Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-19-2014 Planning Commission Packet - REVISED PLANNING COMMISSION - AGENDA REGULAR MEETING 7:00 P.M. June 19, 2014 I. CALL TO ORDER: II. ROLL CALL: Declaration of Quorum III. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: May 15, 2014 V. OLD BUSINESS: 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. Rezone Rezone from C-3 (General Business) to R-3 (Medium Density Residential) (Chester & Jaqueline Fortune) (MF# Z 2014-002) D. Rezone Zoning of Department of Natural Resources Section 16 (MF# Z 2014-001) VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. Special Permit Location of a Church in a C-1 Zone (Casa de Avivamiento) (MF# SP 2014-006) B. Rezone Rezone from C-3 (General Business) to R-3 (Medium Density Residential) (Solano Ent) (MF# Z 2014-003) C. Plan Sylvester Neighborhood Plan (MF# PLAN 2013-003) VII. OTHER BUSINESS: A. Memorandum Kurtzman Neighborhood Alley Vacation Process VIII. WORKSHOP: A. Code Amendment Highway Follow-Through Signs (MF# CA-2012-011) B. Plan Shoreline Master Program Update (MF# PLAN 2013- 0 IX. ADJOURNMENT: REGULAR MEETING May 15, 2014 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 7:00pm by Chairman Cruz. POSITION MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT No. 1 VACANT 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: Chairman Cruz read a statement about the appearance of fairness for hearings on land use matters. Chairman Cruz asked if any Commission member had anything to declare. Commissioner Polk recused herself from the workshop item, MF# PLAN2013-003. Chairman Cruz then asked the audience if there were any objections based on a conflict of interest or appearance of fairness question regarding the items to be discussed this evening. There were no objections. ADMINISTERING THE OATH: Chairman Cruz explained that state law requires testimony in quasi-judicial hearings such as held by the Planning Commission be given under oath or affirmation. Chairman Cruz swore in all those desiring to speak. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Commissioner Greenaway moved, seconded by Commissioner Portugal, that the minutes dated April 17, 2014 be approved as mailed. The motion passed unanimously. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. Special Permit Location of a Church in a C-3 (General Business) Zone (Templo de Alabanzal (MF# SP 2014-0041 Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Rick White, Community & Economic Development Director, discussed the special permit application for the location of a church in a C-3 (General Business) Zone. The site is located at 1202 West Lewis Street. The Planning Commission has seen special permit applications for this site before, most recently in 2011 for a facility to operate an after -1- school program for youth called, Power Zone. Churches are an unclassified use, requiring a special permit application in all zoning districts. Staff has come up with findings of facts and conclusions that are required through the Pasco Municipal Code and a list of six development conditions which are typically applied to churches, such as, adequate parking and that the applicant needing to apply to applicable building codes for an assembly structure. There were no comments for the public hearing. Commissioner Polk moved, seconded by Commissioner Khan, to close the public hearing and schedule deliberations, the adoption of findings of fact and development of a recommendation for City Council for the June 19, 2014 Planning Commission meeting. The motion passed unanimously. B. Special Permit Location of a Wireless Communications Facility (AT&T) (MF# SP 2014-005) Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Shane O'Neill, Planner I, discussed the special permit application for the location of a wireless communications facility in a C-1 (Retail Business) Zone. The applicant proposes to locate the cellular tower adjacent to the mini-storage facility at the southwest corner of Court and Road 68. The cellular tower is proposed to be camouflaged as a faux pine tree including bark, foliage and branches. The base of the tower will contain equipment and an equipment enclosure approximately 600 square feet in area. A chain link fence was originally proposed but, staff is recommending a condition requiring a block wall. The applicant has analyzed the surrounding vicinity in an attempt to locate publicly owned facilities or a structure 35 feet or higher as required by code to analyze the possibility of co-location. The analysis concluded that there are no such sites that would allow for the coverage gap to be met. This particular tower would accommodate two additional providers, reducing the number of cellular towers needed in the area. Located to the northeast of the proposed site is an AM station tower. Staff provided the Planning Commission with the analysis completed by the applicant for the possibility of locating the needed antennae's on the AM tower. The conclusion is that the AM tower has insufficient structural capacity to accommodate the addition antennae's. Chairman Cruz asked for clarification on the analysis given included in the meeting packet given to the Planning Commissioner's. Mr. O'Neill responded that the analysis was of the existing three towers on the property located north of the proposed tower site. Dennis and Marilyn Thorne, 6701 Court Street, addressed the Commission. Ms. Thorne explained that they own the property with the AM towers and although the equipment AT&T is proposing is too heavy to mount to their tower, they would welcome the new tower on their property. There would be some interference with the AM tower frequency. The proposed tower will not become a part of their skyline and they would prefer to see it amongst the other towers where there is already obstruction to the skyline. -2- Mr. Thorne stated that he has spoken to surrounding residents and there is concern as to the aesthetics of the new tower. Bill Glenn, 1324 Cedar, Richland, WA spoke on behalf of Mr. 8s Mrs. Thorne's as their technical consultant and representing Ink Stand Broadcasting who are the operators of KALE on the AM towers. He stated that the new tower will in fact cause interference with the current AM Station Tower. The new tower would act as a reflector and push the signal to the north. Since the radio station has been in place first, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) demands that anything that changes the radio station has to be taken care of by the person making the change. There are still some issues that need to be explored prior to final consideration of the installation. Mr. Glenn stated that AT&T is doing their research because they did extensive studies to determine that the existing towers themselves are not appropriate for what they are trying to install. Chairman Cruz asked Mr. Glenn what would happen if the tower was located with the existing three towers to the radio station. Mr. Glenn answered that there are two approaches; one of which is to detune the structure so that as far as the radio station's towers it wouldn't exist and the other method is to adjust the radio station's systems to accommodate the fact that the reflector is there. Either approach would achieve a specified pattern from the signal of the radio station or both methods are very expensive, however, are both achievable. Commissioner Greenaway asked how far away the proposed tower would have to be in order to avoid interference. Mr. Glenn responded approximately 1/3 to 1/2 mile. As currently specified it is about 600-700 feet. The center tower is the reference to that whole installation and everything would be measured from that. Mr. Thorne added that there needs to be cooperation between the radio station and the proposed tower. George Pierce, 10259 35th Avenue SW, Seattle, WA spoke on behalf of the applicant. He explained that the design of the pole is to integrate with the surrounding environment. AT&T and their new 4G technology requires some larger antennae's and more space between the antennae's so using a canister type design is possible but minimizing the design is best through camouflage. AM interference is quite common and towers are mounted and installed on AM stations which create interference as well. Those are mitigated through an AM study. He stated that he spoke to a firm in Seattle who stated that any structure under 100 feet tall per the FCC does not require an AM study at this time, however Mr. Pierce said he would check for confirmation. If the study is necessary, AT&T will perform that and any mitigation necessary on the tower. As for locating the tower on the nursery property, an extensive amount of time was spent studying the AM towers there and the issue is disturbing the ground ring, necessary for the signal of the AM station, which extends across Road 68 and through most of the parcel, so anywhere on that area they would want to put a tower they would have an issue. Commissioner Greenaway asked if it would be cost prohibitive to detune the tower. -3- Mr. Pierce responded that he would need to see the study first. He has yet to see one happen in his career and they have walked away from sites in the past because of it. Chairman Cruz asked if there are other locations that are comparable to performance to AT&T that don't create an issue for the existing radio towers. Mr. Pierce answered through a search, in which he is the fourth firm to work on this project for AT&T. The original consultant was a tower company hoping to locate a new tower but when they came across the AM station tower and their structural integrity they handed the project back over to AT&T. AT&T found the US Cellular stealth pole but it was too far north. Chairman Cruz asked if cell phone towers have been located on zones other than C-1. David McDonald, City Planner, responded yes, but typically they are matched with a structure that is already in place, such as a water tower. Chairman Cruz stated then that if the Planning Commission should not choose to move forward with the cell tower at the proposed site due to the AM station then they would perhaps consider another site through the special permit process. Mr. Pierce stated that he understood but asked how that decision could be made. Chairman Cruz answered that it would be in the form of a recommendation and would possibly involve more questions. Mr. Pierce added that the applicant would accept a condition of approval that would require the passing of an interference study. Chris Smith, 1706 Road 68, spoke on this special permit application. He stated that the proposed property is by his home. He asked if they put the tower across the street on Court Street, if they would take down one of the three AM towers so that the eye sore would remain the same. Mr. Glenn answered that all three AM towers are in use and will not be removed. Mr. Smith asked if there were any potential health problems due to its proximity to local residences. Mr. Pierce answered that the facility will meet or be below the FCC minimum requirements for health and hazard. Mr. Glenn added that the radio station has also passed the exposure limits. Melinda Puckett, 6520 W. Court Street, spoke on behalf of the special permit application. She stated that she was the property owner of the proposed site and did not foresee any problems with the proposed cell tower being located on her property. -4- With no further comments the public hearing closed. Commissioner Greenaway asked to check if an AM study needs to be done as a proposed special permit condition. Chairman Cruz the Planning Commissioner's if they had any objections to the proposed location. Commissioner Khan, Commissioner Greenaway and Commissioner Polk stated that they would prefer to see an AM study to ensure there is no interference. Rick White, Community & Economic Development Director, stated that staff would check with the City Attorney to see the ability of AT&T locating their tower and about the AM study. Chairman Cruz stated that the Planning Commission is willing to work with the applicant. Commissioner Greenaway moved, seconded by Commissioner Khan, to close the public 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. The motion passed unanimously. C. Preliminary Plat Preliminary Plat Madison Park Planned Density Development (EE Resources( (MF# PP2014-003) Continued from April 17 2014 Meeting Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Mr. McDonald reminded the Commission that a public hearing was held in the previous month but was continued to allow for outside agencies to have more time to review and submit comments, particularly the Port of Pasco. The Port recently updated their master plan and had concerns with the proposed development related to airspace penetrations and the elevation of the development. Mr. McDonald briefly reviewed additional conditions that resulted from discussion and comments from the Port. Those conditions related to statements on the final plats, aviation easements and the need to lower the elevation of a number of lots before houses could be built. Ron Foraker, 6720 W. Park Street, spoke on behalf of the Port of Pasco as the Airport Manager. He stated that the airport has worked extensively with City Staff. Spencer Montgomery, 2810 W. Clearwater Avenue, spoke on behalf of JUB Engineers for this project. He stated that this is the first development since the overlay zone was established and will probably be the most challenging one due to its proximity to the airport and due to the topography. This is why grading will be necessary to bring the homes to a lower elevation due to safety issues. With no further comments the public hearing closed. Commissioner Khan asked for clarification on the condition requiring the note on the plat -5- and if future property owners will be aware of the noise and safety. Mr. McDonald answered that the reason for the note on the plat is for the public to be aware of the airport activity. Title Companies will be able to see the note as well as the public as it will be recorded at the Court House. Commissioner Khan asked how the topography will change and where the excess soil or dirt will go. Mr. McDonald responded that in this particular case the dirt will be pushed to another area on the property where the land is lower in elevation. Commissioner Khan moved, seconded by Commissioner Greenaway, to adopt the findings of fact and conclusions therefrom as contained in the May 15, 2014 staff report. The motion passed unanimously. Commissioner Khan moved, seconded by Commissioner Greenaway, 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. The motion passed unanimously. D. Rezone Rezone from C-3 (General Business) to R-3 (Medium Density Residential) (Chester & Jagueline Fortune) (MF# Z 2014-002) Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Shane O'Neill, Planner I, discussed the rezone application from C-3 (General Business) to R-3 (Medium Density Residential). The site is located at the northeast corner of the intersection of Spokane Street and Utah Avenue and contains two parcels separated by some dedicated right-of-way. The land area is currently 1.9 acres but upon future development, the applicant may wish to perform a variety of vacations and be required to do dedications altering the lot size so the exact number of units allowed on this site in accordance with the rezone is only estimated at 30-40 units. The site is currently zoned for heavy equipment, sales, service and a variety of heavy commercial uses. Most of the surrounding vicinity is vacant. The site to the south contains an apartment complex which is well maintained and fits nicely in the neighborhood. The area to the east is all single-family zoning. The Comprehensive Plan designates the site for mix-residential uses which would allow for a range of residential uses from suburban to R-3. There were no comments and the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Khan moved, seconded by Commissioner Greenaway, to close the public hearing on the proposed rezone and initiate deliberations and schedule adoption of findings of fact, conclusions and a recommendation to the City Council for the June 19, 2014 meeting. The motion passed unanimously. E. Rezone Zoning of Department of Natural Resources, Section 16 (MF# Z 2014-001) -6- Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. David McDonald, City Planner, discussed the rezone application of the Department of Natural Resources property. Staff published this public hearing in the newspaper, on the City website as well as mailed a notice to property owners within 300 feet of the proposed site. The City received a number of letters of correspondence and emails from individuals requesting comments to be placed into the record. Planning Commissioners were given a packet on the bench with the comments Staff had received and Mr. McDonald read the names of those individuals who had submitted comments into the record. Many of the comments received were via email without residential addresses of those individuals; however Staff can determine that there are two of these individuals in city-limits and the others reside in the "donut-hole" to the south. The rezone request comes from the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) who is the owner of the property located between the north line of the FCID Irrigation Canal and the south line of Highway 182 and west of Road 68. This property has been under control of the DNR ever since the State of Washington existed and was annexed into the City of Pasco in 1982 when the I-182 Corridor was annexed into the community. Back in 1982 this land was vacant sagebrush and zoned RT (Residential Transition) which was assigned to properties that were typically undeveloped or vacant, sometimes farmland, and is a holding zone to these vacant properties until circumstances in the community change and then the property would be transitioned. Since 1982, much of the I-182 Corridor has been developed and this is one of the last properties that have not been developed. The DNR has realized that it is in the middle of the urban area and is hard to farm due to surrounding development and with a farm comes dust, noise, chemical applications and operations at various hours of the day. The DNR has been working with City for a couple of years to transition this property from rural farming activity to urban development. In 2012, staff with the help of DNR, presented a land use map for this area to refine the Comprehensive Plan designations for the property. Once that was completed the State Legislature adopted Senate Bill 5035 in 2013 that instructed the DNR to coordinate with the City to rezone this property consistent with the land use map. The DNR submitted a letter requesting that the property be rezoned Commercial, R-1 (Low-Density Residential), R-S-1 (Suburban) and either R-3 or R-4 (Medium or High Density Residential). Part of the property in the southwest corner, consisting of two parcels, is owned by the Pasco School District. The School District submitted a letter to the City requesting that their property also be included in this rezone process. Rezoning the property would implement policies of the Comprehensive Plan, enable development to occur, which would allow for the extension of utilities to the site and would allow for the extension of Chapel Hill Boulevard to connect Road 100 to Road 68. That road would provide alternate routes for emergency vehicles located at the fire station at Road 68. Mr. McDonald briefly discussed the various zoning and the location of such zoning that is being proposed and surrounding land uses. The breakdown of proposed zoning is; 76% for Single-Family, 1% for Office, 15% for Commercial and 8% for Multi-Family. After a completed survey it was determined that there should be a buffer along the highway and Chapel Hill Boulevard with R-3 zoning. -7- Commissioner Polk asked if the City Council or if the citizens of Pasco have any goals of developing the area. Mr. McDonald responded that the City Council and community through the Comprehensive Plan established goals, policies and direction for development within the community and this rezone will implement those goals. Commissioner Khan questioned the email responses from citizens that were given to the Planning Commissioner's prior to the meeting, in particular from Roger Lenk, who commented that the DNR was not the applicant. Mr. McDonald answered that the DNR is the applicant and many of the responses stated incorrect information. The rezone application came directly from the Department of Natural Resources in response to State Legislature directing the DNR to work with the City in the form of a letter. When the letter from DNR was received, Staff spoke with the School District about their adjoining property and in turn they wrote a letter requesting a rezone. Rick White, Community & Economic Development Director, stated that the packet on the bench given to the Planning Commission from citizens was received by the City email system either late the prior evening or the day of the meeting and they comments have not been vetted due to time. However, several inaccuracies were noted. Chairman Cruz added that while the emails and comments must be part of the public record it does not necessarily make the comments true but all evidence must be looked at critically. Chairman Cruz also added that sending comments on the day of the meeting, especially several, does not give the Planning Commissioner's or Staff proper time to read the comments. Commissioner Khan asked staff what is the responsibility of the City to have mixed residential available, such as; RS-20, RS-12, R-S-1, R-1, R-2, R-3 and R-4. The comments received refer to crime being associated with high density residential but the City may need various housing for people of various income levels. Mr. McDonald responded that the Comprehensive Plan encourages a wide-range and type of residential development for all strata's of income and needs of people in the community. This proposal meets the Comprehensive Plan. An example of this type of development is across the highway, north of I-182 behind Wal-Mart. Chairman Cruz added that the Planning Commission needs to be mindful of transitioning between zoning moving from lower density to higher density to commercial. He also stated that high-density residential or apartments are not always related to crime. He could not think of a single instance that the increase in density increases crime per capita. Commissioner Khan agreed with Chairman Cruz in regards to higher density housing and crime. Commissioner Greenaway stated that she would like to see more Commercial and slightly less R-3 zoning. She felt that the area could use more Commercial along the highway. -8- Commissioner Polk agreed with Commissioner Greenaway in that she would like to see more Commercial. Commissioner Greenaway asked if there has been an additional traffic study for the impact this will have on the south part of Road 68. Mr. McDonald responded that there have been several traffic studies done over the years and in the most recent study in 2012 a full build-out scenario was done. The studies suggested a list of projects that should be done as the community grows. The study suggests completing Chapel Hill Boulevard would take traffic off of Road 68. Chairman Cruz added to the completion of Chapel Hill Boulevard and how it would relieve traffic on Road 68. Mr. McDonald added in response to the need for Commercial development, studies by consultants have determined that the areas in the Comprehensive Plan for Commercial will hold up for more than 50 years. This area in the proposed rezone is also not the only area for potential Commercial development. Everything to the east on Chapel Hill Boulevard is zoned for Commercial and there is land near Lowe's, up the Road 68 Corridor as well as Road 100. Placing Commercial development along the highway might make it marginal commercial development because of the distance from Road 68 and Road 100. Chairman Cruz stated that there needs to be enough density to support the Commercial. The urban growth boundary is also set so that development happens in the right places to prevent sprawl. Commissioner Portugal thanked staff for making sure the Commissioners were given all comments received by the public on this proposal. Rich Scrivner, Planning Manager for Washington State Department of Natural Resources, 1111 Washington Street SE, Olympia, spoke on behalf of this application. He stated that staff summed up the proposal accurately and would be available for questions. He added that the DNR has been working with the City for several years for a strategy on this property. Matt Ringle, 3913 Galway Lane, spoke in support of the R-1 zoning proposed in part of this rezone. He was fearful that it was all going to be apartments and did not want to see the increased traffic that comes from apartments. He asked is residents would be notified if the proposed zoning changes from what was being presented.. Mr. White stated that this is the only public hearing and the proposed zoning and the only notification was for this hearing. In July, Planning Commission will deliberate and make a recommendation to City Council. Chairman Cruz added that public comments are welcomed but there will always be some houses that will abut higher density zoning. Mr. Ringle asked if there could be another public hearing. -9- Chairman Cruz responded that the Planning Commission could choose to continue the public hearing but it is no required. Christal Ringle, 3913 Galway Lane, voiced concern about overpopulating the schools in the area. Chairman Cruz answered that all of the residential lots will be subject to the School Impact Fee, which is $4,700 for single-family dwelling units. This impact fee goes to the School District to assist with new schools for the increased population. Mr. Ringle replied that he's heard that Chiawanna High School and the two elementary schools in the area are at capacity as is which is why they are concerned. Mr. White answered that the School District does own property in the area and he believes it is in their plans to work with the City, Department of Natural Resources and any purchaser of the property so that they get a school site in their preferred site which would be an elementary school with a park. Mark MacFarlan, 6208 W. Argent Road, stated that he is a newly annexed resident of Pasco. He stated that he has seen a map that showed where roads were going to be roughly 6-8 months ago. He stated that the area to the south of this proposed property currently has mostly large lots and asked if there was advantage to adding diversity it zoning to what is already there. He stated that the perception of Pasco is a nice area, smaller homes and crowded and schools are an issue. Mr. MacFarlan felt that there was an overaggressive desire to build in Pasco and wanted to maintain property value. He expressed that the proposed zoning is too dense and used Road 68 traffic as an example. Instead of the proposed zoning he requested R-S-1 zoning. Mr. MacFarlan also requested having a second public hearing. He asked if DNR has sold this property yet. Mr. White responded that they have not. Mr. MacFarlan asked why the property would be rezoned when it has not been sold. Mr. White answered that when the Planning Commission considered this back in 2012 for information purposes, a concept plan was done for the purpose of the City understanding what might in fact look like if developed with the Comprehensive Plan land use designations. Mr. MacFarlan stated that if this land is rezoned, nothing smaller than R-S-1 zoning should be applied. Bruce Clatterbuck, 3001 Road 72, stated that he appreciated receiving the public notification in the mail. Him and his wife are opposed to high density housing in the area. He appreciated the concept but agreed with Mr. MacFarlan. Mr. Clatterbuck spoke on concerns about theft with high density development, traffic congestion, infrastructure, aesthetics, sound walls and aggressive development in the area. Jan Tomlinson, 2116 Road 60, asked for zoning clarifications. -10- Mr. McDonald answered that "O" is Office, R-1 (Low-Density Residential) with 7,200 square foot minimum lot sizes. R-3 and R-4 are higher density residential, such as multi- family. Ms. Tomlinson asked about a map that she saw on KEPR news. Mr. White answered that he was not aware of what map she was referring to or the KEPR news story. Mr. McDonald stated that there was a different map at one time that had the proposed school in a different location. Ms. Tomlinson asked about the location of a park. Mr. McDonald responded that the park would be adjoining to the school but all of the maps and sketches have not been final. Mr. White clarified that these are just sketches to show the public what the developed land might look like and was developed by an architect hired by the City. There have since been changes and it is simply a floating concept sketch, not a zoning map or a plat. Ms. Tomlinson stated that the land was going to be auctioned by DNR and whoever purchases the property will not have any say in what the zoning would be. She asked if it would be better if the purchaser was able to request the zoning. Chairman Cruz responded that it would not because they should buy it knowing what the expectations and intended land use is to match the Comprehensive Plan rather than them buying the land and later being denied. This allows the purchaser to know what they can or can't do with the property. It is more beneficial to developers to know what the zoning is on the property before they purchase. Chairman Cruz also referenced the urban growth boundary used to drive growth and development inward. The density of Pasco will continue to increase due to the urban growth boundary and the Planning Commission and City want it to happen thoughtfully. This is why there are transitions into different zoning districts. Ms. Tomlinson mentioned decreased traffic on Argent due to this proposed development and zoning. She did not see how there would be decreased traffic flow on Road 68 with all of the additional housing and commercial development. Chairman Cruz answered that Chapel Hill Boulevard, once completed, will provide an addition east to west route to relieve traffic from Argent Road. Currently Argent Road bears the brunt of the entire east to west traffic. Ms. Tomlinson asked if a traffic study could be completed. Chairman Cruz stated that with large developments traffic studies are completed. Mr. McDonald added that the 2012 study for Road 68 considered the full build-out of this property in that study and included this development. -11- Ms. Tomlinson requested a second public hearing and post-pone a decision. Rich Scrivner, Department of Natural Resources, submitted his presentation for the record. Doug Redfield, 6909 Valley View Place, spoke on some of the changes in Pasco over the years. He asked what the lane width will be when Chapel Hill Boulevard is extended. Mr. White responded that it would be five lanes. Mr. Redfield asked how many people per home would be living in R-1 zoning. Mr. White answered roughly three per home. Mr. Redfield asked why the schools are so crowded if there are only three people per home. Mr. White stated that there aren't enough schools. The School District is independent from the City. They have an operating levy that they use to pay salaries, produce programs, run their yearly curriculum and they have to go to the voters for a bond for capital facilities, new schools for example, and renovation of existing schools. A number of bonds have failed which has resulted in the School District falling behind with the provision of elementary schools and in roughly 5-7 years behind in a middle school. They will need to run another bond issue to provide the capital funds needed to construct more schools. Chairman Cruz added that there is a tie between how much debt the School District can carry to the assessed value. Mr. White explained that they are able to borrow on a bond is fixed by a ratio to its assessed value. The School District was near that recently and should be going down in the near future at which time they will try to receive approval from voters on another bond issue for two more elementary schools and a middle school. Mr. Redfield asked what the implementation time of this proposal. Mr. White stated that the Department of Natural Resources estimates that it will take slightly less than a year to bring to public auction. The development community would tell you that if a parcel is purchased it may take another year to go through approvals and studies to bring a product up and then another year after that to build. Roughly three years for the most sought after land within this section and much won't develop right away and could take a decade or more to develop. Mr. Redfield asked if it would be more practical to let the schools catch up. He also mentioned other projects that need to be brought up to date, such as infrastructure improvements. Chairman Cruz discussed some of the new projects, such as beautification of the fencing and School Impact Fees to help the School District get caught up but there is a lag in the -12- system. Some of the infrastructure improvements will occur when the property is platted and gets developed. Mr. Redfield questioned what the grade level would be behind Valley View Place. Mr. White responded that there a consideration for the grade adjacent to Valley View Place. DNR has put forth a possibility that the C-1 (Retail Business) would like to be extended west along the Chapel Hill extension with the office space remaining as a buffer to those properties. The grade may in fact be a real problem to the development and might be a problem that is unsolved and may be undeveloped property, but perhaps not. It will definitely be difficult and most likely the last piece to develop in the whole area. Mr. Redfield asked if the residents nearby would be required to cement their wells. Mr. White answered no. All of the development in the area will be on city water, sewer, storm drainage. There will not be any impact on a well. Mr. Redfield mentioned a veterinary clinic on Road 88 that was required to cement their well. Mr. White was unaware of the reason behind that. The City doesn't make the call on wells, rather the Department of Health. He added that there is most likely more to the story because wells do not have to be closed up due to city water and sewer becoming available. Chairman Cruz agreed with Mr. White in that it would be a Department of Health issue. They may have had a sanitation concern of the existing wells. Mr. Redfield asked when sidewalks would be brought down Road 68. Mr. White answered that the community doesn't put in fully built roads, sidewalks and street lights because they can't afford it. It is almost always done in partnership with the development and when this property develops those will be required as a condition of the development. Mr. Redfield spoke on the crime in apartment areas. Chairman Cruz explained that there is a difference between crime rate per capita and crime calls. With more people there will be more crimes statistically but that doesn't mean that there is more crime per number of people. So while there may be an increase in crime it won't be an increase in density of crime. Also, there is a big misconception that because there is an apartment complex that there is a "big drug haven" and the evidence doesn't support that conclusion. Mr. Redfield asked if there would be a buffer wall around Valley View Place. Mr. McDonald responded that on the north side where the office area will be located there will have to be a landscape buffer built into the code. It would have to be a landscape strip with trees and shrubs with a solid fence. -13- Mr. Redfield asked what the lighting restrictions would be. Mr. McDonald answered that office areas aren't typically lit up like many commercial areas. There are dark sky regulations when abutting housing. Those would all be an issue when and if a development comes in and it will be looked at during that time. Chairman Cruz reiterated staff on the infrastructure and lighting issues and reminded the public what the Planning Commission is looking for at this time. Mr. Redfield asked if there could be another meeting when there are facts of the development rather than just a review of what it might look like. Chairman Cruz answered that the public will be notified during the platting process, not at this time. Christal Ringle, 3913 Galloway Lane, asked if this is the final zoning. Chairman Cruz responded yes. If the zoning changes it would have to come back as a rezone and the public would be notified. Mr. MacFarlan reiterated that he would like to see R-S-1 zoning be the minimum zoning for the residential proposed in this rezone. He asked Mr. McDonald if this follows the Comprehensive Plan the way it is proposed. Mr. McDonald responded that the Comprehensive Plan had a mix of single-family, multi- family and commercial. Mr. McFarlan asked why more of the R-1 couldn't be turned into R-S-1. Mr. McDonald answered that they are making some of the lots R-S-1. With no further comments the public hearing closed. Commissioner Greenaway stated that she would like to make some of the R-3 (Medium Density Residential) C-1 (Retail Business) to see more commercial business in the area and would like to see it along the highway which would help with a sound barrier and take away the need for fencing. Chairman Cruz stated that there is only so much commercial that the city can support and studies have shown that putting it along the highway wouldn't be beneficial. Mr. White added that the consultant made the point that commercial would not be beneficial along the highway due to access. Commissioner Polk asked if a commercial building came into the area if they would get business from the Louvisa Farms neighborhood. Mr. White stated yes there will be neighboring traffic that would see this commercial but -14- there are natural advantages of having the commercial come in from Road 68. Chairman Cruz stated that the proposed zoning reflects the demand in the area. Commissioner Polk reiterated that she would like to see more commercial zoning since there is already a feeling of a lot of residential development in Pasco. Mr. McDonald responded that there are currently 38 acres zoned C-1 in this proposal. On the north side there is nearly 45 acres of commercial. Chairman Cruz stated he would like to see a lot more C-1, however, there has to be a certain amount of residential to fill the need of the C-1. There was further discussion between Commissioner Polk and Mr. White regarding the proposed C-1 zoning and land use. Commissioner Portugal moved, seconded by Commissioner Khan, to close the public hearing on the proposed rezone and initiate deliberations and schedule adoption of findings of fact, conclusions and a recommendation to the City Council for the June 19, 2014 meeting. The motion passed three to two, with Commissioner Greenaway and Commissioner Polk dissenting. OTHER BUSINESS: A. Memorandum Minimum Lot Size in Multi-Family Zones Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Rick White, Community 8s Economic Development Director, discussed the staff memorandum regarding minimum lot sizes in multi-family zones. He explained that the R-2, R-3 and R-4 zones in Pasco are primarily intended for multi-family dwellings; however, each of these zones has a minimum lot size for single-family dwellings of 5,000 square feet. The City also has a development tool title "Planned Density Development" where developers can use some creativity as long as the overall density of the zone isn't exceeded in determining the lot size of a particular development. The use of the "Planned Density Development process is not mandatory. It was noted in discussions with potential developers that the provisions in the R-2, R-3 and R-4 zones for 5,000 square foot minimum lot sizes could be abused in that subdivisions could be developed meeting the code but possibly done in a manner that would not be of best interest to the community as a whole. This could create "cookie-cutter" subdivisions where every lot is exactly the same size with absolutely no forethought for integration into the community but instead designed to maximize developer profit. The question Mr. White presented before the Planning Commission was: Does the Planning Commission wish to recommend to City Council that the regulations for minimum lot sizes in the R-2, R-3 and R-4 zones be reviewed and addressed to minimize the potential for abuse? If the Commission felt that the minimum lot size regulations need to be reviewed, staff would bring that recommendation to City Council and would also recommend that a moratorium on platting within the R-2, R-3 and R-4 Districts be established to provide certainty that future development does not "vest" under the existing -15- rules for minimum lot sizes. All of the Commissioners voiced support for recommending to City Council the review of the minimum single-family dwelling lot sizes in the R-2, R-3 and R-4 Zoning Districts as explained by staff. WORKSHOP: A. Plan Sylvester's Addition Neighborhood Revitalization Plan (MF# PLAN 2013-003) Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Rick White, Community & Economic Development Director, discussed the Sylvester's Addition Neighborhood Revitalization Plan. Staff has been working since 2012 on a plan for neighborhood revitalization for their infrastructure. The location is around Nixon Park and Margaret Street between 5th Avenue and 10th Avenue. The proposal, after working with the neighborhood for the past year, is that the plan was to prioritize the improvement of Park Street between 5th and 7th with essentially taking problematic trees out, repairing the sidewalks and installing a dry irrigation system so properties could connect to a sprinkler system. The workshop was intended to inform the Planning Commission and could come back as a workshop in the next month or a public hearing could be scheduled. Commissioner Portugal asked if the properties had irrigation water. Mr. White responded that they don't. They would have to pay to hook up. The Planning Commission was in agreement to have the public hearing in June. COMMENTS: Rick White, Community & Economic Development Director, notified the Planning Commission that there would be a Shoreline Master Plan open house beginning at 5:30 p.m. and the Commission is welcome to attend. It will be used to develop more planning as the Shoreline Program goes along. Mr. White also proposed having a second meeting in June to hold public hearings for 2015 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Funds, HOME and NSP funds. The Planning Commission was in agreement to hold a second meeting. With no further discussion or business, the Planning Commission was adjourned at 9:47 p.m. Respectfully submitted, David McDonald, City Planner -16- 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 site has access from Lewis Street 8v 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. 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. 1 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. 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. 9. A Level One Community Service Facility (Power Zone) was previously granted a Special Permit to operate on the site. 2 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. 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? 3 The proposed facility will only be open for religious services a few hours per week. There will be no excessive 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 adopt findings of fact and conclusions therefrom as contained in the June 19, 2014 staff report. MOTION: I move based on the findings of fact and conclusions therefrom the Planning Commission recommend the City Council grant a special permit for the location of a church at 1202 Unit B, West Lewis Street (Parcel # 200 000 220), with conditions as listed in the June 19, 2014 staff report. 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 2014-001 APPLICANT: AT&T Wireless HEARING DATE: 3/20/2014 c/o Smartlink LLC ACTION DATE: 4/17/2014 4111 S Nampa Street Spokane, WA 99203 BACKGROUND REQUEST: SPECIAL PERMIT: Location of Wireless Communication Facilities in an RS-12 (Suburban) Zone 1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Legal: Parcel #118-112-036: Lot 1, Short Plat 2005-11 General Location: 9915 West Argent Road Property The parcel is approximately 1.65 acres 2. ACCESS: The site is accessed from Argent Road. 3. UTILITIES: All municipal utilities currently serve the site. 4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The site is currently zoned RS-12 (Suburban) and contains a church. Surrounding properties are zoned and developed as follows: NORTH: RS-12 - Vacant SOUTH: RS-20 - Single-Family Residences EAST: RS-12 - Vacant WEST: RS-12 - Single-Family Residences 5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan designates the site for low-density residential 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 AT&T Wireless is requesting special permit approval to locate cellular wireless communication facilities at the Desert Springs Covenant Church located on the northeast corner at the intersection of Road 100 and Argent Road. The proposal involves the addition of an architectural feature on the roof of the existing church to house cellular antennae together with a ground-level equipment enclosure. The applicant's request is an effort to fill a coverage/capacity gap west of Road 68. The installation is intended to better support existing users west of Road 68 and would also potentially increase AT&T's ability to support more users in the same area. As illustrated in the elevations submitted with the application (Exhibits 1-3), the applicant wishes to install wireless communication network antennae atop an existing church. The antennae will be housed within an architecturally integrated rooftop feature extending fifteen (15) feet above the existing roofline; for an overall structure height of 55.4 feet above grade. The proposed wireless communication antenna meets the requirements listed under the provisions of PMC 25.70.075, which require wireless facilities to be located on an existing structure taller than thirty-five (35) feet. Wireless Facility zoning regulations 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) 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 2 (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). Commonly, cellular providers locate the equipment cabinets within a fenced area surrounding the base of a pole; in this case the ground-level equipment is proposed to be housed in a metal shelter designed for functionality. Renditions submitted with the application show no fence is proposed around the metal equipment shelter. Staff has entered a condition (#7) 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). 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. 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 RS-12 (Suburban). 2. The Comprehensive Plan identifies the site for low-density residential uses. 3. The site is approximately 1.65 acres in area. 4. The site contains a church approximately 9,200 square feet in area. 5. All municipal utilities currently serve the site. 3 6. In the RS-12 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. 7. The cellular antennae will be mounted on top of an existing church which is 40.4 feet in height. 8. Addition of the antennae housing appurtenance will increase the height of the church by fifteen (15) feet for an overall height of 55.4 feet. 9. Equipment serving the proposed antennae will be located within a 275 square foot ground-level equipment enclosure approximately 11.5 feet in height. 10. The Comprehensive Plan suggests the City ought to maintain land use flexibility with regard to placement of infrastructure for public and private utilities. 11. The Comprehensive Plan does not specifically address cellular equipment. 12. Cellular equipment creates minimal demands on City infrastructure. CONCLUSIONS BASED ON STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT Before recommending approval or denial of a special permit the Planning Commission must develop findings of fact from which to draw its conclusions based upon the criteria listed in PMC 25.86.060. The criteria are as follows: (1) Will the proposed use be in accordance with the goals, policies, objectives and text of the Comprehensive Plan? 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. 4 (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 dominated by residential suburban development. The addition of roof-top cellular antennae, as marked through architecturally consistent features, will not alter or affect the existing or intended character of the surrounding 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? The proposed antennae housing will be located on top of an existing church building and generally will not be noticed by the public. The cellular facility is unlikely to discourage development in the vicinity. The tower will be designed to be integrated into the architectural design of the existing church. (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 fumes, dust or noise. 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 applicable snow and wind loads. 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. 5 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 40 to 50 feet above grade; away from human activity. The cellular antennae and equipment pose no true threat to public health and safety. APPROVAL CONDITIONS 1) The special permit shall apply to parcel # 118-112-036 addressed 9915 West Argent Road; 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 enclosure shall not exceed 55.4 feet in height as measured from existing grade; 4) The cellular antennae shall be enclosed within an architecturally integrated feature attached to the church building; 5) The ground-level equipment enclosure shall be located no closer than ten (10) feet from the north and east property lines of parcel # 118- 112-036; 6) The ground-level equipment shall be located within a decorative block wall 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); 7) The proposed cellular facility must comply with all FCC regulations; 8) The roof-top antennae housing shall not emit light; 9) The roof-top appurtenance housing the cellular antennae shall be constructed and painted to match the architecture of the church; 10) The special permit shall be null and void if a City of Pasco building permit is not obtained by April 30, 2015. RECOMMENDATION MOTION for Findings of Fact: I move to adopt findings of fact and conclusions therefrom as contained in the April 17, 2014 staff report. MOTION for Recommendation: I move based on the findings of fact and conclusions as adopted the Planning Commission recommend the City Council grant a special permit 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. 6 Vicin Ite m: Wireless Communication Facilities it y . Map Applicant. AT&T Wireless. File #. SP2014-001 y City County A. SIT ARGENT RD • Y ,Fj c M1 SOP- IN, 111 r, r — FA < .. -- _.. — -- a Land Use Item: Wireless Communication Facilities Applicant: AT&T Wireless N Map File #: SP2014-001 j Ilk � City County Vacant Single-Family Residences ARGENT RD Single-Family, �/ � Residences Zoning Item: Wireless Communication Facilities Applicant: AT&T Wireless N Map File #: SP2014-001 9� City County Suburban County RS-20 RS-12 \ � � IT Suburban � ARGENT RD OL County RS-20 CONSTRUCTION PLAN KEYED NOTES TIP HEIGHT OF PROPOSED TOP OF PROPOSED AT&T NTENNA SHROUD T&T ANTENNAS 55.4'AGL O PROPOSED 11'-5"x24'-0"PREFABRICATED EQUIPMENT SHELTER. IF 54.4'AGL �,:�" � -— I.I r PROPOSED 6"THICK 11'-5"x24'-0"CONCRETE SLAB-ON-GRADE WITH it J 6 O THICKENED SLAB EDGE PER SHELTER MANUFACTURER RECOMMENDATIONS. 12 O4 EXISTING 40'-5"BUILDING. ED TOP OF EXISTING O PROPOSED 5'CONCRETE STOOP. BUILDING a 40.4'AGL O PROPOSED FRP ANTENNA MOUNT SHROUD ASSEMBLY.SEE SITE NOTE N0.2. O7 PROPOSEDHVACUNITM OUNTEDTOSHELTER. 000 0000 1Q PROPOSEDAT&TPANELANTENNAS. 0 5 T q ��/ 14 PROPOSED COAXIAL CABLE/FIBER TO ANTENNAS. A/\ O q PROPOSED VERTICAL CABLE/FIBER CHASE MOUNTED TO SIDE OF BUILDING ������//// ?L 14 15 (SEE SITE NOTE 2). HE 5 � FINISH GRADE 0 0 0.0Y AGL p g EXISTING SHED(TO REMAIN) PROPOSED AT&T 11'-5" EQUIPMENT SHELTER &LEASE AREA NORTH ELEVATION (LOOKING SOUTH) 2 frastmructure 22"x34"SCALE:1/8 = -O 1 "x17"SCALE:1/16"=1-O" L D C nCRemideernctiaal l 24 PROPOSED COAX/FIBER DOGHOUSE AT SHELTER. THE CIVIL ENGINEERING GROUP Telecom E 14201 NE 200th St.,#100 Ph.425.806.1869 Woodinville,WAMM Fx.425.4822893 w LDCcolp.com TOP OF PROPOSED TIP HEIGHT OF ANTENNA SHROUD PROPOSED 55.4'AG AT&T ANTENNAS DATE: 12-11-13 54.4'AGL DRAWN BY: JDM CHECKED BY: RBH Q PROPOSED MICRIN 1-PHASE COMPACT GENERATOR INTERFACE PANEL 12 MOUNTED TO PROPOSED EQUIPMENT SHELTER. REVISIONS REV DATE I DESCRIPTION BY TOP OF EXISTING 1 12-11-13 PRELIMINARYZONING RBH BUILDING 2 12-27-13 FINALZONING RBH 40.4'AGL 4 .. 0 SITE NOTES 1. VERIFY ANTENNA MODEL,RAD CENTER&AZIMUTHS WITH LOCKDOWN SET RF SITE BUILD FORM. eats REGISTERED 2. PROPOSED ANTENNA SHROUD,CHASES,MOUNTS,AND MOUNTING ARCHITECT o HARDWARE NEAR ANTENNA LEVEL SHALL BE PAINTED TO MATCH EXISTING BUILDING. RICFiA ALL°��l a &TATE OF WABXINGTON 3 9 2 SITE ❑❑❑ ❑❑❑ ROAD 92&ARGENT ❑ 9 W ARGENT RD PAS ASCQ,WA 99301 FINISH GRADE 2 0.0'AGL --- 0 SHEET TITLE ELEVATION i SHEET NUMBER 3 SOUTH ELEVATION (LOOKING NORTH) 1 A-3 22"x34"SCALE:1/8"=1'-0" 11"x17"SCALE:1/16"=1'-O" CONSTRUCTION PLAN KEYED NOTES TOP OF PROPOSED i TIP HEIGHT OF PROPOSED ANTENNA SHROUD OIL AT&T ANTENNAS 55.4'AGL v O PROPOSED 11'-5"x24'-0"PREFABRICATED EQUIPMENT SHELTER. 54.4'AGL PROPOSED 6"THICK 11'-5"x24'-0"CONCRETE SLAB-ON-GRADE WITH ',.J 6 THICKENED SLAB EDGE PER SHELTER MANUFACTURER RECOMMENDATIONS. { 12 E li �i O EXISTING 40'-5"BUILDING. li�� I li{ LIB:I. TOP OF EXISTING BUILDING O PROPOSED FRPANTENNAMOUNTSHROUDASSEMBLY.SEE SITE NOTEN02. 40.4'AGL O7 PROP OSEDHVACUNITMOUNTEDTOSHELTER. 4 PROPOSEDAT&TPANELANTENNAS. 0 ��/ L 14 PROPOSED COAXIAL CABLE I FIBER TO ANTENNAS. 9 O E-1 0 LID ° ° 9 ° - cap 0 FINISH GRADE iiii 0.0'AGL Ilil IIII a 2 PROPOSED AT&T 24'-0" '----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------EQUIPMENT SHELTER-' &LEASE AREA QPROPOSED UNDERGROUND CONDUIT FOR CABLE/FIBER. EAST ELEVATION (LOOKING WEST) 2 ��� Commercial 22"x34"SCALE:1/8"= -O" 11"x17"SCALE:1/16"=1'-O" Infrastructure 1' Residential THE CIVIL ENGINEERING GROUP Telecom E 14201 NE 200th St.,#100 Ph.425.806.1869 WOOEI"VIII.,WAWM Ex.425.4822893 ­L TOP OF PROPOSED TIP HEIGHT OF ��o�.�om OIL ANTENNA SHROUD PROPOSED 55.4'AGL AT&T ANTENNAS 54.4'AGL DATE: 12-11-13 DRAWN BY: JDM CHECKED BY: RBH ir' PROPOSED MICRIN 1-PHASE COMPACT GENERATOR INTERFACE PANEL LT <8> MOUNTED TO PROPOSED EQUIPMENT SHELTER. REVISIONS TOP OF EXISTING REV DATE DESCRIPTION BY BUILDING 1 1211-13 PRELIMINARYZONING RBH 40.4'AGL - 2 12-27-13 FINAL ZONING RBH 4 - SITE NOTES 1. VERIFY ANTENNA MODEL,RAD CENTER&AZIMUTHS WITH LOCKDOWN SET RF SITE BUILD FORM. eats REGISTERED _ - \ 2. PROPOSED ANTENNA SHROUD,CHASES,MOUNTS,AND MOUNTING ARCHITECT HARDWARE NEAR ANTENNA LEVEL SHALL BE PAINTED TO MATCH EXISTING BUILDING. 1 _ RIC14A ALL - STATE OF WASHINGTON 23 / 7 EXISTING SHE D I 000 000 SITE (TO REMAIN) KP0458 ROAD 92&ARGENT 1E I- _ El � � 9915 W ARGENT RD ❑� FINISH GRADE PASCQ WA 99301 0.0Y AGL SHEET TITLE i 0 ELEVATION i SHEET NUMBER 3 WEST EL EVA TION (L OOKING EA ST) 1 A-3.1 22"x34"SCALE:1/8"=1'-0" 11"x17"SCALE:1/16"=1'-O" 5-25E+ RS-12 or RS-12/ / ADJACENT ZONING: RS-12 RS 12 I RS-12(SUBURBAN) / 2 o v Q PROJECT PROPOSED AT&T 11'-5"x24'-0"EQUIPMENT SHELTER LEASE AREA f PROPOSED 10'-0" -------� RS-20 CEI PROPERTY UNE UTILITY EASEMENT 1 1 S� I GP r UGP UGP --GGP IGP i I � —___ ZONING MAP NOT TO SCALE 118-112-036 1 1�ap5s 9WLDINO U Y I 1 O in I t9 ; 3 W .r `I--1--- �. ° 1n Z I I� � H I I A2 a PROPOSED AT&T ANTENNA SHROUD ––––– MOUNTED ON 40'-5"BUILDING 1 � ADJACENT ZONING: 1 1 I RS-12(SUBURBAN) ehRw\ 32'-0"+I �—=1 \ - ANTENNA na1 1 SETBACK W 1 j Commercial 275'-0"± 1 I Infrastructure I ANTENNA SETBACK L D I � Residential THE CIVIL ENGINEERING GROUP Telecom ZONING: 14201 NE 200th St.,#1W Ph.425.806.1864 ----- ` Z Z WOOdmIIIe,WA98072 F.425.4822893 RS-12(SUBURBAN) I Z m —LDCcorp.com 0 o DO Z DATE: 12-11-13 Y V DRAWN BY: JDM \ /� m G CHECKED BY: RBH a F----- --- _' w Q —:�] REVISIONS o Q ° � Z F REV DATE I DESCRIPTION BY W— 1 12-it-13 PRELIMINARI'ZONING RBH Z I 2 12-27-13 FINAL ZONING RBH — a PROPOSED 20'-0" o � � ACCESS EASEMENT G�o I N i �Qy - .- _ . 1�}888 G (E)PROPERTY LINE L &TALE OF WABXINGTON al -0 —uGT ucT-1 EXISTING SITE ACCESS / WARGENT ROAD SITE / \ a KP0458 ROAD 92&ARGENT E --- `—, 9915 W ARGENT RD PASCO,WA 99301 PROPOSED QUANTITIES ° POWER LENGTH: ADJACENT ZONING: SHEET TITLE UNDERGROUND: 157'± RS-20(RESIDENTIAL SUBURBAN) SITE PLAN M TELCO LENGTH: 311'± i SHEET NUMBER 3 SITE PLAN A-1 22"x34"SCALE:1"=20' 11-x17"SCALE:1"=40' PR 17 - CDBG Activities Subject to Jobs/Services Public Benefit Calculation. MicroStrat... Page 1 of 1 PR 17 - CDBG Activities Subject to Jobs/Ser... Home Tools Data Last i ED100% IN*Javascript errors were encountered on this page.*Click here for more details. GROUPING: Agency Tag: (All) Funding Agency: .(All)[7711 Program Year: (All)[— IDIS - PR17 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Office of Community Planning and Development Integrated Disbursement and Information System CDBG Activities Potentially Subject to Jobs/Services Public Benefit Cal PASCO, WA Program Project IDIS Matrix National Area Year ID Activity ID Activity Name Status Code Objective Type Area Nam( 1995 0006 24 EAST LEWIS STREET BEAUTIFICATION Completed 03K LMJFI 0.00 0.00 1996 0005 34 4TH AVENUE BEAUT Completed 03 LMJFI 0.00 0.00 1996 0007 30 REVOLVING LOAN Completed 18A LMJ 0100 0.00 1996 0008 86 EAST LEWIS STREET BEAUTIFICATION Completed 03K LMJFI 0.00 0.00 1996 0010 35 SYLVESTER PARK LIGHTS Completed 03F LMJFI 0.00 0.00 1997 0013 45 REVOLVING LOAN-COUNCIL OF GOV. Completed 18A LMJ 0.00 0.00 1997 0013 61 REGIONAL REVOLVING LOAN FUND Completed 18A LMJ 0.00 0.00 1998 0012 82 REGIONAL REVOLVING LOAN FUND Completed 18A LMJ 0.00 0.00 1999 0008 97 REVOLVING LOAN FUND Completed 18A LMJ 0.00 0.00 1999 0012 101 EVERGREEN 504 PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION Completed 18B LMA 0.00 0.00 12000 0003 117 B/F COUNCIL OF GOVT. REG. REVOLVING FUND Completed 18A LMJ 0.00 0.00 '2001 0003 140 CERTIFIED KITCHEN COMPLEX Completed 18A LMA 0.00 0.00 2001 0003 148 TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE IN COMMUNITY DEV. Completed 18B LMJ 0.00 0.00 IDIS > Snared Reports > PR 17 - CDBG Activities Subject to Jobs/Services Public Benefit Calculation > smardink This proposed facility is needed to fill a coverage/capacity gap between 182 and Road 68, running south from Chapel Hill Blvd. to the river. Currently there are no communication facilities in this area. The closets communication facilities are in the area of Road 68 and Court street, which AT&T Mobility has a facility, and this site will connect in with that site, along with its site located at the City water tanks on Sandifur Parkway. A coverage plot map is being prepared and will be forwarded for your report when complete. Pursuant to 18.40.110.C, in compliance with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) "Shot Clock," we believe that the County has 150 days to make a decision on AT&T's permit application, which, due to its nature (stealth flagpole replacement) is considered to be a new facility and not a collocation. The FCC Declaratory Ruling, dated November 18, 2009 and recently reaffirmed by the Supreme Court, provides deadlines for State and local jurisdictions to act on applications for wireless facilities. The FCC defines a "reasonable" period of time for State and local government to act on wireless applications as 90 days for a collocation applications and 150 days for all other applications. Please note that these timelines are inclusive of all application notice and appeal periods. Thank you for your assistance in processing this application. Please let me know if any additional information is needed. sincerely, Julie NtkCope (509) 220-4155 Enclosures :,. a 4� ir}�: -'',? i'?7y (ter www.smartlinklic.com TOWAIR Search Results Page 1 of 1 TOWAIR Determination results *** NOTICE *** TOWAIR's findings are not definitive or binding, and we cannot guarantee that the data in TOWAIR are fully current and accurate. In some instances, TOWAIR may yield results that differ from application of the criteria set out in 47 C.F.R. Section 17.7 and 14 C.F.R. Section 77.13. A positive finding by TOWAIR recommending notification should be given considerable weight. On the other hand, a finding by TOWAIR recommending either for or against notification is not conclusive. It is the responsibility of each ASR participant to exercise due diligence to determine if it must coordinate its structure with the FAA. TOWAIR is only one tool designed to assist ASR participants in exercising this due diligence, and further investigation may be necessary to determine if FAA coordination is appropriate. DETERMINATION Results Structure does not require registration. The structure meets the 6.10-meter (20-foot) Rule criteria. Your Specifications NAD83 Coordinates Latitude 46-15-26.1 north Longitude 119-13-15.4 west Measurements (Meters) Overall Structure Height (AGL) 16.9 Support Structure Height (AGL) 12.3 Site Elevation (AMSL) 119.8 Structure Type B - Building Tower Construction Notifications Notify Tribes and Historic Preservation Officers of your plans to build a tower. REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION MASTER FILE NO: Z 2014-002 APPLICANT: Chester & Jaqueline Fortune HEARING DATE: 5/15/2014 313 N 6th 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: Leal: Parcel #'s 113-504-020 & 113-504-011: Block 4 and Block 5 together with vacated north south alley adjacent, Frey's Addition 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 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. 5. 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. CONCLUSIONS BASED ON STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT Before recommending approval or denial of a special permit the Planning Commission must develop findings of fact from which to draw its conclusions based upon the criteria listed in PMC 25.86.060. The criteria are as follows: 1. 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 for Findings of Fact: I move to adopt findings of fact and conclusions therefrom as contained in the June 19, 2014 staff report. MOTION for Recommendation: I move based on the findings of fact and conclusions as adopted the Planning Commission recommend the City Council approve the rezone from C-3 to R-3 for Franklin County tax parcel #'s 113-504-020 and 113-504-011. 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) t y - r u , : x 'i-T -pp��- +��;"t +,t�sj .�y� '�.> Ar -_D .',3' i .jl�':P•+I ,.i r,, - ,•r', -r vi"F� - 9 '.�. - f�4� .-�,. �" °�,!'- .t a .•� -� �. ;:j'- - Y`'%� z••! `/•T N�M,c ''s`v - +'�, _ - �- r i .1. -, s -- a. •s e S �i>+ �...-s, �f+ t' 't„` � "�, v'+I if. ±t +..• i ✓� ,.y �/ �li i��� S8 _ '�.'i;.x� `t � i.�j '�. +i�'z:.� _ �.y0i� •r !•, r k ,,�' .J_ •� -i�.�.- r -s ���t�.•.t:�•�; -',_! - Y•�+_ riNriS.t-�''f'�7► , _�' `r� t -•t-�ti�q✓ din - s" Y •N- .y",�- *L��;: •_q,�; �,�i -',���• .��?�' - {a�* err 1," .� ;p� % _.rt.. ��.~4 �' i.r a,�->>� �,.�i�� ��- -.•4 �j y _ .•�'. _ ar 'J' + '--� �v F 'T. �I # .ii�f•1 h, _ l � f� Y .�' ,i !' d� G� � Yy, f F,F -��` � .. . _ �*L ` r _ � i.- -��'`. ' ''�`+�%' •rfih;���^-�' � � :fi9� t �`1 4 1�� � ![[.��'s�7,�' �•�'i •. { - � Ira '' "7- �' �rt�.�'+f '�` •r 4��?��3,L. r is .�'! ,' . K�`�� ;�:>J. r• - - _x�_ ";! {� � - ' - i _� 1.F � -- L � .`-r.�° _ - C.r �^it'.��-y�xti-.: �i� ,F�i �r �t y�•/ !1 f ,a. ��v .fa.z. -�.. �,.' �•`N `J�/, . �''. .e .- tg`+ � •, ,. _� �. :ice 1..,, .r�,'- ,�.:.' f II 'ii5 '• ''''� !. FV. r -<'d��vaq'�r'i _ ' - r ;' -�• r_.. �{-, . f �'�/ •. n r.. .. Y� '�_�m�?F F 1 .i. �.n:t,�J•.. '. .�- � '1•:•Y. � �i ��hV?� Z1• f `�l• � � r - Looking East arm - f 1 y c e r f �ee�l V,4 � � M�+' �` e;,t„ , � 1► �.. 4Y �'TrS'.� ,i YR x_�y RW �kN Ilk t 1f . s fi +tom r LU _• � �� f # � Li - !4 JA �' .e rYt Sri y� ^w.T •. — yk .�. �, � t Al! r.. ,:< � _.�� _ 1 _ �� y;•,i�t��'�z'tl��z 1 �}K • -=_YT -- s :.� ', � .. �r. { �. � - jil � _ �•��i. .-- ��.. C '+E' \I�"4!lf.+'.' eP '� +'?,`�•�! �.� ay (r4f fti,M Looking West WINK I om lowya. . Y{ + 1 "� ':S.K � =M r '� �ry• 'P; _.."� M - `` sue' - 'fi- itf OPPA _ t 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. 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 about 70 feet from the west edge of the main farm field on the site. As a result 2 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. The effect on the property owners if the request is not granted: 4 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 constraints. 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. 15. Two sewer trunk lines are located within the site. 16. The current farming operation is inconsistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. 5 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 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. 6 5. A Concomitant Agreement should be entered into between the City and the petitioner, and if so, the terms and conditions of such an agreement. A Concomitant Agreement is not needed. RECOMMENDATION MOTION for Findings of Fact: I move to adopt findings of fact and conclusions therefrom as contained in the June 19, 2014 staff report. MOTION for Recommendation: I move based on the findings of fact and conclusions as adopted the Planning Commission recommend the City Council rezone the DNR and School District property in Section 16 from RT to R 1-S, R-1, R-3, Office and C-1 as illustrated in the "Proposed Zoning" exhibit attached to June 19, 2014 staff report. 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 �' Proposed Item: Rezone RT to O, C- 1 , R- 1 , RS-1 , R-3/R-4 Applicant: Dept. of Natural Resources N Zoning File #: Z 2014-001 rt W BURDEN BWVD Hqp w t � OLIN R DR C —11Z � O EY DR ;z ES °' ND _ DR 9 z' OS'S r ;.J�r \ A_ R-3' Acres � JA � n���SFy_ J r is R-1 44.6 Acres 176.4 Acres 1 r '1 • r�Y��MTS,' o �- r- SUNSET TBAI I CO r – _ -D CHAPEL HILL BLVD .. f= a C-1 ' { L MAMDE MAPLE 6.0 Acres �u 6.5 Acres �,o•_— � 2 �.. � VALLEY VIEW_ _PL STERLIN;G RD oE S RLING RL•O)' � -< r z _ - r �. RS-1 26.8 Acres RGENT R ARGENT RD r !J r. wClT`!L-IMIT� OI ., REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION MASTER FILE # SP 2014-006 APPLICANT: Casa de Avivamiento HEARING DATE: 6/19/2014 1734 North 5th Ave. ACTION DATE: 7/17/2014 Pasco, WA 99301 BACKGROUND REQUEST: SPECIAL PERMIT: Location of a Church in a C-1 (Retail Business) Zone 1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Legal: Lots 4 to 7, Block 1, Holt's Addition General Location: 1734 North 5th Avenue Property Size: Approximately 0.57 acres 2. ACCESS: The site has access from 5th Avenue. 3. UTILITIES: All municipal utilities currently serve the site. 4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The site is zoned C-1 (Retail Business) and contains a church structure. The zoning and land use of the surrounding properties are as follows: NORTH: R-1 - Apartment Building EAST: C-3 - WA State Department of Transportation SOUTH: R-1 - SFDUs WEST: R-1 - SFDUs 5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan designates this area for low-density residential uses. 6. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The City of Pasco is the lead agency for this project. Based on the SEPA checklist, the adopted City Comprehensive Plan, City development regulations, and other information, a threshold determination resulting in a Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) has been issued for this project under WAC 197-11-158. ANALYSIS The applicant proposes to operate a church in an existing 4,650 square- foot structure located in a C-1 zone. Churches require special permit review regardless of the zone. 1 In 1992 Lighthouse United Pentecostal Church (Frank Blanchard) obtained a Special Permit to operate a church at this location with the following conditions: 1) This special permit shall be personal to the applicant. 2) Thirty-two (32) off-street parking spaces shall be maintained. 3) Two percent (2%) of the net lot (approximately 450 sq. ft.) shall be landscaped by November 1, 1992. 4) All signs not pertaining to the church activity shall be removed by July 6, 1992. 5) This permit shall be null and void if a valid business license has not been obtained by July 6, 1992. The church name was changed in 2008 to Faith Center International. The building has been used as a church from 1992 to the present. Since the special permit granted in 1992 was personal to the applicant, and has now been abandoned, a new special permit application process is required. The church plans on holding services Tuesday 7:00 pm to 8:30/8:45 pm; Thursday 7:00 pm to 9:00 pm; Sunday 11:00am to 2:OOpm and/or 5:OOpm to 8:OOpm. Estimated attendance is 60-80 parishioners. 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. The church sanctuary has seven 15' benches and thirteen 7' benches with a total of 196 lineal feet of seating. This would require 20 paved and striped parking spaces. 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. Churches are considered Unclassified Uses and thereby require special permit review (PMC 25.86.020). 2. The site is located at 1734 North 5th Avenue. 3. The site is zoned C-1 (Retail Business). 4. The site comprises approximately .57 acres. 5. The proposed church will occupy an existing 4,650-square-foot structure. 2 6. The municipal Code (PMC 25.78.170) requires one off-street parking space for every four fixed seats or at least one space for every ten lineal feet of bench seating. 7. A church (Lighthouse United Pentecostal Church/Faith Center International) was previously granted a Special Permit to operate on the site. 8. The Casa de Avivamiento is a non-profit organization. 9. Casa de Avivamiento is defined as a church in the Pasco Zoning Code. 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 Plan does not specifically address churches, but Policy LU-2-B of the Comprehensive Plan encourages the support of facilities for educational and cultural activities. Elements of the Plan encourage the promotion of orderly development including zoning standards for landscaping and off- street parking. Parking and landscaping improvements may be required as conditions of the special permit. The site is identified in the Comprehensive Plan for low-density residential use. Church uses are allowed in residential zones with a special permit. 2. Will the proposed use adversely affect public infrastructure? Churches are generally used during off-peaks hours, on Sundays and during evenings in the middle of the week. The church will use existing City utilities and infrastructure. The proposal will generate little demand for public utilities, operating for only a few hours 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 3 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? Casa de Avivamiento is proposing to occupy an existing building in a fully built-out neighborhood. No changes are planned for the height and size of the structure. The current building has not discouraged development in the general area. 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? Churches typically operate two or three days per week and generate traffic during off-peak times such as Sunday mornings and weekday evenings. The proposed facility will only be open for religious services a few hours per week. There will be no excessive 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? Church operations within the City typically do not endanger public health or safety. Churches are a generally accepted use within the community. TENTATIVE APPROVAL CONDITIONS 1. The Special Permit shall apply to Tax Parcel #113 391 027 (1734 North 5th Avenue); 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); 4 5. Landscaped areas shall be restored and maintained, as per PMC 25.75. 6. The Special Permit shall be null and void if an occupancy registration has not been obtained by August 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 July 17, 2014 Planning Commission meeting. 5 'CI nity Item: Church in C- 1 Zone V Applicant: Casa de Avivamiento N Map 2014-006 File #: SP / iv ! _ , {l �\ oft 4v� : � I s- 9. EA PEARL ST P �RL S ap mow, A0 _ W Ui r Q SITE a rOPAL ST �71"�� z ; 9 � Uwj s ,. L L b , A< L y f AGATE ST 4P i Land Item: Church in C- 1 Zone Use Applicant: Casa de Avivamiento N Map File #: SP 2014-006 Residential Commercial Park PEARL ST P'EAR'L S B Residential Q Q SITE Q OPAL ST = = z = CO Q Comm. lot M Residential:] CL AGATE ST a MH Park IIIIIIII 111111 �� � 1111111 II�III . t■111 . = II 11■11 = = = � Item: Church in C- I Zone Zoning Applicant: Casa de Avivamiento N Map File #: SP 2014-006 z o • e Looking North - El I, Looking East ak- Looking South qa, ". •'.l(E. y JR� 6 s '`�j'qry,df JIn 3-1 Ir r r _ r _ a - 11 _ -'tom• .T.n• Looking West Aft . .w n r � r vt �s. ,.�•':,r;, ,�i "x...�T. �IIId :. '� .as .. rw .ylis._ -,•.',.�,•� �y .ht "ti'' l•4 ,� n, r} +'M®r!.�ail�R ' .t + rr •�y� � �� T�x .•w� •�^- ,� i , �'rf. " � I iW voc °"9CP- -t�•. r ti �.' t :rl _ , c r ar t. 4 r ' �x�'y,�'i 3t5�t. ,5� `r: 1 �I �,. � �� ,�': •'� *�� ��L �r. -.�.. ;��' "r. "r-� -1,� •�r<. .l ...fin �^1'11^v. M1 � 1 �3' �f• I i �, w (� x n s J;- � � 1 Pt ^ '" �'~ .�i .w t �r' rri`A�„ tt: ,.+.'.� M' :1�8-'• ��$�r" a:.���r� �'!ti'.,��� .�yi�` ,.¢1'' :•X - s"` �_ `, W c +,+ �"�`r z +• �C~ ",e E.' ,'J1 "#-r y (•'_,yc�.-#' + `t t i. .r.�� :Y`! ' `y5 J�- ,� ��E F „1�._ '',, z� r"^ a5 xg,4..'• {fir ' '''p.,, F , 1. levy 's ti•{� ��'r!;,5r 1 ' - L � �1"' 'r- �•� a.. ''i tk :.�Tbt`�Br+j i ,�'. �.�:y � ��!$ 1� 1 It hp�}�•, r. .� ZOO# 4;� �1 �! '� ,�i:� ,, .�.4' - � .�X• 4����, 5 .�y�t 6 � CI1-, ri,- j �`�rfJp xa.. _ � i , •�"' , 5 �` y 5}t' rA. '4� y n - .,�4 � 'V r'xy fi,;Q,,'' J�� ^-y_ •Q LY�•tt # ty ,� Phu REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION MASTER FILE NO: Z 2014-003 APPLICANT: Solano Enterprises LLC HEARING DATE: 6/19/2014 5311 Eisenhower Ct ACTION DATE: 7/17/2014 Pasco, WA 99301 BACKGROUND REQUEST: REZONE: Rezone from C-3 (General Business) to R-3 (Medium- Density Residential) 1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Legal: Parcel # 112-023-042: Block 11 Northern Pacific Plat First Addition General Location: 909 N 3rd Avenue Property Size: The parcel is approximately 3.4 acres 2. ACCESS: The site is accessed from 3rd Avenue. 3. UTILITIES: The site is currently served only by municipal water service. The site contains a septic system. The sewer line lying approximately 240 feet south of the site is not available to serve the site due to its shallow depth. There is a sewer line which terminates near the northeast corner of the site; however, the line is on Pasco Housing Authority private property. It is uncommon for sewer lines to be extended from adjacent private parcels. A private sewer lift-station may be needed. 4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The site is currently zoned C-3 (General Business) and contains a commercial building. Surrounding properties are zoned and developed as follows: NORTH: C-1 - Commercial SOUTH: RP - Mobile Homes EAST: R-3 - Multi-Family Residences WEST: R-1 - City Park 5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan designates the site for Mixed Residential uses. Goal LU-3-B 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 Santos Solano of Solano Enterprises LLC has applied to change the zoning designation of Block 11, Northern Pacific Plat First Addition from C-3 (General Business) to R-3 (Medium-Density Residential) to allow for multi-family residential development. The subject site is approximately 3.4 acres in area. The City's Comprehensive Plan designates this site for Mixed Residential land uses which allows for 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 permits the highest residential density at a rate of one dwelling unit for every 3'000ft2 of land area or 14.5 units per acre. For comparison, the single-family R-1 zone permits an approximate density of 6-units per acre. Currently the site appears to be an isolated C-3 (General Business) zoned site among a variety other zoning districts in the surrounding vicinity. 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. These heavy commercial uses are potentially disruptive to lifestyles enjoyed in residential neighborhoods. It is common urban planning practice to assign higher-density residential zones or sometimes office zones, to transitional areas to serve as buffers between contrasting zoning districts. For this reason it may be appropriate to assign the R-3 zone to the site. This relatively large site can be characterized as underdeveloped. The asphalt parking area is highly weathered. The east 2/3 of the site remains unimproved. Recently, the City completed the 4th Avenue corridor capital improvement project whereby a round-a-bout and street frontage improvements were installed directly in front of the site. Due to the investment of public funds into the roadside appearance of the vicinity it may be in the best interest of the public to promote full site development consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 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 35-years ago. 2. The changed conditions, which are alleged to warrant other or additional zoning: Over the years adjacent parcels to the east and south have been developed with a variety of multi family and single-family residential developments aimed mostly at providing housing opportunities for low to moderate income families. 2 Of particular importance is Council's adoption of the City's Comprehensive Plan which occurred after the C-3 zone was assigned to the site. A change in zoning classification to the R-3 zone is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and with existing land uses in the vicinity. 3. Facts to justify the change on the basis of advancing the public health, safety and general welfare: Changing the zoning classification of the site will likely lead to the development of a largely unimproved/undeveloped parcel of land near the central downtown core of the city. Development of this site would contribute to the city's recent investment into right-of-way infrastructure along the 4th Avenue corridor, thereby enhancing the overall character of the vicinity. There is also merit in the elimination of an underdeveloped site near the central core of the city as it is likely to foster further development in the area. 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 an increased number 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. S. 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. 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 currently zoned C-3 (General Business). 2. The site contains a commercial building. 3 3. The applicant is requesting R-3 (Medium-Density Residential) zoning be assigned to the site. 4. The Comprehensive Plan identifies the site and much of the vicinity for Mixed-Residential uses which allows assignment of a range of residential zones including R-3 (Medium-Density Residential). 5. 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. 6. The site is approximately 3.4 acres in area. 7. Municipal water currently serves the site from 3rd Avenue. 8. The site to the east is similarly zoned R-3 and contains a multi-family residential development. 9. The site to the southeast is similarly zoned R-3 and contains a multi-family 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. The proposed R-3 zoning will permit site development similar to the density of the Pasco Housing Authority residential development to the east/southeast. 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 value of properties within immediate vicinity. 3. There is merit and value in the proposal for the community as a whole. Establishment of zoning and development on the subject site will further establish the multi family character matching much of the vicinity. These similar developments in the area have consistently experienced high rates of occupancy. From this we can 4 infer that there is a need in the community for affordable multi family housing opportunities. There is merit in providing an increased range of housing opportunities available in those areas currently served by 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 are proposed. 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 July 17, 2014 meeting. 5 Vicin Item: Rezone (C-3 to R-3)0 y Ap p l it icant. Solano Enterprises LLC N Map File #: Z2014-003 COLRT ST '3 r s � _ '3 I _ a �y SITE A 00 Oil Am y y. C i S�4 Y Land Use Item: Rezone (C-3 to R-3) Applicant: Solano Enterprises LLC N Map File #: Z2014-003 COURT ST Residential Commercial Office SITE N� W W x \� Residential Government/Public �s o� U Item: Rezone (C-3 to R-3)Zoning . . Map Applicant. Solano Enterprises LLC N . File #. Z2014-003 COURT ST RP (Residential Park) C-1 (Retail Business) 0 (Office) SITE r7d w w � RP x (Residential Park) O R-1 (Low-Density Residential) \ Looking North I t �■ �. 1■ _ r �' ��2:lk,y - --.�-� �Y�` � �..+ -.. E:f_'�-��f #:i'� F-' '_�,�` � -��Y3a �••-�'��^.�� fit,'. 41-5��_.T .� �.s, --� - .. - r 4 t•' r • f ,.. �• � .:�� .�"� a�,c� rrl�'°� rf�ee--;�i E'�..rr;� r �,- x�vF¢�" s s �E•.' AOR Vol yF/' -7 pai, ffli '# /1 .� ..' r •i '` ' /f�r1 pis /�' �r ;r M ,k"1 /r y. .. .P ! ti r l a a, i 1� r INS A41A 'Pr x1 ' 'r'J�,` _. to 7� to "� '� :� .�. art, ' �•' ' - � �. at• • 1 u�,�,1, _ 4 -. ..�: ,,�-'�- ► IF i;¢r��'• ��� '� Al �� � s� •«� � I��w a are ice.^' - .� l ✓ r ! s . J ,r r p pow �i Looking West A&-A. - - 4 _ sr^- •- Pal rt ,a ��.� - r ��� `` ,� +�'� - s r - +J � �. - .�� �. _ ;�_!', �� �" r-a n '-�y,C""r' �,ua•ar tom} - � � �vct_-•s-rvarr •+ 7." E rY'w` + ,�tS,r•- } 5 y� zz m -��s. r ..+ r'�_'���..`i �� r�i���?� y.� ...a• 9 _.. - '3`-x�.� .,�,m�+t-y-�-C� �� -'`� ,n .- � 1-=s.t -fit' < 4. �' � .���•a ?'L���f+r!'--sr� ,y; � 'G�� •<-°'� ..- '��,.- - y Y� ".� Tr`."�+•�`��.• � l-zy 5�F" -_ �!� _ } Sjt 8,!141 �-,�-, ����i','��� �y •�G�.�L'i�� Y��L � � .�T - L,�� �,-1, �+71!T+ �a��� 1Y„`L+,'y`'._ _ •A . T - '__� -} ,� � r t x .,#„LSr 'f ��. N., -`. r to`x+•K - -L�� .'t* Y -�^"�Y -. W �-\ � � _ J. T}, ..1 5 �-�i. L' ��• � �/ ]?l�G - - vl �SY� '"�i� T�y f$7��.g4� _.L.�_:Z� � Zka'-�S'�y s j�} • � ,� t.'z :!l�•. �, A r ;���F -'�try ::e? y ^�4 y.:u -`'_._�.. - ,«-�. -.'".�Yy� �-. _.4���'7t=�``.C'- i's:-- "'r ,��. '+�• - ... •� _ys s• �.sr.'a t�^y��5�`- -'�i::+k �r F _�� .A, �^ ;�; ��5`a ?>:i?.�} , �. etc ts': �`t,�a' "_�;� r� �::^q2. -�-s.:._ 4F�irfT' rq-V�,}��. ,R: •-�f`�f �. '}� hE.y - .-\ � �j^�_ 1�� �r - F.�L-}�Ls T•};! `�•�-C�I �Y �;� .`..-�:c?'"-"C,.a+-�- �,s_ `, .r r t..�' . .3• «y, ,'Z K l a- Yt"f^- �Xl t; ..r •. � a } .. " _9 c. °�•Y.r- '"s^.- �.+ � �� - t '�� '�+.-m � ~� y A '�+C .L� .CPJ-' -��, .�1. �. _.mow�. '• _.� 1`5;.�-.� �dE d �!.`�_ - �.? =r- �,}r,3 �5, r .. �=�r1�. - 't �5�~�..s,�=,�Y•'.� - �3'ti:_ �- �'w ,r� _c".x:; _ �,� -N;-� :.�q-r�^a�-:rs -�� rt `a� - y,s�,:- �.CE•:. �y.'�' �v �� yx��'`i���;aj•.- - _ - •� �zh � _=�'C'•�` r :;�-i"�-�- m, f!. .� ':*° '.i1M,1. --`!y 'f "k��. eft. � e' .;'? � ��,;,,c,.,., �_ .��.. -- _•ia'Y.�•.-1` �j ''fF.}. ! �.,� t" .r' ?s- +, �..x t - -,v a, Cp g.,�L -<•• = 1 -.+.-'-f in:-; y s��-' �'+•° �;t. 'r'� ';< a ~r '�. , � r, •s-� �a'�:�S'�, �� � �f � r � -� _ r= ±r� .�. - f+�-• _-��.�eF' ��.:�. .a:'!M��,+ ,�<,.•. 1. 1` "+..'7'd+alb, • r r " • � rt All - - if + + J if +ri t f� j.� 7r, - -. i - +� - - _ - - - - P l� ? ,y MEMORANDUM DATE: June 19, 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 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 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. Following the public hearing, staff requests the Planning Commission discuss and provide direction regarding a question brought up by affected property owners during the scoping process. 1) Should homeowners be provided the option of choosing not to have a new street tree planted in front of their homes? Based on the Planning Commission's direction related to the discussion point above, staff will modify the Plan accordingly and prepare a final draft for review by the Planning Commission and to be forwarded to Council. Motion to close the hearing: 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 July 17, 2014 meeting. Sylvester's Addition Neighborhood Revitalization Plan ,f t ..gyp t�S kWi. t7 _ f,y .. ice. MAW ". City of Pasco Community& Economic Development Department May- 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(Sub-Area 1) ............................................................................................................................ 10 MargaretStreet(Sub-Area z).................................................................................................................... 10 Sylvester& Nixon Streets(Sub-Area 3).................................................................................................... io HenryStreet................................................................................................................................................11 PathForward...............................................................................................................................................11 MaintenanceResponsibility.......................................................................................................................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. Within the planting strips 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 lot"Avenue)were established just before and after the year i9oo. 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. Over the past 75 — ioo 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 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. "al+k3e`' (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 exists 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 relatively 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 potentially 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 (5) 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 discussed. The study area was originally constructed over eighty (8o) years ago; municipal utilities are on a 75-year replacement schedule. Residents encouraged the City to possibly consolidate sidewalk and municipal utility replacement 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 parcel's linear length of road frontage. Additionally, property owners 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 fifth meeting staff informed the attendees of the city's intent to secure project funding entirely through Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) sources and that it is possible that 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 in sufficient quantity include but are not limited to the following: 1) Greenspire Littleleaf Linden (Tilia cordata) z) Armstrong Maple (Acer freemanii) 3) Tulip Tree (Liriodendron tulipi fera) 4) Crimson Sentry Maple (Acer platanoides) 5) Quaking Aspen (Populus tremuloides) 6) Corinthian Linden (Tilia cordata) 7) Summer Sprite Linden (Tilia cordata `Ha_Ikar') 8) Variegated Boxelder(Acer negundo var.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. This is called a triple canopy. Another advantage of the triple canopy is that it can create more privacy near the ground level. 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 (#z). Priority Areas The study area is divided into three sub-areas grouped along east-west oriented roadways using alleys as convenient dividing lines. This grouping coincides well with the degree of sidewalk damage observed; 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/sub-area 1) having the highest degree of sidewalk damage and the most large street trees. Planning Department and Engineering Department staff worked together 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, sections of 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 (Sub-Area i) 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 approximately 3,800 linear feet of private property frontage; 240 linear feet of which belong to the Lourde's Hospital parking lot which 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 4o-6o feet in height. The trees have passed their prime in terms of growth rate and overall 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 and permanently alter the tree's balance. With every passing year the likelihood increases that the entire tree will fall during one of our region's high-wind events. Based on the % block survey standard mentioned above, all sidewalks fronting Park Street (approx. 2,800 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 and as a result the sidewalks are largely undamaged. Regardless, these roadways (5th, 7thY 8th and loth Avenues) are proposed to receive new street tree plantings. Margaret Street (Sub-Area z) 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. Generally, the same project components apply to sub-area z but to a lesser degree. Sylvester & Nixon Streets (Sub-Area 3) 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 Ranking Map. Sub-are 3 is the largest of the three sub-areas and contains the highest 10 number of individual parcels. Despite its large size sub-area 3 contains the lowest 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. Minimal sidewalk damage exists around the perimeter of the Park. Henry Street Originally the project area of this Plan included properties fronting Henry Street, between 5t" and lot" Avenues. Staff surveys of this 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 proposals and removed altogether from the Area Priority Ranking Map. Path Forward To date, a comprehensive planning analysis of construction needs has only been completed for a portion of sub-area 1 (Park Street). Following the completion of construction activities for the first phase of sub-area 1, planning staff will repeat the planning and scoping processes for 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 adaptive 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 responsibility 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 right-of-way improvements. The term 11 maintenance means the proper upkeep of all infrastructure and living vegetation, and in this case applies to that area between the front property line and street curb, bound by parallel lines projecting forward from the side property lines of each parcel. Title 12 "Streets and Sidewalks" of the Pasco Municipal Code duly assigns right-of-way maintenance responsibility (PMC 12.12.030). 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 MEMORANDUM DATE: June 10, 2014 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Rick White, Director Community& Economic Development SUBJECT: Kurtzman Neighborhood Alley Vacation Process The Kurtzman area neighborhoods underwent a multi-year neighborhood improvement plan sponsored in part by Community Development Block Grant money. The block grant funds were partnered with homeowner local improvement district funds to pay for a series of infrastructure improvements in the Kurtzman areas shown on the attached map. The projects installed curb, gutter, sidewalk, street lights and a storm drainage system in each of the neighborhoods. The City's Utility Fund accomplished relocation of water lines in several of the neighborhoods with the overall goal of allowing connections that were made to water sources in the streets as opposed to the alleys. The Planning Commission considered the neighborhood improvement plans as part of the annual block grant allocation process. The Kurtzman neighborhoods were platted in the early 1900's. The neighborhoods had 20 foot wide alleys and none of these alleys are improved and used for access to the rear of the properties. It may be worthwhile for the City to prepare an overall plan that would address vacation of the alleys on a neighborhood wide scale. This would eliminate the piecemeal consideration of alley vacations and would allow a comprehensive property owner notification process to take place. It would also allow a comprehensive assessment of the implications for utility lines and service. Staff requests that the Planning Commission consider such a comprehensive overall alley vacation program and recommend to City Council that Staff prepare such a program. - - -LEWIS ST # __ Lu Lu ON• a _ ,.... . .`�L .�"°r 1 a � �it r.*: G ,e 7 1 >..J QI 7 -,.e LLuy Lij _ ALL_T_O N ST "'�•_- .W F- e—Am _= n s • _ h' _ O _ _ - Y �; LTON Q > �•W � W C7 _ _ – • — _ - " HELE.NQ_ST - - - w w. a > E HELENA ST r ;rr-- — > — ter- > 'Tit Q 2— KALISPEL-L CT U` OCUSTER=CT � BUTTE J Q BUTTE S_l ^G� ENDIV DIVE CT �- G � O EG:L1E N R I ' ` r Legend ..A,. ST - - LID 149 LID 146 Neigh �hood-—Improvement Area LID 148 - MEMORANDUM DATE: June 10, 2014 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Rick White, Director Community& Economic Development Zv� SUBJECT: Kurtzman Neighborhood Alley Vacation Process The Kurtzman area neighborhoods underwent a multi-year neighborhood improvement plan sponsored in part by Community Development Block Grant money. The block grant funds were partnered with homeowner local improvement district funds to pay for a series of infrastructure improvements in the Kurtzman areas shown on the attached map. The projects installed curb, gutter, sidewalk, street lights and a storm drainage system in each of the neighborhoods. The City's Utility Fund accomplished relocation of water lines in several of the neighborhoods with the overall goal of allowing connections that were made to water sources in the streets as opposed to the alleys. The Planning Commission considered the neighborhood improvement plans as part of the annual block grant allocation process. The Kurtzman neighborhoods were platted in the early 1900'x. The neighborhoods had 20 foot wide alleys and none of these alleys are improved and used for access to the rear of the properties. It may be worthwhile for the City to prepare an overall plan that would address vacation of the alleys on a neighborhood wide scale. This would eliminate the piecemeal consideration of alley vacations and would allow a comprehensive property owner notification process to take place. It would also allow a comprehensive assessment of the implications for utility lines and service. Staff requests that the Planning Commission consider such a comprehensive overall alley vacation program and recommend to City Council that Staff prepare such a program. -LEWIS ST ,mss G.. CRdTN' S)�y.a4�, ( - _ -, k: f '4. 4#• E W,,, a- r. W _ „ �,• o ' 7-7, �'' try. W w H El A T q w S j E HELENA v ; Q PCALI'SPELL CT V OCUSTE BUTTE a BUTTE CT f-o E� I$VECND,IV p: Legend _ _ - A ST LID 149 LID 146 Neig it 0 000,-In pro MEMORANDUM DATE: June 19, 2014 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Shane O'Neill, Planner I SUBJECT: Highway Follow-Through Sign Code Amendment (MF# CA 2012-011) Many U.S. motorists with experience driving on our domestic freeways, highways and interstates are familiar with the Department of Transportation standardized on-highway business advertising sign program. These business advertising signs are a cluster of 3 square foot business logo signs placed on a single (usually blue) backing and include the associated exit number or distance measurement to the business. These signs are called General Motorist Service Signs; and are generally located well before the freeway exit where the business is located. The Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) Traffic Manual contains a section on General Motorist Service Signs which requires off- highway follow-through signage when services are not readily visible from an interchange and when a business participating in the WSDOT on-highway sign program does not have direct access to the roadway immediately extending from an off-ramp. Follow-through signing provides motorists (after being directed off the state highway) with confirmation to destinations. Currently, the fore mentioned requirement for follow-through signs conflicts with parts of Pasco's Sign Code (Title 17) which prohibit off-premise signs. An off-premise sign is defined as a sign that carries a message of any kind or directs attention to a business, commodity, service, or entertainment conducted, sold, or offered elsewhere than upon the premises where such sign is located, or to which it is affixed. Because of this conflict staff is proposing to amend PMC Title 17 to permit follow-through signs as required for participation in the WSDOT on-highway sign program. In developing specific Code language Planning staff has coordinated with Engineering Department staff to ensure the proposal will function well and meets both department's needs. Highlights include: - Applicable to all freeway interchanges within the City; - Limit of one sign structure in each direction of travel within 900 feet of the off-ramp intersection; - Construction design to WSDOT standards. Since the February Planning Commission meeting staff has inserted additional language that would modify the proposed code amendment to include all interchanges within the city. The inclusion is intended to eliminate any selective advantage to a given interchange or nearby property. The key to the follow-through signage is the ability to be a qualifying service (food, gas, lodging, recreational services, etc.) and be able to get the initial freeway WSDOT approved signage. With that understanding, staff respectively requests the Commission discuss the appropriateness of the proposed amendment on a city-wide basis. Proposed Follow-Through Sign Applicability Map Item: CA2012-011 o - . . Kartchner Street ' "A" Street 1 Legend Off-ramp intersections 900' buffer zones around off-ramps Proposed 1 1 1 Applicability Ma1 Item: CA2012-011 1\ l Y,, i AI LA P. ,.. � r"~�R st J4J rp�a'��� :' a:_ } .:r^'7�.�sr I.I�+�++.���■q�� Ip �I • ..� a: .. •�dJf --�•, i r�3C ,. d�•' - _ f"� �L.r. ' u.xM11 �ax.._. I' n1 a .al LM1t LLa ��I�� 'u � -��� , t�� +�_ ,� � •��� C'._,f — _ � r,r r�rJ�r"f'` r of iallz R . . ....... �.. _ '� uL�,r� �� � - .'as� - _ _ �.ir,d •. *; }. '�7'�''$.�,� + �,'. i i 1T x xs k .: �., . . s » � iurr*Tottiievmd IT z r Y Y ter{ -� ..-• �X ��e-r� r yy,.._ 4 ,�,/ s ((,//�i�.^^�++r,,..- � 1 NN.. ✓iI �I- `..yam.. - "V�L"-� ,* � _ � - .ry r Proposed Applicability Ma Item: CA2012-011 lip rZ = vim_• , — - f • , c •' , :f 3 ip ir ri r � - r 1d • r , .t .. , .. i 111,x..; K at ..• - _.- � �4 a\e. �I�ti .t* s ?.� A.L, 1 SS sit „ - r _ _. I`o - sA 74� 1 + i Off-ramp intersections ,; a 900' buffer zones around off-ramps Proposed Follow-Through Sign Applicability Map Item: CA2012-011 5 N k E Lewis Street t `' _ "A".Str� E i Legend ' ' j�• Off-ramp intersections 900'buffer zones around off-ramps Shane O'Neill From: Rick White Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2014 8:46 AM To: Jeff Gordon Cc: Shane O'Neill; Krystle Shanks Subject: RE: Followup signs Jeff— I will include your e-mail in the material that goes to the Planning Commission on June 191h Rick White 545.3441 From: Jeff Gordon [maiIto:JeffGordon @ gordonwines.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2014 1:54 PM To: Rick White Subject: Followup signs Rick, I had planned to make it to the workshop on June 19, but I will be out of town that week. We have been in contact with Washington DOT.They have a new person in charge of the highway signs. I do not know what the policy was, but at this point they are not going to allow highway signs that do not have follow-up signs in place. I think it is important not only for Gordon Estate, but for all who have the same circumstances as we do. Highway signs are an invitation to travelers to come and see what Pasco has to offer. It is important that when a traveler does get off the freeway they find their destination without frustration. We (Pasco) should welcome these visitors and use additional signage to provide them with seamless directions so they get to their destination without any trouble. The sooner this is brought fruition, the quicker Gordon Estate and others like us can utilize the highway signs inviting travelers to visit Pasco. Thank You, O 509 547-6331 ext. 101 C 509 539-3000 Jeff g @gordonwines.com www.gordonwines.com www.kamiakwines.com i MEMORANDUM DATE: June 19, 2014 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Jeffrey B. Adams, Associate Planner SUBJECT: Shoreline Master Program - Shoreline Inventory, Analysis, and Characterization Introduction Pasco is updating its Shoreline Master Program (SMP) with project funding from the Department of Ecology (Ecology). In February of 2013 the Planning Commission received an SMP orientation from representatives from the Washington State Department of Ecology. This is a follow-up report of current SMP activities and an introduction to the Shoreline Inventory, Analysis, and Characterization components of the City's SMP. Staff scheduled a public visioning workshop preceding this workshop with the objective of encouraging public input concerning the future vision of Pasco's shorelines. Views and opinions expressed in the public visioning workshop, along with those received during the comment period leading up to the workshop will be incorporated into the final Shoreline Master Program document. The State's "bottom line" requirement for shoreline health is "no net loss of ecological function." The purpose of the Shoreline Inventory, Analysis, and Characterization process is to establish baseline readings of ecological functioning in each shoreline segment. These baseline measurements allow the City to compare conditions longitudinally and direct policy and regulations to maintain or improve ecological function over time. Shoreline Inventory The first step in the process is to inventory the jurisdictional shoreline areas. An inventory describes Pasco's shoreline jurisdiction within city limits and urban growth boundaries in terms of ownership, geography, geology, and vegetative cover, land use patterns and anything that has proximal impact on ecological function. Shoreline Analysis and Characterization The majority of the analysis steps that follow the inventory involve extracting information from existing reports, studies and data. In most cases, field work is limited to field verification of existing data and addressing key data gaps identified after preparing an initial assessment. Page 1 of 2 The SMP Guidelines require that the inventory information be analyzed so as to characterize jurisdictional shorelines. The analysis takes the form of a shoreline inventory and characterization report with maps. The objective of this report is to allow the City to write SMP policies and regulations designed to achieve the State's required "no net loss of ecological function" criterion, and forms the basis for the shoreline restoration plan. A draft of the Shoreline Inventory, Analysis, and Characterization report with appendices has been attached in this packet. Page 2 of 2 DRAFT SHORELINE INVENTORY, ANALYSIS, AND CHARACTERIZATION REPORT J • 'A M• • • • , Prepared for City of Pasco Prepared by Prepared with assistance from Anchor QEA, LLC Oneza&Associates 8033 W. Grandridge Blvd., Suite A 3131 Western Avenue, Suite 316 Kennewick, Washington 99336 Seattle, Washington 98121 This report was funded through a grant from the Washington State Department ofEcology, March 2014 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................1 1.1 Background and Purpose .................................................................................................1 1.2 Report Organization.........................................................................................................1 2 REGULATORY OVERVIEW...............................................................................................3 2.1 Local, State, and Federal Plans and Regulations ............................................................3 2.1 Cultural Resources and Shoreline Development............................................................5 3 SHORELINE JURISDICTION ANALYSIS...........................................................................6 3.1 Shoreline Management Act Shoreline Criteria..............................................................6 3.2 Study Area........................................................................................................................7 3.3 Shorelines Currently Designated in the City of Pasco...................................................7 3.4 Preliminary Shoreline Jurisdiction Analysis and Findings for the Shoreline Master ProgramUpdate ...............................................................................................................8 3.4.1 Shoreline Jurisdiction Data Analysis.........................................................................8 3.4.2 Identification of Shorelines for the Shoreline Master Program Update .................9 3.4.3 Preliminary Shoreline Jurisdiction Areas...............................................................10 3.5 Reach Breaks ..................................................................................................................11 4 CITY OF PASCO INVENTORY........................................................................................13 4.1 Ownership and Land Cover...........................................................................................13 4.2 Land Use .........................................................................................................................15 4.2.1 Existing Land Use.....................................................................................................15 4.2.2 Water-dependent Uses.............................................................................................18 4.2.3 Water-related and Water-enjoyment Uses.............................................................18 4.2.4 Non-water-related Uses...........................................................................................19 4.3 Current Shoreline Master Program Environment Designation ..................................19 4.3.1 Natural.......................................................................................................................20 4.3.2 Conservancy..............................................................................................................20 4.3.3 Rural..........................................................................................................................20 4.3.4 Urban.........................................................................................................................21 4.4 Geology...........................................................................................................................21 4.5 Climate............................................................................................................................21 Draft Shoreline Inventory,Analysis,and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update i 131050-01.01 Table of Contents 4.6 Water Resources.............................................................................................................22 4.6.1 Surface Water Resources..........................................................................................22 4.6.2 Surface Water Quality..............................................................................................23 4.6.3 Floodplain and Floodway.........................................................................................23 4.6.4 Channel Migration Zone..........................................................................................24 4.6.5 Groundwater Resources...........................................................................................24 4.7 Geologic Hazards............................................................................................................24 4.8 Cultural Resources .........................................................................................................25 4.8.1 Historical Background..............................................................................................25 4.8.2 Recorded Cultural and Historical Resources..........................................................28 4.8.3 Potential for Archaeological and Historic Resources.............................................29 4.8.4 Cultural Resources and Shoreline Development....................................................29 5 SHORELINE ANALYSIS AND CHARACTERIZATION...................................................30 5.1 Ecosystem-wide Processes and Conditions ..................................................................30 5.1.1 Hydrology.................................................................................................................30 5.1.2 Sediment ...................................................................................................................31 5.1.3 Water Quality...........................................................................................................33 5.1.4 Habitat.......................................................................................................................35 5.2 Reach Characterizations................................................................................................48 5.3 Future Land Use and Development Potential..............................................................50 5.3.1 Methodology.............................................................................................................50 5.3.2 Data Gaps..................................................................................................................50 5.3.3 Land Development Potential Summary..................................................................50 5.3.4 Preliminary Shoreline Environment Designation Considerations........................54 6 PUBLIC ACCESS................................................................................................................57 6.1 Public Access Goals........................................................................................................57 6.1.1 City of Pasco .............................................................................................................57 6.1.2 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.................................................................................58 6.1.3 Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife..............................................58 6.1.4 Washington State Parks and Recreation.................................................................58 7 INFORMATION SOURCES, ASSUMPTIONS, AND LIMITATIONS...............................60 8 REFERENCES ....................................................................................................................61 Draft Shoreline Inventory,Analysis,and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update ii 131050-01.01 Table of Contents List of Tables Table 1 Critical Areas Buffers and Mitigation Requirements Summary (as of 2014) ..... 4 Table 2 Shoreline Criteria Definitions per RCW 90.58.030 and WAC 173-26-020 ....... 6 Table 3 Streams of Statewide Significance per WAC 173-18-150 for Franklin County and within City of Pasco Jurisdiction'.................................................................. 8 Table 4 Streams of Statewide Significance to be Included in the SMP Update............. 10 Table 5 IAC Reach and Subreaches and Associated Rivershore Segments.................... 12 Table 6 Ownership Types within the City of Pasco ....................................................... 13 Table 7 Ownership Types within City of Pasco Shoreline Jurisdiction......................... 14 Table 8 Land Cover Types within City Limits and Urban Growth Area....................... 14 Table 9 Land Cover Types within City of Pasco Shoreline Jurisdiction........................ 15 Table 10 Existing Land Use in the City.............................................................................. 16 Table 11 Existing Land Use within the City's Shoreline Jurisdiction.............................. 16 Table 12 Existing Zoning within the City's Shoreline Jurisdiction ................................. 18 Table 13 Geologic Hazards of the City .............................................................................. 25 Table 14 ESA-listed Fish Species, and Washington State Priority Habitat Species in FranklinCounty................................................................................................... 40 Table 15 Key Stressors Affecting Ecological Functions.................................................... 48 Table 16 Future Development Potential by Shoreline Reach.......................................... 51 Table 17 Preliminary Environment Designation Consideration...................................... 56 List of Appendices Appendix A City of Pasco Reach Characterization Tables and Reach Maps Appendix B Map Folio Appendix C Rivershore Linkage and Amenity Plan, City of Pasco 2012 Draft Shoreline Inventory,Analysis,and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update iii 131050-01.01 LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS BLM U.S. Bureau of Land Management BNSF Burlington Northern Santa Fe CAO Critical Areas Ordinance cfs cubic feet per second City City of Pasco DART Data Access in Real Time Ecology Washington State Department of Ecology ESA Endangered Species Act FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency GIS geographic information system IAC Inventory, Analysis, and Characterization MAF million acre-feet NRHP National Register of Historic Places OHWM ordinary high water mark PHS priority habitat and species PMC Pasco Municipal Code ppm parts per million RCW Revised Code of Washington SF square foot SMA Shoreline Management Act SMP Shoreline Master Program SR subreach TMDL total maximum daily load UGA urban growth area USDA U.S. Department of Agriculture USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service USGS U.S. Geological Survey WAC Washington Administrative Code WDFW Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife WDNR Washington Department of Natural Resources Draft Shoreline Inventory,Analysis,and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update iv 131050-01.01 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background and Purpose The City of Pasco (City) is in the process of updating its Shoreline Master Program (SMP). The City received grant funding from the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) to develop an updated SMP. A primary purpose of this effort is to update the SMP to comply with Chapter 90.58 Revised Code of Washington (RCW), the Shoreline Management Act (SMA), and Ecology's 2003 Shoreline Master Program Guidelines (Chapter 173-26 Washington Administrative Code [WAC]). The Inventory, Analysis, and Characterization Report provides a technical foundation for the SMP update. This report includes a discussion of the setting and ecosystem-wide processes that influence ecological functions within the City's shorelines. The report also addresses alterations based on existing land use patterns and future potential development within the shoreline jurisdiction area. Inventory, analysis, and characterization tables summarizing conditions by reach are provided in Appendix A. A map folio is provided in Appendix B. The guidelines require the City to demonstrate that the SMP will result in no net loss to shoreline ecological functions during implementation. This report will serve to describe the existing baseline conditions of shoreline ecological function. An associated Shoreline Restoration and Protection Plan and a Cumulative Impacts Analysis report will follow development of the draft program and code elements. The Cumulative Impacts Analysis report will demonstrate how future development under the proposed SMP will result in no net loss of shoreline ecological function. The restoration measures described in the Shoreline Restoration and Protection Plan could be implemented to improve shoreline ecological functions beyond existing conditions. 1.2 Report Organization The report is organized in the following sections: • Regulatory Overview—Describes the SMA; local, state, and federal regulations, and cultural resource considerations. Draft Shoreline Inventory,Analysis,and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update 1 131050-01.01 Introduction • Shoreline Jurisdiction Analysis—Reviews the data and analysis used to determine the shoreline jurisdiction waterbodies and extents of the SMA shoreline jurisdiction. • City of Pasco Inventory—Provides a description of the project area, including ownership and land cover characteristics, land use and SMP environment designations, geology, climate, surface water resources, water quality, floodplains and floodways, channel migration zones, groundwater resources, geologic hazards, and cultural resources characteristics. • Shoreline Analysis and Characterization—Describes the ecosystem processes and the level to which they are currently functioning, impaired, or altered. The processes most critical to ecological functions are described for the Columbia and Snake rivers. Also included is a review of the reach characterization methods and an overview of the inventory, analysis, and characterization tables included in Appendix A. This section also provides an overview of the future land use and development potential analysis, which identify developable residential, commercial, and industrial lands within the City. • Public Access—Identifies existing public access goals and policies. • Information Sources, Assumptions, and Limitations—are also described. Draft Shoreline Inventory,Analysis,and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update 2 131050-01.01 2 REGULATORY OVERVIEW Counties, cities, and towns develop or update local SMPs to be in compliance with Washington state's SMA (RCW 90.58) and consistent with Ecology's guidelines. Washington's SMA addresses concerns about the effects of unregulated development on shorelines. The SMP update process indicates the joint state/local nature of the SMA program as local governments develop SMPs in close coordination with Ecology, informed by local opportunities and constraints, and consistent with state law and guidelines. 2.1 Local, State, and Federal Plans and Regulations SMPs provide provisions to protect archaeological resources, historic resources, and environmentally critical areas within the shoreline, as well as to maintain flood hazard protection (WAC 173-26-221). Environmentally sensitive areas (critical areas) within the City include wetlands, critical aquifer recharge areas, frequently flooded areas, geologically hazardous areas, and fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas. The City references Franklin County's existing SMP, originally adopted in 1974, for shoreline development and also has critical areas regulations under Pasco Municipal Code Title 28 for wetlands, fish and wildlife habitat, aquifer recharge areas, flood hazard areas, and geologically hazardous areas. Table 1 includes a summary of critical area buffer and mitigation requirements identified in these regulations for the City. Critical areas for shoreline jurisdiction areas and individual reaches are also described within the flooding and geological hazards and habitat characteristics sections of the Reach Characterization Tables provided in Appendix A. These features are also identified, as applicable, in the map folio provided in Appendix B. Draft Shoreline Inventory,Analysis,and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update 3 131050-01.01 Regulatory Overview Table 1 Critical Areas Buffers and Mitigation Requirements Summary(as of 2014) PMC CAO(2009) Protection Standards Wetlands • Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual(1997),as amended Wetland Delineation and Rating System • Washington State Wetlands Rating System for Eastern Washington - Revised and the most current copy should be referred to for additional information' Buffers and Mitigation Ratios Category Chapter 28.16 I II III IV Land Use with High Impact 250 200 150 50 Buffer(feet) Land Use with Moderate Impact 190 150 110 40 Land Use with Low Impact 125 100 75 25 Mitigation Ratio Restoration/Creation 4:1 2:1 2:1 1.25:1 Fish and Wildlife Habitat Areas Classification Protection Standards Detailed Study shall be required for any activity within 200 feet of a fish and wildlife habitat area and shall: • Be completed by(or subject to review by) a fish and wildlife biologist Primary and Secondary Habitats • Identify the required habitat Chapter 28.20 • Recommend appropriate buffers based on WDFW PHS management recommendations Primary Habitat Habitats and species that have been identified as Priority Species or Priority (includes rivers identified as"Shorelines of the Habitats by the WDFW PHS Program should not be reduced and shall be preserved State" under the City SMP and streams within the through regulation, acquisition, incentives and other techniques SMA jurisdiction) Notes: 1. The most current copy at the time of this SMP Update is the Washington State Department of Ecology Publication#04-06-15(Ecology 2004, Revised 2007) CAO=Critical Areas Ordinance PMC= Pasco Municipal Code SMP=Shoreline Master Program PHS= Priority Habitat and Species SMA=Shoreline Management Act WDFW=Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Draft Shoreline Inventory,Analysis, and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update 4 131050-01.01 Regulatory Overview In addition, federal, state, and local regulations also apply to these features. Federal regulations include the Clean Water Act (Sections 404 and 401), Endangered Species Act (ESA), Federal Water Pollution Control Act, National Environmental Policy Act, and the National Floodplain Insurance Program. State regulations are administered through the RCW and include the State Environmental Policy Act, the Hydraulic Project Approval, the Bald Eagle Protection Rules, the Surface Mining Act, the State Water Code and Water Pollution Control Act, and the SMA. 2.1 Cultural Resources and Shoreline Development Federal, state, and local cultural resource laws apply to shoreline development. Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act requires a cultural resource review process for federally funded and permitted projects. State laws include RCW 27.53 (Archaeological Sites and Records), which prohibits the unpermitted removal of archaeological materials and establishes a permitting process, and RCW 27.44 (Indian Graves and Records), which describes how human remains must be treated. Draft Shoreline Inventory,Analysis,and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update 5 131050-01.01 3 SHORELINE JURISDICTION ANALYSIS 3.1 Shoreline Management Act Shoreline Criteria The shoreline jurisdiction is the geographic area where the SMA applies and includes all Shorelines of the State and shorelands as defined by the SMA (RCW 90.58.030). See Table 2 for a summary of definitions for areas that are included within a shoreline jurisdiction. Table 2 Shoreline Criteria Definitions per RCW 90.58.030 and WAC 173-26-020 Term Definition Shoreline All "shorelines of the state" and "shorelands" as defined in RCW 90.58.030. Jurisdiction (WAC) • Those lands extending landward for two hundred feet in all directions as measured on a horizontal plane from the ordinary high water mark(OHWM) • Floodways and contiguous floodplain areas landward two hundred feet from such Shorelands(RCW) floodways; and • All wetlands and river deltas associated with the streams, lakes, and tidal waters which are subject to the provisions of this chapter;the same to be designated as to location by the Ecology. Shorelines of the The total of all "shorelines" and "shorelines of statewide significance"within the State (RCW) state. All of the water areas of the state, including reservoirs, and their associated shorelands,together with the lands underlying them; except: (i) shorelines of statewide significance; (ii) shorelines on segments of streams upstream of a point where the mean annual Shorelines(RCW) flow is twenty cubic feet per second or less and the wetlands associated with such upstream segments; and (iii) shorelines on lakes less than twenty acres in size and wetlands associated with such small lakes. The natural rivers or segments thereof as follows: Shorelines of (A) Downstream of a point where the annual flow is measured at two hundred cubic Statewide 1 feet per second or more, or Significance (g) Downstream from the first three hundred square miles of drainage area, (RCW) whichever is longer. Notes: 1.The definition provided is for streams and rivers of statewide significance east of the crest of the Cascade Range. See Revised Code of Washington(RCW;90.58.030(2)(f)for full description of specific larger waterbodies under the classification of shorelines of statewide significance. OHWM=ordinary high water mark RCW=Revised Code of Washington WAC=Washington Administrative Code Draft Shoreline Inventory,Analysis,and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update 6 131050-01.01 Shoreline Jurisdiction Analysis 3.2 Study Area The City of Pasco is located at the confluence of the Columbia and Snake rivers in southeastern Washington within Franklin County. The Columbia River is to the south of the City, and the Snake River is to the east. The study area for this report includes all land currently within the shoreline jurisdiction for incorporated City and the City's unincorporated Urban Growth Area (UGA). The study area includes relevant discussion of the contributing watersheds. 3.3 Shorelines Currently Designated in the City of Pasco The WAC, Title 173— Chapter 18—Section 150, and Chapter 20—Sections 240 and 250 list lakes and streams of Statewide Significance and Shorelines of the State and Shorelines of Statewide Significance designated by statute in Franklin County (including shorelines within the City). Where there is a conflict with the criteria set forth in RCW 90.58.030(2) and WAC 173-18-040, the RCW criteria shall control. The designation of the stream or river shall be governed by the criteria, except that the local government must amend the local SMP to reflect the new designation (WAC 173-18-046). Four Streams of Statewide Significance are currently designated for Franklin County per WAC 173-18-150, three of which are located within the City, based on their historical application of designation criteria. The streams designated in Franklin County that are historically included within the City jurisdiction are summarized below in Table 3. There are no lakes specifically listed in WAC 173-20-240 or 250 as meeting the lake criteria within City jurisdiction. Draft Shoreline Inventory,Analysis,and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update 7 131050-01.01 Shoreline Jurisdiction Analysis Table 3 Streams of Statewide Significance per WAC 173-18-150 for Franklin County and within City of Pasco Jurisdiction' Estimated Length Stream Name Legal Description (miles) From Hanford Works boundary(Sec.23,T12N, R28E) downstream Columbia River left bank only to(Sec.13,T9N, R28E) questionable. The flow 14.4 exceeds 200 cfs MAF at Hanford Works boundary. From mouth of Old Maid Coulee(Sec.11,T12N, R30E) downstream Esquatzel to a sump(Sec.12,T9N, R29E) (Esquatzel River gradually sinking 1.2 Coulee into ground). This stream has over 300 square miles of drainage area ending at mouth of Old Maid Coulee. All of Snake River within Franklin County is under federal Snake River jurisdiction. The flow exceeds 200 cfs MAF at Whitman County 2.8 line. Notes: 1.The Palouse River is also listed in WAC 173-18-150 but is not located within City jurisdiction. cfs=cubic feet per second MAF= million acre-feet WAC=Washington Administrative Code 3.4 Preliminary Shoreline Jurisdiction Analysis and Findings for the Shoreline Master Program Update 3.4.1 Shoreline Jurisdiction Data Analysis Anchor QEA reviewed information in the WAC and compared it to a number of data sources to determine, as accurately as possible with the available data, which waterbodies in the City fit the definition of Shorelines of the State. Anchor QEA received and downloaded GIS- format datasets from the City, Franklin County Planning, the Franklin County GIS website, U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), and Ecology containing information from a variety of sources about the waterbodies and potential shorelands within the City. Anchor QEA has reviewed and appended a Shoreline Management Plan, Lakes, and Rivers dataset developed to identify those waterbodies and associated lands within the City that meet the definition of Shoreline of the State or Shoreline of Statewide Significance per RCW Draft Shoreline Inventory,Analysis,and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update 8 131050-01.01 Shoreline Jurisdiction Analysis 90.58.030. Anchor QEA used several data sources in determining if a waterbody met this definition. Those most used include: • Designated streams named in WAC 173-18-150 • Designated lakes named in WAC 173-20-240 and WAC 173-20-250 • Ecology suggested shoreline arcs (stream) and points (at which streams reach the threshold of significance) • Ecology-suggested shoreline polygons (for lakes) • USGS National Hydrography Dataset • USDA National Agriculture Imagery Program 2013 imagery (USDA 2013) • Google Earth historical aerial imagery • USFWS National Wetland Inventory • Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) flood insurance rate maps 3.4.2 Identification of Shorelines for the Shoreline Master Program Update Anchor QEA reviewed the existing datasets and classified the accuracy of the Shoreline Management Plan, Lakes, and Rivers data to represent the ordinary high water mark (OHWM) of the shoreline. The USGS's National Hydrography Dataset Area, Flowline, and Waterbody datasets, as well as Ecology's suggested shoreline polygon and line datasets, were used as baseline for comparison. There were significant variations in the accuracy related to differences in the sources of data. In many cases, recent and historical aerial imageries were used to determine which of the available datasets provided the most accurate representation of the actual shoreline locations. Anchor QEA determined the upstream extent for the Columbia and Snake rivers, based on geographic boundaries of the City and its UGA, from WAC listings for Franklin County for these waterbodies. Using these upstream extents, datasets were compared to recent imagery to determine the accuracy of various datasets in representing the stream OHWM, as well as the extent of associated features such as riparian wetlands. In a separate Shoreline Jurisdiction Analysis completed for Franklin County (Anchor QEA 2014), it was recommended that Esquatzel Coulee be removed from the shoreline jurisdiction due to physical factors and the authorized uses for the water for Draft Shoreline Inventory,Analysis,and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update 9 131050-01.01 Shoreline Jurisdiction Analysis irrigation. Additionally, within the SMA, there are criteria to provide for reasonable access to water and water-related uses. In Esquatzel Coulee, downstream of the Esquatzel Diversion Channel, there are few to no water-related uses; data suggest little water exists within the creek. The current City SMP includes two Shorelines of Statewide Significance; Anchor QEA's analysis does not change this result, as shown in Table 4. Table 4 Streams of Statewide Significance to be Included in the SMP Update Included in Current City of Stream/Lake Name Pasco SMP Total Length/Area Proposed Shoreline Columbia River Yes 14.4 miles Snake River Yes 2.8 miles 3.4.3 Preliminary Shoreline Jurisdiction Areas As discussed in Section 3.1, the shoreline jurisdiction is the geographic area where the SMA applies and includes all Shorelines of the State and shorelands as defined by the SMA (RCW 90.58.030). Shorelines of the State to be included in the SMP update are summarized in Section 3.4.2. This section describes how the extent of the shoreline jurisdiction, including the shorelands, was determined. The extent of the preliminary shoreline jurisdiction was determined (mapped) using the following steps: • All shorelines meeting the definitions described in Table 2 and identified above were buffered by 200 feet. • All wetlands from the USFWS National Wetland Inventory dataset that intersected any part of the 200-foot buffer were provisionally included. • Those wetlands identified were reviewed for spatial accuracy to determine if any part of them intersected the 200-foot buffer. If so, they were included. • Any additional wetlands in the floodway of streams, meeting the shoreline definition above, were provisionally included. Draft Shoreline Inventory,Analysis,and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update 10 131050-01.01 Shoreline Jurisdiction Analysis 3.5 Reach Breaks Reaches are specific segments of the shoreline that are typically distinguished by the relative intensity of land use development patterns, the physical landscape, or critical biological processes. Reaches are numbered sequentially (i.e., 1, 2, 3, etc.) with subreaches listed alphanumerically (i.e., a, b, c, etc.). Reaches and subreaches provide the basis for the in-depth analysis and characterization information in this report. Physical changes often translate into differences in the function of the shoreline with regards to ecological and physical processes, which in turn may influence the shoreline designation. The reach delineation was performed by evaluating aerial photography, topographic data, geologic maps, land cover data, and existing and future land use, which was considered in concert with the rivershore segments identified in the City's Rivershore Linkage and Amenity Plan (Pasco 2012). The Rivershore Linkage and Amenity Plan (attached as Appendix C) provides guidance for a coordinated long-term development plan along the City's waterfront. In many cases, reaches were further divided into subreaches in the analysis and characterization to identify different patterns in land use, ownership, zoning, level of development, and future development plans. A list of the IAC reaches and subreaches for the shoreline jurisdiction areas within the City and the associated rivershore segments as delineated in the Rivershore Linkage and Amenity Plan are provided in Table 5. Draft Shoreline Inventory,Analysis,and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update 11 131050-01.01 Shoreline Jurisdiction Analysis Table 5 IAC Reach and Subreaches and Associated Rivershore Segments Shoreline Reach (Subreaches) Rivershore Segment' 1a Kohler 1b Dream View 1c Pasco Ranch 1d Horrigan Farms 1e Rivershore Estates 2 Columbia View 3a Chiawana Park 3b Sunset Acres 4a Levee#2 Columbia River 4b Wade Park 5a Moore Mansion 5b Flamingo Village 5c Riverview Park 5d West Cable Bridge 6a Marine Terminal 6b Boat Basin 6c Port of Pasco 7 Sacajawea Park 8a Ainsworth Town Snake River 8b Tidewater Terminal Notes: 1. Rivershore segments are mapped in the City's 2012 Rivershore Linkage and Amenity Plan. 2. Reach 8 is along the Snake River just upstream of the confluence of the Columbia and Snake rivers. Draft Shoreline Inventory,Analysis,and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update 12 131050-01.01 4 CITY OF PASCO INVENTORY 4.1 Ownership and Land Cover Ownership within the City is dominated by private lands. Public lands are dominated by City-owned parcels. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers owns lands at various locations along the shoreline of Columbia River. Sacajawea State Park is public space owned by Washington State Parks and Recreation at the confluence of the Columbia River and the Snake River. Table 6 summarizes the percentage of ownership types within the City limits and UGA. Table 6 Ownership Types within the City of Pasco Ownership Type Owner Acreage Percentages USA 356 1.27% Federal U.S.Army Corps of Engineers 200 0.71% Department of Natural Resources 1,015 3.62% Washington State Parks and Recreation 285 1.02% Public State Washington Department of 64 0.23% Transportation Other 7 0.03% Local City of Pasco 584 2.08% Port of Pasco 2,706 9.64% Private All Private 22,844 81.4% TOTAL 28,061 100% Land ownership within shoreline jurisdiction includes upland lands (above the OHWM) and aquatic lands (below the OHWM). Upland shoreline jurisdiction lands are roughly 73%publically owned and 27%privately owned. The U. S. Army Corps of Engineers is the largest public owner of shoreline lands with 33% of upland ownership from Chiawana Park to State Route 397 bridge. Washington State Parks and Recreation owns 17.97% in Sacajawea State Park. Port of Pasco owns 10.88%in the industrial area between State Route 397 bridge and Sacajawea State Park. The rest of public ownership can be found at various locations in Reaches 1, 5, and 6. Aquatic shoreline jurisdiction lands are almost entirely publically owned among various federal and state agencies. See Table 7 for a summary of ownership for upland shoreline jurisdiction areas. Draft Shoreline Inventory,Analysis,and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update 13 131050-01.01 City of Pasco Inventory Table 7 Ownership Types within City of Pasco Shoreline Jurisdiction Acreage (above Ownership Type Owner OHWM) Percentages USA 2 0.39% Federal U.S.Army Corps of Engineers 226 37.4% Washington State Parks and 109 17.97% Recreation State Washington State Department of Public 8 1.36% Transportation City of Pasco 7 1.13% Local Port of Pasco 66 10.88% Private All Private 187 30.87% TOTAL 605 100% Note: OHWM =ordinary high watermark Land cover in the City is dominated by developed areas and shrub/scrub habitat (not including open water) within the City limits and within the shoreline jurisdiction. See Tables 8 and 9 for a summary of land cover types within the City limits and UGA within the City's shoreline jurisdiction. Table 8 Land Cover Types within City Limits and Urban Growth Area Land Cover Type Acreage Percentages Agriculture 5,117 19.9% Shrub/Scrubland 5,643 21.9% Pasture/Grass 427 1.6% Developed 14,528 56.4% Wetlands 48 0.2% TOTAL 25,763 100 Source: USDA-NASS Cropland Data 2012 Draft Shoreline Inventory,Analysis,and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update 14 131050-01.01 City of Pasco Inventory Table 9 Land Cover Types within City of Pasco Shoreline Jurisdiction Land Cover Type Acreage Percentages Agriculture 36 6.2% Shrub/Scrubland 166 28.8% Pasture/Grass 4 0.7% Developed 342 59.3% Wetlands 29 5.0% TOTAL 577 100% Source: U.S. Department of Agriculture-National Agricultural Statistics Service Cropland Data 2012 4.2 Land Use 4.2.1 Existing Land Use The City is part of the Tri-Cities Metropolitan Area in southeast Washington and includes 25,247 acres in the current incorporated City limits and an additional 5,433 acres within its associated UGA. The City is located at the southern edge of Franklin County, bounded by the Columbia River to the south and the Snake River to the southeast. The City is the major urban area within Franklin County. The City and its associated UGA comprise about 72% of the 55 square miles of designated UGA in Franklin County (Franklin County 2008). The City includes a variety of land uses from residential and commercial/industrial to Open Space. The City's land use designations and acreages are identified in the 2008 Comprehensive Plan. Residential land is the predominant use in the City, containing over 45% of the City's total land. Residential land use is followed by industrial land use, which consists of more than 36% of the total land use within the City. Commercial lands are mostly located near the City Center and along the Interstate-182. Open space land use is distributed throughout the City in the form of parks and natural open spaces. The shoreline areas consist of several parks, trails, and natural open space. See Table 10 for a summary of land use types in the City. Draft Shoreline Inventory,Analysis,and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update 15 131050-01.01 City of Pasco Inventory Table 10 Existing Land Use in the City Land Use Designations Acreage %of Total Residential Lands 11,505 45.6% Low Density 9,791 Mixed Density 1,577 High Density 137 Commercial Lands 2,546 10.1% Mixed Residential/Commercial 374 Commercial 2,172 Industrial Lands 9,229 36.6% Public/Quasi-Public Lands 732 2.9% Open Space Lands 1,235 4.9% TOTAL 25,247 100% Unlike the Citywide land use pattern, the City's shoreline is dominated by Open Space land use consisting of 60% of the total shoreline area. Industrial land use consists of over 25% of the shoreline. Much of the Open Space area is owned by the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers. Washington State Parks and Recreation Department also owns Open Space (Sacajawea State Park) within the shoreline. Other major public landowners include Port of Pasco and Washington State Department of Transportation. Industrial land along the shoreline is mostly owned by the Port of Pasco on the south and southeast sides of the City. Residential uses are mostly concentrated on the south side of 1-182. See Table 11 for a summary of land use within the shoreline jurisdiction. Table 11 Existing Land Use within the City's Shoreline Jurisdiction Land Use Category Acres in Shoreline %of Land Use Open Space 307.30 60.2% Low Density Residential 68.24 13.3% Mixed Residential 2.53 0.5% Mixed Residential Commercial 2.38 0.5% Industrial 130.21 25.5% Commercial 0.02 0.0% TOTAL 510.68 100% Draft Shoreline Inventory,Analysis,and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update 16 131050-01.01 City of Pasco Inventory The City's Comprehensive Plan land use categories and their purposes are discussed below. • Open Space/Nature—This land use designation applies to areas where development will be severely restricted. Park lands, trails, and critical areas are examples of different types of open spaces. • Low Density Residential—This land use allows residential development at a density of two to five dwelling units per acre. The land use designation criteria includes, sewer availability or approval from the Benton-Franklin Health District when sewer is not available, suitability for home sites, and market demand. • Mixed Residential—This land use designation includes single-family dwellings, patio homes, townhouses, apartments, and condominiums at a density of 5 to 20 dwelling units per acre. This is designated to areas where the location is convenient to major circulation routes and it provides transition between more intense uses and low density uses. Availability of sewer services and market demand are also key criteria for this land use designation. • Mixed Residential Commercial—This land use designation is a mix of residential and commercial uses. Residential uses include single-family dwellings, patio homes, townhouses, apartments, and condominiums at a density of 5 to 20 dwelling units per acre. Commercial uses include neighborhood shopping and specialty centers, business parks, service, and office uses. This is designated to areas where the location is convenient to major circulation routes and land is suitable for heavy building sites. • Commercial—This land use is designated for neighborhood, community and regional shopping and specialty centers, business parks, service, and office uses. This is designated to areas where the location is convenient to major circulation routes and land is suitable for heavy building sites. • Industrial—This land use is designated for manufacturing, food processing, storage, and wholesale distribution of equipment and products, hazardous material storage, and transportation-related facilities. The zoning regulates different uses and development within the City. See Table 12 for a summary of zoning within the City's shoreline jurisdiction. Draft Shoreline Inventory,Analysis,and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update 17 131050-01.01 City of Pasco Inventory Table 12 Existing Zoning within the City's Shoreline Jurisdiction Zoning Acres %of Total Low Density Residential (R-1) 0.15 0.04% Medium Density Residential (R-2) 1.24 0.29% Medium Density Residential (R-3) 0.35 0.08% Residential Park(RP) 0.34 0.08% Suburban (RS-1) 0.03 0.01% Suburban (RS-12) 0.89 0.21% Suburban (RS-20) 161.02 37.84% Residential Transition (RT) 16.28 3.83% Light Industrial (1-1) 61.27 14.40% Medium Industrial (1-2) 119.20 28.01% Heavy Industrial (1-30) 64.75 15.22% TOTAL 425.52 100.0% Notes: Source:City of Pasco Data mismatch between the total acreages provided in Table 11 and 12 is due to the lack of zoning designations for UGA areas. 4.2.2 Water-dependent Uses Water-dependent use means a use or portion of a use, which cannot exist in a location that is not adjacent to the water and is dependent on the water by reason of the intrinsic nature of its operations (WAC 173-26-020(36)). Water-dependent uses in the City include boat launches, docks, and piers on Chiawana, Wade, and Sacajawea parks. The marina is located near the Schlagel Park. Private docks are also located adjoining residential properties on Columbia River. Port facilities include a barge dock on the Columbia River. Tidewater, a private transportation and terminal company, owns a barge dock along the Snake River. 4.2.3 Water-related and Water-enjoyment Uses Water-related use means a use or portion of a use, which is not intrinsically dependent on a waterfront location but whose economic viability is dependent upon a waterfront location because: a) the use has a functional requirement for a waterfront location such as the arrival or Draft Shoreline Inventory,Analysis,and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update 18 131050-01.01 City of Pasco Inventory shipment of materials by water or the need for large quantities of water; or b) the use provides a necessary service supportive of the water-dependent uses and the proximity of the use to its customers makes its services less expensive and/or more convenient (WAC 173-26-020 (40)). Water-enjoyment use means a recreational use or other use that facilitates public access to the shoreline as a primary characteristic of the use. It can also be defined as a use that provides for recreational use or aesthetic enjoyment of the shoreline for a substantial number of people as a general characteristic of the use and which through location, design, and operation ensures the public's ability to enjoy the physical and aesthetic qualities of the shoreline. In order to qualify as a water-enjoyment use, the use must be open to the general public and the shoreline-oriented space within the project must be devoted to the specific aspects of the use that fosters shoreline enjoyment (WAC 173-26-020 (37)). The City's shoreline consists of water-related uses such as industrial and barge facilities along the Snake River and the Port of Pasco's industrial facilities along the Columbia River. Water-enjoyment uses include much of the park and open space areas along the shoreline that provides for recreational use, including beach and shoreline access, as well as aesthetic enjoyment of the shoreline on trail systems. The shoreline also contains fishing and passive recreation (e.g., bird watching) opportunities on multiple shoreline locations. 4.2.4 Non-water-related Uses Non-water-related uses directly adjacent to the water are largely limited to a small area of single family use along the Columbia River in the vicinity of I-182 and the northern part of the UGA. There are also some agricultural uses within the UGA. 4.3 Current Shoreline Master Program Environment Designation The City uses the current Franklin County SMP to regulate developments within its shoreline. The 1974 Franklin County SMP includes four shoreline environment designations: 1. Natural 2. Conservancy 3. Rural 4. Urban Draft Shoreline Inventory,Analysis,and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update 19 131050-01.01 City of Pasco Inventory 4.3.1 Natural The purpose of assigning an area to the Natural environment is to preserve and restore those natural resource systems existing relatively free of human influence. Local policies to achieve this objective should aim to regulate all potential developments degrading or changing the natural characteristics, which make these areas unique and valuable. The primary determination for designating an area as a Natural environment is the actual presence of some unique natural or cultural features considered valuable in their natural and original condition, which are relatively intolerant of intensive human use. 4.3.2 Conservancy The purpose of assigning an area to the Conservancy is to protect, conserve, and manage existing natural resources and valuable historic and cultural areas to ensure a continuous flow of recreational benefits to the public and to achieve sustained resource utilization. The Conservancy environment is for those areas that are intended to maintain their existing character. Nonconsumptive use of the physical and biological resources of the area is preferred. Nonconsumptive uses utilize resources on a sustained basis, while minimally reducing opportunities for other future uses of the resources in the area. Activities and uses of a non-permanent nature, which do not substantially degrade the existing character of an area, are appropriate uses for a Conservancy environment. Examples of predominant uses include diffuse outdoor recreation activities and passive agricultural uses such as pasture and range lands. 4.3.3 Rural The purpose of Rural environment is to protect agricultural land from urban expansion, restrict intensive development along undeveloped shorelines, function as a buffer between urban areas, and maintain open spaces and opportunities for recreational uses compatible with agricultural activities. Draft Shoreline Inventory,Analysis,and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update 20 131050-01.01 City of Pasco Inventory The Rural environment is intended for those areas characterized by intensive agricultural and recreational uses and those areas having a high compatibility to support active agricultural practices and intensive recreational development. 4.3.4 Urban The purpose of assigning an area to Urban environment is to ensure optimum utilization of shorelines occurring within urbanized areas by providing for intensive public use and managing development, so it enhances and maintains shorelines for a multiplicity of urban uses. The Urban environment is an area of high intensity land use, including residential, commercial, and industrial development. It is particularly suitable to those areas presently subject to extremely intensive use pressure, as well as areas planned to accommodate urban expansion. 4.4 Geology The geology, soils, and topography of the City area are primarily dictated by glacial outburst flooding that occurred near the end of the last major glacial period, approximately 18,000 to 20,000 years ago. This event is referred to as the Missoula Floods. The geologic makeup is the result of erosion of pre-flood geologic units, deposition of sediments carried by the floodwaters, and the formation of the unique topographic features that influence present-day hydrology. Prior to the Missoula Floods, the geology of Franklin County consisted primarily of Miocene-aged Columbia River Basalt flows that were in some places (e.g., plateaus) capped with varying thicknesses of wind-blown fine sands and silt known as loess (Grolier and Bingham 1978). The segments of the Columbia and Snake rivers around the City are located in a wide valley primarily comprising alluvial soils with relatively high infiltration rates. Within upland areas, particularly areas farther from the confluence of the river, outburst flood deposits of gravel occur as well. 4.5 Climate The City falls within the Central Basin region of Washington, which has the lowest precipitation rates within Washington. Annual precipitation in the City averages around Draft Shoreline Inventory,Analysis,and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update 21 131050-01.01 City of Pasco Inventory 7.15 inches and precipitation is commonly associated with summer thunderstorms and winter rains and snowfall. Snowfall depths rarely exceed 2 to 3 inches and occur from November to March. High temperatures in January can range from 35 to 45 degrees Fahrenheit (1.6 to 7.2 degrees Celsius [°C]) with low temperatures between 20 to 30 degrees Fahrenheit (-6.7 to -1.1 °C). Summer high temperatures are usually in the high 80s to low 90s with low temperatures in the high 50s (WRCC 2013). 4.6 Water Resources 4.6.1 Surface Water Resources This section presents surface water resources as they relate to shoreline master planning for the planning area. The planning area is mostly located in the Esquatzel Coulee basin (Water Resource Inventory Area 37). A small area along the eastern boundary of the planning area is located in the lower Snake River basin (Water Resource Inventory Area 33). Major surface water resources are the Columbia River and Snake River. 4.6.1.1 Columbia and Snake Rivers (Lake Wallula) Lake Wallula is the major surface water resource for the planning area. The portion of the Columbia and Snake rivers within the planning area is part of the upstream portion of Lake Wallula. The lake is created from the impoundment of the Columbia River by McNary Dam. The Columbia River's active continuous USGS gage nearest to the planning area is gage #12514500 (Columbia River on Clover Island at Kennewick, Washington). The Columbia River at this gage drains 104,000 square miles. This gage is a water surface elevation gage and has records from Water Year 1988 to present. The water surface elevation at this gage ranges from 335 feet to 344 feet (NGVD 1929). The closest Snake River historic USGS gage that measured streamflow near the City is gage #13353000 (Snake River below Ice Harbor Dam, Washington). The Snake River at this gage drains 108,500 square miles. It has records from Water Years 1913 to 2000. Draft Shoreline Inventory,Analysis,and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update 22 131050-01.01 City of Pasco Inventory Because the planning area is within the Lake Wallula portion of the Columbia and Snake rivers, water levels are generally stable. Floodplain levels are also confined due to river regulation. 4.6.2 Surface Water Quality This section presents surface water quality as it relates to shoreline master planning for the planning area. 4.6.2.1 Columbia and Snake Rivers (Lake Wallula) The Columbia and Snake rivers are on the Ecology 303(d) list of impaired waters for temperature within the planning area. The Columbia River also has a total maximum daily load (TMDL) for total dissolved gas and is a 305(b) water of concern for pH. Additionally, the Snake River has TMDLs for dioxin and total dissolved gas, and it is a 305(b) water of concern for pH and dissolved oxygen. Temperature and total dissolved gas are measured in the Columbia and Snake rivers at several gages as part of the Columbia River Data Access in Real Time (DART) program. The DART gage nearest to the planning area on the Columbia River is gage PAQW (Columbia River at Pasco, Washington). This gage has been in operation since 2000. The DART gage nearest to the planning area on the Snake River is gage IDSW (Ice Harbor Tailwater). This gage has been in operation since 2005. 4.6.3 Floodplain and Floodway Damage from flooding along the Columbia River occurred in 1948 prior to the construction of the dam system. The flood stage for the Columbia River is 32.0 feet and is measured at the gage downstream of the Priest Rapids dam. During maintenance of the Priest Rapids Dam spillway in July of 2012, high outflows from the dam raised the river near flood stage in the Tri-Cities (KNDU 2012). The floodway boundary is shown in the Map Folio in Maps 2a and 2b. The flood stage for the Snake River is 20.0 feet and is measured at USGS gage #13334300 (Snake River near Anatone, Washington). Draft Shoreline Inventory,Analysis,and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update 23 131050-01.01 City of Pasco Inventory 4.6.4 Channel Migration Zone The Channel Migration Zone is the area along a river within which the channels can be reasonably predicted to migrate over time as a result of natural and normally occurring hydrological and related processes when considered with the characteristics of the river and its surroundings (WAC 173-26-020). These areas adjacent to a stream or river are susceptible to future erosion (Rapp and Abbe 2003). The Columbia and Snake rivers are stable, confined, single-thread channels with low sinuosity and largely unvegetated depositional mid-channel islands and bars. The flooding risk is low in the Columbia and Snake rivers due to the levy and dam system maintained by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Therefore, no Channel Migration Zone is present adjacent to the City. 4.6.5 Groundwater Resources Groundwater in the planning area is within the Columbia Plateau aquifer system, which consists of the Columbia River Basalt Group overlain by quaternary flood deposits. Groundwater in the planning area is hydraulically connected to surface water, so the amount of groundwater pumping affects surface water stream flow, and groundwater resources are recharged by surface water interaction. The estimated mean annual groundwater recharge in the planning area is up 2 inches (USGS 2011). 4.7 Geologic Hazards Geologically hazardous areas are defined as those lands susceptible to erosion, landslides, seismic, or mine hazard events. Surficial geology is shown on Map 4 in the map folio. The boundary of this area is based on a 200-foot buffer from either the OHWM of the Columbia and Snake rivers or from the floodway boundary as determined by FEMA flood insurance maps. Draft Shoreline Inventory,Analysis,and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update 24 131050-01.01 City of Pasco Inventory Table 13 Geologic Hazards of the City Hazard Description Summary Source Soil units susceptible About 0.62%(17.41 acres) of shoreline Soils—Water Erosion to erosion by wind, jurisdiction areas have been identified Hazards GIS Data Erosion water, and unstable as being severe water erosion hazards (Franklin County) slopes (Riverwash). About 0.003%(8.45 acres) of shoreline Generalized Slope GIS Steep Slopes jurisdiction area has slopes greater Data (Franklin County), underlain by weak, than 15% underlain by alluvium or dune Surface Geology Polygon, Landslides fine, and unstable sand. 1: 100,000 Scale(WDNR) geology No area in the City is mapped as an Active Landslide Area GIS active landslide area. Data (Franklin County) Seismic Active faults and There is no known fault exist in the Active fold and fault GIS Hazards earthquake locations City. data layers(WDNR) Two mine sites were identified; both mines were for sand or gravel. Underground mining practices are Mining and Energy Mine Sites Active (permitted) currently not taking place in Resources GIS data mine sites Franklin County. There are no known (WDNR) 2004, 2010, inactive mines sites; however, if they 2011, and 2012 exist,these areas may present slope hazards. Note: WDNR=Washington Department of Natural Resources 4.8 Cultural Resources The City is located at the confluence of the Columbia and Snake rivers. It is in the Southern Plateau, part of the larger Columbia Plateau culture area. The Southern Plateau stretches from southern Okanogan County in the north to the northern border of the Great Basin to the south. The prehistory and history of the Southern Plateau is briefly summarized here. Known archaeological and historic sites are discussed, as well as potential for archaeological and historic sites. 4.8.1 Historical Background At the end of the Pleistocene era, hunters of large mammals fanned out across North America. This period is known in the Columbia Plateau as Paleoindian (Ames and Draft Shoreline Inventory,Analysis,and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update 25 131050-01.01 City of Pasco Inventory Maschner 1999), and in the southern Plateau as Period Ia (Ames et al. 1998). In the Columbia Plateau as a whole, Chatters and Pokotylo (1998) included these early mobile foragers in the Early Period from about 11,000 to 8,000 years ago. The earliest Paleoindian sites recorded in the Columbia Plateau are attributed to the Clovis culture, including the Ritchey-Roberts Clovis cache in East Wenatchee, which dates to 12,250 ago (Mehringer and Foit 1990). After the brief but widespread Clovis occupation, a broad-spectrum, hunter-gatherer culture developed in the Columbia Plateau region and persisted until the middle Holocene, around 5,300 years ago. This culture spans the latter part of the Early Period and the Early Middle Period in the Columbia Plateau sequence (Chatters and Pokotylo 1998), and Period Ib in the Southern Plateau sequence (Ames et al. 1998). A shift toward more permanent settlement began around 6,000 years ago. Known as the Late Middle Period in the Columbia Plateau, and Period II in the Southern Plateau, this period lasted until the beginning of the early Holocene around 3,000 years ago (Chatters and Pokotylo 1998; Ames et al. 1998). In general, Period II tool assemblages are characterized by the addition of groundstone and bone/antler tools to the existing flaked stone technology. Late Holocene cultures in the Columbia Plateau region exhibit a, "shift in adaptations...to storage-dependent collector strategies" (Chatters and Pokotylo 1998), which are characterized by intensive salmon fishing and associated storage features, social inequality, large permanent winter villages, and diverse tool assemblages. Labeled the Late Period, this shift begins around 4,000 years ago and persists until historic contact (Chatters and Pokotylo 1998). In the southern Columbia Plateau, the contemporaneous Period III also includes evidence of intensive camas processing and fiber and wood artifacts preserved in the relatively dry climate (Ames et al. 1998). The late Holocene archaeological cultures correlate with historical ethnographic descriptions. The Columbia-Snake River confluence has a rich archaeological record, with sites in the area attributed to all of the Southern Plateau cultural phases. There are 22 recorded archaeological sites within a mile of the confluence. National Register of Historic Places Draft Shoreline Inventory,Analysis,and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update 26 131050-01.01 City of Pasco Inventory (NRHP)-listed properties include the Lower Snake River Archaeological District and the historic Ainsworth town site. The City is in the traditional territory of Sahaptin-speaking Plateau peoples (Walker 1998; Kershner 2008). Traditional Plateau cultures were based on a seasonal round that took advantage of fish runs, game, and root resources, as well as trade, kinship ties, and intermarriage among groups (Walker 1998). Prior to historic resettlement, permanent winter villages anchored the seasonal round (Boyd and Hajda 1987). Villages consisted of large mat lodges, each housing an extended family, and occasionally also smaller conical structures (Stern 1998; Schuster 1998). Villages were the basic political unit (Schuster 1998). Fishing activities revolved around an early salmon run in March, and a second, larger run in June (Schuster 1998). Fishing technology included the portable (toggling harpoons, leisters, hook-and-line, and nets) and the non-portable (traps, weirs, and platforms at permanent fishing stations; Schuster 1998). Gathering activities took place throughout the year. Fish, roots, and berries were processed, dried, and stored. Although salmon were a key staple, plant foods also made up a significant portion of the diet (Hunn 1981). Religious life involved adherence to the Guardian-Spirit complex, which included the sweatlodge and curative sings and the Washat religion, which was based on ceremonies held in the longhouse and included first food feasts in the spring celebrating the return of the salmon and newly sprouting plants (Schuster 1998). By the time of the first sustained contact between the tribes of the City area and Euro-American settlers in the mid-1800s, tribal life had already been significantly impacted. Introduced diseases decimated the population (Vibert 1997) while the introduction of the horse altered social and economic activities. Still, the area is described in historical accounts as a busy gathering place for trade and resource procurement (Kershner 2008). The earliest recorded Euro-American exploration of the Columbia River was in 1792 (Hayes 1999), but settlement of the region was slow until the 1840s when Americans were attempting to wrest control from the British (Mackie 1997). The Oregon Treaty of 1846 awarded the Oregon Territory to the United States. In 1853, Washington became a territory separate from Oregon, and by the next year, governors of both territories began pursuing Draft Shoreline Inventory,Analysis,and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update 27 131050-01.01 City of Pasco Inventory treaties that relegated tribes to reservations (Wilma 2003). Fourteen tribes and bands signed the Treaty of 1855 that established the Yakama Indian Reservation (YNM 2011). The Lewis and Clark expedition recorded the first description of the confluence of the Columbia and Snake rivers in October of 1805, and David Thompson passed through in 1811 (Nisbet 2005:109). The North Pacific Railroad through the area was built in the late 19th century (partially by Chinese laborers), bringing additional settlement. The town of Ainsworth was platted in 1879 as a railroad camp at what is now Sacajawea State Park, and became the county seat of Franklin County when it was created from Whitman County in 1883 (Kershner 2008). A rail bridge over the Columbia River from Pasco to Kennewick was built in 1887. Pasco was named the county seat in 1885 and incorporated in 1891. A roadway bridge across the Columbia River was constructed in 1922 (Gibson 2005). The economy was primarily agricultural until the 1940s, when the Pasco airfield became a Naval air station and plutonium production was established across the river at Hanford (Sanger 1995, Gibson 2005). Pasco maintained economic activities beyond supporting Hanford, including agricultural chemical storage and distribution, and those became more prominent as the military sector declined in the 1950s. Agriculture, transportation, and logistics remain important today (Kershner 2008). The Hanford plant was deactivated piecemeal in the 1990s, though many Pasco residents are still employed in maintenance and cleanup at the site (Gerber 1992:223). 4.8.2 Recorded Cultural and Historical Resources The Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation maintains an electronic database of archaeological sites, historic structures, and cemeteries. The database shows 13 recorded sites within City limits, 12 of them along the shoreline. The Tri-Cities Archaeological District, an NRHP-eligible district, is partially within the city. Almost the entire Columbia River shoreline within City limits is within the boundaries of an archaeological site or district. Several of the sites include human remains. There are dozens of potentially historic structures in the City, at least seven of which are located within the shoreline jurisdiction, as is the NRHP-listed James Moore house (commonly known as the Moore Mansion). Draft Shoreline Inventory,Analysis,and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update 28 131050-01.01 City of Pasco Inventory 4.8.3 Potential for Archaeological and Historic Resources The City area has a dense concentration of archaeological and historic resources, many with exceptional significance and cultural value. The following archaeological and historical site types could be expected: • Lithic scatters, quarries, and caches • Precontact habitation sites (camps, villages, and cave sites) • Burial sites and cemeteries • Resource procurement sites (fish traps and camas ovens) • Pictographs and petroglyphs • Historic habitation sites (homesteads, farms, and cabins) • Historic agricultural infrastructure • Historic and precontact transportation corridors (trails, routes, railroad grades, and road grades) • Historic public works infrastructure (dams and transmission corridors) Some sites may be on or near the surface, and others may be deeply buried, depending on the localized geomorphology. 4.8.4 Cultural Resources and Shoreline Development State and local cultural resources laws apply to shoreline development. State laws include RCW 27.53 (Archaeological Sites and Records), which prohibits the unpermitted removal of archaeological materials and establishes a permitting process, and RCW 27.44 (Indian Graves and Records), which describes how human remains must be treated. Given the importance of shoreline locations throughout the human history of the area, the potential for cultural resources should be considered high for any shoreline development permit unless demonstrated otherwise. To comply with state and local law, applicants should be prepared to follow the provisions of RCW 27.53 and 27.44 if cultural resources are identified or encountered during the planning or construction process. Draft Shoreline Inventory,Analysis,and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update 29 131050-01.01 5 SHORELINE ANALYSIS AND CHARACTERIZATION 5.1 Ecosystem-wide Processes and Conditions An ecosystem is a natural system consisting of biological (plants, animals, and microorganisms), physical, and chemical factors that together make up the environment. Ecosystem-wide processes are defined by statute as, "the suite of naturally occurring physical and geologic processes of erosion, transport, and deposition; and specific chemical processes that shape landforms within a specific shoreline ecosystem and determine both the types of habitat and the associated ecological functions" (WAC 173-26-020 (14)). Processes occur at multiple scales and are influenced by hydrology, geology, topography, soils, land cover, and land use characteristics. These processes determine the types and quality of shoreline functions or services that contribute to the maintenance of aquatic and terrestrial environments that make up an ecosystem (WAC 173-26-020 (13)). The following sections discuss ecosystem processes and habitat structures that these processes form and maintain. This section also describes conditions, including alterations to the ecosystem process, for the Columbia and Snake rivers and shoreline within the City and the UGA boundary. Alterations to ecosystem processes can affect habitat structure and the availability of habitat services, especially during long periods of time. Ecosystem processes and conditions in the City are presented through the categories of hydrology, sediment, water quality, and habitat. 5.1.1 Hydrology 5.1.1.1 Ecosystem Process The process of water delivery, movement, and storage within an ecosystem is largely affected by landform, geology, soil characteristics, and climate, including precipitation. Rain and snowmelt provide the hydrologic inputs into a watershed. This cycle affects other physical, chemical, and biological functions of the river system. The speed that water flows through the watershed also affects whether nutrients, sediments, or other materials are deposited or retained in the water and transported through the watershed. Draft Shoreline Inventory,Analysis,and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update 30 131050-01.01 Shoreline Analysis and Characterization Water is delivered to streams primarily from surface water runoff from higher elevations and, in some cases, from groundwater. The horizontal structure of river and stream channels includes the wetted channel zone where water is present during low-flow events, an active channel that is seasonally inundated, and the riparian zone located above seasonal high water elevations. The vertical structure of these systems includes a benthic zone along the surface of the bottom substrate and the hyporheic zone, which provides a transition between the surface and the groundwater, or phreatic zone. Hyporheic and benthic zones cycle out excessive nutrients and contaminants, store and transport water and sediment, maintain base flows, and can support vegetation and microorganism communities. The interaction of hydrologic and geomorphic processes contributes to habitat structures useful to aquatic species, including shallow water and off-channel refugia, gravel bars, pools, riffles, and the transport of organic material, including large woody debris. 5.1.1.2 Conditions in the City of Pasco The Columbia River and Snake River are the City's two major surface water resources. Along the Columbia and Snake rivers, McNary Dam operations affect the hydrologic processes. Major alterations from this system include the artificial storage and release cycle that produces higher than natural flows in the late summer and fall and lower than natural flows in the spring and early summer. Riparian vegetation and aquatic species adapt to seasonal inundation fluxes, and these changes in the natural flows may adversely affect these systems and species. Flood storage occurring in the upper Snake River and Columbia Basin outside of the City reduces the frequency, duration, and magnitude of floodplain inundation, while decreasing the floodplain size. This change in the hydraulic regime also affects the cycling of sediment, nutrients, and organic materials within the river, as discussed below. 5.1.2 Sediment 5.1.2.1 Ecosystem Process Sediment delivery through a watershed is based on interactions among gravity, wind, and water across the various geologic features, soils, and land covers. Landslides and mass wasting are a function of slope, soil, and water interacting to create instability. Soil erosion is Draft Shoreline Inventory,Analysis,and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update 31 131050-01.01 Shoreline Analysis and Characterization a function of slope, soil cohesiveness, and ground cover interacting with water or wind forces. Sediments transported by water or wind are deposited wherever and whenever the water or wind transporting them slows. As the size of sediment increases, the water or wind force required to transport the sediment increases, so smaller sediment is able to travel farther than larger sediment when the transporting forces decrease. This is often within topographic depressions where sediment is deposited into lakes, stream pools, wetlands, and floodplains. The sediment erosion, transport, and deposition cycle is a major aspect of river and stream channel formation and channel migration. The maintenance of shallow water habitat along the Columbia and Snake rivers is driven by the recruitment and transport of appropriately sized sediments. Shallow water areas with small and clean natural substrates (e.g., sand and pebbles) are important for benthic production and as refuge for juvenile fish. Coarser substrates tend to provide habitat for predatory fish. Fine sediment (e.g., silt and clay) can decrease water quality by creating turbidity that adversely affects some aquatic species. Shoreline armoring typically exists in developed areas or in areas where significant infrastructure exists, such as overwater bridge crossings or boat ramps. These armoring structures tend to disconnect natural sediment sources from erosion by forming a physical barrier between the shore and the water itself. The wave energy reflected off of these types of armoring leads to the washing away of smaller substrate sizes that support small benthic animals and also prevents riparian vegetation establishment with associated habitat functions. 5.1.2.2 Conditions in the City of Pasco Channelization of streams can include hardening of banks with levees or revetments, straightening of channels, deepening of channels, removal of roughness that impedes flow, and other efforts to minimize the migration of the channel while maximizing flow capacity. The McNary Levee System (also known as the Tri-Cities Levees), along the banks of the Columbia and Snake rivers, is located in the planning area. Draft Shoreline Inventory,Analysis,and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update 32 131050-01.01 Shoreline Analysis and Characterization Fine sediment inputs to the Columbia and Snake rivers are accelerated through agricultural tillage and disturbed, undeveloped lands adjacent to or upland of the planning area. Urban development adjacent to Reaches 2 through 7 may protect these reaches from agricultural runoff impacts. Sediment transport is affected by diking of river segments. Dikes reduce spring flooding and associated sediment deposition within the surrounding floodplain. Dike grading occurs along the Columbia and Snake rivers to protect residential and commercial properties, as well as infrastructure. The dikes are topped with multi-use trails throughout much of the shoreline, allowing for public recreation and enjoyment of the waterfront. Sediment in the Columbia and Snake rivers is generally restricted by regulated operations upstream. Geologic units with higher landslide potential in some City areas could contribute to increased sediment input during storm events. Sediment may build up within the City areas due to generally slower velocities within the pool of Lake Wallula. 5.1.3 Water Quality 5.1.3.1 Ecosystem Process The combined processes that deliver, transport, and store water and sediment in the ecosystem have a substantial impact on water quality. Impacts to water quality occur through land cover changes and development; chemical use in manufacturing, agriculture, and recreation; pathogens from waste; temperature; and natural processes such as plant respiration. Human-induced changes to water quality (e.g., industrial effluents, sewer overflows, and runoff from upland areas) can alter river and lake water temperatures, turbidity, and oxygen content, as well as nutrient, toxin, and pathogen concentrations (Karr 1995; Welch and Lindell 1992). In general, these changes can affect the presence, abundance, and vitality of all aquatic organisms. Water delivery and water quality is affected by soil loss, soil compaction, and road and building construction typically associated with development and urbanization. These activities increase the amount of impervious surface (e.g., parking lots and roads), reduce the percolation of precipitation into the ground, and concentrate pollutants into stormwater discharge areas. Reduced water infiltration increases the amount Draft Shoreline Inventory,Analysis,and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update 33 131050-01.01 Shoreline Analysis and Characterization and rate of surface water runoff, causing high stream discharge or high direct delivery of water to the stream and lake shorelines (Dunne and Leopold 1978; Arnold and Gibbons 1996; Poff et al. 1997). Fertilizers, pesticides, and automobile- and boat-generated pollutants are linked to runoff-borne pollution that enters streams and lakes. Toxins from these and other human-induced changes previously described can settle in river pools, contaminating the sediments of the benthic zone. This leads to toxins either directly affecting benthic species through illness and mortality, or indirectly affecting aquatic and terrestrial species through bioaccumulation from animals lower on the food chain. Many pathogenic protozoa, bacteria, and viruses can be found naturally in the environment, some of which occur as a result of fecal wastes deposited by animals. These come from fecal material of wildlife and domesticated animals deposited within upland areas that drain into aquatic ecosystems or deposited directly into them (Sherer et al. 1992; Stanley et al. 2005). A higher concentration of domesticated livestock (such as in livestock farms or concentrated animal feeding operations) can increase the potential of fecal material draining to shoreline areas. Solar energy input can be another important factor that impacts water quality, especially in the summer when high temperatures coincide with high nutrient loads from agricultural runoff and lower river flows. This can result in high water temperatures and very low levels of dissolved oxygen, both of which can alter the ecology of rivers and streams. Water temperature, a physical characteristic, affects the chemical process of breaking down organic material into nutrients, as well as the biological processes of phytoplankton and zooplankton reproduction and the metabolism of fish species. Water temperatures, plant respiration, and biological decomposition are also inversely related to dissolved oxygen levels, which play a critical role in supporting aquatic organisms such as salmonids. Similarly, alkalinity/pH and nutrient concentrations influence biological processes, particularly phytoplankton production. Draft Shoreline Inventory,Analysis,and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update 34 131050-01.01 Shoreline Analysis and Characterization 5.1.3.2 Conditions in the City of Pasco The Columbia and Snake rivers are on the Ecology 303(d) list of impaired waters for temperature within the planning area. Additionally, the Columbia and Snake rivers have TMDLs for total dissolved gas and dioxin and are 305(b) waters of concern for pH. The Snake River also is a 305(b) water of concern for dissolved oxygen. Features within the City that may contribute to water quality concerns include impervious development over and near the river, recreational boating, and herbicide and pesticide use in residential landscaping. 5.1.4 Habitat This section describes aquatic and terrestrial habitat conditions and the stressors that may affect the functions provided by these habitats in the City, focusing on habitat types such as aquatic, riparian, shrub-steppe; and functions such as foraging, breeding/nesting, and migration elements for terrestrial species; and spawning, rearing, and migration requirements for aquatic species. 5.1.4.1 Habitat Structures Habitat is the natural environment in which particular species or populations have adapted to live. Habitat provides the physical conditions and biological functions needed to support the species as part of a larger ecosystem. The lifecycles of aquatic, avian, and terrestrial species vary, but are often interdependent, meaning the habitat requirements of a single species include other species on which they depend. A species may occupy several types of habitat throughout their life span, because the habitat requirements of a species can vary during different life stages and different seasons. Habitat is often described in terms of the functions of reproduction, forage, and shelter (Morrison 1992): • The reproduction needs of species vary greatly. All species have specific needs for areas to find a mate, reproduce, and successfully rear offspring (often referred to as breeding sites, birthing areas, and nest sites). Some species have very specific needs; for example, amphibians (frogs, toads, and salamanders) require water or moist areas for laying eggs and for larval development. Draft Shoreline Inventory,Analysis,and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update 35 131050-01.01 Shoreline Analysis and Characterization • Forage includes water and food sources. Water is a universal need of all species, while forage needs vary greatly by species. An important consideration is whether a species is prey or a predator. Predators obviously require that the habitat needs for prey species are met. • Shelter includes areas for safe resting, refuge or cover from predators, and shelter from environmental hazards (e.g., daytime or nighttime temperatures, extreme weather events, seasonal climate fluctuations, and unpredictable disturbances such as drought, fire, or flooding). The shoreline zone within the City provides freshwater and terrestrial habitat, with a wide variety of habitat types and features within those types. 5.1.4.1.1 Aquatic Habitat The aquatic habitat within the City consists of the Columbia and Snake rivers. The quality of the aquatic habitat within these systems is controlled by a number of key ecosystem features that combine to provide important ecological functions (or ecosystem services) and support an interconnected array of species, including numerous salmonids species listed as threatened under the ESA. Aquatic habitat features that support healthy salmonids stocks likely also support other aquatic dependent and aquatic-associated birds and terrestrial species. Some ecosystem features applicable to aquatic habitat within the shoreline management jurisdiction of the City include water quality (including presence of contaminants as well as water temperature); water depth; instream cover (such as presence of large rocks and woody debris); substrate size; aquatic and riparian vegetation; floodplain extent and health; and channel migration access. Water quality is a primary ecosystem feature that affects presence and health of aquatic life. Within aquatic habitats, water quality can affect survival of fish through low dissolved oxygen conditions (less than 3 parts per million [ppm] in warm water streams, or less than 5 ppm in cold water streams), very low alkalinity, high turbidity conditions, presence of contaminants, and high temperatures. Freshwater fish in the Columbia and Snake rivers include cold water fish (including ESA-listed salmon and bull trout [Salvelinus con-luentus]) that have an upper lethal limit of approximately 25 degrees Celsius (°C), warm water fish Draft Shoreline Inventory,Analysis,and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update 36 131050-01.01 Shoreline Analysis and Characterization (e.g., largemouth bass[Micropterus salmondes]) that can tolerate temperatures as high as 36°C, and cool water fish (e.g., non-native smallmouth bass[Micropterus dolomieu]) that have similar tolerances to warm water fish but require cooler average temperatures during the growing season. Water depth and water quantity requirements vary by species and life stage; for example, areas near channel margins with shallow water depths are needed for migration of salmonids juveniles, while migrating adults may utilize deeper waters. Substrate requirements can vary by species, but many salmon cannot spawn in substrate smaller than gravel. Instream cover increases the structural complexity of a system through presence of large wood and larger rocks or boulders that improve the habitat quality for most fish. Instream vegetation, similar to instream cover, can improve habitat as long as the amount of aquatic vegetation does not create a low dissolved oxygen issue; in general, native aquatic vegetation provides important habitat conditions while introduced species such as Eurasian watermilfoil (Myriophyllum spicatum) do not. As a result of habitat simplification arising from the completion of hydroelectric dams, these features of instream cover are largely absent from within the Columbia and Snake River systems within the City. Riparian vegetation stabilizes banks, reduces summer temperatures, provides nutrients through leaf debris and insect fall, and provides in-stream cover through tree-fall. Floodplain habitat is required for many fish species during multiple life stages. Extensive and unaltered floodplains that are accessible to fish species are ideal. However, the aforementioned completion of hydroelectric dams have inundated original floodplain habitat within the City. Water levels of the Columbia and Snake rivers are tightly managed, and access to remaining floodplain habitat by aquatic species is generally rare. Instream cover, presence of riparian vegetation, and alteration of shorelines also affect the quality and intensity of available light energy in freshwater systems. Light energy affects water temperature, animal behavior (such as the relationship between predators and prey), and plant photosynthesis and growth (Tilzer et al. 1975). Natural light is altered when riparian vegetation is removed or when structures such as docks are built that create shade and prevent natural light from reaching the water. Reductions in this natural light preclude Draft Shoreline Inventory,Analysis,and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update 37 131050-01.01 Shoreline Analysis and Characterization plant colonization and growth beneath these structures and can cause changes in animal behavior. Natural light can also be reduced by the presence of algal blooms caused by excess nutrient additions that can collect in slack water areas. 5.1.4.1.2 Terrestrial Habitat Urban and agricultural development within the City has resulted in loss, fragmentation, and degradation of shrub-steppe habitat. Habitat fragmentation occurs through the building of roads, utility corridors, agricultural use (including irrigation channels), and urban development, all of which can affect, aquatic and riparian habitat types. Movement corridors, which are crucial to wildlife, are affected by development through fragmentation. The migratory movement through these corridors may be seasonal, depending on the species. The primary function of a corridor is to connect disjunctive areas of habitat by allowing migration and dispersal among the areas. Movement corridors provide the following functions essential to healthy wildlife populations: • Connectivity and, thereby, genetic variation and biodiversity among differing populations and habitats, connecting isolated habitats, and allowing recolonization of extirpated species • Varying habitats for migration patterns (e.g., foraging, mating and nesting, rearing, shelter, and wintering) and allowing populations to move in response to habitat changes, such as fires • Potential habitat for corridor dwellers—species that live within corridors for extended periods (Beier and Loe 1992) Shrub-steppe upland habitat is the largest native land cover type in Franklin County and is also found within the City as small remnant patches. In some areas, shrub-steppe communities abut or nearly abut the shoreline, and there are small remnants of shrub-steppe habitat interspersed among the irrigated agricultural fields that displaced the original habitat. The primary remaining shrub-steppe plant association type in the City area is the big sagebrush (Artemisia triden tata)-bunch wheatgrass association. The habitat structure of this association includes an overstory of 6-foot-tall big sagebrush, an understory of bluebunch wheatgrass (Pseudoroegnezia spicata) and Sandberg's bluegrass (Poa secunda), and groundcover dominated by algae, lichens, and moss providing a microbiotic crust (Link et al. 2006). Draft Shoreline Inventory,Analysis,and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update 38 131050-01.01 Shoreline Analysis and Characterization Riparian areas are located along the shorelines of the City, with varying levels of structural diversity and productivity in terms of organic material, with reductions in diversity and productivity due to levees and upland developed areas. Habitat characteristics of healthy riparian areas include a connected corridor for fish and wildlife travel, vegetation types adapted to wetter soils, occasional flooding, and natural disturbance regimes. Riparian areas also offer important functions for species that inhabit the shrub- steppe, as well as species more limited in range to the riparian zone. For shrub-steppe species, they provide a critical water source and often a more productive environment for forage, escape, thermal cover, and nesting sites. For many species, they provide critical winter habitat. Riparian areas typically support larger flocks and a greater density of upland birds than shrub-steppe habitat due to the greater production of biomass and the more complex mosaic of vegetation (Stinson and Schroeder 2012). The removal of native riparian vegetation in riparian and shrub-steppe habitat, the introduction and proliferation of invasive plant species, like Russian Olive (Elaeagnus angustifolia), and the filling or degradation of wetlands along shorelines impact the organic inputs that fuel production of the lower levels of the food chain and, therefore, can have impacts throughout the entire food web. Organic matter produced by these habitats supports terrestrial and aquatic insects and other organisms that are then eaten themselves by birds, juvenile salmonids, and various fish species. An example of invasive plants is the aquatic plant Eurasian water milfoil, which can cover lake bottoms and out-compete the native aquatic species (altering the plant community), deplete dissolved oxygen, and lead to fish mortality (Frodge et al. 1995). 5.1.4.2 Conditions in the City of Pasco 5.1.4.2.1 Important Wildlife and Priority Habitat and Species Table 14 summarizes the ESA-listed fish species known to occur in the Columbia and Snake rivers in the City, and also includes Washington State Priority Habitat Species identified for Franklin County. Many of the non-aquatic species of animals and plants identified for Franklin County would not be expected to currently occur within the shoreline zone of the City due to the level of development along the shoreline. Draft Shoreline Inventory,Analysis,and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update 39 131050-01.01 Shoreline Analysis and Characterization Table 14 ESA-listed Fish Species, and Washington State Priority Habitat Species in Franklin County Species Category Common Name Scientific Name Bull Trout Salvelinus confluentus Chinook Oncorhynchus tshawytscha ESA-listed Fish Species Steelhead Oncorhynchus mykiss Sockeye Oncorhynchus nerka Coho Oncorhynchus kisutch Giant Columbia River Limpet Fisherolo nuttalli Leopard Dace Rhinichthys falcatus Washington Priority Mountain Sucker Catostomus platyrhynchus Species—Fish Pacific and River Lamprey Lampetra tridentate;Petromyzontiformes Rainbow Trout/Inland Redband Trout Oncorhynchus mykiss Westslope Cutthroat Oncorhynchus clarki lewisi White Sturgeon Acipenser transmontanus Canadian St.John's-wort Hypericum majus Common Northern Sweet Grass Anthoxonthum hirtum Coyote tobacco Nicotiana attenuata Desert Codder Cuscuta denticulata Dwarf Evening Primrose Camissonia pygmaea Grand Redstem Ammannia robusta Gray Cryptantha Cryptantha leucophaea Great Basin Gilia Aliciella leptomeria Halfchaff Awned Sedge Lipocarpha aristulata Lowland Toothcup Rotala ramosior Washington Priority Mat Buckwheat Eriogonum caespitosum Species—Rare Plants' One-cone Ground-pine Lycopodium lagopus Pauper Milk-vetch Astragalus misellus var. pauper Persistentsepal Yellowcressz Rorippa columbiae Prairie Cordgrass Spartina pectinate Piper's Daisy Erigeron piperianus Red Poverty-weed Micromonolepis pusilla Shy Gilly-flower Gilia inconspicua Smooth Willowherb Epilobium pygmaeum Snake River Cryptantha2 Ryptantha spiculifera Twincrest Onion Allium bisceptrum Whited's Penstemon Penstemon eriantherus var. whitedii American White Pelican Pelecanus erythrorhynchos Washington Priority Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus Species—Other Black-crowned Night-heron Nycticorax nycticorax Black-tailed Jackrabbit Lepus californicus Draft Shoreline Inventory,Analysis,and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update 40 131050-01.01 Shoreline Analysis and Characterization Table 14 ESA-listed Fish Species, and Washington State Priority Habitat Species in Franklin County Species Category Common Name Scientific Name Black-tailed Jackrabbit Lepus californicus Burrowing Owl Athene cunicularia Chukar Alectoris chukar Columbia Pebble Snail Fluminicola Columbiana Columbia River Tiger Beetle Cicindela columbica Ferruginous Hawk Buteo regalis Golden Eagle Aquila chrysoetos Great Blue Heron Ardea herodias Juniper Hairstreak Callophrys gryneus Loggerhead Shrike Lanius ludovicianus Merriam's Shrew Sorex merriami Mountain Sucker Catostomus platyrhynchus Washington Priority Mule Deer Odocoileus hemionus Species—Other Peregrine Falcon Falco peregrinus Prairie Falcon Falco mexicanus Preble's Shrew Sorex preblei Ring-necked Pheasant Phasianus colchicus Sage Sparrow Amphispiza belli Sage Thrasher Oreoscoptes montanus Sagebrush Lizard Sceloporus graciosus Striped Whipsnake Masticophis taeniatus Townsend's Big-eared Bat Corynorhinus townsendii Washington Ground Squirrel Urocitellus washingtoni Western Grebe Aechmophorus occidentalis White-tailed Jackrabbit Lepus townsendii Yellow-billed Cuckoo Coccyzus amen.canus Notes: 1. U.S. National Resource Conservation Service website,accessed February 12,2014. 2.Species are also under federal listing. ESA= Endangered Species Act 5.1.4.2.2 Aquatic Habitat The Snake and Columbia rivers make up the border of the southern half of the City and provide the only shoreline jurisdictional aquatic habitat within the City. The aquatic habitat Draft Shoreline Inventory,Analysis,and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update 41 131050-01.01 Shoreline Analysis and Characterization Many ESA-listed anadromous salmonid species are found within the two rivers, including bull trout, steelhead, sockeye, and spring and fall Chinook salmon. Coho salmon are rare but may occur through reintroduction programs underway in the Yakima River Basin and this population segment is not ESA-listed. Pacific lamprey are present but have experienced population decline in recent years. Resident fish include a mix of native and non-native species, such as smallmouth (Micropterus dolomieu) and largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides), northern pikeminnow (Ptychocheilus oregonensis), sculpin (Cottoidea sp.), mountain whitefish (Prosopium williamsonl), white sturgeon, catfish (ktalurus punctatus), sucker (Catostaomidae sp.), walleye (Sander vitreus), chiselmouth (Acrocheilus alutaceus), dace (Leuciscus leuciscus), common carp (Cyprinus carpio), redside shiner (Richardsonius balteatus), peamouth (Mylocheilus caurinus), and various minnow species. Shellfish include the Columbia River limpet, spire snail (Heleobia stagnorum) and California floater (Anodonta californiensis). Non-native species found in the Columbia and Snake rivers that are managed by Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) as game species include bluegill (Lepomis macrochirus), bass, crappie (Pomoxis), shad (Alosa sapidissima), carp (Cyprinus carpio), channel catfish (ktalurus punctatus), perch (Perca), and walleye. The aquatic nearshore and riparian shoreline areas of the Columbia and Snake rivers near the City support concentrations of wintering migratory waterfowl, and primarily serve as resting and feeding areas for Canada goose (Branca Canadensis) and dabbling ducks (Anas); primarily mallard (Anas platyrhynchos), canvasback (Aythya valisineria), ring-necked duck (Aythya collaris), and wood duck (Aixsponsa). Some waterfowl nesting likely occurs in areas with wider riparian buffers, potentially near the confluence of the Snake and Columbia rivers and along reaches of the Columbia River where development is less intensive, such as residential zones, parks, and open spaces. The Columbia River in the vicinity of the City also provides a breeding area for long billed curlew (Numenius americanus) and a variety of gulls, as well as a resting area with limited nesting for great blue heron (Ardea herodias) and egret (Ardea alba). Aquatic invertebrate forage species found in the Columbia and Snake rivers near the City are typical of large river systems. The Columbia River in this reach supports larger invertebrates Draft Shoreline Inventory,Analysis,and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update 42 131050-01.01 Shoreline Analysis and Characterization such as crawfish, as well as numerous aquatic insects, mollusks and gastropods. Significant studies have been conducted along the Hanford Reach, which includes some locations near the City. It is anticipated that presence of aquatic invertebrates may be somewhat representative, although likely differ due to land use changes at the transition from the Washington Department of Energy-managed Hanford Reach into the urban development boundary of the City. Mollusk surveys conducted in the Hanford Reach in 2003, 2004, and 2006 found 17 taxa (5 mussels and 12 snails); 3 taxa are considered to be special status species by federal or state agencies (Mueller 2014). Throughout the past 50 years, the macroinvertebrate fauna of the Hanford Reach has changed, with certain taxa and taxonomic groups increasing while others decrease: Mayfly (Ephemeroptera) diversity has increased; stoneflies (Plecoptera) have disappeared; caddisfly (Trichoptera) diversity and abundance remain high; dragonflies and damselflies (Odonata), true bugs (Hemiptera), butterflies and moths (Lepidoptera) and beetles (Coleopteras) are rare; and fly (Diptera) diversity remains relatively constant (Evans 2003). Limitations to aquatic habitat in the City are the low habitat complexity along the shoreline due to water regime management on the Columbia and Snake rivers. The following aquatic restoration opportunities may be feasible in the City: • Improve migration conditions in the lower Snake River by changing hydrograph of Snake River dam storage. • Reconnect floodplain/side channels and oxbows near this reach, and investigate leasing/purchasing floodplain areas. • Reduce influence of predatory fishes such as smallmouth bass and northern pikeminnow. • Retain and recruit large woody debris or engineered logjams along the shoreline of both rivers to restore and enhance fish habitat, taking into consideration the risk of possible predation issues on juvenile salmonids. • Restore riparian buffers where possible. • Update irrigation intakes, as applicable, for protection of salmon from uptake and impingement. Draft Shoreline Inventory,Analysis,and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update 43 131050-01.01 Shoreline Analysis and Characterization 5.1.4.2.3 Terrestrial Habitat The City's population is generally concentrated around and near the confluence of the Columbia and Snake rivers, leaving little terrestrial habitat within the shoreline jurisdictional zone throughout much of City undeveloped. Irrigated agricultural lands are prevalent throughout the northern ends of the City. Dam development on the Columbia and Snake rivers has altered these waterbodies, impacting the quantity and quality of water in these systems, as well as the shorelines within the City. Alterations specifically affecting the riparian zone in the City include reduced wood recruitment and transport within the river basins, and the lack of connectivity to floodplain habitats. In addition, levee systems along the Columbia and Snake River shorelines in the City further reduce the connectivity of the rivers to their floodplains and also limit the vegetation community development in the riparian zone. Human-induced alterations to light transmission may interfere with plant production and aquatic animal behavior. Plants and animals are adapted to natural light intensities and timing of lighted periods. Light energy affects water temperature, animal behavior (such as the relationship between predators and prey), and plant photosynthesis and growth (Tilzer et al. 1975). Natural light is altered when riparian vegetation is removed or when structures such as docks are built that create shade and prevent natural light from reaching the water. Reductions in this natural light preclude plant colonization and growth beneath these structures and can cause changes in animal behavior. For example, shade cast by overwater structures may disrupt juvenile salmon migration in the Columbia and Snake rivers by creating visual barriers to their movement (Carrasquero 2001). Natural light can also be reduced by the presence of algal blooms caused by excess nutrient additions that can collect in slack-water areas. Artificial light refers to the light that humans create at night, such as lights used for roads, parking lots, industrial complexes (including dams), houses, docks, piers, and sports fields. This light can interfere with aquatic and terrestrial animals' routines and change predator-prey relationships. Draft Shoreline Inventory,Analysis,and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update 44 131050-01.01 Shoreline Analysis and Characterization The shrub-steppe habitat common to Eastern Washington and historically prevalent throughout Franklin County provides many ecosystem services including soil stabilization, wildfire moderation, and overall biodiversity. The displacement of shrub-steppe plant species by cheat-grass (Bromus tectorum), Russian thistle (Salsola tragus), and other invasive species increases fire intensity and frequency which, in addition to the hazards this creates for humans and wildlife, also impacts the dominant shrub-steppe plant species big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata), an important species for rare birds such as the sage grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus) (Link et al. 2006). While undisturbed shrub-steppe habitat is rare in the City, disturbed shrub-steppe communities remain in spaces between agricultural fields and adjacent to the rivers, within the shoreline jurisdictional area. Such areas have been affected to various degrees by grazing, invasive plant infestations, agriculture, and development. Relatively undisturbed shrub-steppe habitat in the City area may still be dominated by native grasses and sagebrush. Undisturbed shrub-steppe lands are characterized by an intact cryptogam crust (a thin layer of moss and lichen that indicates an undisturbed community), mostly native shrubs (e.g., big sagebrush and bitterbrush), and a predominantly native grass understory. The shrub-steppe habitat communities in the City area, while damaged by a variety of activities, may still provide cover, food, and nesting habitat for many species of wildlife and insects. These shrub-steppe areas have been identified in other nearby areas to be particularly important during winter months when nearby and adjacent cultivated fields provide no vegetative cover for wildlife (YSFWPB 2004), and the same may be true for the disturbed, remnant shrub-steppe habitats in Pasco. Recommendations for preserving shrub-steppe habitat consist of limiting development footprints, including agricultural land cover changes, limiting road and utility corridors to avoid fragmenting habitat, restricting vegetation clearing, keeping domestic pets and livestock out of sensitive species habitat, limiting fencing to avoid barriers to native wildlife, and limiting irrigation canals through shrub-steppe habitat (Azerrad et al. 2011). An abundant and diverse community of wildlife inhabits and utilizes shrub-steppe communities in the region, although few of these species are likely to exist along the shoreline areas of the City. In addition to the species identified in Table 14, species that may Draft Shoreline Inventory,Analysis,and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update 45 131050-01.01 Shoreline Analysis and Characterization be found at the margins of the shoreline in less developed areas include reptiles such as the western rattlesnake (Crotalus viridis), Great Basin spadefoot toad (Spea intermontana), and northern sagebrush lizard (Sceloporusgraciosus). Birds noted in Table 14 may be found at various times near the shorelines within the City. The City has many species that have adapted to urban environments, such as raccoons (Procyon lotor), possum (Didelphis virginiana), small rodents, coyotes (Canislatrans), pigeons (Columbidae), house sparrows (Passerdomesticus), and crows (Corpus). Less common are other small mammals such as Townsend ground squirrel (Urocitellus townsendil), black-tailed jackrabbit (Lepus californicus), white-tailed jackrabbit (Lepus townsendii), Merriam's shrew (Sorexmerriamz); and large mammals such as badger (Taxidea taxus), mule deer (Odocoileushemionus), and elk (Cervus canadensis). Riparian and floodplain areas, as well as wetlands, are primarily associated with the mainstem Columbia and Snake rivers. Black cottonwood (Populus trichocarpa) is the dominant plant species in lowland riparian areas and plays a key role in the integrity of riparian systems (USBR 2008). Other species include a variety of willow species, red-osier dogwood (Corpus sericea), aspen (Populus), water birch (Betula occidentahs), serviceberry (Amelanchier), chokecherry (Prunus virginiana), rose (Rosaceae), hawthorn (Crataegus), and snowberry (Symphoricarpos), as well as invasive species such as Russian Olive. Reptile and amphibian species found in these habitats include western painted turtle (Chrysemys picta), spotted frog (Rana pretiosa), gopher snakes (Pituophis melanoleuces), garter snake (Thamnophis sirtalis), and others. Small mammals include beaver (Castor canadensis), river otter (Lutra canadensis), muskrat (Ondatra zibethicus), mink (Mustela vison), porcupines (Erethizon dorsatum), raccoons, skunks (Mephitis mephitis), silver-haired bats (Lasionycteris noctivagans), and pallid bats (Antrozous pallidus). River otters are occasionally observed in the Hanford Reach. Common avian species include Wilson's phalarope (Phalaropus tricolor), belted kingfisher (Megaceryle alcyon), peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus), hairy woodpecker (Picoides villosus) and downy woodpecker (Picoides pubescens). Species of waterfowl that utilize the wetland and riparian habitats within the affected area include mallard, American wigeon (A. Americana), and others (USFWS 2008, 2012). Draft Shoreline Inventory,Analysis,and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update 46 131050-01.01 Shoreline Analysis and Characterization The City area is located in the Pacific Flyway and serve as a resting area for neotropical migrant birds, migratory waterfowl, and shorebirds. Other species observed in the area include great blue heron, American white pelicans (Pelecanus erythrorhynchos), egrets, double-crested cormorants (Phalacrocorax auritus), coots (Fulica americana), and common loons (Gavia immer) (USFWS 2008, 2012). In the Lower Columbia Basin, wildlife resources are positively affected by several large public land holdings, including the Hanford Reach National Monument to the north and the McNary Wildlife Refuge, which provide large contiguous range for native species. For City shorelines, several factors affect the suitability of wildlife habitat: • A lack of connectivity along the shoreline riparian habitat presents challenges for wildlife movement up the Columbia River from the Snake River confluence. Ongoing efforts to remove barriers to wildlife movement benefits species with a wider ranging territory. • Islands in the Columbia River that are part of the McNary National Wildlife Refuge and provide resting areas for a range of migratory wildlife. The river provides a substantial buffer from human disturbance on these islands. • Ongoing efforts to enhance existing habitat in areas where past disturbance has occurred, together with limiting access to critical nesting areas, provides the potential to substantially enhance habitat values in existing floodplain areas. Table 15 summarizes the key stressors affecting ecological functions provided by the specific aquatic and terrestrial systems within the City. Draft Shoreline Inventory,Analysis,and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update 47 131050-01.01 Shoreline Analysis and Characterization Table 15 Key Stressors Affecting Ecological Functions Columbia River Snake River Key Stressors Aquatic Terrestrial Aquatic Terrestrial Recreational access—existing X X X X Recreational area—potential development X X Agricultural use—irrigation X X X Agricultural use—livestock X X Residential development—existing shoreline X X development Residential development—land use change X X (e.g., development of new roads, utilities) Residential development—future X X X X Hydrologic management regimes X X X X 5.2 Reach Characterizations Characterization of shoreline reaches and subreaches is provided in Appendix A. These reach and subreach characterization tables summarize existing physical conditions; characterizations and analyses for water quantity and sediment, water quality, and habitat and species; ecological functions analysis, including identifying functional conditions, stressors, and restoration and protection opportunities; preliminary shoreline environment designation considerations; existing public access and potential additional public access opportunities; and cumulative impact considerations. Each reach was categorized overall in terms of ecosystem function. The categories include functioning, partially functioning, and impaired. The framework, definitions, and categories for this analysis were adapted from a system originally developed for Riparian Area Management guidelines proposed by the U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM; Prichard 1998). This assessment is a relative assessment with some degree of calibration to reflect the overall conditions found in the City. Draft Shoreline Inventory,Analysis,and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update 48 131050-01.01 Shoreline Analysis and Characterization The potential ecological function is defined as the highest ecological status a shoreline reach can attain given no development or management constraints, which takes into account the extent to which management (particularly water management) supports ecological function. Ecological function is defined here as the degree of similarity between existing physical and biological conditions, and the potential ecological function of a site; the higher the ecological function, the closer the site is to potential. Potential, for this assessment, encompasses all the resources defined by the interaction of hydrology, vegetation, water quality, and erosion/deposition (soils), and aquatic and riparian habitat. For example, the potential of the hydrologic component includes the concept of a stream channel's physical characteristics (dimension, pattern, and profile) being within a normal or usual range (e.g., entrenchment, sinuosity, width, depth, and slope of the bankfull channel) as defined by landform and geomorphic stream type given current flows. The three categories of ecological function are as follows: • Functioning is a state of resiliency that will allow a shoreline to hold together during high-flow events with a high degree of reliability. This resiliency allows an area to then produce desired values, such as fish habitat, bird habitat, or forage, over time. Riparian-wetland areas that are not functioning properly cannot sustain these values over time and are susceptible to stochastic disturbances such as fire. • Partially functioning is a state in which the ecological function of the shoreline is somewhat compromised by development or management trends, or is particularly susceptible to future degradation due to development, management, or ecological conditions. A partially functioning shoreline has some ability to recover through changes in management or the removal of identified stressors on ecological function. • Impaired is a state in which the ecological functions of the shoreline are heavily compromised by development or management of the reach. An impaired reach has a low probability of recovery through restoration due to the degree of structural change to the shoreline, waterbody, and surrounding shorelands. Impaired shorelines can be functionally improved, but are unlikely to be self-sustainable. Draft Shoreline Inventory,Analysis,and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update 49 131050-01.01 Shoreline Analysis and Characterization 5.3 Future Land Use and Development Potential 5.3.1 Methodology The future development potential is analyzed using existing City and Franklin County GIS data. GIS data used includes parcel, land ownership, existing land use, and zoning. These datasets were overlaid on the reach map with shoreline jurisdiction boundary. The overlaid map indicates parcels within the shoreline jurisdiction. These parcels were reviewed and analyzed for future development potential. In most cases, portions of the parcels fell within the shoreline. In some other instances, already subdivided and vacant lots were identified as developable land within the shoreline. The undivided land within the shoreline jurisdiction was used to calculate the number of developable lots where applicable. Allowed densities were also taken into account to establish number of developable units. For non-residential lots (e.g., industrial), the portion of land within the shoreline jurisdiction was included in area calculations, which helped determine development potential. 5.3.2 Data Gaps The analysis does not include the critical areas or steep slopes. Setbacks and other buffers were not factored in the calculation, as these are applied at the time of development. Analysis did not include the detailed area calculation for recreational improvements on public land. 5.3.3 Land Development Potential Summary Table 16 indicates the future land development potential within the City's shoreline. The purpose of the analysis is to estimate potential development that may take place along shorelines in the planning timeframe, according to the existing land use and zoning designations. The analysis uses the existing GIS datasets provided by Franklin County and the City, existing planning documents, and current development trends. These results are intended to provide a general overview of the future development potential, but not to dictate how the development should occur. Future development potential may vary from this analysis based on the overall market condition, intent of the property owner, or other local or regional factors. Draft Shoreline Inventory,Analysis,and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update 50 131050-01.01 Shoreline Analysis and Characterization Table 16 Future Development Potential by Shoreline Reach Area Future Development Reach (acres) Land Use Constraints Developable Future Development - Low Density - USACE ownership of - Entire SR 1a - 32 residential lots Residential land - Vacant parcels in SR 1b, 1d, and 1e Reach 1 63.02 - Mixed Residential - Existing road - Mixed Residential - Gravel pit(Broadmoor) Commercial with long-term lease - Open Space Nature - Low Density - Mostly build-out - Vacant lots within the subdivision - 3 residential lots Reach 2 34.39 Residential - Open Space Nature - Low Density - Chiawana Park - No developable land except for - Park improvement Residential - USACE ownership recreational facility improvements for additional boat Reach 3 54.32 - Open Space Nature launch and beach area (Pasco 2012) - Trail improvement - Low Density - USACE ownership of - Development on vacant lots behind the - 15 residential lots Residential land and levee levee and the drainage ditch. These lots Reach 4 50.65 _ Open Space Nature - Wade Park; mostly have portions within the shoreline area. build-out Draft Shoreline Inventory,Analysis, and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update 51 131050-01.01 Shoreline Analysis and Characterization Area Future Development Reach (acres) Land Use Constraints Developable Future Development - Low Density - Public ownership of Park development on vacant BNSF land: - 7,623 square-feet Residential land by USACE - Development of the industrial area only industrial area - Mixed Residential - WSDOT after the abandonment of the BNSF rail (approximately 50% Reach 5 59.54 - Mixed Residential - City of Pasco track land coverage) Commercial - Port of Pasco - Portion of the industrial land within - Industrial - BNSF Railway Company; shoreline is approximately 0.35 acres - Open Space Nature existing levee and railtrack - Industrial - Remediation of the - The Port's vacant industrial property(SR - Park and trail - Open Space Nature toxic spillage on the 6a) could be developed to add about improvements near Port of Pasco property 11,000-square-feet area (approximately the marina - BNSF railtrack 50% land coverage)within the shoreline. - Development of However,this is contingent upon the parking lot at Osprey spillage remediation process which Pointe progresses slowly. Future development - About 18,672 square Reach 6 95.91 is unlikely to take place within the feet of building area planning timeframe. is proposed within - Osprey Pointe development in SR 6c the shoreline would include parking area development within the shoreline. Proposed buildings are mostly located outside the 200-feet shoreline jurisdiction with some portions of the buildings being within the shoreline. — Industrial — Washington State Parks — Park amenities could be improved — Park and trail Reach 7 62.78 — Open Space Nature Department ownership improvements Draft Shoreline Inventory,Analysis, and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update 52 131050-01.01 Shoreline Analysis and Characterization Area Future Development Reach (acres) Land Use Constraints Developable Future Development - Industrial - BNSF railtrack - Low development potential. Industrial - Trail improvements - Open Space Nature Ainsworth historic town area is less likely to have additional Reach 8 90.06 - Industrial area is mostly development within the planning developed with fuel timeframe tanks - Potential for trail connection to the east Notes: BNSF= Burlington Northern Santa Fe SF=square foot SR=Subreach USACE= U.S.Army Corps of Engineers WSDOT=Washington State Department of Transportation Draft Shoreline Inventory,Analysis, and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update 53 131050-01.01 Shoreline Analysis and Characterization 5.3.4 Preliminary Shoreline Environment Designation Considerations The information in this report provides the foundation for developing the City's SMP. Information is organized by waterbodies and reaches to allow for SMP provisions tailored to local conditions found along shorelands. Goals, policies, and regulations will be established based on these conditions. Described in this section are background information on environment designations and a preliminary discussion on how elements of the Washington classification system may apply to conditions in the City. Environment designations are applied based on specific criteria, and include a purpose statement, a description of the classification criteria, management policies, and environment-specific regulations. 5.3.4.1 State Recommended Classification System Washington has identified a recommended classification system that can be used as a starting point in considering environment designations most applicable to the City. These consist of: high-intensity, shoreline residential, urban conservancy, natural, and aquatic as described in WAC 173-26-211. The purpose for each of these environment designations is described in WAC 173-26-211: • High-intensity— "...Provide for high-intensity water-oriented commercial, transportation, and industrial uses while protecting existing ecological functions and restoring ecological functions in areas that have been previously degraded." • Shoreline residential— "...Accommodate residential development and appurtenant structures that are consistent with this chapter. An additional purpose is to provide appropriate public access and recreational uses." • Urban conservancy— "...Protect and restore ecological functions of open space, flood plain and other sensitive lands where they exist in urban and developed settings, while allowing a variety of compatible uses." • Natural—"...Protect those shoreline areas that are relatively free of human influence or that include intact or minimally degraded shoreline functions intolerant of human use. These systems require that only very low intensity uses be allowed in order to maintain the ecological functions and ecosystem-wide processes. Consistent with the Draft Shoreline Inventory,Analysis,and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update 54 131050-01.01 Shoreline Analysis and Characterization policies of the designation, local government should include planning for restoration of degraded shorelines within this environment." • Aquatic— "...Protect, restore, and manage the unique characteristics and resources of the areas waterward of the ordinary high-water mark." Local governments may also establish a different designation system or may retain their current environment designations, provided these are consistent with the purposes and policies of WAC 173-26-211. Parallel environments can also be used where appropriate, with shorelands divided into different sections generally running parallel to the shoreline or along a physical feature such as a bluff. In applying environment designations, the state reminds local governments that they should ensure that existing shoreline ecological functions are protected with the proposed pattern and intensity of development, and that restoration potential for an area is considered (WAC 173-26-211). 5.3.4.2 Preliminary Considerations Developing and applying environment designations in the City will come in later steps in the SMP update process. In preparation for this, an initial description of shoreland areas with high intensity, residential, conservancy and natural characteristics is described in Table 17. This initial description will provide a starting point for drafting environment designations, which will be applied at the reach level in the future. The listing of these areas under the high intensity and other categories should not imply that this is what these areas will be designated in the SMP update process. Developing and applying environment designations in the City will occur with more detailed analysis of the information in this report, input from the City Planning Commission, Ecology, and from the public during the shoreline visioning process and other public forums. Draft Shoreline Inventory,Analysis,and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update 55 131050-01.01 Shoreline Analysis and Characterization Table 17 Preliminary Environment Designation Consideration Shoreland Characteristics Applicable Geographic Areas • Industrial areas, including water-dependent facilities on the Columbia (Reach 6) and Snake rivers(Subreach 8b) High intensity • Chiawana,Wade, Riverview,Schlagel, and Sacajawea parks (SR 3a,5c, and 6b and Reach 7) Several areas along the Columbia River(Reaches 1,2; and SR 3b,4a, and 4b, and portions Residential of SR 5b and 6b) Open space areas located in SR 1c, 3a, 3b, 5c, and 6c and Reaches 7 and 8,which include Conservancy lower intensity recreation areas at Chiawana and Sacajawea parks Natural All islands • Consider a special designation area for leveed areas along the Columbia River,where limited ecological function and future development potential exists, and the areas are Other dedicated for public recreation as part of the regional trail system • Consider a recreation-based designation for the several park areas Draft Shoreline Inventory,Analysis,and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update 56 131050-01.01 6 PUBLIC ACCESS The City shoreline has public access opportunities in multiple locations in parks, trails, and road termini. The City has developed the Rivershore Linkage and Amenity Plan (Pasco 2012; attached as Appendix Q. This plan provides an in depth analysis of public access opportunities, needs, and constraints for the entire shoreline. It also makes short-term and long-term recommendations for public access and other rivershore improvements. For the purpose of the IAC Report, the shoreline reaches and subreaches have been delineated to match the rivershore segments identified in the Rivershore Linkage and Amenity Plan (see Table 5). This Rivershore Linkage and Amenity Plan is being used as the public access plan. Instead of applying uniform public access requirements to all future developments, future public accesses should be consistent with this plan as recommended in WAC 173-26-221(4)(c). The City shoreline has multiple parks along the shoreline. These include Chiawana Park, Wade Park, Riverview Park, Schlagel Park, and Sacajawea State Park. In addition, Sacajawea Heritage Trail parallels almost the entire stretch of shoreline starting from Reach 2 and ending at the Sacajawea State Park at Reach 7. Public access opportunities exist in many of the publicly owned properties, including the long-term goal of developing the Sacajawea Heritage Trail to connect to the Columbia Plateau Trail/Ice Harbor Dam (Section 6.1.4 includes additional discussion of Washington State Parks and Recreation goals related to the Columbia Plateau Trail). Additional discussion on public access opportunities by reach are provided in Appendix A. 6.1 Public Access Goals 6.1.1 City of Pasco The City's Comprehensive Plan includes recreation goal as follows: • Recreation Goal CF-4—In conjunction with Franklin County, provide parks, greenways, trails, and recreation facilities throughout the UGA. The City's Parks, Recreations and Forestry Plan objectives include: Draft Shoreline Inventory,Analysis,and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update 57 131050-01.01 Public Access • Goal 1 (Physical) Objective—Take advantage of the river frontage as a recreational, natural, and scenic asset. • Goal 3 (Management and Operations) Trail Policies—Trails should be routed to provide visual and physical access to natural areas and to the riverfront. 6.1.2 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers The U. S. Army Corps of Engineers' environmental operating principles were developed to ensure that its missions include totally integrated sustainable environmental practices. The Walla Walla district operates and manages dams on Snake River. It provides a variety of recreational opportunities within its management areas. 6.1.3 Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife WDFW's vision for Lands 20/20 (WDFW 2005) intends to offer all Washington citizens, "an opportunity to access and appreciate this state's fish and wildlife." Recreational uses of land are consistent with WDFW's land policy for providing outdoor recreation opportunities when they, "don't threaten fish and wildlife or degrade the habitats that support them." WDFW intends to continue providing wildlife viewing opportunities. WDFW's Swanson Lake Wildlife Area Management Plan (Anderson 2006) indicates that the agency's management objective is to provide recreation compatible with fish, wildlife, and habitat protection. It indicates that access and recreation must be controlled to protect fish and wildlife resources and to comply with federal and state regulations. 6.1.4 Washington State Parks and Recreation Washington State Parks and Recreation applies land classification systems to its parks and recreation areas such as: • Recreational areas for high-intensity outdoor recreational use • Resource recreation for high-intensity outdoor recreational use • Natural areas for preservation, restoration, and interpretation of natural processes • Heritage areas for preservation, restoration, and interpretation of unique or unusual archaeological, historical, scientific, and/or cultural features Draft Shoreline Inventory,Analysis,and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update 58 131050-01.01 Public Access • Natural forest areas for preservation, restoration, and interpretation of natural forest processes • Natural area preserves designated for preservation of rare or vanishing flora, fauna, geological, natural historical, or similar features of scientific or educational value Sacajawea Park is operated by the State Parks and Recreation department. Draft Shoreline Inventory,Analysis,and Characterization Report March 2014 City ofPasco SMP Update 59 131050-01.01 7 INFORMATION SOURCES, ASSUMPTIONS, AND LIMITATIONS This document is based on the best information available to the City at the time this document was produced. This information was obtained from a variety of sources and was collected and prepared for a variety of different purposes. The information was collected during a long time period; however, a substantial effort was made to use the most accurate and current information available. Existing data, reports, and information used for the shoreline inventory are shown in the reference section. Generally, the documents used include the City's Comprehensive Plan and municipal code, USFWS wetland inventories and datasets, and WDFW subbasin and habitat conservation plans, historical references, and scientific literature on ecological functions. GIS data illustrated in the map folio includes information on hydrology, soils, topography, vegetation, land cover, priority habitat and species concentrations, and other features. This report relied largely on GIS data and remotely sensed imagery. Integrating various GIS layers together into map folio projects often resulted in polygon boundary discrepancies. Rectification of these discrepancies was only conducted for layers and geographic locations most relevant to the SMP update. For example boundaries for zoning or land use designations do not always match identified OHWM. The identified shoreline jurisdiction areas are only an approximation for purposes of updating the SMP. Precise OHWM delineation and associated shoreline jurisdiction boundaries will be determined on a project-by-project basis, based on site-specific analysis during the development application and review process for project-specific proposals. Draft Shoreline Inventory,Analysis,and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update 60 131050-01.01 8 REFERENCES Ames, K.M., D.E. Dumond, J. Galm, and R. Minor, 1998. Prehistory of the Southern Plateau. In Handbook ofNorth American Indians, Volume 12, Plateau, edited by D. E. Walker, Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution, 103-194. Ames, K.M. and H.D.G. Maschner, 1999. Peoples of the Northwest Coast: Their Archaeology and Prehistory. London: Thames & Hudson. Anchor QEA, 2014. Preliminary Shoreline jurisdiction Memorandum for Franklin County. Prepared for Franklin County, February 27, 2014. Anderson, J., 2006. Swanson Lake Wildlife Area Management Plan, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Available from: http://wdfw.wa.gov/publications/00542/wdfwOO542.pdf. Arnold, C.L. and C.J. Gibbons, 1996. Impervious Surface Coverage: The Emergence of a Key Environmental Indicator. American Planners Association Journal 62: 243-258. Azerrad, J.M., K.A. Divens, M.F. Livingston, M.S. Teske, H.L. Ferguson, and J.L. Davis, 2011. Management recommendations for Washington's priority habitats.managing shrub- steppe in developing landscapes. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Olympia, Washington, 2011. Beier, P. and S. Loe, 1992. A checklist for evaluating impacts to wildlife movement corridors. Wildlife Society Bulletin 20:434-440. Boyd, R.T. and Y.P. Hajda, 1987. Seasonal Population Movement Along The Lower Columbia River: the Social And Ecological Context. American Ethnologist 14:309-26. Carrasquero, J., 2001. Over-Water Structures.Freshwater Issues. Prepared for Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Washington Department of Ecology and Washington State Department of Transportation. Olympia, Washington. April 2001. Chatters, J.C. and D.L. Pokotylo, 1998. Prehistory: Introduction. Handbook ofNorth American Indians, Volume 12, Plateau, edited by D. E. Walker, Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution, 73-80. Dunne T. and L.B. Leopold, 1978. Waterin Environmental Planning. New York, New York: W.H. Freeman and Company. Draft Shoreline Inventory,Analysis,and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update 61 131050-01.01 References Evans, James R., ed., 2003. Biodiversity Studies of the Hanford Site 2002-2003. Prepared by The Nature Conservancy of Washington for the U.S Department of Energy and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Hanford Reach National Monument. August 29, 2003. Franklin County, 2008. Franklin County Growth Management Comprehensive Plan. Adopted February 27, 2008. Frodge, J.D., D.A. Marino, G.B. Pauley, and G.L. Thomas, 1995. Mortality of largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides) and steelhead trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) in densely vegetated littoral areas tested using in situ bioassay. Lake and Reserv. Manage, 11(2):343-358. Gerber, M.S., 1992. On the Home Front: The Cold War Legacy of the Hanford Nuclear Site. Omaha, Nebraska: University of Nebraska Press. Gibson, E., 2005. Franklin County—thumbnail history. HistoryLink.org Essay 7452. Cited: January 29, 2014. Available from: http://www.historylink.org/index.cfm?DisplayPage=output.cfm&file—id=7452. Grolier, M.J. and Bingham, J.W., 1978. Bulletin No. 71: Geology of Parts of Grant, Adams, and Franklin Counties, East-Central Washington. Prepared for the Washington State Division of Geology and Earth Resources. 1978. Hayes, D., 1999. Historical Atlas of the Pacific Northwest:Maps of Exploration and Discovery.-British Columbia, Washington, Oregon,Alaska, Yukon. Seattle, Washington: Sasquatch Books. Hruby, T., 2004. Washington State Wetland Rating System for Eastern Washington — Revised. Washington State Department of Ecology. Publication #04-06-15. March 2004. Hunn, E.S., 1981. On the relative contribution of men and women to subsistence among hunter-gatherers of the Columbia Plateau: A comparison with Ethnographic Atlas summaries. journal ofEthnobiologyl(1):124-134. Karr, J.R., 1995. Clean water is not enough. Illahee 11: 51-59. Kershner, J., 2008. Pasco—thumbnail history. HistoryLink.org Essay 8604. Cited February 26, 2014. Available at: http://historylink.o rg/index.cfm?DisplayPage=output.cfm&file—id=8604. Draft Shoreline Inventory,Analysis,and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update 62 131050-01.01 References KNDU, 2012. Columbia River below Priest Rapids Dam near Flood Stage. Accessed March 2012. Available from: http://www.kndu.com/story/18894666/columbia-river-below- priest-rapids-dam-near-flood-stage. Link, S.O., W.H. Mast, and R.W. Hill, 2006. Shrub-steppe. Restoring the Pacific Northwest, edited by D. Apostol and M. Sinclair, Washington D.C.: Island Press, 216-240. Mackie, R.S., 1997. Trading Beyond the Mountains: The British Fur Trade on the Pacific 1793-1843. Vancouver, British Columbia: University of British Columbia Press. Mehringer, P.J. and F.F. Foit, Jr., 1990. Volcanic Ash Dating of the Clovis Cache at East Wenatchee, Washington. National Geographic Research 6(4):495-503. Morrison, M.L., B.G. Marcot, R.W. Mannan, 1992. Wildlife-habitatrelationships: Concepts and applications. Madison, Wisconsin: The University of Wisconsin Press. Mueller, R., 2011. Hanford National Environmental Research Park: Freshwater Mollusks. Updated 2011. Cited February 20, 2014. Available from: http://nerp.pnnl.gov/projects—f&w/mollusks.asp. Nisbet, J., 2005. The Mapmaker's Eye:David Thompson on the Columbia Plateau. Pullman, Washington: Washington State University Press. Pasco (City of Pasco), 2012. Rivershore Linkage and Amenity Plan. Prepared for the City of Pasco. July 16, 2012. Poff, N.L., J.D. Allan, M.B. Bain, J.R. Karr, K.L. Prestegaard, B.D. Richter, R.E. Sparks, and J.C. Stromberg, 1997. The Natural Flow Regime: A Paradigm for River Conservation and Restoration. BioScience 47: 769-784. Prichard,D., 1998. A User Guide to Assessing Proper Functioning Condition and the Supporting Science for Lotic Areas. Prepared for the Bureau of Land Management. TR 1737-15. Revised 2003. Rapp, C. and T. Abbe, 2003. A Framework for Delineating Channel Migration Zones. Washington State Department of Ecology. Ecology Publication#03-06-027. RCW (Revised Code of Washington) 90.58, Shoreline Management Act of 1971. Sanger, S.L., 1995. Working on the Bomb:An Oral History of World War II. Portland, Oregon: Portland State University. Draft Shoreline Inventory,Analysis,and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update 63 131050-01.01 References Schuster, H.H., 1998. Yakima and neighboring groups. In Handbook ofNorth American Indians, Volume 12, Plateau, edited by D. E. Walker, Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institute, 327-351. Sherer, B.M., J.R. Miner, J.A. Moore, and J.C. Buckhouse, 1992. Indicator bacterial survival in stream sediments. J. Env. Quality 21:591-595. Stanley, S., J. Brown, and S. Grigsby, 2005. Protecting aquatic ecosystems: A guide for Puget Sound Planners to understand watershed processes. Washington State Department of Ecology. Publication #05-06-027. Olympia, Washington. Available from: https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/publications/publications/0506027.pdf. Stern, T., 1998. Cayuse, Umatilla, and Walla Walla. In Handbook ofNorth American Indians, Volume 12, Plateau, edited by D. E. Walker, Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institute, 395-419. Stinson, D.W. and M.A. Schroeder, 2012. Washington State Recovery Plan for the Columbian Sharptailed Grouse. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Olympia, Washington. Tilzer, M.M., Goldman, C.R., and E. Amezaga, 1975. The Efficiency of Photosynthetic Light Energy Utilization by Lake Phytoplankton. Verhandlungen Internationale Vereinigung Limnologie 19:800-807. USBR (U.S. Bureau of Reclamation), 2008. Yakima River Basin Water Storage Feasibility Study Final Planning Report/Environmental Impact Statement. December 19, 2008. USGS (U.S. Geological Survey), 2011. Hydrogeologic framework and hydrologic budget components of the Columbia Plateau Regional Aquifer System, Washington, Oregon, and Idaho. USGS Scientific Investigations Report 2011-5124. USFWS (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service), 2008. The Final Hanford Reach National Monument Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Impact Statement. September 24, 2008. Available from: http://www.fws.gov/hanfordreach/management.html. USFWS, 2012. Yakima River Basin Integrated Water Resource Management Plan Final Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act Report. February 10, 2012. Draft Shoreline Inventory,Analysis,and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update 64 131050-01.01 References Vibert, E., 1997. Trader's Tales: Narratives of Cultural Encounters in the Columbia Plateau, 1807-1846. Norman, Oklahoma: University of Oklahoma Press. Walker, D.E. and R. Sprague, 1998. History until 1846. Handbook ofNorth American Indians, Volume 12, Plateau, edited by D.E. Walker. Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution, 138-148. Walker, D.E., 1998. Introduction. In Handbook ofNorth American Indians, Volume 12, Plateau, edited by D. E. Walker, Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution, 1-7. WDFW (Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife), 2005. Lands 20/20 -A Clear Vision For The Future, July 2005. Cited: November 15, 2013. Available from: http://wdfw.wa.gov/publications/pub.php?id=00726. Welch, E.B. and T. Lindell, 1992. Ecological Effects of Wastewater: Applied Limnology and Pollutant Effects, Second Edition. E& FN Spon, New Fetter Lane, London. Wilma, D., 2003. Stevens, Isaac Ingalls. HistoryLink.org Essay 5314. Cited: February 26, 2014. Available from: http://www.historylink.org/index.cfm?DisplayPage=output.cfm&file_id=5314. WAC (Washington Administrative Code), 2012. Chapter 173-26, 2012. Cited: August 1, 2012. Available from: http://apps.leg.wa.gov/wac/. WRCC (Western Regional Climate Center), 2013. Climate of Washington: Okanogan-Big Bend. Cited: November 25, 2013. Available from: http://www.wrcc.dri.edu/narratives/washington/. YSFWPB (Yakima Subbasin Fish and Wildlife Planning Board), 2004. Final Yakima Subbasin Plan. May 28, 2004. Available at: http://www.nwcouncil.org/fw/subbasinplanning/yakima/plan. YNM (Yakama Nation Museum), 2011. Introduction and History. Cited: November 2012. Available from: http://www.yakamamuseum.com/home-history.php. Draft Shoreline Inventory,Analysis,and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update 65 131050-01.01 APPENDIX A CITY OF PASCO REACH CHARACTERIZATION TABLES AND REACH MAPS LEGEND Reach Break 66 � � a� ,•'• ; 0 Incorporated City of Pasco Urban Growth Area AM •* County Boundary SMA Jurisdiction NWI Wetland y .N 4 100-year Floodplaln rl r m 3 elo NOTES: • 3 �` _ 1.This information is to be used for planning CL{ i `?fi -� purposes only. Data is displayed as is and `o :�� ,,• ,`` ' '�` P3scr without any guarantee of accuracy or completeness. 2.Aerial image courtesy of USDA NAIP myx�fi• .R�¢ (2013). 3.NWI data acquired from USFWS. m^ } 'Y'i�;'� , 4.Floodplain and floodway data acquired " • ,,�•t from FEMA. CL Franklin - a 0 o,�'r - `ti,_ Pasco Ask* _ ` Walla M `-+ •, 'Q ,e 'r - - Walla a DRAFT Map 1 ANCHOR Miles Subreach 1a - Reach 2 OEA 0 0 0.5 1 City of Pasco Shoreline Master Program ��—' City of Pasco, WA _W +1- N � � � LEGEND Reach Break Incorporated City of Pasco Urban Growth Area N _ M __- ' County Boundary C SMA Jurisdiction PR _ ✓ NWI Wetland E 100-year Floodplain m 500-year Floodplain t0 UI C O U � Pa trt�7n ° rl d ti- TM,1 ►'ry, �fi � � :. -4 :s NOTES: r ._ �'t�• , mss: 6t s. *�` ;� � � 1.This information is to be used for planning CL 9� _x", ` +e a ycjj �' purposes only. Data is displayed as is and without any guarantee of accuracy or completeness. • F 2.Aerial image courtesy of USDA NAIP x - 2013 .NW 3I data acquired from USFWS. 4.Floodplain and floodway data acquired from FEMA. CL N .., k -_ AIL o s s +ry 1 Franklin o ;. i4 Kerinew�ck �� er. �^y o fsyJPi 41— Pasco .] Zvi�7t _. 4C w Walla Walla . _ .•• - . ,: ^^^"'444 r, i ��f i' r �, r tit 'e'�i�a'Ct •', .a � r� DRAFT Map 2 ANCHOR Miles Subreaches 3a - 4b OEA 0 0.5 1 City of Pasco Shoreline Master Program �v City of Pasco, WA y 9OKy 7 {n j � � �F�61r rr��t. 1�iF S3� i��+a2"�� `- T r y� y /►r '>� ��,,,;.r, � Ikf ' ' �', �.�.$"k�k��� ��aw�� v,�,k� r� _ - F`� r •-��ya / LEGEND �2'4 '` sf ' � � �t,ti` s x ' � � Reach Break - �• Incorporated City of Pasco ■ tT •b L$3 1 `'• 'Pascoe r cL, � �t „ Urban Growth Area r� ' "..Jf tr: Y - yk t_L■ kr s,fi ja•t.,7C t� ,_- r,.s Si r Q County Boundary tt� nrt tir �.� SMA Jurisdiction Pasco F. NWI Wetland y �r�,`� " 77" .� r°_' ,, ,. Y.`�'+o^..r� � � ' a� c��•x 100-year Floodplain U reach 1 5a J r • I t U 1 J If O .•wk.H r. .r � t9" }' a ''.,• y°... NOTES: y •� w ` r} kl �'r 1.This information is to be used for planning IL purposes only. Data is displayed as is and 5 ` '• without any guarantee of accuracy or completeness. _ 2.Aerial image courtesy of USDA NAIP x r (2013). d ' . 3.NWI data acquired from USFWS. 4.Floodplain and floodway data acquired from FEMA. IL rr Ca/` Franklin LL tar Pasco a 1 y o • ra�tt ■ �, ,} en �-. �';�ii+l�i� Benton Walla Walla 2 llv DRAFT Map 3 ANCHOR Miles Subreaches 5a - 6c kZ 0 EA 0 0.5 1 City of Pasco Shoreline Master Program ��—' City of Pasco, WA LEGEND Q ! Reach Break m Incorporated City of Pasco N Urban Growth Area N } k. 4 ,rdsco County Boundary SMA Jurisdiction F- �o NWI Wetland 100-year Floodplain x U y J � air �` '�e�.•.- •rI o �k ice., Jk NOTES: 1.This information is to be used for planning n I purposes only. Data is displayed as is and�-' without any guarantee of accuracy or completeness. C) ,. 2.Aerial image courtesy of USDA NAIP x (2013). m` - aa 1 3.NWI data acquired from USFWS. 4.Floodplain and floodway data acquired from FEMA. TIA; o' ke wa Franklin je\ a ys Y CL `'r. + fie_ -*4.k o Pasco Benton Wal Columbia River/ Wal t a _ Lake Wallula ez o DRAFT Map 4 ANCHOR Miles Reach 7 - Subreach 8b kZ OEA 0 0.5 1 City of Pasco Shoreline Master Program ��—' City of Pasco, WA Appendix A City of Pasco Reach Characterization Tables and Reach Maps Reach 1 City of Pasco Reach Description: Columbia River from City of Pasco boundary to Interstate 182 bridge Shoreline Jurisdiction: 368 acres r r i Source:https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/coastalatlas/UlcoastalAtlas/Tools/ShorePhotos.aspx Subreaches(SRs);see Map 1: SR 1a: Begins at City of Pasco Urban Growth Area (UGA) boundary extending south to the edge of residential developments SR 1b: Extends 0.5 mile to the south to the edge of agricultural lands SR 1c: Extends 0.7 mile to the south to the beginning of river bend and where the City limits begin SR 1d: Extends 0.9 mile to the southeast to the edge of residential developments where the City limits end SR 1e: Extends 0.8 mile to the southeast to the Interstate 182 bridge and entirely within the UGA CHARACTERISTICS Ownership: Reach 1 is mostly private with a small amount (less than 10%) of public ownership. Land Use/Current Shoreline Master Program (SMP): Land use designation: • Current land uses are Low Density Residential, Mixed Residential, Mixed Residential Commercial, and Open Space Nature • Zoning—Suburban District(RS-20) and Residential Transition (RT) Current SMP Environment Designation: Rural and Urban (SR 1e) Draft Inventory,Analysis, and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update A-1 131050-01.01 Appendix A City of Pasco Reach Characterization Tables and Reach Maps Reach 1 City of Pasco Existing Land Cover/Development: Reach 1 includes a mix of natural unimproved land, riparian vegetation, agricultural land, roads, utilities, and residential structures. SR 1b and SR 1e include residential and accessory structures. SR 1c includes a boat dock, irrigation pump, and parking. SR 1d includes a boat launch. Geomorphic Character: Description:The shoreline throughout the reach consists of mostly of outburst flood deposits with relatively low banks. In addition, a minor amount of alluvium and sand dune deposits are located at the most downstream extent of the reach (SR 1e). Residential and some industry infrastructure are present along the shoreline throughout Reach 1. Hardened Banks:A minor amount of hardened banks appear to exist along the Reach 1 extent and is primarily associated with the Interstate 182 bridge crossing at downstream extent (SR 1e). Flooding and Geological Hazards: Flooding: Flooding is regulated by upstream dam operations and Lake Wallula pool elevation controls (SR 1d and SR 1e). Geological Hazards: SR 1b, 1c, and 1d have soils susceptible to erosion. SRs 1d and 1e contain slopes that are greater than 1S%and underlain by dune sand, which make them designated landslide hazard areas. Existing Public Access: Reach 1 currently does not include any significant public access amenities. West Court Street parallels much of the Columbia River in this reach. Dent Road ends near the shoreline providing access to the publicly owned portion of the shoreline. The Pasco Ranch boat dock is also located on U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) property. Identified Public Access Improvements: The Rivershore Linkage and Amenity Plan (Pasco 2012) indicates opportunities to preserve right-of-ways on Dent Road in SR 1a. It also recommends the extension of the Sacajawea Heritage Trail in this reach. The Broadmoor Area Plan encompassing SR 1d plans to provide trail and boat accesses. ECOLOGICAL CONDITIONS Water Quantity and Sediment: Local inputs to water quantity include a minor drainage ditch in SR 1c. An irrigation pump in SR 1d appears to withdraw water from the reach. Sediment may aggrade in SR 1d where the normal pool elevation of Lake Wallula begins, which would likely cause reduced velocities. Agricultural runoff from SR 1a, 1c, and 1e may contribute some sediment, as well as a gravel mining operation in SR 1d. Draft Inventory,Analysis, and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update A-2 131050-01.01 Appendix A City of Pasco Reach Characterization Tables and Reach Maps Reach 1 City of Pasco Water Quality: Water quality may be slightly impacted from agricultural runoff in SR 1a, SR 1c, and SR 1e. Water quality may also be impacted by gravel mining in SR 1d and residential runoff in SR 1b and SR 1e. Boat use may also impact water quality throughout the reach. These impacts are expected to be minor compared to the volume of water in the river. Habitat Characteristics and Priority Habitat Species(PHS) Presence: This reach has minimal undeveloped habitat and is noted for presence of chukar, urban natural open space, waterfowl concentrations, and specifically, grebe species. The Columbia River in this reach supports a number of Endangered Species Act (ESA)-listed fish species, as identified in the Inventory, Analysis, and Characterization Report (IAC) Report. SR 1a: SR 1a is adjacent to an agricultural area with crops extending almost to the water. There is a 20-to 50-foot band of vegetation of mostly larger trees immediately adjacent to the shoreline. No docks occur in this subreach. SR 1b: SR 1b is adjacent to a low-density residential neighborhood with landscaped vegetation extending almost to the water's edge on several parcels. Some parcels maintain a 30-foot band of vegetation, including larger trees along the shoreline edge of their property, although some have significantly more tree cover. This subreach does not include any residential docks. SR 1c: SR 1c contains upland lands in agricultural and orchard use. There is a small manmade/dredged off-channel area adjacent to Court Street and Dent Road that contains a private small craft boat dock and that may provide private access for the upland land owners. Shoreline vegetation is either absent or limited mainly to small shrubs in a wide 50-to 100-foot band. Waterfowl, including grebes, are known to congregate here. SR 1d:The main land use in the northern half of this subreach is orchards, and the main use in the southern half is upland aggregate sorting operations. The river makes a bend along this subreach, and the riparian vegetation zone along the curve of this bend is wider. This zone may be partially flooded subject to changes in water levels, as aerial photos show some evidence of standing water and potential off-channel habitat. Farther downstream,the riparian vegetation becomes more confined and sparse where it is adjacent to the aggregate facility. The northern end of this subreach also contains a small embayment that is used as an intake water supply and water access area for foot traffic. Because shoreline riparian habitat is limited,this subreach provides lower functioning habitat to ESA-listed and resident fish species that populate the river. SR 1e:The north half of this subreach is adjacent to low-density residential development and includes another small portion of land near the Interstate 182 bridge. Along the residential area are five visible residential boat docks with two other informal river access points, and the riparian vegetation is thin and patchy, but does include overhanging trees and shrubs. Wildlife habitat is sparse due to development. The south half of this subreach is adjacent to agricultural use. Because shoreline riparian habitat is limited or patchy,this subreach provides lower functioning habitat to ESA-listed and resident fish species that populate the river. Draft Inventory,Analysis, and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update A-3 131050-01.01 Appendix A City of Pasco Reach Characterization Tables and Reach Maps Reach 1 City of Pasco ECOLOGICAL FUNCTIONS ANALYSIS SR 1a Level of Existing Function: Partially Functioning Stressors: Upland development: Orchard field and dirt maintenance access areas in between riparian area (approximately a 25-feet width) an orchard, overhead power lines, a few non-native riparian species (Russian-olive). Recreational use: Informal water access area Potential Restoration Opportunities: Replace non-native riparian species with native alternatives. Control dust through placing gravel on access roads. Potential Protection Opportunities: Protect existing riparian areas. Provide stormwater controls consistent with Eastern Washington Stormwater Manual. SR 1b Level of Existing Function: Partially Functioning Stressors: Upland development: Single family residential development with irrigated landscaping, limited riparian areas in northern half of subreach, established riparian buffers in southern half though approximately half consists of non-native(Russian-olive species), informal water access paths. Potential Restoration Opportunities: Establish riparian plantings at northern half of subreach, considering the use of lower shrubs to preserve views of the water, consider incentives for homeowners to replace irrigated turf with native plantings of shrub-steppe or riparian vegetation. Replace non-native riparian species with native alternatives. Potential Protection Opportunities: Protect existing riparian areas. Provide stormwater controls consistent with Eastern Washington Stormwater Manual. SR 1c Level of Existing Function: Partially Functioning Stressors: Upland development: Irrigated agricultural fields, rural residential development, armored banks associated with infrastructure, small segment of W. Court Street within shoreline jurisdiction, non- native riparian species (Russian-olive) where tall trees are present. Recreational use: One overwater structure associated with informal boat launch. Potential Restoration Opportunities: Establish riparian buffer within central portion of subreach. Replace non-native riparian species with native alternatives. Potential Protection Opportunities: Protect existing riparian areas. Provide stormwater controls consistent with Eastern Washington Stormwater Manual. Draft Inventory,Analysis, and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update A-4 131050-01.01 Appendix A City of Pasco Reach Characterization Tables and Reach Maps Reach 1 City of Pasco SR 1d Level of Existing Function: Functioning Stressors: Upland development:Armoring within cove associated with infrastructure (water intake facilities), sparse non-native (Russian-olive)trees within riparian area. Recreational use: Upland recreation trails and a few water access areas at north side of subreach. Potential Restoration Opportunities: Replace non-native riparian species with native alternatives. Formalize recreation trail to discourage new informal trails through upland and riparian areas. Potential Protection Opportunities: Protect riparian area and intact shrub-steppe habitat. SR 1e Level of Existing Function: Partially Functioning Stressors: Upland development: Industrial development and Harris Road outside of shoreline jurisdiction, limited riparian buffer, and presence of non-native (Russian-olive)trees, single family residential development with irrigated landscaping and limited quantity of overwater structures, small area of upland irrigated agricultural fields adjacent to shoreline slope, W. Court Street, bridge for Highway 12 and Interstate 182. Recreational use: Boat ramp water access and associated trails to the water at north end of subreach. Potential Restoration Opportunities: Establish riparian buffers where not present, replace non-native riparian species with native alternatives, add vegetative filter strip where not present around agriculture fields. Potential Protection Opportunities: Protect existing riparian areas. Provide stormwater controls consistent with Eastern Washington Stormwater Manual. Draft Inventory,Analysis, and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update A-5 131050-01.01 Appendix A City of Pasco Reach Characterization Tables and Reach Maps Reach 2 City of Pasco Reach Description: Columbia River from Interstate 182 bridge (City limits boundary)to the end of waterfront residential developments Shoreline Jurisdiction: 102 acres Mm !! 4' Source:https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/coastalatlas/UlCoastalAtlas/Tools/ShorePhotos.aspx Subreaches;see Map 1: Not Applicable CHARACTERISTICS Ownership: Reach 2 is mostly private with a very small amount (less than 5%) of public ownership (Washington Department of Transportation). Land Use/Current SMP: Land use designation: • Current land uses are Low Density Residential and Open Space Nature • Zoning—Residential Suburban (RS-12) and Residential Suburban (RS-20) Current SMP Environment Designation: Urban Existing Land Cover/Development: Reach 2 is primarily residential and accessory structures and private boat docks. Parking,an inlet filtration pump(under the Interstate 182 bridge),and an irrigation pump station are also within this reach. Geomorphic Character: Description:The shoreline throughout the reach consists of outburst flood deposits with relatively low banks. Moderate-density residential infrastructure is present along the shoreline throughout this reach. Draft Inventory,Analysis, and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update A-6 131050-01.01 Appendix A City of Pasco Reach Characterization Tables and Reach Maps Reach 2 City of Pasco Hardened Banks:A minor amount of hardened bank exists along the reach extent at certain private docks and landscaped areas associated with waterfront residences. Flooding and Geological Hazards: Flooding: Flooding is regulated by Lake Wallula pool levels. Geological Hazards:There are no geologic hazard areas in Reach 2. Existing Public Access: Reach 2 is mostly privately owned and developed and doesn't include direct public access. There is one parking area beneath the Interstate 182 bridge, located adjacent to the Sacajawea Heritage Trail. Identified Public Access Improvements: The Rivershore Linkage and Amenity Plan (Pasco 2012) identifies an action to work with the Franklin County Irrigation District to provide public access on this property. ECOLOGICAL CONDITIONS Water Quantity and Sediment: No local water quantity or sediment inputs are noted in this reach. Sediment may aggrade in this reach from Yakima River input reaching the Lake Wallula pool,which may cause reduced velocities, although this predominately occurs on the right bank of the Columbia River. Water Quality: Minor inputs from residential runoff and boat traffic may slightly impact this reach. This reach is also likely in the mixing zone of the confluence between the Columbia River and Yakima River, so water quality may be impacted from Yakima River input. Habitat Characteristics and PHS Presence: This reach contains 21 overwater docks and ramps located in low density residential area. Landscaped vegetation extends to the river in most cases, and most yards have terracing and/or vertical bulkheads. Most residential land parcels within this reach have at least one row of trees adjacent to the water. Because of the residential nature of this reach, undeveloped areas do not exist in the uplands; therefore,wildlife habitat is limited and connectivity is low between the river and upland habitat areas. ESA-listed and resident fish species are expected to be present in the river. ECOLOGICAL FUNCTIONS ANALYSIS Level of Existing Function: Partially Functioning Stressors: Upland development: Single family residences with irrigated landscaping, fairly limited riparian buffers (though most parcels have at least a small area with a vegetative buffer), overwater structure docks for many parcels. Draft Inventory,Analysis, and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update A-7 131050-01.01 Appendix A City of Pasco Reach Characterization Tables and Reach Maps Reach 2 City of Pasco Potential Restoration Opportunities: Consider incentives for homeowners to convert irrigated turf to native plant species. Potential Protection Opportunities: Protect existing riparian areas. Provide stormwater controls consistent with Eastern Washington Stormwater Manual. Draft Inventory,Analysis, and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update A-8 131050-01.01 Appendix A City of Pasco Reach Characterization Tables and Reach Maps Reach 3 City of Pasco Reach Description: Columbia River from the upstream end of Chiawana Park to the edge of the hardened bank Shoreline Jurisdiction: 382 acres �W Source:https:H fortress.wa.gov/ecy/coastalatlas/UlCoastalAtlas/Tools/ShorePhotos.aspx Subreaches;see Map 2: SR 3a: Begins at the upstream end of Chiawana Park extending east to near Road 84 SR 3b: Extends 0.8 mile to the east ending at the edge of the hardened bank CHARACTERISTICS Ownership: Reach 3 is mostly owned by US Army Corps of Engineers with a very small amount (less than 5%) of private ownership. Land Use/Current SMP: Land use designation: • Current land uses are Low Density Residential and Open Space Nature • Zoning—Residential Suburban (RS-20) Current SMP Environment Designation: Urban Existing Land Cover/Development: Reach 3 predominantly consists of riparian vegetation,vacant land, park land (Chiawana Park) along with trail, parking, pier, and boat launch facilities. Geomorphic Character: Description:The shoreline throughout the reach consists of outburst flood deposits with relatively low banks. Draft Inventory,Analysis, and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update A-9 131050-01.01 Appendix A City of Pasco Reach Characterization Tables and Reach Maps Reach 3 City of Pasco Hardened Banks: Hardened bank exists at the Chiawana Park boat dock. Flooding and Geological Hazards: Flooding: Flooding is controlled by Lake Wallula pool elevations. Geological Hazards:There are no geologic hazard areas in Reach 3. Existing Public Access: Reach 3 has public access along Chiawana Park. The Sacajawea Heritage Trail parallels the shoreline in this reach. The park contains public access amenities such as a boat launch and pier. Identified Public Access Improvements: The Rivershore Linkage and Amenity Plan (Pasco 2012) identifies improvement of park amenities and adding a second boat launch and a beach along the park. The Plan also recommends improving the trail amenities by adding park areas at the termini of Roads 76 and 84 and developing the USACE area as an extension of Chiawana Park. ECOLOGICAL CONDITIONS Water Quantity and Sediment: A minor drainage ditch appears to be a minor input to SR 3a. No known local sediment inputs are noted. Water Quality: Water quality in this reach may be slightly impacted by residential and recreational (boating) use. Habitat Characteristics and PHS Presence: Reach 3 is primarily characterized by a park-like environment,with public use areas along the shoreline for the entirety of the reach. While shoreline vegetation is rather limited, open and undeveloped areas are present within several hundred feet of the shore, which may support limited numbers of upland mammal and bird species, and provide access from the upland areas to the shoreline. ESA-listed and resident fish species are present in the river. SR 3a:This subreach almost entirely comprises Chiawana Park, which exhibits riparian vegetation of several hundred feet in width at the northern end of the subreach. Otherwise, mowed areas extend to the water's edge. The park has landscaped areas and picnic pavilions throughout the upland area. There is one dock present in this subreach, an 80-foot-long,T-shaped structure associated with the park. There is also a dredged inlet serving as a public boat launch at the southern end of this subreach. SR 3b: Low-density residential areas characterize this subreach with lawns that end about 275 feet short of the shoreline. The remaining area near the shoreline contains unvegetated areas with a multi-use recreational trail. Sparse trees in patchy zones are along the water's edge. These areas are identified as habitat for Townsend's ground squirrel and burrowing owl. Draft Inventory,Analysis, and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update A-10 131050-01.01 Appendix A City of Pasco Reach Characterization Tables and Reach Maps Reach 3 City of Pasco ECOLOGICAL FUNCTIONS ANALYSIS SR 3a Level of Existing Function: Partially Functioning Stressors: Upland development: Park development, including parking areas and buildings, irrigated turf landscaping, limited riparian buffer throughout park. Recreational use: Boat launch, overwater structures, shoreline trail associated with Chiawana Park. Potential Restoration Opportunities: Riparian buffer restoration within park. Potential Protection Opportunities: Protect intact shrub-steppe habitat. Provide stormwater controls consistent with Eastern Washington Stormwater Manual. SR 3b Level of Existing Function: Partially Functioning Stressors: Upland development: Bulkhead area and access road in central portion of subreach, some non-native species (Russian-olive) within riparian buffer. Recreational use: Multiple informal upland trails to water connected to formal paved trail at top of slope. Potential Restoration Opportunities: Replace non-native species with native alternatives. Formalize water access trails to discourage new informal access trails. Potential Protection Opportunities: Protect intact shrub-steppe and riparian habitat. Provide stormwater controls consistent with Eastern Washington Stormwater Manual. Draft Inventory,Analysis, and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update A-11 131050-01.01 Appendix A City of Pasco Reach Characterization Tables and Reach Maps Reach 4 City of Pasco Reach Description: Columbia River from the upstream edge of hardened bank to the downstream end of Wade Park Shoreline Jurisdiction:463 acres { . 1_ > R it Source:https:H fortress.wa.gov/ecy/coastalatlas/UlcoastalAtlas/Tools/ShorePhotos.aspx Subreaches;see Map 2: SR 4a: Begins at the upstream edge of hardened bank to the downstream end of hardened bank SR 4b: Extending 1 mile to east ending at the downstream edge of Wade Park CHARACTERISTICS Ownership: Reach 4 is mostly owned by USACE with a very small amount (less than 5%) of private ownership. Land Use/Current SMP: Land use designation: • Current land uses are Low Density Residential and Open Space Nature • Zoning—Suburban District (RS-12), Suburban District (RS-20) and Suburban District (RS-1) Current SMP Environment Designation: Urban Existing Land Cover/Development: There is a levee along the entire stretch of SR 4a and parkland along the entire stretch of SR 4b. SR 4a groundcover consists mostly of riprap with a trail on top of the levee and some riparian vegetation. SR 4b groundcover consists of improved parkland (Wade Park)with a boat launch, piers, a trail, and gravel parking. Draft Inventory,Analysis, and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update A-12 131050-01.01 Appendix A City of Pasco Reach Characterization Tables and Reach Maps Reach 4 City of Pasco Geomorphic Character: Description:The shoreline throughout the reach consists of outburst flood deposits (SR 4a) and alluvium (SR 4b) with relatively low banks. Hardened Banks:Approximately 6,000 feet of artificial hardened banks exist along the Columbia River (left bank) and occur along the entire length of SR 4a. Flooding and Geological Hazards: Flooding: Flooding is controlled by Lake Wallula pool levels. Levees are present along SR 4a that reduce flooding potential. Geological Hazards:There are no geologic hazard areas in Reach 4. Existing Public Access: Reach 4 consists of the Sacajawea Heritage Trail on top of the levee and Wade Park. Access points to the trail are limited due to the drainage ditch behind the levee. Wade Park consists of a boat launch, piers, a trail, and gravel parking. Identified Public Access Improvements: The Rivershore Linkage and Amenity Plan (Pasco 2012 ) recommends adding amenities to the park, lowering the levee,creating beach area,and creating parks with boats or access points along Roads 60 and 68. ECOLOGICAL CONDITIONS Water Quantity and Sediment: A pump connected to a drainage ditch may locally impact water quantity in SR 4a. Sediment may be impacted by levees in subreach 4a as the hardened banks may cause higher velocities,which may result in more sediment movement, and cause potential aggradation in SR 4b downstream of the levees. Water Quality: Water quality may be slightly impacted from residential runoff and recreational use in this reach. Habitat Characteristics and PHS Presence: Reach 4 contains park and multi-use path shorelines adjacent to moderate residential development, offering undeveloped areas, but not a great deal of habitat. The shores are managed for the main use and recreational enjoyment. Fish and wildlife habitat is limited. SR 4a: Banks of this subreach are rocky, contain little to no vegetation, and are within 40 to 50 feet of the multi-use trail that lines the shore. There is a linear ditch that parallels the trail for the length of the subreach. Wetlands and waterfowl concentrations are found just offshore on the small channel islands. There are no docks in this subreach. SR 4b:This subreach contains three smaller docks and one larger dock at the western end of the subreach, all within the waterfront of Wade Park. The park exhibits mowed grass to the water's edge and shoreline vegetation is absent except for several sparse trees. As such, wildlife habitat is limited in this subreach. Draft Inventory,Analysis, and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update A-13 131050-01.01 Appendix A City of Pasco Reach Characterization Tables and Reach Maps Reach 4 City of Pasco ECOLOGICAL FUNCTIONS ANALYSIS SR 4a Level of Existing Function: Impaired Stressors: Upland development: Armored levee, single family residential, and irrigated agriculture upland of levee. Recreational use: Paved trail/maintenance road at top of levee. Potential Restoration Opportunities: Consider incorporating wood structure and vegetation where possible. Potential Protection Opportunities:Provide stormwater controls consistent with Eastern Washington Stormwater Manual. SR 4b Level of Existing Function: Partially Functioning Stressors: Upland development: Bulkhead area at north end of subreach, minimal riparian buffers, irrigated turf within Wade Park. Recreational use: Overwater structures and boat launch with informal parking associated with Wade Park. Potential Restoration Opportunities: Riparian buffer restoration within park. Potential Protection Opportunities:Provide stormwater controls consistent with Eastern Washington Stormwater Manual. Draft Inventory,Analysis, and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update A-14 131050-01.01 Appendix A City of Pasco Reach Characterization Tables and Reach Maps Reach 5 City of Pasco Reach Description: Columbia River from the edge of hardened bank upstream of US 395 (Blue Bridge) to State Route 397 bridge (Cable Bridge) Shoreline Jurisdiction: 195 acres ��r' •r.•+r`�., ,�; v_ 4 01"K°'^��ar�� ys�I``'� Y' �`�i�'M'ta•" �,r-_�` .. AS ' iF '4 rz.s' A I�•� 1' 1. Source:https:H fortress.wa.gov/ecy/coastalatlas/UlcoastalAtlas/Tools/ShorePhotos.aspx Subreaches;see Map 3: SR 5a: Begins at the edge of hardened bank to the US 395 bridge SR 5b: Extending 0.9 mile to the east to the upstream edge of water retention facility SR 5c: Extending 0.4 mile to the east to the downstream end of retention facility SR 5d: Extending 0.4 mile to the east to the State Route 397 bridge CHARACTERISTICS Ownership: Reach 5 is mostly owned by USACE, City of Pasco, and Washington Department of Transportation. There is a very small amount (less than 5%) of private ownership. Land Use/Current SMP: Land use designation: • Current land uses are Open Space Nature, Low Density Residential, Mixed Residential, Mixed Residential Commercial, Commercial, and Industrial • Zoning—Low Density Residential (R-1), Residential Suburban (RS-12), Residential Suburban (RS-20), Residential Park(RP) and Light Industrial (1-1) Current SMP Environment Designation: Urban Draft Inventory,Analysis, and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update A-15 131050-01.01 Appendix A City of Pasco Reach Characterization Tables and Reach Maps Reach 5 City of Pasco Existing Land Cover/Development: Reach 5 is primarily consists of a levee, riprap, a drainage ditch behind the levee, and a trail on top of the levee. There is riparian vegetation, parking, and a park facilities structure on SR 5c. A rail line on SR 5d is near the Blue Bridge. Geomorphic Character: Description:The shoreline throughout the reach consists of alluvium with relatively low banks through urban development area. Hardened Banks:Approximately 10,500 linear feet of artificial hardened banks exist along the Columbia River (left bank). Flooding and Geological Hazards: Flooding: Flooding is controlled by Lake Wallula pool levels. Levees are present along the reach,which reduce flooding potential. Geological Hazards:There are no geologic hazard areas in Reach 5. Existing Public Access: Reach 5 contains the Sacajawea Heritage Trail and Riverview Park. Similar to Reach 4, access points to the trail are limited due to the levee and drainage ditch behind the levee. Identified Public Access Improvements: The Rivershore Linkage and Amenity Plan (Pasco 2012 ) recommends improving the open space area near W. Haystad Street, adding beach area at the Wade Park entrance and south of the Riverview Park, adding a multi-use path over the Blue Bridge, developing the levee, and improving access from the levee to the river. ECOLOGICAL CONDITIONS Water Quantity and Sediment: Pumps connected to a drainage ditch (all subreaches)and a connected pond (in SR 5c) may locally impact water quantity. Sediment may be impacted by levees as the hardened banks may cause higher velocities, which may result in more sediment movement. Water Quality: Water quality may be slightly impacted from residential runoff and recreational use in this reach. Habitat Characteristics and PHS Presence: Reach 5 shorelines include park areas and multi-use paths, with mixed development ranging from residential to light industrial areas. There is little habitat for wildlife along the shoreline, and the habitat function of the nearshore river area is limited due to the lack of riparian vegetation along the shoreline. No PHS are noted within this reach, except for ESA-listed and resident fish in the river. SR Sa: Similar to SR 4a (in Reach 4),the banks of this subreach are rocky, contain little to no vegetation Draft Inventory,Analysis, and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update A-16 131050-01.01 Appendix A City of Pasco Reach Characterization Tables and Reach Maps Reach 5 City of Pasco and are within 40 to 50 feet of the multi-use trail that lines the shore. There is a linear ditch that parallels the trail for the length of the subreach. There are no docks within this subreach. Wildlife habitat is limited here due to the level of development. SR 5b: Similar to SR 5a,the banks of this subreach are rocky, contain little to no vegetation, and are within 40 to 50 feet of the multi-use trail that lines the shore. There is a linear ditch just landward of the trail that parallels the trail for the length of this subreach. There are no docks within this subreach. There is a shoreline park at the street end at South 25th Avenue where patchy shrubs occur. This subreach has limited habitat function for wildlife or aquatic species. SR 5c:The Pasco Youth Baseball Complex is adjacent to this subreach, and Riverview Park sits along the water. This subreach has shorelines similar to SR 5b, with rocky unvegetated shorelines, a multi-use path within 40 to 50 feet of the shore, and a linear ditch present. Riverview Park is directly east of an open-water pond approximately 1,000 feet in length that connects to the ditch on the pond's western end. The pond is not connected to the river, but does contain emergent vegetation and trees for upland wildlife habitat. SR 5d: Similar to SR 5a in this reach, the banks of this subreach are rocky, contain little to no vegetation, and are within 40 to 50 feet of the multi-use trail that lines the shore. There are no docks within this subreach but there is one small structure just west of the Cable Bridge across the Columbia River on the eastern end of SR 5d. Riparian habitat is limited in this subreach due to development and encroachment by the trail and highway, and this also affects the function of the nearshore aquatic habitat for fish species. ECOLOGICAL FUNCTIONS ANALYSIS SR 5a Level of Existing Function: Impaired Stressors: Upland development: Armored levee, residential and vacant lots upland of levee, substantial non-native species (Russian-olive) within vacant lot, Blue Bridge. Recreational use: Paved trail/maintenance road at top of levee. Potential Restoration Opportunities:Consider incorporating wood structure and vegetation where possible. Potential Protection Opportunities:Provide stormwater controls consistent with Eastern Washington Stormwater Manual. SR 5b Level of Existing Function: Impaired Stressors: Upland development: Armored levee, behind levee is a residential area at north end of subreach and industrial and vacant lands in southern portion. Recreational use: Paved trail/maintenance road at top of levee. Potential Restoration Opportunities: Consider incorporating wood structure and vegetation where Draft Inventory,Analysis, and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update A-17 131050-01.01 Appendix A City of Pasco Reach Characterization Tables and Reach Maps Reach 5 City of Pasco possible. Potential Protection Opportunities: Provide stormwater controls consistent with Eastern Washington Stormwater Manual. SR 5c Level of Existing Function: Impaired Stressors: Upland development: Armored levee, stormwater treatment basin landward of levee, substantial non-native species (Russian-olive) surrounding basin. Recreational use: Paved trail/maintenance road at top of levee. Potential Restoration Opportunities: Consider incorporating wood structure and vegetation where possible. Potential Protection Opportunities: Provide stormwater controls consistent with Eastern Washington Stormwater Manual. SR 5d Level of Existing Function: Partially Functioning Stressors: Upland development: Armored levee, Pasco Youth Baseball Complex and associated landscaping upland of levee, and infrastructure (water intake) at south end of this subreach. Recreational use: Paved trail/maintenance road at top of levee. Potential Restoration Opportunities: Consider incorporating wood structure and vegetation where possible. Potential Protection Opportunities: Protect intact shrub-steppe habitat upland of levee. Provide stormwater controls consistent with Eastern Washington Stormwater Manual. Draft Inventory,Analysis, and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update A-I8 131050-01.01 Appendix A City of Pasco Reach Characterization Tables and Reach Maps Reach 6 City of Pasco Reach Description: Columbia River from State Route 397 (Cable) bridge to the upstream edge of Sacajawea State Park Shoreline Jurisdiction: 744 acres Milli; r 1 - 5�4�1 IIII,, Source:https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/coastalatlas/UlCoastalAtlas/Tools/ShorePhotos.aspx Subreaches;see Map 3: SR 6a: Begins at the Cable Bridge to the railroad bridge upstream of Schlagel Park SR 6b: From the railroad bridge to the end of marina facility/breakwater SR 6c: From the edge of marina facility/breakwater to the upstream edge of Sacajawea State Park CHARACTERISTICS Ownership: Reach 6 is entirely owned by Port of Pasco, with an exception of SR 6b. The Boat Basin in SR 6b is owned by USACE. Land Use/Current SMP: Land use designation: • Current land uses are Industrial and Open Space Nature • Zoning—Light Industrial (1-1), Heavy Industrial (1-3), Medium Density Residential (R-2) and Medium Density Residential (R-3) Draft Inventory,Analysis, and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update A-19 131050-01.01 Appendix A City of Pasco Reach Characterization Tables and Reach Maps Reach 6 City of Pasco Current SMP Environment Designation: Urban Existing Land Cover/Development: Reach 6 consists of a mix of riprap, riparian vegetation, a trail, a marina, residential structures, warehouses, parking, unimproved vacant land, and industrial land. SR 6a is mostly riprap that includes a barge dock. SR 397 crosses the shoreline on SR 6a. SR 6b has riparian vegetation around the marina and Schlagel Park. Industrial land cover dominates SR 6c. There is riparian vegetation on the edge of the shoreline in SR 6b and 6c. Geomorphic Character: Description:The shoreline throughout the reach consists of alluvium with relatively low banks through a developed area. Hardened Banks:Approximately 6,500 linear feet of artificial hardened banks exist along the Columbia River(left bank)within all the subreaches. Flooding and Geological Hazards: Flooding: Flooding is controlled by Lake Wallula pool levels. Levees are present along SR 6a, which reduce flooding potential. Geological Hazards:There are no geologic hazard areas in Reach 6. Existing Public Access: Sacajawea Heritage Trail parallels part of the shoreline in Reach 6 and shifts away from the shoreline in SR 6c. Schlagel Park area includes boat marina and related facilities. The Port of Pasco property in SR 6c does not include any major public access. Identified Public Access Improvements: The Port of Pasco Boat Basin/Marine Terminal Master Plan proposes improvements to the marina, and the addition of public beach,viewpoints, and a marina park. In addition to the Boat Basin Plan/Marine Terminal Master,the Rivershore Linkage and Amenities Plan (Pasco 2012) recommends development of water enjoyment facilities (e.g., dining) along the shoreline, improvement of trail connection between the boat basin and Pasco's urban center, and building a Sacajawea Trail underpass through the Schlagel Park boat basin neighborhood. The plan recommends building a shoreline park between the boat basin and Osprey Point. The Port of Pasco Osprey Pointe Business Park Plan indicates trail connections along the shoreline. ECOLOGICAL CONDITIONS Water Quantity and Sediment: No local impacts to water quantity are noted in this reach. Sediment may be impacted by levees as the hardened banks may cause higher velocities,which may result in more sediment movement in SR 6a and may cause aggradation in SR 6b where the levees end and velocities may slow. Draft Inventory,Analysis, and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update A-20 131050-01.01 Appendix A City of Pasco Reach Characterization Tables and Reach Maps Reach 6 City of Pasco Water Quality: Water quality may be impacted by industrial activities in SRs 6a and 6c and recreational activities throughout the reach. A boating area in SR 6b may have the potential for impacting water quality. Habitat Characteristics and PHS Presence: The shorelines of Reach 6 are generally armored and landscaped and offer little wildlife habitat, except for pockets of shallow water and riparian vegetation that appear near Cascade Marina and Sacajawea State Park. The reach is generally industrialized and landscaped for human use. ESA-listed and resident fish species occur within the Columbia River in this reach. SR A: Shorelines in this subreach are armored with riprap and contain overwater structures and several sets of piles, as well as a railroad bridge at the eastern end of this subreach. Riparian vegetation is absent, as access roads, parking lots, and the multi-use trail wind through the adjacent shoreline of the properties. Fish and wildlife habitat function is limited by this development. SR B:This subreach contains the Cascade Marina and Schlagel Park,which exhibit mostly armored shorelines with a thin strip of riparian tree vegetation around the perimeter of the marina embayment. The embayment has two large boat houses and one long dock with boat slips. Open water habitat is available for waterfowl and other birds, and quiet shallow water provides refugia for juvenile fish. SR C:The western third of this subreach, which contains the Port of Pasco building and property, has mowed landscaped areas along the water, as well as the multi-use trail 30 to 50 feet from the shore. Sparse vegetation grows in this area. The eastern two-thirds is industrialized in the uplands and has bare ground within 30 to 150 feet of the shore, but the immediate shoreline contains a sizeable riparian buffer with shrubs and trees next to the water for wildlife use. Nearing Sacajawea State Park on the eastern end of this subreach, waterfowl concentrations occur, and habitat begins to appear that could be potentially suitable for sage grouse and burrowing owl. There is one small dock at the end of Southeast Road 27. ECOLOGICAL FUNCTIONS ANALYSIS SR 6a Level of Existing Function: Impaired Stressors: Upland development: Armored levee, industrial development upland of levee, bridge for Highway 397 and railroad bridge,fill area waterward of levee alignment with warehouse structures and wooden overwater structures, mooring dolphins, and rock armoring with a small area of sheetpile armoring. Potential Restoration Opportunities: Consider incorporating wood structure and vegetation where possible. Replace creosote dock and dolphin material with material that has less water quality implications. Potential Protection Opportunities:Provide stormwater controls consistent with Eastern Washington Stormwater Manual. Draft Inventory,Analysis, and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update A-21 131050-01.01 Appendix A City of Pasco Reach Characterization Tables and Reach Maps Reach 6 City of Pasco SR 6b Level of Existing Function: Partially Functioning Stressors: Upland development: Breakwater structures, marina in central portion of subreach with covered and uncovered moorage, armored shoreline and upland parking lot, single family residential development in southern portion of subreach, shared dock. Recreational use:Trails along breakwater structures, boat ramp, and associated dock at Schlagel Park. Potential Restoration Opportunities: Incorporate riparian buffers where absent. Offer incentives for low-impact development stormwater measures. Potential Protection Opportunities: Protect existing riparian areas within park, near residential areas, and along breakwater structures. Provide stormwater controls consistent with Eastern Washington Stormwater Manual. SR 6c Level of Existing Function: Partially Functioning Stressors: Upland development: Vegetated riparian area with areas of mowed turf adjacent to Osprey Point,with undeveloped, non-native vegetated upland in this same vicinity. Southern portion of subreach includes industrial port development hard banks in moorage areas and elsewhere intact riparian buffers. Recreational use: Paved trail/maintenance road at top of levee, unpaved roads waterward of E. Commerce Street at south end of subreach. Potential Restoration Opportunities: Consider more riparian buffer areas within industrial complex. Potential Protection Opportunities: Preserve existing riparian vegetation and if possible do not mow these woody species. Provide stormwater controls consistent with Eastern Washington Stormwater Manual. Draft Inventory,Analysis, and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update A-22 131050-01.01 Appendix A City of Pasco Reach Characterization Tables and Reach Maps Reach 7 City of Pasco Reach Description: Columbia River from the upstream edge of Sacajawea State Park to Snake River just east of the Sacajawea State Park boat basin Shoreline Jurisdiction: 295 acres t k5- _ .sue T F Source:https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/coastalatlas/UlCoastalAtlas/Tools/ShorePhotos.aspx Subreaches;see Map 4: Not Applicable. CHARACTERISTICS Ownership: Reach 7 is owned by Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission. Land Use/Current SMP: Land use designation: • Current land use is Industrial and Open Space Nature • Zoning—Medium Industrial (1-2), and Heavy Industrial (1-3) Current SMP Environment Designation: Conservancy Existing Land Cover/Development: This reach primarily consists of riparian vegetation in the Sacajawea State Park. There is also a boat launch, dock, a beach, and utility poles within this reach. Geomorphic Character: Description: Reach 7 consists of a topographic low area at the confluence of the Columbia River and Snake River. The shoreline throughout the reach consists of alluvium with relatively low banks throughout Sacajawea State Park. Draft Inventory,Analysis, and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update A-23 131050-01.01 Appendix A City of Pasco Reach Characterization Tables and Reach Maps Reach 7 City of Pasco Hardened Banks:Approximately 100 feet of hardened banks exist along the reach extent associated with the State Park basin boat launch. Flooding and Geological Hazards: Flooding: Flooding is controlled by Lake Wallula pool levels. Sacajawea State Park in this reach is within the 100-year floodplain. Geological Hazards:There are no geologic hazard areas in Reach 7. Existing Public Access: Reach 7 consists of Sacajawea State Park at the confluence of the Snake and Columbia Rivers. This park has historic value regarding the Lewis and Clark Expedition and contains a museum and interpretive center. The park includes boat launch, dock, campsite, and beach area. Identified Public Access Improvements: The Rivershore Linkage and Amenities Plan (Pasco 2012) identifies adding camping facilities and educational opportunities to Sacajawea State Park, and extending the Sacajawea Heritage Trail toward the Columbia Plateau/Ice Harbor Dam trail linkage. ECOLOGICAL CONDITIONS Water Quantity and Sediment: No local impacts to water quantity or sediment are identified. Water Quality: Water quality in this reach may be impacted by recreational use. Wetlands part of Sacajawea State Park may also have a slight impact on water quality in this reach. Habitat Characteristics and PHS Presence: Reach 7 entirely contains Sacajawea State Park, which occurs at the confluence of the Snake and Columbia Rivers. The park has relatively large expanses of undeveloped or restored shoreline with landscaped or natural trees and pockets of off-channel shallow water habitat. The upland portion of the park contains shrub-steppe habitat for upland wildlife species. There is also one armored embayment with a dock and boat launch along the Snake River side of the park. ESA-listed fish species use both rivers for migration and rearing habitat. Compared to adjacent reaches,this reach provides enhanced nearshore aquatic habitat rearing and migratory functions as a result of the intact riparian habitat, characterized by multiple species of native plants, trees, and shrubs. ECOLOGICAL FUNCTIONS ANALYSIS Level of Existing Function: Partially Functioning Stressors Upland development: Park development including five overwater structures, a boat launch, a swim beach, upland turf areas. Overall contains substantial riparian buffer areas, outside of park within upland areas non-native Russian-olive species. Draft Inventory,Analysis, and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update A-24 131050-01.01 Appendix A City of Pasco Reach Characterization Tables and Reach Maps Reach 7 City of Pasco Recreational use: Upland trails, water access, boat use. Potential Restoration Opportunities: Consider incorporating more riparian buffer plantings near the boat launch area at northeast side of subreach. Replace non-native species with native alternatives. Potential Protection Opportunities: Preserve existing riparian and shrub-steppe habitat. Provide stormwater controls consistent with Eastern Washington Stormwater Manual. Draft Inventory,Analysis, and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update A-25 131050-01.01 Appendix A City of Pasco Reach Characterization Tables and Reach Maps Reach 8 City of Pasco Reach Description: Snake River just upstream of confluence with Columbia River, extending from City UGA eastern boundary to near Sacajawea State Park Shoreline Jurisdiction: 260 acres —- - r Source:https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/coastalatlas/UlCoastalAtlas/Tools/ShorePhotos.aspx Subreaches;see Map 4: SR 8a: Begins at Sacajawea Sate Park to the edge of industrial developments SR 8b: Extends 0.5 mile to the north ending at the US 12 bridge CHARACTERISTICS Ownership:SR 8a is owned by Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission and federal government. SR 8b is mostly private with a small amount (less than 10%) of federal ownership. Land Use/Current SMP: Land use designation: • Current land uses are Industrial and Open Space Nature • Zoning—Light Industrial (1-1), Medium Industrial (1-2), and Heavy Industrial (1-3) Current SMP Environment Designation: Urban Existing Land Cover/Development: SR 8a is mostly unimproved natural land with riparian vegetation. SR 8a includes a rail crossing. SR 8b includes State Route 12 crossing, a fuel storage tank, and barge facilities. Geomorphic Character: Description:The shoreline in this reach consists mostly of outburst flood deposits. The reach consists of low bank areas near the confluence with the Columbia River. Lake Wallula levels fluctuate with downstream dam management practices. Hardened Banks:Approximately 7,200 linear feet of artificial hardened banks exist along the Columbia River(left bank) within all the subreaches. Draft Inventory,Analysis, and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update A-26 131050-01.01 Appendix A City of Pasco Reach Characterization Tables and Reach Maps Reach 8 City of Pasco Flooding and Geological Hazards: Flooding: Flooding is controlled by Lake Wallula pool levels. Sacajawea State Park in SR 8a is located in the 100-year floodplain. Geological Hazards:SR 8b contains slopes that are greater than 15% underlain by alluvium,which make them designated landslide hazard areas. Existing Public Access: Reach 8 does not have public access. SR 8a is primarily unimproved and SR 8b is developed with industrial/barge facilities. Identified Public Access Improvements: The Rivershore Linkage and Amenities Plan (Pasco 2012) recommends planning and designing a Sacajawea Heritage Trail extension through the Ainsworth Town site (SR 8a), improving amenities, developing Town of Ainsworth archaeology site, and adding a pedestrian bridge to the side of the Burlington Northern Santa Fe bridge if feasible. Public Access Opportunities: ECOLOGICAL CONDITIONS Water Quantity and Sediment: Irrigation pumps in SR 8b may have a slight impact on water quantity. Agricultural runoff may cause slight sediment input. Water Quality: Water quality may be slightly impacted by agricultural and industrial runoff within the reach. Habitat Characteristics and PHS Presence: This reach is adjacent to industrial facilities and artificially hardened shorelines, including a railroad next to the water and numerous overwater structures. There are artificially hardened shorelines along the entire reach, which significantly reduce the function of the riparian zone. SR 8a:This subreach contains barge moorage area and overwater structures,which artificially shade the water in the river. Habitat is limited to open water areas of the Snake River that provide habitat for ESA-listed and resident fish species, as well as areas for waterfowl concentrations. Greater sage grouse breeding habitat occurs in the upland shrub-steppe areas flanking the shoreline of this subreach. SR 8b:This subreach contains the US 12 bridge,which creates artificially shaded overwater cover. Similar to SR 1a, habitat is limited to open water areas of the Snake River that provide habitat for ESA-listed and resident fish species, as well as areas for waterfowl concentrations. There is also greater sage grouse breeding habitat in the upland shrub-steppe areas flanking the shoreline of this subreach. Draft Inventory,Analysis, and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update A-27 131050-01.01 Appendix A City of Pasco Reach Characterization Tables and Reach Maps Reach 8 City of Pasco ECOLOGICAL FUNCTIONS ANALYSIS SR 8a Level of Existing Function: Partially Functioning Stressors: Upland development: Non-native riparian species (Russian-olive), railroad corridor and railroad bridge. Potential Restoration Opportunities: Replace non-native species with native alternative. Potential Protection Opportunities: Provide stormwater controls consistent with Eastern Washington Stormwater Manual. SR 8b Level of Existing Function: Impaired Stressors: Upland development: Railroad corridor along shoreline, industrial structures and Port development and vessel use,very limited riparian buffers and non-native Russian-olive species where riparian buffer exists, US 12 bridge. Recreational use: Informal roads and possibly off-road vehicle recreation use within upland areas. Potential Restoration Opportunities: Incorporate riparian buffers where absent. Replace non-native species with native alternatives. Potential Protection Opportunities: Protect intact shrub-steppe habitat from degradation by limiting recreation use. Provide stormwater controls consistent with Eastern Washington Stormwater Manual. Draft Inventory,Analysis, and Characterization Report March 2014 City of Pasco SMP Update A-28 131050-01.01 APPENDIX B MAP FOLIO I it - Q Han Yak C ulnty Upper Col,`mbia-Priest Rapids so E s a z Pasco I Lower I C I4, Franklinr, Snake 84 I � ° Lower l 1. N I Snake M Yakima Benton ( ' River o d nF- j U! County � Tr - E ► SunnysHe ;`Wes ( i o �•,:-,' •,, Rich land l Bentori Richland 0 Grandview ® Island ` Mabton � View West �! ° ,Prosser er g Pasco Bad ' .l<erinewick Burbank - } ° Finley s "® • Highland i•'= *'' Walla ° "�y� , Walla o LEGEND d 3e Wallula f s Wall`- • Populated Place t . Garrett Walla' y County Seat MiddleTouchet ` » CL Interstates Columbia-Lake • College � Wallula Washington -------_--- ° O Incorporated City of Pasco CL Urban Growth Area �; „� ' Oreg,On' Umapine Franklin County Boundary ; - ilton Fre Paterson Plymouth Other County Boundary Umatilla - q Q State Boundary r .6 Irrigon NOTES: ' rn# °• Umatilla 1.This information is to be used for planning purposes only. Data are Hydrologic Unit �- displayed as is and without any guarantee of accuracy or completeness. 2.Aerial image courtesy of USDA NAIP(2013). SMA Jurisdiction HermlSton 3.Hydrologic unit data acquired from USGS and NRCS. • a - DRAFT Map 1 ANCHOR Miles Regional Context OEA `'" '" 0 10 20 City of Pasco Shoreline Master Program ��-' City of Pasco, WA 1A. 41F V LEGEND :_- ' 4 ° +� Reach Break Incorporated City of Pasco �, r • - Urban Growth Area 'r �. � ►. �__j County Boundary SMA Jurisdiction . 4 v, # fi ` ; `, Ordinary High Water Mark NWI Wetland m .`r' t f :•N fit. .., - Fy k �l�a_t- rr� r *�rxf '� ".- 100-year Floodplain f i .2 Pasco" Pr �A ���,'•fi; � '��t ��z ��" �r�� �,"�� �•- , �� 500-year Floodplain o �dP°06 NOTES: L�� '► d� 1.This information is to be used for Y 'ca�PO planning purposes only. Data is o;= - r a4- displayed as is and without any guarantee of accuracy or N"�ry=e' completeness. 2.Aerial image courtesy of USDA NAIP o - �` 1 ?� (2013). 3. NWI data acquired from USFWS. 4. Floodway and floodplain data rt �4 - Vacquired from FEMA. �U) {y ., '� iGg� : i}�4w. �► ',m _ l "w ` `kr pia- Franklin o r _ 'TU + -' County UFFir�s :_ vR& S! i1" r.. 4 �. P, SCo 5�' - °osd' � Bent Walla Wount C my N L YR y �- 3' dra . DRAFT Map 2a ANCHOR Miles Shoreline Jurisdiction and Reach Breaks OEA 0 1 2 City of Pasco Shoreline Master Program �v City of Pasco, WA LEGEND o - Reach Break M 0 Incorporated City of Pasco Urban Growth Area L__j County Boundary 0 SMA Jurisdiction Ordinary High Water Mark E NWI Wetland Y 'W �\7 FEMA Floodway m h 100-year Floodplain 0 500-year Floodplain _ t a. — a.i.- e• � _mil' FD MT � � ,4`i � .x t .�^, .i `s4`.� ` aC-:x;'a��.#• ' yl ll� iig' o . �..._ .: '" NOTES: ° {_~ jl+ a+.Pasco r 1.This information is to be used for _ �{" planning purposes only. Data is tr, *' i displayed as is and without any guarantee of accuracy or Z completeness. .-��� 2.Aerial image courtesy of USDA NAIP os .s;. ��, ► I _ _ 5°te`N , .v (2013). 3. NWI data acquired from USFWS. 4. Floodway and floodplain data N I.Y iii acquired from FEMA. t' cn 9 Franklin F — Count CL C3 0 d ,•'{ i'i-r. Ll x 4 '!. f 4-. s �d „ r r i ` Benton Wall S s � ti ' 3 44 s County W II NILY 7 11 till• s E•1R ,y�'`�"' r �, F �� a F'��v - _'" - t r' M -. I I - I DRAFT Map 2b ANCHOR Miles Shoreline Jurisdiction and Reach Breaks OEA 0 0 1 2 City of Pasco Shoreline Master Program �v City of Pasco, WA I I LEGEND I Reach Break a / • Populated Place County Seat Interstates o T8 N - N .r Main County Road o " lli t Railroad:Active e • ► Main Waterway Lateral Canal — - Open Drain •� Wasteway � Incorporated City of Pasco r ` Urban Growth Area County Boundary SMA Jurisdiction Ordinary High Water Mark I. Island g ^ View _ NOTES: 1.This information is to be used for planning O Lai purposes only. Data are displayed as is and 6 Wal without any guarantee of accuracy or �. completeness. 2.Aerial image courtesy of USDA NAIP(2013). m :.r... 3.Canal waterway,wastewa X and open drain data acquired from Franklin County. s� �.•- i Grant o Franklin b of 44,L `rtA „��.�. Walla "�V. st` r Lyra _x %�"'r _ Walla 1Pr Benton o •” I t` 3.. t}� t;� + u»c'' _ .��'4 - '� Lake Wallula 82 Washington ego o DRAFT Map 3 ANCHOR Miles Transportation and Utilities OEA 0 0 2 4 City of Pasco Shoreline Master Program �v City of Pasco, WA 6olumbla ''° LEGEND _ u Lake �' �• Wallula• A + �� Reach Break I , IL ,.'.�' • Populated Place County Seat �. � � � • p •� Interstates f c � Incorporated City of Pasco Urban Growth Area C f'. O I-- County Boundary SMA Jurisdiction E "„ Ordinary High Water Mark y, !` Geologic Unit �,y�� Dunes LL ' ., Alluvial Deposits U 1. O Flood Deposits 0 ° Pasco 0 2 ' ,.- Island Pasco VlewV ML RnVe NOhESnformation is to be used for planning °'"Y f t g,�t Lake purposes only. Data are displayed as is and weuwa without any guarantee of accuracy or o _`F`s91"--t x'-�` -.- „ �. "n" completeness. 2.Aerial image courtesy of USDA NAIP(2013). q.;' R }� 'x 3.Geology data acquired from Washington N r } 1 Dept.of Natural Resources. x ' t� ",l" .'vC P�, LF`• .0 „*a_ �s 3 Kennewick a A-caf� I`�' r. � '�. n �J "� Grant cn O" 4 i sF.,:h•�' -.. ' rim i s�IYk:L�k 4'AA - b '!`j+} �1�"'ls,Y2at Burbarik Franklin CL er r P+ � 4. �''�° :Y�� '�3r hh L•�$ r' ark � r ,_�- "� -�..•�y ro . i y � Walla o Y� ���z _�y�7�1•�.r^r� st. .�•' �^a -" +�x ya,$. Y ..�a".- * ' �'': Walla Benton o r �+ s s a - +" Columbia Riverl s2 o :Ks.. � tt�?$�,`, + � _ �T,,,. - �• *�'� 'x y 1 i Lake Wallula Washington Atf ,*- Oregon ° DRAFT Map 4 ANCHOR Miles Surficial Geology OEA 0 0 2 4 City of Pasco Shoreline Master Program �v City of Pasco, WA ,I LEGEND Reach Break • Populated Place County Seat ° Interstates fir, O Incorporated City of Pasco N _ Urban Growth Area County Boundary N SMA Jurisdiction s •� Ordinary High Water Mark E Soil Permeability High Infiltration Rate N Moderate Infiltration Rate = Low Infiltration Rate 2 yes: Unknown Infiltration Rate s 4e�� _ Pasco Island Pasco gr • ;,. . -_ View NOTES: kK 1.This information is to be used for planning purposes only. Data are displayed as is and without any guarantee of accuracy or lt� . completeness. 2.Aerial image courtesy of USDA NAIP(2013). 3.Soils data acquired from NRCS. a}. 2 :.' ° ;�, "* ss-r p, •.' j �8;;.. ,Y KenneWlCk Grant fillill ^c y y r . x' Franklin CL r f tz' 4 ��s''�Pl�+ ". �' "f 7}• F �,bi1�trP�R. iI ., P.'X b -A7♦ Walla rt Walla Benton o , 3 •�ry .t� §°'� � ",.1�*' Eolumb�a Rrver/ 82 ` `:»��. �tt� �>'i c� 3a»c.r ■;��t'n 4 - /s ' ,.' ,y'+1:'r` ., Lake WallUla Washington Oregon WF- DRAFT Map 5 ANCHOR Miles Hydrologic Soils OEA 0 0 2 4 City of Pasco Shoreline Master Program �v City of Pasco, WA LEGEND I Priority Fish Species in Franklin �- ZQ County: ' "r11 *li '@ C Urban Natural 'yt WILL O � Or Q O: Open Space O; QQ Q C � QyQ Q OQ f C Shrub-steppe Urban ZQ (]tp Burrowing Natural Owl Open Space O yQ Grebe 1 Q Q Q Monitored Species in Franklin Species' County: Q yQ • d Qii O% Burrowing • Q O Q O Owl 0 Q Q Q - � Priority Habitat Sensitive Species in Franklin - d County: z Q QQ Q f Waterfowl (Ili Q Candidate Species in Franklin "'�� C Concentrations NWI Wetland Type County: Burrowing Q Q z d Qa Owl l Q f 'a QGt z QQ at QO: : dP Q O: Q C < Q Gt n (@ O: Y @Q O: Q C c ,. � .s = NOTES:�2 Qa �� Burrowing Q O; Q c r a ► Owl Q e zo eQ { a c q� -WWaterfowl - Yan Q t e C . '+r*`� —---American White � Q QQ Q Q Q Q C M1 *' + r K: Concentrations c� � Q Q e Q Ot d Pelican Q C ex ? Waterfowl Concentrations G f Q Q o Threatened Species in Franklin QQ QQ Q County QMZQ w: Q 4 Endangered Species in Franklin \Q QQ County: Q Y Q Q Q sz DRAFT Map 6a ANCHOR Q'CIQ OEA 9 " i 'QQ Q Q yj Priority Fish Species in Franklin Candidate Species in Franklin LEGEND County: County: Urban M'ac z dQ@ zQ Natural Ci~ Q ca a QGt Open Space "' /%i � Burrowing CI M Q c 'a Q Q Owl iD f z '(m Q CL c Q QCt; QyQ (D Ck Q L---�c r —�•, Q Ca zQ \ GV (m a Y CO yQ Monitored Species in Franklin Q C� County: a Q c Q Q Q z d Qi Ct; QCI z Q CI Q a Ct; Q c Q yQ Q z(dl eQ Q Q c Q Q Sensitive Species in Franklin Q (I d Priority Habitat County: aQd'Q c z Q QQ Q m OD (ED Q ' r Q f NWI Wetland Type I Urban Threatened Species in Franklin Q Q Burrowing Natural Y' County: Q f Q m Q Owl Open Space ' PeSCO Endangered Species in Franklin Burrowing County: Owl Waterfowl y Q Q F 'I °' Concentrations z. - - NOTES: Burrowing I 1 ��/j i' Q e Owl L _ ya@ Q Qe tWaterfowl Q Q Q Q QW �rr kConcentrations .* Q Q e .- - Waterfowl co Q 5-Parsco Concentrations (m QQ co \Q ¢ <d�P bId 4 ha�iR � American / Q �2 �a White / \Q (m_ Pelican tural / Open Space, / Q Q sz B \V/ 3[3 DRAFT Map 6b ANCHOR Q'CIQ OEA g h i 'QQ Q Q S 41F V ql LEGEND Reach Break 17.�._ Y �, . ,-' ' _ 4 • Populated Place 4 n N County Seat Incorporated City of Pasco 1s � FRichland r �.- � -! Urban Growth Area : , a County Boundary FFliyy S + � ` 0 SMA Jurisdiction Ordinary High Water Mark : p f Pascm , .� 305b Rating � ,� ,�,..t-��� � .-�.. + !+► , �r «��i�'«`�, `��,"_ ;�"�, (WA Dept. of Ecology 2008) Tem erature x �f p � . � L:�� _ 5-Requires TMDL 4A-Approved TMDL Actively Implemented V. 2-Waters of Concern NOTES: 1.This information is to be used for planning purposes only. Data is m Rig CL y4 x °, displayed as is and without any o '"" guarantee of accuracy or -6 ,� ` Island completeness. o M � _ { �• a , e r, 2.Aerial image court es y f USDA NAIP V v .1 1. — . 2013). 3.Water quality data acquired from Washington State Dept.of Ecology. h! yr �- N --.- +s, l r��� 'f _ l,�'�"',1 c �� ''m 4 •e��`irc -s�y�, •.'�: Franklin y �.kr45+� fi ti4 :t � � I3nt County �'•+ Walla ec eea Walla a e n fi County L 5 7c :rs..r�' �I � 1 -r*, �. e�T'z4 r��S,t'i �• x t �td atr: k.a•s>��.`s�.`b.W�:��. DRAFT Map 7a ANCHOR Miles Water Quality Assessment OEA p 1 2 City of Pasco Shoreline Master Program �v City of Pasco, WA LEGEND Reach Break • Populated Place a County Seat M 0 Incorporated City of Pasco Urban Growth Area County Boundary 0 SMA Jurisdiction Ordinary High Water Mark 305b Rating E (WA Dept. of Ecology 2008) _ 5-Requires TMDL 4A-Approved TMDL ° -4 it Actively Implemented T, W 2-Waters of Concern o NOTES: �•, 1.This information is to be used for 8.'r�r� planning purposes only. Data is displayed as is and without any o . A rr tiu ���e�a / guarantee of accuracy or 3z ,��'', s�aFp� completeness. o 2.Aerial image courtesy of USDA NAIP (2013). c /�► � 3.Water quality data acquired from ON Washington State Dept.of Ecology. IL U) - ►► — o l0'-- x�r b .�..f'�r F� ,'CiG t�Y'�'ht.'�-•t n�aM.'s3°�_��R ',� t.#��F l9 coi'�.�k'dii4i�e�i -- - `.��mor 1_ ._ ,•X rrakl� n y coun asco CL ck n Benton Waill Coty un o ' i� rf DRAFT Map 7b ANCHOR Miles Water Quality Assessment OEA 0 p 1 2 City of Pasco Shoreline Master Program �v City of Pasco, WA r LEGEND Reach Break Populated Place k Incorporated City of Pasco Q fi Urban Growth Area County Boundary +�� `' ►. SMA Jurisdiction I ,<, Richland Ordinary High Water Mark Public Access Park t� ' �� ► �. - .� ell Trailhead „gip ti" r -- ", s Pas( -- Sacagawea Heritage Trail IE dr �+ ` 'l_ Land Ownership Federal 0 State oWA State Dept.of _ o Local Land o ' w � 'b.� `•o4�'bi• w �aR NOTES: a "" r yew 1.This information is to be used for planning a o r s Chiawan .�, LJ purposes only. Data is displayed as is and without ^- Park any guarantee of accuracy or completeness. '� Island , 2.Aerial image courtesy of USDA NAIP(2013). 3.Land ownership parcels data acquired from View o i • ' °j ' V Franklin County. m �. ,�'yY'�5,•` ,.a �,,�, _I' - 4.State parks and trails data acquired from �t } ` wu Washington Dept.of Parks and Recreation. Wade 5.Public access data digitized by Anchor QEA,LLC. 4Ey „ Park { w t 7i Franklin Z County VV ± ar"to �{1P r cam, a u ° s _ 3y 'W .• > S. ,! u '1+ g'" ix ' t '^ R, �y *-t. Walla County ,�. _ - ' ., --.�'7 t . . , DRAFT Map 8a ANCHOR Miles Land Ownership and Public Access kZ QEA 0 1 2 City of Pasco Shoreline Master Program ��—' City of Pasco, WA s ds %x LEGEND Reach Break • Populated Place County Seat Q O Incorporated City of Pasco N -?Urban Growth Area County Boundary SMA Jurisdiction N ^' N i I Ordinary High Water Mark " - Public Access C O' 4' {Y _ 0 Park Trailhead ---- Sacagawea Heritage Trail _ Land Ownership E2 �s r 1' 46 Federal 1--�Il,a,,, i r t �- o "� �.r� � �—.� ,:fi' - �, X�_ 0 State a r ''+,, morn, WA WA State Dept.of -Natural Resources ° Pasco WA State Dept.of 2 '7-f —Parks and Recreation 3. ., A Local Land F y�V w:p "•_-�# ■ f .'F� ., NOTES: a "`� '�y r 1� �� - '�'• 1.This information is to be used for planning purposes only. Data is displayed as is and without t ~V •i. .r .te po any guarantee of accuracy or completeness. U - ep�a 2.Aerial image courtesy of USDA NAIP(2013). o Riverview 3.Land ownership parcels data acquired from ° Park Franklin County. _-. - — 4.State parks and trails data acquired from Schlagel r � _ -t'..� Washington Dept.of Parks and Recreation. !Park _ - .. ._ 5.Public access data digitized by Anchor QEA,LLC. IL � r _ U) 1 a Franklin ° Count U �k q Ft CL * Kennewick "k �t ,Y co State Park ¢ v Pasco wBurbank, 3j ' Benton Wall 9Z r v \�. s County Wa II NILY .o DRAFT Map 8b ANCHOR Miles Land Ownership and Public Access 0 1 2 City of Pasco Shoreline Master Program �v City of Pasco, WA • i `, - . LEGEND Reach Break • Populated Place u Q Incorporated City of Pasco ® Urban Growth Area r Richland _ �County Boundary Nry � Q SMA Jurisdiction ~: � � �LCl1LJ Ordinary High Water Mark Land Use k "' .._ n 0 Low-Density Residential r Pasco Mixed Residential g� a r Mixed Residential/Commercial Commercial Public/Quasi-Public Parks/Open Space C • t0 - • West ` Pasco NOTES: 1.This information is to be used for planning purposes only. Data is displayed as is and o ; 4 Island _ without any guarantee of accuracy or o _ Ulew MM completeness. 2.2013ial image courtesy of USDA NAIP 3.Land use data acquired from City of Pasco. -- N Franklin 4 ; • County v , Pasco Walla k Walla County DRAFT Map 9a ANCHOR Miles Land Use kZ 0 EA 0 0 1 2 City of Pasco Shoreline Master Program ��—' City of Pasco, WA - " LEGEND Reach Break • Populated Place County Seat Q Incorporated City of Pasco a N ® Urban Growth Area N - County Boundary SMA Jurisdiction Ordinary High Water Mark Land Use 0 Low-Density Residential Mixed Residential High-Density Residential Mixed Residential/Commercial Commercial C + L 0 Industrial Pasco - Public/Quasi-Public o � 0 Parks/Open Space NOTES: o 1.This information is to be used for planning purposes only. Data is displayed as is and 0 5 aFe , without any guarantee of accuracy or o completeness. 2.Aerial image courtesy of USDA NAIP (2013). y 3.Land use data acquired from City of Pasco. m 1L �- • T � ; Franklin Coun EL " Ke`nnew ck w o { Pasco d �, F _ ,l a Burbank:- Benton Wall O Y� t u' o k.: yc County Wall nip— DRAFT Map 9b ANCHOR Miles Land Use kZ 0 EA 0 1 2 City of Pasco Shoreline Master Program ��—' City of Pasco, WA *w«ht v Columbia Riverl A f � °'' Lake Wallula � Y I �. LEGEND Reach Break r • Populated Place Incorporated City of Pasco . r [ s ® Urban Growth Area Q , r Richland County Boundary N a I * Q SMA Jurisdiction I Ordinary High Water Mark r Pasco s ` �►�Rrver — "W _ �: NOTES: Zone 1.This information is to be used for g` ��s; RS-20 Suburban planning purposes only. Data is ° - displayed as is and without any EL RS-12 Suburban guarantee of accuracy or ° + completeness. 6 ® R-S-1 Suburban Island 2.Aerial image courtesy of USDA NAIP ° (2013). R-S-1/PUD Suburban t{, a=r 3.Zoning acquired f City of ® Planned-Unit Developments - g data ac q from y Pasco. R-1 Low Density Residential R-2 Medium Density Residential n �i-c A t_ a rr rr Franklin R-3 Medium Density Residential County tc a R-4 High Density Residential '°`. I RP Residential Park Pasco b o © RT Residential Transition ca?' `� `v + r�'t_ ,F + _ o O Office j�x-.;•a.� + � �r S6� 9. t Walla ° ' s< tti * 2 r a ' i r' Walla County Retail Business & O CR Regional Commercial F,r^°':'�r '• , � "_.�> ��. �, � ez a x A:y .. Y. .. 'riV" +` ., iM - r#-Y. r,. _ _ f > +rr�� .t+ia: DRAFT Map 10a ANCHOR Miles Zoning kL OEA 0 0 1 2 City of Pasco Shoreline Master Program ��—' City of Pasco, WA Zone LEGEND i RS-20 Suburban RS-12 Suburban Reach Break ® R-S-1 Suburban • Populated Place ® R-S-1/PUD Suburban County Seat Planned-Unit Development a R-1 Low Density Residential Incorporated City of Pasco v `•�., - --- R-1/PUD Low Density Residential Urban Growth Area 0 Planned-Unit Development N County Boundary � R-1-A Low Density Residential s ® Alternate 0 SMA Jurisdiction N N R-1-A2 Low Density Residential Ordinary High Water Mark Alternate 0 R-2 Medium Density Residential t R-3 Medium Density Residential E - -; � R-4 High Density Residential ,' RP Residential Park N © RT Residential Transition Pasco` ti o F F it O Office NOTES: BP Business Park 1.This information is to be used for planning purposes only. Data is y C-1 Retail Business displayed as is and without any a t ® C-2 Central Business guarantee ccuracy or completeness. `o 2.Aerial image courtesy of USDA NAIP s - C-3 General Business �. (2013). - CR Regional Commercial 3.Zoning data acquired from City of Pasco. 1-1 Light Industrial I-2 Medium Industrial Cn Frakl in Count o " d 1-3 Heavy Industrial asc CL Kennewi k n Benton Walla couty n Wall W R V S1 0 ass �.�C�r� � e+ - i'(N'> � w ��.� •y�• d ... .rlk..i Nf1 i Y f. `. Jy71 A..-yy DRAFT Map 10b ANCHOR Miles zoning OEA 0 1 2 City of Pasco Shoreline Master Program �v City of Pasco, WA APPENDIX C RIVERSHORE LINKAGE AND AMENITY PLAN , CITY OF PASCO 2012 Kivtr,5korcLinLagt and Amenity Flan , City of ra,5co, WaAlngton Pam iL 7V: _ - _ •sue- � � ;� _ ,�my 1 6, 201 2 Rivershore Linkage and Amenity Plan City of Pasco,Washington July 16, 2012 TAF)LE-O CONTENTS INTRODUCTION a) /cope 6) Definitions C) background J) Purpose Guiding Principles e) General Challenges Inventory Concepts a) Ownership k) Landscape 6, Natural Features C) Transportation J) General Land Use Pattern e) Current Linkage and Amenities Inventory 0 Linkage and Amenities Opportunities v) Linkage and Amenities Constraints h) Phasing Strategies—jhort/ id/Long 1) Potential Implementation Actions J) Maps & Images Page 2 of 1 1 3 Pchrnitions Amenities: Public conveniences which enhance the River/Trail experience, such as Drinking fountains, restrooms, parks and picnic areas, and boat facilities. Destination:facilities such as recreational areas, community centers, and commercial enterprises which are attractive and enhance the River/Trail experience. Linkage: (5ee Upland LinLage) River: in this Plan "River" refers to the system of Columbia and Snake Rivers which surround the City of Pasco. Trail: The Sacagawea Heritage Trail winds along the Columbia River around the Tri-Cities area. Upland Linkage:A multimodal transportation route connecting the Columbia River and 5acagawea Heritage Trail to proximal destinations which have the potential of enriching the River/Trail experience. -Score andArea The City of Pasco Shoreline Amenities Plan includes all waterfront areas along the city limits of Pasco, extending along the Snake River from the northeastern reach of the City Of Pasco's Urban Growth Pjoundary (UGN near Highway 12, south to the confluence Of the Snake and Columbia Rivers at the southernmost point of 5acajawea State Park, and then west and north along the Columbia River to the northern point of the UGF) at Dent Road. This plan is focused on rivershore trails, recreation amenities, community gathering spaces, development opportunities, wayfinding, and connecting to downtown and neighborhood lands, as well as establishing or improving gaps across bridges, natural areas, railway tracks, roads and parks. ,jurisdictions and Agencies • City of Pasco -- The City of Pasco is the lead agency for and sole proprietor of this Plan. Located along the Columbia River's northern shore, the City of Pasco has many residential neighborhoods that abut the 5acagawea Heritage Trail. • rranklin County - rranklin County is located north of the Columbia River and includes the City of Pasco. rranklin County also has rivershore land in unincorporated areas. Page 5 of 1 1 3 • Port of Pasco -The Port of Vasco operates an intermodal rail huk, karge terminal, industrial and business parks in the riverfront area between the Cakle bridge and 5acajawea State Park. Osprey Pointe is the Port of Pasco's newest business development protect along the river. • U.S. Army Corps of Engineers - The W5. Army Corps of E-ngineers (USACE-) has jurisdiction over use and development standards along the Columbia River. The constructed levees are maintained ky the USAM as a flood control tool for the region. Backsround The Columbia and Snake Rivers form approximately half of the city's border (roughly i 4 MI es) making the Pasco Rivershore Area the "front door" to Pasco from the vantage of both Richland and Kennewick, and thus the Rivershore Area is a key resource in the ongoing protect of cityscape enhancement. Past planning efforts pertaining to the local shorelines, including the City of Pasco Rivershore Area have resulted in a plethora of documents ranging from regional, cooperative efforts to local plans. The following comprise a partial list of documents reviewed in preparation of this plan: 1) TRF-C Tri-Cities Rivershore Ma,5ter Plan 2012 2) Comprehensive Plan 2007-2027 3) F)P1C Shoreline Permit;April 2008 4) Parks & Recreation Plan 2005 update 5) broadway Properties _and use and Market Analysis; Decemker 2004 �) Master Plan;5aca)awea Heritage Trail: May 2000 7) Tri-Cities Rivershore E_nhancement; i 997 8) Pasco Rivershore r—nhancement vision Some of the plans are broad in scope and general in their outlook; others are highly focused with measurable outcomes. Page 4 of i 1 3 Project Purpose The 201 2 Tri-Cities Rivershore Master Plan encourages the participatingjurisdictions to "develop facilities and programming that face and embrace the river, rather than turning away from it." Similarly, The Pasco Vision of the Comprehensive Plan reads: "All residents of the city are afforded access to the Columbia River. Pasco is oriented toward and connected with the River through parks, pathways, bikeways, boats launches and docks" (Comprehensive Plan; "The Pasco Vision for 2027;" introduction P5). The ten overarching elements of the 2012 Tri-Cities Rivershore Master Plan are as follows: 1 . Improve wayfinding and identity. 2. Integrate and interpret arts, culture, heritage and environmental features. 3. Create "place" through viewpoints, seating areas and user amenities. 4. F-nhance water-oriented activities and recreation. 5. increase birding and wildlife viewing opportunities. 6. Enhance linkages to and from the rivershore, across the river, and through historic downtowns, commerce, and cultural areas. 7. E_nliven the rivershore through formal and informal programming. S. Strengthen the connection with the Yakima Delta and the Yakima and Snake River systems. 9. Re-engage the riverfront through land use. 10. implement priority rivershore enhancement projects. The Rivershore Linkage and Amenities Plan provides guidance for a coordinated and efficient overall pattern of development in the long term which can maximize benefit for stakeholders, the City of Pasco, and the wider community. It delineates an approach for connecting the public to the Sacagawea Heritage Trail and the extensive Columbia River waterfront. It is based on a specific vision with supporting goals and objectives drawn from over 55 years of planning efforts. Project Guiding Principles The primary Goals of this document are to identify appropriate upland linkages to the 5acagawea Heritage Trail, city parks, and public access points on the Columbia River, and to provide recommendations on future location of same. Linkages to and from the River/Trail only make sense when they lead to recreational facilities such as parks and Page 5 of 1 15 sports facilities, commercial enterprises such as retail shops, restaurants and hotels/motes, and community facilities such as art galleries, museums, and theaters.Amenities enhance the River/Trail experience and male it a place worth visiting.. The best facilities and amenities are clustered in synergistic relationships and are attractive to local citizens and visitors alike. These amenities are within a comfortable waking distance, and ideally, within sight of the River/Trail. The upland LinLages can 6e promenades, creating a "view portal" for many of these upland attractions. Page 6 of 1 15 General Challenges Wkile each segment of the River/Trail along Pasco's shoreline offers a unique mix of Challenges and opportunities, a few of these challenges/opportunities can be generalized as follows: 1) Way-Finding: The regional rivershore area lacks a cohesive signage and way-finding system;The City of Pasco should work with the otherjurisdictions to create and adopt a cohesive, regional signage and way-finding system. 2) Parking areas for River/Trail access: Access points to trail and River are not sufficient. (Jnless a visitor lives within walking/bicycling distance of the Trai l/River, they need a place to park vehicles. Parking should be integrated into access features. 5) Accessibility from trai%water to commercial amenities: Few connections exist to Iink the City's urban areas to the rivershore trail system.Trail users need well-marked, direct, safe and convenient walking and bicycling routes to the water at locations that can serve large potential usergroups. Improving these connections can bring important economic development and transportation benefits to the City of Pasco.A synergistic relationship can occur between commerce and River/Trail activity, but only if those commercial amenities are within reach of the River/Trail system. Focus should be on River/Trail planning on an area within easy walking distance (not more than 1/4 mile) from the River/Trail. Projects to consider include improved trail connections between Pasco's urban center and the F)oat basin/Marine Terminal area; between downtown Pasco and Qsprey Pointe Pjusiness Park; and between the Pasco urban core area east of -595 and the river area between the F)lue and Cable F)ridges. 4) Levees: the levees were built to protect the citizens against flood events. However they create a nearly insurmountable obstacle to boaters, waders and anyone desiring general access to the river. The City of Pasco's system of levees creates a visual and physical separation between the rivershore and developed areas. Levee #2 between Wade Park at Road 59 and jvy Glades should be prioritized as needed trail improvements to establish visual and physical access to the river. 5) Army Corps of engineers "Wildlife Management Area": Wildlife areas are desirable for protecting the environment and enhancing biological functionality. However Page 7 of 1 15 overgrown areas adjacent urban areas more often become refuge areas for criminal activity rather than for woodland creatures. With hundreds of miles of river frontage compared tojust a few miles along the City limits, it may 6e wise to rethink how wildlife areas are managed close to urban areas. dements such as public supervision and access need to be addressed. Trails with periodic "lookout" points would serve the dual function of granting public access to wild areas and create better public supervision of these areas. 6) Location/Distribution of current amenities: Amenities attract, and lack of amenities deters visits to the River/Trail. ff)asic amenities relate directly to River/Trail enjoyment, and include, but are not limited to the following: a) Drinking fountains: Walkers, runners, bicyclists, recreationalists and picnicking families, all depend on availability of water. Drinking fountains should 6e placed periodically along the Trail and clustered with park facilities such as pavilions and picnic areas. 6) Restrooms: River and Trail users also depend on availability of restroom facilities. Restrooms should be clustered with park facilities such as pavilions and Picnic areas, and should 6e stationed periodically in pocket parks along the Trail. c) Shade (trees/picnic pavilions): In the semi-arid Tri-Cities area, protection from the summer sun is desirable and adds to the pleasure of the River/Trail experience. Shade areas are severely lacking along the Trail on the Pasco side of the River. Along with tree planting, placement of picnic pavilions is crucial for enjoyment along the River/Trail. Picnic Pavilions would typically 6e clustered with parks and pocket parks. J) benches: The Trail has an assortment of seating areas, although very few of them are coupled with natural or artificial shading. Seating should 6e strategically clustered with both tree planting and pavilion placement areas along the River/Trail. e) Parks: General gathering places are important for increasing social bonds and a sense of community. Parks serve a community purpose in providing some of those meeting places. Parks should 6e designed with high public visibility and supervision so as to reduce the incidence of vandalism and criminal activity.A well-designed park will have houses, apartments and/or condominiums along the periphery, each with park-facing porches and balconies. This design will serve the dual function of Page 8 of 1 15 increasing supervision of park facilities and increasing the desirability and value of park-side homes. 0 Availability of dog cleanup facilities: 1=or the sake of sanitation, good manners, and aesthetics, canine waste cleanup stations should be Provided Periodically, with City of Pasco dog nuisance code prominently displayed. g) Current residential development along river: One of the main obstacles to linkage and amenities development along the River/Trail will be developed residential areas. Homeowners typically desire parks but resent the higher traffic volumes and intrusion of strangers into their neighborhoods. 7) River Crossings: The blue and Cade bridges were not designed with non-motorized traffic as a priority, and are severely limited in terms of trail width, accessibility and safety. The effort to provide state-of the-art separated Class I multiuse paths over them should be explored. MI6 Consultants has also suggested exploring the possibility of a cantilevered pedestrian bridge built to the side of the 15NS>= bridges to improve the range of river crossing choices for trail users. If a future bridge is built, bike and pedestrian access should be a priority. 8) Railroad: The PjN5l= railroad bridge between the boat Pjasin and Marine terminal requires pedestrians traveling along the Rivershore to go around and over it via the Ainsworth Overpass, forcing people away from the water. This also serves to further isolate the boat basin neighborhood, bringing a higher crime and gang risk factor to the neighborhood. Efforts to build a 5N,5 /jacagawea Trail underpass should be enthusiastically pursued. 9) bridge (Anderstructure: bridge understructures are targets for graffiti and are periodically used as transient shelters. Landscaping, screening, and other measures should be pursued to discourage access to and vandalism of these areas. General Opportunities 1) Provide potential links to commercial and civic districts 2) Improve existing trails and build new trails to patch gaps in trail system 3) Incorporate more interpretive 5ignage & informational plaques 4) Encourage more boat and water-oriented activities 5) Commercia l/industrial zoning along river: a) Potential accessibility from trail/water to commercial amenities: Page 9 of 1 15 b) Potential restaurants/eateries/refreshment establishments c) Potential sportinggoods: i) bicycle/roller blade renta l/repair ii) bait and tackle iii) boat iv) Moorin�Q/docLs/slips V) Sales vi) Kental vii) Maintenance/repair viii)fueling J) Potential General Shopping: i) Art galleries ii) Tourist shops iii) Specialty shops 6) Provide self-guided smart phone tours addressing unique history, culture and environment of the Tri-Cities. Fxamples include: Mid-Century house and Historic Alphabet House Tour, Port of Pasco Tour, Environmental Preserve Areas, Tri- Cities bridges and Pompy's Lessons trail markers. 7) Guiding development of vacant land along trails a) Pocket Parks in vacant lots along river: Small lots along the path may be suitable for "pocket" park rest areas, areas with minimal amenities for bicyclists and pedestrians and the occasional boater using the River/Trail b) Possible access points to trail: Small }liver/Trail-adjacent lots may also serve as ROW and minimal parking for trail access. c) Possible access points to water 8) Complement Pompy's Lessons trail markers with smart-phone codes. 9) Consider low-profile and night sky sensitive lighting at key gathering spots along the trail for improved safety and visibility 1 o) Develop kiosks and gateway features 1 1) "zero" habitat along levee areas: Levees are constructed with an impermeable core covered with large basalt rip-rap. As the minimum State of Washington/ Department of E_cology requirement for development along rivers is "no net loss of ecological function," permitting for heavier public access and uses should be easier. Page 100f 1 1 3 1 2) broadmoor Area Plan: The Plan for this area west of Road i 00/broadmoor boulevard has been approved by the Pasco City Council. 1 3) Osprey Pointe Plan: The Plan for this areajouth of Ainsworth Avenue and East of the boat basin/urine Terminal has been approved by the Pasco City Council and Phase One is now kuilt. I+) boat basin/urine Terminal Plan: The Plan for this area 5outk of Ainsworth Avenue and East of the Cable bridge has been approved by the Pasco City council. 15) Army Corps of Engineers Wildlife Management Area: This stretch of land is under public ownership and can be planned for and permitted as a single entity. Page i 1 of 1 13 jnventory Rivershore Segments The Segments are numbered 1-20, beginning upriver on the Columbia River at the City of Pasco Urban Growth Boundary (GIGS)just north of the Kohler Segment, flowing downstream to Sacagawea Park, and then continuing upstream along the Snake River to the Tidewater Terminal Segment. r—ach Segment is an arbitrary DreaLdown of river frontage which contains somewhat similar characteristics (see Rivershore Segments Map below). Inventory of existing amenities The following amenities have been installed along the City of Pasco shoreline to date: 1) Access points 2) beaches 3) F)ike Path/Tram 4) boat Launches 5) r_nvironmenta%wildlife conservation/protection areas 6) historic markers 7) Interpretive elements s) Landscaping 9) Levee Lowering 1 O) ParLing areas i i) Park/Sport Fields 12-) Picnic areas/Pavilions 1 3) Pubic piers I+) Restrooms 15) Waterfountains Page 120f 1 1 3 Kcfer ■1 Dream View l� Pasc anch WI E Q Hor an arms s Col bia View awana Park' Sunset Acres Levy# Wade Park Moo ion fngo Village City of Pasco iew Park e Bri F dge Basin Yid r Port Rivershore Segments ank 2011 Legend Port of Pasco Ainsw 'Yawn 01 Kohler 08 Sunset Acres 15 Marine Terminal Sacagawe ark 02 Dream View ° 09 Levee#2 ® 16 Boat Basin ® 03 Pasco Ranch 10 Wade Park 17 Port of Pasco 04 Harrigan Farms 11 Moore Mansion 18 Sacagavvea Park 05 Rivershore Estates 12 Flamingo Village 19 Ainsworth Town 06 Columbia View 13 Riverview Park 20 Tidewater Terminal 07 Chiawana Park 14 West Cable Bridge Kohler a) Ownership: Private/(J5 Government b) Landscape and Natural Features: The land along this segment is fairly flat, with a short drop-off into the river. The shoreline is thickly vegetated with a mix of native and non-native trees and shrubs. Farming activities occur within about 30 yards of the river.A private unimproved road separates an orchard/vineyard from the river. C) Transportation: There is no direct public access to the River at this segment. The closest public right-of-way is Kohler Road. Mile the road connects to Dent Road to the South, right-of-way has not been secured to connect the two. J) General Land Use Pattern: 1) Agricultural Areas: Farming activities occur within about 30 yards of the river. A private unimproved road separates an orchard/vineyard from the river. ii) Natural Area: A 20 yard strip of US Government-owned natural area lies between the private road and the River. iii) Preservation of View Corridors: Due to the flat terrain in this section of the River views would lie limited to those structures built close to the River. e) Current Linkage and Amenities Inventory: None in this segment f) Linkage and Amenities Opportunities: Public ownership of about 20-30 yards of land along the river would allow the extension of the Sacagawea f jeritage Trail along this section. This section is undeveloped except for farming activities, and may lend itself well to a park/River/Trail access point. g) Linkage and Amenities Constraints: there is neither direct public access to the River nor secure Right-of- /`lay from Kohler Road to Dent Road at this time. Roads to the property lead through neighborhoods and are designed for low-volume traffic. h) RE-COMME-NDATIONS: Short-Term Recommendations: Page 14 of t t 3 i) Work with Army Corps, the County and Property owners to design and build a continuation of the 5acagawea Trail north to the (Arban Growth P)oundary ((AGf)) line. ii) Secure the Right-of-way From Dent Road to Kohler Road and purchase land For ROW From Kohler road to the shoreline and For Future park development. iii) Include bona Pile river access points/Future parks along this section of trail which connect to Kohler and Dent Roads. iv) Wjth Property owner approval (and covenant) Pjegin irrigation and tree planting along proposed greenkelt. V) Secure ROW and purchase park property. Long--Term Recommendations vi) Develop a public park with access off of Dent/Kohler roads. Continue 5acagawea heritage Trail with "pocket" parks along river. 'r YfrP r" Page 1 5 of 1 1 5 Kohler Proposed Kohler Segment til N N + + S �'y, S 1 a ... :0 30 00 80 120 750 Legend -- Sacnawea Iran Proposed no I- 1: UQ 11 Cu � �� ��ei a ni��r+--•. 0 ` - ewer rb ��rae�. ± :eeeee�ics�ee*-er i i ew _� ie�`maaer.r.rireeAr��r�a�me i �wr iri�e� FeN erg m n■r—e i ree .q i1 e r r i i t W i Dream view a) Ownership: Private/U5 Government k) Landscape and Natural reatures: The land along this segment is fairly flat, with a short drop-off into the river. Area developed with high-end residential units within about 100 yards of the river. The shoreline is vegetated with a mix of native and non-native trees and shrubs. C) Transportation: There is no direct public access to the River at this segment. The closest public rights-of-way are neighborhood streets branching off from Kohler Road. While Kohler road connects to Dent Road to the South, right-of-way has not keen secured to connect the two. J) General Land use Pattern: 1) Residential Development: This area is developed with higher-end residential units in a mix of four sukdivisions and a series of short plats. ii) Natural Area:A strip of us Government-owned natural area ketween 20 and 150 yards separates the river from residential uses. iii) Preservation of view Corridors: Due to the flat terrain in this section of the River views are limited to those structures kuilt close to the River. Most River frontage lots have keen developed. e) Current Linkage and Amenities Inventory: None in this segment 0 Linkage and Amenities Opportunities: Puklic ownership of about 20-150 yards of land along the river would allow the extension of the 5acagawea heritage Trail along this section. g) Linkage and Amenities Constraints: there is neither direct public access to the River nor secure Right-of-Way from Kohler Road to Dent Road at this time.Some homeowners have extended their residential landscaping onto public lands. Page 17 of 1 15 h) RE-COMMENDATION5-. Short-Term Recommendations: 1) WorL with Army Corps, the County and property owners to design and build a continuation of the jacagawea Tram north to the (Jrban Growth F)oundarq (065) line. Obtain ROW for access to the Tram. ii) Include bona hide river access points/future parts along this section of tram which connect to Kohler and Dent Roads. iii) With rroperty owner approval (and covenant) pjegin irrigation and tree planting along proposed tram extension. Long--Term Recommendations iv) Greenbelt/parts/pocLet parts along river; aH.'�J1Pi�J + =' JFI - - rot ; 'age 18 of 1 1 3 Dream View Dream View Proposed Segment N N w E f W E ` s S 8 IF rxxx 0 75 150 225 300 375 Legend .... Sacagawea Trail Proposed e� Y r Dream View 4 Cross-Section Concept 00 �7r�am 1lierN Page 20 of 1 1 3 Pasco Ranch a) Ownership: Private/U5 Government b) Landscape and Natural Features: The land along this segment is fairly flat, with a short drop-off into the river. Orchard farming activities occur within about 100 yards (or less) of the river. The shoreline is vegetated with a mix of native and non-native trees and shrubs. The water is fairly shallow along here, and wide shallow areas are periodically exposed during low water events c) Transportation: Court Street runs along the south half of this segment up to Dent Road, where direct access is available to an irrigation pump station and a private dock. Right-of-way has not been secured for either Dent or Court Street in this section. J) General Land Use Pattern: i) Residential Development: This area is developed with scattered farmstead residential units at the periphery of farming activity. ii) Natural Area: A strip of(15 Government-owned natural area ketween 20 and i 50 yards separates the river from residential uses. This area has been designated ky the U5 Army Corps of Engineers as a "Wildlife Management Area." Hunting is permitted, but no motorized vehicles are allowed. iii) Preservation of View Corridors: There is a slight rise in the terrain in this section of the River, which would allow for suktle views close to the River. A handful of modest homes have been built in a cluster near the river. e) Current Linkage and Amenities Inventory: None in this segment 0 Linkage and Amenities Opportunities: Dent Road cuts directly inland from the middle of this segment, giving residents of northwest Pasco easy access to the site. As well, Shoreline Road (formerly Court Street) separates the private ownership from the Public lands, reducing the potential for shoreline owner resistance to park and trail proposals. Public ownership of about 20-150 yards of land along the river would allow the extension of the Sacagawea Heritage Trail along this section. g) Linkage and Amenities Constraints: Land along this segment of the River has }peen designated by the Army Corps of Engineers as a "Wildlife Management Area." Page 21 of 1 1 5 Any trail development will go through a strict Army corps review and approval process. h) RECOMME-NDATION5: NOTE—the 5ouMern % of Vasco Kanch is Part of the BroadmoorArea flan and leas been extensive y evaluated and planned ]these recommendations correspond to thatgeneralPlanning effort. Short-Term Recommendations: i, Work with Army Corps, the County and property owners to design and build an extension of the 5acagawea Trail with raised wildlife watching decks on piers as a continuation of the 5acagawea Trail north toward the Urban Growth boundary U65) line. ii) Include bona Pole river access points/future parks along this section of trail which connect to Dent Road and Shoreline Road (formerly Court Street). Long-Term Recommendations iii) GreenkeIVparL /pocket habitat areas along river; J J# l 'S,MRJ�- Page 22 of 1 1 3 �f Y - 1 r \ s � ' . 1 5 t Page 23 of 1 1 3 Pasco Ranch - ' Pasco Ranch Amenities , N Segment i N W E w E r' S t Legend 0 150 300 M 600 730 / !F KkHITAT_AR'EA F"t QPion.CPrivele] . JG C� Y iv. TO, YQ r ' i k. I •x � �;•rte.' � \_ N e a x r s. - r z Np P—.R—h cro s-stctlon Concept ;1 Pasco Ranch Page 25 of 1 1 3 f r • rl' Wit Pasco Ranch �. ,, lrric ation Pumps, V �r- r SN r _ _ g � .^ '� f� Pasco Ranch ' Boat Dock Page 26 of 1 13 Wildlife Management Area Hunting Permute No Motorized Vehicles For Information Contact: U-S. Army Corps of Engineers Walla Walla [district 201 N. 3rd St- Walls Walls, WA 59362 (509) 527-7136 1 I US Army Corps of Engineers Fa tee. 27 o{ i i 5 Horrigan Farms a) Ownership: Private/(15 Army Corps of Engineers b) Landscape and Natural Features: The land along this segment is fairly flat, with a short and increasingly steep drop-off into the river toward the south. East of Shoreline Road (formerly Court Street) orchard farming activities occur on the north of the City Limits line, and Central Pre-Mix gravel extraction operation south of the City Limits line. West of Shoreline Road and down to the River the shoreline is heavily vegetated with a mix of native and non-native trees and shrubs. c) Transportation: Shoreline Road (formerly Court Street) runs along the entire length of this segment between the Army Corps of E_ngineers designated Wildlife Management Area to the West and Norrigan Farms Orchard to the E_ast. J) General Land use Pattern: i) Residential ]development:There is one residential unit along this segment. ii) Industrial uses: The Central Pre-Mix gravel extraction operation has a long- term lease on the land. iii) Natural Area: A strip of Army Corps of L,ngineers-owned natural area between 20 and 150 yards separates the river from residential uses. This area is a Wildlife Management Area. iv) Preservation of view Corridors: There is a slight rise in the terrain in this section of the River, which would allow for subtle views close to the River. A handful of modest homes have been built in a cluster near the river. e) Current Linkage and Amenities inventory: None in this segment 0 Linkage and Amenities Opportunities: 1) Preservation of view Corridors: Views along the Columbia River in the broadmoor area have a strong potential for value-added development. View corridors should be maximized for optimal visual access to the river. ii) S' trong visibility of broadmoor from -i 82 rreeway: The north end of the I- 182 bridge is a majorgateway into the City of Pasco and this section especially Of the 5roadmoor area should be designed and built in such a way as to "put our best foot forward." Page 28 of 1 1 3 iii) Columbia River Natural Character & Recreation: This section of the Pasco Rivershore lends itself well to fulfilling the needs of both recreationalist and naturalist. extending the 5acagawea Heritage Trail should 6e a high near-term Priority, granting foot and bicycle access to the more than 40 acres of designated natural area. boat access via boat launches and docks is an equally high Priority. iv) Mineral Extraction Area: The long-term Plan for the mineral extraction area is to create a boat marina and a mixed-development of retail commercial and high- end shorefront residential units. g) Linkage and Amenities Constraints: 1) Impact of Mining / Industrial Uses: The current gravel mining operation physically separates the upper property from the River. The externalities of a mining operation also have obvious impacts. Local Roadways and Truck Traffic: Heavy industrial and agricultural traffic negatively impact the area. iii) Nsical Separation from the River: Large tracts of agricultural land separate the River from the upper Pjraodmoor area. iv) River Plow / Drift Material: The broadmoor area is at the curve of the Columbia River, and a natural collection area for silt, debris, drift wood and other waterborne materials. A) Kr-COMMr-NDATION5: NOTE-the 5roadmoorArea Plan complete y encompasses the f_1orrigan Farms area. The text of the )jroadmoor Area Plan indicates the following for the I-Jorrg'an rarms area: Open ,jpace — The government owned property between the shoreline and,jhoreline Koad has been designated in the Comprehensive P/an as an open space area. The area is also identified as a critical area geoloSically and for habitat purposes. Hiking and walking trails through this area would provide for public access and minimal use of the area for recreation and public e�joyment of the river. Trails through this area to view points along Me river would support the Comprehensive Plan vision statement dealing with access to the Page 29 of I 15 river. Coordination with the Army Cores ofLn�ineers along with shoreline permits may be necessary for the development of trails in this area." The followinS recommendations are more focused efforts within the general Broadmoor Area PlanSuidelines. jhort-Term Recommendations: i) WorL with Army Corps to design and build a continuation of the 5acagawea Trail along the river to City Limits line. Work with County and property owners to design and build a continuation of thejacagawea Trail to the northernmost Urban Growth boundary line. ii) include .bona )Cide river access points/future parks along this section of trail which connect tojhoreline road. iii) begin negotiations with Army Corps to establish part facilities/raised view decLs along river(see link recommendation). iv) With Property owner approval (and covenant) begin irrigation and tree planting along proposed greenbelt. Long-Term Recommendations v) Improve area for waterfowl and elevated bird watching along the rivershore trail, adding nature trails as needed vi) Greenbelt/parL/pocket wildlife preserve areas along river and along main boulevard; vii) boat basin and launch; Possible restricted, non-motorized only boating area near wildlife reserve area. viii) Rivershore commercial development scaled to pedestrian/bicycle traffic. Page 50 of I 13 Fiorrigan Farms HQrrigan Farms Amenities Segment 13 w E w E s s Legend � a a tsfl .31)11 asn HO 750 Fine[L..-h F-I a y ® P t-b.IH.bd tA.ee V+ I ♦.y Co a M CL J w L Y 1 M e^ r r fie Page 5 2 of 1 15 6)20 92007 1:45 PM N-4;-or r. "' w,' y, �i,' ti��t¢ w,`� ♦r �,. :' 'ale R '?r�S"' y` 4f "•• rier s . ..�� ! �:;� rn* _ r4' t a� •ilr. +�i r s '►N'ii leg ,,� ,� k `�. tf`F mu.-✓x�d �.y:A a ��'`f��" a aF`i`^F t!.:� ��w.r� �'� � � �„'� 3 � '� Y "a ...w a' "„�-,R'1"�Y�e^- �' r yl�- �+..'�' � ��i fy x k ah�•ar��[w ��-�r lT� • f1+Ir:.� •�' '# si' f . 1 � �,A wl AI►A�?9 t 'r�xfi:"e. . c 'Y,. # }�11��y� ��� ��,�y � � _ a if+ w z,' e • 7e a F ip i 'i Ig i�!'���g�. � � � �� •'� $�tYj ..�r(.;�y3g+s 40 ,� t { 414 _ • tF + Fame 33 of i 1 3 ' '..F �•yqY ter/.. -e f , t -Welk : +EI. `x'es in ii d&"jk IS'. "It. •k� �;._ rr K ;4b •r � !-f. - :p a 5 Ak PO OW _ l � y 0. ,d E Page 54 of 1 15 -�-_ 1 -- it • r. Farms wilh View oe�� rage 55 of 1 5 w- t , x Rici'lland !Bend H� �bita#� ofE g�„eersr�$ Manag�mer�t Un # Greenbelt Townhomes Along Arterial \ High End Boulevard `\,\ 'View'Housing Butter Medium SF Oriented _ _ _ r. I7 To River 'High End'River • � � � 'Main Street' Housing - - Civic Feature; Playf elds.Active Park Or Civic Use Regional Retail FHASI?y, `� - Center 'High End'Housing ice-'-°" —. :i Rd.RealIgnment. Interchange Boulevards Commercial Townhomes Greenbelt +� —i Near Retail Improved River Park I a Boulevard Sanditur Pkwy Townhomes Medium S,F. Condominiums Oriented To River At Boat Basin 11,a t N R, Boat Basin�Marina _ Office Uses -- Near Freeway —_ Public Use. "- Marina.Related School Commercial Center w i W L tz PW- Page 36 4 i 1 3 Horrigan Farms "Lighthouse" fe• Page 57 of i 1 5 Rivershore F states a) Ownership: Private/(j5 Government b) Landscape and Natural Features: The land along this segment has a steep, -+O-to 50-foot drop into the river. The shoreline is moderately vegetated with a mix of native and non-native trees and shrubs.A high-end, 33-lot subdivision separates the Central Pre-Mix gravel extraction operation from the River. The development is nearly half built out. C) Transportation: 5koreline Road and Court 5trect run between the gravel pit and the residential area along the river. An unimproved river access road connects jhoreline Road to the River about 300 yards west of the subdivision. J) General Land (Jse Pattern: 1) Residential }development: A 33-lot high-end subdivision along the river is nearly half built out. ii) Natural Area: A15-20 yard strip of U5 Government-owned natural area lies between the residential lots and the River. iii) Preservation of view Corridors: Views are limited beyond the 22 river frontage lots. IV) industrial U'5e5: The Central Pre-Mix gravel extraction operation occupies the majority of the area north of Shoreline Road/Court Street and has a long- term lease on the land. e) Current Linkage and Amenities inventory: A parking area has been installed adjacent the Sacagawea Heritage Trail and under the I-i 82 P)ridge. f) Linkage and Amenities Opportunities: Public ownership of about 15-20 yards of land along the river would allow the extension of the Sacagawea Heritage Trail along this section, although the trail cross-section would need to accommodate the steep sloping bank. There exists an unimproved access road and informal boat launch south of Rivershore }give about 300 yards west of the subdivision. g) Linkage and Amenities Constraints: The Central Pre-Mix gravel extraction operation occupies the majority of the area north of Shoreline Road and Court Street and has a long-term lease on the land. Page 38 of 1 15 h) RE-COMMENDATION5-. Short-Term Recommendations: 1) Work with Army Corps, the County and property owners to design and build a continuation of thejacagawea Tram north along this segment. ii) Improve the existing river access point boat launch and add a "rocket" park. iii) begin irrigation and tree planting along proposed greenbelt. Long--Term Recommendations iv) build a Pjoat basin on the current Central Pre-Mix gravel mine. Pjuild the marina as the centerpiece for mixed residential and commercial development. v) Develop area according to the 5roadmoor Concept Plan adopted by the City. i r, - VF RIv —E648 G" OL Cro®e-9eclkrt c.—Pt 'i op 4F - y i RWershore Estates Page39ofi13 f f�4a l 7 vi. ISM }1 S • I ��€ v NO f �. . Rivershore Estates > Segment tf_ w E 0 "n 7.0o Aso- 600 750 Fees §4 RARRM RD ATERS EDGE DR N w E s Rivershore Estates Amenities Legend L`1 80AT_LAUNCH E,ACAGAVVEh_TRAIL Page 40 of I 1 j SHORELINE RD wKr TI W E s Rivershore Estates Pr osed Legend Sarnaw a Trans�rerwsed Farlow Pwpceea ,c Rivershore Estates Pig Farm Page 41 of 1 1 3 ,r. t I Rivershore Estates River Access across from Central Pre-Mix Mimi ii- VIWITI,ail AL r Page 42 of 1 1 3 Columbia view a) Ownership: Private/(j5 Government b) Landscape and Natural reatures: The land along this segment has a very steep slope profile. The shoreline is moderately vegetated with residential landscaping elements mixed with native and non-native trees and shrubs. c) Transportation: Court Street runs between the riverfront residential area and more upland residential subdivisions. Although an unimproved road leads from Court Street down to a rranklin County irrigation District pump station, there are no bona kde public access points to the River along this segment. J) General Land Use Pattern: 1) Residential Development: The entire length of this segment is built out with upper-middle to high-end single-family residential units, with the exception of a couple of vacant lots and a pump station located about 350 yards from the -1 82 freeway bridge. This area also has the highest concentration of private docks in the study area. ii) Natural Area: A slim strip of (15 Government-owned land lies between the residential lots and the River. iii) Preservation of View Corridors: Views are very limited beyond the river frontage lots. IV) industrial (Jses: A newly installed City potable water filtration plant is located just north of Court Street, next to the 1-182 freeway bridge. The inlet pump for the filtration plant is located under the -182 freeway bridge. The Franklin County irrigation District pump station is located just beyond the south terminus of Road i i i and blocks the shoreline well into the }liver. e) Current Linkage and Amenities inventory: A parking area has been installed adjacent to the 5acagawea Heritage Trail and under the 1-1 ,52 E)ridge. f) Linkage and Amenities Opportunities: Public ownership between the residential lots and the river averages around 10 yards, with some lots directly abutting the water line. Page 43 of 1 1 3 9) Linkage and Amenities Constraints: The jacagawea Heritage Trail currently runs alongside Court Street in this segment. because of the extreme grade, the okstacle of the Pump station, the Proximity of residential lots to the river, and the high number of Private dock facilities, extending thejacagawea Heritage Trail along the river in this section would require both high-order engineering Prowess and strong Political will. It is not recommended that the 5acagawca Heritage Trail kc extended along the Diver in this area at this time. h) Kr-COMMr-NDATION5: Short-Term Recommendations: i) Negotiate with the I=ranklin Count Irrigation District to use the irrigation district land for a view and River access Park with Parking lot. Long-Term Recommendations ii) Add a view Park with Parking and River access on the rranklin County Irrigation District land. 1 ' _ I ...,« 4i Columbla Vdew,{d at 582 Bridge ;r•^. .n "> .�r., 1 �.:a s;_. -*.. Page++ ��. '"�Ii►#, � ;�; � �� .ice :� � ��� �i �►�,+,�.;.�'� iii ;�.� ', "t' Y :.�, i . � NO .2umbia View Segment „U el -- : ■�■� ■mill% ,. ♦ Vii► �+��;�' 3 , �'► ti '►'�` It CL 4i Columbia�A at Pump Statio page+6 of fk j . T . Chiawana Park a) OWNr.RShIP: US Government/Local Government leasehold b) Landscape & Natural Features: Chiawana Park is a partially developed community park with two areas of groomed lawns, one overgrown "natural" area, and the balance of the park periodically-mowed weeded areas. c) Transportation: the Park has only one open access point leading through a neighborhood street out to Court Street. There are seven potential access points along the length of the park (See Chiawana Access Points Map). J) General Land Use Pattern: The area is a designated park, although a fraction of it is actually maintained at this point with full amenities. e) Current Linkage and Amenities Inventory: (See Amenities Map) 0 Linkage and Amenities Opportunities: The Chiawana Park area includes large undeveloped areas with potential fors 9 nergi,5tic water-dependent and water-related enterprises and amenities. There are six potential access points along the perimeter of the park. 9) Linkage and Amenities Constraints: The Park is leased from the Army Corps of L,ngineers, and as such, requires Corps approval for even the smallest activity. As well, the ParL is surrounded by an established residential neighborhood. All but one of six potential access points are currently closed to puklic traffic. Activating any of the potential access points is Iikely to ke unpopular with adj'acent property owners. h) RE.COMMr—NDATION5: Short-term Recommendations: 1) Clear undergrowth in "natural" area at north end of part (vandalism/gang activity/public safety hazard) ii) Install (more) drinLingfountains iii) Construct more small "family" scale, and large "family reunion" scale pavilions. iv) Identify and develop future riverside dining venues with scenic, recreational or cultural attributes. Page 47 of 1 15 v) E_stablish limited, seasonal mobile vendor lease areas for diverse, small-scale vendors near Pavilion areas; include standards for vendor 9ualit_q/aesthetics. vi) Add/Upgrade restrooms vii) Complete landscaping: Lawn,trees viii) Keserve area for a second boat launch. ix) Plan for a beach area. X) Add "Community Center"type structure. Long--term recommendations: xi) Construct high-end, pedestrian-scale "micro-village" lease space for diverse, small-scale vendors. xii) Construct second boat launch. xiii)Construct beach area. a Chlawana Dark West End Bike Path Page 48 of 1 1 j ,a : , !I 1 �` � ■ �� ■' 11111111 ,viii r' �1�A111� 1111111111 illll:.■■::' NUNN �� 11111:1111111111; ��IIIh- � � -�1:'lllllll�lll��■ 0 0 �:■�■■���■ 111111.1111 ■III�IC�:� ,�1� �� Ilr 'lllall�llllll� ��IIII- f �a°`airii o �- 7 Proposed -, .■ . . �. Legend Park Prap-Bd x Bike Path E at Court Str Page • of ' f � sr �5 �A CMawana Park ��1 Chlawana Park West End Bike Patti Ch[awana Park West Unimproved Area Page 52 of 1 1 j f w �' to 4 9 Chlawana Park gast Unimproved Area �' yam. ��ir � '.! ����. `•; �. - Chlawana Park Play Equipment and Pavillions 4� r K` y _1 Chlawana Park Pavillions IW Chiawana Park ' s Columbia River Shallow Area MMA ramie 54 of 1 1 3 x _ ffi k* I s r "IT ol PES iNk- Sunset Acres a) Ownership:Army Corps of Engineers (Private ownerships ajpcent) 6) Landscape & Natural Features: mostly flat with mix of native and non-native vegetative types. vegetative growth is mostly sparse weeds and pasture grasses, with dense undergrowth and trees along the River. c) Transportation: Access from Court Street via Roads 76 and 84. The Sacagawea Heritage Trail is built along the entire segment. J) General Land Use Pattern: i) Residential: Over 65 yards of vacant Army Corps of engineers land separates two single-family residential subdivisions (Sunset Acres and Ivy Glades) from the River here. ii) Trail Development: The 5acagawea heritage Trail is developed along the entire length of this segment. iii) Industrial: A major natural gas transmission line extends south and crosses the River from the south terminus of Road 76. C) Linkage and Amenities Opportunities: The width of this area lends itself to both developed park and pocket wilderness areas. There are shallower areas to the east which may lend themselves to beach development. A boat launch could ke located near the end of Road 76. f) Linkage and Amenities Constraints: There are two access points, one from Road 84 and one off of Road 76. Neither has developed parking at this point. view opportunities for surrounding residences are very limited due to the flat terrain and the tree growth along the River. Any activity close to Road 76 would be highly limited due to the presence of the natural gas transmission line. g) RECOMME.NDATION5: Short-Term Recommendations: 1) Develop parking facilities at Roads 76 and 84. ii) Install seating areas and drinking fountains at strategic points along the Trail. iii) Plant clusters of shade trees around the seating areas and drinking fountains. Page 56 of 113 Medium-Range iv) Develop a parking area and mid-sized Park at the terminus of Road 76, complete with restrooms, pavilions, and beach area. v) Develop a "Pocket park" with restrooms at road 84. Long-Term Recommendations: vi) Develop the entire width of the Army Corps land with linear park as an extension of Chiawana 'ark, including small, clustered wildlife areas. vii) Investigate the need for another boat launch. npH lKnp �Sy CroBSSklbn COnGPi q }L.M f A sunset Acres Heer[toad 78 Page 57 of 1 1 3 ry „ �Q• F Mr f Sunset Acres Segment �!�_ IE I !I Sunset Acres Amenities ra9c 58 of I 13 �, �# •i- -F Proposed Sunset '�� T-1 Park Propo�d Parking Proposed Sunset Acres Parking Area at Road 78 -r v _ Sunset Ac s Path to Columbia River HIGH PRESSUAE NATURAL GAS PIPEUNE CROMM PRfPP r i 7ir t Williams 1-8DO-972-77"s 1.9Q491�dP Page 60 of i 1 j i Sunset Acres Ivy Glades Area Irk Sunset Acres Ivy Gladesl Beginning of Levee#2 Page 6 1 of 1 1 3 Levee No. 2 a) Ownership:Army Corps of Engineers (private ownerships ad' acent) b) Landscape &Natural Features:Army Corps of Engineers rip rap levee C) Transportation: There are three developed public access points (Roads 54, 60, and 68) and one access point through a private subdivision (Ivy Glade between the 7200-7400 blocks) to the levee. J) General Land (Ise Pattern: jingle-family dwelling units in the Ivy Glades, Park Estates,Summer's Park,Allstrom view, and Glen Acres Subdivisions. e) Linkage and Amenities Opportunities: There are three developed public access points to the levee. 0 Linkage and Amenities Constraints: The levee and drainage canal between the levee and residential development hinder access to Trail and River along this segment of river shore. Wkile the trail is readily accessible at strategic points, access to the water is accomplished only by a careful climb down a steep, oversized rock embankment. Levee height blocks most river views. g) RECOMMENDATIONS: Short-Term Recommendations 1) Lower Levee;widen path and add landscape features; ii) pipe and fill landward side of ditch at select locations; Iii) Design and build interpretive signage that describes living river concepts as related to shoreline development, such as rivershore management, natural flood processes, and impacts of manmade levees. Long--term Recommendations IV) Fill,grade, and vegetate river face of levee; v) Create parks with "step" access points/boat docks at road 60, 68. vi) Create beach area in shallows between levee and island. vii) Develop strategically sited signature gateway at 1-1 82 & Road 68 Page 62 of 1 1 5 ys ,S � � s q _ 11 t I r ������.�:■■■■ ,,£:E, �,.,>.•.. - ��■nom son on son Levee#2 qpMq Amenities T Legend _lam ■4�k�r..�.-. � � ■ `.� � ■'■�. ■ III, nsxyw:�.z I� Levee#2 Proposed Legend Bonn PmPosed Park Prop�od P.rWng Pmper�d w+E Levee No.2 - ; Drainage _ _jam h-`.• Levee No.2 Ivy Glades Area r t� Levee No.2 Ivy Glades Area Page 65 of 1 15 I o Levee No.2 Road 68 Area s' Levee No.2 Road 68 Area Page 66 of 1 13 d � Levee No. 2 _ - ---, River Vantage Point s: Levee No.2 Access to Road 88 Page 67 of 1 1 3 Wade Park a) OWNEK5HI : Army Corps of Engineers with City of Vasco/rrariLlin County lease(?) 6) Landscape & Natural Features: gently sloping with park-type vegetation:grass and trees C) Transportation: The Tram is fully developed along Wade Park. Wade park can be directly accessed from River Haven Street off of Roads 39,40, and Road 44, from Road 52, and from Road 54.A boat launch has been developed at Road 54. J) General Land Use Pattern: The land around Wade Park is fully developed with single-family residential units. The boat launch at Road 54 includes paved parking. /mother park extension with parking, restrooms and other amenities is being developed at Road 54. A rough gravel parking lot at the east end of Wade Park between Road 39 and 40 is owned by a private party but has been made available to the public. e) Linkage and Amenities Opportunities: The new boat launch at the west end of Wade Park is easily accessible from Court Street via Road 54, and is near a proposed park with existing parking. This area is adjacent to the boat race course and is augmented with temporary commercial refreshment enterprises during the races. More permanent parking pads with power hookups, which would double as pavilion/picnic areas during the off-season, could be installed. f) Linkage and Amenities Constraints: The Trail along Wade Park can get very hot in the summer due to the lack of shade trees; however adjacent neighbors may object to additional tree plantings of these public areas. g) Kr—COMMr—NDATION5: Short-term Recommendations: i) Place water fountains at strategic locations along path; ii) Plant more shade trees in clusters along the Trail; iii) Place canine cleanup stations at strategic locations along path. Long-Term Recommendations: Page 68 of 1 1 3 iv) build restrooms at both ends of the Pak v) jdentify and develop future riverside dining venues with scenic, recreational or cultural attributes. vi) Develop beach area(s), as Practical. Page 69 of i 13 A&- jf .yam. Rn_ f r•l. }fY ] Wade Segment w+E 0 251) $00 750 10 00 ���I■■■■■■�■■_���■■■■■ HI 11 �■ �■ �■■■■■■■■ ■■■I ■�,���� !11111■ ■ ■ ■� ■■ ■■ � � --� Wade Amenities Legend © o Q l�r [ tz TI -H E --LU FFFF7 777 T w E S Wade Park Proposed Legend Park Proposers Beach Proposed Parking Proposed Potential Habitat Area Page 71 of 1 15 Moore Mansion a) Ownership:Army Corps of engineers/WA State Dept of Transportation b) Landscape &Natural reatures:Army Corps of Engineers rip-rap levee c) Transportation: The Trail extends the length of the Moore Mansion segment; it can only be accessed from River Haven Street off of Roads 39 and 40. J) General Land Use Pattern: Levee #1 terminates between Road 39 and 40 next to a rough gravel parking lot at the east end of Wade Park which is owned by a private party but has been made available to the public. e) Linkage and Amenities Opportunities: As the segment name implies, this path could have direct access to the Moore Mansion, a prominent historic site within the City. Shallow areas in the River and easy river access near the Road 39/4o Park entrance may lend to construction of a beach in this area. There is a dedicated, but as yet undeveloped (Havistad) park platted as part of the Amended Pierret's Subdivision south of Havistad Street which could also add to the appeal of this segment. f) Linkage and Amenities Constraints: Due to the levee and the drainage ditch behind, the area is accessible only at one point, a gravel parking area at Road 39/40, which is rather small and is currently under private ownership. There are at present no potable water or restroom facilities at this location. The platted, but undeveloped Havistad park lot is at a considerably lower elevation than the levee, and would not have the "feel" of a riverfront amenity without visual access to the river. As well, it is separated from the River by the levee drainage canal. g) RE-COMME-NDATION5. Short-Term Recommendations: i) pipe and fill landward side of ditch; ii) vegetate landward side of levee with grass, shade trees. iii) Fill,grade, and vegetate river face of levee. Long-Term Recommendations: iv) Develop Havistad Park level with levee. Page 72 of 1 1 3 v) install a keach area at the Road 39/40 Wade FarL entrance, and extending east approximately 100-200 yards. vi) provide state-of-the-art separated Class I multiuse paths over the blue bridge y •pr - " Page 73 of 1 1 5 4 raw fi Moore Mansion Segment w E S f. 0 iso 30Ci d5g 5 0 Feel ❑a O tY ,�. P AiVSTAp S7 N w E s Moore Mansion Amenities Legend A—Paint P—1 aP Interest Bairch Lipland LiaYage ® Paikli p Area & pwa Tra.l Page 74 of 1 1 5 �. r�ays7AD sr N W E Tel S Moore Mansion Proposed Legend S..g-9a TIM ® Parke Mend Linkage Park Preposed OAcres Point Beady Propeeed Mows M.—n ® Pa+klnq Area r r..L —40r ? ^'T it TF s a Page 75 of 1 1 3 Flamingo Village a) Ownership: Army Corps of Engineers with City of Pasco/Franklin County lease(?)/City of Pasco. 6) Landscape &Natural Features:Army Corps of Engineers rip rap levee C) Transportation: Access to the Trail is by way of "A" 5trect near the terminus of 25th Avenue. An undeveloped access point also exists at 20th Avenue. The 25th Avenue access point has keen developed as a pocket park with parking but no amenities J) General Land Use Pattern: The west end of this segment lies ad acent to the Llamingo Village Trailer Park. Lurther east is mostly vacant industrially zoned land. The trail is separated from the trailer park and industrially zoned land by a drainage canal and a significant elevation change up towards the levee. The Levee blocks the view of the river and there is no developed access from the Trail down to the water. e) Linkage and Amenities Opportunities: bccause of its largely vacant nature, this area between the Pioneer Memorial ("51LAe") bridge and Ed Hendler ("Cable") Pjridge has perhaps the most development potential of all City of Pasco segments. Retail commercial development could conceivably be built over the current drainage canal with ground-level parking and levee-level (and higher) retail, restaurant, entertainment, and water-dependent/water-related uses. jteps could be built down the face of the levee to the river for"toes-in-the-water" access. 0 Linkage and Amenities Constraints: Levees are owned and maintained by the Army Corps of Engineers.Any development on or around the levees would require complex and time-consuming reviews. g) Kr—COMMr—NDATION5: Short-Term Recommendations: i) Pipe and fill landward side of ditch; ii) Rezone the area along the River for Retail Commercial development Longs--Term Recommendations: iii) Lill, grade, and vegetate parts of the river face of levee (see Pasco Rivershore Enhancement vision). Page 76 of 1 15 iv) Develop levee top as a wide commercial boardwalk with Periodic River view decks. v) F)uild stair/step access on parts of the River face of the levee down to the water. vi) Allow/encourage retail commercial to build with street-level parking and upper floor shopping, level with, and directly up to the levee,with full levee access. vii) provide state-of-the-art separated Class I multiuse paths over the blue F)ridge viii)Develop strategically sited signature gateway at and 20th & Sylvester J �` _ kt•7e'��.�3C�.l fe�o�"�G ut�!� dSii"i11t.i 7 77 f � i3 i .j Jip- mm NJ i 1 r l�3 - " 111 111111 11111 i�,� _ � 11111. �IIII V1�r11��C �� � -■, y r '``" ' �'� _•^� i.11l� 111111 11111 FTFF ��"• !11111'■� �® � 11111 11111 � ■�.i� � 11!11 i i i`ii•��- ■ i i i•ii-.� Flamingo Village Proposed Legend _�t� 1� FP Pawq Area S vv Nk q µ-' z ` # Irk, 75' 15 r x * J C1VCT YYW�pfri feN ppirVrrtY.K EcN�gY Riverview Park a) Ownership: Army Corps of Engineers with City of Pasco/rranklin County lease?)/City of Pasco b) Landscape & Natural Features: Army Corps of Engineers rip rap levee; City of Pasco basekal%softball facility; City of Pasco Riverview Park. There is a shallow, manmade drainage pond to the west of the park. C) Transportation Access to the Trail is 6.9 way of "A" Street from an undeveloped access point at 20th Avenue, and between i Jth and 1 8th Avenues through the City Of Pasco kasebal%softball field and Riverview Park. A loop of the Trail circles around near the Animal Shelter at 1 8th Avenue. A F)N,5F rail spur crosses "A" Street, curving south along the ball fields and loops east roughly parallel to the river. This rail spur is currently being utilized by a single client, a small concrete company leasing land at the Port of Pasco. The spur will kc abandoned when the lease expires. J) General Land use Pattern:This area is developed with an animal shelter, a City of Pasco basckal%softball field and Riverview Park. e) Linkage and Amenities Opportunities: This is one of the few areas not locked out Of potential "destination" development by residential zoning.The area south of"A" Street could ke enhanced with river-oriented commercial uses, augmenting the developed park and sports facilities. The manmade pond has potential for wildlife viewing, fishing for young families, and should ke enhanced as park land with grassy areas, pavilions, restrooms, pond access and barbecue amenities. There is potential for a pocket wildlife area as part of the pond-centric development. Once the PjNSr rail spur is abandoned the City should negotiate with the E)N5r to acquire the land adjacent to the ball fields. This area could kenefit from additional baseball fields and the addition of soccer facilities. f) Linkage and Amenities Constraints:The area is still zoned I-1 Light Industrial, and as such can be legally developed with such things as building material storage yards, trucking companies, a central power station, automotive assembly and repair facilities, and blacksmith,welding or other metal shops. g) RECOMMENDATIONS: Page 80 of 1 i 3 Short-Term Recommendations: i) Rezone the area south of"A"Street as C-i Retail Commercial. ii) improve Riverview Park for waterfowl and elevated bird watching along the rivershore trail, adding nature trails as needed; Develop a parl< around the pond with a Pocket wildlife viewing area, fishing areas for young families, grassy areas, Pavilions, restrooms and barbecue amenities. iii) Place drinLingfountains, shade trees, and restroom facilities at strategic Points-, Long-Term Recommendations: iv) rill,grade, and vegetate river face of levee (see Pasco Rivershore Enhancement vision. V) Purchase the 5N5r lands east of the ball fields; add baseball and soccer fields. Vi) Develop a beach area just south of the Riverview Park. 4-� ENILA R1V24EM VMO EYiEIAkCT NFNT L�14101V _~- )1J �M pi I 1 Page 8 1 of i l j Riverview Park Segment `' T w E S u aog zgn ;w,r� aoo smr Feel `A"ST m dk DASHING' VIEW PA I F - `ti Riverview Park Amenities Legend Axes Pow Mosk (]ry, Reshaom N j rc,J E.-h ® Parki-Area Upland l,lnk®ge W + E D—kl rg F.�Mwn 6"1 M.N.Table S"—T-1 E Fame 8 2 0f 1 15 i Riverview Park Proposed li�I X11 f Legend secag—ea rrag Parks N /�• Mend Linkage Park P+ep4sed OAcres Pant Bead+Prepesad E - ® Pa+kl+q Area asc, 4k qa♦ _'�.. _ __, Jz -4 1y y�I Page 85 of 1 1 3 West Cable F)ridge a) Ownership:Army Corps of Engineers b) Landscape & Natural Features: Army Corps of E_ngineers rip-rap levee; E)N5r Railroad spur line; undeveloped scrub land. c) Transportation: A E)N5I= Rail spur bisects most of this area; One unfinished access point leads to 13th Avenue. The trail leading to i 3th crosses bNSF land and the Mss rail spur. J) General Land Use Pattern: This area is mostly vacant with some residential and industrial uses along Washington Avenue, extending south towards the River. e) Linkage and Amenities Opportunities: because this area is mostly undeveloped it has more flexibility for future plans. It is close to the ballpark and Riverview park and could eventually ke an extension of and expansion area for that facility. 0 Linkage and Amenities Constraints: The 15N,517-owned rail spur is a prominent and central barrier to any development in this area. (]ntil the spur is abandoned and the land changes hands this area is essentially off-limits to any redevelopment. g) RE-COMMENDATIONS: Short-Term Recommendations: i) Acquire PjNSI= land upon rail spur abandonment. ii) pipe and fill landward side of ditch; Long-Term Recommendations: III) r_xtend park facilities east,with picnic areas and typical park amenities. iv) Fill,grade, and vegetate river face of levee (see Pasco Rivershore Enhancement vision). V) provide state-of-the-art separated Class I multiuse paths over the Cable F jri dge Page 84 of 1 15 lift r R 4 West Cable Bridge ` - Segment N is W E S 1 -b 1 oio 200 104) ana 5r�t F-I 4 I•'C P w,, H� GT r' R IN w S m West Cable Bridge Amenities Legend �'. ACCM POW ® Picnic Table 9....h Upland Unk.ge Kwsk Proposed Upww Unkagle ® Park+n6 Area $ACACAMkTRAIL Page 85 of i 1 3 A t West Cable Bridge Proposed 4 Legend $acapawea Trait Parks UplaW Linkaga Park Prapo�M 1pflaad_i-okaga_Propn.d 13-0 Prw—od Aca Pant Parking Area Ljt �W-..I Y die •� � ' M. YA 3 4 e J1 _ I 1I 'I Page 86 of 1 1 3 Marine Terminal a) Ownership: Port of Pasco/some private b) Landscape & Natural reatures: Army Corps of E-ngineers rip-rap levee; commercial/industrial area (mostly vacant—marine terminal side); P)NSF railroad main line and trestle bridge to the east; 5acagawea trail does not connect former Port of Pasco marine terminal with boat basin area due to bN5F Railroad tracks and trestle bridge. c) Transportation: The Trail extends through the entire length of this segment. Access is from I Oth Avenue, Washington Street, 9th Avenue, Ainsworth Avenue, andth 4 Avenue. J) General Land (jse Pattern: Mostly vacant industrially zoned land. e) Linkage and Amenities Opportunities: The Trail extends through the entire length of this segment. There is a barge dock which would ke an excellent location for an indoor/outdoor waterfront restaurant with integrated dock facilities. Kctail commercial development should ke built with ground-level parking and levee-level (and higher) retail, restaurant, entertainment, and water-dependent/water-related uses.This is another prime potential retail commercial area. 0 Linkage and Amenities Constraints: This is the site of a former WWII fuel tank facility.Some toxic spillage has occurred along the west end of the Marine Terminal area and is in the remediation process. (Anfortunately, the remediation is "low-tech" and thus more time-consuming. The area may not ke "shovel-ready" for some time. An anxious developer may choose to invest in a more intensive (and expensive) remediation process, but this is not a current likelihood. The two available direct north-south routes from this neighborhood to downtown Pasco are 4th Avenue under the Ainsworth (]nderpass, and north along the bN5F main rail line to the City Center; and north on I Oth Avenue. While both routes are fairly well 5idewalk- e9uipped for pedestrians, however neither is designed for bicycle traffic. As well, neither route is aesthetically pleasing. g) KE_COMME_NDATIONS: (see boat basin/Marine Terminal Master Plan). 2) Short-Term Kecommendations: Page 87 of 1 1 3 0 Rezone tale area for business ParL/Commercial retail. 3) Long-Term Recommendations: i) Invest in higher--tech toxic spill remediation ii) L_ncourage/Promote development as Per the tjoat Fjasin/Marine Terminal Plan. iii) P)uild an improved tram connections between Pasco's urban center and the boat basin/Marine Terminal area iv) Consider the possibility of a cantilevered pedestrian bridge bunt to the side of the F)N5F hridge v) Develop strategically sited signature gateway at 4th Ave &Lewis St vi) Identify and develop future riverside dining venues with scenic, recreational or cultural attributes. Y f 1 View Point ! Trail undercrassing `e Public beach Columbia River Tr'r View Point Enhanced boat tauerch, parking,and access New marina park J f'at'e 88 of i i 3 ' r 0/' - Moir; J9 �. Marine Terminal -• ° T Segment w E S 0 1010 240 3010 400 34-0 i feet e r rw W Marine Terminal — Amenities Legend 'J Access.Pwnt EACAGAVJEA_TRAIL IN` B.-h S...V. ea_Tral_P.po w E WI_ Rwwtr S Page 89 of i 13 n f - r77 SL(.i Q r•�_ Marine Terminal Proposed - —� 0 Legend $a-g—Trail Parks - - Lpllaad Linkage Park ProposM N LtPlood Lnkago Promed Beach Proposed Rmlorond Parking Proposed E Access Pant Caltnerraal Prwp m Fir— u I Page 90 of 1 13 150at basin a) Ownerskip:Army Corps of Engineers with City of Pasco lease/Private owners b) Landscape & Natural Features: Army Corps of Engineers rip-rap levee and dike; commercia l/industrial boat marina area and boat launch and docL in disrepair; P)N5r railroad main line and trestle bridge to the west, separating the Port Marine terminal from the boat basin; 5chlagle City park; modest residential areas; boat launch in disrepair, private marina facility; jacagawea tram does not connect former Port of Pasco marine terminal with E)oat basin area, due to PjN5r Railroad tracks and trestle bridge. c) Transportation:This area is barricaded in by the 5N5F Railroad main line to the west, The Ainsworth Overpass along the north, and the Port of Pasco's Osprey Pointe project to the east. Access is from 2'j and Gray avenues to the northeast, and a foot access from the Osprey Pointe development to the east. jince the construction of the Ainsworth overpass this area has become further isolated and less accessible, as the overpass cut off access from Railroad, 4t1', and 3rd Avenues. rurthermore, the 5acagawca Heritage Trail does not go through this area, instead winding north across the overpass avoiding the Pjoat Pjasin neighborhood, and then back down along the river at Osprey Pointe. Neighbors have reported that crime is higher here because the area is isolated from public supervision. J) General Land use Pattern: A private marina operates in the industrially zoned waterfront area, next to a public boat launch and a public park. Modest residential units occupy the residentially zoned north half of the area.A large percent of these units are owner-occupied and are neatly maintained. There are a few industrially zoned lots in the east part of the neighborhood. e) Linkage and Amenities Opportunities: A neighborhood park is already in place, with a boat launch close by. This basin lends itself well to development of a separate beach/swimming area. however the beach should be designed in a way as to separate swimming and boating activities. If the 5N5r Railroad would allow a trail underpass for the 5acagawea Trail under its main line, the Trail could continue through the neighborhood, opening up the neighborhood somewhat and adding public supervision to the area. As the Osprey Pointe project develops to the east, this area will be in higher demand for upscale residential development and an Page 9 1 of 11 3 upgrade will be warranted to the marina facility, with demand for mini-market, boat fueling,fishing supplies, and perhaps restaurant facilities at the marina. 0 Linkage and Amenities Constraints: The F)N5r Railroad has been reluctant in times past to allow for an underpass under its mainline, citing transportation security issues. As well, the Port of Pasco is reluctant to include the boat F)asin in its plans as long as the neighborhood remains unsightly and uninviting to business visitors. The high owner-occupied ratio reduces the likelihood of any major upgrades to the residential neighborhood in the short-term, although as land values in the neighborhood increase due to Osprey Pointe development, owners may be induced to sell for a reasonable profit. There are no direct north-south routes from this neighborhood to downtown Pasco. The closest access would require a circuitous route either west along Ainsworth Avenue and south at 6th Avenue, thence circling east and north to 4th Avenue under the Ainsworth (Anderpass, and north to the City Center; or east to Oregon avenue, north to Lewis Street, and west again to the city Center.The former route navigates through industrial and residential areas, the latter primarily through industrial zones on a truck route that is not bike/pedestrian friendly. g) RE-COMMENDATIONS= (5ee boat basin/Tank rarm Master Plan) Short-Term Recommendations: i) Rezone neighborhood to higher-density residential, to allow for higher-end condos. 'E_staWiA design standards for all new construction compatible with the Marine Terminal and Osprey Pointe themes. ii) begin negotiations for a E)N,5F/`jacagawea Trail underpass. Prepare a "plan >L)" "floating deck" option for the trail to drop into and floats on the River, if necessary. iii) begin plans for continuation of thejacagawea Trail through the neighborhood. iv) begin plans for a public beach separated from the boat launch facility. v) (Jpgrade dike and park facility. vi) Add path and view deck at harbor entrance of dike. Page 92 of 1 13 Long-Term Recommendations: vii) build 5acagawea Trail underpass and trail through the boat basin neighborhood. Viii)build a beach and swimming area as part of 5cklagel Park, separating koat launch uses from swimming. ix) (Jpgrade hoat launch and dock facilities. x) build a park along the River between the boat basin and Osprey Pointe, thematically connecting the two developments. xi) Consider the possibility of a cantilevered pedestrian bridge built to the side of the 5N5F kridge 1J I>n r s. 9 3,n A,- c H C,Lt-- OF a, IMp c f� cpf Page 95 of i i 3 Boat Basin ` Segment - N - 7 imp% .. o 100 aoo aoo aoo smo .* AQ • • Peet - 4! -.�#""' E:7".' - -. •, A N w w E S C} SCh G-EU DIRK j C7 r Boat Basin _ Amenities Legend Access PNM k 1-1.1 le Marker ® R-t— Bosch fl Parking Area SAGAGAWEA_TRAL Beet Lo—lr El Pier SaoKpoiw Trill PrPpowd Page 94 of i 1 3 ■ Boat Basin ... . $a ,"ea Trail Pmposed PvrkPopwed Page 95 of 1 5 Port of Pasco a) Ownership: Port of Pasco b) Landscape & Natural Features:gently sloping to increased slope, scrub vegetation with thick tree growth along river edge (NOTE.—Trees have recently keen thinned around the Osprey Pointe development to the west). C) Transportation: The port of Pasco is a hub of industrial Klver, rail, and truck transportation.The Port owns a karge docking and loading facility on the Columkia Jiver, which leads out to the Pacific and to markets in the Pacific Kim and beyond. This barge facility is located just east of the Osprey Pointe development. Several rail-spurs access the PjNj)= main lines through the Port from both the northwest and northeast. Ainsworth and Oregon Avenues provide quick access for trucking to major highways heading in all directions. The Trail has been developed through the Port property; along the river of the Osprey Pointe area and then inland along Ainsworth Avenue to the last block of warehouses, and then hack south to the river. The Trail ends at the,5acagawea State Park access road. J) General Land Use Pattern: The Port of Pasco has a mix of WWII-era warehouse facilities and vacant lands, and is zoned for heavy industrial use, thought Osprey Pointe is planned as a higher-end business park. e) Linkage and Amenities Opportunities: The completion of the first Osprey Pointe building (the Port of Pasco office) and utilities infrastructure has set the stage for further office development in the park. The Port has designed the building as an example of the design standards expected of future buildings on the site. Landscaping (including the removal of dead trees and undergrowth along the Jiver) is professional and aesthetically pleasing, as well as drought-resistant. The rest of the Port will remain heavy industrial into the foreseeable future. f) Linkage and Amenities Constraints: Trail location is constrained by industrial uses in the area. The Trail currently follows Ainsworth Avenue through the heaviest industrial use areas, leaving the river to avoid the karge loading facility and some outdoor warehousing. One river view access trail weaves ketweern some outdoor storage areas down to the }liver, but does not subsequentlyjoin up with the Trail. Page 96 of 1 15 g) Kr—COMMENDATION5: (see Port of Pasco Osprey Pointe 51-1s11'Ie55 Parr Plan). Short-Term Recommendations: 1) Continue development of Osprey Pointe as planned. ii) Connect Lookout Point tram to main Tram along the River. iii) Provide self-guided smart Phone tours addressing unique history, culture and environment of the Port of Pasco; Highlight big Pasco's working Port and businesses as a tram exhibit Long--Term Recommendations: iv) ff)uild a Park along the River between the 5oat 5asin and Osprey Pointe, thematically connecting the two developments. v) 5uild an improved trail connection between Pasco's urban center and the Osprey Pointe F)usiness FA. L �P R � o r .w Page 97 of 1 13 A' >• I ,p Port of Pasco Segment J N W E 4� S a Ed7®00 ^..� FOV LLL M w E S , Port of Pasco Amenities � Legend � Pecs ss 1-1 IrRarpr t-Mark— ® Piw UPI aM Lmkrgr + hence resk a Rant— Secag—.Tree F�p,+. Pot.0.1 HOW Aaaa ® ,,—QAI" • VIEW_POINT Sxxg—Trad PrcP .4 L� 'a Hist—Mauer T.Ile PI UDwkaPuMcy _. Pale 98 of i 1 3 1= Proposed Port of Pasco Legend ragc of 0 o jacagawea Park a) Ownership:Army Corps of Engineers/Wash jt Parks & Recreation b) Landscape & Natural Features: 5tate park; mostly flat, mix of native and non- native (park) vegetation; beach areas; docks; boat launch; historic Ainsworth Town site. c) Transportation:Access to the Park is limited to a single two-lane road entering the park from the northwest. The Tram ends at this road. An undeveloped path/road meanders through the historic Ainsworth town site. J) General Land Use Pattern: This area is partially developed as a state park with patron amenities such as parking, family and group picnic areas, a koat launch and docks, and a beach. There is housing for park staff and a museum/interpretive center. The balance of the park is vacant, with the exception of some h;gh voltage- power lines utilities crossing the Columbia River at the south shore. e) Linkage and Amenities Opportunities: 15acagawea jtate Park is partially developed and contains the only developed beach within Pasco city limits. This park rests at the confluence of the jnaLe and Columbia Rivers and is historic for its role in the Lewis and Clark L,xpedition, and contains a museum and interpretive center. The park is periodically used for sternwheeler riverboat docking as they come up river from the Pacific coast. While this may ke an ideal site for summer food vending, any commercial activity would need to he sanctioned by thejtate Parks Department. The Park isjust south of the historic Ainsworth town site, and the only public access to the site. Thejacagawea Trail should continue through the park along the north border of the access road and developed park areas, continuing along the meandering Ainsworth access road, and then north up along the 15nake River. Many areas of the park are ideal for local camping and scouting/wilderness cluk-type activities. The balance of the park area is undeveloped and amenable to wildlife viewing. Future development should allow for a few "look but don't touch" viewing trails in appropriate parts of the park. 0 Linkage and Amenities Constraints: because the park is owned and operated by the State Parks Department, the City of Pasco has limited influence over its development. As well, the Ainsworth town site is an historic site and may he difficult Page 100 of 1 15 to protect as an archaeological site, off-limits to scavenging. The northeast part of the old town site is swampy and any tram through the area may require footkridges or boardwalLs to cross over the swamp areas. g) KE-COMMENDATION5: (sate of Washington Parks Department); Short-Term Kecommendations: 1) Place drinLing fountains, shade trees, and restroom facilities at strategic points; ii) Develop overnight camping areas throughout the park iii) Design a tram extension of the 5acagawea Tram through the Ainsworth Town site and beyond. iv) Develop trams in 5acajawea State Park for opportunities to learn akout native Wildlife,geological features and the Confluence Project V) Consider more summer fairs and activities and related food vendor opportunities Long--Term Kecommendations: vi) Develop the 5acagawea heritage Tram through park and towards the Columbia Plateau/Ice Harkor Dam tram linLage; Y .M � w1dl; hh i� _ � r Page 10 1 of 1 1 3 L IN 1 Sacagawea Park } Segment f 0 100 600 400 1200 Feel ' Y N 5 Sacagawea Park Segment 9 Page 102 of 1 1 3 l� N w E s Sacagawea Park +' Proposed Legend Mp l Sacag-u Troll Ames Peinb - Sacagabvaa Trail Proposed Upland Linkage PolemBal Hahim Araa f/ Parks Parlung Area Re�lwoad '- - r 14 L i r� • 'MS� h.bi :� N• i 3 .i TrV t F h Page 103 of 1 i 3 I _ fir^ �~- ad_.."'��_-. � -_ _ - r+� �� ��- - - �� _. _ ���c: ��. �� 4 �[ •\ �� Y`�� `ti �u_ � .� t`.. `,,Y �,.: ��� � �r"e q1 _., t _ n ".. _ a. `��` _ _. ... >., d� t r �,; �+. 4 ,,,.. �., �• • tr^ 'J, Building U do Nature- f F..arfv inhabitants along the Snake and Columbia rivers lived in lodges _. constrtrcted of isaod and covered with we mats. Woad far frames was seance in the days when sage and willonw dominated the river shorn and no trees grew an the acid plains. Natisv Americans ironsport"tl the poles from forested areas on the distant hills,or collected them as drlflwoad. In recent times,Columbia River dams and irrigation systems allow tall trees am green grass to flourish in theoare-arid landseape ¢tf.A -z INT also t 4 { Notice ' Help preserve the past far- the future. ; Disturbance or removal of y artifacts is prohibited. �1 Violators are subject to � fine,and imprisonment. Ainsworth Town a) Ownership: U5 Government b) Landscape & Natural Features: steep slope areas, bN5F R-O-W with trestle bridge; overgrown with mostly non-native vegetation, salt deposits and marsh/swamp areas c) Transportation: There are no direct public access points to this point. An undeveloped, meandering path extends north from 5acagawca 5tate Park to the site. J) General Land Use Pattern: Vacant with an undeveloped archaeological site from the former Town of Ainsworth. e) Linkage and Amenities OPPortunities: The Ainsworth Town site could he developed as an historic site. The undeveloped path which winds through the site could easily kc developed into an extension of the 5acagawea Trail as it converges with the Columkia Plateau trail along the Snake River. f) Linkage and Amenities Constraints: Much of the proposed Trail path Iles in Railroad right-of-way. Any trail development would ke dependent upon vacation of existing rail uses and cooperation of the railroad. g) Kr-COMMr-NDATION5: h) Short-Term Recommendations: i) E)egin conversations with the State Park 5ervice and FW517 Railroad. ii) Plan and design a 5acagawea Heritage Trail extension through the Ainsworth Town site. i) Long-Term Recommendations: 1) continue 5acagawea path towards Ice Harkor Dam trail linkage; ii) place drinking fountains, shade trees, and restroom facilities at strategic Points; iii) Develop Town of Ainsworth archaeology site iv) Consider the possibility of a cantilevered pedestrian kridge built to the side of the PjN5r bridge Page 107 of 1 15 r. O ,f; 0r H ` ' � Ainsworth Town � �." Ainsworth Town Segment Segment a a+ ^a r),; i /.r�� 9wOLauach ® Parking Area 6 rfti N.4ze'"R R PethMJal HaMel Area � Per 4Y - S * d ❑ 100 7❑O 300 4.00 500 Sacd�awe 7W P..aaea 3he0.er faa9 .i r If R f 1 i • R f R f • f f r CIq i+ CD j`✓. 0 .r W v+ W E s Ainsworth Town Proposed Legend 13 S—g—Trail Popp—d r Potential Hl bftalA— Parinng Nen l� r Parks Rail—I TidewaterTerminal a) Ownership: P)NSF Railwac�/Tidewater Terminal Compan�/Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission. 6) Landscape & Natural Features: Steep slope; M517 R-O-W ; industrial uses; US-12 highway and bridge C) Transportation: There are no public access points to any portion of this segment. Plans are being considered to connect Sacajawea State Parl< with the Columbia Plateau Trail (CPT). Currently two existing, off-site fuel tank farms prevent a direct link between CPT and the park. While the Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission owns the former ff-)NSr Railroad ROWjust north of the Tidewater terminal, the Southern part of CPT to Ice Harbor has yet to lie developed and the trail still has railroad tracks and is used for railcar storage. The Washington State Department of Transportation (W5DOT) is scoping a project to build an interchange over highway 1 2. The current W5DOT plans include a bridge wide enough to include a bike lane. One potentially indentified route would follow Sacajawea Parl< Road up to the bridge and a route would have to be identified to connect from the bridge to the Southern end of the Trail. J) General Land Use Pattern: this area is developed with two fuel storage tank facilities, with the balance of the land being vacant. e) Linkage and Amenities Opportunities: Plans are being considered to connect Sacajawea State Park with the Columbia Plateau Trail (CPT)• The Washington State Parl<s and Recreation Commission owns the former ff)N5F Railroad ROW just north of the Tidewater terminal. W5DOT is scoping a project to connect Sacajawea Park to the CPT via Sacajawea Park Road up to an interchange over highway 12, including a bridge wide enough to include a bike lane. 0 Linkage and Amenities Constraints: Two off-site fuel tank farms prevent a direct link between the Columbia Plateau Trail and the park. While the Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission owns the former 5N5F Railroad ROW just north of the Tidewater terminal, the Southern part of CPT to Ice [- arbor has yet to be developed and the trail still has railroad tracks and is used for railcar storage. Page 1 1 0 of 1 1 3 g) RECOMMENDATIONS: Long--Term Kecommendations: i) Continue the 5acagawea Trai l/Columbia Plateau Tram towards the Columbia Plateau/Ice Harbor Dam tram linkage; ii) Install JnAing fountains, shade trees, and restroom facilities at strategic points; iii) Consider the possibility of a cantilevered pedestrian bridge bunt to the side of the ANSI=kridge Page i l i of 1 1 3 fM1 Tidewater Port Tidewater Port Proposed <� Segment N 3 Legend - a :•, $ } saN[W ea Tred Prnp+.,,,J 360 666 900 1200 +Y ` This Page Intentionally Left f)lanL