HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution 16-063-CC �
, BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
GRANT COUNTY, WASHINGTON
RESOLUTION NO. �,� - C.��.�-� �' �
- 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 developinent, open space and recreation, regional
transportation, environmental protection, property rights, natural resource industries,
historic lands and buildings,pennit 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 ai•eas (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, Grant County issued a Final Environmental Impact Stateinent on July, 2, 1999;
and subsequent amendments through 2016 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 Cormnissioners
, Resoltrtion Adopting Amendments for the Year 2016
, 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 Colint has established a ublic artici ation ro am identif in
� Y P p P p �' Y g
procedures whereby proposed amendinents or revisions of the Comprehensive Plan are
� considered by the governing body of the County no more frequently than once every
year; anci
' 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 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
WHEREAS,policy amendments may be initiated by the County or by other entities,
organizations or individuals through petition; and
WHEREAS,petitions ware received on forms provided by the Dapartment, 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 2, 2016 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 befora the Planning Commission for public
hearing; and
, WHEREAS,public hearings were conducted by the Planning Commission on June 22,
2016, to hear staff recommendations and take public testimony on each of the proposed
amendments to the Grant County Comprehensive Plan and proposed Zone Changes;
malcing recommendations and listing Findings of Fact on each amendment and zone
change, and;
WHEREAS,the Planning Commission staff reports and recommendations are made a
part of the record of this public hearing as it relates to SEPA and the attached
amendments and zone changes, and
WHEItEAS, a non-project proposal to consider adoption of amendments to the
Comprehensive Plan, inchiding site-specific land use designation changes, changes to
Figl.ire 5-5 Future Land Use Map, changes to the Town of Coulee City Urban Growth
Boundary were considered, as well as associated Zone Changes, and;
Grant County
Board of Coimty Cominissioners
Resolution Adopting Amendments for the Year 2016
To the Grant County Comprel�ensive Plan
2
I
� WHEREAS; copies of this EIS Addendum were distributed to agencies, organizations
' and individuals listed on the Planning Department distribution list and requesting that
comments be submitted in accordance with WAC 197-11-340 (2), and;
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners conducted an open-record public
hearing on Monday, July 18, 2016 to consider the 2016 requests for amendments 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 2016 Comprehensive Plan amendments
and Zone Changes; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED,that the Board of County Cominissioners for Grant
County adopts Findings of Fact as per Attachment"A"in support of these actions.
PASSED by the Board of County Commissioners in regillar session at Ephrata,
Washington,by the following vote, then signed by its membership nd attested to by its
Clerk in authorization of such passage this �' o day of �/. �..,
2016.
IDATED this�day of ,�...-� a _, 2016.
BOARD OF COUNTY �
COMMISSIONERS
Yea Nay Abstain ,,.��ANT COUNTY,
( WA`S,HINGT
9 �,
� ❑ ❑ V �
Cindy Carte , Chair
, �., � � l��� G✓!%�laJ�
ATTEST: � ❑ ❑ (:���L �� �
�,/`+ � �, �
Carolann Swartz, Member
,�" ;.
` ��,... �' i' �'' _.,�__�__.._.....___.
Clerk of�ie dar � ❑ ❑ d �� �
Richaxd Stevens, Member
Grant Couuty
Board oPCounTy Commissioners
Resohrtion Adopting Amendments for the Year 2016
, To the Gi�ant County Comprehensive Plan
3
ATTACHMEN T 6GA99
' GRANT COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS
2016 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 ainendinents to the
Comprehensive Plan and land use reglilations 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 envirorunentally 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 ara
insufficient to support their extension in a cost-effective manner.
1.3 The 2016 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 clevelopment and adoption
' of comprehensive plans and davelopment regulations." In the amendment public
hearing process, and these findings of fact, the Planning Commission and Board of
County Commissioners considered the 13 Growth Management Goals, weighed them
as they apply to the subject matter of these findings, and has attempted to achieve a
reasoned balance among them.
Section 2 - Public Participation
2.1 Petitions received by the Planning Department were reviewed by the Board of County
Commissioners, and the Board directed the Planning Department to proceed with
fiirther review of the petitions and to prepare environmental documentation consistent
with the requirements ot�RCW 43.21 C 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 22, 2016 at which time testimony
was taken from interested agencies, organizations, and individltal citizens, regarding
the proposed amendments and zone changes.
Attacliment"A"
Grt►nt Cowity Comprehensive Plnn
Amendment 2016
General Findi�tgs of Fnct
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 2016 Addendlun to the
Envirorunental Impact Statemen� 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 fonim. At hearings, all persons desiring to speak were given an
' opportunity to do so. Pitblic testimony and written correspondence were given filll
consideration as pai�t of the amendment process.
2.4 The existing enhanced public participation policies within Urant County ensure that the
public had an opportunity to provide meaningful comments on the proposed
amendments.
2.5 Th� 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 meaningfiil 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.
3.2In 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 affacted 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
(� 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 s�bstantive difference in the properties
thamselves with different designations.
(g) The benefits of the change will outweigh any significant adverse impacts of the
change
Atticliment"A"
Grant County Compreliensive Plnn
Amendmenl 2016
General Findings of Tact
(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
Comtnissioners.
4.4 Detailed applications along with supporting documentation and staff reports are made
a part of this recommendation.
Attachment"A"
Grnnt County Comprehensive Pl1n
Amendmeut 2016
General Findings of Tact
'
ATTACHMENT `B'
' FINAL ACTION AND FINDINGS OF FACT
� BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS
2016 AMENDMENTS
LL 1) P 16-0114—Earl Laurent
2) P 16-0122—Clint Brown
� 3) P 16-0129—CPM Development Corp.
4) P 16-0138 —Town of Coulee City
#1. FILE NO. P 16-0114, 16-0115, 16-0116
� EARL LAURENT
SITE-SPECIFIC LAND USE REDESIGNATION AND ZONE CHANGE
LOCATION:
The proposal site is located along Park Lake Road NE, at the north end of Blue Lake, east of SR
17. The site is located in a portion of the SW '/ of S. 15, T. 24 N, R. 27 E, W.M., Grant County,
' WA (portion of Parcel #16-2132-000). ,
STAFF ANALYSIS:
� The applicant has submitted a request for a site-specific land use re-designation consisting of a
' portion of one parcel. The current designation of the parcel is Rural Remote. The applicant has
proposed a designation change to Shoreline Development and a zone change to Shoreline
Developmant 3. The parcel is currently being, and has historically been, used as a RV
p�rk/Resort. According to the application materials provided, the property has been a summer
and fishing resort under the Laurent's Sun Village name since 1968.
The Shoreline Development land use designation is one of Grant County's Limited Areas of
More Intensive Development (LAMIRD) designations. In order for an existing use and/or area
� to be considered for a LAMIRD designation it must have been in existence on or prior to July 1,
1991 (RCW 36.70a.070(d)).
As with any lancl 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 must first be established that the proposal sita contained development at the time that
Grant County was obligated to comply with the Growth Management Act (GMA), which was
July 1, 1991. The applicant has stated in the application that the site has been operating as
Laurent's Sun Village since 1968. A search a Grant County Building Department records show
permit history back as far as 1969 under the Laurent's Sun Village name. It is therefore clear
, that the site meets the date requirements for a LAMIRD outlined by the GMA.
Attachment"B"
Decisions and Findings of Fact
Board of County Commissioners
2016 Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Zone Changes
' 1
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
RE-DESIGNATION:
The Planning Commission conducted an open record hearing for this application on June 22,
2016. At their hearing the Commission voted to recommend approval of Site Specific re-
designation from Rural Remote to Shoreline Development.
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) The re-designation of approximately 11.7 acres (Portion of Parcel#16-2132-000)
from Rural Remote to Shoreline Development.
, The Board of County Commissioners established the following Findings of Fact:
�) The change woulcl benefit the public health, safety, and or welfare;
2) The chan�ge is warranted because of changed circumstances or becausa 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 itses or property in the immediate vicinity of the
subject property.
5) The change does hczve 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 dasignations.
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 cloes comply with all other applicable criteria and standards of Chapter 25.12
UDC.
ZONE CHANGE
PLANNIl�iG COMMISSION SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIOloT
The Planning Commission conducted an open record hearing for this application on June 22,
2016. The Planning Commission made a recommendation to approve the proposed zone change
from Rural Remote to Shoreline Development 3.
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 11.7 acres (portion of Parcel#16-2132-000) from
Rural Remote to Shoreline Development 3.
Attachment"B"
Decisions and Findings of Fact
Board of County Commissioners
2016 Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Zone Changes
2
The Board of County Coinmissioners 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 clo exist to warrant an amendment to the current zoning district;
6) A public need cloes exist for the proposed rezone. Public need shall mean that a valid public
purpose, for which the coinprehensive plan and this chapter have been adopted,is served by
the proposed rezone.
7) Tha 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 inchide 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. P 16-0122, 16-0123, 16-0124
CLINT BROWN
SITE SPECIFIC LAND USE REDESIGNATION AND ZONE CHANGE
LOCATION:
The proposal site is located at the end of Rd. 10.8 NW, approximately one mile east of Dodson
Rd. NW. The site is located in a portion of the NW 1/ o�S. 11, T. 20 N, R. 26 E, W.M., Grant
County, WA (Parcel #s 16-0602-003, 16-0602-002).
' STAFF ANALYSIS:
The applicant has submitted a request for a site-specific land use re-designation consisting of two
parcels, totaling approximately 80 acres. The subject parcels are currently designated Rural
, Remote. The applicant is proposing the re-designate the site Rural Residential 1. The parcels
' are both currently undeveloped. The applicant has stated in the application materials that they
wish to develop the parcels into five (5) acre parcels and to follow the existing plating pattern
started by the applicant's previous developments to the west.
Staffreview of the application materials has found that it fails to show adequate justification for
the need of additional Rural Residential 1 properties in Grant County. Analysis of the Grant
County Zoning Map of the vicinity shows that the area north and west of the proposal site
already contains a significant amount of Rural Residential designated properties.
PLANNIl�G COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
RE-DESIGNATION:
Attachment"B"
Decisions and Findings of Fact
Board of County Commissioners
' 2016 Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Zone Changes
3
The Plannin Cominission conducted an o en record ublic hearin for this a lication on June
g P P g pp
22, 2016. At their hearing the Cominission voted to recominend approval of this land use re-
designation application from Rural Remote to Rural Residential 1.
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 80 acres (Parcel#s 16-0602-003 & 16-0602-002) from
Rural Remote to Rural Residential l.
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 opportLtnities 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 cloes comply with all other applicable criteria and standards of Chapter 25.12
UDC. '
ZONE CHANGE
PLANNING COMMISSION SgTMMA12Y AND RECOMMENDATION
The Planning Commission conducted an open record heai-ing for this application on June 22,
2016. The Planning Commission made a recommendation to approve the proposed zone change
fiom Rural Remote to Rural Residential 1.
DECISION:
The Board of CoLtnty Commissioners voted unanimously to uphold the recommendation of the
Planning Commission and APPROVE the following re-zone:
1) A zone change of approximately 80 acres (Parcel#s 16-0602-003 & 16-0203-002)
from Rural Rernote to Rural Residential 1.
The Board of County Commissioners established the following Findings of Fact:
Attachment"B"
Decisions and Findings of Fact
Board of County Commissioners
2016 Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Zone Changes
4
1) The proposecl rezone will�zot be contrary to the intent or purposes and regulations of the
Grant County Code or the Comprehensive P1a�1;
2) The property in question is suitable for uses allowed under the proposed zoning district;
3) Uses allowed under the proposed zone changa ar^e coinpatible with neighboring land uses;
4) The proposed rezone can be served by adequate facilities including access, fire protection,
water, storm-water control, and sewage disposal facilities;
5) Substantial changes do exist to warrant an amendment to the current zoning district;
_ 6) A public need cloes exzst for the proposed rezone. Public need shall inean 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 hiunan or natural
environinents 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 vehicula�traffic associated with the rezone will 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).
#3. FILE NO. P 16-0129, 16-0130
CPM DEVELOPMENT CORP.
SITE SPECIFIC LAND USE REDESIGNATION
LOCATION:
The proposal site is located approximately 3/a of a mile north of Rd. 4 SW and three (3) miles
west of Dodson Rd. SW. The site is the NW 1/ of the NE % of S. 24, T. 18 N, R. 25 E, W.M.,
� Grant County, WA(Parcel # 15-1671-000).
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The applicant has submitted an application requesting a Mineral Resource Overlay(MRO) for a
parcel approximately 40 acres in size. The current Land Use Designation for the site is Irrigated.
Establishing an MRO is required prior to the application submitting a Conditional Use Permit
(CUP) for a surface mine. If the MRO is approved, the site will still retain its Irrigated Land Use
Designation and Agriculture Zoning District. Any future use of this site for mining operations or
mineral processing will be contingent on approval of a Conditional Use Permit (CUP). A CUP
application.would require an additional review including a public hearing with the Grant County
Hearing Examiner. The applicant has provided an Engineering Analysis of the sand reserves
onsite and anticipates that there is approximately 2,493,334 net minable tons (or cubic yards) of
materials.
The site is sui�rounded by properties also designated Irrigated and zoned Agriculture. There are
no properties zonad residential within the vicinity of the proposal. The site is not located within
an Urban Growth Area nor is it located within an area designated as a LAMIRD. As alludad to
above, the proposal site is also not located within the Open Space Conservation Zoning District.
Attachment"B"
Decisions and Findings of Fact
Bo�rd of County Commissioneis
2016 Coinprehensive Plan Amendments and Zone Changes
5
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
RE-DESIGNATION:
The Planning Commission conducted an open record hearing for this application on June 22,
2016. At their hearing the Commission voted to recommend approval of the designation of a
Mineral Resource Overlay.
DECISION:
It should be noted that Commissioner Cindy Carter recused herself from this particular hearing.
'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) To designate a 40 acre parcel (Parcel#15-1671-000) with a Mineral Resource
Overlay.
The Board of County Commissioners established the following Findings of Fact:
1) The change woaild 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 tha 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 cloes have merit for the community as a whole.
6) The change, if granted, will not resLtlt in a group of property owners enjoying greater
privileges and opportunities than those enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity
where there is not substantive difference in the properties themselves which justify
different designations.
7) The benefits of the change will outweigh any significant adverse impacts of the change.
8) The change is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and the
requirements of GCC 22, 23, 24 and 25.
9) The change does comply with all other applicable criteria and standards of Chapter 25.12
UDC.
10)The applicant has demonstrated that the site has a known potential extractable resource.
11)The site is not located within the boundaries of an Urban Growth Area or Limited Area of
More Intensive Rural Development.
12)The site is not located within the designated boundary or associated buffer of a wetland or
fish and wildlife conservation area.
13)The site is not located on publicly owned land with'in the boundary of an Open Space
Conservation(OSC) zoning district.
Attachment"B"
Decisions ancl Findings of I'act
Board of County Commissioners
2016 Comprehensive Plan Amandments and Zone Changes
6
#4. File No. P 16-0138, 16-0139, 16-0140
TOWN OF COULEE CITY
SITE SPECIFIC LAND USE REDESIGNATION, UGA AMENDMENT, AND ZONE
CHANGE
LOCATION:
� The proposal site is located along Pinto Ridge Road, south of Coulee City and north of the
railroad right-of-way. An additional site is located north of Rci. 36 NE and east of Rd. I.8 NE.
The site is located in the east portion of S. 3, T. 24 N, R. 28 E, and the east portion of S. 34, T.
25 N, R. 28 E, W.M., Grant County, WA. (Parcel #s 171412000, 171417000, 171418000,
171419002, 312181000, 312181001,070142002, 070618000, 171583001, & 171586001)
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The applicant has submitted a request for a site-specific land use re-designation, and Urban
Growth Area expansion for the Town of Coulee City. The application includes two separate
geographic areas and consists of multiple parcels with multiple property owners (a list of
property owners is attached as part of the application materials). The proposal areas consist of
approximately 142.9 total acres with a current land use designation of Rural Residential 1,
Rangeland, and Residential, Medium Density.
The first site is approximately 77.5 acres in size, is already located within Coulee City's UGA,
and is currently designated as Residential, Medium Density. These properties are under public
ownership (Grant PUD and Bureau of Reclamation) and will therefore never be developed for
residential uses. The applicant is proposing to re-designate this area to a more appropriate
designation for publicly owned lands, Public Facility. Removal of the Residential, Medium
Density designation for this area would reduce the amount of potential dwelling units within the
UGA by 620 (77.5 acres x 8 dwellings per acre).
The second site is approximately 65.4 acres in size and consists of six privately owned
properties. The current designation for these properties is Rural Residential 1 and Rangeland.
The applicant is proposing to expand the UGA to include this area and re-designate the area
Residential, Low Density. Four of the six parcels ara already served by soine inanner of City
services (water and/or sewer). The parcel designated as Rangeland is not considered to be Prime
Farmland. Inclusion of this area into the UGA would provide the potential for 261.4 (65,4 acres
x 4 dwellings per acre) new dwelling units within the UGA.
Whi1e approval of this application would increase the size of the Coulee City Urban Growth
Are�by 65.4 acres, it would actually result in a net reduction of 358.6 potential dwelling Ltnits
(620—261.4. = 358.6). Additionally, the proposal would relocate the potential dwelling units
away from inappropriately designated public lands to an area that actually has potential for fiiture
residential development. The proposal would also allow properties already served by urban
services to be located within the UGA, which is a requirement of the Growth Management Act
and the Grant County Comprehensive Plan.
Attachment"B"
Decisions and Findings of Fact
Board of County Commissioners
2016 Cornprehensive Plan Amendments and Zone Changes
7
' PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
� RE-DESIGNATION:
, The Planning Commission conducted an open record public hearing�or this application on June
� 22, 2016. At their hearing the Commission voted to recommend approval of this land use re-
, designation application from Rural Residential 1, Rangeland, and Residential Medium Density to
' Residential Low Density and Public Facility.
, 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-
dasignation:
1) Re-designate approximately 142 acres from Rangeland, Rural Residentiall, and
� Residential, Medium Density to Residential, Low Density and Public Facility.
Amend (expand) the UGA of Coulee City.
, The Board of County Commissioners established the following Findings of Fact:
; 1) The change woulcl benefit the pltblic health, safety, and or welfare;
2) The change is wananted 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 detriinental 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, wzll not result in a group of property ownars 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 cloes comply with all other applicable criteria and standards of Chapter 25.12
UDC.
ZONE CHANGE
PLANNING COMMISSION SUlVIMARY AND RECOMMENDATION
The Planning Commission conducted an open record hearing for this application on June 22,
2016. The Planning Commission made a recommendation to approve the proposed zone change
from Rural Residential 1, Agriculture, and Urban Residential3 to Urban Residential2 and Public
Facility.
Attachment"B"
Decisions and Findings of F1ct
Boarcl of County Commissioners
2016 Comprehensive Plan Amendments ancl Zone Changes
8
DECISION:
The Board of County Commissioners voted unanimously to uphold the recommendation of the
Planning Coinmission and APPROVE the following re-zone:
1) A zone change of approxim�tely 142 acres from Agriculture, Rural Residential l,
and Urban Residential3 to Urban Residential2 and Public Facility.
The Board of County Cominissioners established the following Findings of Fact:
` 1) The proposed rezone will not be contrary to the intent or purposes and reglilations of the
Grant County Code or the Comprehensiva Plan;
2) The property in question is suitable for uses allowed under the proposed zoning dist�-ict;
3) Uses allowed under the proposed zone change a�e compatible with neighboring land uses;
, 4) The proposed rezone can be served by adequate facilities inchiding access, fire protection,
water, storm-water control, and sewage disposal facilities;
5) Substantial changes do exzst to warrant an amendment to the current zoning district;
6) A public need cloes 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 wrll not result in significant adverse impacts on the human or natural
environments that cannot be mitigated by conditions of approval;
8) The cuinulative impact of additional requests for like actions (the total of the rezones over
time or space)wiCl 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 tivzll 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 ttse adjacent to an airport or airfield(RCW 36.70).
Attachment"B"
Decisions and Pindings of Fact
Board of County Commissioners
2016 Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Zone Changes
: 9