HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-16-2019 Planning Commission Meeting PacketCity 0l
PdSC(
I. CALL TO ORDER:
II. ROLL CALL:
111. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
V. OLD BUSINESS:
A. Preliminary Plat
B. Rezone
VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
AGENDA
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
City Hall — 525 North Third Avenue — Council Chambers
THURSDAY, MAY 16, 2019
7:00 PM
Declaration of Quorum
April 18, 2019
Preliminary Plat, Black Belle Estates (33 lots) (J&J Kelly
Construction) (MF# PP 2019-001)
Rezone from C-1 (Retail Business) to C-3 (General Business)
(YESMAR Properties Inc.) (M F# Z 2019-004)
A. Special Permit Location of Franklin County Museum Annex Building (Franklin
County Historical Society) (MF# SP 2019-002) — Continued from
a previous meeting
B. Code Amendment Code Amendment for Minimum Lot Sizes (MF# CA 2017-009) —
Continued from a previous meeting
C. Code Amendment Code Amendment for Shared Street Frontages (MF# CA 2018-
008) — Continued from a previous meeting
D. Code Amendment Code Amendment Regarding Special Permits for Auto -Wrecking
VII. WORKSHOP:
A. Code Amendment
VIII. OTHER BUSINESS:
A. Comprehensive Plan
IX. ADJOURNMENT:
M F# CA 2019-008
Code Amendment to Increase Dwelling Height in R-3 and R-4
Zones (MF# CA 2019-009)
Comprehensive Plan Update (April 22, 2019 City Council
Workshop Meeting)
This meeting is broadcast live on PSC -Ty Channel 191 on Charter Cable and streamed at www.pasco-wa.com/psetvilve.
Audio equipment available for the hearing impaired; contact staff for assistance.
City 0f MINUTES
I PdSCU PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
City Hall — 525 North Third Avenue —Council Chambers
THURSDAY, APRIL 18, 2019
7:00 PM
CALL TO ORDER:
The meeting was called to order at 7:00 pm by Chairperson Myhrum.
ATTENDANCE:
Commissioners Present: Tanya Bowers, Joseph Campos, Paul Mendez, Abel Campos Isaac Myhrum, Pam
Bykonen
Staff Present: Rick White (Community & Economic Development Director), Jacob B. Gonzalez (Senior
Planner), Darcy Bourcier (Planner 1), Krystle Shanks (Administrative Assistant II)
MEETING VIDEO ON DEMAND:
This meeting in its entirety has been posted and can be viewed on the City's webpage at
https://psctv.viebit.com.
APPEARANCE OF FAIRNESS:
Chairperson Myhrum read a statement about the appearance of fairness for hearings on land use matters.
There were no declarations.
Chairperson Myhrum then asked the audience and the Planning Commission 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:
Chairperson Myhrum explained that state law requires testimony in quasi-judicial hearings such as held by
the Planning Commission be given under oath or affirmation. Chairperson Myhrum swore in all those desiring
to speak.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
Commissioner Mendez moved, seconded by Commissioner J. Campos that the minutes dated March 21,
2019. The motion passed unanimously.
OLD BUSINESS:
A. Rezone
Rezone from RT (Residential Transition) to C-1 (Retail Business)
(ABHL) (MF# Z 2019-002)
Chairperson Myhrum read the master file number and asked for comments from staff.
Jacob B. Gonzalez, Senior Planner, discussed the rezone application from RT (Residential Transition) to C-1
Planning Commission Meeting Page 1 April 18, 2019
(Retail Business). There was a correction regarding the environmental determination, now stating
Determination of Non -Significance has been issued. There were no additional comments from staff.
Commissioner Bowers moved, seconded by Commissioner Bykonen, to adopt findings of fact and conclusions
therefrom as contained in the April 18, 2019 staff report. The motion passed unanimously.
Commissioner Bowers moved, seconded by Commissioner Bykonen, based on the findings of fact and
conclusions, as adopted, the Planning Commission recommend the City Council rezone 6.1 acres on the
northeast corner of Sandifur Parkway and Road 68 from RT to C-1. The motion passed unanimously.
B. Rezone Rezone from RS -20 to RS -12 (J&J Kelly Construction) (MF# Z
2019-003
Chairperson Myhrum read the master file number and asked for comments from staff.
Darcy Bourcier, Planner I, discussed the rezone application from RS -20 (Residential Suburban) to RS -12
(Residential Suburban). There were no additional comments from staff.
Chairperson Myhrum addressed the traffic concerns though given the traffic estimate, he felt that the
infrastructure in the area could support the increased traffic.
Ms. Bourcier responded that both Road 54 and Road 52 will be evaluated on current standards for streets
and improvements will be required and if determined necessary.
Commissioner Mendez discussed a letter submitted to the Planning Commission with concerns and objecting
RS -12 zoning.
Ms. Bourcier stated that the letter was received on April 18, 2019. The hearing for this item closed at the
previous month so staff believes this letter was received for the plat that is on the agenda fora public hearing
which goes along with the rezone.
Commissioner A. Campos moved, seconded by Commissioner Bowers to adopt findings of fact and
conclusions therefrom as contained in the April 18, 2019 staff report. The motion passed unanimously.
Commissioner A. Campos moved, seconded by Commissioner Bowers, based on the findings of fact and
conclusions, as adopted, the Planning Commission recommend the City Council rezone three parcels located
between Roads 52 and 54 south of West Court Street from RS -20 to RS -12. The motion passed unanimously.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
A. Preliminary Plat Preliminary Plat, Black Belle Estates (33 lots) (J&J Kelly
Construction) (MF# PP 2019-001)
Chairperson Myhrum read the master file number and asked for comments from staff.
Planning Commission Meeting Page 2 April 18, 2019
Darcy Bourcier, Planner I, discussed the preliminary plat application for Black Belle Estates (33 lots). The
proposed rezone of the site from Rs -20 to RS -12 must first be approved by City Council prior to plat approval
at the given density. The applicant has been working with an engineering firm on sewer designs and plans
should be complete within a month. Ms. Bourcier addressed concerns voiced at the previous meeting and
in a letter that was received by staff.
Commissioner Bowers discussed traffic concerns voiced by a nearby resident.
Ms. Bourcier responded that the roads will be evaluated for concurrency and if they are not up to standards
then improvements will be required to support increased traffic.
Rick White, Community & Economic Development Director, provided further information on traffic estimates
and discussed road connections with former County properties that get annexed into the City.
Commissioner Bowers addressed density concerns and stated that the City must accommodate the needs of
the growing population.
Commissioner J. Campos added that the more property available to develop, the better the chances of aiding
the affordability of homes.
There were no further questions or comments.
Commissioner J. Campos moved, seconded by Commissioner Mendez to close the public hearing on the
proposed preliminary plat and set May 16, 2019 as the date for deliberations and the development of a
recommendation for the City Council. The motion passed unanimously.
B. Rezone Rezone from RT (Residential Transition) to R-1 (Low Density
Residential) (Enrique Salas) (MF# Z 2019-001)
Chairperson Myhrum read the master file number and asked for comments from staff.
Rick White, Community & Economic Development Director, discussed the rezone application from RT
(Residential Transition) to R-1 (Low Density Residential). This item went to public hearing in March but was
re -advertised and continued due to additional parcels needing to be included in the rezone, including a parcel
owned by another property owner, although the applicant wishes to purchase. The proposed zoning
conforms to the Comprehensive Plan which designates the site for low density residential. There were no
further comments from staff.
Enrique Salas, 4616 Ivy Road, spoke on behalf of his application. He accepted the conditions in the staff
report.
Commissioner J. Campos moved, seconded by Commissioner Bowers, moved to close the hearing and adopt
findings of fact and conclusions therefrom as contained in the April 18, 2019 staff report. The motion passed
unanimously.
Commissioner J. Campos moved, seconded by Commissioner Bowers, based on the findings of fact and
Planning Commission Meeting Page 3 April 18, 2019
conclusions, as adopted, the Planning Commission recommend the City Council rezone the four parcels from
RT (Residential Transition) to R-1 (Low Density Residential). The motion passed unanimously.
C. Rezone Rezone from C-1 (Retail Business) to C-3 (General Business)
(YESMAR Properties Inc.) (MF# Z 2019-004)
Chairperson Myhrum read the master file number and asked for comments from staff.
Rick White, Community & Economic Development Director, discussed the rezone application from C-1 to C-
3. The site is located at the corner of Road 84 and Chapel Hill Boulevard. The Comprehensive Plan designates
the property for commercial uses. The applicant is requesting the C-3 designation, the heaviest commercial
designation, to allow for a micro -brewery to locate at this site. A concomitant agreement will be attached to
the rezone to strictly allow for a micro -brewery but to exclude the remaining uses the C-3 zone would allow
for.
Chairperson Myhrum asked why C-3 zoning was chosen rather than C-2.
Mr. White responded that C-2 was a special zoning district for Downtown Pasco and wouldn't apply to the
proposed site.
Chairperson Myhrum asked if there would be additional tenants.
Mr. White said the applicant is present however he understood that there would be other tenants.
John Ramsey, 8612 Whipple Drive, spoke in support of his rezone application. He believed the rezone would
help bring services to West Pasco that are currently not in the area.
Commissioner Mendez asked if they intended to have a tasting room for the brewery.
Mr. Ramsey stated that the proposed tenant was present at the meeting and could answer those questions.
He added that they were not going to have any tenants storing things outside — all uses would be inside of
the building they constructed. He addressed the question that there would be multiple tenants.
Chairperson Myhrum asked if the intent to rezone to C-3 was solely to allow for the mircro-brewery or if they
had additional intentions with the C-3 zoning designation.
Gary Hall, 10 S. Auburn Street, Kennewick, WA spoke in support of the rezone application. He stated that
the building is aesthetically pleasing with an oversized parking lot and a dedicated area for a roundabout. He
stated that they did have other intended uses with the zoning as stated in their application.
Chairperson Myhrum asked if there were concerns of the design standards in the concomitant agreement.
Mr. Hall responded that he has not seen the concomitant agreement at this time but he was sure Mr. Ramsey
would be in agreement of complying with the City's standards within reason.
Planning Commission Meeting Page 4 April 18, 2019
Mr. White added the 1-182 Overlay District applies to this property. Staff intends to contact the applicant
and owner to develop aesthetic enhancements retroactively.
J. Campos stated that this project looks similar to the development at White Bluffs Brewery with some other
units and he felt this site looked better and was nice.
Rob Ellsworth, 329 N. Kellogg, Kennewick, WA spoke in support of the rezone application. He discussed the
uses they were requesting to allow for within the C-3 zoning district to include; laundry, wholesale business
and warehouse as well as C-2 uses minus grocery stores, theaters parking lots and dwelling units. The
building they constructed lends itself to more uses than what is just allowed in C-1 and they want more
flexibility.
Commissioner Bowers had concerns with the micro -brewery pertainingto noise and other nuisance concerns
with that type of use and wanted to know if they had plans to prevent those issues.
Ben Grogan, 1155 Bridal Drive, Richland, WA spoke in support of the proposed rezone. He stated that is the
owner of the proposed micro -brewery. They would not have late night hours so noise shouldn't be a concern
but was willing to work with the City should that be necessary.
Chairperson Myhrum asked Mr. Grogan if he would have large delivery trucks.
Mr. Grogan responded that they wouldn't as they would be starting out small and using small trucks to make
any deliveries with an occasional truck load of grains and hops. They would be focusing on sales through the
taproom with local distribution to bars with their own pick-up trucks.
Chairperson Myhrum asked if they would be selling other beers not brewed by them.
Mr. Grogan stated that their licensing will be exclusively for distribution of beer manufactured on the
premises.
Commissioner A. Campos voiced support for the project.
Commissioner Bowers asked staff if it would be appropriate to ask for noise buffering.
Mr. White replied that he didn't think so but should there be an issue the City has a very active Code
Enforcement Division that has been successful with similar issues.
Chairperson Myhrum asked staff if they saw many changes to the concomitant agreement between this
hearing and the next meeting.
Mr. White replied that it would be likely due to conflicting uses requested in the application and during the
meeting that staff will need to clarify.
Commissioner Mendez if it was correct in the Concomitant Agreement regarding the standards should be
met that of the C-1 district.
Planning Commission Meeting Page 5 April 18, 2019
Mr. White responded that it was correct.
Commissioner J. Campos moved, seconded by Commissioner Mendez to close the hearing on the proposed
rezone and set May 16, 2019 as the date for deliberations and the development of a recommendation for
the City Council. The motion passed unanimously.
D. Special Permit Location of Franklin County Museum Annex Building (Franklin
County Historical Society) (MFN SP 2019-002)
Chairperson Myhrum read the master file number and asked for comments from staff.
Jacob B. Gonzalez, Senior Planner, discussed the special permit application for the location of the Franklin
County Museum Annex Building. This item had formerly come to the Planning Commission but was
ultimately withdrawn by the applicant to work out the details of their project. The applicant has reapplied
and is proposing a 3,500 square foot structure to be used for a combination of storing museum collection
items and also for a proposed location for the Mid -Columbia Agriculture Hall of Fame as well as event type
of activities. The applicant has been notified that there is a combination of concerns, of which Mr. Gonzalez
discussed and suggested staff recommendations to the site.
Commissioner Bowers asked if the City's Historic Preservation Commission has viewed the proposal.
Mr. Gonzalez replied that they have but added that the design and materials of the structure will need to be
reviewed by staff and the HPC in further detail. For that reason, staff recommended continuing this public
hearing.
Commissioner J. Campos recalled in the original proposal the applicant was going to construct a steel building
and now it has come back looking more like the original structure, conforming more than the original
proposal.
Commissioner A. Campos asked if the Downtown Pasco Development Authority has been involved with the
review of this item in any way since this property is located so close to downtown.
Mr. Gonzalez stated that he was not aware of any correspondence between the applicant and the RPDA but
added that if the new structure was located closer to the sidewalk it would be a benefit for both parties.
Commissioner Bowers asked for clarification on which sidewalk.
Mr. Gonzalez said the sidewalk on West Bonneville.
Commissioner Bykonen asked if the applicant will bring forward a revised site plan at the next hearing.
Mr. Gonzalez said that would be discussed with the applicant and hopefully will be the case.
Richard Scheuerman, 2685 Torrey Pines Way, Richland, WA spoke in support of the special permit application
Planning Commission Meeting Page 6 April 18, 2019
as the Director of the Franklin County Museum. He addressed comments and questions presented by the
Planning Commissioner's and staff and said that they want to be compatible to the nature of the historic site.
Their intention at this point is a conventional stick built building with a stucco finish to be as similar as possible
to the original structure and briefly discussed parking options as well as goals of the museum expansion.
Chairperson Myhrum if the space would be used for events and rental space or for exhibits.
Mr. Scheuerman said that they would be open to use by outside groups but the museum itself needs space
and open area. The idea has been to use portable exhibits to put away when space is needed.
Commissioner Bowers wanted to ensure that the new building is consistent with the character of the original
building. She also asked about the interest of housing the Agricultural Hall of Fame as she thought the REACH
Museum already had something similar.
Mr. Scheuerman addressed those concerns and explained how they would make theirs different.
Commissioner Bowers discussed banquet halls in Downtown Pasco and voiced concern of them utilizing their
space solely for events but was encouraged to hear they had plans for exhibits and programming. She asked
what type of outreach they have done with the surrounding neighborhood.
Mr. Scheuerman said he would like to include them with the Master Gardener's Program.
Chairperson Myhrum asked if there would be a basement.
Mr. Scheuerman said yes to house storage of archives safely to preserve the documents they take in.
Commissioner Mendez added that he was excited for this project.
Commissioner J. Campos asked if some of the land usage was for part of the festival street.
Rick White, Community & Economic Development Director, said the festival street would be on 4th Avenue
between Columbia and Lewis.
Commissioner Bowers moved, seconded by Commissioner A. Campos to continue the special permit on the
proposed location for an annex building for the Franklin County Museum in the R-3 (Medium Density
Residential) zoning district to the May 16, 2019 Planning Commission meeting. The motion passed
unanimously.
WORKSHOP:
A. Code Amendment Code Amendment to Special Permits (MF# CA 2019-008)
Chairperson Myhrum read the master file number and asked for comments from staff.
Jacob B. Gonzalez, Senior Planner, discussed the proposed code amendment to special permits. Staff
Planning Commission Meeting Page 7 April 18, 2019
received a code amendment request to allow a currently operating business to store and operate an auto -
wrecking yard in an adjoining C-3 (General Business) zoning district. This request would amend the Special
Permits Chapter 25.200 of the Pasco Municipal Code (PMC). The proposed amendment would apply
citywide. And exact location of the business that the applicant was not provided. Staff requested comments
or direction for the Planning Commission.
There was general discussion and questions between the commissioners and staff.
The commissioners were in agreement to advertise the proposed code amendment and bring it to a public
hearing at the next meeting.
OTHER BUSINESS:
Rick White, Community & Economic Development Director, reminded the Planning Commission that May
would be the last meeting they would be reviewing any new land use permits as the Hearing Examiner will
begin on Wednesday, June 2nd at 6:OOPM.
Mr. White thanked Commissioner Alecia Greenaway for her service on the Planning Commission for over 10+
years as she has now resigned.
Mr. White reminded the Planning Commission that they would be hearing an update to the Comprehensive
Plan at the May meeting.
ADJOURNMENT:
With no further discussion or business, the Planning Commission was adjourned at 8:28 PM.
Respectfully submitted,
Krystle Shanks, Administrative Assistant II
Community & Economic Development Department
Planning Commission Meeting Page 8 April 18, 2019
City of REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
I
PdSCU PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
City Hall — 525 North Third Avenue —Council Chambers
THURSDAY, MAY 16, 2019
7:00 PM
MASTER FILE #: PP 2019-001
APPLICANT: J&J Kelly Construction, Inc.
1006 Christopher Ln
Pasco WA 99301
REQUEST: PRELIMINARY PLAT: Black Belle Estates (33 -Lot Single -Family
Subdivision)
Tff' 4a 1FJ,1FC
1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:
Legals:
Lot 1: Short Plat 79-28 Lot 4 Except for future road R/W (APN # 119611082)
Lot 2: Short Plat 79-28 Lot 3 (APN # 119611094)
Lot 3: Portion of the NE Quarter of the SE Quarter of the NE Quarter of Section 27, Township 9
North, Range 29 East, W.M
General Location: Between Roads 52 and 54 south of W Court Street
Property Size: The site consists of three parcels comprising approximately 15.3 acres
2. ACCESS: The property has access from Road 52 and Road 54
3. UTILITIES: Municipal water is available in both Road 52 and Road 54. Municipal sewer is not
available but is planned for the near future.
4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The lots are currently vacant and are zoned RS -20 (Suburban), but are
pending the approval of a rezone to RS -12 (see MF# Z2019-003). Surrounding properties are
zoned and developed as follows:
NORTH: RS -20 New single-family development
EAST: RS -12 SFDUs
SOUTH: RS -20 SFDUs
WEST: RS -20 SFDUs
5. Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan indicates the site is intended for low-density
residential development. According to the Comprehensive Plan, low-density residential
development means 2 to 5 dwelling units per acre. The criteria for allocation under the future
land use section of Volume II of the Comprehensive Plan (Vol. II, page 17) encourages
development of lands designated for low-density residential uses when or where sewer is
available; the location is suitable for home sites; and there is a market demand for new home
sites. 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.
1
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 (WAC
197-11-355).
ANALYSIS
In July of 2018 the Planning Commission discussed a proposed 22 -lot preliminary plat by the name of Black
Belle Estates in this location. However, the City suggested that—to avoid the use of septic systems within the
incorporated areas—the City should assist the developer in extending municipal sewer facilities up from W
Sylvester Street. Lots connected to City sewer are permitted at much smaller sizes because they do not
support septic systems. The hearing for the plat was continued numerous times while negotiations occurred
until finally the item was tabled until an agreement could be made.
A rezone of the development site from RS -20 (Suburban) to RS -12 (Suburban) is pending approval by City
Council at the May 6`h, 2019 regular Council meeting. Thus, the applicant has submitted a revised preliminary
plat of Black Belle Estates which accommodates the density standards of the RS -12 zoning district. The
previous version of the plat proposed 22 single-family lots—a density of approximately 1.4 dwelling units per
acre. In anticipation of rezone approval, the plat has been reconfigured to include a total of 33 single-family
lots, or 2.2 dwelling units per acre. This density increase will more effectively utilize the acreage available for
development, which will be facilitated by the proposed extension of municipal sewer facilities from W
Sylvester Street.
The plat site was annexed into the City in 2013 and was zoned RS -20. At the time of annexation, the Planning
Commission considered the character of the neighborhood and the lack of sanitary sewer service prior to
recommending RS -20 zoning. Now, the City must take into account the rate at which Pasco is growing in
population and how Pasco will accommodate such rapid growth.
LOT LAYOUT: The proposed plat contains 33 residential lots. The lots vary in size from 12,537 square feet to
38,960 square feet. The average lot size is 16,424 square feet. The proposal is consistent with the density
requirements of the pending RS -12 zoning on the site. The minimum lot size for the RS -12 zone is 12,000
square feet.
RIGHTS-OF-WAY: All lots have frontage on streets which will be dedicated. The east half of Road 54 and the
west half of Road 52 will be finished with this subdivision. Because the proposed plat is zoned RS -12, curb,
gutter, and sidewalk are not required.
UTILITIES: Municipal water is located in Road 52 and Road 54 and will be extended to and through the new
lots to serve the subdivision. Municipal sewer will be extended by the developer to the plat site from W
Sylvester Street with the help of the City.
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 requested easements; therefore, the front yard easements will not
diminish the buildable area of the lots.
The City Engineer will determine the specific placement of fire hydrants and streetlights when construction
plans are submitted. As a general rule, fire hydrants are located at street intersections and with a maximum
interval of 500 feet between hydrants on alternating sides of the street. Streetlights are located at street
intersections, with a maximum interval of less than 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.
2
IRRIGATION: The property is within the FCID service area.
WATER RIGHTS: The assignment of water rights is a requirement for subdivision approval per Pasco
Municipal Code Section 26.04.115(6) 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.
STAFF 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 RS -12 zone are designed to address overcrowding
concerns. The Comprehensive Plan suggests the property in question be developed with 2 to 5 dwelling units
per acre. The proposed plat has a density of approximately 2.2 units per acre. No more than 40 percent of
each lot is permitted to be covered with structures per the RS -12 standards.
Parks Open Space/Schools: Wade Park is approximately 1,000 feet south of the plat area. Park impact fees
will be collected at the time of permitting to be used for park development.
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
$4,700 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 single-family development as identified in
the Comprehensive Plan. The maximum density permitted under the Comprehensive Plan is 5 dwelling units
per acre. The developer is proposing a density of 2.2 units per acre.
Safe Travel & Walking Conditions: The plat will connect to the community through the existing network of
streets. Sidewalks are not required in the RS -12 zone but may be installed and constructed to current City
standards and to the standards of the American's with Disabilities Act (ADA).
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 33 residential building lots, providing
an opportunity for the construction of 31 new dwelling units in Pasco.
Adequate Air and Light: The maximum lot coverage limitations, building height restrictions, and building
setbacks will assure that adequate movement of air and light is available to each lot.
Proper Access & Travel: The plat will be developed to City standards to assure proper access is maintained
to each lot. Connections to the community will be provided by Road 52 and Road 54. 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 low-density
residential development. Policies of the Comprehensive Plan encourage 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 is relatively flat.
• The site currently contains three houses. One, which is old and vacant, will be removed prior to plat
development.
• The site is not considered a critical area, a mineral resource area or a wetland.
• The Comprehensive Plan identifies the site for low-density residential development.
• Low-density residential development is described in the Comprehensive Plan as 2 to 5 dwelling units per
acre.
• The site is zoned RS -20 (Suburban), but is pending a rezone to RS -12 (Suburban).
• The minimum lot area in the RS -12 zone is 12,000 square feet.
• The developer is proposing 2.2 dwelling units per acre.
• The site currently does not have access to sewer; however, municipal sewer facilities will be extended
from W Sylvester Street at the time of development.
• The site's low density residential designation permits the following zones: RS -20, RS -12, RS -1, and R-1.
• The Housing Element of the Comprehensive Plan encourages the advancement of programs that promote
home ownership and 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.
• Per the ITE Trip Generation Manual 8th Edition, the proposed subdivision, when fully developed, will
generate approximately 323.68 vehicle trips per day.
• The current traffic impact fee is $709 per dwelling unit. The impact fees are collected at the time permits
are issued and said fees are used to make traffic improvements in the 1-182 Corridor when warranted.
• The current park impact fee is $1,466 per dwelling unit.
• 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.
• Plat improvements within the City of Pasco are required to comply with the 2015 Standard Drawings and
Specification as approved bythe 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.
4
• The assignment of water rights is a requirement for subdivision approval per Pasco Municipal Code
Section 26.04.115(B) and Section 3.07.160.
• The developer is responsible for all costs associated with construction, inspection, and plan review
service expenses incurred by the City Engineering Office.
• 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.
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, 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. 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 PUD, the Pasco School
District, Cascade Gas, Charter Cable, Franklin County Irrigation District, and Ben -Franklin Transit Authority for
review and comment.
Based on the School District's 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. All new developments participate in establishing parks through the payment
of park fees at the time of permitting.
(2) The proposed subdivision contributes to the orderly development and land use patterns in the area;
The proposed plat is an infill development. It is designed to make the most efficient use of a vacant parcel of
land per the designated zoning.
(3) The proposed subdivision conforms to the policies, maps, and narrative text of the Comprehensive Plan;
The Comprehensive Plan land use map designates the site for low-density residential development, which is
described as 2 to 5 dwelling units per acre. The plat indicates the density to be 2.2 units per acre, which is
within the density range established by 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;
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 ensure
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 ensure the public use and interest are
served.
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 final plat(s) shall contain a 10 -foot utility easement parallel to all streets unless otherwise
required by the Franklin County PUD.
4. 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."
5. All development activities are subject to the concurrency development standards established in
PMC 12.36.
6. All right of way improvements and extensions of City maintained utilities shall conform to the
standard specifications of the City of Pasco in place at time of development.
7. All work in the right of way must be designed by a professional engineer licensed in the State of
Washington, and are reviewed on a first come first serve basis.
8. 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.
9. All utility lines serving the subdivision, including but not limited to power, telephone and television
cables shall be installed underground. Adequate easements shall be provided for all such utility
lines, which will not be located within the right-of-way. All existing non -City maintained utility lines
must be relocated outside the right of way.
10. The face of the plat shall include this statement: "As a condition of approval of this preliminary plat
the owner has waived the right to protest the formation of a Local Improvement District for
sewer/water/road/sidewalk improvements to the full extent as permitted by RCW 35.43.182."
11. Any existing water rights shall be transferred to the City as a condition of approval. If no water
rights are available then the property owner shall pay to the City, in lieu thereof, a water rights
acquisition fee as established in the City Fee Summary Ordinance located in PMC 3.07. (PMC
26.04.115). These requirements can be complied with during the preliminary plat process or at
Final Plat. If these requirements are fulfilled at final plat the Developer shall adhere to the water
rights policy in place at time of final platting.
12. Approval of this plat is dependent upon the approval of the pending rezone of the site from RS -20
to RS -12 (M F# Z2019-003).
RECOMMENDATION
MOTION: 1 move to adopt Findings of Fact and Conclusions therefrom as contained in the May 16,
2019 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 Black Belle
Estates with conditions as listed in the May 16, 2019 staff report.
17
ll
` Road ;481 s
?'
e
Al
•
a
r,i
Y[
x F�6ysi S�
Ys 59x e�q`qB�S�i� a� gg w
33: ESixsa�gqapx� u 3b 9 s
�
yp $ S sep § s 3@6@lIA g
$
3 § E
P @S G�6E yA$ 63 g @�Ffig
N@p
gy gIg,x
84 ffi PMn
�l2SF
@illi e
hgi § 4; 7 qP $Q pI9%SFE ¢E Na a ="%
@ 3 g� �diy81 b£Abo 3h x YE3 d.£ E%!b € ieb@8%P Na 6,v4'.j -a§§d PFBdS pbpb 3a d
tY?�£ E @t@� A3 855€ ggi@YhP §1 p&Ap 3=@
-A.@ id, $gar@ %.acee;a A%
Hi M Rx""g?,,:Po
5p n= ? 3� n.'§Yp sapf
.i Y 3 p bS 5 "r`x 5 A p @E yy � Yp §A Ep bi A %�
Eby s%_@ @ § r%.A§� FbY .� @Cbax4€..£40 5E%se;s.°@[ '§v EPEE§yE
°`dp[`:?�k?b.osp@ �'EFS,F..r"•?? fFb€._ggES{s:Y Y9?,p€ix„7 s
Eb3 £�hbrbdph F'a m Sb f ihb f- „
AE¢xAipbs4ar d€�,k�@[x§ bs`s §�I"5p = E e y
JVa§ xi g'bjpEa a`w = %' Sp iE 3c s5@e AQSE�xa }cpta�@t A§%€ -@A c@ aq 3p 'M a�g E P
ft h 9agp?'- p Lv£ §i§:§a @, � 33 5h yRq s'3 r §>z b[ 's 5 xp%
Fd- r px Sk.€� @ r -A % P.33.a9:%x¢6-€ s ®E£ § ih€§Yd@[ pAia9 5€F€-SSpdp�5 S [
e is pE
Rio 3 § '06,112 4-2 Plitt §€€ a a -I `§r13 aH=§x �§ �aie -
Y%@§e g p-?s6a% F.S?a.E?ea s§€ aa.,pa §•"gib%.. _pa£s p° n�3gata;, @
a g tt li` x ppE I ab�k.,£ a 6=c_§ 7` §at4.',eY r?E3SF x SPag 5 r"x +a. §
A 5e y 3e" C F S r e 3.?A§cc €s-£ ¢px c
o @ p4a §@ @@3
fit bhe g WAXYT I F9§ p£pA8§ 3 euBb8. HE ?§aa§.§$pp.ek,.$§p3§@:? f@r$5 9 x§nx €s/p, a
E mM
Kim
Y[
x F�6ysi S�
Ys 59x e�q`qB�S�i� a� gg w
33: ESixsa�gqapx� u 3b 9 s
�
yp $ S sep § s 3@6@lIA g
$
3 § E
P @S G�6E yA$ 63 g @�Ffig
N@p
gy gIg,x
84 ffi PMn
�l2SF
@illi e
hgi § 4; 7 qP $Q pI9%SFE ¢E Na a ="%
@ 3 g� �diy81 b£Abo 3h x YE3 d.£ E%!b € ieb@8%P Na 6,v4'.j -a§§d PFBdS pbpb 3a d
tY?�£ E @t@� A3 855€ ggi@YhP §1 p&Ap 3=@
-A.@ id, $gar@ %.acee;a A%
Hi M Rx""g?,,:Po
5p n= ? 3� n.'§Yp sapf
.i Y 3 p bS 5 "r`x 5 A p @E yy � Yp §A Ep bi A %�
Eby s%_@ @ § r%.A§� FbY .� @Cbax4€..£40 5E%se;s.°@[ '§v EPEE§yE
°`dp[`:?�k?b.osp@ �'EFS,F..r"•?? fFb€._ggES{s:Y Y9?,p€ix„7 s
Eb3 £�hbrbdph F'a m Sb f ihb f- „
AE¢xAipbs4ar d€�,k�@[x§ bs`s §�I"5p = E e y
JVa§ xi g'bjpEa a`w = %' Sp iE 3c s5@e AQSE�xa }cpta�@t A§%€ -@A c@ aq 3p 'M a�g E P
ft h 9agp?'- p Lv£ §i§:§a @, � 33 5h yRq s'3 r §>z b[ 's 5 xp%
Fd- r px Sk.€� @ r -A % P.33.a9:%x¢6-€ s ®E£ § ih€§Yd@[ pAia9 5€F€-SSpdp�5 S [
e is pE
Rio 3 § '06,112 4-2 Plitt §€€ a a -I `§r13 aH=§x �§ �aie -
Y%@§e g p-?s6a% F.S?a.E?ea s§€ aa.,pa §•"gib%.. _pa£s p° n�3gata;, @
a g tt li` x ppE I ab�k.,£ a 6=c_§ 7` §at4.',eY r?E3SF x SPag 5 r"x +a. §
A 5e y 3e" C F S r e 3.?A§cc €s-£ ¢px c
o @ p4a §@ @@3
fit bhe g WAXYT I F9§ p£pA8§ 3 euBb8. HE ?§aa§.§$pp.ek,.$§p3§@:? f@r$5 9 x§nx €s/p, a
iJ lv]brtl R
"
..................
,i9 a I t'
—ate..xawe —JO
.1n1l;
p!
Fg. VZ
SpSp r �pS
9s�gss
Jill
p SY 46
S$A�Pg� a
yl S4 S ¢g Y
Y
Y F8kB�B&Yf
CF=
pA
FA'
A.�.-
5- A
o6
Se
iJ lv]brtl R
"
..................
,i9 a I t'
—ate..xawe —JO
.1n1l;
p!
Fg. VZ
SpSp r �pS
9s�gss
Jill
p SY 46
S$A�Pg� a
yl S4 S ¢g Y
Y
Y F8kB�B&Yf
CF=
C�
4-J
L.
/
(
Me
�,
ill
f
5�IW
45
tip"
J
t �sw
t k
L4n
P
sR
-0
sr
R T'r
W
Pasco PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
City Hall — 525 North Third Avenue — Council Chambers
DATE: THURSDAY, May 16, 2019
7:00 PM
MASTER FILE #: Z 2019-004
APPLICANT: YESMAR Properties Inc.
PO Box 2384
Pasco WA 99302
REQUEST: REZONE: Rezone 1 parcel from C-1 (Retail Business) to C-3
(General Business)
BACKGROUND
1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:
Legal: Loviisa Farms II Phase 6 Tract "A" (APN #118010147)
General Location: 8425 Chapel Hill Boulevard; Northwest Corner of Road 84 and Chapel Hill
Boulevard
Property Size: The site consists of three parcels comprising approximately 3.13 acres.
2. ACCESS: The parcel has access from Chapel Hill Boulevard.
3. UTILITIES: Both water and sewer are available off of Chapel Hill Boulevard; Irrigation is located
along the full length of the north property line.
4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The lots are currently vacant and are zoned RT (Residential Transition)
Surrounding properties are zoned and developed as follows:
NORTH: C-1 RV Park
EAST: R-3 Vacant
SOUTH: R-1 SFDUs
WEST: R-1 SFDUs
S. Comprehensive Plan: Under the current Comprehensive Plan land use designations of
"Commercial" the property may be zoned "0," BP, C-1, C-2, C-3, or CR. The Commercial
designation is described as including "Neighborhood, community and regional shopping and
specialty centers, business parks, service and office uses."
Comprehensive Plan Land Use goals and policies include the following:
LU -1. Goal: take deliberate, consistent, and continuous actions to improve the community's
quality of life and achieve the vision.
LU -1-C Policy: Encourage cluster commercial development and discourage strip
commercial development.
Lu -4. Goal: encourage high quality community and regional shopping facilities and commercial
and industrial development.
LU -4-A Policy: Locate commercial facilities at major street intersections to avoid
commercial sprawl and avoid disruptions of residential neighborhoods, and leverage
major infrastructure availability.
LU -4-13 Policy: Plan for major commercial centers which promote functional and
economical marketing and operations and produce sustainable clusters of shopping and
services.
LU -3-C Policy: Maintain and apply design standards and guidelines that will result in
attractive and efficient centers.
Similarly, Comprehensive Plan Economic Development goals and policies include the following:
Ed -2. Goal: assure appropriate location and design of commercial and industrial facilities.
ED -2-13 Policy: Encourage development of a wide range of commercial and industrial uses
strategically located to support local and regional needs.
Ed -3. Goal: maintain development standards and design guidelines to ensure that commercial and
industrial developments are good neighbors.
ED -3-A Policy: Enhance compatibility of commercial and industrial development with
residential and mixed use neighborhoods through the use of landscaping, screening, and
superior building design standards and guidelines.
ED -3-13 Policy: Avoid excessive outdoor illumination and ostentatious identification of
business activities.
ED -3-C Policy: Provide sufficient, accessible, and attractive off-street parking facilities.
ED -3-D Policy: Require existing commercial and industrial facilities to conform to city
design and site amenity standards, when expansion and/or new facilities are proposed.
ED -3-E Policy: Use sufficient landscaping and appropriate screening as well as other
methods to buffer less intensive uses from utilitarian parts of commercial and industrial
facilities.
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 likelyforthis
application (WAC 197-11-355).
ANALYSIS
Applicant is seeking to rezone 8425 Chapel Hill Boulevard (the property located at the northwest corner
of Chapel Hill Boulevard and Road 84) from C-1 (Retail Business) to C-3 (General Business), in anticipation
of locating a microbrewery on the site.
As per Pasco Municipal Code (PMC) 25.44.020(27) Micro -Breweries, producing under 60,000 barrels
annually, are only explicitly allowed in the C-2 zoning district. Because they are allowed in the C-2 zoning
district they would also be allowed in the C-3 zone and in any of the Industrial zones of the city under PMC
25.52.020(9) "bottling" and (11) "Food Products." C-3 zoning is one of the possible zoning designations
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan for the property.
2
The site was annexed into the City in August 16, 1982 (Ordinance 2388), and subsequently platted in 2005
as "Tract A" of the Loviisa Farms II Phase 6 subdivision. The site now contains two commercial shop
buildings. Surrounding properties have been developed as follows: The Sandy Heights Recreational
Vehicle park to the north; Vacant land to the east which was rezoned to R-3 in 2014 as a part of the DNR
land sale (lands just south of this parcel are zoned R-1 and are in process of single-family development);
and the Loviisa Farms residential subdivision to the south and east, platted between 2003 and 2005 and
fully developed with single-family homes.
The Comprehensive Plan designates the property Commercial, which allows for "O," BP, C-1, C-2, C-3, or
CR zoning. The Commercial designation is described as including "Neighborhood, community and regional
shopping and specialty centers, business parks, service and office uses."
Applicant has suggested the following uses on the site:
All Uses in "O"
All Uses in C-1
All Uses in C-2", except for:
• Grocery Store
• Theaters
• Parking Lots
• Dwelling Units
Only the following uses in "C-3":
• Laundry
• Wholesale Business
• Warehouse
Applicant has also suggested Language for a concomitant Agreement as follows:
Wholesale Business uses allowed in the agreement are intended for small scale wholesale sales
and distribution. Typical users will likely sell both perishable and non-perishable goods and distribution
would be from box delivery trucks or smaller vehicles.
Warehouse uses allowed in the agreement are intended for small to medium scale commercial
storage needs. Likely to be with racking. Other warehouse type uses would be for, but not limited to
recreational/indoor sports usage which require open space and high ceilings; contractor or sub-
contractor use for equipment, supply and inventory storage. Single user not to exceed 10,500 sf.
Under no conditions will lay down yard, fenced storage or any type of exterior/open air storage
be allowed.
Staff recommends approval of all uses allowed in the "O", C-1 and C-2 zoning districts (most of which are
already allowed in the C-1 zoning district), but does not recommend outright approval of all wholesale
business and warehouse uses.
Staff recommends limiting wholesale business and warehouse uses to those with 1-182 compatible retail
storefront and intended for small scale wholesale/retail sales and distribution. Typical users will likely
sell both perishable and non-perishable goods on site and distribution would be from box delivery trucks
or smaller vehicles to be stored inside building or off-site. Warehouse uses would be limited to
recreational/indoor sports usage which require open space and high ceilings.
Rezone Criteria
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 changed from RT (Residential Transition) to C-1 (Retail Business)
became effective on November 3, 2003 (Ordinance 3633).
2. The changed conditions, which are alleged to warrant other or additional zoning:
The site itself has been recently developed with two commercial retail shops. The area to the east of the
site is being built out with single-family dwellings, Chapel Hill Boulevard is in the process of being extended
from Road 84 to connect up with Road 68 to the east. A potential client wishes to locate a microbrewery
at the site.
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 allows for "q" BP, C-1, C-
2, C-3, or CR zoning.
4. The effect it will have on the value and character of the adjacent property and the Comprehensive
Plan:
A change in zoning classification may ultimately result in the establishment of a microbrewery at the
location. The Comprehensive Plan allows for "O," BP, C-1, C-2, C-3, or CR zoning at the site. The character
of the surrounding properties is mostly residential, with access to Chapel Hill Boulevard, an arterial street.
5. The effect on the property owner or owners if the request is not granted:
If the property is not rezoned to C-3 it will continue to be limited by the constraints of the C-1 zoning
designation, which currently allows for the following: all uses permitted in the 'O' Office district;
automobile detail shops and automobile rental or leasing, banks, dancing schools, hotels and motels;
printing shops; restaurants, stores and shops for the conduct of retail business, stores and shops for repair
and similar services such as bakeries, retail for distribution from the premises, barbershops and beauty
shops, catering establishments, garage and filling stations, laundromats and dry-cleaning establishments,
locksmith shops, offices, membership clubs, photo shops, shoe repair shops, upholstery shops, sign shops,
theaters; and veterinarian clinics for household pets.
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. Applicant is seeking to rezone 8425 Chapel Hill Boulevard from C-1 to C-3
2. The Comprehensive Plan designates the property Commercial
3. Comprehensive Plan "Commercial" allows for "0," BP, C-1, C-2, C-3, or CR zoning.
4. The Commercial designation is described as including "Neighborhood, community and regional
shopping and specialty centers, business parks, service and office uses."
5. The purpose of the rezone is for the location of a microbrewery on site.
6. Pasco Municipal Code (PMC) 25.44.020(27) allows Micro -Breweries, producing under 60,000
barrels annually in the C-2 zoning district.
12
7. Because microbreweries are allowed in the C-2 zoning district they would also be allowed in the
C-3 zone and in any of the Industrial zones of the city
8. C-3 zoning is one of the possible zoning designations consistent with the Comprehensive Plan for
the property.
9. The site was annexed into the City in August 16, 1982 (Ordinance 2388).
10. The site was platted in 2005 as "Tract A" of the Loviisa Farms II Phase 6 subdivision.
11. The site has been developed with two commercial shop buildings.
12. Surrounding properties have been developed as follows:
a. The Sandy Heights Recreational Vehicle park to the north;
b. Vacant land to the east which was rezoned to R-3 in 2014 as a part of the Department of
Natural Resources (DNR) land sale
c. Lands just south of this parcel are zoned R-1 and are in process of single-family
development); and
d. the Loviisa Farms residential subdivision to the south and east, platted between 2003 and
2005 and fully developed with single-family homes.
13. Chapel Hill Boulevard is in the process of being extended from Road 84 to connect up with Road
68 to the east.
A concomitant agreement would be required.
TENTATIVE CONCLUSIONS BASED ON INITIAL STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT
Before recommending approval or denial of a special permit the Planning Commission must develop
findings of fact from which to draw its conclusions based upon the criteria listed in PMC 25.86.060. The
criteria are as follows:
1. The proposal is in accordance with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan
Under the current Comprehensive Plan land use designations of "Commercial' the property may be zoned
"O," BP, C-1, C-2, C-3, or CR. The Comprehensive Plan also requires the City to take adjacent uses into
consideration when deciding zoning. The Commercial designation is described as including
"Neighborhood, community and regional shopping and specialty centers, business parks, service and
office uses."
Policy LU -1-C requires the city to "Encourage cluster commercial development and discourage strip
commercial development," and Policy LU -4-B says "Plan for major commercial centers which promote
functional and economical marketing and operations and produce sustainable clusters of shopping and
services." This use would be considered a strip development, as it is not clustered with any other
commercial retail uses.
Policy LU -4-A urges the city to "Locate commercial facilities at major street intersections to avoid
commercial sprawl and avoid disruptions of residential neighborhoods, and leverage major infrastructure
availability," and Policy ED -2-B states "Encourage development of a wide range of commercial and
industrial uses strategically located to support local and regional needs." The proposed use is at the
intersection of two minor arterial streets, Chapel Hill Boulevard and Road 84.
Policy LU -3-C requires the City to "Maintain and apply design standards and guidelines that will result in
attractive and efficient centers," and Goal Ed -2, "assure appropriate location and design of commercial
and industrial facilities." Goal Ed -3, "maintain development standards and design guidelines to ensure
that commercial and industrial developments are good neighbors," and Policy ED -3-A "Enhance
compatibility of commercial and industrial development with residential and mixed use neighborhoods
through the use of landscaping, screening, and superior building design standards and guidelines." A
concomitant agreement may be required to satisfy aesthetic considerations.
2. The effect of the proposal on the immediate vicinity will not be materially detrimental.
The immediate area is shown in the Comprehensive Plan for Commercial and Low -Density Residential
zoning. The Commercial designated areas may be zoned "O," BP, C-1, C-2, C-3, or CR, as appropriate. The
Low -Density Residential designation allows for R -S-20, R -S-12, R -S-1, R-1, and/or R -1-A zoning district.
Given the proximity of low-density residential zoning to the south and west, the proposed rezone may be
considered consistent with the referenced plans if accompanied by a concomitant agreement limiting the
uses to those found in the C-1 zoning district, with the addition of microbreweries, and adding some
aesthetic considerations.
3. There is merit and value in the proposal for the community as a whole.
The proposed zoning consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. The site proximal to
residential zoning districts to the east, south and west, and it is also located at the intersection of two
minor arterial streets, Chapel Hill Boulevard and Road 84; as such it has potential of being a benefit to the
community if proper aesthetic considerations are followed to mitigate its proximity to residential
neighborhoods. A concomitant agreement limiting the uses to those found in the C-1 zoning district, with
the addition of microbreweries, and adding some aesthetic considerations would be appropriate.
4. Conditions should be imposed in order to mitigate any significant adverse impacts from the
proposal.
The Pasco Municipal Code includes design standards for both commercial and residential development. A
concomitant agreement limiting the uses to those found in the C-1 zoning district, with the addition of
microbreweries, and adding specific conditions pertaining to design standards is recommended.
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 limiting the uses to those found in the C-1 zoning district, with the addition of
microbreweries, and adding specific conditions pertaining to design standards is recommended. Staff
recommends limiting wholesale business and warehouse uses to those with 1-182 compatible retail
storefronts and requiring business/delivery vehicles to be stored inside the building or off-site, and
limiting warehouse uses to recreational/indoor sports uses.
RECOMMENDATION
MOTION: I move to close the hearing and adopt Findings of Fact and conclusions therefrom as contained
in the May 16, 2019 staff report.
MOTION: I move based on the Findings of Fact and conclusions as adopted the Planning Commission
recommend the City Council rezone the parcel from C-1 (Retail Business) to C-3 (General
Business), with a concomitant agreement limiting the uses to those found in the C-1 zoning
district, with the addition of microbreweries, and adding conditions pertaining to design
standards.
CONCOMITANT ZONING AGREEMENT
WHEREAS, the City of Pasco, Washington, a non -charter code city, under the laws
of the State of Washington (Chapter 35A.63 R.C.W. and Article 11, Section 11 of the
Washington State Constitution) has authority to enact laws and enter into agreements to
promote the health, safety and welfare of its citizens, and thereby control the use and
development of property within its jurisdiction; and
WHEREAS, the Owner(s) of certain property have applied for a rezone of such
property described below within the City's jurisdiction; and
WHEREAS, the City pursuant to R.C.W. 43.12(c), the State Environmental Policy
Act, should mitigate any adverse impacts which might result because of the proposed rezone;
and
WHEREAS, the City of Pasco and the Owner(s) are both interested in compliance
with the Pasco Municipal Code provisions relating to the use and development of property
situated in the City of Pasco, described as follows:
Loviisa Farms H Phase 6 Tract "A" (APN #118010147)
WHEREAS, the Owner(s) have indicated willingness to cooperate with the City of
Pasco, its Planning Commission and Planning Department to ensure compliance with the Pasco
Zoning Code, and all other local, state and federal laws relating to the use and development of
the above described property; and
WHEREAS, the City, in addition to civil and criminal sanctions available by law,
desires to enforce the rights and interests of the public by this concomitant agreement, NOW,
THEREFORE,
In the event the above-described property is rezoned by the City of Pasco to C-3
(General Business) and in consideration of that event should it occur, and subject to the terms
and conditions hereinafter stated, the applicant does hereby covenant and agree as follows:
1. The Owner(s) promise to comply with all of the terms of the agreement in the event the
City, as full consideration herein grants a rezone on the above-described property.
2. The Owner(s) agrees to perform the terns set forth in Section 4 of this agreement.
3. This agreement shall be binding on their heirs, assigns, grantees or successors in
interest of the Owner(s) of the property herein described.
4. Conditions: The following design standards are required:
a. Uses shall be restricted to all those allowed in the "O", C-1, and C-2 Zoning
district, with the addition of microbreweries; and
b. Wholesale Business uses with I-182 compatible retail storefronts intended for
small-scale wholesale/retail sales and distribution.
c. Sale of goods on site and distribution.
d. Any vehicles shall be stored inside building or off-site.
e. Warehouse uses limited to recreational/indoor sports uses;
f Single user not to exceed 10,500 sf.
g. Under no conditions will lay down yard, fenced storage or any type of
exterior/open air storage be allowed.
h. Compliance with the development regulations as contained in PMC 25.130 "I-
182 Corridor Overlay District' shall be required.
The person(s) whose names are subscribed herein do hereby certify that they are the
sole holders of fee simple interest in the above-described property:
Owner:
STATE OF WASHINGTON)
) ss.
County of Franklin )
On this day of , 2019, before me, the
undersigned, duly commissioned and sworn, personally appeared
to
me known to be the individual(s) described above and who executed the within
and foregoing instrument as an agent of the owner(s) of record, and
acknowledged to me that he/she/they signed the same as his/her/their free and
voluntary act and deed, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and on
oath stated that he/she/they is/are authorized to execute the said instrument.
GIVEN under by hand and official seal this day of
, 2019.
Notary Public in and for the State
of Washington, residing at
M
V
i
U
�
`
�
a
N
�
�
i
a
mow.
ra U.
Z+W M'H�
3: H li �a,
D
LL
to
0
CO
MATT A L
D
LL
31 39aiu9vyv,)
U
O 4.4 Lu
O
N
u <
10
Cl
LL
>
C)
CLLLI
ct
40
>
CO
yOIMAI IF
D
a
LL
(a
LL
U)
LL
CO)
LL
V)
vs avou
M
a
LL
U)
LL
co
LL.
0 =
QM
LL
%A 3Ja
0
u7
r
M
Q:
u,
-- b8 civou
C
J
I
0
o�
N
u7
r
M
Q:
u,
-- b8 civou
C
J
I
0
City REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
R&O PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Iq CityHall — 525 North Third Avenue —Council Chambers
THURSDAY, MAY 16th, 2019
7:00 PM
MASTER FILE #: SP 2019-002
APPLICANT: Franklin County Historical Society
305 North 4th Avenue
Pasco, Washington 99301
REQUEST: SPECIAL PERMIT: Franklin County Museum Annex
BACKGROUND
1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:
Legal: GERRYS ADD E17' OF LOT 19 & ALL OF LOTS 20 THRU 24 BLOCK 7
General Location: 417, 421, 425 West Bonneville
Property Size: 0.46 acres
2. ACCESS: The property has access from N 4th Avenue and W Bonneville Street
3. UTILITIES: Municipal water and sewer service are available to the property.
4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The site is zoned R-3 (Medium Density Residential District). Surrounding
properties are zoned and developed as follows:
NORTH: R-3 Office / SFDUs
EAST: R-3 SFDUs
SOUTH: C-1 Surface Parking Lot/ Retail
WEST: C-1 Services (Personal)
5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan indicates the site is intended for mixed residential
development. The purpose and description for the mixed residential land use includes single-family
dwelling units, patio homes, townhouses, apartments and condominiums at a density of 5-20
dwelling units per acre. The mixed residential designation also serves as a transition between lower
and higher density. Policy LU -2-13 of the Comprehensive Plan encourages the support of existing and
future recreational, educational and cultural facilities and services within neighborhoods.
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 per
WAC 197-11-355
ANALYSIS (Updated)
The Franklin County Historical Museum Society proposes to construct a separate (detached) 3,500 square -
foot museum annex that will serve as an extension to the existing Franklin County Museum. The site is zoned
R-3 (Medium Density Residential) district as is much of the surrounding area. The Downtown Pasco / Central
Business District is immediately to the south of the site. The Pasco Municipal Code states that a special permit
for the preservation of a historic place may be requested for uses not otherwise permitted within the
applicable district.
The site previously consisted of three separate and adjoining residential lotsthat have now been consolidated
and recorded by the Franklin County Accessors Office (Parcel #112-052-244). The current site plan indicates
that the new annex building will have dimensions of 50'x 70' and built using a pre-engineered steel material.
The height of the proposed annex building will not exceed the height of the existing Franklin County Museum
building. Approximately one-third of the new building area would be used forthe storage of museum material
and cultural collections which are currently stored off-site. The remaining area would be used for general
exhibition space and a proposed location for a new Mid -Columbia Ag Hall of Fame display.
Current design plans indicate that the building will also feature a combination of a metal, stucco and glass to
complement the existing museum. The Museum was originally constructed in 1910 as part of Andrew
Carnegie's worldwide library construction program. In 1980 the Franklin County Historical Society was
offered the opportunity to use the building as its museum. It opened to the public as the Franklin County
Historical Museum on January 3, 1983.
The applicant submitted an updated site plan on May 2nd, 2019 that addressed some of the identified
concerns included in the April 18`h, 2019 staff report and shared with the Planning Commission The concerns
with the initial site plan were in relation to the setback of the proposed annex building within the lot the
amount of parking spaces and a potential conflict for power access from the Franklin Public Utilities District
INITIAL STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT (Updated)
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 on previously three separate parcels addressed as 419, 421 and 425 W Bonneville
Street.
2. The site is zoned R-3 (Medium Density Residential)
3. The site is located immediately to the east of the Franklin County Museum.
4. The site is to the immediate north of the Central Business District/ Downtown Pasco.
5. The proposed annex building will serve as the extension of the existing Franklin County Museum and
will be used for the storage of museum materials and exhibition space.
6. The building will total 3,500 square feet (50'x 70') in size and is to be constructed out of stucco, metal
and glass.
7. The updated site plan indicates parking for 23 vehicles (reduced from prior site plan submittal)
8. The Franklin County Museum was added to the National Register in 1982 (#82004212)
9. The museum was constructed as a Carnegie Library in 1911 and has been in use as museum since
1983.
10. The use of a historic place may be requested via Special Permit for uses not otherwise permitted
within the applicable district of the site.
11. The Comprehensive Plan encourages the restoration and rehabilitation of historic buildings and sites
(Policy LU -6).
12. Title 20 of the Pasco Municipal Code provides general provisions and guidelines for Historic
Preservation of properties, sites and resources.
TENTATIVE CONCLUSIONS BASED ON INITIAL STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT (Updated)
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. Will the proposed use be in accordance with the goals, policies, objectives and text of the
Comprehensive Plan?
a) Policy LU -2-B of the City Comprehensive Plan encourages the fostering of adequate
provisions for educational and cultural facilities throughout the urban growth area, including
information exhibits.
b) Policy LU -6 of the City Comprehensive Plan encourages the allowance of adaptive uses of
historic buildings and sites if adverse impacts on surrounding neighborhoods are mitigated
2. Will the proposed use adversely affect public infrastructure?
a) The proposal will not generate an abnormal impact to public infrastructure such as water
and sewer.
b) The site will not have an adverse impact on the surrounding transportation network The
Regional Traffic Count Program indicate there was an average AM peak travel volume of 156
and PM peak travel volume of 195.
c) The site is served by Ben Franklin Transit routes 60 150 and 160
d) The city does not encourage the use of alleys to access rear parking Potential conflicts may
exist without alley improvement and maintenance agreements
3. Will the proposed use be constructed, maintained and operated to be in harmony with the existing
or intended character of the general vicinity?
a) The applicant intends to complement the appearance of the existing museum by
constructing the annex building with stucco, glass and metal. Updated renderings and
comment indicate that the exterior material will primarily consist of stucco with a roof tile to
match the existing Franklin County Museum
b) Updated site plans have reduced the amount of vehicle parking to 23 to be located on the
rear (alley side) and front side of the proposed annex building. The Pasco Municipal Code
requires a minimum of 14 spaces as per PMC 25.185.170. Staff recommends that a maximum
of 14 vehicle parking spaces be allocated to not interfere with the current and intended uses
of the general vicinity.
a. The site is located to the immediate north of the C-2 Zoning District (Central Business
District). PMC 25.90.060(8) (Development Standards) of the C-2 Zoning District set
no requirement for parking.
b. The General Provisions of the C-2 Zoning District in PMC 25.90 010 state the
establishment of the C-2 Zoning District is to promote the cluster of businesses and
services within the Urbanized Area that interact and function well together through
the design of a compact, pedestrian oriented design
c. The current site can utilize currently available street parking on 4th Avenue W
Bonneville Street and public parking to the south between the site and W Clark
Street.
d. Guidance from the AARP (American Association of Retired Persons) and the EPA
(Environmental Protection Agency) encourage the use of on -street parking to
facilitate safety, efficiency and economic development.
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?
a) Prior renderings indicate a maximum height of 22 feet. The allowed maximum height in
the R-3 zoning district is 35 feet and 45 feet in the C-2 zone. The height of the proposed
building will not discourage the development of intended uses in the general vicinity.
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?
a) The proposed annex building and operations is not expected to create adverse impacts
to other permitted uses.
6. Will the proposed use endanger the public health or safety if located and developed where proposed,
or in any way will become a nuisance to uses permitted in the district?
a) It is expected that the proposed annex building will not cause harm to the health and
safety of the public and that the associated activity will not become a nuisance to the
permitted uses in the vicinity.
PROPOSED APPROVAL CONDITIONS (Updated)
1. The Special Permit shall apply to tax parcel 112-052-244;
2. No outdoor storage of equipment or materials shall be allowed;
3. A parking maximum of 14 for vehicles within the property boundary.
4. The applicant shall comply with all building code requirements for the occupancy class applicable to
the use;
RECOMMENDATION
MOTION: I move to continue the public hearing for the Special Permit on the proposed location of an
annex building for the Franklin County Museum in the R-3 (Medium Density Residential)
zoning district to the June 20t1, 2019 Planning Commission meeting.
3 t
°� 4TH AVENUE
s N
3 N
J
-75
L NFWCAPE
x
�o
4 PROPOSED ANNEX SITE PLAN
PascoREPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
City Hall — 525 North Third Avenue —Council Chambers
THURSDAY, APRIL 18, 2019
7:00 PM
Devi Tate, Tate Architecture, AIA. Cnnanew% (blue test): 19a), 0-, 2019
MASTER FILE #: SP 2019-002
APPLICANT: Franklin County Historical Society
305 North 4" Avenue
Pasco, Washington 99301
REQUEST: SPECIAL PERMIT: Franklin County Museum Annex
1.
BACKGROUND
Legal: GERRYS ADD E17' OF LOT 19 & ALL OF LOTS 20 THRU 24 BLOCK 7
General Location: 417, 421, 425 West Bonneville
Property Size: 0.46 acres
2. ACCESS: The property has access from N 4`h Avenue and W Bonneville Street
3. UTILITIES: Municipal water and sewer service are available to the property.
4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The site is zoned R-3 (Medium Density Residential District). Surrounding
properties are zoned and developed as follows:
NORTH:
R-3
Office / SFDUs
EAST:
R-3
SFDUs
SOUTH:
C-1
Surface Parking Lot/ Retail
WEST:
C-1
Services (Personal)
5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan indicates the site is intended for mixed residential
development. The purpose and description for the mixed residential land use includes single-family
dwelling units, patio homes, townhouses, apartments and condominiums at a density of 5-20
dwelling units per acre. The mixed residential designation also serves as a transition between lower
and higher density. Policy LU -2-B of the Comprehensive Plan encourages the support of existing and
future recreational, educational and cultural facilities and services within neighborhoods.
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 per
WAC 197-11-355
ANALYSIS
The Franklin County Historical Museum Society proposes to construct a separate (detached) 3,500 square -
foot museum annex that will serve as an extension to the existing Franklin County Museum. The site is zoned
R-3 (Medium Density Residential) district as is much of the surrounding area. The Downtown Pasco / Central
Business district is immediately to the south of the site. The Pasco Municipal Code states that a special permit
for the preservation of a historic place may be requested for uses not otherwise permitted within the
applicable district.
The site previously consisted of three separate and adjoining residential lots that were recently consolidated
and recorded by the Franklin County Accessors Office (Parcel 6112-052-244). Current plans indicate that the
new building will have dimensions of 50'x 70' and built using a pre-engineered steel material. Approximately
one-third of the new building area would be used for the storage of museum material culture collections
which are currently stored off-site. The remaining area would be used for general exhibition space and a
proposed location for a new Mid -Columbia Ag Hall of Fame display.
Current design plans indicate that the building will also feature a combination of a metal, stucco and glass to
complement the existing museum. The Museum was originally constructed in 1910 as part of Andrew
Carnegie's worldwide library construction program. In 1980 the Franklin County Historical Society was
offered the opportunity to use the building as its museum. It opened to the public as the Franklin County
Historical Museum on January 3, 1983.
The applicant was notified and acknowledged potential conflicts regarding power access from the Franklin
Public Utilities District. The applicant was also made aware of site layout concerns from planning staff
regarding the setback (distance from building entrance to sidewalk and street) interfering with the character
of the existing structure and surrounding neighborhood. A response was received by staff noting that there
would not be a significant issue regarding building placement and would be discussed again with the society
development committee.
A special permit was submitted and discussed with the Planning Commission in November 2018. At that
meeting the item was moved to be continued however no further discussion was held at the December 20,
2018 Planning Commission meeting.
INITIAL STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT
Findings of Fact must be entered from the record. The following are initial findings drawn from the
background and analysis section of the staff report. The Planning Commission may add additional findings
to this listing as the result of factual testimony and evidence submitted during the open record hearing.
1. The site is located on previously three separate parcels addressed as 419, 421 and 425 W Bonneville
Street.
2. The site is zoned R-3 (Medium Density Residential)
3. The site is located immediately to the east of the Franklin County Museum.
4. The proposed annex building will bean extension of the existing museum and will be used for storage
and exhibition space.
5. The building will total 3,500 square feet (50' x 70') in size and is to be constructed out of stucco, metal
and glass.
6. The Franklin County Museum is classified as a National Historic Site.
7. The use of a historic place may be requested via Special Permit for uses not otherwise permitted
within the applicable district of the site.
8. The museum was constructed as a Carnegie Library in 1911 and has been in use as museum since
1983.
TENTATIVE 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. Will the proposed use be in accordance with the goals, policies, objectives and text of the
Comprehensive Plan?
a) Policy LU -2-B of the City Comprehensive Plan encourages the fostering of adequate
provisions for educational and cultural facilities throughout the urban growth area, including
information exhibits.
2. Will the proposed use adversely affect public infrastructure?
a) The proposal will not generate an abnormal impact to public infrastructure such as water
and sewer. The site will be served by the existing transportation network including various
Ben Franklin Transit routes within walking distance.
3. Will the proposed use be constructed, maintained and operated to be in harmony with the existing
or intended character of the general vicinity?
a) The applicant intends to complement the appearance of the existing museum by
constructing the annex building with stucco, glass and metal. The submitted design
renderings appear to include noticeable differences in the style of the annex building
compared to the exiting museum. The museums exterior is primarily stucco while the annex
is predominately metal. Exterior material is primarily stucco, with tile roof to match existing.
b) Preliminary design indicates that parking will be located in front of the building resulting in
about 150' separation between the sidewalk and entrance. This layout would interfere with
the built environment of the surrounding neighborhood including Downtown Pasco
Immediate to the south. Congruity with the neighborhood (see attached) wus precisely what was
shown in both the original AND the updated Proposed Annex Site Plan, in that;
A) EIW/N/S properties all enjoy parking within the Right -of -Way;
B) Commercial properties to the E/NE/SW/S incorporate interior parking along the front entrances;
C) Commercial property to the west incorporate parking along the front AND rear facades;
D) The existing Museum (to the west) incorporates parking on the alley side of the facility;
3
E) It's important to note that ANSI 117.1 (Accessibility Code) mandates that handicap parking be
provided as close to the main entry as possible). Not doing so exposes the property owner to lawsuits.
c) The preliminary design layout proposes upwards of 25 parking spots including the removal
of landscaped grass to the south of the existing museum building. Per the Pasco Municipal
Code, section 25.185.170, this facility would require one space per 250 square feet of floor
area. In this case, that would amount to 14 parking spaces. Smart Growth strategies and
guidance from the EPA indicate that an overabundance of parking can be a deterrent to
walkable communities and development. The current Site Ilan (anaehed) inchcaies parking for
both the existing (4684-sf AND added (3500-#) museum facilities, which requires a min. o/33 spaces. The
revised Site Plan now reduces parking m 13 spaces (still less than what's required). There is no 'overabundance
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 impairthe value thereof?
a) Prior renderings indicate a maximum height of 22 feet. The allowed maximum height in
the R-3 zoning district is 35 feet. The height of the proposed building will not result in
any nuisance situations however the appearance and style of the exterior may. As
currently designed, the appearance of the structure will contrast with the surrounding
neighborhood character.
5. Will the operations in connection with the proposal be more objectionable to nearby properties by
reason of noise, fumes, vibrations, dust, traffic, orflashing lights than would be the operation of any
permitted uses within the district?
a) The proposed annex building and operations is not expected to create adverse impacts
to other permitted uses.
6. Will the proposed use endanger the public health or safety if located and developed where proposed,
or in any way will become a nuisance to uses permitted in the district?
a) It is expected that the proposed annex building will not cause harm to the health and
safety of the public and that the associated activity will not become a nuisance to the
permitted uses in the vicinity.
PROPOSED APPROVAL CONDITIONS
1. The Special Permit shall apply to tax parcel 112-052-244;
2. No outdoor storage of equipment or materials shall be allowed;
3. The applicant shall comply with all building code requirements for the occupancy class applicable to
the use;
RECOMMENDATION
MOTION: I move to continue the public hearing for the Special Permit on the proposed location for
an annex building for the Franklin County Museum in the R-3 (Medium Density Residential)
zoning district to the May 16, 2019 Planning Commission meeting.
With these clarifications, there should be no further continuations and we appeal io you jor an expeditious process completion.
dt/Enc£ Jacob Gonzalez, Senior Planner, City of Pasco 4
Dick Seheuerman, Archivist, Franklin County Historic Museum
� R
u
R
CL u
Cjt»of MEMO TO PLANNING COMMISSION
I PdSCO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
I City Hall — 52525North Third Avenue —Council Chambers
THURSDAY, MAY 16, 2019
7:00 PM
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Introduction
Planning Commission
Darcy Bourcier, Planner I
Minimum Lot Size and Frontage in Residential Zones (MF# CA 2017-009)
The PMC states that for lots under 10,000 square feet in size, the minimum lot frontage is to be 60
feet. This provision includes zones R-1 (Low Density Residential) through R-4 (High Density
Residential), which each have their own designated minimum lot size requirement (see table 1).
However, interest has been expressed to decrease the minimum lot frontage for these residential
zones. To illustrate, a property may be zoned R-1 which allows for a minimum lot area of 7,200
square feet and a minimum frontage of 60 feet. If one was to seek a rezone of the property from R-
1 to R-2—which would decrease the minimum lot size to 6,000 square feet—the minimum frontage
would remain 60 feet. In the interest of creating additional lots for new dwellings in Pasco, the City
is proposing the amendment of the Zoning Code to decrease the minimum frontage from 60 feet to
50 feet for zones R-2 through R-4. By doing so, the resulting increase in lot density would allow for
more homes to be constructed to help accommodate Pasco's growing population.
Considering the above information, staff is also entertaining the idea of decreasing minimum lot size
accordingly. Should the minimum frontage decrease while the minimum lot size remains
unchanged, there is a concern regarding the possibility of disproportionately -sized lots. Therefore,
staff proposes revisions to minimum lot size in zoning districts R-2, R-3, and R-4, and seeks the
Planning Commission's input on modifying the Zoning Code in order to accommodate builders and
developers in their effort to offer diverse residential properties at affordable prices while avoiding
facilitating the creation of impractical or awkward lots.
The R-2, R-3 and R-4 zoning districts allow for the development of single-family dwellings and
multiple family structures such as duplexes, fourplexes and apartment buildings. Although
established to allow multiple dwelling units on a single lot, the multi -family zoning districts can be a
source of single family homes on smaller lots. Below is a table detailing Pasco's current zoning
standards regarding single family dwellings in low -to -high density residential zones.
Table 1
Pasco (current standard)
Min Lot Size
(sq. ft.)
Min Lot Frontage
(ft.)
Low Density (R-1)
7,200
60
Med Density (R-2)
6,000
60
Med Density (R-3)
5,500
60
High Density (R-4)
5,000
60
Background
The City of Pasco created the R-2 and R-3 zoning districts in 1965 in which no lot within those two
districts could be smaller than 50 by 100 feet (5,000 square feet). This minimum lot size has been in
the code in one form or another since 1965.
Much of the original portions of Pasco were platted prior to the establishment of zoning. The general
practice for platting in the early years was to divide blocks into 25 -foot wide lots. Builders would
then buy two or more lots to build houses or commercial buildings. As a result it is not uncommon
to find single-family lots close to or below 5,000 square feet in size in older areas of town. The
smallest lots in central Pasco between the High school and Sylvester Park (zoned R-1) are 4,750
square feet. The smallest lots south of "A" Street arejust over 4,600 square feet; some contain 5,250
square feet and others are slightly larger at 5,400 square feet.
Zoning Comparisons
Kennewick and Richland both permit individual lots in their version of the R-2 and R-3 zones with a
minimum of 4,000 square feet. The following tables show the minimum lot size and frontage
standards for single family dwellings in Pasco's neighboring cities.
Table 2
Kennewick
Min Lot Size
(sq. ft.)
Min Lot Frontage
(ft.)
Min Lot Width*
(ft.)
Suburban (RS)
10,500
30
60
Low Density (RL)
7,500
30
60
Med Density (RM)
4,000
30
50
High Density (RH)
4,000
30
N/A
" Measured at front setback line
Table 3
Richland
Min Lot Size
(sq. ft.)
Min Lot Frontage
(ft.)
Single Family Res (R-1-12)
10,000
90
Single Family Res (R-1-10)
8,000
70
Med Density (R-2)
6,000
50
Med Density Small (R -2S)
4,000
42
Multi Family (R-3)
4,000
42
Previous Code Amendments
In 2014 a developer applied for R-2 zoning with the intent of building only single-family homes.
Although most of the lots in the proposed development were in excess of 6,000 square feet the
2
potential was there for a development with numerous 5,000 square foot lots. The creation of 5,000
square foot single-family lots without forethought to building design and subdivision integration
with existing and adjacent neighborhoods had the potential to impact those neighboring
developments. As a result, the Planning Commission was asked to provide some input on the matter
as to whether or not the multi -family zoning districts should be reviewed as it related lot sizes. Later
that year the City Council passed Ordinance 4173 to amend PMC Title 25 to increase the minimum
lot size from 5,000 to 6,000 square feet in the R-2 zoning district and 5,000 to 5,500 square feet in
the R-3 zoning district.
It can be argued, then, that reverting back to smaller minimum lot sizes in the medium -to -high
density residential zoning districts would essentially negate what Ordinance 4173 had
accomplished. Once a developer goes through the process to obtain multi -family zoning he does not
usually diminish his potential return by building single-family homes.
Options
Because the Planning Commission indicated that the minimum lot frontage and size requirements
of the R-1 zoning district should remain as they are, staff has updated the proposed standard
accordingly (see table 4).
Option #1: The proposed changes have been highlighted below.
Table 4
Pasco (proposed standard)
Min Lot Size
(sq. ft.)
Min Lot Frontage
(ft.)
Low Density (R-1)
7,200
60
Med Density (R-2)
5,000
50
Med Density (R-3)
4,500
50
High Density (R-4)
4,000
50
Option #2: Some other variation of Option #1.
Option #3: Maintain the current standard.
Staff recommends holding the hearing on the proposed revisions and, if it is found that these
revisions are appropriate and do not need further discussion, the Planning Commission may close
the hearing and schedule deliberations for the June 20th Planning Commission meeting.
MOTION: I move to close the hearing on the proposed code amendment and June 20, 2019 as the
date for deliberations and the development of a recommendation for the City Council.
9�
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING PMC CHAPTER 21 (SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS) AND
25 (ZONING) TO REDUCE THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE AND FROTANGE
REQUIREMENTS IN CERTAIN ZONING DISTRICTS.
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 21 of the Pasco Municipal must conform to RCW 58.17; and,
WHEREAS, the PMC currently states that parcels under 10,000 square feet in size must
have at least 60 feet of street right-of-way frontage; and,
WHEREAS, interest has been expressed to decrease the minimum lot size and frontage
requirements in certain residential zones; and,
WHEREAS, decreasing the minimum lot size and frontage in certain residential zones
would increase housing density to allow for more homes to be constructed to help accommodate
Pasco's growing population; and,
WHEREAS, the proposed revisions have been considered by the Pasco Planning
Commission at a public hearing and the Commission has recommended City Council approve the
revisions; NOW THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON, DOES
ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That section 21.20.040 of the Pasco Municipal Code shall be and hereby is
amended and shall read as follows:
21.20.040 MINIMUM LOT DIMENSIONS. Lot areas shall conform to the requirements
of PMC Title 25.
(1) Width and Depth.
(a) Lot depth exceeding two and one-half times the lot width shall be avoided.
(2) Frontage. A minimum frontage area for each lot shall be required as follows:
(a) Lots in the R-1, R -1-A, and R -1-A2 zoning districts with less than 10,000 square
feet in area shall have a minimum frontage of 60 feet except lots fronting on cul-de-
sacs, which shall have a minimum frontage of 35 feet and a width of 50 feet or more at
the setback line;
(b) Lots in the R-2, R-3, and R-4 zoning districts with less than 10,000 square feet in
area shall have a minimum frontage of 50 feet except lots fronting on cul-de-sacs,
which shall have a minimum frontage of 35 feet and a width of 50 feet or more at the
setback line; and except lots that are part of zero -lot -line developments which shall
have a minimum frontage of 30 feet;
Lel Lots with more than 10,000 square feet in area shall have a minimum frontage of
90 feet except lots fronting on cul-de-sacs, which shall have a minimum frontage of 35
feet and a width of 50 feet or more at the setback line.
(3) In no case shall a residential lot contain less than 300-44 square feet of lot area
unless the lot is approved by the City through the planned unit development or planned
density development process., or if the lot is part of a zero -lot -line development.
(4) In subdivisions where septic tanks or other individual sewage disposal devices are to
be installed, the size of lots shall be subject to the approval of the Benton/Franklin Health
District, but by no means shall be smaller in size than the applicable zoning district in
which the lot is located. [Ord. 3398 § 2, 1999; Code 1970 § 26.16.040.]
Section 2. That section 25.60.050 of the Pasco Municipal Code (R-2 Medium Density
Residential) shall be and hereby is amended and shall read as follows:
25.60.050 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS.
(1) Minimum lot area: 6;000 5,000 square feet;
(2) One single-family dwelling shall be permitted per lot. Multiple dwellings shall be
permitted based on the density standards in PMC 25.60.050(3);
(3) Density: One dwelling per 6 -,OW 5,000square feet of lot area for single-family
dwellings and 5-,009 4,000square feet of lot area for multiple -family dwellings except
as provided in PMC 25.60.030(8);
(4) Maximum lot coverage: 40 percent;
(5) Minimum Yard Setbacks.
(a) Front: 20 feet;
(b) Side: five feet;
(c) Rear: Principal building: Equal to the height of the dwelling;
Accessory structures: Accessory structures adjacent an alley may be placed on the alley
line provided there are no openings in the wall parallel to the alley. Garages with
vehicle doors parallel to an alley shall be set back from the alley 20 feet. Where there
is no alley the setback shall be five feet. Structures related to rabbits and/or chicken
hens, such as rabbit hutches and/or chicken coops, must be at least 10 feet from any
property line, may not exceed six feet in height and 30 square feet in size, and must be
located behind the rear line of the dwelling. Rabbit hutches and/or chicken coops
adjacent an alley maybe placed within five feet of the alley line provided there are no
openings in the wall parallel to the alley. Property owners shall not allow such
structures to become a nuisance due to noise or odor.
(6) Maximum Building Height
(a) Principal building: 25 feet, except a greater height may be approved by special
permit;
(b) Accessory buildings: 15 feet;
(7) Fences and hedges: See Chapter 25.180 PMC;
(8) Parking: See Chapter 25.185 PMC;
(9) Landscaping: See Chapter 25.180 PMC; and
(10) Residential design standards: See PMC 25.165.100. [Ord. 4110 § 14, 2013; Ord.
4040 § 7, 2012; Ord. 4036 § 15, 2011; Ord. 3731 § 14, 2005; Ord. 3354 § 2, 1999;
Code 1970 § 25.34.050.]
Section 3. That section 25.65.050 of the Pasco Municipal Code (R-3 Medium Density
Residential) shall be and hereby is amended and shall read as follows:
25.65.050 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS.
(1) Minimum lot area: 5;500 4,500 square feet;
(2) One single-family dwelling shall be permitted per lot. Multiple dwellings shall be
permitted based on the density standards in PMC 25.65.050(3);
One dwelling unit per 5;500 4,500 square feet of lot area for single-family dwellings and
3,000 square feet of lot area for multiple -family dwellings and dwellings part of zero -lot -
line developments except as provided in PMC 25.60.030(8);
(4) Maximum lot coverage: 60 percent;
(5) Minimum Yard Setbacks.
(a) Front: 20 feet;
(b) Side: Five feet, except in zero -lot -line developments in which case no side yard
setback is required from the common lot line(s), provided the remainingside ide yard is at
least 10 feet;
(c) Rear. Principal building: Equal to the height of the dwelling;
Accessory structures: Accessory structures adjacent an alley may be placed on the alley
line provided there are no openings in the wall parallel to the alley. Garages with
vehicle doors parallel to an alley shall be set back from the alley 20 feet. Where there
is no alley, the setback shall be five feet. Structures related to rabbits and/or chicken
hens, such as rabbit hutches and/or chicken coops, must be at least 10 feet from any
property line, may not exceed six feet in height and 30 square feet in size, and must be
located behind the rear line of the dwelling. Rabbit hutches and/or chicken coops
adjacent an alley may be placed within five feet of the alley line provided there are no
openings in the wall parallel to the alley. Property owners shall not allow such
structures to become a nuisance due to noise or odor.
(6) Maximum Building Height
(a) Principal building: 35 feet, except a greater height may be approved by special
permit;
(b) Accessory buildings: 15 feet;
(7) Fences and hedges: See Chapter 25.180 PMC;
(8) Parking: See Chapter 25.185 PMC; and
(9) Landscaping: See Chapter 25.180 PMC;
(10) Residential design standards: See PMC 25.165.100. [Ord. 4110 § 15, 2013; Ord.
4040 § 8, 2012; Ord. 4036 § 17, 2011; Ord. 3731 § 16, 2005; Ord. 3354 § 2, 1999; Code
1970 § 25.36.050.]
Section 4. That section 25.70.050 of the Pasco Municipal Code (R-4 High Density
Residential) shall be and hereby is amended and shall read as follows:
25.70.050 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS.
(1) Minimum lot area: 3;899 4,000 square feet;
(2) One single-family dwelling shall be permitted per lot. Multiple dwellings shall be
permitted based on the density standards in PMC 25.70.050(3);
(3) Density: One dwelling unit per 3;800 4,000 square feet of lot area for single-family
dwellings and 1,500 square feet of lot area for multiple -family dwellings and dwellings part of
zero -lot -line developments;
(4) Lot coverage: 60 percent;
(5) Minimum Yard Setbacks.
(a) Front: 20 feet;
(b) Side: Five feet; except in zero -lot -line developments in which case no side yard
setback is required from the common lot line(s), provided the remainingside ide yard is at
least 10 feet:
(c) Rear: Principal building: Equal to the height of the dwelling;
Accessory structures: Accessory structures adjacent an alley may be placed on the alley
line provided there are no openings in the wall parallel to the alley. Garages with
vehicle doors parallel to an alley shall be set back from the alley 20 feet. Where there
is no alley, the setback shall be five feet. Structures related to rabbits and/or chicken
hens, such as rabbit hutches and/or chicken coops, must be at least 10 feet from any
property line, may not exceed six feet in height and 30 square feet in size, and must be
located behind the rear line of the dwelling. Rabbit hutches and/or chicken coops
adjacent an alley may be placed within five feet of the alley line provided there are no
openings in the wall parallel to the alley. Property owners shall not allow such
structures to become a nuisance due to noise or odor.
(6) Maximum Building Height.
(a) Principal building: 35 feet, except a greater height may be approved by special
permit;
(b) Accessory buildings: 15 feet;
(7) Fences and hedges: See Chapter 25.180 PMC;
(8) Parking: See Chapter 25.185 PMC;
(9) Landscaping: See Chapter 25.180 PMC; and
(10) Residential design standards: See PMC 25.165.100. [Ord. 4110 § 16, 2013; Ord.
4040 § 9, 2012; Ord. 4036 § 19, 2011; Ord. 3731 § 18, 2005; Ord. 3354 § 2, 1999; Code
1970 § 25.38.050.]
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 12019.
Matt Watkins
Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Clerk Kerr Law Group
MEMORANDUM TO PLANNING COMMISSION
nCiryq PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
;I
I 1 jSCo City Hall — 525 North Third Avenue — Council Chambers
DATE: THURSDAY, May 16th, 2019
7:00 PM
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Jacob B. Gonzalez, Senior Planner
SUBJECT: Shared Street Frontages (Lots) (MF# CA 2018-008)
Background
The purpose of this memorandum is to provide an update to the Planning Commission regarding
the ongoing efforts to address appropriate infill and development strategies for the City. This
item was introduced to the Planning Commission in late 2018 followed by a public hearing in
February. It was postponed at the March 2019 meeting to allow for additional staff review,
considerations and refinement.
The discussions originate from the increasing need to accommodate housing needs in our city.
Staff has coordinated the details of the ordinances for review including the impacts and
relationship to housing, safety (fire and emergency) and transportation.
The following ordinance was proposed:
Ordinance: Residential Lots without Public Street Frontage (new)
Attached to the staff report are references (sketches) and ordinance for your review.
RECOMMENDATION:
MOTION: I move to close the public hearing on the proposed code amendments.
MOTION: I move the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council the adoption of the
proposed code amendments for Shared Street Frontages as contained in the May 16th, 2019
Planning Commission staff report.
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE of the City of Pasco, Washington
Amending Section 21.20 "Lots and Blocks" to Allow the creation
of Residential Lots without Public Street Frontage
WHEREAS, the City has pursuant to PMC 21.05.020 identified that regulating the division
of land within the Pasco Urban Growth Area to promote the health, safety, convenience, comfort,
prosperity and general welfare of the present and future inhabitants of the Pasco Urban Growth
Area; and
WHEREAS, the City has existing isolated lots where the width exceeds the depth, creating
constraints for efficient use of underutilized properties; and
WHEREAS, the requirement for public street frontage for each lot can prevent
development and the efficient use of land; and
WHEREAS, the City Comprehensive Plan identifies the encouragement of infill and density
development to protect open space and critical areas, accommodate population increases and
provide support for more walkable neighborhoods (LU -3-13);
WHEREAS. "Flag Lots' are defined as lots not meeting minimum frontage requirements
and where access to the public right-of-way is by a narrow private driveway, as defined in PMC
25.15.140; and
WHEREAS, the City recognizes that providing shared street frontage for isolated
residential lots (flag lots) may assist in meeting the goals of the City Comprehensive Plan, The
Washington State Growth Management Act and City Council Goals. NOW THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That Section 21.20.060 of the Pasco Municipal Code, shall be and hereby is
created and shall read as follows:
21.20.060 LOTS WITHOUT PUBLIC STREET FRONTAGE
(1) Characteristics
Flag lot developments may be approved on a lot without full public street frontage in
which access is provided by an approved private driveway / access strip.
(2) Restrictions and Standards
The City's preferred standard for lot configuration are defined in Section 21.20.050.
Creation of residential lots without public street frontage may be approved only by
meeting the criteria identified in 21.20.060 (2) (a -n):
a) Allowed in residential zones where construction of a public street would
prevent the achievement of the minimum residential density of the underlying
zone designation;
b) Permitted only where due to geometric, topographic, or other physical features
in proportion to the size of the development, would be impractical to extend or
build a publically dedicated street;
c) Must be approved through Subdivision process identified in Title 21 of the Pasco
Municipal Code;
d) There shall be no more than three adjoining lots created without public street
frontage;
e) Emergency Access: When the furthest point of a proposed structure is greater
than 150 feet in distance from the public right-of-way, as measured along an
accessible route, an approved fire vehicle turnaround is required as defined bythe
International Fire Code
f) Parking: No parking is permitted along the access (shared driveway) portion of
the lot. The installation of No Parking signage may be required as a condition of
approval;
g) Utilities: Fire hydrants shall be located to meet the requirements of the
International Fire Code. Extension of sanitary sewer, storm sewer, water or other
utility lines that results from the creation of lot(s), will be at the expense of the
property owners and subject to approval by the City Public Works, Building and
Fire departments;
h) Drainage and storm water shall meet the requirements of PMC 16.10.050
i) Signage with addresses shall be posted on the public street side for all properties
that are adjacent to any private shared driveway or access;
j) Structural setbacks on lots without public street frontage shall conform to the
requirements of the applicable zone;
k) Access, maintenance and utility easements necessary to accommodate and
maintain proposed driveway / shared access improvements and utilizes shall be
approved through the Subdivision process in Title 21 and included on the face of
the final plat;
1) Pavement sections for non-public street frontage driveway improvements are
subject to approval by the Pasco Public Works and Fire Department. Gravel lots
will not be permitted;
m) The shared driveway / access must be maintained by the Homeowners
Association or by the adjoining property owners. A maintenance agreement must
be recorded prior to the issuance of the certificate of occupancy and signage on
the plat and must include provisions for snow removal, garbage pickup and any
other necessary provisions as determined by the City;
n) Access shared/common driveways for lots without public street frontage shall
abide by the minimum frontage, pavement and easement widths shown in the
table below:
Lot Configuration
Minimum
Lot Minimum Pavement
Minimum Easement
Frontage
(Flag Width
Width
Width)
Single Family Detached; One Dwelling
Unit per Lot
1 Lot
12
10
14
2 lots with adjacent flags _ _
8 (per lot)
15
19
3 lots with adjacent flags
8 (per lot)
20
24
Multiple Dwellings
Duplex on 1 lot (2 Units on 1 lot)
12
15
20
Section 2. That Section 21.20.050 of the Pasco Municipal Code (Lot Requirements), shall
be and hereby is amended and shall read as follows:
Every lot shall abut on a street.
(1) Lots with double frontage shall be avoided when possible.
(2) Corner lots in residential districts shall be designed to allow for appropriate setbacks of a
building from both streets.
(3) Side lines of lots shall be approximately at right angles to the street line or radial to curved
street lines.
(4) A plat containing lots adjacent to an arterial street shall not be approved unless the plat
recites a waiver of the right of direct access to the arterial. Exceptions to this requirement may
be permitted due to pre-existing development patterns that create practical difficulties for
limiting arterial access. [Ord. 3398 § 2, 1999; Code 1970 § 26.16.050.]
(5) Lots without public frontage may be only be approved in residential zones where due to
geometric, topographic, or other physical features in proportion to the size of the development
would be impractical to extend or build a publically dedicated street. Regulations can be found
in Section 21.20.060 of the PMC:
Section 3. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect five days after passage and
publication as required by the law.
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco, and approved as provided by law this
day of 2019.
Matt Watkins, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Clerk
City Attorney
n)
Lot Configuration
Minimum Lot Frontage / Flag
Width
Minimum Pavement
Width
Minimum Easement
Width
Single Family Detached; One Dwelling Unit per Lot
I lot
12
10
14
2 lots with adjacent flags
8 (for each lot)
15
19
3 lots with adjacent flags
8 (for each lot)
20
24
Multiple Dwellings
Duplex on 1 lot (2 units on 1
lot)
12 (for each lot)
15
19
SFDU —1 Lot
New Lot
Shared
Frontage/
Access
Existing Lot
<- 14' Min Easment Widt
<-10'-> Min
<-12'Min-> Min
PUBLIC STREET
Fire/ Emergency Access: If
length is 150 ft or more,
turnaround required as per I FC.
h->
Pavement Width
Lot Frontage Width
SFDU — 2 Lots
Adjacent Lot 2
Shored
Frontage/
Access
Adjacent Lot 1
Existing Lot
<- 19' Min Easment Wi
<-15'->
<-16'Ft Min ->
PUBLIC STREET
Fire/ Emergency Access: if
length is 150 ft or more,
turnaround required as perlFC.
dth ->
Nin Pavement Width
Nin Lot Frontage Width
SFDU — 3 Lots
PUBLIC STREET
Fire/ Emergency Access: If
length is 150 ft or more,
turnaround required as per IFC.
Pavement Width
.at Frontage Width
MDU — Duplex
New Lot
Fxisti ng Lot
PUBLICSTREET
Shared
Frontage/
Access
Fire / EmergencyAccess: If
length is 150 ft or more,
turnaround required as per IFC.
<- 20' Min Easment Width - >
<-15'->
<- 12' Mi n -> IMin Lot Frmtoye Width
MEMORANDUM TO PLANNING COMMISSION
Cityq PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
mmmm"
,�m� PasCo City Hall — 525 North Third Avenue — Council Chambers
DATE: THURSDAY, May 16th, 2019
7:00 PM
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Jacob B. Gonzalez, Senior Planner
SUBJECT: MF # CA2019-008 —Special Permits
City staff received a request to amend the Pasco Municipal Code (PMC) to include automobile
wrecking yards as an unclassified use within the Special Permits chapter of Title 25 (Zoning).
Applications for special permits are required to undergo additional review by both the Pasco
Planning Commission and City Council. This allows for mitigation measures to be considered to
reduce or eliminate negative impacts on surrounding uses.
The Special Permits Chapter, in 25.200 provides information on the uses, requirements and
processes required for application. Unclassified Uses are described in 25.200.020 and the full list
is provided below:
PMC 25.200.020 Unclassified Uses
The following uses shall be considered unclassified:
(1) High schools, colleges, universities, vocational schools, business colleges and other
similar academic or skills training facilities or institutions not heretofore permitted within
any district;
(2) Cemeteries, crematories, mausoleums, and other places of burial or interment of
remains;
(3) Churches;
(4) Community service facilities, levels one and two, as defined in PMC 25.15.050;
(5) Airports, heliports, or any other landing or maneuvering space for aircraft, together
with terminals and other customary facilities accessory to the unclassified use;
(6) Golf courses, pitch -and -putt courses, miniature golf courses, water parks, sports
complexes, riding stables, and similar facilities for public, private or membership use;
(7) Monasteries, convents or other functionally similar facilities;
(8) Landfills, garbage dumps, and resource recovery facilities;
1
(9) Off-site parking lots, except those required for a residential use, provided such
parking area is not more than 500 feet from the building;
(10) Electrical substations and load transfer stations, natural gas booster stations, and
other similar utility facilities;
(11) Park-and-ride lots, off-street transfer stations or other similar facilities involving the
storage, start-up, idling and movement of public or privately operated carriers, charter or
transit buses, vans, and similar vehicles; and
(12) Agricultural use (commercial), except in areas 1,000 feet from a residential zoning
district, subdivision or dwelling unit.
The proposed code amendment would add an additional unclassified use:
(113) Automobile wrecking yards, subject to the performance standards of 25.120.020 (2)
a -e
The text referencing PMC 25.120.020 regards to the permitted uses of the 1-2 (Medium Industrial
District).
(2) Junkyards, automobile wrecking yards, scrap iron, scrap paper, or rag storage, sorting
or bailing shall be permitted, provided:
(a) An eight -foot, sight -obscuring fence must be constructed and inspected prior
to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for use of the goods. The fence shall
be of solid single neutral color.
(b) No automobile or parts thereof, junk or salvage materials or parts thereof
shall be visible from any public right-of-way. All materials or parts shall be located
within the fenced area.
(c) Fire lanes shall be provided as required in the International Fire Code.
(d) A performance bond for $1,000 shall be required prior to the issuance of an
occupancy permit, to ensure compliance with provisions of this section. The bond
shall remain in force as long as the use exists.
(e) The permit shall be granted for a period not to exceed two years, and at the
end of such period an inspection shall be made of the premises to determine the
advisability of renewing such permit. (Ord. 3354 § 2, 1999; Code 1970 §
25.54.020.)
A review of the Pasco Zoning Code was conducted and the table below represents zoning districts
and the applicability of the code amendment.
Zone
Applicability
C-1—Retail Business District
Not Permitted
C-2 —Central Business District
Not Permitted (PMC 25.90.050 (2))
C-3 —General Business District
Requires Special/Conditional Use Permit (PMC 25.100.040)
CR — Regional Commercial District
Not Permitted
BP — Business Park District
Requires Special/Conditional Use Permit (PMC 25.110.040)
1-1— Light Industrial District
Requires Special/Conditional Use Permit (PMC 25.115.040)
1-2 — Medium Industrial District
Permitted (PMC 25.120.020)
1-3— Heavy Industrial District
Perm itted (PMC 25.125.020)
The map below depicts the zoning districts applicable through the approval of the proposed code
amendment:
■
Ilion.
"y5lThrl'11115�1111
I\I'ffMA
1 �W
,. �'1-,,_i re Ilalll�rl?..v� '-, air■r.
w~,� ji. — `:�� r`-•�� fir► ••` ��`��
! L- n�i'i?= a
-���
uciulccl •`-�
�� - E■'_/-�1-1-11111111��11� ��111
V `■■.� nlea: �sgl�lll1�`���
��m
ilt `(
alailfEC1�__:►'.';:?n
=eAa=
l lilt
P�
The City of Kennewick (WA) limits automobile wrecking and storage sites to their Heavy Industrial
zoning district and the City of Richland limits locations within their Heavy Manufacturing District.
The approval of the proposed code amendment would allow for currently operating or potential
new business to open in applicable zoning districts. In addition to potential benefits of new
businesses, staff encourages the Planning Commission also consider increased residential growth
east of Oregon Avenue and potential impacts to surrounding communities.
Staff recommends the denial of the code amendment request.
Included in the report is the letter of support from the applicant and an enlarged map displaying
applicable zoning districts.
RECOMMENDATION
MOTION: I move to close the hearing on the proposed code amendments.
OPTION #1
MOTION: I move to deny the proposed code amendment to the Pasco Municipal Code and not
allow for the addition of automobile wrecking yards as an Unclassified Use as defined in PMC
25.200.020
OPTION #2
MOTION: I move to accept the proposed code amendments to the Pasco Municipal Code for
the addition of automobile wrecking yards as an Unclassified Use to PMC 25.200.020 and
schedule deliberations and a recommendation to City Council for the June 20th, 2019 Planning
Commission Meeting.
■
ir-.>°-_�51 =ear _ ��L11111■ �I�`��r%'
�a
�,00
Zoning_j\�11'
District
re
M11,
BP
w!
M C-3vi
+Y! . ■� r wOe- .._� o
��=� �-SII=-= ��E
MEN
e�i`i��96p.PA
�B
CR
• 9 �- �\
101 ry""'
n - ��eeeeeeee 3:9 �v a,.
1-3
�"'.e�\jv �le•1
9iiie. a
M
y�/�
/�r/q��1-2
If
OF
01
.
w`
®
E6,
,`
1
Land Use Solutions
& Entitlement
Land Use Planning Services
9101 N. MT. VIEW LANE Spokane, WA 99218
509-435-3108 (V)
4-30-19
Mr. Rick White
Community & Economic Development Director
City Hall
525 N Third Avenue
Pasco WA 99301
Ref: Draft Zone Code Amendment PMC 25.200. 020 Unclassified Uses
Dear Mr. White:
Upon review of Chapter 25 of the PMC, I find that there is very little language needing
amendment to provide for automobile wrecking yard use within "Unclassified Uses". In other
words, simply add a new line item to 25.200.020 (13) Automobile Wrecking Yard. (See
attached). This would then require the proposed use to become a Conditional Use Permit
reviewed by the Planning Commission pursuant to the applicable provisions and procedures of
said Chapter 25.200.
As such, automobile wrecking yards would then be permitted by CUP as an Unclassified Use
within the C-3 zone and the I-1 zone and be permitted outright within the 1-2 and the I-3 zones. I
would also point out that the I-2 zone has performance criteria for auto wrecking yards as well as
similar outdoor open storage uses.
Please note that I had originally suggested that this CUP adhere to the performance criteria
spelled out within the I-2 zone under 25.120.020 (2) a -e. However, Chapter 25.200 seems to
cover this aspect in 25.200.080. 1 was simply trying to address "automobile wrecking yards
rather than other similar outdoor storage uses as mentioned within that sub -section. I will leave
this recommendation for you and staff to make.
Please let me know your thoughts and of course, when this is scheduled for a PC hearing. Thank
you for your help in bringing about a better solution for a zoning dilemma.
Respectfully Submitted
Dwight J Hume
Attached draft language
25.200.020 Unclassified Uses
The following uses shall be considered unclassified:
(1) High schools, colleges, universities, vocational schools, business colleges and other similar
academic or skills training facilities or institutions not heretofore permitted within any district;
(2) Cemeteries, crematories, mausoleums, and other places of burial or interment of remains;
(3) Churches;
(4) Community service facilities, levels one and two, as defined in PMC 25.15.050;
(5) Airports, heliports, or any other landing or maneuvering space for aircraft, together with
terminals and other customary facilities accessory to the unclassified use;
(6) Golf courses, pitch-and-putt courses, miniature golf courses, water parks, sports complexes,
riding stables, and similar facilities for public, private or membership use;
(7) Monasteries, convents or other functionally similar facilities;
(8) Landfills, garbage dumps, and resource recovery facilities;
(9) Off-site parking lots, except those required for a residential use, provided such parking area
is not more than 500 feet from the building;
(10) Electrical substations and load transfer stations, natural gas booster stations, and other
similar utility facilities;
(11) Park-and-ride lots, off-street transfer stations or other similar facilities involving the
storage, start-up, idling and movement of public or privately-operated carriers, charter or
transit buses, vans, and similar vehicles; and
(12) Agricultural use (commercial), except in areas 1,000 feet from a residential zoning district,
subdivision or dwelling unit. [Ord. 4110 § 30, 2013; Ord. 3514 § 7, 2001; Ord. 3354 § 2, 1999;
Code 1970 § 25.86.020.]
(13) Automobile Wrecking Yards
City Of MEMO TO PLANNING COMMISSION
'Miko PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
City Hall — 525 North Third Avenue —Council Chambers
THURSDAY, MAY 16, 2019
7:00 PM
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Darcy Bourcier, Planner I
SUBJECT: Increasing Building Height in the R-3 & R-4 Zoning Districts (CA2019-009)
To accommodate Pasco's forecasted population growth in a limited Urban Growth Area (UGA),
Planning staff believe it necessary to rework zoning provisions specifically within medium and high
density residential zoning districts. Below is a table showing the current building height standard
of dwellings in R-3 (Medium Density Residential) and R-4 (High Density Residential) zoning
districts:
City of Pasco (current standard)
With the UGA under scrutiny for a proposed expansion, the potential for low-density residential
sprawl is problematic. To help mitigate this potential and provide more opportunity for housing
units, the following revisions have been proposed:
R-3 Zone: Allow for a greater dwelling height, up to 40 feet (measured to midpoint of
gable), via Special Permit
R-4 Zone: Increase maximum dwelling height to 40 feet (measured to midpoint of gable),
and allow for a greater dwelling height via Special Permit
It should be noted that the definition of "building height" according to the Zoning Code is "[... ] the
vertical distance from grade plane to the average height of the highest roof surface [...]". Below is
a simplified representation of this provision.
Midpoint of
highest roof
surface
R-3 (Medium
R-4 (High
Density
Density
Residential)
Residential)
Max dwelling
35 feet
35 feet
height
With the UGA under scrutiny for a proposed expansion, the potential for low-density residential
sprawl is problematic. To help mitigate this potential and provide more opportunity for housing
units, the following revisions have been proposed:
R-3 Zone: Allow for a greater dwelling height, up to 40 feet (measured to midpoint of
gable), via Special Permit
R-4 Zone: Increase maximum dwelling height to 40 feet (measured to midpoint of gable),
and allow for a greater dwelling height via Special Permit
It should be noted that the definition of "building height" according to the Zoning Code is "[... ] the
vertical distance from grade plane to the average height of the highest roof surface [...]". Below is
a simplified representation of this provision.
Midpoint of
highest roof
surface
Because the rear setback of a dwelling in an R-3 or R-4 zoning district must be at least equal to the
dwelling height (as shown above), the rear setback in these zones will increase proportionally.
Both Richland and Kennewick permit dwelling heights in excess of what Pasco currently permits, at
least in their versions of the R-4 (High Density Residential) zoning district.
City of Richland
*Dwelling height is measured to midpoint of highest roof surface (same as PMC)
City of Kennewick
R -2S (Medium
R-3 (Multiple -
Density
Family
Residential)
Residential)
Max dwelling
30 feet
40 feet
height
*Dwelling height is measured to midpoint of highest roof surface (same as PMC)
City of Kennewick
*Dwelling height is measured to highest point on roof
Both Richland and Kennewick measure this distance differently; however, these measurements
result in comparable dwelling height due to the height of the average gable.
Planning staff has discussed this proposed code revision with the Fire Marshal/Building Official
regarding any building implications by increasing building height, and no contradictions with the
International Building Code or other adopted codes have arisen.
At this time, Planning staff is seeking discussion and will appreciate input in anticipation of the
creation of a draft Ordinance.
RM (Medium
RH (High
Density
Density
Residential)
Residential)
Max dwelling
35 feet
45 feet
height
*Dwelling height is measured to highest point on roof
Both Richland and Kennewick measure this distance differently; however, these measurements
result in comparable dwelling height due to the height of the average gable.
Planning staff has discussed this proposed code revision with the Fire Marshal/Building Official
regarding any building implications by increasing building height, and no contradictions with the
International Building Code or other adopted codes have arisen.
At this time, Planning staff is seeking discussion and will appreciate input in anticipation of the
creation of a draft Ordinance.
EO
pa
b'
I
o_
C)
O
1-0 1
rD
rD
■
rt
Qn
n
rt
cn
rt
cn
cn
rlt
■
■
d
n
cn
R
PL
■
R
cn
cn
rt
rD
■
Pi
rD
O
rD
0
■
I
0
0
rD
rt
m
Pi
■
W,
rD
�.
O
0
O
rD
0
n
0
rD
C)rt
rD
rD
rt
■
0j
OP
9
c~n '
rt
■
rD
72, 2
M'
■
PL
■
tt
0
0
IND,
■
0
�,
0
R
rD
0
CD
n
Pi
9
i�
■
V)
n
■
rD
O
r
cn
O
■
n
r
n
CA
P)
rD
Pi
CQ
n
rD
CA
0000
O
O
00
N
cii
00
■
N
O
00
Pi
0
O
O
rD rt
M rD
c
M r rD
Qn
Fes" • r..� rD
rD �•
rt
M
O
O
rD
a
■
■
rD rD
I
'-d
0
0
CA
N
PL
y
rD
■
liq
■
rD
CA
rD
cn
cn
rt
rot
M
rD
CT'
rD
rD
o Qn o �j
n rD 0rt
car �• � � �
rD �'
Uq
o'
■
n
0
PL
�
°
M
PL
Qn
0
rD
rt
■
n
N
w
ME
0
c�a
■
rD
■
■
n
N
rD
rD
n
cn
■
0
po
cs'
rD
0
c�a
rD
rD
n
cn
■
n
r)
rtM
Qn
0
r
00
to
po
rt
rD
■
n
0
I.M.
rD
rD
Pi
rD
rD
rt
■
>L
rt
pa
n
O
PL
PirltM
PL
9
■
W
rD
rmt
O n Q'' rDrt rD N
� � � �! C7
('D � rD
cn O
O O
PL ON p
O 00 n
n
p O
rD Pi�° o 0
0
r p
�.
(:n (D
rDp
N r—Lj
O
rD '
�• PL 00
■
�
O
w
I -A
O
0
rtW
Qn
O
lD
ICL
W
r7
n
0
b
c
rD
114,
r)
rD
G
l
p
cn
■
cn
N
,•,
9
■
dui
Qn
rDn
N
Pi
O
a,
■
rD
cn
■
Rib,
Aw
■
�O
w
rD
cn
■
rD
rD
r+
(D
r+
O
Pi
rD
cn
■
Pd
rD
rD
r+
�--►
0
O
��—
_
fol
• • oa
o m
o.
00
o
C)
r) r n
N v,
o n
O
rD
�t
f:�
o �
� o
w�
0 0
rD
v° O
o �
o O -a
C)
w
x
rD
a
rt
cra
0
r
b
at
rt
rtM
i
.=
a)
0=Eo
�
0
3
x
1
cN
c
N
N
3
ro
(D
v
M
(D
o
�_
Q
n
N
(D
v+
i
ni
C
Q
�*
�
C
I
(D
a
00
n
(.n
Wl7
rr
N
l
N
D100
I
l0
y
Q
!Z
in
n
N
EU
M
(D
Ln
L^
co
CA
vii
fr
LA
7
!Z
a
lk
m
z
if
x
I
I
F- nwv I
I
r
..
;.
F
M
... �
�...
b
w
rD
b
r)
w
�
I
w
�
�
n
�
o
rD
w
�
m
rn
rD
o
CD
n
o
,
t�
C
0
■
d
r)
N
O
`O
■
O
r
■
o*N
O
■
O CD
r
1-0Pi
M
cn
0
■
rD
�n
N
►�
O
rD
N
O
�rD
rD
rt
�
o*N
O
■
O CD
r
1-0Pi
M
cn
0
■
�n
►�
O
N
O
�rD
o*N
O
■
O CD
r
1-0Pi
M
cn
0
■