HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-16-2008 Planning Commission Meeting Packet PLANNING COMMISSION - AGENDA
REGULAR MEETING 7:00 P.M. October 16, 2008
I. CALL TO ORDER:
II. ROLL CALL: Declaration of Quorum
III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Dated September 18, 2008
IV. OLD BUSINESS:
A. Rezone C-3 (General Business) to R-3 (Medium Density
Residential) (Beacon Development) (800 Block of N. Wehe
Ave.) (MF# Z 08-004)
V. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
A. Special Permit Water Treatment Plant in an R-S-12 District (City of
Pasco)(11300 Block W. Court St) (MF# SP 08-009)
B. Special Permit Location of a Church in a C-1 District (World Life Christian
Ctr.) (5252 Outlet Dr.) (MF# SP 08-008)
C. Preliminary Plat Heritage Village Phase 5, 15-Lots (Fastrack, INC.) (North
end of Rd 90) (MF# PP 08-002)
D. Preliminary Plat Three Rivers Crossing, 266-Lots (Hayden Enterprises, INC.)
(North of Three Rivers Dr/West of Rd 60) (MF# PP 08-003)
VI. WORKSHOP:
A. Corridors Plan Corridors and Gateways Plan) (City of Pasco) (MF# INFO
08-070 -)
VII.
VIII. OTHER BUSINESS:
IX. ADJOURNMENT:
REGULAR MEETING September 18, 2008
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
CALL TO ORDER:
The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman Todd Samuel.
POSITION MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT
No. 1 Todd Samuel, Chairman
No. 2 James Hay
No. 3 Andy Anderson
No. 4 David Little
No. 5 Joe Cruz
No. 6 Ray Rose
No. 7 Tony Schouviller
No. 8 Jana Kempf
No. 9 Vacant
APPEARANCE OF FAIRNESS:
Chairman Samuel read a statement about the appearance of fairness for
hearings on land use matters. Chairman Samuel asked if any Commission
member had anything to declare. No declarations were made.
Chairman Samuel then asked the audience if there were any objections based
on a conflict of interest or appearance of fairness questions regarding the items
to be discussed this evening. There were no objections.
Chairman Samuel asked the audience if there was an objection to either
commissioner hearing the matter. There were no objections from the audience.
ADMINISTERING THE OATH:
Chairman Samuel explained that state law requires testimony in quasi-judicial
hearings such as held by the Planning Commission be given under oath or
affirmation. Chairman Samuel swore in all those desiring to speak.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
Commissioner Little moved, seconded by Commissioner Cruz, that the minutes
dated August 21, 2008 be approved as mailed. The Motion carried unanimously.
-1-
OLD BUSINESS:
A. Special Permit Location of a New Middle School at the SW
corner of Road 52 & Powerline Road (Pasco
School District) (MF# SPOS-007)
Chairman Samuel read the master file number and asked for comments from
staff.
Staff made brief comments about the findings of fact and discussed some
clarifications in the recommended conditions of approval.
Chairman Samuel asked it the City Engineer had reviewed the proposal as far as
what utilities are needed and what costs would be associated with the project.
Staff explained the City Engineer had reviewed was still in the process of
reviewing utility plans and road construction plans for Road 52. Staff explained
both a water line and sewer line would be installed in Road 52. Road 52 would
be a fully constructed street as per the sales agreement between the property
owner and the Pasco School District. The cost of the street and utility
improvements are the responsibility of the Pasco School District. Any additional
requirements, such as the improvements along Powerline Road, would also be
the responsibility of the Pasco School District.
Chairman Samuel asked about the capacity of the proposed utilities to serve
other future housing developments.
Staff stated current utility lines particularly sewer do not have the capacity to
serve any future development north than Power Line Road.
Chairman Samuel stated the Pasco School District undertook an extensive
search to locate a parcel of land large enough to fit the needs of the District for
the new middle school. The Chairman also noted he recently toured School
Districts Facilities and stated the District was doing a remarkable job of
handling the overpopulation at several of their schools. The Chairman stated
there was a desperate need for more facility space.
Commissioner Kempf moved, seconded by Commissioner Anderson, the
Planning Commission adopt the Findings of Fact and conclusions as contained
in the September 18, 2008 staff report. The findings were unanimously
adopted.
Commissioner Kempf further moved, seconded by Commissioner Anderson,
based on the finding of fact as adopted, the Planning Commission recommend
the City Council grant a special permit to the Pasco School District for the
location of a new middle school at the southwest corner of Road 52 and Power
-2-
Line Road with conditions as contained in the September 18, 2008 staff report.
The motion was unanimously approved.
Staff noted this item would go to the City Council at their first regular meeting in
October. Staff briefly explained the appeal process.
B. Rezone C-1 (Retail Business) to B-P (Business Park)
(Rod McClaskey) (2701 W. Court)(MF# Z08-002)
Chairman Samuel read the master file number and stated this item had been
previously discussed at the last Planning Commission meeting. The Chairman
explained that due to the growing number of business vacancies along Court
Street on both sides of Highway 395 serious consideration was given to rezoning
the property from C-1 to B-P to attract new development and alleviate the
vacancies causing blight on the neighborhood.
Commissioner Hay moved, seconded by Commissioner Anderson, the Planning
Commission adopt the Findings of Fact as contained in the September 18, 2008
report. The Findings were unanimously adopted.
Commissioner Hay further moved, seconded by Commissioner Anderson, based
on the Findings of Fact as adopted, the Planning Commission recommend the
City Council rezone the site from C-1 (Retail Business) to B-P (Business Park).
The motion was unanimously adopted.
Staff noted this item would go to the City Council at their first regular meeting in
October. Staff briefly explained the appeal process.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
A. Rezone C-3 (General Business) to R-3 (Medium Density
Residential) (Beacon Development) (800 Block
of N. Wehe Street) (MF# Z08-004)
Chairman Samuel read the master file number and asked staff for comments.
Staff stated that a notice of the hearing was published in the newspaper and
mailed to surrounding property owners within 300 ft of the site. Staff explained
the rezone application and reviewed the significant changes that had taken place
in the neighborhood over the last 10 years. Noting a new elementary school, a
middle school, and two new subdivisions had been built in the neighborhood
with new homes and streets. The City also recently purchased more land to
upgrade and expand Highland Park.
Staff then reviewed the written report for the benefit of the Planning Commission
and pointed out the assessed value per capita in Pasco was lower than assessed
Richland and Kennewick and Pasco. With the property potentially being owned
by the Catholic Diocese of Spokane there was a concern about property taxes.
-3-
Staff recommended a condition be place on the rezone requiring the payment of
taxes.
Chairman Samuel asked if there were adequate utilities in the area.
Staff stated the utilities would need to be extended by the developer if a project
was to move forward.
Paul Purcell, 1221 East Pike St, Seattle, Beacon Development stated he
represented Beacon Development on behalf of Catholic Housing Services of
Eastern Washington. Mr. Purcell spoke in favor of the rezone. He stated
allowing this type of project meets goals of the City's Comprehensive Plan.
Mr. Purcell understood the need to extend the water/sewer lines
Mr. Purcell pointed out the Tepeyac Haven project on 22nd Avenue has been
awarded the first Gold Leed Certified Affordable Housing Project in the country.
It has been recognized nationally for the quality of construction and energy
efficiency. Mr. Purcell then briefly discussed the need for additional housing in
the community.
Chairman Samuel asked if there were future plans to develop more housing
projects with the City of Pasco.
Mr. Purcell stated no.
Chairman Samuel closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Little stated Tepeyac Haven had a very nice appearance and
mentioned the rezone should be conditioned related to the need to pay taxes.
Staff commented it would be added.
Commissioner Rose moved, seconded by Commissioner Cruz, to close the
hearing on the proposed rezone and initiate deliberations and schedule adoption
of Findings of Fact, Conclusions and a Recommendation to the City Council for
the October 16, 2008 meeting. The motion passed unanimously.
B. Code Amendment Critical Areas Ordinance (City of Pasco)
(MF# CA08-003)
Chairman Samuel read the master file number opened the hearing and asked
for comments from staff.
Staff explained the Growth Management Act (GMA) requires all cities in the state
to prepare a Critical Areas Ordinances to protect critical habitat areas and
property and life from geologic hazards areas. The GMA defines critical areas as
wetlands, aquifer recharge areas, fish and wildlife habitat areas, frequently
flooded areas and geologically hazardous areas.
-4-
Staff then reviewed the proposed code section by section for the benefit of the
Planning Commission. Chapter 28.04 explains the purpose and the intent of the
Critical Areas ordinance,. Chapter 28.08 contains a list of definitions. Chapter
28.12 contains general provisions and the remaining Chapters 28.16 through
28.32 contain the regulatory requirements for each type of critical area.
Staff noted the model ordinance contained 158 pages and the proposed code for
Pasco contained 48 pages.
Staff further explained following Planning Commission action the proposed code
would be sent off to the State for the required 60 day review period.
Commissioner Cruz asked what happens if the State does not make any
comment.
Staff commented that if there was no response, the ordinance could be adopted
by the City Council. If there are comments, it may need to be revised and
resubmitted. Benton City's ordinance was recently rejected by the Department of
Ecology and need to revise and resubmit.
Chairman Samuel opened the public hearing and after three calls with no
answer, the hearing was closed.
Chairman Samuel expressed concern about balancing the need to protect
critical areas with the importance of preserving public access and beneficial
economic use.
Staff further commented the economical use of property is addressed in the
purpose statement.
Chairman Samuel proposed adding to Chapter 28.04.020, that while balancing
and protecting the citizens access and beneficial use of the property by further
preserving and defining reasonable use and exemptions.
Commissioner Anderson was not in favor of modifying the proposed code.
Commissioner Cruz stated he was concerned the proposed addition might
provoke a response from the State; where as the current version would not.
Commissioner Rose asked if there were homeowners on the land along the
Columbia River Bend area designated as a critical area which might be affected.
Staff stated there are no homeowners in that area.
Commissioner Hay moved, seconded by Commissioner Kempf, the Planning
Commission recommend the City Council adopt the Critical Area regulations to
be codified as Title 28 of the Pasco Municipal Code. The motion was
unanimously approved.
-5-
With no further business, the Planning Commission was adjourned at 7:53 pm.
Respectfully submitted,
David McDonald, Secretary
-6-
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
MASTER FILE NO: Z 08-004 APPLICANT: Beacon Development
HEARING DATE: 09/18/08 2121 E. Pike St. # 300
ACTION DATE: 10/23/08 Seattle, WA 98122
BACKGROUND
REQUEST: Rezone from C-3 (General Business) to R-3 (Medium Density
Residential)
1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:
Legal: Block 2 8v 3 Freys Addition and adjoining vacated right-of-way
General Location: 800 Block of N. Wehe Ave
Property Size: Approximately 3.5 acres
2. ACCESS: The property has access from Spokane Street and Wehe
Avenue. (Portions of Spokane 8v Wehe are undeveloped.)
3. UTILITIES: Municipal utilities are available in Spokane Street.
4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The subject parcel is currently zoned C-3
(General Business) and is undeveloped. Surrounding properties to the
north and west are zoned C-3 and are undeveloped. The property to the
south is zoned R-1 (Low Density Residential) and developed with the
Whittier Elementary School. Properties to the east are zone R-1-A (Low
Density Residential Alternate) and developed with a couple of single
family dwellings. Highland Park Homes subdivision is located 350 feet to
the east.
5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan designates this area
for mixed residential development. Thorough the goals of the
Comprehensive Plan the City encourages housing for all economic segments
of the population (H-1), strives to maintain a variety of housing consistent
with the local and regional market (H-2), encourages housing design and
construction that ensure long-term sustainability and value (H-4), and
supports efforts to provide affordable housing to meet the needs of low and
mid-income households in the area (H-5).
6. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: This proposal has been issued a
determination of nonsignificance in accordance with review under the
State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), Chapter 43.21(c) RCW.
ANALYSIS/HISTORY
The applicant is seeking a rezone for the property in question from the current
C-3 zoning to R-3 zoning. The applicant proposes developing the two blocks in
question with multi-family uses. These parcels were originally platted as part of
the Freys Addition in 1891, 117 years ago, and have remained undeveloped
ever since that time. Rezoning the property appears to create an opportunity
for infill development. Infill development impacts the community in many
positive ways provided the development contributes to the cost of local
governmental services (City, County, and School District).
In an effort to encourage the property and other nearby properties to develop
the City formed an LID (Local Improvement District) in 2000 to extend utilities
and streets to portions of the Freys Addition. Spokane Street on the north side
of the site in question was included in that LID.
The purpose statement for the R-3 District contained in PMC 25.36 states
among other things that R-3 zoning is intended to allow for a gradual increase
in density from lower density development to high density development and can
provide a transition between different use areas (i.e. Between commercial and
lower density residential use). The proposed rezone would provide a transition
from the commercially zoned property to the east and north and the less
intense residential development to the south and east. Rezoning the property in
question to R-3 appears to be supported by the purpose statement of PMC
25.36.
The property also meets the locational criteria for development as identified in
the Comprehensive Plan. Utilities are available, the land is suitable for building
sites, more intense zoning is located to the north and west and less intensive
zoning is located to the south and east. The site is located functionally
convenient to two collector-type streets (Broadway and Salt Lake) which both
lead to Oregon Avenue.
The initial review criteria for considering a rezone application are explained in
PMC. 25.88.030. The criteria are listed below as follows:
1. The changed conditions in the vicinity which warrant other or additional
zoning:
• Whittier School was opened in 1998.
• Significant improvements have been made to Highland Park
located directly south of Whittier School in the last 15 years.
• The City purchased additional land to the west of Highland Park in
2008 for the purpose of expanding the park.
• Ochoa Middle School was opened on Sheppard Street in 2002.
2
• The Mesa Verde Subdivision was constructed in 2005 and now
contains 37 dwellings.
• Mesa Verde is located directly west of Ochoa Middle School.
• 85 new dwelling units have been constructed in the Highland Park
Homes Addition.
• Water and sewer utilities were installed in Spokane Street in 2000.
2. Facts to justify the change on the basis of advancing the public health,
safety and general welfare.
The rezone will enhance development opportunities that may lead to the
property being utilized for productive purposes. Development of the
property will eliminate illegal dumping on the property and will eliminate
fire hazards adjacent Whittier School. Developed properties contribute
more fully (through taxes, fees and licenses) to the funding of municipal
services thereby promoting the general welfare.
3. The effect it will have on the nature and value of adjoining property and
the Comprehensive Plan.
The proposed rezone is supported by the comprehensive plan and would
be considered a proper implementation of the plan. Rezoning the
property would benefit the nearby school and low density residential
areas by creating a transition of buffer area between commercial zoning
to the north and west and the residential zoning to the south and east.
4. The effect on the property owners if the request is not granted.
The proposed rezone may increase opportunities to lease or sell the
property and put the property into productive use. The property has
remained vacant for over 100 years.
5. The Comprehensive Plan land use designation for the property.
The Comprehensive Plan designates the site for mixed residential
development. The proposed rezone is for R-3 (Medium Density
Residential) which is consistent with the Plan.
INITIAL STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT
Findings of fact must be entered from the record. The following are initial
findings drawn from the background and analysis section of the staff report.
The Planning Commission may add additional findings to this listing as the
result of factual testimony and evidence submitted during the open record
hearing.
3
1) The site is zoned C-3 (General Business).
2) The Comprehensive Plan designates the site for Mixed Residential Uses.
3) The mixed residential land use designation per the "Description and
Allocation of Land Uses" chart of the Comprehensive Plan (page 17) can
include low density through medium density zoning
4) The applicant has applied for a R-3 Medium Density rezone
5) R-3 Zoning is consistent with the Comprehensive Land Use Designation
of commercial for the site.
6) The site was platted in 1891.
7) The site has remained undeveloped for over 100 years.
8) Whittier School, directly south of the site, was opened in 1998.
9) Ochoa Middle School was opened on Sheppard Street in 2002.
10) The Mesa Verde Subdivision was constructed in 2005 and now contains
37 dwellings.
11) 85 new dwelling units have been constructed in the Highland Park
Homes Addition.
12) The City purchased additional land to the west of Highland Park in 2008
for the purpose of expanding the park.
13) Pasco's assessed value per capita is only $47,532 verses $57,261 for
Kennewick and $77,680 for Richland.
14) It was reported to the Planning Commission in a previous hearing (MF#
04-128-Z) that the assessed value of the Pasco School District is
significantly lower than the values in the Kennewick and Richland School
Districts.
CONCLUSIONS BASED ON STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT
Before recommending approval or denial of a rezone the Planning Commission
must develop its conclusions from the findings of fact based upon the criteria
listed in P.M.C. 25.88.060. and determine whether or not:
(1) The proposal is in accord with the goals and policies of the
comprehensive plan.
4
The goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan encourage the
development of residential land uses on the site. The proposed
zoning district is residential in nature and supports the plan.
(2) The effect of the proposal on the immediate vicinity will not be
materially detrimental.
The property is currently vacant and has been since it was platted
over 100 years ago. Rezoning the property to R-3 will establish a
buffer area of higher density residential between the commercial
zoning to the east and north and the school and residential uses to
the east and south.
(3) There is merit and value in the proposal for the community as a
whole.
It is in the best interest of the community as a whole to encourage
development of the site. Through tax revenues, a developed and
occupied property fully contributes to funding of public safety,
schools, parks and other community services upon which all
residents rely.
(4) Conditions should be imposed in order to mitigate any significant
adverse impacts from the proposal.
The proposed rezone was applied for on behalf of the future owner of
the site, the Spokane Diocese of the Catholic Church. The Spokane
Diocese is the owner of the Tepecyac Haven on 22nd Avenue. During
the course of the 22nd Avenue hearing (MF# 04-128-Z) some concern
was raised over the issue of property taxes because of the non profit
nature of the church. Development of the site will create demands for
community services such as parks, schools and emergency services.
Without contributing to those costs future development of the site will
adversely impact the community. To mitigate those impacts a
concomitant agreement is needed.
(5) A concomitant agreement should be entered into between the City
and the petitioner, and if so, the terms and conditions of such an
agreement.
To ensure development on the property in question contributes to all
municipal and school district service costs a Concomitant Agreement
would be necessary.
5
Recommendation
MOTION: I move the Planning Commission adopt the Findings of Fact as
contained in the October 16, 2008 staff report.
MOTION: I move, based on the findings of fact as adopted, the Planning
Commission recommend the City Council rezone the site from C-3
(General Business) to R-3 (medium Density) with a condition
ensuring all development on the property pays property taxes.
MOTION: I move the Planning Commission adopt the Findings of Fact as
contained in the September 18, 2008 staff report.
MOTION: I move, based on the findings of fact as adopted, the Planning
Commission recommend the City Council rezone the site from C-3
(General Business) to R-3 (Medium density Residential) with the
following condition:
6
1) Any and all development located wholly or partially on this site
shall be subject to payment of property taxes or a PILOT
(payment in lieu of taxes) equal to the respective levees for the
City, Franklin County, the Port of Pasco and the Pasco School
District.
7
Vicinity Item Rezone from C-3 to R-3 Map
Applicant: Beacon Development N
File # : Z 08-004
AOOO
P
SITE - F
PARK VIEW BLVD
LU
l ri$t
�'. 3• ,
�y<
Ll
'" r "'
Land Use item : Rezone from C -3 to R-3
Applicant : Beacon Development - N
MAP File # : Z 08-004
Vacant 7z-
S?O,�NES�
, . . SITE
PARK VIEW BLVD
S F D U 's >
'�� School
Zoning Item : Rezone from C -3 to R-3
Applicant : Beacon Development - N
Map File # : Z 08-004
C=3 7Z
R= 1 =A
�\ � SPOU\NE
� SITE
- PARK VIEW BLVD
LU
C -3 R-1 5 R-2 R- 1
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
MASTER FILE NO: SP08-009 APPLICANT: City of Pasco (Public Works)
HEARING DATE: 10/16/08 525 N. Third Ave.
ACTION DATE: 11/20/08 Pasco, WA 99301
BACKGROUND
REQUEST: SPECIAL PERMIT: Location of the West Side Water Treatment
Plant. (11300 Block of West Court St)
1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:
Leal: Parcel # 118-180-181: A portion of the NW quarter of Section
18, Township 9 North, Range 29 WM; known as Parcel 2 of Boundary
Line Adjustment Survey recorded August 4, 2006 in Volume 2 of
Surveys, page 980 under Recording No. 1687409.
General Location: 11300 Block of West Court Street
Property Size: Approximately 5 acres
2. ACCESS: The site is adjacent to West Court Street
3. UTILITIES: Utility lines are located in West Court Street.
4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The site is currently zoned R-S-12
(Suburban Residential) and is vacant. The properties to the north and
east are zoned R-S-12. The area to the west in the County is R-T
(Residential Transition). The property on the south side of Court Street
is zoned R-S-20. Land use of the surrounding properties is as follows:
NORTH- Vacant farm field
SOUTH- Single-family dwellings
EAST- Single-family dwellings
WEST- I-182 and a farm field
S. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Comprehensive Plan goal UT-1 encourages
the provision of utility services within the UGA to assure anticipated
growth is accommodated over the next 20 years. The GMA mandate
related to utilities and public services as adopted in the City's
Comprehensive Plan (Vol. 1, Pg. 21) states that public facilities and
services necessary to support development shall be adequate to serve
development without decreasing current levels below locally
established standards. The Comprehensive Plan also encourages (CF-5)
the maintenance of an effective and cost efficient level of fire service.
An effective fire protection system is highly dependent upon a reliable
water system.
6. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The City of Pasco is the lead
agency for this project. Based on the SEPA checklist, the adopted City
Comprehensive Plan, City development regulations, and other
information, a threshold determination resulting in a Determination of
Non-significance (DNS) has been issued for this project under WAC
197-11-158.
DISCUSSION
The Public Works Department has applied for a special permit to locate and
develop new water treatment facility in the 11300 block of West Court Street.
With the rapid growth in West Pasco, and the future projected growth, there is
a need to provide expanded domestic water service for residential 8s commercial
purposes and for fire protection within the community.
Utility facilities such as water reservoirs and treatment facilities require
Planning Commission review through the special permit process prior to being
located anywhere within the city.
Since the year 2000 the city's population has increased by more than 20,000
people. Well over 50,000 people are now served by the City's water system. The
State Office of Financial Management has estimated Pasco could increase in
size by another 30,000 people by the year 2027. Continued population growth
will create the need for additional water service and fire protection. The City is
responsible for planning and providing municipal utilities within the
boundaries of the Pasco Urban Growth Area. The City is required by the
Growth Management Act to plan for population increases as estimated by the
State Office of Financial Management.
The current Butterfield Water Plant was constructed in 1949 and has been
expanded several times. The plant has a maximum pumping capacity of 30
million gallons per day. The reliable plant capacity is 28 million gallons per
day (MGD). In 2008 the average summertime peak demand was 20.2 MGD.
On occasion water demand has reached the reliable plant capacity of 28 MGD.
Increasing the size of the Butterfield Plant would be costly and would require
increasing the transmission line size and capacity of the piping leaving the
plant. According to the City of Pasco West side Treatment Plant—Feasibility
Assessment 8v Conceptual Design Report 9/2008, pipeline size and capacity
would also need to be increased for the transmission lines extending to the
west side of the City, were the water would be needed.
2
The proposed project involves the construction of a 75' by 160' treatment
building and a 1.5 million gallon reservoir on half of the five acre site. The
plant will be screened with a six-foot block wall.
STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT
Findings of fact must be entered from the record. The following are initial
findings drawn from the background and analysis section of the staff report
and comments made at the public hearing. The Planning Commission may
add additional findings as deemed appropriate.
1) The site is located in an R-S-12 zone.
2) The site is in the Pasco UGA.
3) The site is currently vacant and owned by the City of Pasco.
4) Comprehensive Plan goal UT-1 encourages the provision of utility
services within the UGA to assure anticipated growth is accommodated
over the next 20 years.
5) The GMA mandate related to utilities and public services as adopted in
the City's Comprehensive Plan (Vol. I, Pg. 21) states that public facilities
and services necessary to support development shall be adequate to
serve development without decreasing current levels below locally
established standards.
6) The Comprehensive Plan encourages (CF-5) the maintenance of an
effective and cost efficient level of fire service. An effective fire protection
system is highly dependent upon a reliable water system.
7) The city has grown by 22,290 new residents since the year 2000.
8) The Department of Financial Management estimates Pasco's population
will increase by another 30,000 people by the year 2027.
9) The Butterfield Treatment Plant has a peak capacity to produce 30 MGD.
10) Peak day demand has been as high as 28 MGD.
11) The reliable plant capacity of the Butterfield Plant is 28 MGD.
12) Over ninety percent of the new residential growth since the year 2000
has occurred west of Rd 36.
13) The Pasco Urban Growth Boundary was expanded west of Rd 68 and
north to Dent Rd to accommodate projected growth.
14) The most significant parcels of land still available for residential
development within the city are located west of Rd 68.
3
15) The City currently has a raw water intake facility on the north side of the
Richland Bridge.
16) The raw water intake is approximately 700 feet from the city owned site
on West Court Street.
17) There is an overhead power line fronting the property along Court Street.
18) Eight large homes are located adjacent the site or directly across Court
Street.
CONCLUSIONS BASED ON STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT
Before recommending approval or denial of a special permit the Planning
Commission must draw its conclusion from the findings of fact based upon the
criteria listed in P.M.C. 25.86.060. The criteria and staff listed conclusions are
as follows:
(I) Will the proposed use be in accordance with the goals, policies, objectives
and text of the Comprehensive Plan?
The proposed use supports plan policies or goals as follows:
(a.) Comprehensive Plan goal UT-1 encouraging the provision of
utility services within the UGA to assure anticipated growth is
accommodated over the next 20 years.
(b.) GMA mandates related to utilities and public services as adopted
in the City's Comprehensive Plan (Vol. I, Pg. 21) stating that
public facilities and services necessary to support development
shall be adequate to serve development without decreasing
current levels below locally established standards.
(c.) The Comprehensive Plan also encourages (CF-5) the maintenance
of an effective and cost efficient level of fire service. An effective
fire protection system is highly dependent upon a reliable water
system.
(2) Will the proposed use adversely affect public infrastructure?
Under the current zoning the site could be developed with 13 single-
family dwellings. The proposed water plant will create far less
demand on the City's utility system than 13 homes.
The proposed water plant and storage reservoir will have a positive
effect on the City's water system in that it is an improvement to public
infrastructure. The reliability and safety of the City water system and
fire protection system will be maintained and the City will be able to
4
provide for increased water service needs to support projected
population growth.
(3) Will the proposed use be constructed, maintained and operated to be in
harmony with existing or intended character of the general vicinity?
Utility equipment, substations, booster stations, lift stations and
major reservoirs are all found within or near residential areas of
Pasco. Other water related utility facilities within the community
(Butterfield Water Plant, the 10,000,000 gallon reservoir in Desert
Plateau, the Road 68 water towers 8v the Broadmoor reservoir) are all
located in or next to residential zoning districts.
The proposed water plant will be constructed on the north half of the
proposed site leaving an expansive lawn area fronting on court Street.
The plant will be screened with a block wall and the building will be
finished in earth tone colors to blend with the surrounding residential
structures.
The treatment portion of the plant will be totally enclosed in a
building thereby shielding the neighborhood from much of the
operational aspects of the plant. Compared with the 130 daily vehicle
trips that would be generated by 13 single-family homes on the site,
traffic will be minimal—perhaps less than 20 trips per day.
(4) Will the location and height of proposed structures and the site design
discourage the development of permitted uses on property in the general
vicinity or impair the value thereof?
The R-S-12 zoning district permits houses to be built to a height of 35
feet. The proposed plant will be approximately 35 feet in height. The
operation of other water related facilities within residential districts
has not discouraged development on nearby properties. Broadmoor
Estates was constructed after the Broadmoor reservoir was
constructed and the Desert Plateau River Heights neighborhood was
developed after the construction of the 10,000,000 gal reservoir. The
development of Wilson Meadows on Road 108 was not diminished or
limited by the fact that the Road 108 public works yard and irrigation
pumping station is nearby.
(5) Will the operations in connection with the proposal be more objectionable to
nearby properties by reason of noise, fumes, vibrations, dust, traffic, or
flashing lights than would be the operation of any permitted uses within the
district?
5
The water plant will be enclosed in a building that provides sound
proofing and visual protection to the neighborhood. The plant will
generate significantly less traffic than other permitted uses within the
district.
(6) Will the proposed use endanger the public health or safety if located and
developed where proposed, or in anyway will become a nuisance to uses
permitted in the district?
The water plant will improve the general welfare of the community by
increasing the capacity of both the water system and the fire
protection system of the City. The plant's enclosure within a building
surrounded by a block wall and the landscaping are all design
features utilized to ensure the proposed water plant will not become a
nuisance to surrounding uses.
APPROVAL CONDITIONS
1) The special permit shall be personal to the applicant.
2) The site shall be developed in substantial conformity with the site plan
and building elevations submitted with the special permit application.
3) The access roadway from Court Street to the Plant must be hard
surfaced.
4) The area of the site between the block wall and Court Street shall be
irrigated and planted in lawn.
5) Six large growing deciduous trees (Oak, Maple, Walnut, Linden etc) shall
be planted in the lawn area to create a visual buffer to the plant and
reservoir.
6) On site drainage facilities shall be provided to prevent storm water run
off and irrigation run off from entering Court Street and sheeting across
Court Street onto the adjacent residential properties.
7) The plant shall be design to meet the I-182 Corridor architectural
standards of PMC 25.58.
8) The block wall shall be an architectural block wall.
9) All onsite generators shall be screened and muffled to prevent noise
intrusion onto adjoining residential properties above noise levels
prescribed in the PMC 9.61.
10) Testing of generators shall not occur on weekends or between 5:00 pm
and 8:00 am.
6
11) The overhead power lines along Court Street shall be undergrounded
with the development of the water plant.
12) The special permit shall be null and void if a building permit has not
been obtained by December 8, 2010.
RECOMMENDATION
Motion: I move to close the hearing on the proposed water
plant and initiate deliberations and schedule adoption
of findings of fact, conclusions and a recommendation
to the City Council for the November 20, 2008
meeting.
7
Vicinity Item Rezone from C-3 to R-3 Map
Applicant: Beacon Development N
File # : Z 08-004
AOOO
P
SITE - F
PARK VIEW BLVD
LU
l ri$t
�'. 3• ,
�y<
Ll
'" r "'
Land Use item : Rezone from C -3 to R-3
Applicant : Beacon Development - N
MAP File # : Z 08-004
Vacant 7z-
S?O,�NES�
, . . SITE
PARK VIEW BLVD
S F D U 's >
'�� School
Zoning Item : Rezone from C -3 to R-3
Applicant : Beacon Development - N
Map File # : Z 08-004
C=3 7Z
R= 1 =A
�\ � SPOU\NE
� SITE
- PARK VIEW BLVD
LU
C -3 R-1 5 R-2 R- 1
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
MASTER FILE NO: SP 08-008 APPLICANT: World Life Christian Ctr.
HEARING DATE: 10-16-08 732 W. 19th Avenue
ACTION DATE: 11-20-08 Kennewick, WA 99337
BACKGROUND
REQUEST FOR SPECIAL PERMIT: Location of a Church in a C-1 District
1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:
Legal: Parcel # 115-502-016: a portion of the South half of Section 8,
Township 9 North, Range 29 WM;
General Location: 5252 Outlet Dr.
Property Size: Approximately 11 acres
2. ACCESS: The site has access from Sandifur Parkway by way of Outlet
Dr.
3. UTILITIES: Municipal water and sewer are available to the site from the
right-of-way adjacent to the south line of the property. The property is
not currently connected to City utilities.
4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The property is currently zoned C-1 (Retail
Business) All surrounding property is zoned C-1 and undeveloped.
S. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The site is designated in the Plan for future
commercial uses. The plan does not specifically address churches, but
elements of the plan encourage the promotion of orderly development
including the development of zoning standards for off-street parking and
other development standards.
6. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: This proposal has been issued a
Determination of Nonsignificance in accordance with review under the
State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), Chapter 43.21 (c) (RCW).
ANALYSIS
The application involves the use of three suites in the Broadmoor Outlet Mall
for church activities.
The Outlet Mall contains over 103,000 square feet of floor space. Currently
only 37,000 square feet of the mall is occupied. There are seven businesses, a
1
Mini Police Station and the Children's Museum within the occupied space.
Sixty-five percent of the mall is vacant.
The proposed church has signed a three year lease for 11,720 square feet of
floor area. The church site is located in the northwest corner of the Outlet
Complex. The church plans to hold services on Wednesday evenings from 6:30
pm to 9:00 pm and on Sunday mornings from 8:00 am to 1:00 pm. During the
week the church office will be open during regular office hours.
The lease agreement requires the church to participate in all common area
charges shared by all lessees within the mall. The lease agreement is for a
period of three years.
The proposed church location has parking to the east, west and north.
The outlet mall was constructed to meet building code requirements for retail
activities. Places of religious worship are classified in the building code as "A"
occupancies. When a building is changed from one occupancy class to another
(from an "M" [Mercantile] to an "A" [Assembly] for example) the building is
required to meet life/safety standards required for the new occupancy
classification. If a portion of the 11,720 square feet is devoted to office space
and classrooms there will likely be enough square footage for 400 people to
congregate in a sanctuary area.
To meet the "A" occupancy requirements proper exiting, exit signage,
emergency lighting, occupancy separation walls (between retail space and
church space), additional restroom facilities and fire sprinklers may be
required by the building code. These requirements are all based on the
occupant load of the building.
The "A" occupancy requirements of the building code have been developed from
years of experience with places of assembly and have been enacted to promote
the life, safety, and protection of people occupying churches and other
gathering places.
Another potential problem with a church locating in a commercial area is the
fact that some retail establishments or restaurants sell or serve liquor. The
issue is typically addressed by placing a condition on the Special Permit
approval limiting the church's ability to object to a liquor license.
INTIAL STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT
Findings of fact must be entered from the record. The following are initial
findings drawn from the background and analysis section of the staff report.
The Planning Commission may add additional findings to this listing as the
2
result of factual testimony and evidence submitted during the open record
hearing.
1. Churches are unclassified uses and require review through the special
permit process prior to locating or expanding in any zoning district.
2. The proposed church site is zoned C-1.
3. The proposed site is located at 5252 Outlet Drive.
4. The site was originally developed as the Broadmoor Outlet Mall.
5. The Outlet Mall contains over 103,000 square feet of floor area.
6. Sixty-five percent of the outlet mall is vacant.
7. Eight suites of the mall are occupied.
8. The old furniture store portion of the mall (Co2) is currently occupied by
a seasonal costume store.
9. The church proposes to lease 11,720 square feet of floor space.
10. Churches are classified as an "A" occupancy under the International
Building Code.
11. Half of the leased space is large enough to hold 400 people.
12. The Municipal Code (PMC 25.78.170) requires one off-street parking
space for every 10 lineal feet of bench (pew) seating or one space for every
4 chairs in a church.
13. Based on the occupancy loading of 400 people, 100 parking spaces
would be required.
14. The current area available for parking improvements will only allow the
church to accommodate 28 members.
15. The mall was designed and built for "M" occupancy loads.
16. "A" occupancy building design standards are different than the "M"
occupancy standards.
17. The church lease is for a three year period.
TENTATIVE CONCLUSIONS BASED ON
INITIAL STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT
Before recommending approval or denial of a special permit the Planning
Commission must develop findings of fact from which to draw its conclusion
based upon the criteria listed in P.M.C. 25.86.060. and determine whether or
not the proposal:
(1) Will the proposed use be in accordance with the goals, policies, objectives
and text of the Comprehensive Plan?
3
The plan does not specifically address churches, but elements of the plan
encourage the promotion of orderly development including the
development of zoning standards for off-street parking and other
development standards.
(2) Will the proposed use adversely affect public infrastructure?
The outlet mall was designed to handle significant traffic with a large
parking lot and interior circulation. The proposed church will conduct
services at times when other mall traffic is generally low and utility usage
is low.
(3) Will the proposed use be constructed, maintained and operated to be in
harmony with existing or intended character of the general vicinity?
The proposed church will be located in the Broadmoor Outlet Mall and
no exterior changes are planned to the building. The current store front
character will be maintained. The church will participate in common
area maintenance costs to maintain the common area of the mall. The
current lease proposal is for a three year period giving the mall owner the
option of terminating the lease after three years if demand for retail
space in the mall improves.
(4) Will the location and height of proposed structures and the site design
discourage the development of permitted uses on property in the general
vicinity or impair the value thereof
The proposed church will be located in part of an existing outlet mall and
no structures will be built or added to the mall. The site design will
remain unchanged. The church will be paying market rent and will be
responsible for common area charges like all tenants of the mall.
(5) Will the operations in connection with the proposal be more objectionable to
nearby properties by reason of noise, fumes vibrations, dust, traffic, or
flashing lights than would be the operation of any permitted uses within the
district?
The church will generate no more dust, vibrations, flashing lights or
fumes than would be expected by permitted retail uses of the zoning
district. Traffic generated by the church will occur mostly on Sunday
mornings when mall traffic is minimal. Wednesday evening church
activities generally generate less traffic than Sunday morning meetings.
(6) Will the proposed use endanger the public health or safety if located and
developed where proposed, or in anyway will become a nuisance to uses
permitted in the district?
4
Churches are generally accepted uses in or near residential
neighborhoods. Past history of church operations within the City has
shown they do not endanger public health or safety and are generally
not nuisance generators.
TENTATIVE APPROVAL CONDITIONS
1) The special permit shall be personal to the applicant;
2) The parking lot in the rear of the building must be hard surfaced;
3) The space leased to the church must comply with all requirements of the
International Building Code for an "A" occupancy prior to occupancy by
the church;
4) The store front appearance of the leased space can not be altered except
as needed to comply with building code exiting requirements;
5) The building including entrances and restrooms must be ADA/handicap-
compliant prior to occupancy by the church;
6) Occupancy of the building for church purposes will not be permitted
until the church complies with all conditions listed above;
7) The church shall not object to the transfer, renewal or issuance of a
liquor license for an existing or new establishment within 1,000 feet of
the property;
8) The special permit shall be valid for a period of three years only and shall
terminate on December 8, 2011.
RECOMMENDATION
Motion: I move to close the hearing on the proposed water
plant and initiate deliberations and schedule adoption
of findings of fact, conclusions and a recommendation
to the City Council for the November 20, 2008
meeting.
5
Vicinity Item Rezone from C-3 to R-3 Map
Applicant: Beacon Development N
File # : Z 08-004
AOOO
P
SITE - F
PARK VIEW BLVD
LU
l ri$t
�'. 3• ,
�y<
Ll
'" r "'
Land Use item : Rezone from C -3 to R-3
Applicant : Beacon Development - N
MAP File # : Z 08-004
Vacant 7z-
S?O,�NES�
, . . SITE
PARK VIEW BLVD
S F D U 's >
'�� School
Zoning Item : Rezone from C -3 to R-3
Applicant : Beacon Development - N
Map File # : Z 08-004
C=3 7Z
R= 1 =A
�\ � SPOU\NE
� SITE
- PARK VIEW BLVD
LU
C -3 R-1 5 R-2 R- 1
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
MASTER FILE NO: PP 08-002 APPLICANT: Fastrack, Inc.
HEARING DATE: 10/16/08 8211 Hudson Dr
ACTION DATE: 11/20/08 Pasco, WA 99301
BACKGROUND
REQUEST: Preliminary Plat - Heritage Village Phase 5 (15-Lots)
1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:
Leal: Lot 1, Coles Estates
General Location: North end of Rd 90 west of Heritage Village Phase 3
Property Size: 4.69 Acres
Number of Lots Proposed: 15 single-family lots
Square Footage range of Lots: 9,100 sq. ft. to 14,956 sq. ft.
Average Lot Square Footage: 10,524 sq. ft.
2. ACCESS: The property has access from La Salle Dr. and Road 90
3. UTILITIES: All municipal utilities are available to the site
4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The site is zoned R-1 (Low density
Residential) with restrictions requiring minimum lot size of 8,500
square feet. Properties to the north in the county are zoned AP-20
(Agricultural Production) Properties directly to the south in the City are
zoned R-1. The subdivisions to the east, west and south are zoned R-1
(Low Density Residential) Residential). Land use of the surrounding
properties is as follows:
NORTH- Farm circle
SOUTH- Vacant
EAST- Heritage Village subdivision (single family)
WEST- Broadmoor Estates subdivision (single family)
5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan indicates the site
is intended for low density residential development. According to the
Comprehensive Plan low density residential means 2 to 5 dwelling
units per acre. The criteria for allocation under the future land use
section of Volume II of the Comprehensive Plan (Vol. II, page 17)
encourages development of lands designated for residential uses when
or where; sewer is available, land is suitable for home sites, and when
I
there is a market demand. Policy H-1-E encourages the advancement
of home ownership and Goal H-2 suggests the City strive to maintain a
variety of housing options for residents of the community. Goal LU-2
encourages the maintenance of established neighborhoods and the
creation of new neighborhoods that are safe and enjoyable places to
live.
6. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: This proposal has been
issued a determination of non-significance in accordance with review
under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), Chapter 43.21(c)
RCW.
ANALYSIS
The City's land use plans for the last 25-30 years have indicated the property
in question should be utilized for low-density (single family) residential
development. Even though the site was originally platted as part of the Coles
Estates in 1967, it has never been developed. Heritage Village, Broadmoor
Estates, Mediterranean Villas and Vintage Village have all developed around or
near the site in the last few years. The proposed plat can be considered an
infill project that utilizes land within the Pasco Urban Growth Boundary that
was previously bypassed (skipped over) by development.
The applicant is proposing to subdivide the site into 15 single-family lots. The
proposal calls for the development of single-family lots that are similar in size
to the lots in Broadmoor Estates and a little larger than the lots in Heritage
Village. The average lot size in the proposed subdivision is 10,524 square feet.
LOT LAYOUT: The proposed plat contains 15 lots meeting or exceeding the R-
1 zoning requirements imposed by the ordinance that rezoned the property
from R-T to R-1.
RIGHTS-OF-WAY: All lots have adequate frontage on streets that will be
dedicated.
UTILITIES: The developer will be responsible for extending the water lines,
sewer lines and other utilities into the plat. A utility easement will be needed
along the first 10-15 feet of all lots. An additional easement will be required
along the south 20 feet of lots 4 and 15 for the temporary looping of the
domestic water system and the temporary connection of the sewer system. This
easement will be vacated once the temporary connections are removed. The
final location and width of the easements will be determined during the
engineering design phase. The front yard setbacks for construction purposes
are larger than the requested easements; therefore the front yard easements
will not encroach upon the buildable portions of the lots.
2
The City Engineer will determine the specific placement of fire hydrants and
streetlights when construction plans are submitted. As a general rule, fire
hydrants are located at street intersections and at a maximum of 600-foot
intervals and streetlights are located at street intersections and at 300-foot
intervals on residential streets.
Sewer service will be required to come from the west and south and not from
La Salle Drive.
STREET NAMES: The proposed street names match the names of
surrounding streets.
IRRIGATION: The Municipal Code requires the installation of irrigation lines
as a part of infrastructure improvements.
WATER RIGHTS: The assignment of water rights is a requirement for
subdivision approval. If no water rights are available to transfer to the City the
property owner/developer must pay a water right fee of $1,500 per acre in lieu
thereof. The Public Works Director may waive the fee if the developer mixes a
soil additive in the ground that provides 30% retention of irrigation water.
FINDINGS OF FACT
State law (RCW 58.17.010) and the Pasco Municipal code require the Planning
Commission to develop Findings of Fact as to how this proposed subdivision
will protect and enhance the health, safety and general welfare of the
community. The following is a listing of proposed "Findings of Fact":
Prevent Overcrowding: Minimum lot sizes of 9,100 square feet or greater will
address the overcrowding concern by providing manageable lots and usable
open spaces. R-1 zoning requires a 20 foot front yard set back and no more
than 40 percent lot coverage providing for open space on the lots.
Parks Opens Space/Schools: The subdivision is too small for the requirement
for a neighborhood park. A fee in lieu of land dedication will be required.
Effective Land Use/Orderly Development: The plat is laid out to effectively
utilize the site consistent with surrounding residential development. The site is
within the Pasco Urban Growth boundary and the development will occur on
land previously skipped over by past development. This development would be
considered an infill project.
Safe Travel 8v Walking Conditions: The plat provides connections to the
community by way of local access streets. Sidewalks are required to be
installed when homes are built.
3
Adequate Provision of Municipal Services: Municipal water and sewer lines will
be extended to the plat from nearby lines. All utility lines will be sized and
installed to meet the standard specification of the City.
Provision of Housing for State Residents: This preliminary plat will provide 15
lots for the construction of new dwellings for Pasco residents.
Adequate Air and Light: The lot sizes and maximum lot coverage limitations will
assure the adequate movement of air and light is available to each lot.
Proper Access 8v Travel: The access street in the plat will be paved and
developed to City standards to assure proper access is maintained to each lot.
Connections to the community will be provided by local streets. The
preliminary plat was submitted to the Transit Authority for review. No
comments were received from the Transit Authority.
Comprehensive Plan Policies 8s Maps: The Comprehensive plan designates the
site for low-density residential development. Policies of the plan encourage the
advancement of home ownership and suggest the City strive to maintain a
variety of housing of residents.
Other Findings: (list additional finds as appropriate)
1) The property is zoned R-1 which is identical to the zoning of adjacent
subdivisions.
2) Heritage Village Phase 3 is located to the east.
3) Broadmoor Estates Phases 4 Sv5 are located to the west and south.
4) The Comprehensive Plan encourages the interconnection of
neighborhood streets.
5) Streets in the proposed subdivision will connect to existing and proposed
neighborhood streets.
6) The proposed plat will allow the interconnection and looping of utilities.
7) The site is currently vacant.
8) The site is within the Pasco UGA.
9) Each lot developed within the I-182 corridor is required by code to pay a
traffic mitigation fee of$300.
10) Comprehensive Plan Policy LU-3-C encourages development to expand in
a progressive and efficient manner.
11) Comprehensive Plan Policy H-3-B encourages the advancement of
homeownership.
12) Comprehensive Plan Policy H-2 suggests the city strive to maintain a
variety of housing options for residents of the community.
13) Comprehensive Plan Policy H-1-B supports the protection and
enhancement of the established character of viable residential
neighborhoods.
4
CONCLUSIONS BASED ON STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT
Before recommending approval or denial of the proposed plat the Planning
Commission must develop findings of fact from which to draw its conclusion
(P.M.C. 26.24.070) there from as to whether or not:
1) Adequate provisions are made for the public health, safety and
general welfare and for open spaces, drainage ways, streets, alleys,
other public ways, water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks, playgrounds,
transit stops, schools and school grounds, sidewalks for safe walking
conditions for students and other public needs;
The proposed plat will be required to develop under the standards of
the municipal code and standard specifications of the City
Engineering Department. These standards were designed to ensure
the public health; safety and general welfare of the community are
secured. These standards include provisions for streets, drainage,
water and sewer service and funding for park lands. This preliminary
plat has been forwarded to the Franklin County PUD, the Pasco
School District and Ben-Franklin Transit Authority for review and
comment.
2) The proposed subdivision contributes to the orderly development
and land use patterns in the area;
The proposed plat is located on a site that has been skipped over by
development. The development is an infill project that makes efficient
use of vacant land that was passed over by previous development.
3) The proposed subdivision conforms to the policies, maps and
narrative text of the Comprehensive Plan;
The Comprehensive Plan land use map designates the site for low
density residential development. Low density development is described
as 2 to 5 single-family units per acre in the Comprehensive Plan. The
Policies of the plan encourage the advancement of home ownership (H-3-
B). Plan Goal H-2 suggests the City strive to maintain a variety of
housing options for residents of the community while Plan Policy H-1-B
supports the protection and enhancement of the established character of
viable residential neighborhoods.
5
4) The proposed subdivision conforms to the general purposes of any
applicable policies or plans which have been adopted by the City
Council;
Development plans and policies have been adopted by the City Council
in the form of the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed subdivision
conforms to the policies, maps, and narrative text of the Plan as noted in
number three above.
5) The proposed subdivision conforms to the general purposes of the
subdivision regulations.
The general purposes of the subdivision regulations have been
enumerated and discussed in the staff analysis and findings of fact.
The findings of fact indicate the subdivision is in conformance with the
general purposes of the subdivision regulations.
6) The public use and interest will be served by approval of the
proposed subdivision.
The proposed plat, if approved, will be developed in accordance with all
City standards designed to insure the health, safety and welfare of the
community are met. The Comprehensive Plan will be implemented
through development of this plat. These factors will ensure the public
use and interest is served.
TENTATIVE PLAT APPROVAL CONDITIONS
1) The horizontal layout of the knuckles on Somerset Lane and
Westmoreland Lane shall not be permitted. The reverse curve in
the right of way line is not allowed. The final plat layout must not
contain the reverse curve in the right of way.
2) A temporary turn around easement must be created at the ends of
Somerset Land and Westmoreland Lane. The easement must be
on the developer property and the turnaround must be to City of
Pasco Standards. The turnaround must be surfaced with a 2 inch
layer of asphalt placed on a 4 inch base rock.
3) At the time lots are developed all abutting roads and utilities shall
be developed to City standards as approved by the City Engineer.
This includes but is not limited to water, irrigation and sewer lines,
streets, street lights and storm water retention. Sidewalks must be
installed no later than the time each lot is developed with a house.
6
The handicapped accessible pedestrian ramps must be completed
with the street and curb improvements prior to final plat approval.
All existing and proposed utilities must be installed underground
by the developer at the developer's expense. The temporary water
and sewer mains along the southerly portion of lots 4 and 15 must
be installed and removed at the developer's expense. The
developer will also be responsible to make the necessary repairs to
the landscaping, curb, gutter sidewalk, and paving as a result of
removing the temporary mains.
4) All streets are to be developed to City Standards and/or as directed
by the City Engineer. Street grades for all arterial and collector
roads shall not exceed 6 percent. Interior local access street
grades shall not exceed 10 percent. All intersections will require
setback lines for appropriate sight distances. No fences, utility
vaults or pedestals, or other obstructions will be allowed in this
area. Approaches to intersecting interior streets shall not exceed 2
percent and any street intersecting an arterial or collector street
shall be zero (0) percent coming out of the toe of the
arterial/collector street slope. All temporary streets will be
required to have a paved turn around (2 inch pavement on 4
inches of rock base) at the end of the street to the satisfaction of
the City Engineer.
5) The developer/builder shall pay the City a "common area
maintenance fee" of$300 per lot upon issuance of building permits
for homes. These funds shall be placed in a fund and used to
finance the maintenance of Boulevard landscaping.
6) The developer/builder shall pay the City a "traffic mitigation fee"
per the Municipal Code.
7) The developer shall install a common Estate type fence 6 feet in
height adjacent the north line of lots 9 to 11. The City may make
repairs or replace the fencing as needed. Property owners
adjoining said fence shall be responsible for payment of all costs
associated with maintenance and upkeep of the fencing. These
fencing requirements shall be noted clearly on the face of the final
plat(s).
8) The developer shall be responsible for all costs associated with
plan review and construction inspection service expenses incurred
by the City of Pasco Engineering Department.
9) The developer will be required to provide a deposit to the City of
Pasco to allow the City of Pasco to hire a surveying company to
perform topographic surveys of the constructed utilities including
manhole lids and flow line elevations, location of sewer stubs,
water valves, water meters, irrigation valves, irrigation services,
7
storm water catch basins, street lights, fire hydrants, monuments
and other pertinent information deemed necessary, to the
satisfaction of the City of Pasco. The developers will be required to
provide as-built drawings for the remainder of the improvements.
The City of Pasco contracted surveyor will be given an electronic
copy of the design drawings to then insert their findings from the
topographic survey.
10) The developer shall insure active and ongoing dust and litter
abatement activities occur during the construction of the
subdivision and construction of the houses thereon.
11) The final plat shall contain 10 to 15 foot utility easements parallel
to all streets as required by utility providers. A temporary utility
easement shall be identified along the southerly 20 feet of lots 4
and 15 for the installation of temporary water and sewer mains.
12) The developer shall install a properly designed irrigation system
with stubs to all lots in the subdivision for future irrigation needs.
All easements/right of ways necessary to convey an irrigation
system to and through the proposed plat must be conveyed to the
City of Pasco. The irrigation lines shall run in easements/rights of
way as directed by the City Engineer.
13) All engineering designs for infrastructure and final plat drawings
shall utilize the published City of Pasco Vertical Control Datum.
Said datum must be identified on the drawings for each submittal.
14) Any and all water rights associated with this land, along with any
wells, pumps, pipe, associated electrical system(s) and
appurtenances shall be conveyed to the City prior to subdivision
construction plan approval of the first phase. If no water rights are
available to transfer to the City the property owner/developer must
pay a water right fee of $1,500 per acre in lieu thereof, prior to
subdivision construction plan approval of the first phase. The
Public Works Director may waive the fee if the developer mixes a
soil additive in the ground that provides 30% retention of irrigation
water.
15) The final plat shall contain the following Franklin County Public
Utility District statement: "The individual or company making
improvements on a lot or lots of this plat is responsible for
providing and installing all trench, conduit, primary vaults,
secondary junction boxes, and backfill for the PUD's primary and
secondary distribution system in accordance with PUD
specifications; said individual or company will make full advance
payment of line extension fees and will provide all necessary utility
easements prior to PUD construction and/or connection of any
electrical service to or within the plat."
8
16) The final plat shall contain the following statement: "Irrigation
service lines are currently available to lots within this plat;
however, water for the irrigation system may not currently be
available. The City of Pasco is constructing its irrigation
infrastructure on an ongoing basis. The use of the system will
become available as time and resources permit the expansion and
connection of new systems to the existing irrigation supply."
17) All corner lots and other lots that present difficulties for the
placement of yard fencing shall be identified by lot number in the
notes on the face of the final plat(s).
18) All storm water must be disposed of through means approved by
the City of Pasco. All methods utilized to capture and dispose of
storm water must be in accordance with current City Codes and
Standard Specifications, and applicable Washington State Law.
19) Lots abutting Edelman Road (the right-of-way on the north side of
the plat)) shall not have direct access to said street. Access shall
be prohibited by means of deed restrictions or statements on the
face of the final plat(s).
20) Irrigation mainlines must be installed throughout the entire
proposed plat of a size sufficient to service each and every
currently proposed / future lot pursuant to PMC 26.04.116. The
developer must install a properly designed irrigation system with
stubs to all lots in the subdivision for future irrigation needs. All
easements/rights of way necessary to convey an irrigation system
to and through the proposed plat must be conveyed to the City of
Pasco. The irrigation lines shall run in easements/rights of way as
directed by the City Engineer.
21) All water lines must be extended through the length of each
proposed plat. All water lines will be required to be looped with the
existing City of Pasco water system. A deposit is required for the
removal of any temporary loops installed by the developer. The
deposit must include the cost of removing the temporary piping,
replacing damaged curb, gutter and sidewalk, and a curb to curb
replacement of all pavement for at least 10 feet on both sides of the
temporary line that was removed. The deposit will be refunded to
the developer when the work is completed by the developer and
accepted by the City. No water valves or meter boxes are to be
located in any easements or walkways.
22) Any and all utilities must be located as directed by the City
Engineer. This shall include but not be limited to gas, phone,
power, cable and all other utilities located within or adjoining this
preliminary plat. Any existing utilities that present difficulties
shall be relocated at the developer's expense, pursuant to the City
9
Engineer's direction. All utility plans, including the above
mentioned, are required to be submitted to the City of Pasco prior
to subdivision approval.
23) Street lighting must be as directed by the City Engineer.
Residential street lights are typically installed every 300 feet and
collector/arterial street lights are installed every 150 feet.
24) Prior to the City of Pasco accepting construction plans for review
for any phase of development the developer must enter into a
Storm Water Maintenance Agreement with the City. The developer
will be responsible to obtain the signatures of all parties required
on the agreement and to have the agreement recorded with the
Franklin County Auditor. The original signed and recorded copy of
the agreement must be presented to the City of Pasco at the first
intake meeting for construction plans for each phase of
development.
25) The developer will be required to conform to all conditions set forth
in the Storm Water Maintenance Agreement including, but not
limited to, regular cleaning and maintenance of all streets, gutters,
catch basins and catch basin protection systems. Cleaning shall
occur on a regular basis to ensure that no excess build up of sand,
trash, grass clippings, weeds or other debris occurs in any portion
of the streets, gutters, or storm water collection facilities. Cleaning
and upkeep of the streets, gutters, and storm water collection
facilities must be to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The
developer will be responsible to operate and maintain the storm
drain system in accordance with the Storm Water Maintenance
Agreement for a period of up to 5 years from the date of final plat
approval for each phase or until the system is accepted by the City
of Pasco. The City of Pasco's acceptance of construction plans for
subsequent phases of the subdivision will be contingent on the
developer satisfying all requirements of the Storm Water
Maintenance Agreement.
26) The developer will be required to comply with the City of Pasco
Civil Plan Review process. A copy of the requirements for the civil
plan review process is available from the City of Pasco Engineering
Department.
RECOMMENDATION
Motion: I move to close the hearing on the proposed plat and
initiate deliberations and schedule adoption of findings
of fact, conclusions and a recommendation to the City
Council for the November 20 meeting.
10
Vicinity Item Rezone from C-3 to R-3 Map
Applicant: Beacon Development N
File # : Z 08-004
AOOO
P
SITE - F
PARK VIEW BLVD
LU
l ri$t
�'. 3• ,
�y<
Ll
'" r "'
Land Use item : Rezone from C -3 to R-3
Applicant : Beacon Development - N
MAP File # : Z 08-004
Vacant 7z-
S?O,�NES�
, . . SITE
PARK VIEW BLVD
S F D U 's >
'�� School
Zoning Item : Rezone from C -3 to R-3
Applicant : Beacon Development - N
Map File # : Z 08-004
C=3 7Z
R= 1 =A
�\ � SPOU\NE
� SITE
- PARK VIEW BLVD
LU
C -3 R-1 5 R-2 R- 1
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
MASTER FILE NO: PP 08-003 APPLICANT: Hayden Enterprises
HEARING DATE: 10/16/08 2622 SW Glacier Pl.
ACTION DATE: 11/20/08 Suite 110
Bend, OR 99301
BACKGROUND
REQUEST: Preliminary Plat/Planned Density Development - Three Rivers
Crossing Division II (259-Lots)
1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:
Legal: The north half of Section 10, Township 9 North, Range 29 East
WM except those potions platted as Phases 4 & 5 Three Rivers Crossing
General Location: North of Three Rivers Drive between Rd 60 and
Convention Drive
Property Size: 85.59 Acres
Number of Lots Proposed: 259 single-family lots
Square Footage range of Lots: 5,000 sq. ft. to 16,411 sq. ft.
Average Lot Square Footage: 8,500 sq. ft.
2. ACCESS: The property has access from Robert Wayne Drive, Westport
Lane, and Ochoco Lane.
3. UTILITIES: All municipal utilities are available to the site
4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The site is zoned R-1 (Low-density
Residential) with restrictions requiring minimum lot size of 8,500 square
feet. Properties to the north in the county are zoned AP-20 (Agricultural
Production) Properties directly to the south in the City are zoned R-1.
The subdivisions to the west are zoned R-T (Residential Transition
Residential). The property to the east is zone R-S-1 (Suburban
Residential). Land use of the surrounding properties is as follows:
NORTH- Farm circle
SOUTH- Developed with the Three Rivers Crossing Phases 1-5
EAST- Farm circle
WEST- Farm circle
5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan indicates the site is
intended for low density residential development. According to the
I
Comprehensive Plan low density residential means 2 to 5 dwelling units
per acre. The criteria for allocation under the future land use section of
Volume II of the Comprehensive Plan (Vol. II, page 17) encourages
development of lands designated for residential uses when or where;
sewer is available, land is suitable for home sites, and when there is a
market demand. Policy H-1-E encourages the advancement of home
ownership and Goal H-2 suggests the City strive to maintain a variety of
housing options for residents of the community. Goal LU-2 encourages
the maintenance of established neighborhoods and the creation of new
neighborhoods that are safe and enjoyable places to live.
6. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: This proposal has been issued a
determination of non-significance in accordance with review under the
State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), Chapter 43.21(c) RCW.
ANALYSIS
Following the City's land use plans for the last 25-30 years the property in
question was rezoned and granted preliminary plat approval for single-family
development in 2002. In the last five years the developer has complete
construction on the south half of the development. While some of the
engineering work has been completed for the north half of the development
construction has not been completed.
The applicant has applied for a preliminary plat approval along with a Planned
Density Development designation. The original preliminary plat for the
property was approved with a planned density designation. The purpose of the
Planned Density Development designation process is to provide a degree of
flexibility for the layout of subdivisions and to encourage variety in housing
developments. The regulations do not permit the average overall density to
exceed that of the underling zone. In this case the underling zoning would
permit 329 single-family lots. The application is seeking approval for 259 lots.
The average lot size will been 8,500 square feet.
The proposal is essentially a continuation of the previously approved
development.
LOT LAYOUT: The proposed plat contains 259 lots with an average lots size
meeting the R-1 zoning requirements imposed by the ordinance that rezoned
the property from R-T to R-1.
RIGHTS-OF-WAY: All lots have adequate frontage on streets that will be
dedicated.
UTILITIES: The developer will be responsible for extending the water lines,
sewer lines and other utilities into the plat. A utility easement will be needed
2
along the first 10-15 feet of all lots. The final location and width of the
easements will be determined during the engineering design phase. The front
yard setbacks for construction purposes are larger than the requested
easements; therefore the front yard easements will not encroach upon the
buildable portions of the lots.
The City Engineer will determine the specific placement of fire hydrants and
streetlights when construction plans are submitted. As a general rule, fire
hydrants are located at street intersections and at a maximum of 600-foot
intervals and streetlights are located at street intersections and at 300-foot
intervals on residential streets.
Sewer service will be required to come from the previously platted Three Rivers
Crossing Subdivision to the south.
STREET NAMES: The proposed street names match the names of streets in
Phases 1-5 of the Three Rivers Crossing development.
IRRIGATION: The Municipal Code requires the installation of irrigation lines
as a part of infrastructure improvements.
WATER RIGHTS: The assignment of water rights is a requirement for
subdivision approval. If no water rights are available to transfer to the City the
property owner/developer must pay a water right fee of $1,500 per acre in lieu
thereof. The Public Works Director may waive the fee if the developer mixes a
soil additive in the ground that provides 30% retention of irrigation water.
FINDINGS OF FACT
State law (RCW 58.17.010) and the Pasco Municipal Code require the Planning
Commission to develop Findings of Fact as to how this proposed subdivision
will protect and enhance the health, safety and general welfare of the
community. The following is a listing of proposed "Findings of Fact":
Prevent Overcrowding: With an average lot size of 8,500 square feet the
proposed development will address the overcrowding concern by providing
manageable lots and usable open spaces. R-1 zoning requires a 20 foot front
yard set back and no more than 40 percent lot coverage providing for open
space on the lots.
Parks Opens Space/Schools: The applicant previously worked with the
School District to reserve a future site for an elementary school at the
northwest corner of Road 60 and Sandifur Parkway. The eight acre site is now
owned by the District. A 5.14 acre parcel adjacent the school property has
been reserved for a neighborhood park. Typically a subdivision must be
3
substantially completed before the City accepts and develops neighborhood
parks
Effective Land Use/Orderly Development: The plat is laid out to effectively
utilize the site consistent with surrounding residential development. The site is
within the Pasco Urban Growth Boundary and the development will occur on
land previously skipped over by past development. This development would be
considered an infill project.
Safe Travel & Walking Conditions: The plat provides connections to the
community by way of local access streets. Sidewalks are required to be
installed when homes are built.
Adequate Provision of Municipal Services: Municipal water and sewer lines
will be extended to the plat from nearby lines. All utility lines will be sized and
installed to meet the standard specification of the City.
Provision of Housing for State Residents: This preliminary plat will provide
15 lots for the construction of new dwellings for Pasco residents.
Adequate Air and Light: The lot sizes and maximum lot coverage limitations
will assure the adequate movement of air and light is available to each lot.
Proper Access & Travel: The access street in the plat will be paved and
developed to City standards to assure proper access is maintained to each lot.
Connections to the community will be provided by local streets. The
preliminary plat was submitted to the Transit Authority for review. No
comments were received from the Transit Authority.
Comprehensive Plan Policies & Maps: The Comprehensive plan designates
the site for low-density residential development. Policies of the plan encourage
the advancement of home ownership and suggest the City strive to maintain a
variety of housing of residents.
Other Findings: (list additional finds as appropriate)
• The property is zoned R-1 which is identical to the zoning of Three Rivers
Crossing Phases 1-5 to the south.
• Three Rivers Crossing Phases 1-5 are to the south.
• Three Rivers Crossing Phases 1-5 contained a future elementary school
site which has since been deeded to the Pasco School District.
• The park site reserved with the original development plans for Three
Rivers Crossing is available is also shown as part of the preliminary plat.
• The Comprehensive Plan encourages the interconnection of
neighborhood streets.
4
• Streets in the proposed subdivision will connect to existing and proposed
neighborhood streets.
• The proposed plat will allow the interconnection and looping of utilities.
• The site is currently vacant.
• The site is within the Pasco UGA.
• The proposed plat was part of a plat that was previously approved by the
City.
• Each lot developed within the I-182 corridor is required by code to pay a
traffic mitigation fee of$300.
• Comprehensive Plan Policy LU-3-C encourages development to expand in
a progressive and efficient manner.
• Comprehensive Plan Policy H-3-B encourages the advancement of
homeownership.
• Comprehensive Plan Policy H-2 suggests the city strive to maintain a
variety of housing options for residents of the community.
• Comprehensive Plan Policy H-1-B supports the protection and
enhancement of the established character of viable residential
neighborhoods.
CONCLUSIONS BASED ON STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT
Before recommending approval or denial of the proposed plat the Planning
Commission must develop findings of fact from which to draw its conclusion
(P.M.C. 26.24.070) there from as to whether or not:
(1) Adequate provisions are made for the public health, safety and general
welfare and for open spaces, drainage ways, streets, alleys, other public
ways, water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks, playgrounds, transit stops,
schools and school grounds, sidewalks for safe walking conditions for
students and other public needs;
The proposed plat will be required to develop under the standards of the
municipal code and standard specifications of the City Engineering
Department. These standards were designed to ensure the public health;
safety and general welfare of the community are secured. These
standards include provisions for streets, drainage, water and sewer
service and funding for park lands. This preliminary plat has been
forwarded to the Franklin County PUD, the Pasco School District and Ben-
Franklin Transit Authority for review and comment. The developer
previously sold an eight acre school site to the School District at the corner
of Sandifur Parkway and Road 60
(2) The proposed subdivision contributes to the orderly development and land
use patterns in the area;
5
The proposed plat is a continuation of an existing and previously approved
residential subdivision (Three Rivers Crossing).
(3) The proposed subdivision conforms to the policies, maps and narrative text
of the Comprehensive Plan;
The Comprehensive Plan land use map designates the site for low density
residential development. Low density development is described as 2 to 5
single-family units per acre in the Comprehensive Plan. The policies of the
plan encourage the advancement of home ownership (H-3-B). Plan Goal H-
2 suggests the City strive to maintain a variety of housing options for
residents of the community while Plan Policy H-1-B supports the protection
and enhancement of the established character of viable residential
neighborhoods.
(4) The proposed subdivision conforms to the general purposes of any
applicable policies or plans which have been adopted by the City Council;
Development plans and policies have been adopted by the City Council in
the form of the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed subdivision conforms to
the policies, maps, and narrative text of the Plan as noted in number three
above.
(5) The proposed subdivision conforms to the general purposes of the
subdivision regulations.
The general purposes of the subdivision regulations have been
enumerated and discussed in the staff analysis and findings of fact. The
findings of fact indicate the subdivision is in conformance with the general
purposes of the subdivision regulations.
(6) The public use and interest will be served by approval of the proposed
subdivision.
The proposed plat, if approved, will be developed in accordance with all
City standards designed to insure the health, safety and welfare of the
community are met. The Comprehensive Plan will be implemented through
development of this plat. These factors will ensure the public use and
interest is served.
6
TENTATIVE PLAT APPROVAL CONDITIONS
1) At the time lots are developed all abutting roads and utilities shall be
developed to City standards as approved by the City Engineer. This
includes but is not limited to water, irrigation and sewer lines, streets,
street lights and storm water retention. Sidewalks must be installed
no later than the time each lot is developed with a house. The
handicapped accessible pedestrian ramps must be completed with the
street and curb improvements prior to final plat approval. All existing
and proposed utilities must be installed underground by the developer
at the developer's expense.
2) All intersections will require setback lines for appropriate sight
distances. No fences, utility vaults or pedestals, or other obstructions
will be allowed in this area.
3) The developer/builder shall pay the City a "traffic mitigation fee" per
the Municipal Code.
4) The developer shall install a common Estate type fence/wall 6 feet in
height along the rear line of all lots abutting Road 60, Power Line
Road and Convention Drive. Said wall must match the existing wall
in Phase 5 of Three Rivers Crossing. The City may make repairs or
replace the fencing as needed. Property owners adjoining said fence
shall be responsible for payment of all costs associated with
maintenance and upkeep of the fencing. These fencing requirements
shall be noted clearly on the face of the final plat(s).
5) The developer shall be responsible for all costs associated with
construction inspection and plan review service expenses incurred by
the City of Pasco Engineering Department.
6) The developer will be required to provide a deposit to the City of Pasco
to allow the City of Pasco to hire a surveying company to perform
topographic surveys of the constructed utilities including manhole
lids and flow line elevations, location of sewer stubs, water valves,
water meters, irrigation valves, irrigation services, storm water catch
basins, street lights, fire hydrants, monuments and other pertinent
information deemed necessary, to the satisfaction of the City of Pasco.
The developers will be required to provide as-built drawings for the
remainder of the improvements. The City of Pasco contracted
surveyor will be given an electronic copy of the design drawings to
then insert their findings from the topographic survey.
7) The developer shall ensure active and ongoing dust and litter
abatement activities occur during the construction of the subdivision
and construction of the houses thereon.
7
8) The final plat shall contain 10 to 15 foot utility easements parallel to
all streets as required by utility providers.
9) All engineering designs for infrastructure and final plat drawings shall
utilize the published City of Pasco Vertical Control Datum. Said
datum shall be identified on the drawings for each submittal.
10) The final plat shall contain the following Franklin County Public
Utility District statement: "The individual or company making
improvements on a lot or lots of this plat is responsible for providing
and installing all trench, conduit, primary vaults, secondary junction
boxes, and backfill for the PUD's primary and secondary distribution
system in accordance with PUD specifications; said individual or
company will make full advance payment of line extension fees and
will provide all necessary utility easements prior to PUD construction
and/or connection of any electrical service to or within the plat."
11) All corner lots and other lots that present difficulties for the
placement of yard fencing shall be identified by lot number in the
notes on the face of the final plat(s).
12) All storm water must be disposed of through means approved by the
City of Pasco. All methods utilized to capture and dispose of storm
water must be in accordance with current City Codes and Standard
Specifications, and applicable Washington State Law.
13) The developer shall be responsible for installing landscaping in the
unimproved right-of-way on Road 60, Convention Drive, and Power
Line Road. This landscaping will consist of lawn and Spring Snow
Crab apple trees or approved equal. The trees shall be spaced at 50-
foot intervals. No trees will be planted within 25 feet of a street light.
The landscaping must include an irrigation system. All landscape
plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Engineering and
Community and Administrative Services Departments prior to
installation.
14) Lots abutting Road 60, Road Convention Drive and Power Line Road
shall not have direct access to those streets. Access shall be
prohibited by means of deed restrictions or statements on the face of
the final plat(s).
15) The developer/builder shall pay the City a "common area
maintenance fee" of $375 per lot upon issuance of building permits
for homes. These funds shall be placed in a fund and used to for the
maintenance of the landscaping along Convention Drive, Power Line
Road and Road 60. The City shall accept maintenance responsibility
for the landscaping abutting said streets at such time as all
maintenance fees for all lots in each division abutting said streets
have been paid.
8
16) Irrigation mainlines must be installed throughout the entire proposed
plat of a size sufficient to service each and every currently proposed /
future lot pursuant to PMC 26.04.116. Additional mainlines, as
directed by the City Engineer may be required to be installed. The
developer must install a properly designed irrigation system with
stubs to all lots in the subdivision for future irrigation needs. All
easements/rights of way necessary to convey an irrigation system to
and through the proposed plat must be conveyed to the City of Pasco.
The irrigation lines shall run in easements/rights of way as directed
by the City Engineer. In addition to the subdivision improvements a
16 inch irrigation mainline must be installed along with the street
improvements for Power Line Road, a 12 inch mainline must be
installed in conjunction with the street improvement for Convention
Drive and a 10 inch mainline must be installed in conjunction with
the street improvements for Road 60.
17) The assignment of water rights associated with this land, along with
any wells, pumps, pipe, associated electrical system(s) and
appurtenances to the City is a requirement for subdivision approval.
If no water rights are available to transfer to the City the property
owner/developer must pay a water right fee of $1,500 per acre in lieu
thereof. The Public Works Director may waive the fee if the developer
mixes a soil additive in the ground that provides 30% retention of
irrigation water.
18) All streets are to be developed to City Standards and/or as directed by
the City Engineer. Street grades for all arterial and collector roads
shall not exceed 6 percent. Interior local access street grades shall
not exceed 10 percent. All intersections will require setback lines for
appropriate sight distances. No fences, utility vaults or pedestals, or
other obstructions will be allowed in this area. Approaches to
intersecting interior streets shall not exceed 2 percent and any street
intersecting an arterial or collector street shall be zero (0) percent
coming out of the toe of the arterial/collector street slope. All
temporary streets will be required to have a paved turn around (2 inch
pavement on 4 inches of rock base) at the end of the street to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer.
19) Convention Drive must be completed in conjunction with the first
phase of development. Convention Drive must have 40 feet of right of
way dedicated on the developer's property to accommodate a future
right of way of 80 feet. Additional right of way on adjoining property
will be required to accommodate the 4 feet of paving required to the
west of the centerline of Convention Drive. The curve radius for the
right of way at the intersection of Convention drive with Power Line
Road must be 55 feet. Convention Drive must be built to a 28 feet
pavement width (24 feet on the developers property and 4 feet west of
9
the centerline of Convention Drive on the adjoining property) to
accommodate a future width of 48 feet. The pavement section for
Convention Drive must be a 4 inch asphalt layer placed on a 2 inch
top course rock with an 8 inch base course rock. The developer must
construct curb, gutter and a 5 feet wide sidewalk along the east side
of convention drive as part of the roadway improvements. All required
fire hydrants and street lighting must be installed by the developer
along the east side of Convention Drive. The developer must also
install a 12 inch irrigation main line in Convention Drive in
conjunction with the roadway improvements. The location and
material for the pipe will be as directed by the City Engineer.
20) Power Line Road must be completed with each phase of development
abutting said street. Power Line Road must have 40 feet of right of
way dedicated on the developer's property to accommodate a future
right of way of 80 feet. Additional right of way on adjoining property
will be required to accommodate the 4 feet of paving required to the
north of the future centerline of Power Line Road. The curve radius
for the right of way at all intersections with Power Line Road must be
45 feet with the exception of the intersections with Convention Drive
and Road 60 which must be 55 feet. Power Line Road must be built
to a 28 feet pavement width (24 feet on the developers property and 4
feet north of the future centerline of Power Line Road on the adjoining
property) to accommodate a future pavement width of 48 feet. The
pavement section for Power Line Road must consist of a 4 inch
pavement layer place on a 2 inch top course with an 8 inch base
course. The developer must install curb, gutter and a 5 feet wide
sidewalk along the south side of Power Line Road as part of the
roadway improvements. All required fire hydrants and street lighting
must be installed by the developer along the south side of Power Line
Road. The developer must also install a 16 inch irrigation main line
in Power Line Road as part of the roadway improvements. The
location and material for the pipe will be as directed by the City
Engineer.
21) Road 60 must be completed with each phase of development abutting
said street. Road 60 must have a 40 feet right of way dedicated on
the developer's property to accommodate a future right of way of 80
feet. Additional right of way on adjoining property will be required to
accommodate the 4 feet of paving required to the east of the future
centerline of Road 60. The curve radius for the right of way for all
streets intersecting Road 60 must be 35 feet, except the intersection
with Power Line Road which must be 55 feet. The pavement width
must be 28 feet (24 feet on the developer's property and 4 feet east of
the future centerline of Road 60 on the adjoining property) for a total
future pavement width of 48 feet. The paving section must consist of
a 4 inch asphalt layer placed on a 2 inch top course with an 8 inch
10
base course. The developer must install curb, gutter and a 5 feet wide
sidewalk and all appurtenant handicapped sections on the west side
of Road 60 along with the street improvements. All required fire
hydrants and street lighting must be installed along with the street
improvements. The developer must also install a 10 inch irrigation
main line in Road 60 in conjunction with the roadway improvements.
The location and material for the pipe will be as directed by the City
Engineer. At the time of development of any phase abutting Road 60,
if the Pasco School District has not developed its property abutting
said road, the developer will be responsible to extend the above
roadway improvements south to Sandifur Parkway, including the
intersection thereof.
22) All water lines must be extended through the length of each proposed
plat. All water lines will be required to be looped with the existing
City of Pasco water system. A deposit is required for the removal of
any temporary loops installed by the developer. The deposit must
include the cost of removing the temporary piping, replacing damaged
curb, gutter and sidewalk, and a curb to curb replacement of all
pavement for at least 10 feet on both sides of the temporary line that
was removed. No water valves or meter boxes are to be located in any
easements or walkways.
23) Any existing irrigation pipe from the previous farming activities on the
site, regardless of size, type or location, must be removed at the
owner/developers expense. Existing pipe must be removed prior to
the development of the phase in which it is located and must be
removed to the satisfaction of the City of Pasco.
24) Any and all utilities must be located as directed by the City Engineer.
This shall include but not be limited to gas, phone, power, cable and
all other utilities located within or adjoining this preliminary plat.
Any existing utilities that present difficulties shall be relocated at the
developer's expense, pursuant to the City Engineer's direction. All
utility plans, including the above mentioned, are required to be
submitted to the City of Pasco prior to subdivision approval.
25) The final plat(s) must contain the following statement: "Irrigation
service lines are currently available to lots within this plat; however,
water for the irrigation system may not currently be available. The
City of Pasco is constructing its irrigation infrastructure on an
ongoing basis. The use of the system will become available as time
and resources permit the expansion and connection of new systems to
the existing irrigation supply". This statement must appear on all
pages of said final plat(s).
26) Street lighting must be as directed by the City Engineer. Residential
street lights are typically installed every 300 feet and collector/arterial
street lights are installed every 150 feet.
27) Prior to the City of Pasco accepting construction plans for review for
any phase of development the developer must enter into a Storm
Water Maintenance Agreement with the City. The developer will be
responsible to obtain the signatures of all parties required on the
agreement and to have the agreement recorded with the Franklin
County Auditor. The original signed and recorded copy of the
agreement must be presented to the City of Pasco at the first intake
meeting for construction plans for each phase of development.
28) The developer will be required to conform to all conditions set forth in
the Storm Water Maintenance Agreement including, but not limited
to, regular cleaning and maintenance of all streets, gutters, catch
basins and catch basin protection systems. Cleaning shall occur on a
regular basis to ensure that no excess build up of sand, trash, grass
clipings, weeds or other debris occurs in any portion of the streets,
gutters, or storm water collection facilities. Cleaning and upkeep of
the streets, gutters, and storm water collection facilities must be to
the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
29) The developer will be required to comply with the City of Pasco Civil
Plan Review process. A copy of the requirements for the civil plan
review process is available from the City of Pasco Engineering
Department.
Recommendation
Motion: I move to close the hearing on the proposed plat and
initiate deliberations and schedule adoption of findings
of fact, conclusions and a recommendation to the City
Council for the November 20, 2008 meeting.
12
Item : Preliminary Plat - Three Rivers Div I
Vicinity •
Applicant: Hayden Enterprises N
Map File # : PP 08-003
-
1
SITE- ./
o eggs bloww�o
' N
U S DR
U THREE RIVER
Ir o, r J Q
WLLJ T - r
_ mil- zq�PNE LAKES DR Q ..�;_ WP _
. ;`-�°- o ,;._OVER
0-, . __- fN IS4UALLY DR; a
._ r.r- -
�f
uj
- -- -ENZIAN FALLS"DR �� rr ,r r. -�-� -• •
- --- -- ----- NDIFUR PKWY - . _
Land Item : Preliminary Plat
Use Applicant : / `Q
Map
40
ff OZZO ---
Ap
■■. • . !
■ �■ i� -.►R• , ����. „mss, ►�,� ,
o!
I���so ���so����
Zoning Preliminary Plat
`Q
Map File 4 : PP 08-003
IN
son I
MEMORANDUM
DATE: October 16, 2008
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Jeff Adams, Associate City Planner
SUBJECT: Corridors and Gateways Plan
The Pasco City Council recently authorized formation of an Ad Hoc Committee
assigned to provide a fresh evaluation of the 1995 Corridors and Gateways Plan
and its objectives, to evaluate corridors it deemed appropriate and to make
recommendations for modifications to the Plan for City Council consideration.
The purpose of the original 1995 Plan was to identify landscape policies that
would enhance safety, aesthetics, consistency, and ease of maintenance in
transportation corridor design. This plan served as a focal point for efforts and
resources. Two city-sponsored corridor projects were completed and designs were
prepared for a third. As well, new private development largely followed design
principles found in the plan for several other corridor areas.
However the previous plan only included the "Central Core" area. The City has
since grown dramatically in both land area and population. As well, the previous
effort's highly specific design requirements may have been too limiting and
inflexible for broader application.
The new plan expands the area under consideration beyond the central core area.
It also uses design policies rather than specific "concepts." These broad policies
are extremely basic and adaptable, and are driven primarily by long-term
maintenance costs, safety concerns, and adaptability to a wide range of city
conditions. This policy breadth becomes important in cases of limited right-of-
way, unusual topography, preexisting landscaping, and so forth.
The "preferred" design policy calls for distancing the sidewalk from the street,
landscaping both sides of the sidewalk, and planting trees and grass with
minimal shrub areas. This preferred design policy incorporates the observations
of the Committee and City of Pasco maintenance administrators, by balancing
and optimizing safety, aesthetics, and ease of maintenance.
The Committee selected corridors and suggested prioritized projects. Corridors
were chosen primarily for their connectivity—primary streets that linked people to
goods and services and to major highways. Projects were prioritized based on
economics (such as cost-sharing opportunities), concerns for continuity (fill-
in-1
the-gaps, join the gateway and the corridor), and safety (transit route location,
roadway functionality). Prioritized routes are as follows:
i. 4th Ave from Court Street to the I-182/12 Interchange
ii. 41h Ave from Lewis Street to Court street
iii. Oregon Avenue from Lewis Street to the Highway 12 Interchange.
iv. Court Street from Road 68 to Road 84.
v. Oregon Avenue from "A" street to Lewis Street.
vi. Oregon Avenue from Ainsworth Avenue to "A" Street.
vii. Court Street from Road 84 to Road 100.
viii. Road 36 from Argent road to Burden Boulevard.
Because of preexisting development regulations, there is little need to address
prioritization of corridors that will ultimately be enhanced by future private
development or redevelopment.
Policies for City entrance enhancements (Gateways) address site inaccessibility,
lack of infrastructure and the special challenges of intergovernmental
partnerships. These challenges tend the city toward very simple but attractive
low-water, low-maintenance designs.
The plan contains maps and tables illustrating the types and locations of
corridors and their importance, as ranked by the committee.
In sum, this document details the purpose of providing corridor streetscape policy
guidance, past efforts, lessons learned, existing conditions, options for corridor
improvements and policy statements to guide the development of improvements
and focus of resources.
Recommendation
MOTION: I move the Planning Commission recommend the City
Council adopt the Corridors and Gateways Plan 2008.
2
CORRIDORS AND GATEWAYS PLAN
PASCO , WASHINGTON
l �
n
• �V
y.
,ps r
OCTOBER 2008
PASC�c>
6Lu F
•�• ;
Corridors and Gateways Plan
City of Pasco, Washington
DI: 4FT
October 8, 2008
Prepared by:
J-U-B ENGINEERS, Inc.
2810 W. Clearwater Avenue, Suite 201
Kennewick, Washington 99336
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
AD HOC COMMITTEE MEMBERS
Matt Watkins, Chair, City Council
Al Yenney, City Council
Dave Little, Planning Commission
Todd Samuel, Planning Commission
Fred Ackerman, Chamber member
Carrie Chambers, Chamber member
Spence Jilek, Chamber member
Jim O'Conner, Chamber Member
John Serle, Chamber Member
CITY OF PASCO STAFF
Gary Crutchfield, City Manager
Jeff Adams, Planner
Dan Dotta, Maintenance
CONSULTANT (J-U-B ENGINEERS, INC)
Spencer Montgomery
Justin Baerlocher, AICP
DRAFT Corridors and Gateways Plan
City of Pasco
2008
Table of Contents
Executive Summary......................................................................................... iii
Introduction................................................................................................... 1
Purposeof Update ........................................................................................ 1
1995 Gateways and Corridors Plan ..................................................................... 1
Purpose................................................................................................... 1
Goals...................................................................................................... 2
Accomplishments ....................................................................................... 2
LessonsLearned ........................................................................................... 3
PlanningProcess........................................................................................... 4
ExistingConditions .......................................................................................... 5
Corridors.................................................................................................... 5
Gateways ................................................................................................... 8
Opportunities and Priorities............................................................................... 11
Opportunities ............................................................................................. 11
Private................................................................................................... 11
CityOpportunity ....................................................................................... 13
Priorities................................................................................................... 14
Corridor and Gateway Improvement Options........................................................... 17
Option 1: Sidewalk with grass strip and trees and shrubs ......................................... 18
Option 2: Sidewalk with grass strip and landscaping on both sides of walk .................... 19
Option 3: Sidewalk with landscape planting strip...................................................20
Option 4: Sidewalk with trees..........................................................................21
Option 5: Sidewalk with shrubs ........................................................................22
Option 6: Sidewalk only .................................................................................23
Option 7: Pathway with landscaping ..................................................................24
Option 8: Low Maintenance.............................................................................25
PolicyGuidance .............................................................................................26
ExistingPolicies ..........................................................................................26
Corridor and Gateway Policies .........................................................................26
10-08-08/Draft Gateways and Corridors Plan
DRAFT Corridors and Gateways Plan
City of Pasco
2008
List of Figures
Figure 1. South Side of Lewis Street near 28th Avenue Looking East ............................... 2
Figure 2. North Side of Lewis Street West of Elm Street Looking East............................. 2
Figure 3. Corridors and Gateways........................................................................ 6
Figure 4. Existing Conditions Map ....................................................................... 10
Figure 5. Improvement Opportunities .................................................................. 12
List of Tables
Table 1. Existing Conditions by Corridor Segment..................................................... 9
Table 2. City Opportunity Prioritization Table........................................................ 16
10-08-08/Draft Gateways and Corridors Plan ii
DRAFT Corridors and Gateways Plan
City of Pasco
2008
Corridors and Gateways Plan
Executive Summary
The Pasco City Council recently authorized formation of an Ad Hoc Committee assigned to do
the following:
• Provide a fresh evaluation of the 1995 Plan and its objectives,
• Evaluate corridors it deemed appropriate and
• Make recommendations for modifications to the Plan for City Council consideration.
Key items covered in the resulting plan update are as follows:
1. Purpose of the plan: To identify landscape policies that would enhance safety, aesthetics,
consistency, and ease of maintenance in transportation corridor design.
2. The 1995 Plan-
a. Merits: The previous plan served as a focal point for efforts and resources. Two
city-sponsored corridor projects were completed and designs were prepared for a
third. As well, new private development largely followed design principles found in
the plan for several other corridor areas.
b. Shortcomings: The previous plan only included the "Central Core" area. The City
has since grown dramatically in both land area and population. As well, the
previous effort's highly specific design requirements may have been too limiting
and inflexible for broader application.
3. The Updated plan:
a. The new plan expands the area under consideration beyond the central core area.
b. The new Plan uses design policies rather than specific "concepts." These broad
policies are extremely basic and adaptable, and are driven primarily by long-term
maintenance costs, safety concerns, and adaptability to a wide range of city
conditions. This policy breadth becomes important in cases of limited right-of-way,
unusual topography, preexisting landscaping, and so forth.
c. The "preferred" design policy calls for distancing the sidewalk from the street,
landscaping both sides of the sidewalk, and planting trees and grass with minimal
shrub areas. This preferred design policy incorporates the observations of the
Committee and City of Pasco maintenance administrators, by balancing and
optimizing safety, aesthetics, and ease of maintenance.
4. Location and prioritization of Corridors
10-08-08/Draft Gateways and Corridors Plan iii
DRAFT Corridors and Gateways Plan
City of Pasco
2008
a. Corridors defined: Corridors were chosen primarily for their connectivity—primary
streets that linked people to goods and services and to major highways.
b. Projects prioritized: Projects were prioritized based on economics (such as cost-
sharing opportunities), concerns for continuity (fill-in-the-gaps, join the gateway
and the corridor), and safety (transit route location, roadway functionality).
Prioritized routes are as follows:
i. 4th Ave from Court Street to the 1-182/12 Interchange
ii. 4th Ave from Lewis Street to Court street
iii. Oregon Avenue from Lewis Street to the Highway 12 Interchange.
iv. Court Street from Road 68 to Road 84.
v. Oregon Avenue from "A" street to Lewis Street.
vi. Oregon Avenue from Ainsworth Avenue to "A" Street.
vii. Court Street from Road 84 to Road 100.
viii. Road 36 from Argent road to Burden Boulevard.
c. Because of preexisting development regulations, there is little need to address
prioritization of corridors that will ultimately be enhanced by future private
development or redevelopment.
5. Gateways: Policies for City entrance enhancements address site inaccessibility, lack of
infrastructure and the special challenges of intergovernmental partnerships. These
challenges tend the city toward very simple but attractive low-water, low-maintenance
designs.
6. Maps and Tables: The plan contains maps and tables illustrating the types and locations of
corridors and their importance, as ranked by the committee.
In sum, this document details the purpose of providing corridor streetscape policy guidance,
past efforts, lessons learned, existing conditions, options for corridor improvements and
policy statements to guide the development of improvements and focus of resources.
10-08-08/Draft Gateways and Corridors Plan iv
DRAFT Corridors and Gateways Plan
City of Pasco
2008
Introduction
For several years the City of Pasco, Washington has worked towards improving the streetscape
of major corridors throughout the City as a way to enhance the attractiveness of the City.
Existing City ordinances identify design standards that influence the provision of sidewalks
and landscaping on all City streets through development and redevelopment. The City feels
that some corridors and gateways are of sufficient importance to justify the additional effort
of coordinating the design and maintenance of streetscape features to provide an enhanced,
consistent and clean appearance that will inspire pride in the City and improve mobility and
safety for pedestrians. The City recognizes that an overall Plan to identify significant
corridors and gateways as well as design options is needed to focus this endeavor.
An earlier effort was undertaken in 1995 which identified conceptual improvements for
corridors in the central core of Pasco. However, since that time the City has grown
significantly in population and area. This increase has brought redevelopment along existing
corridors as well as development of new corridors outside of the original study area. City
leaders have felt it appropriate to revisit the earlier plan.
This document details the purpose of providing corridor streetscape policy guidance, past
efforts, lessons learned, existing conditions, options for corridor improvements and policy
statements to guide the development of improvements and focus resources.
Purpose of Update
Rather than foster an assortment of frontage improvements in any given corridor resulting in
uncoordinated development, the City feels it is appropriate to identify desired landscape
features to be incorporated into roadway corridors that will provide consistency and ease of
maintenance.
This effort has been undertaken to:
• update the earlier plan, accounting for lessons learned and new opportunities
• redefine the network of primary Gateways and Corridors
• prepare new policy guidance that recommends conceptual improvements and
priorities.
1995 Gateways and Corridors Plan
Purpose
In 1995 the City of Pasco undertook a planning effort that was recognized as a "grand first
step toward achieving the vision of an attractive, welcoming network of primary streets and
entryways for the visitors, citizens, and business owners of Pasco."
The purpose of the Plan was to serve as a comprehensive guide for future gateway and
corridor improvement projects. The Plan addressed the "central core" and East Lewis
neighborhoods and included design concepts for 7 gateways and 8 corridors.
Page 1
DRAFT Corridors and Gateways Plan
City of Pasco
2008
Goals
The 1995 Plan stated 5 specific goals:
1. Conduct a planning process which achieves consensus by involving critical community,
civic, and government representatives throughout the process.
2. Develop a plan which will enhance the image and character of the City of Pasco.
3. Develop concepts for the gateways and corridors which will reflect Pasco's history,
people and geographic location.
4. Develop concepts which carry the greatest potential for implementation.
5. Develop a document which clearly presents information needed to support successful
follow-up funding procurement, design refinement, and community volunteer efforts.
Accomplishments
In the last few years the City has implemented corridor improvements amounting to several
hundred thousand dollars on both the east and west ends of Lewis Street. Improvements have
included the addition of curb, gutter and sidewalk as well as landscaping and utility
undergrounding. An example of these improvements are shown in Figures 1 and 2.
Figure 1. South Side of Lewis Street near 28th Avenue Looking East
�7
1
Before After
Figure 2. North Side of Lewis Street West of Elm Street Looking East
Before After
Page 2
DRAFT Corridors and Gateways Plan
City of Pasco
2008
In some cases a considerable amount of effort was put forth to work with adjacent property
owners to acquire right of way, relocate utilities and coordinate improvements with multiple
property owners. These improvements have been viewed as a major enhancement for these
segments of Lewis Street.
Lessons Learned
As part of past projects and several other ongoing efforts, the City has learned much with
respect to development of streetscape improvements in these important corridors. These
lessons serve as a guide in the development of future design plans to implement streetscape
improvements.
• In addition to providing a safe place for pedestrian travel, curb, gutter and sidewalks
provide a clean finished look to urban roadway corridors.
• Grass is the preferred landscape option with respect to maintenance. While the
perception is that shrubbery is easy to maintain whereas grass requires constant
trimming, the reality is that shrubbery also requires routine maintenance and requires
specific training and full-time staff (as opposed to seasonal workers). Shrubbery also
catches litter, thus detracting from the desired beautification effect. Furthermore,
methods have been devised to minimize the amount of edge trimming required,
facilitating maintenance of grass strips.
• Flexibility is important in working with owners of developed property. As much as
consistency is desired, some concepts may be very difficult to implement given
topography and other constraints in any given corridor.
• Gateway areas are generally located within the Washington State Department of
Transportation (WSDOT) right-of-way. Due to state funding constraints and safety
mandates, WSDOT limits the amount of landscaping within the interchange areas.
Interchange areas can be vast and would require a significant amount of maintenance.
Other limitations which are present include difficult access and terrain and the limited
ability to provide water to the gateway areas. As a result, specific gateway areas
need to be rethought. A low-water-usage and low-maintenance design should be
developed for these areas which integrates vegetation native to the Pasco area. Most
of the gateway improvements should be focused around the entrance into the
adjacent corridor in order to mitigate the access, water and maintenance issues.
• Overhead utilities are a significant detraction from otherwise improved corridors.
Whenever possible, utilities should be placed underground so as to remove clutter
from a corridor.
• Long established corridors have already been developed and in many cases have barely
enough right-of-way for sidewalks. The City will probably have to wait for
redevelopment to occur before being able to secure sufficient right-of-way to
implement landscaping enhancements in the corridor.
Page 3
DRAFT Corridors and Gateways Plan
City of Pasco
2008
• Where it is important enough to create a consistent corridor appearance it is equally
essential to maintain that landscaped corridor. Any great project that the City could
undertake to improve Corridors and Gateways could be compromised by a few shabby
properties with weeds or dead landscaping. Any new efforts must be coupled with
increased code enforcement efforts on private properties, particularly rental
properties.
Planning Process
The Pasco City Council authorized the formation of an Ad Hoc Committee consisting of
members of City Council, the Planning Commission and the Chamber of Commerce. The
Committee was assigned to provide a fresh evaluation of the 1995 Plan and its objectives,
evaluate corridors it deemed appropriate and make recommendations for modifications to the
Plan for City Council consideration.
The Committee has been supported by staff and the consulting team and has met several
times to discuss and consider appropriate corridors, desired improvements as well as
priorities. The Ad Hoc Committee reviewed a draft document and changes were incorporated
into a final document for City Council review and approval.
Page 4
DRAFT Corridors and Gateways Plan
City of Pasco
2008
Existing Conditions
Given the significant growth to the west of the central core area included in the 1995 Plan,
several new roadways have been constructed while others have been annexed from Franklin
County. As part of this planning effort the Committee considered what Corridors and
Gateways within the Urban Growth Area should be included in the Plan. The 1995 definitions
of Corridors and Gateways were also examined and it was determined that new definitions
would be appropriate, especially with respect to gateways.
Figure 3 identifies the Corridors and Gateways deemed appropriate by the committee to be
included in the Plan and subject to the policies listed later in this document. This chapter
presents the definition of Corridors and Gateways and identifies the existing features of each
Corridor and the Gateways. Evaluations of the gateways and corridors were based on input
from the committee members and staff, field observation and research performed by the
consultant. Improvement opportunities, constraints and priorities are discussed in the
following chapter.
Corridors
The Corridors have been defined by the Committee, for the purposes of this Plan, as:
A primary street which provides a connection to and from various uses throughout
the City including residential neighborhoods, commercial districts, public space,
recreational areas, and business. Corridors also provide vital connections to
Interstates 1-182, US 395, and US 12 which bisect the City.
The following roadways have been identified as Corridors suitable for special streetscaping
requirements which will provide a consistent presentation of each corridor.
➢ "A" Street - 10th Avenue to US-12
➢ 10th Avenue - Cable Bridge to Lewis Street
➢ 20th Avenue - Columbia River to Argent Road
➢ 4th Avenue - Lewis Street to the 1-182 Interchange
➢ Ainsworth Avenue - 10th Avenue to Oregon Avenue
➢ Argent Road - Road 100 to 20th Avenue
➢ Burden Boulevard - Road 68 to Road 36
➢ Chapel Hill Boulevard - Road 100 to Road 68
➢ Court Street - Road 100 to 4th Avenue
➢ Heritage Boulevard - "A" Street to Lewis Street
➢ Lewis Street - US 395 to US-12
➢ Madison Avenue - Road 44 to Burden Boulevard
➢ Oregon Avenue - Ainsworth Street to the 1-182 Interchange
➢ Powerline Road - Road 100 to Road 52
➢ Road 100/Broadmoor Boulevard - Court Street to Powerline Road
➢ Road 36 - Argent Road to Burden Boulevard
➢ Road 44 - Argent Road to Madison Avenue; Burden Blvd to Sandifur Pkwy
➢ Road 52 - Court Street to Argent Road; Burden Boulevard to Powerline Road
➢ Road 68 - Court Street to Power Line Road
➢ Road 84 - Chapel Hill Boulevard to Argent Road
➢ Sandifur Parkway - Broadmoor Boulevard to Road 44
Page 5
1 1 i
N
Jm POWERLINE ROAD EMOMMIN M EMEMEM OMM11011 INS SWENSON M 01101511011 M sloossoll M E1101011011 j I
101 NEW
� 1 1
0 1 1
a 1
o r�,
m SAN m■-o-•—m q.
1
1 CP
1
CHAPEL HILL D
BU DE �._■_■_•_■_■_■_■_._y
co
1
1
cn p 1
- a Q
0
♦ 1 1
° ♦ •
1
1
♦ W ARGEN R �O
"w _.
' 1
�.
COURIr ST L■-■-OWL
�., W 1 ""'O.z
— 1 1
�� • -
W O RT ST S
•�• 2
C14 —E EV IS ST
�•, m
Lu
rr-7�
Legend ■••'•
♦•�
•� w
_.�■
Corridor -■�■�.�� E"A"ST
Future Corridor ,•■•�•■••••.•� qN
- Gateway •�•`•..�•�•
-•-�-�• Urban Growth Boundary NEW
This drawing is neither a legally recorded map nor a survey and is •�
not intended to be used as such. The information displayed is a \ •�.,
compilation of records, information and data obtained from various •�,
sources,including J-U-B ENGINEERS/Gateway Mapping, Inc. \ `•�•
which is not responsible for its accuracy or timeliness. `•�
rJ 4 FIGURE City of Pasco
UB Corridors and Gateways
Map 3 Corridor & Gateway Plan
DRAFT Corridors and Gateways Plan
City of Pasco
2008
The existing conditions of each Corridor segment are defined in Table 1 and shown in Figure 4
which indicates where sidewalks, landscaping, street trees, and overhead utilities are present
as well as whether the corridor is on a transit route, is designated as a bicycle route, has any
identified Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) projects, is within the City or in
unincorporated Franklin County and what the current zoning is.
The status of the corridors can be grouped into three areas based on how the development
pattern has occurred: Pasco Central Core, West Pasco north of 1-182 and West Pasco south of
1-182. The street cross sections within each of these areas represent a common theme
regarding conditions, limitations and opportunities. Each of these three areas is unique due
to the differences in development patterns and regulatory jurisdiction.
Pasco Central Core
This area is defined as the original central core of the City as identified in the 1995 plan.
This area is bounded by Highway 395 to the west, Interstate 1-182 to the north and US-12 to
the east. The majority of the land within this area is currently developed with the exception
of "A" Street east of Oregon Avenue and some portions of Oregon Avenue which remain
vacant. Typical cross sections of the corridors within this area include sidewalks located
adjacent to the curb with limited right-of-way available beyond the back of sidewalk. Where
there is landscaping along the corridors it is typically located on private property.
Two corridor improvement projects consistent with the 1995 Plan were completed by the City
along portions of west Lewis Street from 28th Avenue to 17thth Avenue and on East Lewis
Street from Oregon Avenue to Cedar Avenue. These projects consisted of adding curb,
gutter, and sidewalk along with landscaping and trees where sufficient right-of-way was
available or could be reasonably purchased. Other properties along the corridors which have
been redeveloped have also been required to add landscaping features consistent with the
City's landscape ordinance. While these projects have incorporated many of the
recommended design features of the previous plan, a consistent design pattern and
landscaping features is lacking throughout each corridor.
West Pasco north of 1-182
This area is generally defined as being north of 1-182, south of Powerline Road, east of
Broadmoor Boulevard and west of Road 36. Since the adoption of the 1995 Plan this area has
been incorporated into the City of Pasco and a majority of the area has been developed
primarily with residential uses with commercial uses focused along Road 68 and the
Broadmoor Boulevard/Sandifur Parkway intersection. Corridor improvements within this area
have been primarily completed by the private sector as part of development approval.
Special design standards for some of these corridors have been developed by the City and
incorporated into the Pasco Municipal Code including sidewalk, landscaping, access
management and screen requirements. Future improvements to these corridors will primarily
depend on the private development.
West Pasco south of 1-182
This area is generally defined as being south of 1-182, east of Road 100, north of the Columbia
River and west of Highway 395. The outer boundaries of this area have been incorporated
within the City of Pasco with a large area in the middle which remains in the jurisdiction of
Franklin County. However, the County portion is located within the City's Urban Growth Area
as identified in the Comprehensive Plan.
Page 7
DRAFT Corridors and Gateways Plan
City of Pasco
2008
Due to the nature of the "county island", most of the roadways in this area are built to
county standards and lack curb, gutter, sidewalk and landscaping. The primary land use
within this area continues to be agricultural with an increasing demand for residential
development. Similar to the area north of 1-182, portions of this area are bounded by special
design standards identified in the Pasco Municipal Code requiring specific sidewalk,
landscaping, access management and screening requirements along specific corridors within
the City including Road 100 and Chapel Hill Boulevard. These standards may need to be
expanded to include roadways within the County which are in the Urban Growth Area as they
are annexed. Future improvements to these corridors will also primarily depend on the
private development as they implement existing standards and apply the policies described
later in this document.
Gateways
Gateways have been defined by the Committee, for the purposes of this Plan, as:
An area located around various interchanges located throughout the City from
Interstate 1-182, US 395 and US 12. These gateway areas are located adjacent to a
corridor and provide transition into the city environment.
The following areas have been identified as Gateways into the City suitable for landscaping
and signage and are shown in Figure 3.
➢ Cable Bridge area
➢ 1-182/20th Street - northeast entrance along the westbound off-ramp;
southwest entrance along the eastbound off-ramp; along the east side of 20th
Avenue south of 1-182
➢ 1-182/4th Street - southwest entrance along the eastbound off-ramp
➢ 1-182/Oregon Avenue - southwest entrance along the eastbound off-ramp
➢ 1-182/Road 100 - southwest entrance along the eastbound off-ramp and
northeast entrance along the westbound off-ramp
➢ I-182/Road 68 - southwest entrance along the eastbound off-ramp and
northeast entrance along the westbound off-ramp
➢ US 12/"A" Street Interchange- southwest and northwest entrances
➢ US 12/Lewis Street Interchange - northwest entrance along the eastbound off-
ramp
➢ US 395 / Court Street Interchange
➢ US 395 / Lewis Street Interchange
In general, the existing conditions of the gateway areas are unimproved with limited
landscaping. Two exceptions are the US 395/Lewis Street Interchange and the Cable Bridge
area of 10th Avenue. These two gateways are currently landscaped and are in excellent
condition, the first with low water and low maintenance requirements and the second with
nicely groomed trees and grass.
Page 8
Table 1. Existing Conditions by Corridor Segment
y C
Corridors
,o 4 oc c ° m v »r a
1 as y c
O 4� m cm V h /� G
Powerline Rd Broadmoor-Road 52 A A A U A No P L No No Industrial
Sandifur Pkwy Broadmoor- Road 68 C C C U C Yes P C 1 P Yes Commercial
Sandifur Pkwy Road 68-Road 44 P P P U P No M L 2 No Yes Commercial
Burden Blvd Road 68-Road 36 C C C U C Yes M/C C 2 P Yes Commercial
Chapel Hill Blvd Road 100-Road 84 P P P U P No M L 1 No Yes Commercial
Chapel Hill Blvd Road 84-Road 68 A A A U - No M L 1 No Yes Residential
Argent Rd Road 100-Road 84 A A A O' P Yes P C 2 Yes No Residential
Argent Rd Road 84-Road 68 A A A O' A Yes P C 5 Yes P Residential
Argent Rd Road 68-Road 52 A A A O' P Yes M M Yes No Residential
Argent Rd Road 52-Road 36 P A A U A Yes M M Yes P Residential
Argent Rd Road 36-20th Ave P A A U P Yes M M Yes Yes Residential
Court St Road 100-Road 84 C A A O' P Yes M M Done P P Residential
Court St Road 84-Road 68 C P C PU' P Yes M M P P Residential
Court St Road 68-40th Ave A A A O P Yes P P 2 Yes P Commercial
Court St 40th Ave-26th Ave C P A O - No P P P Yes Commercial
Court St 26th Ave-4th Ave C P P O A No P M P Yes Commercial
Lewis St 28th Ave-20th Ave X C C C U Yes P P P Yes Commercial
Lewis St 20th Ave-17th Ave C C C U Yes P P P Yes Commercial
Lewis St 17th Ave- 10th Ave P A A U Yes P P Yes Yes Commercial
Lewis St 10th Ave-RR Tracks C A P O Yes P P 2 P Yes Commercial
Lewis St RR Tracks-Cedar Ave C C C U P Yes P P P Yes Commercial
Lewis St Cedar Ave- Interchange X A A P U P Yes P P 1 No Yes Commercial
"A"St 10th Ave-Oregon Ave C A A O A Yes M M 0 P Yes Residential
"A"St Oregon Ave-Heritage Blvd P A A O' A Yes P M 1 P Yes Commercial
"A"St Heritage Blvd-US 12 X A A A O' A Yes M M 1 No Yes Commercial
Ainsworth Ave 10th Ave-Oregon Ave P A A O P Yes P P No Yes Industrial
Road 100 Court St-Argent Rd A A A O' A Yes P M 5 No P Residential
Road 100 Argent Rd-Chapel Hill Blvd P P P O P Yes P M 5 Yes Yes Residential
Road 100 Chapel Hill Blvd- Interchange X A P P O P Yes P M 2 Yes Yes Commercial
Broadmoor Blvd Interchange-Sandifur Pkwy X A P P U - Yes P C 1 Yes Yes Commercial
Broadmoor Blvd Sandifur Pkwy-City Limits P P P U P No P C 1 No Yes Commercial
Road 84 Argent Rd-Chapel Hill P P P O P No M L 1 No P Residential
Road 68 Court St-Argent Rd A A A O P Yes P P 1 No No Industrial
Road 68 Argent Rd-Chapel Hill Blvd A A A O A Yes P P 5 No Yes Commercial
Road 68 Chapel Hill Blvd- Interchange X A A A O A Yes P P 5 No Yes Commercial
Road 68 Interchange-Burden Blvd X P C C U Yes P M 5 No Yes Commercial
Road 68 Burden Blvd-Sandifur Pkwy C C C U Yes P M P Yes Commercial
Road 68 Sandifur Pkwy-Powerline Rd A A A U A Yes P M No Yes Commercial
Road 52 Court St-Argent Rd A A A O A Yes C C No No Residential
Road 52 Burden Blvd-Sandifur Pkwy C C C U C No C L No Yes Residential
Road 52 Sandifur Pkwy-Powerline Rd A A A U No C L No P Residential
Madison Argent Rd-Burden Blvd A A A U No M L No Yes Residential
Road 44 Burden Blvd-Sandifur Pkwy C C A U P No C L No Yes Residential
Road 36 Argent Rd-Burden Blvd P P P O P No C C No Yes Industrial
20th Ave River-Lewis St P A A U A Yes M C 0 No Yes Commercial
20th Ave Lewis St-Court St C P P PU' A Yes P P P Yes Residential
20th Ave Court St-Interchange X C A A O' P Yes P P P Yes Residential
20th Ave Interchange-Argent X C C C U A Yes P P P Yes Commercial
10th Ave Cable Bridge to Lewis St X C A A O A No u P P P Yes Commercial
4th Ave Lewis St-Court St P P P U P No P P P Yes Commercial
4th Ave Court St-Interchange X P P P U P Yes P P No Yes Commercial
Oregon Ave Ainsworth Ave-A St A A A U A Yes P P 0 No Yes Industrial
Oregon Ave I A Street-Lewis Street P P P U P No P P No Yes Industrial
Oregon Ave Lewis St- Interchange X A P P U P No P P No Yes Commercial
Sidewalk C-Complete P-Partial A-Absent
Landscape C-Complete P-Partial A-Absent
Trees C-Complete P-Partial A-Absent
Overhead Power U-Underground PU-Partial Undergrc O-Overhead " Franklin PUD proposed location for converting overhead power lines to ui
Fence C-Complete P-Partial A-Absent
Bicycle Route Yes/No
Street Classification P-Principal,M-Minor,C-Collector,L-Local
TIP Project Project Number
Transit Route Yes/No
City Yes/No
Zoning Name
Land Use Name
i \1 1
�._._■_._._■_■-._■_._._■_■_f 1
1
J - - - - - - - - - — —_- - IMEMN=Ems N
Iw POWERLINE ROAD 1
O 1 1O 1 1
1
rn
�
1 S P cp -■_■_._.�
1 * p � p
CHAPEL VI L BU 4 46 * _
—� i�R iR Ilt �R yt•t I« tyt �3 � I« 1 �r■�r>.�_-r�r�rOFFi rr• �
1
z 1 � 1
1 * O l co 1
'♦♦ ¢ 1 Q
1 ao
1
00 0 1 1
1 Q i 1
WA GENT RD i
lu
� t �
•� 1 1 _.
° 1 1.._._■�
0
w
*11P.• I W O RT ;-T— JRT S
1
•� 2
•�,' ♦ 7Z 1
,•♦ ` #
J
,•�•-■ het E LE IS S * m
Legend -
No Improvements '�••'••. '� Ast
Sidewalk '•'-'••..- W LEW _ EAST
Landscaping •••••.� • ORr qv
* * * 4 Street Trees •'•••. � , •
Overhead Power ^r '�•�•••'••
Overhead Power - High Voltage co '`•..••
....... Urban Growth Boundary �•.•�
This drawing is neither a legally recorded map nor a survey and is •�.
not intended to be used as such. The information displayed is a �•�. ; j` ,/
compilation of records, information and data obtained from various \\ �•�• ' h j
sources,including J-U-B ENGINEERS/Gateway Mapping, Inc.
which is not responsible for its accuracy or timeliness." �•�• 4?
f'461-V-B,J Existing Condition Map
FIGURE City of Pasco
Corridor & Gateway Plan
J-U-9NGINERS.ulnc. 4
DRAFT Corridors and Gateways Plan
City of Pasco
2008
Opportunities and Priorities
Opportunities
Opportunities to improve the Corridors and Gateways identified in this Plan can be limited by
a number of factors including existing and future development, right-of-way availability,
maintenance needs, neighborhood coordination, funding and other constraints.
During the course of this planning effort legal advice was sought. The City's constitutionally
granted police powers provide for the regulation of landscaping incident to the development
of its rights-of-way. The City has the capacity to identify a specific district and establish
landscaping standards that are compatible with the city's vision for that area. The city has
absolute control over that area within its right of-way. In addition to sidewalk, curb, and
gutter, the city can require swales, parking strips, street trees, irrigation improvement, water
features, grass and other types of specifically designated vegetation. The City's authority to
control landscaping requirements beyond the City's property lines, however, is significantly
more limited, especially in developed neighborhoods. Voluntary agreements with property
owners could be pursued, but cannot be required.
Given the various constraints that will be encountered in the Corridors, there are two general
types of opportunities available for improving Corridors:
1) Some improvements will occur primarily by private development with coordination and
review/approval by the City, and
2) Other improvements will necessarily require the City to take the lead and coordinate
with private property owners along the corridor during the design phase.
Within each of these categories there are more specific improvement types that are
explained below. Figure 5 shows the corridors and gateways based on the general
opportunity types as well as indicating which corridors are complete and which are yet to be
created.
Private
New Development
Several corridors in the west Pasco area, north and south of 1-82, are generally undeveloped
or the current land use is agricultural in nature. They are likely to be improved or developed
privately in association with future growth. By and large these corridors have little or no
streetscape improvements with respect to sidewalks and landscaping.
Most of the streetscape improvements are likely to be made by private development in these
corridors, at least on one side of the street in association with the new development.
However, there are numerous locations along the corridor frontage where existing
development (primarily individual homes) is present adjacent to the undeveloped land.
Private landowners cannot be required to install streetscape improvements in these locations
unless in conjunction with redevelopment. Thus, when owners of private development will be
completing significant portions of the streetscape on one of the corridors, it may be in the
best interest of the City to work with adjacent property owners to expand on the private
project to complete a corridor segment with full streetscape improvements.
Page 11
1 1 1
1 ; N
i
POWERLINE ROAD
o -
■
Q )3 ■ 1
o ° ■ 1
of O '------ONE..L
1
U')' a 1
0 Q 1
G-4 0 0 1
0
of
CHAPEL HILL BLVD BURDEN BLVD ._._■.■_-
1
♦♦ OZ M 1
♦ in o 1
♦♦ O _ 1
o o 4F#C) G-2 ■ ■ ■ 1
♦ o � ® 1
♦i � 1
♦, W ARGENT RD �O j
•� Ln
1
♦ W COURT ST G-1 L._._.
♦� — W COURT ST
' ♦ O W O RT ST 0 �•
c� G-5 1
4 z
Legend
cli•�•, - — __ Z. E LEWIS ST
City Priority Corridor • �•.••• m
City Priority Gateway •'••�••••• ---_
5
•. �. — W LE . W G-6
Completed Segment �•`•�... WASt =
_•_•_'�••,..•, _ EAST
Private - -_ - - •••,•••.••••`•• FaiNS
Private Proposed Corridors -- '••. --_ wORTy
-'-'- Urban Growth Boundary '' �, •'••..• ,�' _.___\
City of Pasco •'•.� -co
This drawing is neither a legally recorded map nor a survey and is ••�� \�
not intended to be used as such. The information displayed is a
compilation of records, information and data obtained from various
sources,including J-U-B ENGINEERS/Gateway Mapping, Inc. �` ONE,
which is not responsible for its accuracy or timeliness. �•sar, _
B Improvement FIGURE City of Pasco
rJ V
-4 opportunities Map 5 Corridor & Gateway Plan
J-U-9 ENGINEERS.In c.
DRAFT Corridors and Gateways Plan
City of Pasco
2008
Redevelopment
Current City Code Chapter 25.75 outlines the current minimum standards for landscaping and
screening. It also requires, for existing non-conforming commercial and industrial property,
that upon remodel or expansion exceeding 33% of the assessed value landscaping and
screening requirements of the code shall apply. Many of these types of corridors exist in the
central core of the City.
As these redevelopment opportunities present themselves, City staff must be diligent in
working with property owners to design and implement a consistent landscaping within that
corridor.
City Opportunity
Roadway Improvement Projects
The City regularly undertakes roadway improvement projects. Some projects will involve
roadway widening, others may be more maintenance related. Whenever the City anticipates
improvements on any of the corridors included in this Plan, it is recommended that
appropriate streetscape improvements including curb, gutter, sidewalk and landscaping be
incorporated into the design of the project and implemented during construction. It may also
be important to consider undergrounding utilities that may be in the corridor, or at least
placing conduit and vaults for future use. Adjacent property owners should be contacted as
necessary in order to secure adequate right-of-way to implement a reasonable scale of
improvements. Existing features of the corridor should be taken into account to create a
consistent appearance throughout the corridor.
Utilities
Electrical utilities are currently provided by the Franklin Public Utilities District (Franklin
PUD). The utility lines are located along nearly all of the corridors and consist of a mixture of
overhead and underground distribution lines with the majority of the lines being overhead.
The poles within some of these corridors are beginning to show age and are in need of repair.
The Franklin PUD has continually been replacing these poles with new ones. In addition to
the distribution lines a 115+ KV electric transmission line runs along a portion of Powerline
Road, Road 84, Court Avenue, and "A" Street. This is a high voltage line which cannot be
placed underground.
The Franklin PUD has expressed willingness to underground all utility lines which are in need
of repair rather than replacing the poles if the City were to pay the extra cost of
undergounding. The City has partnered in a few instances and this effort has cleaned up the
visual appearance of the corridors and has provided an opportunity for future landscaping
improvements. The City should establish a formal agreement with the Franklin PUD that will
create a partnership to underground the local distribution power lines in the corridors
included in this Plan. The schedule can be determined by the Franklin PUD based on their
normal pole replacement program and safety needs.
Regarding landscaping in corridors where overhead power exists, it makes the most sense to
not install new landscaping in a corridor until after the powerlines have been placed
underground. Otherwise landscaping could be damaged or removed by the installation of
Page 13
DRAFT Corridors and Gateways Plan
City of Pasco
2008
underground utilities. Landscaping efforts would be best spent on those corridors where
power is already underground.
Areas of Existing Development
Some opportunities exist in areas where development is present but has little streetscape
improvement (sidewalk It landscaping) or consistency and the right-of-way is adequate for
improvements to be added. These corridors are typically found in the Central Core area
where development is present with limited building setbacks or right-of-way and would be
similar to the areas of Lewis Street which were recently updated.
In order to achieve a consistent corridor appearance and/or add landscaping on these
corridors, it will likely take a significant effort on the part of City staff to coordinate with
property owners along the corridor to achieve consensus on appropriate improvements. It
may be possible to enter agreements with property owners such that the City pays for the
landscaping and maintenance while the property owner pays for the installation of the
sidewalk where necessary.
Ideally, in order to bring this Plan to fruition, the City should consistently be working on
developing and implementing improvements in developed corridors that have adequate right-
of-way. One goal could be to design one corridor each year and implement it the following
year. It may take a year of working with property owners through neighborhood meetings to
come to an agreement that meets the approval of all.
Gateways
For those Gateways yet to be developed it will be necessary for the City to take the lead.
Right-of-way is for the most part already owned by the Washington State Department of
Transportation, thus the City will need to work with WSDOT to develop an agreement with
acceptable landscaping plans. The design plans should include low-water-usage and low-
maintenance design and integrate the native landscape vegetation of the Pasco area. As
described earlier in the Existing Conditions chapter, access for maintenance purposes should
be mitigated based on how Gateways are now defined such that only the outside of the
WSDOT interchange area along the off-ramps are anticipated to be landscaped.
Regarding implementation of the Gateway improvements, it is suggested that they be
completed at the same time as the corridor improvements of an adjacent corridor. In this
way any necessary irrigation could be extended with the adjacent corridor project.
Consideration for a "Welcome to Pasco" sign should be given in the overall context of the
Corridor and Gateway together (many of the existing welcome signs are actually placed at the
beginning of the next roadway segment). This implementation strategy should be able to be
achieved whether the adjacent corridor will be done by the private sector or by the City. In
the case of the private sector, the City may choose to assist using City funds. There are only
2 Gateways that can not be attached to a corridor project, and that would need to be carried
out independently because the adjacent corridors are already complete, namely 20th Avenue
and Road 68.
Priorities
In order to provide a focus for the expenditure of City staff time and funding , Corridor
segments that fall in the category of City Opportunities were prioritized using a process that
Page 14
DRAFT Corridors and Gateways Plan
City of Pasco
2008
considered the factors outlined below. A point system was developed and is presented in
Table 2. Priority segments are also shown in Figure 5.
• Segments with utilities already underground received higher priority because
landscaping could be implemented without later disturbing it to place utilities
underground.
• Segments with upcoming Transportation Improvement Program projects were given
higher priority in order to foster corridor improvements with other projects.
• Segments with partial corridor improvements (sidewalks, landscaping or trees) were
ranked higher in order to promote the completion of segments at lower costs.
• Transit routes were given priority, with those that have no sidewalks being
emphasized.
• Segments with significant adjacent developed property were given priority due to the
fact that there are fewer opportunities for private development to implement
improvements. Segments with available right-of-way were given additional priority
over those without.
• Corridor segments adjacent to Gateways were given priority to emphasize the
importance of entrances to the City. The 20th Avenue and Road 68 Gateways were
ranked independently because the adjacent corridors are complete.
• Roadway functional classification, bicycle routes and existing land use were also
considered giving priority to arterials, segments with bicycle routes and commercial
corridors.
It is recognized that some of the corridors may fall within the County island and as such City
funds could not be expended there. If a Corridor segment falling within the County is the
next highest priority, consideration of the improvements to undertake must account for this.
It may be prudent to skip that Corridor until it is annexed into the City.
Page 15
Table 2: City Opportunity Prioritization Table
y r
Corridors Q a•m 4 .or H �F
10 CO
°
J, oi°a o 1 V kll
4th Ave Court St- Interchange 3 1 1 1 5 P 2 Principal 4 2 2 2 City Projects 5 28
4th Ave Lewis St-Court St 1 1 1 5 P 0 Principal 4 3 2 2 1 City Projects 5 25 2
Oregon Ave Lewis St-Interchange 3 0 1 1 5 P 0 Principal 4 2 2 1 City Projects 5 24 3
Court Street Road 84-Road 68 2 1 1 2 P 2 Minor 3 3 1 1 0 City Projects 5 21 4
Oregon Ave A Street-Lewis Street 1 1 1 5 P 0 Principal 4 2 0 1 City Projects 5 20 5
Oregon Ave Ainsworth Ave-A St 0 0 0 5 A 2 Principal 4 0 0 2 0 0 City Project 5 18 6
Court Street Road 100-Road 84 0 0 0 2 P 2 Minor 3 Done 3 1 1 0 City Projects 5 17 7
Road 36 Argent Rd-Burden Blvd 1 1 1 0 P 0 Collector 2 2 0 0 City Projects 5 12 8
Note: Colors identified in the above table represent the existing conditions identified in Table 1.
Priority Point Scoring System
Complete Partial Absent/no
Sidewalk 2 1 0 Overhead Power 2 points for PUD potential Project,5 points for Complete Underground or High Voltage.
Landscape 2 1 0 TIP Project 5 points for full length TIP project,2 points for partial, 1 point for intersection
Trees 2 1 0 Zoning 2 points for Commercial, 1 point for Residential,0 points for Industrial
Bicycle Route 2 1 0 WSDOT Street Classification 4 points principal,3 points minor,2 point collector,0 points local
Transit Route 5 3 0 Traffic Volumes 3 points for 15-20,000,2 point for 10-15,000, 1 point for 5-10,000,0 points for<5,000
City 2 1 0
DRAFT Corridors and Gateways Plan
City of Pasco
2008
Corridor and Gateway Improvement Options
This chapter identifies improvement options for the Corridors and Gateways. These options
were developed by the Committee using the design options from the 1995 Plan and the
existing developed corridors as reference. Each option represents different variations of the
corridor improvements based on the right-of-way available.
The current Pasco Municipal Code has specific minimum requirements for landscaping and
sidewalks. The intent of the corridor design standards is to strengthen the current code
requirement and provide a more enhanced design than currently required. As a result these
options will provide a catalyst for what is desired when a corridor specific plan is prepared.
Some corridor specific plans include Road 100, Chapel Hill Boulevard, Burden Boulevard,
Sandifur Parkway and Broadmoor Boulevard.
Sidewalk- A 5-foot sidewalk (4.5 foot sidewalk with 6" curb) in residential areas and 7-
foot sidewalk (6.5 foot sidewalk with 6" curb) in Commercial areas is required along all
city streets as per chapter 12.04 of the Pasco Municipal Code. However many variations
of sidewalks including locations and design are not identified. The typical sidewalk
location is directly adjacent to the street and curb. It has been identified by the
Committee that a separated sidewalk with a landscape strip in-between the curb and
sidewalk is preferred, although it is not always achievable. Due to right-of-way
constraints this may be the only option available. However, if possible, a wider sidewalk
should be considered to mitigate for pedestrian safety along the higher traffic volume
corridors.
Landscape planting strip - If adequate right-of-way is available, a landscape planting
strip is desired. Several variations exist combining grass, trees, and shrubs. While
specific design plans have not been prepared, it is desired to have a landscape strip
located both between the curb and sidewalk and behind the back of the sidewalk. This
will give the best appearance, safety and functionality for pedestrians and provide an
aesthetically pleasing environment to the driver.
Many of the newly developed corridors within the City have already begun implementing
this idea by preparing specific design standards for each corridor. These corridors
include Road 100, Broadmoor Boulevard, Sandifur Parkway, and Burden Boulevard.
Another example is Lewis Street from 28th to 17th and from Oregon Avenue to Cedar
Street, where the City has implemented a corridor improvement project which
integrates this design concept while retrofitting it to the existing right-of-way.
Special consideration must be made for ease of maintenance. Some design options may
be more difficult to mow and maintain, depending on the width of the landscape strip
and location of trees and shrubs,. Mower width, access to grass edges, and other such
items should be considered in the design.
The improvement options below have been developed and are presented in order of
preference. The intent is to landscape the right-of-way beyond the sidewalk and to provide a
clean, consistent and maintained landscape pattern and theme along each corridor.
Therefore it is intended that each development identify and integrate landscaping materials
and patterns which currently exist. Within the central core the 1995 Plan may provide some
specific items for consideration when going to project level design.
Page 17
DRAFT Corridors and Gateways Plan
City of Pasco
2008
Option 1: Sidewalk with grass strip and trees and shrubs
wig
k S
a 4
As shown above this design option is presently used for the Sandifur Parkway corridor
between Broadmoor Blvd and Road 68 and is the desired design option if right-of-way is
available. Specific details include a meandering sidewalk, multiple varieties of trees on both
sides of the sidewalk, fencing, and pockets of various shrubberies. This concept was
developed by city staff and has been incorporated into the Pasco Municipal Code as the
required landscaping for all development fronting Sandifur Parkway. This design provides the
best visual appearance with appropriate integration of grass, trees, and shrubs for minimal
maintenance required. Having a landscape strip between the sidewalk and the fencing is also
a benefit because full use of the sidewalk is available.
Page 18
DRAFT Corridors and Gateways Plan
City of Pasco
2008
Option 2: Sidewalk with grass strip and landscaping on both sides of walk
)111�1 oil!III
y
t-
It is the intent of this Plan to landscape the entire corridor right-of-way. As shown in the
images above this option is similar to Option 1, but does not have shrubbery. Two important
features of this option are the increased security for the pedestrian and the buffer area
provided between the residential uses and the roadway. When using this option the
landscape width and tree location should be carefully considered. These two issues could
have significant impact on the amount of maintenance required for the corridor.
Page 19
DRAFT Corridors and Gateways Plan
City of Pasco
2008
Option 3: Sidewalk with landscape planting strip
t�
.y
z t
This option is desired as a minimum if right-of-way is available for landscaping. This provides
for pedestrian safety as well as a consistent landscape pattern along the corridor segment.
Depending on the width of the available right-of-way for the landscape strip, it is
recommended that instead of having an extra wide landscape strip between the sidewalk and
curb the landscape strip should be split up to provide a grass buffer between the sidewalk and
fence. This will improve the functionality of a sidewalk with multiple uses.
Another issue to consider is the location of the sidewalk. As shown in the second photo above
some physical features of the corridor may limit the ability to cost effectively separate the
sidewalk from the street. For instance on Lewis Street, the topography limited the ability to
have a separated sidewalk so a modified design option was used.
Page 20
DRAFT Corridors and Gateways Plan
City of Pasco
2008
Option 4: Sidewalk with trees
s,
I
�e
�r
G
Some corridors within the City currently have trees integrated into the sidewalk. This option
provides for some landscaping where right-of-way is limited. It has been identified by the
Committee that this option should be avoided due to maintenance issues.
Due to the compaction of the soil surrounding roadbed and sidewalk and the limited water
source available it is very hard for a tree to survive in these conditions and spread out its
roots. Also, as the trees mature the roots can cause continued destruction to the sidewalk
including cracking and buckling. If this option is used a tree box should be considered to
improve the health of the tree and reduce the destruction of the sidewalk.
Page 21
DRAFT Corridors and Gateways Plan
City of Pasco
2008
Option 5: Sidewalk with shrubs
Y '
EPAIR
710RAGE
f
1 _
This option has not been recommended by the Committee as a design option to promote
within the right-of-way. Due to the off-season maintenance required from weeding, pruning,
spraying and litter cleanup this option could have a significant impact to the staffing of the
parks and recreation maintenance crew. This option is better than sidewalk alone or
undeveloped right-of-way.
Page 22
DRAFT Corridors and Gateways Plan
City of Pasco
2008
Option 6: Sidewalk only (Not Desired)
_ - -
J
- y
r'
1
Not Desired
�r I .
r
F
i
1J
I
Better
This option is undesired by the Committee and is recommended to only be used if adequate
right-of-way is unavailable. As a possible mitigation a wider sidewalk should be considered in
order to improve pedestrian safety along the corridor. The City should also coordinate with
adjacent landowners to improve the landscaping fronting the right-of-way.
For example, as shown in the second photo above, 20th Avenue north of 1-182, this section has
a sidewalk located adjacent to the curb, but beyond the sidewalk outside of the right-of-way
the landscaping is consistent throughout the corridor segment with similar design of grass and
trees.
Page 23
DRAFT Corridors and Gateways Plan
City of Pasco
2008
Option 7: Pathway with landscaping
17
I?
,t S
In some areas with high recreation opportunities and future connections to other
multipurpose pathways this option may be more appropriate. Some benefits to a
multipurpose path include cheaper construction cost and provision of a wider pathway
accommodating multiple user types (bike, pedestrian, stroller, etc...). The city-proposed
bikeway and pathway map should be consulted when considering which corridor segments
should be developed as pathways. Landscaping along the pathway should be consistent with
the Parks and Recreation Department standards for pathways.
Page 24
DRAFT Corridors and Gateways Plan
City of Pasco
2008
Option 8: Low Maintenance
A.
m
�s
r
j +r
As noted earlier within the plan the Gateway areas have unique constraints limiting the
amount and type of landscaping options available. These constraints consist of limited water,
steep slopes, limited access, weather and coordination with the Washington State
Department of Transportation. Due to these issues, it was noted by the Committee that the
desired treatment along the more remote Gateway entrances where water may not be
available should be drought resistant plants native to the Pasco area which require limited
maintenance.
The plant type should be carefully selected in order to limit the amount of maintenance
needed for litter patrol, pruning, weeding, and spraying.
Page 25
DRAFT Corridors and Gateways Plan
City of Pasco
2008
Policy Guidance
Existing Policies
City of Pasco Comprehensive Plan (2007) - Volume I Goals Et Policies
TR-3. GOAL: BEAUTIFY THE MAJOR STREETS OF THE CITY.
TR-3-A Policy: incorporate extensive tree and landscape planting into all
major arterial and collector streets as they are constructed.
TR-3-13 Policy: institute retrofit projects that include significant
landscaping on major arterial streets.
Pasco Municipal Code
The Pasco Municipal Code currently addresses street improvements and
sidewalks, landscaping and screening including: design standards; the 1-182
Corridor Overlay District; special design standards for Sandifur Parkway,
Broadmoor Boulevard, Chapel Hill Boulevard, and Oregon Avenue;
maintenance; and fencing, under sections 25.58.010, 25.75, and 26.12.030.
Corridor and Gateway Policies
The policies below are categorized to provide both general and descriptive guidance. A
statement on the purpose or rationale follows each policy.
1. City Responsibility
1.1.City shall monitor development/redevelopment along each corridor to take
advantage of potential improvement opportunities and ensure that development
proposals fulfill appropriate landscaping and sidewalk requirements.
➢ In order to provide a consistent design throughout each corridor, the City needs to
review each new development proposal (building permit, site plan, binding site
plan, etc.) that abuts a corridor included in this Plan. The suggested
improvements should include landscaping and accomplish the intents of this Plan
to the extent possible.
1.2.City shall work with property owners to determine appropriate improvements.
➢ During the implementation process of this plan the City will encounter many
properties already developed but which do not reflect the corridor improvements
described by this plan. As part of this policy, it should be the City's responsibility
to work with adjacent landowner to identify reasonable and appropriate
improvements consistent with the desired corridor character.
1.3.Private improvements shall be done anticipating full ROW width requirements.
➢ Improvements such as buildings, fences, paved areas, etc. become impediments to
beautification efforts when located within future right-of-way acquisition and
landscape improvement areas. The City should ensure that such developments are
located outside future right-of-way and landscape improvement areas.
Page 26
DRAFT Corridors and Gateways Plan
City of Pasco
2008
1.4.Corridor improvements should be incorporated into roadway projects within the
ROW of each corridor.
Various projects will be done within the ROW of each corridor by the City, private
developers, or utility companies. The City needs to develop a process, including
interdepartmental review, which reviews each project and determine what could
be done as part of the project to apply the standards and polices of the Corridor
Plan. Accomplishment of this plan will depend greatly on the City's commitment
and level of annual funding. Much can be accomplished at little cost to the City
when done in conjunction wit new development.
➢ Redeveloping corridors within the older part of the City (or where development
already exists) will require more financial participation and associated
commitment from the City. Undergrounding of overhead utilities will likely
depend greatly on the City's willingness to commit to a financial partnership with
the PUD.
1.5.Adequate ROW within each corridor should be acquired during roadway and
development projects to provide for appropriate future corridor improvements.
Some of the corridors do not have adequate ROW for suggested improvements.
Adequate ROW should be acquired when development/ redevelopment occurs
throughout the corridors. This effort could be facilitated through the
Transportation Planning process coordinating future roadway capacity needs with
landscaping objectives.
1.6.Landscaping and sidewalk improvements within the ROW should strive to be
consistent with the corridor plan options, to the extent practicable.
➢ It is the intent of this plan to identify suggestions for preferred corridor
improvements for each corridor segment. In order to realize an aesthetically
pleasing environment throughout each corridor in the City, it is important to
provide a consistent landscape for each segment with a smooth transition from
segment to segment. Variations from the defined options should be used only to
the extent required by unusual circumstances (topography, right-of-way width,
etc.).
1.7.All other landscaping and sidewalk improvements outside of the ROW shall be
consistent with the City of Pasco Landscaping Ordinance.
y The City of Pasco currently has a Landscaping Ordinance which identifies
improvement requirements outside of the ROW for residential, commercial and
industrial land uses. All landscaping within this area shall be consistent and
integrated into the Corridor plan.
2. Sidewalks
2.1.A sidewalk separated from the curb with a landscaped strip in-between is
preferred.
As mentioned in the City of Pasco Municipal Code, all new sidewalk improvements
are required to be separated from the curb. The purpose of this is to provide
both an aesthetically pleasing environment to the driver and a sense of safety for
the pedestrian. In some locations where ROW constraints exist, it may be very
costly or nearly impossible to separate the sidewalk.
Page 27
DRAFT Corridors and Gateways Plan
City of Pasco
2008
2.2.If a sidewalk must be located adjacent to the curb, additional width should be
required to provide pedestrian safety.
Since the corridors included in this plan have higher traffic volumes, extra
sidewalk width along the corridor will allow pedestrians improved safety and
comfort from the edge of curb when walking along the sidewalk and allow for
adequate space while passing other pedestrians.
2.3.A sidewalk should be placed on both sides of corridors. Exceptions may be
considered in areas of low pedestrian traffic where long stretches are not likely
to develop or in industrial areas.
Sidewalk placement along both sides of the street will decrease the number of
pedestrians crossing the corridor to get to a pedestrian path and will provide
visual balance in the corridor and increase the connectivity for pedestrian
activity. In relatively few cases because of the industrial nature of a corridor
where development may not occur, a path/sidewalk on one side of the street may
be acceptable to reduce costs. However landscaping on such property would still
be appropriate.
2.4. The City shall coordinate with existing developed property owners adjacent to
developing properties to incorporate additional corridor improvements with new
developments. (Landscaping at City expense, sidewalk at property owner
expense.)
r As new development and redevelopment occurs some corridors will see significant
portions of the corridor improvement completed by individual development
projects. Other portions of the corridor without existing sidewalks may be
developed already with limited redevelopment potential. In order to create
continuity throughout the corridor, the City may, if it deems appropriate, extend
sidewalk improvements to a logical conclusion through existing developed
frontage.
3. Landscaping
3.1.Landscaping along each corridor segment should be as consistent as possible (i.e.
if neighboring development is complete, similar characteristics should be
included in design of new developments).
Because the intent of the corridor plan is to provide a clean and consistent feel
throughout each corridor, it is important that each corridor be constructed to the
some standard. Since some corridors segments are already partially created, new
development will need to match or coordinate/transition with existing. If a
development is the first one to develop along a corridor segment they may pick a
landscaping option that is consistent with the design criteria identified in this
plan. It should be noted that the City and developer should work together to
choose a design which can be appropriately implemented and maintained for the
entire segment with minimal variation.
3.2.If ROW is available, landscaping should be provided on both sides of the
sidewalk.
➢ This policy statement epitomizes the intent of this plan. Where possible within
the ROW constraints and existing development limitations, the ideal situation for
any given corridor would be to provide curb, gutter, landscape strip, sidewalk and
Page 28
DRAFT Corridors and Gateways Plan
City of Pasco
2008
additional landscape strip, then fence/wall where appropriate. This gives the
best appearance, safety, and functionality for pedestrians. This would be similar
to Sondifur Parkway between Road 68 and Road 100 as well as the east side of
Road 100 near Chapel Hill.
3.3.As adjacent private property is developed, the landscaping shall be designed to
seamlessly integrate with the Corridor landscaping for that block.
➢ The City recognizes that corridor landscape designs do not always match the
existing landscaping on adjacent private properties. As building permits are
obtained, required landscaping should smoothly transition into the adjacent
corridor landscape design.
3.4.The city should encourage private property owners to match their landscape
designs to the City standard for their block. The City may assist commercial
property owners who match their landscape plan to the City plan by offering a
joint landscape maintenance program.
➢ The intent of this policy is to encourage private participation through incentives
that promotes the landscape option chosen for a corridor without patchwork
effects.
4. Utilities
4.1.All overhead utilities (excluding 115+ kV electric transmission lines) should be
converted to underground.
➢ The visual effect of the landscape effort envisioned by the Corridors Plan can be
undermined by the existence of overhead electrical/telephone lines and poles.
Placing these utilities underground can dramatically improve the finished
appearance of the landscape improvements and should be accomplished to the
greatest extent possible. The City and the PUD have coordinated on some corridor
improvements in the recent past and should develop a definitive plan to place
distribution (but not transmission) lines underground in all corridors identified in
this plan.
4.2.Conduit for power and associated vaults should be installed during street
improvements if overhead power is not to be relocated underground as part of
the immediate project.
➢ Due to budget constraints and timing, some overhead utility relocation may not
be completed at the time of a street improvement. However, any conduit or
vaults which will ease the underground conversion of the utility at a later date
should be considered and included with the project as appropriate. This will
assist in future corridor improvements and require coordination with various staff
to integrate corridor design options into future projects.
5. Gateway
5.1.City shall coordinate with Washington State Department of Transportation on
implementation of appropriate gateway treatments.
➢ Due principally to state funding constraints, WSDOT's policy generally avoids
landscape improvements in the sate highway interchange areas (which also
represent gateways to the city). To the extent the City desires to improve the
designated gateways, the City will need to actively pursue an agreement with
Page 29
DRAFT Corridors and Gateways Plan
City of Pasco
2008
WSDOT to define the treatment options acceptable to both parties. The City
should expect to bear the majority of costs of any treatment options, including
maintenance.
5.2.Gateway improvements should consist of low maintenance and low water
usages.
Due to the difficult access and terrain and the limited ability to provide water to
the gateway areas, it is recommended that a low-water-usage and low-
maintenance design plan be developed for these gateways. It should integrate the
native landscape vegetation of the Pasco area. Most of the gateway improvements
should be focused around the entrance into the adjacent corridor. The US
395 1Lewis Street Interchange area is a good example of this concept. Grass may
be an option for landscape treatment where safe access for maintenance
personnel and irrigation are available.
5.3.A large scale "Welcome to Pasco" sign should be considered as part of each
gateway near the entrance to the City in conjunction with landscape
improvements.
As identified in the 1995 Gateway and Corridor Plan a welcoming sign as you enter
the City should be considered. These signs should be placed at a location visible
along the adjacent corridor segment as you enter the City.
5.4.Where possible, gateway improvements shall be incorporated as an extension of
applicable corridor improvements.
r Due to the limited amount of gateway improvements it is recommended that the
improvements to each gateway be completed in conjunction with adjacent
corridor improvement projects. As described in Policy 5.2 gateway improvements
are recommended to be focused around the entrance to the corridor so it is easily
visible as an extension of this improvement.
5.5.Improvements for the 201h Avenue and Road 68 gateways should be pursued by
the City independently of a corridor improvement extension.
Corridors adjacent to these two gateways are currently enhanced or completed,
thus the improvements to these gateways will need to be pursued separately by
the City for implementation. All other gateways can be improved in conjunction
with the adjacent corridor project.
6. Maintenance
6.1.Maintenance of the landscaping area within each corridor ROW should be carried
out by the City.
The proper maintenance of a landscaped corridor is equally important as its
installation. Well-maintained corridors convey a sense of competence and caring
in a community, while poorly-maintained landscaped corridors send the opposite
message, thereby defeating the purpose of the landscape initiative.
6.2.Design of landscape areas shall consider ongoing City maintenance requirements
including width of grass strips, variation of tree species, placement of
shrubbery, irrigation systems, and any other landscape maintenance related
issue.
Page 30
DRAFT Corridors and Gateways Plan
City of Pasco
2008
➢ Since the intent is for the City to maintain the landscaped area within the ROW,
appropriate design standards should be considered. For instance, the width of the
lawn mower should be considered to avoid a narrow strip requiring an extra pass
with a mower. Curbing along a fence line would provide a clean edge and simplify
mowing. Placement and variety of trees should be appropriately planned.
➢ Use of shrubs should be minimized in order to limit the amount of maintenance
required from weeding, pruning, spraying, and litter cleanup. Grass and trees
have been found to be easier to maintain than shrubs.
7. Funding
7.1.City shall provide adequate and predictable funding to implement and maintain
corridor and gateway improvements.
➢ Accomplishment of this plan will depend greatly on the City's commitment and
level of annual funding. Much can be accomplished at little cost to the City when
done in conjunction with new development. Redeveloping corridors within the
older part of the City (or were development already exists) will require more
financial participation and associated commitment from the City. Undergrounding
of overhead utilities will likely depend greatly on the City's willingness to commit
to a financial partnership with the PUD.
8. Priority
8.1.City staff shall work to implement corridor improvements, beginning at the
highest priority corridor as defined below as funds allow annually.
➢ Funding available for corridor improvements should be prioritized in order to
leverage resources and provide direction to this effort.
8.2.Highest priority should be for corridor and gateway improvements included with
roadway projects in the annual Transportation Improvement Program (TIP).
➢ All projects which will be redesigning or widening a roadway as part of the City's
TIP should incorporate the corridor landscape improvements. It is recognized that
the budgets of these TIP projects may not allow for the installation of the
corridor improvements. The City should nevertheless include the landscape
design into the overall roadway design so that the corridor improvements can be
installed at a later date with minimal conflict. Preferably, funding from this
program could augment road projects to complete the corridor.
8.3.High priority should be given to projects where electrical distribution lines have
been undergrounded.
➢ The undergrounding of overhead utilities is a major portion of improving a
corridor aesthetically. As stated above, the City and the PUD should develop a
definitive plan to place distribution (but not transmission) lines underground in
all corridors identified in this plan.
8.4.High priority should be given to extend corridor improvements in conjunction
with private development (or redevelopment) to complete or maximize half
street improvements on corridor segments.
➢ As private development occurs along corridor segments the City should work to
assist existing developed properties in finalizing the corridor design for the
segment. For instance if a developer is improving three-fourths of a corridor
Page 31
DRAFT Corridors and Gateways Plan
City of Pasco
2008
segment as part of their project and the remaining one-fourth is existing
development with no corridor improvements the City should work with the new
development and existing landowners to complete the improvement for the entire
segment.
8.5.The next level of priority should focus on determining and implementing
appropriate improvements for the Corridor segments identified in the Table
"City High Opportunity Potential Priority Ranking".
➢ Several corridors will not have private development impetus for the provision of
improvements. The City will need to be proactive in pursuing sidewalk and
landscaping improvements in these corridors. A priority ranking was developed to
give direction to those corridors needing significant City effort. Corridor
segments were ranked based on leveraging other types of funding such as roadway
projects, private development or utilities. Other consideration was given to
completing corridors that have existing components that will be easier to provide
a complete segment and also highest improvement potential for pedestrians and
transit users.
Page 32