Loading...
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 ■