Benton City planning commission adopts findings of fact on ZC 24-02, forwards recommendation to council

The Benton City Planning Commission voted unanimously to adopt findings of fact on zone-change application ZC 24-02 and forward the commission’s recommendation to the City Council. Commissioners said the findings, as read into the record, conclude that the proposed zoning change raises concerns about public safety, traffic and consistency with the city’s comprehensive plan.

Staff had opened the discussion by summarizing the City Council’s remand, which asked the commission to identify factual bases for any recommendation and whether an amendment to the zoning map or text would be inconsistent with Benton City code or the adopted comprehensive plan. The commission discussed municipal-code procedures for council review and the limited set of actions the council may take on quasi-judicial applications.

Commissioners and staff debated the substantive issue at length. Several commissioners said they found inconsistency between language in the comprehensive plan and the land-use map, and they discussed whether the parcel at the edge of the city meets plan criteria for higher-density, multifamily development (for example, adjacency to an arterial or a public-transit route). Commissioners noted the developer had described an intent to place duplex units if rezoned R2, while some nearby residents had told the commission they opposed apartment buildings but believed single-family houses might be acceptable.

Staff noted state growth-management citations read into the record during the discussion (RCW 36.7 series were referenced by staff during the meeting) and told commissioners the city has a planning grant and consultant team assigned to the required multi‑year update to the comprehensive plan. Staff also said it would condense the commission’s adopted findings into a staff report for the council if the commission approved them.

A motion to adopt the findings of fact was moved and seconded; the roll-call vote recorded McLoud — yes; Thompson — yes; Wallace — yes; Lynn — yes; Hamilton — yes. Commissioners asked that written statements and the public list of attendees from the prior hearing be included in the packet sent to council. The commission did not take any final zoning action; it forwarded its factual findings and recommendation for the council to decide under the procedures described in the municipal code.

Next steps: staff will prepare a condensed staff report that includes the commission’s adopted findings and distribute it to the Council ahead of the council’s closed- or open-record hearing. Commissioners also requested additional legal and technical briefing in a future meeting or via the city attorney to resolve the apparent inconsistencies they cited in the comprehensive plan.