Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-16-2012 Planning Commission Packet PLANNING COMMISSION -AGENDA REGULAR MEETING 7:00 P.M. August 16, 2012 I. CALL TO ORDER: II. ROLL CALL: Declaration of Quorum III. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: July 26, 2012 V. OLD BUSINESS: A. Rezone Remand Rezone from an R-1 (Low-Density Residential) to an R-3 (Medium-Density Residential) (Pasco Family Housing) (MF# Z2012-001) B. Special Permit Location of a church in a C-1 District (Bethel Church) (MF# SP2012-012) C. Special Permit Location of a church in a C-1 District (World Life Christian Center) (MF# SP2012-013) D. Special Permit Location of an Elementary School in an R-S-1 District (Pasco School District) (MF# SP2012-014) VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. Special Permit Location of a church in an R-1 District (Manuel Estrada) (MF# SP2012-015) B. Special Permit Location of an Elementary School in a C-3 District (Pasco School District) (MF# SP2012-017) C. Special Permit Location of a cell phone tower (Verizon Wireless) (MF# SP2012-018) D. Rezone Rezone from BP (Business Park) to C-3 (General Business) Bill Dolsen) (MF# Z2012-003) E. Rezone Rezone from CR (Regional Commercial) to C-1 (Retail Business) (General Advertising Agency) (MF# Z2012-004) F. Special Permit Goodwill in a C-1 District (Goodwill Industries) (MF# SP2012-019) VII. OTHER BUSINESS: VIII. WORKSHOP: IX. ADJOURNMENT: REGULAR MEETING July 26, 2012 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 7:00pm by Chairman Cruz. POSITION MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT No. 1 Michael Levin No. 2 Vacant 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. Commissioner Anderson declared that he needed to excuse himself from agenda items VI.D, VI.E, VI.F and VI.G due to his involvement in working with one of the applicants. 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. There were no objections. ADMINISTERING THE OATH: Chairman Cruz explained that state law requires testimony in quasi-judicial hearings such as held by the Planning Commission be given under oath or affirmation. Chairman Cruz swore in all those desiring to speak. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Commissioner Anderson moved, seconded by Commissioner Greenaway, that the minutes dated June 21, 2012 be approved as mailed. The motion passed unanimously. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. Special Permit Location of a church in a C-1 District (Bethel Church) (MF# SP2012-012) -1- Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. David McDonald, City Planner, discussed this item. The request is for Bethel Church to locate a church in the Broadmoor Square Outlet Mall, in space previously occupied by the CO2 Furniture Store. The space has been vacant for roughly four years and has intermittently been used for a seasonal costume store, display and sales. Bethel Church is proposing to locate in the southeast corner of the Mall, using the building for services on Sunday's from 9:00 a.m.-11:00 a.m., weeknights for meetings and a business office for weekdays. The proposal is a temporary measure as the ultimate goal of the church is to find a place within the community where they can build a permanent facility. They have a three year lease with an option to renew for one year increments. Mr. McDonald directed the Planning Commission's attention to the recommended approval conditions and highlighted the termination date of October 2015. Commissioner Hilliard voiced concern over the loss of retail space and how the location of another church in the mall could change the viability the mall as a shopping center, however he understands that the owner needs to keep the building occupied. Mr. McDonald stated one of the concerns Staff had was the loss of retail at this site but the proposal is considered a temporary measure while the building is vacant and permit would expire after three years. Chairman Cruz agreed with the Staff recommendation to limit the special permit to three years. In the future, Planning Commission likely would not grant another special permit but feels this helps solve some issues in the meantime. Commissioner Levin asked if there has been any concern from other tenants in the Mall. Mr. McDonald answered that Staff has not heard any complaints or concerns. Chairman Cruz discussed possible traffic issues that might result from two churches locating at this site. He asked staff what would be done to accommodate the additional retail traffic. Mr. McDonald answered that the meeting times of the two churches would be staggered. Typically on Sunday mornings arterial streets aren't busy and there is no peak traffic period. Commissioner Levin commented that he works out at a gym located near the Bethel Church on Keene Road in Richland, WA and he hasn't had any issues with traffic at that location so he is not concerned about traffic at the Mall. Commissioner Anderson mentioned that when Charter College ends their classes traffic can backed up in the parking lot but is cleared shortly and the parking lot is laid out well for heavy traffic. -2- Commissioner Hilliard agreed that on Sunday's traffic should not be an issue. Tim Phillips, 4502 Desert Drive, spoke on behalf of Bethel Church. The proposal is an opportunity for them to continue to look for land but keep expanding at the same time. They are currently located in a theater in Pasco on Sunday mornings, which limits their time in the building, with no time throughout the week in the evenings. They want to continue to be a part of the Pasco Community. Chairman Cruz asked if Mr. Phillips had any issues with the conditions or recommendations in the staff report. Mr. Phillips stated that he did not have any issues. Lance Bacon, NAI Tri-Cities, 1721 W. 35th Avenue, Kennewick, WA spoke on behalf of the owner of the Outlet Mall as the leasing agent for the proposed property. When an offer from Bethel Church was made, the ownership contacted all of the other tenants to see if they felt it was an acceptable use. They have been trying to find retail tenants but have been turned down. Locating the church to this site might bring more people to the area. With no further comments, the public hearing closed. Commissioner Levin moved, seconded by Commissioner Kempf, to close the public hearing and schedule deliberations, the adoption of findings of fact, and development of a recommendation for City Council for the August 16, 2012 meeting. The motion passed unanimously. B. Special Permit Location of a church in a C-1 District (World Life Christian Center) (MF# SP2012- 013 Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Shane O'Neill, Planner I, discussed this item. World Life Christian Center applied to renew and continue their church use in the Broadmoor Outlet Mall since their previous special permit had expired. Mr. O'Neill reviewed the written report for the benefit of the Commission and explained the church has already made the necessary changes to the building to comply with the International Building Code Standards for "assembly occupancy" types. There is sufficient parking on site and the church is not looking to expand their floor area. David McDonald, City Planner, added that this church purchased land on Court Street last fall. Their goal, like Bethel Church, is to build a permanent location and move out of the Outlet Mall. Commissioner Hilliard stated that he appreciates that this proposal is temporary so that the retail function of the Mall can return. -3- Donald Jarrett, 1951 Peachtree, Richland, WA spoke on behalf of World Life Christian Center. He has been with World Life Christian Center for nine years and they have been in the Outlet Mall for three years. They plan to build on Court Street within two years but are asking for a three year extension just in case. They feel that they bring traffic to the Outlet Mall that wasn't there previously. They hold Thursday evening services and haven't had any issues with Charter College, as the parking lot is built to handle traffic. Chairman Cruz stated that in the future, the Planning Commission will most likely not recommend approve for another special permit and asked if Mr. Jarrett had any issues with the conditions or recommendations contained in the staff report. Mr. Jarrett stated that he did not have any concerns. With no further comments, the public hearing closed. Commissioner Anderson moved, seconded by Commissioner Kempf, to close the public hearing and schedule deliberations, the adoption of findings of fact, and development of a recommendation for City Council for the August 16, 2012 meeting. The motion passed unanimously. C. Special Permit Location of an Elementary School in an R-. S-1 District (Pasco School District) (MF# SP2012-014) Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. David McDonald, City Planner, discussed this item. The Pasco School District has applied for a special permit to locate an elementary school at the north end of Road 52. The District has chosen to realign the grade levels within the schools to accommodate the growth. There is a greater need now for elementary schools versus middle schools. They have chosen to take the proposed site and divide it in half to place an elementary school on the eastern twenty acres. The conditions in the staff report are similar to what has been provided in the past. The site is in a developing residential neighborhood. Most of the schools are located in residential neighborhoods and have been well accepted in the community in those neighborhoods. Rick White, Community 8v Economic Development Director, reminded the Planning Commission that they studied School Impact Fees earlier in the year and one of the things the School District did was try to reduce their capital costs in relation to the request for impact fees by taking the sixth grade out of middle schools and incorporating them into elementary schools. This reduces the need for a middle school; however, there is now a need for elementary schools, which are cheaper build than middle schools. Kim Marsh, 1215 W. Lewis, spoke on behalf of the Pasco School District. He stated that by building an elementary school at this location and two other locations, there -4- would be enough capacity for a K-6 elementary configuration. This will also eliminate the need for a more expensive middle school. This site is twenty acres which means that there will be plenty of parking and bus delivery areas. Commissioner Hilliard asked Mr. Marsh when the School District plans to build the school on the proposed property and when would they extend Powerline Road. Mr. Marsh answered that the School Board is currently considering a potential bond in February of 2013. The school has already been designed and should be opened by the 2014 school year. Powerline Road would be extended as they build the school as part of the conditions. With no further comments, the public hearing closed. Commissioner Anderson moved, seconded by Commissioner Kempf, to close the public hearing and schedule deliberations, the adoption of findings of fact, and development of a recommendation for City Council for the August 16, 2012 meeting. The motion passed unanimously. D. Block Grant Administration 2013 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Fund Allocations (MF# BGAP2012-0031 Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Rick White, Community & Economic Development Director, discussed this item. At the last meeting, applicants for the 2013 CDBG Funds were given a chance to discuss their proposals in front of the Planning Commission. In the memorandum to the Planning Commission there was an attachment with the proposals, how much each agency requested and how much staff recommends. Mr. White briefly went through each recommendation. Commissioner Levin asked for clarification on the Kurtzman Park Spray Park proposed by the City versus the Kurtzman Splash Pad proposed by Regional AmeriCorps. Mr. White answered that Staff has recommended money for the Kurtzman Spray Park which could then provide a role for Regional AmeriCorps. Commissioner Hilliard stated that he feels Staff put a lot of time and effort into their recommendations. Chairman Cruz agreed with Commissioner Hilliard and added that he would like to see money going to the Boys & Girls Club Renovation, however, with the heat in the summer, he would like to see the Spray Park done and have the Boys & Girls Club reapply next year for funds. Splitting the funds between the two projects wouldn't work as there wouldn't be enough money to do both projects if split. Louisa Alaniz, 3 Zinia Court, spoke on behalf of Charity Training Center. She stated that they will apply for funds next year. She also thanked the Planning Commission and Staff for looking over their request. Mr. Alaniz did feel that the Organic Farm -5- would have been an Economic Development Program rather than a Public Service which is what they will focus on next year. Brian Ace, 1102 N. Irving Place, spoke on behalf of Boys & Girls Club. He appreciated the feedback from Chairman Cruz as to why they were not being recommended for funding at this time. They will look at applying next year for funding. They appreciate the support the City has given them over the years and support the Kurtzman Spray Park project. Commissioner Kempf moved, seconded by Commissioner Levin, the Planning Commission recommend the City Council approve the use of funds for the 2013 Community Development Block Grant Program as set forth in the "2013 Fund Summary" as recommended by Staff. The motion passed unanimously. This item will go to City Council Workshop, August 13, 2012. E. Block Grant Administration 2013 HOME Fund Allocations (MF# BGAP2012-004) Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Rick White, Community 8s Economic Development Director, discussed this item. A consortium was formed between Pasco, Richland and Kennewick to receive HOME funds that they otherwise would not receive on their own. The proposal is to use $211,000 for acquisition and infill. This can involve new construction, rehabilitation of existing units including rental units, down payment assistance which is allocated by $5,000 per applicant, and the rest, $13,000 is used for program administration. Commissioner Hilliard moved, seconded by Commissioner Greenaway, the Planning Commission recommend the City Council approve the use of funds for the 2013 HOME Investment Partnerships Program as set forth in the "2013 HOME Fund Summary" as recommended by Staff. The motion passed unanimously. This item will go to City Council Workshop, August 13, 2012. F. Block Grant Administration 2013 Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP) Fund Allocations (MF# BGAP2012-005) Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Rick White, Community & Economic Development Director, discussed this item. The City received Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP) funds that are to be used for homes that have been foreclosed or abandoned. When the program first came out, most of the money was used for acquisition and rehabilitation. The City purchased and rehabilitated three foreclosed homes and is in the process of selling those homes. Staff is recommending a portion of this money to be allocated for down payment assistance for first-time homebuyers that are looking to purchase foreclosed or abandoned homes. -6- Commissioner Hilliard requested clarification as to if the funds were only for first-time homebuyers for the purchase of foreclosed homes or if they could purchase any home. Mr. White answered that the NSP funds were solely for the purchase of foreclosed or abandoned homes. Commissioner Kempf moved, seconded by Commissioner Levin, the Planning Commissioner recommend the City Council approve the use of funds for the 2013 Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP) as recommended by Staff. The motion passed unanimously. This item will go to City Council Workshop, August 13, 2012. G. Block Grant Administration Significant Amendment to the 4th Avenue Wall (MF# BGAP2012-006) Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Rick White, Community 8v Economic Development Director, discussed this item. He explained that the memorandum has changed since the June 21, 2012 meeting. At the June 21, 2012 meeting, Staff recommended the 4th Avenue Wall be funded with a reduction in the amount of ADA Accessibility money the City had. Since the June meeting, the Kurtzman LID went out to bid and the bids received were higher than anticipated. The difference in cost was not great enough to have to do a rebid. The north portion of 4th Avenue, however, will have to be rebid this winter when contractors aren't as active and the City hopes to get a better price. Staff is recommending is that additional money be taken from the ADA Ramp Retrofitting project to be reprogrammed for the Kurtzman Park Neighborhood Improvements. The revised budget is recommended as follows: $450,000 for Kurtzman Park Neighborhood Improvements - Phase IV, $88,240 for ADA Accessibility, and $30,000 for the 4th Avenue Corridor Improvement Project. Todd Lawson, 22 John Street, Seattle, WA asked if the ADA Ramp Retrofitting is throughout the City or only in specified census tracts. Mr. White answered that it is focused only on census tracts 201-204 because those areas are composed mostly of low-moderate income families. Commissioner Levin moved, seconded by Commissioner Kempf, the Planning Commission recommend the City Council approve the use of funds for the 2012 Community Development Block Grant Program as set forth in the Attachment 1 "2012.2 CDBG Fund Summary" as recommended by Staff. The motion passed unanimously. OTHER BUSINESS: A. Code Amendment Special Permits for Donation-Based Thrift Stores in C-R Zones -7- Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Rick White, Community & Economic Development Director, discussed this item. For several months, Planning Commission has looked at a code amendment to examine donation-based thrift stores and consignment stores and whether the prohibitions that were enacted in 1990 were still valid exercises in land-use control. The Planning Commission recommended to City Council that in the C-1 (Retail Business) and C-2 (Central Business) that consignment stores be allowed outright as a permitted use as long as they were separated by 1,000 feet from another consignment store, thrift store or pawn shop and that donation-based thrift stores be allowed by special permit in the C-1 and C-2 Zones as long as they are separated by 1,000 feet from other like stores. At the June 21, 2012 meeting, a request was received from a property owner and Goodwill to include C-R (Commercial Regional) Zoning Districts as a zone that would allow donation-based thrift stores. The Planning Commission did not recommend to City Council for that to occur. This item went to City Council Workshop where the same question regarding C-R Zones was asked and Council remanded this item back to the Planning Commission as to whether donation-based thrift shops should be allowed in the C-R Zones through the special permit process. Since it is a code amendment process, the Planning Commission was reminded they should not be discussing a specific applicant or unique issues. The Planning Commission was given a letter from Mr. Gordon Comfort, an executive of a donation-based thrift store in Pasco. His letter suggests a different path to resolving the locational process by treating it as if the C-R (Commercial Regional) special permit question at hand. The process would involve a rezone and a special permit application for property located in an area that is currently zoned C-R. Staff provided a detailed memorandum. Staff recommendation is that the Planning Commission make a recommendation for the City Council to reject the proposal to allow donation-based thrift shops in C-R Zones and would like to bring this to the next available meeting in August due to urgency in the matter to consider a rezone and special permit application concurrently. Chairman Cruz asked what zones are typically placed adjacent to C-R Zones. Mr. White answered there are C-1 Zones adjacent to the C-R Zone in Pasco. Commissioner Levin asked if the property in question is the old K-Mart building on Court Street and if it is currently a C-R Zone. Mr. White answered that there are two C-R Zoning Districts; one on Court Street west of USR-395 and south of I-182 east of Road 100. Chairman Cruz stated that at the last meeting the Planning Commission was not willing to incorporate donation-based thrift stores in C-R Zones through special permits because at the time it didn't seem to make sense. Mr. White stated that assuming City Council approves the Planning Commission's original recommendation to allow donation-based thrift stores in C-1 and C-2 Zones -8- through special permit process, then the next step would be for those concerned to go through the rezone and special permit process. The rezone would have to happen in order for the special permit to occur. James Wade, 8382 W. Gage Boulevard, Kennewick, WA of N.A.I. Tri-Cities spoke on behalf of his client, Alex Kim, who is the owner of Riverview Plaza. It is decided to leave the decision to include C-R Zoning to the expertise of City Staff and the Planning Commission. Their desire is to facilitate Goodwill and its $3-$4 of annual retail sales, 30-40 jobs and locate Goodwill in the Riverview Plaza in a store front that has been vacant for 11 years. If C-R Zoning is not included, they will apply for a rezone immediately and look forward to appearing at the next meeting in August. Commissioner Kempf stated that she would like to see the C-R Zones stay the way they are and have businesses who would like to do the donation-based thrift stores do so with a rezone and special permit. Commissioner Anderson agreed with Commissioner Kempf. He stated that there are reasons for C-R Zones and doesn't see a special permit for donation-based thrift stores appropriate for C-R Zones. Commissioner Anderson moved, seconded by Commission Kempf, the Planning Commission recommends the City Council reject the proposal to allow donation-based thrift shops in C-R Zones. The motion passed unanimously. WORKSHOP: A. Code Amendment Revisions to P.M.C. Title 25 (MF# CA2011- 0061 Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Shane O'Neill, Planner I, discussed the background of the proposed modifications to Pasco Municipal Code (PMC) Title 25. The some of the modifications were highlighted as follows: • The Planning Commission recommendation on accessory structure heights and setbacks was incorporated into the P.M.C. revisions. • Special permits required for car washes and night clubs in the C-1 (Retail Business) Zoning District. • The density bonus option was removed from the R-4 (High Density Residential) Zoning District. -9- • Criteria for caretaker's residencies was revised to provide additional clarity. The changes establish a stronger need for the caretaker's unit to be located in undeveloped portions of the community. • Provisions for exotic animals was added. • Exception to the residential design criteria would be processed through the special permit process, for example, exceptions dealing with roof pitches. Mr. White explained that many of the revisions are just updates due resulting from changes to State laws, such as upgrades for residential childcare facilities. Many definitions have also been updated throughout the P.M.C. Title 25. Commissioner Greenaway commented that some businesses in Commercial Districts are not watched in the evenings and this presented a chance for higher crime. She felt that business owners in Commercial Districts should have the right to protect their property. Commissioner Hilliard agreed with Commissioner Greenaway. Commissioner Kempf asked if she meant Commercial Districts or Industrial Districts since they are two separate zoning. Commissioner Greenaway answered that she feels the property owner has the right to protect their property whether it is Commercial or Industrial Zoning. Commissioner Anderson disagreed with allowing caretaker's residencies in Commercial Districts. He stated that property owners do have the right to protect their property, but not a right to have a residence in a Commercial area. There are other ways to protect the property without having a person living at the business. He added that caretaker's residencies should be located in remote areas. Commissioner Levin asked if Staff could refresh his memory on the topic of caretaker's residencies. Mr. White answered that there was an applicant earlier this year as well as another person two years ago. The person who applied two years ago was located in a substantially developed neighborhood and the issue was one of crime. The caretaker's residence was approved and stayed on site, even after the issue of crime went away. Chairman Cruz commented that in other Cities, such as Portland, they have co- located residents and businesses in their downtown. Mr. White stated that the City of Pasco does have some areas zoned for co-location (with a Special Permit) where the residential area is above the business with retail use on the bottom floor. This is, however, different from a caretaker's residence. Chairman Cruz stated that he is fine with the way caretaker's residencies are written in the revisions to P.M.C. Title 25. It is fine to have residents co-locate in specific zones where businesses are on the lower level and apartments above in a downtown. -10- Commissioner Anderson agreed with the Chairman. Commissioner Hilliard agreed and would still like to see properties farther out in more undeveloped areas be allowed to protect their properties with a caretaker's residence. Mr. O'Neill asked for some input on administrative adjustments for setbacks. The Planning Commission felt that staff could make those minor adjustments (1 foot) without the need for a Hearing Examiner. The Chairman addressed the topic of Mineral Resource Areas. A Mineral Resource Area is to mine said resources from where they are located since that cannot be controlled, but chemical processes, such as an asphalt plant, are not necessarily required to be co-located. Mr. White answered that was something Staff had looked at after previous comments by Planning Commission and it was meant to be in the revisions for P.M.C. Title 25. It will be addressed before the next time it is presented to the Planning Commission. ADDITIONAL BUSINESS: Commissioner Greenaway and Commissioner Hilliard both attended the Short Course on Local Planning in Walla Walla on June 28, 2012. It provided good information and was well put on. Commissioner Greenaway recommended it for other Commissioners. Commissioner Hilliard said that it was a good course and provided additional resources to help with research. Rick White, Community 8v Economic Development Director, let the Planning Commission know that on September 12, 2012 there is another Short Course to be held in Moses Lake, WA. If any Commissioners wish to attend, they can contact Mr. White. With no further discussion or business, the Planning Commission was adjourned at 8:35 p.m. Respectfully submitted, David McDonald, City Planner -11- MEMORANDUM DATE: August 16, 2012 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Dave McDonald, City Planner SUBJECT: Pasco Family Housing Rezone (MF# Z2012-001) On March 15th of this year, following the public hearing process, the Planning Commission recommended the City Council rezone approximately 3.5 acres of land on North Charles Avenue. The recommendation for the rezone from R-1 (Low Density Residential) and C-1 (Retail Business) to R-3 (Medium Density Residential) included provisions for a concomitant agreement prohibiting all access to the property from Charles Avenue. Adjoining neighbors appealed the Planning Commission recommendation and the matter was reviewed in a closed record hearing by the City Council on May 7, 2012. Following the initial closed record hearing on May 21, 2012, the City Council remanded the matter to the Planning Commission for the purpose of addressing potential impacts of multi-story structures in proximity to Charles Avenue and the potential impact of the rezone on the Pasco School District. The Planning Commission considered the remand at the June 21, 2012 Planning Commission meeting. The recommendation on the remand included a 25 foot height restriction on buildings within the rezone area. Following Council review on July 16th and July 23 the matter was again remanded to the Planning Commission for additional review on the potential impacts of multi-story structures. The Council wanted the Planning Commission to consider height limits on the entire property with emphasis on single story structures along Charles Avenue. In reviewing the Planning Commission's recommendation on the height limitation of 25 feet the City Council expressed the concern that the 25 foot height allowance would permit the construction of two-story structures. The homes located along the east side of Charles Avenue are all single story structures (except one) no taller than about 16 feet. In that respect the neighborhood is characterized by single story houses. The Council discussed the idea of limiting structures along the west side of Charles to a single story to retain the character of the neighborhood and lessen the impacts of two- story multi-unit buildings on the neighborhood. 1 The Planning Commission is now charged with the task of reviewing the proposed rezone giving consideration to the impacts of two-story buildings on the single story houses along the east side of Charles Avenue. In carrying out this task there are a number of items the Planning Commission should consider in arriving at a recommendation on this issue, they are as follows: • The property under consideration for a rezone is currently zoned R-1 (Low Density Residential) and C-1 (Retail Business). The R-1 zoning permits the construction of single or two-story homes up to 25 feet in height. The C-1 zoning permits commercial buildings to be built up to 35 feet in height. No rezone is necessary to build to these heights. • The properties on the east side of Charles Avenue under R-1 zoning are permitted to have buildings up to 25 feet in height. Remodels, additions or reconstruction due to damage could include second stories. • Limiting structures to one story does not limit the height of a structure. Depending on the width of the house and pitch of the roof single story structures could be 25 feet tall. • Setbacks for R-3 and R-1 zoning are identical. The rezone will ensure setbacks on both sides of Charles Avenue have the same building setbacks. Currently the area south of George Street that is zoned C-1 has a 15 foot front yard setback. • With the required setback for front yards and the street right-of-way for Charles Avenue at least 100 feet of separation will be provided between the homes on the east side of Charles and future buildings on the west side of Charles. (See attached illustration) • Side yard setbacks for existing houses on the east side of Charles are only 5 feet. In some cases these houses are only about 10 feet apart. • Limiting all or a certain portion of the buildings on the site to a single story will reduce yard space around the buildings and reduce opportunities for landscaping to enhance the neighborhood. Building footprints will be larger to accommodate the planned square footage. Rather than building up the buildings will be spread out reducing useable yard areas. • A 51 unit single story apartment complex similar to the Bishop Topel complex on Spokane Street would cover 1.32 acres of land verses .66 acres of land coverage for a 51 unit two-story apartment complex. 2 • The portion of the site south of George Street is half the width of that portion on the site north of George Street. Options There are a number of options the Planning Commission could consider in addressing the concerns related to rezoning the property to R-3 keeping in mind the Council emphasis toward single story development. These options are as follows: • Limiting development on the future site or portions of the site to one story. • Limit all buildings built at the setback line to one story with two-story 25 foot buildings permitted to be built 40 feet from the front property line and three story 35 foot buildings to be built 60 feet from the front property line • Limit building heights to 25 feet matching the permitted building height in the neighborhood. This would maintain the previous Planning Commission recommendation of June 21st and ensure buildings would equal the height permitted in the R-1 on the east side of Charles Avenue. • Limit building heights to 25 feet and require trees to be planted in the setback area every 50 feet to create an aesthetic visual barrier between the apartment buildings and Charles Avenue. • Limit building heights to 25 feet south of George Street and require a 40 foot minimum setback for any building over one-story north of George Street. Any of the options above should also include a restriction on access from Charles Avenue. The findings and conclusions in the attached report from the March 15, 2012 Planning Commission meeting may need to be modified as follows: Additional Findings 1. The R-1 District permits buildings heights of 25 feet (PMC 25.28) and the C-1 District (PMC 25.42) permits building heights of 35 feet. Therefore the southern 185 feet of the site currently permits three-story or 35 foot tall 3 buildings. Two-story, 25 foot tall buildings are currently permitted on the northern portion of the site. 2. Two-story houses with windows facing Charles Avenue are currently permitted to be constructed on most of the vacant property on the west side of Charles Avenue. 3. The proposed R-3 zoning would permit 35 foot tall buildings on the entire site. 4. The property on the east side of Charles Avenue is zoned R-1 permitting buildings 25 feet in height. 5. Building setbacks in the R-3 zone are identical to the setbacks in the R-1 zone. 6. Single-family houses located along the east side of Charles Avenue are all single story structures not exceeding 16 feet in height. 7. The single-family houses located on the east side of Charles Avenue can be rebuilt, remodel, expanded or altered to include a second story reaching a height of 25 feet. 8. Living room windows of the houses on the east side of Charles Avenue are either oriented away from Charles Avenue or are partially obscured from the view of the property along the west side of Charles Avenue by garages extending past the living room portion of the house. Modifications to Staff Report Conclusions (1) There is merit and value in the proposal for the community as a whole. As a whole, the larger community would benefit from the proposed additional housing units permitted by a rezone of the property and the community would benefit from the development clean-up of an underdeveloped neighborhood. In this respect there is merit and value to the proposal. From the prospective of the immediate neighborhood, the completion of neighborhood streets and the elimination of a parcel overgrown with weeds would have merit but the additional traffic would not. The possible concern of permitting building heights in excess of 25 feet in a neighborhood that restricts building heights to 25 feet may have an impact of the character and value of the neighborhood. (2) Conditions should be imposed in order to mitigate any significant adverse impacts from the proposal. The rezone should be conditioned to limit access to the property in such a manner as to ameliorate the impacts of additional traffic on Charles Avenue. The rezone could be further mitigated to lessen the impact of multi-family buildings on the neighborhood by limiting building heights on all or a portion of the site to match 4 the surrounding residential neighborhood and or requiring additional height limitations and increased building setbacks from Charles Avenue. (3) A concomitant agreement should be entered into between the City and the petitioner, and if so, the terms and conditions of such an agreement. A concomitant agreement is necessary to ensure concerns of increased traffic in the neighborhood are addressed as well as addressing concerns about increased building heights associated with multi-family buildings. OPTIONS FOR MOTIONS Motion for Findings MOTION: I move to adopt the additional Findings of Fact and modified Conclusions therefrom as contained in the staff memo of August 16, 2012. Alternate Motion #1 MOTION: I move, based on the Findings of Fact and Conclusions therefrom, the Planning Commission recommend the City Council approve the Rezone from C-1 (Retail Business) and R-1 (Low Density Residential) to R-3 (Medium Density Residential), with a concomitant agreement prohibiting access to the property from Charles Avenue and limiting buildings on the site to one story structures not exceeding 20 feet in total height. Alternate Motion #2 MOTION: I move, based on the Findings of Fact and Conclusions therefrom, the Planning Commission recommend the City Council approve the Rezone from C-1 (Retail Business) and R-1 (Low Density Residential) to R-3 (Medium Density Residential), with a concomitant agreement prohibiting access to the property from Charles Avenue and limiting buildings to one story not exceeding 20 feet in total height for the first forty feet from the front property line along Charles Avenue. Additionally any building setback forty feet or more from the property line may be two-stories or 25 feet in height and any building setback 60 feet from the front property line may be 3 stories or 35 feet in height. 5 Alternate Motion #3 MOTION: I move, based on the Findings of Fact and Conclusions therefrom, the Planning Commission recommend the City Council approve the Rezone from C-1 (Retail Business) and R-1 (Low Density Residential) to R-3 (Medium Density Residential), with a concomitant agreement prohibiting access to the property from Charles Avenue, limiting the height of buildings to 25 feet and requiring an oak tree, a linden tree, a maple tree or other tree of similar habit and growth pattern to be planted and maintained every 50 feet along the frontage of Charles Avenue. Said trees to be in a location and a height and caliper size to provide effective visual screening to the approval of the Community and Economic Development Director. Alternate Motion #4 MOTION: I move, based on the Findings of Fact and Conclusions therefrom, the Planning Commission recommend the City Council approve the Rezone from C-1 (Retail Business) and R-1 (Low Density Residential) to R-3 (Medium Density Residential), with a concomitant agreement prohibiting access to the property from Charles Avenue, limiting the height of buildings placed south of the south line of Block 3, Whitehouse Addition to single story construction not exceeding 20 feet in total height and requiring a minimum of 40 feet for a front yard setback for any building over one-story located north of the south line of Block 3, Whitehouse Addition. Alternate Motion #5 (Recommendation from 6/21/12/ PC Meeting) MOTION: I move, based on the Findings of Fact and Conclusions therefrom, the Planning Commission recommend the City Council approve the Rezone from C-1 (Retail Business) and R-1 (Low Density Residential) to R-3 (Medium Density Residential), with a concomitant agreement prohibiting access to the property from Charles Avenue, and limiting building heights to 25 feet. 6 REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION MASTER FILE NO. Z 2012-001 APPLICANT: Pasco Family Housing HEARING DATE: 2/16/2012 12 E. Fifth ACTION DATE: 3/15/2012 Spokane, WA 99202 BACKGROUND REQUEST: REZONE Rezone from R-1 (Low-Density Residential) and C-1 (Retail Business) to R-3 (Medium-Density Residential) 1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Legal: All of Block 3 Whitehouse Addition and Lots 11-24 Block 2 Whitehouse Addition together with adjoining vacated right-of-way. Location: The west side of Charles Avenue between Adelia Street and Alvina Street. Property Size: 3.58 Acres 2. ACCESS: The property has access from Charles Avenue on the east and Alvina Street from the south. 3. UTILITIES: All utilities are available to the site. 4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The site is currently zoned R-1 (Low Density Residential) and C-1 (Retail Business). The site is vacant and contains a block building that was once used as an auto repair shop. Surrounding properties are zoned and developed as follows: North "R-1" Low Density Residential - Highland Park South "R-1" Low Density Residential - Single Family & Vacant East "R-1" Low Density Residential - Single Family West "C-3" General Business - Vacant 5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designates this area for Mixed Residential uses. Goals of the Comprehensive Plan suggests the City strive to maintain a variety of housing options for residents of the community (H-2) and supports efforts to provide affordable housing to meet the needs of low and moderate income households (H-5). Plan Goal LU-2 also encourages the maintenance of established neighborhoods and the creation of new neighborhoods that are safe and enjoyable places to live. 6. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The City of Pasco is the lead agency for this project. Based on the SEPA checklist, the adopted City 1 Comprehensive Plan, City development regulations, and other information, a threshold determination resulting in a Determination of Non-significance (DNS) has been issued for this project under WAC 197- 11-158. This is a non-project action and will therefore have no immediate effect on the Pasco School District. ANALYSIS The property consists of two separate parcels totaling 3.58 acres. The two parcels are divided by the unimproved right-of-way of East George Street. The northern most parcel located between Highland Park on the north and East George Street on the south contains 1.98 acres. The balance of the property is located south of East George Street and westerly of Charles Avenue. This property was platted in lots and block in 1911 and has remained mostly undeveloped since that time. The property north of George Street contained one single-family house which was demolished in 2003. For many years Lots 13- 18 of Block 24 located south of George Street were used as a vehicle storage yard that was filled with broken down and partially dismantled cars, barrels and other items. Lots 19-24 of the same block contained an automotive shop (the shop building still remains on the property) at least one house and a large storage building. In the early 1990's the City required the property owner to remove the slum and blight conditions cause by the impound yard, the accumulation of debris and the substandard buildings located on the property. The property remains undeveloped in a substandard condition today as a result of the lack of infrastructure improvements (no gutter, sidewalk, street lights, storm drainage, etc) and the existence of dead trees, weeds and the dumping that has occurred on the site. The site is located between property that is zoned C-3 (General Commercial) on the west and R-1 (Low Density Residential) on the east. Recognizing sound planning practices often suggest there should be a transition or gradation of land uses from more intense uses to less intense uses the City Council designated the site for mixed residential during the last major Comprehensive Plan update in 2008. The site is currently zoned R-1 and C-1. The C-1 District permits the development retail, office and commercial services such as retail stores, automotive repair shops, tire store, restaurants and taverns. One of the major concerns property owners often have about the location of higher density residential zoning adjacent to low density zoning is the possible impacts the high density zoning may have on the values of properties in adjacent lower density zoning district. A search of the Franklin County Assessor Records in February of 2012 indicates that in many cases this may be 2 more of a perception than a fact. For example the single-family homes that share a common lot line with the Stonegate Apartments have generally increased in value in the last four years. All of the homes in question were constructed two years after the construction of the Stonegate Apartments. Similarly the single-family homes in the Loviisa Farms subdivision constructed directly across Chapel Hill Boulevard from the Sandy Heights RV Park and the Silver Creek Apartments have appreciated in value. It should also be pointed out that the single-family homes located on Charles Avenue were constructed long after the Pasco Housing Authority constructed the multi-family housing units directly to the east. According to the records of the Franklin County Assessor's (2012) the homes in the 300 block of North Charles Avenue have increase in value since they were constructed in 2007. In the cases referenced above it should be noted that the apartment complexes and RV park are not accessed directly from the same street the lower density housing is accessed. The apartment buildings may be considerably higher than the adjoining single-family homes and may impact privacy in rear yards but the traffic impacts are significantly reduced due to the location of access driveways. For example the new multi-family complex built at the southwest corner of Wehe Avenue and Spokane Street is accessed from Spokane Street rather than Wehe Avenue, which fronts future single family residential lots. Even though the property in question is identified in the Comprehensive Plan for mixed use residential development the Planning Commission should consider ways of ameliorating traffic impact to the neighborhood by conditioning where the location of access driveways should be located. The site is large enough to permit the construction 15 to 20 single family homes which would generate 150 to 200 vehicle trips through the neighborhood each day. If the site was developed with 51 apartment units about 336 vehicle trips could be expected in the neighborhood or about 136 more vehicle trips than would be generated by single family homes. Multi-family complexes are often located on or convenient to major streets. The proposed site is accessed only by local streets through the surrounding neighborhood. Bonneville Street and California Avenue are both located on the western edge of the proposed site and could provide an alternate means of accessing the site. If Bonneville Street and other streets to the west were used as the main access there would be little need for traffic from future development on the site to used Charles Avenue or other neighborhood streets to the east. Staff met with the applicant and discussed the issues related to access and as a result of that discussion the applicant has agreed to a concomitant agreement limiting access from the west only. During the initial hearing on this matter the Planning Commission asked staff to provide some information about crime statistics related to low income housing complexes. In a study prepared by the Urban Land Institute (High Density Development Myth 8, Fact 2005) it was reported that crime rates at higher-density developments are not significantly different than crime rates for 3 lower-density development (See Exhibit # 1). Other recent studies confirm the fact that low-income housing does not necessarily cause increases in crime rates (See Exhibit #2 Cornell University Study Abstract). Other studies have considered both the impacts on crime and property values as they related to the development of affordable housing and have concluded affordable housing does not increase crime or reduce neighboring property values (See Exhibit #3 Myths & Facts about Affordable & High Density Housing and Exhibit # 4 Princeton University Study Abstract). (Full copies of the referenced studies are available in the Planning Office.) The initial review criteria for considering a rezone application are explained in PMC. 25.88.030. The criteria are list below as follows: 1. The changed conditions in the vicinity which warrant other or additional zoning: • The Comprehensive Plan designation for the property in question was changed from Low Density Residential to Mixed Residential in 2011. • Sewer service was extended north in Charles Avenue from George Street in 2007. • The former auto storage yard on the property has been removed. • All single-family homes have been removed from the property. • The commercially zoned portion of the property has not been used for commercial purposes for approximately 30 years. • The most recent residential development within the vicinity has been the construction of a multi-family complex directly north of the Whittier Elementary School at the southwest corner of Wehe Avenue and Spokane Street. • Much of the commercially zoned property along Oregon Avenue has been developed in the last 20 years. • Commercial development is beginning to extend east of Oregon Avenue. 2. Facts to justify the change on the basis of advancing the public health, safety and general welfare. The property has remained largely undeveloped for 100 years and has seen a regression in development over the past 25 years with the removal of all housing units and removal of the former automotive repair shop from the property. Rezoning the property to R-3 Medium Density Residential will provide additional flexibility for site development providing a catalyst for the development of the partially improved streets in the neighborhood and providing a buffer between the lower density development to the east and the commercially (C-3) zoned property to the west. 3. The effect it will have on the nature and value of adjoining property and the Comprehensive Plan. 4 The proposal is supported by the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. Rezoning the property and eliminating the commercial zoning from the neighborhood could enhance development options for the site benefiting the neighborhood by completing street improvements and eliminating nuisance conditions created by the weeds and dead trees on the property. The rezone would also eliminate any chance for commercial activities to be re-established in the neighborhood. The properties on Charles Avenue east of the commercial zoned portion of the site have decreased in value in recent years per Franklin County records. Based on experience in other neighborhoods where multi-family development has occurred improvements on the site and the property clean-up associated therewith may improve property values in the neighborhood. 4. The effect on the property owners if the request is not granted. The current R-1 and C-1 zoning has been in place for 30 years or more and has not encouraged development on the property and in fact the property has remained largely undeveloped since it was platted 100 years ago. The proposed rezone may provide the property owner with some flexibility for development and may make the installation of streets and utilities more affordable. If the request is not granted it is probable the property will continue to remain vacant as both commercial and single- family development on the property has proven to be unviable. 5. The Comprehensive land use designation for the property. The Comprehensive Plan designates the site for Mixed Density Residential development. The proposed rezone will bring the zoning into conformance with the Plan. STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT Findings of fact must be entered from the record. The following are initial findings drawn from the background and analysis section of the staff report. The Planning Commission may add findings to this listing as the result of factual testimony and evidence submitted during the open record hearing. 1) The site is currently zoned R-1 (Low Density Residential) and C-1 retail Business. 2) The property to the west is zoned C-3 and the property to the east is zoned R-1 and R-2. 3) The Comprehensive Plan designates the site for Mixed Residential development. 4) The property was platted into lots and blocks 100 years ago. 5) The one remaining house on the site was demolished in 2003. 5 6) The property is vacant and undeveloped except for a vacant block building formerly used as an automotive shop. 7) Commercial use of the C-1 portion of the site has not occurred for approximately 30 years. 8) The site has never been improved with standard streets, curb, gutter, storm drainage and other infrastructure typical of an urban setting. 9) Multi-family duplex units are located directly east of the homes in the 300 block of Charles Street. 10) The multi-family duplex units directly east of the homes in the 300 block of Charles Street were constructed in 1978. 11) According to the records (2012) of the Franklin County Assessor's office the homes in the 300 block of Charles Avenue have increase in value. 12) According to the records (2012) of the Franklin County Assessor's office the homes in the 200 block of Charles Avenue east of the commercial portion of the site and not sharing a common property line with multi- family housing have decreased in value in recent years. 13) Single-family residential homes developed in the Loviisa Farms subdivision across Chapel Hill Boulevard from the 200 unit Silver Creek Apartment complex and the Sandy Heights RV park have increased in value (per Franklin County records 2012) in recent years. 14) The single-family homes on Klickitat Lane sharing a common property line with the 200 unit Stonegate apartment complex were constructed after the Stonegate Apartments were constructed. The homes on Klickitat lane have increased in value (per Franklin County records 2012) in recent years. 15) Studies prepared by the Urban Land Institute, Cornell University, Princeton University, and the California Department of Housing and Community Development (Higher Density Development Myth and Facts, 2005; Low Income Housing Development and Crime, Cornell University 2010; Do Affordable Housing Projects harm Suburban Communities? Crime, Property Values and Property Taxes in Mt. Laurel, New Jersey 2011; Myths and Facts About Affordable & High Density Housing, 2002. Full copies of these reports are on file in the Planning Office.) 16) As the result of Commercial development along Oregon Avenue over the past 20 years few properties are left to develop on Oregon Avenue. Remaining vacant commercial properties east of Oregon Avenue toward Highland Park and the site in question are beginning to develop. 17) If a 51 apartment unit apartment complex was developed on the site it would generate 136 more vehicle trips per day than if the site was developed with 20 single-family homes. 6 CONCLUSIONS BASED ON INITIAL STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT Before recommending approval or denial of a rezone, the Planning Commission must develop its conclusions from the findings of fact based upon the criteria listed in P.M.C. 25.88.060 and determine whether or not: (1) The proposal is in accord with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. The goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan encourage the development of old and new neighborhoods into safe and enjoyable places to live (Goal LU-2). The Comprehensive Plan also encourages the development of a variety of residential environments (Goal H-2) and the Plan and supports efforts to provide affordable housing to meet the needs of low and moderate income households (Goal H-5). (2) The effect of the proposal on the immediate vicinity will not be materially detrimental. The property in question has remained largely undeveloped for the past 100 years. Rezoning the property may provide some flexibility for development options which could lead to the improvement of the streets and utilities in the neighborhood thereby improving conditions in the neighborhood that have only been partially developed over the past 100 years. The proposed rezone is being requested to allow the construction of up to 51 apartment units. Fifty-one apartment units would generate (per the ITE Trip Generation Manual 8th Edition) approximately 136 more vehicle trips on local streets than a 20 unit single-family development. The additional traffic could be viewed by the neighborhood as having a detrimental impact on the neighborhood. (3) There is merit and value in the proposal for the community as a whole. As a whole the larger community would benefit from the proposal additional housing units permitted by a rezone of the property and the community would benefit from the development clean-up of an underdeveloped neighborhood. In this respect there is merit and value to the proposal. From the prospective of the immediate neighborhood the completion of neighborhood streets and the elimination of a parcel overgrown with weeds would have merit but the additional traffic would not. (4) Conditions should be imposed in order to mitigate any significant adverse impacts from the proposal. 7 The rezone should be conditioned to limit access to the property in such a manner as to ameliorate the impacts of additional traffic on Charles Avenue. (5) A concomitant agreement should be entered into between the City and the petitioner, and if so, the terms and conditions of such an agreement. A concomitant agreement is necessary to ensure concerns of increased traffic in the neighborhood are addressed. RECOMMENDATION MOTION: I move to adopt Findings of Fact and Conclusions therefrom as contained in the March 15, 2012 staff report. MOTION: I move, based on the Findings of Fact and Conclusions therefrom, the Planning Commission recommend the City Council approve the Rezone from C-1 (Retail Business) and R-1 (Low Density Residential) to R-3 (Medium Density Residential), with a concomitant agreement prohibiting access to the property from Charles Street. 8 Vicinity Item: Rezone R- 1 to R-3 Applicant: Pasco Family Housing IV N Map File #. Z 2012-001 jr SIP k Aw Ord .y ► �. l < X �. 1 i E .s `�. i - �, ADELIA SiT to F r SITE W , 1 F bTEORGE ST• W s ; W — Q 'A W ui ui a m•. NN �► .vs �, ALV1, -ST. s# Y - 1 I ' Z ^ 0�1 41V , E LEWF�S T ° Land Item: Rezone R- I to R-3 Use Applicant: Pasco Family Housing IV N Map File Z 2012-001 II�� III . . . � • � � � � � � MW zoning Map Applicant: Pasco Family Housing IV N File Z 2012-001 II�� III . . . � • � � � � � � � s rit � M I iX I Vii . mob ' . I '. � � , . Y '�� • _ � < y>- _ � � s . a� ' � � < Y.� A l � �_ n Y � � � �. �. - .- . ,�: 6zv < ' . � � / .:- � �® , :s '7 , , �: ",� - �i � � , �. � fi � � • ,. • b • — ii � . i I i t � �bl , � .� �} }�i �P r,�q�. Y '�A�~-.'M. ' .. �;� � , i *-� ' -- 4 %� _ | & . r 0 o Y • J . r �� J ;��` ��;',.' � �,:�; :_ a.�.�`'_ ;;� : ? =�: � , , ` , ,, �? r -, c . � - _ 0 �. ara 0 c� �, ; rr , i i " ; , '�- MYT Id Higher-density development leads to higher crime rates. The crime rates at higher-density developments are not significantly different from those at lower-density developments. eople sometimes associate density with crime,even though numerous studies show that no relationship exists between the two.A study in Irving, Texas,using geographic information systems and crime statistics,found no link between crime and density.In fact,it found that single-family neigh- borhoods are"not all associated with lower crime rates.""Another study conducted by the University of Alaska found no relationship between housing density and crime in Anchorage." P R O F I L E Westminster Place Although today Westminster Place is a thriving,safe community in midtown St.Louis,it was not always the case.The area,approxi- mately 90 acres,was well known by the St.Louis police department a for its high rate of violent crime,which led to the area's becoming blighted.McCormack Baron Salazar,a St.Louis—based developer, s M brought the community back through the addition of higher-density ro mixed-income housing comprising affordable and market-rate units. m ✓" r+ �' � The master plan included for-sale and rental housing,garden apart- ments,townhouses,single-family homes,and even an assisted liv- ing facility for seniors.A new community pool,a bustling retail cen ter,and a magnet school are included as well.The new plan slowed Increasing the housing density,adding some market-rate housing, and developing a design that slowed traffic and added additional traffic through the community,added landscaping and street and lighting changed Westminster Place from a crime-ridden neighbor- parking lot lighting,and new"eyes on the street,"making it more hood to a thriving,safe community. difficult for criminals to go unnoticed.The area blossomed into a place where people once again feel safe walking.The success of the community spurred the revitalization of surrounding areas. Myth and Fact 19 M Y T H F O U R F A C T F O U R W— —1%==JJJW P R O F I L E East Village East Village is a small urban revitalization project on the edge of downtown Minneapolis.Before the project was built,the neglected 2.9-acre site contained several deteriorating rental homes,old commer- cial buildings,and abandoned surface parking lots.The neighborhood wanted to improve the area and the image of one of the city's oldest neighborhoods,Elliot Park.The developers of the project,Central Community Housing Trust and East Village Housing Corporation,developed the new mixed-income housing and commercial community to encourage a sense of community and ownership.East Village now features community green space,pedestrian paths,and neighborhood businesses.Buildings sur- round the greenway that leads to Elliot Park,a city park with year-round activities and a community center.Brick,bay windows,and French balconies complement historic buildings in the area.In addition, all buildings have multiple entrances to encourage interaction among neighbors.An underground 350- space parking garage frees up space for landscaped areas.This once neglected area has won two awards for innovation and design and become an exceedingly successful vibrant and safe community. EN 12 w6 40 JL� ., L y -T Z } D #_ c w 6 V The additional"eyes on the street"created by the development of East Village in Minneapolis has led to a safer vibrant community. 20 Nigher-Density Development M Y T H F O U R F A C T F O U R Arizona researchers found that when police data are analyzed per unit,apartments actually create less demand for police services than a comparable number of single- family houses.In Tempe,Arizona,a random sample of 1,000 calls for service showed that 35 percent originated from single-family houses and just 21 percent came from apartments.Similarly,a random sample of 600 calls for service in Phoenix,Arizona, found that an apartment unit's demand for police services was less than half of the demand created by a single-family house.13 One reason for the misperception that crime and density are related could be that crime reports tend to characterize multifamily properties as a single"house"and may record every visit to an apartment community as happening at a single house. But a multifamily property with 250 units is more accurately defined as 250 houses. To truly compare crime rates between multifamily properties and single-family houses,the officer would have to count each household in the multifamily commu- nity as the equivalent of a separate single-family household.When they do so,many find what the previous studies prove: that crime rates between different housing types are comparable. Higher-density developments can actually help reduce crime by increasing pedestrian activity and fostering a 24-hour community that puts more"eyes on the street"'at all times.Many residents say they chose higher-density housing specifically because they felt more secure there;they feel safer because there are more people coming and going,making it more difficult for criminals to act without being discovered. This factor could explain why a ULI study of different housing types in Greenwich, Connecticut,shows that higher-density housing is significantly less likely to be bur- glarized than single-family houses"The relationships among design,management, and security became better understood in the past few decades with the publication of several seminal works,including Defensible Space:Crime Prevention through Urban Design by Oscar Newman"and Fixing Broken Windows:Restoring Order and Reducing Crime in our Communities by George Kelling and Catherine Coles."Many new higher- density developments include better lighting plans and careful placement of buildings and landscaping to reduce opportunities for crime,contributing to a safer community. With the emergence of better-quality designs,higher-density mixed-use develop- ment is an attractive and safe addition to a community,one that is increasingly attracting a professional constituency seeking safety features.In fact,the luxury segment is one of the fastest-growing components of the multifamily industry.38 Myth and Fact 21 Exhibit #2 Low-Income Housing Development and Crime Matthew Freedman', Emily Owensb ABSTRACT This paper examines the effect of rental housing development subsidized by the government's Low-Income Housing Tax Credit program on local crime. We take advantage of changes in the formula used to determine the eligibility of census tracts for Qualified Census Tract (QCT) status, which affects the size of the tax credits developers receive for building low- income housing. QCT status attracts real estate development from other parts of the county, differentially improving the housing stock in the poorest census tracts. Low-income housing development, and the associated revitalization of neighborhoods, brings with it significant reductions in violent crime that are measurable at the county level. There are no detectable effects on property crime, perhaps because of changes in reporting behavior among residents. a Comell University, ILR School, 266 Ives Faculty Building,Ithaca,NY 14853(e-mail:mf439 @corne1l.edu). b Comell University,Department of Policy Analysis and Management,MVR,Ithaca,NY 14853(e- mail:ego 5 @come I Ledu). A }f ��° � t^•t:_ ?t'_Y �``��� �� �Nt r �X `,� .fir C a+,",� f • - �. fit,'� ,r r M r ■F n s: {Y wl .• Ayr�A4Sr ,t °p- ;ry .. _- �?�7 �'d"F '� � Br '1a ' V��# - :',k t y'N 1. � �°P ��^•�•�r .. "'V,§ .yi.f 4.I+�'� � _�l I,-_ fir. r fi ,• ,r f" n a-. } r 4 r L D � R • 4 h 1^^ r f y y:ti. • T • n y. y� -'•w-y9W° 1F Ile Ilk Ix ! 4, 'f'`'t• �' 'fib • Ilk , R r tzXA f 4 .�',1 L � L r Y •Al � 4 •°` Ale Y T �t. ti M ` e¢ J . ��•SSS��•SSSy ��^^��PP AND FACT S x 4 „ tr r -, - •any.; About Affordable & High Density rJ. � .t H 0 U S I N G Aa , A Report by California Planning Roundtable " California Department of Housing&Community Development Olk Ow i ti. "Y' S F �K jam` nl -ire; ti- s .lV�. fix.- '�°:+ir� '•'°+ N THE PAST 30 YEARS, Against this backdrop, it should overcrowded; buildings will clash CALIFORNIA'S HOUSING surprise no one that many communities with existing neighborhoods; people PRICES HAVE STEADILY no longer accept population growth won't fit in; and maybe even a OUTPACED ITS RESIDENTS' with open arms.When anyone proposes criminal element. INCOMES. Housing production hasn't the development of affordable or Opponents often believe these kept up with job and household growth multifamily housing, ambivalence myths. But it's essential to counter within the State.' The location and about growth often shifts to hostility. these myths with facts. California type of new housing does not meet the Hostility feeds and strengthens certain desperately needs new affordable needs of many new California house- myths,and deep emotional perceptions housing to reverse recent increases holds. As a result, only one in five of how the world works.Myths— in overcrowding and overpayment. households can afford a typical home, important sources of meaning in all We also need new high-density overcrowding doubled in the 1990's, societies provide shared rationales for housing to support economic stability and more than three million California community members to behave in and prosperity. We need housing to households pay more than they can common ways, having a strong moral accommodate new workers and their afford for their housing.2 component, with clear lines between families and to economize on Meanwhile,the federal government right and wrong. Although myths infrastructure costs,while preserving has dramatically cut back programs are sometimes positive, they can open space and reducing the that used to help local governments also serve as shields for deeper and distance between homes and jobs. accommodate new growth. Voter- uglier motivations: racism,fear of Fortunately, the facts of imposed property tax and spending outsiders, and/or greed. When peo- California's recent experiences with freezes have further constrained ple argue against new high-density high-density and affordable housing local governments from responding and affordable housing, often myths often contradict the myths. We can effectively to new growth. And are used to convince decision-makers now begin to rely on this recent affordable housing development, that the new development and its experience to reassure concerned while still funded in part by the residents don't belong there. residents that the myths don't have federal government, requires a larger Traffic will be too heavy; schools to come true. local commitment than ever before. will become Myth #1 households will continue to rent single-family homes because they High-density housing is affordable housing; affordable offer more space in low-density housing is high-density housing. neighborhoods. For the most part,of course, Fact #1 low-density neighborhoods offer more Not all high density housing is affordable to low-income families. expensive housing than high-density areas. Detached homes cost much more than most apartments and his myth expresses an essential downtown San Diego are all examples condominiums.Among new units,the truth:more units per acre mean of upper-income areas where housing difference is even more striking;new lower land costs per unit, densities are quite high. Similarly, high-density units are much more especially if local governments allow most Californians know that low-density likely to be affordable than new single- builders meaningful density bonuses; neighborhoods often accommodate family units. smaller units cost less to build than people of modest means.The residents Density is not always enough, larger ones.To encourage housing of these neighborhoods often moved however. To ensure affordability, affordability,California cities do need in shortly after the homes were built local governments must intervene to promote higher densities. (several decades ago)—and before with programs and additional But we also know from experience the huge escalation in California's concessions if the new high-density and observation that not all high-density home values that began in the early units are also to be affordable. For a housing is affordable to low-income 1970's. With assistance,many fami- list of resources on affordable housing families. San Francisco's Nob and lies with limited incomes will contin- techniques, see Resources:Making Telegraph Hills, Los Angeles' ue to buy homes in these neighbor- Housing More Affordable, at the end Wilshire Corridor, and high-rises in hoods. Many other low-income of this report. Myth #2 In many high-density High-density and affordable housing will cause too much traffic. neighborhoods, and in most neighborhoods with Fact #2 a mix of housing types, People who live in affordable housing own fewer cars and traffic isn't a big drive less. problem. n California's six largest metro- Low-income households own fewer politan areas, two-thirds of renters and over three-fourths of cars, drive less the households living below the poverty line own no vehicles or only one car, compared to 54 percent of all households and 44 percent of 30 2.5 homeowner households.3 With lower ayi car ownership rates come fewer 25 2.0 trips, and fewer single occupant 0 0 auto commutes. According to the o 20 National Personal Transportation 1.5 Survey in 1995, low-income y H households make 40 percent fewer M 15 d i v trips per household than other F- 1.0 ;e households. Recent traffic growth d 10 owes much to existing development. o In many high-density neighbor- d o.5 hoods, and in most neighborhoods v 5 'o with a mix of housing types, traffic _ isn't a big problem. Fewer auto trips o less $10- $15- $20- $35- $50- $75+ z occur in higher-density areas. Ind than $15 20 55 50 75 neighborhood of 15 homes to the $10 acre,one-third fewer auto trips Annual income ($000) occur, compared to a standard Source:U.S.Energy Information Administration,Residential Transportation Energy Comsumption Survey,Household Vehicles Energy Consumption,1994 suburban tract." A 1990 survey by the Sierra Club's Transportation Committee found that for every High-density housing can housing, stores serving doubling of neighborhood density, vehicle miles traveled are reduced encourage nearby retail neighborhood residents by 20 to 30 percent. development, along with move in, allowing residents Car ownership rates are less in ease of walking and transit to walk to buy groceries higher density areas. According to use. Mixing housing with or to the dry cleaner recent American Housing survey commercial development instead of driving. data, multifamily developments have lower car ownership rates than is ever more crucial for Transit connections also single-family home tracts. traffic control, since non- become more common work trips constitute the when neighborhood density To encourage housing largest number of trips. increases, as transit is affordability, California Over three-fourths of only cost-effective at cities need to promote trips in Southern densities above eight or higher densities. California are non-work 10 units per acre. trips. With high-density Myth #3 Librarians, sheriffs' High-density development strains public services and deputies, nurses,fire infrastructure. fighters, and many other Fact #3 vital members of our Compact development offers greater efficiency in use of communities all need public services and infrastructure. affordable housing. igher-density residential Infill development can sometimes commercial districts and increase development requires less take advantage of unused capacity taxable sales—the primary source extensive infrastructure net- in public services and infrastructure. of revenue in most California works than does sprawl. California Communities can save taxpayers jurisdictions. developers must usually pay for and new residents money when According to the American sufficient infrastructure capacity to housing construction is allowed in Housing Survey, the development of serve their own projects. When areas where infrastructure and service single-family homes is much more communities cannot take advantage capacity has already been paid for likely to cause strain on local economies of scale in providing and is underutilized.Infill development schools than high-density development. infrastructure, extension costs rise. can also make use of a transit and In most cases, a single-family home High-density housing helps provide provide better access to services, can have two to three times the economies of scale both in trunk while improving economic viability. numbers of school aged children lines and in treatment plants. The Higher-density infill residential per household.6 cost savings can be passed on to development can translate to higher new residents, and the smaller debt retail sales. By approving new high- load can help ensure fiscal stability density development in infill locations, throughout the community. communities can revitalize stagnant Myth #4 spouse and a child, the family People who live in high-density and affordable housing would be a very low-income household. A starting air-traffic won't fit into my neighborhood. controller in San Diego County,with Fact #4 income barely higher than $31,000 a year,would also qualify for affordable People who need affordable housing already live and work housing. Librarians, sheriffs'deputies, in your community. nurses,fire fighters, and many other vital members of our communities all need affordable housing. ccording to government than four-fifths (80%) of the area's People motivated by these concerns definitions of affordable median income are officially lower- may just need to"meet"the residents housing,families should income households;families earning of high-density and affordable housing. devote no more than 30% of their less than half of the median are Residents often have been long time income to rent or mortgage payments known as very low-income households. members of the community, and will and utilities. Affordable housing For example, a starting elementary continue to make contributions to often means housing whose residents or high-school teacher in Mountain their neighborhoods. For a list of don't pay too large a share of their View(Santa Clara County), with a resources that can introduce people incomes on rent or a mortgage. gross monthly income of around to those who live in high-density Households earning lower $3,200, can afford to pay $960 a and affordable housing, see incomes can have a variety of month in rent, which qualifies as Resources: Meeting the Residents of occupational and educational low-income if the teacher lives Affordable Housing, at the end of backgrounds. Families earning less alone; if the salary must support a this report. Myth #5 Architectural standards Affordable housing reduces property values. and adequate maintenance Fact #5 also strongly influence No study in California has ever shown that affordable property values housing developments reduce property values.' any studies have been done. The truth is the single Tenure much more important than most significant factor density in recent moves affecting property values is the pre- existing value of the land in a given community or area. This is turn is >10 unit buildings �, Owners based on supply and demand, 2-to 9-unit bldgs. proximity to major urban centers, single- 1� ° 79 91 nearb attractions�eachfront property;Y� family / l/ sz r° panoramic views), any negative homes 91 factors such as environmental contaminants, and availability of >10 unit buildings Renters adequate infrastructure and services. �' Architectural standards and 2-to 9-unit bldgs. i so°i° adequate maintenance also strongly q g Y single- 63%; influence property values,particularly family _ as they apply to affordable rental homes e8 properties. Properly maintained affordable housing developments, ❑ moved ❑ Did not move designed and built with sensitivity in past year to the architectural and aesthetic The majority of both renters and homeowners in California metropolitan areas move less than once a year.Homeowners move less often than renters,but standards desired by the community, even renters move seldom enough to form long-term ties to neighbors. may even increase property values." 'Source:U.S.Dept.of HUD,American Housing Surveys for San Francisco- Oakland,San Jose,Los Angeles-Long Beach,San Diego,Riverside-San Bernardino,and Anaheim-Santa Ana. Myth #6 Affordable housing tenants Residents of affordable housing move too often to be stable invest in a neighborhood community members. and communityJust as Fact #6 much as any other When rents are guaranteed to remain stable, tenants resident move less often. age children, where the mother and ccording to San Francisco's percent, and much less than market- father attend PTA meetings, and BRIDGE Housing, annual rate renters. spend their spare time enjoying turnover in their affordable Affordable housing tenants parks and other community facilities. housing projects is less than 10 percent invest in a neighborhood and These families and other affordable annually. This turnover rate is community just as much as any housing tenants are concerned for approximately the same as most other resident. Affordable housing the public's health and safety just single-family homeowners,around 10 tenants include families with school like other residents of the community. Myth #7 High-density doesn't mean High-density and affordable housing undermine community high-rise. When most people character. hear high-density housing, Fact #7 they imagine high-rise New affordable and high-density housing can always be housing. But in most designed to fit into existing communities. California cities, the market won't even support high-rise ensity, as measured in units buildings. Local governments most housing. More often than per acre, can be a deceiving often encourage infill by reducing not, high-density development measurement,but new housing regulations and restrictions. now means two- and three- at between 20 and 50 units per acre New affordable housing differs can be designed to fit in most little or not at all from any other story wood frame garden California communities. The best development. When BRIDGE apartments that frequently way to convince people of this is to Housing opened its affordable are similar in scale to large show them how well new housing Pickleweed housing development in home luxury housing. can fit into their neighborhoods. see upscale Mill Valley, potential buyers Resources: Increasing housing for neighboring condominiums densities, at the end of this part, for mistook Pickleweed for the market- homes. Thanks to sensitive work by a list of slide shows and videos. rate project. And when Habitat for experienced architects, the new Communities can also achieve Humanity built its self-help project townhomes fit in perfectly (see case higher densities by filling in the in Rancho Santa Margarita,local study). These developments are proof existing urban fabric with second developers and subcontractors that affordable housing doesn't mean units, duplexes, and conversion of contributed materials identical to high-rise slums. outmoded or abandoned commercial those used in nearby market-rate Myth #8 Management & Design are Key. Local governments can also help High-density and affordable housing increase crime. protect the entire community, including new affordable housing Fact #8 residents themselves, by attending to details at the project level. Most The design and use of public spaces has a far more important is effective professional significant affect on crime than density or income levels. onsite management,with strong tenant-screening and good security systems. Design, too, can play an ensity does not cause crime. particularly the sense of ownership and important role in protecting residents For many years social scientists control that residents have over these and neighbors of high-density or have asked whether high- areas, has far more significant affect affordable housing, especially by density housing causes crime. Not on crime than density or income levels. ensuring visibility.New developments one study has shown any relationship In neighborhoods suffering from should also contain a mix of unit between population or housing density disinvestment, particularly those types to accommodate different and violent crime rates;once residents' areas lacking jobs and community kinds of households. When residents incomes are taken into account, the services, crime can be higher. have different occupations and effect of density on non-violent crime Local governments can help family types, someone will probably decreases to non-significance. address legitimate concerns about be home in the development almost After studying housing and crime by working with existing all the time. neighborhoods throughout the country, residents and law enforcement to Oscar Newman concluded that the develop community-based strategies design and use of public spaces, and to reduce crime. In Conclusion planned light rail to handle a large housing and Silicon Valley's new number of new jobs. jobs. The site design, which features n this decade, California's In 1991, Renaissance pedestrian-friendly walkways and persistent affordable housing Associates, a partnership between easy connections to the Tasman shortage has become so General Atlantic Development and Light Rail,will allow Renaissance commonplace that it seems natural. Forest City Development, proposed Village residents to leave their Planners and elected officials must with the landowners that San Jose cars—in their garages altogether. stop believing another pervasive rezone the site for over 1,500 The development also shows myth: that they can do nothing to moderate -- and high-density rental that, with advance planning and sen- create affordable housing. This apartments and for-sale town homes, sitivity to neighbors' concerns, report shows that many California neighborhood retail, and a day-care NIMBY sentiments can be prevented. communities now believe they have center. San Jose readily agreed. The neighbors and the developers the creativity,resources, and will to The project developers started displayed an attitude of openness house all those who need shelter. As work early with neighbors living in that ensured both a smooth approval a result, they have established that, an existing single-family development process and a better project. in fact, California communities can on the site's northern boundary to become more open, more accepting, provide appropriate transitions into San Paulo and better places for old-timers,new Renaissance,while making best use Good Design Beats NIMBYism immigrants, or their children. of the large existing road. In response in Irvine Case Studies to neighbors'concerns,the developers located the lowest-density town home component adjacent to the Renaissance existing residences, and provided High-Density and Affordable ample setbacks between the new _ Housing Help Balance Silicon attached homes&the 1950s-vintage Valley single-family homes. ,tea �� The developers responded to concerns about traffic by canceling he City f Irvine one of ` `• initial plans for a through street that y California's largest planned would connect the existing neighbor- Tcommunities, added tens of hood with Renaissance Village. thousands of new jobs as the This high-density development information economy boomed. But ' shows that often repeated myths the City's housing supply—especially about the effects of high-density housing for families with modest High-technology firms create housing on public services and incomes—could not keep up with thousands of jobs in Silicon transportation aren't always true. its job creation. In late 1990s, the Valley, but housing San Jose's ambitious plans for City and The Irvine Company, construction does not keep pace. employment development in the which owns all the undeveloped New workers have to commute long area led the City to require the con- land in the City, identified a 15-acre distances to reach their jobs. As a struction of more infrastructure than multifamily site as appropriate for result, Silicon Valley suffers from was eventually necessary both on new affordable housing. some of the worst traffic in California the site itself and in neighboring To ensure that such a large and and from the State's highest housing areas of the City. Later, the City prominent new development would prices. In the late 1980s, San Jose determined that it could alleviate fit into West Park Village, the Irvine set out to clear traffic and ease the traffic throughout its road network neighborhood that surrounds it, The housing shortfall by changing its by shifting the location of new resi- Irvine Company contacted the Costa land-use policies. The Renaissance dences and workplaces. Mesa-based architecture firm of project, on a 56-acre site in north The composition of the project McLarand Vasquez & Partners San Jose, was originally designated itself, with over 250 affordable (MV&P). MV&P,which had also for research and development.It had apartments, market-rate apartments, designed the dense and highly enough infrastructure--including a and attached ownership units, popular Corte Bella town homes wide road and convenient access to further assures balance between the across the street from the project site, designed San Paulo's 382 units in surrounding developments and and nearby a number of boutiques 27 separate buildings, with flats and neighboring residents' desires to interspersed in a largely residential town homes of various sizes. San feel included in decisions, the neighborhood. The School and Paulo's overall density reaches about development team has created a Church occupied over half of a city 25 units per acre, with room left over successful model for emulation block and the Church had rights to for two swimming pools, generous throughout southern California. the entire block. The bishop was landscaping, a tot lot,and numerous Midtown interested in developing housing on own features to smooth the transition the underutilized area of the block. from San Paulo's surroundings into Sacramento One of the famous Victorian houses its highest-density areas. Residents Play a Role in succumbed to a fire by transients. To show the City's residents that Creating Affordable Family The Church had the remains removed affordable housing and its residents and was left with an eyesore and belong in Irvine,The Irvine Company Housing in Neighborhood potentially hazardous attraction next also met early with West Park Village to the School playground. Although residents. The neighbors were won there are high-rises housing elderly ;_ over by the open process and the � residents in the midtown neighbor- high-quality design. The Irvine hood, community members and Company and the City emphasized Saint Francis parishioners didn't that San Paulo's residents would be perceive an affordable multifamily members of the Irvine community. housing project fitting in to the Teachers, firefighters, and other existing residential neighborhood. essential contributors to the City's There was significant opposition to life previously forced out of the City building such a project. by its high housing prices would find Mercy Housing California an affordable place to live if San enlisted the assistance of Michael Paulo were approved. !4, Friedman, an experienced in fill Also key to the project's success F, development architect with Tong was the participation of its non-profit and Bottomly, to conduct a series of partner, San Francisco's BRIDGE workshops to listen to community Housing. BRIDGE provided vital and parishioner concerns. To build advice on affordable housing to the the desired number of family units other members of the development composed of one-, two-, and three- team, assisted in the City's approval idtown Sacramento boasts a bedroom units, the architectural process, and coordinated the project's diverse mix of housing and firm designed the building from the financing, which came from City& small businesses. Midtown inside out. Conscientious of local county sources and State-authorized streets are lined with early 1900 resident concerns, the project saved bonds and tax credits, with credit Victorian houses, some of which are the School playground while pre- enhancement by Sumitomo Bank, occupied by high-income families, serving the privacy of the new 46 Ltd. Forty percent of the units are others have been converted into affordable family housing units. affordable to families earning less multiple rental units and more still Additionally,local input resulted in than half of Orange County's median are occupied by office-type businesses, new public space for the community income of$56,500; another 50 units primarily law firms. to enjoy. The project has been built are also designated as affordable to Building family housing in an and occupied for several years and low- and moderate-income families. established downtown isn't easy, but has become an integral part of the In Irvine,the developer,architect, Mercy Housing California demonstrates midtown neighborhood. Residents non-profit partner, and City staff that when the lines of communication and parishioners, who at first feared needed to overcome one key obstacle: are opened, a dense multifamily the project, now point with pride to unfamiliarity.Residents'preconceptions project can gain public support. the community asset they had a fit the myths—and not the reality— Saint Francis of Assisi hand in creating. of today's mixed-income, non-profit Elementary School and Church is sponsored affordable housing. By located in a midtown neighborhood, being sensitive to both the design of a block from historic Sutter's Fort San Diego southern European character ideas,was one of six new successful Small Scale, Mixed-Income remains. Always a neighborhood affordable housing projects that Housing is good fit for Little first and then a commercial and has received the State Housing Italy Neighborhood Development light industrial center, Little Italy's Director's Award for Housing spirit is perhaps best typified by the Development Excellence in 2000. rebuilt Washington Elementary The Little Italy development _ School and development of the consists of 16 row homes, 12 adjacent Amici Park, which serves affordable rental lofts and 37 both as a playground for the school low-and moderate-income apart- " and a park including a bocce ball ments.This successful development i court for the community. Its lovely demonstrates that smaller scale, u vistas now offer an urban neighbor- mixed-income housing can be hood with single-family homes, infilled in an urban setting. he sloping landscape at the condominiums, lofts and apartments. Continuing infill for-sale and northern downtown edge of The India Street commercial strip is rental residential projects is San Diego Bay was once alive with Italian restaurants, small further reinforcing little Italy's home to the many Italian families cafes,art and graphic studios/galleries, distinctive character. Property has who derived a living from the highly specialty shops and low-rise offices. been acquired recently by the successful tuna fishing industry. Little Italy Neighborhood Redevelopment Agency for future Although large-scale commercial Development (LIND), one of the housing developments. fishing is now a memory,the district's region's most innovative residential What Does Density Look Like? Providing a broad range o housing densities is key to ensuring housing opportunities for all residents. Density is calculated by determining the number of dwelling units per acre (du/ac). But, what do different housing densities look like? a: Coggins Square Pleasant Hill,Walnut Creek,CA Chesnut Place,Orange,CA Woodpark Apartments,Aliso Viejo,CA 42 Units/Acre 100 Unit/Acre 24 Units/Acre a - Casa San Juan,Oxnard,CA San Marcos Apartments,Irvine,CA Fullerton City Lights,Fullerton,CA 64 Units/Acre of Family Housing 64 Units/Acre 83 Units/Acre �t• � Russell Manor,Sacramento,CA Arroyo Vista Apartments,Mission w,u � ,vA San Paulo Apartments,Irvine,CA 66 Unites/Acre of Elderly Housing 14 Units/Acre 25 Unit/Acre O Resources zoning and subdivision reform,growth man- and especially affordable housing and/or agement,impact fees,environmental legislation, high-density housing. and administrative reform.$29 includes Some communities will need to see more shipping and handling.To order,call the Increasing Housing Densities in specific examples of good high-density Planners'Bookstore at 312/955-9100. New and Existing Development and affordable housing before being con- vinced that they can live with it.In other Affordable Housing:Restoring the Dream.15- Good Neighbors:Affordable Family Housing cases,residents may need to meet people who minute video(1989)by the Urban Land (Design for Living)by Tom Jones,William live in affordable housing.Almost universally, Institute promotes cost savings in single-family Pettus(Contributor),Michael Pyatok,and R. local governments and planners need advice housing through flexible development standards Thomas Jones.1996.McGraw-Hill Professional and information about how best to ensure the and expedited processing.$34.95 for non-ULT Publishing.Based on the acclaimed AIA design of quality affordable and high-density members.Order number A-17.To order,call Design for Housing initiative and supported housing in their communities.Luckily,more 800/321-5011. by and NEA grant.This is an authoritative and more resources--books,pamphlets,hand- The Effects of Subsidized and Affordable guide to modern affordable housing design. books,slide shows,and videos--are becoming Housing on Property Values:A Survey of This landmark book provides architects, available.This list includes only a few Research.Out of 15 published papers on sub- landscape architects,planners,developers, resources;those interested are encouraged to advocates,government officials,and policy contact the California Department of Housing capped housing,group homes for the handi-ed,and manufactured housing,14 con- makers with workable answers for the design and Community Development(916/445-4728) capped, of affordable,anesthetically pleasing housing. for ordering information on most of these pub- eluded that this housing had no significant or oe and for additional suggestions. negative effects on the values of neighboring Density by Design:New Directions in properties.Some reported positive property Residential Development by Steven D.Fader, Making Housing More Affordable value effects.Free.To order,call HCD at Vincent Scully. 137 pages 2nd edition,March 916/445-4728. 15,2000,Urban Land Institute(ULI).This Blue Print 2001:Housing Element Ideas and document provides innovative solutions to the Solutions for a Sustainable and Affordable Second Units.This paper,updated e reflect challenge of developing higher density housing 1990 amendments to State law increasing the Future,Bay Area Housing,2001.Blue Print that will be successful in the marketplace. 2001 includes a large directory of housing permissible size of second units,describes the Case studies of 14 projects show how others programs and strategies with a wealth of case advantages of and statutory requirements for have implemented the best new ideas in studies,including adaptive reuse,air rights the development of second units.Free.To residential development and design.Projects development,infill development,second units order,call HCD at 916/445-4728. covered range in density from single-family and density bonus developments. Meeting the Residents of subdivisions to downtown high-rise apartments and illustrate many up-to-the There Goes the Neighborhood?The Impact of Affordable Housing minute concepts:new urbanism,transit-oriented Subsidized Multi-Family Housing on Urban development,mixed-income and mixed-housing Neighborhoods,by Edward Goetz,Hin Kin California Homeless and Housing Coalition:A types,urban infill,and adaptive use.They Lam and Anne Heitlin er.Center for Urban 42-minute video,Neighbors in Need,documents g also reveal trends and standards for developing and Regional Affairs and Neighborhood the experiences of three organizations in � g projects that provide a sense of place,use Planning or Community Revitalization, establishing facilities for the homeless.The g Y land efficiently without compromising livability, Minneapolis,Minnesota,1996 1991 video features interviews with residents and that can pass the twin tests of governmental and clients,as well as with one-skeptical approval and marketability. Affordable Housing Slide Show.This 1989 neighbor who now advocate for other similar slide show,also from LHEAP,focuses on the facilities,in Hayward,San Mateo County,and Compact Development Presentation.This pres- San Francisco Bay Area,on techniques for Los Angeles.$15.To order,call 916/447-0390. entation with 39 slides from the Local achieving housing affordability;available on Government Commission highlights some of loan from HCD for the cost of mailing plus a Realize the Dream.The City of Fremont g P the needs,myths and misconceptions about Department De Housing deposit.For more information,call HCD at g p produced a five-minute p compact housing and its role in helping to 916/445-4728. video,now available through HCD introducing create more livable communities.Slide shows decision-makers and citizens to the residents may be purchased or rented.$50.00 for Affordable Housing Handbook.A 1991 publi- of three of the City's bond-financed mixed- complete set,$2.50 for individual slides,or cation of the California Coalition for Rural income apartment projects.Features inter- rent for$15.00 plus$50.00 deposit. Housing.This handbook offers an exhaustive views with residents of both subsidized and list of programs and policies that local govern- unsubsidized units. For information on how to Multifamily Residential Design Principles.The ments can use to ensure the construction, obtain,call HCD at 916/445-4728. City of Sacramento published this excellent rehabilitation,and preservation of affordable guidebook November 19,1999 to provide housing.$5.00 To order,call CCRH at We Call It Home:A Tour of Affordable Housing. multifamily design guidelines for the City 916/443-4448. 16-minutes. Recent video produced by Mann planning Commission. County's Ecumenical Association for Housing Creating a Local Advisory Commission on (EAH)introduces several of EAH's projects Big Blue Book of Affordable Housing Case Regulatory Barriers to Affordable Housing.This and the people who live there,in Marin and Studies,Alexander and Edwards Publishing, 1992 publication by the US Department of Contra Costa counties.$15 to purchase, 2000 Compact and Balanced Development: Housing and Urban Development guides local postage costs to borrow.Call Betty Pagett at Designs for California Living.This 15-minute governments that want to establish committees 415/258-1800. video by the American Institute of Architects to identify and reform ordinances and policies California Council provides tangible examples that reduce the supply of housing and NIMBY fears,community perceptions:Analysis PP Y g of infill and higher-density developments that increase its costs.$4.To order,call HUD User of Affordable and Market Rate Housing enjoy community support,and highlights the at 800/245-2691. Developments in Oakland,California,by role of local governments in their approval Cathy Cha.Dept.of City and Regional Planning, and construction.AIA members:$25;non- Affordable Housing:Proactive&Reactive University of California at Berkeley,1996 members:construction. To order,members: 916/448-9082.;non- Planning strategies.This recent publication ll foow-u In late 1993,the ALACC will release a discusses both"affirmative"measures such HCD offers a website with a section titled: P as,inclusionary zoning,linkage,affordable NIMBY Resources at www.hed.ca.gov/hpd/nimby. urban design video demonstrating how to housing finance,affordable housing preservation, The page includes resources and tools for respond to community concerns,increase and infill-and reactive measures,including addressing NIMBY concerns about housing density,encourage mixed-use transit-oriented development,and obtain innovative financing. Room Enough.This publication,by San 'Cambridge Systematics and Parsons Start Hoffman Francisco's Greenbelt Alliance,discusses five Brinkerhoff Quade&Douglas.Making the FAICP,Stanley R.Hoffman Associates,Los Angeles strategies using vacant land more effectively, Land Use Transportation Air Quality M.Thomas Jacobson building more housing along major streets, Connection:Analysis of Alternatives.Vol.5 JD,AICP,Sonoma State University bringing homes and people downtown,adding Friends of Oregon second units on existing home sites,and Vivian Kahn recycling lands no longer needed for industry 'American Housing Survey,1999;National FAICP,Kahn/Mortimer/Associates,Oakland that communities can use to accommodate Multi Housing Council,Research Notes, more housing while meeting concerns about August 24,2000 Sandra Massa-Lavitk community character and open space.$9.To Palm Desert order,call Greenbelt Alliance at 415/543-4291. Paul Cummings and John Landis, "Relationships between Affordable Housing Mike McCoy ftnsit-Oriented,Mixed-Use and Developments and Neighboring Property University of California,Davis Infill Development Values"(Berkeley: University of California Michael Moore Institute of Urban&Regional Development,1993) City of Petaluma Building Livable Communities:A Policy- 'California Department of Housing and John W.McKenna maker's Guide to Infill Development.The Community Development,"The Effects of San Clemente January 2001 publication from the Local Subsidized and Affordable Housing on Government Commission helps to answer two Property Values: A Survey of Research" Roberta e&As of a policymaker's most frequently asked AICP,Muntli &Asociates,San Francisco questions:"Why build in town?"and"What (Sacramento:DHCD, 1988),2 Steve Preston can local government do to encourage infill Published b the California development?"This guidebook suggests a y FAICP,City of San Gabriel Planning Roundtable number of ways to create infill development in Marvin D.Roos your community.These include:planning The California Planning Roundtable is an AICP,Mainiero,Smith and Associates,Palm Springs proactively;assuring public participation; organization of experienced planning Janet Ruggiero using public facilities and development to professionals who are members of the FAICP,City of Citrus Heights attract investment;assisting with project American Planning Association.Membership financing;zoning for mixed-use and higher- is balanced between the public and private David Salazar density development;encouraging rehabilitation; sectors,and between Northern and Southern AICP,Claremont Graduate University providing in-kind assistance;streamlining the California.The mission of the Roundtable is R.Ann Siracusa permit process;providing public services;,and to promote creativity and excellence in addressing toxic contamination. planning by providing leadership in addressing AICP,Santee Building Livable Communities:A Policymaker's important,unresolved planning issues in Richard B.Stephens Guide to Transit-Oriented Development.This California. The AEI-CASC Companies,Colton is a companion guidebook on transit-oriented Members of the California Planning Susan Stoddard,PhD development from the Local Government FAICP,InfoUse,Berkeley Commission.More and more,community leaders Roundtable, May 2002: are recognizing that building residences, Jeff Carpenter WO Tescher Associates, stores and work places near transit stops can AICP,Community Redevelopment Agency,City of Los Angeles EIP ssociates,Los Angeles play a major role in creating places where we Elaine Costello Frank Wein enjoy living,working and playing.The guide- AICP,City of Mountain View FAICP,DPDS,URS Corporation,Los Angeles book addresses the questions of"why build near transit?"and"why should elected Paul C.Crawford Mark Winogrond officials,land-use agencies and developers FAICP,Crawford Multari&Clark Associates,San Luis Obispo AICP,City of Culver City pay more attention to development near transit Cathy E.Creswell Project Team than to any other kind of development?"The Calif Dept.Housing and Community Development , guidebook has helpful advice,model examples, Project Manager: and resources to help create livable, Linda C.Dalton Susan DeSantis transit-oriented communities in your region. PhD,AICP,California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo California Planning Roundtable project team: Notes David Early Susan A.DeSantis Wayne Goldberg 'Statewide Housing Plan:Raising the Roof. IBI Group,Irvine Vivian Kahn Marvin Roos California Housing Development Projections Michael Dyett Janet Ruggiero and Constraints 1997-2020,California AICP,Dyett and Bhatia,San Francisco Department of Housing and Community California Department of Housing&Community Development,May 2000 David Early Design,Community&Environment,Berkeley Development project team: 2Still Locked Out:New Data Confine that Witty t,rresUM6 California's Housing Affordability Crisjs Janet Fairbanks Paul McDougall Continues,California Budget Project, AICP,San Diego Association of Governments,San Diego Paul Dirksen March 2001 Joanne Freilich Report Design and Production: `American Housing Survey AICP,UCLA Extension Public Policy Program,Los Angeles Pierre Rademaker Design Wayne Goldberg www.rademakerdesign.com 'John Holtzclaw, 1997m Metropolitan AICP,City of Santa Rosa Transportation Commission,1990 Household Cover Rendering©2002 Travel Survey Al Herson Elizabeth Moule&Stefanos Polyzoides FAICP,SAIL,Sacramento Architects and Urbanists Sharon Hightower Pasadena,CA Hightower/Associates,Claremont 11 Do Affordable Housing Projects Harm Suburban Communities? Crime, Property Values, and Property Taxes in Mt. Laurel, New Jersey Len Albright Elizabeth S. Derickson Douglas S. Massey Office of Population Research Princeton University 0 Electronic copy available at: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1865231 Do Affordable Housing Projects Harm Suburban Communities? Crime, Property Values, and Property Taxes in Mt. Laurel, New Jersey ABSTRACT: This paper offers a mixed-method investigation of the community-level consequences of suburban affordable housing development. Opponents of affordable housing development often suggest that the creation of affordable housing will harm surrounding communities. Feared consequences typically include increases in crime, decreases in property values, and increases in taxes. Underlying these fears is the hypothesis that the introduction of affordable housing is associated with community decline. To empirically evaluate this hypothesis, the paper uses the case of Mt. Laurel, NJ—the site of landmark affordable housing legal cases and subsequent 100%-affordable housing development. Employing a time series group control experiment, we use simple OLS regression to compare crime, property value, and property tax outcomes in Mt. Laurel to the outcomes in similar nearby municipalities that did not build comparable 100%-affordable housing developments. We fmd that affordable housing development was not associated with increase crime, decreased property values, and increased taxes. To better understand the community-level consequences of affordable housing development, we also analyze 102 in-depth interviews with residents,police officers, and public officials. Overall, the findings suggest that affordable housing does not harm the communities in which it is developed. We discuss the implications of these findings for sociological understandings of neighborhood effects and for policy dilemmas. Key words: geography of poverty, suburbs, affordable housing, neighborhood effects, mixed methods 1 Electronic copy available at: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1865231 REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION MASTER FILE NO: SP2012-012 APPLICANT: Bethel Church HEARING DATE: 7-26-12 600 Shockley Rd. ACTION DATE: 8-16-12 Richland, WA 99352 BACKGROUND REQUEST FOR SPECIAL PERMIT: Location of a Church in a C-1 District 1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Legal: Parcel # 115-502-016: a portion of the South half of Section 8, Township 9 North, Range 29 WM; General Location: 5202 Outlet Dr. Property Size: Approximately 11 acres 2. ACCESS: The site has access from Sandifur Parkway by way of Outlet Drive 3. UTILITIES: The site is served by municipal water and sewer. 4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The property is currently zoned C-1 (Retail Business). All surrounding property is zoned C-1 and undeveloped. 5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The site is designated in the Plan for future commercial uses. The Plan does not specifically address churches, but elements of the Plan encourage the promotion of orderly development including the development of zoning standards for off-street parking and other development standards. 6. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The City of Pasco is the lead agency for this project. Based on the SEPA checklist, the adopted City Comprehensive Plan, City development regulations, and other information, a threshold determination resulting in a Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) has been issued for this project under WAC 197- 11-158. ANALYSIS The application involves the use of four suites in the Broadmoor Outlet Mall for church activities. The suites in question have been vacant for about four years except for the occasional seasonal costume store. The last major tenant in the space was the CO2 Furniture store. The Outlet Mall contains over 103,000 square feet of floor space. Forty-one thousand square feet is devoted to institutional uses (Charter College, World Life Church and the Police Mini Station). Thirty-three thousand square feet of 1 floor area within the Mall is vacant. The Famous Footwear shoe store and the Children's Museum have recently vacated the Mall. The proposed church has signed a lease for 17,936 square feet of floor area. The church site is located in the southeast corner of the Outlet Complex. The church plans to hold services on Sunday mornings at 9:00 am and 11:00 am. The church also plans to have small group meetings Sunday evening and at various times during the week. The church office will be open during regular business hours. The lease agreement requires the church to participate in all common area charges shared by all lessees within the Mall. The proposed church location has parking to the north and south side of the building. The Outlet Mall was constructed to meet Building Code requirements for retail activities. Places of religious worship are classified in the Building Code as "A" occupancies. When a building is changed from one occupancy class to another (from an "M" [Mercantile] to an "A" [Assembly] for example) the building is required to meet life/safety standards required for the new occupancy classification. The main sanctuary area is large enough to allow seating for at least 450 people. To meet the "A" occupancy requirements proper exiting, exit signage, emergency lighting, occupancy separation walls (between retail space and church space), additional restroom facilities and fire sprinklers may be required by the Building Code. These requirements are all based on the occupant load of the building. The "A" occupancy requirements of the Building Code have been developed from years of experience with places of assembly and have been enacted to promote the life, safety, and protection of people occupying churches and other gathering places. The Outlet Mall was built in 1995 for retail commercial purposes and was originally marginally successful in attracting retail tenants. As the Outlet Mall business model decreased in popularity, occupancy rates at the Broadmoor Outlet Mall declined. Thirty-two percent of the Broadmoor Mall is currently vacant and another forty-one percent of the Mall is occupied by institutional uses such as Charter College, the World Life Christian Center and the Mini Police Station. Without the institutional uses seventy-three percent of the Mall would be vacant. While locating non-tax generating uses in a commercial area with freeway visibility is generally not a good choice for promoting additional retail activity it may be temporarily justified given the ongoing vacancy issues at the Broadmoor Outlet Mall. The Mall is seen as a temporary location for the 2 proposed church which is eventually planning on finding a permanent site owned by the church. It seems probable that once commercial interest in the Outlet Mall increases, non-retail leases of mall space will correspondingly decrease. Another potential problem with a church locating in a commercial area is the fact that some retail establishments or restaurants sell or serve liquor. The issue is typically addressed by placing a condition on the Special Permit approval limiting the church's ability to object to a liquor license. FINDINGS OF FACT Findings of fact must be entered from the record. The following are initial findings drawn from the background and analysis section of the staff report. The Planning Commission may add additional findings to this listing as the result of factual testimony and evidence submitted during the open record hearing. 1. Churches are unclassified uses requiring review through the special permit process prior to locating or expanding in any zoning district. 2. The proposed church site is zoned C-1. 3. The proposed site is located at 5202 Outlet Drive. 4. The site was originally developed as the Broadmoor Outlet Mall. 5. The Outlet Mall contains over 103,000 square feet of floor area. 6. About thirty-three percent of the Outlet Mall is vacant. 7. About forty percent of the Outlet Mall is occupied by institutional uses (Charter College, World Life Church and Police Mini Station). 8. The suites proposed to be occupied by the church have been vacant for four years. 9. The church proposes to lease 17,936 square feet of floor space. 10. Churches are classified as an "A" occupancy under the International Building Code. 11. "A" occupancy building design standards are different than the "M" occupancy standards. 12. The Mall was designed and built for "M" occupancy loads. 13. The proposed sanctuary is large enough to hold at least 450 people. 14. The Municipal Code (PMC 25.78.170) requires one off-street parking space for every 10 lineal feet of bench (pew) seating or one space for every 4 chairs in a church. 3 15. Based on the occupancy loading of 450 people, 113 parking spaces would be required. 16. Parking areas are located to the north and south of the proposed church location with more than 113 parking spaces. CONCLUSIONS BASED ON THE 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 and determine whether or not the proposal: (1) Will the proposed use be in accordance with the goals, policies, objectives and text of the Comprehensive Plan? The Plan does not specifically address churches, but elements of the Plan encourage the promotion of orderly development including the development of zoning standards for off-street parking and other development standards. (2) Will the proposed use adversely affect public infrastructure? The Outlet Mall was designed to handle significant traffic with a large parking lot and interior circulation. The proposed church will conduct services at times when other Mall traffic is generally low and utility usage is low. (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 church will be located in the Broadmoor Outlet Mall and no exterior changes are planned to the building. The current store front character will be maintained. The church will participate in common area maintenance costs to maintain the common area of the Mall. The intended character of the Outlet Mall is retail in nature. The proposed church is not expected to impact the character of the mall in a permanent manner. (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 proposed church will be located in part of the existing Outlet Mall and no structures will be built or added to the Mall. The site design will remain unchanged. The church will be paying market rent and will be responsible for common area charges like all tenants of the Mall. The 4 location of the church within the Outlet Mall will occupy space intended for retail businesses. Allowing the church to be located in the Mall on a long-term basis may discourage the development/location of commercial enterprises within the Mall. This concern could be addressed by limiting the time period for allowing the church to remain in the Mall. (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 church will generate no more dust, vibrations, flashing lights or fumes than would be expected by permitted retail uses of the zoning district. Traffic generated by the church will occur mostly on Sunday mornings when Mall traffic is minimal. Small weekly meetings will generate minimal traffic on other days of the week. (6) Will the proposed use endanger the public health or safety if located and developed where proposed, or in anyway will become a nuisance to uses permitted in the district? Past history of church operations within the City has shown they do not endanger public health or safety and are generally not nuisance generators. RECOMMENDATION MOTION for Findings of Fact: I move to adopt Findings of Fact and Conclusions therefrom as contained in the August 16, 2012 staff report. MOTION for Recommendation: I move based on the Findings of Fact and Conclusions therefrom the Planning Commission recommend the City Council grant a special permit to the Bethel Church for the location of a church in suites 100,110,116 and 118 at 5202 Outlet Drive with the conditions as contained in the August 16, 2012 staff report. 5 APPROVAL CONDITIONS 1) The special permit shall be personal to the applicant; 2) The space leased to the church must comply with all requirements of the International Building Code for an "A" occupancy prior to occupancy by the church; 3) The storefront appearance of the leased space cannot be altered except as needed to comply with Building Code exiting requirements; 4) The building, including entrances and restrooms, must be ADA/handicap-compliant prior to occupancy by the church; 5) Occupancy of the building for church purposes will not be permitted until the church complies with all conditions listed above; 6) The church 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; 7) This special permit shall be valid for a period of three years and will expire on October 1, 2015. 6 Vicinit y Item: Bethel Church Special Permit A pplicant: Bethel Church N Ma p File # : SP2012-012 I}1 r n - II'', _ _ � } r - �`� �► [ ()lil),.I)}2 - X111 NATCHE' w 4E rd 4:,11}II:[ R ]'liNN - ..a-.� .'C)� - --' ; �; ���� •- 111�1H1:F1° 1)1•�_ , iI{}III 111111Ry ![}R( 141'I:It „ rr. •SITE t[-.I ON . ()1 F 4_N,,B BU 431 n^] FT v]IIRzm HR 1)R ' I 513[ 1 1.)]R f fi LO F tj ,,i.. .. -eft_. .. -�y� __ � - r-� �--�._ iry,Y �`��• I 4 _ Permit Item: Bethel Church Special Land Use Ma pp A licant: Bethel Church N p . File # . SP2012-012 V NASH DR A Vacant Comm. Vacant N H DR z & DESOTO DR Office A Office Vacant TM Office Vacant Office Office CORD DR SANDIFUR PKWY A a W TOTTENHAM CT- Vacant � � W O .4 Single Family Residences Vacant SITE i SINGTONrC-T x a z �iJEENS-Bi�RY` L7 A Vacant Ii ATHROW C CADILLY DR 161 Z .l� a 2 � KINGSB R Commercial w Vacant T,N o A °SAS H �a Commercial School NIFR's Vacant �N RV Park Zonin g Item: Bethel Church Special Permit Map Applicant: Bethel Church N File # : SP2012-012 NASH DR N H D A - M z 1 DESOTO DR W —1 A z Retail Business CORD DR SANDIFUR PKWY � C4 ST W T TTENHAM a � H O ,Z.1 CASTE R-1 SITE ' (Low-Density Residential) z UEEATS�-U�I��R L7 A A IATHROW C CADILLY a W KINGSB RY a a A AG`�As CR LBO C-1 (Regional Commercial) (Retail Business) 4� C-1 (Retail Business) BROADMOOR PARK-RETAIL SITE PLAN BROADMOOR PARK 5200 Outlet Drive N Pasco, Washington w w w STORE ROSTER via n cn 5202 AVAILABLE 17,936 SF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5216 5220 5252 5222 Van Heusen 11,720 5224 Kitchen Collection SF 5226 AVAILABLE 4,856 SF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5230 City of Pasco Police Dept. PAR.IN 5232 AVAILABLE 1,194 SF 5234 GNC 5250 Food Court Storage A/B National Maintenance eaoAUm o Storage C AVAILABLE 564 SF BIVO. ROAD 66 5244 5238 AVAILABLE 955 SF 7,486 SF n1CH1AN eZ I xa 5240 AVAILABLE 889 SF 5242 AVAILABLE 1,198 SF 5242 1,198 S PASCO 5244 Dress Barn 5240 889 S au 5250 World Life Christian Center 5238 955 SF N KENNFWICK 5252 World Life Christian Center 5262 Charter College . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5274 Charter College 5278 Charter College Storage 5236A 5288 Paper Factory Storage '2' 5292 Broadmoor Fitness Storage 523 b 6 E > > E. L 52341,181 S b hrye w 5232 1,194 S ° v° ------- ----- 5230 15189 SF h b Leasing & Management by. a NAl Black M N q Comnleiptil Rw31 Estate Services. VJOddwide. h n^ ti 107 S. Howard St. Ste. 500 Spokane, WA 99201 (509) 623-1000 � « � \, < . � � \ � . \ • ` §� ��A / T Lt Y yyy ` y�1 V f QIR lox e r � O 1 � r �� � � � �:± ; . ,. sS . ry. ?. 1� s '. I T' .. , I � • � • ,� i ,J J � _ r `y �'.r: u • � � �y ,l 1 �I' _ � I l a - ' !�a Q I I I . i REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION MASTER FILE NO: SP2012-013 APPLICANT: World Life Christian Ctr. HEARING DATE: 7-26-12 732 W. 19th Avenue ACTION DATE: 8-16-12 Kennewick, WA 99337 BACKGROUND REQUEST FOR SPECIAL PERMIT: Location of a Church in a C-1 District 1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Legal: Parcel # 115-502-016: a portion of the South half of Section 8, Township 9 North, Range 29 WM; General Location: 5252 Outlet Dr. Property Size: Approximately 11 acres 2. ACCESS: The site has access from Sandifur Parkway by way of Outlet Dr. 3. UTILITIES: The site is served by municipal water and sewer. 4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The property is currently zoned C-1 (Retail Business) All surrounding property is zoned C-1 and undeveloped. 5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The site is designated in the Plan for commercial uses. The Plan does not specifically address churches, but elements of the Plan encourage the promotion of orderly development including the development of zoning standards for off-street parking and other development standards. 6. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The City of Pasco is the lead agency for this project. Based on the SEPA checklist, the adopted City Comprehensive Plan, City development regulations, and other information, a threshold determination resulting in a Determination of Non-significance (DNS) has been issued for this project under WAC 197- 11-158. BACKGROUND The application involves the continued use of three suites in the Broadmoor Outlet Mall for church activities. In November of 2008 the World Life Christian Center was granted a special permit (MF# SP08-008) for the location of a church at 5252 Outlet Drive. The special permit has expired and the church is now seeking to renew their previously approved special permit. In addition, the church was granted a special permit (MF#SP10-019) in 2010 allowing a pre- 1 school to be located within the church. The pre-school special permit has no expiration date. Both the church and pre-school have been operating in the Outlet Mall without generating complaints received by the city. ANALYSIS The Outlet Mall contains over 103,000 square feet of floor space; forty-one thousand (41,000) square feet of which is devoted to institutional uses (Charter College, World Life Christian Center and the Police Mini Station). Thirty-three thousand square feet of floor area is vacant. The World Life Christian Center is leasing 11,720 square feet of floor area. The church site is located in the northwest corner of the Outlet Complex. The church holds services on Wednesday evenings from 6:30 pm to 9:00 pm and on Sunday mornings from 8:00 am to 1:00 pm. During the week the church office are open during regular office hours. Although the church is renewing their lease and special permit, they are in the process of securing property on Court Street and planning to relocate to a more permanent facility. The Mall remains thirty-two percent vacant. Approximately forty percent of the Mall is being used for non-tax generating uses which are not an ideal choice of uses within commercial areas with high visibility and freeway access, but given the degree of suite vacancy in the Mall, tax exempt uses may be a viable option at this time. The Outlet Mall was built in 1995 for retail commercial purposes and was marginally successful in originally attracting retail tenants. As the Outlet Mall business model decreased in popularity occupancy rates the Broadmoor Outlet Mall declined. Thirty-two percent of the Broadmoor Mall is currently vacant and another forty-one percent of the Mall is occupied by institutional uses such as Charter College, the World Life Christian Center and the Mini Police Station. Without the institutional uses seventy-three percent of the Mall would be vacant. While locating non-tax generating uses in a commercial area with freeway visibility is generally not a good choice for promoting additional retail activity it may be temporarily justified given the ongoing vacancy issues at the Broadmoor Outlet Mall. The Mall is seen as a temporary location for the proposed church which is eventually planning on finding a permanent site owned by the church. The lease agreement requires the church to participate in all common area charges shared by all lessees within the Mall. 2 The proposed church location has parking to the east, west and north. The Outlet Mall was constructed to meet building code requirements for retail activities. Places of religious worship are classified in the building code as "A" occupancies. When a building is changed from one occupancy class to another (from an "M" [Mercantile] to an "A" [Assembly] for example) the building is required to meet life/safety standards required for the new occupancy classification. The church addressed the building occupancy requirements prior to locating in the Outlet Mall over three years ago. No additional building modifications are anticipated for compliance with the building code. Another potential problem with a church locating in a commercial area is the fact that some retail establishments or restaurants sell or serve liquor. The issue is typically addressed by placing a condition on the Special Permit approval limiting the church's ability to object to a liquor license. FINDINGS OF FACT Findings of fact must be entered from the record. The following are initial findings drawn from the background and analysis section of the staff report. The Planning Commission may add additional findings to this listing as the result of factual testimony and evidence submitted during the open record hearing. 1. Churches are unclassified uses and require review through the special permit process prior to locating or expanding in any zoning district. 2. The proposed church site is zoned C-1. 3. The proposed site is located at 5252 Outlet Drive. 4. The site was originally developed as the Broadmoor Outlet Mall. 5. The Outlet Mall contains over 103,000 square feet of floor area. 6. Thirty-three percent of the outlet Mall is vacant. 7. Nine suites of the Mall are occupied. 8. The church proposes to lease 11,720 square feet of floor space. 9. Churches are classified as an "A" occupancy under the International Building Code. 10. The Mall was designed and built for "M" occupancy loads. 11. The "A" occupancy building design standards are different from the "M" occupancy standards. 12. Half of the leased space is large enough to hold 400 people. 3 13. The Municipal Code (PMC 25.78.170) requires one off-street parking space for every 10 lineal feet of bench (pew) seating or one space for every 4 chairs in a church. 14. Based on the occupancy loading of 400 people, 100 parking spaces would be required. 15. The proposed church location has parking to the east, west and north. 16. In 2008 the World Life Christian Center was granted a special permit for church activities at 5252 Outlet Drive. 17. In 2010 the World Life Christian Center was granted a special permit for pre-school activities at 5252 Outlet Drive. CONCLUSIONS BASED ON THE 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. and determine whether or not the proposal: (1) Will the proposed use be in accordance with the goals, policies, objectives and text of the Comprehensive Plan? The Plan does not specifically address churches, but elements of the Plan encourage the promotion of orderly development including the development of zoning standards for off-street parking and other development standards. (2) Will the proposed use adversely affect public infrastructure? The Outlet Mall was designed to handle significant traffic with a large parking lot and interior circulation. The church will conduct services at times when other Mall traffic is generally low and utility usage is low. (3) Will the proposed use be constructed, maintained and operated to be in harmony with existing or intended character of the general vicinity? The church is located in the Broadmoor Outlet Mall and no exterior changes are planned to the building. The current store front character will be maintained. The church will participate in common area maintenance costs to maintain the common area of the Mall. The current lease proposal is for a three year period, expiring in 2015, giving the Mall owner the option of terminating the lease after three years if demand for retail space in the Mall improves. 4 The proposed church will be located in the Broadmoor Outlet Mall and no exterior changes are planned to the building. The current store front character will be maintained. The church will participate in common area maintenance costs to maintain the common area of the Mall. The intended character of the Outlet Mall is retail in nature. The proposed church is not expected to impact the character of the mall in a permanent manner. (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 church is located in part of the Outlet Mall and no structures will be built or added to the Mall. The site design will remain unchanged. The church will be paying market rent and will be responsible for common area charges like all tenants of the Mall. (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 church generates no more dust, vibrations, flashing lights or fumes than would be expected by permitted retail uses of the zoning district. Traffic generated by the church will occur mostly on Sunday mornings when Mall traffic is minimal. Wednesday evening church activities generally generate less traffic than Sunday morning meetings. (6) Will the proposed use endanger the public health or safety if located and developed where proposed, or in anyway will become a nuisance to uses permitted in the district? Churches are generally accepted uses in or near commercially zoned areas. Past history of church operations within the City has shown they do not endanger public health or safety and are generally not nuisance generators. 5 RECOMMENDATION MOTION for Findings of Fact: I move to adopt findings of fact and conclusions as contained in the August 16, 2012 staff report. MOTION for Recommendation: I move based on the findings of fact and conclusions that the Planning Commission recommend the City Council grant a special permit to World Life Christian Center for the location of a church at 5252 Outlet Drive with the conditions as contained in the August 16, 2012 staff report. APPROVAL CONDITIONS 1) The special permit shall be personal to the applicant; 2) The space leased to the church must maintain compliance with all requirements of the International Building Code for an "A" occupancy; 3) The storefront appearance of the leased space(s) may not be altered except as needed to comply with Building Code exiting requirements; 4) The building, including entrances and restrooms, must be ADA/handicap-compliant; 5) Occupancy of the building for church purposes is contingent upon continued compliance with all conditions listed above; 6) The church 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; 7) The special permit shall be valid for a period of three years only and shall terminate on September 30, 2015. 6 Vicin Item: World Life Christian Center it y Applicant: World Life Curch N Map File # . SP2012-013 :1511 1} r w ..�•.:� - i I3 t 1 S0I'f) 1)18 Jr Fk-- -, - ,r"r , � y� OTT I'll ---_ - •� �"�` t ,i► 1, r, '' - SITE ri� ''_ �_ _.-_ _ (•ll1l 'ti413LIdl alt ��. �r , Tr r iI[ 111 III 2(}11 C'I- I'lI•[ i wllIN DR I 1r R4 rte. m u-- j�F� -!Pr . - .II �y.�.a. - �• 4��. �.. PfiTr ��J'f� f�:-`r �' -- 4 ,. e ��YY C enter Item: World Life Christian Land Use Ma pp LiA ll c ant: World fe Church N p . File # . SP2012-013 V NASH DR A Vacant Comm. Vacant N H DR z & DESOTO DR Office A Office Vacant TM Office Vacant Office Office CORD DR SANDIFUR PKWY A a W TOTTENHAM CT- Vacant � � W O .4 Single Family Residences Vacant SITE i SINGTONrC-T x a z �iJEENS-Bi�RY` L7 A Vacant � I i ATHROW C CADILLY DR 161 Z .l� a 2 � KINGSB R Commercial w Vacant T,N o A °SAS H �a Commercial School NIFR's Vacant �N RV Park Zoning Item: World Life Christian Center Applicant: World Life Curch N Ma p File # : SP2012-013 NASH DR N H D A - M z 1 DESOTO DR —1 W A (RetaBusiness F- il CORD DR �-JL z SANDIFUR PKWY � C4 ST W T TTENHAM a � H O ,Z.1 CASTE R-1 SITE ' (Low-Density Residential) z UEEATS�U I�$ U A A I H ATHROW C- CADILLY a W KINGSBMY a a A AG`�As CR LBO C-1 (Regional Commercial) (Retail Business) � C-1 4 (Retail Business) ■� r:; : , ' �, ��, ,' ,�` 1 � � : . ` x, ��, � � �< , `k ,„ d .s. . �, ' 4 y. 4 x k i ; 17� � 4, L . I o b ' + . .�' \ t ` �� �_� �. IIl11 � 1 f i� . i r o 0 a►a c� CIL �� � � � �:± ; . ,. sS . ry. ?. 1� s '. I T' .. , I � • � • ,� i ,J J � _ r `y �'.r: u • � � �y ,l 1 �I' _ � I l a - ' !�a Q I I I . i REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION MASTER FILE NO: SP2012-014 APPLICANT: Pasco School District #1 HEARING DATE: 7/26/12 1215 W Lewis St ACTION DATE: 8/16/12 Pasco, WA 99301 BACKGROUND REQUEST FOR SPECIAL PERMIT: Location of an Elementary School in an R-S- 1 District. (Rd 52 & Powerline Rd) 1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Legal: The East 1/2 of the Northeast 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4, Section 10, Township 9 North, Range 29 East, W.M., Franklin County. General Location: Southwest corner of Road 52 & Powerline Road Property Size: Approximately 20 acres 2. ACCESS: The site is adjacent to Road 52 and Powerline Road. Powerline Road is currently undeveloped 3. UTILITIES: A 16" water line is located in Road 52. A 10" sewer line is stubbed into School District property at the northeast corner of Three Rivers Drive and Road 56. 4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The site is zoned R-S-1 (Suburban Residential) and is being farmed. The property to the north is zoned A-P (Agricultural Production) in the County and is currently being farmed. The property to the west is zoned R-1 and is developing with the West Pasco Terrace subdivision. The property to the east is zoned R-1-S/PUD and is farmed and/or being developed as the Northwest Commons subdivision. The properties to the south are zoned R-S-20 in the County and are developed with homes on one acre lots. 5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan designates the site as Low-Density Residential. Goal CF-5 suggests adequate provisions should be made for educational facilities located throughout the urban growth area. Policy CF-S-A encourages the appropriate location and design of schools throughout the community. 6. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The City of Pasco is the lead agency for this project. Based on the SEPA checklist, the adopted City Comprehensive Plan, City development regulations, and other information, a threshold determination resulting in a Determination of Non-significance (DNS) has been issued for this project under WAC 197-11-158. DISCUSSION In site in question is part of a larger 40 acre site that has been considered in the past for a location of a middle school. In the fall of 2008 the Pasco School District received a Special Permit for the location of a middle school at the southwest corner of Road 52 and Powerline Road. That special permit was renewed in January of 2011. Since the approval of the middle school in 2011 the School District decided to re-align grade levels by moving sixth grade from the middle schools to the elementary schools. The grade re-alignment will free up space in the middle schools and eliminate the pressing need to construct a new middle school. The grade re-alignment however creates a greater demand for elementary schools. The School District is now proposing to segregate the 40 acre site into two parcels and locate an elementary school on the eastern half of the site. Pasco currently has eleven elementary schools (the School District has one additional elementary school [Edwin Markham] outside the Pasco UGA). With the recent growth in population (Pasco's population has more than doubled in size since 1997) and student enrollment, the School District needs to construct several elementary schools. Elementary school enrollment in Pasco has increased by an average of about 360 new students per year for the last decade. This year the elementary enrollment increased by over 400 new students. The State Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction estimates Pasco's elementary enrollment will increase by 3,157 students over the next six years. This continued growth in school enrollment will create the need for additional elementary schools. To address part of the need for additional school space the District is proposing to develop the site in question with a 69,330 square foot elementary school similar to Maya Angelou and Virgie Robinson. The two story building will have classroom space for 730 students. The site will contain public parking and bus loading off Road 52. The proposed site is partially developed with street improvements and utilities located in Road 52. Powerline Road is not improved. The school district will be responsible for installing sidewalks along Road 52 and completing all of the street improvements in Powerline Road. With respect to traffic-related issues a signal warrant test will be needed to determine when a signal should be installed at Road 52 and Sandifur Parkway. The Regional Transportation Analysis model used by the Regional Council does not include elementary schools in the data used to identify future traffic impacts because elementary schools do not impact the peak hour traffic conditions in the way other land uses do. Based on the Institute of Traffic Engineers Trip Generation Manual (81h Ed) an elementary school with 730 students on average can be expected to generate about 941 vehicle trips per day. That would amount to 2 $40,463 in traffic impact fees. By comparison, if the site were to develop with single family homes about 650 daily vehicle trips could be expected. Most of the schools in Pasco including the Pasco High School and Chiawana High School are located in residential zoning districts. An on-line search of the Franklin County Assessors records (2012) revealed that many of the residential properties located near the existing Maya Angelou Elementary School have increased in valued since the school was built. The Maya Angelou neighborhood was not fully developed until after the school was built. This provides a good indication that elementary schools do not discourage the development of permitted uses on property in the general vicinity of a school or impair the value thereof. Recent development around the McGee Elementary School also provides another example of a residential neighborhood that developed after a school was constructed. Access to the site is limited due to the fact that Road 52 is a dead end street and provides only one route to and from the proposed school site. School sites typically have at least two means of access for safety reasons and to help diffuse traffic and reduce the impacts of traffic on surrounding residential uses. The extension of Powerline Road to the west would provided a second means of access to the school site. STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT Findings of fact must be entered from the record. The following are initial findings drawn from the background and analysis section of the staff report and comments made at the public hearing. The Planning Commission may add additional findings as deemed appropriate. 1. The site is located in an R-S-1 zone. 2. Under the current zoning approximately 65 single-family dwellings could be constructed on the site. 3. Schools are conditional land uses in the R-S-1 zone and require review through the special permit process prior to permitting for construction. 4. The site is at the northern edge of the Pasco Urban Growth Boundary. 5. The site is within the City limits of Pasco. 6. The Comprehensive Plan identifies the site for low-density residential uses. 7. Comprehensive Plan Goal CF-5 suggests that adequate provisions should be made for the location of educational facilities throughout the urban growth area. 8. The site is currently being farmed. 9. The site is owned by the Pasco School District. 10. Sewer and water utilities are stubbed to the site. 11. The site is located at the southwest corner of Road 52 and future Powerline Road. 12. Powerline Road is unimproved and lacks the necessary right-of-way. 13. Road 52 is currently a dead-end street. 3 14. The proposed elementary school site plan lacks a second primary road for the disbursement of traffic and for emergency vehicles. 15. All existing elementary schools in Pasco have at least two access routes to and from the schools 16. City development standards require off-site street and utility (sewer, water, irrigation...) improvements to be constructed or installed concurrently with site development. 17. Off-site street improvements include but are not limited to street construction and paving, installation of curb gutter and sidewalk (7' wide), street lights, handicapped ramps, signage, lane striping, street drainage, traffic signals, speed-reduction modifications, and fire hydrants. 18. According to the Institute of Traffic Engineers Trip Generation Manual (8th Ed) a 730 student elementary school will generate about 941 vehicle trips per day. 19. If developed with single family homes the site would generate about 650 vehicle trips per day. 20. Pasco's population has doubled since 1997. 21. The Pasco School District enrollment has grown from 8,048 in 1997 to 15,633 in 2012. 22. The Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction estimates Pasco's elementary school enrollment will increase by another 3,157 by 2017. 23. Residential development near the existing Maya Angelou and McGee Elementary School indicates elementary schools do not negatively impact the value of surrounding homes or the intended development of residential neighborhoods. 24. No sports fielding lighting will be constructed with the proposed elementary school. 25. In 2008 and 2011 the Pasco School District was issued a Special Permit for the location of a middle school on the site in question. Due to the grade realignment the District will need fewer middle schools sites and additional elementary school sites to accommodate existing and future student populations. CONCLUSIONS BASED ON STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT Before recommending approval or denial of a special permit the Planning Commission must draw its conclusion from the findings of fact based upon the criteria listed in P.M.C. 25.86.060. The criteria and staff listed conclusions are as follows: (1) Will the proposed use be in accordance with the goals, policies, objectives and text of the Comprehensive Plan? The proposed use supports the following plan policies or goals: CF-5 suggests adequate provisions be made for educational facilities throughout the Urban Growth Area. Transportation and Utility policies support city 4 standards that require the extension of streets and utilities in conjunction with development. To be in accord with the Comprehensive Plan the proposed elementary school development would also need to include the development of adjoining streets and utilities. (2) Will the proposed use adversely affect public infrastructure? The location of an elementary school on the proposed site may encourage the development of residential homes to the north of the school site leading to pressure to expand the UGA into areas which the city is not planning to provide utilities. In this respect the proposal may adversely impact public infrastructure. (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 elementary school has been designed to complement the existing and future neighborhood by providing generous yard setbacks, landscaping, screening of mechanical equipment and a pitched roof line to moderate the school's height in keeping with typical pitched roofs of residential homes. Elementary schools are typically located in or near residential neighborhoods and are an accepted part of the character of residential areas. (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 construction of schools in residential neighborhoods often encourages development of nearby properties. Residential development around the Maya Angelou and McGee schools was not completed until after the schools were in place. An on-line search of the Franklin County Assessors records (2012) revealed that values of many residential properties located near the existing Maya Angelou and McGee Elementary schools have increased since the schools were built. (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? Experience has shown that schools within Pasco generate few complaints from neighbors. Elementary schools typically are not a source of dust, fumes, vibrations or flashing lights. The proposed school could generate up to 940 vehicle trips per day. During weekends, the summer break, and other break periods very little traffic will be generated. 5 (6) Will the proposed use endanger the public health or safety if located and developed where proposed, or in anyway will become a nuisance to uses permitted in the district? The elementary school will be constructed to meet all requirements of the International Building Code, the Fire Code, the Plumbing Code, all other construction codes and state regulations pertaining to middle school construction. The building will be required to have fire-rated corridors, area separation walls, sufficient exiting and fire sprinkler systems to ensure the safety of the public. The construction of sidewalks and street improvements will address traffic safety issues. Schools have a long history of being accepted in residential neighborhoods. In most communities schools, including middle schools, are located in or near residential neighborhoods. RECOMMENDATION MOTION: I move to adopt Findings of Fact and Conclusions therefrom as contained in the August 16, 2012 staff report. MOTION: I move based on the Findings of Fact and Conclusions therefrom the Planning Commission recommend the City Council grant a Special Permit to the Pasco School District for the location of an elementary school at the southwest corner of Powerline Road & Road 52 (parcel #116-170-030) with conditions as listed in the August 16, 2012 staff report. APPROVAL CONDITIONS 1. The special permit shall apply to the east half Parcel No. 116170030. 2. The elementary school site shall be developed in substantial conformity with the site plan and building elevations submitted with the special permit application. 3. Powerline Road abutting the School District (all of parcel # 116170030 existing as of June 30, 2012) property shall be improved to arterial street standards meeting construction standards of the City. Improvements shall include but not be limited to curb, gutter, sidewalk and street lighting along the school side of the street. 4. The complete road widths for Powerline Road will be 48 feet; the Pasco School District shall be responsible for constructing a minimum of 28 feet of road width on the south side. 5. The School District shall extend Powerline Road the length necessary to provide a second means of access to and from the proposed school. Street improvements beyond the west boundary of the School District 6 property on Powerline Road shall consist of a minimum of a 28-foot wide paved road surface built to arterial street standards. 6. Sidewalks in the Road 52 right-of-way abutting the school property shall be 7 feet in width. 7. Sidewalks in the Powerline Road right-of-way shall be 5 feet wide and located along the property line rather than the curb line. 8. The planting strip between the Powerline Road curb and the off-set sidewalk must be planted in lawn and trees planted at 50-foot intervals. The landscape and irrigation plan must be approved by the Administrative and Community Services Department prior to installation. 9. The School District shall construct a 6-foot tall block wall/fence along the Powerline Road right-of-way matching the block wall in West Pasco Terrace to the west. 10. The School District shall prepare a traffic study for anticipated traffic to and from the proposed school site to determine the need for additional street improvements and/or the need for traffic signals. This study shall include the increased traffic load generated by the proposed school at the northwest corner of Road 60 and Sandifur Parkway. The traffic study must be completed and submitted to the City Engineer prior to the issuance of a building permit and may result in additional conditions or requirements related to school construction. 11. No on-street parking or bus staging will be permitted on or adjacent to Road 52 or Powerline Road. 12. All costs associated with speed reduction/modification including but not limited to flashing lights, signage, pedestrian sensors, safety and crosswalks shall be paid for by the School District. 13. All street/roadway signage abutting the property is to be provided by the School District and must conform to the most current MUTCD & City of Pasco Construction Standards. 14. The School District shall construct all necessary improvements and accommodations for pedestrian school routes along Road 52 and Powerline Road as required and identified in the traffic study. 15. All street improvements recommended in the traffic study, including traffic signals, must be installed in conjunction with the construction of the elementary school. 16. No mid-block crosswalks will be permitted on Road 52 or Powerline Road. 17. The School District shall pay the traffic mitigation fee in effect at the time a building permit is issued. 18. The School District shall prepare a dust control mitigation plan to be submitted with the building permit application. 19. The School District shall install a 16 inch irrigation line along the length of the school site in Powerline Road. 20. The School District shall dedicate the north 40 feet of the site for the Powerline Road right-of-way. 7 21. The School District shall dedicate the east 10 feet of the site for additional Road 52 right-of-way. 22. A 55-foot radius shall be dedicated at the southwest intersection of Road 52 and Powerline Road. 23. No sports field light shall be permitted. 24. Water rights associated with site must be dedicated to the City prior to the issuance of a building permit. 25. The special permit shall be null and void if a building permit has not been obtained by January 1, 2015. 8 Vicinity Item: PSD Elementary School Applicant: Pasco School District File N Ma p •# : SP2012-014 f P(M HU[INF ROAD C-- �- SITE - ,x, ham)IL I r T ^v: .�.r _ - : � ItLI-1 l 1�q,41 � \'l\ ('f)i111()S�; fii� : 5 � � 1II `� .. .1f:11:(}tii:\L I)R-- -� ,rte•-- � r �. � .� _ t.% V Item: PSD Elementary School Land Use A licant: Pasco School District N pPMap • • File # . SP2012-014 Vacant A ARD D . D BA ALT FALL. R Single Family SITE Vacant Residence)sI z � a DR 3Q' in W I o Vacant Single Family Y x o LS D Residences Single Family SANDIFUR PKWY z Residences Z A -A IUD TAL_O DR CT U i Zonin Item: PSD Elementary School g A pplicant: Pasco School District N File Map •# : SP2012-014 P-0WERL1WE 7RO - A D ARD $A,ALT, R R-1 ( dential) SITE r, OfLi RS-1 a (Suburban) R �n W e'P DR ILI Franklin County 4 (RS-20) P, O Y � O D R LS - - U E z L PH E_ R I ATA IUD 1TAL_O_. DR CT U 11 a . _ _ �. ' ` ' �� `� - , - - . �_ ,,,. : , . ar� .,�„ y �- - -" � � �� 'R ' •�� � 4 � .v —_ .__ --_ � _ f _ . /� t A 4 { Y 1 d 1 k � 4 y 14141 op zt did, del UQ Ilk df I� tip it 1 - 1 a � t # �p r 4 ♦ 'Y` �i JJ f x '1 � t ��': i � 7��� N` ', � •� + � ' 'r ' 1. r r r i. $ ti « f r ^• ,� 1 f ,. ;e F VQ It M IT s s 4 t fir �I t i F f F- $� IF IF Tq It t q � j_ ttT i 1 r, 4 i I III It i {r � r , } ' ` i ` ' r ' ' �• 11 f 116P It It { f K r 1 � 50° A IL fit VQ P + ice } � /` z 3 1N 3j.. � S ry.. � � � ♦y LL It •s � p, IF 8 It t s •�}tM K ai • 6 r � 1 IF I IIF �i r E ' P11 7 ' 6r e ,3 ", 4fl ,4,ku aAY"f i TQ � r k rr If t 1�. 111 111. 1 - rd ,� �1 `Y.� �'�. �lk, •.. i.2 � \ \ e& � k � � .. � « . . . . �. : . ! REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION MASTER FILE NO: SP2012-015 APPLICANT: Manuel Estrada HEARING DATE: 8-16-12 605 N 5th Ave ACTION DATE: 9-20-12 Pasco, WA 99301 BACKGROUND REQUEST FOR SPECIAL PERMIT: Location of a Church in an R-1 District 1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Legal: Parcel # 112-054-107: Block 9, Lots 1 & 2, Gerry's Addition; General Location: 605 N 5th Ave. Property Size: Approximately 0.16 acres 2. ACCESS: The site has access from an alley connecting with 5th Avenue 3. UTILITIES: The site is served by municipal water and sewer. 4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The property is currently zoned R-1 (Low Density Residential). NORTH: R-3 - Single Family Residences SOUTH: R-1 - Apartments and Single Family Residences EAST: R-3 - Single family residences WEST: R-1 - Single Family Residences 5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The site is designated in the Plan for future residential uses. The Plan does not specifically address churches, but elements of the Plan encourage the promotion of orderly development including the development of zoning standards for off-street parking and other development standards. 6. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The City of Pasco is the lead agency for this project. Based on the SEPA checklist, the adopted City Comprehensive Plan, City development regulations, and other information, a threshold determination resulting in a Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) has been issued for this project under WAC 197- 11-158. 1 ANALYSIS The application involves the use of an existing church for church activities. The structure in question was built in 1920 and has been used for church activities for the past 92 years. Past practices typically linked special permit approvals to the applicant and not the land or specific parcel(s) involved. In this case Emanuel Estrada has recently purchased the property with the intent of operating a church. The church in question has been part of the neighborhood's character for nearly 100 years. The surrounding residential and commercial development has occurred with the church present. The neighborhood is now fully developed with homes and commercial businesses. The site contains an attached residence which has historically been used as living quarters for the church pastor. On site living quarters is a component common to churches. The rear portion of the site, abutting the alley, contains an unimproved gravel parking area. This 40' x 50' area provides the only off-street parking available to the church; the area has the potential to provide up to five (5) parking stalls. Permit approval is tentatively conditioned on hard-surfacing and striping the parking area. INITIAL FINDINGS OF FACT Findings of fact must be entered from the record. The following are initial findings drawn from the background and analysis section of the staff report. The Planning Commission may add additional findings to this listing as the result of factual testimony and evidence submitted during the open record hearing. 1. Churches are unclassified uses requiring review through the special permit process prior to locating or expanding in any zoning district. 2. The proposed church site is zoned R-1. 3. The proposed site is located at 605 North 5th Avenue. 4. The site was originally developed as a church. 5. The church was constructed in the year 1920. 6. The church has existed on the site for 92 years. 7. The church is 3,871 square feet in area. 2 8. Churches are classified as an "A" occupancy under the International Building Code. 9. A gravel parking area is located on the south side of the site, adjacent to the alley and contains space for approximately 5 parked vehicles. Access to the parking is from an existing public alley. INITIAL CONCLUSIONS BASED ON THE 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 and determine whether or not the proposal: (1) Will the proposed use be in accordance with the goals, policies, objectives and text of the Comprehensive Plan? The Plan does not specifically address churches, but elements of the Plan encourage the promotion of orderly development including the development of zoning standards for off-street parking and other development standards. (2) Will the proposed use adversely affect public infrastructure? The church is unlikely to place additional demands on public infrastructure beyond increased passenger vehicle traffic. Church activities place a negligible demand on city sewer and water facilities. Churches are generally used for a few hours on Sundays and during the evening in on week days. (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 church has been one of the features of the general vicinity for 92 years. Residents and occupants of the surrounding homes and businesses are accustomed to the church activities. Continuation of the church use is unlikely to affect the character of the neighborhood in a negative way. The church has coexisted in harmony with the neighborhood for many years. Churches are typically located in or near residential areas and often add to the character of the general vicinity in which they are located. (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 3 The location and height of the existing church has not discouraged the development of permitted uses on surrounding properties. The presence of churches in residential neighborhoods in other parts of the community has not discouraged potential residential development or impaired the value of residential properties. In addition, the surrounding neighborhood can be considered "fully developed". (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 church will generate no more dust, vibrations, flashing lights or fumes than would be expected by permitted residential uses of the zoning district. Traffic generated by the church will occur mostly on Sunday mornings when neighborhood traffic is minimal. Churches are generally used infrequently, two or three days a week, and generate traffic during off peak times such as on Sunday mornings and in evenings during the week. The current unimproved parking lot could be a source of a slight amount of dust in the neighborhood. Unimproved parking lots also add to the collection of rocks and dirt in city streets which ends up in street drainage systems. This objectionable condition can be remedied by causing the parking lot to be paved. (6) Will the proposed use endanger the public health or safety if located and developed where proposed, or in anyway will become a nuisance to uses permitted in the district? Past history of church operations within the City has shown they do not endanger public health or safety and are generally not nuisance generators. Churches are generally accepted uses in or near residential neighborhoods. TENTATIVE APPROVAL CONDITIONS 1) The special permit shall apply to parcel 112-054-107; 2) The church must comply with all requirements of the International Building Code for an "A" occupancy prior to occupancy by the church; 3) The building, including entrances and restrooms, must be ADA/handicap-compliant prior to occupancy by the church; 4) The parking area abutting the alley must be hard surfaced, striped and contain stormwater drainage on site; 4 5) The first ten (10) feet adjacent to the church building and abutting the parking lot shall be landscaped to City standards; 6) The strip of bare soil between the building and the sidewalk along Stn Avenue must be landscaped to meet City standards per Department approval; 7) The parking and landscaping improvements listed above shall be completed by October 31, 2014; 8) The church 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; 9) This special permit shall be null and void if a City of Pasco Occupancy Registration is not obtained by January 1, 2013. RECOMMENDATION MOTION: I move to close the public hearing and schedule deliberations, the adoption of findings of fact, and development of a recommendation for City Council for the September 20, 2012 meeting. 5 Vicinit y Item: Lino de Los Valles Church Applicant: Manuel Estrada File N Ma p •#. SP2012-015 N a"1 M. rr , lrl a fti� •. ^. try r a iS� i y. J ar — 4 dmL Land Use Item: Lirio de Los Valles Church Applicant: Manuel Estrada N Map File #: SP2012-015 MF MFR's SFR's SFR's Church SFR's Comm. SFR's SFR's SFR's � Comm. Church � G Zoning Item: Lirio de Los Valles Church Applicant: Manuel Estrada N Map File #: SP2012-015 R-3 (Medium-Density Residential) T R-3 NOS IV VIO$ `�� R-3 R-1 C-1 G (Low-Density Residential) �(Retail Business) C-1 8����VI11�SS OEM CA II A sue. r ' � + ' fi. • r • IG . s It JI It 4. 3.. It E. LEE ;r.` } . jf ±I \ f : \ } g • � \ � � : 4 t; \ AB kit NWAll, Y1 1 Ai 1 1 r V YY b 1 Y 7 .L. CA . 4 5 4 1 ,l tr, r i 94r It C r Amy r �o s. M � V ,F. CALVJ ti TI ttt Ilk- 1 ww T SY 1 k� REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION MASTER FILE NO: SP 2012-014 APPLICANT:Pasco School District #1 HEARING DATE: 8/16/12 1215 W Lewis St ACTION DATE: 9/20/12 Pasco, WA 99301 BACKGROUND REQUEST: SPECIAL PERMIT: Location of an Elementary School in a C-3 District. (Southeast corner of the intersection of Spokane St. and N. California Ave.) 1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Legal: Blocks 164, 165, 167 & 168 Pasco Land Company's First Addition together with vacated adjacent rights-of-way and Block 1, Frey's Addition together with vacated adjacent rights-of-way General Location: Southeast corner of N. California Avenue and Spokane Street adjacent to the Whittier Elementary School Site. Property Size: Approximately 8 acres 2. ACCESS: The site is adjacent to the Whittier Elementary School Site, with direct access off of California Avenue, Spokane Street, and Broadway Boulevard. 3. UTILITIES: All utilities are available to the site. 4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The site is zoned C-3 (General Commercial) and is vacant. The property to the north, is zoned C-3 and is mostly undeveloped, with an office to the northeast; lands to the west are also zoned C-3 and are developed with heavy commercial uses; the lands to the south are zoned C-3 and are vacant. The property to the east is zoned C-3 and R-1 and is developed with the Pasco Family Housing apartment complex (C-3) and the Whittier Elementary School (R-1). 5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan designates the site as Public/quasi-public, with the exception of the southwest parcel along California and Broadway Boulevard, which is designated for Commercial. Goal CF-5 suggests adequate provisions should be made for educational facilities located throughout the urban growth area. Policy CF-5-A encourages the appropriate location and design of schools throughout the community. 6. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The City of Pasco is the lead agency for this project. Based on the SEPA checklist, the adopted City Comprehensive Plan, City development regulations, and other information, a threshold determination resulting in a Determination of Non-significance (DNS) has been issued for this project under WAC 197- 11-158. DISCUSSION The site in question is adjacent to an apartment complex built in 2010 and an elementary school (Whittier), which was built in 1997, and expanded with portable units in 1998 and 1999. Pasco currently has eleven elementary schools (the School District has one additional elementary school [Edwin Markham] outside the Pasco UGA) with one approved recently for construction. With the recent growth in population (Pasco's population has more than doubled in size since 1997) and student enrollment, the School District needs to construct several elementary schools. Elementary school enrollment in Pasco has increased by an average of about 360 new students per year for the last decade. This year the elementary enrollment increased by over 400 new students. The State Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction estimates Pasco's elementary enrollment will increase by 3,157 students over the next 6 years. This continued growth in school enrollment will create the need for additional elementary schools. To address part of the need for additional school space the District is proposing to develop the site in question with a 69,000 square foot two-story, elementary school similar to Maya Angelou and Virgie Robinson. The school will accommodate between 700-800 students and will contain public parking and bus loading off of N. California Avenue. The School District wishes to build on this particular site because it owns the land, and it is otherwise costly and difficult to assemble the necessary acreage for a school (typically around 13 acres), and because they can take advantage of economies of scale by utilizing a shared playground. The proposed site is partially developed with street improvements and utilities located in all surrounding streets. The School District will be responsible for installing sidewalks. With respect to traffic-related issues a signal warrant test will be needed to determine when a signal should be installed at the intersections of Spokane and Broadway with Oregon Avenue, as well as crosswalk signalization between the school sites and the City Park to the south. The side-by-side schools will approximately double the current traffic flows in the area. Most of the schools in Pasco are located in residential zoning districts. By contrast, this proposed school would be built in a commercial zone, 2 surrounded by either vacant land or commercial development to the north, west, and south, and an apartment complex and another elementary school to the east. It is possible that a heavy commercial use, such as a trucking company or heavy equipment yard may not want to locate near an elementary school for liability reasons. This may impact commercial values of adjacent and nearby lands; however the construction of schools in commercial zones has not historically discouraged development on or diminished the value of nearby commercial properties. As an example, Western States Cat completed a major expansion in 2007 adjacent to Ochoa Middle School, six years after the school was built. Access to the site is limited to the northeast with undeveloped rights of way at Wehe Avenue and Spokane Street, but otherwise unimpeded, due to access via Broadway Boulevard and Oregon Avenue. STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT Findings of fact must be entered from the record. The following are initial findings drawn from the background and analysis section of the staff report and comments made at the public hearing. The Planning Commission may add additional findings as deemed appropriate. 1. The site is within the Pasco Urban Growth Boundary. 2. The site is within the City limits of Pasco. 3. The Comprehensive Plan identifies the site for Public/quasi-public, with the exception of the southwest parcel along California and Broadway Boulevard, which is designated for Commercial. 4. The site is located in a C-3 zone. 5. The site contains approximately 8 acres of land. 6. Elementary schools generally require 13 acres, which includes room for shared park facilities. 7. A 10-acre City park (Highland) is developed to the south and east of the site. 8. The school site is separated from the park by Broadway Boulevard. 9. Under the current zoning heavy commercial uses could be developed on the site as well as on adjacent and nearby properties. 10. Half of the Ochoa Middle School site is zoned C-3. 3 11. Schools are conditional land uses in all zones and require review through the special permit process prior to permitting for construction. 12. Comprehensive Plan Goal CF-5 suggests that adequate provisions should be made for the location of educational facilities throughout the urban growth area. 13. The site is currently vacant. 14. The site is owned by the Pasco School District. 15. Sewer and water utilities are stubbed to the site. 16. The site is located at the Southeast corner of N. California Avenue and Spokane Street adjacent to the Whittier Elementary School Site 17. City development standards require off-site street and utility improvements to be constructed or installed concurrently with site development. 18. Off-site street improvements include but are not limited to street construction and paving, installation of curb gutter and sidewalk (7' wide), street lights, handicapped ramps, signage, lane striping, street drainage, traffic signals, speed-reduction modifications, and fire hydrants. 19. Pasco's population has doubled since 1997. 20. The Pasco School District enrollment has grown from 8,048 in 1997 to 15,633 in 2012. 21. The Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction estimates Pasco's elementary school enrollment will increase by another 3,157 by 2017. 22. The construction of schools in commercial zones has not discouraged development on nearby commercial properties or diminished the value of said properties. 23. No sports fielding lighting will be constructed with the proposed elementary school. CONCLUSIONS BASED ON STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT Before recommending approval or denial of a special permit the Planning Commission must draw its conclusion from the findings of fact based upon the criteria listed in P.M.C. 25.86.060. The criteria and staff listed conclusions are as follows: 4 1) Will the proposed use be in accordance with the goals, policies, objectives and text of the Comprehensive Plan? The proposed use supports the following plan policies or goals: CF-5 suggests adequate provisions be made for educational facilities throughout the Urban Growth Area. Transportation and Utility policies support city standards that require the extension of streets and utilities in conjunction with development. To be in accord with the Comprehensive Plan the proposed elementary school development would also need to include the development of adjoining streets and utilities in order to accommodate the increased traffic flows as well as augmented water, power, and sewer usage for twice as many students. 2) Will the proposed use adversely affect public infrastructure? The location of an elementary school on the proposed site will not adversely affect public infrastructure. 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 elementary school has been designed with generous yard setbacks, landscaping, screening of mechanical equipment and a pitched roof line to moderate the school's height. This development will be less intense than the surrounding uses, which are currently, and will likely continue to be heavy commercial in nature. Heavy commercial uses generally include offices, showrooms, warehouses, manufacturing and repair shops, equipment and material storage, and semi-truck traffic. As the school fronts C-3 Zoning on three sides the development of the school in this location may create compatibility issues with the permitted uses of the C-3 Zone. 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 construction of schools in commercial zones has not discouraged development on nearby commercial properties or diminished the value of said properties (The Western States Cat property is an example). However, as mentioned above, heavy commercial uses generally include offices, showrooms, warehouses, manufacturing and repair shops, equipment and material storage, and semi-truck traffic. As the school fronts C-3 Zoning on three sides the development of the school in this location may create compatibility issues with the permitted uses of the C-3 Zone. 5 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? Experience has shown that schools within Pasco generate few complaints from neighbors. Elementary schools typically are not a source of dust, fumes, vibrations or flashing lights. The proposed school could generate up to 940 vehicle trips per day. During weekends, the summer break, and other break periods very little traffic will be generated. Few, if any elementary school activities would be more objectionable than heavy commercial activities currently allowed at the site. 6) Will the proposed use endanger the public health or safety if located and developed where proposed, or in anyway will become a nuisance to uses permitted in the district? The elementary school will be constructed to meet all requirements of the International Building Code, the Fire Code, the Plumbing Code, all other construction codes and state regulations pertaining to middle school construction. The building will be required to have fire-rated corridors, area separation walls, sufficient exiting and fire sprinkler systems to ensure the safety of the public. The construction of sidewalks and street improvements may address traffic safety issues. As mentioned previously, developing a second school translates into approximately double the traffic impact to the site and to adjacent streets. Consequently, a traffic study needs to be done in conjunction with this application. Proposed Approval Conditions 1. The special permit shall apply to Parcels No. 112096027, 113503085, 112096018, 112096045, and 112096036 (or their successors as parcels are joined and parcel numbers reassigned). 2. The elementary school site shall be developed in substantial conformity with the site plan and building elevations submitted with the special permit application. 3. Improvements shall include but not be limited to curb, gutter, sidewalk and street lighting along the school side of the streets. 4. Sidewalks in the road rights-of-way abutting the school property shall be 7 feet in width. 6 5. The School District shall prepare a traffic study for anticipated traffic to and from the proposed school site to determine the need for additional street improvements and/or the need for traffic signals. The traffic study must be completed and submitted to the City Engineer prior to the issuance of a building permit and may result in additional conditions or requirements related to school construction. 6. No on-street parking or bus staging will be permitted on or adjacent to Broadway Boulevard or Spokane Street. 7. All costs associated with speed reduction/modification including but not limited to flashing lights, signage, pedestrian sensors, safety and crosswalks shall be paid for by the School District. 8. All street/roadway signage abutting the property is to be provided by the School District and must conform to the most current MUTCD 8v City of Pasco Construction Standards. 9. The School District shall construct all necessary improvements and accommodations for pedestrian school routes as required and identified in the traffic study. 10. All street improvements recommended in the traffic study, including traffic signals, must be installed in conjunction with the construction of the elementary school. 11. The School District shall prepare a dust control mitigation plan to be submitted with the building permit application. 12. No sports field light shall be permitted. 13. Water rights associated with site must be dedicated to the City prior to the issuance of a building permit. 14. The special permit shall be null and void if a building permit has not been obtained by January 1, 2015. RECOMMENDATION MOTION: I move to close the public hearing and schedule deliberations, the adoption of findings of fact, and development of a recommendation for City Council for the September 20, 2012 meeting. 7 Item: Whittier West Elementary School Vicinity Applicant: Pasco School District N Map File #: SP 2012-017 jti y. SHEPPARD ST . ^�. � � ✓ � =' _ _� j T - ,. �_ t_\ \ �alt_\�, \n�_'v� HIGHLAND ST uj " .� .. > � �•-.. �^j "ail.-� "`1 I� /- , ^ w _ PARK VIEW BLVD SITE __ -_ - y�. -BROADWAY BLVD Jv y, � �� \�.. '1 ."fin �yi ,'''. .� "� \ ~`a �'Q• -— ^w� �'. _ _ }# > R +- n - r > - h ADELIA"•ST- A �.., r _ - - _ r SYCAMOR�C r (•u F\-n= ,k GEORGE ST v,. y - .yz � _ Y Land Item: Whittier West Elementary School Use Applicant: Pasco School District N Map File #: SP 2012-017 SHEPPARD ST Vacant MHP a ¢ J Railroad �PKES1 0 Heavy SFDUs Commercial 3 PARK VIEW BLVD SQOKPNE ST SITE School N BROADWAY BLVD w ¢ w BRO �PVB`�o O m �JU LLJ 0 0 Park a G 0 U) w a Q U n W O o w Py v ADELIA ST vm SFDUs // Vacant (Mixed) SYCAMORE CT GEORGE ST .IESZBRS� a SQL z y J A YL BONN o > m ALVINA ST 9L m z Z W a Item: Whittier West Elementary School Zoning Applicant: Pasco School District N Map File #. SP 2012-017 SHEPPARD ST w RP a -3 ch Lu ¢ x 3 PARK VIEW BLVD SQOKPp1E Sj _ S I T E R= 1 =A �I 1 N BROADWAY BLVD w - a _ w p`t`�PV B�JO w - w ¢ gROP m - > p O > a ¢ - U) w ¢ D U (� w aJU' Q N = p O - o W PZ 9 > AD R-2 C=3 9 m a J a = SYCAMORE CT U GEORGE ST JES'CERS1 a 5v� c o R=3 9 - J A Z YL BO{,j1 y0 m ALVINA ST 72- i .1 vv% t r 90 w PROPOSED ELEMENTARY SCHOOL LOCATED AT N. CALIFORNIA AVE. S E. SPOKANE ST. APPROX, 130 STUDENTS APPROX, 69,000 SF 0 ACRES 122 PARKING STALLS PASCO SCHOOL DISTRICT CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS \ EX15TING APARTMENT COMPLEX 1215 WEST LEWIS \ PASGO, WA 99310 P (509) 543-6095 F (509) 543-6115 \ v - - \ PLAY I \ \ PLAY 2 \ I p ° o I > " 4 �� z LH o I p H I ININS c� o o BRASS AREA I EXISTING WNITTIER ELEMENTARY 5�. CONCEPTUAL EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS N•B 5GALE: 1"=30' ,\�b/ �f y C OESIGN CC I�^ {� IE ■ NORTH .`�P [ I■ARCHITECTS l CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN SCALE: i"-6O' Lookin g North Q.-.—, --,� east i�=_ r..: _=- .. -.._-- _:�•�. � y r Lookin g East w � r= :_-,,•ct � � .�6`°� ''fig`,Sk'�+S�`art �"', "/nom...�� N p�. Y -^''.: t�x j���§y'�'`�.�� '�'a �. �..� �,g+. .,a .t r Lookin g South y 4N ,q;r,,, C* non WAY.. r-. .� w w°ip� v.}rj �1� ^ a\'� �.f�n.a♦- �'at' � spy{"�^a7 :: � 4 .: � � ,.. j STAN. I,d'`4') Y ��s����i � ����C*{fie M.- r.� ,-� ����m��'� �"t.��,.� ,�,,'i ,% ,� y'f.�+►.: .. y �A /f � t• ���u�l" Lookin g West yin.. i t.;t a S � Heavy Equipment to the Northwest - - a m looms& mma& - l _ �- - � �� �� �,r ■ sr _ r, YY �a USDA Office to the Northeast �3. Y 1 s*� !I M T ,/ '.�. � l'�t".. kq�����vsts-J w� 't 'f. �'�� „¢� �r,,'�.. 'h;. ark. �: � �`c" � �x°,. .,t `�'� ..e�st,`t+ '��' � < .r�•a • • .,� �, qqjj ,�. a s'. yJ� r t �,. .�z ». �y�, k.:`�'1 3'..,s..� �'f'.'�'£.: �' d�*k��.i :,+;XY•'�F�!/ub-. '"'.fi�.. :�I. � ���w�'/'� q•� ,�. E�y. �'3 "vK' . .� ''•-+',5t• 4L. y .w"' �,�o� ,��i�T1�,�6+, y..'�t3�Ji.:� •: y.,`��`,����,,F:��r�aW�:2�,� r�jln: - rr;. ;� '�d��"r�,,��r.�A -:.,... ,[• �.. a,�-' ,�. ti?� ,�.3r�,,�r;...,� „,�f♦ ��!-� �'. �,•*_ �i. r tY.✓+'":Y- G ) a ! i� 4 R'_ as� d +!t=�. •�'.�_ ,.;..4'��`6�f,... .,i,.;^� a. . REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION MASTER FILE NO: SP2012-018 APPLICANT: Verizon Wireless c/o Julie Cope HEARING DATE: 8/16/2012 P.O. Box 8436 ACTION DATE: 9/20/2012 Spokane, WA 99203 BACKGROUND REQUEST: SPECIAL PERMIT: Location of a Cellular Antenna Tower in a C-1 (Retail Business) Zone 1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Legal: Parcel #115-442-012: Lot 3, Binding Site Plan 2005-08 General Location: 9335 Sandifur Parkway Property Size: The parcel is approximately 4.4 acres 2. ACCESS: The site is accessed from Sandifur Parkway. 3. UTILITIES: All municipal utilities currently serve the site. 4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The site is currently zoned C-1 (Retail Business) and contains a mini-storage facility. Surrounding properties are zoned and developed as follows: NORTH: C-1 - Vacant SOUTH: C-1 - Office & Vacant EAST: C-1 - Vacant WEST: C-1 - Vacant 5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan designates the site for Commercial uses. Goal OF-2 suggests the City ought to maintain land use flexibility in regard to placement of infrastructure for public and private utilities. Policy OF-2-A encourages the sound management of all energy and communication utilities through coordination and cooperation dealing with construction of such facilities. Policy OF-2-B encourages the placement of utility substations which are necessary for the surrounding neighborhood. 6. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The City of Pasco is the lead agency for this project. Based on the SEPA checklist, the adopted City Comprehensive Plan, City development regulations, and other information, a threshold determination resulting in a Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) has been issued for this project under WAC 197- 11-158. 1 ANALYSIS Verizon Wireless is requesting special permit approval to locate a cellular antenna tower in the northwest corner of the Broadmoor Storage site on Sandifur Parkway. The requested tower is proposed to be 100' in height. Height is the primary factor necessitating special permit review. The C-1 zone permits structures to reach a maximum height of thirty five (35) feet; the proposed cell tower exceeds that limit by sixty five (65) feet. The C-1 zone also contains a provision allowing commercial buildings to exceed the 35 foot height limitation by special permit approval. Verizon intends to lease the northwest corner of the main Broadmoor Storage building and a small portion of land outside of the building immediately adjacent to the building (see attached site plan, pages A-1, A-1 8s A-2 of the attached plans). Commonly, cellular providers locate the equipment cabinets within a fenced area surrounding the base of a pole; in this case the interior equipment room in the mini-storage facility will be used to house the ground- level equipment. Locating equipment cabinets within a building may reduce/eliminate any potential noise impacts generated by the equipment and eliminate visual impacts of the equipment to nearby properties. Land to the north, east and west of Broadmoor Storage is zoned C-1 (Retail Business) and is currently vacant. Residences nearest the proposed cell site are within Mediterranean Villas on Majestia Lane located 470 feet to the north. The homes are attached single-family homes. The physical separation between the homes and the tower should help mitigate visual impacts of the tower on residents of nearby existing and future homes. Franklin PUD power lines transect the site in a north-south orientation. The poles supporting the transmission lines are approximately 55 feet tall; located at 250 foot intervals. The site currently contains two poles. The proposed cell tower would be 45 feet taller than the existing power poles. The power line with 55 foot tall power poles also extends north/south through Mediterranean Villas and Broadmoor Estates. The elevation of the site is approximately 480 feet above sea-level. For reference, the Road 68 area is at 520' while the Columbia River is at 340'. The water tanks on Sandifur are 158 feet tall and at 520' elevation. The top of the tanks are at roughly 678' in elevation. The top of the proposed tower will be at 580' above sea-level. In other words, the top of the proposed tower will be 98 feet lower in elevation than the top of the water tanks on Sandifur Parkway which can be seen from many vistas throughout the Tri-Cities. Painting the proposed cell tower/monopole to blend into the sky and existing building may help disrupt the visual impacts on properties in the vicinity by 2 blending it into the surrounding features. If constructed, it is not likely that the proposal will negatively affect any permitted uses in the vicinity. 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 R-1 (Low Density Residential). 2. The Comprehensive Plan identifies the site for Commercial uses. 3. The site contains a mini-storage facility. 4. The site is 4.4 acres in area. S. All municipal utilities currently serve the site. 6. Properties surrounding the proposed cellular site are all zoned C-1 (Retail Business). 7. There are two PUD power poles running north/south down the center of the site. 8. Cellular towers may be located in the C-1 district by special permit. 9. The Comprehensive Plan suggests the City ought to maintain land use flexibility with regard to placement of infrastructure for public and private utilities. 10. The Comprehensive Plan does not specifically address cellular equipment. 11. Cellular equipment creates minimal demands on City infrastructure. TENTATIVE CONCLUSIONS BASED ON STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT Before recommending approval or denial of a special permit the Planning Commission must develop findings of fact from which to draw its 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? 3 The Comprehensive Plan does not specifically address cellular equipment. The Comprehensive Plan goal OF-2 and policy OF-2-A discuss the need for sound management and coordination in the location of utilities and community facilities. (2) Will the proposed use adversely affect public infrastructure? The proposed use is a part of the communication network utilized by the general public. The proposed equipment will be located in such a manner so as not to impact other public utilities or services. The proposed use does not require water and sewer. (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 cellular equipment will be located within an existing building. The proposed 8.5-foot tall equipment cabinet will be located at the base of the tower. The height of the equipment cabinet is significantly lower in height than regularly permitted structures in the R-1 zone. Painting the pole to blend in with the building and sky will also help achieve a degree of harmony with 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 proposed 100-foot tall monopole is not likely to discourage development in the vicinity. Perhaps the inverse is a more likely result. The added 4G service and increased signal strength may be an attractant to potential commercial developers in an area of town developing at a slower pace than Road 68. (5) Will the operations in connection with the proposal be more objectionable to nearby properties by reason of noise, fumes, vibrations, dust, traffic, or flashing lights than would be the operation of any permitted uses within the district? The proposed cell tower will create no fumes, dust or noise. All ground- level equipment will be completely enclosed within the Broadmoor Storage equipment room. Cell towers facilities have been located throughout the community in residential, commercial and industrial zones without generating any complaints received by the City. 4 (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? Cell tower radio waves have not been proven to be harmful to human health. Radio wave activity is focused on the antennas which are elevated 100 feet above grade away from human activity. The most noticeable impact will be visual. Though potentially displeasing to the eye, the tower poses no true threat to public health and safety. TENTATIVE APPROVAL CONDITIONS 1) The special permit shall apply to Parcel # 115-442-012: Lot 3, Binding Site Plan 2005-08; 2) The cellular tower shall be painted a neutral color which blends well with the landscape such as grey, beige, sand, tope or light brown. 3) The special permit shall be null and void if the applicant has not obtained a City of Pasco building permit by October 31, 2013. RECOMMENDATION MOTION: I move to close the hearing on the proposed cellular tower and initiate deliberations and schedule adoption of findings of fact, conclusions and a recommendation to the City Council for the September 20, 2012 meeting. 5 Vicin Item: Cellular Tower in a C- 1 Zone it y Applicant: Verizon Wireless N Map File # : SP2012-018 �V 1!�N-- i i L I WY I �``"`� .:■ ,� � � - �,�� fig I Ij ;� --" - � '� 1vlf [ ` I W1LSH DR I M2 � 4 e J - - SITE rqp- t � 7'" Qli — �.�a. -6 r s � R 4 �- HA M4 O I ►\IIIIIIIIIIIIIII� tllllllllllllllll IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII■111- .■�■ -�■ � � MINOMMAILVAEFU 11111111111 _ _ � 11111■ 11 ■ � � , 11111111111 . II111� 11 ■■■ ■1 go Office Vacant Vacant Commercial IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII\���� 1111111111111\ X11111111111■1� ■ �■■■■■I ■ A ■ � Zoning Item: Cellular Tower in a C- 1 Zone Applicant: Verizon Wireless N Map File #: SP2012-018 C) c I 11h I III //// I\\\\ 1 11111 1 1 1 11 1 � I I I I I I I I I I I � I I I I I I I I L R-3 IL HIRED ^ (Medium Densi Residential)__ RT (Residential Transition) ,fir N 1 � SITE � a C-1 (Retail Business) a SANDIFUR PKWY A A F a � F C-1 (Retail Business) 11g2 0 4 \ . a too, ImLo 4 - , � & - \ 2 - { » l� � f j Y < 1l GS 4 `b • Li �u t. E i 6t �' -, N r p O d'Q It If LZAPI y Y 1 �' I tFi i jj S ) `� i Fl .i � R i A � it oL 4 s ` LLL L .1 1 Y O + d ' ♦ R �p� } dQ ji �4 �D 1 y ds . n s �'. � w � o �� r � A I � O � '"`� � ` ° �•��� y . - ._ � ; '. ' � I �Z ;d:' I{I♦'I y} i i 1 r r or ` It A ' 1�4 �1 M � � 1 k O l yyK rrA� O 1 P'F LL � 4 i - r r YE'nZMwireless August 10,2012 Planning Department Dear Planner: The purpose of this letter is to provide information for the Verizon Wireless proposed SANDIFUR cell site located on a privet storage facility property at 9335 Sandifur Parkway Pasco Washington. It is Verizon Wireless policy to take a proactive stance and provide the highest possible wireless network quality to our customers. Based on our radio frequency planning tools and other data collected by Verizon Wireless this area has been identified as requiring a new cell site. New cell sites are added to the system to improve coverage and/or add additional call capacity. The SANDIFUR cell site is planned to accomplish primarily capacity improvement which by its nature also improves service quality in the local area. Due to the growth of personal wireless use and the expanding development in the area the current serving cell sites capacity limits are being reached and a new cell is required to provide additional wireless capacity in the locale area. The current serving Verizon Wireless cell sites for this area are; 3 miles to the west, 2.0 miles to the east, 3.1 miles to the south, and 2.9 miles to the west. For a PCS network in a mixed suburban environment such as this those distances put the Sandifur area at the working limits for the serving cells. This has the effect of additionally further reducing the capacity available to users in the area. Thus due to the surrounding sites struggling to provide the high quality service expected by our customers in the area Verizon Wireless is proposing a new cell be constructed to resolve the capacity issues and improve the quality (wireless data speeds and voice quality)in the area. The SANDIFUR cell site is an integral part of our plan to provide first class wireless service to the markets which Verizon Wireless serves. RF radio propagation studies done using VZW proprietary RF propagation analysis computer software(Geoplan)and our RF transmitter field testing have shown that the chosen location at the personal storage facility and an antenna height of 80 foot is adequate to serve the objective area of homes, industrial buildings, commercial/retail, and roads within approximately a 2.0 mile radius. The SANDIFUR location and antenna height are critical due to the requirement that it; "fit in"with the existing cell sites; relieve capacity congestion at the surrounding cell sites, provide excellent in-building coverage and give reliable service in the area. This is critical because if the new cell does not achieve its goals due to location or height it is impossible to fix later and could require more cells be required than necessary. When new wireless cells are fit into an existing network as is the case with the SANDIFUR the variance for both location and antenna height is particularly small due to the proximity of the adjacent cell sites. Many locations will not meet the criteria due to either overlapping coverage with existing cell sites or not providing adequate wireless service in the critical areas where the new cell is expected to serve. Selecting the SANDIFUR location required several visits, RF propagation analysis and transmitter testing of the location. Transmitter testing was conducted at 80 foot (tip height) to confirm that the allowed height and proposed location would be sufficient. The test showed it is but with no margin to spare. With this proposal the SANDIFUR area can expect excellent wireless service and good wireless call connections into the foreseeable future (see attached plots). Two other locations nearby were evaluated the nearby water tank to the east and an existing tower to the west primarily with respect to the following three criteria. 1- Locating the new capacity cell outside of the intended coverage area will severely reduce its ability to offload calls from our current wireless network since for a cell to"take"calls from other cells it's RF signal must be much stronger in the objective area than the other cells. For this type of area distance is the primary factor in RF signal strength making the new cell location extremely critical. • Page 2 August 10, 2012 2- Efficient use of a cell RF capacity requires it to be located as close to the center of the intended coverage area as possible so the cells three sectors can be fully utilized and no one sector is driven to capacity exhaustion. 3- Locating to close to another existing cell site impairs the capacity of both cells by causing too much "overlap" which actually reduces call quality and capacity at both the existing and new cell. Water Tank-Although plenty tall enough (actually too tall because the coverage radius needed for the new cell site is only about 1.5 miles)the location has two serious faults. One, it is not centrally placed with respect to where the wireless coverage is needed, and two it is much to close (9/10ths of a mile) from our cell called TRAC located at Gesa Stadium. Existing tower 1 mile west of the proposed location —This tower is too far from the intended coverage area. As mentioned above it is vitally important for capacity cells to be located as close to the middle of the intended coverage area (where the users are) as possible so the new cell can serve roughly even numbers of uses on each of the three sectors since an unbalanced cell will waste RF capacity thus driving a need for more cells in the future. This tower is located far west of and at least 2 miles from portions of the required coverage area and thus would not be an efficient location for a capacity cell. In addition the available tower center line elevation appears to be quite low (because the tower currently has a lot of mountings on it) and will cause the signal strength coverage from this location to be weak (especially going east)making it unable to capacity offload the current network cells. Thus, the water tank and the existing tower are not usable locations for meeting the objective of the Sandifur capacity offload cell. As a reference I have attached three RF signal "path loss" plots of the area showing the VZW neighbor cells locations (and the water tank "Sandifur-3" location). The plots depict predicted RF coverage before and after the SANDIFUR cell is added. The coverage estimates (actual service may vary) are referenced to a call for a typical user as excellent = "in-building", good = "in vehicle" and marginal = `outdoor'. This being a suburban area with a wide variety of structures (larger buildings, homes, apartments, etc) the required signal strength needs to be generally in the red area to offload calls from the current network and red or green areas to assure our customers a quality experience with voice and wireless data services. It is significant that the selected location for the SANDIFUR cell site fits with the neighbor cells, can resolve the main issue of capacity, and is located in an out of the way area in a personal storage building area. The concurrence of a good location for the new cell and acceptable land use is not easy to find and a definite plus with this location. As a note:The antennas, as proposed and designed for the above noted site, are in compliance with all applicable FCC requirements. In addition, the proposed site meets all applicable ANSI/IEEE C95.1- 1992 exposure levels, as adopted by the FCC requirements and the equipment we use meets the following safety/regulatory standards: FCC Part 15 & Part 24, UL 1950, 3'd Edition, CSA C22.2 #234, UL 50-Type 3R,Transmit Spurious Emissions: IS-9513, FCC Part 15&Part 24. To summarize, a new cellular site is needed to provide acceptable current and future mobile wireless services in the area. In this case Verizon Wireless is proposing a new cell tower with antennas at 80 foot tip height to be constructed and respectfully request approval for this project. Sincerely, Scott Cashmore RF Engineer Verizon Wireless Page 3 August 1 2012 RF Coverage Path Loss RED -very good (indoor) GREEN -good (in vehicle) BLUE-marginal (outdoor) -or d• �T'c SANDIFUR AW Olgj 11fGa�' .I lli �IICF. �P Id�\•°' r�,�a , I.IIa11a. # .i i_ :1ii� 1i t ��;�at Vii• w _ ca�i;lm:a: '® Wall- This �1 ���I�� ■!■ate�Z: iiil�y, �'■+ .. coverage area the Sandifur cell will serve and improve. • Page 4 August 10, 2012 RF Coverage Path Loss RED -very good (indoor) GREEN -good (in vehicle) j BLUE-marginal (outdoor) VA f R LANE . — r SANL9IFUR - RIC H;'AN San r 3 .000 -_- ,TRAC NKFURTER A rte. STERLIN[9 TowEM PAS IIUC]A BULL KIg E - L` - ELEPOw s r STU- I �''3` �J D -10�+ . This is the current service levels in the SANDIFUR area based on RF path loss predictions. Please note the good Sandifur cell location with respect to our current network and the poor location of the water tank"Sandifer-Y. • Page 5 August 10, 2012 RF Coverage Path Loss t RED -very good (indoor) GREEN -good (in vehicle) BLUE-marginal (outdoor) y r ) 4L I ir z MCA\� R LANE ' ?• SANDIFUR RIC HIAN Sanditr-3 TRAC NKFURTER A STERLI NO TOWER& PAS IPIUDA BULL ° r KINGME ELBOW `* STILLWXIER- This is the future service levels in the SANDIFUR area with 80 foot tower. The additional network capacity that SANDIFUR provides will resolve wireless capacity and quality issues in the developing surrounding area. • Page 6 August 10, 2012 LI J _ Viso m FRA - %MUDA _may i -- Showing location of existing tower"USC located about 1 mile west of Sandifur area. DO MOT SCALE DRAWINGS GOOTRAUTOR MUST AT I O'SILL DII AND AD.ISE CONSULTANTS OF ANY ERRORS ON OMISSIONS.NO VARIATIONS OR MODIFICATIONS TO WORK SHOWMAVELL BE IMPLEMESTIED WITHOUT PRIOR WRITTEN APPREVIAL ALL PREVIOUS ISSUES OF THISOFEWING ARE :;EL w MORRISON HERSHFIELD NOR THE a BE PROVIDWISS CONSTRUCTION REELEN OF"IS PROURFEL VerfMnOf Cpless Cpl ' PROJECT NAME: TRISANDIFUR 5 5 PROJECT LOCATION: 9335 SANDIFUR PARKWAY 4 PASCO, WA 99301 3 2 1 0 A 6/26/12 ISSUED FOR REVIEW No. Date I Action VICINITY MAP SCOPE OF WORK LIST OF DRAWINGS Client: VERIZON WIRELESS PLANS TO CONSTRUCT A NEW UNMANNED WIRELESS FACILITY. VERIZON WIRELESS PLANS SHEET DESCRIPTION ISSUE / 1^ TO INSTALL (9) PANEL ANTENNAS FLUSH MOUNTED ON A PROPOSED 100' MONOPOLE AND EQUIPMENT \ /�` CABINETS WITHIN A PROPOSED 10'x23' AT&T LEASE AREA INSIDE OF AN EXISTING BUILDING'S MECHANICAL T-1 COVER SHEET A tvv+ F N ROOM. T-2 GENERAL NOTES, SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS A l ORTZOf;fwireless C-1 EXISTING SITE SURVEY A .. C-2 SITE PLAN A Implementation Team: s A-1 PARTIAL SITE PLAN A 3 A-2 ENLARGED COMPOUND PLAN A IfA-3 PROPOSED ELEVATION A PROLAND , LLC i e E00441 �r3 wM+6 j s PROJECT t,, PROJECT INFORMATION ,GENES SITE ■ SSM. PROPERTY OWNER: KEES KOSTER AdcE; i Mat flu.+n /I� SSeeSr er"° PROPERTY OWNER ADDRESS: 4606 W RIVER BLVD, PASCO, WA 99301 ■ . e weft" $ e t" MORRISON HERSHFIELD y LATITUDE: 46.2799 .80" N R ri 46.279' 44 N ETH F SUITE petY� g BELLEVUE, WA 9000E LONGITUDE: 119'12'48.11 " W 119.213364' IN Tel: 425.41.1301 rSx:Enasvts99 �H � www.morrlsonnereM1PeN.wm GROUND ELEVATION: 489.4' AMSL CODE COMPLIANCE Project: s PROPOSED STRUCTURE HEIGHT: 100'—O" AGL TRISANDIFUR ALL WORK AND MATERIALS SHALL BE PERFORMED AND INSTALLED 9335 SANDIFUR PARKWAY JURISDICTION: CITY C OF PASCO ACCORDANCE WITH THE CURRENT CONDITIONS OF THE FOLLOWING CODES AS PASCO, WA 99301 u F ADOPTED BY THE LOCAL GOVERNING AUTHORITIES. NOTHING THESE PLANS � 3 a TAX PARCEL ID: 115442012 IS TO BE CONSTRUED TO PERMIT WORK NOT CONFORMING TO O THESE CODES: Drawing Title: CIA g i ZONING CLASS: COMMERCIAL 1 WASHINGTON STATE AND LOCAL BUILDING CODES WITH THE FOLLOWING n4 REFERENCE CODE: + y CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT: VERIZON WIRELESS (VAW) LLC, 2008 NATIONAL ELECTRIC CODE (NFPA 70) d/b/a VERIZON WIRELESS 2009 INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE (IBC) COVER SHEET 185 MAPLE ST 2009 INTERNATIONAL MECHANICAL CODE (IMC) EUGENE, OR 97402 SITE DIRECTIONS PERMITTING CONTACT JULIE COPE PROLAND, LLC Score: Pwiect No. (FROM SEATTLE: PO BOX 8436 As shown 7123018 SPOKANE, WA 99203 Beeigner. dote: HEADING EAST ON 1-90 E, TAKE EXIT 137 TO MERGE ONTO WA-26 E MOBILE: (509) 220-4155 B.W. 6/15/12 TOWARD OTHELLO/PULLMAN. TURN RIGHT ONTO WA-243 S. CONTINUE jcope®prolandllc.com STRAIGHT ONTO WA-24 W. CONTINUE ONTO WA-240 E. TURN RIGHT ONTO mow a W. By: R.L. WA-240 E/STATE ROUTE 240. TAKE THE RAMP ONTO 1-182 E. TAKE EXIT 7 A&E CONTACT RICK MATTESON APPROVALS C.L. R.L. FOR BROADMOOR BLVD. TURN LEFT ONTO BROADMOOR BLVD. TURN RIGHT MORRISON HERSHFIELD CORP Project Manager. Client Pypwval ONTO SANDIFUR PKWY. DESTINATION WILL BE ON THE LEFT. 10900 NE 8TH ST, SUITE 810 TITLE SIGNATURE DATE R.M. BELLEVUE, WA 98004 ISSUE No. Bwwing No. PHONE : (425) 508-0110 PROPERTY OWNER rmatteson®morrisonhershfield.com RCC REPRESENTATIVE: A I T — DIMEREEWSANDAWUEODNEULTANTSOF�y ERRORS OR GENERAL NOTES ABBREVIATIONS OMISSIONS.NO OPERATORS OR MODIFICATIONS 70 WORK SHOWNSHAIL BE IMPLEMENTED WITHOUT PROM WRITTEN APPROVAL ALL PREVIOUS ISSUES OF THE DRAWING ME AND SPECIFICATIONS RENVAIN THE PROPEI OF A/C AIR CONDITIONER Jr. JOINT MORRISON HERSHFIELD CORPORATION,NEITHER 1 . WORK SHALL COMPLY WITH ALL APPLICABLE CODES, ORDINANCES, AND REGULATIONS. ALL ACP ACOUSTICAL CEILING PANEL LA. LAYER MORRISON HERSHFIELD NOR THE ARCHITECT WILL NECESSARY LICENSES, CERTIFICATES, ETC., REQUIRED BY AUTHORITY HAVING JURISDICTION SHALL 16. VERIFY ALL EXISTING DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO PERFORMING WORK. A.F.F. ABOVE FINISHED FLOOR LAM. LAuINATED BE PROVIDING CONATRUCTION REVIEW 04'FEE PROJI ALT. ALTERNATE L.F. LINEAL NOT BE PROCURED AND PAID FOR BY THE CONTRACTOR. 17. VERIFY LOCATION OF ALL BURIED UTILITIES PRIOR TO ANY EXCAVATION. A.M.S.L. ABOVE MEAN SEA LEVEL MMMUF. MANUFACTURER 18. IN RAWLAND CONDITIONS, TOWER FOUNDATION STRUCTURAL STEEL TO BE ALUM. ALUMINUM MATER. MATERIAL 2. MORRISON HERSHFIELD CORPORATION HAS NOT CONDUCTED, NOR DOES IT INTEND TO CONDUCT ANC. ANCHOR MAX. MAXIMUM ANY INVESTIGATION AS TO THE PRESENCE OF HAZARDOUS MATERIAL, INCLUDING, BUT NOT GROUNDED PRIOR TO CONCRETE POUR. TOWER FOUNDATION STRUCTURAL STEEL L ANGLE MECH. MECHANICAL LIMITED TO. ASBESTOS WITHIN THE CONFINES OF THIS PROJECT. MORRISON HERSHFIELD TO BE CONNECTED TO PERMANENT GROUND ROD PRIOR TO TOWER ERECTION. ARCH. ARCHITECTURAL IN MANHOLE CORPORATION DOES NOT ACCEPT RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE INDEMNIFICATION, THE REMOVAL, OR TOWER GROUND MUST BE MAINTAINED AT ALL TIMES. RD.0 AT MM. MILLIMETER ANY EFFECTS FROM THE PRESENCE OF THESE MATERIALS. IF EVIDENCE OF HAZARDOUS 19. THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR APPLYING FOR BFF BELOW FINISH FLOOR MIN. MINIMUM MATERIALS IS FOUND, WORK IS TO BE SUSPENDED AND THE OWNER NOTIFIED. THE MISC. MISCELLANEOUS OPEN COMMERCIAL POWER IMMEDIATELY UPON AWARD OF CONTRACT. THE GENERAL BLDG. BUILDING M.D. MASONRY OPENING CONTRACTOR IS NOT TO PROCEED WITH FURTHER WORK UNTIL INSTRUCTED BY THE OWNER IN CONTRACTOR IS REQUIRED TO KEEP ALL DOCUMENTATION RECEIVED FROM THE BLK. BLOCK MPH MILES PER HOUR WRITING. POWER COMPANY, ACKNOWLEDGING APPLICATION FOR POWER, WRITTEN AND BM. BEAM M.S.L MEAN SEA LEVEL 3. ALL MATERIAL FURNISHED UNDER THIS CONTRACT SHALL BE NEW, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. VERBAL DISCUSSIONS WITH THE POWER COMPANY, ETC. BUR BUILT UP ROOF III METAL N.c.v.D. ALL WORK SHALL BE GUARANTEED AGAINST DEFECTS IN MATERIALS AND WORKMANSHIP. THE 20. THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN WRITTEN CONFIRMATION OF THE CER. CERAMIC N.I.C. NOT IN CONTRACT CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE AT HIS EXPENSE ALL WORK THAT MAY DEVELOP DEFECTS EXPECTED DATE OF COMPLETION OF THE POWER CONNECTION FROM THE POWER C.J. CONTROL JOINT NOM. NOMINAL IN MATERIALS OR WORKMANSHIP WITHIN SAID PERIOD OF TIME OR FOR ONE YEAR AFTER THE CL CENTER LINE N.T.S. NOT TO SCALE COMPANY. CO. CEILING O.C. ON CENTER FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE ENTIRE PROJECT, WHICHEVER IS GREATER. CLR. CLEAR O.D. OUTSIDE DIAMETER 4. THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR AND EACH SUBCONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR VERIFYING 21 , IF THE POWER COMPANY IS UNABLE TO PROVIDE THE POWER CONNECTION BY cvr CCOONNCCRETE MASONRY UNIT OH. OVERHEAD ALL EXISTING CONDITIONS AND UTILITIES AT THE JOB SITE BEFORE WORK IS STARTED. NO CLAIMS OWNER'S REQUIRED DATE, THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE AND COL. COLUMN OPNG. OPENING 6 MAINTAIN A TEMPORARY GENERATOR UNTIL THE POWER COMPANY CONNECTION IS OZ. OPPOSITE FOR EXTRA COMPENSATION FOR WORK WHICH COULD HAVE BEEN FORESEEN BY AN INSPECTION, COL. CONCRETE O2. OUNCE 5 WHETHER SHOWN ON THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS OR NOT, WILL BE ACCEPTED OR PAID. COMPLETED. COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE TEMPORARY GENERATOR TO BE CONST. CONSTRUCTION R PIATE APPROVED BY THE OWNER. CONT. CONTINUOUS PLYWD. PLYWOOD 4 5. THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR AND EACH SUBCONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR VERIFYING C.T. CERAMIC TILE PR. PAIR DIMENSIONS AND CONDITIONS AT THE JOB SITE WHICH COULD AFFECT THE WORK UNDER THIS 22. IF THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR FAILS TO TAKE NECESSARY MEASURES AS CTR. CENTER P.S.I. POUNDS PER SQUARE INCH 3 CONTRACT. ALL MANUFACTURERS RECOMMENDED SPECIFICATIONS, EXCEPT THOSE SPECIFICATIONS DESCRIBED IN NOTES 19, 20 AND 21 ABOVE, THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHALL C/W COMPLETE WITH P.S.F. POUNDS PER SQUARE FOOT HEREIN, WHERE MOST STRINGENT SHALL BE COMPLIED WITH. PROVIDE A TEMPORARY GENERATOR AT NO COST TO THE OWNER. O.F. DRINKING FOUNTAIN P.T. PRESSURE TREATED Du./d DAMETER WE RADIUS Z 23. PLANS PART OF THIS SET ARE COMPLEMENTARY. INFORMATION IS NOT LIMITED TO DR. DOWN R.C. RADIAL CENTER 1 6. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY AND COORDINATE SIZE AND LOCATION OF ALL OPENINGS FOR R.D. ROOF DRAIN STRUCTURAL, MECHANICAL, ELECTRICAL, PLUMBING, CIVIL, OR ARCHITECTURAL WORK. ONE PLAN. DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE INSTRUMENTS OF SERVICE AND D.S. DOWNSPOUT RECEP. RECEPTACLE SHALL REMAIN THE PROPERTY OF THE ARCHITECT, WHETHER THE PROJECT FOR On., REINF. REINFORCEO/REINNRCINC 0 EAL 7. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY THAT NO CONFLICTS EXIST BETWEEN THE LOCATIONS OF ANY AND WHICH THEY ARE MADE IS EXECUTED OR NOT. THEY ARE NOT TO BE USED BY BIER EXTERIOR INSULATION FINISH SYSTEM REQ'D. REQUIRED ALL MECHANICAL, ELECTRICAL, PLUMBING, OR STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS, AND THAT ALL REQUIRED THE OWNER ON OTHER PROJECTS OR EXTENSION TO THIS PROJECT EXCEPT BY E.J. EXPANSION JOINT RM. ROOM A fi/26/12 ISSUED FOR REVIEW CLEARANCES FOR INSTALLATION AND MAINTENANCE ARE MET. NOTIFY THE CONSULTANT OF ANY AGREEMENT IN WRITING AND WITH APPROPRIATE COMPENSATION TO THE EEC. EECTRIC/ELECTRICAL RN ROOF TOP UNIT - CONFLICTS. THE CONSULTANT HAS THE RIGHT TO MAKE MINOR MODIFICATIONS IN THE DESIGN OF ARCHITECT. THESE PLANS WERE PREPARED TO BE SUBMITTED 7O GOVERNMENTAL EL ELEVATION R/W RIGHT OF WAY No. Date Action THE CONTRACT WITHOUT THE CONTRACTOR GETTING ADDITIONAL COMPENSATION. BUILDING AUTHORITIES FOR REVIEW FOR COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE CODES E.P. EQUAL AI PANEL SECT. SECTION SECT. SECTION Client: AND IT IS THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE OWNER AND/OR CONTRACTOR TO Eµ, E EACH LWAY S.F. SQUARE NOT 8. DO NOT SCALE THE DRAWINGS. DIMENSIONS ARE EITHER TO THE FACE OF FINISHED ELEMENTS BUILD ACCORDING TO APPLICABLE BUILDING CODES. EXP. EXPANSION SIM. SIMILAR OR TO THE CENTER LINE OF ELEMENTS, UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. CRITICAL DIMENSIONS EXT. EXTERIOR S.P. SPLICE POINT SHALL BE VERIFIED WITH THE CONSULTANT. F.D. FLOOR DRAIN SO. FT. SQUARE FOOT 24. IF CONTRACTOR OR SUB-CONTRACTOR FIND IT NECESSARY TO DEVIATE FROM S.S. STAINLESS STEEL F.E.C. FIRE HOSE EXTINGUISHER SHELTER 9. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR DAILY CLEAN UP OF ALL TRADES AND REMOVE ORIGINAL APPROVED PLANS, THEN IT IS THE CONTRACTOR'S AND THE M. STANDARD EEL F.H.C. FIRE HOSE EQUIPMENT S.R STEEL a ALL DEBRIS FROM THE CONSTRUCTION SITE. AT THE COMPLETION OF THE PROJECT, THE SUB-CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY TO PROVIDE THE ARCHITECT WITH 4 COPIES FIN. FINISH MR. STORAGE VerrEM irele$S OF THE PROPOSED CHANGES FOR HIS APPROVAL BEFORE PROCEEDING WITH THE FIN. FUEL FINISH FLOOR CONTRACTOR SHALL THOROUGHLY CLEAN THE BUILDING, SITE, AND ANY OTHER SURROUNDING FIR. FLOOR smut. STRUCTURAL REST. SUSPENDED Implementation Team: AREAS TO A BETTER THAN NEW CONDITION. WORK. ADDITION THE CONTRACTOR AND SUB-CONTRACTORS SHALL BE FOOTING RESPONSIBLE GA. TEMP.FOR PROCURING ALL NECESSARY APPROVALS FROM THE BUILDING GA. GAUGE TEMP. TEMPORPRY - 10. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ADEQUATELY BRACING AND PROTECTING ALL WORK DURING AUTHORITIES FOR THE PROPOSED CHANGES BEFORE PROCEEDING WITH THE GALV. GALVANIZED THK. THICK CONSTRUCTION AGAINST DAMAGE, BREAKAGE, COLLAPSE, ETC. ACCORDING TO APPLICABLE CODES, WORK. THE CONTRACTOR AND SUB-CONTRACTORS SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR GEN. GENERAL THIOKN. THICKNESS STANDARDS, AND GOOD CONSTRUCTION PRACTICES. PROCURING ALL NECESSARY INSPECTIONS AND APPROVALS FROM BUILDING a GYP. GYPSUM To. TOP OF GYPSUM BOARD T.Q.S. TOP OF STEEL PROLAND, LLC AUTHORITIES DURING THE EXECUTION OF THE WORK. H.C. HANDICAPPED T.O. TOPICAL 11 . THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MEET ALL OSHA REQUIREMENTS FOR ALL INSTALLATIONS. III HOOK U.N.O. UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE 12. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL DAMAGES TO THE EXISTING CONSTRUCTION 25. IN EVERY EVENT, THESE CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS AND SPECIFICATIONS SHALL H.M. HOLLOW METAL VCT VINYL COMPOSITION TIE AND REPAIR ALL DAMAGES TO BETTER THAN NEW CONSTRUCTION. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE INTERPRETED TO BE A MINIMUM ACCEPTABLE MEANS OF CONSTRUCTION BUT NOR. HORIZONTAL VIE VERIFY IN FIELD NOTIFY THE ARCHITECT OF ANY DAMAGE TO THE BUILDING SITE OR ANY ADJACENT STRUCTURES THIS SHALL NOT RELIEVE THE CONTRACTOR, SUB-CONTRACTOR, AND/OR HR. HOUR VERY. VERTICAL . SUPPLIER MANUFACTURER FROM PROVIDING A COMPLETE AND CORRECT JOB HT. HEIGHT W/ WITH A&E: AROUND THE PROJECT. THE CONSULTANT SHALL BE SOLE AND FINAL JUDGE AS TO THE QUALITY / INSUL INSULATION We. MOD w OF THE REPAIRED CONSTRUCTION. ANY ADDITIONAL MODIFICATIONS WHICH MUST BE MADE SHALL WHEN ADDITIONAL ITEMS ARE REQUIRED TO THE MINIMUM SPECIFICATION. IF ANY INT. INTERIOR "M WELDED WIRE MESH I ■ ■ ITEMS NEED EXCEED THESE MINIMUM SPECIFICATIONS TO PROVIDE A BE MADE AT THE CONTRACTOR'S EXPENSE. COMPLETE, ADEQUATE QUATE AND SAFE WORKING CONDITION, THEN IT SHALL BE THE MORRISON HERSHFIELD 13. WHERE ONE DETAIL IS SHOWN FOR ONE CONDITION, IT SHALL APPLY FOR ALL LIKE OR SIMILAR DEEMED AND UNDERSTOOD TO BE INCLUDED IN THE DRAWINGS. FOR EXAMPLE, LEGEND 10900 HE STH STREET, SUITE 810 CONDITIONS, EVEN THOUGH NOT SPECIFICALLY MARKED ON THE DRAWINGS OR REFERRED TO IN IF AN ITEM AND/OR PIECE OF EQUIPMENT REQUIRES A LARGER WIRE SIZE (I.E. BELLEVUE,WA9e004 THE SPECIFICATIONS, UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. ELECTRICAL WIRE), STRONGER OR LARGER PIPING, INCREASED QUANTITY I.E. Tel: A25A51.1301 Fao: .,VU,1369 ( BUILDING/WALL/DETAIL SECTION LARGE ALE DETAIL 14. WHERE NEW PAVING, CONCRETE SIDEWALKS OR PATHS MEET EXISTING CONSTRUCTION, THE STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS), REDUCED SPACING, AND/OR INCREASED LENGTH (I.E. e9nhe,enneld.com CONTRACTOR SHALL MATCH THE EXISTING PITCH, GRADE, AND ELEVATION SO THE ENTIRE BOLT LENGTHS, BAR LENGTHS) THEN IT SHALL BE DEEMED AND UNDERSTOOD TO ��Detail Number Project: xe..v STRUCTURE SHALL HAVE A SMOOTH TRANSITION. BE INCLUDED IN THE BID/PROPOSAL. THESE DOCUMENTS ARE MEANT AS A /n '\ B Detail Number GUIDE AND ALL ITEMS REASONABLY INFERRED SHALL BE DEEMED TO BE A�- p-1 TRISANDIFUR 15. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MODIFY THE EXISTING FLOORS, WALL, CEILING, OR OTHER CONSTRUCTION INCLUDED. Sheet Number AS REQUIRED TO GAIN ACCESS TO AREAS FOR ALL MECHANICAL, PLUMBING, ELECTRICAL, OR Where Detailed �,Sheet Number 9335 SANDIFUR PARKWAY STRUCTURAL MODIFICATIONS. WHERE THE EXISTING CONSTRUCTION DOORS, PARTITIONS, CEILING, 26. THESE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS AND SPECIFICATIONS SHALL NOT BE CONSTRUED Where Detailed PASCO, WA 99301 ETC., ARE TO BE REMOVED, MODIFIED, OR REARRANGED OR WHERE THE EXPOSED OR HIDDEN TO CREATE A CONTRACTUAL RELATIONSHIP OF ANY KIND BETWEEN THE MECHANICAL, ELECTRICAL, SYSTEMS ARE ADDED OR MODIFIED, THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHALL ARCHITECT AND THE CONTRACTOR. REFERENCE _. Drawing Title: REPAIR, PATCH AND MATCH ALL EXISTING CONSTRUCTION AND FINISHES OF ALL FLOORS WALLS AND CEILINGS. WHERE CONCRETE MASONRY CONSTRUCTION IS MODIFIED, THE CONTRACTOR G GENERAL NOTES, SHALL TOOTH IN ALL NEW CONSTRUCTION TO MATCH THE EXISTING BOND. WHERE CONCRETE p_1 CONSTRUCTION IS MODIFIED, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY THE EXACT DETAILS TO BE USED SYMBOLS AND FOR CONSTRUCTION. ALL WORK SHALL BE COVERED UNDER THE GENERAL CONTRACT. Referenced Drawing ABBREVIATIONS IMPORTANT NOTICE PROJECT INFORMATION Seale. Project No. THE EXISTING CONDITIONS REPRESENTED HEREIN ARE 1 . THIS IS AN UNMANNED AND RESTRICTED ACCESS EQUIPMENT AND WILL BE USED FOR THE TRANSMISSION OF RADIO SIGNALS FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROVIDING PUBLIC CELLULAR SERVICE. As shown 7123016 BASED ON VISUAL OBSERVATIONS AND INFORMATION 2. VERIZON WIRELESS CERTIFIES THAT THIS TELEPHONE EQUIPMENT FACILITY WILL BE SERVICED ONLY BY VERIZON WIRELESS EMPLOYEE SERVICE PERSONNEL FOR REPAIR PURPOSES ONLY. THIS FACILITY IS UNMANNED & Designer.W. Date. PROVIDED BY OTHERS. NOT DESIGNED FOR HUMAN OCCUPANCY THUS IT IS NOT OPEN TO THE PUBLIC. B.W. 6/15/12 MORRISON HERSHFIELD CORPORATION CANNOT GUARANTEE Drown By. Chocked Bp THE CORRECTNESS NOR COMPLETENESS OF THE EXISTING 3. THIS FACILITY WILL CONSUME NO UNRECOVERABLE ENERGY. C.L. R.L. CONDITIONS SHOWN AND ASSUMES NO RESPONSIBILITY 4. NO POTABLE WATER SUPPLY IS TO BE PROVIDED AT THIS LOCATION. Project Mara9er. CHEM Approval THEREOF. CONTRACTOR AND HIS SUB-CONTRACTORS 5. NO WASTE WATER WILL BE GENERATED AT THIS LOCATION. R.M. SHALL VISIT THE SITE AND VERIFY ALL EXISTING 6. NO SOLID WASTE WILL BE GENERATED AT THIS LOCATION. New No. DroI No. CONDITIONS AS REQUIRED FOR PROPER EXECUTION OF PROJECT. REPORT ANY CONFLICTS OR DISCREPANCIES TO 7. VERIZON WIRELESS MAINTENANCE CREW (TYPICALLY ONE PERSON) WILL MAKE AN AVERAGE OF ONE TRIP PER MONTH AT ONE HOUR PER VISIT. r� THE CONSULTANT PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. A T - ''1 00 NOT SCALE DRAWINGS CONTRACTOR MUST MESSER ALL DISMENSIONS AND AOVMBE CONSULTANTS OF AW BETWEEN OR TAX LOT - - TAX LOT SHOWN$HALL US MALSIMENTED)WISHOUT PRIOR MOISTER #115430174 40 = . e - .. ws . + - , . . . . . . _ , a. . . �. . . #115441031 APPROVAL ALL PREVIOUS UNLESS OF TITO DRAWING•RE AND SPEEOevTIONSS ERRSws PROPRawwos _ 1 I nuo exec ECnr Due DCORP RA PROPERTY OF EXISTING PROPERTY LINE moan SOx neasnR EEO CORPORATION wenwsa — — ^ — — EXISTING PROPERTY LINE _ _ NORRISION HERSHFIELD NOR THE ARCHITECT WILL 1 _ _ _ _ _ 1 1 , BE ERwoI.c w.sraucrroR REVIEW orTHIS PawEm 1 I EXISTING BUILDING I PROPOSED 10'x23' VERIZON WIRELESS LEASE AREA WRNIN EXISTING BUILDING i I LOT #11515 4301]3 ; ; TAX LOT 1 EXISTING BUILDING t 4 1 � I I #115442013 ' I I ' z ' LD OR w { ; 0 0 O 4 , ' a { L — J F a zI I ( w x = 3 1 TAX 2D w I #n544zD1z - ; I 2 IX { III ° m � qn 5442D14 A 6/26/12 ISSUED FOR REVIEW LOT o z I NcN Date Action 1 OG _ 03 0 Client: j z w EXISTING 10' y UTILITY EASEMENT { EXISTING BUILDING VV / nn I XI TIN - �` EXISTING BUILDING �bNmarefeSP TAX LOT BID _ EXISTING 14 Implementation Team: #115430172 � _ ACCESS GATES 1 _ _ _ — — - - '- -- EXISTING PROPERT' LINE EXISTING PROiER1Y LINE g PROLAND, LLC I F { . W I EXISTING Sd TRANSMISSION w LINE EASEMENT I ■ ■ I MORRISON HERSH FIELD # TAX LOT EXISTING 15' TPX LOT rc l I TAX LOT 115441242 10800 NE LE STREET, SUITE 010 ROW E45EMEN� w 9EL1.1301 o-425A \^^III #115442010 p to #115442011 Tel: 425A51.1301 So-425A51.1369 O_ a I sonhenMlelE.wm Protect: www.mora TAX LOT M I TRISANDIFUR #115430178 I 9335 SANDIFUR PARKWAY EXISTING PAVED PASCO, WA 99301 ACCESS ROAD ' I I I Drawing Title: EXISTING 19' STI EASEMENT - D- - - - - - - - - I SITE PLAN . . . O _ EXISTING PROPERTY LINE I Scale: Project No. As shown 7123016 . _. . _. . _. _.T� ._ .�.-._ ._ ._— .— .__ ._ _ — _ _ _— _ B.W. C Dale: — — — — B.W. 6/15/12 Drown ST. Chlcketl ST. SANDIFUR PARKWAY C.L. R.L. Project Monoger: Client Approval R.M. _ Mace No. Drowin9 No. A C - 2 22"x34' SCALE: IF = 40'-0' 1 1r.1, SCALE: in = 80'-0^ 47720 o a0' SITE PLAN i -- 3 ., I I 1 I I I1' I I I I N I 1 I � Do NOT SCALE DRAWINGS CONTRARTOR MUST VEMIFVANL DIMENSIONS AND ADWROONSULTANTS OF� ERRORS OR EADWN SHALL BE IMPLEMENTED WTHOUT PR40R WRITTEN APPROVAL ALL AN EVIL US SEVEN OF THIS 0 DRIVING ME ED RAW ED ED By THE LATEST RNOEMIML ALL DRAW DONE AND SPECIFICATIONS REMAIN THE PROPERITY OF 5 5 — — — — — EXISTING PROPERTY LANE — EXISTING FENCE - - - - - - - - - - -rt --- 4 EXISTING BUILDING 2 �• � • � � � � � • � �� RV PARKING AREA 0 PROPOSED 100'—D' MONOPOLE I •° - ■ - I I A 6/26/12 ISSUED FOR REVIEW ■ EXISTING GAS !AFTER ■ ■ .' ■ I I I No. Date Action EXISTING ELECTRICAL I I Client: EQUIPMENT EXISTING HVAC PROPOSED SEARS WIRELESS � ' _ UNIT (WP) I \ 10'XnN LEASE AREA WITHIN y _ • A-2 EXISTING BUILDING I✓ .. . . EXISTING CLEAN-OUT (TrP) i �11ylfEf�E55 EXISTING BOLLARD ME) -4� '- ' I I Implementation Team: IF PROLAND , LLC rr� I W1i ;I EXISTING BUILDING 0 . I; A&E: m ■ _, � I I I I � ►. A X1w ` MORRISON HERSHFIELD 9 I I 10900 NE 8TH STREET, SUITE 010 BELLEVUE. WA 98004 Tel: 425A51.1301 Fax:425A51.1369 sonhe5Mleld.com U I I � Project: w,� a l I M TRISANDIFUR :I 9335 SANDIRIR PARKWAY PASCO, WA 99301 . I I w -L — - - J _ Drawing Title: i #19578 WITHN LOWERS METER EXISTING TELGD- _ ° a I I PARTIAL SITE PLAN PEDESTAL I � I _ I Sole: Project No. As shown 7123016 .\ V i Designer. Me: B.W. 6/15/12 Drown By. Checked By. EXISTING EXISTING EXISTING I I C.L R.L. BUILDING BUILDING BUILDING EXISTING BUILDING FEXISTINGBUILDING project Manager. Client Approval A . R.M. . f . . _ levee No. Growing No. A A - 1 22'.340 SCALE: In = 20'-G• PARTIAL SITE PLAN 1 11'x17' SCALE: IF = 40'-0' 20 10 0 0' A 5 00 NOT SGRI DRAWINGS CONTRACTOR MR7 VERIFY ALL 0MRSIONS,NO VARA71ONS OR MODIFICATIONS TO WORK MONOPOLE. ANTENNAS AND ALL EXPOSED APPIRM AL AUL FIN FOODS ISSUES OF ONE DRAW ING ARE MOUNTING HARDWARE PANTED TAN. _ BE PROMISING HONRDkJCD(NN REVIEW OF THE PROJECH PROPOSED REPLACEMENT CURBING VITTZON PANEL PROPOSED ANTENNASS OW 3 PER SECTOR, 3 RAD CENTERS) PROPOSED VERIZON WIRELESS FLUSH ANTENNA MOUNT EXISTING CURBING PROPOSE TO BE REMOVED 1001 MONOPOLE ----- - 6 5 EXISTING MECHANICAL ROOM ENTRANCE 4 PROPOSED VERIZON 3 . _ WIRELESS (12) 1-5/8'0 COAX CABLES f 2 EXISTING GAS METER 1 0 — — A 6/26/12 ISSUED FOR REVIEW No. Data I Action EXISTING ELECTRICAL '9 Client; VE EQUIPMENT PROPOSED RIZON N WIRELESS COAX ENTRY PORT TIP � iV - ,.,/lei+ EXISTING CURBING IAWrr'eIESS TO REMAIN n � Implementation Team: PROPOSED VERIZON WIRELESS AN EXISTING EM CABINETS WRHR 4 AN IXISONG MECHANICPL ROOM OF PROLAND, LLC G � AkE: _ Art;— - - - - - - - MORRISON HERSHFIELD — 10900 NE BTH STFEET, SURE WO BELLEVUE, WA 98004 ._.. PROPOSED VERIZON WIRELESS 23'-0" LEASE AREA Tel: 425.451.130i F=425.451.1369 wx....momwenersltnNe.mm ( 1 Project: I 1 TRISANDIFUR 9335 PASCO,I WA 99301 < G - I `EXISTING Drawing Title: MECHANICAL��, ROOM \\ EXISTING BUILDING PLAN COMPOUND Scaly. Project No. As shown 7123016 Cooper. Ogle: B.W. 6/15/12 Drawn By. Checked BY C.L R.L. t Project Manager. CII AParo'+ol R.M. 4 Hew No. DnRdN No. A A - 2 22"x34" SCALE: 1/2' IF P-0" 11"x " SCALE: 1/4" = r-D" z 2, ENLA(tGED COMPOUND n PLAN I DO HOT SI DRAWINGS,COMPRACESM MUSTVIERIFY ALL. ERRORS OR �� TOP OF PROPOSED ANTENNAS WIRELESS PANEL ANTENNAS TOP OF PROPOSED MONOPOLE PROWN!MALL OF IMPLEMENTED WITHOUT PRIOR WRITTEN APPROVAL SIT PRESSIOUS ISSUES OF TH IS DRAW ING ARE MONOPOLE ANTENNAS AND P1L IXPOSm 100 -0 AGL 100 -0 ACL AND SPECIFICATIONS REMAIN THE PROMBIRTY OF MOUMING HARDWARE PAINTED TAN. HEFEI HERSHFIELD NOR THE ARCHITECT WILL BE PROVIDING CONSTRUCTION RESNIEN Of LINKS PROJECT. PROPOSED VERIZON WIRELESS PANEL ANTENNAS (M 3 PER SECTOR, 3 BAD CENTERS) PROPOSED VERIZON WIRELESS TOP OF PROPOSED VERIZON FLUSH ANTTNNA MOUNT MR PANEL ANTENNAS 89 -0 ESS AGL TOP OF PROPOSED VER20N A WIRELESS PANEL ANTENNAS 4 78 -0 AGL 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 A 6/26/12 ISSUED FOR REVIEW No. Date I Action Client: PROPOSED 100'-O' Verr&W irel @SS MONOPOLE Implementation Team: PROLAND, LLC A&E: MORRISON HERSHFIELD 10900 NE STH STREET, SUITE 610 BELLEVUE, WA 99304 Tel 425.451.1 N1 Fax:425.451 1369 e ,.,. moaisonIARGMAeM.can Project: EXISTING MICROWAVE ANTENNA TRISANDIFUR EXISTING BUILDING (OTHER CARRIER) 9335 SANDIFIER PARKWAY PASCO, WA 99301 Drawing Title: --- PROPOSED ELEVATION SCI Project No. PROPOSED V WIRELESS EQUIPMENT CABINETS WffHIN As shown 7123016 THE EISTNG BUILDING wr. Dots: B.W. B.W. 6/15/12 EXISTING ELECTRICAL MawO By. Checked By: EOUIPMEN C.L. R.L. PSI Manager. Client Approval PROPOSED REPLACEMENT R.M. CURBING Igoe No. Omwin9 No. EXISTING GRADE A /ilm 0 -L1 AGL T A A - 3 22"x34 504LE: 3/16" 1'-0" MOPOSED ELEVATION ] 11 "x17" SG1LE: 3/J2" = i'-0" 4 2 0 4' 7 — Ak 5 REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION MASTER FILE NO. Z 2012-003 APPLICANT: Bill Dolsen HEARING DATE: 8/16/2012 PO Box 1726 ACTION DATE: 9/20/2012 Yakima, WA 98907 BACKGROUND REQUEST FOR REZONE: Rezone from BP (Business Park) to C-3 (General Business) with a Concomitant Agreement 1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Legal: Lot 4 Binding Site Plan 95-5 Location: North end of 26th Avenue Property Size: 8.41 Acres 2. ACCESS: The property has access from 26th Avenue. 3. UTILITIES: All utilities are available to the site. 4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The site is currently zoned BP (Business Park). The site is vacant and never been developed. Surrounding properties are zoned and developed as follows: North "R-1" Low Density Residential - Church & "R-2" Medium Density Residential-Duplex complex South "BP" Business Park - TI Sports East "R-1" Low Density Residential - Single Family West Highway 395 5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designates the site for commercial uses. Plan Policy ED-2-13 encourages the development of a wide range of commercial and industrial uses strategically located to support local and regional needs. Part of the State-wide Growth Management mandate as identified in the Comprehensive Plan includes the promotion, retention and expansion of local businesses. 6. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The City of Pasco is the lead agency for this project. Based on the SEPA checklist, the adopted City Comprehensive Plan, City development regulations, and other information, a threshold determination resulting in a Determination of Non-significance (DNS) has been issued for this project under WAC 197- 11-158. 1 ANALYSIS/HISTORY The property in question was part of a more than 18 acre area north of Court Street adjacent to Highway 395 that was annexed to the City in 1989. Upon annexation the site and companion parcels to the south were zoned C-1 Retail Business. In 1995, six years after annexation, a permit was issued for the construction of the Food Pavilion store on the seven acres south of the site. A year later a convenience store was built at the northwest corner of 26th Avenue and Court Street followed six years later by two commercial buildings along Court Street. The site has continued to remain vacate since annexation 23 years ago. The Food Pavilion store closed in the early 2000's and remained vacant until it was rezoned to BP along with the site in question. In 2010 the Food Pavilion property was purchased by Ti Sports and converted to a research, development and manufacturing facility. (The Food Pavilion store was originally located on the west side of Highway 395 in the River View Shopping Plaza. The River View Shopping Center has been mainly vacant and underutilized for more than 10 years.) The applicant is seeking a rezone for the site to relocate and expand an existing distribution facility that is currently located on Road 34. The Business Park District does not permit the development of warehouses hence the applicant request for a rezone to C-3 (General Business). The subject property is designated for commercial land uses by the Comprehensive Plan Land Use map. The Comprehensive Plan provides general guidance on land use but does not specifically identify which of the 6 commercial zoning districts should be applied to the property. The public rezone process is used to determine the most appropriate zoning district. Commercial zoning districts include C-1 (Retail Business), C-2 Central Business District), "O" (Office), C-3 (General Business) CR (Regional Commercial) and BP (Business Park). The C-3 District permits the most intense commercial land use activities in the community. These uses include heavy machinery sales and service, lumber yards, mobile homes sales yards, automobile sales and service, wholesale businesses, warehousing, and trucking firms. The applicant understood at the time of application that not all permitted uses within the C-3 district would be appropriate on the site and restricted the C-3 rezone request to exclude heavy equipment activities, lumber sales and veterinarian clinics. While the applicant intends to relocate and expand a specific business, zoning decisions need to be considered in the context of all uses permitted in a zoning district. The applicant's existing facility uses 14 to 16 trucks on a regular basis. Eight UPS/FEDEX type trucks provide vending services to the region and 6 to 8 large 30 to 50 foot semi-trucks make deliveries to area stores. These trucks leave the current site between 5:30 am and 7:00 am and return between 2 1:00 pm and 4:00 pm each afternoon. From 4:00 pm to about 10:00 pm the trucks are re-stocked for deliveries the following day. Sometime during the day, usually in the morning, several (3) semi-trucks make deliveries similar in the manner in which deliveries are made to grocery stores. Again review of the application should include consideration that any type of distribution center could be located on the site not just the applicant's proposal. Other types of distribution centers may be more or less intense with respect to impacts on the neighborhood. Given the location of the property adjacent to a residential district it may be necessary to exclude certain C-3 uses from consideration and or include conditions that would reduce or eliminate possible adverse impacts associated with a rezone that may include a distribution center as a permitted use. Conditions could include additional screening through the use of berms, fencing and landscaping, restrictions on the location of buildings on the site, security lighting and orientation of loading docks. The initial review criteria for considering a rezone application are explained in PMC. 25.88.030. The criteria are listed below as follows: 1. The changed conditions in the vicinity which warrant other or additional zoning: • The retail nature of the area has changed as a result of the conversion of the Food Pavilion to a research, development and manufacturing facility. • The old Kmart building (76,000 sq. ft.) on the west side of Highway 395 has been vacant or underutilized for approximately 12 years. • Much of the River View Shopping Plaza west of Highway 395 has been vacant or underutilized for the past decade • A significant shift has occurred in the retail development of the city with major retail development now occurring on Rd 68 near the I- 182 Interchange. 2. Facts to justify the change on the basis of advancing the public health, safety and general welfare. For one reason or another development skipped over this site. The church to the north was built in 1969 and the houses to the east were built in the 1950's, 1960's and 1970's. The location of the property adjacent to the freeway and 750 feet north of Court Street have made it undesirable for both residential and commercial development. Rezoning the property for businesses that are not impacted by freeway noise and that do not need convenient or direct access to an arterial street may encourage development and use of the property. Developed land contributes more fully (through taxes, fees and licenses) to the funding of municipal services thereby promoting the general welfare. Developed 3 land also eliminates problems associated with weeds, the collection of litter and blowing dust that often creates nuisance in the community. 3. The effect it will have on the nature and value of adjoining property and the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan does not specify the exact commercial zoning that should be applied to the property. That determination is to be made through the public rezone process. There are six commercial zoning districts that could be considered for the property, including C-3 General Business. Plan policy ED-2-B encourages the development of a wide range of commercial and industrial uses strategically located to support local and regional needs. The site is conveniently located near the Court Street 395 interchange providing easy access to the local and regional transportation network. Part of the State-wide Growth Management mandate includes the promotion, retention and expansion of local businesses. Rezoning the property would benefit nearby commercial businesses, thereby creating additional business opportunities and buoying up property values. Development of the property with a building could benefit the adjoining residential neighborhood by creating a barrier or buffer between the freeway and the neighborhood thereby reducing freeway noise in the neighborhood. Development of the property would also eliminate a weedy dusty parcel thereby diminishing nuisances caused by weeds, blowing dust and the collection of litter. However, a distribution facility may also increase trucking and sorting activities on the site and will increase noise impacts in particular It is probable that this increase in activity will impact the R-1 and R-3 properties adjacent to the rezone site and noise impacts would need to be mitigated. 4. The effect on the property owners if the request is not granted. The current BP zoning allows the property to be developed with a variety of administrative office buildings, testing labs, research facilities, High Tech type manufacturing plants, industrial medical facilities, research and development facilities and retail businesses. The benefit of this zoning district to the owner is that it allows a combination of C-1 business activities and research, development and manufacturing of High Tech products. Additional setbacks and landscaping requirements are built into the district to provide compatibility with neighboring properties. By maintaining the current zoning the property owner can market the land for a greater number of uses that permitted in some commercial districts. However high tech development firms are difficult to attract and the location of the property 740 feet from an arterial street make it less attractive for retail sales. The proposed rezone may increase opportunities to lease or sell the property and put the property to a productive use. With current and past zoning the property has not developed. 4 5. The Comprehensive Plan land use designation for the property. The Comprehensive Plan designates the site for commercial development. The proposed rezone is for commercial development (C-3 zoning) consistent with the Plan. The existing BP zone is also consistent with the Comprehensive Plan designation of the site. INITIAL STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT Findings of fact must be entered from the record. The following are initial findings drawn from the background and analysis 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 BP (Business Park). 2) The Comprehensive Plan designates the site for commercial development. 3) The Pasco Municipal Code contains regulations for 6 types of commercial zoning districts. 4) The applicant has applied for a C-3 General Business rezone 5) C-3 Zoning is consistent with the Comprehensive Land Use Designation of commercial for the site. 6) Under current and past zoning the site has remained vacant and undeveloped since it was annexed 23 years ago. 7) Properties around the site developed in the 1950's, 1960's and 1970's while the site in question remained vacant and continues to be vacant today. 8) The former Food Pavilion building directly south of the site remained vacant for 7 years until the property it was a part of was rezoned. The rezone enabled a non-retail research, development and manufacturing firm to locate in the building. The firm invested almost a million dollars in remodeling the building. 9) The 76,000-square-foot K-Mart building in the Riverview Shopping Plaza (3521 W Court St.) has been vacant or underutilized for approximately 12 years. 10) The old Food Pavilion building in the Riverview Plaza has been vacant or minimally used since 1996. 11) The site is located 750 feet north of Court Street and lacks arterial street frontage. 12) In addition to permitting the development of retail uses the C-3 District permits the development of more intense commercial activities such as 5 automotive sales and services, heavy equipment sales and service, lumber yards and other uses. CONCLUSIONS BASED ON STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT Before recommending approval or denial of a rezone the Planning Commission must develop its conclusions from the findings of fact based upon the criteria listed in P.M.C. 25.88.060. The criteria are as follows: (1) The proposal is in accord with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. The goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan encourage the development of commercial land uses on the site. The proposed zoning district is commercial in nature and supports the Plan. (2) The effect of the proposal on the immediate vicinity will not be materially detrimental. The property is currently vacant and is slowly becoming deteriorated. The proposed rezone may provide opportunities for additional uses creating employment opportunities and additional activity on the property that would have secondary benefits to adjoining commercial businesses. Activity on the property will also reverse the deterioration trend, thus benefiting other nearby properties. (3) There is merit and value in the proposal for the community as a whole. Encouraging development of the property will have merit and value to the community as a whole because a developed property more fully contributes to funding public safety, schools, parks and other community services upon which all residents rely. (4) Conditions should be imposed in order to mitigate any significant adverse impacts from the proposal. The property is not an appropriate location for many of the high intensity uses that are permitted in the C-3 District. Uses such as heavy machinery sales and service, lumber yards, landscape storage yards, contractor facilities, mobile homes sales, automobile sales and service, trucking firms, truck stops, towing impound yards and related or similar uses would impact the neighborhood in a negative manner. Conditions to exclude such uses would be needed for the benefit of the surround neighborhood. Additionally buffering through landscaping, berms and or walls may be needed to provide the neighborhood with additional protection from possible noise and activity associated with use and development of the property. 6 (5) A concomitant agreement should be entered into between the City and the petitioner, and if so, the terms and conditions of such an agreement. A concomitant agreement is needed to prohibit the development of more intense commercial uses and ensure sufficient buffering is provided for the benefit of the neighborhood. Rezoning the property to C-3 with restrictions on the more intense C-3 uses would essentially cause the property to be zoned similar to C-1 with the addition of distribution facilities. RECOMMENDATION MOTION: I move to close the hearing on the proposed rezone and initiate deliberations and schedule adoption of findings of fact, conclusions and a recommendation to the City Council for the September 20, 2012 meeting. 7 • Item: Rezone from BP to C-3 Vicinity Applicant: Bill Dolsen N Map File #. Z 2012-003 ELLA g- �T ELLA ST WADE C.T CQ `i Q _..•,F; � . - ., k ,,• _ fir,. -.3-.d(i�ike•,.-- !+ —i P�..� f \�.. - � r-. E _fir" �� - \ LEOLA ST 54..t._x. � ,.r.-r-:•'titi "�y '.,• ,fr- -- .� T 'rr - ` if i� Mrk ,1. '- r \ - -–– --� —Yr •�1 �' a ��'.w – � •Z- �•{•,_.: rim 7� ���, ��e.r lir \ .r� � .� �•,�'-r � ^ - �� J _&PEARL ST W PEARL ST r �"��!'-• .�� �-�_ � .,,.-..,._ I_ t �J ! ��^ I: a �•1 + �I � � ---� D__ti I=_ d�,:�t-.�,- -� • , � � r r y J— � ^ �`"�:�" F`' _J.�� �� I� r III �r-- � ••-•1 1,Y4 SITE O.PAL�ST 1► �t, �T r�. , �� . IL _ F kip s — AGATE ST _ s P �� r '" "rw wk` 04'e� C14 �. I I 4 N RUBY ST ..� t �' • i '� ! — 1 71Z� --=-'-__----�� � -3 �e a —� - — - — - — — - "COURT ST�= �� ♦—� ,� , — — Land Item: Rezone from BP to C-3 Use Applicant: Bill Dolsen N Map File #: Z 2012-003 -j I I ;T WADE CT ED11=0 I ELLAST Duple 0 N Q O WILCOX DR Church LEOLA ST SFDUs o M 0 Q 0 W PEARL ST '✓ PEARL ST T Vac. SITE SFDUs T= OPAL ST OPAL ST AGATE ST _ Apt >LLJ w V Q Q 0 N N N V RUBY ST > Comm . CD Commercial N COURT ST Zoning Item: Rezone from BP to C-3 Map Applicant: Bill Dolsen N File #: Z 2012-003 ELLA ST [j=CCK4) L 0 WILCOX DR SM 0 w - W PEARL ST ins IF OPALST logo on a. ^ M 0 i? o p Y ' ryry 1 { 8 x :Y } 4 Ir aa q r V 4 1 _ x. M ai m O 1 56R1�8 � � I O 1 k y ri�r x d l ! z > / . .L \ Iy \ \ > yr . � � � § \ � < \ . \{ . \ ! . . . � . . . » ° { 2 4 . . . . 44y \ \ �/ y � > ° • « 1 : ' d « . 2 « d < f � / mss « q , . \ , f � © � ri 1. 'k 1 10 r, r , a ae y ati t 1 9 � l p _ �► Y Y I � - rt Ld, I V1 4 ILL. L If LL L ILL If rrr A J '1hhh 0 V ^ 1 M1 / . y � � LL \ . } � o o . .Ph � GIQ . . � , . $ a l t 1, `SC 4 r :tip GrQ o- •. .Y t a 4 � r t: T QlQ y �£ e 1t L+' At s m , 5• " . d'R 1.yJ , s�rtx ON t Y` t � r. x �r; + F7 F C , J' - S 5 li. REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION MASTER FILE NO. Z 2012-004 APPLICANT: General Advertising HEARING DATE: 8/16/2012 Agency ACTION DATE: 9/20/2012 PO Box 5894 Pasco, WA BACKGROUND REQUEST FOR REZONE: Rezone from CR (Regional Commercial District) to C-1 (Retail Business District) 1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Legal: Binding Site Plan 2011-05, Lots 1 & 2. Location: 3521 W Court Street Property Size: Approximately 5.61 acres 2. ACCESS: The property has access from Court Street along the south property line and Road 36 to the west. 3. UTILITIES: All utilities are available to the site. 4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The site is currently zoned CR (Regional Commercial). The site is developed with a 76,000 square-foot retail building. Surrounding properties are zoned and developed as follows: North R-S-12 (Suburban Residential) - SFDUs South C-3 (General Commercial) - Post Office East CR (Regional Commercial) - Retail West R-1 (Low-Density Residential) - SFDUs 5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designates this area for commercial uses. 6. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The City of Pasco is the lead agency for this project. Based on the SEPA checklist, the adopted City Comprehensive Plan, City development regulations, and other information, a threshold determination resulting in a Determination of Non-significance (DNS) has been issued for this project under WAC 197- 11-158. ANALYSIS The property is approximately 5.61 acres fronting Court Street along the south property line and fronting Road 36 to the west. It is developed with a 76,000 square-foot retail building formerly occupied by K-Mart and more recently the International Plaza. The building is part of a strip mall with 20,500 square feet 1 of divided retail spaces directly adjoining to the east and another 46,000 square-foot retail space at the east end of the development. The property was annexed into the City in 1979, at which time it was zoned C- 1-D (Designed Shopping Center). The property has since been rezoned to C-1 and in 2003 to CR with a concomitant agreement containing two conditions, as follows: A. The following uses shall be prohibited: 1) Amusement game centers, recreation centers or similar uses; 2) The use of outdoor speakers and public announcement systems of any kind. B. The following design controls shall apply to these properties: 1) All outdoor lighting must be strictly shielded to prevent lighting from encroaching on adjoining residential property; 2) All new development and site improvements shall comply with the 1-182 Corridor Design Standards as identified in P.M.C. 25.58 as existing and hereafter amended. Applicant wishes to rezone the subject property from CR (Regional Commercial District) to C-1 (Retail Business District) to allow for donation-based secondhand thrift shop use by special permit. The City of Pasco Comprehensive Plan shows the property to be within a commercial designation, and the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map indicates the property in question should be utilized for commercial uses. The proposed zoning change from CR to C-1 will be more restrictive with the exception of allowing donation-based secondhand uses with a special permit. The property has been vacant or underutilized for 12 years. The rezone in 2003 from C-1 to CR was an effort by the owner at the time to broaden opportunities to market the building for commercial uses. The hope at the time was to provide additional space for auto and RV sales. The building subsequently continued to be vacant or underutilized with CR zoning and is vacant today. The initial review criteria for considering a rezone application are explained in PMC. 25.88.030. The criteria are listed below as follows: (1) The changed conditions in the vicinity which warrant other or additional zoning: This property was zoned CR (Regional Commercial) in 2003 with the expectation that the CR Zoning would broaden opportunities for the reuse and redevelopment of a major commercial building within the community. Following the CR rezone the property remained underutilized and vacant and has continued to deteriorate. The property has remained vacant while major new commercial property investment has occurred in the Road 68/100 areas. 2 (2) Facts to justify the change on the basis of advancing the public health, safety and general welfare: The building owner is working with a donation-based thrift shop client and will lease or sell the property, contingent upon approval of both this rezone and a special permit. The rezone will allow for donation-based secondhand sales with a special permit. (3) The effect it will have on the nature and value of adjoining property and the Comprehensive Plan: The buildings have been underutilized or vacant for many years. A rezone would have minimal impact on the site and surrounding properties, as the C-1 zone allows for less intensive uses than does the current CR Zone, with the exception of donation-based secondhand thrift stores. (4) The effect on the property owners if the request is not granted: The current property owners have lined up a donation-based thrift shop client for the building, contingent upon approval of both the rezone and a special permit. If both the rezone and the special permit are not secured the donation-based thrift shop client will be unable to use the building and the building will likely remain empty. (5) The Comprehensive Plan land use designation for the property: The Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designates the site for commercial uses. The proposed rezone will make no difference vis-a-vis the Comprehensive Plan. STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT Findings of Fact must be entered from the record. The following are initial Findings drawn from the background and analysis section of the staff report. The Planning Commission may add Findings to this listing as the result of factual testimony and evidence submitted during the open record hearing. 1. The site was annexed by the City of Pasco in 1982 (Ordinance #2388). 2. The site was rezoned from C-1 to CR in 2003 (Ordinance #3620). 3. The site is currently zoned CR (Regional Commercial District) and has been zoned CR for approximately 9 years. 4. Properties to the east are also zoned CR and are developed with retail buildings. 5. The site borders R-1 and RS-12 Zones to the east and north, respectively, which are developed with single-family homes. 3 6. The Comprehensive Plan designates the site for commercial uses. 7. The site is developed with a 76,000 square-foot retail building. 8. This building has been vacant or underutilized for 12 years. 9. Applicant is requesting a change of zoning from CR to C-1. 10. Applicant is concurrently applying for a special permit for a donation- based thrift shop with this rezone application. CONCLUSIONS BASED ON INITIAL STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT Before recommending approval or denial of a Rezone, the Planning Commission must develop its conclusions from the Findings of Fact based upon the criteria listed in P.M.C. 25.88.060 and determine whether or not: (1) The proposal is in accordance with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. The proposal is consistent with Land Use Policy LU-1-13 of the Comprehensive Plan, which seeks to "Enhance the physical appearance of development within the community through land use regulations, design guidelines, and performance and maintenance standards including landscaping, screening, building facades, color, signs, and parking lot design and appearance," and Policy LU-3-C which seeks to "Maintain and apply design standards and guidelines that will result in attractive and efficient centers." Applicant wishes to bring a client to the property who is planning on rehabilitating the building on the site and bringing the landscaping up to current City code. Furthermore, the City has recently passed a Code Amendment allowing secondhand stores in C-1 Zones, which is in keeping with Policy ED-1-A to "Provide a governmental atmosphere which is conducive to the development and expansion of business opportunities." Policy ED-3-A requires the City to "Enhance compatibility of commercial and industrial development with residential and mixed use neighborhoods through the use of landscaping, screening, and superior building design standards and guidelines," and Policy ED-3-C requires the City to "Provide sufficient, accessible, and attractive off-street parking facilities" and Policy ED-3-D, to "Require existing commercial . . . facilities to conform to city design and site amenity standards, when expansion and/or new facilities are proposed." These mitigation efforts occur in the process of assigning conditions to the special permit. (2) The effect of the proposal on the immediate vicinity will not be materially detrimental. It is believed that the rezone will not have any adverse effect on adjacent property values, as the property has been used for general commercial purposes in the past and will continue to do so. Furthermore, the 4 surrounding neighborhood is almost completely developed and infrastructure is in place, including traffic signalization at surrounding intersections. (3) There is merit and value in the proposal for the community as a whole. The building has been vacant or underutilized for some time. Applicant has a client prepared to invest in the site and occupy the building. The rezone will be more restrictive overall, as the CR Zone allows additional uses to those allowed in the C-1 Zone. (4) Conditions should be imposed in order to mitigate any significant adverse impacts from the proposal. No conditions should be necessary for this rezone. (5) A Concomitant Agreement should be entered into between the City and the petitioner, and if so, the terms and conditions of such an agreement. No Concomitant Agreement conditions should be necessary for this rezone. RECOMMENDATION MOTION: I move to close the public hearing and schedule deliberations, the adoption of findings of fact, and development of a recommendation for City Council for the September 20, 2012 Planning Commission meeting. 5 Item: Rezone from CR to C- 1 Vicinity Map Applicant: General Advertising Agency N File #: Z 2012-004 W PEARL ST. T tt v T OPAL PL,Ea. t " --- � l� r ATE ST �- �r - t fit• AG C W s� AGATE ST SITE RUBY ST r a o 7. - �_ � , l I W / RUBS ST COURT ST Iw o r - 1 -F- BROWN _STS' _ f:- , �, � �� � '�R� 0v>r � � `. .era w ♦^1rv�^�,e\'�s,rv._�F- �E e Land Item: Rezone from CR to C- 1 � Use Applicant : General Advertising Agency -(x - Map File #: Z 2012-004 ` TVacant iii i- ' - r-'W =i �i7 OPALST SFDUs T I_ I School - OPAL r ,�l � SFDUs AS —sT ' 0. AGATE ST SITE Retail � o t R . _ G ��i � I rc > _ RUBY ST rc er Office sr i I � I Office -0 - Office coUPost Retail SFDUS - '; � - - Office Autoplex ii-j AM Item: Rezone from CR to C- 1 Zoning Applicant: General Advertising A Map File #. Z 2012-004 W-PEARL ST I RS_ 1 2 OPAL ST OPAL PL R- 1 fl--A- ST R-2 —WA—GATE ST a. SITE \� = o CR RU M --W—RUBY ST COURT ST C- 1 C_ 1C M M O O C-3 RS- 12 RT oc REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION MASTER FILE NO: SP2012-019 APPLICANT: Goodwill Industries of HEARING DATE: 8/16/12 the Columbia Basin ACTION DATE: 9/20/12 815 N Kellogg St Kennewick WA BACKGROUND REQUEST: SPECIAL PERMIT: Location of a donation-based thrift shop in a C-1 Zone. 1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Legal: Binding Site Plan 2011-05, Lot 1. Location: 3521 W Court Street Property Size: Approximately 5.12 acres 2. ACCESS: The property has access from Court Street along the south property line and Road 36 to the west. 3. UTILITIES: All utilities are available to the site. 4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The site is currently zoned CR (Regional Commercial). The site is developed with a 76,000 square-foot retail building. Surrounding properties are zoned and developed as follows: North R-S-12 (Suburban Residential) - SFDUs South C-3 (General Commercial) - Post Office East CR (Regional Commercial) - Retail West R-1 (Low-Density Residential) - SFDUs 5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designates this area for commercial uses. 6. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The City of Pasco is the lead agency for this project. Based on the SEPA checklist, the adopted City Comprehensive Plan, city development regulations, and other information, a threshold determination resulting in a Determination of Non-significance (DNS) has been issued for this project under WAC 197-11-158. ANALYSIS The property is approximately 5.12 acres fronting Court Street along the south property line and fronting Road 36 to the west. It is developed with a 76,000 square-foot retail building formerly occupied by K-Mart and more recently the International Plaza. The building is part of a strip mall with 20,500 square feet of divided retail spaces directly adjoining to the east and another 46,000 square-foot retail space at the east end of the development. The property was annexed into the City in 1979, at which time it was zoned C- 1-D (Designed Shopping Center). The property has since been rezoned to C-1 and in 2003 to CR with a concomitant agreement containing two conditions, as follows: A. The following uses shall be prohibited: 1) Amusement game centers, recreation centers or similar uses; 2) The use of outdoor speakers and public announcement systems of any kind; B. The following design controls shall apply to these properties: 1) All outdoor lighting must be strictly shielded to prevent lighting from encroaching on adjoining residential property; 2) All new development and site improvements shall comply with the 1-182 Corridor Design Standards as identified in P.M.C. 25.58 as existing and hereafter amended; Applicant wishes to locate a donation-based thrift shop on the property. On the 20th of February 1990 the City Council passed ordinance 2768 prohibiting secondhand dealers from operating in the C-1 (Retail Business) zone, as well as restricting placement of these and similar uses in the C-3 (General Business District) and I-1 (Light Industrial) zones to no less than 1,000 feet from each other. The reasoning cited in the ordinance is as follows: 1) The concentration of secondhand stores along with the manner in which they are maintained contributes to visual blight, physical decay, declining property values and perpetuates a negative public image for the community in general; 2) The external effects of physical decay and blight make the Central Business District and certain portions of Lewis Street less desirable for business investment: 3) Secondhand dealers, specifically pawnshops, require considerable regulation to protect the community and public interest by preventing said establishments from becoming facilities for the concealment of crime and outlets for stolen goods: 2 4) The enforcement of municipal codes relative to the operation of secondhand dealers is time consuming, burdensome, and costly to the community; Near the end of 2011 Goodwill Industries began negotiations for the property at 712 North 20th Avenue, with the intent of locating a secondhand collections center at the site. After being informed that the site was not zoned appropriately for the requested use the City began the process of exploring the possibility of amending the municipal code to accommodate secondhand uses in C-1 Zones. On August 6, 2012 the City Council approved a Code Amendment allowing donation-based thrift shops to operate in C-1 Zones with a Special Permit. Since that time Goodwill Industries refocused their attention to the current property located in the Riverview Plaza at 3921 W Court Street, which at the time was zoned CR (Regional Commercial). The current application rides on the back of a rezone application changing the zoning of the property from CR to C- 1. In the Code Amendment secondhand uses were conceptually separated and defined to include three specific categories, as follows: 1) Pawnshops; 2) Consignment stores; and 3) Thrift Shop (Donation-based). It was noted that donation-dependent thrift shops such as Goodwill Industries differ substantially from pawnshops and consignment-type secondhand stores in that there is no built-in incentive for patrons "fencing" stolen goods for cash, and thereby contributing to overall criminal activity in the community. As such, criminal-based policing would not likely be an issue, so much as nuisance-based code enforcement. However, people drop items off at donation-dependent operations as a matter of course; these items ranging in value from "slightly used" to "junk." While secondhand stores often strive to control the flow of castoffs, "midnight drop- offs" are virtually inevitable, and result in visual blight. Thus, visual blight, declining property values and probable increased costs for code enforcement are issues for consideration. In response to some of these concerns the applicant has submitted photos which they indicate "detail the quality of the store we will create at the Riverview Shopping Center" and "an example of a donation drive-thru that will be similar to what will be built in Pasco." The photos submitted include the following design elements: 1) Atrium roof 3 2) Bump-out awnings/overhangs 3) Fenestration (windows) 4) Multiple facades/reliefs 5) Custom window treatments 6) Custom decorative flagpole element 7) Up-lighting 8) Arch 9) Cornices 10) Sloped roof 11) Covered Patio Area 12) 2-tone belt courses 13) Slate tile facing on columns, coins 14) Columns with capitals, cornices. Staff believes retrofitting these elements to the current building would enhance the aesthetic appeal of the structure. Improving the exterior appearance of the building may aid in addressing some of the negative perceptions associated with thrift stores but exterior building treatments do not adequately address the concern about the accumulation of used goods as a result of "midnight drop-offs". This activity can be mitigated only through site management (signage, store policies, cameras) and site design (additional landscaping, walls, fencing and drop-off facilities). The proposed donation (drop-off) area of the store is located on the west side of the building facing Road 36. The properties on the west side of Road 36 are zoned residentially (R-S-12 and developed with single family homes). To afford these homes protection from the outdoor activity that will occur around the donation area additional screening to include a short screening wall between the two columns of the donation canopy will be needed along with the extension of the landscaping buffer along Road 36 and the inclusion of a raised landscaped island in front of and around either end of the donation. Signage warning against after hour deposits posted on the main building and in the donation area along with a warning sign indicating the donation area is monitored by surveillance cameras will provide additional assurances the donation area will not become an unsightly dumping ground after hours. The old Kmart building and parking lot was development in 1980 prior to the initial landscaping standards that appeared in the zoning regulations in 1982. The parking lot does contain some perimeter landscaping but lacks any interior landscaping, particularly landscaping islands at the end of each row of parking. The current owner of the property signed a development agreement that provided a timeline for upgrading the parking lot landscaping. However through the Special Permit process the Planning Commission has the latitude of conditioning the approval of the special permit to include parking lot 4 landscaping as part of the site improvements needed before the building can be occupied. The building on the site has been vacant or underutilized for about 12 years and has generally been neglected with respect to exterior maintenance. Any improvements need on the building are to comply with the design standards contained in PMC 25.58. These standards were included as a condition when the property was rezoned from C-1 to CR in 2003. STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT Findings of Fact must be entered from the record. The following are initial Findings drawn from the background and analysis section of the staff report. The Planning Commission may add Findings to this listing as the result of factual testimony and evidence submitted during the open record hearing. 1. The site was annexed by the City of Pasco in 1979 (Ordinance #2066). 2. The site was rezoned from C-1 to CR in 2003 (Ordinance #3620) and has been zoned CR for approximately 9 years. 3. The CR rezone included a condition that all new development and site improvements shall comply with the 1-182 Corridor Design Standards as identified in P.M.C. 25.58 as existing and hereafter amended. 4. The site is currently in the process of being rezoned from CR (Regional Commercial) to C-1 (Retail Business) Properties to the east are also zoned CR and are developed with retail buildings. S. The site borders R-1 and RS-12 Zones to the west and north, respectively, which are developed with single-family homes. 6. The Comprehensive Plan designates the site for commercial uses. 7. The site is developed with a 76,000 square-foot retail building. 8. This building has been vacant or underutilized for approximately 12 years. 9. Applicant is requesting a Special Permit for the location of a donation- based thrift shop in conjunction with a change of zoning from CR to C-1. 10. Applicant has indicated that "the quality of the store we will create at the Riverview Shopping Center" correspond to photos found in "Items E & F." 11. Applicant has indicated that the "donation drive-thru (depicted in Photo G) . . . will be similar to what will be built in Pasco." 12. Experience within the community has shown secondhand stores along with the manner in which they are maintained contributes to visual blight, physical decay, declining property values and perpetuates a negative public image for the community in general. 13. People drop items off at donation-dependent operations as a matter of course; these items ranging in value from "slightly used" to "junk." While secondhand stores often strive to control the flow of castoffs, "midnight drop-offs" are virtually inevitable, and result in visual blight. 5 14. The parking lot lacks landscaping islands and does not conform to current standards. 15. The property is partially landscaped along the border with Road 36. 16. Goodwill drop-off trailers such as the one in the Wal-Mart parking lot at 4820 Road 68 often cannot contain all the donated items and as a result donated items spill out into the parking lot around the trailers creating an unsightly unkempt appearance. CONCLUSIONS BASED ON INITIAL STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT The Planning Commission must make Findings of Fact based upon the criteria listed in P.M.C. 25.86.060. The criteria and staff listed findings are as follows: (I) 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 use. The Commercial Land Use designation includes all commercial uses listed in the C-1 zones. Donation-based thrift stores are specifically mentioned in the Pasco Municipal Code as being allowed by Special Permit. Policy LU- 1-B encourages enhancement of the physical appearance of development within the City. The applicant has provided a rough elevation drawing with the application and has provided correspondence that included pictures of other Goodwill Stores in Oregon and Arizona depicting general redevelopment concepts for the property. These illustrations indicate enhancements will be made to the building supporting policies of the Plan. Landscaping improvements would be required as part of the redevelopment permitting process. (2) Will the proposed use adversely affect public infrastructure? The public infrastructure surrounding this property was installed to support the original retail nature of the property. The proposed redevelopment of the site for a thrift store will not have any adverse effect on public infrastructure. (3) Will the proposed use be constructed, maintained and operated to be in harmony with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity? 6 Re-occupying the building and putting it to some beneficially use will assist in arresting the declining appearance of the property; however the proposed use could bring a new set of challenges that would disrupt the harmony and character of the general vicinity. Conditions will be needed to ensure the proposed thrift store is operated and maintained to be in harmony with the neighborhood. The applicant has submitted concept photos detailing at least 14 design elements which would enhance the architectural appearance of the structure. (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? Surrounding properties are fully developed. As well, no new structures are proposed. Applicant is proposing a remodel which would enhance the appearance of an old deteriorating structure to improve the value of the existing neighborhood. (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? Items are dropped off at donation-dependent operations as a matter of course. Without proper management and control of the site conditions will quickly occur that may be objectionable to nearby property owners. Special Permit conditions will be needed to specifically address the management of drop-off boxes, management of the donation drop-off area and general screening of the property. (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? Items are dropped off at donation-dependent operations as a matter of course. Without proper management and control of the site conditions will quickly occur that may be objectionable to nearby property owners. Special Permit conditions will be needed to specifically address the management of drop-off boxes, management of the donation drop-off area and general screening of the property. 7 TENTATIVE APPROVAL CONDITIONS 1. The special permit shall apply to Parcel No. 119272172. 2. Signs shall be posted on all sides of the building indicating drop-offs and donations are not accepted after hours. 3. No donation collection areas are permitted on the property except in the donation canopy area. No donation boxes, trailers, containers or similar items for the collection of donations shall be permitted outside the building. 4. No food commodities or other materials shall be stored outside of the building. 5. A raised landscaped island shall be installed immediately to the west of the donation canopy. Said landscaped island shall be at least 8 feet wide at the widest point and shall extend north and south of the donation canopy at least 10 feet. The landscaped island shall contain a mixture of complementary shrubs that will form a visual barrier between the donation center and the sidewalk along Road 36. 6. A four foot decorative fence complementing the design and color of the building and canopy shall be installed between the westerly support columns of the donation canopy. Said fence shall be raised six inches off the ground. 7. The landscaping buffer along Road 36 shall be extended the full length of the property excluding driveways. The additional landscaped buffer shall extend 8 feet easterly of the Road 36 sidewalk. 8. Landscaped islands shall be installed at the ends of each row of parking stalls and in the interior of rows to ensure no parking stall is more than 75 feet from a landscape element. 9. All landscape islands, beds and buffers must contain automated irrigation systems. 10. A landscape plan must be submitted and approved by the Community and Economic Development Director. 11. The driveway entrances shall be reconstructed to meet current ADA requirements. 8 12. The rehabilitation of the exterior elevations shall be required and said rehabilitation shall incorporate at least three design elements per elevation as identified in PMC 25.58. 13. The special permit shall be null and void if a building permit has not been obtained by January 1, 2015. RECOMMENDATION MOTION: I move to close the public hearing and schedule deliberations, the adoption of findings of fact, and development of a recommendation for City Council for the September 20, 2012 Planning Commission meeting. 9 Item: Donation-based Thrift Shop in C- 1 Vicinity Map Applicant: Goodwill Industries N File #: SP 2012-019 F E AR • '' s .`;��' 'w p �l -r - A . — r per+ - :.OPAL PL y r,�, AGATE ST AGATE ST„ ' c� W aft► - - M f . a SITE \ F r _ RUBY ST 7. O ' W R. BY, ST \ mow. •*_ - T - T COURT ST WITT _ r • BR"OWNST L Land Item: Donation-based Thrift Shop in C- 1 � Use Applicant : Goodwill Industries -(x - Map File #: SP 2012-019 ` - V - PEa� acant Aj SFDUs School - SFDUs I T � '� E I_ -� W AGATE ST_ , - S ITE Retail � It ' a j _ _ i p vsr L RUBY Office D ST j J_IL1 - — �- counr s. ., I . ... 00 CV) i Office �e Office ' post I Retail =_ � p � Office Autoplex SFDUs- - ! E - - Zoning Item: Donation-based Thrift Shop in C- 1 Applicant: Goodwill Industries x Map File #: SP 2012-019 --� RS= 12Oo.- - - R- 1 P� � - I I �iovCJ Iri� s` - Ert ST ' CR SI TE - RUBY ST RUBY ST CA RT ST L --C= 1 Co 17- C-3 IRS- 12- TOM L r _J a� rte. ,r V io /MAORIS e �� uV Looki . a r Y \ K e r x , . wt r -� - i. r i ref ,r�.`.w ¢ r �.• - w.� �: �.'� .c Y, ':�- � ?� fi c -gT':' w. _� � '-:.� :. r,,..iLi`.J. .yv9:-..*.i tv � � .e:; a!°- _ i .� l tt.' �� �. �Y�. >".-'.• �Y *,m"�' •�+r�.`�-T� �+r f.a.Et'` r ,� f >, a$i"'" .rs �� � n.. '' a .-. < '"k_rs s* 'a•y�y > 'k� y¢ a � '�.e� '�-r>`"�."E ti C� k� 'l• �•' .'2"�.�. z��!.7"" - _ _. ° s.r ''e^-c' F y f -rf• 3C •K"Sd�+ 1'.. -0:'. :y •'r.a':q, "� '� S k s � W h a LY' P5w Mai :. �,w..• ,r '� d Fr r,x"` t .",ry ` nx . .,k •a 4;`.'4`�,c s ,�' .nt .^. �...,, -.-. ��$y 'a'T Y 1 r ,�ti ��wiv~�"• r. !a+�:.:�•' `4`A'&.;� � .. +Ar �} `'i JFY rr T-I" T 4 i � � is Example "F" OPENING ium 2 ire 1 `I 7 _ " „,� _ .: � o _ a ar �� _ - � , fl �� r ��., ,� - _ � f`F - � i +k�r �" Y � .. ,.. .e r-��� r r:. f '. "'y777MMM7� — - f -T`_-�' yj,Yy� 9,� a+�►'��S�..F jay 4.� I m -e .� � ��- f '*� � � ���� - . _ ;,�.� a-�.�... - - � i mot SOUTH ELEVATION FACJNG rooRr 5rKEE r __FIFTAI 4 ' STDIYtEA�NU�DNT1aM.�,ll16R r 1s t — DETAIL-PUSLIC ENTRY -_ 6OL)DVV)LL - COURT STREET, PA5CO DONATION DRIVE 74RU GOODWILL - COURT STREET, PASCO Ex15r1N6 IAaG6 FU5LIC E"TRY PONATIOF� _ i - - ki SNt!57 ELEVATIPN SOUTH €CEVATION FA�.SNG ROAD36\ --f5ACINC, COU2T 57RE.E.T aF*KE517ACE 2: EmvMERCe J)Ot4ATION e pROV CTeN aNO x«or& 3Q.FF j El \ §L . RETiL \ }/ sTOeE we 00 . ƒ // AU m C�T OR ' ! a @&moaQ� < . m_wemY Coa&R.SE 2keu t,4 WARY m:AQ y E& () .apWr E--_ «o, WA