Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2022.11.28 Council Special Meeting Packet AGENDA City Council Special Meeting 7:00 PM - Monday, November 28, 2022 City Council Chambers & GoToWebinar Page 1. MEETING INSTRUCTIONS for REMOTE ACCESS - Individuals, who would like to provide public comment remotely, may continue to do so by filling out the online form via the City’s website (www.pasco-wa.gov/publiccomment) to obtain access information to comment. Requests to comment in meetings must be received by 4:00 p.m. on the day of this meeting. To listen to the meeting via phone, call (631) 992-3211 and use access code 613-585-088. City Council meetings are broadcast live on PSC-TV Channel 191 on Charter/Spectrum Cable in Pasco and Richland and streamed at www.pasco- wa.gov/psctvlive and on the City’s Facebook page at www.facebook.com/cityofPasco. 2. CALL TO ORDER 3. ROLL CALL (a) Pledge of Allegiance 4. EXECUTIVE SESSION (a) Discuss the Qualifications of an Applicant for Public Employment per RCW 42.30.110(1)(g) (15 minutes) 5. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 3 - 46 (a) Q Closed Record Hearing - Road 40 LLC Rezone I-1 to I-2 (Z 2022- 009) CONDUCT A CLOSED RECORD HEARING 47 - 60 (b) Ordinances Nos. 4619 & 4620 - Second Readings and Passage of 2023-2024 Operating & Capital Projects Budgets Page 1 of 82 1. MOTION: I move to give the second reading and passage of Ordinance No. 4619, approving the Operating Budget for 2023 -2024 Biennium, and further, authorize publication by summary only. -OR- ALTERNATIVE MOTION: I move to give the second reading and passage of the alternate Ordinance No. 4619, approving the Operating Budget for 2023-2024 Biennium, which staggers staff additions, and further, authorize publication by summary only. 2. MOTION: I move to give the second reading and passage of Ordinance No. 4620, approving the Capital Projects Budget for 2023 - 2024 Biennium, and further, authorize publication by summary only. 61 - 82 (c) Approval of Amended Draft City Council Redistricting Plan for Publication and Public Comment MOTION: I move to approve the amended Redistricting Plan for the Pasco City Council Voting Districts for publication and public comment consistent with State and Federal Voter Rights Acts. 6. ADJOURNMENT 7. ADDITIONAL NOTES (a) (RC) Roll Call Vote Required * Item not previously discussed Q Quasi-Judicial Matter MF# “Master File #....” This meeting is broadcast live on PSC-TV Channel 191 on Charter/Spectrum Cable in Pasco and Richland and streamed at www.pasco-wa.gov/psctvlive. Audio equipment available for the hearing impaired; contact the Clerk for assistance. Servicio de intérprete puede estar disponible con aviso. Por favor avisa la Secretaria Municipal dos días antes para garantizar la disponibilidad. (Spanish language interpreter service may be provided upon request. Please provide two business day's notice to the City Clerk to ensure availability.) Page 2 of 82 AGENDA REPORT FOR: City Council November 22, 2022 TO: Dave Zabell, City Manager City Council Special Meeting: 11/28/22 FROM: Rick White, Director Community & Economic Development SUBJECT: Q Closed Record Hearing - Road 40 LLC Rezone I-1 to I-2 (Z 2022-009) I. REFERENCE(S): Hearing Examiner Recommendation Hearing Examiner Rezone Packet Hearing Examiner Transcript September 14, 2022 II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: CONDUCT A CLOSED RECORD HEARING III. FISCAL IMPACT: None IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF: On September 14, 2022, the the Hearing Examiner held a public hearing to consider a request to rezone a property located along the west side of Road 40 East (Parcel from 112540082), No. I-tIndustrial) (Light 1 Io -(Medium 2 Industrial). Following the conduct of the public hearing, the Hearing Examiner recommended approval of the applicant's request for a rezone. Council discussed and approved the conduct of a closed record hearing at the Council meeting of October 17, 2022. V. DISCUSSION: Applicant has applied to change the zoning designation of a 70.79-acre parcel along the west side of Road 40 East, from I-1 (Light Industrial) to I-2 (Medium Page 3 of 82 Industrial) to match the adjacent northern parcel as both parce ls are planned to be part of the same future development. Future site development of the two (2) parcels, totaling 111 acres, is likely to consist of a 2,150,280-square-foot Industrial Park. The proposed I-2 rezoning would be consistent with the existing zoning located adjacent to the north and west. Current uses in the vicinity include undeveloped/ vacant property to the north and west, a mobile home park to the southeast and warehousing to the northeast. At the conclusion of the closed record hearing - Council has several options: • Determine that the recommendation of the Hearing Examiner decision is justified based on the facts and approve the rezone; • Determine that the recommendation of the Hearing Examiner is not supported by the record, and direct staff to develop findings and conclusions for denial of the rezone. A third option for consideration would also include a determination that the recommendation of the Hearing Examiner is justified upon the development of a concomitant agreement limiting the more intense permitted uses of the I-2 zoning district on this rezone site - essentially matching the limited I-2 zoning designated to the northwest. Depending on the Council's decision and direction - staff will return with the appropriate documents for final action. Page 4 of 82 CITY OF PASCO HEARING EXAMINER IN THE MATTER OF ) ) ) ) ) ) RECOMMENDED FINDINGS OF FACT,RECOMMENDED CONCLUSIONS OF LAW, AND RECOMMENDED DECISION Z 2022-009 Nicole Stickney/ AHBL THIS MATTER having come on for hearing in front of the City of Pasco Hearing Examiner on September 14, 2022, the Hearing Examiner having taken evidence hereby submits the following Recommended Findings of Fact, Recommended Conclusions of Law, and Recommended Decision as follows: I.RECOMMENDED FINDINGS OF FACT 1.PROPERTY/ APPLICATION DESCRIPTION: 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 Legal: All that portion of the South Half of the southwest quarter and the south half of the north half of southwest quarter of Section 34, Township 9 North, Range 30 East, W.M., lying north of northeasterly right of way line of Spokane, Portland & Seattle Railway Company, EXCEPT that portion thereof conveyed to Northern Pacific Railway Company by deed recorded in Volume 46 of Deeds page 246, and EXCEPT portion to City of Pasco (Parcel 112540082). General Location: Said property is situated along the west side of Road 40 East, Pasco, Franklin County, WA 99301. Property Size: Approximately 70.79 acres (3,083,612.4 square feet). Applicant: Nicole Stickney/AHBL, 5804 Rd 90 Suite H, Pasco WA 99301. Request: Rezone Parcel 112540082 from I-1 (Light Industrial) to I-2 (Medium Industrial). 2.ACCESS: The parcel has access from Road 40 East. 3.UTILITIES: Municipal water and sewer are available in Road 40 East. 4.LAND USE AND ZONING: The lot is zoned I-1 (Light Industrial) and is vacant. Surrounding properties are zoned and developed as follows: North: I-2 Vacant East: RP Lakeview Manufactured Home Park South: I-3 BNSF Railroad West: I-2 Vacant 5.COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan indicates the site is intended for Industrial development. According to the Comprehensive Plan, the Industrial designation allows for Manufacturing, food processing, storage and wholesale distribution of equipment Z 2022 009 Stickney/ AHBL Page 1 of 6 Page 5 of 82 and products, hazardous material storage, and transportation-related facilities. Zoning may include I-1, I-2 and I-3. LU-2-A Policy: Maintain sufficient land desi gnated to accommodate residential, commercial, industrial, educational, public facility, and open-space uses proximate to appropriate transportation and utility infrastructure. LU-2-D Policy: Encourage the use of buffers or transition zones between non-compatible land uses. LU-6-E Policy: Support the Growth Management Act's goal to encourage growth, including industrial growth, in urban areas. ED-2-B Policy: Encourage development of a wide range of commercial and industrial uses strategically located near major transportation corridors or facilities and in close proximity to existing or proposed utility infrastructure while supporting local and regional needs. ED-2-C Policy: Continue to pursue the development of existing industrially zoned properties that may be serviced by existing or planned utilities. ED-3-A Policy: Enhance compatibility of commercial and industrial development with residential and mixed-use neighborhoods with appropriate landscaping, screening, building and design standards. 6.ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The City of Pasco is the lead agency for this project. Based on the SEPA checklist (SEPA 2020-076), the adopted City Comprehensive Plan, City development regulations, and other information, a threshold determination resulting in a Mitigated Determination of Non-Significance (MDNS) was issued for this project on September 15, 2022 under WAC 197-11-340(2). This DNS has not been appealed. 7.REQUEST: Nicole Stickney/ AHBL, on behalf of Pasco Road 40 LLC, has applied to change the zoning designation of a 70. 79-acre parcel along the west side of Road 40 East, from I-1 (Light Industrial) to I-2 (Medium Industrial) to match the adjacent northern parcel (112540019), as the parcels are planned to be part of the same future development. Future site development of the two parcels, totaling 111 acres, would consist of access drives and parking lots for a 2,150,280-square-foot Industrial Park. The project would include mass grading, roadway construction, stormwater management, and utility extensions to develop and serve the project. The proposed I-2 zoning would be consistent with the existing zoning located adjacent to the north and west. Current uses in the vicinity include undeveloped/ vacant property to the north and west, agricultural uses to the northeast, and a mobile home park to the southeast 8.SITE: The site comprises approximately 70.79 acres (3,083,612.4 square feet) and has been vacant for several years. The Comprehensive Plan designates the lot "Industrial." The "Industrial" designation allows for I-1, I-2, and I-3 zoning and may be developed with Industrial uses. 9.HISTORY: The site was annexed into the City in 1979 and assigned RMH-2 (Mobile Home Park) zoning in conjunction with the annexation (Ordinance #2042). The site was rezoned from RMH-2 to I-1 (Light Industrial) in 1992 (Ordinance 2863), and has not been rezoned since. Amazon Inc. has been developing two million-square-foot distribution centers on parcels to the north and northeast, which were initially codenamed "Project Pearl" and "Project Oyster." In addition, a special permit for a Pasco School District preschool was approved near the south entrance of the proposed development. 1 O. REZONE CRITERIA: The initial review criteria for considering a rezone application are explained in PMC 25.88.030. The criteria are listed below as follows: 10.1 The date the existing zone became effective: Z 2022 009 Stickney/ AHBL Page 2 of 6 Page 6 of 82 Page 7 of 82 10.4.3 "The I-2 medium industrial district is established to provide areas for necessary industrial and related uses that could create problems of compatibility with other land uses. Uses in this district have the potential to generate high levels of noise, light, odor, fumes or smoke that require their protection from encroachment by incompatible land uses." (PMC 25.120.010) 10.4.4 The proposed rezone to I-2 will match the zoning of the adjacent parcels to the north and west and accommodates less intensive industrial uses compared to those allowed on the parcels to the south which are zoned I-3. 10.5 The effect on the property owner or owners if the request is not granted: 10.5.1 As the proposed development involves parcels that have different zoning (I-1 and I-2), the property, in conjunction with the northern property, may not be able to be developed as proposed if the request was not granted, as this would create split zoned parcels, something that has historically not been allowed within the City of Pasco. Therefore, the rezone would be necessary to harmonize the zoning of the two parcels and allow for the proposed development. 10.6 The Comprehensive Plan land use designation for the property 10.6.1 The current comprehensive plan land use designation is Industrial and all surrounding parcels except for the manufactured home park to the east are also designated as such. 10. 7 Such other information as the Hearing Examiner requires 10. 7 .1 A special permit for a Pasco School District preschool was approved near the south entrance of the proposed development. The intersection of the project south driveway and the PSD preschool access point is very dangerous with a 40-mph speed limit, both vertical and horizontal curves, and blind left-hand exit turns. This intersection needs to be evaluated for traffic safety mitigation measures. 1 I. Public notice of this hearing was sent to property owners within 300 feet of the property and posted in the Tri-City Herald on August 22, 2022. 12.An open record public hearing after due legal notice was held September 14, 2022, with the Planning Department staff and public appearing in person and the Hearing Examiner appearing via videoconference. 13.Appearing and testifying on behalf of the applicant was Nicole Stickney. Ms. Stickney testified that she was an agent of the Applicant and property owner and authorized to testify on their behalf. She indicated that he was in agreement with the representations set forth in the staff report, except as follows: 13 .1 She testified there has not been a final SEP A threshold determination; 13 .2 She does not agree that a concomitant agreement is appropriate. 14.No member of the public testified at the hearing. 15.The staff report, application materials, agency comments and the entire file of record were admitted into the record. Z 2022 009 Stickney/ AHBL Page 4 of 6 Page 8 of 82 16.Any Conclusion of Law that is more correctly a Finding of Fact is hereby incorporated as such by this reference. II.RECOMMENDED CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Before recommending approval of this rezone, the Hearing Examiner has developed findings of fact from which to draw those conclusions based upon the criteria listed in PMC 25.210.060. The criteria are as follows: 1.The proposal is in accordance with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. 1.1 The Comprehensive Plan indicates the site is intended for Industrial development. According to the Comprehensive Plan, the Industrial designation allows for Manufacturing, food processing, storage and wholesale distribution of equipment and products, hazardous material storage, and transportation-related facilities. Zoning may include I-1, I-2 and I-3. 1.2 LU-2-A Policy: Maintain sufficient land designated to accommodate residential, commercial, industrial, educational, public facility, and open-space uses proximate to appropriate transportation and utility infrastructure. 1.2.1 A BNSF/Port of Pasco industrial railroad spur line was recently installed along the northern boundary of the overall site the site. 1.3 LU-2-D Policy: Encourage the use of buffers or transition zones between non­ compatible land uses. 1.3.1 As per PMC 25.180.040(5) Loading and service areas shall not face any residential zone, unless no other location is possible. Loading and service areas adjacent to or across a public street or alley from a residentially zoned district shall be screened with a sight-obscuring structure matching the architecture of the building. 1.3.2 As per PMC 25.180.040(6)(a)Parking lots that abut a public street shall be buffered with live vegetation consisting of trees, shrubs and ground cover. 1.4 LU-6-E Policy: Support the Growth Management Act's goal to encourage growth, including industrial growth, in urban areas. 1.5 ED-2-B Policy: Encourage development of a wide range of commercial and industrial uses strategically located near major transportation corridors or facilities and in close proximity to existing or proposed utility infrastructure while supporting local and regional needs. 1.5 .1 The site has easy access to highway, rail, barge, and air transportation. 1.6 ED-2-C Policy: Continue to pursue the development of existing industrially zoned properties that may be serviced by existing or planned utilities. 1.6.1 The site is already industrially zoned; the proposal is to expand the range of industrial uses possible on the site. 1.7 ED-3-A Policy: Enhance compatibility of commercial and industrial development with residential and mixed-use neighborhoods with appropriate landscaping, screening, building and design standards. 1.7.1 As per PMC 25.180.040(5) Loading and service areas shall not face any residential zone, unless no other location is possible. Loading and service areas adjacent to or across a public street or alley from a residentially zoned district shall be screened with a sight-obscuring structure matching the architecture of the building: 1.7.2 As per PMC 25.180.040(6)(a)Parking lots that abut a public street shall be buffered with live vegetation consisting of trees, shrubs and ground cover. Z 2022 009 Stickney/ AHBL Page 5 of 6 Page 9 of 82 2.The effect of the proposal on the immediate vicinity will not be materially detrimental. 2.1 The Comprehensive Plan designates the property "Industrial." As such, the site may be zoned I-1, I-2, or I-3. 3.There is merit and value in the proposal for the community as a whole. 3.1 Both I-1, I-2, and I-3 Industrial zoning are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and the Goals and Policies as adopted by the Pasco City Council (Ordinance 4537). There is merit in allowing for development which could create more manufacturing employment opportunities. 4.Conditions should be imposed in order to mitigate any significant adverse impacts from the proposal. 4.1 The site is adjacent an RP (Residential Park) residential district. Conditions to mitigate any significant adverse impacts from the proposal may be appropriate. 4.2 A special permit for a Pasco School District preschool was approved near the south entrance of the proposed development. The intersection of the project south driveway and the PSD preschool access point is very dangerous with a 40-mph speed limit, both vertical and horizontal curves, and blind left-hand exit turns. This intersection needs to be evaluated for traffic safety mitigation measures. However these issues must be addressed as part of the site development/permitting process. 5.A Concomitant Agreement should be entered into between the City and the petitioner, and if so, the terms and conditions of such an agreement. 5 .1 A concomitant agreement will not be necessary for this rezone. 6.Any Finding of Fact that is more correctly a Conclusion of Law is hereby incorporated as such by this reference. III.RECOMMENDED DECISION Based on the above Recommended Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, the Hearing Examiner RECOMMENDS APPROVAL that all that portion of the South Half of the southwest quarter and the south half of the north half of southwest quarter of Section 34, Township 9 North, Range 30 East, W .M., lying north of northeasterly right of way line of Spokane, Portland & Seattle Railway Company, EXCEPT that portion thereof conveyed to Northern Pacific Railway Company by deed recorded in Volume 46 of Deeds page 246, and EXCEPT portion to City of Pasco (Parcel 112540082), situated along the west side of Road 40 East, Pasco, Franklin County, WA Washington, be rezoned from I-1 to I-2. Dated this J 1cfay of September, 2022. cr�:ARING EXAMINER .ffe -:7 An w L. Kottkamp Z 2022 009 Stickney/ AHBL Page 6 of 6 Page 10 of 82 REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING City Hall – 525 North Third Avenue – Remote WEDNESDAY, 14 September 2022 6:00 PM 1 MASTER FILE #: Z 2022-009 APPLICANT: Nicole Stickney/AHBL 5804 Rd 90 Suite H Pasco WA 99301 REQUEST: REZONE: Rezone Parcel 112540082 from I-1 (Light Industrial) to 1-2 (Medium Industrial) BACKGROUND 1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Legal: All that portion of the South Half of the southwest quarter and the south half of the north half of southwest quarter of Section 34, Township 9 North, Range 30 East, W.M., lying north of northeasterly right of way line of Spokane, Portland & Seattle Railway Company, EXCEPT that portion thereof conveyed to Northern Pacific Railway Company by deed recorded in Volume 46 of Deeds page 246, and EXCEPT portion to City of Pasco (Parcel 112540082). General Location: Said property is situated along the west side of Road 40 East, Pasco, Franklin County, WA 99301. Property Size: Approximately 70.79 acres (3,083,612.4 square feet) 2. ACCESS: The parcel will have access from Road 40 East. 3. UTILITIES: Municipal water and sewer are available in Road 40 East. 4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The lot is zoned I-1 (Light Industrial) and is vacant. Surrounding properties are zoned and developed as follows: NORTH: I-2 Vacant EAST: RP Lakeview Manufactured Home Park SOUTH: I-3 BNSF Railroad WEST: I-2 Vacant 5. Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan indicates the site is intended for Industrial development. According to the Comprehensive Plan, the Industrial designation allows for Manufacturing, food processing, storage and wholesale distribution of equipment and products, hazardous material storage, and transportation-related facilities. Zoning may include I-1, I-2 and I-3. LU-2-A Policy: Maintain sufficient land designated to accommodate residential, commercial, industrial, educational, public facility, and open-space uses proximate to appropriate transportation and utility infrastructure. LU-2-D Policy: Encourage the use of buffers or transition zones between non- compatible land uses. LU-6-E Policy: Support the Growth Management Act's goal to encourage growth, including industrial growth, in urban areas. ED-2-B Policy: Encourage development of a wide range of commercial and industrial uses strategically located near major transportation corridors or facilities and in close proximity to existing or proposed utility infrastructure while supporting local and regional needs. ED-2-C Policy: Continue to pursue the Page 11 of 82 2 development of existing industrially zoned properties that may be serviced by existing or planned utilities. ED-3-A Policy: Enhance compatibility of commercial and industrial development with residential and mixed-use neighborhoods with appropriate landscaping, screening, building and design standards. 6. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The City of Pasco is the lead agency for this project. Based on the SEPA checklist (SEPA 2020-076), the adopted City Comprehensive Plan, City development regulations, and other information, a threshold determination resulting in a Mitigated Determination of Non-Significance (MDNS) was issued for this project on 15 September 2022 under WAC 197-11-340(2). ANALYSIS Request Nicole Stickney/AHBL, on behalf of Pasco Road 40 LLC, has applied to change the zoning designation of a 70.79-acre parcel along the west side of Road 40 East, from I-1 (Light Industrial) to I-2 (Medium Industrial) to match the adjacent northern parcel (112540019), as the parcels are planned to be part of the same future development. Future site development of the two parcels, totaling 111 acres, would consist of access drives and parking lots for a 2,150,280-square-foot Industrial Park. The project would include mass grading, roadway construction, stormwater management, and utility extensions to develop and serve the project. The proposed 1-2 zoning would be consistent with the existing zoning located adjacent to the north and west. Current uses in the vicinity include undeveloped/ vacant property to the north and west, agricultural uses to the northeast, and a mobile home park to the southeast. Site The site comprises approximately 70.79 acres (3,083,612.4 square feet) and has been vacant for several years. The Comprehensive Plan designates the lot “Industrial.” The “Industrial” designation allows for I-1, I-2, and I-3 zoning and may be developed with Industrial uses. History The site was annexed into the City in 1979 and assigned RMH-2 (Mobile Home Park) zoning in conjunction with the annexation (Ordinance #2042). The site was rezoned from RMH-2 to I-1 (Light Industrial) in 1992 (Ordinance 2863), and has not been rezoned since. Amazon Inc. has been developing two million-square- foot distribution centers on parcels to the north and northeast, which were initially codenamed "Project Pearl" and "Project Oyster." In addition, a special permit for a Pasco School District preschool was approved near the south entrance of the proposed development. Rezone Criteria The initial review criteria for considering a rezone application are explained in PMC. 25.88.030. The criteria are listed below as follows: 1. The date the existing zone became effective: Page 12 of 82 3 The site was assigned RMH-2 (Mobile Home Park) zoning in conjunction with the 1979 annexation. The site was rezoned to I-1 (Light Industrial) in 1992. Zoning for the site has not changed since then. 2. The changed conditions, which are alleged to warrant other or additional zoning: The City of Pasco has been growing in the last two decades. New subdivisions have been built to the north of the industrial designated area within the last decade and employment opportunities in the industrial sector are necessary to aid the economy of Pasco. Additionally, the industrial market has more recently seen a need for more diverse manufacturing type uses. The 1-2 zoning district more readily accommodates these types of uses as it is established to provide areas for necessary industrial and related uses that could create problems of compatibility with other land uses. Given the changes in the market and growth in the area, the request for a rezone to 1-2 may be appropriate. The “Industrial” designation allows for I-1, I-2, and I-3 zoning and may be developed with Industrial uses. Applicant is requesting I-2 zoning. The proposed rezone would allow the site to be developed as intended with uses consistent with parcels to the north and northeast, which could not be done under the existing zoning which only permits light industrial uses. 3. Facts to justify the change on the basis of advancing the public health, safety and general welfare: A rezone of this parcel from 1-1 to 1-2 is logical because it is located in an area that is, with the exception of the manufactured home park to the east, already devoted to industrial uses. The 1-2 zoning district allows uses that have the potential to generate noise, light, odor, fumes or smoke. There are several parcels to the south of the site that have the 1-3 Heavy Industrial zoning designation and the parcels to the north of the site have the 1-2 zoning designation. Concentrating the heavier industrial zones in this area provides a necessary space for industrial development. With the exception of property to the east, this advances public health, safety and general welfare by limiting potential nuisances and negative externalities to an area where heavier industrial uses are currently allowed. 4. The effect it will have on the value and character of the adjacent property and the Comprehensive Plan: Except for the mobile home park property to the east, the change in zoning will have little to no effect on the value and the character of the adjacent properties and the comprehensive plan. Both the current 1-1 zoning and proposed 1-2 zoning implement the Industrial Comprehensive Plan land use designation, as well as the plan's various goals and policies (such as LU-6, ED-2, and ED-3) to accommodate industrial development in appropriate areas within the City. The purposes of both zoning districts are similar: "The 1-1 light industrial district is established to preserve areas for industrial and related uses of such a nature that they do not create serious problems of compatibility with other kinds of land uses. Uses permitted in this district should not generate noise levels, light, odor or fumes that would constitute a nuisance or hazard." (PMC 25.115.010) "The 1-2 medium industrial district is established to provide areas for necessary industrial and related uses that could create problems of compatibility with other land uses. Uses in this district have the potential to generate high levels of noise, light, odor, fumes or smoke that require their protection from encroachment by incompatible land uses." (PMC 25.120.010) The proposed rezone to 1-2 will match the zoning of the adjacent parcels to the north and west and accommodates less intensive industrial uses compared to those allowed on the parcels to the south which are zoned 1-3. 5. The effect on the property owner or owners if the request is not granted: Page 13 of 82 4 As the proposed development involves parcels that have different zoning (1-1 and 1-2), the property, in conjunction with the northern property, may not be able to be developed as proposed if the request was not granted, as this would create split zoned parcels, something that has historically not been allowed within the City of Pasco. Therefore, the rezone would be necessary to harmonize the zoning of the two parcels and allow for the proposed development. 6. The Comprehensive Plan land use designation for the property The current comprehensive plan land use designation is Industrial and all surrounding parcels except for the manufactured home park to the east are also designated as such. 7. Such other information as the Hearing Examiner requires A special permit for a Pasco School District preschool was approved near the south entrance of the proposed development; The intersection of the project south driveway and the PSD preschool access point is very dangerous with a 40-mph speed limit, both vertical and horizontal curves, and blind left-hand exit turns. This intersection needs to be evaluated for traffic safety mitigation measures. STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT Findings of fact must be entered from the record. The following are initial findings drawn from the background and analysis section of the staff report. The hearing Examiner may add additional findings to this listing as the result of factual testimony and evidence submitted during the open record hearing. 1. Public notice of this hearing was sent to property owners within 300 feet of the property and posted in the Tri-City Herald on August 22, 2022. 2. Applicant wishes to change the zoning designation of a 70.79-acre parcel along the west side of Road 40 East, from I-1 (Light Industrial) to I-2 (Medium Industrial) 3. The zone change is intended to match the zoning of parcel (112540019) adjacent to the north. 4. Applicant wishes to develop the site together with the parcel to the north. 5. Proposed development is for a 2,150,280-square-foot Industrial Park over 111 acres. 6. Proposed site development would include access drives and parking lots. 7. The project components would include mass grading, roadway construction, stormwater management, and utility extensions. 8. The proposed 1-2 zoning would be consistent with the existing zoning to the north and west. 9. Current uses in the vicinity include undeveloped/ vacant property to the north and west, agricultural uses to the northeast, and a mobile home park to the southeast. 10. The site has been vacant for several years. 11. The Comprehensive Plan designates the lot “Industrial.” 12. The “Industrial” designation allows for I-1, I-2, and I-3 zoning. 13. The site was annexed into the City in 1979 (Ordinance #2042). 14. The site was assigned RMH-2 (Mobile Home Park) zoning in conjunction with the annexation 15. The site was rezoned from RMH-2 to I-1 (Light Industrial) in 1992 (Ordinance 2863). 16. The site has not been rezoned since. 17. Amazon Inc. has been developing two (ea.) one-million-square-foot distribution centers on parcels to the north and northeast. 18. A special permit for a Pasco School District preschool was approved near the south entrance of the proposed development. 19. The initial review criteria for considering a rezone application are explained in PMC. 25.88.030. Page 14 of 82 5 TENTATIVE CONCLUSIONS BASED ON INITIAL STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT Before recommending approval or denial of a rezone, the hearing Examiner must develop findings of fact from which to draw its conclusions based upon the criteria listed in PMC 25.210.060. The criteria are as follows: 1. The proposal is in accordance with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan indicates the site is intended for Industrial development. According to the Comprehensive Plan, the Industrial designation allows for Manufacturing, food processing, storage and wholesale distribution of equipment and products, hazardous material storage, and transportation- related facilities. Zoning may include I-1, I-2 and I-3. LU-2-A Policy: Maintain sufficient land designated to accommodate residential, commercial, industrial, educational, public facility, and open-space uses proximate to appropriate transportation and utility infrastructure. A BNSF/Port of Pasco industrial railroad spur line was recently installed along the northern boundary of the overall site the site. LU-2-D Policy: Encourage the use of buffers or transition zones between non-compatible land uses. As per PMC 25.180.040(5) Loading and service areas shall not face any residential zone, unless no other location is possible. Loading and service areas adjacent to or across a public street or alley from a residentially zoned district shall be screened with a sight-obscuring structure matching the architecture of the building: As per PMC 25.180.040(6)(a)Parking lots that abut a public street shall be buffered with live vegetation consisting of trees, shrubs and ground cover. LU-6-E Policy: Support the Growth Management Act's goal to encourage growth, including industrial growth, in urban areas. ED-2-B Policy: Encourage development of a wide range of commercial and industrial uses strategically located near major transportation corridors or facilities and in close proximity to existing or proposed utility infrastructure while supporting local and regional needs. The site has easy access to highway, rail, barge, and air transportation. ED-2-C Policy: Continue to pursue the development of existing industrially zoned properties that may be serviced by existing or planned utilities. The site is already industrially zoned; the proposal is to expand the range of industrial uses possible on the site. ED-3-A Policy: Enhance compatibility of commercial and industrial development with residential and mixed-use neighborhoods with appropriate landscaping, screening, building and design standards. As per PMC 25.180.040(5) Loading and service areas shall not face any residential zone, unless no other location is possible. Loading and service areas adjacent to or across a public street or alley from a residentially zoned district shall be screened with a sight-obscuring structure matching the architecture of the building: As per PMC 25.180.040(6)(a)Parking lots that abut a public street shall be buffered with live vegetation consisting of trees, shrubs and ground cover. 2. The effect of the proposal on the immediate vicinity will not be materially detrimental. Page 15 of 82 6 The Comprehensive Plan designates the property “Industrial.” As such, the site may be zoned I-1, I-2, or I- 3. 3. There is merit and value in the proposal for the community as a whole. Both I-1, I-2, and I-3 Industrial zoning are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and the Goals and Policies as adopted by the Pasco City Council (Ordinance 4537). There is merit in allowing for development which could create more manufacturing employment opportunities. 4. Conditions should be imposed in order to mitigate any significant adverse impacts from the proposal. The site is adjacent an RP (Residential Park) residential district. Conditions to mitigate any significant adverse impacts from the proposal may be appropriate. A special permit for a Pasco School District preschool was approved near the south entrance of the proposed development; The intersection of the project south driveway and the PSD preschool access point is very dangerous with a 40-mph speed limit, both vertical and horizontal curves, and blind left-hand exit turns. This intersection needs to be evaluated for traffic safety mitigation measures. However these issues must be addressed as part of the site development/permitting process 5. A Concomitant Agreement should be entered into between the City and the petitioner, and if so, the terms and conditions of such an agreement. A concomitant agreement will not be necessary for this rezone. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends based on the Findings of Fact and Conclusions herein that all that portion of the South Half of the southwest quarter and the south half of the north half of southwest quarter of Section 34, Township 9 North, Range 30 East, W.M., lying north of northeasterly right of way line of Spokane, Portland & Seattle Railway Company, EXCEPT that portion thereof conveyed to Northern Pacific Railway Company by deed recorded in Volume 46 of Deeds page 246, and EXCEPT portion to City of Pasco (Parcel 112540082), situated along the west side of Road 40 East, Pasco, Franklin County, WA Washington, be rezoned from I-1 to I-2. Page 16 of 82 COLUMBIARIVERCOLUMBIARIVERCOLUMBIARIVER COLUMBIARIVER E A ST U S 1 2 ESWEHEAVESOREGONAVE SMAITLANDAVEHERITAGEBLVDE DO C K S T EAINSWORTHAVE U S 1 2 W CITY L I M I T S CITY LIMITS0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000500 Feet 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000500 Feet Overview Map SITESITE Item: Road 40 LLC Rezone I-1 to I-2 Applicant: Nicole Stickney / Road 40 LLC File #: Z 2022-009 ±Page 17 of 82 SE ROAD 33E WA R E H O U S E S T E AI N S W O R T H A V ESE ROAD 30S A C A JAWEA PARK RD E CR A N E S T SE ROAD 36SROAD4 0E 0 350 700 1,100 1,400180 Feet 0 350 700 1,100 1,400180 Feet Vicinity Map SITESITE Item: Road 40 LLC Rezone I-1 to I-2 Applicant: Nicole Stickney / Road 40 LLC File #: Z 2022-009 ±Page 18 of 82 MFHs MFHs MFHs Railroad Port of Pasco Vacant Vacant Vacant Vacant Amazon SE ROAD 33E WA R E H O U S E S T E AI N S W O R T H A V ESE ROAD 30S A C A JAWEA PARK RD E CR A N E S T SE ROAD 36SROAD40E0 350 700 1,100 1,400180 Feet Land Use Map SITE Item: Road 40 LLC Rezone I-1 to I-2 Applicant: Nicole Stickney / Road 40 LLC File #: Z 2022-009 ±Page 19 of 82 I-1 I-2 I-2 I-3 RP I-1 SE ROAD 33E WA R E H O U S E S T E AI N S W O R T H A V ESE ROAD 30S A C A JAWEA PARK RD E CR A N E S T SE ROAD 36SROAD4 0E 0 350 700 1,100 1,400180 Feet Zoning Map SITE Item: Road 40 LLC Rezone I-1 to I-2 Applicant: Nicole Stickney / Road 40 LLC File #: Z 2022-009 ±Page 20 of 82 Open Space Parks Industrial Industrial Industrial Industrial SE ROAD 33E WA R E H O U S E S T E AI N S W O R T H A V ESE ROAD 30S A C A JAWEA PARK RD E CR A N E S T SE ROAD 36SROAD4 0E 0 350 700 1,100 1,400180 Feet Comp Plan Map SITE Item: Road 40 LLC Rezone I-1 to I-2 Applicant: Nicole Stickney / Road 40 LLC File #: Z 2022-009 ±Page 21 of 82 Looking North Page 22 of 82 Looking Northeast Page 23 of 82 Looking East Page 24 of 82 Looking Southeast Page 25 of 82 Looking South Page 26 of 82 Looking Southwest Page 27 of 82 Looking West Page 28 of 82 Looking Northwest Page 29 of 82 Pa'Sco Master File # ------ Applicant Info Name: Nicole Stickney, AHBL Address: 5804 Rd 90 Suite H Pasco, WA 99301 Phone: 509-316-7131 Email: NStickney@ahbl.com Community & Economic Development Department PO Box 293, 525 N 3 rd Ave, Pasco, WA 99301 P: 509.545.3441 / F: 509.545.3499 CITY OF PASCO PETITION FOR ZONE CHANGE Fee:$825 D t S b . t d 07/01/2022 a e u m,t e : _____ _ Owner Info (if different than applicant) Name: Pasco Road 40 L.L.C. c/o Tarragon L.L.C. Address: 601 Union Street Suite 3500 Seattle, WA 98101 Phone: 206-933-9600 -Office, 206-755-9977 -Cell Email: bwaiss@tarragon.com, Contact: Ben Waiss Project Address: N/A (accessed off of S Road 40 E) Project Parcel Number: _1_1 _2_54_0_0_8_2 ______________________ _ Current Zoning: 1 -1 Light Industrial Requested Zoning: 1-2 Medium Industrial Describe the nature and effect of the p roposed change: The proposal is to rezone the property from 1-1 to 1-2 in order to match with the zoning of the adjacent parcel to the north, as both parcels are intended to be a part of the same future development. Estimated time frame of development: Following plat approval phase 1 preliminary construction mid 2022 with phase 1 completion in 2023. Future phases per market demand. Updated July 2019 Page 30 of 82 What conditions warrant the proposed rezone? The rezone proposal is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan, zoning classifications, and rezone criteria. (See cover letter) How will the proposed rezone advance the health, safety, and general welfare of the community? A rezone from 1-1 to 1-2 will advance the health, safety, and general welfare of the community. (See cover letter) What effect will the proposed change have on the value and character of adjacent property? The change in zoning will have little to no effect on the value and the character of the adjacent properties. (See cover letter) How does the proposed rezone relate to the City's Comprehensive Plan? Both the current 1-1 zoning and proposed 1-2 zoning implement the Industrial Comprehensive Plan land use designation, as well as the plan's various goals and policies (such as LU-6, ED-2, and ED-3) to accomodate industrial development in appropriate areas within the City. (See cover letter) What effect will be realized by the owner(s) if the proposed rezone is not granted? It appears that a project which will involve development on the parcel and the parcel to the north could not occur due to split zoning, which has historically been prevented in the City of Pasco. (See cover letter) NOTE: Provide a variance report giving a list and mailing address of owners of all property within 300 feet of the applicant's property, as shown by a local title company OR payment of $50.00 which shall be utilized by the City to obtain a current list of property owners of all properties within 300 feet of the applicant's property. Page 31 of 82 fa II Pa'Sco Community & Economic Development Department PO Box 293, 525 N 3 rd Ave, Pasco, WA 99301 P: 509.545.3441 / F: 509.545.3499 Fee for Rezone Environmental Checklist Radius Notification □SEPA Checklist *Notarized Signature of Property Owner □Site map $700.00 $ 75.00 $ 50.00 $825.00 □Fee of $825 At..€'€"�(... I,..� J VIC� ��l�T��D l'vfA\l�/ 11,PIB;f'Co L,. 1.,-. c. )0 A�Wl�� ��o �A:o 4-o �-v.v, State of Washington ) ss. County of King Fee:$825 On this �O�day of ;n,1.Jf; , 2o'ZZ. , before me the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, duly commissioned an sworn, personally appeared "1.-f:G-AvL,,;J being duly sworn on his/her oath that he/she has prepared and read the foregoing statements and has acknowledged to me that the recitations contained therein are true, and has signed this instrument as his/her free and voluntary act and deed for the purposes therein mentioned. SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this �ll' day of '\)J/11\16 I 2o22 Notary Public in and for the State of Washington Residing at �:tfl::?, N A<;.+t�rJefttir.J My Commission expires_g-+-f--'/28"----"'--..... /�Z-_4:�----- Page 32 of 82 Project: Subject: Pasco Road 40 Rezone, AHBL No. 2220065.30 Rezone application SITE MAP Page 33 of 82 TRANSMITTAL m TO: Planning Division DATE: July 1, 2022 City of Pasco PROJECT NO.: 2220065.30 525 N 3rd Avenue Pasco, WA 99301 PROJECT NAME: Pasco Road 40 Rezone FROM: Nicole Stickney, AICP SUBJECT: Rezone applic ation PURPOSE: Application submittal VIA: Hand Delivered by AHBL DESCRIPTION OF CONTENTS: QTY DATED TITLE NOTES 1 7/1/2022 Cover Letter Includes Written Response to Criteria of Approval 1 7/1/2022 Completed Application: "Petition for Zone Change" Includes notarized signature of the parcel owner 1 7/1/2022 Site Map 1 7/1/2022 Applicable Fees: $750 ($700 Rezone aoolication fee+ $50 radius notification fee) REMARKS: This proposal to rezone the property is SEPA exempt per WAC 197-11-800 (6)(c) (which is adopted by reference in PMC 23.45.020), as the project is: (1) within a City planning under RCW 36.70A.040, (2) the proposed rezone is consistent with and does not require an amendment to the comprehensive plan and (3) the applicable comprehensive plan was previously subjected to environmental review and analysis through an EIS prior to adoption which adequately addressed impacts of industrial uses in the proposed area. Due to the SEPA exempt status, the submittal of a non-project SEPA checklist and related Environmental Checklist review fee is not submitted. Thank you! □TACOMA 221 S North 30'> Street, Suite 300 Tacoma, WA 98403-3350 753.383.2422 TEL c: □SEATTLE 1200 611 Avenue, Suite 1670 Seattle, WA 98101-3117 206.7671425 TEL □SPOKANE 827 West First Avenue, Suite 220 Spokone, WA 99201-3904 509.252.5019 TEL \\ahbl.com\data\projects\2022\2220065\30 _PLN\Deliverables_By_Date\20220607 _ Transmittal_ReZoningApp _2220065.docx Page 1 of 1 [gl TRI-CITIES 5804 Rood 90,Suite H Pasco, WA 99301-8551 509 .3805883 TEL Page 34 of 82 July 1, 2022 Community and Economic Development City of Pasco 525 North 3rd Avenue Pasco, WA 99301 Project: Subject: Dear Staff: Pasco Road 40 Rezone, AHBL No. 2220065.30 Rezone application m This letter accompanies our application for a project named "Road 40 Rezone." Enclosed here are the following items to support our application: •Rezone Application with owner's notarized signature •Project narrative and rezone criteria response (see below) Rezone Proposal The subject property is an undeveloped 70.79-acre site that is classified as Industrial in the City's comprehensive plan. The site is not assigned an address and is accessed off S Road 40 E.Our proposal is to rezone parcel 112540082 from J-1 Light Industrial to 1-2 Medium lndustrialto match the adjacent northern parcel (112540019), as the parcels are planned to be part of the same future development. Future site development of the two parcels, totaling 111 acres, would be proposed to consist of access drives and parking lots for an Industrial Park that contains buildings with a total square footage of approximately 2,150,280 square feet. Additional future project items would include mass grading, roadway construction, stormwater management, and utility extensions to develop and serve the project. As shown on Figure 1, the proposed 1-2 zoning will be consistent with the existing zoning located adjacent to the north and west. Current uses in the vicinity include undeveloped/ vacant property, agricultural uses, and a trailer park to the southeast. Amazon Inc. is developing two distribution centers, each more than 1 million square feet in size, in the immediate vicinity (on the parcel to the north which was deemed "Project Pearl" and to the east of the subject parcel across S. Road 40 E on a group of parcels that comprise "Project Oyster)". This project will be harmonious with the planned, permitted use by Amazon. As demonstrated below, the rezone proposal is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan, zoning classifications, and rezone criteria. Civil Engineers Stnictural Engineers Landscape Architects Community Planners Land Surveyors Neighbors TRI-CITIES 5804Rood90 SuiteH Pos<D, WA 99301 509.380.5883 TEL www.ahbl.com Page 35 of 82 Community and Economic Development July 1, 2022 2220065.30 Page 2 of 4 c::=J City limits -R-3 • Medium OeMtty Reldentiftl c=JUGA -R-4 • High Doosity RosidOflllal ZONING -RP· Residential Park -RS-20-Suburban -RT· ResldenUalTransltion -RS-1l•SUburban =o-OfllcaOlstrict R-S-1/PUO • SUburbnn Pannod-Unlt Dowllopmon1 -BP - Business Park R-S-1. Suburban -C-1 • Rolall Business l;::::::D R-1/PUO • La,, Density Re&identi81 Panned-Unit Developmont -C-2 • Coniml Buslneos R·1 • Low Density Residential -C-3 • Geneml Business -R-1-A· Low Density R .. ldential Altemale -CR· Reglooal Ccnvnerdal R-1-A2 • Low DOflslty Rcsidenllal Alternate 1-1 • Light lndUairlnl -R-2 -M<!dium Denaky Reidanllal �2 • Medium lnduslrial -R-3/PUO • Medium Density Reldontial Panned-Unit Development -1-3 • Heavy Industrial Figure 1 -Current Zoning PMC 25.210.030 Requirements for Zoning Petition The following provides justification for the rezone and demonstrates consistency with the City's rezone evaluation criteria. The criteria are stated as they appear in PMC 25.210.030 rather than the summarized version on the rezone application. 1.The date the existing zone became effective; The exact date is unknown; however, it appears the 1-1 zoning has been in place since at least 2014. 2.The changed conditions which are alleged to warrant other or additional zoning; The City of Pasco has been growing in the last two decades. New subdivisions have been built to the north of the industrial designated area within the last decade and employment opportunities in the industrial sector are necessary to aid the economy of Pasco. Additionally, the industrial market has more recently seen a need for more diverse manufacturing type uses. The 1-2 zoning district mmmm Page 36 of 82 Community and Economic Development July 1, 2022 2220065.30 Page 3 of 4 more readily accommodates these types of uses as it is established to provide areas for necessary industrial and related uses that could create problems of compatibility with other land uses. Given the changes in the market and growth in the area, the request for a rezone to 1-2 is appropriate. 3.Facts to justify the change on the basis of advancing the public health, safety and general welfare; A rezone of this parcel from 1-1 to 1-2 is logical because it is located in an area that is already devoted to industrial uses. The 1-2 zoning district allows uses that have the potential to generate noise, light, odor, fumes or smoke. There are several parcels to the south of the site that have the 1-3 Heavy Industrial zoning designation and the parcels to the north of the site have the 1-2 zoning designation. Concentrating the heavier industrial zones in this area provides a necessary space for industrial development. This advances public health, safety and general welfare by limiting potential nuisances and negative externalities to an area where heavier industrial uses are currently allowed. 4.The effect it will have on the value and character of the adjacent property and the Comprehensive Plan; The change in zoning will have little to no effect on the value and the character of the adjacent properties and the comprehensive plan. Both the current 1-1 zoning and proposed 1-2 zoning implement the Industrial Comprehensive Plan land use designation, as well as the plan's various goals and policies (such as LU-6, ED-2, and ED-3) to accommodate industrial development in appropriate areas within the City. The purposes of both zoning districts are similar: "The 1-1 light industrial district is established to preserve areas for industrial and related uses of such a nature that they do not create serious problems of compatibility with other kinds of land uses. Uses permitted in this district should not generate noise levels, light, odor or fumes that would constitute a nuisance or hazard." (PMC 25.115.010) "The 1-2 medium industrial district is established to provide areas for necessary industrial and related uses that could create problems of compatibility with other land uses. Uses in this district have the potential to generate high levels of noise, light, odor, fumes or smoke that require their protection from encroachment by incompatible land uses." (PMC 25.120.010) The proposed rezone to 1-2 will match the zoning of the adjacent parcels to the north and west and accommodates less intensive industrial uses compared to those allowed on the parcels to the south which are zoned 1-3. 5.The effect on the property owner or owners if the request is not granted; The property, in conjunction with the northern property, may not be able to be developed as the proposed industrial park if the request was not granted. This is mmmm Page 37 of 82 Community and Economic Development July 1, 2022 2220065.30 Page 4 of 4 due to the proposed development involving parcels that have different zoning (1- 1 and 1-2). Due to the proposed development and parcel configuration this would create split zoned parcels, something that has historically not been allowed within the City of Pasco. Therefore, the rezone is necessary to harmonize the zoning of the two parcels and allow for the proposed development. 6.The Comprehensive Plan land use designation for the property; The current comprehensive plan land use designation is Industrial and a large area of land surrounding the parcel is also designated as such. 7.Such other information as the Hearing Examiner requires. No other additional information has been requested at this time. We are always grateful for staffs assistance throughout these processes. Please let me know if you have any questions or comments during the review of our proposal. We respectfully request this rezone request be scheduled and noticed for an open record hearing with the City's hearing examiner on August 10, 2022. Sincerely, Nicole Stickney, AICP Senior Planning Project Manager NS/MV c: Ben Waiss, Tarragon LLC \\ahbl.com\data\projects\2022\2220065\30_PLN\Deliverables_By_Date\20220629_Pasco_ 40_Rezone_Ltr_2220065.docx •La mmmm Page 38 of 82 Affidavit of Mailing In regards to MF# Z2022-009 I, Carmen Patrick, hereby confirm that notification was sent by mail August 22, 2022 to the owners of the parcels within 300 feet of the proposed site . The attached Notification List and Notice of Public Hearing are to be used as a reference as to what was sent and to whom received the notification. Given under my hand and official signature this 22nd day, August of 2022. Representative's Signature Page 39 of 82 -4 11 .. PifSco Community Development Department PO Box 293, 525 N 3rd Ave, Pasco , WA 99301 P: 509 .545.3441 / F: 509 .545 .3499 PUBLIC NOTICE Si necesita ayuda para entender este aviso o necesita mas informaci6n, por favor llame al Departamento de Desarrollo Comunitario y Econ6mico de la Ciudad de Pasco a 509-545-3441. Proposal: Nicole Stickney/AHBL, on behalf of Pasco Road 40 LLC, has submitted a rezone application (Z 2022-009) from 1-1 (Light Industrial) to 1-2 (Medium Industrial) for a portion of the South Half of the southwest quarter and the south half of the north half of southwest quarter of Section 34, Township 9 North, Range 30 East, W.M ., lying north of northeasterly right of way line of Spokane, Portland & Seattle Railway Company, EXCEPT that portion thereof conveyed to Northern Pacific Railway Company by deed recorded in Volume 46 of Deeds page 246, and EXCEPT portion to City of Pasco (Parcel 112540082) located along the west side of Road 40 East, Pasco, Franklin County, WA 99301. The proposal is subject to regulations contained in the Pasco Municipal Code . Public Comment Period: Written comments must be submitted to the Community Development Department by 5:00 p.m. on 14 September 2022 to be included in the Hearing Examiner packet . If you have questions on the proposal , contact the Planning Division at (509) 545-3441 or via e-mail to: adamsj@pasco-wa .gov . Open Record Hearing: The Hearing Examiner will conduct the open record hearing at 6:00 p.m . on 14 September 2022 in the Council Chambers in Pasco City Hall at 525 N 3rd Avenue in Pasco , Washington . The Hearing Examiner will consider public testimony concerning the above application at this meeting. If you wish to participate in the hearing virtually, please register at least 2 hours prior to the meeting at the following registration link: www.pasco-wa.gov/publiccomment After registering, you will receive a confirmation email containing information about joining the webinar. Estimated Date of the Decision: It is estimated that the Hearing Examiner will make a decision on the Special Permit within ten (10) business days of the public hearing. Prepared 15 August 2022 by: Jeffrey B. Adams , Associate Planner, PO Box 293 Pasco , WA 99301 (509) 545 -344 1 The City of Pasco welcomes full participation in public meetings by all citizens. No qualified individual with a disab ility shall be excluded or denied the benefit of participating in such meetings . If you wish to use au xili ary aids or require assistance to comment at this public meeting , please contact the Community Development Department at (509) 545-344 1 or TDD (509 ) 585-4425 at least ten days prior to the date of the meeting to make arrangements for special needs . Page 40 of 82 "Exhibit B" ,,,,o Item: Road 40 LLC Rezone I-1 to I-2 Applicant: Nicole Stickney/ Road 40 LLC File #: Z 2022-009 £"VI/. '4f?£°1-f ou 'S£" S7' 700 1,100 Feet 0">"" n, 1,40 ~ ~ $ IJf = = r;:>~ <f?~ ~~ <f?~<?_~ =~ <f?<f? ;,,? 0 e:::,= <f?<f? tf>~ • [) 00 = c:::> <f? <f? ~ ./2 /) ~ ~ = ~<::) <f?~ V {/ ~ <f? <f? <?' <::? c::::> ,::::, c:::::> D c::?c::::> ,::Po DO d)c> ~.::::> = ,:::::> ,::::, =a e:r ~c:::> = c:::J ,:;:::> c$ CJ c:? ~ c::::> CJ ,::::, c::::> D ~ ~i;;::> c:::>c::) di,::::> == .di= =O e>t,0 c:,,::::, .di c:O c:=> ,::::, C!} c:::> ~ c::> \J'\ Ot;r> • c:::> ·~o~ =G'J -~•,::::>,::::> ~ • c:::>c;:O :--_., c:::>O -,.,o ""' ~eAJJAWEA-PARICRD Page 41 of 82 NAME ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP BNSF RAILWAY COMPANY PO BOX 961089 FORT WORTH TX 76161 BROET JE ORCHARDS LLC 3525 EA ST PASCO WA 99301 PASCO ROAD 40 LLC 1302 PUYALLUP ST STE A SUMNER WA 98390 PROJECT OYSTER PASCO , LLC 110 110TH AVE NE BELLVUE WA 98004 LAKEVIEW TRAILER COURT 9073 NEMO ST LOS ANGELES CA 90069 JEFF ADAMS 7903 W 20TH AVE KENNEWICK WA 99338 Page 42 of 82 August 11, 2022 City of Pasco Community Development PO Box 293 Pasco, WA 99301 Attn: Mike Manning, Planner RE: SEPA2022-076 – Tarragon LLC US 12 milepost 293.6 - E. A Street vicinity Rt. We have reviewed the proposed project and traffic impact analysis (TIA, dated March 7, 2022) and have the following comments. • The subject property is in the vicinity of U.S. Highway 12 (US 12). US 12 is a limited access facility, Highway of Statewide Significance (HSS), and part of the National Highway System (NHS). Access to the highway is available via the E. Lewis Street interchange, as well as the E. A Street and Tank Farm/Sacajawea Park intersections. US 12, including the above interchange and intersections currently operate within acceptable safety and operational thresholds. It is to the benefit of the city, county and state to preserve this facility’s efficiency. • We are not opposed to the proposed project; however, we are concerned with the cumulative impact vehicle trips generated by this proposal will have on the US 12/Tank Farm/Sacajawea Park intersection. As previously stated to the city, the collision history review included in the project TIA does not meet WSDOT’s requirements for safety performance analysis of state highways. The TIA must be revised to include a safety analysis component in conformance with Chapters 321 and 321 of the WSDOT Design Manual, as well as the WSDOT Safety Analysis Guide. As a condition of development approval, the updated report must be submitted to WSDOT for review and comment. The developer will be responsible to implement any mitigation measures or safety countermeasures identified by the additional analysis. Further, the background traffic volumes shown at the US 12/Sacajawea Park Rd/Tank Farm Rd intersection are not consistent with the volumes shown in previous TIAs for Project Oyster and Project Pearl. The proponent’s traffic consultant must contact the department to discuss this discrepancy and determine what, if any, corrections should be made to the analysis. Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on this proposal. If you have any questions regarding this letter, please contact Jacob Prilucik at (509) 577-1635. Sincerely, Paul Gonseth, P.E. Region Planning Engineer PG: jjp cc: SR 12, File #2022_009 Page 43 of 82 MINUTES Hearing Examiner Meeting 7:00 PM – Tuesday, September 14, 2022 Road 40 LLC Rezone I-1 to I-2 (Z2022-009) Mr. Kottkamp stated, this is rezone application Z2022-009, this is an application to rezone a parcel from “light industrial” to “medium industrial”. The property is located within the City of Pasco that is more specifically described in the staff report as well as in the application materials. Now for the record, I will admit into the record at this time by this reference and staff report, all those attachments to the staff report which included all of the application materials, all of the noticing document, the comments that have come through agency and public, the site plans, the overhead mapping. I'll admit all those items, indeed I'll admit the entire planning staff file into the record at this time by this reference and we also had sent to the Hearing Examiner on August 23, 2022, Memorandum from the City of Kennewick and that will be admitted into the record as well and I'll turn this matter over to again Mr. Adams for the staff presentation. Jeff Adams commented, thank you Mr. Examiner. This is Master file Z, which stands for rezone, 2022-009 and Nicole Stickney representing AHBL and Road 40 LLC. This is for a rezone from light industrial which is I-1, to medium industrial I-2 zoning. This site is located along the west side of south Road 40 East, adjacent the Lakeview Mobile Home Park. This site is currently zoned I-1 and it contains approximately 70.79 acres. Applicant acting on behalf of Pasco Road 40 LLC has applied to change the zoning from I-1 to I-2 as mentioned before, to match the adjacent northern parcel. These parcels were planned to be developed together. Public notice of the hearing was sent to owners within 300 feet of the property and posted on August 22, 2022. The proposed development is for a 2 million square foot industrial park over 111 acres, so it'd be those two parcels, the current site, and the parcel above. The proposed site development would include access drives and parking lots. The I-2 zoning would be consistent with the existing zoning to the north and also to the west. You can see the darker coloring on the zoning map, that indicates that that's a heavier zoning designation. Current uses in the vicinity include undeveloped vacant property to the north and west, ag uses to the northeast, and a mobile home park to the southeast. This site has been vacant for many years and Comprehensive Plan designates the lot and all the surrounding for industrial uses. The industrial designation allows for I-1, I-2 and I-3 zoning. The site was assigned RMH-2 which is a mobile home park zoning in conjunction with the original annexation and the site was rezoned from that to I-1 in 1992, the site has not been rezoned since. Amazon has been in the process of developing two one million square foot distribution centers to the north and to the northeast of this site and a special permit for a Pasco School District Preschool was approved near the south entrance of the proposed development. The intersection Page 44 of 82 of the project south driveway and the Pasco School District access point is very dangerous with a 40-mile hour speed limit and both vertical and horizontal curves and a blind left-hand exit turn. This intersection needs to be evaluated for traffic safety mitigation measures. Staff is recommending a concomitant agreement for traffic safety and buffering mitigation measures relating to this dangerous intersection. Those are the highlights of our report. Mr. Kottkamp stated thank you and I did read with interest the comments regarding the traffic and from Washington State Department of Transportation. Other than the agreement that you referenced, that would be part of this rezone though if it is ultimately approved by city council. The development permits are where all of the significant traffic study and traffic impact studies are going to be required is that is that fair to say? Jeff Adams answered, that is correct. Mr. Kottkamp continued, all right thank you very much. Is the applicant or applicant’s representative here tonight who wish to speak? Ms. Stickney stated yes good evening. My name is Nicole Stickney that's spelled S-t-i-c-k-n-e-y. Mr. Kottkamp asked, can I get an address for you, work address is fine. Ms. Stickney continued, sure 5804 Road 90, Suite H in Pasco, Washington. That's the address for AHBL. Mr. Kottkamp stated, all right thank you. We'll have you raise your right hand for me, and you swear or affirm under penalty perjury the testimony you give will be true? Ms. Stickney stated, I do. Mr. Kottkamp said all right thank you very much. And you are here as you indicated, as an agent authorized to appear and speak on behalf of the applicant and property owner tonight, is that correct? Ms. Stickney answered yes, that's correct. Mr. Kottkamp stated all right thank you and what would you like to tell me? Ms. Stickney continues, thank you Mr. Examiner and good evening. Thank you to staff for the preparation of your staff report and for helping and assisting along through this process. As noted by staff this is a pretty straightforward project, we are just looking to up-zone the property, change the entitlement. What is happening here is the landowner wants to proceed with some speculative development, if you will, and look to build some shell buildings that could be occupied by a variety of different users. In doing so the applicant also intends to purchase the property to the north, that has not yet occurred, but as you'll notice the property to the north does already have an I-2 zoning designation and therefore our request is to change this parcel to the south to match with the property to the north, the northern parcel. The reason why that's a good idea is just so that everything is consistent on the site and there's no difference in the zoning and we do know that staff typically does encourage some uniformity Page 45 of 82 and zoning for projects, even of this size, it's a good practice. So that is the basis of the request it's really about opening up the uses to be a bit broader if necessary for future users at the site and so that it can be marketed more widely and used more widely. As noted there has been a lot of activity recently in the area which is great for the City and is a real change from what has occurred in the past. As they noted this property has set vacant for decades. So, we want to prepare the property for this good use and for the range of possibilities that are allowed as primary permitted uses and conditional uses in that zoning district I-2. As you saw in my materials that I submitted Mr. Examiner, I have outlined, because it is our burden of proof, the ways that this zoning petition does align with the requirements and the criteria set forth in the Pasco Municipal Code 25.210.030. I won't repeat that because that's because that’s already on the record but essentially, we have identified the facts of how this would advance public health safety, how it can have a beneficial effect on the value and character of surrounding properties, and addressed you know the fact that it complies with the Comprehensive Plan most of all. Again, we're very grateful for staff's assistance. One thing I do want to take note of is that the staff report they indicated that a SEPA determination of non-significance has been issued for this project. That is not the case we have not received any threshold determination at this point, so that is still outstanding. The City did put out an ODNS on August 2nd and we've been waiting anxiously for those comments which we have now received and also for the final threshold determination. In closing I would request that you recommend approval of this rezone. In terms of the concomitant agreement that has been suggested by staff, we feel that that is not warranted, and we would specifically ask that you not include that in your recommendation to City Council. The reason being as you noted those types of mitigation measures should be triggered or come about either under SEPA or with the development of the project itself. Clearly changing the color on a map and up zoning a property is not creating more traffic, it’s not going to create these problems, instead it just changes the entitlement of the property which is already industrial to a different type of industrial and it's really at the project later stages that any project mitigation should be brought into effect. So specifically, they had recommended a concomitant agreement to address traffic safety and buffering mitigation measures and we just feel that that is premature at this point with the rezone so for those reasons we would ask that you specifically do not recommend that to council. Thank you very much. Mr. Kottkamp responded, all right thank you very much for coming out tonight. We'll turn this over to the public, did any member of the public come to testify on this matter? Jeff Adams answered, I don't see anybody. Mr. Kottkamp continued, all right thank you Mr. Adams. Is there anything further from staff? Jeff Adams stated no sir. Mr. Kottkamp stated all right then, what I want to do is I am going to close the public record on this hearing. I will have my recommended decision made within the next 10 working days. Page 46 of 82 AGENDA REPORT FOR: City Council November 22, 2022 TO: Adam Lincoln, Interim City Manager City Council Special Meeting: 11/28/22 FROM: Darcy Buckley, Director Finance SUBJECT: Ordinances Nos. 4619 & 4620 - Second Readings and Passage of 2023- 2024 Operating & Capital Projects Budgets I. REFERENCE(S): Proposed 2023-2024 Operating Budget Ordinance Proposed 2023-2024 Alternate Operating Budget Ordinance Proposed 2023-2024 Capital Projects Budget Ordinance II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. MOTION: I move to give the second reading and passage of Ordinance No. 4619, approving the Operating Budget for 2023 -2024 Biennium, and further, authorize publication by summary only. -OR- ALTERNATIVE MOTION: I move to give the second reading and passage of the alternate Ordinance No. 4619, approving the Operating Budget for 2023 -2024 Biennium, which staggers staff additions, and further, authorize publication by summary only. 2. MOTION: I move to give the second reading and passage of Ordinance No. 4620, approving the Capital Projects Budget for 2023-2024 Biennium, and further, authorize publication by summary only. III. FISCAL IMPACT: $706,317,818, includes fund balance(s). IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF: Page 47 of 82 The City Council was provided a comprehensive briefing of the proposed 2023 - 2024 Biennial Capital Projects and 2023-2024 Biennial Operating Budget, along with associated policy issues at the October 3 and 24, 2022, Council Workshops, respectively. A draft document was supplied to Council on November 2 for reference material and to provide insight to the financial effect of the budgetary items. Upon approval, a finalized version will be completed. As Council had the opportunity to review the budget with the result of comments and/or questions, on November 21, a response to those questions was provided to the Councilmembers. Consistent with State statute, and in furtherance of Council's goals with respect to transparency and providing opportunities for community engagement and input, the first reading and first public hearing was held for comment on the recommended 2023-2024 Budgets on November 7, 2022. The Council meeting of November 21st provided opportunity for the second public hea ring of the 2023-2024 Operating Budget. During that meeting, an alternative timing of staffing additions was provided as an option that would delay select new hiring to 2024. V. DISCUSSION: Based on current biennial budget activity, two (2) funds reflect anticipated negative ending fund balances on December 31, 2024. They are Capital Improvement Fund (REET) and Equipment Operations & Maintenance - Government Fund. There is a large project currently planned in the Capital Improvement Fund that has the potential to be funded via a different source. If reassignment of funding source is possible, the fund will be positively balanced. Should a change in funding source not be possible, timing of planned projects will be reassessed. The Equipment Operations & Maintenance - Government Fund is in need of an analysis of rates. This analysis will occur during the biennium. The Process Water Reuse Facility utility, included in the Water/Sewer Utility Fund, is currently involved in contract negotiations that will have a substantial impact on Fund financial results. Council has been briefed previously on said negotiations, and finalization of the contracts will Council action. Once the associated contract negotiations are completed and approved by Council, the necessary budget adjustments will be made resulting in improved fund balance. Council held two public hearings for the proposed budgets. The first hearing held on November 7th and also included the motion approving the first reading of the ordinances by title only. The second hearing was held on November 21st. During the second hearing staff provided a brief presentation regarding the staffing requests within the proposed budgets. Page 48 of 82 Based on questions received from Council an alternative timing for addition of new staff was shared at the November 21st meeting. This alternative delays hiring fourteen (14) requested positions year 2024. The approximate savings in year 2023 from this alternative is $2,282,166. At the meeting on November 21 the savings were presented as $2.8M. Since this meeting one position slated for 2024 was removed and temporary/contract staffing that exists without permanent FTE to complete work was reestablished. Staff recommends second readings and passage for the 2023 -2024 Operating and Capital Projects Budgets. Page 49 of 82 Ordinance – 2023-2024 Operating Budget - 1 ORDINANCE NO. 4619 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON, APPROVING THE OPERATING BUDGET FOR THE 2023-2024 BIENNIUM. WHEREAS, subsequent to due notice and public hearing thereon, the City Council for the City of Pasco seeks to approve an operating budget for the 2023-2024 biennium. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The following budget containing the totals set forth for each fund for the 2023-2024 biennium is hereby adopted. OPERATING BUDGET FOR 2023-2024 Fund Budgeted Beginning Fund Balance Revenues & Resource Inflows Expenditures & Resource Outflows Budgeted Ending Fund Balance General Fund 28,595,133 179,585,702 189,884,556 18,296,279 Street 698,779 4,967,167 5,159,227 506,719 Arterial 1,591,202 1,246,749 1,537,491 1,300,460 I-182 Impact 2,484,511 1,149,881 2,230,094 1,404,298 Street Overlay 2,403,952 2,270,074 3,462,717 1,211,309 CDBG 548,369 2,743,200 2,073,658 1,217,911 Martin Luther King Center 18,018 344,600 275,728 86,890 Ambulance 5,745,545 25,705,282 25,011,609 6,439,218 ARPA 35,000 422,712 402,711 55,001 Cemetery 355,474 826,552 781,788 400,238 Boulevard Maintenance 2,269,483 150,605 241,604 2,178,484 Athletics 176,649 358,435 320,453 214,631 Golf course 145,810 200,000 232,964 112,846 Animal Shelter Operations 0 4,024,808 3,962,808 62,000 Senior Center 194,228 237,159 431,112 275 Multi Modal 397,694 421,401 224,539 594,556 School Impact 69,549 3,562,600 3,549,714 82,435 Pasco Marina (32,137) 61,332 29,195 0 Lodging 0 1,070,774 1,070,774 0 Litter Abatement 71,407 35,824 33,964 73,267 Revolving Abatement 852,828 750,115 1,044,937 558,006 TRAC 366,838 540,646 545,322 362,162 Park Development 1,372,180 1,130,250 1,201,748 1,300,682 Page 50 of 82 Ordinance – 2023-2024 Operating Budget - 2 Capital Improvement REET 1,851,650 9,303,320 11,665,505 (510,535) Economic Development 13,619,949 3,150,402 3,700,815 13,069,536 Stadium/Convention Center 1,426,943 66,381 1,271,937 221,387 Hotel/Motel Excise Tax 536,733 1,526,124 1,735,731 327,126 LID 0 167,986 167,986 0 General Capital Improvement 0 87,513,840 87,513,840 0 Utility Fund Total 31,129,135 218,865,288 228,096,209 21,898,214 Equipment O&M Govt (256,933) 4,436,152 5,297,522 (1,118,303) Equipment O&M Enterprise 0 384,400 378,400 6,000 Equipment Replacement Govt 15,205,716 3,817,529 2,909,860 16,113,385 Equipment Replacement Enterprise 5,544,038 1,699,533 940,296 6,303,275 Medical/Dental 4,009,192 12,499,640 12,434,652 4,074,180 Central Stores 13,012 0 1,000 12,012 Old Fire Pension 4,024,383 274,002 179,905 4,118,480 Old Fire OPEB 4,516,186 104,000 328,138 4,292,048 Cemetery Endowment 680,837 42,000 0 722,837 Total Fund Balance 130,661,353 575,656,465 600,330,509 105,987,309 Section 2. The City of Pasco’s 2023-2024 Operating Budget shall be in full force and effect on January 1, 2023. Section 3. This Ordinance shall take effect five (5) days after approval, passage and publication as required by law. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco, Washington, this ____ day of __________, 2022. _____________________________ Blanche Barajas Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: ______________________________ ________________________________ Debra Barham, CMC Kerr Ferguson Law, PLLC City Clerk City Attorneys Published: _____________________________ Page 51 of 82 Ordinance – 2023-2024 Operating Budget Alternate - 1 ORDINANCE NO. 4619 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON, APPROVING THE OPERATING BUDGET FOR THE 2023-2024 BIENNIUM, WHICH STAGGERS STAFF ADDITIONS. WHEREAS, subsequent to due notice and public hearing thereon, the City Council for the City of Pasco seeks to approve an operating budget for the 2023-2024 biennium. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The following budget containing the totals set forth for each fund for the 2023-2024 biennium is hereby adopted. OPERATING BUDGET FOR 2023-2024 Fund Budgeted Beginning Fund Balance Revenues & Resource Inflows Expenditures & Resource Outflows Budgeted Ending Fund Balance General Fund 28,595,133 179,585,702 188,462,148 19,718,687 Street 698,779 4,967,167 5,159,227 506,719 Arterial 1,591,202 1,246,749 1,537,491 1,300,460 I-182 Impact 2,484,511 1,149,881 2,230,094 1,404,298 Street Overlay 2,403,952 2,270,074 3,462,717 1,211,309 CDBG 548,369 2,743,200 2,073,658 1,217,911 Martin Luther King Center 18,018 344,600 275,728 86,890 Ambulance 5,745,545 25,705,282 25,011,609 6,439,218 ARPA 35,000 422,712 402,711 55,001 Cemetery 355,474 826,552 781,788 400,238 Boulevard Maintenance 2,269,483 150,605 241,604 2,178,484 Athletics 176,649 358,435 320,453 214,631 Golf course 145,810 200,000 232,964 112,846 Animal Shelter Operations 0 4,024,808 3,962,808 62,000 Senior Center 194,228 237,159 431,112 275 Multi Modal 397,694 421,401 224,539 594,556 School Impact 69,549 3,562,600 3,549,714 82,435 Pasco Marina (32,137) 61,332 29,195 0 Lodging 0 1,070,774 1,070,774 0 Litter Abatement 71,407 35,824 33,964 73,267 Revolving Abatement 852,828 750,115 1,044,937 558,006 TRAC 366,838 540,646 545,322 362,162 Park Development 1,372,180 1,130,250 1,201,748 1,300,682 Page 52 of 82 Ordinance – 2023-2024 Operating Budget Alternate - 2 Capital Improvement REET 1,851,650 9,303,320 11,665,505 (510,535) Economic Development 13,619,949 3,150,402 3,700,815 13,069,536 Stadium/Convention Center 1,426,943 66,381 1,271,937 221,387 Hotel/Motel Excise Tax 536,733 1,526,124 1,735,731 327,126 LID 0 167,986 167,986 0 General Capital Improvement 0 87,513,840 87,513,840 0 Utility Fund Total 31,129,135 218,865,288 227,418,315 22,576,108 Equipment O&M Govt (256,933) 4,436,152 5,206,590 (1,027,371) Equipment O&M Enterprise 0 384,400 378,400 6,000 Equipment Replacement Govt 15,205,716 3,817,529 2,818,928 16,204,317 Equipment Replacement Enterprise 5,544,038 1,699,533 940,296 6,303,275 Medical/Dental 4,009,192 12,499,640 12,434,652 4,074,180 Central Stores 13,012 0 1,000 12,012 Old Fire Pension 4,024,383 274,002 179,905 4,118,480 Old Fire OPEB 4,516,186 104,000 328,138 4,292,048 Cemetery Endowment 680,837 42,000 0 722,837 Total Fund Balance $ 130,661,353 $ 575,656,465 $ 598,048,343 $ 108,269,475 Section 2. The City of Pasco’s 2023-2024 Operating Budget shall be in full force and effect on January 1, 2023. Section 3. This Ordinance shall take effect five (5) days after approval, passage and publication as required by law. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco, Washington, this __ day of ___________, 2022. _____________________________ Blanche Barajas Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: ______________________________ ________________________________ Debra Barham, CMC Kerr Ferguson Law, PLLC City Clerk City Attorneys Published: _____________________________ Page 53 of 82 Ordinance – 2023-2024 Capital Projects Budget - 1 ORDINANCE NO. 4620 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON APPROVING THE CAPITAL PROJECTS BUDGET FOR THE 2023-2024 BIENNIUM. WHEREAS, subsequent to due notice and public hearing thereon, the City Council for the City of Pasco seeks to approve the following Capital Projects Budget for the 2023-2024 biennium. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the capital projects are hereby authorized as detailed. The following schedule summarizes newly authorized projects, as well as continuing projects, and constitutes the Capital Projects Budget. CAPITAL PROJECTS BUDGET FOR 2023-2024 CIP Designation Project Name Amount ACS Burden Blvd Soccer Complex Improvements Planning/ Design 100,000 ACS A Street Sports Complex New Construction Phase 1 650,000 ACS Bus-Train Depot Refurbishment 70,000 ACS Cemetery Estate Fence New Construction 350,000 ACS City Hall Improvement Refurbishment - HVAC/Electronics 800,000 ACS City Hall Refurbishment Phase 2 - New Office Space 200,000 ACS City Hall Window Refurbishment 70,000 ACS Community Park Northwest New Construction 200,000 ACS Dog Park New Construction 50,000 ACS Facilities Shop Gate Replacement - Oregon & Idaho Ave 60,000 ACS Franklin County Irrigation District Trail Phase 1 20,000 ACS GESA Stadium Outfield Fence Refurbishment 120,000 Page 54 of 82 Ordinance – 2023-2024 Capital Projects Budget - 2 ACS GESA Stadium Parking Lot Refurbishment 420,000 ACS GESA Stadium Refurbishment 991,104 ACS Highland Park New Construction - Broadway & CA Ave 37,271 ACS Irrigation Clock Conversion Replacement City Wide 55,000 ACS Marina Dock Replacement - Dock B - WA St & 3rd Ave 1,900,000 ACS Memorial Park Conversion of Play Fields Refurbishment 20,000 ACS Memorial Pool Bubble Cover Construction 1,000,000 ACS Memorial Pool Refurbishment 40,000 ACS Parks Restroom Replacement - East Side Parks 200,000 ACS Peanuts Park North Refurbishment 500,000 ACS Pro Shop & Restaurant Replacement 1,075,000 ACS Regional Wayfinding and City Gateways 500,000 ACS Road 84 Park 100,000 ACS Sacajawea Trail BNSF Crossing New Construction 125,000 ACS Skate Park New Construction 50,000 ACS Sylvester Park Renovation/Expansion - Sylvester & 5th 450,000 ACS Trail Connection Other Improvement - Throughout City 120,000 Total ACS $ 10,273,375 CED - Transportation James Street Improvements - 1 230,000 CED - Transportation Lewis St/Heritage Blvd Intersection Improvements 1,500,000 CED - Transportation New Road 108 - Phase 1 5,461,500 CED - Transportation Rainier Ave/Kartchner St Intersection Improvements 120,000 CED - Transportation Road 40 E Extension 1,330,000 Page 55 of 82 Ordinance – 2023-2024 Capital Projects Budget - 3 CED - Transportation Sandifur Pkwy Extension - Broadmoor to 108 6,545,500 CED - Transportation Sandifur Pkwy Improvements - Bedford to Broadmoor 871,000 CED - Transportation Sandifur Pkwy/Broadmoor Blvd Intersection Improvement 3,600,000 CED - Transportation South Elm Ave Extension 1,194,000 CED - Transportation Sylvester St/US 395 NB Off-Ramp Intersection Improvements 150,000 CED - Transportation Traffic Analysis for I-182/Rd 68 Interchange 250,000 CED - Transportation Traffic Analysis for I-182/US Hwy 395 Interchange 265,000 CED - Transportation Traffic Analysis for US 12 250,000 Total CED $ 21,767,000 Fire Fire Station 85 $ 8,000,000 Irrigation Well Capacity Upgrades 855,918 Irrigation Columbia River Intake Capacity Upgrades 92,041 Irrigation NW Irrigation System Upgrades DNSPUB 6,653,000 Total Irrigation $ 7,600,959 Police City Council Chambers 275,000 Police PD Training Facility Upgrade 350,000 Police Police Dept Headquarters Expansion 500,000 Police Regional Law Enforcement Training Facility 500,000 Total Police $ 1,625,000 Public Works Public Works (PW) Operations Center 800,000 Public Works Shop Addition (Lean-To) 375,000 Page 56 of 82 Ordinance – 2023-2024 Capital Projects Budget - 4 Total PW – Non- Transportation $ 1,175,000 Public Works - Transportation Rd 36 Golf Course Irrigation Line Extension 250,000 Public Works - Transportation Annual Pavement Preservation Program 2,030,000 Public Works - Transportation Argent Rd/Rd 88 Pedestrian Crossing 250,000 Public Works - Transportation Argent Widening Phase 3 3,518,390 Public Works - Transportation Broadmoor Blvd Improvements 4,333,000 Public Works - Transportation Buckingham Dr Extension & Signal 9,822,400 Public Works - Transportation Burns Rd/Broadmoor Blvd Intersection Improvements 2,560,000 Public Works - Transportation City Wide Traffic Signal Improvements Phase 3 20,000 Public Works - Transportation Court St Overlay - US Hwy 395 to 20th 165,000 Public Works - Transportation Court St Overlay Roads 44-68 1,850,000 Public Works - Transportation Court St/Rd 68 Intersection Improvements 2,644,954 Public Works - Transportation Crescent Rd Extension - Road 108 to Chapel Hill 60,000 Public Works - Transportation I-182/Broadmoor Blvd Interchange Multiuse Path/Bridge 700,000 Public Works - Transportation I-182/Rd 68 Interchange Pedestrian/Bicycle Access 500,000 Public Works - Transportation I-82/Broadmoor Blvd Interchange Improvements 5,600,000 Public Works - Transportation Lewis St Corridor Improvements (Phase 1) - 2nd Ave to 5th Ave 51,430 Public Works - Transportation Lewis St Overpass 1,386,337 Public Works - Transportation Oregon Ave (SR 397) Overlay I-182 to Ainsworth Ave 3,000,000 Public Works - Transportation Rd 100 Widening - Court St to Chapel Hill Blvd 375,000 Public Works - Transportation Rd 68 & Burns Rd Traffic Signal 500,000 Public Works - Transportation Rd 76 Overpass - Chapel Hill Blvd to Burden Blvd 100,000 Public Works - Transportation Rd 76 Widening - Wrigley Dr to Cordero Dr 50,000 Page 57 of 82 Ordinance – 2023-2024 Capital Projects Budget - 5 Public Works - Transportation Sandifur Pkwy /Rd 90 Pedestrian Crossing 345,000 Public Works - Transportation Sandifur Pkwy Widening - Road 52 to Road 60 82,755 Public Works - Transportation Sylvester St Overpass Pedestrian/Bicycle Access 500,000 Public Works - Transportation Sylvester St Safety Improvements 3,754,199 Public Works - Transportation W. 'A' St/6th Ave Pedestrian Crossing 250,000 Total PW - Transportation $ 44,698,465 PWRF PWRF Pretreatment Impr. (Ph 1) -Pot Wtr & Elec 4,000,000 PWRF PWRF Pretreatment Impr. (Ph 2) Winter Storage 29,000,000 PWRF PWRF Pretreatment Impr. (Ph 2) Winter Storage 300,000 PWRF PWRF Irrigation System - USBR Property 120,000 PWRF PWRF Land Acquisition and Irrigation System 750,000 PWRF PWRF Pretreatment Improvement (Ph 3) - AD/SBR/RNG 20,000,000 PWRF PWRF Irrigation System - Beus Property 440,000 PWRF PWRF Irrigation System - Farm Upgrades 5,780,000 PWRF PWRF Lab and Office 700,000 Total PWRF $ 61,090,000 Stormwater Stormwater Pipe Relining (Ph 1) 115,000 Stormwater Schlagel Park Stormwater Main Replacement 710,520 Stormwater Infiltration Improvement Program 500,000 Stormwater Sylvester Pipe Repair - 5th Ave to 10th Ave 770,000 Total Stormwater $ 2,095,520 Page 58 of 82 Ordinance – 2023-2024 Capital Projects Budget - 6 Wastewater Animal Shelter Facility Replace- Wa. St & S 18th Ave 100,000 Wastewater Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) Improv. (Ph 1) 5,000,000 Wastewater Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) Improv. (Ph 2) 23,000,000 Wastewater East UGA Expansion Sewer LID 17,364,000 Wastewater West UGA Expansion Sewer LID 200,000 Wastewater Riverview W. Sewer Lift Station 1,865,000 Wastewater Court St Sewer Main Upsize - Rd 100 - Rd 110 (CSP #14) 318,000 Wastewater USACE Easement Upsize -Rd 36 W. of US 395 (CSP #20) 1,287,000 Total Wastewater $ 49,134,000 Water Lewis St Overpass 331,882 Water Star Lane Water Main Replace - Rd 100 to Rd 97 200,000 Water Transmission Main - WPWTP to Zone 3 1,453,000 Water Emergency Power Improvement 1,350,000 Water Richardson Rd Water Main Replace- Rd 92 to Rd 96 300,000 Water Butterfield Water Treatment Plant (WTP) Improvement 9,061,232 Water Alton St. Main ext. - Wehe to Alley E. Owen Ave 463,000 Water Automated Meter Reading 400,000 Water Reservoir Storage Tank - Zone 3 2,308,000 Water Reservoir Storage Tank - Zone 3 1,690,000 Water NE Industrial Area Waterline(s) Ext 1,275,000 Water Rd 76 Water Main Replace- Wernett Rd to W Court St 182,000 Water Reservoir Storage Tank - Zone 2 2,000,000 Water Riverhaven St. Water Main ext. - Rd 36 to Rd 40 86,000 Page 59 of 82 Ordinance – 2023-2024 Capital Projects Budget - 7 Water West Pasco Wtr Treatment Plant Expansion (Ph 3) - Firm Capacity 3,245,000 Total Water $ 24,345,114 TOTAL CAPITAL PROJECTS BUDGET $231,804,433 Section 2. The City of Pasco’s 2023-2024 Capital Projects Budget shall be in full force and effect on January 1, 2023. Section 3. This Ordinance shall take effect five (5) days after approval, passage and publication as required by law. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco, Washington, this ___ day of ______________, 2022. _____________________________ Blanche Barajas Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: ______________________________ ________________________________ Debra Barham, CMC Kerr Ferguson Law, PLLC City Clerk City Attorneys Published: _____________________________ Page 60 of 82 AGENDA REPORT FOR: City Council November 22, 2022 TO: Adam Lincoln, Interim City Manager City Council Special Meeting: 11/28/22 FROM: Eric Ferguson, City Attorney Executive SUBJECT: Approval of Amended Draft City Council Redistricting Plan for Publication and Public Comment I. REFERENCE(S): 2017 Council Voting District Map 2022 (Original) Proposed Council Districts with Voting Precincts 2022 Amended Proposed Council Districts with Voting Precincts (November 18th Map) (Original) Demographer’s Memo Transmitting Recommended City Council Draft Redistricting Plan Amended Demographer’s Memo Transmitting Recommended City Council Draft Redistricting Plan (Dated 11.25.2022) II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: MOTION: I move to approve the amended Redistricting Plan for the Pasco City Council Voting Districts for publication and public comment consistent with State and Federal Voter Rights Acts. III. FISCAL IMPACT: N/A IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF: There is considerable history here, in short, circumstances were such because of then-existing State law, the City and ACLU were required to utilize the federal court system for the City of Pasco to come into compliance with the Federal Voter Rights Act (VRA). On May 8, 2017, Council approved the most recent revisions to the City of Pasco's City Council Voting Districts which were subsequently approved and ordered by Judge Suko of the U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Washington through a consent decree. Of note, under the federal and state VRAs the U.S. Decennial Census is the standard by which Page 61 of 82 electoral districts shall be drawn, meaning that the districts established in 2017 under Judge Suko's order, were necessarily based on the 2010 censu s. As adopted, the City's districting plan provided for one (1) at -large, and six distinct (6) City Council Districts, which now require adjustment based on the results of the 2020 U.S. Census, specifically to account for population growth and where that growth occurred, as well as changes in demographics and city limit (corporate) boundaries over the previous decade. Delayed by the impacts of a world-wide pandemic, the 2020 U.S. Decennial Census was completed in August of 2021, rather than April, and the subsequent release to Washington State Office of Financial Management who in turn provided information to the States, Counties and Municipalities further delayed. Completion of the U.S. Census and release of the information triggers the need and opportunity for the City to review its City Council Districts to assure compliance with the federal, and recently adopted state, Voter Rights Acts. The 2020 Census data was made available by the U.S. government in the fall of 2021, since that time, and per Council direction, staff has been working with specialized legal and demographic professionals to review and update City Council District boundaries to account for changes in; city boundaries, total population, voter population, and other pertinent demographic factors that have occurred between April 1, 2010, and April 1, 2020. As noted previously, the City Council districts were necessarily established based on the 2010 census, the changes in population, corporate limits, demographics in a rapidly growing community like Pasco, which occurred within the decade between 2010 and 2020 have been significant. Considering aforementioned changes, it is then reasonable to expect that the changes to the six (6) districts, in terms of population and boundaries, will be proportionately significant. In preparing for the redistricting effort, it is helpful to keep in mind that the six (6) City Council Districts require adjustments based on the results of the 2020 U.S. Census, and the city limits map in effect at that time. Essentially, the City Council District map that the Council will be adopting as part of the redistricting effort, will reflect how the six Council districts best fit into the April 1, 2020 map for the population, changes in corporate limits, and other statutorily relevant factors of the City at that time, as determined by the 2020 U.S. Census and the two Acts. As Council is aware, there have been annexations to the City subsequent to April 1, 2020. Annexation ordinances relating to each annexation sub sequent to April 2020 should have identified the City Council district to which the newly annexed property was assigned, these individual ordinances will in effect modify the yet to be adopted April 1, 2020 district map. To the extent any of the annexation ordinances fail to reflect a City Council district, or are no longer aligned with the correct district under the adopted April 1, 2020 district map, those annexation Page 62 of 82 areas will be redesignated to align with a contiguous district by subsequent ordinance. Fortunately, most of the area annexed since April 2021 is sparsely populated. In February 2021, the City hired the services of Floyd, Pflueger & Ringer, P.S., as well as Dr. Peter Morrison who developed the current Council Voting Districts in 2017 and assisted the City in updating Redistricting Plan. Staff briefed Council on the progress and development of the Redistricting Plan as information was received from the consultants and believes the draft plan meets the criteria required per RCW 29A.76.010(4) and the federal VRA: • Each internal director, council, or commissioner district shall be as nearly equal in population as possible to each and every other such district comprising the municipal corporation, county, or special purpose district. • Each district shall be as compact as possible. • Each district shall consist of geographically contiguous area. • Population data may not be used for purposes of favoring or disfavoring any racial group or political party To the extent feasible and if not inconsistent with the basic enabling legislation for the municipal corporation, county, or district, the district boundaries shall coincide with existing recognized natural boundaries and shall, to the extent possible, preserve existing communities of related and mutual interest. Council held two public comment sessions on Wednesday, November 2nd and Monday, November 7th. V. DISCUSSION: After the public comment session on November 7th, City staff, along with the consultants, proceeded to draft an ordinance for adoption that would reflec t the map contained in the Draft Redistricting Plan. During that process and the quality assurance process by the City's consultants, it was discovered that there were discrepancies between the census block geography data that was altered by the U.S. Census Bureau in 2020, and the data received from other sources both internally and from Franklin County. In short, these technical anomalies altered the map presented as the Draft Redistricting Plan as required by RCW 29A.76.010. As such, Council was unable to proceed with adoption of an ordinance that complies with RCW 29A.76.010 without resubmitting the amended draft plan to the public for additional written comment. The City's consultants have worked with staff to correct the anomalies, and staff has also met with the Franklin County Auditor’s Office to discuss the role of voting precincts as designated by the County. The verification process and subsequent redrafting process has been completed and the Amended Draft Redistricting Page 63 of 82 Plan is able to be adopted by Council on November 28, 2022, at the Council Special Meeting and regular Workshop, allowing a full week for additional written public comments as required by RCW 29A.76.010 prior to potential final adoption on December 5, 2022. Page 64 of 82 City of Pasco Council DistrictsMay 2017Council Voting Districts:District 1District 2District 3District 4District 5District 6Page 65 of 82 Council District 1 Council District 4 Council District 6 Council District 3 Council District 2 Council District 5 001 003 004 005 006 007 008 009010 011 012 014 016 018 019 021 022 023 026 027 028 029 030 031 032 033 034 035 036 037 038 039 040 041 042 043 044 046 047 048 049 050 051 052 053 054 055 056 057 058 059 060 062 063 065 066 067 102 020 045 105 107 106 013 002 113.01 113.02 015 114 17.01 17.02 024 025 115 116 W Cour t S t E FosterWells Rd Harris Rd Us 395 NUs 395 NN 4Th AveRoad 60Harris RdE Ains w o r t h A v e E A StN Ra i l roadAve W A St Heritage BlvdS 20Th AveN 4Th AveS 10Th AveRoad 44W Ains w o r t h AveN 28ThAveW Lewis StRoad 36N 20Th AveBurden Blvd W Court StRoad 100N 4Th AveS Oregon AveN 1S t AveN O regon AveN 10ThAveUs 395 SE Lewis StBroadmoor BlvdW Sylvester St W Clark St S MaitlandAveS 4Th AveRoad 68W Arge nt R dRoad 68Sandifur Pkwy I-182 E Sandifur Pkwy W Argent Rd Us 1 2 EUs 395 SBurns Rd Road 36I-182 W Us 395 SUs 1 2 W I-182 E Us 395 N I-182 W INFORMATION SERVICES DEPT GIS DIVISION 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000500 Feet 1 of 1NTS 10/27/2022 rka 2022 PROPOSED COUNCIL DISTRICTS WITH VOTING PRECINCTS District 6 District 5 District 4 District 3 District 2 District 1 2022 Proposed Council Districts Voting Precincts 2022 PROPOSED COUNCIL DISTRICTS WITH VOTING PRECINCTSPage 66 of 82 Council District 1 Council District 4 Council District 6 Council District 3 Council District 2 Council District 5 001 003 004 005 006 007 008 009010 011 012 014 016 018 019 021 022 023 026 027 028 029 030 031 032 033 034 035 036 037 038 039 040 041 042 043 044 046 047 048 049 051 052 053 054 055 056 057 058 059 060 062 063 065 066 067 102 020 045 105 107 106 108 110 109 068 013 002 113.01 113.02 015 114 17.01 17.02 024 025 115 116 50.01 50.02 070 INFORMATION SERVICES DEPT GIS DIVISION 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000500 Feet 1 of 1NTS 11/22/2022 rka FINALIZED RECOMMENDED PLAN: NOVEMBER 18TH 2022 PROPOSED COUNCIL DISTRICTS District 6 District 5 District 4 District 3 District 2 District 1 2022 Proposed Council Districts Proposed Annexation FINALIZED RECOMMENDED PLAN: NOVEMBER 18TH 2022 PROPOSED COUNCIL DISTRICTS Voting Precincts Page 67 of 82 DEMOGRAPHER’S MEMO TRANSMITTING RECOMMENDED CITY COUNCIL REDISTRICTING PLAN City of Pasco, Washington Peter A. Morrison, Ph.D. Peter A. Morrison & Associates, Inc. **DRAFT – Pending Formal Adoption by City Council** OCTOBER 27, 2022 This memorandum documents relevant technical features of the Recommended City Council Redistricting Plan (“the Redistricting Plan”) for the City of Pasco, Washington(“City”). These features are the basis for my recommendation to adopt the Redistricting Plan as a “least change” six-district election plan, based upon newly issued 2020 decennial Census data and in accordance with Washington State and federal standards. Relevant considerations that guided this necessary rebalancing and Council Members’ further suggested refinements to bring the City’s current plan into compliance with applicable legal standards are summarized below. This Redistricting Plan rebalances each district’s total population, strengthening Hispanics’ share of eligible voters in District 2, and maintains adherence to traditional districting criteria. Additionally, the Redistricting Plan avoids any dilution of Hispanics’ voting strength in compliance with state and federal requirements. 1. Right to representation. The Redistricting Plan realizes the intention of the City’s elected officials to adopt a plan that assures the rights to representation of all the people in the City of Pasco. 2. Equipopulous Districts. Six of the City’s Seven Council Members are elected by district. As required by law, these six districts are substantially equal in total population based upon 2020 Census (PL94-171) summary population counts. “Substantially equal” means that each district is as close as practically possible to the mathematical ideal of 12,851 persons in a district(i.e., one-sixth of the City’s 77,108 total population as counted in 2020). However, districts need not be exactly equal in total population to be compliant with state and federal law. Courts allow districting plans with up to a 10-percent total deviation from this ideal. Total Deviation from Ideal (“TDI”) is measured as the absolute difference between the most populous district and the least populous district, divided by the ideal number (12,851). Table 1 below documents adherence to these “guard rails” and compliance of the Redistricting Plan with the TDI. Page 68 of 82 2 Table 1. Districts Equalized on Total Population as of 2020 In the Redistricting Plan, the most-populous district (District5) has a population of 13,413 residents, which is 4.37-percent too many. The least-populous district ( District 6) has 12,421 residents, which is 3.35-percent too few. To calculate the Redistricting Plan’s TDI, the extreme deviations of District 5 and District 6 are combined (4.37 plus 3.35), which total 7.72-percent. Relative to the maximum acceptable TDI (10 percent), the Redistricting Plan’s 7.72-percent TDI is well-within the acceptable range of “substantial equality” as required by law. 3. Respecting existing administrative boundaries. Insofar as possible, the Redistricting Plan respects the current boundaries of city election precincts, to avoid the expense of modifying precincts presently in use. 4. Compliance with State and Federal Redistricting Requirements and Guidelines. RCW 29A.76.010 requires the City to prepare a redistricting plan based upon federal decennial census data. The Redistricting Plan must also be consistent with the following criteria: (1) each district must be nearly equal in population, (2) as compact as possible, and (3) consist of a geographically contiguous area; (4) the census population data may not be used for “purposes of favoring or disfavoring any racial group or political party”1; and (5) as far as feasible the districts should follow and coincide with natural boundaries and “preserve existing communities of related and mutual interest.” RCW 29A.76.010. The Redistricting Plan is consistent with all of these criteria as each new district under the Plan is nearly equal in population, as compact as possible, consists of a geographically contiguous area, the population data used to form the new districts does not favor one race or political party, and in forming the Plan all efforts were made to maintain communities of interest while complying with other criteria and legal requirements and considerations. Section 2 of the Federal Voting Rights Act prohibits vote dilution, defined as any electoral practice or procedure that minimizes or cancels out the voting strength of members of racial or language minority groups in the voting 1 This provision does not alleviate the City’s obligations and requirements to comply with Washington’s Voting Rights Act, RCW 29A.92.020, which prohibits any election plan that “impairs the ability of members of a protected class or classes to have an equal opportunity to elect candidates of their choice as a result of the dilution or abridgement of the rights of voters who are members of a protected class or classes.” Page 69 of 82 3 population.2 See pp. 6-10 at: https://www.justice.gov/opa/press-release/file/1429486/download for an overview of these prohibitions. The Redistricting Plan complies with both the Washington State and Federal redistricting guidelines. Consistent with them, the Redistricting Plan respects Hispanics’ ability to elect candidates of choice in three of the City’s six districts. In District 1 and District 6, Hispanics constitute an estimated 58.6-percent of the 2021 citizen voting-age population (CVAP). In District 2, Hispanics constitute an estimated 51.6-percent of the 2021 CVAP. The 2021 percentage will increase further with each passing year as native-born Hispanics under age 18 reach voting age.3 Relevant demographic parameters for the Recommended Plan are shown in Table 2, along with the corresponding data. Table 2. Estimated Hispanic Share of Eligible Voters (derived from 2021 American Community Survey estimates) RECOMMENDED PLAN: 2 This is consistent with Washington’s Voting Rights Act, RCW 29A.92.020. 3 I rely upon the most current official data for distinguishing the City’s voting-age citizen population, in order to gauge Hispanics’ share of all eligible voters. The Census Bureau’s 2021 one-year American Community Survey estimates (furnished for this purpose) document Hispanic voters’ emerging electoral influence for the City as a whole. Page 70 of 82 4 Figures 1 & 2. Maps of Recommended Plan (referencing census block geography) The precise boundaries of each recommended new district visualized above are defined by GIS electronic shape files, which define the district with reference to census block geography. These shape files have been furnished to the City’s GIS department as a deliverable. These shape files should be archived as a permanent record of the census block geography referenced for creating the precise boundaries of the Redistricting Plan as implemented for holding future elections. Page 71 of 82 5 Census block geography does not always correspond exactly with city streets. Where minor discrepancies arise, the City may exercise reasonable discretion in aligning the district boundaries to correspond to actual streets for purposes of holding elections. These shapefiles are intended for the City’s use to prepare all necessary high-resolution maps for use in implementing the Revised Recommended Plan--e.g., to display the district boundaries with reference to recognized streets, voting precincts, newly-annexed territory, and other features to show eligible voters the district in which they reside. Respectfully submitted, __________________________________ Peter A. Morrison Peter A. Morrison & Associates, Inc. October 27, 2022 Page 72 of 82 DEMOGRAPHER’S MEMO TRANSMITTING RECOMMENDED CITY COUNCIL REDISTRICTING PLAN City of Pasco, Washington Peter A. Morrison, Ph.D. Peter A. Morrison & Associates, Inc. **DRAFT** NOVEMBER 25, 2022 This memorandum documents relevant technical features of the Recommended City Council Redistricting Plan (“the Redistricting Plan”) for the City of Pasco, Washington (“City”). These features are the basis for my recommendation to adopt the Redistricting Plan to the City’s current six-district election plan, based upon recently issued 2020 decennial Census data and in accordance with Washington State statutory requirements and federal standards. Summarized below are the relevant considerations that guided this necessary rebalancing and reallocation of the City’s voting population to bring the City’s Council District plan into compliance with applicable legal standards upon ratification and adoption. The Redistricting Plan rebalances each district’s total population, strengthens Hispanics’ share of eligible voters in District 2, and maintains adherence to traditional districting criteria. Additionally, the Redistricting Plan avoids any dilution of Hispanics’ voting strength, in compliance with state and federal requirements. Requirements for Demographer’s Consideration During Redistricting 1. Right to representation. The Redistricting Plan realizes the intention of the City’s elected officials to adopt a plan that assures the rights to representation of all the people in the City of Pasco. 2. Equi-populous Districts. Six of the City’s seven Council Members are elected by district. As required by law, these six districts are substantially equal in total population based upon 2020 Census (PL94-171) summary population counts. “Substantially equal” means that each district is as close as practically possible to the mathematical ideal of 12,851 persons in a district (i.e., one-sixth of the City’s 77,108 total population as counted in 2020). However, districts need not be exactly equal in total population to be compliant with state and federal law. Courts allow districting plans with up to a 10-percent total deviation from this ideal. Total Deviation from Ideal (“TDI”) is measured as the absolute difference between the most populous district and the least populous district, divided by the ideal number (12,851). Table 1 below documents adherence to these “guard rails” and compliance of the Redistricting Plan with the TDI. Page 73 of 82 2 Table 1. Districts Equalized on Total Population as of 2020 In the Redistricting Plan, the most-populous district (District 5) has a population of 13,413 residents, or 4.37- percent too many. The least-populous district (District 6) has 12,421 residents, or 3.35-percent too few. Calculating the Redistricting Plan’s TDI, the extreme deviations of District 5 and District 6 are combined (4.37 plus 3.35), totaling 7.72-percent. Relative to the maximum acceptable TDI (10 percent), the Redistricting Plan’s 7.72-percent TDI is within the acceptable range of “substantial equality” accepted under the law. 3. Respecting existing administrative boundaries. Insofar as possible, the Redistricting Plan respects the boundaries of the election precincts (EPs) that the City has been using, thereby avoiding the expense of modifying precincts presently in use. However, some precinct boundaries require adjustment to comply with state and federal requirements for population distribution among the precincts and to comply with state and federal Voting Rights Acts. See Appendix A below for relevant technical details. 4. Compliance with State and Federal Redistricting Requirements and Guidelines. RCW 29A.76.010 requires the City to prepare a redistricting plan based upon federal decennial census data. The Redistricting Plan must also be consistent with the following criteria: (1) each district must be nearly equal in population; (2) each district must be as compact as possible; (3) each district must be consist of a geographically contiguous area; (4) the census population data may not be used for “purposes of favoring or disfavoring any racial group or political party”1; and (5) as far as feasible, the districts should follow and coincide with natural boundaries and “preserve existing communities of related and mutual interest.” RCW 29A.76.010. The Redistricting Plan is consistent with all these criteria. Each new district under the Plan is nearly equal in population, as compact as possible, consists of a geographically contiguous area, the population data used to 1 This provision does not alleviate the City’s obligations and requirements to comply with Washington’s Voting Rights Act, RCW 29A.92.020, which prohibits any election plan that “impairs the ability of members of a protected class or classes to have an equal opportunity to elect candidates of their choice as a result of the dilution or abridgement of the rights of voters who are members of a protected class or classes.” Distr ict Total Population (all ages) Total Voting-age Population Hispanic Population (all ages) Hispanic Voting-age Population % Hispanic of Voting-age Population 1 1 2 ,64 3 8 ,2 6 3 1 0 ,180 6 ,3 0 2 7 6 .3 % 2 1 2 ,73 5 8 ,5 8 0 9 ,2 4 7 5 ,7 6 1 6 7 .1 % 3 1 3 ,25 5 9 ,0 2 4 4 ,9 9 4 2 ,9 9 7 3 3 .2 % 4 1 2 ,64 1 8 ,5 2 3 5 ,0 9 9 3 ,0 2 0 3 5 .4 % 5 1 3 ,41 3 9 ,3 3 3 4 ,7 8 5 2 ,8 9 5 3 1 .0 % 6 1 2 ,42 1 8 ,3 1 1 1 0 ,045 6 ,3 3 9 7 6 .3 % Total 7 7 ,10 8 5 2 ,0 3 4 4 4 ,350 27,3 1 4 5 2 .5 % Data as of 11/23/22. Pending final qualit y assurance verificat ion. 9 5 %1 2 ,2 0 8 Ide al 1 2 ,8 5 1 1 0 5 %1 3 ,4 9 4 2020 Tot Pop Guar dr ails Page 74 of 82 3 form the new districts does not favor one race or political party, and in forming the Plan all efforts were made to maintain communities of interest while complying with other criteria and legal requirements and considerations. Section 2 of the Federal Voting Rights Act prohibits vote dilution, defined as any electoral practice or procedure that minimizes or cancels out the voting strength of members of racial or language minority groups in the voting population.2 See pp. 6-10 at: https://www.justice.gov/opa/press-release/file/1429486/download for an overview of these prohibitions. The Redistricting Plan complies with both the Washington State and Federal redistricting requirements and guidelines. Consistent with them, the Redistricting Plan respects Hispanics’ ability to elect candidates of choice in three of the City’s six districts. As documented in Table 1 above: ◼ Hispanics constitute 76.3% of the voting-age population of Districts #1 and #6, enumerated as of April 1, 2020. ◼ Hispanics constitute 67.1% of the voting-age population of District 2, enumerated as of April 1, 2020. These percentages are based upon complete counts of all persons ages 18 and older (both citizens and noncitizens). As of late 2022, demographers can now rely upon the Census Bureau’s latest (2021) one-year American Community Survey (ACS) data to estimate Hispanics’ corresponding share of the citizen voting-age population (CVAP). (CVAP numbers cannot be used to formulate the Redistricting Plan itself, but serve as a barometer for evaluating future trends to consider.) These current ACS estimates are furnished specifically for the purpose of gauging a protected group’s potential ability to elect candidates of their choice in a proposed single-member district. In Table 2 below, I have derived estimates of the CVAP as of 2021 for the City of Pasco as a whole and for Council Districts #1, #2, and #6: ◼ For the City as a whole, Hispanics constitute an estimated 37.9% of the CVAP as of 2021. The corresponding percentage as of 2010 was 31.1%.3 This documents Hispanics’ emerging electoral influence over time within the entire City. Looking ahead, I am confident that this percentage will continue to increase with each passing year, as native-born Hispanics under age 18 reach voting age. ◼ As of 2021, Hispanics constitute an estimated 58.6% of the CVAP of Districts #1 and #6. ◼ As of 2021, Hispanics constitute an estimated 51.6% of the CVAP of District 2. Relevant CVAP estimates for the Recommended Plan are shown in Table 2, along with the corresponding data upon which these district estimates are based. 2 This is consistent with Washington’s Voting Rights Act, RCW 29A.92.020. 3 See: Morrison & Associates, “Pasco City Council Districts - Memo for the Record 03-19-2014”, in Appendix B below. Page 75 of 82 4 Table 2. Estimated Hispanic Share of Eligible Voters as of 2021 (based upon 2021 American Community Survey estimates) I undertook an evaluation of impending annexations of two large unincorporated “islands” of territories situated wholly within the City. Upon the future annexation of either “island,” this Redistricting Plan retains the option for the City to attach either or both “islands” to an existing district without diluting Hispanics’ share of eligible voters in District 1, District 2, or District 6. Measure 18+ Total 18+ Citizens % Citizens 18+ Total 18+ Citizens % Citizens 18+ Total 18+ Citizens % Citizens City Total (2 0 2 1 ACS es t.)56,864 45,322 79.7%28,032 17,167 61.2%28,832 28,155 97.7%3 7 .9 % D1 (est.)8,263 6,586 79.7%6,302 3,859 61.2%1,961 5 8.6% D2 (est.)8,580 6,838 79.7%5,761 3,528 61.2%2,819 5 1.6% D3 (est.)8,622 6,872 79.7%2,832 1,734 61.2%5,790 25.2% D4 (est.)8,925 7,113 79.7%3,185 1,951 61.2%5,740 27.4% D5 (est.)9,333 7,439 79.7%2,895 1,773 61.2%6,438 23.8% D6 (est.)8,311 6,624 79.7%6,339 3,882 61.2%1,972 5 8.6% City Total (2 0 2 0 C ensus count) 5 2 ,0 34 41,4 72 7 9 .7 %27 ,31 4 1 6 ,7 2 7 61.2%24,7 20 2 4,7 4 5 9 7 .7 %4 0 .3 % Sourc es: Ci ty tot als from 2 0 2 1 Ameri c an Communi ty Survey 1-year esti mates (accessed at Censusreporter.org) and 2020 Census PL9 4 -1 71 counts. Esti mates for distric ts are benchmarked to 2 0 2 0 dec ennial count s of total 18+ population (bottom row). Hispan ics' In d icat ed S h are o f Elig ib le Vo t ers (CVAP ) as of 2021 All pe rsons 1 8 + (Table B 05003)H ispanic 18+ (Table B 05003I)Non-Hisp. 18+ (by subtr action)Hispanics' 2021 share of CVAP Page 76 of 82 5 Figure 1. Map of Recommended Redistricting Plan (referencing current 2020 census block geography) The precise boundaries of each recommended new district visualized above are defined by GIS electronic shape files, which define the district with reference to census block geography. These shape files have been furnished to the City’s GIS department as a deliverable. These shape files should be archived as a permanent record of the census block geography referenced for creating the precise boundaries of the Redistricting Plan as implemented for holding future elections. Page 77 of 82 6 Census block geography (shown in Fig. 1 above) does not always match city streets. Where minor discrepancies arise, the City may exercise reasonable discretion in aligning an election district’s boundaries to correspond to actual streets for purposes of holding an election. These shapefiles are intended for the City’s use to prepare all necessary high-resolution maps for public distribution and use in implementing the Recommended Redistricting Plan. I recommend maps that display the boundaries of each individual Election District, reference recognized streets, voting precincts, territory annexed since April 1, 2020 as well as other features, to clearer show members of the public the Council District in which they reside. Page 78 of 82 7 APPENDIX A FINAL ADJUSTMENTS MADE TO ACCOMMODATE EXISTING VOTING PRECINCTS This technical appendix documents the further adjustments that I recommend be incorporated in my “Finalized Recommended Plan: November 11, 2022” in order to accommodate the existing voting precincts the City now uses. These further adjustments were emailed to Richard Allen late November 11 (PST), to meet a necessary deadline imposed on the completion of these adjustments and creation of maps for immediate public distribution. Election precincts (EPs) are generally deemed to be administrative districts and exist for the purpose of holding elections; their boundaries are not sacrosanct. As a city’s population increases and/or becomes more heavily concentrated in certain areas over time, election administrators may find it necessary to realign EP boundaries to rebalance the actual and/or anticipated numbers of voters expected to appear and vote at a particular physical location. For this Redistricting Plan, the City’s six single-member election districts (EDs) for the City of Pasco have been drawn precisely to meet Federal and State legal standards. Where possible, we have worked to eliminate “splits” of EPs where possible and alignment with legal requirements can still be met. Thus, I recommend that EPs be realigned where necessary , to assure that EP boundaries exactly match the boundaries of the six EDs to be adopted—ED boundaries should not be realigned to match current EP boundaries. The rationale supporting the realignment of these handful of EP boundaries ensures that the City is insulated from challenges under the VRA. Any further revisions of ED boundaries for any reason must be scrutinized to assure that the proposed revision would not dilute Hispanics’ ability to elect preferred candidates, either directly or indirectly, in D1, D2, and D6. Various proposed and/or ratified annexations after April 1, 2020 and presently at various stages of ratification conceivably could have an indirect effect of diluting Hispanics’ ability to elect their preferred candidates in the majority-minority districts, and should be evaluated for those effects. In response to public comment, I scrutinized the established EPs that the City presently uses. The boundaries of the EPs are precisely defined by GIS shapefiles (“electronic maps”) which show the exact geographic boundary of each EP. My latest inquiries have established that (i) the City’s EP shapefiles which are being overlaid upon maps displaying my recommended EDs were obtained from Franklin County; and (ii) these legacy County shapefiles may not precisely match the US Census Bureau’s newly revised census block maps, which I must use to draw the boundaries of each ED. For that reason, the geographic boundaries of some EPs may not precisely match the 2020 decennial census block geography used to define each individual ED. I discovered discrepancies between the Census Bureau’s 2020 geographic boundary of an EP (as of April 1, 2020) and the apparently outdated geography of that EP (acquired from Franklin County). Given such discrepancies, I maintained the ED boundaries as drawn and adjusted EP boundaries where necessary to achieve as perfect a match as possible. Any necessary adjustments to EP boundaries can be made prior to conducting future elections under the City’s adopted Redistricting Plan which resolves the public concerns voiced about EPs that initially appeared to be split or strangely configured. In short, some EPs will necessarily have to be realigned to facilitate conducting forthcoming elections; ED boundaries, by contrast, must remain intact absent compelling rationale that would meet legal and constitutional challenges. Counsel can offer any further advice that may be necessary. One possible exception deserves consideration—where, as of late-2022, some portion of an ED boundary no longer matches a publicly-recognizable street, road, or other obvious natural boundary feature that can distinguish who resides within versus outside that ED. As real estate properties develop and change over time, Page 79 of 82 8 the boundaries of a particular decennial “census block” may no longer suit that purpose. What once was a publicly recognizable feature disappears (i.e., is rendered obscure to the human eye). Likewise, the boundaries of a EP may become unworkable for practical reasons. The physical address to which voters are directed might have to change to a nearby address situated perhaps one city block outside of the EP. In such circumstances, the City’s administrator of elections may justifiably exercise reasonable administrative discretion in conducting an election at a nearby physical location technically outside the EP. Still, the residents of adjacent districts would necessarily cast votes as residents of their respective EDs, even if the physical address at which they vote happens to be situated outside their ED of residence. I reviewed each EP where boundaries were called into question by members of the City Council or the public during comment. My narrative below describes the concern(s) raised, the issue(s) posed, and the practical solution(s) recommended. The intent of the below is to provide transparency, address and resolve any confusion, and facilitate prompt adoption of the Recommended Plan as now finalized. VOTING PRECINCT(S) MODIFIED (FROM ORIGINAL) AS FOLLOWS EP #39 & EP #46 Change the color the one yellow census block (currently appearing as part of the all-yellow ED3 on the former map) to color green, to show this one block as now part of ED4 and EP46. This will retain the existing boundary between EP46 and EP39 in ED3 and ED4. This change will not affect the redistricted plan’s overall total population balance and has no effect on any of the 3 Hispanic majority-CVAP districts. EP #102 The precinct split here is necessary to maintain proper demographics balance for ED3 as a whole. To do so, make all of EP #102 part of yellow ED3, including the tiny blue block that appears to divide the narrow yellow strip above the “40” label. EP #3 The purple portion of EP #003 must become part of the EP #004, so that its population will be entirely within ED6. EP #36 Maintain this precinct split as shown. The single “blue” block (shown on the former map) must remain part of (blue) ED5. This is necessary to avoid slightly diluting Hispanics’ voting strength in (tan) ED2. EP #48 This tan and blue precinct is situated at the lower left of the map. There is no population in the blue lower half of the precinct. (The split here was introduced to accommodate the wishes of an incumbent council member.) EP #49 This blue and tan precinct was split to accommodate the wishes of an incumbent council member. EP #46 & #51 The vertical black boundary between these two precincts are rendered “no longer viable” by other redistricting priorities. I recommend displaying this vertical black boundary as a dashed line, perhaps in red, to indicate that this dashed line must be revised as the new boundary separating #46 and #51 before conducting an election. Specifically, it will be necessary to situate it so as to aligns exactly with where the green #46 ends and the blue #51 begins. That adjustment will redefine the exact geography of each precinct, to assure that all residents of #46 are within ED4 and all residents of #51 are within ED5. Page 80 of 82 9 VOTING PRECINCT(S) MODIFIED (FROM ORIGINAL) AS FOLLOWS EP #46 Note the single yellow block (at about 3 o’clock). I recommend changing the color of this block from yellow to green, so that any residents of the block appear as residents of ED4 (instead of ED3). The voting precinct boundary can remain exactly as it is now, since the minimal change in Total Population is of no consequence. EP #106 The red portion must remain part of ED1; the tan portion must become part of EP003 so that its population will be entirely within ED2 Page 81 of 82 10 APPENDIX B CITIZEN VOTING-AGE DATA TABLE SUPPORTING CITY OF PASCO ADOPTED PLAN 3A Source: Data table accompanying my Adopted Plan 3a, in Morrison & Associates, “Pasco City Council Districts Memo for the Record 03-19-2014” Respectfully submitted, __________________________________ Peter A. Morrison Peter A. Morrison & Associates, Inc. November 25, 2022 Total (all groups)Hispanic % Hispanic 1 13,948 2.91%3,982 2,415 60.6% 2 12,907 -4.77%4,741 2,465 52.0% 3 13,709 1.14%5,773 1,363 23.6% 4 13,647 0.69%7,168 1,488 20.8% 5 13,559 0.04%7,026 1,186 16.9% Citywide 67,770 28,690 8,917 31.1% Ideal (1/5):13,554 +7.68% Sources: State of Washington, Office of Financial Management, official April 1, 2014 population estimate. US Census Bureau, 2008-2012 American Community Survey, Tables B05003 (adjusted for annexations). Adopted Plan 3a City Council District Total Population (2014) Deviation From Ideal Citizen Voting-age Population (2008-12) Page 82 of 82