Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution 01-176-CCBOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS GRANT COUNTY, WASHINGTON RESOLUTION NO. 2001 -176 -CC 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 September, 1999 Comprehensive Plan. 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, 19901st 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 WHEREAS, over the past year, the Comprehensive Plan's policies may change to ensure 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 WHEREAS, IT IS IMPORTANT THAT AMENDMENTS TO THIS plan retain the broad perspectives articulated in the communit} %inion statement, satisfy the goals and policies of this Plan, and remain consistent with the intent of the GMA; and Grant County Board of County Commissioners Resolution Adopting Amendments for the Year 2000 To the Grant Comm Comprehensive Plan 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, a public meeting was held on Tuesday, December 5, by the Grant County Board of Commissioners in compliance with Section 25.12.030, Grant County Unified Development Code for the purpose of considering the Planning Department staff recommendation for each of the individual submitted proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan and determine whether to initiate the plan amendment review process for each proposal; and WHEREAS, after receiving testimony from citizens and staff at the public meeting, the motion was made, seconded and unanimously approved to recommend staff initiate the SEPA review process and schedule each of the fifty-one amendments proposed. along with staff recommendations before the Planning Commission for public hearing; and WHEREAS, the Planning Department staff held a workshop with members of the Planning Commission on May 23, 2001 to give instruction in conducting the public hearing with regards to consideration of the proposed amendments and review of the SEPA addendum to the September, 1999 Final Environmental Impact Statement as adopted and prepared for the Comprehensive Plan, and; WHEREAS, a public hearing was conducted by the Planning Commission on May 30, 2001, and continued to May 31, 2001 to hear staff recommendations and take public Grant Courtly Board of County Commissioners Resolution Adopting Amendments for the Year 2000 To the Grant County Comprehensive Plan testimony on each of the proposed amendments to the Grant County Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission continued the public hearing, closing public testimony and met to make decisions on each of the proposed amendments which were forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners on June 6, 2001, and continued to June 14, 2001 where final decisions were made and Findings of Fact given, and; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission staff report and recommendation are made a part of the record of this public hearing as it relates to SEPA and the attached amendments. WHEREAS, previously adopted Comprehensive Plan Errata sheets, and final adopted Urban Growth Area Boundary maps for the City of Ephrata pursuant to final orders and stipulations of the Eastern Washington Growth Management Hearings Board will be added to the next printed volume of the Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, a non project proposal to consider adoption of amendments to the Comprehensive Plan, including site-specific land use designation and zoning district changes, changes to Figure 5-5 Future Land Use Map, amendments to the UGA boundary of Quincy, correction of technical mapping errors, incorporation of Comprehensive Plan Errata adopted by Resolution of the Board of County Commissioners; and amendments to Plan goals and policies intended to achieve compliance with directives of the Eastern Washington Growth Management Hearings Board sent out for review on May 3, 2001; and WHEREAS, The Board of County Commissioners conducted an open record public hearing on August 21, 2001, continued to August 22, 2001, and August 28, 2001 to consider the recommendations and findings from the Grant County Planning Commission along with other public comment pertaining to the proposed amendments. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of County Commissioners for Grant County adopts the attached Findings of Fact and the attached record pertaining to the approval or denial of the 2000 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 t day of November 2001. Grant County Board of County Commissioners Resolution Adopting Amendments- for the Year 2000 To the Grant County Comprehensive Plan BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS GRANT COUNTY, WASHINGTON Allison, Chairman Tim ATTEST: Peggy 414 D U Clerk of the Board Grant County Board of County Commissioners Resolution Adopting Amendments for the Year 2000 To the Grant County Comprehensive Plan ATTACHMENT "A" GRANT COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT 2000 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 2000 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 has 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 In September 2000, the Grant County Planning Department solicited petitions for amendments to the 1999 Comprehensive Plan. 2.2 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 RC W 43.21 C and Grant County Code Chapter 24.04 (SEPA). Attachment "A" Grant County Comprehensive Plan Amendment 2000 General Findings of Fact. 2.3 In accordance with Grant County Code Chapter 25.12 — Legislative Actions, the Planning Commission held public hearings on May 30, and 31, June 6, and June 14, 2001, at which time testimony was taken from interested agencies, organizations, and individual citizens, regarding the proposed amendments, as well as the addendum to the 1999 EIS. 2.4 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 2000 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. 2.5 The existing enhanced public participation policies within Grant County ensure that the public had an opportunity to provide meaningful comments on the proposed amendments. 2.6 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 considered testimony provided at public hearings and recommendations provided by staff and interested or affected agencies with jurisdiction. The Planning Commission 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 Attachment "A" Grant County Comprehensive Plan Amendment 2000 General Findings of Fact. (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 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 Decisions and Findings of Fact 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 Supporting Findings of Fact for each decision were identified under Section 3 as detailed above, unless otherwise noted in I he record of the Board of County Commissioners 4.3 Notebooks, and detailed applications along with supporting documentation and staff reports are made a part of this recommendation. Attachment "A" Grant County Comprehensive Plan Amendment 2000 General Findings of Fart. ATTACHMENT "B" FINAL ACTION AND FINDINGS OF FACT BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 2000 AMENDMENTS * 2000-2 Brent Metteer Mallard Haven No Action Required This proposal was addressed at the time the Grant County Unified Development Code was adopted. Subject zoning on the property reflects the request to change the zoning from Commercial to Rural Residential in accordance with the Grant County Official Zoning Map. No action taken by the Board of County Commissioners. * 2000-3 Tim Hansen, Moses Lake Land Use Designation Change Lot 3, and S. '/2 Lot 10 from Agriculture to Rural Stade Orchard Tracts Residential The Board of County Commissioners voted unanimously to uphold the recommendation of the Planning Commission for approval of this land use designation request based on the following Findings of Fact: • The redesignation change is consistent with criteria for land use designations specified in the Comprehensive Plan. • The change will not be detrimental to uses or property in the immediate vicinity of the subject property. • The change has merit for the community as a whole • The change will not result in one property owner enjoying greater privileges and opportunities than those enjoyed by other property owners • The change is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and complies with all other applicable criteria and standards of Chapter 25.12.UDC'- • The change would benefit the public health, safety, and/or welfare, • The change is warranted because of changed circumstances or because of a need for additional property in the proposed land use designation. • The change is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and the requirements of Grant County Code Titles 22, 23, 24, and 25. * 2000-4 City of Quincy, Re -designation to bring F.U. 166, Blk. 72 municipally owned domestic F.U. 212, Blk. 73 and industrial sewer plants and in a portion of S. 24, T. 20 N. the city airport within the city R. 24 EWM and a portion of limits S. 20, T. 20N., R. 24 EWM The Board of County Commissioners unanimously voted to uphold the Planning Commission recommendation for approval of the request and to designate the areas as "Public Facilities" in accordance with the following Findings of Fact: • The redesignation change is consistent with criteria for land use designations specified in the Comprehensive Plan. • The change will not be detrimental to uses or property in the immediate vicinity of the subject property. • The change has merit for the community as a whole • The change will not result in one property owner enjoying greater privileges and opportunities than those enjoyed by other property owners • The change is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and complies with all other applicable criteria and standards of Chapter 25.12.UD(' • The change would benefit the public health, safety, and/or welfare; • The change is warranted because of changed circumstances or because of a need for additional property in the proposed land use designation. • The change is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and the requirements of Grant County Code Titles 22, 23, 24, and 25. * 2000-5 Allan Schrom, Royal City Land Use Designation Change A portion of S. 26, T. 16 N., R. 25 from Open Space to Agriculture EWM The Board of County Commissioners unanimously voted to uphold the Planning Commission recommendation for approval of the Land Use Designation Change from Open Space Conservation to Agriculture in accordance with the following Findings of Fact: • The redesignation change is consistent with criteria for land use designations specified in the Comprehensive Plan. • The change will not be detrimental to uses or property in the immediate vicinity of the subject property. • The change has merit for the community as a whole • The change will not result in one property owner enjoying greater privileges and opportunities than those enjoyed by other property owners • The change is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and complies with all other applicable criteria and standards of Chapter 25.12.UDC • The change would benefit the public health, safety, and or welfare; • The change is warranted because of changed circumstances or because of a need for additional property in the proposed land use designation. • The change is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and the requirements of Grant County Code Titles 22, 23, 24, and 25. * 2000-6 John Schrom, Royal City Land Use Designation Change A portion of S. 26 & 27, from Open Space to Agriculture T.16 N., R. 25 EWM The Board of County Commissioners unanimously voted to uphold the Planning Commission recommendation for approval of the Land Use Designation Change from Open Space Conservation to Agriculture in accordance with the following Findings of Fact: • The redesignation change is consistent with criteria for land use designations specified in the Comprehensive Plan. • The change will not be detrimental to uses or property in the immediate vicinity of the subject property. • The change has merit for the community as a whole • The change will not result in one property owner enjoying greater privileges and opportunities than those enjoyed by other property owners • The change is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and complies with all other applicable criteria and standards of Chapter 25.12.UD(' • The change would benefit the public health, safety, and/or welfare, • The change is warranted because of changed circumstances or because of a need for additional property in the proposed land use designation. • The change is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and the requirements of Grant County Code Titles 22, 237 24, and 25. * 2000-7 Robert Schrom, Royal City Land Use Designation Change A portion of S. 26, 27, and 33 from Open Space to Agriculture T.16N., R. 25 EWM The Board of County Commissioners unanimously voted to uphold the Planning Commission recommendation for approval of the Land Use Designation Change from Open Space ('onservation to Agriculture in accordance with the following Findings of Fact: • The redesignation change is consistent with criteria for land use designations specified in the Comprehensive Plan. • The change will not be detrimental to uses or property m the immediate vicinity of the subject property. • The change has merit for the community as a whole • The change will not result in one property owner enjoying greater privileges and opportunities than those enjoyed by other property owners • The change is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and complies with all other applicable criteria and standards of Chapter 25.12.UDC • The change would benefit the public health, safety, and.lor welfare, • The change is warranted because of changed circumstances or because of a need for additional property in the proposed land use designation. • The change is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and the requirements of Grant County Code Titles 22, 23, 24, and 25. * 2000-8 Larry & Petra Laughlin, Quincy Request for Amendment to the FU 24, Blk. 72 in a portion of S. 7 Performance and Use Standards T. 20 N., R. 25 EWM of the Agricultural zoning district The Board of County Commissioners voted unanimously to uphold the recommendation of the Planning Commission for denial of the request for Amendment to the Performance and Use Standards of the Agricultural zoning district and recommended that Mr. Laughlin seek an amendment to the Unified Development Code. * 2000-9 Nick & Donna Tommer, Ephrata Request for Land Use S. 6, T. 20 N., R. 26 EWM Designation change from Ag. to Rural Residential and Identification of the area around Naylor Junction as being a RAID The Board of County Commissioners voted unanimously to uphold the recommendation of the Planning Commission for denial of the request for Land Use Designation change from Agricultural to Rural Residential and for the identification of the area around Naylor Junction as being a RAID based on the following Findings of Fact: • The redesignation change is not consistent with criteria for land use designations specified in the Comprehensive Plan. • The change may be detrimental to uses or property in the immediate vicinity of the subject property. • The change has a possible conflict with Growth Management Hearings Board recommendations for the designation of RAIDS • The change will result in one property owner enjoying greater privileges and opportunities than those enjoyed by other property owners. • The change is not consistent with the intent and purpose of the Comprehensive Plan. * 2000-10 Don & Deborah Jacobson S. 7, T. 18 N., R. 23 EWM Applicant withdrew his application. No Action Taken * 2000-11 Don & Deborah Jacobson S. 28, T. 16 N., R. 23 EWM Applicant withdrew his application. No Action Taken * 2000-12 Larry Hall, Moses Lake S. 32, T. 20 N., R. 28 EWM Land Use Designation Request from Open Space Conservation to Rural Residential Land Use Designation Request from Open Space Conservation to Rural Residential. No Action necessary, Incomplete appli- cation Request for amendment to the land use designation from Urban Residential to Commercial, Grant County Airport The Board of County Commissioners unanimously voted to uphold the Planning Commission recommendation for approval of the land use designation request from Urban Residential to Commercial based on the following Findings of Fact: • The redesignation change is consistent with criteria for land use designations specified in the Comprehensive Plan. • The change will not be detrimental to uses or property in the immediate vicinity of the subject property. • The change has merit for the community as a whole • The change will not result in one property owner enjoying greater privileges and opportunities than those enjoyed by other property owners • The change is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and complies with all other applicable criteria and standards of Chapter 25.12.UDC • The change would benefit the public health, safety, and, or welfare • The change is warranted because of changed circumstances or because of a need for additional property in the proposed land use designation.. * 2000-13 Larry Hall, Moses Lake Request for amendment to the S. 32, T. 20 N., R. 28 EWM land use designation from Urban Residential to Commercial, Grant County Airport • The Board of County Commissioners unanimously voted to uphold the Planning Commission recommendation for approval of the land use designation request from Urban Residential and Commercial to Commercial based on the following Findings of Fact • The redesignation change is consistent with criteria for land use designations specified in the Comprehensive Plan. • The change will not he detrimental to uses or property in the immediate vicinity of the subject property. • The change has merit for the community as a whole 4 • The change will not result in one property owner enjoying greater privileges and opportunities than those enjoyed by other property owners • The change is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and complies with all other applicable criteria and standards of Chapter 25.12.UDC' • The change would benefit the public health, safety, and/or welfare; • The change is warranted because of changed circumstances or because of a need for additional property in the proposed land use designation. • The change is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and the requirements of Grant County Code Titles 22, 23, 24, and 25. * 2000-14 Larry Hall, Moses Lake Request for land used designation S. 32, T. 20 N., R. 28 EWM change from Public Facilities to Urban Light Industrial or Commercial The Board of County Commissioners voted unanimously to uphold the Planning Commission recommendation for approval to change the land use designation from Public Facilities to Urban Light Industrial based on the following Findings of Fact: • The redesignation change is consistent with criteria for hind use designations specified in the Comprehensive Plan. • The change will not be detrimental to uses or property in the immediate vicinity of the subject property. • The change has merit for the community as a whole • The change will not result in one property owner enjoying greater privileges and opportunities than those enjoyed by other property owners • The change is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and complies with all other applicable criteria and standards of Chapter 25.12.UD( • The change would benefit the public health, safety and/or welfare; • The change is warranted because of changed circumstam.es or because of a need for additional property in the proposed land use designation. • The change is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and the requirements of Grant County Code Titles 22, 23, 24, and 25. * 2000-15 Del Crittenden, Moses Lake Request for land use designation S. 4, T, 19 N., R. 28 EWM change from Agriculture to Heavy Industrial, Grant County Airport This proposal was addressed at the time the Grant County Unified Development Code was adopted. Subject zoning on the property reflects the request to change the zoning to Heavy Industrial in accordance with the Grant County Official Zoning Map. No action taken by the Board of County Commissioners * 2000-16 Del Crittenden, Moses Lake Request for land use designation S. 32, T. 20 N., R. 28 EWM change from Public to Industrial zoning at Grant County Airport The Board of County Commissioners unanimously voted to uphold the recommendation of the Planning Commission for approval of the request and to change the land use designation from Public Facilities to Urban Industrial based on the following Findings of Fact: • The redesignation change is consistent with criteria for land use designations specified in the Comprehensive Plan. • The change will not be detrimental to uses or propert}in the immediate vicinity of the subject property. • The change has merit for the community as a whole • The change will not result in one property owner enloymg greater privileges and opportunities than those enjoyed by other property owners • The change is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and complies with all other applicable criteria and standards of Chapter 25.12.UDC • The change would benefit the public health, safety, and/or welfare; • The change is warranted because of changed circumstances or because of a need for additional property in the proposed land use designation. • The change is consistent with the purpose and intent of t he Comprehensive Plan and the requirements of Grant County Code Titles 22, 23, 24, and 25. * 2000-17 Grant Co. Housing Authority Request for land use designation Moses Lake, Lots 627, 628, change from Residential to 629. and 645, 646, and 647 Commercial, Grant County Larson Subdivision Airport. The Board of County Commissioners unanimously voted to uphold the recommendation of the Planning Commission for denial of the land use designation request from Residential to Commercial and suggested the Conditional Use Permit process would be more consistent with the area and use intended. The decision was based on the following Findings of Fact: • The redesignation change is not consistent with criteria for land use designations specified in the Comprehensive Plan. • The change is not consistent with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan does not comply with all other applicable criteria and standards of Chapter 25.12 1 JI>t * 2000-18 Grant Co. Housing Authority Request for land use designation Moses Lake, Lots 1-7, 416 & change from Residential to 417, 419- 421, Larson Commercial, Grant County Subdivision Airport There was no consensus vote from the Planning Commission. The Board of County Commissioners voted unanimously to approve the subject property as a PDA and concomitant agreement being siged with a stipulation being included that development of the area would have to be in accordance with an agreement with the Housing Authority through the PDA in accordance with the following Findings of Fact: • The redesignation change is consistent with criteria for land use designations specified in the Comprehensive Plan. • The change will not be detrimental to uses or property in the immediate vicinity of the subject property. • The change has merit for the community as a whole • The change will not result in one property owner enjoying greater privileges and opportunities than those enjoyed by other property owners • The change is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and complies with all other applicable criteria and standards of Chapter 25.12 UDC • The change would benefit the public health, safety, and/or welfare • The change is warranted because of changed circumstances or because of a need for additional property in the proposed land use designation. • The change is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and the requirements of Grant County Code Titles 22, 23, 24, and 25 * 2000-19 Rim Rock Cove Owners Assn. Request for land use designation Blue Lake change from Shoreline Dev. 3 to Govt. Lot 45, in S. 29, T. 24 N., a RAID R.27 E.W.M. There was no action taken by the Planning Commission as it was pointed out by Mr. Clark, the Rim Rock Cove Planned Unit Development was currently designated as a RAID and the concerns dealt with primarily setback requirements rather than land use designation. * 2000-20 Patrick Molitor & Maiers Request for land use designation Enterprises, Moses Lake change from Public Facility and A portion of S. 32, T. 20 N., Light Industrial to Residential R.28 EWM and Light Industrial The Board of County Commissioners voted unanimously to uphold the recommendation of the Planning Commission and approve the land use designation change request from Public Facility and Industrial to Residential and Industrial in accordance with the following Findings of Fact: • The redesignation change is consistent with criteria for land use designations specified in the Comprehensive Plan. • The change will not be detrimental to uses or property in the immediate vicinity of the subject property. • The change has merit for the community as a whole • The change will not result in one property owner enjoying greater privileges and opportunities than those enjoyed by other property owners • The change is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and complies with all other applicable criteria and standards of Chapter 25.12 UDC • The change would benefit the public health, safety, and/or welfare. • The change is warranted because of changed circumstances or because of a need for additional property in the proposed land use designation. • The change is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and the requirements of Grant County Code Titles 22, 23, 24, and 25. * 2000-21 Donald & Carolann Swartz Request for land use designation Lucille Swartz, Moses Lake change from Public Facilities to A portion of S. 30, T. 20 N., Light Industrial, Grant County R. 28 EWM Airport The Board of County Commissioners voted unanimously to uphold the recommendation of the Planning Commission and approve the land use designation change from Public Facilities to Industrial in accordance with the following Findings of Fact: • The redesignation change is consistent with criteria for land use designations specified in the Comprehensive Plan. • The change will not be detrimental to uses or property in the immediate vicinity of the subject property. • The change has merit for the community as a whole • The change will not result in one property owner enjoying greater privileges and opportunities than those enjoyed by other property owners • The change is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and complies with all other applicable criteria and standards of Chapter 25.12 IJDC • The change would benefit the public health, safety, and!or welfare; • The change is warranted because of changed circumstam es or because of a need for additional property in the proposed land use designation. * 2000-22 Astro Enterprises, Carol Jones Request for land use designation Moses Lake, Lots 5 & 6, Blk. 2 change from Urban Residential Astro Acres Plat to Commercial The Board of County Commissioners voted unanimously to uphold the recommendation of the Planning Commission for denial of the land use designation change request from Residential to Commercial based on the following Findings of Fact: • The redesignation change is not consistent with criteria for land use designations specified in the Comprehensive Plan. • The change will result in one property owner enjoying greater privileges and opportunities than those enjoyed by other property owners • The change is not consistent with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and complies with all other applicable criteria and standards of Chapter 25 12 (JD(' * 2000-23 Kevin & Stephanie Burgess Request for land use designation Moses Lake, in a portion of change from Residential to S. 16, T. 19 N., R. 28 EWM Commercial, Cascade Valley The Board of County Commissioners voted unanimously to uphold the recommendation of the Planning Commission for approval of the land use designation request from Residential io Commercial in accordance with the following Findings of Fact: • The redesignation change is consistent with criteria for Iand use designations specified in the Comprehensive Plan. • The change will not be detrimental to uses or property in the immediate vicinity of the subject property. • The change has merit for the community as a whole • The change will not result in one property owner enjoying greater privileges and opportunities than those enjoyed by other property owners • The change is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and complies with all other applicable criteria and standards of Chapter 25.12.UDC • The change would benefit the public health, safety and/or welfare. • The change is warranted because of changed circumstances or because of a need for additional property in the proposed land use designation. • The change is consistent with the purpose and intent ofthe Comprehensive Plan and the requirements of Grant County Code Titles 22, 23, 24, and 25. * 2000-24 Ed McLeary, Troutlodge. Request for land use designation S. 21, T. 21, R. 27 EWM change from Rural Remote to Rural Residential The Board of County Commissioners did not uphold the Planning Commission and voted unanimously to change the land use designation from Rural Remote to Rural Residential 1, in accordance with the following Findings of Fact: • The redesignation change is consistent with criteria for land use designations specified in the Comprehensive Plan. • The change will not be detrimental to uses or property in the immediate vicinity of the subject property. • The change has merit for the community as a whole • The change will not result in one property owner enjoying greater privileges and opportunities than those enjoyed by other property owners • The change is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and complies with all other applicable criteria and standards of Chapter 25.12.UDC' • The change would benefit the public health, safety, and%or welfare. • The change is warranted because of changed circumstances or because of a need for additional property in the proposed land use designation. • The change is consistent with the purpose and intent ofthe Comprehensive Plan and the requirements of • Grant County Code Titles 22, 23, 24, and 25. * 2000-25 Mc Leary Family Request for land use designation Limited Partnership from Open Space Recreation to A portion of S. 15, T. 24 N. Recreation Development on R. 27 EWM Park Lake The Board of County Commissioners did not uphold the Planning Commission recommendation for denial. They voted unanimously to change the land use designation from Open Space Conservation to Rural Reseidential II in accordance with the following Findings of Fact: • The redesignation change is consistent with criteria for land use designations specified in the Comprehensive Plan. • The change will not be detrimental to uses or property m the immediate vicinity of the subject property. • The change has merit for the community as a whole • The change will not result in one property owner enjoying greater privileges and opportunities than those enjoyed by other property owners • The change is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and complies with all other applicable criteria and standards of Chapter 25.12.UD(' • The change would benefit the public health, safety, and/or welfare; • The change is warranted because of changed circumstances or because of a need for additional property in the proposed land use designation. • The change is consistent with the purpose and intent of he Comprehensive Plan and the requirements of Grant County Code Titles 22, 23, 24, and 25. * 2000-26 Maurice & Elsa Smith, Schawana Request for land use designation Lot 1, Blk. 1, Town Plat of change from Commercial to Schawana Residential or Rural Community Schawana The Board of County Commissioners voted unanimously to uphold the recommendation of the Planning Commission for approval and change the land use designation from Commercial to Rural Community based on the following Findings of Fact: • The redesignation change is consistent with criteria for land use designations specified in the Comprehensive Plan. • The change will not be detrimental to uses or property to the immediate vicinity of the subject property. • The change has merit for the community as a whole • The change will not result in one property owner enjoying greater privileges and opportunities than those enjoyed by other property owners • The change is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and complies with all other applicable criteria and standards of Chapter 25.12.UDC • The change would benefit the public health, safety, and/or welfare; • The change is warranted because of changed circumstanL es or because of a need for additional property in the proposed land use designation. • The change is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and the requirements of Grant County Code Titles 22, 23, 24, and 25. * 2000-27 Everett Brissey, Trinidad Request for land use Lots, 10 — 12, and 17 — 19, Blk designation change from 11, and Lots 13 — 20, Blk. Rural Remote to Rural 24, and Lots 13 — 20, Blk. 27 Community The Board of County Commissioners voted unanimously to uphold the recommendation of the Planning Commission recommendation for approval and to change the land use designation from Rural Remote to Rural Community based on the following Findings of Fact: The change will not be detrimental to uses or property in the immediate vicinity of the subject property. The change has merit for the community as a whole The change will not result in one property owner enjoying greater privileges and opportunities than those enjoyed by other property owners * 2000-28 Brian Peters & Don Mc Dowall Request for land use Blue Lake, S. 29, T. 24 N., R. designation change from 27 EWM Rural Remote to Shoreline Development on Blue Lake The Board of County Commissioners voted unanimously to uphold the recommendation of the Planning Commission for approval of the land use designation change from Rural Remote to Shoreline Development based on the following Findings of Fact: • The redesignation change is consistent with criteria for land use designations specified in the Comprehensive Plan. • The change will not be detrimental to uses or property in the immediate vicinity of the subject property. • The change has merit for the community as a whole • The change will not result in one property owner enjoying greater privileges and opportunities than those enjoyed by other property owners • The change is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and complies with all other applicable criteria and standards of Chapter 25.12. UDC • The change would benefit the public health, safety, and/or welfare. • The change is warranted because of changed circumstances or because of a need for additional property in the proposed land use designation. • The change is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and the requirements of Grant County Code Titles 22, 23, 24, and 25. * 2000-29 Michael Stutzman, Quincy Request for land use S. 29, T. 20N, R. 27 EWM designation change from Rural Remote to Rural Residential The Board of County Commissioners voted unanimously to uphold the recommendation of the Planning Commission for denial of the land use designation change from Rural Remote to Rural Residential, based on the following Findings of Fact: • The redesignation change is not consistent with criteria for land use designations specified in the Comprehensive Plan. 10 • The change is not consistent with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan does not comply with all other applicable criteria and standards of Chapter 25 12 1 JD(' * 2000-30 Fred Slough, Ephrata Request for land use S. 24, T.20, R.27 EWM designation change from Rural Residential to Commercial or Industrial The Board of County Commissioners received a no quorum recommendation from the Planning Commission, and after discussion, the motion was made by Commissioner Snead, seconded by Commissioner Moore to approve the land use designation request to commercial or industrial. Commissioner Snead was in favor, Commissioner Moore felt this is not the place for commercial or industrial development. There was a motion to amend the motion by Commissioner Snead to change the land use designation to Rural Commercial on the five (5) acres nearest to Highway 17 and the intersection ofNepel Road and the balance of the parcel to be zoned Industrial with the proponent providing a map showing said location The motion was seconded by Chairman Allison, with Commissioner Moore opposing the motion. The following Findings of Fact will apply. • The change will not be detrimental to uses or property in the immediate vicinity of the subject property. • The change has merit for the community as a whole. • A map must be provided by the applicant indicating which portion of the property will be identified as Commercial and Industrial. * 2000-31 Vic Jansen, Moses Lake Request to change the land use A portion of S. 8, T, 19 N., R. change from Urban Residential 28 EWM Cascade Valley 3 to Urban Residential 2 The Board of County Commissioners voted unanimously to uphold the recommendation of the Planning Commission to approve the land use designation on the subject property from l iR3 to UR2 in accordance with the following Findings of Fact: The redesignation change is consistent with criteria for land use designations specified in the Comprehensive Plan. • The change will not be detrimental to uses or property in the immediate vicinity of the subject property. • The change has merit for the community as a whole • The change will not result in one property owner enjoying greater privileges and opportunities than those enjoyed by other property owners • The change is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and complies with all other applicable criteria and standards of Chapter 25.12 UDC * 2000-32 Charles Redmond and JB Request for land use designation and William Perdue, Moses change from Public Facility to Lake, Portion of S. 32, T. 20 N., Light Industrial, Grant County R. 28 EWM Airport The Board of County Commissioners voted unanimously to uphold the recommendation of the Planning Commission to approve the land use designation change on the subject property from Public Facilities to Light Industrial in accordance with the following Findings of Fact: The redesignation change is consistent with criteria for land use designations specified in the Comprehensive Plan. I1 • The change will not be detrimental to uses or property in the immediate vicinity of the subject property. • The change has merit for the community as a whole • The change will not result in one property owner enjoying greater privileges and opportunities than those enjoyed by other property owners • The change is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and complies with all other applicable criteria and standards of Chapter 25.12,UDC • The change would benefit the public health, safety, and welfare. • The change is warranted because of changed circumstances or because of a need for additional property in the proposed land use designation • The change is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and the requirements of Grant County Code Titles 22, 23, 24, and 25. * 2000-33 Tom Johnson, Moses Lake Correct Land Use Designation A portion of S. 3, T. 18 N., R. 28 from Agriculture to Rural Residential II The Board of County Commissioners voted unanimously to uphold the recommendation of the Planning Commission to approve the land use designation change on the subject propert,N from Agriculture to Rural Residential in accordance with the following Findings of Fact: • The change will not be detrimental to uses or property In the immediate vicinity of the subject property. • The change has merit for the community as a whole • The change will not result in one property owner enjoying greater privileges and opportunities than those enjoyed by other property owners • The change is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and complies with all other applicable criteria and standards of Chapter 25.12.UDC • The change would benefit the public health, safety, and/or welfare. * 2000-34 Juanita Longacre, Grant Orchards Request to change land use F.U. 46, Blk. 70, Grant Orchards designation from Agriculture to S. 27, T. 22 N., R. 27 E.W.M Rural Residential, Soap Lake The Board of County Commissioners voted unanimously to uphold the recommendation of the Planning Commission and approve the land use designation change from Agriculture to Rural Residential in accordance with the following Findings of Fact: • The redesignation change is consistent with criteria for land use designations specified in the Comprehensive Plan. • The change will not be detrimental to uses or property in the immediate vicinity of the subject property. • The change has merit for the community as a whole • The change will not result in one property owner enjoying greater privileges and opportunities than those enjoyed by other property owners • The change is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and complies with all other applicable criteria and standards of Chapter 25.1 ?.UD(' * 2000-35 Wayne Mayhugh Request to change land use Ephrata, Portion of F. U. 6, designation from Agriculture to Blk. 71 in a portion of S. 6, Rural Residential T. 20 N., R. 26 EWM 12 The Board of County Commissioners voted unanimously to uphold the recommendation of the Planning Commission and denied the land use designation change from Agriculture to Rural Residential based on the following Findings of Fact: • The redesignation change is not consistent with criteria tier land use designations specified in the Comprehensive Plan. • The change is not consistent with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and complies with all other applicable criteria and standards of Chapter 25.12.t'D(' * 2000-36 Ethel Mae Hesseltine Estate Request to change the land use Moses Lake, S. 35, T. 22 N., designation from Agriculture to R. 28 EWM Rural Residential The Board of County Commissioners voted unanimously to uphold the recommendation of the Planning Commission and denied the land use designation change from Agriculture to Rural Residential based on the following Findings of Fact: The redesignation change is not consistent with criteria for land use designations specified in the Comprehensive Plan. The change is non consistent with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and complies with all other applicable criteria and standards of Chapter 25 12 11D(' * 2000-37 Paul Lauzier Estate Ephrata, S. 17, T. 20 N., R. 26 EWM Request to change the land use designation from Agriculture to Rural Residential The Board of County Commissioners voted unanimously to uphold the recommendation of the Planning Commission for denial of the request to change the land use designation from Agriculture to Rural Residential based on the following Findings of Fact: The redesignation change is not consistent with criteria for land use designations specified in the Comprehensive Plan. The change is not consistent with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and complies with all other applicable criteria and standards of Chapter 25.12 1JDC * 2000-38 Soap Lake and Lakeview Park Growth Management Hearings Board Issue Board of County Commissioners took no action: Growth Management Hearings Board issue. * 2000-39 Blue Lake Area Need to correct land use designations to Rural Residential The Board of County Commissioners voted unanimously to uphold the recommendation of the Planning Commission for approval of the request for land use designation change to Rural Residential It excluding the area identified in application #2000 — 28 in accordance with the following Findings of Fact The redesignation change is consistent with criteria for Land use designations specified in the Comprehensive Plan. The change will not be detrimental to uses or property it the immediate vicinity of the subject property. The change has merit for the community as a whole 13 • The change will not result in one property owner enjoying greater privileges and opportunities than those enjoyed by other property owners • The change is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and complies with all other applicable criteria and standards of Chapter 25.12.UDC'. • The change would benefit the public health, safety, and/ot welfare. • The change is warranted because of changed circumstances or because of a need for additional property in the proposed land use designation. * 2000-40 Moses Lake UGA Change land use designation to Cascade Valley Commercial to reflect the previous Commercial zoning on a single parcel, Scott Road The Board of County Commissioners voted unanimously to uphold the recommendation of the Planning Commission for approval of the land use designation change to reflect the previous Commercisl zoning on a single parcel along Scott Road based on the following Findings of Fact: • The redesignation change is consistent with criteria for land use designations specified in the Comprehensive Plan. • The change will not be detrimental to uses or property in the immediate vicinity of the subject property. • The change has merit for the community as a whole • The change will not result in one property owner enjoying greater privileges and opportunities than those enjoyed by other property owners • The change is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and complies with all other applicable criteria and standards of Chapter 25.12 UDC * 2000-41 Electric City UGA City limits delineation/land use correction The Board of County Commissioners voted unanimously to uphold the Planning Commission recommendation to approve the revised map showing parcels of land inadvertently left off the original Electric City limits map be added in accordance with the following Findings of Fact: • The redesignation change is consistent with criteria for land use designations specified in the Comprehensive Plan. • The change will not be detrimental to uses or property in the immediate vicinity of the subject property. • The change has merit for the community as a whole • The change will not result in one property owner enjoying greater privileges and opportunities than those enjoyed by other property owners • The change is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and complies with all other applicable criteria and standards of Chapter 25.12 UDC * 2000-42 Coulee City, South Correct land use designation to Rural Residential The Board of County Commissioners voted unanimously to uphold the recommendation of the Planning Commission for approval of the change in land use designation map to Rural Residential I based on availability of infrastructure to the area based on the following Findings of Fact: • The redesignation change is consistent with criteria for land use designations specified in the Comprehensive Plan. • The change will not be detrimental to uses or propert} in the immediate vicinity of the subject property. • The change has merit for the community as a whole 14 • The change will not result in one property owner enjoying greater privileges and opportunities than those enjoyed by other property owners • The change is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and complies with all other applicable criteria and standards of Chapter 25.12. UDC * 2000-43 Grant County Airport Barney Industrial Plat correct land use designation to Industrial as previously zoned. The Board of County Commissioners voted unanimously to uphold the recommendation of the Planning Commission for approval of the change in the land use designation maps to reflect the Industrial designation rather than Commercial,.based on the following Findings of Fact: • The redesignation change is consistent with criteria for land use designations specified in the Comprehensive Plan. • The change will not be detrimental to uses or property in the immediate vicinity of the subject property. • The change has merit for the community as a whole • The change will not result in one property owner enjoying greater privileges and opportunities than those enjoyed by other property owners • The change is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and complies with all other applicable criteria and standards of Chapter 25.12 UDC * 2000-44 Town of Warden Correction of blank land use designations to include annexed areas and designation of areas inadvertently left off the map as Medium Density Residential Consistent with adjacent Designations. The Board of County Commissioners voted unanimously to uphold the Planning Commission for approval to reflect additional annexed areas in Warden, to include those annexed areas, and the designation of areas inadvertently left off the Warden Urban Growth Area map based on the following Findings of Fact: • The redesignation change is consistent with criteria for land use designations specified in the Comprehensive Plan. • The change will not be detrimental to uses or property in the immediate vicinity of the subject property. • The change has merit for the community as a whole • The change will not result in one property owner enjoying greater privileges and opportunities than those enjoyed by other property owners • The change is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and complies with all other applicable criteria and standards of Chapter 25.12 UDC * 2000-45 Grant County Errata Sheets, need to insert into the next generation of the Comp. Plan to correct inadvertent clerical, non - substantive errors. Correction of inadvertent clerical, non -substantive errors to the Comprehensive requiring no action by the Planning Commission nor the Board of County Commissioners. 15 * 2000-46 Townsite of Wheeler Correct land use designation on Fig. 5.5 to Rural Community consistent with Rural Community mapping The Board of County Commissioners voted unanimously to uphold the recommendation of the Planning Commission for approval of changing the land use designation on Figure 5.5 to Rural Community consistent with the Rural Community mapping rather than Light Industrial in accordance with the following Findings of Fact: • The redesignation change is consistent with criteria for land use designations specified in the Comprehensive Plan. • The change will not be detrimental to uses or property in the immediate vicinity of the subject property. • The change has merit for the community as a whole • The change will not result in one property owner enjoying greater privileges and opportunities than those enjoyed by other property owners • The change is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and complies with all other applicable criteria and standards of Chapter 25.12 UDC * 2000-47 Moses Lake UGA NE Stratford Road area (1) correct \ multiple land use designations to Commercial as previously zoned; And (2) designate the undesignated Area west of Stratford as Medium Density Residential consistent with adjacent land use designations The Board of County Commissioners voted unanimously to uphold the Planning Commission recommendation for approval to change land use designations on the west side of Stratford Road as Commercial which were previously zoned as commercial and to designate the undesignated area west of Stratford Road asUR-3, in accordance with the following Findings of Fact: • The redesignation change is consistent with criteria for land use designations specified in the Comprehensive Plan. • The change will not be detrimental to uses or property in the immediate vicinity of the subject property. • The change has merit for the community as a whole • The change will not result in one property owner enjoying greater privileges and opportunities than those enjoyed by other property owners • The change is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and complies with all other applicable criteria and standards of Chapter 25.12.11DC * 2000-48 Port of Moses Lake Correct land use designation to reflect Port ownership The Board of County Commissioners voted unanimously to uphold the Planning Commission recommendation for approval to change the land use designation to reflect the Port of Moses Lake ownership adjusting the UGA boundary on the north as well as the change in land use designation from the Port of Moses Lake to Commercial in accordance with the following Findings of Fact: • The redesignation change is consistent with criteria for land use designations specified in the Comprehensive Plan. • The change will not be detrimental to uses or property in the immediate vicinity of the subject property. 16 • The change has merit for the community as a whole • The change will not result in one property owner enjoying greater privileges and opportunities than those enjoyed by other property owners • The change is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and complies with all other applicable criteria and standards of Chapter 25.12 UDC * 2000-49 Moses Lake, Genie/Jones, south of Moses Lake Correct the land use designation to Urban Reserve from Agriculture in The Urban Growth Area for the City Of Moses Lake The Board of County Commissioners voted unanimously to uphold the Planning Commission recommendation for approval of the land use designation of the property from Agriculture to Urban Reserve to maintain consistency of Agricultureal land use not being within the Urban Growth area in accordance with the following Findings of Fact: • The redesignation change is consistent with criteria for land use designations specified in the Comprehensive Plan. • The change will not be detrimental to uses or property in the immediate vicinity of the subject property. • The change has merit for the community as a whole • The change will not result in one property owner enjoying greater privileges and opportunities than those enjoyed by other property owners • The change is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and complies with all other applicable criteria and standards of Chapter 25.12 UDC * 2000-50 EWGMHB "Shall -vs. -May" ISSUE: review for consistency EWGMHB issues The Board of County Commissioners voted unanimously to uphold the recommendation of the Planning Commission for approval of the recommended changes within the text of the Comprehensive Plan changing the wording from "should" to "shall' and from "may" to "will' in accordance with the following Findings of Fact • The redesignation change is consistent with criteria for land use designations specified in the Comprehensive Plan. • The change will not be detrimental to uses or property in the immediate vicinity of the subject property. • The change has merit for the community as a whole • The change is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and complies with all other applicable criteria and standards of Chapter 25.12 UDC * 2000-51 Grant County Rural lands re -calculations for Comp Plan amendments and Ephrata UGA Amendment (To be completed as a Directed task by the BOCC Following final Decisions The Board of County Commissioners directed staff to make the necessary changes to the Comprehensive Plan to reflect the land use designation changes through the adoption of the 2000 Comprehensive Plan discussed herein. As a point of clarification, there are no changes to the Ephrata UGA boundaries associated 17 with this directive. * 2000-52 Richard Hopperstad, Moses Lake Request for staff review and redesignation of his property from Agriculture to Rural Residential There was no action taken by the Board of County Commissioners as this property was redesignated at the time the UDC for Grant County was adopted, showing it as Mr. Hopperstad requested. 18