The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutHE Determination APPL 2020-002 MTCF Properties LLC Short Plat Appeal CITY OF PASCO HEARING EXAMINER FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW,AND DECISION MTCF Properties, LLC Short Plat Appeal APPL 2020-002 September 28, 2020 1. FINDINGS OF FACT 1.1 Background. The City of Pasco Community Development Department issued Findings of Fact and Conditions addressing short plat conditions for a 2.75 acre 7-lot short plat.1 The applicant appealed.2 The dispute was over a single condition, requiring that the plat's entry, which ends in a cul-de-sac, be aligned with the plat entry for the Buena Court plat across the street on Road 62. Its entrance also terminates with a cul-de-sac. As this would reduce development capacity, the Appellant requests entry location which is out-of-alignment, but 125 feet from the Buena Court entrance, which complies with PCC 21.15.020(2). The parcel is in the 900 block of Road 62, Parcel #119-681-033. 1.2 Parties. The City of Pasco Community Development Department ("Department"), P.O. Box 293, 525 N. 3rd Ave., Pasco, WA 99301. MTCF Properties, LLC, c/o Mark Trout, 2839 W. Kennewick Ave., Box 454, Kennewick, WA 99336. 1.3 Hearing. An open record public hearing was held September 9, 2020. Due to COVID-19 restrictions, the hearing was conducted remotely, with the Examiner, Department, and Appellant calling in. The Department, through Mr. White, and Mr. Trout, both appeared. A neighbor wished to attend the meeting in person, not having seen the call-in instructions. As the record was kept open through September 14, the Department provided these details to the neighbor, who submitted written comment. 1.4 Evidence Reviewed. The Department submitted a Staff Report with Exhibits 1-3. Exhibit 1 is the Plat, Exhibit 2 is the Staff Short Plat Findings of Fact and Conditions, and Exhibit 3 is the Appellant's Hearing Examiner Review Application. It includes the appeal form and a legal memorandum, which attaches the Department's Pre-Application Meeting Comment. Without objection, all exhibits were admitted. 1 Department Cover Memo;Exhibit 1 (Plat):Exhibit 2(Department Findings&Conditions). z Exhibit 3. City of Pasco Hearing Examiner Page 1 of 4 Decision, Short Plat Appeal,APPL 2020-002 The record was kept open through September 14, to address Examiner questions on frontage improvements. Both the Department and Appellant provided supplemental information, which was admitted. A public comment was also submitted. As this is an appeal hearing, with the Examiner hearing only party facts and arguments, as the comment raises concerns similar to the Department's, it was reviewed. 1.5 Additional Facts. It is City policy to align the street grid. This produces a predictable street grid, which provides for safer and more efficient vehicle travel.3 This specific situation involves opposing cul-de-sacs, rather than connecting streets. With the 125-foot separation, entrance location does not appear to exacerbate safety concerns or be problematic for vehicular movement. This is though given the lack of sidewalks, there are pedestrian and bicycle safety issues. The Examiner requested clarification on frontage improvements being required. Following the hearing, the Department clarified: As for frontage improvements — the City will require additional street paving and frontage improvements on RD 62 but will not require those on the interior lots of the proposed Short Plat. We will require a"deferral agreement" for improvements on the interior lots. The Appellant also provided supplemental information: 1. Widening Road 62 along the frontage of our property sufficiently increases the safety for pedestrians compared to the narrower road that exists now. 2. I have driven Road 62 numerous times and do not recall passing any pedestrian traffic. It is not a common route for pedestrians to/from a park, school, or, any other use for pedestrians. Of course there will be the occasional pedestrian, but, requiring anything more than widening the road along the front of our property seems pointless for a street that is not a common path for pedestrians. 3. Vehicle and pedestrian traffic is not adversely affected by offsetting the cul de sac from Buena Ct. If anything it reduces the chances of vehicle traffic from entering Road 62 at the same time and same place. 4. The increase of traffic created from only 7 homes in the short plat will have minimal impact on traffic at any given time of the day. The likelihood of severe congestion at any point in time during the day is extremely low. Any congestion would dissipate within minutes. 5. The City has not provided any evidence that suggests more accidents are actually reported at intersections that are offset. The posted speed limit and stop signs seems to be sufficient prevention. Several examples of streets that are offset are attached. This situation is certainly not unique and is not being changed in areas where it already exists. 3 Testimony,Mr.White. City of Pasco Hearing Examiner Page 2 of 4 Decision, Short Plat Appeal,APPL 2020-002 6. The relatively short length of the cul de sac reduces the temptation for vehicles to gain too much speed before entering, or, crossing Road 62. 7. If our cul de sac is aligned with Buena Ct it creates a narrow strip of land along the north side of our cul de sac that is not practical for any use. It certainly does not allow highest and best use of the property and creates potential for this narrow strip to become ignored and unsightly. 8. Our pre-application request for the cul de sac to be offset by 103' was denied and we were told it had to be a minimum offset of 125'. Our formal application included the minimum 125' offset requirement only to be turned down in favor of a continuation of streets - a situation that does not prove to be any safer. 9. It appears the City code allows for an offset of streets by a minimum of 125'. We are not asking for anything that isn't permitted by City code. Requiring the streets to be aligned is inconsistent and misleading. Given the conflicting views, the Examiner must weigh the more specific code direction (125-foot separation) versus the language providing that streets shall normally continue as extensions absent good planning considerations. Given the limited evidence on such planning issues, including safety and accessibility, in this case, this is primarily a code interpretation question. 2. CONCLUSIONS 2.1 Jurisdiction. The Examiner has jurisdiction over this short plat appeal,4 and an appellant challenging a condition has the burden of proof. 2.2 Street Alignment. The Pasco City Code provides the Department with authority to require street alignment. However, with this seven-lot short plat, in which the main entry street terminates in a cul-de-sac and will not connect to another street, the code is less clear. The Department, in its pre-application meeting comment, and then the Appellant, in this appeal, point to PMC 21.15.020(2), "[i]ntersections on opposite sides of a common street shall either be aligned or be offset a minimum of 125 feet." The short plat meets the latter standard. To support its position, the Department points to PCC 21.15.010(1) which provides for continuation of streets and safety considerations.s This code section states, "[s]treets shall normally continue as an extension of existing streets unless good planning dictates a different solution." The Appellant viewed this provision as not applicable because it is constructing a cul- de-sac, so the entry is not a continuation of an existing street, and it meets the more specific 125- foot separation requirement. 4 PMC 21.40.100. 5 Staff Report;Testimony,Mr.White. City of Pasco Hearing Examiner Page 3 of 4 Decision, Short Plat Appeal,APPL 2020-002 6