Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-17-2011 Planning Commission Meeting Packet PLANNING COMMISSION — AGENDA REGULAR MEETING 7:00 P.M. March 17, 2011 I. CALL TO ORDER: II. ROLL CALL: Declaration of Quorum III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: February 24, 2011 IV. OLD BUSINESS: A. Special Permit Agricultural uses in a RS-20 (Residential Suburban) Zone (the 2000 block of Road 72) (Philipp W. Schmitt) (MF# SP 2011-002) B. Special Permit Location of a church in a C-3 (General Business) Zone (3330 W. Court Street) (Troy Jeff Woods) (MF# SP 11-001) C. Rezone Rezone from C-1 (Retail Business) to C-3 (General Business) to allow for auto sales (624 W. Lewis Street) (Shane Fast) (MF# Z 2011-001) D. Rezone Rezone from RT (Residential Transition) to C-1 (Retail Business) (the southeast corner of Wrigley Drive and Clemente Lane) (Lee Eickmeyer) (MF# Z 2011-002) V. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. Rezone Rezone from R-1 (Low Density Residential) to R-2 (Medium Density Residential) Zone (3300 Block west of Wernett Road) (Vinh Pham) (MF# Z 2011- 003 B. Special Permit Expand and continue resource recovery operation in an I-1 (Light hidustrial) Zone (215 E. Ainsworth Avenue) (Ray Poland & Sons, Inc.) (MF# SP 2011- 001 C. Special Permit Child daycare center in a R-1 (Low Density Residential) Zone (345 N. Wehe & 1604 E. Broadway Street) (Elodia Gutierrez) (MF# SP 2011- 004 D. Special Permit Location of a church in a R-2 (Medium Density Residential) Zone (316 N. 11th Avenue) (Mario Rivera) (MF# SP 2011-005) E. Preliminary Plat Preliminary Plat approval for Ranger Heights, an 11-lots subdivision located at 1621 Road 60 (Basswood, LLC) (MF# PP 2011-00 1) VI. OTHER BUSINESS: VII. ADJOURNMENT: REGULAR MEETING February 24, 2011 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman Cruz. POSITION MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT No. 1 Vacant No. 2 James Hay No. 3 Andy Anderson No. 4 Alecia Greenaway No. 5 Joe Cruz No. 6 Kurt Lukins No. 7 Vacant No. 8 Jana Kempf No. 9 Lisa Gemig 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 were no declarations. Chairman Cruz then asked the audience if there were any objections based on conflict of interest or appearance of fairness questions regarding any of 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: Commissioner Hay moved to adopt the January 20, 2011 minutes. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Gemig. The motion passed unanimously. -1 - OLD BUSINESS: A. Rezone Rezone four parcels from RT (Residential Transition) to C-1 (Retail Business) Zone (Northeast corner of "A" Street and Heritage Boulevard) (Howard Rowell) (MF# Z 10-004) Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Shane O'Neill, Planner I, had no further comments. Commissioner Greenaway moved, seconded by Commissioner Kempf, to adopt the Findings of Fact and Conclusions therefrom as contained in the February 17, 2011 staff report. The motion passed unanimously. Commissioner Greenaway further moved, seconded by Commissioner Kempf, based on the Findings of Fact therefrom the Planning Commission recommend the City Council rezone the site from RT (Residential Transition) to C-1 (Retail Business). The motion passed unanimously. NEW BUSINESS: Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. A. Special Permit Expand and continue resource recovery operation in a I-1 (Light Industrial) Zone (215 E. Ainsworth Avenue) (Ray Poland & Sons, Inc.) (MF# SP 2011-001) Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Shane O Neill, Planner I, stated upon researching this item it appears the original special permit for the concrete crushing facility expired last ,year. The application also needs to include the renewal of the existing permit as well as the addition of the hog fuel operation. Staff asked for the item to be continued to the March meeting. Chairman Cruz opened the public hearing. After three calls for public comment, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Hay moved, seconded by Commissioner Kempf, to continue the public hearing to March 17, 20 11. The motion passed unanimously. -2 - B. Special Permit Agricultural uses in a RS-20 (Residential Suburban) Zone (the 2000 block of Road 72) (Philipp W. Schmitt) (MF# SP 2011-002) Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Dave McDonald, City Planner, explained that the applicant in this case was seeking a Special Permit to farm 18 acres of vacant land directly north of the Faith Assembly Church on Road 72. The proposal involves the planting and growing of row crops, certain cereal grains and the winter pasturing of cattle. Mr. McDonald reviewed the written report and discussed the fact that farming does occur in the city in and near residential neighborhoods. The existence of these farms has not negatively impact the value of residential properties. Concerns over dust, noise, cereal grains and the winter pasturing of livestock were also discussed. Mr. McDonald responded to a packet of information submitted to the Planning Commission by Roger Lenk, a property owner who lives on Road 76. Chairman Cruz opened the hearing and asked for comments from the public. Philipp Schmitt, 1523 "A" Fowler Street, Richland stated he has applied to farm an 18.5 acre parcel at the corner of Wernett Road and Road 72. Mr. Schmitt explained that he planned to grow short season produce and sell the produce at local farmers' markets or area grocery stores. His plan for winter wheat was to use it only as a cover crop. Mr. Schmitt asked to have corn included in the list of permitted crops and to have the approval date in condition number 12 be modified in the event the approval process does not occur in time to plant this year. Larry Gomez, 2105 Road 72, was concerned about dust control, noise and the smell of fertilizer. Mr. Gomez also expressed concern over the traffic generated by the Faith Assembly Church. Jessie Roger, 7309 Wernett, stated he lives directly north of the proposed farm field. Mr. Roger explained the problems the neighborhood has had with traffic on Road 76 and the cattle that one of the neighbors brings in from Oregon on a regular basis. Roger Lenk, 1817 Road 76, stated he would explain why the application was not permitted under the code, how the application would be detrimental to the suburban environment then he would summarize the position of the neighbors regarding the proposal. Mr. Lenk explained that he felt the Code required each individual parcel to be over ten acres and that two nine acre parcels did not qualify for an application. Mr. Lenk explained that development of the property for housing was not practical for economic reasons, the applicants farming -3 - practices have been detrimental to the neighborhood and the Council findings from the corn inaze hearing concluded farming activities have a high probability to becorne a nuisance to the neighborhood. Mr. Lenk also discussed the problems associated with the cattle at the southeast corner- of Road 76 and Wernett Road. Based on the information he submitted, Mr. Lenk stated the Planning commission should not recommend approval of a farm under Master file # SP2011-002. Chairman Cruz asked Mr. McDonald if he had any other comments. Mr. McDonald stated that Resolution 3205 (referred to by Mr. Lenk) related mostly to the corn maze and the references to a farm where added by Mr. Lenk. Item number three in the resolution mentions a corn maze, fall festival and cornmercial operation. Chairman Cruz agreed with Mr. McDonald's cornrnents that the characterization is based on the corn maze and traffic and to a lesser extent the farm. A lot of the focus at the last hearing was on the noise, traffic and party atmosphere associated with the corn maze. John Scheline, 1908 Road 72 was sworn in. Mr. Scheline stated he was the Executive Pastor of Faith Assembly and the closest neighbor to the proposed farm. Mr. Scheline pointed out that Mr. Lenk has a pile of brush and garbage on his property that is about six feet tall. Last year the lead pastor for the church spoke to Mr. Lenk and that Mr. Lenk was not opposed to farming he was opposed to the corn maze. Mr. Scheline provided some history about the Faith Assembly Church and stated they wanted to be a good neighbor. Mr. Scheline has lived on Road 72 for eight years and supports the farming operation. He also felt the recommended conditions were acceptable. Janet Johnson, 2104 Road 68, was sworn in. Ms. Johnson was opposed to the farm. Jesse Rogers, 7309 Wernett, was concerned about what would be required for sanitation. Roger Lenk, 1817 Road, stated his property is the finest on the street and there is not trash on the lot. Phil Schmitt, 1523 "A" Fowler Street, Richland, stated when he applied for the corn maze last year he had no idea farming was not permitted on the property -4 - until he received notices form the City. Mr. Schmitt provided some historical background on last ,year's activities to obtain a special permit for a corn maze and addressed some of Mr. Lenk's comments. He stated there has never been an investigation into any of his farm activities by the State. Mr. Schmitt cautioned the Planning Commission to take the time to determine what is true and what is not with respect to Mr. Lenk's packet. Mr. Schmitt then provided some background on bee colony collapse. Following three calls for testimony the Chairman closed the hearing. Commissioner Gemig stated she thought Mr. Schmitt's request for modification of the recommended approval conditions were acceptable. Specifically the allowance of field corn, the cattle limit of one per acre and an adjustment of the approval time frame in number 12. Commission Hay stated he sees four different areas on the overhead that looks like areas that are being farmed on Road b8 and several areas on Road 72. Mr. Hay wanted to know what kind of farming was occurring in these areas. To him it looks like farming is already occurring in the area. Commissioner Cruz stated we have anything from small hobby farm of a couple acres to whole circles within the city being farmed. Mr. McDonald stated there are a number of small farms throughout all of West Pasco. The rows Mr. Hay was referring are commercial vineyards. The property directly north of Mr. Lenk's house contains a new vineyard that was not there a few ,years ago. Commissioner Gemig stated that the conditions should also allow the storage of six small farm implements on the property. Commissioner Kempf was not in favor of including corn in condition number 6. Chairman Cruz stated the Commission needed to be careful to separate the farming proposal from the church activities. The Chairman stated he felt they had enough information to recommend a permit for the farm with appropriate conditions. The Chairman was in favor of adding corn to the list of crops and limiting the number of cattle per acre and months of the ,year. Fencing also needs to be addressed. Commission Greenaway was in favor of permitting the farm for three ,years with a two year extension. Commissioner Gemig was also in favor of allowing the permit for three ,years with a two year extension. -5 - Commissioner Hay also supported the three year permit with a two year extension. Chairman Cruz agreed the initial capital outlay may warrant a three year initial permit with the two year extension. Mr. McDonald then recapped the discussion by stating the initial permit was to be for three ,years with a two year extension for a total of 5 ,years. After 5 ,years the applicant would be required to submit a new application. Cattle are to be limited to one per acre from November to march only. Substantial fencing is required. Following additional discussion, corn was added to the list of allowable crops. Commissioner Gemig stated farm equipment should be permitted on site because it will lessen traffic on the roads due to the fact the equipment will not have to be ferried back and forth to the site. The Chairman stated he would be in favor of allowing seven small implements to be parked on the property and the implements should be prohibited from turning on the road when in use. The general consensus of the Commission was that sanitation facilities need to be on site when workers were present. Commissioner Hay moved, seconded by Commissioner Greenaway, to close the hearing on the proposed farm and schedule deliberations, adoption of findings of fact, conclusions and a recommendation to the City Council for the March 17, 2011 meeting. The motion passed unanimously. C. Special Permit Location of a church in a C-3 (General Business) Zone (3330 W. Court Street) (Troy Jeff Woods) (MF# SP 11-001) Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Shane O'Neill, Planner I, explained that the application involved the location of a church in a tenant space in a C-3 zone at 3330 W Court Street. Mr. O'Neill reviewed the written report and discussed the site layout, location of the tenant space and parking. Chairman Cruz opened the hearing and asked for comments from the public. Jeff Woods, 3109 S. Everett Place, Kennewick stated he was a licensed minister for the United Pentecostal Church and would like to build a church at the proposed location. He felt his church would be a blessing to the area. -6 - Chairman Cruz asked Mr. Woods if lie had any concerns with the recommended approval conditions. Mr. Woods stated he did not. Following three calls for testimony the Chairman closed the hearing. Commissioner Gemig moved, seconded by Commissioner Kempf, to close the hearing on the proposed church and initiate deliberations and schedule adoption of findings of fact, conclusions and a recommendation to the City Council for the March 17, 2011 meeting. The motion passed unanimously. D. Rezone Rezone from C-1 (Retail Business) to C-3 (General Business) to allow for auto sales (624 W. Lewis Street) (Shane Fast) (MF# Z 2011-001) Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Rick White, Community and Economic Development Director explained that the proposal involved the rezone of a parcel a 624 West Lewis Street from C-1 to C-3. The intended use for the site is that of auto sales. Late last year the applicant applied for a Special Permit to allow auto sales on the property. The Special Permit was not an option available due to the fact a car lots exists on the adjoining parcel. The applicant then applied for a rezone. Mr. White reviewed the written report for the benefit of the Planning Commission. Chairman Cruz opened the hearing and asked for comments from the public. Shane Fast, 3109 W 46th, Kennewick, was present to speak in favor of the rezone. Mr. Fast explained the surrounding zoning and pointed out there was a car lot to the east of his lot. Mr. Fast also indicated the previous owner of his building had a dealer's license to sell car. Mr. Fast felt the strict application of the zoning code was depriving him of his rights that are enjoyed by adjacent property owners. Teresa Orosco Day, 915 S. Dawes Ct., Kennewick stated she was the former owner of the property and that she had received licenses to sell cars on the property. When she sold the property to Mr. Fast she encouraged him to get a dealer's license and also sell cars. Following three calls for testimony the Chairman closed the hearing. Commissioner Gemig asked if the property was zoned correctly how did cars sales occur in the past and if the owners did have cars sales in the past how can they not be allow to now? -7 - Mr. White stated he did not know how car sales occurred on the property in the past but sales are not permitted now because the zoning does not allow it. Chairman Cruz stated he was struggling with the application and he would e inclined to not agree with staff's interpretation. Mr. White indicated the information was new to staff and at this point it may be best to allow staff to research the matter and comeback to the Commission with a better explanation of what has happened in the past. Commission Gemig moved seconded by Commissioner Greenaway that the matter be continued to the March 17, 2011 meeting to allow time for additional research to be brought back to the Planning Commission. Commissioner Gemig moved, seconded by Commissioner Greenaway, to close the hearing on the proposed rezone and initiate deliberations and schedule adoption of findings of fact, conclusions and a recommendation to the City Council for the March 17, 2011 meeting. The motion passed unanimously. E. Rezone Rezone from RT [Residential Transition] to C-1 [Retail Business] [Southeast corner of Wrigley Drive and Clemente Lane] [Lee Eickmeyer] (MF# Z 2011-002) Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Rick White, Community and Economic Development Director, identified the location of the proposed rezone and reviewed the written report of the benefit of the Planning Commission. Mr. White explained that considerable investment has been made in surrounding infrastructure to allow for additional commercial and retail development in the area. The proposed zoning would permit development that is identical other commercial development in the area. Chairman Cruz opened the hearing and asked for comments from the public. Randy Mullen, 220 Carr Road, was present to support the rezone request. He stated there has been some interest in development of the land and when he and the other owners discovered the site was not zoned as the remainder of their land to the south they applied for the rezone. Following three calls for testimony the Chairman closed the hearing. Commissioner Greenaway moved, seconded by Commissioner Kempf, to close the hearing on the proposed rezone and initiate deliberations and schedule adoption of findings of fact, conclusions and a recommendation to the City Council for the March 17, 2011 meeting. The motion passed unanimously. -8 - OTHER BUSINESS: With no further business, the Planning Commission was adjourned at 9:44 P.M. David McDonald, Secretary -9 - REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION MASTER FILE NO: SP 2011-002 APPLICANT: Philipp Schmitt HEARING DATE: 2/17/2011 5b04 McKinley Court ACTION DATE: 3/17/2011 Pasco, WA 99301 BACKGROUND REQUEST: SPECIAL PERMIT: Farming in an RS-20 Zone (2000 Block of Road 72) 1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Legal: The southeast and northeast quarters of the northwest quarter of the southeast quarter of Section 21, Township 9 North, Range 29 East, WM less the southerly 165 feet and less road right-of-way. General Location: 2000 Block of Road 72 Property Size: Approximately 18 acres 2. ACCESS: The site has access from Road 72 and Wernett Road. 3. UTILITIES: The proposed use will not need public utilities. 4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The subject property is currently zoned RS-20 (Suburban) and consists of two vacant parcels. Surrounding zoning and land uses are as follows: North R-S-20- County-residential South R-S-20- Faith Assembly Church of God Church East R-S-20- County-residential West R-S-20- County-residential 5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan designates this area for Low-Density Residential 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 Nan-Significance (DNS) has been issued for this project under WAC 197-11-158. ANALYSIS The applicant is requesting Special Permit approval to conduct farming activities in an RS-20 (Suburban Residential) zone on Road 72 north of Court Street. The proposed farm will involve the planting and harvesting of row crops, legumes, cereal grains and the winter pasturing of cattle. Commercial farming on sites larger than 10 acres and within 1,000 feet of a house, subdivision or residentially zone property may be permitted through the Special Permit review process. Even though the Municipal Code contains provisions for commercial farming, the City's Comprehensive Plan has designated the site for future residential use. Therefore farming on the site must be considered only an interim use. As an interim use, farming activities can easily be converted to intended uses when utilities become available. Recent growth in Pasco is a good example of how the conversion process takes place. Most of the development in the I-182 corridor over the last ten ,years has occurred on lands that were formally developed with farms. The farms have not restricted the implementation of the Comprehensive Plan, nor has the development of housing restricted, to any great extent, continued farming activities. The general area surrounding the proposed site can be characterized as a low-density suburban area with large pastures, livestock raising and grape vineyards. Truck farming and raspberry production has also occurred in the neighborhood in the past. In reviewing this proposal staff has identified four issues for consideration by the Planning Commission: 1) dust control; 2) noise; 3) the planting of cereal grains; and 4) the winter pasturing of livestock. During plowing and planting and prior to seed germination fugitive dust could potentially impact adjacent properties if not properly monitored. This impact will be minimized once a crop is established. Staff would suggest the applicant be required to maintain a viable water source on site during the initial grading and leveling to manage fugitive dust during wind events, and submit a dust control plan for approval by City staff. Commercial agricultural activities often occur at odd hours, which could potentially impact adjacent residential uses. Staff suggests the applicant be required to submit a complaint monitoring plan to help alleviate these impacts. The plan should minimally include potential hours of operation, a contact person to whom complaints may be submitted and a process outlining how noise complaints will be addressed. The planting of wheat (cereal grain) within a suburban neighborhood brings with it a concern for fire safety. Wheat fields become very dry prior to harvesting and burn rapidly if set on fire. With two homes immediately adjacent to the site and other homes nearby, planting wheat in a partially built neighborhood is a concern. The simplest way to address the fire safety concerns is to not permit the planting of grains. However grains can sometimes be effective as a cover crop to prevent dust from blowing. If grains are to be used for a cover crop restrictions should be placed on their usage to address fire safety concerns presented by ripe wheat. The last issue is one of using the site for grazing of livestock. The definition of commercial agriculture excludes feeds lots, stockyards, and similar animal husbandry activities. Large concentrations of animals can cause severe odor, dust and fly problems. The pasturing of animals can also create these concerns. The Planning Commission may want to consider limiting the number of cattle to be pastured on the 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 sections 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 within the Pasco Urban Growth Boundary. 2. The Comprehensive Plan identifies the site for future Low-Density Residential development. 3. The site has been used in the past for agricultural activities. 4. Pastures and vineyards as-well-as animal husbandry occur on adjoining properties. 5. A vineyard was planted at 1917 Road 76 approximately 4 years ago. b. 1917 Road 76 is located directly west of the site in question. 7. The site is zoned R-S-20. 8. The site contains 18 acres. 9. The site is large enough for about thirty 20,000 square foot lots. 3 10. Gardening and fruit raising on vacant land are permitted uses in the R-S-20 zone. 11. Non-commercial agriculture uses are a permitted accessory use in the R-S-20 zone. 12. The site is vacant. 13. The site has been used for farming in the past. 14. Large vacant parcels within the general vicinity have been used in the past for producing watermelons, pumpkins and other row crops. 15. Much of the new residential development in the I-182 corridor has been developed on or adjacent to farms. 16. The site is accessible from the north and south by way of Road 72 and from the east by way of Wernett Road. 17. The process of tilling and planting the ground exposes unprotected soil to the wind and can cause blowing dust. 18. The applicant is proposing to plant vegetables, legumes and cereal grains. 19. Wheat is a cereal grain. 20. Ripe wheat is very dry and presents a fire hazard. 21. Locating large numbers of cattle and other farm animals in a single area can create odor, dust and fly nuisances. 22. The R-S-20 District permits one animal unit per 10,000 square feet of lot area. 23. Commercial farming requires the use of heavy equipment and machinery. 24. The City's noise regulations prohibit excessive noise from emanating from properties and intruding into residential areas between the hours of 10:00 pm and 7:00 am. CONCLUSIONS 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? 4 The Comprehensive Plan designates the proposed site for low density residential development. The Plan does not specifically address the proposed use. However, the zoning regulations which implement the Plan permit the keeping of farm animals and allow limited agricultural production in R-S-20 zones. The zoning regulations also permit commercial agricultural production by Special Permit in the R-S-20 zone. 2. Will the proposed use adversely affect public infrastructure? The proposed farm does not depend upon City utilities therefore there will be no adverse impact to city utilities. The current zoning permits the site to be developed with about 30 homes which would generate about 300 vehicle trips per day. An 18 acre farm will generate minor traffic in comparison. Farm traffic can be mitigated by allowing on-site storage of farm equipment to lessen the need to bring equipment to and from the site. 3. Will the proposers use be constructed, maintained and operated to be in harmony ruith the existing or intended character- of the general vicinity? The existing character is that of a suburban residential neighborhood. The act of growing additional crops in the neighborhood will not alter the existing neighborhood character. The location of farms in West Pasco and within the I-182 Corridor has demonstrated that farms within close proximity of dwellings can be operated harmoniously with intended uses. Farms have operated simultaneously with development of Island Estates, Sunny Meadows, Wilson Meadows, The Village at Pasco Heights and other subdivisions in the community. The proposed use will not make intensive use of the land or lead to disorderly growth of the community. 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? There will be no permanent structures erected with this proposal. Development within the community over the last 10 ,years attests to the fact that farming operations do not discourage the development of permitted uses or impair the value of nearby development. The proposed use is a temporary use that will not materially impact property values. 5. Will the operations in connection tuith the proposal be more objectionable to nearby properties by reason of noise, fumes, 5 vibrations, dust, traffic, or flashing rights than xuould be the operation of any permitted uses ruithin the district? Without conditions the proposed activity could create noise, dust and odor and fire hazards that may be objectionable to nearby properties. 6. Will the proposed use endanger- the public health or safety if located and developed where proposed, or in any rua y ruill become o nuisance to uses permitted in the district? The existence of numerous farming operations within the community, particularly in the I-182 corridor, demonstrates that farming near residential uses does not necessarily become a nuisance to permitted uses nor do the farms endanger public health and safety. APPROVAL CONDITIONS 1. The Special Permit shall apply to Tax Parcel 113431037 and 1 1848 10 19; 2. The farm shall be operated by using best management practices for agricultural production; 3. No irrigation water is permitted to be sprayed or otherwise drain onto the adjoining right-of-way; 4. The adjoining roadways shall not be used for turning around farm equipment during plowing, planting, harvesting, weeding and related functions; 5. Farm equipment stored on site must be located in neat rows on the north side of the Faith Assembly parking lot west of the church owned house at 1800 Road 72. No more than seven pieces of equipment shall be permitted to be stored on site. The storage area and equipment must be kept clean of tumble weeds, weeds litter and debris; 6. No irrigation water is permitted to be sprayed onto the adjoining residential fences or properties; 7. Irrigation water and farm chemicals must be applied at agronomic rates; 8. The farm crops shall be limited to alfalfa or row crops such as pumpkins, tomatoes, corn, watermelons, peppers, etc. The definition of row crops does not include wheat and other cereal grains. Cereal grains may be used as a winter cover crop or for green manure purposes; 9. Eighteen head of cattle are permitted on the site only from November 1St to March 31St. 6 10. Cattle must be secured on the site using best management practices for animal husbandry fencing. Said fencing must contain the cattle on site at all times; 11. The property shall be posted to indicate no motorcycling or four-wheeling is permitted; 12. A Conservation Plan approved by the Farm Service shall be submitted to the City prior to site grading; 13. A dust control plan must be approved by City staff prior to site grading; 14. A complaint monitoring plan that identifies how the applicant will respond to neighborhood complaints must be submitted and approved by City staff prior to site grading; 15. At least one portable toilet shall be placed on the site during the growing season. Said portable toilet shall be serviced in accord with industry standards and located in the equipment storage area north of the Faith Assembly parking lot. 16. The Special Permit shall be valid for a period of three ,years and will automatically extend for two additional ,years if the applicant adheres to the conditions of Special Permit approval. Extensions beyond the first five ,years may be permitted, but will require the submittal of a new Special Permit application. In reviewing a new Special Permit application for this farm the Planning Commission will consider the criteria of PMC 25.86.060 along with changes hi surrounding development, the pace at which surrounding development is occurring, improvements to utilities services within the area and any nuisance complaints about the operations of the farm over the past five ,years; 17. The Special Permit shall be null and void if fanning activity has not begun by June 30, 2012. RECOMMENDATION MOTION: I move to adopt findings of fact and conclusions therefrom as contained in the March 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 Philipp Schmitt for the location of a farm in the 2000 Block of Road 72 with conditions as listed in the March 17, 2011 staff report. 7 Item- Farming in RS-20 Zone Vidnity Applicant Pliilll*p Map File SP 2011 -002 .. s w � . � r. •vim'_=1� "'.. p LEI: iw- >. p 1 4 L .. r I. sp dow'516 q RM r Land Fan-ning Item: ` in Zone Use Applicant: Phillip Schmitt N Map File # : SP 2011 -002 UBM -CREEK CT ti1Y=WERf+IETT=R6 SF DU S Bln"TERNUT Cif Cl E SITE SIL.V CREST- T � SFDU's :RE EK T ITS El A T E Church lT =RAY CT LL I SFDU 's i � ac Church = C) COU MITS Zoning Item: Fanning in RS-20 Zone Applicant : Phillip Schmitt x Map File # : SP 2011 -002 � w ��.� VBU-M RS-20 (County) RKU JT C�RCLE SITE - RS-20 II � (County) RS-12 Im ::R7 ♦ � � _ � RS-20 C1 1-y-WMIT.S.-L Adjoining Property Owners c/o Roger E. Lenk 1817 N. Road 76 Pasco, Washington 99301-1830 Februar;, 15, 2011. VIA EMAIL City of Pasco Planning Commission 525 N. Third Avenue Pasco, Washington 99301 Re: SPECIAL PERMIT — CASE NUMBER NIF# SP2011-002 Honorable Members of The Planning Commission: Below you will find information and testimony related to MF# SP2.011-002. This correspondence is divided into three (3) sections. This first section details why consideration of the Application, as submitted and in its present state, is not permitted under the Pasco Municipal Code. The second section details how this application is detrimental to the local suburban residential environment and assists the Commission in developing their Findings of Fact and Conclusions. The final section summarizes the position of adjoining neighbor's and provides recommendations to the Planning Commission. Please provide a copy of tliis correspondence to each member of the Planning Commission prior to this evening's meeting. and incorporate a copy into the Open Hearing Record. CONSIDERATION OF MF# SP2011-002 NOT PERMITTED UNDER THE PASC'O MUNICIPAL CODE APPLICATION DOES NOT CONFORM TO PMC 26.08.160 AND PMC 25.86.35 Pasco Municipal Code Section 26.08.160 LOT (see Attachment 1) provides as follows: "Lot" means a portion of a subdivision, or other parcel of land, intended as a unit for transfer or ownership or development being of sufficient area and dimensions to meet minimum zoning requirements for width and area. The term shall include tracts or parcels. In other words, a lot, parcel or tract is the single unit by which minimum zoning requirements are measured. Re: SPECIAL PERMIT — CASE NI?D►ZBER MF# SP2011-002 Page: 2 Furthermore, Pasco Municipal Code Section 25.86.35 AGRICULTURAL USES (see Attachment 2) provides as follows: Commercial agricultural uses listed as conditional or unclassified uses in this Title shall conform to the following prior to the issuance of a special permit: (a) Special permits for agricultural uses (commercial) may be granted for tracts of land over ten acres in size (emphasis added) within 1,000 feet of a residential zoning district, subdivision or a dwelling unit excluding dwellings associated with agriculture uses. MF# SP2.011-002 is within 1,000 feet of a residential zoning district. Applicant's site plan is comprised of two (2) separate tracts (parcel # 118-481-019 - 9.00 acres and parcel # 118-481-037 - 9.13 acres - see Attachment 3), neither of which meet the (10) acre minimum zoning requirement. In a veiled attempt to satisfy the minimum tract size requirement of PMC 25.86.35, Applicant combines the acreage of two (2) substandard parcels. This is akin to owners of multiple lots banding together in an attempt to meet a minimum zoning requirement, that individually they otherwise could not satisfy. Therefore. A,IF# SP2011-002 does not meet the minimum tract size requirements for an agricultural use. In order to be eligible for an a.tricultur11 use; the two (2) separate substandard parcels must be consolidated prior to consideration. PNIC 25.86.050 NOT COMPLIED WITH Pasco Municipal Code Section 25.86.050 (again, see Attachment 2) details the Open Record Public Hearing Requirements for Special Permits. Generally, notifications must be mailed to property owners within a 300 foot radius of the subject site. However, PNIC 25.86.050 further provides "Except that in the case of commercial agricultural uses, the notification distance shall be increased to 1.000 feet" (emphasis added). The Special Permit being requested by way of MF# SP-20 11-002 is for a commercial agricultural use. Therefore, the Planning Commission was required to mail Open Record Public Hearing notifications to property owners of record within a 1,000 foot radius of the subject site. For its February 17, 2011 Open Record Public Hearing. the Planning Commission onhv mailed notices to properties within a 300 foot radius of the subject site. Many impacted property owners live outside the 300 foot radius, and within the 1,000 foot radius. As such, they were denied requisite notices via mail and an opportunity to provide testimony at this February 17, 2011 Open Record Public Hearing. This was a significant abridgment of their rights. During its consideration of MF# SP09-007, Citv Staff and Citv Council concurred with the necessary application of this requirement. In order to comply with PMC: 25.86.050. the Planning Commission must establish a new date for an Open Record Public Hearing for NIF# SP2011-002. and order that notices be mailed out to Property owners within a 1.000 foot radius of the site well in advance. Re: SPECIAL PERMIT — CASE N17, IBER MF# SP2011-002 Page: 3 ANIMAL PASTURING NOT PERSONAL TO APPLICANT Applicant is requesting to pasture animals. However, Applicant is actually requesting that Carl Wisse of 7408 W. Wernett Road, Pasco, Washington 99301 be allowed to pasture animals. Mr. Wisse currently pastures beef and provides animal husbandry in a a squalid, foul smelling, offensive, fly ridden, unsecured, unmaintained and unhealthful pen at his property. This operation is offensive to everyone in the neighborhood, especially the resultant fecal infested effluent which impacts all adjoining properties. Applicant intends to assist Mr. Wisse in the expansion of his squalid operation onto the vacant property. Since all Special Permits are personal to the Applicant. MF# SP2011-002 as submitted is a rouse to permit Mr. Wisse to expand his offensive squalid operation. SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL ENVIRONMENT APPLICANT MUST BE REMINDED THAT THIS IS THE BEGINNING. NOT THE END OF THE PROCESS On July 17, 2009, hours after completion of the Planning Commission's Open Record Hearing for MF# SP09-007, Applicant initiated farming activities on the subject site, despite not having received any approvals. The Planning Commission and City must remind Applicant that no activity may be engaged in prior to the issuance of a Special Permit under MF# SP2011-002. The City must be responsible for monitoring to ensure that such activities do not take place. The City should not again tip-toe around the issue solely because of the political clout of Faith Assembly Christian Center. THREAT TO DEVELOP SUBJECT SITE NOT CREDIBLE Each time Faith Assembly Christen Center seeks zoning amendments, neighbors are admonished to go along with the proposed changes, or Faith Assembly may have to develop the two (2) subject vacant parcels (e.g. MF#02-88-SP - "Condominiums for Retired Pastors" and MF#09-007 — "32 single family homes"). Although their intent is to intimidate neighbors, the threat of development is not credible in practical economic terms. The total market value of all parcels on the Faith Assembly compound is $3,288,800 (Church Building/#118-491-062 - $2,211,300); (Church Office/#118-491-044 - $428,500); (Assistant Pastor's Cottage/#118481-046 - $178,000); and (Vacant Parcels #118-481-037 - $237,000; #118-481-019 - $234,000). However, according to AG (Assemblies of God) Financial Solutions of Springfield Missouri, in total, these properties have a lien in the amount of$4,380,000. In the vernacular of California, Faith Assembly is under-water to the tune of$1,091,200, less any principal pay-offs. In order to maintain lien covenants, even abandoning these two (2) vacant lots would cost $1,562,400 (value of vacant property plus amount the lien exceeds value of the remaining properties). The threatened development project is econom ically unfeasible, and will not be for an exceeding long time. Re: SPECIAL PERMIT — CASE NUMBER MF# SP2011-002 Page: 4 Therefore. neighbors should not be coerced into believing that approval is necessary in order to avoid the ine-vitability of development. APPLICANT'S ESTABLISHED FARMING PRACTICES HAVE BEEN DETRIMENTAL TO THE INTENDED SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL ENVIRONMENT The City is well aware of the negative impact on local neighbors resulting from Applicant's activities and his pursuit of of MF# SP09-007, more commonly referred to as "The Corn Maize" (incorporated by reference as Attachment 4). Despite no approvals, and no permits being issued, on July 17, 2009, Applicant commenced farming activities. Electrical and irrigation service were installed via subterfuge. Irrigation lines were laid, and crops cultivated. Farm equipment and irrigation lines were stored at the Faith Assembly Christian Center parking lot. Moreover, Applicant's illegal farming activity included the tilling, unfettered irrigation and a d isprop ortion ally high utilization of fertilizer, resulting in over-spraying, and drainage onto adjacent properties. This issue was especially offensive to other local farmers who have adopted and abide by certified organic agriculture methods. In addition, Applicant's field corn crop resulted in "colony collapse disorder" in bee hives on two local farms. This situation was diagnosed by certified Apiarist Jeff McClure. After MF# SP09-007 was denied by the City Council, Applicant abandoned the site resulting in blowing corn leaves, dried vegetation and weeds, fugitive dust; storage of unsightly farming equipment; storage of unsightly amusement ride and ancillary equipment; storage of two (2) commercial tractor trailers; storage of irrigation pipe and other non-farming equipment. These numerous code violations were not resolved until nearly a year later. Neighbors were. and remain outraged at Applicants total disregard for the intended suburban residential environment. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS ALREADY MADE BY COUNCIL Pasco Municipal Code Section 25.22 (see Attachment 5) outlines the permitted, permitted accessory and conditional uses within the R-S-20 Suburban Residential District. PMC Section 25.86.60 (again, see Attachment 2) details the six (6) criteria by which the Planning Commission judges whether a Special Permit is or is not "detrimental to the intended suburban residential environment", and becomes the basis of its recommendation for or against approval. At its November 2, 2009. and December 7, 2009 Closed Record Hearings, City Council considered both Corn Maize, and Farmit.g Only uses by way of MF # SP09-007. Same use. same site; some applicant. Yogi Berra put it best, "This is like deja vu all over again". Fortunately, by way of Resolution 3205 adopted on December 7, 2009 (see Attachment 6), in denying MF# SP09-007, the Pasco City Council provided the Planning Commission direction on how to answer the questions posed under PMC 25.86.60 for a farming only use at this site, by this applicant. Those verbatim findings of fact and conclusions taken with the information herein are as follows: Re: SPECIAL PERMIT — CASE NUMBER MF# SP2011-002 Page: 5 1. The proposed use may be in accordance with the goals, policies, objectives and text of the Comprehensive plan. THE ANSWER IS NO. According to the "conclusions" taken from Resolution 3205 (again, see Attachment 6), farming uses are unclassified uses. Resolution 3205 further states that "Unclassified uses require extraordinary review (emphasis added) through a public hearing process (special permit process). "Applying for a. special permit does not guarantee the application will be approved." 3. Will the proposed use be constructed, maintained, and operated to be in harmony with the existing or intended character of the general vicinib ? THELANS_MER I-SlYQ. According to the "Conclusions" taken from Resolution 3205 (again, see Attachment 6), "The existiniz character of the area is that of a suburban residential neighborhood. The additional vibration, dust and equipment usage associated with the (farming activity) will not encourage the development of permitted uses in the general vicinity". In addition, Applicant's demonstrated aggressive tilling, unfettered irrigation and a disprop ort ion ally high utilization of fertilizer, resulting in over-spraying, and drainage onto adjacent properties, some of which exercise organic farming methods, will not be in harmony with the local environment. Applicant's demonstrated disregard for adjoining properties via improper storage of farm equipment and irrigation lines will similarly distract from the harmony. Further, Applicant's demonstrated disregard for local neighbors after completion of farming activities by abandoning the site resulting in blowing corn leaves, dried vegetation and weeds, fugitive dust; storage of unsightly farming equipment; storage of unsightly amusement ride and ancillary equipment; storage of two (2) commercial tractor trailers; storage of irrigation pipe and other non-farming equipment requiring intervention by Code Enforcement Officials adds to this dis-harmony. Finally,Applicant's choice of field corn crop resulting in "colony collapse disorder" in bee hives on two local farms clearly added to the injury of local neighbors. Furthermore, the squalid conditions created by the proposed pasturing activity will negatively impact all neighbors and is not in harmony with the residential suburban environment. 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 ANSWER IS YES. According to the "Conclusions" taken from Resolution 3205 (again, see Attachment 6), "The use of farm equipment to plo,,v and plant fields in the neighborhood will also create noise, dust, vibrations and diesel exhaust that is typically not present in suburban neighborhoods". The squalid environment created by pasturing of animals on an unsecured site will be very objectionable. Re: SPECIAL PERMIT — CASE NUMBER MF# SP2011-002 Page: 6 6. Will the proposed use endanger the public health or safety if located and developed where proposed, or in any way become a nuisance to uses permitted in the district? THE ANSWER IS YES. According to the "Conclusions" taken from Resolution 3205 (again, see Attachment 6), the "farming activities have a veQ, high probability to become a nuisance to current and future residents of the neighborhood". The pasturing activity will endanger public health given the squalid practices endorsed by Mr. Wisse, and certainly become a nuisance to the permuted uses of the district, especially since the proposed site is unsecured. Utilizing information herein, as well as City Council's own conclusions taken directly from Resolution 3205, the Planning Commission cannot make a favorable finding and should not recommend a1pproval of MF# SP2011-002. SUMMARY First, MF# SP2011-002 does not meet the minimum tract size requirements for an agricultural use as outlined in PMC 25.86.35. In order to be eligible for an agricultural use, the two (2) separate substandard parcels must be consolidated prior to consideration. Second, the provisions of PMC 25.86.050, as recognized by City Staff and Council in MF# SP09-007, dictate that the Planning Commission establish a new date for an Open Record Public Hearing of MF# SP2011-002, and order that notices to property owners within a 1,000 foot radius of the subject site be mailed out well in advance. Third, since all Special Permits are personal to the Applicant, MF# SP2011-002. as submitted is a rouse to permit Mr. Wisse to expand his offensive squalid pasturing/husbandry operation. Fourth, neighbors should not be coerced into believing that approval of MF# SP2011-002 is necessary in order to avoid development of the two (2) separate vacant tracts. Fifth, utilizing information herein, as well as City Council's own conclusions taken directly from Resolution_ 3205, the Planning Commission cannot make a. favorable finding and cannot recommend approval of MF# SP2011-002.. Based on the foregoing, we respectfully request, and believe by way of the Pasco Municipal Code, and prior Conclusions of the City Council, that the Planning Commission NOT recommend aQuroval of MF# SP2011-002. Finally, neighbors remain concerned that political expediencies may again take precedent over the rule of law. If the Planning Commission is predisposed to recommending approval of MF# SP2011-002, local neighbors see necessary the inclusion of Mitigating Conditions and Requirements (provided as Attachment 7) to seriously address the issues brought forward herein. Re: SPECIAL PERMIT — CASE NUMBER MF# SP2011-002 Page: 7 Adjoining property owners and neighbors thank you in advance for your consideration of their concerns. Best Regards, Roger E. Lenk Attachment 1 - PMC 26.08.160 Attachment 2 - PMC 25,86 Attachment 3 - Franklin County Parcel Records Attachment 4 - Closed Record File MF# SP09-007 Attachment 5 - PMC 25.22 Attachment 6 - Resolution 3205 Denying MF# SP09-007 Attachment 7 - Mitigating Conditions and Requirements Should MF# SP2011-002 Be Predisposed to Recommendation cc: The Tri-City Herald ATTACHMENT 1 26.08.160 LOT. "Lot" rneans a portion of a subdivision, or other parcel of land, intended as a unit for transfer of ownership or for development being of sufficient area and dimensions to meet minimum zoning requirements for width and area The term shalt include tracts or parcels. (Ord. 3398 Sec. 2 1999.) 26.08.170 MONUMENT. 'Monument" means a permanent type survey marker, which conforms to the City of Pasco standard detail for monuments, or an approved substitute. (Ord. 3398 Set. 2 1999.) 26.08.180 PEDESTRIAN WAY. "Pedestrian Way' means a right-of-way dedicated to public use, which cuts across a block to facilitate pedestrian access to adjacent streets and properties. (Ord. 3398 Set, 2 1999.) 26.08.190 PLAT CR SUBDIVISION. "Plat or subdivision"means an area of land, which has been divided into two or more lots, tracts, parcels or other divisions of land, and shall include a map, or maps related thereto for the purpose, whether immediate or future, of transfer of ownership, or for building developments, including all designations in street lines, alley lines, public area boundaries, lot lines, easements, rights-of-way, pavement widths, curb lines, location and size of utilities, location and size of land areas to be dedicated; those divisions of land for agricultural purposes, where each parcel is five acres or more in area and which does not include any new streets, easements, rights-of-way or other provisions for necessary public areas and facilities; and further provided this definition shall not apply to the division by description of a portion of a platted lot. (Ord. 3398 Set�;2, 1999.) 26.08.200 PRELIMINARY -PLAT. "Preliminary plat" means an approximate drawing of the proposed layout of`•streets, blocks, lots and other elements of a subdivision or plat from which the City Planning Commission gives preliminary approval to the general layout features of the subdivision or plat. (Ord. 3398 Sec. 2 1999.) 26.08.210 RIGHT OF WAY, PUBLIC. "Public right of way" means any publicly owned land set aside for surface transportation purposes, including vehicular, bicycle and pedestrian transportation, whether improved or not improved. (Ord. 3398 Sec, 2 1999.) 26.08.220 SHORT PLAT. "Short plat" or short subdivision means the division or redivision of land into nine (9) or fewer lots for the purpose of sale, lease or transfer of ownership. (Ord. 3398 Set. 2 1999.) 26.08.230 STREET, DEAD END. "Dead end street" means a street, similar to a cul-de-sac, but providing no turn-around at its closed end. (Ord. 3398 Sec. 2 1999.) FMC Title 26 1011612006 9 ATTACHMENT 2 CCMMLNr Y DEVELOPM94T DEPARTM94T i 5o9'r 545-3441 / Fax=9'�545-31199 P.O. Box 293.525 North Third Avenue. Pasco. Washington 99301 � r NO'T'ICE OF PUBLIC HEARING PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that Philipp W. Schmitt has filed a petition (MF# SP 2011-002) requesting a special permit for Agricultural uses on the following described property: Legal: The East 1/2 of the Northwest 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 of Section 21 Township 9 Range 29; Less Tax Parcel #118481028. Location: The 2000 Block of Road 72 THEREFORE, LET ALL CONCERNED TAKE NOTICE that a Public Hearing will be held by the Planning Commission of the City of Pasco, Washington, in the City Council Chambers, Pasco City Hall, 525 N. Third Avenue at the hour of 7:00 p.m., Thursday, February 17, 2011, so that all concerned may appear and present any objections or support for the proposed special permit. State law permits o 1y one open record r)ubiic hearing on this matter. This will be the onlzl opportuniuj to provide input on this issue. For additional information, please contact the Pasco City Planner at (509) 545-3441. IMMESTR FFF1 David I. McDonald Planning Commission Secretary �TSITE Pasco, Washington N m NOTE. .Property Owners within 300 ,feet of this site were mailed this notice. CHAPTER 25.86 SPECIAL PERMITS Sections: 25.86.010 GENERAL PROVI SI ONS..............................................................149 25.86.020 UNCLASSI FI ED USES.................................................................149 25.86.025 HI STORI C PLACES.....................................................................150 25.86.030 TEMPORARY USES ....................................................................150 25.86.035 AGRI CULTURAL USES................................................................150 25.86.040 APPLI CATION REQUIREMENTS...................................................151 25.86.050 PUBLI C HEARI NG REQUI RED .....................................................151 25.86.060 FI NDI NGS OF FACT BY PLAN NI NG COMMI SSI ON.........................151 25.86.070 RECOM MEN DATI ON OF PLAN NI NG COMMI SSI ON........................152 25.86.080 APPEAL - FI LI NG REQUIREMENTS ..............................................152 25.86.090 CITY COUNCI L CONSI DERATI ON................................................152 25.86.100 EFFECTI VE DATE ......................................................................153 25.86.110 EXPI RATI ON.............................................................................153 25.86.120 EXTENSI ONS ............................................................................153 25.86.130 REVOCATI ON OF PERMIT ..........................................................153 25.86.010 GENERAL PROVISIONS. Unclassified uses enumerated in Section 25.86.020, conditional uses listed within each district, and any other uses specifically referred to this chapter shall be subject to the regulations contained in this chapter, in addition to all applicable requirements of this Title. All such uses, due to their nature, are deemed to require special review to consider, on a case by case basis, their impacts on which would serve them. Conditional uses and other uses specifically referred to this chapter may be permitted only in their respective districts. Unclassified uses may be permitted within any district where not otherwise prohibited. (Ord. 3354 Sec. 2, 1999.) 25.86.020 UNCLASSI FI ED USES. The following uses shall be considered unclassified: (1) High schools, colleges, universities, vocational schools, business colleges and other similar academic or skills training facilities or institutions not heretofore permitted within any district; (2) Cemeteries, crematories, mausoleums, and other places of burial or interment of remains; (3) Churches; (4) Community service facilities, as defined in Sections 25.12.155 and 25.12.156; (5) Airports, heliports, or any other landing or maneuvering space for aircraft, together with terminals and other customary facilities accessory to the unclassified use; (6) Golf courses, pitch and putt courses, miniature golf courses, and similar facilities for public, private or membership use; PMC Title 25 9/15/2008 149 (7) Monasteries, convents or other functionally similar facilities; (8) Mines, quarries and gravel pits; (9) Landfills, garbage dumps, and resource recovery facilities; (10) Off-site parking lots, except those required for a residential use, provided such parking area is not more than five hundred feet from the building; (11) Electrical substations and load transfer stations, natural gas booster stations, and other similar utility facilities; (12) Park and ride lots, off-street transfer stations or other similar facility involving the storage, start-up, idling and movement of public or private operated carrier, charter or transit buses, vans, and similar vehicles; and (13) Agricultural use (commercial) except in areas 1,000 feet from a residential zoning district, subdivision or dwelling unit. (Ord. 3514 Sec. 7, 2001 ; Ord. 3354 Sec. 2, 1999.) 25.86.025 HISTORIC PLACES. A special permit for the preservation by adaptive re-use of an historic place, accepted on the National Register of Historic Places, may be requested for uses not otherwise permitted within the applicable district: (1) A special permit granted under this section is personal to the applicant and shall permit only the applicant to exercise the adaptive re-use authority, and shall not be assigned, transferred, conveyed or passed to heirs or beneficiaries of the applicant's estate; and (2) Each applicant granted a special permit shall be required to substantially preserve the intrinsic qualities of the historic place which led to its acceptance on the National Register of Historic Places. Prior to issuance of any building permits the City may consult with the Washington State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation to insure compliance with this requirement. (Ord. 3354 Sec. 2, 1999.) 25.86.030 TEMPORARY USES. A temporary special permit for any use not otherwise permitted within the applicable district, may be approved by the City Council, provided that such use is clearly of a temporary nature and does not involve the erection of a permanent structure. Requests for temporary special permits shall be applied for and processed in the same manner as herein established for uses requiring a special permit, including such conditions as will safeguard the public health, safety and general welfare for the duration of the permit. This Section shall not apply to temporary structures permitted under Section 25.70.145. (Ord. 3465 Sec. 2, 2001 ; Ord. 3354 Sec. 2. 1999.) 25.86.035 AGRICULTURAL USES. (1) Cominercral agricultural uses listed as conditional or unclassified uses in this Title shall conform to the following prior to the issuance of a special permit: (a) Special permits for agricultural uses (commercial) may be granted for tracts of land over ten acres in size within 1 .000 feet of a residential zoning district, subdivision or a dwelling unit exchiding dwellings associated with agriculture uses. PMC Title 25 9/15/2008 150 (b) The applicant for a special permit shall be required to submit a conservation plan approved by the Farm Service Agency. (Ord. 3354 Sec. 2, 1999.) 25.86.040 APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS. Applications for special permit shall include the following: (1) Present use of the land and structures, if any; (2) Detailed description of the proposed use; (3) Description of any existing zoning ordinance violation; (4) A site map or plan drawn neatly and to scale, showing the following: (a) Exterior property lines and any adjacent public street or alley rights-of-way. (b) Existing and proposed buildings and other structures. (c) Existing and proposed points of ingress and egress, drives and driveways and circulation pattern. (d) The location of existing and proposed parking areas with each parking space shown. (e) Existing and proposed open spaces and landscape areas. (5) Certificate of ownership and a list of owners, with addresses, of all property within three hundred feet of the applicant's property, as provided and certified by a licensed Title company; and (6) Any other pertinent information that may be necessary to determine if the use meets the requirements of this Title (Ord. 3354 Sec. 2 1999.) 25.86.050 PUBLI C HEARI NG REQUI RED. Upon the filing of a complete application for a special permit. the application shall be scheduled for a open record pre-decision hearing before the Planning Commission Notice of such open record hearing shall be given as provided for in Section 25.88.015. Except that in the case of commercial agricultural uses. the notification distance shall be increased to 1 .000 feet. The open record hearing may be continued as deemed necessary by the Planning Commission, provided the applicant consents to any such continuance. In the event the applicant does not consent to a continuance. the Planning Commission shall close the public hearing and render a recommendation to the City Council in accordance with the provisions of Sections 25.86.060 and 25.86.070. (Ord. 3354 Sec. 2, 1999.) 25.86.060 FI NDI NGS OF FACT BY PLANNI NG COMMI SSi ON. Upon conclusion of the open record pre-decision hearing, the Planning Commission shall make and enter findings from the record and conclusions thereof as to whether or not: (1 ) The proposal is in accordance with the goals. policies. objectives. maps and-or narrative text of the Comprehensive Plan: (2) The proposal will adversely affect public infrastructure. (3) The proposal will be constructed. maintained and operated to be in harmony with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity' PMC Title 25 9/15/2008 151 (4) Tile location and heignt of proposed structures and the site design will discourage the development of permitted uses on property in the general vicinity or impair the value thereof: (5) The operations in connection with the proposal will be more objectionable to nearby properties by reason of noise, furnes, vibrations, dust, traffic, or flashing lights than would be the operation of any permitted uses within the district: and (6) The proposal will 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. (Ord. 3354 Sec. 2. 1999.) 25.86.070 RECOMMENDATION OF PLANNING COMMISSION. After a open record pre-decision hearing on a proposed temporary, conditional or unclassified use, the Planning Commission shall render a recommendation to the City Council as to whether the proposal be denied, approved, or approved with modifications and/or conditions. (Ord. 3354 Sec. 2, 1999.) 25.86.080 APPEAL - FILING REQUIREMENTS. (1) Any recommendation of the Planning Commission regarding a special permit application may be appealed in accordance with one of the following methods: (a) Applicant. Within ten calendar days from the date of the Planning Commission recommendation, the applicant files written appeal with the City Planner stating the basis of appeal from said recommendation. (b) Other Person. Within ten calendar days from the date of the Planning Commission recommendation, any person aggrieved by said decision files written appeal with the City Planner stating the harm to be experienced by such person as a result of the Planning Commission's recommendation. (c) A proper and timely filed appeal shall cause the City Council to schedule a closed record hearing, notice of which shall be given in accordance with Section 25.88.040 to consider the appeal of the Planning Commission's recommendation. (2) Either method of appeal shall include payment of an appeal fee in the amount of one hundred dollars ($100) at the time of filing said appeal. (Ord. 3354 Sec. 2, 1999.) 25.86.090 CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION. (1) Unless a proper and timely appeal is filed or the City Council by majority vote deems further review is necessary, the recommendation of the Planning Commission shall be effected by proper action of the City Council without further review. In the event the City Council deems further review is necessary, it shall conduct a closed record hearing, notice of which shall be given in accordance with Section 25.88.040; (2) In those cases, which require further review, the City Council shall at the conclusion of a closed record hearing make and enter findings of fact and take one of the following actions: (a) Approve the special permit with or without conditions. PMC Title 25 9/15/2008 152 (b) Deny the special permit. (Ord. 3354 Sec. 2, 1999.) 25.86.100 EFFECTIVE DATE. Special permits shall become effective on the day after the date of the decision of the City Council. (Ord. 3354 Sec. 2, 1999.) 25.86.110 EXPIRATION. Unless otherwise specified within the special permit, the applicant shall commence the special use authorized or obtain a building permit for construction of authorized facilities within six months after the effective date of the special permit, or the special permit shall expired. In the case of temporary special permits, unless otherwise specified within the permit, the permit shall expire after six (6) months from its effective date. Within thirty (30) days after the date of expiration, the applicant shall have removed from the premises the temporary use and any improvements of a temporary nature authorized by the permit. (Ord. 3354 Sec. 2, 1999.) 25.86.120 EXTENSIONS. A one-time extension of a special permit may be granted provided the extension does not exceed six months and an application for extension is submitted to the City Planner no later than thirty days after the expiration date of the special permit. This provision does not apply to temporary special permits. (Ord. 3354 Sec. 2, 1999.) 25.86.130 REVOCATION OF PERMIT. Any special permit maybe revoked by the City Council if, after a public hearing, notice of which shall be given in accordance with Section 25.88.040, it is found that the conditions upon which the special permit was authorized have not been fulfilled or if the use authorized has changed in size, scope, nature or intensity so as to become a detriment to the surrounding area. The decision of the City Council is final. (Ord. 3354 Sec. 2, 1999.) PMC Title 25 9/15/2008 153 ATTACHMENT 3 TerraScan TaxSifter-Franklin County Washington http*,/teria.co.franklin.wa.us/Ta xSifter/AppraisalDetaits.aspx?kcyI... FRANKLIN COUNTY WASHINGTON TAXSI FIFER SIMPLE SEARCH SALES SEARCH REET SIFTER COUNTY HOME PAGE CONTACT Steve Marks Frarklir County Assessor 1016 N. 4th Ave Pasco,WA 99301 Assessor Treasurer Appraisal MapSliter Parcel Parcel#: 118481019 Owner Name FAITH ASSEMBLY CHURCH CTR DOR Code: 16 - Residential - All other Addressl Situ$ Add ress2: 1800 N ROAD 72 Map Number: 092921.00.000000.000.0000 City, State PASCO WA ZiP: 99301-1875 Description: NE4NW4SE4, LESS E 208 71' OF 21-9.29 OF S 208.71', LESS N 30' FOR WERNETT RD (255275) TerraScan TaxSifter-Franklin County Washington http://terra.co.franklin.wa.us/Ta xSifter/AppraisaiDetaiIs.aspx?keyI... Land Land Land Unit Unity Land Width Depth Code Type Shape Res Acres 3.00 Rectangle AC TerraScan TaxSifter-Franklin County Washington http*,/teria.co.franklin.wa.us/Ta xSifter/AppraisalDetaits.aspx?kcyI... FRANKLIN COUNTY WASHINGTON TAXSI FIFER SIMPLE SEARCH SALES SEARCH REET SIFTER COUNTY HOME PAGE CONTACT Steve Marks Frarklir County Assessor 1016 N. 4th Ave Pasco,WA 99301 Assessor Treasurer Appraisal MapSilter Parcel Parcel#: 118481037 Owner Name FAITH ASSEMBLY CHURCH CTR DOR Code: 1a - Residertial - All other Addressl Situ$ Add ress2: 1800 N ROAD 72 Map Number: 092921.00.000000.000.0000 City, State PASCO WA Zip: 99301-1875 Description: SE4NW4SE4, LESS S 155' CF E 21.9.29 230' THERE©F TerraScan TaxSifter-Franklin County Washington http://terra.co.franklin.wa.us/Ta xSifter/AppraisalDetails.aspx?keyI... Land Land Land Unit Unity Land Width Depth Code Type Shape Res Acres 3.13 Rectangle AC ATTACHMENT 4 AGENDA PASCO CITY COUNCIL Regular :Meeting 7:00 p.m. November 2, 2009 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL: (a) Pledge of Allegiance. 3. CONSENT AGENDA: All items listed under the Consent Agenda are considered to be routine by the Citv Cou=1 and will be enacted by roll call vote as one motion (in the form listed below). There will be no separate discussion of these items. If further discussion is desired by Councilmembers or the public, the item may be removed from the Consent Agenda to the Regular Agenda and considered separately. (a) Approval of Minutes: 1. Minutes of the Pasco City Council Meeting dated October 19, 2009. (b) Bills and Communications: (A detailed listing of claims is available for review in the Finance Manager's office.) 1. To approve General Claims in the arnount of$2,598,921.24 ($78,923.68 in the form of Wire Transfer Nos. 5331 and 5332; and $2,519,997.56 consisting of Claim Warrants numbered 174010 through 174216). 2. To approve Payroll Claims in the amount of$1,849,$57.24, Voucher Nos. 40361 through 40453; and EFT Deposit Nos. 30033175 through 30033722. (c) PUP Easement in Heritage Park(MT #INF009-101): 1. Agenda Report from David 1. McDonald, City Planner dated October 21, 2009, 2. Vicinity Map. 3. PUD Easement, 4. PUD Power Line Map. To authorize the City Manager and City Clerk to sign the document granting the Franklin County PUD an easement across a portion of Heritage Park for electrical power lines. (d) Tourism Promotion Area: 1. Agenda Report from Gary Crutchfield,City Manager dated October 22, 2009. 2. 2010 TPA Budget Summary. 3. 2010 TPA Business Plan (provided in Council packets of 1026; copy available for public review in the City Manager's office). To approve the 2010 operating budget for the Tourism Promotion Area in the total amount of $810,000, *(e�) Final Plat: Three Rivers Crossing Division 2, Phase 2 (Hayden Homes) (MEF#F709-006): 1. Agenda Report from David I. McDonald, City Planner dated October 28, 2009. 2. Final Plat (Council packets only; copies available for public review in the Planning office, the Pasco Library or on the city's webpage at hrg2://www.TMasc4- tivac ov%ne;neraIinfn%citvcouncilreports). 3. Overview Map. 4. Vicinity Map. To approve the Final Plat for Three Rivers Crossing Division 2, Phase 2: (RC) MOTION: 1 move to approve the Consent Agenda as read, 4. PROCLAMATIONS AND ACKNOXN'LEDGMENTS: (a) (b) (c) 5. VISITORS -OTHER THAN AGENDA ITEMS: (a) (b) (c) Rcgular Meeting 2 - November 2,2009 6, REPORTS FROM COMMITTEES ANDfOR OFFICERS: (a.) Verbal Rcports from Councilmembers (b) (c) 7. PUBLIC HEARINGS AND COUNCIL. ACTION ON ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS RELATING:THF12}:TO.- (a) Local Improvement District No. 147 to Create LID for California Avenue from Broadway Boulevard to Bonneville Street and Bonneville Street from Orcgon Avcnue to California Avenue. 1. Agenda Report from Michael McShane,City Engineer eluted October 29, 2009. 2. Assessment Map. 3. Ordinance. CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING (continued) Ordinance No. , an Ordinance of the City of Pasco. Washington, relating to City stree=t improvements: ordering the improvement to approximately 1100 feet o1'Caliibrnia Avenue soutli of Broadway Street and 600 feet of Bonneville Street east of Oregon Avenue, to City street standards all in accordance with Resolution No. 3182 of the City Council; establishing Local Improvement District No. 147, and ordering the carrying out of the proposed improvements; providing; that payment for the improvements be made by special assessments upon the property in the District, payable by the made of"paynrent by bends"; and providing for the issuance and sale of local improvement district warrants redeemable in cash or other short-term financing and local improvement district bonds. MOTION: I move to adopt Ordinance , creating Local Improvement District 147 for California Avenue from Broadway Boulevard to Bonneville Street and Bonneville Street from Oregon Avenue to California Avenue and, further,authorim publication by summary only. *(b) Access and Utility Easement Vacation (Access and Utility Easements in the east half of Section 15,1*9N,R29E)(Linda Loviisa)(MF#VAC09-012). 1, Agenda Report from David 1.McDonald,City Planner dated October 27. _V09, 2. Overview Map, 3. Proposed Ordinance, CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING Ordinance No. , an Ordinance vacating Access and Utility Easements in Section 15. Township 9 North, Range 29 East,W.M. MOTION: I move to adopt Ordinance _ , vacating access and utility easements in Section 15, Township 9 North,Range 29 East and, further,to authorize publication by summary only, 8. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS NOT RELATING TO PUBLIC IEARINGS: Q(a) Special Permit (Appeal) Location of a Corn MazclFarm in an RS-211 ?one: (2000 Block of Road 72)(Haywire Farms) (i<SF ifSP09-007). 1. Agenda Report iiom David 1. McDonald,City Planner dated October 27, 2009, 2. Vicinity Map. 3. Binder containing Hearing Record (Council packets only; eopy available ffir public review in the Planning office, the Pasco Library or on the citti's webpage at http:,:'esuTu.yt�sco- wa.t-xn-12enera linfofcttycounei Ire uorts), 4. Proposed Resolution Approving,the Corn Maze and f=arm. 5. Proposed Resolution Approving only a Farm. 6. Motions. CONDUCT A CLOSED RECORD HEARING I. Motion to Accent Planning Commission Recommendation: (Not recommended by staff) Resolution No. , a Resolution approving a Special Permit for Philipp Schmitt of l laywire Fares to Operate a Corn Maze and Farm in the'_'000 Block of Road 72. 'MOTION 1: 1 move to concur with the f=indings of Fact cif the Planning Commission and approve Resolution Nn. approving a Special Permit for a Corn Maze and Farm in the 2000 Block of Road 72. Regular Meeting -- 1 — November 2,20119 2. Motion to Approve a Farm onl : (Recommended by staff) Resolution No. , a Resolution approving a Special Permit for Philipp Schmitt of Haywire Farms to Operate;a Fart in the 2000 Block of Road 72. MOTION 2A: 1 move to adapt the Findings;of Fact for a Farm only as contained in the stall* report to the Planning Commission. MOTION 2B: Based on the bindings of Fact as adopted, I move to approve Resolution Net. . approving;a Special Permit for a Farm only in the 2000 Block of Road 72. 3. Motion to Approve a Com Maze and Fares with Modified Conditions; MOTION 3: 1 move to table action on the Special Permit application until December 7,2009 to allow staff time to prepare an,approval reeolution with the following additional or modified. conditions(list the conditions). 4. Motion to Deny the Special Permit:, MOTION 4: 1 move to cable action on the Special Pcsmit application until December 7. 2009 to allow staff time to prepare findings to support denial ol'the Special Permit. 5. 'Motion to Remand back to the Plannine Com is ' MOTION 5: 1 move to remand the matter back to the Planning Commission for further review on (list the items of"concern that need additional review or clarification). Q*(b) Ordinance No. , an Ordinance of the City of Pasco, Washington. amending the zoning classification of Lot w and the westerly 50 feet of Lot 1. Block 1 Cline Addition from R-I (Low Density Residential) to C-1 (Retail Business)with a concomitant agreement. 1. Agenda Rcport fi-om Shane O'Neill. Planner I dated October 7,21009. 2. Proposed Rezone Ordinance. 3. Planning Commission Report. 4. Planning.Commission Minutes dated 9=17=1)9 and 10115/09. MOTION: I move to adopt Ordinance loo. . granting a rezone for a parcel of land at 4215 West Court Street from R-I to C-1 with a concomitant agreement as recommended by the Planning Commission and, further.to authorize publication by summary only. 9. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: (a) Local Improvement District No. 146 for the Kurtzman Park neighborhood Improvements, Phase 1: I. Agenda Report from Kick White. Community &- Economic Development Director dated October 28,2009. 2. Vicinity Map. 3. Ordinance No.3932, Original Boundaries and Costs. 4. Map with Original LID Boundary. 5. Ordianance No. 3932.Amended Boundaries and Costs. 6. Map with Revised LID Boundary. 7. Financial Comparison of the two Options. Ordinance No. 3932, an Ordinance of the City of Pasco. Washington. relating; to City street improvements: ordering the improvement to approximately 4600 feet in total,of Elm Avenue and Sycamore Avenue; north of Alton Street and south of Lewis Street and Sycamore Avenue, Hugo Avenue. Waldemar Avenue and Cedar Avenue north of"A" Strect and south of Butte Street and Butte Street eact of Elm Avenue and west of Cedar Avenue, to City standards, to include curb, gutter, sidewalks, storm drainage system, street lighting. and roadway improvements all in accordance with Resolution No. 3179 of the City Council: establishing Local Improvement District No. 146, and ordering the carrying out of the; proposed improvements; providing that payment for the intprovcrments be.made by special assessments upon the property in the District, payable by the mode of`'payment by bonds": and providing for the issuance and sale of local improvement distriet warrants redeemable in cash or other sb rt-term financing and local improvemem district bonds. MOTION: I move to adopt Ordinance No. 3932, creating 1.11) No. 146 for Kurtzman Part, Neighborhood Improvements Phase 1. -OR- Regular Meeting _ 4 November 2. 2009 Ordinance No. 3932, an ordinance of the City of Pasco, Washington, Mating to City street improvements; ordering the improvement to approximately 3400 feet in total, of Elin Avenue, north of Alton Street and south of I.ewis Street and Sycamore Avenue. Hugo Avenue. Waldemar Avenue and Cedar Avenue north of"A" Street and south of Butte Street and Butte Stmet east of Elm Avenue and west of Cedar Avenue, to City standards, to include curb, ►utter, sidewalks, storm drainage system, street lighting, and roadway improvements all in act'ordance with Resolution No. 3179 of the City Council; establishing Local Improvement District No. 146, and ordering the carrying out of the proposed improvements; providing that payment for the improvements be made by special assessments upon the property in the District. payable by the mode of "payment by bonds": and providing for the issuance and sale: of local improvement district warrants redeemable in cash or other short.-term financing and local improvement district bonds. MOTION: I move to amend Ordinance No. 3932. crating LID No. 140 for Kurtzman Park Neighborhood Improvements Phase I, by rani-sving properties on Sycamore Avenue, north of Attun Street, and ruduchtg the cost accordingly as presented in the proposed€mended Ordinance 3932. -AND- MOTION; I nxivc to adopt Ordinance 3932, as amended. 10. NEW BUSINESS: *(a) Improvements to the Martin Luther King Center: L Agenda Report from Rick Terway, Administrative do Community Services Director dated October 29, '009. 2. Chid I'abulation Sheet, (RC) MOTION. I move to award the contract for the rmiud'l of the llfartin Luther King Center Project to Dardan Enterprises, Inc., in the amount of$103.461.00 plus sales tax, including the base bid, and alternate bid number one (1) Accessibility to Gym. and alternate number two (2) Hot Water Heater upgrades and, further, authorise the Mayor to sign the contract. *(b) Commercial Avenue Water and Sewer Pipelines Project No. lit-2-01; 1, Agenda Report from Jess Greenough,Field Division Manager dated October 29,2009- 2. Bid Summary. 3. Vicinity Map. (RC) MOTION. I move to award the low bid for Commercial Avenue. 'Water and Sewer Pipelines Project No. 10-2-01 to Premier Excavation in the amount of$455,618,00, plus applicable sales tax and, further, authorize the Mayor to sign the contract documents. *(c) Award 2009 Sewer Lining Project No. 09-1-01: 1. Agenda Report from Michael McShane,City Fngineer dated(October 14.2009. 2. Bid Summary. 3. Vicinity Map. (RC) MOTION: 1 move to award the low bid, including alternate area 1, 2. 3 & 4, t`or the 2(()9 Sewer Lining Project No. 09-1-01 to RePipe�California. Inc., in the amount of $346,242,50, plus applicable sales tax and, further, authorize the Mayor to sign the contract documents. II, MISCELLANEOUS DISCUSSION: (a) (b) (c) 12, EXECUTIVE SESSION; (a) (b) (c) 13. ADJOURNMENT, (RC) Roll tall Vote Required * Item not previously discussed M1­# "Master File#...." Q Quasi-Judicial Matter Regular Meeting S November 2, 2009 REMINDERS: 1. 1:30 p.rn- Monday, November 2, KGH - Emergency Medical Services Board !Fleeting. (COUNCILMEMBER TOM L_ARSEN.Rep.:AL YENNEY. Alt.) 2. 12:00 p.m.. Wednesday, November 4, 2601 N. Capitol Avenue - Franklin County Mosquito Control District Meeting. (COUNC'ILMEMBER BOB HOFFMANN.Rep..AI, YENNEY,Alt.) 3. 4:00-7:00 p.in., Thursday, November 5,Three-Rivers Convention Center-Tri-Cities Visitor&Convention Bureau's Annual Meeting and Tourism Showcase Reception. (Al I. COIINC'ILMEMBERS INVITED TO ATTEND) 4. 5:30 p.m., Thursday, November 5. Parks & Rec. Classroom - Parks &- Recreation Advisory Council Meeting. (CO1JNCI1,MEMBER REBECCA FRANCIIt. Rep.; MIKI:GARRISON,Alt.) 5. 11:30 a.m., Friday, November 6, Pasco Red Lion--Washington Council of the Blind Conference Welcome Address. (COUNCILMF,MBER BOB HOFFMANN) 6. 9:30 a.m.. Saturday, November 7 - West Richland Chamber of Commerve Veterans' Day Parade. (COLrNCILMF.MBFRS TOM LARSEN and A.I. YLNNI'Y) AGEND A REPORT FUR: City Council October 27, 2009 TO: Gary Crutchfield, Regular kltD.: 11/2;09 Rick Whitc, Community& Eco mic Development Director FROM: David 1. McDonald,City Planner SUH37C:T: SPECIAL PERMIT — APPEAL Location of a Corn MaaetTarm in an-RS-20 Zone e(2000 Block of Road 72) (11a3g v'ire Farms) (MT) SP 09-0071 1. REF ERi',lw CEPS)- I. Vicinity•Map ?, Binder. Containing Hearing Record* :3. Proposed Resolution approving the Corn maze and than 4. Proposed Rcsoluti.on approving only a farm 5. Motions * (Attachments in Council packets only; copies available for public review in the Planning otlice, the Pasco library or on the city's webpage at littp:e,/wwwxasco- wa.gnv<gen era]in fo/c i ivcounci i reports} 11. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL 1 STAFF REC'OMMti NDA-I'IONS: A. CONDUCT A CLOSED RECORD HEARING. B. Council action based on the record (reports, correspondence and transcript)either (I.) Approving the special permit as recommended by the Planning Commission; (2) Approving a Special Permit for a farm only; (3) Approving the Special Permit with modified or additional conditions, i4J Rejecting the Special Pernnit request; or, (5) Remanding the matter Yuck to the Planning Commission for further review on a specific issue. C. Recommended motions are provided in Reference #5. 111. FISCAL 1.NIPACT: NONE 1V. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF: A. On July 15, 2007 the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing to consider a Special Permit for the location of a corn maze and farm proposed for the field north of the Faith Assembly Church in the 2000 Block of Road 72, The Planning Commission recommended approval of a Special Pennit for the corn maze/farm. B. Following the Planning Commission decision, adjoining property owners filed a written appeal of the Planning Commission's recommendation. The attaclhcd appeal petition explains the reasoning behind the appeal. C. Following the appeal the City Council set a Closed Record Hearing for November 2, 2009. 8(a) V. DISCUSSION: Consideration of an appeal occurs in the forin of a"Closed Record Hearing" consisting of a review of the written record of the Special Permit application including the Planning Commission's deliberation. When c..onsidering this appeal, the City Council has the option of rejecting the application, accepting the Planning Commission's rccomnielidation approving the application with additional conditions or approving only the farming portion of the application_ In acting on the special pv-nnit application as per the criteria of PMC 215. 86.060 Council should determine whether or not: (1) The proposal is in accordance with the goals, policies, obirctir'cs, 111aps andior narrative text of the Comprehensive Plan; (:2) The proposal will adversely affect public infrastructure, (3) The proposal will be constructed, maintained and operated to be in harmony with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity; (4) The location and height of proposed structures and the site design will discourage the development of permitted uses on property in the general vicinity or impair the value thereof; (5) The operations in eunnection with the proposal will be more objectionable to nearby properties by reason of noise, fumes, vibrations, dust. tragic, or flashing lights than would be the operation of any permitted uses within die district; and (b) The proposal will 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. Any option the Council chooses to select for the Special Perinit application will need to be supported by Findings of Fact. The bindings identified in the staff report to the Planning Commis%ion can be used as Findings to support approval of the Special Permit as recommended by the Planning Commission or to deny the corn maze and approve the farm as recommended by staff. For any other action the Council will need to develop a separate. list of findings. Staff recommends the Council use motion # 2A and # 2H to deny the corn maze and approve the fain. REFERENCE #3 Resolution for Approval of a corn ►Haze/#ar►n RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION APPROVING A SPECIAL PERMIT FOR PHILIPP SCHMITT OF HAYWIiZE FARMS TO OPERATF A CORN MAZE AND FARM. IN THE 2000 BLOCK OF ROAD 72. WE EREAS, Philipp Schmitt submitted an application for a Special Permit to locate and operate a corn maze and farm in the 2000 Block of Road 72 on June 30, 2009: and, WRERFAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on July 16, 2009 to review the proposed maze/farm application, anti; WHEREAS, following deliberations on August 20, 2009 and on September 17, 2009 the Planning Commission recommended approval of a Special Pennit for both the corn maze and farm with certain conditions; WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed the recorded for the corn maze/farm application in a closed record hearing on November 2, 2009; NOW.THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO: 1. That a Spacial Permit is hereby granted to Philipp Schmitt and haywire Farm for a Corn Maze and Farm located in the 2000 Block of Road 72 (Parcel #s 118-4. 81-03 7 & 118-481-019) under Mastcr File#SP09-007 with the following conditions: (1) The special pennit is personal to the applicant; (2) The applicant must provide the City with a designated parking and traffic control plan to be approved by the City Engineer to ensure vehicles use the church parking lot; (3) No on street parking is pennittcd, (4) A daily litter control plan must be provided to the City to be approved by the Inspection Services Manager; (5) A site security plan must be submitted to the City for police and fire review prior to the issuance of a business license; (6) Portable toilets and sanitation (hand washing) stations must be provided on site. The Inspection Service Managcr will determine the number of toilets and sanitation station needed; (7) Sanitation stations must meet all applicable laws and r0gulati011s; (8) Portable toilets must be located out of direct sight from adjoining homes and be no less than 75 feet from any adjoining property lines or street right-of- way; (9) Any night lighting on the site must not spill onto adjacent properties. All lighting must be shielded per PMC 12.32.040. (10) Illuminated signs are prohibited; REFERENCE #3 Resolution for Approval ol'a corn inazeitimn (l l) Signage must be limited to the entrance near the church parking lot. One directional sign is permitted on church property at the corner of Road '72 and Court Street; (12) No signage is permitted on argent Road, lrernctt Road or any ether off--site location; (13) Event operations must cease by 9:00 pm on weekdays and 10:00 pni on weekends; (14) No amplified music or public announcement systems are permitted; (15) The applicant must at all times comply with City noise regulations iP.'-VIC 9.61); (16) The concession stand must be located adjacent to the church barking lot; 0 7) The corn maze must be setback 30 feet from the west property line of the site, ?5 feet Crone Road 72 and 30 feet from the two homes on the west side of Road 72; (18) A two to three foot high fence is required around all areas planted with corn to stop com leaves from blowing into neighboring properties; (19) The corn macs; and listival activities will not be permitted until the applicant obtains a business license and approval of the parking and traffic plan and litter control plan; (20) The site cannot be used for produce stands selling produce other than pumpkins; (21) All temporary fencing, structures,portable toilets, concession stands and other items associated with the corn maze and festival activities must be removed from (lie site within 15 days of the close of the corn maze; (22) All fields used for crops (corn and pumpkins) must be tilled and restored to a state similar to that which existed prior to the planting of the craps within 15 days of the close of the coat maze; (23) All fields must be treated (with a cover crop or by other means) for dust control within 15 days of the close of the corn maze.; (24) Any lhrming activity under this Special Permit shall he operated by using best management practices for agricultural production; (25) The applicant must prepare a conservation plan approved by a farm service agency. A copy of the plan must be submitted to the city prior to the operation of"the farm; (26) No irrigation water is permitted to be sprayed or otherwise drain onto the adjoining right-ot-way; (27) Irrigation water and farm chemicals must be applied at agronomic. rates; (28) The tarns crop shall be limited to alfalfa or row crops such as pumpkins, tomatoes, watermelons, peppers, and etc. The definition of row crops does not include wheat, barley, buckwheat and similar grains; (29) No farm equipmcnt is permitted to be stored on the. site. (30) The Special Permit for the farming portion of the application shall be valid for a period of 3 years and will automatically extend for an additional 3 years 11' the applicant adheres to the conditio»s of Special Permit approval; REFERENCE 4`3 Resolution for Approval of a corn rnazclfarrn (31) The Special Permit for the corn mace portion of the application is valid for a period of one year during either the 2009 or 2010 season. Any subsequent use of the site ibr a corn maze and associated activities will require Special Permit review. (32) The Special Permit shall be null and void for the farming portion of the app]ication if the farming activity has not begun by June, 2010. Passed by the City Council of the City of Pasco this Z"d day of November, 2009 Joyce Olson, Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO 'FORM: Debra Clark, Cite Clark Leland B. Kerr, City Attorney REFERENCE #4 Resolution for approval elf a farm only RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION APPROVING A SPECIAL PERN41T FOR PHILIPP SCHMI'T'T OF HAYWIR.E FARMS TO OPERATE A FARM IN THE 2000 BLOCK OF ROAD 72. WHEREAS, Philipp Schmitt submitted aii application for a Special Permit to locate and operate a corn male and farm in the 2000 Block of Road 72 on June 30, 2009; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on July 16. 2009 to review the proposed maze/farm application, and; WHEREAS, following deliberations on August 20, 2009 and on September I7, 2009 the Planning Commission recormnecided approval of a Special Permit for both the corn male and farm with certain conditions; WHEREAS, the City Council re%icwcd the recorded for the corn mare/farm application in a closed record hearing o1i November'), 2009; NO'W', THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO: I. That a Special Permit is hereby granted to Philipp Schmitt and Haywire Farms for x Corn Maze and Farm located in the :000 Block of Road 72 (Parcel #s 118-481- 037 & 118-481-019)under blaster File# SP09-007 with the following conditions: (1) The Special Permit is personal to the applicant; (2) The Special Permit shall be for farming only and clues not permit the use of the property for a corn make, a fall festival, or anything like unto it; (3) The farm shall be operated by using best management practices for agricultural production; (4) The applicant must prepare a conservation plan approved by a farm service agency. A copy of the plan n►ust be submitted to the city prior to the operation of the t"arn►; (5) No irrigation water is permitted to be sprayed or otherwise drain onto the adjoining right-of-way, (6) Irrigation water and farm chemicals must be applied at agronomic rates; (7) 'The farm crop shall be limited to alfalta or row crops such as pumpkins, ton►atocs, watermelons,peppers, and etc. The definition of row craps does not include wheat, barley,buckwheat and similar grains; (8) No farm equipment is permitted to be stored on the site; (9) The Special Permit shall be valid for a period of 3 years and will automatically cxtend for an additional 3 years if the applicant adheres to the conditions of Special Permit appro al; REFERFNC E #4 Resolution for approval of a farin only (10) The Special Permit shall be null acid void if farming activity bas not begun by April, 2010. (11) Passed by the City Council of the City of Pasco this 2nd day of November, 2009 Joyce Olson.. Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: Debra Clark,City Clerlc Leland B. Kerr, City Attorney REFERENCE ;05 :Notion Options The following motions can he used for action on the Corn Maze[Farm Special Permit 1) Motion to Accept Planning Commission Recommendation: (Not Recommended by Staff) Motion 1: 1 moved to concur with the Findings of Fact of the Planning Commission and approve Resolution Igo. _ approving a Special Permit for a corn maze and farm iii the 2000 block of Road 72. 2) Motion to Approve a farm only: (Recommended by Staff) :Motion 2 A: I move to adopt the Findings of Fact for a farm only ac contained in the staff report to the Planning Commission. Motion '2 B: Based on the Findings of Fact as adopted 1 move to approve Resolution No. approving a Special Permit for a farm only in the 2000 Block of Road 72. 3) Motion to Approve a Corn Maze and Farm with modified conditions: .lotion 3: 1 move to table action on the Special Permit application until December 7, 2009 to allow staff tiine to prepare an approval resolution with the following additional or modified conditions(list the conditions). 4) Motion to deny the Special Permit_ :Motion 4: I move to table action on the Special Permit application until Decerriber 7, 2009 to allow state' time to prepare findings to support denial of the Special Permit. 5) :Motion to remand back to the Planning Commission: Notion 5: I move to remand the matter back to the Planning Commission for further review on (list the items of concern that need additional review or Clarification). SP 09-007: PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 7/16/09 COMMISSIONER SAMUEL, CHAIRMAN: The final public hearing for this evening is item # 5C a special permit for the location of a corn maze/farm in a RS- 20 zone. This is at the 2000 block of Road 76. The applicant is Phillip Schmitt of Haywire Farms. This is Master File #SP 09-007 and we will start this item with some comments from city staff. SHANE O'NEILL, PLANNER I: Thank you Mr. Chairman. The applicant Phillip Schmitt of Haywire Farms is requesting a special permit to conduct farming and an associated temporary event in an RS-20 zone. The site consists of 3 individual parcels with consistent ownership of the Faith Assembly of God Church. The site is located in the 2000 block of Road 72, south of Wernett Road. The cumulative site is approximately 28 acres. It has access from Road 72 as well as Wernett Road. The Faith Assembly of God Church is surrounded by county land on the northeast and west. The surrounding land use and zoning are as follows; to the north it is zoned RS-20 however it's in the county and is a residential use; to the south is within the city of Pasco, it's RS-20 zone owned and operated by the Nazarene Church; to the east is county land zoned RS-20 and used as residential; to the west is RS-20 county residential land as well. The comprehensive plan designates this area for low-density residential use. The proposal has been issued a determination of non-significance in accordance with SEPA. The applicant has requested a special permit to locate a corn maze and associated activities on 18 acres of land directly north of the Faith Assembly of God Church on Road 72. My understanding is that there will be a corn field and pumpkin patch where there will also be a summer festival, family oriented festival. The proposed corn maze will occupy 11 acres of the land directly north of the Faith Assembly of God Church. Twenty-three conditions relating to traffic, sanitation, lighting, signage, hours of operation, fencing, agricultural practices and permit expiration have been developed for your consideration. Because of the location of this proposal, the staff report has a condition for the permit to expire towards the end of this year. If you have any questions I would be happy to answer. COMMISSIONER SAMUEL, CHAIRMAN: Commissioners, any comments or questions on this particular item? Let me ask a question with regard to special condition# 10. Signage must be limited to the entrance near the church; no signage of any kind is permitted on Court Street, Argent Road, or other offsite locations, what is the thinking on that? 1 SP 09-007: PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 7/16/09 DAVE McDONALD, CITY PLANNER: Well, the thinking stems from the experience that occurred last year when Mr. Schmitt operated a corn maze on Road 68. In addition to that corn maze there was also, I guess, a produce stand and there were a number of signs placed up and down Road 68 and along Burden Boulevard that advertised his location and that signage violated the Pasco Municipal Code related to off-premise signs; and the other concern would be that this is in an area with a few homes in the neighborhood and it wouldn't be appropriate to have signage all over the place. Now Mr. Schmitt wants to address that this evening and perhaps ask that a sign be permitted at the corner of Wernett and Road 72 and a sign with the church office at the corner of Court and Road 72, but no others. COMMISSIONER SAMUEL, CHAIRMAN: Just before we go further on this, how does this relate to the sign code that we have like for yard sales that currently right now where someone wants to put a sign up for the day or for a couple of days saying hey I've got a yard sale at my house. Would it be permissible for him to do something similar to that, is that correct? DAVID McDONALD, CITY PLANNER: Well, my memory is not serving me well here on the sign code for yard sale signs and similar signs like that they are allowed to put them up and need to be taken down, can't be on fences or telephone poles although many people do that. This isn't a yard sale, it is a different animal which requires a special permit review and during that special permit review you can condition the activities that occur under this review. And one of those conditions that we as a staff are concerned about is the placement of signs and the number of signs. And that is why we included item in # 10. COMMISSIONER SAMUEL, CHAIRMAN: Other comments? COMMISSIONER CRUZ: I think your question is a very valid one. I think if we are going to enable a commercial enterprise we shouldn't be overly restrictive about signage and so I was a little curious why it was in here. I think Dave did a good job explaining it but I think there is a little bit more to the story because I remember that coming up at the Code Enforcement and I wish Angie was here. I think we are missing something here. I would just encourage everybody to think of this as you know having a bunch of people wandering through the neighborhood 2 SP 09-007: PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 7/16/09 because they can't figure out where it is at is not necessarily a good idea as well as plastered signs everywhere. COMMISSIONER SAMUEL, CHAIRMAN: K. Is the applicant here this evening to speak to this? Please come forward state your name and address and tell us what your plans are for this. PHILIPP SCHMITT, APPLICANT, 5604 McKinley Court, Pasco, WA 99301: To start off if I can take a second to correct something Mr. McDonald said and might have not been aware of. Last year we operated a produce stand and a corn maze right on the edge of the city limits of Pasco and Franklin County off of Road 68 about a half of mile north of the water tower. It was our first year at that location and I think our last year at that location. When we operated a produce stand early July we opened up the 121h of July last year and we painted signs. We put them on gooseneck trailers with big bails and we located them at Bank Reale's parking lot, TRAC's parking lot, and HAPO's parking lot. We had permission from these land owners to do that. We did not go out and what they call "gorilla tactics" with advertising for events or something like that and spread them around town. We had permission from those places. Mitch Nickolds contacted us about a week after they had been put up and notified we were in violation and they moved within three days. There was no second warning, there were no fines issued so we weren't trying "gorilla tactics" or anything like that, I thought I could legally do that. I wasn't... but since I asked permission... I didn't understand the code nor did I ever look into it. But, that was not repeated and when the corn maze opened up from August on and then we opened the corn maze on the ??"d of September last year. The only sign we had up was there on the edge of the property, so we did follow those rules I just wanted to clarify that. Ok. I would also like to take a half second to apologize my wife's' not here tonight because of a bureaucratic mistake on my part. I thought the meeting was next week. And so I sent my wife off and she is off crabbing in the San Juan's with my uncle and I am here shaking a little bit. Usually at least a week or so before the meeting my wife and I go around to our neighbors and we hand our proposal out. And introduce ourselves, who we are and answer questions at that point. I received my notification in the mail the other day because I am not opening my mail this week and I made a mad spin around today to my neighbors. It was very unprofessional last minute and I did not reach very many neighbors at all but I apologize we usually don't do it this way. It's our 12th year 3 SP 09-007: PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 7/16/09 doing this and this is the first time I have made this tactical mistake. But my wife and I own Haywire Farms and have been in operation since 1997. In the Tri-Cities primarily, we are a farming operation. We raise high density vegetable crops we sell at the farmers markets and to Yokes and the Red Apple in town. We also do seed crops and custom farming area. We have been doing the corn maze since 1998, and at that time for the first 4 years we had just started playing with the idea and had no idea where that road would end up. But we spent four years on Road 100 and Argent. That was our first location. My wife and I took over the whole full operation we were split up with some relatives at that point. And from then on we have been progressing since 2001 by ourselves. We had been bounced around in different locations in town. We like to stay near town and we are trying to buy ground farther out in the country but for right now we are land renters. So we look for good pieces of ground and we rent. After we left that location on Road 100 and Argent and 2001 was our last season and we moved over to Benton County for several years over there and had a great run and the ground opened up in Pasco last year and I got very excited because it was in my home territory and we moved over for a quick one year operation there and we went scampering this season looking for a piece. We have signed a lease with Faith Assembly to farm their ground, corn maze or not for the next three years with the option to farm for another three after that for a possible six years. That ground has not been irrigated from the knowledge we have got from the Franklin Irrigation District said since 1964. There has been no water rights to the ground and my wife and I attended Faith Assembly for the last year. I have been looking at that piece of ground it was in the City of Pasco I know I had a lot of hoops to jump through to make this try and work. And so we approached Faith Assembly to rent the ground with the intention of doing a corn maze. We did a little bit of research with the City and found out it was possible to do and so here we are today. We are currently putting an irrigation system into the ground. A pump station, utility with Franklin PUD and buying what they call outside water from the district. So yearly we will buy water from the Franklin district. Faith Assembly doesn't have plans at this point to bring it into the water district. So it is on a temporary basis. So just for the people, the neighbors that don't know what is going on, that's what we are planning to do. So whether the corn maze happens or not we will be farming that ground for several years it is a great piece of ground. But our history is one thing, but I know there are a lot of unanswered questions tonight. But what we primarily do is bring agri-tainment to 4 SP 09-007: PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 7/16/09 the Tri-Cities. It is a form of agriculture which is the same thing with the wineries bringing people out to tourism. But corn mazes and pumpkin patches are a fall festival type activity and we have been fairly popular in the Tri-Cities besides us there is the Country Mercantile on 395. And so, the two of us kind of battle for families and pumpkin sales every year in the Tri-Cities. Besides jumping to other pieces of ground we have got a fantastic record. I know that the committee up front and my neighbors behind me have all kinds of questions and I am just going to start off in the beginning. I know what most of those questions are since we went through the permits for years at different corn maze locations. Primarily they are noise, dust, traffic control, public safety, the possibility of trespass or vandalism on neighboring properties. Litter, sanitation, health codes from the Benton-Franklin Health Department. And in the last 12 years I am proud to say and this is a notable fact, we have never once been fined or been given warnings by any of the departments that regulate any of those situations. Whether it was clean air authority or Benton County, we have got flying colors from everybody. We take public safety, sanitation, litter, we take all those and we really appreciate the fact that we were allowed to operate and we really controlled those situations very tightly. And we have had no situations or fines ever in our history and that is a noble fact. I don't know how to present that or show that but we have a fantastic history. We are all in it to make the city or the county wherever or whoever we are dealing with happy with what we do and our neighbors cause we understand if neighbors aren't happy we are not going to be around there very long. We would like to be there for the next few years. Reading over the permit right here, our plans are basically, there is a map, do you have the map of our proposal of our corn field kind of like we would like to map it out this season. So I know some of my neighbors have a tentative map how we would like to layout the crops and I don't know if the committee does. But the layout explains quite a bit, so layout to us is everything. Over the last few years we have figured out how the traffic flow, how the crops flow, how to buffer sound and noise of our tractor rides to take the kids out for hayrides and we have learned how to do that quite a bit. So our layout is very important to us. If I speak loud may I walk over to the screen? COMMISSIONER SAMUEL, CHAIRMAN: They won't be able to see on TV so you need to stay in front of the podium. 5 SP 09-007: PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 7/16/09 PHILIPP SCHMITT, APPLICANT: ok alright. So we have the church down here in the corner and this is their northern parking lot. Traffic flow we got permission from the church and urn we are renting their big parking lot. There is 210 paved marked parking spots here that are fully lighted at night time. The lights come on automatically I think at 8:45 or 8:30 and they shut off at 4 or 5 in the morning. That is where we are going to have people park at. They will be entering on the paved most northern paved entrance here on Road 72 just north of the church building. That's our entrance to the maze site right there, they park in obviously the parking area and then they enter our facility or our entertainment area in this brown section between these two trees right here if that is visible to people. And in that area we have about an acre, acre and a half that was printed here about half acre, almost an acre, acre and a half. In that area we have our concessions, our ticket booth, we have our kid activities which include a straw bale maze, a straw bale pyramid, all kinds of activities for families and kids playing. We do our pumpkin sales in there, we have our hayride that loops there and stops, that is where we load people up. We have, we will be building three little buildings this year on skids very, very small buildings. One will be a ticket booth, and then we will have a small little concession stand and a kettle corn stand. So we will have three little buildings out there the size of tool sheds basically. I will be doing our administration and concessions out of there, we are possibly going to be working a deal with the Kennewick Lions Club to do concessions this year. We have always done it ourselves but we are thinking of farming that out to their group as a philanthropy event this year. From this area they enter the corn maze and from our layout we haven't got that designed yet, we won't know until we disc the field and really see the soil conditions but we are looking at doing about a 7-acre corn maze right here in a rectangle pattern and if you have pictures of our past corn mazes we do all different kinds of different designs and this year it's either going to be the dust devils stadium or we are going to put the Pasco bulldog on one end of the field and the Chiawana hawk on it and are kind of our logo ideas just you know and so it begins cause we are going to have a big rivalry and its going to start up its early coming and going I got employees from both schools right there and its already on. So that is kind of our plan or idea. The maze will be about between six and seven acres in size we won't know until we lay it out and cut it, it will have two phases or two parts and we do that for when the public is in there. Most people it takes about 20 minutes to 25 minutes to do each half. Or what we call phase one or phase two. 6 SP 09-007: PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 7/16/09 We split it in two halves so if people go in there moms or dads you have little kids and they have to use the bathroom and it's not wise to have an hour long puzzle throughout there so they can get back out front, take a break, quit if they like or try the second half of the maze. So it is a two part puzzle and in the pictures you have of some of our past mazes those are in your packets you could trace your fingers on it you can see two distinct halves in there. Inside the maze we have usually two fire escapes that are clearly marked, so are what we call emergency escapes there are no fires in a green corn field and so people can go to the outside of the field which is clearly rototilled and packed down so people can walk around the outside and we do have people who occasionally say I am not for this and I am out of this thing, they walk around the edge and come right back into our entertainment area. The back half of our field is our pumpkin patch and that will range this year between five and six acres of pumpkins that might be a little confusing to people because we haven't planted anything yet but our backyard has about six acres of pumpkins planted nursery transplants we are ready to pop them in the ground as soon as we have water. So there you go with pumpkins. We usually plant our corn between the 20th and 25th of July every year. It's very late and we do this for a specific reason after doing corn mazes for 12 years we've learned really quick that corn dries out obviously and most farmers plant early in the spring, April or May, and they harvest it for feed corn or sweet corn whatever it might be. We plant very late and we have learned this neat little trick that if we plant late in the season it might not get as tall as some of the corn fields you see driving down the road. The neat thing is it stays green in October. And it stays very green it is lush and beautiful. Until we get our first heavy frost it bleaches it over a couple days. And that is just two things. Not only does it keep a very nice ambience in the neighborhood, but you don't have a fire hazard, there is absolutely no fire hazard out there and when we're in 2001 the city of Pasco annexed that ground that we have on Argent. Our 4th year at that location and we dealt with the Fire Marshall for the first time out there and it was the first time I had dealt with Dave in the Planning Office here and the Fire Marshall at that time was very concerned about dry corn. It took one trip out there and he said good bye its green. You know we are not worried about that so. That's why we plant so late and so for those of you who aren't sure why there is nothing in the field that's exactly it. So the corn pumpkin fields in the back we plant about 8 or 9 different varieties of pumpkins and we sell those to the public. We have hayrides that we make a little road out to SP 09-007: PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 7/16/09 the corn, we just rototill a path out there and we take the hayride wagons out there and drop people off, they wander around for 15 minutes and every 10 or 15 minutes a wagon runs through there and we pick them up bring their pumpkins up front and weigh them and they are out of there. That is kind of our basic setup. And I'm not sure what else to say about our general setup. We have a road that will be around the outside of the field their asking for that here in the approval conditions and we do that. We have a road around the outside so if we ever do have an emergency and an ambulance for some reason or fire truck had to go around the outside we leave the wide roads there we basically turned dirt into an asphalt road, we rototill it, pack it, we water it once and its rock hard you could almost rollerblade after the first day. And we do that also inside the paths of the corn maze technique we use but it's hard to push strollers through corn. So we keep everything for us we want to keep that dirt down we rototill it, we pack it, it is solid no dust. And that is why we have never had a dust violation or warning from the Clean Air Department here in Richland and when we are in Benton County for years we had to go talk to them every single season about what we were going to do we've never had them visit or a phone call. So it has worked out really well for us and the best thing of all we have a paved parking lot so no longer do we have to run around with a water truck and water trailer to keep that thing soaked. We had one experience in Spokane years ago, we couldn't keep with a wind storm I never want to let that happen again. So never got a ticket from it but the neighbor owned a car lot about a half mile away was not very happy with us so. But, our entertainment area like I said will have a small petting zoo in there we bring in farm animals from friends that we know and from local 4H groups so we will have a donkey, we will have turkeys, chickens. We will have baby calves in there this year we would like to do our little piglet races again we get 6 or 7 piglets we teach them to run around a track after chocolate pudding at the end it's a fun family attraction. We need to follow and we do follow the rules that the USDA has in place. Anytime you have animals that the public can touch and pet we have to have sanitation systems set up and we do that with the Benton-Franklin County health Departments and so we have hand washing facilities out there that are that are serviced by a local sanitation company and then we also have to deal with veterinarian visits out there because we have animals in contact with the public and they want to make sure we're taking good care of the animals so we have a whole different set of guidelines to follow on that. Our opening hours are basically 8 SP 09-007: PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 7/16/09 Monday through Friday from about 4 o'clock in the afternoon until about 9 pm at nighttime and on Saturdays we're open from 10am to 10 pm at night and then on Sundays we are open after church about 1 o'clock until about 5 pm. On weekdays we are open in the mornings just to private tours. We do a very large amount of grade school tours and last year we did you know about almost 2,000 kids and individual tours in the mornings just a couple of school buses come in and we give them a personal tour and we have them for about an hour and a half at our site. It's a lot of fun it's a neat service that we like to do every season. So our main traffic flow is on Wednesday nights and Thursday nights those are our youth group nights and we get hit by the local youth groups from the churches and a lot of Boy Scout and Girl Scout groups those nights and we do get hammered on those nights so we are only there for about a hour and a half cause they are coming in a van pool or buses like that and those are very busy nights Fridays. Friday nights are usually fairly busy for us. Saturday is busy all throughout the day morning until night and then Sundays is just a real nice slow crowd for us we really enjoy it's kind of our laid back day on our farm. We I do totally acknowledge that we did have a lot of people come out last year we had between 7 and 9,000 people and I say that we are all over the board right there because we have a lot of free passes, promotion or doing local radio stations and businesses and we don't count the free passes so I do know we do have about 7,400 paid people that came through our facility last year and so you divide that up over the 4 to 5 weekends that we are going to be operating and those Wednesday and Thursday nights and you know you can start figuring traffic flow. We are going to increase the traffic flow and I understand that. And I am not really impressed with Road 72. It is a skinny, skinny road and that's always been a concern of mine but that is not something I cannot handle or deal with I have no ability to change or do anything on that. What we have done in the past is put signs all along the com field along the approached road say slow kids at play and we make these nice little tasteful signs but we litter the road we want people to see that every second driving down there just to know and I've already talked to 1 neighbor and they do have a dog and their area they are concerned about cause they have lost pets in the area and so we are going to increase the traffic there I do not deny that a bit. We would like to put those signs on the roads, small tasteful ones just to remind people to slow down there is people there is kids there is neighbors in the area. But beyond that it is up to not code enforcement but police patrols and if we do see a problem or sure if the neighbors 9 SP 09-007: PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 7/16/09 do see a problem we would like to get extra patrols out in that area and we occasionally do get the teenagers like to drive up and down that road showing off their wheels and we do hate that but that is something's out of our control we would love to control it but we don't know how to do that so. Without speed bumps and I don't think you guys would appreciate us making some out in the road. As for signage, we would like to put a sign obviously at the entrance at the parking lot here for Faith Assembly, we would like to put one at the north end of Road 72 and Wernett, and we would also like to put one down on Court Street on the comer of the Faith Assembly's property just so people are not driving around and not understanding the road system I mean it is fairly simple for us in Pasco but you have people coming from Kennewick or Richland or Walla Walla and it gets confusing for them and I would like to put those signs up definitely what we will do is a 4 X 8 sign very tastefully painted and put one on two 4 X 4's and stake them in the ground and then they're done. At the end of the season we pull them right out of the ground it's just a direction arrow you at least see the maze or haywire farms and at that point see the directions very simple. At our place my wife she usually speaks about this we are all into cosmetics we have one impression to make on people every fall when they come out so we are always improving we are trying to make that corn greener we are putting sunflowers up more pumpkins we want when they walk in they say wow and believe me when I say there is no garbage anywhere there is no garbage anywhere that's the last thing we want. We have a packed down dirt field when people walk into our entrance area that we water several times a day to keep the dust down to keep it nice and there's just not a speck of white out there. So we are methodical about garbage and I understand that will probably be a concern tonight with our neighbors because we are going to have several thousand people come out over the season and I can see where that would be a concern. We usually bring out a 3-yard dumpster and have the BDI, or whoever the local, yeah its BDI would be the local company to take care of that. Our sanitation is our portable patties requirement they regulate that for us and they usually have to bring out 4 to 7 each season it depends on who the inspector is basically we like to have 7. We personally clean them ourselves which isn't a pleasant deal but it is all about impressions to us along with hand washing facilities cause people are eating concessions out there and touching snouts of pigs and we are very serious into that. I am not sure what else I can cover on of if you have any questions at this point. On the tentative approval and I don't know if the audience 10 SP 09-007: PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 7/16/09 has these but in my proposal the Planning condition is given me ten approval conditions and there is a couple of them I have questions on. # 9 and # 10 the illuminated signs I am only interested in light possibly lighting the signs at both comers with battery packed lights so at night people can see them. We are not talking and definitely anything bright. And # 10, the signage obviously and # 11 event operations must cease by 9 pm on weekdays and 9:30 on weekends. We stop selling tickets at those times and so we have it's been our experience that if we have people come in at 9 pm which we usually do on weekdays until Friday night we are shut down by 10:30 they are in there for about an hour and a half for some reason an hour and a half is fine at night time and then people are off doing other things on weekends we are shut down by 11:30 completely. So we usually sell our last tickets at 9 and 9:30 then we shut the gate as we call it and we start flushing people an hour and a half after that. We send out our employees out through the maze with and they bring the people out front and shut doors. We don't have any ambient noise in the field we have small little boom boxes play country music right up front they could easily have a soft conversation that's how soft the music is we don't have PA systems. The only other thing I might I might change in here the set back rule. I wasn't sure if that was code or not but you are asking for 30 feet from the west property line and 25 feet from Road 76 or along Road 72. We would like to see if we can move that to 20 feet to give us more room to plant corn. Corn is a fantastic buffer for noise and everything else and a 20 foot road along there with the corn is nice and wide in case anyone had to drive around the field. Is been more than sufficient in the past and I would like to gain every little piece of acreage I can out there with planting our corn. # 19 we are a produce farm and it says here that the site cannot be used for produce stands selling produce other than pumpkins. We sell lots of pumpkins, we sell lots of gourds, we sell ornamental corn we will be selling sweet corn at that time late tomatoes, peppers, and the produce stand is not something just only open when the corn maze is there. It is small under a little 10 X 20 tent that we have and a couple of tables but we will be selling our produce, or we would like to sell our produce. We have done this at our other mazes and has worked very well for us. After about the 15th of October usually when the freeze hits us we are done selling the produce we will just only be selling ornamental pumpkins and gourds at that point. Item 21 under the tentative rules all fields and crops must be tilled and restored to a state similar to that which has existed prior to the planting. We are planning our agreement with Faith Assembly to put a barbed 11 SP 09-007: PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 7/16/09 wire fence around the entire property. On the property lines a 4-wire fence is what they call in standard ranching and then at the end of the season we would like to bring some angus cattle in. They will work the corn down, we have a lot of feed out there it's fantastic to those existing cattle on the ground for the last seven years. Faith Assembly has leased it to a property owner and they have had cattle in there and so we would like to split the field in half, run some of our cattle in the bottom half and then I think Faith Assembly would like to have their previous tenant back on the northern half but we don't want to disc the corn. The corn is our cover crop and usually we start breaking into the ground and in late February as soon as the ground thaws we got good moisture from some late winter rains and that is when we break in the first time and three weeks later we break it down again, three weeks later and every time the microbes love to break down and by the 3rd pass that field is ready to plant. And so we would like to keep the corn as our cover crop on the field. Item 20 temporary fencing, structures, portable toilets, concessions stands, everything must be taken down 15 days of the close which the close on this permit is November 15, so by November 30 you would like that those items moved from the field from out of that entire property where you see green and orange right there. We have all that stuff pulled out and in that brown area we would like to leave our existing structures that we put which would be the kid entertainment area. We do put up wood fences in there but we have what you would call a kiddie corral and a couple of different areas we would like to keep that in there. It is all wood, it's all very tastefully done, all our structures, our little concessions stand, our red and white little tool shed barns that you would see in people's backyards are all very small in size. We would like to keep that up. It will, I can't say enhance the area because people have different ideas of enhancements but it will fit the agricultural theme in the area and it will look very nice. So like I said we are into cosmetics when people first enter our place and we would like to keep that up to save us on cost of resetting up. We would like to be doing this year after year. So I think that about covers us, I didn't mean to talk or take up so much time up I'm just trying to cover a whole lot of it and without my wife here I'm kind of in trouble. We do take security and public safety extremely serious. I will be perfectly honest and in the year 2000 our third corn maze we ever had on Road 100 and Argent we had a terrible incident. We had a gang initiation stabbing at our farm and it was a really traumatic experience. A 14 year old came in here and as part of his gang initiation that night was coming and stab somebody. They move up in its 12 SP 09-007: PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 7/16/09 hierarchy and a Franklin County sheriff was trying to explain to me it's just silly stupid but that was a kind of a hierarchy; you stab someone you move up to a sophomore or junior status in your gang. Anyways so the kids after they were arrested, the sheriff discovered they were at the Pasco powder puff football game earlier that night with too much security, too much lights, so they came to our place which was embarrassing and it just blows our mind and so he came in at night he stabbed a kid with a letter pin knife on the side. He was fine it just took a couple of stitches, scared the heck out of us. That night we did have our haunted corn field that night but we have unbelievable security at our place and that night we had great security so even though that happened we were able to evacuate the field instantly and we had the help from the Franklin County Sheriff's Department, Pasco City Police came in instantly, State Patrol was there. It got real exciting very fast, we cleared the maze. I'm just saying this I want to be perfectly honest, lots of people don't know that it was us. We used to be called the Maize, now we are Haywire Farms, just escapes from the stigma that we had. We hated it and we cleared the maze gave everyone a full refund you know and there was no aftermath, there was no lawsuit or anything like that. The kid that made that decision and his friends, he only spent three months in juvi then they were off. I don't know where they are at anymore. But one of the things that helped us out tremendously that night is on those busy nights we recognize we can just sense that if it's going to be a busy night and we really catered to teenagers at that point. That's all we knew, we weren't into families or selling pumpkins, it was a corn maze. And we worked really, we love to have families out, we just didn't understand that is where we wanted to focus our business and so on a busy night with the teenagers we had hired sheriff deputies come work for us off duty. They came in for four hours for 150 bucks and they sit out front and those goofy little gang bangers, and they walked right through the ticket line, paid admission and the sheriffs car was parked right there out front and past him, he sat there and read the rules to people and they still went and did that and that just scared the heck out of us. So even though everything ended up fine, the kid was fine you know, and the guy that committed the crime and he wasn't punished at all. It really fired us up for public safety in a way we hadn't planned for. We were just goofy little farmers planting a corn field and having some fun. And so our public safety now is extremely tight. I hire a guy who is going to speak later on tonight, he is my main security chief out here. He is a gulf war veteran he got a lot of experience as 13 SP 09-007: PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 7/16/09 security, he is still in the field right now, he does a great job setting things up for us but all our employees have two-way radios. We have several members of myself and Sean, and several other members who will have certification in CPR and first aid. On busy nights, we will be hiring. I don't think we will be hiring the Sheriffs deputies I think we will be hiring the city police that they work in that area cause now that we are in the city out there, possible hire them if we feel the need and we can just kind of judge that we do not cater to teenagers anymore. We cater to families. The teenagers come in, but we are selective who we let into our property. If we have ? or 3 gentlemen that are all by themselves, high school age and looking the part of that lifestyle, I'll say we don't let them in. And you know young boys that age should be in with a couple girls, go out there have a good time, horse around, so we do discriminate in that sense. And if they do get in past our ticket booth we shadow them all night and it is very uncomfortable for them. I am saying that I know that is an uncomfortable situation, but literally we put employees with two-way radios and they follow them all night and they leave really quick. We had two situations last year, but they got in past our people taking tickets and it was just two boys and we followed them all night we made them so uncomfortable they left right away. But out of all the people that come through those people of that lifestyle don't come anymore. They know that we won't deal with it and they just are not welcome out there and we will harass them. So I don't know how else to politely or politically correctly say it, but we did have an incident in 2000 that was at our place and we dealt with it really well I think, and we got a good history of how we deal with our public safety now, and with this permit if it is allowed, there is a lot of stipulations in here. I will be working closely with the city police and the fire department. Our emergency situations I am sure, will be getting some training, some ideas but we do not let that crowd in to our field anymore. We have not for a long time so I guess that's it. A lot of information, I was all over the board without my wife, I know I sound like a farmer rather than a public speaker. COMMISSIONER SAMUEL, CHAIRPERSON: Commissioners, any comments or questions? Have you received, you may have said this, I just want you to say it over again which is have you actually in during the time that you have been operating, have you received any complaints and if you have received complaints about your operations, what have they been? 14 SP 09-007: PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 7/16/09 PHILIPP SCHMITT, APPLICANT: We have when we applied for our permits since we always applied for special use permits, so we have done that in Benton County and then in Franklin County last year. The complaints we get are from neighbors that are unfamiliar with our operation and we did have one interesting neighbor over in Benton County that was concerned about pesticide use and herbicide and garbage and all kinds of stuff. He had lots of concerns about his property which I totally understand. We are moving into people's backyards and that is an uncomfortable situation sometimes, especially if they don't know who we are or how we run our operation. And so the complaints before the fact, we have opened the maze while applying for the permits are the concerns that individuals have been-noise. We don't want to hear anything and we understand that we don't want noise, we don't want loud music out there, we don't want rock bands, we don't deal with those items that's pretty easily covered. Dust you know. Cars in the parking lot, kids on 4-wheelers running around from the tractor hayrides whatever else, they don't want to deal with the dust and we've taken care of that situation. We've got that pretty much mastered and we have a great record of that. Noise, dust, sanitation hasn't been a big deal cause that is covered by the Health Department. Litter-it's another one people don't want. Litter or corn leaves blowing on the property, which I understand. Corn mazes are just like a giant elm tree blowing all the garbage in your lawn and so we take care of that pretty easily around the outside of the fence. We put a very small animal fence along the barbed wire and its very small square, we buy it from Ranch and Home, its about ? feet high and the leaves don't make it to the neighboring property. If it does, we have had agreement to go clean it up, we have never been called but we did have one neighbor one year got very excited about that and that's when we started installing those fences. We do not have that in the property we were at last year. We didn't have the need to put it because we are in open farm ground area and didn't have the neighbors concerned about that. Here on this property line, Road 72 and Wernett, we would like to put up that fence to keep leaves from blowing over. It's not an orange construction fencing, it just like chicken wire, keeps the corn leaves from breaking off in violent wind storms like we had the other day and blowing in their yard, no one wants to see that. Those have been our primary concerns. Oh, safety of course and traffic. Traffic is going to be a big one and besides putting our signs up, control on that is kind of out of our step. We would love to control that 15 SP 09-007: PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 7/16/09 like I said unless you give us permission to put up a couple of speed bumps up there, that's out of our hands. COMMISSIONER SAMUEL, CHAIRPERSON: Is it your intention that or belief that the primary traffic in and out of this location is primarily the same traffic flow, same traffic approach that it would be for someone actually going to that church normally or is it different? PHILIPP SCHMITT, APPLICANT: Well the biggest crowd you are going to have at that church obviously are Sunday morning or possibly a Wednesday night, or whether the church rents the building out for marriages every once in a while or I can't pronounce this word quincenera's. DAVE McDONALD, CITY PLANNER: quincenera's PHILIPP SCHMITT, APPLICANT: Thank you for helping me out there. Thank you and so you know, those are large traffic days and so our weekday traffic won't be extreme at all, it really will not be. Wednesday night you will see church buses corning down the road and everything else but youth groups don't allow the teenagers to drive from their church in Kennewick or Richland by themselves. So where you're going to see the traffic flow is Friday night and Saturday and very light traffic on Sunday, I mean usually about 400 people come out on a busy Sunday. The last two weekends are fairly busy of course, if the weather holds nice but Saturday we are going to see traffic that's at the night time. We do get a lot of people come out night time and especially when we operate our field of screams which is a family haunted operation now and the corn and there is traffic on that. I don't know how to alleviate that, I mean we are trying to buy 60 acres out on Dent Road, you know 7 or 8 miles out of town and do this, but we are a little ways away financially in making that step. COMMISSIONER SAMUEL, CHAIRPERSON: Well I assume that the primary way to get to this corn maze is off of Court Street onto 72. It would... it's not a... hopefully people will give some public input on this about how often people actually access that location by going down Wernett and going down Road 72. And since you commented that that is a narrow road, I wonder if that is going to he an issue or not. Hopefully we will hear from the public about whether they think that is an issue and maybe they have some ideas about what we can do about it. 16 SP 09-007: PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 1/16/09 PHILIPP SCHMITT, APPLICANT: I do think that will be an issue. I can safely say in my opinion people that live in the city of Pasco that decided to attend Haywire Farms Fall Festival will know about Argent Road and drive down that direction. You'll head south and that's something I wish I could alleviate, but I think they will know that the clientele that we have from Richland and Kennewick most likely will be coming down Road 68, the entire way down and then over on Court. On our dollar off coupons, we have about 60,000 dollar off coupons, we print and we spread all over town every year. We are at every McDonald's, Sun- Mart, you know it and that's primarily how the people find us and come out to our place. Our map will not even show Argent Road. it's going to just show Road 68 all the way down to Court and then up that direction and I think there is only one or two residences that they will pass that are on the east side of the road that are on the map right here, that they will pass these two places right here. But the parking entrance is right here, so that's my solution to it. That's the best I think you can do unless there are some great ideas out there. COMMISSIONER SAMUEL, CHAIRPERSON: Dr. Rose? COMMISSIONER ROSE: I understand what the signs will be for but 8 feet in size? PHILIPP SCHMITT, APPLICANT: Yeah we use them when people are driving by. We can do a 4 X 4 sign; we use 4 X 8 sheets of plywood and they stand you know about 4 feet out of the ground and they stand 4 X 8 parallel to the ground. 4 X 4 is fine, anything smaller than a 4 X 4 sign, people driving by may not see that. At nighttime usually we paint the signs corn yellow and then we write The Maize or Haywire Farms in forest green. It stands out pretty well when headlights hit that. We would love to put a little set of Christmas lights on it you know tastefully done not garbage or junk. We are not the garage signs you see all over the roads trust me on that. But I do have pictures of those signs. I did not bring those. But I think a 4 X 4 foot sign would be easily visible for most people. But a ? X 4 is getting a little small for people I think, but that's just my opinion. COMMISSIONER SAMUEL, CHAIRPERSON: Ok, any other comments? Alright, well thank you very much. Appreciate that now. I am going to open this up to a public hearing. Those individuals who wish to either speak for or against 17 SP 09-007: PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 7/16/09 this item please come forward, state your name and address for the record. We very much value your input on this. I am looking forward to hearing from the public as to what they think about this. JOHN PIETRUSIEWICZ, 2909 Road 72, Pasco, WA 99301: My name is John Pietrusiewicz I live at 2909 Road 72 and it is up the hill and my concern is traffic. We live like I said up the hill close to Argent and you ask the question how much of this traffic is there during church we don't see that much. But at various times they have meetings at Faith Assembly and traffic is heavy and heavy traffic is fine, but there is a 25 mile an hour speed limit and there is no enforcement. And I shudder to think about this coming in. You know he's concerned and I appreciate his concern about it and I wish there was something he could do. In my opinion, they come back when you get the problem solved well find someplace else. COMMISSIONER SAMUEL, CHAIRPERSON: So you would not be for this proposal? JOHN PIETRUSIEWICZ: I would not be for it at all. You know the whole concept and I appreciate what he is trying to do and all but I don't think this is the spot. COMMISSIONER SAMUEL, CHAIRPERSON: Ok, very good. Thank you very much. Other individuals who wish to speak either for or against this item? JESSE RODGERS, 7309 W. Wernett Road: I'm Jesse Rodgers and I live on 7309 Wernett which would be just north of across the street where he is proposing this maze. When it first came out I thought the church was putting this on and I couldn't understand why the church would want to put a corn maze there. We are already overwhelmed with the traffic in this area. It's cars from the church but it's good to have the church in our area. But back to the roads, and back to the traffic, that road was put in probably in the 1950's. The road is no more than 20 feet wide, there is no sidewalks, there is tack weeds on both sides of the street or walk your dog or walk your horse or walk your wife, or walk with your wife. And you get cars passing on that street and I am telling you now all these will verify these cars are not running 25 miles an hour that they should be running on that street because that is what the speed limit is. I would like to see it lower, but with that city posting. You get two cars passing there and you got a pedestrian on either side of 18 SP 09-007: PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 7/16/09 that road, he's in trouble. He's got to step off into the cockleburs. That is our major problem. My neighbor just lost a German Sheppard from a car hitting him on the way to church going 50 miles an hour coming down north off of Argent down 72. That's a tragedy loss to anybody. But we have had the police department called, we call our Sheriff Department, we get an officer out there maybe once he will come out and sit, the minute they see him, they slow down. We call the sheriff's department they tell they are understaffed, they can't patrol that because that parcel of ground from the church west is city, so we're in a little bit of a doughnut hole here. The County really don't want to work with us, the City, they are occupied elsewhere because we don't have the facility to set a man out there. So they bring out a speed trap wagon. Well most of the people just test to see how fast they are driving out there, that's what I have done but that don't slow anybody down. And the neighbors from Argent clear to Court Street is affected with this. Now the gentlemen says well the people will come in from different ways. Well I live on a graveled road across from that that's a graveled road, he said we're going to contain dust. Is he going to come out there and water that road when that other traffic that comes from Richland south Richland, from Benton City that's coming in from the west? They get mixed up, don't get the right roads so they turn and come down Road 76 and then they turn on Wernett Street. Now we got a dust problem. Is he going to have a water truck out there to maintain it? I have been trying to get it paved for 20 years, but I'm not getting much luck. The other thing is we are talking about, he's going to put the corn maze in there then when he gets done he is going to cut the corn maze down, the corn down and he is going to bring the cattle in. Now when you bring the cattle in the irrigation water goes off there is no way to prevent and you know as well as I know when cattle get to traveling around eating they chew up the ground then when we get our southwest winds that we get for the last 100 years. You know we get it and everybody that is east of this place and to the north of it we catch all the dust. Now what he is saying, oh yeah we are going to do this and this and this in the time that the corn maze is going to be there? Ok, but then you are going to bring the cattle in we're already got one landlord that's running abundance of cows and if you grow up and around and you probably all have the smell of cows. We get it in the southwest area all the time. So this is a temporary deal that he wants to bring in and then when the corn is gone he takes his cows out. We are still stuck there with the smell of the stuff on the ground, so yes I am very much opposed to this deal and if anything can be done to 19 SP 09-007: PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 7/16/09 stop it. I would like any and every one of you if you haven't driven on Road 72, come out and drive up the road or come out and sit on that road maybe one day or one night on Wednesday night when the church is going on, and see what the traffic is. You will realize that that road is not accustomed. He had a maze out on Road 100 and Argent, he had two major roads, wide roads, we don't have no wide roads to take there. He says they are all going to come in from the south end of the deal. No they will not. They come down 68 turn on Wernett and turn on 72 and head for the church. That's where our problem is, and then they go further and they missed it. They go down 72 and shoot down it. I guess I can't see them taking care of this and taking care of the traffic. Like he even admitted there was some knifings going on out there at the other maze, it's going to bring crime in, younger generation, I was young too but I also spun my wheels up dirt roads and gravel roads. You get them on this narrow pavement, I'm not saying younger kids are worse than I was, but it will happen and I hate to see the activities that will accumulate out there. One more thing I forgot to ask and I am not really up on it, but we got ground owls out there. Out in the middle of that dry field, that's their habitat. They are a protected bird. They have shut down some of the Hanford work because they come across these ground owls and their deal. Well my neighbor called on it and somebody in the city said well as long as they don't disturb the ground owls and run them out of there they can do it. Well when they go in there and start plowing up this ground to plant this corn I can't see any other way they are not going to disturb these owls. These owls are quite a little bird. I sit there with my telescope and I look out at them and there always is one sitting up on his little post that they put out there and he is a guard and the rest of them are just milling around until at night then they fly out into the road. They are a good little bird and I can't see if there is any reason they should be able to disturb them being a protected bird. So that is something else that someone might want to take into consideration. I probably spoke overdue myself, but I think everyone of our people here that's on this deal, is not, I don't think anyone of them would be for it. Like I say, it is just very dangerous to get out and walk on Road 72 and Wernett because they are narrow roads. So I thank you for listening to me and thank you. COMMISSIONER SAMUEL, CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much appreciate that very much. Other individuals who wish to speak either for or against this item? 20 SP 09-007: PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 7/16/09 SAL BELTRAN, 2316 Road 72, Pasco, WA 99301: My name is Sal Beltran; I live at 2316 N. Road 72. You're considering putting a commercial enterprise in a residential area. And those are the words he used commercial enterprise. Some of the items you consider noise, traffic, lights, hours of operation until 10:30 or 11:30 each night across the street, from your home, across the street from your pasture. I believe when I looked at this map and I looked at the example provided at previous locations. I counted one house in the photograph. The same photograph was taken of this location I believe there would be nine houses. There would probably be about I don't know probably about ten horses and other animals that are just across the street. This a farm that's one thing I believe that's probably what that area is the majority of the homes in that area are ranehettes, small plots of land with some animals. However a commercial enterprise is going to bring in thousands of people to this area. Well? There is no doubt in my mind it will change the lifestyle of all of the residents all of my neighbors. Most of the folks you see around me I see them walk their dogs each evening. I even see one of my neighbors walk her horse up and down that street. And now we are going to put your decision would potentially put thousands of people on that road. I've lost an animal a pet during a Sunday afternoon with an adult driver. This wasn't in the evening or there was a young teenager behind the wheel. That's why I can tell you I know for a fact it will change our lifestyle. My neighbors will not walk with their kids or walk their dog in the evening just because of the traffic. I am an avid runner. I don't run normally on the afternoon on Sunday afternoons I won't be able to run in my own neighborhood. Now look me in the eye and tell me that is not going to have an impact on the value of my home if I decide to sell my home while this is in operation. The amount of traffic look at this lovely don't bother venturing outside you won't want to hang out in your backyard. Road 72 is a tough road to try to walk or try to ride your horse on unless you're on the shoulder. And as Mr. Rogers mentioned, it's very difficult with the tack weed there to walk on the side of the road. So with your own criteria I ask you consider that noise, traffic I really didn't hear when the applicant talked about how they abided by the rules how they talked about lights especially with operations to 10:30 or 11:30 each night. Noise traffic lights and the decrease in home value and so I do not support this application. Thank you very much. 21 SP 09-007: PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 7/16/09 COMMISSIONER SAMUEL, CHAIRPERSON: Other individuals that wish to speak either for or against this item. This is very valuable input very much appreciate it. PAT GRADY, 2703 Road 72, Pasco, WA 99301: Yes my name is Pat Grady I live at 2703 Road 72 which is north of Wernett and basically I will reiterate the same things most people have said that live on our street. And I mean we have people who come up that street 60 miles an hour and for about six years it's just interesting. About ? weeks ago I seen a city police, Pasco police go down the road from Wernett from, oh what am I thinking. Argent come down past my house, but I would say and I am there working all the time and I would say that in the six years I probably seen I'll try to be I'll double it 10 or 12 either police cars or sheriff department cars go down that road. And one time I invited them to come sit in my yard to try to catch those people that go speeding down that road. That road was built in the 1950's because the house that I live in the man that that owned that house built that road in the early 50's. So it, I mean there's, it would be interesting, I don't know if you want to take a poll you know because this could kind of hurry this up. How many people here raise your hand if you are in favor of that? I'm just saying is there anybody that lives on that road that's in favor of it. You know and I just feel it wouldn't be wouldn't be right speeding down that road and another thing coming off of Argent when they have church there are a lot of cars. John lives up the street from me I am surprised he... well anyways there are a lot of people that come off Argent and come down 72 and I don't know how many come off of Court street but I would venture guess there are as many that comes off Argent that comes off of Court. The same I would think the same ratio of people that will come to that maze as come to that church they are going to come off of Argent all the way down 72 and they are going to come off of Court and 72 and some of them will come off of Wernett. So anyway it's, I wouldn't support it you know I just wouldn't support it. I think it's in town it just doesn't belong there. That's the way I feel. COMMISSIONER SAMUEL, CHAIRPERSON: Alright very good. Other individuals who wish to either speak for or against this item TAMARA ROY, 7116 W. Wernett Road, Pasco, WA 99301: My name is Tamara Roy and I live at 7116 Wernett which is east of the site. I used to live on the corner 22 SP 09-007: PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 7/16/09 of 72 and Wernett and I built a new house on Wernett thinking I would get away from the traffic and I did not. They come right off of 68 and they come down Wernett barely stopping at the stop sign at 72 rounding the corner and heading down 72 to the church, Sunday through Sunday. And I feel I need to represent the family that was that was here but left with all the kids they are brand new to the community and I would like you to look at my kids tell them that they cannot ride their bikes I know that the corn maze is going to be running around October. These children need to go to sleep I have to get up at 5 o clock in the morning and see patients. I don't like to go to bed really late I'm kind of crabby and I have someone's life in my hands that's not good. The dog that passed away died in my hands. This is a commercial enterprise this is a residential community. I would wish that the City of Pasco would like to respect their neighbors in the county I am not for this, and very dead against it. Thank you. COMMISSIONER SAMUEL, CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Other individuals who wish to speak either for or against this item? I want to give anybody who hasn't had a chance vet to speak and then those who feel the need to speak again will be given a chance. CHARLENE HEYEN, 7421 W. Wernett Road, Pasco, WA 99301: Hi I'm Charla Heyen. I live at 7421 W. Wernett. I'm just north of the property actually northeast of the property. You think 72 is bad, you ought to drive on Wernett that's not paved in fact I was over mowing my neighbor's lawn with the lawnmower headed home and I scooted over as far as I could go just to let the bus by on a lawnmower. So you can imagine two vehicles passing there. Anyway I was kind of surprised because I used to be a member of that church and this was years ago and I was led to believe that the property was given to the church through a will and the man stipulated that the property could be used for church purposes only. And I was wondering if somebody could check on that because Faith Assembly sold a piece of the property to the Nazarene church and because it was being used for church purposes that was allowed. I am worried about traffic, I'm worried about parking, overflow parking, I'm worried about property damage and who is going to take care of it. I also am worried when he said that they are going to turn cattle in there. Well cattle will eat all that corn up. And in April in the spring when we get these good wind storms there is not going to be any cattle there, there's not going to be any corn and he doesn't he said that he plows it in February that's going to be 23 SP 09-007: PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 7/16/09 nothing but dust in April and May. You know what kind of dust we have. This activity is going to bring may bring in people that do not respect other people's property. As an example I was going on Argent when the corn maze was on Road 100, I was concerned because there were cars parked on both sides of the streets children running in between the cars. I mean I was I was down to 10 miles an hour because you didn't know if a child was going to dart out in between because they want to cross that road and get over there. They had parking but it was not enough parking. And also there were cars parked on both sides of Road 100. I know that in October it is going to be dark and another thing that we saw out there at Road 100 was broken beer bottles and the next day when you drove by there was all kinds of garbage there was wrappers of every kind and water bottles and with the wind it was picked up and taken to the neighbors house I just assumed that the neighbors were responsible for picking it up. I have livestock and I am also worried that someone may decide that they might to feed the cows a pumpkin or corn and heap it over the fence over to my animals. I guess that's about all of my concerns. Oh, the other one is the new high school going in on Road 70f 841 up on Argent and 76 do you know how many teenagers as soon as school is over is going to barrel down 76 turn on Wernett and go to 72 and then go on down to the church. Because they are going to be flying down that road. We have had in the past one particular teenager I guess it was a race to get home he would turn off of 68 and this is before they repaired and fixed the roads and there was a slight up to Road 72 and down and he would hit that hard enough when he came down the other side his truck was would nose dive into it. We have had them go by our house so fast that they have taken out the chain link fence and taken it with them. So that is my biggest concern. Property damage and traffic control. COMMISSIONER SAMUEL, CHAIRPERSON: Alright good. Thank you very much. Other individuals who wish to speak for this particular item. Second call for anyone individuals who have not spoken so far. Yes ma'am and then you in the red Yes. NANCY RIEKE, 7109 W. Wernett Road, Pasco, WA 99301: Hi my name is Nancy Rieke I live at 7109 W Wernett which is the northeast corner of Wernett and 72. I also have children I also have a dog we do ride bikes and walk and the streets are narrow so the traffic is my primary concern but I also am concerned with the after dark it is pitch black in that area so I am concerned with property 24 SP 09-007: PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 7/16/09 damage with security and safety of my family and pet and just those are the two things that he said he can't control. So those are the things that concern me the most, the safety and the traffic. COMMISSIONER SAMUEL, CHAIRPERSON: Very good. Thank you. You sir in the red, this is very good very much appreciate this. SEAN VAN DILATER, 7815 Wrigley Drive, Pasco, WA 99301: My name is Sean VanDinter I live at 4815 Wrigley Drive. I am speaking for this, a little bit of back ground on me. I was in the military and my profession now is I do security. And after the 2000-2001 incident where the individual got knifed Mr. Schmitt had me come in and since then we haven't had anything that even resembled that. Say its luck say it's because you brought in the right people. But we haven't had any further incidents like that. To say that an incident like that couldn't happen again I think everybody would be fooling themselves because even your best police force your best security team can't cover all the bases and things do happen. The only thing we can do is make sure that we do do the best of our ability to accommodate these individuals here. I understand and I respect every one of their concerns. I do know that the course over the years that we have made big strides in accommodating so that people's property does not get damaged that people do not get injured. But there are things that are really out of our control. I understand that you know that the biggest thing is traffic. It sounds like they have been dealing with traffic down that road for some time. And maybe that is for another council meeting later on or with the county. But something like that could be cured as simply as having some patrols from Pasco Police Department they are out there writing tickets. Everybody knows here that word of mouth that if you drive crazy down this road then you are going to get a ticket. This has some effect and it is a very powerful effect. And as far as property damage to the surrounding houses around there. What we're what we're proposing to do with the security is having people that are on the outside of the maze making sure that we don't have people loitering that we don't have people peeking in window. Again can we control all of that no but we can make an extensive effort to do that. And as far as people hanging out after the maze they're asked to leave, they can't hang out, they can't sit there and drink beer. Any kind of activity that is not the right activity for what we are trying to do we have absolutely no problem having the local police department sheriff's department come in and do what they have to do. Whether it 25 SP 09-007: PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 7/16/09 is cite somebody or arrest somebody that's something we don't play with. This maze you know I'm a father just like most of you guys here some grandparents and stuff and I can appreciate the safety issues. But one gentleman brought up the fact that it is going to bring crime in. When if you stop and think about it something like this as an attraction is something that gives the kids a fall activity to participate in. Where they're at least you know as best we can they've got people looking out so that they are not doing the wrong thing. It keeps them from doing stuff that everyone of us don't want them to do. You know it's one of those things its catch 22. You know I appreciate the fact that you know people ride their bikes that kids play but I would stress on this and no offense to anybody when you're dog was hit was it out in the street or in was it in your yard? Just a question. COMMISSIONER SAMUEL, CHAIRPERSON: You need to go ahead just talk to the commission not the audience. SEAN VAN DINTER: OK, but you know last time I checked people don't drive through yards. Kids running out in front of cars, you got the church there do they do it then? It's one of those things we can only control so much and as far as the security and the safety side of it. We try to do the best we can and we don't hesitate to ask questions we will get with the law enforcement what do you think we should do how do you think we should approach this what do you recommend and we will do it the way they want it done so it is better. So I am definitely for it I think it is an activity that occupies the young kids time and it provides families with young kids that they normally don't get to do. Pet some animals, go through a corn maze you know pumpkin patch you got Halloween coming up you know preschool kids that come out there if you could see the look on their face they absolutely enjoy it. They have the greatest time. They get pictures taken it's a very class act so I'm for it with these people's feelings in mind we can do the best we can. Thank you. COMMISSIONER SAMUEL, CHAIRPERSON: Ok, other individuals who wish to speak for or against this. Only individuals so far that haven't spoke yet I just want to I only want to hear from people who haven't spoke yet and I will give people who wish to speak an opportunity. TRAVIS MATHEWS, 2205 Road 72, Pasco, WA 99301: Hi Travis Mathews, I live on 2205 N Road 72. Are you saying that it's ok if somebody's dog is in the 26 SP 09-007: PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 7/16/09 road just to run them over? That is what it sounds like you know. As far as the corn maze the people we don't want around and we don't care if it's got security we don't even want the security walking around facility. That's why people move out to the country to get away from people. And everybody's pretty much said what I think I want to say so that's about it. COMMISSIONER SAMUEL, CHAIRPERSON: Ok, very good, other individuals who have not spoken on this yet. Do you affirm to tell the truth in this testimony? GARY GATEWOOD: 1821 Road 72, Pasco, WA 99301: I do. My name is Gary Gatewood I live at 1821 Road 72 directly east of the north parking lot of the church. My main concern is everyone else has expressed so far is the traffic issue. With the traffic increase from the church just being there and I am so thankful that the church is there. I have nothing against the church or anything like that I have nothing against the corn maze we have enjoyed the corn maze since we have been in this area. However putting one here at this site in my opinion is just going to be a little bit much adding with that the church traffic and then this traffic on top of that even for that short period of time is too extreme for our families and pets and everybody else involved. So for that reason only I am against this proposal if they were out there in a rural area somewhere that would be great. We have gone to their mazes throughout the years and they have been you know away from the housing areas and you know less populated spots even though we are not that dense there we're still a lot of families around. And so I just wanted to make that comment that traffic is the main issue. Just like everybody says 72 is tight. And when the church is in session they not only fill the parking lot they fill the roads so they park on both sides of the street. And so that makes it even worse for that period of time and I can see that happening as well with the corn maze thing going in so I just wanted to make that comment. Thank you. COMMISSIONER SAMUEL, CHAIRPERSON: Ok, other individuals who wish to speak either for or against this item? Anybody else who wishes to speak on this? Anybody who has ah sir yes anybody who wishes now to speak I will give another opportunity for anybody who wishes to speak who has already spoken that believes that there is something else we need to hear to help us make a decision on this. So I am going to recognize you and then I am going got recognize the applicant. 27 SP 09-007: PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 7/16/09 JOHN PIETRICWIECZ, 2909 Road 72, Pasco, WA 99301: Phil John Pietricwiecz at 2909 Road 72 and I guess I first clarify something I don't have a problem with the traffic on Sunday because I'm at church myself. I've caused problems with someone else in the neighborhood I guess. But to imply that you know that it's ok to have the traffic if we keep off the street when they are there that's I took a little offense with that. PHIL SCHMITT, APPLICANT: I just want to clarify on some of the things you expressed tonight and I don't know exactly where to start on some of these things. Boy I wish my wife was here. # 1 some of the comments Jesse Rogers made I was kind of list them one of his big concerns he had obviously was traffic; we'll save that to the end. We are not proposing running a feed lot out there. Whatever the density rules for cattle for the City of Pasco is what we would like to do. It's just a great feed item out there right now there is sheet grass. Right now you drop a match in the field it goes boom. It's a big danger right now. We are talking about field corn that is unharvested and there will not be a dust issue. There is not a dust issue present with that kind of feed. When we come in March and we disc the ground for the first time cattle leave. They are done at that point. There is no broken up dirt for them to trample or create cattle paths as you've seen through pasture driving up 395 or whatever else as you've seen driving around. This is tall you know 10 foot corn that the cattle knock down and eat the stalks and there is just not a dust issue. I don't know how to prove that or should I just agriculture is not a dust issue but corn is a cover crop. As soon as we break ground and disc it. We are talking of 10 foot of foliage that a cow already knocked down with a disk and there is not a dust issue on that. About a third of that material for one pass gets flipped under the soil the bacteria and with the moisture that you receive over that late winter or early spring start to break down that process. It is not a dust issue until we break down the ground for the last two times. At that point most likely we will be incorporating a spring crop of like some spring wheat or some peas. Covering any kind of dust problems out there. we have farmed several years and I've never had a problem with dust on our property. We're big into irrigation and doing things right. Quickest way to lose a lease on ground is get the neighbors mad. We understand how that works agriculturally and especially in the sense of very As for owls, believe me I am not trying to be a jerk to say this but animals are not protected like that under agricultural ground. And that is agricultural ground right there. Any type of bird or animals, coyote den, badger dens all that second of all I would love to figure a way to or wherever these owls are to move them. I don't mind calling the people to try and figure out how to do it with the local wildlife department. Those animals are not protected federally under that 28 SP 09-007: PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 7/16/09 stipulation. Most of the time you see that under housing or with wetlands or urban development but agriculturally that does not apply. But believe me I don't want to be an owl killer. As for noise and lights there we're a couple of people concerned about that and rightly so. We don't have light pollution on the field. We use Christmas lights around our concession stands and around our entrance areas. There's no light pole you know over 5-10 feet tall and the lights are shining down. We have small lights and small generators to power the lights out there. We do not have light pollution. The only light pollution that would possibly be is the existing lights in Faith Assemby's lots and that's already been permitted and allowed to go in several years ago and with their development of that parking lot. As for noise, I can only say we have never ever had a violation or warning with Franklin County, Benton County, the City of Pasco for when we were here for a few years back in the late 90's and early 2000. The City of Spokane, the County of Spokane or the County of Yakima. We have operated mazes and never once had those. And any code noise violations we don't have a visit we know how to control that. People that need their sleep get their sleep. We don't wake people up. Jump to Road 100 the history there, someone was talking about that. You bet there was garbage, people parked there all over the place that was not a good place for a corn maze. We outgrew ourselves just like that and we realized that and Dave McDonald encouraged us to move and boy did we move on and people were parking all over the place people were extremely rude. We didn't have a paved parking lot, maybe an acre and a half of parking. Here we have 210 parking spots in the north parking lot we have over 300 on the west parking lot, all that is accessible to us. We will be running, parking cars in there and doing a good job. We don't have that kind of crowd that would overwhelm that parking lot. This is not a Costco operation but on Road 100 we were easily overwhelmed over there and people were rude parking in peoples driveways leaving garbage around. We learned really quickly from that and as for the waste, we don't deal with that and in the parking lot we will have parking attendants on those busy days. We hire people we do events with Innkeepers Ministry and their wages go to their ministry and those guys run our parking lot for us at night time they are fully lit up and we park cars nice and tight just like we did in Franklin County this last year. It is not an issue. But I understand how the concern could be. Traffic? We are coming back to traffic and it is a problem you know. I have been going to church there for a year and a half and I am traveling down that road and I'm not paying attention to other people. You know driving I'm sitting there like the residents here dealing with the problem, it's a serious problem. And believe me I will be bringing this problem to I will be talking to the pastoral staff and business manager and this is something I encourage all of you I go to church there and I don't want to see an accident ever with your kids or people on bikes or walking. People are driving its fast or idiots and I would 29 SP 09-007: PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 7/16/09 highly encourage my potential neighbors to go visit with the church and get something figured out. Pasco police really need to be made aware of this. Letters to the Editor whatever this is ridiculous they are driving that fast down the road. Once again I am not aware of it I do not live in that area come down on Sundays but that's ridiculous. And it is a skinny road. I don't know how many feet across it is. It's wide enough for two cars but no there is not a sidewalk on either side of that. The corn maze traditionally does not have pedestrian traffic coming into it. People are driving into it. But there are no sidewalks right there. It is a big concern and I highly everyone involved here tonight to try and get it resolved whether letters have been written or the police department has been contacted. I highly encourage people to really go out for that and make a noise and see if something can be done there. Obviously people if we do or are allowed to have our corn maze here they will be coming down Argent. People in Pasco who know the roads they will be coming that way. And I don't know what to do, I honesty don't. I want to do this here, we have already made a significant investment in the irrigation, the lease, and everything you do for a corn maze. Financially for the money we are putting in for the pump station and everything else. We don't mean to be jumping guns, usually we file for our permit early in the spring, but it took a while to find out we could do it on this ground and find out from Mr. McDonald if it was possible. And we weren't sure if it was even going to work with our farm program this year before we decided to make it happen and so usually this stuff is done in spring before we invest the money. It's getting invested right now so we would really like to do this corn maze here. We understand the traffic is really got people concerned. And the only thing that I can say is I will do everything I can to work with the police, the City police emphasizing the problem that already exists and that I don't want to have a problem there I don't want to be known as the guy with the corn maze and somebody got hit by a car or their car ran through somebody's fence. I don't want to be that guy and so no matter what I will work hard at that. My idea is to do that for several years in a row. And I understand that the audience understands that and hopefully all of you and so I know if I get to do this year if I am allotted to do it it's going to be one heck of a trial I am going to be watched on all fronts. Security, garbage, traffic, everything it's all going to come down to me, it's going to be on me so believe me when in say I will be doing everything I can to control traffic. Besides putting the signs up and working with the local authorities. That's where I am limited at so I am more than open to suggestion or ideas if this goes on to the permit process. One thing I want to emphasize to everyone is you know we are trying to be very honest about security and how much we tighten this up. This is a family operation, I got four boys and just the thought of them hurting themselves out there or anything happening out there just drives me bonkers. I mean we are a tight organization. The people who work for me over the past years, you know its 30 SP 09-007: PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 7/16/09 Christmas money to a lot of the families, but we don't let our kids run around ragged out there because we feel it's so safe. And we do such a good jab. When we say security over and over again it leaves the premise in my mind just listening in the back. You know we got roving patrols and humvees with M-60s on top. That's not it. We have ?-way radios, we have constant communication. We have intimate knowledge at every corner. If someone rolls their ankle in that corn maze, we know how to get the paramedics there if we can't get them out ourselves. I mean we know that field like the back of our hand. We have never once had an incident with any of our neighbors and any of our properties that we have done the maze at with property damage to their property. We have had a peeping tom, I didn't like that one, we didn't have peeping toms, we didn't trespass and that's not a problem. People come to our corn maze, they are in the corn maze having a good time then they are out front. We have a lot of activities up front, get them back out front. Business wise, you know we are trying to sell them corn dogs and kettle corn later on. You know we want them up front, we don't want people in the corn maze for very long and actually people kind of get tired of the corn maze after walking around for 20 minutes through corn they are ready to go do something else you know. Come participate in some other activity, so we're very logical how we run our operation. Once again I just want to say traffic is a concern. I am ready to listen to any option on this, but we would really like the opportunity to prove ourselves for this first year on this property and anything we can do to alleviate traffic like I said in all advertisements, tell people to come off Court, don't even have to say Road 72 and essentially come down Court, you know head west on Court after turning off Road 68 and follow our signs. You know hopefully that you know don't even mention Road 72. I'm not sure how that will work. I think it will work fine. I am ready for any possibility to keep the people from driving you know high speed from Argent and down those roads right there, which have obviously been a problem and once again I encourage everyone to talk to the church down there you know. Let's raise a stink about it and before something ever does bad happen from the youth group drivers or whatever else. Come down there and talk and let's get some announcements at church. Let's get this solved as much as we can. Thank you. COMMISSIONER SCHOUVILLER: My question, what's going to prevent traffic from parking on the shoulders of Road 72 to access your operation? PHILLIP S CHMITT: Our ample parking spots in the field COMMISSIONER S CHOUVILLER: You thing that's going to be? 31 SP 09-007: PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 7/16/09 PHILLIP SCHMITT: I think that's absolutely plenty. Our parking last year and believe we had ? 1/2 acres of parking at our location on Franklin County last year, and we had everyone contained in that parking lot. They were just fine and we have more parking spots here than we will ever need. OUTBURST FROM AUDIENCE: Wednesday night? COMMISSIONER SAMUEL, CHAIRPERSON: Nope, nope no. COMMISSIONER ,SAMUEL, CHAIRPERSON: Other questions or comments? Mr. Cruz? COMMISSIONER CRUZ: You know one of the things that keep popping up and I need to preface my comments with two statements. The first is we need to be concerned with the Planning Commission with what's within our purview. Not what's in the County's purview? And so some of the issues I've heard tonight are very much a county issue, not a city issue. The second thing is I think we need to be concerned, that the church issues are separate from the applicant's issues. And so I don't want to appear insensitive or that I haven't heard your concerns but those are two separate things that aren't something that we can address. My question is more towards Mr. McDonald. When we do like the Fiery Foods Festival? What is the process for possibly street closures or something like that? Is that something that could be made a condition of the permit and say local traffic only on the City's portion of Road 72? DAVE McDONALD, CITY PLANNER: The Fiery Foods Festival is a community wide event that's been basically sanctioned by the City for 20+ years and the streets are closed for that. This is a operation that's run by a private party and trying to close the streets for private business enterprise probably wouldn't be appropriate. COMMISSIONER CRUZ: There's no precedent for that? DAVE McDONALD, CITY PLANNER: No, we don't, I don't know of any. Occasionally for like a parade you know the 4th of July parade, the Cinco de Mayo parade, block parties once in a while you know that involve one block. For everyone that lives on the street. But this is one individual, one private business basically. There is no precedent for blocking the streets off. 32 SP 09-007: PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 7/16/09 COMMISSIONER SAMUEL, CHAIRPERSON: If it was for one night, maybe right? For one afternoon, but I mean day after day week after week right? COMMISSIONER CRUZ: You know again, the thought process is kind of simple; the peaks are going to be Fridays and Saturday nights. You know the Wednesdays; you know its bus traffic and stuff. And so I live right near Road 100 and Argent, and so you know the corn maze was a nuisance, to be polite you know. It's something that we are supportive of and I want to find a way to do this that doesn't create additional burden, undue additional burden on the property owners and so you know I, what I am struggling with is, you know the traffic question. The part that belongs to the City, with the County, I don't see where that is any of our business unfortunately. But the part that belongs with the City. I'm very open to suggestions that would mitigate that and drive the traffic away from the gravel because it doesn't belong there. It belongs on Court Street. The other thing I'd kind of like to say since we are talking about it is, you know what would be the... you know on condition 11 where it says operations must cease. I think in my mind when it says operation must cease, there are no more customers on the property, not you quit selling tickets. I think you know because of the nature of the activity, 9 o'clock pm on weekdays is certainly reasonable. I think the noise code standards are 10 pm is that correct? DAVE McDONALD, CITY PLANNER: That's correct. COMMISSIONER CRUZ: And so for Fridays and Saturday nights I would say I would expect no more customers on the property by 10 pm. and so if that means you quit selling tickets at nine then that's what the deal is because you know you're starting to... you say 11 pm you're crossing over into the boundary of noise regulations. You know when we've done special conditions for generators that supply cell sites they can't do their set test between, is it 10 and T? Is that? I wish I could remember, I'm getting old. You know so that's... I think if we talk through this a little bit more we need to keep some of these issues separate. But the one I think that we have a real obligation to find a way to address, is the traffic. And the last thing I would like to say is, much like we did with our friends at Pre-Mix, you know the good neighbor words are nice, but the proof is in the pudding. I think you did a good job recognizing that in your comments, if we were to support the permit, I would say a one year on the first one. And if the community's worst fears come true, then we have a legitimate basis to say no, this is no longer something we are willing to support. That time is, time and proof are kind of the things that are in my support on one of these things. I think your record is pretty good. I think this is a tough location, but it's exasperated by the existing issue with the church 33 SP 09-007: PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 7/16/09 and roads. And that's really a difficult thing again as a planning commission. The church issue and the county road issue is not something I think we have a burden to address. We have to focus on his application, to do so would be unfair to the applicant. PHILLIP S CHMITT, APPLICANT: Can I comment on one of your...? COMMISSIONER CRUZ: yeah PHILLIP S CHMITT, APPLICANT: Ok as for item 11, operations cease at 9 pm that would financially impact the layout of our business plan. Usually I'll stay on weeknights, Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday we don't let too many people in past 8:30. I mean, we don't see that many people then. And we're usually shut down and Sean you could testify that usually by 10 pm we are shut down. Friday and Saturday nights a little different story. And you're concerned about noise, our history of not having noise complaints, warnings, even a warning from any of the departments we've dealt with before, testify it is a quiet atmosphere. They are in the corn, but everyone must remember if they could. You know we got 10 to 11 to 12 sometimes 13 foot corn out there. You don't hear anything. It works phenomenally well. So that's why, in the picture we had earlier, we surrounded the entire property and the corn maze isn't right up next to someone's house. There's 20 rows of corn there and its amazing how quiet, almost spooky how quiet that is at night time. And as for traffic, yeah I don't think there will be too much traffic going down Wernett Road. If there are, if I am allowed to do the proper road signage like I would like to do. You know tastefully done, small in size. I have a hard time imagining it, if they'd get lost down that gravel road right there. COMMISSIONER CRUZ: Again Dave you're going to have to correct me if I am wrong, we would have to grant him a waiver to operate past 10 pm, right? DAVE McDONALD, CITY PLANNER: The code, you can't grant a waiver to the code. COMMISSIONER CRUZ: I see, it would be a condition. There is a 10 pm cutoff or being noisy, right? DAVE McDONALD, CITY PLANNER: That's correct. COMMISSIONER CRUZ: And so you know you're kind of on the boundary of what you already explained anyway, whether that was a conditional permit or not 34 SP 09-007: PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 7/16/09 you're subject to enforcement through that angle. I think our perspective to help alleviate some of the concerns of the community we would be very clear on that point out of respect for the neighbors. PHILLIP S CHMITT: I understand that. COMMISSIONER CRUZ: And so you know you say it's going to impact your operation anyway. What I'm telling you is you are probably going to be impacted if that's your expectation to run until 10 or 11 pm. And for my personal perspective, if you shut down operations at 10 there's going to be half an hour or so of demobilization of people as they leave and so you're already kind of starting to push the boundaries where you are vulnerable to a noise complaint anyway. If you want to operate until, selling tickets until 10 or whatever you want to go do. You know that's the technicality kind of thing that's asking a lot in the current situation. PHILLIP SCHMITT: It is, but you know we are vulnerable like you said but we have not even had a warning, it's that quiet out there. And our ambient music is that soft. We have not even had a warning until then and if the council decides to do it and whatever the new tentative approval conditions would be, 11 pm would be much more favorable to us, but understand we flush the property and people get out pretty fast. And that time of night they do want to get out but daylight savings time switching over the last week of October. You know it doesn't get dark until 8:30 and we have a lot of people come out when it gets dark and then in the last week of October it drops an hour and its dark at 7:30 It's a big change for us right then but you know having the property clear by 10 pm would financially be detrimental from what we have done for the last 12 years. I don't know what kind of impact it would have, but it would hurt fairly heavy I would think. COMMISSIONER SAMUEL, CHAIRPERSON: Let me say this now, we have been doing this now for about an hour and a half and we've got a lot of testimony, we have heard from everyone in the public. Commissioners, do you have further comments for this applicant that we need to address? So, I guess I want to, if the public thinks there is some input we haven't discussed already, some kind of issue that has been brought up that we really need to hear this, because it's going to help us make a better decision, then by all means please come up. This lady in the purple and this gentleman in the green next, and just keeping in mind we have been hearing you loud and clear and so I hope you'll restrict your comments to not restating what we have already heard, but new information. TAMARA ROY: Tammy Roy, 7116 Wernett, you mentioned something in 35 SP 09-007: PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 7/16/09 regards to the City concerns. If you think about it, you are going to have a lot of neighbors that will most likely be upset and will probably stick to the rules and if you hear noise, you are going to have a lot of phone calls. You are going to overload your 911 system, you are going to take officers off the road where they need to be maybe in other places and not dealing with traffic or lewders or unwanteds. That's one concern. And the gentlemen over here mentioned earlier this evening that it seems like concerns have to come from the public and not from the Council. When it's light or when it's dark at night I'm pretty sure they will have field lights out there even though they're shining down. That area is dark. Remember you have a small part of city in the middle of county. There's not a lot of lights out there. His light noise is going to be loud, so you will have people calling at 7:30. 8:30, 9:30. In regards to security, I have done security before in my past. Radio noise whether you are walking a perimeter or whatever you have, carries. And just a final comments to the people behind me or the gentlemen in front of me who are members of the church. Your neighbors have contacted your church to talk to with blatant disregard. They've asked to have coffee, to come and see the traffic, no one comes. You can stick a cow out in the middle of that road and they will drive by. In regards to the dog comment, if you are going 25 miles per hour as posted, you can see a dog. Thank you very much from your county neighbor. JOHN PIETRUSIEWICZ: I wish to address comments to Mr. Cruz. I am concerned about the omission of traffic of the church and no one wants you to solve these problems. I think they have all given instances of the ample evidence of the capacity of Road 72 if they had more traffic. And in terms of what happens outside of the city limits of 72, I'm an outsider here, I'm not a city resident, just be a good neighbor. I can't just ignore it. Because it is tied to responsibility, don't aggravate it by getting a little bit more in there then they probably can handle now. COMMISSIONER CRUZ: Again, I just wanted to be clear with the expectation, please you know one of those things I like about Todd's participation as a chairman is Todd is very participative and is really trying to solicit that input, please understand you are being heard, but there are limits to what we should do as a city body versus countywide. And we were asked, I think Todd raised a question, how much traffic comes down Road 72? And I think you got a lot of information, maybe a little too much. COMMISSIONER SAMUEL, CHAIRMAN: Yeah we did. But it is still meaningful information. 36 SP 09-007: PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 7/16/09 COMMISSIONER SAMUEL, CHAIRMAN: It's good stuff. Alright, so any other individual who needs to speak on this that input that we haven't already heard. It's going to be some brand new piece of information that's like oh my goodness. State your name and address for the record. SAL BELTRAN: My name is Sal Beltran, I'm from, and I live on 2316 N. Road 72. The applicant mentioned himself that this is not the ideal location for a corn maze. Most folks enjoy the corn maze and with this not being the ideal location. You have heard the issues from the residents whether a commercial enterprise, noise, traffic, lights, whatever. Will this commercial enterprise impact those items that I just mentioned that you do consider? Also consider your city residents that may be impacted by that. I also ask this council not to be myopic, not to take the myopic view. I ask you to please consider your decision and how your decision will impact all of the residents and please don't continue to perpetuate this issue. I just take into my optic view. Thank you. COMMISSIONER SAMUEL, CHAIRPERSON: Any other individuals who wish to speak on this? One more go at it huh? Ok. Name and address for the record. Its ok this is how it's supposed to work. This is valuable input I know it's getting late and we have been talking about this for sometime but we have got to hear this input so just have to all be patient and hang in there. JESSE ROGERS: It won't take long. As far as talking to the church and having them help control the traffic, I called them about 4 or 5 years ago when they got ready to do their expansion, if they could do some. The minister, if he would do some controlling of the traffic out on that road, and maybe have the traffic come in from different areas. His response was, I cannot control what's beyond my means and that's what he said exactly. If you went to the church now and asked him how to help you, he will tell you the same thing. And the other question is real quick like. Who do I have to call on City? On the code for having cattle running in the city limits? I don't know if you guys can answer that or if I got to go to City Hall and find out who the code agent is because that is an issue. The gentleman just before he was told to get his cattle off of that piece of property. There was a dust problem. So if the gentleman says there won't be a dust problem, well I'm not going to contradict but I am just saying them are the two little objects right there. Thank you. COMMISSIONER SAMUEL, CHAIRPERSON: Very good, thank you very much. Alright, last call for any additional input that is critical about this decision. Ma'am? 37 SP 09-007: PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 7/16/09 CHARLENE HEYEN: I'm Charlotte Heyen, Road 7421 W. Wernett and you were talking about the sign issue and maybe if we had a sign at Argent, one at Wernett that says corn maze this way only. COMMISSIONER SAMUEL, CHAIRPERSON: Very good, thank you. Alright, I'm going to unless there is anybody else; Third and final call now for any additional input on this. Very good, public testimony has now ended. Thank you very much. That was excellent. So Commissioners', comments about this? Mr. Cruz do you have a comment? Your light is on. COMMISSIONER SAMUEL, CHAIRPERSON: Other commissioners, any comments on this? So we've got to give city staff a little bit of guidance on whether these special conditions are ok or the findings of fact that they have that they are going to support our direction we are going. We are not going to decide tonight what we are going to do, but we do need to make sure that we give city staff necessary direction. Mr. McDonald did you have a comment? DAVE McDONALD, CITY PLANNER: Yes, Mr. Chairman, Commission members typically when we bring these reports to you for a special permit review, as with Charter College and the previous one, there is 3, 4 maybe 7 conditions at the most. On this particular one staff could see that there may be problems with this proposal and with the location as indicated and that's why you see 23 conditions there. We did accept the application from the applicant. Everyone has the right to a public hearing but the process determines on whether or not that application will be approved. City staff does not approve the application. There are a number of things that were mentioned this evening that we were not aware of. The narrowness of the road, the traffic, all of those problems are something that you need to consider. Even though they are in the county, you are required to look at the vicinity this area is within the urban growth boundary and it is a part of Pasco's planning responsibility even though most of the neighbors are in the county. So there are a number of concerns and issues that were brought up this evening that could change the findings of fact and lend perhaps to a different conclusion. COMMISSIONER SAMUEL, CHAIRPERSON: I totally understand that. In my conversations earlier tonight, I totally understand that there's a lot of secondary effects from this particular item. DAVE MCDONALD, CITY PLANNER: There is. 38 SP 09-007: PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 7/16/09 COMMISSIONER SAMUEL, CHAIRPERSON: That could change the findings of fact. That is exactly right. Mr. White? Did you have a comment? RICK WHITE, COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR: I did, Mr. Chairman and that is one of the advantages of having a two meeting process. Is to entertain the testimony, hear the evidence, and you'll notice the staff report contains tentative conditions. It does not contain though, a recommendation at this point. That is for next month and so based on the evidence that we have heard tonight, we will be bringing back of course a staff recommendation that may or may not be in favor of the proposal. COMMISSIONER SAMUEL, CHAIRPERSON: Ok. Very good. Other comments, Mr. Cruz? COMMISSIONER CRUZ: Just a couple of things, I think I got an idea of where this is headed now. Condition #19 is overly restrictive regardless of the other issues. Same with condition # 21 and I would like to see something a little bit more strict relative to item 11. Again, you know, we got other bigger issues to fry but I think a future reference we need to consider those conditions a little bit more. COMMISSIONER SAMUEL, CHAIRPERSON: Ok. Mr. Schouviller did you have a comment? COMMISSIONER S CHOUVILLER: I was just curious that Mr. Cruz mentioned #19 as to why that is restrictive to pumpkins only on the produce stand, Dave? Can you shed some light on that, item #19? DAVE McDONALD, CITY PLANNER: Well here again it's from the brief experience we had last year with the operation on Road 68. With the signage and so forth it was up and down Road 68 and on Burden Boulevard and again it's in recognition that this area is basically a residential area and having a corn maze is one thing, but having other ancillary activities that are commercial in nature may not be appropriate in that neighborhood. COMMISSIONER SCHOUVILLER: Thank you. COMMISSIONER SAMUEL, CHAIRPERSON: Well very good, just my general comment on this is that I think that there are a number of issues that the public has brought up tonight and believe me it pains me to actually not be in support of this 39 SP 09-007: PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 7/16/09 because I think the community needs activities like this. I think youth need to have items like this to have to go to. I just don't think this is an appropriate location for this, unfortunately there are too many issues that I think the applicant is going to it's going to be nearly impossible to mitigate the issues, especially the traffic issue on the road. So I am currently in the mode of not being supportive of this. I just don't see how the applicant can, it's just not an appropriate location. So, other comments from Commissioners with regard to this? Obviously we're not going to decide this item tonight, but we are trying to give staff some direction as to which way we are going. Mr. Hay? COMMISSIONER HAY: The applicant also mentioned item 17 about the 30 foot setbacks that he would like that reduced to 20. I mean that's another item that was brought up. COMMISSIONER CRUZ: Actually I am glad you brought that up. I think you know having the maze be set back 30 feet from the property is appropriate and not necessarily the corn. It's ok to have the corn up to the fence line because that's no different than any other corn field but having the maze set back some distance is proven. COMMISSIONER SAMUEL, CHAIRPERSON: Ok. Any other comments or otherwise I would, Mr. Cruz, did you have another comments. COMMISSIONER CRUZ: No COMMISSIONER ROSE: How about the daily litter control program that's provided by the City to be approved by the Inspection Services Manager. Why shouldn't the owner of the business be responsible for his litter control? And that could be a real problem with beer cans all sorts of litter and what constitutes good control of litter? I mean it's kind of a big gray zone in there. So it bothers me a bit. COMMISSIONER SAMUEL, CHAIRPERSON: So are you just making a statement Mr. Rose? Or are you asking a question that needs to be answered? COMMISSIONER ROSE: That at least. COMMISSIONER SAMUEL, CHAIRPERSON: City staff? Do you have any comment on Dr. Rose's comment? DAVE McDONALD, CITY PLANNER: Litter was a major concern with staff 40 SP 09-007: PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 7/16/09 and if this was going to be approved, we need to be assured that there was some kind of plan in place that would cover that litter problem. And that plan should be reviewed and approved by the code enforcement manager that is involved with this on the daily activity basis. COMMISSIONER SAMUEL, CHAIRPERSON: Commissioners are there any other conditions or special conditions revised or changed to be included when we look at this and make a decision on this at our next planning meeting? COMMISSIONER HAY: Do we need to clarify item # l las to event operations may cease by, what time? COMMISSIONER SAMUEL, CHAIRPERSON: I think we do at least on the understanding of the applicant and we need to make it clear what that means. I think Mr. Cruz made the comment about that it means... COMMISSIONER HAY: Yes he did, but he didn't quantify it and I think we might need to put some numbers there. COMMISSIONER CRUZ: The noise code is 10, I think we just need to reinforce that. You know, how the applicant elects to comply is a little bit different, but you know we have come across this in the ball games and some of these other things and so you know the discussion and the condition, we are a little bit at odds with one another. For me and so again if you are silent by 10, then I don't really care what they are doing in the corn field, but that needs to be clear. COMMISSIONER SAMUEL, CHAIRPERSON: Staff? Is that perfectly clear? DAVE McDONALD, CITY PLANNER: No. COMMISSIONER CRUZ: Alright well then let me throw it out this way. Cease operations by 10 o'clock. No customers on the premises. And I think that honors the intent of the noise regulation. There will be a little bit of spill over I think that is a lot better than selling tickets until 10. COMMISSIONER SAMUEL, CHAIRPERSON: Commissioners any issue with having staff change that? COMMISSIONER CRUZ: Is that clear enough Dave, was I too specific'? 41 SP 09-007: PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 7/16/09 DAVE McDONALD, CITY PLANNER: No that's fine, thanks. COMMISSIONER SAMUEL, CHAIRPERSON: Any other special conditions that we need to give some guidance to staff on? Staff do you have any questions about any of the conditions that after what you have heard tonight that hey we need to know what the planning commission thinks about this? DAVE McDONALD, CITY PLANNER: No, I think we can put something together. COMMISSIONER SAMUEL, CHAIRPERSON: Very good, I would entertain a motion to move forward on this. Mr. Hay? COMMISSIONER HAY: I move to close the hearing on the proposed corn maze and schedule deliberations, adoptions of the finding of fact, conclusions and a recommendation to the City Council for the August 20, 2009 meeting. COMMISSIONER S CHOUVILLER: Second COMMISSIONER SAMUEL, CHAIRPERSON: It has been moved by Mr. Hay, seconded by Mr. Schouviller all those in favor say aye. COMMISSIONERS: Aye. Any opposed? Alright, so let the record show that we would like to, with the suggestions made, the requests made, the Planning Commission would like to see this on our agenda for a decision at our next Planning Commission meeting. Once again, public, thank you very much for your input, very much appreciate it. 42 SPECIAL PERMIT: SP 09-007 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 8/20/09 COMMISSIONER SAMUEL, CHAIRPERSON: Next item on the agenda, Item 4C is a request for a special permit. This is the location of a corn maze and a farm in a RS-20 zone. The applicant is requesting a permit at 2000 block of Road 76. The applicant is Phillip Schmitt of Haywire Farms; this is Master file # SP 09-007. This is an item that has come to us previously. We had a public hearing on this item, had a lot of public input on this item and we'll start our discussion tonight with any comments from city staff. DAVE McDONALD, CITY PLANNER: Yes, thank you Mr. Chairman. As discussed this item was reviewed by the Planning Commission last month in a public hearing. Staff provided for your benefit a report with a list of possible findings of fact and a recommendation for you to consider to forward to City Council. In between the staff mailing this report to you and the meeting this evening, the applicant met with staff and was concerned or expressed some about the findings of fact. As far as whether or not they were factual and so what we have done over the last day and a half or so gone through and re-listened to the tape and as a result of that there are a couple of things in the findings of fact that we do need to modify. And I will just go over those real quickly we handed out the modifications on the bench this evening. # 18 in the findings of fact previously mentioned that testimony provided by residents talked about equal portions of the traffic coming down Road 72. Equal portions come from Court Street and Argent. There was one resident that brought to your attention and we had a basically plural there and there was only one. Jumping down to # 23 the corn maze will be opened for business on Wednesday evenings during the time church activities are occurring. In the previous set of findings we mentioned that there would be youth activities occurring. In reviewing the tape, the word youth was not used anywhere. There was references both by the applicant and neighbors that you could go out and see all the traffic coming down the street on Wednesday evenings for church activities and the applicant indicated that traffic would be heaviest on Sundays and Wednesday evenings so that was changed. # 25, that previously read that there would be activities, some activities on Friday and Saturday nights. There was no actual reference to Friday and Saturday nights, but there was reference to the church renting the church building out to weddings and quincenera's that's how you pronounce it those could occur perhaps on Friday or Saturday on the weekends but those words were not specifically used. And then item it was 28 on your old set of findings has been removed and that made reference to the applicants' security gentleman that stated that the traffic was bad on Road 72. He actually did not say that. He acknowledged other people saying there had been a history of traffic 1 SPECIAL PERMIT: SP 09-007 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 8/20/09 problems on the road but he did not actually say that so we have removed that. Because of those changes and item # ?, the conclusions on the six criteria that you have to review the words youth activities were again removed from that on Wednesday evenings and now it just says Wednesday evening church activities. And one other small item on the approval conditions. # 7 the farm crop shall be limited to alfalfa or row crops and that's where your previous report that we provided stopped. It now says such as pumpkins, tomatoes, watermelons, peppers and etc. The definition of row crops does not include wheat, barley, buckwheat or similar grains. The concern there is that location is not an appropriate or wise place to grow a big field of wheat. As you know, wheat ripens or yeah when it ripens it gets very dry and there is potential for explosive fires. And we have got houses close by so it is just not appropriate to plant wheat there. And it wasn't clear with the previous recommendation whether or not wheat could be considered a row crop because you planted it in straight rows so that should remove any question. So with that, that's the extent of our comments unless you have questions. COMMISSIONER SAMUEL, CHAIRPERSON: Commissioners, any questions or comments about this particular item? Mr. Schouviller? COMMISSIONER SCHOUVILLER: Yeah, I feel the applicant should be given the permit for the corn maze on a one year conditional permit. I think there is ample parking if there are other activities going on. I think the positives outweigh the negatives as far as the negative activities versus noise, traffic and convenience and I think he should be allowed a one year conditional permit and if Mr. Schmitt shows he is a good neighbor then we can extend it, so I would recommend that the corn maze and the pumpkin patch be approved. COMMISSIONER SAMUEL, CHAIRPERSON: Ok. So I think we will need a motion to that effect here in a moment but let's see if there are any commissioners that have any comments or perhaps regard to your comment whether this should be approved or disapproved. COMMISSIONER PEREZ: I got a question, I'm just wondering if this is going to cost the city any extra money to patrol the area, extra officers in the area. DAVE McDONALD, CITY PLANNER: There was a reference made to that a couple of times in the hearing that they would work with the police and request extra patrols or the neighborhood could request extra patrols. And of course that removes other officers from other parts in the community and perhaps it could cost 2 SPECIAL PERMIT: SP 09-007 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 8/20/09 money for overtime when you have to call in other officers that are off to cover other parts of the community. Businesses typically don't get extra patrols because they are busy. Wal-Mart up on Road 68 at Christmas time doesn't get extra patrols because extra people are going there. It could create some problems for the city as far as budget. COMMISSIONER SAMUEL, CHAIRPERSON: Other comments on this? My comment about it I guess that I think the city needs activities like this. The corn maze is something. I think is a terrific family activity. My concern is the location for it. There are too many homes around this location. Roads are too narrow, the whole business of having lights at night, music at night, is just not, it's just too suburban of an area to have I think this kind of activity going on I feel bad about it because I really, like I said the city of Pasco residents here in the Tri-Cities need these kind of activities and I think it really advances the quality of life but the location is not a good location. So I would not be in favor, but if you want to make the motion to do so we certainly can vote on it. COMMISSIONER HAY: I tend to agree with Commissioner Sehouviller. I would think a year's trial period would work. I was not aware unless I wasn't paying attention that there are other events at this church. So I don't see where a corn maze is going to alter things that much. But I think a year's trial period would be in order. COMMISSIONER SAMUEL, CHAIRPERSON: Ok. other comments? Mr. McDonald did you have comments? DAVE McDONALD, CITY PLANNER: Here again we ran into this question or issue last month on the Planned Parenthood application. If the commission is going to go down the path of recommending this we will need to modify the findings so you can have a supportable recommendation to the City Council. So it would not be advisable to approve it tonight without any findings of fact to back it. COMMISSIONER SAMUEL, CHAIRPERSON: Ok. So what we need to do here this evening is I guess find out whether the Planning Commission is inclined to go with this in the approval direction, which case we would have to do the same thing we did last month with Planned Parenthood and have some findings of fact written up to support it or if we are going to go forward with a more of a no on it. I had the feeling from last month that we were headed towards a no, but perhaps that's not the case. Other Commissioners? Commissioner Little, do you have a comment on 3 SPECIAL PERMIT: SP 09-007 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 8/20/09 this with regard to whether your... COMMISSIONER LITTLE: I can't comment on that. COMMISSIONER SAMUEL, CHAIRPERSON: Oh that's right you can't comment on that you're on the... sorry about that... that is unfortunate. Dr. Rose? COMMISSIONER ROSE: I would go along with the one year provisional. That's as far as I could go with it at this point. COMMISSIONER SAMUEL, CHAIRPERSON: Alright. Mr. Perez? Where are you at on this? COMMISSIONER PEREZ: I have no more comments. COMMISSIONER ,SAMUEL, CHAIRPERSON: No more comments on this. Not leaning yes or no'? COMMISSIONER PEREZ: I'm leaning to a no. COMMISSIONER SAMUEL, CHAIRPERSON: Yeah? So Mr. Anderson is not voting on this so that puts us really close. Alright, I'll tell you what we should do. I think we should have staff develop findings of fact on an alternate finding of fact on this. Mr. White, did you have a comment about this? RICK WHITE, COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR: Just that, Mr. Chairman, we will bring back a set of findings for and against and then hopefully Mr. Cruz and Ms. Kempf will be here also. And they were at the hearing so we'll have more commission members. COMMISSIONER SAMUEL, CHAIRPERSON: Alright, so unless we have an objection we are going to table this instructing city staff to put together some findings of fact that would support it looks like the direction of a one year special permit for this particular item. Is that enough direction? DAVE McDONALD, CITY PLANNER: Yeah that's enough thank you. 4 SPECIAL PERMIT: SP 009-007 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 9/17/09 COMMISSIONER SAMUEL, CHAIRPERSON: Item # B, a request for a special permit. This is a location of a corn maze and farm in an RS-20 zone. 2000 block of Road 76. The applicant is Phillip Schmitt of Haywire farms. This is master file # SP 09-007. This is an item that we have had a public hearing on previously. It's an item Planning Commissioners' have had an opportunity to discuss at our last meeting it appeared the Planning Commissioners' were interested in entertaining a path forward that may be a yes on this and staff had prepared findings of fact to support a no but we didn't have findings of fact to support a yes on. So we had to table the item to this week in order to develop findings of fact that both supported a yes and/or a no vote. And that is where we are at tonight. So City staff I'll ask for any comments or further clarification on this item. DAVE McDONALD, CITY PLANNER: Thank you Mr. Chairman, I believe you have presented the history and background very well. As instructed, staff has provided the second set of findings and conclusions. We've also provided for your consideration a list of conditions to go along with that set of findings. And as you'll note from your report there are 32 conditions for approval. That is a rather lengthy set of conditions. We typically don't have a special permit application with that many conditions and that would lead staff to the thinking that perhaps this is not an appropriate place to locate. At least the corn maze of the facility and that is why staff is still recommending alternate ? be approved which would approve the farming activity with a list of conditions and not approve that maze. We would be open to any comments or questions. COMMISSIONER SAMUEL, CHAIRPERSON: Mr. McDonald? Have you had a conversation with the applicant around these 32 special conditions on a yes and were they willing to... DAVE McDONALD, CITY PLANNER: I have not had a conversation with the applicant. COMMISSIONER SAMUEL, CHAIRPERSON: Have no idea whether the applicant would be willing to be able to abide by these or not. DAVE McDONALD, CITY PLANNER: No, I do not. COMMISSIONER SAMUEL, CHAIRPERSON: Have you had a conversation with the applicant about the farming activity already occurring out there without a 1 SPECIAL PERMIT: SP 009-007 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 9/17/09 special permit? DAVE McDONALD, CITY PLANNER: Yes we have. COMMISSIONER SAMUEL, CHAIRPERSON: And what's the applicants' response about that? DAVE McDONALD, CITY PLANNER: Well, the applicant jumped the gun a little bit in anticipation of the special permit being approved. If the farming portion is approved, then the activities that are ongoing of course would be legal and would be able to continue. COMMISSIONER SAMUEL, CHAIRPERSON: Reason I ask that is because you know we have a process here in the City of Pasco and how to get special permits to do activities and so for an applicant, and as much as I really appreciate what this applicant is trying to do, in regard to making the City of Pasco in fact the Tri-Cities more interesting and place to live. We have a process in which you don't move forward on an activity until a special permit has been granted. And that process is to come to the Planning Commission, make a recommendation to the City Council and the City Council approves a special permit. Not launch off and do that without going through the process. That sets I think a pretty bad precedent for an applicant to do that. I'm disappointed about that. Commissioners, do you have any comments or questions regarding this? COMMISSIONER SAMUEL, CHAIRPERSON: I would say that I thought the city staff did an excellent job. If there was any way, and I like the idea of trying to figure out a way to say yes to things a lot of times, and I thought the city staff has really bent over backward to try and address citizens concerns regarding having this corn maze out there and having 32 special conditions to actually operate this thing. I once again, really speaks to listening to the citizens concerns about what was going on out there and so a lot of these special conditions that are directly in response to the citizen input we received. So I really appreciate that. And so whether we vote yes or no I appreciate that effort. COMMISSIONER SAMUEL, CHAIRPERSON: Other comments or questions? COMMISSIONER SAMUEL, CHAIRPERSON: I entertain a motion one way or the other. z SPECIAL PERMIT: SP 009-007 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 9/17/09 COMMISSIONER S CHOUVILLER: Mr. Chairman, I move to adopt findings of fact and conclusions there from as contained in the July 16, 2009 staff report identified as Alternate 1. COMMISSIONER HAY: Second. COMMISSIONER SAMUEL, CHAIRPERSON: It's been moved by Mr. S chouviller, seconded by Mr. Hay. All those in favor say aye. COMMISSIONER S CHOUVILLER: Aye COMMISSIONER HAY: Aye COMMISSIONER SAMUEL, CHAIRPERSON: Ave COMMISSIONER PEREZ: Aye COMMISSIONER SAMUEL, CHAIRPERSON: Any opposed'? COMMISSIONER KEMPF: Nay COMMISSIONER SAMUEL, CHAIRPERSON: So let the record show that Ms. Kempf voted no. Further? Mr. Sehouviller? COMMISSIONER S CHOUVILLER: Mr. Chair, also I move based on the findings of fact and conclusions identified in Alternate 1 the Planning Commission recommend the City Council grant a special permit to Phillip Schmitt and Haywire Farms for the location of a farm and corn maze with the following conditions. COMMISSIONER HAY: Second COMMISSIONER SAMUEL, CHAIRPERSON: All those in favor say Aye? COMMISSIONER SCHOUVILLER: Ave COMMISSIONER HAY: Aye SPECIAL PERMIT: SP 009-007 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 9/17/09 COMMISSIONER ,SAMUEL, CHAIRPERSON: Ave COMMISSIONER PEREZ: Aye COMMISSIONER SAMUEL, CHAIRPERSON: All those opposed? COMMISSIONER KEMPF: Nay COMMISSIONER SAMUEL, CHAIRPERSON: Let the record show that Ms. Kempf voted no. All the other planning commissioners voted yes. Staff what is the path forward now on this particular item? DAVE McDONALD, CITY PLANNER: The path forward like the last item will go to the City Council at their first regular meeting October 5t"; we believe the date to be, unless somebody files an appeal. And if an appeal is filed, it will cause a closed record hearing to be held before the City Council and usually the closed record hearing is about a month to a month and a half after the City Council date on October 5th. So if someone appeals they would not be able to take action on it until probably mid November. If anyone has questions about the process, they are welcome to call the office and we can explain it. Thank You. COMMISSIONER SAMUEL, CHAIRPERSON: Alright, thank you very much, appreciate that. 4 REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION --- MASTER FILE NO. SP 09-007 APPLICANT: Philipp Schmitt HEARING DATE: 7/ 16/09 5604 McKinley Court ACTION DATE: 8/20/09 Pasco, WA 99301 BACKGROUND REQUEST: SPECIAL PERMIT: Farming in an RS-20 Zone (2000 Block of Road 72) 1. PRQPERTY DESCRIPTION: The southeast and northeast quarters of the northwest quarter of the southeast quarter of Section 21, Township 9 North, Range 29 East, WM less the southerly 165 feet and less road right- of-way. General Location: 2000 Block of Road 72 Property Size: Approximately 28 acres 2. ACCESS: The site has access from Road 72 and Wernett Road. 3. UTILITIES: The proposed use will not need public utilities. 4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The subject property is currently zoned RS-20 (Suburban) and consists of two vacant parcels and the Faith Assembly of God Church. Surrounding zoning and land uses are as follows: ... NORTH- R-S-20- County-residential SOUTH- R-S-20- Nazarene Church EAST- R-S-20- County-residential WEST- R-S-20- County-residential 5. CQMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan designates this area for Low-Density Residential use. 6. ENVIRON„NENTAL DETERMINATION: This proposal has been issued a Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) in accordance with review under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), Chapter 43.21(c) RCW. f ANALYSIS ` The applicant has requested a Special Permit to locate a corn maze and associate activities on 18 acres of land directly north of the Faith Assembly of God Church on Road 72 (the church occupies 10 acres). A corn maze is a combination of an agricultural use and recreational use. Both use categories' are identified as unclassified uses and as such require a Special Permit before locating within the community. The festival component of the corn maze will include hay-rides, a barnyard -- animal exposition, piglet races and a concession stand. The applicant has developed corn mazes within the Tri-Cities area for the past l 1 years. The first corn maze was located on the corner of Road 100 and -' Argent Road on property now occupied by the Desert Springs Covenant Church. The proposed corn maze will occupy 11 acres of land directly north of the Faith Assembly Church parking lot. The pumpkin patch portion of the project will be located on 6 acres just south of Wernett Road. A barn yard area for small petting zoo is proposed for a half acre site at the northwest corner of the church parking lot. The church parking lot, which is completely paved and fully lighted, will be used for parking. The general area surrounding the proposed site can be characterized as a suburban very low density area with large pastures, livestock raising and grape vineyards. Truck farming and raspberry production has also occurred in the neighborhood in the past. The actual use of the corn maze and fall festival activities will occur for about a month during the fall. The heaviest use of the corn maze will be on the weekends and near Halloween. Three to six tours of preschool and elementary aged children may occur on weekdays. The site can be accessed from the north or south by Road 72 and from the east by Wernett Road. The area surrounding the proposed corn maze is sparely developed. Homes on adjoining properties the west are located approximately 500 feet west of the proposed site. One of the major concerns over the location of past corn mazes (the one at Rd 100) was the issue of parking. In this case the Faith Assembly parking lot is available for use. The parking lot is completely paved and 2 fully lit in the evening. The parking lot contains over two hundred parking spaces. INITIAL STAFF FINDING# OF FACT Findings of fact must be entered from the record. The following are initial findings drawn from the background and analysis sections 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. l. The site is within the Pasco [Urban Growth Boundary. 2. The Comprehensive Plan identifies the site for future Low-Density Residential development. — 3. The site has been used in the past for agricultural activities. 4. Pastures and vineyards as-well-as animal husbandry occur on adjoining properties. S. The site is zoned R5-20. 6. The site contains 28 acres. 7. The site includes 3 parcels under the same ownership. 8. Agriculture is a permitted accessory use in the R-S-20 zone. 9. The site contains a Church facility with an improved parking lot and two vacant parcels. 10. The site is accessible from the north and south by way of Road 72 and from the east by way of Wernett Road. — l l. The proposed crops are corn and pumpkins. -' CONCLUSIONS 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: 11 Will the proposed use be in accordance avith the goats, policies, objectives, and text of the Comprehensive Plan.? 3 The Comprehensive Plan designates the proposed site for low density residential development. The Plan does not specifically address the proposed use. However, the zoning regulations which implement the Plan permit the keeping of farm animals and allows limited agricultural production in R-S-20 zones. The zoning regulations also permit _ commercial agricultural production by special permit in the R-S-20 zone. 2) Will the proposed use adversely affect public infrastructure? ... The proposed farm/corn maze is not dependent upon City utilities therefore there will be no adverse impact to city utilities. Peak traffic for - the corn maze will not be greater than that associated with the Faith Assembly Church, Road 72 and Wernett Road currently accommodate church traffic. 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 existing character is that of a suburban residential neighborhood, The act of growing additional crops in the neighborhood will not alter the existing neighborhood character. The location of other farms within the I- 182 Corridor has demonstrated that farms within close proximity of dwellings can be operated harmoniously with intended uses. The proposed use however will contain public activities for about a month ^` that could disrupt the harmony of the existing neighborhood if conditions are not placed on the proposal. Conditions for parking, litter control, noise control and other issues will be needed for the protection 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? - There will be no permanent structures erected with this proposal. Development over the last 10 years within the I-182 Corridor attests to the fact that farming operations do not discourage the development of permitted uses or impair the value of nearby development. The proposed use is a temporary use that will not materially impact property values. 5) Will the operations in connection with the proposal be more objectionable to nearby properties by reason of noise, fumes, 4 vibrations, dust, traffic, or flashing tights than would be the operation of any permitted uses within the district? Without conditions the proposed activity could create noise and/or dust that may be objectionable to nearby properties. Conditions related to parking, litter control and noise will need to be placed on the use of the site to safeguard the neighborhood, 6) Will the proposed use endanger the public health or safety i,f located and developed where proposed, or in any way will become a -- nuisance to uses„permitted in the district? The existence of numerous farming operations within the 1-182 Corridor demonstrates that the farming portion of the use will not become a nuisance to permitted uses nor will it endanger public health and safety. _ The use of the corn maze and festival activities could become a nuisance without use conditions. — TENTATIVE APPROVAL CONDITIONS (1) The special permit is personal to the applicant; (2) The applicant must provide the City with a designated parking and traffic control plan to be approved by the City Engineer to ensure vehicles use the church parking lot; (3) No on street parking is permitted; (4) A daily litter control plan must be provided to the City to be ~' approved by the Inspection Services Manager; (5) A site security plan must be submitted to the City for police and fire review prior to the issuance of a business license; (b) Portable toilets and sanitation (hand washing) stations must be provided on site. The Inspection Service Manager will determine the number of toilets and sanitation station needed; (7) Portable toilets must be located out of direct sight from adjoining homes; -- (8) Any night lighting on the site must not spill onto adjacent properties. All lighting must be shielded per PMC 12.32.020. (9) Illuminated signs are prohibited; — (10) Signage must be limited to the entrance near the church parking lot. No signage of any kind is permitted on Court _ Street, Argent Road or other off-site locations; (11) Event operations must cease by 9:00 pm on weekdays and 9:30 on weekends; 5 (12) No amplified music or public announcement systems are permitted; (13) The applicant must at all times comply with City noise regulations (PMC 9.61); (14) The concession stand must be located adjacent to the church parking lot; (15) The farm activity shall be operated by using best management practices for agricultural production; (16) No irrigation water is permitted to be sprayed or otherwise drain onto the adjoining right-of-way; (17) The corn maze must be setback 30 feet from the west property -- line of the site and 25 feet from Road 72 and 30 feet from the two homes on the west side of Road 72; (18) The corn maze and festival activities will not be permitted until the applicant obtains a business license and approval of the parking and traffic plan and litter control plan; _ (19) The site cannot be used for produce stands selling produce other than pumpkins; (20) All temporary fencing, structures, portable toilets, concession -. stands and other items associated with the corn maze and festival activities must be removed from the site within 15 days of the close of the corn maze; (21) All fields used for crops (corn and pumpkins) must be tilled and restored to a state similar to that which existed prior to the planting of the crops within 15 days of the close of the corn maze; (22) All fields must be treated (with a cover crop or other means) for dust control within 15 days of the close of the corn maze; (23) The Special Permit shall expire on November 15, 2009 any subsequent use of the site for a corn maze will require Special Permit review. RECOMMENDATION MOTION; I move, to close the hearing on the proposed corn maze and schedule deliberations, adoption of findings of fact, conclusions and a recommendation to the City Council for the August 20, 2009 meeting. 6 REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION -- MASTER FILE NO: SP 09-007 APPLICANT: Philipp Schmitt HEARING DATE: 7/16/09 5604 McKinley Court ACTION DATE: 8/20/09 Pasco, WA 99301 BACKGROUND REQUEST: SPECIAL PERMIT: Farming in an RS-20 Zone (2000 Block of Road 72) 1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Legal: The southeast and northeast quarters of the northwest quarter of the southeast quarter of Section 21, Township 9 North, -- Range 29 East, WM less the southerly 165 feet and less road right- of-way. General Loc ion: 2000 Block of Road 72 Property Size: Approximately 28 acres 2. ACCESS: The site has access from Road 72 and Wernett Road. 3. UTILITIES The proposed use will not need public utilities. 4. LAND USE AND MING: The subject property is currently zoned RS-20 (Suburban) and consists of two vacant parcels and the Faith Assembly of God Church. Surrounding zoning and land uses are as follows: NORTH- R-S-20- County-residential SOUTH- R-S-20- Nazarene Church EAST- R-S-20- County-residential WEST- R-S-20- County-residential 5. COMPREH NSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan designates this area for Low-Density Residential use. 6. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATIQN: This proposal has been _ issued a Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) in accordance with review under the State Environmental. Policy Act (SEPA), Chapter 43.21(c) RCW. ANALYSIS The applicant has requested a Special Permit to locate a corn maze and associate activities on 18 acres of land directly north of the Faith Assembly of God Church on Road 72 (the church occupies 10 acres). A corn maze is a combination of agricultural and recreational uses. Both use categories' are identified as unclassified uses and as such require a Special Permit before locating within the community. The festival component of the corn maze will include hay-rides, a barnyard animal exposition, piglet races and a concession stand. The applicant has developed corn mazes within the Tri-Cities area for the past 11 years. The first corn maze was located on the corner of Road 100 and Argent Road on property now occupied by the Desert Springs Covenant Church. .-. The proposed corn maze will occupy 11 acres of land directly north of the Faith Assembly Church parking lot. The pumpkin patch portion of the -- project will be located on b acres just south of Wernett Road. A barn yard area for small petting zoo is proposed for a half acre site at the northwest corner of the church parking lot. The church parking lot, which is completely paved and fully lighted, will be used for parking. The general area surrounding the proposed site can be characterized as a suburban very low density area with large pastures, livestock raising and grape vineyards. Truck farming and raspberry production has also occurred in the neighborhood in the past. The actual use of the corn maze and fall festival activities will occur for ... about a month during the fall. The heaviest use of the corn maze will be on the weekends and near Halloween. Three to six tours of preschool and elementary aged children may occur on weekdays. The site can be accessed from the north or south by Road 72 and from the east by Wernett Road. -- The area surrounding the proposed corn maze is sparely developed. Homes on adjoining properties the west are located approximately 500 feet west of the proposed site. One of the major concerns over the location of past corn mazes (the one at Road 100) was the issue of parking. In this case the Faith Assembly parking lot is available for use. The parking lot is completely paved and .,. fully lit in the evening. The parking lot contains over two hundred parking spaces. 2 _. 1 i FINDINGS OF FACT -- Findings of fact must be entered from the record. The following are initial findings drawn from the background and analysis sections 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 within the Pasco Urban Growth Boundary. 2. The site contains approximately 28 acres. 3. The Comprehensive Plan identifies the site for future Low-Density Residential development. 4. The site contains the Faith Assembly of God Christian Center. S. The Faith Assembly of God Christian Center is the largest church in Pasco. 6. The site has been used in the past for agricultural activities. 7. Pastures and vineyards as-well-as animal husbandry occur on adjoining properties. 8. Surrounding properties are zoned R-S-20 in the County. 9. The site is zoned R-S-20. 10. The site contains approximately 28 acres. 11. Agriculture is a permitted accessory use in the R-S-20 zone. .— 12. Large vacant parcels within the general neighborhood have been used in the past for producing watermelons, pumpkins and other row or truck farming crops. 13. The site contains a Church facility with an improved parking lot and two vacant parcels. -- 14. The proposed use includes the development of a corn maze, pumpkin field and fall festival attraction area. 15. The proposed use is a commercial business enterprise designed to attract customers. 16. The applicant stated in the hearing customers would come from Franklin County, Benton County and Walla Walla. 17. The applicant anticipates attracting 7,000 to 9,000 people to the -- proposed corn maze. 18. The site is accessible from the north and south by way of Road 72 and from the east by way of Wernett Road. 3 19. Testimony provided by residents on Road 72 indicated current church traffic on Road 72 comes in about equal portions from both the north and south. 20. Road 72 is developed to rural standards with no curbs, gutter, sidewalk or street lighting from Argent Road on the north to the north line of the Church parking lot. 21. Wernett Road is developed to .rural standards with no curbs, gutter, sidewalks or street lighting. 22. Road 72 is partially developed to urban standards adjacent to the Faith Assembly Church. -- 23. Improvements (paved area) on Road 72 are only 20 feet wide adjacent to the corn maze site. 24. The corn maze will be open for business on Wednesday evenings during the time when youth and other church activities are occurring. 25. During Wednesday night church activities the church parking lot is in use. 26. The church occasionally has functions on Friday nights and on Saturdays. These activities will generate the need for use of the parking lots. 27. The applicant stated he could not control traffic on surrounding streets. -' 28. The applicant's security manager stated traffic was a problem in the area. 29. The applicant's security manager stated they could not control loitering around the site. 30. The City's noise regulations prohibit excessive noise from emanating from properties and intruding into residential areas between the hours of 10:00 pm and 7:00 am. -- 31. The applicant stated on the weekends he planned to operate up to 11:00 pm. 32. The applicant proposes to play country music on the site. CONCLUSIONS Before recommending approval or denial of a special permit the Planning Commission must develop findings of fact from which to draw its 4 I 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 goats, policies, objectives, and text of the Comprehensive Plan? The Comprehensive Plan designates the proposed site for low density residential development. The Plan does not specifically address the proposed use. However, the zoning regulations which implement the Plan permit the keeping of farm animals and allow limited agricultural production in R-S-20 zones. The zoning regulations also permit conunercial agricultural production by special permit in the R-S-20 zone. 2) Will the proposed use adversely affect public infrastructure? The proposed farm/corn maze is not dependent upon City utilities but -- the maze and fall festival will be dependent upon City and County streets for access. Road 72, the main access road to the site, was constructed to rural standards not urban standards. Likewise, Wernett Road does not meet City standards for a local access street. These roads have no night Iighting, no sidewalks and in many places are half the width of standard City streets. Wernett Road west of Road 72 along the proposed pumpkin patch area is a gravel road only. The operation of a corn maze to coincide with Wednesday evening church services and youth activities will place a strain on the use of public streets. Little onsite parking will be available on Wednesdays nights thereby increasing the likelihood corn maze customers will park on Road 72. Use of the property for farming only will created minimal impact on surrounding streets. 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 existing character is that of a suburban residential neighborhood. Small farms, pastures and vineyards are common in the neighborhood. The act of growing additional crops in the neighborhood will not alter the existing neighborhood character. The location of other farms within the 1- 182 Corridor has demonstrated that farms within close proximity of dwellings can be operated harmoniously with intended uses. The proposed corn maze portion of the application with fall festival activities however, is more of a commercial enterprise that will draw between 7,000 and 9,000 people to the neighborhood over a few weeks. Much of the increase in traffic generated by the influx of people will occur on the weekends and evenings when surrounding neighbors are home enjoying the peace and comfort of their properties. The additional traffic, noise, -- litter and commotion associated with a commercial enterprise in a -- 5 residential. area will disrupt the peace and harmony customarily enjoyed in a residential 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? There will be no permanent structures erected with this proposal. Development over the last 10 years within the I-182 Corridor attests to the fact that farming operations do not discourage the development of permitted uses or impair the value of nearby development. The operation of a commercial corn maze, while not a structure, will have a deleterious impact on the use and enjoyment of surrounding residential properties. The impact on long term property values is unknown at this time. -- 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 f any permitted uses within the district? The addition of 7,000 to 9,000 people into the neighborhood over a short period of time will create increased levels of noise, traffic, vibrations and w dust currently not experienced by the residents. The late night operation of a commercial enterprise within a residential neighborhood with the problems of noise, litter, additional traffic and young people loitering in ..,. the neighborhood will be become objectionable to neighboring residential properties. The location of a small farm within the neighborhood will have a minimal impact on the neighborhood. -• 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 establishment of a commercial corn maze providing recreational services to 9,000 people will become a nuisance in the residential neighborhood due to the increase in traffic, noise, loitering and other _ side effects associated with the corn maze and fall festival. Due to the narrow width and poor conditions of adjoining streets traffic safety is also a concern. The surrounding neighborhood is characterized by low density residential development interspersed with pastures and hobby farms. A commercial vineyard is located Road 72 directly east of the Faith Assembly Church. The existence of numerous farming operations -- within the Nest Pasco area demonstrates that the farming portion of the use will not become a nuisance to permitted uses nor will it endanger public health and safety. �- 6 .-. RECOMMENDATION MOTION: I move to adopt findings of fact and conclusions there from as contained in the July 16, 2009 staff report. MOTION: I move based on the findings of fact and conclusions, the Planning Commission recommend the City Council grant a special permit to Phillip Schmitt of Haywire Farms for the location of a farm with the following conditions: APPROVAL CONDITIONS -- 1) The special permit is personal to the applicant; 2) The special permit shall be for farming only and does not permit the use of the property for a corn maze, a fall festival, or anything like unto it; 3) The farm shall be operated by using best management practices for agricultural production; 4) The applicant must prepare a conservation plan approved by a farm service agency. A copy of the plan must be submitted to the city prior to the operation of the farm; 5) No irrigation water is permitted to be sprayed or otherwise drain onto the adjoining right-of-wad=; .. 6) Irrigation water and farm chemicals must be applied at agronomic rates; 7) The farm crop shall be limited to alfalfa or row crops; -- 8) No farm equipment is permitted to be stored on the site; 9) The special permit shall be valid for a period of 3 years and will automatically extend for an additional 3 years if the applicant adheres to the conditions of special permit approval; 10) The special permit shall be null and void if farming activity has not begun. by April, 2010. 7 REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION — MASTER FILE NO: SP 09-007 APPLICANT: Philipp Schmitt HEARING DATE: 7/16/09 5604 McKinley Court ACTION DATE: 9/17/09 Pasco, WA 99301 BACKGROUND REQUEST: SPECIAL PERMIT. Location of a. Corn Maze/Farm in an R-S- 20 Zone (2000 Block of Road 72) 1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Legal: The southeast and northeast quarters of the northwest quarter of the southeast quarter of Section 21, Township 9 North. -. Range 29 East, WM less the southerly 165 feet and less road right-of-way. General Location: 2000 Block of Road 72 Property Size: Approximately 28 acres 2. ACCESS: The site has access from Road 72 and Wernett Road. 3. UTILITIES: The proposed use will not need public utilities. 4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The subject property is currently zoned RS-20 (Suburban) and consists of two vacant parcels and the Faith Assembly of God Church. Surrounding zoning and land uses are as follows: NORTH- R-S-20- County-residential _ SOUTH- R-S-20- Nazarene Church EAST R-S-20- County-residential WEST- R-S-20- County-residential 5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan designates this area for Low-Density Residential use. 6. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: This proposal has been issued a Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) in accordance -- with review under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), Chapter 43.21(c) RCW. ANALYSIS The applicant has requested a Special Permit to locate a corn maze and associate activities on 18 acres of land directly north of the Faith Assembly of God Church on Road 72 (the church occupies 10 acres). A corn maze is a combination of agricultural and recreational uses. Both use categories' are identified as unclassified uses and as such require a Special Permit before locating within the community. The festival component of the corn maze will include hay-rides, a barnyard animal exposition, piglet races and a concession stand. The applicant has developed corn mazes within the Tri-Cities area for the past 11 years. The first corn maze was located on the corner of Road 100 and Argent Road on property now occupied by the Desert Springs Covenant Church. The proposed corn maze will occupy 11 acres of land directly north of the Faith Assembly Church parking lot. The pumpkin patch portion of the project will be located on C acres just south of Wernett Road. A barn yard area for small petting zoo is proposed for a half acre site at the northwest corner of the church parking lot. The church parking lot, which is completely paved and fully lighted, will be used for parking. The general area surrounding the proposed site can be characterized as a suburban very low density area with large pastures, livestock raising and grape vineyards. Truck farming and raspberry production has also occurred in the neighborhood in the past. The actual use of the corn maze and fall festival activities will occur for about a month during the fall. The heaviest use of the corn maze will be on the weekends and near Halloween. Three to six tours of preschool and elementary aged children may occur on weekdays. The site can be accessed from the north or south by Road 72 and from the east by Wernett Road. The area surrounding the proposed corn maze is sparely developed. -. Homes on adjoining properties the west are located approximately 500 feet west of the proposed site. One of the major concerns over the location of past corn maze (the one at Road 100) was the issue of parking. In this case the Faith Assembly parking lot is available for use. The parking lot is completely paved and fully lit in the evening. The parking lot contains over two hundred parking spaces adjacent to the corn maze site. 2 -. As instructed the staff has provided the Planning Commission two sets of findings and conclusions for consideration. These findings and conclusions are attached as Alternate # 1 for approval of the corn maze and "Alternate # 2" for approval of a farm only. Staff is recommending "Alternate # 2" be accepted by the Planning Commission. 3 ALTERNATE # 1 Findings & Conclusions to support approval of the Corn Maze Application — FINDINGS OF FACT Findings of fact must be entered from the record. The following are initial findings drawn from the background and analysis sections 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 within the Pasco Urban Growth Boundary. -- 2. The site contains 28 acres. 3. The Comprehensive Plan identifies the site for future Low-Density _ Residential development. 4. The site contains the Faith Assembly of God Christian Center. _ S. The Faith Assembly of God Christian Center is the largest church in Pasco. 6. The site has been used in the past for agricultural activities. 7. Pastures and vineyards as-well-as animal husbandry occur on adjoining properties. 8. Large vacant parcels within the general neighborhood have been used in the past for producing watermelons, pumpkins and other row or truck farming crops. 9. The site is zoned R-S-20. 10, Surrounding properties are zoned R-S-20 in the County 11. Agriculture is a permitted accessory use in the R-S-20 zone. 12. The site contains an improved church parking lot with over 200 parking spaces adjacent to the proposed corn maze/farm. Another 310 paved parking spaces are available around the church. .. 13. The church parking lot contains night lighting. 14. The church parking lot has access from both Road 72 and Court Street. — 15, The applicant is proposing to provide agri-entertainment for community residents. 4 16. The applicant has operated and managed corn mazes in the Tri- City area for at least 10 years. 17. The corn maze will be 6-7 acres in size. 18. Site development will include a pumpkin patch and petting zoo area. 19. All pathways and emergency lanes will be tilled and compacted to control dust. -~ 20. Perimeter fencing will be installed to trap blowing corn leaves. 21. The applicant indicated he has never received a warning from the Benton County Clean Air Authority for dust problems for past corn mazes in Benton County. 22. The applicant will provide security functions during the operation of the corn maze. 23. The site is accessible from the north and south by way of Road 72 and from the east by way of Wernett Road. 24. Existing church traffic uses Road 72, Wernett Road and Court Street. 25. Advertising for the corn maze will include maps showing access to the site is by way of Court Street to Road 72. 26. Parking lot attendants will be used to direct traffic into the church parking lot. ... CONCLUSIONS 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? The Comprehensive Plan designates the proposed site for low density residential development. The Plan does not specifically address the proposed use. However, the zoning regulations which implement the Plan permit the keeping of farm animals and allow limited agricultural production in R-S-20 zones. The zoning regulations also permit commercial agricultural production by special permit in the R-S-20 zone. -- 5 2) Will the proposed use adversely affect public infrastructure? The proposed farm/corn maze is not dependent upon City utilities therefore there will be no adverse impact to city utilities. Peak traffic for the corn maze will not be greater than that associated with the Faith Assembly Church. Advertising for the corn maze will show access to the site is by way of Court Street to Road 72 and not Argent Road or Wernett Road. Road 72 and Wernett Road currently accommodates church traffic. 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 existing character of the neighborhood is that of a suburban -- residential neighborhood. The act of growing additional crops in the neighborhood will not alter the existing neighborhood character. The location of other farms within the F 182 Corridor has demonstrated that ~- farms within close proximity of dwellings can be operated harmoniously %ith intended uses. The proposed use however will contain public activities for about a month that could disrupt the harmony of the existing neighborhood if conditions are not placed on the proposal. Conditions for parking, litter control, noise control and other issues tivill be needed for the protection 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? There will be no permanent structures erected with this proposal. Development over the last 10 years within the 1-182 Corridor attests to the fact that farming operations do not discourage the development of permitted uses or impair the value of nearby development. The proposed use is a temporary use that will not materially impact property values. sl 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? Without conditions the proposed activity could create traffic, noise, litter and dust that may be objectionable to nearby properties. Conditions related to parking, litter control and noise will need to be placed on the use of the site to safeguard the neighborhood. -- 6 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 existence of numerous farming operations within the I-182 Corridor demonstrates that the farming portion of the use will not became a nuisance to permitted uses nor will it endanger public health and safety. The use of the corn maze and festival activities could become a nuisance without use conditions. I RECOMMENDATION 1 MOTION: I move to adopt findings of fact and ' conclusions there from as contained in the July 16, 2009 staff report identified as "Alternate #1". ' MOTION: I move based on the findings of fact and conclusions identified in "Alternate #1", the Planning Commission recommend the City Council grant a special permit to Phillip Schmitt and Haywire Farms for the location of a farm and corn maze with the following conditions: _. APPROVAL CONDITIONS -- 1) The special permit is personal to the applicant; 2) The applicant must provide the City with a designated parking and traffic control plan to be approved by the City Engineer to ensure vehicles use the church parking lot; ' 3) No on street parking is permitted; �- 4) A daily litter control plan must be provided to the City to be approved by the Inspection Services Manager; 5) A site security plan must be submitted to the City for police and fire review prior to the issuance of a business license; 6) Portable toilets and sanitation (hand washing) stations must be provided on site. The Inspection Service Manager will determine the number of toilets and sanitation station needed; 7) Sanitation stations must meet all applicable laws and regulations; 8) Portable toilets must be located out of direct sight from adjoining homes and be no less than 75 feet from any _ adjoining property lines or street right-of-way; _ l 7 9) Any night lighting on the site must not spill onto adjacent properties. All lighting must be shielded per PMC 12.32.020. 10) illuminated signs are prohibited; 11) Signage must be limited to the entrance near the church — parking lot. One directional sign is permitted on church property at the corner of Road 72 and Court Street; 12) No signage is permitted on Argent Road, Wernett Road or any other off-site location; 13) Event operations must cease by 9:00 pm on weekdays and 10:00 pm on weekends; ,... 14) No amplified music or public announcement systems are permitted; 15) The applicant must at all times comply with City noise ,.. regulations (PMC 9.61); 16) The concession stand must be located adjacent to the church parking lot; 17) The corn maze must be setback 30 feet from the west property line of the site and 25 feet from Road 72 and 30 feet from the two homes on the west side of Road 72; -- 1 S) A two to three foot high fence is required around all areas planted with corn to stop corn leaves from blowing into neighboring properties; `- 19) The corn maze and festival activities will not be permitted until the applicant obtains a business license and approval of the parking and traffic plan and litter control plan; -' 20) The site cannot be used for produce stands selling produce other than pumpkins; 21) All temporary fencing, structures, portable toilets, concession stands and other items associated with the corn maze and festival activities must be removed from the site within 15 days _ of the close of the corn maze; 22) All fields used for crops (corn and pumpkins) must be tilled and restored to a state similar to that which existed prior to the planting of the crops within 15 days of the close of the corn maze; 23) All fields must be treated (with a cover crop or by other means) for dust control within 15 days of the close of the corn maze; 24) Any farming activity under this special permit shall be operated by using best management practices for agricultural production; 25) The applicant must prepare a conservation plan approved by a farm service agency. A copy of the plan must be submitted to the city prior to the operation of the farm; 26) No irrigation water is permitted to be sprayed or otherwise drain onto the adjoining right-of-way; _. 8 2 7j Irrigation water and farm chemicals must be applied at agronomic rates; 28) The farm crop shall be limited to alfalfa or row crops such as pumpkins, tomatoes, watermelons, peppers, and etc. The definition of row crops does not include wheat, barley, buckwheat and similar grains; 29) No farm equipment is permitted to be stored on the site; 30) The special permit for the farming portion of the application shall be valid for a period of 3 years and will automatically extend for an additional 3 years if the applicant adheres to the conditions of special permit approval; 31) The Special Permit for the corn maze portion of the application is valid for a period of one year during either the 2009 or 2010 season. Any subsequent use of the site for a corn maze and �- associated activities will require Special Permit review. 32) The special permit shall be null and void for the farming portion of the application if the farming activity has not begun by June, 2010. 9 ALTERNATE # 2 Findings & Conclusions to sup,�ort denial of the Corn Maze and approval of a farrow one FINDINGS OF FACT Findings of fact must be entered from the record. The following are initial findings drawn from the background and analysis sections 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 within the Pasco Urban Growth Boundarv. 2. The site contains approximately 28 acres. -- 3. The Comprehensive Plan, identifies the site for future Low- Density Residential development. 4. The site contains the Faith Assembly of God Christian Center. -- 5. The Faith Assembly of God Christian Center is the largest church in Pasco. 6. The site has been used in the past for agricultural activities. - 7. Pastures and vineyards as-well-as animal husbandry occur on adjoining properties. 8. Surrounding properties are zoned R-S-20 in the County. '- 9. The site is zoned R-S-20. 10. Agriculture is a permitted accessory use in the R-S-20 zone. 11. Large vacant parcels within the general neighborhood have been used in the past for producing watermelons, pumpkins and other row or truck farming crops. 12. The site contains a Church facility with an improved parking lot and two vacant parcels. 13. The proposed use includes the development of a corn maze, pumpkin field and fall festival attraction area. 14. The proposed use is a commercial business enterprise designed to attract customers. -- 15. The applicant stated in the hearing customers would come from Franklin County, Benton County and Walla Walla. 16. The applicant anticipates attracting 7,000 to 9,000 people to -- the proposed corn maze over the period of time the corn maze is open to the public. 17. The site is accessible from the north and south by way of Road -' 72 and from the east by way of Wernett Road. 18. Testimony provided by a resident on Road 72 indicated current church traffic on Road 72 comes in about equal portions from -` both the north and south. - 10 19. Road 72 is developed to rural standards with no curbs, gutter, sidewalk or street lighting from Argent Road on the north to the north line of the Church parking lot. 20. Wernett Road is developed to rural standards with no curbs, gutter, sidewalks or street lighting. 21. Road 72 is partially developed to urban standards adjacent to the Faith Assembly Church. 22. Improvements (paved areas) on Road 72 are only 20 feet wide ... adjacent to the corn maze site. 23. The corn maze will be open for business on Wednesday evenings during the time church activities are occurring. -- 24. During Wednesday night church activities the church parking lot is in use. 25. The church occasionally is rented for weddings and -- quinceaneras. These activities will generate the need for use of the parking lots. 26. The applicant stated he could not control traffic on surrounding streets. 27. The applicant's security manager stated they could not control loitering around the site. 28. The City's noise regulations prohibit excessive noise from emanating from properties and intruding into residential areas ' between the hours of 10:00 pm and 7:00 am. -' 29. The applicant stated on the weekends he plans to operate until 11.00 pm. r 30. The applicant proposes to play country music on the site. CONCLUSIONS 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: ' x) Will the proposed use be in accordance with the gouts, policies, -- objectives, and text of the Comprehensive Plan? ' The Comprehensive Plan designates the ro osed site for low density P P residential development. The Plan does not specifically address the proposed use. However, the zoning regulations which implement the Plan permit the keeping of farm animals and allow limited agricultural production in R-S-20 zones. The zoning regulations also permit commercial agricultural production by special permit in the R-S-20 zone. j 11 - 1 2) Will the proposed use adversely affect public infrastructure? The proposed farm/corn maze is not dependent upon City utilities but the maze and fall festival will be dependent upon City and County streets for access. Road 72, the main access road to the site, was constructed to rural standards not urban standards. Likewise, Wernett Road does not meet City standards for a local access street. These roads have no night lighting, no sidewalks and in many places is half the width of standard City streets. Wernett Road west of Road 72 along the proposed pumpkin patch area is a gravel road only. The operation of a corn maze to coincide with Wednesday evening church activities will place a strain on the use of public streets. Little onsite parking will be .... available on Wednesday nights thereby increasing the likelihood corn maze customers will park on Road 72. Use of the property for farming only will create minimal impact on surrounding streets. 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 existing character is that of a suburban residential neighborhood. Small farms, pastures and vineyards are common in the neighborhood. The act of growing additional crops in the neighborhood will not alter the existing neighborhood character. The location of other farms within the I-182 Corridor has demonstrated that farms within close proximity of dwellings can be operated harmoniously with intended uses. The proposed corn maze portion of the application with fall festival activities however, is more of a commercial enterprise that will draw between 7,000 and 9,000 people to the neighborhood over a few weeks. Much of the increase in traffic generated by the influx of people will occur on the weekends and evenings when surrounding neighbors are home enjoying the peace and comfort of their properties. The additional traffic, noise, Jitter and commotion associated with a commercial enterprise in a residential area will disrupt the peace and harmony customarily enjoyed in a residential 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? There will be no permanent structures erected with this proposal. Development over the last 10 years within the I-182 Corridor attests to the fact that farming operations do not discourage the development of permitted uses or impair the value of nearby development. The operation of a commercial corn maze, while not a structure, will have a — 1� deleterious impact on the use and enjoyment of surrounding residential properties. The impact on long term property values is unknown at this time. 5) Will the operations in connection with the proposal be more objectionable to nearby properties by reason of noise, fumes, vibrations, dust, traffiq or flashing lights than would be the operation of any permitted uses within the district? ... The addition of 7,000 to 9,000 people into the neighborhood over a short period of time will create increased levels of noise, traffic, vibrations and -- dust currently not experienced by the residents. The late night operation of a commercial enterprise within a residential neighborhood with the problems of noise, litter, additional traffic and young people loitering in -� the neighborhood will become objectionable to occupants of neighboring residential properties. The location of a small farm within the neighborhood will have a minimal impact on the neighborhood. 6) Will the proposed use endanger the public health or safety located and developed where proposed, or in any way will become a nuisance to uses permitted in the district? The establishment of a commercial corn maze providing recreational services to 9,000 people will become a nuisance in the residential neighborhood due to the increase in traffic, noise, loitering and other side effects associated with the corn maze and fall festival. Due to the { narrow width and poor conditions of adjoining streets traffic safety is also a concern. The surrounding neighborhood is characterized by low density residential development interspersed with pastures and hobby farms. A commercial vineyard is located on Road 72 directly east of the Faith Assembly Church. The existence of numerous farming operations .... within the West Pasco area demonstrates that the farming portion of the use will not become a nuisance to permitted uses nor will it endanger public health and safety. RECOMMENDATION MOTION: I move to adopt findings of fact and conclusions therefrom as contained in the September 17, 2009 staff report. MOTION: I move based on the findings of fact and conclusions, the Planning Commission recommend the City Council grant a special permit to Phillip Schmitt and Haywire Farms for the location of a farm on Road 72 with the following conditions: 13 "- Approval Conditions 1) The special permit is personal to the applicant; 2) The special permit shall be for farming only and does not permit the use of the property for a corn maze, a fall festival, or anything like unto it; 3) The farm shall be operated by using best management practices for agricultural production; 4} The applicant must prepare a conservation plan approved by a farm service agency. A copy of the plan must be submitted to the city prior to the operation of the farm; 5) No irrigation water is permitted to be sprayed or otherwise drain onto the adjoining right-of-way; -- b) Irrigation water and farm chemicals must be applied at agronomic rates; 7) The farm crop shall be limited to alfalfa or row crops such as �- pumpkins, tomatoes, watermelons, peppers, and etc. The definition of row crops does not include wheat, barley, buckwheat and similar grains; 8) No farm equipment is permitted to be stored on the site; 9) The special permit shall be valid for a period of 3 years and will automatically extend for an additional 3 years if the applicant adheres to the conditions of special permit approval; 10) The special permit shall be null and void if farming activity has not begun by April, 2010. -- 14 FEE: $300.00 CITY OF PASCO APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL PERMIT (Pok omcLkL usE on y) KLE'NO: DATE: The undersigned hereby apply for a Special Permit: Applicant: �r��'(1t? ��M;�f N�tiwJc� �tir,�S Applicant's Address: ,cL I 1° ',' C4, 61A 30 I Applicant's Phone Numbers: ,A) U '-0,53 cc f -GIM (home/work, cellular, fax) Property Owner's Name (if different than applicant): ray AS3embl�3 4 General location off property (street address or other description): 3 1c,` 3 West- c ��� -72 Je-�wer'i `*r4 `*re.'f- at'd Legal description of property (attach separate sheet if necessary): Lot(s) Block Subdivision THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION IS REQUIRED TO PROVIDE THE PLANNING COMMISSION WITH A COMPLETE APPLICATION TO REVIEW: 1. Present use of the land and structure(s) if any: �rr✓Ad CMiM� / � I - 641- '�dyq ✓r ?tk�� i,,i hrl�•yi � �p ,�k �ISrM�.l,l �G. .G� 2. If vacant, check here: ❑ -- 3. Please describe any existing violations of any portion of the zoning ordinance upon the property:( 4. Give a detailed description of the proposed use that requires a Special Permit (attach sefla` ig gb= iLW Q= 5Qa - s necessa-rvL I FEE: $300.00 . . 5. A site map/plan, drawn neatly and to scale, showing the following: (a) Exterior property lines and any adjacent public street or alley rights- of-way; (b) Existing and proposed buildings and other structures; (c) Existing and proposed points of ingress and egress, drives, driveways, and circulation pattern; (d) The location of existing and proposed parking areas with each parking space shown; (e) Existing and proposed open spaces and landscape areas. NOTE: Variance report giving a list and mailing address of owners of all property within 300 feet of the applicant's property, as shown by a local title company OR payment of $80.00 which shall be utilized by the City to purchase an ownership listing from the Franklin County Assessor's Office, must be included. Fee for Special Permit - $300.00 Environmental Checkl;st $100.00 $400.00 Signature of Applicant STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ss. County of Franklin ) On this _day of _ 200_, before me the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, duly commissioned an sworn, personally appeared _ _ being duly sworn on his/her oath that he/she has prepared and read the foregoing statements and has acknowledged to me that the recitations contained therein are true, and has signed this instrument as his/her free and voluntary act and deed for the purposes therein mentioned. SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this _ day of -1200---. Notary Public in and for the State of Washington Residing at THE MAIZE & PUMPKIN PATCH at HA YWIRE FARMS 1 _ I Who we are... We are Phil & Marissa Schmitt and, along with our four young sons, we operate Haywire Farms Corn Maze,Pumpkin Patch, & Fail Family Festival. Phil grew up on a farm near Cheney,WA where his father fanned&his grandfather before him farmed. Marissa grew up right here in Pasco next to Edwin Markham Elementary on ground her mother's family began farming in the 1950's. Our boys attend the same elementary school their mother,& even their grandmother attended! Family ties to farming& the Mid-Columbia have instilled in us a desire to continue that heritage with our own boys! Where we've been... Haywire Farms began as a custom farming operation in 1997. With 2 tractors& 2 bale scoops we ran around the Mid-Columbia, and beyond, stacking hay for other farmers. In the fall of that year, while visiting family in Utah, we went through our first corn maze. -- !1+Marissa's sister was helping out her good friend. Brett Herbst, in his second year with The MAiZE. We had such a Mood time and saw great potential in bringing agricultural entertainment to those who would otherwise not have a chance to be around farm life. We -- made the decision to start tip our own maze. In 1998 we brought the first corn maze to the Tri-Cities. We were located on the corner of Rd. 100& Argent in Pasco and we just had a maze,tiny concessions trailer, and dirt parking lot that first year! We loved being able to — ! work in agriculture, have our small son out there with us, and teach families about the industry that has so enriched our community. We were having a great tune! Where we've come... Well,after 12 years& 17 ma7xs we"ve learned a lot and grown a lot! After just a couple of years, people were looking for more than just the little maze &tiny concessions trailer. Our first new addition to the ma7e experience was to add some scares to the experience during the last couple of weeks of October. We don't do anything gory or Satanic,but instead offer some adrenaline pumping, heart racing features to make people jump! Kids as young as 8 years old enjoy our Field of Screams.Next, we added our own pumpkin patch to allow people the opportunity to pick their own pumpkin right off the vine. From there,we have added a barnyard full of activities including hayrides. a petting zoo, barrel rides for the kids,a straw bale maze,and our world famous corn cannons! Our concession trailer offering just candy bars& cans of pop has grown into a concession stand that offers hot dogs, hamburgers, corn on the cob, kettle corn, hot cider,chili, pic, funnel cakes, &the list goes on! To better reach the young people in our community &offer them more focused education we host field trips throughout the maze season. We have seen thousands of Mid- ^ a Columbia kids over the years and welcome the opportunity to show them the benefits of the farming way of life. Where we're heading... -- The 2009 season will find us operating on ground leased from Faith Assembly Christian Center on Rd. 72 in Pasco. We are excited about the opportunities this will provide,and are especially excited to have a paved parking lot to utilize! Every year we try to grow and expand to offer families a new chance to make life long memories,while retaining the goad farmin' fun they have come to know& love! We look forward to growing our kids play area to include a tunnel slide,PVC slide,and a new-fangled contraption known as the Jumping Pillow. We are excited about the prospect of offering corporate outings& family reunions once we are able to expand our party & picnic areas. And, in the more distant future,we hope to grow to include a farm store, u- pick vegetables& fruit,and year-round opportunities for the public to experience the farm in a hands-on way. We hope to someday offer summer camps for kids where they are able to actually help with planting&.caring for the farm &animals. Our vision is great&our desire is huge! What drives our vision... Over the years we have always maintained our goal of educating people about agriculture & giving them a glimpse of that life. We respect the history of farming in our own families& in our community, and we cherish the values associated with that way of life. We want try raise our own boys to know the value of hard work and see the benefit in continuing the legacy that helped build our area. Marissa's grandfather helped pioneer the Columbia Basin in the early 1950's, starting a 100 acre family farm north of Pasco. Our hearts are tied to the life he built. In 2008 we were introduced to the Innkeeper's program through our employee&friend, John Bucko. Pastor Lee Moses began conning out to the farm on a regular basis and brought us some full time & part time employees. We firmly believe it was more than mere coincidence that Pastor I.ee came out to our farm. Our life &our business needed ._ new direction. We know God is calling us to refocus ourselves. We know that our business can serve a higher purpose &can change the lives of far more people than just our little family. We are excited about the possibilities for our family,for Innkeepers, and for whatever else God brings our way as we continue into the future. God has blessed us with health, happiness,and good friends to stand alongside us, and we want to keep our eyes open for ways to serve Him in return. Qgritainment Activities: Farm tours and fieldtrips: During the fall harvest festival we typically have three to six tours per day of the farm. Preschool, early elementary and senior citizen tours typically last 2-3 hours and include most of the activities that we have to offer. In the evenings and on weekends we host youth group and scout visits to the farm. Maze: The corn maze will be about 11 acres in size. The corn will be watered up until opening so it will retain its moisture through the season. Visitors will pay admission to walk through the maze. There will be a smaller portion of the maze -- which will open later and be utilized as our haunted section. There will be clearance around the maze for emergency vehicles and maze staff will be familiar with the maze paths in order to assist in quick access for emergency personnel if -- needed. All corn maze staff carries two way radios. Pumpkin Patch: The pumpkin patch will be about 6 acres in size. Hayrides will be taken to the pumpkin patch where people can choose their pumpkin. There will be a road around and through the pumpkin patch for hayrides. This road can also be used by emergency personnel if needed. Hayrides: We will operate two hayride wagons this year. Both will be equipped with steps to get up to the bed. Each wagon can carry up to 20 adult or 30 children. Drivers are trained to be observant of riders at all times. Customers are directed to remain seated and parents are instructed to keep children seated. -.. Barnyard animals: Pygmy goats, baby calves, a donkey, and turkeys are the typical animals that we bring bamyard. Small in size and easy to manage, these -� animals are spoiled with care. Piglet Races: We will have piglet races on site this year. Pigs are maintained and housed safely and hand washing is available and encouraged for visitors and employees. All animals on our site are treated humanely and fed and watered adequately. We check with appropriate agencies regarding requirements. Concessions: We serve concessions at the farm. All items are applied for and .., approved by the Health Dept. The proper permits are obtained and food handlers are required to have a food handler's card. Food is stored and prepared properly. We have separate handlers for taking money and preparing food. -- Although we were in compliance last year, we have plans for improvements to increase food safety and cleanliness. Haunted Cornfield: For the last ten years we have haunted a certain portion of the corn field. Although we our goal is to scare our clients we refuse to incorporate gore, murder scenes, or anything satanic. We are a destination for families and wholesome memories, those extreme themes will never be used at our festival, Crowd Control: We employ security personnel at the maze. The number of employees is proportionate to the amount of visitors and proper training will be employed to prepare employees to deal with problems and maintain a wholesome atmosphere at the maze. Garbage/Sanitation: We check with the proper agencies to determine the number of portable toilets and hand washing facilities to have on site, These are maintained, emptied, and refilled as needed. Garbage Is deposited into trash cans and taken to the dump. Dust Control: We will control bust with a 500 gallon water trailer and irrigation hand lines. We have two wells on site to provide water. We have worked with the Glean Air Authority regarding this matter in the past and have always fully complied. We have never had a problem, complaint, or been given a citation. '- Parking/Traffic: We plan to keep our parking area watered and employ parking attendants in the parking area as well as at the entrance/exit area. Our parking area will be about 3 acres in size, The entrance and exit will be well defined this year and adequately lighted at night, 5ignage will more clearly identify our entrance and direct traffic to obey the rules of the road upon exit. Community Communication: We value the relationship we share with our neighbors and respect their desire for a peaceful community, We plan to -- communicate more and increase their contributions to the efficient and acceptable operation and maintenance of our event. Noise: We have always been mindful of the need for a peaceful operation. We understand that the visitors to our harvest festival and the nature of the event do increase the noise level for the few weeks we operate. It is not our intention to bother the community and we will work to make sure the noise is not bothersome. We typically play country music softly in the background during business hours. We do not have bands or loud music at our event. We have never had a complaint lodged with the authorities or a citation. -- Courtyard Activities: Wholesome family fun with a country fair feel is goal in this area. Beside the piglet races we have plastic duck races, a kid's Corral play area, a big bale mountain of straw, a straw bale maze, pedal tykes, pedal cars, -- calf roping, and a farm animal display, Many other games and activities that have an agriculture based theme may be added to this area. Cornmaze Activities: Typically our clients just try to solve the maze puzzle, but we also allow our guests to play teamhullding exercises in the field. Scavenger hunts and relay races usually take place with private parties only. "` Ha wir_ Earms Harvest Festival Summary _. What W Haywire Fa Haywire Farms is owned and operated by Phil Schmitt, along with help from his wife, Marissa, and their 4 children. Haywire Farms began as a custom farming operation, with machinery running almost all summer cutting hay and stacking bales. In 1997, while visiting family, we went through our very first corn maze. The concept seemed like a good fit for our family.We opened our first maze in Pasco in the fall of 1998. We have since grown to include a pumpkin patch, barnyard full of activities, hayrides, and a petting zoo_ We have a true fondness for the farming life and the character and hard work associated with that life. It is our desire to expose our children to that life, while also giving other families the chance to enjoy it as well! -- What is-a-com maze "A gold and green amusement park ride that stands still"writes People magazine. And that's only part of the story. Just ask one of the thousands of people who have played in field's across the country. The maze is much more than just a labyrinth, it's a comfiield that is carved into the shape of something tangible. Past designs here in the Tri-Cities have included a hydroplane, the Tri-Cities Americans logo, a locomotive, and a giant outline of our wonderful state, just to name a few! The journey through our immense cornfield includes twists and turns, bridges, riddles and trivia, and various levels of difficulty. Corporate executives down to high school guidance counselors can use this opportunity to develop team building and problem solving skills while having a great time. When you visit the maze you'll find acres of corn, miles of pathways, lots of confusion, and, at the end of it all, accomplishment! Event Oblective -- At Haywire Farms, our objective is to keep the dream of the American farm alive, sustain its rich heritage, while employing a creative approach to benefit financially from agriculture. Our goals are to provide entertainment to the general public, to promote awareness of agriculture, and to create an environment in which one can have fun while accepting the various challenges the maze and our other activities have to offer. We have cross planted agriculture and entertainment, the result: agri-tainment, a high-concept, low-tech means of melding two worlds in order to get families off the couch and into the corn. This recurring seasonal event triggers expectation, which will foster return visits year after year. Each visit unveils new and exciting challenges that will enthrall children, bond families, and boost employees' moral while delivering the message of the American farm. Haywire F'arm's maze reaches across generations, children and youth attack the -- challenge like a video game, adults stroll enjoying time together, and the senior will reconnect to his or her own memories of growing up on the farm. ._ Our Vision for the Future The 2009 operating season will mark our 12th year of corn mazesl In that time, we have operated 16 mazes in four different cities.We have seen many successes and learned a lot of goad lessons along the way. We have seen what works, and what does not workl in 2008, we had the privilege of working with Pastor Lee Moses and his Innkeepers program. Through that relationship, we learned that we want our business to serve as more than a vehicle for our own financial benefit. We want what we do to serve a higher purpose and be of benefit to more than just the 6 people in our family. How that will look exactly is still a work in progress. We look forward to continuing our relationship with Pastor Lee and the Innkeepers board to find outl Like any business, we aspire to be successful. expand ourselves, and flourish. It is our sincere desire to see how our work can t)enefit God's work — as well! RECEIVED SEP23M September 23, 2009 [OMMUNTTY&ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT David McDonald, City Planner City of Pasco 525 North Third Street Pasco, Washington 99301 Re: APPEAL OF SPECIAL PERMIT—CASE NUMBER MF#SP09-007 Dear Mr. McDonald: This is in follow-up to the Planning Commission's action of September 17, 2009 regarding the above captioned matter. Please consider this an appeal in accordance with Pasco Municipal Code Section 25.86.080. This appeal is made on behalf of the _ i � -r ne names below and the signatories to Attachment 1 If Aldd;bu l_ it f r t!tttl 1L�UiJ. In accordance with Municipal Code Section 25.86.080 (2) and Title 25, Appendix A, enclosed is the appeal fee of$100.00(see Attachment 2). "Lse itkiJu5je t io jeller r►rrtl W1 all shed documents as rya l ur Liter Council's backgmaind mate Also ple _provide a cW, , of this package to #ig—f�Z 0f PaIwa C` sl Enfnr =nt B i cnn. = ur n rnattCr__On.QgMing the usQgiatd ro e Also, Appellants herein request written updates from the City as to the continuing status of all matters associated with this case, code violations, and notice of the required public hearing(s). If necessary, please consider this a continuing"Request for Public Records" As noted by the Planning Commission, both Haywire Farms, and Faith Assembly Christian Center have a vested interest in the approval of this Special Permit (see "New Information For Council's Consideration" below, especially Attachment 8). As a result, Planning Commission recusals related to both entities. Similarly, Appellants request that Pasco City Council members recuse themselves from considering this matter should they: 1) have ties to Faith Assembly Christian Center or Haywire Farms; 2) have talked to parties associated with Faith Assembly Christian Center or Haywire Farms concerning this or other associated zoning matters; 3)have received political contributions or assistance from members of Faith Assembly Christian Center or Haywire Farms or; 4) have talked to anyone about the"Corn Maze" or issues associated with these code violations. Re: APPEAL OF SPECIA-L PERMIT—CASE NUMBER MF# SP09-007 Page: 2 As a matter of law, Appellants relieve that Council Members should err on the side of recusal in order to ensure the"appearance of fairness" in this land use issue. HARM TO BE EXPE MNCED IN ACC()RDAN(:E WTM FMC ZSX6, (b)! Should the Special Permit be approved, Appellants will be subjected to harm including but not limited to excessive noise; excessive traffic; unsafe traffic speeds; increased likely hood of property damage or injury ft m vehicles and patrr)ns; trespassing lay morons; vandalizing; Jitter; dust; and other unenu erated nuisances. In addition. Appellants will be harmed by damage to the unimproved, substandard, and unmaintained road infrastructure on Wernett and Road 72 (and collateral damage to vehicles, etc.)caused by heavy traffic associated with the"Com Maze". INFORMATION NEW ' CONSIDERATIQN In September l6, 2002, an issue arose regarding the introduction ofnew information relating to Closed Public Hearings. Councilwoman Crawford asked the City attorney "what Council's position should be regarding the additional documentation presented?" (see Attac:Ii€nent 3, Council Minutes of September 16,2002), City Attorney Kerr explained as follows: " the nature of the additional information is that it is the result of meetings held between the applicant and the appellants so, to a certain degree, neither are in a position to object to the introduction of that evidence. The regulatory reform ordinance, put together several years ago, allows the Council to open the public hearing on a limited basis to receive additional information or evidence in regards to very specific aslrects. Sur )ce new information conies from both the applicant and the appellants Council could allow its introduction to those very specific issues". The exact same set of circumstances have occurred with this case_ As in that case, Applicant communicated to a group of Appellants (in the form of a September 18, 2009 correspondence, see Attachment S), As a result, on September 20. 2009, a group of Appellants met with the Applicant to discuss and address issues and concerns between the parties. As sur form concenjiine this matter and considered by the Psscn Lrpy Council. D&. w you will find the aforementnned Werm atian. The following issues were Brought forward and discussed at that September 20, 2009 meeting: • The first item of new information is the fact that illegal farming activities have been, and continue to take place at the subject site. No activities took place as the Planning Commission's took testimony at its July 16, 2009 Public Hearing. The day after the Public Hearing was closed, farming activities commenced on the subject site. These illegal farming activities included installation of electrical service, installation and laying Re: APPEAL OF SPECIAL PERM r–CASE NUMBER MFW SP09-007 Paige: 3 of irrigation lines, storage of farm equipment and implements, as well as the planting of various crops. This activity began f tlht n _ Attachment 5 is a COPY of the violation notice provided to the City. Attachment 6 is a copy of a September 8, 2009 article from the Tri-City Herald. • The second item of new information is the fact that the Applicant obtained public utilitaes in the form of irrigation water and electricity. These public utilities were obtained by providing false information related to planned site activities, as well as the status of permits obtained from the City_ Collateral agencies were not aware of the illegitimate and un-permitted status of the Applicant's farming activities. • The third item of new information relates to websites rn intained by Applicant and Faith Assembly Christian Center which serve to promote the "Cora Maze" in advance of obtaining requisite permits and approvals. Applicant's website pr motes "Corn Mazes" activities which directly conflict with the City's conditions (see Attachment 7), For example, the website indicates that the weekend closing time is 10W pm.. with a notation that"* Last person enters at closing, time". In addition, noise intensive activities ("Corn Cannon") and prohibited activities ("Camp Fires" ) are planned_ In addition, Attachment 8 is a September 19, 2009 screen shot from the Faith Assembly Christian Center Website advertising the"Corn Maze" as a part of its forthcoming activities. • Additional mitigation measures were discussed. Unfortunatelv, no mitigation measures could resolve the came concerns brought forward at the Planning Commission's Ji ly 16, 2009 Public Hearing. fin h I Be facts contained herein and conside them in its decision on this Smial Permi E D UMN In its July 16, August 20, and September 17, 2009 hearings and meetings, the Planning Commission made several errors and relied upon information which was materially incorrect in its consideration of this matter as enumerated below: 1. Based upon the testimony provided at the July 16, 2009 Public Hearing, the Planning Commission initially developed facts which seared to lien,r t4e at'tttlica n. 2. At its August 20, 2009 meeting, and absent public limelight, the Planning Commission rep,=erse i findi f r r t d �,e t eCi P 3. At its September 17, 2009 meeting, the Planning Commissim adopted"Findings of Fact" which m' no way' reflected the true content of the information Ratheted at July LO-2—OW Public HgariM nor the minutes published as a result of said Public Hearing Ile: APPEAL OF SPECIAL PERMIT— CASE NUMBER MF#SP09-007 Page: 4 4. The Planning Commission did not fly or adequwely consider the negative impacts on neighbors including heavy traffic on unimproved, substandard and unmaintained roads, infrastructure damage thereto and collateral damage to vehicles and property; excessive noise and lighting levels; crowd control of those visiting the "Corn Maze"-, litter; sanitation; dust control on site, and on (inimproved)substan lard roads, trespassing- vtsndalizing,; hours of operation; and the high potential for property damage and injuries in the surrounding neighborhoods. 5. The Planning Commission did not fully or adequately consider the fact that the negative impacts on the neighborhood can not be mitigate regardless of how many conditions are imposed upon the Applicant. ti_ The Planning Commission did not fully or adequately consider that the site and requisite parking for the "Special Permit" is completely owned by Faith Assembly Christian Center. The applicant only leases a portion of the subject site. As suck, a separate Special Permit must be obtained by Faith Assembly for the commerqial use of their parkin; lot (subject "Special Permit" is personal to the Applicant, not applicable to Faith. Assembly). T The report and findings of fact adopted by the Planning Commission indicate that "The proposed use will not need public utilities" (see Attachment 9). As noted above, Applicant required and fraudulently obtained public electricity and public irrigation water. As such, m m of Pfan o ion # . . acted w m?n information whkb was matcliaily jarornct_ & In its approval of the Special Permit, the Planning Conunission disregarded the need to abate continuing code violations related to the site_ As such, the Planning Commission's approval serves to condone, sanctify and encourage activities which are in violation of the Pasco Municipal Code. 9, The Planning Commission erred in considering the Special Permit as }i~arnning activity with an "agritainment" component. Instead, the Planning Commission should have considered the Special Permit as a Entertainment activity inclusive of a minor farming component. 10. The Planning Commission erred in its application of Pasco Municipal Code section 25.22.010. This section provides that Special Permits be issued for the R-S-20 Suburban District, only if "Ibor zafiArt an(I I n del ' tat a in .ia suburban id " (emphasis added). Since the enumerated imps of thr *Corn Muc" «n 1 L.be very de,trirnental to the pded suburban, resi l&ntial e11roamm it does not meet the City's criteria for app rn oval. SUMMARY As detailed above, Appellants, local neighbors from both the City and County, as well as residents of the Tni-Cities, will be significantly harmed if the "Corn Maze" activity is approved by the Pasco City Council. In addition, new information has come forward since the Planning Commission's July 16, 2009 Public hearing which further documents the incompatibility of the planned use for the "Special Permit". and must be introduced and considered by the Paso City Council in its deliberations on this matter. Moreover, the Pasco City Planning Corry ission Re. APPEAL OF SPECIAL PERMIT—CASE NUMBER MFf#SP49-007 Page. S made several significant errors and relied upon information which w-as materially incorrect in its consideration of the matter as well as developing its Findings of Fact and recommendation. "Clend conclude 'liip activity ss "4tt6nMtai to .lk 'ntendrd suburban resid tii! envirosrmt" for tfs R-S-20 Su4artm Distri0 C'm*61 wi8 ail• find that the i t h are nsct�st�t with FMC Z5.1L0[0, and *refeu_dm not mffA the City's-viltri&f [.agwroval In addition. the haco C*ly Council, V1 that 'rarl P t" will sub rrni r encourM other3 tk may wrsb to man tat snjKrmjwd activities. Appellants hereby request that the Pasco City Council take the fallowing actions: • By way of the Pasco Code Enforcement Board, seep abatement and correction of all applicable code violations by Applicant and Faith Assembly Christian Center. As Renerously feytili d a[ter decades haviao lain fallow. conditiew related to treatment for d and dint c9otrr I must be included • Approve a u"rwd Special Permit for traditional "farming only" activities contingent upon satisfactory completion of the above. Re: APPEAL OF SPECIAL PERMIT—CASE NUMBER MF#SP09-007 Page: 6 The Appellants herein thank you in advance for your consideration of this matter. Tamara,and Curtis Roy Patrick and Janice Grady Jesse and Beverly Rodgers 7116 W. Wemett Road 2703 Road 72 7309 W. Wernett Road Pasco,Washington 99301 Pasco.Washington 99301 Pasco,Washington 99301 Nancy B. and Philip L. Rieke Lori and David Peterson Mary and Sal Beltran 7109 W. Wernett Road 7031 W. Wernett Road 2316 Road 72 Pasco,Washington 99301 Pasco,Washington 99301 Pasco,Washington 99301 Mile Schmitt Billie J. Ross Travis Matthews 6921 W. Wemett Road 1605 Road 72 2205 Road 72 Pasco,Washington 99301 Pasco,Washington 99301 Pasco.Washington 99301 Matt Macduff Richard Manke Roger E. Lenk and Lisa C. 7016 W. Wernett Road 7519 W. Court Douglas Pasco, Washington 99301 Pasco,Washington 99301 1817 N. Road 76 Pasco,Washington 99301 Crary B. Gatewood Azure Buckenberger 1821 Road 72 7414 Ter Ray Court Matt and Julie Dawes Pasco,Washington 99301 Pasco,Washington 99301 13 Jasmine Lane Pasco, Washington 99301 Joshua D. Painter Mario Dispio 2420 Road 72 7415 Ter Ray Court Joseph and Korin Crowther Pasco,Washington 99301 Pasco,Washington 99301 5 Hollyhock Court Pasco, Washington 99301 John and Sandy Pietrusiewicz Christina Anasasi 2909 Road 72 2205 N. Road 72 Pasco,Washington 99301 Pasco,Washington 99301 Lynda and Bruce Clatterbuck Raul and Taffy Almeida 3001 Road 72 406 RosselI Avenue Pasco,Washington 39301 Richland Washington 99352 Mary Ann and Edward W. Bass Frank Bolsen 2830 Road 72 7317 W. Wemett Road Pasco,Washington 99301 Pasco,Washington 99301 Marion Boyles Doug Rodgers 7120 W. Wemett Read 7309 W. Wernett Road Pasco,Washington 99301 Pasco,Washington 99301 Re.: APPEAL OF SPECIIAL PERMIT— CASE NUMBER MF# SP09-007 Page: 7 Attachment I —Appellant Signatures Attachment 2 - $100.00 Appeal Fee Attachment 3 - September 16, 2002 Pasco City Council Minutes Attachment 4—September 18, 2009 Correspondence From Applicant to Appellants Attachment 5 —August 22,2009 Correspondence to City of Pasco Attachment 6 - September 8, 2009 Article from the Tri-City herald Attachment 7— September 18, 2009 Screen Shot of"Corn Maze" Website Attachment 8 — September 19, 2009 Screen Shot of Faith Assembly Website Attachment 9—July 16, 21009 Planning Commission Report, Page 1 Hand Delivered CC Tri-City Herald Franklin PUD Franklin County Irrigation District 91 ATTACHMENT 1 i� � ��� I lam• � r '�� • �� I ��� r �'7►'�/�� Imo.,�aJ�• r. . +�.. } . ti _/ls., ././J .M c • + M t +iii _I ��� 1 r>r 11 WIN Sigma Naive Pdrd d kov Address 29 r.3 d ►r' 30 "`7 0 � 4 ? 3 a 3 AA prarft R 33 _ 1 / �&1w, F s 'G 1 35 37 38 1 39 40 41 42 43 45 _ - 46 47 48 5a 51 52 54 S5 56 September 21, 2€ 09 To Whom It May Concern: My family and I inoved here many years ago to enjoyed the senu-rural, quiet country living. As the years went by, we have seen the expected and positive growth of new homes and growing families enjoying the same quiet and safety that we once had. Now we are seeing heavy traffic, loitering, and invading commercial growth of businesses that choose not to keep up their property. Unfortunately, this "Corn Maze" will only bring more unexpected and unwanted forms of growth. A short term commercial endeavor like this will bring with it a bad reputation, more unwanted traffic, loitering, noise and vandalism that will surely take its toll on the patience of its neighbors and leave nothing but empty fields and litter. My wife and I have recently been awakened from our naive trust of our sleepy neighborhood with a home robbery, another product of unwanted growth. We now are on guard and careful to watch for and protest any proposed activity like this that will certainly bring nothing but trouble. Sincerely, ` r Ed and Mary Ann Bass 2830 N. Rd 72 ATTACHMENT 5 CHAPTER 25.22 R-S-20 SUBURBAN DISTRICT Sections: 25.22.010 PURPOSE................................................................................... 29 25.22.020 PERMITTED USES ...................................................................... 29 25.22.030 PERMITTED ACCESSORY USES.................................................... 29 25.22.040 CONDI TI ONAL USES................................................................... 30 25.22.050 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS....................................................... 30 25.22.010 PURPOSE. The R-S-20 suburban district is established to provide a low density residential environment permitting two dwelling units per acre Lands within this district shall. unless specifically allowed herein contain suburban residential development with large lots and expansive yards. Structures in this district are limited to single-family dwellings and customary accessory structures. Certain public facilities and institutions may also be permitted, provided their nature and location are not detrimental to the intended suburban residential environment (Ord. 3354 Sec. 2. 1999.) 25.22.020 PERMITTED USES. The following uses snall be permitted in the R-S- 20 suburban district: (1 ) Single-family dwellings. and (2) New factory assembled homes. (3) Nothing contained in this section shall be deemed to prohibit the use of vacant property for gardening or fruit raising. (Ord 3731 Sec 3, 2005; Ord 3354 Sec. 2. 1999.1 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 (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) Horne occupations as defined in Section 25.12.220: (3) Storage buildings not exceeding 480 square feet of gross floor area and titteen 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 PMC Title 25 9/15/2008 29 all barns. barnyards. chicken houses. or corrals shall be located not iess 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, provided such number of animals does not exceed three dogs and three cats: (7) Family day care home in conformance with WAC 388-73 as now existing and as amended and PMC Chapter 25.66; and (8) Accessory dwellings. (Ord. 3688 Sec. 1. 2004: Ord. 3354 Sec. 2. 1999.) 25.22.040 CONDITIONAL USES. In addition to the unclassified uses listed in Chapter 25.86, the following uses may be permitted by special permit as provided in Chapter 25.86: (1 ) Churches and similar places of worship: (2) Public libraries. and municipal office buildings (3) Public and private schools. public parks and playgrounds: (4) Fire department station houses: (5) Private nursery school. preschool, child mini day care. and chid day care center: (6) Agricultural use kcommeicial), and. (7) Buildings in conjunction with an agrlcultural use (limited). provided the parcel contains at least 5 acres and the building will not be used for the condud or support of any business activity. (Ord. 3667 Sec 1, 2004: Ord 3354 Sec 2. 1999.) 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. (5) Maximum building height; (a) Principal building. Thirty-five (35) feet, except a greater height may be approved by special permit. (b) Accessory buildings: Fifteen (15) feet. (6) Fences and hedges: See Chapter 25.75; (7) Parking: See Chapter 25.78; (8) Landscaping: See Chapter 25.75; and PMC Title 25 9/15/2008 30 ATTACHMENT 6 RESOLE"PION NO.� A RESOLUTION DENYING A SPECIAL PERMIT FORA CORN MAZE IN TIME 2000 BLOCK OF Ii.C)AD 72. WHEREAS, on ,Tung 26, 2009 Haywire Farms submitted an application for a Special Perrnit to locate and operate a C'0111 Maze in the".2000 Block cal'!Rond 72: and, WHEREAS, the. Planning Commission held an open record hearing 011 July 16- ?009 to review the proposed Com Maze application i'ur a Special Permit: and, WHEREAS, follouving deliberations on August 20 and September 17, 2009. the Planning Commission recumm ndcd approval of a 'Special Permit for the Corn Maze; and, NN'HERL'AS, the recommendation far approval was appealed by adjoining property owners; and, WHEREAS, Tho City Council set a closed record appeal hearinu for Novttnber L, 2009 to consider the appeal of the Planning Commission recommendation; and. WHEREAS, the City Council was provided the record of the application, staff re.ports; transcripts and correspondence from the open rec-card hearimg and sub,equent deliberations conducted by the Planning Commission; and, W HFREAS, City Council conducted deliberations on tic appea10 f the Plunttittg Commission reconamidation t6r the Corn Maze application at the glossed record appeal hc;aring ul'Nox.inbcr 2, 2009; NOW, TTTEREFORE. Rlli, 11' RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF 'rHE C:-t`ry OF PASCO. that a Special Permit is he.reby denied to Haywire Famis for a com maze and titan iti the 2000 block of Road 72 under Master File " SP09-007 subject to the findine-s and conclusions contained in attached Exhibit 1. Passed by the City Council of dic City ot'Pasco this 7"' day of December,2009 Joy 01 n, Mayor ~ ATT 'ST; APPR � LAS TO FOR.N,4: s. ebra Clark-, City - e,• Leland R. Kerr, City Attorney• . t EXll1B1T 4-11 Findin-, of Fact S1'09-007 FIN'DIN'GS OF FACT 1. The site is within the Pasco Urban Growth Boundary. 2. The site contains approximately 28 acres. 3. The Comprehensive Plan identifies the site fir future Low-Density Residential development. 4. The site contains the Faith Assembly of God Christian Center. 5_ The. Faith Assembly of God Christian Center is the largest church in Pasco. 6. Surrounding properties are zoned R-S-20 in the County. 7. The. site is coned R-S-20 in the County. 8. Single family- residential dwellings are located directly to the north, east, we-,.t and northeast of the site. 9. The site contains a Church facility %vith an improved parking lot and two vacant parcels. 1.0. The proposed use includes the development of a cord maze, pumpkin field and fall festival attraction area. IL The proposed use is a commercial business entcrprisc designed to attract customers. 12. The applicant stated that customers would come from Franklin County, Benton County and Walla Walla. 1.3. The applicant anticipates attracting 7,000 to 9,000 people to the proposed corn maze over the period of time the corn inaze is open for business. 14. The site is acces5ible thorn the north and south by 4vav of Road 72 and 1' om the east by way of Wernett Read_ 15. Testimony provided by residents on Road 72 indicated current d-itirch traffic on Road 7'-21 conics in about equal portions from both the north nrld south. 16. Road 72 is developed to rural standards with no curbs, gutter, sidewalk or street lighting fruin Argent Road on the north to the north line of the Church parking lot. 17. Wernett Road is developed to rural standards with no curbs, gutter, sidewalks or street lighting. l8. Road 72 is partially developed to urban standards adjacent to the Faith Assembly Churcali. 19. lmpruve inents (paved area) on Road 7'2 are only 20 feet wide adjacent. to the corn maze site. FXHIBIT 41 Finding of Fart SP09-007 20. The corn maze will be open for business on Wednesday evenings during the time church activities are occurring. 111. ]wring Wednesday night church activities the church parking lot is in usc. 22. The church occasionally is rented for weddings and quinceaneras. These: activities will generate the need for use of the parking lots. 23. The proposed use will generate commercial traffic; on surrounding streets. 24. The applicant stated he could not control traffic: on surrounding streets. 25. `1'he: applicant's security manager stated they could not control loitering around the site. 26. The City's noise regulations prohibit excessive noise From emanating from properties and intruding into residential areas between the hours of 10:00 pm and 7:00 am. 27. The applicant stated he plans to operate up to 11-100 ism, on the weekends. CONCLUSIONS BASED ON PMC 25.86.060 .y Theproposed use may be in uccordance with the gords, policie-S, of*lIctiz,f,ti, and text of'the Comprehensive Plan. The. Comprehensive Plan designates the proposed site for how density residential development. The intended use of the site is single family residential. The Plan sloes not specifically address the prupust:d use. However, the zoning regulations which implement the Plan identify some uses such as farming and certain commercial recreation uses as unclassified uses. Unclassified uses require extraordinary review through a public hearing process (special permit process). Applying for a special permit macs not guarantee the application will be approved. 2) The proposed use twill adversely aj)i?ct public injj astructure. The proposed farm/scorn maze is not dependent upon City utilities but the proposed use will be dependent upon City and County- streets for access. 'Road 721, the main access road Lu the site, was constructed to rural standards not urban standards. Ukcwisc, Wernett Road does not meet City standards for a local access street. These roads have no night lighting, no sidewalks and in many placer are half the width of standard City streets. Wernett Road west of Road 72 along the proposed pumpkin patch area is a gravel road only. The operation of a corn maze to coincide with Wednesday evening church activities could place a stfain on the use of public streets. Little onsite parking will be EXHIBIT ftl Findine of Fact SP09-007 available on WW'ednesclays nights thereby increasing the likelihood corn inaze customers will park on Road 72. 3) The proposed use tacit not be constructed, maintained and operated to be in h-cirm«ray with the ea7sting or intended character of the general. vicinity. The existing character of the area is that of a suburban residential neighborhood. The proposed corn maze acid tall festival is a commercial enterprise that will draw between 7,000 and 9,000 people to the neighborhood over z few weeks. Much of the increase in traffic generated by the influx of people will occur on the weekends and evenings when surrounding neighbors are home. The additional traffic, noise, litter and commotion associated with a commercial enterprise in a residential area will disrupt tice peace and harmony customarily enjoyed in a residential neighborhood. 4) The location and height of proposed structures and the site design will discourage the development of pemiirted uses on property in the general vicinity or irrrpuir the value thereof: The location and operation of a commercial corn maze, while not a stricture, will. have a deleterious impact on the use and enjoyment of surrounding residential properties. The impact on long term property values is unknown at this time. The additional traffic, noise, commotion, lights, vibration, dust, and equipment usage associated with the corn maze will not encourage the dc-m-lopment of permitted uses in the general vicinity. 5) The operations in connection, upith the proposal will he more objectionable to nearby properties by reason of noise, furnes, t�brutions, dust, traffic, or flashing lights than would be the operation csf any perrnitted uses within the district. The addition of 7'000 to 9,000 people into the neighborhood outer a short period of time will create increased levels of noise, traffic, vibrations and dust currently neat experienced by the residents. The late night operation of a commercial enterprise within a residential neighborhood with the problems of noise, litter, additional traffic and loitering in the neighborhood will become: objectionable to occupants of neighboring residential properties. The use of farm equipment to plow and plant fields in the neighborhood will also create noise, dust, vibrations and diesel exhaust that i5 typically not present in suburban neighborhoods. 6) Vie proposed use will endanger the public health or safety i/'located urcd developed where proposed.. and tvilt become a nuisance to uses permitted ire the di5tric•'t. Findhig of Fact SP09-007 The establishment of a conuner=vial corn maze providing recreational scrvices to 7,000 to 9,000 people will become a nuisance in the residential neighborhood due to the increase in traffic, noisc, loitering, littering, and nther side effects associated with the corn maze and fall festival. Due to the narrow width and poor conditions of adjoining streets, traffic safety is also a concern. The commerciat nature of the coin rnaze, and associated farming activities have a very high probability to become a nuisance to current and future residents Of the neighborhood. ATTACHMENT 7 MITIGATING CONDITIONS AND REQ0REMENTS SHOULD MF# SP2011-002 BE PREDISPOSED TO RECOMMENDATION • Consistent with the provisions of PMC 26.08.160 and PMC 25.86.35, require consolidation of parcels # 118-481-019 and# 118-481-037 prior to considering this Application; • Subject to completion of the above requirement, comply with the provisions of PMC 25.86.050 (as deemed necessary by staff and City Council via MF# SP09-007) and conduct a public hearing after mailing a written Notice of Public Hearing to property owners within a 1,000 foot radius of the subject site, • In consideration of neighboring farms utilizing organic methods, prior to issuance of the Special Permit, Applicant shall file with the City, a copy of his certification as a Organic Farm in accordance with "The Organic Foods Production Act of 1990" as administered by the United States Department of Agriculture, and adhere to these requirements as it relates to all farming under MF# SP2011-002; • Applicant shall prepare an "organic only" conservation plan approved by a farm service agency and adjacent neighbors. A copy of the plan shall be submitted to the City prior to issuance of the Special Permit, • The Special permit is for valid for Farming Only purposes; no sales, sales stands, visitors, amusement, entertainment, agri-tainment, or any fee related activities shall be permitted on-site or on adjacent properties; • No parking shall be permitted on-street or on adjacent lots; • Prior to issuance of the Special Permit, Applicant shall provide a report to the City prepared by a certified Apiarist advising that all crops to be cultivated are "bee beneficial"; • Applicant shall at all times, provide and maintain at least 6 active individual bee hives for pollination purposes; • Applicant shall not store any equipment,machinery, supplies, irrigation pipe or other materials on-site or at any adjacent property; • Farming activities shall be limited to between 7:00 am to 7:00 pm Monday through Friday and 9:00 am through 7:00 pm Saturday and Sunday; • The Special Permit shall be valid for one year only; • The farm crop shall be limited to alfalfa, or row crops such as tomatoes, peppers, etc. The definition of row crops does not include pumpkins, melons, wheat, barley, buckwheat, corn and similar grains, or other crops which drift onto adjacent properties, rot in fields or attract nuisance birds; • In order to avoid issues with fugitive dust, toxic effluent, and other squalid conditions, no pasturing of livestock, or animals shall be permitted; • The entire site shall be planted with a successful cover crop to control fugitive dust at least 15 days prior to shut off of the irrigation system; • No irrigation water or sprays shall be permitted to drift or drain on adjacent properties or onto the public right of way. REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION MASTER FILE # SP 11-001 APPLICANT: Troy Jeff Woods HEARING DATE: 2/24/2011 3104 S. Everett Place ACTION DATE: 3/17/2011 Kennewick, WA 99337 BACKGROUND REQUEST: SPECIAL PERMIT: Location of a church in a C-3 (General Business) zone. 1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Legal: Westerly 264 feet of the northerly 330 feet of the northeast 1/4 of the northwest 1/4 of the northwest 1/4 of Section 25 Township 9 North Range 29 East General Location: 3330 West Court Street, Suite "K" Property Size: Approximately 1.5 acres 2. ACCESS: The site has access from West Court Street and Road 34. 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 partially occupied multi-tenant commercial building. The zoning and land use of the surrounding properties are as follows: NORTH: CR - Commercial shopping plaza (Riverview Plaza) SOUTH: C-3 - Auto sales EAST: C-3 - Mini-storage facility WEST: C-1 - U.S. Post Office 5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan designates this area for Commercial uses. Policies of the Plan encourage compatibility between land uses and harmony between existing and proposed development. The plan does not specifically address churches, but various elements of the plan encourage adequate provision of off-street parking and situating businesses in appropriate locations for their anticipated uses. b. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The City of Pasco is the lead agency for this project. Based on the SEPA checklist, the 1 adopted City Comprehensive Plan, City development regulations, and other information, a threshold determination resulting in a Determination of Nan-Significance (DNS) has been issued for this project under WAC 197-11-158. ANALYSIS The applicant is seeking a special permit to allow the location of a church in a multi-tenant commercial center at 3330 West Court Street. Churches are defined in Pasco Municipal Code as "Unclassified Uses" which require a special permit prior to locating in any zone within the City. The approximately 20,000 square foot building proposed to be used for a church contains 17 suites. The church is proposing to use one suite equaling approximately 1,078 square feet. The 17 commercial tenant spaces are divided into two (2) separate buildings which are nearly identical in size and layout. The parcel contains 100 parking stalls which are divided into two parking lots, one for each commercial building. In terms of occupancy load, the proposed tenant space has a maximum capacity of 113 people based on interior floor area. The site plan submitted with the application indicates a total of 56 seats. The International Building Code (IBC) does allow 56 fixed seats to be provided in this tenant space. From the occupancy, minimum parking requirements are derived. The church would be required to provide 14 parking stalls. Site specific calculations reveal that the site contains approximately 21 surplus parking spaces based on the current uses contained on-site. The surplus parking figure assumes the proposed site occupied by a retail use. In other words, taking into account the increased parking requirements of the two existing beauty salons and the restaurant and considering all other tenant spaces (including the subject site) occupied with retail businesses; the site contains 21 excess parking stalls. Based on the surplus parking calculation it can be concluded that the site contains sufficient off-street parking to support the proposed church. Traffic generated by the church will occur mostly on Sunday mornings when traffic is minimal and when some of the adjacent businesses will be closed. Wednesday evening church activities generally generate less traffic than Sunday morning meetings. The operations of churches generally generate few complaints from adjoining property owners. 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. Churches are unclassified uses and require review through the special permit process prior to locating or expanding in any zoning district. 2. The proposed site is zoned C-3 (General Business). 3. The proposed site is located at 3330 West Court Street. 4. The site is approximately 1.5 acres. 5. The site contains two identical 10,000 square foot multi-tenant commercial structures. 6. The proposed tenant suite is 1,078 square feet in floor area. 7. The site contains 100 off-street parking stalls. 8. The main access to the site is from West Court Street. Secondary access is available from Road 34. 9. The only access to the suite in question is from Road 34. 10. The proposed site has been developed with a commercial structure since 1980. 11. Churches are classified as an "A" occupancy under the International Building Code. 12. The municipal Code (PMC 25.78. 170) requires one off-street Parking space for every four fixed seats. 13. The floor plan submitted with the application indicates 56 fixed seats are proposed. 14. The suite is located on the south side of the complex which is not visible from Court Street. 3 CONCLUSIONS BASED ON 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 follotus: 1. Will the proposed use be in accordance tuith the goals, policies, objectives and text of the Comprehensive Plan? Policy LU-2-B of the Comprehensive Plan encourages the support of facilities for educational and cultural activities. .2. Will the proposed use adversely affect public infrastructu re? The proposed use will have a minimal impact on public infrastructure. Churches are generally used during off-peaks hours, on Sundays and during evenings in the middle of the week. The church will use existing City utilities and infrastructure. 3. Will the proposed use be constructed, maintained and operated to be in harmony tuith the existing or intended character- of the general vicinity? Churches are typically located in or near residential areas. In this case, all surrounding land uses are of a commercial nature. The site would not be modified to appear any differently than retail businesses located in the same building. 4. Will the location and height of proposed structures and the site design discourage the development of permitted uses on property in the general vicinity or impair- the value thereof? The location and height of the existing structure has not discouraged the development of permitted uses on surrounding properties in the past. No exterior site modifications are proposed. Any prospective businesses seeking to locate within the vicinity will not be affected by the proposed church. 5. Will the operations in connection tuith the proposal be more objectionable to nearby properties by reason of noise, fumes, vibrations, dust, traffic, or flashing lights than tuould be the operation of any permitted uses tuithin the district? Churches are typically used infrequently, generally two or three days per week and generate traffic during off-peak times such as Sunday mornings and in evenings during the week. Increases in traffic will be during off-peak hours and are unlikely to exceed levels the commercial center experiences on a typical weekday. It is unlikely the effects of church operation will be any more objectionable than other uses regularly permitted in a C-3 zone. Permitted uses in the C-3 zone 4 include: Heavy equipment sales and service, warehouses, auto sales and service, etc. 6. Will the proposed use endanger- the public hearth or safety if located and developed where proposed, or in any rua y ruin become a nuisance to uses permitted in the district? Past history of church operations within the City has shown they usually do not endanger public health or safety. Churches are generally accepted uses within the community. APPROVAL CONDITIONS 1. The special permit shall be personal to the applicant; 2. All restrooms must be meet ADA accessibility requirements; 3. The maximum occupancy load (113) shall be posted inside the main assembly area; 4. The outside store front shall not be modified from its current condition with the exception of a sign installed in conformance with a City approved sign permit; 5. The Church shall not object to the issuance of a liquor license within 1,000 feet of the church building; 6. The special permit shall be null and void if a City of Pasco business license is not obtained by August 1, 2011. RECOMMENDATION MOTION: I move to adopt findings of fact and conclusions therefrom as contained in the March 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 Troy Woods for the location of a church in Suite "K" of 3330 West Court Street with conditions as listed in the March 17, 2011 staff report. 5 Vicinity Item: Special Permit (Church) Applicant: Troy Jeff Woods MaP File #: SP 11 -001 ICN s 1 R SITES- - I �r . ,r,,,a q pill v ST " rST- f„ r 7 A 01 c w dF oio w �! .w r1 �^ •• SIC �,, ,� , •.a,Ax fd�R i W �x siL 71 � .� MARiIiE. I, �� 131,�11.51i•li+111N•�, �° ��, p¢ "op s. f ifp 1' 1!►I"ff r !:. r1, r i 1',x..11{fN" , 1 e►_ O s dw 6 IF kF — Land Use Item: Special Permit (Church) Applicant: Troy Jeff Woods rr Map File #: SP 11 -001 SFR's SFR's Commercial Comm . J_T I OUR ST Comm . Post Office a Commercial x � W c,SFR' s o ol o Q . . p MEN db End C=3 INS -MARIIE ST MEMORANDUM DATE: March 17, 2011 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Jeffrey B. Adams, Associate Planner SUBJECT: Rezone - Shane Fast C-1 to C-3 (MF# Z 2011-001) Due to issues raised at the February 24, 2011 Planning Commission meeting concerning the Fast Rezone for property along West Lewis Street the matter was continued to March 17, 2011 to allow staff time to research the issues and report back. As a result of that research Staff found the following: Issue #1: Teresa Orosco the former owner of 624 West Lewis, indicated in the hearing that a licensed auto sales facilities was located on the proposed rezone site in the recent past. Staff response: A January 9, 2001 business license application shows an automobile sales business was approved for the C-3 zoned property at 612 W. Lewis Street (Lots 1-8, Block 16, Gerry's Addition). The mailing address (not the business location) on the business license application was listed as 624 West Lewis Street. The 612 W. Lewis Street site is located at the southwest corner of 5th Avenue and W. Lewis Street. The rezone site involves Lots 9 through 12 and a portion of Lot 13 Gerry's Addition. Staff could not find records for a car sales lot on the proposed rezone site. There are two expired licenses of record for a portion of the rezone site at 624 W. Lewis Street. Neither license is for car sales. In 1990 a license was issued for Pasco Silkscreeners (printing & graphics) and in 1995 a second license was issued for Showcase Advertising (retail clothing). There is no evidence in the business licensing records that a car sales lot was issued a business license for lots involved in the current rezone application. Issue #2: Applicant claims the property in question is already zoned C-3 Staff Response: A 1973 Ordinance (#1594) rezoned Lots 1-7, Block 16, Gerry's Addition from C-1 to C-3. Lots 1-7 are located at the eastern end of the block at the southwest corner of 5th Avenue and W. Lewis Street. No other ordinances could be found in the record changing the zoning of any of the other lots in the block. The oldest zoning map of record (1979) shows approximately the east half (Lots 1-8) of Block 16, Gerry's Addition fronting W. Lewis Street as a C-3 zone. The west half of the block (Lots 9-16 ) are shown as a C-1 zone. The applicant's property (Lots 9-12 & part of 13) is located in the west half of the block and is zoned C-1. i 011 qu Date Pd.: � °1_ C' . Amt. Pd.:_ ��, CR. No. CITY OF PASCO -7 BUSINESS LICENSE APPLICATION '5 G avis�dQ THIS SECTION MUST BE FILLED OUT CLEARLYIND COMPLETELY TO BE REVIEWED j -2- Circle all that apply: New Business//Owner Change/INarne Change/lrransfer of location 1. Business Name:` .Sc S e5 r If making a name change, previous name of business:_ ` Business Location: t,1,Q Ltd• Lp_Wi 5 Do-sco Lop U G 36) / tf transfering location, previous address: 3. Mailing Address: t_ea fvi 5 4. Owner!Operator Name 1 \� Bus Phone 547-C} l�/� ale 5. Corporation_ Partnership_ Private (L ate of Birth: 3131 5� 6. Social Security# - r1�'-rULL— Tax ID# .57 9 _7y 1,711� 7. Describe the type of business and how your business operates: , wazza - 8. If you are a contractor,what is your state license number: Expiration date Type of License: General_ Specialty_Lic. 9. Bond/Certificate of Ins.#� _ what is the expiration date: << ( ss ;s Ns7�_L A°-EDUN 10. Number of employees o! Number of off-street parking spaces_ )o 11. Do you own/operate more than one business at above location: Yes ✓ No If, yes �c 1 [ list their names and license numbers: ? 't r r r rJL. f 3T 7 12. Please fill in the square feet of floor ar on our remises�n_ inch of the following: } Office a Ob Retail Manufacturirxg Shop Inside Storage Outside Storage TOTAL OF ALL—, 13. Does the building have a basement? Yes—No s� IF yes, square feet 14. Does the business involve radioactive substances or radioiogic/toxic chemical wastes of any amount: Yes _ No v-- (If yes, complete disclosure form and attach an emergency plan and any required state license). 15. Will hazardous material or flammable liquid be stored? Yes—No 16. Will the building have high-piled material in storage? Yes—`No f 17. Does building have automatic sprinkler or fire alarm other (describe) 18. In case of emergency regarding your business, please furnish after-hour contact information. (Any change must be resorted immediately. to City Hall). f A. /r ', f r Wit:.! ��U�If Owners Named Horne Addressr� Home Phone B. '71 — Name Relationship to Business Home Address r 4 Home Phone 19. Do (will) any of these operations occur at your business? Circle letter of all that apply. A. Are you an amusement device distributor? Yes _ No Z. If yes, how many do you own and/or lease in Pasco? (Please attached a separate sheet showing the locations in Pasco and number at each location.) (5.20) B. Apartments. Number of units Number of sewer hookups (5.04) C. Arcades, Places of amusement. (5.64) D. Circuses,carnivals and street shows. (5.16) E. Communication Offices. (5.04) e F. Dance halls. (5.24) G. Financial Institutions. (5.04) H. Food establishments. Do you sell/serve prepared food? Do you sell/serve any intoxicating beverages? On-site (food)consumption . Off-site (food)consumption Both (5.29)(22.52.020(6)) I. Gravel pits (5.36)(22.68) J. Hotels and rooming houses. Number of units (5.04)(5.40) K. Video games, jukeboxes, pinball games and other amusement devices. Number on-site owned . Number on-site leased . Total number of devices on-site (5.20) L. Mobile home park. Number of sewer hookups (19.12) M. Mortuary. (5.04) N. Pawnbroker. (5.12) O. Public massage and bath houses. (5.60) P. R.V. Park. Number of sewer hookups (19.12) O. Security police, merchant patrol and private detectives. (5.48) R. Second Hand Dealer. (5.12) S. Solicitor: Residential Charitable Commercial Information RECEIVED Religious Other(describe) T. For-Hire Vehicles. Number of Vehicles (5.45) FEB 0 1 2001 U. Theater. (5.04) CITY CLEWS V. Transfer and storage. Number of trucks (5.04) OFFICE W. Utility Installer. (5.32) DATE OWNER'S SIGNATURE(OTHER AUTHORIZED PERSON) TITLE *OFFICE USE ONLY- 1. Planning Department: P-Sic# -))021 A-Sic# A-Sic# Zone �� Census Tract_'ZO2– Block 3=5z.—Home Occup.Yes No IM a)Zoning Compliance OK� No Initials � Date- 1-36-6 2. Building Inspector: OK ✓ No Initials A `T. Dale -/ 0 3. Police Department: OK No Initials Date 5 / IJ ,! r-� ORDINANCE NO. 1594 1 AN ORDINANCE CHANGING THE ZONE CLASSIFI- CATION OF CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY WITHIN THE CITY OF PASCO FROM RETAIL COMMERCIAL C-1 TO GENERAL COMMERCIAL C-3 THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 12 The zone classification is hereby changed a from Retail Commercial C-1 to General Commercial C-3 for the following described property situated in Pasco , Franklin County, Washington to-wit: Lots 1 through 7, i,nciusive, Block 16, i Gerry's Addition as Recorded in Volume ` B, Page 18, Book of Plats, Franklin County, Washington Section 2. Any and all zoning maps are hereby amended to conform j to the aforesaid zone change. ! Section 3. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect after its passage and publication as required by law. PASSED by the City Council and APPROVED as provided by law, this day ofuly 1973. M _ R. Denney, Councilman "Acting Ivlayor'pro-Tem ATTEST: � != . � Sterl Adams , Councilman 9R YY la. I Z Cit C er i 1 APPROVED AS FORM: D. Wayne Campbell , City Attorney Qriginal Zoning Map _ Pre-1979) �l R3 T - Gs l Site M ct ° SS t! V G:� y s 10 .1i J a I 1 i �. CaC�J CCU �Q c 1 , '�,. REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION MASTER FILE NO. Z 2011-001 APPLICANT: Shane Fast HEARING DATE: 2/24/2011 624 W. Lewis Street ACTION DATE: 3/17/2011 Pasco, WA 99301 BACKGROUND REQUEST: REZONE: Rezone from C-1 to C-3 to allow for Auto Sales Use 1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Legal: Lots 9 through 12 & East 1/2 of Lot 13, Block 16, Gerry's Addition General Location: 624 West Lewis Street Property Size: Approximately .36 acres . ACCESS: The property has access from West Lewis Street and from an east-west alley along the south property line. 3. UTILITIES: All utilities are available at the site. 4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The site is currently zoned C-1 (Retail Business). The site is occupied by a building. Surrounding properties are zoned and developed as follows: NORTH C-1 (Retail Business District—Sea Mar Motel) SOUTH C-1 (Retail Business District—Auto service; residential unit; vacant lots) EAST C-3 (General Business District—Car lot) WEST C-1 (Retail Business District—auto shop) 5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan designates this area for Commercial uses. 6. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The City of Pasco has been the lead agency in issuing a Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) in accordance with review under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), Chapter 43.21(c) RCW. ANALYSIS The property in question consists of two tax parcels located on the south side of West Lewis Street, one parcel east of 6th Avenue in the Gerry's Addition Subdivision, which was platted in 1906. Block 16 of Gerry's addition, which contains the subject property, lies just west of an area of C-2 zoning and is part of the current Central Business district. The subject property is zoned C-1 and is surrounded by C-1 zoning except for the tax parcel directly to the east, which is zoned C-3. A building on the west parcel has been used as a print shop, a clothing store, and a retail plumbing supply store. 1 The tax parcel to the east was rezoned from C-1 to C-3 in 1973 presumably to accommodate auto sales (City of Pasco Ordinance 1594). It is one of two C-3 spots in the western downtown area. While this type of "spot" zoning may have been typical of the era, it is not recommended under current zoning practices. Since the 1973 rezone, the City has tightened regulations in the downtown area, including the implementation of a Central Business District (CBD) overlay zone. The subject property is within that overlay zone. According to PMC 25.45.010, "The purpose of the Central Business Overlay District is to provide regulations that reinforce a positive public image and confidence in commercial activities within the geographical area of the City . . . ... The district does not specifically target C-3 type uses, but it does target undesirable conditions, including "nuisance." C-1 zones generally have fewer potential nuisances than C-3 zones. The applicant wishes to sell cars on the lot, a use which is not allowed in the C-1 zone except with a special permit, and only if the property is adjacent the intersection of two arterial streets; or adjacent a single arterial street (provided it is not adjacent to or across a public street right-of-way from a residential district, and would not be located closer than 300 feet to any existing car lot). This property does not qualify for the Special Permit provisions; it is neither on a corner nor adjacent two arterial streets (option #1 above); and although the subject property is located on an arterial (West Lewis Street) it is nevertheless within 300 feet of an existing car lot (option #2 above), thus excluding it from this Special Permit option. Furthermore, a rezone to C-3 would run contrary to the spirit of the CBD overlay zone, as it would allow such land uses as wholesale businesses, heavy machinery sales and service, warehouses, landscape gardening and storage area for equipment and materials, mobile home and trailer sales and service, and lumber sales business. Veterinarian clinics for livestock, including outdoor treatment facilities, (including boarding or overnight holding of animals), and auto body shops could be allowed in a C-3 zone with a Special Permit. The initial review criteria for considering a rezone application are explained in PMC. 25.88.030. The criteria are list below as follows: 1. The changed conditions in the vicinity which warrant other or additional zoning: Since the 19 1-3 rezone the City has tightened regulations for- the doruntoxun area, including the introduction of the CBD overlay zone. The subject property is xuithin that overlay zone. However- none of the subsequent changes have xuarranted the inclusion of many of the uses allowed by the C-3 zoning, including wholesale businesses, heavy machinery sates and serc,ice, xarehouses, landscape gardening and storage area for equipment and materials, mobile home and trailer- sales and service, and lumber- sales business, as xuell as veterinarian clinics for- livestock, including outdoor- treatment facilities, (including boarding or overnight holding of animals), and auto body shops xuith a Special permit. 2. Facts to justify the change on the basis of advancing the public health, safety and general welfare: A rezone from C-1 to C-3 has the potential of being detrimental to "public health, safety and general tuelfare" by allowing more intense land uses closer- to retail commercial customers. 3. The effect it will have on the nature and value of adjoining property and the Comprehensive Plan: "here is no evidence that auto sales in particular- tuou ld inhibit netu business grotuth, contribute to business loss and decline of property values, and/or- perpetuate a public image which is undesirable or unattractive and detrimental to public and private investment in business property tuithin the CBD, however- the C-3 zone allows for uses not compatible tuith the intent of the CBD overlay zone, such as wholesale businesses, heavy machinery sales and service, warehouses, landscape gardening and storage area for equipment and materials, mobile home and trailer- sales and service, and lumber- sales business, and, tuith a Special permit, veterinarian clinics for livestock, including outdoor treatment facilities, (including boarding or overnight holding of animals), and auto body shops. F'urthermore, a rezone to C-3 tuith a concomitant agreement prohibiting all C-3 uses except Auto sales tuould not be appropriate because it defeats the purpose of the C-3 zone creating an exception to the rule which is as large as the rule itself. 4. The effect on the property owners if the request is not granted: The property otuners tuould still be able to enjoy all uses currently available in the C-1 district and CBD Overlay zone, which tuns the zoning at the time of property acquisition 5. The Comprehensive Plan land use designation for the property: The Comprehensive plan designates the site for- Commercial uses. 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 findings to this listing as the result of factual testimony and evidence submitted during the open record hearing. 1. The Comprehensive Plan designates the site for commercial uses. Z. The site is developed with a commercial building. 3. The site is zoned C-1 (Central Business District). 4. The site was zoned C-1 in 2007 when the applicant acquired the property. 3 5. The purpose of the C-1 Zone, among other things, is to promote commercial activities outside the central business district that meet the retail shopping and service needs of the community. 6. The site is in the Central Business Overlay District. 7. The applicant is proposing a rezone to allow vehicle sales on the property. 8. Special Permits for such vehicle sales is inappropriate because the property does not qualify for either of the Special Permit provisions; being on a corner adjacent two arterial streets; or located on an arterial at least 300 feet from an existing car lot. 9. The Central Business Overlay District was not intended to include uses such as wholesale businesses, heavy machinery sales and service, warehouses, landscape gardening and storage area for equipment and materials, mobile home and trailer sales and service, and lumber sales business, and (with a Special Permit), veterinarian clinics for livestock, including outdoor treatment facilities, (including boarding or overnight holding of animals), and auto body shops. It is primarily zoned C-1 and C-2, with a retail commercial focus. CONCLUSIONS BASED ON INITIAL STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT Before recommending approval or denial of a rezone, the Planning Commission must develop its conclusions from the findings of fact based upon the criteria listed in P.M.C. 25.88.060 and determine whether-or- not: 1. The proposal is in accordance with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. There are no Comprehensive Plan Goals or Policies which directly address this type of request. 2. The effect of the proposal on the immediate vicinity will not be materially detrimental. Expanding the C-3 District into the established central core of the city xuo a ld alloxu uses incompatible ruith the retail intent of the CDD. Allowed uses xuould include wholesale businesses, heavy machinery sales and service, warehouses, landscape gardening and storage area for equipment and materials, mobile home and trailer- sales and serc,ice, and lumber- sales business, and (xuith a Special Permit), veterinarian clinics for livestock, including outdoor- treatment facilities (including boarding or overnight holding of animals), and auto body shops. 3. There is merit and value in the proposal for the community as a whole. Uses allowed in a C-3 zone, such as wholesale businesses, heavy machinery sales and service, xua rehou ses, landscape gardening and storage area for equipment and materials, mobile home and trailer- sales and service, and lumber- 4 sales business, and (ruith a Special permit), veterinarian clinics for livestock, including outdoor- treatment facilities, (including boarding or- overnight holding of animals), and auto bong shops, are generally incompatible with retail business uses found in the CBD. 4. Conditions should be imposed in order to mitigate any significant adverse impacts from the proposal. Conditions necessary to mitigate adverse impacts ruould essentially cause the rezone to mirror- the permitted uses ruithin the C-1 zone, with the addition of auto sales, rather- than reflect the intent of the C-3 zone. 5. A concomitant agreement should be entered into between the City and the petitioner, and if so, the terms and conditions of such an agreement. A concomitant agreement is not necessary because the rezone is not Iva r-r-anted. RECOMMENDATION MOTION for Findings of Fact: I move to adopt Findings of Fact and Conclusions therefrom as contained in the March 17, 2011 staff report. MOTION for Recommendation: I move based on the Findings of Fact and Conclusions therefrom the Planning Commission recommend the City Council deny the rezone from C-1 (Retail Business) to C-3 (General Business). 5 Jeff Adams From: Charles Grigg [chas Ogriggsonline.com] Sent: Monday,January 31, 2011 2:01 PM To: Jeff Adams It is our feeling thatwe should notre-zone C-1 zone to C-3 zone (mf# z 2011-001) The downtown area should not be down zoned to allow car lots. Pasco has many locations for zoned c-3 around the city, Lets not use the downtown are For c-3 uses. Thank you, Charles Grigg Grigg Enterprises, Inc 801 West Columbia Street Pasco, Wa 99301 509-547-0566 Voice 509-547-4387 fax chas grkcgsonline.com i Vicinity Item: Rezone C - 1 to C-3 Map File . App 11 c ant: Shane Fast N # : z 2011 -001 WW 0 ki a ' , . SITE . - , • M D ey i Vl* cl*nl Item: Rezone C - 1 to C-3 '*ty Applicant* Shane Fast Map File Z 2011 -001 Or PIP Aw P � Land Use Item: Rezone C- 1 to C-3 Applicant: Shane Fast N Map File #: Z 2011 -001 Res. SS Commercial s SITE, 74 Commercial s /� 74 Res Commercial FEMME/a Avg FAA W- Iffasoja MAP Zoning Item: Rezone C - 1 to C-3 Applicant- Shane Fast x Map File # : Z 2011 -001 R-2 C-1 to's SOI C-2 C-3 SITE 'e C-1 74 "111 m 1, �� ` 5S Mew 1 � v AI-5 MY /�%// /%� ,/ //j, j/.� WIP '0 m pled MONA A :'SO, 9AP SO "00 01010 AOA pop .921A 4 or ARM IN i IVA 0!SI � NN 1 • or _.►tom _' REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION MASTER FILE NO. Z 2011-002 APPLICANT: Lee Eickmeyer HEARING DATE: 2/24/2011 510 Easy Street ACTION DATE: 3/17/20 11 Pasco, WA 99301 BACKGROUND REQUEST: REZONE: Rezone from RT (Residential Transition) to C-1 (Retail Business) to allow for Commercial Development 1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Legal: Beginning at a point on the west line of Convention Drive said point being the intersection of the westerly extension of the north line of Wrigley Drive with the west line of Convention Drive; Thence southerly along the west line of Convention Drive for a distance of 178 feet; Thence westerly to the intersection with the east line of Clemente Lane; Thence northerly to the northeast corner of Clemente Lane and Wrigley Drive; thence easterly to the point of beginning. General Location: South of Wrigley Drive between Convention D rive and Clemente Lane Property Size: Approximately 2.23 acres . ACCESS: The property has potential access from Wrigley Drive, Convention Drive and Clemente Lane. 3. UTILITIES: All utilities are stubbed in and available to the site. 4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The site is currently zoned RT (Residential Transition). The site is vacant. Surrounding properties are zoned and developed as follows: North RT - Residential Transition—Vacant South C-1 - Retail Business District—Farming East R-1- Low-Density Residential —Single-Family Dwellings West C-1 - Retail Business District—Vacant 5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan Policy LU-3-D encourages the development of employment clusters. Policy LU-4-B encourages the concentration of commercial activities, which are functionally and economically beneficial to each other. 1 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 Nan-significance (DNS) has been issued for this project under WAC 197- 11-158. ANALYSIS At the time the Comprehensive Plan was originally established there was no development in the I-182 corridor except for Desert Plateau. The Plan envisioned development radiating from the major interchange nodes of Road 68 and Road 100. The interchange nodes were established for commercial development while residential development was identified for areas beyond the commercial nodes. Through the implementation of land use regulations development is expanding as planned from the interchange nodes. The proposed zoning request is consistent with that plan and will provide areas for necessary commercial services for existing and new residential development. The property in question consists of part of a tax parcel South of Wrigley Drive between Convention Drive and Clemente Lane, consisting of about 2.2 acres. The subject property is zoned RT and is surrounded by C-1 zoning except for the Residential area to the east, which is zoned R-1. The subject property is also within the I-182 Corridor Overlay district and is subject to the development standards therein. The property to the north is being farmed; land to the east contains the Sunny Meadows Subdivision and is fully built out with single-family residential units; properties to the west and south are vacant, although commercial development is advancing north along Road 68 towards the City Limits. This parcel is in the path of that development. The City's land use plan indicates the property in question should be utilized for commercial uses. Rezoning the site would support past community development efforts in infrastructure improvements, land development and planning within the I-182 Corridor. The initial review criteria for considering a rezone application are explained in PMC. 25.88.030. The criteria are listed below as follows: 1. The changed conditions in the vicinity which warrant other or additional zoning: Commercial development has been advancing north along Roam 68 between Road 76 and Convention Drive for several years. Properties to the south and iuest of the site have developed ruith commercial buildings. Clemente Lane ruas extended to Wrigley Drive approximately five years ago and a traffic signal ruas ii�.stalled at the Burden Boulevard/Convention Drive intersection. about 6 years ago. Water- and seruer- utilities are noru available to the site. 2. Facts to justify the change on the basis of advancing the public health, safety and general welfare: A rezone from RT to C-1 xuill permit uses identical to the uses on properties to the south and xuest and anticipated on surrounding vacant properties. This rezone xuill not be materially detrimental to surrounding properties because it is an extension of the exis Ling com mercia lly zoned property to the sou th a nd rues t. It is consistent ruith the Comprehensive Bran aii.d recent infrastructure development xuithin the neighborhood. 3. The effect it will have on the nature and value of adjoining property and the Comprehensive Plan: The uses permitted by the proposed zoning are identical to the uses on properties to the south and anticipated on surrounding properties. This rezone may create economies of scare improving the commercial viability of the Road 68 commercial corridor. County assessor- records indicate commercially zoned properties xuithin the neighborhood have not diminished the value of surrounding residentially developed properties. The assessor's records indicate nearby residential properties have increase by 14 to 18 percent in the past 5 yea rs. 4. The effect on the property owners if the request is not granted: The property oruners xuill not be able to develop the land in a ruay consistent ruith the Comprehensive Plan goals and policies. 5. The Comprehensive Plan land use designation for the property: The Comprehensive Plan designates the site for- Commercial uses. 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 findings to this listing as the result of factual testimony and evidence submitted during the open record hearing. 1. The Comprehensive Plan designates the site for commercial uses. 2. The site is vacant. 3. The site is zoned RT (Residential Transition). 4. The site was zoned RT in 1982 prior- to construction of streets and utilities within the neighborhood. 5. The purpose of the C-1 Zone, among other things, is to promote commercial activities outside the central business district that meet the retail shopping and service needs of the community. 6. The site is in the I-182 Corridor Overlay District. 3 CONCLUSIONS BASED ON INITIAL STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT Before recommending approval or denial of a rezone, the Planning Commission must develop its conclusions from the findings of fact based upon the criteria listed in P.M.C. 25.88.060 and determine whether-or- not: 1. The proposal is in accordance with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. The proposal is consistent xuith the land use designations and policies of the Comprehensive plan. 2. The effect of the proposal on the immediate vicinity will not be materially detrimental. The uses permitted by the proposed zoning are identical to the uses on properties to the south and anticipated on surrounding properties. This rezone xuill not be materially detrimental to surrounding properties because it is consistent xuith th.e Comprehensive Plan and is an extension of the existing commercially zoned properties to the south. 3. There is merit and value in the proposal for the community as a whole. The proposaI has merit because it is consistent ruith the Comprehensive Plan policies and provides an opportunity for- the location of additional commercial sert►ice s for- the benefit of the community. 4. Conditions should be imposed in order to mitigate any significant adverse impacts from the proposal. Property should be developed according to the underlying zoning and consistent xuith the I-1 82 development standards. 5. A concomitant agreement should be entered into between the City and the petitioner, and if so, the terms and conditions of such an agreement. A concomitant agreement is not necessary. RECOMMENDATION MOTION for Findings of Fact: I move to adopt Findings of Fact and Conclusions therefrom as contained in the March 17, 2011 staff report. MOTION for Recommendation: I move based on the Findings of Fact and Conclusions therefrom the Planning Commission recommend the City Council rezone the site from RT (Residential Transition) to C-1 (Retail Business). 4 • Item: Rezone RT to C- 1 Vlcl*n'ty Applicant- Lee Eicki-neyer N Map File # : z 2011 -002 - SANDIF ROBINSON�3R RI iOs� �� �- COMISK.EY DR R + H RI go. SITEIII�. Its Q A. - -Y DR - t } w WRIGLER Olt . n 6 EE'D x' 49 ►'AMDEIV DLES+TIG iw: B TES Z-" R -7 a- ^ r " + qqz 1 ' `^�..\;"�,\ np •.�idsh,.Ae.. `a � � t i1 F�;•.i S 1: '� 4 '� ;r6', A x -BURDEN-Bt�"D _ Item:Land Use Rezone r to C- 1 Applicant: Map File # : Z 2011 -002 Pj:1:PSa=PMPP' loll Vacant/ Farming , n loll so mosso WMGLEY DR NINE googol IN Rezone r to C- 1 Zoning Item:Map Applicant: Lee Eicki-neyer File Z 2011 -002 RT inn inn so SITE MM NNIIA'A mom mom loon Om Emilio M MIN SEEN moon 0 lol - mile mom NONSIONNUM SEEM ,I REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION MASTER FILE NO. Z 2011-003 APPLICANT: Vinh Pham HEARING DATE: 3/17/2011 203 Huntington ACTION DATE: 4/28/2011 Kennewick, WA 99366 BACKGROUND REQUEST: REZONE: Rezone from R-1 to R-2 with a Concomitant Agreement limiting the density and applying, minimum design standards 1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Legal: Lot 2, Short Plat 2008-09 General Location: 3300 Block of West Wernett Road Property Size: Approximately 5 acres 2. ACCESS: The property has access from West Wernett Road. 3. UTILITIES: All utilities are available at the site. 4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The site is currently zoned R-1 (Low Density Residential). The site is vacant. Surrounding properties are zoned and developed as follows: North R-S-1- Highway I-182 South R-S-12 - Single-family East R-S-1 - Single-family West R-S-1 & R-S-12 - Duplex's, single-family and vineyard 5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan designates this area for Low Density Residential 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 property consists of a 5.12 acre parcel located between Wernett Road and Highway I-182. Although other properties in the neighborhood have been developed, this parcel has remained undeveloped. In 2004 the parcel was annexed and in 2008 a developer received preliminary plat approval to allow development of 21 lots on the property. The current owner desires to develop 1 the property and has explored cost effective ways to accomplish development while complying with preliminary plat approval conditions which included the construction of a sound wall along the freeway. The property owner is proposing to build zero lot line dwellings at densities approved (21 lots) with the preliminary plat for Sun View Estates. Zero lot line houses are homes built on individual lots with no side ,yard setback on one side of the lot. Zero lot line homes have a common wall along a shared property line. The opposite side of the lot often has a setback greater than required by code. Pasco does not have specific zero lot line standards. The only way to accomplish development of zero lot line homes is to either receive approval for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) or obtain a rezone for medium density development. The Sun Willows PUD is an example a development where homes were built with zero lot lines and Mediterranean Villas is another example. The applicant's property is only 5 acres and does not qualify for a PUD designation. The only option available to construct zero lot line dwellings on the property would be through rezoning the site to a multi-family designation with a restriction on the number of units to ensure densities are consistent with the approved preliminary plat. This process was used for development in the College View Heights subdivision at the north end of 201 Avenue. In 2002 this 47-lot subdivision, identified in the Comprehensive Plan for Low-Density development, was rezoned to R-2 (Medium Density Residential) with a concomitant agreement limiting the total number of dwellings to the number of lots in the plat and permitting only one dwelling per lot. The parcel in question has been identified in the City's land use plans for the last 30 ,years as an area for low density development. The preliminary plat (Sun View Estates) that was approved for the property in 2008 contained 21 individual lots with an average lot size of 8,106 square feet. The approved lots in the preliminary plat are similar in size to the lots in the Newton's Addition located to the southwest across Wernett Road. Lots in the Newton Addition average 7,200 square feet in size. The Newton Addition is 3.7 acres and contains 19 lots for a density of 5.1 units per acre. The property in question was approved for a density of 4.1 units per acre. Lots to the south are developed at 3.63 dwellings per acre. Rezoning the site to R-2 with a concomitant agreement on density would maintain the approved density of 4.1 units per acre. It should be noted that there are a number of duplexes and other higher density dwelling within the neighborhood. The current Comprehensive Land Use Map designates the subject property and all surrounding properties for low density development. Pursuant to CP.3.15 of the Comprehensive Plan the Low Density Residential Designation allows a net density of 2-5 units per acre. The approved subdivision for the property allows a density of 4.1 units per acre. The applicant's proposal is consistent with the approved preliminary plat and density suggested in the Comprehensive Plan. The initial review criteria for considering a rezone application are explained in PMC. 25.88.030. The criteria are list below as follows: 1. The changed conditions in the vicinity which warrant other or additional zoning: • Sewer service is now available in the neighborhood. • All properties to the south and southeast are fully developed with a variety of housings types, single family units being the predominate type. • The Newton Addition directly across Wernett Road to the southwest was developed with 7,200 square foot lots. • Duplex units are located to the east and west of the site. • Many of the streets in the neighborhood have been rebuilt to a higher standard in the last 10 ,years. • The water system was upgraded in the neighborhood within the last 10 years. • A preliminary plat with 21 lots was approved for the site in 2008. • The approved preliminary plat approval conditions require a sound wall to be constructed along the freeway. 2. Facts to justify the change on the basis of advancing the public health, safety and general welfare. The rezone will provide additional flexibility for site development while maintaining the low density nature of the site envisioned in the Comprehensive Plan. Encouraging development of homes on the site will lead to the elimination of the potential fire hazard created by the current vacant field. The low density housing will be maintained and future development will participate in the costs previously incurred by the community for the water and sewer system that serve the parcel. The general welfare will be supported by additional in-fill development that will contribute to the cost of providing municipal services. 3. The effect it will have on the nature and value of adjoining property and the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed rezone is supported by the Comprehensive Plan and would be considered a proper implementation of the Plan. Maintaining the previously approved density of the site will protect the established character of the nearby neighborhoods and thereby the nature and value of the neighboring properties. The proposal could enhance development of the site and lead to the elimination of a large field that grows weeds and grasses that can be considered a fire hazard for adjoining residential structures. 4. The effect on the property owners if the request is not granted. 3 The proposed rezone will permit zero lot line single-family dwellings providing the developer with options that may help cover the costs of required plat improvements including a sound wall along the freeway. Without the rezone the zero lot line development would not be permitted. 5. The Comprehensive land use designation for the property. The Comprehensive Plan designates the site for Low Density Residential development. The proposed rezone will not increase the density and is therefore consistent with the Plan. 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 findings to this listing as the result of factual testimony and evidence submitted during the open record hearing. 1) The site is currently zoned R-1 (Low Density Residential). 2) The Comprehensive Plan designates the site Low Density Residential development, which allows a net density of 2-5 units per acre. 3) The approved preliminary plat for the site contains 21 lots. 4) The approved plat has a density of 4.1 dwelling units per acre. 5) The Newton Addition to the southwest of the site is developed to a density of 5.1 units per acre. 6) The applicant is requesting a rezone to R-2 with an agreement limiting the number of dwelling units to no more than 22 units. 7) Duplex units are located directly west and east of the site and other multi-family units are located nearby. 8) The Newton Addition across Wernett was developed with 7,200 square foot lots matching the minimum lot size far the R-1 District. CONCLUSIONS BASED ON INITIAL STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT Before recommending approval or denial of a rezone, the Planning Commission must develop its conclusions from the findings of fact based upon the criteria listed in P.M.C. 25.88.060 and determine whether-or- riot: (1) The proposal is in accord with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. The goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan encourage the development of old and n.etu neighborhoods into safe and enjoyable daces to lire (Goal LII2). The Comprehensive Plan also encourages the development of a variety of residential environments (Goal H-2). 4 (2) The effect of the proposal on the immediate vicinity will not be materially detrimental. The surrounding properties xuill not be detrimentally impacted by the proposed change because the land xuill be able to be developed xuith densities similar- to other-developments in the neighborhood. (3) There is merit and value in the proposal for the community as a whole. Rezoning the property to R-2 xuill alloxu the site to develop xuith dwellings at a density consistent xuith the surrounding neighborhood (Neruton Addition) and consistent ruith the Comprehensive plan. (4) Conditions should be imposed in order to mitigate any significant adverse impacts from the proposal. The rezone should be conditioned to limit one druelling per lot to maintain the loxu density development envisioned in the Comprehensive plan. Additionally to assist xuith enhancing neighborhood property values the zero lot line houses should contain at least three separate architectural features on the front and side elevations. The front elevations should be articulated or- o the nuise construction to provide a distinct identity for-each dxuelling. (5) A concomitant agreement should be entered into between the City and the petitioner, and if so, the terms and conditions of such an agreement. A concomitant agreement is necessary to ensure the number- of druelling units does not exceed the number- of approved lots and that the druellings be constructed xuith some minimal architectural fea to res. RECOMMENDATION MOTION: I move to close the hearing on the proposed rezone and initiate deliberations and schedule adoption of findings of fact, conclusions and a recommendation to the City Council for the April 28, 2011 meeting. 5 Vicinity Item: Rezone - R- 1 to R-2 Map Applicant: Vinh Pham N File #: z 2011 -003 2 i7b, ti 4. .M „ SITE vim I f7 rm w 77 RD CD CNr' Q .• I �'. � '� ., � '` �! n O ,rte ►' � "�. + � « •, 31.L I NA icon- „JA ST _ , SE�►�BR-00 K Uinh Phaiu Land Use Item: Rezone - R- 1 to R-2 Applicant: Vinh Pham x Map File #: Z 2011 -003 � Vacant Vacant SITE CD Resid e t o I �w JAY 3T 3E BROO --F-] Zoning Item: Rezone - R- 1 to R-2 Applicant: Vinh Pharr x Map File #: Z 2011 -003 R=S= 1 R-S-1 SITE WERNETT RD D ° a M `" " O � a R=S=12 °a o JAY ST SfABROOK CT-F-]F I REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION MASTER FILE NO: SP 11-001 APPLICANT: Ray Poland & Sons, Inc. HEARING DATE: 3/ 17/2011 503 W. Columbia Drive ACTION DATE: 4/28/2011 Kennewick, WA 99336 BACKGROUND REQUEST: SPECIAL PERMIT: Renewal and expansion of a resource recovery facility in an I-1 (Light Industrial) zone 1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Legal: That portion of the southeast 1/4 of the northwest 1/4, Township 9 North, Range 30 East, Section 32 included in parcel #'s (112401151, 112401142 & 112401124) General Location: 215 East Ainsworth Avenue Property Size: Approximately 14 acres 2. ACCESS: The site has access from Ainsworth Avenue. 3. UTILITIES: All municipal utilities currently serve the site. 4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The property is zoned I-1 (Light Industrial) and contains a resource recovery facility. The site has been partially mined for gravel. Surrounding properties are zoned and developed as follows: NORTH: I-1- BNSF railroad SOUTH: R-2 & R-3 - Single family residences & duplexes EAST: I-1 - Municipal sewer treatment facility WEST: R-2, R-3 & I-1 - BNSF railroad, single family residences & duplexes 5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan designates this area for industrial uses. 6. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The City of Pasco is the lead agency for this project. Based on the State Environmental Policy Act checklist, the adopted City Comprehensive Plan, City development regulations, and other information, a threshold determination resulting in a Determination of Non-Significance has been issued for this project under WAC 197-11-158. 1 ANALYSIS Resource recovery facilities are listed as unclassified uses in PMC Chapter 25.86.020(9) and as such are required to be reviewed through the special permit process before locating or expanding anywhere in the City. The property in question was issued a special permit in 1998 by the City for concrete crushing and recycling operations. The applicant is requesting to simultaneously renew their special permit for concrete crushing and recycling and to add hog fuel production to their existing facility. The proposed hog fuel facility is essentially a wood recycling plant. Activities associated with the proposed use include accumulation of scrap wood, wood chipping via mechanized chipper, piling of wood chips and transportation of wood chips to off-site locations for use as fuel. The concrete crushing operation involves scrap concrete arriving on-site; the concrete is loaded into the crusher, crushed and comes out as a finer material. The crushed concrete is stored in large piles outdoors until it is transported for use at construction sites. All resource activities on site occur within a substantial topographic depression which serves as a noise and sight barrier. The western border of the site however, is level with the 41h Avenue road grade and the residences located on 41h Avenue. It should be noted that the homes on 4th Avenue are separated from the facility by an 80 foot wide right-of-way and active BNSF railroad tracks. The combined width of the adjacent railroad and City rights-of-way equal approximately 277 feet. The concrete crushing and recycling business has been operating for the past thirteen (13) years without generating complaints from any of the neighboring residences. STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT Findings of fact must be entered from the record. The following are initial findings drawn from the background and analysis section of the staff report and comments made at the public hearing. The Planning Commission may add additional findings as deemed appropriate. 1. The site is zoned I-1 (Light Industrial). 2. The site is within the Urban Growth Boundary. 3. The Comprehensive Plan designates the property for Industrial uses. 4. The site was originally used as a gravel mine. 5. The site is located along the western edge of the City's Sewer Treatment Facility. 6. The Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Railroad right-of-way and the 4th Avenue right-of-way are located along the western boundary of the site. 7. Ray Poland & Sons Inc. was granted a special permit in 1998 to operate a concrete crushing resource recovery facility. 8. The existing and proposed mechanical equipment is located toward the east side of the complex which is furthest away from residences. 9. The concrete crushing equipment is located in the bottom of the old gravel mine. 10. The wood chipping equipment will be located in the bottom of the old gravel mine. 11. The special permit issued in 1998 expired in January of 2010. CONCLUSIONS BASED ON STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT The Planning Commission must make findings of fact based upon the criteria listed in P.M.C. 22.50.060. 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? Although resources recovery facilities are not specifically addressed in the Comprehensive Plan, the proposal will serve an important role in reducing the volume of waste entering landfills. Policy ED-2-13 encourages the development of a wide range of commercial and industrial uses strategically located to support local and regional needs. 2. Will the proposed use adversely affect public infrastructure? The proposed land use does not require sewer and water service. The impact on public infrastructure associated with the addition of hog fuel production will be unnoticeable when combined with the associated current concrete crushing operations. 3. Will the proposed use be constructed. maintained and operated to be in harmony with existing or intended character of the general vicinity? The concrete crushing facility has been operating in harmony with the surrounding uses for approximately thirteen (13) years. The general vicinity can be characterized by the surrounding industrial land, including the railroad 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? This proposal will not involve the construction of permanent structures and will not differ from previous specially permitted uses on the property and adjoining properties. Additional mechanical equipment will be located on site for wood chipping but will not substantially alter the appearance of the 3 site from its current condition. The use of the site for concrete crushing and recycling over the past 13 years has not discouraged development within the general vicinity nor has it unpaired the value of adjoinuig property. 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 activities will be limited to certain daytime hours and dust will be controlled. The proposed use could be objectionable but in this case mitigation measures on emission controls and hours of operation will address those concerns. No complaints from the surrounding neighbors have been received over the span of the previous special permit for concrete crushing. The addition/operation of wood chipping equipment is anticipated to be masked by the effects of concrete crushing operations. 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 proposal with mitigation measures including dust control will not become a nuisance to other uses permitted in the district. Additionally, limitations on the days and hours of operation are measures to assure this use does not become a nuisance to the residences within the general vicinity. RECOMMENDED APPROVAL CONDITIONS 1. The special permit shall apply to parcels 112401151, 112401142 & 112401124; 2. The activities approved by this special permit are limited to concrete crushing and recycling and wood chipping; 3. The site shall not be used for the disposal or storage of any iteins classified as solid waste and/or which readily decompose; 4. The applicant shall obtain and maintain all necessary governmental permits for the operations permitted by this special permit; 5. Crushing and chipping activities shall only be permitted between 7:00 am and 6:00 pm; 6. Crushing and chipping activities on Sundays and holidays is prohibited. Holidays include the date of observance of New Years Day, Martin Luther King Day, Memorial Day, 4th of July, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day; 7. A five (5) foot wide landscaping strip meeting standards listed in PMC 25.75 shall be installed along Ainsworth Avenue east of the driveway entrance. The landscaping strip shall extend east from the driveway entrance to connect with existing landscaping at the intersection of Gray Avenue and Ainsworth Avenue; 4 8. The concrete crushing operation must follow best management practices. Best management practices include, but are not limited to: • Using water or chemical dust suppressant on particulate matter (PM) containing surfaces (i.e. haul roads, staging areas, transfer areas and parking areas) and/or materials prior to and during activities that may release PM into the air. Re-application may be required periodically to maintain effectiveness; • Managing activity during high winds, if the winds are likely to cause the release of PM into the air; • Minimizing the free fall distance, i.e. drop height, of PM containing materials at transfer points such as the end of conveyors, front- end loader buckets, etc.; • Managing vehicle loads with potential of release of PM with appropriate covers or freeboard consistent with applicable laws; • Minimizing exposed areas of PM containing materials such as storage piles, graded surfaces, etc, and/or using tarps or chemical dust suppressants to minimize releases to the air; • Limiting vehicle speed to less than 15 miles per hour on unpaved surfaces; • Consolidating storage piles whenever possible; • Managing stockpile loader and haul truck travel to control release of PM; • Prevent the deposition of particulate matter (PM) onto paved public roadways; 9. This special permit shall expire on January 1, 2021. RECOMMENDATION MOTION: I move to close the hearing on the proposed resource recovery facility expansion and permit renewal and initiate deliberations and schedule adoption of findings of fact, conclusions and a recommendation to the City Council for the April 28, 2011 meeting. 5 Vicinity Special Item: Permit (resource recove } MapA licant: Ray Poland & Sons c . FiNe: SP 2011 -001 litJs I �C ST � " -- T y/ EA _ A. i r Q; 8.397 f , , 4 4 a r. Land Use Item.: Special Permit (resource recovery) Map File SP 2011 Ray 001 a nd & Sons Inc. N-------------------- "C" ST Z �> � BNSF Railroad- (vacant)e Sewer FRs P D Treatment 'ublic Works W Facility ' SITE Port o ..... 0 A/psw0 Pasco s RryAv FiS p "SF s, R%3 9, A. ar "ST Site Plan =Ray Poland & Sons Inc. N �0(4 IlWood chip piles 2, l Proposed wood chipper Existing concrete ` L� crushing equipment Ak IBS � 1 Ar 'ta • Y.^' The sites' only access point ax,e ': 4 ' tea,. a �' ��/� �•�`'� _ r;w . � ` -. :. ILooking to a south ] 1+1! of ��"•' ^t— _ C__=-.- - �� _ - •"'_" 'xT .T y; '� �� !"may _���.. - Jdb Wd for l�• 'iL •.. .,��,b � - - � �,�,�i� �+►i]ter � r � i Looking to the west lk- AL- 1, • � 1 t 1 � 9,31 0 9 12 Hog fuel area 14P ft, r }r _f �'' :,�, ��' •_r✓: lid , '>f(�._; •s �` ti�' • '• .•�, '� •tip• -,• �„� � :�'�� "��15. 1�/s: 'j;! �r��. �'•• _ , • 1 , ••' lei. 1 �'� �� .�; '•'�` •. Ir•+" �:�.: sue. ±? } ♦' t T, r �.. ��- , 'a�;I�. �}t:�� l,� s�' ,i'•� nis ��-�� '� a �� a�s � ,,4. ���.1►.}, `"2�`�l's• !�1 y ,j.r• j •1' 1 �.r � ' •r 1� r V P' t� �,j� -7� �1l� •'�('T�•1P �i •, •�{��'� r. �.t�- 1 1 !%s.Y _ ;'Y� �s i '� �'����.. t� ��jt�`�► -�f�i�l � - .�� � `�\ s".'11 'rfy;'t :�f�.w�7711{{��1��/� � Y ��• 1 .. � -'� ? J •J�:.:? . ,•:Y�' %iw' ... �!r.• -l•-r}a1 '.i-��v�r�s �.rn'4"��•1�� rs�",ri.`�"4 ,`7�'"k 1 Y�e� _ .. ,br�LN'i. •.���� Looking • the east Jw INC ,�. ;� _ ► - • n " L i _ .r i >� r . � w 03/ 0912011 10 : 3 IL - .,,��-Lookincj to the north _ 1 or 1 RQ?9..•' Q � b r t'P�`iRUN ' - �'o1-ICiiLE{/.�S^-F• •^a tall 1Q ��4' �' tiz : o < < � � ziso � �o AA�lk limp - MdP REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION MASTER FILE NO: SP 2011-004 APPLICANT: Elodia Gutierrez HEARING DATE: 03/17/2011 1b04 E Broadway St ACTION DATE: 04/28/2011 Pasco, WA 99301 BACKGROUND REQUEST: SPECIAL PERMIT: Location of a children's daycare center in two existing residences in an R-1 zone. 1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Legal: Lots 1 & 2, block 32, Highland Park Homes General Location: Two Tax Parcels: 1604 E. Broadway St 345 N. Wehe Avenue. Property Size: Approximately 0.36 acres 2. ACCESS: One site is accessible from Broadway Street; the other is accessible from Wehe Avenue. 3. UTILITIES: All municipal utilities currently serve the two sites. 4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The two separate tax parcels are both currently zoned R-1 (Low-Density Residential) and each contain a single family residence. Surrounding properties are zoned and developed as follows: NORTH: R-1 and R-2 - Single family and duplex SOUTH: R-1 Single family units EAST: R-1 Single family units WEST: R-1 City Park 5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan designates the site for low-density residential uses. Goal LU-3-A encourages the location of daycare facilities in each residential neighborhood. 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 is requesting to increase the capacity of an existing home daycare from 12 children to 40-50 children, effectively changing the home- based daycare into a commercial daycare facility. No Special Permit is required 1 for home daycare facilities; however City Code limits the enrollment of a home daycare to 12 children. The first site is a corner lot that fronts on Broadway Street and Wehe Avenue. The second site is south of the first on Wehe Avenue. The properties to the north, south, and east are predominantly single-family residential homes, with some duplex units directly to the north. The lot directly to the west is a City park, and just to the north of the park is Whittier Elementary School. Pasco Municipal Code 25.78.170 requires one parking space for each employee and one space per 6 children. Depending on the age of the children the DSHS ratio of adults to children is one adult for every 4 children down to one per 15 children, (see table below). WAC 170-295-2090: If the age of the Then the staff to child ratio And the maximum Children Adults Cum. Max Cum. Max children is: group size is: Children Adults is: (a)one m onth,through 1:4 8 8 2 8 2 11 months(infant) (b)Twelve months through 29 months 1:7 14 14 2 77 4 (toddler) (c)Thirty months through 5years 1:10 20 2 i7 6 (preschooler) (d) Five years through 12 1:15 30 1 SG i years(school-age child) Thus, with the proposed 50 children the maximum parking requirement for this site will be 7 stalls for employees plus 9 stalls for children's parents/guardians, for a total of 16 stalls. This far exceeds the available parking on the site. According to the 2003 ITE Trip Generation Manual, the estimated weekday trip generation for 7 employees, 50 students and 2,773 square feet of daycare floor would be between 196.9 and 224 trips per day, depending on whether the calculation is based on number of employees, students, or facility square feet. This averages to 213.6 trips per weekday (see table below). Estimated Estimated Estimated Estimate Estimate Estimate Trips Per Trips Per Trips Per Using 7 Using 50 Using Average Employee Student 1,000 Sq. Employees Students 2,773 Estimate Ft. Sq. Ft. 28.1 4.5 79.3 196.9 224.0 219.8 213.6 There are currently 2 paved parking stalls on the first parcel (on Broadway Street) with room for 3 more spaces, for a maximum of 5 total parking spaces. This would allow for up to 12 children at this site. If tandem parking were allowed the number of spaces could be increased by two to 7 total spaces. This would allow for up to 22 children at this site. The second tax parcel (on Wehe Avenue) has two parking spaces with no room for expansion of parking facilities. This would allow for up to 4 students. If tandem parking were allowed, bringing total parking to 4 spaces, this number could be increased to 8 students. Thus the total number of spaces between the two parcels with tandem parking is 9, which would allow for a total of 30 children. The floor space requirements for daycare are as follows: (a) Fifty square feet of useable floor space per infant (includes crib, playpen, infant bed and bassinets); (b) Thirty-five square feet of useable floor space for each toddler or older child that is dedicated to the children during child care hours; and (c) Fifteen additional square feet must be provided for each toddler using a crib or playpen when cribs are located in the sleeping and play area. According to these standards the first tax parcel (on Broadway Street), with 2,773 square feet could house over 50 children (the application does not indicate how much of this area is useable space). The parking and playground facilities are not adequate to support these numbers. The second tax parcel (on Wehe Avenue) has 436 square feet, or enough for about 9 children. D SHS playground requirements are as follows: 75 square feet of useable outdoor ,yard space per child. The first tax parcel (on Broadway Street) has approximately 1,000 square feet of outdoor play area, with about 300 square feet of this comprising a 5' strip alongside the south side of the house. Thus this location has about 700 square feet of useable ,yard; enough for about 9 children. The second tax parcel (on Wehe Avenue) has over 2,000 square feet designated for play area, with another 2,400 square feet available on-site. Taken all together, the two properties have the following capacities (see table below): 3 Children Children Children Allowed Allowed Max Unit Parking based House based Yard Allowed Children Stalls on sq. ft. on sq. ft. based on Allowed Parkin House Yard Broadway St 7 22 2,773 50 700 12 Wehe Ave 4 1::. 436 2,000 5o 12 Totals 11 1 34 3,209 62 2,700 1 62 24 NOTE. 12 children minimum allowed based on home-based daycare license; actual number is smaller. 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 first site (Broadway Street) is approximately 0.18 acres. 2. The Second site (Wehe Ave) is also approximately 0.18 acres. 3. Both sites are zoned R-1 (Law-Density Residential). 4. The Comprehensive Plan identifies the sites for Low-Density Residential uses. 5. All municipal utilities currently serve the sites. b. Daycare centers are conditional uses in the R-1 zone [PMC 25.28.040(5)]. 7. Conditional uses require special permit approval prior to establishment. 8. The first site (Broadway Street) currently contains an approved home occupation daycare center. 9. Home occupation daycare facilities (up to but not exceeding 12 students) do not require Special Permit approval. 10. The current daycare is allowed to accommodate up to 12 children total, with a limit of 4 children under the age of 2, according to the DSHS License (#71395). 11. The applicant is requesting a maximum enrollment capacity of 50 children for the daycare. 12. A 50-child daycare would require up to seven (7) staff members, and require 16 non-tandem parking stalls parking stalls. The Broadway 4 parcel may have enough room for 7 stalls, including two tandem spaces. The Wehe parcel could furnish up to 4 stalls, 2 of which would be tandem spaces. 13. A 50-child daycare could generate up to approximately 214 vehicle trips per day (including employees) (per the ITE Trip Generation Manual) if each child arrived in an individual vehicle. 14. Both the Broadway Street and the Wehe Avenue parcel currently provide on-site, parallel parking for two vehicles each. 15. The existing Broadway Street daycare has been operating on the site since February 2004. TENTATIVE CONCLUSIONS BASED ON INITIAL STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT Before recommending approval or denial of a special permit the Planning Commission must develop findings of fact from which to draw its conclusions 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 tuith the goats, policies, objectives and text of the Comprehensive plan? The site is identified in the Comprehensive Plan for Low-Density Residential uses. The proposed daycare supports Plan Goal LU-3-A which encourages such facilities to be located in neighborhoods. 2) Will the proposed use adversely affect public infrastructure? No infrastructure modifications would be required for the increased daycare enrollment capacity. The site is served by all municipal utilities and the local street network. 3) Will the proposed use be constructed, maintained and operated to be in harmony ruith existing or intended character-of the general vicinity? The intended character of the neighborhood is primarily residential. Typically, schools and or pre-school facilities are located in or adjacent to residential neighborhoods. Parking facilities would need to be expanded, thus changing the character of the properties from residential to commercial. The neighborhood is across Wehe Street from a City park and near an elementary school (Whittier). 4) Will the location and height of proposers structures and the site design discourage the development of permitted uses on property in the general vicinity or impair- the value thereof? The existing Broadway Street daycare is located in a single family residence which received a building permit from the City of Pasco. The structure is located in a fully developed neighborhood. The County Assessor's records indicate the value of the adjoining residential properties have increased over the past four ,years. 5 5) Will the operations in connection tuith the proposal be more objectionable to nearby properties by reason of noise, fumes, vibrations, dust, traffic, or flashing rights than tuould be the operation of any permitted uses tuithin the district? The Home daycare facility has been operating on the site since February of 2004. The existing daycare generates more traffic than a single-family dwelling, and a commercial daycare facility may accommodate up to 50 children and would have the potential of generating over 4 times as many car trips, increasing the negative sound and traffic effects on the neighborhood. 6) Will the proposed use endanger- the public health or safety if located and developed where proposed, or in any tuay become a nuisance to uses permitted in the district? A commercial daycare would increase the concentration of small children in the neighborhood and substantially increase automobile trips to and from the location, increasing the likelihood of traffic safety hazards. (Proposed) Approval Conditions 1) The special permit shall apply to Lots 1 & 2, Block 32, Highland Park Homes; 2) The applicant shall maintain a current Department of Social and Health Service (DSHS) license at all times for the activities allowed within the buildings; 3) The number of children allowed shall be determined by the strict application of the DSHS daycare criteria and shall in no case exceed fifty (24) children; 5) The hours of operation shall be between 6:30 a.m. and 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday; 6) The applicant shall maintain the play area to meet the requirements of the Department of Social and Health Services. The play areas must be fenced to meet State requirements; 7) Only one sign, not exceeding six (6) square feet, shall be permitted upon the property; Applicant shall secure a building permit from the City of Pasco before erecting a Sign; 8) The special permit shall be null and void if a City of Pasco business license for the additional authorized activities is not obtained by December 31, 2011. 6 RECOMMENDATION MOTION: I move to close the hearing on the proposed daycare expansion and initiate deliberations and schedule adoption of findings of fact, conclusions and a recommendation to the City Council for the April 21, 2fl 11 meeting. 7 • • Item: Daycare Center in an R- 1 Zane Vicinity N Map Applicant: Elodia Gutierrez File # : SP 2011 -004 job. LIN BROADWAY�BLVp *1 P F w: e2Q SITE :LU UJ Ui 1 � A. E X'ST �_ Land Item: Daycare Center in an R- 1 Zone Use Applicant : Elodia Gutierrez N Map File # : SP 2011 -004 PARK VIEW Whittier eLVD Elementary x SFDU's School 3 0 �w BROADWAY BLVD no of ���� SFDU 'S - - w I 1 ` SITE Vacant ` � City Park — � � I � ADELU -ST Item: Daycare Center in an R- 1 Zone Zoning N Applicant: Elodia Gutierrez Map File # : SP 2011 -004 PARK VIEW BLVD F 04 1 1 R-,I -A NX--T�-3 Rml BROADWAY BLVD W d SITE a W R-'I W C =3 O C� ADELU -ST f L rp View from Northwest 1 Ll 0 ir i Or 'View from North u I _►r W View from East i pr j�yfietaO.yre�e,��n VOW t � _ { t ' i�� • ` .,� 111 i N wa liven ice',a r View from Southeast (2) 1 - ,;.,,,,�-_ � � •--- .yam►'. ._.. ,. .- -. View from South -' � �. �.•♦ _ +f� �'•) 7^— •mac i�. � � ' lZ a F -Ai A4�= L �r r View from West ., _ . ,_i►' r. "�t y, . ,:..�. r a tj OEM- yy ilr.�fa—�Ca� View from West t t :x All ilk., .Jr •'� •-\ '�\ � ��:''�n0'� � �} dd- �� � aI r +.. r � �� 9.� Y'• j ii e , j 'Looking Southwest Toward Park y f"1 - • Looking Northwest Toward School REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION MASTER FILE # SP 11-001 APPLICANT: Mario Rivera HEARING DATE: 3/17/2011 5814 Ochoco Lane ACTION DATE: 4/28/2011 Pasco, WA 99301 BACKGROUND REQUEST: SPECIAL PERMIT: Location of a church in an R-2 (Medium Density Residential) zone. 1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Legal: The east half of Block 10 Pettits Addition together with adjoining vacated right-of- way General Location: 316 North 11th Avenue Property Size: Approximately 0.5 acres 2. ACCESS: The site has access from 11 th Avenue. 3. UTILITIES: All municipal utilities currently serve the site. LAND USE AND ZONING: The site is zoned R-2 (Medium Density Residential) and contains a partially occupied multi-tenant commercial building. The zoning and land use of the surrounding properties are as follows: NORTH: R-2 - Single family residences & duplexes SOUTH: C-1 - Single family residences EAST: R-2 - Single family residences WEST: R-2 - Single family residences 5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan designates this area for Low-Density Residential uses. Policies of the Plan encourage compatibility between land uses and harmony between existing and proposed development. The plan does not specifically address churches, but various elements of the plan encourage adequate provision of off-street parking and situating businesses in appropriate locations for their anticipated 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 1 Determination of Nan-Significance (DNS) has been issued for this project under WAC 197-11-158. ANALYSIS The applicant is seeking a special permit to allow the location of a church in an existing church. Churches are defined in Pasco Municipal Code as "Unclassified Uses" which require a special permit prior to locating in any zone within the City. The approximately 3,648 square foot building proposed to be used for a church was originally developed for church uses is 1985. Prior occupants have received City of Pasco special permits to conduct church activities on the site. Those special permits were conditioned to require termination of the permit if the owner/applicant changed. In this case, the recommended conditions would apply to the parcel and would not be personal to the applicant. In terms of occupancy load, the proposed church contains 22 parking stalls. Pasco Municipal Code requires one parking stall for every four (4) seats in a church. Inversely, we can interpret that to imply that for every parking stall four (4) occupants are allowed. Accordingly, the existing off-street parking will support up to 88 people attending church at any one given time. Condition(s) addressing maximum occupancy loads are contained below under Tentative Approval Conditions. Traffic generated by the church will occur mostly on Sunday mornings when traffic is minimal. The operations of churches generally generate few complaints from adjoining property owners. 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. Churches are unclassified uses and require review through the special permit process prior to locating or expanding in any zoning district. 2. The proposed site is zoned R-2 (Medium Density Residential). 3. The proposed site is located at 316 North 11th Avenue. 4. The site is approximately 0.5 acres. 5. The site contains 22 off-street parking stalls. 6. Access to the site is from 11th Avenue. 7. The proposed site has been developed with a church structure since 1985. 8. Churches are classified as an "A" occupancy under the International Building Code. 9. The municipal Code (PMC 25.78.170) requires one off-street parking space for every four fixed seats. 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 follotus: 1. Will the proposed use be in accordance ruith the goals, policies, objectives and text Of the Comprehensive Plan? Policy LU-2-B of the Comprehensive Plan encourages the support of facilities for educational and cultural activities. .2. Will the proposed use adversely affect public infrastructu re? The proposed use will have a minimal impact on public infrastructure. Churches are generally used during off-peaks hours, on Sundays and during evenings in the middle of the week. The church will use existing City utilities and infrastructure. 3. Will the proposed use be constructed, maintained a m.d operated to be in harmony xuith the existing or intended character- Of the general vicinity? Churches are typically located in or near residential areas. In this case, all surrounding land uses are of a commercial nature. The site does not require substantial exterior modifications to its current appearance. 4. Will the location and height Of proposed structures and the site design discou rage the development of permitted uses on p r-oper-ty in the general vicinity or impair- the value thereof? The location and height of the existing structure has not discouraged the development of permitted uses on surrounding properties in the past. No 3 exterior site modifications are proposed. Any prospective businesses seeking to locate within the vicinity will not be affected by the proposed church. 5. Will the operations in connection ruith the proposal be more objectionable to nearby properties by reason of noise, fumes, vibrations, dust, traffic, or flashing rights than xuould be the operation of any permitted uses xuithin the district? Churches are typically used infrequently, generally two or three days per week and generate traffic during off-peak times such as Sunday mornings and ui evenings during the week. b. Will the proposed use endanger- the public health or safety if located and developed where proposed, or in any rua y ruill become a nuisance to uses permitted in the district? Past history of church operations within the City has shown they usually do not endanger public health or safety. Churches are generally accepted uses within the community. TENTATIVE APPROVAL CONDITIONS 1. The special permit shall apply to Tax Parcels 112271033 & 112271042; 2. The church occupancy shall be limited to 88 people; 3. The Church shall not object to the issuance of a liquor license within 1,000 feet of the church building; 4. The special permit shall be null and void if a City of Pasco business license is not obtained by August 1, 2011. RECOMMENDATION MOTION: I move to close the hearing on the proposed church and initiate deliberations and schedule adoption of findings of fact, conclusions and a recommendation to the City Council for the April 28, 2011 meeting. 4 tem: Church in R-2 Zone Vi cinit Y Applicant: Mario Rivera N M"11 File #. SP2011 -005 F T- AN 91-P i K r HOPKINS ST- J - /► ��'' rev • y IT z _ o dP * i �r Land Use Item: Church in R-2 Zone Applicant: Mario Rivera N Map File #: SP2011 -005 Duplexes F SFR's School HOPKINS ST SFR's N IT W s Library a a 74 IS sot o M r s Comm. SFR' s 74 S F.C. F ,S mm. s F PUD Comm. P.S.D. F offices R's Zoning Item: Church in R-2 Zone Applicant: Mario Rivera N Map File #: SP2011 -005 1 7 R-1 R- ^ HOPKINS ST L N SITE y R- 1 7e , S R-1 Ic VA m Z �L C- 1 s� r C-1 C- 1 Looking east s• -- - r F w _ Looking west A6 vi, FS oil -9 CAI Lookinq west VT. _ 1 r— t k 9 a f. - r ONORROM Hong [Looking north i CASA ALAS%T AIL lamil. IGILf �I UC�If1� Y r �h REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION MASTER FILE NO: PP 2011-001 APPLICANT: Basswood LLC HEARING DATE: 03/17/2011 1119 W Columbia Dr. ACTION DATE: 04/28/2011 Kennewick, WA 99336 BACKGROUND REQUEST: Preliminary Plat: Ranger Heights, 11-Lots 1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Legal: SHORT PLAT 76-10 LOT 2 General Location: East side of Road 80 at Ruby Street. Property Size: 4.37 Acres Number of Lots Proposed: 11 single-family lots Square Footage Range of Lots: 12,207 ft= to 24,361 ft= Average Lot Square Footage: 17,302 ft2 2. ACCESS: The property has access from Road 80. 3. UTILITIES: Municipal water and sewer are stubbed to the site. Both will need to be extended throughout the site from the west. 4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The site is zoned RS-12 (Suburban Residential). Surrounding properties are zoned and developed as follows: NORTH: RS-12 - Single Family Residences/Vacant Lots SOUTH: RS-12 - Church/Vacant Lot EAST: RS-12 - Single Family Residences/Vacant Lot WEST RS-12 - Single Family Residences 5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan indicates the site is intended for Low-Density Residential development. According to the Comprehensive Plan Low-Density Residential means two to five dwelling units per acre. The criteria for allocation under the future land use section of Volume II of the Comprehensive Plan (Vol. II, page 17) encourages development of lands designated for residential uses when or where: sewer is available; land is suitable for home sites; and when there is a market demand. Policy H-1-E encourages the advancement of home ownership and Goal H-2 suggests the City strive to maintain a variety of housing options for residents of the community. Goal LU-2 encourages the maintenance of established neighborhoods and the creation of new neighborhoods that are safe and enjoyable places to live. 6. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The City of Pasco is the lead agency for this project. Based on the SEPA checklist, the adopted City Comprehensive Plan, City development regulations, comments received from the Pasco School District, and other information, the City has issued a Mitigated Determination of Non-Significance (MDNS) for this project under WAC 197-11-158. To mitigate the impacts associated with the proposed Ranger Heights Subdivision, the District is willing to accept payment of$60,120 in school impact fees. The District has requested that a condition of approval be included requiring the applicant to sign a voluntary agreement under which the applicant will be required to pay $60,120 ($6,012 for each building permit issued, to be paid at the time of building permit issuance), to mitigate the impacts the subdivision will have on the schools. Voluntary agreements are authorized under RCW 82.02.020. ANALYSIS The City's land use plans for the last 29 ,years have indicated the property in question should be utilized for low-density residential development. For much of the past 29 ,years the site was located outside the city limits but within the city's urban growth area. The site was annexed in 2002 and sewer service was extended north on Road 80 to the intersection with Ruby Street in 2007. The applicant is proposing to subdivide the site in question into 11 single- family lots. The plan calls for a cul-de-sac branching west from Road 80. Due to the proximity of Court street this would be an acceptable design, although a through-street with the intent of punching through to road 76 would be preferable. The proposed lot sizes will conform to the RS-12 zoning and existing lots within the neighborhood. LOT LAYOUT: The proposed plat contains 11 lots; with the lots varying in size from 12,207 square feet to over 24,000 square feet. While the average lot size is around 17,000 square feet, consistent with the site and neighborhood zoning. RIGHTS-OF-WAY: All lots have adequate frontage on streets that will be dedicated. UTILITIES: The developer will be responsible for extending sewer, water and other utilities into the plat. A utility easement will be needed along the first 10 feet of street frontage of all lots. The final location and width of the easements will be determined during the engineering design phase. The front ,yard setbacks for construction purposes are larger than the requested easements; therefore the front ,yard easements will not encroach upon the buildable portions of the lots. The City Engineer will determine the specific placement of fire hydrants and streetlights when construction plans are submitted. As a general rule, fire hydrants are located at street intersections and at a maximum of 500-foot intervals and streetlights are located at street intersections and at 300-foot intervals on residential streets. STREET NAMES: The only street in the proposed plat is a continuation of Ruby Street (Ruby Court). 2 IRRIGATION: The site is within the Franklin County Irrigation District and all irrigation line extensions must conform to the requirements of the District. WATER RIGHTS: The site is located within the Franklin County Irrigation D istrict FINDINGS OF FACT State law (RCW 58.17.010) and the Pasco Municipal Code require the Planning Commission to develop Findings of Fact as to how this proposed subdivision will protect and enhance the health, safety and general welfare of the community. The following is a listing of proposed "Findings of Fact": Prevent Overcrowding: Minimum lot sizes of 12,000 square feet or greater will address the overcrowding concern by providing manageable lots and usable open spaces. The Comprehensive Plan suggests the property in question be developed with two to five dwelling units per acre. The proposed plat has a density of about 2.5 units per acre. No more than 40 percent of each lot can be covered with structures per RS-12 zoning standards. Parks Opens Space/Schools: Chiawana Park is located approximately 850 ,yards west of the site. Ruth Livingston Elementary School, McLoughlin Middle School, and Chiawana High School are all located less than a mile to the north. The preliminary plat was submitted to the School District for review. The School District has determined that the proposed subdivision will generate over 9 student units (4.5 elementary, 1.8 middle school, and 1.9 high school multiplied by 11 SFDU's). Since one of the lots is already developed, this reduces the potential new enrollment to 8.2 student units. The School District has further noted that enrollment exceeds current capacity and the School District will not be able to accommodate further enrollment increases (see table below): SCHOOL CAPACITY OCTOBER 2010 ENROLLMENT Livingston 500 800 Elementary McLoughlin 1,0 00 1 ,48 3 Middle Chiawana High 1 2 ,2 00 1 2,032 Effective Land Use/Orderly Development: The plat is laid out for low density residential development as identified in the Comprehensive Plan. The maximum density permitted under the Comprehensive Plan is five dwelling 3 units per acre. The proposed development with about 2.5 dwelling units per acre is an orderly continuation of the existing residential subdivisions surrounding the site. Safe Travel & Walking Conditions: The plat is connected to Road 80. No sidewalks are required in the RS-12 zone. Adequate Provision of Municipal Services: All lots within the plat will be provided with water, sewer and other utilities. Provision of Housing for State Residents: This preliminary plat contains one developed site and 10 undeveloped residential building lots to provide new housing sites for Pasco residents. Adequate Air and Light: The lot sizes and maximum lot coverage limitations will assure that adequate movement of air and light is available to each lot. Proper Access & Travel: The one cul-de-sac street hi the plat will be paved and developed to city standards to assure that proper access is maintained to each lot. Connections to the community will be provided by Road 80, which feeds out to Court Street to the south. The preliminary plat was submitted to the Transit Authority for review (The discussion under "Safe Travel' above applies to this section also). Comprehensive Plan Policies & Maps: The Comprehensive Plan designates the plat site for Low-Density Residential development. Policies of the Comprehensive Plan encourage the advancement of home ownership and suggest the City strive to maintain a variety of housing for residents. Other Findings: (list additional findings as appropriate) • The site is within the Pasco Urban Growth Boundary. • The State Growth Management Act requires urban growth and urban densities to occur within the Urban Growth Boundaries. • Comprehensive Plans for the past three decades have set the site aside for low density residential development. • Low-Density Development is described in the Comprehensive Plan as two to five dwelling units per acre. • The site is zoned RS-12 (Suburban Residential). • The Housing Element of the Comprehensive Plan encourages the advancement of programs that promote home ownership and development of a variety of residential densities and housing types. • The Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan encourages the interconnection of neighborhood streets to provide for the disbursement of traffic. • The interconnection of neighborhood streets is necessary for utility connections (looping) and the provision of emergency services. 4 • This subdivision has not been laid out to have interconnecting streets or utilities. • Dedicated cul-de-sacs are provided on the ends of streets where they are not planned to be extended in the future. • Properties to the west and south of the site have been developed. Partial development has occurred to the north and east. • A sewer line is located along Road 80. • An 8-inch water line runs north In Road 80 between court Street and Wernett Road. CONCLUSIONS BASED ON INITIAL STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT Before recommending approval or denial of the proposed plat the Planning Commission must develop findings of fact from which to draw its conclusion (P.M.C. 26.24.070) therefrom as to whether or not: (1) Adequate provisions are made for the public health, safety and general welfare and for open spaces, drainage ways, streets, alleys, other public ways, water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks, playgrounds, transit stops, schools and school grounds, sidewalks for safe walking conditions for students and other public needs; The proposed plat tuill be required to develop under- the standards of the Municipal Code and the standard specifications of the City Engineering Division. These infrastructure standards ruere designed to ensure the public hearth safety and general xuelfa re of the community are secured. These standards in.clu lie provisions for streets, drainage, xuater- and server- ser7,ice and the payment of park fees. This preliminary plat has been fortuarded to the Franklin County PUD, the Pasco School District and Ben-Franklin Transit Authority for review and comment. Chiaxuana Park is located approximately 850 yarns ruest of the site. Ruth Livingston elementary School, McLoughlin Middle School, and Chiaxuana High School are all located less than a mile to the north. The School District has stated it is not in a position to accept further- enrollment at the elementary or- middle school levels in this area. (2) The proposed subdivision contributes to the orderly development and land use patterns in the area; The proposed plat makes efficient use of vacant land, tuith access to nearby Court Street via Road 80. (3) The proposed subdivision conforms to the policies, maps and narrative text of the Comprehensive Plan; The Comprehensive Plan land use map designates the site for Loxu-Density Residential development. Loxu density development is described as truo to fire single-family units per acre in the text of the Comprehensive Plan. The Housing 5 Element of the Plan encourages the promotion of a variety of residential densities and suggests the community should support the advancement of programs encouraging home otunership. The plan also encourages the interconnection of local streets for inter-neighborhood travel for public safety as tuell as providing for- traffic disbursement. The proposed subdivision conforms to the policies, maps and narrative text of the Comprehensive plan. (4) The proposed subdivision conforms to the general purposes of any applicable policies or plans which have been adopted by the City Council; Development plans and policies have been adopted by the City Council in the form of the Comprehensive plan. The proposed subdivision conforms to the po licies, maps a nd na rra Live text of the Pla n as no ted in nu mber- th i-ee a bone. (5) The proposed subdivision conforms to the general purposes of the subdivision regulations. The general pu r poses of the subdivision regulations have been enumerated and discussed in the staff analysis and findings of fact. The findings of fact indicate the subdivision is in conformance tuith the general purposes of the subdivision regulations. (6) The public use and interest will be served by approval of the proposed subdivision. The proposed plat, if approved, twill be developed in accordance tuith all City standards designed to insure the health, safety and general rue fa re of the community are met. The Comprehensive Plan tuill be implemented through development of this plat. These factors will ensure the public use and interest are ser-t,ed. PLAT APPROVAL CONDITIONS 1. At the time lots are developed, all abutting roads and utilities shall be developed to City standards as approved by the City Engineer. This includes, but is not limited to, water and sewer lines, streets, and storm water retention. Curb, gutter, sidewalks, and street lights are not required in the RS-12 zone. All existing and proposed utilities must be installed underground by the developer at the developer's expense. 2. Ruby Court shall be built to the City of Pasco's Local Street Standard. 3. The developer/builder shall pay the "traffic mitigation fee" established by ordinance at the time of issuance of building permits for homes. Fees collected shall be placed in a fund and used to finance signalization and other improvements necessary to mitigate traffic impacts on the circulation system. 4. All corner lots and other lots that present difficulties for the placement of ,yard fencing shall be identified in the notes on the face of the final plat(s). 6 5. No utility vaults, pedestals or other obstructions will be allowed at street intersections. b. The developer/builder shall pay the current City "Park fund fee" upon issuance of building permits for homes. 7. All storm water is to be disposed of per city and state codes and requirements. 8. The developer shall ensure active and ongoing dust, weed and litter abatement activities occur during the construction of the subdivision and of the houses thereon. 9. The developer shall be responsible for the creation of record drawings. All record drawings shall be created in accordance with the requirements detailed in the Record Drawing Requirements and Procedure form provided by the engineering department. This form shall be signed by the developer prior to plan approval. 10. The developer shall install a properly designed irrigation system which includes valves to each of the lots of the development, as well as an appropriate size distribution system. Developer shall also furnish proper construction documents and final as-built drawings showing any deviations from the construction drawings. 11. Any and all utilities shall be located as directed by the City Engineer. This shall include but, is not limited to gas, phone, power, cable and all other utilities located within or adjoining the plat. Any existing utilities that present difficulties shall be relocated at the developer's expense, pursuant to the City Engineer's direction. All utility plans, including the above mentioned, are required to be submitted to the City of Pasco prior to subdivision approval. 12. The developer shall be responsible for all costs associated with construction inspection and plan review service expenses incurred by the City of Pasco Engineering Department. 13. All engineering designs for infrastructure and final plat drawings shall utilize the published City of Pasco Vertical Control Datum and shall be identified on each such submittal. 14. The final plat shall contain 10-foot utility easements parallel to all streets. An additional easement shall be provided as needed by the Franklin County PUD. All other easement widths are to be as directed by the City Engineer. 15. The final plat shall contain the following Franklin County Public Utility District statement: "The individual or company making improvements on a lot or lots of this plat is responsible for providing and installing all trench, conduit, primary vaults, secondary junction boxes, and backfill for the PUD's primary and secondary distribution system in accordance with PUD specifications; said individual or company will make full advance payment of line extension fees and will provide all necessary utility easements prior to PUD construction and/or connection of any electrical service to or within the plat." 16. All storm water shall be disposed of through grassy swales paralleling the paved surface of the street. The developer shall install the swale with the construction of the street. The swale area must be fully irrigated and sodden or seeded before a certificate of occupancy is issued for each lot. A note shall be placed on the final plat stating these requirements. 17. The developer will be required to comply with the City of Pasco Civil Plan Review process. A copy of the requirements for the Civil Plan Review process is available from the City of Pasco Engineering Department. 18. To mitigate the school impacts associated with the proposed Ranger Heights Subdivision, the developer shall enter into an agreement with the Pasco School District and/or the city of Pasco to pay $60,120, or $6,012 for each building permit issued, to mitigate the impacts the subdivision will have on the schools. RECOMMENDATION MOTION for Findings of Fact: I move to adopt findings of fact and conclusions as contained in the March 17, 2011 staff report. MOTION for Recommendation: I move based on the findings of fact and conclusions, as adopted, that the Planning Commission recommend City Council approve a preliminary plat for Ranger Heights Subdivision with the conditions as listed in the March 17, 2 0 11 staff report. s *� 1 Pasco School District #1 C. L. Booth Education Service Center 1215 W, Lewis • Pasco, Washington 99301 rASCXISTRICT (509)543-6700 HOO #1 March 11, 2011 Rick White City of Pasco PO Box 293 Pasco, WA 99301 RE: Ranger Heights Subdivision— Master File Number: PP2011-001 Dear Rick: As indicated in the letter the Pasco School District filed, there is not sufficient capacity to serve elementary and middle school students from the 11 houses that are contemplated in the proposed Range Heights Subdivision. As reflected in the 2010-2017 Pasco School District Capital Facility, a copy of which is attached to this email, the District needs to construct a new elementary and new middle school to serve students from new residential development. The cost to construct a new 750 student elementary is over $26,000,000, or approximately $35,000 per student. The cost to construct a new 1,250 student middle school is over $60,000,000, or approximately $48,000 per student. The Ranger Heights Subdivision will generate at least 5 elementary school students and 2 middle school students, using a district-wide average of the number of students that live in new single family homes. The proportionate share of the cost to construct the new elementary school, which is necessary as a direct result of the proposed subdivision, is $175,000 (5 students x $35,000 per student). The proportionate share of the cost to construct the new middle school, which is necessary as a direct result of the proposed subdivision, is $96,000 (2 students x $48,000 per student). The total cost to mitigate the direct impacts associated with the proposed subdivision is $271,000. As you know, the Pasco School District has requested the City of Pasco and Franklin County adopt a school impact fee ordinance and collect $6,012 from the builder of every new single family home to mitigate the impacts new homes are having on schools. To mitigate the impacts associated with the proposed Ranger Heights Subdivision, the District is willing to accept payment of $67,122, or the equivalent of what would be collected in school impact fees if the City were implementing the District's requested school impact fee program. The payment of $67,122, as demonstrated in the materials the District has submitted, is significantly less than the actual cost to mitigate the direct impacts. If the City determines it is appropriate to approve the proposed Ranger Heights Subdivision, the District requests a condition of approval requiring the applicant to sign a voluntary agreement under which the applicant will be required to pay $67,122 to mitigate the impacts the subdivision will have on the schools. We understand voluntary agreements are authorized under RCW 82.02.020. Equal Opportunity Employer Rick White March 11, 2011 Page 2 Thank you for asking for more information and for considering the District's request. Sincerely, John M. Morgan Executive Director, Operations Celebrating academics, diversity and innovation. Overview Item: Prelim. Plat - Ranger Heights Map Applicant: Basswood LLC N File # : PP 2011 -001 "2 Tor `LA R +_S T ATE AG . , - = t ' � . - ,SITE T AAA Ah Item: Prelim. Plat - Ranger Heights Vicinity Ap Map plicant: Basswood LLC N File # : PP 2011 -001 Co. • ti -- - --- it �. rt 1 1.,CL, SITE �+�p� foe COURT ST l � I I I I l ; I 188.0' 93.2' 93.2' 9.6' -- 170.5' \ \ \\ C0 f J / EXISTING \\ \\\ C) SHOP BLDG x \ 3� I LO < EXISTING HOME \\ Q II c I J I x O � I \ ,� I � � I p 2 c 3 b 4 \ � w w I 12,388 SF 1 I ; ExrG \ 24 631 SR I Li f 12,207 SF x 12,207 SF co 12,265 SF �`•' f I I WATER ,1 / Z f ' r METER/ \ / I � 0 i 1 EXTG FIRE J 1t P 1V'T . �(' EXTG, 11 Q� �4 ' o� HYD nj I it - � ,� \+ FENCE x x 5 R� a"'i RB U12,462,�• _ -�– I---------� 164_6 __ _.._ — 93.2' — 93.2' _ — 54.3' R=� u� y 12,462 S F \ ROAD SIDE DITCH(TYP) 8"PVC S C3 cr ! EXTG SAN MH _ _ M t- SAN MH p ' I p N ,4H $°DI =L Q. OF `I EDGE OF 03,�� EDGE ,_ _ FIRE HYD ' EXTG £ I �' — — ROAD SIDE DITCH"P) — — — — PAVT PAV'T wI I ; g 1093 125.7' 125-7' 46.4' Cq UJI `�•4' cE co I� I 10 l 0 9 o j._ _- 8 12,997 SF n ➢ 14,573 SF o 13,699 SF x I A I t I 13,699 SF 13,128 SF o x EXISTING GROUND I i LU LA CONTOUR 136.0' 125.7' / 125.7' 148.1' 99.0' ------ -------------- I- -- - � b �1 t EXT'�G DRIV, I�VAY r L - - -J `tea o Scale 1" = 50' 38322 SCI STR� 0 L-- 100 l �SSIONAL 2 17/&11 PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR: Pasco.urdenBlvd,SuiteE DESIGNED: JEF SCALE H: N/A SHEET Pasco,WA 99301930 V: NIA 5091547-5119 RANGER HEIGHTS SUBDIVISION � 5m1547-5129 9 lax DRAWN: JEF DATE: FEB 17,2011 DESIGN GROUP A PRELIMINARY PLAT IN THE CITY OF PASCO, WA engineersI landscape archlteasI planners Isun weyors Internet www.hd)deslgngroup.=n CHECKED: JEF Joe NO.: f r�' � - ,� � _ - /._�' .ice- �•. • Southwest Y�t •�;��art � ;. -: � �,��r �w V p 1 y� ALN f4 T t E� Looking East _ w - �4;fit- - , •_ - •w•, - a �1 � , View LookindNorfljl f _`. � •'� ��-�. ' _ -. •� __ - _ F- - ` _ - - - _ _, _ ' 'ter , 1) ., ir View Looking Southeast ;, •. '���.�t `�� - •: �`''�'