Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-21-2008 Planning Commission Meeting Packet PLANNING COMMISSION - AGENDA REGULAR MEETING 7:00 P.M. February 21, 2008 I. CALL TO ORDER: II. ROLL CALL: Declaration of Quorum III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Dated January 17, 2008 IV. OLD BUSINESS: A. Special Permit Off-Street Parking Lot (Bill Robinson) (E. Lewis Street) (MF# SP 07-013) B. Special Permit Sun Willows Pavilion (IRI Sun Willows Association) (1825 Sun Willows Blvd) (MF# SP 07-014) (Applicant has withdrawn application) V. PUBLIC HEARINGS: None VI. WORKSHOP: A. None VII. OTHER BUSINESS: VIII. ADJOURNMENT REGULAR MEETING January 17, 2008 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman Todd Samuel. MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT Todd Samuel, Chairman Tony Schouviller Andy Anderson James Hay Joe Cruz David Little Ray Rose APPEARANCE OF FAIRNESS: Chairman Samuel read a statement about the appearance of fairness for hearings on land use matters. Chairman Samuel asked if any Commission member had anything to declare. No declarations were made. Chairman Samuel then asked the audience if there were any objections based on a conflict of interest or appearance of fairness questions regarding the items to be discussed this evening. There were no objections. ADMINISTERING THE OATH: Chairman Samuel explained that state law requires testimony in quasi-judicial hearings, such as held by the Planning Commission, be given under oath or affirmation and asked all those that wished to give testimony to stand and he would administer the oath. The oath was administered. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Commissioner Hay moved seconded by Commissioner Anderson the minutes of December 20, 2007 be approved as mailed. The Motion carried unanimously. OLD BUSINESS: -1- A. Special Permit Location of Wireless Communications Equipment on PUD Power Pole (Verizon Wireless) (6520 West Court Street) (MF# 07- 012 SP) Chairman Samuel introduced the project and turned the floor over to Dave McDonald. Staff provided a brief summary of the proposal and the issues discussed during the December 20th public hearing. The concerns voiced by the public, the Planning Commission members, and Staff included noise from generators in the equipment building, strobe lighting atop the utility pole, need for landscaping, need for dedication of additional right-of-way, the installation of curb, gutter, and sidewalk, and correcting drainage problems on 66th Place. To address these concerns, Staff provided 11 proposed conditions of approval. The Planning Commission reviewed the proposed conditions and stated that as written the conditions addressed their concerns. There was no further discussion. Commissioner Cruz moved to adopt the findings of fact and conclusion there from as presented by staff. Commissioner Rose Seconded the motion; motion carried unanimously. Commissioner Cruz moved the Planning Commission recommend approval of the special permit based on the adopted findings of fact and conclusions there from with conditions of approval as provided by Staff. Commissioner Hayes seconded the motion; motion carried unanimously. Chairman Samuel noted that the Planning Commission does not ultimately approve or disapprove projects. The Commission simply provides a recommendation to the City Council based on the record from the public hearing. PUBLIC HEARINGS: Chairman Samuel briefly discussed the hearing process and set a 10 minute time limit on presentations and comments from the public. Commission Cruz suggested that because the majority of the audience was in attendance for the second item on the agenda that item B be heard first. Chairman Samuel and other Commissioners agreed and so item B was heard first. -2- B. Special Permit Sun Willows Pavilion (IRI Sun Willows Association) (1825 Sun Willows Blvd) (MF# SP 07.014) Chairman Samuel read the master file number and asked staff for a report. Staff stated that notice of the hearing was published in the newspaper and mailed to surrounding property owners. Staff provided an overview of the proposed project and its location. The special permit was requested by the operator of the Sun Willows Golf Course, which is owned by the City. The proposal is for 60ft x 40ft open air pavilion to be used for golf tournaments, BBQ's and other similar events. Staff explained that golf courses in all zones require a special permit. The proposed structure is intended to be permanent, and the roof line would be required to match the roof line of the club house currently on the property. Debbie Peterson, 7413 NE Cape Horn Road, Concrete, WA, representing IRI Golf Group, leaser of the Sun Willows Golf Course was present to speak in favor of the application. Ms. Peterson stated that the goal is to increase tournament business at the golf course. Currently, the golf course can accommodate tournaments of about 90 people. She stated that IRI would like to increase the capacity of the facility in order to accommodate up to 120 golfers, also, IRI would like to eliminate traffic in the cafe area during tournaments for the non- tournament players. Ms. Peterson stated that much thought was put in to deciding the location for the proposed structure, and due to proximity to food service and restrooms the proposed site was determined to be the best site for the facility. Also, the new facility will compliment existing development on the golf course. The proposed location of the structure will eliminate a portion of the 1 of 2 practice greens on the golf course. Currently, the golf course holds similar events to what is being proposed in the patio area of the golf club. IRI has agreed to pay for the cost of the structure, and eventually upon termination of the lease agreement the City will retain ownership of the structure. Chairman Samuel opened the public hearing to comments from the public. Larry Bafus, 102 Carmargo Lane, Pasco, WA, current president of the Sun Willows Homeowners Association. Mr. Bafus stated residents of Sun Willows had several concerns. First, Mr. Bafus addressed concerns regarding the impact of the proposal to the entrance of the neighborhood. The residence of Sun Willows believe the entrance to their community is an asset and do not want to see it impacted by an unsightly structure. Second, were noise concerns due to use of the pavilion for non-golf related functions. Mr. Bafus was concerned with the noise of loud speakers as they travel across the golf course and into the residential areas, especially along the first fairway. Third, was a traffic concern -3- due to increased pedestrian, golf cart, and vehicular traffic in excess of normal usage and could potentially impede residents and emergency equipment from getting in and out of the neighborhood. The fourth issue of concern was in regards to use of the golf course for none golf related events. He stated that the main purpose of the golf course is for golfing and not special event parties such as weddings. The fifth concern was the existing restroom facilities. He felt that the existing facilities were not sufficient to accommodate additional patrons from increased capacity. The sixth issue of concern was the location of the proposed structure. Elizabeth Deane, 103 Willow Circle, Ms. Deane stated that she was opposed to the proposed location of the pavilion. She stated that she would like to see it moved on the other side of the existing clubhouse. She was concerned with the noise the consumption of alcohol and impact on property values? Ralph Wood, 110 Berkshire Lane. Mr. Wood stated he had sent a letter regarding his concerns to the mayor. He stated he was opposed to the proposed location of the pavilion. Mr. Wood was also concerned that if the golf course had more tournaments, the local residence would have fewer opportunities to use the course. He believes the existing restrooms were not adequate for more tournaments. He also stated that he would like to see additions attached to the west side of the existing facility instead of a new detached structure. Dee Stack, 145 Willow Circle. Ms. Stack complemented the Planning Commission and the City on development of the Sun Willows golf course. She believes good decisions have been made regarding the golf course up until now. Her main concern was how the City could consider approving a development on city property that would not be approved elsewhere. She believes that the proposed development would not be approved for the Red Lion or Best Western or anyone else. She stated that the City needs to live up to its own standards. Don Anderson, 212 Willow Court. Mr. Anderson stated he did not like the location of the proposed structure at the entrance to the neighborhood or the loss of a practice green. He stated there were two alternate locations that would be acceptable. One would be to place the structure north of the clubhouse where the cart storage is, and the second would be to build an addition that raps around the east side of the existing clubhouse. Renee Finke, 102 Augusta Lane. Ms. Finke was concerned with the noise impacts from the proposed facility. She stated that noise could be heard from activities taking place at the existing clubhouse from the back porch of her home. She did not believe that the proposed site was appropriate for an open air structure. Dale Bechtel, 109 Willow Circle. Mr. Bechtel stated he is the second closest residence to the proposed pavilion location. He was concerned about possible noise due to the close proximity to his home, about 230 feet. -4- Gail Womack, 139 Willow Circle. Ms. Womack stated that everybody loves the golf course. She encouraged the golf course to be a good neighbor. She also stated that she was not opposed to the pavilion, just opposed to its proposed location. Thomas Halazon, 105 Augusta Lane. Mr. Halazon stated he was not a golfer, and that he moved into the neighborhood seeking a quiet and safe neighborhood. He had no concerns with the golfing associated with the new facility. His main concerns were with the after hours noise that would be generated by the proposed facility. His concern was that the pavilion would be rented for parties that would run late into the night. Beverly Fink, 106 Innisbrook Lane. Ms. Fink concerned the proposed facility would not be well maintained while being located at the very beautiful entrance to her subdivision. Duane Taber, 102 Tamarron Ln. Mr. Taber stated he was the Chairman of Park Board. He spoke on his own behalf. He stated that the proposal was a problem. He stated that the leaser has done a good job handling the golf course and wanted to see them around and viable for a long time. He thought the structure being proposed was not any better than a hay barn. He felt that the City needed to really take its time in the development of the golf course and build something nice the community could enjoy, not something cheap. Beverly Fink, 106 Innisbrook Lane. Ms. Fink wanted to point out that when other structures have been built in this area the city has maintained very strict regulations. Others who have built in this area have been held to very high standards such as the Best Western. Chairman Samuel closed public hearing after three calls for additional public testimony. Commissioner Cruz asked to hear IRI respond to the public concerns. this Debbie Peterson 7413 NE Cape Horn Road, Concrete, WA. Ms. Peterson stated the pavilion will not be a temporary structure. Most of the events that would be taking place at the pavilion already exist today, and the goal is to make them available to more residence of the community. Ms. Peterson stated that the facility could be used for non golf related events, but that is not its main purpose. The new facility is intended to benefit the entire community not just outside tournament patrons. IRI will not be marketing or promoting the pavilion for non-golf events, but it would be available for community members for special events when not in use for golf related events. IRI does have rules and regulations by which it must abide related to the use of their liquor license, so all events would be managed accordingly. Chairman Samuel asked Ms. Peterson to address concerns with noise. -5- Ms. Peterson stated that noise would not be significantly different from what is currently occurring on the patio. The events the facility is for are not loud events. The pavilion would mostly be used after all the golfing is done for awards ceremonies. There will be a PA system, but there is already one in use on the patio. There were two main reasons for not placing the pavilion in parking lot, one was that it would eliminate parking, and the second was the accessibility to food service and restrooms. Chairman Samuel asked that Ms. Peterson address concerns regarding lack of restrooms. Ms. Peterson stated that presently when there are large events at the golf course and the bathroom facilities are not over used. And that in cases were there are more than 150 people present port-a-potties are brought in, on a day by day bases depending on need. Chairman Samuel asked Ms. Peterson to address concerns regarding parking near the proposed pavilion. Ms. Peterson stated that no one will need to park in front of the pavilion, even for loading and unloading, because the pavilion will be accessed through the clubhouse. Parking will be in the main parking lot, and most patrons will already be at the clubhouse having played in a tournament. Chairman Samuel requested comments from the Commissioners. Commissioner Cruz asked staff if there was any additional information that needed to be considered. Staff pointed out that several emails had been received (placed on the bench for Commissioners) and should be considered part of the record. Addressing concerns about visual aspects of the structure, Staff stated the pavilion roof would be required to be designed to match the existing clubhouse facilities in shape color and texture. It was pointed out that these types of structures would be and have been approved in other areas. In commercial zones these types of structures could be approved without any review by the Planning Commission or City Council. A pavilion was recently approved for a fast food restaurant in front of. There are two similar pavilions in the City. They house the farmer's market downtown. Staff the occupancy load for this type of structure would be 160 people, and that according to the building Inspector would require 1 toilet, 1 urinal, and 1 sink for the men; and 2 toilets and 1 sink for the women. Staff had no other comments, except that as with the case with the Verizon Wirless facility, noise could be mitigated by requiring some type of sound wall on -6- the east end of the building. Also, conditions could be added to restrict the hours of operation of the pavilion. Commissioner Cruz clarified that in the case of Verizon the Commission specified that testing the generator could not occur outside of normal operating hours. Staff confirmed that Verizon was restricted to testing the generators between 8am and Spm on days other than Saturday and Sunday. Staff suggested that a condition could be added to restrict operation of the pavilion to no later than 8:00pm. Commission Anderson stated that minimally operation hours need to be restricted. He also pointed out that the City has a very strict noise ordinance available to the public if ever an event got out of hand. He would prefer to see activities restricted to Golf related events. Commission Cruz stated the proposed location was not good and felt the existing restroom facilities were severely limited. He thought the putting green was a nice feature of the course and did not want to see it eliminated. He felt that requiring the pavilion to be located in the far NW corner of the parking lot was not reasonable, but allowing it in the NE corner of the clubhouse would be a good compromise. He also supports what Commissioner Anderson said regarding noise. Commissioner Rose agreed that the proposed location was not appropriate and that the design of the pavilion was unimaginative. Commissioner Little was concerned that adding the pavilion would burden the use of the restroom facilities. Commissioner Hay agreed with Commissioner Anderson that the pavilion needed to be limited to golf related activities and operation during daylight hours. Chairman Samuel stated that IRI is doing a good job of managing the golf course. Also, that he is a big supporter of growth and economic development. However, he felt that due to proximity to residence, impacts to parking, and noise impacts that the pavilion was a good idea but not the right location. He wanted to see the pavilion moved to the north side of the club house. Ultimately it was a good idea, but not a good location. Commissioner Anderson moved to close hearing and schedule it for deliberations, conclusion, and adoptions of findings of fact for February 21, 2008. Commission Hayes seconded the motion. -7- Staff suggested the meeting be continued to next month to allow the Parks Director an opportunity to provide further comment on why the proposed location was picked for the pavilion. Staff requested direction regarding what daylight hours meant. Commissioner Anderson stated that the condition should simply state consistent with normal golf course operation. Commission Cruz stated that the condition should limit use of the pavilion to uses consistent with the golf course. Commissioner Anderson moved to close the public hearing and schedule deliberations, adoption of findings of fact, conclusions therefrom, and recommendation for February 21, 2008. Commissioner Anderson seconded the motion. The motion was unanimously to approve. Chairman Samuel declared a five minute break. Chairman Samuel called the meeting back to order. A. Special Permit Off-Street Parking Lot (Bill Robinson) (E. Lewis Streetl (MF# SP 07-013) Chairman Samuel read the master file number and asked staff for a report. Staff stated that notice of the hearing was published in the newspaper and mailed to surrounding property owners. Staff provided an overview of the proposed project and its location. Staff explained the applicant's need for the additional parking area and explained that the subject parcel, Flea Market and surrounding areas were annexed into the City in 1994. The applicant is requesting approval of offsite parking lot. In review of the proposal Staff identified eight issues for consideration including dust control, allowable development on the parking lot, protection of existing utilities, compliance with development standards, pedestrian safety crossing Lewis Place, traffic flow, and the potential need for a lease between applicant and city. With respect to utilities staff explained the property has benefited from fire hydrants in the area, and typical when development occurs the property owner's are required to pay their far share of the costs of development of the system. This property has not paid any fees associated with development of the water system in this area. Currently, curb and gutter exist to the east of the subject parcel. There is a need for this infrastructure to be extended thru the length of this property. Staff also stated traffic circulation impacts could be mitigated by reversing the exit and entrance of the parking lot. This would help eliminate conflicts of having to turn left across traffic possible causing backups. -8- Staff also explained pedestrian safety needs to be addressed because currently there are no cross walks or signage of any kind along Lewis Place, from the proposed parking lot to the flea market. Chairman Samuel stated he recalled a City Council meeting were neighbors of the flea market complained about parking at flea market and garbage from flea market patrons being left on there properties. He asked Staff if this parking lot would help alleviate some of the concerns for the citizens. Staff responded that the parking lot may or may not help the traffic issue. The traffic problem extends down East Lewis Place to the intersection with E Lewis Street (Heritage Bvld). Commissioner Little asked if there would be any ramifications to permitting an unimproved parking lot particularly as it relates. how the City deals with Churches and other similar uses. Staff responded by stating that churches require individual special permit review, and are typically located in residential areas and are required to be fully improved. Staff suggested the proposed parking lot could be considered an interim type use that could be transitioned into a more permanent use as allowed in the C-3 zone in the future. Commissioner Little asked that if this proposal was considered, could a condition be added requiring additional review in 5 or 10 years. Staff stated that the Planning Commission certainly had the option. Commissioner Cruz asked Staff how the parking lot would be affected if the city needed to use the right-of-way. Staff noted that this year Public Works was planning on boring under Highway 12 to extend sewer to the industrial properties to the north side of the highway. To do this they will need a bore hole and a place for machinery, which would use a portion of the right-of-way. However, once the work is complete the right-of- way would no longer be needed by Public Works. Commissioner Rose asked Staff if most businesses were required to have a certain amount of parking and if the flea market was providing any on site parking. Staff stated that yes the Flea market has parking, and the applicant could address that in more detail. Bill Robinson, 10120 Argent, Pasco. Explained the lot in question has been empty for years and has used for illegal dumping for the last ten years. He constantly has to clean it up. Trucks have also used the site for a turnaround -9- for many years which has created dirt roads on the parcel. Mr. Robinson explained the Flea Market has about 12 acres of parking and is open 35 days a year. The existing parking is sufficient for 30 days. Mr. Robinson stated he would like to control the dumping on the parcel by fencing it and also using it for overflow parking. The parcel would be used for overflow parking only and not on a daily basis. He stated he is willing to pay the $15,000 for curbing and $6,000 for water hook-up if he can use the parcel for parking. Commissioner Cruz asked is there was any problems with the need for franchise agreement. Mr. Robinson's stated that use of the right-of-way for boring is not in issue. He will simply re-grade and gravel the area once boring is complete. He noted that he originally thought his property incorporated the right-of-way area. Commissioner Cruz asked if he was ok with franchise agreement and maintaining site. Mr. Robinson stated yes because he already maintains the site. Chairman Samuel opened the public hearing. Bill Gordon, 204 Willow Court. Stated he owns property south of flea market and supports proposal. Chairman Samuel closed the public hearing. Chairman Samuel wanted to know what the commissioners thought would be reasonable time period for granting the special permit. Commissioner Cruz stated that five years would be reasonable. Commissioner Little was concerned that approving this would allow similar type developments in the community. Mr. Robinson stated he would only use the lot on Sundays from 12 to 3 when the primary parking lot is full. He mainly wants to fence the area to control it and keep the site clean. Commissioner Anderson stated that he didn't believe landscaping was needed for this proposal. He did want to see a condition added changing the traffic pattern as suggested by Staff. Commissioner Cruz stated that requiring that this proposal be reviewed again in 5 years was appropriate and would helps alleviate concerns of full compliance with development standards. At the time of review, a determination could be made regarding additional requirements. Chairman Samuel asked Staff if the City would have an issue with fencing the property. la Staff stated no, fencing is something that is allowed to protect property. Staff did request direction on requirements for pedestrian safety. Commissioner Anderson stated that pedestrian safety needs to be referred to City Engineer for direction. He thought that minimally a cross walk will have to be installed. Chairman Samuel did not believe landscaping was need at this point. He felt that when the permit was re-visited in 5 years compliance with additional standards could be considered. For this proposal placing the curb and gutter and fencing the property would be real benefit to city. Commissioner Cruz asked what would happen if franchise agreement could not be reached. Staff stated that the applicant would not be able to proceed with development of the parking lot. Commissioner Cruz asked that if a franchise agreement is not completed will Mr. Robinson still have access to property. Staff stated that he would. Typically, driveways are at least 20ft wide paved aprons. And Staff suggested that paved aprons for access be required for this proposal. Bill Robinson stated that if a franchise agreement is not granted and he cannot use right-of-way the project dies. He will leave the lot as it is, grown over with tumble weeds. Commissioner Little made a motion to close the public hearing and schedule it for deliberations, adoption of findings of fact, conclusions therefrom, and recommendation for February 21, 2008. Commissioner Anderson seconded the motion. The motion was unanimously approved. WORKSHOP: A. Comprehensive Comprehensive Plan Volume II (City of Pasco) Plan Update (Citywide) (MF# CPA 06-0011 Chairman Samuel asked staff for a report. Staff provided a description of the document that was before the commission and brief history of the process to this point. The City's Comprehensive Plan consists of two documents. The first which was reviewed last year contains goals and policies. The second, is the supporting elements that provide the required inventories and background information that support the goals and policies. Staff provided a summary of each chapter in the document and the 41 changes being proposed. Staff noted that comments from the public were reviewed and incorporated into the updated document. Margaret Schutz, 2308 N RD 44, commented on meeting with Staff and was in agreement with Staff's comments and recommendations for changes regarding the land use map. Staff continued to summarize the different chapters of the comprehensive plan. Staff requested the Planning Commission schedule a public hearing to review the Comprehensive Plan. Staff also stated that the City was still waiting on the County to finalize the UGA Boundary, which would probably be completed in late February. Staff was directed to schedule a public hearing for January 31, 2007 for review of the Comprehensive Plan. The majority of Planning Commission stated that they would be able to make that date. OTHER BUSINESS: NONE Commissioner Anderson moved to adjourn the meeting. Commissioner Hayes seconded. With no further business the Planning Commission was adjourned at 9:23 pm. Respectfully submitted, David McDonald, Secretary 42 REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION MASTER FILE NO: SP 07-013 APPLICANT: Bill Robinson HEARING DATE: 01/17/2008 10120 Argent ACTION DATE: 2/21/08 Pasco, WA 99301 BACKGROUND REQUEST: SPECIAL PERMIT: The use of a vacant lot as off-site parking for the Pasco Flea Market. (Robinson, MF# 07-013 SP) 1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Legal: A portion of the southeast quarter of the northwest quarter of section 27, township 9 north, range 30 east, W.M., Pasco, WA, described as follows; begging at southwest corner; then north along the west line 358.05'; then southeast 512.02' to the south line; then west along the south line 363.39' to the point of begging. Less a portion of PSH#3 parcel 5-565 by condemnation SC 12053. General Location: The subject parcel is located across East Lewis Place from the Pasco Flea Market. Property Size: Approximately 24,725.80 sq. ft. or 0.568 acres. 2. ACCESS: The site has access from E. Lewis Place. 3. UTILITIES: Only City water is available to the site, and is located in the Lewis Street Right-of-Way. 4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The subject property is bordered on the northeast side by Highway 12, on the south side by E. Lewis St., and the west side by a vacant parcel zoned C-3. The parcel south of Lewis St. is the location of the Pasco Flea Market and is zoned C-3. Highway 12 is bordered on the northeast side by the City boundary. 5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Policy ECON-3-C suggests that sufficient and attractive off-street parking facilities be provided. This policy recognizes that the primary function of streets is for the movement of traffic and not the parking of vehicles. 6. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: This proposal has been issued a determination of non-significance in accordance with review under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), Chapter 43.21(c) RCW. 7. History: The properties containing the Pasco Flea Market were annexed into the City in 1994. The Pasco Flea Market was in existence several years prior to the annexation of the subject area. Over the years the flea market has grown in popularity and size, thus necessitating additional parking facilities. During most of the operating season existing parking is sufficient to accommodate the parking demands of the flea market; however, around 15-20 times a year there is a shortage of parking for the flea market, and thus necessitating an over flow parking area. ANALYSIS The applicant is proposing an off-site overflow parking lot for the Pasco Flea Market to be used a maximum of 20 times a year. Pursuant to PMC § 25.86.020 Off-site parking lots are considered an unclassified use as long as they are less than 500 feet from the building or in this case the use they are intended to serve and can be allowed in any zone subject to a Special Permit. Also, PMC § 25.78.090 provides development standards for all parking lots. As part of this review process the applicant is requesting relief from portions of these standards including surfacing, landscaping, and lighting and is seeking to be classified as a special events parking lot under the provisions of PMC § 25.78.100. PMC § 25.78.100 identifies sports fields and the Edgar Brown Stadium as eligible facilities for special event parking lots. Under the special permit review criteria however the Planning Commission may review the proposed application for appropriate conditions that may or may require full improvements to the parking lot. Without the approval of the parking lot the applicant was planning on fencing and graveling his property to control weeds and to eliminate the dumping problem on his parcel. In review of this proposal Staff has identified eight (8) issues for consideration by the Planning Commission: 1) dust control; 2) allowable development on site; 3) protection of utility poles and down guys from damage by vehicles; 4) compliance with development standards for parking lots; 5) safe crossing for pedestrians across Lewis Street; 6) the 2 installation of public facilities, 7) traffic flow through the new parking lot; and 8) the potential need for a lease between the applicant and the City. First, the building official has commented that dust must be controlled at all times on the proposed site. The Building Official has stated that the most acceptable methods for dust control are paving the site, graveling the site, or have an acceptable water source available 24 hours a day 7 days a week. In this case the applicant has proposed to gravel the entire site. Second, the building official has stated that the site must remain undeveloped unless appropriate permitting is issued. The concern is that the site would be developed for uses other than parking. As proposed the only development to occur is the fencing and graveling of the site. Any development beyond this would be outside of the scope of this special permit and would require additional review. Third, the Franklin PUD has asked that their utility poles and down guys be protected from damage by vehicles. Typically, these facilities would be located within the required landscaped area of a parking lot, which would be protected by border barricades; however, the applicant is requesting relief from the landscaping requirements due to the lack of water on site and the limited use of the site. Staff would suggest that barricades or bollards be required to protect all PUD facilities. Fourth, in general parking lots are required to comply with the standards of PMC § 25.78.090 Parking Lot Standards. In this case the applicant has stated that the proposed parking is similar in nature to Special Event Parking Lots as identified in PMC § 25.78.100, and as such should be exempt from Parking Lot Standards. The applicant has requested relief from the requirements for surfacing, borders and barricades, landscaping, and lighting. For surfacing the applicant has proposed to gravel the entire site instead of paving the site. For borders and barricades the applicant has proposed a fence along the property lines instead of curbing around the perimeter of the parking lot. The applicant has proposed no landscaping for this site due to the lack of water service to the site. The only need for water service would be for landscaping. If the applicant just fenced his lot and graveled it to prevent dumping there would be no need for landscaping. The planning commission will need to determine whether or not landscaping should be required if the proposal is recommended for approval. If landscaping is not require it should be kept in mind the property still benefits from the existing water line and nearby fire hydrants. Even if the landscaping is not required the 3 applicant should be contributing toward the cost of the fire protection by paying the footage and area charges for water. The applicant has also proposed no lighting for this site because the parking lot will only be used during daylight hours. Fifth, the proposed seasonal parking lot will be located across E. Lewis Place from the Flea Market. There are currently no crosswalks or signage on this portion of E. Lewis Place to identify where pedestrians can cross the street. The Planning Commission may need to consider pedestrian safety in any recommendation on the parking lot. Sixth, the development of all property carries with it the obligation to install or complete necessary infrastructure improvements. These improvements include curb & gutter and sidewalk. Currently the site is lacking the necessary curb and gutter. If the applicant's request is to be approved installing curb and gutter should be a condition. Currently, curbing exist along E. Lewis Place to the southeast of the subject parcel. Staff recommends the applicant be required to extend the existing curbing approximately 375 feet to the western property line of the subject parcel as a condition of approval for this permit. The curbing will aid in controlling driveway access, channel drainage and properly defining the road way. Seventh, the applicant has submitted a traffic circulation plan that Staff would suggest needs additional consideration. The applicant has proposed traffic enter the site at the western most corner of the site circulate through the parking lot and exit the site at the eastern most corner of the site. Because the majority of the traffic is either coming from or heading to the west Staff suggests traffic flow can be improved if vehicles entered the site from the eastern end and exit from the western end. This would reduce the conflicts and back ups associated with left hand turns in front of exiting traffic. Finally, upon review of the proposed site plan it appears the applicant is including some street right-of-way in his proposed parking lot. Private use of public right-of-way is generally not permitted. Excess right-of-way can be vacated or can be used thought a right-of-way license agreement with the City. The right-of-way currently can not be considered for vacation because a large portion of it will be needed some time this year for a bore pit to extend sewer to the east side of Highway 12. Any use of the right-of-way by the applicant will require a license agreement. INTIAL STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT 4 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 located in a C-3 zone. 2. Adjoining properties to the south and west are zoned C-3. 3. The subject site is currently vacant. (A billboard and PUD power pole are located on the site.) 4. The applicant had planned to fence and gravel his property to control weeds and dumping. 5. The right-of-way bordering the site is lacking curb, gutter and sidewalk. 6. Water service is available in East Lewis Place. 7. Fire hydrants are located nearby the property. 8. There is no signage or traffic control devices related to pedestrians in the area of the proposed parking lot. 9. The proposed parking lot is located across the street and north of the Flea Market. 10. The Pasco Flea Market existed at it's current location several years prior to annexation into the City of Pasco. 11. The Pasco Flea Market has increased in size and popularity to necessitate additional parking. 12. The proposed parking lot is considered an off-site parking lot. 13. The proposed overflow parking lot will be used no more than 20 times in any given year. 14. The applicant's site plan includes public right-of-way. 15. The portion of the public right-of-way between the applicant's property and the paved portion of E Lewis Place will be needed by the City for a large bore pit for the extension of a major sewer line. CONCLUSIONS BASED ON STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT Before recommending approval or denial of a special permit the Planning Commission must develop findings of fact from which to draw its conclusion based upon the criteria listed in P.M.C. 25.86.060. The criteria are as follows: 1) Will the proposed use be in accordance with the goals, policies, objectives and text of the Comprehensive Plan? 5 The proposed use will be in accordance with the goals, policies, objectives, and text of the Comprehensive Plan. 2) Will the proposed use adversely affect public infrastructure? The proposed development will not adversely affect public infrastructure. The applicant will be required to install curb and gutter the length of the right-of-way fronting the subject parcel. 3) Will the proposed use be constructed, maintained and operated to be in harmony with existing or intended character of the general vicinity? The surrounding area is used as the Pasco Flea Market. The proposed parking lot will provide needed overflow parking approximately 20 days a year. The proposal will be in harmony with the surrounding uses. 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 P No development other than clearing, grading, and fencing will be allowed on the subject parcel. Use of the subject parcel as an overflow parking lot will not discourage development of permitted uses on property in the general vicinity or impair value thereof. 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 proposed parking lot is adjacent to Highway 12 which creates more noise, vibrations, traffic etc than the proposed parking lot, which will be used a maximum of 20 times a year. 6) Will the proposed use endanger the public health or safety if located and developed where proposed, or in anyway will become a nuisance to uses permitted in the district? The proposed parking lot will not endanger public health or safety by providing safe crossing facilities for pedestrians as they enter the Flea market from the parking lot. Also, use of the parcel as a parking lot 6 will help the owner maintain the site clean and free of weeds to prevent the creation of a nuisance. RECOMMENDATION MOTION for Findings of Fact: I move to adopt findings of fact and conclusions there from as contained in the staff report under Master File # SP 07-013. MOTION for Recommendation: I move based on the findings of fact and conclusions there from the Planning Commission recommend the City Council grant a special permit to Bill Robinson for the location of a offsite parking lot on the north side of East Lewis Place, across from the Pasco Flea Market with conditions as listed in the staff report under Master File # SP 07-013. (Proposed) Approval Conditions (1) The special permit is personal to the applicant; (2) The special permit shall be for a period of five years from the date of approval. The applicant must re-apply for a special permit before the expiration of the five year period. (3) The applicant shall provide safe crossing across East Lewis Place consistent with the requirements of the City of Pasco's Public Works Department and or the City Engineer. (4) The applicant shall redesign the traffic circulation to provide entrance into the site at the eastern end of the site and exiting at the western end of the site. (5) The applicant shall provide curbing or similar type protection for all Franklin PUD facilities within the applicant's property. (6) The applicant shall install curb and gutter, consistent with city standards, the length of the subject area beginning at the existing curb and gutter located east of the subject parcel and ending at the most western boundary of the subject parcel. (7) The applicant shall obtain a franchise agreement with the City of Pasco prior to use of any excess right-of-way for parking. (8) The applicant's use of any right-of-way authorized by franchise agreement must not interfere with the city's use of the right-of- way for utility work. The city shall not be responsible for 7 replacement of any gravel, paving or fencing that may be removed by the city for utility work. (9) The applicant must hard surface the entry driveways a minimum of 27 feet from the back of the curb (10) The parking lot must be kept clean of weeds and debris at all times. (11) The parking lot shall be for intermittent day time use limited to 12-15 days per year for over flow Flea market parking only. (12) No vehicles, trailers, recreational vehicles, equipment, merchandise, or material of any can be stored in the parking lot. (13) The special permit shall be null and void if a building permit for the fencing and other improvements required herein has not been obtained by February 21, 2009. 8 • Item: Special Permit Parking Lot Vicinity Applicant: Bill Robinson N Map File #. SP 07-013 \ � r ON. r s x r . _ SITES E LEWS STa- AL •J E. - Land Item: Special Permit Parking Lot Use Applicant: Bill Robinson N Map File #: SP 07-013 Industrial Vacant SITE E LEWIS ST Vacant Flea Market �sA� Zoning Item: Special Permit Parking Lot Applicant: Bill Robinson x Map File #: SP 07-013 c, County C"3 SITE 9L 72 E LEWIS ST C-3 �s \A� ° Simon Lopez oom�d �NIS" Broa h11118 Flea Market X100 parking spaces 11TO 0.66 acres 7777' 177 -77� 9 472 feet _...Highway.24Q ------------------------------------------------ MEMORANDUM DATE: February 21, 2008 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Dave McDonald, City Planner SUBJECT: Golf Course Pavilion (MF# SP07-013) Attached is an email from Tony Beck of IRI Sun Willows Association, lessee and manager of the Sun Willows Golf Course. Mr. Beck has withdrawn his application for a special permit for the proposed open air pavilion to be located adjacent the east side of the golf course club house. With the withdrawal of the application there is no need to continue with the special permit process. Staff therefore recommends the Planning Commission acknowledge the application withdrawal and then formally close the matter by motion: Recommended Motion MOTION: Based on the applicants withdrawal of his application as noted in the February 15, 2008 email to city staff I move to discharge the matter from the record and close the file on Master File # SP 07- 014. From: Tony Beck Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 9:49 AM To: 'mcdonald @pasco-wa.gov' Subject: Sun Willows G.C. Pavillion Dave, I would like to withdraw my application for the special permit to build the pavilion at Sun Willows G.C.. Could you please tell me what time amount if any I need to wait before reapplying. If there is anything else you need please let me know and I will take care of it. (MF#SP07-013) Thank You Tony Beck Sun Willows G.C. 2/15/2008