FRANKLIN COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES May 2, Brent Stenson, Claude Pierret, Mike Corrales, Melinda Didier, Layton Lowe and Mike Vincent.

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "FRANKLIN COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES May 2, Brent Stenson, Claude Pierret, Mike Corrales, Melinda Didier, Layton Lowe and Mike Vincent."

Melvin Harmon
5 years ago
Views:

1 FRANKLIN COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES May 2, 2017 MEMBERS PRESENT: Brent Stenson, Claude Pierret, Mike Corrales, Melinda Didier, Layton Lowe and Mike Vincent. MEMBERS ABSENT: None. STAFF PRESENT: Loren Wiltse Director of Planning and Building Rebeca Gilley Administrative Assistant The Franklin County Planning Commission was called to order at 7:04 p.m. by Planning Commission Chairperson Melinda Didier. A quorum was present. APPROVAL OF AGENDA ITEMS (Minutes/Agenda/Staff Reports into Record): Claude Pierret made a motion to the minutes dated February 7, Brent Stenson seconded the motion. Motion carried. Claude Pierret made a motion to enter the staff reports into the record. Brent Stenson seconded the motion. Motion carried. OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: The public hearing was opened at 7:06pm. ITEM #1 Introduction of Loren Wiltse, Director of Planning and Building ITEM #2 CUP , an application for a Conditional Use Permit for the construction and operation of a future assisted living facility that will consist of four buildings, each 9,575 square feet in size. The facility would have a capacity for 60 beds for residents plus 16 staff members. The land is zoned Rural Suburban (RS-20). The project site will consist of two parcels, and at the Southeast corner of Three Rivers Drive and Road 60 in the area generally known as West Pasco, Washington. APPLICANT: JF Engineering PLLC on behalf of BV Management Services, 5220 S Auburn Pl., Kennewick, WA

2 OWNER: Joseph and Linda Pizzerella, 5903 Overton Rd, Pasco, WA OPEN PUBLIC HEARING/STAFF REPORT: Loren Wiltse Presented the staff report for conditional use permit application (CUP ). Loren noted that an easement contained on a prior plat for a turnaround was not addressed in the staff report and he noted that the turnaround was no longer needed and would need to be removed prior to construction approval could be granted. PROPONENTS: John Fetterolf, 5220 S. Auburn Place, Kennewick, WA 99337, spoke on behalf of the project. He explained that he agreed with the Staff Report review, Fire response, and Annexation time issues. They made their application to the County rather than the City because there was a time issue with the City s process for annexation, zoning and application. The whole process would have taken 6 months and at the end of construction it will be annexed. John Fetterolf, Project Engineer presented Exhibit #1 an up-dated site plan expanding parking and adding a fence around the buildings. John Fetterolf, The Short Plat turn around will be removed. Melinda Didier, Will you be combining the parcels? John Fetterolf, Not at this time. Melinda Didier, Shared a concern regarding emergency response time. This concern was also noted in agency comments. Crystal Woralt, 54 Applegale, Burbank, WA, we have 3 facilities in the Tri-Cities. Emergency response is not a major concern because the company provides for qualified personnel to handle most on site needs. Joseph Pizzarella, 5903 Overton Road, Pasco, WA 99301, I own this property, I bought it in 1989 and I am in favor of this application. Mike Corrales, How many responses have you had? Crystal Woralt, not a lot. Brent Stenson, inquired about response times? Crystal Woralt indicated that response times are typically minutes or as long as 1 hour. Patients can be transported to the hospital for treatment. OPPONENTS: None Clarification of Public Statements: Loren Wiltse, Recommend a positive finding with consideration of (2) two additional conditions based on the staff report and public comments received during the hearing. 8, Removal of the turnaround easement or right-of-way prior to construction permits being approved. 9. A letter of agreement for EMS services between the City of Pasco Fire Department and Franklin County Fire District #3, provided.

3 Planning Commission Discussion: There was discussion amongst the planning commission, staff, the applicant, and members in the audience in regards to the emergency and city services proposed for the development. Their was discussion related to the Fire Districts concern about its ability to provide timely service and the fact that the department and city are not asking for a denial, but rather an agreement between the City, County Fire District and the applicant. The commission also discussed and confirmed the need for the developer to amend or otherwise vacate the existing cul-de-sac prior to development permits being approved. Brent Stenson Noted a concern about the response time comments provided by the Fire District and the City of Pasco. I want to make sure the applicant understands that building to the City codes and County codes may be different. I want to make sure the applicants understand what is being asked of them. Claude Pierret, asked if the fence was going to be on the North side? John Fetterolf, Noted that the fence will be on the South building first and on the North building in Phase 2, and there will be gates. Claude Pierret, Can people walk out? John Fetterolf, No, folks will have to go through the main entrance. Brent Stenson, Asked if the Fire District and the City have any arrangement or major agreement currently? John Fetterolf, We have not talk to them on response time or had any further discussion related to response time at this point. Loren Wiltse recommended adding two additional conditions based on the comments received. (Noted above) MOTION: The Chair called for a motion. Brent Stenson made a motion for the approval of the application with the (6) findings of fact and (9) conditions of approval, including adding conditions 8 and 9 to the staff report requiring: 8, Removal of the turnaround easement or right-of-way prior to construction permits being approved. 9. A letter of agreement for EMS services between the City of Pasco Fire Department and Franklin County Fire District #3, provided. Claude Pierret seconded the motion. There was no further discussion ROLL CALL: Melinda Didier Yes Claude Pierret Yes Layton Lowe Yes Brent Stenson Yes Mike Vincent Yes Mike Corrales Yes

4 OPEN PUBLIC HEARING/STAFF REPORT: ITEM #3 SUB , a Preliminary Plat application to subdivide approximately 8.14 acres into 13 single-family residential lots. All the proposed lots are 20,000 square feet or more in size. The land is zoned Residential Suburban 20,000 (RS-20) and is located within the City of Pasco Urban Growth Area. This area allows for residential uses on parcels of land with a minimum lot size of approximately 20,000 square feet. APPLICANT: Zeigler Construction, P. O. Box 6084 Harrington, WA OWNER: Donald & Monica Lamb, 2520 W Pearl St., Pasco, WA STAFF REPORT: Loren Wiltse formally presented the staff into the record. PROPONENTS: Caleb Stromstrad AHBL, Inc. Representative Was in favor of project and spoke about right-aways, and asked the planning commission to amend recommended findings (1. g) to not require the 25 foot radius on the south side of proposed Lamb Court. He noted that there was adequate room for future sidewalk use, and that the proposal is consistent with county policies for partial street construction when the adjacent lot is capable of being further developed. Discussion followed. Caleb Stromstad- Asked that the second condition (h) be removed as it appears to be a holdover from a prior project. OPPONENTS: David Little, 3301 Sorento Ct. Commented on road impacts, asking about swells? Loren Wiltse Storm water maintenance in required. David Little The application notes on street parking is not permitted on page 58 until the road is built. Who will maintain the road and snow removal if it s not accepted? How close will development be to the road and adjacent property? How close to property line? How much traffic will be generated and what is the plat for dust control? I would like to see nice houses; can maybe home size be required in the covenants? If there is fencing I would like to see a common fence or block wall. Considering Court Street, the county should reduce speed limit to 40 mph, most people go 60 mph on Court. Steve Johnson, 2104 Road 65 Spoke against the plat, asking if the project would actually require widening 68 to Court St, or can they just post a bond? Frankie Erickson, 1904 Road 68 Pearl Street needs to be paved. Will the plat put a lot of traffic on Pearl, and if it s not a full street there should be a Cul-de-sac. Proposed Pearl street should not be opened (connected to the west because the road is too narrow. Is irrigation to be put in before the houses are built, for dust control? When they remodel the house they had to put in an engineered system, I do not see that information at all. Uncontrolled water use has led to flooding impacts on her lot. I would like that to be addressed. Caleb Stromstad No, Pearl Street is not being connected as part of this project, it is being proposed as a half street county road that will be maintain, and is being proposed to meet county standards for 48 trips per-day. Irrigation is connected as part of this plat.

5 Frankie Erickson Another question, In the past irrigation was used for grapes. Rodents were not controlled so when they would water grapes the water would follow the holes and the system would flood onto her property. Who is going to take care of irrigation use for the 13 houses? For city water, they are going to be in the city so city guidelines will apply. Melinda Didier Annexation will take time. The County and City will work together for future development. Frankie Erickson A Block wall per City requirements would be nice. Loren Wiltse Mrs. Erickson shared concerns about the water use for irrigation regarding flooding. Asking, How will it be maintained? Claude Pierret Out of our jurisdiction. Frankie Erickson Irrigation ends at my property. Clarification of Public Statements: Denny Zeigler Applicant Grape s owner did not take care of it, we will. Monica Lamb Owner Can we get these questions Frankie has asked? Loren Wiltse, Yes, Tracy Lybbert Real Estate Agent In support of project, entry level homes, this is a move up. The Chairman closed the public hearing: Planning Commission Discussion: Brent Stenson Discussed the request to remove 1-G on page 63, the request has been made. Loren Wiltse The project calls for the road to be dedicated as a public road, I do not know what the standard roads are for a radius to accommodate sidewalks, there appears to be more than enough room. County standards allow for a ½ street construction of Pear St, because the adjacent land can be further developed. When the project is completed as proposed it appears the lot to the south will likewise be capable of further development. Layton Lowe It appears the desired radius is located on someone else property? Mike Corrales Have you talked to the Road Department? Caleb Stromstead Have not spoken to Public Works. Layton Lowe Why do you have to develop someone else s parcel? Caleb Stromstead Why should we? Brent Stenson I want to hear from you that you can build this property consistent with the standards. Caleb Stromstad We can make it work.

6 Mike Corrales Do we need to postpone this. Caleb Stromstead No Loren Wiltse Recommended the 25 radius for the future right-of-way on the south side of proposed Lamb Court not be required. This recommendation is consistent with the policies that allow for partial street construction when it s likely that the adjacent land is capable of future development. MOTION: The Chair asked for a motion. Brent Stenson Moved to recommend approval of the application based on (6) findings of fact, and (6) conditions of approval and an amendment to finding 1-G. to read Lamb Court, on the South at Road 68, shall have a 25 foot radius only on the north side ad shall be shown as dedicated on the plat and removal of second condition H. Layton Lowe Seconded the motion. There was no further discussion ROLL CALL: Melinda Didier Yes Claude Pierret Yes Layton Lowe Yes Brent Stenson Yes Mike Vincent Yes Mike Corrales Yes Motion carried (6-0) for the approval of the application SUB OPEN PUBLIC HEARING/STAFF REPORT: ITEM #4 SUB , a Preliminary Plat application to subdivide two parcels which total approximately acres in size, into 55 single-family residential lots. All the proposed lots are 20,000 square feet or more in size. The land is zoned Residential Suburban 20,000 (RS-20) and is located within the City of Pasco Urban Growth Area. This area allows for residential uses on parcels of land with a minimum lot size of approximately 20,000 square feet. The property is located west of Kohler Road, bordered by the Columbia River to the west; Jayleen Way is to the North and the southern border is near Ramsey Drive, in the area known as West Pasco. Franklin County Tax Parcel No : The legal description is Lot 27, Dream View Estates No. 1, According to the Plat thereof recorded in Volume D of Plats, Page 205, Records of Franklin County, Washington. Franklin County Tax Parcel No : The legal description is Farm Unit 107, Third Revision of the Farm Unit Plat, Irrigation Block 1, According to the Plat thereof recorded in Volume C of Plats, Page 63, Records of Franklin County, Washington. APPLICANT: Rodney Burns, 4161 Burns Road, Pasco, WA 99301

7 OWNER: Same. STAFF REPORT: Loren Wiltse presented the staff report. A letter from Tony Bachart was read into the record as Exhibit 1. PROPONENTS: Caleb Stromstead In favor of project, and added the following corrections for the staff report, a clarification on page 116 #6-B, this is a phased project and is being proposed with (3)Phases, and #6-C, clarifying that lots 10-12, 14,15, are within 200 foot of shoreline and are subject to the Franklin County SMP. (Discussion followed.) Caleb Stromstead Asked to remove #6-D because we meet the conditions of the SMP as proposed and no additional access to public is needed. Caleb noted that the comment letter received regarding Kohler Road was not timely as a SEPA comment but was ok for the SUB hearing. Caleb also noted that City standards for the UGA are not adopted thus only County standards apply. As proposed the project is not proposing to install a block wall, and by county policy access to Kohler road is not allowed. Rodney Burns Owner In favor of the project, I do not like block walls or the 200 shoreline setback. Loren Wiltse Noted that the Shoreline is not a setback, it is a jurisdictional area that applies additional standards to developments. Rodney Burns In the past the state or federal government took shoreline from us, and now the SMP apply. This just doesn t seem fair. Opponents: Bradley Johnson- I m in favor but as a parent with children who ride bikes and who like to walk, we shouldn t have to see a block wall. For public safety and general appearance we don t think our front yards should have to look out at a brick wall. Tony Bachart - adding a condition to widen Jayleen Way Road so people can use it is good. Burns Road is crumbling and needs to be widen and the Speed Limit on Kohler Road is 25 to the north and is 35 mph in front of homes south of Jayleen Way. Tony also asked if homes couldn t be required to face Kohler Road. Loren Wiltse- added that county regulations do not control how a person orients their home on their lot. Everyone has the freedom to orient their home on their lot. Rodney Burns- I m selling lots and I don t want to tell them how to build their homes. We are not building a wall, but if people desire a fence for privacy they can build their own. Discussion followed related to block walls road access and conditions. Mike Corrales - as proposed this is not a county issue. Loren Wiltse- the decision to build a fence or not falls on the developer.

8 Loren Wiltse_ reminded the planning commission that public works comments address the status of Kohler Road. And that if the County Board has prohibited access Kohler Road the Commission cannot override that action. Melinda Didier- noted that the commission needs to discuss what is in front of us. Layton Lowe- we need to handle what is in front of us. Tony Bachart- The City is asking for a sidewalk. Brent Stenson - this project is in the County, we have tried to work with the City in the past to develop urban UGA standards and have not been able to reach an acceptable agreement to date. Chairman Didier, closed the public hearing and opened Discussion on the proposal. Discussion: Layton Lowe- noted that maybe it was time to make a recommendation to address city road standards. Brent Stenson- I do not agree to make a standard here. I don t think it s the time. Mike Vincent- This is the same case we had before. This will be in the City soon but that does not mean that safety issues are not important. Claude Pierret- If we don t make a recommendation we are just kicking it down the road. Melinda Didier- This is not the appropriate time for this discussion. Tony Bachart- commented that Kohler Road is not up to county standards. Melinda Didier- noted that the commission needs to discuss what is in front of us. Layton Lowe- we need to handle what is in front of us. Claude Pierret- There have been no public complaints on this issue, Mr. Bachart has called Public Works and has not gotten any response. Loren Wiltse- the issue of urban services within the Comprehensive Plan and Development Regulations will be addressed as part of our required 2018 GMA update. Claude Pierret- I can agree with that. Motion: Claude Pierret moved to recommend a positive recommendation of SUB with 6 findings of fact and 6 conditions of approval, including the following amendments to conditions. Condition 6 (b). shall read This project is a phased development and each phases shall be completed and recorded per-county code 6 (c) shall remove the sentence The proposed lots are of sufficient area to allow future development of the lots outside of the 200 foot shoreline jurisdiction. Mike Vincent- Seconded the motion. There was no further discussion

9 ROLL CALL: Melinda Didier Yes Claude Pierret Yes Layton Lowe Yes Brent Stenson Yes Mike Vincent Yes Mike Corrales Yes Motion carried (6-0) for the positive recommendation for the Board to approve SUB OPEN PUBLIC HEARING/STAFF REPORT: ITEM #5 TC , a proposal to amend the Franklin County Code, Title 17 Zoning, Section Prohibited Land Uses (also known as the Franklin County Development Regulations, Zoning Ordinance, , Chapter 33). The amendment would prohibit Medical marijuana cooperatives, per RCW A.085 (formerly referred to as collective gardens) in all zoning districts in unincorporated Franklin County, unless otherwise allowed by federal law. APPLICANT: Franklin County Planning Department There was no staff report for this non-project action: Loren Wiltse- noted that the propose Text Change is to update the County Code to match recent changes in the state laws related to recreational marijuana cooperatives. The change seeks to confirm Franklin County s ban on production and use of recreational in Franklin County. The chairman opened the hearing for public comments: No comments received. The Chairman closed the public hearing: Discussion: No discussion was presented. Motion: Layton Lowe- moved to recommend the board approve Text Change TC as presented. Motion was 2 nd by Claude Pierret. There was no further discussion. ROLL CALL: Melinda Didier Yes Claude Pierret Yes Layton Lowe Yes Brent Stenson Yes Mike Corrales Yes Mike Vincent Yes Motion carried (6 0) to recommend the Board of County Commissioners approve TC OTHER BUSINESS None: ADJOURN PLANNING COMMISSION 10:31 P.M

FRANKLIN COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES February 7, Billie Ross, Flo Sayre, Lois Hanses, Claude Pierret, Burl Booker, and David Piovesan.

FRANKLIN COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES February 7, 2006 MEMBERS PRESENT: Billie Ross, Flo Sayre, Lois Hanses, Claude Pierret, Burl Booker, and David Piovesan. MEMBERS ABSENT: Bruce Flippo. The Franklin