Loading...
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