Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-19-2012 Planning Commission Minutes REGULAR MEETING April 19, 2012 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 7:OOpm by Chairman Cruz. POSITION MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT No. 1 Michael Levin No. 2 James Hay No. 3 Andy Anderson No. 4 Alecia Greenaway No. 5 Joe Cruz No. 6 Vacant No. 7 Zahra Khan No. 8 Jana Kempf No. 9 Paul Hilliard APPEARANCE OF FAIRNESS: Chairman Cruz read a statement about the appearance of fairness for hearings on land use matters. Chairman Cruz asked if any Commission member had anything to declare. There were no declarations. Chairman Cruz then asked the audience if there were any objections based on a conflict of interest or appearance of fairness questions regarding the items to be discussed this evening. Roger Lenk, 1817 North Road 76, stated for the record in regards to item 613 on the agenda (MF# SP2012-007) that any Planning Commission members are requested to recuse themselves from consideration of this matter should they: 1) have ties to Faith Assembly Center or Imagination Studios; 2) have talked to parties associated with Faith Assembly Christian Center or Imagination Studios concerning this or other associated zoning matters; or 3) have relatives with any association with Faith Assembly Christian Center or Imagination Studios. As a matter of law, Planning Commission members should err on the side of recusal in order to ensure the "appearance of fairness" in this land use issue. Commissioner Levin stated that he attends Faith Assembly. Since he only attends the church he didn't feel connected to the matter at hand. -1- ADMINISTERING THE OATH: Chairman Cruz explained that state law requires testimony in quasi-judicial hearings such as held by the Planning Commission be given under oath or affirmation. Chairman Cruz swore in all those desiring to speak. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Commissioner Anderson moved, seconded by Commissioner Hay, that the minutes dated March 15, 2012 be approved as mailed. The motion passed unanimously with Commissioner Hilliard not voting. OLD BUSINESS: A. Special Permit Location of a private bus terminal (Fronteras Travel) (MF# SP 2012-0031 Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Rick White, Community 8v Economic Development Director, stated staff had no additional comments on this item. Commissioner Hay moved, seconded by Commissioner Kempf, to adopt the findings of fact and conclusions therefrom as contained in the April 19, 2012 staff report. The motion passed unanimously. Commissioner Hay moved, seconded by Commissioner Kempf, based on the findings of fact and conclusions as adopted the Planning Commission recommend the City Council grant a special permit to Fronteras Travel for the location of a private van transportation business at 205 S. 4th Avenue with conditions listed in the April 19, 2012 staff report. The motion passed unanimously. This item will go to the next regular City Council Meeting, May 7, 2012 unless it is appealed. B. Special Permit Pasco School District Elementary (Renewal) (MF# SP 2012-004) Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. David McDonald, City Planner, stated staff had no additional comments on this item. Commissioner Kempf asked if the design of the school had changed due to any changes in capacity from the increase of students in the community. Mr. McDonald answered that this particular school will not be upsized. Other schools in the District might change. -2- Commissioner Levin moved, seconded by Commissioner Hay, to adopt the findings of fact and conclusions therefrom as contained in the April 19, 2012 staff report. The motion passed unanimously. Commissioner Levin moved, seconded by Commissioner Hay, based on the findings of fact and conclusions therefrom the Planning Commission recommend the City Council grant a special permit to the Pasco School District for the location of an elementary school at the northwest corner of Sandifur Parkway & Road 60 (parcel #'s 116-204072 & 116-240-067) with conditions as listed in the April 19, 2012 staff report. The motion passed unanimously. This item will go to the next regular City Council Meeting, May 7, 2012 unless it is appealed. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. Special Permit Continued Public Hearing for the Location of a Caretaker's Facility in an I-1 (Light Industrial) Zone (Dean Shelton) (MF# SP 2012-005) Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Shane O'Neill, Planner I, explained that at the last Planning Commission meeting this item was continued to allow the applicant to provide additional information to support his need for an onsite caretaker's facility. The applicant, Dean Shelton, failed to submit additional information to support his need. It was also pointed out the staff report was revised to include a motion for denial and a motion for approval for the Planning Commission's consideration. Staff recommended the special permit be denied. Mr. O'Neill also explained that based on the discussion from the last Planning Commission meeting the applicant appears to be moving forward with the insurance claim for commercial/industrial office use rather than a caretaker's facility. Chairman Cruz asked if the applicant decided he didn't want to proceed after all. Mr. O'Neill answered the applicant was under the impression that the special permit would not be approved and chose an alternative route for his insurance claim. Commissioner Levin asked if the applicant ever made contact or moved forward with staff since the last meeting. Mr. O'Neill answered the applicant did contact the office but he did not submit the information necessary to show the need for a caretaker's facility. Mr. O'Neill sent a letter to the applicant requesting that he support his need for 24-hour security at the site, however no information was provided. Rick White, Community 8s Economic Development Director, reiterated that the staff recommendation is for denial of the caretaker's facility and that optional motions for -3- approval have been included in the report per discussion from the prior Planning Commission meeting. Commissioner Greenaway asked staff why the police reports weren't as substantial as they appeared at the last meeting. Mr. White answered the findings contained in the staff report from the previous month were much more general and involved an area much less defined. Chairman Cruz opened the public hearing but no comments were made. Commissioner Levin moved, seconded by Commissioner Anderson, to close the hearing on the proposed caretaker's facility, adopt findings of fact, conclusions as contained in the April 19, 2012 staff report and a recommendation of denial to the City Council. The motion passed unanimously. This item will go to the next regular City Council Meeting, May 7, 2012 unless it is appealed. B. Special Permit Expanding the capacity of a pre-school from 50 to 80 children in an existing church in an R-S-20 Zone (Imagination Studios Academy Preschool) (MF# SP 2012-005) Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Rick White, Community 8v Economic Development Director, discussed the special permit application and provided background history on the previous special permit that permitted the preschool in the Faith Assembly Church. The Church was originally granted a special permit in 2004 for a child daycare center. In 2010 following an appeal the City Council approved the existing preschool. Mr. White further explained the current application called for expansion of the preschool for up to 80 children as opposed to 50 children as approved in 2010. The staff report was reviewed for the benefit of the Planning Commission with additional discussion centering on possible traffic impacts associated with the proposed increased in students. Matthew Welk, 1908 North Road 72, represented the Church speaking in favor of the application. He stated the preschool has been operating for eight years. He has received positive feedback and they strive to be a positive influence in the community. The church has more than adequate parking for the expansion. Mr. Welk said he and his wife, who is pregnant with twins, live next to the church. They have a vested interest in traffic safety. He believes that all of the parents in the preschool travel the speed limit. Typically when speeding is an issue it tends to be youth from Chiawanna High School cutting through the neighborhood. Families primarily travel up Court Street and down Road 72. Mornings are the most popular for families to sign up for preschool, between 9:00 am.-noon. They expect initially to expand up to 15 students, -4- perhaps 20, depending on the registration received and whether or not the special permit is approved. Commissioner Levin asked the applicant if the preschool is just Monday through Friday and if it's just up to 80 kids. Mr. Welk said yes, Monday through Friday from 9:00 a.m.-noon. There is also an afternoon possibility but that would only have 15 students. There would only be 80 kids at the preschool onsite at one time. Chairman Cruz explained that if the permit was granted it would decrease the likelihood future increases in students would be permitted due to impact on the neighborhood. Mr. Welk stated he understood and they don't foresee wanting to make the preschool any larger than 80 children at one time. Roger Lenk, 1817 North Road 76, explained he had provided a packet for the Planning Commission prior to the meeting. Mr. Lenk reviewed past special permit applications for the church explaining that under MF# SP02-88 a church representative indicated school use and facility rental were not compatible with the church. After the expanded facility was completed in 2004 the applicant immediately commenced with commercial preschool operations as well as facility rentals. Following an appeal and remand to the Planning Commission the City Council approved a Special Permit under MF# SP09-008 (3/5/2010) to allow an increase in students from 18 to 50. Mr. Lenk stated that unlike any private business in the City, during the entire approval proceedings the applicant was able to continue with its unpermitted daycare activities. Mr. Lenk explained the City took no action on issues related to facility rental, which he believed was inconsistent with P.M.C. 5.25. Mr. Lenk took exception with the April 19, 2012 staff report dealing with traffic impacts. The traffic counts that staff used did not include site impacts associated with ecumenical activities which fill 500 parking stalls for youth activities, special events, concerts, meetings and other money generating activities conducted by the applicant. In order to assess the total impact the facility has on adjoining neighbors on substandard roads which service that facility Mr. Lenk indicated a traffic analysis must be completed by a professional traffic engineer. Neighbors are tired of the high level of traffic generated by the applicant's facility. The applicant's application and site plan note a 652 ft. x 272 ft. youth building. Mr. Lenk asked if that proposed youth building was no longer going to happen. Dave McDonald, City Planner, answered that Mr. Lenk was correct. The youth center was on the original application and they failed to build it. If the applicant wishes to build it they would have to apply for a new special permit. Mr. Lenk stated the staff report did not discuss noise generated from the daycare. The outdoor play area is located in an "amphitheater-like" setting with large amplifying -5- walls. The noise generated by the children is amplified and radiated out into the surrounding neighborhood and is an annoyance throughout the day. Mr. Lenk explained how he felt the application was inconsistent with P.M.C. 25.86.060. He then concluded by stating over time the applicant has engaged in a variety of unrelated for profit activities inconsistent with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and R-S-20 Rural Suburban District. Chairman Cruz asked staff if any of the collateral activities mentioned by the applicant, such as concerts, is relevant to the actual permit application on the agenda for the evening. Mr. White answered that very little if any of the collateral activities are relevant to the current special permit application. Accessory uses common to churches have been discussed before in the past and are allowed. It would be a burden on the community if a permit had to be done before each and every church event other than a service. Mr. Lenk stated the large concerts were bothersome to the neighbors because of the of traffic and the noise. The concerts and shows, such as duck hunter shows, have nothing to do with the church or the expansion related to the preschool. Chairman Cruz responded by saying he understands the traffic issues from the other activities which occur at the church but the matter at hand was for expanding the preschool, not for the other activities at the church. Commissioner Levin asked Mr. Lenk where he lived in relation to where the church and if he really feels the impact of the traffic from the church activities. Mr. Lenk answered that some of the traffic comes down his street as well as Road 72. He uses Road 72, as do his neighbors, and is acting as a representative for the neighborhood. With no further comments, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Anderson moved, seconded by Commissioner Greenaway, to close the hearing on the proposed preschool and initiate deliberations and schedule adoption of findings of fact, conclusions and a recommendation to the City Council for the May 17, 2012 meeting. The motion passed unanimously. C. Special Permit Redevelopment of a school recreation field in an RS-12 Zone (Tri-City Jr. Academy) (MF# SP 2012-008) Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Shane O'Neill, Planner I, stated Tri-City Junior Academy was planning on redeveloping their recreation field to the west of the school building on West Henry Street. The site is approximately 2.3 acres and contains an existing ball field. Mr. O'Neill explained -6- the proposed field improvements included installation of an oval running track with a football field in the center, a scoreboard, signage and fencing. Following an explanation of the proposal Mr. O'Neill reviewed the written report for the benefit of the Planning Commission Commissioner Hilliard asked if there was curb, gutter and sidewalk along the school frontage but not on West Henry and if the recommendation is to expand to an 18 foot width on West Henry. Mr. O'Neill answered that West Henry is developed to a rural standard with the edge of the pavement ending in dirt and grass. The expansion area would be along the field for a more urban standard but will not include curb, gutter and sidewalk. Commissioner Greenaway asked staff if there will be adequate parking. Mr. O'Neill answered that there is some parking on the site and the school is directly to the east and does contain additional parking. If the road is widened, there will also be more room for parking. Anthony Oucharek, 521 Road 35, the principal of the school, spoke on behalf of the special permit. He stated they plan to install a 6 foot fence along the property as requested by their insurer and to keep children safe. Plans also call for a small soccer field in the center of the track for after school games and for better use of the school facility. He does not believe it will increase traffic since they will not be holding any major events. Commissioner Kempf asked the applicant if he realized one of the conditions was that a sign permit must be obtained prior to the construction of signs or scoreboards. Mr. Oucharek answered that he was not aware of that. With no other comments, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Kempf moved, seconded by Commissioner Greenaway, to close the hearing on the proposed redevelopment of a recreational field and initiate deliberations and schedule adoption of findings of fact, conclusions and a recommendation to the City Council for the May, 17, 2012 meeting. The motion passed unanimously. OTHER BUSINESS: A. Code Amendment Variable Rear Setback (MF# CA 2012-007) Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Shane O'Neill, Planner I, explained that the code amendment stems from a complaint received by the City regarding the five foot rear setback required for accessory structures in suburban zones where the maximum structure height is 18 feet. Mr. O'Neill reviewed two alternatives for the Commission's consideration. -7- Alternate 1 matches the County's current zoning standards. Alternate 1, would change the rear setback in the RS-20 zone would change from 5 feet to 10 feet. In the RS-12 zone, it would change structure height from 18 feet to 15 feet. Mr. O'Neill pointed out that the larger shops (18 feet in height) were common in the RS-12 zone and reducing the height may create problems for some property owners. Alternate 2 uses a 12 foot height as a threshold for requiring a 10 foot rear setback in RS-1, RS-12 and RS-20 zones. It does not apply the increased setback to sheds. The definition of a shed changes throughout each zone, getting larger with greater lot sizes. Commissioner Hilliard asked for an explanation of the history on this item. Chairman Cruz stated in previous meetings the question center on whether to go with a variable setback or follow what the County does. Commissioner Anderson stated that the City made a commitment that when areas of the County annex into the City, typically there would be no changes in zoning. He feels that the City should honor that approach. Rick White, Community & Economic Development Director, reminded the Commission that this item was brought to Staff's attention through a neighbor who had experienced the construction of a very large accessory structure built using minimum setbacks and maximum height adjacent to his lot. The complainant thought it would be prudent for the City to have some type of graduated or sliding scale for setbacks depending on the size or height of the building. As the result of previous discussion Planning Commission settled on the two options for further discussion. Chairman Cruz put the two alternatives to a vote. Those who voted for Alternate 1 were: Commissioner Hilliard, Commissioner Greenaway, Commissioner Kempf, Commissioner Levin, Commissioner Anderson and Commissioner Hay. Chairman Cruz was in favor of Alternate 2. Chairman Cruz explained that while he appreciates the County residents who get annexed into the City, he feels that the way Alternate 2 is structured it is more thoughtful and recognizes that for smaller buildings they should be able to be pushed further into the corner than a larger building—especially when there are odd shaped lots. The preference of the Commission as a whole was for Alternate 1. B. Code Amendment Secondhand Stores in C-1 Zones (MF# CA 2012- 003 Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Rick White, Community & Economic Development Director, explained this item was brought to Staffs attention by a request from Goodwill Industries to locate a secondhand retail store in a C-1 zoning district. The current Pasco Municipal Code prohibits secondhand stores of almost all types in the C-1 and C-2 zones, and further requires them to be at least 1,000 feet from any other secondhand store in C-3 and -8- Industrial zones. The current code was adopted in February of 1990 to combat a problem the City had with declining property values and criminal activities associated with secondhand stores, particularly in the Central Business District. The nature of secondhand stores and pawn shops has changed since 1990. Pawn shops have been replaced by pay day loan outlets. Donation dependent secondhand stores do not seem to have the "crime element" associated with pawn shops. That whole element has essentially disappeared from the land use situation today. However, secondhand stores have become places for dropping items off and that centers on the heart of the problem. There are three options staff asked the Planning Commission to consider: (A) No change to the code, (B) Amend the secondhand store code to allow donation-based secondhand stores in C-1 zones by special permit if they meet and maintain appropriate conditions. This may be difficult to enforce, as determining if a store is donation-based or not may be complicated, (C) Review the provisions for secondhand stores in the C-1, C-2, C-3 and I-1 zones. Mr. White explained Staff was seeking direction at this point and will likely place the matter on the agenda for a future workshop item. Gordon Comfort, 5990 Thynewood Loop, West Richland, spoke on behalf of Goodwill Industries. They have made contact with staff and are aware of concerns, especially as they were in the past. He believes that conditions have changed. Goodwill has a track record of maintaining their stores, maintaining donations/drop-offs and no criminal element. Almost all of their stores are in retail business zones. Chairman Cruz asked Mr. Comfort a question in regards to their tax code. Mr. Comfort answered that Goodwill Industries is a 501(c)(3). Commissioner Anderson stated that the Planning Commission should look at C-1, C- 2, C-3 and I-1 zones if this is going to be looked into at all to update it from the early 90's. Commissioner Greenaway agreed with Commissioner Anderson. She stated that it is important to look at this since times have changed. Chairman Cruz asked the Commission if they want to treat the central business district differently than the other zones. Commissioner Kempf stated that she was inclined to leave the central business district from allowing anything in that has previously not been allowed, even charitable organizations. Commissioner Anderson commented that Goodwill is already located in the central business district. -9- Mr. McDonald said that Goodwill has a warehouse in an I-1 zone but the actual home facility is in the C-2 zone. Commissioner Kempf asked if that location was a distribution center. Chairman Cruz answered it was a retail store and distribution center. Mr. White pointed out that the use for Goodwill in that location was grandfathered in. Commissioner Anderson mentioned that he feels Goodwill has been a good addition and would not want to do anything to jeopardize their position or ability to expand or conduct business. This is where the 501(c)(3) tax status comes into play. Mr. White explained to the Commission that the same treatment must be made for a community partner or non-partner. From a land use perspective, impacts have to be looked at from both a donation based and a non-donation based business. Commissioner Kempf was concerned that if the door was opened for one organization then it was easier for other's to come back in and that might not be the direction to go. Chairman Cruz stated that they can control proximity, such as no more than "X" secondhand stores in "X" radius. This would facilitate placement of secondhand businesses, pawnshops or otherwise, without increasing the density which had been a problem in the past. Also, possibly consider waivers for donation based stores to be exempt from the proximity based requirements since they are fundamentally different than other kinds of secondhand stores. Chairman Cruz stated that the key issues are density and the nature of the secondhand stores—profit or non-profit. As Commissioner Kempf stated, it might not be a good idea to repopulate the central business district. C. Plan Rivershore Amenities/Linkages Plan (MF# PLAN 2012-0031 Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Rick White, Community & Economic Development Director, explained this item follows Council goals established in 2008. However, work toward the goal was put on the backburner because the Tri-City Rivershore Enhancement Council was undertaking a larger regional effort updating a master plan from the mid-90's for the entire Tri-City Rivershore. The Tri-City Rivershore Enhancement Plan has been completed and appropriate points from that plan have been folded into the Pasco Rivershore Amenities/Linkages Plan. Mr. White explained the entire Pasco Rivershore, which is almost 14 miles, was broken it into segments. Each segment was inventoried for trail amenities, land use, ownership, natural features and access as well as list opportunities and constraints or that each segment has. -10- Mr. White highlighted several segments of the Plan as follows: The Columbia View segment of the plan, which is east of the I-182 Bridge and west of Chiawanna Park, contains the largest concentration of waterfront owned private properties in Pasco. There is very little Army Corp. of Engineer's owned property between the property lines and ordinary high water mark creating a unique set of problems associated with creating a trail in that area. The Chiawanna Park segment contains a discussion about the amount of commercial or higher intensity use that might be appropriate for that park, such as vendors. The Wade Park segment contains a recommendation dealing with creating a beach in the shallow area. The Flamingo Village area just to the east of the Blue Bridge contains a recommendation for a rezone. Mr. White explained a more detailed report will be provided for the workshop next month which will be followed by a public hearing at the June meeting. D. Sewer Master Plan Sewer Master Plan Advisory Committee Update Commissioner Greenaway provided a brief discussion about the first Sewer Master Plan Advisory Committee meeting that took place on April 11, 2012. The system is in very good shape. The capacity per day is 5.9 million gallons and the City is currently running at 4 million gallons per day. However there is only 1.9 million gallons per day of excess capacity so as the City grows an alternate system will be needed. Currently the Committee is looking at a 20 year plan and short term 6 year plan. In the next couple of weeks there should be an open house at the City Hall. With no further discussion or business, the Planning Commission was adjourned at 8:17 p.m. Respectfully submitted, David McDonald, City Planner -11-