Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-17-2010 Planning Commission Meeting Packet 3 PLANNING COMMISSION — AGENDA REGULAR MEETING 7:00 P.M. June 17, 2010 I. CALL TO ORDER: II. ROLL CALL: Declaration of Quorum III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: May 20, 2010 IV. OLD BUSINESS: A. Resolution Appreciation for Mr. Todd Samuel (Planning Commissioner from May 1, 2006 to May 12, 20 10) B. Resolution Appreciation for Mr. David Little (Planning Commissioner from April 5, 1999 to May 21, 2010) C. Special Permit Operate a private bus terminal in a C-3 Zone (Griselda Lopez) (205 S. 4th Avenue) (MF# SP 10-0 15) D. Rezone Rezone C-2 to C-1 (Ziobro) (117 S. 5th Avenue) (MF# Z 10-001) **Remand from City Council** E. Code Amendment PMC 25.58 I-182 Corridor Overlay District V. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. Special Permit Location of a children's daycare/pre-school in an existing residence in a R-1 Zone (Building Blocks Childcare Center) (3605 W. Ruby Street) (MF# SP 10- 018 B. CDBG 2011 Community Development Block Grant Allocations (Citywide) (MF# CDBG10-012) VI. WORKSHOP: VII. OTHER BUSINESS: VIII. ADJOURNMENT: REGULAR MEETING May 20, 2010 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 7:00 P.M. by Commissioner Anderson, due to the resignation of Commissioner Samuel. POSITION MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT No. 1 Vacant No. 2 James Hay No. 3 Andy Anderson No. 4 David Little No. 5 Joe Cruz No. 6 Kurt Lukins No. 7 Jan Neuenschwander No. 8 Jana Kempf No. 9 Carlos Perez APPEARANCE OF FAIRNESS: Commissioner Anderson read a statement about the appearance of fairness for hearings on land use matters. Commissioner Anderson asked if any Commission member had anything to declare. No declarations were made. Commissioner Anderson then asked the audience if there were any objections based on conflict of interest or appearance of fairness questions regarding the items to be discussed this evening. There were no objections. Commissioner Anderson asked the audience if there were objections to any Commissioner hearing any matter. There were no objections. ADMINISTERING THE OATH: Commissioner Anderson explained that State law requires testimony in quasi- judicial hearings such as held by the Planning Commission be given under oath or affirmation. Commissioner Anderson swore in all those desiring to speak. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Commissioner Little moved, seconded by Commissioner Lukins, that the minutes dated April 15, 2010 be approved as mailed. The motion carried unanimously. ELECTION OF A CHAIRPERSON: -1 - Commissioner Hay moved, seconded by Commissioner Kempf, to nominate Commissioner Cruz as Chairperson. The motion passed unanimously. ELECTION OF A VICE-CHAIRPERSON: Commissioner Anderson moved, seconded by Commissioner Hay, to nominate Commissioner Kempf as Vice-Chairperson. The motion passed unanimously. OLD BUSINESS: A. SPECIAL PERMIT Location of a Church in an R-3 Zone (Iglesia Evangelica Cristiana) (1215 W. Court Street) (MF# SP 10-011) Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Staff had no additional comments. Commissioner Anderson moved, seconded by Commissioner Little, to adopt the findings of fact and conclusions therefrom as contained in the May 20, 2010 staff report. The motion passed unanimously. Commissioner Anderson moved, seconded by Commissioner Little, based on the findings of fact and conclusions therefrom, the Planning Commission recommend the City Council grant a special permit to Iglesia Evangelica Cristiana Espiritual for the location of a church at 1215 West Court Street with conditions as contained in the May 20, 2010 staff report. The motion passed unanimously. B. SPECIAL PERMIT Dwelling units on the second floor of a commercial building in a C-1 Zone (Maria Victoria Galindo) (720 W. Lewis Street) (MF# SP 10-012 Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Following a brief discussion on the recommended conditions Commissioner Hay moved, seconded by Commissioner Anderson, to adopt findings of fact and conclusions therefrom as contained in the May 20, 2010 staff report. The motion passed unanimously. Commissioner Hay moved, seconded by Commissioner Anderson, based on the findings of fact and conclusions therefrom, the Planning Commission recommend the City Council grant a special permit to Maria Galindo to maintain dwelling units on the 2nd floor of a building located at 720 West Lewis Street with conditions as contained in the May 20, 2010 staff report. The motion passed unanimously. -2 - C. SPECIAL PERMIT Operate a truck/trailer and car sales lot in a C- 3 Zone (Mike Young Equipment Locators) (114 N. Oregon Avenue) (MF# SP 10-014) The Chairman indicated the application had been withdrawn. D. SPECIAL PERMIT Operate a private bus terminal in a C-3 Zone (Griselda Lopez) (205 S. 4th Avenue) (MF# SP 10-015 Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Dave McDonald, City Planner explained that due to the absence of the applicant, this item was tabled to the May 20th meeting. Mr. McDonald explained that during the past month several attempts were made to contact the applicant. Correspondence to the applicant had been returned to the City from two different addresses. A brief explanation of the application was again reviewed for the benefit of the Planning commission followed by a discussion on the capacity of the buses. The staff recommended that the 15 passenger vans be used at the site. Chairman Cruz asked if there was a representative present. Jose Torres, represented the applicant. Chairman Cruz asked Mr. Torres if he was comfortable with the permit conditions as stated in the staff report. Mr. Torres stated ,yes, and that he was not aware of the type of proceedings he was attending. He was asked by Ms. Lopez to attend in her absence. Chairman Cruz questioned if he understood there was a restriction for 25- passenger and 51-passenger buses. Mr. Torres stated ,yes. Chairman Cruz explained the hearing was the time for Mr. Torres to speak out if they felt the recommendation was constraining or if there could be an alternate solution. Mr. Torres stated there was a business located on the other side of the alley from the bus office that operated semi-trucks. He stated they only use 25-passenger busses. He did not understand why they would not be allowed to use their 25- passenger buses when the other company parks semi-trucks on the site for weeks at a time. Chairman Cruz asked staff to address the concern. -3 - Mr. McDonald stated the distribution company, which operates out of the building to the south of the bus company is a permitted use in the zoning district. Conditions and restrictions are generally applied to a business activity though the special permit process. Chairman Cruz asked for clarification on the staff recommendation on the size of the bus/van. The staff report mentions restricting a 51-passenger bus but not a 25-passenger bus. Mr. McDonald explained the condition was for a 15-passenger van so the restriction included 25-passenger buses. Commissioner Little asked if the applicant's normal practice was to use a 25- passenger bus. Mr. Torres stated ,yes. The passengers come in on the 51-passenger buses to Yakima. From there they distribute passengers in the smaller 25-passenger buses. The buses do not stay at the Pasco location; they only pick up and drop off passengers. Commissioner Little questioned if they unload passengers from the street. Mr. Torres stated ,yes. They do not have any other option because the distribution company trucks are often using the site. Commissioner Neuenschwander asked staff if the restriction on 25-passenger buses or 51-passenger buses meant on the property or on the road next to the the business. Mr. McDonald stated on the site or on the street. Commissioner Neuenschwander stated there would be no allowance for a 25- passenger bus in that particular area. Mr. McDonald stated that is staff's recommendation. Commissioner Little asked what type of hardship would this impose on the business. Mr. Torres stated a very big one; they would need to purchase smaller buses or find a different way to accommodate their passengers. Mr. McDonald explained that staff discussions with the applicant's application indicated they use 15-passenger vans. Mr. Torres stated they do not have 15-passenger vans in town. They use them in Yakima and Los Angeles; but not in the Tri-Cities. -4 - Chairman Cruz asked Mr. Torres to describe the difference between a 15- passenger van and a 25-passenger bus. Mr. Torres stated the only difference is the seating capacity. The 15-passenger van only has four long seats and the 25-passenger bus has seating along the edges of the bus. Chairman Cruz asked if a 25-passenger bus looked like a rental car shuttle bus. Mr. Torres stated ,yes. Chairman Cruz asked staff if a 25-passenger van would be materially different than a 15-passenger van. Mr. McDonald asked Mr. Torres what the difference was in the length of the 15- passenger van versus the 25-passenger van. Mr. Torres stated he was unable to answer the question off the top of his head. Mr. Torres stated the difference was in the width not length. Mr. White recommended staff provide some research for this item. Commissioner Neuenschwander asked if Mr. Torres provided service from the site at this time. Mr. Torres stated ,yes. Commissioner Neuenschwander asked if the company was currently driving on the site and then backing up. Mr. Torres stated no. They currently pull Lip on the road and drop off passengers on the sidewalk. Commissioner Neuenschwander asked if they placed cones on the road. Mr. Torres stated that he is not aware of that. Chairman Cruz stated one of the recommended conditions restricted loading or picking up passengers on 4th or Columbia Street; which would mean they could only load and unload on the property. Commissioner Little moved, seconded by Commissioner Hay, to table the hearing to the June 17, 2010 meeting. The motion passed unanimously. -5 - PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. REZONE Rezone C-1 to C-3 (Mike Young Equipment Locators) (114 N. Oregon Avenue) (MF# Z 10- 002 Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Mr. McDonald explained that at the April Planning Commission meeting the Planning Commission considered an application for a special permit for car and truck sales on the property in question. As a result of that hearing it was determined the applicant's request was not appropriate for review under the special permit process. The vehicles proposed for sale on the site fell under the category of heavy equipment. During the course of the April public hearing it was explained that it would be more appropriate to consider the applicant's proposal under a rezone rather than a special permit. Mr. McDonald reviewed the rezone staff report pointing out the surrounding C-3 and I-1 zoning along with the heavy commercial and industrial land uses found along the Oregon Avenue corridor. It was pointed out that the Oregon Avenue area had developed with industrial supply facilities and heavy equipment sales and service businesses. The proposed rezone was supported by the Comprehensive Plan and appeared to be an appropriate extension of the existing C-3 in the neighborhood. Mr. McDonald also pointed out that as indicated in the previous meeting, the Planning Commission would consider the proposed rezone in one meeting only. Chairman Cruz opened the public hearing. Mike Young, 4003 W. Sylvester Street, Pasco, thanked staff for their assistance with the proposed rezone. Mr. Young stated he agreed with the staff report. Chairman Cruz closed the public hearing. Commissioner Anderson moved, seconded by Commissioner Kempf to adopt findings of fact and conclusions therefrom as contained in the May 20, 2010 staff report. The motion passed unanimously. Commissioner Anderson further moved, seconded by Commissioner Kempf, based on the findings of fact and conclusions therefrom the Planning Commission recommend the City Council rezone the site from C-1 (Retail Business) to C-3 (General Business). The motion passed unanimously. -6 - WORKSHOP: A CODE AMENDMENT: Outdoor Lighting (PMC Chapter 12.32)) (City of Pasco Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Mr. White, Community & Economic Development Director, stated the Planning Commission had briefly discussed the issue of outdoor lighting in a previous meeting. Mr. White reviewed the memo the Planning Commission had received and discussed the history of the current code. In the early 1970's communities within the Tri-Cities adopted lighting ordinances to protect a new observatory being built on Rattlesnake Mountain from the night glow of urban development. Kennewick and Richland has since updated their Lighting Ordinances with the technological updates that have occurred since the 1970's. The Pasco code has not been updated. This matter was being presented to the Planning Commission to see if it was an issue the Commission wanted to review. Review of the code would raise policy questions that would be appropriate for the Commission to consider. Chairman Cruz asked the Commissioners for comments. Commissioner Anderson stated it would be beneficial to be consistent with the standards of the neighboring cities. He also suggested "grandfathering" existing situations. Commissioner Neuenschwander stated in some communities updated lighting is required when a remodel equals 40% or more of the value a building. Commissioner Neuenschwander supported studying the issue. Commissioner Anderson asked if there was a model ordinance the Commission could use as an example. Mr. White stated Kennewick has a lighting ordinance as well as other examples. Commissioner Neuenschwander stated she would like to see residential properties included in the process. Chairman Cruz stated he recalled special permits having conditions related to light spillage for sports lighting. Mr. McDonald stated the Catholic High School special permit contained such a condition. Chairman Cruz summarized that the Planning Commissioners would like to see a draft ordinance, which includes grandfathering existing properties, to include residential and commercial properties, and to require upgrades for remodels meeting 50% or more of the property value. -7 - Following additional discussion Chairman Cruz summarized that the intent was to limit light spillage and the Commission would like to see an ordinance that would grandfather existing residential and commercial properties and require existing properties to upgrade when they are damaged or remodeled by 50% or more of their value. OTHER BUSINESS: A. Block Grant Allocation Process for 2011 funds: Mr. White, Community & Economic Development Director, stated at the June meeting a public hearing would be held for Community Block Grant applications. The City will receive approximately $600,000 for the 2011 program ,year. The Planning Commission is the City's designated Block Grant Advisory Committee. It is expected the City will receive a number of detailed proposals from parties applying for Block Grant funding. Chairman Cruz called for questions or comments from Commissioners. Commissioner Neuenschwander asked if the Planning Commission meets once a year for Block Grant projects or several times a ,year. Chairman Cruz stated once a year. B. Recognition Resolution for Todd Samuel Mr. White stated Mr. Todd Samuel did an excellent job of eliciting public comment during hearings and requested approval of a resolution recognizing Mr. Samuel. Chairman Cruz called for a motion. Commissioner Anderson moved, seconded by Commissioner Hay, to approve a resolution recognizing the services of Todd Samuel. The motion passed unanimously. With no further business, the Planning Commission was adjourned at 7:57 pm. David McDonald, Secretary -8 - RESOLUTION A RESOLUTION RECOGNIZING THE SERVICES OF MR. TODD S NILTEL. WHEREAS, Mr. Samuel has served as a Member of the Pasco Planning Commission from May 1. ''006 until May 12. ''010; and WHEREAS, Mr. Samuel has contributed personal time and effort in providing support, guidance and advice to the Pasco Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, Mr. Samuel's contribution as a member of the Pasco Planning Commission have resulted in recommendations on land use policy and project decisions to the Pasco City Council; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE PASCO PLANNING COMMISSION: Thanks Mr. Little for his years of service and wishes him luck in his future endeavors. PASSED by the Planning Commission of the City of Pasco this '01h day of May. ''010. James L. Hay, Position No. 2 Andy Anderson.Position No. 3 Joe Cruz.Position No. 5 Kurt Lul:ins, Position No.6 Jan Neuenschwander.Position No.7 Jana Kempf,Position No. 3 Carlos Perez.Position No.9 APPROVED AS TO FORM; Rick White. Director of Community & David I.McDonald.City Planner Economic Development RESOLUTION A RESOLUTION RECOGNIZING THE SERVICES OF i\/IR. DAVID LITTLE. WHEREAS, Mr. Little has served as a Member of the Pasco Planning Commission from April 5. 1999 until May '2 1. ''010; and WHEREAS, Mr. Little has contributed personal time and effort in providing support. guidance and advice to the Pasco Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, Mr. Little's contribution as a member of the Pasco Planning Commission have resulted in recommendations on land use policy and project decisions to the Pasco City Council; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE PASCO PLANNING COMMISSION: Thanks Mr. Little for his years of service and wishes him luck in his future endeavors. PASSED by the Planning Commission of the City of Pasco this 17`h day of June. 2010. James L. Hay, Position No. 2 Andy Anderson.Position No. 3 Joe Cruz.Position No. 5 Kurt Lul:ins, Position No.6 Jan Neuenschwander.Position No.7 Jana Kempf,Position No. 3 Carlos Perez.Position No.9 APPROVED AS TO FORM; Rick White. Director of Community & David I.McDonald.City Planner Economic Development REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION MASTER FILE NO: SP 10-015 APPLICANT: Griselda Lopez HEARING DATE: 4/15/10 & 5/20/10 516 S. 6th Street ACTION DATE: 6/17/10 Yakima, WA 99301 BACKGROUND REQUEST: SPECIAL PERMIT: Location of a private bus terminal (Fronteras Travel) (Griselda Lopez) (2 05 S. 4th Avenue) 1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Legal: Lots 13-17, Block 19, Gerry's Addition General Location: 205 S. 4th Avenue Property Size: 14,300 square feet 2. ACCESS: The site is adjacent to South 4th Avenue. 3. UTILITIES: Water and sewer services are located in the alley to the east. 4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The site is currently zoned C-3 (General Business) and is vacant. Surrounding zoning and land uses are as follows: NORTH- C-2- Farmer's market parking lot SOUTH- I-1 - Vacant EAST- C-3 & C-2 - Commercial/old motel WEST- I-1 - Golden Nugget nightclub 5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan designates the site for commercial uses. The Comprehensive Plan (Goal TR-2) encourages efficient use of multi-modal transportation systems, which would include bus and van services for residents. 6. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The City of Pasco is the lead agency for this project. Based on the SEPA checklist, the adopted City Comprehensive Plan, city development regulations, and other information, a threshold determination resulting in a Determination of Non-significance (DNS) has been issued for this project under WAC 197- 11-158. 1 ANALYSIS A private bus service has been operating at 205 S. 4th Avenue for approximately two ,years without the benefit of a City business license. This business was recently sold to a new owner. The new owner applied for a business license and was informed by staff that a license could not be issued for the van/bus service until a special permit had been granted for the site. Pasco Municipal Code Section 25.86.020 lists the applicant's transportation business as an unclassified use requiring special permit review before locating in the city. This request is similar to other private bus service applications that have been reviewed by the Planning Commission in the past. Private transportation services have operated with special permit approval at 115 N. 4th Avenue, 1320 N. 4th Avenue, 702 W. Lewis Street and 1011 W. Sylvester Street. There is also a bus/van service (Estrella Blanca) operating from the Pasco Multi-Modal Terminal on North 1st Avenue. The special permit application for the proposed transportation service indicated scheduled service at 205 S. 4th Avenue would include one arrival and one departure per day, seven days a week. The departing van leaves the site at 7:00 a.m. and the arrivals occur at 7:00 p.m. The applicant further emphasized to staff that the scheduled arrival and departures are the Company's advertized schedule. If no tickets have been sold, no stops are made in Pasco. During the winter months when ridership is down vans do not arrive or depart from the site on a daily business. Twenty-five passenger vans are the primary vehicles used by Fronteras Travel to transport passengers to Yakima where a 51- passenger bus provides connections to other states. No changes to the site or building are planned as a result of the bus service to and from the Fronteras Travel office at 205 S. 4th Avenue. 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 and comments made at the public hearing. The Planning Commission may add additional findings as deemed appropriate. 1. The site is located in a C-3 (General Business) zone. 2. The site is located at 205 S. 4th Avenue. 3. There is currently a van ticket office located at 205 S. 4th Avenue. 4. The applicant has plans to continue to operate a regularly scheduled van service from an existing ticket office at 205 S. 4th Avenue. 5. Scheduled departures will occur at 7:00 a.m. every day of the week. 6. Scheduled arrivals will occur at 7:00 p.m. every day of the week. 7. Twenty-five passenger vans are the primary vehicles used in the proposed van service. 8. A twenty-five passenger van is 24.5 inches in length. 9. Private operator carriers, charter or transit buses, vans and similar businesses are listed as unclassified uses in PMC 25.86.020. 10. Unclassified uses require review through the special permit process before locating in the community. 11. Private bus/van companies have been permitted by special permit to locate in other commercial zoning districts on N. 4th Avenue, Lewis Street and Sylvester Street. 12. No alterations are planned for the office or site. 13. The site has a small on-site parking area that can be used for passenger loading and unloading. 14. The on-site parking and loading area is shared with a wholesale produce business. 15. The wholesale produce business utilizes large trucks for receiving and delivering produce. CONCLUSIONS BASED ON STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT Before recommending approval or denial of a special permit, the Planning Commission must draw its conclusion from the findings of fact based upon the criteria listed in P.M.C. 25.86.060. The criteria and staff listed conclusions are as follows: 1 j Will the proposed use be in accordance ruith the goals, policies, objectives and text of the Comprehensive plan? The site is designated by the Plan for commercial uses. The Plan also encourages the efficient use of multi-modal transportation systems. The van service would be considered part of the multi-modal transportation system. 2) Will the proposed use aduerselg affectpublic. infrastructure? The site is developed with all municipal utility services. No building additions or alterations are planned that would increase demands on the utility system. Fourth Avenue is a designated arterial street and has been constructed to arterial street standards to carry more traffic and heavier loads as compared to local access streets. The addition of a van on 4th Avenue at off peak travel times is not anticipated to generate significant demands on the surrounding street system. 3) Will the proposed use be constructed, maintainer) and operated to be in harmony xuith existing or intended character-of the general vicinity? 3 The intended character of the area includes the development of various commercial enterprises. The proposed use is a commercial activity. No changes to the building or site are planned as a result of the proposed van service. 4) Will the location and height of proposed structures and the site design discourage the development of permitted uses on property in the general vicinity or impair- the value thereof? The location and height of the structures on-site will not change as a result of the proposed van service. The property will continue to be used for commercial purposes. 5) Will the operations in connection ruith the proposal be more objectionable to nearby properties by reason of noise, fumes, vibrations, dust, traffic, or- flashing rights than ruould be the operation of any permitted uses xuithin the district? The proposed van service will create no more noise, vibrations, and fumes than the semi-trucks and delivery trucks used by the produce business located on the site. 6) Will the proposed use endanger- the public hearth or safety if located and developed where proposed, or in anyway ruill become a nuisance to uses permitted in the district? The on-street parking area directly in front of 205 South 4th Avenue is about 37 feet long. On-street parking of a passenger van along with the loading and unloading of passengers and luggage on a public sidewalk may lead to the creation of a nuisance situation twice a day. This problem can be resolved by requiring all vans to load and unload on private property. 4 RECOMMENDED APPROVAL CONDITIONS 1. The special permit shall be personal to the applicant. Scheduled van service shall be limited to one arrival and one departure per day. 3. No van loading shall occur on 4th Avenue or Columbia Street. 4. Vans must be assisted across the sidewalk by one or more spotters when exiting the site. 5. No more than a 25-passenger van may be permitted at the site. 6. The applicant shall maintain all necessary governmental approvals and licenses required for the operation of a transportation business. 7. The special permit shall be null and void if a City of Pasco business license is not obtained by October 1, 2010. RECOMMENDATION MOTION for Findings of Fact: I move to adopt findings of fact and conclusions therefrom as contained in the June 17, 2010 staff report. MOTION for Recommendation: I move based on the fuidings of fact and conclusions as adopted the Planning Commission recommend the City Council grant a special permit to Fronteras Travel for the location and private van transportation business at 205 S. 4th Avenue with conditions as listed in the June 17, 2010 staff report. 5 • Item: Special Pennit - Bus Ten-ninal Vicinity Applicant: Griselda Lopez N Map File # : SP 10-015 tr �r� ore S - r - SITE . Land Item : Special Permit - Bus Terminal Use Applicant: Griselda Lopez N j Map File # : SP 10 -015 � 01 Commercial 117 SITE ,��� ✓� \ `�� . Industrial Zoning Item : Special Permit - Bus Terminal Applicant: Griselda Lopez N Map File # : SP 10 -015 C=2 C=2 C=3 - C 2 C=2 C-1 o��Me�PS C-3 SITE Z. } _ 9 Y - d vi AV -moomr;lIc TAN- PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 5/20/10 A. SPECIAL PERMIT Operate a private bus terminal in a C-3 Zone (Griselda Lopez) (205 S. 4th Avenue) (MF# SP 10-015 Chairman Cruz read the master file slumber and asked for comments from staff. Dave McDonald, City Planner stated this item had been continued from the Planning Commission meeting on April 15 and was tabled to the May 20th meeting to discuss the item and hold a public hearing due to the absence of the applicant or a representative for the applicant. There have been several attempts to contact the applicant by phone; and mail had been returned from two different addresses. This application is for a special permit to allow a bus transportation company to operate on South 4th Avenue. It was discussed at the meeting in April in detail regarding the special permit. This request is for a private bus terminal for bus services which requires a special permit at any location in the city. Staff has recommended that service be limited to the smaller buses and not allow for the 25-passenger or 51-passenger buses to be used at this site due to the lack of area for parking and for buses to turn around. Chairman Cruz questioned procedures if this item can hold a public hearing under old business. Mr. McDonald stated yes. Chairman Cruz questioned if there was a representative for this item. .lose Torres, represented the applicant. Chairman Cruz questioned if he was comfortable with the permit conditions as stated in the staff report. Mr. Torres stated ,yes and that he was not made aware of what type of proceedings he was attending. He was asked by Ms. Lopez to attend in her absence. Chairman Cruz questioned if he understood there was a restriction for 25- passenger and 51-passenger buses. Mr. Torres stated ,yes. Chairman Cruz stated this is the time to speak out if they feel this is overly constraining or if there would be an alternative solution for this request. Mr. Torres stated that there is a business located on the other side of the alley and he stated they park semi-trucks there. He stated they only have 25- passenger buses come to the site, stop, unload and continue to the next stop. He did not understand why they would not be allowed to use their 25- passenger buses when the other company parks their semi-trucks there for weeks at a time. Chairman Cruz questioned staff to address his concern. Mr. McDonald stated the distribution company, which operates out of the building to the south of the building the bus company operates from, is a permitted use in that zoning district. This means they do not require a special permit for their business so there is no way to condition their business license in that respect. Chairman Cruz mentioned the staff report only mentions the restriction for a 51-passenger bus and no mention of the 25-passenger bus. Mr. McDonald stated it should include the 25-passenger bus. Chairman Cruz further stated the restriction is for no 25-passenger bus or 51- passenger bus. Commissioner Little questioned if the normal practice uses a 25-passenger bus. Mr. Torres stated ,yes. The passengers come in on the 51-passenger buses which stop in Yakima and distribute passengers in the smaller 25-passenger bus. The bus does not stay in the Pasco location; they pick up and drop off passengers. Commissioner Little questioned if they unload passengers off of the street. Mr. Torres stated ,yes. They do not have any other options; whereas before they used the alley to the south and now the company uses that area. Commissioner Neuenschwander questioned staff on the definition of no 25- passenger buses or 51-passenger buses are permitted at the site; to mean on the property or on the road next to the side of the business. Mr. McDonald stated on the site or on the street. Commissioner Neuenschwander stated there would be no allowance for a 25- passenger bus in that particular area. Mr. McDonald stated that is staff's recommendation. Commissioner Little questioned what type of hardship would this impose on the business. Mr. Torres stated a very big one; they would need to purchase smaller buses or find a different way to accommodate their passengers. Mr. McDonald stated in discussions with the applicant and the application states there are 15-passenger vans available. Mr. Torres stated they do not have 15-passenger vans in town. They do use them in Yakima and Los Angeles; but not in the Tri-Cities. Chairman Cruz questioned Mr. Torres to describe the difference between a 15- passenger van and a 25-passenger bus. Mr. Torres stated the only difference is the seating capacity. The 15-passenger van only has four long seats and the 25-passenger bus has seating along the edges of the bus. Chairman Cruz questioned if a 25-passenger bus looks like a rental car shuttle bus. Mr. Torres stated yes. Chairman Cruz questioned staff if that would be materially different than a 15- passenger van in this situation. Mr. McDonald questioned the overall length of the 15-passenger van versus the 25-passenger van. Mr. Torres stated he was unable to answer that off the top of his head. Chairman Cruz questioned if the van is five feet, ten feet, and is the body wider. Mr. Torres stated the difference is the bus is wider but not longer. Mr. White recommended staff provide research for this item. Commissioner Neuenschwander questioned if they provide service at this time at this site. Mr. Torres stated ,yes. Commissioner Neuenschwander questioned if they were currently driving on the site and then back up. Mr. Torres stated no. They currently pull up on the road and drop off passengers. Commissioner Neuenschwander questioned if they place cones on the road. Mr. Torres stated that he is not aware of that. Chairman Cruz stated one of the conditions is restricting loading or picking up passengers on 4th or Columbia Street; which would mean he could only load and unload on the property. Mr. Torres questioned if they would be able to drive onto the alley like in the past. Mr. McDonald stated the alley is not an actual alley but is an access into the parking area the distribution company operates. Commissioner Little moved, seconded by Commissioner Hay, to table this item to the June 17, 2010 meeting. The motion passed unanimously. MEMORANDUM DATE: June 2, 2010 TO: Planning Commission FROM : Rick White, Community and Economic Development Director SUBJECT: Ziobro Rezone from C-2 to C-1 for Dance Hall Use - Remand The Planning Commission recommended that the City Council deny a rezone request from C-2 to C-1 for property to be used as a dance hall at 117 South 5t" Avenue. Upon considering the recommendation for denial, the City Council remanded the matter to the Planning Commission for further review. In their remand the City Council directed the Planning Commission to consider the following three issues: 1 . Portion of the building devoted to dance hall use (the portion of the building proposed for use was discussed at length in the hearing; although a rezone request involves property, the building size was indicated as 18,000 square feet on the application and the portion for actual use was revised during the hearing to 8000 square feet); 2. Serving alcohol (the applicant indicated at the hearing that the dance hall would not serve alcohol); 3. Parking (the applicant indicated at the hearing that since a smaller portion of the building was going to be used for the dance hall, parking requirements would be reduced and that a verbal agreement to allow dance hall patrons to use nearby parking was likely to be secured). Transcripts from the Open Record Hearings of March 18 and April 15, 2010 have been prepared for the Planning Commission's use in this remand. Attached to this cover memo is a listing of the page and line number in the transcript that corresponds to the above remand items. The transcripts of the testimony and the staff reports and exhibits are also attached. Since this is a remand, there will not be additional testimony. The Planning Commission should review the staff reports and transcripts and clarify or enhance the findings or conclusions (if the Commission feels that is necessary). Staff has prepared additional findings for the Commission's consideration. t As a final note, staff submits for the Planning Commission's consideration that much of the testimony presented during the hearing concerned detailed and site-specific items of operation should a dance hall be permitted at 117 S. 5`" Avenue. However, the application was for a rezone — not site approval or a special permit. Zoning is often defined as the legislative division of a community into areas in which are permitted only certain designated uses of land or structures. This contrasts with the notion of a special permit , in that such permits recognize certain uses may be allowed within given zoning districts as long as conditions may be imposed that provide for the protection of the immediate neighborhood and the public interest. I n the C-2 Zone, the operation of a dance hall is not a permitted use or a use allowed through a special permit, it is a use specifically prohibited. That is why the requirements to grant a zone change utilize the criteria required by Pasco Municipal Code Section 25.88.030 (see the 3118110 Staff Report — page 3). This criteria place the burden of establishing justification for the zone change on the applicant. Absent compelling justification, the Commission is not under an obligation to recommend approval of a rezone to the City Council. March 18, 2010 Meeting Buildina Size Page 4, Lines 17 — 18 Page 10, Lines 18 — 20 Page 15, Lines 19- 25 Page 20, Lines 1 — 5 Page 29, Lines 11 - 12 Parkina Page 15, Lines 19 — 25 Page 19, Lines 22 — 25 Page 20, Lines 1 — 5 Alcohol Page 11, Lines 19 — 25 Page 12, Lines 4- 7 Page 16, Lines 23 — 25 Page 17, Lines 1 — 16 Page 23, Lines 4 - 8 Page 27, Lines 3 - 6 Page 28, Lines 16 - 19 April 15, 2010 Meeting Buildina Size Page 11, Lines 17 — 18 Page 12, Lines 6- 8 Page 21, Lines 16 - 18 Parkins Page 21, Lines 16 -18 Alcohol Page 17, Lines 13 - 19 Page 18, Lines 1 — 5 Page 20, Lines 18 -20 PLANNING COMM I SSI ON FIND I NGS OF FACT JUNE 17, 201 0 Findings of fact must be entered from the record. The Planning Commission may add findings to this listing as the result of factual testimony and evidence submitted during the open record hearing. 1) The Comprehensive Plan designates the site for commercial uses. 2) The site is developed with a commercial building. 3) The site is zoned C-2 (Central Business District), and permits the following uses: a. Artist and office supplies; b. Bakeries; c. Banks and financial institutions; d. Barber and beauty shops; e. Bookstores, except adult bookstores; f. Clothing, shoes and accessories, and costume rentals; g. Crafts, stationary and gift shops; h. Department stores; i. Fresh and frozen meats, including seafood; j. Florists; k. Furniture and home appliance stores; I. Galleries for art and restored or refinished antiques; m. Hardware and home improvement stores; n. Import shops; o. Jewelry and gem shops, including custom work; p. Offices for medical and professional services; q. Restaurants, sandwich shops, cafeterias and delicatessens; r. Sporting goods; s. Tailoring and seamstress shops; t. Theaters for movies and performances, except adult theaters; u. Public markets for fresh produce and craft work; v. Parking lots; w. Micro-breweries and micro-wineries; x. Research, development and assembly facilities for component devices and equipment of an electrical, electronic or electromagnetic nature; and y. Home brewing and/or wine making equipment sales. (Ord. 3354 Sec. 2, 1999.) 4) When the applicant purchased the property in January of 2006 the site was zoned C-2. 5) The purpose of the C-2 zone, among other things, is to promote a business atmosphere that reinforces a positive public image of the downtown area. 6) To meet the purposes of the C-2 zone the district regulations specifically prohibit these uses: a. Gasoline and service stations, automobile services or repair, except tire stores; b. Outdoor storage of goods or materials; c. Membership dubs; d. Taverns; e. Billiard and pool halls; f. Amusement game centers; g. Pawn shops; h. Card rooms, bingo parlors, dance halls and similar places; i. Adult theaters, adult bookstores, tattoo parlors, bathhouses and massage parlors; j. Community service facilities level two k. Secondhand dealers. Similar or like uses although not specifically listed are also prohibited; and I. Adult Business Facilities. (Ord. 3514 Sec. 6, 2001; Ord. 3354 Sec. 2, 1999.) 7) The site is in the Central Business Overlay District. 8) The Central Business Overlay District was originally designed to address "general public disorder, loitering, nuisance and other acts detrimental to the public image of the area." ,) The applicant indicated that approximately 8,000 square feet would be the portion devoted to IFie darine hall use. The Flanning CommiSS10r1 heard lesl:imony and cmrisidered Itial the 1 B4O00 square toot building on the site was not to be tully used For the: proposed dance hall. 10) The applicant indicated and the Planning Commission heard testimony that alcohol would not he served in ounjunclion -ailh the proposed dance hall. 11) The applicant indicated and the Planning Commission heard testimony that since the portion of the building devoted ]a dance hall use was going Io be 8,000 square leet versus 18,000 square feet, the parking requirements were to b accordingly reduced; and that parking available on nearby properties was likely io be secured for use For the proposed dance hall operations, CONCLUSI DNS BASED ON I NI TI AL STAFF Fl N D I NOS OF FACT Before recommenofng approval or denial of a rezone, the Fanning Comm1'ssion must develop its conclusions from the findings of fact,based upon the criteria listed in P.M.C. 25 88.080 and determine whether or not: 1 ) The proposal 1s in accardance with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Flan. Introduction of a dance hall in the C-2 Zoning District would not be in accordance with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. The goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan include a requirement to reduce "public disorder, loitering, nuisance and other acts detrimental to the public image of the downtown area" (Vol. 11, pp. 15-16, Comprehensive Plan). This provision has been translated into PMC Section 25.44.050, as follows: "Evidence received by the Planning Commission and contained in previous studies and Pasco Police Crime Reports demonstrate that certain uses make the Central Business District less desirable or attractive to the public due to a demonstrated history of contribution to general public disorder, loitering, nuisance and other acts detrimental to the public image of the area [including] . . . dance halls and similar places." 2) The effect of the proposal on the immed'ate vianity will not be materially detrimental. Expanding the C-1 District into the established central core of the city would not further the purposes for the establishment of the C-2 District. Expansion of the C-1 District even as conditioned by the owner, would allow the introduction of a dance hall which have been determined by the community to be materially detrimental to the downtown area, according to "Evidence received by the Planning Commission and contained in previous studies and Pasco Police Crime Reports" and itemized in PMC Section 25.44.050. 3) There/s merit and value in the proposal for the community as a whole. "Dance halls and similar places" have a"demonstrated history [of contributing to] general public disorder, loitering, nuisance and other acts detrimental to the public image of the area (PMC 25.44.050)." To introduce that which has been found detrimental to the downtown area would be counterproductive to instilling "merit and value" for the community as a whole. 4) Condi'ti'ons should be Imposed in order to mitigate any significant adverse impacts from the proposal. The proposed rezone is not appropriate for the site. Conditions necessary or as proposed by the owner do not change the fundamental nature of dance halls. Dance halls still generate large attendance at specific times and have a high potential to encourage loitering. 5) A concomitant agreement should be entered into between the Oty and the petitioner, and if so, the terms and conditions of such an agreement. A concomitant agreement is not necessary because the rezone is not warranted. REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION MASTER FILE NO: Z 10-001 APPLICANT: John Ziobro HEARING DATE: 03/18/2010 1333 Columbia Park Trail ACTION DATE: 04/15/2010 Richland, WA 99352 BACKGROUND REQUEST: REZONE: Rezone from C-2 to C-1 to allow for Dance Hall Use 1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Legal: Gerry's Add Lots 15 to 22, Blk. 17 General Location: 117 S 5th Avenue Property Size: Approximately .b4 acres 2. ACCESS: The property has access from both North 5th Avenue and West Columbia Street. 3. UTILITIES: All utilities are available at the site. 4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The site is currently zoned C-2 (Central Business District) and is within the Central Business Overlay District. This district was designed to reduce "general public disorder, loitering, nuisance and other acts detrimental to the public image of the area." The site is occupied by a building. Surrounding properties are zoned and developed as follows: North: C-2 (Central Business District) South: I-1 (Light Industrial District) East: C-2 (Central Business District) West C-1 (Retail Business District) 5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan designates this area for Commercial uses. b. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The City of Pasco has been the lead agency in issuing a Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) in accordance with review under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), Chapter 43.21(c) RCW. 1 ANALYSIS The property in question is located on the northeast corner of 5th Avenue and Columbia Street in the Gerry's Addition Subdivision which was platted in 1906. The subject property is zoned C-2 and within the Downtown Business Overlay District. A building on the property has been used as a car dealership, a commercial kitchen appliance retailer, and recently carved into small stalls to function as a type of mini-mall. The current owner has applied for and received a business license to hold small, private events such as birthday parties, quinceaneras, and receptions. The Applicant would like to change the use to a public dance hall. Dance halls are prohibited by the code in both the C-2 zone and the Overlay District. The purpose of the C-2 zone (PMC 25.44.010) is to promote a business atmosphere that reinforces a positive public image of the downtown area. The development of the C-2 zoning regulations in the late 1980's was part of a concerted community effort to combat the deleterious effects of certain businesses on the vitality of the CBD. Prior to the adoption of the C-2 zoning regulations there was a concentration of businesses (dance halls, pool halls taverns etc) that fostered an environment that encouraged public loitering, public disorder, public nuisance and other acts that created a poor public image of downtown Pasco. The current C-2 regulations have been responsible for the reversal of the conditions that previously created detrimental conditions for encouraging businesses to locate in the Overlay District. Several ,years after the City Council adopted the C-2 regulations, the City Council added zoning regulation specifically for the downtown area in the form of the Central Business Overlay District (PMC 25.45). The Overlay District was enacted for the express purpose of eliminating "general public disorder, loitering, nuisance and other acts detrimental to the public image of the area." Rezoning the site to C-1 would open the door to various businesses to locate in the downtown area that could again foster the environment that leads to general public disorder. Dance halls, taverns and night clubs are all permitted uses in the C-1 zone. The concern over dance halls is apparently well-founded. A Pasco police report (attached) shows 17 calls for Police assistance at the neighboring Golden Nugget dance hall since January 1, 2009. Anecdotally, a deadly assault occurred recently at a dance hall/nightclub several blocks away in a C-1 zone. The C-2 area is unique in the city in that buildings are often built to property lines without setbacks, and on-site parking is virtually nonexistent. For this reason the district is not conducive to large facilities for public assembly like auditoriums and dance halls. The subject building is about 18,000 square feet in size with very limited parking. An 18,000 square foot building used for public assembly would require 180 parking spaces. The initial review criteria for considering a rezone application are explained ill PMC. 25.88.030. The criteria are list below as follows: 1. The changed conditions in the vicinity which warrant other or additional zoning: No changes have occurred ill the neighbor-hood that xuou ld xua rra nt a zoning change. As a result of implementation of the C-2 zoning regulations and other- efforts the CBD is substantially a better- neighborhood than it xua s ill the mini-1980's. Conditions and businesses that contributed to public disorder, loitering, nuisances and other- acts detrimental to the public image of the area have largely been reduced. A change from C-2 to C-1 xuou ld a lloru the opportunity for increased "general public disorder, loitering, nuisance and other acts detrimental to the public image of the a rea." 2. Facts to justify the change on the basis of advancing the public health, safety and general welfare: The facts indicate that a rezone from C-2 to C-1 ruould likely be detrimental to supporting "public health, safety and general welfare" by allowing uses that, according to evidence revierued by the planning Commission ill 2001, contribute "to general public disorder, loitering, nuisance and other- acts detrimental to the public image of the area." 3. The effect it will have on the nature and value of adjoining property and the Comprehensive Plan: Evidence received by the planning Commission du ring hearings that led to the enactment of the C-2 zo ning regu la do rhs demo rhs tra ted tha t cer-ta ill la rid uses inhibit nexu business groruth, contribute to business loss and decline of property va lues, a rid/o r-per petu a to a pu blic image which is u rhdesira ble or unattractive and detrimental to public and private investment ill business property xuithin the CBD. 4. The effect on the property owners if the request is not granted: The property otuners ruould still be able to enjoy all uses currently available ill the C-2 district/ Overlay District, which xuas the zoning at the time of purchase. S. The Comprehensive Plan land use designation for the property: The Comprehensive Elan designates the site for- Commercial uses. 3 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 Planning Commission may add findings to this listing as the result of factual testimony and evidence submitted during the open record hearing. 1) The Comprehensive Plan designates the site for commercial uses. 2) The site is developed with a commercial building. 3) The site is zoned C-2 (Central Business District). 4) The site was zoned C-2 in January of 2006 when the Applicant purchased the property. 5) The purpose of the C-2 Zone, among other things, is to promote a business atmosphere that reinforces a positive public image of the downtown area. 6) To meet the purposes of the C-2 Zone the district regulations specifically prohibit certain uses such as membership clubs, taverns, billiard and pool halls, amusement game centers, dance halls and similar places. 7) The site is in the Central Business Overlay District. 8) The Central Business Overlay District was originally designed to address "general public disorder, loitering, nuisance and other acts detrimental to the public image of the area." 9) Pasco Police have reported 17 calls for Police assistance at the nearby Golden Nugget dance hall nightclub since January 2009. 4 CONCLUSIONS BASED ON INITIAL STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT Before recommending approval or denial of a rezone, the Planning Commission must develop its conclusions from the findings of fact based upon the criteria listed in P.M.C. 25.88.060 and determine whether-or- not: (1) The proposal is in accordance with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. Introduction of a dance hall in the C-2 Zoning District ruould not be in accordance xuith the goals and policies of the Comprehensive plan. The goals and policies of the Comprehensive plan include a requirement to reduce "public disorder, loitering, nuisance and other- acts detrimental to the public image of the doxuntoxun area" (Vol. II pp. 15-16 Comprehensive plan). This provision has been translated into PMC Section 25.44.050, as follows: "Evidence received by the Planning Commission and contained in previous studies and Pasco police Crime Reports demonstrate that certain uses make the Central Business District less desirable or- attractive to the public due to a demonstrated history of contribution to general public disorder, loitering, nuisance and other- acts detrimental to the public image of the area [including/ . . . dance halls and similar-places." (2) The effect of the proposal on the immediate vicinity will not be materially detrimental. Expanding the C-1 District into the established central core of the city xuould not further- the purposes for- the establishment of the C-2 district. Expansion of the C- 1 district xuould alloxu the introduction of a dance hall and other- uses in the C-2 zoning district which have been determined by the community to be materially detrimental to the doruntorun area, according to "Evidence received by the Planning Commission and contained in previous studies and Pasco Police Crime Reports" and itemized in PMC Section 25.44.050. (3) There is merit and value in the proposal for the community as a whole. "Eonce halls and similar- places" have a "demonstrated history [of contributing to] general public disorder, loitering, nuisance and other- acts detrimental to the public image of the area." To introduce that which has been found detrimental to the dotuntoxun area ruould be counterproductive to instilling "merit and value"for- the community as a whole. (4) Conditions should be imposed in order to mitigate any significant adverse impacts from the proposal. 5 The proposed rezone is not appropriate for the site. Conditions necessary to mitigate adverse impacts ruourd essentially cause the rezone to mirror- the permitted uses xuithin the C-2 zone. (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 is not necessary because the rezone is not Iva r-r-anted. RECOMMENDATION MOTION: I move to close the hearing on the proposed rezone and initiate deliberations and schedule adoption of findings of fact, conclusions and a recommendation to the City Council for the April 15, 2009 meeting. 6 Vicinity Item: Rezone C-2 to C- 1 Map Applicant: John Ziobro N File #: Z 10-001 poop SA WP On go A- r SO a �kl Aw- SITE r G r. - Land Item: Rezone C-2 to C- I Use Applicant: John Ziobro D Map File #: Z 10-001 lop LINES ITE 19 r10 Vacant m Zoning Item: Rezone C-2 to C- I Map Applicant: John Ziobro D File #: Z 10-001 I� . r CBOD Item: Rezone C-2 to G I Map Applicant: John Ziobro N File #: Z 10-001 POP III SEEN Central Business WA Overlay District UK 6?4 V;1 &I WA User:PDVORAK Pasco Police Department 03102J2010 15:25:26 CALL ID CALLGLASS CSDISPOSIT ACTDATE ACTTIME STREETNBR STREET 0900012 TI ASSAULT 01/Oi/2009 00:OC:00 C006 214 S 4TH AVE 0902602 TI DOMESTIC 01/18/2009 00:00:00 0103 214 S 4T14 AVE 0904261 IC AS/BAR 01/30/2009 00:GD:00 2236 214 S 4TH AVE 0909306 IC AS/EAR 03/06/2009 00:00:00 2331 214 S 4TH AVE 0910411 IC AS/BAR 03/13/2009 00:00:00 2323 214 S 4TH AVE D922247 TI A/FTSID 05/31/2009 00:00:00 1516 214 S 4TH AVE 0924417 IC AS/BAR 06/12/2OD9 00:00:00 232E 214 S 4TH AVE 0925718 TI MAL/MISC 06/20/2009 00:00:00 2224 214 S 4TH AVE 0929965 IC 911HU 07/15/2009 00:00:0D 2315 214 5 4TH AVE 0935457 IG FIELD 06/i6/2009 00:00:00 0055 214 S 4TH AVE 0936539 IC AS/0TH 08/22/2009 OC:OO:OD 1629 214 S 4TH AVE 0947537 IC CIVIL 10/30/2009 D0:00:00 11D4 214 S 4TH AVE 0947763 IC SUSP/CIR 10/3!/2009 DO:00:00 1531 214 S 4TH AVE 0954C56 IC FIT-LC 12/17/2009 03:00:CO 1041 214 S 4TE AVE 0954440 TI AUTO/THE 12/20/2009 00:DO:00 D056 214 S 4TH AVE 0954581 IC REC/STLN 12/21/2009 00:00:00 1212 214 S 4TH AVE 1006170 TI THEFT 02/14/2010 00:DO:00 !639 214 S 4TH AVE C:IFoxTmp110.162... Pagel REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION MASTER FILE NO: Z 10-001 APPLICANT: John Ziobro HEARING DATE: 03/18/2010 1333 Columbia Park Trail ACTION DATE: 04/15/2010 Richland, WA 99352 BACKGROUND REQUEST: REZONE: Rezone from C-2 to C-1 to allow for dance hall use. 1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Legal: Gerry's Add Lots 15 to 22, Blk. 17 General Location: 117 S. 5th Avenue Property Size: Approximately .64 acres 2. ACCESS: The property has access from both N. 50, Avenue and W. Columbia Street. 3. UTILITIES: All utilities are available at the site. 4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The site is currently zoned C-2 (Central Business District [CBD]) and is within the Central Business Overlay District. This district was designed to reduce "general public disorder, loitering, nuisance and other acts detrimental to the public image of the area." The site is occupied by a building. Surrounding properties are zoned and developed as follows: NORTH: C-2 - (Central Business District) SOUTH: I-1 - (Light Industrial District) EAST: C-2 - (Central Business District) WEST: C-1 - (Retail Business District) 5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan designates this area for commercial uses. 6. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The City of Pasco has been the lead agency in issuing a Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) in accordance with review under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), Chapter 43.21(c) RCW. 1 ANALYSIS The property in question is located on the northeast corner of 5th Avenue and Columbia Street in the Gerry's Addition Subdivision which was platted in 1906. The subject property is zoned C-2 and within the Central Business Overlay District. A building on the property has been used as a car dealership, a commercial kitchen appliance retailer, and recently carved into small stalls to function as a type of mini-mall. The current owner has applied for and received a business license to hold small, private events such as birthday parties, quinceaneras, and receptions. The applicant would like to change the use to a public dance hall. Dance halls are prohibited by the code in both the C-2 zone and the Central Business Overlay District. The purpose of the C-2 zone (PMC 25.44.010) is to promote a business atmosphere that reinforces a positive public image of the downtown area. The development of the C-2 zoning regulations in the late 1980's was part of a concerted community effort to combat the deleterious effects of certain businesses on the vitality of the CBD. Prior to the adoption of the C-2 zoning regulations there was a concentration of businesses (dance halls, pool halls, taverns, etc) that fostered an environment that encouraged public loitering, public disorder, public nuisance and other acts that created a poor public image of downtown Pasco. The current C-2 regulations have been responsible for the reversal of the conditions that previously created detrimental conditions for encouraging businesses to locate in the Central Business Overlay District. Several ,years after the City Council adopted the C-2 regulations, the City Council added zoning regulation specifically for the downtown area in the form of the Central Business Overlay District (PMC 25.45). The Central Business Overlay District was enacted for the express purpose of eliminating "general public disorder, loitering, nuisance and other acts detrimental to the public image of the area." Rezoning the site to C-1 would open the door to various businesses to locate in the downtown area that could again foster the environment that leads to general public disorder. Dance halls, taverns and night clubs are all permitted uses in the C-1 zone. The concern over dance halls is apparently well-founded. A Pasco Police report (attached) shows 17 calls for Police assistance at the neighboring Golden Nugget dance hall since January 1, 2009. Anecdotally, a deadly assault occurred recently at a dance hall/nightclub several blocks away in a C-1 zone. The C-2 area is unique in the city in that buildings are often built to property lines without setbacks, and on-site parking is virtually nonexistent. For this reason the district is not conducive to large facilities for public assembly like auditoriums and dance halls. The subject building is about 18,000 square feet in size with very limited parking. An 18,000 square foot building used for public assembly would require 180 parking spaces. The attorney for the applicant has crafted a Concomitant Zoning Agreement with the following two conditions: a) The owner shall be restricted or otherwise precluded from operating a night club as defined by the Pasco Municipal Code. b) As a condition of issuance of a permit to operate a dance hall, the owner agrees to a restriction prohibiting serving alcohol during dance hall hours of operation. However, the proposed conditions do not negate the fact that the proposed use is a dance hall, and that, according to the aforementioned research, dance halls are listed as one of the uses that foster "general public disorder, loitering, nuisance and other acts detrimental to the public image of the area." 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 changed conditions in the vicinity which xuarrant other- or additional zoning: No changes have occurred in the neighborhood that would warrant a zoning change. As a result of implementation of the C-2 zoning regulations and other efforts the CBD is substantially a better neighborhood than it was in the mid- 1980's. Conditions and businesses that contributed to public disorder, loitering, nuisances and other acts detrimental to the public image of the area have largely been reduced. A change from C-2 to C-1 would allow the opportunity for increased "general public disorder, loitering, nuisance and other acts detrimental to the public image of the area." Although the applicant has agreed to operate a dance hall without serving alcoholic beverages, there is a high potential for loitering and its attendant adverse impact on the public image of the area. 2) Facts to justify the change on the basis of advancing the public hearth, safety and general rueifare: The facts indicate that a rezone from C-2 to C-1 would likely be detrimental to supporting "public health, safety and general welfare" by allowing uses that, according to evidence reviewed by the Planning Commission in 2001, contribute "to general public disorder, loitering, nuisance and other acts detrimental to the public image of the area." 3) The effect it xuill have on the nature and value of adjoining property and the Comprehensive Fran: 3 Evidence received by the Planning Commission during Bearings that led to the enactment of the C-2 zoning regulations in 1999 demonstrated that certain land uses inhibit new business growth, contribute to business loss and decline of property values, and/or perpetuate a public image which is undesirable or unattractive and detrimental to public and private investment in business property within the CBD. 4) The effect on the property oiuners if the request is riot gr-orzted: The property owners would still be able to enjoy all uses currently available in the C-2 District/Central Business Overlay District, which was the zoning at the time of purchase. The C-2 zoning regulations were enacted in 1999. 5) The Co mprehensive Pla n Zo nd a se desig no Lion fo r- the property: The Comprehensive Plan designates the site for commercial uses, and refers to the C-2 zoning regulations enacted in 1999. 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 Planning Commission may add findings to this listing as the result of factual testimony and evidence submitted during the open record hearing. 1) The Comprehensive Plan designates the site for commercial uses. 2) The site is developed with a commercial building. 3) The site is zoned C-2 (Central Business District), and permits the following uses: a. Artist and office supplies; b. Bakeries; c. Banks and financial institutions; d. Barber and beauty shops; e. Bookstores, except adult bookstores; f. Clothing, shoes and accessories, and costume rentals; g. Crafts, stationary and gift shops; h. Department stores; L Fresh and frozen meats, including seafood; j. Florists; k. Furniture and home appliance stores; 1. Galleries for art and restored or refinished antiques; m. Hardware and home improvement stores; n. Import shops; 4 o. Jewelry and gem shops, including custom work; p. Offices for medical and professional services; q. Restaurants, sandwich shops, cafeterias and delicatessens; r. Sporting goods; s. Tailoring and seamstress shops; t. Theaters for movies and performances, except adult theaters; u. Public markets for fresh produce and craft work; v. Parking lots; w. Micro-breweries and micro-wineries; x. Research, development and assembly facilities for component devices and equipment of an electrical, electronic or electromagnetic nature; and y. Home brewing and/or wine making equipment sales. (Ord. 3354 Sec. 2, 1999.) 4) When the applicant purchased the property in January of 2006 the site was zoned C-2. 5) The purpose of the C-2 zone, among other things, is to promote a business atmosphere that reinforces a positive public image of the downtown area. 6) To meet the purposes of the C-2 zone the district regulations specifically prohibit these uses: a. Gasoline and service stations, automobile services or repair, except tire stores; b. Outdoor storage of goods or materials; c. Membership clubs; d. Taverns; e. Billiard and pool halls; E Amusement game centers; g. Pawn shops; h. Card rooms, bingo parlors, dance halls and similar places; L Adult theaters, adult bookstores, tattoo parlors, bathhouses and massage parlors; j. Community service facilities level two k. Secondhand dealers. Similar or like uses although not specifically listed are also prohibited; and 1. Adult Business Facilities. (Ord. 3514 Sec. 6, 2 00 1; Ord. 3354 Sec. 2, 1999.) 7) The site is in the Central Business Overlay District. 8) The Central Business Overlay District was originally designed to address "general public disorder, loitering, nuisance and other acts detrimental to the public image of the area." CONCLUSIONS BASED ON INITIAL STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT 5 Before recommending approval or denial of a rezone, the Planning Commission must develop its conclusions from the findings of fact based upon the criteria listed in P.M.C. 25.88.060 and determine whether-or- not: 1) The proposal is in accordance i.uith the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. Introduction of a dance hall in the C-2 Zoning District would not be in accordance with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. The goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan include a requirement to reduce "public disorder, loitering, nuisance and other acts detrimental to the public image of the downtown area" (Vol. II, pp. 15-16, Comprehensive Plan). This provision has been translated into PMC Section 25.44.050, as follows: "Evidence received by the Planning Commission and contained in previous studies and Pasco Police Crime Reports demonstrate that certain uses make the Central Business District less desirable or attractive to the public due to a demonstrated history of contribution to general public disorder, loitering, nuisance and other acts detrimental to the public image of the area [including] dance halls and similar places." 2) The effect of the proposal on the immediate vicinity iuill not be mo to Ha lly detrimental. Expanding the C-1 District into the established central core of the city would not further the purposes for the establishment of the C-2 District. Expansion of the C-1 District even as conditioned by the owner, would allow the introduction of a dance hall which have been determined by the community to be materially detrimental to the downtown area, according to "Evidence received by the Planning Commission and contained in previous studies and Pasco Police Crime Reports" and itemized in PMC Section 25.44.050. 3) Ther-e is merit and i,alue in thepr-oposal for- the community as a tuhole. "Dance halls and similar places" have a "demonstrated history [of contributing to] general public disorder, loitering, nuisance and other acts detrimental to the public image of the area (PMC 25.44.050)." To introduce that which has been found detrimental to the downtown area would be counterproductive to instilling "merit and value" for the community as a whole. 4) Conditions should be imposed in order to mitigate any significant adverse impacts from the proposal. The proposed rezone is not appropriate for the site. Conditions necessary or as proposed by the owner do not change the fundamental nature of dance halls. 6 Dance halls still generate large attendance at specific times and have a high potential to encourage loitering. 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 is not necessary because the rezone is not warranted. RECOMMENDATION MOTION for Findings of Fact: I move the Planning Commission adopt the Findings of Fact as contained in the March 18, 2010 staff report. MOTION for Recommendation: I move, based on the Findings of Fact as adopted, the Planning Commission recommend the City Council deny a rezone of the property at 117 South 5th Avenue from C-2 to C-1 to allow for dance hall use. 7 Vicinity Item: Rezone C-2 to C- 1 Map Applicant: John Ziobro N File #: Z 10-001 poop SA WP On go A- r SO a �kl Aw- SITE r G r. - Land Item: Rezone C-2 to C- I Use Applicant: John Ziobro D Map File #: Z 10-001 lop LINES ITE 19 r10 Vacant m Zoning Item: Rezone C-2 to C- I Map Applicant: John Ziobro D File #: Z 10-001 I� . r CBOD Item: Rezone C-2 to G I Map Applicant: John Ziobro N File #: Z 10-001 POP III SEEN Central Business WA Overlay District UK 6?4 V;1 &I WA Telquist Ziobro McMillen Attorneys at Law April 1, 2010 Rick White City of Pasco Planning Department 2nd Floor 525 North 3rd Avenue Pasco, WA 99301 Re: Change of Zone Application Owner: Delia Hernandez Property Location: 117 South 5th Avenue City File No.: Z 10-001 Our File No.: 09-203 Dear Rick: I am following up the Planning Commission meeting and your call related to the above- referenced Application. You indicated that you were looking for follow-up on the representations made before the Planning Commission. I am enclosing a draft Concomitant Zoning Agreement, following the form used by the City of Pasco, which places specific restrictions on the property. The City is welcome to propose additional restrictions to go within that Agreement. With regard to specific commitments Ms. Hernandez is willing to make, these include: I. Limited days of week of operation to Fridays and Saturdays. 2. Hours of operation: 8:00 p.m. to 1:00 p.m. 3. No alcohol will be served at the dance hall. 4. Ms. Hernandez will agree to a Concomitant Zoning Agreement that prohibits the conversion of the dance hall to a night club. 5. Her business will refuse admission to any person under the influence of alcohol. 6. She has a verbal agreement from neighboring property owner identified on the map I have attached. We will try to secure a written agreement prior to the next hearing. 7. She will maintain a minimum of four security people, one at each door. This would be her minimum staffing. She anticipates having as many as six people for security. George E. Telquist • John S. Ziobro • Robert G. McMillen 1333 Columbia Park Trail, Suite 110 • Richland,WA 99352 (509) 737-8500 • Toll Free (877)789-LAW1 • Fax(509) 737-9500 • www.tzmlaw.com Page 2 of 2 To:Rick White Our File No.09-203 Date:April 1,2010 Ms. Hernandez has During the Planning Commission meeting or during staff comments, some concern was expressed with regard to changes in ownership of the building. Ms. Hernandez has three children between the age of 19 and 24 that may become involved in the business or succeed her in operation of the business. She may form a limited liability company for purposes of managing her various business entities. If she did so, she would name her children as members. At the present time, however, she is a sole proprietor. She would like some recognition from the City that in the event she became incapacitated, her children could take over the business without any changes in restrictions that would be imposed if her change of zone is approved. ' If you need any additional information,please let me know. Sincerely, TELQUIST, ZIOBRO & MCMILLEN, PLLC I OHN S. 710BRO j Enclosures JS7Jjr cc. Delia Hernandez(w/enc,) George E. Telquist ' John S. Ziobro • Robert G. McMillen 1333 Columbia Park Trail, Suite 110 • Richland,WA 99352 (509)737-8500 ' Toll Free (877)789-LAW1 • Fax(509) 737-9500 • www.tzmlaw.com CONCOMITANT ZONING AGREEMENT The City of Pasco, Washington, a non-charter City, under the laws of the State of Washington (Chapter 35A.63,RCW and Article 11, Section 11 of the Washington State Constitution) has authority to enact laws and enter into agreements to promote the health, safety, and welfare of its citizens, and thereby control the use and development of property within its jurisdiction; and WHEREAS, the owner of certain property has applied for a rezone of such property described below within the City's jurisdiction; and WHEREAS, the City,pursuant to RCW 43.12(c), the State Environmental Act, should mitigate any adverse impacts which might result because of the proposed rezone; and WHEREAS, the City of Pasco and the owners are both interested in compliance with the Pasco Municipal Code provisions relating to the use and development of property situated in the City of Pasco, described as follows: GERRY'S ADD.,LOTS 15-22, BLOCK 17 WHEREAS, the owner has indicated a willingness to cooperate with the City of Pasco, its Planning Commission and Planning Department to ensure compliance with the Pasco Zoning Code, and all other local, state, and federal laws relating to the use and development of the above-described property; WHEREAS, local governmental may enter into a development agreement with a person having ownership or control of real property within its jurisdiction pursuant to RCW 36.70B.170, and WHEREAS, the City, in addition to civil and criminal sanctions available by law, desires to enforce the rights and interests of the public by this Concomitant Zoning Agreement; NOW, THEREFORE, In the event the above-described property if rezoned by the City of Pasco from C-2 to C- 1, and in consideration if that event should occur, and subject to the terms and conditions hereinafter stated, the applicant does hereby covenant and agree as follows: 1. The owner promises to comply with all of the terms of the Agreement in the event the City, as full consideration herein, grants a rezone on the above-described property. '. The owner agrees to perform the terms set forth in Section 4 of this Agreement. Concomitant Zoning Agreement Page I of 2 This Agreement shall be binding on the heirs, assigns, grantees, or successors in interest of the owner of the property herein described. 4. Conditions: a) The owner shall be restricted or otherwise precluded from operating a night club as defined by the Pasco Municipal Code. b] As a condition of issuance of a permit to operate a dance hall, the owner agrees to a restriction prohibiting serving alcohol during dance hall hours of operation. 5. Legal Description. GERRY'S ADD.,LOTS 15-22, BLOCK 17. The person whose names are subscribed herein do hereby certify that they are the sole holders of fee simple interest in the above-described property: OWNER: DEL IA HE RNANDE Z SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this_--day of-------_, 2010. ---------------------- NOTARY PUBLIC in and for the State of Washington, residing at: ------------_ My Commission Expires: ------------_. Concomitant Zoning Agreement Page 2 of 2 Excerpted Transcript of the Planning Commission Meeting Date - March 18, 2010 In Re- Rezone C-2 to C-1 (John Ziobro) 117 S. 5th Avenue Master File No. Z 10-001 ChaRae Kent, CCR, RPR Kent Reporting Phone: 509-527-2244 Fax: 509-027-2299 Kent Reporting.com Paqe 1 STATE OF WASHINGTON CITY OF PASCO In re : Rezone C-2 to C-1 ) Master File (John Ziobro) No . Z 10-001 117 S . Sth Avenue ) ) PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TIME : 7 : 00 p.m. , Thursday, March 18, 2010 TAKEN AT : City Hall Pasco, Washington REPORTED BY: ChaRae Kent, CCR, RPR License No . 2408 ChaRae Kent CCR RPR Kent Reporting * (599) 627-2244 Paqe 2 1 APPEARANCES FOR PLANNING COMMISSION: 7 MR. TODD SAMUEL - CHAIRMAN 5 MR. ANDY ANDERSON MR. JAMES L . HAY MR. DAVID 0 . LITTLE MR. JOE CRUZ c, 10 17 FOR THE CITY OF PASCO : 12 13 MR. DAVID MCDONALD 14 MR. RICK WHITE 15 MR. SHANE O ' NEILL 16 MS . SOPHIA AQUARIUS 17 18 19 20 21 GG 23 24 25 ChaRae Kent , CCR, RPR Kent Reporting * ( 509) 627-2244 Page 3 BE IT REMEMBERED that on Thursday, March 18, 2010, at 7 : 00 p.m. , at Pasco City Hall , Pasco, Washington, the Planning Commission Meeting was taken before ChaRae Kent, Certified Court Reporter and Registered Professional 5 Reporter . The following proceedings took place : 6 P R O C E E D I N G S U 10 MR . SAMUEL : Okay . So that ends our old business 11 and now we ' ll move into the section of our agenda on 12 public hearings for ne:: business . And the first item is 13 item 5A, a rezone . This is a rezone from a C-2 zone to 14 a C-1 zone . The location is 117 South Fifth avenue . 15 This is master file number Z 10-001 . And I believe we' ll 16 start with some comments from Rick White, our Community 17 and Economic Director . 18 MR . WHITE : Thank Vou, Mr . Chairman and Commission . 19 As you mentioned, it ' s a rezone request from the existing 20 C-2 zone to a C-1 zone for property located at 117 South 21 Fifth Avenue . That ' s on the corner -- the northeast 22 corner of Columbia and Fifth . The site itself is a 23 little over six-tenths of an acre and there' s a building 24 on the site that ' s roughly 18, 000 square feet in size . 25 The staff ...e� art goes in o the history and purpose ChaRae Kent, CCR, RPR Kent Reporting * ( 509) 627-2244 Page 4 1 of the C-2 zone . It was a zone that was developed in the late 1980s to combat what was then a bad -- I 'm going to call it a bad Public image for the downtown Pasco area . The zone itself was developed so that the focus was on uses that resulted in large amount of pedestrian 6 movement , short duration parking and uses that were arranged as to be complimentary to other uses located in the zone so a person could park in one spot, walk to 9 another, and walk to another and basically like a zoning 10 district and something you would expect in the downtown . 11 The particular C-2 zone does not have a parking 12 requirement . That was one of the major factors in the 13 analysis of this zone change request . A C-1 -- the uses 14 allowed in the C-1 zone designate -- excuse rae, cause the 15 need for significant amounts of parking, depending on the 16 building size. It ' s estimated that a building this size, 17 18, 000 square feet, would generate the need for roughly 18 180 parking stalls . 19 The Commission is required to review the criteria 20 found in the Pasco Municipal Code 25 . 88, and those are on 21 page 3 in your staff report . I won ' t go through those in 22 great detail , but I will touch on them briefly . The 23 conditions in the vicinity are changed in order to 24 warrant this zoning. Basically staff could not determine 25 that there wer._- changed condi ion in t'-,\e neighborhood ChaRae Kent , CCR, RPR Kent Reporting * (509) 627-2244 Page 5 1 that would warrant this particular zone change request . Criteria number 2 was the establishing of facts to -justify the change on the basis of advancing the public health, safety and general welfare . Again, the 5 discussion and the history of this C-2 zone in this 6 particular part of the downtown area led staff to the 7 conclusion that there are no facts at this time to 8 justify a change in zone based on advancing the public 9 welfare . 10 Criteria number 3 : The affect it will have, the 11 zone change, on the nature and value on adjoining 12 property and on the comprehensive plan. Again, relying 13 on the significant amount of work that was done in 14 establishing the C-2 zoning district in the late 1980s, 15 staff is of the conclusion that the regulations 16 demonstrate that certain land uses are in fact an 17 inhibiting factor to business growth in the area, which 18 is , in turn, the reason for the C-2 zone in the first 19 place . 20 Criteria number 4 is the affect on the property 21 owners if the request is not granted. And again, the 22 conclusion is that the property owners would still be 23 able to enjoy the uses that are currently available in 24 the C-2 zoning district, which was the zoning at the time 25 of purchase . ChaRae Kent , CCR, RPR Kent Reporting * (509) 627-2244 Page 6 And criteria number 5 speaks to the comprehensive plan designation for the property which is an overriding designation of commercial . Staff has developed at least preliminary findings of 5 fact for the Commission ' s consideration and conclusions G and a recommendation, of course, that after the hearing 7 is concluded that the Commission schedule adoption of 8 findings for the next planning commission meeting. 9 MR . SAMUEL : All right . Very good. Before we hear 10 from the applicant, any questions of Mr . White? 11 So the next step in this process is we want to hear 12 from the applicant about shat their plans are and 13 addressing some of the concerns that City staff Have 14 brought up . So if the representative of the applicant. 15 will come forward and state their name and address for 16 the record. We are anxious to hear from you. 17 MR . ZIOBRO : Good evening . John Ziobro, 1333 18 Columbia Park Trail, Suite 110, Richland, Washington 19 99352 . 20 I ' m here on behalf of the applicant Dalia Hernandez . 21 She is also here and what we thought we would do is she 22 would tell you about the vision of her property and then 23 I will make comments based upon the submittal in the 24 staff report . And we may use the overhead projector . 2 5 Will v ou be abl - to in t at. off Ol a". ChaRae Kent , CCR, RPR Kent Reporting * ( 509) 627-2244 Page 7 MS . HERN NDEZ : Hi, I am Dalia Hernandez . I am not good with English but will try my best . I am here to ask to change this zone but I don' t want to change the whole building. They say that I need 5 a lot of parking for my 18, 000 square foot . I just want 6 to change the ]_pack part . I already had a license to do a reception hall . On the front of the business I own my 3 store that will cash checks, we send money to Mexico and we Have a lot of customers . Before it was a restaurant 10 and I don ' t think there a lot of people come in to the 11 downtown . So when I move Here, I brought a lot of people 12 and you can see I had a lot of customers and we are 13 making good. 14 But why it is important to me is to open this dance 15 for the youth is because I am single mom and I have my 16 kids . I have a daughter 24 and 22 . And I think we 17 always want to go out and dance somewhere to get fun but 18 there no good place for good people . We never like a 19 places with drinks . So it ' s a way I ask them to do this . 2G And I would like to make nice so people can come and like 21 eat an ice scream and a snow cone and dance a little bit . 22 So I believe I can do a lot of changes . I can go up and 23 bring more people in . I would like to -- like farmer ' s 24 market, they always Anglo people come on Saturday . So I 25 - could like to e c la e t ads 'w � they can come ChaRae Kent , CCR, RPR Kent Reporting * (509) 627-2244 Page 8 1 inside my business . 2 And I own two business . I come 3 from. . . (inaudible ) . . . Santa Cruz and (inaudible ) Santa 4 Cruz and (inaudible) Santa Cruz . And I work with my 5 children . 6 ( INSTRUCTED TO STEP AWAY FROM THE MICROPHONE . ) 7 So I don ' t really have interest to serve alcohol 8 because that ' s one of the most things that you are 9 concerning . But I also own a restaurant for 10 years . 10 And I can ' t get a license for to serve alcohol in the 11 restaurant . I know I can do it because I never had 12 because I had clean my record, but I never tried to do 13 this . And I don ' t think you can be concerned on alcohol 14 and that ' s not an important . 15 And one other thing that I have this place for like 16 almost five years . And I was making payments without 17 making money because I come to the City and they always 18 change mind and rules . And they make me put the fire 19 sprinklers and I had to spend more than $100, 000 on 20 sprinklers . Because they told me -- Mr . Mitch told me 21 that I have more than 50 people on the place, we need to 22 fire sprinklers so I had to work and get it done with 2' es.rerything . 24 We had to separate the building from the other one . 25 We had put the a And ; mo� 4aao I came to the ChaRae Kent , CCR, RPR Kent Reporting * ( 509 ; 627-2244 Page 9 1 City and he told me, well, right now if you have a place that you can less than 300 people, you don 't need fire sprinklers and I got like mad because why they make me 4 spend too much money . I can divide the building in two 5 places that way I can save more than $150, 000 . I owe a 6 lot of money . I was making payments . I changed plans . 7 Whenever I come to the City I was back -- because they told me make this and that way you can make your parties or whatever you want to do . And I do whatever they ::ant 10 and I come and they change mind so I keep working and I 11 don ' t really know . 12 I got signatures from my neighborhood . I went and 1 13 asked them if they could sign for me because I want to 14 change the zone and I want to do this dance for the 15 youth . ,.nd I get the signatures to the lawyer. I don't 16 know if you put some with the papers, but I don 't think I 17 am going to have problems around . We ' ve been open with 18 the dance -- with the reception hall for almost a year . 19 And they got their own license to get the drinks . But I 20 pay for four securities . We never had to call the 21 police . They always come and check and see and 22 everything is fine. But we never had problems . 2:3 I think I 'm example of a lot of people for my 24 customers . I don ' t think I going to have problems . I 2 5 don ' t know if �u v �a y qu st is )ns ChaRae Kent , CCR, RPR Kent Reporting * ( 509) 627-2244 Page 10 MR . SAMUEL : Commissioners, any questions? There ' s a couple of -- there was a couple of concerns with regards to having the number of people that 4 you would have at a dance there and where they would 5 park . So what is your plan for where these people would 6 park that came to Vour facility? MS . HERNANDEZ : Well, I have a lot of parking around. Like I own the building across the street and we 9 have a lot of parking there and we have all of the street 10 by Columbia from across the dance hall to -- by 11 (inaudible) all the parking . 12 And I talked to my neigh]_Jor on corner of Columbia 13 and Lewis across from me and he said that we need 14 something, he can sign that we can use his parking, but I 15 don ' t think we need. We have a lot . 16 MR . SAMUEL : So it would just be your position that 17 you have enough parking? 18 MS . HERNANDEZ : Yes . Yes, because we just want to 19 use 8, 000 square feet of my building in the night for the 20 dances and not the whole building . 21 MR . SAMUEL : So how often do you think these dances 22 would happen? Would it be like once a week or once a month or how often would it be? 24 MS . HERNANDEZ : I would like to do it once a week. 25 MR . SAMUE ik� ,orl S turday o :Friday or Sunday? ChaRae Kent, CCR, RPR Kent Reporting * (509) 627-2244 Page 11 MS . HERNANDEZ : Saturday only. MR . SAMUEL : Saturday? MS . HERNANDEZ : Uh-huh . MR . SAM7EL : Do you have any kind of idea as at what time frame it would be? Would these dance` go from like 6 6 o ' clock to midnight or what would be the time? MS . HERNANDEZ : From 8 : 00 to 1 : 00 in the morning. $ MR . SAMUEL : 8 : 00 until 1 o ' clock in the morning . Last question and I ' ll let someone else ask a 10 question. Some of the staff had reported that there has 11 been some similar facilities that have dances in that 12 particular neighborhood that Have had a lot of trouble 13 with police calls . So what would make your facility 14 different such that we wouldn ' t -- you know, the City 15 ::ouldn ' t be getting calls from the police like other 16 dance facilities that are in this particular area have 17 been? 18 MS . HERNANDEZ : I think also they serve alcohol and 19 there ' s one place on the Cruise Avenue that they are 20 supposed to be for youth people but they serve drinks 21 next door. So people they can go and get a drink and 22 come back . So I always see problems there . So I don' t 2:j get -- I don 't really get interested to be involved in 24 those things . 25 MR . SAMUE_: y� u t in alcohol i the primary ChaRae Kent, CCR, RPR Dent Reporting * (509) 627-2244 Page 12 1 reason why there is so much trouble at other places? 2 MS . HERNANDEZ : Yes . 3 MR . SAMUEL : Other questions? Mr. Little? MR . LITTLE : So we could approve this without an 5 alcohol permit or the condition and that wouldn 't be a 6 problem with you? MS . HERNANDEZ : Not a problem. MR . LITTLE : And then also, talk about security again . For people entering as well, you know, they may 10 have more alcohol than they need or other substances, how 11 do you control that? 12 MS . HERNANDEZ : I was taking care of mv reception 13 hall and I have four people working for me, but I also 14 work inside the building, see if there' s no people -- 15 youth people drinking inside . If I see people, thc17 nc,�d 16 to go out and I go and take care of them. And we have 17 four people working right now for me and they can be 18 training to take out those . And you guys can tell us the 19 rules that you want . 20 MR . SAMUEL : Other questions or comments? 21 Right now do either you or Mr . Zi.ol_Jro know how many 22 -- specifically how many parking spaces you do have? I 2:3 mean, how many cars could park in the spaces you' ve got, 24 do you know? 25 MS . HERNAMZ': ,' b�l ' evK more -than 90 . ChaRae Kent , CCR, RPR Kent Reporting * (SCQ) 627-2244 Page 13 MR . SAMUEL : More than 80? MS . HERNANDEZ : Uh-huh . MR . SAMUEL : Okay . All right . Well, thank you very 4 much . 5 MS . AQUARIUS : Can I get your name and address for ( the record. MS . HERNANDEZ : Dalia Hernandez . Do you need my home address or business? a MS . AQUARIUS : Your home address . 10 MS . HERNANDEZ : 407 East 4th Avenue in Kennewick . 11 MS . AQUARIUS : Thank you. 12 MR . ZIOBRO : Again, John Ziobro on behalf of the 13 applicant . 14 I think you could quickly establish that she 15 embodies the spirit of the small business owner and 16 entrepreneur . By the time she came to me, she had done 17 numerous impressive and expensive things to make this 18 property work. And just in case you didn ' t get all of 19 that, she has spent $200, 000 making improvements to the 20 building . It includes putting in the fire wall , which 21 she believed would Help assist in this process . 22 She ' s paid for the water line to be reinstalled . 23 She ' s paid for electrical and she ' s made a large 24 investment and she did that as a first step to have a 25 reception busir.es: he appr ve I -- wh i has . ChaRae Kent , CCR, RPR Kent Reporting * ( 509) 627-2244 Page 14 And there have been no calls , police calls that I think you ' ll find in the record related to her business . So, a couple things that I wanted to touch on and then I ' ll make sure I answer all of your questions 5 because I think I have an answer for just about 6 everything . As a preliminary matter, when I was looking at this I looked at the comprehensive plan -- and actually I 9 talked to Mr . White and we ' ve worked together a long 10 period of time and I respect the staff report and his 11 opinion, but I do have some points I ' d like to make 12 because I think there' s a way to make this work . 13 But the first thing you ' ll notice is we ' re talking 14 about a fine line between C-1 and C-2 . We- ' re bordered on 15 two sides of the property by the very zoning designation 16 that we 'd like to have you approve. So when you ' re 17 talking about , are we a fish out of water, are we asking 18 you to stretch to make this approval, I think the first 19 answer is, no, we ' re not . 20 And then we looked at the compatible compatibility 21 with the vicinity -- and I think that also relates to the 22 staff report . But one of the things we would like to 23 point out is that the Golden Nugget is here right 24 (indicated) . And I want you to keep in mind when you 25 think about tha , loop he ' r p k�' n_ Before you deny ChaRae Kent, CCR, RPR Kent Reporting * (509) 627-2244 Page 15 1 our application based on parking, take a look at their' s . You have a reception hall here ( indicated) . And if staff is able to maybe play with their overhead projection, the Out-ITT-About nightclub is here (indicated) and I think they all present the same type of issue . 6 And the other thing I :mould ask the planning 7 Commission to keep in mind is there ' s a difference 8 between the exercise of zoning authority and site plan approval where you are going to address issues like 10 parking and lighting and security . So I think some 11 difference can be given to staff if they make it past the 12 first step and we get to the point ::here we ' re actually 13 talking about can you submit an application and get it 14 approved. 15 And when we ' re talking about the comp plan policies, 16 I focused on the policy that we ' re trying to stimulate 17 business development . And you Have a lady here who has 18 got a large building and she ' s trying to find ways to 19 stimulate business . And one of the things I think is 20 necessary so we have a fair and complete record she' s 21 talking about using 8, 000 square feet for the dance hall . 22 The parking calculation was based on 18, 000 square feet . 23 So I think it ' s safe to assume quickly we can get down to 24 the -- I think the staff report was 180 for 18, 000 . So 25 now we re down - ' u t at loan by more than half . ChaRae Kent, CCR, RPR Kent Reporting * (509) 627-2244 Page 1G 1 She has parking on site. She owns this building here (indicated) and she has this lot available (indicated) . 3 This lot might be available (indicated) . There ' s street 4 stalls here and this lot and this lot might be available 5 (indicated) . 6 And the reason I bring that up is I think ::Tat we could do is we could do a change of zone with the development agreement and one of the things you could > require in the development agreement is that she obtains 10 either parking easements or some kind of license or 11 authority to use the parking lots of these businesses 12 that have adjacent businesses that may not be open when 13 she' s open . So if she can demonstrate that she can 14 adequately handle parking, maybe what we need to do is go 15 back and see if these street parking and the parking 16 that she has available gets us close . And again, I think 17 that ' s a site plan permitting issue rather than a zoning 18 issue . 19 I talked about a development agreement and you 20 asked -- I think the fear of staff is she gets this 21 approved and a year later someone buys it or she says, 22 gee, we would make a lot of money if we have a nightclub. 23 ti�Tell , we can do something about that . We could enter 24 into a development agreement that says she will serve no 2 5 alcohol as part o �h r c pt on al ' . Afid that you ChaRae Kent , CCR, RPR Kent Reporting * (509) 627-2244 Page 17 I could condition any permitting based upon the covenant that she would sign and record on the property that she won ' t have alcohol as part of the dance club. Now she has a reception business and people do get banquet or 5 liquor licenses for their individualized events . She' s committed to Having a dance club that ' s not going to turn into or evolve into a nightclub where there ' s alcohol . And I think that dovetails right into y the staff report that we really are concerned about 10 general public disorder with this application . Again, it 11 you eliminate the alcohol component, if you do something 12 about parking, I don ' t think it ' s a fair comparison to 13 sav an under 21 dance club or an alcohol free dance club 14 presents the same evils as a night club. I think that ' s 15 the analogy that was made here . And I think that ' s an 16 unfair comparison . 17 I also would ask -- again, you ' re talking about a 18 small business owner and a dream. And before you 19 extinguish that dream, I would hold staff accountable for 20 some of the evidence that is in the record . you Have 21 calls for police service . Again, as a suggestion, that 22 because there ' s calls for service -- and I think this is all related to the Golden Nugget -- that because of their 24 experience, she ' s going to present the same perils . 25 Three of e:, - 't e fi st n i FTSID, which is ChaRae Kent , CCR, RPR Kent Reporting * (5C9) 627-2244 Page 18 1 a fail to stop and ID . That is an accident . That is not a night club-related incident . There ' s a A1ALMTSCH, which is malicious mischief or destruction of property and one of these related to an auto incident . And some are just 5 field contacts . So I 'm sitting here looking at it thinking, gee, you might deny this application because staff has put in front of you a list of calls for services that just have codes and don ' t tell what you happened. I think if 10 you ' re going to hold that against my client, the police 11 report should be entered into the record so you can 12 review them and find out is the night club the problem or 13 is there some other problem before you say, gee, we have 14 this evidence and now we ' re, going to hold it against. 15 Ms . Hernandez . I think that ' s a stretch . And I think if 16 you ' re at all persuaded b'v that evidence, I would ask you 17 to send this back to staff and say if this is part of the 18 criteria that you ' re going to use to deny this permit, 19 then why don ' t you bring the police reports in so 20 everyone has the benefit of full disclosure in 21 understanding is the night club the problem and can we 22 then make an analogy that that problem is applicable to her situation . 24 I also think it ' s fair to take a look at 25 comprehensive a o].ic ' e a d c an v in circumstances ChaRae Kent , CCR, RPR Kent Reporting * ( 509) 627-2244 Page 19 1 or the community and then go back to the City staff report that says we ' re relying on input from the 1980s and we' re relying on zone changes or designations that are over 10 years old. Because one of the things you do 5 is you look at the community and look at the recent C developments in the community;- and you decide: Do those 1 justify a change of zone . 8 And again, I think part of the basis for denial is 9 that we have this evidence that some of it is 10 years 10 old and some of it -- I think I ' m being generous to say 11 as much as 20 years old, maybe 30 years old -- and again, 12 it could be a finding used against my client . And 1 ' d 13 like to think you would give her the benefit of having 14 recent, solid data before you determine that her 15 application is somehow related to the testimony from 16 those prior hearings . And again, if you ' re going to use 17 that data in those hearings, those are City records, 18 maybe they should be made a part of this as well so we 19 have the benefit of commenting on it and the Planning 20 Commission of hearing that evidence of saying were under 21 21 clubs and dance clubs part of the problem. 22 Let me make sure I ' ve covered everything . We think 23 she has 40 on-site parking spaces . We think there ' s 15 24 more across the street . Again, we think we can get 25 permission from o h r e ' g oc s . ChaRae Kent , CCR, RPR Kent Reporting * (509) 627-2244 Page 20 So what might make some sense here is to go back and refine this a little bit to say what is the minimum parking for 8, 000 square feet and can we identify 4 parking . And we ' d be glad to meet with staff and show 5 them our parking stalls; get an accurate count . But 6 again, I think that ' s -- when she applies to have a club, that ' s when you handle that issue . She ' s demonstrated that her receptions Have not created problems . I 'm not aware of any complaints -- 10 parking, noise, alcohol disturbances . So I think -you 11 have a responsible business owner . 12 So the last thing -- and I know Mr . White is 13 familiar with the development agreement process and I 14 think it has to be part of a Planning Commission hearing 15 in the zoning process . But we can put one together that 16 limited or prohibited alcohol related to her business . 17 identified how she would obtain parking . There ' s 18 probably other issues that staff might have that I think 19 we can work with to make happen . 20 I think I ' ve covered all your questions . But if I 21 didn ' t, remind me and I ' ll answer any other questions 22 staff might have . 23 MR . SAMUEL : Restate your argument again about C-2 24 versus the C-1 . Right now it ' s C-2 zoning . This 25 particular kin o husilnes i? no'`�ccept ble; it ' s not ChaRae Kent , CCR, RPR Kent Reporting * ( 509) 627-2244 Pack e 21 1 authorized. MR . ZIOBRO : It ' s not permitted. MR . SAMUEL : But as a C-1 -- if we rezone this specific piece as a C-1 , it is -- and in fact a lot of 5 other types of businesses are acceptable in a C-1 . MR . ZIOBRO : Correct . MR . SAMUEL : So restate to me your argument again about if something happens to her in the future and she 9 sells this property to somebody else, how are we going to 10 prevent -- and she' s a great owner -- how are we going to 11 prevent the next owner, who may not be so great , from 12 causing us a problem. 13 MR . Z103RO : I think the way to do it is a 14 development agreement . And it would -- we would probably 15 hear from staff if they ' re authorized specifically by the 16 municipal code, but they are by State statute . And 17 they ' re only good for a period of time, but they are also 18 renewable. 19 But you could have an agreement between 20 Ms . Hernandez and the City -- you could even record it -- 21 that said these are the conditions under which we will 22 operate a dance hall, in exchange for the benefit of the 23 favorable zoning designation that allows some uses that. 24 may not -- may otherwise not be desirable . She intends 25 to stay an ownet. And fTankl , i`` a risk we cannot ChaRae Kent , CCR, RPR Kent Reporting * ( 509) 627-2244 Pa'=7e 22 1 calculate to know whether she will be the owner in 5 2 years, 10 years or 20 . We would like to think she will be successful and she ' ll remain the owner for several 4 years and keep it and it will never be an issue . 5 But we think we can agree with staff on limitations C that she would 1 accept on the property . You can record 1 them on the property and any buyer who came along and 8 said I ' ll give you lot of money, they ' ll know that there ' s something on that property that advises them 10 that, despite the zoning, this business owner has agreed 11 to a business limitation . I think there ' s a way to do 12 that . And she would go to that length to try to make it 13 happen . 14 If there was a way to do a conditional use within 15 the existing zoning, we would -just do that . But I don ' t 16 think that ' s an option . So I think the only way to do ii_ 17 is to change the zoning designation . 18 MR . SAMUEL : Can you restate -- she mentioned it a 19 little bit . I would like you to restate what your 20 understanding is of the applicant ' s plan to manage public 21 safety. So if we ' re concerned about fights or 22 congregating down there, how could we be assured that in 23 fact this is not going to be a trouble situation like 24 some other, perhaps, dance locations are down there? 25 MR . ZIOBR4I., ' a g ea& question a.nd I don ' t think ChaRae Kent , CCR, RPR Kent Reporting * (509) 627-2244 Page 23 1 we have that level of detail . I think that would be, you know, a condition of her business license or permitting . All I can tell you is she has not had problems to-date . 4 She understands that -- especially when you are trying to 5 reach the under 21 crowd, or the crowd that is not 6 consuming alcohol , they go there to be safe . She' s not 7 going to be effective unless she ' s providing a safe environment . She plans on having security . There ' s a lighting component that comes with that . I can 't tell 10 you what the level of training she has for those that 11 provide security. There' s companies that do it . 12 Sometimes you can find off-duty police officers that do . 13 I don ' t know what she has . And frankly, I would be 14 making a best guess to tell you what the nuts and bolts 15 of her security would be to assure there weren ' t any 16 problems . 17 I think the biggest one is -- this is something she 18 may have said in her statement, but I ]snow she said it to 19 me . She has a restaurant across the street and could 20 serve alcohol . The fact that she doesn' t , should speak 21 volumes about her view on what that brings in terms of 22 environment and the problems that come with that . And 23 she wants to make sure that her businesses don ' t present 24 those issues . 1-5 MR . SAMUE k C ss i ,n s ny other ChaRae Kent , CCR, RPR Kent Reporting * (509) 627-2244 Pa'=je 24 1 questions of the applicant? Before you step down, City staff , any response to what the applicant has said with regards to some of -- addressing specifically some of the concerns of City 5 staff had mentioned in the staff report with regard to 6 the development plan? Do you have any comments on that? MR . WHITE : Perhaps just a comment that I ' m a little nervous about getting into the detailed, site-specific conditions of approval that may apply if the property had 10 any C-1 zoning designation right now. 11 I just want to make sure the commission understands 12 that the request is for a change of zone, not site 13 approval . And the history of the C-2 zone suggests that 14 the Cite has been down this road before . 15 I also didn ' t hear a concern -- a statement about 16 the affect of setting a precedent . So I know that the 17 site is on the corner of a central business district , but 18 sometimes that doesn ' t necessarily help in terms of zone 19 change, assuming that you want to change the zone in the 20 first place . And it may be a domino affect as you go up 21 Fifth Avenue . So again, just keep those things in mind, 22 please . 2:3 MR . SAMTTEL : All right . Absolutely . 24 MR . ZIOBRO : I don ' t disagree with Mr . White ' s 25 comments . And y ugges .ir-)n s a 1 ' the bit atypical . ChaRae Kent , CCR, RPR Kent Reporting * ( 509) 627-2244 Page 25 1 But the City of Richland has granted zoning changes along with the development agreement because of the exact concerns you have . We don ' t want to wait until we are at project approval before we start making sure we ' re protecting neighboring property owners . It is a mechanism that you can take advantage of, if that ' s an issue . And like I said, I ' m really here to try to find a way; to make this work for Ms . Hernandez because I think 9 she ' s the kind of person you want as a business owner in 10 the city . 11 MR . SAMUEL : Very good . 12 MR . ZIOBRO : So there ' s nothing that saes you can ' t 13 remand this back to staff . We ' ll -try to give them 14 whatever theV need to come back and make a more favorable 15 recommendation . 16 MR . SAMUEL : Okay . Any other comments of the 17 applicant? All right . Thank Vou very much . 18 MR . ZIOBRO : Thank you for your time tonight . 19 MR . SAMUEL : What we ' re going to do now is we want 20 to hear from the public on this, either for or against 21 this . So hat I ' m going to do is each individual who 22 comes up will have up to three minutes to speak . At the 23 end of that three minutes, I ' ll ask you to sit down . If 24 you are not finished with your testimony, then after 25 everyone else has h d an oppc tunity to speak, you ' ll ChaRae Kent , CCR, RPR Kent Reporting * ( 509) 627-2244 Page G6 1 have an opportunity to come back up again and speak for another three minutes . We' ll just keep doing that until you have had an opportunity to get off your chest what 4 you want to and make sure that we have the information 5 about how you feel about this . 6 So with that , any individuals who wish to speak either for or against this item please come forward now. Second call for any individuals who wish to speak 9 either for or against this . 10 Third and final call . Once again, this is the only 11 opportunity to get into the record what you might think 12 either being for or against this so that the City Council 13 can make a good decision on this . 14 Please corae forward and rotate dour name and address 15 for the record. 16 Did you swear in when I first. -- 17 MS . LOPEZ : I didn ' t . 18 MR . SAMUEL : You did not . 19 Do you swear to tell the truth in the testimony you 20 are about to give; if so, say I do . 21 MS . LOPEZ : I do. 22 MR . SAMUEL : Your name and address, please . 23 MS . LOPEZ : Josie Lopez . I live in Richland. 24 2114 Van Giesen Street . 25 I don 't kn6w 't e lo ,�ple, but I fihink it ' s a reall,„, ChaRae Kent , CCR, RPR Kent Reporting * (509) 627-2244 Pa'=J 2? 1 neat thing that they ' re trying to do for the City -- somewhere where the youth can gather and get together . Especially one of the things that really, you ]snow, something that really touched me is that a place where 5 they don ' t serve liquor where kids can get together for 6 something fun . I think -- I lived in the Seattle area before and I ' ve only been over here in Tri-Cities for about eight 9 years and I think it ' s important to Have a place where 10 kids can go . There ' s not a lot of places here in the 11 Tri-Cities . I know I have an 18 year old and a 14 year 12 old myself and other than the outdoors or, you know, we 13 take most of our kids back to Spokane or even to Seattle 14 to do stuff . And it ' s nice to have a place where kids 15 can gather . So that ' s about all I have to say . Thank 16 you . 17 MR . SAMT= : Thank you very much . Anyone else who 18 wishes to speak either for or against this? 19 Last and final call . 20 All right . City staff , do you have any additional 21 information you wish to add to this testimony, Mr . White? 22 MR . WHITE : No, but I just wanted to make sure that 23 the Commission is aware that if they would like, of 24 course, at your discretion, you can continue the hearing . 25 And if you ' re dt A' ' n o dire '_ staff to either meet ChaRae Kent , CCR, RPR Kent Reporting * (509) 627-2244 Page 2° 1 with the applicant or explore additional evidence to have 2 for the record, we can certainly accommodate that . MR . SAMUEL : Commissioners, what is your feeling on 4 this to provide that guidance to City staff? 5 MR . ANDERSON : I think you need to close the 6 hearing . MR . SAMUEL : So I will go ahead and close the input to the -- so the record is now closed as for as input . Commissioners, do you wish to speak about this? 10 Mr . Anderson? 11 MR . ANDERSON : I ' m torn on this . And the reason I 'm 12 torn is I spent 21 years on the Pasco Police Department 13 and I ' ve got a lot of blood and a lot of sweat and a lot 14 of t irne in this area . I saTn7 it 5n l-en it was bad . And I 'm 15 very apprehensive to open the door even slightly to start 16 what was down there before . I 've seen teenage clubs that 1. 7 didn ' t serve alcohol and we spent a great deal of time in 18 and around the area breaking up fights, breaking up 19 disagreements . Kids are kids . They are going to get �0 their chests pumped out and they are going to be bumping 21 and the next thing you ]-,now there ' s going to be fists 22 swinging . 23 I understand her desire and I appreciate her desire 2,1 not to have alcohol and to provide a place for the kids _ 25 But I just, don ' in t i i th right place given it ' s ChaRae Kent, CCR, RPR Kent Reporting * ( 509) 627-2244 1 proximity to alcohol, to bars, to the In-N-Out, to the other places down there that serve alcohol . I just think it ' s the wrong place . MR . SAMUEL : Other comments? Mr . Cruz? MR . CRUZ : You know, I think we have an obligation to try. I hear all the arguments that he makes . And I remember downtown Pasco when I got here in 1984 was a 8 very different place . But it ' s one of those things where 9 we don' t find and we encourage that kind of development . 10 I think that ' s an integral part of having a downtown 11 area . And we ' re talking about 8, 000 square feet, not 12 18 , 000 . I think that ' s a mitigating factor Here . 13 I think 1 o ' clock in the morning would probably go 14 past my comfort level for an under 21 club . But I would 15 be comfortable sending this back for a do-over and 16 letting the City staff and the applicant work something 17 out . 18 My biggest concern is like we ' ve kind of heard a 19 little bit is if we change the zoning, then it ' s kind of 20 no holds bar . So we would need some comfort that, you 21 know, we get through the special permit process that , you 22 know, it would come up for a renewal relatively quickly . It would be something I would like for maybe a one or a 24 two year initial period. You know, use time as a factor 25 as well as the ,-)t1 er fi;,ings . Then tlefe ' s some guarantee ChaRae Kent, CCR, RPR Kent Reporting * (509) 627-2244 Page 30 1 that, you know, we could reinstitute the original zone or have some control in the future . That ' s a weird state there . I 'm comfortable sending it back again to talk 4 about 18' 000 feet . 5 The other thing I ' d say is I was a lot more intrigued -- I was curious what this actually was when I 7 read the staff report at home. And I don ' t think the 8 staff report was as accurate as maybe it could have been c` about what the applicant ' s intended plans were. You 10 know, I read the Golden Nugget part, too, and I don ' t 11 think that ' s what we ' re talking about here . 12 MR . SAMUEL : Okay . Very good. 13 Mr . Little, did you have a comment? 14 MR . LITTLE : I think I go along with the 15 commissioner that we should try to make it to see ::hat it 16 would take to make it a workable deal and evaluate it on 17 that basis . 18 MR . SAMUEL : Mr . Hay, do you have a comment? 19 MR . HAY : Yes, I too am with Mr . Anderson . 20 (Inaudible) They were not good; they were bad. I would 21 be in favor of giving staff the option of a redo and see 22 what we could come up with and see if there ' s something 23 we can work out . 24 MR . SAMUEL : Mr . Anderson, did you have a comment? 25 MR . ANDER N • woul ji4st point out one thing that ChaRae Kent, CCR, RPR Kent Reporting * (509) 627-2244 Page 31 1 once the door is open, it ' s really hard to close. It costs a whole bunch of money to close it . Takes a whole bunch of time and we ' re right back where we started from. So just a caution . MR . SAMUEL : Any other comment? 6 So my comment on this is, you know, I ' ve been in the Tri-Cities since 1982 . Pasco is a very different place now than it was in ' 82 . And I think it took a lot of CC, hard work and some significant pain and anguish in 10 rezoning downtown Pasco to try to encourage the kind of 11 development that is going to create a downtown that we 12 can be proud of and that is safe and to discourage the 13 kind of development that led to a lot of the problems 14 that we had down here in the 1980s . And so I am very 15 hesitant to make a change that moves us back down a 16 direction that ' s a different direction than the direction 17 we 've been going . I think we' ve been going a really good 18 direction. 19 I ' m very -- I really like this applicant and the 20 idea a lot . I ' m really more concerned about the next 21 person that ' s going to be using that property . And so 22 there ' s a specific reason why our City Council for the last 20 years created that zoning area and that 24 particular area, protected it , and restricted what could 2 5 be down there r v y s. ec ' f i c r aL' i. , for a very ChaRae Kent , CCR, RPR Kent Reporting * (509) 627-2244 Page 32 1 specific amount of history that went down on there . 2 And so I would be very reluctant unless there was a lot of assurance from the City staff and some type of an 4 agreement that could be put together that would really 5 make it clear of what could and could not be done down there . And that if this applicant were to leave or to 7 sell this property, that that -- that that kind of 8 permission wouldn 't go on to the next owner of this 9 property . And I think that ' s a very difficult thing to 10 do . I don 't even know if it ' s legal to do that. . 11 And so I guess my vote would be to have City staff 12 go back and look at this again and determine -- and to 13 come back to us with some additional information; perhaps 14 look at the staff report and the findings of fact; make 15 sure that they line up with the testimony that we 16 received today and make sure that that is correct. . And 17 then also I think I ' d like to see the City staff work 18 with this applicant and determine what -- what are the 19 possibilities and come back to us and present those 20 possibilities to us and see if, in deed, there could be 21 enough assurance to convince the majority of the Planning 22 Commission . 23 My basic feeling is that could be very difficult to 24 do . But I would be -- since there appears to be a 25 majority of commiss:,_on,=%r- ha ar or that, I think ChaRae Kent , CCR, RPR Kent Reporting * (509) 627-2244 Pa'=7e 33 that ' s the guidance to City staff . Staff, do you have questions about that? MR . WHITE : No, I think we ' re okay . MR . SAMUEL : Okay . Very good. So I just want to 5 say -- Mr . Little, did you have a comment? 6 MR . LITTLE : We will need a motion to do that . MR . SAMTJEL : Just real quick before we make that motion . I just wanted to say I thought that this 9 applicant did a great jol--, of putting together a story, a 10 plan, that on the face of it could be viable . And this 11 is a difficult part of town, but this is the kind of 12 facility I think that we need. I struggle maybe that the 13 location is right . But this is the kind of thing that we 14 need in our cornmunity . And so I appreciate that thou(:Tht 15 a lot . And so Mr . Little -- 16 MR . LITTLE : I would make a motion that we continue 17 the hearing for another month . 18 MR . HAY : Seconded. 19 MR . SAMUEL : It ' s been moved bpi Mr . Little . 20 Seconded by Mr . Hay . All those in favor say aye . 21 COMMISSIONERS ( IN UNISON) : Aye . 22 MR . SAMTJEL : All those opposed? 23 MR . ANDERSON : Aye . 24 MR . SAMUEL : So let the record show; that 25 Mr . Anderson wa6 Grp osed Al th rc s' -)f the ChaRae Kent , CCR, RPR Kent Reporting * ( 509) 627-2244 Page 34 1 commissioners have requested and so we shall continue 2 this meeting at the next month ' s meeting . Thank you very much . I appreciate it . 4 ( ITEM CONCLUDED . ) r u 10 A 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ChaRae Kent , CCR, RPR Kent- Reporting * ( 509) 627-2244 Page 35 C E R T I F I C A T E 2 STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ss . COUNTY OF BENTON ) This is to certify that I, ChaRae Kent, Certified 5 Court Reporter and Notary Public in and for the State of 6 Washington, residing at Richland, reported the within and 7 foregoing deposition; said deposition being taken before me as a Notary Public on the date herein set forth; that 9 the witness was first b_y me duly sworn; that said 10 examination was taken by me in shorthand and thereafter 11 transcribed, and that same is a full, true, and correct 12 record of the testimony of said witness, including all 13 questions, answers and objections, if any, of counsel . 14 I further certify that I am not a relative or 15 employee or attorney or counsel of any the parties, nor 16 am I financially interested in the outcome of the cause . 17 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and 18 affixed my official seal this day of , 19 2010 . 20 21 CHARAE KENT, RPR, CCR 22 CCR NO . 2408 Notary Public in and for the State 23 of Washington, residing at Richland 24 25 M. 7 commission expires u rn. 17 , 2012 ChaRae Kent , CCR, RPR Kent Reporting * (509) 627-2244 Excerpted Transcript of the Planning Commission Meeting Date : April 15, 2010 In Re- Rezone C-2 to C-1 (John Ziobro) 117 S. 5th Avenue Master File No. Z 10-001 ChaRae Kent, OCR, RPR Kent Reporting Phone: 509-027-2244 Fax: 509-027-2299 Kent Repo rting.com STATE OF WASHINGTON CITY OF PASCO In re : Rezone C-2 to C-1 ) Master File (John Ziobro) ) No . Z 10-001 117 S . 5th Avenue ) PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TIME : 7 : 00 p .m. , Thursday, April 15, 2010 TAKEN AT : City Hall Pasco, Washington REPORTED BY: ChaRae Kent , CCR, RPR License No. 2408 Paqe 2 1 APPEARANCES FOR PLANNING COMMISSION: 2 MR. TODD SAMUEL - CHAIRMIT'ITT 3 MR. ANDY ANDERSON MR. JAMES L . HAY 4 MR. DAVID O . LITTLE MR. JOE CRUZ 5 MS . JANA KEMPF MR. CARLOS PEREZ FOR THE CITY OF PASCO : MR. DAVID MCDON711LD MR. RICK WHITE MR. SHANE O 'NEILL MS . SOPHIA AQUARIUS 10 11. 12 1:3 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ChaRae Kent, CCR, RPR Kent Reporting * (509) 627-2244 Page 3 BE IT REMEMBERED that on Thursday, April 15, 2010, at 1 : 00 p .m. , at Pasco City Hall , Pasco, Washington, the Planning Commission Meeting was taken before ChaRae Kent, 4 Certified Court Reporter and Registered Professional Reporter . The following proceedings took place : 6 P R O C E E D I ITT ' S MR . SAMUEL : Hello . Good evening . My name is Todd 10 Samuel and I ' d like to welcome you to the City of Paco ' 11 Planning Commission meeting . 12 The purpose of the Planning Commission is to conduct 13 workshop meetings and public hearings on land use, 14 development requests and other selected City of Pasco 15 Planning Activities . To perform our duty, the Planning 16 Commission obtains public testimony, gathers and analyzes 17 information, performs detailed fact finding, and based on 18 information we gather we make recommendation to the Pasco 19 City Council based on what we think would be in the best 20 interest of the City . The City Council taker the record 21 of facts and findings that we create, together with your 22 recommendation and makes the final decision on all 23 matters . 24 So, to begin tonight ' s meeting I ' d like ask the 25 meeting secretary to call the role . ChaRae Kent , CCR, RPR Kent Reporting * ( 509) 627-2244 Page 4 1 MS . AQUARIUS : Mr . Todd Samuel? 2 MR . SAMUEL : Present_ . ? MS . AQUARIUS : Mr . James Hay? 4 MR . HAY : Here . 5 MS . AQUARIUS : Mr . Andy Anderson? 6 MR . ANDERSON : Here . l MS . AQUARIUS : Mr . Davin Little'? 8 MR . LITTLE : Here . 9 MS . AQUARIUS : Mr . Joe Cruz? 10 N_R . CRUZ : Here . 1 MS . AQUARIUS : Ms . Jana Kempf? 2 ID'S . KEMPF : Here . 13 MS . AQUARIUS : Mr . Carlos Perez? 14 MR . PEREZ : Here . 15 MS . AQUARIUS : We have a quorum. 16 MR . SAMUEL: Thank you very much . 17 I would like to remind the audience that tonight ' s 18 proceedings are being broadcast live on PSG Channel 12 on 19 cable and also will be rebroadcast several times . And 20 because of that, I would like you to please check your 21 cell phone and make sure it ' s in the quiet position and 22 doesn ' t end up interrupting our meetings . 23 Also, this meeting tonight is recorded and you can 24 watch it on the City of Pasco ' s website, which is 25 Pasco-WA . gov . ChaRae Kent , CCR, RPR Kent Reportinq 1 ( 509) 627-2244 Page 5 1 I ' ll also remind you that there are copies of the meeting agenda on the back table . So if you would like 3 to follow along with what we ' re doing tonight, you can 4 pick up an agenda back there . For those present this evening, when you give -- when you are given the opportunity to address the Commission, please come up to this podium, state your name and address for our records . 9 Before we begin tonight ' s meeting, also I need to 10 remind the audience and the Planning Commission that the 11 Washington state law requires that public meetings and 1 % hearings like the one being held this evening not only be 13 fair, but appear to be fair . 14 Washington state law prohibits members of the 15 Planning Commission from communicating with members of 16 the public concerning the subject of a public hearing 17 outside of the public hearing meeting . In addition, 18 G�jashington state law prohibits Planning Commission 19 members from participating in a hearing or decision in 20 which the member may have a direct interest or may either 21 be benefitted or harmed by a Planning Commission 22 decision . 23 An objection to any Planning Commission member 24 hearing any matter on tonight ' s agenda needs to be aired 25 at this time or it will be waived. So, first let me ask ChaRae Kent , CCR, RPR Kent Reporting * ( 509) 621-2244 Page 6 the Planning Commission members : Does anyone have a declaration this evening? So, let the record show that none of the Planning 4 Commission members indicated that they had a conflict ,- 5 Secondly, is there anyone in the audience this 6 evening who would object to any of the Planning 7 Commissioners hearing any of the matters on the agenda 8 this evening? So, let the record show that no one in the audience 10 indicated any objection . 11 Washington state law requires items given in 12 meetings like this evening ' s Planning Commission meeting 13 be given under an oath or an affirmation of truth . 14 Therefore, before we go any further, I would like to ask 15 that all individuals who elan to speak at this evening ' s 16 meeting stand and be sworn in . 17 So, anyone who wishes to give testimony tonight, do 18 you swear to tell the truth in the testimony you are 19 about to give tonight; if so, say I do . 20 (AUDIENCE IN UNISON) : I do . 21 MR . SAMUEL : Thank you very much . 22 Ladies and gentlemen, we as a Planning Commission, 23 need and value your input . It helps us to understand the 24 issues more clearly and make better recommendations to 25 the City Council . Furthermore, in many cases your input ChaRae Kent , CCR, RPR Kent Reporting * ( 509) 627-2244 Page 7 1 here at this Planning Commission meeting is your only opportunity to get your facts and opinions placed into the official record that the City Council will use to make its decision . I encourage you to please take full 5 advantage of this opportunity tonight . So, looking at the agenda, the next item is approval of the meeting minutes from our March 18, 2010 meeting. Meeting minutes were mailed out to the commissioners 9 ahead of time . I trust you had an opportunity to take a 10 look at them . 11 I would entertain a motion to approve L e meeting 12 minutes . Mr . Hav? 13 MR . HAY : I ' d like to make a motion that we approve 14 the minutes as mailed. 15 MR . ANDERSON : Second. 16 MR . SAMUEL : It. ' s been moved by Mr . Hay . Seconded 17 by Mr . Anderson . 18 All those in favor say ave . 19 COMMISSI-0N MEMBERS IN UNISON: Ave . 20 MR . SAMUEL : Any opposed? 21 Let the record show that the meeting minutes were 22 unanimously approved. 23 Next item on the agenda is item 4, old business . We 24 have a number of items that Have previously come before 25 the Planning Commission and they ' re here before us on the ChaRae Kent, CCR, RPR Kent Reporting * (509) 627-2244 Page P 1 agenda tonight for us to obtain any further clarification from City staff for us to discuss these items amongst ourselves and to come to a conclusion on what our recommendation to the City Council will be . 5 So, first item is item 4A, which is a request for a rezone . This is a rezone from a C-2 to a C-1 district . The location is 117 South Fifth Avenue . This is master file number Z-10-001 . And we ' ll start our discussion g with any further clarifying comments from the City staff 10 or Director of Economic Development Mr . White . 11 MR . WHITE : Thank you, Mr . Chairman . 12 This a carry-over item from last month ' s meeting 13 and there is additional information that. will be 14 presented tonight that was not available last month . So 15 with your indulgence, Mr . Chairman, I would request that 16 the public hearing be reopened to introduce the new 17 information contained in the staff report . 18 MR . SAMUEL : Very good . Before we reopen the public 19 hearing, just can you summarize for us some of the new 20 information that has been received. 21 MR . WHITE : Yes, I can . As the commission knows, 22 this is a rezone from C-2 to C-1 . It ' s located in the northeast corner of Fifth Avenue and Columbia Street . 24 It ' s a proposal to essentially allow a dance hall as a 25 permitted use on the property indicated on the overhead. ChaRae Kent , CCR, RPR Kent. Reporting * ( 509) 627-2244 Page 9 As the commission also knows, the C-2 zoning regulations were developed in the late 1980s to basically combat an adverse affect that certain business activities were having in the downtown area . 5 Excuse me, Mr . Chairman, before I forget, the 6 Planning Commission received a staff report on the bench this evening and in it on page 4 there were two changes . There was a mistake in reference to the C-2 zoning 9 regulations being adopted in 10-99 . That ' s not in fact 10 true . It is in the late 1960s . And then on the 11 conclusions, page 7 -- excuse me, the motions, there are 12 two motions located at the middle of the page . The :Nord 13 "and" and the word "conclusions" were added to both of 14 those motions . So those are the onlV two chances . 15 Getting back to the background for this item and 16 then the new information . At the last Planning 17 Commission meeting the commission recalls that there was 18 discussion about a concomitant zoning agreement between 19 the applicant and the City to basically establish a list 20 of limiting factors or conditions that would be 21 applicable to the rezone if adopted. The applicant ' s 22 attorney has submitted a proposed concomitant agreement. 23 and you have that in your packet . It ' s also identified 24 on page 3 of the staff report showing the two conditions 25 that were received from the applicant ' s attorney . ChaRae Kent , CCR, RPR Kent Reporting * ( 509) 627-2244 Page 10 The staff position in this matter is that even though the conditions have been developed as indicated, the final analysis still hasn ' t changed: The proposed use of a dance hall that was basically considered one of 5 the activities that proved to be adverse to other 6 business activities located in the downtown area . So, the staff analysis of the review criteria required by Pasco Municipal Code has essentially remained identical to what was given to the commission last month . 10 And the staff factual findings were slightly changed to 11 clearly indicate which uses were permitted presently in 12 the C-2 zone and which uses are presently prohibited, and 13 then a rather ambiguous reference to a nearby nightclub 14 and the activity associated with that was removed from 15 the findings . Essentially, though, the conclusions 16 remain unchanged and the staff recommendation remains 17 unchanged. 18 MR . SAMUEL : Commissioners, any comments or 19 questions of Mr . G�Jhite before we Bear or give the 20 applicant an opportunity for the applicant to provide us 21 with testimony? 22 Okay . Does the applicant wish to speak to us about 23 this matter before we open the public hearing? 24 Because we received additional information this 25 evening, we are going to open this back up to hear from ChaRae Kent , CCR, RPR Kent Reporting * ( 509) 627-2244 Page 11 1 the public again . So, I will gavel open a public hearing 2 and we will accept input from the public . But before we do that , I would be glad to hear from the applicant . 5 MR . ZIOBRO : Thank you, Mr . Chairman . John Ziobro, C, 1333 Columbia Park Trail , Richland, Washington, Suite 110 . We would also like to introduce evidence . So if you 9 are waiting to hear from us , I 'm -just trying to make you 10 understand mechanically I can do that now or -- 11 MR . SAMUEL : Go ahead. 12 MR . ZIOBRO : -- do vou want to Have the hearing? 13 MR . SAMUEL : No . Go ahead now. 1 4 MR . ZIOBRO : Just a couple corrunents on the staf f 15 report and some follow-up comments from those that I made 16 to the commission back in March . 7. 7 WG, represented that the square footage is 8, 00o 18 square feet . I think we also made an invitation to staff 19 to come inspect and/or verify because it also relates to 20 parking . And I don ' t believe the staff report reflects 21 one way or another . In fact, my version of the staff 22 report still represents this is an 18 , 000 square foot 23 facility . So we ' d like the record to make clear, we ' re 24 representing it ' s 8, 000 square feet and we trunk parking 25 should be evaluated based on an 6, 000 square foot. ChaRae Kent , CCR, RPR Kent Reporting * ( 509) 627-2244 Page 12 1 building . MR . SAMUEL : Let me just be clear about something because there was confusion about that in my mind. And 7 since we are now in the public hearing again, we can ask 5 questions and gain additional information . L So my question is : Is the facility 18, 000 square feet but the portion of the facility that the dance hall is part of is 8, 000 square feet; is that correct? MR . ZIOBRO : Correct . 10 MR . SAMUEL : So the facility itself, though, the 11 location is an 18, 000 square foot facility? 12 MR . ZIOBRO : Correct . 13 MR . SAMUEL : Of which 6, 000 of it would be used for 14 a dance hall? 15 MR . ZIOBRO : Correct . 16 MR . SAMUEL : Okay . 17 MR . ZIOBRO : My client Dalia Hernandez is here . She 18 has secured, at least to-date, a verbal approval from an 19 adjacent business owner to use his parking space during 20 business hours . I think if we proceed forward we can 21 provide a written agreement that would demonstrate she' s 22 making steps and she hasn 't reached the threshold for 23 minimum parking, that that can be obtained . 24 I ' m still a little troubled about the fact that the 25 staff has made reference to events from the ' 80s and ChaRae Kent, CCR, RPR Kent Reporting * (509) 627-2244 Page 13 1 police reports that we ask be made part of the record so we would at least have the ability to evaluate how much weight to give these reports and they weren ' t attached. And, you know, I think you certainly have the discretion to decide how much weight to give any evidence that ' s 6 before you . But, you know, we ' re being asked to defend a 7 position without the benefit of any specific facts or old 8 staff reports or police reports . And so I would 9 encourage the board to give them no weight because it ' . 10 simply someone' s recitation of events from several years 11 ago and we have no ability to refute any of the 12 information contained within it . 13 The other thing I would like to do is -- I 'm not 14 making any representation as to the legal Tn7eight of the 15 information I 'm going to provide, but I think they ' re 16 symbolic of what you have here . You have an applicant. in 17 a community that supports the application and the only 18 resistance we ' re meeting is at the staff level . 19 So what I would like to do is hand up -- I have five 20 letters, or more, in support . One is from a member of 21 Ms . Hernandez ' church. It is more to her character. 22 I have a letter from Sterling Bank related to -- I 23 think it relates somewhat to her credit worthiness, but 24 also as to her standing as a business client for 25 Sterling . I Have two letters from Sterling. One from a ChaRae Kent , CCR, RPR Kent Reporting * (509) 627-2244 Pdg e 14 1 distant individual in support . Another letter from Banner Bank. And another letter from a commercial loan officer from SK Real Estate . And other character letters . The last thing -- and I brought three copies of 6 these . She has a petition of nearby business owners . 1 It ' s one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine 8 pages of nearby business owners that are in support of her application . And again, I leave it to the board ho:: 10 much weight to give them. But I think one thing that can 11 be said about this application is in terms of the 12 community, there' s no opposition to the application . 13 So if I could hand these to the clerk . 14 MR . SAMUEL : Yes, please. 15 MR . ZIOBRO : The only other thing I would like to 16 add is we did provide a copy of the development agreement. 17 or concomitant agreement and we provided a letter to 18 staff . And we ' ve invited the opportunity to improve it 19 or craft it in a way that addresses the staff needs . 20 It sounds like at the end of the day the staff does 21 not support a dance hall period. We think there' s an 22 ability to do this . And we also think that -- and maybe 23 staff can comment on it -- to the business license 24 procedure. You can revoke a business license for certain 25 violations . Maybe what we can do is have some conditions ChaRae Kent , CCR, RPR Kent Reporting * (509) 627-2244 Page 15 1 built into the business license or recommendation to do 2 that . But there seems to be a bit of an effort here to not 4 let my client get out of the gates and see if she can 5 make this work, based upon a history that doesn ' t pertain 6 to her property or to her use or to this decade . And I trunk it would be disappointing to not give her the 8 opportunity to prove that she can make this work . She ' s 9 done an awful lot to try to make it Happen . And we -Mould 10 ask that you provide a favorable recommendation tonight . 1 My client is going to address the commission . 12 If you have any questions , I might come back up and 13 try to assist her . But those are all comments I have 14 unless the commission has some specific questions . 15 MR . SAMUEL : Any questions for Mr . Ziobro? 6 All right . Thank you very much . 17 MR . ZIOBRO : Thank you . 18 MR . SAMUEL : Ms . Hernandez , you wish to speak to us 19 about this? 20 State your name and address for the record . 21 MS . HERNANDEZ : Dalia Hernandez, 407 E . 4th Avenue 22 in Pasco . 23 And this is Florentino Cortez, my neighbor , who can 21 let me use the parking in the evening . And I really feel 25 good with people who call me and they gave me their ChaRae Kent , CCR, RPR Kent Reporting * (509) 527-2244 Page 1G 1 support after the newspaper put an ad . And I am sure that a lot of people there agree . And I have support from the people from the radios . And I know the only people to come here that come with me . . . (Inaudible) . I 5 believe I am going to be doing good for the business and G I forgot to pay the people the money. I want to show you 7 the money that we make the whole year cashing checks . And like I understand that you guys want to bring people to the building and make good business and I can show you 10 that I am doing good with my store. But this is like -- 11 I don ' t know how to say -- dream of me and my kids to get. 12 something fun and nice here . 13 Do you want to ask them for questions? They are 14 here to support it . 15 MR . SAMUEL : Before you step away, Commissioners, 16 any questions of the applicant? 17 MR . SAMUEL : All right . Thank you. Thank you very 18 much . 19 MR . SAMUEL : All right . So what we ' re going to do 20 is open this up to hear from the public now. So, anyone 21 who wishes to provide us with any input either for or 22 against this item, please come forward and let us know 23 what you think about this . 24 MS . DELIA TABON: My name is Delia Tabon . My 25 address is 419 East Bruneau Place, Kennewick, Washington . ChaRae Kent , CCR, RPR Kent Reporting * (509) 627-2244 Page 17 I just recently graduated from Heritage University as a teacher and I work a lot with low income families and I know the Hispanic community has a lot of troubles 4 and maybe that ' s based on what they see in downtown Pasco 5 area . And one of the greatest things for our family 6 :mould be to open up somewhere where kids can go and have fun -- not just a dance club, but open after school like dance activities where kids can practice dance from our 9 culture, which isn ' t in our community right now . Like 10 they do in New York where they have free activities where 11 kids can be off the street and doing something useful for 12 the community. 13 So, it is not just -- and we support no drinking. 14 And so something where we can bring our culture . 15 Currently we Have -- there ' s a lots of clubs where our 16 culture -- people go down because there ' s -- it ' s only 17 alcohol . And we want somewhere where we can go and 18 support , remember our culture and show who we are but 19 without supporting the alcohol . Thank you . 20 MR . SAMUEL : Thank you very much . Appreciate that. . 21 Other individuals who wish to speak either for or 22 against this item? 23 MS . ELIZABETH TABON: Elizabeth Tabon, 1316 1,11est 24 Yakima Street in Pasco . 25 I support this decision . I am a WST7 student and I ChaRae Kent , CCR, RPR Kent Reporting * (509) 627-2244 Page 18 1 know the affect of wanting to have fun with no alcohol . And we worked really, really hard in school and we just :rant that time, you know, to have our own fun and not being able to dance along somebody that ' s currently over 5 the legal limit . So I think it ' s a great opportunity. 6 You know, I know maybe some of you guys have kids of 7 your own age 21 , 22, or maybe in high school, that want 8 to have a great place to dance, have fun and be able to C' feel safe in our community . We have such a great 10 opportunity . I know this business project is going to be 11 a great success not only for you guys where you guys are 12 going to have economical gain with our taxes . But also 13 you guys are going have a great start because our youth 14 out there is going to see how objectively you guys are 15 taking this decision to help us out and how you guys are 16 actually seeing our side for this . 17 And if you are ever worried about what could 18 potentially happen if something were to happen to my mom, 19 you can guarantee or be sure that we are going to take 20 over. I am a criminal justice major but I am going to 21 minor in business . So I will be there. So definitely 22 you can count on that . 2:3 Any questions? 24 MR . SAMUEL : No . Thank you very much . I appreciate 25 that . ChaRae Kent , CCR, RPR Kent Reporting * (509) 627-2244 Page 19 1 Other individuals who wish to speak either for our 2 or against this item? 3 MS . CASTRO : My name is Ramona Castro . I live at 4 5120 Robert Mayne Drive . And I swear to tell the truth . 5 MR . SAMUEL : Thank you very much . Appreciate that . 6 MS . CASTRO : Integrity . It seems like before I was 7 getting ready to come over here this afternoon . . . 8 Integrity, the word integrity is highly in my brain 9 tonight . And I had the opportunity not only to know the 10 young lady that owns the businesses . But I am so proud, 11 like I ' ve said before, to see the lineage that I ' ve had 12 contact with in my business or in my profession . And now 13 the girls are adding to the bouquet of integrity, not 14 only integrity but pride . Pride of owning something . 15 Ownership, owning and being part of the growth of Pasco . 16 I think that ' s what we ' re all about . 17 As commissioners give their time and come to this 18 hour, you know, to hear all of the businesses . It ' s 19 because business is what we ' re about now in this time, in 20 our time of lack, or lack of jobs, and so on and so 21 forth . I have had the opportunity to be in her business . 22 And for the time that I was there, children are happy, 23 the colors are happy around the business . And if 24 children, little two year old, three year olds are happy, 25 and eating not only candy but eating good food, wherever ChaRae Kent , CCR, RPR Kent Reporting * ( 509) 627-2244 Page 20 1 they are sitting . 2 And I see the people coming in the business of the z, exchange of changing or cashing checks, or whatever, the 4 integrity is there, the pride and the responsibility . I 5 think those three things are very obvious in Daisy . And 6 I call her Daisy because that ' s how I ' ve known her . And I 'm so proud of you, Daisy, and your children . My goodness sakes . This is -- being a citizen of the 9 Tri-Cities, you guys you brought in %our business . And 10 in your jobs that you have had as policeman -- because I 11 know some of you have been policeman, I know, I ' ve been 12 here for a long time -- and probably investigators and so 13 you see this is growth in the small business is what 14 we ' re going to be making . 15 I am a business woman . Nobody Here knows that I 16 have been in business . But I ' ve had integrity with the 17 IRS . I ' ve had integrity in my books . And this is what. 18 you are going two see here . I 'm supporting Here in her 19 endeavors because I do not believe in alcohol . And I 20 know that she will stand for it . And if she has to stop 21 it , she ' ll stop it because she has integrity . Thank you . 22 MR . SAMUEL : Any other individuals who wish to speak 23 either for or against this item? 24 MR . ZIOBRO : Hi, John Ziobro again . 25 I just wanted to point out one item. Do you mind if ChaRae Kent , CCR, RPR Kent Reporting * ( 509) 627-2244 Pac)e 21 I approach the screen? MR . SAMUEL : Nobody can see if you approach the scene . You ' ll have to try to figure out how to use the 4 cursor . There you go . 5 MR . ZIOBRO : Is there a wav to switch over? L MR . SAMUEL : If Denise is here there is . I don ' t think Denise is here tonight . MR . ZIOBRO : If I remember right from last time . There you go . 10 The neighboring property owner who was introduced, 11 this is his lot here ( indicated) . He represented to me 12 he thinks he has about 50 parking spaces . But again, I 13 think I would defer to, you know, the planning staff ' s 14 more technical analysis as to how many parking spaces 15 that would be . But again, ::Mien you are talking about an 16 8, 000 square foot building, the parking she has in the 17 nearby parking, I just think the record should be clear 18 we think as many as 50 additional parking spaces that we 19 could provide an agreement that I think would memorialize 0 that. . 21 MR . SAMUEL : Go ahead and step back . Switch it back 22 to the way you had it before . 23 Other individuals who wish to speak either for or 24 against this item? 25 Second call for any additional input . ChaRae Kent , CCR, RPR Kent Reporting * ( 509) 627-2244 F'a'=J 222 Third and final call . All right . City staff , you ' ve Beard from the applicant; you ' ve heard from the community . Specifically 4 I do recall from our last meeting that the applicant. that. 5 brought up the request to see some of the reports L regarding police activity or crime activity in that area . Do you have any comment with regard to that? From your standpoint is that a reasonable request or it ' s not a g reasonable request? 10 MR . WHITE : My recollection was it pertained to one 11 particular address . Those were available for the 12 applicant to review. They :%?eren ' t included in the staff 13 report in this month ' s version of the staff report., nor 14 in the suggested and recommended findings . 15 MR . SAMUEL : Okay . So City% staff ' s response would 16 be that if the applicant wanted to get the records on 17 this or wanted it to be part of the record, the applicant 18 should have made the effort to obtain the records 19 themselves to enter into the record? 20 [IR . WHITE : Udell , certainly . The police records are 21 fairly limited. They indicate what the codes were . 22 Mal M, I believe, for example, meant malicious mischief 23 and that is as far as they go . So there ' s no detail in 24 those . They ' re available . I didn ' t believe it was 25 pertinent to the discussion as suggested in fact by the ChaRae Kent , CCR, RPR Kent Reporting * ( 509) 627-2244 Pa'=J 223 applicant last month . MR . SAMUEL : Okay . Very good. Commissioners, any comments or questions about this 4 particular item? Mr . Little? 5 MR . LITTLE : Yes, I have. As far as the central business overlay, how is the recent activities of the partnership or involvement with the grant through CBC and the City and how does that -- I guess what are their intentions or how have they improved downtown? 10 MR . WHITE : Commissioner Little, they ' re focused on 11 providing personalized business, education, and support 12 to existing businesses . And then they ' re also charged 13 with helping the Pasco Downtown Development Association ' s 14 work through the block grant process for facade 15 improvements . So they are basically not related to this 16 issue at all . 17 MR . SAMUEL : Any other questions before I close this 18 and we begin our deliberations? 19 All right . I ' m going to go ahead and close the 20 public hearing. 21 Commissioners, what is your thoughts on this 22 particular item before we decide to make a decision on this? Do you have some thoughts or opinions on this? 24 Mr . Cruz? 25 MR . CRUZ : I ' ll throw the same rock I threw last ChaRae Kent , CCR, RPR Kent Reporting * (509) 627-2244 Pa'=J 24 1 time . You know, again , I appreciate the staff ' s position 2 about trying to preserve the positive change we 've seen 3 in Pasco . The continued reference to a dance hall, much like the kind that Commissioner Anderson talked about in the past, like we ' ve seen in some of the current businesses, I just don ' t think that ' s warranted Here . The staff report -- like I said last time -- was to take a different -- take maybe a broader view of what the 9 applicant ' s intended use was to try to work out a 10 compromise so we can actually rule . This is a 11 regurgitation of last time with a little bit. of 12 refinement . 13 So, as far as I 'm concerned, I would just as soon 14 send it back because I don ' t think we ' ve done the 15 applicant Justice . 16 MR . SAMUEL : Other comments? Mr . Anderson? 17 MR . ANDERSON : Surprise . My thoughts on this are 18 that when the applicant ]--,ought this piece of property she 19 knew that was in a C-2 zoning district -- or I would Hope 20 that it was told to her during the process of buying the 21 building . There was a specific reason for developing 22 this area into a C-2 district. -- and that hasn ' t changed 23 -- it is to try to develop businesses in this area . It ' s 24 part of the central business district , which is 25 restrictive in covenants . And hopefully it was disclosed ChaRae Kent , CCR, RPR Kent. Reporting * ( 509) 627-2244 Pack e 25 1 to the applicant when she bought the building . Yeah, I applaud her for her ambitions and what she ' s done down there . Because I think she does have a viable 4 business down there . But expanding this piece of 5 property and opening it up as a dance hall and changing 6 the zoning is not consistent with that overlay, to the 7 central business overlay . And therefore, it ' s my opinion 8 and my standing that this request for a zoning change is 9 without any substance and should 1 be denied . 10 MR . SAMUEL : Other commissioner ' s comments either 11 for or against this item? 12 These comments are going to help City Council make a 13 good decision on what to do here . I know a lot of times, 14 if we are denying something, they specificallv want to 15 try to understand what our thinking is on this . So any 16 additional information that we can input into the record 17 will help the City Council . Mr . Hay? 18 MR . HAY : I pretty much echo Commissioner Anderson ' s 19 comments . The only way I could support anything like 20 this Sn7ould be with some kind of a time limit, perhaps six 21 months or a year . That ' s about the only way I could see 22 something like this that I would agree with . 23 MR . SAMUEL : Okay . Other comments? Mr . Cruz? 24 MR . CRUZ : Mr . Hay ' s comments is exactly the kind of 25 thing I 'm talking about here . We ' ve done shorter ChaRae Kent , CCR, RPR Kent Reporting * ( 509) 627-2244 Page G6 1 duration kind of permits or agreements in the past or reviews . You know, I ' m totally in support of something like that to protect us from some of the negative consequences . 5 But again, I don ' t think that the staff has done the 6 applicant justice here . And again, we ' ve heard a lot 7 about support . We' ve heard a willingness to work on some 8 revisions . You know, I look at the C-2 prohibited g businesses, and again, there ' s a pretty common theme 10 there . What we ' re talking about here isn ' t exactly like 11 a lot of those other things and I think we need to give 12 it some real consideration and this second rev doesn ' t do 13 it . 14 MR . SAM??EL : Oka-,,7 . Other comments? 15 Let me make a comment -- actually, I prepared a 16 comment about this, so I 'm just going to read it into the 17 record. It is my own feeling about this . So, first. let 18 me start by saying that I want to thank the applicant, 19 Ms . Hernandez, for her support for the business community 20 and certainly for thinking about the needs of our youth . 21 I further want to thank I1,1s . Hernandez for investment 22 in Pasco and for the operation of her multiple other 23 businesses in our community . Her desire and dedication 24 to building and growing business in Pasco is very much 25 appreciated. ChaRae Kent , CCR, RPR Kent Reporting * (509) 627-2244 Pack e 27 According to the records of the City of Pasco and the Planning Commission ' s records and City Council records have taken up the question numerous times over the past 25 years regarding what type of zoning is 5 appropriate for a downtown area. What types of businesses will support the kind of revitalization and 7 business growth, public image, and reputation that we as 8 a community want for our downtown . 9 Over the past 25 years Hours and Hours of testimony 10 have been received from City staff and residents and 11 business owners -- testimony very similar to what we have 12 received on the matter before us tonight . The planning 13 and zoning policy of the City of Pasco has been in place 14 since the 1980s has been to specifically prohibit 15 businesses from being established in the central business 16 district like the business being proposed by the 17 applicant -- a dance hall . 18 The reason for this prohibition is because the 19 evidence and the testimony received has repeatedly 20 indicated over the past 25 years that dance halls and 21 some similar places have a demonstrated history of 22 contributing to general public disorder, loitering, 23 nuisance and other acts det-rimental to the public image 24 of the area. This is contained in PMC Section 25 . 44 . 050 . 25 Since the 1980s the City of Pasco rezoned the ChaRae Kent , CCR, RPR Kent Reporting * ( 509) 627-2244 Page 28 1 central business district_ to C-2 and we have all witnessed -- at least I have in the 27 years I ' ve been lived in the Tri-Cities -- I ' ve witnessed a steady progress and revitalization that the downtown area has 5 undergone . The proposed business is just not compatible with the planning and direction that the community wants for this area of the city . There would have to be a very 3 compelling testimony -- which I have not heard -- 9 together with detailed plans presented to convince me to 10 vote to recommend that we take a risk to approve a type 11 of business that has demonstrated unfavorable History 12 that has been specifically prohibited by previous Pasco 13 Planning Commissions and City Councils . 14 I agree with the staff ' s findings of fact in this 15 matter and I believe that we, as a Planning Commission, 16 should vote no on this rezone and recommend to the City 17 Council that they deny this request . I think it ' s 18 regrettable that I have to take that position . Because I 19 think we received a significant amount of testimony that 20 there ' s a portion of this community that really believes 21 that we need to Have something like that . 22 I think, like we ' ve discussed at several Planning 23 Commission meetings before on several other topics, it ' s 24 not only the type of business, but it is the location of 25 the business . And I think that this particular location ChaRae Kent , CCR, RPR Kent Reporting * ( 509) 627-2244 F'ag is not the right location in our community for this type of business . And that ' s what the previous Planning Commissions have decided and that ' s what the previous City Councils have decided and I will be -- I would be 5 hesitant, if not outright opposed, to going against what we ' ve learned, the lessons learned over the last 27 7 years . 8 Other comments or questions? Mr . Anderson? 9 MR . ANDERSON : Mr . Chair, would you entertain a 10 motion? 11 MR . SAMUEL : I would. 12 MR . ANDERSON : I move the Planning Commission adopt 13 the findings of fact and conclusions as contained in the 14 March 10, 2010 staff report . 15 MS . KEMPF : Second. 16 MR . SAMUEL : It ' s been moved by Mr . Anderson . 17 Seconded by Ms . Kempf . 18 All those in favor say aye . 19 COMMISSION MEMBERS IN UTNISON: Ave . 20 MR . SAMUEL : Any opposed? 21 MR . CRUZ : Aye . 22 MR . HAY : Aye . 23 MR . SAMUEL : Let the record reflect that Mr . Cruz is 24 opposed and Mr . Hay is also opposed . 25 MR . ANDERSON : Mr . Chair, I move based on the ChaRae Kent , CCR, RPR Kent Reporting * ( 509) 627-2244 Page 30 1 findings of fact and conclusions as adopted the Planning Commission recommend the City Council deny a rezone for ? property at 117 South Fifth Avenue from C-2 to C-1 to Y allow for a dance hall use . 5 MS . KEMPF : Second. G MR . SAMUEL : It ' s been moved by Mr . Anderson . 7 Seconded by Ms . Kempf . All those in favor say aye . 8 COM1,IISSION MEMBERS IN UNISON: Aye . a MR . SAMUEL : All those opposed? 10 MR . CRUZ . Aye . 11 MR . HAY : A-,,7e . 12 MR . SAMUEL : So, let the record show that Mr . Cruz 13 and Mr . Hay voted no . 14 The majority of the Planning Commission has voted to 15 recommend to City Council that we deny this rezone . 16 Mr . White, what is the next step forward on this 17 item? 18 MR . WHITE : This will proceed to Cite Council for a 19 formal adoption of the decision on Maki 3rd, I believe, 20 unless an appeal is received. And if that ' s the case, 21 then it will be delayed until the transcript is prepared 22 and be brought to City Council at a later date . 23 MR . SAMUEL : Very good . Thank you very much . 24 Next item on the agenda is item number 43, a request 25 for a special permit . ChaRae Kent , CCR, RPR Kent Reporting * ( 509) 527-2244 Page 31 ( ITEM CONCLUDED AT 7 : 39 P .M. ) r� 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ChaRae Kent , CCR, RPR Kent- Reporting * ( 509) 627-2244 Fd`-je 32 C E R T I F I C A T E 2 STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ss . COUNTY OF BENTON ) This is to certify that I, ChaRae Kent, Certified 5 Court Reporter and Notary Public in and for the State of 6 Washington, residing at Richland, reported the within and foregoing Planning Commission meeting; that said Planning Commission meeting was taken by me in shorthand and thereafter transcril-Jed, and that same is a true and 10 correct record of the testirnon�, . 11 I further certify that I am not a relative or 12 employee or attorney or counsel of any the parties, nor 13 am I financially interested in the outcome of the cause . 14 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and 15 affixed my official seal this day of , 16 2010 . 17 1s 19 CHARAE KENT, RPR, CCR 20 CCR NO . 2408 Notary Public in and for the State 21 of Washington, residing at Richland GG 23 24 My commission expires January 17, 2012 25 ChaRae Kent, CCR, RPR Kent Reporting * (509) 627-2244 11`IEMORANDUNI DATE: Jude 17, 2010 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Dave McDonald, City Planner SUBJECT: Code Amendment PMC 25.58 I-182 Corridor Overlay District Late last summer the Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider possible amendments to the I-182 Corridor Overlay District standards that would create standards for temporary business activities. The attached memo to the Planning Commission dated August 20. 2009 explains the background of the current I-182 standards and the need for modifications applicable to temporary businesses. Following the public hearing on the attached proposed code amendment. the Planning Commission tabled action on the matter until additional work could be completed on the proposal. Several months of rather full Planning Commission agendas and the appeal or remand of several Planning Commission recommendations (Planned Parenthood. Haywire Farms Corn Maze, Imagination Studios Preschool. Gemmell Caretakers Residence and the 5th & Columbia Rezone) made it difficult to complete work on the proposed code amendment. Due to the length of time that has transpired since the close of the initial public hearing. it may be advisable to hold an additional hearing prior to forwarding a recommendation to the City Council. If the Planning Commission concurs with staff's observation. a hearing will be scheduled for the July 15`h meeting. 1 MEMORANDUM DATE: August 20, 2009 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Dave McDonald, City Planner SUBJECT: Code Amendment PMC 25.58 I-182 Corridor Overlay District Introduction In the fall of 2001 the Planning Commission held several meetings to develop a code amendment providing for development standards in the I-182 Corridor west of Road 36. The City Council accepted the Planning Commission's recommendations by adopting Ordinance #3515 enacting the I-182 Corridor Overlay District as Pasco Municipal Code 25.58. The purpose of PMC 25.58 was to create development provisions designed to enhance the aesthetics of commercial development around and near the Road 68 and Road 100 Interchanges. This chapter of the Zoning code includes enhanced standards for landscaping and building design and screening. Much of the development that now exists in the I-182 Corridor has occurred since the adoption of the I-182 standards in December of 2001. While not being overbearing, these standards have been responsible for visual enhancements to commercial buildings and parking lots on Road 68, Burden Boulevard and the other commercial areas west of Road 36. The development of the garden centers at the Lowes and Wal-Mart buildings along with some of the additional architectural features and landscaping on those projects are examples of what the code was designed to achieve. The purpose statement of PMC 25.58 states that the Overlay District is to provide additional development regulations to create aesthetically attractive buildings and commercial development within the I-182 Corridor of the city. PMC 25.58 provides development guidance for buildings and landscaping but it does not provide safeguards to protect the intended character of the I-182 area with respect to activities such as special event sales in service station parking lots or itinerant merchants in other parking lots. While buildings built in the I- 182 Overlay District are required to contain several architectural features per elevation and must be constructed of certain materials there are no such requirements for temporary businesses that set up in parking lots. As a result the temporary businesses operate in a haphazard fashion with goods displayed all over parking lots on city sidewalks on shrubs and in landscaped beds. These businesses also store various items (propane tanks, coolers, tables chairs, recreational equipment, etc) in the parking lot around the vehicle from which business is transacted. The haphazard display of goods and use of parking lots for storage purpose by vendors totally unrelated to the purpose of the building on the lot defeats the whole purpose for which the community established the I-182 m development standards. Experience from other areas of the community has shown that temporary businesses (itinerant merchants) routinely store miscellaneous items around their sales vehicle such as propane tanks, buckets, boxes coolers, dust bins, milk crates, recreational equipment, flower pots, satellite dishes, hoses, chairs tables, and picnic benches. These temporary businesses also affix carport structures, tarps, umbrellas to the ground. Experience has also shown that temporary businesses are often open for business past the time permanent businesses usually close. With the late hours of operation the Pasco Police Department has found that where temporary businesses concentrate geographically there is an increase in disorderly conduct, assaults, and other criminal activity. Findings 1) In 2001 the Pasco City Council adopted Ordhiance 3515 enacting the 1- 182 Overlay District codified as Pasco Municipal Code Chapter 25.58 2) The purpose of PMC Chapter 25.58 is to provide development regulations to create aesthetically attractive buildings and commercial development within the I-182 corridor of the city 3) Permanent businesses in the I-182 Overlay District are required to develop with enhanced architectural features, screening and landscaping in comparison with other commercial areas of the community 4) Buildings built in the I-182 Overlay District must contain architectural features such as columns, pilasters, belt courses, brackets, decorative molding, quoins and similar items 5) Buildings in the I-182 area must be contain exterior walls one or more of the following materials: wood, brick, stucco, block, glass, and composite materials b) PMC 25.58 requires the owners of all building sites to maintain their properties in a clean, safe and well-maintained condition consistent with the enhanced landscaping and screening requirements 7) Temporary businesses include itinerant merchants and businesses licensed for special event sales 8) Temporary businesses locating in the I-182 Overlay District have not been included in the design standards necessary to support the purpose and intent of the I-182 Overlay District 9) Temporary businesses locating in parking lots of permanent businesses in the I-182 Overlay District have scattered and displayed merchandise 2 for sale in a haphazard fashion on public sidewalks, around parking lots, in areas of parking lots necessary for safe travel, and on shrubbery and plants in landscaped beds 10) Temporary businesses locating in parking lots within Pasco store items such as propane tanks, buckets, boxes, coolers, flower pots, dust bins, milk crates, recreational equipment and satellite dishes around the vehicles from which the businesses operate 11) Temporary businesses locating in parking lots set up permanent customer seating, and attach carport structures covered with metal siding material and or plastic tarps 12) Temporary businesses locating in parking lots often run water hoses and electrical extension cords across parking lots 13) Temporary businesses locating in parking lots occupy parking spaces and aisle ways within parking lots of permanent businesses 14) Experience within the community has shown that temporary businesses are often open for business past 10:00 pm 15) Temporary businesses conduct business activities out-of- doors where the conduct of such activities can generate noise and commotion that impacts neighboring residential properties 16) Where temporary businesses (itinerant vendors) are geographically concentrated the Pasco Police Department reports an increase in lawlessness with such businesses such as assaults, fights, disorderly conduct, gang activity, the public consumption of alcohol and other criminal activity 17) The Pasco Police Department has found that where itinerant vendors are located individually at dispersed locations there are virtually no calls for service and virtually no reports of lawlessness 3 ORDINANCE NO.– — AN ORDINANCE relating to zoning and amending PMC Title 25 dealing with temporary businesses in the I-182 Overlay District. WHEREAS, in 2001 the Pasco City Council adopted Ordinance 3515 enacting the I-182 Overlay District codified as Pasco Municipal Code Chapter ''5.58; and, WHEREAS, the purpose of PMC Chapter ''5.58 is to provide development regulations to create aesthetically attractive buildings and commercial development within the I-182 corridor of the city; and WHEREAS, permanent businesses in the I-182 Overlay District are required to develop with enhanced architectural features, screening and landscaping in comparison with other commercial areas of the community; and, WHEREAS, PMC 25.58 requires the owners of all building sites to maintain their properties in a clean, safe and well-maintained condition consistent with the enhanced landscaping and screening requirements; and, WHEREAS, temporary businesses locating in the I-182 Overlay District have not been included in the design standards necessary to support the purpose and intent of the I-182 Overlay District; and, WHEREAS, temporary businesses locating in parking lots of permanent businesses in the I-182 Overlay District have scattered and displayed merchandise for sale in a haphazard fashion on public sidewalks, around parking lots, in areas of parking lots necessary for safe travel, and on shrubbery and plants in landscaped beds; and, WHEREAS, temporary businesses locating in parking lots store items such as propane tanks, buckets, boxes, coolers, flower pots, dust bins, milk crates, recreational equipment and satellite dishes around the vehicles from which the businesses operate; and, WHEREAS, temporary businesses locating in parking lots set up permanent customer seating, and attach carport structures made of metal siding like material and or plastic tarps to the ground; and, WHEREAS, temporary businesses locating in parking lots often run water hoses and electrical extension cords across parking lots; and, WHEREAS, experience within the community has shown that temporary businesses are often open for business past 10:00 pm; and, WHEREAS, temporary businesses conduct business activities out-of- doors where the conduct of such activities can generate noise and commotion that impacts neighboring residential properties; and, WHEREAS, without the implementation of dispersal regulations for certain types of temporary businesses (itinerant vendors) past Police Department reports have shown an increase in lawlessness with such businesses such as assaults, fights, disorderly conduct, gang activity, the public consumption of alcohol and other criminal activity; and, WHEREAS, the Police Department has found that where itinerant vendors are located individually at dispersed locations there are virtually no calls for service and virtually no reports of lawlessness; and, WHEREAS, the City Council takes note of Police Department reports and relies on Police Department experience before making decisions to combat crime; and, WHEREAS, the City Council recognizes that important and substantial governmental interests provide a constitutional basis for the reasonable regulations of business activities within the City limits; and, WHEREAS, the City Council has the responsibility to assure the public health, safety and welfare are maintained within the community; and, WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that to maintain and protect the general welfare, public health and safety and to support the purposes of Pasco Municipal Code Chapter 25.58 it is necessary to amend PMC Title ''S,NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That Chapter 25.12 of the Pasco Municipal Code be and the same is hereby amended to include a new sub section ''5.1''.45'' to read as follows: 25.12.452 Temporary Business: Means an itinerant vendor as defined under PMC 5.10A.020 Al, B) and C) and any business licensed as a temporary special sales event out of doors and not included within the business activity licensed for the permanent business located on the lot. Section 3. That Chapter 25.58.020 of the Pasco Municipal Code be and the same is hereby amended to read as follows: 25.58.020 APPLICABILITY. The Development and Design Standards of this Overlay District will apply to all multi-family zones, office districts (0), retail business districts (C-1), general business districts (C-3), regional business districts (C-R) and business park districts (B- P) located in the I-182 Corridor which is described as follows: Beginning at a point on the North Bark meander line of the Columbia River, said -point being the at tho intersection of the North meander line of the Columbia River and the north line of the Sz- quarter- south half of the southwest quarter of Section 44, 12, T9N, R28E; Thence, easterly along 4w— said north line 446& and continuing easterly along the north line of the south half of the SE quarter of said I Section 11— Tr 9N, t& the eefitef of Said seet ..., to a point on said north line a disc nee of 808 feet pW& more or Rii;xs less westerly of the NW corner of the SE quarter of the SE quarter of said Section 12, TQ-N, P-1-S-4, the *° X 09 said ottiex ''' 0t" :009 a lure-be af int-North 05° ''0' 0" East, for a distance of 1,777.0 feet to the East line of the West half of the West half of Northeast quarter of said Section 1'; Thence Northerly along said east line bearin,R North 01 18', 0" east, to the north line of said Section 12, Thence easterly along the north line of said Section 1'' and continuing easterly along the north line of Sections 7, S, 9, 10 and 11 all in Township 9 North. Range 29 East to the NE corner of said Section 11; Thence southerly along the east line of said Section 11 and continuing southerly along the east lines of Sections 14 and 23,Township 9 North.Range 2'9 East. to tha inter-° *i^^ •A,ith the south right-of- way line of Interstate 1-182, Thence northwesterly along th P, go 11 th said right-of-way line of 4- 443 -to the into-seetien ..,ith the south line of the Franklin County Irrigation District Canal right- of-way; Thence westerly along the- said south line of the Franklin County Irrigation District Canal right-of-way to the �- *° ° tion "°i*" the east right-of-way line of Road 100; Thence southerly along the said east right-of-way line of Road 100 to thea intear-Seetion with the southeasterly projection of `w �� south line of Lot 29, 4 Block 2 Peppermint Terrace Third Addition; Thence northwesterly along said projection and continuing northwesterly along the eantar. lina south line of Lots 22 through 29 all of Block '' Peppermint Terrace Third Addition to the northwest boundary of said Addition; Thence continuing northwesterly along the northwesterly projection of the - Teffaee 'T'hird Ad @ n said south line f&f a distance of 657.5 feet; Thence south 46" 45' 43" west a distance of 779 feet; Thence north 43" 14' 17" west for a distance of 450 feet; Thence north 46" 42' 28" east a distance of 312 feet; Thence north 43" 17' 32- for a distance of 300 feet; Thence north 46':' 4?-' 28" east for a distance of 85 feet; Thence north 43" 17' 32- west for a distance of 340 feet to the easterly right-of-way line of Crescent Drive; Thence northeasterly along tlam said easterly right-of-way line of Crescent Drive to the intersection with the south line of the FCID Canal right-of-way; Thence westerly along #ho said south line 4 `"° P -ip-eaH4 to the inter-se tion with the north line of Section 18, T9N, R29E; Thence westerly along the north line of said Section 18 to the intersection with the south right-of-way line of Interstate 4-182., Thence southwesterly along said south right-of-way line of the Interstate x-182- right of way to the intersection with the North meander line of the Columbia River; Thence northwesterly along the north fit meander line of the Columbia River to the point of the beginning. Section 3. That Chapter 2-5.58. of the Pasco Municipal Code be and the same is hereby amended to include a new sub section 2-5.55.095 to read as follows: 25.58.095 Temporary Business Standards: (A) Temporary businesses are only permitted on lots that are fully developed with curb gutter and sidewalk and improved with parking lots, landscaping and buildings. (B)Temporary businesses must be located at least 300 feet from the property line of any residentially zoned property. (C) Goods. wares and merchandise of any kind can only be displayed or offered for sale from the temporary business vehicle or conveyance. (D) Only one temporary business vehicle is permitted per licensee and lot or parcel. (E) Temporary businesses must be located at least 500 feet apart. 3 (F) No ancillary or accessory equipment of any kind is permitted to be used with a temporary business including but not limited to: tables. chairs. benches. picnic tables. umbrellas. propane tanks. tents. awnings. carport structures. satellite dishes. recreational equipment. amusement devices. entertainment equipment. portable or temporary shelters. portable heaters. temporary lighting fixtures. decorative lighting. coolers not located on the business vehicle. freezers/refrigerators not located on the business vehicle. carpet. fencing. faux landscape elements. (G) No parking lot modifications are permitted for the location of temporary businesses including but not limited to: curbing. concrete slabs. decking and patios. (G) Signage is only permitted on the temporary business vehicle and not on public right-of-way or in parking lots. (H) No advertising for services. activities and products that are not available on or from the temporary business vehicle is permitted. (I) Temporary businesses must be located at least 25 feet from any public right-of-way (J) Temporary businesses must locate in an area of the parking lot that will not impede fire lanes or the use of drive aisles within and around parking lots. (K) Required off street parking cannot be diminished by the location and operation of a temporary business. Section 4. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect five days after passage and publication as required by laNv. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco, at its regular meeting of 'A --------------- Matt Watkins Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: --------------- -------- Debra L. Clark Leland B. Kerr City Clerk City Attorney 4 REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION MASTER FILE NO: SP 10-018 APPLICANT: Building Blocks Childcare Center HEARING DATE: 6/17/2010 3605 West Ruby Street ACTION DATE: 7/15/2010 Pasco, WA 99301 BACKGROUND REQUEST: SPECIAL PERMIT: Expansion of a children's daycare in an existing residence in an R-1 Zone. 1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Legal: Lot 32, Court Vista Addition General Location: 3605 West Ruby Street Property Size: Approximately 0.2 acres 2. ACCESS: The site is accessible from West Ruby Street. 3. UTILITIES: All municipal utilities currently serve the site. 4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The site is currently zoned R-1 (Low-Density Residential) and contains a single family residence. Surrounding properties are zoned and developed as follows: North: R-1 - Single family residence South: C-1 & R-3 - Dental office and a four-plex East: CR - Bank and a vacant commercial structure West: R-1 - Single family residences 5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan designates the site for Low-Density Residential uses. Goal LU-3-A encourages the location of daycare facilities in each residential neighborhood. 6. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The City of Pasco is the lead agency for this project. Based on the SEPA checklist, the adopted City Comprehensive Plan, City development regulations, and other information, a threshold determination resulting in a Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) has been issued for this project under WAC 197- 11-158. 1 ANALYSIS The applicant is requesting to increase the capacity of an existing daycare from twenty (20) children to twenty seven (27) children. The existing special permit authorizing the daycare limits the enrollment to twenty (20) children. In 2003 the property owner applied for a special permit to allow the home daycare to be fully converted into a commercial daycare. The special permit was approved. Since that time the property/business owner has been successful and as a result is experiencing pressure to expand the capacity. The State Department of Social and Health Services (DSHS) recently reviewed the Building Blocks Daycare and determined the facility has enough square footage and playground area to accommodate twenty seven children. However DSHS will not license the facility for 27 children until such time that the City approves a special permit for an additional seven children. The site is a corner lot that fronts on Ruby Street and Road 36 directly west of the Riverview Shopping Center. The properties to the north and west are single family residential homes. Properties to the south contain a dental office and parking lot and a four-plex. The current special permit required the applicant to install a solid 6 foot fence along the common property lines with adjoining homes and to hard-surface the loading/unloading area (the driveway). Typically there are three vehicles parked at the facility during business hours. The concrete driveway on-site has been extended towards the nearest property line to provide additional area. The driveway currently serves two purposes for daycare operations; they are employee parking and child loading/unloading. The applicant indicated there is sufficient space in the driveway for employee vehicles to be parked and for families to arrive by pulling into the driveway. Once the child is loaded or unloaded the vehicle backs out of the driveway into the right-of-way and departs. According to the 2003 ITE Trip Generation Manual, the currently permitted daycare is estimated to generate 90 vehicle trips per day. The Manual indicates that the proposed 27 student capacity would generate approximately 120 trips per day. By way of comparison, the dental office directly to the south is estimated to generate 217 vehicle trips per day; and an average single family dwelling can be expected to generate ten (10) vehicle trips per day. The current Special Permit for the daycare facility with 20 children was reviewed and approved in 2003. The initial staff report at that time recommended denial of the special permit. However as a result of support from several surrounding property owners the Planning Commission recommended approval of a special permit with a list of eleven conditions. Staff has identified nine (9) possible conditions from the previous list of eleven that would still be applicable to the proposed daycare expansion. In 2003 the original special permit application requested an enrollment capacity of twenty five (25) children, which is over double the maximum capacity allowed for family daycares. Staff recommends approval of the special permit with a condition limiting the maximum enrollment capacity to twenty five (25) children. INITIAL 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 Planning Commission may add additional findings to this listing as the result of factual testimony and evidence submitted during the open record hearing. 1. The site is approximately 0.2 acres. 2. The site is zoned R-1 (Law-Density Residential). 3. The Comprehensive Plan identifies the site for Low-Density Residential uses. 4. All municipal utilities currently serve the site. 5. Daycare Centers are Conditional Uses in the R-1 Zone [PMC 25.28.040(5)]. 6. Conditional Uses require Special Permit approval prior to establishment. 7. The site currently contains an approved daycare center. 8. The current special permit limits the daycare center to an enrollment capacity of 20 children. 9. The applicant is requesting a maximum enrollment capacity of 27 children for the daycare. 10. The proposed daycare could generate up to approximately 120 vehicle trips per day (including employees) (per the ITE Trip Generation Manual) if each child arrived in an individual vehicle. 11. The daycare accommodates children ages 1 year and older. 12. The current daycare facility has three (3) staff members. 13. The expanded daycare will have up to four (4) staff members. 14. Daycare services are currently provided Monday through Friday. 15. The daycare is currently closed on the weekends. 16. The site provides on-site parking for three vehicles. 17. The existing daycare has been operating on the site for 7 ,years. 3 18. Prior to establishment of the current commercial daycare facility the site was used for a family daycare facility. 19. As a result of public noticing a complaint regarding traffic levels was received. TENTATIVE CONCLUSIONS BASED ON INITIAL STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT Before recommending approval or denial of a special permit the Planning Commission must develop findings of fact from which to draw its conclusions based upon the criteria listed in P.M.C. 25.86.060. The criteria are as follows: 1) Will the proposed use be in accordance tuith the goons, policies, objectives and text of the Comprehensive plan? The site is identified in the Comprehensive Plan for Low-Density Residential uses. The proposed daycare supports Plan Goal LU-3-A which encourages such facilities to be located in neighborhoods. 2) Will the proposed use adversely affect public infrastructure? No infrastructure modifications would be required for the increased daycare enrollment capacity. The site is served by all municipal utilities and the local street network. 3) Will the proposed use be constructed, maintained and operated to be in harmony xuith existing or intended character-of the general vicinity? The intended character of the neighborhood is primarily residential. Typically, schools and or pre-school facilities are located in or adjacent to residential neighborhoods. The neighborhood is adjacent to a contiguous strip of commercially zoned and developed parcels along Court Street. 4) Will the location and height of proposed structures and the site design discourage the development of permitted uses on property in the general vicinity or impair- the value thereof? The daycare school is located in a structure originally constructed as a single family residence and later converted to a commercial daycare which received a special permit and building permit from the City of Pasco. The County Assessor's records indicate the value of the adjoining residential properties have increased over the past four ,years. 5) Will the operations in connection ruith the proposal be more objectionable to nearby properties by reason of noise, fumes, vibrations, dust, traffic, or 4 flashing rights than ruould be the operation of any permitted uses auithin the district? The daycare facility has been operating on the site for over 7 ,years without generating any noise, dust, traffic or other conditions that would be objectionable to the neighborhood. As a result of noticing property owners within a 300 foot radius, one complaint about traffic volumes generated by the daycare was received. Even though the existing daycare generates more traffic than a single-family dwelling, the daycare operators have managed to minimize the effects on the neighborhood. 6) Will the proposed use endanger- the public health or- safety if located and developed where proposed, or in any ruay become a nuisance to uses permitted in the district? Prior to noticing the subject special permit, operation of the current daycare had not generated nuisance complaints from the adjacent commercial businesses and homes. As a result of noticing property owners within a 300 foot radius, one complaint about traffic volumes generated by the daycare was received. Daycare functions will take place indoors and within the fenced rear ,yard as they have been for the past seven ,years. (Proposed) Approval Conditions 1) The special permit shall apply to Lot 32, Court Vista Addition; 2) The existing solid 6 foot wood fencing shall be maintained in good repair along the northern and western property lines; 3) The applicant shall maintain a current Department of Social and Health Service license at all times for the activities allowed within the buildings; 4) The number of children allowed shall be determined by the strict application of the DSHS daycare criteria and shall in no case exceed twenty five (25) children; 5) The hours of operation shall be between 6:30am and 6:00pm, Monday through Friday; 6) The applicant shall maintain the play area to meet the requirements of the Department of Social and Health Services. The play areas must be fenced to meet State requirements; 5 7) The pick-up and drop-off area shall remain in the existing on-site location; 8) Only one sign not exceeding (6) six square feet shall be permitted upon the property; 9) The special permit shall be null and void if a City of Pasco business license for the additional authorized activities is not obtained by December 31, 2010. RECOMMENDATION MOTION: I move to close the hearing on the proposed daycare expansion and initiate deliberations and schedule adoption of findings of fact, conclusions and a recommendation to the City Council for the July 15, 2010 meeting. 6 Vicinity Item: Special Permit-Daycare Expansion Map Applicant: Building Blocks Chi l• care N File #: SP 10-0 18 7 •• W A r. SITE --I ri s ��r s1T� CO VRT ST ler 1 Land Item: Special Permit - Daycare Expansion1 Use Applicant: Building Bloc-Ks Childcare N ap File #: SP 10-018 ` Li a W AGATE ST SITE J n W R T ommerci6i C mmercial M F R COURT ST i M Q mm rci I o Commercial 0 0 N ST Zoning Item: Special Permit - Daycare Expansion1 Applicant: Building Bloc-Ks Childcare Div} Map File #: SP 10-018 ` —____ W--AGATE-ST SITE CL Rini z CR ti C- 1 M L--L,-,�w RUBV -3 COURT ST C-1 MEMORANDUM DATE: June 9, 2010 TO: Planning Commission F ROM: Angela R. Pitman, Block Grant Administrator SUBJECT: 2011 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) PROGRAM ALLOCATION Requests for Funding Attached for your review and consideration are the CDBG Fund and Proposal Summaries (Attachments 1 & 2) relating to our Community Development Block Grant Program for ''011. Seventeen (17)requests for funds were submitted totaling $2',8''9,3''1. Each applicant will present their proposal before the Planning Commission tonight,June 17, 2010. Estimated Funds Available It is estimated that the 2011 annual entitlement grant will be $600,000 with program income from 2010 in the amount of$150,000. Funds available for reallocation are $92,840 making a total of$842,840 in funds available for use in 2011. There is always some question regarding actual funding levels approved by Congress. Actual available funding for these FY 2011 activities will remain in question until the early part of 2011 when the allocation is made. If funding levels are lower than estimated, activity funding may need to be reallocated accordingly. Public Service Cap HLTD regulations state that the amount of CDBG Funds obligated within a program year to support public service activities may not exceed 150 of the combined total of the entitlement plus the prior year's program income. For 2011, the estimated entitlement of$600,000, and 2010 program income of$150,000 makes the maximum available for public service activities $112,500. Current requests for public services total $80,000. Staff recommends a maximum of $80,000 for public services 0 l oo). Planning & Administration Cap HLTD regulations state that the amount of CDBG Funds obligated within a program year to support planning and administration activities may not exceed 20% of the combined total of the entitlement plus the current year's program income. For 2011, the estimated entitlement of $600,000 makes the maximum available for planning and administration $120,000. Current requests for planning and administration total $120,000. Staff recommends a maximum of $1 2 0,000 for planning and administration (''0%). The City Staff would like to thank the members of the Planning Commission for your time and assistance. /arp Attachments: 1 . 2011 CDBG Fund Summary ''011 CDBG Proposal Summary Attachment 1 2011 CDBG Fund Summary -June 17, 2010 Attachment 1 Planning Commission Meeting Page 1 Proposals-Recommendations ID Recipients ACTIVITY I AGENCY NonCDBGMatch Agency Staff PC NAME Requested Recommend Recommend City of Pasco-Community CDBG Program $).)0 $1 20,000.01) $120,000.01) 1 &Economic Development Administration Revitalization Specialist- City of Pasco-Community Economic Project Delivery $0.00 $40,000.00 &Economic Development for NRSA City of Pasco- Administrative& Civic Center-Youth $45,500.00 3 Community Services Recreation Specialist City of Pasco- Martin Luther King Administrative& Community Center $100,500.00 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 4 Community Services Recreation Specialist City of Pasco- Administrative& Senior Citizen's Center $200,010.0) $40,000.00 $40,000.00 5 Community Services Recreation Specialist Pasco Downtown Pasco Downtown Development Association- Development Commercial $40,420.00 $?.5,000.00 $50,000.00 ?, SK Kitchen Pasco Downtown Development Association- Downtown Fagade $27,000.00 $80,000.00 7 PDDA Improvamant(2fagades) Hispanic Chamber of Downtown Fagade $).00 $80,000.00 8 Commerce Improvement(4 fagades) Volunteer Chore Services $118,157.00 $?,000.00 $4,000.00 5 Catholic Family Charities (1 2_households) $85,500.00 $155,435.00 10 Jerico Roads Ministries Havensafe(8 Households) Boys&Girls Cluk.of Toxicity Removal/Program Benton &Franklin Space Rehabilitation & $1).1)1) $55,300.00 $11,000.01) 11 Counties Energy City of Pasco- Administrative& $1).1)1) $150,000.00 $131,300.00 12 Community Services Northeast Soccer Complex City of Pasco- Administrative& Senior Center Kitchen $1).1)1) $85,000.00 13 Community Services Remodel City of Pasco- Administrative& Martin Luther King Center- $1).1)1) $?5,000.00 $?.5,000.00 14 Community Services HVAC Replacement City of Pasco- Administrative& $130,000.00 $48,000.00 $48,000.00 15 Community Services Code Enforcement Officer Neighborhood Cith of Pasco-Public Improvements-Phase III $300,000.00 $350,000.00 $334,540.00 1?• Works (CT201BG2) nti- ang Prevention/Intervention $0,00 $1,3?,5,58?..00 117 Dread Champions Program $1,051,117.00 $2,825,321.00 $843,840.00 Entitlement(2011 Estimated) $ 600,000 Program Income(2010 Estimated) $ 150,000 Prior Year Reallocations(2008-2009) $ 92,840 Total Funds Available $ 842,840 Proposals Recommended SURPLUSIDEFICIT $ (1,986,481) 6/11/2010 Attachment 1 2011 CDBG Fund Summary - June 17, 2010 Attachment 1 Planning Commission Meeting Page 2 Reallocate-Carryover ---]RECIPIENT ACTIVITY PY HUD ID BALANCE CARRY OVER REALLQCATEN Pasco Downtown Development Association- DOWNTOWN FACADE PDDA IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 2008 250 $ 84,939,00 $ 64,939.00 CATHOLIC FAMILY & Catholic Family & Child CHILD SVCS-VOL. Services-Pasco CHORE 20061 2511$ 6,457.40 $ 6,457.40 Catholic Family & Child Services-Pasco CHIP MINOR REHAB 2008 256 $ 28,516.24 25,5-6 2 MARTIN LUTHER KING City of Pasco-Administrative CENTER STORM & Community Services DRAINAGE 2008 2551$ 14,836.40 $ 14,836.40 City of Pasco-Administrative PEANUTS PARK & C om m u nity S ervice s RESTROOM UPGRADE 2008 256 $ 4,224,49 $ 4,224,49 City of Pasco-Administrative VOLUNTEER PARK ADA & ComrnunityServices TRAIL PICNIC PAVILION 2008 2571$ 416.20 $ 416.20 City of Pasco-Community& PROGRAM Economic Development ADMINISTRATION 2009 261 $ 8,062.B5 $ 8,062.B5 Pasco Downtown Development Association- FACADE IMPROVEMENT PDDA PROGRAM 2009 2661$ B0,000.00 $ B0,000,00 Catholic Family & Child CATHOLIC FAMILIES VCS Services-Pasco RAMPS 2009 267 $ 4,000.00 $ 4,000.00 Benton Franklin CAC - ENERGY EFFICIENT Home Energy HEALTHY HOMES 2009 2681 $ 13,040.27 $ 13,040.27 BOYS & GIRLS CLUB Boys& Girls Club of Benton CAPITAL & Franklin Counties IMPROVEMENTS 2009 269 $ 40,838.95 $ 40,838.95 LUCAS PARK City of Pasco-Administrative PLAYGROUND & Community Services EQUIPMENT 2009 273 $ 7.41 $ 7.e- KURTZMAN PARK City of Pasco-Public Works NEIGHBORHOOD Department IMPROVEMENT -PHASE 2009 2721$ 172,760.00 $ 72,760.00 $458.119.21 $365.279.52 592.839.69 6i1 1/2010 Attachment 1 2011 CDBG Fund Summary - June 17, 2010 Attachment 1 Planning Commission Meeting Page 3 Public Service Cap ID ACTIVITY ACTIVITY/AGENCY NonCDBGMatch Staff PC CC Approve NAME Recommend Recommend City of Pasco- Administrative & Civic Center-Youth $45,500.00 $20,000.00 2 Community Services Recreation Specialist $0.00 $0.00 City of Pasco- Martin Luther King Administrative & Community Center $100,500.00 $20,000.00 3 lCommunity Services Recreation Specialist $0.00 $0.00 City of Pasco- Administrative & Senior Citizen's Center $200,000.00 $40,000.00 4 Community Services Recreation Specialist $0.00 $0.00 $346,000.00 $60,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 Entitlement (2011 Estimated) $ 600,000 Prior Year (2010) Program Income $ 150,000 Total Funds Subject to Public Services Cap $ 750,000 Public Services Cap(Maximum) $ 112,500 Public Services Recommended $ 80,000 11% 6/11/2010 Attachment 1 2011 CDBG Fund Summary - June 17, 2010 Attachment 1 Planning Commission Meeting Page 4 Admin Cap ID ACTIVITY ACTIVITY/AGENCY NonCDBGMatch Agency Staff PC CC Approve NAME Requested Recommend Recommend City of Pasco- Community & Economic CDBG Program 1 Development Administration $0.00 $120,000.00 $120,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $120,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 Entitlement(2011 Estimated) S 600,000 Program Income (2011 Estimated) Prior Year(2008-2009) Reallocations S 92,840 Estimated Total Subject to Admin CAP S 600,000 Admin Cap S 120,000 6/11/2010 CITY OF PASCO 3011 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROPOSAL SUMMARY —JUNE 17, 3010 1 CDBG Program Administration — Requested: $130,000 CDBG funds are requested to plan, administer and deliver housing and community needs, ensure compliance with local, state and federal rules, regulations and laws, and provide for the successful delivery of programs that primarily benefit low to moderate income people. Requesting full 2'0% cap due to number of projects ongoing this program year. 3 Civic Center -Youth Recreation Specialist— Requested: $20,000 CDBG funds are requested to provide a portion of the salary and benefits for recreation specialist at the Youth Civic Center. This facility's program is to provide recreation programs for youth at risk and families in low-to-moderate income Census Tract (202). Consistent with funding in 2010,public services are capped at no greater than 150 of current entitlement plus prior year program income. 3 Martin Luther Kin Community Center Recreation Specialist— Requested: $30,000 CDBG funds are requested to provide a portion of the salary and benefits for recreation specialist at the Martin Luther King. This facility's program is coordinated with the YMCA, Salvation Army and Campfire LISA, who all collaborate to provide education and physical activities to at risk school age , youth, and families in Census Tract ('01). Consistent with funding in 2010,public services are capped at no greater than 15% of current entitlement plus prior year program income. 4 Senior Citizen's Center Recreation Specialist— Requested: $40,000 CDBG funds are requested to provide a portion of the salary and benefits for recreation specialist to oversee and operate program at Pasco's senior center. This facility's program provides supervision and leadership necessary for programs serving the elderly of Pasco with support services, nutrition, health and living skills support. Consistent with funding in ''010,public services are capped at no greater than 15% current entitlement plus prior year program income. 5 Anti-Gang Prevention/Intervention Program — Requested: $1,365,586 CDBG funds are requested to estalish relevant anti-gang prevention programs to meet the needs of low-income gang/anti-gang members and their families in the community. 1 CITY OF PASCO 3011 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROPOSAL SUMMARY —JUNE 17, 3010 New public service activity, funds requested exceed the public service cap. 6 Pasco Downtown Development Commercial Kitchen — Requested: $65,000 CDBG funds are requested to continue operations of the Pasco Specialty Kitchen, a certified commercial incubator kitchen. By providing technical support to small food-related businesses the Pasco Specialty Kitchen improves their success rate by helping them to establish and achieve their goals. In consideration for technical assistance, the startup businesses agree to make jobs created available to low-to-moderate income persons in Pasco (Census Tract Reduction consistent with prior year funding levels. It is estimated 16 FTE jobs will be created at least 51% to be held by LMI individuals. 7 Downtown Facade Improvement (4 facades) PDDA — Requested: $80,000 CDBG funds are requested to support business to continue downtown fagade improvements,for new projects are anticipated for 2009 (Census Tract 202). It is estimated that 4 business will be assisted with fagade improvements. 8 Downtown Facade Improvement (=1 facades) HCC — Requested: $80,000 CDBG funds are requested to support business to continue downtown fagade improvements,for new projects are anticipated for 2009 (Census Tract 202). It is estimated that 4 business will be assisted with fagade improvements. 9 Catholic Family Volunteer Chore Services (13)— Requested: $6,000 CDBG funds are requested to provide minor household repairs and wheelchair ramps for very low to low income households. This population includes elderly and disabled. This year a roof repair program will be added to Volunteer Chore Services activities (City-wide). It is estimated that 12 elderly households, typically very low income, will be assisted. 10 Havensafe Domestic Violence Transitional/Emergency Housing — Requested: $195,435 CDBG funds are requested for acquisition/rehabilitation of a 6,000 square foot safe house suitable to provide 15 additional bed spaces for persons experiencing domestic violence in Pasco. It is estimated that 15 bedspaces will be made available, and 28 Pasco residents served. CITY OF PASCO 3011 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROPOSAL SUMMARY —JUNE 17, 3010 11 Boys & Girls Club - Program Space Rehabilitation (asbestos floor removal/obsolete light replacement) —Requested: $99,300 CDBG funds are requested to replace remaining obsolete light fixtures with energy efficient and safer fixtures, and remove asbestos flooring in the building where floor covering are wearing through. Obsolete light fixture replacement estimated at $11,000, the remainder is for removal of asbestos where exposed) 13 Martin Luther King Community Center -Energy Efficient HVAC & Hot Water Unit Replacements — Requested: $65,000 CDBG funds are requested to replace outdated and failing HVAC systems and unsafe hotwater tanks at Martin Luther King Center with energy efficient units reducing energy costs and increasing safety at the facility. HVAC systems have currently surpassed their life expectancy. This facility primarily serves low-moderate income families in Census Tract ''O1. 13 Northeast Soccer Complex —Requested: $150,000 CDBG funds are requested to construct a soccer complex in Census Tract ''03 which will be used primarily by the Hispanic Soccer League. This project will serve residents of Census Tracts 201, 202, 2 03 and ''04, neighborhoods that are made up of primarily low-moderate income families. There is another complex located in Census Tract ''06, which serves regional needs for competitive soccer tournaments. Soccer is a very popular sport in the Pasco area. This complex will primarily serve Census Tracts ''O1, 202, 203, 204 having a high population of Hispanic families. The primary user will be the Hispanic Soccer League. 14 Senior Citizen's Center Kitchen Remodel— Requested: $85,000 CDBG funds are requested to renovate the Senior Center kitchen. The kitchen is designed for preparation of foods from scratch and has outdated appliances that no longer function and in some cases are now obsolete. In this state, it does not meet current needs. CDBG funds would remove obsolete mixers and steamers, make more counter space available, provide for larger ovens and replace failing walkin refrigerator and freezer with energy efficient models reducing energy requirements and providing for more assured food safety. This kitchen serves the area Meals on Wheels program for seniors. 15 Code Enforcement Officer — Requested: $48,000 CDBG funds are requested to provide for a code enforcement officer to help 3 CITY OF PASCO 3011 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROPOSAL SUMMARY —JUNE 17, 3010 improve neighborhood appearance and for compliance with rules and regulations dealing with homeowner needs in primarily low to moderate income neighborhoods (Census Tracts 201, 202, 2 03 and 204). It is estimated that code enforcement activities will help arrest the decline of distressed neighborhoods, thereby assisting with revitalization efforts. 16 Kurtzman Park Neighborhood Improvements - Phase III (CT301BG3)— Requested: $350,000 CDBG funds are requested to provide curb. gutter. sidewalk and roadway improvements in low-income neighborhood (Census Tract 201 ). This is the construction phase of a multiple year project This project is estimated to provide special assessment assistance to 50 households for installation of basic infrastructure in ''012. 17 Neighborhood Revitalization Strategy Area Specialist —Requested: $40,000 CDBG funds are requested to plan. administer and deliver housing and community needs, ensure compliance with local, state and federal rules. regulations and laws. and provide for the successful delivery of programs that primarily benefit low to moderate income people within the proposed Neighborhood Stabilization Strategy Area. Staff is needed to undertake significant revitalization strategies for residential and commercial properties in a proposed Neighborhood Revitalization Strategy Area. It is estimated 4 business will be assisted. 4 2411 Projects and Activities - Requested 0001 Project Administration SUM $120,000.00 Activity Activity MatrixXitation Nat Objective Obj Outcome Proposed Requested NonCDBG 01 CDBG Program 21A 570.206 0 570.205 SLE Availability/Accessibility 0 $120,000.00 $0.00 Administration GoalStratObj: o StrategyDeNc. Program Administration Table3Desc: CDBG funds are requested to plan, administer and deliver housing and community needs, ensure compliance with local, state and federal rules,regulations and laws, and provide for the successful delivery of programs that primarily benefit low to moderate income people. 0002 Public Services sum $1,445,586.00 Activity Activity MatrixXitation Nat Objective Obj Outcome Proposed Requested NonCDBG 02 Civic Center-Youth 05D 570.201(e) LMA 570.20B(a)(1} SLE Availability/Accessibility 5640 $20,000.00 $45,500.00 Recreation Specialist GoalStratObj: v StrategyDesC: (2)Support activities that provide for appropriately located, effective, and timely service to priority needs populations. Table3Desc: CDBG funds are requested to provide a portion of the salary and benefits for recreation specialist at the Youth Civic Center.This facility's program is to provide recreation programs for youth at risk and families in low-to-moderate income Census Tract(202). 03 Martin Luther King 05D 570.201(e) LMA 570.20B(a)(1} SLE Availability/Accessibility 5805 $20,000.00 $100,500.00 Community Center Recreation Specialist GoalStratObj: v StrategyDesc: (2)Support activities that provide for appropriately located, effective, and timely service to priority needs populations. Table3Desc: CDBG funds are requested to provide a portion of the salary and benefits for recreation specialist at the Martin Luther King.This facility's program is coordinated with the YMCA, Salvation Army and Campfire USA, who all collaborate to provide education and physical activities to at risk school age, youth, and families in Census Tract(201). 04 Senior Citizen's Center 05A 570.201(e) LMC 570.206(a)(2) SLE Availability/Accessibility 1500 $40,000.00 $200,000.00 Recreation Specialist GoalStratObj: v Strate yDesc. (2)Support activities that provide for appropriately located, effective, and timely service to priority needs populations. Table3Desc: CDBG funds are requestecito provide a portion of the salary and benefits for recreation specialistto oversee and operate program at Pasco's senior center. Thisfacility's program provides supervision and leadership necessary for programs serving the elderly of Pasco with support services, nutrition, health and living skills support. Friday,Jame 11, 2010 Page 1 of 5 05 Anti-Gang 051 570.201(e) LMC 570.208(a)(2) SLE Availability/Accessibility 170 $1,365,586.00 $0.00 Prevention/Intervention Program GoalStratObj: v StrategyDese: (2)Support activities that provide for appropriately located, effective, and timely service to priority needs populations. Table3Desc: CDBG funds are requested to estalish relevant anti-gang prevention programs to meetth needs of low-income gang/anti-gang members and their families in th ecommunity. 0003 Economic Opportunities SUM $225,000.00 Activity Activity Matrix/Citation Nat Objective Obj Outcome Proposed Requested NonCUBG 06 Pasco Downtown 18B 570.201(o)(ii) LMJ 570.208(a)(4) FO Sustainability 0 $65,000.00 $40,420.00 Development Commercial Kitchen GoalStratObj: i StrategyUeSC: (1)Provide assistance to existing or new micro-enterprises and other businesses to hire or retain lower-income workers and/or lower-income business owners. (2)Support retentioln or recruitment actions to ensure that essential business can provide services to an areathat has a majority of lower-income persons or in an area with 20%or more of its populations'income at or above the poverty level.(3)Support incentives to businesses newly locating to an area that is underdeveloped,degraded or blighted that will create jobs and add stability to the area. (4)Support training andwork-skills programs/projects that prepare lower- income workers to be gainfully employed in local industries and businesses.(5)Support a range of eligible economic development needs in targeted Redevelopment Strategy Areas such as Pasco's Downtown area. Table3Desc: CDBG funds are requested to continue operations of the Pasco Specialty Kitchen, a certified commercial incubator kitchen.By providing technical support to small food-related businesses the Pasco Specialty Kitchen improves their success rate by helping them to establish and achieve their goals. In consideration for technical assistance,the startup businesses agree to make jobs created available to low-to-moderate income persons in Pasco(Census Tract 202). 07 Downtown Fagade 14E 570.202 LMA 570.208(a)(1) EO Sustainability 4 $80,000.00 $27,000.00 Improvement(4 fagades) PDDA GoalStratObj: 1 StrategyDesC: (5)Support a range of eligible economic development needs in targeted Redevelopment Strategy Areas such as Pasco's Downtown area. Table3Desc: CDBG funds are requestedto support business to continue downtown fagade improvements, for new projects are anticipated for 2009(Census Tract 202). OB Downtown Fagade 14E 570.202 LMA 570.208(a)(1) EO Sustainability 4 $80,000.00 $0.00 Improvement(4 fagades) HCC GoalStratObj: 1 StrategyDeSC: (5)Support a range of eligible economic development needs in targeted Redevelopment Strategy Areas such as Pasco's Downtown area. Table3Desc: CDBG funds are requested to support bu siness to continu a downtown fagade improvements, for new projects are anticipated for 2009(Census Tract 202). Friday,Jame 11, 2010 Page 2 of 5 0004 Decent Housing SUH $201,435.00 Activity Activity Matrix/Citation Nat Objective Obj Outcome Proposed Requested NonCDBG 09 Catholic Family Volunteer 14A 570.202 LMH 570.2wa)(3) DH Availability/Accessibility 12 $6,000.00 $115,197.00 Chore Services(12) GoalStratObj: 1V StrategyDesc: (2)Su stain or improve the quality of existing affordable hou sing stock. (Support acquisition or rehabilitation, code enforement, energy efficiency improvements, or new construction in targeted neighborhoods.) Table3Desc: CDBG funds are requested to provide minor household repairs and wheelchair ramps for very low to low income households. This population includes elderly and disabled.This year a roof repair program will be added to Volunteer Chore Services activities(City-wide). 10 Havensafe Domestic 03C 570-201(c) LMC 570.20B(a)(2) DH Availability/Accessibility 0 $195,435.00 $59,500.00 Violence Transitional/E m erg e n cy Housing G oalStra tObj: IV StrategyDeSC: (2)Sustain or improve the quality of existing affordable housing stock.(Support acquisition or rehabilitation, code enforement, energy efficiency improvements, or new construction in targeted neighborhoods.) Table3DeSC: CDBG funds are requested for acquisition/rehabilitation of a 6,000 square foot safe house suitable to provide 15 additional bed spaces for persons experiencing domestic violence in Pasco. 0005 Public Facilility Improvements sum $399,300.00 Activity Activity MatrixXitation Nat Objective Obj Outcome Proposed Requested NonCDBG 11 Boys&Girls Club-Program 03R 570.201(c) LMA 570.206(a)(1) SLE Availability/Accessibility 1 $99,300.00 $0.00 Space Rehabilitation (asbestos floor removal/obsolete light replacement) G o a l S t r a tObj: 1 l I StrategyDeSC. (1)Support revitalization of neighborhoods by improving and supporting public facilities that serve low-and moderate-income neighborhoods and households. Table3Desc: CDBG funds are requestedto replace remaining obsolete lightfixtures with energy efficient and safer fixtures, and remove asbestos flooring in the building where floor covering are wearing through. 12 Martin Luther King 03F 570.20](0) LMA 570.208(a)(1) SLE Availability/Accessibility 1 $65,000.00 $0.00 Community Center-Energy Efficient HVAC&Hot Water Unit Replacements GoalStratObj: Ill StrategyDesc: (1)Support revitalization of neighborhoods by improving and supporting public facilities that serve low- and moderate-income neighborhoods and households. Table3Desc: CDBG funds are requestedto replace outdated and failing HVAC systems and unsafe hotwater tanks at Martin Luther King Carter with energy efficient units reducing energy costs and increasing safety atthe facility. Friday,Jame 11, 2010 Page 3 of 5 13 Northeast Soccer Complex 03F 570.201(e) LMA 570.20B(a)(1} SLE Availability/Accessibility 1 $150,000.00 $662.910.00 GoalStratObj: l I I StrategyDeSC. (2)Improve parks and recreation facilities in targeted neighborhoods. Table3Desc: CDBG funds are requested to construct a soccer complex in Census Tract 203 which will be used primarily by the Hispanic Soccer League. This project will serve residents of Census Tracts 201, 202, 203 and 204, neighborhoods that are made up of primarily low-moderate income families.There is another complex located in Census Tract 206, which serves regional needs for competitive soccer tournaments. 14 Senior Citizen's Center 03A 570.201(c) LMA 570.208(a)(1) SLE Availability/Accessibility 1 $65,000.00 $0.00 Kitchen Remodel GoalStratObj: 1 I I StrategyDesC: (1)Support revitalization of neighborhoods by improving and supporting public facilities that serve low- and moderate-income neighborhoods and households. Table3Desc: CDBG funds are requested to renovate the Senior Center kitchen.The kitchen is designed for preparation of foods from scratch and has outdated appliances that no longer function and in some cases are now obsolete. In this state, it does not meet current needs. CDBG funds would remove obsolete mixers and steamers, make more counter space available, provide for larger ovens and replace failing walkin refrigerator and freezer with energy efficient models reducing energy requirements and providing for more assured food safety. 0006 Code Enforcement SUM $48,000.00 Activity Activity Matrix/Citation Nat Objective Obj Outcome Proposed Requested NonCDBG 15 Code Enforcement Officer 15 570.202(c) LMA 570.206(a)(1) DH Sustainability 0 $48,000.00 $147,000.00 GoalStratObj: iv StrategyDeSC. (2)Sustain or improve the quality of existing affordable housing stock. (Support acquisition or rehabilitation, code enforement,energy efficiency improvements, or new construction in targeted neighborhoods.) Table3Desc: CDBG funds are requested to provide for a code enforcement officer to help improve neighborhood appearance and for compliance with rules and regulations dealing with homeowner needs in primarily low to moderate income neighborhoods(Census Tracts 201, 202, 203 and 204). 0007 Community Infrastructure SUM $350,000.00 Activity Activity MatrixXitation Nat Objective Obj Outcome Proposed Requested NonCDBG 15 Kurtzman Park 03L 570.201(c) LMA 570.206(a)(1) DH Affordability 0 $350,000.00 $300,000.00 Neighborhood Improvements-Phase III (CT201 BG2) GoalStratObj: 1I StrategyDesC. (1)Expand or improve basic community infrastructure in lower-income neighborhoods while minimizing costs to households below 80%of area median income. Table3Desc: CDBG funds are requested to provide curb, gutter, sidewalk and roadway improvements in low-income neighborhood(Census Tract 201).This is the constructionphase of a multiple year project. Friday,Jame 11, 2010 Page 4 of 5 0008 Neighborhood Revitalization SUM $40,000.00 Activity Activity Matrix/Citation Nat Objective Obj Outcome Proposed Requested NonCDBG 17 Neighborhood Revitalization 18B 570.201(o)(ii) LMA 570.208(a)(1) EO Sustainability 4 $40,000.00 $32,000.00 StrategyArea Specialist GoalStratObj: ii StrategyDesc: (1)Expand or improve basic community infrastructure in lower-income neighborhoods while minimizing costs to households below 80%of area median income. Table3DeSc: CDBG funds are requested to plan, administer and deliver housing and community needs, ensure compliance with local,state and federal rules,regulations and laws, and provide for the successful delivery of programs that primarily benefit low to moderate income people within the proposed Neighborhood Stabilization Strategy Area. $2,829,321.00 $1,763,027.00 Friday,Jame 11, 2010 Page 5 of 5