under SEPA.
Would not
provide open
space and
recreation beyond
SEPA and code
requirements.
10. Environment: Protect the
environment and enhance the
state’s high quality of life,
including air and water quality,
and the availability of water.
The "vision"
proposed would
enhance resident's
quality of life
through parks, bike
and pedestrian trails
and nearby
employment
access.
Would be
consistent with
existing Pasco
policies and code
requirements.
Would be
consistent with
existing Pasco
policies and code
requirements.
11. Citizen Participation and
Coordination: Encourage the
involvement of citizens in the
planning process and ensure
coordination between
communities and jurisdictions
to reconcile conflicts.
Citizens involved
thru SEPA and the
Amendment
process
Citizens involved
thru SEPA and the
Amendment
process
Citizens involved
thru SEPA
12. Public Facilities and
Service: Ensure that those
public facilities and services
necessary to support
development shall be adequate
to serve the development at the
time the development is
There are adequate
public facilities to
serve the
development with
mitigation.
There are adequate
public facilities to
serve the
development with
mitigation.
There are
adequate public
facilities to serve
the development
with mitigation.
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
20
available for occupancy and
use without decreasing current
service levels below locally
established minimum
standards.
13. Historic Preservation:
Identify and encourage the
preservation of lands, sites and
structures that have historical
or archaeological significance.
Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
21
6 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT, ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND
MITIGATION MEASURES
This section identifies the affected environment, analyzes the environmental impacts and, where
applicable, recommends mitigation measures to reduce or eliminate the identified impacts. This
section also identifies any unavoidable adverse impacts which cannot be mitigated.
In determining what elements of the environment were to be reviewed, comments to the
Determination of Significance and Scoping Notice were used as well as the existing location and
site characteristics. Because of the relationship between this DEIS and the City's Comprehensive
Plan EIS, Table 5Table 5 below, compares the City's Comprehensive Plan EIS to this DEIS.
Table 5 - SEPA Elements of the Environment
Comprehensive Plan EIS Proposed Amendment EIS
Element Section Element Section
Earth 4.1 Earth 6.1
Surface Water 4.2 Utilities 6.3
Plants and Animals 4.3 Not Reviewed
Land Use 4.4 Land Use 6.4
Environmental Health 4.5 Environmental Health 6.8
Shoreline Use 4.6 Not Reviewed
Population, Housing and
Employment 4.7 Population, Housing and
Employment 6.5
Parks and Recreation 4.8 Parks and Recreation 6.7
Transportation 4.9 Transportation 6.9
Public Service and Utilities 4.10 Public Services 6.6
Heritage Conservation 4.11 Not Reviewed
Not Reviewed Air Quality 6.2
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
22
6.1 Earth
6.1.1 Affected Earth
The proposed amendment area is a mostly level, vacant field without significant ground cover. It
is currently bordered on the west by industrially zoned vacant land and a proposed 10-field City
Sports Complex; on the east by a recently approved distribution center; on the south by an unused
railroad spur and undeveloped industrial land; and, to the north by East A Street and developed
residential land. This site will be developed in a collaborative nature and cohesive with adjacent
developments. (See Figure 1Figure 1, Existing Site)
Site Looking South from East A Street
The proposed amendment area is undeveloped and generally level. Vegetation is primarily
volunteer grasses and irrigated agricultural crop circles. Soils primarily consist of 89-Quincy
Loamy Fine Sands. There is also an area of 90-Quincy Loamy Fine Sands and Urban Land,
Torrisamments Complex. All of the soils are well drained, and the Quincy series consist of 50%
or more of fine sand or, less than 25% very coarse, coarse, and medium sand, plus less than 50%
very fine sand. Slopes range from 0% to 15%. Figure 3Figure 3 illustrates the existing soils within
the proposed amendment area.
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
23
Figure 3 – Soils
The topography of the New Heritage amendment area is generally flat with slopes ranging from
0% to 15%, with no existing areas over 15% slope. The proposed amendment area does not contain
critical areas or resource lands. Figure 4Figure 4 illustrates the existing critical areas, including
steep slopes
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
24
Figure 4 – Critical Areas and Resource Lands
6.1.2 Potential Impacts
The soils are well drained and pose no significant impact if developed in either residential or
industrial uses with proper mitigation related to storm water runoff. Undeveloped, there is some
potential for storm water impact during heavy rainfall periods. Unprotected soils, either prior to
or during construction have the potential for wind-blown erosion.
6.1.3 Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measures may be employed to reduce siltation and slides:
• Maintain compliance with local air-quality agency requirements by watering exposed
areas during construction.
• Avoid disturbing the steep slope area.
• Compact soils at densities appropriate for planned land uses.
• Provide vegetative cover or soil cement on exposed surfaces.
• Maintain Open Space land use and environment designations.
• Construction should be staged so that the maximum amount of existing vegetation is
left in place.
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
25
• Catch basins should be installed near storm drains
6.2 Air Quality
6.2.1 Affected Environment
Two agencies have air quality jurisdiction in the sub-area: the United States Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA); the Eastern Regional Office of the Washington Department of Ecology
(WDOE). Although their standards are similar, each agency has established its own criteria,
particularly in relation to dust. The WDOE has the lead role in setting air quality standards for
Franklin County. According to the WDOE, fugitive dust is the primary air quality concern for this
region.
6.2.2 Potential Impacts
Potential impacts for the Preferred Alternative and the Medium Density Alternative relate
primarily to dust generation during construction and before ground cover is established (see 6.1,
above). Potential impacts from the No-Action Alternative also relates to fugitive dust, but may
occur from manufacturing activities and/or processing, depending on the specific industry
developed at the site. Undeveloped, the site has the potential to create fugitive wind-blown dust
with most fugitive dust occurring during the dry months, April through October. Air quality
impacts from traffic from all alternatives would not likely reduce air quality below federal, state
and local standards.
6.2.3 Mitigation Measures
The WDOE has a Fugitive Dust Policy which outlines specific steps in reducing fugitive dust
during construction. These policies include watering requirements during grading. In addition,
the WDOE has the authority to issue fines when fugitive dust suppression requirements are not
met. The City of Pasco also requires a dust control plan prior to construction. Additional
mitigation measures are identified under Section 6.1.3.
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
26
6.3 Utilities
6.3.1 Affected Environment
6.3.1.1 Sewer Systems
The project area is currently serviced by the City of Pasco and is accounted for in the 2014
Comprehensive Sewer Plan (CSP) and the 2021 CSP Addendum. The project area is located in the
South Eeast Pasco Trunk sewage basin as noted in the 2014 CSP. The Southeast Pasco Trunk
utilizes an existing 30-inch trunk main and provides service to approximately 771 acres of
industrial land. The sewage basin is also included in the 2021 CSP addendum; however, it is
grouped with a larger sewage basin that is specific to the total area that the Maitland lift station
services. Therefore, the 2021 CSP addendum does not specifically breakdown sewage flows from
the 771 acres of the industrial area that is noted in the 2014 CSP. as noted in the CSP. The South
East Pasco Trunk contains 771 acres of industrial area. The 2014 CSP has estimated that the
buildout of the 771 acres wcould have future flow of around 1 MGD. The 2021 CSP assumes some
development to occur; however, it does not provide estimated flows that would contribute to the
30-inch trunk main. The 1 MGD This assumes an industrial flow of 1,500 GPD/Acre with a 10%
reduction of land use. Flows for this area are conveyed to the a 30-inch trunk sewer main. The 30-
inch trunk main directs flows to the Maitland Lift Station and then to the wastewater treatment
plant.
The Maitland lift station has a firm capacity of 4,100 gpm as noted in the 2021 CSP addendum.
The lift station currently has an average daily flow of 850 gpm with a peak hour flow of 1,777
gpm based upon the 2021 CSP addendum.
The existing 30-inch trunk main is currently flowing less than 50% of capacity as noted in the
2021 CSP addendum.
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
27
6.3.1.2 Water Systems
The proposed amendment area is served by the City of Pasco and was evaluated in the 2019
Comprehensive Water System Plan (CWSP) and according to CWSP, the City of Pasco has a total
available water right of 13,645.50 acre-feet per year and 20,149 GPM for instantaneous flow. This
water right converts to a Maximum Day Demand (MDD) of 29 MGD. The CWSP also indicates
that the City of Pasco’s potable water source includes the Butterfield Water Treatment Plant
(BWTP) with a capacity of 26.8 MGD a day and the West Pasco Treatment Plant (WPTP) with a
capacity of 6 MGD.
The proposed New Heritage Site is in Pressure Zone 2 which is serviced by the BWTP.
Additionally, there is the Eastside Booster Pump that also supplies pressurized water to Zone 2.
Zone 2 is a closed system and has no current storage capacity but is tied into Zone 3 through a
pressure reducing valve. Zone 3 does provide storage capacity. There is an existing 16-inch water
main that runs through the site that services the project area. The CWSP shows a current Zone 2
storage deficiency of 3.73 million gallons (MG).
The 2019 CWSP indicates that the City has an existing and future deficiency in storage for Zone
2. The City has identified the storage need in their 2019 CWSP plan. The planned timeframe for
this storage Capital Improvement Project (CIP) is to be completed sometime between 2020-2023.
This CIP will provide a 5.75 MG reservoir to improve reliability, fire flows and level of service
for all of Zone 2 and the project area.
The City is currently developing additional storage capacity for Zone 3. This storage improvement
is noted in the City’s CIP. As previously noted, Zone 2 is tied to Zone 3 through a pressure reducing
valve. The Zone 3 improvement will help improve Zone 2 water storage needs.
6.3.1.3 Other Utilities
The responsibility for planning for private utilities rests with the utility providers. Unlike City
utilities that are provided mainly to City residents, non-City operated utilities are not limited to
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
28
city limit lines for service areas. Consequently, service boundaries for each utility provider will
vary in size (City of Pasco Comprehensive Plan, Volume II).
Non-City-owned utilities include those utilities, whether owned privately or publicly, that provide
services. Non-City owned utilities serving Pasco are as follows:
• Franklin County PUD
• Big Bend Electrical Cooperative
• Cascade Natural Gas
• Charter
• CenturyLink
• Various wireless telephone providers
• Basin Disposal Incorporated (BDI)
• Franklin County Irrigation District No. 1
• South Columbia Basin Irrigation District
City Ofof Pasco Comprehensive Plan – Volume ii
6.3.1.4 Stormwater
According to the City of Pasco Comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan, Pasco has an
average annual rainfall of 6.5 inches and an average snow fall of 2.5 inches. Due to the City’s low
annual rainfall, warm climate, flat topography, and fast-draining soils, most of the stormwater
generated in the city infiltrates the ground either through natural processes or manmade structures,
such as dry wells and infiltration trenches.
6.3.2 Environmental Impact
Sewer and Water System
Estimated demand volumes for sewer and water, for both the Preferred Alternative and the
Medium Density Alternative, are summarized in Tables 6 through 9, below.
Table 6 – Preferred Alternative Projected Sewerage Volumes
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
29
Land Use Acre
(AC) Units GPDA Estimated
Population GPDA Total
GPDA
Open
Space/Roadways 58 - - - - -
Retail 3 - 2,500 - - 2,500
Service/Office 2 - 2,500 - - 2,500
School 15 - - 550 *20 11,000
SF Homes 69 414 - 1,387 **80 110,960
Duplex/Tri-Plex 17 204 - 684 **80 54,720
Apartment 32 736 - 2,466 **80 197,280
Total 196 - - - - 378,960
*20 GPD/Student
**80 GPCD per 2019 CWSP
Table 7 – Preferred Alternative Proposed Water Demand with Irrigation
SF Homes,
Duplex and
Apartment
ERU (GPC) Residence (GPD)
(# of Units x ERU)
Retail, Office,
School (GPD)
Proposed Land
Use Volumes
(MGD)
1,354 *424 574,096 16,000 0.59
*424 ERU per 2019 CWSP GPC = Gallons per Connection
Table 8 – Medium Density Alternative Projected Sewage Volumes
Land Use Acre
(AC) Units GPDA Estimated
Population GPDA Total
GPDA
Open
Space/Roadways 58 - - - - -
Retail 2 - 2,000 - - 2,000
Service/Office 2 - 2,000 - - 2,000
School 15 - - 550 *20 11,000
SF Homes 85 468 - 1,568 **80 125,440
Duplex/Tri-Plex 10 80 - 268 **80 21,440
Apartment 24 480 - 1,608 **80 128,640
Total 196 - - - - 290,520
*20 GPD/Student
**80 GPCD per 2019 CWSP
Table 9 – Medium Density Alternative Proposed Water Demand with Irrigation
SF Homes,
Duplex and
Apartment
ERU (GPC) Residence (GPD)
(# of Units x ERU)
Retail, Office,
School (GPD)
Proposed Land
Use Volumes
(MGD)
1,028 *424 435,872 15,000 0.45
*424 ERU per 2019 CWSP GPC = Gallons per Connection
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
30
Estimated sewer demand for the Preferred Alternative is approximately 0.38 MGD and the
Medium Density Alternative is 0.29 MGD. The project area contains 197 of the 771 acres in the
South Eeast Pasco Trunk Sewage Basin that is defined in the 2014 CSP. Using the land area ratio
of the overall sewage basin, the project area is approximately 26% of the overall sewage basin. A
No-Action Alternative would generate approximately 0.26 MGD assuming an estimated demand
of 1 MGD for the overall sewage basin. Both proposed land use alternatives are well below the
estimated future 1 MGD; however, they both are slightly over the No-Action Alternative. As noted
in the 2014 CSP and the 2021 CSP Addendum, the City of Pasco noted that there is a lack of data
to accurately determine projected industrial wastewater flows so it should be noted that industrial
wastewater flows can vary greatly depending upon the type of industrial use. Therefore, the
estimated 0.26 MGD under the No-Action Alternative could be significantly higher if a higher
industrial wastewater user is constructed.
The Maitland lift station has a firm capacity of 4,100 gpm. The current flows to the Maitland lift
station are around 850 gpm with a peak hour flow of 1,777 gpm. The Preferred Alternative would
generate an average daily flow of approximately 263 gpm with a peak hour flow of 580 gpm. The
No-Action Alternative could produce an average daily flow of around 180 gpm with a peak of 403
gpm. The net difference between Residential (Preferred Alternative) and Industrial (No-Action
Alternative) land use is approximately 83 gpm for average daily flows and 177 gpm peak hour
flows. This net difference is approximately 2%, average daily flow, and 4%, peak hour flows,
versus the total firm capacity of 4,100 gpm. These percentages are relatively small and are not
anticipated to be a significant impact to the Maitland lift station function and operation. As
previously noted, there is a there is a lack of data to accurately determine projected industrial
wastewater flows so it should be noted that industrial wastewater flows could have a greater impact
than residential flow depending upon the type of industrial use.
The 2021 CSP addendum notes that the existing pipe capacity of the 30-inch trunk main is
currently less than 50%. The 10-year projected sewage flows are also estimated to be less than
50% of the pipe capacity. The 20-year projected sewage flows indicates that the pipe capacity may
be greater than 100%; however, that assumes a future Tank Farm Lift Station near the Snake River
that is not yet defined. The difference of peak hour flow for the Preferred Alternative versus the
No-Action Alternative is approximately an additional 177 gpm which is about a 4% increase of
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
31
peak hour flows as compared to the overall capacity. The additional 177 gpm peak hour flow is
not a significant impact to the overall capacity of the 30-inch trunk main. As previously noted,
there is a there is a lack of data to accurately determine projected industrial wastewater flows so it
should be noted that industrial wastewater flows could have a greater impact than residential flow
depending upon the type of industrial use.
Under the both the 2014 and 2021 CSP’s there are no significant deficiencies that affect this
sewage basin. The only potential deficiency noted in the 2021 CSP addendum is the 20-year
projected sewer flow which may or may not put the 30-inch trunk main over capacity. There are
no current defined CIP’s for this sewage basin. The comparison between the two Preferred
Alternatives versus the No-Action Alternative is insignificant and that future development,
regardless of being industrial or residential land use could have similar impacts to the existing
sanitary sewer systems. There is potential for a greater impact to the City’s sanitary sewer with the
No-Action Alternative if the industrial user is heavy water user. Large wastewater producers are
generally related to agricultural processing which is an allowed use under the current zoning.
Identified CIP’s for this sewage basin are needed regardless of the two Action Alternatives or the
No-Action Alternative.
As noted in Table 7Table 7 and Table 9Table 9 the estimated demands for water for the project
area are 0.59 MGD (Preferred Alternative) and 0.45 MGD (Medium Density). Depending upon a
specific user, industrial developments under the No-Action Alternative could easily require more
potable water due to processing requirements, higher fire flows requirements due to larger building
structures and higher occupancy rates than residential structures. The CWSP has provided an
additional future 1 MGD user demand for this industrial area for an estimated industrial user.
As previously mentioned, the 2019 CWSP indicates that the City has an existing and future
deficiency in storage for Zone 2. The City has identified the storage need in their 2019 CWSP
plan. The planned timeframe for this storage Capital Improvement Project (CIP) is to be completed
sometime between 2020-2023. However, the City is currently developing additional storage
capacity for Zone 3. As previously noted, Zone 2 is tied to Zone 3 through a pressure reducing
valve. The Zone 3 improvement will help improve Zone 2 water storage needs. The City recently
allowed the development of two large industrial distribution facilities in Zone 2 despite the noted
deficiency in the CWSP.
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
32
The identified CIP’s for water systems would be is required under the No-Action Alternative and
the two Action Alternatives. and the No-Action Alternative. The CWSP also indicates that there
is adequate fire flow capacity to support generally up to 4,000 GPM. Industrial users will tend to
require larger fire flows due to larger building structures and higher occupancy than residential
structures. Fire flows for industrial developments generally require a minimum of 4,000 gpm
versus 1,500 gpm for residential. Therefore, the two Action Alternatives would have less of an
impact for fire demand than the No-Action Alternative.
Sewer and water impacts are generally covered under the City's Comprehensive Plans and the
Comprehensive Plan EIS. Since industrial developments can have a wide range of water and sewer
demands it is difficult to accurately predict future water and sewer demands unless the specific
users are known. The CSP and CWSP have made provisions for future growth within the identified
industrial area, and we have found no significant differences between the No-Action Alternative
and the two Action Alternatives. If the zone change is allowed as the Preferred Action Alternative
the overall impacts won’t be felt until the entire development is fully completed which may take
several years. Overall impacts are dependent upon the timing and size of the construction phases.
There is potential for a greater impact to the City’s water and sanitary sewer systems with the No-
Action Alternative if the industrial user is heavy water user. Large wastewater producers are
generally related to agricultural processing which is an allowed use under the current zoning.
Finally, based upon our understanding of the water and sewer CIP’s, these improvements would
be are needed regardless of the industrial or residential land use. for both the two Action
Alternatives and the No-Action Alternative.
The City of Pasco operates an irrigation water delivery system for certain parts of the City, but the
proposed New Heritage Site is not included in the existing irrigation system. Irrigation water for
the project area will have to come from either the domestic water system or from on -site sources.
No irrigation service was included in the CWSP analysis.
Stormwater
Future development under both the Mixed-Use and Existing Plan alternatives would create
impervious surfaces which would increase surface water runoff. Table 10Table 10 summarizes
the percent of impervious surfaces for both development alternatives.
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
33
Table 10 – Impervious Surfaces
Land Use
Preferred
Alternative
Mixed UseMedium
Density Alternative
No-Action
Alternative
Acres %
Imp.
Imp.
Acres Acres %
Imp.
Imp.
Acres Acres %
Imp.
Imp.
Acres
Residential 176.31 35% 60.66 177.3 33% 58.51 196.3 90% 173.98
Public & Quasi-
Public, Schools 15 40% 6 15 40% 6 0 0 -
Commercial/Office 5 85% 4.25 4 85% 3.40 0 0 -
Total 193.31 37% 70.91 196.3 35% 67.91 196.3 90% 173.98
Source: JUB
The City of Pasco requires that developers detain and/or infiltrate post -development storm water
runoff to pre-development, natural state conditions. Because of the small differences in impervious
area between the Preferred Alternative and the Mixed-Use Alternative, there would not be a
significant difference in the storm water runoff rate under each of these alternatives. Under the
No-Action Alternative, depending on the level of future industrial development, there could be a
potential for a greater increase in runoff. Under all three alternatives, there would be some post -
development increase in the total amount of average flow.
Under all three alternatives, there is a potential for water quality contamination. Under the
Preferred and Medium Density alternatives, there is a potential for oil, gasoline, solvents,
detergents, insecticides, fertilizers and other contaminants to enter into surface and ground waters.
Under the No-Action Alternative, there is an increased potential for these contaminates to enter
the ground water, due to potential higher runoff and depending on the type of industry being
developed.
6.3.3 Mitigation Measures
Sewer and Water System
In addition to the CIP projects list in the previous section, the City of Pasco has identified
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
34
mitigation measures under the Comprehensive Plan EIS that are included by reference and
summarized below:
• "The City should continue to implement the improvements described in the Comprehensive
Water System Plan (CWSP), 2019 to address deficiencies resulting from growth for the
planning period.
• The City should continue to implement the improvements described in the City’s 2014
Comprehensive Sewer Plan (CSP), 2014Plan and the 2021 CSP Addendum to address
deficiencies resulting from growth for the planning period.
• Conduct specific water and sewer system analysis once a more defined master plan has been
prepared and prior to the development of any construction phase of the project.
• To accommodate future population growth, the City should, maintains its services with Basin
Disposal Inc.
• In 2019, the City conducted an Expanded UGA Infrastructure Evaluation, which evaluated the
impact of the anticipated growth, UGA expansion, and land use changes. As a result, in order
to accommodate future growth, the City will need to make additional improvements to the West
Pasco WTP, Zone 3 Reservoir, and acquire additional water rights to meet the 2038 demands.
• In 2017 and 2019, the City re-evaluated the capacity and loading requirements of the
Northwest Service Area as a result of potential development demands and growth projects
changes as part of the 2019 Comprehensive Plan update and Urban Growth Area (UGA)
expansion. A strategy to provide sewer service to the proposed UGA and other growth areas
within the city (Broadmoor Area) was evaluated and alternatives were identified.
• Development should be consistent with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan.
• The City should continue to provide and maintain collection services to all City residents
consistent with adopted service levels and the City’s various public services and utilities
plans."
Stormwater
Under both development alternatives, subsurface drainage (percolation trench, infiltration
trenches, etc.) could be constructed to reduce peak runoff flows to natural state conditions.
Detention ponds would also be used to provide settlement for silt. Oil/water separators would be
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
35
used to reduce impacts from automobiles. Additional mitigation measures could occur through
bio-filtration prior to final discharge, either before or after entry into the various detention ponds.
In addition, the City of Pasco Comprehensive Plan EIS identified the following specific mitigation
measures which are incorporated here by reference
• "Implement mitigation measures described for reducing impacts to earth resources described
in Section 4.1.3.
• Under both development alternatives, detention ponds will reduce peak runoff flows to natural
state conditions. Detention ponds will also provide settlement for silt. Oil/water separators can
reduce impacts from automobiles.
• Additional mitigation measures include bio-filtration, either before or after entry into the
various detention ponds, and buffers around wetlands in accordance with the CAO.
• Stormwater improvements are planned to manage stormwater and protect water quality Other
mitigation measures include:
• Development should be consistent with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan.
• Maintain compliance with existing federal, state, and local policies that regulate land use
activities near, and within, surface waters such as the Yakima and Columbia rivers and
wetlands, including:
‒ NPDES regulations and City stormwater regulations
‒ USACE wetland avoidance and mitigation requirements
‒ The City SEPA and CAO requirements
6.4 Land Use
6.4.1 Affected Environment
Pasco’s Comprehensive Plan and Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), provide information on
the existing uses of land within the Pasco UGA.
“Pasco includes a variety of land uses from residential, commercial, industrial to open
space. Pasco’s land use designations and acreages are identified in the 2018
Comprehensive Plan. Residential land is the predominant use in Pasco, containing over
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
36
44% of Pasco’s total land. Residential land use is followed by industrial land use, which
consists of 24% of the total land use within Pasco. Commercial lands are distributed along
the major corridors, Pasco Center and along the Interstate-182. Open space land use is
distributed throughout Pasco in the form of parks and natural open spaces. The shoreline
areas consist of several parks, trails, and natural open space.”
Pasco’s Comprehensive Plan’s Preferred Alternative includes an expansion of the UGA by 3,500
acres along the north edge of Pasco, raising the total UGA acreage to 28,677. Pasco’s
Comprehensive Plan Non-Project EIS discusses the land use categories included in the
Comprehensive Plan. Table 11 identifies the acreages for each land use category. Future land uses
in the UGA are illustrated in Figure 5Figure 5, below.
Table 11 – Existing Land Use in the UGA
Land Use Designation Acreage* % of Total
Residential Lands 13,339 46.5%
Low Density 10,603 37.0%
Medium Density 2,219 7.7
Medium-High Density 224 0.8%
High Density 294 1.0%
Commercial Lands 3,027 10.6%
Mixed Residential/Commercial 435 1.5%
Commercial 2,237 7.8%
Mixed Use Interchange 26 0.1%
Mixed Use Neighborhood 77 0.3%
Mixed Use Regional 148 0.5%
Office 104 0.4%
Industrial Lands 6,545 22.8%
Public / Quasi-Public Lands 933 3.3%
Open Space / Park Lands 1,321 4.6%
Airport Reserve Lands 2,091 7.3%
DNR Reserve Lands 1,233 4.3%
Confederated Tribes – Coville Reservation 188 0.7%
Total 28,677 100%
**The total includes 4,300 acres of street right of way, which is about 17% of the total.
Source: Pasco of Pasco Comprehensive Plan Environmental Impact Statement, Table 7.
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
37
Figure 5 – Comprehensive Plan Land Uses
The following is a description of each land use category as identified in the Comprehensive Plan:
• Open Space/Nature – This land use designation applies to areas where
development will be severely restricted. Parklands, trails, and critical areas are
examples of different types of open spaces.
• Low Density Residential – This land use allows residential development at a
density of two to five dwelling units per acre. The land use designation
criterion includes sewer availability or approval from the Benton-Franklin Health
District when sewer is not available, suitability for home sites, and market demand.
• Medium Density Residential – This land use designation includes single-family
dwellings, patio homes, townhouses, apartments, and condominiums at a density of
6 to 20 dwelling units per acre. This is designated to areas where the location is
convenient to major circulation routes, it provides transition between more intense
uses, and low density uses. Availability of sewer services and market demand are
also key criteria for this land use designation.
• High Density Residential – This land use designation includes multi-family
dwellings, apartments, and condominiums at a density of 21 dwelling units or more
per acre. This is designated to areas where the location is convenient to major
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
38
circulation routes and employment areas. Availability of sewer services and market
demand are also key criteria for this land use designation.
• Mixed Residential Commercial – This land use designation is a mix of residential
and commercial uses. Residential uses include single-family dwellings, patio
homes, townhouses, apartments, and condominiums at a density of 5 to 29 dwelling
units per acre. Commercial uses include neighborhood shopping and specialty
centers, business parks, service, and office uses. This is designated to areas where
the location is convenient to major circulation routes and land is suitable for heavy
building sites.
• Commercial – This land use is designated for neighborhood, community and
regional shopping and specialty centers, business parks, service, and
office uses. This is designated to areas where the location is convenient to major
circulation routes and land is suitable for heavy building sites.
• Industrial – This land use is designated for manufacturing, food processing,
storage, and wholesale distribution of equipment and products, hazardous material
storage, and transportation-related facilities
• Public and Quasi Public - This land use is designated for schools, civic buildings,
fire stations and other public uses.
• Airport Reserve - This land use is designated for lands owned or occupied by the
Tri-Cities Airport.
• DNR Reserve - This land use is designated for lands owned by DNR.
Within the immediate vicinity of the proposed amendment area, land uses include Industrial, Low
Density Residential, Mixed UseMedium Density Residential, Public and Quasi-Public, Open
Space/Nature, and Mixed Residential or Commercial. Table 12, summarizes the acreages for each
land use category in the vicinity of the proposed amendment area.
Table 12 – Amendment Area Vicinity Land Uses
Land Use Designation Acreage %
Industrial 1,383 62%
Low Density Residential 539 25%
Mixed Use Residential 117 5%
Public / Quasi-Public 79 4%
Open Space / Nature 53 2%
Mixed Residential / Commercial 55 2%
Total 2,226 100%
Source: JUB
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
39
The Vicinity Land Use Map (See Figure 6Figure 6, below) illustrates land uses in the immediate
vicinity of the proposed amendment.
Figure 6 – Vicinity Land Uses
Under the Industrial designation of the Comprehensive Plan, Pasco’s Zoning Code identifies three
separate zoning classifications: Light Industrial (I-1), Medium Industrial (I-2) and Heavy
Industrial (I-3). The amendment area is currently zoned Medium Industrial with approximately 17
acres along East A Street zoned Light Industrial. The area to the immediate south, east and west
are also zoned Medium Industrial. The area to the immediate north along East A Street is zoned a
mix of Residential, Commercial, and Mixed Commercial Residential.
Pasco Zoning Code allows the following uses under the Medium Industrial District zoning
classification.
Medium Industrial District
Uses permitted in the I-2 district shall be:
1. All uses not otherwise prohibited by law, but no residential buildings
shall be permitted; and
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
40
2. Junkyards, automobile wrecking yards, scrap iron, scrap paper, or rag
storage, sorting or bailing shall be permitted, provided:
a. An eight-foot, sight-obscuring fence must be constructed and
inspected prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for use
of the goods. The fence shall be of solid single neutral color.
b. No automobile or parts thereof, junk or salvage materials or parts
thereof shall be visible from any public right-of-way. All materials
or parts shall be located within the fenced area.
c. Fire lanes shall be provided as required in the International Fire
Code.
d. A performance bond for $1,000 shall be required prior to the
issuance of an occupancy permit, to ensure compliance with
provisions of this section. The bond shall remain in force as long as
the use exists.
e. The permit shall be granted for a period not to exceed two years,
and at the end of such period an inspection shall be made of the
premises to determine the advisability of renewing such permit.
[Ord. 3354 § 2, 1999; Code 1970 §25.54.020.
Pasco Zoning Code allows the following uses under the Light Industrial District zoning
classification:
The I-1 light industrial district is established to preserve areas for industrial and related uses of
such a nature that they do not create serious problems of compatibility with other kinds of land
uses. Uses permitted in this district should not generate noise levels, light, odor or fumes that
would constitute a nuisance or hazard. [Ord. 3354 § 2, 1999; Code 1970 § 25.52.010.]
Uses permitted in the I-1 district shall be:
1. All uses permitted in the C-3 district;
2. Building material storage yard;
3. Trucking, express and storage yards;
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
41
4. Contractor’s plant or storage yards;
5. Laboratories, experimental;
7. Automotive assembly and repair;
8. Kennels;
9. Creamery, bottling, ice manufacture and cold storage plant;
10. Blacksmith, welding or other metal shops, excluding punch presses over 20 tons rated
capacity, drop hammers, and the like;
11. The manufacturing, compounding, processing, packaging of cosmetics, pharmacology and
food products, except fish and meat products, and the reducing and refining of fats and
oils;
12. Printing plant; and
Parking lots within 500 feet of a C-2 district boundary, provided such lots are paved and the
development complies with the landscape and fencing requirements of the C-1 district, as
enumerated in PMC 25.85.020(13). [Ord. 4110 § 23, 2013; Ord. 3354 § 2, 1999; Code 1970
§ 25.52.020.
6.4.2 Potential Impacts
Preferred Alternative
The Preferred Alternative would remove 196.31 acres of undeveloped Industrial land and add
181.31 acres of Mixed Residential/Commercial Land and 15 acres elementary school site. Table
13Table 13 describes the impact of this change on all land within the Pasco City Limits and UGA
boundary.
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
42
Table 13 – Preferred Alternative Land Use Changes
Land Use Designations Total
(Acres)
Proposed
Alternative
(Acres)
Change
(Acres)
Mixed Residential/Commercial 435 +181.31 616.31
Industrial 6,545 -196.31 6,348.69
Gov't Public / Quasi-Public 933 +15 948
Under Pasco’s Zoning Ordinance (25.215.015 - Comprehensive Plan Land Use Density Table),
the Mixed Residential/Commercial Land Use designation will “....allow a combination of mixed-
use residential and commercial in the same development. Single-family dwellings, patio homes,
townhouses, apartments, and condominiums at a density of 5 to 29 dwelling units per acre.
Neighborhood shopping and specialty centers, business parks, service and office uses”. Proposed
zoning classifications R-1 through R-4; C-1, O; and Waterfront, are allowed under the Mixed
Residential/Commercial Land Use designation with the approval of the Pasco City Council, with
the recommendation by the Pasco Hearing Examiner.
This change could also impact the viability of adjacent industrial land uses within the immediate
area without mitigation. It may also increase the pressure on other adjacent industrial land uses to
convert to a similar designation in the future. Without mitigation, this change may also impact
adjacent residential uses from runoff, noise, traffic, and reduction in air quality.
Medium Density Alternative
The Medium Density Alternative would also remove 196.31 acres of Industrial land and add
177.31 acres of Medium Density Residential land, 4 acres of commercial land and a 15-acre
elementary school site. Table 14Table 14 describes the impact of this change on all land withing
the Pasco City Limits and UGA boundary.
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
43
Table 14 – Medium Density Land Use Changes
Land Use Designations Total (Acres)
Proposed
Alternati
ve (Acres)
Change (Acres)
Medium-High Density 224 +177.31 401.31
Commercial 2,237 +4.00 2,241
Industrial 6,545 -196.31 6,348.69
Gov't Public / Quasi-Public 933 +15.00 948
Under Section 25.65.050, the Medium Density Zone allows:
• Minimum lot area: 4,500 square feet.
• One single-family dwelling shall be permitted per lot. Multiple dwellings shall be permitted
based on the density standards in subsection (3) of this section.
• Density. All developments shall be compliant with the Comprehensive Plan land use
density table in PMC 25.215.015. In addition, one dwelling unit per 4,500 square feet of
lot area is required for single-family dwellings and 3,000 square feet of lot area is required
for multiple-family dwellings, duplexes, two-family dwellings, triplexes, courtyard
apartments, and zero-lot-line dwellings, except as provided in Chapter 25.161 PMC.
This change could also impact the viability of adjacent industrial land uses within the immediate
area without mitigation. It may also increase the pressure on other adjacent industrial land uses to
convert to a similar designation in the future. Without mitigation, this change may also impact
adjacent residential uses from runoff, noise, traffic, and reduction in air quality.
No-Action Alternative
Under the No Action Alternative, the Industrial designation in the City's Comprehensive Plan
would remain. The uses and zoning classifications allowed under that designation could be
constructed. In the amendment area site, uses allowed under the I-1 and I-2 classification would
be allowed. Some of these uses, without mitigation, would adversely impact nearby residential
land uses and the natural environment through increased noise, odor, reduction in air quality and
runoff.
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
44
6.4.3 Mitigation Measures
Preferred Alternative
The City is concerned that the land uses identified in the "Vision” for the Preferred Alternative
may not be supported under Pasco's existing codes, policies and requirements. While the "New
Urbanism" land use concept contained in this approach may provide significant benefits to the
public, this concept is not fully addressed under the Pasco's codes. The Applicant has proposed
specific mitigation measures, beyond those normally included in a Non-Project EIS, to insure that
the "Vision" outlined under this alternative is implemented, including:
• Enter into a Concomitant Agreement GMA Development Agreement to insure compliance
with proposed mitigation under this EIS.
• Provide a range of residential configurations, including single-family residences on a
separate lot with access from a public street, where pedestrian, bike and automobile access
are from the public street, or automobile access is from an alley.
• Provide a range of densities from 3 to 24 units per acre.
• Locate residences within walking and biking distance (0.5± mile) to park/s, school, retail
shops and offices to reduce the reliance on the automobile.
• Duplexes in or near single-family residential areas designed to be compatible with single-
family houses.
• Multi-family apartments designed to be compatible with nearby residential and commercial
uses.
• Provide a mixed-use commercial and office space on the ground floor with residential uses
above.
• Stand-alone commercial, and office uses, such as grocery stores and hardware stores, that
are designed to serve populations outside of the 0.5± mile walking area, located at major
intersections and designed to serve both the New Heritage area and other areas outside of
New Heritage.
• If the Pasco School District requires an elementary school site in this area, set aside land
for this purpose within walking and biking distance from the major residential areas
• Include dedicated pathways and bikeways, separated from vehicular traffic, and sidewalks
and dedicated bikeways within roadways.
• Design this open space and pathway system to connect the residential areas to the
neighborhood centers, parks, schools and employment centers.
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
45
• Design this open-space concept to serve as the “Heart” of the community; providing both
recreation and meeting spaces.
• Provide sidewalks, space for bicycles and street trees on roadways.
• Provide public multi-modal bus stop/transit area within walking/biking distance to the
major residential areas.
Medium Density Alternative
Meet the requirements of the Medium Density (R-2) Zoning Ordinance and all City SEPA policies
and implement the mitigation measures included in Section 6.0 of this EIS. The Pasco Zoning
Ordinance provides the following purpose for implementation:
The purpose of this title is to implement the Comprehensive Plan for the Pasco Urban Area.
This title is to also further the purpose of promoting the health, safety, conveni ence,
comfort, prosperity and general welfare of the present and future inhabitants of the Pasco
Urban Area; and
(1) To encourage and facilitate the orderly growth and development of the Pasco Urban
Area.
(2) To provide adequate open space for light and air, to prevent overcrowding of the land,
and to reduce congestion on the streets.
(3) To secure economy in municipal expenditures, to facilitate adequate provisions for
transportation, water, sewer, schools, parks, and other public facilities and services.
(4) To increase the security of home life and preserve and create a more favorable
environment for citizens and visitors of the Pasco Urban Area.
(6) To secure safety from fire, panic and other dangers.
(7) To stabilize and improve property values.
(8) To enhance the economic and cultural well-being of the inhabitants of Pasco.
(9) To promote the development of a more wholesome, serviceable and attractive city
resulting from an orderly, planned use of resources. [Ord. 4110 § 3, 2013; Ord. 3354 § 2,
1999; Code 1970 § 25.04.020.]
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
46
In addition, the Medium Density (R-2) district has provided its intent for all residential projects:
The R-2 district is established to provide a medium density residential environment
compliant with the Comprehensive Plan land use density table in PMC 25.215.015. The R-
2 district is intended to allow for a gradual increase in density between low and high
density residential districts. [Ord. 4575 § 9, 2022; Ord. 3354 § 2, 1999; Code 1970
§ 25.34.010.]
The 4-acre neighborhood commercial area would be developed under the requirements of the C-1
Commercial District with the following stated purpose:
The C-1 retail business district is established to provide for the location of commercial
activities outside the central business district that meet the retail shopping and service
needs of the community. [Ord. 3354 § 2, 1999; Code 1970 § 25.42.010.]
No-Action Alternative
Mitigation measures will depend on specific industry but will have to follow all City of Pasco
Zoning requirements and all SEPA policies for mitigation.
6.5 Population, Housing, and Employment
6.5.1 Affected Environment
Population
The Pasco Comprehensive Plan EIS projects an increase in Pasco's population from 73,590 in 2018
to 121,828 by 2038 (See Table 13) for an increase of 48,238 new residents.
Under the Preferred Alternative, based on the projected 1,354 housing units with an average
household size of 3.17, the 2038 projected population projected by the Pasco Comprehensive Plan
EIS would increase from 121,828 to 126,120 or by about 3.5%. Under the Medium Density
alternative, based on 1,028 housing units, population would increase from 121,828 to 125,087, or
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
47
about 2.7%. (See Table 15Table 15, Populations Projections). Under the No-Action Alternative
there would be no direct increase in population.
Table 15 – Population Projections
Source: Pasco Comprehensive EIS, Land Strategies/JUB
The population projections contained in the Pasco Comprehensive Plan was based on a low,
medium and high range of projections for Franklin County by the State Office of Financial
Management (OFM). In agreement with Franklin County, Pasco selected the medium range, based
on the historical percentage of Pasco's population to that of Franklin County. Because this
agreement was negotiated between Pasco and Franklin County, it was a significant factor in the
development of the Pasco Comprehensive Plan, particularly in relation to population and housing
which could be impacted by this amendment.
Housing
Housing need in the Pasco Comprehensive Plan was directly based on Pasco's projected 2038
population increase of 48,238; using a multiplying factor of 3.17 persons per household. Based on
this, Pasco projected a total need of 15,213 new housing units by 2038. Existing vacant buildable
land was estimated to provide 9,581 units; therefore, an additional 5,636 housing units was
projected to be required to meet the demand of future housing. To provide for this increase, Pasco
has expanded the UGA by 3,500 acres (Pasco's EIS Preferred Alternative). In justifying this
expansion, Pasco also used a 20% market factor, a 5% environmental factor and a 20% factor for
roads and utilities. Table 16Table 16, identifies the residential acreages within the 3,500± UGA
expansion area.
Year Comprehensive
Plan
Preferred
Alternative
Medium
Alternative
2018 73,590 73,590 73,590
2038 121,828 126,120 125,087
Population Increase
(2018 to 2038) 48,238 52,530 51,497
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
48
Table 16 – Pasco UGA Housing
Type Acres %
Low Density Residential 1,830 77%
Mixed/Medium Density Residential 429 18%
High Density Residential 122 5%
Total 2,381 100%
Based on the total of 5,636 units in the UGA, this results in an average net density of 2.43 units
per acre. When the adjustment is made for the market factor, environmental factor and roadways
and utilities, the density is approximately 3.9 units per acre.
Under the Preferred Alterative, 1,354 new housing units would be added on 118 net acres for a
density of 11.5 units per acre. The Medium Density alternative would have 1,028 housing units
with a net density of 8.6 units per acre.
The No-Action alternative does not allow housing under the Pasco Zoning Code.
Employment
Currently the amendment area is vacant and provides no employment. Abutting the amendment
area to the East is the new Amazon Fulfillment
Complex which has projected 1,200± employees
on a total of 266± acres, or approximately 4.5
employees per acre. According to the Tri-Cities
Journal of Business:
"Project Oyster will be a distribution warehouse
with 1,080,500 square feet on 162 acres. It will
have a 35,000-square-foot office, 1,020 vehicle
parking spots and 390 semitruck parking spots. It
will employ 683 people working in two shifts."
Tri-Cities Journal of Business
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
49
Project Pearl will be slightly smaller, with 1,049,760 million square feet. A rail spur runs along
the southern boundary of its 104-acre site but stops at Road 40 and doesn’t extend to the Oyster
site." "It will have 110 loading docks, 304 trailer parking stalls, 48 box truck parking stalls, 48
van parking stalls and 54 parking stalls. It will employ 500 people working in two shifts.
According to Pasco's Comprehensive Plan, there are 6,545 acres of industrial land located within
the city limits and UGA boundary. Of this amount, 2,883 acres are developed, primarily by large
agricultural processing and distribution industries. Of the remaining 3,662 acres, or approximately
55% of the total land acreage; 2,031± acres are owned by the Port, City, and/or other government
entities; 1,827± acres are undeveloped (31%); and 354 acres are underutilized (5%).
6.5.2 Potential Impacts
Population and Housing
Both the Preferred Action and the Medium Density alternative would have a limited impact from
either the increase in population or housing. when compared to the total projected increase under
the Pasco Comprehensive Plan. But even small increases can have impacts and the impacts
identified in the Pasco Comprehensive Plan EIS should still apply; these include:
• Impacts to population, housing, and employment would occur from inadequate existing
facilities or insufficient future development opportunities to accommodate growth;
• An increase in population will require more intensified commercial, business, and other
public facilities than would be possible under current development and population
conditions;
• An intensification of urban uses and densities will increase traffic congestion, park
requirements, police and fire requirements, and other public service demands and fiscal
impacts;
• Additional urban development could further tax the City’s fiscal and public service
resources, potentially leading to a dilution of the service levels or capabilities provided
current residents; and,
• Inadequately located or designed urban infrastructure, including roads, parking lots,
and other improvements that are not properly sited, could create stormwater runoff,
erosion, and other environmental hazards affecting neighboring properties and public
services.
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
50
Under the No-Action Alternative the site would remain Industrial and there would be no additional
population or additional housing.
Employment
Employment under the Preferred Alternative would come from workers at the future elementary
school and at the 5 acres of proposed retail and office land uses. Total employment in the
amendment area would be between 617 and 739, depending on the specific mix of retail and office
uses. Assuming an average of between 1 and 2 workers per household, the total employment would
be between 1,354 and 2,708 which would require between 615 and 2,091 employees to seek work
outside of the amendment area. It is assumed that many of these workers would seek employment
at the nearby warehouse distribution centers and other industries in the area. This would increase
impacts on traffic, public transit, public facilities and noise. (See Table 17Table 17)Table 15)
Employment under the Medium Density Alternative would also come from workers at the future
elementary school and at the proposed 4 acres of retail and office land uses. Total employment in
the amendment area would be between 553 and 667, depending on the specific mix of retail and
office uses. Assuming an average of 1 and 2 workers per household, the total employment would
be between 1,028 and 2,056 which would require between 361 and 1,053 employees to seek work
outside of the amendment area. This would also increase impacts on traffic, public transit, public
facilities and noise. (See Table 17Table 17)
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
51
Table 17 – Projected Employment
Land Use
Preferred
Alternative
Medium Density
Alternative
No-Action
Alternative
Low High Low High Low High
Schools
Sq. Ft. per Employee 1,250 1,100 1,250 1,100
Total Square Footage 205,000 205,000 205,000 205,000
Total Employment 164 186 164 186
Service/Office
Sq. Ft. per Employee 150 130 150 130
Total Square Footage 43,560 43,560 43560 43560
Total Employment 290 335 290 335
Retail
Sq. Ft. per Employee 200 150 200 150
Total Square Footage 32,560 32,560 21780 21780
Total Employment 163 217 109 145
Total Employment 617 739 563 667
Industry
Acre/Employee 3 6
Total Acres 196.31 196.31
Total Employment 589 1,178
Source: Land Strategies/JUB
In order to estimate the total employment under the No-Action Alternative, assumptions had to be
made on which industries might be likely to locate on the site. Warehouse land uses have low
employment per acre while many manufacturing industries have much higher employee counts.
For this analysis, it was assumed that heavy manufacturing and processing industries would not
wish to locate near the existing residential land uses to the north. The most likely use would be
similar to the two distribution facilities to the east. The average employment per acre for these two
industries was 4.5. Based on this, it was assumed that employment under the No-Action
Alternative would be between 3 and 6 employees per acre, or 589 and 1,176. This employment
would also increase demand on Public Services, traffic, air quality and runoff. This would result
in either 150 less employees or 561 more employees under the No-Action Alternative. Depending
on the employment level, this alternative would also increase impacts on traffic, public transit,
public facilities and noise. (See Table 17Table 17)
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
52
Under the No-Action Alternative, as noted in Pasco's Comprehensive Plan EIS, most of Pasco's
existing employment is on the east end of the City, especially the large industrial employers while
a large portion of the population and housing is located in the expanded UGA on the west end of
the city. Because of this, without housing, future employees in this Industrial area would be forced
to commute to other areas of Pasco and/or to outside of the area.
6.5.3 Mitigation Measures
Mitigation measures that could be used for both the Preferred Action and the Medium Density
alternatives include:
• Implement mitigation measures identified under Earth, Air, Utilities, Land Use, Parks
and Recreation and Transportation.
Follow the Goals and Policies outlined in the Pasco Comprehensive Plan.
• H-1. GOAL: Encourage housing for all economic segments of the City’s population
consistent with the local and regional market.
• H-1-A Policy: Allow for a full range of housing including single family homes,
townhouses, condominiums, apartments, and manufactured housing, accessory dwelling
units, zero lot line, planned unit developments etc. in areas as appropriate.
• H-2. GOAL: Preserve and maintain the existing housing stock for present and future
residents.
• ED-1 Goal: Maintain economic development as an important and ongoing City initiative.
• ED-1-F Policy: Recognize that infrastructure, including transportation and utility
planning are vital to economic development and attracting businesses.
• ED-2 Goal: Assure appropriate location and design of commercial and industrial facilities.
• ED-2-B Policy: Encourage development of a wide range of commercial and industrial
uses strategically located to support local and regional needs.
• ED-3 Goal: Maintain development standards and design guidelines to ensure that
commercial and industrial developments are good neighbors.
• ED-3-A Policy: Enhance compatibility of commercial and industrial development with
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
53
residential and mixed-use neighborhoods through the use of landscaping, screening, and
superior building design standards and guideline.
6.6 Public Services
6.6.1 Affected Environment
Fire and Police
Pasco Fire Department (PFD) provides fire suppression, advanced life support, emergency medical
services, ambulance transport services, technical rescue services, and hazardous materials services
(through a regional partnership) to its service area community (Pasco Comprehensive Plan EIS).
Station 81 is located on Oregon Avenue, approximately 1.5 miles from the site and is staffed full
time. The Pasco Fire Department uses response time in determining impacts and future
requirements for fire and emergency services.
Law enforcement services for the City are provided by the City Police Department.
Unincorporated areas of the UGA are served by the County Sheriff. The City and County law
enforcement agencies cooperate readily when the need arises. Pasco currently has 1.03 patrol
officers per 1,000 people (Pasco Comprehensive Plan EIS).
School
Based on the Pasco School District No. 1, 2016 Update to the Capital Facilities Plan (PSDCPA),
there are now a total of fifteen (15) elementary schools and, as of October 1, 2015, there were
9,940 students enrolled. There are three middle schools. with a total enrollment of 2,540 students
and two traditional high schools with 4,904 students enrolled. This results in a total school
enrollment of 17,384, or about 235 students per 1,000 population. By 2021, the PSDCPA forecast
predicts there will be 18,597 students enrolled in grades K-12.
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
54
6.6.2 Potential Impacts
Fire and Police
Because of the close proximity of Fire Station 81, it is not anticipated that emergency response
times would not be met. Resource requirements (staff, equipment, etc.) would be proportionally
impacted from the increased population and new structures.
Based on the existing 1.03 officers per 1,000 people, the Preferred Alternative would generate a
need for an additional 4 patrol officers. The Medium Density Alternative would generate a need
for an additional 3 patrol officers.
School
Based on the above, the Preferred Alternative would generate the need to accommodate an
additional 609 elementary students. Based on the standard of 500 students per elementary school,
this results in the need for one elementary school. (See Table 18Table 18). Based on the same
standard, the Medium Density Alternative would generate 462 elementary students which is
slightly less than the 500-student elementary school standard. None of the alternatives would
generate the direct need for either a Middle School or a High School, but would increase the
general need.
Table 18 – Student Enrollment
School Type Enrollment %
Students per 1,000 Population
Students Preferred
Alternative
Med. Density
Alternative
Elementary School 9,940 57% 134 609 462
Middle School 2,540 15% 34 156 118
High School 4,904 28% 66 301 228
Total 17,384 100% 235 1,066 809
Source: Land Strategies
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
55
6.6.3 Mitigation Measures
Potential mitigation measures include:
• Meet City and State building code requirements related to fire safety;
• Provide adequate street access for emergency equipment;
• Provide visual access to park and open space facilities;
• Police, fire and other public services, including schools, may be mitigated through the
increased tax base.
• Mitigation fees for school construction.
6.7 Parks and Recreation
6.7.1 Affected Environment
Pasco adopted in 2016 a Park and Recreation Plan. This Plan:
“[E]stablishes policies for park and recreation services and urban forestry practice, and
it identifies parks and recreation facility needs for City of Pasco” (Parks, Recreation and
Forestry Plan, Pasco of Pasco).”
The Plan identifies one existing neighborhood park to the north of the amendment site (Kurtzman
Park) that could serve a small portion of the amendment site, and a Regional State Park
(Sacajawea) to the southeast. In addition, the plan identifies the Sacajawea Trail that runs along
the waterfront that intersects with a Pasco defined bike and pedestrian path that abuts the
amendment area. The Plan also establishes standards for future parks based on projected
population (see Table 19Table 19, below), identifies the standard for each park type.
Pasco also budgeted in the CIP to construct a 28-acre multi-use sports complex immediately west
of the site. Construction of Phase 1, which includes 3 soccer/multiuse fields, is scheduled to begin
in 2022. The final project will include up to 10 multiuse sports fields.
Pasco’s 2019 Parks and Recreation Plan also described each park type:
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
56
“Neighborhood parks include a playground and park designed primarily for non-
supervised, non-organized recreation activities. In Pasco, they are generally small (3-7
acres) and serve a radius of approximately one-half mile. At average residential densities,
this amounts to about 5,000 to 7,500 residents. Since these parks are located within
walking and bicycling distance of most users, the activities they offer become a daily
pastime for neighborhood children. While it is not necessarily the rule, neighborhood parks
sometimes provide space for organized community events. A few examples include Island
Park, Richardson Park, and Centennial Park.
Community Park facilities are generally designed for organized activities and sports,
although individual and family activities are encouraged. Community parks can provide
indoor facilities to meet a wider range of recreation interests. A community park can also
serve the function of neighborhood parks, although community parks serve a much larger
area and offer more facilities. Their service area is about a one-mile radius and will
support a population of approximately 12,000 – 15,000 persons depending upon its size
and nature of its facilities. They require more support facilities including parking, rest
rooms, and covered play areas. They usually exceed 20 acres in size and often have sport
fields or similar facilities as the central focus of the park. Memorial Park fulfills the needs
of a community park in Pasco.
Large urban parks, like Chiawana Park, are designed to serve the entire community. They
are like a community park but much larger. They provide a wide variety of specialized
facilities such as large picnic areas, water related activities, indoor recreation facilities,
and sports fields. They require more support facilities such as parking, rest rooms, and
play areas because of their size and facilities offered. They usually exceed 50 acres in size
and should be designed to accommodate many people.
Regional parks are large recreational areas that serve an entire Pasco or region. They
can be large and often include one specific use or feature. If possible, they should be
developed around a unique or significant resource to emphasize regional recreation
interest. These types of park areas are found nearby and include Sacajawea State Park,
Columbia Park (Pasco of Kennewick), and Howard Amon Park (Pasco of Richland). These
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
57
parks offer riverfront and boating facilities as well as other passive recreation
opportunities and are within a short travel time for Pasco residents.
Linear parks are land areas that generally follow a drainage corridor, ravine, or some
other elongated feature such as a power line or railroad right-of-way. This type of park
area often contains various levels/types of trail systems and sometimes includes greenbelts.
Pathways and trails are designed to provide walking, bicycling, and other nonmotorized
means for linking various parts of the community and connecting parks to residential
areas. Trails provide recreation-oriented bicycle and walking opportunities utilizing
canals, drainage corridors, easements, and other publicly accessible facilities. The trail
system includes unpaved foot trails used for walking, hiking, mountain bike riding and
horseback riding, and paved multi-use bicycle trails designed for bicycle riding, walking
and hiking. The system can consist of both off-street and on-street trail segments. Many
off-street segments already exist along the waterfront and Interstate 182.” (Bolding added
for emphasis). The Plan also indicates the ½-mile service areas for each park in Pasco.
6.7.2 Potential Impacts
Both the Preferred Alternative and the Medium Density Alternative would impact existing park
and recreation facilities. As noted above, the Pasco Park and Recreation Plan establishes standards
for each park type. Table 19Table 19 identifies these standards and indicates the relative impact
of each of these alternatives. The No-Action Alternative will not provide park space, nor directly
create the need for additional park space.
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
58
Table 19 – Pasco Park Standards
Type
2006 Adopted
Standard (Pasco
Parks Plan)
Preferred
Alternative
Medium Density
Alternative
Facilities
Required Acres Facilities
Required Acres
Neighborhood Parks
3-7 Acre Standard
2.00 acres/1,000
population 1 4.5 1 3.4
Community Parks
20+ Acre Standard
2.10 acres/1,000
population 0 9.5 0 7.2
Large Urban Parks 2.99 acres/1,000
population 0 13 0 10.3
Regional Parks
No Adopted Standard
8.93 acres/1,000
population n/a n/a n/a n/a
Linear Park
No Adopted Standard
1.56 acres/1,000
population n/a n/a n/a n/a
Softball Fields 1 field per 3,000
population 1 n/a 1 n/a
Youth Baseball 1 field per 2,000
population 1 n/a 1 n/a
Soccer Fields 1 field per 2,000
population 2 n/a 1 n/a
Tennis Courts 1 court per 1,500
population 3 n/a 2 n/a
Trails (8” wide) 0.50 miles per
1,000 population 2.2 n/a 1.6 n/a
Source: Pasco Parks, Land Strategies
6.7.3 Mitigation Measures
Specific mitigation measures would be identified at the time of subdivision approval and will
depend on the proponents proposed design for the property. In general, mitigation for all the action
alternatives would be similar and include:
• Implement Pasco Park and Recreation Plan Goals and Policies;
• Implement Pasco Comprehensive Plan Goals and Policies, including:
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
59
o LU-2-C Policy: Ensure that adequate public services are provided in a reasonable
time frame for new developments.
o LU-2-D Policy: Encourage the use of buffers or transition zones between non-
compatible land uses.
o LU-3-A Policy: Design major streets, schools, parks, and other public facilities that
will encourage the individual identities of neighborhoods.
o LU-3-C Policy: Ensure all developments include appropriate landscaping and
screening, as required by adopted regulations and guidelines.
o ED-3-C Policy: Provide appropriate access through a combination of pathways,
sidewalks, non-motorized travel lanes and parking.
o CF-1-B Policy: Encourage public participation in defining the need for, the
proposed location of, and the design of public facilities such as parks, ball fields,
pedestrian and bicycle corridors, and street and utility extensions and
improvements.
o CF-3-A Policy: Assure land development proposals provide land and/or facilities
or other mitigation measures to address impacts on traffic, parks, recreational
facilities, schools, and pedestrian and bicycle trails.
o CF-5. Goal: in conjunction with the county, provide parks, greenways, trails, and
recreation facilities throughout the UGA.
• Develop a system of interconnected parks, recreation facilities, bike and pedestrian trails,
gathering and meeting spaces, school facilities, retail spaces, and workspaces in order to
facilitate the Vision of a walkable “New Urban” community.
6.8 Environmental Health
6.8.1 Affected Environment
The Amendment area is currently vacant. The areas to the west and southwest are also vacant
(except for a railroad spur to the south). The area directly east is currently under construction for
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
60
two major distribution centers. The area to the north contains a mix of residential, and commercial
uses. There is an existing residential mobile home park (Lakeview) located 2/3 of a mile to the
southeast of the project area.
While not currently constructed, the City of Pasco has funded and is scheduled to construct Phase
1 of a 28-acre sports complex in the industrial area off East A Street. This sports complex is located
at the southeast corner East A St. and S. Elm Ave. Construction of Phase 1 is scheduled to begin
sometime in 2022; therefore, the sports complex should be an existing feature in late 2022.
6.8.2 Potential Impacts
If approved, depending on the size, location and types of uses permitted, these uses could be
exposed to environmental impacts from other industrial use in the area through increased exposure
to chemicals, risk of fire, run-off from the storage of hazardous wastes, odor and decreases in air
quality, noise and visual blight. Currently most of these nearby industrial areas are Zoned I-1,
which limits the types of industrial uses that can be developed and would likely have less impact
on the proposed amendment area. If approved, potential environmental health impacts from the
amendment area include increased runoff, construction noise, air-quality reduction from increased
traffic, and increased traffic congestion.
Under the No-Action Alternative, depending on the specific industry developed on the site,
impacts to adjacent residences and adjacent industries could be significant without mitigation.
These could include increased exposure to chemicals, risk of fire, run-off from the storage of
hazardous wastes, odor and decreases in air quality, noise and visual blight.
6.8.3 Mitigation Measures
Potential mitigation measures for all the alternatives depend on the specific uses allowed, their
location and mitigation measures required at the time of approval by Pasco. Potential mitigation
includes:
• Assure the construction of the sound barrier wall along their eastern property boundary
agreed to by the distribution center.
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
61
o Mitigate impacts from adjacent industrial uses through adoption of mitigation measures
during construction and operation, and through the adoption of the Goals and Policies
of Pasco Comprehensive Plan, including:
o LU-2-D Policy: Encourage the use of buffers or transition zones between non-
compatible land uses.
o LU-3-C Policy: Ensure all developments include appropriate landscaping and
screening, as required by adopted regulations and guidelines.
o ED-3. Goal: Maintain development standards and design guidelines to ensure that
commercial and industrial developments are good neighbors
o ED-3-A Policy: Enhance compatibility of commercial and industrial development with
residential and mixed-use neighborhoods with appropriate landscaping, screening,
building and design standards,
o ED-3-B Policy: Ensure outdoor illumination and signage of businesses have a positive
impact and are compatible with neighborhood standards.
o ED-3-C Policy: Provide appropriate access through a combination of pathways,
sidewalks, non-motorized travel lanes and parking.
o ED-3-D Policy: Require businesses and buildings in and adjacent to the Central
Business District to conform to established development standards.
• Apply mitigation measures to reduce run-off, construction noise, traffic congestion and air-
quality based on existing Pasco codes, standards and SEPA policies.
• Create a "New Urbanism" community with open spaces and buffers to reduce impacts from
adjacent industrial from visual blight, noise, runoff and odor (See Land Use, Section 6.4).
50'+/-15'+/-
3 :1 S lo p e
Drought Tolerant
Landscaping
Masonary Wall 10'-15' High
Property line
Varies
15'
Distribution Center Property
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
62
• Fence areas abutting industrial property with concrete block wall or other sound and visual
obscuring fencing material.
6.9 Transportation
6.9.1 Affected Environment
The New Heritage site does not have existing roadways within the proposed 196.31-acre
development area. The key roadways to serve this site are: “A” Street – a minor east-west arterial
adjacent to the site along the northern boundary; Heritage Blvd – a local north-south roadway
between A Street and US 12 which is designated in the Comprehensive Plan as a future principal
arterial; and US 12/I-182 – An east-west expressway that crosses the Columbia River to the west
connecting with Benton County and Interstate I-82, and crossing the Snake River to the east
connecting to Walla Walla. (See
Figure 7
Figure 7, Pasco Street System). There is also a railroad spur to the South which, currently, does
not serve any of the adjacent industries.
In addition to roadways that serve New Heritage, the site also has multi-modal opportunities.
• Benton Franklin Transit provides fixed route and on demand transit service to the City of
Pasco and the Tri-Cities area. In the vicinity of the New Heritage Site, service is provided
by Routes 64 and 65, each providing service every half hour throughout the day. Routes
64 and 65 have stops on “A” Street. Both routes provide transfer opportunities at the 22nd
Avenue Transit Center.
• Bike and Pedestrian - The City of Pasco has a network of facilities that serve bicycle and
pedestrian needs. In the vicinity of the proposed New Heritage Site, “A” Street has a
sidewalk on the north side from Wehe Avenue to East 40th AvenueRoad 40 East. It also
has bike lanes in each direction and a 9’ wide pathway on the south side from Elm Street
to Road 40 East 40th Avenue.
Formatted: Justified
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
63
Figure 7 – Pasco Street Systems
6.9.2 Potential Impacts
All alternatives will increase the demands on transportation and transit facilities, along with the
need for additional non-motorized facilities such as trails and bikeways. These facilities will be
integrated into the development alternatives and will provide opportunities for recreational, and
commuter uses.
Alternative 1: Preferred Alternative
The Preferred Alternative includes a variety of land uses with both multi-family units as well as
single family residential units, retail and office space. For the purposes of this analysis, a mixture
of office space, business park, and retail in the form of restaurants, grocery and other neighborhood
shopping were evaluated and estimated to generate approximately 1,3151314 PM peak hour
external trips with 57% of trips inbound to the site. (See details in Appendix 3).
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
64
A planning level analysis was performed of the resulting traffic volumes, similar to the analysis
performed for the preparation of the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan with
respect to V/C ratios and intersection planning level analysis. This analysis was done by adding
traffic to the roadway network anticipated to be generated by the two adjacent warehouses being
constructed to the east, since they were not included in the Comprehensive Plan analysis, as well
as the 1315 1314 PM peak hour trips generated by the Preferred Alternative. Trips were distributed
using existing traffic patterns (Details are included in Appendix 3). The analysis resulted in 16
intersections currently STOP controlled that would likely require improvements in order to achieve
acceptable LOS, 12 of these intersections were identified as likely needing improvements in the
Comprehensive Plan. There are also 13 existing traffic signals that would need improvements, 10
of which were identified in the Comprehensive Plan. Potential improvements to the eastbound off
ramp and westbound on ramp at the US 12/Lewis Street interchange may also be needed. One
existing roundabout may also need improvements, and is also identified in the Comprehensive
Plan.
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
65
Figure 8 – Preferred Alternative Intersection Control Evaluation
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
66
Figure 9 – Preferred Alternative Roadway Volume to Capacity Ratios
Alternative 2: Medium Density Alternative
Under the Medium Density Alternative, a variety of land uses are also proposed including single
and multi-family residential and a mixture of office space, business park, as retail in the form of
restaurants, grocery and other neighborhood shopping, although at a lesser density than the
Preferred Alternative. This alternative is estimated to generate approximately 1,1401,138 external
trips with 5658% of trips inbound to the site.
A similar evaluation as the Preferred Alternative was performed with respect to V/C ratios and
intersection planning level analysis. The analysis identifies that the same 16 unsignalized
intersections and 13 signalized intersections would likely need improvements along with US 12
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
67
ramps to/from the west at the Lewis Street interchange and improvements to an existing
roundabout.
Alternative 3: No-Action Alternative
The City’s Comprehensive Plan does not specify industrial land uses for the proposed amendment
site. The zoning for the site is I-1 along “A” Street and I-2 for the rest of the Heritage site (see
section 6.4.1 for details on uses allowed in these zones). Similar sites within this area and zoning
classification have been primarily developed as warehousing and food processing, although it is
possible, under the current zoning, for the property to be developed for a wide range of other uses.
The traffic model prepared by the Benton Franklin Council of Governments and used by the City
of Pasco in preparing its Comprehensive Plan, did not include any development for this site during
the 20-year planning period, nor for the two large warehouses being constructed immediately to
the east. This means that the potential uses could range from vacant to any allowable use under the
City’s Zoning Code, other than residential.
Given this wide range of potential development, some reasonable basis for evaluating the traffic
impacts resulting from the No Action Alternative, had to be developed. To do this, an assumption
had to be made that if there were a change in the market, the sit e could be developed in uses
identified in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual as General
Light Industrial. Based on this assumption, the No-Action Alternative could result in
approximately 1,2351,237 peak hour trips with 13% inbound and 87% outbound. A planning level
analysis of these traffic volumes, similar to the analysis performed for the Preferred Alternative
and the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan, resulted in traffic impacts higher than
shown in the Comprehensive Plan, but lower than what could be expected to result from the most
traffic impactive land uses allowed under the Zoning Code.
The results of the No Action Alternative analysis indicates that the westbound on ramp to US 12
from Lewis Street will have a V/C ratio greater than 1.0, with the eastbound off-ramp at 0.95
volume to capacity ratio. The results of the intersection analysis indicate there would be 13
intersections with STOP control that would need improvements (4 more than the Comprehensive
Plan), two of which are on “A” Street. There are also 13 intersections with traffic signals that
would need improvements as well, this being three more than the Comprehensive Plan. One
roundabout is also identified as likely needing improvements. Important in all this evaluation is
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
68
that such a large percentage of the trips are going away from the Heritage site since the primary
activity there is employment.
Table 20 – Comparison of Trip Generation
Trip Type Preferred
Alternative
Mixed
UseMedium
Density
Alternative
No-Action
Alternative
Inbound 867 738 175
Outbound 660 5835 1170
Less Internal 213 185 108
Total External Trips 13341314 1138 1237
6.9.3 Mitigation Measures
Preferred Alternative and Medium Intensity Density Alternative
Using the planning level methodology that was used in the preparation of the Comprehensive Plan
as described in Appendix 3, the impacts related to the future development of the site under both
the Preferred Alternative and the Medium Density Alternative are similar to those of the No-Action
Alternative and are summarized in Table 21Table 21 below. The analysis described in Appendix
3 does not account for specific trips between the Heritage site and the two large distribution
facilities being constructed or other industries nearby, so it is conservatively high on trips further
away from the site. Given that workers at these facilities will have additional housing nearby, the
impact on the roadway system may be less than those identified for the No Action scenario.
The planning methodology used here identifies locations where improvements may be needed. It
is logical to expect that when more detail is provided on a future development proposal, and more
detailed traffic operations analysis is undertaken, that slightly different mitigation would be
required for scenarios that add either more or less trips to the roadway network. Specific mitigation
measures to assure concurrency would be identified at the time of approval of the Land Subdivision
and Concomitant GMA Developer Agreement. Future mitigation with respect to transportation
facilities will be determined through the preparation of a Traffic Impact Analysis i f this
Comprehensive Plan Amendment request is approved. At the time of application it should be
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
69
determined which intersections are appropriate for evaluation based on the more detailed
development proposal submitted at that time.
No Action Alternative
The Regional Travel Demand Model used for preparation of the Transportation Element of the
Comprehensive Plan did not include development on the New Heritage site during the planning
period. Nor did the Regional model include traffic associated with the two large distribution
facilities being constructed to the east. Because of this, the No-Action Alternative, based on the
traffic evaluation included in Appendix 3, indicates that any future industrial development of the
New Heritage site under the No-Action Alternative would require additional traffic improvements
beyond the mitigation identified in the Comprehensive Plan. What transportation improvements
would actually be required under the No-Action Alternative depends on what specific development
is being proposed, although it is likely that the requirement would be at least as much as those
required under either the Preferred Alternative or the Medium Density Alternative for these
reasons: one, it generates more trips; two, the directional split of inbound and outbound trips is
highly directional; and three, very few trips are absorbed internally to the site because of the lack
of complementary land uses associated with the industrial land uses allowed.
Table 21 – Comparison of Traffic Mitigation
Potential
Improvement Type
Preferred
Alternative
Mixed
UseMedium
Density
Alternative
No-Action
Alternative
Comprehensive
Plan
Two-Way or All-Way
Stop Intersection
upgrade
16 16 16 12
Traffic Signal
Intersection Upgrade 13 13 13 10
Roundabout Upgrade 1 1 1 1
Potential US 12 ramp
improvements WB on, EB off WB on, EB
off WB on None
Examining Table 21 shows that the anticipated mitigation for the Preferred Alternative is the same
as for both the Medium Density Alternative as well as the No Action Alternative. Each of the
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
70
alternatives identifies the following intersections as potentially needing improvements beyond
those intersection identified in the Comprehensive Plan:
1) Four existing Stop-Controlled intersections may need to be signalized, including: Lewis
Street/US 12 eastbound ramps, “A” Street/Cedar Street (one of the accesses to the New
Heritage site), “A” Street/1st Street and Sylvester Street/US 395 ramp.
2) Three existing signalized intersections may need additional lanes: Court Street/US 395
northbound ramps, Court Street/US 395 southbound ramps, “A” Street/4th Avenue.
3) The US 12 westbound may need improvements under all three scenarios and the westbound
ramps may need improvements under the preferred alternative and the medium intensity
alternative.
Although the results are very similar at a planning level it should be noted that specific
improvements at intersections are not identified and that more detailed evaluation would need to
be performed as more detailed proposals are brought forward and more information is available.
In fact, it would appear that several of the above listed potential intersections for improvements
may be near the threshold of needing mitigation (given that they change between the
Comprehensive Plan analysis and the No-Action analysis). Depending on the actual development
proposal if the Comprehensive Plan amendment is approved they may or may not need to be
evaluated and should be determined at that time
In addition, the City of Pasco Comprehensive Plan EIS identified the following specific mitigation
measures which are incorporated here by reference and should be employed to reduce impacts to
the transportation network:
• The City will implement travel demand management methodologies identified in the City
of Pasco Draft Comprehensive Plan (2020b) to limit and manage the demand on and
access to the major facilities of I-182 and US 395.
• During construction, the City will work with its development applicants to oversee that
appropriate coordination with affected agencies and property owners occurs upon future
development. This includes providing appropriate public notification and detour routes
upon development of its own projects.
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
71
• During construction, the City could require construction management plans at the time of
development to reduce potential short‐term impacts.
• To accommodate future population growth projections, the City has planned a roadway
network to serve developing areas, and many of the improvements will be paid for by
private development. Identified improvements to transportation networks are described
further in the City of Pasco Draft Comprehensive Plan Volume 2 (Oneza & Associates
2020).
• The City will cooperate with the RTPO and Benton-Franklin Council of Governments for
levels of service.
• The City should consider multi‐modal needs in new corridors and in street standards for
when new roadway facilities are constructed.
• Implement the City of Pasco adopted Ordinance No. 3821 establishing concurrency
procedures for transportation facilities in conjunction with new development.
• Implement land use compatibility that generates traffic along roads with adequate
capacity.
• City’s allocates $249M budget for Capital improvements in 2020-2025. About $48M of
this would be spent on transportation improvements.
• Various long term and short term improvements are identified in Table T-10 and T-11 in
the Comprehensive Plan Volume II.
• City will continue to require the traffic impact fees from future developments that will be
used for future road and other improvements
• Development should be consistent with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan.
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
72
7 Heritage Conservation
7.1 Affected Environment
The Heritage amendment area is currently undeveloped. The site has historically been identified
as industrial and portions of the original site are currently being developed for warehouse and
distribution. There is no indication above ground of any historical sites or structures. The Pasco
Comprehensive Plan EIS provides historical information related to Tribal settlement and is
included here by reference.
7.2 Potential Impacts
If archaeological or historical materials are found, either under both the Preferred Alternative or
the Medium Density Alternative, future development could disturb or destroy such materials.
Under the No Action alternative, industrial activities could also impact archaeological materials.
7.3 Mitigation Measures
Any future development proposal will require further SEPA review. At that time, in the event that
archaeological or historical materials are discovered during future projects activities, work in the
immediate vicinity should be discontinued, the area secured and concerned tribes and the Office
of Archaeology and Historic Preservation notified. In addition, the follow policies have been
identified in the Pasco Comprehensive Plan EIS:
• LU-8 Goal: Encourage the restoration and rehabilitation of historic buildings and sites.
• LU-8-A Policy: Allow adaptive re-uses in historic structures.
• Franklin County Countywide Planning Policies Historic Preservation: Identify and
encourage the preservation of land sites and structures that have historical or
archaeological significance.
In addition:
The City should comply with applicable laws and regulations regarding impacts to cultural
resources. Section 106, Executive Order 05-05, and RCW 27.53, among others, require
impacts to cultural resources be mitigated. Mitigation is developed on a project-by-project
basis, in consultation with Native American tribes, the Department of Archaeology and
Historic Preservation, and other interested parties.
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
73
Appendix 1 City of Pasco Determination of Significance and Scoping Notice
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
74
Appendix 2 Public Comments Received from Scoping Notice
From:Garza, Arnie
To:Andrew Hattori
Subject:RE: SEPA Checklist & DS/Scoping Notice - Broetje Orchards CPA/New Heritage (City of Pasco) - SEPA2022-038
Date:Wednesday, June 8, 2022 6:28:20 AM
Attachments:image001.png
[NOTICE: This message originated outside of City of Pasco -- DO NOT CLICK on links or
open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.]
Andrew we have a 6” main gas line on the South side of E A Street and can get the customer gas if he
would like.
From: Andrew Hattori <hattoria@pasco-wa.gov>
Sent: Tuesday, June 7, 2022 4:48 PM
Subject: SEPA Checklist & DS/Scoping Notice - Broetje Orchards CPA/New Heritage (City of Pasco) -
SEPA2022-038
** WARNING: EXTERNAL SENDER. NEVER click links or open attachments without positive
sender verification of purpose. DO NOT provide your user ID or password on sites or forms
linked from this email. **
All,
Please see attached SEPA Checklist and DS/Scoping Notice (SEPA2022-038) for the proposed Broetje
Orchards CPA/New Heritage Comprehensive Plan Amendment. The applicant has applied for an
amendment to the Future Land Use Map of the 2018-2038 Pasco Comprehensive Plan, to change a
parcel’s designation from Industrial Land Use to Mixed Residential Commercial Land Use with a total
combined site area (parcel) of approximately 197 acres. The proposal is located on Parcels #112-
470-014, #112-430-012, #112-430-021, #112-462-078, and #112-462-096 in Pasco, WA. Please
submit comments for the DS/Scoping Notice by June 28, 2022.
Thank you,
Capture Andrew Hattori
Planner I
525 N. 3rd Avenue 1st Floor
Pasco, WA 99301
NOTE NEW PHONE NUMBER
(509) 544-4146
hattoria@pasco-wa.gov
From:Arrow Coyote
To:Andrew Hattori
Cc:Sydney.Hanson@dahp.wa.gov; Guy Moura
Subject:Re: SEPA Checklist & DS/Scoping Notice - Broetje Orchards CPA/New Heritage (City of Pasco) - SEPA2022-038
Date:Monday, June 27, 2022 9:29:22 AM
Attachments:image001.png
[NOTICE: This message originated outside of City of Pasco -- DO NOT CLICK on links or
open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.]
RE: SEPA2022-038 - Scoping Notice Broetje Orchards CPA/New Heritage
Location: properties are located south of East "A" Street and West of South Rd 40 E (Parcel # #112-
470-014, #112-430-012, #112-430-021, #112-462-078, and #112-462-096) in Pasco, WA.;
9N/30E/Sec. 34
Please be advised your proposed undertaking lies within the traditional territory of the Palus Tribe.
The Palus Tribe is a constituent member of and represented by the Confederated Tribes of the
Colville Reservation [Colville Confederated Tribes (CCT)]. The CCT is governed by the Colville Business
Council (CBC). The CBC delegated to the Tribal Historic Preservation Officer (THPO) the responsibility
of representing the CCT with regards to cultural resources management issues throughout these
traditional territories of our constituent tribes under Resolution 1996-29. This area includes most of
eastern Washington, parts of northeastern Oregon, south central British Columbia, and parts of
north central Idaho. In 1996, the CCT also entered into an agreement with the National Park Service
to assume state historic preservation officer responsibilities as outlined in Section 101 (d) (2) of the
National Historic Preservation Act. The assumption agreement explicitly tasks the Tribal Historic
Preservation Officer (THPO), to advise and assist Federal and State agencies and local governments
in carrying out their historic preservation responsibilities and for the CCT to carry out their
responsibilities for review of federal undertakings regarding cultural resources matters.
The project entails an amendment to the Future Land Use Map of the 2018-2038 Pasco
Comprehensive Plan, to change a parcel’s designation from Industrial Land Use to Mixed Residential
Commercial Land Use with a total combined site area (parcel) of approximately 197 acres.
There are a few sites and surveys in the section, but it is unknown if these are located in the project
area. There is insufficient data to assess impacts of this project on cultural resources. Therefore, we
request a letter from DAHP with an assessment of the cultural resources within the APE, and/or an
archaeological assessment or investigation be conducted in the project APE and the resulting report
be sent for review prior to the commencement of the project.
On Tue, Jun 7, 2022 at 4:48 PM Andrew Hattori <hattoria@pasco-wa.gov> wrote:
All,
Please see attached SEPA Checklist and DS/Scoping Notice (SEPA2022-038) for the
proposed Broetje Orchards CPA/New Heritage Comprehensive Plan Amendment. The
applicant has applied for an amendment to the Future Land Use Map of the 2018-2038
Pasco Comprehensive Plan, to change a parcel’s designation from Industrial Land Use to
Mixed Residential Commercial Land Use with a total combined site area (parcel) of
approximately 197 acres. The proposal is located on Parcels #112-470-014, #112-430-012,
#112-430-021, #112-462-078, and #112-462-096 in Pasco, WA. Please submit comments
for the DS/Scoping Notice by June 28, 2022.
Thank you,
Capture
Andrew Hattori
Planner I
525 N. 3rd Avenue 1st Floor
Pasco, WA 99301
NOTE NEW PHONE NUMBER
(509) 544-4146
hattoria@pasco-wa.gov
--
Arrow Coyote, Archaeologist
History/Archaeology Program
Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation
21 Colville Street
Nespelem, WA. 99155
509-634-2736 office
509-634-1280 cell
arrow.coyote@colvilletribes.com
STATE OF WASHINGTON
DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY
Eastern Region Office
4601 North Monroe St., Spokane, WA 99205-1295 • 509-329-3400
June 27, 2022
Andrew Hattori
Planner I
City of Pasco
PO Box 293
Pasco, WA 99301
Re: Broetje Orchards CPA / New Heritage
File: SEPA2022-038, CPA2022-003
Dear Andrew Hattori:
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Notice of Application and anticipated
Determination of Nonsignificance regarding the Broetje Orchards CPA / New Heritage project
(Proponent: Broetje Orchards LLC). After reviewing the documents, the Department of Ecology
(Ecology) submits the following comments:
Water Quality Program-Shannon Adams (509) 329-3610
This SEPA stated it was a non-project action. However, methods for erosion control were
described. Therefore, future construction activities may require coverage under the
Construction Stormwater General Permit.
For more information or technical assistance, please contact Shannon Adams at (509) 329-
3610 or via email at Shannon.Adams@ecy.wa.gov.
State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA)-Cindy Anderson (509) 655-1541
Ecology bases comments upon information submitted for review. As such, comments made
do not constitute an exhaustive list of the various authorizations you may need to obtain,
nor legal requirements you may need to fulfill in order to carry out the proposed action.
Applicants should remain in touch with their Local Responsible Officials or Planners for
additional guidance.
For information on the SEPA Process, please contact Cindy Anderson at (509) 655-1541 or
via email at Cindy.Anderson@ecy.wa.gov.
To receive more guidance on or to respond to the comments made by Ecology, please contact the
appropriate staff listed above at the phone number or email provided.
Department of Ecology
Eastern Regional Office
(Ecology File: 202202883)
From:John Burn
To:Andrew Hattori
Subject:RE: SEPA Checklist & DS/Scoping Notice - Broetje Orchards CPA/New Heritage (City of Pasco) - SEPA2022-038
Date:Friday, June 10, 2022 2:01:57 PM
Attachments:image001.png
[NOTICE: This message originated outside of City of Pasco -- DO NOT CLICK on links or
open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.]
Andrew,
No comments
John Burns
Operations Manager FCID#1
From: Andrew Hattori <hattoria@pasco-wa.gov>
Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2022 4:48 PM
Subject: SEPA Checklist & DS/Scoping Notice - Broetje Orchards CPA/New Heritage (City of Pasco) -
SEPA2022-038
All,
Please see attached SEPA Checklist and DS/Scoping Notice (SEPA2022-038) for the proposed Broetje
Orchards CPA/New Heritage Comprehensive Plan Amendment. The applicant has applied for an
amendment to the Future Land Use Map of the 2018-2038 Pasco Comprehensive Plan, to change a
parcel’s designation from Industrial Land Use to Mixed Residential Commercial Land Use with a total
combined site area (parcel) of approximately 197 acres. The proposal is located on Parcels #112-
470-014, #112-430-012, #112-430-021, #112-462-078, and #112-462-096 in Pasco, WA. Please
submit comments for the DS/Scoping Notice by June 28, 2022.
Thank you,
Capture Andrew Hattori
Planner I
525 N. 3rd Avenue 1st Floor
Pasco, WA 99301
NOTE NEW PHONE NUMBER
(509) 544-4146
hattoria@pasco-wa.gov
https://wsdot-my.sharepoint.com/personal/gonsetp_wsdot_wa_gov/Documents/desktop/Pasco Broetje DS_Scoping
comments.docx
June 27, 2022
City of Pasco
Community Development Department
P. O. Box 293
Pasco, WA 99301
Attention: Jacob Gonzalez, Planning Manager
Subject: Determination of Significance and Scoping Notice for the Proposed
Broetje Orchards CPA/New Heritage; CPA2002-003, SEPA20220038
We have reviewed the Determination of Significance and Scoping Notice by the City of
Pasco for the proposed comprehensive plan amendment for the New Heritage
development. We have the following comments.
The Determination of Significance and Scoping Notice identifies three alternatives and
we conclude that all alternatives will have potential negative impacts to the state
transportation system which includes Interstates 182, and US Highways 12 and 395 in the
vicinity.
In the application materials, specifically SEPA2022-038 Supplemental Report by JUB,
several Land Use and Transportation Goals only list the local system but not state
highways, which should be included in further technical reports and analyses. The
analysis also excludes discussion of the US 12/East A Street intersection.
The Environmental Impact Statement will need to complete a land capacity and traffic
analysis for both the current and future conditions for each alternative. The analysis needs
to include the state transportation system as part of the study. The current and future
traffic analysis must not include any improvements to the state system without agreement
from WSDOT.
City of Pasco
SEPA Determination and Scoping Notice – New Heritage
Page 2
We support your efforts and look forward to continued discussions. Thank you again for
the opportunity to participate and provide comments. If you have any questions
regarding these comments, please contact Debi Freudenthal at FreudeD@wsdot.wa.gov
or (509) 577-1633.
Sincerely,
Paul Gonseth, P.E.
Planning Engineer
PG: df
1761 GEORGE WASHINGTON WAY
UNIT 347
RICHLAND, WA 99344
ROJO Venture, L.L.C.
October 17,2022
Jacob Gonzales, Planning Manager
City of Pasco, Community and Economic Development Department
P.O. Box 293
Pasco, WA 99301
Dear Mr. Gonzales,
Re: CPA 2022-003/SEPA
ROJO Venture is the owner of +/-20 acres along East A Street immediately
adjacent to the east boundary of the proposed project and we will be directly
impacted by any action. ROJO Venture is opposed to the proposed
Comprehensive Plan amendment. ROJO Venture, LLC offers the following
comments.
• The project proposed is bordered on 3 sides by Industrial zoning and the
North side, East A Street is the main truck route access to the Industrial
zone
o East- ROJO Ventures with existing Industrial zone businesses in
place and the new Amazon distribution centers
o South- Industrial with recently constructed rail access
o West- Industrial, City owned (proposed athletic facility)
o North- East A Street Arterial
• The DEIS does not include 2 large tracts to the South of the proposal area
that are under common ownership with the proposal area. Common
control should be addressed by the DEIS. These parcels should be included
2
in the DEIS area if they may be added later. Or, the current zoning should
be reinforced, and buffer requirements addressed.
• Approval of the proposal creates a Spot or Island zone surrounded by
Industrial activity creating areas of incompatible zone interaction that will
have to be mitigated.
• The change of zoning immediately adjacent to our Light Industrial zoned
property significantly affects the development potential by forcing new
development requirements on our property (copied below from page 39
of DEIS)
o Parking lots within 500 feet of a C-2 district boundary, provided
such lots are paved and the development complies with the
landscape and fencing requirements of the C-1 district, as
enumerated in PMC 25.85.020(13). [Ord. 4110 § 23, 2013; Ord.
3354 § 2, 1999; Code 1970§ 25.52.020.
• East A Street is the only access designated in the proposal to access the
proposed Residential and Commercial area emergency access to the area
needs to be addressed should East A Street become blocked. The
potential blockage is greater with the Industrial access route and of
significant consequence with the proposed school.
• The developer has designated nearly 10% of the project area for schools
but the school development is optional to other parties. In the event the
school district does not develop the school the designated area reverts to
the base development; therefore traffic, services and other studies should
address the impacts both with and without schools.
• The City of Pasco needs to review the compatibility of their planned sports
complex with the proposed Residential zone. A case in point is a similar
project in Spokane, WA that is being opposed by residents in the area
o glen rose sports complex Spokane
o Glenrose Community Association -Sports Complex
(glenroseassociation.org)
3
Mr. Gonzales, while we are generally pro development and growth, we want to
encourage you to consider all the potential impact that the proposed
development may have on the community in general and the neighboring
properties. On behalf of the members of ROJO Ventures, LLC, Polly Frisby, Karen
Walton and myself we thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
John Hjaltalin
1
Elizabeth Smith
From:Jacob Gonzalez <gonzalezjb@pasco-wa.gov>
Sent:Wednesday, November 16, 2022 8:57 AM
To:Elizabeth Smith
Cc:Rick White
Subject:RE: City of Pasco DEIS - Notice of Availability Comment Period Extension - New Heritage
Land Use Amendment
Elizabeth,
I wanted to also make a comment that should have been included in the submittal from the city regarding the DEIS.
There were numerous references made on the potential use of a Concomitant agreement in the DEIS. While this has
been used in the past, the PMC restricts the use to rezones, and does not apply to Comprehensive Plan Land Use
Amendments.
The city would encourage the FEIS to incorporate details and specifics about what the Concomitant agreement would
include, please see the list in PMC 25.210.100. As mentioned in the DEIS, the city does not currently have the necessary
code language or development standards to implement a “new urbanism” or related development. Identifying specifics
about what those standards should or may need to would be essential for an eventual Planning Commission and Council
decision.
Thank you again, we appreciate your team’s patience.
Jacob B. Gonzalez | Planning Manager
Community & Economic Development
525 N. 3rd Avenue | Pasco, WA 99301
(509) 544-4136|gonzalezjb@pasco-wa.gov
This email and your response are considered a public record and will be subject to disclosure under Washington’s Public Records Act.
From: Jacob Gonzalez <gonzalezjb@pasco-wa.gov>
Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2022 4:00 PM
To: Elizabeth Smith <esmith@jub.com>
Cc: Rick White <WHITER@pasco-wa.gov>
Subject: RE: City of Pasco DEIS - Notice of Availability Comment Period Extension - New Heritage Land Use Amendment
Elizabeth,
Please find all comments received on the DEIS for the New Heritage Land Use Amendment.
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
75
Appendix 3 Traffic Analysis
30-19-079/New Heritage Appendix 3 - Traffic Analysis P a g e | 1
APPENDIX 3
NEW HERITAGE SITE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
TRAFFIC ANALYSIS
EXISTING CONDITIONS
There are no existing roadways on the proposed Amendment area site itself. There is a network
of functionally classified streets that serve the area around the site, as shown in Figure 3-1 below,
which also shows the location of traffic signals in this portion of the city.
FIGURE 3 -1. EXISTING ROADWAY NETWORK AND TRAFFIC CONTROL
Note: intersections without a symbol are Two-Way Stop Controlled.
2
Key roadways that provide primary access to the site includes:
• “A” Street - Adjacent to the site along the northern boundary is “A” Street, an east-west
minor arterial that has two lanes west of 20th Avenue, four lanes from 20th Avenue to Elm
Street, five lanes from Elm Street to Heritage Blvd along the northern boundary of the site,
three lanes from Heritage Blvd to East 40th StreetRoad 40 East and two lanes from 40th
Street to US 12. There are three traffic signals on “A” Street where it crosses other
principal arterial roadways at Oregon Ave (SR 397), 4th Avenue and 10th Avenue.
• Heritage Blvd – is a two lane north-south local road with limited access between “A” Street
and US 12 with no stops. It is designated to become a principal arterial in the
Comprehensive Plan.
• US 12/I-182 – US 12 is designated an east-west expressway with two lanes in each
direction as it comes west across the Snake River. West of a grade separated interchange
at Lewis Street it becomes coincident with Interstate 182, continuing west through Pasco
and into Benton County. It widens to three lanes in each direction west of US 395.
With respect to existing traffic operations, results from the Comprehensive Plan are discussed here.
Traffic volumes for roadway segments were collected by the Benton Franklin Council of
Governments (BFCOG) in 2018 were reviewed and evaluated at a planning level for both roadway
segments and intersection Levels of Service to identify potential areas of concern that may not
meet city standards. Capacities from the regional model were also used for each roadway,
generally the capacities used were 800 vehicles per lane plus 300 when a local roadway has a two-
way left-turn lane or left turn lanes at intersections, with the capacity of freeway lanes being 1700.
. The resulting roadway network volume to capacity ratios (V/C) were calculated. V/C <0.60
typically provides Level of Service (LOS) A, V/C between 0.60 and 0.70 LOS B, V/C between
0.70 and 0.80 LOS C, V/C between 0.80 and 0.90 LOS D, V/C between 0.90 and 1.0 LOS E and
V/C > 1.0 LOS F. : Level of Service Standards adopted by the City of Pasco and the Benton
Franklin Council of Governments are LOS “D” for urban roadways and intersections.
Intersection approach volumes were also examined using a planning level methodology and
evaluated for two conditions. First, whether stop control is adequate when comparing major street
3
and minor street traffic volumes, comparing to Exhibit 10-15a table included in from the Highway
Capacity Manual (Intersection Control Type and Peak-Hour Volumes) as shown below. If
intersection volumes fell in the region of the Exhibit indicating that Two-Way Stop Control is the
likely control type then it was assumed that the intersection would function acceptably. If entering
volumes fell above that region it indicates that improvements may be needed, which may be in the
form of additional lanes to add capacity, or a higher form of intersection control. Turning
movement volumes would need to be evaluated using the Highway Capacity Manual methodology.
Second, for signalized intersections entering volumes were compared with entering capacity
multiplied bywith an intersection adjustment factor to account for the fact that two roadways must
share the pavement within the intersection. The adjustment factors used are: for roadways with
the same functional classification = 0.55, roadways with one level of functional classification
4
difference = 0.50, roadways with two levels of functional classification difference = 0.45. Any
intersection with a V/C > 0.90 was identified as potentially needing additional capacity, likely in
the form of additional lanes.
As reported in the Comprehensive Plan, all functionally classified roads east of the railroad tracks
in Pasco function with good volume to capacity (V/C) ratios and Levels of Service, with only one
roadway having a V/C ratio greater than 0.70. Elsewhere in the City there is congestion over both
of the bridges from Pasco to Kennewick and in the vicinity of the US 395/I-182 interchange. The
Comprehensive Plan Update performed a planning level system wide evaluation of intersections
which identified four intersections in central and east Pasco that are currently unsignalized but
based on entering volumes may need improvements. These intersections include Heritage Blvd at
A Street, two intersections on Lewis Street and one on Oregon Avenue.
Ben Franklin Transit provides fixed route and on demand transit service to the City of Pasco and
the Tri-Cities area. In the vicinity of the Amendment area service is provided by Routes 64 and
65, each providing service every half hour throughout the day. Route 65 has stops on “A” Street
between Heritage Blvd and Terra Vida Lane while Route 64 has stops on “A” Street between Wehe
Avenue and Elm Avenue. Both routes provide transfer opportunities at the 22nd Avenue Transit
Center.
The City of Pasco has a network of facilities that serve bicycle and pedestrian needs. In the vicinity
of the proposed Amendment area, “A” Street has a sidewalk on the north side from Wehe Avenue
to East 40th AvenueRoad 40 East. It also has bike lanes in each direction and a 9’ wide pathway
on the south side from Elm Street to East 40th AvenueRoad 40 East.
There is an existing rail spur along the southern boundary of the New Heritage site that was
constructed to promote industrial development at this site as well as on the south side.
EFFECTS OF T HE PROPOSAL
COM PREHENSIVE PLAN
For each of the alternatives discussed below, a planning level analysis was performed using the
same methodology as was used in the preparation of Transportation Element of the Comprehensive
Plan Analysis as described above. The methodology for forecasting future traffic conditions and
5
comparing to the Comprehensive Plan for the three alternatives (including the No Action) is
discussed below.
To assist with identifying future conditions, the BFCOG develops and maintains the regional travel
demand model. The model is a strategic planning tool that includes population and employment
forecasts, identified transportation projects and models future conditions across the region. The
outcome is a regional model that is adopted by the BFCOG Board, of which the City of Pasco is a
member.
The City of Pasco submitted to BFCOG updated population and employment forecasts, by
Transportation Analysis Zones that reflect the expanded Urban Growth Area and land uses
associated with the Comprehensive Plan. An updated traffic volume forecast using the regional
travel demand model was prepared. This effort ensures that the Land Use Element and the
Transportation Element are consistent for the purposes of the Comprehensive Plan. The results of
the refined regional model provide insights and better understanding as to how the transportation
network will function with the increase in population and employment. Of note for this current
Traffic Analysis for the New Heritage site is that the Regional Travel Demand Model assumed no
additional development on the site during the planning horizon of the Comprehensive Plan. Nor
did the regional travel demand model include any trips associated with the two large warehouses
being constructed to the east of the Heritage site.
A similar analysis to that of existing conditions was performed using the traffic volume forecasts
of the Comprehensive Plan to evaluate both roadway segments and intersections to determine
where capacity needs are anticipated based on the land uses built into the regional model.
Similar to the existing condition roadway volume to capacity ratios (V/Cs) are good, with the only
segment in central and east Pasco with a V/C ratio greater than 0.70 being the westbound on-ramp
from Lewis Street to US 12. The long-range analysis of the Comprehensive Plan, within the area
shown in Figure 3-1 above, indicates 12 existing intersections with STOP control that may likely
need improvements to provide acceptable Levels of Service. These improvements could be in the
form of turn lanes or a higher level of traffic control such as a roundabout or traffic signal. There
are also 10 existing signalized intersections and one existing roundabout that are forecast to be
6
over capacity that may also need improvements in the form of additional lanes. These results, for
the Comprehensive Plan analysis for the area included in the maps at the end of this appendix.
NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE
To evaluate the effects of the alternatives an evaluation of the No Action Alternative must also be
performed. To evaluate the New Heritage site under the No Action alternative, the land use
changes in the regional model were examined and it was found that no additional development
was assumed on this site. Thus, to evaluate the No-Action alternative trip generation and
distribution needed to be performed for this scenario as well, assuming the site were to develop as
light industrial. Similarly, the Comprehensive Plan didn’t include trips associated with the two
large warehouses being constructed to the east. These trips were added as well.
Multiple industrial land uses are offered in the Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip
Generation Manual 10th Edition. Many land uses are allowed under the current zoning, including
office, business park, manufacturing and light industrial. For the purposes of this analysis an
assumed land use of General Light Industrial was used for trip generation purposes. The resulting
trips would amount to approximately 1,235 PM peak hour trips with 13% of those inbound to the
site and 87% outbound.
The trip generation assumptions of each of the three development alternatives are included in tables
towards the back of this appendix. A summary of trip generation of the three alternatives is
provided in Table 3.1.
7
TABLE 3 -1 – COMPARISON OF TRIP GENERATION
Trip Type
Alternative 1
Preferred
Alternative
Alternative 2
Medium
DensityMixed
Use
Alternative
Alternative 3
No-Action
Alternative
Inbound 867 738 175
Outbound 660 5835 1170
Less Internal 213 185 108
Total External Trips 13341314 1138 1237
Source: ITE Trip Generation 10th Editions
The trips generated by each alternative were assigned to the roadway network using the same trip
distribution percentages. The percentages shown below in Table 3-2 were estimated using a
cordon line around central and east Pasco and the existing traffic volumes crossing the cordon line
during the PM peak hour. Based on the location of the New Heritage the percentages of trips using
the Blue Bridge (US 395) and the Cable Bridge were adjusted to reflect an easier and less
congested route to Kennewick using the Cable Bridge. An additional 12 large blocks were also
designated in central and east Pasco to assign trips to this area as well, amounting to 23% of the
total trips.
8
TABLE 3 -2. TRIP DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
Cordon Line % In % Out
US 12 East of “A” Street 4 3
Kahlotus Hwy north of US 12 3 1
US 395 North of I-182 2 3
4th Ave North of I-182 2 1
Argent Rd west of 20th Avenue 3 5
I-182 west of US 395 25 24
Court Street west of US 395 6 5
Sylvester Street west of US 395 3 4
US 395 South (Blue Bridge) 5 8
10th Ave South (Cable Bridge) 24 23
Central/East Pasco 23 23
Total 100% 100%
The results of the planning level analysis for the No Action Alternative indicates that the
westbound on ramp to US 12 will have a V/C ratio greater than 1.0. The results of the intersection
analysis are shown in the maps at the end of this appendix as well. The intersection control
analysis indicates that there could be 16 intersections with STOP control that would need
improvements (4 more than the Comprehensive Plan), two of which are on “A” Street. There are
also 13 intersections with traffic signals that would need improvements as well, this being three
more than the Comprehensive Plan, one of which is on “A” Street at 4th Avenue. Important in all
this evaluation is that such a large percentage of the trips are going away from the Heritage site
since the primary activity there is employment.
9
Maps showing the results of the Volume to Capacity analysis as well as the Intersection Control
Analysis follow the tables at the back of this appendix as well. Appropriate maps were prepared
focusing on the area of impact of the New Heritage Site including central and east Pasco.
Transit and Bicycle/pedestrian features would be offered within the Heritage site. The existing
rail spur along the southern boundary would not likely be used on its north side but could still be
used on its south side.
PREFERRED A LTERNATIVE
The Preferred Alternative includes a variety of land uses including both multi-family units as well
as single family units, retail and office space. The specific assumptions are included in a table
following the text of this appendix. As shown in Table 3-1, this alternative is estimated to generate
approximately 1,315 trips with 57% of trips inbound to the site.
A similar evaluation as the other alternatives was performed with respect to V/C ratios and
intersection planning level analysis. The analysis resulted in the same 16 intersections currently
STOP controlled that would likely require improvements in order to achieve acceptable LOS, 12
of which are also identified in the Comprehensive Plan. There are 13 existing traffic signals that
would need improvements, these are the same as the other alternatives which also include 10 that
are identified in the Comprehensive Plan. Although the results are very similar at a planning level
it should be noted that specific improvements at intersections are not identified and that more
detailed evaluation would need to be performed as more detailed proposals are brought forward
and more information is available.
MEDIUM INTENSITY DENSITY ALTERNATIVE
Under this alternative a variety of land uses are also proposed including a mixture of Office space,
business park, as retail in the form of restaurants, grocery and other neighborhood shopping were
evaluated. This alternative assumes about 235 more multi-family units as well as more commercial
and office space. The trip generation specifics are included in a table later and estimates that this
alternative would generate approximately 1,140 trips with 56% of trips inbound to the site.
10
A similar evaluation as the other alternatives was performed with respect to V/C ratios and
intersection planning level analysis. The analysis was essentially identical to the results for the
Low Intensity Density alternative, indicating that 13 unsignalized intersections and 13 signalized
intersections would likely need improvements along with the westbound US 12 on-ramp from
Lewis Street.
MITIGATION MEASURES
NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE
As mentioned previously, the Regional Travel Demand Model used for preparation of the
Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan did not include development on the New
Heritage site, nor the site of the two proposed large distribution facilities, during the planning
period. Thus, mitigation for the No Action Alternative would include installation of 16 new traffic
signals or other capacity improvements at existing unsignalized intersections, including 12
identified in the Comprehensive Plan, it would also include reconstruction of 13 existing traffic
signals to increase capacity, 10 of which are included in the Comprehensive Plan. One existing
roundabout would also need additional capacity as identified in the Comprehensive Plan, as well
as ramp improvements at the Lewis Street interchange.
PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE
At a planning level perspective, the mitigation required for this alternative are similar to the No
Action Alternative. With the potential difference being that improvements may be needed for the
US 12 eastbound off-ramp at Lewis Street. In practice though, at the level of detail of this analysis,
the implementation of the improvements at the time of the development will likely be slightly
different. It is anticipated that a more detailed analysis will be performed when a development
proposal is submitted if the Comprehensive Plan is amended to allow mixed use commercial and
residential instead of industrial. At that time a more refined development proposal will have been
prepared and appropriate intersections for detailed evaluation should be determined for inclusion
11
in a detailed Traffic Impact Analysis in order to provide acceptable Levels of Service consistent
with the State of Washington Concurrency requirements.
MEDIUM INTENSITY DENSITY ALTERNATIVE
At a planning level perspective, the mitigation required for this alternative is the same as that for
the Preferred Alternative. In practice though, at the level of detail of this analysis, the
implementation of the improvements at the time of the improvement will likely be slightly more.
Although the same intersections are identified as needing potential improvements as the No Action
scenario, it is important to note that the impacts for this alternative may be less than those of the
No-Action alternative for four reasons:
1. It generates fewer trips,
2. The directional split of inbound and outbound trips are more evenly distributed,
3. The mixed-use nature of the proposed development allows for more trips to be contained
on-site such as people that live and work within Heritage, or people that are able to live
and shop within the proposed development.
4. Proximity to the proposed large distribution facilities will be a benefit for both them and
the Heritage residents.
TABLE 3 -3 – COMPARISON OF TRAFFIC MITIGATION
Potential
Improvement Type
Preferred
Alternative
Mixed Use
Alternative
No-Action
Alternative
Comprehensive
Plan
Two-Way or All-Way
Stop Intersection
upgrade
16 16 16 12
Traffic Signal
Intersection Upgrade 13 13 13 10
Roundabout Upgrade 1 1 1 1
12
Potential US 12 ramp
improvements
WB on
EB off
WB on
EB off
WB on None
Although the results are very similar at a planning level it should be noted that specific
improvements at intersections are not identified and that more detailed evaluation would need to
be performed in a Traffic Impact Analysis as more detailed proposals are brought forward and
more information is available.
TRIP GENERATION Preferred Alternative
Description
Land
Use
Codes Units
Rate
Weekday
Daily
Traffic
PM
Peak
Period
Rate
% PM
In
% PM
Out
Expected
Units
(independe
nt variable)
Calculated
Daily Trips
Based on
Average
Rate
Calculated
PM Trips
Based on
Average
Rate
Passby
Percent
PM Trips
with Origin
or
Destination
outside
Heritage In Out
Single-Family Detached Housing 210 DU 9.44 0.99 63% 37% 618 5,834 612 612
385 226
Multi Family Housing (Low-Rise) 220 DU 7.32 0.56 63% 37% 736 5,388 412 412
260 152
Elementary School 520 1,000 Sq. Ft. GFA 19.52 1.37 45% 55% 205 4,002 281 281
126 154
General Office Building 710 1,000 sq Ft. GFA 9.74 1.15 16% 84% 42 409 48 48
8 41
Medical-Dental Office Building 720 1,000 sq Ft. GFA 34.80 3.46 28% 72% 2 70 7 7
2 5
Office Park 750 1,000 sq Ft. GFA 11.07 1.07 7% 93% 0 0 0 0
0 0
Business Park 770 1,000 sq Ft. GFA 12.44 0.42 46% 54% 0 0 0 0 0 0
Shopping Center 820 1,000 Sq. Ft. GFA 37.75 3.81 48% 52% 16 604 61
34 40 19 21
Supermarket 850 1,000 sq Ft. GFA 106.78 9.24 51% 49% 11 1,175 102
36 65 33 32
High Turnover (Sit-Down) Restaurant 932 1,000 Sq. Ft. GFA 112.18 9.77 62% 38% 2 224 20 43 11 7 4
Fast-Food Restaurant with Drive Through Window 934 1,000 Sq. Ft. GFA 470.95 32.67 52% 48% 2 942 65 49 33 17 16
Gasoline/Service Station with Convenience Market 945 Vehicle Fueling Positions 205.36 13.99 51% 49% 4 821 56 66 19 10 9
Source: ITE 10th Edition Total Trips 1638 19468 1663 1529 867 660
121 92
746 568
Less Internal (14%)
Total Trips In/Out of Heritage
TRIP GENERATION Medium Density Alternative
Description
Land
Use
Codes Units
Rate
Weekday
Daily
Traffic
PM
Peak
Period
Rate
% PM
In
% PM
Out
Expected
Units
(independe
nt variable)
Calculated
Daily Trips
Based on
Average
Rate
Calculated
PM Trips
Based on
Average
Rate
Passby
Percent
PM Trips
with Origin
or
Destination
outside
Heritage In Out
Single-Family Detached Housing 210 Dwelling Units 9.44 0.99 63% 37% 548 5,173 543 543
342 201
Multi Family Housing (Low-Rise) 220 Dwelling Units 7.32 0.56 63% 37% 480 3,514 269 269
169 99
Elementary School 520 1,000 Sq. Ft. GFA 19.52 1.37 45% 55% 205 4,002 281 281
126 154
General Office Building 710 1,000 sq Ft. GFA 9.74 1.15 16% 84% 41 399 47 47
8 40
Medical-Dental Office Building 720 1,000 sq Ft. GFA 34.80 3.46 28% 72% 3 104 10 10
3 7
Office Park 750 1,000 sq Ft. GFA 11.07 1.07 7% 93% 0 0 0 0
0 0
Business Park 770 1,000 sq Ft. GFA 12.44 0.42 46% 54% 0 0 0 0 0 0
Shopping Center 820 1,000 Sq. Ft. GFA 37.75 3.81 48% 52% 0 0
34 0 0 0
Supermarket 850 1,000 sq Ft. GFA 106.78 9.24 51% 49% 15 1,602 139
36 89 45 43
High Turnover (Sit-Down) Restaurant 932 1,000 Sq. Ft. GFA 112.18 9.77 62% 38% 0 0 43 0 0 0
Fast-Food Restaurant with Drive Through Window 934 1,000 Sq. Ft. GFA 470.95 32.67 52% 48% 4 1,884 131 49 67 35 32
Gasoline/Service Station with Convenience Market 945 Vehicle Fueling Positions 205.36 13.99 51% 49% 4 821 56 66 19 10 9
Source: ITE 10th Edition 1300 17499 1475 1324 738 585
103 82
635 503
Less Internal (14%)
Total Trips In/Out of Heritage
TRIP GENERATION No Action Alternative
Description
Land
Use
Codes Units
Rate
Weekday
Daily Traffic
PM
Peak
Period
Rate
% PM
In
% PM
Out
Expected
Units
(independe
nt variable)
Calculated
Daily Trips
Based on
Average
Rate
Calculated
PM Trips
Based on
Average
Rate In Out
General Light Industrial 110 1,000 Sq. Ft. GFA 4.96 0.63 13% 87% 2134 10,587 1,345
175 1170
Source: ITE 10th Edition 2134 10587 1345 175 1170
Internal (8%)1059 134 14 94
Total External 9528 1211 161 1076
acres 196
sq ft 8,537,760
Floor Area Ratio 25%
sq of Industrial 2,134,440
in thousands 2134
N 3RD
AVE
E A ST
W CLAR
K
S
T N 1ST
AVEN OREGON
AVE
W PEARL ST
W COURT ST
E LEWIS ST
S WEHE AVESMAITLANDAVEHERI
TAGEBLVDS4THAVES 10TH AVEW A ST
EAINSWORTHAVE
N
C
O
MME
R
CI
A
L
A
V
E
New
Heritage
0.410.640.470.131
1.01
0.42
0.96 1.050.630.780.57
0.391.251.62 0.24
0.07
0.56
0.12
0.4
0.29
0.480.370.21
0.33
0.32
0.10.16
0.54
0.910.231.020.4900.720.380.70.580.05 0.340.97
1.190.140.55
0.
1
9
0.
3
6
0.750.86
0.7
4
0.730.
1
8
1.440.71
0.3
0.350.890.080.
1
7
182
182
395
395
12
12
12
397
397
COLUMBIA
RIVER
COMP PLAN
VOLUME TO
CAPACITY RATIO
¯
0 0.25 0.5
Miles
Volume to Capacity Ratio (1 Hour) (0.50)
Less than 0.70
0.70 to <0.80
0.80 to <0.90
0.90 to <1.00
More than or equal to 1.00
N 3RD
AVE
E A STN 24TH AVEW CLAR
K
S
T N 1ST
AVEN OREGON
AVE
W PEARL ST
W COURT ST
E LEWIS ST
S WEHE AVESMAITLANDAVEHERI
TAGEBLVDS4
TH A V ES 10TH AVEW A ST
EAINSWORTHAVE
N
C
O
MME
R
C
I
A
L
A
V
E
New
Heritage0.850.57
0.01
0.71
0.670.660.490.58
0.15
1.05
1.09
0.7
0.98 1.060.650.81.14
0.612.05
0.44
0.50.56
1.281.7
0.27
0.07
0.18
0.29
1.82
0.240.480.32
0.36 0.03
0.510.26
0.38
0.81
0.780.190.880.69
0.990.93
0.920.250.14
0.91
1.84
0.770.54
1.
0
7
0.39
1.03
0.350.41
0.02
0.060.160.310.370.471.04 0.720
.
9
6
0.42
0.13
0.430.82
0.090.120.590.34 0.530.550.08
0.31.02
1.190.620.460.73
0.
20.680.211.4
3
0.740.2210.05
0.
1
7
1.470.4 0.90.10.52
0.11
182
182
395
395
12
12
12
397
397
COLUMBIA
RIVER
2040 NO ACTION
VOLUME TO
CAPACITY RATIO
¯
0 0.25 0.5
Miles
Volume to Capacity Ratio (1 Hour) (0.50)
Less than 0.70
0.70 to <0.80
0.80 to <0.90
0.90 to <1.00
More than or equal to 1.00
N 3RD
AVE
E A STN 24TH AVEW CLAR
K
S
T N 1ST
AVEN OREGON
AVE
W PEARL ST
W COURT ST
E LEWIS ST
SMAITLANDAVEHERI
TAGEBLVDS4THAVES 10TH AVEW A ST
EAINSWORTHAVE
N
C
O
MME
R
C
I
A
L
A
V
E
New
Heritage0.550.38
0.01
0.69
0.650.480.770.66
0.62
1.03
0.1
1.09
0.58 0.671.05
0.81.14
0.612.05
0.49
0.44
0.450.520.56
1.320.571.67 0.26
0.08
0.15
0.51
0.3
1.82
0.410.240.32
0.29 0.03
0.36
0.35
0.79
0.780.190.920.63
0.93
0.251.060.14
0.91
1.84
0.54
1.07
0.4 0.39
0.02
0.160.310.720.370.471.04 0.710
.
9
6
0.42
0.13
0.82
0.07
0.270.810.090.590.34
0.460.060.99
1.20.430.95
0.
20.680.85
0.211.1
6
0.740.2310.05
0.
1
7
1.50.75 0.890.120.
1
8
0.5
0.11
182
182
395
395
12
12
12
397
397
COLUMBIA
RIVER
¯
0 0.25 0.5
Miles
Volume to Capacity Ratio (1 Hour) (0.50)
Less than 0.70
0.70 to <0.80
0.80 to <0.90
0.90 to <1.00
More than or equal to 1.00
MEDIUM
DENSITY
ALTERNATIVE
VOLUME TO
CAPACITY RATIO
N 3RD
AVE
E A STN 24TH AVEW CLAR
K
S
T N 1ST
AVEN OREGON
AVE
W PEARL ST
W COURT ST
E LEWIS ST
S WEHE AVESMAITLANDAVEHERI
TAGEBLVDS4THAVES 10TH AVEW A ST
EAINSWORTHAVE
N
C
O
MME
R
C
I
A
L
A
V
E
New
Heritage 0.70.01
0.650.480.19
0.77
0.58
0.66
0.62
1.03
0.10.591.09
0.551.060.671.05
0.80.691.14
0.612.05
0.49 0.440.460.520.56
1.340.571.67 0.26
0.09
0.16
0.53
0.3
1.82
0.430.240.32
0.38 0.03
0.36
0.35
0.79
0.780.15
0.930.64
0.990.920.250.14
0.91
1.84
0.750.54
1.07
0.4 0.390.080.020.310.720.370.471.04 0.710
.
9
6
0.42
0.13
0.82
0.07
0.270.810.60.34 0.50.06
1.20.
20.680.85
0.211.1
9
0.740.2310.05
0.
1
7
1.510.76 0.890.120.
1
8
0.51
0.95
0.11
182
182
395
395
12
12
12
397
397
COLUMBIA
RIVER
¯
0 0.25 0.5
Miles
Volume to Capacity Ratio (1 Hour) (0.50)
Less than 0.70
0.70 to <0.80
0.80 to <0.90
0.90 to <1.00
More than or equal to 1.00
PREFERRED
ALTERNATIVE
VOLUME TO
CAPACITY RATIO
è è è è è è è
è
è
è
è
è
è
èèèè
è
è
èè
è
è
èèè
èè èè
èèèè
è
è è
è è
è
è
èééé é é é é
é
é
é
é
é
é
éééé
é
é
éé
é
é
ééé
éé éé
éééé
é
é é
é é
é
é
éëëëë ë ë ë ë
ë
ë
ë
ë
ë
ë
ëëëë
ë
ë
ëë
ë
ë
ëëë
ëë ëë
ëëëë
ë
ë ë
ë ë
ë
ë
ëìììì ì ì ì ì
ì
ì
ì
ì
ì
ì
ìììì
ì
ì
ìì
ì
ì
ììì
ìì ìì
ìììì
ì
ì ì
ì ì
ì
ì
ìíííí í í í í
í
í
í
í
í
í
íííí
í
í
íí
í
í
ííí
íí íí
íííí
í
í í
í í
í
í
í
!!
!!!!
!!
!
""
""""
""
"
$$
$$$$
$$
$N 3RD
AVES CEDAR AVEN 24TH AVEE A ST
W CLAR
K
S
T N 1ST
AVEN OREGON
AVE
W PEARL ST
W COURT ST
E LEWIS ST
S WEHE AVESMAITLANDAVEHERI
TAGEBLVDS 4THAVES 10TH AVEW A ST
PASC
O
K
A
HL
O
T
U
S
R
D
E AI
N
S
W
O
R
T
H
A
V
E
NCO
M
M
E
R
CIA
L
A
V
E
New
Heritage
182
182
395
395
12
12
12
397
397
COLUMBIA
RIVER
EXISTING
INTERSECTION
CONTROL
¯
0 0.25 0.5
Miles
Existing Intersection Control
!"$All Way Stop
Roundabout
èéëìí Signalized
Street Classification
Interstate
Other Freeway
Principle Arterial
Principal Arterial,Future
Minor Arterial
Collector
Collector, Future
Ramps
3/29/2022
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan January 3, 2023
76
Appendix 4 EIS Comment Matrix
Commenter Comment Response
1 City of Pasco - Sewer
The DEIS only references the City's 2014 Capital Sewer Plan
(CSP). The review of sewer impacts from the proposed Land
Use Amendment should be updated based on the 2021 CSP
Addendum to see possible differences in capacity for this
area.
The 2021 CSP addendum was added as reference and the
EIS was updated to reflect. The 2021 Amended CSP does
not account for any industrial development within the
project area. The 2014 CSP included a 1 MGD allowance for
future industrial development and is noted in the EIS
comparison analysis. Section 6.3.1.1 has been updated to
include reference to the 2021 CSP addendum.
2 City of Pasco - Sewer
The Maitland LS should have capacity, but the gravity main
downstream of the proposed Land Use Amendment has
some sections expected to exceed 80% capacity in the
coming years, which could be problematic with the
proposed change in land use, likely causing significantly
more flow to be conveyed through this portion of the
collection system.
The 2021 CSP notes that existing and 10-year PFH capacity
of the 30-inch collection pipe less would be less than 50%
capacity. The 20-year PFH capacity shows the 30-inch line
in excess of 100% capacity due to a future Tank Farm LS
that is not defined. The capacity of the 30-inch line will be
heavily influenced by future industrial flows that will come
from areas generally north of SR-12. It is also stated in
several sections of the 2021 CSP that industrial flows are
hard to project as they are heavily dependent upon the
specific industrial use. Therefore, additional modeling and
analysis will need to be conducted for each type of
development that would utilize the existing 30-inch
collection line. The proposed residential development will
be constructed in several phases thus the overall impact will
take several years to hit peak demand. Section 6.3.2 Sewer
and Water System has been updated.
1 City of Pasco - Water
The DEIS appears to rely on future storage in Zone 2. The
most recent Capital Improvement Plan shows this storage
reservoir not being completed until 2026, provided funding
support can be obtained prior to the start of the project.
This raises the concern that the proposed Land Use
Amendment won't be able to be accommodated until the
Zone 2 water reservoir is constructed.
The 2019 CWP states that the system has an existing
deficiency as of today. Either land use, industrial or
residential, would require a mitigation. In the 2019 CIP
additional storage is accounted for to make up for the
deficiency. The City has recently allowed two large
industrial warehouse facilities to be constructed in this area
despite the existing deficiency. The proposed residential
development will be constructed in several phases thus the
overall impact will take several years to hit peak demand.
Additionally, there is a Zone 3 storage improvement
currently being developed by the City. Zone 3 is ties to
Zone 2 by a PRV. Therefore, the Zone 3 improvement will
help Zone 2 storage needs. Section 6.3.2 Sewer and Water
System has been updated.
City of Pasco 2018 Comprehensive Plan Update – EIS Scoping Comment
Comment No.
Commenter Comment Response
City of Pasco 2018 Comprehensive Plan Update – EIS Scoping Comment
Comment No.2 City of Pasco - Water
Given the proposed Land Use Amendment location is in
Zone 2, it essentially receives the majority of its water
directly from the East Side BPS, which is already starting to
get stressed (at least during the heavy processing months).
Residential developments may have a bigger impact on
peak flows in the morning and evening than an industrial
user might have.
The 2019 CWP states that the system has an existing
deficiency as of today. Either land use, industrial or
residential, would require mitigation. In the 2019 CWP
additional storage is accounted for by CIP #T-001 to make
up for the deficiency. Industrial fire flows generally require
4,000 gpm versus 1,500 gpm for residential; therefore,
residential has a less of an impact in regards to fire flows.
The City has recently allowed two large industrial
warehouse facilities to be constructed in this area despite
the existing deficiency. The proposed residential
development will be constructed in several phases thus the
overall impact will take several years to hit peak demand.
3 City of Pasco - Water
The City encourages the applicant to contact RH2
Engineering to ensure the appropriate evaluation and
potential impacts of the proposed amendment are known
based on the most recent data for water and sewer utilities.
Noted.
1 City of Pasco - Transportation
Page 62, Road 40 East is incorrectly referred to as East 40th
Avenue. Same issue on Page 3 in Appendix 3. Page 2 in
Appendix 3, similar issue where Road 40 East is referred to
as East 40th Street.
Updated in report.
2 City of Pasco - Transportation
Page 63 states 1,315 PM peak hour external trips are
generated by Alternative 1, but Table 20 and Table 3-1
shows 1,334 external trips.
Updated in report.
3 City of Pasco - Transportation
The analysis should consider the added traffic from the
industrial park Tarragon Pasco-111 to the east on Road 40
East, and additionally the new connection between Road 40
East and Heritage Boulevard. The new connection to Road
40 East may impact the 4% inbound and 3% outbound
traffic to US-12 east of A Street. Consider expanding the
scope of this analysis to include the intersections of Road
40 East & Sacajawea Park Road and US-12 & Sacajawea
Park Road/Tank Farm Road.
The Heritage Comprehensive Plan concept has been
discussed with the City of Pasco for more than two years.
Tarragon was not an approved development when earlier
drafts of the Heritage Comprehensive Plan amendment
were being prepared. Application for Comprehensive Plan
was submitted to the City back in May 2022. The City
provided a Scoping Summary on 8/23/2022 and the
Tarragon project was not included in this summary. The
DEIS was submitted to the City on 9/1/2022. The date of
the Tarragon MDNS was issued on 9/16/2022. Since the
Heritage Comprehensive Plan was submitted prior to the
Tarragon project the DEIS/EIS will not include Tarragons as
a part of the analysis.
Commenter Comment Response
City of Pasco 2018 Comprehensive Plan Update – EIS Scoping Comment
Comment No.4 City of Pasco - Transportation
Page 63 mentions acceptable LOS but the acceptable levels
of service are not defined in the document. What are the
acceptable LOS thresholds, which intersection types to they
apply to (AWSC, TWSC, Signal, etc.), and whose standards
are applied to each intersection (City of Pasco, Washington
State Department of Transportation, etc.)?
The EIS for the New Heritage Comprehensive Plan
amendment application prepared an analysis similar to that
performed for the City Comprehensive Plan. Detailed city-
wide turning movement volumes were not available for the
preparation of Comprehensive Plan, only roadway segment
volumes. Without turning movement volumes a detailed
traffic operations analysis that would provide accurate
intersection delay and Level of Service is not achievable.
Thus a planning level analysis was performed that estimates
whether an intersection would provide acceptable LOS or
likely need improvements.
LOS standards in the region are the same for all
jurisdictions and have been adopted region-wide by the
Benton Franklin Council of Governments, the standard is
LOS "D" in urban areas of the region.
5 City of Pasco - Transportation
The report covers PM peak hour analysis. Please confirm
why AM analysis was not performed for any portion of the
study area, including WSDOT facilities.
This EIS was performed in order to provide a comparison to
the existing City Comprehensive Plan which evaluated PM
peak hour conditions. The purpose of the EIS was to
provide decision-makers with information by which they
could tell if a change in allowed Land Use as identified in
the Comprehensive Plan would have significant impacts,
thus the methodology similar to that used in the
Comprehensive Plan was a reasonable approach and only
evaluated PM peak hour.
6 City of Pasco - Transportation Level of service calculations, analysis methodologies, traffic
volumes, and supporting documentation should be
included as technical appendices.
See response to comment 4 above for LOS calculations.
More detail with respect to the analysis methodology has
been added to Appendix 3.
7 City of Pasco - Transportation Page 65 refers to Alternative 2 as Medium Density
Alternative, but in other parts of the report (such as Page 7
in Appendix 3, or Table 3-1) it is referred to as Medium
Intensity, or Mixed Use. Use a consistent name for each
alternative.
Updated in report.
8 City of Pasco - Transportation Page 65 states 1,140 external trips are generated by
Alternative 2, but Table 20 and Table 3-1 shows 1,138
external trips. Additionally, this page states 56% of trips are
inbound but Table 3-1 shows 58% inbound when
calculated.
Updated in report.
9 City of Pasco - Transportation Page 66 states that the Comprehensive Plan does not
specify industrial land uses for the site. As mentioned
elsewhere in the report, the site is zoned 1-2 Medium
Industrial. This zoning designation has a defined set of
acceptable land uses. Revise this sentence to clarify the
zoning for the site and the associated restriction for
industrial land uses that are allowed.
Detailed information about the zoning is discussed in
section 6.4.1 of the EIS, including the uses allowed in the
Medium Industrial and Light Industrial zones. The zoning
for the site has been added to the sentence and a reference
to 6.4.1.
10 City of Pasco - Transportation Page 66 states 1,235 PM peak hour trips are generated by
Alternative 3, but Table 20 and Table 3-1 shows 1,237
external trips.
Updated in report.
Commenter Comment Response
City of Pasco 2018 Comprehensive Plan Update – EIS Scoping Comment
Comment No.11 City of Pasco - Transportation Is a v/c of 1.0 the threshold for mitigation? Or 0.70? It is not
clear what the target v/c is for roadway segments, if they
differ per functional classification, and whose standards are
being used (City of Pasco? BFCOG? WSDOT?).
An explanation of the methodology has been expanded in
Appendix 3.
12 City of Pasco - Transportation Mitigation measures in section 6.9.3 are specific to certain
intersections, please list or tabulate the intersections and
roadway segments that require mitigation for each
alternative.
Rather than list 16 stop controlled intersections and 13
signalized intersections, a shorter list of intersections in
addition to the 12 stop controlled and 10 signalized
intersections has been added after Table 21.
13 City of Pasco - Transportation Table 21 should also show the segment mitigation
improvement as it is included in Table 3-3 on page 9 of
Appendix 3.
This segment has been added to Table 21 as well as the list
of differences following Table 21.
14 City of Pasco - Transportation On Figure 8 (and related figures, including those at the end
of Appendix 3), please include a note for the segment
mitigation where US-12 ramp improvements are needed
per Table 3-3.
We believe that this is fairly represented in the V/C figures
that have been prepared and is not necessary. Per the
comments above, this segment has been added to Table 21
and the list of differences below Table 21.
15 City of Pasco - Transportation Appendix 3 page 2 states that traffic volumes for the 2018
year were collected by BFCOG. Are these segment volumes
or intersection turning movement counts? Include the
volumes in an appendix or plot them on a figure for review.
The BFCOG volumes were indeed segment volumes, which
are included in the Comprehensive Plan. See also the
response to comment 4.
16 City of Pasco - Transportation Appendix 3 page 2 states that capacities from the regional
model were used for each roadway. What are the capacities
for roadways? Do they depend on functional classification,
speed limits, presence of TWLTL, or other factors? A table or
general description of this information is needed.
An explanation of the methodology has been expanded in
Appendix 3.
17 City of Pasco - Transportation Appendix 3 page 2 states that an adjustment factor is
applied to the capacity of intersections. What are these
factors and how are they calculated? What was the base
assumed capacity of each type of intersection?
An explanation of the methodology has been expanded in
Appendix 3.
18 City of Pasco - Transportation Appendix 3 page 3 states that the same methodology for
planning level analysis was used as the Transportation
Element of the Comprehensive Plan. What is this
methodology? More detail is needed.
An explanation of the methodology has been expanded in
Appendix 3.
19 City of Pasco - Transportation
Does the BFCOG travel demand model contain population
and employment forecasts for 2038 (per Comprehensive
Plan) or 2040? The report seems to suggest 2040 is the
forecast year. Do all cities in the BFCOG area contain
updated 2040 population and employment forecasts?
Correct, the BFCOG model is a 2040 model. The consultant
team worked with City of Pasco staff to determine
appropriate assumptions for the year 2038 Land Use
section for the Comprehensive Plan updated. The
demographics in the regional model were updated to
reflect that for the City of Pasco only because the
Broadmoor area was significantly underrepresented. It was
determined working with BFCOG that the demographics for
other jurisdictions would not be undertaken at the time
because they were in the process of creating a 2045 model.
20 City of Pasco - Transportation The title for Table 3-1 should specify that the values shown
are for the PM peak hour only. Additionally, specify the
alternative numbers (1, 2, 3) for the column headers.
Updated in report.
Commenter Comment Response
City of Pasco 2018 Comprehensive Plan Update – EIS Scoping Comment
Comment No.21 City of Pasco - Transportation The trips for the preferred alternative on Table 3-1 are not
summed correctly. 867+660-213=1,314 not 1,334. Similar
issue with Alternative 2.
Updated in report.
22 City of Pasco - Transportation The trip distribution methodology described on page 5 of
Appendix 3 states that a cordon line around the study area
was used to measure existing volumes across the cordon
during the PM peak hour. This estimate may skew the
distribution towards regional travel patterns which may not
be the same between each alternative, as was mentioned in
the report on page 6 of Appendix 3 where the No Action
alternative is stated to have primarily employment trips
rather than residential or services in the other two
alternatives. A select-zone analysis would provide much
better accuracy for each alternative's trip distribution and
can be unique to each alternative (although Alternative 1
and 2 likely are similar enough to assume the same trip
distribution).
This may be true, however a select-zone analysis was not
performed for this analysis, rather the methodology was
used was described and some potential anomalies
identified. Trip distribution percentages are always an
estimate and provide an approximation of future trips by
which to perform an analysis. A slightly different set of
assumptions may (or may not) yield different results,
especially at a planning level analysis. This analysis was
performed to allow a comparison of the proposed Land Use
amendment to the Comprehensive Plan.
23 City of Pasco - Transportation
Appendix 3 page 8 states that more detailed analysis will be
performed with a development proposal. Is this referring to
the Traffic Impact Analysis, or does this refer to something
else?
A more detailed Traffic Impact Analysis will be required if
this request is approved and a more detailed proposal is
submitted by the developer. The current document is
planning level and provides a general overview of potential
issues/impacts with the change in land use from industrial
to mixed use.
24 City of Pasco - Transportation
Trip generation was performed using ITE's Trip Generation
Manual 10th Edition. This edition was deprecated in
September of 2021 with the release of the 11th Edition,
please update the trip generation accordingly.
This effort to evaluate the New Heritage change of Land
Use proposal began in 2019 when the 10th Edition of ITE
Trip Generation was current. It did not make sense to
spend the effort on reworking the entire analysis for a
potential change in trip generation of a few percentages of
trips when they are all estimates in the first place.
25 City of Pasco - Transportation An internal trip reduction was applied to all 3 alternatives.
How was this reduction calculated, using what
methodology and assumptions? Show supporting
documentation and detail the methodology.
A reasonable percentage of internal trips that would be
either trip chaining or carpooling was assumed for each of
the scenarios.
26 City of Pasco - Transportation Do the Comprehensive Plan v/c ratios at the end of
Appendix 3 show v/c results for 2038 or 2040? There is no
year in the figure title.
The Comprehensive Plan was prepared for year 2038
estimated traffic using a modified regional model.
27 City of Pasco - Transportation
A more readable method to show v/c impacts would be to
show the change in v/c between the Comprehensive Plan
and each of the 3 alternatives, highlighting changes that
exceed the target v/c. Consider adding this to the report.
Minor changes in V/C between scenarios are not
meaningful at this planning level of analysis. It was felt to
be more meaningful to show the V/C ratios in color coded
ranges. The differences between scenarios were noted in
tables and text summaries in the report.
Commenter Comment Response
City of Pasco 2018 Comprehensive Plan Update – EIS Scoping Comment
Comment No.1 City of Pasco
There were numerous references made on the potential use
of a Concomitant agreement in the DEIS. While this has
been used in the past, the PMC restricts the use to rezones,
and does not apply to Comprehensive Plan Land Use
Amendments.
This report is a non-project EIS and development standards
have not been identified at this time. The intent of the
concomitant agreement was to identify standards and
mitigation measures for future development of the site. It
has been identified that a GMA Development Agreement
would be a better tool for identifing future development
standards and mitigation in the future. At the time of
development, it is anticipated that a GMA Development
Agreement will be created to identify specific project
elements identified in Section 21.60.010 of the Pasco
Municipal Code. Additional SEPA review will be required at
the time of development, as well to identify specific
mitigation measures to ensue project concurrency. The
term "concomitant agreement" has been changed to "GMA
Developer Agreement" in places where the City Code was
not being quoted.
1 WSDOT
The DEIS identifies three alternatives, and we agree with its
conclusions that potential negative impacts will occur to
the state system, primarily at the US 12/A Street and
Sacagawea Park/Tank Farm intersections, and specific
mitigation measures to ensure concurrency would be
identified at the time of approval of a Land Subdivision and
Concomitant Agreement.
As subsequent developments are proposed, they will be
subject to review for their impacts to the state system. This
information is normally obtained through a Traffic Impact
Analysis (TIA) performed by the developer. Improvements
to offset the impacts of future development proposals must
be identified in the TIA. Developers will be responsible for
any mitigation necessary to offset significant adverse
impacts to the state highway system and we expect the city
to assess a pro rata share contribution from developers for
all other impacts.
Thank you for your comments. Future more detailed
analysis will be performed on a selected intersections if this
Comprehensive Plan Amendment request is approved.
The project proposed is bordered on 3 sides by Industrial
zoning and the North side, East A Street is the main truck
route access to the Industrial zone
East- ROJO Ventures with existing Industrial zone
businesses in place and the new Amazon distribution
centers
South- Industrial with recently constructed rail access
North- East A Street Arterial
1 ROJO Venture, L.L.C.
Comment Noted
Commenter Comment Response
City of Pasco 2018 Comprehensive Plan Update – EIS Scoping Comment
Comment No.2 ROJO Venture, L.L.C.
The DEIS does not include 2 large tracts to the South of the
proposal area that are under common ownership with the
proposal area. Common control should be addressed by the
DEIS. These parcels should be included in the DEIS area if
they may be added later. Or, the current zoning should be
reinforced, and buffer requirements addressed.
These tracks were not included in the requested Plan
Amendment and the Applicant has not identified any plan
to change these properties to residential. The DEIS does
indicate potential mitigation measures that would mitigate
impacts from these properties to the proposed residential
uses, including buffers, landscaping and fencing. In the
event that the applicant were to request a change to there
industrial properties in the future, additional SEPA analysis
would be required, including public notice..
3 ROJO Venture, L.L.C.
Approval of the proposal creates a Spot or Island zone
surrounded by Industrial activity creating areas of
incompatible zone interaction that will have to be
mitigated.
The area to the north is included in the City's
Comprehensive Plan for residential land uses and is
currently zoned for a mix of residential and commercial
uses. The proposal would be an extension of that zoning
classification and would therefore not create an "island" or
be considered a "spot zone". The DEIS does indicated
potential mitigation measures that would mitigate impacts
from these industrial properties to the proposed residential
uses, including buffers, landscaping and fencing.
4 ROJO Venture, L.L.C.
The change of zoning immediately adjacent to our Light
Industrial zoned property significantly affects the
development potential by forcing new development
requirements on our property (copied below from page 39
of DEIS). Parking lots within 500 feet of a C-2 district
boundary, provided such lots are paved and the development
complies with the landscape and fencing requirements of the
C-1 district, as enumerated in PMC 25.85.020(13). [Ord.
4110 § 23, 2013; Ord. 3354 § 2, 1999; Code 1970§
25.52.020.
That provision relates to a parking lot in a C-1 District
adjacent to a C-2 District. The proposed Comprehensive
Plan Amendment would change the property from Medium
Density Industrial to Mixed Use. This designation is
implemented under a range of zoning classifications as
identified under Section 25.215.015 of the Pasco City Code.
Specific land uses and their relation to abutting properties
and their specific impact to abutting properties cannot be
evaluated until a specific site plan had been proposed by
the applicant. Once a specific site plan is proposed, the
environmental impact of this proposed site plan will be
evaluated under future SEPA review and public notice will
be provided for comment., Additional mitigation measures
will be evaluated under the City's Zoning Code, Subdivision
Code and Building Permit requirements. The applicant may
also apply for a Planned Unit Development Permit for future
review.
5 ROJO Venture, L.L.C.East A Street is the only access designated in the proposal
to access the proposed Residential and Commercial area
emergency access to the area needs to be addressed should
East A Street become blocked. The potential blockage is
greater with the Industrial access route and of significant
consequence with the proposed school.
While primary emergency access would be by East A Steet,
additional access could be provided via Lewis Street to
either Heritage Blvd. or Cedar Avenue in the event of a
blockage on East A Street.
Commenter Comment Response
City of Pasco 2018 Comprehensive Plan Update – EIS Scoping Comment
Comment No.6 ROJO Venture, L.L.C.
The developer has designated nearly 10% of the project
area for schools but the school development is optional to
other parties. In the event the school district does not
develop the school the designated area reverts to the base
development; therefore traffic, services and other studies
should address the impacts both with and without schools.
The proposed Elementary School site was proposed as a
mitigation measure based on the projected school age
population generated by the proposed action. In the event
that the School District elects to not develop a school at
this site, no additional development could occur above the
density and intensity identified in the Preferred Alternative
without additional SEPA review and public notice.
7 ROJO Venture, L.L.C.
The City of Pasco needs to review the compatibility of their
planned sports complex with the proposed Residential
zone. A case in point is a similar project in Spokane, WA
that is being opposed by residents in the area
As noted, specific land uses and their relation to abutting
properties and their specific impact to abutting properties
cannot be evaluated until a specific site plan had been
proposed by the applicant. Once proposed, the
environmental impact of this proposed site plan will be
evaluated under future SEPA review and public notice will
be provided for comment., Additional mitigation measures
will be evaluated under the City's Zoning Code, Subdivision
Code and Building Permit requirements. The applicant may
also apply for a Planned Unit Development Permit for future
review.