HomeMy WebLinkAboutHE 2015-001 GESA POWELL & GUNTER
Attorneys at Law
1025 Jadwin Avenue
Don E.Powell Richland,WA 99352 (509)943-6781
Alan B.Gunter Fax(509)946-5177
-----------------------
Rachel M Woodard
V 1 ,
May 5, 2015
Shane O'Neill
City of Pasco
525 N. 3`d Ave.
Pasco, WA 99301
Re: GESA Credit Union Request for Variance
Dear Shane:
Enclosed please find the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for the above referenced case.
If you require further assistance in this matter, please contact my office.
Yours very truly,
POWELL& GUNTER
G
Alan B. Gunter
ABG:al
Enclosures
F:/Word/Alicia/CityofPascoLetter4
PASCO MUNICIPAL VARIANCE HEARING
REQUEST FOR VARIANCE )
CASE #HE 2015-001
GESA Credit Union )
This matter was heard on April 29, 2015, at 3:30 p.m., at Pasco City Hall in Pasco,
Washington, at the request of GESA Credit Union for a variance to the commercial landscaping
requirements of land zoned C-1. Present were Shane O'Neill and Rick White on behalf of the
City of Pasco and Steve Oord, George Galloway, and Rick Thompson on behalf of GESA Credit
Union. Based on the testimony, the records, and photographs submitted at the hearing, the
Hearing Examiner now enters his:
FINDINGS OF FACT
A. The site is located at 2202 West Sylvester Street.
B. The GESA Administrative Services/Data Center was recently constructed on the site.
C. The Comprehensive Plan designates the site for commercial uses.
D. The site is zoned C-1 (Retail Business).
E. Adjoining properties to the south and west are zoned for residential uses and are
developed with a residential apartment complex to the west and a manufactured home
subdivision to the south.
F. Section 25.75.050(3)(B) of the Pasco Municipal Code requires commercial sites to install
ten (10) foot wide landscaping buffers when adjoining less intense zones such as
residential.
G. The original plans submitted with the building permit application for the GESA
Administrative Services/Data Center included only landscaping along Sylvester Street to
the north of the building and to the east of the building adjacent to the driveway entrance.
H. Planning staff building permit review comments of May 23, 2014 explained a 10-foot
landscaped buffer was needed per PMC25.75.050(3) along the western and southern
boundaries of the site. A revised landscape plan was requested at that time.
I. A revised landscape plan showing a 15-foot buffer along the west and south boundary
lines of the site was resubmitted and approved on December 15, 2014.
J. GESA installed a berm along the southern and western boundaries of the site but did not
install landscaping per the approved plan.
K. Irrigation of the landscaping strip does not present a significant or credible risk of water
damage to the structure built on the site or its contents.
L. GESA submitted an application for Hearing Examiner review appealing the requirement
to install a landscaped buffer along the perimeter property lines to the west and south.
Findings of Fact, Pg. I
Conclusions of Law,and
Order on Variance Request
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The request for a variance was properly submitted to the office of the Hearing Examiner
for the City of Pasco and all proper notices were given. The Hearing Examiner has jurisdiction
and authority over the request for a variance. In order to grant a variance the Hearing Examiner
must find that all three of the following questions can be answered in the affirmative.
1. Because of special circumstances applicable to the property, the strict application of
the zoning ordinance would deprive the property of rights and privileges enjoyed by
other similar properties in the vicinity.
2. The granting of the variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare
or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and zone in which the
subject property is situated.
3. The special circumstances applicable to the subject property were not created through
the action(s) of the applicant or any predecessor in interest.
None of the three questions can be answered in the affirmative. This petition for a
variance does not meet the criteria required for a variance.
ORDER
Based upon the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law the applicant's request
for a variance is denied.
The Hearing Examiner's decision will become final in twenty-one (21) calendar days
from the date of issuance of the decision in the manner required by law unless appealed to the
Franklin County Superior Court.
Done this �� of May, 2015.
16l 11� Y
Alan B. Gunter, Hearing Examiner
W ord/docs/Pasco.GESA.Findings
Findings of Fact, Pg. 2
Conclusions of Law, and
Order on Variance Request