HomeMy WebLinkAbout2024.08.12 Council Workshop Packet
AGENDA
City Council Workshop Meeting
7:00 PM - Monday, August 12, 2024
Pasco City Hall, Council Chambers & GoToWebinar
Page
1. MEETING INSTRUCTIONS for REMOTE ACCESS - The Pasco City
Council Workshops are broadcast live on PSC-TV Channel 191 on
Charter/Spectrum Cable in Pasco and Richland and streamed at
www.pasco-wa.gov/psctvlive and on the City’s Facebook page at
www.facebook.com/cityofPasco.
To listen to the meeting via phone, call (914) 614-3221 and use access code
347-125-017.
2. CALL TO ORDER
3. ROLL CALL
(a) Pledge of Allegiance
4. VERBAL REPORTS FROM COUNCILMEMBERS
5. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION WITH OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC
COMMENT – the public may comment on each topic scheduled for
discussion, up to 2 minutes per person with a total of 8 minutes per item. If
opposing sides wish to speak, then both sides receive an equal amount of
time to speak or up to 4 minutes each side.
3 - 31 (a) Presentation - Benton County Recovery Coalition and 9-1-1
Funding for Franklin County (15 minutes)
Presentation - Franklin County Sheriff Jim Raymond related to
Benton County Recovery Coalition and 9-1-1 Funding for Franklin
County.
32 - 40 (b) Presentation - Columbia River Shoreline Reconveyance Update
(10 minutes)
Presentation by Karl Dye and David Reepleog from the Tri-City
Development Council (TRIDEC)
Page 1 of 481
41 - 427 (c) 2023 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket (15 minutes)
428 - 452 (d) 2025-2030 Capital Improvement Plan Presentation (15 minutes)
453 - 462 (e) Resolution - Acceptance of Work for A Street Sports Complex
Phase 1 (5 minutes)
463 - 469 (f) Resolution - Accept Quote for New Cat and Dog Kennels for New
Tri-Cities Animal Control Facility (5 minutes)
470 - 479 (g) Resolution - Project Acceptance for East Riverview Lift Station
(3 minutes)
6. MISCELLANEOUS COUNCIL DISCUSSION
7. EXECUTIVE SESSION
8. CLOSED SESSION
(a) Discuss Collective Bargaining Unit Negotiations per RCW
42.30.140(4)(a) (15 minutes)
9. ADJOURNMENT
10. ADDITIONAL NOTES
480 - 481 (a) Adopted Council Goals (Reference Only)
(b) This meeting is broadcast live on PSC-TV Channel 191 on
Charter/Spectrum Cable in Pasco and Richland and streamed at
www.pasco-wa.gov/psctvlive.
Audio equipment available for the hearing impaired; contact the
City Clerk for assistance.
Servicio de intérprete puede estar disponible con aviso. Por
favor avisa la Secretaria Municipal dos días antes para
garantizar la disponibilidad. (Spanish language interpreter
service may be provided upon request. Please provide two
business day's notice to the City Clerk to ensure availability.)
Page 2 of 481
AGENDA REPORT
FOR: City Council August 2, 2024
TO: Adam Lincoln, City Manager City Council Workshop
Meeting: 8/12/24
FROM: Adam Lincoln, City Manager
City Manager
SUBJECT: Presentation - Benton County Recovery Coalition and 9-1-1 Funding for
Franklin County (15 minutes)
I. REFERENCE(S):
Presentation - Benton County Recovery Coalition
Presentation - 9-1-1 Funding for Franklin County
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Presentation - Franklin County Sheriff Jim Raymond related to Benton County
Recovery Coalition and 9-1-1 Funding for Franklin County.
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
N/A
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
Presentations on the Benton County Recovery Coalition and 9-1-1 Funding for
Franklin County.
V. DISCUSSION:
Sheriff Jim Raymond, from the Franklin County Sheriff's Office, will attend the
City Council Workshop Meeting and provide two presentations to City Council
regarding the Benton County Recovery Coalition and 9-1-1 funding for Franklin
County.
Page 3 of 481
Benton County Recovery
Coalition
presentation
Pa
g
e
4
o
f
4
8
1
The Beginning Visions of a One Stop or Now
Columbia Valley Center for Recovery
Prior to 2018, the Vision of a One Stop Center began
with the following groups of Community Members:
Lawyers, Law Enforcement, Fire Department
Providers of Medical, Substance abuse, and Mental
Health Services
Pa
g
e
5
o
f
4
8
1
2013-Present
One stop Recovery Center
Property Acquisition
1.legislative appropriations
2. State Grants
3.American Recovery funding)
Alternatives to Incarceration
Local control of Beds and Services
Pa
g
e
6
o
f
4
8
1
The Recovery Coalition
https://www.509recovery.org/
In the beginning, there was a visionary group
that helped bring about where we are today
This group secured funds to purchase the Old
Kennewick General Hospital property through
state taxes and grants
Worked with State and local Governments to
push forward the vision of a One-Stop Crisis
Center
Pa
g
e
7
o
f
4
8
1
The Recovery Board of Directors for the Coalition
•Michele S Gerber –Chair•Jason Bliss•Jaime Carson•Cameron Fordmeir•Courtney Hesla•Chris Jensen•Jim Millbauer•Mary Rosen•Nancy Roach•Danielle Stenhjem•Eileen Tanner
This group is to be differentiated from the Behavioral
Health Advisory Committee (BFBHAC)
Pa
g
e
8
o
f
4
8
1
Bi-County Advisory Behavioral Member
Equal voting members are to report to the
commissioners and make recommendations, and
communication needs improvement
Franklin County has eight voting members
Benton County has eight voting members
There is a 17th Member from the General Public
Kim Lettrick -911 Director of Secomm
Pa
g
e
9
o
f
4
8
1
Franklin County Advisory Board Members
•Kevin Crowley
•Jim Raymond
•Angie Manterola
•Becky Grohs
•Erin Petty
•John Roach
•Mark Holyoak
•BJ Olson
Pa
g
e
1
0
o
f
4
8
1
Benton County is the owner of all property involved
Benton County advised in 2022 that they would be
responsible for all construction improvements
The Bi-County Commissioners agreed in 2022 that the Bi-
County Behavioral Health Advisory Board voting members
would vote on all fund requests and ensure funds were used
according to the partnership and agreement.
Pa
g
e
1
1
o
f
4
8
1
Franklin County Advisory Board Members
Voted for Lourdes Temporary Sobriety Center as did
Benton County
Some Members believe that none of the collected
money should be used to advance a construction
schedule for a building
Some members feel that they are in place to satisfy the
desires of Benton County.
Pa
g
e
1
2
o
f
4
8
1
Recover Center Development
2022: Drafting and reviewing an RFP for the Recovery Center and
Mobile Crisis Response Teams
2023: The Contract for the Recovery Center was awarded to
Comprehensive Healthcare
Progress included finalizing layouts and securing funding, with facility
tours conducted to understand available resources
2024: The validation phase of the Recovery Center is nearing
completion
Construction expected to start between June and August
The facility is projected to be completed by December 2025
Pa
g
e
1
3
o
f
4
8
1
Sobering Center Initiatives
2022-2023: Initial discussions and proposals for a Sobering Center
Recommendations included entering into a contract with
Lourdes for sobering services at an interim location
The estimated time to open was January or February 2024
2024: Continued discussions emphasizing the need for the
following:
A detailed plan and cost analysis before making a formal
recommendation
Lourdes indicated that the cost would be more than originally
estimated
Have not been able to move forward without a contract
Pa
g
e
1
4
o
f
4
8
1
Crisis Response and Field Responder Programs
2022-2023: Development and Issuance of an RFP for the
Field Responder Program aimed at providing rapid
response and proper staffing for crisis situations
2024: Efforts continued to finalize the program, focusing
on ensuring collaboration with local agencies and
addressing staffing challenges
Pa
g
e
1
5
o
f
4
8
1
Workforce Development
2023: Formation of Workforce Subcommittee to address
shortages and promote training programs. Collaboration
with educational institutions like Columbia Basin College
to develop certification programs for substance use
disorder professionals
2024: The CBC Substance Use Disorder program is set to
start in September 2024, aiming to enroll up to 80 students
Pa
g
e
1
6
o
f
4
8
1
Current Franklin County Funds
$8,008,676 million
These funds will be utilized for services and programming
within Benton County-owned property.
RCW: 82.14.460 –Grants the authority to impose the tax and
regulate its use.
Pa
g
e
1
7
o
f
4
8
1
“The Problems”
Poor communication and unclear expectations have led to
confusion about who various entities are and who has the
formal role of making recommendations to the
Commissioners
BFBHAC, 509 Recovery Coalition, and Benton County have
been hard at work and there is a lack of clarity (for some) on
who is responsible for solely making all the decisions
Due to muddled guidance from the BFBHAC and confused
communication with the Franklin County Board of
Commissioners the Lourdes Temporary Sobriety Center has
stalled
Pa
g
e
1
8
o
f
4
8
1
Questions?
Pa
g
e
1
9
o
f
4
8
1
ENSURING CRITICAL EMERGENCY SERVICES FOR OUR COMMUNITY
Pa
g
e
2
0
o
f
4
8
1
Emergency Services in Franklin
County are in Crisis
Infrastructure is in Decline and Beyond Repair
Rural Areas of Franklin County Suffering From
Dead Zones
Inevitable System Failure
Urgency of Action
Need to upgrade to 800Mhz Capability for Towers
and Radios
Pa
g
e
2
1
o
f
4
8
1
Why We Need Funding
The Current Funding for 911 from User Agencies
only Funds the Basic Services.
Public and First Responder Safety is Currently at
Risk
Microwave and Infrastructure Will Cost in the 8
Figure Range for the Entire Region
Reality is the cost are unknown. Some estimates
rise as high as 30 million.
Pa
g
e
2
2
o
f
4
8
1
Taxing Options for Consideration
E911 Tax
-One Cent per $10 purchase Sales Tax for Franklin County
Communications Tax
-Two Cents per $10 purchase Sales Tax for Franklin County
Kittitas County Passed this Initiative Last Month (Yes –63% of vote)
For Both Taxes
Tax would apply to residents, and visitors to our County who rely on Emergency Services
Both are 50% plus one for passage
On the Tuesday, November 5th Presidential Ballot
If passed, the Comm. Tax would be $2 on a $1000 purchase
Pa
g
e
2
3
o
f
4
8
1
Not to be Confused with the
Public Safety Tax
This 3 cents for every $10 purchase tax was imposed in 2014.
It was extended in last year’s November Election
These funds for Franklin County go to Corrections and Interest of Capital.
The City of Pasco is using the funds to pay the Bond on Police HQ and their
Street Crimes Unit.
This revenue is already earmarked into the future
Pa
g
e
2
4
o
f
4
8
1
Differences Between the Taxes
E911 Tax -The funds raised can ONLY be used towards 911
Dispatch center’s phone systems, security, and
maintenance costs
Communications Tax -These funds can be used for 911
communications. This tax can fund our infrastructure,
microwave, subscriber fees, field radios, basically
anything radio related and a start to replace our radio
systems.
Pa
g
e
2
5
o
f
4
8
1
How the Taxes Will Be Used
An estimated $4 Million would be raised annually for each
One Cent per $10 sales tax.
SUSTAINABLE source of funding for Emergency
Communications and E911 Depending on Tax
Enhanced Coordination with All Local Emergency Agencies
in and that border Franklin County
The funding would also be used toward a secondary
Emergency Operations Center in Franklin County, for
further safety redundancy for our area (From the E911
Tax)
Pa
g
e
2
6
o
f
4
8
1
Strategic Importance
Franklin County Emergency Services Needs to
Transition to 800 MHz Radio Technology
VHF System Used by Fire and Law Needs To Be
Replaced By 800 MHz Capability
Boosts Overall Emergency Response Effectiveness
and is Cohesive with Other Local Agencies
Pa
g
e
2
7
o
f
4
8
1
Other Fundraising Efforts for Our Area
Richland Fire Chief, Thomas Huntington is Leading an Effort for all 24 Local Fire and Law agencies (including Franklin County) to get Funding from State and Federal Agencies and smaller local grants.
These are competitive grants, and there is not guarantee of success
If successful, these efforts will compliment any shortfalls we have with the radio infrastructure, radios, microwave, etc.
Pa
g
e
2
8
o
f
4
8
1
Tax Initiative Costs
Cost of filing for the Initiative for the November
Ballot (Approximately $21,000 per initiative)
Develop Volunteer Organization for Marketing Efforts
Pa
g
e
2
9
o
f
4
8
1
Engaging the Community
Educate City and County Residents for the
Importance to Pass this Initiative
Continue to Build Cooperation with Local
Organizations and Leaders.
Seek Feedback and Input on Specific Needs and
Priorities
Pa
g
e
3
0
o
f
4
8
1
Together, We Can Save Lives
The “Can” Has Been Kicked Down the Road Long
Enough
Lives are in Danger.
Either Tax is a Fair Tax for All
Pa
g
e
3
1
o
f
4
8
1
AGENDA REPORT
FOR: City Council August 7, 2024
TO: Adam Lincoln, City Manager City Council Workshop
Meeting: 8/12/24
FROM: Jesse Rice, Director
Parks & Recreation
SUBJECT: Presentation - Columbia River Shoreline Reconveyance Update (10
minutes)
I. REFERENCE(S):
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Presentation by Karl Dye and David Reepleog from the Tri-City Development
Council (TRIDEC)
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
significant owns (USACE) Engineers of United Army States The Corps
property in the Tri-Cities area. Most of the Corps’ land is managed by local
governments for recreational purposes while other land is self-managed by the
Corps for recreation and flood control.
For the past several years the Tri-Cities region, facilitated through the Tri-City
Development Council (TRIDEC) has worked on reconveyance of the Columbia
River Shoreline from federal control to local government agencies to allow
management and use that better suits the community.
In addition to several local agencies including Port of Pasco, Port of Benton,
Benton County, Franklin County, City of Pasco, City of Richland, and City of
Kennewick, both the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation
(CTUIR) and most recently the Yakama Nation Confederated Tribes and
Bands have collaborated to create a federal legislative action plan which would
transfer lands from USACE to the respective requesting groups.
V. DISCUSSION:
Karl Dye (President and CEO) and David Reepleog (VP for Federal Programs)
Page 32 of 481
of the Tri-City Development Council (TRIDEC) will provide an update on the
latest effort regarding the regional rivershore reconveyance effort.
Page 33 of 481
Pa
g
e
3
4
o
f
4
8
1
P1.5
P3.5
Pa
g
e
3
5
o
f
4
8
1
Pa
g
e
3
6
o
f
4
8
1
Pa
g
e
3
7
o
f
4
8
1
Pa
g
e
3
8
o
f
4
8
1
Pa
g
e
3
9
o
f
4
8
1
Pa
g
e
4
0
o
f
4
8
1
AGENDA REPORT
FOR: City Council August 8, 2024
TO: Adam Lincoln, City Manager City Council Workshop
Meeting: 8/12/24
FROM: Jacob Gonzalez, Director
Community & Economic Development
SUBJECT: 2023 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket (15 minutes)
I. REFERENCE(S):
Exhibit A: CPA2022-003 New Heritage (Industrial to Mixed
Residential/Commercial)
Exhibit B: CPA2023-001 Road 100 & Argent (Low Density Residential to Mixed
Residential/Commercial)
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Discussion.
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
N/A
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
With few exemptions, Washington State Law prohibits local jurisdictions from
amending their Comprehensive Plans more than once per calendar year. The
City has established a process outlined in the Pasco Municipal Code (PMC)
Chapter evaluated be to amendments that for allows 25.215 proposed
concurrently, considered the annual docket. The amendment process has two
components consisting of establishing the docket, followed by the evaluation
and recommendation of the docket items.
Summary of Amendments
The 2023 Amendment Docket consists of two items:
CPA2022-003 - New Heritage
o Request: Industrial to Mixed Residential/Commercial
o Docketed: This item was placed on the 2022 Comprehensive
Page 41 of 481
Plan Amendment Docket via Resolution No. 4251 on September
19, the of status pending associated to Due 2022. the
Environmental Impact Statetement (EIS), no formal decision was
made. The item was thus continued (placed) on the 2023 docket.
o Planning Commission Recommondation: The Pasco Planning
Commission recommended in favor of this item on January 25,
2023, and that it be forwarded to Pasco City Council.
CPA2023-001 - Road 100 & Argent
o Request: Low Density Residential to Mixed
Residential/Commercial
o Docketed: This item was placed on the 2023 Comprehensive
Plan Amendment Docket via Resolution No 4393 on November 6,
2023.
o Pasco Planning The Commission Planning Recomondation:
Commission recommended a denial of this item on May 16, 2024,
and that it be forwarded to Pasco City Council.
V. DISCUSSION:
Each amendment must be evaluated based on the approval criteria listed
below, which will be considered the official findings.
Approval Criteria PMC Subsection 25.215.020(8)(c)
(i) The proposed amendment bears a substantial relationship to the public
health, safety, welfare, and protection of the environment;
(ii) The proposed amendment is consistent with the requirements of Chapter
36.70A RCW and with the portion of the City’s adopted Comprehensive Plan
not affected by the amendment;
(iii) The proposed amendment corrects an obvious mapping error; or
(iv) proposed The amendment addresses an identified deficiency in the
Comprehensive Plan.
Additional factors for consideration PMC Subsection 25.215.020(9)
(a) The effect upon the physical environment;
(b) The effect on open space and natural features including, but not limited to,
topography, streams, rivers, and lakes;
(c) The compatibility with and impact on adjacent land uses and surrounding
neighborhoods;
(d) The adequacy of and impact on community facilities, including utilities,
roads, public transportation, parks, recreation, and schools;
(e) The quantity and location of land planned for the proposed land use type
and density and the demand for such land;
Page 42 of 481
(f) The current and projected project density in the area; and
(g) The effect, if any, upon other aspects of the Comprehensive Plan.
Next Steps:
Staff will prepare and issue a notice for public hearing to be conducted on the
2023 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket.
Application materials are attached as Exhibit A and B.
Page 43 of 481
2023 Comprehensive Plan Amendments
•Comprehensive Plan:
•Guiding document and set of strategies
•20-year growth management planning
•Adopted 2021
•Amended 2023
•Amendments:
•Once per year
•Emergency amendments allowed (ex: budget)
•Evaluated per PMC criteria
•Concurrent review
Pa
g
e
4
4
o
f
4
8
1
2023 Comprehensive Plan Amendments
•Amendment Criteria (PMC 25.215.020):
(i)The proposed amendment bears a substantial relationship to the public health, safety, welfare, and protection of the environment;
(ii)The proposed amendment is consistent with the requirements of Chapter 36.70A RCW and with the portion of the City’s adopted Comprehensive Plan not affected by the amendment;
(iii)The proposed amendment corrects an obvious mapping error; or
(iv)The proposed amendment addresses an identified deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan
Pa
g
e
4
5
o
f
4
8
1
2023 Comprehensive Plan Amendments
•Amendment Criteria (PMC 25.215.020):
(a)The effect upon the physical environment;
(b)The effect on open space and natural features including, but not limited to, topography, streams, rivers, and lakes;
(c)The compatibility with and impact on adjacent land uses and surrounding neighborhoods;
(d)The adequacy of and impact on community facilities, including utilities, roads, public transportation, parks, recreation, and schools;
(e)The quantity and location of land planned for the proposed land use type and density and the demand for such land;
(f)The current and projected project density in the area; and
(g)The effect, if any, upon other aspects of the Comprehensive Plan.
Pa
g
e
4
6
o
f
4
8
1
2023 Comprehensive Plan Amendments
•Amendment Summary
File Number:CPA 2022-003
Applicant:New Heritage
Description:Future Land Use Map Amendment:
Industrial to Mixed Residential and
Commercial
Current Zoning:I-2 Medium Industrial District
Address / Parcel(s)112470014, 112430012, 112430021,
112462078, 112462096
Total Area (Acres)197
Environmental
Determination
Determination of Significance, issued
06/07/2022, EIS Required
Pa
g
e
4
7
o
f
4
8
1
2023 Comprehensive Plan Amendments
•Amendment Summary
File Number:CPA2023-001
Applicant:Clover Planning, LLC
Description:Future Land Use Map
Amendment: Low Density
Residential to Mixed
Residential/Commercial
Current Zoning:RS-20
Address /
Parcel(s)
118292027, 118292036
Total Area
(Acres)
2.85
Environmental
Determination
Determination of Non-
Significance, Issued 06/19/2023
Pa
g
e
4
8
o
f
4
8
1
Next Steps
2023 Comprehensive Plan Amendments
Workshop Public Hearing
(Findings/Evaluations)
Final
Determination/Decision
Pa
g
e
4
9
o
f
4
8
1
2023 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket
CPA2022-003
File Number: CPA2022-003
Applicant: New Heritage
Description: Future Land Use Map Amendment: Industrial to Mixed Residential and
Commercial
Current Zoning: I-2 Medium Industrial District
Address / Parcel(s) 112470014, 112430012, 112430021, 112462078, 112462096
Total Area (Acres) 197
Environmental Determination Determination of Significance, Issued 06/07/2022
Non-Project Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) Issued 07/29/2024
Page 50 of 481
Pasco
29%,“
Com rehensive Plan Amendment A lication
Use this application to propose an amendment to the adopted City of Pasco Comprehensive Plan.Only
completed applications that have been provided a Notice of Completion no later than 5:00 PM on May 2,2022
will be considered in the 2022 annual amendment cycle.Applications or proposals received after May 2,2022
will be considered in the following year cycle.
Community &Economic Development Department
525 N 3rdAvenue,Pasco,Washington 99301 |PO Box 293
Phone (509)545—3441 |Fax (509)545-3499
City Pasco State WA Zip 99301
Phone 509-412-11 10 Email rogerb@broetjefamiIytrust.org
Applicant:Roger Bairstow
Company Name
(ifapphcable):Broetje Orchards LL
C
Mailing Address 3713 East A Street
SECTION1A
MASTER FILE#:
DATE RECEIVED:/_/
AUTHORIZED AGEN
The undersigned hereby certifiesthat all informationsubmittedwith this application is complete and correct
to the best ofmy knowledge.
Print Name
Signature __J_J_Date
CONTACT INFORMATION
SECTION 13
(STAFF ON LY
('2‘...-I'
Page 51 of 481
p //9
naval
SECTION 2A
Ifthis is a proposal for a text amendment provide the specific language for the proposed amendment in the
space below or attach to this form.Referencethe Comprehensive Plan pages or sections proposed to be
amended.
The Comprehensive Plan can be accessed at
Current Comprehensive Plan Land Use Industrial
Ifthis is a proposal for a re ert s eci ic amendment or chan e to the Future Land Use Ma describe the
change you are proposing.Also,complete questions under Section 4.
Property Address Unassigned
10-Digit Parcel Identification Number #112470014,#112430012,#112430021,#112462078,#112462096
Site Area (Acres)197 AC total (35.3,16.9,140.0,2.46,1.65 respectively)
Current Zoning Medium Industrial (I—2)&Light Industrial (I-1)
Proposed Comprehensive Plan Land Use
GENERALINFORMATION
Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment:
Not applicable.
htt 5:www asco-wa.ov 1088 10763 Cit -o —
Com rehensive—
Page 52 of 481
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT QUESTION
SECTION3
Questions 1 -5 apply to all proposed amendments to the Pasco Comprehensive Plan.Please answer the
questions below,or attach additional pages as needed.
01:What is the proposed amendment intended to accomplish?
The proposed amendment is to change the currently designated land use from Industrial to either
Mixed Residential/Commercial or Medium Density Residential.This would create a mix of residential,
commercial,and office spaces.Residential densities are estimated range between 6.6 units per acre
(UPA)to 11.5 UPA.See Section 1 &2 of the New Heritage 2022 Supplemental Report for more
information.
02:How will the proposed amendment support the Goals and Policies contained in Pasco’s Comprehensive
Plan?
This proposal will support Land Use Goals and Policies by providing a mix of commercial,residential,and supportive
land uses that will apply current Pasco design standards.This proposal will create neighborhoods that are walkable
to services,work,play,school,and parks.Housing Goals and Policies will be supported by encouraging housing for
all economicssegments with a wide range of housing options (multifamily,single-family,duplex,etc.).Economic
Development Goals and Policies will be supported by reducing commute times by providing additional housing
adjacent to industrial centers.See Section 4 of the New Heritage 2022 Supplemental Report for more information.
Q3:How will the proposed amendment support the Established Council Goals adopted via Resolution No
####
The proposed amendment will meet a variety of the Established Council Goals,See Section 3.3 of
the New Heritage 2022 Supplemental Report for more information and a detail response regarding
how the proposed amendment is in conformance with the Council Goals.
Q4:What impacts the proposed amendment have on the natural environment,such as critical areas or other
natural areas?
The current Industrial designation,and the potential uses allowed under that designation,could have
a greater impact on water,emissions to air,production of noise,storage or release of toxic/
hazardous substances than the proposed residential and retail uses.This would depend on the
specific uses proposed under the industrial designation.See Section 5 of the New Heritage 2022
Supplemental Report for more information.
(15:How will the proposed amendment address the long—terminterests,including the health,safety and
general welfare of the community?
New Heritage envisions a mixed—use development that is compact,pedestrian friendly,and where many activities of
daily living are within walking or biking distance.Diversity is crucial to the vision as a hallmark healthy community for
New Heritage.The proposal will pay tribute to the variety if cultures found in our community in its architectural and
landscape.The proposed would provide needed affordable housing,reduced travel commute times,traf?c
congestion,and pollution.See Sections 1,2 &5 of the New Heritage 2022 Supplemental Report for more
information.
Page 53 of 481
PROPERTY/SITEAMENDMENTS AND LAND USE MAP QUESTION
SECTION4
Questions 6 -11 apply only specific property specific amendments and/orchanges to the Future Land Use Map.
In addressing these questions,please describe potential impacts and measures to mitigate any negative
impacts.
(16:Describe the suitability of the area for the proposed designation,considering the adjacent land uses and
the surrounding development pattern.
This area has been historically industrially zoned and has not seen development for over 40 years.With new
distribution centers directly to the east,this increases the need for housing nearby to serve future
employees and the existing employees who work in the vicinity.Residential properties exist to the north
along E "A"Street.Also a new city park will be developed just to the west of the along "A"Street.In general,
the proposed use would have significantly less impact on the adjacent residential neighborhood and
industrial uses.Impact to adjacent industrial uses would be mitigated.See Sections 1,2 &5 of the New
Heritage 2022 Supplemental Report for more information.
Q7:What is the potential for the uses allowed under the proposed designation to be incompatible with uses
in the immediate vicinity of the property?How would adverse impacts be mitigated?
Tvoicallv.residential and industrial uses are not compatible includino commercial and mixed-use.This
proposal will allow these uses to act as a buffer between incompatible uses.Landscape buffers and
setbacks will also be utilized.The proposed use would be more compatible with the existing neighborhood
and proposed city park to the northwest.Impacts to adjacent industrial uses would be mitigated.No
additional adverse impacts than what exists presently.See Section 5 of the New Heritage 2022
Supplemental Report for more information.
(18:Describe the extent to which the proposed amendment supports the following:
a)Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element
b)Comprehensive Plan Transportation Element
c)Comprehensive Plan Implementation Element
The proposed amendments Comprehensive Plan Compatibility is described in Section 4 of the New
Heritage 2022 Supplemental Report.This section describes each of the goals and policies of the
comprehensive plan and the amendments conformance.
09:Describe any probable environmental impacts that might result from the proposed amendment.How
would any adverse impacts be mitigated?
Generally,Industrial zoning has a greater potential for environmental impacts to the natural and man-made environment
than does reverentially zoned land.These risks include increased exposure to chemicals or risk of ?re,run-off from the
storage of hazardous wastes,odor,and decreases in air quality.and noise.While the City's Comprehensive Plan
Environmental Impact Statement does not address these issues in detail,Pasco's existing codes,policies,and
requirements could address some or all of these impacts.See Section 5 of the New Heritage 2022 Supplemental Report
for more information regarding the existing condition,effects,and mitigation related to potential environmental impacts.
Page 54 of 481
@227?
05 H7092
03 /¥202
Q10:Describe the extent in which adequate public facilities and services are likely to be available to serve
the development allowed under the proposed amendment.
Pasco Fire Department (PFD)provides fire suppression,advanced life support,emergency medical
services,ambulance transport services,technical rescue services,and hazardous materials services to its
service area community.Law enforcement services for the City are provided by the City Police Department.
See Section 5.5 of the New Heritage 2022 Supplemental Report for more information regarding effects of
the proposal on public facilities.In addition,Section 5.6 and 5.7 address Utility and Transportation effects.
Q11:Please describe how the proposed amendment is consistent with the evaluation criteria in Pasco
Municipal Code 25.215.020(7)(b)(ii)and as referenced on page 2,section 3.
The proposed amendment is consistent with the evaluation criteria in Pasco
Municipal Code 25.215.020(7)(b)(ii),see Section 3.1 of the New Heritage 2022 Supplemental Report
for more information and a detail response regarding how the proposed amendment is in
conformance with the evaluation criteria.
SECTION5
l have read the Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Procedures Guide
I have contacted the Department of Community and Economic Development and have received
an intake application and have attached that letter to the application.
I have met with the Department of Community and Economic Development and participated in
the required Pre-Application Meeting on:02 /16 /2022
l have completed and submitted a State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA)Checklist
NOTICE OF COMPLETENESS:The application shall be considered complete within 28 days after submittal,unless
other notified per Pasco M ''a ode 4.02.060
Signature of Applica t Date
I certify that I am the owner or owner’s authorized agent.lf acting as an authorized agent,I further certify that
lam authorized to act as the owner’s agent regarding the property at the above-referenced address for the
purpose of filing applications for decisions,permits or review under applicable Pasco Municipal Codes,and l
have full power and authority to perform on behalf of the owner all acts required to enable the city to process
and review such applications.
I certify that the information on this application is true and correct and that the applicable requirements of the
City of Pasco,R ,an tate Environmental Policy Act (SEPA)will be met.
Signature Date
Owner or Owner’s Agent
Page 55 of 481
Prepared for:
Broetje Orchards LLC
Prepared By:
J-U-B ENGINEERS, Inc.
3611 South Zintel Way
Kennewick, WA 99337
With assistance from:
Land Strategies
The Metts Group
SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT
PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO PASCO’S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
FROM INDUSTRIAL TO MIXED COMMERCIAL/RESIDENTIAL
NEW HERITAGE
April 2022
Page 56 of 481
30-19-079/New Heritage i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 OVERVIEW.................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Vision for the Site ............................................................................................................................ 2
1.3 Land Use ........................................................................................................................................... 3
2 REPORT SCOPE ............................................................................................................ 6
2.1 Scope ................................................................................................................................................. 6
2.2 Alternatives ...................................................................................................................................... 6
3 SUMMARY – APPROVAL CRITERIA ........................................................................... 9
3.1 Pasco Code Requirements ............................................................................................................. 9
3.2 Community Development Requirements .................................................................................. 11
3.3 City Council Goals and Policies ................................................................................................... 15
4 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMPATIBILITY .............................................................. 19
5 EXISTING CONDITION, EFFECTS, AND MITIGATION ............................................ 36
5.1 Land Use ......................................................................................................................................... 36
5.2 Population, Housing, and Employment ..................................................................................... 42
5.3 Environmental Health ................................................................................................................... 48
5.4 Parks and Recreation .................................................................................................................... 50
5.5 Public Facilities .............................................................................................................................. 55
5.6 Utilities ............................................................................................................................................ 56
5.7 Transportation ............................................................................................................................... 61
6 ECONOMICS ............................................................................................................... 66
Page 57 of 481
30-19-079/New Heritage ii
TABLE OF TABLES
Table 2.1 – Land Use Estimates by Alternative ........................................................................................................ 8
Table 4.1 – Comprehensive Plan Compatibility ..................................................................................................... 19
Table 5.1 – Existing Land Use in Pasco Limits and UGA ....................................................................................... 36
Table 5.2 – Existing Vicinity Land Uses ................................................................................................................... 38
Table 5.3 – Proposed Land Uses in the Amendment Vicinity .............................................................................. 41
Table 5.4 – Average Household size ....................................................................................................................... 46
Table 5.5 – Employment ........................................................................................................................................... 47
Table 5.6 – Typical System Description Components ........................................................................................... 51
Table 5.7 – Low Use Projected Sewage Volumes .................................................................................................. 58
Table 5.8 – Low Intensity Alternative Proposed Water Demand with Irrigation ............................................... 58
Table 5.9 – Medium Use Projected Sewage Volumes .......................................................................................... 59
Table 5.10 – Medium Intensity Alternative Proposed Water Demand with Irrigation ..................................... 59
Table 5.11 – High Use Projected Sewage Volumes............................................................................................... 60
Table 5.12 – High Intensity Alternative Proposed Water Demand with Irrigation ............................................ 60
Table 6.13 – Commuting Flows by Geographic Area (2019)................................................................................ 68
TABLE OF FIGURES
Figure 1.1 – Amendment Area ................................................................................................................................... 1
Figure 1.2 – Vicinity Map ............................................................................................................................................ 2
Figure 5.1 – Pasco Future Land Use Map ............................................................................................................... 37
Figure 5.2 – Vicinity Land Use .................................................................................................................................. 39
Figure 5.3 – Park Service Area ................................................................................................................................. 53
Figure 5.4 – Pasco Street System ............................................................................................................................ 62
Figure 6.1 – Net Absorption, Industrial Properties in Franklin County ............................................................... 66
Figure 6.2 – Commuter Flows, City of Pasco (2019) .............................................................................................. 68
Figure 6.3 – Pasco Urban Growth Boundary .......................................................................................................... 69
LIST OF APPENDICES
A. Transportation
B. Economic Analysis
Page 58 of 481
30-19-079/New Heritage 1
1 OVERVIEW
1.1 INTRODUCTION
An Amendment is being proposed for a 196-acre area, currently designated in Pasco’s
Comprehensive Plan as “Industrial”, to either “Mixed Residential/Commercial” or "Medium Density
Residential." This 196-acre site is a portion of a 239-acre area. The remaining 42-acres, located
south of the existing railroad spur, would remain industrial. (See Figure 1.1). If this application to
amend the Comprehensive Plan is approved, an application for a Rezone and Land Subdivision
under the Pasco Zoning Code will be submitted. This would allow a mix of residential, commercial
and office uses, with residential densities ranging from a minimum of 6.6 Units Per Acre (UPA) to
a maximum 11.5 UPA. The purpose of this report is to: evaluate the effects this amendment would
have on the community and the environment; suggest measures to reduce impacts; and to
provide measures to increase compatibility with the goals and policies of Pasco’s Comprehensive
Plan.
FIGURE 1 .1 – AMENDMENT AREA
The land being evaluated for the Comprehensive Plan Amendment is comprised of five parcels in
Pasco:
• 112430012 (16.9 acres)
• 112430021 (140.0 acres)
• 112470014 (35.3 acres)
• 112462078 (2.46 acres)
• 112462096 (1.65 acres)
Page 59 of 481
30-19-079/New Heritage 2
FIGURE 1 .2 – VICINITY MAP
1.2 VISION FOR THE SITE
The site is proposed to be a mixed residential and commercial area, providing much needed
housing to the East Pasco area using the "New Urbanism" concept. This concept would
incorporate walkable blocks and streets, housing, and shopping opportunities in proximity,
accessible public spaces, and school facilities near those being served into the development. New
Heritage would be a mixed-use development that is compact, pedestrian-friendly and where many
of the activities of daily living (shopping, access to green-space, work, schools, etc.) are within
walking or biking distance. It will also serve nearby employment centers and provide job
opportunities to the families living there.
Page 60 of 481
30-19-079/New Heritage 3
Diversity is crucial to New Heritage’s vision and is a hallmark of a healthy community per Broetje
Orchards’ long-established experience and success in community-building. As such, new
development will seek to honor the history and culture unique to the East Pasco area. Further, this
concept of diversity also seeks to provide housing and services that welcome all, attracting low
and high-income residents, the elderly and young families.
In the tradition of Broetje Orchards
vision and values, New Heritage will be
a place that seeks to facilitate
connections between the residents
who live and work there. As such,
gathering places that are work nor
home, where individuals can feel a
sense of safety and belonging are a
core feature of the development and
provide opportunities for relationships
between residents to form. The New
Heritage concept will promote civic
engagement and advancing the well-being of those who are there. This is a goal of Broetje
Orchards’ current and future work (https://broetjefamilytrust.org).
1.3 LAND USE
New Heritage envisions up to five general land use categories:
• Residential
• Commercial/Office
• Schools
• Parks and Open space
• Roads and Utilities
The following describes the character of each of these land uses based on the “Vision” discussed
above:
RESIDENTIAL
New Heritage could develop a range of residential configurations. It could include the typical
single-family residences on a separate lot with access from a public street, where pedestrian, bike
and automobile access are from the public street, or automobile access is from an alley. This
option could have a range of 3 to 8 units per acre. Multi-family uses would range from duplexes
to multi-story apartment buildings ranging from 8 to 24 units per acre.
Source: Skibba Illustration
Page 61 of 481
30-19-079/New Heritage 4
Most of these residential uses would be
located within walking and biking distance
(0.5± mile) to parks, schools, retail shops
(coffee, barber, restaurants, offices, etc.) and
employment centers. Building designs for
these residential uses would vary depending
on the type and location. For instance,
duplexes in or near single-family residential
areas would be designed to be compatible
with single-family houses. Denser, multi-
family apartments would be designed to be compatible with nearby residential and commercial
uses. Pedestrian and bike access would be a combination of trails, street sidewalks and bikeways.
COMMERICAL/OFFICE
New Heritage would also contain a mix of retail uses. The vision would be to have shopping within
walking and biking distance to reduce the reliance on the automobile and to develop a real sense
of community. This category also would include mixed-use commercial and office space on the
ground floor with residential uses above.
This category could include mixed-use commercial and office space, located within a 0.5± mile
walking range, to primally serve the denser single-family and multi-family land uses.
This category may also include stand-alone
commercial, and office uses that are
designed to serve populations outside of the
0.5± mile walking area. This option would
include retail spaces that require more
parking and are designed to serve a wider
market, such as grocery stores and hardware
stores. This type of retail use would generally
be located at major intersections and be
designed to serve both the New Heritage
area and other areas outside of New
Heritage.
SCHOOLS
Because of the potential projected population of the New Heritage site and for the stated need
by the Pasco School District for a school site in this area, it is assumed that an elementary school
may be required to serve the area. Because of this, land has been set aside for this purpose. This
land use would also be served by a combination of walkways, pathways and bikeways and would
be within walking and biking distance from the major residential areas.
Source: Edge 1
Source: VMWP 1
Page 62 of 481
30-19-079/New Heritage 5
PARKS AND OPEN SPACE
One of the major elements in this “Vision” is the extent
and location of its Parks and Open Space system. This
includes parks, but also includes dedicated pathways
and bikeways, separated from vehicular traffic, and
sidewalks and dedicated bikeways within roadways. This
open space and pathway system would be the major
element connecting the residential areas to the
neighborhood centers, parks, schools and employment
centers. It is envisioned that this open-space concept
could also serve as the “Heart” of the community;
providing both recreation and meeting spaces. This
category also includes buffers to separate the existing
industries east of the site and along the existing railroad
spur to the South.
ROADS AND UTILITIES
A portion of the site will have to be dedicated to roadways, utility easements, existing easements,
and existing public roadways. All roadways would have sidewalks, space for bicycles and street
trees. Roadways would also have suitable stopping areas for public transportation. The vision also
anticipates that some type of public bus stop/transit center located within walking distance to the
major residential areas.
Source: Can Stock Photo
Page 63 of 481
30-19-079/New Heritage 6
2 REPORT SCOPE
2.1 SCOPE
In order to fully evaluate the potential effects of this Land Use change to Pasco’s Comprehensive
Plan, and to the community, the following major issues are addressed:
• Land Use – Including Impacts to and from Industry
• Population, Housing, and Employment
• Parks and Recreation
• Transportation
• Public Services and Utilities
• Economics
This analysis also includes an assessment of the amendment area, including current uses,
topography, access/utilities, and the existing infrastructure (rail, roadways, etc.). It evaluates the
need for residential uses near major employment centers, traffic, noise, pollution, and quality of
life.
2.2 ALTERNATIVES
To prepare this report, New Heritage looked at four alternatives. This was done to compare the
potential benefits and impacts of a range of alternatives, as well as showing the similarities and
differences of those impacts to the natural and built environment. New Heritage emphasizes that
no alternative should be considered definitive. This will allow New Heritage and the decision
makers, with input from the public and stakeholders; the opportunity to incorporate the better
features of each alternative into a recommended final overall design. This process also provides a
basis for the development of future mitigation measures and design details. The following
describes each of the alternatives. Table 2.1, below, summarizes the three action alternatives.
NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE
A No-Action alternative is intended to establish a basis for evaluating the three future action
alternatives. Under this alternative, the current Comprehensive Plan designation of “Industrial” for
the entire site would remain industrial and no land use changes would occur. The No-Action
alternative is intended to provide a basis for comparison between the three action alternatives
and the existing planning designation under Pasco’s Comprehensive Plan.
ALTERNATIVE 1, LOW INTENSTIY MIXED USE
Development under this alternative would conform to the “Vision” that New Heritage has outlined
in Section 1, but at the lowest overall intensity when compared to the other alternatives.
Page 64 of 481
30-19-079/New Heritage 7
• Residential – This alternative would contain a mix of single-family and multi-family units
with an average overall density of 6.6 units per acre with a total of 794 residential units.
• Commercial/Office – This alternative would contain approximately 32,670 square feet of
retail and service/office space.
• Park and Trails – This alternative would contain acreage for parks, open space, buffers and
trails. Actual park acreage will be determined during the Land Subdivision Process.
• Schools – Approximately 15 acres has been set aside for an elementary school, if needed.
• Roads/Infrastructure – For this alternative, approximately 29 acres have been allocated for
roads and infrastructure, including easements and rights-of-way.
ALTERNATIVE 2, MEDIUM IN T ENSITY MIXED USE
This alternative would also conform to the “Vision” that New Heritage has proposed in Section 1,
but at a medium intensity when compared to the other two alternatives.
• Residential – This alternative would contain a mix of single-family and multi-family units
with an average overall density of approximately 8.6 units per acre, with a tota l of 1,028
housing units.
• Commercial/Office – This would contain approximately 65,340 square feet of retail and
service/office space, including retail and office space with residential units above.
• Park and Trails – This alternative would contain acreage for parks, open space, buffers and
trails. Actual park acreage will be determined during the Land Subdivision Process.
• Schools – Approximately 15 acres has been set aside for an elementary school.
• Roads/Infrastructure – For this alternative, approximately 29 acres have been allocated for
roads and infrastructure, including easements and rights-of-way.
ALTERNATIVE 3, HIGH INTENSITY MIXED USE
This alternative would also conform to the “Vision” that New Heritage has proposed in Section 1,
but at a higher intensity when compared to the other two alternatives.
• Residential – This alternative would contain a mix of single-family and multi-family units
with an average overall density of 11.5 units per acre. Based on this, the total number of
residential units would be 1,354. This includes residential units above the commercial and
office spaces.
• Commercial/Office – This alternative would contain approximately 76,230 square feet of
retail/office space.
• Park and Trails – This alternative would contain acreage for parks, open space, buffers and
trails. Actual park acreage will be determined during the Land Subdivision Process.
• Schools – Approximately 15 acres has been set aside for an elementary school.
Page 65 of 481
30-19-079/New Heritage 8
• Roads/Infrastructure – For this alternative, approximately 29 acres have been allocated for
roads and infrastructure, including easements and rights-of-way.
TABLE 2 .1 – LAND USE ESTIMATES BY ALTERNATIVE
Land Use Alternative 1
Low Intensity
Alternative 2
Medium Intensity
Alternative 3
High Intensity
Commercial/Office Acres FAR Floor
Area Acres FAR Floor
Area Acres FAR Floor
Area
Retail 1 0.25 10,890 2 0.25 21,780 3 0.25 32,670
Service/Office 1 0.50 21,780 2 0.50 43,560 2 0.50 43,560
Subtotal 2 32,670 4 65,340 5 76,230
Other Land Uses Acres Acres Acres
Schools 15 15 15
Parks * * *
Roads & Utilities
@ 15% 29 29 29
Subtotal 73 73 73
Residential Acres UPA Units Acres UPA Units Acres UPA Units
Single-Family 100 5 500 85 5.5 468 69 6 414
Duplex/Tri-Plex 7 6 42 10 8 80 17 12 204
Apartments 14 18 252 24 20 480 32 23 736
Subtotal 121 6.6 794 119 8.6 1,028 118 11.5 1,354
Total Site Acreage 196 196 196
Total Population 3.35 2,660 3.35 3,442 3.35 4,536
Source: Broetje Orchards LLC, JUB, Land Strategies
UPA = Units Per Acre
FAR = Floor Area Ratio
Average Household Size per City’s Comprehensive Plan and US Census for Washington State
Average Household Size x Total Units = Total Population
* Park space to be determined during Land Subdivision Process.
Page 66 of 481
30-19-079/New Heritage 9
3 SUMMARY – APPROVAL CRITERIA
3.1 PASCO CODE REQUIREMENTS
For the proposed amendment to be approved, the Pasco Planning Commission must make the
following specific findings to the Pasco Council:
1. After completion of an open record hearing on a petition for reclassification of property, the
Planning Commission shall make and enter findings from the records and conclusions there
of which support its recommendation and find whether:
a. The proposal is in accord with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan;
b. The effect of the proposal on the immediate vicinity will be materially detrimental;
c. There is merit and value in the proposal for the community as a whole;
d. Conditions should be imposed in order to mitigate any significant adverse impacts
from the proposal;
e. A concomitant agreement should be entered into between Pasco and the petitioner,
and if so, the terms and conditions of such an agreement.
2. The Planning Commission shall render its recommendation to approve, approve with
modifications and/or conditions, or reject the petition based on its findings and conclusions.
The Commission's recommendation, to include its findings and conclusions, shall be
forwarded to the Pasco Council at a regular business meeting thereof. [Ord. 3354 § 2, 1999;
Code 1970 § 25.88.060.]
The following addresses each of these requirements:
a. Accord with the Goals and Policies of The Comprehensive Plan:
Based on these assumptions, Table 5.3, Goals and Policies Conformance, below,
identifies each Goal and Policy contained in the Comprehensive Plan and discusses
how the Low Intensity, Medium Intensity and High Intensity alternatives conform
to each Goal and Policy. Because the No-Action Alternative does not change the
current designation under the Comprehensive Plan, it is assumed to already be in
conformance with the Comprehensive Plan’s Goals and Policies.
b. Effect of the Proposal on the Immediate Vicinity:
Compatibility with uses in the immediate vicinity is discussed in Sections 5.1
through 5.8 and in Appendices A and B. This discussion includes potential effects
on the environment and proposed mitigation measures. In summary, the project
would have a positive impact on adjacent residential uses north of East A Street. It
would not impact adjacent industrial uses, except in the possibility that the
adjacent industries, including the adjacent distribution center, could reduce the
Page 67 of 481
30-19-079/New Heritage 10
viability of residential uses without mitigation. Mitigation measures to reduce this
potential have been proposed by both New Heritage and The Distribution Centers.
c. There is Merit and Value in the Proposal for the Community as a Whole:
The amendment site is adjacent to two major distribution centers containing over
1,200 employees (Business Journal). The proposal would provide needed
affordable residential uses, reducing commute times, traffic congestion and
pollution. (See Sections 5.1, 5.2, 5.7 and 5.8). This change would also provide
mitigation measures to reduce any impacts to the community. It would also make
effective use of the infrastructure currently in place (See Section 5.6).
Pasco has continued to grow. The Comprehensive Plan provides that most new
residential development will occur to the northwest, in the Broadmoor area, leaving
the eastern portion of Pasco lacking residential opportunities; particularly given the
significant employment base in the eastern portion of Pasco (See Section 5.8 and
Appendix B).
d. Conditions Should be Posed in Order to Mitigate any Significant Adverse Impacts
from the Proposal:
Mitigation measures have been proposed in Section 5 that could mitigate any
adverse effects from the proposal. As noted in the introduction, it is assumed that
necessary mitigation measures would be identified during the Land Subdivision
Process.
e. A Concomitant Agreement Should be Entered into Between Pasco and Petitioner:
A concomitant agreement should be entered into either at the time of approval of
the amendment, or at the time of approval of the Land Subdivision, or a
combination of both. This report assumes that such approvals would mitigate any
significant impacts from the amendment proposal and assure that the amendment
is not in significant conflict with the above required findings.
In addition to the above requirements, Section 25.215.020, Comprehensive Plan Amendment,
identifies other requirements for the approval of a Comprehensive Plan Amendment:
25.215.020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment.
(7) Annual Review of Docket.
(b) All complete applications shall be docketed and reviewed concurrently, on an annual
basis and in a manner consistent with RCW 36.70A.130.
(ii) City Council Review of Docketed Requests. After the May 1st deadline, City staff
will present the docketed requests to the Planning Commission (Commission) for review
and a recommendation. The Commission’s recommendation shall be forwarded to the
Page 68 of 481
30-19-079/New Heritage 11
City Council (Council) as soon as practical for Council review. The Council shall determine
which specific docketed requests are processed based on the following criteria:
(A) Timing of the requested amendment is appropriate, and Council will have sufficient
information to make an informed decision;
(B) The City will be able to conduct sufficient analysis, develop policy and related
development regulations;
(C) The requested amendment has not been recently rejected by Council;
(D) The amendment will further implement the intent of the City’s adopted
Comprehensive Plan or the Growth Management Act;
(E) The amendment is not better addressed through another planning process.
All the required information needed for Council review is included in this Report, including
Appendices A and B, and in the completed application for the amendment. The information
provided is also sufficient for the development of analysis, policy and development regulations.
This is a new amendment request and has not been previously rejected by Council. As noted in
Section 4, the proposed amendment is consistent with the intent of the Comprehensive Plan. As
noted in this Section, the proposed amendment is also in conformance with the Growth
Management Act. The proposal is needed to meet an urgent requirement to provide affordable
housing to adjacent industries and there is no other planning process that could meet this need
on a timely basis.
3.2 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS
The Pasco Community and Economic Development Department has also established the general
criteria for approval of an amendment to the City's Comprehensive Plan:
• Does the proposed amendment bear a substantial relationship to the public health, safety,
welfare, and protection of the environment?
This is discussed in Section 5, below and in Appendices A and B. Section 5 and the
Appendices provide information related to the impacts associated with the No-Action
Alternative and the three action alternatives. It also provides mitigation measures to
address these impacts. In summary, this analysis determined that the proposed
amendment would have less impacts to the natural environment and to the public health,
safety and welfare than the current Industrial designation.
• Is the proposed amendment consistent with the requirements of the Washington State
Growth Management Act and to the affected portion(s) of the adopted Pasco Comprehensive
Plan?
The Washington State Growth Management Act provides thirteen goals to guide the
development and adoption of comprehensive plans and development regulations. The
following discusses this proposed amendment conformance to these goals:
Page 69 of 481
30-19-079/New Heritage 12
1. Urban growth. Encourage development in urban areas where adequate public
facilities and services exist or can be provided in an efficient manner.
The site has adequate public facilities (See Section 5 and Appendices A and B).
2. Reduce sprawl. Reduce the inappropriate conversion of undeveloped land into
sprawling, low-density development.
The proposal reduces sprawl by converting existing undeveloped industrial
land into residential uses, within the current Urban Growth Area (UGA).
3. Transportation. Encourage efficient multimodal transportation systems that are
based on regional priorities and coordinated with county and city comprehensive
plans.
The proposal would provide for public transportation as well as other forms of
transportation (See Sections 1, 2 and 5).
4. Housing. Plan for and accommodate housing affordable to all economic
segments of the population of this state, promote a variety of residential densities
and housing types, and encourage preservation of existing housing stock.
The proposal would meet an identified need for affordable housing required
by adjacent industrial and business land uses (See Section 1 and Appendix B).
5. Economic development. Encourage economic development throughout the state
that is consistent with adopted comprehensive plans, promote economic
opportunity for all citizens of this state, especially for unemployed and for
disadvantaged persons, promote the retention and expansion of existing
businesses and recruitment of new businesses, recognize regional differences
impacting economic development opportunities, and encourage growth in areas
experiencing insufficient economic growth, all within the capacities of the state's
natural resources, public services, and public facilities.
This site is a portion of the original 400+ Heritage industrial site. The major
portion of this site is currently being developed for two major distribution
centers. There are currently insufficient affordable residences to serve the
employees of these two developments as well as other existing and planned
industrial developments in the immediate area. (See Appendix B). The lack of
affordable housing can have an adverse impact on the ability for industry to
attract employees (See Appendix B).
The Pasco UGA has over 7,000 acres of industrial land. While a large portion of
this land is in rights-of-ways or is owned by public agencies, there is still
significant acreage remaining available for industrial uses (See Appendix B).
Page 70 of 481
30-19-079/New Heritage 13
6. Property rights. Private property shall not be taken for public use without just
compensation having been made. The property rights of landowners shall be
protected from arbitrary and discriminatory actions.
Not applicable.
7. Permits. Applications for both state and local government permits should be
processed in a timely and fair manner to ensure predictability.
Not applicable.
8. Natural resource industries. Maintain and enhance natural resource-based
industries, including productive timber, agricultural, and fisheries industries.
Encourage the conservation of productive forestlands and productive agricultural
lands, and discourage incompatible uses.
Not applicable.
9. Open space and recreation. Retain open space, enhance recreational
opportunities, conserve fish and wildlife habitat, increase access to natural
resource lands and water, and develop parks and recreation facilities.
The proposed amendment will require park and open space (See Sections 1, 2
and 5). Actual acreage to be determined during the Land Subdivision Process.
10. Environment. Protect the environment and enhance the state's high quality of
life, including air and water quality, and the availability of water.
Mitigation measures are identified in Section 5 and Appendices A and B. In
general, the proposed conversion to residential and retail/office uses would
have less impact on the natural environment than industrial uses.
11. Citizen participation and coordination. Encourage the involvement of citizens in
the planning process and ensure coordination between communities and
jurisdictions to reconcile conflicts.
The City's Amendment process will provide adequate public review and
comment. In addition, the Rezone and Land Subdivision also provides
opportunity for public comment (See Section 4).
12. Public facilities and services. Ensure that those public facilities and services
necessary to support development shall be adequate to serve the development at
the time the development is available for occupancy and use without decreasing
current service levels below locally established minimum standards.
There are adequate public facilities immediately available to serve the site.
13. Historic preservation. Identify and encourage the preservation of lands, sites, and
structures, that have historical or archaeological significance.
Not Applicable.
Page 71 of 481
30-19-079/New Heritage 14
Conformance to the Pasco Comprehensive Plan is discussed in detail in Section 4. This includes
conformance to the projected 20-year population projections and conformance to the economic
policies. It also addresses the impact lack of affordable housing will have on keeping and attracting
new firms. ("The shortage of affordable housing undermines not only a swift economic recovery but
also the economic competitiveness and productivity of metropolitan areas, as high housing costs
affect regional economies’ ability to attract new firms and businesses and to expand existing ones -
Center for American Progress, 2012).
• Does the proposed amendment correct a mapping error or address a deficiency in the
Comprehensive Plan?
The proposed amendment does not correct a mapping error, but it does correct a
deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan that does not provide affordable housing close to
one of the primary industrial centers in the region. This is primarily due to the significant
number of nearby industries that do not require highly skilled labor (See Appendix B).
• What are the effects on the physical environment, including open space and natural
features?
The proposed amendment would have less effect on the physical environment than the
current industrial classification, particularly given the current Medium Intensity Industrial
zoning of the site (See Section 5).
• What is the compatibility and impact on adjacent land uses and surrounding
neighborhoods?
In general, residential uses would have significantly less impact on adjacent residential
neighborhoods than industrial uses. Impact to adjacent industrial uses would be mitigated
(See Section 5).
• What are the impacts on public facilities, and utilities, transportation system, parks,
recreation, and public schools?
Impacts to public facilities are addressed in Section 5, and in Appendices A and B. An
elementary school site is available and park space will be provided. Impacts to other public
facilities (police, fire, etc.) is also discussed in Section 5.
• What is the effect on other components of the adopted Comprehensive Plan?
There are two primary issues related to the proposed amendment: The economic impact
related to changing 196 acres from Industrial to Mixed Use Residential/Commercial or
Medium Density Residential; and the impact the additional population will have on the 20-
year population projections in the Comprehensive Plan and approved by the County and
Washington State.
o The impacts related to the conversion of 196 acres of industrial land to a primary
residential use is discussed in Section 5 and in Appendix B. In summary, it finds
that the lack of affordable housing for unskilled employees can have a significant
Page 72 of 481
30-19-079/New Heritage 15
impact on existing and prospective industries (See Appendix B). Even industries
that require skilled employees have difficulty attracting and keeping employees if
affordable housing is not available. Because the high cost of housing reduces a
family’s ability to spend, it also impacts other businesses such as restaurants,
groceries, health services, etc.
o The impacts related to the projected increase in population is also discussed in
Section 5. In summary, the City Comprehensive Plan provided for a 20% market
factor in justifying the expansion of the UGA boundary. The purpose of this market
factor was to maintain affordability in property acquisition and housing
development. If this market factor was reduced to allow for the proposed
additional housing units, the proposed amendment would not increase total
projected population. It is also possible that this amendment will slightly reduce
the projected density in the expanded UGA expansion area, or could reduce the
overall average household size in Pasco, which would also limit any projected
population increase. This issue is discussed in Section 5.
3.3 C ITY C OUNCIL G OALS AND P OLICIES
Every 2 years, the City Council establishes specific goals designed to guide the work of the City.
The following identifies how the proposed amendment is in conformance with these 2020-2021
goals.
QUALITY OF LIFE
Promote a high-quality of life through quality programs, services and appropriate investment and
re-investment in community infrastructure by:
• Using Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and other public and private capital to
revitalize older neighborhoods and safe routes to essential services.
• Continuing efforts toward designing, siting, programming needs, and site selection for a
community center and pursuing acquisition of land for future community park.
• Developing Phase I of the A Street Sporting Complex and continue efforts to provide
additional soccer and sports fields.
• Coordinating with the Pasco Public Facilities District to develop a public education
campaign, financial analysis and prepare a ballot measure concerning the development of
a regional aquatic facility for consideration by the people.
• Completing construction of a new animal control facility.
• Ongoing efforts to improve efficiency and effectiveness of public resources in the delivery of
municipal services, programs, and long-term maintenance and viability of public facilities.
• Collaborating with the Inclusion, Diversity and Equity Commission and community leaders
to enhance engagement efforts and organizational cultural competency.
Page 73 of 481
30-19-079/New Heritage 16
• Updating design standards for the development of new neighborhoods and re-development
to promote greater neighborhood cohesion through design elements, e.g.: walkability,
aesthetics, sustainability, and community gathering spaces.
• Updating Parks and Facilities Comprehensive Plan to include: public facilities inventory,
needs assessment, level of service, and centers evaluation.
• Teaming with local and regional partners to develop a Housing Action Plan with a focus on
strategies that emphasize affordable housing.
RESPONSE: The amendment would provide community park facilities and would promote
walkability, aesthetics, sustainability and community gathering spaces. This development will also
compliment the planned City’s A Street Sport Complex. (See Section 1)
FINANCIAL SUSTAINABILITY
Enhance the long-term viability, value, and service levels of services and programs, including:
• Regular evaluation of services and programs to confirm importance to community,
adequacy, and cost-benefit.
• Continuation of cost of service and recovery targets in evaluating City services.
• Ongoing evaluation of costs, processes and performance associated with delivery of City
services including customer feedback and satisfaction, staffing, facilities, and partnership
opportunities.
• Instilling and promoting an organizational culture of customer service across all business
lines.
• Updating policies relating to urbanization of the unincorporated islands to assure
consistency with long-range planning, community safety, and fiscal sustainability.
RESPONSE: New Heritage provides a number of community services to assist residents and
coordinates these activities with appropriate public agencies.
COMMUNITY SAFETY
Preserve past improvements and promote future gains by:
• Developing a Comprehensive Police Strategic Master Plan through a transparent process to
evaluate future service levels of the department to assure sustainability, public safety, and
crime control over the next 5-10 years.
• Collaborating with regional and community partners to evaluate and implement strategies
to reduce the incidence of homelessness.
• Leveraging and expanding partnerships to maintain and enhance behavioral health services
to community members in crisis being assisted by police and fire.
• Continuing efforts to improve police and community relations.
• Working to achieve and maintain target fire response times through ope rational
improvements and long-range strategic planning of facilities and staffing.
Page 74 of 481
30-19-079/New Heritage 17
• Focusing on the long-term goal of sustaining a Washington State Rating Bureau Class 3
community rating.
• Leveraging infrastructure database of sidewalks, streetlights and pavement conditions along
with evaluating policies and methods to address needs and inequities.
RESPONSE: The proposed amendment and future Land Subdivision Permit would be a
continuation of the existing Tierra Vida development to the north. Historical police call data
confirms that police calls were 50% lower in the Tierra Vida neighborhood than the City’s average
across all neighborhoods. The New Heritage development will have a positive impact on Pasco’s
overall behavioral health. Lack of affordable housing is a large contributor to poor behavioral
health outcomes. Further, through its non-profit organizations Broetje Orchards provides service
to its communities that contribute to the growth and well-being of those living there, such as
community support, social services, neighbor mediation, etc. This reduces family crisis and services
of police and fire. Fire response time would be maintained (See Section 5).
COMMUNITY TRANSPORTATION NETWORK
Promote a highly-functional multi-modal transportation system through:
• Commencement and completion of construction of the Lewis Street Overpass project.
• Continued emphasis on improvements in Road 68/I-182/Burden Blvd. corridor to improve
operation and safety.
• Data-driven pro-active neighborhood traffic calming efforts.
• Continued collaboration with Ben Franklin Transit to enhance mobility and access.
• Completion of a Transportation System Master Plan and utilization of its recommendations
to develop policies, regulations, programs, and projects that provide for greater connectivity,
strategic investment, mobility, multi-modal, accessibility, efficiency and safety.
RESPONSE: The proposed amendment, through creation of a walkable community, would
improve transportation (See Sections 1 and 5, and Appendices A and B). The goal is to create a
"New Urbanism" community that emphasizes walking and biking. It will also help and ease
commuting to adjacent and nearby industrial centers for all economic levels through a range of
affordable housing.
ECONOMI C VITALITY
Promote and encourage economic vitality by supporting:
• Downtown revitalization efforts of Downtown Pasco Development Authority (DPDA), post -
COVID restart, and City initiatives such as Downtown Master Plan process and sign code
modifications.
• The construction of Peanuts Park and Farmers Market and continued efforts to pursue
streetscape and gateway upgrades.
• The completion of the Comprehensive Land Use Plan Update and Broadmoor Master Plan
efforts, adoption of Urban Growth Area expansion alternative, implementation of adopted
Page 75 of 481
30-19-079/New Heritage 18
long-range planning efforts with appropriate analysis and adoption of planning actions
including: zoning code changes, phased sign code update, and development regulations and
standards.
• Increased efforts to promote the community as a desirable place for commercial and
industrial development by promoting small business outreach and assistance, predictability
in project review, and excellent customer service.
• Partnerships and encouragement of Department of Natural Resources (DNR) to facilitate
development of the remaining state-owned properties at Road 68/I-182.
• Continued coordination with the Port of Pasco to complete and implement a waterfront-
zoning plan and provide for public infrastructure.
• Active partnerships in the planning and development of strategies to promote tourism and
deployment of assets to spur economic activity.
• In concert with community partners, development of a comprehensive economic
development plan.
RESPONSE: The proposed amendment would provide needed affordable housing within easy
commute distance to existing employment centers. This has been critical in attracting certain
businesses and industries where access to labor is critical (See Section 5 and Appendix B). It would
enhance implementation through the development of a Contract Agreement and Rezone, with a
future Land Subdivision to assure that the Goals and Policies of the Comprehensive Plan are met,
and the project vision identified in Section 1 is implemented.
COMMUNITY IDENTITY
Identify opportunities to enhance community identity, cohesion, and image through:
• Continued efforts of community surveying through traditional methods and the application
of new technologies.
• Providing opportunities for community engagement through boards, commissions, volunteer
opportunities, social media, forums, and other outlets.
• Enhanced inter-agency and constituent coordination developed during the pandemic.
• Continued efforts of the community identity/image enhancement campaign to include
promotion of community and organizational successes.
• Enhanced participation and support of cultural events occurring within the community.
• Support of the Arts and Culture Commission in promoting unity and the celebration of
diversity through art and culture programs.
RESPONSE: The proposed amendment would create a unique community identity with a range
of affordable housing, an emphasis on pedestrian access, bikeways, community centers and
programs that emphasis community interaction (See Section 1). As a calling card of Broetje
Orchards’ community development work, community participation and engagement is a core
focus. Please see https://broetjefamilytrust.org for more information.
Page 76 of 481
30-19-079/New Heritage 19
4 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMPATIBILITY
The Pasco Zoning Code requires that any amendment to the City's Comprehensive Plan be in
conformance to the Plan's Goals and Policies. Table 4.1, below discusses each of the
Comprehensive Plan's Goals and Policies and this amendment's conformance:
TABLE 4 .1 – COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMPATIBILITY
GOALS AND POLICIES COMPATIBILITY
LAND USE
LU-1. GOAL: TAKE DELIBERATE, CONSISTENT,
AND CONTINUOUS ACTIONS TO IMPROVE
THE COMMUNITY’S QUALITY OF LIFE
LU-1-A Policy: Maintain and apply current design
standards for major public investments,
particularly streets.
LU-1-B Policy: Enhance the physical appearance
of development within the community through
land use regulations, design guidelines, and
performance and maintenance standards
including landscaping, screening, building
facades, color, signs, and parking lot design and
appearance.
LU-1-C Policy: Encourage conservation design
with cluster commercial development and
discourage strip commercial development.
LU-1-D Policy: Land uses should be permitted
subject to adopted standards designed to
mitigate land use impacts on adjacent, less
intensive uses, while preserving constitutionally
protected forms of expression.
Implementation of the project "Vision" and the
requirements of the Pasco Zoning and Subdivision
Regulations will allow all proposed alternatives to
meet this Goal and Policies. This proposed
amendment will create a mixed use
residential/commercial area: including, parks/trails,
school, and road infrastructure. Current Pasco
design standards will be applied to all major public
investments (see Section 5) and all future
development will be reviewed and approved
through Pasco’s Land Subdivision process.
The proposed amendment, for all alternatives,
would have less impact on adjacent land uses than
the current industrial uses (see Section 5.3).
Adjacent industrial land uses can be mitigated, and
all alternatives will be connected to Pasco services.
Residential densities would exceed minimum Pasco
requirements (see Section 5.6).
Page 77 of 481
30-19-079/New Heritage 20
GOALS AND POLICIES COMPATIBILITY
LU-2. GOAL: PLAN FOR A VARIETY OF
COMPATIBLE LAND USES WITHIN THE UGA
LU-2-A Policy: Maintain sufficient land
designated to accommodate residential,
commercial, industrial, educational, public
facility, and open-space uses proximate to
appropriate transportation and utility
infrastructure.
LU-2-B Policy: Facilitate planned growth within
Pasco limits and UGA and promote infill
developments in Pasco limits.
LU-2-C Policy: Ensure that adequate public
services are provided in a reasonable time frame
for new developments.
LU-2-D Policy: Encourage the use of buffers or
transition zones between non-compatible land
uses.
LU-2-E Policy: Discourage the siting of
incompatible uses adjacent to Pasco (Tri-Cities)
Airport and other essential public facilities.
LU-2-F Policy: Discourage developments
dependent on septic system, and at a density
below the minimum, to sustain an urban level of
services.
The proposed amendment could provide a mix of
commercial, residential and supportive land uses
under all the alternatives. The UGA will retain
enough land to accommodate all land uses and
adequate public services would be provided (see
Section 5). Buffers and setbacks would be provided
between non-compatible land uses. In addition,
public services are currently available to the site
(see Section 5.5, Appendix A).
LU-3. GOAL: MAINTAIN ESTABLISHED
NEIGHBORHOODS AND ENSURE NEW
NEIGHBORHOODS ARE SAFE AND
ENJOYABLE PLACES TO LIVE
LU-3-A Policy: Design major streets, schools,
parks, and other public facilities that will
encourage the individual identities of
neighborhoods.
LU-3-B Policy: Support existing and design future
recreational, educational, and cultural facilities
and services through the Capital Facilities Plan;
dedication of land through the concurrency
management process; and coordination with
service providers.
LU-3-C Policy: Ensure all developments include
appropriate landscaping and screening, as
required by adopted regulations and guidelines.
LU-3-D Policy: Encourage the use of irrigation
(non-potable) water for landscape maintenance.
The new urbanism concept (see Section 1) provides
that neighborhoods are walkable to services, work,
play, school and parks. Gathering places are
provided to ensure an enjoyable place to live. The
concept incorporates a high level of design
consistency and will establish a unique identity to
this neighborhood (see Section 1 and 5).
Under the proposed amendment, space will be
provided for schools, recreation, and cultural
facilities and services (see Sections 1 and 5.4). All
alternatives provide landscaping and screening and
will meet or exceed adopted regulations and
guidelines. The proposal could also provide
recreation and community gathering spaces for the
existing neighboring developments.
Page 78 of 481
30-19-079/New Heritage 21
GOALS AND POLICIES COMPATIBILITY
LU-4. GOAL: INCREASE COMMUNITY
ACCESSIBILITY THROUGH PROPER LAND USE
PLANNING
LU-4-A Policy: Reduce the dependency of vehicle
travel and encourage pedestrian and multi-
modal options by providing compatible land-
uses in and around residential neighborhoods.
LU-4-B Policy: Encourage infill and higher density
uses within proximity to major travel corridors
and public transportation service areas.
LU-4-C Policy: Encourage the development of
walkable communities by increasing mixed-use
(commercial/residential) developments that
provide households with neighborhood and
commercial shopping opportunities.
LU-4-D Policy: Designate areas for higher density
residential developments where utilities and
transportation facilities enable efficient use of
capital resources.
LU-4-E Policy: Encourage the orderly
development of land by emphasizing
connectivity and efficiency of the transportation
network.
LU-4-F Policy: Support mixed use, smart growth,
infill, and compact developments with transit and
pedestrian amenities that promote a healthy
community.
The new urbanism concept will create a walkable
community. The Vision (see Sections 1, 5.1 and 5.2)
will provide pedestrian and multi-modal options
with parks, recreation and shopping within walking
and biking distances.
The amendment could provide a mix of densities
from 5 UPA to 12 UPA within proximity to major
travel corridors and public transportation (see
Section 5.5). The densities of the proposed
alternatives are higher than Pasco average and
would have utilities and transportation facilities
available (See Section 5.5 and 5.6).
LU-5. GOAL: MAINTAIN A BROAD RANGE OF
RESIDENTIAL LAND USE DESIGNATIONS TO
ACCOMMODATE A VARIETY OF LIFESTYLES
AND HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES
LU-5-A Policy: Allow a variety of residential
densities throughout the UGA
LU-5-B Policy: Encourage higher residential
densities within and adjacent to major travel
corridors, Downtown (Central Business District),
and Broadmoor.
All alternatives provide for a mix of residential land
use designations and densities to accommodate a
variety of lifestyles (see Section 1 and 2). The
proposed amendment would expand the
residential densities to the east of the downtown
with transit and bike access to the Central Business
District.
Page 79 of 481
30-19-079/New Heritage 22
GOALS AND POLICIES COMPATIBILITY
LU-6 GOAL: ENCOURAGE DISTINCTIVE
QUALITY COMMUNITY AND REGIONAL
COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL
DEVELOPMENTS THAT SUPPORT PASCO’S
OVERALL DEVELOPMENT GOALS
LU-6-A Policy: Encourage commercial and
higher-density residential uses along major
corridors and leverage infrastructure availability.
LU-6-B Policy: Promote efficient and functional
neighborhood level and major commercial
centers to meet community demand.
LU-6-C Policy: Ensure attractive hubs for activity
by maintaining and applying design standards
and guidelines that will enhance the built
environment of each community.
Implementation of the project "Vision" (See Section
1) would allow the amendment to meet this Goal.
Planned Business and Office Park uses would also
support Pasco’s overall development goals.
Higher density residential and commercial uses
would be within or adjacent to major travel
corridors to leverage infrastructure availability (see
Sections 5.8 and 8.7).
The proposed site would contain both
neighborhood retail and office/service uses.
Specific design standards and guidelines would be
established as part of the Land Subdivision and
Development approval process (see Sections 1 and
2).
LU-7 GOAL: SAFEGUARD AND PROTECT
SHORELANDS AND CRITICAL LANDS WITHIN
THE URBAN AREA
LU-7-A Policy: Maintain regulatory processes to
preserve wetlands, wildlife habitats, and other
critical lands within the urban growth area.
LU-7-B Policy: Conform to the adopted goals and
policies of the Shoreline Master Program as part
of this Comprehensive Plan.
LU7-C Policy: Ensure the implementation of the
requirements of the Washington State Shoreline
Management Act (RCW 90.58)
Not Applicable. Development does not occur in the
shore lands/critical area.
LU-8. GOAL: ENHANCE THE PROTECTION
AND PRESERVATION OF HISTORIC
BUILDINGS, SITES and NEIGHBORHOODS
LU-8-A Policy: Allow adaptive re-uses in historic
structures.
LU-8-B Policy: Increase public awareness and
partnerships to increase historic New Heritage
tourism with the Franklin County Museum.
LU-8-C Policy: Monitor and update the Historic
Preservation Plan as guided by the Historic
Preservation Committee.
Not Applicable. Proposed development area has no
historic structures.
Page 80 of 481
30-19-079/New Heritage 23
GOALS AND POLICIES COMPATIBILITY
HOUSING
H-1. GOAL: ENCOURAGE HOUSING FOR ALL
ECONOMIC SEGMENTS OF PASCO’S
POPULATION CONSISTENT WITH THE LOCAL
AND REGIONAL MARKET
H-1-A Policy: Allow for a full range of housing
including single family homes, townhouses,
condominiums, apartments, and manufactured
housing, accessory dwelling units, zero lot line,
planned unit developments etc.
H-1-B Policy: Higher intensity housing should be
located near arterials and neighborhood or
community shopping facilities and employment
areas.
H-1-C Policy: Support the availability of special
needs housing throughout the community.
H-1-D Policy: Support or advance programs that
encourage access to safe and affordable housing.
The Vision would encourage housing for all
economic segments with a wide range of housing
options provided from multi-family, single-family,
duplex, triplex, and housing above commercial (see
Sections 1 and 2). It would also serve the housing
needs of adjacent industrial uses. The Vision would
place residential areas within walking/biking
distances to shopping, employment, recreation and
schools. Housing affordability is a key element in
this proposal and is intended to meet the needs of
nearby employees.
H-2. GOAL: PRESERVE AND MAINTAIN THE
EXISTING HOUSING STOCK FOR PRESENT
AND FUTURE RESIDENTS
H-2-A Policy: Use the Residential Rental Program
as a method to ensure that all rental housing in
Pasco comply with minimum housing code
standards.
H-2-B Policy: Assist low-income households with
needed housing improvements.
H-2-C Policy: Support organization s and or
programs involved in affordable housing
development, repair and rehabilitation.
There is no housing currently on the amendment
area. Affordable housing organizations have been
and would continue to be supported.
H-3. GOAL: ENCOURAGE HOUSING DESIGN
AND CONSTRUCTION THAT ENSURES LONG
TERM SUSTAINABILITY AND VALUE
H-3-A Policy: Encourage innovative techniques in
the design of residential neighborhoods and
mixed- use areas to provide character and variety
in the community.
H-3-B Policy: Maintain development regulations
and standards that control the scale and density
of residential housing to ensure compatibility
with surrounding uses.
H-3-C Policy: Utilize design and landscaping
standards to ensure all residential development
exhibits a consistent level of access, quality, and
appearance.
The Vision will allow for a wide range of housing
designs and allows for a wide range of mixed-use
areas (see Section 1). Detailed design and land use
issues will be addressed under the Land
Subdivision and Development approval process
and Concomitant Agreement. The proposal would
be a continuation of existing Tierra Vida
development to the north, under the "New
Urbanism" concept, providing a combination of
high quality housing with affordability.
Page 81 of 481
30-19-079/New Heritage 24
GOALS AND POLICIES COMPATIBILITY
H-4. GOAL: SUPPORT EFFORTS TO PROVIDE
AFFORDABLE HOUSING TO MEET THE NEEDS
OF THE COMMUNITY
H-4-A Policy: Collaborate with local, state and
federal agencies, and private organizations to
assist lower income residents rehabilitate and/or
maintain their homes.
H-4-B Policy: Work with public and private sector
developers to ensure that lower income and
affordable housing is available.
H-4-C Policy: Increase housing supply and
diversity through appropriate and flexible
development standards.
The Vision Statement provides for a wide range of
affordability (see Section 1). The New Heritage
Foundation has as its founding purpose the need
to assure affordable housing. This will be even
more critical as additional employment is
generated within nearby industrial areas.
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
ED-1. GOAL: MAINTAIN ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT AS AN IMPORTANT AND
ONGOING PASCO INITIATIVE
ED-1-A Policy: Promote an environment, which
supports the development and expansion of
business opportunities.
ED-1-B Policy: Continue efforts to attract and
recruit new employers to the community with
promotional efforts in cooperation with other Tri -
Cities partners.
ED-1-C Policy: Support the promotion of Pasco’s
urban area as a good business environment by
enhancing the infrastructure of the community.
ED-1-D Policy: promote tourism and recreational
opportunities.
ED-1-E Policy: Recognize that infrastructure,
including transportation and utility planning, is
vital to economic development and attracting
businesses.
ED-1-F Policy: Support and encourage
residential/commercial mixed-use developments
that provide neighborhood shopping and
services and promote walkable neighborhoods.
There is substantial demand for additional
residential uses to reduce commute times to the
adjacent industrial centers (see Section 5.2).
By providing adjacent affordable housing, the
project could encourage more potential employees
to the community and nearby remaining industrial
area (See Section 5.7).
The project will cooperate with others and will
provide promotional efforts to attract industrial
uses to the area (see Section 5.7).
Underutilized infrastructure is currently available to
the site (see Sections 5.5 and 5.6.).
Under all alternatives, the project is a mixed-use
development and provides neighborhood
shopping and services and promotes walkable
neighborhoods.
Page 82 of 481
30-19-079/New Heritage 25
GOALS AND POLICIES COMPATIBILITY
ED-2. GOAL: ASSURE APPROPRIATE
LOCATION AND DESIGN OF COMMERCIAL
AND INDUSTRIAL FACILITIES
ED-2-A Policy: Maintain a strong working
relationship with the Port of Pasco and regional
Economic development agencies to further
economic opportunities.
ED-2-B Policy: Encourage development of a wide
range of commercial and industrial uses
strategically located to support local and regional
needs.
ED-2-C Policy: Continue the pursuit and
preservation of industrial sites for development
that may be serviced by existing utilities.
ED-2-D Policy: Ensure that lands with large-scale
agricultural uses are converted to an appropriate
scale of urban agriculture or other related uses to
fit community needs.
The proposal would convert 196.3 acres from
“Industrial” to “Mixed-Use Residential Commercial
or Residential” (see Sections 5.1, 5.2, 5.3, and 5.4).
Sections 5.2 and 5.7 discusses the location of
commercial and industrial uses. Specifically, there is
an urgent need to locate housing within easy
commute distance to employment. This is
particularly important for low and moderate-
income employees where commute costs can
impact lifestyle. The proposal is intended to
provide uses to support local and regional needs.
New Heritage would maintain a working
relationship with the Port of Pasco and Tri-City
Development Council (TRIDEC) and other regional
economic development agencies to promote
industrial and business park uses adjacent to the
amendment area to further economic
opportunities.
ED-3. GOAL: MAINTAIN DEVELOPMENT
STANDARDS AND DESIGN GUIDELINES TO
ENSURE THAT COMMERCIAL AND
INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENTS ARE GOOD
NEIGHBORS
ED-3-A Policy: Enhance compatibility of
commercial and industrial development with
residential and mixed-use neighborhoods with
appropriate landscaping, screening, building and
design standards,
ED-3-B Policy: Ensure outdoor illumination and
signage of businesses have a positive impact and
are compatible with neighborhood standards.
ED-3-C Policy: Provide appropriate access
through a combination of pathways, sidewalks,
non-motorized travel lanes and parking.
ED-3-D Policy: Require businesses and buildings
in and adjacent to the Central Business District to
conform to established development standards.
Under the Mixed Commercial/Residential Land Use
concept, landscape screening, fencing, land use
location, and design (building, sign, and lighting)
would ensure the proposal remains a good
neighbor (See Sections 1, 2, 5.1, 5.2, 5.3 and 5.4).
This includes a planned network of pathways,
sidewalks, non-motorized travel lanes and parking
to encourage pedestrian access (see Sections 1 and
2).
Page 83 of 481
30-19-079/New Heritage 26
GOALS AND POLICIES COMPATIBILITY
ED-4. GOAL: POSITION THE COMMUNITY FOR
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND PROSPERITY
ED-4-A Policy: Leverage the Tri-Cities Airport as
an appealing gateway to attract visitors and new
industry to the airport district and the greater
Pasco region.
ED-4-B Policy: Collaborate with public/private
partners to create a master plan vision of the
waterfront, Broadmoor area, and other
neighborhoods as necessary.
ED-4-C Policy: Pursue the ongoing revitalization
of Downtown Pasco including incentivizing
development in the Central Business District.
Currently there is limited residential and supportive
land uses serving this area. A mixed-use area,
developed under the New Urbanism concept
outlined in Section 1, would provide easy commute
distances to existing and future employment
centers and the Tri-Cities Airport. Some of these
future employment centers could be within walking
and bike distances. In addition, the downtown
would also remain within biking distance to the site.
CAPITAL FACILITIES
CF-1. GOAL: USE THE SIX YEAR CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENT PROCESS AS THE SHORT-
TERM IMPLEMENTATION OF THE 20-YEAR
CAPITAL FACILITY NEEDS IDENTIFIED IN THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
CF-1-A Policy: Systematically guide capital
improvements consistent with the vision and
plan of the community.
CF-1-B Policy: Encourage public participation in
defining the need for, the proposed location of,
and the design of public facilities such as parks,
ball fields, pedestrian and bicycle corridors, and
street and utility extensions and improvements.
The capital facility improvements required would
be provided by the development under the Land
Subdivision process (see Sections 5.5, 5.6, and
Appendix A). Public participation would occur
during the Rezone, Land Subdivision and Plan
Amendment Processes.
Page 84 of 481
30-19-079/New Heritage 27
GOALS AND POLICIES COMPATIBILITY
CF-2. GOAL: ENSURE CONCURRENCY OF
UTILITIES, SERVICES, AND FACILITIES
CONSISTENT WITH LAND USE
DESIGNATIONS AND ACTIONS WITHIN
CAPITAL BUDGET CAPABILITIES
CF-2-A Policy: Encourage growth in geographic
areas where services and utilities can be
extended in an orderly, progressive, and efficient
manner.
CB-2-B Policy: Deficiencies in existing public
facilities should be addressed during the capital
facilities budgeting process.
CF-2-C Policy: Periodically review capital facilities
needs and the associated fiscal impacts on the
community in light of changing regional and
local economic trends. The appropriate interval
for such a review is ten years during the
mandated GMA update cycle, except for the
annual 6-Year Budget review.
Public facilities are addressed under Sections 5.5,
5.6, and Appendix A. All required public facilities
and services would be required under the Land
Subdivision process and concomitant agreement
process.
CF-3. GOAL: MAINTAIN ADEQUATE LANDS
FOR PUBLIC FACILITIES
CF-3-A Policy: Assure land development
proposals provide land and/or facilities or other
mitigation measures to address impacts on
traffic, parks, recreational facilities, schools, and
pedestrian and bicycle trails.
Land has been set aside for schools, roadways,
utilities, parks, trails and open spaces. Mitigation
measures are identified in this report that address
impacts on traffic, parks, recreation facilities,
schools and pedestrian and bicycle paths (see
section 5 and Appendix A).
CF-4. GOAL: ACQUIRE ADEQUATE WATER
RIGHTS FOR FUTURE NEEDS
CF-4-A Policy: Ensure the acquisition of water
rights commensurate with Pasco’s planned
development and need for water in residential,
commercial, industrial, and other urban uses.
CF-4-B Policy: Ensure that new developments,
utilizing Pasco water, transfer to Pasco any
existing water rights associated with the
properties being developed. In absence of any
existing water rights, developments should pay
water rights acquisition fees to Pasco.
The amendment area is currently within the City of
Pasco water service area.
Page 85 of 481
30-19-079/New Heritage 28
GOALS AND POLICIES COMPATIBILITY
CF-5. GOAL: IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE
COUNTY, PROVIDE PARKS, GREENWAYS,
TRAILS, AND RECREATION FACILITIES
THROUGHOUT THE UGA
CF-5-A Policy: Implement the adopted parks and
recreation plan as a part of this comprehensive
plan
CF-5-B Policy: Encourage use of existing natural
features, open spaces, and appropriate excess
right-of-way as an integral part of the
community-wide park system.
CF-5-C Policy: Maintain a cooperative agreement
with Pasco school district regarding the
development, use, and operation of
neighborhood parks.
The proposal provides an extensive system of
parks, greenways, trails and recreation facilities. The
Goals, Policies and Standards of Pasco’s Park,
Recreation and Forestry Management Plan are
addressed in Section 5.4. Where feasible, rights-of-
way will be used as part of the open-space system
and school property would be integrated into the
park and trail system.
CF-6. GOAL: FOSTER ADEQUATE PROVISION
FOR EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES
THROUGHOUT THE UGA
CF-6-A Policy: Work with the school district to
coordinate facility plans with this comprehensive
plan and encourage appropriate location and
design of schools throughout the community.
CF-6-B Policy: Work with Columbia Basin College
to coordinate campus development plans
including access and traffic circulation needs.
Coordination with the School District has begun,
the proposal has allocated 15-acres for an
elementary school. It is intended that the school
site would have access to the trail system to
encourage pedestrian access. In addition, planned
park and recreation facilities could be located
adjacent to better utilize both facilities (see
Sections 2 and 5.4).
CF-7. GOAL: MAINTAIN, WITHIN PASCO, A
LEVEL OF FIRE PROTECTION SERVICE THAT IS
EFFICIENT AND COST-EFFECTIVE.
ENCOURAGE THAT SAME LEVEL OF SERVICE
IN THE UNINCORPORATED PORTION OF THE
UGA
CF-7-A Policy: Strive to provide a sufficient
number of fire stations in appropriate locations
throughout the community.
CF-7-B Policy: Maintain a cooperative policy with
the county fire district.
An existing fire station is located about a mile from
the site and would be able to serve the proposed
amendment area (See Section 5.5).
Page 86 of 481
30-19-079/New Heritage 29
GOALS AND POLICIES COMPATIBILITY
CF-8. GOAL: LOCATE ESSENTIAL PUBLIC
FACILITIES TO OPTIMIZE ACCESS AND
EQUITABLY DISTRIBUTE ECONOMIC
BENEFIT/BURDENS THROUGHOUT THE
REGION AND COUNTY
CF-8-A Policy: Review all reasonable alternatives
for the location of essential public facilities prior
to granting necessary permits.
CF-8-B Policy: Ensure all potential environmental
impacts are considered for each essential public
facility including the cumulative impacts of
multiple facilities.
CF-8-C Policy: Ensure essential public facilities
contribute to necessary concurrency
requirements for transportation and utilities.
CF-8-D Policy: Adopt mitigating measures during
the special permit review process to address
potential land use compatibility issues with
surrounding uses.
No essential public facilities have been identified at
this location. Depending on the essential public
facilities required, space could be provided, and
compatibility could be achieved. This action would
require additional analysis by Pasco or a regional
agency requesting the action.
UTILITIES
UT-1. GOAL: PROVIDE ADEQUATE UTILITY
SERVICES TO THE UGA TO ASSURE THAT THE
ANTICIPATED 20-YEAR GROWTH IS
ACCOMMODATED
UT-1-A Policy: Ensure that public water and
sewer services are available concurrently with
development in the urban growth area.
UT-1-B Policy: Prioritize investments in public
water and sewer system improvements to
support planned development within the urban
growth area.
UT-1-C Policy: Coordinate utility providers’
functional plans and Pasco’s land use and utility
comprehensive plans to ensure long term service
availability.
UT-1-D Policy: Leverage irrigation water in new
developments to ease the use of potable water
for maintenance of landscaping.
Mitigation measures have been proposed to
address the impacts on population growth (see
Sections 5.2 and 5.6). Public sewer and water
service are currently available at the site (see
Section 5.5).
Page 87 of 481
30-19-079/New Heritage 30
GOALS AND POLICIES COMPATIBILITY
UT-2. GOAL: ENSURE THAT ADEQUATE
PLACEMENT OF UTILITY FACILITIES IS
ADDRESSED IN DEVELOPMENT PLANS
UT-2-A Policy: coordinate private utility
providers’ plans for energy and communication
utilities with Pasco land use plans and
development permit applications.
UT-2-B Policy: locate and design utility
substations consistent with adopted codes and
standards to be compatible with the aesthetic
standards of affected neighborhoods.
Sections 5.6 discuss the adequacy of the utilities
serving the site and proposed mitigation measures.
Coordination with private utility providers would
occur at the time of approval for development as
part of the Land Subdivision process.
UT-3. GOAL: ASSURE THE PROVISION OF
ADEQUATE AND EFFICIENT STORM WATER
MANAGEMENT
UT-3-A Policy: Require adequate provision of
storm water facilities with all new land
development.
UT-3-B Policy: Include adequate storm water
management facilities to serve new or existing
streets.
Section 5.5 discuss all utilities, including
stormwater management. The proposed project
would be required to comply with current storm
water management requirements.
Page 88 of 481
30-19-079/New Heritage 31
GOALS AND POLICIES COMPATIBILITY
TRANSPORTATION
TR-1. GOAL: PROVIDE FOR AND MAINTAIN A
SAFE, INTEGRATED AND EFFECTIVE
TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM THAT
PROMOTES CONNECTIVITY
TR-1-A Policy: Participate in the metropolitan and
regional transportation planning efforts of the
Benton-Franklin Council of Governments.
TR-1-B Policy: Require transportation and land
use planning efforts and policy that meet the
needs of the community and the objectives of
this plan.
TR-1-C Policy: Minimize traffic conflicts on the
arterial street system by implementing access
and corridor management best practices.
TR-1-D Policy: Encourage multi-modal street
design with traffic calming and safety in
consideration of surrounding land uses.
TR-1-E Policy: Provide increased neighborhood
travel connections for public safety as well as
providing for transportation disbursement.
TR-1-F Policy: develop an interconnected
network of streets, trails, and other public ways
during the development process while
preserving neighborhood identity.
TR-1-G Policy: adopt and maintain a functional
street classification system consistent with
regional and state guidance.
TR-1-H Policy: Maintain level-of-service “D” on all
arterials and collectors and level-of- service “C”
during the PM peak-hour.
TR1-I Policy: Require developments to meet the
intent of Pasco Complete Street Ordinance.
Section 5.5 and Appendix A discuss the
transportation impacts of each alternative and how
those impacts would differ from those that would
occur under the No-Action alternative. Measures
required to mitigate those impacts identified are
also addressed.
With the new-urbanism concepts identified under
Section 1, the proposal would emphasize
walkability to schools, parks, retail and nearby
employment centers.
The site would also provide for public
transportation and space for bike and pedestrian
access to public roadways. The intent is to provide
an interconnecting system of streets, trails and
public ways to enhance the quality of life.
All Pasco standards, ordnances and guidelines
would be met under the approval processes of
Pasco.
Page 89 of 481
30-19-079/New Heritage 32
GOALS AND POLICIES COMPATIBILITY
TR-2. GOAL: ENCOURAGE EFFICIENT,
ALTERNATE, AND MULTI-MODAL
TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS
TR-2-A Policy: Maintain the multi-model
passenger terminal.
TR-2-B Policy: Collaborate with Ben Franklin
Transit in programming transit routes, transit
stops, and supporting facilities that increase user
accessibility during the development process.
TR-2-C Policy: Encourage the use of public
transportation including ridesharing, and Ben
Franklin Transit’s Van Pool program.
TR-2-D Policy: Encourage bicycle and pedestrian
travel by providing safe and purposeful bicycle
and pedestrian routes.
TR-2-E Policy: Encourage park-and-ride lots for
bicycles and/or automobiles.
TR-2-F Policy: Support rail services for
passengers, industries, and commerce within the
area.
There would be space for a central transit station
and transit stops throughout the site (see Section
5.5). Van Pooling would be included in the concept.
Bikeways and pathways are provided to
interconnect residential, schools, parks, services
and nearby employment centers.
TR-3 GOAL: IMPROVE OPERATING
EFFICIENCY OF THE TRANSPORTATION
SYSTEM
TR-3-A Policy: Evaluate, plan, and install traffic
control devices and intersection designs to
improve travel safety and efficiency.
TR-3-B Policy: ensure adequate maintenance of
the existing facilities.
The existing railroad spur could still serve adjacent
industries.
Transportation and traffic are discussed under
Sections 5.5 and Appendix A. All required safety
and design standards would be met at the time of
approval of a specific plan under the Land
Subdivision and Development approval process.
TR-4 GOAL: BEAUTIFY THE MAJOR STREETS OF
PASCO
TR-4-A Policy: Incorporate design and
streetscape into all major arterial and collector
streets as they are constructed.
TR-4-B Policy: Encourage retrofit projects that
include beautification on major arterial streets.
A detailed street tree planting plan will be
submitted during the Land Subdivision and
Development approval process (see Section 5.4).
TR-5 GOAL: MAINTAIN A FREIGHT ROUTE
SYSTEM TO PROVIDE ACCESS TO
COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL AREAS
TR-5-A Policy: Promote the safe and efficient
movement of freight through Pasco.
TR-5-A Policy: Support the development of
facilities that are critical components of the
movement of freight.
Existing railroad spur will be retained to serve
abutting industry (see Sections 2, 5.5, and
Appendix A). Site is adjacent to major local and
state freight corridors to allow access to the site.
Page 90 of 481
30-19-079/New Heritage 33
GOALS AND POLICIES COMPATIBILITY
IMPLEMENTATION & MONITORING
IM-1. GOAL: ENSURE CONSISTENCY AND
CERTAINTY IN LAND USE PLANNING AND
DEVELOPMENT
IM-1-A Policy: Maintain codes, standards, and
guidelines, which are clear, concise, and
objective.
IM-1-B Policy: Strive for consistency and certainty
through a predictable schedule of assessment
and amendments on an annual basis, rather than
sporadically.
IM-1-C Policy: Create and enforce a common set
of development standards for both the
incorporated and unincorporated lands of the
UGA, in cooperation with Franklin County.
IM-1-D Policy: Maintain a general land use map
that clearly designates various land uses and
densities consistent with the goals and policies of
this plan.
IM-1-E Policy: Establish development project
permit approval procedures that are well defined
and consistent with regulatory criteria and
standards.
IM-1-F Policy: Ensure appropriate timelines for
action on applications.
Consistency would be established during the
Comprehensive Plan Amendment process. This
process, and the subsequent Land Development
process, ensures that the proposal will be
consistent with Pasco development standards, land
uses, densities, regulatory criteria and standards,
timelines, and the Goals and Policies of the
Comprehensive Plan.
IM-2. GOAL: ADVANCE PASCO’S
INFORMATION AND DECISION-MAKING
CAPACITY
IM-2-A Policy: Utilize innovative planning level
data and analysis to determine progress of the
Comprehensive Plan through annual updates,
metrics and tracking.
IM-2-B Policy: Analyze development patterns of
the UGA and identify revisions, amendments, and
changes to the goals, policies, objectives.
IM-2-C Policy: Conduct an annual review of the
Comprehensive Plan.
IM-2-D Policy: Ensure that all plans and studies
shall be consistent with the goals, policies, and
proposals of this comprehensive plan.
IM-2-E Policy: Lead and collaborate on efforts for
database, Geographic Information Systems (GIS),
and other data related programming and
projects with local, regional, and state agencies.
The purpose of this report is to provide the public,
stakeholders, Pasco and other public agencies data
necessary to analyze the consistency of the
proposal with the Goals and Policies of the
Comprehensive Plan and its conformance with the
basic standards and guidelines of Pasco. It also
provides a non-Project level analysis of the
potential effects of the proposal on the natural and
man-made environment.
Page 91 of 481
30-19-079/New Heritage 34
GOALS AND POLICIES COMPATIBILITY
IM-3 GOAL: ENSURE THAT THE PUBLIC HAS A
MEANINGFUL OPPORTUNITY TO
PARTICIPATE IN THE PLANNING EFFORTS OF
PASCO
IM-3-A Policy: Ensure the appropriate
notification of plans, projects, and studies are
provided to all impacted residents of Pasco.
IM-3-B Policy: Encourage and facilitate expanded
public participation by designing user-friendly
processes and documents.
IM-3-C Policy: Consider the interests of the entire
community and the goals and policies of the
Comprehensive Plan prior to making land use
and planning decisions.
IM-4-D Policy: Use a range of public forums and
media outreach to collect, obtain, and facilitate
public engagement.
IM-4-E Policy: Provide equitable access to all
Pasco programming, services, and events,
including accommodations for disabilities and
community members with limited English-
speaking ability.
IM-4-F Policy: Ensure that all public engagement
is culturally relevant and provides residents with
an opportunity to engage and provide feedback
to Pasco.
IM-4-G: Collaborate with the Inclusivity, Diversity
and Equity Commission.
The development of this report is intended to
provide Pasco, public, other decision makers, and
stakeholders, the Vision, intent, alternatives,
potential effects of the proposal and mitigation
measures to ensure consistency with the Goals,
Policies and procedures of Pasco’s Comprehensive
Plan. Subsequent planning processes, including the
procedures to amend the Comprehensive Plan and
the Land Development process, will include public
participation.
Page 92 of 481
30-19-079/New Heritage 35
GOALS AND POLICIES COMPATIBILITY
IM-4 GOAL: WORK IN PARTNERSHIP WITH
VARIOUS GOVERNMENT ENTITIES
IM-4-A Policy: Coordinate with other
governmental units in preparing development
regulations.
IM-4-B Policy: Work with BFCG’s Growth
Management Committee to develop consistency
among the various jurisdictions that are planning.
IM-4-C Policy: Work with other state agencies
such as the Department of Natural Resources and
the Department of Fish and Wildlife when
developing regulations, which would impact
those agencies.
IM-4-D Policy: Work with the Office of Financial
Management in siting essential public facilities of
regional and statewide importance
IM-4-E Policy: Participate with communities
within the County in developing regulations that
are consistent with each other and provide a
smooth transition between rural areas and urban
cities.
Development will be in collaboration with Pasco of
Pasco, Franklin County and appropriate State,
regional, local agencies, and impacted utility
agencies. Development will be consistent with all
agency requirements adopted by Pasco and/or
required for construction.
Page 93 of 481
30-19-079/New Heritage 36
5 EXISTING CONDITION, EFFECTS, AND MITIGATION
5.1 LAND U SE
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Pasco’s Comprehensive Plan and Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), provide information on
the existing uses of land in Pasco.
“Pasco includes a variety of land uses from residential, commercial, industrial to open
space. Pasco’s land use designations and acreages are identified in the 2018
Comprehensive Plan. Residential land is the predominant use in Pasco, containing
over 44% of Pasco’s total land. Residential land use is followed by industrial land
use, which consists of 24% of the total land use within Pasco. Commercial lands are
distributed along the major corridors, Pasco Center and along the Interstate -182.
Open space land use is distributed throughout Pasco in the form of parks and
natural open spaces. The shoreline areas consist of several parks, trails, and natural
open space. See Table 9 (Table 5.1) for a summary of land use types in Pasco.”
TABLE 5 .1 – EXISTING LAND USE IN PASCO LIMITS AND UGA
Land Use Designation Acreage* % of Total
Residential Lands 11,167 44%
Low Density
Mixed Density
High Density
Commercial Lands 2,666 11%
Mixed Residential/Commercial
Commercial
Industrial Lands 5,968 24%
Public/Quasi-Public Lands 925 4%
Open Space / Park Lands 1,012 4%
Airport Reserve Lands 2,236 9%
DNR Reserve Lands 1,234 5%
Total 25,208 100%
*The total includes 4,300 acres of street right of way, which is about 17% of the total.
Source: Pasco of Pasco Comprehensive Plan Non-Project Environmental Impact Statement.”
Pasco’s Comprehensive Plan’s Preferred Alternative also included an expansion of the UGA by
3,600 acres along the north edge of Pasco, raising the total UGA acreage to 28,808. In addition,
Pasco’s Land Capacity Analysis assumed a 20% market factor, a 5% environmental factor, and a
20% factor for roadways in justifying the expanded UGA.
Pasco’s Comprehensive Plan Non-Project EIS also discusses the land use categories included in
the Comprehensive Plan (See Figure 5.1):
Page 94 of 481
30-19-079/New Heritage 37
FIGURE 5 .1 – PASCO FUTURE LAND USE MAP
Pasco’s Comprehensive Plan land use categories and their purposes are discussed below:
• Open Space/Nature – This land use designation applies to areas where development will
be severely restricted. Parklands, trails, and critical areas are examples of different types of
open spaces.
• Low Density Residential – This land use allows residential development at a density
of two to five dwelling units per acre. The land use designation criterion includes sewer
availability or approval from the Benton-Franklin Health District when sewer is not available,
suitability for home sites, and market demand.
• Medium Density Residential – This land use designation includes single-family dwellings,
patio homes, townhouses, apartments, and condominiums at a density of 6 to 20 dwelling
units per acre. This is designated to areas where the location is convenient to major
circulation routes, it provides transition between more intense uses, and low density uses.
Availability of sewer services and market demand are also key criteria for this land
use designation.
• High Density Residential – This land use designation includes multi-family dwellings,
apartments, and condominiums at a density of 21 dwelling units or more per acre. This is
designated to areas where the location is convenient to major circulation routes and
employment areas. Availability of sewer services and market demand are also key criteria
for this land use designation.
Page 95 of 481
30-19-079/New Heritage 38
• Mixed Residential Commercial – This land use designation is a mix of residential and
commercial uses. Residential uses include single-family dwellings, patio homes, townhouses,
apartments, and condominiums at a density of 5 to 29 dwelling units per acre.
Commercial uses include neighborhood shopping and specialty centers, business parks,
service, and office uses. This is designated to areas where the location is convenient to major
circulation routes and land is suitable for heavy building sites.
• Commercial – This land use is designated for neighborhood, community and regional
shopping and specialty centers, business parks, service, and office uses. This is designated to
areas where the location is convenient to major circulation routes and land is suitable for
heavy building sites.
• Industrial – This land use is designated for manufacturing, food processing,
storage, and wholesale distribution of equipment and products, hazardous material
storage, and transportation-related facilities
• Public and Quasi Public - This land use is designated for schools, civic buildings, fire
stations and other public uses.
• Airport Reserve - This land use is designated for lands owned or occupied by the Tri-Cities
Airport.
• DNR Reserve - This land use is designated for lands owned by DNR.
Within the immediate vicinity of the proposed amendment area, land uses include Industrial, Low
Density Residential, Mixed Use Residential, Public and Quasi-Public, Open Space/Nature, and
Mixed Residential Commercial. Table 5.2, Existing Land Use within the Vicinity of the Proposal,
summarizes the acreages for each land use category. Figure 5.2, illustrates the immediate vicinity
used as a basis for the below acreages.
TABLE 5 .2 – EXISTING VICINITY LAND USES
Land Use Designation Acreage %
Industrial 1,383 62%
Low Density Residential 539 24%
Mixed Use Residential 117 5%
Public/Quasi-Public 79 4%
Open Space/Nature 53 2%
Mixed
Residential/Commercial 55 2%
Total 2,226 100%
Page 96 of 481
30-19-079/New Heritage 39
FIGURE 5 .2 – VICINITY LAND USE
The 196-acre Amendment area is currently undeveloped except various sewer lines, water lines,
powerlines, other utilities and rights-of-way. There is also an existing railroad spur along the
southern portion of the site and two proposed Distribution Centers directly to the east.
Under the Industrial designation of the Comprehensive Plan, Pasco’s Zoning Code identifies three
separate zoning classifications: Light Industrial (I-1), Medium Industrial (I-2) and Heavy Industrial
(I-3). The amendment area is currently zoned Medium Industrial with approximal 17 acres along
East A road zoned Light Industrial. The area to the immediate south, east and west are also zoned
Light Industrial. The area to the immediate north along East A Street is zoned a mix of Residential,
Commercial, and Mixed Commercial Residential.
Pasco Zoning Code allows the following uses under the Medium Industrial District zoning
classification.
MEDIUM INDUST RIAL DISTRICT
Uses permitted in the I-2 district shall be:
1. All uses not otherwise prohibited by law, but no residential buildings shall be permitted; and
2. Junkyards, automobile wrecking yards, scrap iron, scrap paper, or rag storage, sorting or
bailing shall be permitted, provided:
a. An eight-foot, sight-obscuring fence must be constructed and inspected prior to the
issuance of a certificate of occupancy for use of the goods. The fence shall be of solid
single neutral color.
Page 97 of 481
30-19-079/New Heritage 40
b. No automobile or parts thereof, junk or salvage materials or parts thereof shall be
visible from any public right-of-way. All materials or parts shall be located within the
fenced area.
c. Fire lanes shall be provided as required in the International Fire Code.
d. A performance bond for $1,000 shall be required prior to the issuance of an
occupancy permit, to ensure compliance with provisions of this section. The bond
shall remain in force as long as the use exists.
e. The permit shall be granted for a period not to exceed two years, and at the end of
such period an inspection shall be made of the premises to determine the advisability
of renewing such permit. [Ord. 3354 § 2, 1999; Code 1970 §25.54.020.
Pasco Zoning Code allows the following uses under the Light Industrial District zoning
classification.
The I-1 light industrial district is established to preserve areas for industrial and related uses of such
a nature that they do not create serious problems of compatibility with other kinds of land uses. Uses
permitted in this district should not generate noise levels, light, odor or fumes that would constitute
a nuisance or hazard. [Ord. 3354 § 2, 1999; Code 1970 § 25.52.010.]
Uses permitted in the I-1 district shall be:
1. All uses permitted in the C-3 district;
2. Building material storage yard;
3. Trucking, express and storage yards;
4. Contractor’s plant or storage yards;
5. Laboratories, experimental;
7. Automotive assembly and repair;
8. Kennels;
9. Creamery, bottling, ice manufacture and cold storage plant;
10. Blacksmith, welding or other metal shops, excluding punch presses over 20 tons rated
capacity, drop hammers, and the like;
11. The manufacturing, compounding, processing, packaging of cosmetics, pharmacology and
food products, except fish and meat products, and the reducing and refining of fats and oils;
12. Printing plant; and
13. Parking lots within 500 feet of a C-2 district boundary, provided such lots are paved and the
development complies with the landscape and fencing requirements of the C -1 district, as
enumerated in PMC 25.85.020(13). [Ord. 4110 § 23, 2013; Ord. 3354 § 2, 1999; Code 1970
§ 25.52.020.]
Page 98 of 481
30-19-079/New Heritage 41
EFFECTS ON THE PROPOSAL
NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE
Under the No Action Alternative, the Industrial designation in the City's Comprehensive Plan
would remain. The uses and zoning classifications allowed under that designation could be
constructed. In the amendment area site, uses allowed under the I-1 and I-2 classification would
be allowed. Some of these uses could potentially adversely impact nearby residential land uses
and the natural environment through increased noise, odor, reduction in air quality and runoff
(see Sections 5.3 to 5.7).
Generally, Industrial Zoning has a greater potential for environmental impacts to the natural and
man-made environment than does residentially zoned land. While the City’s Comprehensive Plan
Environmental Impact Statement does not address this issue in detail, Pasco's existing codes,
policies and requirements could address some or all of these impacts.
ALL ACTION ALTERNATIVES
Under all action alternatives, with the approval of a Land Subdivision, future land uses in the
vicinity would change as illustrated in Table 5.3 , below.
TABLE 5 .3 – PROPOSED LAND USES IN THE AMENDMENT VICINITY
Land Use Designation Proposed
Amendment Revised Acreage %
Industrial -196 1,187 53%
Low Density Residential 0 539 24%
Mixed Use Residential +123 240 11%
Public/Quasi-Public +44 123 6%
Open Space/Nature * 82 4%
Mixed Residential/Commercial 0 55 2%
* Park space to be determined during Land Subdivision Process
Under Pasco’s Zoning Ordinance (25.215.015 - Comprehensive Plan land use density table), the
Mixed Residential/Commercial Land Use designation will “allow a combination of mixed-
use residential and commercial in the same development. Single-family dwellings, patio homes,
townhouses, apartments, and condominiums at a density of 5 to 29 dwelling units per acre.
Neighborhood shopping and specialty centers, business parks, service and office uses”. Proposed
zoning classifications R-1 through R-4; C-1 and O; and Waterfront, are allowed under the Mixed
Residential/Commercial Land Use designation with the approval of the Pasco City Council, with
the recommendation by the Pasco Hearing Examiner.
Under all action alternatives, this change could impact the viability of adjacent industrial land uses
within the immediate area without mitigation. It may also increase the pressure on other adjacent
industrial land uses to convert to a similar designation in the future. Without mitigation, this
Page 99 of 481
30-19-079/New Heritage 42
change may also impact adjacent residential uses from runoff, noise, traffic, and reduction in air
quality. These and other potential impacts and mitigation measures resulting from this change
are also discussed Sections 5.2 through 5.7, below.
LOW INTENSIT Y ALTERNATIVE
Under the low intensity alternative, the proposed amendment to Pasco Comprehensive Plan
would convert approximately 196 acres from “Industrial” to “Mixed Residential Commercial” or
"Medium Density Residential". With this change, this alternative would provide approximately 121
acres of residential land with 794 residential units with an average density of 6.6 UPA;
approximately 32,670 square feet of retail/office space; area for open space; 15 acres for an
elementary school and, approximately 29 acres for roadways and utilities (See Table 2.1).
MEDIUM INTENSITY ALTERNATIVE
Because this alternative anticipates that the same amount of land would be changed from
Industrial to Mixed Residential Commercial or Medium Density Residential, the land use impacts
would be similar. With this change, this alternative would provide approximately 116 acres of
residential land with 1,028 residential units with an average density of 8.6 UPA; approximately
65,340 square feet of retail/office space; area for open space; 15 acres for a school and,
approximately 29 acres for roadways and utilities (See Table 2.1).
HIGH INTENSITY ALTERNATIVE
This alternative also anticipates that the same amount of land would be converted from Industrial
to Mixed Residential Commercial or Medium Density Residential, consequently the land use
impacts would also be similar. With this change, this alternative would provide approximately 118
acres of residential land with 1,354 residential units with an average density of 11.5 UPA;
approximately 76,230 square feet of retail/office space; area for open space; 15 acres for an
elementary school and, approximately 29 acres for roadways and utilities (See Table 2.1).
MITIGATION MEASURES
Mitigation measures related to the proposed amendment are discussed under Sections 5.2
through 5.7 below. This includes specific mitigation measures discussed under 5.2, Population,
Housing and Employment, 5.3, Environmental Health, and 5.7, Industrial/Economic. These
mitigation measures include buffers, setbacks, and land use location developed during site design.
5.2 POPULATION, HOUSING, AND EMPLOYMENT
EXISTING CONDITIONS
POPULATION
Part of Pasco’s Comprehensive Plan Non-Project Environmental Impact Statement (NPEIS) stated:
Page 100 of 481
30-19-079/New Heritage 43
“… population estimates for Pasco in 2018 are 73,590 and in 2019 are 75,290. Based on 2018
numbers, it is estimated that 48,238 people will be added to Pasco’s population in the next
20 years (Oneza & Associates, 2018).
Based on this, without this amendment, the future total population in 2029 is projected to be
123,528. Or a little less than 6,200 new residents per year.
HOUSING
The Comprehensive Plan’s NPEIS stated;
The 2017 American Community Survey (ACS) data indicate 21,653 housing units in Pasco.
About 70 percent of the housing units are owner-occupied and 30 percent renter occupied.
Per Pasco of Pasco Draft Comprehensive Plan Volume II, using the average hous ehold size
of 3.17 persons per unit, added population from the 2018 base population will require 15,217
housing units. Existing vacant buildable land is estimated to provide 9,581 units in a variety
of housing types (e.g., single-family, multi-family, town home, condo); therefore, an
additional 5,636 housing units will be required to meet the demand of future housing (Oneza
& Associates 2018).”
Based on the above, Pasco currently has an average household size of 3.49. Based on Pasco's
Comprehensive Plan, there would be a total of 36,870 housing units projected by 2029 with an
average household size of 3.35.
There is currently no housing located within the amendment area.
EMPLOYMENT
For employment the NPEIS states;
“Pasco’s economy is also tied to the economy of the Tri-Cities metro area. The Tri‐Cities area
is unique in that its employment base is dominated by a select number of large employers.
Roughly one in five of estimated 116,000 jobs in the Benton and Franklin Counties are for
large employment firms or agencies, with the top five ranging in type, including research
and development, health services, engineering and construction, food processing, and
education. The continued employment growth at the Department of Energy Hanford Nuclear
Reservation, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Energy Northwest and the Office of
River Protection will continue the growth of Pasco’s population. This growth will not only
attract new residents to Pasco, but also provide opportunities for our young population to
remain in Pasco. Employment in the Tri‐Cities region increased from 2006 to 2015 by more
than 22,000 jobs, with an average annual growth rate of 2 percent. There are roughly
116,000 jobs in the region. All industries experienced positive employment growth by the
end of the 10‐year period. However, from 2011 to 2014 employment slightly declined as
spending cuts at the Hanford Site impacted the entire regional economy. In Pasco, the
expansion of its economy led to increasing industrial diversity, and although the economic
downtown in 2008 did have an impact, food manufacturing, agriculture, private and public
educational and healthcare services provided strong stability.”
The 196-acre amendment area is undeveloped except for utilities and a railroad spur to the south.
The areas to the West, South and East are all designated as Industrial in the Comprehensive Plan.
Page 101 of 481
30-19-079/New Heritage 44
The area to the north is designated in the Comprehensive Plan as Mixed Residential/Commercial,
Commercial, and low and medium density residential (See Figure 5.2).
Recently, two large distribution centers are in process of being developed to the east of the
amendment area. Total projected employment at these two facilities is approximately 1,800
people. Other industrial developments have also been recently announced which will also increase
employment in the area.
EFFECTS ON THE PROPOSAL
POPULATION
ALL ACTION ALTERNATIVE
Under all action alternatives, an increase in population would impact public services, traffic, noise,
utilities and air quality. It could also impact the population projections in the City's Comprehensive
Plan. These impacts are addressed in other sections of this report and in Housing, below.
NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE
Under the No Action Alternative, the site would remain industrial, and population would not be
directly impacted. Indirectly, primary employment would increase which would increase housing
demand, and consequently, population (See Employment, below and Appendix B)
LOW INTENSITY ALTERNATIVE
Based on the estimated persons per household shown in Table 5.4, the total population increase
under this alternative would be 2,660, or an increase of approximately 2.2% over the 20-year
planning period.
MEDIUM DENSITY ALTERNATIVE
If the amendment is approved, there would be an estimated population increase of 3,442, or
approximately 2.7%.
HIGH INTENSITY ALTERNATIVE
If the amendment is approved, there would be an estimated population increase of 4,536, or
approximately 3.7%.
HOUSING
Pasco has projected that a net of 15,217 new housing units would be required by 2038 (Oneza &
Associates 2018). To provide for this increase, Pasco has expanded the UGA by 3,600 acres (Pasco's
EIS Preferred Alternative). In justifying this expansion, Pasco also used a 20% market factor, a 5%
environmental factor and a 20% factor for roads and utilities.
Based on this, Pasco is projected to have a total of 36,870 housing units by 2029 with a total of
population of 123,528. This results in a household size of 3.35.
Page 102 of 481
30-19-079/New Heritage 45
ALL ACTION ALTERNATIVES
In order to not impact the population projections under the City's Comprehensive Plan, any
increase in housing, from any of the proposed action alternatives, would have to either reduce
the 20% market factor used in justifying the GMA boundary (it is assumed that the 5%
environmental factor and the 20% roads and utilities factor would not be affected), or reduce the
average projected housing density in Pasco (See Table 5.4, below).
NO ACTI ON ALTERNATIVE
The No-Action Alternative would leave the site as industrial. Under this designation, no housing
would be provided.
LOW INTENSITY ALTERATIVE
Under this alterative, 794 housing units would be added on 121 acres with an average density of
6.6 units per acre. In order to be consistent with Pasco's projected housing increase, this would
require that the projected 20% market factor be reduced by about 9%, and/or a change to the
City’s average household size (See Table 5.4).
Without mitigation, an increase in housing could impact noise, surface water runoff, air quality,
utilities, traffic and public services, but would not impact the human and man-made environments
to the extent that the No-Action could.
MEDIUM INTENSITY ALTERNATIVE
Under this alterative, 1,028 housing units would be added on 119 acres with an average density
of 8.6 units per acre. In order to be consistent with Pasco's projected housing increase, this would
require that the projected 20% market factor be reduced by about 11%, and/or a change to the
City’s average household size (See Table 5.4).
Without mitigation, an increase in housing could impact noise, surface water runoff, air quality,
utilities, traffic and public services, but would not impact the human and man-made environments
to the extent that the No-Action could.
HIGH INTENSITY ALTERNATIVE
Under this alterative, 1,354 housing units would be added on 118 acres. In order to be consistent
with Pasco's projected housing increase, this would require that the projected 20% market factor
be reduced by about 14%, and/or a change to the City’s average household size (See Table 5.4).
Without mitigation, an increase in housing could impact noise, surface water runoff, air quality,
utilities, traffic and public services, but would not impact the human and man-made environments
to the extent that the No-Action could.
Page 103 of 481
30-19-079/New Heritage 46
TABLE 5 .4 – AVERAGE HOUSEHOLD SIZE
Item Comprehensive
Plan
Low
Density
Alternative
Medium
Density
Alternative
High
Density
Alternative
Projected Population 123,528 123,528 123,528 123,528
Proposed Increase 0 2,259 2,770 3,506
Total 123,528 125,787 126,298 127,034
Projected Housing
Units 36,870 36,870 36,870 36,870
Proposed Increase 0 778 994 1,296
Total 36,870 37,648 37,864 38,166
Average Household
Size 3.35037 3.34113 3.33557 3.32846
Source: JUB, Land Strategies
EMPLOYMENT
NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE
Under the No-Action Alternative the site will remain in a combination of Light Density Industrial
and Medium Density Industrial. The impacts of this designation on population and housing have
been generally discussed in the City's Comprehensive Plan Final EIS (See Existing Conditions,
above).
According to DataUSA, the total employment in Pasco in 2019 was 62,775. This does not include
the approximately 2,400 employees currently projected for planned projects (Tri-Cities Area
Journal of Business). It’s important to point out that the existing Pasco Comprehensive Plan has
projected most of the future population and housing growth in the Broadmoor area, which is on
the west side of Pasco. The primary area for the employment growth outlined above is on the east
side of Pasco. This means that, under the current Comprehensive Plan, many new employees,
particularly those at the two proposed distribution centers, would be required to commute across
town, resulting to impacts to traffic (See Appendix A and B).
Because Medium Density Industrial allow any use not otherwise prohibited by law, it is not
possible to project the employment on the site under the no-action alternative. The Institute of
Transportation Engineers Manual estimates 6 employees per acre for this type of land use, but
this estimate may be low. Based on this estimate the site would contain 1,176 employees.
ALL ACTION ALTERNATIVES
Under all action alternatives there would be employment related to the commercial and
service/office land-uses being proposed (See Table 5.5).
For all action alternatives, except employees living on site, employees will have an impact on traffic
and public services, including transit. Businesses and offices will also impact traffic, utilities and
public services.
Page 104 of 481
30-19-079/New Heritage 47
TABLE 5 .5 – EMPLOYMENT
Land Use
Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3
SF
Emp.
Total
SF
Total
Emp.
SF
Emp. Total
Emp.
SF
Emp.
Total
SF
Total
Emp.
Elementary
School 1,250 205,000 164 1,250 205,000 164 1,25
0 205,001 164
Service/Office
Single Tenant
Office 295 13,780 47 295 26,560 90 295 26,780 91
Medical-Dental 207 8,000 39 207 17,000 82 207 17,000 82
Sub Total 21,780 85 43,560 172 43,780 173
Retail
Restaurants 134 3,490 26 134 8,780 66 134 11,000 82
Neighborhood
Retail 588 7,400 13 588 13,000 22 588 21,000 36
Sub Total 10,890 39 21,780 88 32,000 156
Total 288 424 493
Source: ITE/JUB, Land Strategies
MITIGATION MEASURES
Specific mitigation measures are identified in Sections 5.3 to 5.7, below. Pasco’s Comprehensive
Plan also identifies Goals and Policies that would mitigate potential impacts resulting from the
proposed amendment.
• H-1. GOAL: Encourage housing for all economic segments of Pasco’s population consistent
with the local and regional market.
• H-1-A Policy: Allow for a full range of housing including single family homes, townhouses,
condominiums, apartments, and manufactured housing, accessory dwelling units, zero lot
line, planned unit developments etc. in areas as appropriate.
• ED-1-F Policy: Recognize that infrastructure, including transportation and utility planning
are vital to economic development and attracting businesses.
• ED-2 Goal: Assure appropriate location and design of commercial and industrial facilities.
• ED-2-B Policy: Encourage development of a wide range of commercial and industrial uses
strategically located to support local and regional needs.
• ED-3 Goal: Maintain development standards and design guidelines to ensure that
commercial and industrial developments are good neighbors.
• ED-3-A Policy: Enhance compatibility of commercial and industrial development with
residential and mixed-use neighborhoods using landscaping, screening, and superior
building design standards and guidelines.
Page 105 of 481
30-19-079/New Heritage 48
Additional mitigation measures include encouraging carpooling and transit to nearby
employment centers and the provision of bike and walking corridors to adjacent employment
centers.
5.3 ENVIRONM ENTAL HEALTH
EXISTING CONDITIONS
The amendment remains vacant. The areas to the west and southwest are also vacant (except for
a railroad spur to the south). The area directly east is currently under construction for two major
distribution centers and the area to the north contains a mix of residential, and commercial uses.
There is an existing residential mobile home park (Lakeview) located 2/3 of a mile to the southeast
of the project area.
While not currently constructed, the City of Pasco has funding and is schedule to construct Phase
1 of a 28 acre sports complex in the industrial area off East A Street. This sports complex is located
at the southeast corner East A St. and S. Elm Ave. Construction of Phase 1 is scheduled to begin
sometime in 2022; therefore, the sports complex will be an existing feature in late 2022.
EFFECTS ON THE PROPOSAL
NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE
In the future, industrial uses allowed under the Industrial designation in the Comprehensive Plan,
particularly under the Medium Density classification in Pasco Zoning Ordinance, could pose
environmental health risks to adjacent land uses. These risks include increased exposure to
chemicals or risk of fire, run-off from the storage of hazardous wastes, odor and decreases in air
quality, noise, increased traffic/congestion, and visual blight. These impacts would potentially have
an increased affect to the existing residential areas to the north, northeast and also to the
southeast (See Section 5.7, below). The proximity of existing residential developments to the
north, northeast and southeast of this industrial area has prompted the majority of industrial
developments to occur at existing industrial zoned lands located approximately 4 miles to the
north of this area.
A 28-acre sports complex will be located at the southeast corner East A St. and S. Elm Ave directly
adjacent to the industrial zoned land.
LOW INTENSITY ALTERNATIVE
Under this alternative, with approval of a Rezone and Land Subdivision, any uses permitted under
zoning districts R-1 through R-4; C-1 and O; Waterfront as identified in the Pasco Zoning Code
would be allowed. Depending on the size, location and types of uses permitted in the land use
approval, these uses could be exposed to environmental impacts from other industrial areas
through increased exposure to chemicals or risk of fire, run-off from the storage of hazardous
wastes, odor and decreases in air quality, noise and visual blight. Currently the majority of these
nearby industrial areas are Zoned L-1, which limits the types of industrial uses that can be
Page 106 of 481
30-19-079/New Heritage 49
developed and would likely have less impact on the proposed amendment area. Potential
environmental health Impacts from the amendment area include increased runoff, construction
noise, air-quality reduction from increased traffic, and increased traffic congestion.
MEDIUM INTENSITY ALTERNATIVE
Increased residential density and the expansion of the retail and office areas could be
proportionally impacted by adjacent industrial uses. In addition, this increased density and
expansion would also proportionally increase runoff, construction noise, reduce air-quality, and
increase traffic congestion.
HIGH INTENSITY ALTERNATIVE
This alternative would have the greatest increase in residential density and office areas. This could
result greater environmental health impacts from adjacent industrial uses. This increased density
would also proportionality increase runoff, construction noise, reduce air-quality, and increase
traffic congestion.
MITIGATION MEASURES
NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE
The impacts to the No-Action Alternative have been addressed under Pasco’s current
Comprehensive Plan and Environmental Impact Statement.
ALL ACTION ALTERNATIVES
Potential mitigation measures for all the alternatives depend on the specific uses allowed, their
location and mitigation measures required at the time of approval by Pasco. One potential impact
could result from truck noise from the proposed distribution center. To mitigate this potential
impact, the distribution center has agreed to construct a sound barrier wall along their western
property boundary. In addition, a landscape buffer could be developed to provide additional
buffering.
Impacts from adjacent industrial uses could be mitigated, in part, through adoption of mitigation
measures during construction and operation, and through the adoption of the Goals and Policies
of Pasco Comprehensive Plan, including:
50'+/-15'+/-
3 :1 S l o p e
Drought Tolerant
Landscaping
Masonary Wall 10'-15' High
Property line
Varies
15'
Distribution Center Property
Page 107 of 481
30-19-079/New Heritage 50
• LU-2-D Policy: Encourage the use of buffers or transition zones between non -compatible
land uses.
• LU-3-C Policy: Ensure all developments include appropriate landscaping and screening, as
required by adopted regulations and guidelines.
• ED-3. GOAL: MAINTAIN DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND DESIGN GUIDELINES TO
ENSURE THAT COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENTS ARE GOOD NEIGHBORS
• ED-3-A Policy: Enhance compatibility of commercial and industrial development with
residential and mixed-use neighborhoods with appropriate landscaping, screening, building
and design standards,
• ED-3-B Policy: Ensure outdoor illumination and signage of businesses have a positive impact
and are compatible with neighborhood standards.
• ED-3-C Policy: Provide appropriate access through a combination of pathways, sidewalks,
non-motorized travel lanes and parking.
• ED-3-D Policy: Require businesses and buildings in and adjacent to the Central Business
District to conform to established development standards.
In addition, Pasco Code provides development standards and requirements that mitigate future
industrial impacts on future residential uses.
If the change to the amendment area is approved, specific mitigation measures would be applied
to reduce run-off, construction noise, traffic congestion and air-quality. As noted in Sections 1
and 2, the intent is to create a walkable community with significant open spaces, parks and trails.
These applied mitigation measures and land use approach would significantly reduce any
potential impacts. In addition, the Vision anticipates the extensive use of buffers and open space
to reduce impacts from adjacent industrial from visual blight, noise, runoff and odor. These buffers
would include the wall identified above and landscaped areas.
5.4 PARKS AND RECREATION
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Pasco adopted in 2016 a Park and Recreation Plan. This Plan:
“[E]stablishes policies for park and recreation services and urban forestry practice,
and it identifies parks and recreation facility needs for Pasco of Pasco” (Parks,
Recreation and Forestry Plan, Pasco of Pasco).”
The Plan identifies one existing neighborhood park to the north of the amendment site (Kurtzman
Park) that could serve a small portion of the amendment site, and a Regional State Park
(Sacajawea) to the southeast. In addition, the plan identifies the Sacajawea Trail that runs along
the waterfront that intersects with a Pasco defined bike and pedestrian path that abuts the
amendment area. The Plan also establishes standards for future parks based on projected
population. Table 5.6, below, identifies the standard for each park type, based on the projected
population for each alternative.
Page 108 of 481
30-19-079/New Heritage 51
Pasco also budgeted in the CIP to construct a 28-acre soccer complex immediately west of the
site. Construction of Phase 1, which includes 3 soccer/multiuse fields, is scheduled to begin in
2022. The final project will include up to 10 multiuse sports fields.
TABLE 5 .6 – TYPICAL SYSTEM DESCRIPTION COMPONENTS
Type
2006 Adopted
Standard
(Pasco Parks
Plan)
Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3
Acres Facilities
Required Acres Facilities
Required Acres Facilities
Required
Neighborhood Parks
3-7 Acre Standard
2.00 acres/1,000
population 2.7 1 3.4 1 4.5 1
Community Parks
20+ Acres
2.10 acres/1,000
population 5.6 0 7.2 0 9.5 0
Large Urban Parks 2.99 acres/1,000
population 8 0 10.3 0 13 0
Regional Parks
No Adopted
Standard
8.93 acres/1,000
population n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
Linear Park
No Adopted
Standard
1.56 acres/1,000
population n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
Softball Fields 1 field per 3,000
population n/a * n/a * n/a *
Youth Baseball 1 field per 2,000
population n/a * n/a * n/a *
Soccer Fields 1 field per 2,000
population n/a * n/a * n/a *
Tennis Courts 1 court per
1,500 population n/a * n/a * n/a *
Trails (8” wide) 0.50 miles per
1,000 population n/a * n/a * n/a *
Source: Pasco Parks, Land Strategies
*Type, size and number of amenities to be determined during Pasco Land Subdivision process.
Pasco’s 2019 Plan and Recreation Plan also describes each park type:
“Neighborhood parks include a playground and park designed primarily for non-supervised, non-
organized recreation activities. In Pasco, they are generally small (3-7 acres) and serve a radius of
approximately one-half mile. At average residential densities, this amounts to about 5,000 to 7,500
residents. Since these parks are located within walking and bicycling distance of most users, the
activities they offer become a daily pastime for neighborhood children. While it is not necessarily the
rule, neighborhood parks sometimes provide space for organized community events. A few examples
include Island Park, Richardson Park, and Centennial Park.
Community Park facilities are generally designed for organized activities and sports, although
individual and family activities are encouraged. Community parks can provide indoor facilities to
Page 109 of 481
30-19-079/New Heritage 52
meet a wider range of recreation interests. A community park can also serve the function of
neighborhood parks, although community parks serve a much larger area and offer more facilities.
Their service area is about a one-mile radius and will support a population of approximately 12,000
– 15,000 persons depending upon its size and nature of its facilities. They require more support
facilities including parking, rest rooms, and covered play areas. They usually exceed 20 acres in size
and often have sport fields or similar facilities as the central focus of the park. Memorial Park fulfills
the needs of a community park in Pasco.
Large urban parks, like Chiawana Park, are designed to serve the entire community. They are like
a community park but much larger. They provide a wide variety of specialized facilities such as large
picnic areas, water related activities, indoor recreation facilities, and sports fields. They require more
support facilities such as parking, rest rooms, and play areas because of their size and facilities
offered. They usually exceed 50 acres in size and should be designed to accommodate many people.
Regional parks are large recreational areas that serve an entire Pasco or region. They can be large
and often include one specific use or feature. If possible, they should be developed around a unique
or significant resource to emphasize regional recreation interest. These types of park areas are found
nearby and include Sacajawea State Park, Columbia Park (Pasco of Kennewick), and Howard Amon
Park (Pasco of Richland). These parks offer riverfront and boating facilities as well as other passive
recreation opportunities and are within a short travel time for Pasco residents.
Linear parks are land areas that generally follow a drainage corridor, ravine, or some other
elongated feature such as a power line or railroad right-of-way. This type of park area often contains
various levels/types of trail systems and sometimes includes greenbelts.
Pathways and trails are designed to provide walking, bicycling, and other nonmotorized means for
linking various parts of the community and connecting parks to residential areas. Trails provide
recreation-oriented bicycle and walking opportunities utilizing canals, drainage corridors,
easements, and other publicly accessible facilities. The trail system includes unpaved foot trails used
for walking, hiking, mountain bike riding and horseback riding, and paved multi-use bicycle trails
designed for bicycle riding, walking and hiking. The system can consist of both off -street and on-
street trail segments. Many off-street segments already exist along the waterfront and Interstate
182.” (Bolding added for emphasis). The Plan also indicates the ½-mile service areas for each park
in Pasco.
Page 110 of 481
30-19-079/New Heritage 53
FIGURE 5 .3 – PARK SERVICE AREA
EFFECTS ON THE PROPOSAL
NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE
Under the No-Action Alternative there would be no parks constructed and the site would remain
“Industrial.” Planned parks and recreation facilities would not change.
LOW INTENSITY ALTERNATIVE
The Low Intensity Alternative projects an additional 2,660 in population. Pasco’s Park and
Recreation Plan Standards would require additional park facilities. The type of park facilities will
be determined during the Pasco Land Subdivision approval. Table 5.6 provides a general list of
park facilities that may be considered.
The Low Intensity Alternative would have parks and
recreation land. In addition, trails and sidewalk would
need to be provided to meet current Park standards.
The types, size and location of park improvements will
be determined as part of Pasco’s Land Subdivision
approval.
Park and recreation facilities that are developed on
the amendment site, may be dedicated to the Park
and Recreation Department of Pasco. If dedicated,
this would impact Pasco’s maintenance requirements.
Source: SVPVPA
Page 111 of 481
30-19-079/New Heritage 54
Not all the facilities described above and in Table 5.6 may be required by the Pasco Zoning Code.
The types, size and location of park improvements will be determined as part of Pasco’s Land
Subdivision approval.
MEDIUM INTENSITY ALTERNATIVE
The Medium Intensity Alternative projects could add an additional 3,444 in population. Pasco’s
Park and Recreation Plan Standards would require additional park facilities. The type of park
facilities will be determined during the Pasco Land Subdivision approval. Table 5.6 provides a
general list of park facilities that may be considered.
The Medium Intensity Alternative would have parks and
recreation land. In addition, trails and sidewalk would
need to be provided to meet current Park standards.
The types, size and location of park improvements will
be determined as part of Pasco’s Land Subdivision
approval.
Park and recreation facilities that are developed on the
amendment site, may be dedicated to the Park and
Recreation Department of Pasco. If dedicated, this
would impact Pasco’s maintenance requirements.
Not all the facilities described above and in Table 5.6 may be required by the Pasco Zoning Code.
The types, size and location of park improvements will be determined as part of Pasco’s Land
Subdivision approval.
HIGH INTENSITY ALTERNATIVE
The High Intensity Alternative projects could add an additional 4,536 in population. Pasco’s Park
and Recreation Plan Standards would require additional park facilities. The type of park facilities
will be determined during the Pasco Land Subdivision approval. Table 5.6 provides a general list
of park facilities that may be considered.
The High Intensity Alternative would have parks and
recreation land. In addition, trails and sidewalk would
need to be provided to meet current Park standards.
The types, size and location of park improvements will
be determined as part of Pasco’s Land Subdivision
approval.
Park and recreation facilities that are developed on the
amendment site, may be dedicated to the Park and
Recreation Department of Pasco. If dedicated, this
would impact Pasco’s maintenance requirements.
Source: Skibba Illustration
Star Tribune
Page 112 of 481
30-19-079/New Heritage 55
Not all the facilities described above and in Table 5.6 may be required by the Pasco Zoning Code.
The types, size and location of park improvements will be determined as part of Pasco’s Land
Subdivision approval.
MITIGATION MEASURES
Mitigation for all the action alternatives would be similar and include:
• Implement Pasco Park and Recreation Plan Goals and Policies;
• Implement Pasco Comprehensive Plan Goals and Policies, including:
o LU-2-C Policy: Ensure that adequate public services are provided in a reasonable
time frame for new developments.
o LU-2-D Policy: Encourage the use of buffers or transition zones between non-
compatible land uses.
o LU-3-A Policy: Design major streets, schools, parks, and other public facilities that
will encourage the individual identities of neighborhoods.
o LU-3-C Policy: Ensure all developments include appropriate landscaping and
screening, as required by adopted regulations and guidelines.
o ED-3-C Policy: Provide appropriate access through a combination of pathways,
sidewalks, non-motorized travel lanes and parking.
o CF-1-B Policy: Encourage public participation in defining the need for, the
proposed location of, and the design of public facilities such as parks, ball fields,
pedestrian and bicycle corridors, and street and utility extensions and
improvements.
o CF-3-A Policy: Assure land development proposals provide land and/or facilities or
other mitigation measures to address impacts on traffic, parks, recreational
facilities, schools, and pedestrian and bicycle trails.
o CF-5. Goal: in conjunction with the county, provide parks, greenways, trails, and
recreation facilities throughout the UGA.
• Develop a system of interconnected parks, recreation facilities, bike and pedestrian trails,
gathering and meeting spaces, school facilities, retail spaces, and workspaces in order to
facilitate the Vision of a walkable “New Urban” community.
5.5 PUBLIC FACILITI ES
EXISTING CONDITIONS
FIRE
"Pasco Fire Department (PFD) provides fire suppression, advanced life support, emergency
medical services, ambulance transport services, technical rescue services, and hazardous materials
services (through a regional partnership) to its service area community (Pasco Comprehensive
Page 113 of 481
30-19-079/New Heritage 56
Plan EIS). Station 81 is located on Oregon Avenue, approximately 1.5 miles from the site and is
staffed full time.”
POLICE
"Law enforcement services for the City are provided by the City Police Department.
Unincorporated areas of the UGA are served by the County Sheriff. The City and County law
enforcement agencies cooperate readily when the need arises. Pasco currently has 1.03 patrol
officers per 1,000 people" (Pasco Comprehensive Plan EIS).
EFFECTS ON THE PROPOSAL
FIRE / POLICE
NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE
The impacts to the No-Action Alternative have been addressed under Pasco’s current
Comprehensive Plan and Environmental Impact Statement.
ALL ACTION ALTERNATIVES
Under all of the action alternatives there may be a slight increase in emergency calls over the No
Action Alternative, depending on the specific industry that would occupy the site.
MITIGATION MEASURES
FIRE / POLICE
Implement the Goals and Policies of the City's Comprehensive Plan:
• CF-7-A Policy: Strive to provide a sufficient number of fire stations in appropriate locations
throughout the community.
• CF-7-B Policy: Maintain a cooperative policy with the county fire district.
5.6 UTILITIES
EXISTING CONDITIONS
SANITARY SEWER SERVICES
The project area is currently serviced by the City of Pasco and is accounted for in the
Comprehensive Sewer Plan (CSP). The existing treatment plan has a capacity of 8.68 million gallons
per day (MGD) and in 2011 the maximum flow was 4.27 MGD. There is an existing 30-inch
diameter sewer trunk main that collects sewer flows from the Road 40 East Interceptor. Flows from
the Road 40 East Interceptor flows through the project site in the existing 30-inch sewer trunk
main. Currently the proposed amendment site is undeveloped and has no sanitary sewer flows.
The calculated pipe capacity of the 30-inch sewer trunk main using the Manning’s Formula for
50% capacity is 3,838,856 Gallons per Day (GPD) and 7,018,514 GPD at 75%.
Page 114 of 481
30-19-079/New Heritage 57
POTABLE WATER SERVICE
The proposed amendment area is served by the City of Pasco and was evaluated in the 2019
Comprehensive Water System Plan (CWSP) and according to CWSP, the City of Pasco has a total
available water right of 13,645.50 acre-feet per year and 20,149 GPM for instantaneous flow. This
water right converts to a Maximum Day Demand (MDD) of 29 MGD. The CWSP also indicates that
the City of Pasco’s potable water source includes the Butterfield Water Treatment Plant (BWTP)
with a capacity of 26.8 MGD a day and the West Pasco Treatment Plant (WPTP) with a capacity of
6 MGD.
The proposed New Heritage Site is in Pressure Zone 2 which is serviced by the BWTP. Additionally,
there is the Eastside Booster Pump that also supplies pressurized water to Zone 2. Zone 2 is a
closed system and has no current storage capacity but is tied into Zone 3 through a pressure
reducing valve. Zone 3 does provide storage capacity. There is an existing 16-inch water main that
runs through the site that services the project area. The CWSP shows a current Zone 2 storage
deficiency of 3.73 million gallons (MG).
The 2019 CWSP indicates that the City has an existing and future deficiency in storage for Zone 2.
The City has identified the storage need in their 2019 CWSP plan. The planned timeframe for this
storage Capital Improvement Project (CIP) is to be completed sometime between 2020-2023. This
CIP will provide a 5.75 MG reservoir to improve reliability, fire flows and level of service for all of
Zone 2 and the project area. This CIP is required regardless of land uses under the No-Action
Alternative or land uses under the three Action Alternatives. The CWSP also indicates that there is
adequate fire flow capacity to support generally up to 4,000 GPM. Industrial users will tend to
require larger fire flows due to larger building structures and higher occupancy than residential
structures.
The City of Pasco operates an irrigation water delivery system for certain parts of the City, but the
proposed New Heritage Site is not included in the existing irrigation system. Irrigation water for
the project area will have to come from either the domestic water system or from on-site sources.
No irrigation service was included in the CWSP analysis.
OTHER PUBLIC SERVICES AND UTILITIES
The site is currently undeveloped. What stormwater leaves the site is either infiltrated or is
collected on adjacent streets. Other utilities such a cable and phone are available to the site.
EFFECTS ON THE PROPOSAL
NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE
Sewer and water impacts are generally covered under the City's Comprehensive Plan (Volume 2)
and the Comprehensive Plan EIS. The analysis provided in the Comprehensive Plan and EIS is not
specific enough to make a detailed comparison between the No-Action Alternative and the three
Action Alternatives. Depending on the specific industry occupying the site, which could range
Page 115 of 481
30-19-079/New Heritage 58
from food processing to bulk storage, the No-Action Alternative could either be greater, similar
to or less the three Action Alternatives.
Storm drainage management would depend on the specific industries developed and would have
to be retained to meet City and State standards. Other utilities such as phone and cable would
also have to be extended to meet the demands of the specific industry/s.
LOW INTENSITY ALTERNATIVE
Demand volumes for sewer under the Low Intensity Alternative are summarized in Table 5.7.
TABLE 5 .7 – LOW USE PROJECTED SEWAGE VOLUMES
Land Use Acre
(AC) Units Low Use
GPDA
Estimated
Population GPDA Low Use
Total (GPDA)
Open
Space/Roadways 58 - - - - -
Retail 1 - 1,500 - - 1,500
Service/Office 1 - 1,500 - - 1,500
School 15 - - 550 *20 11,000
SF Homes 100 500 - 1,675 **80 134,000
Duplex/Tri-Plex 7 42 - 141 **80 11,280
Apartment 14 252 - 844 **80 67,520
Total 196 - - - - 226,800
*20 GPD/Student
**80 GPCD per 2019 CWSP
Water demand is projected for the Low Intensity Alternative on Table 5.8, below.
TABLE 5 .8 – LOW INTENSITY ALTERNATIVE PROPOSED WATER DEMAND
WITH I R RIGATION
SF Homes,
Duplex and
Apartment
ERU (GPC)
Residence
(GPD)
(# of Units x
ERU)
Retail, Office,
School (GPD)
Proposed Land
Use Volumes
(MGD)
794 *424 336,656 14,000 0.35
*424 ERU per 2019 CWSP GPC = Gallons per Connection
Since industrial sewer and water demands can have a wide range of possible flows it is unknown
if the proposed amendment will have a less, similar or greater impact. The specific impact and/or
potential mitigation measures, if any, will need to be defined during the approval of the Land
Subdivision application process.
The extent and type of storm drainage required would likely be less than under the No-Action
Alternative because of the extensive park and open spaces. Other utilities would also have to be
Page 116 of 481
30-19-079/New Heritage 59
extended by the specific provider. Specific storm drainage requirement would be developed at
the time of project approval.
MEDIUM INTENSITY ALTERNATIVE
Demand volumes for sewer under the Medium Intensity Alternative are summarized in Table 5.9,
below.
TABLE 5.9 – MEDIUM USE PROJECTED SEWAGE VOLUMES
Land Use Acre
(AC) Units Low Use
GPDA
Estimated
Population GPDA
Low Use
Total
(GPDA)
Open
Space/Roadways 58 - - - - -
Retail 2 - 2,000 - - 2,000
Service/Office 2 - 2,000 - - 2,000
School 15 - - 550 *20 11,000
SF Homes 85 468 - 1,568 **80 125,440
Duplex/Tri-Plex 10 80 - 268 **80 21,440
Apartment 24 480 - 1,608 **80 128,640
Total 196 - - - - 290,520
*20 GPD/Student
**80 GPCD per 2019 CWSP
Water demand is projected for the Medium Intensity Alternative on Table 5.10, below.
TABLE 5.10 – MEDIUM INTENSITY ALTERNATIVE PROPOSED WATER
DEMAND WITH IRRIGATION
SF Homes,
Duplex and
Apartment
ERU (GPC) Residence (GPD)
(# of Units x ERU)
Retail, Office,
School (GPD)
Proposed Land
Use Volumes
(MGD)
1,028 *424 435,872 15,000 0.45
*424 ERU per 2019 CWSP GPC = Gallons per Connection
Since industrial sewer and water demands can have a wide range of possible flows it is unknown
if the proposed amendment will have a less, similar or greater impact. The specific impact and/or
potential mitigation measures, if any, will need to be defined during the approval of the Land
Subdivision application process. The extent and type of storm drainage require would likely be
less than under the No-Action Alternative because of the extensive park and open spaces. Other
utilities would also have to be extended by the specific provider. Specific storm drainage
requirement would be developed at the time of project approval.
Page 117 of 481
30-19-079/New Heritage 60
HIGH INTENSITY ALTERNATIVE
Demand volumes for sewer under the High Intensity Alternative are summarized in Table 5.11,
below.
TABLE 5 .11 – HIGH USE PROJECTED SEWAGE VOLUMES
Land Use Acre
(AC) Units Low Use
GPDA
Estimated
Population GPDA Low Use Total
(GPDA)
Open
Space/Roadways 58 - - - - -
Retail 3 - 2,500 - - 2,500
Service/Office 2 - 2,500 - - 2,500
School 15 - - 550 *20 11,000
SF Homes 69 414 - 1,387 **80 110,960
Duplex/Tri-Plex 17 204 - 684 **80 183,312
Apartment 32 736 - 2,466 **80 197,280
Total 196 - - - - 507.552
*20 GPD/Student
**80 GPCD per 2019 CWSP
Water demand is projected for the High Intensity Alternative on Table 5.12, below.
TABLE 5 .12 – HIGH INTENSITY ALTERNATIVE PROPOSED WATER DEMAND
WITH IRRIGATION
SF Homes,
Duplex and
Apartment
ERU (GPC) Residence (GPD)
(# of Units x ERU)
Retail, Office,
School (GPD)
Proposed Land
Use Volumes
(MGD)
1,354 *424 574,096 16,000 0.59
*424 ERU per 2019 CWSP GPC = Gallons per Connection
Since industrial sewer and water demands can have a wide range of possible flows it is unknown
if the proposed amendment will have a less, similar or greater impact. The specific impact and/or
potential mitigation measures, if any, will need to be defined during the approval of the Land
Subdivision application process. The extent and type of storm drainage require would likely be
less than under the No-Action Alternative because of the extensive park and open spaces. Other
utilities would also have to be extended by the specific provider. Specific storm drainage
requirement would be developed at the time of project approval.
MITIGATION MEASURES
SANITARY SEWER SERVICE
Mitigation measures for Sanitary Sewer would include:
• Implement the 2014 CSP or most current CSP goals and policies.
Page 118 of 481
30-19-079/New Heritage 61
• Implement the most current City of Pasco Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary
Sewer design.
DOMESTIC WATER FACILITIES
Mitigation measures for Domestic Water Facilities would include:
• Implement the 2019 CWSP or most current CWSP goals and policies.
• Implement the most current City of Pasco Design and Construction Standards for
Domestic Water Facilities design.
• Implement the Water Storage Capacity CIP project for a 5.75 MG water reservoir as noted
in the 2019 CWSP.
• Conduct specific water system analysis once a more defined master plan has been
prepared and prior to the development of any phase of the project.
5.7 TRANSPORTATION
EXISTING CONDITIONS
There are no existing roadways within the proposed 196-acre New Heritage Site. There is a
network of streets that serve the area around the site as shown in Figure 5.4, which also shows
the location of traffic signals in this portion of the city. Key roadways that will provide primary
access to the site include:
• “A” Street – a minor east-west arterial adjacent to the site along the northern boundary;
• Heritage Blvd – a local north-south roadway between A Street and US 12 which is
designated in the Comprehensive Plan as a future principal arterial; and,
• US 12/I-182 –An east-west expressway that crosses the Columbia River to the west
connecting with Benton County and Interstate I-82, and crossing the Snake River to the
east connecting to Walla Walla.
Page 119 of 481
30-19-079/New Heritage 62
FIGURE 5 .4 – PASCO STREET SYSTEM
Details related to the roadways within the immediate New Heritage Site, including details on the
traffic operations, is included in Appendix A.
• Transit - Ben Franklin Transit provides fixed route and on demand transit service to the
City of Pasco and the Tri-Cities area. In the vicinity of the New Heritage Site, service is
provided by Routes 64 and 65, each providing service every half hour throughout the day.
Routes 64 and 65 have stops on “A” Street. Both routes provide transfer opportunities at
the 22nd Avenue Transit Center.
• Bike and Pedestrian - The City of Pasco has a network of facilities that serve bicycle and
pedestrian needs. In the vicinity of the proposed New Heritage Site, “A” Street has a
sidewalk on the north side from Wehe Avenue to East 40th Avenue. It also has bike lanes
in each direction and a 9’ wide pathway on the south side from Elm Street to East 40th
Avenue.
• Rail - There is an existing rail spur along the southern boundary of the New Heritage site
that was constructed to promote industrial development at this site as well as on the south
side.
EFFECTS ON THE PROPOSAL
NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE
The City’s Comprehensive Plan does not specify industrial land uses for the proposed amendment
site. Similar sites within this area and zoning classification have been primarily developed as
warehousing and food processing, although it is possible, under the current zoning, for the
Page 120 of 481
30-19-079/New Heritage 63
property to be developed for a wide range of other uses. In addition, the Traffic Model prepared
by the Benton Franklin Council of Governments and used by the City in preparing its
Comprehensive Plan, did not include any development for this site during the 20-year planning
period. This, and the fact that the site has not been developed for any industrial use in the last
40 years and is not projected to in the future (See Appendix A), means that the potential uses
could range from vacant to any allowable use under the City’s Zoning Code, other than
Residential.
Given this wide range, some reasonable basis for evaluating the traffic impacts resulting from the
proposed amendment, had to be developed. To do this, an assumption was made that, if there
were to be a change in the market, the site could be developed in uses identified in the Institute
of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual as General Light Industrial. Based on this
assumption, the No-Action Alternative could result in 1,235 peak hour trips with 13% inbound
and 87% outbound, see details in Appendix A. A planning level analysis of these traffic volumes,
similar to the analysis performed for the preparation of the Transportation Element of the
Comprehensive Plan that resulted in traffic impacts higher than shown in the Comprehensive Plan,
but lower than what could be expected to result from the most traffic impactive land uses allowed
under the Zoning Code.
LOW INTENSITY ALTERNATIVE
Under this alternative a variety of land uses are proposed and have been discussed previously. For
the purposes of this analysis, a mixture of office space, retail in the form of restaurants, grocery
and other neighborhood shopping, were evaluated and estimated to generate approximately 930
external trips with 56% of trips inbound to the site (see tables in Appendix A).
The impacts for this alternative are similar to those of the No-Action Alternative identified under
Appendix A, but may be expected to be slightly lower for three reasons: One, it generates fewer
trips; two, the directional split of inbound and outbound trips is more evenly distributed; and
three, the mixed-use nature of the proposed development allows for more trips to be contained
on-site such as people that live and work within the New Heritage site, or people that are able to
live and shop within the proposed development.
Transit and bicycle/pedestrian features would be offered within the New Heritage site. The existing
rail spur along the southern boundary would not likely be used on its north side but could still be
used on its south side.
MEDIUM INTENSITY ALTERNATIVE
Under this alternative a variety of land uses are also proposed including a mixture of office space,
business park, as retail in the form of restaurants, grocery and other neighborhood shopping were
evaluated and estimated to generate approximately 1,140 external trips with 56% of trips inbound
to the site.
Page 121 of 481
30-19-079/New Heritage 64
A similar evaluation as the No Action Alternative was performed and is discussed in Appendix A.
The analysis showed impacts similar to the results for the Low Intensity Alternative.
HIGH INTENSITY ALTERNATIVE
The High Intensity Alternative also includes a variety of land uses and are documented in more
detail in Appendix A. For the purposes of this analysis, a mixture of office space, business park,
and retail in the form of restaurants, grocery and other neighborhood shopping were evaluated
and estimated to generate approximately 1,315 external trips with 57% of trips inbound to the
site.
Results are very similar at a planning level, a more detailed evaluation will likely be performed
once a final development proposal is brought forward after the Comprehensive Plan
amendment is approved.
MITIGATION MEASURES
NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE
The Regional Travel Demand Model used for preparation of the Transportation Element of the
Comprehensive Plan did not include development on the New Heritage site during the planning
period. Nor did the Regional model include traffic associated with the two proposed large
distribution facilities nearby. Because of this, the No Action Alternative, based on the traffic
evaluation included in Appendix A, indicates that any future industrial development of the New
Heritage site under the No-Action Alternative would require additional traffic improvements
beyond the mitigation identified in the Comprehensive Plan. What transportation improvements
would actually be required under the No-Action Alternative depends on what specific
development is being proposed, although it is likely that the requirement would be at least as
much as those required under any of the Action Alternatives for these reasons: one, it generates
more trips; two, the directional split of inbound and outbound trips is highly directional; and three,
the very few trips are absorbed internally to the site because of the lack of complementary land
uses associated with the industrial land uses allowed.
ALL ACTION ALTERNATIVES
Using the planning level methodology that was used in the preparation of the Comprehensive
Plan described in Appendix A, the impacts related to the future development of the site under
all three Action Alternatives are similar to those of the No-Action Alternative. The analysis
described in Appendix A does not account for trips to/from the proposed large distribution
facilities nearby, so it is conservatively high on trips further away from the site. Given that workers
at these facilities will have additional housing nearby the impact on the roadway system may be
less than those identified for the No Action scenario. The planning methodology used here
identifies locations where improvements may be needed. It is logical to expect that when more
detail is provided on a future development proposal, and more detailed traffic operations analysis
is undertaken, that slightly different mitigation would be required for scenarios that add more
Page 122 of 481
30-19-079/New Heritage 65
trips to the roadway network. Specific mitigation measures to assure concurrency would be
identified at the time of approval of the Land Subdivision and Concomitant Agreement.
Page 123 of 481
30-19-079/New Heritage 66
6 ECONOMICS
The major questions related to the impact economics has on the proposed amendment includes:
• What is the economic impact of removing 196 acres from the City's industrial center?
• What are the benefits of adding affordable housing adjacent to the existing industrial area
of Pasco?
IMPACT OF REMOVING INDUSTRIAL ACREAGE:
According to the Integrated Non-project Final Environmental Impact Statement prepared for the
City of Pasco Comprehensive Plan, there are currently 7,095 acres of industrial land located within
the City limits and UGA boundary (see Table 9). Of this amount, 4,212 acres, or approximately 45%
of the total land acreage, is exempt and owned by the Port, City, and/or other government entities,
1,827 acres are undeveloped (26%), and 354 acres are underutilized (5%).
The maximum employment identified in Section 5 is 329. This is 651 employees less than the 980
employees estimated using the 5 employees per acre (EPA) previously used by the Port of Pasco.
It would also reduce the total 1,827 undeveloped acreage by approximately 11%. Based on 5 EPA,
the total projected employment for all undeveloped land is 9,135. The 651-employee difference
could reduce this projected employment by about 7%.
Historically, Pasco has not had problem in industrial land availability. Even large land users such
as food processing industries have been able to find suitable land in the past. For instance, in 2017
there was over 500+ acres of industrial land for sale around the Tri-Cities region (this was reduced
due to the recent sale of a portion of the Heritage site). and it appears that roughly 45 acres of
industrial land is absorbed each year, on average. Industry experts claim there is an abundance of
undeveloped industrial land within the region to be absorbed, indicating roughly a 5-7-year
absorption rate (See Figure 6.1).
FIGURE 6 .1 – NET ABSORPTION, INDUSTRIAL PROPERTIES IN FRANKLIN COUNTY
Source: Costar
(60,000)
(40,000)
(20,000)
0
20,000
40,000
60,000
80,000
100,000
120,000
140,000
160,000
20
2
0
Q
4
Q
T
D
20
2
0
Q
3
20
2
0
Q
2
20
2
0
Q
1
20
1
9
Q
4
20
1
9
Q
3
20
1
9
Q
2
20
1
9
Q
1
20
1
8
Q
4
20
1
8
Q
3
20
1
8
Q
2
20
1
8
Q
1
20
1
7
Q
4
20
1
7
Q
3
20
1
7
Q
2
20
1
7
Q
1
20
1
6
Q
4
20
1
6
Q
3
20
1
6
Q
2
20
1
6
Q
1
20
1
5
Q
4
20
1
5
Q
3
20
1
5
Q
2
20
1
5
Q
1
Page 124 of 481
30-19-079/New Heritage 67
Based on the above, there is more than enough industrial acreage in Pasco to meet the projected
requirements and any future projected demand.
BENEFITS OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING
The lack of affordable housing has resulted in a significant hardship in many communities.
Appendix B discusses the various impacts related to the location of housing in Pasco. The lack of
affordable housing also has economic impact. According to the National Low-Income Housing
Coalition:
Increasing access to affordable housing bolsters economic growth. Research shows that the
shortage of affordable housing costs the American economy about $2 trillion a year in lower
wages and productivity. Without affordable housing, families have constrained opportunities
to increase earnings, causing slower GDP growth. In fact, researchers estimate that the
growth in GDP between 1964 and 2009 would have been 13.5% higher if families had better
access to affordable housing. This would have led to a $1.7 trillion increase in income, or
$8,775 in additional wages per worker. Moreover, each dollar invested in affordable housing
boosts local economies by leveraging public and private resources to generate income—
including resident earnings and additional local tax revenue—and supports job creation and
retention.
This is also listed as an issue by Habitat for Humanities:
Greater tax generation, creation of jobs, opportunities for economic development, increased
job retention and productivity, and the ability to address inequality — all are among the
economic benefits of increased access to quality, affordable housing. a 2004 study [by the
Harvard Kennedy School] showed a harmful link between high housing costs and employee,
productivity and retention, which hurts businesses and a community’s economy. Since then,
the impact of high housing costs in the U.S., both rental and homeownership, has only grown.
Freeing our local, state and national economies from the drag created when housing is
unaffordable helps everyone.
According to Census’ LEHD on the Map program (2019 data is the most recent data available),
three-quarters of Pasco residents commute outside the area for work. Despite this, there is a cross-
haul of workforce — as many are coming into Pasco to work as are leaving (see Figure 6.2).
Roughly 69% of the jobs in Pasco are being filled by people who live outside the city.
However, as the geographic boundary broadens, less residents commute outside the area for work
(Table 6.1). More Franklin County residents commute outside the county for work than Benton
County residents, where the larger concentration of jobs are located (see Figure 6.2). In addition,
32% of housing units in Benton and Franklin counties have zero or only one vehicle (the share is
slightly higher in Benton). This makes it more challenging for residents to get to work.
Page 125 of 481
30-19-079/New Heritage 68
FIGURE 6 .2 – COMMUTER FLOWS, CITY OF PASCO (2019)
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Center for Economic Studies, LEHD
TABLE 6.13 – COMMUTING FLOWS BY GEOGRAPHIC AREA (2019)
Geographic Area
Living and
Working in
Area
Living in Area
but Working
Outside
Employed in
Area but Living
outside (% of
jobs)
City of Pasco 24% 76& 69%
Franklin County 32% 68% 62%
Benton County 61% 39% 40%
Kennewick-Richland
MSA 74% 26% 25%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Center for Economic Studies, LEHD
This disparity between where people live and where they work has a significant impact on the
quality of life in Pasco. The cost of commuting also disproportionately affects low-income workers.
With over half the workers and half the residents in Franklin County earning less than $40,000 per
year, larger commutes put more of a strain on the community as people with lower incomes
typically drive farther to work and spend more out of pocket.
The Pasco Comprehensive Plan has expanded the city's Urban Growth Boundary to the north in
the Broadmoor area (See Figure 6.3). A significant portion of the projected population growth
Page 126 of 481
30-19-079/New Heritage 69
over the next 20 years is projected to locate in this area. This can result in even high commute
costs for the workers in the industrial area of the city to the south.
FIGURE 6 .3 – PASCO URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY
Source: Pasco Comprehensive Plan, JUB
In conclusion, rising rental costs with low vacancy rates and high levels of low-income residents,
coupled with high home prices and overall higher cost of living in the tri-cities region is a recipe
for mitigating factors such as job creation in the central business district to reduce overall
commuting costs for low-income and minority residents. (See Appendix B). It can also
significantly increase traffic congestion due to longer commute.
Page 127 of 481
30-19-079/New Heritage
APPENDIX A
Page 128 of 481
30-19-079/New Heritage Appendix A - Traffic Analysis
P a g e | 1
APPENDIX A
NEW HERITAGE SITE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT
TRAFFIC ANALYSIS
EXISTING CONDITIONS
There are no existing roadways on the proposed Amendment area site itself. There is a network
of functionally classified streets that serve the area around the site, as shown in Figure A-1 below,
which also shows the location of traffic signals in this portion of the city.
FIGURE A -1 . EXISTING ROADWAY NETWORK AND TRAFFIC CONTROL
Note: intersections without a symbol are Two-Way Stop Controlled.
Page 129 of 481
2
Key roadways that provide primary access to the site includes:
• “A” Street - Adjacent to the site along the northern boundary is “A” Street, an east-west
minor arterial that has two lanes west of 20th Avenue, four lanes from 20th Avenue to Elm
Street, five lanes from Elm Street to Heritage Blvd along the northern boundary of the site,
three lanes from Heritage Blvd to East 40th Street and two lanes from 40th Street to US
12. There are three traffic signals on “A” Street where it crosses other principal arterial
roadways at Oregon Ave (SR 397), 4th Avenue and 10th Avenue.
• Heritage Blvd – is a two lane north-south local road with limited access between “A” Street
and US 12 with no stops. It is designated to become a principal arterial in the
Comprehensive Plan.
• US 12/I-182 – US 12 is designated an east-west expressway with two lanes in each direction
as it comes west across the Snake River. West of a grade separated interchange at Lewis
Street it becomes coincident with Interstate 182, continuing west through Pasco and into
Benton County. It widens to three lanes in each direction west of US 395.
With respect to existing traffic operations, results from the recently completed Comprehensive
Plan are discussed here. Traffic volumes collected by the Benton Franklin Council of Governments
(BFCOG) in 2018 were reviewed and evaluated at a planning level for both roadway segments and
intersection Levels of Service to identify potential areas of concern that may not meet city
standards. Capacities from the regional model were also used for each roadway. The resulting
roadway network volume to capacity ratios were calculated. Intersection approach volumes were
also examined and evaluated for two conditions. First, whether stop control is adequate when
comparing major street and minor street traffic volumes, comparing to a table included in the
Highway Capacity Manual (Intersection Control Type and Peak-Hour Volumes). Second, for
signalized intersections entering volumes were compared with entering capacity with an
intersection adjustment factor to account for the fact that two roadways must share the pavement
within the intersection.
As reported in the Comprehensive Plan, all functionally classified roads east of the railroad tracks
in Pasco function with good volume to capacity (V/C) ratios and Levels of Service, with only one
roadways having a V/C ratio greater than 0.70. Elsewhere in the City there is congestion over both
of the bridges from Pasco to Kennewick and in the vicinity of the US 395/I-182 interchange. The
Comprehensive Plan Update performed a planning level system wide evaluation of intersections
which identified four intersections in central and east Pasco that are currently unsignalized but
based on entering volumes may need improvements. These intersections include Heritage Blvd
at A Street, two intersections on Lewis Street and one on Oregon Avenue.
Ben Franklin Transit provides fixed route and on demand transit service to the City of Pasco and
the Tri-Cities area. In the vicinity of the Amendment area service is provided by Routes 64 and
Page 130 of 481
3
65, each providing service every half hour throughout the day. Route 65 has stops on “A” Street
between Heritage Blvd and Terra Vida Lane while Route 64 has stops on “A” Street between Wehe
Avenue and Elm Avenue. Both routes provide transfer opportunities at the 22nd Avenue Transit
Center.
The City of Pasco has a network of facilities that serve bicycle and pedestrian needs. In the vicinity
of the proposed Amendment area, “A” Street has a sidewalk on the north side from Wehe Avenue
to East 40th Avenue. It also has bike lanes in each direction and a 9’ wide pathway on the south
side from Elm Street to East 40th Avenue.
There is an existing rail spur along the southern boundary of the New Heritage site that was
constructed to promote industrial development at this site as well as on the south side.
EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSAL
For each of the alternatives discussed below, a planning level analysis was performed using the
same methodology as was used in the preparation of Transportation Element of the
Comprehensive Plan Analysis as described above. The methodology for forecasting future traffic
conditions for the four alternatives (including the No Action) is discussed below.
To assist with identifying future conditions, the BFCOG develops and maintains the regional travel
demand model. The model is a strategic planning tool that includes population and employment
forecasts, identified transportation projects and models future conditions across the region. The
outcome is a regional model that is adopted by the BFCOG Board, of which the City of Pasco is a
member.
The City of Pasco submitted to BFCOG updated population and employment forecasts, by
Transportation Analysis Zones that reflect the expanded Urban Growth Area and land uses
associated with the Comprehensive Plan. An updated traffic volume forecast using the regional
travel demand model was prepared. This effort ensures that the Land Use Element and the
Transportation Element are consistent for the purposes of the Comprehensive Plan. The results
of the refined regional model provide insights and better understanding as to how the
transportation network will function with the increase in population and employment. Of note
for this current Traffic Analysis for the New Heritage site is that the Regional Travel Demand Model
assumed no additional development on the site during the planning horizon of the
Comprehensive Plan. Nor did the regional travel demand model include any trips associated with
the two large, proposed distribution facilities.
Page 131 of 481
4
A similar analysis to that of existing conditions was performed using the traffic volume forecasts
of the Comprehensive Plan to evaluate both roadway segments and intersections to determine
where capacity needs are anticipated based on the land uses built into the regional model.
Similar to the existing condition roadway volume to capacity ratios (V/Cs) are good, with the only
segment in central and east Pasco with a V/C ratio greater than 0.70 being the westbound on -
ramp from Lewis Street to US 12. The long-range analysis of the Comprehensive Plan, within the
area shown in Figure A-1 above, indicates 11 existing intersections with STOP control that may
likely need improvements to provide acceptable Levels of Service. These improvements could be
in the form of turn lanes or a higher level of traffic control such as a roundabout or traffic signal.
There are also 10 existing signalized intersections and one existing roundabout that are forecast
to be over capacity that may also need improvements in the form of additional lanes. These
results, for the Comprehensive Plan analysis for the area included in the maps at the end of this
appendix.
The trip generation assumptions of each of the four Alternatives are included in tables towards
the back of this appendix. Maps showing the results of the Volume to Capacity analysis as well
as the Intersection Control Analysis follow the tables at the back of this appendix as well.
Appropriate maps were prepared focusing on the area of impact of the New Heritage Site
including central and east Pasco.
The trips generated by each alternative were assigned to the roadway network using the same
trip distribution percentages. The percentages shown below in Table A-1 were estimated using
a cordon line around central and east Pasco and the existing traffic volumes crossing the cordon
line during the PM peak hour. Based on the location of the New Heritage the percentages of trips
using the Blue Bridge (US 395) and the Cable Bridge were adjusted to reflect an easier and less
congested route to Kennewick using the Cable Bridge. An additional 12 large blocks were also
designated in central and east Pasco to assign trips to this area as well, amounting to 23% of the
total trips.
Page 132 of 481
5
TABLE A -1. TRIP DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
Cordon Line % In % Out
US 12 East of “A” Street 4 3
Kahlotus Hwy north of US 12 3 1
US 395 North of I-182 2 3
4th Ave North of I-182 2 1
Argent Rd west of 20th Avenue 3 5
I-182 west of US 395 25 24
Court Street west of US 395 6 5
Sylvester Street west of US 395 3 4
US 395 South (Blue Bridge) 5 8
10th Ave South (Cable Bridge) 24 23
Central/East Pasco 23 23
Total 100% 100%
NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE
To evaluate the effects of the alternatives an evaluation of the No Action Alternative must also be
performed.
To evaluate the New Heritage site under the No Action alternative, the land use changes in the
regional model were examined and it was found that no additional development was assumed on
this site. Thus, to evaluate the No-Action alternative trip generation and distribution needed to
be performed for this scenario as well, assuming the site were to develop as light industrial.
Similarly, the Comprehensive Plan didn’t include trips associated with the two large, proposed
distribution facilities in the heritage vicinity.
Multiple industrial land uses are offered in the Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip
Generation Manual 10th Edition. Many land uses are allowed under the current zoning, including
office, business park, manufacturing and light industrial. For the purposes of this analysis it was
assumed that General Light Industrial zoning for trip generation purposes. The resulting trips
would amount to approximately 1,235 PM peak hour trips with 13% of those inbound to the site
and 87% outbound. These trips were distributed to the roadway network serving the site using
the trip distribution percentages shown in Table A-1. The vast number of trips primarily headed
east-west on “A” Street and north-south on Heritage Blvd to US 12.
The results of the No Action Alternative analysis indicates that the westbound on ramp to US 12
will have a V/C ratio greater than 1.0. The results of the intersection analysis are shown in the
maps at the end of this appendix as well. There would be 13 intersections with STOP control that
would need improvements (2 more than the Comprehensive Plan), two of which are on “A” Street.
Page 133 of 481
6
There are also 13 intersections with traffic signals that would need improvements as well, this
being three more than the Comprehensive Plan, two of which are on Court Street near US 395,
and the other one at “A” Street/ 4th Avenue. Important in all this evaluation is that such a large
percentage of the trips are going away from the Heritage site since the primary activity there is
employment.
LOW INTENSITY ALTERNATIVE
Under this alternative a variety of land uses are proposed. For the purposes of this analysis, a
mixture of office space, business park, and retail in the form of restaurants, grocery and other
neighborhood shopping were evaluated and estimated to generate approximately 930 trips with
56% of trips inbound to the site. Specifics on the land uses and amount of development assumed
is included in the trip generation tables at the end of this appendix.
A similar evaluation as the No Action Alternative was performed with respect to V/C ratios and
intersection planning level analysis. Although the traffic volumes on the westbound on-ramp to
US 12 from Lewis Street are lower, the V/C would still indicate that this ramp may need to be
expanded. The intersection analysis resulted in the same 13 intersections currently STOP
controlled that would likely require improvements in order to achieve acceptable LOS (10 of which
are identified in the Comprehensive Plan. There are 13 existing traffic signals that would need
improvements, these are also the same 13 as shown in the No Action Scenario, and three more
than the Comprehensive Plan. Although the same intersections are identified as needing potential
improvements as the No Action scenario, it is important to note that the impacts for this
alternative may be less than those of the No-Action alternative for four reasons:
1. It generates fewer trips,
2. The directional split of inbound and outbound trips are more evenly distributed,
3. The mixed-use nature of the proposed development allows for more trips to be contained
on-site such as people that live and work within Heritage, or people that are able to live
and shop within the proposed development.
4. Proximity to the proposed large distribution facilities will be a benefit for both them and
the Heritage residents.
Transit and Bicycle/pedestrian features would be offered within the Heritage site. The existing rail
spur along the southern boundary would not likely be used on its north side but could still be
used on its south side.
MEDIUM INTENSITY ALTERNATIVE
Under this alternative a variety of land uses are also proposed including a mixture of Office space,
business park, as retail in the form of restaurants, grocery and other neighborhood shopping were
Page 134 of 481
7
evaluated. This alternative assumes about 235 more multi-family units as well as more commercial
and office space. The trip generation specifics are included in a table later and estimates that this
alternative would generate approximately 1,140 trips with 56% of trips inbound to the site.
A similar evaluation as the No Action alternative was performed with respect to V/C ratios and
intersection planning level analysis. The analysis was essentially identical to the results for the
Low Intensity alternative, indicating that 13 unsignalized intersections and 13 signalized
intersections would likely need improvements along with the westbound US 12 on-ramp from
Lewis Street.
HIGH INTENSITY ALTERNATIVE
The High Intensity Alternative also includes a variety of land uses with an additional 325 more
multi-family units as well as single family units and more retail and office space. The specific
assumptions are included in a table following the text of this appendix. This alternative is
estimated to generate approximately 1,315 trips with 57% of trips inbound to the site.
A similar evaluation as the other alternatives was performed with respect to V/C ratios and
intersection planning level analysis. The analysis resulted in the same 13 intersections currently
STOP controlled that would likely require improvements in order to achieve acceptable LOS. There
are 13 existing traffic signals that would need improvements, these are the same as the other
alternatives which also include 10 that are identified in the Comprehensive Plan. Although the
results are very similar at a planning level it should be noted that specific improvements at
intersections are not identified and that more detailed evaluation would need to be performed as
more detailed proposals are brought forward and more information is available.
MITIGATION MEASURES
NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE
As mentioned previously, the Regional Travel Demand Model used for preparation of the
Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan did not include development on the New
Heritage site, nor the site of the two proposed large distribution facilities, during the planning
period. Thus, mitigation for the No Action Alternative would include installation of 13 new traffic
signals or other capacity improvements, including 10 identified in the Comprehensive Plan, it
would also include reconstruction of 13 existing traffic signals to increase capacity, 10 of which
are included in the Comprehensive Plan. One existing roundabout would also need additional
capacity as identified in the Comprehensive Plan, as well as ramp improvements at the Lewis Street
interchange.
Page 135 of 481
8
LOW INTENSITY ALTERNATIVE
Although this alternative would require mitigation when compared to the existing Comprehensive
Plan, essentially needing three new traffic signals as well as ramp improvements at the Lewis Street
interchange, it is anticipated to require similar mitigation items as the No-Action Alternative.
MEDIUM INTENSITY ALTERNATIVE
At a planning level perspective, the mitigation required for this alternative is the same as that for
the Low Intensity Alternative. In practice though, at the level of detail of this analysis, the
implementation of the improvements at the time of the improvement will likely be slightly more.
HIGH INTENSITY ALTERNATIVE
At a planning level perspective, the mitigation required for this alternative is the same as that for
the Low Intensity Alternative. In practice though, at the level of detail of this analysis, the
implementation of the improvements at the time of the development will likely be slightly more.
Page 136 of 481
TRIP GENERATION NO ACTION
Description
Land
Use
Codes Units
Rate
Weekday
Daily Traffic
PM
Peak
Period
Rate
% PM
In
% PM
Out
Expected
Units
(independe
nt variable)
Calculated
Daily Trips
Based on
Average
Rate
Calculated
PM Trips
Based on
Average
Rate In Out
General Light Industrial 110 1,000 Sq. Ft. GFA 4.96 0.63 13% 87% 2134 10,587 1,345
175 1170
Source: ITE 10th Edition 2134 10587 1345 175 1170
Internal (8%)1059 134 14 94
Total External 9528 1211 161 1076
acres 196
sq ft 8,537,760
Floor Area Ratio 25%
sq of Industrial 2,134,440
in thousands 2134Pa
g
e
1
3
7
o
f
4
8
1
TRIP GENERATION ALTERNATIVE 1 - LOW INTENSITY
Description
Land
Use
Codes Units
Rate
Weekday
Daily
Traffic
PM
Peak
Period
Rate
% PM
In
% PM
Out
Expected
Units
(independe
nt variable)
Calculated
Daily Trips
Based on
Average
Rate
Calculated
PM Trips
Based on
Average
Rate
Passby
Percent
PM Trips
with Origin
or
Destination
outside
Heritage In Out
Single-Family Detached Housing 210 Dwelling Units 9.44 0.99 63% 37% 542 5,116 537 537
338 199
Multi Family Housing (Low-Rise) 220 Dwelling Units 7.32 0.56 63% 37% 252 1,845 141 141
89 52
Elementary School 520 1,000 Sq. Ft. GFA 19.52 1.37 45% 55% 205 4,002 281 281
126 154
General Office Building 710 1,000 sq Ft. GFA 9.74 1.15 16% 84% 20 195 23 23
4 19
Medical-Dental Office Building 720 1,000 sq Ft. GFA 34.80 3.46 28% 72% 2 70 7 7
2 5
Office Park 750 1,000 sq Ft. GFA 11.07 1.07 7% 93% 0 0 0 0
0 0
Business Park 770 1,000 sq Ft. GFA 12.44 0.42 46% 54% 0 0 0 0 0 0
Shopping Center 820 1,000 Sq. Ft. GFA 37.75 3.81 48% 52% 0 0 0
34 0 0 0
Supermarket 850 1,000 sq Ft. GFA 106.78 9.24 51% 49% 7 747 65
36 41 21 20
High Turnover (Sit-Down) Restaurant 932 1,000 Sq. Ft. GFA 112.18 9.77 62% 38% 0 0 43 0 0 0
Fast-Food Restaurant with Drive Through Window 934 1,000 Sq. Ft. GFA 470.95 32.67 52% 48% 2 942 65 49 33 17 16
Gasoline/Service Station with Convenience Market 945 Vehicle Fueling Positions 205.36 13.99 51% 49% 4 821 56 66 19 10 9
Source: ITE 10th Edition 1034 13738 1174 1082 607 474
85 66
522 408
Less Internal (14%)
Total Trips In/Out of HeritagePa
g
e
1
3
8
o
f
4
8
1
TRIP GENERATION ALTERNATIVE 2 - MEDIUM INTENSITY
Description
Land
Use
Codes Units
Rate
Weekday
Daily
Traffic
PM
Peak
Period
Rate
% PM
In
% PM
Out
Expected
Units
(independe
nt variable)
Calculated
Daily Trips
Based on
Average
Rate
Calculated
PM Trips
Based on
Average
Rate
Passby
Percent
PM Trips
with Origin
or
Destination
outside
Heritage In Out
Single-Family Detached Housing 210 Dwelling Units 9.44 0.99 63% 37% 548 5,173 543 543
342 201
Multi Family Housing (Low-Rise) 220 Dwelling Units 7.32 0.56 63% 37% 480 3,514 269 269
169 99
Elementary School 520 1,000 Sq. Ft. GFA 19.52 1.37 45% 55% 205 4,002 281 281
126 154
General Office Building 710 1,000 sq Ft. GFA 9.74 1.15 16% 84% 41 399 47 47
8 40
Medical-Dental Office Building 720 1,000 sq Ft. GFA 34.80 3.46 28% 72% 3 104 10 10
3 7
Office Park 750 1,000 sq Ft. GFA 11.07 1.07 7% 93% 0 0 0 0
0 0
Business Park 770 1,000 sq Ft. GFA 12.44 0.42 46% 54% 0 0 0 0 0 0
Shopping Center 820 1,000 Sq. Ft. GFA 37.75 3.81 48% 52% 0 0
34 0 0 0
Supermarket 850 1,000 sq Ft. GFA 106.78 9.24 51% 49% 15 1,602 139
36 89 45 43
High Turnover (Sit-Down) Restaurant 932 1,000 Sq. Ft. GFA 112.18 9.77 62% 38% 0 0 43 0 0 0
Fast-Food Restaurant with Drive Through Window 934 1,000 Sq. Ft. GFA 470.95 32.67 52% 48% 4 1,884 131 49 67 35 32
Gasoline/Service Station with Convenience Market 945 Vehicle Fueling Positions 205.36 13.99 51% 49% 4 821 56 66 19 10 9
Source: ITE 10th Edition 1300 17499 1475 1324 738 585
103 82
635 503
Less Internal (14%)
Total Trips In/Out of Heritage
Pa
g
e
1
3
9
o
f
4
8
1
TRIP GENERATION ALTERNATIVE 3 - HIGH INTENSITY
Description
Land
Use
Codes Units
Rate
Weekday
Daily
Traffic
PM
Peak
Period
Rate
% PM
In
% PM
Out
Expected
Units
(independe
nt variable)
Calculated
Daily Trips
Based on
Average
Rate
Calculated
PM Trips
Based on
Average
Rate
Passby
Percent
PM Trips
with Origin
or
Destination
outside
Heritage In Out
Single-Family Detached Housing 210 DU 9.44 0.99 63% 37% 618 5,834 612 612
385 226
Multi Family Housing (Low-Rise) 220 DU 7.32 0.56 63% 37% 736 5,388 412 412
260 152
Elementary School 520 1,000 Sq. Ft. GFA 19.52 1.37 45% 55% 205 4,002 281 281
126 154
General Office Building 710 1,000 sq Ft. GFA 9.74 1.15 16% 84% 42 409 48 48
8 41
Medical-Dental Office Building 720 1,000 sq Ft. GFA 34.80 3.46 28% 72% 2 70 7 7
2 5
Office Park 750 1,000 sq Ft. GFA 11.07 1.07 7% 93% 0 0 0 0
0 0
Business Park 770 1,000 sq Ft. GFA 12.44 0.42 46% 54% 0 0 0 0 0 0
Shopping Center 820 1,000 Sq. Ft. GFA 37.75 3.81 48% 52% 16 604 61
34 40 19 21
Supermarket 850 1,000 sq Ft. GFA 106.78 9.24 51% 49% 11 1,175 102
36 65 33 32
High Turnover (Sit-Down) Restaurant 932 1,000 Sq. Ft. GFA 112.18 9.77 62% 38% 2 224 20 43 11 7 4
Fast-Food Restaurant with Drive Through Window 934 1,000 Sq. Ft. GFA 470.95 32.67 52% 48% 2 942 65 49 33 17 16
Gasoline/Service Station with Convenience Market 945 Vehicle Fueling Positions 205.36 13.99 51% 49% 4 821 56 66 19 10 9
Source: ITE 10th Edition Total Trips 1638 19468 1663 1529 867 660
121 92
746 568
Less Internal (14%)
Total Trips In/Out of Heritage
Pa
g
e
1
4
0
o
f
4
8
1
N
3
R
D
A
V
E
E A ST
W CLAR
K
S
T
N
1
S
T
A
V
E
N
O
R
E
G
O
N
A
V
E
W PEARL ST
W COURT ST
E LEWIS ST
S
W
E
H
E
A
V
E
SMAITLAND
AVE
H
E
R
I
T
A
G
E
BLVD
S4THAVE
S 1
0
T
H
A
V
E
W A ST
EAINSWORTHAVE
N
C
O
M
M
E
R
CI
A
L
A
V
E
New
Heritage
0.41
0
.
6
4
0.
4
7
0.
1
3
1
1.01
0.42
0.96
1.
0
5
0.63
0.
7
8
0.57
0.
3
9
1.
2
5
1.62 0.24
0.07
0.56
0
.
1
2
0.4
0.29
0.
4
8
0.3
7
0.21
0.33
0.32
0.10.16
0.54
0.9
1 0.
2
3
1.0
2
0.
4
9
0
0.7
2
0.38
0.
7
0.
5
8
0.05
0.
3
4
0.97
1.1
9
0
.
1
4
0
.
5
5
0.
1
9
0.
3
6
0.750.86
0.7
4
0.7
3
0.
1
8
1.4
4
0.71
0.3
0.35
0
.
8
9
0.08
0.
1
7
182
182
395
395
12
12
12
397
397
COLUMBIA
RIVER
COMP PLAN
VOLUME TO
CAPACITY RATIO
¯
0 0.25 0.5
Miles
Volume to Capacity Ratio (1 Hour) (0.50)
Less than 0.70
0.70 to <0.80
0.80 to <0.90
0.90 to <1.00
More than or equal to 1.00
Pa
g
e
1
4
1
o
f
4
8
1
N
3
R
D
A
V
E
E A ST
N
2
4
T
H
A
V
E
W CLAR
K
S
T
N
1
S
T
A
V
E
N
O
R
E
G
O
N
A
V
E
W PEARL ST
W COURT ST
E LEWIS ST
S
W
E
H
E
A
V
E
SMAITLAND
AVE
H
E
R
I
T
A
G
E
BLVD
S
4
TH A V E
S 1
0
T
H
A
V
E
W A ST
EAINSWORTHAVE
N
C
O
M
M
E
R
C
I
A
L
A
V
E
New
Heritage
0.
8
5
0.57
0.01
0.71
0.
6
7
0
.
6
6
0.
4
9
0.58
0
.
1
5
1.05
1.09
0.7
0.98
1.
0
6
0.65
0.
8
1.14
0.
6
1
2.05
0.44
0.
5
0.56
1.
2
8
1.7
0
.
2
7
0.07
0
.
1
8
0.29
1.82
0.
2
4
0.
4
8
0.32
0.36
0
.
0
3
0.51
0
.
2
6
0.38
0.81
0.78
0.19
0.8
8
0.69
0.
9
9
0.93
0.9
2 0.
2
5
0.14
0.91
1.84
0.
7
7
0.54
1.
0
7
0
.
3
9
1.03
0.35
0.41
0.02
0.0
6
0.1
6
0
.
3
1
0
.
3
7
0.4
7
1.04
0.
7
2
0
.
9
6
0.42
0.13
0.430.82
0.
0
9
0.
1
2
0.
5
9
0.34
0.
5
3
0.550.08
0.3
1.02
1.1
9
0
.
6
2
0.4
6
0
.
7
3
0.
2
0.6
8
0.2
1
1.4
3
0.7
4
0
.
2
2
1
0.05
0.
1
7
1.4
7
0.4
0
.
9
0.1
0.52
0.11
182
182
395
395
12
12
12
397
397
COLUMBIA
RIVER
2040 NO ACTION
VOLUME TO
CAPACITY RATIO
¯
0 0.25 0.5
Miles
Volume to Capacity Ratio (1 Hour) (0.50)
Less than 0.70
0.70 to <0.80
0.80 to <0.90
0.90 to <1.00
More than or equal to 1.00
Pa
g
e
1
4
2
o
f
4
8
1
N
3
R
D
A
V
E
E A ST
N
2
4
T
H
A
V
E
W CLAR
K
S
T
N
1
S
T
A
V
E
N
O
R
E
G
O
N
A
V
E
W PEARL ST
W COURT ST
E LEWIS ST
S
W
E
H
E
A
V
E
SMAITLAND
AVE
H
E
R
I
T
A
G
E
BLVD
S4TH
AVE
S 1
0
T
H
A
V
E
W A ST
EAINSWORTHAVE
N
C
O
M
M
E
R
C
I
A
L
A
V
E
New
Heritage
0.
8
5
0.
5
5
0.63
0.01
0
.
6
5
0.
4
8
0
.
8
0
.
8
1
0.
1
7
0.76
0.58
1.03
0.1
1.09
0.56
0.66
1.05
0.
7
9
1.14
0.
6
1
2.05
0.43
0
.
5
2
1.
3
2
0.571.66 0.26
0.08
0
.
1
5
0.9
2
0.49
0.3
1.82
0.38
0.
2
4
0.4
1
0.32
0.29
0
.
0
3
0.51
0.35
0.34
0.78
0.19
0.62
0.93
0.
2
5
1.06
0.14
0.91
1.84
0.
6
7
0.54
1.07
0
.
3
9
0.
3
6
0.0
7
0.02
0
.
3
1
0.7
2
0
.
3
7
0.4
7
1.04
0.
7
1
0
.
9
6
0.42
0.13
0.82
0
.
2
7
0.
0
9
0.
1
2
0.
5
9
0.440.06
0.99
1.2
0
.
4
0.16
0.
2
0.6
8
0.
4
6
0.84
0.2
1
1.1
0.7
4
0
.
2
3
1
0.05
1.5
0.75
0
.
8
9
0.11
0.
1
8
0.5
0.94
182
182
395
395
12
12
12
397
397
COLUMBIA
RIVER
ALTERNATIVE 1
VOLUME TO
CAPACITY RATIO
k
0 0.25 0.5
0LOHV
Volume to Capacity Ratio (1 Hour) (0.50)
/HVVWKDQ0.70
0.70WR 0.80
0.80WR 0.90
0.90WR 1.00
0RUHWKDQRUHTXDOWR1.00
Pa
g
e
1
4
3
o
f
4
8
1
N
3
R
D
A
V
E
E A ST
N
2
4
T
H
A
V
E
W CLAR
K
S
T
N
1
S
T
A
V
E
N
O
R
E
G
O
N
A
V
E
W PEARL ST
W COURT ST
E LEWIS ST
SMAITLAND
AVE
H
E
R
I
T
A
G
E
BLVD
S4THAVE
S 1
0
T
H
A
V
E
W A ST
EAINSWORTHAVE
N
C
O
M
M
E
R
C
I
A
L
A
V
E
New
Heritage
0.
5
5
0.38
0.01
0.69
0
.
6
5
0.
4
8
0.770.66
0
.
6
2
1.03
0.1
1.09
0.58
0.67
1.05
0.
8
1.14
0.
6
1
2.05
0.49
0.44
0.
4
5
0
.
5
2
0.56
1.
3
2
0.571.67 0.26
0.08
0
.
1
5
0.51
0.3
1.82
0.41
0.
2
4
0.32
0.29
0
.
0
3
0.36
0.35
0.79
0.78
0.19
0.9
2
0.63
0.93
0.
2
5
1.06
0.14
0.91
1.84
0.54
1.07
0.4
0
.
3
9
0.02
0.1
6
0
.
3
1
0.7
2
0
.
3
7
0.4
7
1.04
0.
7
1
0
.
9
6
0.42
0.13
0.82
0.07
0
.
2
7
0.
8
1
0.
0
9
0.
5
9
0.34
0.460.06
0.99
1.2
0
.
4
3
0
.
9
5
0.
2
0.6
8
0.85
0.2
1
1.1
6
0.7
4
0
.
2
3
1
0.05
0.
1
7
1.5
0.75
0
.
8
9
0.12
0.
1
8
0.5
0.11
182
182
395
395
12
12
12
397
397
COLUMBIA
RIVER
ALTERNATIVE 2
VOLUME TO
CAPACITY RATIO
¯
0 0.25 0.5
Miles
Volume to Capacity Ratio (1 Hour) (0.50)
Less than 0.70
0.70 to <0.80
0.80 to <0.90
0.90 to <1.00
More than or equal to 1.00
Pa
g
e
1
4
4
o
f
4
8
1
N
3
R
D
A
V
E
E A ST
N
2
4
T
H
A
V
E
W CLAR
K
S
T
N
1
S
T
A
V
E
N
O
R
E
G
O
N
A
V
E
W PEARL ST
W COURT ST
E LEWIS ST
S
W
E
H
E
A
V
E
SMAITLAND
AVE
HE
R
I
T
A
G
E
B
LVD
S4THAVE
S 1
0
T
H
A
V
E
W A ST
EAINSWORTHAVE
N
C
O
M
M
E
R
C
I
A
L
A
V
E
New
Heritage
0.7
0.01
0
.
6
5
0.
4
8
0.19
0.77
0.58
0.66
0
.
6
2
1.03
0.1
0.5
9
1.09
0.55
1.
0
6
0.67
1.05
0.
8
0.69
1.14
0.
6
1
2.05
0.49
0
.
4
4
0.
4
6
0
.
5
2
0.56
1.
3
4
0.571.67 0.26
0.09
0
.
1
6
0.53
0.3
1.82
0.43
0.
2
4
0.32
0.38
0
.
0
3
0.36
0.35
0.79
0.78
0.15
0.9
3
0.64
0.
9
9
0.9
2 0.
2
5
0.14
0.91
1.84
0.
7
5
0.54
1.07
0.4
0
.
3
9
0.
0
8
0.02
0
.
3
1
0.7
2
0
.
3
7
0.4
7
1.04
0.
7
1
0
.
9
6
0.42
0.13
0.82
0.07
0
.
2
7
0.
8
1
0.
6
0.34
0.
5
0.06
1.2
0.
2
0.6
8
0.85
0.2
1
1.1
9
0.7
4
0
.
2
3
1
0.05
0.
1
7
1.5
1
0.76
0
.
8
9
0.12
0.
1
8
0.51
0.95
0.11
182
182
395
395
12
12
12
397
397
COLUMBIA
RIVER
ALTERNATIVE 3
VOLUME TO
CAPACITY RATIO
¯
0 0.25 0.5
Miles
Volume to Capacity Ratio (1 Hour) (0.50)
Less than 0.70
0.70 to <0.80
0.80 to <0.90
0.90 to <1.00
More than or equal to 1.00
Pa
g
e
1
4
5
o
f
4
8
1
è è è è è è è
è
è
è
è
è
è
èèèè
è
è
èè
è
è
èèè
èè èè
èèèè
è
è è
è è
è
è
èééé é é é é
é
é
é
é
é
é
éééé
é
é
éé
é
é
ééé
éé éé
éééé
é
é é
é é
é
é
éëëëë ë ë ë ë
ë
ë
ë
ë
ë
ë
ëëëë
ë
ë
ëë
ë
ë
ëëë
ëë ëë
ëëëë
ë
ë ë
ë ë
ë
ë
ëìììì ì ì ì ì
ì
ì
ì
ì
ì
ì
ìììì
ì
ì
ìì
ì
ì
ììì
ìì ìì
ìììì
ì
ì ì
ì ì
ì
ì
ìíííí í í í í
í
í
í
í
í
í
íííí
í
í
íí
í
í
ííí
íí íí
íííí
í
í í
í í
í
í
í
!!
!!!!
!!
!
""
""""
""
"
$$
$$$$
$$
$
N
3
R
D
A
V
E
S
C
E
D
A
R
A
V
E
N
2
4
T
H
A
V
E
E A ST
W CLAR
K
S
T
N
1
S
T
A
V
E
N
O
R
E
G
O
N
A
V
E
W PEARL ST
W COURT ST
E LEWIS ST
S
W
E
H
E
A
V
E
SMAITLAND
AVE
H
E
R
I
T
A
G
E
BLVD
S 4THAVE
S 1
0
T
H
A
V
E
W A ST
PASC
O
K
A
H
L
O
T
U
S
R
D
E AI
N
S
W
O
R
T
H
A
V
E
NCO
M
M
E
R
CIA
L
A
V
E
New
Heritage
182
182
395
395
12
12
12
397
397
COLUMBIA
RIVER
EXISTING
INTERSECTION
CONTROL
¯
0 0.25 0.5
Miles
Existing Intersection Control
!"$All Way Stop
Roundabout
èéëìí Signalized
Street Classification
Interstate
Other Freeway
Principle Arterial
Principal Arterial,Future
Minor Arterial
Collector
Collector, Future
Ramps
3/29/2022
Pa
g
e
1
4
6
o
f
4
8
1
è
è
è
è
è
è
è
è
è
è
é
é
é
é
é
é
é
é
é
é
ë
ë
ë
ë
ë
ë
ë
ë
ë
ë
ì
ì
ì
ì
ì
ì
ì
ì
ì
ì
í
í
í
í
í
í
í
í
í
í
è è è è è è è
è
è
èèèè
è
è
è
è èè
è èè
èèèè
è
è è
è è
è
èééé é é é é
é
é
éééé
é
é
é
é éé
é éé
éééé
é
é é
é é
é
éëëë ë ë ë ë
ë
ë
ëëëë
ë
ë
ë
ë ëë
ë ëë
ëëëë
ë
ë ë
ë ë
ë
ëììì ì ì ì ì
ì
ì
ìììì
ì
ì
ì
ì ìì
ì ìì
ìììì
ì
ì ì
ì ì
ì
ìííí í í í í
í
í
íííí
í
í
í
í íí
í íí
íííí
í
í í
í í
í
í
E
ϯ
Z
s
^
Z
s
E
Ϯ
ϰ
d
,
s
^d
t>
Z
<
^
d
E
ϭ
^
d
s
E
K
Z
'
K
E
s
tW Z>^d
tKhZd^d
> t/^^d
^
t
,
s
^D/d>E
s
,
Z
/d
'
>s
^ϰd,s
^
ϭ
Ϭ
d
,
s
t^d
W^
K
<
,
>
K
d
h
^
Z
/
E
^
t
K
Z
d
,
s
EKDD
Z
/
>
s
New
Heritage
182
182
395
395
12
12
12
397
397
COLUMBIA
RIVER
/hatw9I9b^Ls9
t[!b
Lbd9w^9/dLhb
/hbdwh[
9s![h!dLhb
k
0 0.25 0.5
0LOHV
LŶƚĞƌƐĞĐƟŽŶ /ŽŶƚƌŽů 9ǀĂůƵĂƟŽŶ
7ZR:D\RU$OO:D\6WRS$FFHSWDEOH/HYHORI6HUYLFH
7ZR:D\RU$OO:D\6WRS,PSURYHPHQWV/LNHO\1HHGHG
5RXQGDERXW$FFHSWDEOH/HYHORI6HUYLFH
5RXQGDERXW,PSURYHPHQWV/LNHO\1HHGHG
èéëìí6LJQDOL]HG,QWHUVHFWLRQ$FFHSWDEOH/HYHORI6HUYLFH
èéëìí6LJQDOL]HG,QWHUVHFWLRQ2YHU&DSDFLW\
^ƚƌĞĞƚ /ůĂƐƐŝĮĐĂƟŽŶ
,QWHUVWDWH
2WKHU)UHHZD\
3ULQFLSOH$UWHULDO
3ULQFLSDO$UWHULDO)XWXUH
0LQRU$UWHULDO
&ROOHFWRU
&ROOHFWRU)XWXUH
5DPSV
3/29/2022
Pa
g
e
1
4
7
o
f
4
8
1
è è
è
è
è
è
è
è
è
è
è
è
èé é
é
é
é
é
é
é
é
é
é
é
éë ë
ë
ë
ë
ë
ë
ë
ë
ë
ë
ë
ëì ì
ì
ì
ì
ì
ì
ì
ì
ì
ì
ì
ìí í
í
í
í
í
í
í
í
í
í
í
íèèè è è è
è
è
èèèè
è
è
è
è èè
è èè
èèèè
è
è
è è
è
é é é é é é
é
é
éééé
é
é
é
é éé
é éé
éééé
é
é
é é
é
ë ë ë ë ë ë
ë
ë
ëëëë
ë
ë
ë
ë ëë
ë ëë
ëëëë
ë
ë
ë ë
ë
ì ì ì ì ì ì
ì
ì
ìììì
ì
ì
ì
ì ìì
ì ìì
ìììì
ì
ì
ì ì
ì
í í í í í í
í
í
íííí
í
í
í
í íí
í íí
íííí
í
í
í í
í
E
ϯ
Z
s
^
Z
s
E
Ϯ
ϰ
d
,
s
^d
t>
Z
<
^
d
E
ϭ
^
d
s
E
K
Z
'
K
E
s
tW Z>^d
tKhZd^d
> t/^^d
^
t
,
s
^D/d>E
s
,
Z
/d
'
>s
^ϰd,s
^
ϭ
Ϭ
d
,
s
t^d
W^
K
<
,
>
K
d
h
^
Z
/
E
^
t
K
Z
d
,
s
EKDD
Z
/
>
s
New
Heritage
182
182
395
395
12
12
12
397
397
COLUMBIA
RIVER
ϮϬϰϬ bh !/dLhb
Lbd9w^9/dLhb
/hbdwh[
9s![h!dLhb
k
0 0.25 0.5
0LOHV
LŶƚĞƌƐĞĐƟŽŶ /ŽŶƚƌŽů 9ǀĂůƵĂƟŽŶ
7ZR:D\RU$OO:D\6WRS$FFHSWDEOH/HYHORI6HUYLFH 7
7ZR:D\RU$OO:D\6WRS,PSURYHPHQWV/LNHO\1HHGHG 15
5RXQGDERXW$FFHSWDEOH/HYHORI6HUYLFH 0
5RXQGDERXW,PSURYHPHQWV/LNHO\1HHGHG 1
èéëìí6LJQDOL]HG,QWHUVHFWLRQ$FFHSWDEOH/HYHORI6HUYLFH 29
èéëìí6LJQDOL]HG,QWHUVHFWLRQ2YHU&DSDFLW\ 13
^ƚƌĞĞƚ /ůĂƐƐŝĮĐĂƟŽŶ
,QWHUVWDWH
2WKHU)UHHZD\
3ULQFLSOH$UWHULDO
3ULQFLSDO$UWHULDO)XWXUH
0LQRU$UWHULDO
&ROOHFWRU
&ROOHFWRU)XWXUH
5DPSV
3/29/2022
Pa
g
e
1
4
8
o
f
4
8
1
è è
è
è
è
è
è
è
è
è
è
è
è
é é
é
é
é
é
é
é
é
é
é
é
éë ë
ë
ë
ë
ë
ë
ë
ë
ë
ë
ë
ëì ì
ì
ì
ì
ì
ì
ì
ì
ì
ì
ì
ìí í
í
í
í
í
í
í
í
í
í
í
íèèè è è è
è
è
èèèè
è
è
è
è èè
è èè
èèèè
è
è
è è
è
é é é é é é
é
é
éééé
é
é
é
é éé
é éé
éééé
é
é
é é
é
ë ë ë ë ë ë
ë
ë
ëëëë
ë
ë
ë
ë ëë
ë ëë
ëëëë
ë
ë
ë ë
ë
ì ì ì ì ì ì
ì
ì
ìììì
ì
ì
ì
ì ìì
ì ìì
ìììì
ì
ì
ì ì
ì
í í í í í í
í
í
íííí
í
í
í
í íí
í íí
íííí
í
í
í í
í
E
ϯ
Z
s
^
Z
s
E
Ϯ
ϰ
d
,
s
^d
t>
Z
<
^
d
E
ϭ
^
d
s
E
K
Z
'
K
E
s
tW Z>^d
tKhZd^d
> t/^^d
^
t
,
s
^D/d>E
s
,
Z
/d
'
>s
^ϰd,s
^
ϭ
Ϭ
d
,
s
t^d
W^
K
<
,
>
K
d
h
^
Z
/
E
^
t
K
Z
d
,
s
EKDD
Z
/
>
s
New
Heritage
182
182
395
395
12
12
12
397
397
COLUMBIA
RIVER
![d9wb!dLs9 ϭ
Lbd9w^9/dLhb
/hbdwh[
9s![h!dLhb
k
0 0.25 0.5
0LOHV
LŶƚĞƌƐĞĐƟŽŶ /ŽŶƚƌŽů 9ǀĂůƵĂƟŽŶ
7ZR:D\RU$OO:D\6WRS$FFHSWDEOH/HYHORI6HUYLFH 7
7ZR:D\RU$OO:D\6WRS,PSURYHPHQWV/LNHO\1HHGHG 15
5RXQGDERXW$FFHSWDEOH/HYHORI6HUYLFH 0
5RXQGDERXW,PSURYHPHQWV/LNHO\1HHGHG 1
èéëìí6LJQDOL]HG,QWHUVHFWLRQ$FFHSWDEOH/HYHORI6HUYLFH 29
èéëìí6LJQDOL]HG,QWHUVHFWLRQ2YHU&DSDFLW\ 13
^ƚƌĞĞƚ /ůĂƐƐŝĮĐĂƟŽŶ
,QWHUVWDWH
2WKHU)UHHZD\
3ULQFLSOH$UWHULDO
3ULQFLSDO$UWHULDO)XWXUH
0LQRU$UWHULDO
&ROOHFWRU
&ROOHFWRU)XWXUH
5DPSV
3/29/2022
Pa
g
e
1
4
9
o
f
4
8
1
è
è
è
è
è è
è
è
è
è
è
è
è
é é
é
é
é
é
é
é
é
é
é
é
éë ë
ë
ë
ë
ë
ë
ë
ë
ë
ë
ë
ëì ì
ì
ì
ì
ì
ì
ì
ì
ì
ì
ì
ìí í
í
í
í
í
í
í
í
í
í
í
íèèè è è è
è
è
èèèè
è
è
è
è èè
è èè
èèèè
è
è
è è
è
é é é é é é
é
é
éééé
é
é
é
é éé
é éé
éééé
é
é
é é
é
ë ë ë ë ë ë
ë
ë
ëëëë
ë
ë
ë
ë ëë
ë ëë
ëëëë
ë
ë
ë ë
ë
ì ì ì ì ì ì
ì
ì
ìììì
ì
ì
ì
ì ìì
ì ìì
ìììì
ì
ì
ì ì
ì
í í í í í í
í
í
íííí
í
í
í
í íí
í íí
íííí
í
í
í í
í
E
ϯ
Z
s
^
Z
s
E
Ϯ
ϰ
d
,
s
^d
t>
Z
<
^
d
E
ϭ
^
d
s
E
K
Z
'
K
E
s
tW Z>^d
tKhZd^d
> t/^^d
^
t
,
s
^D/d>E
s
,
Z
/d
'
>s
^ϰd,s
^
ϭ
Ϭ
d
,
s
t^d
W^
K
<
,
>
K
d
h
^
Z
/
E
^
t
K
Z
d
,
s
EKDD
Z
/
>
s
New
Heritage
182
182
395
395
12
12
12
397
397
COLUMBIA
RIVER
![d9wb!dLs9 Ϯ
Lbd9w^9/dLhb
/hbdwh[
9s![h!dLhb
k
0 0.25 0.5
0LOHV
LŶƚĞƌƐĞĐƟŽŶ /ŽŶƚƌŽů 9ǀĂůƵĂƟŽŶ
7ZR:D\RU$OO:D\6WRS$FFHSWDEOH/HYHORI6HUYLFH 7
7ZR:D\RU$OO:D\6WRS,PSURYHPHQWV/LNHO\1HHGHG 15
5RXQGDERXW$FFHSWDEOH/HYHORI6HUYLFH 0
5RXQGDERXW,PSURYHPHQWV/LNHO\1HHGHG 1
èéëìí6LJQDOL]HG,QWHUVHFWLRQ$FFHSWDEOH/HYHORI6HUYLFH 29
èéëìí6LJQDOL]HG,QWHUVHFWLRQ2YHU&DSDFLW\ 13
^ƚƌĞĞƚ /ůĂƐƐŝĮĐĂƟŽŶ
,QWHUVWDWH
2WKHU)UHHZD\
3ULQFLSOH$UWHULDO
3ULQFLSDO$UWHULDO)XWXUH
0LQRU$UWHULDO
&ROOHFWRU
&ROOHFWRU)XWXUH
5DPSV
3/29/2022
Pa
g
e
1
5
0
o
f
4
8
1
è è
è
è
è
è
è
è
è
è
è
è
èé é
é
é
é
é
é
é
é
é
é
é
éë ë
ë
ë
ë
ë
ë
ë
ë
ë
ë
ë
ëì ì
ì
ì
ì
ì
ì
ì
ì
ì
ì
ì
ìí í
í
í
í
í
í
í
í
í
í
í
íèèè è è è
è
è
èèèè
è
è
è
è èè
è èè
èèèè
è
è
è è
è
é é é é é é
é
é
éééé
é
é
é
é éé
é éé
éééé
é
é
é é
é
ë ë ë ë ë ë
ë
ë
ëëëë
ë
ë
ë
ë ëë
ë ëë
ëëëë
ë
ë
ë ë
ë
ì ì ì ì ì ì
ì
ì
ìììì
ì
ì
ì
ì ìì
ì ìì
ìììì
ì
ì
ì ì
ì
í í í í í í
í
í
íííí
í
í
í
í íí
í íí
íííí
í
í
í í
í
E
ϯ
Z
s
^
Z
s
E
Ϯ
ϰ
d
,
s
^d
t>
Z
<
^
d
E
ϭ
^
d
s
E
K
Z
'
K
E
s
tW Z>^d
tKhZd^d
> t/^^d
^
t
,
s
^D/d>E
s
,
Z
/d
'
>s
^ϰd,s
^
ϭ
Ϭ
d
,
s
t^d
W^
K
<
,
>
K
d
h
^
Z
/
E
^
t
K
Z
d
,
s
EKDD
Z
/
>
s
New
Heritage
182
182
395
395
12
12
12
397
397
COLUMBIA
RIVER
![d9wb!dLs9 ϯ
Lbd9w^9/dLhb
/hbdwh[
9s![h!dLhb
k
0 0.25 0.5
0LOHV
LŶƚĞƌƐĞĐƟŽŶ /ŽŶƚƌŽů 9ǀĂůƵĂƟŽŶ
7ZR:D\RU$OO:D\6WRS$FFHSWDEOH/HYHORI6HUYLFH 7
7ZR:D\RU$OO:D\6WRS,PSURYHPHQWV/LNHO\1HHGHG 15
5RXQGDERXW$FFHSWDEOH/HYHORI6HUYLFH 0
5RXQGDERXW,PSURYHPHQWV/LNHO\1HHGHG 1
èéëìí6LJQDOL]HG,QWHUVHFWLRQ$FFHSWDEOH/HYHORI6HUYLFH 29
èéëìí6LJQDOL]HG,QWHUVHFWLRQ2YHU&DSDFLW\ 13
^ƚƌĞĞƚ /ůĂƐƐŝĮĐĂƟŽŶ
,QWHUVWDWH
2WKHU)UHHZD\
3ULQFLSOH$UWHULDO
3ULQFLSDO$UWHULDO)XWXUH
0LQRU$UWHULDO
&ROOHFWRU
&ROOHFWRU)XWXUH
5DPSV
3/29/2022
Pa
g
e
1
5
1
o
f
4
8
1
30-19-079/New Heritage
APPENDIX B
Page 152 of 481
New Heritage
Site
Economic/Industrial Analysis
Page 153 of 481
1
Addendum to New Heritage Site Economic/Industrial Analysis
Purpose
The purpose of this addendum is to provide a high-level understanding of the housing market in Franklin
County and neighboring Benton County as well as the economic implications related to extended
commute times. This analysis is an overview and requires a more in-depth analysis to gain insights into
the significant challenges that face the region. Like most things, housing needs differ depending upon
income levels and overall housing availability. This analysis hopes to provide decision makers a high-
level understanding of housing trends and affordability in the two-county region.
Data & Analysis
New 2020 Census data has become available since the submittal of the New Heritage Site
Economic/Industrial Analysis. According to Census 2020, population in Pasco increased at an annual rate
of 2.6% from 2010 to 2020, adding roughly 17,300 people to the population base during that time. For
comparison, population growth within Franklin County averaged 2.2% annually during the same time
period with Pasco contributing the most to the County’s growth. With 96,749 people, Franklin County is
the 14th most populated county in the State of Washington out of 39 counties (2020 Census).
Figure 1. Population Trends & Annual Growth Rate (2010-2020)
Source: Eastern Washington University, Benton-Franklin Trends
0.0%
1.0%
2.0%
3.0%
4.0%
5.0%
6.0%
7.0%
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
300,000
350,000
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
An
n
u
a
l
P
o
p
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
G
r
o
w
t
h
R
a
t
e
(
l
i
n
e
g
r
a
p
h
)
Po
p
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
(
b
a
r
g
r
a
p
h
)
Benton County (population)Franklin County (population)Benton County
Franklin County Kennewick Pasco
Richland
Page 154 of 481
2
Commuting Patterns
Commuting data show the movement of workers in a given area. We are able to take a deeper
dive to highlight what type of workers are commuting into Franklin County and the type of jobs
residents are seeking elsewhere. These data show the opportunities in the untapped segments
of the labor pool.
According to Census’ LEHD on the Map program (2019 data is the most recent data available),
three-quarters of Pasco residents commute outside the area for work. Despite this, there is a
cross-haul of workforce — as many are coming into Pasco to work as are leaving (see Figure 2).
Roughly 69% of the jobs in Pasco are being filled by people who live outside the city.
Figure 2. Commuter Flows, City of Pasco (2019)
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Center for Economic Studies, LEHD
However, as the geographic boundary broadens, less residents commute outside the area for
work (Table 1). More Franklin County residents commute outside the county for work than
Benton County residents, where the larger concentration of jobs are located (see Figure 3). In
addition, 32% of housing units in Benton and Franklin counties have zero or only one vehicle (the share
is slightly higher in Benton). This makes it more challenging for residents to get to work.
Page 155 of 481
3
Table 1. Commuting Flows by Geographic Area (2019)
Geographic Area Living and
Working in Area
Living in Area
but Working
outside
Employed in Area but
Living outside
(% of jobs)
City of Pasco 24% 76% 69%
Franklin County 32% 68% 62%
Benton County 61% 39% 40%
Kennewick-Richland
MSA 74% 26% 25%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Center for Economic Studies, LEHD
Figure 3. Where Jobs are Concentrated, Kennewick-Richland MSA (2019)
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Center for Economic Studies, LEHD
Page 156 of 481
4
Figure 4. Where Residents Live, Kennewick-Richland MSA (2019)
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Center for Economic Studies, LEHD
Table 2. Commuting Distances by Geographic Area (2019)
How far are residents commuting?
How far are workers commuting
into the Area?
Pasco
Franklin
County
Benton
County
Kennewick-
Richland
MSA Pasco
Franklin
County
Benton
County
Kennewick-
Richland
MSA
Less than 10
miles 65% 59% 62% 61% 67% 57% 65% 63%
10 to 24
miles 9% 14% 13% 13% 9% 14% 11% 12%
25 to 50
miles 8% 9% 7% 8% 6% 10% 6% 7%
Greater than
50 miles 18% 18% 18% 18% 18% 19% 18% 18%
Page 157 of 481
5
Table 3. Place of Residence and Work (2019)
Where
Residents Work
Where Workers
Live
Richland 29% 17%
Kennewick 20% 21%
Pasco 14% 18%
Prosser 2% 1%
West Richland --- 5%
Other 35% 38%
Housing has become less affordable in recent years in Benton & Franklin counties. The housing
affordability index (HAI) has a value of 100 when the median-income family has sufficient income to
purchase a median-priced existing home. A higher index number indicates that more households can
afford to purchase a home. In 3Q 2021, the composite HAI for Franklin County was 114.1, indicating that
the typical household had 114.1 percent of the income necessary to purchase the typical home. This is
down from 139.0 in 3Q 2017, indicating that housing has become less affordable in the region, similar to
many markets across the country.
Figure 5. Housing Affordability Index - All Homebuyers
Source: Eastern Washington University, Benton-Franklin Trends
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
20
1
7
-
Q
1
20
1
7
-
Q
2
20
1
7
-
Q
3
20
1
7
-
Q
4
20
1
8
-
Q
1
20
1
8
-
Q
2
20
1
8
-
Q
3
20
1
8
-
Q
4
20
1
9
-
Q
1
20
1
9
-
Q
2
20
1
9
-
Q
3
20
1
9
-
Q
4
20
2
0
-
Q
1
20
2
0
-
Q
2
20
2
0
-
Q
3
20
2
0
-
Q
4
20
2
1
-
Q
1
20
2
1
-
Q
2
20
2
1
-
Q
3
Benton & Franklin Counties HAI: All Buyers Franklin County HAI: All Buyers
Washington State HAI: All Buyers
Page 158 of 481
6
It is important to understand the composition of population and the social dynamics that result in for
housing demand. Pasco is a young area with a median age of only 29, compared to nearly 38 across the
state and nation. It also has a heavily concentrated Hispanic population (34%, compared to 13.7%
statewide and 18.7% nationwide) which addresses different housing needs—the need for multi-
generational housing. For example, there are approximately 28,000 households in Franklin County
(22,700 residing in Pasco) with an average household size of 3.3 people per household (in owner-
occupied units), compared to 2.65 statewide. Renter-occupied units is higher at 3.46 people per
household compared to statewide at a lower rate of 2.37.
There are approximately 18,700 (69%) households that own their own homes and 9,500 households
(31%) that rent. The rental vacancy rate has been trending downward in Franklin County reaching as low
as 2.3% in 2019 (EWU). During the same time, the share of renters paying 30% or more of their income
on housing has remained steady at 42.7% (similar to the region and state) and renters paying 50% or
more of their income has trended downward, sitting at 16.2% in Franklin County, compared to 20.5%
statewide.
Figure 6. Overall Rental Vacancy Rate
Source: Eastern Washington University, Benton-Franklin Trends
With rents on the rise, the share of renters spending 50% or more on housing costs is trending upward
in the tri-cities area and more than statewide and national trends—see Figure 8. However, there
appears to be a healthy supply of housing below $80,000 which helps alleviate some strain on housing
constraints (Figure 9).
2.3%
0.0%
2.0%
4.0%
6.0%
8.0%
10.0%
12.0%
14.0%
16.0%
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
United States Washington State Benton & Franklin Counties
Benton County Franklin County
Page 159 of 481
7
Figure 7. Monthly Fair Market Rent, Benton & Franklin counties
Source: Eastern Washington University, Benton-Franklin Trends
Figure 8. Share of Renters Paying 50%+ of Income on Housing
Source: Eastern Washington University, Benton-Franklin Trends
$0
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1,000
$1,200
$1,400
$1,600
$1,800
$2,000
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
Efficiency Rent Fair Market Two-Bedroom Fair Market Three-Bedroom
Fair Market Four-Bedroom Fair Market One-Bedroom
0.0%
5.0%
10.0%
15.0%
20.0%
25.0%
30.0%
35.0%
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
United States Washington State Benton & Franklin Counties
Benton County Franklin County Kennewick
Pasco Richland
Page 160 of 481
8
Figure 9. Housing Supply by Price Level, Benton & Franklin counties
Source: Eastern Washington University, Benton-Franklin Trends
Limited inventory coupled with increasing median home prices; developers cannot keep up with
demand. The level of building permits—both single-family and multi-family—have been on the rise but
not enough to keep up with demand.
Figure 10. Total Number of Residential Building Permits
Source: Eastern Washington University, Benton-Franklin Trends
The disparity between wages and home prices is an increasing problem across the country. The tri-cities
is no different. Although median wages jumped 5.3% in one year (from 2019-2020), home prices jumped
roughly 15%. Wages remain under state and national averages. Until 2020, wages have not kept up with
increases in the cost of living.
0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
12.0
14.0
16.0
20
1
9
-
Q
1
20
1
9
-
Q
2
20
1
9
-
Q
3
20
1
9
-
Q
4
20
2
0
-
Q
1
20
2
0
-
Q
2
20
2
0
-
Q
3
20
2
0
-
Q
4
20
2
1
-
Q
1
20
2
1
-
Q
2
20
2
1
-
Q
3
Month's Supply Below $80,000 Month's Supply $80,000 to $159,999
Month's Supply $160,000 to $249,999 Month's Supply $250,000 to $500,000
937 781 897 840 798 825 952 848 942 1082 1125
322
346 197
90 144 243
405
263
343
458 220
636
558
374
245 280
396
496
609
616
574
620
127
12
157
130 42
0
34
89
0
27
0
0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
1,600
1,800
2,000
2,200
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Benton County - Total Single Family Units Benton County - Total Multi-family Units (2+)
Franklin County - Total Single Family Units Franklin County - Total Multi-family Units (2+)
Page 161 of 481
9
Figure 11. Median Hourly Wages
Source: Washington Employment Security Department
Figure 12. Metro Area Regional Price Parity (Cost of Living Index)
Source: Eastern Washington University, Benton-Franklin Trends
$10.00
$12.00
$14.00
$16.00
$18.00
$20.00
$22.00
$24.00
$26.00
$28.00
$30.00
$32.00
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
State State excluding King County Benton Franklin
88
90
92
94
96
98
100
102
104
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Kennewick-Pasco-Richland MSA Boise MSA Spokane MSA
Page 162 of 481
10
Conclusion
The cost of commuting disproportionately affects low-income workers. With over half the workers and
half the residents in Franklin County earning less than $40,000 per year, larger commutes put more of a
strain on the community as people with lower incomes typically drive farther to work and spend more
out of pocket.
In economics, two basic principles characterize the role of transportation in relation to economic
activity. First, there are special advantages, usually referred to as "economies of agglomeration," to
carrying out economic activities in close proximity. In other words, costs are lower when certain types of
activities locate close to each other. Transportation is, therefore, critical—anything that reduces
transportation costs would allow a higher concentration of production, resulting in larger benefits from
agglomeration.
Second, local wages and housing prices adjust at every location so that households and firms do not
have an incentive to move; that is, wages and land prices should adjust until households and firms are
indifferent between locations. When choosing where to live, individuals consider several factors, such as
job opportunities, housing options, social networks, and commuting costs. Some people might choose to
live far away from jobs, possibly accepting a costlier commute, because they would be compensated, in
effect, by other factors such as lower housing costs.
A very specific trade-off between commuting costs and land prices emerges as a result: At locations near
employment centers, commuting costs are low and land prices are high; at more distant locations,
commuting costs are higher and land prices are lower.
In most MSAs across the country, the suburbs are of higher income status and the central cities are
relatively poor. The reasons are twofold: First, the larger financial costs associated with owning a car
may cause lower-income families to rely on other modes of transportation, such as public transit; and
second, public transit is more accessible in central cities than in suburbs. As a consequence, any shift of
jobs away from central activity hinders labor market prospects for minorities.
Rising rental costs with low vacancy rates and high levels of low-income residents, coupled with high
home prices and overall higher cost of living in the tri-cities region is a recipe for mitigating factors such
as job creation in the central business district to reduce overall commuting costs for low-income and
minority residents.
Page 163 of 481
Page 164 of 481
Page 165 of 481
Page 166 of 481
NEW HERITAGE
NON-PROJECT
ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT
STATEMENT
Page 167 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
Project Title
Proposed Action
Project Location
Implementation Date
Amendment to the City of Pasco's Comprehensive Plan
Adoption of an Amendment to the City of Pasco's
Comprehensive Plan. This Final Environmental Impact
Statement (FEIS) is being prepared to comply with the
Washington State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) to address
potential impacts and mitigation measures related to an
Amendment to Pasco's Comprehensive Plan to allow a change
of the current Medium and Light Industrial designations to
Mixed Commercial-Residential. This FEIS addresses land use,
urban design, transportation, capital facilities, government
services and utilities, and environmental policy. The following
three land use alternatives are evaluated in this document.
Preferred Alternative - Mixed Commercial-Residential with
an average density of approximately 8.7 housing units per
acre and 5 acres of community business.
The adoption of this proposed action would result in the future
development of 196.31± acres of mixed-uses; including: 176±
acres in residential (approximately 1,354 homes and/or units),
including open spaces, roads and utilities; 5± acres in
community business (retail and office); and a 15± acre
elementary school site.
Medium Density Alternative - Mixed Commercial-
Residential with an average density of approximately 5.8
housing units per acre and 4 acres of community business.
This alternative would also result in the development of 196.31±
acres of mixed uses; including: 177± acres in residential
(approximately 1,028 homes and/or units), including open
spaces, roads and utilities; 4± acres in community business
(retail and office); and a 15± acre elementary school site.
No Action Alternative
This alternative assumes that no permits will be issued for
residential development and the area will remain industrial.
City of Pasco
____________ 2024
Page 168 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
Lead Agency
Responsible Official
Contact Person
Approvals or Permits
Required
Principal Contributors
Issue Date for the Draft
EIS
Comments Due on
City of Pasco
City of Pasco Planning Department
Rick White, Community Development Director
Community Development Department
P. O. Box 293
Pasco, WA 99301
(509) 585-4276
Jacob Gonzalez
Planning Manager
City of Pasco
Community Development Department
P. O. Box 293
Pasco, WA 99301
(509) 585-4276
The Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan will require
public hearings, the recommendation of the Planning
Commission, and approval and adoption by the City Council. In
the future, other permits related to the development of the
property may also be issued under this EIS including permits for
grading, utility development, subdivision approval, and building
permits.
Land Strategies
141 S 17th Street, #119
Independence, OR 97351
(Primary Author)
J-U-B ENGINEERS, Inc
3611 S Zintel Wy,
Kennewick, WA 99337
(509) 783-2144
(Transportation, Utilities, Natural Habitat, New Heritage)
September 23, 2022
December 14, 2022
Page 169 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
Note: This Final EIS has been prepared under the revised rules of WAC 197-11-235.
Consequently, this FEIS should be reviewed as a single document with the Draft Amendment
to the City’s Comprehensive Plan (Volumes I and II). Additional supporting documents are
available from the City of Pasco.
Page 170 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
CITY OF PASCO
NEW HERITAGE AMENDMENT TO CITY’S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
NON-PROJECT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 What is the Non Project EIS? ................................................................................ 1
1.2 What is the process? .............................................................................................. 1
1.3 How will future environmental reviews be handled? ............................................ 2
1.4 How does this amendment to the city’s comprehensive plan and the Pasco
comprehensive plan relate? ................................................................................... 2
1.5 What are Pasco’s requirements for an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan? . 2
2 LOCATION ............................................................................................................................. 4
3 DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATIVES .................................................................................. 6
3.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................... 6
3.2 How the alternatives were developed .................................................................... 6
3.3 The Alternatives .................................................................................................... 6
3.3.1 Alternative 1: Preferred Alternative - Mixed Commercial-Residential ................ 6
3.3.2 Alternative 2: Medium Density Alternative - Mixed Commercial/Residential .. 10
3.3.3 Alternative 3: No Action Alternative .................................................................. 12
3.4 Comparison of Alternatives ................................................................................. 12
4 MAJOR ISSUES AND AREAS OF CONTROVERSY ....................................................... 14
4.1 Land Use .............................................................................................................. 14
4.2 Traffic .................................................................................................................. 14
4.3 Loss of Employment ........................................................................................... 14
4.4 Lead Agency Concern ......................................................................................... 15
5 COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVES ................................................................................ 16
5.1 Comparison to Pasco Comprehensive Plan Goals and Policies .......................... 16
6 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT, ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION
MEASURES .......................................................................................................................... 20
6.1 Earth .................................................................................................................... 21
6.1.1 Affected Earth ..................................................................................................... 21
6.1.2 Potential Impacts ................................................................................................. 22
Page 171 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
6.1.3 Mitigation Measures ............................................................................................ 24
6.2 Air Quality ........................................................................................................... 24
6.2.1 Affected Environment ......................................................................................... 24
6.2.2 Potential Impacts ................................................................................................. 25
6.2.3 Mitigation Measures ............................................................................................ 26
6.3 Utilities ................................................................................................................ 28
6.3.1 Affected Environment ......................................................................................... 28
6.3.2 Potential Impacts ................................................................................................. 30
6.3.3 Mitigation Measures ............................................................................................ 35
6.4 Land Use .............................................................................................................. 37
6.4.1 Affected Environment ......................................................................................... 37
6.4.2 Potential Impacts ................................................................................................. 43
6.4.3 Mitigation Measures ............................................................................................ 45
6.5 Population, Housing, and Employment ............................................................... 48
6.5.1 Affected Environment ......................................................................................... 48
6.5.2 Potential Impacts ................................................................................................. 50
6.5.3 Mitigation Measures ............................................................................................ 53
6.6 Public Services .................................................................................................... 54
6.6.1 Affected Environment ......................................................................................... 54
6.6.2 Potential Impacts ................................................................................................. 55
6.6.3 Mitigation Measures ............................................................................................ 56
6.7 Parks and Recreation ........................................................................................... 56
6.7.1 Affected Environment ......................................................................................... 56
6.7.2 Potential Impacts ................................................................................................. 58
6.7.3 Mitigation Measures ............................................................................................ 60
6.8 Environmental Health .......................................................................................... 61
6.8.1 Affected Environment ......................................................................................... 61
6.8.2 Potential Impacts ................................................................................................. 61
6.8.3 Mitigation Measures ............................................................................................ 63
6.9 Transportation ..................................................................................................... 66
6.9.1 Affected Environment ......................................................................................... 66
6.9.2 Potential Impacts ................................................................................................. 67
Page 172 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
6.9.3 Mitigation Measures ............................................................................................ 74
7 Heritage Conservation ........................................................................................................... 79
7.1 Affected Environment ......................................................................................... 79
7.2 Potential Impacts ................................................................................................. 79
7.3 Mitigation Measures ............................................................................................ 79
8 Summary of Impacts by Alternative ..................................................................................... 80
9 Summary of Mitigations by Alternative ................................................................................ 90
TABLES
Table 1 - Summary of Proposed Land Uses Proposed Action Medium Density Alternative ......... 8
Table 2 - Summary of Proposed Land Uses Medium Density Plan Alternative .......................... 10
Table 3 - Comparison of Alternatives Land Use Acreage ............................................................ 12
Table 4 - Comparison of Alternatives to GMA Goals .................................................................. 16
Table 5 – SEPA Elements of the Environment ............................................................................. 20
Table 6 – Alternative 1: Preferred Alternative Projected Sewerage Volumes ............................. 30
Table 7 – Alternative 1: Preferred Alternative Proposed Water Demand with Irrigation ............ 30
Table 8 – Alternative 2: Medium Density Alternative Projected Sewage Volumes .................... 31
Table 9 – Alternative 2: Medium Density Alternative Proposed Water Demand with Irrigation 31
Table 10 – Impervious Surfaces ................................................................................................... 34
Table 11 – Existing Land Use in the UGA ................................................................................... 38
Table 12 – Amendment Area Vicinity Land Uses ........................................................................ 40
Table 13 – Preferred Alternative Land Use Changes ................................................................... 43
Table 14 – Medium Density Land Use Changes .......................................................................... 44
Table 15 – Population Projections ............................................................................................... 48
Table 16 – Pasco UGA Housing ................................................................................................... 49
Table 17 – Projected Employment ................................................................................................ 52
Table 18 – Student Enrollment ..................................................................................................... 55
Table 19 – Pasco Park Standards .................................................................................................. 59
Table 20 – Comparison of Trip Generation .................................................................................. 74
Table 21 – Comparison of Traffic Mitigation............................................................................... 76
Page 173 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
FIGURES
Figure 1 – Site Location Map ......................................................................................................... 4
Figure 2 – Vicinity Map .................................................................................................................. 5
Figure 3 – Soils ............................................................................................................................ 22
Figure 4 – Critical Areas and Resource Lands ............................................................................. 23
Figure 5 – Land Use/Vicinity Map ............................................................................................... 27
Figure 6 – Comprehensive Plan Land Uses .................................................................................. 40
Figure 7 – Vicinity Land Uses ...................................................................................................... 41
Figure 8 – Pasco Street Systems ................................................................................................... 67
Figure 9 – Alternative 1: Preferred Alternative Intersection Control Evaluation ......................... 68
Figure 10 – Alternative 1: Preferred Alternative Roadway Volume to Capacity Ratios .............. 71
APPENDICES
Appendix 1 City of Pasco Determination of Significance and Scoping Notice ........................... 97
Appendix 2 Public Comments Received from Scoping Notice .................................................... 98
Appendix 3 Traffic Analysis ......................................................................................................... 99
Appendix 4 EIS Comment Matrix .............................................................................................. 100
Appendix 5 Letters of Approval ................................................................................................. 101
Page 174 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
1
1 INTRODUCTION
On June 7, 2022, the City of Pasco issued a Determination of Significance and Scoping Notice
(See Appendix 1) that a Non-Project Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) is being required to
address potential impacts and mitigation measures related to an Amendment to Pasco's
Comprehensive Plan. The proposed amendment is to allow a change of the current Medium and
Light Industrial designations to Mixed Commercial-Residential. The following responds to
questions that have been raised concerning the SEPA process (WAC 197.11) and this approach.
1.1 What is the Non Project EIS?
A Non-Project EIS addresses issues at a program, plan or policy level, analyzing impacts in a city
or area wide context rather than the site-specific analysis provided in a project EIS. Therefore,
site-specific information is not normally discussed in the document. In some instances, more
specific quantifiable measurements of impacts are available and are included in the analysis. A
Non-Project EIS addresses the types of environmental impacts that can be expected under each of
the alternatives and recommends mitigation to either reduce environmental impacts or make the
alternatives more viable. Future environmental review and more detailed analysis is required only
where the level of information provided is insufficient or substantial changes have occurred that
have not been addressed.
1.2 What is the process?
First, the Responsible Official of the City determined that an Environmental Impact Statement
(EIS) was required. Once that occurred, the City issued a Scoping Notice to request public input
on the scope of the document, including issues to be addressed, alternatives to be evaluated and
the level of detail (See Appendix 1). Once a final scope of work had been determined based on
public comment , this document was prepared for public review. The public is now being
requested to comment on this document. A public hearing will also be held to solicit public input.
Once comments from the public have been received, a Final Environmental Impact Statement
(FEIS) will be prepared. This document will contain all of the corrections, responses and public
comments received. It will be this document that is used by the City Council to make their final
decision on the adoption of the New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan.
Page 175 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
2
1.3 How will future environmental reviews be handled?
If the Amendment is approved, any future development applications will be reviewed by the City
to determine if the proposal results in any significant changes that were not reviewed under this
SEPA process. If there are significant changes, then additional SEPA analysis may be required.
1.4 How does this amendment to the city’s comprehensive plan and the Pasco
comprehensive plan relate?
The City of Pasco' Comprehensive Plan was updated on June 7, 2021. It is intended that this
Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan would modify and be incorporated into the Pasco
Comprehensive Plan upon adoption by the City Council. Because of this, this FEIS clearly
identifies those goals contained in the current Pasco Comprehensive Plan which will be added to,
changed or modified.
As part of the June 7, 2021, update, the City prepared a Final EIS that identifies impacts and
mitigation measures related to the expansion of the Broadmoor Urban Growth Area. Because of
the relationship of this proposed amendment to the Pasco Comprehensive Plan, this FEIS will also
include many of the Broadmoor impact mitigation measures. Copies of both the June 7, 2021,
update and Comprehensive Plan Final EIS is available from the Pasco Planning Department.
1.5 What are Pasco’s requirements for an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan?
For the proposed amendment to be approved, the Pasco Planning Commission must make the
following specific findings to the Pasco Council (PMC 25.210.060):
1) After completion of an open record hearing on a petition for reclassification of property, the
Planning Commission shall make and enter findings from the records and conclusions there
of which support its recommendation and find whether:
a) The proposal is in accord with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan;
b) The effect of the proposal on the immediate vicinity will be materially detrimental;
c) There is merit and value in the proposal for the community as a whole;
d) Conditions should be imposed in order to mitigate any significant adverse impacts from
the proposal;
e) A Concomitant Agreement should be entered into between Pasco and the petitioner during
the rezone process, and if so, the terms and conditions of such an agreement.
Page 176 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
3
2) The Planning Commission shall render its recommendation to approve, approve with
modifications and/or conditions, or reject the petition based on its findings and conclusions.
The Commission's recommendation, to include its findings and conclusions, shall be forwarded
to the Pasco Council at a regular business meeting thereof. [Ord. 3354 § 2, 1999; Code 1970
§ 25.88.060.]
Additional approval requirement under Section 25.215.020 of the Pasco City Code, include:
The City may approve [the] Comprehensive Plan amendments if it finds that:
(8) (c) Approval Criteria. The City may approve Comprehensive Plan amendments
if it finds that:
(i) The proposed amendment bears a substantial relationship to the public
health, safety, welfare, and protection of the environment;
(ii) The proposed amendment is consistent with the requirements of Chapter
36.70A RCW and with the portion of the City’s adopted Comprehensive
Plan not affected by the amendment;
(iii)The proposed amendment corrects an obvious mapping error; or
(iv) The proposed amendment addresses an identified deficiency in the
Comprehensive Plan.
(9) Additional Factors. The City must also consider the following factors prior to
approving Comprehensive Plan amendments:
(a) The effect upon the physical environment;
(b) The effect on open space and natural features including, but not limited to,
topography, streams, rivers, and lakes;
(c) The compatibility with and impact on adjacent land uses and surrounding
neighborhoods;
(d) The adequacy of and impact on community facilities, including utilities,
roads, public transportation, parks, recreation, and schools;
(e) The quantity and location of land planned for the proposed land use type
and density and the demand for such land;
(f) The current and projected project density in the area; and
(g) The effect, if any, upon other aspects of the Comprehensive Plan
Page 177 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
4
2 LOCATION
The New Heritage sub-area contains approximately 196.31± acres and is bounded on the north by
East A Street, on the east by an existing warehouse development, on the west by vacant industrial
land (that has City of Pasco ownership and private ownership) and an undeveloped public right-
of-way, and on the south by a Burlington Northern Rail Road spur. (See Figure 1 and Figure 2).
Section 33, Township 9 North, Range 30 East.
Figure 1 – Site Location Map
Page 178 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
5
Figure 2 – Vicinity Map
Page 179 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
6
3 DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATIVES
3.1 Introduction
The City of Pasco issued the EIS scoping notice on June 7, 2022 to agencies having jurisdiction,
tribes and the general public. Based on the responses to the Scoping Notice, this FEIS presents
three alternatives for future growth in the sub-area under the Mixed Commercial/Residential
Proposed Action. The three alternatives are used in this FEIS as a way of comparing potential
impacts under different land use scenarios and showing the similarities and differences of those
impacts. Therefore, the EIS alternatives provide framework for analyzing impacts and making
comparisons among the alternatives.
3.2 How the alternatives were developed
Broetje Orchards LLC, principal owner of the New Heritage Amendment area, submitted a vision
report and analysis for the 196.31 ± acres which describes intended uses if the proposed
amendment is approved. It is this original vision that is being used by the proponent as the
Preferred Alternative. A second alternative assumes that the property would be developed at a
lower, medium density, but also under the Medium Density Residential Classification. The No-
Action Alternative is required under SEPA, primarily as a base point for comparison, assumes that
no approvals or changes are made, and that the property remains as a mix of Light and Medium
Industrial. It was determined that within this range of options there was adequate latitude to
address a sufficiently wide range of impacts.
3.3 The Alternatives
The following generally describes the three alternatives, including the No Action Alternative as a
comparative base.
3.3.1 Alternative 1: Preferred Alternative - Mixed Commercial-Residential
The Preferred Alternative has an average density of approximately 8.7 housing units per acre, 5
acres of community business and a site for a 15-acre elementary school.
Page 180 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
7
The following New Heritage "Vision" describes the basic approach used in developing the
Preferred Alternative. Detailed designs, in conformance with this vision, would be developed as
part of the City's future permitting process.
The site is being proposed as a mixed residential
and commercial area that would be developed
using the “New Urbanism” concept. This
concept moves away from traditional, single-use
development to a community oriented new-
urbanism design with an emphasis on walkable
blocks and streets, housing, shopping and
employment opportunities in proximity,
accessible public spaces, and school facilities near those being served.
New Heritage envisions a mixed-use development
accentuating a neighborhood that is compact,
pedestrian-friendly and where many of the activities of
daily living (shopping, access to green-space, work,
schools, etc.) are within walking or biking distance.
New Heritage indicates that the project will seek to
borrow from successful developments that have
incorporated the use of retail and office spaces on
lower floors with residential above, and will serve
nearby employment centers that will provide job
opportunities to the families living here beyond service and retail.
New Heritage states that diversity is crucial to its vision as a hallmark of a healthy community. It
indicates that the development will pay tribute to the variety of cultures found in our community
in its architecture and landscape. Further, they indicate that they will encourage housing and
services that welcome all, creating a diverse community.
Source: Skibba Illustration
Page 181 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
8
New Heritage has proposed that this area will be a place that transcends buildings in order to
facilitate connections between the residents who live and work there. It states that communities
need gathering places that are neither work nor home, where individuals can feel a sense of safety
and belonging and, which provides the opportunity for relationships between individuals to form.
New Heritage indicates that the site will offer community centers and the like to help facilitate this
sense of ‘being’ and connection. They indicate that promoting civic engagement and advancing
the well-being of those who are there is a significant goal.
Table 1 below summarizes the size and percentage of area for each of these land uses.
Table 1 - Summary of Proposed Land Uses Proposed Action Medium Density Alternative
Acreage by Land Use Acres Percentage
Residential 176.31 90%
Community Business ±5 3%
Elementary School ±15 7%
Total Acreage ±196.31 100%
Maximum Average Residential Density per Gross Acre ±8.7
Source: Land Strategies/JUB
The following outlines each of the major land use elements that would be included in the New
Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan under the Mixed-Use Alternative:
Residential
Overall gross density would average about 8.7± units per
acre, including the open space, roadways and utilities. Based
on this, there will be up to 1,354 units within the sub-area.
Within the approximately 8.7± units per acre, specific
densities will vary widely. The Amendment to the City’s
Comprehensive Plan would allow densities of up to 18± units
per gross acre adjacent to business and high amenity areas,
with adequate public services, to a low of 4± units per gross
acre for single-family detached residences.
Source: Moule & Polyzoides
Architects and Urbanists
Page 182 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
9
Community Business
This alternative would allow a 5± acre community business area containing up to 76,000± square
feet depending on the specific retail and office uses that occupy the site. The Community Business
will consist of a central community gathering space as well as retail and office uses to serve the
local east Paso community. Retail uses would be limited to such uses as: grocery store, beauty
shop, barber shop, drugstore, cafe, and similar stores. Office and public service uses would be
limited to legal offices, accounting, real estate, medical offices and other professional services.
Parks and Open Space
The park and open space system will be
distributed throughout the development and will
meet City of Pasco park requirements. This
alternative envisions one primary park site
together with an open space network
interconnecting each neighborhood, school and
businesses. Approximately 20 acres of City
owned property is adjacent to the proposed New
Heritage development. If access is available, the
proposed parks and open space could be
connected to the adjacent City Sports Complex. In addition, entryways, storm water facilities,
easements and school park facilities would also be used as open space.
Easements/Circulation/Roadways
Easements will be required for utilities and roadways. These could be used as both open space and
for circulation, including bikeways and trails. Other easements would be required for storm water
detention.
Vehicle access to the property is currently via East A Street on the north. This alternative would
provide two primary access points on East A Street (See Figure 1) to serve the future development
on the site and anticipates that future development of any collector roadways and residential access
streets would meet current City of Pasco Standard Specifications (See Section 6.9). Bicycle and
pedestrian circulation would be along, or adjacent to, proposed roadways and, where applicable,
Source: SVPVPA
Page 183 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
10
in designated open space corridors. Public transportation would serve the area at designated
intersections and bus stops.
Utilities
Utilities such as sewer, water, power and telephone would be provided in conformance with City
of Pasco requirements and the standards of the specific utility companies.
Schools
The Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan would provide space for one elementary
school. The elementary school site would contain up to 15± acres, including nearby park space.
In the event the Pasco School District elects not to construct a school on the site, this land use
would revert to residential under the same standards and requirements as the other residentially
designated land use areas, but the total number of units would not increase.
3.3.2 Alternative 2: Medium Density Alternative - Mixed Commercial/Residential
The Medium Density Alternative proposes and average density of approximately 5.8 housing units
per acre, 4 acres of community business, and a 10 acre elementary school site with a 5 acre park
nearby.
This alternative would also allow a mix of commercial and residential land uses but at a lower
density than the Preferred Alternative would allow. It would not follow all of the "Vision”
definitions outlined above, but would meet all of Subdivision Requirements of the Pasco Zoning
Code.
Table 2 below summarizes the size and percentages for each of the major land use under this
alternative.
Table 2 - Summary of Proposed Land Uses Medium Density Plan Alternative
Acreage by Land Use Acres Percentage
Residential 177.31 91%
Community Business 4 2%
Elementary School 15 7%
Total Acreage ±196.31 100%
Maximum Average Residential Density per Gross Acre ±5.8
Source: Land Strategies/JUB
Page 184 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
11
The following outlines each of the major land use elements that would be included under this
alternative:
Residential
Based on this, there will be approximately 1,028 housing units with and average density of 5.8
units per acre; although specific densities will vary widely. This alternative would allow densities
of up to 18± units per gross acre adjacent to high amenity and business areas, with adequate public
services, to a low of 4± units per gross acre for single-family detached residences.
Business Park
This alternative would allow a 4± acre community business area containing up to 65,340± square
feet depending on the specific retail and office uses that occupy the site. The Community Business
will also consist of a central community gathering space as well as retail and office uses to serve
the local east Pasco community. Retail uses would be limited to such uses as: grocery store,
beauty shop, barber shop, drugstore, cafe, and similar stores. Office and public service uses would
be limited to legal offices, accounting, real estate, medical offices and other professional services.
Parks and Open Space
The park and open space system would be based on the Pasco Subdivision Code and other Pasco
requirements for approval. Parks and open space will be distributed throughout the development
and will meet City of Pasco park requirements. This alternative envisions one primary park site
together with an open space network interconnecting neighborhoods, school and businesses.
Approximately 20 acres of City owner property is adjacent to the proposed New Heritage
development. If access is available, the proposed parks and open space could be connected to the
adjacent City Sports Complex. In addition, entryways, storm water facilities, easements and school
park facilities could be included in open space.
Easements/Circulation/Roadways
Easements will be required for utilities and roadways. These could be used as both open space and
for circulation, including bikeways and trails. Other easements for storm water detention will be
put in place, as needed.
Vehicle access to the property is currently via East A Street on the north. This alternative would
also provide two primary access points on East A Street to serve the future development on the
Page 185 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
12
site and anticipates that future development of any collector roadways and residential access streets
would meet current City of Pasco Standard Specifications.
Bicycle and pedestrian circulation would be along, or adjacent to, proposed roadways and, where
applicable, in designated open space corridors. Public transportation would serve the area at
designated intersections and bus stops.
Utilities
Utilities such as sewer, water, power and telephone would be provided in conformance with City
of Pasco and the standards of the utility companies.
3.3.3 Alternative 3: No Action Alternative
The No Action Alternative is intended to act as a benchmark for evaluating the impacts of
Alternative 1 (Preferred Alternative) and Alternative 2 (Medium Density). This alternative
assumes industrial development will occur and, although the Pasco Zoning Code allows nearly
any non-residential use in the Medium and Light Industrial Zone, it is reasonable to assume that
the most likely uses that would choose to locate here are warehousing and light manufacturing. It
is assumed that any industrial development would meet Pasco’s Zoning Code requirements and
the City’s Goals and Policies.
3.4 Comparison of Alternatives
Table 3, below compares the basic elements of the three alternatives in relation to acreage, number
of units, population and square footages.
Table 3 - Comparison of Alternatives Land Use Acreage
Acreage by
Land Use
Alt. 1 - Preferred
Alternative
Alt. 2 - Medium
Density Alternative
Alt. 3 - No-Action
Alternative
Acres Percentage Acres Percentage Acres Percentage
Industrial 0 0% 0 0% 196.31 100%
Residential 176.31 90% 177.31 90% 0 0%
Business/Service 5 3% 4 2% 0 0%
School 15 8% 15 8% 0 0%
Totals 196.31 100% 196.31 100% 196.31 100%
Source: Land Strategies/JUB
Page 186 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
13
If Alternative 1: Preferred Alternative is approved, all existing code requirements would have to
be met and any approved mitigation measures identified under this EIS would have to be
implemented. Additionally, City Council has the authority to specify additional mitigation
measures during the rezoning process. This can include the requirement for a Concomitant
Agreement to assure future compliance. Alternative 2: Medium Density Alternative and
Alternative 3: No-Action Alternative would also have to meet Pasco's code requirements and any
requirement identified under SEPA. This report is for a non-project EIS and development
standards have not been identified at this time. At the time of development, it is anticipated that a
Concomitant Agreement will be created to identify specific project elements identified in Section
21.60.010 of the Pasco Municipal Code. Additional SEPA review will be required at the time of
development, as well. If the City and the proponent do not agree on the terms to be included in the
Concomitant Agreement the City can deny rezone approval and/or the approval of any future
project proposals.
Page 187 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
14
4 MAJOR ISSUES AND AREAS OF CONTROVERSY
The following paragraphs discuss major issues and potential areas of controversy identified during
the preparation of this Final EIS. Possible measures to mitigate the impacts related to these issues
and controversy are proposed under Section 6.
4.1 Land Use
The proposed amendment would change the land uses on the proponent’s site from industrial to
mixed housing and business/office uses. As a mitigation, the proponent has proposed a "Vision"
on the site provides increased amenities. Currently, the City of Pasco does not have the codes and
policies in place to assure the implementation of this approach. The mitigation measures identified
under this FEIS and the approval of the Concomitant Agreement is intended to address this issue.
Concern has also been expressed that the proposed amendment, if approved, could lead to other
industrially zoned properties requesting changes to residential uses. Whether future industrial
properties make this request will depend on the market for industrial uses as compared to the
market for residential uses. Some of this potential will be reduced through the implementation of
the mitigation measures identified under this FEIS, which would generally include buffers,
landscaping, project design and layout and sound barriers. If this project is approved and goes
forwards there would be very little ground remaining to be developed as industrial.
4.2 Traffic
The proposed amendment would increase traffic from residences and business/office uses.
Mitigation measures identified under the Traffic Section of this FEIS are intended to provide
mitigation. In addition, if approved, once specific permits are applied for then additional traffic
studies and mitigation will more than likely be required.
4.3 Loss of Employment
Concern has been expressed that the proposed amendment, if approved, could result in a reduction
of future employment. Actual employment loss would depend on the specific future industry
located on the site. This could range from warehousing (low employment) to manufacturing (high
employment). Historically, this area has been vacant with little to no development. There has been
recent develop within the last 2-years that has included distribution industries, a greenhouse
growing facility and a City sports park.
Page 188 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
15
4.4 Lead Agency Concern
The City of Pasco, Lead Agency has raised concerns about the loss of industrial lands, the
conversion of industrial lands, the impacts to current industrial users and the incompatibility and
potential consequences of the location of residents near and immediately within the proximity of
the industrial development. Cumulative impacts are anticipated by the proposed land use change
and are described in Section 6 of this FEIS. Each of the 3 alternatives will have an impact to
existing industrial and residential uses. Identified mitigation measures will help offset impacts to
ensure viability of ongoing and future industrial developments.
Page 189 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
16
5 COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVES
5.1 Comparison to Pasco Comprehensive Plan Goals and Policies
The Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA) requires Cities and Counties to develop
general goals and policies in their Comprehensive Plans consistent with GMA goals (RCW
34.70A.020). Because this Amendment must also be in conformance with these general GMA
goals, Table 4 compares the GMA goals to the three alternatives.
Table 4 - Comparison of Alternatives to GMA Goals
GMA Goals
(RCW 36.70A.020)
Alternative 1:
Preferred
Alternative
Alternative 2:
Medium
Density
Alternative
Alternative 3:
No-Action
Alternative
1. Urban Growth:
Encourage development
in urban areas where
adequate public facilities
and services exist or can
be provided in an efficient
manner.
Adequate public facilities
currently exist with
mitigation
Adequate public
facilities
currently exist
with mitigation
Adequate public
facilities
currently exist
with mitigation
2. Reduce Sprawl:
Reduce inappropriate
conversion of
undeveloped land into
sprawling, low-density
development.
The Amendment area is
undeveloped. An 8.7 UPA
Density is proposed that
exceeds City averages.
The Amendment
area is
undeveloped. A
5.8 UPA Density
is proposed that
exceeds City
averages.
The site would
be developed in
industrial uses.
3. Transportation:
Encourage efficient multi-
modal transportation
systems that are based on
regional priorities and
coordinated with county
and city comprehensive
plans.
A multi-modal
transportation center is
proposed, and bike and
pedestrian access is
enhanced.
Bus stops would
be along public
streets.
Pedestrian and
bike access
would be public
sidewalks and
streets as
required.
Depending on
the industry, bus
stops could be
required. Bike
and pedestrian
access would be
per Pasco code.
Page 190 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
17
4. Housing: Plan for and
accommodate housing
affordable to all economic
segments of the
population of this state,
promote a variety of
residential densities and
housing types, and
encourage preservation of
existing housing stock.
Provides a variety of
residential densities close
to employment centers.
Provides some
mixture of
residential
densities near
employment
centers under the
Medium Density
Zoning
classification.
Does not
provide
residential land
uses.
5. Economic
Development: Encourage
economic development
throughout the state that
is consistent with adopted
comprehensive plan,
promote economic
opportunity for all
citizens of this state,
especially for the
unemployed and for
disadvantaged persons,
promote the retention and
expansion of existing
businesses and
recruitment of new
businesses, recognize
regional differences
impacting economic
development
opportunities, and
encourage growth in areas
experiencing insufficient
economic growth, all
within the capacities of
the state’s natural
resources, public services
and public facilities.
Provides for 5 acres of
retail and office
employment and supports
nearby industry’s need for
employee housing.
Provides for 4
acres of retail
and office
employment and
supports nearby
industry’s need
for employee
housing.
Provides 196.31
acres of
industrial space.
Page 191 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
18
6. Property Rights:
Private property shall not
be taken for public use
without just compensation
having been made. The
property rights of
landowners shall be
protected from arbitrary
and discriminatory
actions.
No impact to property
rights
No impact to
property rights
No impact to
property rights
7. Permits: Applications
for both state and local
government permits
should be processed in a
timely and fair manner to
ensure predictability.
Concomitant Agreement
and Pasco Codes and
Policies would provide
permit predictability
Pasco
Subdivision and
Zoning Codes
would provide
permit
predictability
Pasco Zoning
Codes would
provide permit
predictability
8. Natural Resource
Industries: Maintain and
enhance natural resource-
based industries,
including productive
timber, agricultural, and
fisheries industries.
Encourage the
conservation of
productive forestlands
and productive
agricultural lands and
discourage incompatible
uses.
Existing undeveloped land
would be converted to
residential and
commercial.
Existing
undeveloped
land would be
converted to
residential and
commercial.
No impact to
natural
resources.
9. Open Space and
Recreation: Retain open
space, enhance
recreational opportunities,
conserve fish and wildlife
habitat, increase access to
natural resource lands and
water, and develop parks
and recreation facilities.
Provides 8% to 10% of site
as open space. Includes
bike and pedestrian trail
system.
Provides open
space as required
by Pasco’s codes
and requirements
under SEPA.
Would not
provide open
space and
recreation
beyond SEPA
and code
requirements.
Page 192 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
19
10. Environment: Protect
the environment and
enhance the state’s high
quality of life, including
air and water quality, and
the availability of water.
The "vision" proposed
would enhance resident’s
quality of life through
parks, bike and pedestrian
trails and nearby
employment access.
Would be
consistent with
existing Pasco
policies and code
requirements.
Would be
consistent with
existing Pasco
policies and
code
requirements.
11. Citizen Participation
and Coordination:
Encourage the
involvement of citizens in
the planning process and
ensure coordination
between communities and
jurisdictions to reconcile
conflicts.
Citizens involved thru
SEPA and the Amendment
process
Citizens involved
thru SEPA and
the Amendment
process
Citizens
involved thru
SEPA
12. Public Facilities and
Service: Ensure that those
public facilities and
services necessary to
support development shall
be adequate to serve the
development at the time
the development is
available for occupancy
and use without
decreasing current service
levels below locally
established minimum
standards.
There are adequate public
facilities to serve the
development with
mitigation.
There are
adequate public
facilities to serve
the development
with mitigation.
There are
adequate public
facilities to serve
the development
with mitigation.
13. Historic Preservation:
Identify and encourage
the preservation of lands,
sites and structures that
have historical or
archaeological
significance.
Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable
Page 193 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
20
6 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT, ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND
MITIGATION MEASURES
This section identifies the affected environment, analyzes the environmental impacts and, where
applicable, recommends mitigation measures to reduce or eliminate the identified impacts. This
section also identifies any unavoidable adverse impacts which cannot be mitigated.
In determining what elements of the environment were to be reviewed, comments to the
Determination of Significance and Scoping Notice were used as well as the existing location and
site characteristics. Because of the relationship between this FEIS and the City’s Comprehensive
Plan EIS, Table 5 below, compares the City’s Comprehensive Plan EIS to this FEIS.
Table 5 – SEPA Elements of the Environment
Comprehensive Plan EIS Proposed Amendment EIS
Element Section Element Section
Earth 4.1 Earth 6.1
Surface Water 4.2 Utilities 6.3
Plants and Animals 4.3 Not Reviewed
Land Use 4.4 Land Use 6.4
Environmental Health 4.5 Environmental Health 6.8
Shoreline Use 4.6 Not Reviewed
Population, Housing and
Employment 4.7 Population, Housing and
Employment 6.5
Parks and Recreation 4.8 Parks and Recreation 6.7
Transportation 4.9 Transportation 6.9
Public Service and Utilities 4.10 Public Services 6.6
Heritage Conservation 4.11 Not Reviewed
Not Reviewed Air Quality 6.2
Page 194 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
21
6.1 Earth
This section describes existing conditions relative to soils and erosion, topography and geologic
hazards.
6.1.1 Affected Earth
The proposed amendment area is a mostly level, vacant field without significant ground cover. It
is currently bordered on the west by industrially zoned vacant land and a proposed 10-field City
Sports Complex; on the east by a recently approved distribution center; on the south by an unused
railroad spur and undeveloped industrial land; and, to the north by East A Street and developed
residential land. This site will be developed in a collaborative nature and cohesive with adjacent
developments. (See Figure 1, Existing Site)
Site Looking South from East A Street
The proposed amendment area is undeveloped and generally level. Vegetation is primarily
volunteer grasses and irrigated agricultural crop circles. Soils primarily consist of 89-Quincy
Loamy Fine Sands. There is also an area of 90-Quincy Loamy Fine Sands and Urban Land,
Torrisamments Complex. All of the soils are well drained, and the Quincy series consist of 50%
or more of fine sand or, less than 25% very coarse, coarse, and medium sand, plus less than 50%
very fine sand. Slopes range from 0% to 15%. Figure 3 illustrates the existing soils within the
proposed amendment area.
Page 195 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
22
Figure 3 – Soils
The topography of the New Heritage amendment area is generally flat with slopes ranging from
0% to 15%, with no existing areas over 15% slope. The proposed amendment area does not contain
critical areas or resource lands. Figure 3illustrates the existing critical areas, including steep slopes.
6.1.2 Potential Impacts
The soils are well drained and pose no significant impact if developed in either residential or
industrial uses with proper mitigation related to storm water runoff. Undeveloped, there is some
potential for storm water impact during heavy rainfall periods. Unprotected soils, either prior to
or during construction have the potential for wind-blown erosion.
Alternative 1
This alternative would change the use from industrial to a mixed used commercial/residential.
Earth moving operations to develop infrastructure, public roadways, residential and commercial
structure would take place. Residential development would include front/rear landscaped yards
along with open spaces areas for parks. Maximum average residential density would be
approximately 8.7 units per acre.
Page 196 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
23
Figure 4 – Critical Areas and Resource Lands
Alternative 2
This alternative would change the use from industrial to a mixed used commercial/residential.
Earth moving operations to develop infrastructure, public roadways, residential and commercial
structure would take place. Residential development would include front/rear landscaped yards
along with open spaces areas for parks. Maximum average residential density would be
approximately 5.8 units per acre.
Alternative 3
This alternative would result in continued use of the land under the existing land use designation
as Industrial. Earth moving operations to develop infrastructure and buildings would take place.
Generally, industrial sites contain large buildings with gravel and paved impervious surfaces to
accommodate trucks, passenger vehicles and laydown/storage yards. Minimal landscaped areas
are included in industrial developments.
Page 197 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
24
6.1.3 Mitigation Measures
Alternatives 1, 2 and 3
Maintain compliance with local air-quality agency requirements by watering exposed
areas during construction.
Avoid disturbing the steep slope area.
Compact soils at densities appropriate for planned land uses.
Provide vegetative cover or soil cement on exposed surfaces.
Maintain Open Space land use and environment designations.
Construction should be staged so that the maximum amount of existing vegetation is left
in place.
Catch basins should be installed near storm drains
6.2 Air Quality
This section describes existing conditions as it relates to air quality for the amendment area.
6.2.1 Affected Environment
Two agencies have air quality jurisdiction in the sub-area: the United States Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA); the Eastern Regional Office of the Washington Department of Ecology
(WDOE). Although their standards are similar, each agency has established its own criteria,
particularly in relation to dust. The WDOE has the lead role in setting air quality standards for
Franklin County. According to the WDOE, fugitive dust is the primary air quality concern for this
region. Additionally, WDOE has developed a Health Disparities Map showing different regions
across Washington State and their associated environmental health status. This map shows
pollution levels for diesel emissions and ozone. The Health Disparities Map indicates that the
eastern portion of Pasco has an environmental exposure rating of 9. For comparison purposes a
large portion of western Pasco has an environmental exposure rating of 8. Similarly, the map also
notes that the eastern and western portions of Pasco have a PM2.5 emission rating of 6 and
concentration of 9. The ozone concentration for the entire City of Pasco is 10. Therefore, the
environmental exposure is more of a regional issue rather than a site specific issue. There are no
mitigation measures for any of the alternatives that would potentially improve environmental
exposure, PM2.5 and ozone issues since this is a regional issue. However, there are mitigation
measures that the alternatives could implement to help reduce or minimize project impacts.
Page 198 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
25
Existing uses adjacent to the site include residential to the north, Amazon distribution center to the
east, trucking company to the northeast and greenhouse facility (Local Bounti) to the west. A rail
spur is located south; however, the spur line has never been used and existing and future land uses
will more than likely not utilize this spur line. The review of the SEPA documents for Amazon
and Local Bounti had noted no air quality or emissions issues from their projects.
The City of Pasco is currently constructing a 28-acre soccer park located at the northwest corner
of the project site. The review of the SEPA document as prepared by the City of Pasco did not note
or identify any air quality or emission issues that would affect the park or it’s users from existing
or future industrial uses.
The City of Pasco has issued residential permits for new housing directly north of the industrial
area. There are no known air quality issues or concerns that have been identified or raised by the
City or the residents.
6.2.2 Potential Impacts
Alternatives 1 and 2
These alternatives would add residential housing units adjacent to existing industrial users. There
would be an increase in population and vehicular trips in the area but reduce overall truck trips as
compared to Alternative 3. This would reduce the amount of diesel emissions that are typically
associated with freight traffic. With housing units close to employment centers there would be a
decrease in regional traffic emission as there would be less trips coming outside of the
amendment area. These alternatives would also eliminate emissions that are typically associated
with industrial development.
The review of the existing Amazon distribution center, greenhouse facility and City 28-acre
soccer complex SEPA documents noted no known emission issues other than vehicular
emissions that would affect these alternatives.
If this proposed amendment is approved, there would very little future industrial development
that could occur adjacent to the site; thus, future industrial development is very limited and
generally would not be significantly impacted by this alternative. Amazon distribution center is
and aware of this proposed amendment and would support this amendment. Amazon has
installed at 15-ft tall concrete masonry wall for visual and sound screening in anticipation for this
Page 199 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
26
proposed amendment. Refer to Figure 5 showing amendment area and adjacent land uses.
Properties located to the south of the amendment area are owned by the proponent (Broetje
Orchards, LLC). Snake Rivers Agriculture LLC parcels located to the west have provided a letter
in support for the project which is attached in Appendix 5.
Alternative 3
This alternative would result in the increase of industrial development. Industrial development
will increase the amount of truck/freight trips in the area. It will also increase the chances for the
emissions of other pollutants that are generally associated with industrial activities. Additionally,
industrial development will impact regional traffic as there will be increased vehicular trips
across the region due to added employment. The location of this project is directly south of
existing residential developments which is only separated by East A Street. Prevailing winds
would generally direct emissions from the industrial area onto the existing residential area. The
development of this alternative may have an adverse impact on the existing residential area
which would be dependent upon the type of industrial development. Additionally, this alternative
may have a negative impact on the new City sports park that is currently being developed
adjacent to the amendment area.
6.2.3 Mitigation Measures
Alternatives 1, 2 and 3
WDOE has a Fugitive Dust Policy which outlines specific steps in reducing fugitive dust
during construction. These policies include watering requirements during grading. In
addition, the WDOE has the authority to issue fines when fugitive dust suppression
requirements are not met. The City of Pasco also requires a dust control plan prior to
construction.
Mitigation measures identified under Section 6.1.3.
For a regional basis, ensure compliance with the most current EPA vehicle and fuel
regulatory requirements to continually help reduce vehicular emissions.
Ensure that existing and future industrial emissions don’t exceed local, state or federal
limits.
Page 200 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
27
Alternatives 1 and 2
Provide vegetated buffers directly adjacent to existing industrial uses in accordance with
the City of Pasco Municipal Code 25.180.040.
Promote transit and other types of transportation that do not contribute to additional air
emissions and reduce vehicle traffic.
Minimize residential backyards directly adjacent to industrial zoned properties.
Try to develop linear parks/open space directly adjacent to industrial zoned properties.
Figure 5 – Land Use/Vicinity Map
Page 201 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
28
6.3 Utilities
6.3.1 Affected Environment
6.3.1.1 Sewer Systems
The project area is currently serviced by the City of Pasco and is accounted for in the 2014
Comprehensive Sewer Plan (CSP) and the 2021 CSP Addendum. The project area is located in the
Southeast Pasco Trunk sewage basin as noted in the 2014 CSP. The Southeast Pasco Trunk utilizes
an existing 30-inch trunk main and provides service to approximately 771 acres of industrial land.
The sewage basin is also included in the 2021 CSP addendum; however, it is grouped with a larger
sewage basin that is specific to the total area that the Maitland lift station services. Therefore, the
2021 CSP addendum does not specifically breakdown sewage flows from the 771 acres of the
industrial area that is noted in the 2014 CSP. The 2014 CSP has estimated that the buildout of the
771 acres could have future flow of around 1 MGD. The 2021 CSP assumes some development to
occur; however, it does not provide estimated flows that would contribute to the 30-inch trunk
main. The 1 MGD assumes an industrial flow of 1,500 GPD/Acre with a 10% reduction of land
use. Flows for this area are conveyed to the 30-inch trunk sewer main. The 30-inch trunk main
directs flows to the Maitland Lift Station and then to the wastewater treatment plant.
The Maitland lift station has a firm capacity of 4,100 gpm as noted in the 2021 CSP addendum.
The lift station currently has an average daily flow of 850 gpm with a peak hour flow of 1,777
gpm based upon the 2021 CSP addendum.
The existing 30-inch trunk main is currently flowing less than 50% of capacity as noted in the
2021 CSP addendum.
6.3.1.2 Water Systems
The proposed amendment area is served by the City of Pasco and was evaluated in the 2019
Comprehensive Water System Plan (CWSP) and according to CWSP, the City of Pasco has a total
available water right of 13,645.50 acre-feet per year and 20,149 GPM for instantaneous flow. This
water right converts to a Maximum Day Demand (MDD) of 29 MGD. The CWSP also indicates
that the City of Pasco’s potable water source includes the Butterfield Water Treatment Plant
(BWTP) with a capacity of 26.8 MGD a day and the West Pasco Treatment Plant (WPTP) with a
capacity of 6 MGD.
Page 202 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
29
The proposed New Heritage Site is in Pressure Zone 2 which is serviced by the BWTP.
Additionally, there is the Eastside Booster Pump that also supplies pressurized water to Zone 2.
Zone 2 is a closed system and has no current storage capacity but is tied into Zone 3 through a
pressure reducing valve. Zone 3 does provide storage capacity. There is an existing 16-inch water
main that runs through the site that services the project area. The CWSP shows a current Zone 2
storage deficiency of 3.73 million gallons (MG).
The 2019 CWSP indicates that the City has an existing and future deficiency in storage for Zone
2. The City has identified the storage need in their 2019 CWSP plan. The planned timeframe for
this storage Capital Improvement Project (CIP) is to be completed sometime between 2020-2023.
This CIP will provide a 5.75 MG reservoir to improve reliability, fire flows and level of service
for all of Zone 2 and the project area.
The City is currently developing additional storage capacity for Zone 3. This storage improvement
is noted in the City’s CIP. As previously noted, Zone 2 is tied to Zone 3 through a pressure reducing
valve. The Zone 3 improvement will help improve Zone 2 water storage needs.
6.3.1.3 Other Utilities
The responsibility for planning for private utilities rests with the utility providers. Unlike City
utilities that are provided mainly to City residents, non-City operated utilities are not limited to
city limit lines for service areas. Consequently, service boundaries for each utility provider will
vary in size (City of Pasco Comprehensive Plan, Volume II).
Non-City-owned utilities include those utilities, whether owned privately or publicly, that provide
services. Non-City owned utilities serving Pasco are as follows:
Franklin County PUD
Big Bend Electrical Cooperative
Cascade Natural Gas
Charter
CenturyLink
Various wireless telephone providers
Basin Disposal Incorporated (BDI)
Franklin County Irrigation District No. 1
South Columbia Basin Irrigation District
City of Pasco Comprehensive Plan – Volume ii
Page 203 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
30
6.3.1.4 Stormwater
According to the City of Pasco Comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan, Pasco has an
average annual rainfall of 6.5 inches and an average snow fall of 2.5 inches. Due to the City’s low
annual rainfall, warm climate, flat topography, and fast-draining soils, most of the stormwater
generated in the city infiltrates the ground either through natural processes or manmade structures,
such as dry wells and infiltration trenches.
6.3.2 Potential Impacts
Sewer and Water System
Estimated demand volumes for sewer and water, for both Alternative 1 and 2, are summarized in
Tables 6 through 9, below.
Table 6 – Alternative 1: Preferred Alternative Projected Sewerage Volumes
Land Use Acre
(AC) Units GPDA Estimated
Population GPDA Total
GPDA
Open
Space/Roadways 58 - - - - -
Retail 3 - 2,500 - - 2,500
Service/Office 2 - 2,500 - - 2,500
School 15 - - 550 *20 11,000
SF Homes 69 414 - 1,387 **80 110,960
Duplex/Tri-Plex 17 204 - 684 **80 54,720
Apartment 32 736 - 2,466 **80 197,280
Total 196 - - - - 378,960
*20 GPD/Student
**80 GPCD per 2019 CWSP
Table 7 – Alternative 1: Preferred Alternative Proposed Water Demand with Irrigation
SF Homes,
Duplex and
Apartment
ERU (GPC) Residence (GPD)
(# of Units x ERU)
Retail, Office,
School (GPD)
Proposed Land
Use Volumes
(MGD)
1,354 *424 574,096 16,000 0.59
*424 ERU per 2019 CWSP GPC = Gallons per Connection
Page 204 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
31
Table 8 – Alternative 2: Medium Density Alternative Projected Sewage Volumes
Land Use Acre
(AC) Units GPDA Estimated
Population GPDA Total
GPDA
Open
Space/Roadways 58 - - - - -
Retail 2 - 2,000 - - 2,000
Service/Office 2 - 2,000 - - 2,000
School 15 - - 550 *20 11,000
SF Homes 85 468 - 1,568 **80 125,440
Duplex/Tri-Plex 10 80 - 268 **80 21,440
Apartment 24 480 - 1,608 **80 128,640
Total 196 - - - - 290,520
*20 GPD/Student
**80 GPCD per 2019 CWSP
Table 9 – Alternative 2: Medium Density Alternative Proposed Water Demand with
Irrigation
SF Homes,
Duplex and
Apartment
ERU (GPC) Residence (GPD)
(# of Units x ERU)
Retail, Office,
School (GPD)
Proposed Land
Use Volumes
(MGD)
1,028 *424 435,872 15,000 0.45
*424 ERU per 2019 CWSP GPC = Gallons per Connection
Estimated sewer demand for the Alternative 1 is approximately 0.38 MGD and Alternative 2 is
0.29 MGD. The project area contains 197 of the 771 acres in the Southeast Pasco Trunk that is
defined in the 2014 CSP. Using the land area ratio of the overall sewage basin, the project area is
approximately 26% of the overall sewage basin. Alternative 3 would generate approximately 0.26
MGD assuming an estimated demand of 1 MGD for the overall sewage basin. Both proposed land
use alternatives are well below the estimated future 1 MGD; however, they both are slightly over
Alternative 3. As noted in the 2014 CSP and the 2021 CSP Addendum, the City of Pasco noted
that there is a lack of data to accurately determine projected industrial wastewater flows so it should
be noted that industrial wastewater flows can vary greatly depending upon the type of industrial
use. Therefore, the estimated 0.26 MGD under Alternative 3 could be significantly higher if a
higher industrial wastewater user is constructed.
The Maitland lift station has a firm capacity of 4,100 gpm. The current flows to the Maitland lift
station are around 850 gpm with a peak hour flow of 1,777 gpm. The Preferred Alternative would
generate an average daily flow of approximately 263 gpm with a peak hour flow of 580 gpm.
Page 205 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
32
Alternative 3 could produce an average daily flow of around 180 gpm with a peak of 403 gpm.
The net difference between Residential (Preferred Alternative) and Industrial (No-Action
Alternative) land use is approximately 83 gpm for average daily flows and 177 gpm peak hour
flows. This net difference is approximately 2%, average daily flow, and 4%, peak hour flows,
versus the total firm capacity of 4,100 gpm. These percentages are relatively small and are not
anticipated to be a significant impact to the Maitland lift station function and operation. As
previously noted, there is a there is a lack of data to accurately determine projected industrial
wastewater flows so it should be noted that industrial wastewater flows could have a greater impact
than residential flow depending upon the type of industrial use.
The 2021 CSP addendum notes that the existing pipe capacity of the 30-inch trunk main is
currently less than 50%. The 10-year projected sewage flows are also estimated to be less than
50% of the pipe capacity. The 20-year projected sewage flows indicates that the pipe capacity may
be greater than 100%; however, that assumes a future Tank Farm Lift Station near the Snake River
that is not yet defined. The difference of peak hour flow for Alternative 1 versus Alternative 3 is
approximately an additional 177 gpm which is about a 4% increase of peak hour flows as compared
to the overall capacity. The additional 177 gpm peak hour flow is not a significant impact to the
overall capacity of the 30-inch trunk main. As previously noted, there is a there is a lack of data to
accurately determine projected industrial wastewater flows so it should be noted that industrial
wastewater flows could have a greater impact than residential flow depending upon the type of
industrial use.
Under both the 2014 and 2021 CSP’s there are no significant deficiencies that affect this sewage
basin. The only potential deficiency noted in the 2021 CSP addendum is the 20-year projected
sewer flow which may or may not put the 30-inch trunk main over capacity. There are no current
defined CIP’s for this sewage basin. The comparison between Alternative 1 and 2 versus
Alternative 3 is insignificant and that future development, regardless of being industrial or
residential land use could have similar impacts to the existing sanitary sewer systems. There is
potential for a greater impact to the City’s sanitary sewer with Alternative 3 No-Action Alternative
if the industrial user is heavy water user. Large wastewater producers are generally related to
agricultural processing which is an allowed use under the current zoning.
Page 206 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
33
As noted in Table 7 and 9 the estimated demands for water for the project area are 0.59 MGD
(Preferred Alternative) and 0.45 MGD (Medium Density). Depending upon a specific user,
industrial developments under the No-Action Alternative could easily require more potable water
due to processing requirements, higher fire flows requirements due to larger building structures
and higher occupancy rates than residential structures. The CWSP has provided an additional
future 1 MGD user demand for this industrial area for an estimated industrial user.
As previously mentioned, the 2019 CWSP indicates that the City has an existing and future
deficiency in storage for Zone 2. The City has identified the storage need in their 2019 CWSP
plan. The planned timeframe for this storage Capital Improvement Project (CIP) is to be completed
sometime between 2020-2023. However, the City is currently developing additional storage
capacity for Zone 3. As previously noted, Zone 2 is tied to Zone 3 through a pressure reducing
valve. The Zone 3 improvement will help improve Zone 2 water storage needs. The City recently
allowed the development of two large industrial distribution facilities in Zone 2 despite the noted
deficiency in the CWSP.
The identified CIP’s for water systems would be required under all of the alternatives. The CWSP
also indicates that there is adequate fire flow capacity to support generally up to 4,000 GPM.
Industrial users will tend to require larger fire flows due to larger building structures and higher
occupancy than residential structures. Fire flows for industrial developments generally require a
minimum of 4,000 gpm versus 1,500 gpm for residential. Therefore, Alternative 1 and 2 would
have less of an impact for fire demand than Alternative 3.
Sewer and water impacts are generally covered under the City's Comprehensive Plans and the
Comprehensive Plan EIS. Since industrial developments can have a wide range of water and sewer
demands it is difficult to accurately predict future water and sewer demands unless the specific
users are known. The CSP and CWSP have made provisions for future growth within the identified
industrial area, and we have found no significant differences between the alternatives. If the zone
change is allowed Alternatives 1 and 2 overall impacts won’t be felt until the entire development
is fully completed which may take several years. Overall impacts are dependent upon the timing
and size of the construction phases. There is potential for a greater impact to the City’s water and
sanitary sewer systems with Alternative 3 No-Action Alternative if the industrial user is heavy
water user. Large wastewater producers are generally related to agricultural processing which is
Page 207 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
34
an allowed use under the current zoning. Finally, based upon our understanding of the water and
sewer CIP’s, these improvements would be needed regardless of the industrial or residential land
use.
The City of Pasco operates an irrigation water delivery system for certain parts of the City, but the
proposed New Heritage Site is not included in the existing irrigation system. Irrigation water for
the project area will have to come from either the domestic water system or from on-site sources.
No irrigation service was included in the CWSP analysis.
Stormwater
Future development under all of the alternatives would create impervious surfaces which would
increase surface water runoff. Table 10 summarizes the percent of impervious surfaces for both
development alternatives.
Table 10 – Impervious Surfaces
Land Use
Alt. 1 - Preferred
Alternative
Alt. 2 - Medium
Density Alternative
Alt. 3 - No-Action
Alternative
Acres %
Imp.
Imp.
Acres Acres %
Imp.
Imp.
Acres Acres %
Imp.
Imp.
Acres
Residential 176.31 35% 60.66 177.3 33% 58.51 196.3 90% 173.98
Public & Quasi-
Public, Schools 15 40% 6 15 40% 6 0 0 -
Commercial/Office 5 85% 4.25 4 85% 3.40 0 0 -
Total 193.31 37% 70.91 196.3 35% 67.91 196.3 90% 173.98
Source: JUB
The City of Pasco requires that developers detain and/or infiltrate post-development storm water
runoff to pre-development, natural state conditions. Because of the small differences in impervious
area between the all of the alternatives, , there would not be a significant difference in the storm
water runoff rate under each of these alternatives. Under Alternative 3 No-Action Alternative,
depending on the level of future industrial development, there could be a potential for a greater
increase in runoff. Under all three alternatives, there would be some post-development increase
in the total amount of average flow.
Page 208 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
35
Under all three alternatives, there is a potential for water quality contamination. Under
Alternatives 1 and 2, there is a potential for oil, gasoline, solvents, detergents, insecticides,
fertilizers and other contaminants to enter into surface and ground waters. Under Alternative 3
No-Action Alternative, there is an increased potential for these contaminates to enter the ground
water, due to potential higher runoff and depending on the type of industry being developed.
6.3.3 Mitigation Measures
Sewer and Water System – Alternatives 1, 2 and 3
Provide comprehensive water and sewer plans showing peak water and sewer demands
along with projected phasing prior to preliminary plat approvals.
Ensure there is adequate fire flow capacity depending upon the type of development.
For industrial developments, provide peak water and sewer demands based upon the
proposed industry during design review to City officials.
In addition to the CIP projects list in the previous section, the City of Pasco has identified
mitigation measures under the Comprehensive Plan EIS that are included by reference
and summarized below:
"The City should continue to implement the improvements described in the Comprehensive Water
System Plan (CWSP), 2019 to address deficiencies resulting from growth for the planning period.
The City should continue to implement the improvements described in the City’s 2014
Comprehensive Sewer Plan (CSP) and the 2021 CSP Addendum to address deficiencies resulting
from growth for the planning period.
Conduct specific water and sewer system analysis once a more defined master plan has been
prepared and prior to the development of any construction phase of the project.
To accommodate future population growth, the City should, maintains its services with Basin
Disposal Inc.
In 2019, the City conducted an Expanded UGA Infrastructure Evaluation, which evaluated the
impact of the anticipated growth, UGA expansion, and land use changes. As a result, in order to
accommodate future growth, the City will need to make additional improvements to the West
Pasco WTP, Zone 3 Reservoir, and acquire additional water rights to meet the 2038 demands.
In 2017 and 2019, the City re-evaluated the capacity and loading requirements of the Northwest
Service Area as a result of potential development demands and growth projects changes as part of
Page 209 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
36
the 2019 Comprehensive Plan update and Urban Growth Area (UGA) expansion. A strategy to
provide sewer service to the proposed UGA and other growth areas within the city (Broadmoor
Area) was evaluated and alternatives were identified.
Development should be consistent with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan.
The City should continue to provide and maintain collection services to all City residents consistent
with adopted service levels and the City’s various public services and utilities plans."
Stormwater - Alternatives 1, 2 and 3
Under all of the alternatives, subsurface drainage (percolation trench, infiltration
trenches, etc.) could be constructed to reduce peak runoff flows to natural state
conditions. Detention ponds would also be used to provide settlement for silt. Oil/water
separators would be used to reduce impacts from automobiles. Additional mitigation
measures could occur through bio-filtration prior to final discharge, either before or after
entry into the various detention ponds.
In addition, the City of Pasco Comprehensive Plan EIS identified the following specific
mitigation measures which are incorporated here by reference
Implement mitigation measures described for reducing impacts to earth resources
described in Section 4.1.3.
Under both development alternatives, detention ponds will reduce peak runoff flows
to natural state conditions. Detention ponds will also provide settlement for silt.
Oil/water separators can reduce impacts from automobiles.
Additional mitigation measures include bio-filtration, either before or after entry into
the various detention ponds, and buffers around wetlands in accordance with the
CAO.
Stormwater improvements are planned to manage stormwater and protect water
quality.
Development should be consistent with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive
Plan.
Maintain compliance with existing federal, state, and local policies that regulate land
use activities near and within surface water such as the Yakima and Columbia rivers
and wetland including:
Page 210 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
37
NPDES regulations and City stormwater regulations
USACE wetland avoidance and mitigation requirements
The City SEPA and CAO requirements
6.4 Land Use
6.4.1 Affected Environment
Pasco’s Comprehensive Plan and Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), provide information on
the existing uses of land within the Pasco UGA.
“Pasco includes a variety of land uses from residential, commercial, industrial to open
space. Pasco’s land use designations and acreages are identified in the 2018
Comprehensive Plan. Residential land is the predominant use in Pasco, containing over
44% of Pasco’s total land. Residential land use is followed by industrial land use, which
consists of 24% of the total land use within Pasco. Commercial lands are distributed along
the major corridors, Pasco Center and along the Interstate-182. Open space land use is
distributed throughout Pasco in the form of parks and natural open spaces. The shoreline
areas consist of several parks, trails, and natural open space.”
Pasco’s Comprehensive Plan’s Preferred Alternative includes an expansion of the UGA by 3,500
acres along the north edge of Pasco, raising the total UGA acreage to 28,677. Pasco’s
Comprehensive Plan Non-Project EIS discusses the land use categories included in the
Comprehensive Plan. Table 11 identifies the acreages for each land use category. Future land
uses in the UGA are illustrated in Figure 6.
Page 211 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
38
Table 11 – Existing Land Use in the UGA
Land Use Designation Acreage* % of Total
Residential Lands 13,339 46.5%
Low Density 10,603 37.0%
Medium Density 2,219 7.7
Medium-High Density 224 0.8%
High Density 294 1.0%
Commercial Lands 3,027 10.6%
Mixed Residential/Commercial 435 1.5%
Commercial 2,237 7.8%
Mixed Use Interchange 26 0.1%
Mixed Use Neighborhood 77 0.3%
Mixed Use Regional 148 0.5%
Office 104 0.4%
Industrial Lands 6,545 22.8%
Public / Quasi-Public Lands 933 3.3%
Open Space / Park Lands 1,321 4.6%
Airport Reserve Lands 2,091 7.3%
DNR Reserve Lands 1,233 4.3%
Confederated Tribes – Coville Reservation 188 0.7%
Total 28,677 100%
**The total includes 4,300 acres of street right of way, which is about 17% of the total.
Source: Pasco of Pasco Comprehensive Plan Environmental Impact Statement, Table 7.
The following is a description of each land use category as identified in the Comprehensive
Plan:
Open Space/Nature – This land use designation applies to areas where
development will be severely restricted. Parklands, trails, and critical areas are
examples of different types of open spaces.
Low Density Residential – This land use allows residential development at a
density of two to five dwelling units per acre. The land use designation
criterion includes sewer availability or approval from the Benton-Franklin Health
District when sewer is not available, suitability for home sites, and market
demand.
Medium Density Residential – This land use designation includes single-family
dwellings, patio homes, townhouses, apartments, and condominiums at a density
of 6 to 20 dwelling units per acre. This is designated to areas where the location
is convenient to major circulation routes, it provides transition between more
intense uses, and low density uses. Availability of sewer services and market
demand are also key criteria for this land use designation.
Page 212 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
39
High Density Residential – This land use designation includes multi-family
dwellings, apartments, and condominiums at a density of 21 dwelling units or
more per acre. This is designated to areas where the location is convenient to
major circulation routes and employment areas. Availability of sewer services
and market demand are also key criteria for this land use designation.
Mixed Residential Commercial – This land use designation is a mix of residential
and commercial uses. Residential uses include single-family dwellings, patio
homes, townhouses, apartments, and condominiums at a density of 5 to 29
dwelling units per acre. Commercial uses include neighborhood shopping and
specialty centers, business parks, service, and office uses. This is designated to
areas where the location is convenient to major circulation routes and land is
suitable for heavy building sites.
Commercial – This land use is designated for neighborhood, community and
regional shopping and specialty centers, business parks, service, and office uses.
This is designated to areas where the location is convenient to major circulation
routes and land is suitable for heavy building sites.
Industrial – This land use is designated for manufacturing, food processing,
storage, and wholesale distribution of equipment and products, hazardous
material storage, and transportation-related facilities
Public and Quasi Public - This land use is designated for schools, civic
buildings, fire stations and other public uses.
Airport Reserve - This land use is designated for lands owned or occupied by the
Tri-Cities Airport.
DNR Reserve - This land use is designated for lands owned by DNR.
Within the immediate vicinity of the proposed amendment area, land uses include Industrial, Low
Density Residential, Medium Density Residential, Public and Quasi-Public, Open Space/Nature,
and Mixed Residential or Commercial. Table 12, summarizes the acreages for each land use
category in the vicinity of the proposed amendment area.
Page 213 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
40
Figure 6 – Comprehensive Plan Land Uses
Table 12 – Amendment Area Vicinity Land Uses
Land Use Designation Acreage %
Industrial 1,383 62%
Low Density Residential 539 25%
Mixed Use Residential 117 5%
Public / Quasi-Public 79 4%
Open Space / Nature 53 2%
Mixed Residential / Commercial 55 2%
Total 2,226 100%
Source: JUB
The Vicinity Land Use Map (See Figure 7, below) illustrates land uses in the immediate vicinity
of the proposed amendment.
Page 214 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
41
Figure 7 – Vicinity Land Uses
Under the Industrial designation of the Comprehensive Plan, Pasco’s Zoning Code identifies three
separate zoning classifications: Light Industrial (I-1), Medium Industrial (I-2) and Heavy
Industrial (I-3). The amendment area is currently zoned Medium Industrial with approximately 17
acres along East A Street zoned Light Industrial. The area to the immediate south, east and west
are also zoned Medium Industrial. The area to the immediate north along East A Street is zoned a
mix of Residential, Commercial, and Mixed Commercial Residential.
Pasco Zoning Code allows the following uses under the Medium Industrial District zoning
classification.
Medium Industrial District
Uses permitted in the I-2 district shall be:
1. All uses not otherwise prohibited by law, but no residential buildings shall be permitted;
and
2. Junkyards, automobile wrecking yards, scrap iron, scrap paper, or rag storage, sorting or
bailing shall be permitted, provided:
Page 215 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
42
a. An eight-foot, sight-obscuring fence must be constructed and inspected prior to the
issuance of a certificate of occupancy for use of the goods. The fence shall be of solid
single neutral color.
b. No automobile or parts thereof, junk or salvage materials or parts thereof shall be
visible from any public right-of-way. All materials or parts shall be located within the
fenced area.
c. Fire lanes shall be provided as required in the International Fire Code.
d. A performance bond for $1,000 shall be required prior to the issuance of an occupancy
permit, to ensure compliance with provisions of this section. The bond shall remain in
force as long as the use exists.
e. The permit shall be granted for a period not to exceed two years, and at the end of such
period an inspection shall be made of the premises to determine the advisability of
renewing such permit. [Ord. 3354 § 2, 1999; Code 1970 §25.54.020.
Pasco Zoning Code allows the following uses under the Light Industrial District zoning
classification:
The I-1 light industrial district is established to preserve areas for industrial and related uses of
such a nature that they do not create serious problems of compatibility with other kinds of land
uses. Uses permitted in this district should not generate noise levels, light, odor or fumes that
would constitute a nuisance or hazard. [Ord. 3354 § 2, 1999; Code 1970 § 25.52.010.]
Uses permitted in the I-1 district shall be:
1. All uses permitted in the C-3 district;
2. Building material storage yard;
3. Trucking, express and storage yards;
4. Contractor’s plant or storage yards;
5. Laboratories, experimental;
7. Automotive assembly and repair;
8. Kennels;
Page 216 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
43
9. Creamery, bottling, ice manufacture and cold storage plant;
10. Blacksmith, welding or other metal shops, excluding punch presses over 20 tons rated
capacity, drop hammers, and the like;
11. The manufacturing, compounding, processing, packaging of cosmetics, pharmacology and
food products, except fish and meat products, and the reducing and refining of fats and
oils;
12. Printing plant; and
Parking lots within 500 feet of a C-2 district boundary, provided such lots are paved and
the development complies with the landscape and fencing requirements of the C-1 district,
as enumerated in PMC 25.85.020(13). [Ord. 4110 § 23, 2013; Ord. 3354 § 2, 1999; Code
1970 § 25.52.020.
6.4.2 Potential Impacts
Alternative1
This alternative would remove 196.31 acres of undeveloped Industrial land and add 181.31 acres
of Mixed Residential/Commercial Land and 15 acres elementary school site. Table 13 describes
the impact of this change on all land within the Pasco City Limits and UGA boundary.
Table 13 – Preferred Alternative Land Use Changes
Land Use Designations Total
(Acres)
Proposed
Alternative
(Acres)
Change
(Acres)
Mixed Residential/Commercial 435 +181.31 616.31
Industrial 6,545 -196.31 6,348.69
Gov't Public / Quasi-Public 933 +15 948
Under Pasco’s Zoning Ordinance (25.215.015 - Comprehensive Plan Land Use Density Table ),
the Mixed Residential/Commercial Land Use designation will “....allow a combination of mixed-
use residential and commercial in the same development. Single-family dwellings, patio homes,
townhouses, apartments, and condominiums at a density of 5 to 29 dwelling units per acre.
Neighborhood shopping and specialty centers, business parks, service and office uses ”. Proposed
Page 217 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
44
zoning classifications R-1 through R-4; C-1, O; and Waterfront, are allowed under the Mixed
Residential/Commercial Land Use designation with the approval of the Pasco City Council, with
the recommendation by the Pasco Hearing Examiner.
This change could also impact the viability of adjacent industrial land uses within the immediate
area without mitigation. It may also increase the pressure on other adjacent industrial land uses to
convert to a similar designation in the future if there were not demand for industrial land use.
Without mitigation, this change may also impact adjacent residential uses from runoff, noise,
traffic, and reduction in air quality.
Alternative 2
This alternative would also remove 196.31 acres of Industrial land and add 177.31 acres of
Medium Density Residential land, 4 acres of commercial land and a 15-acre elementary school
site. Table 14 describes the impact of this change on all land withing the Pasco City Limits and
UGA boundary.
Table 14 – Medium Density Land Use Changes
Land Use Designations Total (Acres)
Proposed
Alternati
ve (Acres)
Change (Acres)
Medium-High Density 224 +177.31 401.31
Commercial 2,237 +4.00 2,241
Industrial 6,545 -196.31 6,348.69
Gov't Public / Quasi-Public 933 +15.00 948
Under Section 25.65.050, the Medium Density Zone allows:
Minimum lot area: 4,500 square feet.
One single-family dwelling shall be permitted per lot. Multiple dwellings shall be permitted
based on the density standards in subsection (3) of this section.
Density. All developments shall be compliant with the Comprehensive Plan land use
density table in PMC 25.215.015. In addition, one dwelling unit per 4,500 square feet of
lot area is required for single-family dwellings and 3,000 square feet of lot area is required
for multiple-family dwellings, duplexes, two-family dwellings, triplexes, courtyard
apartments, and zero-lot-line dwellings, except as provided in Chapter 25.161 PMC.
This change could also impact the viability of adjacent industrial land uses within the immediate
area without mitigation. It may also increase the pressure on other adjacent industrial land uses to
Page 218 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
45
convert to a similar designation in the future if there were no demand for industrial land use.
Without mitigation, this change may also impact adjacent residential uses from runoff, noise,
traffic, and reduction in air quality.
Alternative 3
Under this alternative, the Industrial designation in the City's Comprehensive Plan would remain.
The uses and zoning classifications allowed under that designation could be constructed. In the
amendment area site, uses allowed under the I-1 and I-2 classification would be allowed. Some of
these uses, without mitigation, would adversely impact nearby residential land uses, City sports
park and the natural environment through increased noise, odor, reduction in air quality and runoff.
6.4.3 Mitigation Measures
Alternative 1
The City is concerned that the land uses identified in the "Vision” for the Preferred Alternative
may not be supported under Pasco's existing codes, policies and requirements. While the "New
Urbanism" land use concept contained in this approach may provide significant benefits to the
public, this concept is not fully addressed under the Pasco's codes. The Applicant has proposed
specific mitigation measures, beyond those normally included in a Non-Project EIS, to ensure that
the "Vision" outlined under this alternative is implemented, including:
Enter into a Concomitant Agreement during the rezone process to insure compliance with
proposed mitigation under this FEIS.
Provide a range of residential configurations, including single-family residences on a
separate lot with access from a public street, where pedestrian, bike and automobile access
are from the public street, or automobile access is from an alley.
Provide a range of densities from 3 to 24 units per acre. The range of densities may be
adjusted to meet current state and/or local land use policies at the time of project
development.
Locate residences within walking and biking distance to park/s, school, retail shops and
offices to reduce the reliance on the automobile.
Duplexes in or near single-family residential areas designed to be compatible with single-
family houses.
Multi-family apartments designed to be compatible with nearby residential and commercial
uses.
Page 219 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
46
Provide a mixed-use commercial and office space on the ground floor with residential uses
above.
Stand-alone commercial, and office uses, such as grocery stores and hardware stores, that
are designed to serve populations outside of the walking area, located at major
intersections and designed to serve both the New Heritage area and other areas outside of
New Heritage.
If the Pasco School District requires an elementary school site in this area, set aside land
for this purpose within walking and biking distance from the major residential areas.
Include dedicated pathways and bikeways, separated from vehicular traffic, and sidewalks
and dedicated bikeways within roadways.
Design this open space and pathway system to connect the residential areas to the
neighborhood centers, parks, schools and employment centers.
Design this open-space concept to serve as the “Heart” of the community; providing both
recreation and meeting spaces.
Provide sidewalks, space for bicycles and street trees on roadways.
Provide public multi-modal bus stop/transit area within walking/biking distance to the
major residential areas.
Provide vegetation buffers and/or concrete block walls directly adjacent to industrial zoned
properties.
Implement zoning ordinances or regulatory controls to manage potential land use conflicts
and ensure compatibility between residential, commercial, and industrial activities.
Specific measures may include but not limited to buffer zones, setbacks or other specific
development standards. Specific mitigation measures can be established as a part of the
Concomitant Agreement during the rezone process.
Establish a monitoring and review process to assess the effectiveness of mitigation
measures. Specifics can be established as a part of the Concomitant Agreement during the
rezone process.
Alternative 2
Meet the requirements of the Medium Density (R-2) Zoning Ordinance and all City SEPA policies
and implement mitigation measures described under Alternative 1. The Pasco Zoning Ordinance
provides the following purpose for implementation:
The purpose of this title is to implement the Comprehensive Plan for the Pasco Urban Area.
This title is to also further the purpose of promoting the health, safety, convenience,
comfort, prosperity and general welfare of the present and future inhabitants of the Pasco
Urban Area; and
Page 220 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
47
(1) To encourage and facilitate the orderly growth and development of the Pasco Urban
Area.
(2) To provide adequate open space for light and air, to prevent overcrowding of the land,
and to reduce congestion on the streets.
(3) To secure economy in municipal expenditures, to facilitate adequate provisions for
transportation, water, sewer, schools, parks, and other public facilities and services.
(4) To increase the security of home life and preserve and create a more favorable
environment for citizens and visitors of the Pasco Urban Area.
(6) To secure safety from fire, panic and other dangers.
(7) To stabilize and improve property values.
(8) To enhance the economic and cultural well-being of the inhabitants of Pasco.
(9) To promote the development of a more wholesome, serviceable and attractive city
resulting from an orderly, planned use of resources. [Ord. 4110 § 3, 2013; Ord. 3354 § 2,
1999; Code 1970 § 25.04.020.]
In addition, the Medium Density (R-2) district has provided its intent for all residential projects:
The R-2 district is established to provide a medium density residential environment
compliant with the Comprehensive Plan land use density table in PMC 25.215.015. The R-
2 district is intended to allow for a gradual increase in density between low and high
density residential districts. [Ord. 4575 § 9, 2022; Ord. 3354 § 2, 1999; Code 1970
§ 25.34.010.]
The 4-acre neighborhood commercial area would be developed under the requirements of the C-1
Commercial District with the following stated purpose:
The C-1 retail business district is established to provide for the location of commercial
activities outside the central business district that meet the retail shopping and service
needs of the community. [Ord. 3354 § 2, 1999; Code 1970 § 25.42.010.]
Alternative 3
Mitigation measures will depend on specific industry but will have to follow all City of Pasco
Zoning requirements and all SEPA policies for specific mitigation.
Page 221 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
48
6.5 Population, Housing, and Employment
6.5.1 Affected Environment
Population
The Pasco Comprehensive Plan EIS projects an increase in Pasco's population from 73,590 in 2018
to 121,828 by 2038 (See ) for an increase of 48,238 new residents.
Under Alternative 1, based on the projected 1,354 housing units with an average household size
of 3.17, the 2038 projected population projected by the Pasco Comprehensive Plan EIS would
increase from 121,828 to 126,120 or by about 3.5%. Under Alternative 2, based on 1,028 housing
units, population would increase from 121,828 to 125,087, or about 2.7%. (See Table 15,
Populations Projections). Under Alternative 3 there would be no direct increase in population.
Table 15 – Population Projections
Source: Pasco Comprehensive EIS, Land Strategies/JUB
The population projections contained in the Pasco Comprehensive Plan was based on a low,
medium and high range of projections for Franklin County by the State Office of Financial
Management (OFM). In agreement with Franklin County, Pasco selected the medium range, based
on the historical percentage of Pasco's population to that of Franklin County. Because this
agreement was negotiated between Pasco and Franklin County, it was a significant factor in the
development of the Pasco Comprehensive Plan, particularly in relation to population and housing
which could be impacted by this amendment.
Housing
Housing need in the Pasco Comprehensive Plan was directly based on Pasco's projected 2038
population increase of 48,238; using a multiplying factor of 3.17 persons per household. Based
on this, Pasco projected a total need of 15,213 new housing units by 2038. Existing vacant
Year Comprehensive
Plan
Alt. 1 -Preferred
Alternative
Alt. 2 - Medium
Alternative
2018 73,590 73,590 73,590
2038 121,828 126,120 125,087
Population Increase
(2018 to 2038) 48,238 52,530 51,497
Page 222 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
49
buildable land was estimated to provide 9,581 units; therefore, an additional 5,636 housing units
was projected to be required to meet the demand of future housing. To provide for this increase,
Pasco has expanded the UGA by 3,500 acres (Pasco's EIS Preferred Alternative). In justifying
this expansion, Pasco also used a 20% market factor, a 5% environmental factor and a 20%
factor for roads and utilities.
Table 16, identifies the residential acreages within the 3,500± UGA expansion area.
Table 16 – Pasco UGA Housing
Type Acres %
Low Density Residential 1,830 77%
Mixed/Medium Density Residential 429 18%
High Density Residential 122 5%
Total 2,381 100%
Based on the total of 5,636 units in the UGA, this results in an average net density of 2.43 units
per acre. When the adjustment is made for the market factor, environmental factor and roadways
and utilities, the density is approximately 3.9 units per acre.
Under Alternative 1, 1,354 new housing units would be added on 118 net acres for a density of
11.5 units per acre. Alternative 2 would have 1,028 housing units with a net density of 8.6 units
per acre. Alternative 3 No-Action Alternative does not allow housing under the Pasco Zoning
Code.
Page 223 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
50
Employment
Currently the amendment area is vacant and
provides no employment. Abutting the amendment
area to the East is the new Amazon Fulfillment
Complex which has projected 1,200± employees on
a total of 266± acres, or approximately 4.5
employees per acre. According to the Tri-Cities
Journal of Business:
"Project Oyster will be a distribution warehouse
with 1,080,500 square feet on 162 acres. It will have
a 35,000-square-foot office, 1,020 vehicle parking
spots and 390 semitruck parking spots. It will
employ 683 people working in two shifts."
Project Pearl will be slightly smaller, with 1,049,760 million square feet. A rail spur runs along
the southern boundary of its 104-acre site but stops at Road 40 and doesn’t extend to the Oyster
site." "It will have 110 loading docks, 304 trailer parking stalls, 48 box truck parking stalls, 48
van parking stalls and 54 parking stalls. It will employ 500 people working in two shifts.
According to Pasco's Comprehensive Plan, there are 6,545 acres of industrial land located within
the city limits and UGA boundary. Of this amount, 2,883 acres are developed, primarily by large
agricultural processing and distribution industries. Of the remaining 3,662 acres, or approximately
55% of the total land acreage; 2,031± acres are owned by the Port, City, and/or other government
entities; 1,827± acres are undeveloped (31%); and 354 acres are underutilized (5%).
6.5.2 Potential Impacts
Population and Housing
Alternatives 1 and 2 will have in increase in population and housing adjacent to industrial uses.
There is existing residential to the north of the amendment area and a new City sports park located
northwest of the amendment area. This will increase pedestrian and vehicular traffic in the general
area. Alternative 1 and 2 would have a limited impact from either the increase in population or
housing when compared to the total projected increase under the Pasco Comprehensive Plan. But
Tri-Cities Journal of Business
Page 224 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
51
even small increases can have impacts and the impacts identified in the Pasco Comprehensive Plan
EIS should still apply; these include:
Impacts to population, housing, and employment would occur from inadequate existing
facilities or insufficient future development opportunities to accommodate growth;
An increase in population will require more intensified commercial, business, and other
public facilities than would be possible under current development and population
conditions;
An intensification of urban uses and densities will increase traffic congestion, park
requirements, police and fire requirements, and other public service demands and fiscal
impacts;
Additional urban development could further tax the City’s fiscal and public service
resources, potentially leading to a dilution of the service levels or capabilities provided
current residents; and,
Inadequately located or designed urban infrastructure, including roads, parking lots,
and other improvements that are not properly sited, could create stormwater runoff,
erosion, and other environmental hazards affecting neighboring properties and public
services.
Under Alternative 3 the site would remain Industrial and there would be no additional population
or additional housing. There would be an increase in population and housing outside of the
amendment area.
Employment
Alternative 1
Employment under this alternative would come from workers at the future elementary school
and at the 5 acres of proposed retail and office land uses. Total employment in the amendment
area would be between 617 and 739, depending on the specific mix of retail and office uses.
Assuming an average of between 1 and 2 workers per household, the total employment would be
between 1,354 and 2,708 which would require between 615 and 2,091 employees to seek work
outside of the amendment area. It is assumed that many of these workers would seek
employment at the nearby warehouse distribution centers and other industries in the area. This
would increase impacts on traffic, public transit, public facilities and noise. (See Table 17). If the
school is not constructed then the anticipated employment would be reduced.
Page 225 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
52
Alternative 2
Employment under this alternative would also come from workers at the future elementary
school and at the proposed 4 acres of retail and office land uses. Total employment in the
amendment area would be between 553 and 667, depending on the specific mix of retail and
office uses. Assuming an average of 1 and 2 workers per household, the total employment would
be between 1,028 and 2,056 which would require between 361 and 1,053 employees to seek
work outside of the amendment area. This would also increase impacts on traffic, public transit,
public facilities and noise. (See Table 17). If the school is not constructed then the anticipated
employment would be reduced.
Table 17 – Projected Employment
Land Use
Alt. 1 - Preferred
Alternative
Alt. 2 - Medium
Density
Alternative
Alt. 3 - No-Action
Alternative
Low High Low High Low High
Schools
Sq. Ft. per Employee 1,250 1,100 1,250 1,100
Total Square Footage 205,000 205,000 205,000 205,000
Total Employment 164 186 164 186
Service/Office
Sq. Ft. per Employee 150 130 150 130
Total Square Footage 43,560 43,560 43560 43560
Total Employment 290 335 290 335
Retail
Sq. Ft. per Employee 200 150 200 150
Total Square Footage 32,560 32,560 21780 21780
Total Employment 163 217 109 145
Total Employment 617 739 563 667
Industry
Acre/Employee 3 6
Total Acres 196.31 196.31
Total Employment 589 1,178
Source: Land Strategies/JUB
Page 226 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
53
Alternative 3
In order to estimate the total employment under this alternative, assumptions had to be made on
which industries might be likely to locate on the site. Warehouse land uses have low employment
per acre while many manufacturing industries have much higher employee counts. For this
analysis, it was assumed that heavy manufacturing and processing industries would not wish to
locate near the existing residential land uses to the north. The most likely use would be similar to
the two existing distribution facilities to the east. The average employment per acre for these two
industries was 4.5. Based on this, it was assumed that employment under this alternative would
be between 3 and 6 employees per acre, or 589 and 1,176. This employment would also increase
demand on Public Services, traffic, air quality and runoff. This would result in either 150 less
employees or 561 more employees under this alternative. Depending on the employment level,
this alternative would also increase impacts on traffic, public transit, public facilities and noise.
(See Table 17)
Under Alternative 3, as noted in Pasco's Comprehensive Plan EIS, most of Pasco's existing
employment is on the east end of the City, especially the large industrial employers, while a large
portion of the population and housing is located in the expanded UGA on the west end of the
City. Without housing, future employees in this Industrial area would be forced to commute to
other areas of Pasco and/or to outside of the area. This would create additional traffic throughout
the region.
6.5.3 Mitigation Measures
Mitigation measures for Alternative 1 and Alternative 2 include:
Implement mitigation measures identified under Earth, Air, Utilities, Land Use, Parks
and Recreation and Transportation.
Train labor force consistent with the job market in the area.
Provide easy access to employment and reduce local traffic volumes by creating a live-
work environment.
Develop adequate infrastructure.
Page 227 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
54
Maintain minimum housing density.
Other mitigations that may be included in the Concomitant Agreement.
Follow the Goals and Policies outlined in the Pasco Comprehensive Plan.
H-1. GOAL: Encourage housing for all economic segments of the City’s population
consistent with the local and regional market.
H-1-A Policy: Allow for a full range of housing including single family homes,
townhouses, condominiums, apartments, and manufactured housing, accessory dwelling
units, zero lot line, planned unit developments etc. in areas as appropriate.
H-2. GOAL: Preserve and maintain the existing housing stock for present and future
residents.
ED-1 Goal: Maintain economic development as an important and ongoing City initiative.
ED-1-F Policy: Recognize that infrastructure, including transportation and utility
planning are vital to economic development and attracting businesses.
ED-2 Goal: Assure appropriate location and design of commercial and industrial facilities.
ED-2-B Policy: Encourage development of a wide range of commercial and industrial
uses strategically located to support local and regional needs.
ED-3 Goal: Maintain development standards and design guidelines to ensure that
commercial and industrial developments are good neighbors.
ED-3-A Policy: Enhance compatibility of commercial and industrial development with
residential and mixed-use neighborhoods through the use of landscaping, screening, and
superior building design standards and guideline.
6.6 Public Services
6.6.1 Affected Environment
Fire and Police
Pasco Fire Department (PFD) provides fire suppression, advanced life support, emergency medical
services, ambulance transport services, technical rescue services, and hazardous materials services
(through a regional partnership) to its service area community (Pasco Comprehensive Plan EIS).
Station 81 is located on Oregon Avenue, approximately 1.5 miles from the site and is staffed full
Page 228 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
55
time. The Pasco Fire Department uses response time in determining impacts and future
requirements for fire and emergency services.
Law enforcement services for the City are provided by the City Police Department.
Unincorporated areas of the UGA are served by the County Sheriff. The City and County law
enforcement agencies cooperate readily when the need arises. Pasco currently has 1.03 patrol
officers per 1,000 people (Pasco Comprehensive Plan EIS).
School
Based on the Pasco School District No. 1, 2016 Update to the Capital Facilities Plan (PSDCPA),
there are now a total of fifteen (15) elementary schools and, as of October 1, 2015, there were
9,940 students enrolled. There are three middle schools. with a total enrollment of 2,540 students
and two traditional high schools with 4,904 students enrolled. This results in a total school
enrollment of 17,384, or about 235 students per 1,000 population. By 2021, the PSDCPA forecast
predicts there will be 18,597 students enrolled in grades K-12.
6.6.2 Potential Impacts
Fire and Police
Because of the close proximity of Fire Station 81, it is not anticipated that emergency response
times would not be met. Resource requirements (staff, equipment, etc.) would be proportionally
impacted from the increased population and new structures.
Based on the existing 1.03 officers per 1,000 people, Alternative 1 would generate a need for an
additional 4 patrol officers. Alternative 2 would generate a need for an additional 3 patrol officers.
School
Based on the above, Alternative 1 would generate the need to accommodate an additional 609
elementary students. Based on the standard of 500 students per elementary school, this results in
the need for one elementary school. (See Table 18). Based on the same standard, Alternative 2
would generate 462 elementary students which is slightly less than the 500-student elementary
school standard. None of the alternatives would generate the direct need for either a Middle School
or a High School but would increase the general regional need.
Table 18 – Student Enrollment
Page 229 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
56
School Type Enrollment %
Students per 1,000 Population
Students
Alt. 1 -
Preferred
Alternative
Alt 2 - Med.
Density
Alternative
Elementary School 9,940 57% 134 609 462
Middle School 2,540 15% 34 156 118
High School 4,904 28% 66 301 228
Total 17,384 100% 235 1,066 809
Source: Land Strategies
6.6.3 Mitigation Measures
Potential mitigation measures for Alternatives 1 and 2 include:
Meet City and State building code requirements related to fire safety;
Provide adequate street access for emergency equipment;
Provide visual access to park and open space facilities;
Police, fire and other public services, including schools, may be mitigated through the
increased tax base.
Mitigation fees for school construction.
Potential mitigation measures for Alternative 3 include:
Meet City and State building code requirements related to fire safety;
Provide adequate street access for emergency equipment;
Police, fire and other public services may be mitigated through the increased tax base.
6.7 Parks and Recreation
6.7.1 Affected Environment
Pasco adopted in 2016 a Park and Recreation Plan. This Plan:
“[E]stablishes policies for park and recreation services and urban forestry practice, and
it identifies parks and recreation facility needs for City of Pasco” (Parks, Recreation and
Forestry Plan, Pasco of Pasco).”
The plan identifies one existing neighborhood park to the north of the amendment site (Kurtzman
Park) that could serve a small portion of the amendment site, and a Regional State Park
(Sacajawea) to the southeast. In addition, the plan identifies the Sacajawea Trail that runs along
the waterfront that intersects with a Pasco defined bike and pedestrian path that abuts the
Page 230 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
57
amendment area. The Plan also establishes standards for future parks based on projected
population (see Table 19, below), identifies the standard for each park type.
Pasco also budgeted in the CIP to construct a 28-acre multi-use sports complex immediately west
of the site. Construction of Phase 1, which includes 3 soccer/multiuse fields, is currently under
construction. The final project will include up to 10 multiuse sports fields.
Pasco’s 2019 Parks and Recreation Plan also described each park type:
“Neighborhood parks include a playground and park designed primarily for non-
supervised, non-organized recreation activities. In Pasco, they are generally small (3-7
acres) and serve a radius of approximately one-half mile. At average residential densities,
this amounts to about 5,000 to 7,500 residents. Since these parks are located within
walking and bicycling distance of most users, the activities they offer become a daily
pastime for neighborhood children. While it is not necessarily the rule, neighborhood parks
sometimes provide space for organized community events. A few examples include Island
Park, Richardson Park, and Centennial Park.
Community Park facilities are generally designed for organized activities and sports,
although individual and family activities are encouraged. Community parks can provide
indoor facilities to meet a wider range of recreation interests. A community park can also
serve the function of neighborhood parks, although community parks serve a much larger
area and offer more facilities. Their service area is about a one-mile radius and will
support a population of approximately 12,000 – 15,000 persons depending upon its size
and nature of its facilities. They require more support facilities including parking, rest
rooms, and covered play areas. They usually exceed 20 acres in size and often have sport
fields or similar facilities as the central focus of the park. Memorial Park fulfills the needs
of a community park in Pasco.
Page 231 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
58
Large urban parks, like Chiawana Park, are designed to serve the entire community. They
are like a community park but much larger. They provide a wide variety of specialized
facilities such as large picnic areas, water related activities, indoor recreation facilities,
and sports fields. They require more support facilities such as parking, rest rooms, and
play areas because of their size and facilities offered. They usually exceed 50 acres in size
and should be designed to accommodate many people.
Regional parks are large recreational areas that serve an entire Pasco or region. They
can be large and often include one specific use or feature. If possible, they should be
developed around a unique or significant resource to emphasize regional recreation
interest. These types of park areas are found nearby and include Sacajawea State Park,
Columbia Park (Pasco of Kennewick), and Howard Amon Park (Pasco of Richland). These
parks offer riverfront and boating facilities as well as other passive recreation
opportunities and are within a short travel time for Pasco residents.
Linear parks are land areas that generally follow a drainage corridor, ravine, or some
other elongated feature such as a power line or railroad right-of-way. This type of park
area often contains various levels/types of trail systems and sometimes includes greenbelts.
Pathways and trails are designed to provide walking, bicycling, and other nonmotorized
means for linking various parts of the community and connecting parks to residential
areas. Trails provide recreation-oriented bicycle and walking opportunities utilizing
canals, drainage corridors, easements, and other publicly accessible facilities. The trail
system includes unpaved foot trails used for walking, hiking, mountain bike riding and
horseback riding, and paved multi-use bicycle trails designed for bicycle riding, walking
and hiking. The system can consist of both off-street and on-street trail segments. Many
off-street segments already exist along the waterfront and Interstate 182.” (Bolding added
for emphasis). The Plan also indicates the ½-mile service areas for each park in Pasco.
6.7.2 Potential Impacts
Alternative 1 and Alternative 2 would impact existing park and recreation facilities. As noted
above, the Pasco Park and Recreation Plan establishes standards for each park type. Table 19
identifies these standards and indicates the relative impact of each of these alternatives.
Page 232 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
59
Alternative 3 will not provide park space, nor directly create the need for additional park space
within the amendment area. However, it will add population and housing outside of the amendment
area which may impact regional park and recreation facilities.
Table 19 – Pasco Park Standards
Type
2006 Adopted
Standard (Pasco
Parks Plan)
Alt. 1 - Preferred
Alternative
Alt. 2 - Medium
Density
Alternative
Facilities
Required Acres Facilities
Required Acres
Neighborhood Parks
3-7 Acre Standard
2.00 acres/1,000
population 1 4.5 1 3.4
Community Parks
20+ Acre Standard
2.10 acres/1,000
population 0 9.5 0 7.2
Large Urban Parks 2.99 acres/1,000
population 0 13 0 10.3
Regional Parks
No Adopted Standard
8.93 acres/1,000
population n/a n/a n/a n/a
Linear Park
No Adopted Standard
1.56 acres/1,000
population n/a n/a n/a n/a
Softball Fields 1 field per 3,000
population 1 n/a 1 n/a
Youth Baseball 1 field per 2,000
population 1 n/a 1 n/a
Soccer Fields 1 field per 2,000
population 2 n/a 1 n/a
Tennis Courts 1 court per 1,500
population 3 n/a 2 n/a
Page 233 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
60
Trails (8” wide) 0.50 miles per
1,000 population 2.2 n/a 1.6 n/a
Source: Pasco Parks, Land Strategies
6.7.3 Mitigation Measures
Specific mitigation measures would be identified at the time of subdivision approval and will
depend on the proponents proposed design for the property. In general, mitigation for Alternative
1 and 2 would be similar and include:
Implement Pasco Park and Recreation Plan Goals and Policies;
Implement Pasco Comprehensive Plan Goals and Policies, including:
o LU-2-C Policy: Ensure that adequate public services are provided in a reasonable
time frame for new developments.
o LU-2-D Policy: Encourage the use of buffers or transition zones between non-
compatible land uses.
o LU-3-A Policy: Design major streets, schools, parks, and other public facilities that
will encourage the individual identities of neighborhoods.
o LU-3-C Policy: Ensure all developments include appropriate landscaping and
screening, as required by adopted regulations and guidelines.
o ED-3-C Policy: Provide appropriate access through a combination of pathways,
sidewalks, non-motorized travel lanes and parking.
o CF-1-B Policy: Encourage public participation in defining the need for, the
proposed location of, and the design of public facilities such as parks, ball fields,
pedestrian and bicycle corridors, and street and utility extensions and
improvements.
o CF-3-A Policy: Assure land development proposals provide land and/or facilities
or other mitigation measures to address impacts on traffic, parks, recreational
facilities, schools, and pedestrian and bicycle trails.
o CF-5. Goal: in conjunction with the county, provide parks, greenways, trails, and
recreation facilities throughout the UGA.
Page 234 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
61
Develop a system of interconnected parks, recreation facilities, bike and pedestrian trails,
gathering and meeting spaces, school facilities, retail spaces, and workspaces in order to
facilitate the Vision of a walkable “New Urban” community.
6.8 Environmental Health
This section describes environmental health conditions relating to hazardous materials, risk of
fire or explosions and noise.
6.8.1 Affected Environment
The amendment area is currently vacant. A small area to the west will contain a greenhouse facility
(Local Bounti), the area to the southwest is vacant and the area to the south is an unused rail spur.
The area directly east is an existing distribution warehouse center. The area to the north contains
a mix of residential, and commercial uses. There is an existing residential mobile home park
(Lakeview) located 2/3 of a mile to the southeast of the project area.
The City of Pasco is currently constructing a 28-acre sports complex in the industrial area off East
A Street. This sports complex is located at the southeast corner East A St. and S. Elm Ave. This
park will be located at the northwest corner of the amendment area. Construction of Phase 1 is
currently ongoing, therefore, the sports complex should be an existing feature in 2024.
There are no known hazardous material spills, violations or instances of recorded contamination
within the amendment area. A larger portion of the amendment area is currently being farmed.
Agricultural uses may include pesticides and herbicides. There are no visible signs of hazardous
materials or gross contamination within the amendment area.
6.8.2 Potential Impacts
Alternatives 1 and Alternative 2
These alternatives could be exposed to environmental impacts from industrial users through
increased exposure to chemicals, risk of fire, run-off from the storage of hazardous wastes, odor,
decreases in air quality, noise and visual blight. Currently, most of these nearby industrial areas
are Zoned I-1, which limits the types of industrial uses that can be developed and would likely
have less impact on the proposed amendment area.
Page 235 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
62
As previously mentioned in Section 6.2 Air Quality, there are no documented emission issues
from existing industrial users, other than from vehicular emissions, that may affect this
alternative. In the case of fire, chemical releases or hazardous spills from the existing users, the
prevailing winds would generally direct emissions away from the amendment area. Prevailing
winds would direct industrial emissions north/northeast to existing residential developments
located across East A Street.
Portions of the amendment area that abut existing industrial properties will be separated and/or
screened from current industrial activities. Along the western portion of the amendment area,
Elm Street is being extended between the greenhouse facility (Local Bounti) and the amendment
area. This roadway extension will create a buffer between the two land uses. The width of the
public right of way will be 60-ft. Along the eastern portion of the site there is an existing 15-ft
tall concrete masonry wall that was constructed as part of the Amazon distribution center to
create a visual and sound buffer between the amendment area.
If approved, potential environmental health impacts from the amendment area include increased
runoff, construction noise, air-quality reduction from increased traffic, and increased traffic
congestion. There will be less freight trucks in the area as compared to Alternative 3. Residential
developments adjacent to industrial should be mitigated to help offset potential environmental
health impacts.
Increased truck/freight traffic and sounds generated by industrial activities could impact the
proposed amendment. Review of SEPA documents for Local Bounti and Amazon Distribution did
not mention any issues in regards to noise issues/concerns for those specific projects. However,
industrial users will need to adhere to existing City municipal code requirements for noise levels.
Current City code notes that the maximum sound transmission between industrial users 70 dBA.
Maximum sound transmission between Industrial and Residential users is 60 dBA. Therefore;
there would be a decrease of 10 dBA if these alternatives were approved. The use of sound walls
or noise dampening equipment may be required for certain industrial applications. Concrete
masonry walls should be considered when industrial and residential uses abut one another.
Additionally, a vegetated buffer and/or lineal park should be considered when industrial and
residential uses are adjacent to one another. Industrial development that would produce emissions
Page 236 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
63
of a displeasing odor, store explosive or hazardous materials or that could be detrimental to existing
residential uses should be discouraged.
Alternative 3:
Depending on the specific industry developed on the site, impacts to existing adjacent residences
and existing adjacent industries could be significant without mitigation. These could include
increased exposure to chemicals, risk of fire, run-off from the storage of hazardous wastes, odor
and decreases in air quality, noise and visual blight. Industrial developments adjacent to residential
developments should be mitigated to help offset potential environmental health impacts.
As previously stated, residential zoned land located north and southeast of industrial land and the
City sports park located along East A Street may be impacted by industrial development.
Prevailing winds would direct emissions from industrial sites towards the residential uses.
Industrial developments need to take into account the release of emissions generated from their
use to the existing surrounding areas. Industrial developments that could produce emissions that
are of a displeasing odor, store explosive or hazardous materials or that could be detrimental to
existing residential uses should be discouraged.
Increased truck traffic and sounds generated by industrial applications/development could impact
existing and future residential developments. Industrial developments will need to adhere to
existing City code requirements for noise levels. The use of sound walls or noise dampening
equipment may be required which will be dependent upon the industrial user. Concrete masonry
walls along the south side of East A Street may need to be considered depending upon the type of
industrial user. The use of industrial freight vehicles that meet current EPA vehicle and fuel
regulatory requirements should be implemented to minimize vehicle emissions in the regional area.
6.8.3 Mitigation Measures
Potential mitigation measures for all the alternatives depend on the specific uses allowed, their
location and mitigation measures required at the time of approval by Pasco. Potential mitigation
includes:
Alternative 1 and 2
Page 237 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
64
Assure the construction of the 15-ft tall concrete masonry wall along their eastern property
boundary agreed to by the Amazon distribution center.
Apply mitigation measures to reduce run-off, construction noise, traffic congestion and air-
quality based on existing Pasco codes, standards and SEPA policies.
Create a "New Urbanism" community with open spaces and buffers to reduce impacts from
adjacent industrial from visual blight, noise, runoff and odor (See Land Use, Section 6.4).
Fence areas abutting industrial property with solid concrete block wall or other sound and
visual obscuring fencing material.
For a regional basis, ensure compliance with the most current EPA vehicle and fuel
regulatory requirements to continually help reduce vehicular emissions.
Provide vegetated buffers directly adjacent to existing industrial uses in accordance with
the City of Pasco Municipal Code 25.180.040.
Promote transit and other types of transportation that do not contribute to additional air
emissions and reduce vehicle traffic.
Minimize residential backyards directly adjacent to industrial zoned properties.
Develop linear parks/open spaces directly adjacent to industrial zoned properties.
Conduct noise level studies for areas directly adjacent to existing industrial users to
determine background noise levels. Provide mitigation measures that may include concrete
masonry wall, vegetative buffer, linear park or other sound proofing applications to meet
current City code requirements.
Mitigate impacts from adjacent industrial uses through adoption of mitigation measures
during construction and operation, and through the adoption of the Goals and Policies of
Pasco Comprehensive Plan, including:
50'+/-15'+/-
3 :1 S l o p e
Drought Tolerant
Landscaping
Masonary Wall 10'-15' High
Property line
Varies
15'
Distribution Center Property
Page 238 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
65
o LU-2-D Policy: Encourage the use of buffers or transition zones between non-
compatible land uses.
o LU-3-C Policy: Ensure all developments include appropriate landscaping and
screening, as required by adopted regulations and guidelines.
o ED-3. Goal: Maintain development standards and design guidelines to ensure that
commercial and industrial developments are good neighbors
o ED-3-A Policy: Enhance compatibility of commercial and industrial development with
residential and mixed-use neighborhoods with appropriate landscaping, screening,
building and design standards,
o ED-3-B Policy: Ensure outdoor illumination and signage of businesses have a positive
impact and are compatible with neighborhood standards.
o ED-3-C Policy: Provide appropriate access through a combination of pathways,
sidewalks, non-motorized travel lanes and parking.
o ED-3-D Policy: Require businesses and buildings in and adjacent to the Central
Business District to conform to established development standards.
Alternative 3
Apply mitigation measures to reduce run-off, construction noise, traffic congestion and air-
quality based on existing Pasco codes, standards and SEPA policies.
Ensure that existing and future industrial emissions don’t exceed local, state or federal
limits.
Promote transit and other types of transportation that do not contribute to additional air
emissions and reduce vehicle traffic.
Fence areas abutting industrial property with solid concrete block wall or other sound and
visual obscuring fencing material.
For a regional basis, ensure compliance with the most current EPA vehicle and fuel
regulatory requirements to continually help reduce vehicular emissions.
Provide data/studies showing that industrial users will not exceed City code noise levels.
Provide mitigation measures that may include concrete masonry wall, vegetative buffer or
other sound proofing applications to meet current City code requirements.
Page 239 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
66
Mitigate impacts from adjacent industrial uses through adoption of mitigation measures
during construction and operation, and through the adoption of the Goals and Policies of
Pasco Comprehensive Plan, including:
o LU-2-D Policy: Encourage the use of buffers or transition zones between non-
compatible land uses.
o LU-3-C Policy: Ensure all developments include appropriate landscaping and
screening, as required by adopted regulations and guidelines.
o ED-3. Goal: Maintain development standards and design guidelines to ensure that
commercial and industrial developments are good neighbors
o ED-3-A Policy: Enhance compatibility of commercial and industrial development with
residential and mixed-use neighborhoods with appropriate landscaping, screening,
building and design standards,
o ED-3-B Policy: Ensure outdoor illumination and signage of businesses have a positive
impact and are compatible with neighborhood standards.
o ED-3-C Policy: Provide appropriate access through a combination of pathways,
sidewalks, non-motorized travel lanes and parking.
o ED-3-D Policy: Require businesses and buildings in and adjacent to the Central
Business District to conform to established development standards.
6.9 Transportation
6.9.1 Affected Environment
The New Heritage site does not have existing roadways within the proposed 196.31-acre
development area. The key roadways to serve this site are: “A” Street – a minor east-west arterial
adjacent to the site along the northern boundary; Heritage Blvd – a local north-south roadway
between A Street and US 12 which is designated in the Comprehensive Plan as a future principal
arterial; and US 12/I-182 – An east-west expressway that crosses the Columbia River to the west
connecting with Benton County and Interstate I-82, and crossing the Snake River to the east
connecting to Walla Walla. (See Figure 8, Pasco Street System). There is also a railroad spur to
the South which, currently, does not serve any of the adjacent industries.
Page 240 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
67
In addition to roadways that serve New Heritage, the site also has multi-modal opportunities.
Benton Franklin Transit provides fixed route and on demand transit service to the City of
Pasco and the Tri-Cities area. In the vicinity of the New Heritage Site, service is provided
by Routes 64 and 65, each providing service every half hour throughout the day. Routes
64 and 65 have stops on “A” Street. Both routes provide transfer opportunities at the 22nd
Avenue Transit Center.
Bike and Pedestrian - The City of Pasco has a network of facilities that serve bicycle and
pedestrian needs. In the vicinity of the proposed New Heritage Site, “A” Street has a
sidewalk on the north side from Wehe Avenue to Road 40 East. It also has bike lanes in
each direction and a 9’ wide pathway on the south side from Elm Street to Road 40 East.
Figure 8 – Pasco Street Systems
6.9.2 Potential Impacts
All alternatives will increase the demands on transportation and transit facilities, along with the
need for additional non-motorized facilities such as trails and bikeways. These facilities will be
integrated into the development alternatives and will provide opportunities for recreational, and
commuter uses.
Page 241 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
68
Alternative 1
This alternative includes a variety of land uses with both multi-family units as well as single family
residential units, retail and office space. For the purposes of this analysis, a mixture of office
space, business park, and retail in the form of restaurants, grocery and other neighborhood
shopping were evaluated and estimated to generate approximately 1314 PM peak hour external
trips with 57% of trips inbound to the site. (See details in Appendix 3).
A planning level analysis was performed of the resulting traffic volumes, similar to the analysis
performed for the preparation of the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan with
respect to V/C ratios and intersection planning level analysis. This analysis was done by adding
traffic to the roadway network anticipated to be generated by the two adjacent warehouses being
constructed to the east, since they were not included in the Comprehensive Plan analysis, as well
as the 1314 PM peak hour trips generated by this alternative. Trips were distributed using existing
traffic patterns (Details are included in Appendix 3). The analysis resulted in 16 intersections
currently STOP controlled that would likely require improvements in order to achieve acceptable
LOS, 12 of these intersections were identified as likely needing improvements in the
Comprehensive Plan. There are also 13 existing traffic signals that would need improvements, 10
of which were identified in the Comprehensive Plan. Potential improvements to the eastbound off
ramp and westbound on ramp at the US 12/Lewis Street interchange may also be needed. One
existing roundabout may also need improvements and is also identified in the Comprehensive Plan.
Figure 9 – Alternative 1: Preferred Alternative Intersection Control Evaluation
Page 242 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
69
Vehicular trips from this alternative will mix with vehicular trips generated from industrial sites.
Industrial trips will generate a larger volume of truck trips along East A Street. Currently there
are existing residential developments located on the north side of East A Street. These existing
residents should notice a change of traffic with the operation the Amazon distribution facility.
Amazon was required to mitigate their traffic impacts to the surrounding area. It is our
understanding that Amazon implemented traffic improvements as required by the City; therefore,
it is assumed that those improvements mitigated any traffic safety concerns the City may have
had specific for that project.
This alternative will add more residential trips to the surrounding area. These trips will be
predominately cars and not trucks. Traffic impacts due to increased traffic will be mitigated by
this alternative as required by City code requirements. There will also be added pedestrians and
bicyclists generated by this alternative. Walking and bicycle paths are to be implemented in the
interior of this alternative and will be linked to the existing East A Street pathway. This
Page 243 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
70
alternative will not increase truck traffic versus Alternative 3; however, it will increase car,
pedestrian and bicycle use for the general area. This will increase the chance of encounters
between trucks, cars, pedestrians and bicyclists. An appropriate traffic study specific to the site
shall be completed to determine appropriate levels of mitigation as required by City code.
There is an existing rail spur located south of this alternative. This existing spur is not currently
in use. This spur was put in place to support industrial users; however, none of the existing
industrial users have had a use for this spur. Under this alternative, it is more than likely that this
spur will never be used and will eventually be removed. In order to guarantee no future rail spur
usage, the proponent would need to obtain notarized letters of non-use of the rail spur from the
Port of Pasco and adjacent land users that have access to this spur. In the likely hood of the spur
being used in the future, then there will need to be appropriate setbacks, buffers and sound walls
implemented along the southern portion of this alternative.
Alternative 2
Under this alternative, a variety of land uses are also proposed including single and multi-family
residential and a mixture of office space, business park, as retail in the form of restaurants, grocery
and other neighborhood shopping, although at a lesser density than Alternative 1. This alternative
is estimated to generate approximately 1,138 external trips with 58% of trips inbound to the site.
A similar evaluation as Alternative 1 was performed with respect to V/C ratios and intersection
planning level analysis. The analysis identifies that the same 16 unsignalized intersections and 13
signalized intersections would likely need improvements along with US 12 ramps to/from the west
at the Lewis Street interchange and improvements to an existing roundabout.
Vehicular trips from this alternative will mix with vehicular trips generated from industrial sites.
Industrial trips will generate a larger volume of truck trips along East A Street. Currently there
are existing residential developments located on the north side of East A Street. These existing
residents should notice a change of traffic with the operation the Amazon distribution facility.
Amazon was required to mitigate their traffic impacts to the surrounding area. It is our
understanding that Amazon implemented traffic improvements as required by the City; therefore,
it is assumed that those improvements mitigated any traffic safety concerns the City may have
had specific for that project.
Page 244 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
71
This alternative will add more residential trips to the surrounding area. These trips will be
predominately cars and not trucks. Traffic impacts due to increased traffic will be mitigated by
this alternative as required by City code requirements. There will also be added pedestrians and
bicyclists generated by this alternative. Walking and bicycle paths are to be implemented in the
interior of this alternative and will be linked to the existing East A Street pathway. This
alternative will not increase truck traffic versus Alternative 3; however, it will increase car,
pedestrian and bicycle use for the general area. This will increase the chance of encounters
between trucks, cars, pedestrians and bicyclists. An appropriate traffic study specific to the site
shall be completed to determine appropriate levels of mitigation as required by City code.
There is an existing rail spur located south of this alternative. This existing spur is not currently
in use. This spur was put in place to support industrial users; however, none of the existing
industrial users have had a use for this spur. Under this alternative, it is more than likely that this
spur will never be used and will eventually be removed. In order to guarantee no future rail spur
usage, the proponent would need to obtain notarized letters of non-use of the rail spur from the
Port of Pasco and adjacent land users that have access to this spur. In the likely hood of the spur
being used in the future, then there will need to be appropriate setbacks, buffers and sound walls
implemented along the southern portion of this alternative.
Figure 10 – Alternative 1: Preferred Alternative Roadway Volume to Capacity Ratios
Page 245 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
72
Alternative 3
The City’s Comprehensive Plan does not specify industrial land uses for the proposed amendment
site. The zoning for the site is I-1 along “A” Street and I-2 for the rest of the Heritage site (see
section 6.4.1 for details on uses allowed in these zones). Similar sites within this area and zoning
classification have been primarily developed as warehousing and food processing, although it is
possible, under the current zoning, for the property to be developed for a wide range of other uses.
The traffic model prepared by the Benton Franklin Council of Governments and used by the City
of Pasco in preparing its Comprehensive Plan, did not include any development for this site during
the 20-year planning period, nor for the two large warehouses being constructed immediately to
the east. This means that the potential uses could range from vacant to any allowable use under the
City’s Zoning Code, other than residential.
Page 246 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
73
Given this wide range of potential development, some reasonable basis for evaluating the traffic
impacts resulting from this alternative, had to be developed. To do this, an assumption had to be
made that if there were a change in the market, the site could be developed in uses identified in
the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual as General Light
Industrial. Based on this assumption, this alternative could result in approximately 1,237 peak hour
trips with 13% inbound and 87% outbound. A planning level analysis of these traffic volumes,
similar to the analysis performed for Alternative 1 and the Transportation Element of the
Comprehensive Plan, resulted in traffic impacts higher than shown in the Comprehensive Plan, but
lower than what could be expected to result from the most traffic impactive land uses allowed
under the Zoning Code.
The results of this alternative analysis indicates that the westbound on ramp to US 12 from Lewis
Street will have a V/C ratio greater than 1.0, with the eastbound off-ramp at 0.95 volume to
capacity ratio. The results of the intersection analysis indicate there would be 13 intersections
with STOP control that would need improvements (4 more than the Comprehensive Plan), two of
which are on “A” Street. There are also 13 intersections with traffic signals that would need
improvements as well, this being three more than the Comprehensive Plan. One roundabout is also
identified as likely needing improvements. Important in all this evaluation is that such a large
percentage of the trips are going away from the Heritage site since the primary activity there is
employment.
Vehicular trips from this alternative will add more car and truck trips to the roadway network.
Currently there are existing residential developments located on the north side of East A Street.
These existing residents should notice a change of traffic with the operation the Amazon
distribution facility along with future industrial development. Traffic impacts to the surrounding
area will need to be mitigated as required by City code requirements.
The City of Pasco is currently constructing a 28-acre sports complex at the southeast corner of
East A Street and Elm Street. This park will attract regional and local residents from the
surrounding area and will increase car, pedestrian and bicycle use. With increased truck traffic
due to this alternative, cars, pedestrian and bicyclists will have the chance for more encounters
with truck traffic versus Alternative 1 and 2. Industrial development will need to conduct traffic
studies to determine appropriate levels of mitigation as required by City code.
Page 247 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
74
There is an existing rail spur located south of this alternative. This existing spur is not currently
in use. This spur was put in place to support industrial users; however, none of the existing
industrial users have had a use for this spur. Under this alternative, the spur would remain as is
for potential use.
Table 20 – Comparison of Trip Generation
Trip Type Alt. 1 -Preferred
Alternative
Alt. 2 -
Medium
Density
Alternative
Alt 3. - No-Action
Alternative
Inbound 867 738 175
Outbound 660 585 1170
Less Internal 213 185 108
Total External Trips 1314 1138 1237
6.9.3 Mitigation Measures
Alternatives 1 and 2
Using the planning level methodology that was used in the preparation of the Comprehensive Plan
as described in Appendix 3, the impacts related to the future development of the site under both
these alternatives are summarized in Table 21. The analysis described in Appendix 3 does not
account for specific trips between this amendment area and the two large Amazon distribution
facilities being constructed or other industries nearby, so it is conservatively high on trips further
away from the site. Given that workers at these facilities will have additional housing nearby, the
impact on the roadway system may be less than those identified for Alternative 3.
The planning methodology used identifies locations where improvements may be needed. It is
logical to expect that when more detail is provided on a future development proposal, and more
detailed traffic operations analysis is undertaken, that slightly different mitigation would be
required for scenarios that add either more or less trips to the roadway network. Specific mitigation
measures to assure concurrency would be identified at the time of approval of the Land Subdivision
and Concomitant Agreement. Future mitigation with respect to transportation facilities will be
determined through the preparation of a Traffic Impact Analysis if this Comprehensive Plan
Amendment request is approved. At the time of application it should be determined which
Page 248 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
75
intersections are appropriate for evaluation based on the more detailed development proposal
submitted at that time.
To ensure that trucks from industrial uses are not entering residential areas, there shall be no direct
roadway connections from an industrial site to a residential area. Main roadway connections to the
existing roadway network for these alternatives should include Elm Street, Cedar Avenue/East A
Street and Heritage/East A Street.
Pedestrian and bicycle linkage should be implemented in the layout of the roadway network.
Linkage should be provided to the existing East A Street pathway. Appropriate crosswalks, signage
and signals should be implemented to improve safety.
In order to guarantee no future rail spur usage south of these alternatives the proponent shall
obtain notarized letters and/or agreements from the Port of Pasco and adjacent land users that
have access to this spur that they have no intent to use the existing spur and that it can be
removed from use. In the likely hood of the spur being used in the future, then there will need to
be appropriate setbacks, buffers and sound walls implemented along the southern portion of
these alternatives.
Alternative 3
The Regional Travel Demand Model used for preparation of the Transportation Element of the
Comprehensive Plan did not include development on the New Heritage site during the planning
period. Nor did the Regional model include traffic associated with the two large distribution
facilities being constructed to the east. Because of this, this alternative, based on the traffic
evaluation included in Appendix 3, indicates that any future industrial development under this
alternative would require additional traffic improvements beyond the mitigation identified in the
Comprehensive Plan. What transportation improvements would actually be required under this
alternative depends on what specific development is being proposed, although it is likely that the
requirement would be at least as much as those required under either Alternative 1 or 2 for the
following reasons:
Generates more trips;
Higher percentage of truck trips;
The directional split of inbound and outbound trips is highly directional;
Page 249 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
76
High outbound trips will have larger impact to regional traffic
Very few trips are absorbed internally to the site because of the lack of complementary
land uses associated with the industrial land uses allowed.
Table 21 – Comparison of Traffic Mitigation
Potential
Improvement
Type
Alt 1:
Preferred
Alternative
Alt 2:
Medium
Density
Alternative
Alt 3: No-Action
Alternative Comp. Plan
Two-Way or
All-Way Stop
Intersection
upgrade
16 16 16 12
Traffic
Signal
Intersecti
on
Upgrade
13 13 13 10
Roundabout
Upgrade 1 1 1 1
Potential US 12
ramp
improvements
WB on,
EB off
WB on, EB
off WB on None
Table 21 shows that the anticipated mitigation for Alternative 1 is the same as for Alternative 2
and 3. Each of the alternatives identifies the following intersections as potentially needing
improvements beyond those intersection identified in the Comprehensive Plan:
1) Four existing Stop-Controlled intersections may need to be signalized, including: Lewis
Street/US 12 eastbound ramps, “A” Street/Cedar Street (one of the accesses to the New
Heritage site), “A” Street/1st Street and Sylvester Street/US 395 ramp.
2) Three existing signalized intersections may need additional lanes: Court Street/US 395
northbound ramps, Court Street/US 395 southbound ramps, “A” Street/4 th Avenue.
Page 250 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
77
3) The US 12 westbound may need improvements under all three scenarios and the westbound
ramps may need improvements under the preferred alternative and the medium intensity
alternative.
Although the results are very similar at a planning level it should be noted that specific
improvements at intersections are not identified and that more detailed evaluation would need to
be performed as more detailed proposals are brought forward and more information is available.
In fact, it would appear that several of the above listed potential intersections for improvements
may be near the threshold of needing mitigation (given that they change between the
Comprehensive Plan analysis and the No-Action analysis). Depending on the actual development
proposal if the Comprehensive Plan amendment is approved they may or may not need to be
evaluated and should be determined at that time
Pedestrian and bicycle linkage should be implemented as a part of the industrial development,
specifically along East A Street. Appropriate crosswalks, signage and signals should be
implemented to improve safety.
This alternative would not require any modifications or mitigations to the existing rail spur that
is located along the southern boundary of the amendment area.
In addition, the City of Pasco Comprehensive Plan EIS identified the following specific mitigation
measures which are incorporated here by reference and should be employed to reduce impacts to
the transportation network:
The City will implement travel demand management methodologies identified in
the City of Pasco Draft Comprehensive Plan (2020b) to limit and manage the
demand on and access to the major facilities of I-182 and US 395.
During construction, the City will work with its development applicants to oversee
that appropriate coordination with affected agencies and property owners occurs
upon future development. This includes providing appropriate public notification
and detour routes upon development of its own projects.
During construction, the City could require construction management plans at the
time of development to reduce potential short‐term impacts.
To accommodate future population growth projections, the City has planned a
Page 251 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
78
roadway network to serve developing areas, and many of the improvements will be
paid for by private development. Identified improvements to transportation
networks are described further in the City of Pasco Draft Comprehensive Plan
Volume 2 (Oneza & Associates 2020).
The City will cooperate with the RTPO and Benton-Franklin Council of
Governments for levels of service.
The City should consider multi‐modal needs in new corridors and in street
standards for when new roadway facilities are constructed.
Implement the City of Pasco adopted Ordinance No. 3821 establishing concurrency
procedures for transportation facilities in conjunction with new development.
Implement land use compatibility that generates traffic along roads with adequate
capacity.
City’s allocates $249M budget for Capital improvements in 2020-2025. About
$48M of this would be spent on transportation improvements.
Various long term and short term improvements are identified in Table T-10 and
T-11 in the Comprehensive Plan Volume II.
City will continue to require the traffic impact fees from future developments that
will be used for future road and other improvements
Development should be consistent with the goals and policies of the
Comprehensive Plan.
Page 252 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
79
7 Heritage Conservation
7.1 Affected Environment
The Heritage amendment area is currently undeveloped. The site has historically been identified
as industrial and portions of the original site are currently being developed for warehouse and
distribution. There is no indication above ground of any historical sites or structures. The Pasco
Comprehensive Plan EIS provides historical information related to Tribal settlement and is
included here by reference.
7.2 Potential Impacts
If archaeological or historical materials are found, either under both the Preferred Alternative or
the Medium Density Alternative, future development could disturb or destroy such materials.
Under the No Action alternative, industrial activities could also impact archaeological materials.
7.3 Mitigation Measures
Any future development proposal will require further SEPA review. At that time, in the event that
archaeological or historical materials are discovered during future projects activities, work in the
immediate vicinity should be discontinued, the area secured and concerned tribes and the Office
of Archaeology and Historic Preservation notified. In addition, the follow policies have been
identified in the Pasco Comprehensive Plan EIS:
LU-8 Goal: Encourage the restoration and rehabilitation of historic buildings and sites.
LU-8-A Policy: Allow adaptive re-uses in historic structures.
Franklin County Countywide Planning Policies Historic Preservation: Identify and
encourage the preservation of land sites and structures that have historical or
archaeological significance.
In addition:
The City should comply with applicable laws and regulations regarding impacts to cultural
resources. Section 106, Executive Order 05-05, and RCW 27.53, among others, require
impacts to cultural resources be mitigated. Mitigation is developed on a project-by-project
basis, in consultation with Native American tribes, the Department of Archaeology and
Historic Preservation, and other interested parties.
Page 253 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
80
8 Summary of Impacts by Alternative
Topics/Impacts Common
to All Alternatives
Alternative 1: Preferred
Alternative
Alternative 2: Medium
Density
Alternative 3:
No-Action
Alternative
6.1 Earth
Clearing, grading,
erosion and impervious
areas will impact all
alternatives.
Front and rear yard
landscaping, open space
and parks.
Higher density than Alt. 2
with approximately 8.7
units per acre.
Front and rear yard
landscaping, open space
and parks.
Lower density than Alt. 1
with approximately 5.8
units per acre.
Minimal landscape
areas and no open space
or parks.
Large amounts of
impervious surfaces.
Possible areas of gravel
surfacing.
Pa
g
e
2
5
4
o
f
4
8
1
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
81
Topics/Impacts Common
to All Alternatives
Alternative 1:
Preferred
Alternative
Alternative 2:
Medium
Density
Alternative 3:
No-Action
Alternative
6.2 Air Quality
Fugitive dust during
construction activities.
Regional air quality is
similar throughout the
City.
All alternatives will have
an impact to air quality.
City of Pasco ozone
concentration is 10 per
WDOE Health
Disparities Map.
Increase population and
vehicular trips but reduce
truck trips as compared to
Alt. 3.
Eliminate possible future
industrial emissions that
are generally associated
with industrial activities.
Adding residents and
households adjacent to
existing industrial
developments.
Less regional trips than
Alternative 3.
Increase population and
vehicular trips but reduce
truck trips as compared to
Alt. 3.
Eliminate possible future
industrial emissions that
are generally associated
with industrial activities.
Adding residents and
households adjacent to
existing industrial
developments.
Less regional trips than
Alternative 3.
Increase in truck trips
as compared to Alt. 1
and 2 which will
increase diesel related
emissions.
Increase the chance for
emissions of pollutants
generally associated
with industrial
activities.
Possible emission
impacts to existing
residential users north
of the amendment area.
Increase in regional
vehicular trips versus
Alt. 1 and 2.
Impact to air quality at
new City sports park
currently being
constructed on East A
Street.
Pa
g
e
2
5
5
o
f
4
8
1
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
82
Topics/Impacts Common
to All Alternatives
Alternative 1:
Preferred
Alternative
Alternative 2:
Medium
Density
Alternative 3:
No-Action
Alternative
6.3 Utilities
All alternatives will have
an impact to City of
Pasco water and sewer
services.
Water system CIP
required for all of the
alternatives.
Water and sewer system
impacts are generally the
same for all of the
alternatives.
All of the alternatives
will have a potential for
water quality
contamination due to
stormwater controls.
Estimated water demand
is 0.59 MGD.
Estimated water and
sewer demands are
slightly greater than Alt 2
and 3.
Build out of area will be
done in phases and will
take several years.
Overall utility impact will
take several years.
Estimated water demand
is 0.45 MGD.
Estimated water and
sewer demands are less
than Alt 1 but slightly
greater than Alt. 3.
Build out of area will be
done in phases and will
take several years.
Overall utility impact will
take several years.
Estimated water demand
is unknown; however, it
could be more than Alt. 1
and 2 but will be
dependent upon a specific
user.
Large industrial user with
heavy water usage could
have a greater impact on
the City water and sewer
system versus Alt. 1 and
2.
There is a higher risk of
water quality
contamination due to
stormwater controls for
industrial sites versus Alt.
1 and 2.
Increased fire flow
requirements for
industrial developments
versus Alt. 1 and 2.
Pa
g
e
2
5
6
o
f
4
8
1
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
83
Topics/Impacts Common
to All Alternatives
Alternative 1:
Preferred
Alternative
Alternative 2:
Medium
Density
Alternative 3:
No-Action
Alternative
6.4 Land Use
All alternatives will have
residential development
adjacent to industrial
development.
All alternatives will be
developed adjacent to a
City sports park.
All construction and
operational impacts may
affect nearby land uses
from increased traffic
noise, odor and air
quality.
Would remove 196 acres
of zoned industrial land
Add 181 acres of mixed
commercial/residential
zoning.
Add residential uses
adjacent to industrial
zoned land.
Add 15 acres of land for
possible elementary
school.
Higher population density
versus alternative 3.
Decrease the potential for
urban sprawl.
Would remove 196 acres
of zoned industrial land
Add 181 acres of mixed
commercial/residential
zoning.
Add residential uses
adjacent to industrial
zoned land.
Add 15 acres of land for
possible elementary
school.
Higher population density
versus alternative 3.
Decrease the potential for
urban sprawl.
Existing and future
residential zoned lands
adjacent to industrial
uses.
City sports park directly
adjacent to industrial
uses.
Pa
g
e
2
5
7
o
f
4
8
1
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
84
Topics/Impacts Common
to All Alternatives
Alternative 1:
Preferred
Alternative
Alternative 2:
Medium
Density
Alternative 3:
No-Action
Alternative
6.5 Population, Housing
and Employment
All alternatives will have
an increase in
employment.
Impacts to population,
housing and employment
would occur in/out of
amendment area.
Estimated 1,354 new
housing units.
Increase in population
due to new housing units.
Estimated employment
between 617 to 739 in the
amendment area.
Estimated 1,028 new
housing units.
Increase in population due
to new housing units.
Estimated employment
between 563 to 667 in the
amendment area.
No housing units added in
the amendment area.
No population increase in
the amendment area.
Estimated employment
between 589 to 1,178 in
the amendment area.
New employment will
need to generally
commute from areas
outside of the amendment
area.
Increase in housing and
population outside of the
amendment area.
Pa
g
e
2
5
8
o
f
4
8
1
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
85
Topics/Impacts Common
to All Alternatives
Alternative 1:
Preferred
Alternative
Alternative 2:
Medium
Density
Alternative 3:
No-Action
Alternative
6.6 Public Services
All alternatives will have
an increase demand on
public services and
utilities.
Increased traffic could
impact traffic enforcement
and/or emergency
response time.
A need for additional
police and fire personnel
needed due to increase in
population and housing.
New elementary school is
anticipated due to
increase in population and
housing.
A need for additional
police and fire personnel
needed due to increase in
population and housing.
New elementary school is
anticipated due to
increase in population and
housing.
A need for additional
police and fire personnel
may be needed due to
increased employment in
the amendment area
which will generally
increase population and
housing outside of the
amendment area.
May increase the
population due to new
employment which may
have an impact on
existing schools.
Pa
g
e
2
5
9
o
f
4
8
1
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
86
Topics/Impacts Common
to All Alternatives
Alternative 1:
Preferred
Alternative
Alternative 2:
Medium
Density
Alternative 3:
No-Action
Alternative
6.7 Parks and Recreation
Regional population
growth will result in
greater demand for parks
and recreation.
Will increase the need for
parks and recreation.
Alternative will include
areas for parks and
recreation.
Will increase the need for
park space.
Alternative will include
areas for parks and
recreation.
Will not provide park
space or create the need
for additional park space.
May impact existing park
and recreation areas
throughout the City due
to increased employment.
Pa
g
e
2
6
0
o
f
4
8
1
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
87
Topics/Impacts
Common to All
Alternatives
Alternative 1:
Preferred
Alternative
Alternative 2:
Medium
Density
Alternative 3:
No-Action
Alternative
6.8 Environmental
Health
All alternatives will
have an impact to
Environmental
Health for the
general area.
Increased traffic for
all of the
alternatives will be
similar in volume.
Existing residential
developments
adjacent to all
alternatives.
Prevailing wind
direction
north/northeast.
City sports complex
adjacent to all of the
alternatives.
Air quality issues
are regional.
Could increase the risk of
exposure to noise, chemicals,
risk of fire, odor or hazardous
wastes from existing/new
industrial users.
Existing industrial land uses
directly adjacent to
amendment area have no
known air quality impacts
other than vehicular
emissions.
Existing 15-ft CMU wall
along the eastern portion of
the amendment area at the
Amazon Distribution Center.
Less trucks than Alt 3.
Increases traffic.
Adjacent to existing industrial
users with high truck traffic
usage.
Prevailing winds would direct
emissions from industrial uses
located east/west of
amendment area to the
north/northeast.
Could increase the risk of
exposure to noise, chemicals,
risk of fire, odor or
hazardous wastes from
existing/new industrial users.
Existing industrial land uses
directly adjacent to
amendment area have no
known air quality impacts
other than vehicular
emissions.
Existing 15-ft CMU wall
along the eastern portion of
the amendment area at the
Amazon Distribution Center.
Less trucks than Alt 3.
Increases traffic.
Adjacent to existing
industrial users with high
truck traffic usage.
Prevailing winds would
direct emissions from
industrial uses located
east/west of amendment area
to the north/northeast.
Increased traffic with
higher percentage of
trucks.
Existing residential
developments directly
adjacent to the north and
southeast.
Prevailing wind
direction would direct
emissions from
industrial area to
existing and future
residential areas.
City sports park being
developed directly
adjacent to industrial
uses.
New industrial
development could
increase the exposure to
existing and future
residential development
to noise, chemicals, risk
of fire, odor, or
hazardous wastes.
Pa
g
e
2
6
1
o
f
4
8
1
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
88
Topics/Impacts Common
to All Alternatives
Alternative 1:
Preferred
Alternative
Alternative 2:
Medium
Density
Alternative 3:
No-Action
Alternative
6.9 Transportation
All alternatives will have
an impact to the
transportation network.
Volume of PM Peak hour
trips for the alternatives
are similar.
PM Peak hour trips
around 1,314.
57% of PM Peak hour
inbound to amendment
area.
Will increase residential
trips to the surrounding
area.
Will decrease industrial
trips to the surrounding
area.
Increase the mix of
residential trips with
industrial trips.
Removal of rail spur
and/or mitigation impacts
of rail spur.
Reduce regional trips as
compared to Alt 3 with
employment center next
to housing units.
PM Peak hour trips
around 1,138.
58% of PM Peak hour
inbound to amendment
area.
Will increase residential
trips to the surrounding
area.
Will decrease industrial
trips to the surrounding
area.
Increase the mix of
residential trips with
industrial trips.
Removal of rail spur
and/or mitigation impacts
of rail spur.
Reduce regional trips as
compared to Alt 3 with
employment center next
to housing units.
PM Peak hour trips
around 1,237.
13% of PM Peak hour
inbound with 87%
outbound.
Will increase truck
traffic.
Increase the mix of
industrial trips with
residential trips.
Increase in traffic impacts
to the regional area as
compared to Alt 1 and 2
due to the large amount of
outbound PM Peak hour
trips.
Pa
g
e
2
6
2
o
f
4
8
1
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
89
Topics/Impacts Common
to All Alternatives
Alternative 1:
Preferred
Alternative
Alternative 2:
Medium
Density
Alternative 3:
No-Action
Alternative
7.0 Heritage
Conservation
All alternatives will have
a similar impact to
cultural resources.
Similar impacts as Alt 2
and 3.
Similar impacts as Alt 1
and 3.
Similar impacts as Alt 1
and 2.
Pa
g
e
2
6
3
o
f
4
8
1
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
90
9 Summary of Mitigations by Alternative
Topic
6.1 Earth
For Alternatives 1, 2 and 3
Maintain compliance with local air-quality agency requirements by watering exposed areas during
construction.
Avoid disturbing the steep slope area.
Compact soils at densities appropriate for planned land uses.
Provide vegetative cover or soil cement on exposed surfaces.
Maintain Open Space land use and environment designations.
Construction should be staged so that the maximum amount of existing vegetation is left in place.
Catch basins should be installed near storm drains
Topic
6.2 Air Quality
For Alternatives 1, 2 and 3
WDOE has a Fugitive Dust Policy which outlines specific steps in reducing fugitive dust during construction.
These policies include watering requirements during grading. In addition, the WDOE has the authority to issue
fines when fugitive dust suppression requirements are not met. The City of Pasco also requires a dust control
plan prior to construction.
Mitigation measures identified under Section 6.1.3.
For a regional basis, ensure compliance with the most current EPA vehicle and fuel regulatory requirements to
continually help reduce vehicular emissions.
Ensure that existing and future industrial emissions don’t exceed local, state or federal limits.
For Alternatives 1 and 2
Provide vegetated buffers directly adjacent to existing industrial uses in accordance with the City of Pasco
Municipal Code 25.180.040.
Pa
g
e
2
6
4
o
f
4
8
1
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
91
Promote transit and other types of transportation that do not contribute to additional air emissions and reduce
vehicle traffic.
Minimize residential backyards directly adjacent to industrial zoned properties.
Try to develop linear parks/open space directly adjacent to industrial zoned properties.
Topic
6.3 Utilities
For Alternatives 1, 2 and 3
Provide comprehensive water and sewer plans showing peak water and sewer demands along with projected
phasing prior to preliminary plat approvals.
Ensure there is adequate fire flow capacity depending upon the type of development.
For industrial developments, provide peak water and sewer demands during design review to City officials.
Coordinate with City on status of City of Pasco CIP projects.
Incorporate applicable mitigation measures under the City of Pasco Comprehensive Plan EIS.
Subsurface drainage (percolation trench, infiltration trenches, etc.) could be constructed to reduce peak runoff
flows to natural state conditions. Detention ponds would also be used to provide settlement for silt. Oil/water
separators would be used to reduce impacts from automobiles. Additional mitigation measures could occur
through bio-filtration prior to final discharge, either before or after entry into the various detention ponds.
Incorporate mitigation measures under the City of Pasco Comprehensive Plan EIS.
Under both development alternatives, detention ponds will reduce peak runoff flows to natural state conditions.
Detention ponds will also provide settlement for silt. Oil/water separators can reduce impacts from
automobiles.
Additional mitigation measures include bio-filtration, either before or after entry into the various detention
ponds, and buffers around wetlands in accordance with the CAO.
Stormwater improvements are planned to manage stormwater and protect water quality.
Development should be consistent with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan.
Maintain compliance with existing federal, state, and local policies that regulate land use activities near and
within surface water such as the Yakima and Columbia rivers and wetland including:
NPDES regulations and City stormwater regulations
USACE wetland avoidance and mitigation requirements
The City SEPA and CAO requirements
Pa
g
e
2
6
5
o
f
4
8
1
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
92
Topic
6.4 Land Use
Alternative 1
Enter into a Concomitant Agreement to ensure compliance with proposed mitigation under this FEIS.
Provide a range of residential configurations, including single-family residences on a separate lot with access
from a public street, where pedestrian, bike and automobile access are from the public street, or automobile
access is from an alley.
Provide a range of densities from 3 to 24 units per acre. The range of densities may be adjusted to meet current
state and/or local land use policies at the time of project development.
Locate residences within walking and biking distance to park/s, school, retail shops and offices to reduce the
reliance on the automobile.
Duplexes in or near single-family residential areas designed to be compatible with single-family houses.
Multi-family apartments designed to be compatible with nearby residential and commercial uses.
Provide a mixed-use commercial and office space on the ground floor with residential uses above.
Stand-alone commercial, and office uses, such as grocery stores and hardware stores, that are designed to serve
populations outside of the walking area, located at major intersections and designed to serve both the New
Heritage area and other areas outside of New Heritage.
If the Pasco School District requires an elementary school site in this area, set aside land for this purpose within
walking and biking distance from the major residential areas
Include dedicated pathways and bikeways, separated from vehicular traffic, and sidewalks and dedicated
bikeways within roadways.
Design this open space and pathway system to connect the residential areas to the neighborhood centers, parks,
schools and employment centers.
Design this open-space concept to serve as the “Heart” of the community; providing both recreation and meeting
spaces.
Provide sidewalks, space for bicycles and street trees on roadways.
Provide public multi-modal bus stop/transit area within walking/biking distance to the major residential areas.
Pa
g
e
2
6
6
o
f
4
8
1
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
93
Provide vegetation buffers and/or concrete block walls directly adjacent to industrial zoned properties.
Implement zoning ordinances or regulatory controls to manage potential land use conflicts and ensure
compatibility between residential, commercial, and industrial activities. Specific measures may include but not
limited to buffer zones, setbacks or other specific development standards. Specific mitigation measures can be
established as a part of the Concomitant Agreement during the rezone process.
Establish a monitoring and review process to assess the effectiveness of mitigation measures. Specifics can be
established as a part of the Concomitant Agreement during the rezone process.
Alternatives 2
Meet the requirements of the Medium Density (R-2) Zoning Ordinance and all City SEPA policies.
Compliant with the Comprehensive Plan land use density table for Medium Density (R-2).
Commercial area to be developed under the C-1 Commercial District
Implement mitigation measures identified under Alternative 1 noted above.
Alternative 3
Mitigation measures specific to the type of industry and following City of Pasco Zoning requirements and all
SEPA policies for specific mitigation.
Development should be consistent with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan.
Ensure that industrial land uses are compatible with surrounding existing land uses.
Topic
6.5 Population, Housing and Employment
Alternatives 1 and 2
Implement mitigation measures identified under Earth, Air, Utilities, Land Use, Parks and Recreation and
Transportation.
Train labor force consistent with the job market in the area.
Provide easy access to employment and reduce local traffic volumes by creating a live-work environment.
Develop adequate infrastructure.
Maintain minimum housing density.
Other mitigations that may be included in the Concomitant Agreement.
Pa
g
e
2
6
7
o
f
4
8
1
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
94
Topic
6.6 Public Services
Alternatives 1 and 2
Meet City and State building code requirements related to fire safety;
Provide adequate street access for emergency equipment;
Provide visual access to park and open space facilities;
Police, fire and other public services, including schools, may be mitigated through the increased tax base.
Mitigation fees for school construction.
Alternative 3
Meet City and State building code requirements related to fire safety;
Provide adequate street access for emergency equipment;
Police, fire and other public services may be mitigated through the increased tax base.
Topic
6.7 Parks and Recreation
Alternatives 1 and 2
Develop a system of interconnected parks, recreation facilities, bike and pedestrian trails, gathering and meeting
spaces, school facilities, retail spaces, and workspaces in order to facilitate the Vision of a walkable “New Urban”
community.
Placement of parks and open space to provide buffers from industrial uses (See Land Use, Section 6.4).
Develop linear parks/open spaces directly adjacent to industrial zoned properties.
Implement Pasco Park and Recreation Plan Goals and Policies
Implement Pasco Comprehensive Plan Goals and Policies related to parks and recreation.
Topic
6.8 Environmental Health
Alternatives 1 and 2
Assure the construction of the 15-ft tall concrete masonry wall along their eastern property boundary agreed to
by the Amazon distribution center.
Pa
g
e
2
6
8
o
f
4
8
1
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
95
Apply mitigation measures to reduce run-off, construction noise, traffic congestion and air-quality based on
existing Pasco codes, standards and SEPA policies.
Create a "New Urbanism" community with open spaces and buffers to reduce impacts from adjacent industrial
from visual blight, noise, runoff and odor (See Land Use, Section 6.4).
Fence areas abutting industrial property with solid concrete block wall or other sound and visual obscuring
fencing material.
For a regional basis, ensure compliance with the most current EPA vehicle and fuel regulatory requirements to
continually help reduce vehicular emissions.
Provide vegetated buffers directly adjacent to existing industrial uses in accordance with the City of Pasco
Municipal Code 25.180.040.
Promote transit and other types of transportation that do not contribute to additional air emissions and reduce
vehicle traffic.
Minimize residential backyards directly adjacent to industrial zoned properties.
Develop linear parks/open spaces directly adjacent to industrial zoned properties.
Conduct noise level studies for areas directly adjacent to existing industrial users to determine background noise
levels. Provide mitigation measures that may include concrete masonry wall, vegetative buffer, linear park or
other sound proofing applications to meet current City code requirements.
Mitigate impacts from adjacent industrial uses through adoption of mitigation measures during construction and
operation, and through the adoption of the Goals and Policies of Pasco Comprehensive Plan.
Alternative 3
Apply mitigation measures to reduce run-off, construction noise, traffic congestion and air-quality based on
existing Pasco codes, standards and SEPA policies.
Ensure that existing and future industrial emissions don’t exceed local, state or federal limits.
Promote transit and other types of transportation that do not contribute to additional air emissions and reduce
vehicle traffic.
Fence areas abutting industrial property with solid concrete block wall or other sound and visual obscuring
fencing material.
For a regional basis, ensure compliance with the most current EPA vehicle and fuel regulatory requirements to
continually help reduce vehicular emissions.
Mitigate impacts from adjacent industrial uses through adoption of mitigation measures during construction and
operation, and through the adoption of the Goals and Policies of Pasco Comprehensive Plan.
Pa
g
e
2
6
9
o
f
4
8
1
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2024
96
Topic
6.9 Transportation
Alternatives 1 and 2
Enter into a Concomitant Agreement to ensure compliance with proposed mitigation under this FEIS.
Preparation of a Traffic Impact Analysis to further evaluate traffic impacts once a detailed site plan has been
developed showing street layout, densities, residential and commercial use areas and park/open space areas.
Provide appropriate mitigation to meet current City code requirements.
Roadways shall not directly connect residential to industiral developmetns.
Provide pedestrian and bicycle linkage throught the amendment area and linking to the existing East A Street
pathway.
To eliminate the existing rail spur, obtain notarized letters/agreements stating non-use of the rail spur that is
located south of the amendment area between the Port of Pasco and land users with direct access to the spur. If
notarized letters/agreements cannot be obtained provide adequate mitigation measures to include setbacks,
buffers and sound walls along the rail spur line.
Alternative 3
Preparation of a Traffic Impact Analysis to further evaluate traffic impacts once a detailed site plan has been
developed showing industrial use.
Provide appropriate mitigation to meet current City code requirements.
Roadways shall not directly connect industrial developments to residential areas.
Provide pedestrian and bicyle linkage along East A Street.
Topic
7.0 Heritage Conservation
Alternatives 1, 2 and 3
SEPA review of proposed projects.
Comply with applicable laws and regulations in regards to cultural resources.
Stop work and notify appropriate officials upon a discovery of archaeological or historical materials.
Development should be consistent with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan.
Pa
g
e
2
7
0
o
f
4
8
1
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2023
97
Appendix 1 City of Pasco Determination of Significance and Scoping Notice
June 4, 2024
Page 271 of 481
Page 272 of 481
Page 273 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2023
98
Appendix 2 Public Comments Received from Scoping Notice
June 4, 2024
Page 274 of 481
From:Garza, Arnie
To:Andrew Hattori
Subject:RE: SEPA Checklist & DS/Scoping Notice - Broetje Orchards CPA/New Heritage (City of Pasco) - SEPA2022-038
Date:Wednesday, June 8, 2022 6:28:20 AM
Attachments:image001.png
[NOTICE: This message originated outside of City of Pasco -- DO NOT CLICK on links or
open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.]
Andrew we have a 6” main gas line on the South side of E A Street and can get the customer gas if he
would like.
From: Andrew Hattori <hattoria@pasco-wa.gov>
Sent: Tuesday, June 7, 2022 4:48 PM
Subject: SEPA Checklist & DS/Scoping Notice - Broetje Orchards CPA/New Heritage (City of Pasco) -
SEPA2022-038
** WARNING: EXTERNAL SENDER. NEVER click links or open attachments without positive
sender verification of purpose. DO NOT provide your user ID or password on sites or forms
linked from this email. **
All,
Please see attached SEPA Checklist and DS/Scoping Notice (SEPA2022-038) for the proposed Broetje
Orchards CPA/New Heritage Comprehensive Plan Amendment. The applicant has applied for an
amendment to the Future Land Use Map of the 2018-2038 Pasco Comprehensive Plan, to change a
parcel’s designation from Industrial Land Use to Mixed Residential Commercial Land Use with a total
combined site area (parcel) of approximately 197 acres. The proposal is located on Parcels #112-
470-014, #112-430-012, #112-430-021, #112-462-078, and #112-462-096 in Pasco, WA. Please
submit comments for the DS/Scoping Notice by June 28, 2022.
Thank you,
Capture Andrew Hattori
Planner I
525 N. 3rd Avenue 1st Floor
Pasco, WA 99301
NOTE NEW PHONE NUMBER
(509) 544-4146
hattoria@pasco-wa.gov
Page 275 of 481
From:Arrow Coyote
To:Andrew Hattori
Cc:Sydney.Hanson@dahp.wa.gov; Guy Moura
Subject:Re: SEPA Checklist & DS/Scoping Notice - Broetje Orchards CPA/New Heritage (City of Pasco) - SEPA2022-038
Date:Monday, June 27, 2022 9:29:22 AM
Attachments:image001.png
[NOTICE: This message originated outside of City of Pasco -- DO NOT CLICK on links or
open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.]
RE: SEPA2022-038 - Scoping Notice Broetje Orchards CPA/New Heritage
Location: properties are located south of East "A" Street and West of South Rd 40 E (Parcel # #112-
470-014, #112-430-012, #112-430-021, #112-462-078, and #112-462-096) in Pasco, WA.;
9N/30E/Sec. 34
Please be advised your proposed undertaking lies within the traditional territory of the Palus Tribe.
The Palus Tribe is a constituent member of and represented by the Confederated Tribes of the
Colville Reservation [Colville Confederated Tribes (CCT)]. The CCT is governed by the Colville Business
Council (CBC). The CBC delegated to the Tribal Historic Preservation Officer (THPO) the responsibility
of representing the CCT with regards to cultural resources management issues throughout these
traditional territories of our constituent tribes under Resolution 1996-29. This area includes most of
eastern Washington, parts of northeastern Oregon, south central British Columbia, and parts of
north central Idaho. In 1996, the CCT also entered into an agreement with the National Park Service
to assume state historic preservation officer responsibilities as outlined in Section 101 (d) (2) of the
National Historic Preservation Act. The assumption agreement explicitly tasks the Tribal Historic
Preservation Officer (THPO), to advise and assist Federal and State agencies and local governments
in carrying out their historic preservation responsibilities and for the CCT to carry out their
responsibilities for review of federal undertakings regarding cultural resources matters.
The project entails an amendment to the Future Land Use Map of the 2018-2038 Pasco
Comprehensive Plan, to change a parcel’s designation from Industrial Land Use to Mixed Residential
Commercial Land Use with a total combined site area (parcel) of approximately 197 acres.
There are a few sites and surveys in the section, but it is unknown if these are located in the project
area. There is insufficient data to assess impacts of this project on cultural resources. Therefore, we
request a letter from DAHP with an assessment of the cultural resources within the APE, and/or an
archaeological assessment or investigation be conducted in the project APE and the resulting report
be sent for review prior to the commencement of the project.
On Tue, Jun 7, 2022 at 4:48 PM Andrew Hattori <hattoria@pasco-wa.gov> wrote:
All,
Please see attached SEPA Checklist and DS/Scoping Notice (SEPA2022-038) for the
Page 276 of 481
proposed Broetje Orchards CPA/New Heritage Comprehensive Plan Amendment. The
applicant has applied for an amendment to the Future Land Use Map of the 2018-2038
Pasco Comprehensive Plan, to change a parcel’s designation from Industrial Land Use to
Mixed Residential Commercial Land Use with a total combined site area (parcel) of
approximately 197 acres. The proposal is located on Parcels #112-470-014, #112-430-012,
#112-430-021, #112-462-078, and #112-462-096 in Pasco, WA. Please submit comments
for the DS/Scoping Notice by June 28, 2022.
Thank you,
Capture
Andrew Hattori
Planner I
525 N. 3rd Avenue 1st Floor
Pasco, WA 99301
NOTE NEW PHONE NUMBER
(509) 544-4146
hattoria@pasco-wa.gov
--
Arrow Coyote, Archaeologist
History/Archaeology Program
Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation
21 Colville Street
Nespelem, WA. 99155
509-634-2736 office
509-634-1280 cell
arrow.coyote@colvilletribes.com
Page 277 of 481
STATE OF WASHINGTON
DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY
Eastern Region Office
4601 North Monroe St., Spokane, WA 99205-1295 • 509-329-3400
June 27, 2022
Andrew Hattori
Planner I
City of Pasco
PO Box 293
Pasco, WA 99301
Re: Broetje Orchards CPA / New Heritage
File: SEPA2022-038, CPA2022-003
Dear Andrew Hattori:
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Notice of Application and anticipated
Determination of Nonsignificance regarding the Broetje Orchards CPA / New Heritage project
(Proponent: Broetje Orchards LLC). After reviewing the documents, the Department of Ecology
(Ecology) submits the following comments:
Water Quality Program-Shannon Adams (509) 329-3610
This SEPA stated it was a non-project action. However, methods for erosion control were
described. Therefore, future construction activities may require coverage under the
Construction Stormwater General Permit.
For more information or technical assistance, please contact Shannon Adams at (509) 329-
3610 or via email at Shannon.Adams@ecy.wa.gov.
State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA)-Cindy Anderson (509) 655-1541
Ecology bases comments upon information submitted for review. As such, comments made
do not constitute an exhaustive list of the various authorizations you may need to obtain,
nor legal requirements you may need to fulfill in order to carry out the proposed action.
Applicants should remain in touch with their Local Responsible Officials or Planners for
additional guidance.
For information on the SEPA Process, please contact Cindy Anderson at (509) 655-1541 or
via email at Cindy.Anderson@ecy.wa.gov.
To receive more guidance on or to respond to the comments made by Ecology, please contact the
appropriate staff listed above at the phone number or email provided.
Department of Ecology
Eastern Regional Office
(Ecology File: 202202883) Page 278 of 481
From:John Burn
To:Andrew Hattori
Subject:RE: SEPA Checklist & DS/Scoping Notice - Broetje Orchards CPA/New Heritage (City of Pasco) - SEPA2022-038
Date:Friday, June 10, 2022 2:01:57 PM
Attachments:image001.png
[NOTICE: This message originated outside of City of Pasco -- DO NOT CLICK on links or
open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.]
Andrew,
No comments
John Burns
Operations Manager FCID#1
From: Andrew Hattori <hattoria@pasco-wa.gov>
Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2022 4:48 PM
Subject: SEPA Checklist & DS/Scoping Notice - Broetje Orchards CPA/New Heritage (City of Pasco) -
SEPA2022-038
All,
Please see attached SEPA Checklist and DS/Scoping Notice (SEPA2022-038) for the proposed Broetje
Orchards CPA/New Heritage Comprehensive Plan Amendment. The applicant has applied for an
amendment to the Future Land Use Map of the 2018-2038 Pasco Comprehensive Plan, to change a
parcel’s designation from Industrial Land Use to Mixed Residential Commercial Land Use with a total
combined site area (parcel) of approximately 197 acres. The proposal is located on Parcels #112-
470-014, #112-430-012, #112-430-021, #112-462-078, and #112-462-096 in Pasco, WA. Please
submit comments for the DS/Scoping Notice by June 28, 2022.
Thank you,
Capture Andrew Hattori
Planner I
525 N. 3rd Avenue 1st Floor
Pasco, WA 99301
NOTE NEW PHONE NUMBER
(509) 544-4146
hattoria@pasco-wa.gov
Page 279 of 481
https://wsdot-my.sharepoint.com/personal/gonsetp_wsdot_wa_gov/Documents/desktop/Pasco Broetje DS_Scoping
comments.docx
June 27, 2022
City of Pasco
Community Development Department
P. O. Box 293
Pasco, WA 99301
Attention: Jacob Gonzalez, Planning Manager
Subject: Determination of Significance and Scoping Notice for the Proposed
Broetje Orchards CPA/New Heritage; CPA2002-003, SEPA20220038
We have reviewed the Determination of Significance and Scoping Notice by the City of
Pasco for the proposed comprehensive plan amendment for the New Heritage
development. We have the following comments.
The Determination of Significance and Scoping Notice identifies three alternatives and
we conclude that all alternatives will have potential negative impacts to the state
transportation system which includes Interstates 182, and US Highways 12 and 395 in the
vicinity.
In the application materials, specifically SEPA2022-038 Supplemental Report by JUB,
several Land Use and Transportation Goals only list the local system but not state
highways, which should be included in further technical reports and analyses. The
analysis also excludes discussion of the US 12/East A Street intersection.
The Environmental Impact Statement will need to complete a land capacity and traffic
analysis for both the current and future conditions for each alternative. The analysis needs
to include the state transportation system as part of the study. The current and future
traffic analysis must not include any improvements to the state system without agreement
from WSDOT.
Page 280 of 481
City of Pasco
SEPA Determination and Scoping Notice – New Heritage
Page 2
We support your efforts and look forward to continued discussions. Thank you again for
the opportunity to participate and provide comments. If you have any questions
regarding these comments, please contact Debi Freudenthal at FreudeD@wsdot.wa.gov
or (509) 577-1633.
Sincerely,
Paul Gonseth, P.E.
Planning Engineer
PG: df
Page 281 of 481
1761 GEORGE WASHINGTON WAY
UNIT 347
RICHLAND, WA 99344
ROJO Venture, L.L.C.
October 17,2022
Jacob Gonzales, Planning Manager
City of Pasco, Community and Economic Development Department
P.O. Box 293
Pasco, WA 99301
Dear Mr. Gonzales,
Re: CPA 2022-003/SEPA
ROJO Venture is the owner of +/-20 acres along East A Street immediately
adjacent to the east boundary of the proposed project and we will be directly
impacted by any action. ROJO Venture is opposed to the proposed
Comprehensive Plan amendment. ROJO Venture, LLC offers the following
comments.
• The project proposed is bordered on 3 sides by Industrial zoning and the
North side, East A Street is the main truck route access to the Industrial
zone
o East- ROJO Ventures with existing Industrial zone businesses in
place and the new Amazon distribution centers
o South- Industrial with recently constructed rail access
o West- Industrial, City owned (proposed athletic facility)
o North- East A Street Arterial
• The DEIS does not include 2 large tracts to the South of the proposal area
that are under common ownership with the proposal area. Common
control should be addressed by the DEIS. These parcels should be included
Page 282 of 481
2
in the DEIS area if they may be added later. Or, the current zoning should
be reinforced, and buffer requirements addressed.
• Approval of the proposal creates a Spot or Island zone surrounded by
Industrial activity creating areas of incompatible zone interaction that will
have to be mitigated.
• The change of zoning immediately adjacent to our Light Industrial zoned
property significantly affects the development potential by forcing new
development requirements on our property (copied below from page 39
of DEIS)
o Parking lots within 500 feet of a C-2 district boundary, provided
such lots are paved and the development complies with the
landscape and fencing requirements of the C-1 district, as
enumerated in PMC 25.85.020(13). [Ord. 4110 § 23, 2013; Ord.
3354 § 2, 1999; Code 1970§ 25.52.020.
• East A Street is the only access designated in the proposal to access the
proposed Residential and Commercial area emergency access to the area
needs to be addressed should East A Street become blocked. The
potential blockage is greater with the Industrial access route and of
significant consequence with the proposed school.
• The developer has designated nearly 10% of the project area for schools
but the school development is optional to other parties. In the event the
school district does not develop the school the designated area reverts to
the base development; therefore traffic, services and other studies should
address the impacts both with and without schools.
• The City of Pasco needs to review the compatibility of their planned sports
complex with the proposed Residential zone. A case in point is a similar
project in Spokane, WA that is being opposed by residents in the area
o glen rose sports complex Spokane
o Glenrose Community Association -Sports Complex
(glenroseassociation.org)
Page 283 of 481
3
Mr. Gonzales, while we are generally pro development and growth, we want to
encourage you to consider all the potential impact that the proposed
development may have on the community in general and the neighboring
properties. On behalf of the members of ROJO Ventures, LLC, Polly Frisby, Karen
Walton and myself we thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
John Hjaltalin
Page 284 of 481
Page 285 of 481
Page 286 of 481
Page 287 of 481
Page 288 of 481
1
Elizabeth Smith
From:Jacob Gonzalez <gonzalezjb@pasco-wa.gov>
Sent:Wednesday, November 16, 2022 8:57 AM
To:Elizabeth Smith
Cc:Rick White
Subject:RE: City of Pasco DEIS - Notice of Availability Comment Period Extension - New Heritage
Land Use Amendment
Elizabeth,
I wanted to also make a comment that should have been included in the submittal from the city regarding the DEIS.
There were numerous references made on the potential use of a Concomitant agreement in the DEIS. While this has
been used in the past, the PMC restricts the use to rezones, and does not apply to Comprehensive Plan Land Use
Amendments.
The city would encourage the FEIS to incorporate details and specifics about what the Concomitant agreement would
include, please see the list in PMC 25.210.100. As mentioned in the DEIS, the city does not currently have the necessary
code language or development standards to implement a “new urbanism” or related development. Identifying specifics
about what those standards should or may need to would be essential for an eventual Planning Commission and Council
decision.
Thank you again, we appreciate your team’s patience.
Jacob B. Gonzalez | Planning Manager
Community & Economic Development
525 N. 3rd Avenue | Pasco, WA 99301
(509) 544-4136|gonzalezjb@pasco-wa.gov
This email and your response are considered a public record and will be subject to disclosure under Washington’s Public Records Act.
From: Jacob Gonzalez <gonzalezjb@pasco-wa.gov>
Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2022 4:00 PM
To: Elizabeth Smith <esmith@jub.com>
Cc: Rick White <WHITER@pasco-wa.gov>
Subject: RE: City of Pasco DEIS - Notice of Availability Comment Period Extension - New Heritage Land Use Amendment
Elizabeth,
Please find all comments received on the DEIS for the New Heritage Land Use Amendment.
Page 289 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2023
99
Appendix 3 Traffic Analysis
June 4, 2024
Page 290 of 481
30-19-079/New Heritage Appendix 3 - Traffic Analysis P a g e | 1
APPENDIX 3
NEW HERITAGE SITE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
TRAFFIC ANALYSIS
EXISTING CONDITIONS
There are no existing roadways on the proposed Amendment area site itself. There is a network
of functionally classified streets that serve the area around the site, as shown in Figure 3-1 below,
which also shows the location of traffic signals in this portion of the city.
FIGURE 3 -1. EXISTING ROADWAY NETWORK AND TRAFFIC CONTROL
Note: intersections without a symbol are Two-Way Stop Controlled.
Page 291 of 481
2
Key roadways that provide primary access to the site includes:
• “A” Street - Adjacent to the site along the northern boundary is “A” Street, an east-west
minor arterial that has two lanes west of 20th Avenue, four lanes from 20th Avenue to Elm
Street, five lanes from Elm Street to Heritage Blvd along the northern boundary of the site,
three lanes from Heritage Blvd to Road 40 East and two lanes from 40th Street to US 12.
There are three traffic signals on “A” Street where it crosses other principal arterial
roadways at Oregon Ave (SR 397), 4th Avenue and 10th Avenue.
• Heritage Blvd – is a two lane north-south local road with limited access between “A” Street
and US 12 with no stops. It is designated to become a principal arterial in the
Comprehensive Plan.
• US 12/I-182 – US 12 is designated an east-west expressway with two lanes in each
direction as it comes west across the Snake River. West of a grade separated interchange
at Lewis Street it becomes coincident with Interstate 182, continuing west through Pasco
and into Benton County. It widens to three lanes in each direction west of US 395.
With respect to existing traffic operations, results from the Comprehensive Plan are discussed here.
Traffic volumes for roadway segments were collected by the Benton Franklin Council of
Governments (BFCOG) in 2018 were reviewed and evaluated at a planning level for both roadway
segments and intersection Levels of Service to identify potential areas of concern that may not
meet city standards. Capacities from the regional model were also used for each roadway,
generally the capacities used were 800 vehicles per lane plus 300 when a local roadway has a two-
way left-turn lane or left turn lanes at intersections, with the capacity of freeway lanes being 1700.
The resulting roadway network volume to capacity ratios (V/C) were calculated. V/C <0.60
typically provides Level of Service (LOS) A, V/C between 0.60 and 0.70 LOS B, V/C between
0.70 and 0.80 LOS C, V/C between 0.80 and 0.90 LOS D, V/C between 0.90 and 1.0 LOS E and
V/C > 1.0 LOS F. Level of Service Standards adopted by the City of Pasco and the Benton
Franklin Council of Governments are LOS “D” for urban roadways and intersections.
Intersection approach volumes were also examined using a planning level methodology and
evaluated for two conditions. First, whether stop control is adequate when comparing major street
and minor street traffic volumes, comparing to Exhibit 10-15 from the Highway Capacity Manual
as shown below. If intersection volumes fell in the region of the Exhibit indicating that Two-Way
Page 292 of 481
3
Stop Control is the likely control type then it was assumed that the intersection would function
acceptably. If entering volumes fell above that region it indicates that improvements may be
needed, which may be in the form of additional lanes to add capacity, or a higher form of
intersection control. Turning movement volumes would need to be evaluated using the Highway
Capacity Manual methodology.
Second, for signalized intersections entering volumes were compared with entering capacity
multiplied by intersection adjustment factor to account for the fact that two roadways must share
the pavement within the intersection. The adjustment factors used are: for roadways with the same
functional classification = 0.55, roadways with one level of functional classification difference =
0.50, roadways with two levels of functional classification difference = 0.45. Any intersection
Page 293 of 481
4
with a V/C > 0.90 was identified as potentially needing additional capacity, likely in the form of
additional lanes.
As reported in the Comprehensive Plan, all functionally classified roads east of the railroad tracks
in Pasco function with good volume to capacity (V/C) ratios and Levels of Service, with only one
roadway having a V/C ratio greater than 0.70. Elsewhere in the City there is congestion over both
of the bridges from Pasco to Kennewick and in the vicinity of the US 395/I-182 interchange. The
Comprehensive Plan Update performed a planning level system wide evaluation of intersections
which identified four intersections in central and east Pasco that are currently unsignalized but
based on entering volumes may need improvements. These intersections include Heritage Blvd at
A Street, two intersections on Lewis Street and one on Oregon Avenue.
Ben Franklin Transit provides fixed route and on demand transit service to the City of Pasco and
the Tri-Cities area. In the vicinity of the Amendment area service is provided by Routes 64 and
65, each providing service every half hour throughout the day. Route 65 has stops on “A” Street
between Heritage Blvd and Terra Vida Lane while Route 64 has stops on “A” Street between Wehe
Avenue and Elm Avenue. Both routes provide transfer opportunities at the 22nd Avenue Transit
Center.
The City of Pasco has a network of facilities that serve bicycle and pedestrian needs. In the vicinity
of the proposed Amendment area, “A” Street has a sidewalk on the north side from Wehe Avenue
to Road 40 East. It also has bike lanes in each direction and a 9’ wide pathway on the south side
from Elm Street to Road 40 East.
There is an existing rail spur along the southern boundary of the New Heritage site that was
constructed to promote industrial development at this site as well as on the south side.
EFFECTS OF T HE PROPOSAL
COM PREHENSIVE PLAN
For each of the alternatives discussed below, a planning level analysis was performed using the
same methodology as was used in the preparation of Transportation Element of the Comprehensive
Plan Analysis as described above. The methodology for forecasting future traffic conditions and
Page 294 of 481
5
comparing to the Comprehensive Plan for the three alternatives (including the No Action) is
discussed below.
To assist with identifying future conditions, the BFCOG develops and maintains the regional travel
demand model. The model is a strategic planning tool that includes population and employment
forecasts, identified transportation projects and models future conditions across the region. The
outcome is a regional model that is adopted by the BFCOG Board, of which the City of Pasco is a
member.
The City of Pasco submitted to BFCOG updated population and employment forecasts, by
Transportation Analysis Zones that reflect the expanded Urban Growth Area and land uses
associated with the Comprehensive Plan. An updated traffic volume forecast using the regional
travel demand model was prepared. This effort ensures that the Land Use Element and the
Transportation Element are consistent for the purposes of the Comprehensive Plan. The results of
the refined regional model provide insights and better understanding as to how the transportation
network will function with the increase in population and employment. Of note for this current
Traffic Analysis for the New Heritage site is that the Regional Travel Demand Model assumed no
additional development on the site during the planning horizon of the Comprehensive Plan. Nor
did the regional travel demand model include any trips associated with the two large warehouses
being constructed to the east of the Heritage site.
A similar analysis to that of existing conditions was performed using the traffic volume forecasts
of the Comprehensive Plan to evaluate both roadway segments and intersections to determine
where capacity needs are anticipated based on the land uses built into the regional model.
Similar to the existing condition roadway volume to capacity ratios (V/Cs) are good, with the only
segment in central and east Pasco with a V/C ratio greater than 0.70 being the westbound on-ramp
from Lewis Street to US 12. The long-range analysis of the Comprehensive Plan, within the area
shown in Figure 3-1 above, indicates 12 existing intersections with STOP control that may likely
need improvements to provide acceptable Levels of Service. These improvements could be in the
form of turn lanes or a higher level of traffic control such as a roundabout or traffic signal. There
are also 10 existing signalized intersections and one existing roundabout that are forecast to be
Page 295 of 481
6
over capacity that may also need improvements in the form of additional lanes. These results, for
the Comprehensive Plan analysis for the area included in the maps at the end of this appendix.
NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE
To evaluate the effects of the alternatives an evaluation of the No Action Alternative must also be
performed. To evaluate the New Heritage site under the No Action alternative, the land use
changes in the regional model were examined and it was found that no additional development
was assumed on this site. Thus, to evaluate the No-Action alternative trip generation and
distribution needed to be performed for this scenario as well, assuming the site were to develop as
light industrial. Similarly, the Comprehensive Plan didn’t include trips associated with the two
large warehouses being constructed to the east. These trips were added as well.
Multiple industrial land uses are offered in the Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip
Generation Manual 10th Edition. Many land uses are allowed under the current zoning, including
office, business park, manufacturing and light industrial. For the purposes of this analysis an
assumed land use of General Light Industrial was used for trip generation purposes. The resulting
trips would amount to approximately 1,235 PM peak hour trips with 13% of those inbound to the
site and 87% outbound.
The trip generation assumptions of each of the three development alternatives are included in tables
towards the back of this appendix. A summary of trip generation of the three alternatives is
provided in Table 3.1.
Page 296 of 481
7
TABLE 3 -1 – COMPARISON OF TRIP GENERATION
Trip Type
Alternative 1
Preferred
Alternative
Alternative 2
Medium
Density
Alternative
Alternative 3
No-Action
Alternative
Inbound 867 738 175
Outbound 660 585 1170
Less Internal 213 185 108
Total External Trips 1314 1138 1237
Source: ITE Trip Generation 10th Editions
The trips generated by each alternative were assigned to the roadway network using the same trip
distribution percentages. The percentages shown below in Table 3-2 were estimated using a
cordon line around central and east Pasco and the existing traffic volumes crossing the cordon line
during the PM peak hour. Based on the location of the New Heritage the percentages of trips using
the Blue Bridge (US 395) and the Cable Bridge were adjusted to reflect an easier and less
congested route to Kennewick using the Cable Bridge. An additional 12 large blocks were also
designated in central and east Pasco to assign trips to this area as well, amounting to 23% of the
total trips.
Page 297 of 481
8
TABLE 3 -2. TRIP DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
Cordon Line % In % Out
US 12 East of “A” Street 4 3
Kahlotus Hwy north of US 12 3 1
US 395 North of I-182 2 3
4th Ave North of I-182 2 1
Argent Rd west of 20th Avenue 3 5
I-182 west of US 395 25 24
Court Street west of US 395 6 5
Sylvester Street west of US 395 3 4
US 395 South (Blue Bridge) 5 8
10th Ave South (Cable Bridge) 24 23
Central/East Pasco 23 23
Total 100% 100%
The results of the planning level analysis for the No Action Alternative indicates that the
westbound on ramp to US 12 will have a V/C ratio greater than 1.0. The results of the intersection
analysis are shown in the maps at the end of this appendix as well. The intersection control
analysis indicates that there could be 16 intersections with STOP control that would need
improvements (4 more than the Comprehensive Plan), two of which are on “A” Street. There are
also 13 intersections with traffic signals that would need improvements as well, this being three
more than the Comprehensive Plan, one of which is on “A” Street at 4th Avenue. Important in all
this evaluation is that such a large percentage of the trips are going away from the Heritage site
since the primary activity there is employment.
Maps showing the results of the Volume to Capacity analysis as well as the Intersection Control
Analysis follow the tables at the back of this appendix as well. Appropriate maps were prepared
focusing on the area of impact of the New Heritage Site including central and east Pasco.
Page 298 of 481
9
Transit and Bicycle/pedestrian features would be offered within the Heritage site. The existing
rail spur along the southern boundary would not likely be used on its north side but could still be
used on its south side.
PREFERRED A LTERNATIVE
The Preferred Alternative includes a variety of land uses including both multi-family units as well
as single family units, retail and office space. The specific assumptions are included in a table
following the text of this appendix. As shown in Table 3-1, this alternative is estimated to generate
approximately 1,315 trips with 57% of trips inbound to the site.
A similar evaluation as the other alternatives was performed with respect to V/C ratios and
intersection planning level analysis. The analysis resulted in the same 16 intersections currently
STOP controlled that would likely require improvements in order to achieve acceptable LOS, 12
of which are also identified in the Comprehensive Plan. There are 13 existing traffic signals that
would need improvements, these are the same as the other alternatives which also include 10 that
are identified in the Comprehensive Plan. Although the results are very similar at a planning level
it should be noted that specific improvements at intersections are not identified and that more
detailed evaluation would need to be performed as more detailed proposals are brought forward
and more information is available.
MEDIUM DENSITY ALTERNATIVE
Under this alternative a variety of land uses are also proposed including a mixture of Office space,
business park, as retail in the form of restaurants, grocery and other neighborhood shopping were
evaluated. This alternative assumes about 235 more multi-family units as well as more commercial
and office space. The trip generation specifics are included in a table later and estimates that this
alternative would generate approximately 1,140 trips with 56% of trips inbound to the site.
A similar evaluation as the other alternatives was performed with respect to V/C ratios and
intersection planning level analysis. The analysis was essentially identical to the results for the
Low Density alternative, indicating that 13 unsignalized intersections and 13 signalized
intersections would likely need improvements along with the westbound US 12 on-ramp from
Lewis Street.
Page 299 of 481
10
MITIGATION MEASURES
NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE
As mentioned previously, the Regional Travel Demand Model used for preparation of the
Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan did not include development on the New
Heritage site, nor the site of the two proposed large distribution facilities, during the planning
period. Thus, mitigation for the No Action Alternative would include installation of 16 new traffic
signals or other capacity improvements at existing unsignalized intersections, including 12
identified in the Comprehensive Plan, it would also include reconstruction of 13 existing traffic
signals to increase capacity, 10 of which are included in the Comprehensive Plan. One existing
roundabout would also need additional capacity as identified in the Comprehensive Plan, as well
as ramp improvements at the Lewis Street interchange.
PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE
At a planning level perspective, the mitigation required for this alternative are similar to the No
Action Alternative. With the potential difference being that improvements may be needed for the
US 12 eastbound off-ramp at Lewis Street. In practice though, at the level of detail of this analysis,
the implementation of the improvements at the time of the development will likely be slightly
different. It is anticipated that a more detailed analysis will be performed when a development
proposal is submitted if the Comprehensive Plan is amended to allow mixed use commercial and
residential instead of industrial. At that time a more refined development proposal will have been
prepared and appropriate intersections for detailed evaluation should be determined for inclusion
in a detailed Traffic Impact Analysis in order to provide acceptable Levels of Service consistent
with the State of Washington Concurrency requirements.
MEDIUM DENSITY ALTERNATIVE
At a planning level perspective, the mitigation required for this alternative is the same as that for
the Preferred Alternative. In practice though, at the level of detail of this analysis, the
implementation of the improvements at the time of the improvement will likely be slightly more.
Page 300 of 481
11
Although the same intersections are identified as needing potential improvements as the No Action
scenario, it is important to note that the impacts for this alternative may be less than those of the
No-Action alternative for four reasons:
1. It generates fewer trips,
2. The directional split of inbound and outbound trips are more evenly distributed,
3. The mixed-use nature of the proposed development allows for more trips to be contained
on-site such as people that live and work within Heritage, or people that are able to live
and shop within the proposed development.
4. Proximity to the proposed large distribution facilities will be a benefit for both them and
the Heritage residents.
TABLE 3 -3 – COMPARISON OF TRAFFIC MITIGATION
Potential
Improvement Type
Preferred
Alternative
Mixed Use
Alternative
No-Action
Alternative
Comprehensive
Plan
Two-Way or All-Way
Stop Intersection
upgrade
16 16 16 12
Traffic Signal
Intersection Upgrade 13 13 13 10
Roundabout Upgrade 1 1 1 1
Potential US 12 ramp
improvements
WB on
EB off
WB on
EB off WB on None
Although the results are very similar at a planning level it should be noted that specific
improvements at intersections are not identified and that more detailed evaluation would need to
be performed in a Traffic Impact Analysis as more detailed proposals are brought forward and
more information is available.
Page 301 of 481
TRIP GENERATION Preferred Alternative
Description
Land
Use
Codes Units
Rate
Weekday
Daily
Traffic
PM
Peak
Period
Rate
% PM
In
% PM
Out
Expected
Units
(independe
nt variable)
Calculated
Daily Trips
Based on
Average
Rate
Calculated
PM Trips
Based on
Average
Rate
Passby
Percent
PM Trips
with Origin
or
Destination
outside
Heritage In Out
Single-Family Detached Housing 210 DU 9.44 0.99 63% 37% 618 5,834 612 612 385 226
Multi Family Housing (Low-Rise)220 DU 7.32 0.56 63% 37% 736 5,388 412 412 260 152
Elementary School 520 1,000 Sq. Ft. GFA 19.52 1.37 45% 55% 205 4,002 281 281 126 154
General Office Building 710 1,000 sq Ft. GFA 9.74 1.15 16% 84% 42 409 48 48 8 41
Medical-Dental Office Building 720 1,000 sq Ft. GFA 34.80 3.46 28% 72% 2 70 7 7 2 5
Office Park 750 1,000 sq Ft. GFA 11.07 1.07 7% 93% 0 0 0 0 0 0
Business Park 770 1,000 sq Ft. GFA 12.44 0.42 46% 54% 0 0 0 0 0 0
Shopping Center 820 1,000 Sq. Ft. GFA 37.75 3.81 48% 52% 16 604 61
34 40 19 21
Supermarket 850 1,000 sq Ft. GFA 106.78 9.24 51% 49% 11 1,175 102
36 65 33 32
High Turnover (Sit-Down) Restaurant 932 1,000 Sq. Ft. GFA 112.18 9.77 62% 38% 2 224 20 43 11 7 4
Fast-Food Restaurant with Drive Through Window 934 1,000 Sq. Ft. GFA 470.95 32.67 52% 48% 2 942 65 49 33 17 16
Gasoline/Service Station with Convenience Market 945 Vehicle Fueling Positions 205.36 13.99 51% 49% 4 821 56 66 19 10 9
Source: ITE 10th Edition Total Trips 1638 19468 1663 1529 867 660
121 92
746 568
Less Internal (14%)
Total Trips In/Out of Heritage
Pa
g
e
3
0
2
o
f
4
8
1
TRIP GENERATION Medium Density Alternative
Description
Land
Use
Codes Units
Rate
Weekday
Daily
Traffic
PM
Peak
Period
Rate
% PM
In
% PM
Out
Expected
Units
(independe
nt variable)
Calculated
Daily Trips
Based on
Average
Rate
Calculated
PM Trips
Based on
Average
Rate
Passby
Percent
PM Trips
with Origin
or
Destination
outside
Heritage In Out
Single-Family Detached Housing 210 Dwelling Units 9.44 0.99 63% 37% 548 5,173 543 543 342 201
Multi Family Housing (Low-Rise)220 Dwelling Units 7.32 0.56 63% 37% 480 3,514 269 269 169 99
Elementary School 520 1,000 Sq. Ft. GFA 19.52 1.37 45% 55% 205 4,002 281 281 126 154
General Office Building 710 1,000 sq Ft. GFA 9.74 1.15 16% 84% 41 399 47 47 8 40
Medical-Dental Office Building 720 1,000 sq Ft. GFA 34.80 3.46 28% 72% 3 104 10 10 3 7
Office Park 750 1,000 sq Ft. GFA 11.07 1.07 7% 93% 0 0 0 0 0 0
Business Park 770 1,000 sq Ft. GFA 12.44 0.42 46% 54% 0 0 0 0 0 0
Shopping Center 820 1,000 Sq. Ft. GFA 37.75 3.81 48% 52%0 0 34 0 0 0
Supermarket 850 1,000 sq Ft. GFA 106.78 9.24 51% 49% 15 1,602 139
36 89 45 43
High Turnover (Sit-Down) Restaurant 932 1,000 Sq. Ft. GFA 112.18 9.77 62% 38%0 0 43 0 0 0
Fast-Food Restaurant with Drive Through Window 934 1,000 Sq. Ft. GFA 470.95 32.67 52% 48% 4 1,884 131 49 67 35 32
Gasoline/Service Station with Convenience Market 945 Vehicle Fueling Positions 205.36 13.99 51% 49% 4 821 56 66 19 10 9
Source: ITE 10th Edition 1300 17499 1475 1324 738 585
103 82
635 503
Less Internal (14%)
Total Trips In/Out of Heritage
Pa
g
e
3
0
3
o
f
4
8
1
TRIP GENERATION No Action Alternative
Description
Land
Use
Codes Units
Rate
Weekday
Daily Traffic
PM
Peak
Period
Rate
% PM
In
% PM
Out
Expected
Units
(independe
nt variable)
Calculated
Daily Trips
Based on
Average
Rate
Calculated
PM Trips
Based on
Average
Rate In Out
General Light Industrial 110 1,000 Sq. Ft. GFA 4.96 0.63 13% 87% 2134 10,587 1,345
175 1170
Source: ITE 10th Edition 2134 10587 1345 175 1170
Internal (8%)1059 134 14 94
Total External 9528 1211 161 1076
acres 196
sq ft 8,537,760
Floor Area Ratio 25%
sq of Industrial 2,134,440
in thousands 2134Pa
g
e
3
0
4
o
f
4
8
1
N
3
R
D
A
V
E
E A ST
W CLAR
K
S
T
N
1
S
T
A
V
E
N
O
R
E
G
O
N
A
V
E
W PEARL ST
W COURT ST
E LEWIS ST
S
W
E
H
E
A
V
E
SMAITLAND
AVE
H
E
R
I
T
A
G
E
BL
V
D
S
4
T
H
AVE
S 1
0
T
H
A
V
E
W A ST
EAINS
WO
RTH
AVE
N
C
O
M
M
E
R
C
I
A
L
A
V
E
New
Heritage
0.41
0
.
6
4
0.
4
7
0.
1
3
1
1.01
0.42
0.96
1.
0
5
0.63
0.
7
8
0.57
0.
3
9
1.
2
5
1.62 0.24
0.07
0.56
0
.
1
2
0.4
0.29
0.
4
8
0.3
7
0.21
0.33
0.32
0.10.16
0.54
0.9
1 0.
2
3
1.0
2
0.
4
9
0
0.7
2
0.38
0.
7
0.
5
8
0.05
0.
3
4
0.97
1.1
9
0
.
1
4
0
.
5
5
0.
1
9
0.
3
6
0.750.86
0.7
4
0.7
3
0.
1
8
1.4
4
0.71
0.3
0.35
0
.
8
9
0.08
0.
1
7
182
182
395
395
12
12
12
397
397
C
O
L
U
MB
I
A
RI
V
ER
COMP PLAN
VOLUME TO
CAPACITY RATIO
k
0 0.25 0.5
0LOHV
Volume to Capacity Ratio (1 Hour) (0.50)
/HVVWKDQ0.70
0.70WR 0.80
0.80WR 0.90
0.90WR 1.00
0RUHWKDQRUHTXDOWR1.00
Pa
g
e
3
0
5
o
f
4
8
1
N
3
R
D
A
V
E
E A ST
N
2
4
T
H
A
V
E
W CLAR
K
S
T
N
1
S
T
A
V
E
N
O
R
E
G
O
N
A
V
E
W PEARL ST
W COURT ST
E LEWIS ST
S
W
E
H
E
A
V
E
S
M
AITLAND
A
V
E
H
E
R
I
T
A
G
E
BL
V
D
S
4
TH A V E
S 1
0
T
H
A
V
E
W A ST
EAINSWO
R
TH
A
VE
N
C
O
M
M
E
R
C
I
A
L
A
V
E
New
Heritage
0.
8
5
0.57
0.01
0.71
0.
6
7
0
.
6
6
0.
4
9
0.58
0
.
1
5
1.05
1.09
0.7
0.98
1.
0
6
0.65
0.
8
1.14
0.
6
1
2.05
0.44
0.
5
0.56
1.
2
8
1.7
0
.
2
7
0.07
0
.
1
8
0.29
1.82
0.
2
4
0.
4
8
0.32
0.36
0
.
0
3
0.51
0
.
2
6
0.38
0.81
0.78
0.19
0.8
8
0.69
0.
9
9
0.93
0.9
2 0.
2
5
0.14
0.91
1.84
0.
7
7
0.54
1.
0
7
0
.
3
9
1.03
0.35
0.41
0.02
0.0
6
0.1
6
0
.
3
1
0
.
3
7
0.4
7
1.04
0.
7
2
0
.
9
6
0.42
0.13
0.430.82
0.
0
9
0.
1
2
0.
5
9
0.34
0.
5
3
0.550.08
0.3
1.02
1.1
9
0
.
6
2
0.4
6
0
.
7
3
0.
2
0.6
8
0.2
1
1.4
3
0.7
4
0
.
2
2
1
0.05
0.
1
7
1.4
7
0.4
0
.
9
0.1
0.52
0.11
182
182
395
395
12
12
12
397
397
C
O
L
U
MB
I
A
RI
V
ER
2040 NO ACTION
VOLUME TO
CAPACITY RATIO
k
0 0.25 0.5
0LOHV
Volume to Capacity Ratio (1 Hour) (0.50)
/HVVWKDQ0.70
0.70WR 0.80
0.80WR 0.90
0.90WR 1.00
0RUHWKDQRUHTXDOWR1.00
Pa
g
e
3
0
6
o
f
4
8
1
N
3
R
D
A
V
E
E A ST
N
2
4
T
H
A
V
E
W CLAR
K
S
T
N
1
S
T
A
V
E
N
O
R
E
G
O
N
A
V
E
W PEARL ST
W COURT ST
E LEWIS ST
SMA
I
TLAND
A
VE
H
E
R
I
T
A
G
E
BL
V
D
S
4
TH
AVE
S 1
0
T
H
A
V
E
W A ST
EAINSWO
R
TH
A
VE
N
C
O
M
M
E
R
C
I
A
L
A
V
E
New
Heritage
0.
5
5
0.38
0.01
0.69
0
.
6
5
0.
4
8
0.770.66
0
.
6
2
1.03
0.1
1.09
0.58
0.67
1.05
0.
8
1.14
0.
6
1
2.05
0.49
0.44
0.
4
5
0
.
5
2
0.56
1.
3
2
0.571.67 0.26
0.08
0
.
1
5
0.51
0.3
1.82
0.41
0.
2
4
0.32
0.29
0
.
0
3
0.36
0.35
0.79
0.78
0.19
0.9
2
0.63
0.93
0.
2
5
1.06
0.14
0.91
1.84
0.54
1.07
0.4
0
.
3
9
0.02
0.1
6
0
.
3
1
0.7
2
0
.
3
7
0.4
7
1.04
0.
7
1
0
.
9
6
0.42
0.13
0.82
0.07
0
.
2
7
0.
8
1
0.
0
9
0.
5
9
0.34
0.460.06
0.99
1.2
0
.
4
3
0
.
9
5
0.
2
0.6
8
0.85
0.2
1
1.1
6
0.7
4
0
.
2
3
1
0.05
0.
1
7
1.5
0.75
0
.
8
9
0.12
0.
1
8
0.5
0.11
182
182
395
395
12
12
12
397
397
C
O
L
U
MB
I
A
RI
V
ER
k
0 0.25 0.5
Miles
sŽůƵŵĞƚŽ/ĂƉĂĐŝƚLJZĂƟŽ;ϭ,ŽƵƌͿ;Ϭ͘ϱϬͿ
Less than 0.70
0.70 to <0.80
0.80 to <0.90
0.90 to <1.00
More than or equal to 1.00
MEDIUM
DENSITY
ALTERNATIVE
VOLUME TO
CAPACITY RATIO
Pa
g
e
3
0
7
o
f
4
8
1
N
3
R
D
A
V
E
E A ST
N
2
4
T
H
A
V
E
W CLAR
K
S
T
N
1
S
T
A
V
E
N
O
R
E
G
O
N
A
V
E
W PEARL ST
W COURT ST
E LEWIS ST
S
W
E
H
E
A
V
E
SMA
I
TLAND
A
VE
HE
R
I
T
A
G
E
B
LVD
S
4
TH
AVE
S 1
0
T
H
A
V
E
W A ST
EAINSWO
R
TH
A
VE
N
C
O
M
M
E
R
C
I
A
L
A
V
E
New
Heritage
0.7
0.01
0
.
6
5
0.
4
8
0.19
0.77
0.58
0.66
0
.
6
2
1.03
0.1
0.5
9
1.09
0.55
1.
0
6
0.67
1.05
0.
8
0.69
1.14
0.
6
1
2.05
0.49
0
.
4
4
0.
4
6
0
.
5
2
0.56
1.
3
4
0.571.67 0.26
0.09
0
.
1
6
0.53
0.3
1.82
0.43
0.
2
4
0.32
0.38
0
.
0
3
0.36
0.35
0.79
0.78
0.15
0.9
3
0.64
0.
9
9
0.9
2 0.
2
5
0.14
0.91
1.84
0.
7
5
0.54
1.07
0.4
0
.
3
9
0.
0
8
0.02
0
.
3
1
0.7
2
0
.
3
7
0.4
7
1.04
0.
7
1
0
.
9
6
0.42
0.13
0.82
0.07
0
.
2
7
0.
8
1
0.
6
0.34
0.
5
0.06
1.2
0.
2
0.6
8
0.85
0.2
1
1.1
9
0.7
4
0
.
2
3
1
0.05
0.
1
7
1.5
1
0.76
0
.
8
9
0.12
0.
1
8
0.51
0.95
0.11
182
182
395
395
12
12
12
397
397
C
O
L
U
MB
I
A
RI
V
ER
k
0 0.25 0.5
Miles
sŽůƵŵĞƚŽ/ĂƉĂĐŝƚLJZĂƟŽ;ϭ,ŽƵƌͿ;Ϭ͘ϱϬͿ
Less than 0.70
0.70 to <0.80
0.80 to <0.90
0.90 to <1.00
More than or equal to 1.00
PRECERRED
ALTERNATIVE
VOLUME TO
CAPACITY RATIO
Pa
g
e
3
0
8
o
f
4
8
1
è è è è è è è
è
è
è
è
è
è
èèèè
è
è
èè
è
è
èèè
èè èè
èèèè
è
è è
è è
è
è
èééé é é é é
é
é
é
é
é
é
éééé
é
é
éé
é
é
ééé
éé éé
éééé
é
é é
é é
é
é
éëëëë ë ë ë ë
ë
ë
ë
ë
ë
ë
ëëëë
ë
ë
ëë
ë
ë
ëëë
ëë ëë
ëëëë
ë
ë ë
ë ë
ë
ë
ëìììì ì ì ì ì
ì
ì
ì
ì
ì
ì
ìììì
ì
ì
ìì
ì
ì
ììì
ìì ìì
ìììì
ì
ì ì
ì ì
ì
ì
ìíííí í í í í
í
í
í
í
í
í
íííí
í
í
íí
í
í
ííí
íí íí
íííí
í
í í
í í
í
í
í
!!
!!!!
!!
!
""
""""
""
"
$$
$$$$
$$
$
E
ϯ
Z
s
^
Z
s
E
Ϯ
ϰ
d
,
s
^d
t>
Z
<
^
d
E
ϭ
^
d
s
E
K
Z
'
K
E
s
tW Z>^d
tKhZd^d
> t/^^d
^
t
,
s
^
D
/d>E
s
,
Z
/
d
'
>
s
^ϰd
,
s
^
ϭ
Ϭ
d
,
s
t^d
W^
K
<
,
>
K
d
h
^
Z
/
E
^
t
K
Z
d
,
s
EKDD
Z
/
>
s
1HZ
+HULWDJH
182
182
395
395
12
12
12
397
397
C
O
L
U
MB
I
A
RI
V
ER
9y/^d/E'
/Ed9Z^9d/KE
KEdZK>
k
MLOHV
9džŝƐƟŶŐ/ŶƚĞƌƐĞĐƟŽŶŽŶƚƌŽů
!"$AOO:D\SWRS
RRXQGDERXW
èéëìí SLJQDOL]HG
^ƚƌĞĞƚůĂƐƐŝĮĐĂƟŽŶ
IQWHUVWDWH
OWKHUFUHHZD\
PULQFLSOHAUWHULDO
PULQFLSDOAUWHULDOFXWXUH
MLQRUAUWHULDO
CROOHFWRU
CROOHFWRUFXWXUH
RDPSV
Pa
g
e
3
0
9
o
f
4
8
1
Pa
g
e
3
1
0
o
f
4
8
1
Pa
g
e
3
1
1
o
f
4
8
1
Pa
g
e
3
1
2
o
f
4
8
1
Pa
g
e
3
1
3
o
f
4
8
1
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2023
100
Appendix 4 EIS Comment Matrix
June 4, 2024
Page 314 of 481
Commenter Comment Response
1 City of Pasco - Sewer
The DEIS only references the City's 2014 Capital Sewer Plan
(CSP). The review of sewer impacts from the proposed Land
Use Amendment should be updated based on the 2021 CSP
Addendum to see possible differences in capacity for this
area.
The 2021 CSP addendum was added as reference and the
EIS was updated to reflect. The 2021 Amended CSP does
not account for any industrial development within the
project area. The 2014 CSP included a 1 MGD allowance for
future industrial development and is noted in the EIS
comparison analysis. Section 6.3.1.1 has been updated to
include reference to the 2021 CSP addendum.
2 City of Pasco - Sewer
The Maitland LS should have capacity, but the gravity main
downstream of the proposed Land Use Amendment has
some sections expected to exceed 80% capacity in the
coming years, which could be problematic with the
proposed change in land use, likely causing significantly
more flow to be conveyed through this portion of the
collection system.
The 2021 CSP notes that existing and 10-year PFH capacity
of the 30-inch collection pipe less would be less than 50%
capacity. The 20-year PFH capacity shows the 30-inch line
in excess of 100% capacity due to a future Tank Farm LS
that is not defined. The capacity of the 30-inch line will be
heavily influenced by future industrial flows that will come
from areas generally north of SR-12. It is also stated in
several sections of the 2021 CSP that industrial flows are
hard to project as they are heavily dependent upon the
specific industrial use. Therefore, additional modeling and
analysis will need to be conducted for each type of
development that would utilize the existing 30-inch
collection line. The proposed residential development will
be constructed in several phases thus the overall impact will
take several years to hit peak demand. Section 6.3.2 Sewer
and Water System has been updated.
1 City of Pasco - Water
The DEIS appears to rely on future storage in Zone 2. The
most recent Capital Improvement Plan shows this storage
reservoir not being completed until 2026, provided funding
support can be obtained prior to the start of the project.
This raises the concern that the proposed Land Use
Amendment won't be able to be accommodated until the
Zone 2 water reservoir is constructed.
The 2019 CWP states that the system has an existing
deficiency as of today. Either land use, industrial or
residential, would require a mitigation. In the 2019 CIP
additional storage is accounted for to make up for the
deficiency. The City has recently allowed two large
industrial warehouse facilities to be constructed in this area
despite the existing deficiency. The proposed residential
development will be constructed in several phases thus the
overall impact will take several years to hit peak demand.
Additionally, there is a Zone 3 storage improvement
currently being developed by the City. Zone 3 is ties to
Zone 2 by a PRV. Therefore, the Zone 3 improvement will
help Zone 2 storage needs. Section 6.3.2 Sewer and Water
System has been updated.
Co
m
m
e
n
t
N
o
.
EIS Scoping Comments
Page 315 of 481
Commenter Comment ResponseCo
m
m
e
n
t
N
o
.
2 City of Pasco - Water
Given the proposed Land Use Amendment location is in
Zone 2, it essentially receives the majority of its water
directly from the East Side BPS, which is already starting to
get stressed (at least during the heavy processing months).
Residential developments may have a bigger impact on
peak flows in the morning and evening than an industrial
user might have.
The 2019 CWP states that the system has an existing
deficiency as of today. Either land use, industrial or
residential, would require mitigation. In the 2019 CWP
additional storage is accounted for by CIP #T-001 to make
up for the deficiency. Industrial fire flows generally require
4,000 gpm versus 1,500 gpm for residential; therefore,
residential has a less of an impact in regards to fire flows.
The City has recently allowed two large industrial
warehouse facilities to be constructed in this area despite
the existing deficiency. The proposed residential
development will be constructed in several phases thus the
overall impact will take several years to hit peak demand.
3 City of Pasco - Water
The City encourages the applicant to contact RH2
Engineering to ensure the appropriate evaluation and
potential impacts of the proposed amendment are known
based on the most recent data for water and sewer utilities.
Noted.
1 City of Pasco - Transportation
Page 62, Road 40 East is incorrectly referred to as East 40th
Avenue. Same issue on Page 3 in Appendix 3. Page 2 in
Appendix 3, similar issue where Road 40 East is referred to
as East 40th Street.
Updated in report.
2 City of Pasco - Transportation
Page 63 states 1,315 PM peak hour external trips are
generated by Alternative 1, but Table 20 and Table 3-1
shows 1,334 external trips.
Updated in report.
3 City of Pasco - Transportation
The analysis should consider the added traffic from the
industrial park Tarragon Pasco-111 to the east on Road 40
East, and additionally the new connection between Road 40
East and Heritage Boulevard. The new connection to Road
40 East may impact the 4% inbound and 3% outbound
traffic to US-12 east of A Street. Consider expanding the
scope of this analysis to include the intersections of Road
40 East & Sacajawea Park Road and US-12 & Sacajawea
Park Road/Tank Farm Road.
The Heritage Comprehensive Plan concept has been
discussed with the City of Pasco for more than two years.
Tarragon was not an approved development when earlier
drafts of the Heritage Comprehensive Plan amendment
were being prepared. Application for Comprehensive Plan
was submitted to the City back in May 2022. The City
provided a Scoping Summary on 8/23/2022 and the
Tarragon project was not included in this summary. The
DEIS was submitted to the City on 9/1/2022. The date of
the Tarragon MDNS was issued on 9/16/2022. Since the
Heritage Comprehensive Plan was submitted prior to the
Tarragon project the DEIS/EIS will not include Tarragons as
a part of the analysis.
EIS Scoping Comments
Page 316 of 481
Commenter Comment ResponseCo
m
m
e
n
t
N
o
.
4 City of Pasco - Transportation
Page 63 mentions acceptable LOS but the acceptable levels
of service are not defined in the document. What are the
acceptable LOS thresholds, which intersection types to they
apply to (AWSC, TWSC, Signal, etc.), and whose standards
are applied to each intersection (City of Pasco, Washington
State Department of Transportation, etc.)?
The EIS for the New Heritage Comprehensive Plan
amendment application prepared an analysis similar to that
performed for the City Comprehensive Plan. Detailed city-
wide turning movement volumes were not available for the
preparation of Comprehensive Plan, only roadway segment
volumes. Without turning movement volumes a detailed
traffic operations analysis that would provide accurate
intersection delay and Level of Service is not achievable.
Thus a planning level analysis was performed that estimates
whether an intersection would provide acceptable LOS or
likely need improvements.
LOS standards in the region are the same for all
jurisdictions and have been adopted region-wide by the
Benton Franklin Council of Governments, the standard is
LOS "D" in urban areas of the region.
5 City of Pasco - Transportation
The report covers PM peak hour analysis. Please confirm
why AM analysis was not performed for any portion of the
study area, including WSDOT facilities.
This EIS was performed in order to provide a comparison to
the existing City Comprehensive Plan which evaluated PM
peak hour conditions. The purpose of the EIS was to
provide decision-makers with information by which they
could tell if a change in allowed Land Use as identified in
the Comprehensive Plan would have significant impacts,
thus the methodology similar to that used in the
Comprehensive Plan was a reasonable approach and only
evaluated PM peak hour.
6 City of Pasco - Transportation Level of service calculations, analysis methodologies, traffic
volumes, and supporting documentation should be
included as technical appendices.
See response to comment 4 above for LOS calculations.
More detail with respect to the analysis methodology has
been added to Appendix 3.
7 City of Pasco - Transportation Page 65 refers to Alternative 2 as Medium Density
Alternative, but in other parts of the report (such as Page 7
in Appendix 3, or Table 3-1) it is referred to as Medium
Intensity, or Mixed Use. Use a consistent name for each
alternative.
Updated in report.
8 City of Pasco - Transportation Page 65 states 1,140 external trips are generated by
Alternative 2, but Table 20 and Table 3-1 shows 1,138
external trips. Additionally, this page states 56% of trips are
inbound but Table 3-1 shows 58% inbound when
calculated.
Updated in report.
9 City of Pasco - Transportation Page 66 states that the Comprehensive Plan does not
specify industrial land uses for the site. As mentioned
elsewhere in the report, the site is zoned 1-2 Medium
Industrial. This zoning designation has a defined set of
acceptable land uses. Revise this sentence to clarify the
zoning for the site and the associated restriction for
industrial land uses that are allowed.
Detailed information about the zoning is discussed in
section 6.4.1 of the EIS, including the uses allowed in the
Medium Industrial and Light Industrial zones. The zoning
for the site has been added to the sentence and a reference
to 6.4.1.
10 City of Pasco - Transportation Page 66 states 1,235 PM peak hour trips are generated by
Alternative 3, but Table 20 and Table 3-1 shows 1,237
external trips.
Updated in report.
EIS Scoping Comments
Page 317 of 481
Commenter Comment ResponseCo
m
m
e
n
t
N
o
.
11 City of Pasco - Transportation Is a v/c of 1.0 the threshold for mitigation? Or 0.70? It is not
clear what the target v/c is for roadway segments, if they
differ per functional classification, and whose standards are
being used (City of Pasco? BFCOG? WSDOT?).
An explanation of the methodology has been expanded in
Appendix 3.
12 City of Pasco - Transportation Mitigation measures in section 6.9.3 are specific to certain
intersections, please list or tabulate the intersections and
roadway segments that require mitigation for each
alternative.
Rather than list 16 stop controlled intersections and 13
signalized intersections, a shorter list of intersections in
addition to the 12 stop controlled and 10 signalized
intersections has been added after Table 21.
13 City of Pasco - Transportation Table 21 should also show the segment mitigation
improvement as it is included in Table 3-3 on page 9 of
Appendix 3.
This segment has been added to Table 21 as well as the list
of differences following Table 21.
14 City of Pasco - Transportation On Figure 8 (and related figures, including those at the end
of Appendix 3), please include a note for the segment
mitigation where US-12 ramp improvements are needed
per Table 3-3.
We believe that this is fairly represented in the V/C figures
that have been prepared and is not necessary. Per the
comments above, this segment has been added to Table 21
and the list of differences below Table 21.
15 City of Pasco - Transportation Appendix 3 page 2 states that traffic volumes for the 2018
year were collected by BFCOG. Are these segment volumes
or intersection turning movement counts? Include the
volumes in an appendix or plot them on a figure for review.
The BFCOG volumes were indeed segment volumes, which
are included in the Comprehensive Plan. See also the
response to comment 4.
16 City of Pasco - Transportation Appendix 3 page 2 states that capacities from the regional
model were used for each roadway. What are the capacities
for roadways? Do they depend on functional classification,
speed limits, presence of TWLTL, or other factors? A table or
general description of this information is needed.
An explanation of the methodology has been expanded in
Appendix 3.
17 City of Pasco - Transportation Appendix 3 page 2 states that an adjustment factor is
applied to the capacity of intersections. What are these
factors and how are they calculated? What was the base
assumed capacity of each type of intersection?
An explanation of the methodology has been expanded in
Appendix 3.
18 City of Pasco - Transportation Appendix 3 page 3 states that the same methodology for
planning level analysis was used as the Transportation
Element of the Comprehensive Plan. What is this
methodology? More detail is needed.
An explanation of the methodology has been expanded in
Appendix 3.
19 City of Pasco - Transportation
Does the BFCOG travel demand model contain population
and employment forecasts for 2038 (per Comprehensive
Plan) or 2040? The report seems to suggest 2040 is the
forecast year. Do all cities in the BFCOG area contain
updated 2040 population and employment forecasts?
Correct, the BFCOG model is a 2040 model. The consultant
team worked with City of Pasco staff to determine
appropriate assumptions for the year 2038 Land Use
section for the Comprehensive Plan updated. The
demographics in the regional model were updated to
reflect that for the City of Pasco only because the
Broadmoor area was significantly underrepresented. It was
determined working with BFCOG that the demographics for
other jurisdictions would not be undertaken at the time
because they were in the process of creating a 2045 model.
20 City of Pasco - Transportation The title for Table 3-1 should specify that the values shown
are for the PM peak hour only. Additionally, specify the
alternative numbers (1, 2, 3) for the column headers.
Updated in report.
EIS Scoping Comments
Page 318 of 481
Commenter Comment ResponseCo
m
m
e
n
t
N
o
.
21 City of Pasco - Transportation The trips for the preferred alternative on Table 3-1 are not
summed correctly. 867+660-213=1,314 not 1,334. Similar
issue with Alternative 2.
Updated in report.
22 City of Pasco - Transportation The trip distribution methodology described on page 5 of
Appendix 3 states that a cordon line around the study area
was used to measure existing volumes across the cordon
during the PM peak hour. This estimate may skew the
distribution towards regional travel patterns which may not
be the same between each alternative, as was mentioned in
the report on page 6 of Appendix 3 where the No Action
alternative is stated to have primarily employment trips
rather than residential or services in the other two
alternatives. A select-zone analysis would provide much
better accuracy for each alternative's trip distribution and
can be unique to each alternative (although Alternative 1
and 2 likely are similar enough to assume the same trip
distribution).
This may be true, however a select-zone analysis was not
performed for this analysis, rather the methodology was
used was described and some potential anomalies
identified. Trip distribution percentages are always an
estimate and provide an approximation of future trips by
which to perform an analysis. A slightly different set of
assumptions may (or may not) yield different results,
especially at a planning level analysis. This analysis was
performed to allow a comparison of the proposed Land Use
amendment to the Comprehensive Plan.
23 City of Pasco - Transportation
Appendix 3 page 8 states that more detailed analysis will be
performed with a development proposal. Is this referring to
the Traffic Impact Analysis, or does this refer to something
else?
A more detailed Traffic Impact Analysis will be required if
this request is approved and a more detailed proposal is
submitted by the developer. The current document is
planning level and provides a general overview of potential
issues/impacts with the change in land use from industrial
to mixed use.
24 City of Pasco - Transportation
Trip generation was performed using ITE's Trip Generation
Manual 10th Edition. This edition was deprecated in
September of 2021 with the release of the 11th Edition,
please update the trip generation accordingly.
This effort to evaluate the New Heritage change of Land
Use proposal began in 2019 when the 10th Edition of ITE
Trip Generation was current. It did not make sense to
spend the effort on reworking the entire analysis for a
potential change in trip generation of a few percentages of
trips when they are all estimates in the first place.
25 City of Pasco - Transportation An internal trip reduction was applied to all 3 alternatives.
How was this reduction calculated, using what
methodology and assumptions? Show supporting
documentation and detail the methodology.
A reasonable percentage of internal trips that would be
either trip chaining or carpooling was assumed for each of
the scenarios.
26 City of Pasco - Transportation Do the Comprehensive Plan v/c ratios at the end of
Appendix 3 show v/c results for 2038 or 2040? There is no
year in the figure title.
The Comprehensive Plan was prepared for year 2038
estimated traffic using a modified regional model.
27 City of Pasco - Transportation
A more readable method to show v/c impacts would be to
show the change in v/c between the Comprehensive Plan
and each of the 3 alternatives, highlighting changes that
exceed the target v/c. Consider adding this to the report.
Minor changes in V/C between scenarios are not
meaningful at this planning level of analysis. It was felt to
be more meaningful to show the V/C ratios in color coded
ranges. The differences between scenarios were noted in
tables and text summaries in the report.
EIS Scoping Comments
Page 319 of 481
Commenter Comment ResponseCo
m
m
e
n
t
N
o
.
1 City of Pasco
There were numerous references made on the potential use
of a Concomitant agreement in the DEIS. While this has
been used in the past, the PMC restricts the use to rezones,
and does not apply to Comprehensive Plan Land Use
Amendments.
This report is a non-project EIS and development standards
have not been identified at this time. The intent of the
concomitant agreement was to identify standards and
mitigation measures for future development of the site. It
has been identified that a GMA Development Agreement
would be a better tool for identifing future development
standards and mitigation in the future. At the time of
development, it is anticipated that a GMA Development
Agreement will be created to identify specific project
elements identified in Section 21.60.010 of the Pasco
Municipal Code. Additional SEPA review will be required at
the time of development, as well to identify specific
mitigation measures to ensue project concurrency. The
term "concomitant agreement" has been changed to "GMA
Developer Agreement" in places where the City Code was
not being quoted.
1 WSDOT
The DEIS identifies three alternatives, and we agree with its
conclusions that potential negative impacts will occur to
the state system, primarily at the US 12/A Street and
Sacagawea Park/Tank Farm intersections, and specific
mitigation measures to ensure concurrency would be
identified at the time of approval of a Land Subdivision and
Concomitant Agreement.
As subsequent developments are proposed, they will be
subject to review for their impacts to the state system. This
information is normally obtained through a Traffic Impact
Analysis (TIA) performed by the developer. Improvements
to offset the impacts of future development proposals must
be identified in the TIA. Developers will be responsible for
any mitigation necessary to offset significant adverse
impacts to the state highway system and we expect the city
to assess a pro rata share contribution from developers for
all other impacts.
Thank you for your comments. Future more detailed
analysis will be performed on a selected intersections if this
Comprehensive Plan Amendment request is approved.
The project proposed is bordered on 3 sides by Industrial
zoning and the North side, East A Street is the main truck
route access to the Industrial zone
East- ROJO Ventures with existing Industrial zone
businesses in place and the new Amazon distribution
centers
South- Industrial with recently constructed rail access
North- East A Street Arterial
1 ROJO Venture, L.L.C.
Comment Noted
EIS Scoping Comments
Page 320 of 481
Commenter Comment ResponseCo
m
m
e
n
t
N
o
.
2 ROJO Venture, L.L.C.
The DEIS does not include 2 large tracts to the South of the
proposal area that are under common ownership with the
proposal area. Common control should be addressed by the
DEIS. These parcels should be included in the DEIS area if
they may be added later. Or, the current zoning should be
reinforced, and buffer requirements addressed.
These tracks were not included in the requested Plan
Amendment and the Applicant has not identified any plan
to change these properties to residential. The DEIS does
indicate potential mitigation measures that would mitigate
impacts from these properties to the proposed residential
uses, including buffers, landscaping and fencing. In the
event that the applicant were to request a change to there
industrial properties in the future, additional SEPA analysis
would be required, including public notice..
3 ROJO Venture, L.L.C.
Approval of the proposal creates a Spot or Island zone
surrounded by Industrial activity creating areas of
incompatible zone interaction that will have to be
mitigated.
The area to the north is included in the City's
Comprehensive Plan for residential land uses and is
currently zoned for a mix of residential and commercial
uses. The proposal would be an extension of that zoning
classification and would therefore not create an "island" or
be considered a "spot zone". The DEIS does indicated
potential mitigation measures that would mitigate impacts
from these industrial properties to the proposed residential
uses, including buffers, landscaping and fencing.
4 ROJO Venture, L.L.C.
The change of zoning immediately adjacent to our Light
Industrial zoned property significantly affects the
development potential by forcing new development
requirements on our property (copied below from page 39
of DEIS). Parking lots within 500 feet of a C-2 district
boundary, provided such lots are paved and the development
complies with the landscape and fencing requirements of the
C-1 district, as enumerated in PMC 25.85.020(13). [Ord.
4110 § 23, 2013; Ord. 3354 § 2, 1999; Code 1970§
25.52.020.
That provision relates to a parking lot in a C-1 District
adjacent to a C-2 District. The proposed Comprehensive
Plan Amendment would change the property from Medium
Density Industrial to Mixed Use. This designation is
implemented under a range of zoning classifications as
identified under Section 25.215.015 of the Pasco City Code.
Specific land uses and their relation to abutting properties
and their specific impact to abutting properties cannot be
evaluated until a specific site plan had been proposed by
the applicant. Once a specific site plan is proposed, the
environmental impact of this proposed site plan will be
evaluated under future SEPA review and public notice will
be provided for comment., Additional mitigation measures
will be evaluated under the City's Zoning Code, Subdivision
Code and Building Permit requirements. The applicant may
also apply for a Planned Unit Development Permit for future
review.
5 ROJO Venture, L.L.C.East A Street is the only access designated in the proposal
to access the proposed Residential and Commercial area
emergency access to the area needs to be addressed should
East A Street become blocked. The potential blockage is
greater with the Industrial access route and of significant
consequence with the proposed school.
While primary emergency access would be by East A Steet,
additional access could be provided via Lewis Street to
either Heritage Blvd. or Cedar Avenue in the event of a
blockage on East A Street.
EIS Scoping Comments
Page 321 of 481
Commenter Comment ResponseCo
m
m
e
n
t
N
o
.
6 ROJO Venture, L.L.C.
The developer has designated nearly 10% of the project
area for schools but the school development is optional to
other parties. In the event the school district does not
develop the school the designated area reverts to the base
development; therefore traffic, services and other studies
should address the impacts both with and without schools.
The proposed Elementary School site was proposed as a
mitigation measure based on the projected school age
population generated by the proposed action. In the event
that the School District elects to not develop a school at
this site, no additional development could occur above the
density and intensity identified in the Preferred Alternative
without additional SEPA review and public notice.
7 ROJO Venture, L.L.C.
The City of Pasco needs to review the compatibility of their
planned sports complex with the proposed Residential
zone. A case in point is a similar project in Spokane, WA
that is being opposed by residents in the area
As noted, specific land uses and their relation to abutting
properties and their specific impact to abutting properties
cannot be evaluated until a specific site plan had been
proposed by the applicant. Once proposed, the
environmental impact of this proposed site plan will be
evaluated under future SEPA review and public notice will
be provided for comment., Additional mitigation measures
will be evaluated under the City's Zoning Code, Subdivision
Code and Building Permit requirements. The applicant may
also apply for a Planned Unit Development Permit for future
review.
EIS Scoping Comments
Page 322 of 481
New Heritage Amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan June 4, 2023
101
Appendix 5 Letters of Approval
June 4, 2024
Page 323 of 481
Page 324 of 481
You don't often get email from jhjalt@live.com. Learn why this is important
From:Kristin Webb
To:Jacob Gonzalez; Rick White; Carmen Patrick
Subject:FW: CPA2022-003
Date:Thursday, June 9, 2022 8:20:05 AM
From: John Hjaltalin <jhjalt@live.com>
Sent: Thursday, June 9, 2022 8:14 AM
To: Kristin Webb <webbk@pasco-wa.gov>
Cc: Polly Frisby <kandcfrisby@gmail.com>; Craig and Karen Walton <candkwalton@charter.net>
Subject: CPA2022-003
[NOTICE: This message originated outside of City of Pasco -- DO NOT CLICK on links or
open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.]
ROJO Venture, LLC owns the parcels listed below.
112530057
112530050
112530051
We are commenting against the proposal CPA2022-003 for the re-zoning of the of the subject
area from Industrial to Mixed Residential and Commercial. This proposal will share a boundry
with our property and will promote activity and development that will be in conflict with the
long-term established activity and uses on our property. The proposal will also restrict future
use and development activities that would be protected and/or compatible with the current
zoning and the current activities on our parcels. The proposal will also prevent development
opportunities that may not be in conflict with the zoning of our property, but a change in the
neighborhood atmosphere will hinder the attraction to our adjacent parcels and their
permitted activities by potential clients.
We would also like to point out that the photographic map included with the notice is not
accurate and could be misleading because it does not accurately reflect current development
on other adjacent properties particularly the large Amazon projects directly adjacent to the
East boundry of CPA2022-003. These projects to be completed this summer will have
significant industrial traffic that will also impact the North boundry of CPA2022-003 and the
South boundry is already confined by an industrial rail spur. The West boundry is near the
main truck access route to the Pasco Port area. It is inconsistent to force a residential area into
this environment.
John Hjaltalin
Member
Page 325 of 481
ROJO Venture, LLC
Page 326 of 481
Page 327 of 481
Page 328 of 481
Page 329 of 481
Page 330 of 481
Page 331 of 481
Page 332 of 481
Page 333 of 481
Page 334 of 481
Page 335 of 481
Page 336 of 481
Page 337 of 481
Page 338 of 481
Page 339 of 481
Page 340 of 481
Page 341 of 481
Page 342 of 481
Page 343 of 481
Page 344 of 481
Page 345 of 481
Page 346 of 481
Page 347 of 481
Page 348 of 481
Page 349 of 481
Page 350 of 481
Page 351 of 481
Page 352 of 481
Page 353 of 481
Page 354 of 481
Page 355 of 481
Page 356 of 481
Page 357 of 481
Page 358 of 481
Page 359 of 481
Page 360 of 481
Page 361 of 481
Page 362 of 481
Page 363 of 481
Page 364 of 481
Page 365 of 481
Page 366 of 481
Page 367 of 481
Page 368 of 481
Page 369 of 481
Page 370 of 481
Page 371 of 481
Page 372 of 481
Page 373 of 481
Page 374 of 481
Page 375 of 481
Page 376 of 481
Page 377 of 481
Page 378 of 481
Page 379 of 481
Page 380 of 481
Page 381 of 481
2023 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket
CPA2023-001
File Number: CPA2023-001
Applicant: New Heritage
Description: Future Land Use Map Amendment: Low Density Residential to Mixed
Residential/Commercial
Current Zoning: RS-20
Address / Parcel(s) 118292027, 118292036
Total Area (Acres) 2.85
Environmental Determination Determination of Non-Significance, Issued 06/19/2023
Page 382 of 481
1
Community & Economic Development Department
525 N 3rd Avenue, Pasco, Washington 99301 | PO Box 293
Phone (509) 545-3441 | Fax (509) 545-3499
Comprehensive Plan Amendment & Procedures Guide
Thank you for your interest in the City of Pasco. This guide is intended to provide you with the necessary information to
successfully apply for an amendment to the Pasco Comprehensive Plan. If you need assistance in filling out the application
forms or have questions regarding the Comprehensive Plan Amendment review process, please contact the Community
and Economic Development Department at (509) 545-3441 or CompPlan@pasco-wa.gov.
Purpose
Pasco’s Comprehensive Plan is the city’s foundational policy document that guides growth and development for the next
twenty years. The Plan guides city decisions on how to address rapid population growth and housing, land-use,
transportation, natural and built environment, economic opportunities and where to make capital investments aimed at
improving our community’s quality of life.
An amendment to the Plan is a mechanism by which the city may periodically modify its land use, development, or growth
policies to reinforce the role of the Comprehensive Plan in guiding growth in our community. Comprehensive Plan
amendments are legislative decisions made by the Pasco City Council, and a shall abide by the public notice and public
hearing requirements required by Pasco Municipal Code 25.215.020.
The Pasco City Council will consider amendments to the Comprehensive Plan no more than once per year, except for
emergencies and for exceptions as identified in the Washington State Growth Management Act RCW 36.70A.130.
PLEASE NOTE that the annual amendment review has two processes. The first is the establishment and acceptance of an
annual docket, consisting of the completed applications (PMC 25.215.020(7)) which determines whether applications
should be considered. The second process evaluates the docketed applications as required in PMC 25.215.020(9). Final
decisions in both steps are made by the Pasco City Council.
Timeline for 2022 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Applications
Per Pasco Municipal Code 25.215.020(7), the Department of Community and Economic Development shall notify the
public that the amendment process has begun, at least 60 days prior to May 1st of each calendar year. The following
timeline provides an approximate estimate of the amendment process for 2022.
DATE ACTION / DESCRIPTION
DECEMBER 1, 2021 Application period for 2022 Amendments begins
MAY 2, 2022 Deadline to submit a Comprehensive Plan amendment application for 2022
MAY 31, 2022 Department of CED establishes list of initiated applications
SPRING – SUMMER 2022 Preliminary review and Planning Commission recommendation to Pasco City Council
SUMMER 2022 City Council approval of applications and establishment of docketed requests for 2022
SUMMER – FALL 2022 Final Review, study sessions and public hearing before the Planning Commission
LATE FALL 2022 City Council action on proposed amendments
Page 383 of 481
2
How to Apply for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment
Who May Apply?
Any property owner or their representative, citizen, agency, neighborhood association or other party within the Pasco
Urban Growth Area may apply for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment. The Pasco City Council, Planning Commission or
staff are also eligible to apply for an amendment.
Step 1: Getting ready to apply for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment
Contact the Department of Community and Economic Development to discuss your proposed application and to receive
an “intake application” letter. The application letter is competed by City Staff and summarizes your proposed amendment
and includes applicable references to the Comprehensive Plan. The letter confirms you (the applicant or representative)
are aware of the application procedures, timelines and must be submitted with application materials.
Step 2: Pre-Application Meeting (Required)
Applicants interested in applying for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment are required to meet with the City prior to
applying. This meeting will occur after the intake application letter has been requested by the applicant and completed
by the City. Written documentation identifying your proposal will be used to complete the Intake Application Letter.
Step 2: The proposed amendment application
Contact the Department of Community and Economic Development to receive the official Comprehensive Plan
Amendment application. Applicants will need to complete and submit the following:
Intake Application Letter
Pre-Application Meeting
Application for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment
SEPA Environmental Checklist
Only after the above documents have been received and verified, will the City issue a Completeness of Application.
The Comprehensive Plan Amendment application provides the applicant (or representative) to provide the necessary
support and rational for the application. This includes:
Identify the purpose of the amendment, describing support for, reasoning, or background information
Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan Amendment review procedures outlined in Pasco Municipal Code
25.215.020(7)(b)(ii)
The public hearing notice requirements for Comprehensive Plan Amendments are described in Pasco Municipal Code
25.215.020(8). The City of Pasco provides mailed and electronic noticing materials.
Step 3: Preliminary Review and Establishment of Annual Docket
All completed applications are to be placed on an Annual Docket. The Annual Docket consists of all proposed
Comprehensive Plan Amendments applications. Completed applications will be presented to the Pasco Planning
Commission for a review and recommendation to the Pasco City Council. The Pasco Municipal Code 25.215.020(7)(b)(ii)
requires that the City Council determine which applications in the Annual Docket are to be move forward, based on the
following criteria:
a)Is there sufficient time for Council to make an informed decision?
b)Will the City be able to conduct sufficient analysis to develop policy and related development regulations?
c)Has the proposed amendment been previously rejected for consideration?
d)Will the amendment implement and comply with the adopted Comprehensive Plan and Washington State Growth
Management Act?
Page 384 of 481
3
e) Is the proposed amendment better addressed through another planning process?
Step 4: Final Review of the Annual Docket
Following the establishment of the Annual Docket from Step 3, a public hearing will be scheduled at the Pasco Planning
Commission. The Planning Commission will consider all of the docketed applications concurrently, and will evaluate each
amendment in relationship to the approval criteria of Pasco Municipal Code 25.215.020(8)(c) and 25.215.020(9).
General Approval Criteria
Does the proposed amendment bear a substantial relationship to the public health, safety, welfare, and protection of
the environment?
Is the proposed amendment consistent with the requirements of the Washington State Growth Management Act and
to the affected portion(s) of the adopted Pasco Comprehensive Plan?
Does the proposed amendment correct a mapping error or address a deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan?
What are the effects on the physical environment, including open space and natural features?
What is the compatibility and impact on adjacent land uses and surrounding neighborhoods?
What are the impacts on public facilities, and utilities, transportation system, parks, recreation, and public schools?
What is the effect on other components of the adopted Comprehensive Plan?
Step 5: Action on Proposed Actions
The Pasco City Council must consider the docketed items recommended by the Planning Commission within 60 days of
receiving the recommendation. All amendment applications will be considered concurrently for one of the following
actions on each application:
Approve the application
Deny the application
Modify the application
City staff must also transmit a copy of all proposed amendments to the Washington State Department of Commerce at
least 60 days prior to Council action per the requirements of RCW 36.70A.106. A copy of the amendments must be
forwarded to the Department of Commerce within 10 days of final City Council decision.
APPLICATION FEES
Item Amount (Fee)
Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application $700.00
State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Checklist $75.00
Radius Notification $50.00
TOTAL______________________________ $825.00
Contact Information:
Phone: (509) 545-3441
Email: CompPlan@pasco-wa.gov
Page 385 of 481
4
Community & Economic Development Department
525 N 3rd Avenue, Pasco, Washington 99301 | PO Box 293
Phone (509) 545-3441 | Fax (509) 545-3499
Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application
Use this application to propose an amendment to the adopted City of Pasco Comprehensive Plan. Only
completed applications that have been provided a Notice of Completion no later than 5:00 PM on May 2, 2022
will be considered in the 2022 annual amendment cycle. Applications or proposals received after May 2, 2022
will be considered in the following year cycle.
SECTION 1A
CONTACT INFORMATION
Applicant:
Company Name
(if applicable):
Mailing Address
City State Zip
Phone Email
SECTION 1B
AUTHORIZED AGENT
The undersigned hereby certifies that all information submitted with this application is complete and correct
to the best of my knowledge.
Print Name
Signature Date ____/____/____
(STAFF ONLY)
MASTER FILE #: ____________________
DATE RECEIVED: _____ / _____ / _______
Page 386 of 481
5
SECTION 2A
GENERAL INFORMATION
If this is a proposal for a text amendment, provide the specific language for the proposed amendment in the
space below or attach to this form. Reference the Comprehensive Plan pages or sections proposed to be
amended.
The Comprehensive Plan can be accessed at https://www.pasco-wa.gov/1088/10763/City-of-Pasco-
Comprehensive-Plan
Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment:
If this is a proposal for a property specific amendment, or change to the Future Land Use Map, describe the
change you are proposing. Also, complete questions under Section 4.
Property Address
10-Digit Parcel Identification Number
Site Area (Acres)
Current Comprehensive Plan Land Use
Current Zoning
Proposed Comprehensive Plan Land Use
& 118-292-027
& 9904 W. Argent Road
Page 387 of 481
6
SECTION 3
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT QUESTIONS
Questions 1 - 5 apply to all proposed amendments to the Pasco Comprehensive Plan. Please answer the
questions below, or attach additional pages as needed.
Q1: What is the proposed amendment intended to accomplish?
Q2: How will the proposed amendment support the Goals and Policies contained in Pasco’s Comprehensive
Plan?
Q3: How will the proposed amendment support the Established Council Goals adopted via Resolution No
####
Q4: What impacts the proposed amendment have on the natural environment, such as critical areas or other
natural areas?
Q5: How will the proposed amendment address the long-term interests, including the health, safety and
general welfare of the community?
Page 388 of 481
7
SECTION 4
PROPERTY/SITE AMENDMENTS AND LAND USE MAP QUESTIONS
Questions 6 - 11 apply only specific property specific amendments and/or changes to the Future Land Use Map.
In addressing these questions, please describe potential impacts and measures to mitigate any negative
impacts.
Q6: Describe the suitability of the area for the proposed designation, considering the adjacent land uses and
the surrounding development pattern.
Q7: What is the potential for the uses allowed under the proposed designation to be incompatible with uses
in the immediate vicinity of the property? How would adverse impacts be mitigated?
Q8: Describe the extent to which the proposed amendment supports the following:
a)Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element
b)Comprehensive Plan Transportation Element
c)Comprehensive Plan Implementation Element
Q9: Describe any probable environmental impacts that might result from the proposed amendment. How
would any adverse impacts be mitigated?
Page 389 of 481
8
Q10: Describe the extent in which adequate public facilities and services are likely to be available to serve
the development allowed under the proposed amendment.
Q11: Please describe how the proposed amendment is consistent with the evaluation criteria in Pasco
Municipal Code 25.215.020(7)(b)(ii) and as referenced on page 2, section 3.
SECTION 5
__________ I have read the Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Procedures Guide
__________ I have contacted the Department of Community and Economic Development and have received
an intake application and have attached that letter to the application.
__________ I have met with the Department of Community and Economic Development and participated in
the required Pre-Application Meeting on: _____ / _____ / _____
__________ I have completed and submitted a State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Checklist
NOTICE OF COMPLETENESS: The application shall be considered complete within 28 days after submittal, unless
other notified per Pasco Municipal Code 4.02.060
Signature of Applicant ______________________________________ Date _____ / _____ / _____
I certify that I am the owner or owner’s authorized agent. If acting as an authorized agent, I further certify that
I am authorized to act as the owner’s agent regarding the property at the above-referenced address for the
purpose of filing applications for decisions, permits or review under applicable Pasco Municipal Codes, and I
have full power and authority to perform on behalf of the owner all acts required to enable the city to process
and review such applications.
I certify that the information on this application is true and correct and that the applicable requirements of the
City of Pasco, RCW, and the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) will be met.
Signature ______________________________________________________ Date _____ / _____ / _____
Owner or Owner’s Agent
Page 390 of 481
Baljit CPA (LDR to MRC)
3015 ROAD 100
Page 1 of 3
Clover Planning & Zoning, LLC
Land Use Services Consultant
ATTACHMENT A
The list below provides Pasco’s Comprehensive Plan goals and policies supporting approval of this
application together with explanations and reasoning of how our application supports each goal and
policy.
LU-2. GOAL: PLAN FOR A VARIETY OF COMPATIBLE LAND USES WITHIN THE UGA
LU-2-A Policy: Maintain sufficient land designated to accommodate residential, commercial, industrial,
educational, public facility, and open-space uses proximate to appropriate transportation and utility
infrastructure.
During the 2022 Comprehensive Plan Amendment review cycle, City Council expressed concern over
the loss of lands designated for commercial uses. This application proposes a contribution to lands
available for commercial development. The Mixed Residential & Commercial (MRC) land use
designation is currently (2022) applied to 2.3% of the City. Approval of this application will contribute
to a more balanced distribution of the MRC designation. Furthermore, the subject site is positioned to
make use of existing sewer and water utility infrastructure.
LU-6 GOAL: ENCOURAGE DISTINCTIVE QUALITY COMMUNITY AND REGIONAL
COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENTS THAT SUPPORT THE CITY’S
OVERALL DEVELOPMENT GOALS
LU-6-A Policy: Encourage commercial and higher-density residential uses along major corridors and
leverage infrastructure availability
The site occupies the southeast corner of the intersection of W. Argent Road and Road 100. The Existing
Street Functional Classification System Map (T-1) identifies Road 100 as a principal arterial roadway,
and W. Argent Road as a minor arterial roadway. The subject intersection mirrors the intersection of W.
Page 391 of 481
Baljit CPA (LDR to MRC)
3015 ROAD 100
Page 2 of 3
Argent Road and Road 68 which is also designated Mixed Residential & Commercial uses. The subject
site is positioned to make use of the excess capacity of the 20-inch water main in W. Argent Road.
LU-6-B Policy: Promote efficient and functional neighborhood level and major commercial centers to
meet community demand.
The large supply of residents in the surrounding vicinity stand to benefit from additional retail services
made available through approval of this application. The City’s Comprehensive Plan and the WA GMA
emphasize promotion of “walkable” neighborhoods. This proposal directly promotes the creation of a
neighborhood-level commercial node at the intersection of two high-traffic-volume arterial roadways.
Subsequent site development will meet the market demand for retail services in the Road 100 area.
ED-1. GOAL: MAINTAIN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AS AN IMPORTANT AND
ONGOING CITY INITIATIVE
ED-1-A Policy: Promote an environment which supports the development and expansion of business
opportunities.
Approving this map amendment will support development of business opportunities by making the 3-
acre site available for commercial uses. Rejecting this application will make the statement that Pasco
discourages economic development. This proposal requests to directly benefit from adopted Goal ED-1
and Policy ED-1-A, explicitly.
ED-1-F Policy: Support and encourage residential/commercial mixed-use developments that provide
neighborhood shopping and services and promote walkable neighborhoods.
This application requests assignment of the Mixed Residential & Commercial land use designation to a
busy intersection surrounded by single-family residential neighborhoods. The MRC designation
precisely requests application of a mixed-use residential/commercial to create a commercial node
available to provide neighborhood shopping within walking distance from many homes. In this way,
approval of this application is explicitly supported and encouraged by economic development goal ED-
1-F.
The Comprehensive Plan encourages mixed uses in Pasco. Such uses are generally mutually supportive
of each other. Locating residences, offices, neighborhood shops, cafes, etc. in the same building or same
Page 392 of 481
Baljit CPA (LDR to MRC)
3015 ROAD 100
Page 3 of 3
site promotes walkability and reduces the vehicle miles traveled. Commercial zones available in the
MRC designation allow for the aforementioned business types.
ED-2-B Policy: Encourage development of a wide range of commercial and industrial uses strategically
located near major transportation corridors or facilities and in close proximity to existing or proposed
utility infrastructure while supporting local and regional needs.
This request aims to make 3-acres of land available for commercial development at the intersection of
two major transportation corridors containing existing sewer and water utility infrastructure. Both
adjacent roadways (Rd 100 & W. Argent Rd) contain municipal sewer and water mains. The water main
in W. Argent Rd is 20-inches in diameter and the water main in Road 100 is 12-inches in diameter. The
sewer main in W. Argent Road is 10-inches in diameter and the sewer main in Road 100 is 12-inches in
diameter. The utilities listed contain ample capacity to support site development with land uses permitted
under the Mixed Residential & Commercial land use designation. The site is positioned to make efficient
use of the excess capacity of the 20-inch water main in W. Argent Road.
Residents of the surrounding neighborhoods currently experience a lack convenient retail services within
walking distance. These residents need access to retail goods and services. Approval of this application
will make the subject site available to meet this current demand for convenient retail goods and services.
Commercial site redevelopment will cause minimal interruption to existing development patterns. Retail
business operation at this high-traffic intersection across from a large church property will not disrupt
lifestyles of the surrounding residents.
ED-2-E Policy: Periodically assess the adequacy of the supply of vacant and re-developable lands in the
City limits and the UGA, especially commercial and industrially zoned land.
This application offers an opportunity for the city to assess the adequacy of land available for commercial
retail business development. Comprehensive Plan Table LU-2 indicates 10.5% of land in Pasco is zoned
for commercial uses. The MRC designation is applied to a substantially lesser degree, accounting for
approximately 2% of land in Pasco’s city limits. Approval of this application will allow for
redevelopment of an underutilized site in a high-impact location. Adopting this map amendment will add
to the City’s retail commercial land-base.
Page 393 of 481
Baljit CPA (LDR to MRC)
3015 ROAD 100
Page 1 of 3
Clover Planning & Zoning, LLC
Land Use Services Consultant
ATTACHMENT B
Our Comprehensive Plan (Land Use Map) Amendment application is in the public interest for the
following reasons:
City of Pasco Comprehensive Plan goals and policies supporting approval of this application are listed
in ‘Supplement A’ included with the submitted application materials.
Furthermore, the application request satisfies the required findings of PMC 25.215.020 in the following
ways:
(i) The proposed amendment bears a substantial relationship to the public health, safety, welfare, and
protection of the environment;
A commercially designated node at the intersection of two arterial roadways will provide convenient
retail services within walking distance to residents of the immediate vicinity; thereby promoting a healthy
lifestyle for Pasco residents by encouraging walking. Reducing travel distances between customers and
services enhances public safety. Adding to the retail service base of a city enhances general welfare.
(ii) The proposed amendment is consistent with the requirements of Chapter 36.70A RCW and with the
portion of the City’s adopted Comprehensive Plan not affected by the amendment;
The application serves to satisfy urban infill initiatives of the Washington State Growth Management
Act [RCW36.70(A)(1)&(2)] by encouraging infill development within Pasco’s Urban Growth Boundary
thereby reducing urban sprawl by alleviating pressure on outward growth.
Additional Factors. The City must also consider the following factors prior to approving Comprehensive
Plan amendments:
Page 394 of 481
Baljit CPA (LDR to MRC)
3015 ROAD 100
Page 2 of 3
(a) The effect upon the physical environment;
Transitioning the site to the MRC land use designation avoids impacts to the physical environment as
the site does not contain wetlands, sensitive areas, endangered or threatened plants or animals. Site
development will not require construction of new roadways or any other activities requiring removal of
large amounts of vegetation.
(b) The effect on open space and natural features including, but not limited to, topography,
streams, rivers, and lakes;
Land use conversion will have no effect on natural features. The site is flat and will require minimal
grading (less than 500 cubic yards). The subject site is separated from the Columbia River shore by 1,200
linear feet at the nearest measurement.
(c) The compatibility with and impact on adjacent land uses and surrounding neighborhoods;
Developments consistent with zones and uses allowed by MRC designation are compatible with low-
density residential neighborhoods as demonstrated by the same configuration in many other locations as
illustrated in the Future Land Use Map (LU-1). Commercial development will benefit from the high pass-
through rate of exiting traffic at the adjacent street intersection. Homes fronting travel routes leading to
the subject site have grown accustom to traffic impacts over the past thirty or more years. Impact
mitigation measures to protect adjacent uses, such as fences, walls, landscaping, and setbacks, are
integrated into Zoning Code provisions, as necessary.
(d) The adequacy of and impact on community facilities, including utilities, roads, public
transportation, parks, recreation, and schools;
Road 100 and W. Argent Road have adequate capacity to serve the additional passenger vehicle traffic
generated by developments consistent with zones and uses allowed by MRC designation. Impacts on
roads and municipal utilities will be mitigated by way of impact fee payment to the City of Pasco during
the building permit process. Improvements to utility and roadway infrastructure may be attached to
development permits. Future non-residential development poses no impact on local schools, parks or
recreation. In the event residential development is proposed, parks and school impact fees will be paid.
(e) The quantity and location of land planned for the proposed land use type and density and
the demand for such land;
Our planning application applies to a 3-acre site at the high-impact corner of the intersection of Road
100 and W. Argent Road. The site’s vicinity currently lacks commercially designated land. The nearest
commercially designated node lies approximately 3,900 feet directly north, on Road 100. The second
Page 395 of 481
Baljit CPA (LDR to MRC)
3015 ROAD 100
Page 3 of 3
closest commercially designated node lies approximately 2-miles to the east, at the intersection of W.
Argent Road and Road 68.
Our site-specific market research suggests the demand for commercial land is sufficient to support retail
sales and service businesses. Existing commercial developments at the above-mentioned intersections
provide material evidence supporting the viability of commercial uses in this location in similar locations
in Pasco.
(f) The current and projected project density in the area; and
The immediately surrounding vicinity does not contain commercially zoned or designated sites. Based
on Pasco’s Future Land Use Map, the projected commercial project density in the surrounding vicinity
remains very low. There is a fueling station and convenience store on Road 100 about 2 miles to the
north. This example demonstrates the suitability of Road 100 for commercially zoned land.
(g) The effect, if any, upon other aspects of the Comprehensive Plan.
The following goals and policies affect this application: Goal LU-2, Policies LU-2-A; Goal LU-6,
Policies LU-6-A & LU-6-B; Goal ED-1, Policies ED-1-F, ED-1-A, ED-1-F, ED-2-B, ED-2-E, and IM-
1-D. A narrative linking this application to applicable Comprehensive Plan goals and policies is provided
in Attachment ‘A’, included with this submittal packet.
Page 396 of 481
Baljit CPA (LDR to MRC)
3015 ROAD 100
Page 1 of 2
Clover Planning & Zoning, LLC
Land Use Services Consultant
ATTACHMENT C
Transportation Accessibility
Locating medium- and high-density residential housing and retail commercial services along major
travel corridors has shown to be a good practice as residents have immediate access to businesses,
services (retail, jobs, restaurants) and transit facilities.
Multi-family development along transportation corridors provides residents with convenient access to
businesses and services, provided those businesses and services are also located along the same major
travel corridor. For quick and convenient access to exist between residential and commercial areas,
both types of land uses must be near major travel corridors. Changing the site to a commercial/multi-
family land use designation would help to facilitate quick and convenient access to a small
neighborhood center of 3 acres for the current and future residents along and surrounding the W.
Argent Road and Road 100 corridors.
The land use map below is intended to illustrate the existing pattern of mixed-residential/commercial
land use assignments at other arterial road intersections in west Pasco. Examples are identified as
green circles. Our subject application site is identified as a pink circle filled in green. The map
demonstrates that approval of our application will form a consistent land use pattern; serving as an
extension of mixed-residential/multi-family land use nodes on Road 100, and thereby matching the
patters established on the Road 68 corridor.
Page 397 of 481
Ba
l
j
i
t
C
P
A
(
L
D
R
t
o
M
R
C
)
30
1
5
R
O
A
D
1
0
0
Pa
g
e
2 of
2
Pa
g
e
3
9
8
o
f
4
8
1
Page 399 of 481
Page 400 of 481
Purpose of checklist:
Community & Economic Development Department
PO Box 293, 525 N 3 rd Ave, Pasco, WA 99301
P: 509.545.3441 / F: 509.545.3499
SEPA
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
State Environmental Policy Act
SEPA 2023-014
CPA 2023-001
Baljit Singh
Fee:$75
Governmental agencies use this checklist to help determine whether the environmental impacts of your
proposal are significant. This information is also helpful to determine if available avoidance, minimization
or compensatory mitigation measures will address the probable significant impacts or If an
environmental impact statement will be prepared to further analyze the proposal.
Instructions for applicants:
This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Please
answer each question acc urately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. You may need to consult
with an agency specialist or private consultant for some questions. You may use "not applicable" or
"does not apply" only when you can explain why it does not apply and not when the answer is unknown.
You may also attach or incorporate by reference additional studies reports. Complete and accurate
answers to these questions often avoid delays with the SEPA process as well as later in the decision
making process.
The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal. even if you plan to do them over a period of
time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your
proposal or Its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to
explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may
be significant adverse impact.
Instructions for Lead Agencies:
Please adjust the format of this template as needed. Additional information may be necessary to
evaluate the existing environment, all interrelated aspects of the proposal and an analysis of adverse
impacts. The checklist is considered the first but not necessarily the only source of information needed to
make an adequate threshold determination. Once a threshold determination is made, the lead agency is
responsible for the completeness and accuracy of the checklist and other supporting documents.
Use of checklist for nonproject proposals:
For nonproject proposals (such as ordinances, regulations, plans and programs), complete the applicable
parts of sections A and B plus the Supplemental Sheet for Non-Project Actions (part D}. Please
completely answer all questions that apply and note that the words "project, applicant," and "property
or site" should be read as "proposal, proponent," and "affected geographic area,11 respectively. The lead
agency may exclude (for non-projects) questions in Part B (Environmental Elements) that do not
contribute meaningfully to the analysis of the proposal.
WAC 197-11-960 Environmental Checklist Updated April 2020
Page 401 of 481
Page 402 of 481
Page 403 of 481
Page 404 of 481
Page 405 of 481
Page 406 of 481
Page 407 of 481
Page 408 of 481
Page 409 of 481
Page 410 of 481
Page 411 of 481
Page 412 of 481
Page 413 of 481
Page 414 of 481
Page 415 of 481
Page 416 of 481
Page 1 of 11
Public Comment Received
Comprehensive Plan Amendment 2023-001
Email #1
From: Dallas Green <dallas@dallasgreenteam.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2023 8:59 PM
Subject: Comment CPA2023-001
Regarding the zoning change request for CPA2023-001 which will be before the commission on 10/19/23:
I am in strong support of an individual's land rights and in most cases their ability to develop and modify
their use as a city grows and evolves. The issue the planning commission must consider is not specific just
to these parcels, the City of Pasco fails the residents on daily basis as a result of the lack of traffic
infrastructure to support the growth. This failure rests at the feet of the city’s planning commission,
planning department, and council.
The intersection of Road 100 and Argent is heavily traveled not just from homes built prior to 2008 but
right after with Chiawana High School other housing developments, it has become quite a mess. The
addition of a right turn lane on Argent west bound to north bound Road 100 has helped but the number
of cars that turn left heading south on Road 100 is not insignificant. Those vehicles are forced to dart
between oncoming traffic in both directions. The Road 100 traffic heading southbound turning east on to
Argent, towards Chiawana High School, backs up southbound Road 100 daily, congesting traffic in all
directions.
With the River Shore development recently approved by the planning commission (a horrendous mistake)
we will see a greater number of vehicles utilizing West Court and the west side of Argent, all converging
on that intersection.
Most people would consider it insane to approve yet another rezone prior to the traffic infrastructure
already considered, planned, and in process but that is just what the City of Pasco does. Build and build
and the traffic nightmares continue.
Planning commission members, this is your chance to start addressing Pasco's failed traffic planning
history. You on the planning commission are wielding the rezone approval pen wildly to support high
density housing and it seems quite clear you are not considering the traffic disruptions as well as the
destruction of single family neighborhoods the overwhelming majority of Pasco residents moved here to
enjoy.
Regards,
Dallas Green, CRS, SRES
Managing Broker
Dallas Green Team - eXp Realty
T: 509-378-1848
E: Dallas@DallasGreenTeam.com
Page 417 of 481
Page 2 of 11
Email #2
From: June Detloff <june.detloff@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2023 9:07 PM
Subject: CPA2023-001 Rezone
Please do not allow any further commercial zoning in the south end of Road 100.
Thank you.
June Detloff
2615 Road 96
509-547-6544
Email #3
From: Roger Wright <roger@rgwenterprises.com>
Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2023 9:01:41 AM
Cc: brenda.wright@charter.net <brenda.wright@charter.net>
Subject: File No CPA2023-001
We are the owners of 10217 Willow Way, PID 118-212-130. We have reviewed the application for Comp
Plan change File No. CPA2023-001, 3015 Road 100 & 9904 W. Argent. This application proposes to change
the land use for this 2.86 acre site from Low Density Residential to Mixed Residential and Commercial.
We are very opposed to this action. This would completely change the nature of the existing neighborhood
impacting the property values for the existing residential homes, will further impact traffic at this location
which already is nearly impossible to access Road 100 due to business and school traffic, and we already
have a commercial area a short distance north on Road 100. Installing commercial development here will
only further draw criminal activity into the residential neighborhoods, an activity already occurring
adjacent to the commercial area on Road 100 at the freeway.
We request the Planning Commission deny this application and keep the land use at this location Low
Density Residential.
Roger and Brenda Wright
10217 Willow Way
Pasco, WA 99301
Email #4
From: petyr_.Jk@charter.net <petyr.Jk@charter.net>
Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2023 11:32 AM
To: Jacob Gonzalez <gonzalezjb@pasco-wa.gov>
Subject: Reject Commercial Rezoning of Rd. 100 and Argent Intersection
To: Jacob B. Gonzalez, Planning Commission Director
Page 418 of 481
Page 3 of 11
Rebuttal to the application by Shane O'Neill, Clover Planning &Zoning LLC for rezoning of land on the SE
corner of Road 100 and Argent from RS-20 to Mixed Residential-Commercial with eventual rezone to C-1.
The planning Commission should reject this amendment based on Pasco Municipal Code (25.215.020
Comprehensive Plan amendment) 8(c)(i) Which reads “The proposed amendment bears a substantial
relationship to the public health, safety, welfare, and protection of the environment;” I believe the
amendment will have a substantial NEGATIVE impact on the health, safety, welfare and environment of
our neighborhood and I outline some of those criteria below. It is clear that the applicants want
commercial development that most the nearby residents do not believe is in their best interests and will
significantly degrade our neighborhood.
The application is redundant and inconsistent as noted below. First, the land designation is inconsistent,
and the acreage is contradictorily listed as 1.9, 2.86 and 3 acres throughout the document. The application
lists Road 100 as a principal arterial and Argent as a minor arterial. The comprehensive plan map (City-of-
Pasco-2018-2038-Map-Folio-Updated (pasco-wa.gov)) list these as a minor arterial and a collector
respectively.
The applicant suggests that this parcel will be an ideal location for a “walkable, neighborhood friendly”
commercial zone. The applicants do not understand the importance of this corner in traffic flow for
residents to I-182 for employment and shopping. Commercial development of this intersection will impede
the last remaining free-flowing exit point for local residents. It will significantly obstruct residents from
accessing nearby commercial resources and commuting to work.
The applicant frequently mentions the need for “walkable” commercial development. To achieve such a
goal will involve a long-term plan to reimagine this intersection. Currently the intersection, as well as Road
100 and Argent are not safe for pedestrian, cyclist, or moped traffic. This development is likely to
exacerbate the problem and make the neighborhood less “walkable.” The application does not provide
any plan to make this area meet walkable criteria other than to make use of popular buzzwords.
The application will most probably result in the construction of a poorly planned strip mall with attendant
traffic problems, 24/7 noise and light pollution, increased crime, and unsafe pedestrian access. The
applicants suggest this intersection should “mirror” that of Road 68 and Argent. We do not need another
such traffic and commercial nightmare at Road 100 and Argent.
As a resident of Riverview area for 35 years and of Pasco proper since annexation, I have seen considerable
changes to the area. This application represents the worst type of planning. I strongly suggest the planning
commission reject the motion for recommendation and not forward the report to the City Council.
Rejecting this application will show that Pasco encourages intelligent integration of residential
neighborhoods with commercial opportunities. This application is a sad example of how developers game
the system by buying up property, allowing the residential property to decay, then describing the site as
“underutilized” (I quote from the application) and eventually converting the real estate to commercial
property.
Peter C. Rieke, Ph.D.
9104 W. Pooler St. Pasco, WA 99301
509-438-6126
Petyr_jk@charter.netPeter C. Rieke, Ph.D.
9104 W. Pooler St. Pasco, WA 99301
509-438-6126
Petyr jk@charter.net
Page 419 of 481
Page 4 of 11
Email #5
From: Jody Kronvall <jkronvall@hotmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2023 7:41:55 PM
Subject: File No CPA2023-001
We have been Pasco residents at 10204 W. Argent for the past 36 years. We have just been notified of the
Comp Plan change File No. CPA2023-001.
We are unable to come to the meeting on October 19th, but wanted to voice our objection to this
proposal. Growth in this area has been dramatic, but we have been accepting of the changes. To allow this
area to go from Low Density to Mixed Residential and Commercial is asking for trouble. There is already a
high volume of traffic due to the school and business, why compound this with a small parcel? Yes there
is a church on this corner, but that is only impacted on Sunday primarily. When you survey this area, one
only sees houses, let's keep it this way.
Charlie and Jody Kronvall
10204 W. Argent Road
Pasco, WA 99301
Email #6
From: Patricia Campbell patocean@hotmail.com
Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2023 11:08 AM
Subject: File Number CPA2023-001
Sirs,
We have recently received a Notice of Public Hearing regarding the potential rezone of a 2.86 parcel of
property located at 3015 Road 100 and 9904 W Argent. Provided File Number CPA 2023-001
documentation listed in the Notice refers to a request to rezone this property from Low Density Residential
to a Mixed Residential and Commercial zoning. The term Mixed Residential and Commercial appears to
allow the owner/developer of this property potential free reign to develop whatever they prefer. There is
abundant property in this area along Road 100 north of the Franklin County Irrigation District canal
available for commercial development. We have been residents of this neighborhood for 32 years, and it
has always been a desirable, well maintained area to live.
Property values (and associated property tax revenues) have remained high because of this, and are
potentially at risk dependent upon the type of future developments. We would prefer that the zoning of
Low Density Residential remain in place for this property, allowing the integrity of this neighborhood to
remain in place, and urge you to consider our concerns in your decision making process.
Thank You,
Duncan and Patricia Campbell
10208 W Willow Way
Pasco, Wa 99301
Page 420 of 481
Page 5 of 11
Email #7
From: Carolyn Henry <chenry509@charter.net>
Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2023 11:22 AM
Subject: Re-zoning File No CPA2023-001
Planning Commission:
We are the owners of 3109 Road 103, parcel number 118202598. We have reviewed the application for
Comp Plan change File No. CPA2023-001, 3015 Road 100 & 9904 W. Argent. This application proposes to
change the land use for this 2.86 acre site from Low Density Residential to Mixed Residential and
Commercial.
We are very opposed to this action. This would completely change the nature of the existing neighborhood
impacting the property values for the existing residential homes, will further impact traffic at this location
which already is nearly impossible to access Road 100 due to business and school traffic, and we already
have a commercial area a short distance north on Road 100. Installing commercial development here will
only further draw criminal activity into the residential neighborhoods, an activity already occurring
adjacent to the commercial area on Road 100 at the freeway.
We request the Planning Commission deny this application and keep the land use at this location Low
Density Residential.
Thank you,
William and Carolyn Henry
3109 Road 103
Pasco, WA 99301
Email #8
Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2023 11:34 AM
Subject: Online Form Submittal: Contact the City Clerk
Name: mark a mansell
Email: MAMANSELL@GMAIL.COM
Subject: Comments Against Future Land Use Map Amendment for Parcel(s) 118292036 & 118292027
Requesting a change from Low Density Residential to Mixed Residential and Commercial
Comment: My wife and I are against the future land use map amendment for Parcel(s) 118292036 &
118292027, changing from Low Density Residential to Mixed Residential and Commercial.
We moved into the area because, in part, this is a residential area and NOT a business/commercial area.
The almost three acres rezoning will provide room for numerous businesses. There is no business plan
submitted, so let go with the worst case, a multi-business area with high thruput businesses and lots of
traffic placed at one of the busiest intersections in the area. This would be a traffic disaster.
Page 421 of 481
Page 6 of 11
Throughout the Tri -Cities, one can see beggars at the entrances to many business areas. They also beg
from shoppers as they w[a]nder around the area. There are often homeless people in the area. We do not
want these in our area; we do not want the crime that comes with this; we do not want the reduced safety
that comes with this.
There are hundreds of dwellings to the north and south of this intersection and unimproved lands that will
increase that number significantly as they are developed. This intersection is the collection point for all of
these subdivisions. While it is a great for business owners, It is the worst possible place to locate businesses
for the local residents and traffic.
There are no business needs in this area that are not met by local business areas already in place in the
local community within a five-minute drive.
Regards,
Mark and Donna Mansell
Email #9
From: CV Smith <vanfan2@msn.com>
Sent: Sunday, October 29, 2023 4:37 PM
To: Andrew Hattori <hattoria@pasco-wa.gov>
Subject: Re: Comprehensive Plan Amendment Code and Application
Dear Mr. Hattori,
Thank you for your message, and I appreciated the call from Jacob Gonzales, also. Please formally consider
these remarks as part of the public process.
To confirm, I respectfully request:
1. This application should be reviewed as part of the planned upcoming periodic review for several
reasons, including
a. This process has been ruined by the proposer’s representative's angry threats to public
commenters that we can resolve it with a fight in the parking lot;
b. The amendment is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan’s designation for Road 100 adopted
only two years ago to prohibit ‘mixed-use residential and commercial’ in this area. Pasco should be
implementing the Plan rather than considering upending it;
c. The amendment would have irreversible and significant direct, indirect, and cumulative effects;
d. An amendment with this much effect should be part of the periodic review process that has broad
notice and public input;
e. The amendment removes the potential opportunity for other types of residential uses (e.g.
medium density residential) which would be more consistent with the surrounding low density residential
designation.
Page 422 of 481
Page 7 of 11
2. If Pasco wishes to continue now with the application, a new, effective notice is required to be sent
to the neighborhood and others. The current Pasco rule for notice is not consistent with the requirement
for “effective” notice. RCW 36.70A.035 required notice procedures reasonably calculated to provide notice
to property owners and other affected and interested individuals, government agencies, groups, and
businesses. Examples of reasonable notice provision include posting on the property.
a. Given the scope and impact of the proposed change, the 300 ft. boundary selected for notice (or
slightly larger?) is much too small, not appropriate.
b. The property has no posting.
c. The Save Our Shorelines group was not notified even though the proposed change is near areas
known to be used as a landing areas for migratory birds (the near-by designated open space, large open
church grass area, and agricultural field). This group has worked with cities and the community for years
and should have been notified.
d. It’s unclear whether Franklin County was notified.
e. Competing businesses less than a mile away were not notified.
3. If Pasco wishes to continue now with the application, after appropriate notice is provided, the City
and Applicant should provide a workshop to provide information on the amendment process and why it
would be appropriate to amend this important land use element only two years after the plan was
adopted, and outside of the periodic review process that begins soon. I believe the applicant owned these
properties prior to the Plan development and should have (or maybe did?) raise this issue during that
process. The applicant should be working with the neighborhood to find a mutually acceptable solution.
4. Pasco should revise its rules about Plan amendments which seem to remove Pasco’s discretion
and require a Supplemental SEPA analysis before rejecting a proposal. While a court would probably read
in discretion, the rules as written could cause confusion.
5. Pasco's amendment process, that has been described by commissioners as being phased (based
on the planning commission then the Council first determining whether the application is complete), does
not match the broad findings formally made by the planning department (the amendment would be
consistent with the Plan and the GMA).
6. Pasco's attorney should be participating.
Thank you for considering these comments.
Connie Smith
Email #10
From: kjajs@charter.net
To: Jeff Adams
Subject: File #CPA-2023-001 - Road 100 & Argent
Date: Wednesday, May 15, 2024 12:09:35 PM
Page 423 of 481
Page 8 of 11
To: Jeff Adams, Associate Planner, and the Planning Commission:
We are the owners of the property at 10204 Willow Way. We are strongly opposed to the proposed change
of the land use for the property listed in the application at 3015 Road 100 & 9904 W. Argent. This change
from Low Density Residential to Mixed Residential and Commercial would strongly impact the residents in
this surrounding area.
The change to this area would be devastating to the residents and neighborhood safety especially with no
specific project designated. This change of this land use designation would open the possibility of unknown
projects and other uses. This area does not need more traffic as we have seen a substantial increase of
traffic with the new developments and building in the surrounding area. With the new developments
being built all around our area, the commercial and multi-unit projects should suffice the area’s needs.
We need to consider the safety of our young children, our future children, and of the residents in this area.
This area has been designated Low Density Residential area for many years and should continue to remain
that way.
We hope that you will take into consideration with great respect to all current and future residents living
in the area the seriousness and impact a land use change would have on this community.
Respectfully submitted,
Kay & Albert Slahtasky
10204 Willow Way.
Email #11
From: Petyr Private <petyr.rieke@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2024 9:56 PM
To: Jacob Gonzalez <gonzalezjb@pasco-wa.gov>; David Milne <MilneCouncil@pasco-wa.gov>; Teresa
Kruschke <tmkruschke@gmail.com>; dallas@dallasgreenteam.com
Subject: Land use amendment at Rd 100 and Argent
Jacob please see the attached document and enter it into the public comments. On a side note, I am
appalled at the lack of notice given for this public hearing. I received notification on Tuesday and have had
precious little time to get the word out. I will be checking to see if any notification rules have been ignored.
This is simply not the way to run such an important commission given that the city knows there is
considerable public interest.
Thank you for your time and I always enjoy working with you.
Pete Rieke
9104 W Pooler Rd, Pasco, WA 99301
To : Jacob B. Gonzalez, Planning Commission Director
Rebuttal to the application by Shane O'Neill, Clover Planning &Zoning LLC for rezoning of land on the SE
corner of Road 100 and Argent from RS-20 to Mixed Residential-Commercial with eventual rezone to C-1.
Page 424 of 481
Page 9 of 11
The planning Commission should reject this amendment based on Pasco Municipal Code (25.215.020
Comprehensive Plan amendment) 8(c)(i) Which reads “The proposed amendment bears a substantial
relationship to the public health, safety, welfare, and protection of the environment;” I believe the
amendment will have a substantial NEGATIVE impact on the health, safety, welfare and environment of
our neighborhood and I outline some of those criteria below. It is clear that the applicants want
commercial development that most the nearby residents do not believe is in their best interests and will
significantly degrade our neighborhood.
The application is redundant and inconsistent as noted below. First, the land designation is inconsistent,
and the acreage is contradictorily listed as 1.9, 2.86 and 3 acres throughout the document. The application
lists Road 100 as a principal arterial and Argent as a minor arterial. The comprehensive plan map (City-of-
Pasco-2018-2038-Map-Folio-Updated (pasco-wa.gov)) list these as a minor arterial and a collector
respectively.
The applicant suggests that this parcel will be an ideal location for a “walkable, neighborhood friendly”
commercial zone. The applicants do not understand the importance of this corner in traffic flow for
residents to I-182 for employment and shopping. Commercial development of this intersection will impede
the last remaining free-flowing exit point for local residents. It will significantly obstruct residents from
accessing nearby commercial resources and commuting to work.
The applicant frequently mentions the need for “walkable” commercial development. To achieve such a
goal will involve a long-term plan to reimagine this intersection. Currently the intersection, as well as Road
100 and Argent are not safe for pedestrian, cyclist, or moped traffic. This development is likely to
exacerbate the problem and make the neighborhood less “walkable.” The application does not provide
any plan to make this area meet walkable criteria other than to make use of popular buzzwords.
The application will most probably result in the construction of a poorly planned strip mall with attendant
traffic problems, 24/7 noise and light pollution, increased crime, and unsafe pedestrian access. The
applicants suggest this intersection should “mirror” that of Road 68 and Argent. We do not need another
such traffic and commercial nightmare at Road 100 and Argent.
As a resident of Riverview area for 35 years and of Pasco proper since annexation, I have seen considerable
changes to the area. This application represents the worst type of planning. I strongly suggest the planning
commission reject the motion for recommendation and not forward the report to the City Council.
Rejecting this application will show that Pasco encourages intelligent integration of residential
neighborhoods with commercial opportunities. This application is a sad example of how developers game
the system by buying up property, allowing the residential property to decay, then describing the site as
“underutilized” (I quote from the application) and eventually converting the real estate to commercial
property.
Peter C. Rieke, Ph.D.
9104 W. Pooler St. Pasco, WA 99301
509-438-6126
Petyr_jk@charter.net
Road 100/Argent is a significant arterial for exiting the Riverview area. Commercial development will
significantly block residents from accessing community resources.
Page 425 of 481
Page 10 of 11
To suggest that this will encourage walkability is almost ludicrous both Rd 100 and Argent are dangerous
places to for pedestrians and cyclists.
We do not need another strip mall in the midst of a low-density residential area. To suggest that this corner
should mirror that of Road 68 and Argent is baffling.
Q3 – support council goals multi-modal transportation network and retail taxes
Q6 - walking distance to residents of the immediate vicinity; thereby promoting a healthy lifestyle for Pasco
residents by encouraging walking. Reducing travel distances between customers and services enhances
public safety. Road 100 and Argent Street are extremely unfriendly to walking and cycling
Retail for the sake of retail is not in the general welfare.
Q6 – commercial land is available 1 mile north negating the need for this commercial development.
68 and Argent is a traffic mess for much of the day and best avoided if at all possible. We should not
“mirror” this fiasco at Road 100 and Argent
Q7 – incompatibility. Commercial development will result in noise and light pollution, increases and mixed
traffic flow that will negatively impact local residents.
Goals
LU-2: PLAN FOR A VARIETY OF COMPATIBLE LAND USES WITHIN THE UGA
Nearby commercial development already address the need for compatible land uses. This application
creates an incompatible use resulting a radical change of the nature of the neighborhood.
LU-6: ENCOURAGE DISTINCTIVE QUALITY COMMUNITY AND REGIONAL COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL
DEVELOPMENTS THAT SUPPORT THE CITY’S OVERALL DEVELOPMENT GOALS
Road 100 is a minor arterial and Argent is a collector. Not principal or minor arterials respectively. It does
not mirror Road 68/Argent in any manner. This is a residential neighborhood that feed to commercial areas
to the north.
LU-6-B Policy: Promote efficient and functional neighborhood level and major commercial centers to meet
community demand.
The neighborhood has retail and commercial areas to the north that most residents pass through on a
daily basis to reach the Broadmoor/I-82 interchange. There is little need for more retail in this vicinity and
the idea that this promotes “walkable” neighborhood is almost ludicrous. It will make pedestrian access
more dangerous.
ED—1. GOAL: MAINTAIN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AS AN IMPORTANT AND ONGOING CITY INITIATIVE
Rejecting this application will show that Pasco encourages intelligent integration of residential
neighborhoods with commercial opportunity. This application is a sad example of how developers game
the system by buying up property, allowing the homes to decay, and eventually converting the real estate
to commercial property.
ED-1-F Policy: Support and encourage residential/commercial mixed-use developments that provide
neighborhood shopping and services and promote walkable neighborhoods.
Page 426 of 481
Page 11 of 11
This development will create greater traffic hazards, promote more 24 hr. noise and traffic, and make this
intersection less pedestrian friendly.
ED-2-B Policy: Encourage development of a wide range of commercial and industrial uses strategically
located near major transportation corridors or facilities and in close proximity to existing or proposed
utility infrastructure while supporting local and regional needs.
Most residents use this intersection to access larger shopping areas and commute to work. The
intersection’s primary purpose is a feeder to areas north. There is not a lack of nearby retail services, and
this plan is unlikely to create services withing walking distance, and will make this intersection more
hazardous to pedestrians.
ED-2—E Policy: Periodically assess the adequacy of the supply of vacant and re-developable lands in the
City limits and the UGA, especially commercial and industrially zoned land.
Meeting the goals of some percentage of commercial land designation is not a valid reason for changing
zoning. The area is “underutilized” because the owners purchased the property, allowed the residential
value to decay, and now deem it somehow appropriate for commercial development.
Page 427 of 481
AGENDA REPORT
FOR: City Council August 7, 2024
TO: Adam Lincoln, City Manager City Council Workshop
Meeting: 8/12/24
FROM: Richa Sigdel, Deputy City Manager
City Manager
SUBJECT: 2025-2030 Capital Improvement Plan Presentation (15 minutes)
I. REFERENCE(S):
Presentation
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Discussion
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
Planning Purposes Only
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
A Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) is a comprehensive, strategic blueprint that
outlines planned capital expenditures over a multi-year period, typically five to
ten years. The CIP encompasses major infrastructure projects such as the
construction and streets, parks, buildings, maintenance of and public
water/sewer systems. It serves as a long-term planning tool that helps the City
of Pasco (City) manage and prioritize capital projects, ensuring that critical
infrastructure is developed and maintained in a systematic and fiscally
responsible manner.
V. DISCUSSION:
Tonight, staff presents the draft Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) for 2025-2030.
Draft detailed project sheets can be viewed through the City's capital planning
tool: ClearGov | ClearDocs; staff will present details on high-priority projects.
Communication, Outreach & Next Steps
The City website provides information to educate the public on the purpose and
Page 428 of 481
importance of the CIP. Three
events are scheduled to gather public input and feedback: two in-person
events and one virtual option.
August 20th, Cafe Con Arte - 5:30 pm
August 28th, Holiday Inn Express - 5:30 pm
August 22nd, Facebook Live - 7:00 pm
Council Engagement and Adoption
At the Council's request, staff will provide additional presentations and updates
as needed.
Councilmembers will have an opportunity to tour the projects presented this
evening, several of which have already been toured.
Following the public outreach and input process, the Council will review and
adopt the CIP.
Page 429 of 481
Pasco City Council Workshop
August 12, 2024
Pa
g
e
4
3
0
o
f
4
8
1
Capital Improvement Plan
(CIP) Presentation
Pa
g
e
4
3
1
o
f
4
8
1
CIP Introduction
•What is a Capital Improvement Plan (CIP)?
•Comprehensive, Strategic blueprint that outlines planned
capital expenditures over a multi-year period.
•Encompasses major infrastructure projects.
•Long-term planning tool that helps the City of Pasco identify
and prioritize capital projects.
Pa
g
e
4
3
2
o
f
4
8
1
Funding Strategy
•Internal Funds
•Restricted for capital use – Arterial, Overlay, Traffic & Park
Impact, Real Estate Excise Tax
•Restricted for Utility – Development Fees, Rates
•Unrestricted - General Fund
•Loans (paid via internal funds)
•Debt (paid via internal funds)
•External Funds
•Donations
•Grants
•Proportionate Shares
Pa
g
e
4
3
3
o
f
4
8
1
Funding Strategy
•Secured
•Existing reserves
•Grants awarded
•Donations committed
•Debt Issued
•Unsecured
•Targeted grants
•Donations discussed but not committed
•Debt not issued and require rate increases to support
•Unknown sources at this time
Pa
g
e
4
3
4
o
f
4
8
1
Funding Strategy
•Unsecured Funds Projects
•Projects or their phases will be initiated when the funding is
secured
•Important to include to show the need and keep the need
visible to all stakeholders
•Minimize the unsecured funds projects for the next biennium
•Pursue external funding
Pa
g
e
4
3
5
o
f
4
8
1
Future Funding Decisions
•Rate increases will be needed in utilities to support the
significant capital needs.
•Updates to connection fees and traffic impact fees that have
not been updated in significant number of years needed to
support future capital needs in utilities and transportation
network.
•Internal funds will be shifted if future revenue does not
support the capital demands.
•If grants are not received, projects will be delayed till other
funding is secured.
Pa
g
e
4
3
6
o
f
4
8
1
CIP Communication and Outreach
•Two in-person and one virtual public meetings:
•August 20th, Cafe Con Arte – 5:30 pm
•August 28th, Holiday Inn Express – 5:30 pm
•August 22nd, Facebook Live Event – 7:00 pmPa
g
e
4
3
7
o
f
4
8
1
Pa
g
e
4
3
8
o
f
4
8
1
Pa
g
e
4
3
9
o
f
4
8
1
Highlighted Projects
•Butterfield WTP Improvements (all phases)
•The phased replacement of this facility is a major undertaking and will take time and
money.
•Rivershore Sewer Trunk Line Replacement
•Project recently funded for design via ecology
•Road 76 Overpass
•Sylvester Street Pedestrian/Bike Overpass
•Fully funded and in beginning stages of design
•Broadmoor Improvements
•Irrigation System Expansion
•Xeriscape
•Irrigation Timers
•Thunderbird Parking Lot
Pa
g
e
4
4
0
o
f
4
8
1
Butterfield WTP Improvements
ISSUE
•Facility built in 1946
•Aging infrastructure, safety, reliability with water
quality changes and capacity demands
SOLUTION
Proposed phased replacement.
COST
Total investment estimated $230M in the next 10 years.
Delivered as multiple smaller projects.
FUNDING STRATEGY:
Low interest loans provided by DOH Drinking Water,
Public Works Board and potentially WIFIA.
$1.5M secured for first stages of design of immediate
needs projects.
Pa
g
e
4
4
1
o
f
4
8
1
Butterfield WTP Improvements
Pa
g
e
4
4
2
o
f
4
8
1
Butterfield WTP Improvements
Pa
g
e
4
4
3
o
f
4
8
1
Rivershore Sewer
Interceptor Upsizing
ISSUE
Capacity constraints
SOLUTION
Proposed replacement in phases.
FUNDING STRATEGY:
Low interest loans provided by
ECY
$1.277M secured for design phase
Construction 2027 onward
Pa
g
e
4
4
4
o
f
4
8
1
Pavement Preservation
Overlay of Lewis Street
segments
Total cost: $5.1M
Federal Grant
(NHSP): $4.6M
Construction in 2026
Pa
g
e
4
4
5
o
f
4
8
1
Pavement Preservation
Overlay of Ainsworth Ave
Total cost: $2.08M
Federal Grant
(NHSP):$2.02M
Construction in 2026
Pa
g
e
4
4
6
o
f
4
8
1
Sylvester St Overpass
Ped/bike Access
Completes the corridor non-
motorized facilities
Total cost: $3.81M
Funding:
•Secured Ped/bike
program Grant
•Secured Sandy Williams Grant
Program
Total grant funding $3.73M
Construction in 2027
Pa
g
e
4
4
7
o
f
4
8
1
Irrigation Clock Controllers
•Covert ~180 Irrigation Clock
Controllers to single Smart
Water System
•Allow centralized programming
reducing staff travel time
•Add leak flow detection to shut
off water
•Allow weather monitoring
to adjust watering
Pa
g
e
4
4
8
o
f
4
8
1
"Thunderbird" Parking Lot
•Convert previous
Thunderbird Hotel parcel to
parking lot area
•Include fencing, lighting,
landscape, and gates
•Allow additional parking next
to Peanuts Parks to support
attendance of Farmer's
Market, and
downtown special events.
Pa
g
e
4
4
9
o
f
4
8
1
Xeriscape Conversion
•Pilot conversion of City
facilities, parks and
boulevards
•Reduce current water
usage
•Reduce cost to maintain
traditional grass
landscape
Pa
g
e
4
5
0
o
f
4
8
1
Discussion and Questions?
Pa
g
e
4
5
1
o
f
4
8
1
Pasco City Council Workshop
August 12, 2024
Pa
g
e
4
5
2
o
f
4
8
1
AGENDA REPORT
FOR: City Council August 12, 2024
TO: Adam Lincoln, City Manager City Council Workshop
Meeting: 8/12/24
FROM: Maria Serra, Director
Public Works
SUBJECT: Resolution - Acceptance of Work for A Street Sports Complex Phase 1
(5 minutes)
I. REFERENCE(S):
Resolution
PowerPoint Presentation
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Discussion
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
Total Payment to Big D's Construction of Tri-Cities, Inc.: $1,385,767.22
This project was funded through a State of Washington Recreation
Conservation Office (RCO) Grant and local funds.
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
The A Street Sports Complex Phase 1 Project (No. 21155), construction
contract was awarded by Council action to Big D's Construction of Tri-Cities,
Inc. of Pasco WA on August 1, 2022, in the amount of $1,314,509.10. The
project is now complete and was constructed per project specifications. Final
construction costs paid totaled $1,385,767.22, after the approval of 6 Change
Orders.
Change Orders (CO) for the project included:
CO No.1 No Cost Change order: FPUD made some changes in the size and
location of their vaults. Since the work had not started on the vault installation,
this Change order did not incur any added cost.
Page 453 of 481
CO No.2 ($4,687.62): Grading revision to lower finish grade around existing
utilities along A street portion of the project..
CO No.3 ($39,100.13): Upsize of 8" water main to 12" water main down Elm
Street from the intersection of A street to the project limits.
CO No.4 ($2,418.60): Change of sales tax from 8.7% to 8.9%.
CO No.5 ($24,128.03): Install a mow strip, fabric, and rock along new slope on
A street.
CO No 6 ($923.74): Place fabric and landscape rock in northwest corner of
entryway in lieu of grass.
The project is complete and the materials and workmanship meets the
standards specified in the contract documents.
V. DISCUSSION:
Staff recommends approval of the proposed Resolution accepting the work
performed by Big D's Construction of Tri-Cities, Inc. for the Construction of the
A Street Sports Complex Phase 1 Project.
Page 454 of 481
Resolution – A St Sports Complex Project Acceptance- 1
RESOLUTION NO. ________
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON,
ACCEPTING WORK PERFORMED BY BIG D’S CONSTRUCTION OF TRI-
CITIES, INC., UNDER CONTRACT FOR THE A STREET SPORTS
COMPLEX PHASE 1 PROJECT.
WHEREAS, the work performed by Big D’s Construction of Tri-Cities, Inc., under
contract for Project No. 21 155 has been examined by City of Pasco (City) Staff and been found
to be in apparent compliance with the applicable project specifications and drawings; and
WHEREAS, it is the City Staff’s recommendation that the City of Pasco formally accept
the contractor's work and the project as complete.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF PASCO, WASHINGTON:
That the City Council concurs with City Staff’s recommendation and thereby accepts the
work performed by Big D’s Construction of Tri-Cities, Inc., under contract for Project No. 21 155
A Street Sports Complex Phase 1 as being completed in apparent compliance with the project
specifications and drawings.
Be It Further Resolved, that the City Clerk is hereby directed to notify the Washington
State Department of Revenue of this acceptance.
Be It Further Resolved, that the final payment of retainage being withheld, pursuant to
RCW 60.28.011, regulations and administrative process, shall be released upon apparent
compliance with and satisfaction of applicable project specifications and verification thereof by
Public Works Department staff and Finance Director.
Be It Further Resolved, that this Resolution shall take effect immediately.
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco, Washington, on this ___ day of
__________, 2024.
_____________________________
Pete Serrano
Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_____________________________ ___________________________
Debra Barham, CMC Kerr Ferguson Law, PLLC
City Clerk City Attorneys
Page 455 of 481
Pasco City Council Workshop
Meeting
August 12, 2024
Pa
g
e
4
5
6
o
f
4
8
1
A Street Sports Complex Phase 1
Project # 21155
Contract awarded on August 1st, 2022,
to Big D’s Construction of Tri-Cities,
Inc. for $1,314,509.10
Pa
g
e
4
5
7
o
f
4
8
1
A Street Sports Complex Phase 1 Project
Before
Pa
g
e
4
5
8
o
f
4
8
1
A Street Sports Complex Phase 1 Project
In Progress
Pa
g
e
4
5
9
o
f
4
8
1
A Street Sports Complex Phase 1 Project
After
Final Construction Cost:$ 1,385,767.22
Change Orders: $71,258.12
Pa
g
e
4
6
0
o
f
4
8
1
A Street Sports Complex Phase 1 Project
Construction Costs
$842,297.00Engineer’s Estimate
$1,314,509.10Bid Award
$71,258.12Change orders
$1,385,767.22Final Construction Costs
Change order AmountChange Order DescriptionChange Order No.
$0FPUD revised plans1
$4,687.62Grading Revision in easement2
$39,100.13Water Main Upsize3
$2418.60Sales Tax change4
$24,128.03Additional Mow strip along north slope5
$923.74Additional Landscape rock6
Total - $ 71,258.12
Pa
g
e
4
6
1
o
f
4
8
1
Questions?
Pa
g
e
4
6
2
o
f
4
8
1
AGENDA REPORT
FOR: City Council June 12, 2024
TO: Adam R. Lincoln, City Manager City Council Workshop
Meeting: 8/12/24
FROM: Maria Serra, Director
Public Works
SUBJECT: Resolution - Accept Quote for New Cat and Dog Kennels for New Tri-
Cities Animal Control Facility (5 minutes)
I. REFERENCE(S):
Resolution
Presentation
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Discussion
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
Vendor Name Quote Responsive Quote
MWI Veterinary Supply $420,677.32 Yes
Covetrus $425,169.50 Yes
Patterson Veterinary
Supply $429,325.08 Yes
Otto Environmental $469,936.17 No
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
A revised formal RFQ was issued (Quote 17999) for New Cat and Dog Kennels
for the New Tri-Cities Animal Control Facility on June 26, 2024. This new RFQ
differed from the original in that material types were changed and two new
"overflow" kennels were added. Four (4) quotes were received which were
opened on July 17, 2024. The lowest responsive quote was submitted by MWI
Veterinary Supply Co. of Boise Idaho in the amount of $420,677.32. The
engineer's estimate was $421,032.77.
For reference, the original RFQ was issued on March 24, 2024 and five (5)
quotes were opened on April 8, 2024. Council rejected all quotes given that the
Page 463 of 481
lowest responsive quote was in the amount of $568,693.90, significantly
exceeding the engineer's estimate.
V. DISCUSSION:
Staff recommends award to MWI Veterinary Supply Co. for the New Cat and
Dog Kennels for the New Tri-Cities Animal Control Facility and authorize the
City Manager to execute the contract documents.
Page 464 of 481
Resolution – New Cat & Dog Kennel Quote Acceptance - 1
RESOLUTION NO. ____
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON,
AWARDING QUOTE NO. 17999 FOR THE NEW CAT & DOG KENNELS FOR
THE NEW TRI-CITIES ANIMAL CONTROL FACILITY; AND FURTHER,
AUTHORIZES THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE CONTRACT
DOCUMENTS.
WHEREAS, the City of Pasco (City) identified a need to purchase new cat and dog kennels
for the New Tri-Cities Animal Control Facility; and
WHEREAS, the City solicited sealed public quotes for the new cat and dog kennels,
identified as Quote No. 17999 New Cat & Dog Kennels for the Tri-Cities Animal Facility; and
WHEREAS, on July 17, 2024, at 11:00 a.m., four (4) quotes were received and opened by
the City with one (1) quote deemed irregular; and
WHEREAS, the lowest responsive bidder was MWI Veterinary Supply Co. with a quote
of $420,677.32; and
WHEREAS, the quote documentation was reviewed, and the lowest bidder was
determined to be responsible and responsive.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF PASCO, WASHINGTON:
That the City hereby awards Quote No. 17999 for the New Cat & Dog Kennels for the New
Tri-Cities Animal Control Facility to MWI Veterinary Supply Co., in the amount of $420,677.32;
and further authorizes the City Manager to execute the Contract documents.
Be It Further Resolved, that this Resolution shall take effect and be in full force
immediately upon passage by the City Council.
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco, Washington, on this ____ day of
August, 2024.
_____________________________
Pete Serrano
Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_____________________________ ___________________________
Debra Barham, CMC Kerr Ferguson Law, PLLC
City Clerk City Attorneys
Page 465 of 481
Pasco City Council Workshop
Meeting
August 12th , 2024
Pa
g
e
4
6
6
o
f
4
8
1
Quotes for New Cat & Dog Kennels for the New
Tri-Cities Animal Control Facility – Quote# 17999
Pa
g
e
4
6
7
o
f
4
8
1
Quotes for New Cat & Dog Kennels for the New
Tri-Cities Animal Control Facility – Quote# 17999
New Cat & Dog Kennels Quotes
Vendor Name Quote Amount Responsive Quote
MWI Veterinary Supply $420,677.32 Yes
Covetrus $425,169.50 Yes
Patterson Veterinary Supply $429,325.08 Yes
Otto Environmental $469,936.17 No
Engineers Estimate $421,032.77
Pa
g
e
4
6
8
o
f
4
8
1
Questions?
Pa
g
e
4
6
9
o
f
4
8
1
AGENDA REPORT
FOR: City Council August 7, 2024
TO: Adam Lincoln, City Manager City Council Workshop
Meeting: 8/12/24
FROM: Maria Serra, Director
Public Works
SUBJECT: Resolution - Project Acceptance for East Riverview Lift Station (3
minutes)
I. REFERENCE(S):
Resolution
PowerPoint Presentation
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Discussion
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
Bid Award $ 936,885.68
Change Orders (Tax Adjustments) $ 1,974.30
Project Closeout Reconciliation (Under Budget) ($ 29,513.41)
Final Construction Cost $ 909,346.57
The project closeout reconciliation amount represents a total of bid items not
completely used and reflects work completed under budget. Bid items not used
included cold mix asphalt construction materials not needed during the warmer
weather construction timeframe. The closeout reconciliation amount also
accounts for not using the entire force account bid item.
Funding for this project was included in the 2021-2022 Adopted Budget as
summarized below.
2021-2022 Adopted Budget:
Sewer Fund (450) $ 1,400,000
Secured 2017 Utility Revenue Bond $ 300,000
Page 470 of 481
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
The Riverview East Sewer Lift Station project, originally titled Road 52 & Pearl
Lift Station, supports development within the East Riverview area at a density
consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan and population growth
projections. The construction of this lift station allows for properties within this
designated sub-basin area to be served by the City's Sanitary Sewer system.
The work performed includes:
Installation of a new packaged sewer lift station (two pumps at 120 GPM
each) with associated site improvements
Installation of approximately 2,200 linear feet of 4-inch-diameter force
main
Installation of approximately 400 linear feet of 12-inch-diameter gravity
sewer main
The lift station has the capacity to reliably serve 267 Equivalent Residential
Units (ERUs). A development with 56 ERUs is already connected to and being
served by this lift station. Similar developments within this basin are
anticipated to follow in the near term.
V. DISCUSSION:
City Staff recommends approval of the resolution for the acceptance of the
Riverview East Lift Station Project, as constructed by Big D’s Construction, Inc.
Page 471 of 481
Resolution – Riverview East LS Project Acceptance- 1
RESOLUTION NO. ________
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON,
ACCEPTING WORK PERFORMED BY BIG D’S CONSTRUCTION, INC.,
UNDER CONTRACT FOR THE RIVERVIEW EAST LIFT STATION
PROJECT.
WHEREAS, the work performed by Big D’s Construction, Inc., under contract for Project
No. 19053 Riverview East Lift Station has been examined by City of Pasco (City) Staff and been
found to be in apparent compliance with the applicable project specifications and drawings; and
WHEREAS, it is the City Staff’s recommendation that the City of Pasco formally accept
the contractor's work and the project as complete.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF PASCO, WASHINGTON:
That the City Council concurs with City Staff’s recommendation and thereby accepts the
work performed by Big D’s Construction, Inc., under contract for Project No. 19053 Riverview
East Lift Station as being completed in apparent compliance with the project specifications and
drawings.
Be It Further Resolved, that the City Clerk is hereby directed to notify the Washington
State Department of Revenue of this acceptance.
Be It Further Resolved, that the final payment of retainage being withheld, pursuant to
RCW 60.28.011, regulations and administrative process, shall be released upon apparent
compliance with and satisfaction of applicable project specifications and verification thereof by
the Public Works Department staff and Finance Director.
Be It Further Resolved, that this Resolution shall take effect immediately.
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco, Washington, on this ___ day of August,
2024.
_____________________________
Pete Serrano
Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_____________________________ ___________________________
Debra Barham, CMC Kerr Ferguson Law, PLLC
City Clerk City Attorneys
Page 472 of 481
Pasco City Council
Workshop Meeting
August 12, 2024
Pa
g
e
4
7
3
o
f
4
8
1
Riverview East Lift Station
Project #19-053
Pa
g
e
4
7
4
o
f
4
8
1
Riverview East Lift Station
Project #19-053
Pa
g
e
4
7
5
o
f
4
8
1
Riverview East Lift Station
Project #19-053
Pa
g
e
4
7
6
o
f
4
8
1
Riverview East Lift Station
Project #19-053
Pa
g
e
4
7
7
o
f
4
8
1
CONSTRUCTION COSTS
$1,102,478.96Engineer’s Estimate
$936,885.68Bid Award
$(27,539.11)Change Order Total
$909,346.57Final Construction Contract Total
Riverview East Lift Station
Project #19-053
AmountDescription of Contract Changes
$862.69State Sales Tax Adjustment from 8.6% to 8.7%
$1,111.61State Sales Tax Adjustment from 8.7% to 8.9%
($29,513.41)Reconciliation of Bid Items to Reflect Work Completed
Pa
g
e
4
7
8
o
f
4
8
1
Questions?
Pa
g
e
4
7
9
o
f
4
8
1
QUALITY OF LIFE
Promote a high-quality of life through quality programs, services and appropriate investment and re-
investment in community infrastructure including, but not limited to:
• Completion of Transportation System Master Plan and design standard updates to promote greater
neighborhood cohesion in new and re-developed neighborhoods through design elements, e.g.;
connectivity, walkability, aesthetics, sustainability, and community gathering spaces.
• Completion of the Parks, Recreation and Open Space Plan and development of an implementation
strategy to enhance such services equitably across the community. • Completion of the Housing Action and Implementation Plan with a focus on a variety of housing to address
the needs of the growing population.
FINANCIAL SUSTAINABILITY
Enhance the long-term viability, value, and service levels of services and programs, including, but not
limited to:
• Adopting policies and strategic investment standards to assure consistency of long-range planning to include
update of impact fees, area fees to specific infrastructure, and SEPA mitigation measures related to new
development, e.g.; schools, traffic, parks, and fire.
COMMUNITY TRANSPORTATION NETWORK
Promote a highly functional multi-modal transportation system including, but not limited to:
• Application of the adopted Transportation System Master Plan including development of policies, regulations,
programs, and projects that provide for greater connectivity, strategic investment, mobility, multi -modal
systems, accessibility, efficiency, and safety.
COMMUNITY SAFETY
Promote proactive approaches for the strategic investment of infrastructure, staffing, and equipment
including, but not limited to:
• Adoption and develop implementation strategies for Comprehensive Fire Master Plan aimed at maintaining the
current Washington State Rating Bureau Class 3 community rating.
• Collaboration with regional partners to influence strategies to reduce incidences of homeless by leveraging
existing resources such as the newly implemented 0.1% mental health sales tax, use of resource navigator
programs, and other efforts. • Development of an implementation strategy for the Comprehensive Police Master Plan to support future service
levels of the department to assure sustainability, public safety, officer safety, crime control, and compliance
with legislative mandates.
ECONOMIC VITALITY
Promote and encourage economic vitality including, but not limited to:
• Implementation of the Comprehensive Land Use Plan through related actions including zoning code changes,
phased sign code update, and development regulations and standards.
• Completion of Area Master Plans and environmental analysis complementing the Comprehensive Land Use
Plan such as Downtown and Broadmoor Master Plans.
• Development of an Economic Development Plan, including revitalization efforts.
COMMUNITY IDENTITY
Identify opportunities to enhance community identity, cohesion, and image including, but not limited to:
• Development of a Community Engagement Plan to evaluate strategies, technologies, and other opportunities
to further inclusivity, community engagement, and inter-agency and constituent coordination efforts.
• Support of the Arts and Culture Commission in promoting unity and the celebration of diversity through art
and culture programs, recognition of significant events or occurrences, and participation/sponsorship of events
within the community.
Page 480 of 481
CALIDAD DE VIDA
Promover una calidad de vida alta a través de programas de calidad, servicios, inversiones y reinversiones
apropiadas en la infraestructura de la comunidad incluyendo, pero no limitado a:
• Terminar el Plan de Transportación para promover más cohesión entre nuestras vecindades actuales y re-desarrolladas
a través de elementos de diseño, p.ej. conectividad, transitabilidad, sostenibilidad estética, y espacios para reuniones
comunitarias.
• Terminar el Plan de los Parques, la Recreación, y los Espacios Vacíos y el desarrollo de una estrategia de
implementación para mejorar tales servicios justamente a lo largo de la comunidad.
• Terminar el Plan de Acción e Implementación de Viviendas con un enfoque en una variedad de viviendas para tratar las
necesidades del aumento en la población.
SOSTENIBIILIDAD FINANCIERA
Mejorar la viabilidad a largo plazo, el valor, y los niveles de los servicios y los programas, incluyendo, pero no
limitado a:
• Adoptar las políticas y los estándares de inversión estratégica para asegurar consistencia en la planificación a largo
plazo para incluir la actualización de las tarifas de impacto, las tarifas en áreas de infraestructura específica, y las
medidas de mitigación SEPA relacionadas con el nuevo desarrollo, p.ej. escuelas, tráfico, parques, e incendios.
RED DE TRANSPORTACION COMUNITARIA
Promover un sistema de transportación multimodal en alta operación incluyendo, pero no limitado a:
• Aplicar el Plan de Transportación que fue adoptado, incluyendo el desarrollo de las políticas, las reglas, los programas,
y los proyectos que proporcionan más conectividad, inversión estratégica, movilidad, sistemas multimodales,
accesibilidad, eficiencia, y seguridad.
SEGURIDAD COMUNITARIA
Promover métodos proactivos para la inversión estratégica en la infraestructura, el personal, y el equipo
incluyendo, pero no limitado a:
• Adoptar y desarrollar estrategias de implementación para el Plan Comprehensivo para Incendios. Con el propósito de
mantener la clasificación comunitaria actual en la tercera Clase del Departamento de Clasificación del Estado de
Washington.
• Colaborar con socios regionales para influenciar estrategias que reduzcan los incidentes de personas sin hogar al
hacer uso de los recursos actuales como el impuesto de ventas de 0.1% implementado recientemente para la salud
mental, el uso de programas para navegar los recursos, y otros esfuerzos.
• Desarrollar una estrategia de implementación para el Plan Comprehensivo de la Policía para apoyar los niveles futuros
de servicio del departamento para asegurar la sostenibilidad, la seguridad pública, la seguridad de los policías, el
control de crímenes, y el cumplimiento con los mandatos legislativos.
VITALIDAD ECONOMICA
Promover y fomentar vitalidad económica incluyendo, pero no limitado a:
• Implementar el Plan Comprehensivo del Uso de Terreno a través de acciones relacionadas, incluyendo cambios de los
códigos de zonificación, actualización en las etapas de los códigos de las señales, y el desarrollo de las reglas y los
estándares.
• Terminar los Planes de las Áreas y un análisis ambiental el cual complementa al plan integral de uso de la tierra como a
los Planes del Centro y de Broadmoor.
• Desarrollar un Plan de Desarrollo Económico, el cual incluya esfuerzos de revitalización.
IDENTIDAD COMUNITARIA
Identificar oportunidades para mejorar la identidad comunitaria, la cohesión, y la imagen incluyendo, pero no
limitado a:
• Desarrollar un Plan de Participación de la Comunidad para evaluar las estrategias, las tecnologías, y otras
oportunidades para promover la inclusividad, la participación de la comunidad, y los esfuerzos interdepartamentales y de
coordinación de los constituyentes.
• Apoyar a la Comisión de las Artes y Cultura al promover la unidad y la celebración de la diversidad a través de
programas de arte y cultura, reconocer eventos o acontecimientos significantes, y participar/patrocinar eventos dentro
de la comunidad.
Page 481 of 481