Loading...
HE 2015-001 GESA POWELL & GUNTER Attorneys at Law 1025 Jadwin Avenue Don E.Powell Richland,WA 99352 (509)943-6781 Alan B.Gunter Fax(509)946-5177 ----------------------- Rachel M Woodard V 1 , May 5, 2015 Shane O'Neill City of Pasco 525 N. 3`d Ave. Pasco, WA 99301 Re: GESA Credit Union Request for Variance Dear Shane: Enclosed please find the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for the above referenced case. If you require further assistance in this matter, please contact my office. Yours very truly, POWELL& GUNTER G Alan B. Gunter ABG:al Enclosures F:/Word/Alicia/CityofPascoLetter4 PASCO MUNICIPAL VARIANCE HEARING REQUEST FOR VARIANCE ) CASE #HE 2015-001 GESA Credit Union ) This matter was heard on April 29, 2015, at 3:30 p.m., at Pasco City Hall in Pasco, Washington, at the request of GESA Credit Union for a variance to the commercial landscaping requirements of land zoned C-1. Present were Shane O'Neill and Rick White on behalf of the City of Pasco and Steve Oord, George Galloway, and Rick Thompson on behalf of GESA Credit Union. Based on the testimony, the records, and photographs submitted at the hearing, the Hearing Examiner now enters his: FINDINGS OF FACT A. The site is located at 2202 West Sylvester Street. B. The GESA Administrative Services/Data Center was recently constructed on the site. C. The Comprehensive Plan designates the site for commercial uses. D. The site is zoned C-1 (Retail Business). E. Adjoining properties to the south and west are zoned for residential uses and are developed with a residential apartment complex to the west and a manufactured home subdivision to the south. F. Section 25.75.050(3)(B) of the Pasco Municipal Code requires commercial sites to install ten (10) foot wide landscaping buffers when adjoining less intense zones such as residential. G. The original plans submitted with the building permit application for the GESA Administrative Services/Data Center included only landscaping along Sylvester Street to the north of the building and to the east of the building adjacent to the driveway entrance. H. Planning staff building permit review comments of May 23, 2014 explained a 10-foot landscaped buffer was needed per PMC25.75.050(3) along the western and southern boundaries of the site. A revised landscape plan was requested at that time. I. A revised landscape plan showing a 15-foot buffer along the west and south boundary lines of the site was resubmitted and approved on December 15, 2014. J. GESA installed a berm along the southern and western boundaries of the site but did not install landscaping per the approved plan. K. Irrigation of the landscaping strip does not present a significant or credible risk of water damage to the structure built on the site or its contents. L. GESA submitted an application for Hearing Examiner review appealing the requirement to install a landscaped buffer along the perimeter property lines to the west and south. Findings of Fact, Pg. I Conclusions of Law,and Order on Variance Request CONCLUSIONS OF LAW The request for a variance was properly submitted to the office of the Hearing Examiner for the City of Pasco and all proper notices were given. The Hearing Examiner has jurisdiction and authority over the request for a variance. In order to grant a variance the Hearing Examiner must find that all three of the following questions can be answered in the affirmative. 1. Because of special circumstances applicable to the property, the strict application of the zoning ordinance would deprive the property of rights and privileges enjoyed by other similar properties in the vicinity. 2. The granting of the variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and zone in which the subject property is situated. 3. The special circumstances applicable to the subject property were not created through the action(s) of the applicant or any predecessor in interest. None of the three questions can be answered in the affirmative. This petition for a variance does not meet the criteria required for a variance. ORDER Based upon the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law the applicant's request for a variance is denied. The Hearing Examiner's decision will become final in twenty-one (21) calendar days from the date of issuance of the decision in the manner required by law unless appealed to the Franklin County Superior Court. Done this �� of May, 2015. 16l 11� Y Alan B. Gunter, Hearing Examiner W ord/docs/Pasco.GESA.Findings Findings of Fact, Pg. 2 Conclusions of Law, and Order on Variance Request