Loading...
Resolution 13-063-CC V ' " � ' BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONER� GRANT COUIiTTY, WASHINGTON RESOLUTIOI�T NO. � '"° ��� � v A Resolution Relating to Comprehensive Planning in Grant County in Accordance with the Washington State Growth Management Act(RCW 36.70 A) and amending the 2006 Comprehensive Plan and Zone Changes. WHEREAS, in 1990, the Washington State Legislature passed and the Governor signed into law the Growth Management Act(GMA) as contained in SHB No 2929 � (Washington Laws, 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 WHElaEAS, after complete review and public record of the State Environmental Review process, Grant County issued a Final Environmental Impact Statement on July, 2, 1999; and subsequent amendments through 2013 and; WHEREAS, over the past years, the Comprehensive Plan's policies may have changed to insure that the development patterns in the County remain consistent with the intent of the communities' vision for the future and the Plan's goals and policies; and WHEREAS, it is important that amendments to this plan retain the broad perspectives articulated in the community vision statements, satisfies the goals and policies of this Plan, and remain consistent with the intent of the GMA; and Grant County Board of County Commissioners Resolution Adoptiug Amendments for the Year 2013 �I To the Grant County Comprehensive Plan 1 , . ` I 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 lcinds of amendments identified herein may include: • Urban Growth Area Boundary Changes; • Plan policy or text changes; • Plan Map changes; • Supporting document changes; emergency amendments; and • Site-specific amendments; and V6�HEREAS,policy amendments may be initiated by the County or by other entities, organizations or individuals through petition; and WHEREAS,petitions were received on forms provided by the Department, containing appropriate maps showing the proposed change and addressing the policy or map evaluation criteria as described in the Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, On May 6, 2013 the Board of County Commissioners directed staff to initiate the SEPA review process and schedule each of the complete amendments proposed, along with staff recommendations before the Planning Commission for public hearing; and WHEREAS,public hearings were conducted by the Planning Commission on June 26, � 2013, to hear staff recommendations and take public testimony on each of the proposed amendments to the Grant County Comprehensive Plan and proposed Zone Changes; making recommendations and listing Findings of Fact on each amendment and zone change, and; WHEREAS,the Planning Commission held a second public hearing on August 7, 2013 in order to reconsider their recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners after it became lcnown that a Planning Commission member engaged in ex-parte communication prior to the June 26, 2013 meeting, and �VHEItEAS,the Planning Commission staff reports and recommendations are made a part of the record of this public hearing as it relates to SEPA and the attached amendments and zone changes. Grant County Board of County Commissioners Resolution Adopting Amendmeuts for the Year 2013 To tUe Grant County Comprehensive Plan 2 � WHEREAS, a non-project proposal to consider adoption of amendments to the Comprehensive Plan, including site-speci�c land use designation changes and changes to Figure 5-5 Future Land Use Map, were considered, and; WHEREAS, copies of this EIS Addendum were distributed to agencies, organizations and individuals listed on the Planning Department distribution list and requesting that comments be submitted in accordanca with WAC 197-11-340 (2), and; WHEItEAS,the Board of County Commissioners conducted an open-record public hearing on Tuesday, September 10, 2013 to consider the 2013 requests for amendment to the Comprehensive Plan, and the recommendation from the Planning Commission for each of the proposed amendments and their respective zone changes; NOW,THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED,that the Board of County Commissioners for Grant County adopts the attached Findings of Fact per Attachment"B" and the attached record pertaining to the approval of the 2013 Comprehensive Plan amendments and Zone Changes; 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 sassion at Ephrata, Washington, by the following vote, then signed b�yits membership a�ll attested to by its Clerk in authorization of such passage this���"�" day of ,,,�� �� 2013. DATED this�day of G , 2013. BOAI�D OF COUI�TY COMMISSIONERS Yea Nay Abstain GRANT COUNTY, /VVr� HI GT N � � ❑ � Cindy Cart , Chair ATTEST: C��i��.��%2�� ,� � � � Carolann Swartz, Vice Chair :,!"° .. , s, lerk of tl� B �d � �...e.._.�,___ �� L� ❑ ❑ � Richard Stevens, Member Grant County Board of Couuty Commissioners Resolutton Adopting Amendments for tha Year 2013 To the Grant County Comprehensive Plan 3 ' ATTACHMENT "A" GRANT COUl�TY COMPREHENSIVE PLAl� AMENDMENT 2013 FINDINGS OF FACT Section I—General Findings I i 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 lilcely to create demands for urban services and utilities that are insufficient to support thezr extension in a cost-effective manner. 1.3 The 2013 Comprehensive Plan amendment process responds to the environmental concerns raised during the public hearing process, whole protecting property owners from unconstitutional takings and substantive due process violations. 1.4 RCW 36.70A.020 sets for a list of 13 goals "to guide the development and adoption of comprehensive plans and development regulations." In the amendment public hearing process, and these findings of fact, the Planning Commission and Board of County Commissioners considered the 13 Growth Management Goals, weighed them as they apply to the subject matter of these findings, and has attempted to achieve a reasoned balance among them. Section 2 - Public Participation 2.1 Petitions received by the Planning Depai�tment were raviewed by the Board of � County Commissioners, and the Board directed the Planning Department to proceed with further review af the petitions and to prepare environmental documentation consistent with the requirements of RCW 43.21C and Grant County Code Chapter 24.04 (SEPA). 2.2 In accordance with Grant County Code Chapter 25.12 — Legislative Actions, the Planning Commission held public hearings on June 26, 2013 at which time testimony was talcen from interested agencies, organizations, and individual citizens, regarding Attachrnent"A" Grant County Comprehensive Plan Amendment 2013 General Tindings of Fact the proposed amendments and zone changes. A second meeting was held on August 7, 2013 in order for the Planning Commission to reconsider their recommendation after it was brought to Staff's attention that a member of the Planning Commission engaged in ex-parte communication with an applicant. At this meeting the Commission reaffirmed their recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners. 2.3 Board of County Commissioners and Planning Commission meetings, hearings, and study sessions requiring "legal notice" were advertised in the local paper of record pursuant to the requirements of RCW 36.70 and the Grant County Unified Development Code. Copies of the proposed amendments, and 2013 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 spealc were given an opportunity to do so. Public testimony and written correspondence were given full consideration as part of the amendment process. 2.4 The existing enhanced public participation policies within Grant County ensure that the public had an opportunity to provida meaningful comments on the proposed amendments. 2.5 The appeal mechanisms contained within Grant Caunty 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 pei�tinent provisions of the Grant County Comprehensive Plan and Unified Development Code. 3.2In reviewing the amendments, the Planning Commission and Board of County Commissioners considered testimony provided at public hearings and recommendations provided by staff and interested or affected agencies with jurisdiction. The Planning Commission and Board of County Commissioners approved, approved with conditions, or rejected an application for a change of designation or density based on the following criteria: (a) The change would benefit the public health, safety, and/or welfare; (b) The change is warranted because of changed circumstances or because of a need for additional property in the proposed land-use designation. (c) The change is consistent with the criteria for land use designations specified in the Comprehensive Plan. (d) The change will not be detrimental to uses or property in the immediate vicinity of the subject property. (e) The change has merit and value for the community as a whole Attacl�ment"A" Grant Coimty Comprehensive Plan Amendment 2013 General Tindings of P'act (fj 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 Recommendations And/or Actions 4. 1 Recorded motions by the Board of County Commissioners for each proposed amendment and Findings of Fact are listed in Attachment"B" 4.2 Recorded motions by the Board of County Commissioners for each proposed zone change and Findings of Fact are listed in Attachment"B" 4.3 Supporting Findings of Fact for each decision were identified under Section 3 as detailed above, unless otherwise noted in the record of the Board of County Commissioners. 4.A� Detailed applications along with supporting documentation and staff reports are made a part of this recommendation. Atta�hmenr��A„ Grant County Comprehensive Plan Amendment 2013 General Tindings of F'act ATTACHMENT `B' FINAL ACTION AND FINDINGS OF FACT BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS � 2013 AMENDMENTS � 1) 13-5779—Beverly Hasper � 2) 13-5780—Tony Favero 3) 13-5781 —Bruce Mathews (3MI, LLC) I 4) 13-5782—Kevin(Bob) Tatum #1. FILE NO. 13-5779 ! BEVERLY HASPER � SIT�-SPECIFIC LAND USE REDESIGNATION AND ZONE CHANGE LOCATION: The subject area is located in the northwest corner of the intersection of H Rd. NE and Rd. 10 � NW, approximately one mile south of SR 28. The properties are located in a portion of the SE '/4 I of Section 10, Township 20 North, Range 25 East, W.M., Grant County, WA. Parcel #s 20- 0167-002, 20-0167-003, and a portion of 20-0167-000. STAFF ANALYSIS: The applicant has submitted a request for a site-specific land use re-designation consisting of two parcels and a portion of another totaling 19.0 acres. The poi�tions of the property involved in this application are currently used for residential, in the northern most portion of the properties , involved in the re-designation application there do appear to be some historic corrals. The property is currently designated as Irrigated—Agriculture, however the proposal is made up of � multiple parcels. � i � Also the soil types for the property, for which the re-designation is proposed; according to the � Columbia Basin Project Land Classification are type 3 and 6 soils which are not considered to be ;' ideal farm ground. The properties described in the proposal are portions of Farm Unit 22, Block � 71, but are not currently served by USBR water and historically do not appear to have ever been � served by USBR water. Aerial photographs, as far bacic as 1996, show that the property has not � been used for Agricultural production. � PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ; RE-DESIGNATION: The Planning Commission conducted an open record hearing for this application on June 26, � 2013. At their hearing the Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of Site � Specific re-designation from Irrigated - Agriculture to Rural Residential 1. � I � Attachment"B" Decisions and Findings of Fact ' Board of County Commissioners i 2013 Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Zone Changes 1 I i, DECISION: The Board of County Commissioners voted unanimously to uphold tlie recommendation of the Planning Commission and approve the following requast for a Site Specific Land Use Re-designation: 1) The re-designation of approximately 19-acres (Pai•cel#20-0167-002,20-0167-003 and a portion of 20-0167-000)to Rural Residential 1. The Board of County Commissioners established the following Findings of Fact: 1) The change would benefit the public health, safety, and or welfare; 2) The change is warranted because of changed circumstances or because of a need for additional property in the proposed land use designation. : 3) The change is consistent with the criteria for land use designations specified in the Comprehensive Plan. 4) The change will not be detrimental to uses or property in the immediate vicinity of the subject property. 5) The change does have merit for the community as a whole. 6) The change, if granted, will not result in a group of property owners enjoying greater privileges and opportunities than those enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity where there is not substantive difference in the properties themselves which justify different designations. 7) The benefits of the change will outweigh any significant adverse impacts of the change. 8) The change is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and the requirements of GCC 22, 23, 24 and 25. 9) The change does comply with all other applicable criteria and standards of Chapter 25.12 UDC. ZONE CHANGE PLANNING COMMISSION SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission conducted an open record hearing for this application on June 26, 2013. The Planning Commission made a unanimous recommendation to approve the proposed zone change from Agriculture to Rural Residential 1. DECISION: The Board of County Commissioners voted unanimously to uphold the recommendation of the Planning Commission and approve the following re-zone: 1) A zone change of approximately 19-acres (Parcel#20-0167-002,20-0167-003 and a portion of 20-0167-000) to Rural Residential 1. The Board of County Commissioners established the following Findings of Fact: 1) The proposed rezone will not be contrary to the intent or purposes and regulations of the Grant County Code or the Comprehensive Plan; 2) The property in question is suitable for uses allowed under the proposed zoning district; 3) Uses allowed under the proposed zone change are compatible with neighboring land uses; 4) The proposed rezone can be seived by adequate facilities including access,fire protection, '� water, storm-water control, and sewage disposal facilities; 5) Substantial changes do exi�t to warrant an amendment to the current zoning district; i� �� Attachment"B" � Decisions and Findings of Fact ' Board of County Commissioners 2013 Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Zone Changes 2 � . ' � � 6) A public need�loes exist for the proposed rezone. Public need shall mean that a valid public purpose, for which the comprehensive plan and this chapter have been adopted,is served by the proposed rezone, 7) The proposed rezone will not result in significant adverse impacts on the human or natural , environments that cannot be mitigated by conditions of approval; 8) The cumulative impact of additional requests for lilca actions (the total of the rezones over time or space) will not produce significant adverse effects to the environment that cannot be mitigated by conditions of approval; 9) The pedestrian and vehicular traffic associated with the rezone will not be hazardous to existing and anticipated traffic in the neighborhood; and 10)The proposed zoning district�loes not include any allowable use or activity that would result in the location of an incompatible use adjacent to an airport or airfield(RCW 36.70). #2. File No. 13-5780 TONY FAVERO SITE SPECIFIC LAND USE REDESIGNATION AND ZONE CHANGE LOCATION: The proposal site is 14372 N. Frontage Road E., Moses Lake, WA. The parcel is located in a portion of the NW '/a of Section 33, Township 19 North, Range 29 East, W.M., Grant County, Washington. Parcel #s 19-0570-012, 19-0570-013, and 19-0570-014. STAFF ANALYSIS: The applicant has submitted a request for a site-specific land use re-designation of three parcels totaling approximately 28.17 acres from Rural Urban Reserve to Industrial (Rural). These properties are bordered on all sides by properties designated Rural Urban Reserve. The Rural Industrial land use designation is one of the County's LAMIRD (Limited Areas of More Intensive Rural Development) designations. In order for an existing use or existing area to be considered for a LAMIRD designation, it must have been in existence on July 1, 1991 (RCW 36.70a.070(d)). Tl�e site/use in question, for this application, is the Central Washington Livestock sales facility located at 14372 North Frontage Road E, Moses Lake, WA. A Conditional Use Permit was approved for the livestock sales yard by the Grant County Board of Adjustment on October 15, 1990. However no building permits were obtained for the structure until July 19, 1993. Grant Count Planning Staff is of the opinion that an approved CUP does not qualify as development and therefore the site in question does not meet the requirements for a LAMIRD designation. As with any land use application,the burden of proof to have the application resides solely with the applicant. Prior to considering whether the proposed land use designation is appropriate for the site, it mustr firs tbe established that the site contained commercial/industrial development at the time that Grant County was obligated to comply with the GMA, which was July 1, 1991. The applicant has submitted evidence from the previous owner, Martell Palmer, stating that he ' utilized the pasture and corrals on the property for cows since 1990. Also included in the ' Attachment"B" Decisions and rindings of Fact Board of County Commissioners � 2013 Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Zone Changes 3 application was a copy of the CUP issued in 1990 and the Building Permit issued in 1993. Because there is no evidence to support the presence of commercial/industrial development on ' the site prior to July 1, 1991, staff is unable to recommend approval of the proposed change in ' land use designation to Rural Industrial. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN RE-DESIGNATION: The Planning Commission conducted an open record public hearing for this application on June 26, 2013. At their hearing the Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of this land use re-designation application from Rural Urban Reserve to Industrial, Rural. A second hearing was held on August 7, 2013 in order for the Planning Commission to reconsider their recommendation after it was brought to Staff's attention that a member of the Planning Commission engaged in ex-parte communication with the applicant,prior to the June hearing, at this meeting the Planning Commission re-affirmed their recommendation of approval to the County Commissioners. DECISION: The Board of County Commissioners voted unanimously to uphold the recommendation of the Planning Commission and approve the following request for a Site Specific Land Use Re- designation: 1) Re-designate approximately 28.17 acres (parcel#s 19-0570-012, 19-0570-013 & 19- 0570-014) from Rural Urban Reserve to Industrial, Rural. The Board of County Commissioners established the following Findings of Fact: 1) The change would benefit the public health, safety, and or welfare; 2) The change is warranted because of changed circumstances or bacause of a need for additional property in the proposed land use designation. 3) The change is consistent with the criteria for land use designations specified in the Comprehensive Plan. 4) The change will not be detrimental to uses or property in the immediate vicinity of the subj ect property. 5) The change does h�zve merit for the community as a whole. 6) The change, if granted, will not result in a group of propei�ty owners enjoying greater privileges and opportunities than those enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity where there is not substantive difference in the properties themselves which justify � different designations. 7) The benefits of the change will outweigh any significant adverse impacts of the change. 8) The change is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and the requirements of GCC 22, 23, 24 and 25. 9) The change tloes comply with all other applicable criteria and standards of Chapter 25.12 UDC. 10)The Planning Commission does acicnowledge that ex-parte communication occurred between a Planning Commission member and the applicant of the Favero Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application, file number 13-5780. 11)The Planning Commission �loes recognize this change in circumstances which allows them to reconsider the original reconimendation. Attachment"B" Decisions and Findings of Fact Board of County Commissioneis 2013 Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Zone Changes 4 12)The Planning Commission cloes seelc to invoke its discretion found in Grant County Code 2.68.130 to waive the requirement for a new application and application fee from the applicant. 13)The Planning Commission does not find that the ex-parte communication unduly or unfairly influenced the original vote of the remaining Planning Commission members. 14)The Planning Commission does find that the original recommendation for the approval of file number 13-5780 should be upheld and continue on to the BOCC for approval. ZONE CHANGE PLANNING COMMISSION SUMMARY AND RECOMIVIENDATION: The Planning Commission conducted an open record hearing for this application on June 26, 2013. At the hearing no members from the public spolce for or against this proposal. Planning Commission made a unanimous recommendation to approve the proposed Re-zone from Rural Urban Reserve to Rural Light Industrial. DECISION: The Board of County Commissioners voted unanimously to uphold the recommendation of the Planning Commission and approve the following re-zone: 1) A Re-zone of approximately 28.17 acres (parcel #s 19-0570-012, 19-0570-013 and 19- 0570-014) from Rural Urban Reserve to Rural Light Industrial. The Board of County Commissioners established the following Findings of Fact: 1) The proposed rezone will not be contrary to the intent or purposes and regulations of the Grant County Code or the Comprehensive Plan; 2) The property in question is suitable for uses allowed under the proposed zoning district; 3) Uses allowed under the proposed zone change are compatible with neighboring land uses; 4) The proposed rezone can be served by adequate facilities including access, fire protection, water, storm-water control,and sewage disposal facilities; 5) Substantial changes�lo exi�t to warrant an amendment to the current zoning dis�rict; 6) A public need does exist for the proposed rezone. Public need shall mean that a valid public purpose, for which the comprehensive plan and this chapter have been adopted, is seived by the proposed rezone. 7) The proposed rezone wild not result in significant adverse impacts on the human or natural environments that cannot be mitigated by conditions of approval; 8) The cumulative impact of additional requests for lilce actions (the total of the rezones over time or space) will not produce significant adverse effects to the environment that cannot be mitigated by conditions of approval; 9) The pedestrian and vehicular traffic associated with the rezone will not be hazardous to existing and anticipated traffic in the neighborhood; and 10)The proposed zoning district does not include any allowable use or activity that would result in the location of an incompatible use adjacent to an airport or airfield(RCW 36.70). Attachment"B" � Decisions and Findings of Fact Board of County Commissioners 2013 Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Zone Changes 5 #3. FILE NO. 13-5781 BRUCE MATHEWS (3MI, LLC) SITE SPECIFIC LAND USE REDESIGNATION AND ZONE CHANGE LOCATION: ' The proposal is located at 4398 Stratford Rd. NE, Moses Lake, WA 98837, on the west side of Stratford Rd. approximately one mile north of SR 17. The site is located in a portion of Section 10, Township 19 North, Range 28 East, W.M., Grant County, WA. Parcel #17-0478-062. STAFF ANAI,YSIS: The applicant has submitted a request for a site-specific land use re-designation consisting of a portion of one parcel. The proposed change is from Residential—Medium Density to Commercial. The parcel currently has a mini-storage facility on-site. The parcel is bordered on the west by the City Limits of Moses Lake, the north and east is bordered by Urban Residential zoning and to the south is Urban Commercial2. This parcel is currently used as commercial property; the mini-storage facility has been at this site since 1997. The site specific land use re-designation that the applicant has proposed would make the designation consistent with the existing ongoing land use. As the propei�ty is currently being utilized for a commercial use, and is adjacent to property zoned and utilized for commercial uses (propei�ty to the south) it is unlilcely that the property would ever be redeveloped for residential purposes. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN RE-DESIGIVATION: The Planning Commission conducted an open record hearing for this application on June 26, 2013. At their hearing the Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of this re- designation from Residential, Medium Density to Commercial, Urban. DECISION: The Board of County Commissioners voted unanimously to uphold the recommendation of the Planning Commission and approve the following request for a Site Specific Land Use Re- designation: 1) Re-designate approximately 1.45 acres (parcel#17-1406-000) from Residential, Medium Density to Commercial, Urban. The Board of County Commissioners established the following Findings of Fact: 1) The change wouCd benefit the public health, safety, and or welfare; 2) The change is warranted because of changed circumstances or because of a need for additional property in the proposed land use designation. 3) The change is consistent with the criteria for land use designations specified in the Comprehensive Plan. 4) The change will not be detrimental to uses or property in the immediate vicinity of the subj ect property. 5) The change �loes have merit for the community as a whole. Attachment"B" Decisions and Findings of Fact Board of County Commissioners 2013 Comprehensive Plan A�nendments and Zone Changes 6 � � ' 6) The change, if granted, wiCl not result in a group of property owners enjoying greater privileges and opportunities than tihose enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity where there is not substantive difference in the properties themselves which justify different designations. 7) The benefits of the change widl outweigh any significant adverse impacts of the change. 8) The change is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and the requirements of GCC 22, 23, 24 and 25. 9) The change does comply with all other applicable criteria and standards of Chapter 25.12 UDC. ZONE CHANGE PLANNING COMMISSION SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission conducted an open record hearing for this application on June 26, 2013. At the hearing no members of the public spoke for or against the proposaL The Planning Commission made a unanimous recommendation to approve the proposed zone change from Urban Residential3 to Urban Commercial2. DECISION: The Board of County Commissioners voted unanimously to uphold the recommendation of the Planning Commission and approve the following re-zone: 1) A Re-zone of approximately 1.45 acres (parcel#17-1406-000) from Urban Residential3 to Urban Commercial 2. The Board of County Commissioners established the following Findings of Fact: 1) The proposed rezone will not be contrary to the intent or purposes and regulations of the Crrant County Code or the Comprehensive Plan; 2) The property in question is suitable for uses allowed under the proposed zoning district; 3) Uses allowed under the proposed zone change�rre compatible with neighboring land uses; 4) The proposed rezone can be served by adequate facilities including access, i"ire protection, water, storm-water control,and sewage disposal facilities; 5) Substantial changes�lo exist to warrant an amendment to the cut�rent zoning district; 6) A public need does exist for the proposed rezone. Public need shall mean that a valid public purpose, for which the comprehensive plan and this chapter have been adopted, is served by the proposed rezone. 7) The proposed rezone will not result in significant adverse impacts on the human or natural environments that cannot be mitigated by conditions of approval; 8) The cumulative impact of additional requests for like actions (the total of the rezones over time or space) will not produce significant adverse effects to the environment that cannot be mitigated by conditions of approval; 9) The pedestrian and vehicular traffic associated with the rezone will not be hazardous to existing and anticipated traffic in the neighborhood; and 10)The proposed zoning district does not include any allowable use or activity that would result in the location of an incompatible use adjacent to an airport or airfield(RCW 36.70). Attachment"B" Decisions and Findings of Fact Board of County Commissioners 2013 Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Zone Changes 7 #4. FILE NO. 13-5782 KEVIN (BOB) TATUM SITE SPECIFIC LAND US�REDESIGNATION AND ZONE CHANGE LOCATION: The proposal is located at the intersection of Loring Dr. NE, I Rd.NE, and Harris Rd. NE. There is no address for the site at this time. The site is located in a portion o�Section 3, Township 19 North, Range 28 East, W.M., Grant County, WA. (NE portion of 17-0143-000) STAFF ANALYSIS: The applicant has submitted a request for a site-specif"ic land use re-designation consisting of a portion of one parcel. The proposed change is from Residential - Medium Density to Commercial (Urban). The parcel is currently vacant and un-developed. The parcel is bordered on the west by the City Limits of Moses Lake and Urban Heavy Industrial, the north and east is bordered by Rural Residential zoning and to the south is Urban Residential3. This parcel is divided by Loring Drive, Harris Road and I Road NE. A portion of the parcel had a land use designation change to Commercial, Urban approved in 2010. The portion of the property currently being proposed for a designation change was recently included into the Urban Growth Area pursuant to Grant County Code § 23.04 (e) (2), which states "where a UGA zoning district divides a lot of record at the time of adoption of this chapter,the entire parcel shall be deemed to lie within the UGA boundary and retain the UGA zoning district." Therefore the UGA was expanded, at the request of the property owner, to include the portion of the parcel included in this application and it was given a land use designation of Residential, Medium Density and a zoning designation of Urban Residential3, which is what the designation and zoning was for the portion of the property included in the UGA at the time of adoption. The applicant is now proposing to re-designata this poi�tion of the property in order to give the entire property a consistent land use designation. This property is not located immediately adjacent to any high density housing developments so the impact to adjoining property owners would be minimal. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN RE-DESIGNATION: The Planning Commission conducted an open record public hearing for this application on June 26, 2013. At their hearing the Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of this land use re-designation application from Residential, Medium Density to Commercial,Urban. DECISION: The Board of County Commissioners voted unanimously to uphold the recommendation of the Planning Commission and approve the following request for a Site Specific Land Use Re- designation: 1) Re-designate a 29.5 acre portion of parcel#17-0143-000 from Residential,Medium Density to Commercial, Urban. The Board of County Cominissioners established the following Findings of Fact: Attachment"B" I Decisions and P'indings of Fact I Board of County Commissioners , 2013 Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Zone Changes 8 1) The change would bene�'it the public health, safety, and or welfare; 2) The change is warranted because of changed circumstances or because of a need for additional property in the proposed land use designation. 3) The change is consistent with the criteria for land use designations specified in the � Comprehensive Plan. 4) The change will not be detrimental to uses or property in the immediate vicinity of the subject property. 5) The change �loes have merit for the community as a whole. 6) The change, if granted, will not result in a group of property owners enjoying greater privileges and opportunities than those enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity ' where there is not substantive difference in the properties themselves which justify different designations. � 7) The bene�ts of the change will outweigh any significant adverse impacts of the change. 8) The change is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and the requirements of GCC 22, 23, 24 and 25. 9) The change does comply with all other applicable criteria and standards of Chapter 25.12 UDC. ZONE CHANGE PLANNING COMMISSION SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIOIoT: The Planning Commission conducted an open record hearing for this application on June 26, 2013. At the hearing no members of the public spoke for or against the proposal. The Planning Commission made a unanimous recommendation to approve the proposed zone change from Urban Residential3 to Urban Commercial 1. DECISION: The Board of County Commissioners voted unanimously to uphold the recommendation of the Planning , Commission and approve the following re-zone: 1) A Re-zone of a 29.5 acre portion of parcel#17-0143-000 from Urban Residential3 to ' Urban Commercial 1. The Board of County Commissioners established the following Findings of Fact: 1) The proposed rezone will not be contrary to the intent or purposes and regulations of the Crrant County Code or the Comprehensive Plan; ' 2) The property in question is suitable for uses allowed under the proposed zoning district; 3) Uses allowed under the proposed zone change are compatible with neighboring land uses; 4) The proposed rezone can be served by adequate facilities including access, fire protection, water, storm-water control,and sewage disposal facilities; 5) Substantial changes clo exist to warrant an amendment to the current zoning district; 6) A public need does exist for the proposed rezone. Public need shall mean that a valid public purpose, for which the comprehensive plan and this chapter have been adopted, is served by the proposed rezone. 7) The proposed rezone will not result in significant adverse impacts on the human or natural environments that cannot be mitigated by conditions of approval; Attachment"B" Decisions and Findings of Fact Board of County Commissionars 2013 Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Zone Changes 9 ' 8) The cumulative impact of additional requests for like actions (the total of the rezones over ' time or space) will not produce significant adverse effects to the environment that cannot be mitigated by conditions of approval; 9) The pedestrian and vehicular traffic associated with the rezone wzll not be hazardous to existing and anticipated traffic in the neighborhood; and 10)The proposed zoning district cloes not include any allowable use or activity that would result in the location of an incompatible use adjacent to an airport or airfield(RCW 36.70). Attachment"B" Decisions and Findings of Fact Board of County Commissioners 2013 Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Zone Changes 10