Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-18-2016 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes-1-   REGULAR MEETING February 18, 2016 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 Tanya Bowers No. 2 VACANT No. 3 Paul Mendez No. 4 Alecia Greenaway No. 5 Joe Cruz No. 6 Loren Polk No. 7 Zahra Khan No. 8 VACANT No. 9 Gabriel Portugal APPEARANCE OF FAIRNESS: Chairman Cruz read a statement about the appearance of fairness for hearings on land use matters. There were no declarations. 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 Bowers that the minutes dated January 21, 2016 be approved. The motion passed 6 to 1 with Chairman Cruz abstaining. OLD BUSINESS: A. Rezone Rezone from R-1 (Low Density Residential) to R-3 (Medium Density Residential) (Scott Lybbert) (MF# Z 2015-006) Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Dave McDonald, City Planner, discussed the rezone application from R- (Low Density Residential) to R-3 (Medium Density Residential). In the public hearing the previous month there was considerable discussion and testimony from neighbors voicing concerns -2-   relative to the proposed rezone from R-1 to R-3. A number of suggestions were made by adjoining property owners. Staff indicated at that public hearing that they would come back with a concomitant agreement for consideration and deliberations before developing a recommendation to the City Council. One of the suggestions made by one of the neighbors was that if this was to be rezoned to R-3, the house be left R-1 at the end of the site. With that thought in mind, staff has recommended rezoning the site R-3 but exclude the northern 110 feet of the property to remain R-1. This would mean along Aintree Drive there would be a buffer of single-family residential and prohibit the home from ever being converted to a duplex. Attached to the proposed rezone ordinance is a concomitant agreement that lists a set of conditions that would apply to this rezone and would get recorded in the courthouse along with the ordinance and runs with the land and binding on any future owners of the land. Once these are recorded they cannot be removed unless the Planning Commission or City Council goes through a public hearing process with a new application, in which case the neighbors would be notified again. Some of the proposed conditions are: (1) Only townhouse style attached homes with customary accessory structures would be permitted (defined as 4 or fewer units), (2) The height is limited to the height standards to the subdivision to the north and east for the R- 1 zoning which is 25 feet and language has been placed to prohibit anyone from applying for a special permit to increase the height over 25 feet, (3) Building design will not allow for metal or vinyl siding but instead must use construction materials to match the neighboring homes including, cement fiberboard siding, stucco, brick or architectural stone and all soffits would have to be boxed, (4) Along the northerly and easterly side of the property will require a 15 foot landscape buffer with a spacing of trees and the overall site itself should have a minimum of 2 trees planted for each dwelling unit, (5) A set of covenants and restrictions should be attached to this property so there would be an association responsible for maintenance of the site and landscaping and lastly, (6) To ensure no light spillage onto the adjoining properties there should be shielding of any outdoor lighting in place. Most of those items capture the concerns of the neighbors. Commissioner Polk asked for clarification on how many dwelling units are allowed. Mr. McDonald responded that the property is currently zoned R-1 which would allow for 1 dwelling unit for every 7,200 square feet. Commissioner Polk responded that she was referring to a comment made in the staff report regarding where it states that R-3 zoning would permit 1 dwelling for every 3,000 square feet of land but the developer is planning on providing 5,000 square feet of land. Mr. McDonald explained that was based on the proposal that was submitted by the applicant but it was just a conceptual plan and would have 5,000 square feet per dwelling unit. Commissioner Polk stated that she just wanted to clarify because she didn’t know if the land would be developed with more density. Mr. McDonald replied that it would be doubtful to max out at 3,000 square feet per unit because the developer will have to have driveways, roadways, parking and the buildings have to be set apart for fire safety. -3-   Chairman Cruz agreed that it would be difficult to get the maximum capacity. Commissioner Bowers asked about the traffic concerns on Aintree Drive that were addressed at the public hearing. Commissioner Polk added there were concerns about school buses as well. Mr. McDonald responded that some people complained about the narrowness of the road, however it is a standard city street but part of the problem could be the curve. They have access to Aintree Drive now and can use it. The applicant, Mr. Lybbert, is trying to improve the access in the neighborhood by inquiring the parcel along Road 68 but is still in the process of doing that. If it occurs then the main entrance would be on Road 68 and the secondary access would be off of Aintree Drive. Commissioner Bowers asked about the traffic concerns voiced by residents about Valley View Road with the difficulty for them to make turns. Mr. McDonald responded that if Mr. Lybbert cannot obtain the property along Road 68 nothing will change and it won’t make an impact. The benefit of Mr. Lybbert purchasing the property along Road 68 would require him to do a traffic study which will then indicate or dictate what improvements will need to made to Road 68, such as a turn pocket at the intersection which would provide for a left-hand turn. The street would also have to be widened and curb, gutter and sidewalk would have to be installed on the east side of the street. Commissioner Greenaway moved, seconded by Commissioner Khan, to adopt the findings of fact and conclusions therefrom as contained in the February 18, 2016 staff report. The motion passed unanimously. Commissioner Greenaway moved, seconded by Commissioner Khan, based on the findings of fact and conclusions as adopted the Planning Commission recommend the City Council rezone parcel 117-430-147 from R-1 to R-3 with conditions as specified in the February 18, 2016 staff report. The motion passed unanimously. B. Preliminary Plat Preliminary Plat for Columbia Villas, Phase 3 (Big Creek Land Co.) (MF# PP 2015-006) Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Dave McDonald, City Planner, briefly reviewed the preliminary plat for Columbia Villas, Phase 3. He explained the need to limit driveways for the commercial lot on both Road 68 and Three Rivers Drive. The approval conditions include language that restricts driveways to at least 210 feet from the intersection on both streets. The language is consistent with the concomitant agreement for the rezone. The applicant was in agreement with the driveway condition. Commissioner Bowers moved, seconded by Commissioner Polk, to adopt the findings of fact and conclusions therefrom as contained in the February 18, 2016 staff report. The motion passed unanimously. -4-   Commissioner Bowers moved, seconded by Commissioner Polk, based on the findings of fact and conclusions as adopted, the Planning Commission recommend the City Council approve the preliminary plat for Columbia Villas, Phase 3, with conditions as listed in the February 18, 2016 staff report. The motion passed unanimously. C. Rezone Rezone from R-4 (High Density Residential) to C-1 (Retail Business) (FBA Land Holdings) (MF# Z 2015- 008) Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Dave McDonald, City Planner, discussed the rezone from R-4 (High Density Residential) to C-1 (Retail Business). The conditions needed to be consistent with the preliminary plat companion application (MF# PP 2015-006). The distance for the driveways must be 210 feet in both directions. Commissioner Polk moved, seconded by Commissioner Greenaway, to adopt findings of fact and conclusions therefrom as contained in the February 18, 2016 staff report. The motion passed unanimously. Commissioner Polk moved, seconded by Commissioner Greenaway, based on the findings of fact and conclusions as adopted, the Planning Commission recommend the City Council rezone parcel from R-4 to C-1 with driveway location specified by a concomitant agreement. The motion passed unanimously. D. Rezone Rezone from C-1 (Retail Business) to C-3 (General Business) (GESA) (MF# Z 2015-007) Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Rick White, Community & Economic Development Director, discussed the rezone application from C-1 (Retail Business) to C-3 (General Business). The rezone is an effort to resolve the problem with three strands of barbed wire surrounding the GESA administrative service building located on Sylvester Street. The C-1 zoning district, which is the current zoning for the site, allows for a single strand of barbed wire. The administrative service building was constructed with three strands of barbed wire, at least on the sides of the building and the rezone was sought as a way to resolve that difference. As explained in the public hearing, the site has a need for high security. There was no clear direction on the sentiment of the Planning Commission so the public hearing was concluded and the findings were prepared for both approval and denial of the application. The Planning Commission is charged with having that deliberation and making a recommendation to City Council. Commissioner Khan asked the Commissioners if they were in favor of approval or denial. Chairman Cruz went polled the Commissioners.. Commissioner Khan stated she was a “yay” vote. -5-   Commissioner Portugal was a “nay” vote. Commissioner Greenaway stated that she was on the fence. Commissioner Polk stated that at the moment she would vote “nay”. The applicant is looking to rezone the entire site which would include the bank and she did not want to see barbed wire on that part of the site as well, although they likely wouldn’t. Also, it was mentioned in the findings of fact that the building was the reason for changing city code which was unanimously agreed upon and part of that code included that if any further renovations were done to the site to improve the value of the land GESA would have to meet the new code. If rezoned, it could allow them to avoid the new code. She stated that she understood they need three strands of barbed wire for the site but perhaps there could be a way to allow for a special permit for the barbed wire and have the site remain C-1 she would prefer that. It is a main arterial street in the city and it would be nice to see the new code continued to be relevant. Commissioner Bowers stated that she is inclined to vote “yay”. But since they do need the three strand of barbed wire it would help if there was some landscaping around the barbed wire. Commissioner Mendez stated that he was a “nay” vote for the same reasons discussed by Commissioner Polk but he is open to a concomitant agreement. Chairman Cruz stated he read through the notes from the public hearing and he stated that he is empathetic to GESA’s concerns and recognizes that the City allowed it to get permitted but making it C-3 for the single purpose of barbed wire seems Ludacris. He would vote to deny the rezone and make them work something out with the City to come up with an alternative solution. He stated that he is familiar with high security and there are many other ways to protect the building outside of barbed wire, although barbed wire is the most cost effective and therefore preferred. And while there are other C-3 properties in the area, they are not common C-3 uses and overtime will likely be zoned C-1. Commissioner Khan stated that she would change her vote to a “nay”. Commissioner Khan moved, seconded by Commissioner Greenaway, to adopt findings of fact and conclusions therefrom as contained in the February 18, 2016 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 deny the rezone request for parcel 119-451-059. The motion passed unanimously. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. Special Permit Special Permit to locate a church (Bethel Church) (MF# SP 2016-001) Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. -6-   Dave McDonald, City Planner, discussed the special permit application to locate a church. Bethel Church received a temporary special permit a few years ago to locate in the Broadmoor Outlet Mall. They received an extension to that special permit but have found a location they feel they could build a church. The site is located on Chapel Hill Boulevard just to the north of the Chapel Hill Crossings Apartments and to the west of the Villages at Chapel Hill. This site is comprised of three parcels, 7 acres, which is a decent size for a church allowing for ample parking and expansion in the future. The applicant has provided a site plan that shows the parking lot along Chapel Hill Boulevard with landscaping and the first phase of the building along with future additions to the building. They are also proposing grass fields and sports facilities along the freeway to the north of the proposed church. The church can hold approximately 570 people or more in the main auditorium which would require parking for 143 spaces, however, they are providing 227 spaces with their site plan exceeding the parking requirements. In terms of traffic, churches typically operate minimally throughout the week with their big day on Sunday. The rest of the community at that time is not generating significant amounts of traffic so there shouldn’t be conflicts with the neighborhoods and the church. On weeknights there are a few meetings but again, it is after the morning and evening rush for traffic. This site is located within the I-182 Corridor and with that there are enhanced design standards the church will have to follow. The church has indicated that the exterior of the building will be some type of stucco material which generally fits with the design standards. Staff provided findings of fact and the review of criteria to consider when reviewing special permits. Chairman Cruz asked if parking is allowed on Chapel Hill Boulevard. Mr. McDonald responded that people can park on the street. Commissioner Bowers asked for clarification on a traffic light on Chapel Hill Boulevard. Mr. McDonald replied that there is a traffic light on Road 68 at Chapel Hill Boulevard. Commissioner Polk asked if the land is zoned C-1. Mr. McDonald answered that the whole land is zoned C-1, including all of the land north of Chapel Hill Boulevard as a part of the mixed-use designation for the neighborhood. Jim Dirks, 70405 E. 713 PRNE, Richland, WA spoke on behalf of Bethel Church. He stated that the church is happy with the community and feel that this site is a good fit. Commissioner Bowers asked if the play fields would be available for the community. Mr. Dirks responded that he’s not sure. They have a facility in Prosser where their facilities are used by the community but it will be up to the specific board at the church, plus liabilities that need to be considered. Commissioner Khan asked if the church intends to keep the preschool that is currently a part of the Broadmoor Outlet Mall location. Mr. Dirks responded that he believes they would have the preschool at the new location. -7-   Commissioner Khan asked the same about the coffee shop at their current location. Mr. Dirks responded that the coffee shop isn’t currently operating and is uncertain as to whether it would continue. Commissioner Mendez asked if they continue to operate the preschool during daytime, weekday hours and how many students they accommodate because traffic is a concern. Mr. Dirks replied that he believes there are roughly 50 students and it would likely continue during the day. Commissioner Mendez asked how many members the church could accommodate for services. Mr. Dirks responded that it would hold 500 including the children’s area – the auditorium would hold roughly 450. Services have generally been at 9:00 a.m. and 11:00 a.m. at all of their locations. Commissioner Bowers asked how many have been attending at the Broadmoor Outlet Mall location. Mr. Dirks answered that they can seat roughly 300 and between the two services they currently have about 300 attendees including children. Commissioner Polk mentioned the preschool and asked if the special permit would transfer to the new location since it could affect the function of the church. Mr. McDonald responded that typically special permits are required for commercial daycares. A person could have a daycare in a home as long as you have 12 kids or less with no special permit required. Staff was unsure when the application came in whether the daycare was going to transfer over. Through this process the special permit could be modified to include the daycare so they wouldn’t have to come back and go through the process again. It is essentially a function of the church. Chairman Cruz discussed his concern regarding traffic and on-street parking on Chapel Hill Boulevard. He would like to see a constraint to have enough on-site parking to suit the maximum occupancy in the building so that cars aren’t parking on residential streets and congesting the neighborhoods. Mr. Dirks responded that he is fully supportive of that and the site plan has an overabundance of parking. Kalyn Karlberg, 6614 Aintree Drive, spoke on behalf of this special permit application. She stated that she welcomes the church to come to her area but has concerns regarding traffic on Road 68. The traffic will have to turn left and that turn lane cannot even handle morning and afternoon traffic and sometimes people have to wait 4-5 lights to be able to take a left. For 300-500 people to make a turn at the same to go to church on a Sunday it will make traffic a nightmare. It was mentioned that most traffic is down during Sunday’s but Ms. Karlberg stated that she does travel Sunday mornings and it will be very heavily -8-   trafficked. A solution would be to have someone come in and direct the traffic on Sunday mornings, such as local police, that could be hired by the church to ensure the traffic flows and doesn’t inhabit all of the people that live in the area. She stated that she has to take a left to get to her home and if she’s travelling during that time she will have to wait with 300-500 other people. Commissioner Polk mentioned that Bethel Church does have guided traffic. Chairman Cruz clarified that Bethel Church in Richland uses local police to guide traffic. With no further questions or comments the public hearing closed. Commissioner Bowers stated that she appreciated the last comment regarding guided traffic since that is one of her concerns. Commissioner Polk asked if a church would pay for a traffic study. Mr. McDonald answered that the church will be required to pay a traffic impact fee. When the last church was built off of Sandifur Parkway they had to pay a traffic mitigation fee and that church has even more attendees than this proposed church will and they get through the neighborhood fine on Sunday’s. There is also another way to come to the proposed church, as not everyone will come from Road 68. Saratoga Lane connects with Argent Road so many people coming from the south will come that way. Chairman Cruz agreed that traffic should not be an issue as the majority of the use will be on Sunday’s when traffic is generally low. He mentioned Faith Assembly on Court Street which seats 1,200 people keeps traffic moving. The proposed Bethel Church will have less attendees. Commissioner Bowers asked how many attendees might live in the vicinity around the church as that could reduce traffic. Chairman Cruz responded that it would be hard to get that type of demographic information. Commissioner Portugal asked how the traffic on Road 68 will be addressed. Mr. McDonald responded that as the properties on Road 68 develop the developers will add width to the road and curb and gutter. The City is currently working with the Department of Natural Resources to extend Chapel Hill Boulevard out to the west. Staff is also currently working with the State and Federal Highway Department to come up with a design for additional entrances/exits off of the freeway at different locations to funnel traffic away from Road 68. In addition, part of the DNR project includes Road 76 that would go up to the freeway and either over or under it. It will be a number of years before much of these projects are started. The State and Federal Highway Administration doesn’t move very fast. Rick White, Community & Economic Development Director, added that the property to the north of Chapel Hill Boulevard is currently zoned C-1 (Retail Business) which would allow -9-   for such stores as Target and since those are a permitted use, not public hearing would even be required. So while 500 people coming to the church seems like a lot, it is drastically less than a commercial store that would have large amounts of traffic 7 days per week and often during peak hours. Chairman Cruz agreed that there are permitted uses that could be developed on this property that would generate more traffic than a church. He asked in terms of the daycare if any of the Commissioners had an issue. Chairman Khan asked if the daycare would fall under this special permit. Mr. McDonald responded that it could fall under this special permit and they are licensed by the State and they would have to follow all regulations for outdoor play areas, supervision and staff. The Commissioners did not have any issues with the daycare. Commissioner Polk stated that the use even with the daycare will still mostly be the same and the impact seems marginal. Commissioner Polk moved, seconded by Commissioner Greenaway, to close the public hearing and schedule deliberations, the adoption of findings of fact and development of a recommendation for City Council for the March 17, 2016 meeting. The motion passed unanimously. B. Special Permit Special Permit to locate a preschool in an existing home (John Cooley) (MF# SP 2016-002) Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Rick White, Community & Economic Development Director, discussed the special permit to locate a preschool in an existing home in the RS-20 zoning district. The surrounding area is also zoned RS-20. The proposed preschool is expected to operate 4 days per week for 4 hours per day and would serve up to 12 children. The notable thing about this application is that the applicant and property owner do not wish to live in the home, otherwise, they would not be before the Planning Commission because the State has preempted many of the home daycare and preschool uses from consideration of local commissions for permitting. If they lived at the property, they would only need to get a business license for a home occupancy, however since they don’t wish to live there they must get a special use permit. In the staff report there is information regarding the teacher to student ratio as well as information regarding parking. It is expected with 12 children and 1-2 employees they will have either 3-4 parking stalls depending on the final number. The traffic generated will roughly be 24 trips per day based on a rough average. Staff has provided conclusions, findings of fact and proposed approval conditions noting consideration that parking must be approved by staff to meet applicable backing up, maneuvering and measurements and there may be a condition for an applicable fencing once the play area is better defined from the site drawing that the applicant has submitted. Staff received 2 emails from the public regarding this application and those had been distributed to the Planning Commissioners at the bench. -10-   Commissioner Khan asked if the public hearing should be delayed until the parking and fencing criteria are determined. Mr. White answered no, but assuming it is approved, staff would suggest conditions that would require parking to be done to City’s standards along with fencing along the play area. Jane Cooley, 709 S. Taft Street, Kennewick, spoke on behalf of her application. Chairman Cruz stated to Ms. Cooley that this is her opportunity to state her case into the record. Ms. Cooley responded that the proposal is for a Montessori style preschool, which tends to be quiet and respectful. It would be a work requirement and there would be good barriers for the children so that there will not be a need for fencing. For the most part in a 4 hour day, the children are kept active in learning experiences. She added that her preference isn’t for 12 children per day but rather 2 sessions, 4 hours long with 6 children each session. This way there will not be a need for assistant teachers. They also have 6 parking spots. Commissioner Portugal asked about not having a need for a fence. Ms. Cooley answered that they have temporary barriers on wheels which would keep the children within a close area to the house. And with a Montessori style preschool the children are kept active in learning experiences. Commissioner Portugal stated that he was concerned because sometimes children can run out. Ms. Cooley responded that they won’t be running and playing but there are barriers around the patio area and the children would stay within that confined area if they were anywhere near the house. Chairman Cruz asked if she currently operated a Montessori school and if she has contacted the State to see what they require to operate a Montessori school. Ms. Cooley answered that she currently did not operate a Montessori school but she knows the State requirements. They do not require any fencing or barriers but she does intend on placing fencing in the future. Commissioner Bowers asked if the home is currently occupied. Ms. Cooley responded that it is not. Commissioner Bowers asked if she owned the property. Ms. Cooley answered that she does. -11-   Chairman Cruz summed up the emails that the Planning Commission received as public comment. One letter was concerned about parking issues, availability and parking along Road 49. Other concerns were regarding drop-off issues due to the location near the intersection of Road 49 and Sylvester Street, safety issues of lack of fencing referencing an accident that happened recently on Sylvester. Another email asked the Commission to consider the impact of placing a preschool on Sylvester due to safety with cars racing and that careful consideration should be made to safety, parking and maintaining the property values of the homes in the area. Commissioner Bowers asked where the nearest Montessori preschools are located in Pasco. Ms. Cooley responded that they are all over but whether they are really Montessori or not she is unsure. Commissioner Khan asked if she was Montessori certified. Ms. Cooley answered that it isn’t a requirement to be Montessori certified to use the name. She added that she does have several master’s degrees in education. Commissioner Portugal asked if she was certified to be a teacher or if she had a license. Ms. Cooley responded that it isn’t required to be licensed as a teacher for a preschool. Chairman Cruz added that those certifications or licenses are not important for the Planning Commission to consider. Staff nodded yes that the parking would be on site. Charles Harding, 4804 W. Sylvester Street, spoke on behalf of this application. He asked for clarification for the parking requirements and if it would be on the property. Also, if the application were approved what would change if they no longer wished to operate a preschool but wanted to operate another business, such as selling tires. Chairman Cruz answered that special permits for preschools and other permitted uses in residential areas are very restrictive. Hours of operation, parking and other improvements they have to work through. Another business could not be operated at the property. Commissioner Polk added that it is still zoned residential so in order for another business to operate they would have to rezone the property to commercial if they wanted a business. Chairman Cruz stated that another thing the Planning Commission could do is add a condition to require the special permit to be renewed after a certain amount of time to allow for the neighborhood to see if the preschool is a good fit or mitigate any concerns. Commissioner Khan stated that she is in favor or fencing. -12-   Commissioner Mendez agreed and wanted to see fencing required. Commssioner Polk agreed but would be willing to see a temporary special permit issued to see if the current barriers are effective before making that requirement. Mr. White stated that a resolution could be a condition that states fencing is required by State licensing as mandatory. That way the City of Pasco wouldn’t be requiring the fencing or other operations of the preschool, rather leaving those requirements to the State. Chairman Cruz stated that the proposal shows adequate parking, the hours of operation are reasonable and the cap on 12 students per day is reasonable and the fencing requirement to be in accordance with State licensing requirements would work. Commissioner Mendez moved, seconded by Commissioner Portugal, to close the public hearing and schedule deliberations, the adoption of findings of fact and development of a recommendation for City Council for the March 17, 2016 meeting. The motion passed unanimously. C. Special Permit Special Permit to locate a daycare center in an existing home (Juan & Mariana Valdivia) (MF# SP 2016-003) Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Rick White, Community & Economic Development Director, discussed the special permit application to locate a daycare facility in an existing home in an RS-12 zone. Commissioner Bowers moved, seconded by Commissioner Portugal, to close the public hearing and schedule deliberations, the adoption of findings of fact and development of a recommendation for City Council for the March 17, 2016 meeting. The motion passed unanimously. D. Special Permit Special Permit to locate a temporary structure for senior services (City of Pasco) (MF# SP 2016-004) Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Dave McDonald, City Planner, discussed the special permit to locate a temporary modular building for senior services on city owned property on First Avenue. Last April the Planning Commission considered relocating the proposed building to the fire station on Oregon Avenue. After receiving bids on that project, it was determined to be too expensive to complete the project. The new proposal for the building is to move it across the street. The building is currently located on the northeast corner of the City Hall property and only it only needs to be moved 300 feet. The use of the building will require a special permit. The City is proposing to use the facility for the Meals on Wheels Program that is currently located in the Senior Center so the building will be refurbished and equipment will be placed in the building. There will -13-   possibly be other services related to senior activities taking place in the building. Staff is recommending to have the building pit set in some fashion to give it more of a permanent look and painted to match the government facility buildings in the neighborhood. Dan Dotta, 781 Tumbleweed Lane, Burbank WA spoke on behalf of the City on this application. He stated that they won’t be able to pit set the building. What they will have to do is backfill up against the 2 foot tall foundation. The problem they ran into is the weight of the triple-wide into a pit and getting the beams out. This was the only alternative to get it set. But with the backfill there won’t be any ramps and it will look like a permanent structure with landscaping around it. With no further questions or comments the public hearing closed. Commissioner Greenaway moved, seconded by Commissioner Portugal, to adopt findings of fact and conclusions therefrom as contained in the February 18, 2016 staff report. The motion passed unanimously. Commissioner Greenaway moved, seconded by Commissioner Portugal, based on the findings of fact and conclusions as adopted the Planning Commission recommend the City Council grant a special permit for the location of a modular building on parcel # 112-104- 035 with conditions as contained in the February 18, 2016 staff report. The motion passed unanimously. WORKSHOP: A. Code Amendment Home Occupations/Client Present (MF# CA 2015- 007) Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. /// COMMENTS: With no further discussion or business, the Planning Commission was adjourned at 8:38 p.m. Respectfully submitted, David McDonald, City Planner