HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution 10-070-CCBOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
GRANT COUNTY, WASHINGTON
RESOLUTION
-CC
TON
^ U/V
RESOLUTION NO. 10-
A Resolution Relating to Comprehensive Planning in Grant County in Accordance
with the Washington State Growth Management Act (RCW 36.70 A) and amending
the 2006 Comprehensive Plan and Zone Changes.
WHEREAS, in 1990, the Washington State Legislature passed and the Governor signed
into law the Growth Management Act (GMA) as contained in SHB No 2929
(Washington Laws, 1990 1st Ex. Sess., Ch 17), which was subsequently codified as
among other chapters, Chapter 36.70 A RCW; and
WHEREAS, the Washington State Growth Management Act requires all counties and
cities in the State to do some planning and the fastest growing counties and cities with
them, to plan extensively in keeping with state goals and policies on: sprawl reduction,
affordable housing, economic development, open space and recreation, regional
transportation, environmental protection, property rights, natural resource industries,
historic lands and buildings, permit processing, public facilities and services, and early
and continuous public participation; and
WHEREAS, the Washington State Growth Management Act requires all counties and
cities within the state to classify, designate, and conserve natural resource lands
(agricultural and mineral) and protect critical areas (wetlands, geologically hazardous
areas, fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas, aquifer recharge areas, and frequently
flooded areas); and
WHEREAS, Chapter 36.70 RCW required Grant County to adopt a Comprehensive Plan
that met specified GMA goals and addressed the mandated GMA elements; and
WHEREAS, after complete review and public record of the State Environmental Review
process, the Grant County Planning Commission issued a Final Environmental Impact
Statement on July, 2, 1999; and subsequent amendments through 2006 and;
WHEREAS, over the past years, the Comprehensive Plan's policies may have changed
to insure that the development patterns in the County remain consistent with the intent of
the communities' vision for the future and the Plan's goals and policies; and
Grant County -
Board of County Commissioners
Resolution Adopting Amendments and Zone Changes for the Year 2010
To the Grant County Comprehensive Plan
I
WHEREAS, it is important that amendments to this plan retain the broad perspectives
articulated in the community vision statements, satisfies the goals and policies of this
Plan, and remain consistent with the intent of the GMA; and
WHEREAS, the Growth Management Act (GMA) establishes procedures for the review
and amendment of Comprehensive Plans governing counties and cities planning under
the Act; and
WHEREAS, the county has established a public participation program identifying
procedures whereby proposed amendments or revisions of the Comprehensive Plan are
considered by the governing body of the County no more frequently than once every
year; and
WHEREAS, amendments to the Comprehensive Plan fall into several major categories
or types and different review application and review criteria apply to each. The kinds of
amendments identified herein include:
• Urban Growth Area Boundary Changes;
• Plan policy or text changes;
• Plan Map changes;
• Supporting document changes; emergency amendments; and
• Site-specific amendments; and
WHEREAS, policy amendments may be initiated by the County or by other entities,
organizations or individuals through petition; and
WHEREAS, petitions were received on forms provided by the Department, containing
appropriate maps showing the proposed change and addressing the policy or map
evaluation criteria as described in the Comprehensive Plan; and
WHEREAS, On April 28, 2010 the Board of County Commissioners directed staff to
initiate the SEPA review process and schedule each of the complete amendments
proposed, along with staff recommendations before the Planning Commission for public
hearing; and
WHEREAS, public hearings were conducted by the Planning Commission on July 15,
2010 and July 21, 2010, to hear staff recommendations and take public testimony on each
of the proposed amendments to the Grant County Comprehensive Plan and proposed
Zone Change; making recommendations and listing Findings of Fact on each amendment
and zone change, and;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission staff reports and recommendations are made a
part of the record of this public hearing as it relates to SEPA and the attached
amendments.
Grant county
Board of County Commissioners
Resotution Adopting Amendmems and Zone Changes for the Year 2010
To the Grant County Comprehensive Plan
2
WHEREAS, a non -project proposal to consider adoption of amendments to the
Comprehensive Plan, including site-specific land use designation changes, changes to
Figure 5-5 Future Land Use Map, amendments to the UGA boundaries of the City's of
Moses Lake, Unincorporated Lakeview Park, Royal City, City of Ephrata and the City of
George were considered, and;
WHEREAS, in accordance with Chapter 2 of the Comprehensive Plan, UGA boundary
expansions were supported by, and dependent upon criteria set forth in the GMA; 1) in
areas already characterized by urban growth that have adequate existing public facility
and service capabilities to serve such development and 2) in areas already characterized
by urban growth that will be served adequately by a combination of both existing public
facilities and services and any additional needed public facilities and services that are
provided by either public or private sources and; 3) in the remaining portions of the urban
growth areas and;
WHEREAS, when considering inclusion of rural areas within urban growth boundaries,
attention was given to recognizing the high priority Grant County places on conserving
and protecting both agricultural lands of long-term commercial significance and those
lands characterized by rural development as well as changes that have occurred on the
perimeters of the City's Urban Growth Boundary. and;
WHEREAS, copies of this EIS Addendum were distributed to agencies, organizations
and individuals listed on the Planning Department distribution list and requesting that
comments be submitted in accordance with WAC 197-11-340 (2), and;
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners conducted an open -record public
hearing on Thursday, August 26, 2010 to consider the 2010 requests for amendment to
the Comprehensive Plan and zone changes, and the recommendation from the Planning
Commission for each of the proposed amendments and zone changes;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of County Commissioners
for Grant County adopts the attached Findings of Fact per Attachment `B" and the
attached record pertaining to the approval of the 2010 Comprehensive Plan amendments;
and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Board of County Commissioners for Grant
County adopts Findings of Fact as per Attachment "A" in support of these actions.
PASSED by the Board of County Commissioners in regular session at Ephrata,
Washington, by the following vote, then signed by its membership and attested to by its
Clerk in authorization of such passage this 2 day of ! , at 2010.
Grant county
Board of County Commissioners
Resolution Adopting Amendments and Zone Changes for the Year2010 -
To the Grant County Comprehensive Plan
3
DATED this rday of , 2010.
BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS
Yea Nay Abstain GI2�4N� COUNTY. WASHINGTON
® ❑ ❑ ( \
Cindy CartChair
ATTEST: Carolann Swartz, Vice Chair
Id ❑ ❑ -
Richard Stevens, Member
Constituting the Board of County Commissioners of Grant County,
Washington
Grunt county
Board of County Commissioners
Resolution Adopting Amendments and Zone Changes for the Ym 2010
To the Grant County Comprehensive Plan
4
ATTACHMENT"A"
GRANT COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
AMENDMENT 2010
FINDINGS OF FACT
Section I — General Findings
1.1 Grant County has experienced and will continue to experience population growth and
accompanying development, resulting in competing demands for public facilities,
services and land uses, and is required to prepare and adopt amendments to the
Comprehensive Plan and land use regulations pursuant to the Growth Management
Act.
1.2 Growth Management requires that land be managed properly and wisely. Otherwise
meeting the demands of a rapidly growing county population is likely to cause urban
and suburban sprawl, commercial strip development, development at inappropriate
locations and densities, damage to environmentally sensitive areas, and the loss of
natural resource lands, rural character, open space, and critical areas. Also, this
pattern of development is likely to create demands for urban services and utilities
that are insufficient to support their extension in a cost-effective manner.
1.3 The 2005 Comprehensive Plan amendment process responds to the environmental
concerns raised during the public hearing process, whole protecting property owners
from unconstitutional takings and substantive due process violations.
1.4 RCW 36.70A.020 sets for a list of 13 goals "to guide the development and adoption
of comprehensive plans and development regulations." In the amendment public
hearing process, and these findings of fact, the Planning Commission and Board of
County Commissioners considered the 13 Growth Management Goals, weighed them
as they apply to the subject matter of these findings, and has attempted to achieve a
reasoned balance among them.
Section 2 - Public Participation
2.1 Petitions received by the Planning Department were reviewed by the Board of
County Commissioners, and the Board directed the Planning Department to proceed
with further review of the petitions and to prepare environmental documentation
consistent with the requirements of RCW 43.21C and Grant County Code Chapter
24.04 (SEPA).
2.2 In accordance with Grant County Code Chapter 25.12 — Legislative Actions, the
Planning Commission held public hearings on July 15, 2010 and July 21 2010 at
Attachment "A"
Grant County Comprehensive Plan
Amendment 2010
General Findings or Fact.
which time testimony was taken from interested agencies, organizations, and
individual citizens, regarding the proposed amendments and zone changes.
2.3 Board of County Commissioners and Planning Commission meetings, hearings, and
study sessions requiring "legal notice" were advertised in the local paper of record
pursuant to the requirements of RCW 36.70 and the Grant County Unified
Development Code. Copies of the proposed amendments, and 2010 Addendum to the
Environmental Impact Statement were broadly disseminated for public and agency
review at no charge. All meetings and hearings to which the public was invited were
conducted in an open forum. At hearings, all persons desiring to speak were given an
opportunity to do so. Public testimony and written correspondence were given full
consideration as part of the amendment process.
2.4 The existing enhanced public participation policies within Grant County ensure that
the public had an opportunity to provide meaningful comments on the proposed
amendments.
2.5 The appeal mechanisms contained within Grant County ordinances provide sufficient
due process to allow interested parties an opportunity to respond at a meaningful
time and in a meaningful manner.
Section 3 — Criteria for Amendment Approval
3.1 A petition for a site-specific land use redesignation was reviewed for conformance
with pertinent provisions of the Grant County Comprehensive Plan and Unified
Development Code.
3.2 In reviewing the amendments, the Planning Commission and Board of County
Commissioners considered testimony provided at public hearings and
recommendations provided by staff and interested or affected agencies with
jurisdiction. The Planning Commission and Board of County Commissioners
approved, approved with conditions, or rejected an application for a change of
designation or density based on the following criteria:
(a) The change would benefit the public health, safety, and/or welfare;
(b) The change is warranted because of changed circumstances or because of a need
for additional property in the proposed land -use designation.
(c) The change is consistent with the criteria for land use designations specified in
the Comprehensive Plan.
(d) The change will not be detrimental to uses or property in the immediate vicinity
of the subject property.
(e) The change has merit and value for the community as a whole
(f) The change, if granted, will not result in an enclave of property owners enjoying
greater privileges and opportunities than those enjoyed by other property owners
Attachment "A"
Grant County Comprehensive Plan
Amendment 2010
General Findings of Fact.
in the vicinity where there is not substantive difference in the properties
themselves with different designations.
(g) The benefits of the change will outweigh any significant adverse impacts of the
change
(h) The change is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan
and the requirement s of Grant County Code Titles 22, 23, 24, and 25; and
(i) The change complies with all other applicable criteria and standards of GCC
Chapter 25.12
Section 4 — Board of County Commissioners Final Recommendations
And/or Actions
4.1 Recorded motions by the Board of County Commissioners for each proposed
amendment and Findings of Fact are listed in Attachment "B"
4.2 Recorded motions by the Board of County Commissioners for each proposed zone
change and Findings of Fact are listed in Attachment `B"
4.3 Supporting Findings of Fact for each decision were identified under Section 3 as
detailed above, unless otherwise noted in the record of the Board of County
Commissioners.
4.4 Detailed applications along with supporting documentation and staff reports are
made a part of this recommendation.
Attachment `A"
Grant Count, Comprehensive Plan -
Amendment 2010
General Findings of FacL
ATTACHMENT 'B'
FINAL ACTION AND FINDINGS OF FACT
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS
2010 AMENDMENTS
1) 10-5420
— Tim & Cindy Ray
2) 10-5419
— Base Group Enterprises
3) 10-5433
— DAR Investments (Garrison & Gonzalez)
4) 10-5422
— Kevin (Bob) Tatum
5) 10-5428
— AmeriCold Corporation
6) 10-5429
— National Frozen Foods
7) 10-5432
— Jay Johns
8) 10-5434
— Grant County & Vic Jansen
9) 10-5423
— Harold E. Schempp
10)10-5424
— Arla Mae Deycous
11)10-5425
— James M. Harmon & Jorge Jimenez
12)10-5426
— William M & Elaine M. Hill
13)10-5427
— Jay Looker
14)10-5421
— Shang -Wei Chang
15)10-5430
— W. Ron & Pamela M. Baker
#1. FILE NO. 10-5420
TIM & CINDY RAY
URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY CHANGE; SITE-SPECIFIC LAND USE REDESIGNATION AND
MINOR ZONE CHANGE
LOCATION:
The subject area is generally located west of Fairway Drive NW and east of Rd A.5 NW and borders the west side of
the Lakeview UGA. The parcel is a portion of Farm Unit 66, Block 70 all located in Section 26, Township 22 N.,
Range 26 E. W.M., (parcel # 20-0066-000).
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The applicant's have submitted a Comprehensive Plan Amendment requesting a UGA boundary change to include
one parcel totaling approximately 20.44 -acres within the unincorporated Lakeview Park's Urban Growth Area
Boundary (UGA) and a Site Specific Land Use Re -designation from "Agriculture" to "Residential, low density"
along with a Minor Re -Zone changing the zoning from Agriculture to Urban Residential - 2
In review of this application, staff has identified the following issue(s):
Lack of Need for Additional Residential Lands
The Washington State Growth Management Act contemplates that the size of an UGA will be determined by
demand established by population forecast, as determined by the WA Office of Financial Management, for the
required twenty-year planning period. Also, pursuant to GCC § 25.12.030(g)(2), petitions for UGA boundary
changes shall: 1) be supported by and dependant on criteria set forth in the GMA such as population forecasts and _
allocated urban population distributions, existing urban densities and infill opportunities, phasing and availability of
adequate public facility and service capacities to serve such development in an economical manner, proximity to
designate natural resource lands, and the presence of critical areas; and 2) demonstrate that a full range of urban
Attachment B
Decisions and Findings of Fact
Board of County Commissioners
2010 Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Zone Changes
1
public services and facilities, including water, sewer, storm drainage, transportation, fire protection, and schools can
be provided, is compatible with contiguous development within the UGA and adjacent rural and resource lands, and
development in the amended area will occur at urban densities.
As presented the application material provides analysis in an attempt to support the expansion of the UGA to
include the proposed 20.44 acres of land for residential use. The application materials indicate that this site should
be included in the UGA to accommodate the anticipated growth of the Lakeview UGA over the next twenty years.
Currently the Lakeview UGA consists of approx. 568 total acres. To date there remains two large parcels
within the UGA which are not platted. Parcel #1 is 76 acres in size and carries a Residential -high density
designation (8/1 min. - 16/1 max) and Parcel #2 is 73.96 acres in size and carries a Residential— low density
designation (1/lnim — 4/1 max). Potentially if these two parcels are developed at their respective minimum range it
would increase the number of dwelling units in the Lakeview UGA by 681. Also, Grant County Assessor Laurie
Grammer determined from the Assessor's data that there is currently 507 lots within the Lakeview Park UGA, 408
of those lots contain dwelling units, resulting in 99 lots with building potential. Staff also researched how many
building permits for single family residences and manufactured homes have been issued. In the past 9 years it
appears approx. 39 permits have been issued or an average of approx. about 4.33 per year.
During the 2006 Comprehensive Plan update it was determined the Lakeview UGA has a projected average
annual growth rate of 2%. The 2000 Census stated the population within the Lakeview Park UGA was 797 with a
2025 projection of 1,308 or an increase of 511 persons As outlined in the Technically Appendices of the
Comprehensive Plan, land demand is calculated on the following formula: Projected Population growth (511) +
(number of person per household (2.59) x housing density (4.9)) = Land Demand (40.25 acres) Also the land
demand (40.25 acres) is multiplied by a Market Safety Factor of 25% for a total projected land supply of 50.33
acres. Based on this data it appears the Lakeview UGA has sufficient vacant lands within its existing boundary to
accommodate the expected growth for a period of twenty years.
Another criteria is urban services should be provided within the UGA. Staff has received a letter from the
Lakeview Water Association stating this property is outside of the Lakeview Park Water Associations franchise.
The water association is also near their connection limits as established by the Dept. of Health.
According to the Soil Survey of Grant County, the site contains soil subclasses of IV under irrigated conditions.
Historically it is unclear if this property has ever been farmed but in checking with the Bureau of Reclamation it
appears the property is within the project boundaries and part of farm unit with the ability to obtain irrigation water.
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN RE -DESIGNATION:
The Planning Commission conducted an open record hearing for this application on July 15, 2010. At their hearing
the Commission voted unanimously to recommend denial of the Urban Growth Boundary amendment request and
unanimously to approve the amended site-specific land use re -designation request from Agriculture to Rural
Residential -1.
DECISION:
The Board of County Commissioners voted unanimously to uphold the recommendation of the Planning
Commission by denying the request for inclusion into the Urban Growth Boundary of Unincorporated Lakeview
Park and approval of the following Site Specific Land Use Re -designation.
1) Re -designate parcel #20-0066-000 from "Irrigated Agriculture" to "Rural Residential — 1".
The Board of County Commissioners established the following Findings of Fact:
1. The change would benefit the public health, safety, and or welfare;
2. The change is warranted because of changed circumstances or because of a need for additional property in
the proposed land use designation.
3. The change is consistent with the criteria for land use designations specified in the Comprehensive Plan.
4. The change will not be detrimental to uses or property in the immediate vicinity of the subject property.
5. The change does have merit for the community as a whole.
6. The change, if granted, will not result in a group of property owners enjoying greater privileges and
opportunities than those enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity where there is not substantive
difference in the properties themselves which justify different designations.
7. The benefits of the change will outweigh any significant adverse impacts of the change.
Attachment B
Decisions and Findings of Fact
Board of County Commissioners
2010 Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Zone Changes
2
8. The change is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and the requirements of
GCC 22, 23, 24 and 25.
9. The change does comply with all other applicable criteria and standards of Chapter 25.12 UDC.
10. The Board of County Commissioners does find that pursuant to the requirements of the Growth Management
Act and the Comprehensive Plan, an analysis has been completed utilizing the required Classification and
Designation Criteria for the identification of Agricultural Resource Lands of Long -Term Commercial
Significance.
11. The Board of County Commissioners does not find that the property is or will be primarily devoted to -
agricultural production.
12. The Board of County Commissioners does not find that the property has long-term commercial significance
because the land: (1) Does not have productive growing capacity, (2) Is not productive, (3) Does not have good
soil composition for long-term commercial production, (4) Is located in close proximity to population areas, and
(5) Does have the possibility for more intense uses.
Minor Zone Chanee
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
The Planning Commission recommended a zoning district consistent with their Comprehensive Plan
recommendation. Their unanimous recommendation was to change the Zoning designation from Agriculture to
Rural Residential -1.
DECISION:
The Board of County Commissioners voted unanimously to uphold the recommendation of the Planning
Commission and approve.
1) A Minor Re -zone of parcel # 20-0066-000 from Agriculture to Rural Residential — 1.
The Board of County Commissioners established the following Findings of Fact:
1) The proposed rezone will not be contrary to the intent or purposes and regulations of the Grant County Code or
the Comprehensive Plan;
2) The property in question is suitable for uses allowed under the proposed zoning district;
3) Uses allowed under the proposed zone change are compatible with neighboring land uses; -
4) The proposed rezone can be served by adequate facilities including access, fire protection, water, storm -water
control, and sewage disposal facilities;
5) Substantial changes do exist to wan -ant an amendment to the current zoning district;
6) A public need does exist for the proposed rezone. Public need shall mean that a valid public purpose, for which
the comprehensive plan and this chapter have been adopted, is served by the proposed rezone.
7) The proposed rezone will not result in significant adverse impacts on the human or natural environments that
cannot be mitigated by conditions of approval;
8) The cumulative impact of additional requests for like actions (the total of the rezones over time or space) will not
produce significant adverse effects to the environment that cannot be mitigated by conditions of approval;
9) The pedestrian and vehicular traffic associated with the rezone will not be hazardous to existing and anticipated
traffic in the neighborhood; and
10) The proposed zoning district does not include any allowable use or activity that would result in the location of an
incompatible use adjacent to an airport or airfield (RCW 36.70).
#2. File No. 10-5419
BASE GROUP ENTERPRISES
URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY CHANGE, SITE SPECIFIC LAND USE REDESIGNATION AND
MINOR ZONE CHANGE
LOCATION:
Attachment B
Decisions and Findings of Fact
Board of County Commissioners -
2010 Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Zone Changes
3
The subject parcel is located at the intersection of SR -26 and Road "E" SW, 13412 Rd "E" SW, Royal City, WA,
Farm Unit 128 Block 85 and is located in a portion of S 7/8, T 16 N, R 26 E, WM, Grant County, WA. (Parcel #21-
0770-001)The subject parcel is bisected by E Road SW with a triangular area located on the northeast side of E
Road SW and the other portion of the parcel located on the northwest side of E Road SW.
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The applicant has submitted a Comprehensive Plan Amendment requesting a Site Specific Land Use Re -designation
of approximately 3.14 acres from "Irrigated (Agriculture)" to "Commercial (Urban)". The subject parcel is located
in Farm Unit 128 Block 85. The soil is a Prosser-Starbuck very fine sandy loam and considered a Class 4 (Irrigated)
and Class 6 (Non Irrigated). The property is the site of the existing Brownies Korner Gas Station and Mini -Market.
The site also includes three (3) single family residences which is a nonconforming use. The homes are currently
used as rental property for farm worker housing. The existing commercial and residential uses pre -date the adoption
of the current County Comprehensive Plan. Historically, the property has not been used as agriculture land. Royal -
City supports expanding the Royal City Urban Growth Area to include the subject property (letter attached).
This parcel is bisected by E Road SW. The properties located to the north, east and the west is designated as
Irrigated (Agriculture). The properties to the south are inside the urban growth area and designated as Industrial
(Urban).
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN RE -DESIGNATION:
The Planning Commission conducted an open record hearing for this application on July 15, 2010. At their hearing
the Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval for this application.
DECISION:
The Board of County Commissioners voted unanimously to uphold the recommendation of the Planning
Commission to approve the following request for a Site Specific Land Use Re -designation and inclusion of the site
into the Royal City Urban Growth Area:
1) Amend the Royal City Urban Growth Area boundary to include parcel #21-0770-001.
2) Re -designate parcel #21-0770-001 from Irrigated Agriculture to Urban Commercial.
The Board of County Commissioners established the following Findings of Fact:
1. The change would benefit the public health, safety, and or welfare:
2. The change is warranted because of changed circumstances or because of a need for additional property in
the proposed land use designation.
3. The change is consistent with the criteria for land use designations specified in the Comprehensive Plan.
4. The change will not be detrimental to uses or property in the immediate vicinity of the subject property.
5. The change does have merit for the community as a whole.
6. The change, if granted, will not result in a group of property owners enjoying greater privileges and
opportunities than those enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity where there is not substantive
difference in the properties themselves whichjustify different designations.
7. The benefits of the change will outweigh any significant adverse impacts of the change.
8. The change is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and the requirements of
GCC 22, 23, 24 and 25.
9. The change does comply with all other applicable criteria and standards of Chapter 25.12 UDC.
10. The Board of County Commissioners does find that pursuant to the requirements of the Growth
Management Act and the Comprehensive Plan, an analysis has been completed utilizing the required
Classification and Designation Criteria for the identification of Agricultural Resource Lands of Long -Term
Commercial Significance.
11. The Board of County Commissioners does not find that the property is or will be primarily devoted to
agricultural production.
12. The Board of County Commissioners does find that the property has long —term commercial significance
because the land: (1) does not have productive growing capacity, (2) is not productive, (3) does not have
good soil composition for long-term commercial production, (4) is located in close proximity to population
areas, and (5) does have the possibility for more intense uses.
Attachment B
Decisions and Findings of fact
Board of County Commissioners
2010 Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Zone Changes
4
Minor Zone Chanee
PLANNING COMMISSION SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning Commission conducted an open record hearing for this application on July 15, 2010. At the hearing
no members of the public spoke for or against this proposal. Planning Commission made a unanimous
recommendation to approve the proposed Minor Zone change from Agriculture to Urban Commercial 2 (UR2).
DECISION:
The Board of County Commissioners voted unanimously to uphold the recommendation of the Planning
Commission and approve.
1) A Minor Re -zone of parcel #21-0770-001 from Agriculture to Urban Commercial — 2
The Board of County Commissioners established the following Findings of Fact:
1) The proposed rezone will not be contrary to the intent or purposes and regulations of the Grant County Code or
the Comprehensive Plan;
2) The property in question is suitable for uses allowed under the proposed zoning district;
3) Uses allowed under the proposed zone change are compatible with neighboring land uses;
4) The proposed rezone can be served by adequate facilities including access, fire protection, water, storm -water
control, and sewage disposal facilities;
5) Substantial changes do twist to warrant an amendment to the current zoning district;
6) A public need does twist for the proposed rezone. Public need shall mean that a valid public purpose, for which
the comprehensive plan and this chapter have been adopted, is served by the proposed rezone.
7) The proposed rezone will not result in significant adverse impacts on the human or natural environments that
cannot be mitigated by conditions of approval; _
8) The cumulative impact of additional requests for like actions (the total of the rezones over time or space) will not
produce significant adverse effects to the environment that cannot be mitigated by conditions of approval;
9) The pedestrian and vehicular traffic associated with the rezone will not be hazardous to existing and anticipated
traffic in the neighborhood; and
10) The proposed zoning district does not include any allowable use or activity that would result in the location of an
incompatible use adjacent to an airport or airfield (RCW 36.70).
#3. FILE NO. 10-5433 — DAR INVESTMENTS, LLC
(DON GARRISON & ANTHONY GONZALEZ)
URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY" CHANGE (Withdrawal), SITE SPECIFIC LAND USE
REDESIGNATION AND MINOR ZONE CHANGE
LOCATION:
The subject area consists of a 152.94 acre parcel located within the UGA boundary of the City of George. The
parcel is located near the intersection of Beverly -Burke Road and Road 1 NW; and is in a portion of S. 31, T. 19 N.,
R. 24 E. WM, Grant County WA (Parcel #15-1107-000)
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The applicant's have submitted a Comprehensive Plan Amendment requesting a UGA boundary change to withdraw
one parcel totaling approximately 152.94 -acres from the City of George's Urban Growth Area Boundary (UGA), a
Site Specific Land Use Re -designation from "Residential — Suburban" to "Rural Residential — 1" and a minor zone
change from Agriculture" to "Rural Residential — V.
During the 2007 Comprehensive Plan Amendment cycle this parcel was approved to enter into the UGA of the City
of George and received a Comprehensive Plan Amendment from Agriculture to Residential — Suburban. At that
time Staff recommended denial since there was adequate lands already located in the existing Urban Growth Area.
Although it is understood much of the lands within the UGA is under a principal ownership who is not interested in
Attachment B
Decisions and Findings of Fact
Board of County Commissioners
2010 Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Zone Changes
5
developing their properties at this time. Since that time it has become apparent after much effort that City utilities
are not available at this site.
In review of this application, staff has identified the following issue(s):
Lack of Need for Additional Residential Lands
The Washington State Growth Management Act contemplates that the size of an UGA will be determined by
demand established by a population forecast, as determined by the WA Office of Financial Management, for the
required twenty-year planning period. Also, pursuant to GCC § 25.12.030(g)(2), petitions for UGA boundary
changes shall: 1) be supported by and dependant on criteria set forth in the GMA such as population forecasts and
allocated urban population distributions, existing urban densities and infill opportunities, phasing and availability of
adequate public facility and service capacities to serve such development in an economical manner, proximity to
designate natural resource lands, and the presence of critical areas; and 2) demonstrate that a full ranee of urban
public services and facilities, including water, sewer, storm drainage, transportation, fire protection, and schools can
be provided, is compatible with contiguous development within the UGA and adjacent rural and resource lands, and
development in the amended area will occur at urban densities.
As presented the application material provides analysis in an attempt to support the reduction of the UGA by
excluding the proposed 152.94 -acres of land for residential use. The application materials indicate that this site is
not needed as there currently exists adequate lands within the UGA to support projected growth over the next twenty
years.
The project growth rate for the City of George is 2 percent. In reviewing the Population of Cities, Towns and
Counties from the Office of Financial Management it appears George's population has increased from 528 in the
2000 Census to 550 in the 2009 estimate. This reflects an increase of 22 people which is well below the projected
2% projected growth rate. In reviewing the 1999 Comprehensive Plan Technical Appendices, it was determined that
the City of George had sufficient vacant lands within the existing corporate limits to accommodate the expected
growth for a period of twenty years. The realized and expected growth rates for the City of George have not
exceeded land capacity within the corporate limit boundaries of the City, nor the available residential land already
within the UGA. An additional 12 acres of residential land was included in the UGA in 2006, that property has not
yet developed, nor are there pending land use development applications for the site. Also the City of George
supports the reduction of their Urban Growth Area. It became apparent while the applicants were attempting to Plat
this property that the City of George was not able to supply the required infrastructure required for residential
development within an UGA.
With the removal of the parcel from the UGA, the applicants have requested a re -designation of Rural
Residential — 1. The Rural Residential — 1 designation is intended to provide a transitional area between areas of
potentially higher density and rural developments. These areas are also typically too far from Urban area for public
services.
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN RE -DESIGNATION:
The Planning Commission conducted an open record hearing for this application on July 15, 2010. At their hearing
the Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of this application.
DECISION:
The Board of County Commissioners voted unanimously to uphold the recommendation of the Planning
Commission to approve the following request for a Site Specific Land Use Re -designation and the withdrawal of
the site from the City of George Urban Growth Area:
1) Amend the City of George Urban Growth Area boundary to exclude parcel #15-1107-000.
2) Re -designate parcel #15-1107-000 from Residential — Suburban to Rural Residential — 1.
The Board of County Commissioners established the following Findings of Fact:
1. The change would benefit the public health, safety, and or welfare;
2. The change is warranted because of changed circumstances or because of a need for additional property in
the proposed land use designation.
3. The change is consistent with the criteria for land use designations specified in the Comprehensive Plan.
4. The change will not be detrimental to uses or property in the immediate vicinity of the subject property.
5. The change does have merit for the community as a whole.
Attachment B
Decisions and Findings of Fact
Board of County Commissioners
2010 Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Zone Changes
6
6. The change, if granted, will not result in a group of property owners enjoying greater privileges and
opportunities than those enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity where there is not substantive
difference in the properties themselves which justify different designations.
7. The benefits of the change will outweigh any significant adverse impacts of the change.
8. The change is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and the requirements of
GCC 22, 23, 24 and 25.
9. The change does comply with all other applicable criteria and standards of Chapter 25.12 UDC.
MINOR ZONE CHANGE
PLANNING COMMISSION SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning Commission conducted an open record hearing for this application on July 15, 2010. At the hearing
no members of the public spoke for or against this proposal. Planning Commission made a unanimous
recommendation to approve the proposed Minor Zone change from Agriculture to Rural Residential — 1.
DECISION:
The Board of County Commissioners voted unanimously to uphold the recommendation of the Planning
Commission and approve:
1) A Minor Re -zone of Parcel #15-1107-000 from Agriculture to Rural Residential —1.
The Board of County Commissioners established the following Findings of Fact:
1) The proposed rezone will not be contrary to the intent or purposes and regulations of the Grant County Code or
the Comprehensive Plan;
2) The property in question is suitable for uses allowed under the proposed zoning district;
3) Uses allowed tinder the proposed zone change are compatible with neighboring land uses;
4) The proposed rezone can be served by adequate facilities including access, fire protection, water, storm -water
control, and sewage disposal facilities;
5) Substantial changes do exist to warrant an amendment to the current zoning district;
6) A public need does exist for the proposed rezone. Public need shall mean that a valid public purpose, for which
the comprehensive plan and this chapter have been adopted, is served by the proposed rezone.
7) The proposed rezone will not result in significant adverse impacts on the human or natural environments that
cannot be mitigated by conditions of approval;
8) The cumulative impact of additional requests for like actions (the total of the rezones over time or space) will not
produce significant adverse effects to the environment that cannot be mitigated by conditions of approval;
9) The pedestrian and vehicular traffic associated with the rezone will not be hazardous to existing and anticipated
traffic in the neighborhood; and
10) The proposed zoning district does not include any allowable use or activity that would result in the location of an
incompatible use adjacent to an airport or airfield (RCW 36.70).
#4. FILE NO. 10-5422
KEVIN (BOB) TATUM
SITE-SPECIFIC LAND USE REDESIGNATION & MINOR REZONE
LOCATION:
The subject area is located north of the city limits of Moses Lake between Miller Rd NE & Rd I NE, the southwest
quarter of S 03, T 19 N, R 28 E, WM, Grant County, WA. (Assessor Parcel # 17-0143-000) The subject area is a
triangular area located in the southwest portion of the parcel. The area is bisected by Loring Road and bordered on
the eastern side by the railroad.
STAFF ANALYSIS:
Attachment B
Decisions and Findings of Fact
Board of County Commissioners
2010 Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Zone Changes --
7
The applicant has submitted a Comprehensive Plan Amendment requesting a Site Specific Land Use Re -designation
of approximately 5 acres from "Residential Medium Density" to "Urban Commercial". The applicant has not
identified a proposed use at the site, however, they desire to develop the property as a commercial development that
will be consistent with nearby commercial properties. The applicant believes that this site, as a commercial site, will
support the future urban growth of the area.
The parcel in question is bisected by the railroad track and the application is for the portion of the parcel which lies
westerly of the railroad tracks only. This portion is located within the Urban Growth Area of the City of Moses
Lake. The surrounding properties to the west are designated as Urban Commercial, to the south west touching on
the comer is the Moses Lake City boundary properties, and directly to the south the designation is Residential,
Medium. The properties on the easterly side of the railroad are outside of the urban growth area and designated as
Rural Residential.
This parcel is bordered on the west by North Gateway Center Binding site plan and Loring Drive which is a
relatively new minor arterial bisects the parcel.
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN RE -DESIGNATION:
The Planning Commission conducted an open record hearing for this application on July 15, 2010. At their hearing
the Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of this application.
DECISION:
The Board of County Commissioners voted unanimously to uphold the recommendation of the Planning
Commission to approve the following request for a Site Specific Land Use Re -designation:
1) Re -designate parcel #17-0143-000 from Residential —:Medium Density to Urban Commercial.
The Board of County Commissioners established the following Findings of Fact:
1. The change would benefit the public health, safety, and or welfare;
2. The change is warranted because of changed circumstances or because of a need for additional property in
the proposed land use designation.
3. The change is consistent with the criteria for land use designations specified in the Comprehensive Plan.
4. The change will not be detrimental to uses or property in the immediate vicinity of the subject property.
5. The change does have merit for the community as a whole.
6. The change, if granted, will not result in a group of property owners enjoying greater privileges and
opportunities than those enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity where there is not substantive
difference in the properties themselves which justify different designations.
7. The benefits of the change will outweigh any significant adverse impacts of the change.
8. The change is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and the requirements of
GCC 22. 2124 and 25.
9. The change does comply with all other applicable criteria and standards of Chapter 25.12 UDC.
MINOR ZONE CHANGE
PLANNING COMMISSION SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning Commission conducted an open record hearing for this application on July 15, 2010. At the hearing
no members of the public spoke for or against this proposal. Planning Commission made a unanimous
recommendation to approve the proposed Minor Zone change from Urban Residential - 3 to Urban Commercial -1.
DECISION:
The Board of County Commissioners voted unanimously to uphold the recommendation of the Planning
Commission and approve:
1) Minor Re -zone of Parcel #17-0143-000 from Urban Residential — 3 to Urban Commercial - 1.
The Board of County Commissioners established the following Findings of Fact:
Attachment B
Decisions and Findings of Fact
Board of County Commissioners
2010 Comprehensive Ptan Amendments and Zone Changes
8
1) The proposed rezone will not be contrary to the intent or purposes and regulations of the Grant County Code or
the Comprehensive Plan;
2) The property in question is suitable for uses allowed under the proposed zoning district;
3) Uses allowed under the proposed zone change are compatible with neighboring land uses;
4) The proposed rezone can be served by adequate facilities including access, fire protection, water, stone -water
control, and sewage disposal facilities:
5) Substantial changes do exist to wan -ant an amendment to the current zoning district;
6) A public need does exist for the proposed rezone. Public need shall mean that a valid public purpose, for which
the comprehensive plan and this chapter have been adopted, is served by the proposed rezone.
7) The proposed rezone will not result in significant adverse impacts on the human or natural environments that
cannot be mitigated by conditions of approval;
8) The cumulative impact of additional requests for like actions (the total of the rezones over time or space) will not
produce significant adverse effects to the environment that cannot be mitigated by conditions of approval;
9) The pedestrian and vehicular traffic associated with the rezone will not be hazardous to existing and anticipated
traffic in the neighborhood; and
10) The proposed zoning district does not include any allowable use or activity that would result in the location of an
incompatible use adjacent to an airport or airfield (RCW 36.70).
#5. File No. 10-5428
AMERICOLD CORPORATION
URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY CHANGE AND SITE-SPECIFIC LAND USE REDESIGNATION
LOCATION:
The subject parcel is located at 3245 Road "N" NE, Moses Lake, WA, Farm Unit 81 Block 41 and is located in a
portion of S 16, T 19 N, R 29 E, WM, Grant County, WA. (Parcel #31-1849-000 & 19-0469-000)
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The applicant has submitted a Comprehensive Plan Amendment requesting a Site Specific Land Use Re -designation
of approximately 37 acres from "Irrigated (Agriculture)" to "Industrial (Urban)". The property is the site of the
existing Americold Corporation. The existing commercial uses pre -date the adoption of the current County
Comprehensive Plan. Previous Comp Plan and Zoning actions have changed the development pattern such that the
long term commercial significance of this site is questionable. The site contains soils that are listed in the Soil
Survey of Grant County as Prime Farmlands and are classified as Class II soils under irrigated conditions.
This subject parcels site address is 3245 Road "N" NE, Moses Lake. The properties located to the north and east ate
designated as Industrial (Urban) and to the west is Industrial (Urban) and City of Moses Lake. The property to the
south is Irrigated (Agriculture). The properties to the north, east and west are inside the urban growth area.
PLANNING COM_VIISSION RECOMMENDATION FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN RE -DESIGNATION:
The Planning Commission conducted an open record hearing for this application on July 15, 2010. At their hearing
the Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval for this application.
DECISION:
The Board of County Commissioners voted unanimously to uphold the recommendation of the Planning
Commission to approve the following request for a Site Specific Land Use Re -designation and inclusion of the site
into the City of Moses Lake Urban Growth Area:
1) Amend the City of Moses Lake Urban Growth Area boundary to include parcels #19-0469-000 & 31-
1849-000.
2) Re -designate parcel #19-0469-000 & 31-1849-000 from Irrigated Agriculture to Urban Industrial.
The Board of County Commissioners established the following Findings of Fact:
Attachment B
Decisions and Findings of Fact
Board of County Commissioners
2010 Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Zone Changes
9
1. The change would benefit the public health, safety, and or welfare;
2. The change is warranted because of changed circumstances or because of a need for additional property in
the proposed land use designation.
3. The change is consistent with the criteria for land use designations specified in the Comprehensive Plan.
4. The change will not be detrimental to uses or property in the immediate vicinity of the subject property.
5. The change does have merit for the community as a whole.
6. The change, if granted, will not result in a group of property owners enjoying greater privileges and
opportunities than those enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity where there is not substantive
difference in the properties themselves which justify different designations.
7. The benefits of the change will outweigh any significant adverse impacts of the change.
8. The change is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and the requirements of
GCC 22, 23, 24 and 25.
9. The change does comply with all other applicable criteria and standards of Chapter 25.12 UDC.
10. The Board of County Commissioners does find that pursuant to the requirements of the Growth
Management Act and the Comprehensive Plan, an analysis has been completed utilizing the required
Classification and Designation Criteria for the identification of Agricultural Resource Lands of Long -Term
Commercial Significance.
11, The Board of County Commissioners does not find that the property is or will be primarily devoted to
agricultural production.
12. The Board of County Commissioners does find that the property has long-term commercial significance
because the land: (1) does not have productive growing capacity, (2) is not productive, (3) does not have
good soil composition for long-term commercial production, (4) is located in close proximity to population
areas, and (5) does have the possibility for more intense uses.
#6. File No. 10-5429
NATIONAL FROZEN FOODS
URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY CHANGE AND SITE-SPECIFIC LAND USE REDESIGNATION
LOCATION:
The subject parcel is located at 14406 Road 3 NE, Moses Lake, WA, Farm Unit 81, and Block 41 that are located in
a portion of S 16, T 19 N, R 29 E, WM, Grant County, WA. (Parcel #19-0471-002)
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The applicant has submitted a Comprehensive Plan Amendment requesting a Site Specific Land Use Re -designation
of approximately 3 acres from "Agriculture Resource (Irrigated)" to "Industrial (Urban)". The property is the site of
the existing National Frozen Foods Corporation. The existing commercial uses pre -date the adoption of the current
County Comprehensive Plan. In 2007 the National Frozen Foods sixty-three (63) acre site was annexed into the
City of Moses Lake and the subject three (3) acre parcel was inadvertently left out. The subject parcel is contiguous
with the sixty-three (63) acre site. The subject site contains a shop for equipment storage and repair. Historically,
the property has not been used as agriculture land although it is in Farm Unit 81, Block 41. The City of Moses Lake
supports adding the three (3) acres into the UGA. The soil is Sage hill very fine sandy loam, two (2) to five 95)
percent slopes.
This subject parcels site address is 14406 Road 3 NE, Moses Lake. The properties located to the north are
designated as Industrial (Urban) and to the west is Industrial (Urban), while the property to the east is Industrial
(Rural). The property to the south is Irrigated (Agriculture). The property to the north is inside the urban growth
area.
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN RE -DESIGNATION:
The Planning Commission conducted an open record hearing for this application on July 15, 2010. At their hearing
the Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval for this application.
DECISION:
Attachment B _
Decisions and Findings of Fact
Board of County Commissioners
2010 Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Zone Changes
10
The Board of County Commissioners voted unanimously to uphold the recommendation of the Planning
Commission to approve the following request for a Site Specific Land Use Re -designation and inclusion of the site
into the City of Moses Lake Urban Growth Area:
1) Amend the City of Moses Lake Urban Growth Area boundary to include parcels #19-0471-002.
2) Re -designate parcel #19-0471-002 from Irrigated Agriculture to Urban Industrial.
The Board of County Commissioners established the following Findings of Fact:
1. The change would benefit the public health, safety, and or welfare;
2. The change is warranted because of changed circumstances or because of a need for additional property in
the proposed land use designation.
3. The change is consistent with the criteria for land use designations specified in the Comprehensive Plan.
4. The change will not be detrimental to uses or property in the immediate vicinity of the subject property.
5. The change does have merit for the community as a whole.
6. The change, if granted, will not result in a group of property owners enjoying greater privileges and
opportunities than those enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity where there is not substantive
difference in the properties themselves which justify different designations.
7. The benefits of the change will outweigh any significant adverse impacts of the change.
8. The change is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and the requirements of
GCC 22, 23, 24 and 25.
9. The change does comply with all other applicable criteria and standards of Chapter 25.12 UDC.
10. The Board of County Commissioners does find that pursuant to the requirements of the Growth
Management Act and the Comprehensive Plan, an analysis has been completed utilizing the required
Classification and Designation Criteria for the identification of Agricultural Resource Lands of Long -Term
Commercial Significance.
11. The Board of County Commissioners does not find that the property is or will be primarily devoted to
agricultural production.
12. The Board of County Commissioners does find that the property has long -tetra commercial significance
because the land: (1) does not have productive growing capacity, (2) is not productive, (3) does not have
good soil composition for long-term commercial production, (4) is located in close proximity to population
areas, and (5) does have the possibility for more intense uses.
#7. File No. 10-5432
JAY JOHNS
SITE-SPECIFIC LAND USE REDESIGNATION AND MINOR ZONE CHANGE
LOCATION:
The subject parcel is located at 17691 Road B.5 NE, Soap Lake, WA 98851 and is located in a portion of S 4, T 21
N, R 27 E, WM, Grant County, WA. (Parcel #31-2730-000).
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The applicant has submitted a Comprehensive Plan Amendment requesting a Site Specific Land Use Re -designation
of approximately 36.8 acres from "Agricultural Resource (Irrigated)" to "Rural Residential I". The applicant has
stated that the basis for this request is that the subject area is not suitable for Agricultural Production and has no
long-term commercial agricultural significance. The subject area is not located within a Farm Unit however the
property is within Quincy Columbia Basin Irrigation District. The applicant states that the subject area has soils that
are unsuitable for agricultural production. The soil is a Class 6 and 7, Malaga Stony Sandy Loam 0-15% slopes.
The surrounding properties are designated Agricultural Resource (Irrigated).
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN RE -DESIGNATION:
The Planning Commission conducted an open record hearing for this application on July 21, 2010. At their hearing
the Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval for this application.
Attachment B
Decisions and Findings of Fact
Board of County Commissioners
2010 Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Zone Changes
II
DECISION:
The Board of County Commissioners voted unanimously to uphold the recommendation of the Planning
Commission to approve the following request for a Site Specific Land Use Re -designation:
1) Re -designate parcel #31-2730-000 from Agriculture Resource (Irrigated) to Rural Residential - 1.
The Board of County Commissioners established the following Findings of Fact
1. The change would benefit the public health, safety, and or welfare;
2. The change is warranted because of changed circumstances or because of a need for additional property in
the proposed land use designation.
3. The change is consistent with the criteria for land use designations specified in the Comprehensive Plan.
4. The change will not be detrimental to uses or property in the immediate vicinity of the subject property.
5. The change does have merit for the community as a whole.
6. The change, if granted, will not result in a group of property owners enjoying greater privileges and
opportunities than those enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity where there is not substantive
difference in the properties themselves which justify different designations.
7. The benefits of the change will outweigh any significant adverse impacts of the change.
8. The change is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and the requirements of
GCC 22, 23, 24 and 25.
9. The change does comply with all other applicable criteria and standards of Chapter 25.12 UDC.
10. The Board of County Commissioners does find that pursuant to the requirements of the Growth
Management Act and the Comprehensive Plan, an analysis has been completed utilizing the required
Classification and Designation Criteria for the identification of Agricultural Resource Lands of Long -Term
Commercial Significance.
11. The Board of County Commissioners does not find that the property is or will be primarily devoted to
agricultural production.
12. The Board of County Commissioners does find that the property has long —term commercial significance
because the land: (1) does not have productive growing capacity, (2) is not productive, (3) does not have
good soil composition for long-term commercial production, (4) is located in close proximity to population
areas, and (5) does have the possibility for more intense uses.
MINOR ZONE CHANGE
PLANNING COMMISSION SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning Commission conducted an open record hearing for this application on July 21, 2010. At the hearing
no members of the public spoke for or against this proposal. Planning Commission made a unanimous
recommendation to approve the proposed Minor Zone change From Agriculture to Rural Residential - 1.
DECISION:
The Board of County Commissioners voted unanimously to uphold the recommendation of the Planning
Commission and approve:
1) A Minor re -zone of Parcel #31-2730-000 from Agriculture to Rural Residential —1.
The Board of County Commissioners established the following Findings of Fact:
1) The proposed rezone will not be contrary to the intent or purposes and regulations of the Grant County Code or
the Comprehensive Plan;
2) The property in question is suitable for uses allowed under the proposed zoning district;
3) Uses allowed under the proposed zone change are compatible with neighboring land uses;
4) The proposed rezone can be served by adequate facilities including access, fire protection, water, storm -water
control, and sewage disposal facilities;
5) Substantial changes do exist to warrant an amendment to the current zoning district;
6) A public need does exist for the proposed rezone. Public need shall mean that a valid public purpose, for which
the comprehensive plan and this chapter have been adopted, is served by the proposed rezone.
Attachment B
Decisions and Findings of Fact
Board of County Commissioners
2010 Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Zone Changes
12
7) The proposed rezone will not result in significant adverse impacts on the human or natural environments that
cannot be mitigated by conditions of approval;
8) The cumulative impact of additional requests for like actions (the total of the rezones over time or space) will not
produce significant adverse effects to the environment that cannot be mitigated by conditions of approval;
9) The pedestrian and vehicular traffic associated with the rezone will not be hazardous to existing and anticipated
traffic in the neighborhood; and
10) The proposed zoning district does not include any allowable use or activity that would result in the location of an
incompatible use adjacent to an airport or airfield (RCW 36.70).
#8. File No. 10-5434
GRANT COUNTY & VIC AND KRISTI JANSEN
SITE-SPECIFIC LAND USE REDESIGNATION AND MINOR ZONE CHANGE
LOCATION:
The subject property is located on the north side of Wheeler Road between JR Simplot Company and the Wheeler
community. The proposed site is located in a portion of S 16, T 19 N, R 26 E, WM, Grant County, WA. (Parcel #
19-0472-000)
STAFF ANALYSIS
In early 2009 Grant County initiated a review and a minor zone change of the affected LAMRID areas as a result of
the implementation of Resolution 04 -007 -CC. During that process and pursuant to Ord. 09 -0544 -CC staff was
directed to review the Wheeler 4 LAMRID to verify the Logical Outer Boundary and return during the 2010
Comprehensive Plan amendment cycle with a recommendation. As a result of the review of the Wheeler 4
LAMRID, this Comprehensive Plan Amendment has been submitted by Grant County requesting a re -designation of
approx 30 acres from "Agriculture" to "Rural Industrial".
The site contains soils that are listed in the Soil Survey of Grant County as Prime Farmlands and are classified as
Class II soils under irrigated conditions. This parcel is a Farm Unit and may have historically been farmed at one
time, although at this time all farming has ceased. Given the encroachment of urban development around the site,
the long term commercial significance of the site is in question even though the site meets the criteria for
designation as Agricultural Resource Lands.
The east half of the parcel was part of the original Wheeler 4 LAMRID and in the process of amending the
LAMRIDS for compliance with the EWGMHB decisions it was removed. At that time the site was determined as
unable to carry the Rural Industrial designation and it reverted back to the designation of Agriculture Resource.
During the 2007 Comprehensive Plan Amendment cycle parcels 19-0471-000, 19-0473-000 and only the west half
of the parcel in question received a site specific amendment from Agriculture to Rural Industrial.
Currently existing to the west of the property are several large industrial site and to the east is Wheeler which has the
mixed use designation of Rural Community. The applicant supplied information stating the entire parcel has had an
active railroad spur since the 1950's along with the presence of major industrial facilities in close proximity the
entire parcel should be designation should be Rural Industrial.
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning Commission conducted an open record hearing for this application on July 21, 2010. At their heating
the Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of this application.
DECISIO_V:
The Board of County Commissioners voted unanimously to uphold the recommendation of the Planning
Commission to approve the following request for a Site Specific Land Use Re -designation:
1) Re -designate the east half of parcel #19-0472-000 from Agriculture Resource (Irrigated) to Rural
Industrial.
Attachment B
Decisions and Findings of Fact
Board of County Commissioners
2010 Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Zone Changes
13
0
The Board of County Commissioners established the following Findings of Fact:
1. The change would benefit the public health, safety, and or welfare;
2. The change is warranted because of changed circumstances or because of a need for additional property in
the proposed land use designation;
3. The change is consistent with the criteria for land use designations specified in the Comprehensive Plan.
4. The change will not be detrimental to uses or property in the immediate vicinity of the subject property;
5. The change does have merit for the community as a whole:
6. The change, if granted, will not result in a group of property owners enjoying greater privileges and
opportunities than those enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity where there is not substantive
difference in the properties themselves which justify different designations;
7. The benefits of the change will outweigh any significant adverse impacts of the change;
8. The change is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and the requirements of
GCC 22, 23, 24 and 25.
9. The change does comply with all other applicable criteria and standards of Chapter 25.12 UDC;
10. The Board of County Commissioners does find that pursuant to the requirements of the Growth
Management Act and the Comprehensive Plan, an analysis has been completed utilizing the required
Classification and Designation Criteria for the identification of Agricultural Resource Lands of Long -Term
Commercial Significance.
11. The Board of County Commissioners does not find that the property is or will be primarily devoted to
agricultural production.
12. The Board of County Commissioners does find that the property has long-term commercial significance
because the land: (1) Does not have productive growing capacity, (2) Is not productive, (3) Does not have
good soil composition for long-term commercial production, (4) Is not located in close proximity to
population areas, and (5) Does have the possibility for more intense uses.
Minor Zone Chance
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning Commission recommended a zoning district consistent with the Comprehensive Plan designation.
Planning Commission made a unanimous recommendation to approve the proposed Minor Zone change for the
entire parcel from Agriculture to Rural Heavy Industrial.
DECISION
The Board of County Commissioners voted unanimously to uphold the recommendation of the Planning
Commission and approve:
1) A Minor re -zone of the entire parcel #19-0472-000 from Agriculture to Rural Heavy Industrial.
The Board of County Commissioners established the following Findings of Fact:
1) The proposed rezone will not be contrary to the intent or purposes and regulations of the Grant County Code or
the Comprehensive Plan:
2) The property in question is suitable for uses allowed under the proposed zoning district;
3) Uses allowed under the proposed zone change are compatible with neighboring land rises;
4) The proposed rezone can be served by adequate facilities including access, fire protection, water, storm -water
control, and sewage disposal facilities;
5) Substantial changes do exist to warrant an amendment to the current zoning district
6) A public need does exist for the proposed rezone. Public need shall mean that a valid public purpose, for which
the comprehensive plan and this chapter have been adopted, is served by the proposed rezone.
7) The proposed rezone will not result in significant adverse impacts on the human or natural environments that
cannot be mitigated by conditions of approval;
8) The cumulative impact of additional requests for like actions (the total of the rezones over time or space) will not
produce significant adverse effects to the environment that cannot be mitigated by conditions of approval;
9) The pedestrian and vehicular traffic associated with the rezone will not be hazardous to existing and anticipated
tic in the neighborhood; and
Attachment B
Decisions and Findings of Fact
Board of County Commissioners
2010 Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Zone Changes
14
10) The proposed zoning district does not include any allowable use or activity that would result in the location of an
incompatible use adjacent to an airport or airfield (RCW 36.70).
#9. File No. 10-5423
HAROLD E. SCHEMPP
SITE-SPECIFIC LAND USE REDESIGNATION AND MINOR ZONE CHANGE
LOCATION:
The subject parcel is located at the intersection of Sagebrush Flats Road and Johnson Canyon Road, approximately
2.5 miles west of Ephrata and is located in a portion of S 7, T 21 N, R 26 E, WM, Grant County, WA (Parcel #14-
1347-501 & 14-1347-502).
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The applicant has submitted a Comprehensive Plan Amendment requesting a Site Specific Land Use Re -designation
of approximately 30 acres from "Agricultural Resource (Dryland)" to "Rural Remote".
The surrounding properties are designated Agricultural Resource (Dry land/Rangeland). With the exception of the
parcel west of #14-1347-501 which went through the Comp Plan Land Use Re -designation in 2007 (Parcel #14-
1347-500), that re -designated the parcel from Agricultural Resource (Dry land) to Rural Remote. Although
surrounding properties are currently utilized for dry land wheat production, the project site and the surrounding areas
are not within the boundaries of the Columbia Basin Project service area, and are not expected to receive irrigation
waters. In addition the topography of the subject site makes farming impractical. The soils found at the site appear
to range from Type 4 to Type 6 and are not considered to be prime farmlands. The existing designation of
Agriculture is not supported by the requirements of designating agricultural lands pursuant to the Grant County
Comprehensive Plan and the Growth Management Act.
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN RE -DESIGNATION:
The Planning Commission conducted an open record hearing for this application on July 21, 2010. At their hearing
the Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval for this application.
DECISION:
The Board of County Commissioners voted unanimously to uphold the recommendation of the Planning
Commission to approve the following request for a Site Specific Land Use Re -designation:
1) Re -designate parcels #14-1347-501 & 14-1347-502 from Agriculture Resource (Dryland) to Rural
Remote.
The Board of County Commissioners established the following Findings of Fact:
1. The change would benefit the public health, safety, and or welfare;
2. The change is warranted because of changed circumstances or because of a need for additional property in
the proposed land use designation;
3. The change is consistent with the criteria for land use designations specified in the Comprehensive Plan.
4. The change will not be detrimental to uses or property in the immediate vicinity of the subject property;
5. The change does have merit for the community as a whole;
6. The change, if granted, will not result in a group of property owners enjoying greater privileges and
opportunities than those enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity where there is not substantive
difference in the properties themselves which justify different designations;
7. The benefits of the change will outweigh any significant adverse impacts of the change;
8. The change is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and the requirements of
GCC 22, 23, 24 and 25.
9. The change does comply with all other applicable criteria and standards of Chapter 25.12 UDC;
10. The Board of County Commissioners does find that pursuant to the requirements of the Growth
Management Act and the Comprehensive Plan, an analysis has been completed utilizing the required
Classification and Designation Criteria for the identification of Agricultural Resource Lands of Long -Term
Commercial Significance.
Attachment B -
Decisions and Findings of Fact
Board of County Commissioners _
2010 Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Zone Changes
15
11. The Board of County Commissioners does not find that the property is or will be primarily devoted to
agricultural production.
12. The Board of County Commissioners does find that the property has long-term commercial significance
because the land: (1) Does not have productive growing capacity, (2) Is not productive, (3) Does not have
good soil composition for long-term commercial production, (4) Is not located in close proximity to
population areas, and (5) Does have the possibility for more intense uses.
MINOR ZONE CHANGE
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning Commission recommended a zoning district consistent with the Comprehensive Plan designation.
Planning Commission made a unanimous recommendation to approve the proposed Minor Zone change for the
entire parcel from Agriculture to Rural Remote.
DECISION
The Board of County Commissioners voted unanimously to uphold the recommendation of the Planning
Commission and approve:
1) A Minor re -zone of two parcels #14-1347-501 & 14-1347-502 from Agriculture to Rural Remote.
The Board of County Commissioners established the following Findings of Fact:
1) The proposed rezone will not be contrary to the intent or purposes and regulations of the Grant County Code or
the Comprehensive Plan;
2) The property in question is suitable for uses allowed under the proposed zoning district;
3) Uses allowed under the proposed zone change are compatible with neighboring land uses;
4) The proposed rezone can be served by adequate facilities including access, fire protection, water, storm -water
control, and sewage disposal facilities;
5) Substantial changes do exist to warrant an amendment to the current zoning district;
6) A public need does exist for the proposed rezone. Public need shall mean that a valid public purpose, for which
the comprehensive plan and this chapter have been adopted, is served by the proposed rezone.
7) The proposed rezone will not result in significant adverse impacts on the human or natural environments that
cannot be mitigated by conditions of approval;
8) The cumulative impact of additional requests for like actions (the total of the rezones over time or space) will not
produce significant adverse effects to the environment that cannot be mitigated by conditions of approval:
9) The pedestrian and vehicular traffic associated with the rezone will not be hazardous to existing and anticipated
traffic in the neighborhood; and
10) The proposed zoning district does not include any allowable use or activity that would result in the location of an
incompatible use adjacent to an airport or airfield (RCW 36.70).
#10. File No. 10-5424
ARLA MAE DEYCOUS
SITE-SPECIFIC LAND USE REDESIGNATION AND MINOR ZONE CHANGE
LOCATION:
The subject area is located in the northwest quarter of 22, T 21 N, R 26 E, WM, Grant County, WA. The area is
located within the City of Ephrata's Urban Growth Area. The parcel is bordered on the north by Orchard Ave SE,
on the west by A St. SE and on the South by SR 282. Assessor's Parcel #31-3109-000
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The applicant has submitted a Comprehensive Plan Amendment requesting a Site Specific Land Use Re -designation
of approximately 10.9 acres from "Residential Low Density" to "Urban Commercial" and has identified a potential
use for the site as a mini storage facility.
Attachment B
Decisions and Findings of Fact
Board of County Commissioners
2010 Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Zone Changes -
16
The Properties to the south and east are located within the corporate limits of the City of Ephrata and according to
mapping found on the City of Ephrata's web page contain various residential zoning. The properties directly to the
east is located within the UGA with a designation of Residential -low density. The properties to the south, across SR
282, are outside of the UGA with a designation of Rural Residential 2.
Based on research and mapping prepared by Grant County GIS it appears there is currently only one area of approx.
40 acre in the northern area of the City of Ephrata's UGA has a designation of Commercial (Urban). With the
inclusion of this proposal the Commercial designation would be approx. I 1 % of the total Urban Growth Area.
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning Commission conducted an open record hearing for this application on July 21, 2010. At their hearing
the Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of this application.
DECISION:
The Board of County Commissioners voted unanimously to uphold the recommendation of the Planning
Commission to approve the following request for a Site Specific Land Use Re -designation:
1) Re -designate parcel #31-3109-000 from Residential — Low Density to Urban Commercial
The Board of County Commissioners established the following Findings of Fact:
1. The change would benefit the public health, safety, and or welfare;
2. The change is warranted because of changed circumstances or because of a need for additional property in
the proposed land use designation.
3. The change is consistent with the criteria for land use designations specified in the Comprehensive Plan.
4. The change will not be detrimental to uses or property in the immediate vicinity of the subject property.
5. The change does have merit for the community as a whole.
6. The change, if granted, will not result in a group of property owners enjoying greater privileges and
opportunities than those enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity where there is not substantive
difference in the properties themselves which justify different designations.
7. The benefits of the change will outweigh any significant adverse impacts of the change.
8. The change is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and the requirements of
GCC 22, 23, 24 and 25.
9. The change does comply with all other applicable criteria and standards of Chapter 25.12 UDC.
MINOR ZONE CHANGE
PLANNING COMMISSION SUMMARY:
During the Planning Commission public hearing the agent and land owners spoke in favor of this proposal no one
spoke against this proposal. The Planning Commission made a unanimous recommendation to approve the
proposed Minor Zone Change from Urban Residential — 2 to Urban Commercial - 2.
DECISION
The Board of County Commissioners voted unanimously to uphold the recommendation of the Planning
Commission and approve:
1) A Minor re -zone of parcel #31-3109-000 from Urban Residential -2 to Urban Commercial -2.
The Board of County Commissioners established the following Findings of Fact:
1) The proposed rezone will not be contrary to the intent or purposes and regulations of the Grant County
Code or the Comprehensive Plan;
2) The property in question is suitable for uses allowed under the proposed zoning district;
3) Uses allowed under the proposed zone change are compatible with neighboring land uses;
4) The proposed rezone can he served by adequate facilities including access, fire protection, water,
storm -water control, and sewage disposal facilities;
5) Substantial changes do exist to warrant an amendment to the current zoning district;
Attachment B
Decisions and Findings of Fact
Board of County Commissioners
2010 Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Zone Changes
17
6) A public need does exist for the proposed rezone. Public need shall mean that a valid public purpose,
for which the comprehensive plan and this chapter have been adopted, is served by the proposed
rezone.
7) The proposed rezone will not result in significant adverse impacts on the human or natural
environments that cannot be mitigated by conditions of approval;
8) The cumulative impact of additional requests for like actions (the total of the rezones over time or
space) will not produce significant adverse effects to the environment that cannot be m tigated by
conditions of approval;
9) The pedestrian and vehicular traffic associated with the rezone will not be hazardous to existing and
anticipated traffic in the neighborhood; and
10) The proposed zoning district does not include any allowable use or activity that would result in the
location of an incompatible use adjacent to an airport or airfield (RCW 36.70).
#11. File No. 10-5425
JAMES M. HARMON & JORGE JIMENEZ
SITE SPECIFIC LAND USE REDESIGNATION AND MINOR ZONE CHANGE
LOCATION:
The subject parcel is located at 24397 Broadway Avenue, Mattawa, WA and is located in a portion of S 2, T 14 N, R
23 E, WM, Grant County, WA. Parcel #15-0054-007 & 15-0054-008
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The applicant has submitted a Comprehensive Plan Amendment requesting a Site Specific Land Use Re-desiguation
of approximately 6 acres from "Residential Medium Density" to "Industrial (Urban)". The property is the site of an
existing Auto wrecking, salvage and recycling business_ A trucking business, 30 x 40 feet shop and mobile home
are also part of the property. Both sites are connected to Mattawa water. The existing commercial and residential
uses pre -date the adoption of the current County Comprehensive Plan. The subject properties were Heavy Industrial
then the properties were re -designated to Urban Residential 3 in 1999 when the Comprehensive Plan was adopted
even though the subject property was still operating as an auto wrecking and salvage yard. Directly to the west of
the property, the Grant County Public Works owns and operates a shop. A landfill was to the north of the subject
property which has since been filled in and directly to the northwest is a cattle feedlot. Historically, the subject
property and the surrounding property have not been used for residential purposes.
This parcel is located on Broadway Avenue S Extended. The properties located to the north, east and the west is
designated as Residential Medium Density. The properties to the south are Irrigated (Agriculture).
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN RE -DESIGNATION:
The Planning Commission conducted an open record hearing for this application on July 21, 2010. At their hearing
the Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval for this application.
DECISION:
The Board of County Commissioners voted unanimously to uphold the recommendation of the Planning
Commission to approve the following request for a Site Specific Land Use Re -designation:
1) Re -designate parcels #15-0054-007 & 15-0054-008 from Residential —Medium Density to Urban
Industrial.
The Board of County Commissioners established the following Findings of Fact:
1. The change would benefit the public health, safety, and or welfare; _
2. The change is warranted because of changed circumstances or because of a need for additional property in
the proposed land use designation.
3. The change is consistent with the criteria for land use designations specified in the Comprehensive Plan.
4. The change will not be detrimental to uses or property in the immediate vicinity of the subject property.
5. The change does have merit for the community as a whole.
Attachment B
Decisions and Findings of Fact
Board of County Commissioners
2010 Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Zone Changes
18
6. The change, if granted, will not result in a group of property owners enjoying greater privileges and
opportunities than those enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity where there is not substantive
difference in the properties themselves which justify different designations.
7. The benefits of the change will outweigh any significant adverse impacts of the change.
8. The change is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and the requirements of
GCC 22, 23, 24 and 25.
9. The change does comply with all other applicable criteria and standards of Chapter 25.12 UDC.
MINOR ZONE CHANGE
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION:
Planning Commission made a unanimous recommendation to approve the proposed Minor Zone change from Urban
Residential 3 to Urban Heavy Industrial (UHI).
DECISION:
The Board of County Commissioners voted unanimously to uphold the recommendation of the Planning
Commission and approve:
1) A Minor re -zone of Parcels #15-0054-007 & 15-0054-008 from Urban Residential - 3 to
Urban Heavy Industrial.
The Board of County Commissioners established the following Findings of Fact:
1) The proposed rezone wiU not be contrary to the intent or purposes and regulations of the Grant County
Code or the Comprehensive Plan;
2) The property in question is suitable for uses allowed under the proposed zoning district;
3) Uses allowed under the proposed zone change are compatible with neighboring land uses;
4) The proposed rezone can be served by adequate facilities including access, fire protection, water,
storm -water control, and sewage disposal facilities;
5) Substantial changes do exist to warrant an amendment to the current zoning district;
6) A public need does exist for the proposed rezone. Public need shall mean that a valid public purpose,
for which the comprehensive plan and this chapter have been adopted, is served by the proposed
rezone.
7) The proposed rezone will not result in significant adverse impacts on the human or natural
environments that cannot be mitigated by conditions of approval;
8) The cumulative impact of additional requests for like actions (the total of the rezones over time or
space) will not produce significant adverse effects to the environment that cannot be mitigated by
conditions of approval;
9) The pedestrian and vehicular traffic associated with the rezone will not be hazardous to existing and
anticipated traffic in the neighborhood; and
10) The proposed zoning district does not include any allowable use or activity that would result in the
location of an incompatible use adjacent to an airport or airfield (RCW 36.70).
#12. File No. 10-5426
WILLIAM M. & ELAINE M. HILL
ORVILLE FRENCH, JOSEPH JOY & DAVID MELBURN
SITE SPECIFIC LAND USE REDESIGNATION AND MINOR ZONE CHANGE
LOCATION:
The subject property is located as part of the New Town Trinidad Plat located just east of Douglas County and
bordered on the north side by SR 26. The proposed site is located in a portion of S 7, T 20 N, R 23 E, WM, Grant
County, WA. The proposed parcels are as follows: W Hill: Parcels #05-0670-000, 05-0684-005, 05-0688-000, 05 -
Attachment B
Decisions and Findings of Fact
Board of County Commissioners
2010 Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Zone Changes
19
0686-001,05-0713-000,05-0715-000,05-0737-000,05-0734-000,05-0737-001,05-0741-000,05-0748-000,05-
0750-000,05-0750-010,05-0769-028,05-0768-000,05-0767-004,05-0775-000,05-0772-002,05-0774-000,05-
0777-000,05-0764-000; O. French: 05-0697-000; J. Joy: 05-0763-000; D. Melbum: 05-0747-000
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The applicant Mr. Hill has submitted a request for a site-specific land use redesignation of approx. 200 -acres from
"Agricultural Resource" (dryland) and "Rural Remote" to "Rural Residential I". In reviewing the parcels it became
apparent there exists parcels surrounded by Mr. Hill's property that are under different ownership and if the
application was approved, would remain with a land use designation of Agriculture. Staff requested the applicant to
contact the land owners and inquire if they wished to become part of the application. In response to the applicant's
inquire three landowners joined with Mr. Hill in this application.
The application materials states the basis for this request is that the subject area is not suitable for Agricultural
Production and has no long-term commercial agricultural significance. In reviewing the Soil Survey of Grant
County there doesn't appears to be any soils listed as Prime Farmland soils. These parcels also appear to be located
outside of the Columbia Basin Irrigation Project lands.
This property is located adjacent to the Douglas/Grant County line. In viewing the zoning maps from Douglas
County the adjacent properties have a zoning designation of RR -5 which has a maximum density of one Dwelling
unit per 5 acres. The properties located to the South across SR 28 have a designation of Rural Community (IDU
per 1 acre), and to the Fast and North has a designation of Agriculture (Dryland).
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning Commission conducted an open record hearing for this application on July 21, 2010. At their hearing
the Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of this proposal alone with a recommendation to
consider changing the designation of all of the land within the boundary of this proposal to a land use designation of
Rural Residential - 1.
DECISION:
The Board of County Commissioners voted unanimously to uphold the recommendation of the Planning -
Commission to approve the following request for a Site Specific Land Use Re -designation:
1) Site specific re -designation of parcels #05-0670-000, 05-0684-005, 05-0688-000, 05-0686-001, 05-0713-
000,05-0715-000,05-0737-000,05-0734-000,05-0737-001,05-0741-000,05-0748-000,05-0750-000,05-
0750-010,05-0769-028,05-0768-000,05-0767-004,05-0775-000,05-0772-002,05-0774-000,05-0777-
000,05-0764-000,05-0687-000,05-0763-000,05-0747-000 from Agricultural Resource and Rural
Remote to Rural Residential - 1
2) Site specific re -designation of all parcels within the outside boundary of the application. (parcels #
05 -0689 -000,05 -0714 -000,05 -0736 -000,05 -0749-000,05-0733-000,05-0756-000,05-0755-001,05-
0738-000, 05-740-000, and 05-0773-000) from Agricultural Resource and Rural Remote to Rural
Residential - 1.
The Board of County Commissioners established the following Findings of Fact:
1. The change would benefit the public health, safety, and or welfare;
2. The change is warranted because of changed circumstances or because of a need for additional property in
the proposed land use designation;
3. The change is consistent with the criteria for land use designations specified in the Comprehensive Plan.
4. The change will not be detrimental to uses or property in the immediate vicinity of the subject property;
5. The change does have merit for the community as a whole;
6. The change, if granted, will not result in a group of property owners enjoying greater privileges and
opportunities than those enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity where there is not substantive
difference in the properties themselves which justify different designations;
7. The benefits of the change will outweigh any significant adverse impacts of the change;
8. The change is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and the requirements of
GCC 22, 23, 24 and 25.
Attachment B
Decisions and Findings of Fact
Board of County Commissioners
2010 Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Zone Changes
20
9. The change does comply with all other applicable criteria and standards of Chapter 25.12 UDC;
10. The Board of County Commissioners does find that pursuant to the requirements of the Growth
Management Act and the Comprehensive Plan, an analysis has been completed utilizing the required
Classification and Designation Criteria for the identification of Agricultural Resource Lands of Long -Term
Commercial Significance.
11. The Board of County Commissioners does not find that the property is or will be primarily devoted to
agricultural production.
12. The Board of County Commissioners does not find that the property has long-term commercial
significance because the land: (1) does not have productive growing capacity, (2) is not productive, (3)
does not have good soil composition for long-term commercial production, (4) is located in close proximity
to population areas, and (5) does not have the possibility for more intense Ag. uses.
13. The Board of County Commissioners finds that all property within the boundary should be consistent in
land use designation.
MINOR ZONE CHANGE
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION:
Planning Commission made a recommendation to approve the proposed Minor Zone change from Agriculture and
Rural Remote to Rural Residential — 1 also included was a recommendation to include all of the parcels within the
application boundary. The motion passed with one vote in opposition.
DECISION:
The Board of County Commissioners voted unanimously to uphold the recommendation of the Planning
Commission and approve:
1) A Minor re -zone of parcels #05-0670-000, 05-0684-005, 05-0688-000, 05-0686-001, 05-0713-000, 05-
0715 -000,05 -0737 -000,05 -0734 -000,05 -0737-001,05-0741-000,05-0748-000,05-0750-000,05-0750-
010, 05-0769-028, 05-0768-000, 05-0767-004, 05-0775-000, 05-0772-002, 05-0774-000, 05-0777-000, 05-
0764-000, 05-0687-000, 05-0763-000, 05-0747-000 from Agricultural Resource and Rural Remote to
Rural Residential — 1.
2) A Minor re -zone of parcels within the outside boundary of the application. (parcels # 05-0689-000,
05 -0714 -000,05 -0736 -000,05 -0749 -000,05 -0733-000,05-0756-000,05-0755-001,05-0738-000,05-740-
000, and 05-0773-000) from Agriculture to Rural Residential — 1.
The Board of County Commissioners established the following Findings of Fact:
1) The proposed rezone will not be contrary to the intent or purposes and regulations of the Grant County
Code or the Comprehensive Plan;
2) The property in question is suitable for uses allowed under the proposed zoning district;
3) Uses allowed under the proposed zone change are compatible with neighboring land uses;
4) The proposed rezone can be served by adequate facilities including access, fire protection, water,
storm -water control, and sewage disposal facilities;
5) Substantial changes do exist to warrant an amendment to the current zoning district;
6) A public need does exist for the proposed rezone. Public need shall mean that a valid public purpose,
for which the comprehensive plan and this chapter have been adopted, is served by the proposed
rezone.
7) The proposed rezone will not result in significant adverse impacts on the human or natural
environments that cannot be mitigated by conditions of approval;
8) The cumulative impact of additional requests for like actions (the total of the rezones over time or
space) will not produce significant adverse effects to the environment that cannot be mitigated by
conditions of approval;
9) The pedestrian and vehicular traffic associated with the rezone will not be hazardous to existing and
anticipated traffic in the neighborhood; and
10) The proposed zoning district does not include any allowable use or activity that would result in the
location of an incompatible use adjacent to an airport or airfield (RCW 36.70).
Attachment B
Decisions and Findings of Fact
Board of County Commissioners
2010 Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Zone Changes
21
#13. File No. 10-5427
JAY LOOKER
SITE SPECIFIC LAND USE REDESIGNATION AND MINOR ZONE CHANGE
LOCATION:
The subject parcel is located at 10400 Sage Hills Road SE, Warden, Farm Unit 205 Block 44, in a portion of S 26, T
17 N, R 29 E, WM, Grant County, WA (Parcel #18-0039-000, 18-0036-000, 19-1412-000 & 19-1413-001).
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The applicant has submitted a Comprehensive Plan Amendment requesting a Site Specific Land Use Re -designation
of approximately 120.96 acres from "Agricultural Resource (Irrigated)" to "Rural Commercial'. In considering
LAMIRD Designations we have to verify development of site prior to July 1, 1991, the year Grant County was
mandated to comply with the Growth Management Act. The applicant has stated that the basis for this request is
that the subject area has been a golf course and RV resort since 1964 which pre -dates the 2000 County Wide
Comprehensive Rezone. The golf course has been in continuous operation from 1964 through the present. The re-
designation of the subject parcels will have an insignificant impact upon the agricultural land. The subject area is
located in Farm Unit 205 block 44 and the soil is Class 3, 4 and 6.
The surrounding properties are designated Agricultural Resource (Irrigated).
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN RE -DESIGNATION:
The Planting Commission conducted an open record hearing for this application on July 21, 2010. At their hearing
the Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval for this application.
DECISION:
The Board of County Commissioners voted unanimously to uphold the recommendation of the Planning
Commission to approve the following request for a Site Specific Land Use Re -designation:
1) Re -designate parcels #Parcel #18-0039-000, 18-0036-000, 19-1412-000 & 19-1413-001 from
Agriculture Resource (Irrigated) to Rural Commercial.
The Board of County Commissioners established the following Findings of Fact:
L The change would benefit the public health, safety, and or welfare;
2. The change is warranted because of changed circumstances or because of a need for additional property in
the proposed land use designation.
3. The change is consistent with the criteria for land use designations specified in the Comprehensive Plan.
4. The change will not be detrimental to uses or property in the immediate vicinity of the subject property.
5. The change does have merit for the community as a whole.
6. The change, if granted, will not result in a group of property owners enjoying greater privileges and
opportunities than those enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity where there is not substantive
difference in the properties themselves whichjustify different designations.
7. The benefits of the change will outweigh any significant adverse impacts of the change.
8. The change is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and the requirements of
GCC 22, 23, 24 and 25.
9. The change does comply with all other applicable criteria and standards of Chapter 25.12 UDC.
10. The Board of County Commissioners does find that pursuant to the requirements of the Growth
Management Act and the Comprehensive Plan, an analysis has been completed utilizing the required
Classification and Designation Criteria for the identification of Agricultural Resource Lands of Long -Term
Commercial Significance.
11. The Board of County Commissioners does not find that the property is or will be primarily devoted to
agricultural production.
12. The Board of County Commissioners does find that the property has long —term commercial significance
because the land: (1) does not have productive growing capacity, (2) is not productive, (3) does not have
Attachment B
Decisions and Findings of Fact
Board of County Commissioners -
2010 Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Zone Changes
22
good soil composition for long-term commercial production, (4) is not located in close proximity to
population areas, and (5) does have the possibility for more intense uses.
MINOR ZONE CHANGE
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning Commission conducted an open record hearing for this application on July 21, 2010. Planning
Commission made a unanimous recommendation to approve the proposed Minor Zone change From Agriculture to
Rural Recreational Commercial (RRC).
DECISION
The Board of County Commissioners voted unanimously to uphold the recommendation of the Planning
Commission and approve:
1) A Minor re -zone of parcel #18-0039-000, 18-0036-000, 19-1412-000 & 19-1413-001 from Agriculture
Resource to Rural Recreation Commercial.
The Board of County Commissioners established the following Findings of Fact.
1) The proposed rezone wdl not be contrary to the intent or purposes and regulations of the Grant County Code or
the Comprehensive Plan;
2) The property in question is suitable for uses allowed under the proposed zoning district;
3) Uses allowed under the proposed zone change are compatible with neighboring land uses;
4) The proposed rezone can be served by adequate facilities including access, fire protection, water, storm -water
control, and sewage disposal facilities;
5) Substantial changes do exist to warrant an amendment to the current zoning district;
6) A public need does exist for the proposed rezone. Public need shall mean that a valid public purpose, for which
the comprehensive plan and this chapter have been adopted, is served by the proposed rezone.
7) The proposed rezone will not result in significant adverse impacts on the human or natural environments that
cannot be mitigated by conditions of approval;
8) The cumulative impact of additional requests for like actions (the total of the rezones over time or space) will
not produce significant adverse effects to the environment that cannot be mitigated by conditions of approval;
9) The pedestrian and vehicular traffic associated with the rezone wig not be hazardous to existing and anticipated
traffic in the neighborhood; and
10) The proposed zoning district does not include any allowable use or activity that would result in the location of an
incompatible use adjacent to an airport or airfield (RCW 36.70).
#14. File No. 10-5421
SHANG-WEICHANG
URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY CHANGE AND SITE SPECIFIC LAND USE
REDESIGNATION
LOCATION:
The subject parcel is located on the North side of SR 282 and in a portion of S 25, T 21 N, R 26 E, WM, Grant
County, WA. (Parcel #16-0870-000)
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The applicant has submitted a Comprehensive Plan Amendment requesting a Site Specific Land Use Re -designation
of approximately 247.4 acres from "Rural Remote to "Commercial (Urban)". The property is vacant at this time.
Several comments were received from concerned members of the Ephrata Sportsman's Association and area law
enforcement. They had reasonable comments to make however at this point it is a non -project action. If it should be
zoned commercial hopefully then the concerned citizens would comment on the project which could be addressed
by the developer at that time. The property is located at the end of the airport runway. When designating
commercial lands within the Urban Growth Area, the County can ensure that those developments are appropriate
intensity to be located in a commercial area. The subject site and list of potential uses allowed at the site if
Attachment B
Decisions and Findings of Fact
Board of County Commissioners
2010 Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Zone Changes
23
designated commercial would be more appropriately located within the Urban Growth Area. The City of Ephrata
supports expanding the Ephrata Urban Growth Area to include the subject property (letter attached).
This subject parcel is located in Section 25, Township 21 N, and Range 26 E W M. The properties located to the
north are designated as Rural Remote and City of Ephrata. To the west is City of Ephrata and Rural Residential 1,
while the property to the east is Rural Remote. The property to the south is Rural Residential 1.
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN RE -DESIGNATION:
The Planning Commission conducted an open record hearing for this application on July 21, 2010. At their hearing
the Commission voted to recommend the north eighty (80) acres be removed from the proposal with the remaining
167 acres being re -designated to Commercial (Urban) for this application.
DECISION:
The Board of County Commissioners voted unanimously to uphold the recommendation of the Planning
Commission to approve the following request for a Site Specific Land Use Re -designation:
1) Amend the City of Ephrata Urban Growth Area boundary to include only the south triangle of #16-
0870-000.
2) Re -designate the south triangle of parcel #16-0870-000 from Rural Remote to Urban Commercial
and leaving the northern eighty (80) acres Rural Remote.
The Board of County Commissioners established the following Findings of Fact:
1. The change would benefit the public health, safety, and or welfare;
2. The change is warranted because of changed circumstances or because of a need for additional property in
the proposed land use designation.
3. The change is consistent with the criteria for land use designations specified in the Comprehensive Plan.
4. The change will not be detrimental to uses or property in the immediate vicinity of the subject property.
5. The change does have merit for the community as a whole.
6. The change, if granted, will not result in a group of property owners enjoying greater privileges and
opportunities than those enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity where there is not substantive
difference in the properties themselves which justify different designations.
7. The benefits of the change will outweigh any significant adverse impacts of the change.
8. The change is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and the requirements of
GCC 22, 23, 24 and 25.
9. The change does comply with all other applicable criteria and standards of Chapter 25.12 UDC.
10. Does afford protection to the Ephrata Sportsmen Association.
#15. File No. 10-5430
W. RON & PAMELA M. BAKER
SITE SPECIFIC LAND USE REDESIGNATION AND MINOR ZONE CHANGE
LOCATION:
The subject area is a 1.36 acre portion of parcel # 17-0499-000 located in the south west comer of the parcel. The
parcel is bordered on the west by Stratford Rd NE and on the East by Wenatchee Dr. and the southern portion by the
railroad tracts. Located in the southwest quarter of S 11, T 19 N, R 28 E, WA Grant County, WA.
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The applicant has submitted a Comprehensive Plan Amendment requesting a Site Specific Land Use Re -designation
of approximately 1.36 acres from "Rural Residential — 2" to "Rural Commerciar'.
During the 2008 Comprehensive Plan amendment cycle the designation of this property was changed from Rural
Residential 2 to Urban, Public Facilities with the condition that the Grant County PUD shall obtain title ownership
of this parcel within one year of the BoCC decision (09/30/08). If this condition was not satisfied, the parcel would
revert to its former designation and be removed from the UGA of the City of Moses Lake. As the Grant County
PUD did not obtain ownership, the property has reverted back to its former designation of Rural Residential — 2.
Attachment B
Decisions and Findings of Fact
Board of County Commissioners
2010 Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Zone Changes
24
At the time that Grant County adopted its GMA compliant comprehensive plan (1999), the County attempted to
designate a number of areas throughout the County as Rural Areas of More Intensive Development (RAIDs)
pursuant to the Growth Management Act. Upon adoption two challenges were filled with the Eastern Washington
Growth Management Hearings Board (EWGMHB) regarding our designation of the RAID areas. The EWGMHB
found the County's designation of the RAIDS (subsequently renamed LAMIRDs) non-compliant and required the
County to revisit the areas designated and modify the boundaries ("Logical Outer Boundaries" (LOB) pursuant to
the GMA) such that they complied with the delineation standards found in RCW 36.70A. Pursuant to that directive,
the County assessed each LAMIRD area and revised the LOB such that the site complied with the GMA. This
review process required consideration of the Planning Commission to recommend the necessary amendments to the
LAMIRD areas to the Board of County Commissioners. In their review, the Planning Commission utilized a
document titled "Grant County Planning Department Rural Areas of More Intensive Development Boundary
Analysis" in making their recommendation on the proposed amendments to all of the RAIDS. In January 2004, the
Board of County Commissioners approved the recommended changes to the LAMIRDs. After final consideration
by the EWGMHB, the revised LAMIRD boundaries were found to be compliant with the GMA.
ht the process of amending the LAMIRDs, the subject properties were removed from the Stratford Road 3 LAMIRD
because the County could not support the inclusion. With the removal of the properties from the LAMIRD, the site
was unable to carry the rural commercial designation now sought by the applicant and the property reverted back to
a land use designation of Rural Residential - 2 by design.
When designating commercial lands within the unincorporated area of the county, and outside of a designated Urban
Growth Area, the County must ensure that those developments are either:
A) Home-based or a cottage industries (small scale commercial) and of the appropriate intensity to be located
in a rural area.
B) Any new rural commercial uses should be permitted only within the Rural Villages, Rural Communities,
Agricultural Service Centers and Recreational Development designations.
C) The parcel must have been existing undeveloped commercial or industrial zoned lands located outside of
the UGA prior to the adoption of the Comprehensive Plan.
D) Further, the Comprehensive Plan, County Wide Planning Policies and the Growth Management Act
prohibit the inappropriate conversion of undeveloped land into sprawling low density development.
Currently and historically this area has been vacant of any commercial or residential development. Existing on the
west side of the proposed area is a 105 feet BPA/PUD electrical easement and power line which parallels Stratford
Rd, which would make it difficult at best for any residential development. Also in an effort to identify zoning prior
to 2000 Staff viewed hand color maps in which appears this area was previously zoned as Commercial.
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning Commission conducted an open record hearing for this application on July 21, 2010. At their hearing
the Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval for this application.
DECISION:
The Board of County Commissioners voted unanimously to uphold the recommendation of the Planning
Commission to approve the following request for a Site Specific Land Use Re -designation:
1) Re -designate approx. 1.36 acres of parcel 17-0499-000 from Rural Residential —2 to Rural
Commercial.
The Board of County Commissioners established the following Findings of Fact:
1. The change would benefit the public health, safety, and or welfare;
2. The change is warranted because of changed circumstances or because of a need for additional property in
the proposed land use designation.
3. The change is consistent with the criteria for land use designations specified in the Comprehensive Plan.
4. The change will not be detrimental to uses or property in the immediate vicinity of the subject property.
5. The change does have merit for the community as a whole.
Attachment B
Decisions and Findings of Fact
Board of Countv Commissioners
2010 Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Zone Changes
25
6. The change, if granted, will not result in a group of property owners enjoying greater privileges and
opportunities than those enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity where there is not substantive
difference in the properties themselves which justify different designations.
7. The benefits of the change will outweigh any significant adverse impacts of the change.
8. The change is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and the requirements of
GCC 22, 23, 24 and 25.
9. The change does comply with all other applicable criteria and standards of Chapter 25.12 UDC.
MINOR ZONE CHANGE
PLANNING COMMISSION SUMMARY:
During the Planning Commission hearing no members of the public spoke for or against this proposal. Planning
Commission made a unanimous recommendation to approve the proposed Minor Zone change.
DECISION:
The Board of County Commissioners voted unanimously to uphold the recommendation of the Planning
Commission and approve:
1) A Minor re -zone of a 136 acre portion of parcel #17-0499-000 from Rural Residential - 2 to
Rural Commercial.
The Board of County Commissioners established the following Findings of Fact:
1) The proposed rezone will not be contrary to the intent or purposes and regulations of the Grant County Code or
the Comprehensive Plan;
2) The property in question is suitable for uses allowed under the proposed zoning district;
3) Uses allowed under the proposed zone change are compatible with neighboring land uses;
4) The proposed rezone can be served by adequate facilities including access, fire protection, water, storm -water
control, and sewage disposal facilities;
5) Substantial changes do exist to warrant an amendment to the current zoning district;
6) A public need does exist for the proposed rezone. Public need shall mean that a valid public purpose, for which
the comprehensive plan and this chapter have been adopted, is served by the proposed rezone.
7) The proposed rezone will result in significant adverse impacts on the human or natural environments that cannot
be mitigated by conditions of approval;
8) The cumulative impact of additional requests for like actions (the total of the rezones over time or space) will
produce significant adverse effects to the environment that cannot be mitigated by conditions of approval;
9) The pedestrian and vehicular traffic associated with the rezone will not be hazardous to existing and anticipated
traffic in the neighborhood; and
10) The proposed zoning district does not include any allowable use or activity that would result in the location of an
incompatible use adjacent to an airport or airfield (RCW 36.70).
Attachment B
Decisions and Findings of Fad
Board of County Commissioners
2010 Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Zone Changes
26