HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005.05.23 Council Special Meeting Packet AGENDA
PASCO CITY COUNCIL
Special Meeting 7:00 p.m. May 23,2005
1. CALL TO ORDER. !
2. BUSINESS ITEMS:
(a) Adjustment of Council District Boundaries:
1. Agenda Report from Gary Crutchfield, City Manager dated May 20, 2005.
2. PMC 1.10.090.
3. Council District Boundary Maps (2). [Maps of current and realignment options may be
viewed in the City Clerk's office, on the City's website (www.ci.pasco.wa.us) or at the
Pasco library.]
CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING
3. ADJOURNMENT.
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Council May 20, 2005
FROM: Gary Crutchfie Manager Special Mtg.: 5/23/05
SUBJECT: Adjustment of ouncil District Boundaries
I. REFERENCE(S):
1. PMC 1.10.090.
2. Council District Boundary Maps (2) [Maps of current and realignment options may be
viewed in the City Clerk's office, on the City's website (www.ci.pasco.wa.us) or at the
Pasco library.]
1.1. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL/STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
05/23: Conduct Public Hearing
III. FINANCIAL IMPACT: None.
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
A) PMC Chapter 1.10 provides that the city be divided into five Council districts,
principally to assure appropriate geographic representation on the City Council. Thus,
five of the seven Council seats are each filled by an individual residing in the respective
district, while the remaining two Council seats are filled by "at large" Council
representatives (no restriction on residence location). PMC 1.10 also provides that
Council district boundaries must be nearly equal in that none of the Council districts may
be more than 10 percent larger or smaller (in terms of population) than any other Council
district.
B) The Council district boundaries were last revised in 2003 in advance of the general
municipal elections that year. The adjustments were required at that time due to
population growth and annexations. Since then, because of population growth, District 3
(the least populous) now has a population only about 68 percent of District 4.
C) The population of each Council district has been updated to reflect housing units
completed since the last update in April 2003. The adjustment suggested by staff(map
Option A) was discussed at the May 9 workshop. At that workshop, there was discussion
of amending the staff's recommendation by including Precincts 16 and 17 in District
Two, with Precinct 15 remaining in District Five (map Option B). This amendment
would not affect population distribution among the districts as the combined population
of Precincts 16 and 17 is equal to the population of Precinct 15.
D) PMC Chapter 1.10 requires the district boundaries to be adjusted but that such adjustment
cannot occur "... less than 60 days prior to the next general municipal election..." The
next general municipal election will be in September and "filing" week occurs in late
July; thus, the Council district boundaries should,be adjusted not later than the month of
June.
E) In addition to the population requirements, state law requires the city to conduct at least
one public hearing on the proposed plan and that such hearing occur at least one week
before formal adoption of the plan. A public hearing will be conducted at the special
meeting for formal adoption of the final plan at the June 6 meeting.
V. DISCUSSION:
A) Staff has provided Council a map of current Council district boundaries as well as two
options for proposed adjustments of boundaries that would result in no district having
more than 10 percent disparity in population, thus fulfilling the requirement imposed by
PMC Chapter 1.10. This proposal also respects current Councilmember residencies.
B) Following the public hearing, Council may determine how council district boundaries
will be configured for action at the June 6 regular meeting.
2(a)
1.10.090 RE-ESTABLISHMENT OF DISTRICT BOUNDARIES. The
Council shall re-establish district boundaries whenever the population in any
district exceeds by ten percent or more the population in any other district;
provided, that no change in the boundaries of any district shall be made within
sixty days next before the date of a general municipal election, nor within
twelve months after the districts have been established or altered. (Ord. 3476
Sec. 6, 2001; Ord. 1472 Sec. 9, 1971.)
o c
All
ry
� � N N :t' '• e�,
F ).
v K
V/ ;�:�>�;•
xY3Y O
iC
'mow)
to
J " ROAD 6~
'�l�p✓R• �'1 n "mM y:: C ?!.'�' nr�b2c Y 4 i
36
X,^ �vyxdt
1ml r
f� V
�" +yih�3>'+ �Y --%` G' { � � 1 F� �-".q t�.' h�M 3�,.•y"•U"'F dae;x.r .3 i�'7r�'pa�� � :
k a
Old
WIN co
k�r�
AJ
r F'��3xr�:r,yg �'`t� air'•' ;y�, ,7,�tS+ri�Y�,.4"Y'
a 'ige:r><:•k''31t��-'�3� �.. '�km.7 i'h'� _g '�'i t<�.�} 4
,�.��tRix'- 'S t. £•9 y,�, �? A ti��, ray-cs„''' .
�� .Vr'' ,•k•z �, u
}
if 4pA a
RYA.
�4yy2.,r `Yi* il. Z '! y fi(. I'a` '�yv •^ C
3. tl J a:r Jra
• � �^.._. �'���J.j�i.;'.�.sa.�rrr`'Y• � s ay�r':Z''�
iY
rg:,d ', ..,,: Y't,:hr.'.A•1' ,��W+ `'* Gr, .:a' .`?e```.*+.-y:� •
�` �'iet�:•,tu;�t.; �.��,,4t,'�',>t .�°,t�?':,^r:rF:G,.'�:4 ,4,,.;3,:.,:�:,y �,,,� ,,.,e�r!"':zs: "
f{'¢mow ���. \ }A�•t$C.� k �3- � � W
= Y N
• .. Sc f I ;•� /
,`. •,�''�` � �Cyr U'.:. s4 i /
� � b3 i.:.=� •fit ,. �`
3
15
{ Y ? a FL' p "MUM 9
r s Y 3x t ,•.,. �. x 1.k, is �r ,2 ���t °,'',G'� t
..'nom .�?Y```�"P's-$'�' x 2�^ k-:e h 4 'ei C•Fv 2 d� �4 �!a R.a ,� ^�4
.`�AMR..!1"�,'Y
NUN ,tC` As-' w.`6Q\t Y`� r` 'v'A :
� '"�Y'- '�'�,. •w4ti•,. �4;.:`�yri� ....,�e,�•, .K^�i`�.',y.,frF°.it,'.�a .�,s\tx ,�,� "���� ��";. ��,p
.y;H/r. 4
Y^`" ,1 3•'� •,�y�(.{����.J't i.���'";�kE`Y'T'+nt�:ar'`*.r - ,�y r� '� ��� J.L��.
W° r�3�`� ,.�kj Y�t�'.=�•'•x.�'.f;£6 .'�'I: s���Y�,� ,�x� t
'� Q'f''.g7Ki.('4 �K�l::{a•5,P't k.,-.it�.,•v,�]„�,,,' ` k�4�i ^:�,.,,. :v �r 4
! �' ;q�?+.,�C':a�P$•�s aa3y�"'hS _ �, 3.,°t��; 4 dt.+` •av;g
,( ice':;a,!�:.�'r^��'r x• °t'[�'�"t-.•%„- t •i� ^�'� �r� Ya'5:�:'
�"• '•R'4s T5t'�Y' d Zr+:a� rf`">t�s` "�`". �'+ :`�."�-�.'r'�'`ri�rmi'Y`�'"� �.f �''F�`,y��,"R.• ,�'�'�Y � r,, -
r.;�: �'.. ;°•'�f .& sue, s��_'a'ct � +,°�:4>'.-""(",%'�p-{, p y„ ..0'�,�s �,'^'"
AGENDA
PASCO CITY COUNCIL
Workshop Meeting 7:00 p.m. May 23,2005
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. VERBAL REPORTS FROM COUNCILMEMBERS:
3. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION:
(a) Planning Commission Interviews:
1. Agenda Report from Gary Crutchfield,City Manager dated May 18, 2005.
2. Applications (4) (Council packets only).
(b) Application of Admission Tax to Golf Activities:
1. Agenda Report from Gary Crutchfield, City Manager dated May 19, 2005.
2. Vicinity Map of Pasco Golf Land.
3. Letter from Bill McIntyre, Owner of Pasco Golf Land dated 513105.
4. PMC Section 3.02.010- .030,
(c) Nonconforming Uses (MF#04-137-I):
1. Agenda Report from David I. McDonald, City Planner dated May 17, 2005.
2. Proposed Ordinance.
3. Memos to Planning Commission.
4. Planning Commission Minutes.
(d) Six-Year Transportation Improvement Plan 2006-2011:
1. Agenda Report from Robert J. Alberts,Public Works Director dated May 18, 2005,
2. Proposed Plan.
3. Resolution.
4. Map.
(e) WCIA Insurance Summary Update. (NO WRITTEN MATERIAL ON AGENDA)
Presentation by: Stan Strebel,Administrative&Community Services Director.
(f) Stealth Cell Towers:
1. Agenda Report from Thomas Colleran,Planner I dated May 2, 2005.
2. Memo outlining Stealth Tower Ordinances around Washington.
(g) Transportable Storage Units:
1. Agenda Report from Thomas Colleran,Planner I dated May 2, 2005.
2. Memo outlining Transportable Unit Ordinances around Washington.
(h) Amendment No. 1 to the Transpo Group Professional Services Agreement:
1. Agenda Report from Robert J. Alberts, Public Works Director dated May 19, 2005.
2. Amendment No. 1.
(i) Resolution,Approval of Drought Management Plan:
1. Agenda Report from Gary Crutchfield, City Manager dated May 20, 2005.
2. Proposed Resolution with Drought Management Plan.
(j) National Incident Management System(NIMS):
1. Agenda Report from Gregory L. Garcia,Fire Chief dated May 17, 2005.
2. Proposed Resolution.
4. OTHER ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION:
(a)
(b)
(c)
5. EXECUTIVE SESSION:
(a)
(b)
(c)
6. ADJOURNMENT.
Workshop Meeting 2 May 23,2005
REMINDERS:
1. 10:00 a.m., Saturday, May 21, 516 W. Clark Street — Kurt's Decorative Service 50'b Anniversary
Ribbon Cutting Ceremony. (MAYOR GARRISON TO PRESENT PROCLAMATION)
2. 12:00 p.m., Monday, May 23, Red Lion Hotel — Chamber of Commerce General Membership
Meeting. ("Building Industry Update for the Tri-Cities"presented by Jeff Losey, Executive Director,
Home Builders Association.)
3. 4:00 p.m., Monday, May 23, Port of Benton — Hanford 'Area Economic Investment Fund Board
Meeting. (COUNCILMEMBER MATT WATKINS)
4. 7:30 a.m., Thursday, May 26 — Tri-Cities Visitor & Convention Bureau Board Meeting.
(COUNCILMEMBER TOM LARSEN)
5. 4:00 p.m., Thursday, May 26, Three Rivers Convention Center — TRIDEC Board Meeting.
(MAYOR MIKE GARRISON,Rep.; COUNCILMEMBER MATT WATKINS,Alt.)
6. 5:30 p.m., Thursday, May 26, 710 W. Court Street—Community Action Committee Board Meeting.
(COUNCILMEMBER EILEEN CRAWFORD, Rep.; JOE JACKSON, Alt.)
7. 7:00 p.m., Thursday, May 26, 800 W. Canal Drive — Benton-Franklin District Board of Health
Meeting. (COUNCILMEMBERS REBECCA FRANCIK and MATT WATKINS)
8. 12:00 p.m., Wednesday, June 1, 1135 E. Hillsboro St., #B — Franklin County Mosquito Control
District Board Meeting. (COUNCILMEMBER JOE JACKSON)
9. 9:00 a.m. — 3:00 p.m., Friday, June 3, WSU Tri-Cities, Richland — Growth Management Workshop.
(COUNCILMEMBER EILEEN CRAWFORD)
City Hall will be closed Monday, May 30 in honor of Memorial Day.
The next meeting of the Pasco City Council will be held Monday, June 6 @ 7:00 p.m.
I
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Council May 18, 2005
FROM: Gary Crutchfiel ity anager Workshop Mtg.: 05/23/05
SUBJECT: Planning Com fission Interviews
I. REFERENCE(S):
1. Applications (4) (Council packets only)
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL/STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
5/23: Council to conduct brief interviews with Rose Gundy, Peter Ives, Cathy Torres
and Laurence Walkup.
III. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
A) The Planning Commission is composed of nine members; terms are for six years.
The commission meets on the third Thursday of each month at 7:00 p.m.
B) The Planning Commission conducts workshop meetings and public hearings on
land-use policy and development requests and issues recommendations for the
City Council.
C) At the present time there is one vacancy on the commission:
I. Position No. 1 (vacant) term expiration date of 2/2/10
D) After Council committee review of all applications, the following have been
selected to interview for Position No. 1:
1. Rose Gundy.....................................................................7608 Galiano
2. Peter Ives........................................................ 5508 Westminster Lane
3. Cathy Torres................................... 1720 W. Yakima
4. Laurence Walkup................................................. 8703 Tottenham Ct.
IV. DISCUSSION:
A) After conduct of interviews at the Workshop meeting, it is recommended that an
appointment be made by the Mayor (with concurrence of Council) at the Regular
meeting of June 6.
3(A)
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Council May 19, 2005
FROM: Gary Crutchfi Manager Workshop Mtg.: 5/23/05
SUBJECT: Application of Admission Tax to Golf Activities
I. REFERENCE(S):
1. Vicinity Map of Pasco Golf Land
2. Letter from Bill McIntyre, Owner of Pasco Golf Land dated 5/3/05
3. PMC Section 3.02.010 - .030
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL/STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
5/23: Discussion and direction
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
A) The city annexed several blocks of unincorporated lands lying between roads 36 and
40 south of Argent Place last year (see attached vicinity map). The annexation
included several blocks of homes as well as "Pasco Golf Land," a business situated
on the north side of the highway. Although Pasco Golf.Land is a privately-owned
and operated business, it leases land from the Port of Pasco; thus, it was not a
signatory on the annexation petition.
B) The Pasco Municipal Code requires admission tax to be paid on all spectator
activities where admission is charged as well as "golf courses or driving ranges."
The admission tax has long been applied to, the Sun Willows Golf Course and its
driving range. Pasco Golf Land was advised earlier this year that it was subject to
the city's admission tax, as the property had been annexed last year. The owner of
Pasco Golf Land (Bill McIntyre) has expressed concern with the application of such
tax to his business and was encouraged to express those concerns in writing (May 3
letter attached).
C) A review of the Pasco admission tax in relation to Kennewick and Richland reveals
that Pasco's tax rate (2.5%) is only half that required in both Kennewick and
Richland (5%). However, the admission tax is not applied to golf courses in both
Kennewick and Richland. The exemption from the admission tax for golf courses is
based on the interpretation that if the person paying the admission fee is a
"participant" in the sport (not merely a spectator), then the admission tax is not
applicable. Consequently, golf course operators in both Kennewick and Richland
avoid payment of the admission tax. Another example of this interpretation is that
bowling alleys in all three cities do not pay admission tax.
V. DISCUSSION:
A) The City of Pasco has long applied the admission tax to "golf courses or driving
ranges" as explicitly reflected in the city's admission tax ordinance (see, definition of
"place" in PMC 3.02.010). Although the 2.5% admission tax rate represents a
relatively small impact on the admission fee (for example, an $8.00 admission fee
would have to be increased by only 20 cents to offset the effect of the tax), it does in
fact represent an additional expense for the owner (to the extent it is not recovered
through price increases). Given the fact that businesses within the Tri-Cities often
compete with others across the river, the city should strive (to the extent it can
afford) to assure a level playing field for its businesses.
3(b)
B) The means to "level the playing field" in this particular instance would be deletion of
the term "golf courses or driving ranges" from the city's definition of those places
subject to admission tax. The effect of doing so, however, would also relieve the
operators of the Sun Willows Golf Course from paying the admission tax that it has
long paid to the city. The average annual admission tax receipts from the Sun
Willows Golf Course has approximated$17,000 over the last couple of years. Given
that the Sun Willows Golf Course is owned by the city and leased to a private
operator, it is conceivable that the lease arrangement can be modified so as to
minimize or avoid any net loss to the city, even though the admission tax would be
dropped (in other words, the lease agreement can be modified to increase the rent or
other such payments associated with the operation so as to offset the expected loss of
the admission tax from Sun Willows Golf Course). The result would be the same
admission tax application to businesses in Pasco as is reflected across the river
(albeit at a lower rate) without the loss of revenue associated with such a change.
C) Although the city cannot legally do what the Pasco Golf Land owner requested
("waive" the admission tax requirement), the city can, in fact, amend its ordinance so
as to exempt golf courses and golf driving ranges from application of the admissions
tax. Such an action would accomplish the objective of the Pasco Golf Land owner
and is recommended by staff, with the caveat that the Sun Willows Golf Course lease
be amended to minimize (if not avoid) the associated loss of revenue.
i
ANNEXATION
AREA# 10
(PASCO)
N
OLD CITY LIMITS
NEW CITY LIMITS
Argent Place
Old City Limits j
I
i I
Pasco Golfland
I
4% Ro Port of Pasco
sP]9-13
O 3)
« i
(2) sF 92-1 c6)
I
W. UVINGSTON RD
ul
W \�
Port of Pasco
(3)
(4) I
,v
(2) 10 N) IS) (2J fU I
I
r o aw wr
W. WE W. WERNETT RD
RNETT RD L—�--
r 76-t
V71-4
4 w. Y L_
s
� 1
r—T—
. -- (1) (2) (3) o
«
—
�� I i
- OS W. ELLA ST r c
f,) sa 87-o7
r 3 1 r I '.
City admits 67-�
W. LEOLA ST F�`�
1.�
a n
I (1) a +I
W. PEARL ST _ _ P
PASCO CITY HALL.
RECEIVED
PASCO GOLFLAND, INC, MAY 0 4 2005
2901 N ROAD 40
PASCO, WA. 99301 CITY MANAGER'S
(509) 544-9291 (BUSINESS LOCATION) OFFICE
(509) 783-1986 (BUSINESS OFFICE)
MAY 3,2005
City of Pasco
525 North Third Avenue
Pasco, WA 99301
RE: Request for Waiver of Admissions Tax of 2.5%
Attn: Gary Crutchfield, City Manager
As I recently discussed with you and with Rebecca Francik, I am writing to request a waiver of
the 2.5% Admissions Tax on revenues from Pasco Golfland greens fees and range balls.
Pasco Golfland was recently annexed by the city of Pasco. At the time of the annexation, we
were assured that there would be no change in our taxes attributable to this annexation.
However, we have been notified that an Admissions Tax of 2.5% is now to be applied to our
gross receipts for greens fees and driving range bails.
Admissions Tax for our driving range and 9-hole par three golf course is just another problem we
face in a small business, one more tax and we are getting taxed out of business. While this tax of
2.5%may seem small, absorbing it pressures our narrow operating margin further, and passing it
on to our customer reads like a price increase to them. Right now we draw customers from all of
the Tri-Cities, however increasing prices will make it easier for our customers to to stay home, or
go to Kennewick's Columbia Park, Richland's Buckskin, or West Richland's Golf Course (not to
mention other driving ranges).
We have tried hard to maintain a family-owned business that caters to all golfers, specifically
families and students (something that is hard to find). All of the local schools, including CBC,
practice at our facility and we offer discounts to these students when they play on their own. We
are also actively pursuing the `First Tee' program which will introduce golf to those that may not
normally have the chance.
With the increasing prices (electricity, fuel, property taxes, and payroll) we have been
experiencing, we are on an extremely narrow operating margin. We are privately held and do not
have deep corporate pockets to draw on. We want to continue to be an asset to the City of Pasco.
Applying the admissions tax to Pasco Golfland business does not seem to be within the spirit of
the intent of the admissions tax. We respectfully request a waiver from this tax'as it applies to
greens fees and range balls. We would apply the admissions tax to any events in which we
charge admission should we put on such an event (i.e., Long Drive contest).
We would be happy to discuss the matter further and explain our situation to the City Council.
Please contact us as soon as possible so we can resolve this issue.
Sincerely,
Bill McIntyre
Owner Pasco Golfland, Inc.
Copy: Rebecca Francik
3.02.010 DEFINITIONS.
A) "Admission Charge," in addition to its usual and ordinary meaning
includes:
1) A charge made for season tickets and subscriptions; and
2) A cover charge, or a charge made for use of seats and tables
reserved or otherwise, and other similar accommodations; and
3) A charge made for food and refreshment in any place where
free entertainment, recreation or amusement is provided; and
4) A charge made for rental or use of facilities for purposes of
recreation or amusement for which general admission is normally
charged on an individual basis shall be considered as the admission
charge; and
5) Automobile parking charges if the amount of the charge is
determined according to the number of passengers in an automobile; and
6) Any sum of money referred to as "a donation" which must be
paid before entrance is allowed.
B) "Bona Fide Charitable or Non-Profit Organization" means any
organization duly existing under the provisions of RCW Chapters 24.12, 24.20
or 24.28, or any agricultural fair organized under the provisions of RCW 36.37
or 15.76, or any non-profit corporation duly existing under the provisions of
RCW Chapter 24.03 for charitable, benevolent, educational, civic, patriotic,
political, social, fraternal, athletic or agricultural purposes, or any non-profit
organization or association, whether incorporated or otherwise, when found by
the Finance Manager to be organized and operating or conducting an event or
activity for one or more of the above-listed purposes.
C) "Person" means an individual, receiver, assignee, firm, partnership,
joint venture, corporation, company, joint stock company, limited liability
company, limited liability partnership, association, society, or a group of
individuals acting as a unit whether mutual, cooperative, fraternal, non-profit
or otherwise.
D) "Place" includes, but is not restricted to theaters, dance halls,
amphitheaters, nightclubs, auditoriums, stadiums, athletic pavilions or fields,
swimming pools, aquatic parks, baseball or other athletic parks, ice arenas,
golf courses, or driving ranges, adult entertainment facilities as defined in PMC
5.27, circuses, si e shows, amusement parks, merry-go-rounds, ferris wheels,
roller coasters, observation towers, arcades and similar attractions.
E) "Finance Manager" means the Finance Manager of the City of
Pasco or his designee. (Ord. 3557 Sec.1 & 2, 2002; Ord. 3437 Sec. 2, 2000.)
3.02.020 TAX IMPOSED - RATES. A tax in the amount of two and one
half (2.5%) percent of the admission char e shall be levied and imposed upon
every person including children, without regard to age) who pays an admission
charge to any place, including a tax on persons who are admitted free of charge
or at reduced rates. to any place for which other persons pay a charge or a
regular higher charge for the same or similar privileges or accommodations.
Whenever the charge to children or senior citizens for admission to any
place is less than the charge made to other persons, or when such persons are
admitted free, the lesser admission charge is not considered to be a reduced
rate under this chapter. The amount of tax payable by such persons shall be
determined by the amount of actual admission tax paid. (Ord. 3557 Sec. 3,
2002; Ord. 3437 Sec. 2, 2000.)
3.02.030 ADMISSION TAX EXEMPTION. A) The admission tax listed in
section 3.02.020 is not imposed:
1)When the admission charge, either for a single event or by
prorating a season ticket or subscription price, is ten cents or less; or
2) Upon a person paying an admission charge to an activity of
an elementary or secondary school where the school or school district is
the sponsor; or
3) Upon a person paying an admission charge to an activity of
an accredited public or private college, junior college, university, or the
recognized student body association thereof; or
4) Upon admission charges paid by any government agency; or
5) Where no admission charge or compensating payment is
collected from the persons attending the activity or event; or
6) Upon a person paying an admission charge to an activity or
performance of a bona fide charitable or non-profit organization
furnishing evidence of their organization's status under one of the
applicable RCW chapters as listed in section 3.02.010(B); provided:
a) The Finance Manager's office receives a properly
completed license application, including proof of the organization's
status, for this exemption at least fifteen days prior to the event;
and
b) The bona fide charitable or non-profit organization
must be organized and operated exclusively for those purposes
detailed in the RCW chapters listed in section 3.02.010(B); and
C) The bona fide charitable or non-profit organization
must be fiscally responsible for the event and receive the full
benefit and use of the proceeds from the event. If the bona fide
charitable or non-profit organization contracts with a non-exempt
person to conduct the event on its behalf, the exemption applies
only if the exempt organization receives payment of its expenses
and charges a net sum equal to at least twenty percent (20%) of
the anticipated gross of admission charges.
B) This section is to be construed strictly against an exemption.
C) The exemption to admission tax as provided in this section shall
not apply to an event in which a college, university or non-profit organization
lends its name to an endorsement for an ineligible person for the purpose of
invoking the tax exemption. (Ord. 3557 Sec. 4, 2002; Ord. 3437 Sec. 2, 2000.)
AGENDA REPORT NO. 35
FOR: City Council Date: 5/17/05
TO: Gary Crutchfie Oirector Manager Workshop: 5-23-05
Richard J. Smi ( Regular:
Community & E onomic Development
FROM: David McDonald, City Planner72�}�_.
SUBJECT: Nonconforming Uses (MF # 04-137-1)
I. REFERENCE(S):
A. Proposed Ordinance
B. Memos to Planning Commission
C. Planning Commission Minutes
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL/STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
5/23/05Review and Discussion
6/6/05 Motion: I move to adopt Ordinance No. amending the
nonconforming provisions of PMC Title 25, and, further to authorize
publication by summary only.
III. FISCAL IMPACT
None
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
A. Last year Terry Milham, the owner of a four-plea on Sylvester
Street submitted a written request to the City asking that changes
be made in the nonconforming chapter of the zoning regulations.
The City Council considered the matter in November 2004 and
referred the issue to the City Planning Commission for study and a
recommendation.
I
B. Mr. Milham asked for an amendment to the zoning regulations that
would permit nonconforming uses to be rebuilt if they are damaged
by more than 50 percent of their assessed value. Some cities in
Washington, including Yakima, Kennewick, Walla Walla, and
Richland permit nonconforming uses to be rebuilt following
substantial damage provided they are rebuilt to the exact foot print
of the original building. Other cities such as Spokane have a
complex process that permits reconstruction of nonconforming
uses depending on the type of adjoining land use.
C. The Planning Commission discussed this issue in a series of
workshops which culminated with a public hearing on April 21,
2005.
V. DISCUSSION:
A. Staff believes that some owners of multi-family dwellings which are
located in less intense zoning districts have experienced difficulty in
securing mortgages due to FHA concerns about non-conforming )3(c
uses. Such mortgages cannot be readily sold in the secondary
market.
B. Staff, however, remains concerned about permitting the
reconstruction of a nonconforming house in an industrial zone or a
business that lacks sufficient off street parking does not protect and
enhance the value of nearby industrial properties. Allowing a
damaged house to be rebuilt adjacent a chemical plant or welding
shop does not encourage orderly growth nor protect such industrial
uses from inherent nuisances when homes are located adjacent
industrial uses.
C. The Planning Commission recommended that the prohibition
against the reconstruction of non-conforming uses remain in place
with the exception of non-conforming multi family dwellings located
in less intense residential zones which may be destroyed by fire or
natural disaster. It is the .owners of such properties who have been
most vocal about the need to amend the ordinance. The
recommended amendment will address their concerns.
D. The City Council reviewed the proposed code amendment at a
workshop on May 9, 2005. Staff indicated in the workshop that
additional refinements were needed for the proposed code
amendment prior to Council action. The proposed code amendment
has been modified to include a time frame for obtaining permits and
by the elimination of language requiring reconstruction to follow the
original foot print of the building.
E. If Council concurs, an ordinance amending the Pasco Municipal
Code will be placed on the June 6, 2005 agenda for action.
I
EXHIBIT# 1
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE relating to Zoning amending PMC Title 25 dealing with
Nonconforming Uses.
WHEREAS, cities have the responsibility to regulate and control the
physical development within their borders and insure the public health, safety
and welfare are maintained; and,
WHEREAS, the City of Pasco has zoning regulations that encourage
orderly growth and development of the City; and,
WHEREAS, from time to time, the City Council causes the zoning
regulations to be reviewed to insure they fulfill their intended purposes; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that to further the purposes
of maintaining a quality community, it is necessary to amend PMC Title 25;
NOW THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON, DOES
ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That Section 25.72.050 of the Pasco Municipal Code be
and the same is hereby amended to read as follows:
25.72.050 MAINTENANCE, DAMAGE, REPAIRS AND RESTORATION. j
(2 ) No building damaged by fire or other causes to the extent of
more than fifty (50) percent of the assessed
value of the structure as determined by the records of the Franklin
County Assessor shall be repaired or rebuilt, except multi family
units previously authorized by building_permit in any residential
zoning district may be rebuilt under the following conditions:
a. Permits must be obtained within one year of building damage or all
nonconforming privileges are lost;
b. The fire or other cause of damage was determined to be accidental
or a natural disaster;
c. The proposed repair or reconstruction shall not increase the
nonconformity of the structure or use;
d. Nothing in this Chapter shall prevent the strengthening or
restoring to a safe condition of any nonconforming building
ordered by any official charged with protecting public safety.
e. Reconstruction should adhere to the required district set backs.
(3) Any structure or portion thereof declared unsafe by a
properly authorized per-so the Building Official may be restored to a
safe condition and continue as a nonconforming use, unless such
repairs exceed fifty (50) percent of the assessed value of the
structure as determined by the records of the Franklin County
Assessor except multi family units previously authorized by building
permit in any residential zoning district may be _rebuilt under the
following conditions:
a. Permits must be obtained within the time frame provided in the
notification by the Building Official or all nonconformina privileges
are lost
b. The fire or other cause of damage was determined to be accidental
or a natural disaster;
c. The proposed repair or reconstruction shall not increase the
nonconformity of the structure or uses
d. Nothing in this Chapter shall prevent the or
restoring to a safe condition of any nonconforming building
ordered by an official charged with -protecting public safe
e. Reconstruction should adhere to the required district set backs.
Section 3. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect five days
after passage and publication as required by law.
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco, at its regular meeting of
2005.
Michael B. Garrision
Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Webster U. Jackson Leland B. Kerr
City Clerk City Attorney
2
CITY OF PASCO
SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO.
ORDINANCE NO. , amends PMC Title 25 dealing with nonconforming
uses
The full text of Ordinance No. , is available free of charge to any person
who requests it from the City Clerk of the City of Pasco (509) 545-3402, P.O.
Box 293, Pasco, Washington 99301.
Webster U. Jackson, City Clerk
3
Memo
To: Planning Commission
From: Dave McDonald, City Planner
Subject: Nonconforming Uses
Date: January 20, 2005
At their November 29th workshop the City Council held a discussion on
nonconforming issues related to the location of single family and multi
family dwellings in zoning districts other than ones approved for such
uses.
In the context of zoning the term nonconforming means land uses,
buildings or premises that were lawfully established and in existence at
the time the zoning regulations were enacted and are maintained after
the effective date of the regulations even though they do not comply with
the regulations.
The zoning regulations group similar land uses together for the purposes
of avoiding conflicts between uses, to maintain security of home life, to
stabilize property values and to encourage orderly growth. When zoning
districts were originally established in the 1960's or . earlier, not all
neighborhoods were completely homogeneous. Occasionally a duplex or
four-plex would be in a single family zone or a house would be located in
a commercial zone. Rather than requiring the immediate elimination of
the few uses that did not match the majority uses in a given zone the
non matching uses (such as a house in a commercial zone) were
identified as nonconforming uses, Nonconforming uses were and are
permitted to continue provided they are not enlarged or reconstructed
after significant damage. The intent is for nonconforming uses to
eventually be phased out.
An owner of a nonconforming four-plex has requested the City consider
changing the current nonconforming regulations to permit the
reconstruction of nonconforming buildings under certain conditions.
Following discussion on this matter the City Council forwarded the
matter to the Planning Commission for study and the development of a
recommendation for a possible code amendment.
The attached Council Report and correspondence will provide the
Planning Commission with background information on the issue. Over
the next several months staff will be providing the Planning Commission
with information on nonconforming uses to assist with the development
of a recommendation to the City Council.
EXHIBIT# 1
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE relating to Zoning amending PMC Title 25 dealing with
Nonconforming Uses.
WHEREAS, cities have the responsibility to regulate and control the
physical development within their borders and insure the public health, safety
and welfare are maintained; and,
WHEREAS, the City of Pasco has zoning regulations that encourage
orderly growth and development of the City; and,
WHEREAS, from time to time, the City Council causes the zoning
regulations to be reviewed to insure they fulfill their intended purposes; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that to further the purposes
of maintaining a quality community, it is necessary to amend PMC Title 25;
NOW THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON, DOES
ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That Section 25.72.050 of the Pasco Municipal Code be
and the same is hereby amended to read as follows:
25.72.050 MAINTENANCE, DAMAGE, REPAIRS AND RESTORATION.
(2 ) No building damaged by fire or other causes to the extent of
more than fifty (50) percent of such assessment of the assessed
value of the structure as determined by the records of the Franklin
County Assessor shall be repaired or rebuilt, except multi family
units previously authorized by building permit in any residential
zoning district may be rebuilt under the following conditions:
a. Permits must be obtained within one year of building damage or all
nonconforming privileges are lost;
b. The fire or other cause of damage was determined to be accidental
or a natural disaster;
c. The proposed repair or reconstruction shall not increase the
nonconformity of the structure or use;
d. Nothing in this Chapter shall prevent the strengthening or
restoring to a safe condition of any nonconforming building
ordered by any official charged with protecting public safety.
e. Reconstruction should adhere to the required district set backs.
v. a.aa. a.aaasauaaa aaa..a asaava aaay .a wi..a.a a,aaa. . .....av a.v . av v�---�. - -b
status of his four-plex it is not possible for potential purchasers to
obtain financing to purchase the property. He has stated that, as
the result of changes in lending practices, prospective purchasers
are unable to obtain conventional financing on nonconforming
properties.
V. DISCUSSION:
A. In the context of zoning the term "nonconforming" means land uses,
buildings or premises that were lawfully established and in existence
at the time the zoning regulations were enacted and are maintained
after the effective date of the regulations even though they do not
comply with the regulations.
B. The zoning regulations group similar land uses together for the
purposes of avoiding conflicts between uses, to maintain security of
home life, to stabilize property values and to encourage orderly
growth. When Pasco's zoning districts were originally established, in
the 1960's or earlier, not all neighborhoods were completely
homogeneous. Occasionally, a duplex or four-plex would be in a
single family zone or a house would be located in a commercial zone.
Rather than requiring the immediate elimination of the few uses that
did not match the majority of uses in a given zone, the non matching
uses (such as a house in a commercial zone) were identified as
nonconforming uses. Nonconforming uses were and are permitted
to continue provided they are not enlarged or reconstructed after
significant damage. The intent is for nonconforming uses to
eventually be phased out.
C. As Staff understands this request, Mr. Milham is asking for an
amendment to the zoning regulations that would permit
nonconforming uses to be rebuilt if they are damaged by more than
50 percent of their assessed value. Some cities in Washington,
including Yakima, Kennewick, Walla Walla, and Richland permit
nonconforming uses to be rebuilt following substantial damage
provided they are rebuilt to the exact foot print of the original
building. Other cities such as Spokane have a complex process that
permits reconstruction of nonconforming uses depending on the
type of adjoining land use.
D. Historically the nonconforming status of buildings was not an
impediment to financing. The standard loan requirements for
property insurance provided mortgage companies with the security
needed to protect the loans in the event a building was damaged or
destroyed. Those.requirements are present today regardless of the
zoning status of a building. It is unclear why mortgage companies
are concerned given that the proceeds from an insurance settlement
can be used to pay off any outstanding mortgage.
E. Permitting the reconstruction of nonconforming buildings to their
original foot print addresses the concerns of a few property owners
about financing; However, it does not address the original purpose
for the creation of nonconforming uses. Permitting the
reconstruction of a nonconforming house in an industrial zone or a
business that lacks sufficient off street parking does not protect and
enhance the value of nearby industrial properties. Allowing a
damaged house to be rebuilt adjacent a chemical plant or welding
shop does not encourage orderly growth nor protect such industrial
uses from inherent nuisances when homes are located adjacent
industrial uses.
F. Considerable thought is needed in responding to Mr. Milham's
request. The Council basically has three options available on this
issue. The Council could, after one or more workshops, hold a
public hearing to consider amending the regulations. The Planning
Commission could be instructed to study the matter and hold a
hearing or the Council could determine that no changes are needed
and take no action on the matter. Given the significant number of
cities that have modified their nonconforming provisions to
accommodate secondary mortgage lenders, it would appear prudent
to forward this matter to the Planning Commission for study and the
development of a recommendation.
I
Terry Milllarn
1016 West 37'x' Place
Kennewick, WA. 09337 REC',F_IVED
Email tmilhamOkliarter.net .
Cell 509-539-3910
SEP + `i 1.11114
CaM+�i�,r�rrr t►r:vFri�inaenl-r ncr,r.'
TO: Rick Sniitli (Manager—Planning and Zoning—City of Pasco
Hello Mr. Smith
Subject: Request to change a zoning stalernent in my property's (4 10 Sylvester Pasco, Washington)
zoning profile. Propose to change the statement; "if more than 50%destroyed then only a duplex
can be built on the site"to "owner can rebuild present structure to original footprint within 6 nionths
if destroyed." The lenders will accept this statement and will loan money. This is basically a
"grand father.clause."
Due to zoning changes well after the subject property was built, I am unable to sell the property as
lenders will not loan funds on properties that are listed/zoned as "non-conforming with conditions
that effect the value of the property." My property falls into this category.
have entailed you and Dave McDonald this past week in regards to this issue with research on
what other cities accomplish in these zoning"non-conforming with conditions statement
conditions"circumstances.
Rick, I appreciate your efforts. The bottom line is that if the property burned down, (statistically
low) and if the property burned down more than 50% (even lower statistically probable), the city
would let the owner rebuild the same building. Rebuilding the same structure again to the same
blueprint/footprint will not adversely effect (lie individuals, the area of city, or city.
The issue resides with the zoning department to resolve this issue. I have a buyer for the property.
This is of the up most importance to resolve this non-conforming issue ASAP!
Sincerely
Terry M i 1 tram
Att: appraisal
cc. butterworth
tucker.
t
To: Rick Smilh (Director- Planning and Zoning - Pasco)
Gary CrutCllfield (City Manager—Pasco
From: Terry Milham (Property owner in the City of Pasco). Subject property is located
at 410 Sylvester.
Subject: Research completed on why lenders are not able to secure mortgages on
legal non-conforming residential property when adverse stipulations
placed upon the properties.
References: Chris Hinkley (loan officer), American Home Mortgage, 1128 Columbia
Park Trail, Richland, WA. 99352 Phone# 509-735-5363
Gary 11_ Lackey (loan officer), Major Mortgage, 741 l Clearwater Ave.
Kennewick, WA. 99336 Phone # 509-735-1895
Eric Sniezak, (loan officer), A+ Mortgage, Inc. 3820 S. Pine Street,
Tacoma, WA. 98409 Phone # 253-405-2200
Western Regional Office Fannie Mae, 135 North Los Robles Ave, Suite
300, Pasadena, CA. 91 101, Representative—Nick Perez (nonconforming
property representative) Phone # 626-396-5100
Freddie Mac, 21700 Oxnard Street, Suite 1900, Woodland Hills, CA.
91367-3642 Phone 4500-373-3343
Attachment Guide Lines (Fannie Mae) on criteria for Property Appraisals (see
attachment A, titled, "Site Analysis"
Rick and Gary
I Hope the work l have completed on why lenders cannot secure mortgages on legal non-
conforming properties in the City of Pasco is a help to you in resolving the quagmire
surrounding these properties. 1 sincerely believe that a workable solution is possible
giving the owners of such properties the ability to refinance or to sell the property.
Hopefully the information helps to bring a informed position to the City Council.
(1) A big question that both of you have had is "why are legal nonconforming
properties presently not being funded (mortgages obtain) when in the years past
there hasn't been a problem in obtaining mortgages for these properties. I have an
answer for you and its "off the record" so to speak. As explained to me, the
bottom line is that the Appraisers are held more accountable to document all
zoning criteria for a property and any adverse effects the zoning criteria has on the
property. See attachment A (Fannie Mae's guidelines) under Site Analysis,
section 907.01 "Zoning" including bullet one. This section tells what is required
by.the appraiser for(lie secondary market, i.e.; Fannie Mae and Freddie Mae.
These agencies are who buys most of the mortgages in America from the
mortgages companies. It's been a practice for appraisers ill years past to not go
into it detailed report in documenting adverse effects that zoning may have on a
particular property. Adverse zoning criteria effects the sale of many properties.
As you react the section on zoning, you will see the criteria required by the
appraisers. The appraisers currently are held to a higher standard.
(2) Zoning See attachment A under Site Analysis, section 907.01, the second and
third bulleted items. Please note or call one of the references above for validation.
These guidelines have been in place for decades. Bullet one is very interesting
and it read as follows_ "We will purchase or sectiritize a mortgage that is sect tred
by a one to four fanri!),property or a turit in a PUD project if the property
represents n legal, but non-conforming, use or the land-as long as the
appraiser's analysis reflects any adverse effect that the nor--conforming use has
on the value and marketability of the property" Mullet two: "We will purchase
or secur•itize a condominimn unit ntorigage or a cooperative share h-om a project
that represents a le-gal but non-contbrining. use of the land only if the
iniprovenients can be rebuilt to current density in the event of their partial or
full desirtiction (ht such cases the niortgaze fle nutst include a copy of the
applicable zoninQ re rilalions or a letter i-out the local zoning authorit y that
cu.tthorizes reconstruction to current density).
The secondary market has seen that the legal non-conforming zoning issues.can
be a problem for property owners when it comes to the sell or refinance of such
property. As you.noticed above, the guidelines permit a"letter" format to be
included in the mortgage file from the zoning authority stating that a.full rebuild
can be approved in case of partial or fall destruction. In essence they are not
requiring cities to change overall zoning, but to evaluate individual properties. It
becomes clearer why many cities such as Richland and Kennewick use the
"letter" approach-to enable many home owners to sell or obtain mortgages on
these properties.
You should have enough information above to facilitate the zoning department
review of these issues. This should assist in presenting an informed position/fact
of the manner to,the city council for review.
Again I want to thank you for your efforts with these zoning issues on the non-
conforming properties. The bottom line is,"the inability to build to the same
density/footprint" is preventing rile from selling my property. The secondary.
market will not knowingly purchase mortgages where the properties
marketability/density is in jeopardy.
Thanks I
Terry Milham l Jr I t.; t
509-539-391 U / _t
I
MRE _ Property & Appraisal Analysts filF
cC�yr.cnt 7/2cc- Cow,
907
be used to evaluate both the ►,,ventory of two- to four-family properties currently
for sale in the subject neighborhood and competing Nvith the subject property, as
well as the recent price and marketing tune trends that affect the subject property.
SITE ANALYSIS
907 The property site should be of a size, shape, and topography that is generally
conforming and acceptable in the market area. It must also have competitive
utilities, street improvements, and other amenities. Since amenities, easements,
and encroachments may either detract from or enhance the marketability of a site,
the appraiser must comment on them if the site has adverse conditions or is not
typical for the neighborhood. If there is market resistance to a property because
Its site is not compatible with the neighborhood or with the requirements of the
competitive market, the lender sbould undem-rite the mortgage more carefully
and, if appropriate, require more conservative mortgage terms.
90
907.01 ZONING: The appraiser is responsible for reporting the specific zoning
classification for the subject property.The appraiser must include a general
statement to describe what the zoning permits ( "one-family", 'Two-family'•, etc. }
when he or she indicates a specific zoning such as R-1, R*2, etc. Tlie appraiser
must also include a specific statement irtdicatin; whether thz improvements
represent a legal use; a legal, but non-conforming (grandfathered) use; or art
illegal use under the ?Oring regulations; or whether there is no local zoning.
We generally will not purchase or securitize a mortgage on a property if the
improvements do not constitute a legally permissible use of the land. We do make
certain exceptions to this policy, as long as the property is appraised and
underwritten in accordance with the special requirements we impose as a
condition to agreeing to snake the exception:
We will purchase or securitize a mortgage that is secured by a one- to four-
family property or a brit in a PUD project if the property represents a legal, but
non-conforming, use of the land -- as long as the appraiser's analysis reflects any
adverse effect that the non-conforming use has on the value and tnarketabil
of.the property_
= We will purchase or securitize a conrloniinhon unit mortgage or a cooperative
share load from a project that represents a legal, but non-conforming, use of the
land only if the improvements can be rebuilt to current density in the event of
their partial or full destruction. (TnSuch cases, the mortgage file must include a 90
copy of the applicable zoning regdTa-7to—n—sbT a letter from the local zoning
authority that authorizes reconstruction to gurrent ensily .
We will purchase or securitize a mortgage secured by a one family property that
includes an illegal additional writ or accessory apartment (which may be referred
to as a mother-in-law, mother-daughter, or granny unit) as long as the illegal use
conforms to the subject neighborhood and to the market. The property must be
appraised in conformity with its legal rise, that of a one-family property (and the
borrower must qualify for the mortgage without considering any rental income
from the illegal unit). The appraiser must report that the improvements
represent an illegal use and demonstrate that the improvements are typical for
the market tlirough an analysis of at least three comparable properties that have
the same illegal use. The lender must also make suxe that the existence of the
illegal additional unit will not jeopardize any future hazard insurance claim that
P
inight need to be 51ed for the property. We will not purchase or securitize a
mortgage secured by a Avo- to four-faintly,property that includes an illegal
206 FN%!A
Memo
To: Planning Commission
From: Dave McDonald, City Planner
Subject: Nonconforming Uses
Date: February 24, 2005
At the January meeting staff introduced the Planning Commission to the
definition of nonconforming uses.
In the context of zoning the term nonconforming means land uses,
buildings or premises that were lawfully established and in existence at
the time the zoning regulations were enacted..and are maintained after
the effective date of the regulations even though they do not comply with
the regulations.
When zoning was initially established in the United States the writers of
zoning legislation believed that certain land uses were not compatible
and that efficiencies in the allocation of land resources could be achieved
if incompatible uses were' clearly separated. To accomplish the desired
land use.. efficiencies, cities were divided into distinct districts or
compartments that restrict uses to residential, commercial or industrial
development. The thought process behind the districting of a city was
that no residence would have a commercial business for a direct
neighbor and industrial plants would be free of complaining homeowners
and unattended children.
However by dividing, existing development into tidy compartments or
zones it was nearly impossible to establish zones that were completely
developed . with similar land uses. Drafters of the original zoning
ordinances quickly realized this and made provision for uses that did not
conform to the majority of uses in a given zoning district. The few uses in
a district that were not the same as the majority of uses were classified
as legal nonconforming uses and were permitted to continue. However
certain restrictions were placed on nonconforming uses. The continued
presence nonconforming uses was conditioned by regulations that
prevented expansion or continuance if catastrophic damage occurred.
Over the years courts have ruled that the rights of nonconforming uses
and the application of zoning regulations should be strictly construed.
Courts have determined nonconforming uses "should be restricted,
decreased, and finally eliminated." A court in Maine went so far as to
state that nonconforming uses "should not be perpetuated any longer
than necessary. The policy of zoning is to abolish nonconforming uses as
speedily as justice will permit."
Pasco's original zoning regulations were established following the
national trends. Pasco's zoning regulations like others grouped similar
land uses together.for the purposes of avoiding conflicts between uses, to
maintain security of home life, to stabilize property values and to
encourage orderly growth. When zoning districts were originally
established in the 1960's or earlier, not all neighborhoods were
completely homogeneous. Occasionally a duplex or four-plex would be in
a single family zone or a house would be located in a commercial zone.
Rather than requiring the immediate elimination of the few uses that did
not match the majority uses in a given zone the non matching uses (such
as a house in a commercial zone) were identified as nonconforming uses.
The intent of Pasco's code is for nonconforming uses to eventually be
phased out.
In one particular area of the City (south of "A" Street, west of Maitland
Ave) we have seen a number of nonconforming structures that have been
phased out as intended by the zoning regulations.
Pasco's nonconforming uses regulations have been in place for many
years. It has only been recently that property owners have pointed out
that the nonconforming status of properties creates problems for
conventional financing. Historically the nonconforming status of
buildings was not an impediment to financing. The standard loan
requirements for property insurance provided mortgage companies with
the security needed to protect the loans in the event a building was
damaged or destroyed. Those requirements are present today regardless
of the zoning status of a building. It is unclear why mortgage companies
are concerned, given that the proceeds from an insurance settlement can
be used to pay off any outstanding mortgage debt.
In response to financing questions some cities in Washington, including
Yakima, Kennewick, Walla Walla, and Richland permit nonconforming
uses to be rebuilt following substantial damage provided they are rebuilt
to the exact footprint of' the original building. Other cities such as
Spokane have a complex process that permits `reconstruction of
nonconforming uses depending on the type of adjoining land use.
Permitting the reconstruction of nonconforming buildings to their
original footprint addresses the concerns of a few property owners about
financing; However, it does not address the original purpose for the
creation of nonconforming uses. Permitting the reconstruction of a
nonconforming house in an industrial or commercial zone does not
protect and enhance the value of nearby industrial or commercial
properties. Allowing a damaged house to be rebuilt adjacent to a
chemical plant or welding shop does not encourage orderly growth nor
protect such industrial uses from inherent nuisances when homes are
located adjacent to industrial or commercial uses.
Permitting the reconstruction of nonconforming buildings in essences
makes them conforming. There will never be an opportunity to resolve
conflicts between competing uses if nonconforming buildings can
continually be rebuilt. Reconstructing nonconforming buildings is
counter to the fundamental purposes for which the City established
zoning.
Before the Planning Commission entertains proposals to possibly amend
the current nonconforming uses regulations it would be important to
have a clear understanding of the purpose and intent of zoning
regulations as a whole. The purpose statement that guided the
development of the zoning regulations and future amendments is
provided below.
25.04.020 PURPOSE OF TITLE. . The purpose of this Title is to
implement the Comprehensive Plan for the Pasco Urban Area. This Title
is to also further the purpose of promoting the health, safety,
convenience, comfort, prosperity and general welfare of the present and
future inhabitants of the Pasco Urban Area, and;
(1) To encourage and facilitate the orderly growth and
development of the Pasco Urban Area.
(2) To provide adequate open space for light and air, to prevent
overcrowding of the land, and to lessen congestion on the streets.
(3) To secure economy in municipal expenditures, to facilitate
adequate provisions for transportation, water, sewer, schools, parks, and
other public facilities and services.
(4) To increase the security of home life and preserve and create
a more favorable environment for citizens and visitors of the Pasco Urban
Area.
(6) To secure safety from fire, panic and other dangers.
(7) To stabilize and improve property values.
(8) To enhance the economic and cultural well being of the
inhabitants of Pasco.
(9) To promote the development of a more wholesome, serviceable
and attractive city resulting from an orderly, planned use of resources.
(Ord. 3354 Sec. 2, 1999.)
After review of the information contained in this memo the Planning
Commission will need to begin formulation a recommendation to the City
Council on the nonconforming uses. Another workshop will be scheduled
for March to be followed by a possible hearing in April.
Memo
To: Planning Commission
From: Dave McDonald, City Planner
Subject: Nonconforming Uses
Date: March 17, 2005
In response to requests to modify the current nonconforming provisions
of the zoning regulations the Planning Commission has held workshops
for the past two months.
In responding to requests for changes in the code the Planning
Commission recognized the fact that permitting the reconstruction of
nonconforming buildings to their original footprint addressed the
concerns of a few property owners about financing; However, it did not
address the original purpose for the creation of nonconforming uses.
Permitting the reconstruction of a nonconforming house in an industrial
or commercial zone does not protect and enhance the value of nearby
industrial or commercial properties. The staff received the direction that
it was not appropriate to relax the non conforming standards across the
community. There was a particular concern about allowing the
continuation of non conforming uses in industrial and commercial zones.
After reviewing the purpose and intent of the zoning regulations the
Planning Commission suggested that the only change to be considered in
the nonconforming uses regulations should be restricted to multi family
structures in residential areas only. Following that direction staff has
prepared the attached code amendment.
The proposed code amendment reflects the direction provided by the
Planning Commission to limit nonconforming code changes to non
conforming multifamily structures in residential zones only.
Proposed Nonconforming Code Amendment
25.72.050 MAINTENANCE, DAMAGE, REPAIRS AND
RESTORATION.
(2 ) No building damaged by fire or other causes to the extent
of more than fifty (50) percent of such assessment of the
assessed value of the structure as determined by the records
of the Franklin County Assessor shall be repaired or rebuilt,
except multi family units in any residential zoning district may
be rebuilt under the following conditions:
a. The fire or other cause of damage was determined to be
accidental or a natural disaster;
b. The proposed repair or reconstruction must duplicate the
original building footprint;
c. The proposed repair or reconstruction does not increase the
nonconformity of the structure or use;
d. Reconstruction must adhere to the required district set
backs;
e. Nothing in this Chapter shall prevent the strengthening or
restoring to a safe condition of any nonconforming building
ordered by any official charged with protecting public safety.
(3) Any structure or portion thereof declared unsafe by a
properly authorized person may be restored .to a safe condition
and continue as a nonconforming use, unless such repairs
exceed fifty (50) percent of the assessed value of the structure
as determined by the records of the Franklin County Assessor
except multi family units in any residential zoning district may
be rebuilt under the following conditions:
a. The fire or other cause of damage was determined to be
accidental or a natural disaster;
b. The proposed repair or reconstruction must duplicate the
original building footprint;
c. The proposed repair or reconstruction does not increase the
nonconformity of the structure or use;
d. Reconstruction must adhere to the required district set
backs;
(4) Nothing in this Chapter shall prevent the
strengthening or restoring to a safe condition of any
nonconforming building ordered by any official charged with
protecting_public safety.
4� V -
Memo
To: Planning Commission
From: Dave McDonald, City Planner
Subject: Nonconforming Uses
Date: April 21, 2005
Over the past several months the Planning Commission has held
workshops to discuss nonconforming uses issues.
In responding to requests for changes in the code the Planning
Commission recognized the fact that permitting the reconstruction of
nonconforming buildings to their original footprint addressed the
concerns of a few property owners about financing; However, it did not
address the original purpose for the creation of nonconforming uses.
Permitting the reconstruction of a nonconforming house in an industrial
or commercial zone does not protect and enhance the value of nearby
industrial or commercial properties. The Planning Commission felt it was
not appropriate to relax the non conforming standards everywhere in the
community. There was a particular concern about allowing the
continuation of non conforming uses in industrial and commercial zones.
After reviewing the purpose and intent of the zoning regulations the
Planning Commission suggested that the only change to be considered in
the nonconforming uses regulations should be restricted to multi family
structures in residential areas only. Following that direction staff has
prepared the attached code amendment.
The proposed code amendment reflects the direction provided by the
Planning Commission to limit nonconforming code changes to non
conforming multifamily structures in residential zones only.
A public hearing has been set for the April 21St meeting. Following the
hearing a recommendation will need to be sent on to the City Council.
Recommendation
Motion: I moved to recommend the City Council amend PMC Section
25.72.050, by creating provisions for the continuation of certain
nonconforming uses in residential zoning districts as identified in Exhibit
it 1.
EXHIBIT # l
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE relating to signage amending PMC Title 25 dealing
with Nonconforming Uses.
WHEREAS, cities have the responsibility to regulate and control the
physical development within their borders and insure the public health, safety
and welfare are maintained; and,
WHEREAS, the City of Pasco has zoning regulations that encourage
orderly growth and development of the City; and,
WHEREAS, from time to time, the City Council causes the zoning
regulations to be reviewed to insure they fulfill their intended purposes; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that to further the purposes
of maintaining a quality community, it is necessary to amend PMC Title 25;
NOW THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON, DOES
ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That Section 25.72.050 of the Pasco Municipal Code be
and the same is hereby amended to read as follows:
25.72.050 MAINTENANCE, DAMAGE, REPAIRS AND RESTORATION.
(2 ) No building damaged by fire or other causes to the extent of
more than fifty (50) percent of sueh assessm. e t, of the assessed
value of the structure as determined by the records of the Franklin
County Assessor shall be repaired or rebuilt, except multi family
units previously authorized by building permit in any residential
zoning district ma 'be rebuilt under the following conditions:
a. The fire or other cause of damage was determined to be accidental
or a natural disaster;
b. The proposed repair or reconstruction must duplicate the original
building footprint;
c. The proposed repair or reconstruction does not increase the
nonconformity of the structure or use;
d. Reconstruction must adhere to the required district set backs:
e. Nothing in this Chapter shall prevent the strengthening or
restoring t_o a safe condition of any nonconforming building
ordered by any official charged with protecting public safety.
3 An structure or portion thereof declared� ) y p unsafe by a
properly authorized person may be restored to a safe condition and
continue as a nonconforming use, unless such repairs exceed fifty
(50) percent of the assessed value of the structure as determined by
the records of the Franklin County Assessor except multi family
units previously authorized by building permit in any residential
zoning district may be rebuilt under the following conditions:
a. The fire or other cause of damage was determined to be accidental
or a natural disaster;
b. The proposed repair or reconstruction must duplicate the original
building footprint;
c. The proposed repair or reconstruction does not increase the
nonconformity of the structure or use;
d. Reconstruction must adhere to the required district set backs;
(4) Nothing in this Chapter shall prevent the strengthening or
restoring to a safe condition of-any nonconforming building ordered
by any official charged with protecting public safety.
Section 3. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect five days
after passage and publication as required by law.
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco, at its regular meeting of
2005.
Michael B. Garrision
Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Webster U. Jackson Leland B. Kerr
City Clerk City Attorney
' I
2
REGULAR MEETING January 20, 2005
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JANUARY 20, 2005
OTHER BUSINESS:
A. Other Business: CODE AMENDMENT: Non-conforming Use
Code Amendment, (City of Pasco)
IMF# 2004-137-I)
Acting Chair Smurthwaite read the master file number and asked for the Staff
report.
Staff reported that in November of last year City Council held a workshop to
discuss issues related to non-conforming uses. Staff explained what
nonconforming uses were and how such uses were created. Non-conforming
uses are allowed to continue under a grandfathering provision that allows them
to be used until those uses are abandoned for a period of one year or more or
destroyed by 50% or more of its value by fire or other cause. The idea was that
non-conforming uses would eventually be phased out and replaced with
conforming uses. Over the years, that didn't seem to pose a significant
problem for property owners. However recently it has created difficulties for
people trying to sell or refinance their properties. The city council has asked
the Planning commission to study this matter and develop a recommendation.
Terry Milham, 1016 W 37th Place, Kennewick, owner of a 4-plex at
410 Sylvester, recently found the buyer for his building was unable to get a
loan. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac predominantly buy all of the mortgages.
The reason the property cannot be financed is because of the non-conforming
issue, if it burned down more than 50 percent it could not be rebuilt. Mr.
Milham asked the City to consider an amendment to the code to allow
nonconforming buildings to be rebuilt. Mr. Milham stated most cities have a
mechanism to deal with non-conforming issues.
Staff stated that they would be bringing this item back to the Planning
commission over the next few months.
REGULAR MEETING February 24, 2005
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES FEBRUARY 24, 2005
CALL TO ORDER:
WORKSHOP
A. Workshop: CODE AMENDMENT: Noon-conforming Use
Code Amendment, (City of Pasco
(MF# 2004-137-I1
Acting Chair Smurthwaite read the master file number and asked for the Staff
report.
Staff reported that the Non-conforming Use Code issue was discussed briefly at the
last Planning Commission meeting in January. A concerned property Mr. Milham
also spoke to the Commission. Staff provided the Planning Commission with a
memo that gives a better explanation of the term "non-conforming" and how it is
applied in Pasco. Staff asked if Planning Commission understood what the term
"non-conforming" means.
Planning.Commission answered affirmatively.
Staff reviewed the written memo for the benefit of the Planning Commission. It was
pointed out that in the area of town south of "A" Street between the rail tracks is
zoned for industrial uses. While most of the properties are developed with homes
there have been some homes that have been phased out due to damage. As a
result there has been an increase in industrial development in the area.
Commission Anderson stated he would not want to see the code changed to permit
the reconstruction of homes in industrial or commercial areas that it should be
restricted to residential areas only.
Terry Milham 1016 37th Place, Kennewick addressed the Commission. He
explained that Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae will not purchase loans for non
conforming properties unless they can be rebuilt.
Barrett Brown, 7807 S Jeorrd Rd, Kennewick stated he owned two duplexes off
32nd He has tried four times in the last year to sell his buildings and every time
they have fallen through because of the zoning.
Brian Tucker, Richland stated he has tried several times to purchase properties in
Pasco and each time he was not able to get financing because of the nonconforming
issue.
Acting Chair Smurthwaite asked if there were any questions of Staff.
There were none.
Staff stated they would provide additional material on this subject at the next
meeting.
- 1 -
REGULAR MEETING March 17, 2005
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MARCH 17, 2005
WORKSHOP:
A. Workshop: CODE AMENDMENT: Non-conforming Use
Code Amendment, (City of Pascol
IMF# 2004-137-11
Acting Chairperson Smurthwaite read the master file number and asked for the
Staff report.
There was some discussion on the non-conforming use amendment and staff
recommended a public hearing at the next meeting. The recommended code
amendment would benefit residential nonconforming uses in residential zoning
districts, but not in commercial or industrial zoning districts.
OTHER BUSINESS:
In July of 2004, Planning Commission approved siting two portable class
rooms for Tri-Cities Junior Academy. The school wants to re-configure their
arrangement. Instead of an L-shape, they want to mate the portables and put
them on a basement. Parking would be slightly modified. Special permits are
conditioned to completed substantially in conformance with the site plan
submitted. In this case, everything is the same except for the configuration.
Concensus of the Planning Commission was that it is essentially the same
request, they did not have a problem with the slight modification.
ADJOURNMENT:
There being no further business before the Planning Commission,
Commissioner Hay moved for adjournment at 8:45 p.m., Commissioner
Mosebar seconded, motion carried unanimously.
- 1 -
DRAFT
REGULAR MEETING April 21, 2005
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES April 21, 2005
E. Public Hearing: CODE AMENDMENT: Non-conforming Use
Code Amendment, (CitV of Pasco
(MF# 04-137-11
Acting Chairperson Smurthwaite read the master file number and asked for the
Staff report.
Staff reported that this request is for approval of a Code Amendment for Non-
conforming Use Code Amendment PMC-25.72.050. This amendment is to
address the issue of people wishing to rebuild duplex or multiplex buildings.
Staff reiterated the purpose of zoning is to help retain property values and to
preserve the safety and welfare of the community. Staff recommends the
changes only apply to residential rebuilds and not to rebuilds in industrial and
commercial zones. As such the recommendations cover multifamily units
previously authorized by building permit in any residential zoning district to be
rebuilt under the conditions stated in the ordinance. Staff reported that these
conditions include: 1) the unit can only be rebuilt if it is determined that the
damage is accidental or a natural disaster, 2) the rebuilt building duplicates
the footprint of the old building so you are not expanding or changing the
nonconformity, 3) does not increase the size of the nonconformity, 4) honors
the required setbacks of the property, 5) nothing in the ordinance shall prevent
the strengthening or restoring to a safe condition of any nonconforming
building ordered by any official charged with protecting public safety. Staff
advises the Planning Commission recommend this code amendment, as
written, to the City Council for approval.
Acting Chairperson Smurthwaite asked if there were any questions of Staff.
There was none.
ACTING CHAIRPERSON SMURTHWAITE OPENED THE PUBLIC HEARING AND
ASKED IF THERE WAS ANY ONE PRESENT THAT WISHED TO SPEAK ON
THIS MATTER.
Terry Milham, 1016 W 37th Place Kennewick, questioned item four dealing with
setbacks and how they would apply to his four-plex over on Sylvester. Staff
clarified that if his unit accidentally burned down or a natural disaster was to
strike he could build his unit back to the way it was originally approved.
Bruce Schnabel, 368 Riverwood St. Richland, thanks staff for their
recommendation. Bruce Schnabel reported that without the proposed changes
it is not only a finance issue but also an insurance issue.
Following three (3) calls from Acting Chairperson Smurthwaite for comment
from the floor, either for or against, the public meeting was declared closed.
Commissioner Little moved the Planning Commission recommend the City
- 1 -
DRAFT
Council amend PMC Section 25.72.050, by creating provisions for the
continuation of certain nonconforming uses in residential zoning districts as
identified in Exhibit # 1
Commissioner Hay seconded, motion carried unanimously.
Staff explained the appeal process and stated this item would go before the City
Council on May 3rd.
I
- 2 -
AGENDA REPORT NO.
FOR: City Council DATE: 05/18/05
TO: Gary Crutchfie anager Workshop: 05/23/05
Regular: 06/06/05
FROM: Robert J. Albert ,44-6wr of Public
SUBJECT: Six-Year Transportation Improvement Plan 2006 - 2011
I. REFERENCES
1. Proposed Plan
2. Resolution
3. Map
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL/STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
05/23: Discussion
06/06: Conduct Public Hearing
MOTION: I move to approve Resolution No.
thereby adopting the City's Six-Year Transportation Improvement
Plan for 2006 through 2011.
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
None
IV. HISTORY AND BRIEF FACTS:
Each year, all Cities and Counties in the State are required to adopt an updated Six-
Year Transportation Improvement Plan specifically for federal and state funded
projects. For the City of Pasco, this plan has consisted of all projects including the
annual overlays, street widening, and signal projects which are within the City
limits. Larger projects such as the Ainsworth Overpass, and the Lewis Street
Overpass also have been shown.
The proposed six-year program represents those projects that are anticipated to be
needed within six years. Several projects will need to be coordinated with utility
projects which could change the actual timing of the projects. Although this
process of adopting a six-year plan is a state requirement, the Council will again
review the projects in the Six-Year C.I.P. process and the budgeting process.
While the worksheets presented by staff include a potential funding source, many of
the projects listed will be dependent upon available funding and/or local
improvement districts. In addition, Staff will be pursuing available grants from the
various funding programs.
It is staff's desire to present this program to the public at a public hearing on June 6,
2005, and request that the Council adopt the plan by resolution.
V. ADMINISTRATIVE ROUTING:
Project File
3(a)
Y
O
0
N
O O
O a O o O O
0 c 00 O 00
0 LL 00 O o 0
04 �, N O N_ C3) _O
a � Ei9 b9 d4
c 7 O :
LL m LL LL. LL LL
O Q? 4? N O
Q? O N (1) Q)
Q) N
CO
V 00 � OC) �m to m m
O
O N Q1 N
T O O O O M U ` O - C
r � CT 0 Q co QQ
O OQ � O OO
ea 601C) 6q 0 0 Qb90 00
!V 70 'a -0 -a ° -C7 m070 -0
= N -c 00 -0C 7c70 oo
E c c '00 E pp c c c
00 0 c 0 c c LO 0
O O :3 CO =I 0 0 :3 C-) X 00 D A N to
O C LL LL LL LL T- LL fll LL LL LL — M LL ti LL_ LL cD
N LL c aai aoi ai aoia a0i =� a) � a c � a aLL
f
-- y--. +--. -�-- �-- +- .F..
LL C� (n U? � tI) NW (n fl3 LL t� {n (� Cn C/) VU1 Cn
>+— >+— >+—
La) t� T t� CL5 N CU Ca
/ W L yL- L •L 'L L yL�- L L yL+ � yL� � L 'L •yL Q�
?. O > 1... L.. L W Q� L > L Q� L Q� > L ia) a)
m a. 0 < < < LLQL.LLLQQ OQLLLLQLL. 0 < < LLLL
F
Q) N
E U 0
.a O 00000 0C) o 0 0000 O 000
u C] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Qy O CD) O0000CQ000 000000 OOOOO
0 000000000 CD C) 0 �0 O
Q •� 000000OC (DLnO CD C) CD CD co C) 000 DLO
(D V") V- �- CV � NIn CDin = Mr- 0 COU') = tl-
a. GS ff3 ft3 EFT to 69-Cf} 6a Gq ka 69 K}U!)- 69. to CF} 64 CF)-6f} E0:� Cf3 03
c
O
++
.gym+
L
O c
co ¢ > N
O O O
O 0 O W
_ i
L O O 00 00 D N O N C C W C c
D O V- 'D� (0 u) O 0 m 0 0
() M
U) O O M U O 0 X
0
�= 0�S 02S o 025 E v 0 O ' o 0 0� a
C a o _ U J0tS � 0tS .. U .� �co LL CD OU K N In U? � � (00 , CD o = to (n -4t cc to to wIq00
� > > m 73 � � D
uo .2 -0 o o � `ov -C 0 0 0 � v
•- •L' L m m cn /RCS m 3 'SLR TLI ca m �: m
I 0 m m m `i/ O 0 yJ 0 O 0 � .L �V O O m 0 lV \V lY a a
0 J >> > < QL c -1 >> Ofof ) w >> > � �
V
m a
co a is r
cc � co C "D
lu cn
Cn
V rL = C Y3 Cn O f/} O
� mi3 = a_� 0) c �,� 000
0 is p y U) co 'v) °' ro a0i v) O � `° w a0i `° °°
tv 4)S0G .a� 0 � � > two V) 0 cp m
N > Y a. � LO L. (L C.`�/0)
` = Y H i
�oo
aC to a o r -
ojSt!) H .Ec�t > oNON �' °� � � olS � H
y o N C O .` 0 �. O tl) y m rn y y 0
m 0 0 d U a Q 0 m d O O d
-- d o� �- i L.
m � w � � � ° � c�vN � 0 a) cn
o - -
N O N _N t0 M m 3 w m m 3 N C ,� C C O O O N N o
O c� cu to o,
�' r r o
c
0 cv
W
O
C N
C Q)
00 as
Q�
7
0 0 O
0 ° C
°Q
v1 0O °o E 0
CY) 0 O
L BOOU
Co
L CD da a
O �- °
U~j U)
� c°n 0
T- LO
_ 03, tO c`�o
-c3 ) -a -0 -0 -0 (D 70 � 70
70 w = = O a) N =;
3 LL_ u- LL_ LL. LL_ LL. LL. LL. LL. LL_ U-
6-0 a) C a� N -0 a) N ° � ° _0 a) ° w
c a) 0asa� 00 ° ca) 00
- CA0U) U) co U) LL 000/)
>, C) > _ O C) >,- C)
III to M L 60-'t 00 (o m J'Nn m
L L L L L L �' V), L L L
0 > m > mmm > V- mIt
CL o O f= oa a
4w
U)
0
V c °
V O COO O C:) C:) O O O O
° 0000 ° OO ° = o 0OOo
y 0 0 = 0 ° 0 ° 0 ° - Q 0 0 0 0
� o°--moo C3 C) o° o °-
L 0 0 (O O O O 5 0 N O 0 0 0 0
(O LLB r r LO CO LO r (O r 00 (O LO Nr N
d E!} Gq bA fA 64 Ef3 Efl CA fig 6c3 (f} 60- E!} Efl 69
Q1
O
O
O
C)
Lf'3
a
L
O o O � Q)
Cll to O O In to C O cn >+M
+L. OU) fII O ON + � ot5
U) L a 0 U) a=' — T- III In
c O >+ co co CY OL U O In
o O '=
O In 0) O W N U) N to) 0 (n (n om
� � O
O O O {nZ�/� •� O O �
L L 0 W � L L L. CO co {n
4 CU Co r �' o CII CG CII ° 0 (o III O 0
.J > > Q > > > < J > > it LL
le In
O
'p 'O
to
o
N d
_ +�
V U) _ V O V
C C E .�
fq O cm R > N L- �0+
-)c a. m m a U V 0 0 �c CL _
C) #+ L = L 0 i ti ++ c
—
Q CL L O S Lo
tm CD
U , r- a °� VLF � - U mco
off N C � � ojs � HN > G3 pjSi/) �_ w
4) m C d � w <o m O O CA c6 !a d N
� O -C
G1 C1 z- i d d1
m > � 0c W > � � U) > � �
Z m 0 d c O Q +. y � O ( L
v tea) 0OL) 0 � 3 � � � U) = o
(U N O O t. L N V- H H Q O O N O O O O
� N � LLQQ � C4 JU � rl � ULL
0
EXHIBIT A
2006 to 2011 Transportation Improvement Plan
2006
a) Overlays and Crack Seal—Yearly project to improve roadway surfaces through-
out the City of Pasco.
b) Miscellaneous Street Projects—Yearly project to maintain roadway
infrastructure.
c) Miscellaneous Traffic Signal Upgrades—This project is funded every two years
and is used to upgrade and maintain existing traffic signals.
1. Road 68 Widening (Rodeo to Burden)—Adds a lane on the west side of Road
68 to improve traffic movement.
2. Road 68 & I-182 Improvements - Overpass improvements to complete the
corridor.
3. Road 68 & Wrigley Traffic Signal—Install traffic signal to be reimbursed by
Impact Fees.
4. Lewis Street Overpass—Replace the existing underpass with an overpass.
5. Road 100 & I-182 Ramps & Signals—Install additional ramps and install traffic
signals.
6. Road 68 & Court Street Traffic Signal—Install new traffic signal at the
intersection.
7. Road 28/Road 26 Improvements—Improve the traffic flow from Court Street
south to Commercial area.
8. Lewis St. /"A" St. Connector—New road from Lewis St. interchange to "A" St.
2007
9. Road 44 & Burden Traffic Signal—Install new traffic signal to improve traffic
flow.
10. Sandifur Parkway (Rd 52 to Rd 60)—Construct the north half of Sandifur.
11. Sandifur & Broadmoor Traffic Signal—Install new traffic signal to improve
traffic flow.
ZMYEARTIP&CIP12006-2011 TIPIEXHIBIT A.doc
12. Court Street Widening (Rd 68 to Rd 84)—First phase to increase the width of
the existing road to 48 feet wide.
2008
13. Road 44 & Court Street Traffic Signal—Install a new traffic signal to improve
traffic flow.
14. Court Street Widening (Rd 84 to Rd 100)— Second phase to increase the width
of the existing road to 48 feet wide.
2009
15, Road 100 Widening—Widen the existing road from I-182 to Court Street.
16. Argent& Road 100 Traffic Signal—Install new traffic signal to increase traffic
flow.
17. Argent Road Widening(Rd 72 to Rd 84)--Improve the road in conjunction
with the new school.
2010
18. "A" St. & SR 12 Interchange—Design phase of the project.
19. Commercial Ave. Improvements—Complete Commercial Ave. with curb,
gutter & storm water facilities.
2011
20. Court Street Widening—Complete Court Street to the City limits with
additional width, curb & gutter
21. Foster Wells/SR-395 Interchange—Study for the installation of an interchange.
I
I
ZA6YEARTIP&CM2006-201I TIPIEXHIBIT A.doc
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION adopting the revised and extended Comprehensive Street, Storm Drain
and Bridge Programs for the City of Pasco.
WHEREAS, RCW 35.77.010 provides for annual revision and extension of the
Comprehensive Street Program of each city and town, after holding public hearings thereon; and
WHEREAS, it is now time to revise and extend the Comprehensive Street, Storm Drain
and Bridge Programs; and
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO,
WASHINGTON, DO RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
That the City Council of the City of Pasco hereby adopts the revision and extension of the
Comprehensive Street, Storm Drain and Bridge Programs for the ensuing six years as attached
hereto and labeled "Six-Year Transportation Improvement Plan 2006 - 2011" incorporated by
this reference as though fully set forth herein; and
That the Comprehensive Street, Storm Drain and Bridge Programs shall be filed with the
Benton-Franklin Regional Council and the State of Washington.
PASSED by the City Council and APPROVED by the Mayor this 6th Day of June 2005.
Michael L. Garrison, Mayor
ATTEST:
Sandy Kenworthy
Deputy City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
I
Leland B. Kerr
City Attorney
a J
Z
+, 0 Z
LE F-
3A U�
L,
vi Ln
�w
w ♦ti m
g�
Z
LJ
J ww
p�
>
F`r' 40
FE ¢
~g e �
ow
O }
e o``
Z JO
5 m
9*39 Lucr
a - ' °~�
i~ w Wa
i "¢1 ~Erz
Qum
HILgAW
W /f
O - d
O m m 20 r
oZ � � z
0 `
L) ;n o
V1 m
m F
A F V F o W
a � W
[y O enanM r ^' pUZ Z �q Z G Z F a X �
o^ ON I� _q Q z ° WZ ° I
�. A
- —- F .. _ a .! Cn
0 F3 � zap+ > �
rW V Ca C Q <
ff { I rasa a o �" < aw
opt ae � � � �
ow
d C7 CS p - 6L' to
$ ° ° ° a e En
O O d O 0 v 0
aa ° °w
a
436 � �C Cp
.�!'. .10 i r a0 .tea N N
z � d
z
rn
V
�:
X
Z m 6 X 0.
O W > <[<s. rz trl C, E--F
d
fn a w 0. 2 1- 000
V� 4 d
a S N V) ; O
_ O fn
--_'-- ..
v'1 dl d{ �
y - CO m m m 0 m N
f ♦ / A O m G < 0 WCa pq
d d d < Z 2
4 O 0 0 0 0 0 w O < d
I ax `s` a: WOd a0: V) V)
G�
o Fx 44mV -A �ot- 00Ch
�z
AGENDA REPORT NO. 33
FOR: City Council Date: May 2, 2005
TO: Gary Crutchfiel Manager Workshop: 05-23-05
„� Regular:
THRU: Richard J. Smi , Director (l
Community & Economic Development
FROM: Thomas Colleran, Planner I
SUBJECT: Stealth Cell Towers
I. REFERENCES
A. Memo outlining Stealth Tower Ordinances around Washington
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL/STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
05-23-05: DISCUSSION
III. FISCAL IMPACT
None.
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
A. As more people begin to carry cell phones and the cell phone
carriers expand there network coverage and capacity, cell phone
towers are becoming more abundant and noticeable as they are
scattered around the landscape. Some members of Council have
expressed concern about the appearance of the towers and asked
staff to look into options for concealing the towers.
B. Currently in Pasco, PMC-25.70.070 regulating communication
towers states:
(2) Wireless Communication Towers are permitted under the
following conditions:
(a) Such structures shall be permitted in all industrial or C-3
zoning districts provided the location is 500 feet or more from a
residential district. Any location closer than 500 feet requires
special permit approval.
(b) Such structures may be permitted by special permit in all
other zoning districts provided said structures are:
(i) Attached to or located on an existing or proposed building
that is higher than thirty-five (35) feet; or
(ii) Located on or with a publicly owned facility such as a water
reservoir, fire station, police station, school, county or port
facility.
C. Currently in Pasco there are ten wireless communication towers.
D. About a quarter of the estimated 130,000 cellular towers across
the U.S. are camouflaged to not be readily noticeable. Such cell
towers are known as "Stealth Towers."
E. The first Stealth Tower was developed in 1992 by Larson
Camouflage. Concealing an antenna can be expensive. The least
expensive option is the basic flagpole, which adds $10,000 to
$20,000 to the price of a tower. Stealth Towers designed to look
like trees can cost double that amount. The more customized the
installation, the higher the price.
3(f)
F. The most common types of stealth installation are as part of a
building such as a penthouse, the top of a church, or on a water
tower. The other common stealth installations resemble objects
found in the community such as trees, flagpoles and church
crosses.
G. Some common regulations to help minimize the visual impact of
cell towers include: (1) requiring stealth (or camouflage) towers and
antennas; (2) encouraging co-location; (3) imposing significant
setbacks of at least 150 percent of the tower's height; and (4)
limiting tower heights to no more than 10-20 feet above other
features such as trees and buildings.
H. Currently in the City of Pasco there are no provisions in the zoning
code requiring that stealth technology to be considered when
constructing a tower.
V. DISCUSSION:
A. The attached 4/26/04 memo outlines ordinance requirements
pertaining to cell towers in other Washington municipalities. Most
of the stealth provisions of other ordinances establish camouflage
as a goal or a performance standard but allow cell tower
companies to find the means to camouflage the tower subject to
the Planning Commission and City Council's approval.
B. If Council desires to consider Stealth Tower aesthetics, the
Planning staff can analyze possible amendments and ask the
Planning Commission to review this matter at their June 16, 2005
meeting. A recommendation would be forwarded to City Council.
I
To: Rick Smith
From: T.C. Colleran
Date: April 26, 2005
Re: Stealth Tower Aesthetics
Included below are ordinances on cell phone lowers from other cities around Washington State
A) Kennewick-18.75.350:
The purpose of this section is to provide predictability to service providers in the permitting process and to allow
for site development issues to be addressed through clear and objective sighting criteria and development
standards. Co-location on existing structures is strongly encouraged to allow for the increased need for
wireless communication facilities while minimizing the adverse visual impacts of such facilities.
(1)Co-location of wireless antennas on existing structures is allowed in all zoning districts.The parent structure
can be a cellular tower, building, public power line, light pole, other public utility structure, or any multiple-
family structure of four units or more. Approval is subject to the following:
(e)All antennas must be painted a neutral, non-reflective color that will blend with the surrounding
landscaping and parent facility. Recommended shades are gray, beige,sand,taupe, or light brown.A
color chip or other sample of the proposed color must be approved by the Community and Economic
Development Director.
(3) New wireless communication facilities, as defined in KMC 18.09.537 up to fifty-five (55)feet in height, are
permitted uses in all Commercial, Industrial,and Public Facility Districts except"CN" (Commercial,
Neighborhood) Districts.The only type of tower allowed for wireless communication facilities are monopoles.
New guyed towers or latticed towers are prohibited. New wireless communication facilities, other than
collocated facilities, are prohibited in all other zoning districts.A site plan must be approved in accord with
KMC 18.80.120.
B) Richland-23.76.070
A. Visual Impact:
2. Site location and development shall preserve the pre-existing character of the surrounding buildings and
land uses and zone district to the extent consistent with the function of the communications equipment.
Wireless communications towers shall be integrated through location and design to blend in with the
existing characteristics of the site to the extent practical. Existing on-site vegetation shall be preserved or
improved, and disturbance of the existing topography shall be minimized, unless such disturbance would
result in less visual impact of the site to the surrounding area.
4. All monopoles and lattice type facilities shall be screened with trees, shrubs and landscaping planted in
sufficient depth to form an effective and actual sight barrier within five(5)years. Said landscaping shall
have a minimum mature height of eight(8)feet.
C. Availability of Suitable Existing Towers or Other Structures: Applications for a special use permit shall
demonstrate to the reasonable satisfaction of the Planning Commission that alternatives are not capable of
accommodating the applicant's needs. Evidence and information shall be submitted to establish the
following:
1. Permitted shorter support structures are not of sufficient height to meet the applicant's engineering
requirements.
2. No existing support structures are located within the geographic area required to meet the applicant's
engineering requirements.
3. Existing support structures do not have sufficient structural strength to support the proposed antenna and
related equipment.
I
C) Federal Way- 22-967 Development standards
4) Screening standards for all PWSFs. PWSFs shall be screened or camouflaged through employing the best
available technology and design, as determined by the city.This may be accomplished by use of compatible
materials, location, landscaping, color, stealth techniques such as, but not limited to, artificial trees and
hollow flag poles, and/or other methods or techniques to achieve minimum visibility of the facility as viewed
from public streets or residential properties. In addition, the provisions for landscaping as outlined in the use
zone charts,Article XI of this chapter, District Regulations, shall apply.
Rick Smith
April 26, 2005
Page 2
D) Maple Valley- 18.50.020 Personal wireless service facilities
F. Site Development Standards.All wireless facilities shall be constructed, erected or built in accordance with the
following site development standards:
1.Wireless facilities shall be screened or camouflaged by employing the best available technology. This
may be accomplished by use of compatible materials, location, color, stealth technologies, and/or other
tactics to achieve minimum visibility of the facility as viewed from public streets or residential properties.The
City of Maple Valley shall approve all screening and camouflaging.
E) Redmond-20D.170.45-070 Wireless Communications Facilities—Development Standards.
(a) Placement of a freestanding wireless communication facility shall be denied if placement of the antenna(s)on
an existing structure can accommodate the operator's communications needs. The co-location of a
proposed antenna(s) on an existing broadcast and relay tower or placement on an existing structure shall be
explored and documented by the operator in order to show that reasonable efforts were made to identify
alternate locations.
(b) No wireless equipment reviewed under this section shall be located within required building setback areas.
(c)The combined antenna(s)and supporting structure shall not extend more than 15 feet above the existing or
proposed roof structure.
(d) No wireless equipment shall be used for the purposes of signage or message display of any kind.
(e) Location of wireless communication antenna(s)on existing buildings or other structures shall be screened or
camouflaged to the greatest practicable extent by use of shelters,compatible materials, location,color,
and/or other stealth tactics to reduce visibility of the antenna(s) as viewed from any street or residential
property.
F) Sumner- 18.37.040 Performance standards.
A.Wireless Communication Facility Preference. Proposed antennas, associated structures and placement shall
be evaluated, based on available technologies, for approval and use in the following order of preference:
1. Stealth antennas.
2. Attached wireless communication facilities, only when subsection(A)(1) cannot be reasonably accomplished.
3. Co4ocation wireless communication facilities, only when subsection(A)(1)or(2)cannot be reasonably
accomplished.
4. Freestanding wireless communication facilities which extend no more than 15 feet above adjacent existing
vegetation or structures,only when subsections(A)(1), (2)or(3)cannot be reasonably accomplished.
5. Freestanding wireless communication facilities which extend more than 15 feet above adjacent existing
vegetation or structures,only when subsections(A)(1)through (4)cannot be reasonably accomplished.
If the applicant chooses to construct a new freestanding wireless communication facility,the burden of proof shall
be on the applicant to show a wireless communication facility of a higher order of preference cannot
reasonably be accommodated on the same or other properties.The city reserves the right to retain a
qualified consultant, at the applicant's expense,to review the supporting documentation for accuracy.
G) Fife- 19.72.010 Purpose.
The purpose of this chapter is:
B. The provisions of this chapter shall not be interpreted to prohibit or to have the effect of prohibiting a WCF in
the city.This chapter is to be applied in such a manner as to not unreasonably discriminate between
providers of functionally equivalent wireless communication services. To the extent that any provision of this
chapter is inconsistent or conflicts with any other city ordinance,the provisions of this chapter shall control.
However, each provision of this chapter,to the extent reasonably possible, shall be construed to be
consistent with other city codes and regulations;
C.To encourage the use of stealth technology so that WCFs blend into the surrounding environment, thus
minimizing the visual impact to surrounding properties;
D.To encourage creative approaches in locating and constructing WCFs so that they will be compatible with
surrounding land uses;
E. To encourage co-location of WCFs in order to prevent the unnecessary proliferation of WCFs within the city.
(Ord. 1317§3, 1998).
19.72.070 Facility preference.
A proposed WCF shall be evaluated for approval and use in the following order of preference:
A. Stealth Support Structure and Antenna.A WCF which is completely blocked or sufficiently camouflaged from
view from public rights-of-way, residential uses and districts such that a casual observer cannot identify the
WCF from any of the above locations.
B.A WCF which extends not more than 15 feet above adjacent existing vegetation or structures, only when
subsection A of this section cannot be reasonably accomplished.
C.A WCF which extends more than 15 feet above adjacent existing vegetation or structures, only when
subsections A or B of this section cannot be reasonably accomplished.
AGENDA REPORT NO. 34
FOR: City Council Date: May 2, 2005
TO: Gary Crutchfiel Manager Workshop: 05-23-05
Regular:
THRU: Richard J. Smit , Director r.
Community & Economic Deve pment
FROM: Thomas Colleran, Planner 1-1�
SUBJECT: Transportable Storage Units
I. REFERENCELSL
A. Memo outlining transportable unit Ordinances around Washington
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
05-23-05: DISCUSSION
III. FISCAL IMPACT
None.
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
A. Some members of Council have expressed concern about the
appearance of transportable storage containers in the community
and asked staff to look into options for preserving the aesthetics of
the community.
B. Transportable storage units, also known as cargo containers and
portable storage units are the units used to ship goods across the
ocean. At the harbor the unit can then be put onto a truck or train
for shipment to the final destination.
C. The available lengths of the units are 10, 20, 30, and 40 feet. The
20 and 40 foot lengths are the standard in ocean freight shipping,
making them more readily available for the average consumer to
acquire. The width of an average cargo container is 8 feet and the
height of an average container is 8.5 feet. The containers originate
in Asia where they are used to ship consumer goods to the United
States. Due to the relative lack of exports to Asia the containers
are plentiful and become surplus.
D. The raw shell of a cargo container costs on average $5 a square-
foot or $1600 for a 40 foot x 8 foot container. Surplus containers
are thus becoming increasingly popular as inexpensive,
preassembled storage units
E. In the City of Pasco's Zoning code, portable storage units are
prohibited in Residential areas, but allowed in Office, C-3 and
Industrial zones by "Special Permits." A memo outlining container
regulations in other Washington cities is attached.
V. DISCUSSION:
A. Staff believes that due to their industrial appearance cargo
containers are inappropriate in residential/office zones and
questionable in commercial areas. Staff believes when one
calculates the cost of screening the containers per Pasco's "Special
Permit" criteria, the cost savings appear to be marginal which in 3(9)
affect negates the reason for acquiring the transportable unit, as
inexpensive storage, in the first place.
B. If Council desires to consider transportable unit aesthetics and/or
to further restrict permissible locations, the Planning staff can
analyze the issue further and ask the Planning Commission to
review this proposed amendment at their June 16, 2005 meeting.
A recommendation would be forwarded to City Council.
To: Rick Smith
From: T.C. Colleran
Date: April 26, 2005
Re: Transportable Units
Included below are ordinances on Transportable Units from other cities around Washington State
A) Kennewick- 18.75.480: Transportable Units:
(1)Transportable units may be used for permanent storage purposes when ancillary to a permitted use in C, 1, PF
and OS zones provided that all setbacks and access requirements are met_
(2)Transportable units that are uniformly painted and in good repair may be used for temporary storage in
subdivision sales areas and equipment yards(18.75.090)and in C, I, PF and OS zones for storage during
construction and/or remodeling after a building permit has been issued.The units shall be removed from the
site once the permit expires or at the end of twelve months,whichever occurs first. Screening is not required in
these instances.
(3)Transportable units may also be used for temporary storage in"R"and"HMU"zones for new residential
construction or remodeling after a building permit has been issued. The units shall be removed from the site at
the expiration of the building permit. In no case shall the units remain on the site for more than twelve months.
(Ord.4012 Sec. 3,2001)
B) Richland-
Not allowed in residential areas. No code written specifically for cargo containers, but can apply for a
"Special Permit"to place one in the Central Business Use District, General Business Use District, Commercial
Recreation Use District,Waterfront Use District, Limited Manufacturing Use District, Medium Industrial Use
District, and Heavy Manufacturing Use District.
C) Moses Lake Chapter 18.76
18.76.010 Purpose:The purpose of this chapter is to establish minimum standards for the placement of cargo
containers as storage facilities in C-2, MLIP, L-1, and H-1 zones,where they are allowed by conditional use
permit.
18.76.020 Submittal Requirements:The following shall be submitted along with an application for a conditional use
permit for container placement:
A.A site plan to a standard scale, showing:
1. The location and dimensions of the container(s)and the building to which it is appurtenant.
2. The access to the building and the containers.
B.A statement of what will be stored in the container(s),for review by the Fire Marshal. (Ord. 2144, 12/9/03)
1.8.76.030 Minimum Conditions:Where a conditional use permit has been granted for use of cargo containers as
permanent or temporary storage facilities,the following minimum conditions shall be met:
A. The cargo containers shall be used as an appurtenance to the primary use, such primary use being situated in
an enclosed adjoining building.
B. The cargo containers shall be placed on a level concrete or asphalt surface at all times.
C.The cargo containers shall not be stacked.
D.A fire apparatus access road shall be provided to both the containers and to the building the containers are
appurtenant to. Fire apparatus access roads shall be a minimum of twenty feet(20)wide with thirteen feet
six inches (13'6")vertical clearance, shall be hard surfaced, and shall provide access to within one hundred
fifty feet(150')of any portion of the container(s).Access roads shall be either looped or provide d with an
approved turn around as specified in Moses Lake Municipal Code Chapter 16.36
E. The cargo containers shall not be visible to the motoring public or from residential neighborhoods immediately
adjacent to the property where it is located unless other measures approved by the Planning Commission
are employed to mitigate the visual impacts of the containers. However,the Planning Commission doe s not
nee d to require mitigation measures if it determines that the motoring public or adjacent residential
neighborhoods are not impacted.
F.The cargo containers shall abide by all set back requirements applicable to the zone in which they are located.
G.The recipient of the conditional use permit is the only party allowed to use the container(s).
H.A container placement permit is required for each container.The permit shall be obtained from the Building
Official prior to the arrival of the container on the site.The fee for the container placement permit shall be as
Rick Smith
April 26, 2005
Page 2
specified in MLMC 3.54. T he placement permit and fee is required each year for temporary containers.
(Ord. 2144, 1219103)
18.76.040 Additional Conditions for Permanent Containers:
A. The cargo containers shall be painted so as to blend in with the building to which they are associated.
B. The cargo containers shall have a maximum allowable square footage of container storage area not to
exceed five percent(5%)of the gross floor area of the building with which the container(s) is associated. In
no event shall the number of permanent containers allowed as appurtenant storage facilities exceed three
(3) in number.
C.A cargo container shall not remain on site if the use it is appurtenant to is abandoned or changes use,
unless a separate conditional use permit is granted. (Ord. 2144, 1219103)
D)Tukwila Ordinance No. 1989
C. Criteria for approval are as follows:
1. Only two cargo containers will be allowed per lot, maximum length 30 feet.
2.The container is located to minimize the visual impact to adjacent properties, parks, trails and rights-of-way as
determined by the Director. Cargo Container Ord 5130102
3.The cargo container is sufficiently screened from adjacent properties, parks,trails and rights-of-way, as
determined by the Director. Screening may be a combination of solid fencing, landscaping, or the placement
of the cargo containers behind, between or within buildings.
4. If located adjacent to a building, the cargo container must be painted to match the building's color.
5. Cargo containers may not occupy any required off-street parking spaces.
6. Cargo containers shall meet all setback requirements for the zone.
7. Outdoor cargo containers may not be refrigerated.
8. Outdoor cargo containers may not be stacked.
E) SeaTac-15.13.063 Cargo Containers--Accessory Use
A. The Director of Planning and Community Development may allow a cargo container as an accessory use for
permitted or conditional uses, but not including dwelling units, in all other zones not listed in SMC 15.13.062,
subject to the criteria set forth in subsection B of this section.
B. Cargo containers allowed as an accessory use shall conform with the following criteria:
1. Be located to minimize the visual impact to adjacent properties, streets,and pedestrian facilities;
2. Be painted to match the color(s)of the adjacent building. If the container is located within a building or not
visible from adjacent properties as determined by the Director of Planning and Community Development,
painting is not required;
3. Be screened from adjacent properties and rights-of-way. Screening may be a combination of solid fencing,
landscaping, or the placement of the cargo containers behind, between,or within buildings. All proposed
screening shall be submitted for review and approval by the Director of Planning and Community
Development;
4. The location and use of cargo containers on a site shall conform to all requirements and approvals of SMC
Titles 1.3 and 15;
5. The location of a cargo container within a structure shall be approved by the Fire Department and Building
Division;
6. Cargo containers shall not occupy any required off-street parking spaces for the site or property and the
location must comply with all setback requirements;
7. If a cargo container is located on a lot within,or adjacent to a residential zone,the cargo container shall be
no greater in size than ten (10)feet by twenty(20)feet, and shall have a stick-built structure,with a peaked
roof,constructed to completely enclose the container. No stick-built structure shall be required if the cargo
container is totally screened from adjacent properties as determined by the Director of Planning and
Community Development;
8. Only one(1)cargo container shall be allowed on property located within a residential zone or on property
located adjacent to a residential zone. The property owner may request additional cargo containers subject
to the Conditional Use Permit(CUP) process under SMC 15.22.030.
Adjacent property is defined as property that abuts the residential zone. Property located across a public
right-of-way is not regarded as adjacent property;
9. Cargo containers shall not be stacked.(Ord. 01-1010§3)
F)Yakima, Spokane,Walla Walla
There are no municipal regulations in any of these cities specifically allowing or banning cargo containers.
AGENDA REPORT NO. 16
FOR: City Council Date: 05/19/05
TO: Gary Crutchfi anager Workshop Mtg.: 05/23/05
Regular Mtg.: 06/06/05
FROM: Robert J. Albertoaac Works Director
SUBJECT: Amendment No. 1 to the Transpo Group Professional Services
Agreement
I. REFERENCE(S):
1. Amendment No. 1
IL ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL/STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
05/23: Discussion
05/09: Motion: I move to authorize the Mayor to execute Amendment
No. 1 to the Transpo Group Professional Services Agreement for
transportation and traffic management services.
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
Arterial Street Fund
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
This amendment is to have the Transpo Group provide the necessary traffic
design and transportation review services.
On August 16, 2004, the City signed an on-going services agreement with
the Transpo Group to provide Traffic Engineering services as needed with
an annual budget of$30,000. The proposed amendment is for services that
are not considered on-going and not within the budget.
The amendment is for two specific tasks. The first task is to provide the
design for an additional north bound traffic lane on Road 68 between Rodeo
Drive and Burden Boulevard. The design also includes a free right turn lane
onto Burden Boulevard. The fee for this task is not to exceed $10,000.
The second task is to review the traffic impacts due to events at the TRAC
and the Sports Complex. Recommendation would be provided on both
capital needed improvements along with operational suggestions. The fee
for this task is not to exceed $15,000.
Services performed under this amendment would not exceed $25,000. Staff
recommends Council authorize the Mayor to execute the amendment and to
include the cost in the year end budget supplement.
V. ADMINISTRATIVE ROUTING:
Project File
3(h)
AMENDMENT NUMBER.1 to
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
WHEREAS, the City and The Transpo Group entered into a Professional Services
Agreement on August 16, 2004, with respect to on-going transportation and traffic management
services.
NOW, THEREFORE, this agreement is amended to allow The Transpo Group to
provide additional transportation consulting and traffic design and engineering services.
1. Scope of Work.
Task A Provide a design to add a lane on the east side of Road 68 and a free right
turn lane at Burden Boulevard east bound.
Task B—Review the traffic patterns for events at the TRAC and Sports Complex.
Make recommendations regarding any needed capital and operational improvement to
improve traffic flow for events.
2. Fee.
Task A - The added services by the consultant shall be in an amount not to exceed
$10,000.
Task B - The added services by the consultant shall be in an amount not to exceed
$15,000.
3. Time of performance.
Task A- It is anticipated that the traffic design and engineering services shall be
complete for the project within 30 days of approval of this amendment.
Task B - It is anticipated that the transportation consulting services shall be complete
for the project within 60 days of approval of this amendment.
DATED THIS DAY OF , 2005.
The Transpo Group i
Amendment No. 1
Professional Services Agreement—On-going Services
CITY OF PASCO: CONSULTANT—The Transpo Group:
Michael L. Garrison, Mayor Signature Title
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Webster U. Jackson, City Clerk Leland B. Kerr, City Attorney
i
The Transpo Group 2
Amendment No. 1
Professional Services Agreement—On-going Services
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Council May 20, 2005
FROM: Gary Crutchf y anager Workshop Mtg.: 5/23/05
Regular Mtg.: 6/06/05
SUBJECT: Resolution, Ap roval of Drought Management Plan
L REFERENCE(S):
1. Proposed Resolution with Drought Management Plan
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL/STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
5/23: Discussion
6/06: MOTION: I move to approve Resolution No. approving a Drought
Management Plan.
HL FISCAL IMPACT:
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
A) Council has discussed the need for and content of the Drought Management Plan at
prior meetings. The proposed Drought Management Plan has been reviewed by
Council and is recommended for approval as a policy framework to be used in the
future by staff and Council in developing specific action plans to respond to
reductions in the city's water supply.
V. DISCUSSION:
A) Staff recommends approval of the resolution and Drought Management Plan.
i
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION APPROVING A DROUGHT MANAGEMENT PLAN.
WHEREAS, the City of Pasco relies solely on the Columbia River to fulfill the domestic
water supply needs for all of its citizens, resident and corporate alike; and,
WHEREAS, any notable reduction in Columbia River water supply could have
significant deleterious effects on the conduct and quality of urban life throughout the community;
and,
WHEREAS, the city desires to be prepared to address the possible reduction of water
supply, due either to emergent conditions or the more gradual constraints associated with
climatic drought conditions; NOW THEREFORE,
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO:
Section 1: That the attached drought management plan is hereby approved as a
framework of policy to manage potential water supply reductions.
Section 2: That the City Manager is hereby directed and authorized to provide timely
recommendations to City Council, consistent with the policy framework reflected in the drought
management plan, so as to respond to the reduction of water supply while minimizing the
adverse influence on the quality of community life.
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco this 6`h day of June, 2005.
I
Michael L. Garrison
Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Sandy L. Kenworthy Leland B. Kerr
Deputy City Clerk City Attorney
City of Pasco
Drought and Water Shortage Response Plan
April 2005
This Drought and Water Shortage Response Plan addresses the restrictions and
regulations, which may be imposed on the use of City of Pasco domestic and irrigation
water during a time of a drought or water shortage. The plan is based on four
thresholds in which the restrictions increase with the increase in thresholds. The
requirements will vary by customer identified as the City, Public Institutions (County,
College, Schools), Residential, Commercial, Industrial, and Construction.
Threshold
Alert 1: Drought Alert
A drought or water shortage (alert number 1) will be declared by the Mayor when
a warning has been given that there is an anticipated water shortage in the Columbia
River, depleting ground water levels, or a problem with the City's systems.
Implementation Requirements:
City -
Public Notification — Notify the news media of the alert, provide
information in utility billings, and work with other agencies and
civic groups.
Education — Emphasize the City's conservation programs and ask
for voluntary reductions for both the indoor and outdoor use of
water by working with the news media and mailings to customers.
City Reductions - Require all departments to reduce water use.
• Reduce use City-wide.
• Parks Division coordinates with the GWMA and Soil
Conservation District on improving efficiency and
predicting minimum water needs.
• Restrict vehicle washes to recycled washing facilities
where possible.
• Reduce amount of water used for hydrant programs,
flushing, and non-essential uses.
• Restrict water use in construction contracts.
Public Institutions - Voluntary curtailment.
• Monitoring outdoor irrigation systems to improve
efficiency and reduce water waste.
• Coordinate with the GWMA and Soil Conservation
District on improving efficiency and predicting
minimum water needs.
• Restrict vehicle washes to recycled washing facilities
where possible.
Residential -Voluntary curtailment.
• Reduction of indoor water use.
• Scheduling of outdoor watering to every other day
watering.
• Emphasis on wise use of water.
Commercial -Voluntary curtailment.
• Reduction of indoor and outdoor water use.
• Emphasis on wise water use.
Industrial - Voluntary curtailment.
• Reduction of indoor and outdoor water use.
• Emphasis on wise water use.
Construction-Voluntary curtailment and mandatory restrictions.
Voluntary-
• Reduction of city water use.
• Ground cover in lieu of water for dust control.
• Emphasis on wise water use.
Mandatory -
• Use of well water where available.
• Use of FCID water where available.
• No water settling of trenches.
Drought and Water Shortage Response Plan—Page 2
Alert 2: State Imposed Water Restrictions - Short term (1-2 months)
A water shortage on the Columbia Riuer has occurred for the short term. An alert
number 2 is declared by Council. A surcharge on water rates may be required. The
surcharge may be on the amount of water not needed for typical indoor use and the
moderate amount needed for outdoor watering. Customers on the City irrigation
system will be required to adjust their watering with less water pressure.
Implementation Requirements:
City -
Public Notification- Notify the news media of the alert and water
rate changes, provide information to customers, and work with
other agencies and civic groups.
Council may pass an emergency water rate surcharge Ordinance.
Any surcharge would be imposed on the amount of water not
considered essential. The typical monthly residential indoor and
summer outdoor uses will be considered in establishing the
definition of essential use in the Ordinance.
Irrigation system water pressure will be reduced 15% to encourage
conservation.
City Reductions - Mandatory reductions to all Departments.
• Reduce all outdoor watering by 15%. Brown spots
acceptable in turf.
• Vehicle washing with recycled water only.
• Use WTP effluent for sewer flushing programs.
• Sweep & vacuum floors only, no washing or
mopping unless health issues are a concern.
• Reduce flows and pressures in City irrigation
system.
• Reduce use at swimming pools, restrict shower use.
• Close spray grounds.
• Further restrict water for construction projects.
• Defer hydrant flushing programs.
• No water for Fire Department training.
• Place temporary water use restrictions on the
approval of new developments and issuance of
building permits.
Drought and Water Shortage Response Plan—Page 3
Public Institutions —Mandatory requirements.
• Reduce all outdoor watering by 15%. Brown spots
acceptable in turf.
• Vehicle washing with recycled water only.
• Sweep & vacuum floors only, no washing or
mopping unless health issues are a concern.
Residential — Mandatory requirements.
• A water rate surcharge may be required on non-
essential water defined in the emergency
Ordinance.
• Premises vehicle washing restricted to once a week.
• Every other day outdoor watering. Brown spots
should be acceptable in turf.
Commercial — Mandatory requirements.
• Water rate surcharge may be implemented to be
calculated to encourage the reduction of historic
use by 15%. Surcharge established in emergency
Ordinance.
• Reduce outdoor watering by 15%.
• Restaurants to serve table water on request.
• No parking lot flushing.
Industrial — Mandatory requirements.
• Water rate surcharge may be implemented to be
calculated to encourage the reduction of historic
use by 15%. Surcharge established in emergency
Ordinance.
• Reduce outdoor watering by 15%.
Construction - Mandatory requirements
• Construction water rates to be temporarily
increased 200% to 300% on a rising block rate
scale in emergency Ordinance.
• No water waste at sites.
Drought and Water Shortage Response Plan—Page 4
Alert 3: State Imposed Water Restrictions — Long term (2+ months).
A serious water shortage has occurred. An alert number 3 is declared by Council.
An increase in water rate surcharge will be required. Outdoor watering will be limited
to keep vegetation alive. Commercial and Industrial customers will be asked to reduce
all water use. Construction water will be rationed. Water policing program will be
implemented along with fee structure for fines.
Implementation Requirements:
City -
Public Notification— notify the news media of the alert and water
rate changes, provide information to customers, and work with
other agencies and civic groups.
Council will amend emergency Ordinance and temporarily increase
all water rate classifications.
Irrigation system pressures and flows further reduced to encourage
conservation.
City Reductions —Mandatory reductions to all Departments.
• Create a water policing force and implement a
water drought fee schedule for offenders.
• Reduce all outdoor watering and provide only
sufficient water to keep vegetation alive.
• No testing programs that use water.
• No vehicle washing.
• Close swimming pools.
• Defer construction projects that require
construction water.
• Call in all construction water hydrant meters.
• No street sweeping.
• Further reduce flows and pressures on City
irrigation system.
Drought and Water Shortage Response Plan—Page 5
Public Institutions — Mandatory requirements.
• Pay new water rate structure.
• Reduce all outdoor watering to keep vegetation
alive only.
No vehicle washing
• Reduce indoor use.
No visual water misuse or waste.
Residential —Mandatory requirements.
• Pay new water rate structure.
• Reduce all outdoor watering to keep vegetation
alive only.
• No visual water misuse or waste. Water waste
subject to fines.
Commercial — Mandatory requirements.
• Pay new water rate structure.
• Reduce all outdoor watering to keep vegetation
alive only.
• No visual water misuse or waste. Water waste
subject to fines.
Industrial — Mandatory requirements.
• Pay new water rate structure.
• Reduce all outdoor watering to keep vegetation
alive only.
• No visual water misuse or waste. Water waste
subject to fines.
Construction- Mandatory requirements.
• Pay new water rate structure.
• No construction water from hydrants.
• Ground cover for dust control.
Drought and Water Shortage Response Plan—Page 6
Alert 4: City Water Supply Availability Critical.
A critical water shortage has occurred. An alert number 4 is declared by Council.
Water supply at 60% or less of historic usage and no increase in supply foreseen in the
near future. A moratorium on new construction and new water service connections will
be needed. Monitoring and water scheduling (rationing)program will need to be
implemented.
Implementation Requirements:
City -
Public Notification - Notify the news media of the alert and
severity of conditions, provide information in utility billings, and
work with other agencies and civic groups.
Impose temporary building and new water service moratorium.
Increase fines for water misuse and waste.
Irrigation system will operate at minimum pressures and flows.
City Reductions -Mandatory reductions to all Departments.
• No waste of water.
• Implement monitoring and scheduling program.
• Close some public bathroom facilities.
• Select turf areas that will receive no water.
Public Institutions- Mandatory requirements
• Impose new monitoring and scheduling program.
• No water misuse or waste.
• Select turf areas that will receive no water.
Residential - Mandatory requirements.
• Impose new monitoring and scheduling program.
• No visual water misuse or waste.
• Water waste or misuse subject to new fines and
penalties.
Drought and Water Shortage Response Plan—Page 7
Commercial — Mandatory requirements.
• Impose new monitoring and scheduling program.
• High water users such as car washes and
Laundromats subject to restricted flows.
• Water waste or misuse subject to new fines and
penalties.
Industrial —Mandatory requirements.
• Impose new monitoring and scheduling program
• High water users subject to restricted flows.
• Water waste or misuse subject to new fines and
penalties.
Construction — Mandatory requirements.
• Only emergency construction water.
• No fire hydrant meters.
Drought and Water Shortage Response Plan—Page 8
AGENDA REPORT
FOR: City Council May 17, 2005
TO: Gary Crutchfie anager W/Shop Mtg.: 5123/05
FROM: Gregory L. Garcia, Fire Chief Reg. Mtg.: 6/6/05
SUBJECT: Implementing the National Incident Management System (NIMS)
I. REFERENCE(S):
1. Proposed Resolution
111. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL/STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
MOTION: I move to approve Resolution No. , authorizing the implementation
of the National Incident Management System.
1CII. FISCAL IMPACT:
None
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
A) Since September 11, 2001, attacks on the World Trade center and the Pentagon, much has
been done to improve prevention, preparedness, response, recovery and mitigation
capabilities and coordination processes across the Country. A comprehensive national
approach to incident management, applicable at all jurisdictional levels and across
functional disciplines, would further improve the effectiveness of emergency response
providers and incident management organizations across a full spectrum of potential
incidents and hazardous scenarios.
B) In Homeland Security Directive (HSPD)-5, President Bush directed the Secretary of the
Department of Homeland Security to develop and administer a National Incident
Management System (NIMS), which would provide a consistent nationwide approach for
federal, state, local and tribal governments to work together more effectively and
efficiently to prevent, prepare for, respond to, and recover from domestic incidents,
regardless of cause, size or complexity.
C) The Incident Command System components of NIMS are already an integral part of
various incident management activities in the Fire Department. The Police Department is
in the process of adopting the Incident Command System for their incidents.
D) The Incident Command System is a proven, on-scene, all hazard incident management
concept and has become the standard for on-scene management. The Incident Command
System is interdisciplinary and organizationally flexible to meet the needs of incidents of
any size or level of complexity. The system has been used for a wide range of incidents,
from planned events to hazardous materials spills to acts of terrorism.
E) Whether from different departments within the same jurisdiction, from mutual aid
partners or from State and federal agencies, responders need to be able to work together,
communicate with each other and depend on each other.
V. DISCUSSION:
A) While most incidents are generally handled on a daily basis by a single jurisdiction at the
local level, there are important instances in which successful domestic incident
management operations depend on the involvement of multiple jurisdictions, functional
agencies and emergency responder disciplines.
B) NIMS provides a consistent, flexible and adjustable framework within which government
and private entities at all levels can work together to manage incidents, regardless of their
cause, size, location or complexity.
3(])
C) NIMS provides a set of standardized organizational structures, such as the Incident
Command System (ICS), multi-agency coordination systems and public information
systems as well as requirements for processes, procedures and systems to improve
interoperability (use of communication devices) among jurisdictions and disciplines in
various areas, including training; resource management; personnel qualifications and
certification; communications and information management; technology support; and
continuous system improvement.
D) The multi-agency and multi jurisdictional terminology refers to fire departments, police
department, public works, finance and City management, emergency management as well
as other governmental organizations.
E) The "Policy Level' refers to government officials, such as governors, mayors, city and
county managers, department heads and other managers within the organization.
F) There are several training sessions that are required for each level of management and for
the non-management to be completed by January 1, 2007. The first step in adopting
NIMS is to have the City of Pasco formally adopt NIMS by resolution.
G) In order to receive FY 2006 preparedness funding, applicants will need to certify as part
of the grant applications that they have met the FY 2005 NIMS requirements. This
resolution is part of that requirement. Staff is recommending that the City Council
approve this resolution and require that the National Incident Management System be
implemented by the City.
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION "IMPLEMENTING THE NATIONAL INCIDENT
MANAGEMENT SYSTEM"(NIMS)
WHEREAS, In Homeland Security Directive (HSPI3)-5, the President directed the Secretary of the
Department of Homeland Security to develop and administer a National Incident Management System(NIMS),
which would provide a consistent nationwide approach for federal, state, local and tribal governments to work
together more effectively and efficiently to prevent, prepare for, respond to, and recover from domestic
incidents,regardless of cause, size or complexity,and
WHEREAS, the collective input and guidance from all federal,state,local and tribal homeland security
partners has been, and will continue to be, vital to the development, effective implementation and utilization of
a comprehensive Incident Management System;and
WHEREAS, to facilitate and coordinate the most efficient and effective incident management it is
critical that federal, state, local, and tribal organizations utilize standardized terminology, standardized
organizational structures, uniform personnel qualification standards, uniform standards for planning, training,
and exercising, comprehensive resource management, and designated incident facilities during emergencies or
disasters;and
WHEREAS, the NIMS standardized procedures for managing personnel, communications, facilities
and resources will improve the City of Pasco's ability to utilize federal funding to enhance local and state
agency readiness, maintain first responder safety,and streamline incident management processes; and
WHEREAS, the Incident Command System components of NIMS are already an integral part of
various incident management activities throughout the City of Pasco,including all public safety and emergency
response organizations training programs; and
WHEREAS, the National Commission of Terrorist Attacks (9-11 Commission)recommended adoption
of a standardized Incident Command System;and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Pasco, Washington desires that the National Incident
Management System be utilized for all incident management in the City of Pasco; NOW, THEREFORE, BE
IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO:
Section 1: That the City Manager is hereby directed and authorized to take all steps necessary and
appropriate to assure that all affected departments of the city be trained for and prepared to use the National
Incident Management System.
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco this 3 d day of June,2005.
Michael L. Garrison
Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Sandy L. Kenworthy Leland B. Kerr
Deputy City Clerk City Attorney