HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005.09.26 Council Workshop Packet AGENDA
PASCO CITY COUNCIL
Workshop Meeting 7:00 p.m. September 26,2005
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. VERBAL REPORTS FROM COUNCILMEMBERS:
3. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION:
(a) 2006 Community Development Block Grant Program Allocations and Annual Work
Plan:
1. Agenda Report from Richard J. Smith, Community &Economic Development Director and
Cruz Gonzalez, Urban Development Coordinator dated September 21, 2005.
2. 2006 Summary of CDBG Applications for Funding.
3. Planning Commission Minutes dated July 21, 2005 Workshop and Public Hearing and
August 18, 2005 Planning Commission Action.
4. Resolution Approving 2006 Allocations and Annual Work Plans.
(b) Sale of Personal Property Surplus to City Need:
1. Agenda Report from Webster Jackson, Administrative Services Manager dated September
9, 2004.
2. Proposed Resolution.
(c) Amendment to Lease Agreement-Levee 12-1:
1. Agenda Report from Stan Strebel, Administrative & Community Services Director dated
September 19, 2005.
2. 8/22 Letter from Corps of Engineers.
3. Proposed Amendment.
(d) Proposed Code Amendment for PMC Title 26 (Hammerhead Turnarounds) (MF #05-
125-CA):
1. Agenda Report from David 1. McDonald, City Planner dated September 21, 2005.
2. Proposed Ordinance.
3. Memo to Planning Commission: dated 9/7/05.
4. Planning Commission Minutes: dated 9/15/05.
(e) Community Survey:
1. Agenda Report from Gary Crutchfield, City Manager dated September 23, 2005.
2. Memorandum dated 9/23/05, reference Clarification.
3. Workshop Agenda Report dated 9112/05, reference Community Survey.
4. Memorandum.from Management Assistant dated 9/9/05,
4. OTHER ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION:
(a)
(b)
(c)
5. EXECUTIVE SESSION:
(a)
(b)
(c)
6. ADJOURNMENT.
REMINDERS:
1. 4:00 p.m., Monday, September 26 - Hanford Area Economic Investment Fund Meeting.
(COUNCILMEMBER MATT WATKINS)
AGENDA REPORT NO. 76
FOR: City Council DATE: September 21, 2005
WORKSHOP: 9/26/2005
TO: Gary Crutchfi Manager REGULAR: 10/3/2005
FROM: Richard J. Smith, Director
Community & Economic Development
Cruz Gonzalez, Urban Development Coordinator
SUBJECT: 2006 Community Development Block Grant Program Allocations and
Annual Work Plan
I. REFERENCE(S).-
A. 2006 Summary of CDBG Applications for Funding
B. Planning Commission Minutes July 21, 2005 Workshop and Public Hearing
and August 18, 2005 Planning Commission Action
C. Resolution Approving 2006 Allocations and Annual Work Plans
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCILISTAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
9/26/2005: DISCUSSION
10/3/2005: MOTION: I move to approve Resolution No. regarding the City's
2006 CDBG Allocations and Annual Work Plan.
III. FISCAL IMPACT
It is estimated for 2006, there will be approximately $858,000 available including
an entitlement grant of $698,000 from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development, plus a $160,000 of program income.
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
A. A summary of requests for 2006 CDBG funds is attached (Reference "A"). The
City received twenty-two (22) requests for funds totaling $1,431,775. A total
of approximately $858,000 is available.
B. All proposed activities are eligible for funding under U.S. Housing and Urban
Development Department regulations. The City has a longstanding policy of
declining outside public service requests because the 15% federal limit is
consumed by established municipal service programs.
C. The Planning Commission held a workshop and Public Hearing on July 21,
2005. The Public Hearing which was advertised in the Tri-City Herald and
Giant Nickel in Spanish and solicited public comment on applications for
funding from Pasco's 2006 Community Development Block Grant Program. At
the workshop eleven (11) people made presentations relating to their
proposals. Planning Commission action was on August 18, 2005.
V. DISCUSSION
A. At the August 18, 2005 City Planning Commission meeting, staff presented
recommendations for funding. The Planning Commission recommended that
the staff funding recommendations be approved.
B. It is necessary that Pasco's. Annual Plan be submitted to HUD by
November 15, 2005. Therefore, it is recommended the funding as outlined in
the summary of 2006 Planning Commission recommendations be approved.
3(a)
CITY OF PASCO Exhibit A
2006 CDBG Proposal Summary& Requests
Attachment 2
PLANNING CITY
STAFF COMMISSION COUNCIL
ACTIVITY REQUEST RECOMMEND RECOMMEND APPROVAL
1 CDBG Program Administration $ 120,000.00 $ 105,000.00 $ 105,000.00
2 Code Enforcement $ . 48,000.00 $ 48,000.00 $ 48,000.00
3 Downtown Fagade Improvement $ 40,000.00 $ 40,000.00 $ 40,000.00
4 Abatement (Dangerous Buildings) $ 50,000.00 $ - $ -
I
* 5 Recreation Program -Civic Center $ 37,500.00 $ 37,500.00 $ 37,500.00
* 6 Recreation Specialist–MLKCC $ 37,500.00 $ 37,500.00 $ 37,500.00
I
* 7 Senior Citizens Program $ 29,000.00 $ 29,000.00 $ 29,000.00
8 Economic Development Incentives $ 100,000.00 $ - $ -
9 Volunteer Park Restroom upgrade $ 150,000.00 $ 115,000.00 $ 115,000.00
and ADA trail
10 Sacajawea Heritage Trail $ 150,000.00 $ 192,000.00 $ 192,000.00
11 Street Reconstruction $ 50,000.00 $ - $ -
East Pasco Underground Power
12 $ 150,000.00 $ - $
Lines
I
13 Handicap ramps (city-wide) $ 80,000.00 $ 100,000.00 $ 100,000.00
* 14 Alpha Men of Tomorrow Mentoring $ 5,000.00 $ - $ -
Program
15 Boys & Girls Club—Facility rehab $ 145,000.00 $ 35,000.00 $ 35,000.00
* 16 CAC-Choices Continuum of Care $ 6,775.00 $ - $ -
Center
17 CAC-Energy Home Program $ 20,000.00 $ 20,000.00 $ 20,000.00
18 Catholic Family& Child Services- $ 10,000.00 $ 10,000.00 $ 10,000.00
Low Income minor repairs
19 Pasco Downtown Development $ 65,000.00 $ 65,000.00 $ 65,000.00
Association-Comm. Kit.
* 20 Pasco School Dist. (classes using $ 30,000.00 $ 24,000.00 $ 24,000.00
Pasco Com. Kit.)
21 The Manna Project $ 20,000.00 $ - $ -
22 Habitat for Humanity $ 78,000.00 $ - $ -
TOTAL $ 1,421,775.00 $ 858,000.00 $ 858,000.00 $ -
Estimated FY 2006 Entitlement $ 698,000.00
Program Income $ 160,000.00
Total Funds Available $ 858,000.00
* Community Services subject to 15% cap.
CITY OF PASCO
2006 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION SUMMARY
Attachment 1
1. PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION ($120,000
The Community&Economic Development Department is requesting funds to offset the
City's costs for operating the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program
for 2006. HUD regulations specify that a maximum 20% of the program allocation can
be spent on administration. The 2006 request is approximately 17% of the allocation.
2. CODE ENFORCEMENT ($48,000):
The Community Development Department is requesting funds to help defray the
expenses of operating a Code Enforcement Program to address blighted conditions and to
create a more viable living environment for low to moderate-income families in low to
moderate-income areas in Pasco. This amount covers part of the program delivery costs
of code enforcement officers who are responsible for these areas in Pasco.
3. DOWNTOWN FACADE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM ($40,000):.
The City Council authorized the use of$20,000 in CDBG funds to be used as matching
grants to encourage downtown property owners to improve their fagades. This request for
additional funds will allow the program to continue into 2006.
4. ABATEMENT (DANGEROUS BUILDINGS): ($50,000):
As a result of code enforcement activities, selected facilities may be found to be unsafe
and a risk to the public. After inspections, notice to owners, and a hearing, such facilities
will be removed and final disposition of the property will be determined.
5. RECREATION PROGRAM- CIVIC CENTER($37,500):
The Administrative & Community Service Department is requesting funding for a staff
person to manage recreation programs at the Civic Center Activity Building. The
majority of these programs serve area youth (preschool through school age). Programs
are offered during the school year and summer. Programs are targeted to "at-risk" youth.
Most participants walk to the facility, located in low-moderate income neighborhoods.
6. RECREATION SPECIALIST -M.L.K. COMMUNITY CENTER($37,500)
The Administrative &Community Services Department is requesting partial funding for
a full time staff person to manage youth programs at.the Martin Luther King Community
Center. The Center, located in a low-income neighborhood provides a range of
recreational opportunities for area youth. The highest concentration or minority students
live around the Martin Luther King Center. Programs are coordinated with the YMCA,
Salvation Army, and Campfire USA.
7. SENIOR CITIZENS PROGRAMS ($29,000):
The Administrative & Community Service Department is requesting funds to support
senior citizens programming at the senior center. Funds are used for staff and program
costs. Programming has increased for seniors over the past several years and the
increased activity level necessitates continuing these services. Primary beneficiaries are
the City's low-income elderly.
8. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT INCENTIVES: ($100,000):
It is anticipated that in 2006 the City of Pasco will need to provide incentive funding for
industry locating in Pasco. The growth in Pasco is presently at an all time high and is
expected to continue in 2006 and beyond. In our future planning it is necessary to
anticipate that large new business will require incentives to locate in Pasco.
9. VOLUNTEER PARK UPGRADE: ($150,000):
This proposed Activity involves improvements to a public park by installing a new
prefabricated restroom and continuing an ADA trail around the park. Park upgrade would
be of benefit to the neighboring community, which is populated by primarily low to
moderate income residents.
10. SACJAWEA HERITAGE TRAIL: ($150,000):
The final phase of the Sacagawea Heritage Trail in Pasco is incomplete from 2nd Avenue
(Pasco boat basin) to approximately 13`x' Avenue which is about one mile. It is
anticipated that in 2006 work will be started in completing this important part of the trail
which is in a very low income area of households in Pasco.
11. STREET RECONSTRUCTION: ($50,000):
It is planned that the City of Pasco Public Works Department will be upgrading selected
areas within Pasco with new and reconstructed streets in areas of low to moderate income
households in 2006.
12. EAST PASCO UNDERGROUND POWER LINES: ($150,000):
In 2005, the City of Pasco identified an area in East Pasco which requires upgrading of
streets, sidewalks and power requirements to support new schools and households in low
to moderate income areas. The estimated costs were in excess of$600,000 and funds
were allocated in 2005. This request is in furtherance of that effort and within that scope
of work.
13. HANDICAP RAMPS ($80,000):
The City Public Works & Engineering Department proposes reconstructing street corners
in Pasco to meet accessibility standards.
14. ALPHA MEN OF TOMORROW MENTORING PROGRAM ($5,000):
Funds are being requested to sponsor a mentoring program for African American male
students of the Pasco School District to graduate from high school and college. In
addition to stressing the importance of academic achievement, leadership development
and social development, the students will be instructed on the requirements for
completing high school and going to college.
15. BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB FACILITY REHABILITATION ($145,000):
Window Renovation. The Boys & Girls Club is invested in making the building at
801 N 18`h both functional as well as beautiful. They propose to utilize CDBG funds to
complete improvements to exterior doors and windows. This renovation was begun in
2003 utilizing CDBG funds to update windows on the west side of the building. This
project was continued in 2004 with the renovation to the south side of the building. In
August of 2005, this project will extend to the east side of the building. The remaining
cost requested for 2006 will be used to complete the Gymnasium windows and the
east-side entry. The existing windows are original to the building and consist of a single
pane glass approximately 7' high. Each year, thousands of dollars are lost as heat and
air-conditioning from our recently added HVAC system exit the building through these
windows. Additionally, as a visible community asset(due to use by Pasco families as
well as proximity to Edgar Brown Stadium) exterior window improvements will enhance
the appearance of the Pasco community. The estimated cost for this improvement would
be $35,000.
Gamesroom Renovation. The original use of the Main Branch was an elementary
school. Due to this fact, the entire building is accessed by a series of long hallways. A
major safety concern in the building is unsupervised youth utilizing hallways for program
transitions. We will renovate the Gamesroom to encompass 1032 sq. ft. of additional
program space. This renovation will eliminate a jog in the hallway allowing for direct
visibility by staff to all accessible areas of the south wing of the building. We anticipate
this renovation resulting in a drastic increase in safety for the 2388 members we serve on
a yearly basis. Additionally, this renovation will serve to eliminate a large quantity of
asbestos-based material utilized when the building was originally constructed. There is no
renovation currently being contemplated by our organization that would have as drastic
of an impact on safety. The estimated cost for this improvement would be $110,000.
16. BENTON-FRANKLIN CAC - CHOICES CENTER OF CARE: ($6,775):
The Community Action Committee has developed the subject program and is a non-stop
intake-application system for all homeless and potentially homeless population. CAC has
a project office in Pasco and coordinates the need and contacts for homeless persons.
This funding will supplement other funding to carry this program through 2006.
17. BENTON-FRANKLIN CAC—ENERGY HOME PROGRAM: ($20,000):
Funds are being requested to leverage state energy conservation funds to be used on 14
low income homes in Pasco for insulation, furnace repairs and lead based paint testing.
Use of these funds helps the City of Pasco's HOME program by providing match funding
for the HOME program.
I
I
18. CATHOLIC FAMILY& CHILD SERVICES ($20,000):
This organization is requesting funds to purchase materials to support volunteers who do
home repairs and build ramps for low-income elderly residents in Pasco. Volunteers
come from a wide variety of sources through out the Tri-Cities, which includes many
different faith-based organizations, individuals and Hanford groups.
19. PASCO DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATON— COMMERCIAL
KITCHEN ($65,000.00):
Funding is requested for start-up costs through 2006 to supplement revenues which are
predicted to be less than operating costs. This estimate is based upon a best efforts basis
since there is no historical background data to rely on. The Kitchen is located in a low to
moderate income area and will be an area benefit which will support the Farmers &
Market and is anticipated to create jobs for low to moderate income persons and create
small businesses which will increase the volume of business in the Farmers Market.
Additionally, it is anticipated that educational institutions will utilize the facility for
culinary instruction and hopefully increasing revenues.
20. PASCO SCHOOL DISTRICT---CULINARY INSTRUCTION ($30,000):
The Pasco School Dist is planning on the development of a culinary hands-on workshop
for approximately twenty one students which would use the Pasco Commercial Kitchen
for over 60 hours per month. Details have been discussed with the staff of the PDDA
regarding costs and space. The overall cost estimate for carrying out this program would
be about $115,000. The.CDBG grant would cover program development costs.
21. MANNA PROJECT: ($20,000):
This proposed Activity involves improvements to a private park which has been greatly
improved by private donations over the past few years. It is located off of Sylvester in a
low income neighborhood near Rowena Chess Elementary School and is safe clean
recreational space for children and families and to play games and have picnics. A
covered shelter is needed and a drinking fountain.
22. HABITAT FOR HUMANITY: ($78,000):
This activity is designed to help first time home owners with down payment assistance
for homes they help build, thus creating an increased community pride. The development
of data supporting this effort is necessary for documentation. The Activity would meet
the goal of improving affordable housing opportunities.
Exhibit B
REGULAR MEETING July 21, 2005
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JULY 21, 2005
E. Public Hearing: Block Grant Program: 2006 Program Year
Requests for CDBG Funding
Chairman McCollum read the agenda item title and asked for the Staff report.
Staff reported that the Commission will be reviewing the 2006 Community
Development Block Grant Program Application packet. Staff reported it is
estimated Pasco will receive $698,000 which is the same amount received last
year in 2005. Staff explained 22 requests were submitted for a total of
$1,431,775. These 22 proposals all meet the HUD requirements.
Chairman McCollum asked if there were any questions of Staff.
There were none.
CHAIRMAN MCCOLLUM OPENED THE PUBLIC HEARING AND ASKED IF
THERE WAS ANY ONE PRESENT THAT WISHED TO SPEAK ON THIS MATTER.
John Hughes, Community Development Block Grant Coordinator, requested
funds in the amount of $120,000 for Program Administration. The funding is to
offset the City's costs for operating the Community Development Block Grant
(CDBG) Program for 2006. HUD regulations specify that a maximum 20% of the
program allocation can be spent on administration. The 2006 request is
approximately 17% of the allocation.
John Hughes, requested funds in the amount of $48,000 for the Code
Enforcement program. The Community Development Department is requesting
funds to help defray the expenses of operating a Code Enforcement Program to
address blighted conditions and to create a more viable living environment for
low to moderate-income families in low to moderate-income areas in Pasco. This
amount covers part of the program delivery costs of code enforcement officers
who are responsible for these areas in Pasco.
Rick Smith, Community & Economic Development Director, requested funds in
the amount of $40,000 for the Downtown Facade Improvement Program. The
City Council authorized the use of $20,000 in CDBG funds last year to be used
as matching .grants to encourage downtown property owners to improve their
facades. This request for additional funds will allow the program to continue into
2006.
Rick Smith, Community 8, Economic Development Director, requested funds in
the amount of $50,000 for Abatement of Dangerous Buildings. As a result of
code enforcement activities, selected facilities may be found to be unsafe and a
risk to the public. After inspections, notice to owners, and a hearing, such
facilities will be removed and final disposition of the property will be determined.
This request would help defray some of the abatement costs incurred by low- to
moderate-income persons.
Stan Strebel, Administrative & Community Services Director, requested funds in
the amount of $37,500 for the Civic Center Recreation Program. The funding
- 1 -
would be for a staff person to manage recreation programs at the Civic Center
Activity Building. The majority of these programs serve area youth. Programs
are offered during the school year and summer. Programs are targeted to "at-
risk" youth. Most participants walk to the facility from the surrounding low-
moderate income neighborhoods.
Stan Strebel, Administrative & Community Services Director, requested funds in
the amount of $37,500 for the Martin Luther King Community Center. The
request was for partial funding of a full time staff person to manage youth
programs at the Martin Luther King Community Center. The Center, located in
a low-income neighborhood and provides a range of recreational opportunities
for area youth. The highest concentration or minority students live around the
Martin Luther King Center. Programs are coordinated with the YMCA, Salvation
Army, and Campfire USA.
Stan Strebel, Administrative & Community Services Director, requested funds in
the amount of $29,000 for the Senior Center. Funds will be used for staff and
program costs. Programming has increased for seniors over the past several
years and the increased activity level necessitates continuing these services.
Primary beneficiaries are the City's low-income elderly.
Rick Smith, Community & Economic Development Director, requested funds in
the amount of $100,000 for Economic Development Incentives. It is anticipated
that in 2006 the City of Pasco will need to provide incentive funding for
industries locating in Pasco. The growth in Pasco is presently at an all time.high
and is expected to continue in 2006 and beyond. In our future planning it is
necessary to anticipate that new business will require incentives to locate in
Pasco.
Todd Knittel, Public Works & Engineering Associate Engineer, requested funds
in the amount of $80,000 for Handicap Ramps. The City Public Works 8v
Engineering Department proposes reconstructing street corners in Pasco to meet
accessibility standards.
Commissioner Anderson asked what specific aread the ramp improvements were
taking place in.
Mr. Knittel responded the improvement .were taking place in the older parts of
town.
Commissioner Mosebar asked why the dots on the map were different colors.
Mr. Knittel responded the colors signify the years the ramps were installed
Commissioner Little asked how much an average ramp costs to install.
Mr. Knittel responded that the average cost is $1,500 per ramp.
Rick Smith, Community & Economic Development Director, requested funds in
the amount of$150,000 for completion of the Sacajawea Heritage Trail. The final
phase of the Sacagawea Heritage Trail in Pasco is incomplete from 2nd Avenue
(Pasco boat basin) to approximately 13th Avenue which is about one mile. It is
anticipated that in 2006 work will be started to complete this important part of
the trail which is in a very low income area of Pasco.
- 2 -
Rick Smith, Community & Economic Development Director, requested funds in
the amount of $50,000 for Street Reconstruction. It is planned that the City of
Pasco Public Works Department will be upgrading selected areas within Pasco
with new and reconstructed streets in areas of low- to moderate-income
households in 2006.
Stan Strebel, Administrative & Community Services Director requested funds in
the amount of $150,000 for Volunteer Park Upgrades. This proposal involves
improvements to the park by installing a new prefabricated restroom and
continuing an ADA trail around the park. Park upgrades would benefit to the
neighboring community, which is populated by primarily low- to moderate-
income residents.
Rick Smith, Community & Economic Development Director, requested funds in
the amount of $150,000 for East Pasco Power Lines Under grounding. In 2005,
the City of Pasco identified an area in East Pasco which requires upgrading of
streets, sidewalks and power requirements to support new schools and
households in low- to moderate-income areas. The estimated costs were in
excess of $600,000 and funds were allocated in 2005. This request is in
furtherance of that effort and within the approved scope of work.
Russell Blye, Chapter Secretary of Alpha Men of Tomorrow, requested funds in
the amount of $5,000 for a Mentoring Program. Funds are being requested to
sponsor a mentoring program for African American male students of the Pasco
School District to encourage graduation from high school and college. In
addition to stressing the importance of academic achievement, leadership
development and social development, the students will be instructed on the
requirements for completing high school and going to college.
Greg Faulke, Executive Director of Boys & Girls Club, requested funds in the
amount of $145,000 for the Boys & Girls Club Facility Rehabilitation. Funds
would be used to complete planned window replacements started in 2003, and
expand and renovate the game room. The organization serves approximately
2,000 Pasco youth from low- to moderate-income families.
Debra Biondilillo, Benton-Franklin Community Action Committee requested
$6,775 for Choices, a Continuum Care Center. The Community Action
Committee (CAC) has developed the subject program for the homeless and
potentially homeless population. CAC has a project office in Pasco and
coordinates the need and contacts for homeless persons. This funding will
supplement other funding to carry this program through 2006.
Dave Odom, Housing Winterization Department Director, Benton-Franklin
Community Action Committee requested funds in the amount of $20,000 for the
Energy Home Efficiency Program. Funds are being requested to leverage state
energy conservation funds to be used on 14 low income homes in Pasco for
insulation, furnace repairs and lead based paint testing. Use of these funds
helps the City of Pasco's HOME program by providing match funding for the
HOME program.
Commissioner Rose asked Mr. Odom if there were volunteers involved with this
program.
- 3 -
Mr. Odom responded that volunteers do not help on site, but volunteers do help
at the administration level.
John Hughes, spoke for Shari Hallman of Catholic Family & Child Services who
was ill and not able to be present. Catholic Family & Child services requested
funds in the amount of $20,000 for the Volunteer Chore Services. Requested
funds would be used to purchase materials to support volunteers who do home
repairs and build ramps for low-income elderly residents in Pasco. Volunteers
come from a wide variety of sources throughout the Tri-Cities, which includes
many different individuals, Hanford groups and faith-based organizations.
Dorothy Schoeppach, Pasco Downtown Development Association, requested
funds in the amount of $65,000 for the Commercial Kitchen. Funding is
requested for start-up costs through 2006 to supplement revenues which are
predicted to be less than operating costs. The Pasco Specialty Kitchen is located
in a low- to moderate-income area and will be an area benefit which will support
the Farmer's Market and is anticipated to create jobs for low- to moderate-
income persons. Additionally, it is anticipated that educational institutions will
utilize the facility for culinary instruction.
Chairman McCollum asked if any of the businesses had moved out and opened
their own shop.
Ms. Schoeppach responded that no businesses have moved out as of yet, but
she expects a couple of businesses will by the end of the year.
Commissioner Rose asked how many hours per week the kitchen is utilized.
Ms. Schoeppach responded that it is seasonal and the last month was a very
busy month.
John Hughes spoke for Chris Martinson of the Pasco School District who was
out of town. Pasco School District requested funds in the amount of $30,000 for
Culinary Instruction at the Commercial Kitchen. The Pasco School District is
planning on. the development of a culinary hands-on workshop for
approximately twenty one students which would use the Pasco Commercial
Kitchen for over 60 hours per month. Details have been discussed with the staff
of the PDDA regarding costs and space. The overall cost estimate for carrying
out this program would be about $115,000. The CDBG grant would cover
program development costs.
Lynn Jones, Manna Project, requested funds in the amount of $20,000. This
proposed Activity involves improvements to a private park which has been
greatly improved by private donations over the past few years. It is located off of
Sylvester in a low income neighborhood near Rowena Chess Elementary School
and is safe clean recreational space for children and families to play games and
have picnics. Funds are requested to provide a covered shelter and a drinking
fountain.
Commissioner Miles asked Ms. Jones how she came upon with the cost of the
project.
Ms. Jones responded by prayerful consideration and an educated guess based
- 4 -
on the costs per square foot of a remodeling job.
Teresa Richardson, Executive Director for Tri-County Partners of Habitat for
Humanity, requested funds in the amount of $78,000 for Habitat for Humanity
projects. This activity is designed to help first time home owners with down
payment assistance for homes they help build. The Activity would meet the goal
of improving affordable housing opportunities.
i
- 5 -
REGULAR MEETING August 18, 2005
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES AUGUST 18, 2005
E. Old Business: BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM: 2006 Program
Year Funding Recommendations, (City of
Pasco
Chairman McCollum read the master file and asked for the Staff report.
Staff reported that the applicant (City of Pasco) is requesting approval of the
2006 Program Year Funding,
Chairman McCollum asked if there were any questions of Staff.
Commissioner Smurthwaite asked staff why the Heritage Trail request was
increased.
Staff noted that because of Davis Bacon rules, by giving the Heritage Trail
more money and cutting the money from the block grant program from East
Lewis Project the city would save over $50,000. Staff noted that the money cut
from the East Lewis Project would be funded through the general fund.
Commissioner Smurthwaite asked why the Handicap ramp funding was
increased by $20,000.
Staff responded that they are proposing to increase the money to help get the
Handicap ramps done sooner.
Commissioner Smurthwaite asked staff how long will it be necessary to fund
the Commercial Kitchen.
Staff responded that it will be necessary until the Commercial Kitchen breaks
even.
Commissioner Mosebar asked staff how close the Commercial Kitchen is to
breaking even.
Staff responded they could not answer that question.
Commissioner Miles asked if the hyphen meant that the recommendation is
for no money to be given.
Staff responded that his interpretation was correct.
Commissioner Hay moved the Planning Commission recommend the Block
Grant Budget as presented on August 18, 2005 to the City Coucil for approval
Commissioner Smurthwaite seconded the motion. The motion carried
unanimously.
- 1 -
Exhibit C
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION approving the Program Year 2006 Community Development Block
Grant Allocations and Annual Work Plan.
WHEREAS, staff has prepared the Program Year 2006 Annual Work Plan for activities
totaling $858,000; and
i
WHEREAS, on September 19, 2005 the Annual Work Plan was modified and presented
to the City Council for review; NOW, THEREFORE,
I
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON, DO RESOLVE AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That the Pasco City Council hereby approves the Annual Work Plan as
follows:
I. CDBG Program Administration $ 105,000.00
2. Code Enforcement 48,000.00
3. Downtown Facade Improvement 40,000.00
4. Recreation Program- Civic Center 37,500.00
5. Recreation Specialist–MLKCC 37,500.00
6. Senior Citizens Program 29,000.00
7. Volunteer Park upgrade 115,000.00
8, Sacajawea Heritage Trail 192,000.00
9. Handicap ramps (city-wide) 100,000.00
10. Boys & Girls Club—Facility rehab 35,000.00
11. CAC-Energy Home Program 20,000.00
12. Catholic Family & Child Services-Low Income minor repairs 10,000.00
13. Pasco Downtown Development Association-Comm. Kit. 65,000.00
14, Pasco School Dist. (classes using Pasco Com. Kit.) 24,000.00
TOTAL $ 858,000.00
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco this day of 52005.
Michael L. Garrison
Mayor
ATTEST:
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Sandy L. Kenworthy Leland B. Kerr
Deputy City Clerk City Attorney
1� .
AGENDA REPORT
FOR: City Council September 9, 2005
TO: Gary Crutchfield, City Manager W/Shop Mtg.: 9/26/05
Stan Strebel, Administrative& i
Services Directo Regular Mtg.: 10/3/05
FROM: Webster Jackson, Administrative Services Manager
SUBJECT: A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE SALE OF PERSONAL PROPERTY
SURPLUS TO CITY NEED
I. REFERENCE(S):
1. Proposed Resolution
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL/STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
9/26: Discussion
10/3: Motion: I move to approve Resolution No. authorizing the sale of
personal property surplus to city needs.
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
None
III. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF
i
The City of Pasco Police Department has in its possession a collection of miscellaneous
items consisting of an assortment of various kinds of tools, bicycles, portable and two-
way radios, cameras, electronic equipment, saws, etc. These items are the result of arrests.
and the recovery of stolen property whereas no one has come forth to claim any of it by
presenting proof of ownership. The disposition of this property is in accordance with
RCW Title 63.32.010,"Methods of Disposition", and PMC 2.46, "Sale of City Property".
No minimum prices are suggested for each of the miscellaneous items, as they are too
numerous. Staff estimates that the total sales price will be approximately $500.00, and is
requesting Council to declare the items surplus to city needs and authorize staff to sell the
items for a price that is in the best interest of the City.
Therefore, staff is requesting Council approval of the action stated in Section II above.
V. DISCUSSION:
To be determined.
3(b)
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION authorizing the sale of personal property surplus to City needs.
WHEREAS, there are certain items of personal property surplus to City needs;
NOW, THEREFORE,
i
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON, DOES
RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
I. The items of personal property listed below are declared surplus property
and city staff is directed to advertise for sale by competitive bid, sealed
bid, or public auction at, or above,the minimum sale price set forth below:
Several miscellaneous items consisting of tools, bicycles, portable and
two-way radios, cameras, electronic equipment, saws, etc. MINIMUM
PRICE: $500.
2. In the event the minimum bid price is not received on an item(s), staff is
authorized to negotiate a sale at a price that is in the best interest of the
City.
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco this day of October 2005.
CITY OF PASCO
Michael L. Garrison, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Webster Jackson, City Clerk Leland B. Kerr, City Attorney
1i
I
AGENDA REPORT
FOR: City Council September 19, 2005
TO: Gary Crutchfi anager Workshop Mtg.: 9/26/05
Regular Mtg.: 10/3/05 I'
FROM: Stan Strebel, A rive and Community
Services Dire
SUBJECT: Amendment to Lease Agreement—Levee 12-1, .
Pasco Boat Basin
I. REFERENCE(S):
A. 8/22 Letter from Corps of Engineers
B. Proposed Amendment
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCILISTAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
9/19: Discussion
1013: MOTION: I move to approve Amendment No. 1 to the Levee 12-1, Pasco Boat Basin
Lease and, further,to authorize the Mayor to sign the amendment.
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
N/A
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
A) In March 2004 the City entered into a fifty year lease with the Army Corps of Engineers
(COE) for the portion of the Columbia River Levee 12-1 between the Blue and Cable
bridges. The lease cleared the way for the City to lower the levee and construct a
segment of the Sacagawea Heritage Trail on the towered levee.
B) In the fall of 2004, after requesting that the COE address an odor problem stemming
from algae growth in pond 12-1, adjacent to the Pasco Little League fields, staff became
aware that the COE considered the pond odor problem now a City responsibility due to
the new lease.
This was quite a surprise to staff because throughout years of discussion on the concept
of transfer or lease of the levee the COE had maintained that, under any scenario, it
would maintain control of the surface waters upland of the levee. Further, the lease
document contains no specific reference to the pond itself or City responsibilities :with
respect thereto.
In previous years, the COE has responded to odor complaints with aeration equipment
placed in the pond.
C) In meeting with COE representatives, staff pointed out that the City had no authority to
operate the COE pumps or to otherwise control the water levels in the pond. Also the
City had no benefit (i.e. boating or fishing) from the pond other than aesthetics It
therefore did not make sense to try to interpret the lease to assign certain mainten nce
responsibilities to the City.
D) The COE has finally agreed to delete the pond from the lease in recognition that the .City
is not responsible for the pond and odors emanating therefrom. The City still re Gins
responsibility for the maintenance of large diameter perforated pipe, which discharges
into the pond,that was installed as part of the trail improvement project.
D) Staff recommends approval of the attached lease amendment.
i
3(c)
,
i
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY PASCO CITY HALL
WALLA WALLA DISTRICT,CORPS OF ENGINEERS R EC EIVELT
201 NORTH THIRD AVENUE
WALLA WALLA WA 99362-1876 AUG 2 4 2005
\ REPLY TO
ATTENTION OF
Au ust 22, 2005 OFFICE CITY N'1A,`IAGEfTS
9
Real Estate Division
Subject: Amendment No.1, Department of the Army Lease W912EF-1-04-13,
City of Pasco
Mr. Gary Crutchfield
City Manager
City of Pasco
PO Box 293
Pasco, Washington 99301
Dear Mr. Crutchfield:
Attached for review and acceptance by the city of Pasco (the city) is proposed
amendment number 1 which removes the Levee 12-1 Pond from the subject lease.
Please review the amendment and if it is agreeable, please sign and date both copies
where indicated by the green arrows. Please also have both copies of the Certificate of
Authority completed. When all signatures have been obtained, return both copies of the
amendment tome at the address above and they will be executed by the government.
One copy of the amendment will be returned to the city for its record and use.
If you have any questions, please call me at 509-527-7324. You may also contact
me by email at Paul.S.Shampine @usace.army.mil.
Sincerely,
Enclosures Paul Shampine
Realty Specialist
i
AMENDMENT NO. 1, DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
LEASE NO. W912EF-1-04-13
TO THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON
FOR PUBLIC PARK AND RECREATIONAL PURPOSES
Levee 12-1, The Pasco Boat Basin
on
McNary Lock and Dam Project
Franklin County, Washington
WHEREAS, on March 26, 2004, the City of Pasco, Washington, grantee,
leased a continuous land area in Franklin County on the McNary Lock and Dam
Project including portions of premises Tracts XX-3457 and XX-3461 and all of
premises Tracts XX-3458 and XX-3459, known collectively as the Levee 12-1
Pond, for Public Park and Recreation purposes; and
WHEREAS, in a letter dated November 5, 2004, a copy of which is
attached as Exhibit I, the grantee requested that the lease be amended to
remove the 12-1 Pond from the leased premises due to management of the
pond's odor and acknowledged that if its use or improvement is desired in the
future, that an additional amendment will be required; and
WHEREAS, the requested amendment to the lease will not conflict or
interfere with nor adversely affect the operation of the McNary Lock and Dam
project for its authorized purposes;
NOW THEREFORE, effective on the date of execution of this amendment
by the Chief, Real Estate Division, Walla Walla District, Corps of Engineers,
Department of the Army Lease W912EF-1-04-13 is hereby modified in the
following particulars, but in no others:
1. Waters and lands of the Levee 12-1 Pond, at and below normal surface
elevation 330.5 feet mean sea level, National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929,
as shown in Exhibit J, are hereby removed from the lease area.
2. Removal of the pond from the lease shall in no way relieve the grantee from
any responsibility for operation and maintenance of the recently installed 470
linear feet of 78-inch perforated pipe and its appurtenances that discharge into
the Levee 12-1 pond.
In all other respects, the covenants, provisions and conditions of said lease shall
remain in full force and effect.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF I have hereunto set my hand by authority of the
Secretary of the Army this day of , 2005.
RICHARD CARLTON
Chief, Real Estate Division
Walla Walla District, Corps of Engineers
This amendment to Department of the Army Lease No. W912EF-1-04-13 is also
executed by the grantee this day of , 2005.
CITY OF PASCO
By:
Title:
CERTIFICATE OF AUTHORITY
certify that I am the of
I
that , who signed the foregoing
instrument on behalf of the grantee, was then of
I further certify that the said officer was acting within the scope of powers
delegated to this officer by the governing body of the grantee in executing said
instrument.
Date
(signature)
I
CITY MANAGER (509) 545-34E04 /Scam 726-34441 Fax (509) 545-3403
P.O.Box 293 (525 North 3rd Avenue) Pasco,Washington 99301
November 5, 2004
i
,�x e �eceiv ed Vii.
Richard Carlton, Chief 1 1 Chief, Real Estate
Real Estate Division c uilsitlon
Walla Walla District, Corps of Engineers `nDralse]
201 North Third Ave. Legal ----
< t�f&D
Walla Walla WA 99362-1876 ---
Re: Lease No. W912EF-1-04-13 4 Planning
_,.. f:d�;�n'��i .-
LFq al Pro ero"'i-
Oe
Dear Mr. Carlton:
The City of Pasco.hereby requests an amendment to the referenced lease to delete the 12-1 pond
(see attached) from said lease.
Prior to the execution of the lease, when the city received complaints from citizens regarding the
unpleasant odor emanating from the pond(presumably due to unchecked growth of algae),the
Corps responded with efforts to mitigate the nuisance.
Throughout the several years of discussion regarding the potential conveyance of the Tri-Cities
levee to local jurisdictions, Corps officials made it very clear to all of us involved that the Corps
would retain entire control over the drainage system associated with the levee. Indeed,WRDA
96 stipulated as much.
When we forwarded citizen complaints about the pond odors this summer, we were surprised to
leans the Corps' position was that the lease placed responsibility for the pond in the hands of the
city. While the lease is apparently silent on the specific duties of the lessee and lessor with
respect to the pond, the city had maintained throughout lease negotiations the same
understandings of Corps responsibility for the drainage system that had permeated all disci ssions
prior to that time.
As a consequence, key city staff met with Corps personnel at the pond on September 23 to view
and discuss the relevant circumstances. The conclusion of that discussion was the best way to
deal with the conflict would be to amend the lease to delete the pond; that amendment would
clarify that it is not included within the property]eased by the city. We understand that, if the
city desires to improve or use the pond in the future, we will need to amend the lease to add the
pond.
Richard Carlton, Chief, Real Estate Division
November 5, 2004
RE: Lease No. W912EF-1-04-13
Paae 2
Please initiate the process necessary to formally amend the lease to reflect the "meeting of the
minds"arrived at during the on-site discussion with Corps personnel on September 23.
Since ,
i
Ga tc field
Ci,y Manager
GC/tlz `
cc: City Council
Starr Strebel, Administrative and Community Services Director
attachment
-J
f! a0W +n
cr,9rr`r a r, r
•'r+ 11NNII
QJ
cif: � � e:.�•S fIr"��y� - ,41 I �y�o
Erg-
it
-
i�J ['
i � -�� e - - f v `� .2 .Sx„_-=_-- f �'Wit_ri• r ffi
LZI
LLLLLLW
If t 1 L tr 't+ J� �i►�l`a't Imo' I
i�
LLLLLLL
r'. t� C) LLLL' Lt
LLLLLL
L,_�. ,t��..:r�r,•'>:-i by w-y� ,;. - •
1r-��°,¢I� .rYm y_t_S)J,fti,��C Y^••t1•�Y -��....'-;',
. ��, ••-_.._:ecsl� � �a..t=•:=_:T..._. . ,.-��•-� to ! �sW
COLUMBIA R 11 SEPT
�jy`'• Fy►
Olt
•� S
I Af�: LRi. �s s' t •�y�J! S �:r, Z;;.,
tk-
..3s.-- -"'KA' _. r,-1-_,ry•'�r! � t` ��� l�r�' �;•µ ?i�•�4�i iT4;;�y.:
:::�.,; ��" $��z' S�� •y�'t 'sYs { ��; Yom. �.;-. .�-�.u' �•.�- '!t
'S '`• iii' � .[� #:` � �,�..� :e:,,, .�°"._`... �c
''."
mow
[l�� •�' : ay::• _ •:�J••:::[�- ��� t- •ACM �.11Tl-
`:. 1 - `=::y"i _ ,'7f.':_.'•-L-'t.�., ,/ ''�'� , ,'�.\s - �F► fsPiz.;j�,"�SV}
*� ,•.,t_ t ., -��_, .•.�'; ... �`.. �7 ,'.f. ����: '1''4'x.-.+a .��
�•�'{,•,��`.:r%�s�-.�.!'i��.'`-- a 'i`��a��', •;1.'/ 'l'�-,� �ai��a�'�� 4�e, `�
._• �������� �- :i :L�-��',`r .t�Ra �.y"�-ir, �' r�` ,,;;\�'�;'��.� ��i(i':' •�,sYy� 4
-S! g"�'a .:.�� iS,' / •.yam.'' `.i. }�t: ter ,.�' ��
•.�`c �1k1 `���s"-r',.��s,�1,'�'� _•�a�, ` +. r� ._�. a` •4..:.' y
:,.. cY.
At
.
, - _�_ _ +a' - .:.'{ aye;. r_.,.'r,`t.,' '�% � '�.'j:;'>�-�'•:�'.
a.jF
:\ ,.:• - ..} s .�`r.; �' 1. -t .'� t• ��.
•7� R4 :.. •V•b. •-�j.... •t. Er;.. >-[... R: '$',� � fl:' 1`sJ•• � f' s i'•.•w�
'::.s ice•.- y .; .. f 4,i%=_' _ � 1t ;�'•=• s'.'` ,... ' "':
i�,.: f�'• ��:.tea:! Js'i'S.'•�:'4.C;, ).a:>.� ; �"` �' ',7 3c0 „`„'
J•� -4.d_•; �.
Ad
S.
'{` ' .,� � '.' � t � Y,k� r �. '�aa•�{�r t�,�.,•:'i d,. 'L isfy`, :l t Y�' ':•�C-�. � �'
•:�-� '�' � - ':r'�- iii > jj >--�� i. �•t l°' r, ':l
�., ' r':c�•i-.r_' - 4 �:`.i[T-.T'�r"- - v�'•` � �I �t1 y%?"' _ - .:'C,:,�=� �A'.?I': �',-..
,}:l7'' .�._ y,, .. s -'aL.:.:. i,1'h,'!„-i��'+� ..',2._Slr .�,.:.s }„•�.��.���.-�"•R ,y�.�.<•:.�:
o1, `-���` � �i�' i- < _• ,.
:yk4> .•= Via: ; ar`; . r':_Y:. \tom' `7/.
"�:.�' � ,°;�`.i" .�j"`�•. ;*-:�:: �:: rte'`mot
f:" n .=r. .r 's4,T•`~r, - ;"1
PO
0.0 F�.'_
Rr' :� 4,.ti`t# .y" E.,..•`
y
III,Am
tom: •y?: -,:�•_...#,.�':nk'�•�`::.elr ..._ . .
. 4�: '.:... j
1 fj 'etl: .', �(•... - _ :.�r� ,4..- �/1. A:i - ��.
any :.k•. Sec-tion3l , Township 3
Range
x
AGENDA REPORT NO. 79
FOR: City Council DATE: 9/21/OS
TO: Gary Crutchfi 1 Manager WORKSHOP: 9/26/05
Richard J. Smi Yi rector REGULAR: 10/3/05
Community an nom ic Development
FROM: David I. McDonald, City Planner
SUBJECT: Proposed code amendment for PMC- 26. (Hammerhead
Turnarounds) (MF # 05-125-CA)
I. REFERENCE(S):
A. Proposed Ordinance
B. Memo to Planning Commission: Dated 9/7/05
B. Planning Commission Minutes: Dated 9/15/05
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL/STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
9/26/05 Discussion:
10/3/05 Motion: I move to adopt Ordinance No. , amending Pasco
Municipal Code Title 26 by creating provisions for
hammerhead dead-end streets and, further, to authorize
publication by summary only.
III. FISCAL IMPACT: NONE
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
A. On September 15, 2005 the Planning Commission held a public
hearing to review a proposed code amendment for the inclusion of
provisions for hammerhead turnarounds in the City's subdivision
regulations.
B. At the conclusion of the September 15th public hearing the
Planning Commission recommended the attached code amendment
for hammerheads.
V. DISCUSSION:
A. Since 1996 the City has annexed considerable portions of the
unincorporated lands within the Urban Growth Area located west
of Highway 395. Within the annexation areas there were a number
of short dead-end streets. These dead-end streets are currently
nonconforming with respect to the City's subdivision regulations.
B. Dead-end streets are only permitted in the City where a street is
planned to extend beyond a subdivision into succeeding phases, or
where a cul-de-sac has been authorized.
C. Development adjacent the dead-end streets annexed to the City
requires the construction of a cul de sac. In most situations it will
be impossible to add a cul-de-sac because one side of a street may
be fully developed. Thus, the other half of the necessary circle is
not available. ' An alternate method of addressing public safety in
these situations is the construction of hammerhead turnarounds.
The proposed code. amendment provides for that option.
3(d)
♦ T
D. Upon review of the Planning Commission's recommendation, the
City Attorney indicated there should be a clear standard to rely
upon when permitting hammerheads. The intent of the
recommendation was to permit hammerheads only in those
situations where the county previously approved plats with dead
end streets that now provide no practical means for development of
a cul-de-sac. The Planning Commission's recommendation has,
therefore, been slightly modified (see Section 26.12.075) to address
the City Attorney's concern. The modification makes it clear that
hammerheads are only permitted where existing platted
development precludes the possibility of the construction of a
standard cul-de-sac.
E . If Council concurs with the attached recommendations, the
proposed ordinance will be placed on the October 3rd agenda for
Council action.
is
I
k
f
i
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE relating to subdividing amending PMC Title 26 dealing with
hammerhead turnarounds.
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 subdivision regulations that encourage
orderly growth and development of the City; and,
WHEREAS, from time to time, the City Council causes the subdivision
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 26; NOW
THEREFORE, 1
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON, DOES
ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That Section 26.08.145 of the Pasco Municipal Code be and the
same is hereby amended to read as follows:
(2) Dead end streets. Dead end streets are prohibited, except where the
comprehensive plan or preliminary plat indicates a street is to continue past the
subdivider's property, the City may allow the dead end until such time as the street
can be built through at a later date. Dead end streets may be permitted in the R-S-20
and R,S-12 districts as provided in section 26.12.075.
Section 2. That Section 26.08.145 of the Pasco Municipal Code be and the
same is hereby amended to read as follows:
26.08.145 Hammerhead/T: "Hammerhead / T" means a roadway that provides
a "T" shaped, three-point turnaround space for emergency equipment.
Section 3. That Section 26.12.075 of the Pasco Municipal Code be and the
same is hereby amended to read as follows:
26.12.075 Hammerhead / T's are only permitted in R-S-20 and R-S-12
zoning districts where property was platted in the county prior to annexation and
existing development precludes the expectation that a standard cul-de-sac can be
developed.
1 Dead end .streets with hammerheads should normally be less than three
hundred (300) feet but will be permitted up to four hundred and _fifty (450) feet in
length.
(2) Streets with hammerheads shall not serve more than 8 lots.
(3) Right-of-Way widths for streets intersecting Hammerheads. Minimum
right-of-way widths for all dead end streets with hammerheads serving no more than 8
lots shall not be less than forty (40 ) feet with no on street parking
i
(4) Right-of-Way widths for Hammerheads. Minimum right-of-way widths
for hammerheads shall not be less than 30 feet with no on street parking.
(5) Roadway widths. Minimum roadway widths for all dead end streets with
hammerheads shall not be less than the following dimensions:
(a) Thirty (32) feet from the face of curb to the face of curb;
(b) Thirty (30) feet of pavement width where there is no curb and
gutter;
(c) Twenty-eight (28) feet of pavement for hammerheads;
(5) Hammerheads shall comply with the minimum requirements set.forth in
Figure 26.12.075.01 or 26.12.075.02.
Figure 26.12.075.01 Figure: 26.12.075.02
- 40•
30'
63' 63' �
C�rvderr
Lh)e II }
i ! f
k
Connecting Road Connecting Roed
Section 4. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect five days
after passage and publication as required by law.
I
PASSED by the City Council of.the City of Pasco, at its regular meeting of
2005.
i
Michael B. Garrision
Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Sandy L. Kenworthy Leland B. Kerr
Deputy City Clerk City Attorney
i
i
1
i
2
i
CITY OF PASCO
SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO.
ORDINANCE NO. amends PMC Title 26 pertaining to hammer head
turnarounds.
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
I
i
3
i
i I
i
I
I
4
Ii
4
I
i
I,
Memo
To: Planning Commission
From: Dave McDonald
Subject: Hammerhead Turnarounds
Date: September 7, 2005
Since 1996 the City has annexed all of the West Pasco neighborhoods
located along the Columbia River from Highway 395 to the I-182 bridge
(see the attached map). Within this area there are a number of short
dead end streets that terminate at the US Army Corp of Engineers
property along the north side of the river. Some of these dead end
streets provide access to parcels that are large enough to divide into two
or three lots. However, to do so requires the construction of a cul de sac
or the connection to another nearby street because the existing
subdivision regulations prohibit dead end streets. Often it is impossible,
to construct cul de sacs or street extensions on these dead end streets
because one side of the street may be fully developed.
Last year an applicant approached the Planning staff about the use of
hammerhead turnarounds instead of a cul-de-sac. Staff explained that
currently the code does not permit hammerhead turnarounds.
The applicant then approached the Fire Chief about hammerhead
turnarounds, and the Fire Chief agreed that he could get emergency
vehicles turned around in a hammerhead.
Staff researched the issue. further referring to the adopted International
Fire Code (IFC). IFC 503.2.5 stated that hammerhead turnarounds can
be permitted for property access with the approval of the Fire Chief.
The proposed code amendment (attached) would permit hammerheads
on dead ends street no longer than 450 feet in length. The use of
hammer heads would be applicable only in the R-S-20 and R-S-12
districts. The applicability of the proposed code amendment to the large
lot suburban areas would ensure the regulations would only be
applicable to the dead end streets that were established in the County,
prior to annexation.
The fire Department and Engineering Department have reviewed the
proposed code amendment and are in general agreement with the
proposal.
Staff has scheduled a public hearing on the proposed code amendment.
for September 15th. Following the public hearing the Planning;
Commission should make a recommendation to the City Council
i
I
II
j
f
i I
r i' •/ / rj
i
::`!•".:4 �.&� X63, i'
;,�,�,°��:3�-��.'!�F' / .' i '� -..mss•".-•'-.•
/ J
-r
/ �f' / . tax• A'dse3.: �� ��..
N
{
: I
r
I
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE relating to subdividing amending PMC Title 26 dealing
with hammerhead turnarounds.
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 subdivision regulations that encourage
orderly growth and development of the City; and,
WHEREAS, from time to time, the City Council causes the subdivision
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 26;
NOW THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON, DOES
ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1, That Section 26.08.145 of the Pasco Municipal Code be and
the same is hereby amended to read as follows:
(2) Dead end streets. Dead end streets are prohibited, except where
the comprehensive plan or preliminary plat indicates a street is to continue
past the subdivider's property, the City may allow the dead end until such time
as the street can be built through at a later date. Dead end_streets may also be
permitted in the R-S-20 and R-S-12 as provided in section 26.12.075.
Section 2. That Section 26.08.145 of the Pasco Municipal Code be and
the same is hereby amended to read as follows:
26.08.145 Hammerhead/T: "Hammerhead-j T" means a roadway that
provides a "T" shaped, three-point turnaround space for emergengLequipmerit.
Section 3. That Section 26.12.075 of the Pasco Municipal Code be and
the same is hereby amended to read as follows:
26'.12.075 Hammerhead 1 T. Hammerheads will be permitted in R-S-20
and R-2-12 zoning districts where topography or other conditions justify their
use on dead end streets.
(1) Dead end streets with hammerheads should normally be less than
three hundred (300) feet, but will be permitted up to four hundred and fifty
(4501 feet in length.
I
(2) Right-of-Way widths for streets. Minimum right-of-way widths for
all dead end streets with hammerheads shall not be less than sixty (60 ) feet.
3 Right-of-Way Right-of-Wgy widths for Hammerheads. Minimum right-of-way
widths for hammerheads shall not be less than 30 feet.
(4) Roadway widths. Minimum roadway widths for all dead end
streets with hammerheads shall not be less than the following dimensions:
(a) Thirty-eight (38) feet from the face of curb to the face of curb;
(b) Thirty-six (36) feet of pavement width where there is no curb
and gutter;
(c) Twenty-eight (28) feet of pavement for hammerheads;
(5) Hammerheads shall comply with the minimum requirements set
forth in Figure 26.12.075.01 or 26.12.075.02.
Figure 26.12.075.01 Figure: 26.12.075.02
i
30,
sa'
r i
i
30• - i_ . I
I
t. Center
Line I
i
} l
j t
Connecting Road �nnectlgg Road -
Section 4. 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:
i
Sandy L. Kenworthy Leland B. Kerr
Deputy City Clerk City Attorney
2
j
�I
i.
REGULAR MEETING September 15, 2005
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES SEPTEMBER 15, 2005
B. Public Hearing: CODE AMENDMENT: Hammerhead
Turnarounds, (City of Pasco)
(MF# 2005-125-CAS
Chairman McCollum read the master file number and asked for the Staff
report.
Staff explained the hearing was for the pie ,. reviewing a code
amendment to the subdivision regulations ' x with Hammerhead
Turnarounds. Staff the issue was rommde amendment so
individual property owners were not ncd Th� bode amendment
would allow properties to be developer htntly' o� � veloped
because of the requirements for cul de-sa proposed E € 't ndment
would permit hammerhead turnarounds t 0-fie` 'lon streets nolonger than
450 feet. Hammerheads could serve nab'#xsia 8 lots and would be
applicable R-S-12 and R-S-20 zones. Staffnoted ' he proposed right-of
way widths for the hammerheads wo tldb 40 feet'fortl?+ main street and 30
feet for the hammerhead. Staff alst �t ,the progosd�code amendment
conforms to the International Fire + .'`` ►f ,
Chairman McCollum asked if them were of Staff.
.A
Commissioner Rose asked why c`rrcular tt rnaro di are not being considered
since they seem to make rrt ense
Staff responded that ip sarne situatld'-i ' is not enough room for a
;..,
circular turnaround t `installed.
Commissioner Rose g
asl€i ` mere is enough room for a car or fire truck to
turnaround ig a hammo a
5' d.`t < f � posed hr i head code would create enough room Staff res.. _
for vhilea to tut {
Chai- ian McCollumeh if there would be parking restrictions that go
with this code am-n- ment.
.TIM nded that on A parking was not allowed unless the right-o#-way
was ino to 60 feet ' ` {
Chairman bed he thinks this looks like a reasonable request,
and provides'�"Wip fi0� ility.
Commissioner Mt . °sked how many streets would hammerheads be the only
feasible option.
Staff responded they knew of three. Hammerheads would be a feasible option
off Roads 52, 76, and 84 by the river.
Commissioner Rose asked if there has been any consideration in coordinating
with the Corp of Engineers about using there land for turnarounds.
i
F
1 .
i
F;
i
REGULAR MEETING September 15, 2005
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES SEPTEMBER 15, 2005
Staff responded no. Staff noted the City has dealt with the Corp of Engineers
in the past and it sometimes takes longer than ten years get something done.
CHAIRMAN MCCOLLUM OPENED THE PUBLIC HEARING AND ASKED IF
THERE WAS ANY ONE PRESENT THAT WISHED TO SPEAK ON THIS
MATTER.
�
Brad Peck 200 Road 34 asked staff if it was
p01 + inly advertise in the
newspaper for code amendments and not ti } � ''``�
Q fy '' �'; " owners who might be
�,
affected. Mr. Peck also asked who initia e chi dment, was if from
the city staff or did land owners appro f alb" _ e.
�x� -I n';` c,^� cs�. Ni.
i.
Staff responded to the first question e � tlt when amendment
to the zoning code or subdivision cods dosed is only
provided in the newspaper. Staff noted thfa se a code d" : endment is
general in nature and not property specificropM'Y. rers are not notified.
si np`fi , h¢'si
Staff responded to the second questior �stating that cd endment resulted
from staff working with a property q� � dyer a year.=: effort to locate a
cul-de-sac on an existing dead erj 0A_1P68f'-,-�` not feasible to develop a cut-
de-sac on the street.
Mr. Peck asked if this provides a f ldit, adeti =for people to develop and
squeeze in additional lots on their'1landf�'=°
Staff responded the pro opal yvould on' = ' ' 1 . " R-S-12 and R-S-20 zones.
p P P � �
Mr. Peck asked if , #glance woul " been appropriate for these
hammerheads insteacpfhaging the code.
_ 1 `.
Staff respancil,a the propi would be a better way to deal with the
issue. :_ ,=° ^ :•
a i
'.};.se 6•wy�-"„`y�;+aY1 .:�•i;�, e�'+g;i axj}4 :4 t .,
Follqree ” ' ";`=m Chain McCollum for comment from the floor,
ei 'i- or against;' lic meeting was declared closed.
�._.
a.;.�,i�l'siti 3':.t 'g�;`:"ii!8.•'ai?��;:ws. I
: "q issioner Hay moZdment he Planning Commission recommend the City
0� lopt the Code pertaining to Hammerhead Turnarounds.
gi
.. ,;..; u r..i..<<
Comr fir;. Anders : """bonded, motion carried with one opposing vote
pP g
from Co ger Mai`Mbar.
1
r T
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Council September 23, 2005
FROM: Gary Crutch, Manager Workshop Mtg.: 9/26/05
SUBJECT: Community Su Vey
I. REFERENCE(S):
1. Memorandum dated 9/23/05, reference Clarification
2. Workshop Agenda Report dated 9/12/05, reference Community Survey
3. Memorandum from Management Assistant dated 919105
11. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL/STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
9126: Discussion toward consensus
HI. FISCAL IMPACT:
Between $9,000 and 12,000, one-time expense
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
A) Council discussed during its prior workshop meeting the notion of sponsoring a
I
formal community survey which could provide additional information for the
Council's biennial retreat. Please refer to the attached agenda report for the
workshop meeting dated September 12.
B) Council raised several questions during the prior discussion which have been
addressed through follow-up staff contact with the National Research Center (please
refer to attachment#1, the memorandum dated 9/23 clarifying those matters).
V. DISCUSSION:
A) Given the high-cost but low-value of open-ended questions, staff recommends that
they not be used. In addition, the Spanish language aspect, while costing $1,400,
would not produce a statistically-valid conclusion, rendering it relatively
meaningless. If the survey is conducted in English only and does not include any
open-ended questions, the combined cost is approximately$9,500.
B) Given the relative value of the information derived from this formal survey for use in
the Council retreat process and the relatively low cost (less than $10,000 every other
year), staff recommends Council give favorable consideration to utilizing the
National Citizens Survey. In order to have the results complete and available prior to
the Council retreat next spring, the city must commit by October 3, 2005. The initial
commitment requires a deposit of about $4,000; while this expense is not included in
the 2005 budget, it can be easily absorbed by the general fund operating reserve. The
balance of the survey cost (less than $6,000), can be included in the 2006 budget, as
the payment is not required until January.
C) In any case, Council should attempt to reflect a consensus one way or another so that
staff may follow up accordingly.
3(e)
MEMORANDUM
September 23, 2005
TO: Gary Crutchfield, City Manager
FROM: Elden Buerkle, Management Assistant fj
RE: Clarification of Some Issues Regarding the Community Survey
We contacted staff at the National Research Center(NSC) regarding questions raised about the
National Citizen Survey at the Council workshop meeting of September 12.
The added cost to mail two survey instruments (one in English and one in Spanish) to all 1,200
households to be sampled is $5,600. That would include the cost of translation, so the net
additional cost would be $4,200 if we use that process instead of the usual one of having those
who want to complete the survey in Spanish contact the City.
The NSC staff commented that the response rate for Spanish language surveys is typically low:
Ten or fewer Spanish language returns out of about 400 total surveys returned. The few times
jurisdictions have used the process of mailing survey instruments in both languages, the return
rate for Spanish surveys increased, but was still low. They said their best response for Spanish
language surveys was 9 percent of returns. Assuming a total of around 400 returned surveys,
that rate would produce about 36 returned Spanish language surveys.
i
Even with a Spanish language response rate of 9 or 10 percent of total surveys, the number
would not be enough to develop statistically valid conclusions about the opinions of Spanish-
speaking residents as distinct from the rest of the population sampled. Their responses/opinions
would need to be bundled with those of the total population sample.
In developing the sample for the National Citizen Survey, NSC staff typically select a random
sample of households from US Postal Service lists. This is,done because often City utility lists
may not include separate households in multi-family dwellings.
Apparently, we were mistaken in our understanding that we would be able to substitute questions
more relevant to Pasco for those few that do not apply to services the City provides, for example,
questions on bus and rail services. Those questions may be deleted, but to maintain
comparability with other jurisdictions, different questions may not be put in their place.
Benton-Franklin Transit was contacted to see if they were interested in taking part in the Pasco
community survey. We discovered that they have a regular process to survey the Tri-City
community about transit issues.
The survey template contains room for three policy questions. An additional policy question
may be added for a charge of$500. We might want to consider the cost/benefit of adding a
policy question rather than an open-ended question, which would cost an additional $1,250.
i
i
MEMORANDUM
September 9, 2005
TO: Gary Crutchfield, City Manager
FROM: Elden Buerkle,Management Assistant
RE: The National Citizen Survey
i
i
As we discussed, the National Citizen Survey (NCS), offered by the National Research
Center and the International City/County Management Association (ICMA), looks like
the best option for a Pasco community survey. The basic survey will be mailed to 1,2.00
randomly selected Pasco households from Boulder, Colorado and then _returned for
processing in enclosed, postage paid, business reply envelopes. The number of surveys to
be mailed out (1,200), should produce the approximate 400 responses needed to ensure a
confidence level of 95 percent and accuracy of plus/minus 5 percent.
Here is some information about the survey, costs,.scheduling, etc.:
SURVEY:
The NCS standardized survey instrument consists of five pages of questions designed to
gauge citizen satisfaction with community and government services (sample attached).
There is space for three policy questions on Pasco specific issues. Open ended questions
may be added for an additional charge (below).
Some of the questions deal with services the City of Pasco does not offer. They are:
• 3 questions on bus service;
• 2 questions about library services;
• 1 question about rail/subway services.
Those questions may be deleted from the survey instrument, or it may be possible to
substitute in their place questions more directly related to City of Pasco services. Because
the city helps support the Pasco branch of the Mid-Columbia Library, we might want to
consider retaining the library questions.'
COSTS:
Basic Survey: $8,200. This includes developing and printing the survey instrument
(based on the NCS standard survey), mailing the survey to 1,200 randomly selected
Pasco households, postage costs for the completed responses to be mailed back to NCS,
compiling the data,producing reports and comparing Pasco's responses to all those in the
NCS database (about 400).
Community Survey,p. 2
Additional Costs:
Spanish Language Survey: $1,400. The cover letter mailed with the survey will include a
paragraph in Spanish asking recipients who desire to complete the survey in Spanish to
call a phone number at the City of Pasco. The city will be responsible for taking those
calls and mailing the Spanish language survey instrument to those who request it.
Included will be a postage paid business reply envelope supplied by NCS for returning
survey responses. There will be some additional postage cost for the city to mail Spanish
surveys to those who request them.
Open Ended Question: $1,250 for each open ended question. NCS will categorize and
compile responses and develop a report classifying written opinions, along with a
complete report of all verbatim responses.
Custom Norms: $1,000. In addition to comparing Pasco's results to those in the entire
NCS database, comparisons can be developed based on size of city or on region of the
country.
SCHEDULE:
Once the survey process is completed, we will receive three reports in electronic format:
• an executive summary,
• a statistical analysis of survey results, and
• comparison of Pasco's results with national norms.
Of course, we will receive the additional custom norm report if we decide to go with that
option.
Because we need survey results available to use at the Community Forum (scheduled for
February next year), there are three objectives we are aiming at in terms of scheduling.
One, because surveys results are a snapshot of opinions at a specific point in time, it is
desirable to have the survey completed as close to the Community Forum as possible.
Second, we need to have enough time before the Community Forum to analyze and
review the results and determine how they are to be used. A third objective should be to
ensure the survey does not take place concurrently with the municipal election cycle to
avoid any confusion between the community survey and the election.
I suggest we go with the survey schedule beginning in October. This will require us to
have the enrollment form and first payment ($4,100) to NCS by October 3.
Prenotification cards will be mailed to randomly selected Pasco households the week of
November 14, with surveys mailed to Pasco households over the next two weeks. The
final report will be completed and available the week of January 23, 2006. That should
leave time to analyze and evaluate the results before the Community Forum.
Community Survey,p. 3
CONCLUSION:
If we want to have results of the National Citizen Survey available for the Community
Forum in February 2006, we will need to make a commitment by October 3 to receive the
final report the week of January 23, 2006.
The cost of performing the community survey will be approximately $12,000. This
assumes one open ended question, a custom norm report, a Spanish language option, plus
some additional postage cost for mailing out Spanish language surveys. There will be an
increased cost of$1,250 for each additional open ended question.
THE XYZ OF ABC 2005 CITIZEN SURVEY
Please complete this questionnaire if you are the adult(age 18 or older) in the household who most recently had
a birthday.The adult's year of birth does not matter. Please circle the response that most closely represents your
opinion for each question.Your responses are anonymous and will be reported in group form only.
1. Please circle the number that comes closest to your opinion for each of the following questions:
Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know
How do you rate ABC as a place to live?.............................................:1 2 3 4 5
How do you rate your neighborhood as a place to live?.......................1 2 3 4 5
How do you rate ABC as a place to raise children?..............................1 2 3 4 5
How do you rate ABC as a place to work?............................................1 2 3 4 5
How do you rate ABC as a place to retire?...........................................1 2 3 4 5
How do you rate the overall quality of life in ABC? ...............................1 2 3 4 5
2. Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to ABC as a whole:
Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know
Sense of community..............................................................................1 2 3 4 5
Openness and acceptance of the community towards people of
diverse backgrounds.......................................................................1 2 3 4 5
Overall appearance of ABC...................................................................1 2 3 4 5
Opportunities to attend cultural activities...............................................1 2 3 4 5
Shopping opportunities..........................................................................1 2 3 4 5
Airquality ..............................................................................................1 2 3 4 5
Recreational opportunities.....................................................................1 2 3 4 5
Jobopportunities...................................................................................1 2 3 4 5
Access to affordable quality housing.....................................................1 2 3 4 5
Access to affordable quality child care..................................................1 2 3 4 5
Access to affordable quality health care................................................1 2 3 4 5
Access to affordable quality food...........................................................1 2 3 4 5
Ease of car travel in ABC .......................:..............................................1 2 3 4 5
Ease of bus travel in ABC......................................................................1 2 3 4 5
Ease of rail/subway travel in ABC .........................................................1 2 3 4 5
Ease of bicycle travel in ABC ................................................................1 2 3 4 5
Ease of walking in ABC..........................................................................1 2 3 4 5
Educational opportunities......................................................................1 2 3 4 5
Overall image/reputation of ABC...........................................................1 2 3 4 5
Overall quality of new development in ABC..........................................1 2 3 4 5
3. Please rate the speed of growth in the following categories in ABC over the past 2 years:
Much Somewhat Right Somewhat Much Don't
too slow too slow amount too fast too fast know
Population growth............................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 6
Retail growth (stores, restaurants etc.)............................ 1 2 3 4 5 6
Jobsgrowth ..................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 6
The XYZ of ABC
4. To what degree, if at all,are the following problems in ABC:
Not a Minor Moderate Major Don't
row biem row blem rop blem problem know
Crime.....................................................................................................1 2 3 4 5
Drugs.....................................................................................................1 2 3 4 5
Toomuch growth............................................... ..............................1 2 3 4 5
Lackof growth .......................................................................................1 2 3 4 5
Graffiti ....................................................................................................1 2 3 4 5
Noise......................................................................................................1 2 3 4 5
Run down buildings, weed lots, or junk vehicles...................................1 2 3 4 5
Taxes.....................................................................................................1 2 3 4 5
Traffic congestion ..................................................................................1 2 3 4 5
Unsupervised youth...............................................................................1 2 3 4 5
Homelessness.......................................................................................1 2 3 4 5
Weeds....................................................................................................1 2 3 4 5
Absence of communications from the XYZ of ABC translated into
languages other than English..........................................................1 2 3 4 5
Unwanted local businesses...................................................................1 2 3 4 5
Toxic waste or other environmental hazard(s)......................................1 2 3 4 5
5. Please rate how safe you feel from the following occurring to you in ABC:
Very Somewhat Neither safe Somewhat Very Don't
safe safe nor unsafe unsafe unsafe know
Violent crime (e.g., rape, assault, robbery) ..................... 1 2 3 4 5 6
Property crimes (e.g., burglary,theft).............................. 1 2 3 4 5 6
Fire .................................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 6
6. Please rate how safe you feel:
Very Somewhat Neither safe Somewhat Very Don't
safe safe nor unsafe unsafe unsafe know
In your neighborhood during the day............................... 1 2 3 4 5 6
In your neighborhood after dark......................................1 2 3 4 5 6
In ABC's downtown area during the day......................... 1 2 3 4 5 6
In ABC's downtown area after dark................................. 1 2 3 4 5 6
In ABC's parks during the day......................................... 1 2 3 4 5 6
In ABC's parks after dark................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 6
7. During the past twelve months,were you or anyone in your household the victim of any crime?
0 No 4 Go to question#9 0 Yes -* Go to question#8 0 Don't know
U
8. If yes, was this crime(these crimes)reported to the police?
0 No 0 Yes 0 Don't know
a)
U
9. In the last 12 months, about how many times, if ever, have you or other household members participated in
the following activities in ABC?
Once or 3 to 12 13 to 26 More than
N
Cr
ever twice times times 26 times
Used ABC public libraries or their services...........................................1 2 3 4 5 0
Used ABC recreation centers................................................................1 2 3 4 5 .6
z
Participated in a recreation program or activity.....................................1 2 3 4 5 0
Visited a neighborhood or XYZ park......................................................1 2 3 4 5 N
Ridden a local bus within ABC ..............................................................1 2 3 4 S b
Attended a meeting of local elected officials or other local public N
meeting............................................................................................1 2 3 4 5
Watched a meeting of local elected officials or other local public
meeting on cable television.............................................................1 2 3 4 5
Recycled used paper, cans or bottles from your home.........................1 2 3 4 5
Volunteered your time to some group/activity in ABC...........................1 2 3 4 5
Read ABC Newsletter............................................................................1 2 3 4 5
Used the Internet for anything...............................................................1 2 3 4 5
Used the Internet to conduct business with ABC..................................1 2 3 4 5 C
Purchased an item over the Internet.....................................................1 2 3 4 5
z
a�
L
F
,XThe National Citizen SurveyTM page 2 of 5
The XYZ of ABC
10. How do you rate the quality of each of the following services in ABC?
Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know
Police services.......................... ................1 2 3 4 5
.............................................
Fireservices..........................................................................................1 2 3 4 5
Ambulance/emergency medical services..............................................1 2 3 4 5
Crime prevention...................................................................................1 2 3 4 5
Fire prevention and education...............................................................1 2 3 4 5
Trafficenforcement................................................................................1 2 3 4 5
Garbagecollection.................................................. ..............................1 2 3 4 5
Recycling...............................................................................................1 2 3 4 5
Yardwaste pick-up.............................................................................:..1 2 3 4 5
Streetrepair...........................................................................................1 2 3 4 5 .
Streetcleaning.......................................................................................1 2 3 4 5
Streetlighting.......................................................:.................................1 2 3 4 5
Snowremoval ......................................................................................1 2 3 4 5
Sidewalk maintenance...........................................................................1 2 3 4 5
Traffic signal timing................................................................................1 2 3 4 5
Amount of public parking.......................................................................1 2 3 4 5
Bus/transit services................................................................................1 2 3 4 5
Stormdrainage......................................................................................1 2 3 4 5
Drinkingwater........................................................................................1 2 3 4 5
Sewerservices......................................................................................1 2 3 4 5
XYZparks..............................................................................................1 2 3 4 5
Recreation programs or classes............................................................1 2 3 4 5
Range/variety of recreation programs and classes...............................1 2 3 4 5
Recreation centers/facilities...................................................................1 2 3 4 5
Accessibility of parks.............................................................................1 2 3 4 5
Accessibility of recreation centers/facilities...............
Appearance/maintenance of parks........................................................1 2 3 4 5
Appearance of recreation centers/facilities ...........................................1 2 3 4 5
Land use, planning and zoning .............................................................1 2 3 4 b
Code enforcement(weeds, abandoned buildings, etc) ........................1 2 3 4 5
Animalcontrol .......................................................................................1 2 3 4 5
Economic development.........................................................................1 2 3 4 5
Healthservices......................................................................................1 2 3 4 5
Services to seniors................................................................................1 2 3 4 5
Services to youth...................................................................................1 2 3 4 5
Services to low-income people..............................................................1 2 3 4 5
Public library services....................................................:.......................1 2 3 4 5
Variety of library materials.....................................................................1 2 3 4 5 i
Public information services......................
m
Municipalcourts ....................................................................................1 2 3 4 5
Public schools.......... ....... 1 2 3 4 5
............................................................
Cable television ...1 2 3 4 5 i
The XYZ of ABC
14. Please rate the following statements by circling the number that most clearly represents your opinion:
Strongly Somewhat Neither agree Somewhat Strongly Don't
agree agree nor disagree disagree disagree know
receive good value for the XYZ of ABC taxes I pay...... 1 2 3 4 5 6
1 am pleased with the overall direction that the XYZ of
ABC is taking............................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 6
The XYZ of ABC government welcomes citizen
involvement............:.................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 6
The XYZ of ABC government listens to citizens.............. 1 2 3 4 5 6
15. What impact, if any, do you think the economy will have on your family income in the next 6 months? Do you
think the impact will be:
0 Very positive 0 Somewhat positive 0 Neutral 0 Somewhat negative 0 Very negative
16. Please check the response that comes closest to your opinion for each of the following questions:
a. Policy Question #1 Policy Question#1 Policy Question#1 Policy Question #1 Policy Question#1 Policy
Question#1 Policy Question#1 Policy Question#1 Policy Question#1 Policy Question #1 Policy Question #1
Policy Question#1 Policy Question#1 Policy Question#1 Policy Question #1 Policy Question#1 Policy
Question#1 Policy Question#1
O Scale point 1 0 Scale point 3 O Scale point 5
O Scale point 2 0 Scale point 4 O Scale point 6
b. Policy Question#2 Policy Question #2 Policy Question#2 Policy Question#2 Policy Question#2 Policy
Question#2 Policy Question#2 Policy Question#2 Policy Question#2 Policy Question #2 Policy Question#2
Policy Question#2 Policy Question #2 Policy Question #2 Policy Question #2 Policy Question#2 Policy
Question #2 Policy Question#2
O Scale point 1 0 Scale point 3 O Scale point 5
0 Scale point 2 0 Scale point 4 0 Scale point 6
c. Policy Question #3 Policy Question#3 Policy Question#3 Policy Question#3 Policy Question#3 Policy
Question#3 Policy Question#3 Policy Question#3 Policy Question #3 Policy Question #3 Policy Question#3
Policy Question #3 Policy Question#3 Policy Question#3 Policy Question #3 Policy Question#3 Policy
Question#3 Policy Question #3
0 Scale point 1 0 Scale point 3 0 Scale point 5
0 Scale point 2 O Scale point 4 O Scale point 6
d. OPTIONAL[See Worksheets for details and price of this option]Open-Ended Question Open-Ended Question
Open-Ended Question Open-Ended Question Open-Ended Question Open-Ended Question Open-Ended
Question Open-Ended Question Open-Ended Question Open-Ended Question Open-Ended Question Open- c
Ended Question
U
F
U
OT
U1
G1
N
C
O
Z
Lo
0
a
N
O
O
N
s
N
2
C
N
N
m
C
O
M
Z
m
t
M
'XThe National Citizen SurveyTM Page 4 of 5
i
I
I
The XYZ of ABC
Our last questions are about you and your household.Again,all of your responses to this survey are completely
anonymous and will be reported in group form only.
17. Do you live within the XYZ limits of the XYZ of 24. Are you or any other members of your
ABC? household aged 65 or older?
0 No O Yes 0 No 0 Yes
18. Are you currently employed? 25. Does any member of your household have a
O No 4 Go to question #19 physical handicap or is anyone disabled?
0 Yes 4 Go to question #18a O No 0 Yes
18a.What one method of transportation do you 26. What is the highest degree or level of school you
usually use(for the longest distance of your have completed? (mark one box)
commute)to travel to work? 0 12th Grade or less, no diploma
• Motorized vehicle (e.g. car, truck, van, 0 High school diploma
motorcycle etc...) 0 Some college, no degree
• Bus, Rail, Subway, or other public O Associate's degree (e.g. AA, AS)
transportation 0 Bachelor's degree (e.g. BA, AB, BS)
• Walk 0 Graduate degree or professional degree
• Work at home
• Other 27. How much do you anticipate your household's
total income before taxes will be for the current
18b.1f you checked the motorized vehicle(e.g. year?(Please include in your total income
car,truck,van, motorcycle,etc.) box in 18a, money from all sources for all persons living in
do other people(adults or children)usually your household.)
ride with you to or from work? 0 Less than$24,999
0 No 0 Yes 0 $25,000 to$49,999
0 $50,000 to $99,999
19. How many years have you lived in ABC? 0 $100,000 or more
0 Less than 2 years 0 11-20 years
0 2-5 years 0 More than 20 years 28. Are you Spanish/Hispanic/Latino?
0 6-10 years 0 No 0 Yes
20. Which best describes the building you live in? 29. What is your race? (Mark one or more races to
• One family house detached from any other indicate what race you consider yourself to be)
houses 0 American Indian or Alaskan native
• House attached to one or more houses (e.g., a 0 -Asian or Pacific Islander
duplex or townhome) 0 Black, African American
• Building with two or more apartments or 0 White/Caucasian
condominiums 0 Other
• Mobile home
• Other 30. In which category is your age?
0 16-24 years 0 55-64 years N
21. Is this house, apartment, or mobile home... 0 25-34 years 0 65-74 years
• Rented for cash or occupied without cash 0 35-44 years 0 75 years or older
payment? O 45-54 years °
• Owned by you or someone in this house with a z
mortgage or free and clear? 31. What is your sex? o
0 Female 0 Male N .
22. Do any children 12 or under live in your o
household? 32. Are you registered to vote in your jurisdiction? N
0 No O Yes 0 No 0 Yes 0 Don't know
23. Do any teenagers aged between 13 and 17 live in 33. Did you vote in the last election? io
your household? 0 No 0 Yes 0 Don't know
0 No 0 Yes 34. Are you likely to vote in the next election?
0 No 0 Yes O Don't know
Thank you for completing this survey. Please return the completed survey in the postage paid envelope to: °
National Research.Center, Inc.,3005 30th St., Boulder,CO 80301 z
r
J�The National Citizen SurveyTM Page 6 of 5