Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPublic Hearing - BOCCOpen Record Public Hearing 2024 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Hearing November 121 2024 1:00 P.M. In Attendance: Cindy Carter, Chair Danny E. Stone, Vice -Chair Rob Jones, Member Caitlin E. Manell, Deputy Clerk of the Board Chris Young, Director of Development Services Jim Anderson -Cook, Deputy Director of Development Services Public In -Person: See Sign in Sheet Public via Zoom: Harold Crose, Bruce Moreira, Deanna Elliott, Austin Hicks, "Jordan G", Gil Alvarado, "nbare", Ben Floyd, Paul Hicks, Donette Miranda, "Jane)", Anna Hou, "Jeanne", Janelle Moore The Commissioners held an Open Record Public Hearing to consider the 2024 Comprehensive Plan Amendments. Jim Anderson -Cook, Deputy Director of Development Services discussed the following applications: • File #P 24-0085 — GRANT COUNTY. Amendment to Chapter 25.32 of the Grant County Unified Development Code to designate the Hearings Examiner as the Grant County Building and Fire Board of Appeals and enforcement procedures per Grant County Code. GCC 14.04.070. The Planning Commission recommended APPROVAL of the Unified Development Code amendment to Chapter 25.32. A motion was made by Commissioner Jones, seconded by Commissioner Stone, to uphold the recommendation of the Planning Commission and APPROVE the subject Unified Development Code amendment application (File # P 24-0085) updating Chapter 25.32 of the Grant County Unified Development Code to designate the Hearings Examiner as the Grant County Building and Fire Board of Appeals and enforcement procedures per GCC 14.04.070, with the eight (8) findings of fact in the affirmative. • Point of Order was called by Commissioner Stone about allowing time for Public Comment. Discussion was held about making a motion to close Public Comment periods. It was decided that no motions will be made to close public comment throughout the hearing. The motion passed unanimously. • File #P 24-0086 — GRANT COUNTY. Amendment to Chapter 25.12 of the Grant County Unified Development Code to include Administrative, Judicial and SEPA appeal processes and reconsiderations. The Planning Commission recommended APPROVAL of the Unified Development Code amendment to Chapter 25.12. Commissioner Stone asked Jim Anderson -Cook to give an overview of the current legislative and judicial processes. A motion was made by Commissioner Stone, seconded by Commissioner Jones, to uphold the recommendation of the Planning Commission and APPROVE the subject Unified Development Code amendment application (File # P 24-0086) updating Chapter 25.12 of the Grant County Unified Development Code to include Administrative, Judicial, and SEPA appeal processes and reconsiderations, with the eight (8) findings of fact in the affirmative. The motion passed unanimously. File #P 24-0088 — GRANT COUNTY Miscellaneous text amendments to the Grant County Unified Development Code Chapter 22.04, cleaning up old code references and missed changes. The Planning Commission recommended APPROVAL of the Unified Development Code amendment to Chapter 22.04. A motion was made by Commissioner Jones, seconded by Commissioner Stone, to uphold the recommendation of the Planning Commission and APPROVE the subject Unified Development Code amendment application (File # P 24-0088) updating the Grant County Unified Development Code Chapter 22.04 -cleaning up old code references and missed changes, Chapter 23.04, Table 3 - to reflect proposed changes to certain uses in the Public Facility zoning designation, Section 23.08.020 - to reflect proposed changes to Domestic Animal Maintenance and Residential Accessory Uses and Structures, Section 23.12.080 - to propose changes to Clearing, Grading, and Drainage standards, and Chapter 25.02 Definitions, with the eight (8) findings of fact in the affirmative. The motion passed unanimously. File #P 24-0082 —GRANT COUNTY Amendment to Chapters 23.04 and 25.02 of the Grant County Unified Development Code to define Adult Entertainment and Uses and only allow as a Commercial use in Urban Light Industrial (ULI) and Urban Heavy Industrial (UHI) zoning districts within Grant County via Conditional Use Permit. The Planning Commission recommended APPROVAL of the Unified Development Code amendment to Chapters 23.04 and 25.02. A motion was made by Commissioner Stone, seconded by Commissioner Jones, to uphold the recommendation of the Planning Commission and APPROVE the subject Unified Development Code amendment application (File # P 24-0082) updating Chapters 23.04 and 25.02 of the Grant County Unified Development Code to define Adult Entertainment and Uses and only allow as a Commercial use in Urban Light Industrial and Urban Heavy Industrial zoning districts within Grant County via Conditional Use, with the eight (8) findings of fact in the affirmative. The motion passed unanimously. File #P 24-0251(Comprehensive Plan Amendment) & P 24-0252 (SEPA) -Grant County. Update Chapter 7 —Transportation Element, Appendix E and Chapter 8 —Capital Facilities Element, Appendix F, of the Grant County Comprehensive Plan. The Planning Commission recommended APPROVAL of the proposed Six Year Mandatory Update 2025 — 2030. A motion was made by Commissioner Jones, seconded by Commissioner Stone, to uphold the recommendation of the Planning Commission and APPROVE the subject annual Comprehensive Plan amendment (File # P 24-0251 ) updating Chapter 7 —Transportation Element, Appendix E and Chapter 8 — Capital Facilities Element, Appendix F, of the Grant County Comprehensive Plan, with the five (5) findings of fact in the affirmative. The motion passed unanimously. • File #P 24-0253 (Comprehensive Plan Amendment) -Grant County. Annual update to Chapter 5 —Economic Development Element, Appendix J. of the Grant County Comprehensive Plan. The Planning Commission recommended APPROVAL of the annual Comprehensive Plan amendment. A motion was made by Commissioner Jones, seconded by Commissioner Stone, to uphold the recommendation of the Planning Commission and APPROVE the subject annual Comprehensive Plan amendment (File # P 24-0253) updating Chapter 5 -Economic Development Element, Appendix J, of the Grant County Comprehensive Plan. The motion passed unanimously. File #P 24-0219 (Comprehensive Plan Amendment) & P 24-0220 (SEPA) -City of Ephrata. A Site -Specific Comprehensive Plan Amendment application to remove 168-acres of designated Rural Lands from the Ephrata UGA and replace with 86.9-acres (UGA swap) of designated Rural Recreational Commercial (LAMIRD) and Rural Residential lands in Unincorporated Grant County, previously designated as an Essential Public Facility. The Planning Commission recommended APPROVAL of this site -specific Comprehensive Plan Amendment and UGA re -designation. Commissioner Stone asked for clarification on the map provided in the PowerPoint. Staff elaborated on the zones depicted in the map. Ben Floyd from the Grant County PUD spoke in support of this amendment. A motion was made by Commissioner Stone, seconded by Commissioner Jones, to uphold the recommendation of the Planning Commission and APPROVE the subject re -designation (File # P 24-0219) removing 168-acres of designated Rural Lands from the Ephrata UGA and replacing them with 86.9-acres of designated Rural Recreational Commercial (LAMIRD) lands and Rural Residential lands in Unincorporated Grant County, with the nine (9) findings of fact in the affirmative. The motion passed unanimously. File #P 24-0217 (Comprehensive Plan Amendment) & P 24-0218 (SEPA) - Riverstone Land Holdings LLC. ASite-Specific Land Use Re -designation application requesting an 85.89-acre parcel designated with a Mineral Resource Overlay (MRO) of approximately 75.00 acres. The proposal site is located at the 21700 Block of Hwy 243 S, Mattawa, WA. The Planning Commission recommended APPROVAL of the land use re -designation to a Mineral Resource Overlay (MRO). Jim Anderson -Cook requested that it be noted that MROs have 13 findings of fact. Commissioner Stone asked for clarification about the MRO designation. Jim Anderson -Cook gave a brief explanation. A motion was made by Commissioner Jones, seconded by Commissioner Stone, to uphold the recommendation of the Planning Commission and APPROVE the subject re -designation (File # P 24-0217) designating approximately 75.00 acres of an 85.89-acre parcel with a Mineral Resource Overlay (MRO),, with the thirteen (13) findings of fact in the affirmative. The motion passed unanimously. File #P 24-0249 (Comprehensive Plan Amendment) & P 24-0250 (SEPA) -Capstone Realty. A Site -Specific Land Use Re -designation application requesting a 640.00-acre parcel(s) designated with a Mineral Resource Overlay (MRO) of approximately 40.00 acres. The location of the proposal is on Overen Road, % of a mile south from the intersection of Baird Springs Rd. NW. The Planning Commission recommended APPROVAL of the land use re -designation to a Mineral Resource Overlay (MRO). Commissioner Stone asked about the designation for the road along this parcel, and if the road could handle higher traffic. Jim Anderson -Cook stated that these conditions would be examined with an application for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP). A motion was made by Commissioner Stone, seconded by Commissioner Jones, to uphold the recommendation of the Planning Commission and APPROVE the subject re -designation (File # P 24-0249) designating approximately 40.00 acres of a 640.00-acre parcel area with a Mineral Resource Overlay (MRO),, with the thirteen (13) findings of fact in the affirmative. The motion passed unanimously. • File #P 24-0221(Comprehensive Plan Amendment/Rezone) & P 24-0222 (SEPA) -Azad Tarikian. ASite-Specific Land Use Re -designation application requesting 36.62-acres of the subject parcel be re -designated from Resource Lands —Rural Resource to Rural Lands, Rural Residential 1 along with an application for a rezone from Rural Resource (RRES) to Rural Residential 1 (11111). The proposed site is located at 22899 N Hwy 17, Soap Lake, WA. The Planning Commission recommended APPROVAL of this land use re -designation application as well as the zone change. Commissioner Carter noted that there will be two separate motions for this item. Jim Anderson -Cook noted that there are different numbers of findings of fact in the motions. Commissioner Stone asked how one parcel can be zoned separately. Jim Anderson -Cook explained that this zone is a split parcel. It was noted that the Code allows for the director of Development Services to make this rezoning, but staff felt that it was appropriate to bring it before the Board of County Commissioners in a Public Hearing. Commissioner Stone noted that this parcel contains a privately owned canal. A motion was made by Commissioner Jones, seconded by Commissioner Stone, to uphold the recommendation of the Planning Commission and APPROVE the subject re -designation (File # P 24-0221) from Resource Lands —Rural Resource to Rural Lands, Rural Residential 1, with the nine (9) findings of fact in the affirmative. The motion passed unanimously. A motion was made by Commissioner Stone, seconded by Commissioner Jones, to uphold the recommendation of the Planning Commission and APPROVE the subject rezone application (File # P 24- 0221)from Rural Resource to Rural Residential 1, with the ten (10) findings of fact in the affirmative. The motion passed unanimously. • File #P 24-0257 (Comprehensive Plan Amendment/Rezone) & P 24-0258 (SEPA) -Central Terminals. ASite-Specific Land Use Re -designation application requesting 55.38 acres of the subject parcel be re -designated from Urban Lands -Residential, Low Density to Urban Lands —Open Space along with an application for a rezone from UGA —Urban Residential 2 (UR2) to UGA — Urban Open Space Recreation (OSR). The proposal site is located at 4524 NE Westshore Drive, Moses Lake, WA. The Planning Commission recommended APPROVAL of this land use re - designation application as well as the zone change. Commissioner Stone asked for a broader explanation of this request. Jim Anderson -Cook reviewed the map and gave further explanation of the owner's request. Jim Anderson -Cook said it should be noted that the center of the property is a well location for the City of Moses Lake; the well -head radius would not allow for development. Commissioner Jones noted that other portions of the parcel would be good property to develop. It was also noted in the staff report that the applicant and the planner have the right to amend this designation and zoning should the plans change. Bob Fanchor of Central Terminals spoke more about this request and discussed plans for this parcel. Commissioner Jones asked him the current driving range location is residential. Yes, it is. Gil Alvarado of GAG LLC, representing Central Terminals, attending via Zoom requested to speak, but had technical difficulties. Commissioner Carter asked Bob Fanchor if he felt comfortable moving forward without Gil Alvarado speaking. Bob Fanchor said yes. A motion was made by Commissioner Stone, seconded by Commissioner Jones, to uphold the recommendation of the Planning Commission and APPROVE the subject re -designation (File # P 24-0257) from Urban Lands -Residential, Low Density to Urban Lands —Open Space, with the nine (9) findings of fact in the affirmative. The motion passed unanimously. A motion was made by Commissioner Jones, seconded by Commissioner Stone, to uphold the recommendation of the Planning Commission and APPROVE the subject rezone application (File # P 24- 0257) from UGA —Urban Residential (UR2) to UGA —Urban Open Space Recreation (OSR), with the ten (10) findings of fact in the affirmative. The motion passed unanimously. • File #P 24-0247 (Comprehensive Plan Amendment/Rezone) & P 24-0248 (SEPA) -Royal Slope Solar, LLC. ASite-Specific Land Use Re -designation application requesting 160.00 acres of the subject parcel be re -designated from Resource Lands —Agriculture Irrigated to Rural Lands - Rural Resource along with an application for a rezone from Agriculture (AG) to Rural Resource (RRES). Represented by Tetra Tech, Paul Hicks, online. The Planning Commission recommends APPROVAL of the land use re -designation application as well as the zone change. Commissioner Stone asked why this application was not included in 2021— 2022. Staff responded that the current landowner did not own this parcel at the time. Commissioner Stone asked why the applicant is the leasing company rather than the landowner. Staff explained that it is common for the company leasing the land to fill out the application. . Commissioner Stone asked staff how this application lines up with the Growth Management Act (GMA),, and their designation of not removing Agricultural Land? Jim Anderson -Cook explain that the Department of Commerce opposes this application as it is in violation of the WACs and RCWs (removing production ag lands), however, it is not under irrigation or part of a farm unit. Jim Anderson -Cook spoke with the Department of Commerce on October 3, 2024 and mentioned that this parcel would be removed from the Agricultural Land during the County -Wide Ag Lands Analysis. Donette Miranda, the applicant via Zoom, mentioned that she is available to answer questions. Austin Hicks, Tetra Tech, LLC thanked the Commissioners for their consideration. This application is a cleanup measure to make the parcels consistent across the property. Austin Hicks confirmed that this was not included in the first phase of the project due to the ownership issues. Harold Crose, Columbia Basin Conservation District (CBCD) via Zoom, said that this would be considered prime irrigated land. From a Conservation District perspective, this is the kind of land that they try to maintain as agriculture. Commissioner Carter asked Austin Hicks for confirmation about his comment that there was no water available on this land. Austin Hicks said it is outside of the Columbia Basin Project, there is only well water there. A motion was made by Commissioner Stone to DENY the recommendation of the Planning Commission on the subject re -designation (File # P 24-0247) from Resource Lands —Agriculture Irrigated to Rural Lands, Rural Resource, with the nine (9) findings of fact in the negative. There was no second, so the motion died. A motion was made by Commissioner Jones, seconded by Commissioner Stone to remand the application to the Planning Commission forfurther proceedings. • Discussion was held about the future Agricultural Land Analysis. • Jim Anderson -Cook asked for clarification about the motion being made. Discussion was held about how to state the motion. o Commissioner Stone stated that he is willing to second the motion is Commissioner Jones amends his original motion to match what Jim Anderson -Cook is requesting. Commissioner Jones did not amend, as he was not positive about the correct way to state the motion. A motion was made by Commissioner Carter to uphold the recommendation of the Planning Commission and APPROVE the subject re -designation (File # P 24-0247) from Resource Lands — Agriculture Irrigated to Rural Lands, Rural Resource, with the nine (9) findings of fact in the affirmative. o Commissioner Stone called a Point of Order. A motion is on the table and no vote has been taken on it. Commissioner Carter asked the Clerk for confirmation on the vote having been taken. Clerk responded that no vote has been taken on the original motion made by Commissioner Jones. o There was no second, so this motion died. • Discussion was held about the correct way to state the motion. The motion passed unanimously. File #P 24-0083 - Grant County. Amendment to Chapter 25.08 of the Grant County Unified Development Code to establish expiration and renewal criteria for Conditional Use Permits. Staff recommended APPROVAL, but the Planning Commission recommended DENIAL of this Unified Development Code amendment to Chapter 25.08. Commissioner Stone discussed the conversations held during the Planning Commission regarding this application. Commissioner Stone asked staff positions on this. Jim Anderson -Cook reiterated that staff recommended approval, which would allow Conditional Use Permits (CUPS) to be reviewed. Discussion was held about enforcement and expiration of CUPS. Commissioner Jones asked if previously approved permits would be grandfathered in or re -opened for review? Chris Young stated that they would be grandfathered in. Commissioner Jones asked if that meant they could not revisit permits that come from large complaint areas? Jim Anderson -Cook said no, they cannot. Commissioner Stone asked why not? Chris Young said that it would be deemed "Existing Non-Conformant". Discussion was held about when CUPs would be required. Jeff Gallacci spoke about this project. He has no interest in this but had questions about terms of objectivity. Jeff Gallacci suggested quantitative measurements to ensure conditions are being met, rather than "conditions on conditions". Staff responded with clarification about this application. A motion was made by Commissioner Stone, seconded by Commissioner Carter, to uphold the recommendation of the Grant County Planning Department and APPROVE the subject Unified Development Code amendment application (File # P 24-0083) updating Chapter 25.08 of the Grant County Unified Development Code to establish expiration and renewal criteria for Conditional Use Permits, with the eight (8) findings of fact in the affirmative. • Commissioner tones asked if putting this in Code in place could be subject for review at any time? Discussion was held about the review timeline and conditions for review. • A motion was made by Commissioner Stone, seconded by Commissioner Carter to close discussion on the main motion and call for a vote. The motion passed unanimously. The motion does not pass, with Commissioner Stone voting in favor, and Commissioners Carter and Jones voting against. Jim Anderson -Cook clarified the motion needed for this application. Commissioner Jones asked about the process should this application be remanded. Jim Anderson -Cook recommended not remanding. Commissioner Carter asked staff if they would like a new motion to uphold the Planning Commission's recommendation. Staff said no but Commissioner Stone disagreed. A motion was made by Commissioner Jones, seconded by Commissioner Carter, to uphold the recommendation of the Planning Commission and DENY the subject Unified Development Code amendment application (File # P 24-0083) updating Chapter 25.08 of the Grant County Unified Development Code to establish expiration and renewal criteria for Conditional Use Permits, with the three (3) findings of fact in the affirmative and five (5) in the negative. The motion passed, with Commissioner Carter and Jones voting in favor, and Commissioner Stone voting against. File #P 24-0081 - Grant County. Amendment to Chapters 23.04, 23.08, 25.02 of the Grant County Unified Development Code to continue to allow Cannabis Production and Processing in the Urban Light Industrial (ULI), Urban Heavy Industrial (UHI),. Rural Light Industrial (RLI),, and Rural Heavy Industrial (RHI) Zones while discontinuing to allow Cannabis Production and Processing in the Rural Resource (RRes), Rural Remote (RRem),. and Agriculture (AG) Zones. The Planning Commission recommended APPROVAL of this Unified Development Code amendment to Chapters 23.04, 23.08, 25.02. Commissioner Carter asked when the current Cannabis Moratorium end. It ends January 25, 2025. Commissioner Jones asked if existing non -conforming be sold and continue operations? Chris Young said no, unless the zone changes. Discussion was held. Greg Haynes, owner of parcels of land approved by Grant County and Washington State Liquor and Cannabis Board to process and produce cannabis. Greg Haynes requested clarification about licensure in Grant County and the Moratorium. A motion was made by Commissioner Stone, seconded by Commissioner Jones, to uphold the recommendation of the Planning Commission and APPROVE the subject Unified Development Code amendment application (File # P 24-0081) updating Chapters 23.04, 23.08, 25.02 of the Grant County Unified Development Code to continue to allow Cannabis Production and Processing in the Urban Light Industrial, Urban Heavy Industrial, Rural Light Industrial, and Rural Heavy Industrial zones while discontinuing to allow Cannabis Production and Processing in the Rural Resource, Rural Remote, and Agriculture zones, with the eight (8) findings of fact in the affirmative. The motion passed unanimously. • File #P 24-0087 - Grant County. Amendment to the Grant County Unified Development Code Chapters 23.04, 23.08, 25.02 to allow for the siting of Energy Storage Systems (ESS) in certain zoning districts. Staff recommended APPROVAL WITH MODIFICATIONS. The Planning Commission recommended APPROVAL of this Unified Development Code amendment to Chapters 23.04, 23.08, 23.02. Commissioner Jones asked for more information about the modifications that staff recommended. Discussion was held about this. Commissioner Stone asked about agricultural lands, and how this amendment would affect this. Discussion was held about GMA conditions. Commissioner Carter asked about farmers that use solar power storing batteries on their farms. Harold Crose, of the Columbia Basin Conservation District, via Zoom, asked for clarification about the term "certain" in this application. Jim Anderson -Cook gave a brief description. Commissioner Stone asked if the Planning Commission recommended approval with modifications. Yes, they did. Commissioner Jones asked if the motion needed to note the modifications. No, they don't. A motion was made by Commissioner Jones, seconded by Commissioner Carter, to uphold the recommendation of the Planning Department and APPROVE the subject Unified Development Code amendment application (File # P 24-0087) updating Chapters 23.04, 23.08, 25.02 to allow for the siting of Energy Storage Systems (ESS) in certain zoning districts, with the eight (8) findings of fact in the affirmative. The motion passed unanimously. File #P 24-0084 -Grant County. Amendment to Section 23.08.357(b) and Chapter 25.02 of the Grant County Unified Development Code to further define the limitations on parcel conversions of nonagricultural uses on lands with a zoning designation of Agriculture (AG) and a Comprehensive Plan designation of Dryland or Rangeland within Grant County. Amend Section 23.08.357(h) to be consistent with proposed amendments to Chapter 24.08. Amend Section 23.08.357(i) to establish baseline soils testing and monitoring for solar development decommissioning agreements. The Planning Commission recommended DENIAL of this Unified Development Code amendment application. Commissioner Stone asked for elaboration about the amendment and the desire to follow the GMA. Jim Anderson -Cook gave a summary of the proposed code, and explained that this amendment would open Grant County up for the possibility of being taken to the Growth Management Act Board of Appeals, due to being further in violation of the GMA. Jim Anderson -Cook reviewed GCC 23.04.560(e) and RCW 36.70A.177(3)(b)(ii). Staff and Planning Commission recommend denial. Kirsten Hansen asked if this amendment protected agricultural lands. Jim Anderson -Cook answered with a brief explanation. Commissioner Stone disagrees with staff and thinks they should work to get in compliance with the GMA on the protection of agricultural lands. A motion was made by Commissioner Jones, seconded by Commissioner Carter, to uphold the recommendation of the Planning Commission and DENY the subject Unified Development Code amendment application (File # P 24-0084) updating Section 23.08.357(b) and Chapter 25.02 of the Grant County Unified Development Code to further define the limitations on parcel conversions of nonagricultural uses on lands with a zoning designation of Agriculture and a Comprehensive Plan designation of Dryland or Rangeland within Grant County. Amend Section 23.08.357(h) to be consistent with proposed amendments to Chapter 24.08. Amend Section 23.08.357(i) to establish baseline soils testing and monitoring for solar development decommissioning agreements, with the eight (8) findings of fact in the affirmative. • Discussion was held about the compliance issue, and potential repercussions of denying this amendment. The motion passed, with Commissioners Carter and Jones voting in favor, and Commissioner Stone voting against. File #P 24-0246 - Grant County. Amendment to Article II and Article IV of the Grant County Unified Development Code Chapter 24.08, Critical Areas and Cultural Resource Lands, Chapter 25.02 Definitions, and Chapter 25.24 Mitigation Requirements & Impact Fees to reflect proposed changes in the General Mitigation Requirements and Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas and to establish a Mitigation Bank, In -lieu Fee, and Permitee-responsible mitigation program to offset development impacts to Shrubsteppe habitat. The Planning Commission recommended APPROVAL WITH MODIFICATIONS of this Unified Development Code amendment. Commissioner Carter stated that the Planning Commission modifications of the Shrubsteppe Critical Areas 1-to-1 would be illegal. It would need to be 2-to-1 Christopher Allen Sharp asked Jim Anderson -Cook about the energy crisis. Jim Anderson -Cook and Commissioner Carter responded about the power delivery problem in Grant County. Christopher Allen Sharp spoke about the power distribution and the solar farms. Kirsten Hansen asked about the proposed changes mentioned in the summary of the application. Commissioner Carter gave a brief explanation of this. Discussion was held about mitigation banking. Commissioner Stone apologized to Jim Anderson -Cook for not interrupting the citizen speaking off topic. Commissioner Stone spoke about his service the Washington Shrubsteppe Restoration Initiative (WSSRI) and discussed the mitigation bank. Harold Crose, of the Columbia Basin Conservation District (CBCD)., via Zoom spoke on this —the mitigation bank would allow CBCD to do many things that are valuable to the land. Commissioner Stone asked Chris Young for comment. Chris Young gave a brief comment. Commissioner Jones discussed the conflict about this topic. Kirsten Hansen asked who pays for the mitigation bank. Commissioner Carter responded that it would be the developer or landowner. A motion was made by Commissioner Stone, seconded by Commissioner Jones, to deny the recommendation of the Planning Commission on the subject Unified Development Code amendment application (File #P 24-0246) amending Article 11 and Article IV of the Grant County Unified Development Code Chapter 24.08, Critical Areas and Cultural Resource Lands, Chapter 25.02 Definitions, and Chapter 25.24 Mitigation Requirements &Impact Fees to reflect proposed changes in the General Mitigation Requirements and Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas and to establish a Mitigation Bank, In - lieu Fee, and Perm itee-resp onsible mitigation program to offset development impacts to Shrubsteppe habitat, with eight (8) findings of fact in the affirmative. The motion passed unanimously. • File #P 24-0255 (Comprehensive Plan Amendment/Rezone) & P 24-0256 (SEPA) -Big River Vineyards, LLC. ASite-Specific Land Use Re -designation application requesting 283.38 acres of the subject parcels be re -designated from Rural Lands, Rural Residential 1 to Resource Lands — Rural Resource along with an application for a rezone from Rural Residential 1(RR1) to Rural Resource (RRES). The proposal site is located north of Rd. 13 NW between Rd M.5 NW and Adams Rd NW, Quincy, WA. The Planning Commission recommended APPROVAL of this land use re -designation application as well as the zone change. Tim Moore spoke on behalf of a group of residents on three sides of this parcel. He stated that the down zone would allow for industrial uses rather than residential uses. Residents are concerned about reduction of property value and solar farms on the property. Commissioner Carter asked Jim Anderson - Cook for a response. Jim Anderson -Cook replied that solar would be one of the allowed uses of the property with this re -zoning, with the issuance of a CUP. Commissioner Carter reviewed a letter submitted by Big River Vineyards, LLC. Jim Anderson -Cook stated that some information in the letter is inaccurate. Jeremy McCreary asked about permitting for solar farms, and solar farm permits already issued. He felt that taking away residential property will cause a ripple effect. Jeremy McCreary stated that it is already hard to find residential property in Quincy, and that rural residents are concerned about being surrounded by industrial land. Chris Realme, reiterating what Jeremy said. He feels that the rezone would be moving backwards. Gil Alvarado, GAG Planning LLC, via Zoom spoke as the agent for the applicant. He stated that this is a non -project action, just a land -use matter. Permitting for solar is not the case, just setting the purpose of the different types of uses for the zone. Gil Alvarado asked Jim Anderson -Cook if a solar farm would need a CUP? Yes, it would. Discussion was held about potential planned uses for this property. Jeremy McCreary asked if a new CUP would be needed if a new solar farm is going in? Jim Anderson - Cook said that it depended on the applicant and explained the requirements for CUPs. Commissioner Carter asked if the public would have the opportunity to comment and participate should a CUP be applied for? Jim Anderson -Cook said yes, the public is notified in advance for these opportunities. Commissioner Jones spoke about "spot zoning" and is confused on why staff would be supportive of that, when Grant County is wanting contiguous zonings. Jim Anderson -Cook explained the current zonings of this area. Jeremy McCreary commented on the section of land that is zoned as Rural Residential. Commissioner Stone asked for elaboration of what Rural Resource zoning lands are used for? A table was presented for land uses in certain zones. Commissioner Stone asked staff if there have been applications or potential applications for solar on this property? Jim Anderson -Cook confirmed that there has been an inquiry and active conversations about parcels to the east of the applicant. Jim Anderson -Cook stated that there are no guarantees of future permits. Lyle Floyd said the "rumors" about solar farms are not rumors anymore since Jim Anderson -Cook just confirmed that there are active conversations about the solar farms being built. A motion was made by Commissioner Stone, seconded by Commissioner Jones, to deny the recommendation of the Planning Commission on the subject re -designation (File # P 24-0255) from Rural Lands, Rural Residential to Resource Lands —Rural Resource, with the nine (9) findings of fact in the negative. • Commissioner Jones discussed that he would have chosen to remand this recommendation, rather than deny. He does not necessarily approve or deny. Commissioner Carter said he could vote against and make a new motion to remand. • Commissioner Stone spoke to his main motion. • Discussion was held about the upcoming Lands Analysis. The motion failed, with Commissioner Stone voting in favor, and Commissioner Jones and Carter voting against. A motion was made by Commissioner Jones, seconded by Commissioner Carter, to remand the application to the Planning Commission forfurther proceedings the subject re -designation (File # P 24- 0255) from Rural Lands, Rural Residential 1 to Resource Lands —Rural Resource, with the nine (9) findings of fact in the negative. Commissioner Jones discussed that he understands the timeline of the Lands Analysis but does not approve or deny the spot change. The motion passed, with Commissioner Carter and Jones voting in favor, and Commissioner Stone voting against. A motion was made by Commissioner Jones, seconded by Commissioner Carter, to remand the application of the Planning Commission on the subject rezone application (File # P 24-0255) from Rural Residential (RR1) to Rural Resource (RRES), with the ten (10) findings of fact in the affirmative. The motion passed, with Commissioner Carter and Jones voting in favor, and Commissioner Stone voting against. A motion was made by Commissioner Stone, seconded by Jones to close the public comment portion of the hearing. The motion passed unanimously. Commissioner Carter asked for a motion to adopt the Comprehensive Plan Amendment in its entirety. Commissioner Stone called a Point of Order, asking if a blanket motion was necessary, as each application was acted on individually. Commissioner Carter said that she didn't know but it has always been done in the past. A motion was made by Commissioner Stone to close the hearing with a statement that the motions made during the hearing were authoritative. There was no second, so the motion died.