Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-25-2013 Planning Commission Minutes- - 1 REGULAR MEETING April 25, 2013 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 7:00pm by Chairwoman Kempf. POSITION MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT No. 1 Tim Hoekstra No. 2 Tony Bachart No. 3 Andy Anderson No. 4 Alecia Greenaway No. 5 Joe Cruz No. 6 Loren Polk No. 7 Zahra Khan No. 8 Jana Kempf No. 9 Paul Hilliard APPEARANCE OF FAIRNESS: Chairwoman Kempf read a statement about the appearance of fairness for hearings on land use matters. Chairwoman Kempf asked if any Commission member had anything to declare. There were no declarations. Chairwoman Kempf then asked the audience if there were any objections based on a conflict of interest or appearance of fairness question regarding the items to be discussed this evening. There were no objections. ADMINISTERING THE OATH: Chairwoman Kempf explained that state law requires testimony in quasi-judicial hearings such as held by the Planning Commission be given under oath or affirmation. Chairwoman Kempf swore in all those desiring to speak. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Commissioner Khan moved, seconded by Commissioner Hilliard, that the minutes dated March 21, 2013 be approved as mailed. The motion passed unanimously. OLD BUSINESS: A. Special Permit Location of a temporary cellular antennae tower in a C-1 (Retail Business) Zone (AT&T c/o Vinculums) (MF# SP 2013-004) Chairwoman Kempf read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Rick White, Community & Economic Development Director, stated that there were no new comments or conditions since the previous meeting. -2- Commissioner Hilliard asked staff if this special permit is for the temporary cellular tower and if the applicant has moved forward with a permanent tower. Mr. White answered that the applicant has turned in their application for a special permit for a permanent cellular antennae tower and it will be on the agenda for the next meeting. Commissioner Polk asked what the length of time for the Determination of No Hazard from the FAA process is. Mr. White replied that he is uncertain on the length of time but it is necessary to be obtained before the permit can be issued for the location of the mobile unit. It was his understanding that the applicant was well underway in that process. Commissioner Hoekstra asked for clarification on the ownership of the flagpole and the property. Mr. White answered that the flagpole and equipment is owned by the cellular provider and the property is owned by Franklin County. There is more than one cell provider at this location and they co-operate to the best of their ability but cannot always share equipment which is why there is a need for a separate tower to locate on this site. Commissioner Hilliard moved, seconded by Commissioner Khan, to adopt findings of fact and conclusions therefrom as contained in the April 25, 2013 staff report. The motion passed unanimously. Commission Hilliard moved, seconded by Commissioner Khan, based on the findings of fact and conclusions as adopted the Planning Commission recommend the City Council grant a special permit to AT&T for the location of a temporary cellular tower at 6600 Burden Boulevard with conditions as listed in the April 25, 2013 staff report. The motion passed unanimously. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. Special Permit Location of a church in an R-1 District (Samuel Nuñez) (MF# SP 2013-003) (Continued from March 21, 2013 Meeting) Chairwoman Kempf read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Rick White, Community & Economic Development Director, discussed this special permit for the location of a church in an R-1 Zoning District. The hearing was continued from the March 21st to allow the applicant to present at the hearing and ensure the church understood the approval conditions. At the previous meeting there was public testimony that suggested noise was an issue so two conditions were added; one adding conformation of the noise ordinance and the other condition providing for Planning Commission review of the special permit at any given time to make certain complaints are addressed. Elizabeth Ramiro, 220 W. Sylvester Street, the church’s secretary, spoke on behalf of the church. -3- Rosalea Lopez, 217 N. Douglas Avenue, the church’s treasurer, also spoke on behalf of the church. Chairwoman Kempf asked if they understood all of the conditions in the staff report. Ms. Ramiro answered that she understands all of the conditions. Commissioner Khan asked if either of them had any comments or concerns from Ms. Howard who spoke at the last public hearing regarding noise levels from the church. Ms. Ramiro responded that they were not aware of any noise issues until a few weeks ago. She stated that their church was never advised of any noise concerns. The church is only used Monday-Friday from 7:00 p.m. to 9:30 p.m., occasionally until 10:00 p.m. On Sunday’s they operate from 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. which includes school, service and afternoon service. Commissioner Hilliard asked if they were aware of the condition requiring the paving of the parking lot. Ms. Ramiro answered that she understood the requirement and that there is a timeline to complete the work. She asked if there would be an extension. Mr. White stated staff should know 2-3 months in advance if it would be necessary to return to the Planning Commission for an extension before the permit would expire. Commissioner Hoekstra asked if the church was anticipating anything that would be a noise concern as addressed in the previous public hearing. Ms. Ramiro and Ms. Lopez responded that they did not anticipate noise problems from upcoming events. Commissioner Polk asked if the concern voiced at the previous public hearing regarding increased traffic had been addressed. Mr. White answered that there was no evidence that the church caused any additional traffic in the alley or was responsible for any additional traffic. With no further comments the public hearing closed. Commissioner Khan moved, seconded by Commissioner Hilliard, to close the public hearing and schedule deliberations, the adoption of findings of fact, and development of a recommendation for City Council for the May 16, 2013 meeting. The motion passed unanimously. B. Special Permit Location of a church in a CR (Regional Commercial) Zone (World Life Christian Center) (MF# SP 2013-005) -4- Chairwoman Kempf read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Rick White, Community & Economic Development Director, discussed the special permit application for the location of a church in a CR (Regional Commercial) Zone. The church proposes to use the easterly portion and northern two-thirds of the building with the existing front third retained for retail space. There would be enough sanctuary space for roughly 900 church attendees. The property underwent a zone change in which a concomitant agreement was signed to include conditions that the Planning Commission should be aware of which are located in the staff report. Those conditions prohibited amusement, game and recreation centers, outlined special design standards for outdoor lighting and for the development to comply with the I-182 corridor design standards. Chairman Kempf asked if this was a standard special use permit for churches with the addition of the concomitant agreement. Mr. White responded that it is fairly similar to other special use permits for churches. David Jarrett, 1951 Peachtree, Richland, WA spoke on behalf of the church. He explained that World Life Christian Center has been at the Broadmoor Outlet Mall and they are ready to move into their own space. They are currently working on architectural designs but getting the special permit is the first step. Commissioner Hilliard asked the applicant for clarification on access to the church. Mr. Jarrett answered there is an entrance in the front of the building that goes to the center of the building that separates the retail space from the church space. Commissioner Hoekstra asked if there is a need for another exit point to assist with traffic coming in and out of the parking lot. Mr. Jarrett answered that there is a drive in the rear so there is a way to exit from the front and back of the lot. Jose Zamora, 4732 Sedona Court, Senior Pastor for the church, spoke in support of the proposal. He stated the church has outgrown their current space.. They would like to improve the area and be an asset to the community. With no further comments the public hearing closed. Commissioner Hilliard moved, seconded by Commissioner Khan, to close the public hearing and schedule deliberations, the adoption of findings of fact, and development of a recommendation for City Council for the May 16, 2013 Planning Commission meeting. The motion passed unanimously. C. Special Permit Location of a high school in a C-1 (Retail Business) Zone – Delta High (Pasco School District) (MF# SP 2013-008) Chairwoman Kempf read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. -5- Rick White, Community & Economic Development Director, discussed the special permit application for the location of a high school in a C-1 (Retail Business) Zone. Delta High School, is a specialized Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) School that focuses curriculum on those four subjects. It will serve not only Pasco students but Richland and Kennewick students as well. The property will contain appropriate visitor parking and drop off areas. It will not have football fields or other extra-curricular facilities because they will not be provided at this location. The traffic impacts can be roughly compared to an office park of similar size, however, less than one would experience if this 45,000 square foot building were developed with retail spaces. Even at a lesser traffic generation rate than a retail use, the school will generate traffic that is generally off-peak, overlapping a little with the morning peak but earlier than the afternoon peak and should not conflict with the other traffic patterns in that area. An email was received from an adjacent property owner that requested that an architectural wall be placed on the perimeter of the school except for the Broadmoor Street side. Commissioner Bachart stated that there is already a substantial wood fence. He asked if the current fence would remain in place or if the new fence would replace it. Mr. White responded that it could be done both ways. If the fence remains, it will not be the School District’s responsibility to maintain, rather the various homeowners. If the block wall is built then it will be maintained by the School District. Commissioner Khan asked if the property west of the proposed site would have sidewalk put in by the School District. Mr. White stated that it would not be the School District’s responsibility to put in the sidewalk on the property to the west of the proposed site. When the property to the west develops it will be that developer’s responsibility. Commissioner Hilliard discussed the traffic counts for the mornings and afternoons and how they will create their own peak traffic flow times. He asked if there is right- of-way and access in the future to grow as the site on the west is development. Mr. White responded that the existing right-of-way is adequate for the school but will not be adequate in the future when the property on the west is developed. There will be a substantial additional dedication of right-of-way and street improvements when that property develops to the west. On the tentative list of conditions the School District is asked to do a study to address traffic management concerns. Chairwoman Kempf asked if the property on the west was still currently mineral land and will most likely not be developed for another several years. Mr. White stated that the mineral designation doesn’t go all the way over and the gravel pit itself expires in the year 2025. The current property owner doesn’t seem to be motivated to develop that property. John Morgan, 1215 E. Lewis Street, Assistant Superintendent of the Pasco School District, spoke on behalf of the school. He explained that Delta is a State recognized -6- high school. They have math and science teams that perform around the nation. There would be a minimum number of buses coming from other districts, unlike other schools where there are thousands of students. The School District will build the stone wall if it is decided that it is necessary. Commissioner Khan asked for the projected population of the school. Mr. Morgan answered that there would be roughly 400 students. Chairwoman Kempf asked if there would be slightly less bus traffic due to many of these students having their own vehicles or their parents dropping them off. Mr. Morgan stated that they have found that the majority of these students will ride the bus or their parents will drop them off. Commissioner Hilliard stated that he liked the design of the school. Commissioner Bachart asked if the student population is expected to someday exceed 400 students. Mr. Morgan replied that 400 students is the expected population after growth and that it is not currently at 400 students. Commissioner Hoekstra asked for clarification of the design of the building. Mr. Morgan answered that the design is going to be a great caveat for the district and community. Sharon Gittleman, 6008 Majestia Lane, was concern the school is going to impact views that some of the Mediterranean Villas residents have. She was also concerned about the increasing traffic and the ability of the residences to get in and out of the development. She also wanted to know where the students will congregate between classes and during breaks. She wanted to know what the stone wall would entail and what it would look like. Margaret Jacobson, 9601 Mia Lane, asked what the height of the school would be and the height of the proposed block wall. Chairwoman Kempf answered that the wall would be 6 feet tall. Commissioner Polk asked if the students would be allowed off campus for lunch. Mr. Morgan spoke to the concerns voiced by Mr. Gittleman, Ms. Jacobson and Commissioner Polk. He stated that the building at its highest point will be 35 feet tall consisting of a one-story building and partial two-story. They will have an onsite lunch facility but that doesn’t mean they cannot leave campus. The district has found that traditionally the students eat on campus meeting with their teachers or with their groups. Commissioner Khan asked what the security will look like at Delta High School. -7- Mr. Morgan responded that traditionally the Pasco School District has a Security Resource Officer (SRO) at each campus but the board will decide if one is needed. There will be security cameras on campus and security entrances. With no further comments the public hearing closed. Commissioner Hilliard moved, seconded by Commissioner Khan, to close the public hearing and schedule deliberations, the adoption of findings of fact and development of a recommendation for City Council for the May 16, 2013 Planning Commission meeting. The motion passed unanimously. D. Code Amendment Airport Zoning Update (MF# CA 2013-001) Chairwoman Kempf read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. David McDonald, City Planner, explained the background of the proposed airport zoning code amendment. The current ordinance was developed in the early 1970’s and hasn’t been updated since its adoption. The proposed code will bring the airport zoning regulations up to modern day standards and meet requirements that are currently available through handbooks developed by the State of Washington Department of Transportation. Major changes in the code include the addition of a purpose statement, definitions specific to the airport including a diagram visually explaining airspace zones, airport safety compatibility zones, general review procedures and the requirement for a disclosure statement on residential properties within close proximity to the airport. Rick White, Community & Economic Development Director, stated that these code amendments are a result of work between City Staff, County Staff and Port of Pasco Staff and Consultants. During the process of working together, great care has gone into making sure the uses in the compatibility zones is not very much different than current zoning for permitted uses and densities. Randy Hayden, 1110 Osprey Pointe Blvd, spoke on behalf of the Port of Pasco. He stated that the Port of Pasco is fully supportive of the updates to the Airport Overlay District and he explained it will help the airport expand to meet the needs of the community well into the future. Chairwoman Kempf asked about expansion of the runways. Mr. Hayden stated the current runway can be expanded because the area it would need to extend into is an agricultural production area. Commissioner Hilliard asked about easements to gain more property and access. Mr. Hayden responded that they are in the process of acquiring more property around the airport. Commissioner Hoekstra asked if the growth of the airport would cause a need for expansion of the roadways. -8- Mr. Hayden responded that the airport is a traffic generator in that area of town. City Staff has been active in improving access. The Port will be working jointly with the City and Columbia Basin College (CBC) to widening Argent Road in the near future. Carter Timmerman, 18204 59th Drive NE, Suite B, Arlington, WA 98223, spoke in support of the airport zoning updates on behalf of the Washington State Department of Transportation Aviation Division. His office recommendations approval of the proposed airport zoning updates and their office is available for support. With no further comments the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Khan asked if McGee Elementary was in the vicinity of the airport and if it interfered with the safety compatibility zones. Mr. Hayden stated schools within many of the compatibility zones are prohibited, particularly K-12. As the ordinance was being written an exception was made for existing schools to be able to remain if they so choose. A new school in one of those zones would not be permitted because of the safety considerations. The Port of Pasco and the School District continue to have a good working relationship over the years and they are aware of the situation. Commissioner Hoekstra asked if the compatibility zones will need to expand if there is growth and expansion to the airport. Mr. Hayden answered that the compatibility zones presented to the Planning Commission are for the expected growth. Commissioner Hilliard asked for clarification that current homes, assembly buildings and other buildings will not be removed due to the compatibility zones. Mr. Hayden agreed and stated that there currently aren’t any issues. The Port of Pasco just wants to ensure that there aren’t issues in the future. Commissioner Hilliard moved, seconded by Commissioner Khan, to adopt the Findings of Fact as contained in the April 25, 2013 staff memo on the Airport Zoning Update. The motion passed unanimously. Commissioner Hilliard moved, seconded by Commissioner Khan, to recommend the City Council adopt the proposed Code Amendment updating the airport zoning regulations under PMC Chapter 25.81. The motion passed unanimously. E. Code Amendment Park Fees Update (MF# CA 2013-002) Chairwoman Kempf read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. David McDonald, City Planner, discussed the code amendment for Park Fee Updates. The current fee has not kept up with the construction costs for the development of new parks. Staff is proposing that the current regulations be repealed completely and those regulations be combined and located with the other impact fees, such as the School Impact Fees and Traffic Impact Fees. The Park Impact Fee will have to be paid prior to the issuance of any building permit and would be applicable to all new residential -9- development within the City of Pasco. Mr. McDonald briefly listed some exemptions to the fee, definitions, possible reductions in the fee and the proposed amendments. The proposed fee would be $1,500 per dwelling unit. Commissioner Khan asked if there is a minimal amount of acreage for dedicated park land. Mr. McDonald answered that the standard size for a neighborhood park is 5 acres for a 160 acre subdivision. Commissioner Khan asked if there is a minimal amount of facilities that the City would require the developer to put in the park. Mr. McDonald stated that the City does not require specific items to be placed in parks. Typically land has been dedicated to the City along with infrastructure improvements and the collection a reduce fee. When a development is nearly finished the Parks Department will hold public meetings for the neighborhood to receive input on the types of facilities to be placed in the park. Commissioner Khan asked if the neighborhood decided that they wanted a swimming pool if it would be the City’s responsibility to maintain. Mr. McDonald answered if a pool was built in a City Park it would be the City’s responsibility to maintain however neighborhood parks won’t have swimming pools. Commissioner Polk asked if the ratio is for the size of parks for the other cities in the area. Mr. McDonald stated that every City has a different ratio within their comprehensive park plan. The City of Pasco has a Comprehensive Park Plan in which the ratio is based on population of people for a neighborhood park. Commissioner Hoekstra asked what is driving costs so high to propose $1,500 per dwelling unit for Park Impact Fees. Mr. McDonald answered that much of the costs for the parks revolve around the equipment that’s placed in the parks. There are new enhanced national safety requirements that the City didn’t have years ago, such as the rubberized matting that goes around the equipment. Material costs have also increase substantially. Commissioner Bachart asked if the neighborhood could vote for a pool at the public meetings held prior to completion of development. Mr. McDonald answered they could but there wouldn’t be enough funds to build the pool. The neighborhood is typically given a range of items that could be built and a budget. Commissioner Hilliard asked if there is any other funding that helps pay for community parks. Mr. McDonald stated that there is the Park Impact Fee along with state grants that the City can apply for and local taxes. -10- Commissioner Khan asked how staff calculated a 3.25% annual increase of the fee. Mr. McDonald answered that when it was initiated in 1999 that was roughly the cost of inflation. Since that time the costs have escalated more. Commissioner Hoekstra asked for clarification on the fee for multi-family units. Mr. McDonald answered that the $1,500 fee would be per unit, so if there are 60 units in the complex the fee would be $90,000. But typically what happens with larger apartment complexes is that they will have swimming pools, basketball courts and a recreation building. If they have many of those amenities their fee is reduced Commissioner Hilliard stated that the fee is good for the community but will hurt development. He would encourage staff to find other avenues for park funding. With no further comments the public hearing closed. Mr. McDonald added that the recommendation is for the hearing to be closed at this time and staff will bring an ordinance back for approval once the City Attorney completes his review. Commissioner Polk stated that she agrees with a reduced fee for the developers who dedicate park land but felt that a 50% reduction is a large reduction and 5 acres doesn’t always feel like a lot of park land for a large neighborhood that may have 600 homes. Mr. McDonald responded that the developer is not only dedicating the land for the park but they would also be providing all of the infrastructure, streets, sewer, water, storm drainage and street lights which a significant amount of capital cost. Commissioner Hoekstra stated that as the parks get developed so does the cost for maintenance. There needs to be a balance between stimulating park development to create a healthy neighborhood environment but at the same time be able to afford the parks. Mr. McDonald responded that the money for the impact fee does not cover the maintenance. The maintenance is covered through annual taxes on homes. Chairwoman Kempf stated that the 50% reduction is very workable and is appealing for the developer to dedicate the land. Rick White, Community & Economic Development Director, stated that staff can take a look at the reductions and ratios that go along with a “typical” development and a “non-typical” development with more dwelling units. Commissioner Hoekstra added that it would make sense in terms of congestion in the park to have larger park space for larger developments. Commissioner Polk responded that after some thought the 50% does seem reasonable since the developer is also making infrastructure improvements but agrees that for larger developments more park space should be developed. -11- Commissioner Hilliard stated that since the fee is doubling from its current amount to $1,500 with a 3.25% annual increase, he is concerned what it will look like in 5-10 years. Instead of the automatic 3.25% annual increase he would like to see this come back to the Planning Commission in five years to make any needed adjustments. Commissioner Hoekstra asked for clarification from Commissioner Hilliard. Commissioner Hilliard stated that with the 3.25% increase annually, in ten years the fee will be substantially higher and he is concerned with the fee getting too high. Commissioner Hoekstra asked if staff could look at the fee being locked at $1,500 for the next five years. Mr. McDonald stated that they will discuss the concern with the Parks Department. Commissioner Polk asked the Commissioners if they would accept a higher fee if it was guaranteed to be a locked in rate for the next five years. Commissioner Hilliard responded no. He stated that there needs to be other sources of funding for the parks. Commissioner Hoekstra added that costs should be controlled for the developers because development should be encouraged. Mr. White stated that impact fees are hard and people either like them or they don’t. He posed the question of how much does new growth need to pay for the impact they produce. If they aren’t paying any impact then the public is picking up all of it because someone has to pay. It is not an issue strictly between the developer and the government but the public has to pay as well The deductions that are in the proposed update add incentives for the developer to provide fully dedicated park sites. If the City has to put in the same improvement in the neighborhood it will cost much more because the City will have to pay a different wage scale and comply with bidding laws. The developer does not necessarily have to follow those same rules. Commissioner Khan moved, seconded by Commissioner Bachart, to close the public hearing on the proposed park fee code amendment. The motion passed unanimously. F. Plan Automobile Repair Operations (MF# PLAN 2012-006) Chairwoman Kempf read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Rick White, Community & Economic Development Director, discussed the action plan for automobile operations. Retail and Commercial Zones used to have service stations allowed as a permitted use. Service stations don’t seem to exist anymore but the buildings remain in place and have been used for auto repair operations. They have presented themselves to be a nuisance in the sense of dismantling automobiles, storing parts outside, parking in the street and depositing parts and fluids onto public streets which is a problem for the storm drainage system. Several months ago City Council tasked the Planning Commission to create an action plan. An advisory committee that consisted of City Staff, Commissioner Levin, Commissioner Khan and two automobile business owners. The committee conducted -12- an inventory and review of existing codes, developed an activity list containing the full set of actions, gave definitions for “minor automobile repair” and “automobile repair facilities”, they created draft changes within the C-1 Zoning District to allow minor automobile repair, they recommended screening requirements and they recommend the Action Plan be presented to Council prior to the Commission undertaking a formal recommendation on any of the proposed code amendments. Commissioner Khan asked if it would be beneficial to define “screening”. Mr. White answered that the screening requirements were cut out of the presented exhibits that were given with the staff memo but it should contain the definition of “screening”. Commissioner Hoekstra asked about the capacity of the outdoor facility and the maximum amount of vehicles parked outside. Mr. White answered that capacity was not defined but was intended to mean the amount of cars relative to the repair facilities. After hours in the C-1 vehicles cannot be left outdoors in public visibility. In the C-3 Zone the vehicles could remain outdoors but would need to be behind screening. Commissioner Hoekstra asked how the proposed plan speaks to the appearance of an auto sales lot compared to auto repair facility. Where the cars aren’t for sale but they are parked and lined up to look like a sales lot. He asked if the City has enough language in the code to enforce the operations. Mr. White responded that the question Commissioner Hoekstra asked has been one of the problems the City was trying to resolve with the action plan and eventually a code amendment. Staff conducting inventory in June of last year and January of this year and much improvement has happened in that time. Many of the cars are setting out being used for parts. Commissioner Hoekstra stated that filling up a lot in a C-1 Zone with cars used for parts is not good for business or the area and asked if more needed to be added to enforce this problem. Mr. White responded that there is an adequate start with the action plan and eventually a code amendment will be coming to the Planning Commission and more can be added if needed at that time. With no further comments the public hearing closed. Commissioner Hoekstra moved, seconded by Commissioner Bachart, to approve the Action Plan as presented, recommend it be forwarded to City Council and authorize the Chairman’s signature. The motion passed unanimously. Commissioner Hoekstra moved, seconded by Commissioner Khan, continue the public hearing on the code amendments associated the Action Plan until May 16, 2013. The motion passed unanimously. -13- OTHER BUSINESS: Rick White, Community & Economic Development Director, presented a Certificate of Appreciation for Planning Commissioner, Michael Levin, who recently resigned after dedicating over two years of service to the City of Pasco. COMMENTS: With no further discussion or business, the Planning Commission was adjourned at 8:57 p.m. Respectfully submitted, ______________________________ Dave McDonald, City Planner