Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1305 ResolutionRESOLUTION NO. 1305 A RESOLUTION establishing guidelines to be consulted in the consideration of land -use classification actions for mobile home development within the City of Pasco. WHEREAS, the City of Pasco, through zoning provisions, recognizes mobile homes as necessary and desirable components of the housing stock within the City of Pasco; and WHEREAS, the City of Pasco finds the recent, current, and projected trend toward mobile home structures in lieu of conventional structures may result in a disproportionate share of the regional housing market for mobile home units; and WHEREAS, the City of Pasco desires to accomodate and encourage and appropriate share of the regional housing market for mobile home units; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO: That the following policies shall be consulted in a consideration of land -use classification requests relating to the provision of mobile home units within the City of Pasco: 1. Land -use classifications for development of mobile home units should not be assigned to lands which are considered undesirable for residential development. 2. Mobile home subdivisions (RMH-1) should be located only on those lands deemed desirable for long term residential use. 3. Mobile home development on lands which are of substantial potential for higher use (commercial or industrial) should only occur in accordance with the following criteria: a. The site is on the fringe of the "higher" use area; b. The site is not anticipated to be subjected to conversion pressure :for at least ten (10) years; c. The site remains under single ownership and is classified RMH-2 or RMH-3. 4. Of the total number of mobile home units, the following proportions should generally be maintained: a. RMH-1: 50% b. RMH-2: 40% c. RMH-3: 10% 5. The number of mobile home units (in RMH-1, RMH-2, and RMH-3 combined) should not exceed 25% as a proportion of the total number -2 - of dwelling units within the greater Pasco housing market (incorporated area plus the unincorporated residential development east of Road 68 and south. of Argent Road). 6. Due to the volatility of the regional housing market, the desirable proportion of mobile home units should be reviewed annually. P'SS)ZD by the City Council of the City of Pasco this .1,-;7 day of 1979. Chet Bailie, Mayor ATT ST: E ells, City Clerk APPRO�VE'D" ' AS TO FORM Dennis J. De F lice, -City Attorney November 6, 1979 MEMORANDUM TO: PLANNING FROM: GARY CRUTCHFIELP,/City Planner Mobile Home As the Planning Commission was informed last month, the City Council has directed that the.CaTmission investigate the current proportion of mobile home develolmlent and reccmmQ nd- to the Council a policy to be used in guiding zoning decisions for mobile home development. The basic question being :raised is: How much of the city's residential land should be classified for mobile home development? To aid the Commission in arriving at a recomrrendation, the following information is provided. EXISTING CONDITIONS A. Regional Characteristics: Within'a regional context, mobile homes presently represent approximately 12% of all housing units (one of every eight units is a mobile home). Whale the outlying areas such as Benton County and the urban area fringe (West Richland) reflect the greatest proportion of mobile hares, all three of the Tri -Cities urban communities reflect mobile hcM development. Richland, with only 4% mobile homes, does not presently provide for mobile hoe subdivisions within its corporate limits; all of its mobile hares are located within mobile home parks. Table 1, below indicates the data available for each jurisdiction as of April 1, 1979. TABLE 1 MOBILE HOME UNITS IN BI -COUNTY AREA, BY JURISDICTION, 4/79 N/A: NotAlppl - AW libis A6011,,.,11 lit WEST RICHLAND KEN MgICK PASCO RICHLAND BENTON CO. FRANKLIN CO. TOTAL Total Units 11,792 10,577 6,595 1,289 10,251 N/A 40,504 Iii Units 472 1,185 789 371 2,278 N/A 5,095 Pprcerrt 4.0 11_2 11.9 28.7 22.2 N/A 12.5 N/A: NotAlppl - AW libis A6011,,.,11 lit W 's When the data for municipalities within the metropolitan area is viekkd, the proportion of mobile homes drops to about 9% (this figure drops to 8.5% when West Richland statistics are excluded).' Table 2, below reflects the urban area data. TABLE 2 MOBILE HOME UNITS, INCORPORATED JURSIDIC.TIONS WITHIN METROPOLITAN AREA, 4/79 B. Pasco Characteristics: Although the foregoing data indicates nearly 12% of Pasco's housing units are nubile homes (equivalent to the regional average discussed above, it should be noted that the data is restricted by municipal boundaries. In order to obtain a true picture of what should be regarded as the "Pasco housing market", Table 3 (below) includes tze unincorporated portion of Franklin County (to Road 68, south.of Argent Road) with the municipal statistics. '-ABLE 3 UNITS IN PASCO HOUSING MARKET, BY TYPE OF UNIT, 4/79 CITY COUNTY TOTAL WEST % # RICHLNIZ MRMWICK PASCO RICHLAND TOTAL Total Units 11 792 10,577 6,595 1,289 30,253, MH Units 472 1,185 789 371 2,817 Percent 4.0 11.2 1 11.9 28.7 9.3 B. Pasco Characteristics: Although the foregoing data indicates nearly 12% of Pasco's housing units are nubile homes (equivalent to the regional average discussed above, it should be noted that the data is restricted by municipal boundaries. In order to obtain a true picture of what should be regarded as the "Pasco housing market", Table 3 (below) includes tze unincorporated portion of Franklin County (to Road 68, south.of Argent Road) with the municipal statistics. '-ABLE 3 UNITS IN PASCO HOUSING MARKET, BY TYPE OF UNIT, 4/79 Since zoning is the principal tool used in managing ,the various types of residential and the number of units, zoning patterns must be considered. In order to project the effect of full development under current zoning conditions, Table 4 (below)estimates the number of acres currently vacant in each zoning classification and the number of housing units which might result from. full development. lit' CITY COUNTY TOTAL # % # % # % Conventional Apartments :Mobile Hones TOTAL 3472 2334 789 6595 52.6 35.4 11.9 1453 47 -0- 1500 96.8 3.2 -0- 4925 2381 789 8095 60.8 29.4 9.7 Since zoning is the principal tool used in managing ,the various types of residential and the number of units, zoning patterns must be considered. In order to project the effect of full development under current zoning conditions, Table 4 (below)estimates the number of acres currently vacant in each zoning classification and the number of housing units which might result from. full development. lit' TABLE' 4 SATURATIO14 DEVELOPMENT OF PASCO HOUSING MARKET, BY ZOZZ AND TYPE OF UNIT TYPE !DF ESTIMATED PO'=- IAL EXISTING POTENTIAL POTENTIAL UNIT ZONE VACANT ADD'L UNITS UNITS TOTAL UNITS PROPORTION, - R -1S 1200 3600 4925 8605 58.8 p R-.1" 20 80 U ' R--2 80 800 2381 3681 25.2 R3 20 500 Rivni-1 85 340 G RMH-2 150 1200 789 2329 15..9 RMH-3 -0- -0- 1555 6520 6595 13115 As indicated in Table 4., full development under.existing zoning designations could result in a proportion of nearly 16%.mobile homes (one out of every six units). Given current trends in mobile home demand, mobile hone improvements, and the increasing cost of conventional structures, the projected 16% may well be below the level of demand and the proportion of housing -stock in mobile home units a decade from now. a ADVANTAGES/DISADVAN.PAGES A. MOBILE; HOME SUBDIVISION Advantages: 1. Individual ownership usually generates greater interest in conviu ity functions, much as in conventional subdivisions. (Greater stability.) 2. Individual ownership generally means a higher level of maintenance of subdivision and individual lots (pride of ownership). 3. Property values (land and structure).are usually higher due.to land costs (information provided by Franklin County Assessor). 4. Provides greater opportunity for low and moderate income households to achieve home ownership. Disadvantages: 1. Individual ownership of lots generally represents a more permanent commitment of land resource to residential develogment than would a mobile home park under one ownership. 2. Long-term depreciation of mobile homes in a subdivision may be greater than conventional structures; however, given the contemporary factors of inflationary costs of conventional structures, increasing demand for mobile homes, and the ever -improving quality of homes produced by the mobile home industry, the rate of depreciation may become (or already be) quite comparable to that of conventional structures. Depreciation also •depends, of course., on'the quality of maintenance affored the structure; it is usually assumed that higher -valued structures receive a higher level of maintenance due sinply to the financial ability of the owner. 3. Greater municipal costs for maintenance of streets and utilities. Advantages: 1. Greater long-term ability to convert use of land. .(This advantage loses its potential as improverent requirements increase.and as demand increases for mobile have rental sites). 2. Provides greater opportunity for low and moderate income households to own their here without loXsing mobility (which may be essential to nature of employment). 3. Less maintenance cost to municipality due to private streets and utilities. Disadvantages: 1. Property values (land and structures) are usually lower (information provided by Franklin County Assessor) . '2': Due to mobility of renters, mobile here parks generally represent a less stable population. CnNCT d ]S TnNS 1. Both types of mobile home development are necessary elements of the community's housing opportunity. 2. Subdivisions, due to their relative stability, maintenance and value factors, appear to be preferrable to mobile home parks. 3. Mobile -home parks offer a unique opportunity to provide an interium use of those lands with long-term potential of higher use (commercial, industrial); however, this opportunity has an equally great potential for abuse in terms of location and, more importantly, the likelihood of ultimate conversion to a higher use. With present improvement requirements, mobile home parks may well prove to be a more permant land use than has been considered in the recent past. RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Mobile homes, whether in a subdivision or park represent a decent form of housing for their occupants; therefore, mobile home zoning (PMH -1 and RMH-2) should not be assigned to lands which are considered undesirable for residential develoFanent. 2. Mobile hone development on .lands which are of substantial potential for higher use (commercial or industrial) should only occur in accordance with the following criteria: A. The site is on the fringe of the "higher use" area; B. The site is not anticipated to be subjected to conversion pressure for at least ten years; C. The site remains under single ownership and is classified R4H-2 or RMH-3; D. The zoning action is conditioned by concomitant agreement to require review of pertinent factors in ten years and, if deemed appropriate by the City Council, reclassification to the higher use. 3. Mobile home subdivisions (RMH-1) should be located only on those lands deemed desirable for long-term residential use. 4. Mobile here units WMH-1, RMH-2,and R4H-3, combined) should not exceed 25% as a proportion of the total number of dwelling units within the "Pasco housing market" (incorporated area plus the unincorporated residential develop - went east of Road 68 and south of Argent Road). 5. Of the total number of mobile hcme units, the following proportions should generally be maintained: RMH•-1 : 50% RMH•-2 40% RM14-3,1d' 10%