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