HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-17-2011 Planning Commission Packet PLANNING COMMISSION - AGENDA
REGULAR MEETING 7:00 P.M. November 17, 2011
I. CALL TO ORDER:
II. ROLL CALL: Declaration of Quorum
III. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: October 20, 2011
V. OLD BUSINESS:
A. Special Permit Location of a Level Two Community Service Facility in
an I-1 (Light Industrial Zone (Union Gospel Mission)
(112 N. 2nd Ave) (MF# SP 2011-0 14)
B, Special Permit Location of a Level One Community Service Facility in a
C-3 (General Business) Zone (PowerZone) (1202 W.
Lewis St) (MF# SP 2011-013)
VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
A. Code Amendment Rabbits and Hens in Residential "R" Zones IMF# CA
2011-005
B. Comprehensive Plan 2011 Comprehensive Plan Update (MF# CPA 2011-0011
VII. ADJOURNMENT:
REGULAR MEETING October 20, 2011
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
CALL TO ORDER:
The meeting was called to order at 7:00p--n by Chairman Cruz.
POSITION MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT
No. 1 Michael Levin
No. 2 James Hay
No. 3 Andy Anderson
No. 4 Alecia Greenaway
No. 5 Joe Cruz
No. 6 Kurt Lukins
No. 7 Zahra Kahn
No. 8 Jana Kempf
Igo, 9 Vacant
APPEARANCE OF FAIRNESS:
Chairman Cruz read a statement about the appearance of fairness for hearings on land
use matters_ Chairman Cruz asked if any Commission member had anything to declare,
No declarations were made.
Chainnan Cruz then asked the audience if there were any objections based on a conflict
of interest or appearance of fairness questions regarding the items to be discussed this
evening. There were no objections.
ADMINISTERING THE OATH:
Chairman Cruz explained that state law requires testimony in quasi-judicial hearings
such as held by the Planning Commission be given under oath or affirmation, Chairman
Cruz swore in all those desiring to speak.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:.
Chairman Cruz motioned to approve the minutes dated September 15, 2011.
Commissioner Kempf moved, seconded by Commissioner Hay, that the minutes dated
September 15, 2011 be approved as mailed. The Motion carried unanimously.
OLD BUSINESS:
A. Special Permit Expansion of mini-storage facility (y 42A001230
units) in a C-1 (Retail Business) Zone (ELM Trust
(SW Car. Rd 68 and Court) (MF# SP 2011-0121
(Continued Public Hearin
Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff.
-1-
Community & Economic Development Director, Rick White, explained that while this
item is under Old Business, it is a continued Public Hearing from the September 15,
2011 Planning Commission meeting.
Mr. White summed up the Special Permit, explaining that mini-storage facilities are not
considered a permitted use outright in a C-1 (Retail Business) Zone. They are allowed
only through Special Permit. The Special Permit process allows the Commission to
establish conditions that will ensure the proposal will be in accordance with the policies
of the Comprehensive Plan and be developed and maintained in a matter that is
harmonious with the neighborhood. In this particular case, the corner of Road 68 and
Court Street is considered to be a high impact corner because of the high visibility of
the site and the present and future traffic counts in the area. Mr. White reviewed the
three options for site design and architecture contained in the recommended approval
conditions. The three options provide some flexibility for the applicant while providing
designs standards to protect the neighborhood and future development.
Applicant, Rob Puckett, 6620 West Park Street, stated his proposal does not reflect the
City of Pasco's proposal. Mr. Puckett explained he planned to match the existing metal
buildings and chain link fencing of his current storage facility to the south.
Chairman Cruz asked the applicant to clarify if he supported any of the optional
conditions proposed by staff.
Mr. Puckett responded that there would be no brick fencing because of the cost.
Chairman Cruz asked about the other two options, wrought-iron fencing or stuccoing
the buildings.
Mr. Puckett stated he wanted to mirror what currently exists with is storage facility to
the south,
Chairman Cruz asked the applicant what he suggested the Planning Commission do.
Mr. Puckett responded that he sent his proposal (metal buildings and chain link
fencing) to staff member, Dave McDonald.
Rick White responded the C-1 District does not allow mini--warehouses as an outright
permitted use. Slatted fencing, chain-link fencing with slats, looks good the day it goes
up but it does not last and does not look well unless it's re-slatted on a continual basis.
The community is going to want to know why a warehouse type of look was allowed to
continue at a high impact corner.
Chairman Cruz asked the applicant why the other two storage units are effectively
meeting the proposed conditions and why his site makes it difficult to meet the
proposed options?
Mr. Puckett answered that the other storage sheds are in the County.
Chairman Cruz stated the other storage sheds have been in business for quite some
time and they appear to be fine complying,
-2-
Commissioner Greenaway asked the applicant if the wrought-iron security fencing was
too cost prohibitive.
Mr. Puckett said that he was unaware as to how much it would cost. The only thing he
checked on was the block wall.
Commissioner Lukins commented that he understood the economic concerns of the
applicant but how would it look in five to ten years. Commissioner Lukins agreed with
the point the area is a high impact area and with more people moving to the area it
looks like Condition ##2 create the least impact economically and would still meet the
criteria City staff was looking for.
Commissioner Levin asked if staff and the applicant had a chance to meet since the
September meeting.
Rick White answered that they did meet with the applicant. No agreement was reached
but options were discussed.
Commissioner Kempf commented that the City was being more than accommodating
wish the three options.
Chairman Cruz said that had this storage unit been in a different zone there wouldn't
be any issues with the applicant's proposed plan but as it stands, he did-ft have any
problems imposing the conditions of the Special Permit.
Commissioner Levin moved seconded by Commissioner Greenaway to adopt the
findings, the facts and conclusions contained in the October 20, 2011 staff report. The
motion passed unanimously.
Commissioner Levin moved, seconded by Commissioner Greenaway that the Planning
Commission recommended that the City Council grant a Special Permit to BLM
Trust/Mor-Stor LLC for the development of eight mini-storage buildings on a vacant site
on Lots 2 and 3 of Short Plat 93-08, with conditions as contained in the October 20,
2011 staff report. The motion was passed unanimously.
Staff explained the recommendation would go to the City Council on November 7, 2011
unless an appeal is filed, in which case a closed record hearing would be scheduled.
B. Special Permit Location of a Parkinp, Lot in an R-2 (Medium
Density Residential) Zone (Pasco School District)
(1215 W. Lewis St) (MF# X2011-0111
Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff.
Shane O'Neill, Planner 1, explained the public hearing on this item was held at the
September 15, 2011 meeting. As a result of the hearing the maps were revised to more
accurately reflect the site proposed for the parking lot.
Commissioner Kempf asked if the School District was responsible for adding new
crosswalks or if the City was responsible. Mr, O'Neill stated the applicant was
responsible for installing the crosswalk and the recommendation for the condition came
from the City Engineering Department. There were no further comments or questions.
-3-
Commissioner Hay moved, seconded by Commissioner Lukins to adopt the findings, the
facts and conclusions contained in the October 20, 2011 staff report. The motion
passed unanimously.
Commissioner Hay moved, seconded by Commissioner Lukins based on the findings,
the facts and the conclusions that the Planning Commission recommend the City
Council grant the Special Permit to the Pasco School District for the location of an off-
site parking lot at 1125 N. 22nd Avenue with conditions as contained in the October 20,
2011 staff report. The motion passed unanimously.
Staff explained that this item would go to the next regular City Council Meeting on
November 7, 2011.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
A. Special Permit Location of a Level Two Community Service Facility
in an I-1 (Light Industrial) Zone (Union Gospel
Mission) (112 N. 2nd Ave) IMF# SP 2011-014)
Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff.
City Planner, Dave McDonald, explained the Union Gospel Mission submitted an
application for Special Permit for a Level Two Community Service Facility in an 1-1 Zone
located at 225 S 4th Avenue. The catalyst for this application was the fact that the City
of Pasco recently purchased a number of properties between Lewis Street and Clark
Street, east of 2,,d Avenue, including two buildings owned by the Mission. They're
proposing to construct a new men's facility which would expand in size, allowing them
to help more men as well as add parking. One of the problems the Mission has now is
that the buildings are built to the property lines and there are no outdoor areas for
patrons to queue up for services. Currently the sidewalk in front of the Mission is used
as an extension of the Mission facilities and creates difficulties for both the Mission and
the City. The new facility would have plenty of space on site for the men services as
well as the community outreach building. If the Mission builds at the proposed location
they will need to extend utilities, which will cause 3rd Avenue to be disrupted, which will
be the responsibility of the applicant to replace that street. When reviewing the
application the Planning Commission was cautioned to consider the possible effects the
new Mission Facility could have on Pasco Downtown investment and revitalization
efforts as well as the Pasco Farmer's Market.
Commissioner Kempf asked staff if there was any consideration for the train tracks
being so close to the southern boundary of the proposed facility.
Mr. McDonald answered the applicant plans to fence the site on all sides, including
along the southern boundary and eventually the rail line will be removed.
Applicant, Donald Porter, 1465 Desert Springs Avenue, introduced Beth Bailey with
Ares Corporation, Kurt Shaffer from Tippett Company, and Andrew Porter from the
Union Gospel Mission. Mr. Porter asked Mr. Shaffer to make an opening statement.
Kurt Shaffer, 9116 Tuscany Drive, Tippett Company, said that his firm was retained to
help the Union Gospel Mission find a location that would suit their needs and continue
-4-
to help them serve the community, The location being considered would suit their
needs and still allow them to serve the community.
Mr. Porter commented on the sensitivity to the City of Pasco and the change in
homelessness. He described the design of the building and how two entrances would be
created, one for patrons and one for visitors. Many of the homeless people will be
coming by car which is why there will be a parking lot for them by the 3rd Street
entrance. There will also be an area designated for drive-thru food pickup once a week
for the patrons. With all of the additional parking, this could help :he Farmer's Market
because the Mission's board could allow parking for the Market.
Beth Bailey, 226 Englewood Drive, Architect for Ares Corporation, presented an
overview of the architectural design of the proposed building. The proposed design will
have good visibility, safety, and comfort for the patrons and volunteers. The outdoor
courtyard was also discussed.
Mr. Porter then spoke about activities inside the main Center.
Juli Massingale, 199504 E. 25th Avenue, Kennewick works on the property just south of
the proposed site. She was concerned about the people the Mission turns away due to
failure of a drug or alcohol test. She doesn't want those turned away at her facility for
safety issues because there are only three women that work at the facility.
Rolando Rodriquez, 7909 W. Dradie Street, owner of Case Management located at 117
S. 3rd Avenue, expressed his concerns. If the proposed site was approved he felt it
would be difficult to recruit staff and bring in customers. Mr. Rodriguez is concerned
about the men that are turned away due to failure of drug or alcohol tests, Mr.
Rodriguez has picked up beer bottles and broken glass on several occasions. With
people hanging around his business there's a need to increase security. People have
come in his business just to use the restroom, The merchants in Downtown Pasco
want to improve their area and make Pasco grow positively. He asked for the Special
Permit to be denied due to the possible harm it could have on growth.
Victoria SilvernaiI, 120 Thayer Drive, from the Pasco Specialty Kitchen, voiced her
concerns for the proposal. She liked the look and design of the new building and
promotes their mission but she would not like to see it downtown. The Specialty
Kitchen is available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week and she was concerned about the
people turned away due to failure of drug or alcohol tests.
Mike Miller, 515 W, Clark Street, Vice-President of Moon Security as well as President
for the Downtown Pasco Development Authority, spoke about his concerns and support,
The DPDA supports the Union Gospel Mission and its goals but there were some issues
with loitering, and the proximately to the Farmer's Market.
Commissioner Levins asked Mr. Miller what could be done to assist with the people
rejected from the Union Gospel Mission to give confidence to address voiced concerns.
Mr. Miller answered extra policing and enforcement for people who are inebriated, Mr,
Miller said turn-aways should not be blamed on the Union Gospel Mission because
they are drinking elsewhere.
-i-
Mr. Porter said that not many men are turned away because the people drinking know
not to come to the Union Gospel Mission. He also feels the Mission could bring
business to the downtown because of the amount of volunteers and public that will be
coming to the new facility.
Chairman Cruz asked the applicant if he was aware the proposed property was in the
central business district.
Mr. Porter said they were aware the business district and that there were Special Permit
considerations, which is why their realtor has been working with the City to work out
concerns.
Commissioner Lukins asked City staff to verify the location was in the central business
district or if it bordered it.
Mr. McDonald answered that it was not zoned Central Business District, just near it.
Chairman Cruz asked the applicant if they had a security team.
Mr. Porter stated the building will have a camera surveillance system. Staff also walks
the property doing cheeks and a night watchman is on duty from 11:00 p.m. to 7:00
a.m.
Chairman Cruz asked the applicant if he had seen the proposed conditions. Mr. Porter
had seen the conditions and there were no issues and that they were acceptable other
than a water issue that is being worked out.
Mr. Rodriguez spoke again to address some observations regarding private and public
restrooms. He believes there should be public restrooms for use downtown. He
reiterated the focus of the downtown is to create business and jobs.
The Chairman closed the hearing.
Commissioner Levin moved, seconded by Commissioner Greenaway to close the hearing
on the proposed Union Gospel Mission and initiate deliberations and schedule
adoptions of Findings of Fact, Conclusions and a recommendation to the City Council
for the November 17, 2011 meeting. The motion passed unanimously.
B. Special Permit Location of a Level One Community Service
Facility in a C-3 (General Business) Zone (Power
zonel 11202 W. Lewis SO IMF# SP 2011-0131
Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff.
Shane O'Neill, Planner 1 summed up the staff report and explained the applicant
proposed to locate a level one community service facility in a C-3 (General Business)
Zone. The site is approximately .5 acres and is part of the railroad right-of-way. The
proposal is for an after-school tutoring center, with the goal of helping high risk
students graduate. The proposed use is closely aligned with a level one community
service facility hence the need for a Special Permit. The facility has 8 staff members
serving up to 36 students for 2 1/2 hours a day, 4 days a week, from the hours of 3:00
p.m• to 5:30 p.m. In addition to providing assistance with homework the staff will teach
-6-
personal self-sufficiency skills. The proposed building is approximately 10,450 square
feet but the applicant only proposes to occupy 1,200 square feet.
Carole Schuh, 1202 W. Lewis Street, Director of Power Zone, stated the information in
the staff report was accurate. On Wednesday's they meet from 3:00 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. It
is their goal to help kids make good choices and make it in life.
Chairman Cruz asked staff if the proposed facility hours were to double would it change
any of the findings significantly.
Mr. O'Neill answered only the finding relating to the hours would change but the
impacts would not change.
Commissioner Lukins asked if the applicant was currently operating at this location.
Mr. O'Neill stated yes.
Following little additional discussion Commissioner Hay moved, seconded by
Commissioner Kempf to close the hearing and initiate deliberations to adopt the
Findings of Facts and Conclusions and a recommendation to the City Council for the
November 17, 2011 meeting. The motion passed unanimously.
C. Comprehensive Plan 2011 Comprehensive Plan Update (MF# 2011-0011
Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff.
Dave McDonald, City Planner summed up the 2011 Comprehensive Plan Update by
reviewing the memorandum and related materials the Planning Commission received in
their packet. The proposal for the amendment was divided into two sections; one dealt
with the land use maps and the growth boundary and the other dealt with the Capital
Facilities Element. The City has grown since the last review in 2007 creating the need
to update the maps accordingly.
Mr. McDonald explained the City has invested considerable funding for infrastructure
east of Highway 395 to serve future industrial development. The Urban Growth Area
needs to be modified slightly to allow the community to rea:ize the benefits for the new
infrastructure.
Mr. McDonald briefly reviewed the Capital Facilities Element and discussed the School
Districts request for modification of the Plan to include the District's Capital Facilities
Plan in the City's Comprehensive Plan. The School Districts request for the imposition
of impact fees was also briefly discussed. It was further explained that the City is
waiting on the School District to complete their capital facilities plan and as a result the
hearing will need to be continued to November 17, 2011.
Mr. White add that the Planning Commission will be reviewing the School Districts
Capital Facilities Plan in November and they might want to wait to make a decision
until the December meeting rather than November's due to the extent of the plan.
-7-
Commissioner Greenaway moved, seconded by Commissioner Kempf to continue the
hearing on the Comprehensive Plan updates until November 17, 2011. The motion
passed unanimously.
OTHER BUSINESS:
A. Workshop Hens in Residential "R" Zones
Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff.
Rick White, Community and Economic Development Director explained the City
received a written request for a code amendment to allow the keeping of hens in
residential zones subject to certain conditions. The suburban zones (RS-20, RS-12, and
RS-1) in Pasco allow the keeping of hens. There is a size limitation on the lots. None of
the other residential zones allow the keeping of hens or rabbits. Mr. White reviewed
details of the proposed code amendment, such as, quantity of hens, lot sizes, and
housing of the hens. The code amendment would only allow the keeping of three hens
on single family lots that do not now qualify for the keeping of bens. If personal
responsibility is exercised, staff doesn't see a large difference between keeping cats,
dogs, or other small animals provided conditions were met.
Commissioner Lukins asked what the other cities in the area (Kennewick and Richland)
were doing in regards to the codes on keeping of hens.
Mr. White answered that they are doing the same thing.
Amelia Larson, 8615 Studebaker Drive, stated Mr. White's report was accurate. As for
the noise issue, hens are not louder than any other pet, and keeping them away from
fences is important, as well as being a responsible owner. Hers take up less space than
dogs or many other animals.
Chairman Cruz asked about the proposed number of hens to be allowed. Ms. Larson
said three would be about right, perhaps five but that could be pushing it.
Chris Baugh, 5812 Curlew Lane, spoke in support of the proposal of the code
amendment. He personally has 12 hens (Mr. Baugh lives in a County R-S-20 Zone) and
it has taught his children a lot and has provided their family with food.
Mr, White explained the proposed code amendment item would be brought back for a
formal hearing and a staff report.
OTHER BUSINESS:
Rick White clarified that there would not be a Special :Meeting on Thursday, October 27,
2011 as discussed in a previous meeting.
With no further business, the Planning Commission was adjourned at 9:15 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
David McDonald, Secretary
_g_
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
MASTER FILE # SP 2011-014 APPLICANT: Union Gospel Mission
HEARING DATE: 10/20/2011 112 N. 2nd Avenue
ACTION DATE: 11/ 17/2011 Pasco, WA 99301
BACKGROUND
REQUEST: SPECIAL PERMIT: Location of a Level Two Community
Service _ Facility in an I-1 (Light
Industrial) Zone
1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:
The westerly 731 feet of Lot 2, Binding Site
Plan 2003-06
General Location: 225 S. 4th Avenue
Property Sing: Approximately 6.70 acres
2. ACCESS: The site has access from 4th Ave. and from the southern
terminus of 3rd Ave.
3. UTILITIES: All municipal utilities currently serve the site,
however fire flow is inadequate. The nearest line capable of
providing the proper fire flow is located in West Columbia Street.
4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The site is zoned I-1 (Light Industrial)
and is currently vacant. The zoning and land use of the
surrounding properties are as follows:
NORTH: I-1, C-3 & C-2 - Warehousing and an old motel
SOUTH: I-1 - Construction supply yard
EAST: I-1 - Warehouses
WEST: I-1 - Construction supply yard and night club
5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan designates
this area for commercial uses.
6. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The City of Pasco is the
lead agency for this project. Based on the SEPA checklist, the
adopted City Comprehensive Plan, City development regulations,
and other information, a threshold determination resulting in a
Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) has been issued for this
project under WAC 197-11-158.
1
ANALYSIS
The applicant proposes to relocate the existing Union Gospel Mission
men's shelter and accessory buildings in the 100 block of North 2nd
Avenue to a new site at 225 South 4th Avenue. The Mission has been
providing services to the Tri-Cities community for over 57 years, much of
which has been provided through the current Mission facilities in the
100 block of North 2nd Avenue. These services include emergency shelter
(housing), meals, recovery programs, transitional housing programs,
weekly food box distribution, and monthly clothing and furniture
distributions. Services are provided to both transient and permanent
residents. The mission is proposing to relocate all of their services,
except the women and children's shelter, to a 6.70 acre site on South 4th
Avenue.
The Union Gospel Mission plans to construct a 35,990 square foot Men's
Center, a 6,800 square foot Community Outreach Center and a 3,280
square foot maintenance facility on 6.70 acres of BNSF property with
access to both S. 3rd Avenue and & S. 4th Avenue. A majority of the site
will be devoted to the Men's Center which will contain a dining hall,
dormitories, a chapel, office, and related facilities. The Community
Outreach Center will contain a warehouse that will double as a weekly
food bank and clothing distribution center. The development proposal
includes site landscaping, q landscaped parking lot providing 113
parking stalls and four areas dedicated for future expansion. The main
entrance to the facility will be on 4th Avenue with a service or secondary
entrance off 3rd Avenue.
Under PMC 25.12.156 the definition of Community Service Facility -
Level Two includes missions, food banks and other types of non-profit
services; PMC 25.86.050(4) requires special permit approval for the
location of Community Service Facilities anywhere in the City.
As part of the City project to convert the Lewis Street underpass into an
overpass, the City has purchased properties east of 2nd Avenue between
West Clark Street and West Lewis Street. A portion of the existing Union
Gospel Mission property was included in those property purchases. The
Mission needs to replace the two buildings purchased by the City as part
of the overpass right-of-way acquisition. Relocating the Mission
warehouse and maintenance building several blocks away will improve
the efficiency of Mission operations through the elimination of the
problems associated the lack of space and the fact that the buildings are
separated by North 2nd Avenue. The Mission is seeking to replace the two
buildings lost to the City purchase and consolidate most of their
2
operations on one site, hence the application for the new Men's Center
and Community Outreach Center on South 4th Avenue.
The current Mission facility on North 2nI Avenue has no outdoor space
where patrons may congregate (hang out) during the day. As a result,
the sidewalk in front of the current Mission building routinely becomes
an extension of the Mission and is used by Mission patrons to congregate
during day or to queue up for services. The sidewalk has been used by
the Mission in the past for locating bins to distribute items to the needy.
Men milling around in front of the Mission walking back and forth across
2nd Avenue between Mission facilities and families queuing up on the
street next to the side walk all tend to create traffic and safety issues on
North 2nd Avenue between Lewis Street and Clark Street.
The proposed facility on South 4th Avenue is designed more efficiently
than the current facility to better accommodate Mission patrons by
providing off-street parking, queuing areas and a fenced courtyard. With
the fenced courtyard, liberal building setbacks and private sidewalk
along the Community Outreach Center there will be no need for Mission
distribution activities and other Mission related functions to occur on
public sidewalks as they now on North 2nd Avenue.
While the proposed new Mission site is located about 500 feet closer to
the downtown center (461 and Lewis) than the current facility, the actual
Men's Center and Community Outreach building are located in the
center rear of the site about the same distance from 41h and Lewis as the
current Men's Facility. The Men's Center is located 108 feet south of the
end of South 3rd Avenue and 250 feet east of South 4th Avenue.
Landscaping and a parking lot serve as buffers between the Men's Center
and South 3rd Avenue and South 4th Avenue; which may help mitigate
the problems associated with the current Mission Facilities where
patrons spend much of the day milling around on City sidewalks and in
2nd Avenue.
The edge of the proposed site is located on south 4th Avenue only 240 feet
south of the Farmers Market parking lot, which is considerably closer to
the Market than the current facilities on North 2nd Avenue. Travel
distances to the proposed Mission buildings will be about 715 feet
(accounting for building setbacks and site entrances) traveling south on
4th Avenue and about 550 feet along Columbia Street then south of south
3rd Avenue. Given past experiences, the Mission has demonstrated a
history of contribution to general public disorder, loitering and other acts
detrimental to the public image [PMC 25.44..050 (Exhibit#1)] of
Downtown Pasco. The Planning Commission will need to give careful
consideration to the possible impacts of this application to downtown
3
revitalization in general and to the operations of the Farmers Market and
downtown Festivals.
INITIAL STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT
Findings of Fact must be entered from the record. The following are
initial findings drawn from the background and analysis section of the
staff report. The Planning Commission may add additional findings to
this listing as the result of factual testimony and evidence submitted
during the open record hearing.
1. The site proposed for the new Men's Center and Community
Outreach Center is located at 225 South 4th Avenue.
2. The proposed site contains 6.70 acres.
3. The proposed site is zoned I-1 (Light Industrial).
4. The Comprehensive Plan designates the proposed site for
commercial uses.
5. The site in question is owned by BNSF Railway Company.
6. The BNSF Railway Company signed the Union Gospel Mission
Special Permit application.
7. Pasco Municipal Code (PMC) Section 25.12.156 defines missions
and related non-profit organizations as Level Two Community
Service Facilities.
8. PMC 25.86.020(4) requires special permit review for Level Two
Community Service Facilities.
9. The Union Gospel Mission has operated at 112 North 2nd Avenue for
over 50 years.
10. The existing Union Gospel Mission properties contain 0.76 acres of
land.
11. The City of Pasco has purchased the Union Gospel Mission
warehouse and maintenance building on North 2nd Avenue in
preparation for the construction of the Lewis Street overpass.
12. The existing Union Gospel Mission facility has no parking facilities
for patrons.
13. The existing Union Gospel Mission contains no staging or queuing
area off public sidewalks for food and clothing distributions.
14. The existing Union Gospel Mission lacks an outdoor gathering
area/courtyard for Mission patrons to gather. City sidewalks are
currently used for that purpose.
4
15. The Union Gospel Mission proposes to construct a new Men's Center
and Community Outreach Center at 225 South 4th Avenue.
16. The proposed Men's Center is 35,990 square feet in area.
17. The proposed parking lot contains 113 parking stalls.
18. The proposed "Community Outreach Center" is a 6,800 square foot
building located north of the maintenance shop to the east of the
Men's Center.
19. The proposed on-site maintenance building is 3,280 square feet and
is located behind or east of the Men's Center.
20. The proposed Men's Center will be setback approximately 100 feet
from the south end of 3rd Avenue.
21. The proposed Men's Center will be setback over 260 feet from South
4th Avenue.
22. The proposed site is located 240' south of the Farmer's Market
parking lot. The proposed site is separated from the Farmer's Market
by Columbia Street and a row of buildings along the south side of
Columbia and by an alley. Walking distance down 4th Avenue from
the southwest corner of the Farmer's Market parking lot,to the front
door of the Men's center is about 715 feet. Walking distance from
the Farmer's Market parking lot to the north side of the Men's
Center (by way of Columbia Street) is 554 feet.
23. Parking lots and landscaping will be located between the Mission
buildings and adjoining street right-of-way.
24. The proposed site layout contains extensive landscaping.
25. The Men' Center contains a walled outdoor courtyard for daytime
gatherings.
26. All outdoor gathering areas and queuing areas will be contained
onsite near the Men's center or along the front of the Community
Outreach Center.
27. The 6 inch water line in the alley to the north of the site is not
capable of providing the necessary fire flow for the proposed
buildings.
28. The nearest water line capable of providing adequate fire flows is
located in West Columbia Street.
29. Access from South 3rd Avenue is impeded to the location of a fire
hydrant near the center line of the roadway.
30. Installing a water line in South 3rd Avenue will require the street to
be excavated causing the road surface to be destroyed.
5
31. The proposed facility will include a maintenance shop for
maintenance activities including the maintenance of mission
vehicles and equipment.
32. Public testimony at the October 20, 2011 hearing indicated that
public restrooms were need for patrons of the Mission.
CONCLUSIONS BASED ON INITIAL STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT
The Planning Commission must make Findings of Fact based upon the
criteria listed in P.M.C. 25.86.060. The criteria and staff listed findings
are as follows:
1. Will the proposed use be in accordance with the goals, policies,
objectives and text of the Comprehensive Plan?
The site is identified in the Comprehensive Plan for commercial
uses. The Commercial Land Use Designation includes all
commercial uses listed in the C-1, C-2 and C-3 zones. Components
(offices, warehouse, maintenance building, motels and parking) of
the proposed facility are similar to permitted uses in the I-1 (Light
Industrial) District.
Policy LU-1-13 encourages enhancement of the physical appearance
of development within the City. The proposal would replace a
vacant lot with a well developed facility and parking lot containing
landscaping. Policy LU-2-1) requires all development to be
landscaped. Development of the site, including landscaping, will
support policies of the Comprehensive Plan (including LU-2-D) and
enhance the appearance of the immediate vicinity.
2. Will the proposed use adversely affect public infrastructure?
All municipal utilities are currently available to the site from
surrounding streets. Commercial development standards require
right-of-way improvements on all road frontages to bring the
bordering roadways and sidewalks up to current standards. Water
and sewer demands of the proposed use will be similar to a motel
complex with a restaurant. The demands on the utility system may
be less than the demands of a permitted use such as a food
manufacturing or bottling facilities. Impacts to the adjoining
streets will likewise be minimal due to the fact the site has
significant setbacks and a large area for service vehicles and
parking. The proposal will lessen the impacts the current mission
facility has on North 2nd Avenue.
6
3. Will the proposed use be constructed, maintained and operated
to be in harmony with the existing or intended character of the
general vicinity?
The proposed use will be equally or less intensive from an activity
standpoint than other permitted uses in the I-1 zone. Permitted
uses in the 1-1 zone such as automotive assembly and repair,
trucking express storage yards, heavy equipment sales and service
and metal fabrication shops all have the potential to generate
higher levels of noise, fumes, vibration and glare than the proposed
use. The food distribution will occur once a week and the clothing
distribution occurs once a month. The design of the current
Mission facilities encourages public loitering and general public
disorder on city sidewalks due to the lack of outdoor courtyards
and the lack of building setbacks. The sidewalk is essentially used
as an extension of the Mission. Liberal building setbacks, building
orientation and an enclosed courtyard may help address past
Mission issues of patrons loitering on and blocking city sidewalks,
but this is not guaranteed. The proposed location of the
Community Outreach buildings with ample onsite queuing space
will also address the issue of food bank patrons lining up on public
sidewalks and streets to receive food boxes and clothing. The
addition of landscaped berms and or landscape walls along the
northern portion of the property near 3rd Avenue may further
address concerns about loitering and general public disorder. If
these design features fail to address issues associated with the
Mission, the proposal will have an adverse impact on downtown
revitalization.
4. Will the location and height of proposed structures and the site
design discourage the development of permitted uses on
property in the general vicinity or impair the value thereof?
Much of the property surrounding the proposed site is zoned I-1
(Light Industrial). There are no height limitations in the I-1 zone.
The height limitation of the commercially zoned properties to the
north is 45 feet. The proposed Men's Center will be about 22 feet in
height which is similar to or less than the height of surrounding
warehouses. The proposed facility will also contain significantly
more improved onsite parking and landscaping than the
surrounding industrial supply facilities. Development of the site,
which is currently a vacant lot, will consist of a paved parking lot,
landscaping and new buildings, which will improve the appearance
of the neighborhood. An online search of the Franklin County
Assessor's records (7/2011) indicate that property values
surrounding the most recently approved food bank (Golden Age
7
Food Share, 504 S Oregon Ave, 2005) have generally increased over
the past few years. Food banks are the most analogous use for
comparison with the Mission.
5. Will the operations in connection with the proposal be more
objectionable to nearby properties by reason of noise, fumes,
vibrations, dust, traffic, or flashing lights than would be the
operation of any permitted uses within the district?
The design of the current of the current Mission facilities
encourages public loitering and general public disorder on city
sidewalks due to the lack of outdoor courtyards and the lack of
building setbacks. The sidewalk is essentially used as an extension
of the Mission. Loitering on public sidewalks has lead to other
problems such as panhandling, verbal abusiveness, public
drunkenness and other behavioral acts predominantly associated
with the presence of transients [Ord # 2684 (Exhibit #2)].
The proposed facility has been designed with liberal building
setbacks, a large onsite parking lot and extensive landscaping.
Onsite queuing space and the enclosed courtyard will eliminate the
need for Mission patrons to loiter on public sidewalks prior to
receiving services from the Mission. The addition of landscaped
berms and or landscape walls along the northern portion of the
property near 3rd Avenue may further address concerns about
loitering and general public disorder. The inclusion of a fence along
the northern property line will provide controlled access to the main
service entrance of the proposed mission buildings.
The operation of the proposed facility will create less noise, fumes,
vibration and dust than the nearby material supply facilities.
6. Will the proposed use endanger the public health or safety if
located and developed where proposed, or in any way will
become a nuisance to uses permitted in the district?
The design of the current of the current Mission facilities
encourages public loitering and general public disorder on City
sidewalks due to the lack of outdoor courtyards and the lack of
building setbacks. The sidewalk is essentially used as an extension
of the Mission. Loitering on public sidewalks has lead to other
problems such as panhandling, verbal abusiveness, public
drunkenness and other behavioral acts predominantly associated
with the presence of transients [Ord # 2684 (Exhibit #2)].
Development of the site with on-site parking, significant buildings
setbacks, on-site queuing and an enclosed courtyard will address
8
many of the safety and nuisance concerns associated with patrons
of the current Mission facilities loitering and congregating on public
sidewalks in front of the Mission.
The addition of landscaped berms and or landscape walls along the
northern portion of the property near 3rd Avenue may further
address concerns about loitering and general public disorder. The
inclusion of a fence around the property will provide access control
to the site and will provide security for both the Mission and
surrounding properties. The fencing will also serve to contain all
Mission activities on site.
TENTATIVE APPROVAL CONDITIONS
1. The Special Permit shall apply to the westerly 731 feet of Lot 2,
Binding Site Plan 2003-06;
2. The site shall be developed in substantial conformance with the
site plan submitted with the Special Permit application;
3. The site shall be completely fenced with a chain link fence 6 feet in
height along the northern, eastern and southern property lines.
Fencing along 4th Avenue shall be set back from the 41 Avenue
property 15 feet and said fence roust be constructed of masonry
pillars or columns matching the Men's Center on 10 foot centers
with tubular metal fencing located between the pillars;
4. A landscaping screen shall be planted along the west 25 feet of the
east/west alley bordering the north line of the site;
5. No food commodities, clothing or other materials shall be stored
outside of any building;
6. Mission procedures shall clearly prohibit the use of the yard area
westerly of the rear line of the Men's Center, including the parking
lot to the north of the Men's Center for any activity related to
providing services of any kind to Mission patrons and or for day
time gatherings. This restriction does not apply to the outdoor
courtyard at the northwest corner of the Men's Center;
7. The landscaped areas between the Men's Center and northern
property line west of the 3rd Avenue entrance and between the
Men's Center and the northern parking lot shall contain a
landscaped berm or wall (a minimum of three feet in height), to
function as a visual barrier;
8. Public restroom facilities shall be available to Mission patrons at
all times while people gather during the day in the court yard or
other areas permitted by this Special Permit. Adequate signage
shall be displayed on the Mission property clearly indicating where
restrooms are available;
9
9. The driveway entrances shall meet current ADA requirements;
10. 3rd Avenue shall be paved for a width of 29 feet from Columbia
Avenue to the property. The pavement section shall be 3" of hot
mix asphalt (HMA) with 2" of crushed surfacing top course (CSTC)
and 8" of crushed surfacing base course (CSBC);
11. The driveway entrances shall meet current ADA and City
Standards;
12. To meet fire flow requirements, the applicant must access water by
tapping the 16-inch water main in W Columbia Street. The
applicant shall extend a 12-inch water main from the tap down S
3rd Avenue to the property (approximately 175 feet). This main
shall be tapped to provide water service. The location of the water
meter shall be per City of Pasco standards and Pasco Municipal
Code;
13. The existing fire hydrant in S 3rd Avenue shall be relocated to the
westerly edge of the right-of-way per City of Pasco standards;
14. Additional private fire hydrants may be required on premises,
depending on the final layout of the proposed development;
15. In order to meet premises isolation, a reduced pressure backflow
assembly (RPBA) will be required. The RPBA shall be installed
behind the water meter, behind the right-of-way line, and per City
of Pasco standards;
16. The existing brick manhole in S 3rd Avenue shall be removed and
replaced per City of Pasco standards;
17. An oil-water separator shall be installed on-site per City of Pasco
standards and Pasco Municipal Code;
18. The special permit shall be null and void if a building permit has
not obtained by December 31, 2013.
RECOMMENDATION
MOTION: I move to adopt Findings of Fact and Conclusions
therefrom as contained in the November 17, 2011 staff
report.
MOTION: I move based on the Findings of Fact and Conclusions
therefrom the Planning Commission recommend the
City Council grant a Special Permit to the Union
Gospel Mission for the location of a Men's Center,
Community Outreach facility and related buildings
and activities at 225 South 4th Avenue with conditions
as contained in the November 17, 2011 staff report.
10
db
e�
UNION I
Um
is
- ow
INS
a
f I,�
i
T
•
• S
ME
_1�
F
MLLE
ow
I
_ t ' A
a�
is�,
1
r
`a r
�q
NQ i
i4` r\•
4• • f� r
-7L • ,
l •'
fi
1,
4r �..
I•V. I _
fit.it � � y��• -.. ����,�+•• - �•
t
.• -- r _
�.`L �y `.,�,'
`��'�I�,•�.. � 'fir' �� ,i
.�' ,o Z � � ' ,�.
�• f ,
f.�� '�
:,..
't: '" y� 'I� �r �,3
:�'1�
y ( ` '� titr �tiQ� J
5, .�_ '� � , r. y,
,; ` � _^
� ' � � r
N� ' � i i
;4,.'r
. � + -
s
�:�
- "�r_ _ _ -
e
_._
.Ys�
� 1
� ; rl. �
� �
1 - ( 1 .r
� r j 1 ��y
c
� �
.� � .
i
— 4
i ���• .. .
� � � -;��:
-tip � ��� ��
r � ;�
' R'�
'�J' 4� s—'aL '' - {°,�
! ' ��
,- _z , ., � . __
;;;• ;� f 1,
!�� �`,�- r _ `r' fir. f
..,;;
��
t
� ,� ry �
�S {. _ � 'fir t t _
�. �
.;�
r -Y� �...
. _ � _
C�
� __
• �.
�/�' r'
i y I' , �.^Yt. �,
.a ,
(, ti. .,i
� i ,
.�`.
^is.
� �
ti,��3'-.
.s� � � •� J
_)
J � 4
', � ' ..
• � Y ;�
' - �' ��
�- � _ �,.
• .. . .
�• �� �
t. � � ` _ �
i !�, if .1 •�
Rn. t
IL
1 1 �4b �. •
Ir
• L
Z
h IF ~
:'tom-
rj f
3.41 :p%. T
.J_
Site Data
Men's Center 35,990 S.F.
Community Outreach Center 8,800 S.F.
Maintenance Shop 3,280 S.F.
Total Parking Spaces 113 i l
to
COMMLINrTy
• e s cu uK
OUTREACH
,t rVnMn CENTER
, '.lire► a, _.. 'iar+a!
. . MEN'S
1 � CENTER
oftm
IV Ffti-mr,
�.► - _r
s IXIRREM►ROR11T/Ll'R f`^
ARES CORPORATION
Applied Research&Engineering Services
New Men's Center and Community Outreach Center- Site Plan N6RTH lsoo)adwin Avenue,Richland,WA9935z
PH 509,946.3300
•
Pasco, WA Scale:ll64"= 1'-O' ARESRL@ARESCORPORAT10N.COM
- I _ - � iL
1
i-
6
North Elevation
- ter-_fw' � Ya
West Elevation
ARES CORPORATION
Applied Research&Engineering Services
New Men's Center and Community Outreach Center - Buildin Elevations uooJadwin Avenue,Richland,WA99352
PH 509.946.33oo
Pasco, WA ARESRLQARESCORPORATION.COM
GUEST
Legend ENTRANCE
I
Crisis Rescue&Recovery .JTT'-'—
Administration GUEST ENTRY
COURTYARD j
R F'%VE
Chapel(199 total seats) DAYRWM -
1
Kitchen &Dining r ``
IF F J Future Expansion �' i W s
Total Square Footage 35,990
CFIAPCL .
ti y �7 4
FUTURE ` P' TT I
AOWN �v — rry tit
r----
l • • r.•_. I If N
PUBLIC - + I —r+— '
ENTRANCE
DP.YROOII
I A flZ!tIA 11
I sg'
L1COW.,CrNi.' ?
I RANG � 171'I R"301.4 DINING !1 I I
I � q
L �_
234-6
ARES CORPORATION
Applied Research It Engineering Services
JMN.ew Men's Center and Community Outreach Center- Floor Plan NORTH iioo]adwin Avenue,Richland,WAS9352
PH 509.946.3300
co, �Q Scale:1/32"=tr-� ARESRLQARESCORPORATION.COM
Exhibit #1
(15) Jewelry and gem shops, including custom work;
(16) Offices for medical and professional services;
(17) Restaurants, sandwich shops, cafeterias and delicatessens;
(18) Sporting goods;
(19) Tailoring and seamstress shops;
(20) Theaters for movies and performances, except adult theaters;
(21) Public markets for fresh produce and craft work;
(22) Parking lots;
(23) Micro-breweries and micro-wineries;
(24) Research, development and assembly facilities for component devices and
equipment of an electrical, electronic or electromagnetic nature; and
(25) Home brewing and/or wine making equipment sales. (Ord. 3354 Sec. 2,
1999.)
25.44.030 PERMITTED ACCESSORY USES. The following accessory uses and
buildings, as respectively defined in Sections 12.12.020 and 12.12.145, shall be
permitted in the C-2 district:
(1) Parking lots;
(2) Alcoholic beverage sales provided it is for on-site consumption and located
within a restaurant;
(3) Other uses clearly incidental or secondary to a principal use;
(4) Beer/wine beverage sales for on-site and off-site consumption provided
the product is produced on-site in a micro-brewery and/or micro-winery; and
(5) Sales of micro-brewery products and non-fortified wines for off-site
consumption provided such sales are in conjunction with an establishment selling
predominately, based upon floor area, home brewing and/or wine making equipment as
permitted in Section 25.44.020.
(6) Storage buildings; excluding container storage, as defined in Section
25.12.430 are permitted. (Ord. 3735 Sec. 5, 2005; Ord. 3354 Sec. 2, 1999.)
25.44.040 CONDITIONAL USES. The following uses are permitted subject to the
approval of a special permit:
(1) Dwelling units, provided the units are within the principle building, are all
above the ground floor of said building, and the ground floor of said building is
designed or intended to be used for a use permitted in Section 25.44.020. (Ord. 3537
Sec. 6, 2005; Ord. 3354 Sec. 2, 1999.)
25.44.050 PROHIBITED USES. Evidence received by the Planning Commission
and contained in previous studies and Pasco Police Crime Reports demonstrates that
certain uses make the Central Business District less desirable or attractive to the public
due to a demonstrated history of contribution to general public disorder, loitering,
nuisance and other acts detrimental to the public image of the area. Certain other uses
provide entirely, or predominately, automobile services and, thereby, do not foster the
clustering concept intended to attract pedestrian visitors. Other uses may, by their
PMC Title 25 12/21/2009 58
Exhibit #2
ORDINANCE NO. 2684
AN ORDINANCE related to zoning, amending PMC Title 21, by
enacting new definitions in Chapter 22. 12, and
amending entirely Chapter 22.44, the C-2 district
regulations.
WHEREAS, the chronic physical deterioration of downtown Pasco is
evidenced by business closures, vacant buildings, vandalism,
property disinvestment and declining property values, all of
which contribute to visual slum, blight and decay; and
WHEREAS, chronic downtown social problems of loitering,
drunkeness, panhandling, solicitation, verbal abusiveness,
lewdness, and other behavioral acts are predominantly associated
with the presence. of. transients, street persons and other
homeless persons, prostitutes, habitual criminals, and others who
are attracted to certain types of service providers or places
which perpetuate their lifestyle, fill emotional or physical
needs, or otherwise support and increase their presence in the
downtown; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has adopted public policy, through the
Community Development Policy Plan and the 3-R Area Action Plan,
which recognizes the aforementioned problems and supports
comprehensive revitalization of the downtown area, of which
revision of zoning regulations is but one implementation
technique; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did undertake an analysis of the
existing C-2 regulations by conducting two workshop sessions,
with participation by citizens, the Pasco Chamber of Commerce and
Pasco Downtown Development Association, and conducted a public
hearing on March 17, 1988, at the conclusion of which a
recommendation for certain revisions was made to City Council;
and
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the recommendation of the
planning Commission and finds, with further amendment, the
proposal to be appropriate to further the policy of intended
downtown revitalization, and complements the previous expenditure
of public funds for infrastructure and new construction
improvements in the downtown area; NOW THEREFORE
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
section I. That. a new Section 22.12.062 hereby is enacted to
read as follows:
22 . 12 . 062 AMUSEMENT GAME DEVICE. "Amusement game device" means
a machine or other device, whether mechanical, electrical, or
electronic, to be operated by the public for the purpose of
entertainment, amusement or as a game, the object of Which is to
Section 7. That Chapter 22.44 hereby is amended in its
entirety to read as follows:
CHAPTER 22.44
C-2 CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT ZONE
Sections:
22 .44.010 Purpose.
22 .44 .020 Permitted uses.
22.44 .030 Permitted accessory uses.
22 . 44 .040 Conditional uses.
22.44.050 Prohibited uses.
22.44. 060 Building Heights
22.44.070 Lot area.
22. 44.080 Yard requirements.
22.44.010 PURPOSE. The C--2 Central Business District is
established to promote the centralization of business and
reinforce a positive public image and confidence in commercial
revitalization, within a compact commercial area having
primarily common-wall building construction. Such construction
offers the unique opportunity within Pasco to cluster together
types of retail business and retail services which functionally
interact well together, and will economically tare better, as a
result of close proximity by cumulatively attracting more persons
than as individual destination points.
It is intended that the commercial clustering concept be
fostered by emphasizing pedestrian access and circulation within
the district, in a manner which is .healthy, safe, uninhibited and
convenient for employees and visitors of all ages. Public and
private off-street parking shall be located to encourage the
transition from automobile to pedestrian movement. On-street
parking should be shared by vicinal business and be oriented
to short duration convenience parking for customers in the
vicinity.
In order to preserve the public health, safety and welfare in
central business district redevelopment, protect public and
private investment in property and infrastructure improvements
and stabilize declining property values, certain uses of the land
may be restricted or prohibited.
(2) Container storage, as defined in Section 22.12 .750,
authorized in accordance with section 22..80. 030 .
22 .44. 050 PROHIBITED USES. Evidence received by the
Planning Commission and contained in previous studies and Pasco
Police crime reports demonstrates that certain uses make the
central business district less desirable or attractive to the
public due to a demonstrated history of contribution to general
public disorder, loitering, nuisance and other acts detrimental
to the public image of the area. Certain other uses provide
entirely, or predominately, automobile services and,thereby, do
not foster the clustering concept intended to attract pedestrian
visitors. other uses may, by their inherent nature, require a
disproportionate amount of the limited vicinal on-street parking,
for an extended time, which is intended to be available and
shared by all business for the short duratioh convenience of
customers.
The following listed businesses, for the reasons above, inhibit
new business growth, contribute to business loss and decline of
property values, inhibit convenient access to vicinal business,
do not foster the clustering concept intended to orient the
business environment to pedestrians,or perpetuate a public image
which is undesirable or unattractive and detrimental to public
and private investment in revitalization efforts and, therefore,
are prohibited within the C-2 district:
1. Gasoline and service stations, automobile. services
or repair , except tire stores
2 . Outdoor storage of goods or materials
3 . Membership clubs
4. Taverns
5. Billiard and pool halls
6. Amusement game centers
7. Pawn shops
8. card rooms, bingo parlors, dance halls and similar places
9. Adult theaters, adult bookstores, tattoo parlors,bath-
houses and massage'parlors
10. community service facilities
Similar or like uses although not specifically listed are also
prohibited.
22. 44.060 BUILDING HEIGHTS: Buildings may be four stories
or forty-five feet in height, except building heights greater
than four stories or forty-five feet may be allowed by special
permit.
Exceptions to height regulations:
(1) Chimneys, water tanks, penthouses, towers, monuments,
cupolas, domes, false mansards, and similar structures and
CITY OF PASCO
SUMMARY RY OF ORDINANCE p0. 2684
ORDINANCE N0. 2684 is an ordinance relating to zoning by enacting
certain new defl-n-Itions and amending, entirely, the regulations
that apply in the C-2 (Central Business District) zone.
Sections 1-6. Enacts new definitions for *'Amusement game
device, " "Amusement game center, " "Billiard and pool halls, "
"outdoor storage," "Pawn shops,." and "Tavern. "
Section 7. Amends the regulations in the C-2 (Central Business
District) zone by:
a. Establishing a purpose statement;
b. Revising the list of permitted uses,
C. Revising the list of accessory uses;
d. Establishing reasons for prohibiting certain
types of uses and identifies a minimum list of uses
prohibited in the C-2 zone.
Section 8. Requires the ordinance, or this summary herein, to be
published before it is in effect.
The full text of Ordinance N0.2684 is available free of charge
to anyone who requests it from the City Clerk of the City of
Pasco, (509) 545-3402, P. 0. Box' 293- Pasco, Washington 99301.
Eve yn We ls, C ty Clerk
April 19, 1988
Tri City Herald
P.O. BOX 2608
Pasco, Washington 99302
Gentlemen:
Please publish Ordinance No. 2683 and Summary of Publication for
Ordinance No. 2684 on the following date:
April 22, 1988
Please send two (2) Affidavits of Publication for each.
Sincerely yours,
Evelyn Wells
City Clerk
ew
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
MASTER FILE # SP 2011-013 APPLICANT: PowerZone
HEARING DATE: 10/20/2011 P.O. Box 5200
ACTION DATE: 11/ 17/201 1 Pasco, WA 99301
BACKGROUND
REQUEST: SPECIAL PERMIT: Location of a Level One Community
Service Facility in a C-3 (General
Business) Zone
1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:
Legal: Not Available-within BNSF Right-of-Way
General Location: 1202 W. Lewis Street
Property Size: Approximately 0.5 acres
2. ACCESS: The parking lot site has access from Lewis Street 8s 11th
Avenue (1 lth Ave is located on Railroad right-of-way)
3. UTILITIES: All municipal utilities currently serve the site.
4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The site is zoned C-3 (General
Business) and contains a commercial structure. The zoning and
land use of the surrounding properties are as follows:
NORTH: C-1 - Pasco School District Administrative Office
SOUTH: C-3 -Vacant
EAST: C-3 - Commercial Businesses
WEST: C-3 - Vacant
S. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan designates
this area for commercial uses.
6. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The City of Pasco is the
lead agency for this project. Based on the SEPA checklist, the
adopted City Comprehensive Plan, City development regulations,
and other information, a threshold determination resulting in a
Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) has been issued for this
project under WAC 197-11-158.
ANALYSIS
The applicant proposes to operate PowerZone, a faith-based, after-school
youth center in an existing commercial structure located in a C-3 zone.
The proposed use is most closely aligned with a Level One Community
1
Service Facility; which is considered an Unclassified Use and thus
requires special permit review. The applicant has indicated that
PowerZone will employ eight (8) staff members who can serve up to 36
students. Students will primarily use public transit to access the center
and a van will be used to transport students home. The youth center will
not occupy the entire structure; rather, a 1,200 square foot portion of the
structure will be used. The center will be open from 3:00 pm to 5:30 pm
Monday-Thursday except on Wednesdays when the center is open
between 3:00 pm and 8:30 pm.
The PowerZone Youth Center will provide an after school tutoring
program to high-risk middle school and high school students. In
addition to providing assistance with homework, the center will provide
opportunities for students to attend retreats and camps with the goal of
increasing personal self-sufficiency. PowerZone currently serves 36
students.
The site is located on right-of-way owned by BNSF Railway and is not
contained within a defined tax parcel. The site is bound by arterial
streets to the north and to the south. Both arterials serve public transit,
which provides convenient access for students traveling to the youth
center from nearby schools.
The proposed youth center adds to the consolidation of education related
uses in the general vicinity. The Pasco School District administration
office is located directly to the north and a few of Pasco's schools are
located nearby. Longfellow Elementary, Pasco High, Emerson Elementary
and Pasco Library are all located within less than one mile of the subject
site.
INITIAL STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT
Findings of Fact must be entered from the record. The following are
initial findings drawn from the background and analysis section of the
staff report. The Planning Commission may add additional findings to
this listing as the result of factual testimony and evidence submitted
during the open record hearing.
1, The site is addressed 1202 West Lewis Street.
2. The site is zoned C-3 (General Business).
3. The site is located on right-of-way owned by BNSF Railway
Company.
2
4. The PowerZone Youth Center is a non-profit organization dedicated
to providing tutoring and mentoring for at risk middle and high
school students.
5. PowerZone will provide tutoring services for 2.5 hours per day four
days per week.
6. PowerZone is defined as a Community Service Facility in the Pasco
zoning code.
7. Community Service Facilities are considered Unclassified Uses and
thereby require special permit review (PMC 25.86.020).
8. The proposed youth center is located approximately 0.7 miles south
of the Pasco High School.
9. The proposed youth center is located directly south of the Pasco
School District administrative offices.
10. The proposed youth center is located on a Benton Franklin Transit
route.
11, The proposed youth center will occupy approximately 1,200 square
feet of the existing commercial structure.
CONCLUSIONS BASED ON INITIAL STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT
The Planning Commission must make Findings of Fact based upon the
criteria listed in P.M.C. 25.86.060. The criteria and staff listed findings
are as follows:
1. Will the proposed use be in accordance with the goals, policies,
objectives and text of the Comprehensive Plan?
Comprehensive Plan Goal CF-5 encourages the fostering of
adequate provisions for educational facilities throughout the urban
growth area. PowerZone is a private educational support facility.
2, Will the proposed use adversely affect public infrastructure?
The proposal will generate little demand for public utilities only
being open to serve students for approximately 2,5 hours per day
for four days per week. Water and sewer demands of the proposed
use will be negligible compared to permitted uses such as
restaurants. Impacts to the adjoining streets will likewise be
minimal due to the fact the facility will only be open a total of 10
hours per week.
3. Will the proposed use be constructed, maintained and operated
to be in harmony with the existing or intended character of the
general vicinity?
3
The building proposed for use by PowerZone is currently in place
and has existed for over 40 years. No changes are planned for the
exterior of this commercial building. The proposed use will have
minimal impact on the existing and intended character of the
neighborhood.
4. Will the location and height of proposed structures and the site
design discourage the development of permitted uses on
property in the general vicinity or impair the value thereof?
PowerZone is proposing to occupy an existing building. No changes
are planned for the height and size of the structure. The current
building has not discouraged development in the general area. The
lack of development between West Lewis Street and West "A" Street
west of 10th Avenue is due to the fact the property is railroad right-
of-way.
S. Will the operations in connection with the proposal be more
objectionable to nearby properties by reason of noise, fumes,
vibrations, dust, traffic, or flashing lights than would be the
operation of any permitted uses within the district?
The proposed facility will only be open for tutoring services 10
hours per week. There will be no fumes, vibrations, dust, noise, or
flashing lights as a result of this activity.
6. Will the proposed use endanger the public health or safety if
located and developed where proposed, or in any way will
become a nuisance to uses permitted in the district?
The proposed tutoring center will be open 2.5 hours per day, four
days per week primarily during the school year. Minimal activity
will occur at the site minimizing any chance for the creation of
nuisance conditions.
APPROVAL CONDITIONS
1. The Special Permit shall apply to Tax Parcel #200000220 for the
building at 1202 West Lewis Street located within BNSF right-of-
way;
2. The applicant shall comply with all building code requirements for
the occupancy class applicable to the use;
3. Street frontage and utility improvements meeting City Standards
shall be required if tenant improvements for PowerZone exceed
4
33% of the leasehold value as established by the Franklin County
Assessor under Tax Parcel # 200000220;
4. The Special Permit shall be null and void if an occupancy
registration has not been obtained by June 30, 2012.
RECOMMENDATION
MOTION: I move to adopt Findings of Fact and Conclusions
therefrom as contained in the November 17, 2011 staff
report.
MOTION: I move based on the Findings of Fact and Conclusions
therefrom the Planning Commission recommend the
City Council grant a Special Permit to PowerZone for
the location of a Level-One Community Service Facility
at 1202 West Lewis Street with conditions as
contained in the November 17, 2011 staff report.
5
lf,t'
�f. - r • i
1 � t
1,ra-
..........
S,HjlXIS
XJK
s�
xA
3AV Hlo
.............
HiLL
CO)
a� � a
ct
,...q U 3AV HlU
0
�IAV HIP,L
v 6 A
NI HiCti
MOD
I
1 �
7
6
Y`
3 1 LM
3/1d Hl I� �
O O r ccnn =
AV HlU
a U • . NEE
U 3nb Hl£!�
J Y 5 y5
NI HIS
n
r -
r�
f
• A
v
low
i
k
O �
• 1
o
0
* , ,rtl r•. _fit-.
t ��r
\
AL
Aw-
t tt .
At
l 4'
' l
I
8 ' jq t
1
' � .�
� t
� + �
1� C
_ � .
.� �. � � � �
,.,. � 1,
� 1
• �
. ;.
E ��
�1 �
• - � � • � �
�,
� t
1�� e
� � � , .
� �
� h
� � i
% ..
1 � I; +tom , •r ��� r
f ;�%.��r � 1 I
,�
>, y
t+IY. _ I J r
A � •� '•�
� t , f. , ; �, ,(,.. . , .�
- - � 1 V �, y' � , ..
�+ � • ,
� � �� �� _
�r_7r
�.,
�. t� � .f. �• y
! ' .Y.�'��r.i �
�' f '��a.
- � T
� �
9 �`� � `
I
1 i
�, i �� ,, �
�, i
� k .„
r• � � � �a
49;
•
Alt r '
t ,`
..w
X
mid f .
r
A
t
1
f
t t �
C �f
+ I t
E
E
i
V/
i
i
�..tt
r
�_ � _�
��'t . • �t' _.err•
. .,� iif
�. � ,1��.
� 1. i. n► j��i1�.�
� ♦ .
1 �a , , �
� i _ R
9 '1 Z � '� �
4
,�.
� �.
�• ..�_
,. :1 � � ��
1 )/� ` � a
� �
•� v
� �
r � � �
.� � `
1
' .i �,�
i,
� �� -ih � ��, f
� . ,1 �:
� � �
—war I.�.�� �{�'S t� S� � . ':
w.. � ! �' .�,. L ��,
.a 7
F � � v v
� `'
i
� a
i`
1 �, ,
,� � ,�
i -_- _ - _ --r � �
�- � �
�1 , ' i
• - - ;',
,\ 1 `,
l
1 r.,, ,\\ I, , � ,
� � � � i:.
_ s .. �..
- a - ..
�.
w Af
O w
r
•ti�
1
Laii
1 I �
r
w I
a,
- ra
r
°r°i..r 1
rn # I
U/
MEMORANDUM
November 17, 2011
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Jeffrey S. Adams, Associate Planner
RE: Hens in Residential Zones
Issue statement
The City of Pasco recently received a letter requesting the legalization of "small
numbers of hens . . . in residential zones in Pasco." This letter reflects the
sentiment of a growing number of Pasco residents that the Pasco Municipal
code should be modified to allow for laying hens in residential zones. As noted
in Exhibit 1, the inclusion of rabbits has also been suggested.
What is Currently Allowed
The Pasco Municipal Code (PMC) allows for "the keeping of farm animals upon
the premises . . . for a personal use only , . ." in the RS-20, RS-12, and R-S-1
zones (PMC 25.12.040). No commercial animal husbandry operations are
allowed. Chickens are not allowed in any other zones in the City.
This provision for "the keeping of farm animals upon the premises . . . for a
personal use only . . ." is allowed as long as the lot in question has at least "ten
thousand (10,000) square feet over and above an area equal in size to 12,000
square feet set aside for the dwelling on the parcel." (See PMC 25.22.030;
25.24.030; 25.26.030). Thus farm animals are only allowed on parcels of
22,000 square feet (1/2 acre) or larger.
Furthermore, "for each full ten thousand square foot increment of land over
and above [the area] set aside for the dwelling" the owner may have one animal
unit. An "animal unit" is defined as "any one of the following: steer, cow, milk
cow, horse, mule/donkey, three goats, three sheep, three pigs, twenty chickens,
twenty fowl or twenty rabbits" (See PMC 25.12.065). A cap of "2 animal units"
is placed on the keeping of "chickens, fowl or rabbits" in these zones.
Finally, chicken houses must be located at least ten feet from any adjoining or
abutting property held under separate ownership and twenty-five feet from a
public roadway (See PMC 25.22.030; 25.24.030; 25.26.030).
In summary, if a property owner has at least 22,000 square feet of land in an
R-S-1, RS-12, or RS-20 zone, they may keep up to 20 chickens for personal
use; a person may keep up to 40 chickens if the lot has 32,000 or more square
feet. All coops and chicken-related structures need to be positioned at least 10
feet from the side and rear property lines and 25 feet from any public road.
Pros/Cons of Keeping Small Numbers of Hens
Pros, (as put forth in the request letter):
Hens provide healthier eggs.
Page 1 of 5
Their eggs supplement the diets of low-income families.
Hens eat waste products like bugs, weeds, and kitchen scraps, changing
trash into food.
Chicken droppings provide valuable, odorless (sic) fertilizer that is high in
nitrogen, preventing the need for petroleum-based commercial fertilizer.
Chickens are fun, friendly pets.
Chickens have educational value for children about where food like eggs
comes from.
Chickens are much more suited to a smaller area (such as a backyard)
than a dog or a cat because they are smaller and don't have the need to
run and roam such as dogs and cats.
They contribute to sustainability and self-sufficiency.
Cons (gathered from various sources)
Both rabbit and chicken-raising requires personal responsibility.
Chicken eggs must be collected daily.
Both rabbits and chickens create a great deal of waste,
Rabbit and chicken waste creates a less than pleasing aroma for
neighborhoods.
Rabbit and chicken food may encourage rats and raccoons.
Chickens make unwanted noise.
Some yards are not large enough.
Chickens can quickly denude vegetation in a run or pen, causing blowing
dust concerns.
Chickens can fly into neighboring yards.
Rabbits may burrow into neighboring yards.
Code enforcement may increase.
On the Pros and Cons
Healthier eggs: Whether homegrown eggs are healthier is not necessarily a
zoning issue, and thus need not be dealt with here.
Cost effectiveness: As with perceived nutritional value of eggs, home poultry-
keeping economics is not a zoning issue, and will not be addressed.
Pest Control: Chickens do eat bugs, and chicken byproducts are typically not as
toxic as sprays.
Weed Control: Weed control is an important consideration for code
enforcement, but as noted above, chickens eat vegetation of all kinds. However,
Page 2 of 5
chickens given only a small patch of yard can quickly denude that area of
vegetation, thus creating a blowing dust nuisance.
Recycling Table Scraps: Chickens can efficiently convert most "wet" garbage,
such as lawn clippings, and fruit and vegetable scraps, into manure. Recycling
is an element of the City of Pasco's Comprehensive Plan
"Odorless" Manure: Rabbit and chicken manure is not unscented.
Accumulations of rabbit or chicken waste, like any animal waste, will create a
nuisance for neighbors. But this is not unlike dog or cat manure control;
owners are equally obligated to prevent pet waste buildup, regardless of the
type of animal. However, unlike dog or cat manure, rabbit and chicken manure
is generally safe for food crops. As well, chickens given adequate space to roam,
and kept off of impermeable surfaces, will work the manure into the dirt with
their scratching behaviors, thus fertilizing and improving soil quality.
Pets: Both rabbits and chickens, Iike many animals can be treated as
domesticated pets. All pets require a certain level of personal responsibility for
their care. For rabbits and hens this includes feeding, watering, protecting from
predators (skunks, raccoons, and neighborhood dogs), and for chickens, daily
egg collection. Most rabbits and hens are docile, but like any other "pet" they
(especially "broody" hens), can become unruly and would require special
handling. The care of an unruly rabbit or chicken would not be more onerous
than that required for a troublesome dog or cat, except that chickens have the
added feature of Iimited flight capability (Roosters would not be allowed under
this code amendment). GeneralI_y, rabbits and hens are fairly quiet, and can
usually be favorably compared to a dog or cat in terms of noise output.
Educational Value: The educational value of chickens may be seen as
contributing to community self-reliance, as children can be instructed to some
degree on animal husbandry, food production, and farm economics.
Smaller Area: It may be true that chickens require a smaller area than a cat or
dog of similar size. However such small confinement may defeat the "free-
range" component of the "healthier chickens/better eggs" argument.
Sustainability/Self-sufficiency: As noted above, chickens fed and housed in a
certain way can contribute to sustainable agriculture/self sufficiency and
perhaps produce healthier eggs. However chicken-raising at home as opposed
to on a commercial ranch is not per se a guarantee of either.
Possible .rmplemenxation Guidelines
These code revisions would pertain only to residential zones (Rabbits and
chickens are already allowed in the RS-20, RS-12, and R-S-1 zones, but only
with a minimum lot size of 22,000 square feet).
The PMC could be revised to allow for up to three rabbits or three hens (no
roosters) along with up to three cats or three dogs, or a combination not to
exceed six total animals (see attached Draft Ordinance).
Page 3 of 5
Because much of the demand for rabbits and laying hens occurs in the
smaller-lot R-2, R-3, and R-4 zones, the code should be adapted for these
zones in such a way as to allow rabbits or hens only as long as yard space is
sufficient for rabbits or hens, hutches/coops, and runs. A 5,000 square-foot
minimum yard size is suggested (see attached Draft Ordinance).
Finally, development standards should reflect rules for placement of rabbit
hutches or chicken coops and runs to keep them away from neighboring yards
and to preempt a possible nuisance (see attached Draft Ordinance).
Findings of Fact
1. Rabbits and chickens are currently allowed only in the RS-20, RS-12,
and R-S-1 zones in the City.
2. The Pasco Municipal Code (PMC) allows for the keeping of up to 20
rabbits and chickens in the RS-20, RS-12, and R-S-1 zones for personal
use, provided there is a minimum lot size of 22,000 square feet (PMC
25.12.040) and allows for the keeping of up to 40 rabbits and chickens in
the RS-20, RS-12, and R-S-1 zones for personal use, provided there is a
minimum lot size of 32,000 square feet (PMC 25.12.040).
3. Butchering of animals in residential districts is prohibited (PMC
9.60.030(13).
4. PMC Title 25 currently allows up to 3 dogs and three cats, not to exceed
6 animals total, in all residential zones.
5. Rabbit hutches and chicken houses in the RS-20, RS-12, and R-S-1
zones must be located at least ten feet from any adjoining or abutting
property held under separate ownership and twenty-five feet from a
public roadway.
6. A request has been received to consider an amendment to the Pasco
Municipal Code to allow the keeping of hens and rabbits in residential
districts.
7. The Planning Commission has researched and considered the request
and has recommended that such an amendment be approved with
appropriate conditions.
Recommendation
MOTION: I move the Planning Commission adopt the Findings of Fact as
contained in the November 17, 2011 staff memo on Code
Amendments for PMC Section 25.
MOTION: I move the Planning Commission recommend the City Council
adopt the proposed Code Amendments modifying PMC Chapters
25.20, 25.22, 25.24, 25.26, 25.28, 25.30, 25.32, 25.34, 25.36, and
25.38 as indicated on the attached Ordinance to include provisions
Page 4 of 5
for the keeping of rabbits and laying hens in residential ("R")
zoning Districts.
Page.5 of 5
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO ZONING AND AMENDING PMC TITLE 25
DEALING WITH LAYING HENS IN RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS.
WHEREAS, cities have the responsibility to regulate and control the physical
development within their borders and ensure that the public health, safety and welfare are
maintained; and,
WHEREAS, the City of Pasco has zoning regulations that encourage orderly
growth and development of the city, and,
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the Planning Commission's
recommendations, and has determined that to further the purpose of the comprehensive
planning and to maintain and protect the welfare of the community, it is necessary to
amend PMC Title 25,NOW, THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON,DOES
ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1, That Section 25.20.030 of the Pasco Municipal Code be and the same is
hereby amended to read as follows:
25.20.030 PERMITTED ACCESSORY USES. The following uses shall be permitted as
accessory in the R-T district:
(1) Accessory dwellings;
(2) Home occupations (see definition in Section 25.12.220);
(3) Ranch and farm buildings appurtenant to an agricultural use and agricultural uses
(limited), as defined in Section 25.12.040, except that the keeping, of animals shall be
permitted on parcels consisting of at least ten thousand (10,000) square feet over and
above an area equal in size to 12.000 square feet set aside for the dwelling on the parcel,
and
(4) Uses incidental and customary to a permitted use. (Ord. 3354 Sec. 2, 1999.);
)_The keeping of dojzs, cats, rabbits, and hens, provided such number of animals does
not exceed three dogs, and/or three cats, and/or three rabbits and/or three hens, the total
number of animals not to exceed-six-, in all cases. animals shall not be allowed to roam or
fly to other properties; roosters are not allowed.
Section 2. That Section 25.22,030 of the Pasco Municipal Code be and the same is
hereby amended to read as follows:
25.22.030 PERMITTED ACCESSORY USES. The following uses shall be permitted as
accessory to a permitted use in the R-S-20 suburban district:
Page 1 of 11
(1) Detached residential garages as defined in Section 25.12.200, provided they do not
exceed the height of 18 feet and are no larger than 1,200 square feet in area;
(2) Home occupations as defined in Section 25.12.220;
(3) Storage buildings not exceeding 480 square feet of gross floor area and fifteen feet in
height;provided no container storage, as defined in Section 25.12.430, shall be permitted.
For each additional 20,000 square feet of lot area, the gross floor area of storage sheds
can be increased by 400 square feet;
(4) Agricultural uses (limited), as defined in Section 25.12.040, except that the keeping of
animals shall be permitted on parcels consisting of ten thousand (10,000) square feet over
and above an area equal in size to 12,000 square feet set aside for the dwelling on the
parcel;
(5) One animal unit (as defined in Section 25.12.065) shall be allowed for each full ten
thousand square foot increment of land over and above an area equal in size to 12,000
square feet set aside for the dwelling on the same parcel; provided that all barns,
barnyards, chicken houses, or corrals shall be located not less than twenty-five feet from
a public roadway and not less than ten feet from any adjoining or abutting property held
under separate ownership; and provided said number of chickens, fowl or rabbits does not
exceed 2 animal units;
(6) The keeping of dogs, and cats, rabbits, and chickens, provided such number of
animals does not exceed three dogs and/or three cats, and/or three rabbits, and/or three
hens, the total number of animals not to exceed six; in all cases, animals shall not be
allowed to roam or fly to other properties, roosters are not allowed,
Section 3. That.Section 25.22,050 of the Pasco Municipal Code be and the same is
hereby amended to read as follows:
25.22.050 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. (1) Minimum lot area: Twenty thousand
(20,000) square feet;
(2) Density. One dwelling unit per lot, except as provide in 25.22.030 (8);
(3) Maximum Lot Coverage: Forty(40) percent;
(4) Minimum Yard Setbacks;
(a) Front: Twenty-five (25) feet.
(b) Side: Ten (10) feet.
(c) Rear: Principal Building: Twenty-five (25) feet.
Accessory structures. Accessory structures adjacent an alley may be placed on the alley
line provided there are no openings in the wall parallel to the alley. Garages with vehicle
doors parallel to an alley shall be setback from the alley twenty (20) feet. Where there is
no alley, the set back shall be five (5) feet. Structures related to rabbits and/or hens, such
as rabbit hutches and/or chicken coops, must be at least tee O) feet from any property
line. Proj2erty owners shall not allow such structures to become a nuisance due to noise or
odor.
Page 2 of 11
Section 4. That Section 25.24,030 of the Pasco Municipal Code be and the same is
hereby amended to read as follows:
25.24.030 PERMITTED ACCESSORY USES. The following uses shall be permitted as
accessory to a permitted use in the R-S-12 suburban district:
(l) Detached residential garages as defined in Section 25,12.200, provided they do not
exceed 18 feet in height and 1,200 square feet in area;
(2) Home occupations as defined in Section 25.12.220;
(3) Storage buildings not exceeding 260 square feet of gross floor area and fifteen feet in
height; provided no container storage, as defined in Section 25.12.430, shall be permitted.
For each additional 12,000 square feet of lot area the gross floor area of storage sheds can
be increased by 260 square feet;
(4) Agricultural uses (limited), as defined in Section 25.12.040, except that the keeping of
animals shall be permitted on parcels consisting of ten thousand (10,000) square feet over
and above an area equal in size to 12,000 square feet set aside for the dwelling on the
parcel;
(5) One animal unit (as defined in Section 25.12.065) shall be allowed for each full ten
thousand square foot increment of land over and above an area equal in size to 12,000
square feet set aside for the dwelling on the same parcel; provided that all barns,
barnyards, chicken houses, or corrals shall be located not less than twenty-five feet from
a public roadway and not less than ten feet from any adjoining or abutting property held
under separate ownership; and provided said number of chickens, fowl or rabbits does not
exceed 2 animal units;
(6) The keeping of dogs, aa4 cats, rabbits, and chickens, provided such number of
animals does not exceed three dogs and/or three cats, and/or three rabbits, and/or three
hens, the total number of animals not to exceed six; in all cases, animals shall not be
allowed to roam or fly to other prof-rerties; roosters are not allowed,
Section 5. That Section 25.24.050 of the Pasco Municipal Code be and the same is
hereby amended to read as follows:
25.24.050 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. (1) Minimum lot area: Twelve thousand
(12,000) square feet;
(2) Density: One dwelling unit per lot, except as provide in 25.24.030 (8);
(3) Maximum Lot Coverage: Forty(40) percent;
(4) Minimum Yard Setbacks:
(a)Front: Twenty-five (25) feet.
(b) Side: Ten (10) feet.
(c)Rear: Principal Building: Twenty-five (25) feet.
Accessory structures. Accessory structures adjacent an alley may be placed on the alley
line provided there are no openings in the wall parallel to the alley. Garages with vehicle
doors parallel to an alley shall be setback from the alley twenty (20) feet_ Where there is
no alley, the set back shall be five (5) feet. Structures related to rabbits and/or hens, such
Page 3 of 11
as rabbit hutches and/or chicken coops, must be at least ten f 10) feet froin any propert y
line. Property owners shall not allow such structures to become a nuisance due to noise or
odor.
Section 6. That Section 25.26.030 of the Pasco Municipal Code be and the same is
hereby amended to read as follows:
25.26.030 PERMITTED ACCESSORY USES. The following uses shall be permitted as
accessory to a permitted use in the R-S-1 suburban district:
(1) Detached residential garages as defined in Section 25.12.200, provided they do not
exceed 15 feet in height and 1,000 square feet in area; except on lots that are 12,000
square feet or more the height may be increased by 3 feet and the area may increase by
200 square feet;
(2) Home occupations as defined in Section 25.12.220;
(3) Storage buildings not exceeding 200 square feet of gross floor area and fifteen feet in
height; provided no container storage, as defined in Section 25.12.430, will be permitted;
(4) Agricultural uses (limited), as defined in Section 25,12.040, except that the keeping of
animals shall be permitted on parcels consisting of ten thousand (10,000) square feet over
and above an area equal in size to 12,000 square feet set aside for the dwelling on the
parcel;
(5) One animal unit (as defined in Section 25.12.065) shall be allowed for each full ten
thousand square foot increment of land over and above an area equal in size to 12,000
square feet set aside for the dwelling on the same parcel, provided that all barns,
barnyards, chicken houses, or corrals shall be located not less than twenty-five feet from
a public roadway and not less than ten feet from any adjoining or abutting property held
under separate ownership, and provided said number of chickens, fowl or rabbits does not
exceed 2 animal units;
(6) The keeping of dogs, aad cats, rabbits, aLid chickens, provided such number of
animals does not exceed three dogs and/or three cats, and/or three rabbits,_and/or three
hens, the total number of animals not to exceed six; in all cases, animals shall not be
allowed to roam or fly to other properties; roosters are not allowed;
Section 7. That Section 25.26.050 of the Pasco Municipal Code be and the same is
hereby amended to read as follows:
25.26.050 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. (1) Minimum lot area: Ten thousand
(10,000) square feet;
(2) Density: One dwelling unit per lot, except as provided in 25.26.030 (8);
(3) Maximum Lot Coverage: Forty (40) percent;
(4) Minimum Yard Setbacks:
(a) Front: Twenty (20) feet.
(b) Side: Principal building: Ten (10) feet.
Accessory structures: Five feet, provided the accessory structure is located behind the
rear building line.
Page 4 of 11
(c) Rear: Principal Building: Equal to the height of the dwelling.
Accessory structures. Accessory structures adjacent an alley may be placed on the alley
line provided there are no openings in the wall parallel to the alley. Garages with vehicle
doors parallel to an alley shall be setback from the alley twenty (20) feet. Where there is
no alley, the set back shall be five (5) feet. Structures related to rabbits and/or hens, such
as rabbit hutches and/or chicken coops, must be at least ten (10) feet from any propert y
line. Property owners shall not allow such structures to become a nuisance due to noise or
odor.
Section S. That Section 25.28.030 of the Pasco Municipal Code be and the same is
hereby amended to read as follows:
25.28.030 PERMITTED ACCESSORY USES. The following uses shall be permitted as
accessory to a permitted use in the R-1 low density residential district:
(1) Detached residential garages as defined in Section 25.12.200, provided they do not
exceed 15 feet in height and 1,000 square feet in area; except on lots that are 12,000
square feet or more the height may be increased by 3 feet and the area may increase by
200 square feet;
(2) Home occupations, as defined by Section 25.12.220;
(3) Storage buildings not exceeding two hundred square feet of gross floor area and
fifteen feet in height; provided no container storage, as defined in Section 25.12.430,
shall be permitted;
(4) The renting of rooms for lodging purposes only; provided, however, such
accommodations shall not exceed two persons in a single-family dwelling. One off-street
parking space, per roomer, must be provided in addition to the requirement set forth
under Section 25,78.170(5);
(5) The keeping of dogs, and cats, rabbits, and chickens for personal use, provided such
number of animals does not exceed three dogs and/or three cats. and/or three rabbits,
and/or three hens, the total number of animals not to exceed six in all cases, animals
shall not be allowed to roam or fly to other properties; roosters are not allowed;
Section 9. That Section 25.28.050 of the Pasco Municipal Code be and the same is
hereby amended to read as follows:
25.28.050 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. (l) Minimum lot area: Seven thousand two
hundred (7,200) square feet
(2) Density: One dwelling unit per lot, except as provide in 25,28.030 (7);
(3) Maximum Lot Coverage: Forty (40) percent;
(4) Minimum Yard Setbacks:
(a) Front: Twenty (20) feet.
(b) Side: Five(5) feet.
(c) Rear: Principal Building: Equal to the height of the dwelling.
Page 5 of 11
Accessory structures. Accessory structures adjacent an alley may be placed on the alley
line provided there are no openings in the wall parallel to the alley. Garages with vehicle
doors parallel to an alley shall be setback from the alley twenty (20) feet. Where there is
no alley, the set back shall be five (5) feet. Structures related to rabbits and/or hens, such
as rabbit hutches and/or chicken coops, must be at least ten (10) feet from any nropert y
line. Property owners shall not allow such structures to become a nuisance due to noise or
odor.
Section 10. That Section 25.30.030 of the Pasco Municipal Code be and the same is
hereby amended to read as follows:
25.30.030 PERMITTED ACCESSORY USES. The following uses shall be permitted as
accessory to a permitted use in the R-1-A District;
(1) Detached residential garages, as defined in Section 25.12.200, provided they do not
exceed fifteen feet in height and 1,000 square feet in area;
(2) Home occupations, as defined in Section 25.12.220;
(3) Storage buildings not exceeding two hundred square feet of gross floor area and
fifteen feet in height; provided no container storage, as define in Section 25.12.430, shall
be permitted;
(4) The renting of rooms for lodging purposes only; provided, however, such
accommodations shall not exceed two persons in a single-family dwelling. One off-street
parking space, per roomer, must be provided in addition to the requirement set forth
under Section 25,78.170(5);
(5) The keeping of dogs, aFA cats, rabbits. and chickens for personal use, provided such
number of animals does not exceed three dogs and/or three cats, and/or three rab 'ts
and/or three hens, the total number of animals not to exceed six; in all cases, animals
shall not be allowed to roam or fly to other woperties.. roosters are not allowe
Section 11. That Section 25.30.050 of the Pasco Municipal Code be and the same is
hereby amended to read as follows:
25.30.050 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. (1) Minimum lot area: Seven thousand two
hundred (7,200) square feet;
(2) Density: One dwelling unit per lot, except as provided in 25.30.030 (7);
(3) Maximum Lot Coverage: Forty(40) percent;
(4) Minimum Yard Setbacks:
(a) Front: Twenty (20) feet.
(b) Side: Five (5) feet
(c) Rear: Principal Building: Equal to the height of the dwelling, but not less than ten (10)
feet.
Accessory structures. Accessory structures adjacent an alley may be placed on the alley
line provided there are no openings in the wall parallel to the alley. Garages with vehicle
doors parallel to an alley shall be setback from the alley twenty (20) feet. Where there is
no alley, the set back shall be five (5) feet. Structures related to rabbits and/or hens, such
Page 6 of 11
as rabbit hutches and/or chicken coops, must be at least ten (10) feet from any propert y
line. Property owners shall not allow such structures to become a nuisance due to noise or
odor.
Section 12. That Section 25.32.030 of the Pasco Municipal Code be and the same is
hereby amended to read as follows:
25.32.030 PERMITTED ACCESSORY USES. The following uses shall be permitted as
accessory to a permitted use in the R-IA2 District;
(1) Detached residential garages, as defined in Section 25.12.200, provided they do not
exceed fifteen feet in height and 1,000 square feet in area;
(2) Home occupations, as defined in Section 25.12.220;
(3) Storage buildings not exceeding two hundred square feet of gross floor area and
fifteen feet in height, provided no container storage, as define in Section 25.12.430, shall
be permitted;
(4) The renting of rooms for lodging purposes only, provided., however, such
accommodations shall not exceed two persons in a single-family dwelling. One off-street
parking space, per roomer, must be provided in addition to the requirement set forth
under Section 25.78.170(5);
(5) The keeping of dogs, and cats, rabbits, and chickens for personal use,, provided such
number of animals does not exceed three dogs and/or three cats, and/or three rabbits.
and/or three hens, the total number of animals not to exceed six; in all cases, animals
shall not be allowed to roam or f v to other 1xroperties; roosters are not allowed:
Section 13. That Section 25.32.050 of the Pasco Municipal Code be and the same is
hereby amended to read as follows:
25.32.050 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. (1) Minimum lot area: Seven thousand two
hundred (7,200) square feet;
(2) Density: One dwelling unit per lot, except as provided in 25.32,030 (7);
(3) Maximum Lot Coverage: Forty(40)percent;
(4) Minimum Yard Setbacks:
(a) Front: Twenty(20) feet.
(b) Side: Five (5) feet.
(c) Rear: Principal Building: Equal to the height of the dwelling, but not less than ten (10)
feet.
Accessory structures. Accessory structures adjacent an alley may be placed on the alley
line provided there are no openings in the wall parallel to the alley. Garages with vehicle
doors parallel to an alley shall be setback from the alley twenty (20) feet. Ahere there is
no alley, the set back shall be five (5) feet, Structures related to rabbits and/or hens, such
as rabbit hutches and/or chicken coops, must be at least ten (10) feet from any propertx
line, Property owners shall not allow such structures to become a nuisance due to noise or
odor.
Page 7 of 11
Section 14. That Section 25.34.030 of the Pasco Municipal Code be and the same is
hereby amended to read as follows:
25.34.030 PERMITTED ACCESSORY USES. The following uses shall be permitted as
accessory to a permitted use in the R-2 district:
(1) Detached single family residential garages, as defined in Section 25.12.200, provided
they do not exceed fifteen feet in height and 1,000 square feet in area;
(2) Home occupations as defined by Section 25.12.220;
(3) Storage buildings not exceeding two hundred square feet of gross floor area and
fifteen feet in height; provided no container storage, as defined in Section 25.12.430,
shall be permitted;
(4) The keeping of dogs and cats provided such number of animals does not exceed three
dogs and three cats;
() On lots with a minimum of 5,000 square feet and containing, only one single-family
dwelling unit. tie keeping of up to three rabbits or three hens for personal use, yrovided
the total number of animals (including does cats, rabbits, and hens does not exceed six;
in all cases, animals shall not be allowed to roam or fly to other properties, roosters are
not allowed,
Section 15. That Section 25.34.050 of the Pasco Municipal Code be and the same is
hereby amended to read as follows:
25.34.050 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. (l)Minimum lot area: Five thousand
(5,000) square feet;
(2) Density: One dwelling per 5,000 square feet of lot area except as provided in
25.34.030 (7);
(3) Maximum Lot Coverage: Forty (40)percent;
(4) Minimum Yard Setbacks:
(a) Front: Twenty(20) feet.
(b) Side: Five(5) feet.
(c) Rear: Principal Building: Equal to the height of the dwelling.
Accessory structures. Accessory structures adjacent an alley may be placed on the alley
line provided there are no openings in the wall parallel to the alley. Garages with vehicle
doors parallel to an alley shall be setback from the alley twenty (20) feet. Where there is
no alley, the set back shall be five (5) feet. Structures related to rabbits and/or hens, such
as rabbit hutches and/or chicken cooUs, must be at least ten (10) feet from any property
line. Property owners shall not allow such structures to become a nuisance due to noise or
odor.
Section 16. That Section 25.36.030 of the Pasco Municipal Code be and the same is
hereby amended to read as follows:
25.36.030 PERMITTED ACCESSORY USES. The following uses shall be permitted as
accessory to a permitted used in the R-3 district:
Page 8 of 11
(1) Detached single family residential garages, as defined in Section 25.12.200, provided
they do not exceed fifteen feet in height and 1,000 square feet in area;
(2) Horne occupations as defined by Section 25.12.220;
(3) Storage buildings not exceeding two hundred square feet of gross floor area and
fifteen feet in height; provided no container storage, as defined in Section 25.12.430,
shall be permitted;
(4) The keeping of dogs and cats provided such number of animals does not exceed three
dogs and three cats;
(5) On lots with a minimum of 5,000 square feet and containing only one single-family
dwelling unit, the keeping of up to three rabbits or three hens for Laersonal use. orgvlded
the total number of animals (including dogs, cats, rabbits. and hens) does not exceed six;
in all cases, animals shall not be allowed to roam or fly to other prnl}crties; roosters are
not allowed,
Section 17. That Section 25,36.050 of the Pasco Municipal Code be and the same is
hereby amended to read as follows;
25.36.050 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. (1) Minimum lot area: Five thousand
(5,000) square feet;
(2) Density: One dwelling unit per 5,000 square feet of lot area for single family
dwellings and 3,000 square feet of lot area for multiple family dwellings;
(3) Maximum Lot Coverage: Sixty(60) percent;
(4) Minimum Yard Setbacks:
(a) Front: Twenty(20) feet.
(b) Side: Five (5) feet.
(c) Rear: Principal Building: Equal to the height of the dwelling.
Accessory structures. Accessory structures adjacent an alley may be placed on the alley
line provided there are no openings in the wall parallel to the alley. Garages with vehicle
doors parallel to an alley shall be setback from the alley twenty (20) feet. Where There is
no alley, the set back shall be five (5) feet. Structures related to rabbits and/or hens, such
as rabbit hutches and/or chicken coops, must be at least ten (10) feet from any property
line. Property owners shall not allow such structures to become a nuisance due to noise or
odor.
Section 18. That Section 25.38.030 of the Pasco Municipal Code be and the same is
hereby amended to read as follows:
25.38.030 PERMITTED ACCESSORY USES. The following uses shall be permitted as
accessory to a permitted use in the R-4 district:
(1) Detached single family residential garages, as defined in Section 25.12.200, provided
they do not exceed fifteen feet in height and 1,000 square feet in area;
(2) Horne occupations as defined by Section 25,12.220;
Page 9 of 11
(3) Storage buildings not exceeding two hundred square feet of gross floor area and
fifteen feet in height; provided no container storage; as defined in Section 25.12.430,
shall be permitted;
(4) The keeping of dogs and cats provided such number of animals does not exceed three
dogs and three cats;
(5) On lots with a minimum of 5,000 square feet and containing only one single-family
dwelling unit, the keepin@ of uP to three rabbits or three hens for personal use, Provided
the total number of animals (including does, cats, rabbits, and hens) does not exceed six;
in all cases, animals shall not be allowed to roam_or fly to o1bgr pi-orperties; roosters are
not allowed;
Section 19, That Section 25.38.050 of the Pasco Municipal Code be and the same is
hereby amended to read as follows:
25,38.050 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, (1) Minimum lot area: Five thousand
(5,000) square feet;
(2) Density: One dwelling unit per 5,000 square feet of lot area for single family
dwellings and 1,500 square feet of lot area for multiple family dwellings;
(3) Lot Coverage: Sixty (60) percent;
(4) Minimum Yard Setbacks:
(a) Front: Twenty (20) feet.
(b) Side: Five(5) feet.
(c) Rear: Principal Building: Equal to the height of the dwelling.
Accessory structures. Accessory structures adjacent an alley may be placed on the alley
line provided there are no openings in the wall parallel to the alley. Garages with vehicle
doors parallel to an alley shall be setback from the alley twenty (20) feet. Where there is
no alley, the set back shall be five (5) feet. Structures related to rabbits and/or hens, such
as rabbit hutches and/or chicken coops, must be at least ten (10) feet from any property
line. Property owners shall not allow such structures to become a nuisance due to noise or
odor.
Section 20. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect five days after
passage and publication as required by law.
Page 10 of 11
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco, at its regular meeting of
. 2011.
Matt Watkins
Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Debra L, Clark Leland B. Kerr
City Clerk City Attorney
Page 11 of 11
August 26, 20 11
Dear Rick White.
My name is Amelia Larson. I am writing to request that you legalize small numbers of
hens (not roosters) in residential zones in Pasco, WA. In this letter, I will describe the
benefits of chickens in the city. I will also provide examples of backyard chicken laws
from other cities.
Benefits: Hens provide a number of benefits to an urban family that other pets, such as
dogs, cannot provide. These include:
Hens provide healthier eggs that supplement the diets of low income families.
• Hens eat waste products like bugs,weeds,and kitchen scraps,changing trash into food.
• Chicken droppings provide valuable,odorless fertilizer that is high in nitrogen,preventing the need for
petroleum-based commercial fertilizer,
• Chickens are fun, friendly pets with educational value for children about where food like eggs comes from.
• Chickens are much more suited to a smaller area(such as a backyard)than a dog or a cat because they are
smaller and don't have the need to run and roam such as dogs and cats.
They contribute to sustainability and self-sufficiency,
Noise: A noise concern is a valid ,vorry for noisier fowl like roosters, peafowl, or guineas.
I-Jens, however, are atnong the quietest of poultry species. They do cluck - for example, to
brag about an egg they just laid - but if they are outdoors. they cannot be heard inside
nearby buildings. Any noises a domestic bird might make are not as loud as a dog
barking.
Examples from other cities:A good example of a responsible chicken ownership la�� is
1bund in Seattle, WA:
SMC 23.42.052 Keeping of animals
The keeping of small animals, farm animals, domestic fowl and bees is
permitted outright in all zones as an accessory use to any principal use
permitted outright or to a permitted conditional use, in each case subject
to the standards of this Section 23.42.052.
A. Small Animals. Up to three small animals may be kept accessory to each
business establishment, other than an urban farm,or dwelling unit on a lot,
except as follows:
1. In no case is more than one miniature potbelly pig allowed per business
establishment or dwelling unit(see subsection 23.42.052.13).
2. In single-family zones,
a. accessory dwelling units shall not be considered separate dwelling units
for the purpose of this Section 23.42,052,
b. up to four small animals are permitted on lots of at least 20,000 square
feet; and
c. one additional small animal is permitted for each 5,000 square feet of
lot area in excess of 20,000 square feet.Accessory structures, including
kennels,for four or more animals must be at least 10 feet from any other
lot in a residential zone.
B, Miniature Potbelly Pigs.That type of swine commonly known as the
Vietnamese,Chinese, or Asian Potbelly Pig(Sus scrofa bittatus)may be kept
as a small animal,provided that no swine that is greater than 22 inches in
height at the shoulder or more than 150 pounds in weight may be kept in the
city.
C.Domestic Fowl. Up to eight domestic fowl may be kept on any lot in
addition to the small animals permitted in subsection 23.42.052.A.
1. On lots greater than 10,000 square feet that include either a community
garden or an urban farm,one additional fowl is permitted for every 1,000
square feet of lot area over 10,000 square feet in community garden or urban
farm use.
2. Roosters are not permitted.
3. Structures housing domestic fowl must be located at least 10 feet away
from any structure that includes a dwelling unit on an adjacent lot,
D, Farm Animals.Cows,horses,sheep and other similar farm animals are
permitted only on lots of at least 20,000 square feet,The keeping of swine
is prohibited,except for miniature potbelly pigs allowed under subsection
23.42.052.6.
1. One farm animal for every 10,000 square feet of lot area is permitted.
2.Farm animals and structures housing them must be kept at least 50 feet
from any other lot in a residential zone.
E. Beekeeping.Beekeeping is permitted outright as an accessory use,when
registered with the State Department of Agriculture,provided that:
1. No more than four hives, each with only one swarm,are allowed on lots of
less than 10;000 square feet.
2.Hives shall not be located within 25 feet of any lot line except when
situated 8 feet or more above the grade immediately adjacent to the grade of
the lot on which the hives are located or when situated less than 8 feet
above the adjacent existing lot grade and behind a solid fence or hedge six
(b)feet high parallel to any lot line within 25 feet of hive and
extending at least 20 feet beyond the hive in both directions.
F.Miniature Goats.The types of goats commonly known as Pygmy, Dwarf and
Miniature Goats may be kept as small animals,provided that male miniature
goats are neutered and all miniature goats are dehorned. Nursing offspring
of miniature goats licensed according to the provisions of this Code may be
kept until weaned,no longer than 12 weeks from birth,without violating the
limitations of subsection 23.42,052,A.
Here are exarnples from other major cities:
Mesa,AZ: 5 hens can be kept on any lot as long as the coop is 45 feet away from the
neighbor's house.
Phoenix,AZ: Similar to Mesa. Law also requires coop be cleaned once every week.
Chicago, 11.: All tuilirnited number of chickens may be kept for pets or eggs. Slaughter is
not permitted and the chickens must be penned.
San, Francisco, CA: You may keep any combination of 4 small animals on your lot
without pennission.
Thant: you for taking this issue into consideration. As a citizen working toward
sustainability and the overall %velfare of the earth 1 thank you for working with me toward
my goal. When chickens are allowed in Pasco city I would fully expect the same type of
restrictions that are in place for dogs and cats. 1 would also follow them exactly because
1 know the effects of lackadaisical pet ownership.
Please inforni me of how l may move forward in order to change this law for the goad of
all of Pasco's citizens trying to raise their own food in light of economic hardship. 1 feel
this is a step toward a better community in general when citizens know how to take care
of themselves and others by using the natural resources around them and the earth
beneath them. Chickens seem a natural part of this for us and our children. We will
throw away less (benefit to the city), provide snore food for ourselves (eggs and garden
produce helped by chicken manure which is essentially a benefit to the world). Wc'11 be
waiting for your response.
In Summary;
• Hens offer a number of benefits to urban families.
• Perceived concerns (such as noise and odor) apply more to dogs than liens.
• Many other cities have reasonable regulations permitting limited domestic bens.
Chickens have existed in cities since the dawn of tune, and they still exist al I over the
world. Benefits to raising hens in Pasco. As a citizen of Pasco, WA, I urge City Council to
amend the code forbidding bens in residential areas in order to permit the responsible
raising ofsinall numbers ofbackyard poultry.
Thank you,
i
Name:* Kristin Peterson
Email:* monkeyfamily44@rnsn.com
Subject:* chickens or rabbits in Pasco!
Comment:* I am supporting Amelia Larson's request for legalizing hens and
rabbits in residential zones in Pasco. Our family would love to have
rabbits at our home. Thank you for your time and consideration.
Kristin Peterson
To Whom it may concern,
I am writing to request that you legalize small numbers of hens
(not roosters) and rabbits in residential zones in Pasco, WA. In this
letter, I will describe the benefits of chickens in the city. I will also
provide examples of backyard chicken laws from other cities.
Benefits: Hens provide a number of benefits to an urban family
that other pets, such as dogs, cannot provide. These include:
-Hens provide healthier eggs that supplement the diets of low
income families.
-Hens eat waste products like bugs, weeds, and kitchen scraps,
changing trash into food.
Chicken droppings provide valuable, odorless fertilizer that is high
in nitrogen, preventing the need for petroleum-based commercial
fertilizer.
-Chickens are fun, friendly pets with educational value for children
about where food like eggs comes from.
Chickens are much more suited to a smaller area (such as a
backyard) than a dog or a cat because they are smaller and don't
have the need to run and roam such as dogs and cats.
-They contribute to sustainability and self-sufficiency.
Noise: A noise concern is a valid worry for noisier fowl like roosters,
peafowl, or guineas. Hens, however, are among the quietest of
poultry species. They do cluck - for example, to brag about an egg
they just laid - but if they are outdoors, they cannot be heard
inside nearby buildings. Any noises a domestic bird might make
are not as loud as a dog barking.
Examples from other cities: A good example of a responsible
chicken ownership law is found in Seattle, WA: SMC 23.42.052
Keeping of animals The keeping of small animals, farm animals,
domestic fowl and bees is permitted outright in all zones as an
accessory use to any principal use permitted outright or to a
permitted conditional use, in each case subject to the standards of
this Section 23.42.052.
A. Small Animals. Up to three small animals may be kept accessory
to each business establishment, other than an urban farm, or
dwelling unit on a lot, except as follows:
1. In no case is more than one miniature potbelly pig allowed per
business establishment or dwelling unit (see subsection
23.42.052.8).
2. In single-family zones, a. accessory dwelling units shall not be
considered separate dwelling units for the purpose of this Section
23.42.052;
b. up to four small animals are permitted on lots of at least 20,000
square feet; and
c. one additional small animal is permitted for each 5,000 square
feet of lot area in excess of 20,000 square feet.
Accessory structures, including kennels, for four or more animals
must be at least 10 feet from any other lot in a residential zone.
B. Miniature Potbelly Pigs. That type of swine commonly known as
the Vietnamese, Chinese, or Asian Potbelly Pig (Sus scrofa bittatus)
may be kept as a small animal, provided that no swine that is
greater than 22 inches in height at the shoulder or more than 150
pounds in weight may be kept in the city.
C. Domestic Fowl. Up to eight domestic fowl may be kept on any lot
in addition to the small animals permitted in subsection
23.42.052.A.
1. On lots greater than 10,000 square feet that include either a
community garden or an urban farm, one additional fowl is
permitted for every 1,000 square feet of lot area over 10,000 square
feet in community garden or urban farm use.
2. Roosters are not permitted.
3. Structures housing domestic fowl must be located at least 10
feet away from any structure that includes a dwelling unit on an
adjacent lot.
D. Farm Animals. Cows, horses, sheep and other similar farm
animals are permitted only on lots of at least 20,000 square feet.
The keeping of swine is prohibited, except for miniature potbelly
pigs allowed under subsection 23.42.052.8.
1. One farm animal for every 10,000 square feet of lot area is
permitted.
2. Farm animals and structures housing them must be kept at
least 50 feet from any other lot in a residential zone.
E. Beekeeping. Beekeeping is permitted outright as an accessory
use, when registered with the State Department of Agriculture,
provided that:
1. No more than four hives, each with only one swarm, are allowed
on lots of less than 10,000 square feet.
2. Hives shall not be located within 25 feet of any lot line except
when situated 8 feet or more above the grade immediately adjacent
to the grade of the lot on which the. hives are located or when
situated less than 8 feet above the adjacent existing lot grade and
behind a solid fence or hedge six (6) feet high parallel to any lot line
within 25 feet of a hive and extending at least 20 feet beyond the
hive in both directions.
F. Miniature Goats. The types of goats commonly known as Pygmy,
Dwarf and Miniature Goats may be kept as small animals, provided
that male miniature goats are neutered and all miniature goats are
dehorned. Nursing offspring of miniature goats licensed according
to the provisions of this Code may be kept until weaned, no longer
than 12 weeks from birth, without violating the limitations of
subsection 23.42.052.A.
Here are examples from other major cities:
Mesa, AZ: 5 hens can be kept on any lot as long as the coop is 45
feet away from the neighbor's house.
Phoenix, A2: Similar to Mesa. Law also requires coop be cleaned
once every week.
Chicago, IL: An unlimited number of chickens maybe kept for pets
or eggs. Slaughter is not permitted and the chickens must be
penned.
San Francisco, CA: You may keep any combination of 4 small
animals on your lot without permission.
Thank you for taking this issue into consideration. As a citizen
working toward sustainability and the overall welfare of the earth I
thank you for working with me toward my goal. When chickens are
allowed in Pasco city I would fully expect the same type of
restrictions that are in place for dogs and cats. I would also follow
them exactly because I know the effects of lackadaisical pet
ownership, Please inform me of how I may move forward in order to
change this law for the good of all of Pasco's citizens trying to raise
their own food in light of economic hardship. I feel this is a step
toward a better community in general when citizens know how to
take care of themselves and others by using the natural resources
around them and the earth beneath them.
Chickens seem a natural part of this for us and our children. We
will throw away less (benefit to the city), provide more food for
ourselves (eggs and garden produce helped by chicken manure
which is essentially a benefit to the world). Well be waiting for your
response.
In Summary:
-Hens offer a number of benefits to urban families.
-Perceived concerns (such as noise and odor) apply more to dogs
than hens.
-Many other cities have reasonable regulations permitting limited
domestic hens.
Chickens have existed in cities since the dawn of time, and they
still exist all over the world. Benefits to raising hens in Pasco. As a
citizen of Pasco, WA, I urge City Council to amend the code
forbidding hens in residential areas in order to permit the
responsible raising of small numbers of backyard poultry. Thank
you,
Mrs. Amelia Larson
MEMORANDUM
DATE: November 17, 2011
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Dave McDonald, City Planner
SUBJECT; Comprehensive Plan Update (MF# CP2011-001)
At the regular meeting of October 20, 2011 the Planning Commission held a
public hearing to consider various amendments to the Comprehensive Plan.
These amendments included updates to the Land Use map, the Urban
Growth Area boundaries, the general maps and the Capital Facilities Element
of the Plan (see further explanation in the attached memo form 10/20/2011).
The update to the Capital Facilities was initiated by a request from the Pasco
School District related to the need for new development to contribute to the
cost of providing schools in the community. More specifically the School
District has asked the City to adopt an impact fee ordinance for school impact
fees.
The imposition of school impact fees requires the City to amend the
Comprehensive Plan by incorporating the Pasco School District's Capital
Facilities Plan into the City's Capital Facilities Element of the Plan. The
Pasco School District is in the process of updating their Capital Facilities Plan
for 2011-2017. A copy of the Plan was not available for review at the public
hearing on October 20th and as a result the public hearing on this matter was
continued until November 17th. During the October 20th meeting staff
informed the Commission that the School District may not complete their
Capital Facilities Plan in time for the November Planning Commission
meeting and a further continuation of the hearing may be necessary. The
School District has now indicated their Capital Facilities Plan will be available
by the end of November. Staff recommends the hearing be continued to the
December 15, 2011 meeting.
Recommendation
MOTION: I move to continue the hearing on the Comprehensive
Plan updates until December 15, 2011 Planning Commission
meeting,
t
MEMORANDUM
DATE: October 20, 2011
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Dave McDonald, City Planner
SUBJECT: Comprehensive Plan Update MF# CP2011-001
The City is required by the Growth Management Act to develop and adopt a
Comprehensive Plan. The Plan must be reviewed and if necessary updated
every seven years. The Plan can also be updated on a more frequent basis as
conditions change within the community. However, Plan updates cannot be
more frequent than once a year. The last major Comprehensive Plan update
began in 2007 and was completed in 2008.
As a result of a request from the Pasco School District, industrial
infrastructure improvements, adoption of the Broadmoor Concept Plan and
adoption of the Marine Terminal/Boat Basin Plan, there is a need to consider
revisions to the Comprehensive Plan.
Land Use Map and Growth Area Bounda Update
The following points represent changing conditions which warrant
modification to the Land Use Map and Growth Area Boundary:
• In 2009 the Broadmoor Concept Plan was completed. The
Broadmoor Concept Plan altered the Land Use Designations
in the Road 100/Broadmoor Interchange area by expanding
both the Mixed Residential and Commercial areas to the
west.
• The Marine Terminal and Boat Basin Plan was adopted in
the fall of 2010. The Marine Terminal and Boat Basin Plan
is a master plan that provides a more detailed view of future
land uses between the Cable Bridge and Osprey Pointe south
of Ainsworth Street.
• During the last couple of years the City has invested two
million dollars in improvements to the north end of Capital
Avenue. Capital Avenue was extended one mile north to
provide a connection with East Foster Wells Road. The road
I
was constructed to industrial standards (additional base and
asphalt) with curb and gutter to provide access to the
industrial lands on the east side of SR 395 south of East
Foster Wells Road. A mile of sewer line was also installed
along with 1.25 miles of water line. Every 600 feet, 8 inch
lateral sewer lines were stubbed out east and west of Capital
Avenue to provide sewer service to future industrial users.
The water line was also stubbed out to both sides of Capital
Avenue. Finally the water line was extended west in Foster
Wells and connected under SR 395 to a main line on the
west side of SR 395. A spare 12 inch line was placed under
SR 395 for future needs.
• In 2010 the City bored under SR 12 and placed a large
casing with four pipes of varying sizes under the freeway.
This $600,000 plus project was the first phase of a multi-
phase infrastructure project to provide utilities to current
and future industrial users in and around the Lewis
Street/Kahlotus Highway Interchange. Two million dollars of
sewer improvements will be connected to the SR 12 casing in
the next few years and an additional $800,000 frill be
devoted to water system improvements. The water system
will aid in the future expansion of industrial processing and
will provide fire protection that is currently lacking in the
County east of SR 12.
• Section lines or portions thereof are often used to delineate
the Pasco Urban Growth Area boundaries. The east
boundary of Section 35, Township 9 North Range 20 East
along the Snake River northerly of the SR 12 Bridge dissects
part of the Tidewater Barge Terminal.
Under the provisions of the Growth Management Act urban growth is to be
confined within Urban Growth Areas (UGA). The UGA should include areas
that will provide for a broad range of land uses including no nresidential uses
(RCW 36.70A.110). The broad range of land uses should include a reasonable .
"land market supply factor" to provide for a range of commercial and
industrial land (RCW 36.70A.11O). County-wide Planning Policies suggest
UGA's should include lands already characterized by urban growth and as
having existing public facilities and services (water and seiner) to serve
existing and future growth [Policy No. 2 (C)]. The City has recently completed
$2.6 million of utility improvements to serve the lands suggested for inclusion
in the UGA (see UGA Map attached). Another 2.8 million dollars is planned to
be spent installing utilities to serve properties near the Kahlotus/Lewis Street
Interchange.
2
M.aip Updates
One thousand seven hundred and ninety-five (1,795) residential lots have
been developed with homes since the last major Comprehensive Plan update
was initiated in 2007. As a result, all of the base maps within the
Comprehensive Plan are out of date and no longer reflect the street layout of
the City.
Capital Facilities Update
Capital Facilities planning is a mandatory requirement of the Growth
Management Act [RCW 36.70A.070(3)]. Capital facilities include city streets,
parks, public buildings, water and sewer infrastructure and facilities of other
public subdivisions of government such as the School District, the Irrigation
District and the PUD. Information related to these special services districts
are contained in either the Capital Facilities Chapter of the Comprehensive
Plan or the Non-City Utilities Chapter of the Plan.
In January of this year the Pasco School District submitted a letter to the City
(will be provided for 11/17/2011 meeting) explaining the District had
outgrown its ability to provide schools for new development without new
development contributing to the cost of providing the schools. The District
further explained in their letter that the City could not approve residential
subdivisions unless the City finds adequate provisions are made for schools
(RCW 17.110).
The School District placed the City on notice that without impact fees or
SEPA mitigation for new residential development there will 'not be adequate
provisions made for schools. The imposition of impact fees requires the City
to amend the Comprehensive Plan by incorporating the Pasco School
District's Capital Facilities Plan into the City's Capital Facilities Element of
the Comprehensive Plan. By Resolution (will be provided for 11/ 17/2011
meeting) the School District has requested the City amend the
Comprehensive Plan and adopt an impact fee ordinance.
The Goals and Polices section of the Capital Facilities Element of the
Comprehensive Plan contains a policy (CF-S-A) that states the City is to work
with the School District to coordinate District facility plans with the
Comprehensive Plan and encourage the appropriate location of schools
throughout the community. While the current Plan (Volume'll page 45) makes
reference to the School District Facilities Plan it is not incorporated in the
Comprehensive Plan. The plan does however call for the City to work with the
School District during the development review process to insure impacts of
development on the School District are minimized. In the past this was
3
accomplished by forwarding copies of proposed plats to the School District for
review and comment. During this process the city had developers set aside
land the School District could purchase adjacent to sites dedicated for parks,
thereby reducing the overall cost for school site acquisition. Due to the pace
of growth this is no longer adequate to meet school needs; hence the January
letter from the District requesting the imposition of school impact fees on new
development.
Incorporating the School District Capital Facilities Plan within. the City's
Comprehensive Plan will require amendments to both Volumes I and I1 of the
Comprehensive Plan. The attachments contain the sections of the City's Plan
that need to be amended along with proposed language to accomplish the
amendments.
The Pasco School District is in the process of updating their Capital Facilities
Plan for 2011-2017. A copy of the Plan will not be available until October
26th. As a result the Findings listed below do not include information about
the School District's Capital Facilities. The Public Hearing on this matter will
need to be continued until the November 17, 2011 Planning Commission
meeting.
Findings of Fact
The following are initial findings drawn from the background and analysis
section of the staff report. The Planning Commission may add additional
findings to this listing as the result of factual testimony and evidence
submitted during the public hearing.
1. The Growth Management Act requires the development of local
Comprehensive Plans.
2. The Comprehensive Plan can be updated no more than once a
year.
3. The Growth Management Act mandates specific elements to be
included within comprehensive plans including an element for
capital facilities.
4. One thousand seven hundred and ninety-five residential lots have
been developed with homes since the last major Comprehensive
Plan update was initiated in 2007. As a result, all of the base maps
used for the various maps within the Comprehensive Plan are out
of date and no longer reflect the street layout of the City.
5. In 2009 the Broadmoor Concept Plan was completed. The
Broadmoor Concept Plan altered the Land Use Designations in the
Road 100/Broadmoor Interchange area by expanding both the
Mixed Residential and Commercial areas to the west.
6. The Marine Terminal and Boat Basin Plan was adopted in the fall
of 2010. The Marine Terminal and Boat Basin Plan is a master
4
plan that provides a more detailed overview of future land uses
between the Cable Bridge and Osprey Pointe south of Ainsworth
Street.
7. The City has invested $800,000 in the past two years to improve
the Capital Avenue connection with East Foster Wells Road.
Capital Avenue was improved to industrial standards with curb,
gutter, storm drainage and a thickened road base and asphalt.
8. The City has invested $1,200,000 in water and sewer line
improvements during the past two years to extend water and sewer
lines in Capital Avenue and connect the water to the west side of
SR 395,
9. The water and sewer utilities have been stubbed with lateral lines
to serve properties on both the east and west side of Capital
Avenue.
10. In 2010 the City
11. bored a casing under SR 12 and placed four pipe lines in the
casing for a cost of $600,000. This is the first phase of a multi-
phase infrastructure project to provide utilities to current and
future industrial users in and around the Lewis Street/Kahlotus
Highway Interchange. Two million dollars of sewer improvements
will be connected to the SR 12 casing in the next few years and an
additional $800,000 will be devoted to water system improvements.
The water system will aid in the future expansion of industrial
processing and will provide fire protection that is currently lacking
in the County east of SR 12.
12. Section lines are often used to identify the extent of the Urban
Growth Area around the City of Pasco. In one case the use of
section lines cause the Urban Growth Boundary to inadvertently
dissect the Tide Water Marine Terminal facilities causing a portion
of the Tide Water Marine Terminal be inside the UGA and a portion
of the Terminal to be outside the UGA.
13. RCW 36.70A.110 encourages Urban Growth Areas to include a
broad range of land uses including a reasonable land market
factor' to ensure there is a wide range of land available for all uses
including commercial and industrial uses.
14. County-wide Planning Policies suggest UGA's should include
lands already characterized by urban growth and having existing
public facilities and services (water and sewer) to serve existing
and future growth [Policy No. 2 (C)]. The city has spent $2.6
million on water sewer for industrial development needs east of SR
395 and SR 12. Another $2.8 million of utility improvements will
occur over the next few years.
15. A portion of the land proposed to be included in the UGA was
previously located within the UGA but was removed from the UGA
because the land was developed with a large commercial dairy.
The dairy has been relocated.
5
Recommendations
MOTION: I move to continue the hearing on the Comprehensive
Plan updates until November 17, 2011.
6
Land Use Map & Growth Area Boundary Update
a,
I
I
F
m �
* ►-
.�_ t da
o � �
- r
U �
L lY
CL
a a c° O
OIL
C w
CD
;..... _
_ m
\ y m
J-- b 'Fig l9�
cr
CL
f _``�, vww,a w.wNrwry..ew r ul.un.�+wy.aW.,r�.u,ey
°!"°sll"13V d e9111Y e°aIIW wfec6u W.,.0 rilr,llu.y�rVi�414K_q.
etyla4is�ls�.:wa.dwN a!nlw Aew ee`°ay^/ynl vW n/+lWe�1o�9
le L wrraPYa woV Vrwi xml 9e'Jal/�M°'I�°Y WI'el W�!I I.w>°9
\ e8-IV 44Mo-19 uegan _��.Jiw 91w P_n wsA eN ruy ba^ydlF°d P..v
a ueyP uyy�a®'Jrwsy4 twymaeJx�p waaw�""eyl vl etc.
' v.J�apeyaeWeJl+�wae F'suWlrw.l V���dY tluapfq•a It Nre
wW^F ay>•'.��YMtl�Y eUxutYU�YN Y';GfL`n
�1
seBue
yo dJ>n Pasodad �
.� s;!wi-1 Apo
O
easy yimoj J u eqj n
pua6a7
-
7
S - -
N
,y rreeic
r
� � l
J
' r
Map Updates
•
a
d
m
! El-
� a
tm
a c
c m
e t
I�//��✓ �C C�YA
I � r�L er SytiC
_ l \�,\Y •9� �ElIE�6fi
f
a
•
�- Z .�
r�
r
r
•
4
TV
N
O
O
r
Q ® ■ � to
IL
tu l
i
r
- 1
t 0
V c
C 1
a U
ca a pp�
[9 ..
r fr
i�
to 0
�x�
r
V
Legend
Resource Lands
Urban Growth Boundary Resource Lands
Proposed UGA Changes
^��'Meg lwawwn...w+T+...a..w n.GR.lte/wm
_ ,fw...Ma Mngwt•oq MT�M+�••'R^Iw'>••^A
•�^�w.i��.n�f^�^r•W U.fwnmtlr�...an.f,saes..
p•.rl.ku.fMn�i *O�����j w.nr..blM.v.�Av
w fvywtiu n dn^.w.rym sr auT�u..n.+:�,.
.�^.iwNawmt fn,....�rMw�ruwT^IMledgw iYlwa
�.a �� aa,M«eotivp,.�v pr��>,a rmnuowtiM.,rt,,;�Y a..�nwc.�w
L°4` \� \ u^n�dWP9 1NW11'CC�++uaSW�n y.4�tm4wum.4H 4V�ro Wt���"W
�. uwu.yryi,maLtrryl�P.nu now oa,inl!$�ll4�daf
rY w w.w.yaw'm,x Yw:.'f.al.nLW Ju,Jo ao'»'^i y YY wiry ws.K
p�pm NU..pmu..W'+�v+u J+l+F tmWre,uN�YN�PN�nW^�.ep.T
eeiV 41moaE) uegjn lG..• n2P �e�,u varil�k'.)m sn�e h•11.�'+rM4n Je.W«c•ry�.nna
.VL'TWbp^w✓i��nl'gYJ"N;J,N.4 rm J191iw+
rr ew....mw�����.yv'y�rrxcrvso;,;,.�vxyrn��a��tiuei
safiueyo den pasodOJd
sliwil /tiro 0
ear oj ue a
• ��� pua60-1
i
M �
s
r . ,
k
i
►y
Legend
Aquatic
Wetlands/Riparian Areas
Steep Slope
Liquefaction Susceptibility
I� Urban Growth Boundary Critical Areas
® Proposed UGA Changes
MA.wlu nifa�f.f MiITMW I.fs.....1..•_�..Y.M W
M n•Wd i.m h�n.a..f r.�ry hw w,n.M..ea.d�w.ew
Iy Ntµ�1rftlllA..R V.M•wwn N•yw..faA�•InI.M
�nw.nw .. q.drn.+w..nn..�YMfw+^✓+r
+O'°1y•!(!I VIw yww rfW•eri wVPd/royfr..0
vl��nuf.��N1.4�•�SP1+w:IVMaf
a Yrnt 4 IYU•W r�W r.j�PrM 1
r::+,wi.••:,why..y..ew r..w-P
ur.•f.wrr.o-caw»r=..a,.o.,�rerekru�►.+
.. wrwr�-•aw...seru a:vlwrourvaavww.asnn
sabueyo yE)n pasodad
so;noa }jsueal fuepuno8 uwmcuE)Uecpfl 99 alnob l!sueil
9ZZ alnob l!sueil -- 99 alnob psueal t IN r
\\ 0%alnob l!suejl yg alnob l!suejl
OZ!alnoN}!sued a6� Z9 alnoll psuejl isomm■
4'
L9 a no lsuel i 09 a n o bl!sues
1 Ic.WWuWi
PUOBOI
N.
'E-
T m
Tl
Mr-
t
�'•a'w-i.::.y.wwa.o ti••.lann w+Yw.��,x..i.
4.•tW Gw•nrall..b M'.Vw w.ti,�n�.�'+ro n+••
+•MNr4�•LLvvw.ut�•��Wu..by,.4p�a4-•NPNv
1•W.•p••••n•rn.�.�ti.,aVYM1OV G.UN Vtlll.x w i'luaix
seBueyo dE)n pasodoad
sauoZ stsAIpua Owei1 tiepunoe ywo3o ueqpn
sauoZ sisAIBUV OWeal
291
ss4
..s� =fit' '
iot
`►[L, t9� :�gj:: '.;[fit .. . '
�". � 614 :.: •. :. _-�N!Qk�' _ -- ..-. .. ,
i
i• :. i`. 8£L
IV
i •
t98£4
set
i � a
� r • �K:7
� mr.c•r �r:�:-.
o y .
��� � �• ors"'t. �:�-��
�. •�.i� & �: it m+ �:
I`J ali�-f�fSlt�a�i`4R4��cs F�;�•
e
Pon'It
SUP
fit! v oil
SKIM
e B-1 I
Ulm
m
IM
9t�G�laI•pSi' C�
r x'i xrp�M. A,!R ;.� rR.
co III.
WWII& co
uf q.1
spy // co d1 ffi 0+ � Erc�c�ce-
-ry tM
I I
e �•. � c�l r ,� f
IIILLL C a��_�;
Capital Facilities Update
Volume I `-
Goals & Policies
QmU=bensive glad
City of Pasco,Washington
2007 to 2027
This comprehensive plan and the preparatory work which cleated it were
paid for in part by a grant from the State of Washington,administered by the
Department of Community, Trade and Economic Development.
w
_ r�
Qmmcmncy Managment _
lit
rM
A concurrency management system is a regulatory process that establishes
procedures to determine if public facilities have adequate capacity to
accommodate a proposed development. The process uses criteria adopted and
implemented in the municipal code. Under the GMA, concurrency must be
established for transportation facilities, however jurisdictions may establish
concurrency for any public facility or service. The City of Pasco adopted
Ordinance # 3821 establishing concurrency procedures for transportation
facilities in conjunction with new development.
Six Y gar Ca ip W hp rovernent Plan
The Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) sets out the capital projects the city
plans to undertake within the next six years to support implementation of
the Comprehensive Plan. The six year schedule is up-dated annually, with
the first year of the schedule acting as the capital budget for the current fiscal
year. During the annual updating of the six-year schedule, cost estimates, and
funding sources are updated and revised to reflect changed conditions or new
information available to the city. The CIP and the twenty-year Capital Facility
Plan should be revised to include additional projects that may be needed to
maintain adopted levels of service.
Pasco ch€of Qiqgict#I Capital Fanilitigs P an
The School Distri&�l E Ldlities Plan sets forth the Districts educ- `oral
prop m standards (Lev, l Qf "service) classroom s.0 . core RMRMrns and
services necessary_for the education-ofgh,ildren within the District. The Ulan
also identities thCaoital Facilitie� needs to #,j.commod 121 epct studct t
gyrollrneat over the next six years. The ftnan ing l la wi 41% the Camel
F"s hies flan includes bands. State matching funds and school impact fees
u mcbods Qf a ` constructi n o h a ' c.
Cpoita.l Facilities Flan is included as a. Q.f tfris _Lg ehensive Plan in the
Capital Facilities Element in jLblur«r,H.
A.dminl&ahyc Action
The Comprehensive Plan includes policies that should be carried out through
administrative actions. These actions include development review,development
permitting, preparation of reports, making information available to the public,
and review for concurrency. Development review practices must be continually
monitored to ensure administrative function are consistent with and support the
policies of the Comprehensive Plan.
Introduction 5
The source documents primarily used as functional comprehensive plans for
infrastructure and the six-year capital improvement plans are prepared routinely
and updated annually as required for obtaining funding from the State. The
individual capital improvement plans define projects and proposed funding for
those projects required, first to rehabilitate existing facilities and secondly to
provide level of service(LOS)capacity to accommodate new growth.
Generally, the proposed new capacity, replacement and rehabilitation of capital
facilities, and financing for the next six years reflects the general planning
goals and policies, as well as land use infrastructure requirements, identified in
Pasco's longer-range planning documents. These d urn 'n 1 de:
• The Transportation Element, and related regional and county
transportation plans;
• The Comprehensive Park and Recreation Plan and Trails Plan;
• Water, Sewer, and Stormwater Comprehensive Plans; and
• Specific facility plans for infrastructure improvements and city-
owned buildings.
• Fano-School Pistrict No. 1 Ca :1 Fades flan
Other source documents include, plans for schools the irrigation district, the
Benton-Franklin Council of Governments Regional Transportation Plan, the
Columbia Basin Ground Water Management Area Plan, and other service
providers.
The Broadmoor Concept Plan (2t 09)
The roadmor Concept Plan c v u approximately 1.1 90 acres of land north and
Nvest of the roa oor1I-1 2 InterchaanK. The goal 2—ftht-c3roadmooir Concept
Plan is to pr—ovidr. a more dcWlcd bevel of Vidanc[r fixture &VQJ0Vrnent
in the lroadmoor aregthan is provided for in the Comzef�ensive flan. The
Bwad poor Coricc t P a (2N_9�and a[ subuaquot amondmegts-thereto is,
made parr:of this Comprdensiye Plan by rofireaca,
]boat Basin Marincs ind Plan ( U 10
The Boat Basin Marine Terminal Plan covers that 2giliep of the Ci located
Capital facilities Element 22
south of Ainsworth Avenue between the Cable Bpi�p--oncl Osprey inte zn
the Big, Port of Pasco. The goad of the Bout Basin Manne Terminal Plan is to
Provide a more dctai ed level ofguidanco for fu hug redeye pmeltoftheMarine
Ternairtal_ond Boat Basin area is tz vidgd fQr in thg colijarchg1sive Plan.
The Boat Basin Marine Torminal. Plan(2010) and any subsequent mtpo(jnotg
theretu is rinade pul o this Cornprchensive Plan by refuence.
P$scg Bicycle &Pedestrian Master Plan
t►e Pasco Bicycles & Pedestrian Mauer Plan Appli�y-wide. The key foal.
of the Pasco Bicy le&Pedewrriatt_iulasteo`Plan is to provide a nrit ritiacd action
— —- d a --
plan fQj in rya ovine identified travel routs with bicycle lanes and Xatbvjvs. 'llie
B° c1e& Pedestrian Master Plan replac.cb the Bike%a an�4y
included in the Comprehensive Ngn.ThePascoBicycle&Pedestrian Mast erP
( 011) and suseclalent amendments thereto is made part of this CoMI re �vC.
Plan by rekrence.
Capital facilities Element 23
volume H
CITY 4F
Washington Sumorthig Elements
j4mprehensive Plan
City of Pasco,
2007 to 2027
This comprehensive plan and the preparatory w. . . .. . r
in part by i grantftom the State of Washington, administered by Department of
Community, •r- and Economic Development
•rte -r t a ="��� ►. - �- `
Capital Facilities
abon
Land use decisions such as
annexation or commercial versus
residential zoning,etc.,have direct
impacts upon the City financial
capabilities and liabilities in both
the immediate and distant futures.
Because of this relationship the
Growth Management Act (RZt
36.70A.070[3]) requires
local governments include capital
budgeting as an active plannin
function. The GMA requires that
capital budgeting support the land use decisions. If there is insufficient funding
to meet the infrastructure demands of growth then the land use element should
be adjusted to protect the integrity of the financial capabilities of the respective
local government.
The specific Statutory [RCW 36.70A.070(3)] requirements for capital
facilities planning are provided as follows:
1. "(3) A capital facilities plan element consisting of: (a) an
inventory of existing capital facilities owned by public entities,
showing the locations and capacities of the capital facilities. (b)
a forecast of the future needs for such capital facilities; (c) the
proposed locations and capacities of expanded or new capital
facilities.(d)at least a six-year plan that will finance such capital
facilities within projected funding capacities and clearly identify
sources of public money for such purposes;and(e)a requirement
to reassess the land use element if probable funding falls short of
meeting existing needs and to ensure that the land use element,
capital facilities plan element, and financing plan within the
capital facilities plan element are coordinated and consistent."
Capital facilities planning is a tool that deliberately brings to the surface for
public examination, the financial decisions necessary to maintain and improve
the physical attributes of the City. Capital improvement projects are to be based
upon the needs of the community and are to be consistent with, and promote
the City's Comprehensive PIan. Under the GMA and countywide planning
policy framework, urban growth begins in the unincorporated areas adjacent
to a city. Counties use rural rather than urban standards for housing and other
development. This practice has always left the expensive questions associated
Capital Facilities 28
with urbanization to the time of annexation before they are answered. The City
is the sole supplier of water and sewer utilities, emergency medical service,
and recreation services within the Urban Growth Area. It is anticipated this
will continue and no joint financing of urban services will occur in the near
fixture. No joint financing of urban level utilities and facilities is proposed
by the City. The planning coordination required by the GMA is viewed as a
continuing process and close coordination of land development standards for
the Urban Growth Area is an objective of that continuing process. When land
development standards are either common or consistent between the City and
County for the Urban Growth Area,relative future financial relief will be felt by
the City's capital facilities budget.
iW22%=_P-1110
Capital improvement projects are those major, non-reoccurring expenditures
that have a useful life of five years or more and a minimum cost of$25,000.
Specific types of capital improvement projects include one or more of the
following:
• Any acquisition of land for a public purpose;
• Any construction of a new facility such as a public building,
water lines;or play field, or an addition to, or expansion of
such a facility;
• Any non-recurring rehabilitation (i.e., something which
is infrequent and would not be considered annual or other
recurrent maintenance) or major repair of all or a part of a
building, its grounds, or a facility, or of equipment;
• Purchase of major equipment;
• Any planning, feasibility,engineering,or design study related
to an individual capital improvement project or to a program
that is implemented through individual capital improvement
projects.
The City of Pasco has a wide range of facilities which it funds to varying
degrees based upon budget capabilities and priorities. These are:
• storm drainage (collection system)
• major and minor arterial streets ( between major intersections)
• pedestrian and bicycle Iinkages and routes
('apical Facilitics 29
• potable water system (treatment, storage, distribution)
• sanitary sewer system (collection system, treatment system)
• park and open space system (including land support for
existing or future educational facilities)
• emergency response facilities (fire, paramedic,police)
• community beautification(directed toward land acquisition and
landscaping(with irrigation system)for any and all parts of the
City
• public building construction and remodeling (libraries; city
offices, community centers, maintenance buildings, etc.)
Special service districts and utility companies represent an additional range of
capital facilities.These are:
• schools
• public utility districts
• irrigation districts
1. The following criteria are the basis for decision-making concerning new
and proposed continuing capital budget items for the City of Pasco:
Public Safety: The project must identify a clear and immediate safety risk.
Requests from departments, which deal principally with public safety, such as
Fire and Police, do not automatically meet this standard. Another department,
such as Parks and Recreation, could have a project that addresses a clear and
immediate safety issue.
Public Health: Benefit to the environment and public health is a primary
consideration. This consideration is only used when public health is a critical
factor; a matter of necessity, rather than a matter of choice. For example all
water or sewer projects concern public health; however, this consideration
would be used only when urgent. Continual health hazards, however, would
make a water or sewer project virtually mandatory.
Legal Requirement: Many federal and state grants are contingent upon local
participation,and such intergovernmental agreements require legal compliance.
Court orders and judgments (e.g., annexation, property owner rights,
environmental protection); also represent legal requirements which may affect
a CIP project. Consideration must be given to both existing legal requirements
Capital Facilities 30
(e.g., federal/state stipulation that earmarked funds must be spent by a certain
date), and anticipated legal requirements (e.g., pending annexation which is
expected to be approved by the end of the year).
Related Projects: CIP projects in one category are essential to the success of
projects in other categories. In some instances,a street should not be developed
until a storm drain has been completed. Obviously, park development cannot
proceed until parkland has been acquired,but the development may also depend
upon the completion of street project to provide access to the park. In addition,
significant federal or state grants might be involved, and the City would be
required to provide its matching share or forfeit the grant. Related projects by
other agencies may affect a saving which should be pursued.
Consistency with Current Comprehensive Plan:A master plan for a specific
category of public facilities has long-term objectives set during the planning
process. City departments have an obligation to request CIPprojects that support
and implement the stated goals and objectives of the master plan. Consideration
should not be given here to any project that does nothing to actively implement
the plan, or adversely affects the plan.
Net Impact on Future Operating Budgets: The substantial cost impact of a
proposed CIP project on future operating budgets of the City is an important
factor in the City's decision to construct the project. In some cases, however, a
project may generate enough revenue to offset,or even exceed,future operating
costs(e.g.,water or sewer treatment plant, stadium, airport, etc.).
Other: There are additional priority factors that departments may include for
evaluation. Some of these additional factors for consideration could include
public support,level of service,cost savings to the City,and impact on economic
development.
. Plan For Capital Facilities _
There are at least three reasons to plan for capital facilities:(1)good management,
(Z) growth management,and(3)eligibility for grants and loans.
Good Management
Planning for major capital facilities and their costs enables City of Pasco
to:
a. Demonstrate the need for facilities and the need for revenues to pay for
them;
b. Estimate future operation/maintenance costs of new facilities that will
impact the annual budget;
Capital Facilities 31
c. Take advantage of sources of revenue (i,e., grants, impact fees, real
estate excise taxes)that require a CIP in order to qualify for the revenue;
and
d. Get better ratings on bond issues when the City borrows money for
capital facilities (thus reducing interest rates and the cost of borrowing
money).
Growth Management
Capital improvements plans are necessary in the comprehensive plan in
order to:
a. Provide capital facilities for land development that is envisioned or
authorized by the land use element of the comprehensive plan;
b. Maintain the quality of life for existing and future development by
establishing and maintaining standards for the level of service of
capital facilities;
C. Coordinate and provide consistency among the many plans for
capital improvements, including:
• Other elements of the comprehensive plan (i.e.,transportation and
utilities elements),
• Master plans and other studies of the local government,
• Plans for capital facilities of state and/or regional significance,
• Plans of other adjacent local governments,and
•Plans of special districts.
d. Ensure the timely provision of adequate facilities to support existing
populations and future development;
e. Document all capital projects and their financing (including projects
to be financed by impact fees and/or real estate excise taxes that
are authorized by the State of Washington Growth Management Act
(GMA)).
The CIP is the element that makes the rest of the comprehensive plan"real".
In reality, the CIF determines the quality of life in the community.
Eligibility for Grants and Loans
The State of Washington Department of Commerce's Public Works Trust
Capital Facilities 32
Fund requires that local governments have some type of CIP in order to
be eligible for grants and loans. Some other grants and loans have similar
requirements (i.e., Interagency for Outdoor Recreation), or give preference
to governments that have a CIF.
Revenue sources are of several types and are designed either for one specific
application or may be used for a variety of projects.As an example, sources of
grant money for transportation facility construction are dedicated to that single
general purpose.
State statues set out the powers local governments have for funding capital
and other projects. There are four generic types of local govemment project
funding: Taxes; Fees; Grants; and Dedicated Funds from State revenues. The
following is a description of funding sources.
Property Tax
Property tax levies are the most frequently used means of supporting operational
and maintenance expenses due to the reoccurring nature of both. It is also used
to meet general obligation bond debt service costs.
Under State law local governments are prohibited from increasing the property
tax levy more than the lesser of 1% or the implicit price deflator as of July of
the previous year.
General Obligation Bonds
There are two types of general obligation bonds. Those approved by the voters
and those limited in amount that may be approved by the elected body of the
county, city or special district, called councilmanic bonds.
Voter-approved bonds increase the property tax rate so that for a given
assessed value on a property, the owner will pay a higher percentage in taxes.
This increase in taxes collected across the properties of the affected districts
is exclusively dedicated to paying off the debt and interest of the money
borrowed under the authority of the approved banding measure. As assessed
property values increase, the bonds may be paid off in a shorter timeframe than
originally projected.Approval for general obligation bonds requires 60 percent
of the number of voters provided the voter turnout is at least 40 percent of the
turnout at the last previous general election.
Councilmanic bonds are different than voter-approved bonds because they do
not have associated with them the authority to raise taxes.Councilmanic bonds
must be paid off from the operating budget created with general tax revenues.
Lease-Purchase arrangements also fall in this general type of financing public
facilities.
Capital Facilities 33
The amount of local government debt allowable in the form of general
obligation bonds is limited to 7.5 percent of the taxable value of property in the
jurisdiction. This is divided so that a jurisdiction cannot use all of its bonding
capacity for one type of improvement. The total general obligation bonding
capability is divided as follows:2.5 percent general purpose use; 2.5 percent for
utility bonds, and; 2.5 percent open space and park facilities. If the jurisdiction
has an approved general purpose bond with unused capacity, as much as 1.5
percent of the 2.5 percent may be used as councilmanic bonds.
Real Estate Excise Tax
RCW 82.46 authorizes the collection of a real estate excise tax levy of .25
percent of the purchase price of real estate within the City, at the time of sale.
The legislature approved in the Growth Management Act an additional .25
percent excise tax that is dedicated to the support of the capital facilities of the
community. Presumably this added money is to help a community deal with
the "concurrency" requirements of the GMA. Concurrency is the requirement
that land development cannot occur unless an urban level of facilities and
services are provided at the time (concurrently)a land development is ready for
occupancy. The first .25 percent excise tax also was dedicated to the planning
and construction of urban services and facilities, but the two provisions differ a
little as illustrated in the following.
The first.25 percent of the real estate excise tax is for the following and includes
the items listed for the second .25 percent excise tax: The acquisition of parks
and recreation facilities, planning, acquisition, construction, reconstruction,
repair,replacement,rehabilitation or improvement of law enforcement facilities,
fire, protection facilities, trails, libraries, administrative and judicial facilities,
and water front flood control projects, and housing projects subject to certain
limitations.
The second .25 percent of the real estate excise tax and may be applied to:
The planning, acquisition, construction, repair, replacement, rehabilitation or
improvement of streets, roads, highways, sidewalks, street and road lighting
systems, traffic signals, bridges, domestic water systems; storm and sanitary
sewer systems,parks and recreation facilities.
Business and Occupation Tax
RCW 35.1 1 authorizes cities to collect this tax on the gross or net income of
businesses,not to exceed a rate of.2 percent.Revenue thus received may be used
forcapital facilities acquisition,construction,maintenance and operations.Voter
approval is required to initiate the tax or increase the tax rate to be applied
Local Option Sales Tax
Local government may collect a tax on retail sales of up to 1.1 percent, of
which .l percent can be used only for criminal justice purposes. Imposition of
this tax requires voter approval.
Capital Facilides 34
Utility Tax
RCW 35.21 authorizes cities to place a tax on the gross receipts of electricity,
gas, garbage, telephone, cable TV, water, sanitary sewer and storm water
management providers. The current rate is 8.5 percent.
Community Development Block Grant
Federal Department of Housing and Urban Development makes financial
assistance available through this program to local general purpose governments.
This money must be applied for by the local government and must be used for
eligible activities meeting the national objects of the program.
Community Economic Revitalization Board
The State Department of Trade and Economic Development provides low
interest loans and occasional grants to finance public sewer,water,access roads,
bridges, and other facilities in support of a specific private sector development
project which will trade goods and services outside of the State. One of the
objectives is to create one job per each $3000 of loan or grant money made
available.
Public Works Trust Fund Grant
The State Department ofTrade and Economic Development provides low interest
loans for capital facilities, planning, emergency planning and construction of
bridges, roads, domestic water, sanitary sewer, and storm water. Applicant
jurisdictions must have a capital facilities plan in place and must be levying
the original .25 percent real estate excise tax. Construction and emergency
planning projects must be for construction or reconstruction of existing capital
facilities only.Capital Improvement Planning projects are limited to streets and
utilities.
Special Purpose Districts
RCW 67.38.130 authorizes cultural arts, stadium/convention special purpose
districts with independent taxing authority to finance capital facilities. The
special district requires a majority voter approval for formation and has an
annual funding limit of$25 per$1000 of assessed valuation;these districts may
be formed across the borders of other governmental units.
Emergency Medical Services
The State authorizes$.50 per$1,000 assessed valuation property tax levy which
may be enacted by fire and hospital districts, cities, towns, and counties.
Fire Districts
The State authorizes a levy limit of$1.50 per $1,000 of assessed valuation for
fire and emergency medical response service.
Fire Impact Fees
RCW 82.0250-090 authorizes a charge (impact fee) to be paid by new
Capital Facilities 35
development for its fair share of the cost of the protection and emergency
medical service facilities required to serve the development. impact fees must
be used for capital facilities necessitated by growth, and not to correct existing
deficiencies in levels of service. Impact fees cannot be used for operating
expenses.
Park and Recreation Services Area
RCW 36.68.400 authorizes park and recreation service areas as junior taxing
districts forthe purpose offinancing the acquisition,construction,improvement,
maintenance or operation ofany park,senior citizen activity center,zoo,aquarium
and recreational facility. The maximum levy Iimit is $.15 per $1000 assessed
valuation. The Park and Recreation Service District can generate revenue from
either the regular or excess property tax levies and through general obligation
bonds, subject to voter approval.
User Fees and Program Fees
Fees or charges for using City owned property, facilities or programs, such as
swimming lessons.
Park Impact Fees
RCW 82.02.050.090 authorizes local governments to enact impact fees to fund
parks and recreational facilities necessary to serve new development. These
impact fees must be used for capital facilities necessitated by growth, and not to
correct existing deficiencies in levels of service or operating expenses.
School Im
RCW 82.02.050-090 authorizes local govemments to enact impact fees as ae
conditiort_ol_deyelaprri�-,nt aryLI a rrrcrrtionate sharc 4f"the cost to fund
school facilities that reasgnably benefit new development.
State Parks and Recreation Commission Grants
These State grants are for park capital facilities acquisition and construction,
and require a 50 percent local match.
Motor Vehicle Fuel Tax
RCW 82.36 authorizes this tax, which is administered by the State Department
of Licensing,and paid by gasoline distributors.Cities and counties receive 11.53
percent and 22.78 percent, respectively, of the motor vehicle fuel tax receipts.
Revenues must be spent for highway purposes including the construction,
maintenance and operation of city streets, county roads and State highways.
Local Option Fuel Tax
RCW 82.80 authorizes this countywide local option tax equivalent to 10
percent of the statewide motor vehicle fuel tax and a special fuel tax of 2.3
cents per gallon. Revenues are distributed back to the county and its cities on
a weighted per capita basis (1.5 for population in unincorporated areas and
Capital FacUides 36
1.0 for population in incorporated areas). Revenues must be spent for highway
purposes (construction, maintenance, operation).
Transportation Benefit District
RCW 35.21.225 authorizes cities to create transportation districts with
independent taxing authority for the purpose of acquiring, constructing,
improving, providing, and funding any city street,county road or state highway
improvement within the district.
Road Impact Fees
RCW 82.02.050.090 authorizes cities and counties to exact road impact fees
from new development for its fair share of the system improvement cost of
roads necessary to serve the development. Impact fees must be used for capital
facilities necessitated by growth, and not to correct existing deficiencies in
levels of Service. Impact fees cannot be used for operating expenses.
, Re
cow-Ay levying the twe en a wvishtcd per-eapift+asis(1.5 fe: population-in
Street Utility Charge
RCW 35.95.040 authorizes cities to charge for city street utilities, to maintain,
operate and preserve city streets. Facilities which may be included in a street
utility, including street lighting, traffic control devices, sidewalks, curbs,
gutters, parking facilities and drainage facilities. Households and businesses
may be charged a fee up to 50 percent of actual costs of construction,
maintenance and operations while cities provide the remaining 50 percent.
The fee charged to businesses is based on the number of employees and may
not exceed $2 per full-time employee per month. Owners or occupants of
residential property are charged a fee per household which may not exceed$2
per month.
National.Highway System Grants
The Washington State Department of Transportation awards grants for
construction and improvement of the National Highway System. In order to
be eligible projects must be a component of the National Highway System
and be on the Regional Transportation Improvement Plan.Funds are available
on an 86.5 percent Federal to a 13.5 percent local match, dependent upon the
proposed project's ranking is sufficiently high enough on the Regional TIP
list.
Capital Facilities 37
Surface Transportation Program Grants
This provides grants for road construction, transit capital projects, bridge
projects, transportation planning, and research and development.To be eligible,
a project must have a high enough ranking on the Regional TIP list. Fmids-are
not be cxwrided beyond 19991.
Federal Aid Bridge Replacement Program Grants
The Washington State Department of Transportation provides grants on a
statewide priority for structurally deficient or functionally obsolete bridges.
Funding is on an 80 percent Federal to 20 percent local match.
Federal Aid Emergency Relief Grants
This funding source is limited to restoration of roads and bridges on the federal
aid system which are damaged by natural disasters or catastrophic failures.
Funding is available at an 83.13 percent Federal to a 16.87 percent local
match.
Urban Arterial Trust Account Grants
The Washington State Transportation Improvement Board manages funding for
projects to alleviate and prevent traffic congestion. Project funding is an 80
percent Federal and a 20 percent local match.
Transportation Improvement Account Grants
The Washington State Transportation Improvement Board manages funding
for projects to alleviate and prevent traffic congestion caused by economic
development growth. Eligible projects should be multi-agency, multi-modal,
congestion and economic development related which are partially funded
locally. Funding is an 80 percent Federal to a 20 percent local match.
Sewer Districts/Users Fees
This is a special purpose district that must be established by the voters of the
affected area.Once established with an operating levy it may assess properties in
the district for operating and other expenses within approved limits and perform
all the duties and responsibilities related to the construction, maintenance,
and operation of sewage collection and treatment. The State authorizes cities,
counties and special purpose districts to collect fees from waste water generator.
Fees may be based upon the amount of potable water consumed or may be
flat rate fees. The revenue may be used for capital facilities or operating and
maintenance costs.
System Development Fees
The State authorizes a fee to connect to a sanitary sewer system based upon
the capital cost of serving the new connection.
Capital Facilities 38
Centennial Clean Water Fund Grant
The State Department of Ecology issues grants and Ioans for the design,
acquisition, construction and improvement of water pollution control facilities
and related activities to meet State and Federal requirements and protect water
quality. Future funding for this program cannot be reliably forecasted.
State Revolving Fund Loans
The State Department of Ecology administers low interest loans and loan
guarantees for water pollution control projects. Applicants must demonstrate
water quality need, have a facilities plan for water quality treatment, show
ability to repay a loan through a dedicated source of funding, and conform to
other State and Federal requirements.
Department of Ecology Grants
The State Department of Ecology grants to local governments for a variety of
programs related to solid waste,including Remedial Action Grants to assist with
local hazardous waste sites, Moderate Risk/Hazardous Waste Implementation
Grants to manage local hazardous waste, and Food and Yard Waste Composing
Grants.
Flood Control Special Purpose District
RCW 86.15.160 authorizes flood control special purpose districts with
independent taxing authority(up to a $.50 property tax levy limit without voter
approval), to finance flood control capital facilities.In addition, the district can,
with voter approval, use an excess levy to pay for general obligation dept. This
is unneeded in the Pasco urban growth area.
Storm Drain Utility Fee
The State authorizes cities and counties to charge a fee to support storm drain
capital improvements. The fee is usually a flat rate per month per residential
equivalency. Residential equivalencies are based on an average amount of
impervious surface. Commercial property is commonly assessed a rate based
on a fixed number of residential equivalencies.
Storm Drainage Payment In Lieu of Assessment
Revenues from this fund may be used for the construction, maintenance and/
or repair of storm drainage facilities, acquisition of property, or related debt
service.
Utility Revenue Bonds and Property Tax Excess Levy
See above for a general discussion of general obligation bonds, The amount of
local government debt for utility bonds is restricted by law to 25 percent of the
taxable value of property. Local government utilities tend to use bonds backed
by utility user fees rather than general obligation bonds.
Capital Facilities 39
ts Plan
T.......
�.�
The Capital Improvements Plan(CIP)supports the City ofPasco's Comprehensive
Plan. That CIP and amendments thereto is made a part of this Comprehensive
Plan by reference.
The referenced CIP is presented in three sections:
I. Introduction: Purpose,benefits, and methodology of the CIP.
II. Fiscal Policies: Statements of requirements and guidelines that are
used to finance the CIP.
III. Capital Improvements: List of proposed capital projects, including
project costs, revenues, and timing, as well as future operating
costs.
The total cost of Capital Improvement Projects for 2012—2017 is:
Cost
Tne4fF+a,~ility [i thrausan€i
General 16,605
Park 2,475
Street Overlays 6,880
Street Coonstruction 97,274
Water 26,707
Sewer 19,828
Process Water Reuse Facility 5,550
Storm Water 583
Irrigation 1,401
Studies/Master Plans 84�
Total L 178"151
During the annual budgeting cycle the budgeted amounts per type of
facility are changed to reflect the completion of some projects and the
addition of others.
The Benton-Franklin Council of Governments is the designated Regional
Transportation Planning Organization (RTPO) and Metropolitan Planning
Organization (MPO). It maintains the regional plans for all modes of
transportation and allocates federal transportation funds for local improvements.
That program is updated yearly and is incorporated in this plan by reference.
Capital Facilities 40
its. -
The City maintains a record of properties it has accumulated from gifts, tax
foreclosures, and purchases. The Planning Department has compiled a record
of properties called the PASCO PROPERTIES PROFILE.
The Properties Profile changes regularly as property is gained or sold by the City.
This management tool helps enable the City to use all its available resources
more effectively as it grows. This report may be viewed in the Planning
Department.
The City of Pasco is responsible for providing water and sewer service to the
community. The City operates two water filtration plants, a water distribution
and storage system, and a waste water collection system and treatment facility.
Other utilities are operated by other public and private providers. The City
utilities require expansion and maintenance which take resources.The following
Table No. 2,, shows how the demand for services has increased.
Genaral Statistics 20#6 2007 2008 � 2009 200 2011
fl ..e
Population Served (City) 47 510 50210 52190 54,531 5-8„300 61.000
City Area(sq. miles 33,6 03..6 33.6 33.4 33,E 33.6
except river)
ble Water
The delivery of safe drinking water is the most important utility service
the City provides. Potable water is a necessary component of urban level
residential, commercial _w
and industrial growth. The, =
City builds capacity into the.
water system for effective
fire suppression in structures
which is an important safety
measure. Pasco currently has
a very efficient storage and — —
distribution system which
includes all unincorporated
lands within the urban growth
area. The City water system
is highly sophisticated and
includes two water treatment plants,reservoirs,pump stations and pipelines that
serve the Pasco Urban Growth Area. Progress is being made through the City's
efforts to bring former private systems in previously unincorporated Pasco up
to American Water Works standards.
Capital Facilities 41
The City system includes two water filtration treatment plants and three water
reservoirs. The following is a list of key system water fixtures.
• Butterfield Water Treatment Plant—capacity 30 million gallons
per day
• Riverview Heights reservoir- 10 million gallons.
• Road 68 standpipe-2.7 million gallons (currently used for
irrigation water)
• Rd 68 Composite Tower - 2.5 million gallons
• Broadmoor Boulevard reservoir— 1 million gallons
• West Pasco Water Treatment Plant clear well - 1 million
gallons
The City water distribution system has been arranged into three(3) service
zones. Generally these service zones may be described as:
Service Zone 1: South of I- 182 and west of the railroad yard
Service Zone 2: East of the railroad yard, the southern portion
of the airport and a strip south of 1-182 between
Service Zone 1 and Service Zone 3
Service Zone 3: Generally north of 1-182 and encompassing
most of the north part of the city.
The City has been implementing the Comprehensive Water Service Plan with
facility improvements that have been made in recent years. That Plan and
amendments thereto is made a part of this Comprehensive Plan by reference.
The following Table No. 3 provides a statistical picture of the City's water
system.
Water 2006 T2007 1 2008 2009 2010 2011
Maine(miles) 288.81 291.75 298.42 301.60 306.11 309.38
fire Hydrants(no.) 1887 1906 1986 1997 2036 2069
Seances 15021 15208 15508 15748 16081 16305
Average Pressure (p.s.i.) 70 70 70 70 70 70
Number of Valves 6066 6129 6302 6369 6407 6540
Water Treatment Plant 24 24 24 24 30 30
Capaoty(mgd)
Water Treatment Plant 26.6 22.7 246 30 1 26 7 NiA
Peak Day Prod.(mgd) - - — —
Capital Facilities 42
Water 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
VyWer Trsetment Plant 109 114 11,5 12.1 13.4 NIA
Average Day Prod_tm9dl
Water Treatrnent Pf. 1.62 7,62 1.+62 1.62 1,62 1-62
siaraaf�Cap- (Mgd) I
Reaervair Capecity I 135 135 e 13.5 13 "a Y3.5 13.5
t;
Sewage Treatment
The City of Pasco sewage treatment facility was updated in 1999, am and is currently
operating at approximately ?f% 55% of capacity. The plant is capable of handling
a population of about x,,08 $0.600. The current City population is 50,21$ 61.00.
The Pasco UGA population is projected to reach 87,300 by the year 2027. Planning
is currently underway for determining a location of a second treatment facility. The
second treatment facility will provide additional capacity to cover the short fall and
future growth beyond the planning horizon. Funding for the facility will be through
the capital improvements process and will come from the sewer utility fund.
The City has a goal of extending municipal sewer to un-served portions of the city
and improve affected streets, providing for recovery of the cost over time as adjacent
properties choose to connect to sewer.This is being done through the local improvement
district(LID)process and on select streets in recently annexed neighborhoods without
LID's. This process enables the city to provide sewer service to areas that are lacking
service while at the same time upgrading the substandard county roads that have been
annexed.
The City under separate study has completed a Comprehensive Sewer Plan, That Plan
and amendments thereto is made a part of this Comprehensive Plan by reference. An
illustrated inventory of the sanitary sewer system is shown in Table No.5.
Sanitary Sewer 2006 2007 2008 1 2009 2010 2011
Mains lm{es) 206.5 2131 216.2 219.8 224.0 226:0
Number of Manholes 3656 3758 3819 3891 3972 4008
Number of Services 12023 12302 12488 12776 13195 13403
Force Main 5.52 5.52 5.52 I 5.52 5.52 5.52
Pump Stations 10 11 11 11 11 12
Sewage Treatment Plant 72000 72000 72000 80600 80600 80600
Capacity(Pop. Equtv)
Sewage Treatment Plant 3.2 1 3.1 3.3 316 3.9 N/A
Dally Treatment(mgd)
Storm Water
Storm water is handled in Pasco by the storm sewer system, on-site collection
and dissipation systems or grassy swales along roadways. The storm water
sewer system has been used in the older parts of the City to accept storm nm-
off from adjacent land developments as well as streets. In recent years the City
has been requiring development to mitigate the effects of storm water collection
at projects. This eliminates the need for an extensive storm sewer system.
Street drainage in newer areas is also accomplished in a similar fashion by the use
of catch basins and drain fields or grassy swales along the side of the street or by
Capital Facilities 44
collection ponds. The arid and often windy climate which evaporates moisture
quickly enables these methods to function effectively and avoids impacting the
waters of the Columbia River. It is anticipated the City of Pasco will continue
to require onsite storm water retention methods through the planning period and
beyond. Table No.b contains an inventory of the storm water system.
8t nn Water System 2Q08 2007 206—B 2009 2010 2011
Lanes -III€les 4� 4n 40 4C} 42 43
Catch Basins (no.) 2664 2738 2BO1 2878 3.089 3176
Mar, Doles 1229 1231 123.1 1231 1243 1252
EARra(Miles) en tvvrrs t�reirr 13.31 13.64 14.44 15.45 166 05 16.29
Milesl
a
L r
a. eurrmt-fiaeflitie!i to --t ztnd
need 6ar s s grrm-
School
....�L.o...1 63.
Public acilities.in the State of Washington are defined is cp'tn1 iI!ties
owned and operated by governmental entities and include school facilities
(RCW 82.02,090 FZJ), Thc-.Pasco Schocil_ istrict is the &g1erryi-no,t l etll i,
that provido gen,.ral eduction vi es(K-12)wi the 1'ajq Urban Cria t
Area, The School Diskkt VN.parcs ` i Plans including Ca ital Facility
!Jan-.Lt-q assist with planning for future scltooi facility neLdis. The.currept Capital
Facilities Riau {2011-?Q17) Kpyi+dK:g the coMMunia vyith the District's facility
and forecast needs for the next six years.
Capital Facilities 45
In4ccorda ze)xit capital ac' ities under the Grovwth Mgn agg=1 t x,
the School District Capital Facilities Plan contains the 1`nllowini elle
• The District's standard of service or educational oro�nstandards
which are based on pm am yM class size by grade s]af3,n a of
ciassroos, tykes of fagi1it es and otthg factors identited by the lei, t.
• M inyantecrofexJstin&opitg facilitic: owned by the District.
Shi3Wi11 the IOGa#pros and ca ac' of the facilities, bawd
District's standard of service.
• Future en-mllm_ent forecasts for elementary. middle. an4 h.
schools.
• A forgo5t of_ e futur eds for capital facilities and school sites based
on the Di gig's earollmenj projections.
• The u Dosed capacities of exnanded a new capital facilities fiver the
ne2q six years based on the inygntory of existing.facilities and die, standard
of service.
• The_Pot for nesded iGIcili igs god the plan for financing capitaj facilities
within pre-m gctej fWding capacities,
• A sql•►ool impact fee calculation jd9n*ing the amount sin lei f , ily and
er, should pay to rniti vats: the linl2acts newconst ry
_turn of single-f mil � ars_d multi-fanail homes has on the District.
The SchQ.Ql Distl-icf5i Capital acilities Plan projects student enrol ment w0f
increase to over 21,000 students by 2017a n increase of 1000 swdents over the
enrrllt?tent. To serve the forecasted increases in student enrol ti nt the,
District wilI creed to construct four nevv elementau schools.two middle schools
a d dd capNity fnr aMrgximately 1.600 high school students.
Financing for planned school facilities is explained in Section 6 of the CFP.
School capital facijitLes are financed through Oneral obligation bonds- State
Common School Construction Funds and impact or mitigatioxt fees.. I; ncral
obliption bonds are the DCknar}P source for capital imyrovemcntprgjects within
the ;3chool District. 'fhe n�obligation bonds = soften au rneroted with
Lmnding from the State Cgru off} School Construction ]~Salad.
The Gro%nth MORa ent Act authesrizes the Me of i act fees t
fundin for the constTUction of VubI ic school fac,iIities heeded to accommodate
increases lit studg3ij enjgflMMLdqg to new development in the comotnun.it►�.
Capital Facilities 40
Schgol impact fees are a mgans of addressing e . e is th
r v. ions have been made for schools and school ZLuWd§ as a RW Qf the
deyelgpmentpr-ocess. The CiryisrGauiredby law(RC 1 58,17110)todete[rrnine
w_hSIber or not ,provisio s have been made fttr sll e of public facilities.
including schools, wlaerr new sl [livisions are bein -reviewed fnr aanroval.
T.hg law 12Mhibits the city from approving a subdiyisior unless wr en#t- n.divas
shot afro riateroyisions Have been made for sche�ols and school grounds.
The Pasco School District has placed The Cily on notice ±Mjgh written
correspondence (letter dated 111112011) that the Datri€;t has quts€roun its
abili rle schools fnr the rnrnunit;� without-leguir ng development
a b ,01a to co ute to
mitigating the impacts oiew dex laptnent-on_thc__€,,bUol Ustem through
irtdiv_idoal review of new pJ#q addresses only paA of theslev;l Haan g ion
in the.Ciot DeveloRment can occur in any Mo of the communi�x on the
numem+us subadivisioas that have heart approved in Gast years as well as in,
am subdiyij igns ,School impact fees rather than individual mitigation wou.d
apply t_o all new resWentii deyelopmertf therelsy.ads ressirlg the rNuirement
to v®d hc� scho ourtds in h la` f L±er than
laiecemea] fashion.
DO Pasco &hgoL District NQ.1 Capital h'# ilities Play =1-2 l7 ;end any
subsgUWnt aMendments thereto is made a.nais-t Of thi§�mprehemiye OPliln by
f cUM of CFP is atta hod in Appendix
Essential public facilities are capital facilities typically difficult to site because
of potential adverse impacts related to size, bulk, hazardous characteristics,
noise, or public health and safety. Essential public facilities can be publicly
of privately owned and include, but are not limited to the following: Airports,
highways of state-wide significance, state or regional transportation facilities,
correctional institutions, solid waste handling facilities, sewage treatment
facilities, state educational facilities, mental health facilities, substance abuse
facilities, group homes, correctional work release facilities, juvenile care and
treatment centers, any and all facilities for incarceration and facilities identified
by the office of Financial Management consistent with RCW 36.70A.200.
The GMA precludes local comprehensive plans or development regulations
from prohibiting the siting of essential public facilities, (RCW 36.70A.200
Essential public facilities are listed as unclassified uses in the city's development
regulations. As such these uses are generally not restricted by zoning districts,
Non-0 ty Utilities 47
but due to their nature require extraordinary review through the special permit
review process prior to locating within the city. Unclassified uses are listed in
PMC 25.86.020 and include the facilities discussed above.
A few of the essential public facilities located in Pasco include, the Tri-Cities
Airport, the Basin Disposal solid waste transfer station, the Franklin County
jail,the Benton-Franklin Detox Center,the BNSF Classification yard,Columbia
Basin College and the Chevron Tank Farms.
The distinction between lands identified for public purposes, as shown on the
land use map contained in Appendix VIII, and essential public facilities can
create confusion.Table No. 7 below illustrates the distinction.
Distinguishing Public Purpose Lands from Essential Public Facilities
Public Purpose Lands Essential Pubh Facilities
Lands needed to accommodate 70=Facilities needed to provide public
public facilities. services and functions that are typically difficult
to site.
Lands needed to provide the full range
of services to the public provided by Those public facilities that are usually
government, substantially funded unwanted by neighborhoods, have unusual site
by government,contracted for by requirements, or other features that complicate
government,or provided by private the siting process.
entities to public service obligations.
Examples: Examples:
• Utility Corridors . Airports
• Transportation Corridors • Large-scale Transportation Facilities
• Sewage Treatment Facilities • State Educational Facilities
• Storm water Management • Correctional Facilities
Facilities • Solid Waste Handling Facilities&
• Recreation Facilities Landfills
Schools • Inpatient Facilities{Substance Abuse
• Other Public Uses Facilities, Mental Health Facilities&
Group Homes).
Non-City Utilities 48