HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-19-2009 Planning Commission Meeting Packet PLANNING COMMISSION - AGENDA
REGULAR MEETING 7:00 P.M. March 19, 2009
I. CALL TO ORDER:
II. ROLL CALL: Declaration of Quorum
III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: February 19, 2009
IV. OLD BUSINESS:
A. Special Permit Daycare/Preschool (Jigsaw Development) (6200 Block of
Burden Blvd.) (MF# SP 09-002)
V. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
A. Special Permit Remand Hearing on Location of an Asphalt Batch Plant
(CPM Development Corporation) (11919 Harris Rd)(MF
#SP06-010) *
* Note: Testimony is limited to new information presented
in the FEIS Addendum.
VI. WORKSHOP:
VII. OTHER BUSINESS:
VIII. ADJOURNMENT:
REGULAR MEETING February 19, 2009
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 Jana Kempf
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. Commissioner Little recused himself from the
Old Business item on the Special Permit for CBC, due to the fact he is an
employee of CBC.
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 were objections to any
commissioner hearing any matter. 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:
Commissioner Anderson moved, seconded by Commissioner Hay, that the
minutes dated January 15, 2009 be approved as mailed. The Motion carried
unanimously.
-1-
OLD BUSINESS:
A. Special Permit CBC Research Farm (Columbia Basin College)
(4100 Block of Argent Pl.) (MF# SP 08-015)
Chairman Samuel read the Master File number and asked for discussion and or
comments from staff.
Staff had no additional comments.
Commissioner Anderson moved, seconded by Commissioner Hay, that the
Planning Commission adopt the Findings of Fact and conclusions as contained
in the February 19, 2009 staff report. The motion was unanimously approved.
Commissioner Anderson further moved, seconded by Commissioner Hay, based
on the Findings of Fact as adopted, the Planning Commission recommends that
City Council grant CBC a special permit for the location of a research farm in
the 4100 block of Argent Place with conditions as contained in the February 19,
2009 staff report. The motion was unanimously approved.
Staff noted this item would go to the City Council at their next regular meeting.
Staff briefly explained the appeal process.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
A. Rezone R-1 (Low Density Residential) to C-1 (Retail
Business) (Franklin County PUD) (1411 W.
Clark) (MF# Z 09-001)
Chairman Samuel read the master file number and asked for comments from
staff.
Staff stated the PUD applied for a rezone to enable expansion of their current
office facility. Staff reviewed the written report explaining the PUD has existed on
the site for the past 40+ years. The Comprehensive Plan designates the site for
public and quasi-public uses which is consistent with the current use. The PUD
property to the east is zoned C-1. The proposed rezone from R-1 to C-1 would
eliminate the non-conforming situation existing on the site and would allow the
PUD to expand by simply obtaining building permits without continually
applying for special permits.
Terry Thornhill, 9211 Sandifur Parkway, Architect for project stated they have
extensive renovations planned for the building. Mr. Thornhill reviewed the
renovations for the benefit of the Planning Commission.
Chairman Samuel asked if the auditorium would be expanded.
-2-
Mr. Thornhill stated the current auditorium would be replaced with a board
room/multi-use facility which will be available for rental.
Chairman Samuel asked what the cost estimates were for the renovations.
Mr. Thornhill stated approximately 3 million dollars.
Chairman Samuel opened the hearing to the public, after 3 calls and no
response from the audience, the hearing was closed.
Commissioner Schouviller asked if the rezone was required for the future
expansions.
Staff stated rezoning the property would eliminate the need for a special permit
for each future revision. Revisions in the past have been for interior work and
did not require a special permit.
Commissioner Schouviller moved, seconded by Commissioner Anderson that the
Planning Commission adopts the Findings of Fact as contained in the February
19, 2009 staff report.
Commissioner Schouviller further moved, seconded by Commissioner Anderson
based on the Findings of Fact as adopted, the Planning Commission recommend
the City Council rezone the site from R-1 (Low Density Residential) to C-1 (Retail
Business). The motion passed unanimously.
Staff stated this item would go to the City Council at their first regular meeting
in March. Staff briefly explained the appeal process.
B. Special Permit Daycare/Preschool (Jigsaw Development)
(6200 Block of Burden Blvd.) (MF# SP 09-002)
Chairman Samuel read the master file number and asked for comments from
staff.
Staff explained the proposal involved the location of a daycare/nursery school in
a C-1 zone. The proposed daycare plans to occupy the north 1/2 of the site
located in the 6200 block of Burden Boulevard. Staff discussed surrounding
land uses zoning. The site proposal included 40 parking stalls, a playground
area and a building large enough for up to 220 children. The Comprehensive
Plan LU3-A encourages the location of daycare facilities in each residential
neighborhood. Daycares are defined as community service facilities in the Pasco
Municipal Code and as such are required to obtain a special permit before
locating anywhere in the city. It was pointed out that the proposal would be
significantly less disruptive to nearby residential properties than other uses
permitted in the C-1 zone.
-3-
Scott Thomason, 8027 W. Entiat Place, Kennewick, WA was present to speak in
favor of the proposal. Mr. Thomason explained the teaching staff will be certified
with college degrees. Their emphasis will be towards teaching vs. babysitting.
Classrooms will be set up with 3 teachers per classroom. The playground will
contain jungle gyms and other equipment for learning activities. The facility will
also have a commercial kitchen to provide healthy meals. Mr. Thomason will be
partnering with the Health Dept. to create healthy menus for the children.
Chairman Samuel asked what impact the project would have on neighbors
residing next to the facility.
Mr. Thomason stated his building would be attractive; hours of operation will be
during the day vs. having a nightclub (tavern) or carwash which would have
evening traffic.
Chairman Samuel asked if the daycare would be open during the weekends.
Mr. Thomason stated it would be open Monday thru Friday.
Commissioner Little asked about traffic impacts and parking.
Mr. Thomason stated the majority of students would come from families that live
close by. Additional traffic would not be created since most families would drop
off children on their way to work.
Commissioner Rose asked for clarification of the qualification of Mrs. Thomason.
Mr. Thomason stated she is a fully credentialed teacher.
Commissioner Kempf asked about security measures.
Mr. Thomason stated a security system would be installed and the site would be
fenced.
Chairman Samuel asked what the fencing requirements were.
Staff stated the Department of Social and Health Services requires minimum
fencing of 4 feet.
Mr. Thomason stated he will be in full compliance with any requirements of the
City and DSHS.
Chairman Samuel asked Mr. Thomason if he would be concerned with the
vacant lot in front of his property being occupied in the future by a tavern or
similar use.
Mr. Thomason stated he has an agreement with the property owner about this
issue.
-4-
Chairman Samuel asked if the access to the property would be through the
driveway into Times Square.
Mr. Thomason stated yes.
Chairman Samuel then asked if the City Engineering Department had reviewed
the proposal.
Staff stated the Engineering Department was primarily concerned about
easements for utilities and construction of the sidewalk along Burden Blvd.
Commissioner Little asked if the proposed school/daycare would have
precedence over other businesses locating in this area.
Staff stated there was not precedence. The School District is the only entity that
that can impact liquor licensing.
Chairman Samuel asked if the lighting would cause problems for the neighbors.
Mr. Thomas stated the lighting would not be excessive.
Commissioner Anderson asked what the hours of operation would be.
Mr. Thomason stated Monday - Friday from 6:00am - 6:30pm.
Chairman Samuel opened the public hearing.
Rob Mason, 6308 W. Fenway Drive, spoke in favor of the business. Mr. Mason
had some concerns about lighting at night, traffic, parking, and he wondered if
owning a firearm would be an issue living next to this facility.
Commissioner Anderson stated the restriction was for the possession of firearms
on school property not private property. The facility is a commercial business
and not a school.
Barbara Chaney, 5903 Road 58, was not in favor of the location for this facility
and states Burden Blvd is already congested with traffic.
Chairman Samuel questioned staff if the driveway would be on Burden Blvd..
Staff stated there was a joint driveway on Burden Blvd. and another driveway on
Robert Wayne Drive.
With no further comment, the public hearing was closed.
Staff stated the concerns over alcohol sales and lighting could be addressed in
the special permit conditions.
Chairman Samuel mentioned he would also like clarification on the fence
requirements.
-5-
Chairman Samuel asked if there was a model daycare/facility in the area that
could be referenced for the type of landscaping required.
Staff stated the I-182 Corridor standards specify the types and number of
bushes/trees required.
Chairman Samuel asked if the utilities were sufficient for the site.
Staff explained the only concern from the Engineering Department was over
easements. The water meter will be out by Burden Blvd..
Commissioner Rose moved, seconded by Commissioner Kempf to close the
hearing on the proposed daycare/nursery school and initiate deliberations and
schedule adoption of Findings of Fact, Conclusions and a Recommendation to
the City Council for the March 19, 2009 meeting. The motion passed
unanimously.
Staff explained this item would go to the Planning Commission for deliberations
and a recommendation to the City Council will follow.
C. Code Amendment Critical Areas Ordinance (City of Pasco) (MF#
CA 08-003)
Chairman Samuel read the master file number and asked for comments from
staff.
Staff stated that a notice of the hearing was published in the newspaper
notifying the public of the Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO) review. The CAO was
reviewed by the Planning Commission in the fall of 2008 during a public
hearing. Following the hearing the proposed Ordinance was sent to CTED, as
required by the GMA, for State agency review. The City received comments from
the Dept. of Ecology which suggested a number of changes and corrections be
made to the draft ordinance.
Staff explained the Critical Area Ordinance is required by the Growth
Management Act (GMA) and it is not an optional situation. The City is required
to adopt a Critical Area Ordinance. Staff then discussed the meaning of Critical
Areas.
Staff stated they had received a phone call earlier in the day from the Dept. of
Ecology asking that the reference to outdoor recreational activities be changed to
passive recreational activities.
Chairman Samuel asked if the map presented (critical areas map) showed the
areas that would be affected.
Staff stated the map was a general guide that represents critical areas. The
language in the ordinance requires studies to be done in areas where there
might be a concern about a critical area involved in a particular development.
-6-
The study would then determine if the area is critical habitat for fish and wildlife
protection.
Chairman Samuel asked how a citizen or developer would know whether they
are about to develop in a critical area.
Staff stated that the ordinance suggests developers meet with City staff prior to
applying for permits to discuss such issues.
Staff explained that Pasco does not have many critical areas and the community
has a long history of being a farm community. As a result, a good share of what
is inside the urban growth boundary has been farmed for many years. Areas
with wetlands were mentioned in Sacajawea Park and along the western end of
the community.
Chairman Samuel asked if there were areas, other than the mentioned areas
that would be affected by this code change
Staff stated there were some natural areas remaining on airport property and
west of Road 100. The airport property should not be used to preserve habitat
due to conflicts with airport operations. Much of the Road 100 area is
designated for mineral extraction.
Staff explained the burden of determining critical areas is on the City when a
permit seeker comes in to obtain a permit.
Chairman Samuel asked who the City's Hearing Examiner was.
Staff stated the ordinance allows for the City Manager to select an individual for
this role and at the moment Alan Gunter, an Attorney from Richland is being
used as the Examiner.
Chairman Samuel opened the public hearing, after three calls for public
comment and no response, the hearing was closed to the public.
Commissioner Anderson moved, seconded by Commissioner Hay that the
Planning Commission adopt the Findings of Fact and Conclusions as contained
in the February 19, 2009 staff memo on code amendments for the Critical Areas
Ordinance. The motion passed unanimously.
Commissioner Anderson further moved, seconded by Commissioner Hay that
the Planning Commission recommends the City Council adopt the Critical Area
regulations to be codified as Title 28 of the Pasco Municipal Code.
Staff explained this item will go to the City Council in a workshop prior to their
approval.
WORKSHOP:
-7-
A. Block Grant Neighborhood Stabilization Plan (City of Pasco)
(MF# CDBG 09-001)
Chairman Samuel read the master file number and asked for comments from
staff.
Staff stated this particular block grant fund is part of the Neighborhood
Stabilization Program which was authorized by Title 3 of the Housing 8s
Economic Recovery Act of 2008 otherwise known as HERA. This particular block
of funds is different from the CDBG entitlement funds. This was allocated to the
State of Washington as the grantee and we are a sub recipient. All the citizens'
participation requirements have been met by the State of Washington and they
have submitted an annual action plan and we are as a sub recipient going to
submit an annual action plan to them. Pasco has been identified by CTED as an
area of greatest need and we are expecting to receive $402,141 for neighborhood
stabilization projects. The purpose of HERA is to quickly address the needs and
neighborhoods having the greatest impact from home foreclosure and subprime
mortgage loans.
To be eligible to use these funds, properties have to be abandoned which is
vacant for 90 days and have delinquent taxes or have been foreclosed upon.
Eligible activities are defined by CDBG regulations in 24 CFR 570.201. We must
use 25% of the allocation to benefit persons who are at or below 50% of the area
median income and it may be used to assist people who are at 120% of AMI.
Activity A is for establishing financing mechanisms for purchase and
redevelopment of foreclosed on homes and residential properties and those
mechanisms can be things such as loan loss reserve, soft seconds and shared
equity loans for low and moderate home buyers, or down payment assistance.
Foreclosure is required to be able to use funds for that and can be contributed
towards 25% of the NSP funds that benefit those at or below the 50% AMI.
Activity B is for purchase and rehabilitation of homes and residential properties
in order to sell or rent or redevelop those homes and projects for other people to
buy. Those eligible activities under 24 CFR 570.201 include acquisition,
purchasing the property, disposing the property, relocation costs, if the homes
are occupied, and ownership assistance which would be the down home
payment assistance. That is also an activity that requires foreclosure to be
eligible. Properties that are bought and rehabilitated cannot be sold for anything
more than what we put into them. We cannot earn a profit on these sales.
Activity C which would allow establishment of land banks by local government is
not allowed under the Washington plan.
Activity D demolition of blighted structures. In order for a structure to be
eligible, it has to be determined to be a blighted structure by the local
government and it has to be a clear danger beyond repair.
-8-
Activity E is to redevelop demolished or vacant properties with new construction.
This is not allowable under CDBG entitlement. Under NSP funds, you would be
able to redevelop on vacant properties. Foreclosure is not required. They can be
redeveloped as residential owner or renter occupied or non-residential which
includes parks, commercial or mixed uses and these projects must meet the
national objectives that apply for that activity. If it is a commercial activity, it
would need to create new jobs, if it is parks and public facilities then it needs to
be an area benefit, shelter housing would need to meet limited clientele
requirements.
CTED also encourages recipients of the funding to address housing needs of the
homeless and those at risk of homelessness and also to address the housing
needs of special needs population within the City and to support the local 10-
year plan to end homelessness. The City of Pasco actively participates in these
types of activities by being a member of the Benton Franklin Continuum of Care
group called HOMEBASE. Where we meet and proactively try to find solutions to
some of these problems and we are also working together with them in
preparation of the 10-year plan. In response to these requests by the State, we
have put out an RFP on January 6th to 11 of the organizations that are on that
listing and they also forwarded the RFP to anyone interested in their
organization with the hope that we would be able to bring forward projects for
consideration for this plan. We also presented this to the BFCAC meeting on
January 14, 2009 and issued a letter of intent to participate to the State on
January 15, 2009. By the January 23, 2009 deadline, we received 1 proposal
from Property Research Specialists, LLC and received 2 other requests for other
information.
Property Research Specialists, LLC applied for funding $400,000 to $100,000
which breaks down to $1,000 per home that would save 100 homes that are
being foreclosed upon. In reviewing the proposal for eligibility, feasibility and
whether it met the national objectives as well as the priority goals and objectives
of the consolidated plan. It met all the criteria with the exception for eligibility
for NSP funding. This particular block of funding is not allowable for foreclosure
prevention or mitigation.
Another source of funds that might be possible for the NSP or foreclosure
mitigation would be CDBG entitlement funds, this project would be classified as
a public service which by our own policy we do not fund. This project is
ineligible.
It is estimated 49% of the funds or $194,000 would be used to purchase and
rehab homes for rental or homeowner properties, 25% $106,000 would be
targeted to those individuals that are at 50% or below AMI. We have set aside
11% $43,000 for demolition of blighted structures. If that project does not
appear, the funds can be reallocated into another activity. An estimated 10%, or
$40,000 for financing mechanisms in the form of a down payment assistance
program, and the 5% that was allowable would be used for administrative
services.
-9-
The next steps after approval would be to forward to the City Council for a
workshop on March 16, 2009. It would then be open for public review for a 15
day period. After that 15 day period we would be able to submit to CTED as a
final approved plan.
Commissioner Schouviller questioned the application process for the distressed
buyer.
Staff stated this funding is not allowable for that, the City would like to partner
with local organizations to provide that type of counseling or try to get into a
comprehensive housing counseling program. Some of the requirements for
purchasing a home require that the family go through 8 hours of first time
homebuyers counseling which is currently provided by Consumer Credit
Counseling as a HUD approved counselor. This funding is not allowed for
counseling; however it is allowable for purchase of homes after they have been
foreclosed upon.
Commissioner Schouviller questioned who would make the decision on which
properties are purchased.
Staff stated after approval of the plan, a program would need to be set up to
determine criteria for what houses to purchase. This program would be run by
the City and the program administrator.
Staff clarified this program would be similar to HOME, where homes are
purchased and rehabilitated. The only difference between the 2 programs is that
homes eligible for this program need to be foreclosed upon and/or vacant.
Commissioner Little questioned if the houses would be privately refinanced.
Staff stated the homes would be purchased at a discount, rehabilitate with a
community partners such as Habitat for Humanity.
Commissioner Little further questioned once they receive private money, does
the money go back into the pool and re-circulate the money.
Staff stated the program income goes back into the pool and go out and do it
again. The money would be reallocated in the same percentages that were
established earlier to make sure we maintain the minimum of 25% that goes to
assist those that are 50% or below.
Commissioner Little questioned the number of homes that would be effected.
Staff estimated 3 units which would serve approximatlyl5+ individuals.
Commissioner Rose questioned if there were any other projects to reference.
Staff stated this is a new program in the State of Washington. It is similar to the
HOME program; however, payment is not expected right away.
la
Chairman Samuel questioned how they determined the breakdown of the
money.
Staff stated they have a great need to purchase and rehabilitate vs. demolishing
blighted structures. Money can be reallocated to best fit the needs of the
community.
Commissioner Schouviller moved, seconded by Commissioner Anderson that the
Neighborhood Stabilization Action Plan is forwarded to the City Council for
review and adoption.
Karma Simmons and Tony Brown presented information on their program
Property Research Specialists, LLC.
OTHER BUSINESS:
With no further business, the Planning Commission was adjourned at 8:52 pm.
David McDonald, Secretary
11-
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
MASTER FILE NO: SP 09-002 APPLICANT: Jigsaw Development LLC.
HEARING DATE: 2/19/2009 8027 West Entiat Place
ACTION DATE: 3/19/2009 Kennewick, WA 99336
BACKGROUND
REQUEST: SPECIAL PERMIT: Location of a Children's Daycare/Pre-School in
a C-1 District.
1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:
Legal: The North 160 feet of Lot 3, BSP 2001-08
General Location: 6200 Block of Burden Blvd
Property 94,824 square feet (2.2 acres)
2. ACCESS: The site is accessible from Burden Boulevard.
3. UTILITIES: All municipal utilities are available to the site from Burden
Boulevard.
4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The site is currently zoned C-1 (Retail
Business) and vacant. Properties to the north are developed with the
Sunny Meadows Subdivision and are zoned R-1 (Low Density
Residential). Properties to the east and west are zoned C-1 and
developed with multi-tenant office buildings together with a mini-storage
facility. The TRAC facility and the City owned GESA baseball stadium
are located to the south. The TRAC is zoned C-1 and most of the ball
stadium site is zoned R-1.
5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan designates the site
for Commercial uses. Goal LU-3-A encourages the location of daycare
facilities in each residential neighborhood.
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.
ANALYSIS
The applicant is proposing to construct a new daycare/pre-school facility on
the site in question. The proposed building will be a modular structure treated
on the exterior with materials and features to meet the I-182 Overlay District
standards. The Applicant is planning on providing daycare and learning
services for up to 220 children at any given time. The 9,877 square foot
building will contain six classrooms, an administrative office, a kitchen and a
nap room. A playground area will be located on the east side of the building
adjacent to the mini-storage facility. The ages of the children served will range
from 1 month to 5 years. Initial hours of operation will be from 5:00 AM to
7:00 PM Monday through Friday.
The site is located on Burden Boulevard 2,820 feet east of Road 68, both of
which are arterial streets. Burden Boulevard is fully developed in this area
with the exception of sidewalks.
Traffic to and from the proposed daycare/pre-school will typically coincide with
the morning and afternoon peak traffic through the neighborhood. The ITE
Trip Generation Manual (Volume 7) indicates the daycare/pre-school could
generate up to 560 vehicle trips per day. The Applicant is estimating that
vehicle trips will be in the neighborhood of 380-400 trips per day if the daycare
was occupied to capacity.
The proposed site contains 40 parking spaces. A daycare facility of the size
proposed requires about 50 parking spaces. Additional parking is available
directly to the west, in the Times Square Commercial Center parking lot. The
lot in question is part of the same binding site plan which indicates shared
access and parking.
Daycares/nursery schools are defined as community service facilities and as
such are required to obtain a special permit before locating anywhere within
the city. Daycare facilities and schools are often located in or adjacent to
residential neighborhoods. Daycare and school activities in residential
neighborhoods typically do not generate complaints from neighbors.
By way of comparison, the C-1 district permits among other uses the
development of auto repair shops, car washes, restaurants, taverns, and
membership clubs. These uses often are open for business well into the
evening and on weekends.
INITIAL STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT
Findings of fact must be entered from the record. The following are initial
findings drawn from the background and analysis section of the staff report.
The Planning Commission may add additional findings to this listing as the
result of factual testimony and evidence submitted during the open record
hearing.
1. The site is zoned C-1 (Retail Business).
2. Daycares/nursery schools are defined by the zoning regulations (PMC
25.12.155) as community service facilities.
2
3. Community service facilities require review through the special permit
process (PMC 25.86) prior to locating within the City.
4. The Comprehensive Plan identifies the site for Commercial uses.
S. Auto repair shops, car washes, restaurants, taverns, membership clubs
and retail stores are permitted uses in the C-1 district.
6. Restaurants, taverns, membership clubs and retail stores are generally
open for business 7 days per week.
7. Business hours for restaurants, taverns, membership clubs and retail
stores can extend to 9:00 pm or later.
8. The site proposed for a children's daycare/pre-school is currently vacant.
9. The proposed daycare/pre-school could generate up to approximately
560 vehicle trips per day (including employees) if each child arrived in an
individual vehicle.
10. The applicant indicated a maximum capacity of 220 children for the
daycare/pre-school.
11. The daycare/pre-school will accommodate children ages 0-5 years.
12. The daycare/pre-school will have up to 25 staff members.
13. The site plan indicates forty (40) on-site parking stalls.
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 with the goals, policies, objectives
and text of the Comprehensive Plan?
The site is identified in the Comprehensive Plan for commercial uses. The
proposed daycare/pre-school supports Plan Goal LU-3-A which encourages
such facilities to be located in neighborhoods.
2) Will the proposed use adversely affect public infrastructure?
All municipal utilities are currently available to the proposed site from Burden
Boulevard. Connection to City sewer/water and underground power will be
required as a part of the permitting process.
3) Will the proposed use be constructed, maintained and operated to be in
harmony with existing or intended character of the general vicinity?
3
The intended commercial neighborhood will be developed with commercial
buildings. The proposed daycare/nursery school will be housed in a
commercial building that must meet the I-182 overlay design standards. In this
respect the proposed building will be constructed and maintained in harmony
with the intended character of the general vicinity.
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 daycare/nursery school facility will be a one story building constructed
with an appearance similar to adjoining commercial buildings. The County
Assessor's records indicate the value of the adjoining residential properties to
the north have increased over the past four years. The existing commercial
zoning and development has not impaired the value of adjoining residential
properties.
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?
Development of the site will eliminate the weeds and dusty conditions that now
exist. Traffic to and from the site will correspond to the morning and evening
peaks through the neighborhood and will access the site from Burden
Boulevard rather than the residential neighborhood from the north. This use
will not generate vibrations, noise or fumes that often accompany permitted
uses such as car washes, restaurants and taverns. A daycare/nursery-school
may be less disruptive to the adjacent residences than other permitted uses
due to the fact the daycare/nursery school will be closed on weekends and
during evening hours when people tend to be home.
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?
Daycares are similar to schools, which are commonly located in or adjacent to
residential neighborhoods where they are generally not viewed as a nuisance.
Other uses permitted in the C-1 zone such as car-washes, taverns, nightclubs
and restaurants are more likely to be disruptive than the proposed
daycare/pre-school.
4
RECOMMENDATION
MOTION: I move to close the hearing on the proposed daycare/nursery
school and initiate deliberations and schedule adoption of findings
of fact, conclusions and a recommendation to the City Council for
the March 19, 2009 meeting.
APPROVAL CONDITIONS
1) The special permit shall be personal to the applicant;
2) The applicant shall comply with all DSHS operational requirements
for the daycare;
3) The daycare/nursery school shall not object to the transfer, renewal
or issuance of a liquor license for an existing or new establishment
within 1,000 feet of the property;
4) All outdoor light fixtures shall be fully shielded in such a manner that
the entire light source shall be level or above the edge of the light
fixture to limit direct line of sight of a fixture's lamp to the property
upon which the fixture is installed;
5) The north edge of the parking lot shall be screened or landscaped to
limit vehicle head lights from encroaching on neighboring residential
properties;
6) The proposed development and preschool building shall meet all I-182
Corridor Overlay District design standards (PMC 25.58);
7) The special permit shall be null and void if a building permit has not
issued by April 1, 2010.
5
• Item: Special Permit Da care/Preschool
Vicinity Applicant: Jigsaw Deve opment N
Map 09-002 File #. SP
±� DODGER DR
0 P-
I � � ■ � - I - J '`t •�, _ � � Jam" :.
T-• a ..- �.
7� �71�
7,
1-yr •k,. �I Jr:�.,.► iii � � �tN. ~:� 0 '� � ? _
&AS a-C `
f 1 ]�
FENWAY
DR_ �►_ ..
Ir
i
A � r ! 1�*�'— �'£� 111x= r 11,E 1 fir+-• — ._`•-s� � p ' pi.
z \\\\\\\\\\\\\
�- _ _
-
CD
SITE __ Co
I!cg
LLI
7�i
fy -..-r _ _ _ - ..r�.-. _ �. • _
- - BURDEN BLVD - -
--
\wM
Land Item: Special Permit Daycare/Preschool �
Use Applicant : Jigsaw Development -fix
Map File #: SP 09-002 j
� J �
SFDU 's� TSFDU s
0
FENWAY DR
xFT
LU
z
S I T E
a
N,
ommercial Commercial a
.0
ry
BURDEN BLVD -
TRAC I Facility
Zoning Item: Special Permit Da ycare/Preschool Applicant: Jigsaw Development N
Map File #: SP 09-002
z ER DR
�J
R- 1 � R- 1
I I
--T 0
FENWAY DR
OF
uj
z
SITE o
C= 1 C= 1
N' 0
M
0
ry
31URDEN BLVD
C-1
270'9.72'
S89°21'S1'E LANDSCAPE STRIP 1
�o ARFA 1500 sd It
QL — — — EXIST.10'PUD EASEMENT
Ll
ccc__r I
1
i f
� I 1
I I
TRASH ENCLOSURE
m
I I
f i I1 I
I I
07 t I
I
I I
1 1
1
I ,
0 1 l
N 1 I I
I
n 1 I
f r
Cl) N < ! I l II
NEW F CONC.WALK--,,, 1 J
–
1
II PLAYGROUND
¢ o AREA
PRESCHOOL/DAYCARE FACILITY
w > z MODULAR SEGREGTED AGE AREAS]
w — [()8'x 12Y MODULAR BUILDING] L J
¢
` AREA' 11760 111
. 11 8406 s fn 543 sq AREA
o
Z o
tD Hy m
N
c0 � � 1
I
�• – a '. — • I -_ SUNNY MEADOWS PHASE 1
l
LOTS 1 2
i I I 1.00 acres I
I I
I I
N 1
1
1
O I 1
1
r
t
V N I
20'-0' 20'-0 26'-0" 20'-0' '
103'-0'
50 5 1 4 � 30 20
_ 0
------------ / _1 -- 98 - 73'6..
N I �\
------------------------------------------- _�- ^ - i L--------
SERVICE ACCESS/PARKING ESMT. LANDSC.
------------------------------------------------------------- [ASPHALT AREA wssgA
-----------------------------------
-----------------AREA-4M Rf--------------------------------------------- ------ Lcupna
N 89'21'51'W
274'5.4' ——
I I
PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN
\ / Scale 1"-10I'l
oil
,� uuiuuuunimuun '� �� 00 0d OO 00 00 r
'iiIII'aill l iulIII III!i!lllllllllllllllllllllllllll � 777
r � r
����� - - �, � r, I � � -�_ � ® - _ li�lllIIIIII�IIIIIIIIIIII�III�I(III IIIIIIIIIII III I I II II Ip ll( IIIhIIl�IhIIIIIIIh III!'' ' illll��
a-
Ifs V!A �� � �+��5�i�� .,`� �� ���?•E��'�� � � A %��1� �
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
MASTER FILE NO: SP 06-010(REMAND) APPLICANT: CPM Development Corp
HEARING DATE: 3/15/09 dba Central Premix
ACTION DATE: 11919 Harris Road
Pasco, WA 99301
BACKGROUND
1. INTRODUCTION
REQUEST: SPECIAL PERMIT: Location of a Hot Mix Asphalt (HMA)
Plant.
This matter comes before the Planning Commission following
action of the City Council. The Council was responding to a
Franklin County Superior Court order on CPM's appeal from the
Planning Commission's and Council's decision on an earlier CPM
application. The Court order reversed, in part, and vacated the
City Council's decision. The Court did not grant the relief
requested by CPM to mandate the issuance of a permit for an HMA
plant. Rather, the Court remanded the matter to City Council for
further proceedings on the Application. Because of new
information, the Council sent the matter back to staff and for
Planning Commission review.
The Planning Commission's considerations are limited to the
"additional information relating to a "state-of-the-art" HMA plant
and related mitigation." That additional information relates to:
a. Plant design and odor control,
b. Plant design and noise,
c. Height of plant and related mitigation (e.g., landscape berm),
d. Odor response program.
2. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:
Legal: The west 1/2 of Section 7, Township 9 North, Range 29
EWM, lying north and west of the northerly right-of-way of Harris
Road, the east 1/2 of the southeast 1/4 of Section 12, Township 9,
Range 28 EWM, lying north of the northerly right-of-way of Harris
Road and Government Lots 3, 4 and 5 lying north and east of the
northeasterly right-of-way line of Harris Road; Except the east
1225 feet of the south 480 feet of Government Lot 5 and; Except
any portion lying within 200 feet of the ordinary high water line of
the Columbia River.
General Location: 11919 Harris Road, Pasco, Washington.
Property Size: Approximately 445 acres
3. ACCESS: Access is provided from Harris Road to the project site.
4. UTILITIES: Municipal water and sewer are not available on the
site. City water is located in Harris Road east of the proposed
asphalt plant site, and sewer utilities are located approximately
300 feet to the south and west of the plant site.
5. LAND USE AND ZONING: The Comprehensive Plan land use
designation for the site is Mixed Residential/Commercial, as for
the lands immediately to the east and west. The Comprehensive
Plan designation for lands immediately south of the site is Low
Density Residential. The site is now zoned as Residential
Transition (RT). Property located directly southwest of the proposed
plant site is designated as "RS-20".
6. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan also
designates this area as a "Resource Lands Area".
7. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The original environmental
determination was a "Determination of Significance" (DS) which
was issued in November of 2004. Ultimately five areas were
addressed in the Draft EIS (DEIS) as those which were likely to
have a significant adverse impact on the environment. These five
areas were:
a. Odors
b. Noise
c. Truck and vehicular traffic
d. Potential groundwater contamination.
e. Potential impact of fire and explosion.
The DEIS was issued in January of 2006; and concluded that with
the mitigation measures proposed there were no unavoidable
significant adverse impacts resulting from the proposed HMA
plant. The Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) was
2
issued in May of 2006. The evaluation of alternatives and impacts
did not change substantially from the DEIS. Additional noise
mitigation measures were identified by the project proponent and
additional analysis showed that the cumulative impact of the
additional noise was unlikely to be discernable to the nearest
neighbor to the facility. The FEIS concluded that there were no
unavoidable probable significant adverse environment impacts
resulting from the proposed action.
In January of 2009, Central Pre-Mix (CPM) contracted with Robert
Thorpe and Associates, to provide a FEIS Addendum. The
Addendum to the FEIS was requested by the City as the means for
CPM to address new information and review further mitigation
measures consistent with the Court remand of the special use
permit application to the City of Pasco.
8. SPECIAL PERMIT REVIEW CRITERIA: Consistent with PMC
25.86.060, upon conclusion of the hearing, the Planning
Commission shall make and enter findings from the record and
conclusions thereof as to whether or not:
a. The proposal is in accordance with the goals, policies,
objectives, maps and/or narrative text of the Comprehensive
Plan;
b. The proposal will adversely affect public infrastructure;
c. The proposal will be constructed, maintained and operated
to be in harmony with the existing or intended character of
the general vicinity;
d. 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;
e. The operations in connections with the proposal will 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; and
f. 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.
9. DISCUSSION
The CPM Pasco site has been used for sand and gravel excavation and
processing since the 1950's when the land was in unincorporated
Franklin County. It was annexed to the City of Pasco in 1982. CPM
currently operates under special land use permits issued by the City,
most recently in 1995, which allow sand and gravel extraction and
3
processing, concrete batch plants, equipment storage, office and shops
and related activities associated with these main activities on the site. In
August of 2004 CPM proposed to move its current HMA operation from
their Richland location to the gravel and concrete site adjacent to Harris
Road in Pasco. In November of 2004, CPM submitted an amended
application with additional information requested by the City of Pasco.
Also in November of 2004, the City's SEPA responsible official issued a
DS requiring preparation of an EIS for the proposed HMA plant
relocation. The FEIS was issued in May of 2006 and was not appealed.
The FEIS also concluded that there were no unavoidable and probable
significant adverse environmental impacts resulting from the proposed
action.
The Pasco Planning Commission conducted open record hearings on the
special use permit application on two different meeting dates in August
2006. In September of 2006, the Planning Commission conducted
deliberations to determine the recommendation to City Council on CPM's
permit request. The Planning Commission accepted staff's
recommendation of denial of the permit and adopted staff's findings and
conclusions. The Planning Commission recommended to City Council
that the special permit application be denied. This recommendation was
in turn appealed to the City Council. City Council conducted a closed
record hearing in January of 2007, at which time Council concurred with
the Planning Commission's recommendations and denied the special use
permit sought by CPM.
CPM appealed the City Council decision to Franklin County Superior
Court under the Land Use Petition Act (RCW 36.70c). The Court granted
CPM's appeal in part and vacated Council's decision. Superior Court did
not grant the relief requested by CPM (a mandate to issue the special
permit for the HMA plant). The Court instead remanded the matter to the
City for further proceedings.
In October of 2008, the Pasco City Council approved Resolution No. 3109
which provided for a remand of MF# SP 06-010 with the specifications
that it be directed to the Planning Commission to "consider additional
information relating to a "state of the art HMA"plant and related mitigation
of impacts associated with such a plant...." Consistent with the remand
from Superior Court, staff contacted CPM for additional information
regarding a "state-of-the-art" HMA plant, to be submitted through an
addendum to the final EIS. The additional information that was to be
submitted in the Addendum is:
4
I. A description of the plant design that has the effect of minimizing
odors and/or a description of the odor control process that will be
initiated by CPM;
2. A description of the noise levels produced by the plant while in full
operation (expressed in decibel levels) at representative distances
from the plant;
3. The height of the plant after full assembly including the height of
the silos;
4. The height and design of the berm proposed for enclosing the
plant; and
5. A description of the continuous odor response program and/or the
complaint resolution process.
The FEIS Addendum was issued on February 13, 2009. The FEIS
Addendum was used in this process because of new information -
specifically the proposed use by CPM of a new GENCOR plant rather
than the move the existing Richland HMA plant to the Pasco site. The
revised (or new) HMA plant design was identified in the Addendum to not
result in additional probable significant adverse environmental impacts
beyond those that were already analyzed in the original FEIS.
Consistent with the hearing process employed by the City of Pasco for
special land use permits and with the decision of the Franklin County
Superior Court, the matter has been remanded to the Planning
Commission for reconsideration, including consideration of the new
material and mitigation measures contained in the FEIS Addendum.
10. ADDITIONAL/NEW INFORMATION FOR CONSIDERATION
The original proposal from CPM was to move the existing HMA plant from
the Richland site to the Pasco site. Instead, CPM has requested to install
and operate a new HMA plant at the Pasco site. The new HMA plant
proposed for installation is a GENCOR Model 400 Ultra plant (equivalent
or better plant). The GENCOR plant proposed for location at the Pasco
site is a "counter flow design drum mix plant." In lay terms, this means
that the burner flame heats sand and gravel to remove moisture and the
heated aggregate is transported to a location behind the burner. Liquid
asphalt is then mixed with the heated aggregate. The liquid asphalt does
not come in contact with the burner flame. The plant is designed to
provide enclosure of the mixing and movement processes so that
5
emission of vapors is minimized. Combustion noise is shielded in a more
technologically advanced manner than the existing Richland HMA plant,
and vapors and fumes are collected through a design which reintroduces
them into the combustion chamber as fuel.
The FEIS Addendum also contains information on noise levels associated
with the new HMA plant. The original environmental noise analysis
which was performed in August of 2005 used the Richland plant as the
base for analysis. That analysis has been updated with sound level
information applicable to the GENCOR HMA plant. Consistent with the
original FEIS, the asphalt burners were orientated to the north in the
noise models. The new analysis showed a 1-dba increase in total facility
noise (including accessory equipment) for the receptors identified as R4
and R5 in the FEIS Addendum. The modeling based on the GENCOR
400 indicates that the plant meets Pasco Municipal Code day/night
maximum levels without additional noise attenuation.
The original FEIS prepared for the relocation of the Richland plant
specified that the height of the plant would be 54 feet at full installation.
The FEIS Addendum indicates that the newly proposed GENCOR plant
(particularly the silos) would have a height of 65 feet which places the
new plant at a total height of 415 feet above sea level.
The FEIS Addendum contained a description of the landscape berm that
was committed to by CPM as a mitigation measure in the original EIS.
The FEIS Addendum describes the berm as approximately 30 feet wide at
the base with an average height of 15 feet and side slopes of 1:1. The
berm has been supplemented through a planting of a rye grass mixture
and with evergreen and deciduous trees that will be located between the
berm and Harris Road. The evergreen trees are shown as planted on 20'
centers interspersed with a juniper species on 8' centers and deciduous
trees at 12' centers. The evergreen species (Austrian Black Pine) has an
expected height at maturity of 50', occurring at a growth rate of 1'-2' feet
per year. The deciduous trees (Purple Leaf Plum) have an expected
height at maturity of 25' occurring at a growth rate of approximately 2'
feet per year. The berm is proposed to be located from the existing truck
entrance on the west to a point approximately 500 feet east of the
proposed HMA access road.
The FEIS Addendum describes the continuous odor response program
(CORP) proposed by CPM for the Pasco site. The (CORP) is a process that
6
establishes a hierarchy of complaint reporting and a procedure for
internal investigation of such complaints. The CORP does not involve an
outside agency. This CORP is not intended to replace Department of
Ecology (DOE) regulation of air quality or imposition of conditions by
DOE for any plant operations, or City permit compliance and
enforcement efforts. This Staff Report contains a draft revision of the
CORP. The draft will be further refined.
Exhibit List
1. Aerial Photo of site
2. Vicinity map with zoning designations
3. 1994 Special Use Permit
4. 1995 Special Use Permit
5. 2004 Special Use Permit Application
6. FEIS
7. September 2006 staff report to Planning Commission
8. Transcripts from August and September 2006 Planning
Commission meetings
9. Superior Court remand order and transcript
10. October 2008 City Council agenda report and Resolution #3109
11. Auburn Plant site visit summary September 2008
12. FEIS Addendum
13. 3/9/09 Armij o letter
14. 3/2/09 Bates letter
15. 2/27/09 Roach letter
16. 2/27/09 Castleberry letter
17. 2/27/09 Korenko letter
18. 2/27/09 HBA letter
19. 2/27/09 Pinard letter
20. 2/23/09 Fewel letter
21. 2/21/09 Burgess letter
22. 2/22/09 Piwetz letter
23. 2/20/09 Horrigan Farms/Gallant letter
24. 2/19/09 Pinard letter
25. 2/19/09 Link letter
26. 2/17/09 Dawson letter
27. 3/12/09 Draft Continuous Odor Response Program
28. 3/12/09 Revised Draft of the Continuous Odor Response Program
(CPM)
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission direct Staff to prepare
Findings and Conclusions in support of approval of the CPM request;
and further direct Staff to prepare conditions for assignment to the
7
Special Use permit for appropriate mitigation of impacts for consideration
by the Planning Commission at a special meeting on March 26th, 2009. A
preliminary list of conditions and mitigating measures, follows;
8
PROPOSED MITIGATION
1. Installation of a GENCOR model 400 Ultra Plant model year 2008
or newer (or equivalent or better plant ("Plant").
2. Retrofit the new asphalt oil tanks with an odor control device as
described in February 19, 2009 letter from Laurie Pinard -
specifically a 6 foot fiber bed or better as approved by the
Department of Ecology.
3. Implement a continuous odor response program (CORP). This
program shall contain a component that requires notification to
the Pasco Community 8v Economic Development Department of all
complaints received within 1 hour of their receipt.
4. The entire HMA Plant footprint and working area shall be paved to
limit potential for potential groundwater contamination. The access
road to the Plant from Harris Road will be paved to allow
simultaneous truck ingress/egress to the property and Plant.
5. Establish a separate ingress/egress road for HMA operations at the
location indicated in the FEIS and FEIS Addendum.
6. New diesel fuel tanks shall be double walled or secondarily
contained to prevent potential groundwater contamination.
7. Follow best management practices for sand and gravel general
permits for the site.
8. Modify the existing storm water pollution prevention plan, erosion
and sediment control plan and spill response plan to accommodate
the HMA plant in conformance with accepted industry standards
and applicable local and State law and regulation.
9. Configure the plant so the burner points north or away from Harris
Road.
10. The new Plant will be required to meet City of Pasco noise
standards for all day and night applications.
11. Periodic maintenance, including but not limited to water of interior
roads, for the HMA access road and plant area must occur so that
there is no fugitive dust caused by HMA operations.
12. Following all Plant permitting, and at such time as the City and
/or private party determines to construct the west portion of the
intersection of realigned Harris Road at Road 100/Sandifur
Parkway, pay or contribute $250,000 for the cost of and
improvements to the Harris Road realignment and intersection
improvements.
13. Provide secondary containment facilities meeting accepted industry
standards for asphalt oil tanks in the event of a spill.
14. Provide industry accepted training of personnel and safe
operational practices for maintenance and repairs.
15. Maintain a "no vegetation" buffer around the HMA Plant.
16. Use shielded site lighting per Pasco Municipal Code 12.32 so that
light spillage does not occur off site. Submit cut sheets for lighting
proposed to the City for approval prior to installation.
17. Install the view obscuring landscaped berm as identified and
designed in the FEIS Addendum, including landscaping and
supporting irrigation system. Maintain the landscaping in a
healthy weed/debris free condition allowing trees/shrubs to reach
an expected mature height.
18. Comply with applicable local and State regulations.
MOTION: I move to close the hearing on the Remand of SP 06-010 and
initiate deliberations and schedule adoption of findings of fact,
conclusions and a recommendation to the City Council.
10
• Item: Special Permit - As halt Batch Plan
Vicinity
Applicant: Central Pre-mnlx N
Map
File #: SP 06-010 Exhibit 1 - Aerial Photo of site
CO
T.s O „
t 0
SITE
��,`� CHAPEL HILL_ BLVD
HARRIS RD
UP
. o T;
T
Item:Zon,ng
Special , ASDhalt I Plan
Applicant: Central Pre-MIx
Q'
Map - S 06-010
RS-40 RT
(County)
RT
(County)
S \ -
• ` iii iiinin
1 � • • • � �� � _= == iiiiin
iii
For more information concerning the Central Pre-Mix Project go to the following City
of Pasco web link:
http://www.pasco-wa.gov/GeneralInfo/CEDCentralPreMixHotMixAsphaItPlant