Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-15-2008 Planning Commission Meeting Packet PLANNING COMMISSION - AGENDA REGULAR MEETING 7:00 P.M. May15, 2008 I. CALL TO ORDER: II. ROLL CALL: Declaration of Quorum III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Dated April 17, 2008 IV. OLD BUSINESS: A. Special Permit Farming in an R-S-1 Zone (DNR) (7500 Block of Argent) (MF # SP 08-001) V. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. Special Permit Kids R Kids Daycare (Maria Aguilar) (1901 N 201h Ave) (MF # SP 08-002) VI. WORKSHOP: VII. OTHER BUSINESS: VIII. ADJOURNMENT: REGULAR MEETING April 17, 2008 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman Todd Samuel. POSITION MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT No. 1 Todd Samuel, Chairman No. 2 James Hay No. 3 Andy Anderson No. 4 David Little No. 5 Joe Cruz No. 6 Ray Rose No. 7 Tony Schouviller No. 8 Vacant No. 9 Vacant APPEARANCE OF FAIRNESS: Chairman Samuel read a statement about the appearance of fairness for hearings on land use matters. Chairman Samuel asked if any Commission member had anything to declare. No declarations were made. Chairman Samuel then asked the audience if there were any objections based on a conflict of interest or appearance of fairness questions regarding the items to be discussed this evening. There were no objections. Chairman Samuel asked the audience if there was an objection to either commissioner hearing the mater. There were no objections from the audience. ADMINISTERING THE OATH: Chairman Samuel explained that state law requires testimony in quasi-judicial hearings such as held by the Planning Commission be given under oath or affirmation. Chairman Samuel swore in all those desiring to speak. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: -1- Commissioner Little moved, seconded by Commissioner Rose, that the minutes dated March 20, 2008 be approved with the corrections on attendance. The Motion carried unanimously. OLD BUSINESS: A. REZONE R-S-1 (SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL) TO R-1 (LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL) (ALL PRO CONTRACTING) (3300 BLOCK OF W WERNETT) )MF #Z08-001) Chairman Samuel introduced the item and explained that it had been presented at the last meeting and public comment had been received at that time. No further public comments will be taken during the deliberations. Chairman Samuel asked if there were any comments from staff. Staff explained the concomitant agreement restricting the proposed rezone to 8,000 square foot lots. Commissioner Little asked if there would be a sound wall along the freeway. Staff explained that would be a recommended condition for approval of a final plat. Commissioner Hay moved seconded by Commissioner Anderson that the Planning Commission adopt the findings of fact as contained in the April 17, 2008 staff report. The motion was unanimously approved. Commissioner Hay moved based on the findings of fact as adopted seconded by Commissioner Anderson that the Planning Commission recommends the City Council rezone the site from R-S-1 to R-1 with a condition requiring a minimum lot size of 8,000 square feet. The motion was approved unanimously. Staff noted the recommendation would go to the City Council for action on May 5, 2008. If an appeal is filed, there will be a closed record hearing by the City Council before any action is taken. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. Special Permit Farming in an R-S-1 Zone (Department of Natural Resources) (7500 Block of Argent )MF#SP08-001) Chairman Samuel read the master file number and asked staff for a report. -2- Staff stated that a notice of the hearing was published in the newspaper and mailed to surrounding property owners. Staff provided an overview of the proposed project and its location in the 7500 block of W. Argent. The Department of Natural Resources owns the site and has made application to develop a farm to preserve the water rights. The application is similar to the Pasco School District application a couple of years ago for property located west of the site which resulted in the approval of a special permit for a farm. The application for a farm near the Road 100 interchanged was also discussed briefly. Chairman Samuel asked about the amount of commercial zoning designated in the comprehensive plan for the Road 100 area. Staff explained that about 100 acres were designated in the Comprehensive Plan for commercial development near Road 100. The propose site is zoned and classified as a low density residential. Chairman Samuel questioned the proper amount of property for growth. Staff stated one of the differences between the current site and the Road 100 site is the existence of a major gas line that runs diagonally through the property making it more difficult to develop. Commissioner Rose questioned the type of agriculture that would be developed on this property. Commissioner Cruz questioned the length of time involved in perfecting water rights. Staff stated about two years. The property has to be put to a beneficial use, such as growing and harvesting a crop. Chairman Samuel asked if any complaints had been received from neighbors of current farms (nearby) concerning sand, noise or dust control. Staff replied they were not aware of any complaints. Chairman Samuel referenced the Linda Loviisa farm. Staffs explained due to the wind patterns there have been complaints about blowing dust from the farm located where Linda Loviisa is being built. Chairman Samuel opened the public hearing. -3- Linda Clatterbuck, 3001 Road 72, stated she was in favor of agriculture use with a constant covered crop. She was however concerned about the storage of farm equipment. The appearance of farm machinery at the fruit stand on Court Street is not very appealing. Staff explained that the fruit stand on Court Street is located in the County and did not receive permission from the City to store machinery in plain view. The fruit stand farm is a different type of farm than the proposed farm and as a result no machinery will be stored on site. Chairman Samuel addressed Ms. Clatterbuck's concern regarding the proposed crop for this property by explaining the School District's farm was restricted to certain crops. Bruce Clatterbuck, 3001 Road 72, stated he had a genuine concern regarding groundwater contamination and would prefer a perennial grass or alfalfa crop. He wanted to see a low pressure irrigation system be installed. Chairman Samuel questioned Mr. Clatterbuck as to whether there were any proof regarding high levels of nitrates being caused by the farms already in the area. Mr. Clatterbuck stated no, but there was a lengthy study that the Conservation District did a few years ago about nitrates in West Pasco. Clatterbuck stated he was a former employee of the USDA and is pro-farming. Tom Kidwell, 4320 Riverhaven, explained he was the farmer on the Pasco School district property to the west and on the DNR land to the north of the FCID canal. The School District farm was planted with alfalfa and oats for dust control purposes. Commissioner Little asked how long Mr. Kidwell intended to farm the site and what crop would be used Mr. Kidwell stated there would be a 5-year timeframe. His intention was to plant alfalfa. Commissioner Little questioned the timeframe expected to recover costs and protect the water rights. Mr. Kidwell stated 3-5 years, if 3 years was granted he would request an extension. Linda Clatterbuck, 3001 Road 72, further recommended the pivot area not be used for storage. -4- Staff requested some direction from the Planning Commission for recommendations regarding conditions on timeframes, farm management plans, and equipment storage. Commissioner Cruz stated he would like to recommend that no equipment be stored longer than 30 days. Following three calls for further testimony Chairman Samuel closed the hearing. Commissioner Anderson recommended the timeframe be a minimum of 3 years with an extension to 5 years with an annual review each year after that. In reference to the equipment storage, he mentioned the equipment used for the farm on the Pasco School District property was only at the property to cut and bale the hay. The hay was stored on the property in an area with easy access for trucks. Commissioner Little questioned if there would be a fee for each additional review. Staff stated the fee was $480. Commissioner Anderson suggested that if no problems existed or if there were no development plans that the time limit could be extend to 5 years. Commissioner Rose suggested that the approved agriculture use contain a year- round stabilization of the soil. Commissioner Cruz questioned the prohibition of livestock uses with the main concern being the accelerated levels of nitrates. Commissioner Rose did not object to use of the land for a pasture. Commissioner Anderson moved, seconded by Commissioner Hay, to close the hearing on the proposed special permit and initiate deliberations and schedule adoption of findings of fact, inclusions and a recommendation to the City Council for the May 15, 2008 meeting. The motion carried unanimously. B. Code Amendment Driveway Standards (City of Pasco( (MF#CAOS-001( Chairman Samuel read the master file number and asked staff for a report. Staff explained this item was discussed in a workshop last month. The current driveway and sidewalk code was developed in 1969 and has not been revised significantly since. While driving habits, size of motor vehicles, school buses and -5- service vehicles for commercial use have increased in size, no changes have been in the municipal code. Staff explained there were several reasons why the city should be concerned with managing driveways. First, streets are designed to contain a certain amount of storm water runoff. The current storm drainage system is not designed for increased storm water from large driveways. Second, municipal codes are enacted in part to help reduce conflicts within the community. Unrestricted driveway sizes in residential neighborhoods limit on-street parking. This can lead to neighborhood conflicts when visitors and guests to one house constantly park in front of another house because there is no street frontage for parking as the result of wide driveways. Third, commercial driveways are a concern, because the location and size of commercial driveways can impact traffic safety on major streets. Staff pointed out the first two pages of the proposed ordinance was not discussed last month and needed to be considered. These pages dealt with definitions, permitting, construction staking and other matters. Staff stated developers are required to provide their own surveying and staking for construction rather than the City Engineer or Building Inspector as provided for in the current code. Staff explained Section 9 of the proposed ordinance dealing with sidewalks modifies the existing code by providing specific circumstances under which the Public works Director may alter the requirement for a standard 7-foot sidewalk in a commercial area. Staff explained Section 11 of the proposed ordinance dealing with standards for driveways. These standards included driveway widths, location of driveways in relation to utilities, the number of permitted driveways and standards for circular driveways. The proposed code provides specific criteria for the Public Works Director to review when considering the width for commercial driveways. Commissioner Samuel questioned if there is a non-conforming house being remodeled, would the driveway have to meet this new code. Staff explained that if the remodel exceeds 33% of the value of the house, the house would have to comply with the updated regulations. The 33% standard is found throughout the code. It is found, for example, in the landscaping regulations. Chairman Samuel asked if this would be something that would actually be enforced by the construction inspectors. Staff explained that it would be tied to a building permit and enforced during that process. -6- Commissioner Little asked about the converting of garages into living areas. Staff explained that is no longer permitted as per the residential design standards that were adopted in 2005. Staff explained that under the rules adopted in 2005; the primary driveway must terminate into a garage or carport. Thus, in order to convert a garage into a recreation room there would have to be sufficient area on the lot to build a new garage or carport for the primary driveway to terminate into. Commissioner Anderson stated the revised proposal did not contain the section regarding the 33% rule but the ordinance mailed with the packet did. Staff's recommendation was for the 33% rule to be included in the ordinance and should be so considered when the Planning Commission makes a recommendation to the City Council. Chairman Samuel asked for further clarification on the impact of the 33% rule on the conversion of garages to a living area and the driveway did not terminate in a garage or carport. Staff explained the proposed 33% rule does not impact the current application of the code. When the code was amended in 2005 to address state requirements on manufactured homes the residential design standards required driveways to terminate into a garage or carport. Remodeling the garage into a living space causes the driveway to be in violation of the code. Commissioner Little asked if a garage was remodeled would the home owner be required to eliminate the driveway. Staff explained that at least a portion of the driveway would have to be removed and an alternate garage would have to be provided. Following a brief discussion on commercial driveways Chairman Samuel stated he was of the opinion that larger driveways should be encouraged for commercial driveways along major streets. And he thought that the proposal encourages the restriction of commercial driveways to 35ft. Staff noted the suggestion and stated that by providing a set of review criteria the Public Works Director would be granted the flexibility of approving commercial driveways with larger widths as conditions warrant. Commissioner Anderson agreed that provision #2 provides Public Works with the needed flexibility to approved wider driveways when needed. Commissioner Cruz asked about replacement of abandoned driveways. If there is a required timeframe the replacements occur as required in section 12. -7- Staff explained that this provision is typically applied when property owners are notified that repairs are needed in the sidewalks or when permits are issued for alteration or repairs or new construction. Chairman Samuel asked if there were additional other comments. Chairman Samuel opened the public hearing. Following three calls for public comment the hearing was closed. Commissioner Anderson moved seconded by Commissioner Hay that the Planning Commission recommends the City Council amend the driveway standards of Title 12 as presented by Staff including the 33 % rule. The motion was unanimously approved. Planning Commission Minutes 4/17/08 WORKSHOP: A. Code/Policy Amendment Subdivision Fence Standards (City of Pasco) (MF#CA08-0021 Chairman Samuel read the Master file Number and asked staff for comments. Staff explained the City's practice of requiring Estates fences for subdivisions backing on arterial streets by discussing the various types (wood vinyl, block etc) of fences that have been used. The practice began in 1995 in response to the unsightliness of mixing different types of fencing along the length of a subdivision. Reference was made to the mixture of fencing on Burden Boulevard west of Rd 44. Staff stated with several years of maintenance experience with different types of fencing a decision needs to be made about the preferred fencing to be used in subdivision development. Staff then reviewed a number of photos to highlight the different types of fencing in use and the maintenance problems associated with each. Chairman Samuel asked what type of fencing material was being used in the new Linda Loviisa development on Burden Boulevard. Staff explained the vinyl posts are the same as the posts used in other developments, but the material between the posts was a product called -8- cambium. The cambium product has interior ribbing for additional strength and will not break like the other products. Commissioner Cruz stated fencing issues are discussed a lot at the Code enforcement meetings. Staff explained the fencing material for the First Place subdivision off Rd 44 was being developed with a block wall at a cost of only a few dollars ($ 4.00) more per foot than the vinyl fence being placed in the Linda Loviisa development. Staff explained that out of the discussion they were looking for a fencing standard that could be used for all new subdivisions. Staff was of the opinion that block would be the best product Chairman Samuel stated some of the fences around new neighborhood are in poor condition and he thought block was the preferred material. Commissioner Anderson expressed concern about the impacts of graffiti on block walls. Commissioner Cruz explained he would be able to support the use of high density polyethylene. He has experience installing miles of piping made with this material and it is almost indestructible. He also stated that there needs to be a concrete runner under the fence and around the posts for weed control. Commission Anderson stated block looks good, but he was concerned about graffiti. The high density polyethylene is a viable alternative to block. Commission Cruz stated if the block product was selected it needed to be split faced or architectural block and not the standard smooth faced cinder block. In summary the chairman stated it appeared the Commission believed the HDPE board would be acceptable and the architectural block would be acceptable. His preference was the block. The general consensus was that block would be the number one choice followed by HDPE. Commissioner Cruz felt precast walls should also be acceptable. There was no disagreement on the precast walls. Chairman Samuel stated they were all in agreement that something needed to be done to set a standard for the subdivision fences. Commissioner Hay moved, seconded by Commissioner Anderson, that the meeting be adjourned. The motion passed unanimously. With no further business the Planning Commission was adjourned at 9:00 pm. -9- Respectfully submitted, David McDonald, Secretary la REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION MASTER FILE NO: SP 08-001 APPLICANT: WA DNR HEARING DATE: April 17, 2008 Toby McKay ACTION DATE: May 15, 2008 713 Bowers RD Ellensburg, WA 98926 BACKGROUND REQUEST: SPECIAL PERMIT: Farming in an R-S-1 Zone (7500 Block of W. Argent) (DNR) (MF# SP 08-001) 1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Legal: That portion of parcel 117-510-016 located in the SW 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of Section 16, Township 9 North, Range 29 East, W.M., in the City of Pasco laying south of the Franklin County Irrigation District Canal. General Location: 7500 Blk. of Argent Rd. Property Size: Approximately 30 acres. 2. ACCESS: The site has access from Argent Rd. 3. UTILITIES: City water is available to the site, and is located in the Argent right-of-way. Sewer service is located at the intersection of Road 72 and Argent. 4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The subject property is currently zoned RT (Residential Transition) and is bordered on the south and east by the City Boundary, on the west by lands zoned R-S-1, and on the north by lands zoned RT. The land to the west is the site of the New Pasco High School. The lands to the north and northwest are in agricultural use. The lands to the south and east are under Franklin County jurisdiction and are in residential use. 5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan designates this area for low density residential development. 6. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: This proposal has been issued a determination of nonsignificance in accordance with review under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), Chapter 43.21(c) RCW. ANALYSIS The applicant, the Department of Natural Resources, has submitted an application for a farming operation in an effort to perfect the remaining water rights on the parcel in question. Pasco has been an agricultural community from its inception. Considerable acreage devoted to farm fields can be found within the City limits and such has been the case for many years. Recognizing the importance of agricultural production to the community as a whole the City Council specifically established all farm fields within the City as of 1990 as lawfully established non-conforming uses. (Ordinance # 2780) In 1990 agricultural uses were also added as an unclassified uses in the zoning regulations and as such required review thorough the Special Permit process when they are within 1,000 feet of a dwelling or residential subdivision. In the early 1990's much of the I-182 corridor area was put into agricultural production with farming operations still occurring between recently developed subdivisions. These farms made productive use of the land and played an important role in preserving water rights for the community. As irrigation water was applied to the land water rights became perfected. When development occurs and farms are converted to land uses as indicated in the Comprehensive Plan the water rights are required to be transferred to the City. Following the necessary paperwork the water rights are then converted for community-wide use. The property has been used in the past, as reported in the School District Hearing on the adjacent farm, by dirt bikers, four wheelers and horseback riders. Although the property in question has been vacant for many years it currently has water rights available, however, the water rights have not been perfected. The applicant is endeavoring to put the land into agricultural production to preserve the water rights. The water rights can only be preserved if they are put to use through agricultural production or they will be forever lost. The property is identified in the Comprehensive Plan for low density residential uses and is currently zoned R-S-1 (Suburban Residential). Farming on the site can only be considered an interim use that can be easily converted to the intended use when conditions and development activities warrant full development. Recent growth in Pasco is a good example of how the conversion process takes place. Most of the 2 development in the I-182 corridor over the last ten years has occurred on lands that were formally developed with farms. In reviewing this proposal Staff has identified five (5) issues for consideration by the Planning Commission: 1) dust control; 2) noise; 3) general farming operations; 4) ground water concerns; and 5) the eventual conversion to a residential use. During the initial grading and leveling of the site fugitive dust could potentially impact adjacent lands if not properly monitored. This impact would be eliminated 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 so that during wind events the site can be managed to prevent dust from leaving the site. During other times of the year a cover crop can be utilized to control dust. Often commercial agricultural activities occur at odd hours with the use of heavy equipment and various chemicals. Development of an appropriate farm management plan such as the one required for the adjacent School District would help mitigate any adverse impacts on surrounding properties. During the hearing process for the adjacent School District Farm several neighbors voiced the concerns over ground water contamination from overwatering during the irrigation season. Again this concern can be addressed through implementing a farm management plan and specifying the type of crop to be grown. Even though the Municipal code makes provisions for commercial agriculture, the City's comprehensive plan has designated this area for low density residential development. Therefore farming on the site must be considered only an interim use. Placing a time limit or a reassessment date for the farming operation would address the concern of having the farming operation on the site for an extended period of time. It should also be mention that the School District prepared a Phase One Environmental Study and Burrowing Owl Study for the adjacent farm to the west. A portion of those studies include a survey buffer that covers the western portion of the site in question. INTIAL 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 3 listing as the result of factual testimony and evidence submitted during the open record hearing. 1. The site is zoned R-S-1. 2. The Comprehensive Plan identifies the site for future single family housing development. 3. The site is not designated as a critical area. 4. Commercial agriculture (farms) is listed as unclassified uses in the zoning regulations. 5. The site is in the Pasco Urban Growth Boundary. 6. The site contains 30 acres. 7. The site is vacant. 8. Testimony for the School district hearing indicated four wheelers, dirt bike riders, and horseback riders have used the site for many years for off-road recreation activities. 9. A large commercial farm is located directly north of the site. 10. The subject site is within 1000 ft of a residential zone. 11. The Pasco School District was granted a special permit for a farm on the property to the west. 12. The School District prepared a Burrowing Owl Report (BOSR) for the nearby property. 13. The BOSR indicated there were no burrowing owls or important fish and wildlife habitat on the adjacent school site. 14. The site in question is similar to the adjacent school site but contains far less shrub vegetation than the school site did. 15. The site is not list as a critical area in the City's Comprehensive Plan. 16. Much of the property was de-vegetated in the early 1990's in preparation for the development of a farm. 17. The site is adjacent Argent Road, a major street. 18. There are many small irrigated pastures located to the south of the site. 19. A farm management plan was establish for the School District farm to address concerns related to farm operations, dust, and ground water. 20. Developing a farm on the site will secure scarce water rights. 4 TENTATIVE CONCLUSIONS BASED ON INTIAL STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT Before recommending approval or denial of a special permit the Planning Commission must develop findings of fact from which to draw its conclusion based upon the criteria listed in P.M.C. 25.86.060. The criteria are as follows: 1) Will the proposed use be in accordance with the goals, policies, objectives and text of the Comprehensive Plan? The Comprehensive Plan designates the proposed site for low density residential development. The proposal is an interim use that will preserve the site for uses designated in the Comprehensive Plan. The proposal also supports Policy LU-3-F that encourages the use of irrigation water in residential districts and Policy OF-3-B that calls for the continued expansion of the water system. The proposal will preserve water rights for the Pasco Community. 2) Will the proposed use adversely affect public infrastructure? The proposed farm will have no adverse impact on public infrastructure. A farm is not dependant upon City utilities or infrastructure as are residential and commercial development. 3) Will the proposed use be constructed, maintained and operated to be in harmony with existing or intended character of the general vicinity? The proposed use will be in harmony with the large commercial farm to the north and is similar in nature to the many acres of irrigated pasture lands and hobby farms to the south. 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. Farms have operated simultaneously with the development of Island Estates, Sunny Meadows, the Village of Pasco Heights, and in harmony with other residential developments in the I-182 Corridor. The proposed use will not make intensive use of the land or lead to the 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? 5 There will be no structures erected with this proposal other than a pivot irrigation system. 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. 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? Gardening and fruit growing are permitted uses in the R-S-1 district. Farming activities are occurring north of the site. The proposed use will not create more traffic, flashing lights, fumes, noise or vibrations than the traffic on Argent Road or activities at the High School. 6) Will the proposed use endanger the public health or safety if located and developed where proposed, or in any way will become a nuisance to uses permitted in the district? The proposed farm will be compatible with the existing farm to the north and the pasture ground and hobby farms to the south. The proposed farm is only an interim use, and will not impede the development of future uses; nor will it become a nuisance to future permitted uses. The existence of numerous farming operations within the I-182 Corridor demonstrates that the proposed use will not become a nuisance to permitted uses nor will it endanger public health and safety. RECOMMENDATION MOTION for Findings of Fact: I move to adopt findings of fact and conclusions there from as contained in the May 15, 2008 staff report. MOTION for Recommendation: I move based on the findings of fact and conclusions there from the Planning Commission recommend the City Council grant a special permit to the Department of Natural Resources for a farm in the 7500 block of West Argent with conditions as contained in the May 15, 2008 staff report: (Proposed) Approval Conditions 6 (1) The special permit is personal to the applicant; (2) The farming 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) Irrigation water and farm chemicals must be applied at agronomic rates; (5) The farm crop shall be limited to alfalfa only; (6) No farm equipment is permitted to be stored on the site; (7) The property shall be posted to indicate no motorcycling or four wheeling is permitted; (8) The water rights preserved with this farming operations shall remain with the property for future needs within the City of Pasco; (9) The special permit shall be valid for a period of 3 years and will automatically extend to 5 years if the applicant adheres to the conditions of special permit approval. Extensions beyond the first five years may require additional review and the granting of a new special permit if deemed necessary by the City Council, provided no farming activity shall be permitted beyond June 1, 2018 unless a special permit is granted to do so. (10) The special permit shall be null and void if farming activity has not begun by June 30, 2009. 7 • Item: S pecial Permit Farmin in R-S- 1 one Vicinity • A pplicant: Dept. of Natural esources N Map File #. SP 08-001 sy......... ". 0Ito a VALLEY VIEW PL Q w.- - M1T ' 01 If SITE �: �-,;t_r_�- �; f O 0 0 00 0 0 .y Y. y �'° T m I 00 00 _ - - ARGENT RDA-_ tom` IL, IL ° ° _ Land Item: Special Permit Farming in R-S- I one Use Applicant: Dept. of Natural Resources N Map File #: SP 08-001 Farming City Limit SFDUs T U City Limit O va High School 0 SFDUs Under TE"r a_ _ C) Construction Q -1 0 00 Mixed City Limit 00 Comm. Res. E F I Low-Density SFDUs o � City Limit 0 101 1 a Zonin Item: S pecial Permit Farming in R-S- 1 one g Applicant: Dept. of Natural Resources N Map File #: SP 08-001 RT City Limit County RS-20 U City Limit 0 rn m RS-1 SITE RS-12 C-1 City Limit E I C�� County RS-20 w City Limit � fU REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION MASTER FILE NO: SP 08-002 APPLICANT: Maria Aguilar HEARING DATE: 5/15/2008 1716 W. Marie St. Pasco WA. 99301 BACKGROUND REQUEST: SPECIAL PERMIT: Expansion of a Day Care at 1903 North 20th Avenue. 1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Legal: The south 25 feet of Lot 4, all of Lot 5, Block 1, Richardson Addition together with the adjacent vacated west half of the north/south alley. General Location: 1903 North 20th Avenue Property Size: 160 ft x 115 ft or 18,400 square feet 2. ACCESS: The site's principle access is from Pearl Street. 3. UTILITIES: All municipal utilities are available to the site. 3. LAND USE AND ZONING: The site is currently zoned "O" (Office) and contains two office buildings. The properties to the south are zoned R-1 and contain single family dwellings. The property to the west is zoned "O" and contains an office building. Richardson Park to the east is zoned R-1 (Low Density Residential) and the house to the north is zoned "O". 5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan designates this area for commercial uses. The plan does not specifically address day care centers, but various elements of the plan encourage protection of the established residential character. Policies of the plan also encourage location of businesses in appropriate locations for their anticipated uses and provision of adequate off-street parking. Policies of the plan encourage the provision of services in close proximity to the residences they serve. 6. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: This proposal has been issued a determination of non-significance in accordance with review under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), Chapter 43.21(c) RCW. ANALISYS The site contains two office buildings and supporting parking facilities. The applicant is proposing to expand the daycare use from its current location in the office building adjacent to Richardson Park to the office building facing 20th Avenue. The buildings share a paved parking lot off Pearl Street. The applicant's proposal involves the expansion of a previously permitted day-care center to accommodate between 25-35 children. The site currently has a DSHS approved outdoor play area. The adjacent park may also be utilized from time to time for play activities. The site is located at the northeast corner of 20th and Pearl and as such has access from both streets. Although the proposal is not specifically considered as a commercial/office use, it does share some of the same characteristics. The traffic generated by the day care will not exceed that typically generated by uses permitted in the underlying office zone. Because the property has already been approved for daycare use there should not be a need for substantial changes in conditions for the expansion. Due to the traffic on 20th Avenue the Planning Commission may consider restricting the parking lot fronting 201h Avenue to employee parking only. Parents dropping off and picking up children should be encouraged to use the parking lot on Pearl Street. INTIAL STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT Findings of fact must be entered from the record. The following are initial findings drawn from the background and analysis section of the staff report. The Planning Commission may add additional findings to this listing as the result of factual testimony and evidence submitted during the open record hearing. 1. The site is zoned "O" Office. 2. The Comprehensive Plan identifies the site for commercial uses. 3. Richardson Park is located directly to the east of the site. 4. The site is located at the corner of 20th Avenue and Pearl Street. 5. The site is in the Pasco Urban Growth Boundary. 6. The building proposed for day care use is currently vacant. 7. There is an on site playground located between the two buildings. 8. Robert Frost Elementary School is located west of 201h Avenue. 9. The subject site is within 1000 ft of a residential zone. 10. The Pasco School District was granted a special permit for a farm on the property to the west. 11. Plan. 2 TENTATIVE CONCLUSIONS BASED ON INTIAL 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 with the goals, policies, objectives and text of the Comprehensive Plan? Day-Care Centers are not specifically discussed in the Comprehensive Plan, but various elements of the plan encourage locating businesses in appropriate areas for their anticipated uses and providing adequate off street parking. The site is located at the intersection of a collector street and a major arterial. Policies of the plan encourage the provision of services in close proximity to the residences they serve. Residential neighborhoods are located both to the south and to the east of this site. 2) Will the proposed use adversely affect public infrastructure? A collector street as well as all municipal utilities serve the proposed site. The utilities serving the property are sized to serve utility demands of greater intensities than the proposed use. 3) Will the proposed use be constructed, maintained and operated to be in harmony with existing or intended character of the general vicinity? The proposed use will not alter the existing character of the office complex or the surrounding park and 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? This proposal involves expanding a previously permitted use within an existing single story office immediately adjacent to Richardson Park. 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 "O" zoning permits several land uses which could be more objectionable than the proposed use. 3 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 traffic and noise generated by this use will have a very low probability of creating a nuisance for surrounding properties. RECOMMENDATION MOTION: I move, to close the hearing on the proposed Special Permit and schedule deliberations, adoption of findings of fact, conclusions and a recommendation to the City Council for the June 19, 2008 meeting. 4 Item : Special Permit Daycare Center Vicinity Applicant: Marla Aguilar N Map 08-002 File # : SP SUM I C H �Rz'DtS 0 N S T - %I _ b Its M S ITE f MEARL ST W ah ■ W » J' CO ter N " r• ��1 r i .jOPAL-VST bL a' Land Item: Special Permit Daycare Center Use Applicant: Maria Aguilar N Map File #: SP 08-002 'Office SFRU's School Vacant RICHARDSON ST Park Multi-Family Eye Clinic SITE] PEARL ST w E Office > y Q u`�. '—SFRU's Li r- � o N N OPAL ST Zoning Item: Special Permit Daycare Center Applicant: Maria Aguilar N Map File #: SP 08-002 R-1 RICHARDSON ST R-1 R-3 "O" SITE, PEARL ST w w a a R-1 _-R-1 c~n R-3 "�•� � CD N N OPAL ST