Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Meeting Packet 5-21-26AGENDA PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING City Hall - Council Chambers 525 North Third Avenue Pasco, Washington THURSDAY, MAY 21, 2026 6:30 PM This meeting is broadcast live on PSC-TV Channel 191 on Charter Cable and streamed at www.pasco-wa.com/psctvlive. Audio equipment available for the hearing impaired; contact staff for assistance. Please silence your cell phones. Thank you. I. CALL TO ORDER- II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGENCE III. ROLL CALL: Declaration of Quorum IV. WELCOME AND ANNOUNCEMENTS V. APPROVAL OF MINUTES • Meeting Minutes from March 19, 2026 meeting VI. OLD BUSINESS None VII. PUBLIC HEARINGS None VIII. WORKSHOP • Commercial Land Capacity • Unified Development Code Introduction • Less Restrictive Housing – Presentation only, no staff report IX. OTHER BUSINESS • Director Items o No Planning Commission meetings in June, July or August. X. ADJOURNMENT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES City Hall - Council Chambers 525 North Third Avenue Pasco, Washington THURSDAY, MARCH 19, 2026 6:30 PM Page 1 of 4 CALL TO ORDER City of Pasco Planning Commission meeting was called to order at 6:30 p.m., by Chair Jerry Cochran. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Chair Cochran led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL Commissioners Present: Pat Jones, Rob Waites, Dana Crutchfield, Brian Tungesvik, Migues Miranda and Jerry Cochran, a quorum was declared. Commissioners Excused: Austin Crawford, Kim Lehrman Staff Present: CED Director Haylie Matson, CDBG Administrator Kristin Webb DECLARATIONS Chair Cochran asked if there were any Planning Commission members who have a declaration at this time regarding any of the items on the agenda.  No declarations were heard. Chair Cochran asked if anyone in the audience objected to any Planning Commission member hearing any of the items on the agenda.  No declarations were heard. APPROVAL OF MINUTES With the change that Vice-Chair Lehrman adjourned the meeting, Commissioner Jones motioned to approve the Planning Commission meeting minutes of March 19, 2026. Commissioner Waites seconded, and the motion carried unanimously. OLD BUSINESS None PUBLIC HEARINGS • Tri-Cities HOME Consortium Citizen Participation Plan Kristin Webb presented an overview of the updated Tri-Cities Home Consortium Citizen Participation Plan (CPP), which outlines how the consortium ensures public involvement in HUD-funded housing and community development programs. The CPP establishes requirements for transparency, public engagement, and participation in key planning documents, including the Consolidated Plan, Annual Action Plan, Fair Housing Assessment, and CAPER. The proposed updates were primarily administrative and intended to maintain compliance with HUD regulations, improve clarity, and reflect current engagement practices, including digital outreach. Key revisions included removing outdated COVID-19 provisions, clarifying adoption and implementation procedures, expanding notification methods, adding conflict of interest provisions, and updating amendment procedures. The public comment period was open from February 5 to March 31, 2026, with no comments received. Page 2 of 4 Staff noted that the public hearing provides an opportunity for testimony, after which the Planning Commission may make a recommendation to City Council regarding approval of the updated CPP. Questions/Comments from Commissioners: Commissioner Jones asked for clarification of the mega waiver. Kristin Webb noted that during COVID-19, HUD waivers allowed temporary suspension of certain CPP requirements, including the 30- day CAPER review period, to expedite distribution of emergency funding. Commissioner Cochran opened the public hearing. Hearing no one, Commissioner Cochran closed the public hearing. Commissioner Waites moved the planning commission to recommend that City Council approved the updated Tri-Cities Home Consortium Citizen Participation Plan as presented. Seconded by Commissioner Jones, motion passed unanimously. WORSHOP • Missing Middle Housing Discussion Director Matson provided an overview of state-required middle housing legislation, noting limited local flexibility and no viable exemptions despite review with legal and consultants. Middle housing includes housing types between single-family and apartments (e.g., duplexes through sixplexes, townhomes, cottages). The legislation, adopted in 2023, must be implemented by year-end and aims to address statewide housing shortages. It requires cities like Pasco (Tier 1) to allow a minimum of four units per lot, with up to six units if affordability criteria are met. The law also expands ADU allowances, reduces parking requirements, and requires consistent development standards with single-family zoning. Staff noted the City is working on comprehensive plan and municipal code updates to align with state requirements, with additional policy discussions forthcoming. Director Matson reviewed key middle housing regulations, noting design standards must apply equally to all housing types and balance cost considerations. Middle housing is already allowed in several zones and will be expanded citywide, with market uptake expected to occur gradually. While the City may limit certain housing types, this is not currently being pursued. She emphasized that local regulatory options are limited and reviewed exemption criteria, noting Pasco does not qualify due to strict requirements, including historical considerations. Next steps include updates to the Comprehensive Plan and Development Code, with materials expected later this year. She will continue presenting key topics to the Commission, including upcoming discussion on commercial capacity, noting concerns about loss of commercial land to residential conversions and the importance of maintaining balance. Director Matson emphasized the importance of maintaining a strong commercial base to support economic development and reduce reliance as a bedroom community. Staff outlined plans to discuss commercial capacity in April and noted efforts to maintain a continuous feedback loop between staff, Planning Commission, and City Council by sharing input between both bodies. Page 3 of 4 She invited additional feedback from the Commission and noted that efforts are underway to develop balanced design guidelines that improve quality while minimizing cost impacts. Staff emphasized that the process will remain iterative, with additional opportunities for Commission review later in the year. Questions/Comments from Commissioners: Commissioner Crutchfield asked about emergency access for middle housing configurations and whether single-family homes are still allowed. Director Matson confirmed emergency access standards will still apply and clarified that single-family homes remain permitted, provided development does not preclude future density consistent with zoning requirements. Commissioner Tungesvik asked about the ability to develop multiple units on a single lot and rent them; Director Matson confirmed this is allowed, noting current owner-occupancy requirements for ADUs will be removed. He also observed that middle housing is more feasible on larger lots and less so on smaller lots, with staff confirming feasibility varies by lot size and utility constraints. Commissioner Tungesvik further asked about privacy and setbacks. Director Matson clarified that regulations must be applied equally to all housing types, and while existing setbacks can be maintained or adjusted by area, no additional restrictions specific to middle housing are allowed. Commissioner Jones asked whether additional units must be rented or could be sold separately; Director Matson explained both options may be possible depending on the ownership structure. He also asked about attached units, and staff clarified they may be sold independently if legally divided, similar to townhome development. He further asked about the implementation timeline, and Director Matson confirmed the requirements must be implemented by the end of the year. Director Matson suggested implementing balanced design guidelines to ensure middle housing is visually compatible and of higher quality, noting such standards must apply equally to single-family housing. Staff emphasized the need to balance aesthetics with cost impacts and indicated consultants are developing options. It was also noted that some areas, such as Riverview, may develop more slowly due to infrastructure and access constraints. Commissioner Waites asked whether there is a minimum square footage requirement for middle housing, noting the trend toward smaller “tiny home” developments. Commissioner Crutchfield asked whether areas near the river could qualify for alternative compliance or exemptions due to potential flood risk (e.g., dam failure concerns). Director Matson stated they will review whether river-adjacent areas could qualify for alternative compliance, noting potential inconsistencies with existing policies that support mixed-use development in those areas. Chair Cochran expressed concerns about state-imposed middle housing requirements and emphasized a preference for a measured approach, including strong design standards to maintain neighborhood quality. He also requested clarification on the potential consequences of non-compliance with state requirements, including impacts such as loss of funding or legal risks, to better inform future policy discussions. Commissioner Crutchfield emphasized the importance of adequate inspection staffing and oversight to ensure construction quality as housing development increases. Concerns were raised about recent construction deficiencies, highlighting the need for strong building inspection to prevent safety issues, particularly in rental housing. Commissioner Tungesvik asked whether partial compliance is possible; staff clarified compliance is effectively all-or-nothing and noted most jurisdictions comply to avoid funding impacts or legal risks. Page 4 of 4 He also raised concerns about code enforcement capacity with increased ADUs. Director Matson acknowledged current workload and limited staffing and noted an upcoming discussion with City Council to evaluate resources and priorities. Commissioner Waites emphasized the importance of preserving existing commercial zoning to prevent increased residential density and recommended maintaining commercial areas to support balanced growth. Director Matson thanked the Commission for the discussion and feedback, noting the information will be shared with City Council and used to inform next steps moving forward. OTHER BUSINESS • Director Items Director Matson announced the resignation of Planning Commissioner Rosa Torres and thanked her for her service, noting that a vacancy will be advertised. She also provided a scheduling update, indicating two meetings remain before her upcoming maternity leave in June. Staff proposed holding a June meeting, taking July and August off, and resuming in September with an increased meeting schedule to address upcoming work. Director Matson will prepare and share a proposed meeting schedule at the next meeting. She noted upcoming materials will be extensive but not new in substance, as topics have been introduced in advance. She emphasized the importance of reviewing packets ahead of time to maintain efficient meetings and suggested up to two meetings per month (September/October) if needed. ADJOURNMENT Chair Cochran stated with no other business, I recommend a motion to adjourn. Commissioner Jones made the motion to adjourn the meeting, it was seconded by Commissioner Waites, and the motion passed unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 7:32 pm. YouTube link to watch full meeting: Pasco Planning Commission Meeting March 19, 2026 Respectfully submitted, Carmen Patrick, Administrative Assistant II Community & Economic Development Department REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION City Hall – 525 North Third Avenue – Council Chambers THURSDAY, May 21, 2026 6:30 PM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Haylie Matson, CED Director SUBJECT: Commercial Land Capacity Review – Comprehensive Plan Update Briefing File Numbers: CPA2026-001 Comprehensive Plan Periodic Update Applicant: City of Pasco Description: The Commercial Land Capacity Review examines whether Pasco has enough commercial land to support future jobs, businesses, and economic growth through 2046. The analysis found that while the City currently has a small surplus of commercial land, continued requests to convert commercial properties to residential uses could eliminate that capacity and impact long-term employment opportunities, retail growth, and access to community services. Staff is seeking policy direction from the Planning Commission on how to evaluate and limit future commercial-to-residential conversions as part of the Comprehensive Plan update. Environmental Determination N/A Exhibits: 01 Land Use Map 02 Land Capacity Assessment Questions + Analysis from City Land Use Consultants 03 Powerpoint Action Requested No formal action is requested. Staff is requesting clear policy direction from Planning Commission on how to approach pending (and optional) Comprehensive Plan amendment requests, particularly those proposing to convert commercial land to residential. This direction will guide staff recommendations as part of the Comprehensive Plan update, including future land use policies and evaluation of similar land use and zoning requests. REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION City Hall – 525 North Third Avenue – Council Chambers THURSDAY, May 21, 2026 6:30 PM The current land use map for Pasco is attached for reference. The red and purple areas on the map (commercial and mixed-use designations) generally follow major arterials or are strategically located based on surrounding uses, visibility, and service needs within the community. History and Facts Brief This staff report outlines the City’s commercial land capacity and the policy considerations associated with current Comprehensive Plan (land use) amendment requests. Additional technical information prepared by the City’s consultants is included in the Land Capacity Assessment Questions document in the attached materials. As part of the Comprehensive Plan update, the City completed a Land Capacity Analysis to determine whether there is sufficient land to support projected housing and employment growth through 2046. The analysis shows the City currently has approximately 532 acres of vacant commercial land and 143 acres of underutilized commercial land, along with additional mixed-use capacity. This inventory supports approximately 7,800 commercial jobs and more than 13,000 total jobs when industrial and pipeline development are included. Pasco is projected to add approximately 13,000 jobs by 2046, requiring the City to maintain sufficient land designated for employment uses. Under current assumptions, the City maintains a modest surplus of commercial land capacity, estimated at approximately 140 acres. However, this surplus is narrow and highly sensitive to change. Under alternative assumptions that allow greater residential development within commercial and mixed-use areas, the City shifts to a significant deficit exceeding 1,000 acres of commercial land capacity. At the same time, the City has received approximately 30 land use amendment requests this cycle. Several of these requests propose converting commercially designated land to residential uses. The requests result in a range of approximately 61 to 167 acres of commercially designated land potentially affected, depending on how mixed-designation parcels are counted. At the upper end of that range, the loss of commercial land would exceed the City’s current surplus and move the City into a deficit. In other words, this means the City’s current surplus of about 140 acres would be fully used up and exceeded if up to 167 acres are converted, resulting in a shortfall of land needed to support future jobs, businesses, and services. REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION City Hall – 525 North Third Avenue – Council Chambers THURSDAY, May 21, 2026 6:30 PM The City Council was briefed on this matter in April 2026. In general, the council expressed support for preserving commercial land and incorporating policies into the Comprehensive Plan to discourage conversion of commercial land to residential uses. Staff will be working on incorporating this feedback as well as Planning Commission feedback into the DRAFT comprehensive plan documents for review and consideration by both groups. Background Pasco’s land use pattern reflects its role as a regional employment center with a strong industrial base. Approximately 10 percent of the City’s land is designated commercial, while a significantly larger share supports industrial uses. Industrial land is a critical component of the City’s economic foundation. It supports major employers and regional economic activity and is the most difficult type of employment land to replace once lost. Compared to other Eastern Washington Cities, Pasco already maintains a relatively balanced but employment-focused land use pattern as shown in the table below: City Percentage of Land Use Designation Commercial Industrial Residential Open Space Pasco 10 37 46 5 Kennewick* 12 5 67 10 Richland** 9 22 32 16 Wenatchee*** 8 10 74 6 West Richland** 9.5 .3 46 N/A Airway Heights**** 20 38 13+ 13 *Based on the 2021 Comprehensive Plan **Based on 2017 Comprehensive Plan ***Based on 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update ****Based on Comprehensive Plan documents in 2022 Planning Commission Meeting records. This document listed 408 acres in the R-1 zone (13% of total city acres) but did not list acreage for other residential zones. REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION City Hall – 525 North Third Avenue – Council Chambers THURSDAY, May 21, 2026 6:30 PM These comparisons highlight that Pasco carries a significantly larger share of industrial land than many peer cities, reinforcing its role as an employment center within the region. In addition to meeting employment targets, maintaining commercial land is critical to supporting the City’s economic development goals. The City continues to see retail leakage to surrounding jurisdictions, where residents travel outside Pasco for shopping, dining, and entertainment. Preserving and strategically locating commercial land creates opportunities to attract destination retail and services that keep spending within the community. Impact (other than fiscal) Converting the existing commercial land in Pasco to residential has long term impacts beyond individual projects. From a capacity standpoint, the City is at or near a tipping point, where additional conversion of commercial land begins to impact its ability to meet long-term employment targets. Once commercial land is converted and developed residentially, it is effectively removed from the employment land supply for decades. Unlike residential land, commercial land cannot easily be intensified or replaced once lost. Conversion also affects access to services. Fewer commercial areas limit opportunities for neighborhood services and increase reliance on existing corridors, resulting in longer travel distances and increased traffic demand. Converting commercial land to residential also reduces the City’s ability to attract retail and destination uses that generate local spending. When commercial opportunities are limited, residents are more likely to spend money in neighboring cities, resulting in lost sales tax revenue and fewer local amenities. Discussion In terms of the state-mandated Comprehensive Plan update, there is no required ratio of commercial to residential land. The key requirement is that the City demonstrates it can meet both housing and employment growth targets over time. From an economic development standpoint, the City may choose to maintain or expand its commercial land base to support long- term growth. Currently, staff is not proposing to add new commercial land through this update, but rather to maintain the existing inventory. Under current assumptions, the City maintains a small surplus of commercial land. However, that surplus can be eliminated quickly depending on how land use decisions are made. REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION City Hall – 525 North Third Avenue – Council Chambers THURSDAY, May 21, 2026 6:30 PM The primary concern is the cumulative effect of the approximately 30 pending amendment requests. While each request may appear reasonable when viewed individually, the combined impact poses a clear risk to long term employment capacity. Additional considerations include: • Market realities: Residential development consistently outcompetes commercial uses, particularly in mixed-use zones. Even when commercial is allowed, it is often not constructed. • Mixed-use limitations: While mixed-use designations can provide flexibility, current regulatory limitations reduce the City’s ability to ensure commercial development occurs in these areas. • Employment land constraints: Limited ability to replace lost commercial and industrial land once converted. • Community expectations: Residents continue to express a need for more retail, dining, and neighborhood services, which requires preserving commercial land in appropriate locations. The analysis also supports prioritizing the preservation of specific types of land, including: • Industrial lands that support long term economic development • Established commercial corridors and nodes • Opportunities for neighborhood-scale commercial that support daily needs and reduce travel demand From a practical standpoint, the City is approaching a point where continued conversion of commercial land will begin to directly limit its ability to meet employment targets and support long term economic development. From an economic development perspective, preserving commercial land is not only about job capacity but also about competitiveness within the Tri-Cities region. Retail and entertainment uses tend to cluster in areas where sufficient land and visibility exist. Without maintaining and planning for these areas, Pasco risks missing opportunities to attract destination businesses that draw both residents and visitors. If we do not preserve space for these uses, we are effectively planning for that spending to occur somewhere else. REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION City Hall – 525 North Third Avenue – Council Chambers THURSDAY, May 21, 2026 6:30 PM Recommendation Staff recommends that the Planning Commission provide clear policy direction to limit the conversion of commercially designated land to residential uses, particularly where such conversions would reduce long term employment capacity. Staff further recommends establishing a consistent framework for evaluating these requests, which may include: 1. Prioritizing preservation of key commercial corridors, nodes, and industrial areas 2. Requiring a demonstrated public benefit for any proposed conversion 3. Requiring offsetting commercial land designations when conversion is approved 4. Limiting conversions where cumulative impacts would reduce overall capacity below projected need 5. Supporting development of commercial areas that attract retail, dining, and destination uses that retain local spending within the City This direction is necessary to ensure the City maintains sufficient commercial land to support projected job growth, economic development, and community service needs over time. The direction provided will inform staff in three key areas: 1. Development of Comprehensive Plan policies 2. Evaluation of future amendment requests 3. Processing of current applications Constraints (time or other considerations) City code does not allow applicant-initiated amendments during the periodic update, and the City may elect not to process these requests. However, the CED Department has accepted proposals for consideration with the understanding that applications not advanced this cycle will need to be resubmitted in the future. The Comprehensive Plan update is on a defined timeline, and amendment requests are already under review. Without policy direction, staff is limited in its ability to provide consistent recommendations for current and future applications and to effectively update Comprehensive Plan policies related to this issue. Next Steps Staff will incorporate the Planning Commission direction into both the Comprehensive Plan update and the review of pending amendment requests. REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION City Hall – 525 North Third Avenue – Council Chambers THURSDAY, May 21, 2026 6:30 PM Alternatively, Planning Commission may 1. Direct staff to proceed with converting all or some properties from commercial to residential. 2. Direct staff to delay processing any applications requesting conversion until after completion of the Comprehensive Plan update. 3. Direct staff to evaluate requests on a case-by-case basis, with a clear expectation to preserve sufficient commercial land to meet long term employment needs. 4. Direct staff to limit conversions and require that any loss of commercial land be offset by designation of new commercial land within the same application, subject to property owner agreement and City verification of an acceptable swap. Do c u m e n t P a t h : \\ g s d a t a s t o r e \ G I S \ G I S P r o j e c t s \ D e p t C E D P l a n n i n g \ Z O N I N G \ P R O J E C T _ F I L E \ Z O N I N G \ Z O N I N G . a p r x 1:28,000 LAND USE FILE NAME 1 of 1Scale: 1:28,000 SHEET NUMBERSCALE kaufmannc CREATED BY 7/16/2025 PLOT DATE NOTICE: WARRANTY OF ACCURACY. The materials provided with this product, including but not limited to, data, maps, and tables (collectively, 'information'), are presented 'AS IS' without any warranty, express or implied. The City of Pasco and its staff do not warrant the completeness, accuracy, or timeliness of the information and shall not be liable for any inaccuracies or omissions. The information is subject to change and is intended solely for general informational purposes. Users should independently verify critical information and seek professional advice when necessary. Prior to any digging or excavation, it is essential for safety and compliance with local regulations that users contact 'Call Before You Dig' services by dialing 811. This ensures the location and safety of underground utilities are confirmed before any ground is broken. The City of Pasco does not endorse any specific commercial products or services referenced in the information. Reliance on this information is at the user's own risk. NOTES LEGEND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY DEPT GIS LAND USE Land Use Future Land Use Airport Reserve Commercial Confederated Tribes - Colville DNR Reserve High Density Residential Industrial Low Density Residential Medium Density Residential Medium High Density Residential Mixed Residential Commercial Mixed Use Interchange Office Open Space Parks Public Quasi-Public Reclamation <all other values> Boundaries Pasco City Limits Pasco Urban Growth Boundary Roads Interstate Highway Ramp Principal Arterial Principal Arterial Future Minor Arterial Minor Arterial Future Collector Collector Future Neightborhood Collector Neightborhood Collector Future Local Other Rivers Roads_WWCO Roads_web_FCO Streets_KNW Airport DBO.CityLimitMask Rivers Roads Interstate Highway Ramp Principal Arterial Principal Arterial Future Minor Arterial Minor Arterial Future Collector Collector Future Neightborhood Collector Neightborhood Collector Future Local Other Pasco City Limits Pasco Urban Growth Boundary Land Use Future Land Use Airport Reserve Commercial Confederated Tribes - Colville DNR Reserve High Density Residential Industrial Low Density Residential Medium Density Residential Medium High Density Residential Mixed Residential Commercial Mixed Use Interchange Office Open Space Parks Public Quasi-Public Reclamation <all other values> 0 0.5 1 1.5 2Miles ² KENNEWICK RICHLAND FRANKLIN COUNTY March, 26, 2026 Pasco Comprehensive Plan Update Memorandum from Framework and BERK Consulting to City Staff Land Capacity Assessment Questions + Analysis March 26, 2026 1. Item Removed – Not Applicable to Presentation 2. Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Rezones (From Haylie Matson to Framework) We have approximately 30 Comprehensive Plan and land use amendments with associated rezones to process. These are separate from the work Framework is already looking at related to areas where zoning and land use are out of sync. What is the status of that exercise? We are ready to meet and discuss these applications. Should this meeting be scheduled with Framework only, or should we include BERK as well? BERK updated the LCA based on the changes that Council was briefed on and we have closed most of the gap on housing. We still have a gap of approximately 400 units in the lower AMI bands but those could be made up through other strategies that we are exploring and will share when we meet next. The mapping exercise yielded 100s of parcels that are out of sync. We should discuss the level of review and analysis support you would like from Framework and BERK on these as it could be a signiflcant effort and beyond our current scope of work. We can certainly include the changes in the LCA analysis but if the City would like us to provide guidance and recommendations on each application it may require a scope amendment. March, 26, 2026 3. Commercial Land Capacity Review: 3a. How much vacant land is currently zoned commercial: From Exhibit 7 in LCA memo (city limits only, net acres before market or infrastructure deductions). Included Commercial/Office Zones: BP, C-1, C-2, C-3, C-R, O, and Broadmoor Commercial Overlay w/C-1 underlying zoning • Vacant: 531.90 acres • Underutilized: 143.23 acres Table 1: Vacant and Underutilized Commercial Land Land Use Category Zones Included in Calculation Vacant Land Underutilized Land Commercial/Office Zones BP, C-1, C-2, C-3, C-R, O, and Broadmoor Commercial Overlay w/ C-1 underlying zoning 531. 90 acres 143.23 acres Mixed-Use Zones MU and Broadmoor Mixed R-C w/C-1 or MU underlying zoning 62.68 acres 0 acres Industrial Zones I-1, I-2, or I-3 1,404.04 acres 135.15 acres Total 2000 acres 278 acres 3b. What is our commercial growth capacity based on current assumptions? From Exhibit 10 and Exhibit 12 in LCA memo (city limits only). Table 2: Current Job Capacity Job Type # of jobs Current zoning Sensitivity Analysis Commercial 7,807 7,807 Industrial 4,515 4,515 Pipeline* 820 820 Total 13,142 11,854 *Based on 286,850 square feet of commercial space March, 26, 2026 Assumptions: Table 3: Assumed Employment Density by Zone Job Type Employment Density Commercial 18.1 jobs/acre Industrial 4.3 jobs/acre Pipeline* 1/350 sf Table 4: Assumed % of Commercial by Zone Zone % Commercial Current zoning Sensitivity Analysis C-1, C-2, C-3 and Broadmoor Commercial Overlay 90% 75% BP, C-R, and O 100% 100% MU and Broadmoor Mixed R-C 50% 35% I-1, I-2, I-3 100% 100% 3c. What are best practices for cities of our size and projected growth in terms of land use balance such as Mixed Use, Single Family, Multifamily, Industrial, and Commercial. There is no “correct” ratio of commercial to residential land that cities should be striving for. Pasco must show that it can meet job capacity and housing targets, which is one indication of whether its land use balance is functioning well. But cities vary greatly and their distributions of land uses refiect their unique characteristics. For example, Pasco’s current use of 40% of its lands for industrial and ~10% for commercial refiects it’s role as a regional agricultural and industrial processing hub, anchored by the Port of Pasco, and is a major distinguishing factor that makes it unique among the Tri-Cities and much of Eastern WA. Questions the city might ask include how to best distribute commercial uses to reduce traffic? How can commercial areas be designed to be walkable? What types of jobs does the City want to attract? See Table 5 for land use comparisons. March, 26, 2026 3d. Based on projected employment growth and planning assumptions, how much commercial and employment land should Pasco plan for through the 2046 planning horizon? We’re assuming an additional 12,997 jobs in the City of Pasco by 2046 (or 38,030 total jobs in the city by 2046). Total acres of land needed to meet that growth varies depending on how much is commercial vs. industrial based on the following formula. Note that buildable acres is not the same as vacant + underutilized acres from Part A above (which is before deductions). Additional Jobs = Acres of Land x Job Density AND Additional Jobs = COMMERCIAL [Acres of Land x Job Density] + INDUSTRIAL [Acres of Land x Job Density] Where: Additional Jobs = (Job Growth) – (Pipeline Jobs) Acres of Land = Buildable acres OR 12,997 – 820 jobs = (Buildable Ac. Commercial x 18.1 jobs/ac) + (Buildable Ac. Industrial x 4.3 jobs/ac) 12,117 jobs = (Buildable Ac. Commercial x 18.1 jobs/ac) + (Buildable Ac. Industrial x 4.3 jobs/ac) Additional Jobs (2046) Job Density (jobs/acre) Acres of Land* Needed (2046) 12,177** 18.1 673 *Buildable Acres **Not including pipeline jobs 3e. How many commercial acres would be lost if all current application requests were approved. @Daniel to provide this calculation. See staff report. March, 26, 2026 3f. Do current land capacity assumptions indicate Pasco has a surplus or deflcit of commercial land over the planning horizon. Acres of Commercial Land Surplus / (Deficit) Current 141* Sensitivity Analysis (1,143)* * Assuming 8.0 acre surplus with 18.1 commercial jobs /acre or ~33.3 acre surplus with 4.3 industrial jobs /acre * Assumes more residential in commercial and mixed use areas) = ~63.1 acre deficit assuming 18.1 commercial jobs/acre or ~263.3 acre deficit assuming 4.3 industrial jobs/acre 3g. At what point would converting commercial land to residential begin to create a long-term shortage of commercial or employment land. From a purely numerical perspective, the Baseline Land Capacity Analysis and its underlying assumptions already place Pasco at a tipping point. The 30 comprehensive plan amendments currently pending this year, many of which include land use changes that convert commercial land to residential land, already jeopardize the City’s ability to meet its employment growth capacity targets. More broadly, the gradual erosion of commercial land places increased strain on the city to support its tax base and economic growth goals. While it is technically possible to reverse a commercial-to-residential conversion, the reality is that once residential development occurs on former commercial land, the commercial use is effectively halted for the next 50 to 75 years or even more, so long as the housing structure still stands. Unlike residential land, where density increases and middle housing can bring about new housing capacity, for commercial lands the only way to “densify” or bring any back is to redesignate land elsewhere - which the Council has indicated it does not favor. 3h. Are there speciflc categories of commercial land such as regional retail, neighborhood commercial, employment centers, highway commercial, or mixed-use corridors that should be protected or prioritized from conversion. • Depending on their values and goals for economic growth, cities will prioritize commercial land types differently. In Pasco, the city might be best served in prioritizing the protection of industrial lands. These lands form the economic backbone of the City, and are the most difficult to “replace.” With the Port actively seeking to diversify its industrial tenant base, converting industrial land would March, 26, 2026 directly undermine some of the most concrete and impactful economic development opportunities the City will see in both the near- and long-term. • The relative importance of other commercial land use categories, including regional retail, mixed-use corridors, and more, is less cut-and-dried. However, the community has expressed a desire for more shopping, dining, and service opportunities in Pasco. Preserving existing commercial nodes and corridors, currently zoned C-1, C-2, and C-3, and locating more density in these places, is an effective way to ensure that Pasco retains its current and future residential and commercial development capacity. • The GMA has a strong focus on reducing Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) by single- occupancy vehicles, a goal that could simultaneously address the community’s frustration with increasing traffic demands. Allowing mixed-use and neighborhood- level commercial development would increase the accessibility of goods and services to meet the daily needs of residents, locating them closer to where people live and reducing the strain on Pasco’s busiest commercial corridors. 3i. Would shifting some areas to mixed-use designations provide fiexibility while still preserving employment capacity. Shifting some areas to zoning designations that allow both residential and commercial uses could provide fiexibility while preserving employment capacity. However, the feasibility of commercial versus residential could result in the development of primarily residential land uses in these zones. Further, with the recently-passed SB6026 in place, cities may not have the ability to require ground fioor retail, resulting in mixed-used zones that essentially function as residential. An alternative approach would be to designate areas as neighborhood commercial, supporting small hubs where residents can access daily needs. This would not only ensure that employment capacity is met, but promote walkable neighborhoods and help to reduce retail-oriented traffic. The community survey shows 80% of respondents in favor of introducing small corner shops into neighborhoods. j. How does Pasco’s commercial land ratio compare to similar fast-growing cities in Washington and the Tri-Cities region. The following table summarizes the break down of land uses according to zoning categories in cities in the Tri-Cities region and Eastern Washington. Note that percentages do not add up to 100, as cities have various other categories including Transition zones, Public Service, etc. These numbers do not show current land use and include vacant parcels. March, 26, 2026 Table 5: Land Use Ratios in Eastern Washington Cities City Percentage of Land Use Designation Commercial Industrial Residential Open Space Pasco 10 37 46 5 Kennewick* 12 5 67 10 Richland** 9 22 32 16 Wenatchee*** 8 10 74 6 West Richland** 9.5 .3 46 N/A Airway Heights**** 20 38 13+ 13 *Based on the 2021 Comprehensive Plan **Based on 2017 Comprehensive Plan ***Based on 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update ****Based on Comprehensive Plan documents in 2022 Planning Commission Meeting records. This document listed 408 acres in the R-1 zone (13% of total city acres) but did not list acreage for other residential zones. 3k. Are there additional metrics or analysis that should be included in a presentation to Council and the Planning Commission regarding Pasco’s commercial land capacity? The following tables show assumptions for Kennewick and Wenatchee LCAs. Table 6: Kennewick Assumptions Employment Density % Commercial Commercial Industrial Commercial Zones Business Park Zone Urban Mixed Use 26.2 jobs/acre 7.5 jobs/acre 90% 50% 35% Table 7: Wenatchee Assumptions Employment Density % Commercial Low Density Mixed Use** Commercial + High Density MU Industrial Low Density Mixed Use** Industrial 30 jobs/acre 40 jobs/acre* 15 jobs/acre* 50% 100% *Based on existing density of 36 commercial or government jobs/acre ** Neighborhood Commercial + Lower Density MU REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION City Hall – 525 North Third Avenue – Council Chambers THURSDAY, May 21, 2026 6:30 PM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Haylie Matson, CED Director SUBJECT: Unified Development Code (UDC) Update – Code Audit and Framework Overview File Numbers: CA2025-004 Unified Development Code Update Applicant: City of Pasco Description: The Unified Development Code (UDC) Update is a comprehensive effort to modernize and consolidate Pasco’s development regulations into a single, user-friendly code. The update is intended to improve clarity, streamline permitting processes, align regulations with the Comprehensive Plan, and ensure compliance with new state housing and land use requirements. Environmental Determination N/A Exhibits: 01 Memorandum – Development Code Update from Framework 02 Powerpoint Action Requested No formal action is requested currently. Staff is seeking policy direction from the Planning Commission on the overall approach to the Unified Development Code update. This includes guidance on zoning consolidation, implementation of state housing requirements, and the level of streamlining desired for permitting and administrative procedures. History and Facts Brief The City has initiated a comprehensive update to its development regulations in coordination with the ongoing Comprehensive Plan update. The City retained a consultant team to assist with this effort. The work focuses on three primary objectives: ensuring compliance with new state REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION City Hall – 525 North Third Avenue – Council Chambers THURSDAY, May 21, 2026 6:30 PM mandates, aligning development regulations with the Comprehensive Plan, and consolidating existing regulations into a Unified Development Code. Recent changes in state law require updates to local development regulations, particularly in the areas of housing, permitting, and environmental review. These requirements include expanding housing options, allowing additional dwelling units, streamlining permit timelines, and establishing clear and objective development standards. At the same time, the City is updating its Future Land Use Map as part of the Comprehensive Plan process. The Development Code must be revised to reflect that long-range vision and provide tools that allow the City to implement adopted policies effectively. Currently, development regulations are distributed across multiple titles of the Pasco Municipal Code. This structure makes it difficult for applicants and staff to navigate requirements and results in inconsistencies in how regulations are applied. Background The existing code structure has developed over time and contains several overlapping and sometimes conflicting provisions. Development-related regulations are in several different titles, which can make it challenging to identify applicable standards and processes. The zoning framework is similarly complex. The City currently has numerous residential and commercial zones with overlapping purposes and standards. In many cases, distinctions between zones have been reduced over time due to changes in state law, particularly in relation to housing requirements. This complexity affects both usability and predictability. Applicants often face uncertainty in understanding what is allowed, and staff must interpret multiple sections of code to administer development regulations. Discussion The proposed Unified Development Code is intended to bring all development-related regulations into a single, organized structure. This will allow for clearer interpretation, improved usability, and more consistent administration. One of the primary components of the update is zoning consolidation. The current zoning structure includes multiple residential and commercial zones with similar standards. Consolidating these zones will simplify the code while still allowing flexibility in development outcomes. The intent is not to reduce options, but to make the code easier to understand and apply. REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION City Hall – 525 North Third Avenue – Council Chambers THURSDAY, May 21, 2026 6:30 PM The update will also address housing requirements under state law. While Pasco already allows a range of housing types in certain zones, additional updates are needed to ensure full compliance. This includes allowing a broader range of middle housing types and adjusting development standards where necessary. Commercial and mixed-use zones will also be refined. The goal is to better define how these areas function, support neighborhood-scale services, and strengthen the role of key commercial areas, including downtown. Another key component is the permitting and administrative process. Currently, permitting requirements are spread across multiple sections of code, and some processes are not clearly defined. The update will consolidate these procedures and establish clearer timelines and expectations. This is intended to reduce confusion and improve efficiency for both applicants and staff. Overall, the code audit identified several consistent themes. The current code is complex, contains redundancy, and lacks clear organization in some areas. The proposed update is intended to address these issues while aligning the code with current policy direction and legal requirements. Recommendation Staff recommend that Planning Commission support the overall direction of the Unified Development Code update and provide policy guidance on key issues. This includes the level of zoning consolidation, the approach to housing implementation, and priorities for improving permitting processes. This direction is necessary to ensure that the updated code reflects Council’s policy goals and provides a clear framework for future development. Constraints (time or other considerations) City code does not allow applicant-initiated amendments during the periodic update, and the City may elect not to process these requests. However, the CED Department has accepted proposals for consideration with the understanding that applications not advanced this cycle will need to be resubmitted in the future. The Comprehensive Plan update is on a defined timeline, and amendment requests are already under review. REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION City Hall – 525 North Third Avenue – Council Chambers THURSDAY, May 21, 2026 6:30 PM Without policy direction, staff is limited in its ability to provide consistent recommendations for current and future applications and to effectively update Comprehensive Plan policies related to this issue. Next Steps Staff will incorporate Planning Commission and Council feedback into the next phase of the project, which includes drafting the Unified Development Code framework and proposed zoning updates. The code audit will be made available for public review, followed by additional outreach and engagement. A draft code will be brought back to Planning Commission for further review prior to the adoption process later this year. 1221 E PIKE ST SUITE 300 SEATTLE, WA 98122 To: City of Pasco From: Framework Date: April 21, 2026 Re: Development Code Update Purpose The City of Pasco has hired Framework to make updates to its Development Code. This update effort includes three key components: (1) bring the Pasco Municipal Code (PMC) into compliance with new state mandates; (2) align zoning code with the updated land use direction outlined in the Comprehensive Plan Update process; and (3) Consolidate regulations into a single Unified Development Code (UDC), designed to increase the usability of the code and permit approval processes. Scope of Work 1. Comply with New State Mandates The following state legislation, adopted since the 2018 Comprehensive Plan, necessitates updates to Pasco’s Municipal Code to remain in compliance with the Growth Management Act (GMA). • Middle Housing Bill (HB 1110): Requires Pasco to allow at least four dwelling units per lot in all residential zones, and up to six units per lot for lots that are either within a quarter mile of a major transit stop or that include at least one affordable housing unit. The City must also authorize middle housing in all residential neighborhoods, allowing at least six of the nine middle housing types defined by the state in all residential zones. The City previously implemented middle housing before passage of HB 1110 but updates are required for full compliance. The City has local authority to establish lot sizes, housing types, and development standards that apply to middle housing development. 2 • Accessory Dwelling Unit Bill (HB 1337): Requires the City to allow at least two ADUs per lot in all zones where detached single-family housing is permitted, and prohibits certain requirements for owner-occupancy, minimum lot sizes, and parking minimums. • STEP housing (HB 1220): Requires the City to allow Emergency Shelters, Transitional housing, Emergency housing, and Permanent Supportive housing (collectively known as STEP Housing) in certain zones; Shelters and Emergency Housing in all zones where hotels are permitted, and Transitional and Permanent Supportive housing in all zones where residential dwellings or hotels are permitted. • Parking Reform (SB 5184): Places a cap on the maximum number of parking spaces that the City may require for multifamily, single family, commercial, and a limited number of other uses. • Local Permitting Review (SB 5290): Requires the City to establish standardized permit decision timelines and a clearly defined framework for applicants requesting additional information. • SEPA Exemption Bills (SB 5412, SB 5818, SB 6061, HB 2673, HB 2343): Require SEPA exemptions for infill housing, residential development consistent with adopted plans, and certain non-project housing actions. • Streamlining Development Regulations (HB 1293): Mandates that the City establish a clear and objective process for any design review requirements. 2. Align with Comprehensive Plan Updates Future Land Use Map Alignment A key component of the Comprehensive Plan is the update to the Future Land Use Map (FLUM), which communicates the City’s long-range plan for residential, commercial, industrial, and mixed- use development types across Pasco’s Urban Growth Area. As such, the updated FLUM will reflect the growth strategy developed under the Comprehensive Plan Update process. Because the FLUM is part of the Comprehensive Plan, updates will follow the Comprehensive Plan amendment process. 3 Planned updates to the FLUM will refine land use categories to accommodate a wider range of zone designations, allowing the City to handle most rezone requests solely as zoning amendments without triggering parallel Comprehensive Plan amendments. Through streamlining Pasco's existing zoning framework, the Development Code Update will implement changes to the FLUM that reflect the community’s vision for housing types, public space, and neighborhood layout. Building on this updated policy framework, the Development Code Update will revise zoning regulations to implement the FLUM updates, ensuring land use regulations across the board are more closely aligned with the community’s goals for housing, neighborhood design, and public spaces. Zoning Consolidation Pasco's current zoning code includes approximately 20 base zoning districts, many with overlapping purposes and inconsistent standards. This complexity reduces usability and limits the effectiveness of the FLUM in guiding desired development outcomes. Further, new State legislation has effectively collapsed the distinctions codified under the current zoning structure, making it largely outdated. The proposed zoning consolidation is intended to improve clarity, simplify implementation, and reduce redundancy across the code. Preliminary dimensional standards for each consolidated zone, aligned with growth targets and law compliances, have been drafted and will be refined as the UDC is assembled. • Low-density residential zones. The project team is exploring consolidation of the R-S-20, R-S- 12, R-S-1, R-1-A, R-1-A2, and R-1 zones into a single new zone, NR (Neighborhood Residential). Under the adopted Comprehensive Plan Land Use Density Table (PMC 25.215.015), these residential zones are all classified as “Low Density Residential,” with a stated allowable density between 3 and 6 dwelling units per acre.1 While these residential zones are distinguished in the code, their underlying development permissions already largely align with HB 1110, making the 1 The code immediately comes into conflict with itself, as the R-S-20 and R-1 zones already fall outside of that range. If developed with only one home on a lot, these would come in at 2.18 units per acre and 10.9 units per acre respectively. This code update project also addresses these contradictions. 4 shift to NR (Neighborhood Residential) less a change in what can be built and more a simplification of existing, overlapping standards. For example: Case Study: R-1 Zoned Parcels Pasco’s current code states that a property owner of a parcel zoned as R-1 is allowed to develop the following: o One primary dwelling unit, which could take the form of:  A detached Single Family Dwelling Unit (SFDU), where lot size meets the minimum 4,000 sq ft.  Attached SFDUs, where lot size meets the minimum 3,500 sq ft per dwelling unit.  A Duplex or Triplex, where lot size meets the minimum 5,000 sq ft. o One accessory dwelling unit (ADU), either attached or detached, which is not counted towards density calculations. This code framework presents two notable outcomes. First, duplexes and triplexes are functionally the same as two or three attached single-family units, with minimal difference in the number of units or housing type produced – but while a triplex may be developed on a 5,000 sq ft lot, three “attached SFDUs” would require a 10,500 sq ft lot, more than double the area for the same housing yield. Second, if a property owner chooses, they may develop a triplex and an ADU on a 5,000 sq ft lot, resulting in four dwellings on a single lot. Four units per lot is the required number of market units that HB 1110 requires Pasco to allow – meaning that on a unit-count basis, the R-1 zone already meets or exceeds HB 1110’s requirements. The statute's effect is not necessarily to increase allowed density; it is to expand the range of housing types a property owner is permitted to choose. • Higher-density residential zones. R-2, R-3, and R-4 will consolidate into MR (Medium-density Residential). Because HB 1110 requires middle housing in all residential zones, the distinctions between the current single-family zones are significantly reduced and consolidation of zones simplifies administration of the code for the City and applicants. The City has local control over 5 lot sizes and development standards and in some cases consolidated zones will result in an increase in the minimum lot size. • Mixed-use and downtown zones. The current MU zone, together with select C-1 and C-3 parcels identified through the land capacity analysis, will consolidate into an expanded MU (Mixed-Use) zone. The current C-2 zone will be redesignated as DT (Downtown), recognizing the distinct character and form of downtown Pasco. • Commercial and office zones. C-1 and C-3 parcels not converted to MU will be designated C (Commercial). The current BP and O zones will consolidate into O (Office). A new NC (Neighborhood Commercial) zone will be created to accommodate small-scale commercial nodes embedded in residential areas; this zone has no direct equivalent in the current code. • Industrial zones. Industrial zones are not being consolidated under this effort and will carry forward substantially as-is, though standards will be reviewed for internal consistency with the UDC. 3. Create a Unified Development Code According to the Municipal Research Service Center (MRSC), “Unified Development Codes integrate multiple types of land use and development regulations into one location of a municipal or county code. This often includes combining and locating a zoning code, subdivision regulations, critical areas ordinance, and development review procedures into a single title of a local government's code document.” Currently, these elements of Pasco’s codes are scattered throughout several titles in the Pasco Municipal Code (PMC), making it difficult for developers, business owners, and others to ascertain crucial information for their projects. By incorporating zoning districts, development stands, environmental protection, and additional elements into a UDC, the City can reduce administrative overhead for both development applicants and City staff. Administration & Permitting Process Permitting and administrative procedures are a core component of the UDC and must be organized clearly to ensure consistent and efficient implementation of development regulations. In 6 the current code, information on permitting and related fees is currently dispersed across multiple PMC titles, including Title 2 (detailing the permitting process and approvals), Title 12 (specific to street- and driveway-related permits), Title 21 (specific to subdivisions), and Title 25 (across multiple sections related to planned development, density flexibility, comprehensive plan, and zoning amendments). Further, land use and site plan review processes remain unclear, and there are places where unnecessary procedural burden is created; for example, routine special use review is elevated to the Hearing Examiner (PMC 25.195.020). C i t y o f P a s c o Le s s R e s t r i c t i v e Al t e r n a t i v e ( L R A ) Ho u s i n g O u t r e a c h Ma r c h – Ma y 2 0 2 6 Co m m u n i t y I n f o r m a t i o n & I n p u t S e s s i o n s Pr e s e n t a t i o n A g e n d a 1. Wh y T h i s M a t t e r s 2. Wh a t i s a n E s s e n t i a l P u b l i c F a c i l i t y ( E P F ) ? 3. Wh a t i s L R A ( L e s s R e s t r i c t i v e A l t e r n a t i v e ) Ho u s i n g ? 4. Wh a t i s a S e c u r e C o m m u n i t y T r a n s i t i o n Fa c i l i t y ( S C T F ) ? 5. L e g a l F r a m e w o r k : W h a t C i t i e s C a n a n d Ca n n o t D o 6. W h a t i s P a s c o D o i n g T o d a y ? 7. K e y C o n s i d e r a t i o n s & I m p a c t s 8. C o m m u n i t y F e e d b a c k & N e x t S t e p s Ci t y o f P a s c o | L R A H o u s i n g O u t r e a c h | M a r c h – Ma y 2 0 2 6 Pu r p o s e o f P r e s e n t a t i o n Wh y I t Ma t t e r s St a t e L a w re q u i r e s c i t i e s t o p l a n f o r t h e s e fa c i l i t i e s Yo u r I n p u t sh a p e s f u t u r e c o d e u p d a t e s Tr a n s p a r e n c y is c e n t r a l t o t h i s p r o c e s s • St a t e l a w r e q u i r e s c i t i e s t o a l l o w c e r t a i n f a c i l i t i e s • Gr o w i n g c o m m u n i t y i n t e r e s t a n d c o n c e r n a b o u t L R A ho u s i n g a n d S C T F s • Ci t y i s a c t i v e l y e v a l u a t i n g l o c a l r e g u l a t i o n s a n d s i t i n g cr i t e r i a • Pu b l i c i n p u t w i l l d i r e c t l y s h a p e f u t u r e P a s c o M u n i c i p a l Co d e u p d a t e s Ci t y o f P a s c o | L R A H o u s i n g O u t r e a c h | M a r c h – Ma y 2 0 2 6 Es s e n t i a l P u b l i c F a c i l i t i e s ( E P F s ) De f i n i t i o n : Fa c i l i t i e s t h a t a r e n e c e s s a r y b u t d i f f i c u l t t o s i t e — re q u i r e d b y s t a t e l a w t o b e a l l o w e d s o m e w h e r e w i t h i n c i t y li m i t s . • Ci t i e s a r e r e q u i r e d t o p l a n f o r a n d a l l o w E P F s • Ci t i e s c a n n o t p r o h i b i t E P F s e n t i r e l y , e v e n w i t h co m m u n i t y o p p o s i t i o n • Th e k e y q u e s t i o n : w h e r e a n d h o w — no t i f • St a t u s o f L R A s a s E P F s i s u n d e r a c t i v e l e g a l r e v i e w EP F E x a m p l e s • Ai r p o r t s • Co r r e c t i o n a l f a c i l i t i e s • So l i d w a s t e f a c i l i t i e s • Me n t a l h e a l t h f a c i l i t i e s • SC T F s ( u n d e r r e v i e w ) • LR A s ( u n d e r r e v i e w ) Ci t y o f P a s c o | L R A H o u s i n g O u t r e a c h | M a r c h – Ma y 2 0 2 6 Le s s R e s t r i c t i v e A l t e r n a t i v e H o u s i n g ( L R A ) Op e r a t i o n Op e r a t e d b y P r i v a t e P r o v i d e r s Mu s t m e e t s t a t e -ma n d a t e d sa f e t y a n d s i t i n g r e q u i r e m e n t s Su p e r v i s e d & S e c u r e In d i v i d u a l s r e m a i n u n d e r su p e r v i s i o n a n d l e g a l co n d i t i o n s , t h o u g h t h i s v a r i e s ba s e d o n t y p e o f f a c i l i t y Cl a s s i f i e d a s E P F s Un d e r s t a t e l a w , L R A s a r e Es s e n t i a l P u b l i c F a c i l i t i e s — af f e c t i n g w h a t c i t i e s c a n re g u l a t e Ci t y o f P a s c o | L R A H o u s i n g O u t r e a c h | M a r c h – Ma y 2 0 2 6 Se c u r e C o m m u n i t y T r a n s i t i o n F a c i l i t i e s ( S C T F s ) Op e r a t i o n Ru n a n d m a n a g e d b y t h e S t a t e of W a s h i n g t o n t o h o u s e a n d mo n i t o r r e g i s t e r e d s e x of f e n d e r s w h o a r e t r a n s i t i o n i n g ou t o f c o n f i n e m e n t Su p e r v i s e d & S e c u r e Pr o v i d e o n -si t e s u p e r v i s i o n , se c u r i t y m e a s u r e s , a n d tr e a t m e n t s e r v i c e s Cl a s s i f i e d a s E P F s Un d e r s t a t e l a w , S C T F s a r e Es s e n t i a l P u b l i c F a c i l i t i e s — af f e c t i n g w h a t c i t i e s c a n re g u l a t e Ci t y o f P a s c o | L R A H o u s i n g O u t r e a c h | M a r c h – Ma y 2 0 2 6 Wh a t i s t h e C i t y o f P a s c o D o i n g ? 01 Mo r a t o r i u m A d o p t e d Ci t y C o u n c i l a d o p t e d a t e m p o r a r y 6 -mo n t h mo r a t o r i u m o n E P F a p p l i c a t i o n s — a pl a n n i n g t o o l , n o t a b a n 02 Le g a l & P o l i c y R e v i e w Co n d u c t i n g a t h o r o u g h r e v i e w o f s t a t e l a w , sa f e t y c o n s i d e r a t i o n s , a n d r e g u l a t o r y o p t i o n s 03 Si t i n g R e g u l a t i o n s De v e l o p i n g z o n i n g a n d s i t i n g c r i t e r i a — se t b a c k s , d e v e l o p m e n t s t a n d a r d s , a n d co n d i t i o n s 04 Co m m u n i t y O u t r e a c h Ho s t i n g p u b l i c f e e d b a c k s e s s i o n s b e f o r e a n y co d e u p d a t e s a r e p r o p o s e d t o C o u n c i l Ci t y o f P a s c o | L R A H o u s i n g O u t r e a c h | M a r c h – Ma y 2 0 2 6 Wh a t t h e C i t y C a n a n d C a n n o t D o CI T Y C A N • Es t a b l i s h z o n i n g a n d s i t i n g c r i t e r i a • Se t d e v e l o p m e n t s t a n d a r d s • St u d y s a f e t y a n d s e p a r a t i o n r e q u i r e m e n t s • Ga t h e r a n d i n c o r p o r a t e p u b l i c i n p u t ✘ CI T Y C A N N O T • Pr o h i b i t t h e s e f a c i l i t i e s e n t i r e l y • Re g u l a t e t r e a t m e n t o r d a i l y o p e r a t i o n s • Ov e r r i d e s t a t e l a w r e q u i r e m e n t s Ci t y o f P a s c o | L R A H o u s i n g O u t r e a c h | M a r c h – Ma y 2 0 2 6 Pu b l i c F e e d b a c k O p p o r t u n i t i e s Ma r c h 3 1 Is a a c S t e v e n s M i d d l e S c h o o l In -Pe r s o n | 4 : 3 0 P M Ap r i l 1 5 Ra y R e y n o l d s M i d d l e S c h o o l In -Pe r s o n | 4 : 3 0 P M Ap r i l 2 9 Mc L o u g h l i n M i d d l e S c h o o l In -Pe r s o n | 4 : 3 0 P M Ma y 6 Pa s c o C i t y H a l l Hy b r i d | 1 2 : 0 0 P M | V i r t u a l o p t i o n a v a i l a b l e On l i n e c o m m e n t f o r m a l s o a v a i l a b l e . I n t e r p r e t a t i o n s e r v i c e s p r o v i d e d a t a l l s e s s i o n s . Ci t y o f P a s c o | L R A H o u s i n g O u t r e a c h | M a r c h – Ma y 2 0 2 6 Yo u r I n p u t M a t t e r s Qu e s t i o n s As k a n y t h i n g a b o u t L R A h o u s i n g , S C T F s , o r t h e C i t y ' s r o l e Fe e d b a c k Sh a r e y o u r p e r s p e c t i v e o n s i t i n g c r i t e r i a a n d c o m m u n i t y s a f e t y Co m m e n t s Wr i t t e n c o m m e n t s a c c e p t e d i n -pe r s o n o r v i a t h e o n l i n e f o r m Th a n k y o u f o r b e i n g p a r t o f P a s c o ' s f u t u r e .