Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-18-2013 Planning Commission Packet PLANNING COMMISSION - AGENDA REGULAR MEETING 7:00 P.M. July 18, 2013 I. CALL TO ORDER: II. ROLL CALL: Declaration of Quorum III. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: June 20, 2013 V. OLD BUSINESS: A. Special Permit Location of an automotive body shop in a C-3 (General Business) Zone (Russell Dean) (MF# SP 2013-012) B. Rezone Rezone from R-2 (Medium Density Residential) to C- 1 (Retail Business) (Jeff McClure) (MF# Z 2013-003) C. Preliminary Plat Aintree Pre-Plat (Nathan Machiela of Hayden Homes) (MF # PP 2013-001) D. Code Amendment Park Fees Update (MF # CA 2013-002) VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. Block Grant 2014 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Fund Allocations (MF# BGAP 2013-002) B. Block Grant 2014 HOME Fund Allocations (MF# BGAP 2013- 0031 C. Block Grant 2014 NSP Fund Allocations (MF# BGAP 2013-004) VII. OTHER BUSINESS: A. Plan Tri-Cities Prep Master Plan VIII. WORKSHOP: IX. ADJOURNMENT: REGULAR MEETING June 20, 2013 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 7:00pm by Chairman Hilliard. 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: Chairman Hilliard read a statement about the appearance of fairness for hearings on land use matters. Chairman Hilliard asked if any Commission member had anything to declare. Commissioner Anderson stated that he would have to recuse himself from the public hearing on 2014 Community Development Block Grant Funds (MF# BGAP 2013-002) due to a conflict in interest. Chairman Hilliard 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: Chairman Hilliard explained that state law requires testimony in quasi-judicial hearings such as held by the Planning Commission be given under oath or affirmation. Chairman Hilliard swore in all those desiring to speak. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Commissioner Anderson moved, seconded by Commissioner Greenaway, that the minutes dated May 16, 2013 be approved as mailed. The motion passed unanimously. OLD BUSINESS: A. Special Permit Location of a cellular tower (AT&T) (MF # SP 2013-009) Chairman Hilliard read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Shane O'Neill, Planner I, discussed the special permit application for the location of a cellular antennae tower. He explained that the only change to the report since the previous meeting is the addition of a condition stating that the Washington State Flag -1- that will be flown on the new pole must fly at a lower height than the existing United States Flag on the adjacent pole. Commissioner Anderson moved, seconded by Commissioner Khan, to adopt findings of fact and conclusions therefrom as contained in the June 20, 2013 staff report. The motion passed unanimously. Commissioner Anderson 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 cellular tower at 6600 Burden Boulevard with conditions as listed in the June 20, 2013 staff report. The motion passed unanimously. B. Special Permit Location of a Water Intake Facility (City of Pasco) W # SP 2013-011) Chairman Hilliard read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. David McDonald, City Planner, discussed the special permit application for the location of a water intake facility. Mr. McDonald stated that there were no additional comments since the previous meeting. Commissioner Greenaway moved, seconded by Commissioner Polk, to adopt the findings of fact and conclusions therefrom as contained in the June 20, 2013 staff report. The motion passed unanimously. Commissioner Greenaway moved, seconded by Commissioner Polk, based on the findings of fact and conclusions as adopted the Planning Commission recommend the City Council grant a special permit for the construction of a municipal water intake facility on a portion of Lot 11, Harris Subdivision with conditions as listed in the June 20, 2013 staff report. The motion passed unanimously. C. Zoning Rezone from RT (Residential Transition) to R-1 (Low Density Residential) (Hayden Homes) (MF # Z 2013-001) Chairman Hilliard read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. David McDonald, City Planner, discussed the rezone application from RT (Residential Transition) to R-1 (Low Density Residential). Mr. McDonald stated that there were no additional comments since the previous meeting. Commissioner Hoekstra asked if this particular application and report were connected to the supplemental report or memorandum the Planning Commission received concerning the sewer. Mr. McDonald responded that it was not but it will be related to a plat later on but the rezone is the first step. Commissioner Khan asked if there has been any discussion on traffic impact if it is rezoned to R-1. -2- Mr. McDonald answered no but the new development will be required to pay the traffic impact fee and there will also be supplemental funds available. Commissioner Khan asked how school impact fees apply to this property. Mr. McDonald answered that school impact fees will apply but that will be something discussed during the hearing on the plat itself, not the rezone application. Commissioner Hoekstra moved, seconded by Commissioner Khan, to adopt the findings of fact and conclusions therefrom as contained in the June 20, 2013 staff report. The motion passed unanimously. Commissioner Hoekstra moved, seconded by Commissioner Khan, based on the findings of fact and conclusions as adopted the Planning Commission recommend the City Council approve the rezone from RT (Residential Transition) to R-1 (Low Density Residential). The motion passed unanimously. D. Zoning Rezone from R-3 (Medium Density Residential) with density limit of 30-units to R-3 (Medium Density Residential) without density limit (Ronald Grate) (MF # Z 2013 7002 Chairman Hilliard read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Rick White, Community 8v Economic Development Director, discussed the rezone application removing a 30-unit density limit requirement from a concomitant agreement in an R-3 zone. Mr. White mentioned that one condition had slightly changed, giving the applicant greater flexibility in building design and still meets the intent of what was discussed at the previous meeting. The height was also clarified to require single-story construction rather than an 18' height, again to give the applicant more flexibility in the case of different pitch or heights of the roof on the same structure. Commissioner Polk asked about adding an age restriction to the deed or concomitant agreement and wanted to know if there had been any discussion on that since the previous meeting. Mr. White responded that if the applicant wishes to do that he is welcome to but it is not something the Planning Commission should require. Commissioner Khan asked a question to clarify some of the handouts that were given to them prior to the meeting on this item. David McDonald, City Planner, responded to her question. Commissioner Hoekstra moved, seconded by Commissioner Khan, to adopt the findings of fact and conclusions therefrom as contained in the June 20, 2013 staff report. The motion passed unanimously. Commissioner Hoekstra moved, seconded by Commissioner Khan, based on the findings of fact and conclusions as adopted the Planning Commission recommend the -3- City Council approve the applicants request to rezone Cole's Estates, Lot 5, to R-3 (Medium Density Residential) Zone, with a concomitant agreement containing the conditions listed in the June 20, 2013 staff report. The motion passed five to one with Commissioner Polk dissenting. E. Plan Automobile Repair in Commercial Zones (MF # PLAN 2012-006) Chairman Hilliard read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Rick White, Community & Economic Development Director, discussed automobile repair operations in Commercial Zones. Mr. White explained the proposed ordinance amending the Zoning Code to contain specific language to implement the Action Plan and the process of the code amendment. Commissioner Khan asked a question to clarify the start time of business proposed at a previous Planning Commission meeting. Mr. White answered that prior discussion concerned adjusting the business day to match the hours specified in the noise ordinance and that was taken into consideration. Commissioner Anderson moved, seconded by Commissioner Greenaway, to adopt the findings of fact as contained in the June 20, 2013 staff memo on automobile repair operations. The motion passed unanimously. Commissioner Anderson moved, seconded by Commissioner Greenaway, the Planning Commission recommend the City Council adopt the proposed ordinance amending Title 25 of the PMC as contained in the June 20, 2013 staff memo. The motion passed unanimously. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. Special Permit Location of an automotive body shop in a C-3 (General Business Zone) (Russell Dean) (MF # SP 2013-012) Chairman Hilliard read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Shane O'Neill, Planner I, discussed the location of an automotive body shop in a C-3 (General Business) Zone. The application is running concurrently with a short plat application to sub-divide the parcel. Auto body shops are required to obtain a special permit application in C-3 Zones. Mr. O'Neill briefly discussed some of the conditions typically applied to special permit applications for automotive body shops. Commissioner Polk stated that the report mentions the Department of Ecology overseeing the air quality. She asked if they have standards for different zones and population or if it's a blanket standard. -4- Rick White, Community & Economic Development Director, responded that the Department of Ecology's air criteria is specific to the use not to the population. Aaron Haggerty, 3200 W. Octave, the General Manager of Russ Dean's Family RV Center, spoke on behalf of the application. Chairman Hilliard asked if the applicant had any questions for the Planning Commission. Mr. Haggerty responded no. Commissioner Hoekstra asked the applicant how much volume or business they expect to generate. Jason Schmidt, 3200 W. Octave, the Operations Director of Russ Dean's Family RV Center, stated that they currently take roughly 15-20 jobs per month off-site. They are trying to consolidate operations to keep vehicles off the roads. Commissioner Hoekstra asked if vehicles would be stored on the property. Mr. Schmidt answered they would have a building buffer to store vehicles. With no further comments the public hearing closed. Commissioner Anderson moved, seconded by Commissioner Greenaway, to close the public hearing and schedule deliberations, the adoption of findings of fact and development of a recommendation for City Council for the July 18, 2013 Planning Commission Meeting. The motion passed unanimously. B. Rezone Rezone from R-2 (Medium Density Residential) to C-1 (Retail Business) (Jeff McClure) (MF # Z 2013-003) Chairman Hilliard read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Shane O'Neill, Planner I, discussed the rezone application from R-2 (Medium Density Residential) to C-1 (Retail Business). The site is developed with a metal structure and much of the frontage is unimproved. The Comprehensive Plan designates the site for Commercial Use. Mr. O'Neill provided additional background related to Code Enforcement on the property and the adjacent Bonnie Brae Mobile Home Park. Staff recommended the site be rezoned C-1 consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Commissioner Greenaway stated that in 1970 the property had a gas station and -5- wondered how the property ever became zoned Residential. Mr. O'Neill answered the gas station was built when the property was in the County and he was unsure of the zoning at the time. Commissioner Greenaway asked what year the City took possession of the property. Mr. O'Neill stated it was annexed in 1994. Jeff McClure, 2303 E. Lewis Street, spoke on behalf of his application. Chairman Hilliard asked the applicant if he had any questions for the Planning Commission. Mr. McClure responded he did not. Commissioner Anderson asked the applicant what he intended to use this property for if it is rezoned Commercial. Mr. McClure answered that he does not do any business at this site. He would like to use this location to store his beekeeping supplies. He does not have any bees at this location. With no further comments the public hearing closed. Commissioner Polk moved, seconded by Commissioner Greenaway, to close the public 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 July 18, 2013 meeting. The motion passed unanimously. C. Preliminary Plat Aintree Pre-Plat (Nathan Machiela of Hayden Homes) (MF # PP 2013-001) Chairman Hilliard read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. David McDonald, City Planner, discussed the preliminary plat application. The applicant is proposing to take the 5 acre parcel which was is in the process of being rezoned to R-1 (Low Density Residential) and develop it into 15 single-family lots. Mr. McDonald reviewed the findings in the written report and briefly discussed the proposed conditions. This property is a difficult site to sewer and due and the City Engineers are recommending the sewer line be connected to Pimlico Drive to the east. This would require an easement between two lots and some fill may be needed. Chairman Hilliard asked if the intent was to gravity the sewer through an easement and if Hayden owned the area where the easement was needed? -6- Mr. McDonald answered yes to both questions. Jason Maddox, 6115 Burden Boulevard, with HDJ Design Group, spoke on behalf of the applicant, Hayden Homes. The applicant at this time is proposing 14 new single- family residential lots and there is one existing residence on the property as well as a barn. The barn will be taken down if this development occurs. The roadway will be developed to City standards with sidewalks and on-street parking ending in a cul-de- sac. Water would come from Aintree Drive. Since the property is in the FCID and uphill from the canal a pump station to be installed somewhere in the development for irrigation water. He asked for the application to not be conditioned at this time with a specific option for sewer. They wanted time to explore options various options. Tracy Libbert, 695 Lake Road, Burbank, WA, spoke in support of this preliminary plat application and agreed with Mr. Maddox on leaving the options open to explore the best options for sewer. With no further comments the public hearing closed. Mr. McDonald noted that the staff report did not include a condition for placement of the sewer. During the next month the project engineer and the engineering staff can work together to work out details on the sewer line. Commissioner Hoekstra asked for clarification on when the conditions and findings of fact would be coming back to the Planning Commission. Mr. McDonald answered they would come back at the next Planning Commission meeting. Commissioner Hoekstra moved, seconded by Commissioner Khan, to close the hearing on the proposed subdivision and initiate deliberations and schedule adoption of findings of fact, conclusions and a recommendation to the City Council for the July 18, 2013 meeting. The motion passed unanimously. D. Block Grant 2014 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Fund Allocations (MF # BGAP 2013-002) Chairman Hilliard read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Rick White, Community 8s Economic Development Director explained Pasco was an entitlement city and receives Block Grant funds each year from the Federal Government. He explained that no decision was expected presently; rather information is expected to be shared in the form of a public hearing. Angela Pitman, Block Grant Administrator, gave a brief presentation on the 2014 CDBG process funding levels and the purposes of the CDBG program. Ms. Pitman explained the request for funds are typical larger than the amount the City -7- is awarded. The estimated amount of funds available for 2014 is $656,756. The City received proposals for $1,470,344.89, a deficit of$814,589. Ms. Pitman stated the City reviews all applications for eligibility, to make sure they meet national objectives, they meet goals and objectives of the consolidated plan and also Resolution 1969 that established the Planning Commission as the Advisory Board. The City checks subrecipients to determine if they have the capacity to carry out their project and if they're project is feasible. Ms. Pitman explained which activities were allowed and how much funds were available for the various types of projects. Commissioner Hoekstra asked for clarification between grant funds requested and how much the City has available. Ms. Pitman explained there was a $814,589 deficit between this year's allocation from HUD and funds being requested from agencies. Commissioner Hoekstra asked if the proposals have been reviewed against Resolution 1969 to see if there were any projects that would be excluded. Mr. White responded that between the public hearing and the next meeting staff will review will review the applications for eligibility and will have a recommendation for the Planning Commission at that time. Chairman Hilliard reiterated that the public hearing was simply to gather information. Victoria Silvernail, 110 S. 4th Avenue, spoke on behalf of the Pasco Specialty Kitchen. Ms. Silvernail explained the Specialty Kitchen was requesting $60,000. They offer potential new business clients an affordable, certified commercial incubator kitchen for small food-based businesses to make and package their products. The grant would make it possible to keep their costs affordable. Six clients were added in 2012 and they are still with the Specialty Kitchen. In the first two quarters for 2013, the Specialty Kitchen has already added 8 clients, 3 of which are manufacturing products and 4 in different levels of planning. Ms. Silvernail discussed other programs the kitchen provides and success of her clients, including 11 clients who now have storefronts and creating new jobs. Commissioner Hoekstra asked the applicant where the $60,000 is used. Ms. Silvernail stated it takes roughly $100,000 to run the kitchen. The money she collects from the clients pays for the repair of equipment and purchasing of equipment in the facility and the utilities. The $60,000 takes care of the salaries and other expenses. The Specialty Kitchen is a project of the DPDA. Amy Kuchler, PO Box 688, spoke on behalf of the Downtown Pasco Development Authority Fagade Improvement Program. Downtown Pasco's retail buildings need physical improvements to increase retail traffic, to create jobs, to eliminate blight and to aid in the continued economic revitalization of Downtown Pasco. The funds are -8- used as matching funds to help the store owners up to 75% of their project costs but up to $25,000 maximum. The number of facades the $60,000 can assist depends on the scope of the projects. Recently Vierra's Bakery completed their facade using CDBG funds and it has become a main focal point of the downtown. Chairman Hilliard asked the applicant if there were any businesses Downtown on a waiting list for fagade improvements. Ms Kuchler responded there are businesses currently on a waiting list but many have expressed interest. It is difficult to get people on a waiting list without knowing how much funds would be available. Chairman Hilliard announced the next applicant from Friendly Temple Ministries but there were no members from the organization present. Daryl Francis, 720 W. Court Street, spoke on behalf of the Benton Franklin Community Action Committee (CAC)application. He explained that the funds would be used for housing rehab to provide low or zero percent interest loans to home owners for energy efficiency, repairs, lead hazard reductions, connection to city water and minor rehab to improve the home. They currently have five applications on file. Chairman Hilliard asked how people find out about the rehab program. Mr. Francis answered through the City. Commissioner Hoekstra asked the applicant how his agency will determine which projects to fund. Mr. Francis stated they have not received funds so they haven't decided. There will most likely be an evaluation of affordability with health and safety as top priorities. Commissioner Hoekstra asked if there were a number of houses or units they were targeting to assist. Mr. Francis answered they would most likely make $10,000 the maximum per unit cost so 5 units could be completed. Commissioner Khan asked if the 5 units would be owned or rented. Mr. Francis answered that they would be homeowners. Chairman Hilliard asked if they would only be servicing census tracts 201, 202, 203 and 204 or if it would be for the entire city. Mr. Francis stated it would only be for the low-moderate income census tracts. Commissioner Khan asked what type of clients would be using the homes; homeless -9- transitional housing, elderly or disabled. Mr. Francis replied the funds are being requested to help low-moderate income homeowners with repairs to their homes. Anne Meyer, 2110 West Henry, spoke on behalf of the application for Catholic Family & Child Services. She stated that the goal of Volunteer Chore Services is to keep people safe, independent and in their own home as long as possible. There are currently many requests to install wheelchair ramps and handrails for the elderly and disabled population. All of the work is completed by trained volunteers. Chairman Hilliard asked what the grant money would be used for. Ms. Meyer stated for material costs only, labor is provided by volunteers. Paul Bremberger, 1600 N. 20th Avenue, Suite A, spoke on behalf of CBVC, Inc. He stated that since the early 2000's there have been nearly 1.5 million veterans separating from active duty and their transition back into civilian life is difficult in some cases and is a nationwide problem. They're program was established to help transition veterans back into the community. The grant money would be used to purchase and rehab a residential property for transitional housing. Currently there is a transitional home in Kennewick and a home about to open in Richland. Commissioner Khan asked how many beds they had between Kennewick and Richland. Mr. Bremberger responded the Kennewick home has 5 beds and the Richland home will have 6. Chairman Hilliard asked if the organization owns these homes. Mr. Bremberger answered that CBVC, Inc owns the homes. Commissioner Hoekstra asked if the home in Pasco is already owned or if their intentions were to purchase the home with the funds. Mr. Bremberger replied their intention was to purchase the home with the funds. Commissioner Hoekstra asked staff how the ownership of the home would work if they were using grant funds to purchase the home and how it would work. Ms. Pitman stated that HUD has rules that apply when property is purchased by a non-profit. They would have to meet the national objectives. Cori Jones, 124 N. 5th Avenue, spoke on behalf of the South Eastern Washington Service Center of the Deaf and Hard of Hearing (SEWSCDHH). She stated their organization assists the deaf and the hard or hearing and their family members. -10- Funds would be used for: electrical upgrades, drywall, roof, ADA Accessibility, fire doors and extinguishers, and HVAC units. Commissioner Hoekstra asked staff if given the amount of work that needs to be done will the building be required to meet new code standards. Mr. White responded that it probably would. Commissioner Hoekstra asked if the proposed $255,844.89 in funds includes the additional work necessary to bring the building up to code. Ms. Jones responded that she believes it does but she could double-check. Commissioner Hoekstra asked if there were any concerns that costs might be driven higher once walls are opened up. Chairman Hilliard pointed out that they put a contingency in their application for such case. Ms. Jones replied with other grants they hope to have enough funds. Kathy Jones, 2505 W. Lewis Street, spoke on behalf of the Housing Authority. She stated they were asking for $250,000 to support the revitalization a low-income neighborhood. They would use the funds to improve the public infrastructure on 4th Avenue and Pearl Street.The Housing Authority is developing a 38-unit low-income apartment project with 37 units set aside for farmworkers and their families with 1 unit available for a property manager. Based on the number of families on the waiting list this project is needed. Mr. White asked the applicant if the State portion of the funding was contingent on farmworker housing or the percentages of average median income. Ms. Jones stated both. Chairman Hilliard asked if funding was also contingent on funding from the City. Ms. Jones stated they must provide a match privately or by obtaining grants. Commissioner Khan asked if they don't receive the full $250,000 how would they fund the project. Ms. Jones responded they would go back to the engineers to see if it would work. Commissioner Khan asked if$550,000 was their cap for the project. Ms. Jones answered yes. -11- Commissioner Hoekstra asked where the $7.8 million non-CDBG match comes from. Ms. Jones answered that the $7.8 million includes funds from the Washington Department of Commerce that was awarded to them. Ahmad Qayoumi, 525 N. Third Avenue, spoke on behalf of the Works Department regarding for ADA Improvements. Mr. Qayoumi briefly explained the program. Commissioner Greenaway asked how many projects these funds would complete. Mr. Qayoumi answered that each ramp costs $5,000 so the hopes are to complete 20. Mr. White spoke on behalf of several City applications. Beginning with Program Administration, he stated it was an annual request and it was for salaries and delivering services to the program. The applications for Senior Center Recreation Specialist, Martin Luther King Community Center Recreation Specialist and Civic Center Youth Recreation Specialist are to pay partial salaries to provide services to at-risk youth in census tracts 201-204 census tracts. The Senior Center provides services city-wide to elderly. The Code Enforcement Officer application would pay for the Code Enforcement Officer who services only census tracts 201-204. The Memorial Park Shelter Remodel 8v ADA Path application would be to construct an ADA path around the entire park which is part of the American Disability Act. The funds would also be used to remodel the pavilion. Commissioner Khan asked if the Code Enforcement Officer funds would go directly to one officer in particular to pay their salary. Mr. White answered yes, it is for a specific officer in a specific area. Commissioner Hoekstra asked about the success over the period of time since the Code Enforcement Officer has been operating in that area and the impact it has had. Mr. White replied that it is difficult to quantify. Nearly half of the code enforcement cases come from east of Highway 395. Chairman Hilliard asked if roughly $269,000 of the requested funds was for staff support to keep the program running. Mr. White responded that only $120,000 would be for Program Administration, there were 3 recreation positions to total roughly $70,000 and a Code Enforcement Officer for $48,000. -12- Commissioner Khan asked how many people administer the CDBG Program. Mr. White responded that Ms. Pitman administers the program, time is also charged to the program by him, Ms. Shanks, the Code Enforcement Officer who dedicates their time to CDBG projects, planners, inspectors and even engineers. Commissioner Khan moved, seconded by Commissioner Greenaway, to continue the public hearing and schedule deliberations and development of a recommendation for City Council for the July 18, 2013 meeting. The motion passed unanimously. E. Block Grant 2014 HOME Fund Allocations (MF # BGAP 2013- 003) Chairman Hilliard read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Rick White, Community Ss Economic Development Director, discussed the 2014 HOME Fund Allocations. He explained that the HOME Program is actually another block grant devoted exclusively to low-moderate income families for affordable housing. Pasco formed a consortium with Kennewick and Richland to receive the HOME funds with Richland operating as the lead agency. Individually the three cities would not be able to receive the money due to population size. Staff would recommend the money be used for first-time homebuyer down payment assistance, paying up to $9,000 in down payment assistance and paying for title reports and credit reports. Chairman Hilliard asked how people would find out about the program. Mr. White stated that Ms. Pitman has set up a program with realtors, lenders and closing agents who are well aware of the program to refer their customers. Angela Pitman, Block Grant Administrator, stated the information is also on the website. Commissioner Hoekstra asked if there was anything in place to keep people from "double-dipping" into assistance or funds. Mr. White said yes. Commissioner Hoekstra moved, seconded by Commissioner Khan, to continue the public hearing and schedule deliberations and development of a recommendation for City Council for the July 18, 2013 meeting. The motion passed unanimously. F. Block Grant 2014 NSP Fund Allocations (MF # BGAP 2013- 004 Chairman Hilliard read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. -13- Rick White, Community & Economic Development Director, discussed the 2014 NSP Fund Allocations. He explained that it is another home focused block grant program. In 2010 as a part of the Federal Stimulus Package, the City received about $426,000 to be used to prevent adverse effects on neighborhoods from vacant and foreclosed properties. The City has rehabilitated to date 11 foreclosed properties and provided down payment assistance for homebuyers to purchase foreclosed properties. There is still funding available and there are still 2 more homes likely to be sold. Staff recommended continuing the purchase and acquisition program in combination with the rehabilitation program to purchase foreclosed homes, rehabilitate and then sell to an eligible buyer. Commissioner Hilliard asked if the program has been successful. Mr. White replied that it's been successful but some of the foreclosed properties are in rough shape and it takes a lot to get them fixed. Commissioner Khan asked if the banks work with the City to negotiate price on the homes. Mr. White stated that more often than not the homes are owned by a federal agency. When the program first started they were easier to work with than they are now. They are now much more likely to try to sell the homes at a higher price. Commissioner Khan asked if there has been any turnover in terms of foreclosure with the homes purchased and occupied with NSP funds. Angela Pitman, Block Grant Administrator, stated no and explained some of the safe guards in place to prevent foreclosures. Commissioner Hoekstra asked if the City did any criminal background checks and if the City would be liable. Ms. Pitman stated that the City does not do criminal background checks because it is not required by HUD. Commissioner Hoekstra moved, seconded by Commissioner Greenaway, to continue the public hearing and schedule deliberations and development of a recommendation for City Council for the July 18, 2013 meeting. The motion passed unanimously. G. Code Amendment Building Heights for Detached Garages (MF# CA 2013-003) Chairman Hilliard read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. David McDonald, City Planner, discussed the proposed code amendment for building heights for detached garages. Last month a public hearing was held to discuss this matter. The Commissioners discussed a number of ideas and what staff heard was that the City regulations should be in line with what the County does relating to -14- height requirements for accessory structures. The County allows for increased building heights through the special permit process only. Staff has included language in the proposed ordinance identical to the County setting a height limit at 18 feet but a greater height may be approved by special permit both in the RS-20 and RS- 12 Zones. Staff also included additional review criteria as requested by the Commission. With no further comments the public hearing closed. Commissioner Hoekstra moved, seconded by Commissioner Anderson, to recommend the City Council adopt the proposed Code Amendments modifying PMC Chapters 25.22, PMC 25.24 and PMC 25.86 as attached to the June 20, 2013 staff memo. The motion passed unanimously. OTHER BUSINESS: Mr. White thanked the Planning Commissioners for their patience for the long meeting and listening to all of the applicants. COMMENTS: With no further discussion or business, the Planning Commission was adjourned at 9:36 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Dave McDonald, City Planner -15- REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION MASTER FILE NO: SP2013-012 APPLICANT: Russell Dean HEARING DATE: 6/20/2013 3200 W. Octave St. ACTION DATE: 7/18/2013 Pasco, WA 99301 BACKGROUND REQUEST: SPECIAL PERMIT: Location of an automotive body shop in a C-3 (General Business) Zone 1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Legal: The south 200.04 feet of Lot 1, Short Plat 77-27 General Location: 3306 West Marie Street Property Size: The parcel is approximately 2.6 acres with about 52,000 square feet (1.2 acres) available for the proposed auto body shop. This application is running concurrently with a Short Plat application to divide the existing lot into two parcels. 2. ACCESS: The site is accessible from both Road 34 and W. Octave Street. 3. UTILITIES: All municipal utilities are currently available to serve the site. 4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The site is currently zoned C-3 (General Business). The north portion of the site contains an automotive parts/accessories wholesale warehouse and distribution center while the south portion is vacant. Surrounding properties are zoned and developed as follows: NORTH: C-3 - Commercial wholesale distribution SOUTH: C-3 - Commercial wholesale distribution EAST: C-3 - Commercial RV sales WEST: C-3/RS-1 - Post office/church S. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan designates the site for Commercial uses. LU-4-13 promotes planning for major commercial centers which promote functional and economical operations to produce sustainable clusters of shopping and services. The Auto-Plex area of the community is dominated by automotive sales and service facilities; the proposed auto body shop is functionally similar to the surrounding businesses. Goal LU-1-C encourages cluster commercial development. The proposed use is geographically consolidated with many other automotive sales and service businesses. LU-4-C encourages the application of standards and guidelines that will result in attractive and efficient commercial centers. 1 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 applicant is requesting special permit approval to locate an automotive body shop with a large scale spray booth in a C-3 (General Business) zone located at the intersection of Road 34 and Octave Street. The north half of the site in question currently contains a commercial/industrial parts and accessories wholesale warehouse and distribution center; the southern portion is a gravel parking area. The proposal involves construction of a 6,820 square foot commercial shop structure to house the spray booth and to provide enclosed working space. The site plan submitted also indicates a proposed future shop addition equal to the area of the currently proposed structure, for a total floor area of approximately 13,640 square feet. The Planning Division is currently processing a Short Plat application (MF# SPLAT2013-006) to subdivide the site into two similarly sized parcels. Once processed, the site (Lot 2) proposed to contain the auto body shop will be approximately 52,000 square feet in area; occupying the northeast corner of the intersection of Octave Street and Road 34. Lot 2 (of SPLAT2013-006) is largely undeveloped in its current state. Lot 2 functions as a fenced gravel parking lot and is used for RV parking by Russ Dean RV dealership. The frontage areas, typically required to be landscaped, contain only gravel. The western frontage on Road 34 contains sidewalk while the south frontage on Octave Street does not. The potential impacts to nearby residential zones can be compared to the Action Auto special permit (MF# SP2013-007) where special permit approval was granted for a body shop directly across the right-of-way from a residential neighborhood. Since its construction there have been no complaints received by the City from nearby residents of the adjacent neighborhoods. This is one example chosen to illustrate a case where an auto body shop is located less than 200 feet away from residential units. In another circumstance, an auto body shop located adjacent to a residential area on "A" Street has been the source of long-standing yet unverified complaints of fumes and odors. Impacts of primary concern are that of noise and fumes. The issue of fumes, monitoring and enforcement will be the responsibility of the State Department of Ecology permitting. Paint booth manufactures' product details submitted with the application includes high volume ventilation and filtration equipment to help meet air quality standards. Regarding noise, the residence nearest to the site is approximately 500 feet to the southwest. The body shop will be open during normal business hours when people are commonly away from home. Based on experience with other auto body shops near residential units, there appears to be 2 sufficient distance between the body shop and the nearest residences to diffuse noise to an appropriate level. 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 parcel is currently 2.6 acres in area. 2. Parcel number 119-370-191 is zoned C-3 (General Business). 3. Auto body shops are listed as a Permitted Conditional Use in the C-3 (General Business) zone [PMC 25.46040(2)]. 4. The Comprehensive Plan identifies the parcel for commercial uses. 5. The Comprehensive Plan encourages the grouping of similar business types. There are other automotive sales or related businesses located in the immediate vicinity of the Auto-Plex. 6. The proposed use is automotive in nature. 7. The site is surfaced with gravel. 8. The sites' frontage on Octave Street lacks sidewalks. 9. The site lacks required right-of-way landscaping on both Road 34 and Octave Street frontages. 10. The north half of the parcel contains a commercial wholesale distribution warehouse with parking and required landscaping. 11. Currently the site has an active Short Plat (MF# SPLAT2013-006) application to divide the parcel into two lots. The resulting "Lot 2" will be 52,000 square feet in area and is the site to which this Special Permit application applies. 12. The 52,000 square foot (approximately 1.2 acre) site proposed to contain the body shop is the south 200.04 feet of parcel number 119-370-191. 13. The proposed auto body site is located easterly of and across the street from existing residential areas. 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 PMC. 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 designates the proposed site for commercial development. The Comprehensive Plan encourages urban development within the Pasco Urban Growth Boundary. The proposal involves the establishment of a commercial business. Comprehensive Plan policy LU-4- B encourages concentration of commercial activities, which are functionally and economically beneficial. The proposed use is functionally similar to other automotive related business located around the site. (2) Will the proposed use adversely affect public infrastructure? The proposed use will not create a significant impact on infrastructure. The proposed auto body shop will utilize existing infrastructure consistent with its intended use. Sewer and water usage for an auto body shop is minimal. (3) Will the proposed use be constructed, maintained and operated to be in harmony with existing or intended character of the general vicinity? The existing character and intended character of the vicinity is automotive in nature. The site is part of a conglomeration of automotive businesses commonly referred to as the Pasco Auto-Plex. The proposed body shop will support some of the existing auto dealerships, especially Russ Dean RV, and will blend in with automotive sales and service character of the 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 Surrounding properties are zoned to permit commercial development. Buildings on surrounding lots and on the lot in question are permitted to be 45 feet in height. According to the construction details provided with the application, the auto shop will be 26 feet tall not including the height of ancillary ventilation stacks. Development on the lot in question and on surrounding lots must comply with all municipal codes including landscaping, zoning and building codes. These codes are intended to support property values and encourage compatibility within neighborhoods. (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? Impacts of primary concern are that of noise and fumes. The issue of fumes, monitoring and enforcement will be the responsibility of the State Department of Ecology permitting. City staff does not have the capability to measure violations of the Department of Ecology air quality permit associated with the spray booth. Any monitoring/enforcement related to air quality will be conducted by the Department of Ecology which provides "complaint driven" enforcement at best. Paint booth manufactures' product 4 details submitted with the application includes high volume ventilation and filtration equipment to help meet air quality standards. Regarding noise, the residence nearest to the site is over 500 feet to the southwest. The body shop will be open during normal business hours when people are commonly away from home. Based on experience with other auto body shops near residential units there appears to be sufficient distance between the body shop and the nearest residences to diffuse noise to an appropriate level. The site is currently in a graveled condition; development of the site will include paving all surfaces not occupied by the shop building. This means the proposal will reduce or eliminate dust generated by the site. Traffic generated by the body shop will be much lower than some of the regularly permitted uses both in the C-1 and C-3 zones. Grocery stores, restaurants and express trucking yards are examples of high-traffic uses not requiring special permit review in the C-3 zone. Unfortunately the ITE Vehicle Trip Generation Manual does not provide a traffic analysis for auto body shops. (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? Auto body shops possess qualities which would be inherently disruptive to nearby residences. Impacts most commonly include high noise levels due to metal shaping activities, and noxious fumes and airborne particulates produced by painting and paint removal. The Washington State Department of Ecology (DOE) administers the Federal Clean Air Act by imposing regulations on paint booth emissions through permitting. The applicant must obtain the proper DOE permits to address air quality. The residence nearest to the site is approximately 500 the southwest and is usually upwind of the site. Noise generated by the body shop will be during typical business hours when people are typically away from home. It is the opinion of staff that in the case of people at home during normal business hours; there is sufficient distance between the body shop and the nearest residences to diffuse noise to an appropriate level for that time of day. APPROVAL CONDITIONS 1. The special permit shall apply to the south 200.04 feet of Lot 1, Short Plat 77-27; 2. The site shall be developed in substantial conformance with the site plan submitted with the Special Permit application; 3. Landscaping strips meeting the requirements of PMC 25.75 must be installed on both the Octave Street and Road 34 frontages; 5 4. Sidewalk must be installed along the entire Octave Street frontage per City standards; 5. The applicant shall be responsible for obtaining all required Department of Ecology air quality permits for the paint booth; 6. No painting, metal bending, fabrication, priming or grinding shall occur outside of an approved building; 7. All impervious surface improvements shall be designed to drain, confine and/or impound storm water or site-generated water within the private property upon which the improvement is to be located; 8. The pedestrian ramp at the corner of Octave Street and Road 34 must be replaced to meet current ADA requirements; 9. The special permit shall be null and void if a building permit for required paint booth improvements has not been obtained by March 3, 2014; and 10. Prior to issuing a Certificate of Occupancy for the proposed facility the applicant shall provide 24-hour contact information. RECOMMENDATION MOTION for Findings of Fact: I move to adopt findings of fact and conclusions therefrom as contained in the July 18, 2013 staff report. MOTION for Recommendation: I move based on the findings of fact and conclusions as adopted the Planning Commission recommend the City Council grant a special permit for the construction and operation of an auto body shop on the south 200.04 feet of Lot 1, Short Plat 77-27. 6 Vicin i Item: Special P - Auto Body in C-3 t Y Applicant: Russ Dean N Map File #: SP2013 -012 I I # { COURT ST _ . a r• f r •If�Rf,i .,-•. .ate� - � .r 1 1{ . i 4 a "c— f ' kr r 4 I o i 'SITE F at ',.❑_ r, � �a � � � � �► p•M �� 6f1i.F!c µs1 � ��� NIF(fi1CfKP n� � .� G a ,ffF.E f rfCtF 1�1 i°'-- j r -� t O,,y..' � _ 0.,,� _ V FW it`I}t.-F fC 6:•rFiffflF' �,� ,, ., {C. r o f 1- •' - _ `� +a~ f.. f f'**!fr rf ca fl 1 r fi -i P Ii Fir; 11,7L , r - $ ' Land UseItem: Special Permit - Auto Body in C-3 Map Applicant: Russ Dean N File #: SP2013 -012 I I Commercial COURTS Comm. Post Office MARE Commercial S d � 3 M � SITE a � o Church OCTAVE ST Q M Residential � Residential w MARGARET ST Commercial F a Zonin g Item: Special Permit - Auto Body in C-3 Applicant: Russ Dean N Ma p File .#. SP2013 -012 C-1 CR C-1 COURT ST C-1 Retail Business C-3 R-1 General Business MARIE ST R-1 � � M A SITE w a � a 0 0 x � RS-1 OCTAVE ST RS-12 Suburban Suburban M C-3 � RP W MARGARET ST W Mill , L r .yam ♦ � "�V _ - __"-_�.p�� � •— S�- T' -�_-� T �— J y _ fir=. � -• , 3 m + �® 2%r—I 4 MAXI - RANGE INDUSTRIAL PAINT BOOTHS III T H E V, LEADER IN SPRAY BOOTH APPLICATIONS NOVA VERTA I I MAXI-RANGE INDUSTRIAL PAINT BOOTHS - - -- -- - --- I. ■ I' I o p II n " e S' iI rl � Truck and Prep Combination II 11 P �I Multiple Door Options and Booth Configurations — Whether you're painting painting system tailored quality craftsmanship of industrial trucks and to your specific needs. Nova Verta's modular equipment, boats, rail, or From solutions that components are designed aircraft, the flexibility of provide short-term for year-in, year-out NovaVerta's Maxi-Range payback, long-term performance. Industrial Paint Booths lets operational cost savings, you create a large-scale or systems in between, the A N G t , , I r; Standard Touchpad 300 11 I Via Metro - Jan . tniomo Optional Touch Screen 600C Pands }� Doors Lighting Quality begins with the Nova The ability to select door I Nova Verta gives you the freedom Verta industrial booth assembly placements adds more versatility, to optimize lighting and eliminate panels. These three-layered panels Simplify work flow with drive- shadowing based on how you provide a pre-coated, white, through doors. Split the cabin in work. Choose from multi-voltage, galvanized interior; two-inch slip- half with an electric roll door and energy efficient ballasts with four in panel insulation; and a blue, add an additional control system or six light tubes. Then, place galvanized steel exterior. On site, that can, with the touch to either them horizontally on wall panels these precision-designed panels controller, operate the booth as and/or at hip angles. All fixtures attach to horizontal and vertical a single booth with the door are Class 1 Division 2 with inside tubular steel framing using nut I open, or individually with the access and wiring harnesses and and bolt assembly. The end result center door closed. Add side, rear use T-8 tubes with a 98 color is the most rigid paint booth or front egress service doors and rendering index for maximum design in the industry. This panel side wall viewing windows for i visibility and color matching. design maximizes energy operator convenience. Nova efficiency and shop comfortwhile Verta's craftsmanship also i Air flow eliminating dirt-collecting edges includes door sealing material to The wide spread use of that can lead to corrosion. Plus, create a tight, energy-efficient I waterborne paints makes booth all models meet or exceed the paint environment. airflow more critical than ever — most stringent code requirements and no one gives you options from OSHA, NFC, IFC, NFPA, comparable to the performance CEC, NEC, BOCA and local air of Nova Verta's solutions. quality controllers. Nova Verta's modular make up air systems use variable frequency drives (VFDs) to properly balance i downdraft, side downdraft, single side downdraft, or semi- , downdraft air flow units, while controlling air speeds, maintaining optimum paint 1 N D U 5 T R I A p A i Tubular Framing Super Structure Unlimited Lighting i I r Side Downdrah Wall Industrial Tunnel Booth Center Dividing Door booth cabin pressure, minimizing\ Direct-fired Pre-Wired air turbulence, and promoting 1 When short-term payback is ` Factory pre-wiring gets you up\ cleaner paintwork, which can the goal, Nova Verta's direct- and painting faster. The control reduce cutting and polishing. fired solutions feature an I panel features pre-designed, \ ' optional energy savings mode color-coded and labeled wiring Nova's air flow systems work in that reduces air flow when in Seal Tite conduit to all unison with indirect or direct spraying is not being components. Combined with fired burners. performed. It also recirculates easy-to-read installation manuals, 90% of the booth 's air when Nova Verta's systems minimize Indirect-fired I in the cure mode, minimizing ! the need for electrical contractors �� '� Indirect-fired solutions provide heating needs. and reduce set-up time and three distinct operating cycles: j expense. prep, paint, and cure. This Controller option safely re-circulates 90% Depending on the burner Built-to-Last 1 ` of the booth's warm air during selection, Nova Verta uses a Performance ��: 's+> the prep and cure cycles - programmable logic controller Engineered for economical, without exposing operators to with a touch pad, monochrome lasting performance, Nova Verta '��„�: the dangers of carbon touch screen, or a full colortouch systems cost less to install, slash monoxide. Using an indirect screen to make operating the operating expenses such as fueli fired burner allows booth's features virtually intuitive, and electrical bills, and feature recirculation in the prep cycle All systems also incorporate I maximum airflow and is proven to reduce fuel automated booth pressure control water or solvent paint spray y r usage by 90% and trim through the VFD, and provide self I conditions. At Nova Verta, our electricity demand by 50%. diagnostics to minimize down priority is providing you with a I Indirect-fired solutions also time and assistwith live technical ! paint booth system that provides have lower humidity output support. optimum conditions for prep which promotes quicker drying work, spraying, and curing - and of waterborne paints. contributes to a premium paint finish for projects of all sizes. I i `+r II 11 II II II II I I � V � 11 l • 1Ij^IIf' V l 1 II 11 11 Jill Side Downri ah: Weld Front ilk Post Filtration 5 tem (Optionap PV 1 Direa-Drive Turbine Exhaust Fan 4 t Yacht Building 7 Pre-Hired Finger Safe Controls VFD is Rated NEMA 4X aa T,vm Dual Inlet Hi-Capacity Low DB (Make up air fans) 1 Horizontal Lighting Package 304 Stainless Steel Heat Exchanger i MAXI-RANGE INDUSTRIAL / PAINT BOOTHS Product Details Standard-Option Cabin Dimensions* Length 20 to 200' Width 12 to 100' Train Booth Truck Semi Down CTOF Height 12 to 80' tAll designs, specifications and components are sub l ect to change upon factory discretion at anytime without notice. Models represented are for informational purposes only and do not represent suitability for all applications. Controllers El • Allen-Bradley, Rockwell Automation, or Siemens Side Downdraft Bilold open VroducGon Booths • Touch pad or touch screen operation I Ligght Fixtures • 7 or 6 tubes • Class 1 Divison 2 inside access Air Make-Up System Direct or indirect fired i Air Flow Rear Wall&haust Prep Areas Industrial Inspection StaNOn Pit downdraft, side downdraft, semi-downdraft, or — single-sided downdraft Doors & Windows • Electric roll doors or bifold • Drive-throwgh • Center divide door with dual booth controls • Side, rear, or front egress service doors Options de DOwndraft ElecVic Roll Door Rail Car Side Do dralt • Viewing windows for side walls • Post filtration extractor • Panel configurations for individual paint mix rooms, vestibules, prep stations and cure stations Code Compliance 1 Most products are ETL Listed for their 1 intended purpose to meet IFC, IBC, IEC, IMC, NFPA 33, 70, 86, 91 , 101 , UL508A, ANSI, and OSHA standards Narrow Makeup Air Units Ran Parts Booth 0 NOVA VERTA novavertausa.com 800-668-2921 "Expanding Distribution - Inquiries Welcome" stn]ogrgl0.�]�as,]<eea,no duo Lnwk'P6., M1m,ea eY Unwo wiwne Wu:Ar}Fp�,9'ri np I q I Q I I � j I I =_I s �7 I I I i � 1 ti rn 1 ------------------- n ' > $� RUSS DEAN FAMILY RV ALD ARCHI7EGTS.P.9. eeo sxrwn saaw t:scsade.a]eu �.► � �e" ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLAN SERVICE CENTER 3201 W OCTAVE ST y PASCO,WA 711T 1 wmrAtArc]iRacb m 1' r, � •� AM- jo 9a�� ld ►�,�� ff IN AW - ',n, 4 '.• y� 'iii' ,I(f - 9 - - - - - � iii+. �; �� � �� '�`• r - g \ W East Side of Site IT r`v r t Looking East on i1//�����. !`��//Il�f l�1I9t3�lllltil iu� u,uur'mFa�,;�,�-� '�•>.il; ��I�.t__� , °i .�' - -'"f if I � I I_ .1 ] 1 J J,. 1111111111111 DIIV -rS�_�_ + a 1�i � -I.� • // / LIIJJJIJJJI)ll�j /1 )111B,1,kApiUAUUn u, ,upgx" ;s _ i i .� 666"'1�� r lr % , / •� I11DUlunlmuuW pn _ - i f — JLJIJIIIIIIIIIIl��i1:, t iltth �l.l.l ✓ Il1lllJl U/1/11��u���1 �,,,�u,�,��,� 111/��uYl� Ofluun wiwyp1° fill 111/1111/11i1.i1/1111 -- � ��� l✓t ll �� ����•�'� /i"°'� ��fJ11 �� 1 IJ)I 1 �Fiu�uU�u� ,mss.` _ - _ _ r- ���� ��11111111)/ ry1°/N/U11111UIp111111 J1�' r _ ail •.�. ��-�,;";, t �'``z� +:,� - - WOO R M _ • any y. �js,� T. !rWV� ` •1 �f . �n ry4r} •_ _ t,��3� �.,~� � :„ ��`? 'mil� '�yy' 'f j IN _I�. - �F. tyJ�. • .� ''•f sJ�. "/nom �jxii :', f'� a Ir A � Lo 1 - \ �- —sue `" s. °ar.� • .. _ n' Looking Ellary � r °s r-- t , I 1 :l�r.=i% t _ �' , I �� - ' �...- s°�, � — �- 1 �; I I � � �. (r�• E -- a �� I� ---- - kt �I z� �-�3"�` �,�-,!'�,yt3%''f - 'j - '.: Y�` �yk���. j��'' - � -`_''- 4 - = ^-±� n� �" � sy'� `�aty� - -�- _ _ -�•sr���'c - �" i� _ s ' ����}„�?r� _ ��t���. s,+.' - e - ����.� '� sa _ `. -q,S,ti•'3>'- Sii�1A�y�:�w.a:"� �s. � Y- -1_ 2+ �'l7r'�.. 'Yt .ir'�k��✓� .� ��f. 5 _ i.• L'._• � ``e.° ,�� �Ste. �'� � �p.� - - y_� "��-.tea' �i r {� a , n Wl r'-w.. � ,•. .. I WOE.,, �-"'-�j'Yr;.c�i�- �.+fT�J�� '��.Jv,� -���.�: Y'd'�Tt,Fk.�.�Y�*.�.�'�`°'=.`.Jr �'C'.l a�=`-•S�;``;;�;ati`- T:"� Oyu '�~ T Vii. $�:- j�*3•' .�. -9r •• :-.` ."� .x, -��-� ;� i.,.ep, �� 1'y: '1P -�•+ - ,�. ���%"�•f1i :o� '�4.' ...iS, t `�;- �� �-. �2 �. 1.�e �=. ti.. - :r ��. ✓' -�, 1-!Y ;�-�`,;,�.�',��,yr _-.'�,. oy s _ yr n,..�*,r �,�� _ :�;; <i .�n -a'�. •"t.-`� r�Y.. Y:�� .� � �;..7`.r: y,.-+G'- �;, �_ry,�ii'�Cfh '�ef;n'r� J {r - � �'�y �..• - •'R-4� ,i�."'v.+ �. y .�?'�Y �: �y,. .t,�' ,! ~` :,y�,; .`k�,,. �.,-w`. .,J'-�� - 'r3� w re. ,yawl! "rr.TT �'�,°.s+� � .1',y'r'•a`- -r.�^,.�.{� � ���r l_ ,., r.`c "y�: -''3- � 1` .k,._ REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION MASTER FILE NO. Z 2013-003 APPLICANT: Jeff McClure HEARING DATE: 6/20/13 29 Wayne Ct ACTION DATE: 7/18/13 Burbank, WA 99323 BACKGROUND REQUEST: REZONE Rezone from R-2 (Medium-Density Residential) to C- 1 (Retail Business). 1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Legal: That portion of Section 28, Township 9 North, Range 30 East W.M. described as follows; the north 248.71' of the west 228.71' of the northwest quarter of the northwest quarter of the southeast quarter of Section 28, Township 9 North, Range 30 East W.M. General Location: 2302 East Lewis Street Property Size: The parcel is approximately 1.15 acres. 2. ACCESS: The property has access from both Lewis Street and Cedar Avenue. 3. UTILITIES: All utilities are available to the site. Utilities will need to be extended into the site prior to development. 4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The site is currently zoned R-2 (Medium- Density Residential). The site contains a 2,400 square foot metal structure. Surrounding properties are zoned and developed as follows: North C-3 - Commercial South R-2 - Vacant East R-2 - Residential West C-1 - Vacant 5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan designates this area for Commercial uses. Most of the parcels fronting Lewis Street east of Sycamore Avenue are designated 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. 1 ANALYSIS The applicant (Mr. McClure) has requested a change of zoning for his parcel located on the southeast corner of Lewis Street and Cedar Avenue. After a lengthy history of Code Enforcement activity related to commercial uses in a residential zone, Mr. McClure has applied to change the parcel's zoning from R- 2 (Medium Density Residential) to C-1 (Retail Business). The site in question previously contained a gas station which was demolished many years ago. In 1970, a 2,400 square foot metal shop building was constructed on the site. Currently, the site is being used for storage of various items; most of which are items typically associated with commercial bee keeping. Some time ago the applicant located commercial/industrial cargo storage containers on the property. The parcel is fenced with metal wire fencing and from the roadway appears to be a type of commercial storage yard. By Code, the fore mentioned conditions are not suitable in the R-2 district, nor would said conditions be permitted in the C-1 zone. As a strategy to bring some of the Code violations into conformance, the owner wishes to apply commercial zoning to the parcel. A change in zoning classification alone however will not simply eliminate all existing Code violations; there are certain site development standards that would need to be met before a commercial business may be formally established and licensed. It should be noted that the site is adjacent to the Bonnie Brae residential park to the east. Special consideration should be taken when proposing commercial zoning adjacent to residential uses. In terms of use, Bonnie Brae conforms to its respective zoning and Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation. 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 date the existing zone became effective: The current zoning classification was established when the property was annexed in 1994. 2. The changed conditions in the vicinity which warrant other or additional zoning: The Lewis Street freeway interchange was built from 1996 to 1997 adding to the volume of commercial vehicle traffic on Lewis Street. Since 1994 right-of-way improvements have been made to Lewis Street between Oregon Avenue and Cedar Avenue. Those improvements included the installation of sidewalks, street trees and roadside landscaping strips. Recently, an L.I.D. in this vicinity was completed, adding curbs, gutters, sidewalks, etc. to much of the residential roadways directly south of the site. The owner of this property did not participate in the L.I.D. Since 1994 several hundred residential units were built in the vicinity which adds to the customer base in this part of the community. 2 3. Facts to justify the change on the basis of advancing the public health, safety and general welfare: The rezone would facilitate development of a commercial land use on Lewis Street which is a main arterial road serving fairly dense residential neighborhoods to the north and south. Much of the land fronting on the south side of Lewis Street east of Oregon Ave contains non-residential uses. The site was developed as a commercial gas station before being annexed into the city. Upon annexation in 1994 a relatively large area of land, which included the subject site, was designated with the R-2 zoning classification. The R-2 zone was applied to the annexed land because at the time that area contained the Bonnie Brae trailer park. Since 1994 other non-residential development has occurred on Lewis Street. Rezoning the site may facilitate the property becoming fully developed with the necessary infrastructure, landscaping and building improvements. The proposal could have a positive impact upon the general public and the welfare of the community by enhancing the eastern entrance to the City. Such development supports past public expenditures for streetscape improvements along East Lewis Street. Additionally, the rezone will provide more area for the development of retail services serving many of the new homes in the area. 4. The effect it will have on the nature and value of adjoining property and the Comprehensive Plan: Based on past experience with rezoning underutilized land and evidence provided by tax records of Franklin County, the proposed rezone will not negatively impact adjoining properties. Rezoning the property will assist with the implementation of the Comprehensive Plan. In May, 2013 staff researched the tax record history for homes located adjacent to parcels zoned C-1 compared to homes not abutting C-1 zones. The tax records indicate no significant difference between the two categories; homes adjacent to C-1 zoned parcels held the same patterns in assessed value as the homes not abutting C-1 zones. 5. The effect on the property owners if the request is not granted: Retaining the residential zoning for the parcel would require the owner cease all on-site commercial and/or industrial business activity. The existing metal building could not be used until a residential use is established. It may also be a requirement that any proposed residential structure be larger in floor area than the existing 2,400 square foot metal building or to remove the metal building before residential construction would be permitted. 6. The Comprehensive Plan land use designation for the property: The Comprehensive Plan designates the site for Commercial uses. A change in zoning classification from R-2 (Medium-Density Residential) to C-1 (Retail Business) is consistent with the Plan's Land Use Map. Plan Policy LU-4-B encourages the location of commercial facilities at major street intersections to avoid commercial sprawl and avoid disrupting residential neighborhoods, and to leverage major infrastructure availability. The site in question is located on 3 Lewis Street (major arterial) very near the intersection of Heritage Boulevard which ultimately serves as a freeway on-ramp. The sites' locational circumstance may best serve the city in a commercial capacity. 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 approximately 1.IS acres in area. 2. The site is currently zoned R-2 (Medium-Density Residential). 3. The Comprehensive Plan designates the site for Commercial uses. 4. The proposed change of zoning is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. S. The site previously contained a gas service station which also distributed bulk oil products. 6. The site was developed with an automotive service station and bulk oil distribution facility while in Franklin County's jurisdiction. 7. The site fronts both Lewis Street and Cedar Avenue. 8. The Commercial Land Use Designation in the Comprehensive Plan includes the C-1 (Retail Business) zone. 9. City records indicate the property owner has been conducting non- residential activity on the site for the past few years. 10. The existing 2,400 square foot metal shop structure was constructed in 1970. 11. The site was annexed into the city in 1994 by Ordinance #3033. 12. The R-2 zone was applied to the site upon annexation. 13. East Lewis Street between Oregon Avenue and Cedar Avenue was treated with right-of-way improvements including sidewalks, street trees and roadside landscaping strips. 14. Since 1994 several hundred residential housing units were established in that area of the community east of Oregon Avenue. 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 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 the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and several Plan policies and goals. The request for C-1 zoning is consistent with the Commercial Land Use Designation. 4 2. The effect of the proposal on the immediate vicinity will not be materially detrimental. The application of the C-1 zone alone will not authorize the owner to continue his current business activity without developing the site to current standards. The nature of the current non-residential activity detracts from the appeal of the vicinity. The C-1 zone in this location will not inherently be a detriment to the immediate vicinity. Many uses permitted in the C-1 zone would be beneficial in serving the surrounding neighborhoods. 3. There is merit and value in the proposal for the community as a whole. Surrounding residential neighborhoods may support increased commercial developments fronting Lewis Street. The C-1 zone in this location is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. The rezone will facilitate the establishment of additional commercial services on Lewis Street. Considering the dense residential development, primarily to the north, there may be value and merit to increasing the commercial land bordering the main arterial road which serves the vicinity. Due to its ease of access, the most suitable use of land immediately surrounding the Lewis Street freeway interchange may be that of a commercial node. 4. Conditions should be imposed in order to mitigate any significant adverse impacts from the proposal. The applicant has not proposed any specific development plan to be considered for the application of any special conditions or restrictions beyond those built into the C-1 zoning language. The C-1 zone contains requirements for special permit review for uses which may be disruptive to adjacent or nearby residences. C-1 permitted uses were developed with consideration to the fact that C-1 zones commonly abut residential zones throughout the city. No special site-specific conditions are proposed by staff. S. 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 not proposed by staff. RECOMMENDATION MOTION for Findings of Fact: I move to adopt findings of fact and conclusions therefrom as contained in the July 18, 2013 staff report. MOTION for Recommendation: I move based on the findings of fact and conclusions as adopted the Planning Commission recommend the City Council approve the rezone from R-2 (Medium Density Residential) to C-1 (Retail Business) for 2302 E. Lewis Street. 5 Item: Rezone - R-2 to C- 1 Vicin . A licant: Jeff McClure N Map pp Fil e #.• Z2013 -003 A4� -+ i i 7 'T r. LEWIS ST -� SITES 7 r Land Use Item: Rezone - R-2 to C- 1 Ma p File pp A licant: Jeff McClure N #: • Z2013 -003 Single Family Residential Single Family Residential Vacant Vacant LEWIS ST W � � Commercial Vacant SITE o w Residential Vacant x x Residential Vacant Vacant Item: Rezone - R-2 to C- 1 Zoning Applicant: Jeff McClure N Map • • File #. Z2013 -003 R-1-A (Low-Density Residential Alternate) R-2 R-1-A (Low-Density Residential Alternate) C-1 C-1 (Retail Business) (Retail Business) C-3 LEWIS ST _1 SITE C_3 C_1 o C � x R-1 R-2 (Low-Density Residential) (Medium-Density Residential) 2'}.. ,\j _'A WK LW Oft- as � +r / f .��,�f :,;r {�k•r. ,joy . s ri� 1 ?� ."l.'�Y F'lRC•r�Q .y n �. .� r �. � l►T.��F '~� i�YiG�SF+-- ±Y����i�� - °ash n.�-s + � _ 1 �;y,.r. .r.,-•,isfa. ;_ mwi -. `-..�caFto:.�e�*a , ly, i _ Th Q A Alt -_ � •.�_ s."-" - --.. ---- .k9G-y^.��� �y'�L� --- _ :5=ak ��t.ss�u?K._�t ..of-.. _ d. r� - � �I _ _ - _ - --_ .-4a�_ �-,.a...�q�'�C�" -_ -'I°i--. ,- � � -�."ham ..III ®�■■��� ������� �� �■ � - ' ,, r ��� - - - -.. _ .- ). .Y y✓�� - rz • • • • �� �� I ,t yr. -- ---t-__ ��� ,�yE- ��_ 'k`° - .:. _' e._. � _ Y ..�—.� - __ - , f �. •- - _ _. _ _ -ti - _ __ _ � � 3 may. +•�E- i .. .. s � Looking East AM- i -:i _- �- mss_ -•� - - - _ _ a,..__„�� 4� �' y Y r` r?►s, a y F,; i..S ,''. s P'a'-��YY+®r"h°�ka''"."''__ .,.__ x -,r '-•`.." ....*. .r-��r .tr .'f f�' 3n:•ks,+✓,v�• � :a«y'• - "7"i' :.n." �-•..� �:1yd"i.�.'-i'.y' - - -._..,.,� ': 'rti�?.�pY,� - a ''pr` i''• ' �;.' ��f�.�a� .y-:'� +�'a`� r rr ",v 7l '4 _ � ,w .yi � '( .i �,.Y �r i -_ __ <••_.... :L:- _ _._ „v x2r^'aR. �'�i:S 'x .: ,r-�: ��i'�:`ki�'-:;�i�j"{�f,i�'t"�'`7'.� •,<t: m!;�, "-eh�� - r:v rN���, r ".2' -�- • •�.�'�'� ftr � '� r:�` 4�'?'d ��"`-= ��'�1 pi ��' _ � ";'mo � *r Y•'r's ' #\ , x `._., M :re �� a�.R K _:'� 8-:•• �' �.!`. 4•: Sp � _' r•a a J"Y. �>� �fl 4k,Ntk.1P✓<3•'-T �'S D�"t�+r b• AX#q yraA'v Ox o (vA -.�s' �'�„YT, - - v `,,t, r H.�t � �. a� jyy 4'�'fz'K, •:✓e � y� C.�{ �' ,n� .� FS - - - 6- r• :���•,o �_. ^r < v.�'�?r a8�:a:. - 5ri•,,.;... .., y'.�(+-:ye a,:� � � \. -:�' .._ +s u ,F y� ,�k ; . ,rd:�,z�',�`r.ktlf'R !8�ty( �a.w� � ,j kp �, 4;�y� P;-a,e :•:'�/I� l ..r9�r L't: ' � .s°r� � `° `. ,.?-y;(�"+� �p.;A., _.� ..) .a p�:,li�, '' r}. �!4•/..-1,...� _rr°, 4.::7zi � ..r _ �,` �, � _,-a r.�--€ _ _ -,.,,q. „-fit ..t.� r r,.-:�__ ,,t„ '�+' f -::� �i�?::�'��f:°^ ��.t (Ik j;w S 1_.. v, ..i.'.�s tf �' „ � �� �• =ate •�. <;.�'/� r7, �Wrf, ;s�- 'S 1.,.�J�, y���fn.a•i"� P. •y�a.` {,e. _:,,..�c �-.'!R<f l � 3 ��p� �� ? ,r a%_,i�"''� �' q�: RY•,',.r�� ..e:n''�� ES:k• 4 1 �..�• �, -° -•r.. R .�.. t' � 5.:: "ti:k�Fr_ - .r••a ��.. _ sw 0 m.:.,, ti 144 y �(r '� i �-.. �, '-�' ' - .�'M �.. ,,2.._�✓�' •`Sai. ,�;" n„'!a�: !.. :iaa y .ar r�v� - n:,+4� f i �1G' ( 's-.t� t# - '.+^S - �r a: 'Ck r ,'�� J(A y'�, � x�_•,��:r� -d2L • R'� ,roc! vy�- .r H e �m':. e e •A�,�,}�•1:� :IC r`?��.��� „J�.. 1�3:4�E u ! .�IH:1f�,j-. ,?. FT'•�'� - .t'r 1 C�iF• K. -"iY�y�.. :lr'•.1, 94 ,�•'.:,. •"�.f', �.� •»'-.y'-�',.. •,,-,a,...� _.S,J,' vim; 4.� �,° .;�/+ . 'f. �. -,g. o- fee _ -:>�,.• d `� `,`,• .e •-k ;.. 'A�=s!�, � � � .: °-.�..-�; ,��'�,�+:,.;. _;°,«•�'. �� .:,. „r,�, '�/y S�F,4 ::.�,�b -W•:;i �t 4=, t,+ '� �pa.,.,;�. �-_ - !Q� � •''��p�- .'L'y ,� }.'.r{ $ � - !r:�.- -,v�R .E; �..rs. .4 ..� •1 �Y. :i.:.r�z�f�` � � Y�1. � �r: '.7,C.t'�'U. .-.n. ev,'ds.`+:. r, yr y',- 11•' 4a a .�' `a.'_ ,s,*. '\r•^'. -,=i?r �R. .e`. .�, ,� �R '`� -ter° J�i'Y �� [•' f. � :kli h; �• i r .�,e � .; � ��� 3' - _"r_� �a� ,�, .,yE* n.( F'A1<,, r 4 {'s-"4q:�»'r.. •y '� cal .k •,�•"., � v .: . •�. ��r.- :/'• l.'.'!%',� '-P. '.� .�+ ��� _..-4'l.. �`: '1 ,r f.. '�3H, A �145 1.�.,-,�"„ � ,fV' �'Sr v, �� �-`...�, iS.._ _ - r',e � F '�`�c�iA v.- !C• '!'a '�I Ykr .5. •.r.4. :�c, �`���p, ��,-� .�aA G �a- E+- -.�. I �.✓'., • .:Rt� �� ..•:;'r• fir; � Z',a�x ,i� � i9�v- .: rx' !), 71i \!`'.�,fai - - f'-. •. :f i.�",. .i..•�; ��' 4ti;2 F. �`4• _; l� - 5'7s...... .!� 9 �,. •g- "�^ ..�. 1'f `� � .�� ..nV�',: R .'� -R�,. 'p -hr. .i_� 'W n. ,Cx. --..�i.P�,,.�"�: -'t '(��'�/...:y,/ yy °� ca', ,,,.,�f„>,_<,'Yr$y. �y .f:•".ar- j {-��k-. .,i�..,,. � �1 ,�'- ..�,,� {y �•,.. � '.rl -.'fie, �: i��. _ iJ 4 y� -'P v E .r '.y. tS �'A'd. ilY".' N �5•', \( � �y} _ _ -�� �:•�: ."`". _Ja. .",}•. '�. .�� t ,A3�.f°' Y.r_ F `lY i�'. i fi �' ,��'F��, i4Y�C'1 �atl l; e'- •J .\ 1.1�Y Sfir. ��a...�, :..: -pf,. ,�..�' P -'•'-„r~"'k % �' `lK.,l 9,�. � � 1. 86''- �P� n..:d � q"�i�'y ii F , .�, i••�,a.:,, � �..�•, �•'�'!•�' a�\� - �d :e`�, tl '�r;�. nt•R":5�r33•�� i �a.-t��((5 �c•• `` 1 �;..>> r- ,' �iiw�.:: -� �•` '�a4rt'-a:.��- �\,�.qt_ r.7 ,dt� ,i v p..a :i�` '�..''A n .y5„'T��r, '��.S�:'� ( .�.,,.aC.te�• ��. ��+A�,i j°, d•: •1 �'f ,F-, �'�. F .A�_":. e» •- ,�ls. �;;.,N !�. �.,• �� :'r F� i�,, �'�:�'�i'� �• _ � '���,i� a F r �4 .� i.9 �N.- R¢¢�''',�4;b n A�' ���i ��t,r�q .+p�. q,..�'y i�,' y� ., `i},• � �� ,, �•i]�� �■i �� I � 'r'.J�1�'r��.9y .���.•. � � 19 � -�� .,1[; M� N/r�{� �'Fir�Ilj�.�\�„���v�� Ir j1•; �y'�.1�>F'���t ,� �. � !47 1��,�fi��i/ ,. -t' ' ���:'11h��,.Jir, !a'�;9���L�.J'��.• �t��!L�ld�i � . .:. .rd���A'i'�!Wt'hiciG. y;}i!jJ,.L91�.1 �1 +.�'Il�sfz\r:�' >.°:. f��r_Y �roe_T.±n.;:tY i°s'���i���i� �::s� '�.� -'::�: i - -- , e i ,i � �// 1 .�i � .di��ry1r� I � .,k ,� � `'� ��fvd. y .�i � � •` i �,� {� .ltd '•s:l��t� �+.'�'�`f- � t. ��;.; st s r ',� �I �; ��� � ��� �'� �,��;� � � '�I�i�.� •� �},. ` � .s �.,.�, '� .�,.,n. iF'i'bR ��`.� i ,:� � , F;. Ass Op l'1 [�`'�� � �� . �4' ��� 'fir� � ,/; i - � .: 6 �l �� ��� ,I,� }�.�fl���� ��il ��'�:� r 4 ��, ���,.��'a:4 �l; �I ��� /� 7� �'�.'� ��� � Y�±1��` �' ��l •-. J '� i r "� tl•�l4a,sil; ! ,f I ��' �_I •.L! � Ii ��el f,. }� t', �� � it 1 ��II � �� � t i r � i ' �. �� '� ���.! ,f,�; ' � ��- � �� I� i � ��� rC, � � � ?�� ..tike+. �, 'r� P\ i � � 1,�•� I, � .� �'��`�`,r �. ,_ .t�, ., era � �I I � iJ� , x i l� � � �. � !I ';' . , ,.t•� • Looking .. f C71, _ �r JAI _I REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION MASTER FILE NO: PP 2013-001 APPLICANT: Hayden Homes HEARING DATE: 6/20/2013 2464 SW Glacier PI #110 ACTION DATE: 7/18/2013 Redmond, OR 97756 BACKGROUND REQUEST: Preliminary Plat: Aintree Preliminary Plat, 15-Lots (Single- Family) 1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Legal: That portion of the SW quarter of the SW quarter of Section 15, Township 9 North, Range 29 East, WM. lying northerly of the FCID canal except that portion platted as Chapel Hill Division, 2 and that portion platted as short Plat 2010-14 General Location: 6720 Aintree Drive Property Size: 5.05 Acres Number of Lots Proposed: 15 lots Square Footage of Lots: 7,803 ft2 to 22,058 ft2 Average Lot Square Footage: 12,033 ft2 2. ACCESS: The property will have access from Aintree Drive. A 60 foot wide public road will provide access to each lot. 3. UTILITIES: Municipal sewer and water services are currently available from the mainlines in Aintree Drive. 4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The site is in the process of being zoned R-1 (Low-Density Residential) from RT (Residential Transition). Surrounding properties are zoned and developed as follows: NORTH: R-1 - Single Family Residences SOUTH: C-1 - Fire Station/Commercial Business EAST: R-1 - Single Family Residences WEST County RS-20 - Single Family Residences 5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan designates this area for Mixed Residential uses. Land Use Policy LU-3-B encourages "infill" development. Other goals and policies suggest the City permit a full range of residential environments including single family homes (H-2-A) and standards that control the scale I and density of accessory buildings and homes to maintain compatibility with other residential uses (H-4-13). 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 applicant is proposing to subdivide the 5.05 acre site in question into 15 lots to allow the construction of 15 single-family residences. Currently zoned RT (Residential Transition), the site is in the process of being rezoned to the R-1 (Low-Density Residential) zone consistent with surrounding properties in the Chapel Hill subdivision. This property was part of the original farm circle that occupied the area between the FCID canal and I-182 east of Road 68. Because the parcel was held under separate ownership from the farm circle it was not rezoned and platted when the Chapel Hill subdivision was being planned. Consistent with the RT zoning classification the site was developed with one single-family house and a shop/barn. In 2003 the surrounding farm circle was rezoned to R-1, R-3 and R-4 and developed as the Chapel Hill Subdivision. The site has remained minimally developed since that time. Due to the irregular shape of the parcel development options are limited to a single cul-de-sac surrounded by lots. In addition to the shape of the parcel the steep slopes will also impact the layout of the subdivision causing a wide variation in the size of the lots. This subdivision is considered an infill development that is consistent with the purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and is supportive of past development in the Chapel Hill Subdivision. LOT LAYOUT: The proposed plat contains 15 lots; with lots varying in size from 7,803 to 22,058 square feet; the average size being 12,033 square feet. RIGHTS-OF-WAY: The Plat fronts Aintree Drive which is currently developed to City standards. The one cul-de-sac proposed for the plat will be developed to City standards. The Franklin County Irrigation District canal borders the southern side of the parcel. 2 UTILITIES: The developer will be responsible for extending utilities into the Plat. A common utility easement will be needed along either side of the cul-de-sac. The easement will be used by the PUD and other utility providers. The PUD permits common use of utility trenches which enables the easement to be used by other utility providers. The City Engineer will determine the specific placement of fire hydrants and streetlights when construction plans are submitted. STREET NAMES: Aintree Drive is already named. A name of the future public road will be assigned during the final platting process. IRRIGATION: Municipal Code requires installation of irrigation lines as a part of infrastructure improvements. WATER RIGHTS: The assignment of water rights is a requirement for subdivision approval. Water rights have not yet been assigned to the City. FINDINGS OF FACT State law (RCW 58.17.010) and the Pasco Municipal Code require the Planning Commission to develop Findings of Fact as to how this proposed subdivision will protect and enhance the health, safety and general welfare of the community. The following is a listing of proposed "Findings of Fact": Prevent Overcrowding: Density requirements of the R-1 zone are designed to address overcrowding concerns. The proposed plat has a density of approximately 3 units per acre. No more than 40 percent of each lot is permitted to be covered with structures. Parks Opens Space/Schools: A City park will be located at the corner of Chapel Hill Boulevard and Saratoga Lane. Hayden Homes recently submitted plans for the street and utilities necessary to serve the park. The proposed subdivision is served by Mark Twain Elementary, McLoughlin Middle School and Chiawana High School. The City is required by RCW 58.17.110 to make a finding that adequate provisions are being made to ameliorate the impacts of the proposed subdivision on the School District. Based on the School Districts Capital Facilities Plan the City collects school mitigation fees for each new dwelling unit. The fee is paid at the time of building permit issuance. In response to past subdivision proposals the School District by letter dated August 30, 2012, has explained that the collection of impact fees addresses the requirements of RCW 58.17.110. 3 Effective Land Use/Orderly Development: The plat is laid out to effectively utilize the site consistent with the rezone approval set to occur in July 2013. The rezone will apply the R-1 zone to the site which allows approximately 6 units per acre. The Plat is designed for 15 units. Safe Travel & Walking Conditions: The Plat is connected to the community by Aintree Drive which leads to Road 68. Sidewalks are a part of the development requirements for the property and must conform to current City standards and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements. Adequate Provision of Municipal Services: All lots within the Plat will be provided with water, sewer and other utilities. For the sewer to operate without a lift station the proposed subdivision sewer line will need to be connected to the existing line in Pimlico Drive. Provision of Housing for State Residents: The proposed Preliminary Plat contains 15 single-family building lots, providing an opportunity for the construction of 15 dwelling units. Adequate Air and Light: The maximum lot coverage limitations and building setbacks will assure that adequate movement of air and light is available to each lot. Proper Access & Travel: Aintree Drive has been developed to City standards. The Preliminary Plat was submitted to the Transit Authority for review. (The discussion under "Safe Travel" above applies to this section also). Comprehensive Plan Policies & Maps: The Comprehensive Plan designates the Plat site for mixed residential development. Policies of the Comprehensive Plan suggest the City strive to maintain a variety of housing for residents. Other Findings: 1. The site is within the Pasco Urban Growth Boundary. 2. The State Growth Management Act requires urban growth and urban densities to occur within the Urban Growth Boundaries. 3. The Comprehensive Plan identifies the site for mixed residential development. 4. The site is zoned RT (Residential Transition). 5. The site is anticipated to be rezoned to R-1 in July, 2013. 6. The developer is proposing to build 15 dwelling units on the site. 4 7. The Housing Element of the Comprehensive Plan encourages the development of a variety of residential densities and housing types. 8. The preliminary plat approval will facilitate an infill development which is encouraged by the Comprehensive Plan. 9. The Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan encourages the interconnection of neighborhood streets to provide for the disbursement of traffic. 10. Aintree Drive provides access to the site in the northwest corner of the parcel. 11. The School District impact fees will be collected at the time at building permit is issued for each home. 12. The School District recently passed a bond levy to further mitigate the impact created by additional enrollment. 13. RCW 58.17.110 requires the City to make a finding that adequate provisions have been made for schools before any preliminary plat is approved. 14. The School District indicated by previous correspondence dated February 3, 2012, that impact fees address the requirement to ensure adequate provisions are made for schools. 15. The proposed development is adjacent to the Franklin County Irrigation District canal. 16. The property is served by the Franklin County Irrigation District 17. The Chapel Hill development to the east of the proposed plat was required to install a common fence along the canal right-of-way as part of the subdivision improvements. CONCLUSIONS BASED ON THE FINDINGS OF FACT Before recommending approval or denial of the proposed Plat the Planning Commission must develop Findings of Fact from which to draw its conclusion (P.M.C. 26.24.070) therefrom as to whether or not: (1) Adequate provisions are made for the public health, safety and general welfare and for open spaces, drainage ways, streets, alleys, other public ways, water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks, playgrounds, transit stops, schools and school grounds, sidewalks for safe walking conditions for students and other public needs; The proposed Plat will be required to develop under the standards of the Municipal Code and the standard specifications of the City Engineering Division. These standards include all infrastructure improvements designed to ensure the public health, safety and general welfare of the 5 community are secured. These standards include provisions for access, drainage, water and sewer service and fire safety. The Preliminary Plat was forwarded to the Franklin County PUD, the Pasco School District and Ben-Franklin Transit Authority for review and comment. Based on the School Districts Capital Facilities Plan the City collects school mitigation fees for each new dwelling unit. The fee is paid at the time of building permit issuance. In response to past subdivision proposal the School District, by letter dated August 30, 2012, has explained the collection of impact fees addresses the requirements of RCW 58.17.110. A neighborhood park will located at the corner of Chapel. All new developments participate in establishing parks through the payment of park fees at the time of permitting. The development will be required to pay a traffic mitigation fee with each permit for the development's share of future street improvements including the installation of new traffic signals. (2) The proposed subdivision contributes to the orderly development and land use patterns in the area; The proposed Plat makes efficient use of vacant land and will provide for additional housing following the designation of the Comprehensive Plan and the established zoning. The proposed subdivision is an infill development that will utilize vacant land within the Pasco Urban Growth Boundary thereby contributing to the orderly development of the community. (3) The proposed subdivision conforms to the policies, maps and narrative text of the Comprehensive Plan; The Comprehensive Plan land use map designates the site for mixed residential development. The Housing Element of the Plan encourages the promotion of a variety of residential. The completion of the plat will provide building lots for single-family dwellings, one of the types of housing identified as appropriate in the mixed residential areas of the community. (4) The proposed subdivision conforms to the general purposes of any applicable policies or plans which have been adopted by the City Council; Development plans and policies have been adopted by the City Council in the form of the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed subdivision conforms to the policies, maps and narrative text of the Plan as noted in number three above. 6 (5) The proposed subdivision conforms to the general purposes of the subdivision regulations. The general purposes of the subdivision regulations have been enumerated and discussed in the staff analysis and Findings of Fact. The Findings of Fact indicate the subdivision is in conformance with the general purposes of the subdivision regulations provided certain mitigation measures are provided for (i.e. school impact mitigation, park fees and traffic fees). (6) The public use and interest will be served by approval of the proposed subdivision. The proposed Plat, if approved, will be developed in accordance with all City standards designed to insure the health, safety and general welfare of the community are met. The Comprehensive Plan will be implemented through development of this plat. These factors will insure the public use and interest are served. REVISED PLAT APPROVAL CONDITIONS 1. The developer shall install a properly designed irrigation system meeting the specifications of the Franklin County Irrigation District; 2. At the time lots are developed, all abutting roads and utilities shall be installed to City standards as approved by the City Engineer. This includes, but is not limited to water and sewer lines, streets, street lights and storm water retention. The handicapped accessible pedestrian ramps must be completed with the street and curb improvements prior to final Plat approval. All proposed utilities must be installed underground by the developer at the developer's expense; 3. The sewer line serving the plat must connect to City sewer in a manner and at a location approved by the Director of Public Works; 4. The developer/builder shall pay the "traffic impact fee" established by ordinance at the time of issuance of building permits for homes. Fees collected shall be placed in a fund and used to finance signalization and other improvements necessary to mitigate traffic impacts on the circulation system within the I-182 corridor; 7 5. The developer/builder shall mitigate impacts to the Public School System by the "school impact fee" established by Ordinance at the time of issuance of building permits for homes; 6. No utility vaults, pedestals, or other obstructions will be allowed at street intersections; 7. All storm water is to be disposed of per City and State codes and requirements; 8. The developer shall insure active and ongoing dust, weed and litter abatement activities occur during the construction of the subdivision and construction of dwellings thereon; 9. The developer shall install a common fence along the Franklin County Irrigation District canal to match the common fence in the Chapel Hill subdivision to the east. No access shall be permitted through the common fence to the irrigation canal right-of-way; 10. The developer shall be responsible for the creation of record drawings. All record drawings shall be created in accordance with the requirements detailed in the Record Drawing Requirements and Procedure form provided by the Engineering Division. This form shall be signed by the developer prior to construction plan approval; 11. All engineering designs for infrastructure and Final Plat drawings shall utilize the published City of Pasco Vertical Control Datum and shall be identified on each such submittal; 12. The Final Plat shall contain a 10-foot utility easement parallel to all streets; 13. The Final Plat shall contain the following Franklin County Public Utility District statement: "The individual or company making improvements on a lot or lots of this Plat is responsible for providing and installing all trench, conduit, primary vaults, secondary junction boxes, and backfill for the PUD's primary and secondary distribution system in accordance with PUD specifications; said individual or company will make full advance payment of line extension fees and will provide all necessary utility easements prior to PUD construction and/or connection of any electrical service to or within the Plat"; 14. Street lighting must be installed to the City of Pasco/Franklin County PUD standards and as directed by the City Engineer. 8 Residential street lights are typically installed every 300 feet, and collector/arterial type street lights are typically installed every 150 feet. Street light positioning is alternating and is measured along the centerline of the road; 15. Prior to the City of Pasco accepting construction plans for review the developer must enter into a Storm Water Maintenance Agreement with the City. The developer will be responsible for obtaining the signatures of all parties required on the agreement and to have the agreement recorded with the Franklin County Auditor. The original signed and recorded copy of the agreement must be presented to the City of Pasco at the intake meeting for construction plans; 16. The developer will be required to conform to all conditions set forth in the Storm Water Maintenance Agreement including, but not limited to, regular cleaning and maintenance of all streets, gutters, catch basins and catch basin protection systems. Cleaning shall occur on a regular basis to ensure that no excess buildup of sand, trash, grass clippings, weeds or other debris occurs in any portion of the streets, gutters, or storm water collection facilities. Cleaning and upkeep of the streets, gutters, and storm water collection facilities must be to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The developer will be responsible for operating and maintaining the storm drain system in accordance with the Storm Water Maintenance Agreement for a period of up to five years from the date of Final Plat approval depending on the build out schedule for homes on the lots; and, 17. The developer will be required to comply with the City of Pasco Civil Plan Review process. RECOMMENDATION MOTION: I move to adopt Findings of Fact and Conclusions therefrom as contained in the July 18, 2013 staff report. MOTION: I move based on the Findings of Fact and Conclusions, as adopted, the Planning Commission recommend the City Council approve the Preliminary Plat of the Aintree subdivision with conditions as listed in the July 18, 2013 staff report. 9 Vicinity Ite m: P reliminary Plat ( 15-Lots A N i c ant. Ha Y en omes Ma p pp l File #• PP2013 -001 City Limits Ilk " JO too t _ fir - r - .SITEr},. , ''�� A r�,,, Aw F 11 x r p 4 it s =-- A R:GEN _ 9„ Item: Prel iminary Plat 15-Lots Land Use Applicant: H Homes N File #: Ma p • PP2013 -001 CHAPEL HILL BLVD N Multi-Family EL MAR CTS O Residences 4° 4 d � � w� � CIS Single-Family Residences A z INTREE N VALLEY VIEW PL DR o N;Single-Family Residences SITE pircoDR U� DISEDR SFR's Fire a Station a 0 Q Vacant Vacant Comm. Single-Family Residences Argent Road a a x H Item: Preliminary Plat 15-Lots Zoning . A licant. Homes N pp Hayden y Map • • File #. PP2013 -001 CHAPEL HILL BLVD RT High-Density R-4 EL MAR CT � 4 Residential Transition Residential 4 4 N W VALLEY VIEW PL �� � �� R-1 County ty RS-20 � � Low-Density — - Residential SITE - P�,jLIC p � A�bISFDR DR U O N RS-12 Suburban a c Q C-1 RS-20 ° Retail Business Suburban Argent RS-12 Suburban x H W Looking North now j wo ol� _ ■■ ■i i �■ a ■■ �' .0. rL _ �- _ 1 s ■■ ■■ � I I I � II r . . Looking East WPM MI" bF gj !,i it + �� f 1 / •E� - « /� I - . S�- ��� r"'i '�;� y , Looking South ills Ilk 3ki 4 3r -i i VII All 4w` 44 NA14� N T i IRN F? VN S Nw Looking West fA A I- - -1 I ` `RM Y�e.- �. ��;,,,- a-- .IFS eK ;y-.. n:>,.+e , - „3 L[� �.1.. a 'a'x ,_:• .•c. � �, 1- -r': 'xri ice+ file n y" t"'yy���. 16Y' �s. S,i.r e 4��„`a���-�u a'f .f''�' :�.r�; ,t�+� ;l- ev:fa" _ :i�•_`rtl - i - �.� {�,�,� - - - - _ 4 � p\--� __ - q '�t H/�j F. 'l{'��T : 7:� �..• :�-'�A.Cf"- +,'-.3i' -ry'a. _�" _ aC=..n ��1�: 4 � s ,-- - - _:� .'�5 -���' b/,. ..� ��'X.... -:'_,Cof, t, 49G1n � � r .� 1fl Ml r�+--•'�(. .n _ "a�,s-,�'.�: �� r _ �1._ L� - '� � - A? �+L Y. � � •�-.i l ,a`1[, ��w �:���Mr-'_ � w. - r MEMORANDUM DATE: July 18, 2013 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Dave McDonald, City Planner SUBJECT: Park Fee Code Amendment (MF# CA 2013-002) At the April meeting the Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider consolidating the park fees with the other development impact fees (traffic and schools) that are found in Title 3, under Revenue and Finance. In addition to consolidating the park fees, the Director of Administrative and Community Services indicated the current fee structure has not kept pace with finished park improvement costs. The Director suggested the park fee should increase to $1,500 per dwelling unit to more accurately cover the costs for new park development. During the hearing, the Planning Commission was informed that other code revisions related to the park fund and park districts were need. As a result the public hearing on the park fees and consolidation in Title 3 was closed with no action. Staff explained that once work was completed on the park districting the matter would be returned to the Planning Commission for final recommendation. Because the park districting and park fees are somewhat related, staff was endeavoring to have the two issues forwarded to the City Council simultaneously. The Administrative and Community Services Department has now completed park districting work enabling the park fee ordinance to move forward. Only one hearing is necessary for the changes in the park fees and that was held in April. The park districting code does not require a hearing before being modified. No action on the park districting will be required of the Planning Commission. However, staff has attached a map of the proposed district modification to make the Planning Commission aware of the districting layout. The City currently has 23 neighborhood park districts and two community park districts. Redistricting has created a third community park district. The neighborhood park districts have remained unchanged. The districts are geographic areas of the community used to assign park fees. Currently the park fees are split between the community districts and neighborhood districts with 90 percent of the fee assigned to neighborhood districts and 10 percent to community districts. I Additional background and history on the park fee is provided in the Planning commission Memo of April 25, 2013 attached hereto. FINDINGS 1) The City requires new residential development to contribute its proportionate share of the cost of providing park facilities to meet the recreational needs of said new development. The park fee has been part of the Municipal Code since 1980. 2) The original park fee was $200 per dwelling unit. 3) In 1997 the fee was reevaluated and determined to be insufficient to cover the proportionate share of the cost of parks needed to serve new residential development. The based fee was set at $450 per dwelling in 1997 with a 3.25 annual increase. 4) The 2013 park fee is $709 per dwelling unit. 5) The Community and Administrative Services Director recently analyzed the cost of new park development compared to the park fee and found the current fee of $709 was less than half of the cost for constructing a five acre neighborhood park per dwelling unit. 6) The Planning Commission held a public workshop dealing with the park fee on March 21, 2013. Information on said workshop was made available to the public through the City's web site at www.pasco-wa.gov. 7) The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the park fee during the regular meeting of April 25, 2013. Notice of said hearing was provided in the Tri-City Herald on April 7, 2013 and April 14, 2013. Information on said hearing was also made available to the public through the City's web site at www.pasco-wa.gov. RECOMMENDATION MOTION: I move the Planning Commission adopt the findings of fact as contained in the July 18, 2013 staff memo on the park fee Amendments. MOTION: I move the Planning Commission recommend the City Council adopt the proposed park fee amendments as attached to the July 18, 2013 staff memo to the Planning Commission. 2 22 23 16 D D� 17 19 1 F13 8 6 5 7 4 3 � Proposed Code CHAPTER 3.133-1 PARK IMPACT FEES 3.133-1.010 PURPOSE ............................................................................................ 1 3.133-1.020 FINDINGS .................................................................................. 1 3.133-1.030 IMPOSITION OF PARK IMPACT FEE.......................................... 1 3.133-1.030 APPLICABILITY.......................................................................... 1 3.133-1.040 EXEMPTIONS ............................................................................. 2 3.133-1.050 DEFINITIONS............................................................................. 2 3.133-1.060 IMPACT FEE REDUCTION .......................................................... 3 3.133-1.010 PURPOSE. The purpose of this Chapter is to ensure new residential development contributes a proportionate share to the capital costs necessary to provide parks, recreational open space and related amenities for residents of the City of Pasco. It is further the intent of this chapter to assist in the implementation of the City's Park, Recreation and Forestry Plan and Capital Facilities Plan. 3.133-1.020 FINDINGS. The City Council finds and determines that residential development within the city will create additional demand and need for parks, recreation and open space within the city. The City Council further finds the city does not have sufficient resources to meet anticipated park and recreation needs created by new residential growth and that said growth should pay a proportionate share of the costs of park, recreation and open space facilities needed to serve new growth. It is the intent that the provisions of this Chapter shall be liberally construed to effectively carry out the purposes of the Council in establishing this impact fee. 3.133-1.030 IMPOSITION OF PARK IMPACT FEE. A park impact fee as provided in PMC 3.07.240 is hereby imposed for the City of Pasco and is required for all new residential development. The park impact fee must be paid prior to the issuance of a building permit. Compliance with the provisions of this chapter is required prior to the issuance of a building/development permit authorizing construction of a residential park (mobile home park) in accordance with Title 19 and Chapter 25.40 (RP Zone). The total impact fee shall be based on the number of mobile home spaces to be authorized under the permit. 3.133-1.030 APPLICABILITY. The park impact fee as provided in PMC 3.07.240 applies to all new residential development within the City of Pasco regardless of geographic location. 1 3.133-1.040 EXEMPTIONS. The provisions of this chapter shall not apply to the following: (1) Rebuilding of lawfully established dwelling unit(s) destroyed or damaged by fire, flood, explosion, act of nature, or other accident or catastrophe; provided, that such rebuilding takes places within one (1) year after destruction and provided no additional dwelling units are created; (2) Alteration, expansion, reconstruction, remodeling, or rebuilding of existing single-family dwellings, multifamily dwelling units, factory assembled dwellings and mobile homes; provided, no additional dwelling units are created; (3) Condominium projects in which existing dwelling units are converted into condominium ownership and where no new dwelling units are created. (4) Construction of residential accessory structures. (5) Installation of individual mobile homes or recreational vehicles within a residential park. 3.133-1.050 DEFINITIONS. For purposes of this Chapter, the following terms shall have the indicated meanings: DEDICATED PARK LAND means a 5 acre parcel dedicated to the city with approval of a final plat and containing the adjoining infrastructure improvements. FULLY DEVELOPED NEIGHBORHOOD PARK means dedicated park land that is developed with lawn, an irrigation system, pathways, trees, playground equipment, ball courts and sun shelters according to a plan approved by the city prior to construction. INFRASTRUCTURE means curb, gutter, sidewalks, handicap ramps, street lights, fire hydrants, storm drainage facilities, road base, road pavement to the center line of the street, street signs, provisions for electrical power, one water stub and one sewer stub, site rough grading and hydro seeding for dust control. NEW RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT means the construction or placement of, single-family site built dwellings, factory assembled dwellings including mobile homes and multi-family dwellings within the City of Pasco. Included within this definition are the terms residential subdivision, apartment complex and residential park. OPEN RECREATION AREA means areas of land, at least improved with lawn and irrigation, intended and designed for unorganized, passive or active recreation and may include minor recreation improvements such as children's playground equipment and children's wading pool, provided such minor improvements do not occupy more than half (1/2) of the total open recreation area. Open recreation areas must equal at least 100 square feet of area for each dwelling unit within the development. Open recreation 2 area shall not include parking lots; driveways and other automobile-oriented areas or recreation improvement areas and swimming pools as defined herein. PARK IMPACT FEE means a payment of a fee imposed upon new residential development as a condition of development approval to pay for a proportionate share of the costs to provide park and recreational facilities needed to serve new growth and development. The park pact fee does not include building permits or permit application fees or any other fee require of new development. PARKS, RECREATION AND FORESTRY PLAN means the Park, Recreation and Forestry Plan adopted by the City Council for the City of Pasco and used as a planning document that provides policies and guidance on developing citywide park and recreation facilities. RECREATION IMPROVEMENT AREA means an area developed with recreation facilities such as, but not limited to, basketball, tennis and similar playing courts, saunas, hot tubs, recreation buildings and similar improvements. Recreation improvements shall not include parking lots, driveway and other automobile-oriented areas, habitable buildings, swimming pools, or minor recreation improvements. SWIMMING POOLS. Means a pool for swimming which contains at least five hundred (500) square feet of water surface area and is at least four (4) feet in depth at the deepest point. 3.133-1.060 IMPACT FEE REDUCTION. The base impact fee per dwelling unit may be reduced per the following: (1) Open Recreation Area. New residential developments that provide one or more open recreation areas the base fee will reduced at the rate of one percent (1%) for each ten (10) square feet of open recreation area per unit (as determined by dividing the total square feet of open recreation area by the total number of dwelling units), not to exceed thirty percent (30%). (2) Recreation Improvement Area. New residential developments that provide recreation improvement areas the base fee will be reduced at the rate of one percent (1%) for each ten (10) square feet of recreation improvement area per unit (as determined by dividing the total square feet of recreation improvement area by the total number of dwelling units), not to exceed thirty percent (30%). (3) Swimming Pools. New residential developments that provide one or more swimming pools the base fee shall be reduced at the rate of one-half percent (1/2%) of each square foot of water surface area per unit (as determined by dividing the total 3 square feet of water surface area by the total number of dwelling units), not to exceed fifteen percent (15%). (4) Dedication of Park Land. New residential developments that provide dedicated park land as a part of the platting process shall have the base fee reduced by fifty percent (50%). (5) Dedication of a Fully Developed Neighborhood Park. New residential developments that dedicate a fully developed neighborhood park shall have the neighborhood park portion of the impact fee waived. Residential subdivisions with privately maintained and operated recreation facilities must contain final plat conditions ensuring the perpetual maintenance of the recreation facilities. Proposed Amendments for Chapters 3.07 and 3.29 3.07.230 PARK IMPACT FEES Base Fee/Charge Reference A) Single-Family Dwelling $1,500.00 3.133-1.030 B) Multi-Family Dwelling $1,500.00 3.133-1.030 C) All other dwelling units $1,500.00 3.133-1.030 The base fee established herein shall increase by 3.25 percent on January 1 of each year without notice. 3.29.010 ESTABLISHED. There is established a fund to be called the "Park Fund." All moneys derived from the fees collected pursuant to Chapters 25.80 and 26.20 3.133-1 shall be deposited in and disbursed from this fund only. All interest earned that is attributable to moneys in the fund shall be deposited in and credited to the fund. 4 MEMORANDUM DATE: July 8,2013 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Angela R. Pitman, Block Grant Administrator SUBJECT: 2014 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) PROGRAM ALLOCATION(MF#BGAP2013-003) Requests for_Fundin Attached for your review and consideration are the CDBG Fund and Proposal Summaries (Attachments I & 2) relating to our Community Development Block Grant Program for program year 2014. Fifteen (15) requests for funds were submitted totaling$1,470,344.89. Applicants presented their proposals before the Planning Commission on June 20,2013. Estimated Funds Available It is estimated that the 2014 annual entitlement grant will be $619,417 based on the award for program year 2013. Prior year funds available for commitment are $36,339 making a total of $655,756 in funds available for use in 2014. There is always some question regarding actual funding levels approved by Congress. Actual available funding for these FY 2014 activities will remain in question until the early part of the year when the CDBG allocation is made by Congressional Resolution. If funding levels are lower than estimated, activity funding may need to be reallocated accordingly. Public Service Cap HUD regulations state that the amount of CDBG Funds obligated within a program year to support public service activities may not exceed 15% of the combined total of the entitlement plus the prior year's program income. For 2014,the estimated entitlement of$619,417, and estimated 2014 program income of $2,000 makes the maximum available for public Service activities $87,000. Current requests for public services total $112,500. Staff recommends a maximum of$70,000 for public services (I I%). Planning r& Administration Cap HUD regulations state that the amount of CDBG Funds obligated within a program year to support planning and administration activities may not exceed 19% of the combined total of the entitlement plus the current year's program income. For 2014, the estimated entitlement of$619,417 makes the maximum available for planning and administration $120,000. Current requests for planning and administration total $120,000. Staff recommends a maximum of$120,000 for planning and administration (19%). The City Staff would like to thank the members of the Planning Commission for your time and assistance. MOTION: l move the Planning Commission close the public hearing and recommend the City Council approve the use of funds for the 2014 Community Development Block Grant Program as set forth in the "2014 Fund Summary" as recommended by Staff. Attachments: 1. 2014 CDBG Fund Summary 2. 2014 CDBG Proposal Summary Attachment 12014 CDBG Fund Summary-7.18.13 Attachment 1 Planning Commission Meeting Page 1 Proposals-Recommendations LOCI NonCDBG Agency Stott PC City Council GoalStrat PJII] D R€CIPPENT ACTIVITY/ NAME Klatch Requested Recommend Recommend A roval Ob' Risk Priority 0001 01 City of Pasco-Community&Economic Development CDBG Program Administration $0.00 $120,000.00 $120,000.00 0 2 0 OOOZ 02 City of Pasco-Administrative&Community Services Martin Luther King Community Center Recreation $100,500.00 $37,500.00 $20,000.00 V.2 3 B2 Specialist 0002 03 City of Pasco-Administrative&Community Services Civic Center-Youth Recreation Specialist $45,500.00 $37,500.00 $20,000.00 V.2 3 B2 0002 04 City of Pasco-Administrative&Community Services Senior Citizen's Center Recreation Specialist $200,500.00 $37,500.00 $30,000.00 V.2 3 B2 0003 05 Downtown Pasco Development Authority Pasco Specialty Kitchen $44,200.00 $60,000.00 $50,000.00 1.1-5 5 A2 0003 06 Downtown Pasco Development Authority Downtown Facade Improvement Program $15,000.00 $60,000.00 $15,000.00 1.5 5 Al 0003 07 Friendly Temple Ministries&Trotter Enterprises Friendly Temple Job Training Program $0.00 $60,000.00 1.4 t0 A2 0004 08 Benton Franklin CAC-CHIP Minor Rehab&Repairs Community Housing Improvement Minor Rehab $5,000.00 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 V.2 5 C1 Program 0004 09 Catholic Family&Child Services-Pasco Catholic Family Volunteer Chore Services(7) $65,500.00 $4,000.00 $3,129.00 IV.2 6 BI 0004 10 CBVC,Inc Veteran Supportive Housing $10,000.00 $100,000.00 V.2 6 B1 0005 11 City of Pasco-Administrative&Community Services Memorial Park Shelter Remodel&ADA Path $0.00 $100,000.00 $100,000.00 11.2 3 Al 0005 12 SEWSCDHH Renew SEWSCOHH Facility Improvement $0.00 $255,844.89 111.1 9 Al 0006 13 City of Pasco-Community&Economic Development Code Enforcement Officer $147,000.00 $48,000.00 $48,000.00 IV.2 2 Al 0007 14 City of Pasco-Public Works ADA Improvements $250,000.00 $250,000.00 $100,000.00 11.2 3 Al 0007 15 Pasco Housing Authority fourth and Pearl Family Housing $7,852,457.00 $250,000.00 $100,000:00 11.1 3 Al 8,735,657.00 1,470,344.89 656,129.00 0.00 0.00 Estimated Entitlement 2014 S 619,417 Estimated PI 2014 $ - Available to Commit $ 36,712 Total Funds Available $ 656,129 Proposals Received $ 1,470,345 SURPLUSMEFICIT $ (614,216) Proposals Recommended $ 656,129 Funds available for Commitment 0 7/212013 CITY OF PASCO 2014 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROPOSAL SUMMARY—JULY 18, 2013 1 CDBG Program Administration—Requested: $120,000 Recommended: 5120,000 Plan, administer and deliver housing and community needs, ensure compliance with local, state and federal rules, regulations and laws, and provide for the successful delivery of programs that primarily benefit low to moderate income people. Planning and Administration is capped at no greater than 20%. This amount is recommended as it will pay City-wide for the direct delivery of CDBG services throughout all City Departments. 2 Martin Luther King Communi Center Recreation Specialist— Requested: $ 37,500 Recommended: $ 20,000 This facility's program is coordinated with the YMCA, Salvation Army and Campfire USA, who all collaborate to ,provide education and physical activities to school age children. City of Pasco Martin Luther King Center Program. This amount is consistent with past amounts for this program and pays for the direct delivery of service in census tracts 201-204. 3 Civic Center -Youth Recreation Specialist—Requested: S37,500 Recommended: $ 20,000 Provide a portion of the salary and benefits for recreation specialist at the Youth Civic Center. This facility's program is to provide recreation programs for youth at risk and families in low-to-moderate income Census Tract (202). Public services are capped at no greater than 15% of current entitlement plus prior year program income. This amount is consistent with past amounts for this program and pays for the direct delivery of service in census tracts 201-204. 4 Senior Citizen's Center Recreation Specialist—Requested: S 37,500 Recommended: $ 30,000 Portion of the salary and benefits for recreation specialist to oversee and operate program at Pasco's senior center. This facility's program provides supervision and leadership necessary for programs serving the elderly of Pasco with support services, nutrition, health and living skills support. 1 CITY OF PASCO 2014 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROPOSAL SUMMARY—JULY 18, 2013 Public services are capped at no greater than 15% current entitlement plus prior year program income. This amount is consistent with past amounts for this program and pays for the direct delivery of service for elderly City-wide. 5 Pasco Specialty Kitchen —Requested: $ 60,000 Recommended: $ 50,000 Continue operations of the Pasco Specialty Kitchen, a certified commercial incubator kitchen. By providing technical support to small food-related businesses the Pasco Specialty Kitchen improves their success rate by helping them to establish and achieve their goals. In consideration for technical assistance, the startup businesses agree to make jobs created available to lore-to-moderate income persons in Pasco (Census Tract 202). This amount is consistent with past allocations and is a component of downtown revitalization and economic development. 6 Downtown Facade Improvement Program—Requested: $ 60,000 Recommended: $ 15,000 Support downtown businesses with facade improvements (Census Tract 202). It is estimated that 2 business will be assisted with fagade improvements. This amount will enable the Association to complete approximately two major facade improvements this next calendar year. Currently there is a turnover in the Director position and no sites are in queue for the Fagade Improvement Program. 7 Friendly Temple Job Traininiz Program—Requested: $ 60,000 Recommended: $0 Equipment requires extended accounting. Facility Improvement, vehicles, landscaping equipment, kitchen/restaurant equipment Equipment requires extended accounting. Facility Improvement, vehicles, landscaping equipment, kitchen/restaurant equipment. This request is not recommended for funding approval due to its high risk and unproven program results. 8 CHIP Minor Rehab Program CAC— Requested: $ 50,000 Recommended: S 50,000 Minor household repairs, energy efficient upgrades and hazardous material removal for low to moderate income households. 2 CITY OF PASCO 2014 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROPOSAL SUMMARY —JULY 18, 2013 Recommend this project for minor rehabilitation/repair for those with housing costs over 30% of monthly income, and income below 50% AMT. This amount is recommended as it is a successful program and was funded in this amount with the 2013 allocation process. The program fills a needed housing repair and rehabilitation niche that currently is not able to be provided for with HOME funds. 9 Catholic Family Volunteer Chore Services (7)—Requested: $ 4,000 Recommended: $ 3,129 Provide minor ADA accessibility remodels, repairs and construct wheelchair ramps for very low to low income households. This population includes elderly and disabled (City-wide). It is estimated that 7 elderly households, typically very low income, will be assisted. Historically this is the amount the Catholic Family & Child Services has used. 10 Veteran Supportive Housing—Requested: $100,000 Recommended: $0 Supportive Housing for Veterans. No amount is recommended for allocation since there is no site chosen and unknown amount of rehabilitation work on an unknown site results in a marginal project. The City is exploring other options to provide rental housing with the Veteran's Coalition. 11 Memorial Park Shelter Remodel & ADA Path —Reguested: $100,000 Recommended: $100,000 Retrofit handicap access ramps for disabled persons with ramps that meet current ADA accessibility codes. This amount is recommended for community infrastructure in census tract 202. 12 Renew SEWSCDHH Facility Improvement—Requested: $255,$45 Recommended: $0 Facility Improvement. This project may require an entire building upgrade and may be placing repair money into a facility that needs complete replacement. In addition, it is a regonal facility serving several counties and should be funded with a more regional approach. 3 CITY OF PASCO 2014 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROPOSAL SUMMARY—JULY 18, 2013 13 Code Enforcement Officer—Requested: $ 48,000 Recommended: $ 48,040 Provide partial salary for one of three code enforcement officers to help improve neighborhood appearance and for compliance with rules and regulations dealing with homeowner needs in primarily low to moderate income neighborhoods (Census Tracts 201, 202, 203 and 204). This amount is consistent with past allocations and is a direct service delivery to census tracts 201-204. 14 ADA Improvements—Requested: $250,000 Recommended: $100,000 Retrofit handicap access ramps for disabled persons with ramps that meet current ADA accessibility codes. Handicap ramps retrofit city-wide. This amount is recommended for allocation as it is an important City-wide project serving handicapped citizens. Previous years allocations for city-wide ADA improvements have been reallocated for other City Public Works projects. 15 Fourth and Pear_l Family Housing Street Improvements — Requested: $250,000 Recommended: $100,000 Provide street infrastructure asoociated with construction of a multi-family project on Housing Authority property at 4`h Avenue and Pearl Street. Infrastructure improvements of streets. This amount is recommended as it pays for the street improvements associated with the project. 4 MEMORANDUM DATE: July 8, 2013 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Angela R. Pitman, Block Grant Administrator SUBJECT: 2014 HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIPS (HOME) PROGRAM ALLOCATION AND ANNUAL WORK PLAN (MF# BGAP2013-004) Background Pasco entered into a HOME Consortium Agreement with Richland and Kennewick in 1996 making the City eligible for Federal HOME funds, The Tri-Cities HOME Consortium Agreement is currently being revised and renewed through 2016. Each November an annual action plan is required to be prepared and submitted to HUD for use of estimated funds for the following program year. Estimated Funds Available It is estimated that the 2014 annual entitlement grant to the HOME Consortium will be $453,764, based on the award for program year 2013. Each member city is allocated a share of the entitlement utilizing the same formula used to allocate the CDBG entitlement grants. Pasco's share of the entitlement for 2014 is estimated to be $149,723 based on 2013 allocations There is always some question regarding actual funding levels approved by Congress. Actual available funding for these FY 2014 activities will remain in question until the early part of the year when the HOME allocation is made by Congressional Resolution. If funding levels are lower than estimated, activity funding may need to be reallocated accordingly. Planning&.Administration HUD regulations state that the amount of HOME Funds obligated within a program year to support planning and administration activities may not exceed 10% of the entitlement. This is awarded to Richland annually as the Lead Agency of the HOME Consortium to manage all activities. Member cities are provided funds for planning and administration from 10% of program income received from completed projects within their jurisdiction. CHDO Set-Aside Each year 15% of the entitlement grant must be set-aside to help Community Housing Development Organizations (CHDO) add to the permanent affordable housing stock. Tile member cities receive these funds every third year. In 2013, Pasco and Kennewick exchanged CHDO funds for program years 2011 and 2014. Pasco will also receive CHDO fiends in 2015. Current Balances Pasco's HOME budgeted funds as of June 13, 2013 through Program Year 2013 is $435,513.34. The budget amount is approved by Council Resolution each year and includes HOME entitlement funds and estimated program income anticipated from acquisition/infill projects. Proposed units of housing that remain to be completed through program year 2013 with these restricted funds total 25. Any change to the budgeted amounts below that exceed 10% of the entitlement or changes the scope of the activity requires preparation of substantial amendment to the annual action plan in compliance with the Citizen Participation Plan. Contracted/ Reserved/ Units Budgeted Obligated Application Pending 2012/2013 First Time Homebuyer Assistance $ 131,126 $ - $ 131,126 23 2011/2012/2013 Infill Projects $ 244,280 $ - $ 295,449 2 2013 Administration from PI $ 8,939 $ - $ 8,939 20I3 Program Income $ 51,169 $ 435,513 $ - $ 435,514 25 Proposed Activities HOME funds are based on need and income eligibility and may be used anywhere within the city limits, however, neighborhoods designated as priority by Pasco City Council receive first consideration. Funding is first targeted in the Longfellow and Museum neighborhoods, then within low-moderate income census tracts (201, 202, 203 and 204). If HOME funds cannot be applied to those areas, then they are used as needed within the Pasco City limits for the benefit of eligible low-moderate income families. The City is able to use HOME finds for acquisition and rehabilitation of%acant/foreclosed properties, or developing vacant property through "infill" new construction projects. Program income anticipated from the resale of prior year construction projects in addition to outstanding balances will continue to fund program activities through 2014. Staff recommends that anticipated 2014 HOME entitlement funds and program income is allocated to the proposed activities per annual work plan beio A: Proposed Activities Budget Units First Time Homebuyer Assistance $ 145,236 13 $ 145,236 13 Recommendations After discussions and staff evaluation, it is recommended that the activities set forth above would best meet the City's Consolidated Plan and be most effective in carrying out the objectives for the City in 2014. Your review and recommendation to the City Council would be appreciated. Therefore, we propose the following Motion: MOTION: I move the Planning Commission recommend the City Council approve the use of funds for the 2014 HOME Investment Partnerships Program as set forth in the "2014 HOME Fund Summary" as recommended by Staff. MEMORANDUM DATE: July 8, 2013 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Angela R. Pitman, Block Grant Administrator SUBJECT: 2014 NEIGHBORHOOD STABILIZATION PROGRAM (NSP) ALLOCATION AND ANNUAL WORK PLAN(MF#BGAP2013-005) Bacl ground The City received a total of $426,343 in CDBG funding for the Neighborhood Stabilization Program through 2010.To date, the City has recovered 11 foreclosed properties. Down payment assistance has been provided to 8 homebuyers, three are below 50% of median income which accounts for 43% of the funds used. The City has also purchased and rehabilitated 3 houses. Two of these have been resold to income eligible households. The third is currently' under contract to be sold. Three NSP acquisitions were rehabilitated using HOME funds. The NSP share of program income for the two houses sold is $176,895. Estimated Funds Available Pasco's NSP unexpended grant balance as of March 31, 2013 is $41,688, and program income remaining to be expended from the two houses sold is $144,614, for a total of$186,302. Funds totaling $196,024 are reserved for Administration ($15,926), expenditures not drawn ($30,098), and one acquisition/rehabilitation ($150,000) for 2013 pending. Approximately, $163,528 will be available for projects in 2014. The budget amount is approved by Council Resolution each year for following program year activities. Proposed Activities The City is able to use NSP funds for down payment assistance, acquisition and rehabilitation of foreclosed properties. Staff proposes the funds be allocated to one acquisition/rehabilitation for the 2014 annual work plan. 2014 Funding Sources Budget Units Entitlement Funds & Program Income Remaining $ 186,302.00 Estimated Program Income Pending $ 173,250.00 $ 359,552.00 2014 Proposed Activities Committed Funds $ 196,023.66 Acquisition/Rehabilitation $ 163,528.34 1 $ 359,552.00 1 The City Staff would like to thank the members of the Planning Commission for your time and assistance. MOTION: I move the Planning Commission recommend the City Council approve the use of funds for the 2014 Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP) as recommended by Staff. Tri-Cities Prep July 16, 2013 In 2008 Tri-Cities Prep submitted a Master Site Plan for the school's campus at 9612 St. Thomas Drive in Pasco. This master plan is to serve the school for a 10-year period,therefore expiring in 2018 (attachment A). Since that date, most items on the site plan have not been completed as the school balances growth with financial limitations (attachment B). One major difference is that the student population in 2008 was just over 100 students; this fall we will open to over 200. This growth has required us to face some very real limitations of our current building and consider options to continue to serve the academic needs of our student population while maintaining their safety. During a recent struggle attempting to meet the scheduling needs of our students, it was brought to our attention that a two-classroom portable was available from St. Joseph's school in Kennewick for little or no cost. This unit would provide us with a temporary fix to our current facility problems until such time that adequate funds can be raised to build additional classrooms as planned for. We have hired and are working with a qualified portable building moving contractor, the unit in question has been serving an educational need in Kennewick and therefore is ADA compliant for an educational setting. Our target is to be able to occupy this unit when classes start on August 21St, 2013. The meager money we have currently raised for this project will allow us to address exterior cosmetic needs of both the new portable building and our current administrative building. Currently we are working to complete the permitting package to obtain a placement permit for the new unit (we will also obtain the appropriate permitting for the renovations of the current administrative building). As we maintain excellence in education as a primary mission,we are dedicated to establishing and maintaining an aesthetically beautiful campus as well. Over the course of the past 12 months we have worked on the grounds planting 26 new trees, providing weed coverage and creating an oasis in the west Pasco desert. The new portable,while not reflected in the 2008 master plan, does not exceed the approved square footage of the building. As the attached drawings indicate, our current structure is substantially smaller than the approved footprint. Additionally, we grant that 1) the number of storage containers along the property's east end will be reduced by one to account for the new portable building; and 2) the portable building is a temporary solution with a limited lifespan on the property. 1 Tri-Cities Prep July 16, 2013 In conclusion,we submit that the proposed addition of one additional temporary portable building is: 1) In substantial compliance with the master plan; 2) Is essential to continuing to meet the educational needs of the student body; 3) Will provide the safest option for meeting said needs; and 4) Will be placed and finished in such a way as to be aesthetically in conformance with the structures currently on the campus. 2 US" G x S,4T'OB ( • MONUMENT SIGN (23 L.F.) B FULL ACCESS x. 60 0 60 120 l SCALE IN FEET A N 6S x x �oGTDBER GLGRY MAPLE 11) • LANDSCAPE BERM DETAIL SCALE: 1"=10' GOLD PIN CUSHION CYPRESS„:I p ELI,AH BLUE GE FES FesGDE e:I ® GOLD FLAME S"REA(8) STADIUM LIGHTS,TYP. BLUE STAR,DNIPER,6, • SEASONAL COLOR CURBING LANDSCAPE BERM DETAIL r"" — ' CONTOUR SCALE: 1"=10' FULL ACCESS ?hry0 TRI-CITIES PREP y21�'• x �J F`55�Oti T" O 0'Z1 x x y REST. STADIUM LIGHTS,TYP. TENNIS ]�+ `STADIUM LIGHT,TYP. FENCE,TYP. h• x 1- FOOTBALL&SOCCER (DEPRESSED INTO GRADE t6-FT) Y OVERFLOW PARKING z 215' r ti OVERFLOW PARKING SEATING BERM O (fi-RS FELO) 2 STADIUM LIGHT,TYP. STORAGE X 588'56'43"E 1280.35' REST. FENCE,TYP. x x x �r I s RIGHT IN/OUT FULL ACCESS LEFT TURN ISLAND s TRI-CITIES PREP (J-V� PASCO,WASHINGTON - CONCEPT LAYOUT#1 e—A ,.P-- SCALE:1"=60'(FULL SIZE ONLY)