WENATCHEE PLANNING COMMISSION SCHEDULED MEETING October 15, 2014 WENATCHEE CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 129 S. Chelan Avenue Wenatchee, WA AGENDA

Transcription

1 WENATCHEE PLANNING COMMISSION SCHEDULED MEETING October 15, 2014 WENATCHEE CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 129 S. Chelan Avenue Wenatchee, WA AGENDA I. CALL TO ORDER: 5:30 PM II. ADMINISTRATIVE AFFAIRS A. Approval of minutes from the regular meeting of September 17, 2014 B. Explanation of public hearing procedures III. OLD BUSINESS None IV. NEW BUSINESS A. Public hearing - Consideration of a comprehensive plan amendment application submitted by Stemilt Growers Inc., GBI Holding Co. and Chelan County PUD No. 1. This application was submitted to Chelan County to change the land use designation from Residential High to Industrial for properties located within Sunnyslope, accessed off of SR97A, Wenatchee, WA 98801, within Chelan County Assessor Parcel #'s , , , , ; and a long narrow parcel and gravel parcel which do not have a parcel number - Latitude and Longitude degrees N; degrees W; within Township 23N, Range 20 E., WM, Section 22. Consistent with the January 10, 2005 Interlocal Cooperative Agreement between the City of Wenatchee and Chelan County, the City of Wenatchee is also processing the amendment. B. Work session - Update and discussion of code and comprehensive plan amendments scheduled for consideration at a public hearing on November 19, V. OTHER A. Member roundtable VI. ADJOURNMENT In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the Mayor s office at (509) (TTY 711). Notification 72 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to the meeting (28 CFR ADA Title 1.)

2 WENATCHEE PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING COUNCIL CHAMBERS September 17, 2014 I. CALL TO ORDER MINUTES Chair Scott Griffith called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. with the following members in attendance; Randy Asplund, Jean Speidel, Ace Bollinger, and David Williams. City staff was represented by Steve King, Community and Economic Development Director and Glen Devries, Planning Manager. II. ADMINISTRATIVE AFFAIRS A. Approval of the minutes of the regular meeting of August 20, Commissioner Bollinger moved to approve the minutes as written. the motion. The motion carried. Commissioner Asplund seconded III. PUBLIC COMMENT Keith Huffaker addressed the Commission regarding concerns for the practice of requiring the cut-out of 12 inches of asphalt when a curb cut is done. Huffaker is asking the Commission for consideration of changing the current code that addressed the requirement. Steve King, Director of Community and Economic Development, addressed Huffaker's concerns. advised that he is the one that wrote the code and could provide some insight. King Chair Griffith advised Huffaker that the Commission would consider his concern and the matter when addressing code revisions in the future. IV. OLD BUSINESS None V. NEW BUSINESS A. Work session: Comprehensive Plan Amendments Update Sunnyslope, Freight Plan, Grandview Historic District Property Removal Glen Devries, Planning Manager, presented the staff report. B. Work session: Zoning Code Update I-502, Public Assembly Devries presented the staff report. 1

3 WENATCHEE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Commissioners asked questions of staff. C. Work session: Consolidated Plan Target Area Update Steve King, Director of Community and Economic Development, presented the staff report. Commissioners with a map showing the revised Consolidated Plan Target Area. He provided Commissioners asked questions of staff. D. Work session: Makerspace Update King presented the staff report. E. Discuss Proclamation for National Planning Month in October King invited the Commissioners to attend the City Council meeting on September 25 th to accept the Proclamation for National Planning Month. F. Member round table King advised that the addition of the Member Round Table to the agenda was an opportunity for Commissioners to ask questions, provide feedback, and/or discuss concerns. VI. OTHER None VII. ADJOURNMENT With no further business to come before the Planning Commission, Chair Scott Griffith adjourned the meeting at 7:03 p.m. Respectfully submitted, CITY OF WENATCHEE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Kim Schooley, Administrative Assistant 2

4 Staff Report 2014 Comprehensive Plan Amendments STAFF REPORT 2014 Comprehensive Plan Map Amendments FROM: Department of Community Development TO: Chelan County Planning Commission DATE: September 12, 2014 SUBJECT: Proposed 2014 Comprehensive Plan Map Amendments A. Introduction... 1 B. Growth Management Goals... 2 C. Staff Analysis CPA D. Suggested Findings of Fact E. Suggested Conclusions of Law F. Staff Analysis CPA G. Suggested Findings of Fact H. Suggested Conclusions of Law I. Attachment A. Introduction This staff report provides an analysis of proposed 2013 Comprehensive Plan amendments. The one application for amendment requests to change two Comprehensive land use designations which are addressed below after a summary of the processing timeline and a general review of the Growth Management Goals. Determining where to place density is a complex question which requires a detailed review. The bulk of this staff report is dedicated to reviewing the Chelan County Code criteria. Staff used facts and statistics to analyze each proposal in an impartial and objective manner. While each application may or may not have met all the criteria, the applications must be weighed by their individual and collective impacts. Missing one criterion, in Staff s opinion, may or may not result in a recommendation for denial of the proposal. Additionally, public comment plays a major role in understanding potential impacts to surrounding land uses, impacts to rural character, and how the amendment may serve the general public s interest. This Staff Report is intended to provide a basic understanding of each application. The Chelan County Planning Commission will use this information to make initial recommendations to Board of Chelan County Commissioners. PROCEDURE & PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE COMPLIANCE 60 Day State Agency Review: July 24, 2014 ID # Optional Noticing: legal notice to Wenatchee World & mailed to surrounding properties April 1, 2014 SEPA Determination: July 31, 2014 SEPA Publication: August 1, 2014 Planning Commission Public Hearing: September 24, 2014 Board of County Commissioners Public Hearing: December 2014 (tentative) Page 1 of 22

5 Staff Report 2014 Comprehensive Plan Amendments B. Growth Management Goals 1. Urban Growth. Encourage development in urban areas where adequate public facilities and services exist or can be provided in an efficient manner. STAFF COMMENT: The proposed amendment is located within the Rural Resource land designations with rural densities and rural services. The proposed amendment within the Wenatchee Urban Growth Area is reflective of the industrial nature of the surrounding area and existing industrial level of infrastructure. Each proposed designation change is consistent with this GMA goal. 2. Reduce Sprawl. Reduce the inappropriate conversion of undeveloped land into sprawling, low-density development. STAFF COMMENT: The rural character of Chelan County includes various parcel sizes from 2.5 acres and greater. The various rural land use designations allow for appropriate use of land within the County s narrow valleys and fit with the historic patterns of small family orchards. Sprawl is defined as inappropriate conversion of undeveloped land into sprawling, low-density development (GMA) or by Webster as irregular development without restraint. Chelan County does not support sprawl development, including development which would extend urban services in an inappropriate manner. Rather, Chelan County supports rural densities and services within the rural area. Each land use designation purpose statement found in the County Comprehensive Plan is established to guide all planning and land use determinations. The proposed amendment within the Wenatchee Urban Growth Area would remove the residential designation and place an industrial designation adjacent to existing industrial land uses. Each proposed designation change is consistent with this GMA goal. 3. Transportation. Encourage efficient multimodal transportation systems that are based on regional priorities and coordinated with County and city comprehensive plans. STAFF COMMENT: Chelan County s transportation pattern primarily consists of three highway systems, Hwy 97, Hwy 97A and Hwy 2, and various finger roads that support the various valley areas. The majority of the County is served by private or forest service roads. Development regulations require that transportation needs be developed concurrent with new development. Each proposed amendment would require development specific review at the time of future land use applications. The proposed amendment within the Wenatchee Urban Growth Area is accessed from a private road easement with no known intent of dedicated future road. Each proposed designation change is consistent with this GMA goal. Page 2 of 22

6 Staff Report 2014 Comprehensive Plan Amendments 4. Housing. Encourage the availability of affordable housing to all economic segments of the population of this state, promote a variety of residential densities and housing types, and encourage preservation of existing housing stock. STAFF COMMENT: Chelan County uses clustering subdivisions as an innovative technique to preserve rural lands in open space designations. If the proposed residential development housing was to be placed in clusters this would allow for preservation of rural character by providing at least 70% open space and other amenities. The use of clustering is a reasonable land development within rural areas and encouraged by the Growth Management Act. The proposed amendment north of Wapato Lake would potentially increase density from 5 housing units (42/10) to 9 housing units (42/5), a change of 4 residential housing units. The proposed amendment within the Wenatchee Urban Growth Area would reduce housing land within the Urban Growth Area by approximately 114 building lots ((26 acres 20% for infrastructure and 40% shoreline protection)/4000 sq ft lots). Each proposed designation change is consistent with this GMA goal. 5. Economic Development. Encourage economic development throughout the state that is consistent with adopted comprehensive plans, promote economic opportunity for all citizens of this state, especially for unemployed and for disadvantaged persons, promote the retention and expansion of existing businesses and recruitment of new businesses, recognize regional differences impacting economic development opportunities, and encourage growth in areas experiencing insufficient economic growth, all within the capacities of the state's natural resources, public services, and public facilities. STAFF COMMENT: Chelan County provides various rural densities not only to address the historic land use and topographic limitation but as a means of providing a variety of orchards/farms and residential parcels sizes. The proposed amendment within the Wenatchee Urban Growth Area would provide more industrial lands adjacent to existing industrially zoned properties which may increase job opportunities. Each proposed designation change is consistent with this GMA goal. 6. Property Rights. Private property shall not be taken for public use without just compensation having been made. The property rights of landowners shall be protected from arbitrary and discriminatory actions. STAFF COMMENT: Chelan County supports private property rights. Each proposed designation change is consistent with this GMA goal. 7. Permits. Applications for both state and local government permits should be processed in a timely and fair manner to ensure predictability. STAFF COMMENT: Chelan County attempts to provide all applicants with timely and accurate review of files. Each proposed rural designation is consistent with this GMA goal. Page 3 of 22

7 Staff Report 2014 Comprehensive Plan Amendments 8. Natural Resource Industries. Maintain and enhance natural resource-based industries, including productive timber, agricultural, and fisheries industries. Encourage the conservation of productive forest lands and productive agricultural lands, and discourage incompatible uses. STAFF COMMENT: Chelan County is benefited by a range of resource lands and related industries. The proposed changes within the rural designation are consistent and support the resource lands by placing development outside resource areas. The proposed amendment within the Wenatchee Urban Growth Area would provide additional industrial lands along the Columbia River. Each proposed designation change is consistent with this GMA goal. 9. Open Space and Recreation. Retain open space, enhance recreational opportunities, conserve fish and wildlife habitat, increase access to natural resource lands and water, and develop parks and recreation facilities. STAFF COMMENT: The majority of Chelan County is protected Federal or State land, open to public recreation. This land provides excellent conservation of fish and wildlife habitat, protection to land and water and, where appropriate, developed parks and trail facilities. Additionally, development regulations allow for open space development and provide property owners with opportunities to retain open space areas. The proposed amendment within the Wenatchee Urban Growth Area is not in an area currently serving the public or providing open space. Each proposed designation change is consistent with this GMA goal. 10. Environment. Protect the environment and enhance the state's high quality of life, including air and water quality, and the availability of water. STAFF COMMENT: Chelan County provides protection measures and environmental review of all general and specific land development. At the time of site specific development, additional and appropriate environmental review will be required for non-exempt projects. The proposed amendment within the Wenatchee Urban Growth Area would retain the shoreline protection buffer area. Each proposed designation change is consistent with this GMA goal. 11. Citizen Participation. Encourage the involvement of citizens in the planning process and ensure coordination between communities and jurisdictions to reconcile conflicts. STAFF COMMENT: Chelan County provides opportunity for public review and comment on all Comprehensive Plan Amendments, including completing an optional notification to surrounding property owners of the proposed amendments. Each proposed designation change is consistent with this GMA goal. 12. Public Facilities and Service. Ensure that those public facilities and services necessary to support development shall be adequate to serve the development at the time the Page 4 of 22

8 Staff Report 2014 Comprehensive Plan Amendments development is available for occupancy and use without decreasing current service levels below locally established minimum standards. STAFF COMMENT: Chelan County code requires appropriate facilities and services for development. Depending on the future development - roads, police, fire, hospital, wells and sewer, impacts could vary greatly and will be reviewed with future permits. The proposed amendment within the Wenatchee Urban Growth Area does not have public access or crossing permit from the railroad. The proposed amendment would be consistent with the current use, access and permits as industrial lands. Each proposed designation change is consistent with this GMA goal. 13. Historic Preservation. Identify and encourage the preservation of lands, sites, and structures that have historical or archaeological significance. STAFF COMMENT: Chelan County contains areas of historic importance, as defined by the State Department of Archaeology. All development permits include a review for known sites and a provision to halt work if historic materials are discovered. Each proposed designation change is consistent with this GMA goal. 14. Shoreline. Manage shorelines wisely. STAFF COMMENT: The preservation of shoreline is a key component of Chelan County planning activities. The proposed amendment is along Wapato Lake, a shoreline of statewide significance. The amendment could potentially increase the number of residential building lots adjacent to the shoreline but all development would be required to be consistent with the Shoreline Master Program. The proposed amendment within the Wenatchee Urban Growth Area would place industrial land uses adjacent to the Columbia River, a shoreline of statewide significance. The surrounding uses are industrial including that north of the subject area. All development would be required to be consistent with the Shoreline Master Program. Each proposed designation change is consistent with this GMA goal. C. Staff Analysis CPA : Andy Wisdom CPA PROPOSAL: Application from Andy Wisdom requesting a change of approximately 42 acres from Rural Residential/Resource 10 (RR10) to Rural Residential/Resource (RR5) north of Wapato Lake, addressed 672 Lower Joe Creek Road, Manson, WA (Assessor s parcel numbers: and ). GENERAL INFORMATION: Density: Overall the property would potentially increase density from 5 housing units (42/10) to 9 housing units (42/5), a change of 4 residential housing units. Site Information: Each parcel contains a single-family residence. Access: Access is from a private easement. Page 5 of 22

9 Staff Report 2014 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Surrounding: Agricultural and residential developed rural land surrounds these parcels; zoned Rural Residential/Resource 5, 10 (RR5, RR10), and Commercial Agricultural Lands (AC). COMMENTS: No comments have been received, as of the drafting of the staff report. Current Zoning Page 6 of 22

10 Staff Report 2014 Comprehensive Plan Amendments 2011 Image REVIEW CRITERIA The evaluation criteria from Chelan County Section was used to analyze the proposed amendments. Agency and public comments have been incorporated as appropriate. Chelan County Code (1) (A) The proposal is consistent with the goals of the Growth Management Act, (RCW 36.70A), and any applicable Countywide Planning Policies. FACT: The review of GMA goals are addressed in Section B, above. Countywide Planning Policies provide guidance to coordinated planning with the public and other affected jurisdictions. CONCLUSION: The proposal is consistent with the GMA goals and Countywide Planning Policies. Page 7 of 22

11 Staff Report 2014 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Growth Management Act Comprehensive Plans - Mandatory elements: RCW 36.70A.070 (5): Rural element. Counties shall include a rural element including lands that are not designated for urban growth, agriculture, forest, or mineral resources. The following provisions shall apply to the rural element: STAFF COMMENT: The following is a review of the proposal for consistency with the required Growth Management Act RCW 36.70A.070. FACT: Chelan County has adopted a Rural Element within its Comprehensive Plan that meets the requirements of GMA. CONCLUSION: The proposal is reviewed below for consistency with GMA. RCW 36.70A.070 (5)(a):Growth management act goals and local circumstances. Because circumstances vary from County to County, in establishing patterns of rural densities and uses, a County may consider local circumstances, but shall develop a written record explaining how the rural element harmonizes the planning goals in RCW 36.70A.020 and meets the requirements of this chapter. FACT: Chelan County has adopted a Rural Element within its Comprehensive Plan that meets the requirements of GMA. CONCLUSION: The proposal is a request to change from one rural designation to another rural designation within Chelan County. RCW 36.70A.070 (5)(b): Rural development. The rural element shall permit rural development, forestry, and agriculture in rural areas. The rural element shall provide for a variety of rural densities, uses, essential public facilities, and rural governmental services needed to serve the permitted densities and uses. To achieve a variety of rural densities and uses, counties may provide for clustering, density transfer, design guidelines, conservation easements, and other innovative techniques that will accommodate appropriate rural densities and uses that are not characterized by urban growth and that are consistent with rural character. FACT: Chelan County provides, within the Comprehensive Plan, a variety of rural densities, uses, necessary services and innovative techniques to support the rural areas. CONCLUSION: The proposed Comprehensive Plan map amendment provides for the rural character of Chelan County by allowing a mix of densities. The proposed rural densities are within the established rural densities outlined in the Comprehensive Plan and will be governed by appropriate land uses if rural infrastructure can be properly placed. A more detailed review of how the proposed amendment fits within the specific rural designation is addressed below. RCW 36.70A.070 (5)(c): Measures governing rural development. The rural element shall include measures that apply to rural development and protect the rural character of the area, as established by the County, by: (i) Containing or otherwise controlling rural development; (ii) Assuring visual compatibility of rural development with the surrounding rural area; (iii) Reducing the inappropriate conversion of undeveloped land into sprawling, low-density development in the rural area; (iv) Protecting critical areas, as provided in RCW 36.70A.060, and surface water and Page 8 of 22

12 Staff Report 2014 Comprehensive Plan Amendments groundwater resources; and (v) Protecting against conflicts with the use of agricultural, forest, and mineral resource lands designated under RCW 36.70A.170. FACT: The Growth Management Act requires the rural components (listed above) be used when adopting a Comprehensive Plan. Chelan County Comprehensive Plan meets these requirements. Each new Comprehensive Plan map designation is reviewed for consistency with these elements in order to ensure rural character is maintained, as defined by the adopted Chelan County Comprehensive Plan. The proposed amendment is adjacent to natural lands, residential lands, agricultural activities and recreational development. According to Chelan County records, the amendment area contains wetlands, shoreline and geologically hazardous areas. The proposed amendment is located adjacent to resource lands agricultural as defined by RCW 36.70A.170. CONCLUSION: The proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Plan map is consistent with (i) rural development, (ii) visual impacts, (iii) sprawl, and (v) resource lands. The proposed amendment, depending on future development, may not be consistent with (iv) critical areas. Possible conflicts with critical areas (wetlands and shoreline) and compatibility with surrounding land uses may be addressed through code and/or project mitigation at the time of site specific land development application(s). Growth Management Act Comprehensive Plans Definitions: RCW 36.70A.030 (15): "Rural character" refers to the patterns of land use and development established by a County in the rural element of its comprehensive plan: STAFF COMMENT: The Growth Management Act definition for rural character is adopted as part of the Chelan County Comprehensive Plan and is addressed below: RCW 36.70A.030 (15) (a) In which open space, the natural landscape, and vegetation predominate over the built environment; FACT: Chelan County is unique in the State with approximately 80% of its lands being owned by the Federal and State government. The remaining land is largely covered with Geological Hazards, as defined by Chelan County Code. CONCLUSION: There is an abundance of open space and natural areas which are not expected to change. The proposed rural designation is within the defined rural character of Chelan County s Comprehensive Plan and allows for the retention of the County s natural areas. RCW 36.70A.030 (15) (b) That foster traditional rural lifestyles, rural-based economies, and opportunities to both live and work in rural areas; FACT: The variety of parcel sizes allow for a variety of rural based economics, both in housing options and economic endeavors such as, farming, orchards, home based Page 9 of 22

13 Staff Report 2014 Comprehensive Plan Amendments businesses, etc. This particular area of Chelan County has a large variety of lot sizes and land uses. CONCLUSION: The proposed amendment may provide more opportunities for rural living. RCW 36.70A.030 (15) (c) That provide visual landscapes that are traditionally found in rural areas and communities; FACT: Changes in rural designations which increase density may or may not affect the landscapes to the rural character based on the location, elevation of the site, and future development. CONCLUSION: An increase in rural density does not always equate to an increase in impacts depending on the site specific proposal type, location and buffers, and possible mitigation options. At the time of site specific land use applications, impacts may be reviewed through the SEPA review and Chelan County Code requirements. RCW 36.70A.030 (15) (d) That are compatible with the use of the land by wildlife and for fish and wildlife habitat; FACT: The site for the proposed amendment is within a shoreline area. CONCLUSION: Any development on the proposed amendment lands will require mitigation for known impacts to the shoreline. Site specific impacts are reviewed at the time of development. RCW 36.70A.030 (15) (e) That reduce the inappropriate conversion of undeveloped land into sprawling, low-density development; FACT: Chelan County Comprehensive Plan supports various rural designations consistent with the character and history of Chelan County. CONCLUSION: The proposed rural designations would not result in sprawling lowdensity development as determined by Chelan County Comprehensive Plan. RCW 36.70A.030 (15) (f) That generally do not require the extension of urban governmental services; FACT: Chelan County requires rural services be in place at the time of or concurrent with rural development. No urban governmental services are required within County lands. CONCLUSION: The proposed rural designations are consistent with this requirement. RCW 36.70A.030 (15) (g) That are consistent with the protection of natural surface water flows and groundwater and surface water recharge and discharge areas. FACT: Chelan County, the Chelan-Douglas Health District and the State Department of Ecology work together to ensure the protection and conservation of water resources Page 10 of 22

14 Staff Report 2014 Comprehensive Plan Amendments within the County. The Department of Natural Resource data shows the subject parcels contain un-typed streams. CONCLUSION: The proposed amendment would be required to provide site specific details necessary to review surface or groundwater impacts at the time of future project development. Chelan County Code (1) B The amendment is consistent with or supports the Chelan County Comprehensive Plan goals and policies. STAFF COMMENT: The following goals and policies are not exhaustive but rather represent guiding factors, used by staff, in reviewing potential map amendments. RE GOAL 1: Rural areas should maintain a balance between human uses and the natural environment. Policy 3: Provide for a variety of rural densities and designations that would accommodate the wide variety of rural land uses which represent the rural character. RE GOAL 2: Maintain the land and water environments which support and enhance natural resource-based economic activities, wildlife habitats, traditional rural lifestyles, outdoor recreation and other open spaces. Policy 11: In order to achieve a variety of rural densities and uses, the County may provide for clustering, density transfer, design guidelines, conservation easements, and other innovative techniques that will accommodate appropriate rural densities and uses that are not characterized by urban growth and that are consistent with rural character. Policy 13: Development in hillside areas should be encouraged to take maximum advantage of benches, terraces, and forested areas as desirable building sites, and to minimize the impacts of development in open, exposed, and visually conspicuous areas. GOAL 3: Develop at densities such that demands will not be created for urban levels of public services and facilities. Policy 1: The provision of rural governmental services should be recognized as non-urban levels of services. The rural community should expect rural governmental services including police, fire, roads, and general utilities. Policy 2: It is the policy of Chelan County to recognize the future inclusion of certain rural lands into urban growth areas. Therefore, the density of rural lands immediately adjacent to an urban growth area should be a density that would allow for further subdivision of land and ensure the opportunity for orderly placement of infrastructure when included in an Urban Growth Area. Policy 3: Rural areas adjacent to urban growth areas can function as reserve areas for future growth and expansion of urban growth areas. Capital facilities and transportation plans should consider the potential for these areas to become urban growth areas. These plans should try to anticipate, where appropriate, where future additional infrastructure and facilities will be sited. Policy 17: Densities allowed determine how many people can ultimately reside in the County. Appropriate rural densities and designations should be applied which maintain the rural character, accommodate rural population projections and can be provided with rural services within the constraints of the County Budget and Capital Facility Plan. FACT: The proposed amendment is within the various rural designations (densities) outlined in the Chelan County Comprehensive Plan. Page 11 of 22

15 Staff Report 2014 Comprehensive Plan Amendments CONCLUSION: The proposed amendment is consistent with RE Goal 1, Policy 3. Consistency with the remaining goals and policies cited would be determined at the time of site specific land development application(s). Chelan County Code (1) C The amendment complies with Comprehensive Plan land use designation/siting criteria. STAFF COMMENT: Listed below are the locational guidelines for the affected land use designations. Staff reviewed the proposed change for consistency with these criteria. RR5, RURAL RESIDENTIAL/RESOURCE: 1 DWELLING UNIT PER 10 ACRES Locational Guidelines: 1. Geographical and Geological Characteristics. The area is predominantly rural in character. Soil characteristics or other physical constraints to development may also be present. Some areas of undeveloped, open space may exist. The area may also be adjacent to designated urban growth areas. 2. Natural Resources. The area may have agricultural or forest land practices of both small scale and/or commercial significance. The area may also be adjacent to designated resource lands. 3. Public Services. Uses do not require extension or provision of urban level services. Rural governmental services are available or may be provided for within the 20 year planning period. 4. Existing Land Uses. Dispersed single family residences, farms or forestry uses, cottage industries and small businesses, and other rural development may be present. Predominant parcel sizes are 5 acres or larger. FACT: The proposal is predominantly rural in character and adjacent to rural and recreational lands. Urban level services are not required. Surrounding parcel sizes range from five acres to over 50 acres. CONCLUSION: The application is consistent with the locational guidelines though future development may be limited due to reduced rural services. Chelan County Code (1) D. The amendment is supported by and consistent with the capital facility element and the transportation element. Amendments that would alter existing provisions of the capital facilities or transportation elements shall demonstrate why existing provisions should not continue to be in effect or why exiting provisions should be amended. FACT: No alteration of the Capital Facility Element or Transportation Element is expected as a result of the proposal. CONCLUSION: The proposed amendment, if developed to its full potential, may require off-site access and infrastructure improvements in addition to the standard on site and infrastructure improvements. No change in the Capital Facility Element or Transportation Element has been identified. Page 12 of 22

16 Staff Report 2014 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Chelan County Code (1) E. The amendment does not adversely affect the surrounding land uses; FACT: The proposed amendment is rural in nature. Future development would have to comply with critical area and habitat protections adopted in Chelan County Code. CONCLUSION: The proposed amendment does not appear to have adverse impacts on the surrounding land uses. Chelan County Code (1) F. The amendment does not adversely affect lands designated as resource lands of long-term commercial significance or designated critical areas in ways that cannot be mitigated. FACT: The proposed amendment is adjacent to agricultural resource lands of long-term commercial significance. The designated critical areas include Wetland, Stream, Riparian and Geological Hazards lands. CONCLUSION: The proposed amendment does not affect lands of long-term commercial significance. The site specific critical areas may require review and mitigation through site specific development process. Chelan County Code (1) G. The amendment does not adversely affect the supply of land for various purposes which is available to accommodate projected growth over the twenty-year planning period covered by the comprehensive plan. FACT: Overall the property would potentially increase density from 5 housing units (42/10) to 9 housing units (42/5), a change of 4 residential housing units and the associated population allocation for the rural areas. The Chelan County Comprehensive Plan page LU 14 states that the Office of Financial Management Projections (high series) is 107,177 residents by the year 2030 for all of Chelan County. The Comprehensive Plan breaks down the population distribution by City, UGA and rural lands, see page LU 19. As of 2008, the rural lands within Chelan County need to provide for an estimated 7,552 residents or 3,021 dwelling units (7552/2.5 persons per household) by the year Chelan County has an estimated 3,686 vacant parcels (as of 2008, see LU 6). Assuming one dwelling unit per parcel, the County has more parcels than required to meet the projected population estimates. CONCLUSION: The proposed amendment is not necessary to provide for rural population demands. Chelan County Code (1) H. The proposed amendment serves the interests of both the applicant and the general public including public health, safety, and welfare. FACT: The above analysis combined with the SEPA determination defines potential benefit and/or hindrance to the applicant and general public including public health, safety, and welfare. CONCLUSION: The proposed amendment meets the locational guidelines for placement as defined by the Chelan County Comprehensive plan and the majority of criteria reviewed under Chelan County Code ; therefore, the proposed Page 13 of 22

17 Staff Report 2014 Comprehensive Plan Amendments amendment serves both the applicant and the interests of the general public including public health, safety and welfare. D. Suggested Findings of Fact 1. Chelan County adopted a Comprehensive Plan per the requirements of RCW 36.70A040 (4) (d), the Growth Management Act on February 1, The Comprehensive Plan has been amended annually with the last amendment adopted January 2014, and an emergency correction to the Capital Facilities Element July Chelan County adopted Title 14, Development Permit Procedures and Administration outlining provisions relating to the amendment of the Comprehensive Plan consistent with RCW 36.70A The County followed the procedures required for amendment of the Comprehensive Plan. 3. Growth Management Act (RCW 36.70A), Chelan County Comprehensive Plan and Chelan County Code outline provisions relating to the adoption and amendments to the Comprehensive Plan. The County used the applicable guidelines and regulatory review criteria for each amendment. 4. RCW 36.70A.100 and.210 requires that a framework for planning be established for each county resulting in the Chelan County-wide Planning Policies, established and adopted by each City, through the 1997 Memorandum of Understanding. 5. RCW 43.21C, the State Environmental Policy Act, and WAC require environmental review of Comprehensive Plans. The County completed a SEPA non-project action cumulative effects analysis and SEPA Determination as part of their adoption process. 6. RCW 36.70A.106 requires that Comprehensive Plans be reviewed by State agencies during the public review process prior to adoption. The County submitted all documents to the Department of Commerce for the required 60-day review and distribution to State agencies. 7. Each amendment has the potential to amend the Capital Facilities or Transportation Element due to the change in land use designation and future development, but no changes are anticipated at this time. 8. Cumulatively, the amendments provide a shift of density from more rural isolated areas to more populated rural areas. 9. A request for Comprehensive Plan Map amendment was submitted by Andy Wisdom (agent) to change the Comprehensive Plan designation of Rural Residential/ Resource 10 (RR10) to Rural Residential/ Resource 5 (RR5) for approximately 42 acres at the north end of Wapato Lake addressed as 672 & NNA Lower Joe Creek Road, Manson, and identified with Assessor s parcel numbers: and The amendment is consistent with the locational guidelines as defined by the Chelan County Comprehensive Plan. Actual land development and possible impacts for future development may be mitigated through site specific development options. Page 14 of 22

18 Staff Report 2014 Comprehensive Plan Amendments E. Suggested Conclusions of Law 1. The amendments to the Chelan County Comprehensive Plan are consistent with the requirements of the Growth Management Act (RCW 36.70A), Chelan County Comprehensive Plan and County-Wide Planning Policies. 2. The amendment(s) are consistent with and support the Chelan County Comprehensive Plan goals and policies. 3. The amendment(s) comply with the Comprehensive Plan designation/siting criteria. 4. The amendment(s) are consistent with the Capital Facilities and Transportation Elements of the Comprehensive Plan. 5. The amendment(s) do not adversely affect the surrounding land uses. 6. The amendment(s) do not adversely affect designated resource lands of long-term commercial significance or designated critical areas in ways that cannot be mitigated. 7. The amendment(s) do not adversely affect the supply of land for various purposes available to accommodate projected growth over the twenty-year planning period covered by the comprehensive plan. 8. Chelan County has considered written and oral comments from the public, agencies and tribes during the County adoption process, as documented in the Staff Report submitted to the Planning Commission and Board of County Commissioners Hearings. 9. The amendments are consistent with Chelan County Code Title 14 Development Permit Procedures and Administration The requirements of RCW C, the State Environmental Policy Act and WAC have been satisfied A request for Comprehensive Plan Map amendment was submitted by Andy Wisdom (agent) to change the Comprehensive Plan designation of Rural Residential/ Resource 10 (RR10) to Rural Residential/ Resource 5 (RR5) for approximately 42 acres at the north end of Wapato Lake addressed as 672 & NNA Lower Joe Creek Road, Manson, and identified with Assessor s parcel numbers: and The proposed amendment is consistent with the goals, policies, and siting criteria for the Rural Residential/Resource 5 designation criteria contained in the Chelan County Comprehensive Plan. F. Staff Analysis CPA CPA PROPOSAL: An application from Stemilt Growers requesting a change of approximately 26 acres from Residential High (RH) to Industrial (I) for 7 parcels of land totaling approximately 26 acres just north of the Odabashian Bridge, addressed NNA State Route 97A, Wenatchee, WA (Assessor s parcel numbers: , , , , and two other adjoining areas not currently parceled). Page 15 of 22

19 Staff Report 2014 Comprehensive Plan Amendments GENERAL INFORMATION: Density: Overall the property would potentially decrease density by approximately 114 building lots ((26 acres 20% for infrastructure and 40% shoreline protection)/4000 sq ft lots). Site Information: The site is used for fruit bin storage and natural shoreline. Access: Access is from a private road easement. Surrounding: Industrial developed is to the north and west; the east is the Columbia River and the south is highway; zoned Industrial (I). COMMENTS: No comments have been received, as of the drafting of the staff report. Current Zoning Page 16 of 22

20 Staff Report 2014 Comprehensive Plan Amendments 2011 Image REVIEW CRITERIA The evaluation criteria from Chelan County Section was used to analyze the proposed amendments. Agency and public comments have been incorporated as appropriate. Chelan County Code (1) (A) The proposal is consistent with the goals of the Growth Management Act, (RCW 36.70A), and any applicable Countywide Planning Policies. FACT: The review of GMA goals are addressed in Section B, above. Countywide Planning Policies provide guidance to coordinated planning with the public and other affected jurisdictions. CONCLUSION: The proposal is consistent with the GMA goals and Countywide Planning Policies. Page 17 of 22

21 Staff Report 2014 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Chelan County Code (1) B The amendment is consistent with or supports the Chelan County Comprehensive Plan goals and policies. STAFF COMMENT: The Sunnyslope Sub-area Plan, appendix K of the Chelan County Comprehensive Plan, had a vision of Olds Station evolving with increased demand for highdensity housing in Sunnyslope [calling] for the inclusion of residential uses in Olds Station as part of a larger urban mixed-use strategy. Today s market may not support residential uses in Olds Station, but areas of Wenatchee s waterfront are now undergoing a transition that could be extended into the Olds Station area. (see page 40). Goal 3 Accommodate forecast population in a manner that retains elements of Sunnyslope that residents cherish. Policy C Encourage residential development in Olds Station Goal 8 Develop additional housing in Olds Station and along the waterfront Policy A Encourage eventual permitting of housing in Olds Station and along the Columbia River/Wenatchee River waterfront Policy B Reduce barriers to developing housing in Olds Station and along the waterfront Goal 11 Keep Sunnyslope housing affordable to all economic segments Policy A Encourage increased housing densities in Central Sunnyslope and Olds Station FACT: There are no specific goals or policies that reference industrial land uses or development. There are several that address the goal of residential within the industrial area as mixed use and options for diversity of residential developments. CONCLUSION: The proposed amendment would remove the only high density residential adjacent to the Industrial zoning district. The future development of mixed use, industrial and residential, would be required to occur within the Industrial designation which permits multi-family dwelling units. Chelan County Code (1) C The amendment complies with Comprehensive Plan land use designation/siting criteria. STAFF COMMENT: The Sunnyslope Sub-area Plan does not have land use designation/siting criteria; therefore, this provision does not apply. Chelan County Code (1) D. The amendment is supported by and consistent with the capital facility element and the transportation element. Amendments that would alter existing provisions of the capital facilities or transportation elements shall demonstrate why existing provisions should not continue to be in effect or why exiting provisions should be amended. FACT: No alteration of the Capital Facility Element or Transportation Element is expected as a result of the proposal. The current access is by private easement and railroad crossing. CONCLUSION: No change in the Capital Facility Element or Transportation Element has been identified. Page 18 of 22

22 Staff Report 2014 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Chelan County Code (1) E. The amendment does not adversely affect the surrounding land uses; FACT: Future development would have to comply with critical area and habitat protections adopted in Chelan County Code. The current surrounding land uses are industrial. CONCLUSION: The proposed amendment does not appear to have adverse impacts on the surrounding land uses. The change to Industrial would appear to provide a more consistent land use with less conflict between industrial and residential. Chelan County Code (1) F. The amendment does not adversely affect lands designated as resource lands of long-term commercial significance or designated critical areas in ways that cannot be mitigated. FACT: The proposed amendment is not adjacent to resource lands (forest, mining, or agricultural) of long-term commercial significance. It is along the shoreline of the Columbia River. CONCLUSION: The proposed amendment does not affect lands of long-term commercial significance. The site specific critical areas may require review and mitigation through site specific development process. Chelan County Code (1) G. The amendment does not adversely affect the supply of land for various purposes which is available to accommodate projected growth over the twenty-year planning period covered by the comprehensive plan. FACT: The Sunnyslope Sub-area Plan was intended to accommodate 6,000 new residents, overall, the subarea will accommodate up to 6,000 additional residents in Sunnyslope and Olds States (see page 35). Over the last several years population projections have held or decreased to match the status of the economy. The Office of Financial Management projected in 2007 that Chelan County would have a population of 86,914 by the year In 2012, that projection had declined to 80,635, attachment A. CONCLUSION: The proposed amendment would impact the build-out projects within the Sunnyslope Sub-area Plan; however, future projects have been stagnant or declining over the last several years. Therefore, the projected loss of approximately 114 building lots would not appear to affect the population projections. Chelan County Code (1) H. The proposed amendment serves the interests of both the applicant and the general public including public health, safety, and welfare. FACT: The above analysis combined with the SEPA determination defines potential benefit and/or hindrance to the applicant and general public including public health, safety, and welfare. CONCLUSION: The proposed amendment meets the Comprehensive Plan and the majority of criteria reviewed under Chelan County Code ; therefore, the proposed amendment serves both the applicant and the interests of the general public including public health, safety and welfare. Page 19 of 22

23 Staff Report 2014 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Chelan County Code (2) Urban Growth Area Amendments. In addition to the criteria stated previously, proposed urban growth area boundary amendments must also meet all of the following criteria: A. The area designated for the expansion of any urban growth area shall be contiguous to an existing urban growth boundary. FACT: The proposed amendment is not an expansion of the Urban Growth Boundary. CONCLUSION: The criteria does not apply. Chelan County Code (2) B. Urban growth areas shall contain areas characterized by urban growth. FACT: The proposed amendment is within the Urban Growth Boundary and contains a fruit bin storage area. CONCLUSION: The proposed amendment is consistent with the criteria. Chelan County Code (2) C. Urban growth areas shall be served by or planned to be served by urban governmental services. FACT: The proposed amendment is within the Urban Growth Boundary with existing services adjacent or nearby. CONCLUSION: The proposed amendment is consistent with the criteria. Chelan County Code (2) D. Urban growth areas shall be designated so as to be compatible with natural resource lands and the protection of designated critical areas. FACT: The proposed amendment is not adjacent to natural resource lands. The shoreline is a designated critical area containing riparian shoreline. CONCLUSION: The existing development standards for the Shoreline Master Program are intended to mitigate development and protect critical areas. Chelan County Code (2) E. Expansion or amendment of an urban growth area should also meet one of the following two criteria. FACT: The proposed amendment is within an existing Urban Growth Area. CONCLUSION: This provision does not appear to apply. G. Suggested Findings of Fact 1. Chelan County adopted a Comprehensive Plan per the requirements of RCW 36.70A040 (4) (d), the Growth Management Act on February 1, The Comprehensive Plan has been amended annually with the last amendment adopted January 2014, and an emergency correction to the Capital Facilities Element July Chelan County adopted Title 14, Development Permit Procedures and Administration outlining provisions relating to the amendment of the Comprehensive Plan consistent with Page 20 of 22

24 Staff Report 2014 Comprehensive Plan Amendments RCW 36.70A The County followed the procedures required for amendment of the Comprehensive Plan. 3. Growth Management Act (RCW 36.70A), Chelan County Comprehensive Plan and Chelan County Code outline provisions relating to the adoption and amendments to the Comprehensive Plan. The County used the applicable guidelines and regulatory review criteria for each amendment. 4. RCW 36.70A.100 and.210 requires that a framework for planning be established for each county resulting in the Chelan County-wide Planning Policies, established and adopted by each City, through the 1997 Memorandum of Understanding. 5. RCW 43.21C, the State Environmental Policy Act, and WAC require environmental review of Comprehensive Plans. The County completed a SEPA non-project action cumulative effects analysis and SEPA Determination as part of their adoption process. 6. RCW A.106 requires that Comprehensive Plans be reviewed by State agencies during the public review process prior to adoption. The County submitted all documents to the Department of Commerce for the required 60-day review and distribution to State agencies. 7. Each amendment has the potential to amend the Capital Facilities or Transportation Element due to the change in land use designation and future development, but no changes are anticipated at this time. 8. Cumulatively, the amendment provides a shift from residential to industrial. 9. A request for Comprehensive Plan Map amendment was submitted by Stemilt Growers to change the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designation, founding within the Sunnyslope Sub-area Plan Appendix, from Residential High (RH) to Industrial (I) for 7 parcels of land totaling approximately 26 acres just north of the Odabashian Bridge, addressed NNA State Route 97A, Wenatchee, WA (Assessor s parcel numbers: , , , , and two other adjoining areas not currently parceled). Actual land development and possible impacts for future development may be mitigated through site specific development options. H. Suggested Conclusions of Law 1. The amendments to the Chelan County Comprehensive Plan are consistent with the requirements of the Growth Management Act (RCW 36.70A), Chelan County Comprehensive Plan and County-Wide Planning Policies. 2. The amendment(s) are consistent with and support the Chelan County Comprehensive Plan, appendix K Sunnyslope Sub-area Plan, goals and policies. 3. The amendment(s) does not have Comprehensive Plan designation/siting criteria. 4. The amendment(s) are consistent with the Capital Facilities and Transportation Elements of the Comprehensive Plan. 5. The amendment(s) do not adversely affect the surrounding land uses. 6. The amendment(s) do not adversely affect designated resource lands of long-term commercial significance or designated critical areas in ways that cannot be mitigated. Page 21 of 22

25 Staff Report 2014 Comprehensive Plan Amendments 7. The amendment(s) do not adversely affect the supply of land for various purposes available to accommodate projected growth over the twenty-year planning period covered by the comprehensive plan. 8. Chelan County has considered written and oral comments from the public, agencies and tribes during the County adoption process, as documented in the Staff Report submitted to the Planning Commission and Board of County Commissioners Hearings. 9. The amendments are consistent with Chelan County Code Title 14 Development Permit Procedures and Administration The requirements of RCW C, the State Environmental Policy Act and WAC have been satisfied A request for Comprehensive Plan Map amendment was submitted by Stemilt Growers to change the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designation, founding within the Sunnyslope Sub-area Plan Appendix, from Residential High (RH) to Industrial (I) for 7 parcels of land totaling approximately 26 acres just north of the Odabashian Bridge, addressed NNA State Route 97A, Wenatchee, WA (Assessor s parcel numbers: , , , , and two other adjoining areas not currently parceled). I. Attachment A. Office of Financial Management Population Projections B. CPA file of record C. CPA file of record Page 22 of 22

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47 Chelan County Planning Commission Minutes September 24, 2014 Planning Commissioners In Attendance: Commission Chair, Randy Baldwin, Commission Co- Chair Aaron Young, Commissioners Jim Newberry, Joe Bell, Randy Sexauer, Ron Coulter and Pat Hammersmith Planning Commissioners Absent: Jim Blair Staff Present: Interim Director David Grimes, Planner II Lilith Yanagimachi and Planning Tech Deniese Aultman 6:58:35 PM Chair Baldwin called the Meeting to Order. Administrative: Review and approve Planning Commission minutes. Commissioner Bell moved to approve the August 27, 2014 meeting minutes. Commissioner Newberry second All Approved Old Business: None New Business: 6:59:34 PM Chair Baldwin opened the Public Hearing. Commissioner Coulter stated that he and Larry Hibbard spoke of the item to be heard. He did not think the conversation would exclude him from hearing the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment. No Commissioner has an interest in the proposals listed below. Open Record Hearing to consider two proposed Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map Amendments located within the County and within the unincorporated Urban Growth Area (UGA) of the City of Wenatchee. 1. CPA : Application from Stemilt Growers requesting a Comprehensive Plan Amendment of approximately 26 acres from Residential High (RH) to Industrial (I) for seven (7) parcels of land just north of the Odabashian Bridge, addressed NNA State Route 97A, Wenatchee. 7:02:47 PM Planner Yanagimachi presented the staff report. She reported that residential density loss would occur. The current Comprehensive Plan states that the Sunnyslope area is expected to hold 6000 residents. She noted changes in population projections, which indicate a reduction, would not be a concern. Staff recommended approval. Interim Director Grimes noted the map area and reviewed the criteria (under Title 14) from the handout with the Planning Commission. Page 1 of 6

48 Chelan County Planning Commission Minutes September 24, :06:27 PM Chair Baldwin asked where the 2 other parcels were listed. Planner Yanagimachi noted that two unidentified parcels were along the shoreline. The City of Wenatchee s representative Glen DeVries was present. Chair Baldwin opened the meeting up to public testimony and turned the meeting over to Glen DeVries. 7:08:53 PM Glen DeVries of the City of Wenatchee testified regarding the coordination between different entities to streamline development in the Sunnyslope urban area. He noted that the City Planning Commission will hear this proposal on October 15, He gave the City s view of the County staff report as presented, stating that the City is in support of the report and the proposed changes. 7:12:59 PM Commissioner Coulter asked if there were any trails in this area. Planner DeVries did not know. Planner Yanagimachi noted there is a trail on the East Wenatchee side of the river but not in this area. Co-Chair Young asked when was the zoning changed? Planner Yanagimachi noted she thought Commissioner Hammersmith asked what the zoning was to the north. Planner Yanagimachi noted that it was Industrial. 7:16:48 PM Director Grimes noted that this is Phase I of two phases of this year s annual Comprehensive Plan Amendments to be presented. 7:17:45 PM Anne Hessburg of Grette Associates (agent for Stemilt) gave a history of the Stemilt property and ownership. She noted that it is not clear who owns the property strip along the shoreline, but the Assessor s office is still working on that determination. She also noted that the parcels surrounding the area are all zoned industrial. Commissioner Hammersmith asked if there are plans to develop this property. Miss Hessburg stated that changing the zoning will bring old uses into compliance. 7:25:10 PM Chair Baldwin closed public testimony for this application. There was consensus for the Planning Commissioners that all were in favor of the proposed Comprehensive Plan Map amendment.. 2. CPA : Application from Andy Wisdom requesting a Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment of approximately 42 acres from Rural Residential/Resource 10 (RR10) to (RR5) north of Wapato Lake, addressed 672 Lower Joe Creek Road, Manson. Page 2 of 6

49 Chelan County Planning Commission Minutes September 24, :25:46 PM Planner Yanagimachi presented the staff report. Staff recommended Approval. Planner Yanagimachi handed out comments received which were read by the Planning Commission and then entered as exhibits: 7:27:56 PM Exhibits entered into the record. Exhibit A Kathy Spangler and Seth Christian Exhibit B Ernesto Fajardo Exhibit C Mary Murphy and Larry Hibbard Exhibit D Donald Cullison 7:35:03 PM Commissioner Newberry asked how long ago did the neighboring property change zoning? Planner Yanagimachi stated she thought 2000 but would check on that. 7:41:30 PM Donald Cullison testified in opposition of the proposal. He noted where his property was in relation to the property in question. He stated the question about the neighboring property change was not appropriate, because the property had never been farmed and was rocks and hills. He noted that the Wisdom property has room for farming, but if you change the zoning there would be no room. 7:51:23 PM Exhibit E maps were submitted by Donald Cullison s showing the Wisdom property and the surrounding property owner s parcels and area. 7:52:19 PM Seth Christian testified in opposition of the proposal. He noted that his land had been orchard since the 1950 s and that access is an issue as there is a primitive road to access the property. He pointed out the easement road off of Lower Creek Rd. 7:58:49 PM Commissioner Young noted that the current property uses an easement that exceeds what the County allows for emergency vehicles and noted that the property in question can legally have about 14 homes on the parcels now. Mr. Christian stated he would be opposed to a cluster development as he doesn t think residential uses should be next to the existing farming community. Commissioner Newberry noted that the cluster subdivisions are allowed now whether this change is approved or not. Mr. Christian stated he understood that. 8:03:32 PM Larry Hibbard testified in opposition that the land in the area has historically been agricultural lands. He stated that the access would be hard to mitigate and the farms would need to use the easement to load apples. The current road serves agricultural lands. He noted that the Comprehensive Plan supports agricultural lands and this proposal is against the Comprehensive Plan. He went through the objections to the staff report. Page 3 of 6

50 Chelan County Planning Commission Minutes September 24, :13:58 PM Commissioner Coulter asked about the easement going through private property. Mr. Hibbard described the easement and the width in places. Commissioner Young asked if the rural character would change with the parcel size from 10 to 5 acres. Mr. Hibbard explained the traffic coming out of the orchard is hard to see and the creation of more residential development would increase the number of kids walking down the easement to meet a school bus. Commissioner Young noted that he understood the concerns but he had trouble seeing how the change from 10 to 5 acres would cause all the concern stated here tonight. Mr. Hibbard noted that the decision tonight should be to protect the Comprehensive Plan. 8:19:58 PM Andy Wisdom testified for Approval for the Comprehensive Plan change. Commissioner Young asked if there were any other ways to access the property other than the easement. Mr. Wisdom stated there is another easement at the other end of the property. He stated that the change is a modest change and the concerns tonight were related to commercial agricultural property but his site is residential. He noted he did not want to see the agricultural community disappear and that is not his intent. He stated that the change would give flexibility for property uses. He noted that the road would be required to be upgraded which should help, and he would mitigate as necessary. 8:25:32 PM Director Grimes addressed comments against the staff report and he stated that the property is in Rural Residential/Resource. He read from the Comprehensive Plan regarding the protection of agricultural and residential uses. He explained that the Locational Guidelines under Natural Resources, for Rural Residential 2.5, are found in the Comprehensive Plan and states that, The area may have agricultural or forest land practices of both small scale and /or commercial significance. The area may also be adjacent to designated resource. He stated that the County believes that the proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Commissioner Young asked about the required width of road. Planner Yanagimachi noted a private access road is a 50 easement. Commissioner Young asked when RR10 was put in if the access was considered. Commissioner Newberry stated that it is unfortunate that ag is not viable when the orchards have been pulled out and not replanted. 8:36:49 PM Commissioner Young stated he failed to see where the change from 10 to 5 acres changes the character of the area. He said it might make the land more viable other than increased traffic. Mr. Hibbard asked if the Commissioner s would base their decision on the Comprehensive Plan and not the future build out. Commissioner Young noted he was trying to see an argument and he just does not see the proposal being against the Comprehensive Plan. Page 4 of 6

51 Chelan County Planning Commission Minutes September 24, 2014 Chair Baldwin noted that he went through the comments and he thought the proposal was consistent with the Comprehensive Plan as well. 8:42:57 PM Mr. Cullison stated that he put a lot of zoning issues into his letter but did not go into detail. He noted that he would be affected with setbacks on the easement with his house on the corner. He objected to having more family homes allowed in the area and that the Comprehensive Plan was created to protect farm land. Chair Baldwin noted that access is a different issue. 8:47:18 PM Chair Baldwin closed the public testimony. 8:48:09 PM Commissioner Young motioned to approve Phase I for the 2 Comprehensive Plan Amendments as submitted in favor of CPA and CPA Commissioner Sexauer second. Open discussion occurred regarding separating out the motion. 8:50:10 PM Commissioner Young requested to withdraw the motion. Commissioner Sexauer agreed. 8:51:34 PM Commissioner Newberry motioned to approve Phase I CPA Stemilt to approve as submitted including all finding of facts and conditions of approval. Commissioner Coulter second All Approve 8:53:22 PM CPA Commissioner Coulter motioned to deny the proposal. Commissioner Hammersmith second. Commissioner Young noted that he did not think that the Commission was to decide on what the future build out would cause but whether it meets the Comprehensive Plan. Commissioner Coulter noted that the testimony was convincing that there would be an impact. Commissioner Newberry noted that the neighbor s wanted things to stay the same but the proposal did meet the Comprehensive Plan. Commissioner Young stated he did not see that the proposal didn t meet the requirements and that it would not create an impact. Call for the vote. Approve Commissioner Coulter and Commissioner Hammersmith Oppose- Chair Baldwin, Co-Chair Young, Commissioner Bell, Commissioner Newberry & Commissioner Sexauer Motion failed. 9:00:25 PM Commissioner Newberry motioned to approve CPA proposal, finding of facts, Conditions and Staff s findings. Page 5 of 6

52 Chelan County Planning Commission Minutes September 24, 2014 Approve- Chair Baldwin, Co-Chair Young, Commissioner Bell, Commissioner Newberry & Commissioner Sexauer Oppose Commissioner Coulter and Commissioner Hammersmith Motion Passed. 9:01:16 PM Chair Baldwin adjourns the September 24, 2014 Public Hearing 9:04:07 PM Commissioner Baldwin moved to adjourn the meeting. Commissioner Newberry second. All Approved Page 6 of 6

53 SUPPLEMENTAL STAFF REPORT TO: City of Wenatchee Planning Commission FROM: City of Wenatchee Community and Economic Development Staff BDATE: October 9, 2014 I. REQUESTED ACTION Stemilt Growers Inc., GBI Holding Co. and Chelan County PUD No. 1 have submitted a comprehensive plan amendment application to Chelan County to change the land use designation from Residential High to Industrial for properties located within Sunnyslope, accessed off of SR97A, Wenatchee, WA 98801, within Chelan County Assessor Parcel #'s , , , , ; and a long narrow parcel and gravel parcel which do not have a parcel number- Latitude and Longitude degrees N; degrees W; within Township 23N, Range 20 E., WM, Section 22. Consistent with the January 10, 2005 Interlocal Cooperative Agreement between the City of Wenatchee and Chelan County, the City of Wenatchee is also processing the amendment. The application is a request to amend the land use designation within the Sunnyslope Sub-Area Plan, a component of the Wenatchee Urban Area Comprehensive Plan. Application materials have been enclosed as Exhibit "A". These materials address county comprehensive plan amendment criteria but also speak to consistency with the Sunnyslope Sub Area Plan and the applicants' rationale for requesting the change. This rationale includes but is not limited to: A majority of these parcels are currently in industrial use and have been for decades. There are no residential uses established on these properties, nor will there be in the future. Changing the comprehensive plan land use designation will bring the map into compliance with the underlying uses already established and will allow the property owners to continue the existing uses as well as help them establish new uses in line with the existing uses in the future. The existing land uses surrounding the subject properties are industrial in nature, as the zoning for all of the adjacent parcels is Industrial. The proposed change would only positively affect or impact the surrounding land use, as the property owners of this proposal also own the adjacent parcels that are currently designated Industrial. The proposed amendment is more appropriate that the existing land use designation for several reasons. First, the change will bring all the parcels in this area into the same designation, removing an island of a different designation. Second, the change will align the designation with the existing uses on these parcels. Third, the existing Residential High designation is inappropriate in this location as developing residentially would be potentially be dangerous for residents to travel thorough an industrial area to access their homes. Finally, residential uses are not compatible with industrial uses Sunnyslope Sub-Area Plan Staff Report Page 1

54 This amendment would serve the interests of the public as whole within the City of Wenatchee's UGA and Chelan County by allowing the existing industries/businesses in this area to continue to grow and thus provide economic growth and local jobs. The current designation of the subject parcels is inappropriate in this location as developing residentially would potentially be dangerous for residents to travel through an industrial area to access their homes. Finally residential uses are not compatible with industrial uses. Residential development in this area could pose a health safety or welfare issue. This amendment would alleviate this issue. II. SITE CHARACTERISTICS / ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Ownership and designation boundaries: At the time of application submittal, the applicants discussed that the requested designation change included 7 total parcels. The application listed 5 parcel numbers with the owners listed above, and noted that the ownership of the long narrow strips of land between the ordinary high water mark and the identified tax parcels was unknown and being researched by the Chelan County Assessor's Office. Since that time, the Chelan County Assessor's Office has identified and created a new parcel number with the ownership identified as, Shoreline Concrete Co. Inc., Chelan County Assessor's Tax Parcel Number This site is approximately 1.94 acres in area. The remaining area appears to be within state ownership. Designation maps indicate lines that do not perfectly follow the Burlington Northern Railway, BNSF, Right-of-Way on the western edge of the parcels and the current RH land use designation. This is most likely the result of a general planning designation map being applied to the zoning and parcel layer. Application materials depicted that the entire Residential High land use designation would be proposed to change to an Industrial land use designation. Chelan County Assessor Parcel #'s- owners, existing uses, acreage and site descriptions: 2014 Sunnyslope Sub-Area Plan Staff Report Page 2

55 2014 Sunnyslope Sub-Area Plan Staff Report Page 3

56 Stemilt Growers LLC, the site is used for bin storage outside of shoreline jurisdiction. Historic orchard has been removed. The area within shoreline jurisdiction is currently not in use. Site acreage is 4.76 acres. The site is generally level, surrounded by what appears to be state ownership on the east and to the south, with BNSF ROW to the west and additional parcels within their ownership to the north. On the northern portion of the parcel is a relatively unimproved access crossing BNSF ROW Stemilt Growers LLC, the site appears to be a truck storage and staging area for their operations. The site is generally level and is a triangular shaped parcel. Due to the unique shape of the parcel, it is surrounded by adjoining Stemilt owned parcels to the northeast and to the south, with BNSF ROW to the west. At the southern portion of the parcel there is the same relatively unimproved access crossing BNSF ROW. The parcel is approximately 1.19 acres Stemilt Growers LLC, the site appears to be a truck storage and staging area for their operations. The site is generally level and adjoins another Stemilt owned parcel to the south and west. To the north of this parcel is a parcel owned by GBI Holding, to the east of this parcel is in the ownership of Shoreline Concrete Inc. Access to the parcel is through adjoining Stemilt owned parcels. The parcel is approximately 5.79 acres. Portions of the site are within shoreline jurisdiction, some which have been developed GBI Holding, the site has had some historic use and contains rock material that extends into the water predating the current shoreline master program. The majority of the site is within the Shoreline Jurisdiction. The site contains a drainage pond. Outside of these historic improvements the parcel is not in active use and contains more varied terrain, including some steep slopes. Access would need to extend through adjoining parcels if access rights were obtained. The parcel is approximately 7.07 acres. To the south of the parcel is in Stemilt ownership. Two parcels are located to the east of the site including a parcel owned by the Chelan County PUD and a portion of the parcel owned by Shoreline Concrete Inc..A portion of the parcel extends to the ordinary high water mark of the Columbia River. BNSF ROW fronts the parcel to the west Chelan County PUD, the site is a narrow strip of land, undeveloped containing steep slopes and riparian habitat within shoreline jurisdiction. The site is approximately.94 acre, and is adjacent to the ordinary high water mark of the Columbia River on the east, adjacent to the GBI Holding Inc. to the West, and downstream to the south is adjacent to Shoreline Concrete Inc. Access to the site would need to extend through adjoining parcels if access rights were obtained Shoreline Concrete Co. Inc., the site is a narrow strip of land, undeveloped containing steep slopes and riparian habitat along the Columbia River. The site is approximately 1.94 acres. To the north of the parcel upstream is the parcel 2014 Sunnyslope Sub-Area Plan Staff Report Page 4

57 owned by Chelan County PUD, to the south of the parcel ownership appears to be the State of Washington. To the west of the Parcel are two parcels, one owned by GBI Holding Inc. and the other owned by Stemilt. Access to the site would need to extend through adjoining parcels if access rights were obtained. Access: Only one access point can be visually observed crossing the BNSF Railway tracks. In no instance is there a public road which provides access to these parcels. Once crossing the railway tracks to the west of any of the parcels, one would have to go through private property, then access private roads that could then extend to the state highway. Environmental Review: The City of Wenatchee has determined the proposed amendments to the Sunnyslope Sub-Area Plan will not have probable significant adverse impacts on the environment. The City of Wenatchee has issued a determination of non-significance (DNS) and is adopting by reference the existing Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for the Wenatchee Urban Area Comprehensive Plan Update 2006 adopted April 4, 2007, Final SEIS under the State Environmental Policy Act Rules (Chapter WAC) for the proposal. The environmental determination was made on September 25, 2014 and the comment period for the determination closes on October 10, III. PUBLIC PROCESS On February 28, 2014, the applicants submitted the proposed amendment to Chelan County. On September 17, 2014 the project application was discussed with the City of Wenatchee Planning Commission at a public workshop. Chelan County as the lead agency provided joint notice of the application on July 24, 2014, for 60 day review/public comment. Copies of the environmental documents for the City of Wenatchee were sent to the Department of Ecology SEPA Register on September 25, 2014; The Chelan County Planning Commission held a duly advertised public hearing on September 24, 2014, forwarding a recommendation of approval on the application to the Chelan County Board of Commissioners; Notice of the City of Wenatchee environmental determination, the October 15, 2014 Public Hearing before the City of Wenatchee Planning Commission and the December 11, 2014 Public Hearing before the Wenatchee City Council was published on September 26, 2014 in the Wenatchee World legal adds; The proposed amendments and environmental documents were placed on the City of Wenatchee website under the heading of "What's Happening", on the " Day Review", link; On October 15, 2014, the City of Wenatchee Planning Commission conducted an advertised public hearing. IV. AGENCY AND PUBLIC COMMENTS: 2014 Sunnyslope Sub-Area Plan Staff Report Page 5

58 Chelan County initiated a joint 60-day comment period on July 24, Upon conclusion of this comment period, one comment was submitted by the Washington State Department of Ecology indicated that based upon the historical agricultural use of the land that there was the possibility that the soil contains residual concentrations of pesticides. The comment further recommends that the site be tested and if concentrations are above the Model Toxics Control Act, that potential buyers be notified of their occurrence. The public comment is enclosed as Exhibit "B". V. POLICY REVIEW The Washington State Growth Management Act, RCW 36.70A. establishes that the frequency of amendments for local comprehensive plans is limited to one annual amendment process, with certain exceptions. The hearing on this application is one of two hearings which will be held by the City of Wenatchee Planning Commission for the purposes of evaluated changes to the Wenatchee Urban Area Plan and associated components in Chelan County has the lead role in the City of Wenatchee Urban Growth Area north of the Wenatchee River for the development of comprehensive plans and implementing development regulations. By mutual agreement, the City of Wenatchee and Chelan County are processing this individual application in a concurrent manner, with an initial recommendation by the Chelan County Planning Commission in September 2014; 2 nd a recommendation by the City of Wenatchee Planning Commission in October 2014; third an initial hearing on the application by the Chelan County Board of Commissioners in November 2014 providing summary notes of the proceedings to the Wenatchee City Council but not acting on the application until the first quarter of 2015; and a decision by the Wenatchee City Council in December COUNTYWIDE PLANNING POLICIES- The January 2005 Interlocal Cooperative Agreement between Chelan County and the City of Wenatchee, reiterates the commitment in the 1997 Memorandum of Understanding between the cities in Chelan County and Chelan County for the City of Wenatchee to take the lead in the development of plans and development regulations to the South of the Wenatchee River. The memorandum and interlocal agreement establish in more detail commitments between jurisdictions to implement County Wide Planning Policies. The following Countywide Planning Policies are applicable to the proposed amendments: POLICY 5: POLICIES ADDRESSING THE NEED FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR ALL ECONOMIC SEGMENTS OF THE POPULATION AND THE ADOPTION OF PARAMETERS FOR THE DISTRIBUTION OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING I. The housing element of each comprehensive plan shall: A. Assess current price structure and availability of housing options Sunnyslope Sub-Area Plan Staff Report Page 6

59 B. Address income statistics of the population to assess financial accessibility to existing housing inventory including owner and renter occupied. C. Assess the need for additional units based upon population projections including owned, rented and shelter units and including an assessment of second home ownership. D. Address the manner and the extent that demand from all segments of the housing market will be met. E. Assess the ability to provide sufficient land, infrastructure and services to each housing segment including, but not limited to, government-assisted housing for low income families, manufactured housing, multi-family housing, migrant agricultural worker housing, and group homes. All segments of the housing market must be accommodated in appropriate numbers on a countywide basis. POLICY 6: POLICIES FOR JOINT COUNTY AND CITY PLANNING WITHIN URBAN GROWTH AREAS AND POLICIES PROVIDING FOR INNOVATIVE LAND USE MANAGEMENT TECHNIQUES THAT MAY INCLUDE USE OF FLEXIBLE ZONING PROCESSES (i.e. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS, TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS, CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT DENSITY BONUS, ETC.) City and county planning efforts will be coordinated within urban growth areas. POLICY 7: POLICIES FOR COUNTY WIDE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND EMPLOYMENT I. The Economic Development element of the Comprehensive plans should be based upon a needs assessment which evaluates the following factors within the community: A. An inventory of available land suitable for development of commercial and industrial use B. The availability of infrastructure including transportation (air, rail, and roads) and utilities C. The availability of housing to support economic growth D. Analysis which evaluates the commercial and industrial sectors which are not adequately represented in the community based upon the state average and factoring in community desires. II. Encourage coordination and cooperation at the local and regional level to ensure consistency on economic growth considerations. VII. Commercial and industrial activities should be encouraged to locate in areas with infrastructure capacity and the potential to provide adequate, affordable housing, and/or transportation linkages to existing housing. CITY OF WENATCHEE URBAN AREA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN- Pg. 8 of the Land Use/Urban Growth Area Element, under the heading of Olds Station and Sunnyslope establishes the following issues as key interests in this area as the Sunnyslope Sub Area Plan was being developed: 2014 Sunnyslope Sub-Area Plan Staff Report Page 7

60 1. Ensuring that the projected number of housing units can be accommodated through land use and infrastructure plans. 2. Providing strategies for the extension of sanitary sewer that will be provided by the city. 3. Ensuring that level of service standards for public facilities and services in the area are consistent with city standards. 4. Ensuring that industrial land uses are protected in the area. 5. Coordinating development with traffic impacts on North Wenatchee Avenue. Goals and Policies: OLDS STATION AND SUNNYSLOPE Coordinate with Chelan County to address public facilities, services and housing issues. Policy 1: Work to ensure that sanitary sewer systems are extended to the urban area in a timely manner. Policy 2: Chelan County should adopt land use controls that work towards meeting housing targets INDUSTRIAL DISTRICTS Ensure that the city and county set aside sufficient land for industrial opportunities. Policy 1: Support Chelan and Douglas counties in designation of industrial areas both within and outside of urban growth areas where compatible with adjacent development. Policy 2: Protect the viability of Wenatchee s limited industrial areas by restricting incompatible development adjacent to these uses. Policy 3: Provide opportunities for light manufacturing and flexible space, such as foundries and welding, within some of Wenatchee s commercial districts. SUNNYSLOPE SUB-AREA PLAN, A COMPONENT OF THE CITY OF WENATCHEE URBAN AREA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN- 4. Land Use: The Olds Station Area which includes the area of the proposed comprehensive plan amendment, is included as a, "Zone of Change". On page 37 of the Land Use Section the following statements are made: The Zone of Change represents an opportunity to manage land development in a new way. It anticipates a gradual evolution of land use in Olds Station, and a more rapid 2014 Sunnyslope Sub-Area Plan Staff Report Page 8

61 transformation of land uses in what are new some of Sunnyslope's last remaining orchard areas. Olds Station, now an employment, shopping, and services center, is largely governed by a Planned Development District overseen by the Port of Chelan County. This plan anticipates Olds Station will evolve over time into a district including residential uses, mixing apartments or condominiums along with or in proximity to office and light industrial development. Pg of the Land Use Section discuss the Residential High and Industrial Land Use Designations in the context of the Sunnyslope Sub-Area Plan. Residential High: This designation supports a wide range of housing types, permitting apartments, condominiums, townhomes, and single-family development. Its location near the center of Center Sunnyslope is essential for creating a dynamic and walkable place near Sunnyslope Elementary School and the emerging small-scale commercial center at School and Easy. Industrial-Olds Station will remain an employment center with the Port of Chelan County and other property owners continuing to develop industrial and professional offices in this area (consistent with current planned development permit approvals). The Industrial designation will accommodate this, however, the increased demand for high-density housing in Sunnyslope calls for the inclusion of residential uses in Olds Station as part of larger urban mixed-use strategy. Today's market may not support residential uses in Olds Station, but areas of Wenatchee's waterfront are now undergoing a transition could be extended into Olds Station Area. 8. Goals and Policies The Sunnyslope Long-Range Plan recognizes the large context of Chelan County and the City of Wenatchee in which the plan must fit. The goals and policies included here relate to Sunnyslope, but the goals and policies of Chelan County's and the City of Wenatchee's comprehensive plans still apply as appropriate. The goals and policies provided here are intended to supplement, and be consistent with each of those two comprehensive plans. (pg.56) Goal 8-Develop additional housing in Olds Station and along the waterfront. A. Encourage eventual permitting of housing in Olds Station and along the Columbia River/Wenatchee River waterfront B. Reduce barriers to developing housing in Olds Station and along the waterfront. Policy D, Goal 9- Coordinate with the Port of Chelan County and others to encourage residential development in Olds Station. 9. Implementation Actions 2014 Sunnyslope Sub-Area Plan Staff Report Page 9

62 Revise zoning eventually to permit mixing residential uses in Olds Station. Responsibility-Chelan County, City of Wenatchee, Chelan County Port District CITY OF WENATCHEE SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM- The City of Wenatchee received a conditional approval letter from the Washington State Department of Ecology for its new Shoreline Master Program. The City of Wenatchee has accepted the recommended and required changes of this conditional approval from the Department of Ecology, under Ordinance# This new Master Program will become effective 14 days from the date that the Department of Ecology issues the formal approval letter on the action. A review of the proposed amendment identifies that the proposal will be within the High Density Shoreline Environment Designation. This Designation accommodates industrial uses where consistent with the provisions of the Master Program. Critical area regulations in the form of shoreline buffers would be significantly smaller than current county standards. Current County critical area regulations establish buffers of feet for this area, depending upon the intensity of use. The new Master Program would establish a 60 foot buffer area, and additional regulations pertaining to the steep slopes on the site, the majority of which are located in the 60' foot buffer. These standards would be applicable in the long term, when at such time the property may be annexed into the City. VI. STAFF ANALYSIS: 1. Public and Agency Comments: The comment submitted by the Department of Ecology pertaining to the historic use of portions of the properties in orchard production and the potential presence of pesticides is noted but is not relevant to the comprehensive plan amendment evaluation process. 2. Countywide Planning Policies: Policy 5 of the countywide planning policies establishes a framework for each jurisdiction to address affordable housing in comprehensive plans. Relevant policies for housing are discussed under each comprehensive plan heading below. The joint review process of this comprehensive plan amendment demonstrates the County's and City's commitment to coordinated planning in urban growth areas under Policy 6 of the Countywide Planning Policies. Under Policy 7, VII commercial and industrial activities are encouraged to locate in areas with infrastructure capacity and the potential to provide adequate, affordable housing, and/or transportation linkages to existing housing. The proposed amendments include existing industrial uses that adjoin other parcels in the same ownerships across BNSF ROW. This area is within the service boundaries for urban governmental services. Linkages to affordable housing from LINK Transit, bicycle or car can be made from the State Highway that fronts the other parcels that are in the same ownership west of BNSF ROW Sunnyslope Sub-Area Plan Staff Report Page 10

63 3. Sunnyslope Sub-Area Plan: The Land Use Section, Section 4, identifies Olds Station as a "zone of change", providing a gradual evolution of land uses in Olds Station that anticipates future residential uses mixing apartments or condos along with or in proximity to office and light industrial development. The RH Designation discussion in the Land use Section does not reference Olds Station as a location for Residential High development. The Industrial Designation discusses that today's market may not support changes in the industrial areas, but may eventually change similar to changes which have occurred in the waterfront of Wenatchee City Limits. The Land Use Section and the goals and policies section, Section 8, do not specify the area of the proposed amendment as a RH Designation, but rather support a long term view that as the community changes that the mix of uses may transition and supports that potential change in the context of meeting the overall goals and policies of the Sunnyslope Plan and Wenatchee Urban Area Plan. Goal and policy statements specifically speak to encouraging housing in Olds Station along the waterfront and recommend coordination with the Port of Chelan County and others to encourage residential development. It is recognized in the plan that the Port of Chelan County oversees a significant amount of the land area under existing planned development, and they are the only specific land owner mentioned, in addition to the statement, "others". Under Section 9, implementation, the plan suggests revising permitting to eventually permit the mixing of residential uses in Olds Station by working with the County, City, and Port District. These policy and implementation provisions do not specify specific locations in Olds Station and speak to a long term collaborative process. This process would necessitate comprehensive plan amendments and code changes to modify existing zoning regimes and provide opportunities. The proposed amendments are not mandated by the Sub-Area plan to remain Residential High. 4. City of Wenatchee Urban Area Plan: The Wenatchee Urban Area Plan adopted the Sunnyslope Sub-Area as a component of the plan. The policies of the Wenatchee Urban Area Plan also apply to Sunnyslope as appropriate. This statement is also reiterated in the Sunnyslope Sub-Area Plan itself. Two main issues that are relevant to this proposal are housing/the ability to meet housing targets, and the provision of sufficient land for industrial development/protection of the viability of limited industrial areas. Policies specifically speak to restricting incompatible development from industrial areas. Housing- The Chelan County Staff report on the proposal discusses that the growth occurring has not met anticipated growth projections for the Wenatchee Urban Growth Area. The county staff report discusses the effect of the economic downturn for the projections. City staff has been reviewing population projections in comparison with US 2014 Sunnyslope Sub-Area Plan Staff Report Page 11

64 Census population data and Washington State Office of Financial Management, OFM, estimates for current population. In addition to assisting local jurisdictions with current population estimates on an annual basis, OFM provides population projects for planning purposes. These projections are provided every 5 years and provide jurisdictions a high, medium and low estimate. Counties and cities work collaboratively to identify the most appropriate projection for their communities. Chelan County and the cities in the County have historically chosen the high population projection, and then determine the appropriate allocation of that population for each jurisdiction. In reviewing the current and past population numbers in relation to 2002, 2007 and 2012 population projections, it is evident that the county as a whole has not been trending at the high projections but instead at the medium or lower projections prior to the economic crisis and now currently. (See Exhibit "C") What does that mean for this proposal? The urban growth area analysis which occurred anticipated and planned for a much higher population growth than has occurred. Excess capacity likely exists because of that trend. The proposal should have a negligible effect on the ability of the City of Wenatchee to accommodate necessary population growth. The cities in the county and Chelan County have to revisit population projections and the ability to accommodate housing in a mandated 2017 comprehensive plan update process. Industrial use- The applicant has expressed a desire to recognize existing industrial use in the requested amendments as industrial. The applicant has expressed concerns over the concept of residents working their way through industrial sites to access the area of amendments. No public access exists. Additionally, the development of residential uses in that area would likely trigger extensive improvements to the railway crossing if they would even be permitted by BNSF, and issues of secondary access depending upon the number of units would have to be addressed. Stemilt currently uses three of the parcels, the primary parcels with developable land in industrial use to support their operations. According to 2011 statistics from the Chelan County Port District, Stemilt is the largest employer in Chelan County. The comprehensive plan has a clear interest in the protection of industrial uses, their viability and providing sufficient land for industrial uses. The area proposed for a designation is in effect an island of existing industrial uses, with limited opportunities for residential use. Staff recommends approval of the proposed amendments to the Sunnyslope Sub-Area Plan of the Wenatchee Urban Area Plan. Staff recommends that the area for redesignation be consistent with the map submittal provided by the applicant, including adjoining public and private right-of-way that is designated as RH, so that no fragments remain of the designation, should the amendment be approved. Staff's recommendation is based upon the suggested findings of fact and conclusions of law enclosed at the conclusion of the staff report Sunnyslope Sub-Area Plan Staff Report Page 12

65 VI. SUGGESTED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Suggested Findings of Fact: 1. The City of Wenatchee has adopted the Wenatchee Urban Area Comprehensive Plan and a series of sub-area comprehensive plans pursuant to the Growth Management Act (GMA), RCW Chapter 36.70A, which cover the Wenatchee Urban Growth Area and all incorporated areas within the City of Wenatchee, that have been found to be consistent with each other and with the adopted GMA plans of the adjoining jurisdictions. 2. The City of Wenatchee Planning Commission is responsible for long range planning matters and providing implementation recommendations to assure compliance with the Growth Management Act for the City of Wenatchee Urban Growth Area in coordination with Chelan County and within the incorporated boundaries of the City of Wenatchee. These measures include updates and amendments to the comprehensive plan; development regulations, environmental regulations, and any other rules, actions or regulations deemed necessary to implement the Growth Management Act. 3. On September 17, 2014, the City of Wenatchee Planning Commission held a workshop on the proposed amendments. 4. Copies of the environmental documents were sent to the Department of Ecology SEPA Register on September 25, Joint notice of the public 60 day review and comment period was issued by Chelan County, as the lead agency for planning in the Sunnyslope Sub-Area, on July 24, The Chelan County Planning Commission held a duly advertised public hearing on September 24, 2014, forwarding a recommendation of approval on the application to the Chelan County Board of Commissioners. 7. Notice of the City of Wenatchee environmental determination, the October 15, 2014 Public Hearing before the City of Wenatchee Planning Commission and the December 11, 2014 Public Hearing before the Wenatchee City Council was published on September 26, 2014 in the Wenatchee World legal adds. 8. On October 15, 2014, the City of Wenatchee Planning Commission conducted an advertised public hearing. The Planning Commission entered into the record the files on this amendment, accepted public testimony, and deliberated the merits of the proposal. 9. The City of Wenatchee Planning Commission has reviewed the entire record including the goals and policies of the comprehensive plan and public testimony as it relates to the proposed amendments to the Sunnyslope Sub-Area Plan of the Wenatchee Urban Area Comprehensive Plan. 10. The City of Wenatchee issued a determination of non-significance (DNS) and adopted by reference the existing Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for the Wenatchee Urban Area Comprehensive Plan Update 2006 adopted April 4, 2007 Final SEIS under the State Environmental Policy Act Rules (Chapter WAC) 2014 Sunnyslope Sub-Area Plan Staff Report Page 13

66 for the proposed amendments to the Sunnyslope Sub-Area Plan of the Wenatchee Urban Area Comprehensive Plan. 11. The goals and policies from the Wenatchee Urban Area Comprehensive Plan and Sunnyslope Sub-Area Plan identified under Section V. Policy Review of this staff report, are hereby incorporated as findings herein. These policies demonstrate consistency with the comprehensive plan and support the proposed amendments to the Sunnyslope Sub-Area Plan of the Wenatchee Urban Area Comprehensive Plan. 12. Exhibit "C" to this staff report identifies that the County as a whole has not been growing at anticipated high population projections. Given that the needed capacity anticipated in the land use capacity analysis at a high population projection has instead been trending at a need more consistent with medium population projections, the amendment should have a negligible impact on accommodating housing in the Wenatchee Urban Growth Area. 13. The proposed amendment contains existing industrial uses that support adjoining industrial uses west of the intervening BNSF right-of-way. 14. Any residential development of the parcels within the area of the proposed amendment would have to access the parcels through existing industrial development and private road infrastructure prior to accessing public right-of-way. 15. The applicants have requested that the change in designation recognize the existing industrial uses, and the ability to continue and expand these uses as a component of their operations. The applicant has also indicated concerns that residential uses accessing through their industrial operations would create concerns of incompatibility and safety. 16. The opportunity to provide for residential uses along the Columbia River in Olds Station has not been identified by goals and polices and designation descriptions as a fixed location in the Sunnyslope Sub-Area Plan but is instead a long term collaborative approach between jurisdictions and property owners that will require amendments to the comprehensive plan and zoning code at such time it is warranted or requested. Suggested Conclusions of Law: 1. The procedural and substantive requirements of the State Environmental Policy Act have been complied with. 2. The procedural requirements of RCW 36.70A have been complied with. 3. The proposed amendments are consistent with the Chelan County Countywide Planning Policies, the City of Wenatchee Urban Area Comprehensive Plan, and the Sunnyslope Sub Area Plan. 4. The proposed amendments are consistent with the requirements of Revised Code of Washington, and the Washington Administrative Code. 5. The proposed amendments have been reviewed and processed in accordance with the requirements of Title 10 Zoning, Title 12 Environmental Protection, and Title 13 Administration of Development Regulations of the City of Wenatchee Code Sunnyslope Sub-Area Plan Staff Report Page 14

67 Respectfully Submitted, Glen A. DeVries, A.I.C.P. Planning Manager 2014 Sunnyslope Sub-Area Plan Staff Report Page 15

68 Exhibit "A"

69

70

71

72

73

74

75

76

77

78

79

80

81

82

83

84

85

86

87