Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-15-2014 Planning Commission Packet PLANNING COMMISSION - AGENDA REGULAR MEETING 7:00 P.M. May 15, 2014 I. CALL TO ORDER: II. ROLL CALL: Declaration of Quorum III. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: April 17, 2014 V. OLD BUSINESS: VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. Special Permit Location of a Church in a C-3 (General Business) Zone (Templo de Alabanza) (MF # SP 2014-004) B. Special Permit Location of a Wireless Communications Facility (AT&,T)(MF# SP 2014-005) C. Preliminary Plat Preliminary Plat Madison Park Planned Density Development (EE Resources) (MF# PP2014-001 Continued from April 17, 2014 Meeting D. Rezone Rezone from C-3 (General Business) to R-3 (Medium Density Residential) (Chester & Jagueline Fortune) (MF# Z 2014-002) E. Rezone Zoning of Department of Natural Resources Section 16 (MF# Z 2014-001) VII. OTHER BUSINESS: VIII. WORKSHOP: A. Plan Sylvester's Addition Neighborhood Revitalization Plan (MF# PLAN 2013-003) IX. ADJOURNMENT: REGULAR MEETING April 17, 2014 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 7:00pm by Chairwoman Greenaway. 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 Gabriel Portugal APPEARANCE OF FAIRNESS: Chairwoman Greenaway read a statement about the appearance of fairness for hearings on land use matters. Chairwoman Greenaway asked if any Commission member had anything to declare. There were no declarations. Chairwoman Greenaway then asked the audience if there were any objections based on a conflict of interest or appearance of fairness question regarding the items to be discussed this evening. There were no objections. ADMINISTERING THE OATH: Chairwoman Greenaway explained that state law requires testimony in quasi-judicial hearings such as held by the Planning Commission be given under oath or affirmation. Chairwoman Greenaway swore in all those desiring to speak. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Commissioner Hoekstra moved, seconded by Commissioner Khan, that the minutes dated March 20, 2014 be approved as mailed. The motion passed unanimously. OLD BUSINESS: A. Special Permit Location of a Wireless Communication Facility in an RS-12 (Suburban( Zone (AT&T) (MF# SP 2014- 001 Chairwoman Greenaway read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Rick White, Community & Economic Development Director, discussed the special permit application for the location of a wireless communication facility in an RS-12 Zone. He stated that there were no additions to the staff report. -1- Commissioner Bachart moved, seconded by Commissioner Khan, to adopt the findings of fact and conclusions therefrom as contained in the April 17, 2014 staff report. The motion passed unanimously. Commissioner Bachart 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 allow the installation of wireless communication facilities on tax parcel # 118-112-036 addressed 9915 West Argent Road with conditions as contained in the April 17, 2014 staff report. The motion passed unanimously. B. Special Permit Location of a Preschool in a C-1 (Retail Business) Zone (Bethel Church) (MF# SP 2014-002) Chairwoman Greenaway read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Rick White, Community & Economic Development Director, discussed the special permit application for the location of a preschool in a C-1 Zone. Per Planning Commission discussion a condition has been added to the staff report requiring a fence if the preschool added an outdoor play area. Additionally comments were added to the staff report explaining the difference between a regulated preschool and an unregulated preschool. In this case the Bethel Church Preschool is an unregulated preschool category due to the limited hours children are on the site. Commissioner Portugal stated that as a retired school teacher he realizes children will sometimes wander and the fence requirement would provide protection. He asked if the fence would be negotiated with the neighboring properties. Mr. White responded that it was his understanding that the church doesn't know if they will have an outdoor play area but the Commission wanted the precaution added in case they do have an outdoor play area. Commissioner Hoekstra suggested a condition be added for fencing even if the State would not require the fencing. Commissioner Portugal asked if there is going to be an indoor play area since children that age will need several breaks. Mr. White responded staff was unsure if there will be an indoor play area. Addressing Commissioner Hoekstra's discussion, he stated that they could change the language of one of the conditions in the staff report to state that any outdoor play area must be fenced. Commissioner Bachart stated that he felt the current condition in the staff report could be interpreted to require fencing if there was an outdoor play area regardless of State requirements. Mr. White agreed with Commissioner Bachart. -2- Commissioner Hoekstra agreed with Mr. Bachart regarding the fencing condition. With no further comments the public hearing closed. Commissioner Hoekstra moved, seconded by Commissioner Khan, to adopt the findings of fact and conclusions therefrom as contained in the April 17, 2014 staff report. The motion passed unanimously. Commissioner Hoekstra moved, seconded by Commissioner Bachart, based on the findings of fact and conclusions therefrom the Planning Commission recommend the City Council grant a special permit for the location of a preschool operation at 3315 W. Court Street, with conditions as listed in the April 17, 2014 staff report. The motion passed 6 to 1, with Commissioner Kempf dissenting. C. Special Permit Expansion of a Storage Facility (Sound Investment Group LLCL(MF# SP 2014-003) Chairwoman Greenaway read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Rick White, Community & Economic Development Director, discussed the special permit application for the expansion of a storage facility. He stated on the tax parcel number was added to the conditions. There were no other changes to the staff report. Commissioner Khan moved, seconded by Commissioner Kempf, to adopt the findings of fact and conclusions therefrom as contained in the April 17, 2014 staff report. The motion passed unanimously. Commissioner Khan moved, seconded by Commissioner Kempf, based on the findings of fact and conclusions as adopted the Planning Commission recommend the City Council grant a special permit to allow the expansion of a mini-storage facility on tax parcel # 115-442-012 addressed 9335 Sandifur Parkway with conditions as contained in the April 17, 2014 staff report. The motion passed unanimously. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. Preliminary Plat Preliminary Plat Madison Park Planned Density Development (EE Resources) Chairwoman Greenaway read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. David McDonald, City Planner, provide background information on the proposed preliminary plat. He stated the plat was originally part of the Northwest Commons Plat approved by City Council in the September of 2005. The original preliminary plat is valid for another year but, a number of things have changed since the original approval that staff suggested the developer apply for a new preliminary plat. When the development was originally approved there was a portion of it that was approved for septic tank use. At the time there were only about 372 lots could be served with sewer the rest needed septic tanks. Since 2005 the modeling has been refined and -3- it is believed that all of the lots in the development can now have sewer. Also since the original approval the Port of Pasco updated the Airport Master Plan which the Planning Commission reviewed a year ago as well as zoning regulations relating to that plan. Due to changes in the Airport Master Plan and proposed runway extension the Port purchased about 30 acres of the development. With these changes the plat needed to be reconfigured. Mr. McDonald explained the planned density development process and provided information on the lot sizes. The minimum lot size being proposed is just over 8,000 square feet and the largest almost 21,000 square feet. The average lot size is 10,897 square feet. Commissioner Portugal asked if septic tanks will not be allowed. Mr. McDonald answered that is correct there will not be septic tanks. Commissioner Bachart discussed traffic impacts on Road 68 due to additional homes and residents. Mr. McDonald responded that the traffic impact fee was based on a study done taking the entire I-182 Corridor Area into account. The modeling for the traffic study assumed a full built-out for the area. Rick White, Community & Economic Development Director, added that there will be signal improvements including channel improvements to improve left-hand turns on Road 68. Commissioner Bachart asked if there would be a point when the improvements will be triggered. Mr. White answered that there is not. The Growth Management Act allows communities to set their own level of service for traffic facilities. While Road 68 might seem bothersome at times it actually functions as it should most of the time. Commissioner Hoekstra asked how large the site is altogether. Mr. McDonald stated 220 acres. Commissioner Hoekstra asked about the location and size of the park proposed for the neighborhood. Mr. McDonald stated that it will be slightly less than 5 acres. The park will be adjacent to an openspace/greenway. Commissioner Hoekstra discussed the school impact fee and letter from the School District. -4- Mr. McDonald responded that the school impact fee has been in effect for a few years since the School District updated their Capital Facilities Plan and was adopted by City Council. Mr. McDonald added that staff notified the public in a timely manner regarding this application, however, some of the reviewing agencies were not given enough time so staff is requesting the public hearing be continued to allow those reviewing agencies more time to comment. Commissioner Portugal asked if all lots would have irrigation water. Mr. McDonald answered yes. Chairwoman Greenaway opened the hearing for public comment. Ron Foraker, 6720 W. Park Street, spoke on behalf of the airport along with Spencer Montgomery of JUB Engineers regarding this application. He asked the Planning Commission to consider allowing the Port of Pasco to add comments for the next meeting in May. Commissioner Hoekstra asked if there would be emergency services in terms of disasters given the proximity of the airport to the residential area as well as access. Mr. Foraker addressed the topic of emergency services. The capability of Port equipment was discussed along with the use of the dirt roads along the perimeter of the airport. Jaime Morales, 4705 Northwest Commons, spoke on behalf of this application. He asked if the developer would be the same developer who previously built near this location. Mr. McDonald stated that there are two parts to this application. There is a developer who is requesting approval of the plat. He builds the roads, sidewalks, street lights and sewer lines and then sells the lots to the builders. The current developer may make the lots available to Viking Homes or New Tradition or another builder. It is uncertain but recently they have been Viking Homes. Commissioner Hoekstra asked if Mr. Morales had a concern with the builders, such as Viking Homes or New Tradition. Mr. Morales stated that he thought there might be concern if apartments or low income was building in the area but after listening to the discussion it will be single-family residential homes and there is no concern. Mr. McDonald added that the property is zoned RS-1 for low-density residential which would not allow multi-family dwelling units regardless of the builder or developer. Commissioner Khan moved, seconded by Commissioner Polk, to continue the public hearing on the proposed preliminary plat to the May 15, 2014 meeting. The motion passed unanimously. -5- B. Code Amendment Amending Title 27 Historic Preservation to qualify for Certified Local Government (CLG) Status (MF# CA 2014-001) Chairwoman Greenaway read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Rick White, Community 8s Economic Development Director, discussed the code amendment to Title 27 Historic Preservation to qualify for Certified Local Government status. Last year the City adopted a Comprehensive Historic Preservation Work Plan. It was prepared by the Historic Preservation Commission and a consultant. It was one of the 2012-2013 City Council Goals. It included a fair amount of action items to increase the awareness of historic preservation efforts and programs within the City. One of those action items was to have the City apply for certified local government status which is a designation from the State that allows the City to do a number of things to promote historic, to apply for grants to further historic preservation efforts and to receive technical assistance from the State. The money does come with some strings attached, many of which are taken from Federal Law. The historic preservation ordinance is missing some key sections that have to deal with historic preservation efforts. Attached to the Planning Commission memo is a draft ordinance that takes the existing Historic Preservation, Title 27 and shows all of the additions that need to be inserted in order to conform to State Law and Federal Law. Commissioner Portugal asked if only the area west of Road 68 applied to this amendment. Mr. White responded that it would be for all of Pasco, however there are parameters to what is considered historically significant, but there isn't a geographical limitation. Commissioner Bachart asked for clarification on the access to grants and whether those grants would only be applicable for the City or for an actual property owner. Mr. White stated that he does not believe there are grants for individual property owners but for the municipalities and states, there are some financial resources available, primarily technical assistance. Chairwoman Greenaway asked for clarification on the committee overseeing this. Mr. White stated that it was the same committee that worked on the original plan but members have changed. With no further comments the public hearing closed. Commissioner Hoekstra moved, seconded by Commissioner Kempf, to close the public hearing on the proposed rezone and initiate deliberations and schedule adoption of findings of fact and conclusions and make a recommendation to City Council for the May 15, 2014 meeting. The motion passed unanimously. -6- OTHER BUSINESS: Chairwoman Greenaway introduced the Planning Commission to the newest member, Commissioner Gabriel Portugal. WORKSHOP: A. Rezone Zoning of Department of Natural Resources Section 16 (MF# Z 2014-001) Chairwoman Greenaway read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Rick White, Community & Economic Development Director, discussed the upcoming rezone that will be on the May agenda. He explained that the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) owns approximately 300 acres south of Interstate 182 and west of Road 68. The City is currently conducting a survey through this property so the alignment of Chapel Hill Boulevard, between Road 68 and Road 84, can be determined. Per state legislative directive, the DNR is mandated to dispose of the majority of Section 16 by July 15, 2015. For the most part this means that the property located south of the Chapel Hill Boulevard extension will be surveyed and placed for sale. At the May 15th Planning Commission Meeting, staff will bring forward an application to establish zoning districts from the current designation of RT (Residential Transition). Mr. White reminded the Commission that they should refrain from engaging in conversations or speculate on zoning scenarios outside the public hearing about possible zoning for this property. COMMENTS: With no further discussion or business, the Planning Commission was adjourned at 8:05 p.m. Respectfully submitted, David McDonald, City Planner -7- REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION MASTER FILE # SP 2014-004 APPLICANT: Templo de Alabanza HEARING DATE: 5/15/2014 P.O. Box 1666 ACTION DATE: 6/19/2014 Pasco, WA 99301 BACKGROUND REQUEST: SPECIAL PERMIT: Location of a Church in a C-3 (General Business) Zone 1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Legal: Parcel # 200-000-220: BNSF Operating Lease #BF34019, southwest 1/4 of the southeast 1/4 of Section 30, Township 9 North, Range 30 East; General Location: 1202 W. Lewis Street, Unit B Property Size: Approximately 0.5 acres 2. ACCESS: The parking lot site has access from Lewis Street & 11th Avenue (11 th Ave is located on Railroad right-of-way) 3. UTILITIES: All municipal utilities currently serve the site. 4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The site is zoned C-3 (General Business) and contains a commercial structure. The zoning and land use of the surrounding properties are as follows: NORTH: C-1 - Pasco School District Administrative Office SOUTH: C-3 - Vacant EAST: C-3 - Commercial Businesses WEST: C-3 - Vacant 5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan designates this area for commercial uses. 6. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The City of Pasco is the lead agency for this project. Based on the SEPA checklist, the adopted City Comprehensive Plan, City development regulations, and other information, a threshold determination resulting in a Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) has been issued for this project under WAC 197-11-158. 1 ANALYSIS The applicant proposes to operate a church with up to 30 congregants in an existing commercial structure located in a C-3 zone. Churches require special permit review regardless of the zone. In 2011 PowerZone obtained a Special Permit to operate a youth after school program in the same building, employing eight (8) staff members and serving up to 36 students. The youth center occupied a 1,200 square foot portion of the structure. The center was open from 3:00 pm to 5:30 pm Monday-Thursday except on Wednesdays when the center was open between 3:00 pm and 8:30 pm. The church will operate Wednesdays, Fridays, and Sundays. Required parking for church uses is one space for each four seats based upon maximum seating capacity or at least one space for every ten lineal feet of bench seating. With 30 congregants (30 seats) the church would be required to furnish 8 paved parking spaces. The site is located on right-of-way owned by BNSF Railway and leased to Milne Enterprises Inc. The site is bound by arterial streets to the north and to the south. INITIAL STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT Findings of Fact must be entered from the record. The following are initial findings drawn from the background and analysis section of the staff report. The Planning Commission may add additional findings to this listing as the result of factual testimony and evidence submitted during the open record hearing. 1. The site is addressed 1202 West Lewis Street. 2. The site is zoned C-3 (General Business). 3. The site is located on right-of-way owned by BNSF Railway Company and leased to Milne Enterprises Inc. 4. The Templo de Alabanza is a non-profit organization. 5. Templo de Alabanza will provide religious services for up to 30 congregants weekly on Wednesdays, Fridays, and Sundays. 6. Templo de Alabanza is defined as a church in the Pasco Zoning Code. 7. Churches are considered Unclassified Uses and thereby require special permit review (PMC 25.86.020). 8. The proposed church will occupy approximately 1,200 square feet of the existing commercial structure. 2 9. A Level One Community Service Facility (Power Zone) was previously granted a Special Permit to operate on the site. CONCLUSIONS BASED ON INITIAL STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT The Planning Commission must make Findings of Fact based upon the criteria listed in P.M.C. 25.86.060. The criteria and staff listed findings are as follows: 1. Will the proposed use be in accordance with the goals, policies, objectives and text of the Comprehensive Plan? The site is identified in the Comprehensive Plan for commercial use. The Commercial Land Use designation includes all commercial uses listed in the C-3 zones. Parking improvements may be required as part of the permitting process. The proposed use as a church is not specified for the C-3 zoning district but may be allowed in any zoning district with a special permit. 2. Will the proposed use adversely affect public infrastructure? The proposal will generate little demand for public utilities, operating for only a few hours three days per week. Water and sewer demands of the proposed use will be negligible compared to permitted uses such as restaurants. Impacts to the adjoining streets will likewise be minimal due to the fact the facility will only be open a few hours per week. 3. Will the proposed use be constructed, maintained and operated to be in harmony with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity? The building proposed for worship use is currently in place and has existed for over 40 years. No changes are planned for the exterior of this commercial building. The proposed use will have minimal impact on the existing and intended character of the neighborhood. 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? Templo de Alabanza is proposing to occupy an existing building. No changes are planned for the height and size of the structure. The current building has not discouraged development in the general area. The lack of development between West Lewis Street and West "A" Street west of 101h Avenue is due to the fact the property is railroad right-of-way. 3 5. Will the operations in connection with the proposal be more objectionable to nearby properties by reason of noise, fumes, vibrations, dust, traffic, or flashing lights than would be the operation of any permitted uses within the district? The proposed facility will only be open for religious services a few hours per week. There will be no fumes, vibrations, dust, noise, or flashing lights as a result of this activity. 6. Will the proposed use endanger the public health or safety if located and developed where proposed, or in any way will become a nuisance to uses permitted in the district? The proposed church will be open a few hours per day, three days per week. Minimal activity will occur at the site, reducing any chance for the creation of nuisance conditions. APPROVAL CONDITIONS 1. The Special Permit shall apply to Tax Parcel #200 000 220 for the building at 1202 Unit B, West Lewis Street located within BNSF right-of-way; 2. The church shall not object to the issuance, transfer, or renewal of a liquor license for an existing or new establishment within 1,000 feet of the property; 3. The applicant shall comply with all building code requirements for the occupancy class applicable to the use; 4. Paved and striped parking shall be provided at the rate of one space for each four seats based upon maximum seating capacity or at least one space for every ten lineal feet of bench seating, as per PMC 25.78.170(2); 5. Street frontage and utility improvements meeting City standards shall be required if tenant improvements for Templo de Alabanza exceed 33% of the leasehold value as established by the Franklin County Assessor under Tax Parcel # 200 000 220; 6. The Special Permit shall be null and void if an occupancy registration has not been obtained by July 30, 2015. RECOMMENDATION MOTION: I move to close the public hearing and schedule deliberations, the adoption of findings of fact, and development of a recommendation for City Council for the June 19, 2014 Planning Commission meeting. 4 Vicinity Item: Church in C- 1 Zone Map Applicant: Templo de Alabanza N File #: SP 2014-004 V �� n k �' � F'� •�'� per► \ � O - Y,: v � . SIT E 11 qk ki Or t w n a f� T �. "All ST INa r �' Jr• _,.. "B",S T Land Item: Church in C- 1 Zone Use Applicant: Templo de Alabanza N Map File #: SP 2014-004 des, ;a� des. P.U.D. God s� erG�a N SITE > w 5- s� Q Commercial Commercial � Go��M O V Vacant "A" ST E Uc0 Commercial. _ --i N o D Public > S I m Mixed z U. m m m � C Residential 4 "B" ST Item: Church in C- 1 Zone Zoning Applicant: Templo de Alabanza N Map File #: SP 2014-004 Ci'1 c k '2 •Z z C-1 GA SITE R-3 > C-1 s s� A C-3 M V C-3 I-1 "A" ST 0 0 = V c0 C"3 D R-2D D C-1 � R-2< m m M � w 11BI ST 11 king No wila J- Y d — I �''tlti. ler AJ I Looking h M F NAi - r air _ - _ ' a' �.4•{ "r i . �� �,- - _��- _ - _ _ r � ' � .t + 1 111 A, � � I� � .� �...x�� -_ - - - - � _ �. � � �1 � �. 1 � ...� _ i AL. L J� REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION MASTER FILE NO: SP 2014-005 APPLICANT: AT&T Mobility HEARING DATE: 5/15/2014 918 S Horton Street, STE 1002 ACTION DATE: 6/19/2014 Seattle, WA 98134 BACKGROUND REQUEST: SPECIAL PERMIT: Location of Wireless Communication Facilities in an RS-12 (Suburban) Zone 1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Leal: Parcel # 119-701-412: Lot 2, Short Plat 93-08 General Location: The southwest corner of the intersection of Road 68 and W. Court Street Property The parcel is approximately 1.4 acres 2. ACCESS: The site is accessed from Road 68 and West Court Street. 3. UTILITIES: All municipal utilities are currently available to serve the site from Road 68 and West Court Street. 4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The site is currently zoned C-1 (Retail Business) and is vacant. Surrounding properties are zoned and developed as follows: NORTH: RS-20 (County) - Vacant SOUTH: C-1 - Commercial EAST: C-1 - Vacant WEST: R-2 - Vacant 5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan designates the site for commercial uses. Goal OF-2 suggests the City ought to maintain land use flexibility in regard to placement of infrastructure for public and private utilities. Policy OF-2-A encourages the sound management of all energy and communication utilities through coordination and cooperation dealing with construction of such facilities. Policy OF-2-B encourages the placement of utility substations which are necessary for the surrounding neighborhood. 6. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The City of Pasco is the lead agency for this project. Based on the SEPA checklist, the adopted City Comprehensive Plan, City development regulations, and other information, a threshold determination resulting in a Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) has been issued for this project under WAC 197- 11-158. 1 ANALYSIS New Cingular Wireless PCS doing business as AT&T Mobility is requesting special permit approval to locate a cellular wireless communication tower on a vacant parcel located on the southwest corner at the intersection of Road 68 and W. Court Street. The proposal involves construction of a new antennae tower approximately 90-feet in height. The applicant's request is an effort to fill a coverage/capacity gap south of I-182 (coverage maps Exhibits 1-3). The installation is intended to better support existing users and would provide siting for two additional cellular providers to locate antennae on the same tower. As illustrated in the elevations submitted with the application (Exhibits 4-6), the applicant wishes to install an 89-foot tall wireless communication network tower on a vacant parcel. The tower design is proposed to appear as a pine tree complete with faux branches, foliage and bark. At the base of the tower will be a 40'x40' (1,600ft2) equipment enclosure constructed of a six-foot tall chain- link fence with privacy slats and three strands of barbed wire above. Surrounding the fenced area the applicant proposes to install a live vegetative buffer to further help screen the ground-level equipment enclosure and pole base from view and to enhance appearance. A 31-foot wide utility service and parking easement will connect Road 68 to the fenced enclosure to establish legal access and use of the property. Staff has entered a condition (#5) requiring the equipment enclosure be screened from view from surrounding roadways. The screening must meet design requirements of the I-182 Overlay District (PMC 25.58). Cellular facilities are proposed to be located in approximately the southeast corner of the subject parcel; roughly twenty feet north of the nearest mini- storage building. This location may alleviate some the visual impact created by the new tower and enclosure by separating them from Court Street traffic as much as the site will allow. Zoning regulations for wireless facilities were specifically developed to permit, through special permit review, cellular tower/antenna equipment on taller buildings within the community. The PMC special permit review criteria for wireless facilities are written as follows: 25.70.075 WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES. Wireless Communication Facilities are permitted under the following conditions: (1) Such structures shall be permitted in all industrial or C-3 zoning districts provided the location is 500 feet or more from a residential district. Any location closer than 500 feet requires special permit approval. 2 (2) Such structures may be permitted by special permit in all other zoning districts provided said structures are: (a) Attached to or located on an existing or proposed building or structure that is higher than thirty-five (35)feet, or (b) Located on or with a publicly owned facility such as a water reservoir, fire station, police station, school, county or port facility. (3) All wireless communication facilities shall comply with the following standards (a) Wireless facilities shall be screened or camouflaged by employing the best available technology. This may be accomplished by use of compatible materials, strategic location, color, stealth technologies, and/or other measures to achieve minimum visibility of the facility when viewed from public rights-of-way, and adjoining properties such that a casual observer cannot identify the Wireless Communication Facility. (b) Wireless facilities shall be located in the City in the following order of preference: i) Attached to or located on buildings or structures higher than 35 feet. ii) Located on or with a publicly owned facility iii) Located on a site other than those listed in a or b). (c) If an applicant chooses to construct a new freestanding wireless communication .facility, the burden of proof shall be on the applicant to show a wireless communication facility located on a higher order of preference site cannot reasonably be accommodated. The citg reserves the right to retain a qualified consultant, at the applicant's expense, to review the supporting documentation for accuracq.. (4) All applications for building permits must be accompanied by verification of approval by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and any other state or federal requirements for tower design and location. Additionally all tower construction plans must be designed and stamped by a licensed professional engineer. (5) All wireless communication facilities shall be removed by the facility owner within 6 months of the date the facility ceases to be operational or if the facility falls into disrepair. In this case the applicant is unable to locate an existing building 35-feet or taller nor a publicly owned facility in the general vicinity which would also allow the cellular coverage objectives to be met. Staff has been provided with said analysis is in general agreement with the findings. This leaves the last locational preference being a site other than an existing building 35-feet or taller or a publicly owned facility. 3 A determination of non-significance from TOWAIR for the FAA has been obtained by the applicant; as required by PMC 25.70.075(4) a copy has been included in the application submittal. INITIAL STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT Findings of fact must be entered from the record. The following are initial findings drawn from the background and analysis section of the staff report. The Planning Commission may add additional findings to this listing as the result of factual testimony and evidence submitted during the open record hearing. 1. The site is zoned C-1 (Retail Business). 2. The Comprehensive Plan identifies the site for commercial uses. 3. The site is approximately 1.4 acres in area. 4. The site is vacant. 5. All municipal utilities are currently available serve the site from adjacent roadways. 6. In the C-1 zone cellular towers may be permitted by special permit provided the tower is either: i) Attached to or located on an existing or proposed building or structure that is higher than thirty-five (35) feet; or ii) Located on or with a publicly owned facility such as a water reservoir, fire station, police station, school, county or port facility. iii) Located on a site other than those listed in a) or b). 7. As analyzed by the applicant, there are no publicly owned facilities nor are there any existing buildings taller than 35 feet, within a 1,300-foot radius of the site that would allow for AT&T's coverage objectives to be met. 8. The cellular antennae tower will be approximately 90-feet in height. 9. The cellular antennae tower will be treated with features to disguise the tower as a tree. 10. Equipment serving the proposed antennae will be located within a 1,600 square foot ground-level equipment enclosure fenced with chain-link fence and barbed wire. 4 11. The Comprehensive Plan suggests the City ought to maintain land use flexibility with regard to placement of infrastructure for public and private utilities. 12. The Comprehensive Plan does not specifically address cellular equipment. 13. Cellular equipment creates minimal demands on City infrastructure. TENTATIVE CONCLUSIONS BASED ON INITIAL STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT Before recommending approval or denial of a special permit the Planning Commission must develop findings of fact from which to draw its conclusions based upon the criteria listed in 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? The Comprehensive Plan does not specifically address cellular equipment. The Comprehensive Plan goal OF-2 and policy OF-2-A discuss the need for sound management and coordination in the location of utilities and community facilities. Policy ED-1-C promotes the need to support Pasco's urban area as a good business environment by enhancing the infrastructure of the community. The applicability of policy ED-1-C is enhanced due to the fact that the new tower will provide more/better service primarily to commercially zoned properties. Policy UT-1-C encourages coordination of utility providers' functional plans with the City's land use and utility plans to ensure long term service availability. (2) Will the proposed use adversely affect public infrastructure? The proposed use is a part of the communication network utilized by the general public. The proposed equipment will be located in such a manner so as not to impact other public utilities or services. The proposed use does not require water and sewer. (3) Will the proposed use be constructed, maintained and operated to be in harmony with existing or intended character of the general vicinity? The character of the vicinity is a combination of residential suburban development and commercial businesses. The two notable businesses near the site are commercial in nature; they are a nursery and the adjacent mini-storage facility. Much of the surrounding vicinity remains largely vacant. The nursery business to the northeast has contained an AM radio tower, approximately 100 feet in height, for many years. It is unlikely that placement of a new antennae tower on the proposed site 5 will significantly alter the existing and/or intended character of the general vicinity. (4) Will the location and height of proposed structures and the site design discourage the development of permitted uses on property in the general vicinity or impair the value thereof? There exist a number of cellular antennae towers throughout the community. Staff has not received complaints from potential developers about any of the existing towers being a deterrent to development opportunities. Perhaps the inverse is a more likely result. The added 4G cellular data service of increased signal strength may be an attractant to potential commercial developers. (5) Will the operations in connection with the proposal be more objectionable to nearby properties by reason of noise, fumes, vibrations, dust, traffic, or flashing lights than would be the operation of any permitted uses within the district? The proposed cellular equipment will create no notable fumes, dust or noise. Emergency power generators are included in the ground-level equipment. The generators will be periodically activated to test functionality. Noise associated with the generators should be no greater than noise generated by normal vehicle traffic on Court Street. The generators and other equipment will be fully housed within a solid containment enclosure. An antennae tower will generate far less noise, dust and fumes than many of the land uses allowed in the C-1 zone. Cellular facilities have been located throughout the community in residential, commercial and industrial zones without generating any complaints received by the City. (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? The proposal is required to be designed by a professional engineer to withstand the forces of nature. The applicant is also required by law to coordinate with the FAA and FCC prior to obtaining a building permit. A Determination of No Hazard to Air Navigation for the tower has been issued to AT&T by the FAA for the proposed facility. Radio waves at frequencies utilized by local cellular networks have not been proven to be harmful to human health. Radio wave activity is focused on the antennas which are elevated approximately 50 to 90 feet above grade, away from human activity. The cellular antennae and equipment pose no true threat to public health and safety. 6 TENTATIVE APPROVAL CONDITIONS 1) The special permit shall apply to parcel # 119-701-412, Lot 2, Short Plat 93-08, Franklin County WA; 2) The property shall be developed in substantial conformity with the elevations and site plan submitted with the application except as conditioned herein; 3) The cellular antennae tower shall not exceed 90 feet in height as measured from existing grade; 4) The entire cellular antennae tower shall be treated with faux tree branches, foliage and bark; 5) The ground-level equipment shall be located within a sight-screening enclosure which fully blocks the view from all rights-of-way. Design of the sight-screening shall meet the requirements of the I-182 Overlay District (PMC 25.58); 6) The antennae tower shall not emit white light between the hours of 6pm and Sam; 7) The ground-level equipment enclosure shall be located no closer than fifteen (15) feet from the property line adjacent to Road 68; 8) The ground-level cellular equipment enclosure shall be surrounded by a landscaping buffer which obscures view of the equipment enclosure. Said landscaping buffer shall be served by an automatic irrigation system and shall be maintained in a well-kept manner by the applicant; 9) The proposed cellular facility must comply with all FCC regulations regarding radio frequency emissions; 10) The special permit shall be null and void if a City of Pasco building permit is not obtained by June 30, 2015. RECOMMENDATION MOTION: I move to close the hearing on the proposed wireless communications facility and initiate deliberations and schedule adoption of findings of fact, conclusions and a recommendation to the City Council for the June 19, 2014 meeting. 7 Vicin Item: Special Permit - Cellular Tower 0 it y Ap Map plicant. New Cingular/AT&T N File #: SP2014-005 - f I .p J `w+ � City Limits County City COURT ST fi r SITE zz P �ds' Land Use Item: Special Permit - Cellular Tower Applicant: New Cingular/AT&T N Ma p File #. SP2014-005 Commercial Vacant Residential City Limits Count City COURT ST 00 Comm. a Vacant SITE 9z Vacant x C Residential Commercial Residential Zoning Item: Special Permit - Cellular Tower Applicant: New Cingular/AT&T N Map File #: SP2014-005 RS-20 (County) Gl (County) COURT ST F-7 a 00 a SIT a x R-2 C-1 (Detail Business) �y (Medium-Density J Residential) L I - RS-1 PUD Base Line - Existing Coverage Red color is a stronger Good Coverage Levels signal level than legend x Ba [I RSRP LE8m1-IeI Bert RSRP fRS EPREI Level(dS.)>-90 1 � , tBe#RSRP 10.5 EPREf Levei ltleml>-98 Best RSRP IRS EPRE)Level ltlBml>-103 Best RSRP RS EPRE7 EI L Level ltleml> 108 "�"" - 1 -� -3`(: 4C.6' '\ Best RSRP IRS EPRevel106mI> 313 1II Best RSRP IS EPRf7level lCBml> t16 F f Best RSRP EPREI LevelltlBml> -118 11 L609i9 - Bert RSRP IBRRS EPREfLmel(EBmI>--IM !W 144 Z- -7 -r Poor Coverage Levels USCC Structure with 80' Antenna tip Note: Tower currently 60' Other proposed new site KP0458 (not on air yet) coverage is shown aemuun aea BPOese ROW BSCC m furore Rsl Best RSRP R5 EPREI Level 16Bm1> 90 Best RSRP(RS IRS E Level ICB > 98 Best RSRP IRS fMPRn fl level IEB.l mI a 103 Best RSRP IRS EM Lae:leeml1-:10 38 -- _ AL00465 Best RSRP IRS EMq Level IdBml> 11 p� n _ Best RSRP IRS EPRM Level 818.1 a .116 Other New Site - Jii__ �_:_ 7Best RSRP IRS fPRf]Level laBml>--1i6 � KP0458 M... � . ... ALM29 �S ,> CC �. s YL z I F � r Coverage is poor to serve Hwy 230 Coverage is a major objective of this site Proposed Location - 80' Antenna Tip Much better coverage is obtained from this location =r ALWC14 Leeene x - Future Al R RP(dB.) IM. �6es[RSRP IRS EPRf]LNtl ldBml>=-W Best RSRP(RS EPRf)LNI ItlBml a=y6 Ben RP IR EPPA Lml pml> ;0 Best MRPREPRE)LNeI(BB.) 10 1] W Ben RP(RS EPRE)LNeI(dBm)> 113 A 6 pL Fe 1 41 _ Ben RRP IREPR LNelltltlBml> 116 en RSRP RSEMEj LNel Bml =-18 Proposed Location WEen RSRP(RSEPRE)LMBJBmI-4M for KP0444 ISM - FLOpd66 ',Gents apeno I I � y {{ r � I ( } T I 1' Coverage is much stronger to serve Hwy 230 which is a major objective of this site aW P-s- CONSTRUCTION PLAN KEYED NOTES pQ11 23 (L,PROPOSED 11'-5'x24'-0'EQUIPMENT SMELTER(DESIGNED BY OTHERS) �ta 13 V Yournrodd.Delivered. 19 14 4O 17 PROPOSED UTILITY H-FRAME. ALPHA SECTOR PROJECT CONSULTANTS: TO9 'P OF AGL PROPOSED MONORNE BRANCHES O PROPOSED 89'-0'STEEL MONOPINE 8 -0" GAMMA SECTOR 73 O PROPOSED 800AMP 4-GANG METER BASE W/DISCONNECTS ON RYKA e UTILITY H-FRAME f y 5 TIP HEIGHT OF PROPOSED ANTENNAS - I- 7e CONSULTING 84•-0"AGL ;M1Sq?y� .� r PLANS PREPARED BV: RAD CENL TER OF PROPOSED ANTENNAS 80'-0"AG � conNenerorNe 18 WO0oIw �ALRNONDRG SURE 210 BETA SECTOR lease RHOry EE.wA Um>zwm BEHIND 17 23 BEHIND E erzseer,lraz 1AAILc ERSe areNGP WVWJ. RNERSTONE£NGR.CO PLAN NORTH 79 BEHIND 12 FUTURE CARRIER ANTENNA ARRAY MICROWAVE. PROJECTINFO'co ANTENNA PLAN 12 PROPOSED ANTENNAS(4 PER SECTOR,TOTAL OFI2) KP0444 13 22x34 SCALE.1/4'=1'-0" 11x17 SCALE:1/8'=1'-0' I 14 PROPOSED PLATFORM ANTENNA MOUNT Wt HANDRAIL WEST COURT PASCO 1418 ROAD N .I PASCO,WA 99301 FRANKLIN COUNTY 17 PROPOSED(4)SURGE SUPPRESSION DISTRIBUTION UNITS. ISSUED FOR: I <18>PROPOSED REMOTE RADIO HEADS(8 PER SECTOR,TOTAL OF 24). ZONING c iV f 'f REV:-DATE:=ISSUED FOR: BY: 19 PROPOSED UNIVERSAL RING MOUNT FOR SURGE SUPPRESSION z DISTRIBUTION UNITS. <6>PROPOSED GPS/E91100WNUNK ANTENNA. 04-15-14 REVISED FINAL NJH 22 PROPOSED LTE GPS ANTENNA. pL 04-03-14 FINAL NJH V 23 2RPEROSECTOR,TOTAL 1 OF 6)ACHED TO STANDOFF ARMS Q TYP 12 1 q 03-17-14 PRELIMINARY LLW / -DRAWN BY:=CHK.: TYP 72nd �t L LLW EJS MWO I I' CURRENTISSUE DATE: -14 I 2] PROPOSED 12-0'WIDE ACCESS GATES. LICENSURE: 04-15 I O PROPOSED 6-D HIGH CHAIN-LINK FENCE WI PRIVACY SLATS,COLOR 21 y I - E8 TO BE DETERMINED BY JURISDICTIONBLEy �e& ry 0C 90 l 30 PROPOSED ICE BRIDGE. _ 22 \ 31INSIDE I �PROPOSED(8)48V DC POWER TRUNK CARIES '�oNgE q.1¢1A 2 32 INSIDE 32 PROPOSED(4)FIBER TRUNK CABLES. DRAWING INFORMATION: 33 PROPOSED SIGNAGE. 4 [NSlays nrvlo novise oNSULTAN ac / V NMESUPERSEOEOB �nT i0.E Si0N3 / 2] sD iAllU_Or DOl Um 29 T soTHe1RTHAN­Cl uTI To III cu=N 11 s 33 Sr i ENoHBRED. E SITE NOTES rDUwINGTITLE: EAST ELEVATION& 1. VERIFY ANTENNA RAD CENTER&AZIMUTHS WITH LOCKDOWN ANTENNA PLAN SET RF SITE BUILD FORM, 2. SIGNAGE TO BE POSTED AT SITE ACCESS. DRAWING NUMBER: A GRADE(REF 0'-0"1 _ 3. ALL VISIBLE ANTENNAS,CARLFS AND MOUNTING HARDWARE 359'-0"AMSL WILL BE PAINTED PER JURISDICTIONAL REQUIREMENTS. A-2 1 EAST ELEVATION 2 KEYED NOTES 22x34 SCALE:3/18"=t'-0' 11x17 SCALE:3/32'=1'-0" 22x34 SCALE:NTS 1107 SCALE:NTS CEI JOB NUMBER: NB 14-09005 THIS IS NOT A SURVEY ALL INFORMATION AND TRUE NORTH HAVE BEEN OBTAINED FROM EXISTING p DRAWINGS AND ARE APPROXIMATE. PATTERSON ST at&t Your world.Delivered. —————————— —— _—— \� PROJECT CONSULTANTS: -- -- -- -- -- N89°21'15"E 22449' ✓ 1 RYKA I CONSULTING 3E2 PLANS PREPARED BV: OPINEASTONE --- I 1892SWODDINVILLEREDMOND NONE,SITE 211 ILL 'OOoHV5 ONE '02. d �T3 H : I EMAIL.uiHEwmxnbm+ wFO:CORNERSTON I 1 I PROJECT INFO: et KP0444 I \ I WEST COURT PASCO I \ \ I 1418 ROAD 88 NING \ PASCO.WA 99301 ADJACENT ZO ^�I FRANKLIN COUNTY USE: VACANT I n 3 ZONE: R-2 MDR I e l ISSUED FOR ZONING SUBJECT ZONING (°I REV:=DATE:—ISSUED FOR! 6Y: I°o USE: VACANT \ Iw ZONE: R-2 MDR TL#119701412 I OD 3S8I\ (19.37 ACRES) \\ SETBACK I AV.1 Ai.? O 63 SO FT \ 04-15-14 REVISED FINAL NJH 010}14 FINAL NJH 358--——_— _ PROPOSED 89'-O"MONOPINE WI LOW — — I I l 03-17-74 PRELIMINARY LLW PROFILE MOUN8(12)PANEL ANTENNAS SITE ACCEBS Q DRAWN BY:=CHK.: APV.: PROPOSED LANDSCAPING BUFFER T _ LLW EJS MWO — � rCURRENT ISSUE DATE: -15-14 *� I LICENSURE: N89°21'15"E 244.82' S (E)BUILDING PROPOSED xAH91 PROPOSED POWER RUN AT&T EQUIPMENT SHELTER \ rflllllll o. � 'nWALE q.Ig1A \ DRAWING INFORMATION: (E)ELECTRICALVAULT A.OIMErvStONS aND ASWISE CONSUMNTS OFANYT THE PRDVIOU3155VES OF TH 0 BY THE LATEST RE V SIGN' —101 CONTAINED NT PRIETARY BY NATURE.IAN OSLRES • (E)UTILITY POLE O-E—AN XHIICH ISnYa TFDT0M EDCUENTIs ETHIC DRAWING TITLE: ADJACENT ZONING 1 usE: COMMERICAL I SITE PLAN ZONE: R-2 MDR I DRAWING NUMBER: f PLAN NORTH A- I 1 1 SITE PLAN CEI JOB NUMBER: N8 4-09DO5 22x34 SCALE:1"=20'-0" 1 1x1 7 SCALE:V 40'-W I I *YnI! Your world.Delivered. I PROJECT CONSULTANTS: I RYKA CONSULTING wl PLANS PREPARED eV: co co 201-0° 20'-0' y�j _E COMNEFIETONE M1 Q 1­1­Woo EDn1OID RD NE,SUITE 210 WOODINVf WA98Di2 PHONE:425.40).ti32 FUTURE CARRIERS GROUND EMAIL.—C-- LEASE AREA(TYP OF 2) __RNERSrorvE-ENCa.caw Wl LOW PROFILE ONOPINE PROJECT INFO: I W/LDW PROFILE MOUNT a(42)ANTENNAS KP0444 fsigr', rl PROPOSED 12'4° 1{s, 1 ACCESSGATE WEST COURT PASCO ` I PROPOSED ACCESS ROAD 1416 ROAD 68 PASCO,WA 98301 — — FRANKLIN COUNTV I SITE ACCESS ISSUED.OR: 1 L ZONING olt1, I I REV::DATE:=ISSUED FOR: SY: `C`'1 I Q 0415-14 REVISED FINAL NJH 0 I Q 04-03-14 FINAL NJH , PROPERTY LINE d\_tj Qq 03-17-14 PRELIMINARY LLW _ \ DRAWN BY:=CHK.: APV.: PROPOSED H-FRAME W/ \ METERS S HOFFMAN BOX I LLW EJS MWO PROPOSED CURRENT ISSUE DATE: EQUIPMENT SHELTER a 04-75-14 PROPOSED LICENSURE: LANDSCAPING BUFFER o LESLEY (E)FENCE� n eP46�n2 O�U' (E)BUILDING I PROPOSED POWER RUNS DRAWING cnINFORMATION: OALL DIMENSIquS AND AD- rI Y H AT3VIONS ED S PROGRIETARY BV NANFE.A SE ORD MLrtE (E)ELECTRICAL VAULT D-11 r«A cuENT is TLY I ^DRAWINGTRLE: LPROJECT PLAN I � DRAWING NUMBER: III VIII II II 1111 II IIII III III VIII tl III II 1111111 PAN NORTH PROJECT PLAN CEI JOB NUMBER: NB 4-09006 22x34 SCALE:118'=1'-0` 11x17 SCALE:1116'=1'-0° CELLULAR SITE PORTION OF NE1/4 OF NE1/4 OF SEC.28,T.9 N.,R.29 E.,W.M. NonnESCRIPTPROVSED.LEGAL 28426— 6 BEFCREYOUIDGDAYS at&t — — — R SEC 811 Your world.Delivered. COURT 5T. - POWERMETER TELCO RISER UNDERGROUND LOCATE OVERHEAD UTILITY aN POST POWER CADINET """ ,awo..=�wTMa.•.Mw..e.�.ars fPF°•`" PROJECT CONSULTANTS: wEB�P, diOSTDTwE°°' RYKA GD UTILITY CURB CUT , �R-20.W' • ��=.��"E W,•m.YUE POLE(TTP) CONC WAL"� L=3f.7<u' STATE MAP: L Y am °21'15'E DAP FOUND CONSULTING AP WNp G a enaaGAP FsourvD AP eaftunuTY POLE 1 PLANS PREPARED BY: FOUND TOP-32.S'AGL ?� GUY ANCHOR w� I SIGN FME HYDRANT � ��CC1f1NERISTOHMS UTILITY POLE aew OOD MILD BERM SUITE 211 GUY I GN PHONE'.amenb�afm E�VAIL'u�a C D1RT� SIAB 1 —}.��36z .CGRNERSTONEENGR.COM VICINITYMAP: PROJECTINFO: SEWER \ TEM:ta'SPKE MANHOLE ' KP0444 ELEV=381.&1' / ELOCAT�ON 3 LOT 2 / SR WEST COURT PASCO#2 • m$ TL#11 93701412 o 1416 ROAD 66 1aT3 AC. %� EDGE PASCO,WA 99301 \ ASPHALr FRANKLIN COUNTY sEMENTa DRTPCRD. —ISSUED FOR: r,nEREFaRTPROVID� 0 PRELIMINARY SURVEY 358-- \\� neon MQEDW I 1� — (Rf)V81ogr PLAT NO.3e.AFN.,o REV._DATE:=ISSUED FOR: BY Rogoseo 11•1 6f ACCE a6, F UTUTY a PARKING ESMT. : ED6%ND WA ER ME ER eARacA '"NCI NN 66 LEASE AREA i 6'I B couN\ EASEMENT PRO FIRE FOUND BE W/ PR _ C 04-04-ib LIPS FIX3MD P 2ao AR \ Q REVISEDTOWER HYDRANT BAR.a CAP BARB WIRE N 86°21 5' B 03-13-16 IRS LOCATION WATER VALVE �SOLIARD E eouAno� \ N TBS: Qq 03-05-14 PRELIMINARY SURVEY JRS BoLURO S 10 LEYEL(AAMSN)ELEVATIONS REFFERRENCED TO THE IrDRAWN BY:=CHK.: z 'A d GNI \ 2. RECORD BEARINGS HAVE BEEN ROTATED TO L JRS NSY JRS SELF-sTORAGE BUILOIxG P LILT Ujd'0 . SURVEY MONUMENTS=HER—WERE CURB......UE DATE: oWvA BDDNp,K. 04-04-14 s0Lwro U111PO' LICENSURE: FIRC nrOaAN OP=32B'AGL A ELCOINIFSER 6 as aP�nrM,w DZON c AR OFMINI SITE NFORMAnoN. 1 MAL FLCODING(NO TAX^ORES 116TDR1401z PR •I RY AGING)WI BARBWIRENCE 1 SITE OWNR. "T"LMOORBTRUST IS1� N PER FIRM M P N0.3 LDW OS80 B,GA ED MAY I,16B) aDE PASCO,WA 6 VDf M D ZONING E RSFARR3)SINGLE FA MILYRESIDENTAL) BOUNCARY BOB—. TOTALLOTAREA: a6; S.F.(, AC) - • THISW ASFECIAL¢ED TTOPOGRAPHIC MAPWnH PROJECTAfEA: 250G GRIPROPOSEDLEASEAREAI SLNINGGATE M xlYUxesdxOEASEMENTS HE wG A GaAPHIG NCENTER PROPOSEDMONOPINE DRAWING INFORMATION: DEPICTION OF VAPIOUSINFCRMATION GATHERED FROM OORONATE DATA YY _ .L. MAPS ANDAVAIIABLEEMON MENTS FOUND DURING THE UOE- ie°14'T1.56°N IND 83 DALL DIMENSIONS AND ADVISEC ONSULTANTS OF CALE:1 FIELD3URVEr.NDPRC NIGITUOE - 6°f0'6 Dw HAD 83 ggoqB ANDCMiawo"s AL YTHENTEGTREVISONS S I PeR1R FORMED Y WERESET. 366A FEET NAVO BB apgAWINGARESUPEPSEOEOL6 356 8 NO TITLE RESEARCH WAS PERFORMED BY GROUND EL EINFORMATICM BY NTAINFn THIZ S.T DOCUMENr OO etl TREE LEGEI.i1. RR REF fiPRCPRIETARV BY NATURE.ANYUSE aR DISCLOSURES NAD BS WSPC890UTH ZANE DECIDUOUS OTHER THAN WHILHISRFIATEJ ED CLIENT IS E APEEA", THIS SURVEY WAS PERFORMED WRH A TOPCON GPT BI BIRCH STRICTLY PROHIBIT CAM NG SEWER BECONOSOFARC ANDMEASURINGDISTANCE QI3s2FPM ALI51� CH CHERRY DRAWING TITLE: MANHOLE X D))­.TOPCGN LEGA-111 ACT-RIPER �Uft RECEIVERS MEASURING DISTANCE S A,NPPM X D))mm. TREE 1TPe 3(Ip I. TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY& ( J(FN V BvERR WN IIy— E EVERCR EXISTING CONDITIONS MAP Imo-UTILITY _ EVERGREEN. HEIGHT AMSI nU HOL�CK ii$$II///////"' CO RISER BENCH MARK:CORS STATION SODS ® DRAWING NUMBER: ELEV 383235'(NAVD Bat OF MP MAORONA — ————————————— POLE I'—NT MEASUREG) OK OAK" _____________ EeNCHMARKDI3LaIME" C-1 C ®O SHRUBlBUSH IEVAnON3 ESTABLISHED AT THIS SITE ARE 9U B LICE EFFORT WAS MADE TO CHECK FOR OOCAL 6ENCHMARKS. WERE APPROXIMATED AT 35'TD dBABOVE GROUND TOLEMNCEREWEBTEO FORTHIS PROIECT.FM OTHER TREESAND VEGETATIONRMAY EXIST.ONLY ANO CE JOB NUMBER: 14-09005 ' CONSTRUCTION PLAN KEYED NOTES \>AT&T 40'-0"x40'-0'LEASE AREA. <2>PROPOSED 1V-5°x24-0'EQUIPMENT SHELTER(DESIGNED BYOTIERS) 40aW I /�0 FUTURE CARRIER 16'-0"x74'-0"GROUND LEASE AREA. Your world.Delivered. <3 PROPOSED UTILITY H-FRAME. PROJECT CONSULTANTS: OPROPOSED 89'-W STEEL MONOPINE O PROPOSED 800AMP 4-GANG METER BASE W!DISCONNECTS ON RY,�A e UTILITY H-FRAME. CONSULTING OPROPOSED PROJECT EASEMENT FOR ACCESS AND UTILITY(1S-0'x30'-W) C PLANS PREPARED BY: X95, QQ. E_COPWEI9lTONE 18828 W SUITE 2'1 W"D MAN eE.E wa BO,. P�RREIST Bm-EN—DO �. R roNE-ENCR.com 18 J J >•' J ti;J J' �7' J' t'J �7' tt PROJECT INFO:DDR i al PROPOSED ANTENNAS(4 PER SECTOR TOTAL OF 12). KPO444 14 PROPOSED PLATFORM ANTENNA MOUNT W/HANDRAIL. WEST COURT PASCO �-�)S 1410 ROAD 68 13 \ I PASCO,WA 99301 27 FRANKLIN COUNTY O rISSUED FOR: PROPOSED(4)SURGE SUPPRESSION DISTRIBUTION UNITS. L 21 33 18 PROPOSED REMOTE RADIO HEADS IS PER SECTOR,TOTAL OF 24). ZONING REV:-DATE:=ISSUED FOR: N' 3q t,\i l LII l-\ 19 PROPOSED UNIVERSAL RING MOUNT FOR SURGE SUPPRESSION -'J' I Ilia DISTRIBUTION UNITS. 22 33 I �0 PROPOSED TECH PARKING. 31 tS<�l}f) 6 21 PROPOSED GPSIE911 DOWNUNKANTENNA 32 1 04-15-14 REVISED FINAL NJH ' <g>PROPOSED LTE GPS ANTENNA. Qp 00-03-id FINAL NUN PROPOSED RRH MOUNT ATTACHED TO STANDOFF ARMS 23 (2 PER SECTOR,TOTAL OF 6). pQ 03-17-14 PRELIMINARY LLW rDRAWN BY:=CHK.: LLW EJS MWO CURRENT ISSUE DATE: r S\Jts �S�lt's L 04-75-14 PROPOSED 12'-0'WIDE ACCESS GATES. LICENSURE: PROPOSED 6'-0"HIGH CHAIN-LINK FENCE W/PRIVACY SLATS,COLOR TO BE DETERMINED BY JURISDICTION �SLEr. PROPERTY OPROPOSED ICE BRIDGE. / o za TE7� u I 31 PROPOSED(B)48V DC POWER TRUNK CABLES. q.{51A w L a <32>PROPOSED(4)FIBER TRUNK CABLES. DRAWING INFORMATION: 33 PROPOSED SIGNAGE. onD'/ISE CONSUET EDFAZE' DRANSNO REMU ER 1 ALL �AT O PROPOSED GRAVEL WITHIN COMPOUND. ,cE* -1 ITI EDao OTHER THANK SICXw NEV,TE NAMED NTiSE 35 (E)BUILDING a PROPOSED GRAVEL ACCESS ROAD, NOSISHBE SITE NOTES CDRAWINGTITLE: Til-TT7TTFrTT7TTTTTTTTTT7TTTT7T7-I I..........I...I....... 5TIFI-7 1, VERIFY ANTENNA I CENTER AZIMUTHS WITH LOCKDOWN ENLARGED SITEPLAN SET RE SITE BUILD FORM. 2. SIGNAGETO BE POSTED AT SITE ACCESS. DRAWING NUMBER: 3. ALL VISIBLE ANTENNAS.CABLES AND MOUNTING HARDWARE WILL BE PAINTED PER JURISDICTIONAL REQUIREMENTS. I .1 . ENLARGED SITE PLAN PLAN NORTH 2 KEYED NOTES I CEI JOB NUMBER: NB 14-09005 22x34 SCALE.NTS 11x17 SCALE:NTS I 22x34 SCALE:NTS 111.17SCA LE:NTS Lookin g North d = y mod,2 4 -11- W. . .......... I s • Looking East At- 'his s =.w u _ ,• j i r ., Looking South [tower location tro Jw_ -- x'�i - �'- .x .' ����#� - '�-.k`�,. c2r ��'�x ,�s��,..�; Y o-�r F:._Z r �'u..: v �-+F�� '�` -r.;t�' �• z_ - s WA ��. �it. - _�*• e 11,,..` � �' tt'-,� ��' � r vy �4�q;v.. e'"' .>h� '.a'€t r R,i�iP �-.:� _ �-^'� - .a., �,.:�-� i .••• s. _�§ s��-'F-� k i�=?�� � •r.,..< ti -.e c1. X:x mob•, u, � + ,�:- � t`•..�.,• ��s-�� ,c ..,', :,w. .rt`. _.i''� _ t .h >N �' •�,r ..'�}=ak�`i - 'aihY _ - '?z '3;i: -.�jr� ;.c✓�.. �._ _r:.- .�...-' -' .xc ...+,.:_. .•.;•� ;t ,G- f*'.., x'a'r ;.r "'a _ ,:_s ��x�-� r. r-. �+.. --�-.-x- _ - ,.x ) _ _•.�.t '�- �" '".3,4;r �.t -+. =�c ?x+f��., ''.�- ,±e::.r. '-n�+ x,;s-:�a::,. '�.aF-'-. • �. ' �..z°a"' t��-%- •Ff-r.. :: -.rt^- r, ;�� fur' c1-� _ �°a^- - - ,. -.-. .E i�. :�G3, - - - � -..I rra- .�w•.d•: �1-:-.. ?..*-,ys. - n.7 `�,s ,.ie. sr r� rt : �.'.,�� _� �?5 � - "���� ,�C''/ •�i6s ? 'S`t 9.4K,-..L( j." 3!i+ - Y� _,.� .��.,1 - � - �� - r •r' r t s ,r rya ie �:- ..nn: :^_�• �, Y a'*z a^. =:� -r �': �.�c:- x m 'L . � •^, .,-._ x '!4•'' - '._?•- :-.< '� ��.l3 ._ - � �•at -:�, rt � [.-` ���°�'-`` -ate ?'4»y,e ..��� i Looking West fir. "PAR_ r - �c� s:�F" 4C � �'�°'.�'�P- 'F _ 'ti �-avC ,_ �V�"`'*Y•° '. �'" � �i Ya''' 1 F - _ ,rl:_ s 4� f yti � - a• a3C� .F w 4• x�s _ '�'.__ � tie-.j. •• ��' �_� -•L 'zi G..nth� � ,��� {:� - _ ""s, "SYy•6 �' ., r. :..� H: g� No JLp•, .t' ! ^_�"', � — - w/ "m, ty.7,�.y� �. ,� .T' y.. S'3" gyp„ .z'.C r..tk'�-"fin t ,�•- �`�ai.s.. �{ '�,"..,� .�j„ Y.Ji.,. '*+. -'4�;�_ All _.�.. .A. a. .... •'�l..i � I-- i 1 t 1 . ] 1 y K r 1�6A lip I • rl 1 tiPq ra a { Y � t- w, M 1� •y 'I Tel ft� __ -' - r L _•. mot` � \ " t� � -.: i �, mod"=Y�i!� /`�• . iii +sy,.� �,_ a L�.a 4 �a i ' � c• yY r �• l, ' _q �. . ., �, {� . • . � ' � .. Q�.,.�tt'el� �� j r '-� s. y i -� REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION MASTER FILE NO: PP 2014-003 APPLICANT: EE Resources HEARING DATE: 4/17/ 8v 5/15 250 NW Franklin 2014 Suite 401 ACTION DATE: 5/15/2014 Bend, OR 97701 BACKGROUND REQUEST: Preliminary Plat: Madison Park Planned Density Development 1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Legal: Franklin County tax parcel #116340142; lying south of Power Line Road, east of Road 52 all within the north half of Section 11, Township 9 North, Range 29 East, WM. General Location: East of Road 52 and south of the easterly projection of Power Line Road. Property 220 Acres Number of Lots Proposed: 387 lots Square Footage Range of Lots: 8,004ft2 to 21,343 ft' Average Lot Square Footage: 10,897 ft2 2. ACCESS: The property has access from Santa Fe Lane, Santa Cruz Lane and Porto Lane which provide connections to Road 52 and Sandifur Parkway. 3. UTILITIES: Utilities exist in surrounding streets in the subdivision to the south and in Road 52. 4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The site is zoned RS-1 and was originally part of the Northwest Common development approved in 2005. Surrounding properties are zoned and developed as follows: NORTH: AP-20 (Agricultural Production County Zoning) - Farm Ground SOUTH: RS-1 - Northwest Commons Subdivision EAST: RS-1 - Vacant Port property WEST R-1 - New Elementary School 5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan indicates the site is intended for low-density residential development. According to the Comprehensive Plan low-density residential means 2 to 5 dwelling units per acre. The criteria for allocation under the future land use section of Volume II of the Comprehensive Plan (Vol. II, page 17) encourages development of lands designated for residential uses when or where; sewer is available, land is suitable for home sites, when there is a market I demand and where there are major circulation routes. Policy H-1-E encourages the advancement of home ownership and Goal H-2 suggests the City strive to maintain a variety of housing options for residents of the community. Goal LU-2 encourages the maintenance of established neighborhoods and the creation of new neighborhoods that are safe and enjoyable places to live. 6. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The City of Pasco is the lead agency for this project. Based on the SEPA checklist, the adopted City 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 proposed plat encompasses a major portion of the Northwest Common Development that was approved in 2005. Northwest Commons was initially limited to 372 sewer connections due to the lack of capacity in the major trunk lines to the south of the development. Studies have since revealed sewer capacity was not as limited as originally thought and the Public Works Department has determined another 240 plus sewer connection could be permitted within the subdivision. As a result septic systems are no longer needed within the development. This represents a substantial change from the original preliminary plat approval. Another major change to the original preliminary plat occurred as the result of the Port of Pasco purchasing 34 acres within the plat for a runway protection zone. Two years ago the Port updated the Airport Master Plan and the Master Plan called for a 1,200 foot extension to one of the runways. The runway extension impacted the plat because a large area fell under the runway protection zone, a zone in which houses should not be built. To insure no houses would be built in the protection zone the Port purchased the land. The Port purchase impacted the street and lot layout of the plat. Due to the changes in the sewer connections and Port property purchase staff suggested the applicant re-apply for preliminary plat approval prior to the preliminary plat approval expiring next fall. The original Northwest Commons plat (now named Madison Park) was approved with a variety of lot sizes ranging from over a half acre for the septic tank lots to 4,500 square feet for the townhouse lots. The density of the plat is determined by the average lot size of 10,000 square feet. Because of the underlying zoning the average lot size must be maintained at 10,000 square feet for any subsequent plat. The applicant is again seeking approval for a Planned Density Development that would allow a range of lot sizes between 8,004 square feet to over 20,000 square feet. 2 The Planned Density Development process was designed to provide a degree of flexibility to the development process. The process can only be used for parcels that contain 20 or more acres. Essentially the under lying zoning is used to determine the number of building lots permitted within a proposed plat. Lots are allow to be varied in size, some smaller and some larger than the minimum specified by the zoning. However as explained above the development is not permitted to exceed the maximum number of lots allowed by the zoning. LOT LAYOUT: The proposed plat contains 387 lots; with the lots varying in size from 8,004 to 21,343 square feet. The average lot size is 10,897 square feet. RIGHTS-OF-WAY: All lots have adequate frontage on streets which will be dedicated. UTILITIES: The developer will be responsible for extending utilities into the plat. A utility easement will be needed along the first 10 of street frontage of all lots. The final location and width of the easements will be determined during the construction design phase of the platting process. The front yard setbacks for construction purposes are larger than the requested easements; therefore the front yard easements will not encroach upon the buildable portions of the lots. The City Engineer will determine the specific placement of fire hydrants and streetlights when construction plans are submitted. As a general rule, fire hydrants are located at street intersections and with a maximum interval of 500 feet between hydrants on alternating sides of the street. Streetlights are located at street intersections, with a maximum interval of 300 feet on residential streets, and with a maximum interval of 150 feet on arterial streets. The intervals for street light placements are measure along the centerline of the road. Street lights are placed on alternating sides of the street. STREET NAMES: Streets within the plat will all be named prior to final platting. IRRIGATION: The municipal code requires the installation of irrigation lines as a part of infrastructure improvements. WATER RIGHTS: The assignment of water rights is a requirement for subdivision approval. The developer has previously deeded the water rights to the City. 3 FINDINGS OF FACT State law (RCW 58.17.110) 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: With an average lot size of 10,897 square feet the proposed development will address the overcrowding concern by providing manageable lots and usable open spaces. RS-1 zoning requires a 20 foot front yard setback and no more than 40 percent lot coverage which also addresses the overcrowding issue. Parks Opens Space/Schools: The plat contains a neighborhood park which the developer must improve. There are four other neighborhood parks within a mile of the proposed plat. The School District is in the process of building four new schools within the community. 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. At the request of the School District the City enacted a school impact fee in 2012. The imposition of this impact fee addresses the requirement to ensure there are adequate provisions for schools (See attached letter). All new residential development pays a school impact fee (when permits are issued) to assist with the provision of schools within the community. The preliminary plat was submitted to the School District for review. No additional requests were made by the School District for the City to address RCW 58.17.110. (See attached PSD letter) Effective Land Use/Orderly Development: The plat is laid out for low-density residential development as identified in the Comprehensive Plan. The maximum density permitted under the Comprehensive Plan is 5 dwelling units per acre. The proposed development with about 3.9 dwelling units per acre is an orderly continuation of the existing residential subdivisions to the south. Safe Travel & Walking Conditions: The Plat will connect to the community through the existing network of streets. Sidewalks are installed at the time homes are built on individual lots. The sidewalk will be constructed to current City standards and to the standards of the American's with Disabilities Act (ADA). The ADA handicap ramps at the corners of each intersection will be installed with the construction of the road improvements. Adequate Provision of Municipal Services: All lots within the plat will be provided with water, sewer and other utilities. 4 Provision of Housing for State Residents: The proposed preliminary plat contains 387 building lots, providing opportunities for the construction of 387new homes for Pasco residents. 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: The access streets through the plat will be paved and developed to City standards to assure that proper access is maintained to each lot. (The discussion under safe travel above applies to this section also.) Comprehensive Plan Policies & Maps: The Comprehensive Plan designates the plat site for low-density and mixed-residential development. Policies of the Comprehensive Plan suggest the City strive to maintain a variety of housing for residents. Airport Consideration: The proposed preliminary plat falls within the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Part 77 Imaginary Surfaces which defines development height restrictions around the Tri-Cities Airport. The preliminary plat is also partially within the Airport Safety Compatibility Zones (ASCZ) as discussed in PMC 25.81. The Port of Pasco has indicated approximately 17 lots in the proposed preliminary plat are located in an avigation easement where the ground elevation is within 10 feet of the airspace. Extensive grading will be needed on these lots to enable houses to be built. Other Findings: • The site is within the Pasco Urban Growth Area Boundary. • The State Growth Management Act requires urban growth and urban densities to occur within Urban Growth Boundaries. • The Comprehensive Plan identifies the site for low-density residential development. • The site was zoned RS-1 in 2005. • The site was originally included in the Northwest Commons preliminary plat that was approved by the City Council in 2005. • The original Northwest Commons plat contained 177 lots that were to be serviced by septic tanks. • Additional studies since 2005 indicate there is capacity in the sewer trunk lines to accommodate over 600 sewer connections within the property in question. 5 • Thirty-four acres of the original Northwest Commons preliminary plat now falls under a runway approach zone that prohibits residential development. The Port of Pasco has purchased this property to protect future expansions at the Tri Cities Airport. • The Housing Element of the Comprehensive Plan encourages the development of a variety of residential densities and housing types. • The Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan encourages the interconnection of neighborhood streets to provide for the disbursement of traffic. • Per the ITE Trip Generation Manual 8th Addition the proposed subdivision, when fully developed, will generate approximately 3703 vehicle trips per day. • The current traffic impact fee is $709 per dwelling unit. The impact fees are collected at the time permits are issued and said fees are used to make traffic improvements and add traffic signals in the I-182 Corridor when warranted. • 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. • The City of Pasco has adopted a school impact fee ordinance compelling new housing developments to provide the School District with mitigation fees. The fee was effective April 16, 2012. • Past correspondence from the Pasco School District indicates impact fees address the requirement to ensure adequate provisions are made for schools. 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 Pasco Municipal Code and the standard specifications of the City Engineering Division. These standards for streets, sidewalks, and other infrastructure improvements were designed to ensure the public health, safety and general welfare of the community are secured. These standards include provisions for 6 streets, drainage, water and sewer service and the provision for dedication of right-of-way. The preliminary plat was forwarded to the Franklin County PUD, the Pasco School District, Cascade Gas, Charter Cable and Ben-Franklin Transit Authority for review and comment. The PUD requested easements along the front of all lots for utility service. 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 the collection of impact fees addresses the requirements of RCW 58.17.110. A neighborhood park will be built within the confines of the plat. Four other neighborhood parks are located within one mile of the proposed subdivision. (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 designations of the Comprehensive Plan and the established zoning. The proposed plat will also provide for the looping of utilities and interconnectivity of streets as supported in the Comprehensive Plan. (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 low-density and residential development. The Comprehensive Plan describes Low-density development as 2 to 5 single-family dwelling units per acre. The policies of the plan encourage the advancement of home ownership (H-3-B). Plan Goal H-2 suggests the City strive to maintain a variety of housing options for residents of the community while Plan Policy H-1-13 supports the protection and enhancement of the established character of viable residential neighborhoods. (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. (5) The proposed subdivision conforms to the general purposes of the subdivision regulations. 7 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 (i.e. school, park and traffic fees) are included in approval conditions. (6) The public use and interest will be served by approval of the proposed subdivision. If approved the proposed plat 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. PLAT APPROVAL CONDITIONS 1. 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, sewer and irrigation 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 including any power lines along Road 52. 2. Santa Cruz Lane between Porto Lane and Tyre Lane shall be constructed with the first phase of the development. 3. The developer shall install a properly designed irrigation system with stubs to all lots in the subdivision for future irrigation needs. All easements/rights-of-way necessary to convey the irrigation system to and through the proposed plat must be conveyed to the City of Pasco. The irrigation lines shall run in easements/rights-of-way as directed by the City Engineer. 4. Excess right-of-way along Power Line Road and Road 52 must be landscaped. Said landscaping shall include irrigation, turf and trees. Trees shall be planted at 50 foot intervals. The species of the trees will be determined by the Parks Department. All landscaping and irrigation plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Parks Department prior to installation. Water usage for City right-of-way landscaping shall come from a source as approved by the City of Pasco with the connection and meter fees paid for by the developer. 5. The developer/builder shall pay the City a "common area maintenance fee" of $475 per lot upon issuance of building permits for homes. These funds 8 shall be placed in a fund and used to finance the maintenance of arterial boulevard strips. The City shall not accept maintenance responsibility for the landscaping abutting said streets until such time as all fees are collected for each phase that abut said streets. 6. 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. The developer shall be responsible for improving and dedicating the park site to the City. The park improvement plans must be reviewed and approved by the Parks Division prior to construction. The park must be built and dedicated before permits have been issued for 250 houses. The community park fee must be collected with the issuance of a building permit for each house. 8. 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. 9. No utility vaults, pedestals, or other obstructions will be allowed at street intersections. 10. All corner lots and other lots that present difficulties for the placement of yard fencing shall be identified in the notes on the face of the final plat(s). 11. All storm water is to be disposed of per City and State codes and requirements. 12. 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. 13. The developer shall prepare a dust, weed and erosion control plan to be approved by the City prior to approval of any construction drawings for the first phase of the subdivision. 14. 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. 15. All engineering designs for infrastructure and final plat(s) drawings shall utilize the published City of Pasco Vertical Control Datum and shall be identified on each such submittal. 16. The final plat(s) shall contain a 10-foot utility easement parallel to all streets unless otherwise required by the Franklin County PUD. Depending on load needs the PUD will need 15 foot easements for select streets to be determined at the design stage of the development. 9 17. The final plat(s) 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". 18. Street lighting must be installed to the City of Pasco/Franklin County PUD standards and as directed by the City Engineer. 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. 19. 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. 20. 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(s) approval depending on the build out schedule for homes on the lots. 21. The developer will be required to comply with the City of Pasco Civil Plan Review process. 22. The developer shall install a common Estate type masonry wall/fence 6 feet in height adjacent the rear line of all lots backing on Road 52 and Power Line Road as a part of the infrastructure improvements associated with each phase abutting said streets. Prior to installation the City must approve said wall/fence. Consideration must be given to the vision triangle at the intersection of streets. The City may make repairs or replace the fencing as needed. Property owners adjoining said fence shall be responsible for payment of all costs associated with maintenance and upkeep. These fencing requirements shall be noted clearly on the face of 10 the final plat(s). A concrete mow strip shall be installed under any common fence as directed by the City Parks Division and shall be approved by the Parks Department prior to installation. 23. The developer shall install landscaping (turf) and irrigation within the gas line easement and the Home Owners Association established for the plat shall maintain said landscaped area. A note shall be place on all final plats explaining the obligation of the Home Owners Association to maintain the gas line easement landscaping. 24. The developer shall install a common Estate type masonry wall/fence 6 feet in height around the City well site on Road 52. Said wall must match the wall constructed along Road 52. Property owners adjoining said fence shall be responsible for payment of all costs associated with maintenance and upkeep. These fencing requirements shall be noted clearly on the face of the final plat(s). 25. The developer shall install a common Estate type masonry wall/fence 6 feet in height around the irrigation well sites abutting Power Line Road. Said walls must match the wall constructed along Road 52 and conform to all front yard setback provisions. Property owners adjoining said fence shall be responsible for payment of all costs associated with maintenance and upkeep. These fencing requirements shall be noted clearly on the face of the final plat(s). Required front yard setbacks must be maintained along all interior streets. 26. Lots abutting Power Line Road and Road 52 shall not have direct access to said streets. Access shall be prohibited by means of deed restrictions or statements on the face of the final plat(s). 27. All lots within avigation easement "C" as determined by the Port of Pasco must be graded to comply with airspace height restrictions for said easement. Grading plans for the impacted lots must be reviewed by the Port prior to submittal to the Engineering Division. 28. An FAA Form 7460-I must be submitted to the Port of Pasco and the FAA for the construction of any structure within 20 feet of the height limitations set forth in the Transition Zone. 29. The following statement must appear on all final plats within Airport Safety Compatibility Zone Three, the Transitional Zone and the Approach Zone: "Property within this (plat/short plat or binding site plan) may be subject to varying noise levels and vibrations due to proximity to the Tri- Cities Airport. Properties near the airport may be located within height and use restriction zones as described and illustrated by Federal standards and regulations and the City of Pasco Zoning Regulations. There is the potential that standard flight patterns will result in aircraft passing over the properties at low altitudes and during all hours of the day. Future airport expansion including runway extensions may impact the size and number of aircraft utilizing the airport. Developments near 11 the airport should assume that at any given time there will be some impact from air traffic." RECOMMENDATION MOTION: I move to adopt Findings of Fact and Conclusions therefrom as contained in the May 15, 2014 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 for Madison Park with conditions as listed in the May 15, 2014 staff report. 12 Item: Preliminary Plat (387 Lots) Overview Applicant: Map PP 2014-00 , T.M lUf ■ ■■ ■■ ■ _s�, �l, ■ ■ ■■ ■■ ■■ ■ ME M Id Eli hd M �■ �u® ■■ ■■ ■ CG r� ���re� a���� �► � �� r� � a� ��a Moans®�i�lr��i�1 1i� 1i�1rliii�lliTa�ii�l sire oa �u���©1ri1ir�f'��� g • ��. .��, . •! �� ri,�, r�'� ■� CRUMi� � (r' i©�i���l�i������li�Y� � a►Q�G ,� : rte �ru ■� C".rL®T�► Qj�' �a� W � ��f� � �� • BOB �`ib ����'� �� W ■�■�i�G�afr■ ®i�i�l■■■ �■� ��► ,,�® i► ��W � ��i�i�®�ii��i�� �®�� --i--���i'' ii�l�1■��1�€■�i■i■ 6'�l v l ii ■ ■w ■w ���®itis fig► ��'��'��■ `,.���-, C�'"� � �� � ��■� WNmm�m �■■!��■MGM YI■■■■■■■■■■■■ i� � � � � ■� Gi�� lir "� 4, ��'� ' ■ dA� k�Gi ri- Pro ®i��i■ ■iN■i ii ■iris ■■iii'■■i ®■�■■■■ ■� ■��p i�i'��ii�IIiiea� � � �■ ■ur I ��`�' �► �'"'�'� ice. -���s� �� i������i�■■� ib��■�■iw■®■■■ w ii'� � � r.0! G�(�I �� .- � �® ���■ � r _ �A� �l�iil■�iu(��irl�.'�i ■'I�YM■■iY�f■■Ili�Fi�if� 111er► '��® ®�,a� i�a�i���B��ri •,� � r��� �� '��► �`� `��►�► `���� �� i� �����s�� 's','� Pe+�iu"dsa��■I�iW�© i�■■■�■��■■■i■ I����� ��®® ■■ ���� ® � � q �� � ��� -_..�G������v�,'�� r - - �' i3� �i�Ai ►` I ■ ■■ ■rte ,fi► �► �► �,7��r�1 �; i �■i ■ ��� ! �■�■ ®�i� ■� 1!■1 �i�■®■■ � ��3��a�ri��i ae �� ■� � .��► � p.�,��f,,,, X41 ■ ����������rr��i* ��iwi�l ■iA■iir�■■iri�i��i4 �I® �■ �:1.f.4�■1 6�1 mod' '� A� ■� � ��G��D��:���P� � �r�a9i��r� � MAUNA • Item: Preliminary Plat (387 Lots) Vicinity Applicant: EE Resources N Map 2014-003 File #: PP CITY LIMITS SITE SANTA CRUZ LN CITY LIMITS Fl p S��T IN J z 9T J S> W � i � O J PARLEY CT = z( PARLEY DR +� e ., m m cn NW COMMONS DR o w - SANDIFUR PKWY' U ."1 PALMYRA DR Land Item: Preliminary Lots)Plat Use Applicant: EE Resources N Map File #: PP 2014-003 Agriculture (County) SITE Elementary Vacant School SANTA CRUZ LN N N Z ¢ NN T 9 J U LLl Z } J SFDUs ° =� ° Church O J S9 ¢ (County) �� PARLEY CT = J PARLEY > G\O O0 m Cn CLF G� NW COMMONS DR SFDUs z SANDIFUR Vacant PKW Item: Preliminary Plat (387 Lots) Zoning Applicant: EE Resources N Map 2014-003 File #. PP AP-20 (County) CITY LIMITS SITE R-S-1 R'S-1 R-S-1 PUD PUD ANTA CRUZ LN CITY L•4MITS N Z Q lP Ui Of J ° LLl � Z } J RS-20 °� ° 0 U °� S9 Z PARLEY CT (County) �� = J PARLEY DR o R-S-1 ° PUDG °- NW COMMONS DR R-S-1 PRELIMINARY PLAT OF MADISON PARK - PLANNED DENSITY DEVELOPMENT SITE G2 �\.�q�� PASCO,WASHINGTON mom�umo NSA_',��x,1311°" Located in S.d.n 11,Township 9 NONE,Range 29 East,W.M., _ pi� FNI County,Wwhingron EI t_�`09 ID E Now— N 89°08'3 " E _ _ K 2 Erg[neering\12-001 NW Coror—\NWC VICINITY MA GAS EASEMENT 200 100 0 200 400 •_ _ _ _ _ - g - _ /!//'.%�\ SCALE FEET Z z - _ - _ - - - 4 / - LT) DANM', rlrr OF PA6CD DATUM 0 _ O o %F /. w Z -/ 73 74 NEW LOT VICINITY I MAP _ l T INDEX OF DRAWINGS O Q °� _ ry 173 174 I EXISTING LOT SHEET NO. DESCRIPTION l m F9 _ _ I PRELIMINARY PLAT MAP d Q J 2 CONTOUR MAP Z \'�' �d4'�� 'ICS 3 WATER AND DRAINAGE MAP O Q 4 SANITARY SEWER MAP in Z Z PRELIMINARY PLAT INFORMATION Q W INFORMATION NEW PROJECT DATA Q a _ PARCEL NUMBER TAI LOTS 116-3-U-030. W 6 -350-010 Z SITE ADDRESS ROAD 5 1&SANDIFUR PKWY Z .2.]_33 ACRES J CY) .'p � OPEN SPACE AREA IiJ3 ACRES w �nw�`1m' \�� _ PUBLIC ROAD AREA 27_33 ACRES - �\ /// \` / LOT AREA 14.62 ACRES O PROPOSED USE SINGLE FAMILY NUMBER OF LOTS 357 LOTS GROSS DENSITY 30 UNITS PER A'F.E o � PHASE 2 / / DENS 9 uwrs PER n:.eE nwe`mrn rra,�no>< SU r l S t PJD SUBURBAN � Y (�T,T T T T T T 1 / __ ING ENE ROGr \ / \ CO Cn PROPOSED ZONE R 5 1 DD BJBURBAN �, DISTRICT —— ++ \ \ \ / / 1, M N MUM LET 11 11 B OP ' 4 S. p��q�� l A 1—LOT S Z E 21,}43 S I .�� �� ��-L PHA§E tL� � AVERAGE LOT SIZE 1D,89➢S.F. TTTTT FTTTTTTTTT��T � I TT -- UTILITIES IIII ` IPIM�I�I . I A , ' wolwrAi2wAV \ -L J- A _ — WATER: C TY OF PAGCO J_ SEWER: c iY OF PASCO T N 4T 1 T4T ET T T T T T �T �. T -� r• • —— pouD w srE_ Illy of PASCO OWER: FRANKLIN PLUS I /I�; �y) TTTTTTTT GAS, CENT IRY NATURAL Gas_o T T T _L L _. / .�` - I — TELEPHONE- GAS ASC SCHOOL DISTRICT CENT oP PAeco FIRE OL DISTRICT. CITY'OF PASCO ISO Ti 7F7F7FF-T T1 � ��� - � � T�-� \ � �. TTTTTT 0. J _I I_I I_I I_II I_I I i�_ T T T _ OWNER SPONSOR — T /\�l p — EE RESOUIRCEE,LLC G2 ENGINEERING I t T� j -L mx, GAVE SWISHER 1x14 E.ENCOH LANE _ L / �1/ Y �2tacf ANPUN,SUITE 402 DEER PARK,WA 99006 �\1 \/ (� T T TAT N 97/01 A f�J \ / � T T T T T T �• P (509)991-9033 TT T - GENERAL NOTES e CAD �. _�/ T T—j .N� / A A / - NDAR PREP RED MY MINISTER&GLAESER SURVEFED 6303 sc� IIOR M1 , rl �I a CD,W 99301 ASCO HONE 509 5q4]902 509-544-7861. 1--L__'SJ T l 3 A�,TOO CLOCK WALL WILL VEHICLE ACC SS 98661360-694-3313 REM A:3611-6TO SANDI VEflT F(/A VAN _ L L \ I EH CLE ACCESS fA0 LOT IN THE PROJECT TO SANG FUR T \ Y _ YAkh At CLOC M NOW 5 OR CONSTRUCTED ROAD r / J I Ceo ev J 1 Jr CONS WA LIEp L MAT THE E EXISTING BOUNDARY ADJACENT TO ao av: —— T —p mom—— CONS s2 AND Pa PHASES ADJACENT THE OARO WILL MATCH UA INE ROAD BLOCK wnu AND BE —T T —I I T T Y P1 THE PROJECT I PHASES COMPLETED I To PHASES LE 52 AND POPHASE LINES cK MAP 4.THE PROJECT WILE BE COMPLETED IN PHASES.0 FINAL PHASE LINES WILL BE DETERMINED IN THE FUTURE BASED ON MARKET CONDITIDNS Arv0 FEA6161L1tt. 1 A REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION MASTER FILE NO: Z 2014-002 APPLICANT: Chester & Jaqueline Fortune HEARING DATE: 5/15/2014 313 N 61h Avenue ACTION DATE: 6/19/2014 Walla Walla, WA 99362 BACKGROUND REQUEST: REZONE: Rezone from C-3 (General Business) to R-3 (Medium- Density Residential) 1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Legal: Parcel #'s 113-504-020 8s 113-504-011: Block 4 and Block 5 together with vacated north south alley adjacent General Location: The northeast corner of the intersection of Spokane Street and Utah Avenue Property Size: The combined area of the parcels is approximately 1.9 acres 2. ACCESS: The site is accessed from Utah Avenue and Spokane Street. 3. UTILITIES: All municipal utilities are currently available to serve the site from Utah Avenue and Spokane Street. 4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The site is currently zoned C-3 (General Business) and is vacant. Surrounding properties are zoned and developed as follows: NORTH: C-3 - Vacant SOUTH: R-3 - Multi-Family Residences EAST: R-1-A - Single-Family Residences/Vacant WEST: C-3 - Office/Vacant 5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan designates the site for Mixed Residential uses. Goal LU-3-13 encourages infill and (higher) density to protect open space and critical areas in support of more walkable neighborhoods. Goal LU-3-E encourages the city to designate area for higher density residential development where utilities and transportation facilities enable efficient use of capital resources. 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 Chester and Jaqueline Fortune have applied to change the zoning designation of Blocks 4 and 5, Frey's Addition from C-3 (General Business) to R-3 (Medium- Density Residential) to allow for multi-family residential development. The subject site is comprised of two parcels with a combined area of slightly less than two acres. The City's Comprehensive Plan designates this site for Mixed Residential land uses which allows a variety of residential (density) zones ranging from RS-20 (Suburban) through R-3. Of the allowable zones under the Mixed Residential designation, the R-3 zone allows for the highest residential density at a rate of one dwelling unit for every 3'000ft2 of land area or 14.5 units per acre. The site lies on the border of two zoning districts, C-3 (General Business) and R-1 (Low-Density Residential). Generally, the uses permitted in the C-3 zone are heavy commercial in nature such as contractor's yards and heavy equipment sales and services, which are potentially disruptive to lifestyles enjoyed in single-family neighborhoods. It is common urban planning practice to assign higher-density residential zones or sometimes office zones, to transitional areas such as this to serve as buffers between contrasting zoning districts. For this reason it may be appropriate to assign the R-3 zone to the site. Land directly south of the site is currently zoned R-3 and contains the Bishop Topel Haven apartments which is a 43 townhome-style residential development. The success of the Bishop Topel Haven development may indicate land use/zoning compatibility in the general vicinity. A bulk of the site borders two existing roadways; they are Utah Avenue and Spokane Street which are paved but lack frontage improvements such as curbs, gutters, sidewalks, street lights and landscaping. Construction of these improvements will be required at the building permit stage. All property lines of both parcels border public rights-of-way. Prior to development it is foreseen that right-of-way may be required to be dedicated and that the owners may also wish to vacate portions of Duluth Street and/or Nevada Avenue. These activities may affect the area of land available to accommodate future development. 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 over 40-years ago. 2 2. The changed conditions, which are alleged to warrant other or additional zoning: A 43-unit multi family residential named Bishop Topel Haven was developed immediately south of the site. The success of the Bishop Topel Haven has provided an attractive example of the possibility for residential development in the area. Also, the single-family residential neighborhoods east of Wehe Avenue have experienced substantial infill over the years; generating a need for alternate housing options. 3. Facts to justify the change on the basis of advancing the public health, safety and general welfare: The rezone will create a medium-density (residential) transition/buffer between residential areas to the east and commercial zones to the west. The rezone from C-3 to R-3 will encourage "infill and density including planned unit developments to protect open space and critical areas," as per Land Use Policy LU-3-B, and allow for "higher-density residential development where utilities and transportation facilities enable efficient use of capital resources," in keeping with Land Use Policy LU-3-E. This rezone would still align with that intended goal and also "Allow for a full range of residential environments including single family homes, townhouses, condominiums, apartments, and manufactured housing," consistent with Housing Policy H-2-A. 4. The effect it will have on the value and character of the adjacent property and the Comprehensive Plan: A change in zoning classification resulting in a multi family residential development will enhance the residential character of the vicinity by providing a wider range of housing opportunities. The rezone from C-3 to R-3 will encourage "infill and density including planned unit developments to protect open space and critical areas," as per Land Use Policy LU-3-B, and allow for "higher-density residential development where utilities and transportation facilities enable efficient use of capital resources," in keeping with Land Use Policy LU-3-E. This rezone would still align with that intended goal and also "Allow for a full range of residential environments including single family homes, townhouses, condominiums, apartments, and manufactured housing," consistent with Housing Policy H-2-A. 5. The effect on the property owner or owners if the request is not granted: Without transitioning the site to a residential zoning classification residential development will not occur on the property. The applicant may not wish to proceed with any site development if it cannot be residential in nature. 3 INITIAL STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT Findings of fact must be entered from the record. The following are initial findings drawn from the background and analysis section of the staff report. The Planning Commission may add additional findings to this listing as the result of factual testimony and evidence submitted during the open record hearing. 1. The site is comprised of two parcels. 2. The site is vacant. 3. The site is currently zoned C-3 (General Business). 4. The applicant is requesting the R-3 (Medium-Density Residential) zoning district be assigned to the site. S. The Comprehensive Plan identifies the site for Mixed-Residential uses which allows assignment of a range of residential zones including R-3 (Medium-Density Residential). 6. The R-3 zone is the highest density allowed under the Mixed Residential land use designation, allowing 1 dwelling unit for every 3,000 square feet of land area. 7. The site is approximately 1.9 acres in area. 8. All municipal utilities are currently available to serve the site from adjoining roadways. 9. The site to the south is similarly zoned R-3 and contains a 43-unit multi- family townhome-style residential development. TENTATIVE CONCLUSIONS BASED ON INITIAL STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT Before recommending approval or denial of a special permit the Planning Commission must develop findings of fact from which to draw its conclusions based upon the criteria listed in PMC 25.86.060. The criteria are as follows: 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. Land Use Policy LU-3-B encourages "infill" development while H-2-A suggests the City permit a full range of residential environments. Housing Policy (H-B-A) encourages standards that control the scale and density of accessory buildings and homes to maintain compatibility with other residential uses. The zoning standards for proposed rezone would be similar to the standards for the multi family development to the south. 2. The effect of the proposal on the immediate vicinity will not be materially detrimental. 4 The proposed R-3 zoning will permit site development matching the density of the Bishop Topel Haven development to the south. Based on past experience with rezoning and development of vacant land adjacent to existing single-family and multi family developments, and evidence provided by tax records of Franklin County, the proposed rezone will not be materially detrimental to the immediate vicinity. 3. There is merit and value in the proposal for the community as a whole. Lying on the dividing line between single-family zoned neighborhoods to the east and heavy commercial land to the west, the application of a multi family residential zoning to the site will serve as a buffer between the two contrasting land uses. Land immediately south of the site is zoned R-3 and contains a multi- family development, establishment of similar zoning and development on the subject site will further establish the multi family character of the vicinity. There is merit in providing an increased range of housing opportunities available in those areas currently served my municipal utilities and public transportation and will enable efficient use of capital resources. The proposal is supported by land use goals and policies contained in the Comprehensive Plan. 4. Conditions should be imposed in order to mitigate any significant adverse impacts from the proposal. No special Conditions would be required. 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 needed. RECOMMENDATION MOTION: I move to close the hearing on the proposed rezone and initiate deliberations and schedule adoption of findings of fact, conclusions and a recommendation to the City Council for the June 19, 2014 meeting. 5 Vicin Item: Rezone (C-3 to R-3) it y Applicant. Chester Fortune N Map File #: Z2014-002 i 4U + i . + , t _ boil i .jr. T H[C NLAND ST - _ SITE _ A Land Use Item: Rezone (C-3 to R-3) Applicant: Chester Fortune N Ma p File #: Z2014-002 Vacant � Single-Family 3 W Residence o oa HIGHLAND ST SITE �G Vacant Office w $A W SFR's 3 Multi-Family Residential • Item: Rezone (C-3 to R-3) Zonin . g Applicant. Chester Fortune N Map . File #: Z2014-002 x w C-3 w o (General Business) HIGHLAND ST G SITE tit R 1-A (Low-Density Residential Alternate) w �41 sT 5eo� w R3 (Medium-Density Residential) Lookifig--�� rth f I7� AP 'Yf J 4 ♦� �.�q. Rya i - gira v ,aw: Looking East a 1,1 q r YJ 1 Looking South =w ;v; JC is .d - _:.. _�y 'poi., "��'•r- � }._.; � emu.. s, ,1.'�ljf��r `� fir' .�:�„-yL.`_" ���, -��'� _� r �.�� �-, _,;K ice, �,j,..a '!kr'�` •�.� �'�y� :' •►��T u , 0., e;i� aY•s�r<:lT'� ,. _�. ,'-� ?c°. a -^Fs'-'!b , .1r;'p��, . �.si;4`. �.s: ;.� - fif- � _ .r�r � � °�"�•N,{ �+`rS �e 9..c � r"7 zu "-� -.'a-"s ��� I�i _ ' v 7 j6. � TE - S. I: - ir ,c # 1 �Y1�' � �." �� y T�'�''•A'e`��'��'�,,��^y� "E ��,� ���� �c yid ,o- 1r sit F'' �' a / ';r �'�w �t e :�3yr N, tk•:.�+ �r,�t�.� � z All '� •;�� �� rtf ��r �± P �;:; , ��� �A1 ';.';tA_.y�rr���•tr `` � +s� ,.t ��• a� `�\ f \ �•�'� �` � r r �- - `K S F Looking West i\� All r 1 1 C' REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION MASTER FILE NO. Z 2014-001 APPLICANT: DNR HEARING DATE: 5/15/14 1111 Washington St SE ACTION DATE: 6/19/14 Olympia, WA 98504 BACKGROUND REQUEST: REZONE Rezone from RT (Residential Transition) and C-1 (Retail Business) to RS-1 (Suburban Residential), R- 1 (Low-Density Residential), R-3 (Medium-Density Residential), R-4 (High-Density Residential), O (Office) and C-1 (Retail Business). 1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Legal: The west half of said Section 16 between the north line of the FCID Irrigation Canal and the south line of Highway I-182 and the southeast 1/4 of said Section 16 west of Road 68 except the southeast 1/4 thereof together with the northeast 1/4 of said Section 16 except that portion lying northerly of Highway 1-182 and easterly of Road 68. General Location: South of 1-182 between Road 68 and Road 84. Property Size: Approximately 320 Acres. 2. ACCESS: The property has access from Road 68, Road 84 and Argent Road. Chapel Hill Boulevard is planned to extend between Road 68 and Road 84 and Road 76 is planned to extend north from Argent providing additional arterial access. 3. UTILITIES: All utilities are available in surrounding developments to the east and west. A 24 inch sewer trunk line is located along the southern 140 feet of the site from the end of Valley View Drive to Road 84. A 15 inch sewer trunk line also runs north and south through the site approximately 1,200 feet east of Road 84. 4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The site is currently zoned RT (Residential Transition) and C-1 (Retail Business) *and is being farmed. Surrounding properties are zoned and developed as follows: North The site borders 1-182. Properties to the north of the freeway are zoned C-1, RT and R-1—Lowe's, residential development and vacant land South RP, RS-1, RS-20 (County)-- Pathfinder Mobile Home Park, Chiawana High School and SFDU's East RS-20 (County) 8v C-1 - SFDUs, Vacant land and 1 Commercial development West R-1 - SFDUs 5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan designates the site for low-density residential development, mixed residential and commercial land uses. Land Use Policies discourage the development of strip commercial development (LU-1-C) to avoid disruptions to residential neighborhoods (LU-4-A). Commercial development is encouraged to locate at the intersections of major streets. Housing policies encourages the development of medium and high density housing to locate near arterials and neighborhood or community shopping centers (H-1-A). Other policies encourage the development of a full range of residential environments and the advancement of programs supporting home ownership (H-2-A 8v H-1-E). The Allocation of Land Uses Table in Volume 2 of the Comprehensive Plan indicates low-density residential and mixed residential development zoning is to be established when sewer service is available, when there is a market demand and where land is suitable for home sites. The table also indicates mixed residential (multi-family) development should be located along major circulation routes and be used in transition areas between more intense uses and low density areas. 6. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The City of Pasco is the lead agency for this project. Based on the SEPA checklist, the adopted City Comprehensive Plan, City development regulations, and other information, a threshold determination resulting in a Determination of Non-significance (DNS) has been issued for this project under WAC 197- 11-158. ANALYSIS The property in question was annexed to the City in 1982 and is located more or less in the center of the Pasco Urban Growth Area. Since the mid-1990's almost six (5.78 sq. miles) square miles of land has developed around the site. This development has included single family residential subdivisions, multi- family developments, schools, community facilities, offices and commercial services. Due to State (DNR) ownership the site has remained undeveloped. While most of the I-182 Corridor has been developed with residential subdivisions, schools, community facilities, commercial businesses the site has remained vacant and in agricultural production (78 acres are vacant the remained is being farmed). The State has now recognized farming in the center of town is problematic with the rural/urban conflicts associated with farm equipment noise, hours of operation, dust and chemical usage. The Loviisa Farms subdivision is only 2 about 70 feet from the west edge of the main farm field on the site. As a result the Legislature passed Senate Bill # 5035 in 2013 that included Section #3238 directing the DNR to coordinate with the City to rezone the site in preparation for a land sale. The Legislation suggested the rezoning of the site should be consistent with the planning map held by the DNR. That planning map was based in part on a refinement of the land use map contained in the City's Comprehensive Plan and was reviewed by the Planning Commission in December of 2012. The DNR planning map is also the map submitted with the rezone request illustrating the preferred zoning for the site. The requested zoning map attached to this report reflects the DNR request. Notice of the hearing was published to indicate the rezone may involve a change from the current RT (Residential Transition) and C-1 (Retail Business) zoning to RS-1 (Suburban Residential) R-1 (Low-Density Residential), R-3 (Medium-Density Residential), R-4 (High-Density Residential), O (Office) and C- 1 (Retail Business). The C-1 district was listed twice above because a portion of the current C-1 property will eventually be below the realignment of Chapel Hill Boulevard in an area that will be more appropriate for another zoning classification. Twenty-five acres of the property being considered under this rezone is owned by the Pasco School District. The District has consented to have their property included in the overall rezone. The site is located in the center of the Pasco UGA which by definition is an area established for the encouragement of urban development. The site is more or less surrounded by urban development and is located adjacent to the busiest freeway interchange in the City. The City's land use plans for the past 30 years have indicated the site should be utilized for low density residential, mixed residential and commercial development. Following the direction of the land use plan, most of the community's residential and commercial development over the last two decades has occurred in the I-182 corridor. Development skipped over the DNR site because the land was not available for private development. Direction from the State Legislature has now made the land available for sale for private development provided it can be rezoned following the refined land use plan for the site. Rezoning the site would implement policies of the Comprehensive Plan and would support past community development efforts related to infrastructure improvements. Rezoning the property will enable development that will allow for needed utility extensions through the site to provide the looping needed to enhance reliability and safety for the area. Rezoning the site will also enable the completion of Chapel Hill Boulevard between Road 68 and Road 84 ultimately improving the transportation system to more effectively disperse traffic and provide alternate routes for emergency vehicles. The east half of Road 84 would also be able to be completed if the property was rezoned to allow development. 3 The proposed R-1 zoning will match the zoning in the Loviisa Farms subdivision to the west and the zoning of the Chapel Hill subdivision east of Road 68. The areas proposed for C-1 zoning will complement the commercial zoning on the other corners of the interchange to the north, northeast and east. The multi-family zoning proposal will take advantage of a site adjacent to a major arterial and will provide a buffer between C-1 zoning and R-1 zoning. The initial review criteria for considering a rezone application are explained in PMC. 25.88.030. The criteria are listed below as follows: 1. The changed conditions in the vicinity which warrant other or additional zoning: Adjacent development and growth within the City make the proposed zone change appropriate, timely, and consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. Surrounding properties in the I-182 corridor have been developed for several years and have essentially skipped over the DNR property. Almost 6 square miles of land have been developed on the west side of Pasco in the past 20 years. Changed conditions in the neighborhood include installation of all utilities in the surrounding subdivision, construction of major streets as well as the construction of homes, apartments, schools, parks, community facilities and commercial buildings. 2. Facts to justify the change on the basis of advancing the public health, safety and general welfare: The rezone will enable the DNR to sell the property to residential developers who will extend utilities with construction of subdivisions thereby looping the utilities for reliability and safety. Intertying the utilities will advance the safety and general welfare of the community. Development of the property will also improve arterial circulation between Road 68 and Road 84 by dispersing traffic and providing alternate routes for emergency vehicles. The safety and general welfare of the community will also be advanced because this rezone will lead to the elimination of a large farming operation in the center of an urban community. The elimination of the farm will eliminate the application of various chemicals, operation of nosy machinery and generation of dust. Elimination of the farming operation will lead to a more safe and secure environment for residential life. 3. The effect it will have on the nature and value of adjoining property and the Comprehensive Plan: Based on past experience with rezoning vacant land and farm land adjacent to existing subdivisions, 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. 4 4. The effect on the property owners if the request is not granted: The DNR is under a mandate to sell the residential portions of their property by June of 2015. The State legislation adopted for the property requires the DNR to work with the city on rezoning the property prior to the sale. Without the rezone the sale will be delayed. 5. The Comprehensive Plan land use designation for the property: The Comprehensive Plan designates the site for commercial, low-density residential and mixed residential development. The proposed rezone is consistent with the Plan. STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT Findings of Fact must be entered from the record. The following are initial Findings drawn from the background and analysis section of the staff report. The Planning Commission may add Findings to this listing as the result of factual testimony and evidence submitted during the open record hearing. 1. The site is currently zoned RT (Residential Transition) and has been zoned RT for approximately 30 years. 2. The site is in the Pasco UGA. 3. The site is located in the I-182 Corridor. 4. Since the mid-1990's 5.78 square miles of land in the I-182 Corridor has been developed with a combination of residential housing, schools, parks, community facilities, offices and commercial businesses. 5. The Loviisa Farms subdivision with over 900 homes is located 70 feet to the west of the site on the west side of Road 84. 6. The Loviisa Farms subdivision was completed in 2007. 7. The Chapel Hill subdivision with over 400 apartment units and close to 300 single-family homes is located to the east of the site on the east side of Road 68. 8. The Pathfinder Mobile Home Park and the new Chiawana High School are located directly to the south of the site. 9. The site is located adjacent to the busiest freeway interchange in Pasco. 10. The site has been bypassed by development due to the constraints of State ownership and zoning. 11. The site is currently being farmed. 12. Farming in the center of an urban area is problematic. The generation of dust, noise and use of farm chemicals are all inconsistent with the peaceful coexistence with surrounding residential development. 13. The site is owned by the Washington State Department of Natural Resources. 14. The State Legislature directed (ESSB 5035) the DNR to coordinate with the City of Pasco to rezone the site consistent with the planning 5 map held by the DNR. Said map is a refinement of the directives of the Comprehensive Plan and provides some guidance on where major arterial streets will be located within the site. Knowledge of arterial street locations is necessary to make zoning decisions. 15. Two sewer trunk lines are located within the site. 16. The current farming operation is inconsistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. 17. The rezone will facilitate an infill development which is encouraged by the Comprehensive Plan. 18. Surrounding subdivisions contain zoning similar to the zoning proposed for the site. CONCLUSIONS BASED ON INITIAL STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT Before recommending approval or denial of a Rezone, the Planning Commission must develop its conclusions from the Findings of Fact based upon the criteria listed in P.M.C. 25.88.060 and determine whether or not: 1. The proposal is in accordance with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. The proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan including the following: Land Use Policy LU-3-B encourages "infill" development while H-2-A suggests the City permit a full range of residential environments including single-family and multi family dwellings. Land Use Policy LU-1-C discourages the development of strip commercial development and LU-4-A guides the location of commercial facilities to major street intersections to avoid commercial sprawl and disruptions to residential neighborhoods. Policy H-1-A encourages the development of medium and high density housing to locate near arterials and neighborhood or community shopping centers. 2. The effect of the proposal on the immediate vicinity will not be materially detrimental. The proposed R-1 zoning matches the R-1 zoning in the Chapel Hill and Loviisa Farms subdivisions and will permit the development of single-family dwellings under similar development standards that applied to the Chapel Hill and Loviisa Farms development. The commercial zoning portion of the proposal will be consistent with the existing commercial zoning on the site and the C-1 zoning on the other corners of the I-182/Road 68 Interchange. 3. There is merit and value in the proposal for the community as a whole. Adjacent residential development and growth within the City make the zone change appropriate, timely and consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. The rezone will facilitate a residential infill project that will improve utility redundancy in the area and provide for the completion of Chapel Hill Boulevard 6 and Road 84. The proposal will also lead to the removal of a large farming operation in the heart of the urban area. 4. Conditions should be imposed in order to mitigate any significant adverse impacts from the proposal. The proposed zoning is identical to the zoning in the Chapel Hill development and as a result there is no need for conditions. 5. A Concomitant Agreement should be entered into between the City and the petitioner, and if so, the terms and conditions of such an agreement. A Concomitant Agreement is not needed. RECOMMENDATION As the report for this application was being prepared a slight realignment of the planned Chapel Hill extension was requested by the DNR. As a result staff is recommending the site be rezoned with a band of R-3 multi-family between Chapel Hill Boulevard and the freeway. Staff is also recommending a modification in the DNR request to have the property abutting the Valley View Addition be rezoned for Offices rather than C-1 retail business. Offices are a less intense land use and will provide a buffer between the homes on Valley View Drive and the C-1 areas to the north. The proposed zoning map attached to this report provides a complete illustration of the staff recommendation for this rezone. MOTION Motion: I move to close the hearing on the proposed rezone and initiate deliberations and schedule adoption of findings of fact, conclusions and a recommendation to the City Council for the June 19, 2014 meeting. 7 V I Item: Rezone RT to 0, G I I R- I I RS- I � R-3/R-4 'C*n'ty Applicant: Dept. of Natural ResourceS N Map File Z 2014-001 �WN 11 iii 6i1� ra a a0 psi ��i �� ra ,mss � V�� ♦��^ ���� v+� MM► fir+ y►♦ �',� ® ,� ♦ �i <1�► � �®®iii � ����� ® fir♦�♦,r�Q'1�,� �? ♦�®��� �., NONE Ed I ,-*MEN INIQUIEP"i LandUse Map Applicant: Dept. of Natural ResourceS N File #: Z 2014-001 -� _'�11-��IiiiiiiOW :: ..tip •••••.1111■■■1■■■ • • 1111��♦♦��1♦1♦♦j♦♦♦1♦I�Iiiii � � MEN son UNA loss 1111■■ `1� • \,- __��� ,• ,� 1� 111 x•111 �� � „ • • _ III, ��� MEN 11 1 11111. 111■■11� �!�_• i:� �� --�•.;; •.:::: . : : = - = �`X1111 ■� i�l��� � ■.tip Zoning Item: Rezone RT to 0, G I � R-I I RS-I � R-3/R-4 Map Applicant: Dept. of Natural ResourceS N File #: Z 2014-001 ■■■ ■■■ INEEMEM ■- --■ lamps - iii►��► ii�� 1�♦1��1�� i 1111����� �1�1��j♦�1���1�■■■ I■■■\ ♦♦♦WON ♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ ♦����1■■■■ ■ ,� NOR HE Is Is ■■■■�■■�♦1�♦♦ ��ljjititiii �. i� i��♦♦��� ��♦ ♦♦1111■■■■ �I►I���;��i �i �� iiiii ■■■1■■■1'llll \ � • i., � ■ � 11 1 11111. 1111111■ �■ !'! - is �' Requested Applicant: Dept. of Natural ResourceS N Zoning File Z 2014-001 Mmm i�ti ciu■ �� w� �'� ark �F+ ©���,�� � ®, � ��►air�� '� ���� d� \ Con 11.6 Acres l I�RS-1 III �0 26.8 Acres �I V, i _ ® i AWK - --- Proposed Applicant: Dept. of Natural ResourceS N Zoning File - : Z 2014-00 M12a Mwe0 �,� ��� eW �� v.� �p rer japj '���► ��i1�► l MAN NM S11iii�u���i a WIN man ' � ., Iwo WK HIM MEMORANDUM DATE: May 15, 2014 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Shane O'Neill, Planner I SUBJECT: Sylvester's Addition Neighborhood Revitalization Plan (MF# PLAN 2013- 003) Council's adopted 2012-2013 goals included development and implementation of a neighborhood revitalization plan east of 10th avenue and west of the BNRR mainline. In 2012, staff began surveying the condition of city streets and sidewalks east of 10th Avenue to identify those that would benefit from the development of a revitalization plan of repairs. Based upon results from the field surveys a project area was defined and includes Margaret, Park, Sylvester and Nixon Streets bound by 5th Avenue to the east and by 10th Avenue to the west. Within the overall project area, Park Street contains the highest level of sidewalk damage and the highest number of large street trees proposed for replacement. In 2013, staff began the scoping process by mailing information and holding a series of neighborhood meetings with affected property owners. To date, five neighborhood meetings have been held. The Draft Plan is nearing completion with the exception of further detail needed for the approach to repairs to Margaret and Nixon Streets. Staff feels it may be best if an adaptive approach is taken whereby outcomes of the first priority phase of construction are incorporated into Plan language to better guide these future phases. Throughout the public involvement process, property owners were relatively agreeable to the need for sidewalk repairs but were discouraged by the need to remove the large existing street trees that give the neighborhood much of its character. However, several property owners provided perspective on the dangerous condition of many of the street trees and the high cost for their removal. The Draft Plan recommends that the priority repair area with the most severe tree and sidewalk issues (Park Street between 5th and 7th Avenues) apply for CDBG funds to remove and replace the sidewalk and street trees. An application for 2015 Community Development Block Grants would be prepared by staff for this purpose. The Draft Plan also recommends that dry irrigation lines be installed in conjunction with the sidewalk repairs so adjacent property owners will have the ability to provide underground irrigation to the planting strips adjacent their property. Currently few owners have this ability. Maintenance of the planting strips is the responsibility of the adjacent owner per our existing Municipal Code provisions. Staff requests the Planning Commission review and comment on the draft Plan. Based on the direction provided by the Planning Commission, staff will formalize the draft and schedule a public hearing before the Commission. Sylvester's Addition Neighborhood Revitalization Plan ,f t ..gyp t�S kWi. t7 _ f,y .. ice. MAW ". City of Pasco Community& Economic Development Department April - 2014 Table of Contents Sylvester's Addition Neighborhood Revitalization Plan.............................................................................1 Tableof Contents.........................................................................................................................................z Introduction.................................................................................................................................................3 History..........................................................................................................................................................4 ProblemStatement .....................................................................................................................................5 PlanGoals.....................................................................................................................................................5 Background..................................................................................................................................................5 Scoping& Public Involvement....................................................................................................................5 AlternativesProposed.................................................................................................................................6 Alternate1 ................................................................................................................................................6 Alternatez................................................................................................................................................6 Alternate3................................................................................................................................................6 NeighborhoodMeetings.............................................................................................................................6 Neighborhood Meeting#1 (2/2013).........................................................................................................6 NeighborhoodMeeting#z(412013)........................................................................................................6 NeighborhoodMeeting#3 (6/2013)........................................................................................................7 Neighborhood Meeting#4(12/2013).......................................................................................................7 NeighborhoodMeeting#5(3/2014)........................................................................................................7 Construction Components..........................................................................................................................8 Trees.............................................................................................................................................................8 Parking..........................................................................................................................................................g Irrigation.......................................................................................................................................................g PriorityAreas................................................................................................................................................g ParkStreet.................................................................................................................................................. 10 MargaretStreet......................................................................................................................................... 10 Sylvester& Nixon Streets.......................................................................................................................... 10 HenryStreet................................................................................................................................................11 PathForward...............................................................................................................................................11 Maintenance Responsibility.......................................................................................................................ii Funding........................................................................................................................................................1z Community Development Block Grant(CDBG) Funding..........................................................................1z Appendix.....................................................................................................................................................12 2 Introduction Typical of western railroad towns, the original Town Plat of Pasco recorded in April of 1886 was laid out with street rights-of-way 8o feet in width. The plats that followed continued the same theme with streets forming the nucleus of the City by 1921 laid out with 8o-foot wide street rights-of-way. In early plats the streets were improved with 30 to 40 foot road surfaces typically centered in the 8o foot right-of-way. On either side of the road surface was another 20 to 25 feet of right-of-way developed with large planting strips (lawn and large trees) and five-foot wide sidewalks. The sidewalks were often placed near the outer edge of the right-of-way adjacent to the abutting lots. Streets were designed in this manner to allow for the gradual increase in pavement width as neighborhoods grew. Once built however,the streets in the subject project area were not changed. As the original Pasco neighborhoods aged and automobile ownership per household increased so did the demand on on-street parking availability. As a result the large planting strips became an area for the storage of vehicles, equipment and other items. Responding to citizen complaints about the lack of planting strip maintenance, the City Council amended the municipal code in 1994 to require all planting strips to be maintained with lawn, trees and ground cover. The parking of motor vehicles, boats, campers and trailers was also prohibited along with the storage of lumber,firewood and other items generally. The neighborhoods referenced above (located in the central core of the community west of the BNSF rail mainline and loth Avenue) were established just before and after the year l9oo. Many of the homes in these neighborhoods are approaching 75 years of age. Designed for a different age, the narrow streets and smaller lots create parking constraints for residents today who rely heavily on automobiles for everyday activities. The once attractively landscaped planting strips with large shade trees now create another set of issues for the neighborhoods. The purpose of this study is to develop a neighborhood revitalization plan to address the issues of mature and failing street trees, damaged sidewalks and parking availability. Over the past 75 — goo years, the trees originally planted in the right-of-way as part of the streetscape design have grown substantially. Mostly Silver Maples, the trees have reached over fifty feet in height. These trees have reached their maturity and have begun failing in terms of structure and overall appearance. Woody debris consistently falls into the right-of- way and as much as co-dominant stems or entire trees have begun to fall during high wind events.This condition is hazardous to people and property; cars can be damaged and people may be harmed by the falling debris. 3 (Vehicle damaged by a tree in 2012) History A series of sidewalk damage field surveys conducted during 2012 revealed concentrations of damage to city sidewalks. The predominant type of sidewalk damage observed was upheaval caused by trees located within City right-of-way planting strips. Generally, neighborhoods containing more large/mature trees are those with the most sidewalk damage. Only moderate to severe levels of damage were noted as needing repair and appear as individual points shown in the attached maps. Much of the damage surveyed occurs within an area of town (illustrated in the Area-Priority Ranking Map, see appendix) originally platted in Sylvester's Addition [also known as Sylvester's Second Addition (1889)] and Sylvester's Third Addition (1891). All rights-of-way contained in these Plats are eighty (80) feet wide, fifty feet of which is occupied by sidewalks and landscaping strips containing medium to large sized trees. The remaining thirty (30) feet of the right-of-way contains the road surface. Despite the relatively wide rights-of-way, the roads themselves are fairly narrow. The narrow road issue is further compounded by the use of on-street parking. Because many of the homes in the Sylvester's Addition were constructed without driveways, the on-street parking in the area is heavily used. Access to these properties was limited to alleys only. As a result on street parking is heavily used often reducing the travel lane widths, creating congestion and a cluttered streetscape view. 4 Problem Statement Well-functioning residential neighborhoods contain uniform and predictable sidewalk surfaces without abrupt changes. Sidewalk surfaces should be flat and even without large cracks, uplift or sinkholes. Unfortunately the Sylvester's Addition neighborhood contains a high concentration of sidewalk damage caused by trees, vehicles and unauthorized repairs. Repairs to damaged sidewalks can be expensive and involve the use of heavy machinery. Sidewalk repairs are the responsibility of the adjacent property owner, but can often be expensive and inefficient if done in a piecemeal fashion. If the sidewalk damage in residential areas persists or increases it may lead to an increase in civil lawsuits at a significant cost to both property owners and the City. Plan Goals The purpose of this study is to develop a neighborhood revitalization plan to address the issues of damaged sidewalks and parking availability. Accomplishing the goals may involve the following types of activities: physical changes to the right-of-way configuration, removal of mature street trees, modification to right-of-way irrigation systems and sidewalk replacement.This Plan aims to outline how and where these activities should be applied. Background Scoping & Public Involvement Neighborhood meetings were held in February, April, June and December of 2013 and March Of 2014, to allow property owners within the project area opportunities to provide staff with input and information relevant to various aspects of the proposed projects' goals and objectives. Throughout the scoping process some property owners expressed opposition to any proposals involving widening road surfaces; citing the example of the W. Henry Street road widening project where vehicle speeds increased as a result. Residents view the faster traveling vehicles as a nuisance and/or hazard. 5 Alternatives Proposed Originally staff presented a set of five alternate project goal statements to be used in guiding path forward for project activities. Early on staff narrowed it down to a set of three project goal alternates which were then presented to the neighborhood. During the first couple of neighborhood meetings it became clear that the stakeholders were most closely aligned with the goals contained in Alternate #1. The three proposed project goal alternates are listed below. Alternate 1 Remove problem trees, repair damaged sidewalk and replant street friendly trees. Alternate z Remove problem trees, repair sidewalks and revise planting strips to include on-street parallel parking. Alternate 3 Remove problem trees, repair sidewalks and revise planting strips to include on-street angled parking. Neighborhood Meetings To date, a series of five neighborhood involvement meetings were held at the Pasco Senior Center. Prior to each meeting notices were mailed to affected property owners inviting them to attend. Initially all property owners within the larger project area received meeting notices but as the project focused more narrowly upon project sub-area 1, meeting notice mailings were sent only to sub-area 1 property owners. Neighborhood Meeting#1 (2/2013) During the first meeting, discussions addressed a broad scope of issues and concerns; not all issues discussed pertained to the objectives of the Plan. The input received was useful to develop a better understanding of the project area as the residents perceive it and how they would like to see it in the future. Neighborhood Meeting#2 (4/2013) For the second meeting staff had prepared a set of three possible project alternatives aimed at fixing damaged sidewalks and alleviating congested on-street parking. At the second meeting residents initially indicated their overall preference for Alternate #1 which replaces both broken sidewalks and trees associated with the damage; this alternate does not address parking related problems. 6 Neighborhood Meeting#3 (6/2013) The outcome of the third meeting was similar to that of the second meeting in that people preferred alternate #1. At the third meeting the issue of aging utility systems was mentioned. The study area was originally constructed over eighty (8o) years ago; municipal utilities are on a 75-year replacement schedule, so if it foreseen that the city intends to update sewer/water lines the residents urged the city to possibly consolidate these projects to eliminate or reduce multiple disturbances in the neighborhood. Neighborhood Meeting#4 (12/2013) The fourth meeting was the first time project construction cost estimates were provided to the affected property owners. The cost estimates were provided for tree removal and replacement, stump removal, sidewalk removal and replacement and for the installation of new landscape irrigation lines. During the fourth meeting one or more property owners requested the option for a tree installation waiver whereby a property owner could choose not to have a new tree planted in front of their home. At the time of the meeting many stakeholders were under the impression that property owners would be bearing the full cost of the project; because of this they expressed a want to be responsible only for costs associated with construction adjacent to each parcel. In other words, property owners did not like the idea of paying an average cost rate based solely on their linear length of road frontage. Additionally, property owner desired that the replacement trees be similarly large trees. Neighborhood Meeting#5 (312014) During the fifth meeting staff presented the few attendees with a diagram showing the proposed finished streetscape layout including underground irrigation lines, trees and sidewalks. Staff also presented a list of proposed tree species to be used as new plantings. The tree species list was generated based on some research into individual species growth- form and behavior and the list was also based upon a site visit to Job's Nursery. The final species chosen are well stocked at the nursery and are of similar caliper and height to ensure some degree of uniformity at the time of planting. All fruit bearing trees (including trees with ornamental fruit) were excluded from consideration to avoid a variety of nuisances associated with falling and rotting fruit. Also during the meeting staff informed the attendees of the city's intent to secure project funding entirely through Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funding sources and that it is possible property owners may not be assessed for the expenses. 7 Construction Components Trees Over the past 75 — 100 years, the trees originally planted in the right-of-way as part of the streetscape design have grown substantially. Mostly Silver Maples, the trees have reached over fifty feet in height. These trees have reached their maturity and have begun failing in terms of structure. Woody debris as large as co-dominant stems and even entire trees have begun to fall during high wind events. This condition is hazardous to people and property; cars can be damaged and people can be hurt by the falling woody debris. Although neighborhood residents expressed their enjoyment of the trees, retention of the mature trees may be a detriment to the improvement project at hand. A majority of the trees must be removed due to their interference with sidewalk replacement. For those trees which are not an immediate threat to sidewalks, growth form is the greater concern. Due to the propensity for the larger trees to fail and drop debris staff proposes to replace them with more suitable tree species. Some of the preferred tree species suitable for plantings along roadways in the project area and which are locally available include but are not limited to the following: 1) Greenspire Littleleaf Linden (Tilia cordata) z) Armstrong Maple (Acer freemanii) 3) Tulip Tree (Liri_odendron tuiipi fera) 4) Crimson Sentry Maple (Acer platanoides) 5) Quaking Aspen (Populus tremuloides) 6) Corinthian Linden (Tilia cordata) 7) Summer Sprite Linden (Tilia cordata `Halkar') 8) Variegated Boxelder(A_cer_n_egundov_ar.variegatum) Using a well distributed combination of the species listed above is intended to create a staggered tree canopy structure which will appear fuller at all heights. Combining low, medium and tall trees will provide a tree canopy better able to resist wind from ground-level upwards. A comprehensive list of the City's preferred street trees is included in the appendix of this Plan. 8 Parking The neighborhood meeting component of the scoping process revealed the property owner's general priority level for additional parking. From the meetings, staff's impression is that the property owners (in attendance) do not value additional parking enough to justify assessing the costs of modifying the right-of-way to provide it. Revisions to the existing parallel on-street parking configuration are not proposed. Property owners saw that having an on-street parking space in front of their home does not guarantee that the parking space would remain available to them. Due to the perceived high number of vehicles per household, the property owners felt that additional on-street parking would quickly fill up with vehicles, many non-operational or infrequently used. Irrigation Installation of landscaping irrigation lines is a project component which has been presented to property owners during the neighborhood meeting phase. The proposal for new landscape irrigation includes installation of 1-inch PVC lines leading from the front property line of each home to the roadside landscape strip and then extending in either direction to cover the full width of the parcels' landscape strip. As part of this project irrigation lines are not proposed to be connected to the private municipal water line(s) belonging to each parcel. For reference, an example of the proposed irrigation layout designed for a single block of Park Street is included in the appendices of this Plan. Priority Areas The study area is divided into sub-areas organized by east-west oriented roadways using alleys as convenient dividing lines. This grouping coincides well with the degree of sidewalk damage observed and thus allowing priority to be assigned to each based on the amount of work required to make repairs. Each sub-area is listed below in order of damage severity with the first (Park Street) being having the highest degree of sidewalk damage and the most large street trees. Planning Department staff worked with Engineering Department staff to develop a certain threshold for assessing sidewalk replacement and deciding when it is appropriate to retain undamaged existing sidewalk. The threshold used is % of a city block. In other words, sidewalk may be retained when it is contiguously undamaged for one half of one block or more. There is no economy in retaining less than a % block; meaning it may increase costs to attempt to retain portions of undamaged sidewalk less than a % block in length. 9 Park Street The Park Street project sub-area hereinafter referred to as "sub-area 1", ranks first on the Area Priority Ranking_Map. This sub-area contains that portion of Park Street bound by Stn _ Avenue to the east and by loth Avenue to the west. Sub-area 1 contains the highest number of large/mature street trees in the study area and consequently also has the highest degree of sidewalk damage. Sub-area 1 contains 3,800 linear feet of private property frontage; 240 linear feet of which belong to the Lourde's Hospital parking lot and needs no work to correct sidewalk damage. For discussion purposes Sub-area 1 contains 3,56o linear feet of (residential)frontage applicable to improvements of this Plan. Field studies revealed twenty five (25) mature and failing street trees on Park Street; all of which are proposed to be replaced. These trees are primarily Silver Maples ranging in size from 3-5 feet in diameter and approximately 40-50 feet in height. The trees have passed their prime in terms of growth rate and appearance. The trees are in a state of decline, dropping significantly sized woody debris such as co-dominant stems. These large fall-outs damage property below the tree permanently altering the tree's balance.With every passing year the likelihood the entire tree will fall during one of our region's high-wind events increases. Based on the % block survey standard mentioned above, all sidewalks fronting Park Street (2,3oo LF) must be replaced. In sub-area 1 staff found no need to replace sidewalks fronting the numerically named roadways (5th 7th, 8th and loth Avenues). These north-south oriented roadways generally lack landscaping, including trees; as a result the sidewalks are undamaged. These roadways are proposed to receive new street tree plantings. Margaret Street The Margaret Street project sub-area hereinafter referred to as "sub-area z", ranks second on the Area Priority Ranking Map. Sub-area z contains far fewer large mature trees and far less sidewalk damage than Park Street. Sub-area z is nearly identical in size to the Park Street sub-area 1 but may require significantly fewer tree removals and possibly less sidewalk replacement. Sylvester & Nixon Streets Properties fronting Sylvester Street have been grouped with properties fronting Nixon Street. This sub-area hereinafter referred to as "sub-area 3", ranks third on the Area-Priority Rank_ing Map. Sub-are 3 is the largest of the three sub-areas and contains the highest number of individual parcels. Despite its large size sub-area 3 contains the lowest 10 occurrence of damaged sidewalks in need of repair. For this reason it is assigned the lowest priority for construction activity needs. Sub-area 3 contains Sylvester Park which is an approximately z-acre city park containing three tennis courts, two full basketball courts and a child's playground. Henry Street Originally the project area of this Plan included properties fronting Henry Street, between 5th and loth Avenues. Staff surveys the project area revealed minimal to no sidewalk damage along Henry Street. Due to the lack of remarkable damage to the Henry Street sidewalks or other right-of-way infrastructure, the Henry Street sub-area has been excluded from further proposed project construction activities and removed altogether from the Area Priority Ran_king_Map. Path Forward To date a comprehensive planning analysis of construction needs has only been completed for Sub-area 1 (Park Street). Following the completion of the first phase of construction activities planning staff will repeat the planning and scoping processes within sub-areas z & 3. The intent behind waiting until sub-area 1 construction is complete before proceeding to sub-areas z & 3 is to allow staff to modify certain strategies and concepts by adapting to the outcomes and lessons learned from the first phase of construction. This delayed approach will provide property owners an opportunity to visualize proposed project activities by visiting Park Street to see an example of the final product. Maintenance Responsibility Currently, property owners within the project area maintain the roadside landscaping areas in front of their homes, as has been the case since the creation of the neighborhood. The city intends to continue with the assignment of right-of-way landscape maintenance to the adjacent property owners. Following the completion of right-of-way construction activities, property owners are to continue maintaining their portion of the adjoining improvements. The term maintenance means the proper upkeep of all infrastructure and living vegetation contained in that area 11 between the front property line and street curb, bound by parallel lines projecting forward from the side property lines of each parcel. Funding Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Funding It is the intent of the Community & Economic Development Department to fund project costs by securing CDBG funds and in the future to possibly leverage funding from the Sidewalk Improvement Program (CIP project). Staff will file a CDBG application in May(2014) with the hopes of receiving grant funding for the 2015 project year. CDBG entitlement grants may be used for infrastructure projects which provide a suitable living environment (i.e. residential neighborhoods) in areas which primarily benefit low to moderate income households. This Plan's project area is contained within a US Census Block which qualifies as low to moderate income. Appendix 1) Sylvester's Addition Neighborhood Improvement Plan Area Priority Ranking Map 2) Sylvester's Addition Neighborhood Improvement Plan Phase 1 Proposal Map 3) Recommended Trees for the Mid-Columbia Region 12 Sylvester's Addition Neighborhood Improvement Plan Area Priority Ranking Map Ll Ll L � 1 11 HENRY ST N Sub-area #2 MARGARET ST w > > > Sub-area #1 PARK ST H � H O oo NIXON ST Sub-area #3 F � 11 'T Legend Sidewalk Damage SYLVESTER ST Sylvester's Addition Neighborhood Improvement Plan N Phase 1 Proposal 903 N 7th Ave 723 W Park St 717 W Park St 715 W Park St 705 W Park St PARK ST E� Legend Tree • 732 W Park St 728 W Park St 724 W Park St 718 W Park St 714 W Park St 712 W Park St • . . • • Irrigation Mid-Columbia Community Forestry Council WASHINGTON$TaTE UNWVERSITY AVWM BENTON COUNTY EXTENSION t y ' ' C # # Recommended Trees for the Mid-Columbia Region Class I - Narrow Parking Strips - strips >5' & <10' (A. Under utility lines B. Not under utility lines) Botanical Name Common Name Height Spread A/B Comments Landscape Features Acer palmatum dissectum Maple, Japanese Laceleafs 5-12 5-12 A Needs afternoon shade and a Foliage interest either during the growing season or fall protected location colors. Many varieties available. Crimson Queen, Red Dragon, Viridis, etc Acer platanoides 'Columnar' Columnar Norway Maple 35 15 B Green foliage that turns to golden yellow in the fall. Acer platanoides 'Crimson Sentry' Crimosn Sentry Maple 25 15 A/B Red new growth matures to a maroon-purple. Red- bronze in Fall. Acer rubrum 'Armstrong' or Red Maple 45-40 15 B Foliage is green during the growing season and turn 'Bowhall' yellow, orange and red tones in fall. Amelanchier grandiflora Serviceberry 20 15 A/B Fragrant white flowers in early spring that leads to 3/8" purple blue edible berries. Green foliage turns orange tones in fall. Amelanchier laevis Allegheny Serviceberry 25 15 A/B Fragrant white flowers in early spring that leads to small blue berries. Brilliant red fall color. Amelanchier laevis 'Snowcloud' Snowcloud Serviceberry 25 15 A/B Fragrant white flowers in early spring that leads to 3/8" purple blue edible berries. Green foliage turns scarlet in fall. Aronia melanocarpan 'Autumn Chokeberry, Autumn Magic 5-6 5-6 A White flowers in spring. Dark green leaves turn bright red Magic' to purple tones. In fall, black berries form and persist into winter. Betula nigra 'Summer Cascade' Birch, Summer Cascade 12-15 8-10 A Bronze birch borer resistant Green leaves that turn golden yellow. Winter interest, creamy brown bark that exfoliates. Caragana arboerscens Peashrub, Siberian 8/10 6/8 A Has thorns Green leaves that turn are yellow brown in fall. In spring has small yellow pea shaped flowers. Carpinus betulus 'Frans Fontaine' Columnary European Hornbeam 35 15 B Dark green foliage turns bright yellow in fall. Page 1 Final Draft 9/09 Class I - Narrow Parking Strips - strips >5' & <10' (A. Under utility lines B. Not under utility lines) Botanical Name Common Name Height Spread A/B Comments Landscape Features Cornus alba'Argenteo-Marginata' Dogwood, Variegated Redtwig 6-10 5-8 A Shrub, use tree form Red stems are great for winter interest. Green with white margins are great for summer interest. Forsythia x intermedia 'Spring Gloy Forsythia, Spring Glory 10 10 A Shrub, use tree form Yellow flowers in early spring cover branches. Green turning to purple-red tones over yellow fall color. Ginkgo biloba 'Princeton Sentry' Princeton Sentry Ginkgo 40 15 B Odd foliage shape for great interest. Golden-yellow fall color. Hydrangea paniculata Hydrangea, Panicle 10-15 10-15 A Shrub, use tree form Large panicle or pointed clusters of white flowers in mid- summer. Leave flower to dry and turn pink, lasts for months. Pee Gee, Pink Diamond, etc Liquidambar styraciflua 'Clydesform' Emerald Sentinel Sweetgum 30 12 B Green leaves turning to yellow/orange tones for fall. Oxydendron arboreum Sourwood 20 15 A/B Green foliage turn to brilliant scarlet red orange tones in fall. In mid-summer clusters of small bell shaped white flowers cover tree. Physocarpus opulifolius Ninebark, Diabolo 10 8 A Shrub, use tree form Dark mahogany-purple foliage all growing season. Small clusters of white flowers in May. White-tan exfoliating bark for winter interest. Prunus fruticosa 'Globosa' Cherry(Flowering), Globe 8-12 8 A See Class V In early to mid spring, covered in lots of small white flowers. Pyrus calleryana cultivars Capitol Pear 40-35 15-12 B Codling moth problems possible, Dark green foliage turn red/yellow tones for fall. In spring see Class V before the leaves tree is covered in cluster of white flowers. Quercus alba x Q. robur Crimson Spire Oak 45 15 B Green foliage turns red tones for fall. Retains leaves all 'Crimschmidt' through winter. Ribes sanguineum 'King Edward Currant (Flowering), King Edward VII 6-8 6-8 A In early to mid-spring, clusters of red-pink panicle clusters VII' of flowers appear to drip at first then stand up. Long color show. Syringa lacinata Lilac, Cutleaf 8 5-6 A Deeply serrated leaf shape. In spring, fragrant lavender pink blooms are in great abundance. Syringa meyeri 'Palibin' Lilac, Dwarf Korean Lilac 8 5-6 A Violet-purple flowers emerge in mid-spring for a good color show. Syringa x'Bailebelle' Lilac, Tinkerbelle 8 5-6 A In mid to late spring, wine red flowers appear with a spicy fragrance Syringa x'Bailming' Lilac, Prince Charming 8 5-6 A In mid to late dpring, lavender pink flowers appear with a pleasant fragrance. Tilia cordata 'Corzam' Corinthian Linden 45 15 B Green leaves turn yellow for fall. In June, clusters of small fragrant, yellow flowers appear. Page 2 Final Draft 9/09 Class I - Narrow Parking Strips - strips >5' & <10' (A. Under utility lines B. Not under utility lines) Botanical Name Common Name Height Spread A/B Comments Landscape Features Tilia cordata 'Halkar' Summer Sprite Linden 45 15 B Green leaves turn yellow for fall. In June, clusters of small fragrant, yellow flowers appear. Viburnum opulus 'Sterile' Viburnum, Snowball Tree 10 10 A Green leaves turn to red tones in fall. Ball-shaped clusters of white flowers cover tree in May. Page 3 Final Draft 9/09 Class II- Parking Strips - strips >10' wide & <20' wide Botanical Name Common Name lHeight ISpread A/B Comments Landscape Features Acer buergeranum Trident Maple 20 20 Glossy green leaves turn red orange tones in fall. Acer campestre'Panacek' Maple, Hedge Metro Gold 35 20 Dark green leaves turn bright yellow in fall. Acer ginnala Maple, Amur 15-20 15 A Medium green foliage turns brilliant orange-red to deep red in fall. Acer griseum Maple, Paperbark 20-30 10-15 Leaves emerge red, mature to green, then turn back to red for fall. Has exfoliating, cinnamon bark. Acer palmatum Maple, Japanese family 12-25 15-20 A Needs proctection from afternoon Assorted shapes, textures, foliage interest in spring, sun and west winds summer and fall. Bloodgood, Fireglow, Sangu Kaku, etc Acer platanoides'Columnare' Maple Norway, Columnar 50 15-20 Dark green turn golden yellow in fall. Acer platanoides'Easy Street' Maple, Easy Street 40 20 Dark green turn golden yellow in fall. Acer rubrum 'Autumn Spire' Maple Red Autumn Spire 50 20-25 Green leaves turn to red tones in fall. Acer rubrum 'Bowhall' Maple, Red Bowhall 40 10-15 Green leaves turn yellow, orange and red tones in fall. Acer rubrum 'Karpick' Maple, Red Karpick 40 20 Green leaves turn to yellow and red tones in fall. Acer tataricum Maple, Tatrian and family 20-25 18-20 A Green leaves turn red on the outside and yellow on the inner foliage. Seeds are persistent and red in late spring- early summer. Hot Wings, etc Acer x freemanii 'Armstrong' Maple, Armstrong 40-50 15 Green leaves turn to red tones infall. Acer x freemanii 'Celzam' Maple, Celebration 45 20-25 Dark green turn golden yellow in fall. Acer x freemanii 'Scarsen' Maple, Scarlet Sentinel 40-45 20-25 Green leaves turn to red tones in fall. Amelanchier laevis Serviceberry, Allegheny 25 15 A Fragrant, white flower clusters in early spring, produce purple-red berries. Green leaves turn orange-red in fall. Amelanchier x grandiflora Serviceberry, Autumn Brillance 20-25 15 A Fragrant, white flower clusters in early spring, produce purple-black berries. Green leaves turn red orange tones in fall. Carpinus caroliniana Hornbeam,American 25 20 Green leaves turn golden yellow in fall. Catalpa bungeii 'Nana' Catalpa, Umbrella 18-20 18-20 A Large heart shaped leaves. Chionanthus virginiana Fringe Tree, american 18 20 Tree form Medium to dark green turn yellow for the fall. In late spring has lots of clusters of white flowers. Cornus florida Dogwood, Eastern and family 15-20 15-20 A Needs protection from winds, not a Medium green leaves turn red tones for the fall. Flower street tree colors vary from variety to variety of whites, light pinks and rose-reds. Generally blooms in mid-April. Pink, Red, White, Cherokee Series, etc Page 4of13 Class II- Parking Strips - strips >10' wide & <20' wide Botanical Name Common Name Height Spread A/B Comments Landscape Features Cornus kousa Dogwood, Kousa and family 20 20 A Needs protection from winds, not a Medium green leaves turn red tones for the fall. Flower street tree colors vary from variety to variety of whites and light pinks. Generally blooms in mid to late May. Kousa, Satomi, Heartthrob, etc Cornus mas Dogwood, Cornelian Cherry 20-25 15 Cotinus coggygria Smoke tree and family(tree form) 15-20 15-20 A Foliage color ranges from green to purple red with brilliant red to orange fall color. In late spring clusters of smoky purple, puff-like panicles flowers appear. Laburnum x watered 'Vossii' Goldenchain, Vossii 25 20 All parts poisonous Abundant clusters of yellow flowers in spring. Mackia amurensis Mackia, Amur 25 20 Nitrogen fixer Upright clusters of white flowers in mid summer. Malus x'Spring Snow' Crabapple, Spring Snow 25 15-20 A Sterile, no fruit Yellow bark backdrops loads of white, sterile flowers in spring before the leaves. Nyssa sylvatica Tupelo, Black 35 20 Dark green leaves turn to hot copper red in fall. Parrotia persica Parrotia, Persian 20-40 15-25 Hard to find in a single trunk Green textured leaves turn to a multi-toned fall color of yellows, purples, reds and oranges. Unusual flower shape of red stamen in early spring. Populus tremula 'Erects' Aspen, Swedish Columnar 40 10-15 Green leaves turn yellow orange in fall. Prunus (Flowering Cherry Hybrids) Cherry(Flowering), Hybrids 15 to 30 15 to 30 Not to be planted near hot surfaces; A wide of variety of structures, and flower can be simple See Class V to double and range in color from white to a dark pink. Okame, Mt Fuji, Kwanzan, etc Prunus (Flowering Plum) Plum (Flowering), Hybrids See Class V The majority have purple red leaves with single pink flowers before leaves emerge. 'Blireiana' has double pink flowers and red foliage matures to olive green. Newport, Thundercloud, Krauter Vesuvius, Cistena, etc Prunus virginiana Chokecherry 20-30 20-25 Varieties can have green foliage that turns yellow. 'Canada Red' has green leaves that mature purple red. All have small white flowers. Pyrus calleryana Pear, Flowering 30-35 15-30 See Class V Dark green leaves turn purple red tones for fall. All have single white flowers that cover the tree in spring before the leaves emerge. Cleveland Select, Aristocrat, Autumn Blaze, Chanticleer, etc Quercus alba x Q. robur Oak, Crimson Spire 45 15 Dark green leaves turn red tones for fall. Retains leave Crimschmidt' through winter. Page 5 of 13 Class II- Parking Strips - strips >10' wide & <20' wide Botanical Name lCommon Name lHeight ISpread A/B Comments Landscape Features Syringa reticulata Lilac, Japanese Tree 25 15 In late spring, produces fragrant white clusters of flowers. Page 6 of 13 Class III- Corridor Planting Areas- areas along corridor >20' wide & <35' wide with crowns no wider than 40' Botanical Name Common Name Height Spread A/B Comments Landscape Features Acer campestre Maple, Hedge 30 30 Dark green leaves turn bright yellow in fall. Acer miyabei 'Morton' Maple, State Street 25-40 20-35 Dark green leaves turn yellow in fall. Acer negundo Boxelder, Sensation and Variegated 35 25-30 Can attract boxelder bugs Sensation' has green leaves that turn red. Variegated has green with white edged leaves. Acer platanoides Maple, Norway Hybrids 50 30-40 Excludes parent plant Dark green turn golden yellow in fall. Acer platanoides Emerald Queen, Deborah, Easy Street, Crimson King, etc Acer platanoides 'Colunarbroad' Maple, Parkway 40 25 Dark green turn golden yellow in fall. Acer rubrum Maple, Red and family 40 to 50 35 to 40 Green leaves turn to red tones in fall. Color changes and fall color varies by variety. October Glory, Red Sunset, Burgundy Belle, etc Acer saccharinum 'Silver Cloud' Maple, Silver Cloud 50-60 30 Bright green leaves with bright yellow fall color. Acer saccharinum 'Silver Queen' Maple, Silver Queen 50 40 Bright green leaves with bright yellow fall color. Acer saccharum 'Green Mountain' Maple, Green Mountain 50-75 35-40 Heat tolerant Medium green foliage that turns orange in fall. Acer x freemanii Maple, Freeman 50-60 40 Dark green foliage that turns orange, red and yellow tones in fall. Color change and fall color varies by variety. Autumn Blaze, Sienna Glen, Marmo, etc Aesculus x carnea Horsechestnut, Red and Family 40 to 50 35 In spring clusters of pink or red flowers emerge. Flower color varies by variety. Alnus glutinosa Alder, Black 50 30 Nitrogen Fixer. Betula nigra Birch, River and family 40-50 30-40 Heat and birch borer resistant Green leaves turn to golden yellow in fall. Has exfoliating bark of cream, orange and brown. Bark color varies by variety. Dura Heat, Heritage, etc Betula papyrifera 'renci' Birch, Renaissance Reflection 60 25 Heat and birch borer resistant White exfoliating bark with dark green leaves that turn yellow in fall. Betula papyrifera 'Varen' Birch, Prairie Dream 50 40 Heat and birch borer resistant White exfoliating bark with dark green leaves that turn yellow in fall. Betula platyphylla'Fargo' Birch, Dakota Pinnacle 60 25 Heat and birch borer resistant White exfoliating bark with dark green leaves that turn yellow in fall. Betula platyphylla 'VerDale' Birch, Prairie Vision 35-45 30-35 Heat and birch borer resistant White exfoliating bark with dark green leaves that turn yellow in fall. Capinus betulus Hornbeam, European 40-60 25-40 1 Green leaves turn golden yellow in fall. Page 7of13 Class III- Corridor Planting Areas- areas along corridor >20' wide & <35' wide with crowns no wider than 40' Botanical Name Common Name Height Spread A/B Comments Landscape Features Catapla x erubescens Catalpa, Purple 40 30 New growth is purple Leaves emerges purple and mature to green. Flowers in late spring with clusters of white blooms. Celtis occidentalis Hackberry, Common 50-75 50 Cercis canadensis Redbud, Eastern 20-30 20-25 Small flowers cover branches, varies in color from shades of pink to lavender, depending on variety. Oklahoma, Flame, etc. Gingko biloba (male) Gingko (Male strains) 45-50 25-40 Fan-shaped green leaves turn yellow for fall. Autumn Gold, Halka, The President, Shangri-La, Saratoga Gleditsia triacanthos var. inermis Honeylocust 40 to 60 30-35 Thornless Depending on variety, green leaves turn yellow for fall. 'Sunburst' has yellow new growth. Gymnocladus dioica Coffeetree, Kentucky 50 35 Not easy to find Tolerant to our environment. Green leaves turn yellow for fall. Irregular growing habit. Koelreuteria paniculata Goldenrain Tree 30 30 In late spring panicles of yellow blooms cover the tree. Seed pods resemble Chinese lanterns. Liquidamber styraciflua Sweetgum 40-50 25-30 Corky bark and dark green foliage. Fall color ranges from yellows, reds to purple tones. Fall color depends on variety. American, Cherokee, Worplesdon Maackia amurensis Maackia, Amur 20-30 20-30 Upright clusters of white flowers in mid summer. Metasequoia glyptostroboides Redwood, Dawn 60 25 Dark green needles that turn rusty orange in fall. Rough brown barked is interesting too. Ostrya viginiana Hophornbeam, American 40 25 Adaptive tree with green leaves. Pistacia chinensis Pistache, Chinese 30 30 Dark green leaves turn orange-red for fall. Quercus frainetto Oak, Forest Green 50 30 Dark glossy green leaves with yellow fall color. Sorbus aucuparia Mt. Ash, Carindal Royal 40 20 Dark green leaves turn orange red for fall. Has either orange or red berries. Taxodium distichum Bald Cypress 50-70 25-30 Light green needles with a fine textured look. Needles turn rusty orange for fall. Shawnee Brave, etc Tilia americana Linden, American 40 to 60 25-30 Green leaves turn yellow for fall. In June, clusters of small fragrant, yellow flowers appear. Redmond, etc Tilia cordata Linden, Littleleaf 35-50 30-35 Green leaves turn yellow for fall. In June, clusters of small fragrant, yellow flowers appear. Shamrock, Greenspire, Chancellor, etc Ulmus wilsoniana Elm, Prospector 140 130 1 Dutch elm disease resistant Large dark green leaves with yellow fall color. Page 8of13 Class III- Corridor Planting Areas- areas along corridor >20' wide & <35' wide with crowns no wider than 40' Botanical Name Common Name Height Spread A/B Comments Landscape Features Zelkova serrata Zelkova, Japanese 60-70 35-40 Dark green leaves turn rusty red in fall. Greenvase, Village Green Zelkova serrata 'Schmidtlow' Zelkova, Wireless 20 36 A Dark green leaves turn rusty red fall color. Page 9of13 Class IV-Open Space-open areas >35' wide with no utility & no limit to width or height Botanical Name Common Name Height Spread Comments Landscape Features Acer platanoides Maple, Norway 45-60 40-60 Dark green turn golden yellow in fall. Cladrastis kentuckea Yellowwood,American Green leaves turns brilliant yellow in fall. White flower clusters in late spring. Eucommia ulmoides Hardy Rubber Tree 45 45 Hard to find Glossy dark green leaves turn yellow in fall. Adaptive tree. Fagus sylvatica Beech, Green Bronze fall color. Fraxinus pennsylvanica 'Urbanite' Ash, Urbanite 50 40 Ash borer a serious problem Dark green leaves turn mahogany-purple to yellow tones in fall. for stressed ash Gleditsia triacanthos var. inermis Honeylocust 40 to 60 30-35 Thornless Depending on variety, green leaves turn yellow in fall. 'Sunburst' has yellow new growth. Gymnocladus dioicus Coffee Tree, Kentucky 50 35 Not easy to find Tolerant to our environment. Green leaves turn yellow in fall. Irregular growing habit. Lirodendron tulifera Tulip Tree 70-90 35-50 Green tulip shaped leaves turn yellow in fall. Flowers are yellow"tulips" produced in summer when tree mature. Phellodendron lavallei Cork Tree 40 35 Dark green leaves turn yellow in fall. Platanus x acerfolia 'Bloodgood' Sycamore (Plane Tree), Bloodgood, 90 50 Anthracnose resistant Durable trees that are for large areas that need quick shade. 'Columbia' Columbia Quercus cocinea Oak, Scarlet 75 50 Green leaves turns rusty red in fall. Quercus macrocarpa Oak, Bur 60 60 Green leaves with deeply lobed leaves. Turns yellow in fall. Quercus muehlenbergii Oak, Chinkapin 50 50 Dark green with yellow toned fall color. Quercus rubra Oak, Northern Red 50-60 50 Green leaves that turn orange-red in fall. Salix Willows 50-60 40-60 Shallow, invasive roots, likes Green leaves that turn yellow in fall. Some varieties have winter interest water with there stem being yellow, orange or even red. Golden Niobe, Navajo, Green Weeping, etc Tilia americana Linden, American 40 to 60 25-30 Green leaves turn yellow in fall. In June, clusters of small fragrant, yellow flowers appear. Ulmus hyrbids Elm, Hybids 40-50 35-45 Dutch elm disease resistant Green leaves with a variety of leaf size, shape and fall color that varies varieties available by variety. Frontier, Accolade, etc Ulmus parvifolia 'Allee' Elm, Lacebark 50 35 Dutch elm disease resistant Glossy dark green foliage that turns yellow-orange to rust-red. varieties available Page 10 of 13 Evergreen Trees Botanical Name Common Name Height Spread A/B Comments For Larger Areas Abies concolor Canadians Blue Fir, Concolor Blue (White) 30 15-20 Cedrus atlantica Cedar, Blue Atlas 30-40 20-30 Picea pungens Spruce, Colorado 40-60 20-25 Requires regular watering, not very drought tolerant Pinus nigra Pine, Austrian Black 40-50 20-30 Pinus sylvestris Pine, Scotch 40-60 20-25 Sequoiadendron giganteum Sequoia, Giant 50 30 Thuja plicata Cedar, Western Red 50 20-30 Needs winter watering For Smaller Areas Abies koreana 'Horstmann's Silberlocke' Fir, Horstmann's Korean 12-15 8-10 Needs winter watering Calocedrus decurrens Cedar, Incense 30-40 10-20 Needs winter watering Cedrus atlantica Hybrids Cedar, Blue Atlas Hybrids 20-30 15-20 Granny Louise, Himalayan Blue, Weeping (Pendula) Cedrus deodara Hybrids Cedar, Deodara Family 20-30 10-20 Best protected form wind Chamaecyparis nootkatensis 'Pendula' Cedar, Weeping Alaskan 20-30 8-10 Chamaecyparis obtusa Hinoki Cypress and family 5-12 3-15 Afternoon shade needed Juniperus scopulorum Juniper, Tolleson's Blue Weeping 10-20 10-15 Picea omorika Hybrids Spruce, Serbian Family 6-15 10-15 Bruns, Weeping, Dwarf Picea pungens (Hybrids) Spruce, Colorado hybrids 15-30 8-15 Requires regular watering, not very drought tolerant Fat Albert, Hoopsi, Bacheri, etc. Pinus aristata Pine, Bristlecone 20 8 Can be hard to find Pinus flexis Vanderwolf's pyramid' Pine, Vanderwolf's 20-25 10-15 Pinus held reichii 'Leucodermis' Pine, Bosnian Red Cone 20 10 Pine, Austrain hybrids -Anorld Sentinel, Pinus nigra (Hybrids) Oregon Green, Brepo, Compact, etc 20-30 7-20 Pinus thunbergiana 'Thunderhead' Pine, Thunderhead 10-12 10-12 Page 11 of 13 Class V-Fruiting Trees Restricted WACs (O-Ornamental F-Bearing Edible Fruit) Common Name O or F Comments Almond F Apples F Codling moth and apple maggot host Apricot F Apricot, Flowering O Cherry, Flowering O Remove all suckers to prevent rootstock from bearing fruit Cherry, Sour F Western cherry fruit fly Cherry, Sweet F Western cherry fruit fly Crabapple, Flowering Hybrids O Codling moth and apple maggot host Crabapple, Fruiting Hybrids F Codling moth and apple maggot host Hawthorne, Flowering O Codling moth and apple maggot host Peach/Nectarine F Peach/Nectarine Flowering O Pear, Asian F Codling moth and apple maggot host Pear, European F Codling moth and apple maggot host Pear, Flowering O Codling moth and apple maggot host Pluot, Aprium F Plum, European F Plum, Flowering O Plum, Japanese IF