Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-19-2017 Planning Commission Meeting PacketREGULAR MEETING PLANNING COMMISSION - AGENDA CALL TO ORDER: ROLL CALL: PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE APPROVAL OF MINUTES: OLD BUSINESS: A. Rezone B. Preliminary Plat VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 7:00 P.M. October 19, 2017 Declaration of Quorum September 21, 2017 Rezone from I-1 (Light Industrial) to I-2 (Medium Industrial) (Tom Kidwell) (MF# Z 2017-005) Preakness Ridge, 86 -Lot Multi -Family (Big Sky Developers LLC) (MF# PP 2017-008) A. Special Permit Location of a Church in a C-3 District (Pedro Bautista) (MF# SP 2017-012) - Continued from September 21, 2017 meeting B. Special Permit Replacement of Stevens Middle School (Pasco School District) (MF# SP 2017-013) C. Special Permit Location of Elementary School #17 (Pasco School District) (MF# SP 2017-014) D. Special Permit Location of Middle School #4 (Pasco School District) (MF# SP 2017-015) E. Special Permit Location of a Beauty School (Maria Avila) (MF# SP 2017-016) F. Rezone Rezone from RT (Residential Transition) to R-1 (Low Density Residential) (Pahlisch Homes LLC) (MF# Z 2017-006) G. Code Amendment Ordinance Amending PMC Chapter 26.28 Allowing Administrative Approval of Final Plats (MF# CA 2017-0071 VII. WORKSHOP: VIII. OTHER BUSINESS: IX. ADJOURNMENT: This meeting is broadcast live on PSC -TV Channel 191 on Charter Cable and streamed at www.pasco-wa.com/i)sctvlive. Audio equipment available for the hearing impaired; contact staff for assistance. REGULAR MEETING PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING CALL TO ORDER: September 21, 2017 The meeting was called to order at 7:00pm by Chairwoman Roach. POSITION MEMBERS PRESENT No. 1 Tanya Bowers No. 2 No. 3 Paul Mendez No. 4 Alecia Greenaway No. 5 No. 6 Ruben Alvarado No. 7 Zahra Roach No. 8 Pam Bykonen No. 9 Gabriel Portugal APPEARANCE OF FAIRNESS: MEMBERS ABSENT Joseph Campos Joe Cruz Chairwoman Roach read a statement about the appearance of fairness for hearings on land use matters. There were no declarations. Chairwoman Roach 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. There were no objections. ADMINISTERING THE OATH: Chairwoman Roach explained that state law requires testimony in quasi-judicial hearings such as held by the Planning Commission be given under oath or affirmation. Chairwoman Roach swore in all those desiring to speak. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Commissioner Greenaway moved, seconded by Commissioner Bykonen that the minutes dated August 17, 2017 be approved. The motion passed unanimously. OLD BUSINESS: A. Special Permit Wireless Tower IPI Tower Development LLC with T-Mobilel IMF# SP 2017-0111 Chairwoman Roach read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Rick White, Community & Economic Development Director, discussed the special permit for the location of a wireless tower. Since the previous meeting, staff has added -1- a condition regarding the color of the tower. The tower must be painted a neutral color and will occur during the permitting stage. There were no additional comments. Commissioner Bowers moved, seconded by Commissioner Greenaway, to adopt findings of fact and conclusions therefrom as contained in the September 21, 2017 staff report. The motion passed unanimously. Commissioner Bowers moved, seconded by Commissioner Greenaway, based on the findings of fact and conclusions therefrom, the Planning Commission recommend the City Council grant a special permit to PI Tower Development LLC for the location of an 80 -foot monopole and its associated ground equipment at 2600 North 20th Avenue with conditions as contained in the September 21, 2017 staff report. The motion passed unanimously. B. Rezone Rezone from RS -12 (Suburban) to C-1 (Retail Business) (DBsD Enterprises) (MF# Z 2017-0031 Chairwoman Roach read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Dave McDonald, City Planner, discussed the rezone application from RS -12 to C-1. Staff had no additional comments to add to this item. Commissioner Bowers asked if the final determination after last month's discussion was in favor of rezoning to multi -family residential or commercial. Mr. McDonald responded that the recommendation is to rezone from Residential Suburban (RS -12) to Retail Commercial (C-1). Commissioner Greenaway asked if this parcel was within the city limits. Mr. McDonald responded that this piece of property was in the city limits. Commissioner Mendez asked if there are any known developments that will be occurring on this site. Mr. McDonald said the applicant didn't have a specific plan other than some type of commercial. This site would lend itself to a small strip development. Commissioner Bowers moved, seconded by Commissioner Alvarado, to adopt findings of fact and conclusions therefrom as contained in the September 2, 2017 staff report. The motion passed unanimously. Commissioner Bowers moved, seconded by Commissioner Alvarado, based on the findings of fact and conclusions as adopted, the Planning Commission recommend the City Council rezone parcel number's 118-552-022 and 118-552-081 at the southwest corner of Argent and Road 68 from RS -12 to C-1. The motion passed unanimously. -2- C. Zoning Determination Determination of Zoning in the D&D Annexation Area (City of Pasco) (MF# ZD 2017-0021 Chairwoman Roach read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Dave McDonald, City Planner, discussed the zoning determination application for the D&D Annexation Area. This item is to determine zoning on a piece of property prior to annexation so that once it is annexed, zoning will be assigned. There will still need to be an annexation hearing held by City Council. Staff had no additional comments. Chairwoman Roach asked if there was a date set for the City Council annexation hearing. Mr. McDonald responded that it would be in October but a date has not been set. Commissioner Alvarado asked what could happen if City Council decided not to annex this piece of land, would that still allow the neighboring site just recommended for rezone to develop commercial — would it have enough land still to develop commercial without this piece of land. Mr. McDonald answered that they have indicated that they would annexation. They signed a resolution shortly after the initial petition came in with conditions. The process is now in the applicant's court to complete the second petition to move forward. Commissioner Greenaway moved, seconded by Commissioner Bykonen, to adopt findings of fact and conclusions therefrom as contained in the September 21, 2016 staff report. The motion passed unanimously. Commissioner Greenaway moved, seconded by Commission Bykonen, based on the findings of fact and conclusions as adopted, the Planning Commission recommend the City Council zone the D&D Annexation Area (parcel number's 118-552-031) to C-1. The motion passed unanimously. D. Code Amendment Revisions to Residential Design Standards for False Dormers & Flat Roofs (City of Pasco) IMF# CA 2017-004) Chairwoman Roach read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Rick White, Community & Economic Development Director, discussed the code amendment for revisions to residential design standards for false dormers and flat roofs. The Commission has seen this item several times and has had discussion. There has been one change since the previous staff report. The proposed ordinance allows false dormers on roof pitches at least 5/12, however last month it stated 6/12 pitch. -3- Chairwoman Roach asked if there would need to be 30 sqft of glazing or 32 sqft. and what side of the property. Mr. White clarified that it was only for the front side of the property. And there is an option in case someone doesn't want that much open window area. Commissioner Mendez asked what "fenestrated false" dormers were. Mr. White responded that it meant those that have openings. Commissioner Alvarado asked if there has been much interest for more flat roofs and if that was the reason for the rezone. Mr. White replied that there has been interest but as of now there hasn't been a tool to handle those that do want a flat roof. There is the option to apply for a variance which is difficult to get because there is nothing "special" about a lot to justify a flat roof. That is the reasoning for the code amendment. Commissioner Bykonen moved, seconded by Commissioner Greenaway, the Planning Commission adopt the findings of fact as contained in the September 21, 2017 staff memo regarding roof pitch and false dormer requirements. The motion passed unanimously. Commissioner Bykonen moved, seconded by Commissioner Greenaway, the Planning Commission recommend the City Council adopt the proposed code amendment regarding roof pitch and false dormer requirements as attached to the September 21, 2017 staff memo to the Planning Commission. The motion passed unanimously. E. Code Amendment Revisions to CBD Zoning (City of Pasco) IMF# CA 2017-005) Chairwoman Roach read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Rick White, Community & Economic Development Director, discussed the code amendment for revisions to the Central Business District (CBD) Zoning. There were no additional comments from staff. Chairwoman Roach asked if this would exclude the Pasco Specialty Kitchen. Mr. White said no because it didn't qualify. Chairwoman Roach asked if consignments stores used to have to be only 300-500 feet from another and not 1,000 feet from each other and if that changed. Mr. White said no, it hadn't changed and 1,000 feet is what was adopted years ago. ME Commissioner Mendez asked if this ordinance would prohibit taverns and pool halls in the downtown area. Mr. White replied that this code amendment doesn't but the one adopted in the 1990's did and there haven't been changes made to it since. Commissioner Bowers moved, seconded by Commissioner Portugal, the Planning Commission recommend to City Council the adoption of the proposed amendments to the Central Business District Zone as contained in the September 21, 2017 Planning Commission staff report. The motion passed unanimously. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. Special Permit Location of a Church in a C-3 District (Pedro Bautista) (MF# SP 2017-012) Chairwoman Roach read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Rick White, Community & Economic Development Director, discussed the special permit for the location of a church in a C-3 zoning district. Churches require the special permit process regardless of zoning. This site may look familiar as a site for a church because it was approved by the Commission in 2011 for a church in almost the same location on the back side of the strip mall on the corner of Road 34 and Court Street. This is almost identical except it involves a different suite in the building. The church will be roughly 1,000 square feet. The special permit that was granted in 2011 cannot be used for this application because it contained a condition that stated it was personal to the church applicant at that time rather than the locations. Staff would recommend that the Commission not include that condition on this particular special permit should they decide to recommend approval. There is plenty of parking at this site and churches rarely, if ever, conflict with the typical business day commercial traffic. Commissioner Bowers asked if there was anything in the staff report about bathrooms and if staff knew how many were available. Mr. White responded that he did not know how many bathrooms were available but one of the conditions is that they meet the International Building Codes so it will be handled. Pedro Bautista, 1327 N. 24th Avenue, Apt. 3A, spoke on behalf of his application. Commissioner Alvarado translated on his behalf. He wanted to make sure his congregation had a legal place to come pray and worship. Commissioner Portugal asked the applicant in Spanish if he understood the conditions contained in the staff report. Mr. Bautista responded that he did not. -5- Chairwoman Roach stated that the Commission should go over the conditions with the applicant to ensure he understood them clearly. Mr. White responded that staff can work with the applicant as there are several employees available to translate. Commissioner Portugal explained to the applicant to arrange a time with staff to go over the conditions. Chairwoman Roach asked if the Commission should continue the public hearing to allow the applicant a chance to meet with staff and bring back any questions or comments. Mr. White replied that the Commission can continue the hearing. Commissioner Mendez asked how many people would attend the church. Mr. Bautista said only about 6 people. Chairwoman Roach asked if they plan to expand. Mr. Bautista responded that they are hoping to grow. He asked if he would have access to the building. Commissioner Portugal said once the permit is issued which could be 1-2 months since it has to come back to the Planning Commission and to Council. Mr. Bautista said that he understood. Commissioner Alvarado reiterated everything in Spanish for the applicant. Commissioner Mendez moved, seconded by Commissioner Greenaway, to continue the public hearing to the October 19, 2017 Planning Commission meeting for deliberations and the development of a recommendation for City Council. The motion passed unanimously. B. Rezone Rezone from I-1 (Light Industrial) to I-2 (Medium Industrial) (Tom Kidwell) IMF# Z 2017- 0 Chairwoman Roach read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Dave McDonald, City Planner, discussed the rezone application from I-1 to I-2. The property owner owns several parcels along the PK Highway, Ventura Road and Commercial Avenue. There was a hearing on this same site about a month ago for a special permit to locate a ready -mix plant. The applicant now wishes to rezone the property to I-2. This site has been included in the Comprehensive Plan for over 35 years for industrial development. Within the Comprehensive Plan the industrial designation doesn't specify what zoning district properties are to be zoned but that is to take place through the hearing process. The industrial designation would allow properties to be rezoned to I-1, I-2 and I-3, except I-3 is just reserved for the Port of Pasco down along the river near the Sacagawea Park. The difference between I-1 and I-2 zoning is mainly that in the I-2 zone, property owners can locate salvage yards, junk yards, automobile wrecking yards and then the list of conditional uses would require special permit are lengthy compared to the I-1 zone. I-2 zone conditional uses would include: garbage dumps, rendering plants, acid manufacturing, cement and lime manufacturing, commercial composting and asphalt batch plants. The surrounding area does have more intense industrial uses. Just up the road is the regional dump site for Basin Disposal. There are also food processors, warehouses for storing potatoes and onions and at certain times of the year those warehouses can have a very foul odor that you wouldn't find in heavier commercial or light industrial areas. Provided in the staff report is a list of findings of fact for review. Commissioner Bowers asked about the Oxarc facility mentioned in the staff report and if it was the name of a company. Mr. McDonald responded yes, they are a welding supply facility. Commissioner Alvarado voiced concern because across the highway there is residential. He has heard complaints from residents in this area about odors so he is worried if it is zoned I-2, it would only add to the problem. Mr. McDonald replied that is why most of the foul smelling items are contained in the conditional use section. If an asphalt batch plant wanted to come along or a rendering plant, they would require an additional hearing and at the hearing stage the Planning Commission can place conditions on that use or recommend denial. This provides another step and safeguard for the community and that neighborhood with the conditional use process. Commissioner Alvarado asked if there was a process for letting those residents know about the rezone application. Mr. McDonald said that there is a notification sent to property owners within 300 feet of the proposed site and the residents in this case are well beyond 300 feet. There is a notice placed in the newspaper and posted on the City's website. Commissioner Alvarado clarified that the residents near this proposed site yet were past the 300 foot radius notification would have to know to check the paper. Mr. McDonald replied that the City could send the residents an additional notice to these residents specifically as an option. Commissioner Alvarado said that he felt it would be important to these homeowners -7- because at this time he doubts most of them are aware. Commissioner Portugal asked about the 300 foot radius notification and how that is a State mandate. He asked for clarification on the rules. Rick White, Community 8s Economic Development Director, replied that this had come up in the past and it involved a cell tower application. That specific concern was taken to City Council through 2-3 workshop hearings and Council opted to maintain the required distance consistent with State law and the rest of the applications and cities in Washington State. He said he was unsure of which neighborhood nearby this site Commissioner Alvarado was referring to but he thinks the nearest neighborhood is 1,800 feet away. Commissioner Alvarado said he believed that right across from Sunrise Estates there is future development coming. Mr. White responded that he wasn't certain on the distances but from the edge of the proposed site to Highway 12 is roughly 700-800 feet or more. One of the reasons City Council decided not to change the 300 foot radius notification because it gets extremely complicated and the likelihood of anyone within 2,100 feet worried about a project that far away is slim. Chairwoman Roach asked if there is a public notice that is posted on the property. Mr. White said no - it is posted on the webpage, in the newspaper and sent directly to property owners within 300 feet of the exterior boundaries of the site. Commissioner Bykonen clarified that the notice was sent to the property owner, not necessarily the resident. Tom Kidwell, 4320 River Haven, spoken on behalf of his application. The purpose of this public hearing is only for the rezoning of the property. He will have to come back through a public hearing for a special permit in order to locate an asphalt plant at this location. Chairwoman Roach asked if he had someone interested in this site for a particular use. Mr. Kidwell responded that it was the same gentleman that was at the previous month's public hearing for a concrete plant. Chairwoman Roach asked if the entirety of the site would be used for concrete and asphalt. Mr. Kidwell said yes. The name of the company is JMAC from Wenatchee, Washington and from his understanding they run a very clean operation. In Chairwoman Roach asked if there was anything else he would like to state. Mr. Kidwell answered that he would like the Commission to move forward with the rezone so he can come back to the Planning Commission with the special permit application which will involve more detail. The special permit cannot be requested until a rezone has been approved. Randy Hayden, Executive Director for the Port of Pasco, 1110 Osprey Pointe Blvd, spoke on behalf of the rezone application. He stated that he was not in opposition of the rezone but did have some concerns. The Port has been speaking with DNR who owns the land to the northeast to purchase for a future industrial park, like the Pasco Processing Center. His concern is if an asphalt plant locates at this site, which is the interest expressed by the applicant, there could potentially be odors that would detract from a food processor. He isn't certain that it would be a deterrent and in today's standards there are probably stricter controls on asphalt plants, but he is concerned it could still potentially detract from potential food processors. In terms of the residential, he did feel that the proposed site is far enough away downwind of odors that would come back to the houses so it shouldn't be much of an issue. The existing uses surrounding the property, such as the garbage dump and onion sheds, are far enough away to the north and east that they don't have the same character. If it were allowed, he would ask that when the special permits come in that the Commission is very careful on how they are compatible with the other types of uses. The Port is trying to attract industry in Pasco and if it becomes unattractive to those types of food processessors, he would hate to see the business lost. On the other hand, a new asphalt plant would be good in Pasco. A lot of asphalt is used at the airport and having competition in the area could be a good thing. Chairwoman Roach responded that the Commission has already approved a special permit for a concrete ready -mix plant for the southern portion of this site. Mr. Hayden replied that he was aware of the approval of the concrete ready -mix plant and didn't see any issues with that type of activity. With no further questions or comments the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Bowers asked if asphalt production was different than concrete. Mr. McDonald answered yes. Chairwoman Roach asked if there was an unpleasant odor created by asphalt mixing plants. Mr. McDonald said there was, especially with the older plants. The newer modern plants try to control the odor. Commissioner Bykonen added that she believed there was an asphalt company in Richland on Lacey Road in case any of them were curious to check on the odors. W Commissioner Portugal asked Commissioner Bykonen if she smelled the odors and if she could describe it. Commissioner Bykonen said it smells like tar, such as when tarring a roof. Rick White, Community & Economic Development Director, said that in 2008 there was an asphalt plant requested on the west side of town at the American Rock site. The City required an environmental impact statement and the hearings were a big deal. Through that process of the impact statement and the hearings, staff learned quite a bit about asphalt plants and toured several, particularly the ones that heat the aggregate now instead of the oil and tar. The new technique is far different than the old technique that heated the oil, tar and aggregate at the same time. The old way used to even emit a blue smoke the fumes were so strong and today it isn't that way. There are certainly process requirements that would have to be looked at to locate an asphalt plant anywhere in the Pasco city limits. Commissioner Mendez said he assumed that plant was not approved. Mr. White responded that it was approved with several conditions but the company was sold to American Rock and they aren't interested in asphalt. Commissioner Mendez asked if that site is located near Rivershore Estates. He said that the City likely received a lot of comments. Mr. White said the City received several. Commissioner Alvarado asked if there was a quantified way to know the extent of the potential smell or if a study has been done. Mr. White said there are some "rule of thumbs" from what was learned in 2008 and the quantity of odor is far less than from an old style of plant. The studies done in 2008 tried to quantify the amount of dilution of the odor that takes place based on the distance away from the odor source. Past 600'-800' from the odor source it is very difficult for any detection to occur. The prevailing winds would also work in favor at this particular location because the winds would carry to an uninhabited area to the east. Commissioner Alvarado asked about the current odors the residents receive. Mr. White said it was also a weather pattern and there is sometimes inversion where the air doesn't go anyplace which is why there is sometimes agrictultural smells, even at City Hall. The odors typically happen when there is an inversion or fog. Chairwoman Roach reminded the commission of condition #4 and that there are additional protections in place as well as another hearing would be required for the actual special permit for the asphalt plant, this application is for a rezone. -10- Commissioner Greenaway moved, seconded by Commissioner Bowers, to close the public hearing on the proposed rezone and set October 19, 2017 as the date for deliberations and the development of a recommendation for the City Council. The motion passed unanimously. C. Preliminary Plat Preakness Ridge, 86 -Lot Multi -Family (Big Sky Developers LLCI (MF# PP 2017-0081 Chairwoman Roach read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Dave McDonald, City Planner, discussed the preliminary plat application for Preakness Ridge, 86 -lots of multi -family. In 2003, the Chapel Hill Development received preliminary plat approval and that development was a mixed-use development containing single-family homes, three sections for multi -family development and some commercial development in between Chapel Hill Boulevard and the freeway. It is a long narrow strip of land that is a little difficult to develop. The City has received a request from a developer that has developed in Pasco in the past and would like to develop this site with zero lot line duplex type of homes similar to what is located on Sandifur Parkway at Road 76. They built duplexes with one unit on each lot and the common wall was the property line and has been a successful development. This developer would like to replicate that at this location. There are other properties in the community similar and they have been listed in the staff report. One of those is the townhomes behind Walmart on Road 76 and Mediterranean Villas is another example. The other option the developer would have at this location is to build multi -story larger buildings. In fact, last year the Building Department received a permit application for a 220 unit apartment complex at this site. They paid their plan review fee then backed out. This property is zoned for multi -family and is located across the street that is also zoned for multi -family. Commissioner Bowers asked about the area just west of this site zoned R-3. Mr. McDonald responded that it is a park site and that there will be a 5 acre park located there that was dedicated to the City a couple of years ago. The developer put in the street, sidewalk and stubbed water and sewer. Mr. McDonald added that the staff report didn't include drawings so the drawings were passed out to the Commissioner's. Chairwoman Roach stated that she remembers this item coming to the Planning Commission a few years ago with the previous applicant applying for a rezone of this property and the neighborhood input. Mr. McDonald clarified that it wasn't this property but the property across the street. This property has been zoned since 2003. Chairwoman Roach asked about the substation. She said it appears from the aerial view there are arborvitaes along three sides and one side is open and asked if that side -11- didn't have any arborvitaes due to driving access. Mr. McDonald said that is correct - it is the side the substation is accessed and in that area to the west they have a number of vaults with equipment. The developer will be putting a fence up on his side. The property lines go to the substation but there is a large easement running north and south that they won't be able to build on because access is needed to the substation. They also have an easement for the substation access along the southern portion of the plat coming off of the cul-de-sac and that portion will not be able to be built on either. Chairwoman Roach asked if the dashed line in their image was the access route for the substation. Mr. McDonald responded yes. The easement on the eastern edge is 40' wide and there are two easements on the south, one for access and one for electrical equipment. Chairwoman Roach asked if there was any concern for this plat being so close to the substation. Mr. McDonald said no. The Columbia Place subdivision lies between Bums Road and Sandifur Parkway and directly across the street from there is a substation. There is another major substation at Road 92 near larger homes as well as one on Court Street with homes across the street. Chairwoman Roach added that it's enforced in a way that discourages people to trespass. Mr. McDonald replied that it definitely is enforced with barbed wire fencing around it. Commissioner Alvarado asked about frontage between Chapel Hill Boulevard and "Road A". He said he assumed that the duplexes would be facing the proposed "Road A" and that there would be a fence on Chapel Hill. Mr. McDonald responded that they will be fronting "Road A" but the developer hasn't decided yet if he will put a fence up. The fourplexes against the freeway just west of where the park will be currently do not have any fencing or barriers. Commissioner Alvarado said the developer may need to get creative because it could look awkward to have homes on the other side and facing the back of a home without a fence or the home just has a big fence in front of it. Mr. McDonald said the fence my not be a problem, perhaps a little awkward with the backs of the duplexes facing the homes but it doesn't appear to be awkward or create any problems with the fourplexes and there are homes directly across the street from them. -12- Caleb Stromstad, 5804 Road 90, spoke as a representative for the applicant. He said the staff report was pretty straightforward and he had nothing to add unless the Commission had questions. Commissioner Alvarado asked what the developer was thinking of doing for the design. Mr. Stromstad replied that they are still working on the grading concept. There are some unique grading challenges at this site. As far as the backyards go, they do not have a plan to fence but there will likely need to be a wall in some places on the Chapel Hill side just to make the grades work. Overall, the developer really wants the product to look good. The zero lot line homes have a higher resale value and will make the neighborhood look attractive. He asked for clarification about the process and if this item will come back to the Planning Commission next month. Chairwoman Roach said yes. It will come back to the Planning Commission who will then make a recommendation to City Council. Rick White, Community & Economic Development Director, clarified that this was the public hearing and there will be no more hearings. The Commission will deliberate on this item in the next month, make a recommendation in October and then it will go to the first City Council meeting in November. Mr. Stromstad said that with other cities the decision would be made and forwarded to City Council in one meeting and didn't know what the reason was behind having a second meeting which delays the process. There were no citizens in the audience to complain on the item. Mr. McDo d responded that there is a process set up that requires a public hearing, were tes mony and information is submitted. Then in Pasco, the hearing in closed and Planning Commission comes back the following month to deliberate and discu s it. That is the current process used. With no further questions or comments the public hearing closed. Commissioner G eenaway moved, seconded by Commissioner Mendez, to close the public hearing on the proposed subdivision and initiate deliberations and schedule adoption of findings of fact, conclusions and a recommendation to the City Council for the October 19, 2917 meeting. The motion passed unanimously. WORKSHOP: / A. Code-Ainendment Ordinance Amending PMC Chanter 26.28 Allowing Administrative Approval of Final Plats (MF# CA 2017-007) Chairwoman Roach read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. -13- Rick White, Community & Economic Development Director, discussed the ordinance amending PMC Chapter 26.28, allowing administrative approval of final plats. Currently, preliminary plats come to the Planning Commission for public hearing, then come back for deliberations and are then sent on to City Council for a recommendation to approve or deny a preliminary plat with a number of conditions. The applicant will have 5 years to fulfill those conditions based on the preliminary plat approval. When it is complete, and they are often done in phases, the phases go to City Council for approval. It is a pro -forma approval because at that stage everything is complete. The improvements are constructed, conditions complied with and if the improvements aren't constructed, a bond is posted in case the developer walks from the project the City can complete the public improvements, such as a road or park. Up until July of 2017, State Law requires that final plat process to go through City Council for approval but that has been changed to allow administrative approval of the final plat. Staff has developed an ordinance that appears to change a lot in our existing subdivision code but it actually changes very little. It clarifies some items and allows administrative approval instead of City Council approval. The process the Planning Commission is involved with won't change at all and the City Council will still be hearing the Commission's recommendations on preliminary plats just as they do now. But in 5 years from now when the plat is completed, City Council won't be involved should this code amendment be processed and approved. Chairwoman Roach asked if this ordinance would take 5 years to be put into effect. Mr. White replied that if it is approved it will go into effect when it is adopted by City Council but it is an amendment to the subdivision code. The Planning Commission should weigh in on what Council should do. Chairwoman Roach said she would support the process to move more expediently as there has been such requests from the public and applicants. This may help move things along. Mr. White added that once the preliminary plat is approved by Council they may not see plat again and neither does the Planning Commission. When it does come back to Council for final approval it's on the consent agenda, it's not even a hearing or discussed. It would save 2-4 weeks of time at the end of the process when everything is complete and the developer just needs approval which is what the state law was getting at. Commissioner Portugal added that there needs to be a balance between expedience and the process to make sure nothing backfires. While he understands there are deadlines, he does want us to use caution to ensure the well-being of the residents. Commissioner Greenaway said she agreed with Commissioner Portugal but the problem is 5 years down the road when the project is complete that step in the process should be quick. -14- Commissioner Bykonen reminded the Commission that once the plat is ready for final approval by Council, it is put on the consent agenda and Council doesn't even discuss it and that has been her experience regardless of the jurisdiction. Commissioner Alvarado asked if staff saw any drawbacks to the ordinance amending the PMC. Mr. White said no. Commissioner Portugal discussed the process of cell towers and how it is decided for the companies to disguise them, such as the pine tree cell tower on Road 68 and Court Street or not disguise them as some other towers in the community. He asked if it was possible to have a requirement for cell towers or to make older cell towers to look more aesthetic. Mr. White responded that as Commissioner Cruz once pointed out, that sometimes it is site specific and a tower disguised as a tree may look good in one location but out of place and worse in another location. At the same meeting where the cell tower disguised as a pine tree was approved there was also a cell tower approved disguised as a church steeple on top of a church. It is more of a location basis but the Planning Commission weighs in on the decision. Commissioner Alvarado asked if the item they were discussing the ordinance amendment was for development of plats. Mr. White replied yes and with the code amendment the Planning Commission typically looks at it first at a workshop and then staff takes direction and makes any necessary changes based on feedback and then schedule a hearing to come back to the Planning Commission with a draft ordinance for a recommendation. There were no further questions or comments. OTHER BUSINESS: With no further discussion or business, the Planning Commission was adjourned at 8:25 p.m. Respectfully submitted, David McDonald, City Planner stem REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION MASTER FILE NO: SP2017-012 HEARING DATE: 09/21/17 ACTION DATE: 10/19/17 BACKGROUND REQUEST: SPECIAL PERMIT: 1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: APPLICANT: Pedro Bautista 1327 N 24th Ave Apt 3A Pasco, WA 99301 Location of a Church (Iglesia de Dios Pentecostes "Casa de Milagros") in a C-3 District Legal: Parcel # 115-502-016: The West 264' of the North 330' of the NE quarter of the NW quarter of the NW quarter Section 25, Township 9 North, Range 29 East W.M. General Location: 3330 West Court Street, Suite Q Property Size: Approximately 1.8 acres; suite around 1,000 square feet 2. ACCESS: The site has access from West Court Street and Road 34 3. UTILITIES: Municipal utilities currently serve the site. 4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The property is currently zoned C-3 (General Business) and contains various commercial suites within the existing building. Surrounding properties are zoned and developed as follows: NORTH: CR - Commercial Strip Centers SOUTH: C-3 - Office and Parking Lot EAST: C-3 - U -Haul Storage Facility WEST: C-3 - Auto Licensing Office and Parking Lot 5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The site is designated in the Plan for future commercial uses. The Plan does not specifically address churches, but elements of the Plan encourage the promotion of orderly development including the development of zoning standards for off-street parking and other development standards. Policy LU -2-B of the Comprehensive Plan encourages the support of facilities for educational and cultural activities. 6. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The City of Pasco is the lead agency for this project. An environmental determination will be made after the public hearing for this project. A Determination of Non- Significance or Mitigated Determination of Non -Significance is likely for this application (WAC 197-11-355). ANALYSIS The applicant is seeking a special permit to allow the location of a church in a multi -tenant commercial center at 3330 West Court Street. Churches are defined in Pasco Municipal Code as "Unclassified Uses" which require a special permit prior to locating in any zone within the City. The applicant proposes to locate the church within Suite Q which occupies around 1,000 square feet of floor area inside the building. One of the neighboring suites, Suite K, had previously been used as a church, as the applicant at the time had been granted a special permit in 2011. It has since ceased operation. Even though Pedro Bautista is applying for an identical use within the same building, the special permit that was granted in 2011 is personal to the initial applicant and cannot be transferred. The proposed site has been developed with a commercial structure since 1980. The approximately 20,000 square foot building contains 17 suites which are divided into two separate buildings that are nearly identical in size and layout. The parcel contains 100 parking stalls which are divided into two parking lots—one for each commercial building. It is anticipated the Casa de Milagros Church will use the space on Sunday mornings and Wednesday evenings with around twenty church -goers in attendance. In terms of occupancy load, the proposed tenant space has a maximum capacity of 113 people based on interior floor area. Off-street parking for visitors will not be an issue, as many of the businesses in the neighboring suites will be closed on Sunday mornings and Wednesday evenings, providing plenty of surplus parking. Furthermore, traffic generated by the church will occur mostly on Sunday mornings when traffic is minimal and when many of the adjacent businesses will be closed. Wednesday evening church activities generally generate less traffic than Sunday morning meetings. The operations of churches generally generate few complaints from adjoining property owners A potential problem with a church locating in a commercial area is the fact that some retail establishments or restaurants sell or serve liquor. There is a concern some churches may object to the approval of liquor licenses nearby. The issue is typically addressed by placing a condition on the Special Permit approval limiting the church's ability to object to a liquor license. 2 Therefore, they decided to extend the public hearing to the next meeting on October 19, 2017. At this time, staff believes that the applicant fully understands the conditions, as they were explained to him in his first language. It is expected that the Planning Commission will both close the public hearing and make a formal recommendation to City Council on October 19. 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 unclassified uses requiring review through the special permit process prior to locating or expanding in any zoning district. 2. The proposed church site is zoned C-3 (General Business). 3. The proposed site is located at 3330 West Court Street. 4. The site is approximately 1.8 acres. 5. The site contains two identical 10,000 square foot multi -tenant commercial structures. 6. The proposed tenant suite is around 1,000 square feet in floor area. 7. The site contains 100 off-street parking stalls. 8. The main access to the site is from West Court Street. Secondary access is available from Road 34. 9. The proposed site has been developed with a commercial structure since 1980. 10. Suite K, a neighboring suite, had previously been granted a special permit for a church in 2011 but has since ceased operation. 11. Church functions will occur on Sunday mornings and Wednesday evenings. CONCLUSIONS BASED ON THE 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 conclusion based upon the criteria listed in P.M.C. 25.86.060 and determine whether or not the proposal: 3 (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 elements of the Plan encourage the promotion of orderly development including the development of zoning standards for off-street parking and other development standards. Policy LU -2-13 of the Comprehensive Plan encourages the support of facilities for educational and cultural activities. (2) Will the proposed use adversely affect public infrastructure? The proposed use will have a minimal impact on 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. (3) Will the proposed use be constructed, maintained and operated to be in harmony with existing or intended character of the general vicinity? Churches are typically located in or near residential areas. In this case, all surrounding land uses are of a commercial nature. The site would not be modified to appear any differently than retail businesses located in the same building. (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 location and height of the existing structure has not discouraged the development of permitted uses on surrounding properties in the past. No exterior site modifications are proposed. Any prospective businesses seeking to locate within the vicinity will not be affected by the proposed 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? Churches are typically used infrequently, generally two or three days per week and generate traffic during off-peak times such as Sunday mornings and in evenings during the week. Increases in traffic will be during off-peak hours and are unlikely to exceed levels the commercial center experiences on a typical weekday. It is unlikely the effects of church operation will be any more objectionable than other uses 4 regularly permitted in a C-3 zone. Permitted uses in the C-3 zone include: Heavy equipment sales and service, warehouses, auto sales and service, etc. (6) Will the proposed use endanger the public health or safety if located and developed where proposed, or in anyway will become a nuisance to uses permitted in the district? Past history of church operations within the City has shown they do not endanger public health or safety and are generally not nuisance generators. APPROVAL CONDITION$ 1) The space leased to the church must be maintained to conform with all "A" occupancy requirements of the International Building Code; 2) The outside store front shall not be modified from its current condition with the exception of a sign installed in conformance with a City approved sign permit; 3) The church shall not object to the transfer, renewal or issuance of a liquor license for an existing or new establishment within 1,000 feet of the property; 4) The special permit shall be null and void if a City of Pasco business license is not obtained by May 1, 2018. MOTION for Findings of Fact: I move to close the hearing on the proposed special permit and adopt Findings of Fact and Conclusions therefrom as contained in the October 19, 2017 staff report. MOTION for Recommendation: I move, based on the Findings of Fact and Conclusions therefrom, the Planning Commission recommend the City Council grant a special permit to Pedro Bautista for the location of a church at 3330 West Court Street, Suite Q with conditions as contained in the October 19, 2017 staff report. 5 Z Fmk ?:.;. � } ��..� "'" ?• � 4,iT41t � � 1kfl r:M3NR4 YF[ r 1�v., s ►f I - erre :_u; tiB Road r +-j NIL m 1 xlitltt` ,�� d at -{ U r r' .aa c - e , 0-1 Fyl M -10 Am[cr t m !� � iaa45kxa - v ctaae � � �� � f � 1 .. � aT a fle • r . . :: ... .P=491 .: zQ Fi,�,.P MENNEN•-. o Road- 32 v �� V I TDI ct N �1 r+ � p O Ct g:"O n •,-4 a � a i Road_3=4 � Cz a� cn ,u EU) .v �. C) R2 0 U o a PIZ Road36 SFDUs CommercialES- MD.Us i rr s '' p I' Ij V 'yy� `I A �� 7 i L-1 m m A I it ! IJ REPORT TO PLANNING MASTER FILE NO: Z 2017-005 APPLICANT: Tom Kidwell HEARING DATE: 9/21/2017 4320 W. Riverhaven St. ACTION DATE: 10/19/2017 Pasco, WA 99301 BACKGROUND REQUEST: REZONE: Rezone from I -i (Light Industrial) to 1-2 (Medium Industrial) 1. Legal: Lot 4, Binding Site Plan 2016-06 General Location: SW corner of Ventura Rd and the PK Highway Property Size: 36 acres. 2. ACCESS: The site is accessible from Ventura Road, Kendall Drive and the Pasco Kahlotus Road. 3. UTILITIES: All municipal utilities are currently serving the site. 4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The lot is currently zoned I-1 (Light industrial) and is vacant. Surrounding properties are zoned and developed as follows: NORTH: I-1 - Agriculture and Carrot Plant SOUTH I-1 - Chemical Haulers, Onion Processers, Truss Plant, Petroleum Supplier and an Electrical Fabricator EAST: I-1 -Agriculture WEST: I-1 - Meat Cutting Facility and a "C" Store 5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The plan encourages the concentration of activities that are functionally and economically beneficial to each other. ED -2-13 encourages the development of a wide range of commercial uses strategically located to support local and regional needs. 6. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: Based on the SEPA checklist, the adopted City Comprehensive Plan, City development regulations, testimony at the public hearing and other information, a Determination of Non -Significance (DNS) has been issued for this project. 1 ANALYSIS The proposed rezone site has been identified in the Comprehensive Plan for more intense industrial uses for over 35 years. The site has also been zoned for industrial activities for about 35 years. The site was originally zoned I-1 in the County prior to annexation in 2013. The City Council recently approved a special permit for the location of a ready -mix concrete plant on the site. The Allocation of Land uses Table in the Comprehensive Plan indicates areas designated for industrial uses are suitable for manufacturing, food processing, hazardous material storage, transportation related facilities and the storage and distribution of equipment and products. I-1, I-2 and I-3 zoning are permissible within the Industrial Designation. Among other things the Allocation table suggests industrial lands should be located convenient to the regional transportation system, be near utilities and contain relatively flat land suitable for heavy building sites. The site in question is within 1,000 feet of the Lewis Street/ SR 12 Interchange, contains relatively flat ground, and is a quarter of a mile from the largest electrical substation in the County. The general area surrounding the site can be characterized as an industrial area with land uses including a truss manufacturing plant, chemical haulers, a petroleum product supplier and hauler, food processors, trucking firms, a large BPA Substation, potato and onion warehouses, a regional garbage transfer station (BDI), a industrial pipe supplier, the Oxarc facility and related industrial facilities. The property was recently granted a special permit by the City Council for the location and operation of a concrete ready -mix plant. The operation of the referenced uses is associated with significant outdoor storage, and higher levels of noise, odors, fumes, vibrations, dust and truck traffic. The land uses permitted in the I-2 District are similar to those permitted in the I-1 District with the notable exception of junkyards and auto wrecking yards being permitted in the I-2 District. The 1-2 District has a considerably longer list of allowable conditional uses that require special permit review. Some of these conditional uses include garbage dumping, rendering plants, acid manufacturing, cement and line manufacturing, commercial composting and asphalt batch plants. 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 in in 2013 when the property was annexed to the City. Prior to that time the property was zoned for industrial uses in the County. 2 2. The changed conditions, which are alleged to warrant other or additional zoning: The property has been in the City for the past four years. A major sewer line was installed adjacent to the property after annexation in 2013 and a 16 inch water line is located in Commercial Avenue. A water line was also extended in Ventura Road in 2013. Other changes in the area include the expansion of the trucking firms to the south that store and transport chemicals and petroleum products, the approval of a special permit for the location and operation of a concrete ready -mix plant, the expansion and location of other trucking firms, the opening of the Oxarc facility and other industrial activities in the area. 3. Facts to justify the change on the basis of advancing the public health, safety and general welfare: The site is located in an area that the community was planned for industrial uses for over 35 years. Public infrastructure including sewer and water has been installed in the area and sized for industrial needs. The Lewis Street Interchange was designed for industrial traffic and is utilized by the BDI fleet of trucks, the carrot plant trucks and other agricultural related facilities nearby that have a heavy reliance on trucking. The Lewis Street Interchange is the freeway connection to the Heritage Boulevard truck route and a connection to the surrounding Counties. The rezone would support past industrial development and would further implement the Comprehensive Plan which has been adopted to advance the general welfare of the community. 4. The effect it will have on the value and character of the adjacent property and the Comprehensive Plan: The rezone is consistent with the designation of the Comprehensive Plan and will minimal impact on surrounding industrial properties. 5. The effect on the property owner or owners if the request is not granted: The proposed rezone may allow the property to be developed with uses that would be compatible with and similar to the recently approved ready -mix facility. If the property is not rezoned the owner may lose opportunities for development that would support and complement the ready -mix plant. STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT 3 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 located at the southwest corner of the PK Highway (Pasco Kahlotus Road) and Ventura Road. 2. The site contains 36 acres. 3. The site was granted a special permit by the City Council on September 5, 2017 for the location and operation of a concrete ready -mix plant. The ready -mix plat is to be located on the southern third of the site. 4. The site is about 1,000 feet from the Lewis Street/SR 12 Interchange providing convenient access to construction sites in a three county area. 5. The Comprehensive Plan designates the property for industrial uses. 6. There are three industrial zones permitted under the industrial land use designation. 1-2 is one of those zones. 7. The site is currently zoned 1-1 (Light Industrial). 8. Properties site is currently zoned I-1 (Light Industrial). 9. The general area surrounding the site can be characterized as an industrial area with land uses including a truss manufacturing plant, chemical haulers, a petroleum product supplier and hauler, food processors, trucking firms, a large BPA Substation, potato and onion warehouses, a regional garbage transfer station (BDI), a industrial pipe supplier the Oxarc facility and related industrial facilities. 10. The site is near 8 potato/onion warehouses that generate foul smelling odors at certain times of the year. 11. Portions of the site are about 800 feet from the freeway (SR -12) and the truck traffic and noise associated with the traffic. 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 25.88.060. The criteria are as follows: 1. The proposal is in accordance with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. 2 The Comprehensive Plan has identified the site for industrial land uses for over 35 years. The industrial designation within the Comprehensive Plan allows property to be zoned for I-1, I-2 and I-3 uses. 1-3 zoning is reserved only for Port facilities. The plan encourages the concentration of activities that are functionally and economically beneficial to each other. ED -2-B encourages the development of a wide range of industrial and commercial uses strategically located to support local and regional needs. 2. The effect of the proposal on the immediate vicinity will not be materially detrimental. The proposed I-2 zoning will permit additional industrial uses to locate on the site. Most of the additional uses require a special permit hearing providing an opportunity for placing mitigating conditions that may be needed for the benefit of adjoining properties. 3. There is merit and value in the proposal for the community as a whole. There is merit in providing an opportunity for a greater range of commercial uses on the property which may lead to the development of a lot that has remained vacant and in a poor state of repair of the past 42 years. 4. Conditions should be imposed in order to mitigate any significant adverse impacts from the proposal. Most of the additional uses allowed under the I-2 District require special permit review which provides an opportunity for the City to condition the uses if necessary to mitigate any adverse impact. The regulation for salvage yards provides a list mitigating measures related to screening and storage of parts. The landscaping chapter of the zoning regulations provides additional mitigating measures. 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. MOTION for Findings of Fact: I move to adopt findings of fact and conclusions therefrom as contained in the October 19, 2017 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 Lot 4, Binding Site Plan 2016- 06 from I-1 to I-2 as recommended by the Planning Commission. 5 rl w sm N O .PM4 LO � x O � � O � � N Q� v N a .PM4 Z r A �'��rUtllflnt! of zQ LL � a O N � V O 3-enture-Rd Ln cu o CL co H y N 4-J O V s CU Ucu N NQom., 'i ca v� G PIZ c� a zQ Tom J N d U O r, Venture -Rd Ln 0 ENO E2 - O o 0 N 4-� N cz N $'CO) ca �P 'P c O J N ' ��V ���.. »6� e.� M r.• �y •i Y .R' i✓r7. .71 x T •t Y 5 5�y' fix { Pr b) i.�• AI ,c y�c _'�� j� rt `� r• �js , K L REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION MASTER FILE NO: PP 2017-008 APPLICANT: Big Sky Developers LLC HEARING DATE: 9/21/2017 12406 Eagle Reach Ct ACTION DATE: 10/19/2017 Pasco, WA 99301 REQUEST: Preliminary Plat: Preakness Ridge, 86 -Lot Multi -Family Subdivision 1, PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Legal: That portion of the South half of Section 15, Township 9 North Range 29 East, WM included in Parcel # 117470138 General Location: 5400 to 5600 Block of Chapel Hill Boulevard Property Size: 12.64 Acres Number of Lots Proposed: 86 lots for zero lot line construction Square Foota e Range of Lots: 3,937 ft2 to 12,999 ft2 Average Lot Square Footage: 4,744 ft2 2. ACCESS: The property will have access from Chapel Hill Boulevard. 3. UTILITIES: Municipal water and sewer service are available in Chapel Hill Boulevard. 4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The site is zoned R-4 (High Density Residential) Surrounding properties are zoned and developed as follows: NORTH: R-1 - I-182 is directly north & Loviisa Farms is north of the freeway SOUTH: R-3 & R-1 - Single Family EAST: RT - PUD Substation WEST R-3 - Future Park and an Apartment complex S. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan indicates the site is intended for mixed residential development. According to the Comprehensive Plan, mixed residential development means 5 to 20 dwelling units per acre. The criteria for allocation under the future land use section of Volume II of the Comprehensive Plan (Vol. II, page 17) encourages development of lands designated for mixed residential uses when or where: sewer is available, the location is convenient to major circulation routes, the site serves as a transition between more intense uses and low density uses, and when there is a market demand. Policy H -1-E encourages the advancement of home ownership and Goal H-2 suggests the City strive to maintain a variety of housing options for residents of the community. Goal LU -2 encourages the maintenance of established neighborhoods and the creation of new neighborhoods that are safe and enjoyable places to live. 6. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: Based on the SEPA checklist, the adopted City Comprehensive Plan, City development regulations, testimony at the public hearing and other information, a Determination of Non -Significance (DNS) has been issued for this project. ANALYSIS The project site is located between I-182 and Chapel Hill Boulevard west of a PUD substation and east of the Villages at Chapel Hill and a future City Park. Road 60, south of the Stone Gate Apartments and east of Columbia Place. The site is relatively flat and slopes slightly from the north to the south. The site is vacant with a combination of bare ground and native and non-native grasses and other vegetation. The site was initially designated for mixed residential development under the Comprehensive Plan in 1982. The R-3 (Medium Density Residential) zoning was established in 2003 prior to the development of the Chapel Hill subdivision 8in 2005. The Chapel Hill subdivision contains a mix of R-4, R-3 R-1 and C-1 zoning. The applicant is proposing to subdivide the site into 86 lots to allow the construction of 43 duplexes. Each duplex would occupy two lots with the common lot line dividing each unit. This proposal is identical to the process that was used for the development of the Island Estates Row Homes in the Island Estates subdivision (Phase 8), Mediterranean Villas and Columbia Villas Phases 1, 2 and 3. Each of these subdivisions was zoned for multi -family development and platted into individual lots. The lots lines within these subdivisions became the common boundary line separating the multi -family dwelling units built therein. The property site is located along the south right-of-way line of I-182. For most of the day considerable noise is generated from the freeway traffic LOT LAYOUT: The proposed Plat contains 86 residential lots and one future commercial lot. The lots vary in size from 3,937 square feet to 12,999 square feet. The proposal is consistent with the density requirements of the R-4 zoning of the site. R-3 zoning permits the development of one dwelling unit per 1,500 square feet of lot area for multi -family type structures. RIGHTS-OF-WAY: All lots have frontage on streets which will be dedicated. z UTILITIES: Municipal water and sewer lines are located in Chapel Hill Boulevard. The developer will be responsible for extending utilities into the Plat. A utility easement will be needed along the first 10 feet of street frontage of all lots. The final location and width of the easements will be determined during the engineering design phase. The front yard setbacks for construction purposes are larger than the required easements; therefore the front yard easements will not diminish the buildable area of the lots. The Engineering Division will determine the specific placement of fire hydrants and streetlights when construction plans are submitted. As a general rule, fire hydrants are located at street intersections and with a maximum interval of 500 feet between hydrants on alternating sides of the street. Streetlights are located at street intersections, with a maximum interval of 300 feet on residential streets, and with a maximum interval of 150 feet on arterial streets. The intervals for street light placements are measure along the centerline of the road. Street lights are placed on alternating sides of the street. STREET NAMES: The one street name need for the plat will follow the race track theme of the Chapel Hill subdivision. IRRIGATION: The municipal code requires the installation of irrigation lines as a part of the infrastructure improvements. WATER RIGHTS: The assignment of water rights is a requirement for subdivision approval per Pasco Municipal Code Section 26.04.115. and Section 3.07.160. If no water rights are available to transfer to the City the property owner/developer must pay a water right fee in lieu thereof as established in PMC Chapter 3.07. The Public Works Director may waive the fee if the developer mixes a soil additive in the ground that provides 30% retention of irrigation water. FINDINGS OF FACT State law (RCW 58.17.010) and the Pasco Municipal Code require the Planning Commission to develop Findings of Fact as to how this proposed subdivision will protect and enhance the health, safety and general welfare of the community. The following is a listing of proposed "Findings of Fact": Prevent Overcrowding: Density requirements of the R-3 zone are designed to address overcrowding concerns. The Comprehensive Plan suggests the property in question be developed with 5 to 20 dwelling units per acre. The proposed Plat has a density of less than 7 units per acre. No more than 60 percent of each lot is permitted to be covered with structures per the R-3 zoning standards. 3 Parks Opens Space/Schools: A City park site is located directly west of the site. The Parks Division will be improving the park next year. The City is required by RCW 58.17.110 to make a finding that adequate provisions are being made to ameliorate the impacts of the proposed subdivision on the School District. At the request of the School District the City enacted a school impact fee in 2012. The imposition of this impact fee addresses the requirement to ensure there are adequate provisions for schools. A school impact fee in the amount of $4,525 will be charged for each new dwelling unit at the time of building permit issuance. Effective Land Use/Orderly Development: The Plat is laid out for multi- family development as identified in the Comprehensive Plan. The maximum density permitted under the Comprehensive Plan is 20 dwelling units per acre. The developer is proposing a density of 6.80 units per acre. The proposed subdivision will complete the development of residential land within the Chapel Hill subdivision. Safe Travel & Walking Conditions: The plat will connect to the community through the existing network of streets. Sidewalks are installed at the time homes are built on individual lots. The sidewalks will be constructed to current City standards and to the standards of the American's with Disabilities Act (ADA). The ADA ramps at the corners of all intersection will be installed with the construction of the road improvements Adequate Provision of Municipal Services: All lots within the Plat will be provided with water, sewer and other utilities. Provision of Housing for State Residents: This Preliminary Plat contains 86 residential building lots, providing an opportunity for the construction of 43 duplexes units containing a total of 86 new dwelling units. Adequate Air and Light: The maximum lot coverage limitations and building setbacks will assure that adequate movement of air and light is available to each lot. Proper Access & Travel: The streets through and adjoining the Plat have been or will be paved and developed to City standards to assure proper access is maintained to each lot. Connections to the community will be provided by Chapel Hill Boulevard and Saratoga Lane. The Preliminary Plat was submitted to the Transit Authority for review. (The discussion under "Safe Travel" above applies to this section also.) Comprehensive Plan Policies & Maps: The Comprehensive Plan designates the plat site for mixed residential development. Policies of the Comprehensive 4 Plan encourages the advancement of home ownership and suggest the City strive to maintain a variety of housing for residents. Other Findings: • The site is within the Pasco Urban Growth Boundary. • The State Growth Management Act requires urban growth and urban densities to occur within the Urban Growth Boundaries. • The site slopes slightly to the east and south. • The site is vacant with a combination of bare ground and native and non-native grasses and other vegetation. • The site is not considered a critical area a mineral resource area or a wet land. • The Comprehensive Plan identifies the site for mixed residential development. • Mixed residential development is described in the Comprehensive Plan as five to twenty dwelling units per acre. • The developer is proposing 6.8 dwelling units per acre. • The site is zoned R-3 (Medium Density Residential). • The site was zoned R-3 in 2003. • The Housing Element of the Comprehensive Plan encourages the development of a variety of residential densities and housing types. • The Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan encourages the interconnection of neighborhood streets to provide for the disbursement of traffic. • The interconnection of neighborhood streets is necessary for utility connections (looping) and the provision of emergency services. • The neighborhood is connected to the community by way of Chapel Hill Boulevard and Saratoga lane. • Per the ITE Trip Generation Manual 8th Addition the proposed subdivision, when fully developed, will generate approximately 572 vehicle trips per day. • RCW 58.17.110 requires the City to make a finding that adequate provisions have been made for schools before any preliminary plat is approved. • The City of Pasco has adopted a school impact fee ordinance compelling new housing developments to provide the School District with mitigation fees. The fee was effective April 16, 2012. • Past correspondence from the Pasco School District indicates impact fees address the requirement to ensure adequate provisions are made for schools. 5 • Plat improvements within the City of Pasco are required to comply with the 2015 Standard Drawings and Specification as approved by the City Engineer. These improvements include but are not limited to water, sewer and irrigation lines, streets, street lights and storm water retention. The handicapped accessible pedestrian ramps are completed with the street and curb improvements prior to final plat approval. Sidewalks are installed at the time permits are issued for new houses except sidewalks along major streets, which are installed with the street improvements. • All engineering designs for infrastructure and final plat(s) drawings are required to utilize the published City of Pasco Vertical Control Datum. • All storm water generated from a developed plat is required to be disposed of per City and State codes and requirements. Prior to the City of Pasco accepting construction plans for review the developer is required to enter into a Storm Water Maintenance Agreement with the City. The developer is responsible for obtaining the signatures of all parties required on the agreement and to have the agreement recorded with the Franklin County Auditor. The original signed and recorded copy of the agreement is presented to the City of Pasco at the intake meeting for construction plans. • The City has nuisance regulations (PMC 9.60) that require property owners (including developers) to maintain their properties in a manner that does not injure, annoy or endanger the comfort and repose of other property owners. This includes controlling dust, weeds and litter during times of construction for both subdivisions and buildings including houses. • Prior to acceptance of final plats developers are required to prepare and submit record drawings. All record drawings shall be created in accordance with the requirements detailed in the Record Drawing Requirements and Procedure form provided by the Engineering Division. This form must be signed by the developer prior to construction plan approval. • The project site is adjacent to I-182 which is a busy freeway that can generate considerable noise during much of the day. CONCLUSIONS BASED ON INITIAL STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT Before recommending approval or denial of the proposed Plat the Planning Commission must develop findings of fact from which to draw its conclusion (P.M.C. 26.24.070) therefrom as to whether or not: (1) Adequate provisions are made for the public health, safety and general welfare and for open spaces, drainage ways, streets, alleys, other public ways, water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks, 0 playgrounds, transit stops, schools and school grounds, sidewalks for safe walking conditions for students and other public needs; The proposed plat will be required to develop under the standards of the Pasco Municipal Code and the standard specifications of the City Engineering Division. These standards for streets, sidewalks, and other infrastructure improvements were designed to ensure the public health; safety and general welfare of the community are secured. These standards include provisions for streets, drainage, water and sewer service and the provision for dedication of right-of-way. The preliminary plat was forwarded to the Franklin County PUD, the Pasco School District, Cascade Gas, Charter Cable and Ben -Franklin Transit Authority for review and comment. Based on the School Districts Capital Facilities Plan the City collects school mitigation fees for each new dwelling unit. The fee is paid at the time of building permit issuance. The school impact fee addresses the requirements of RCW 58.17.110. The Chapel Hill development previously provided the City with a five acre park site near the northeast corner of Chapel Hill Boulevard and Saratoga Lane. Utilities have been stubbed to the park site and all street improvements have been completed. The Parks Division will fully develop the park site next year. (2) The proposed subdivision contributes to the orderly development and land use patterns in the area; The proposed Plat makes efficient use of vacant land and will provide for the looping of utilities and interconnectivity of streets as supported in the Comprehensive Plan. (3) The proposed subdivision conforms to the policies, maps and narrative text of the Comprehensive Plan; The Comprehensive Plan land use map designates the site for mixed residential development. Mixed residential development is described as 5 to 20 dwelling units per acre in the text of the Comprehensive Plan. The Housing Element of the Plan encourages the promotion of a variety of residential densities and suggests the community should support the advancement of programs encouraging home ownership. The Plan also encourages the interconnection of local streets for inter -neighborhood travel for public safety as well as providing for traffic disbursement. (4) The proposed subdivision conforms to the general purposes of any applicable policies or plans which have been adopted by the City Council; 7 Development plans and policies have been adopted by the City Council in the form of the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed subdivision conforms to the policies, maps and narrative text of the Plan as noted in number three above. (5) The proposed subdivision conforms to the general purposes of the subdivision regulations. The general purposes of the subdivision regulations have been enumerated and discussed in the staff analysis and Findings of Fact. The Findings of Fact indicate the subdivision is in conformance with the general purposes of the subdivision regulations provided certain mitigation measures (i.e.: school impact fees are paid.) (6) The public use and interest will be served by approval of the proposed subdivision. The proposed Plat, if approved, will be developed in accordance with all City standards designed to insure the health, safety and general welfare of the community are met. The Comprehensive Plan will be implemented through development of this Plat. These factors will insure the public use and interest are served. TENTATIVE PLAT APPROVAL CONDITIONS 1. No utility vaults, pedestals, or other obstructions will be allowed at street intersections. 2. All corner lots and other lots that present difficulties for the placement of yard fencing shall be identified in the notes on the face of the final plat(s). 3. The developer shall install an eight -foot masonry wall along the freeway right-of-way. The wall details must be included on the subdivision construction drawings. All final Plats shall include a note that clearly indicates the maintenance responsibility for the freeway wall is the responsibility of the property owners adjoining the wall. 4. The final plat(s) shall contain a 10 -foot utility easement parallel to all streets unless otherwise required by the Franklin County PUD. 5. The final plat(s) shall contain the following Franklin County Public Utility District statement: "The individual or company making improvements on a lot or lots of this Plat is responsible for providing and installing all trench, conduit, primary vaults, secondary junction boxes, and backfill for the PUD's primary and secondary distribution system in accordance with PUD specifications; said individual or company will make full advance payment of line extension fees and will provide all necessary utility easements prior to PUD construction and/or connection of any electrical service to or within the plat". 8 6. The Developer must coordinate with the Franklin County PUD to ensure all road and access easements to the substation adjacent the east boundary line of the plat are open and unencumbered. 7. The cul de sac at the east end of Chapel Hill Boulevard must be squared to the southeast to provide additional right-of-way access to the storm water pond to the south. RECOMMENDATION MOTION: I move to adopt Findings of Fact and Conclusions therefrom as contained in the October 19, 2017 staff report. MOTION: I move based on the Findings of Fact and Conclusions, as adopted, the Planning Commission recommend the City Council approve the Preliminary Plat for Preakness Ridge, with conditions as listed in the October 19, 2017 staff report. W w Nl 3AIGS321 t/101aW .-r LLI , /FM W r (I. � AW- 1 v! '� •� t� Q Jr v `O Q / i C w m N Qw Jaz (ZO }�Z Q Z Z�co ¢ C � G � } LLI w Z y 7 aoO *Z Lu I J (7 y Z In LL F LL N Z wNy a _ Z LL YZ0 LU wxF F— ILL — �OU d Z O O CL u 6a lb' 0a 5 � a � r E VD 6 C e i "u 0 IR 4 qq$$ c U @a Z 116 O R& V1 O w 3 4 ge i& F aR .o PIS s d MLIRIN RN gg€;y. 5 K kxa.tlgF api z .. Y g,Rao g �q '6"y$ y q uaxt w;®s'sa2gaf 4 91Ya ����g6�xaa��G�R§�Fga�3 U $= s p y W tl 4 � HN HUN "., g- 2 K 8 �x 44Rfi§��€x�3��.a63 �����i'Fo�'���x o_ a gg33 1 PIS $8` ei3333e�g E ��3 q€; �wx> `8 a. @Ii3=3F�e?�4sp S3 $8l83�5�11I3�'�e�ex Il I '11 a �III,I .<.4p.00®o.o1>m.�,pao.a L { W II,IIII, i - a 1 ~ W JS38 i � P %tj, I � � .�. r �, �� l Y.' M h Y S � � - _ .. � t�' � k � �M � ti � M1 r � `���� o, e ti s lit i�[ 1 { ��^S"�,X� \i w}' i ' � I r� }lr�� 1 r T��/ :ir,`.e,v �..� �._,� l � 'sem ,-�".. r L. '. � ' v y ... ' � i x f F� rI { � s' _�_ ' '. jl � �� {� _ _ s �„ .� �J µ j 4 _- :... �'k �+ � ..�..� � 2 Yy. 0. �� tai �, � �} b Y � � � � _ 1 t V is ,...Aj • RYA � .9 • � e r, ��M "t` 34 'i ���� s+( _ ..4 � �'� Lul `� H � � .. f�Y �^L T�� f.� 2� 4 !r j�' 7 �i,A b .s �G 's �� � � - f� y �� I. � �� w4 -. { .,. '� �� i A �M' ��<, F �, X11 I ��- �� rye 1 ,ice ai �., � � �... 'i ��, ` �:. '; 'f t a lei§ tT��)'� b� �' Y � _ � i,� .'S ,._ �, � �. r �' , t � 1 i ,� 9 � � +"'fir � /irk -. 3. '. ,i 0 0 04 REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION MASTER FILE NO: SP 2017-013 APPLICANT: Pasco School District # 1 HEARING DATE: 10/ 19/17 1215 W Lewis St ACTION DATE: 11/16/17 Pasco, WA 99301 BACKGROUND REQUEST: SPECIAL PERMIT: Stevens Middle School Replacement 1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Legal: A portion of the SW 1/4 of the NE Quarter of NE 1/4 of Section 25, Township 9 North, Range 29 East, W.M. contained within Parcel # 119332080 adjoining parcels and Hillhaven Addition. General Location: 1120 22nd Avenue Property Size: Approximately 16.55 acres 2. ACCESS: The site is accessible from 22nd Avenue, 24th Avenue and 26th Avenue. 3. UTILITIES: All municipal utilities serve the school site. 4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The site is zoned R-2 and R-3 (Medium Density Residential) and is developed with the Stevens Middle School Campus. The zoning and land use of the surrounding properties are as follows: NORTH: C-1 - Commercial Businesses SOUTH: R-2 8c R-3 -Multi-Family Residences EAST: R-1 - Single Family Residences WEST: R-2- Single Family and Multi -family Residences 5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan designates the site as public and quasi -public uses. Goal CF -5 suggests adequate provisions should be made for educational facilities located throughout the urban growth area. Policy CF -5-A encourages the appropriate location and design of schools throughout the community. 6. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The City of Pasco is the lead agency for this project. An environmental determination will be made after the public hearing for this project. A Determination of Non - Significance or Mitigated Determination of Non -Significance is likely for this application (WAC 197-11-355). Stevens Middle School was constructed in 1960 and has been a part of the surrounding neighborhood for the past 57 years. As the community has grown Stevens Middle School and the school site have been modified to meet increased enrollment. Since 2010 the School District has been working to improve the school site by adding parking, changing bus drop off and pick-up facilities and consolidating the sports field with the main campus by closing a portion of 24th Avenue. The next phase of redevelopment calls for the construction of a replacement school for the existing aging building. The new school will be constructed at the northeast corner of West Henry Street and 24th Avenue. Following the construction of the new school the existing school will be razed and a new football field and track will be constructed on the north side of the campus generally between 22nd Avenue and the closed portion of 24th Avenue. A portion of the existing parking lot south of the McDonald's parking lot on 22nd Avenue will be converted to tennis courts. The earlier improvements to Stevens School were granted special permits by the City Council. The previous approvals did not include the construction of a replacement school building on the site. A traffic study was previously completed when the closure of 24th Avenue was considered and approved. Traffic is not anticipated to change much except for the fact parking and parent drop-off areas will be improved. This will improve the traffic conditions on 22nd Avenue during the school year. Bus facilities will be added on the south side of the campus along Henry Street further eliminating current congestion around the school. 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 located in an R-2 and R-3 zone. R 2. The Comprehensive Plan identifies the site for public and quasi -public uses. 3. Comprehensive Plan Goal CF -5 suggests that adequate provisions should be made for the location of educational facilities throughout the urban growth area. 4. Schools are conditional land uses and require review through the special permit process prior to permitting for construction. 5. Stevens Middle School has been located at the current site for the past 57 years. 6. The Planning Commission considered a Stevens Middle School re- development plan during a Special Permit review in 2011. The Development plan included a new parking lot on the east side of 22nd Avenue a revised bus parking area on the north side of the school and bus access from 24th Avenue rather the 22nd. 7. The Planning Commission considered a Stevens Middle School re- development plan and street closure during a Special Permit review in 2015. The Development plan included closing 24th Avenue to connect the main school campus with the sports field on the west side of 24th Avenue. 8. A Traffic Study was prepared for the proposed street closure in July of 2014. Twenty -Fourth Avenue was closed based in part on the traffic study. 9. The relocation and reconstruction of Stevens Middle School in the southwest corner of the school site will allow parking and traffic circulation to be improved benefiting the surrounding neighborhood. 10. Stevens Middle School has been located on the site for 57 years and is an established part of the neighborhood CONCLUSIONS BASED ON STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT Before recommending approval or denial of a special permit the Planning Commission must draw its conclusion from the findings of fact based upon the criteria listed in P.M.C. 25.86.060. The criteria and staff listed conclusions are as follows: 1) Will the proposed use be in accordance with the goals, policies, objectives and text of the Comprehensive Plan? The proposed use supports the following plan policies or goals: CF -5 suggests adequate provisions be made for educational facilities throughout the Urban Growth Area. The Comprehensive Plan land use 3 map indicated the site is to be developed with public and quasi -public land uses. Schools are a public land use. 2) Will the proposed use adversely affect public infrastructure? Stevens Middle School has been located on the site for over 57 years and has not adversely impacted public infrastructure. The proposal will not increase the need for municipal utilities. The proposal may lessen congestion on neighboring streets due to the reconfiguration of parking, student drop off areas and the relocation of the bus facilities. 3) Will the proposed use be constructed, maintained and operated to be in harmony with existing or intended character of the general vicinity? Stevens Middle School is part of the neighborhood character and has been for 57 years. Schools are typically located in or near residential neighborhoods and are an accepted part of the character of residential areas. 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 location and height of the school will be altered from the current configuration as the school will be completely rebuilt. The overall height will generally match the height of the existing gym. The neighborhood is fully developed as a result there is no development to discourage. Past experience has shown the location of schools within Pasco neighborhoods has not impaired the value of residential development within those neighborhoods. 5) Will the operations in connection with the proposal be more objectionable to nearby properties by reason of noise, fumes, vibrations, dust, traffic, or flashing lights than would be the operation of any permitted uses within the district? Experience has shown that schools within Pasco generate few complaints from neighbors. Schools typically are not a source of dust, fumes, vibrations or flashing lights. During weekends, the summer break, and other break periods very little activities occurs on school sites. 0 6) Will the proposed use endanger the public health or safety if located and developed where proposed, or in anyway will become a nuisance to uses permitted in the district? The new school will be built to current health and safety requirements which will enhance the safety of students and teachers. Past experience has shown the location of schools within Pasco neighborhoods has not created nuisance conditions that impact permitted uses. Proposed Approval Conditions 1. The special permit shall apply to Parcel No. 119332081. 2. The school site shall be developed in substantial conformity with the site plan submitted with the special permit application. 3. This special permit approval does not preclude the School District from extending the classroom wing of the building toward 22nd Avenue provided the 20 foot setback is maintained from the right- of-way. 4. Portable classroom may also be permitted on the site without further special permit review provided the number of portables does not exceed eight. 5. The special permit shall be null and void if a permit for site redevelopment has not been obtained by December 31, 2020. RECOMMENDATION MOTION: I move to close the hearing on the proposed special permit and set November 16, 2017 as the date for deliberations and the development of a recommendation for the City Council. 5 � ff m��� ow" .m ■� \�� z�,� � � �| : «:■ w §d. -9f ¥� W " W r Lu I Q-- � ❑ ❑ Z CO) Q U WcL Q 3 3AV H10Z •�L L'E O V -4-111 3AV aNZZ ' FLI L Cl) U M N c r ? -E3" LvZ E (�0 E m rn � o O N = LL ldFO !IInW U � � � N Ea .-� H 3AV HIM N � y LU l moll ill MM v) r � ,r.It �terti� - sti 1 t . T S �l s I � ip �r �Y= r +� ,SKr. .._J � .•�- _ �_._ At{ d `' -j '. ,il :t�1 t� '� �: \ III �� �� i 1 ('1� REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION MASTER FILE NO: SP 2017-014 APPLICANT: Pasco School District #I HEARING DATE: 10/ 19/17 1215 W Lewis St ACTION DATE: 11 / 16/17 Pasco, WA 99301 BACKGROUND REQUEST: SPECIAL PERMIT: Location of an Elementary School in an R-1 District. (9 100 Block of Burns Road) 1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Legal: That portion of the S '/2 of the SW 'A of section 5, township 9 north, range 29 east, W.M., Franklin County, WA being described as follows: beginning at the SE corner of above said SW '/4; thence S 89037'55" W 1,269.48 feet; thence N 01°01'10" E 1,336.68 feet to a point on the northerly line of above said S '/2; thence N 89032'38" E along said line 1,269.53 feet to the NE corner of said S '/2; thence S 01'01'10" W along the easterly line of said SW '/4 1,338.63 feet to the point of beginning. Together with and subject to easements, reservations, covenants and restrictions of record and in view. General Location: 9100 Block of Burns Road Property Size: Approximately 12.5 acres on a 60 -acre parcel 2. ACCESS: The site is adjacent Burns Road at approximately the 9100 block. 3. UTILITIES: Water and sewer lines will be stubbed into School District property at the southeast corner along Burns Road. The School District will also be responsible for running water and sewer the length of their frontage to Burns Road. 4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The site is zoned R-1 (Low Density Residential) and is being farmed. The property to the north is zoned A -P (Agricultural Production) in the County and is currently being farmed. The property to the west is zoned R-1 and is being developed with the Columbia Terrace subdivision. The property to the east is zoned R-1 and is being farmed. The properties to the south are zoned R-1 and are developed with single- family homes in the Broadmoor Estates subdivision. 5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan designates the site as Low -Density Residential. Goal CF -5 suggests adequate provisions should be made for educational facilities located throughout the urban growth area. Policy CF -S-A encourages the appropriate location and design of schools throughout the community. 6. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The City of Pasco is the lead agency for this project. An environmental determination will be made after the public hearing for this project. A Mitigated Determination of Non -Significance based on the provision of a traffic study for necessary street improvements is likely for this application (WAC 197-11-355). The Pasco School District proposes to build an elementary school on a portion of a 60 -acre site composed of one 38.9 -acre parcel owned by the School District and approximately 2 1. 1 acres of another parcel to the east now under contract. The eastern lot and a portion of the western lot are designated for the elementary school. Most of the site to the west is being proposed for a middle school. Pasco currently has fifteen elementary schools, which have been growing in enrollment by an average of over 5% annually since 2000. The fifteen elementary schools have the capacity to serve 7,735 students, but as of August 2017, there were 8,539 students enrolled. The District has had to adjust enrollment by moving students around to different schools and re -assigning grades to different schools in order to accommodate the growth. Mobile classrooms have also been added to virtually every PSD campus even at or near the completion of new schools in order to accommodate growth. With the ongoing growth in population (Pasco's population has more than doubled in size since 2000, at an average annual increase of over 5%) and student enrollment, the School District needs to construct several schools. Elementary school enrollment in Pasco has increased by an average of about 28 new students per school per year for the last two decades. This continued growth in school enrollment will create the need for additional elementary schools. To address part of the need for additional school space the District is proposing to develop the site in question with a 72,000 -square -foot elementary school. The building will have classroom space for 750 students. The site will contain sports fields, public parking, and bus loading off Burns Road. The proposed site is farmland developed with crop circles located along the north side of Burns (formerly Powerline) Road. Burns Road is improved with 2 pavement only. The School District will be responsible for completing all of the street improvements in Burns Road and installing roads along the east and west borders of the site. A signal warrant test may be needed to determine when a signal should be installed at Broadmoor Boulevard and Burns Road. The Regional Transportation Analysis model used by the Regional Council does not include elementary schools in the data used to identify future traffic impacts because elementary schools do not impact the peak hour traffic conditions the way other land uses do. Based on the Institute of Traffic Engineers Trip Generation Manual (8th Ed) an elementary school with 750 students on average can be expected to generate about 967.5 vehicle trips per day. That would amount to $41,602 in traffic impact fees (trips multiplied by $43.00/trip). By comparison, if the site were to develop with single family homes about 1,236.9 daily vehicle trips could be expected. Most of the schools in Pasco including the Pasco High School and Chiawana High School are located in residential zoning districts. An on-line search of the Franklin County Assessors records (2017) revealed that all of the residential properties directly adjacent the existing Franklin STEM Elementary School located at 6010 Road 52 have increased in valued since the school was built by an average of over $55,000 between 2014-2017 (range $27,000-$135,800). The neighborhood has yet to be completed and plans are already underway to further develop the unoccupied land around the school. This provides a good indication that elementary schools do not discourage the development of permitted uses on property in the general vicinity of a school or impair the value thereof. Access to the site will be from a proposed road to be constructed along the east property line of the site and from Burns Road to the south. Both Broadmoor Boulevard and Road 90 feed into Burns Road for local access. School sites typically have at least two means of access for safety reasons and to help diffuse traffic and reduce the impacts of traffic on surrounding residential uses. 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 and comments made at the public hearing. The Planning Commission may add additional findings as deemed appropriate. 1. The site is located in an R-1 zone. 3 2. Under the current zoning approximately 202 single-family dwellings could be constructed on the site. 3. Schools are conditional land uses in the R-1 zone and require review through the special permit process prior to permitting for construction. 4. The site is at the northern edge of the Pasco Urban Growth Boundary. 5. The site is within the City limits of Pasco annexed in 2016. 6. The Comprehensive Plan identifies the site for low-density residential uses. 7. Comprehensive Plan Goal CF -5 suggests that adequate provisions should be made for the location of educational facilities throughout the urban growth area. 8. The site is currently being farmed. 9. The west 38.97 acres of the site are owned by the Pasco School District and the remaining approximately 2 1. 1 acres are under contract. 10. Sewer and water utilities will be stubbed to the site. 11. The site is located at the 9100 block Burns Road. 12. Burns Road is not fully improved. 13. All existing elementary schools in Pasco have at least two access routes to and from the schools. 14. City development standards require street and utility (sewer, water, irrigation) improvements to be constructed or installed concurrently with site development. 15. Off-site street improvements include but are not limited to street construction and paving, installation of curb gutter and sidewalk (7' wide), street lights, handicapped ramps, signage, lane striping, street drainage, traffic signals, speed -reduction modifications, and fire hydrants. 16. According to the Institute of Traffic Engineers Trip Generation Manual (8th Ed) a 750 -student middle school will generate about 967.5 vehicle trips per day. 17. If developed with single family homes the site would generate about 1,236.9 vehicle trips per day. 18. A Mitigated Determination of Non -Significance based on the provision of a traffic study for necessary street improvements is likely for this application. 19. Pasco's population has more than doubled since 1997. 20. The Pasco School District enrollment has grown from 8,048 in 1997 to 17,878 in 2016. 21. No sports fielding lighting will be constructed with the proposed elementary school. C! CONCLUSIONS BASED ON STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT Before recommending approval or denial of a special permit the Planning Commission must draw its conclusion from the findings of fact based upon the criteria listed in P.M.C. 25.86.060. The criteria and staff listed conclusions are as follows: I) Will the proposed use be in accordance with the goals, policies, objectives and text of the Comprehensive Plan? The proposed use supports the following plan policies or goals: CF -5 suggests adequate provisions be made for educational facilities throughout the Urban Growth Area. Transportation and Utility policies support city standards that require the extension of streets and utilities in conjunction with development. To be in accord with the Comprehensive Plan the proposed elementary school development would also need to include the development of adjoining streets and utilities. 2) Will the proposed use adversely affect public infrastructure? The location of an elementary school on the proposed site may encourage the development of residential homes to the north of the school site leading to pressure to expand the UGA into areas the School District will help pay for the sewer trunk line in Burns Road. The School District will thereby be helping the City implement the Sewer Comprehensive Plan. The area north of this proposed school is in the Sewer Comprehensive Plan which the City will be servicing. 3) Will the proposed use be constructed, maintained and operated to be in harmony with existing or intended character of the general vicinity? The proposed elementary school has been designed to complement the existing and future neighborhood by providing generous yard setbacks, landscaping, screening of mechanical equipment and a pitched roof line to moderate the school's height in keeping with typical pitched roofs of residential homes. Elementary schools are typically located in or near residential neighborhoods and are an accepted part of the character of residential areas. 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? 5 The construction of schools in residential neighborhoods often encourages development of nearby properties. For example, residential development around the Franklin STEM Elementary School located at 6010 Road 52 progressed after the school was in place. An on-line search of the Franklin County Assessors records (2017) revealed that values of all residential properties located near the existing Franklin STEM Elementary School have increased since the school was built. 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? Experience has shown that schools within Pasco generate few complaints from neighbors. Elementary schools typically are not a source of dust, fumes, vibrations or flashing lights. The proposed school could generate up to 967.5 vehicle trips per day. During weekends, the summer break, and other break periods very little traffic will be generated. Schools have a long history of being accepted in residential neighborhoods. In most communities schools are located in or near residential neighborhoods. A Mitigated Determination of Non - Significance based on the provision of a traffic study for necessary street improvements is likely for this application and any approval should be conditioned upon meeting or accomplishing the recommendations contained within the study. 6) Will the proposed use endanger the public health or safety if located and developed where proposed, or in anyway will become a nuisance to uses permitted in the district? The elementary school will be constructed to meet all requirements of the International Building Code, the Fire Code, the Plumbing Code, all other construction codes and state regulations pertaining to elementary school construction. The building will be required to have fire -rated corridors, area separation walls, sufficient exiting and fire sprinkler systems to ensure the safety of the public. The construction of sidewalks and street improvements will address traffic safety issues. Proposed Approval Conditions 6 1. The special permit shall apply to Franklin County Assessor's Parcel No. 115170085, approximately 21.1 acres of parcel 115170068, and any subdivisions thereof. 2. The elementary school site shall be developed in substantial conformity with the site plan and building elevations submitted with the special permit application. Nothing herein prohibits the School District from adding four additional classrooms to the school building or placing portable classrooms on the site. 3. Burns Road abutting the School District property and the property currently under contract (Franklin County Assessor's Parcel No. 115170085 and approximately 21.1 acres of parcel 115170068 existing as of September 25, 2017) shall be improved to arterial street standards meeting construction standards of the City. Improvements shall include but not be limited to curb, gutter, sidewalk and street lighting along the school side of the street. 4. Sidewalks in the Burns Road right-of-way shall be 5 feet wide and located along the property line rather than the curb line. 5. The planting strip between the Burns Road curb and the offset sidewalk must be planted in lawn and trees planted at 50 -foot intervals. The landscape and irrigation plan must be approved by the Administrative and Community Services Department prior to installation. 6. No on -street parking or bus staging will be permitted on or adjacent to Burns Road or the proposed road along the western property line. 7. All costs associated with speed reduction/ modification including but not limited to flashing lights, signage, pedestrian sensors, safety and crosswalks shall be paid for by the School District. 8. All street/roadway signage abutting the property is to be provided by the School District and must conform to the most current MUTCD & City of Pasco Construction Standards. 9. A Mitigated Determination of Non -Significance based on the provision of a traffic study for necessary street improvements is likely for this application and any approval should be conditioned upon meeting or accomplishing the recommendations contained within the study. 10. The School District shall construct all necessary improvements and accommodations for pedestrian school routes along Burns Road and the proposed road along the western property line as required and identified in the traffic study. 11. No mid -block crosswalks will be permitted on Burns Road or the proposed road along the western property line. 7 12. The School District shall prepare a dust control mitigation plan to be submitted with the building permit application. 13. The School District shall install a 16 inch irrigation line along the length of the school site in Burns Road. 14. The School District shall dedicate the south 40 feet of the site for the Burns Road right-of-way. 15. The School District shall dedicate the west 60 feet of the site for future road right-of-way. 16. No sports field light shall be permitted. 17. Water rights associated with site must be dedicated to the City prior to the issuance of a building permit. 18. The special permit shall be null and void if a building permit has not been obtained by December 2018. 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 November 16, 2017 Planning Commission meeting. 9 G _*'g M Z yr M U_ 0 O y L 'O 3 amu_ O F N om �rnm NU S �o O O (n LL. o O w¢v Q Oa' 4L O Q 6 Vi N N V CL C m Q¢ O U as O E o cn O W U a a G _*'g _ ) E § \ , t k \ k \ \ ). } )k\ NIS \ b ® Rk a)f o / §2 .§ ! ()/ CL7 ^ 2 2 2 \ § ® / § *Rw 3 � � W O „o O_ U ink-�i1 P 4-4 - j Cox: 1�9�112! U 2 ICI O0® f (- ®U r O N � U r � I p -I ct ct ¢ o. co , f r 00 O �- � •u W Z N O O U N N � Q � _ U � OC4n r --'l s O O C�l �1 Op''N ct 0 � U � U r e j MA ® ®4.0 Q(D t O ° z al tf _ '- .a . r e • NMI • NMI ■■■I PAJ milli ■■ ■ IN • •----- plioll • OMNI _lo OAF I , , • 1 ■ 4 z 11 1 1'. 2� REPORT TO PLANNING MASTER FILE NO: SP 2017-015 HEARING DATE: 10/ 19/17 ACTION DATE: 11 / 16/17 APPLICANT: Pasco School District # 1 1215 W Lewis St Pasco, WA 99301 REQUEST: SPECIAL PERMIT: Location of a Middle School in an R-1 District. (9300 Block of Burns Road) 1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Legal: That portion of the S '/2 of the SW I/4 of section 5, township 9 north, range 29 east, W.M., Franklin County, WA being described as follows: beginning at the SE corner of above said SW '/4; thence S 89°37'55" W 1,269.48 feet; thence N 01°01'10" E 1,336.68 feet to a point on the northerly line of above said S '/2; thence N 89°32'38" E along said line 1,269.53 feet to the NE corner of said S '/2; thence S 01°01'10" W along the easterly line of said SW 1/4 1,338.63 feet to the point of beginning. Together with and subject to easements, reservations, covenants and restrictions of record and in view. General Location: 9300 Block of Burns Road Property Size: Approximately 60 acres 2. ACCESS: The site is adjacent Burns Road at approximately the 9300 block. 3. 3. UTILITIES: Water and sewer lines will be stubbed into School District property at the southeast corner along Burns Road. The School District will also be responsible for running water and sewer the length of their frontage of Burns Road. 4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The site is zoned R-1 (Low Density Residential) and is being farmed. The property to the north is zoned A -P (Agricultural Production) in the County and is currently being farmed. The property to the west is zoned R-1 and is being developed with the Columbia Terrace subdivision. The property to the east is zoned R-1 and is being farmed. The properties to the south are zoned R-1 and are developed with single- family homes in the Broadmoor Estates subdivision. 5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan designates the site as Low -Density Residential. Goal CF -5 suggests adequate provisions should be made for educational facilities located throughout the urban growth area. Policy CF -5-A encourages the appropriate location and design of schools throughout the community. 6. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The City of Pasco is the lead agency for this project. An environmental determination will be made after the public hearing for this project. A Mitigated Determination of Non -Significance based on the provision of a traffic study for necessary street improvements is likely for this application (WAC 197-11-355). The Pasco School District proposes to build a middle school on a site recently annexed into the City (2016: Ordinance 4238), composed of one 38.9 -acre parcel owned by the School District and approximately 21.1 acres of another parcel to the east now under contract, all totaling 60 acres. The western lot and a portion of the eastern lot are designated for the middle school. An elementary school is being proposed for the remaining portion of the site to the east. Pasco currently has three middle schools, which have been growing in enrollment by an average of over 4% annually since 2000. The district has had to adjust enrollment by moving students around to different schools and re- assigning grades to different schools in order to accommodate the growth. Mobile classrooms have also been added to virtually every PSD campus—in some cases right upon completion of new schools—in order to accommodate growth. With the ongoing growth in population (Pasco's population has more than doubled in size since 2000, at an average annual increase of over 5%) and student enrollment, the School District needs to construct several schools. Middle school enrollment in Pasco has increased by an average of about 125 new students per year for the last two decades. This continued growth in school enrollment will create the need for additional middle schools. To address part of the need for additional school space the District is proposing to develop the site in question with a 115,000 -square -foot middle school similar to Ellen Ochoa Middle School. The building will have classroom space for 1,100 students. The site will contain sports fields, public parking, and bus loading off a future road to be built west of the site. The proposed site is farmland developed with crop circles located along the north side of Burns (formerly Powerline) Road. Burns Road is improved with pavement only. The School District will be responsible for completing all of the 2 street improvements in Burns Road and installing roads along the east and west borders of the site. A signal warrant test may be needed to determine when a signal should be installed at Broadmoor Boulevard and Burns Road. The Regional Transportation Analysis model used by the Regional Council does not include middle schools in the data used to identify future traffic impacts because middle schools do not impact the peak hour traffic conditions the way other land uses do. Based on the Institute of Traffic Engineers Trip Generation Manual (8th Ed) a middle school with 1,100 students on average can be expected to generate about 1,782 vehicle trips per day. That would amount to $76,626 in traffic impact fees (trips multiplied by $43.00/trip). By comparison, if the site were to develop with single family homes about 1,236.9 daily vehicle trips could be expected. Most of the schools in Pasco including Pasco and Chiawana High Schools are located in residential zoning districts. An on-line search of the Franklin County Assessors records (2017) revealed that all of the residential properties directly adjacent the existing Ellen Ochoa Middle School have increased in valued since the school was built by an average of over $24,000 between 2014-2017 (range $8,100-$35,600). The Ellen Ochoa neighborhood was not fully developed until after the school was built. This provides a good indication that middle schools do not discourage the development of permitted uses on property in the general vicinity of a school or impair the value thereof. Access to the site will be from a proposed road to be constructed along the west property line of the site and from Burns Road to the south. Both Broadmoor Boulevard and Road 90 feed into Burns Road for local access. School sites typically have at least two means of access for safety reasons and to help diffuse traffic and reduce the impacts of traffic on surrounding residential uses. 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 and comments made at the public hearing. The Planning Commission may add additional findings as deemed appropriate. 1. The site is located in an R-1 zone. 2. Under the current zoning approximately 202 single-family dwellings could be constructed on the site. 3. Schools are conditional land uses in the R-1 zone and require review through the special permit process prior to permitting for construction. 4. The site is at the northern edge of the Pasco Urban Growth Boundary. 3 5. The site was annexed into the City in 2016 (Ordinance 4238) and is now within the City limits of Pasco. 6. The Comprehensive Plan identifies the site for low-density residential uses. 7. Comprehensive Plan Goal CF -5 suggests that adequate provisions should be made for the location of educational facilities throughout the urban growth area. 8. The site is currently being farmed. 9. The west 38.97 acres of the site are owned by the Pasco School District and the remaining approximately 2 1. 1 acres are under contract. 10. Sewer and water utilities will be stubbed to the site. 11. The site is located at the 9300 block Burns Road. 12. Burns Road is not fully improved. 13. All existing middle schools in Pasco have at least two access routes to and from the schools. 14. City development standards require street and utility (sewer, water, irrigation) improvements to be constructed or installed concurrently with site development. 15. Off-site street improvements include but are not limited to street construction and paving, installation of curb gutter and sidewalk (7' wide), street lights, handicapped ramps, signage, lane striping, street drainage, traffic signals, speed -reduction modifications, and fire hydrants. 16. According to the Institute of Traffic Engineers Trip Generation Manual (8th Ed) a 1,100 -student middle school will generate about 1,782 vehicle trips per day. 17. If developed with single family homes the site would generate about 1,236.9 vehicle trips per day. 18. A Mitigated Determination of Non -Significance based on the provision of a traffic study for necessary street improvements is likely for this application. 19. Pasco's population has more than doubled since 1997. 20. The Pasco School District enrollment has grown from 8,048 in 1997 to 17,878 in 2016. 21. Residential development near the existing Ellen Ochoa Middle School indicates middle schools do not negatively impact the value of surrounding homes or the intended development of residential neighborhoods. 22. No sports fielding lighting will be constructed with the proposed middle school. El CONCLUSIONS BASED ON STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT Before recommending approval or denial of a special permit the Planning Commission must draw its conclusion from the findings of fact based upon the criteria listed in P.M.C. 25.86.060. The criteria and staff listed conclusions are as follows: 1) Will the proposed use be in accordance with the goals, policies, objectives and text of the Comprehensive Plan? The proposed use supports the following plan policies or goals: CF -5 suggests adequate provisions be made for educational facilities throughout the Urban Growth Area. Transportation and Utility policies support city standards that require the extension of streets and utilities in conjunction with development. To be in accord with the Comprehensive Plan the proposed middle school development would also need to include the development of adjoining streets and utilities. 2) Will the proposed use adversely affect public infrastructure? The location of a middle school on the proposed site may encourage the development of residential homes to the north of the school site leading to pressure to expand the UGA into areas the School District will help pay for the sewer trunk line in Burns Road. The School District will thereby be helping the City implement the Sewer Comprehensive Plan. The area north of this proposed school is in the Sewer Comprehensive Plan which the City will be servicing. 3) Will the proposed use be constructed, maintained and operated to be in harmony ufith existing or intended character of the general vicinity? The proposed middle school has been designed to complement the existing and future neighborhood by providing generous yard setbacks, landscaping, screening of mechanical equipment and a pitched roof line to moderate the school's height in keeping with typical pitched roofs of residential homes. Middle schools are typically located in or near residential neighborhoods and are an accepted part of the character of residential areas. 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 construction of schools in residential neighborhoods often encourages development of nearby properties. Residential development 5 around the Ellen Ochoa School located north of Lewis Street in east Pasco was not completed until after the school was in place. An on-line search of the Franklin County Assessors records (2017) revealed that values of all residential properties located near the existing Ellen Ochoa Middle School have increased since the school was built. 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? Experience has shown that schools within Pasco generate few complaints from neighbors. Schools have a long history of being accepted in residential neighborhoods. In most communities schools, including middle schools, are located in or near residential neighborhoods. Middle schools typically are not a source of dust, fumes, vibrations or flashing lights. The proposed school could generate up to 1,782 vehicle trips per day. During weekends, the summer break, and other break periods very little traffic will be generated. A Mitigated Determination of Non -Significance based on the provision of a traffic study for necessary street improvements is likely for this application, and any approval should be conditioned upon meeting or accomplishing the recommendations contained within the study. 6) Will the proposed use endanger the public health or safety if located and developed where proposed, or in anyway will become a nuisance to uses permitted in the district? The middle school will be constructed to meet all requirements of the International Building Code, the Fire Code, the Plumbing Code, all other construction codes and state regulations pertaining to middle school construction. The building will be required to have fire -rated corridors, area separation walls, sufficient exiting and fire sprinkler systems to ensure the safety of the public. The construction of sidewalks and street improvements will address traffic safety issues. Proposed Approval Conditions 1. The special permit shall apply to Franklin County Assessor's Parcel No. 115170085, approximately the west 21.1 acres of parcel 115170068, and any future consolidations or subdivisions thereof. 2. The middle school site shall be developed in substantial conformity with the site plan and building elevations submitted with the special permit application. Nothing herein prohibits the School 3 District from adding four additional classrooms to the school building or placing portable classrooms on the site. 3. Burns Road abutting the School District property and the property currently under contract (Franklin County Assessor's Parcel No. 115170085 and approximately the west 21.1 acres of parcel 115170068 existing as of September 25, 2017) shall be improved to arterial street standards meeting construction standards of the City. Improvements shall include but not be limited to curb, gutter, sidewalk and street lighting along the school side of the street. 4. Sidewalks in the Burns Road right-of-way shall be 5 feet wide and located along the property line rather than the curb line. 5. The planting strip between the Burns Road curb and the offset sidewalk must be planted in lawn and trees planted at 50 -foot intervals. The landscape and irrigation plan must be approved by the Administrative and Community Services Department prior to installation. 6. No on -street parking or bus staging will be permitted on or adjacent to Burns Road or the proposed road along the western property line. 7. All costs associated with speed reduction/modification including but not limited to flashing lights, signage, pedestrian sensors, safety and crosswalks shall be paid for by the School District. 8. A traffic study shall be conducted for necessary street improvements, if required by the MDNS. 9. All street/roadway signage abutting the property is to be provided by the School District and must conform to the most current MUTCD & City of Pasco Construction Standards. 10. The School District shall construct all necessary improvements and accommodations for pedestrian school routes along Burns Road and the proposed road along the western property line. 11. No mid -block crosswalks will be permitted on Burns Road or the proposed road along the western property line. 12. The School District shall prepare a dust control mitigation plan to be submitted with the building permit application. 13. The School District shall install a 16 inch irrigation line along the length of the school site in Burns Road. 14. The School District shall dedicate the south 40 feet of the site for the Burns Road right-of-way. 15. The School District shall dedicate the west 60 feet of the site for future road right-of-way. 16. No sports field light shall be permitted. 17. Water rights associated with site must be dedicated to the City prior to the issuance of a building permit. 18. The special permit shall be null and void if a building permit has not been obtained by December 2018. 7 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 November 16, 2017 Planning Commission meeting. W Z CO) 3 d' O O U 'd v O C OU O ®� ct ct V) U � N CL d W y r ® ® t 'a ; � NK, C5 ' NMI NMI . ON . ON . . NMI milli _ • NEI _ • Him M:Him-1 •�,• '�"` "Qr� * va'aacve'w�aopwmuaxva ewnre �` ! o to OQ �.+.� .. Aan1S 3LS avoa sNans a r- ter— I I jE _-- -----;v7 'h r II g[IAl , I it 2� REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION MASTER FILE NO: MF# SP 2017-016 APPLICANT: Maria Avila HEARING DATE: 10/ 19/17 2612 Glendive St. ACTION DATE: 11/16/17 Pasco, WA 99301 BACKGROUND REQUEST: SPECIAL PERMIT: Location of a Beauty and Barber School in 19 a C-1 Zone Legal: Sylvesters 2nd Addition Lots 22 3/4 & 23 BLK 12 General Location: 746 West Court Street, Suite B Property Size: 7,896 square feet 2. ACCESS: Access to the site is available from West Court Street and North 7+h Avenue. 3. UTILITIES: The property is served by utilities located in Court Street. 4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The site is zoned C-1 (Retail Business) Residential) and developed with two commercial -use buildings. Surrounding properties are zoned and developed as follows: NORTH: O, C-1, & R-3 -Office, commercial, and multi -family dwelling units SOUTH: R-1 -Duplex and SFDUs EAST: C-1 -Commercial WEST: O -Office 5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan designates the site for commercial development. Goal CF -5 suggests adequate provisions should be made for educational facilities located throughout the urban growth area. Policy CF -S-A encourages the appropriate location and design of schools throughout the community. 6. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The City of Pasco is the lead agency for this project. An environmental determination will be made after the public hearing for this project. A Determination of Non - Significance or Mitigated Determination of Non -Significance is likely for this application (WAC 197-11-355). ANALYSIS Maria Avila is seeking a Special Permit to relocate her existing beauty school from 915 West Court Street to a commercial building just on the other side of the street to the east at 746 West Court Street. The applicant had received a Special Permit for locating the beauty school at the former address in 2016, but is seeking to relocate to the latter address to better serve her visitors' parking needs. There is no specific zoning for beauty schools; however the code does make provision for schools/ educational facilities in the community through the special permit process. Beauty schools have been permitted within the City in the past and licensed as private schools. Within the proposed location is an existing barber shop which has operated since 2013; it is expected that both the barber shop and beauty school will share the 1,600 -square foot building. Training will be provided for approximately six students or less at a time. The outward appearance of the existing building in which the applicant intends to locate will not change with the proposed beauty school. Parking has always been limited at this location but the barber shop has been able to function for four years because most of their services are provided by appointment. Currently, there are five off-street parking stalls including an ADA parking stall; however, with the addition of several students, parking could become a larger issue. The PMC requires at least eleven parking spaces for a building this size. One option potentially available to the applicant is to borrow parking from the Tri -Cities Community Health's 77 -space parking lot to the southwest. The Tri -Cities Health office building requires at least 73 dedicated spaces, so the four additional spaces could be used to fulfill most of the beauty school's remaining student parking. However, even in this situation, the building would still be short two spaces. The Planning Commission should note that parking is likely to occur on N 7+h Ave and should also note that the development pattern along Court Street presents a parking problem for almost all land uses. Absent complete revitalization of this neighborhood indicates parking is likely to always be problematic. 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 and comments made at the public hearing. The Planning Commission may add additional findings as deemed appropriate. 1. The site is located in a C-1 zone. 2 2. The applicant had received a Special Permit for locating a beauty school at 915 W Court St in 2016, but is seeking to relocate the school to 746 W Court St, Suite B to better serve her visitors' parking needs. 3. Beauty schools have been permitted within the City in the past and licensed as private schools. 4. Within the proposed location is an existing barber shop which has operated since 2013; both the barber shop and beauty school will share the 1,600 -square foot building. 5. The outward appearance of the existing building in which the applicant intends to locate will not change with the proposed beauty school. 6. Training will be provided for approximately six students or less at a time. 7. There are five off-street parking stalls including an ADA parking stall, but the PMC requires at least eleven parking spaces for a building this size. 8. The proposed beauty school could potentially borrow four parking spaces from the Tri -Cities Health's parking lot located to the southwest, but two more spaces would still be required. CONCLUSIONS BASED ON STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT Before recommending approval or denial of a special permit the Planning Commission must draw its conclusion from the findings of fact based upon the criteria listed in P.M.C. 25.86.060. The criteria and staff listed conclusions are as follows: 1) Will the proposed use be in accordance with the goals, policies, objectives and text of the Comprehensive Plan? The proposed use is supported by Plan goals CF -5 which suggests adequate provisions be made for educational facilities throughout the Urban Growth Area. 2) Will the proposed use adversely affect public infrastructure? Public streets and utilities are in place to serve the property. Demands on infrastructure will not change with the addition of the beauty school in the existing building. 3) Will the proposed use be constructed, maintained and operated to be in harmony with existing or intended character of the general vicinity? 3 Lupita's Beauty School has operated at 915 W Court Street since 2016 and its proposed new location is very close by. The operation of the existing barber shop and its outward appearance in this location will not change. 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 height and footprint of the building will not change with the location of the beauty school. The properties around the site have already been developed with commercial, office, and residential uses. 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? Nothing will change on the site to cause noise, dust, and other activities that would be objectionable to neighboring properties. 5) Will the proposed use endanger the public health or safety if located and developed where proposed, or in anyway will become a nuisance to uses permitted in the district? The beauty school in its current location is not a public health and safety concern. It can be presumed that after the relocation the beauty school would not create new health and safety concerns for the neighborhood. Proposed Approval Conditions 1. The special permit shall apply to Parcel # 112151109. 2. The number of students shall be limited to six at any one time on the site. 3. The special permit shall be null and void if all necessary licenses have not been obtained by October 1, 2018. F1 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 November 16, 2017 Planning Commission meeting. Z -4;;;;c ,(}281k,a ?,Alp. �!,Jl L w 3m I I PM4 U V) cz C:) ct cz C:) U (1) CL4 !no V) u P�4 —4 4-j ,(}281k,a ?,Alp. �!,Jl L w 3m I I PM4 ,(}281k,a ?,Alp. �!,Jl L w 3m I I zQ a� .� as 0 0 U' p c) LL c -� o aCt O w Duplex cz •`� `�' N 7th Ave a4-j a c }' •- ++ 0 y � U SFDU ''C Cz N 8th Ave a SFDUs zQ U 0 0 U }, � M � > , r c� O �cz >m r-1 •C O � W � • �' N 7th Ave a� 4-J a �c� U �• �., U) b� U N 8th Ave O N _:RR7At i J � r. � lA♦ 3M d Am am Irl 01i 9 •11 REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION MASTER FILE NO: Z 2017-006 APPLICANT: Chad Bettersworth HEARING DATE: 10/19/2017 210 SW Wilson Ave ACTION DATE: 11/16/2017 Suite 100 Bend, OR 97702 BACKGROUND REQUEST: REZONE: Rezone from RT (Residential Transition) to R-1 (Low - Density Residential) 1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Leizal_ Farm Unit 84, Irrigation Block 1 General Location: At the southwest corner of Burns Road and Dent Road Property Approximately 144 acres. 2. ACCESS: The parcel is accessible from Burns Road. 3. UTILITIES: Municipal water service is available in Burns Road. The Comprehensive Sewer Plan calls for the location of a trunk line running north from Harris Road to Burns Road east of the rezone site. Construction on the line is to begin in the fall of 2018. 4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The lot is currently zoned RT (Retail Business) and is vacant. Surrounding properties are zoned and developed as follows: NORTH: RS - 20 Single Family Homes (County) SOUTH: RT - Gravel Pit and Ready Mix Plant EAST: RT - Vacant WEST: RT - Orchard and Farm Fields (County) 5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan designates a majority of the site for low-density residential uses. The southern 15 acres of the site is designated for mixed residential/ commercial uses. Goal H-2 suggests the City strive to maintain a variety of housing options for residents of the community including single-family housing 6. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The City of Pasco is the process of completing the Draft Broadmoor Area Non -Project Environmental Impact Statement which covers the entire proposed rezone area. The Draft considers low density residential development on the rezone site with lots ranging from 5,000 square feet to 7,000 square feet. The City of Pasco is the lead agency and has issued a Determination of Significance. ANALYSIS The site has been designated for low-density residential development since 1982 but, was not zoned until it was annexed in 998. Upon annexation the property was zone RT (Residential Transition) and continued to be farmed. The RT zone is intended to be assigned to areas of the community that are essentially undeveloped but intended for residential development. The low-density classification as described in the Comprehensive Plan permits the development of two to five dwelling units per acre. Zoning options under the low-density designation include R-1 through RS -20. The applicant is seeking R-1 zoning and is planning on developing a residential neighborhood with common open/green space as -well -as a community recreation area. If the development unfolds as planned the build out density will be just over 3 units per acre. If the common green areas are eliminated density will be just over 4 units per acre. The Three Rivers Crossing development for example, north of Sandifur Parkway, was developed with 4 units per acre. Surrounding properties to the north are being developed in the County on half acre lots because there is not service available. Burns Road provides a transition area between the larger lots to the north and the proposed lots that could be developed under R-1 zoning. The applicant's request is consistent with the low- density designation of the Comprehensive Plan. It is also consistent with the draft of the Broadmoor Area Plan that calls for smaller single-family lots. The current Broadmoor Area planning effort is an extension and refinement of the Planning Commission's 2009 planning effort for 1,800 acres located west of Broadmoor Boulevard and north of I-182. The current planning effort has refined land use designations and major transportation corridors through the planning area. The plan contains a mix of residential, multi -family, commercial, recreational and civic uses. The plan will encourage a trail system, a mix of single- family lot sizes along with design standards similar to the current I-182 standards for commercial development. The plan will also include modest design standards for residential development. The proposed rezone site is located within an area identified in the Broadmoor Area Plan for residential development. The Broadmoor Plan encourages smaller single-family lot sizes (5,000-7,000 square feet) along with a trail network connecting to parks. The applicants rezone proposal includes a variety of lots meeting the R-1 standards along with a trail system and open green areas. It is unclear if any specific residential design standards will be incorporated into the development. The initial review criteria for considering a rezone application are explained in PMC. 25.88.030. The criteria are listed below as follows: `A 1. The date the existing zone became effective The current zoning classification was established in 1998 when the property was annexed to the City. The RT zoning was only intended until more definitive plans were developed for the property and until utilities became available. 2. The changed conditions, which are alleged to warrant other or additional zoning: The property was annexed in 1998 and since that time Burns Road has been constructed connecting the property to Broadmoor Boulevard to the east. A 16 inch water line has been located in Burns Road and parallels the north boundary of the proposed rezone site. The owner of the property has been participating with the City in the preparation of the Broadmoor Area Plan that suggests single- family lots in this portion of the consistent with the R-1 densities. The Comprehensive Sewer Plan was also updated in the past few years ago to identify were the trunk sewer lines will generally be located to serve the Broadmoor Area and other areas to the north. 3. Facts to justify the change on the basis of advancing the public health, safety and general welfare: The proposed zoning request is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan which has been determined to be in the best interest of advancing public health, safety and general welfare of the community. The rezone will lead to the creation of another residential neighborhood providing housing opportunities for Pasco residents. The creation of another residential neighborhood in the area will improve water flow through the 16 inch water main in Burns Road eliminating concerns water stagnation due to lower flows. 4. The effect it will have on the value and character of the adjacent property and the Comprehensive Plan: A change in zoning classification will ultimately result in the establishment of a single-family residential neighborhood consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The rezone may improve the value of commercial property near the Road 100 Interchange and will have minimal to no impact on current and future residential development in the area. 5. The effect on the property owner or owners if the request is not granted: Without transitioning the site to residential zoning the development potential of the site will be limited. Future site planning cannot move forward without knowing what the zoning will be. c 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 being farmed and contains on farm house. 2. The site was annexed in 1998. 3. The site contains 144 acres. 4. The site is currently zoned RT (Residential Transition). 5. Properties to the south, east and west are zone RT. 6. Properties to the north are zoned RS -20. 7. The site is located on Burns Road. 8. The American Rock gravel pit is located to the south. 9. The applicant is requesting R-1 (Low -Density Residential) zoning. 10. The Comprehensive Plan identifies the site for Low -Density -Residential uses which includes R-1 zoning. 11. The City is currently working with property owners in the Broadmoor Area west of Broadmoor Boulevard to finalize refined development plan for the area. 12. A 16 -inch water line is located in Burns Road. 13. The Comprehensive Sewer Plan identifies generally how the site can be served by municipal sewer system. 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. H -2-A suggests the City permit a full range of residential environments. Housing Policy (H -B -A) encourages standards that 11 control the scale and density of accessory buildings and homes to maintain compatibility with other residential uses. 2. The effect of the proposal on the immediate vicinity will not be materially detrimental. The immediate area is shown in the Comprehensive Plan and the proposed Broadmoor Area Plan to an area for low-density residential development with densities permitted by R-1 zoning. Proposed rezone is consistent with the referenced plans and will not be detrimental to future nearby develops that will need to conform to the provision of the plans. 3. There is merit and value in the proposal for the community as a whole There is merit in developing vacant parcels within the City in accordance with the goals and policies contained in the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed zoning is consistent with the Plan's Land Use Map. Providing an increased range of housing opportunities benefits the community as a whole. Additionally locating housing in areas served by major water lines 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. The Broadmoor Area Plan includes design standards for residential and commercial development. The rezone should be conditioned so that all housing within the rezone area will be consistent with the Broadmoor Plan residential design standards. 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 needed to ensure residential development within the rezone site will be consistent with the design standards that will apply to the overall Broadmoor Plan area. RECOMMENDATION MOTION: I move to close the hearing on the proposed rezone and set November 16, 2017 as the date for deliberations and the development of a recommendation for the City Council. 5 W i:. 4tw}�t `F1 ff ' 0 Vicinity Item: Rezone from RT to R-1 Applicant: Chad Bettersworth Map File #: Z 2017-006 w BLADlZFOOT DR_N1 E9i'(� LC-R �T DR// 2, --- City-� SITE Item: Rezone from RT to R-1 Land Use Applicant: Chad Bettersworth W E Map File #: Z 2017-006 S U) .. J _T U Farming (County) SFDUs (County SITE Mineral Extraction Farming /Vacant Item: Rezone from RT to R-1 " Zoning Applicant: Chad Bettersworth W E Map File #: Z 2017-006 S 42 E J U R -T (County) 20 (County) SITE RT I i � f i\ n.� Tin Io NP F� 3 } u 0 c 0 C 0. c r� 0 >s� Oma' CL a m O 17g g v� 0 u c a n a,, a a~ RM3 g J a � 3 �JCDC3L1:�4J�J� 0 c C nes 0 V ao CL a g v� 0 u c a n a,, a J a � �JCDC3L1:�4J�J� MEMORANDUM DATE: October 19, 2017 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Darcy Bourcier, Planner I SUBJECT: Ordinance Amending PMC Chapter 26.28 Allowing Administrative Approval of Final Plats (MF# CA2017-007) Earlier this year in July the Senate passed a bill amending RCW 58.17.100, 58.17.170, and 58.17.190 which addresses the approval of final plats. The bill authorizes the legislative body of a city to delegate final plat approval to a planning commission or other authorized administrative personnel. Currently, the City of Pasco's review process of the subdivision of land includes preliminary and final plat approval by the City Council. According to the current code, the Planning Commission holds a hearing to review a preliminary plat and ensure that the plat conforms to all planning standards as established in the PMC. The Planning Commission subsequently makes a recommendation to City Council which the Council may adopt or reject. At the time of final plat approval, all issues related to zoning, environmental impact, and building have been resolved. Thus, staff believes that delegating final plat approval to the Planning Director or City Manager would benefit both the City and applicants who submit subdivision proposals by decreasing the review process by nearly two weeks and eliminating a formality that has the potential to cause liability. Staff has scheduled a public hearing for the Planning Commission meeting of October 19, 2017. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING PMC CHAPTER 26.28 ALLOWING ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL OF FINAL PLATS. WHEREAS, the development and approval of plats within the State of Washington are governed by RCW 58.17; and, WHEREAS, local subdivision regulations including the City of Pasco subdivision regulations within Title 26 of the Pasco Municipal must conform to RCW 58.17; and, WHEREAS, the State Legislature recently amended RCW 58.17 grant cities the option of administratively approving final plat without City Council action; and, WHEREAS, PMC Title 26 currently contains provisions for administrative approval of short plat; and, WHEREAS, to provide for timely approvals of final plats the City Council hereby exercises the option to authorize administrative approvals of final plats as authorized by RCW 58.17.100; NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That section 26.28.010 of the Pasco Municipal Code shall be and hereby is amended and shall read as follows: 26.28.010 APPLICATION. (1) Except as provided in subsection (2) below, a final plat meeting all of the requirements of this Chapter shall be submitted to the City Ceurs=il City Planner for approval within seven (7) years of the date of the preliminary plat approval if the date of the preliminary plat approval is was on or after January 1, 2008 but before December 31, 2014, and within five (5) years of the date of preliminary plat approval, if the date of preliminary plat approval is was on or after January 1, 2015. (2) A final plat meeting all requirements of this Chapter shall be submitted to the G:..eil City Planner for approval within ten (10) years of the date or preliminary plat approval if the project is within the City limits, not subject to the requirements adopted under Chapter 90.48 RCW (Shoreline Management Plan), and the date of the preliminary plat approval is was on or before December 31, 2007. Ordinance—Amending PMC 26.28 - 1 WIM Ordinance—Amending PMC 26.28 - 1 (3) A complete application for final plat approval shall consist of ten full sized, four 11x17 paper copies and an electronic copy of the plat. The paper copies together with such supplementary information and certificates which may be required shall be submitted to the City Planner at least twenty days prior to the date sought for final plat approval. Following written notification of corrections or modifications necessary for the final plat, if any, the applicant shall submit a signed, dated and stamped molar drawing of the subdivision with an updated electronic copy and the applicable bonding instrument as identified in 26.28.050. A bond will only be needed if there are outstanding improvements to complete. Section 2. That section 26.28.030 (14) of the Pasco Municipal Code shall be and hereby is amended and shall read as follows: (14) Spaces for certificates or approvals of the following officials or agencies: a) Nia5;e City Manager or Designee b) Ghat .., a Gity Planning G,...... issio City Planner c) City Engineer d) County Engineer (where applicable) e) Franklin County P.U.D. or applicable utility provider f) Franklin County Irrigation District #1 (where applicable) g) Benton Franklin Health District (where applicable) h) County Assessor i) County Treasurer j) County Auditor Section 3. That section 26.28.060 of the Pasco Municipal Code shall be and hereby is amended and shall read as follows: 26.28.060 CITY COUNCIL ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL. The final approval of a plat is an administrative function not requiring action by the City Council. City couneil shall have sple alatigefity to appreve final plats. Stieh appr-eval shall ee by majority affinnative vote of the City Couneil during a regular City Couneil meeting. A final plat shall only be approved if the City Cothwil administrative review process finds the subdivision proposed for final plat approval conforms to all terms of the preliminary plat approval, and the said subdivision meets the requirements of Chapter 58.17 RCW, other applicable state laws and this title which requirements were in effect on the date of submission of a fully completed preliminary plat application. Section 4. That section 26.28.070 of the Pasco Municipal Code shall be and hereby is amended and shall read as follows: Ordinance — Amending PMC 26.28 - 2 26.28.070 TERMS OF APPROVAL. (1) A subdivision shall be governed by the terms of approval of the final plat, and the statutes, zoning ordinances and regulations in effect on the date of preliminary plat approval for a period of seven (7) years after final plat approval if the date of the final plat approval is on or before December 31, 2014; and for a period of five (5) years after the final plat approval if the date of final plat approval is on or after January 1, 2015, unless the City Gouneil through the administrative approval process it is found that a change in conditions creates a serious threat to the public health or safety in the subdivision. If a serious threat to public health and safety is found the plat must be reviewed by the City Council. (2) A subdivision shall be governed by the terms of approval of the final plat, and the statutes, zoning ordinances and regulations in effect at the time of approval of the preliminary plat for a period of ten (10) years after final plat approval if the project is located within the City limits, not subject to the requirements adopted under Chapter 90.58 RCW (Shoreline Management Plan), and the date of the final plat approval is on before December 31, 2007, unless the Gity G,...neil A«A., through the administrative approval process it is found that a change in conditions creates a serious threat to the public health or safety in the subdivision. If a serious threat to public health and safety is found the plat must be reviewed by the City Council. Section 5. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect five days after passage and publication as required by law. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco, Washington, and approved as provided by law this day of '12017. Matt Watkins Mayor ATTEST: Daniela Erickson City Clerk Ordinance — Amending PMC 26.28 - 3 APPROVED AS TO FORM: Leland B. Kerr City Attorney