HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007.01.16 Council Meeting Packet AGENDA
PASCO CITY COUNCIL
Regular Meeting 7:00 p.m. January 16,2007
Please note that our Council meeting will take place on Tuesday, January 16
as City Hall will be closed Monday, January 15 in honor of Martin Luther King Jr.
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. ROLL CALL:
(a) Pledge of Allegiance.
3. CONSENT AGENDA: All items listed under the Consent Agenda are considered to be routine by the
City Council and will be enacted by roll call vote as one motion (in the form listed below). There will be
no separate discussion of these items. If further discussion is desired by Councilmembers or the public,
the item may be removed from the Consent Agenda to the Regular Agenda and considered separately.
(a) Approval of Minutes:
1. Minutes of the Pasco City Council Meeting dated January 2, 2007.
(b) Bills and Communications: (A detailed listing of claims is available for review in the Finance
Manager's office.)
1. To approve General Claims in the amount of$358,225.21 ($14,997.86 consisting of Claim
Warrants numbered 158429 through 158430 and, $343,227.35 consisting of Claim Warrants
numbered 158445 through 158626). (2006 EXPENSES)
2. To approve General Claims in the amount of$555,691.24 ($70,397.49 in the form of Wire
Transfer Nos. 4668 and 4672 and, $39,350.83 consisting of Claim Warrants numbered
158431 through 158444, and $445,942.92 consisting of Claim Warrants numbered 158627
through 158685). (2007 EXPENSES)
3. To approve bad debt write-offs for utility billing, ambulance, miscellaneous, cemetery, code
enforcement and Municipal Court non-criminal, criminal and parking accounts receivable in
the total amount of$181,072.77 and, of that amount, authorize $112,964.15 be turned over
for collection.
(c) Fire Department Emergency Response Time Report:
1. Agenda Report from Gregory L. Garcia,Fire Chief dated January 5,2007.
2. Fire Department Emergency Response Report, 2006.
To accept and approve the 2006 Fire Department Emergency Response Time Report.
(d) 2007 Professional Services Agreement with the Pasco Downtown Development Association:
1. Agenda Report from Richard J. Smith, Community&Economic Development Director dated
January 4,2007.
2. Professional Services Agreement for 2007.
To approve the 2007 Agreement with the Pasco Downtown Development Association to provide
professional services and, further, authorize the City Manager to sign the agreement.
(e) Bargaining Contract for Uniformed Police Department Represented Employees:
1. Agenda Report from Lynne Jackson, Human Resources Manager dated December 29,2006.
2. Proposed Collective Bargaining Agreement (Council packets only; copy available in Human
Resources office for public review).
To approve the Collective Bargaining Agreement with the Pasco Police Officers Association,
uniformed employees and, further, authorize the Mayor to sign the agreement.
(f) Resolution No. 3003, a Resolution adopting the names of "Lincoln Park" for the new park
located on Wrigley Drive and"Casa del Sol Park" for the new park located on Laredo Drive.
1. Agenda Report from Stan Strebel, Administrative & Community Services Director dated
December 20,2006.
2. Proposed Resolution.
3. Recommendation from Park and Recreation Advisory Council.
4. Resolution No. 2499.
To approve Resolution No. 3003, adopting the name of"Lincoln Park" for the new park located
on Wrigley Drive and "Casa del Sol Park" for the new park located on Laredo Drive as
recommended by the Park and Recreation Advisory Council.
Regular Meeting 2 January 16,2007
*(g) Resolution No. 3004, a Resolution accepting work performed by Goodman and Mehlenbacher
Ent., Inc.,under contract for the 66h Place Sewer and Water Line Project Nos. 06-1-03 and 06-2-
01.
1. Agenda Report from Doug Bramlette, City Engineer dated January 10,2007.
2. Resolution.
To approve Resolution No. 3004, accepting the work performed by Goodman & Mehlenbacher,
Ent.,Inc.,for the 66`h Place Sewer&Water Line Project Nos. 06-1-03 and 06-2-01.
(RC) MOTION: I move to approve the Consent Agenda as read.
4. PROCLAMATIONS AND ACKNOWLEDGMENTS:
(a)
(b)
(c)
5. VISITORS- OTHER THAN AGENDA ITEMS:
(a)
(b)
(c)
6. REPORTS FROM COMMITTEES AND/OR OFFICERS:
(a) Verbal Reports from Councilmembers.
(b)
(c)
7. PUBLIC HEARINGS AND COUNCIL ACTION ON ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS
RELATING THERETO:
(a) Public Hearing on the Final Assessment Roll for ULID 142:
1. Agenda Report from Doyle Heath,Utility Engineer dated January 10, 2007.
2. Ordinance.
3. Vicinity Map.
CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING
Ordinance No. , an Ordinance of the City of Pasco, Washington, relating to Utility
Local Improvement District No. 142, approving and confirming the assessments and assessment
roll of Utility Local Improvement District No. 142 created for the purpose of carrying out a
system or plan of additions to and betterments and extensions of the waterworks utility of the
City, including the sanitary sewerage system and the system of storm or surface water sewers of
the City specified, adopted and ordered to be carried out by Ordinance No. 3712, and levying and
assessing the cost and expense thereof against the several lots, tracts, parcels of land, and other
property as shown on the assessment roll.
MOTION: I move to adopt Ordinance No. confirming the Final Assessment
Roll for Utility Local Improvement District No. 142 and, further, authorize publication by
summary only.
8. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS NOT RELATING TO PUBLIC HEARINGS:
Q-(a) Ordinance No. , an Ordinance of the City of Pasco, Washington, amending the zoning
classification of certain real property located within Gerry's Addition and Pettit's Addition from
C-1 (Retail Business)to R-1 (Low Density Residential)and R-2 (Medium Density Residential).
1. Agenda Report from David 1. McDonald, City Planner dated January 9, 2007.
2. Proposed Rezone Ordinance.
3. Planning Commission Report.
4. Planning Commission Minutes: dated 11/16/06& 12/21/06.
MOTION: I move to adopt Ordinance No. rezoning various parcels around
Clark Street from 5`h Avenue to lWh Avenue from C-1 to R-1 and R-2 as recommended by the
Planning Commission and, further, to authorize publication by summary only.
Q-(b) Ordinance No. , an Ordinance of the City of Pasco, Washington, amending the zoning
classification of certain real property located in the Sprouse Addition from "O" (Office) to C-1
(Retail Business)with a Concomitant Agreement.
1. Agenda Report from David 1.McDonald, City Planner dated January 9, 2007.
2. Proposed Rezone Ordinance.
3. Planning Commission Report.
4. Planning Commission Minutes: dated 11/16/06 & 12/21/06.
MOTION: I move to adopt Ordinance No. , granting a rezone for 1712 and 1704
North 20"' Avenue from "O" to C-1 with a concomitant agreement as recommended by the
Planning Commission and, further, to authorize publication by summary only.
Regular Meeting 3 January 16,2007
Q-(c) Ordinance No. , an Ordinance of the City of Pasco, Washington, amending the zoning
classification of certain real property located within Coles Estates from R-T (Residential
Transition)to R-1 (Low Density Residential)with a Concomitant Agreement.
1. Agenda Report from David I. McDonald, City Planner dated January 9, 2007.
2. Proposed Rezone Ordinance.
3. Planning Commission Report.
4. Planning Commission Minutes: dated 11/16/06& 12/21/06.
MOTION: I move to adopt Ordinance No. , granting a rezone for lots in Coles
Estates from R-T to R-1, with a concomitant agreement as recommended by the Planning
Commission and, further, to authorize publication by summary only.
9. UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
(None)
10. NEW BUSINESS:
Q(a) Special Permit Appeal — Location of an Asphalt Batch Plant in the Central Pre-Mix Pit
(11919 Harris Road) (MF#SP06-010):
I. Agenda Report from David I. McDonald,City Planner dated December 20, 2006.
2. Appeal dated September 29,2006.
3. Staff Memo on the Appeal.
4. Planning Commission Hearing Record.
(Note: References and attachments were provided to Council only; copies are available in the
Planning Office or at the Pasco Library for public review.)
CONDUCT A CLOSED RECORD HEARING
Motion for Denial(recommended)
MOTION: I move to adopt the findings of fact and conclusions, as contained in the
staff report to the Planning Commission.
MOTION: Based on the findings of fact and conclusions therefrom, as adopted, I
move to deny the request by Central Pre-Mix and Dale Adams to operate an asphalt
batch plant at the Central Pre-Mix pit off Harris Road.
Motion for Remand (option)
MOTION: I move to remand the Special Permit for the operation of the asphalt plant
back to the City Planning Commission for additional consideration.
*(b) Transportation Improvement Board (TIB) Grant for Walkways:
1. Agenda Report from Robert J. Alberts,Public Works Director dated January 10, 2007.
2. Vicinity Map.
3. Cross Sections.
MOTION: I move to accept the TIB Grant of $231,000 for walkways along Court Street
between Roads 68 and 84.
(c) North 4 1 Avenue Corridor Enhancements—Contract for Engineering/Survey Services:
1. Agenda Report from Richard J. Smith, Community&Economic Development Director dated
January 3, 2007.
2. Vicinity Map.
3. Amendment No. 2 to Professional Services Agreement.
MOTION: I move to authorize Amendment No. 2 to the February 22, 2006 Professional
Services Agreement with CH2M Hill, authorizing additional engineering services, not to exceed
$49,700, for North 4th Avenue enhancements and, further, authorize the Mayor to sign the
Agreement.
(d) Aerial Photography:
1. Agenda Report from Gary Crutchfield, City Manager dated January 5,2007.
2. Memorandum from Stan Strebel to City Manager dated 1/2/07.
3. Photo example A.
4. Photo example B.
(Note: photo references are in Council packets only; copies available at the Pasco Library
and in the Information Services Office for public review.)
MOTION: I move to authorize participation in the Franklin County aerial photography project at
6 inch pixel imaging level for a total cost of$30,546 and direct that the expenditure be included
in the 2007 supplemental budget.
Regular Meeting 4 January 16,2007
*(e) Award 2007 West Pasco Sewer Extension—Phase I,Project No. 07-1-01:
1. Agenda Report from Doug Bramlette, City Engineer dated January 11, 2007.
2. Vicinity Map.
3. Bid Summary.
(RC) MOTION: I move to award the low bid excluding Alternate A for the 2007 West Pasco Sewer
Extension Phase 1, Project No. 07-1-01 to Goodman & Mehlenbacher, Ent., Inc., in the amount
of $1,124,725.94 including sales tax and, further, authorize the Mayor to sign the contract
documents.
Q*(f) Special Permit—RV Park in a C-1 Zone(2600 Block of E. Lewis) (MF#SP06-017):
1. Agenda Report from David I.McDonald, City Planner dated January 9, 2007.
2. Report to Planning Commission.
3. Planning Commission Minutes: dated 11/21/06& 12/21/06.
4. Site Plan (Council packets only; copy available in Planning Office for public review).
MOTION: I move to approve the special permit for the location of an RV Park in the 2600 block
of East Lewis Street as recommended by the Planning Commission.
Q-(g) Special Permit— Stadium Sun Shade Structure in Excess of 35 feet (Dust Devil's Stadium)
(MF#SP06-019):
1. Agenda Report from David I.McDonald, City Planner dated January 9,2007.
2. Report to Planning Commission.
3. Planning Commission Minutes: dated 12/21/06.
MOTION: I move to approve the special permit for the construction of a shade structure at the
Dust Devil's Stadium, as recommended by the Planning Commission.
Q•(h) Special Permit—Location of a Day Care at 403 N.20th Avenue(MF#SP06-016):
1. Agenda Report from David I.McDonald,City Planner dated January 9,2007.
2. Report to Planning Commission.
3. Planning Commission Minutes: dated 11/16/06& 12/21/06.
MOTION: I move to approve the special permit for a Commercial Day Care at 403 N. 20t"
Avenue, as recommended by the Planning Commission.
11. MISCELLANEOUS DISCUSSION:
(a)
(b)
(c)
12. EXECUTIVE SESSION:
(a)
(b)
(c)
13. ADJOURNMENT.
(RC) Roll Call Vote Required
* Item not previously discussed
MF# "Master File#......
Q Quasi-Judicial Matter
REMINDERS:
1. 4:00 p.m., Tuesday, January 16, Conference Room#1 —Tri-Cities Regional Center Oversight Committee
Meeting. (COUNCILMEMBERS REBECCA FRANCIK and MATT WATKINS)
2. 6:00 p.m., Tuesday, January 16, Conference Room #1 — LEOFF Disability Board Meeting. (MAYOR
JOYCE OLSON and COUNCILMEMBER REBECCA FRANCIK)
3. 5:30 p.m., Wednesday, January 17, Roy's Smorgy — Good Roads Association Board Meeting.
(COUNCILMEMBER BOB HOFFMANN,Rep.; MAYOR JOYCE OLSON,Alt.)
4. 12:00 p.m., Thursday, January 18, 322 W. Columbia Street—Pasco Downtown Development Association
Board Meeting. (COUNCILMEMBER TOM LARSEN,Rep.; MATT WATKINS, Alt.)
5. 11:30 p.m., Friday, January 19, Roy's Smorgy — Benton-Franklin Council of Governments Board
Meeting. (COUNCILMEMBER TOM LARSEN,Rep.; BOB HOFFMANN,Alt.)
MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING PASCO CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 2, 2007
CALL TO ORDER:
The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Joyce Olson, Mayor.
ROLL CALL:
Councilmembers present: Rebecca Francik, Michael Garrison, Joe Jackson, Tom Larsen,
Joyce Olson, and Matt Watkins. Robert Hoffmann was excused.
Staff present: Gary Crutchfield, City Manager; Leland B. Kerr, City Attorney; Stan
Strebel, Administrative & Community Services Director; Richard Smith, Community &
Economic Dev. Director; Doug Bramlette, City Engineer and Denis Austin, Police Chief.
The meeting was opened with the Pledge of Allegiance.
CONSENT AGENDA:
(a) Approval of Minutes:
Minutes of the Pasco City Council Meeting dated December 18, 2006.
(b) Bills and Communications:
To approve General Claims in the amount of$1,638,022.13 ($64,165.01 in the form of
Wire Transfer Nos. 4663 and 4666 and, $1,573,857.12 consisting of Claim Warrants
numbered 158272 through 158405). (2006 EXPENSES)
To approve General Claims in the amount of$94,572.09 ($94,572.09 consisting of Claim
Warrants numbered 158406 through 158428). (2007 EXPENSES)
To approve Payroll Claims in the amount of$1,743,490.82, Voucher Nos. 35667 through
35753; and EFT Deposit Nos. 30014092 through 30014573.
MOTION: Mr. Watkins moved to approve the Consent Agenda as read. Mr. Jackson
seconded. Motion carried by unanimous Roll Call vote.
REPORTS FROM COMMITTEES AND/OR OFFICERS:
Mr. Garrison attended the Tri-Cities Visitor& Convention Bureau Board Meeting on
December 21.
Mayor Olson spoke at the Opening Ceremonies for First Night Tri-Cities.
NEW BUSINESS:
Main Avenue Storm Water— Phase II, Project No. 07-8-01:
MOTION: Mr. Watkins moved to award the low bid including Alternate A for the Main
Avenue Storm Water—Phase II, Project No. 07-8-01 to Sharpe & Preszler Construction
Co., Inc., in the amount of$105,624.45 including sales tax and, further, authorize the
Mayor to sign the contract documents. Mr. Jackson seconded. Motion carried by
unanimous Roll Call vote.
MISCELLANEOUS DISCUSSION:
MOTION: Mr. Watkins moved to move the January 22 Workshop meeting to January
29. Mr. Jackson seconded. Motion carried unanimously.
1 3(a).1
MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING PASCO CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 2, 2007
EXECUTIVE SESSION:
Council adjourned to Executive Session at 7:10 p.m. for approximately 15-30 minutes to
review the performance of a city employee.
Mayor Olson called the meeting back to order at 7:32 p.m.
MOTION: Mr. Garrison moved to grant the City Manager a merit award of$10,000 for
meritorious performance in 2006, particularly for operational costs savings and
unanticipated grants of more than half a million dollars. Mr. Jackson seconded. Motion
carried 5-1. No- Larsen.
ADJOURNMENT:
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 7:35 p.m.
APPROVED: ATTEST:
Joyce Olson, Mayor Sandy Kenworthy, Deputy City Clerk
PASSED and APPROVED this 16th day of January, 2007.
2
CITY OF PASCO
Council Meeting of:
January 16,2007
Accounts Payable Approved
The City Council
City of Pasco, Franklin County,Washington
We,the tga!inst -KLeciityanded,do certify under penalty of perjury that the materials have been furnished,the
serviceor a labor p formed as described herein and that the claim is a just,due and unpaid
obligati at we are authori zed to authenticate and certify said cl .
Gary utchf d, Manage James W.Ch-16-, Finance Manager
We,the undersigned City Councilmembers of the City Council of the City of Pasco, Franklin County,Washington,
do hereby certify that the merchandise or services hereinafter specified have been received;that Check No.s
158429 and 158430 are approved for payment in the amount of$14,997.86, and Check No.s 158445 through
158626 are approved for payment in the amount of$343,227.35,for a combined total of$358,225.21 on this
16th day of January,2007.
Councilmember Councilmember
SUMMARY OF CLAIMS/WIRE TRANSFERS BY FUND:
GENERAL FUND:
Legislative 320.00
Judicial 15,299.25
Executive 1,918.72
Police 17,894.40
Fire 7,941.50
Administration&Community Services 45,485.35
Community Development 1,944.30
Engineering 7,776.19
Non-Departmental 54,829.76
Library 3,463.58
TOTAL GENERAL FUND: 156,873.05
STREET 29,687.65
C. D. BLOCK GRANT 5,430.00
KING COMMUNITY CENTER 4,775.91
AMBULANCE SERVICE 2,207.79
CEMETERY 3,065.76
ATHLETIC PROGRAMS 2,168.00
SENIOR CENTER 9,676.99
MULTI MODAL FACILITY 5,490.88
RIVERSHORE TRAIL& MARINA MAIN 0.00
LITTER CONTROL 2,219.47
REVOLVING ABATEMENT 816.00
PARKS FUND 0.00
TRAC DEVELOPMENT 0.00
STADIUM/CONVENTION CENTER 0.00
SUN WILLOWS RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT 0.00
METRO DRUG TASK FORCE 0.00
METRO DRUG FORFEITURE FUND 36.11
GENERAL CONSTRUCTION 2,177.36
WATER/SEWER 112,645.87
EQUIPMENT RENTAL-OPERATING 20,929.74
EQUIPMENT RENTAL- REPLACEMENT 0.00
MEDICAUDENTAL INSURANCE 0.00
CENTRAL STORES 24.63
FIRE PENSIONS 0.00
PAYROLL CLEARING 0.00
LID CONSTRUCTION 0.00
GRAND TOTAL ALL FUNDS: $ 358,225.21
2006 EXPENSES
3(b).1
CITY OF PASCO
Council Meeting of:
January 16,2007
Accounts Payable Approved
The City Council
City of Pasco, Franklin County,Washington
We,the u de signed,do hereby certify under penalty of perjury that the materials have been furnished,the
services n ered e r performed as described herein and that the claim is a just,due and unpaid
obligation ai t the city an that we are authorized to authenticate and said cIaLJ
Gary u ager James W. Ch#s6, Finance Manager
We,the undersigned City Councilmembers of the City Council of the City of Pasco, Franklin County,Washington,
do hereby certify that the merchandise or services hereinafter specified have been received;that Wire Transfer
No.s 4668 and 4672 in the amount of$70,397.49, have been authorized;that Check No.s 158431 through
158444 are approved for payment in the amount of$39,350.83,and Check No.s 158627 through 158685
are approved for payment in the amount of$445,942.92,for a combined total of$555,691.24 on this
16th day of January,2007.
Councilmember Councilmember
SUMMARY OF CLAIMSIWIRE TRANSFERS BY FUND:
GENERAL FUND:
Legislative 0.00
Judicial 847.10
Executive 24.03
Police 500.94
Fire 133.25
Administration&Community Services 5,270.73
Community Development 363.07
Engineering 159.72
Non-Departmental 130,068.97
Library 0.00
TOTAL GENERAL FUND: 137,367.81
STREET 33,743.84
C. D. BLOCK GRANT 6.01
KING COMMUNITY CENTER 2,104.49
AMBULANCE SERVICE 9,610.40
CEMETERY 2,106.01
ATHLETIC PROGRAMS 2,576.00
SENIOR CENTER 4,861.02
MULTI MODAL FACILITY 1,200.00
RIVERSHORE TRAIL& MARINA MAIN 1,500.00
LITTER CONTROL 0.00
REVOLVING ABATEMENT 1,500.00
PARKS FUND 0.00
TRAC DEVELOPMENT 0.00
STADIUM/CONVENTION CENTER 2,100.00
SUN WILLOWS RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT 0.00
METRO DRUG TASK FORCE 16,733.27
METRO DRUG FORFEITURE FUND 1,260.47
GENERAL CONSTRUCTION 0.00
WATER/SEWER 184,265.19
EQUIPMENT RENTAL-OPERATING 16,812.02
EQUIPMENT RENTAL-REPLACEMENT 0.00
MEDICAUDENTAL INSURANCE 97,986.88
99 UTGO BONDS LIBR/FIRE STAT 303.50
2002 UTGO REFUNDING BONDS 303.50
PAYROLL CLEARING 39,350.83
LID CONSTRUCTION 0.00
GRAND TOTAL ALL FUNDS: $ 555,691.24
2007 EXPENSES
3(b).2
AGENDA REPORT
FOR: City Council DATE: 01/12/2007
TO: Gar4DEWRITE-OFIF'S/COLLECTION.
ty anger REGULAR: 01/16/2007
Stan ministrative&Community Services Director
FROM: Jim nce Manager
SUBJECT: BA
I. REFERENCE(S):
Write-off and collection lists are on file in the Finance Department.
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL/STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
MOTION: I move to approve bad debt write-offs for utility billing, ambulance, miscellaneous,
cemetery, code enforcement and Municipal Court non-criminal, criminal and parking
accounts receivable in the total amount of $181,072.77, and, of that amount, authorize
$112,964.15 be turned over for collection.
III. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
1. UTILITY BILLING -These are all inactive accounts, 60 days or older. Direct write-offs are under
$10 with no current forwarding address,or are accounts in"occupant" status. Accounts submitted for
collection exceed$10.00.
2. AMBULANCE -These are all delinquent accounts over 90 days past due or statements are returned
with no forwarding address. Those submitted for collection exceed $10.00. Direct write offs
including DSHS and Medicare customers; the law requires that the City accept assignment in these
cases.
3. MISCELLANEOUS -These are all delinquent accounts over 90 days past due or statements that are
returned with no forwarding address. Those submitted for collection exceed$10.00.
4. COURT ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE-These are all delinquent non-criminal and criminal fines, and
parking violations over 30 days past due.
5. CODE ENFORCEMENT — LIENS — These are Code Enforcement violation penalties which are
either un-collectable or have been assigned for collections because the property owner has not
complied or paid the fine. There are still liens in place on these amounts which will continue to be in
effect until the property is brought into compliance and the debt associated with these liens are paid.
6. CEMETERY—These are delinquent accounts over 120 days past due or statements are
returned with no forwarding address. Those submitted for collection exceed$10.00.
Amount
Direct Referred to Total
Write-offs Collection Write-offs
Utility Billing $ 0.00 2,897.59 2,897.59
Ambulance $ 68,108.62 .00 68,108.62
Miscellaneous $ .00 .00 .00
Court A/R $ .00 106,763.00 106,763.00
Liens $ .00 2,419.50 2,419.50
Cemetery $ .00 884.06 884.06
TOTAL: $ 68,108.62 112,964.15 181,072.77
IV. ADMINISTRATIVE ROUTING:
cc: Dot French,Municipal Court Clerk
3(b).3
AGENDA REPORT
FOR: City Council January 5, 2007
TO: Gary Crutchfi 1 6anager Workshop Mtg.: 1/8/07
FROM: Gregory L. Garcia, Fire Chief Regular Mtg.: 1/16/07
SUBJECT: Fire Department Emergency Response Time Report
I. REFERENCE(S):
1. Fire Department Emergency Response Report, 2006
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
1/8 Discussion
1/16 MOTION: I move to accept and approve the 2006 Fire Department Emergency
Response Time Report.
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
None
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
A) House Bill 1756 approved by the legislature in 2005, requires that every fire
jurisdiction evaluate its level of service and deployment delivery and response time on
an annual basis. The evaluations required by the law shall be based on the data
relating to level of service, deployment, and the achievement of each response time
objective in each geographic area within the fire department's jurisdiction.
B) Turnout time is the time Dispatch alerts the firefighters of an incident and the
responding unit advises dispatch that they are responding.
C) Response time is travel time from the emergency vehicle's location to the incident.
V. DISCUSSION:
A) The report shows that the overall average response time for fire suppression is 5
minutes 13 seconds well under the 6-minute standard set in Resolution 2938.
B) The Emergency Medical Services (ambulance) response average time is 3 minutes 5
seconds for the paramedic ambulance to arrive at the scene of a medical response.
Nearly half of the 6-minutes allotted under Resolution 2938.
C) The response time for the Aircraft Rescue and Firefighting (ARFF) vehicle to arrive at
its stand-by position on the airport is 1 minute 30 seconds. The FFA required response
time is 3 minutes.
D) The report reflects that the fire department is meeting the response criteria as set in
Resolution 2938 100% of the time.
E) Staff recommends that the City Council accept and approve the report pursuant to state
law and City Resolution 2938.
3(c)
CITY OF PASCO
FIRE DEPARTMENT
EMERGENCE RESPONSE TIME
2006 REPORT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ITEM PAGE
Mission Statement 1
Department Information 1
Adopted Response Time Standards 2
Predictable Results 5
Plan of Action 5
Organizational Chart 6
2006 Response Results 7
Resolution 2938 8
I. Mission Statement
The Pasco Fire Department's mission is to provide rapid mitigation of fire, rescue, hazardous
materials and medical emergencies with compassion, integrity, and respect for the people we ,
serve. To be the premier provider of public safety services, utilizing our people as the critical
resource to accomplish our goals.
II. Departmental Information:
The City of Pasco Fire Department has exists a Fire Department within the State of Washington
under the tenants of Title 52 of the RCW's, with the legal formation of the Fire Department
mandated by City Council Resolution.
The City of Pasco Fire Department provides service to 28 square miles in the City of Pasco
within Franklin County.
The services provided by the City of Pasco Fire Department include:
• Fire Suppression
• Advanced Life Support(ALS)Emergency Medical Services
• Public Education
• Hazardous materials "Operations Level"Response
• Aircraft Rescue and Firefighting(ARRF)
Total emergency responses in 2006 were broken down as follows:
• Emergency Medical Responses: 2268
• Fire Suppression Responses: 294
• Wildland Responses: 41
• Hazardous Materials Responses: 47
• Aircraft Responses: 7
• Technical Rescue Responses: 0
• Total Responses: 2657
The Pasco Fire Department operates under a chain-of-command which has been established by
the City Council, which is elected to represent the public they serve. The chain-of-command, or
organizational chart is Attachment A.
1
In 2006,the City of Pasco Fire Department employed fifty-one(5 1) career members.
• Fire Chief
• Assistant Fire Chief
• Shift Captains 3
• Station Lieutenants 9
• Firefighters 21
• Firefighter/Paramedics 15
• TOTAL STAFF 51 career
The functions performed by the City of Pasco Fire Department include the following:
• Emergency response to fires and medical aid emergencies fire department staff
• Emergency response to all motor vehicle accidents within the City of Pasco
• Mutual aid emergency responses when requested by neighboring jurisdictions
• Public Education classes in the local elementary schools
• Coordination with local Emergency management personnel from Franklin County
• Hazardous Materials "Operations" level.emergency response
Response Standards
III. Adopted Standards
A. Response time to don safety equipment and response to the incident.
Turnout Time Standard:
The Pasco Fire Department has adopted a turn out time standard of 2 minutes,
which the department should meet 85 % of the time. All firefighting safety
equipment must be donned before the vehicle can leave the station for a fire
response.
A. Response time for the arrival of the first arriving engine company as a fire suppression
incident.
Response Time Standard:
The Pasco Fire Department has adopted a response/travel time standard of 6
minutes for the arrival of the first engine company to a fire suppression incident,
which the department should meet 90 % of the time.
1. This equates to the travel time to the incident by the first arriving engine
company.
2
B. Response time for the deployment of a full first alarm assignment at a fire suppression
incident.
Response Time Standard for Full 1st Alarm Response:
The Pasco Fire Department has adopted a response/travel time standard of 12
minutes for the arrival of the full complement of a 1st alarm response to a fire
suppression incident, which the department should meet 85% of the time. Further,
the Pasco Fire Department has adopted a 1st alarm response of 11 firefighters and
or 2 engine companies (if applicable), 2 aid units, 1 ladder truck and 1 Command
Officer(if applicable).
1. This equates to the travel time to the incident for the full complement of the first
alarm assignment to a fire suppression incident.
C. Response time for the arrival of the first arriving unit with a first responder or higher
level capability at an emergency medical incident.
Response Time Standard:
The Pasco Fire Department has adopted a response/travel time standard time of 6
minutes/seconds for the arrival of the first emergency medical unit with
appropriately trained personnel on board to an emergency medical incident, which
the department should meet 90% of the time.
I. This equates to the travel time to the incident by the first arriving engine
company, aid car or other emergency medical unit with appropriately trained
personnel on board (i.e. IS` responder, emergency medical technicians,
paramedics, etc.).
D. Response time for the arrival of an advanced life support unit to an emergency medical
incident, where this service is provided by the fire department.
Response Time Standard:
The Pasco Fire Department has adopted a response/travel time standard of 6
minutes for the arrival of an advanced life support unit with appropriately trained
personnel (paramedics) on board to an ALS emergency medical incident, which the
department should meet "% of the time.
I. This equates to the travel time to the incident by the first arriving engine
company, aid car or other emergency medical unit with trained paramedics on
board.
3
E. Response time for the arrival of the first arriving apparatus with appropriately trained and
equipped Hazardous Materials Level "A" Technicians on board at a hazardous materials
incident, where this service is provided by the fire department.
Response Time Standard:
The Pasco Fire Department has adopted a response/travel time standard of 6
minutes for the arrival of the first unit with appropriately trained Hazardous
Materials Technicians on board to a hazardous materials incident, which the
department should meet 90 % of the time.
1. This equates to the travel time to the incident by the first arriving engine
company, aid car, or other special operations unit with appropriately trained and
equipped personnel on board (Hazardous Materials Technicians).
F. Response time for the arrival of the first arriving apparatus with appropriately trained and
equipped Technical Rescue Technicians on board at the technical rescue incident, where
this service is provided by the fire department.
Response Time Standard:
The Pasco Fire Department has adopted a response/travel time standard of 6
minutes for the arrival of the first unit with appropriately trained and equipped
Personnel on board to a technical rescue incident, which the department should
meet 85% of the time.
1. This equates to the travel time to the incident by the first arriving engine
company, aid car, or other special operations unit with appropriately trained and
equipped personnel in board.
G. Response time for the arrival of the first arriving apparatus with appropriately trained and
equipped Aircraft Rescue and Firefighting personnel on board at an aircraft incident,
where this service is provided by the fire department.
Response Time Standard:
The Pasco Fire Department has adopted a response/travel time standard of 3
minutes for the arrival of the first unit with appropriately trained and equipped
Aircraft Rescue and Firefighting personnel on board to an aircraft incident, which
the department should meet 100% of the time.
1. This equates to the travel time to the incident by the first arriving engine
company, aid car, or other aircraft rescue unit with appropriately trained and
equipped personnel on board (Aircraft Rescue and Firefighting trained personnel).
2. The response time is set by the Federal Aviation Administration through 14 CFR
Parts 121 and 139.
4
H. Response time for the arrival of the first arriving apparatus with appropriately trained and
equipped Wild land Firefighting personnel on board at a wild fire incident, where this
service is provided by the fire department.
Response Time Standard:
The Pasco Fire Department has adopted a response/ travel time standard of 6
minutes for the arrival of the first unit with appropriately trained and equipped
Wild Land Firefighting personnel on board to a wild land fire incident, which the
department should meet 85% of the time.
1. This equates to the travel time to the incident by the first arriving engine company
or other wild land firefighting unit with appropriately trained and equipped
personnel on board (Wild Land Firefighters with appropriate certifications).
IV. Predictable Results
Population served by the Pasco Fire Department has grown by approximately 5% per year over
the last 3 years. New construction has increased which has contributed to an increase in
population served. The major fiscal impacts over this last year have been: rising personnel cost,
fuel costs, and the need to replace one fire engine, one rescue truck and one ambulance. Without
improving reliability of staffing our response times may increase. The City Council set the level
of response times and level of service for the demographics of the City of Pasco.
V. Plan of Action
To meet the response time objectives for items above, the Pasco Fire Department will continue to
-evaluate its response data to determine if relocating resources, improving personnel reliability or
other organizational changes may improve our ability to accomplish our response time standards.
The Pasco Fire Department will continue to engage the public so they fully understand the level
of service available based on the resources provided.
5
d
H
W
w w �
I
w w
cr 99
d ea w
cc
° '
.
V �
d
Cc O
95
w w
r
bo
.t,
w �
a
U
a w w
w w
V
� 6 rn o
� L
y
y
cC) O
b
yWD
Cd o 0 0 0 o Q
tj o 0 0 0 0
ol
0 0 0 0 o z
cd v
+Q+ o en o N N
9 en O r, Z
L �
a h
a� o0 0 0 0 00 0
w d en
b
C C ° °
o �
o W C z z z z
O
tj
ed
C)
O O
N z N
dE.• u, �
L U3
00 ~ o
CL N
en N
GM
z a
o
C
a
' �o
�
Ga W2 y.
ATTACHMENT C
RESOLUTION NO. C7_q3�
A Resolution approving performance standards for Pasco Fire
Department emergency responses.
WHEREAS, the City of Pasco Fire Department is legally established as a fire department
to provide certain emergency medical,fire and rescue services; and,
WHEREAS,the Pasco Fire Department has a mission statement and goals and objectives
to guide the organization in providing fire and emergency medical services to our
community; and,
WHEREAS, the Pasco Fire Department has a basic organizational structure which
includes the City Council, City Manager, Chief, Officers, Firefighters, Paramedics and EMTs;
and,
WHEREAS, the Pasco Fire Department is required by state law (SHB 1756, laws of
2005)to establish turnout and response time goals for various emergency responses; and,
WHEREAS, the Pasco Fire Department has developed written response coverage
objectives required to comply with applicable provisions of SHB 1756;NOW,THEREFORE
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON, DO
RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That the Pasco City Council hereby approves the attached Response
Standards as the Pasco Fire Department policy for determining resource deployment for
emergency medical, fire and rescue services; and,
This resolution was adopted at a regularly scheduled pub l a meeting of the City of Pasco
City-Council for City of Pasco Fire Department on this day of February,2006.
Joyce ,lso Mayor
ATTE T: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Sandy Kenw hy, Deputy City lerk Leland B. Kerr,City Attorney
8
AGENDA REPORT NO. 3
FOR: City Council Date: January 4, 2007
TO: Gary Crutchfi i Manager Workshop: 1/8/2007
Regular: 1/ 16/2007
FROM: Richard J. Smith, Director
Community & Economic Development
SUBJECT: 2007 Professional Services Agreement (PSA) with the
Pasco Downtown Development Association (PDDA)
I. REFERENCE(:
A. Professional Services Agreement for 2007
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL/STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
1/8/2007 Workshop: DISCUSSION
1/ 16/2007 REGULAR: MOTION: I move to approve the 2007
Agreement with the Pasco Downtown
Development Association to provide
professional services and authorize the City
Manager to sign the agreement.
III. FISCAL IMPACT
$16,000
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
A. For more than 20 years, the City has contracted with the Pasco
Downtown Development Association (PDDA) to provide varying
levels of funding to help defray costs associated with such
activities as: expanding membership; developing consensus of
downtown business interests; marketing the downtown; soliciting
participation in the fagade improvement program; and assisting
the formation of the Business Improvement District (BID).
B. Over the past five years in particular, the PDDA effort has been
less than effective. Membership has declined. The State of
Washington canceled PDDA's long-standing certification as a "Main
Street" (downtown revitalization) program, thus eliminating it from
receiving certain state assistance (and making Pasco ineligible for
the financial assistance available under the recent B&O tax
deferral program enjoyed in Kennewick and Walla Walla). Their
effort to generate a BID was met with an overwhelming lack of
interest on the part of businesses in the core downtown area. And
the executive director recently resigned. In short, the ability of
PDDA to resurrect a meaningful revitalization effort in downtown is
in serious doubt.
C. At a workshop on November 13, 2006, the City Council discussed
the PDDA's past performance. As a result of those discussions and
subsequent talks between representatives of the City Council and
PDDA Board on December 4, 2006, staff is soliciting proposals
from qualified economic development/management consultants to
analyze downtown Pasco organizations and programs and develop
recommendations regarding the best organizational structure to
provide leadership for revitalization activities and to manage on-
going programs and events. The consultants report should be
completed by Summer, 2007. 3(d)
V. DISCUSSION:
A. A Professional Services Agreement for 2007 has been prepared
which will allow the PDDA to continue to manage on-going
programs.
B. Points of note in the Agreement are as follows:
1. Tasks are limited to management of on-going programs and the
filing of quarterly reports.
2. Compensation is fixed at $16,000 to be paid in four
installments. The assumption is that a half-time employee paid
$15.00/hour would manage the on-going activities ($15.00 x
1040 hours = $15,600).
3. The funds would be sufficient to operate the PDDA for 12
months. The City would, however, have the right to terminate
the contract after six months which would coincide with the
completion of the consultant's report.
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE
CITY OF PASCO AND PASCO DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT
ASSOCIATION
FOR
2007
An Agreement by which the Pasco Downtown Development Association (PDDA), a non-profit
Washington State corporation (hereinafter called "ASSOCIATION"), agrees to provide
professional services to the City of Pasco, a municipal corporation of the State of Washington
(hereinafter called "CITY"), for the stated consideration and in accordance with the terms and
conditions provided herein and setting forth the rights and responsibilities for the parties.
WHEREAS, the ASSOCIATION is a private, non-profit corporation, established to
promote downtown business and property development through a balanced and comprehensive
process that includes organization,promotion, design, and economic restructuring; and
WHEREAS, the CITY desires to promote and sustain the economic development of the
downtown businesses for the benefit of the CITY'S residents; and
WHEREAS, the CITY has a continuing need for additional assistance in planning and
implementation of a comprehensive downtown revitalization program and related improvements;
and
WHEREAS, the CITY desires to provide for the protection of the health, safety, and
general welfare of the CITY'S residents and visitors; and
WHEREAS, the CITY has retained the services of a qualified economic
development/management consultant to make recommendations regarding the most effective
organizational management structure to achieve downtown revitalization objectives; and
WHEREAS, The consultant's report and recommendations are expected to be presented
to the City Council in July, 2007.
IT IS AGREED AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The ASSOCIATION will accomplish the following specific objectives
during the term of this Agreement.
A. Continue to manage programs and activities related to the Specialty Commercial
Kitchen, Farmer's Market, Fiery Foods Festival, Fagade Improvement Program,
marketing vacant space and promoting the downtown.
B. Provide the CITY with written quarterly reports which address both the
ASSOCIATION'S financial position and performance in fulfilling the objectives
and service obligations which are the subject of this Agreement. The reports will
be due on April 9,July 9, October 8, and December 28, 2007.
Page 1 of 2
Section 2. Consideration. In consideration of the services performed on behalf of the
CITY as set forth in the Agreement under Section 1, the CITY shall pay a maximum of Sixteen
Thousand Dollars ($16,000) in four equal installments of Four Thousand Dollars ($4,000) each.
The payments shall be made upon receipt of appropriate invoices for services rendered and
required quarterly reports for April, July, October, and December.
Section 3. Terms. This Agreement shall commence as of January 1, 2007 and terminate
on December 31, 2007 except that anytime after July 9, 2007, the CITY, for its convenience
and upon thirty(30)days written notice, may terminate the Agreement.
DATED this day of 52007
CITY OF PASCO PASCO DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT
ASSOCIATION
Gary Crutchfield For the PDDA
City Manager
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Sandy Kenworthy Leland B. Kerr
Deputy City Clerk City Attorney
Page 2 of 2
AGENDA REPORT
FOR: City Council December 29, 2006
TO: Gary Crutchfi nager Workshop Mtg.: 1/08/07
FROM: Lynne Jackson, uman Resources Manager Regular Mtg.: 1/16/07
SUBJECT: Bargaining Contract for Uniformed Police Department Represented Employees
I. REFERENCE(S):
1. Proposed Collective Bargaining Agreement (Council packets only; copy in Human Resources
Office for public review)
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL/STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
1/08: DISCUSSION
1/16: MOTION: I move to approve the Collective Bargaining Agreement with the Pasco
Police Officers Association, uniformed employees, and, further, authorize
the Mayor to sign the agreement.
III. FISCAL IMPACT: Increases annual cost of police operations by approximately$1,084,217.
Police operations cost for 2004 (last year of previous contract): $3,870,027.
Anticipated Police operations cost for 2007: $4,954,244
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
The previous contract terminated December 31, 2004.
V. DISCUSSION:
The city and representatives of the uniformed employees in the Police Department who are
represented by PPOA have reached tentative agreement on a new, three-year contract. The
bargaining unit has voted to approve it. Following is a listing of the significant changes:
• Effective January 1, 2005: 3% increase for all represented, uniformed employees
Effective July 1, 2005: 1%increase
Effective January 1, 2006: 3.7% increase for all staff officers
Corporals: 10% above top step staff officer
1 A yr Sergeants: 15% above top step staff officer
2°d yr Sergeants: 20% above top step staff officer
Effective July 1, 2006: 1%increase. Maintain percentage separation for
supervisors.
Effective January 1, 2007: 3% increase. Maintain percentage separation for
supervisors.
Effective July 1, 2007: t/4% increase. Maintain percentage separation for
supervisors.
• Officers to pay 10% of their medical premium with a premium cap of $78.50/month for
2007.
• Officers will be eligible to accrue compensatory time, in lieu of cash overtime, up to a
maximum accumulation of eighty (80) hours. At end of calendar year 40 hrs may be converted
to vacation time. (Accrued vacation leave cannot exceed the maximum accrual for any reason,
including conversion of compensatory time.) All remaining accrued but unused compensatory
time will be cashed out. The City may deny use of compensatory time for dates of specific
events (New Year's Eve, Cinco de Mayo Festival, July 4` Celebration, Fiery Foods Festival,
Water Follies weekend), if two employees have already been granted vacation or compensatory
time off, in the event of an actual emergency.
• Education reimbursement costs will be capped at the in-state residential tuition rate for
Washington State University.
Staff recommends Council ratification of the Agreement 3(e)
AGENDA REPORT
FOR: City Council December 20, 2006
TO: Gary Crutc fi i , Manager Workshop Mtg.: 1/8/07
Regular Mtg.: 1/16/07
FROM: Stan Strinistrative and Community Services Director
SUBJECT: Naming of New Parks
I. REFERENCE(S):
A. Proposed Resolution
B. Recommendation from Park and Recreation Advisory Council
C. Resolution No. 2499
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL/STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
1/8: Discussion
1/16: MOTION: I move to approve Resolution No. c?012�� adopting the name of
"Lincoln Park" for the new park located on Wrigley Drive and "Casa
del Sol Park" for the new park located on Laredo Drive as
recommended by the Park and Recreation Advisory Council.
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
N/A
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
A) Two new neighborhood parks in Subdivisions north of Burden Blvd. are nearly
complete_ The City Park and Recreation Advisory Council and staff conducted
two community meetings earlier this year to get citizen comments on the design of
the two parks. Suggestions for names were solicited.
B) Following the guidelines of the City's facility naming policy (Resolution No.
2499, attached) the Advisory Council considered citizen comments, historical and
geographic elements prior to developing its recommendation, as described in the
attached letter from the Chairman of the Council.
C) At the December meeting of the Advisory Council a motion was passed to
recommend "Lincoln Park" for the new park on Wrigley Drive in the Pasco
Heights subdivision and "Casa del Sol Park" for the new park on Laredo Drive in
the Casa del Sol subdivision.
D) It is recommended that the Council approve the name recommendation so that
appropriate signage can be prepared prior for the parks being opened this summer.
3(f)
RESOLUTION NO. 3�5
A RESOLUTION adopting the names of"Lincoln Park" for the new park located on Wrigley
Drive and "Casa del Sol Park" for the new park located on Laredo Drive.
WHEREAS, the City Parks and Recreation Advisory Council have recommended names for the
new City parks being constructed on Wrigley Drive and Laredo Drive; and
WHEREAS, following meetings with residents of the neighborhood to be served by the new
park and considering the best interests of the community, the Advisory Council has recommended the
names of"Lincoln Park" and "Casa del Sol Park" for the parks; NOW THEREFORE
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO:
SECTION 1: That the new park located on Wrigley Drive shall be named "Lincoln Park" and
the new park located on Laredo Drive shall be named "Casa del Sol Park".
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco this day of 2007.
Joyce Olson, Mayor
ATTEST:
Sandy Kenworthy, Deputy City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Lee Kerr, City Attorney
ADMINISTRATIVE AND COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT
P.O.BOX 293, 525 NORTH THIRD AVENUE, PASCO,WASHINGTON 99301
DIVISIONS
ADMINISTRATIVE
SERVICES
(509)544-3096
December 12, 2006 FAX 543-5727
CITY CLERK
(509)545-3402
FAX 543-5727
FACILITIES
Pasco City Council SERVICES
(509)543-5757
c/o Gary Crutchfield FAX 543-5758
Pasco City Manager FINANCE
Pasco City Hall SERVICES
(509)545-3401
FAX 544-3082
Honorable Council Members and Manager Crutchfield:
INFORMATION
SERVICES
This is to transmit the recommendation of the Park and Recreation Advisory Council that FAX 545-34 8
the new park (located on Wrigley Drive) being completed in the Pasco Heights
Subdivision be named "Lincoln Park". We note that, with the exception of Wrigley RECREATION
Drive, (which was originally constructed and named in an adjacent subdivision)the (509)545-3456
FAX 545-3455
streets in this subdivision are named for former U.S. Presidents. The recommendation of
the Advisory Council for "Lincoln Park" provides for recognition of this park's location
within the City while honoring this great former President of our country. (Other names
considered by the Advisory Council included Roosevelt, Truman, Kennedy, Washington,
Founders and Presidential.)
We are also pleased to recommend the name of"Casa del Sol Park" for the new park
being completed on Laredo Drive in the subdivision of the same name. We note that
streets in this subdivision reflect names of Spanish origin and feel that the proposed
name, which means "house of the sun", is appropriate for the neighborhood. This name
was also suggested by several neighbors who attended park design meetings and was the
unanimous choice of the Advisory Council.
On behalf of the Council I am pleased to submit these names for these new facilities.
Please do not hesitate to contact me if I can provide further information.
Sinc ly
r
Duane Taber
Chairman
Park and Recreation Advisory Council
RESOLUTION NO. 2499
A RESOLUTION APPROVING A POLICY FOR NAMING OF
CITY PARKS AND RECREATION FACILITIES.
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined it to be beneficial to approve
a policy and procedure for the naming of City Parks and Recreation Facilities
as occasion may require, and
WHEREAS, the City Parks and Recreation Advisory Council has
developed and recommended the establishment of such a policy, Now,
THEREFORE,
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO:
That the attached policy for naming of City Parks and Recreation
Facilities is hereby approved.
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco this 7th day of February,
2000.
w
ichael L."Garrison, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
lJ
SCE a4ae 'M l 94-9-$'-4 AL-C�/"
Catherine D. Seaman, Leland . Kerr, City Attorricy
Deputy City Clerk
Policy for
Naming of City Parks
and Recreation Facilities
Purpose:
The purpose of this policy is to provide a process whereby City parks and
recreational facilities may be named.
Polic :
When authorized by the City Council, the City Parks and Recreation Advisory
Council shall be charged with the responsibility of making recommendations
for the naming of City parks and recreational facilities. The City Council shall
consider the recommendations of the Advisory Council and make final
determinations.
Procedure:
1. When, in the opinion of the Parks and Recreation Advisory Council, it is
necessary to name or rename a City park or recreation facility, it shall
advise the City Council of its opinion and may suggest a process whereby
a name shall be chosen.
2. The City Council shall review the matter and, if it concurs with the
Advisory Council, shall authorize the Council to proceed. Otherwise the
Council shall give such direction to the Advisory Council as it deems
appropriate.
3. The Advisory Council may conduct public hearings or use contests,
solicitations, historic evidence or any other appropriate means under the
circumstances, and within the direction of the City Council, to generate
ideas and recommendations for a name. Names for parks and facilities
should be appropriate for the facility and the community served. If for a
neighborhood facility, the name should support or help establish a
neighborhood identity. If for a facility serving the entire community, the
name should be appropriate considering the diversity of users. Names
should be such that their meaning and significance to the neighborhood
or the community will remain over time.
4. The Advisory Council shall submit its recommendations to the City
Council for final consideration.
AGENDA REPORT NO. 2
FOR: City Council January 10, 2007
TO: Gary Crutchfi i Manager Regular Mtg: January 16, 2007
Robert J. Albe t 1ic Works Director
FROM: Doug Bramlette, City EngineerA6
SUBJECT: Accept 66th Place Sewer & Water Line Project; Project# 06-1-03 & 06-2-01
I. REFERENCE(S):
1. Resolution
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL/STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
1/16: MOTION: I move to approve Resolution No. accepting the
work performed by Goodman & Mehlenbacher, Ent. Inc. for the 66th Place Sewer
& Water Line Project #06-1-03 & #06-2-01.
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
Water/Sewer Fund
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
On June 5, 2006 the City Council awarded the 66"' Place Sewer & Water Line
Project # 06-1-03 & #06-2-01 to Goodman & Mehlenbacher, Ent. Inc., in the
amount of $76,896.42, including sales tax. The final cost of the project was
$92,134.23.
The project included the installation of approximately 310 linear feet of 8-inch
sanitary sewer and two 4 inch sewer services. It also included the installation of
257 linear feet of 8-inch Ductile Iron Water Pipe. Due to the soil conditions and
excessive sloughing, it was necessary to completely repave the roadway instead of
only patching the roadway as the plans were initially bid. A catch-basin was also
installed to alleviate a stormwater run-off problem. The additional paving and
catch-basin is the reason for the increased construction costs, however, it is within
the budget of$100,000.
The work is now complete and staff recommends acceptance of the work.
V. ADMINISTRATIVE ROUTING
Project File
3(9)
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK PERFORMED BY GOODMAN &
MEHLENBACHER ENT. INC., UNDER CONTRACT FOR THE 66TH PLACE SEWER &
WATER LINE PROJECT#06-1-03 &06-2-01.
WHEREAS, the work Performed by GOODMAN & MEHLENBACHER ENT.
INC., under contract for the 66' Place Sewer &Water Line Project# 06-1-03 & 06-2-01,
has been examined by Engineering and has been found to be in apparent compliance with
the applicable project specifications and drawings, and
WHEREAS, it is Engineering recommendation that the City of Pasco formally
accept the contractor's work and the project as complete; NOW, THEREFORE,
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO, that the
City Council concurs with Engineering recommendation and thereby accepts the work performed
by GOODMAN & MEHLENBACHER ENT. INC., under contract for the 66`h Place Sewer &
Water Line Project # 06-1-03 & 06-2-01, as being completed in apparent conformance with the
project specifications and drawings, and
Be It Further Resolved, that the City Clerk is hereby directed to notify the Washington
State Department of Revenue of this acceptance, and
Be It Further Resolved, that the final payment of retainage being withheld pursuant to
applicable laws, regulations and administrative determination shall be released upon satisfaction
of same and verification thereof by the Public Works Director and Finance Manager.
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco this 16th day of January, 2007.
Joyce Olson
Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Sandy L. Kenworthy Leland B. Kerr
Deputy City Clerk City Attorney
AGENDA REPORT NO. 02
FOR: City Council DATE: 1/10/07
TO: Gary Crutch i Manager Regular: 1/16/07
Robert J.Alb �irec�or, Public Works
FROM: Doyle Heath,Utility Enginee"
SUBJECT: Public Hearing on the Final Assessment Roll for U.L.I.D. 142
I. REFERENCE(S):
1. Ordinance
2. Vicinity Map
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL/STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
1/16: Public Hearing
1/16: MOTION: I move to adopt Ordinance No. confirming the Final
Assessment Roll for Utility Local Improvement District No. 142 and, further,
authorize publication by summary only.
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
U.L.I.D. No. 142 was created by Ordinance No. 3712 to install sanitary sewer on West
Wernett Road, West Jay Street, West Ella Street, West Leola Street, West Pearl Street,
and Roads 38, 39 and 40. The Preliminary Assessment Roll amount was $769,700.00
($8,950.00 per lot). The total of all the costs for this project was $818,475.59. The
difference was because of soil conditions, errors that had to be corrected underground
by previous contractors, and depths of the sewer line being greater than past U.L.I.D.
projects. The Staff proposes that the difference be reflected in the 2007 Final
Supplemental Budget Adjustment. The Final Assessment Roll amount is $688,000.00
(8,000.00 per lot). This assessment per lots would be consistent with recent Sewer
U.L.I.D. action as approved in Resolution No. 2961, dated June 5, 2006.
The Port of Pasco, Tri-Cities Airport informed the City at the time of the Preliminary
Assessment that the lot they own(Parcel Number 119-041-073) can not be developed
by regulation of the Federal Aviation Administration. Staff recommends approval of the
Final Assessment Roll with the condition the City account for the assessment for this
lot.
A protest has been received form the property owner living at 3617 West Wernett Road.
The Final Assessment is lower than the Preliminary Assessment value of$8,950.00.
Staff believes the property owners have benefited from their assessment.
Staff recommends approval of the Final Assessment Roll with the only change being
the condition the City account for the assessment of the Port of Pasco property (Parcel
Number 119-041-117). The complete Final Assessment Roll is available for review at
the City Clerk's office.
V. ADMINISTRATIVE ROUTING
Project File
#02 Pub Hearing ULM 142 Final Assessment R011 7(a)
CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE of the City of Pasco, Washington, relating to Utility
Local Improvement District No. 142, approving and confirming the assessments
and assessment roll of Utility Local Improvement District No. 142 created for the
purpose of carrying out a system or plan of additions to and betterments and
extensions of the waterworks utility of the City, including the sanitary sewerage
system and the system of storm or surface water sewers of the City specified,
adopted and ordered to be carried out by Ordinance No. 3712, and levying and
assessing the cost and expense thereof against the several lots, tracts, parcels of
land, and other property as shown on the assessment roll.
WHEREAS, the assessment roll levying the special assessments against the property
located in Utility Local Improvement District No. 142 in the City of Pasco, Washington (the
"City"),has been filed with the City Clerk as provided by law; and
WHEREAS, notice of the time and place of hearing thereon and making objections and
protests to the roll was published at and for the time and in the manner provided by law fixing
the time and place of hearing thereon for the 16th day of January, 2007, at the hour of 7:00 p.m.,
local time, in the Council Chambers in the City Hall, Pasco, Washington, and further notice
thereof was mailed by the City Clerk to each property owner shown on the roll; and
WHEREAS, at the time and place fixed and designated in the notice, the hearing was
held, all written protests received were considered and all property owners who submitted such
protests or their representatives appearing at the hearing who wished to be heard were heard, and
the City Council, sitting and acting as a Board of Equalization for the purpose of considering the
roll and the special benefits to be received by each lot, parcel, and tract of land shown upon such
roll, including the increase and enhancement of the fair market value of each such parcel of land
by reason of the improvement, overruled all such protests;NOW, THEREFORE,
#02 Pub Hearing ULID 142 Final Assessment Roll.doc
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN as
follows:
Section 1. The assessments and assessment roll of Utility Local Improvement District
No. 142, which has been created and established to carry out the system or plan of additions to
and betterments and extensions of the waterworks utility of the City, including the sanitary
sewerage system and the system of storm or surface water sewers of the City specified, adopted
and ordered to be carried out by Ordinance No. 3712, as the same now stand be and the same are
in all things and respects approved and confirmed in the total amount of$688,000.00.
Section 2. Each of the lots, tracts, parcels of land, and other property shown upon the
assessment roll is determined and declared to be specially benefited by this improvement in at
least the amount charged against the same, and the assessment appearing against the same is in
proportion to the several assessments appearing upon the roll. There is levied and assessed
against each lot, tract, or parcel of land and other property appearing upon the roll the amount
finally charged against the same thereon.
Section 3. The assessment roll as approved and confirmed shall be filed with the City
Finance Manager for collection and the City Finance Manager is authorized and directed to
publish notice as required by law stating that the roll is in his hands for collection and that
payment of any assessment thereon or any portion of such assessment can be made at any time
within thirty days from date of first publication of such notice without penalty, interest or cost,
and that thereafter the sum remaining unpaid may be paid in fifteen (15) equal annual
installments of principal. The estimated interest rate is stated to be 5.5% per annum, with the
exact interest rate to be fixed in the ordinance authorizing the issuance and sale of the water and
sewer revenue bonds authorized to be issued by Ordinance No. 3712. The first installment of
#02 Pub Hearing ULID 142 Final Assessment Roll.doc
assessments on the assessment roll shall become due and payable during the thirty-day period
succeeding the date one year after the date of first publication by the City Finance Manager of
notice that the assessment roll is in his hands for collection and annually thereafter each
succeeding installment shall become due and payable in like manner. If the whole or any portion
of the assessment remains unpaid after the first thirty-day period, interest upon the whole unpaid
sum shall be charged at the rate as determined above, and each year thereafter one of the
installments, together with interest due on the unpaid balance, shall be collected. Any
installment not paid prior to expiration of the thirty-day period during which such installment is
due and payable shall thereupon become delinquent. All delinquent installments shall be subject
to a charge for interest at the rate as determined above and for an additional charge of 6%penalty
levied upon both principal and interest due upon such installment or installments. The collection
of such delinquent installments shall be enforced in the manner provided by law.
PASSED by the City Council and APPROVED by the Mayor of the City of Pasco,
Washington, at a regular open public meeting thereof, this 16th day of January, 2007.
Joyce Olson, Mayor
ATTEST:
Debra L. Clark, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Leland Kerr, City Attorney
#02 Pub Hearing ULID 142 Final Assessment Roll.doc
CITY OF PASCO
SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO.
ORDINANCE NO. is an ordinance relating to Utility Local Improvement District No.
142, approving and confirming the assessments and assessment roll.
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, PO Box 293, Pasco, WA 99301.
Sandy Kenworthy, Deputy City Clerk
CERTIFICATION
I, the undersigned, City Clerk of the City of Pasco, Washington(the"City"), hereby
certify as follows:
1. The attached copy of Ordinance No. (the "Ordinance") is a full,true and correct
copy of an ordinance duly passed at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City held at the
regular meeting place thereof on January 16, 2007, as that ordinance appears on the minute book
of the City; and the Ordinance will be in full force and effect five days after the publication of its
summary in the City's official newspaper; and
2. A quorum of the members of the City Council was present throughout the meeting
and a majority of those members present voted in the proper manner for the passage of the
Ordinance.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this day of January,2007.
CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON
Debra L. Clark, City Clerk
SEWER ULID 142 - WERNETT ROAD/ROAD 38
ULID BOUNDARY
FINAL
ASSESSMENT s9 10 86 3 8 83 131617 --5
ALL LOTS 119-042-125 119.042-090 119-042-107 119.611.073 119.041-144 119-041.141-117
LARRY a IESSIE JOSE B 1 PORT OF CNER7L OONRIAL, q.
EMILY BRADFORD MARIAA I€ PASCO BERG ZACHEHER
000.00 QUESTAD ZEPEDA (Tit) R) 513
U � =
/ 3821-5
73909 _ 3821 J 3809 ,N_•-.,J (� 3715 1
W. WERNETT RD W.WERNETT RD W.WERNETT RD
- O - 317 64 38 a 3)2a 712 - 0 3612 3604 h )y. `
-- 61 32 55 5 76 81 (}}' 35tz
119-132-297 119-132-304 114132-313' f119-131-029 119-131-038 119-131-047 119-131-056 119-131-065 119-131-074 1O
ri I Q MA 5 WE i GARY B MIGUEL 6 JOHN B CTOYO FRANK i AIFERA00 LOTS E M '�
I Q CAROLYN GAY1E i MARY ROSAIJA MARIE KERB NAGASAKA DEBRA K l LONNIE WILTSEV
I O C1igPMIW SAP O-1 . CJARK RUELAS W.AKERLEY URIBE Q
4!12 €d'
57 _-i^ '",�. �.-€. . wM#n O N t
;a�F..._.. �p. 2 �20 70 ' S4 78 49
1 c1 119-131-136 119-131-127 119-131-118 119-131-109 119• f
5i 22 66 131-092 119-131 oe3 .; t
TOMMY 119-I32-331�W=& 119.132-759 I KIPP1'
~ ONTO IER0.Y A O THOMAS L IVANITA A LOSE 6 LESLIE C
JOHNS CIMRLES L DECKER DOLORES M i LIMELL NAEF LETICIA SANDRA M ; 5
r,•) DVIOLE SGiMIDT CZEBOTAR SUMMERS VELASCID MAVWS Q ] 1D 3805 3721 3 3705 3621 3 3 3605 3r1i3
rn i W.]AY ST W.]AY ST
LL 3920 3912 3904 3820 3812 3804 3 3 362 3612 3604 3520 3512
46 3 de 36, 37 26
4 12 45 68 29 60 319.131-145 119.171.154 119-131.163 19.131`.172'319.131.181 119.131-190
i} 119.132.126 119.132.135 119-132-IM 319.132-153 119-132-162 119.132.171 BRADLEY VAN R i EVERARDO 6 FRAM(. JOE D 6 DEAN)•
1108870 JD6 MEXi US. SIDNEY DALE �-�-'-, }f
(� AUVIL SHIRLEYA MARGARET SHERYL MARJORIE REIMAN I iPATSY KAY ROSALINDA eIUDYL LINDA DEBORAH R. a+
BROWNLEE LAWYER SMITH GRANT OD LEWIS THOMAS MARTINEZ HEILMAN HERBERT GLATT Q) 1 ^
2 Z O 7•° Z
i:2) ( (3 t 0 72 63 69 16 75 62 p 44 1�-241 82 53 74 I 12
m 119-132-LBO 119-132.199 119-132.206 119-172.215 119-132-224 119-132-2331 21 (119-1]t-252 119-119-131-234 119-131.215 139-131-23 0 i m { WiWER RICHARD ANGELH MULL ]OHNi RISTI JOHND ARNOHERBERT i TAYLOR &DIANA SMITH CAVAZOS NEIDI iCHAAITYN€ V€KETIERIING MELBpEGGY 6NORM11 ANDWOODS ry 1 ,jF,ZtC -I SANTpS (ETAU FTORO SALAZAR J W = 3922 3913 3905 3823 3833 3805 3723 373705 36
C Z
0 0 - W.ELLA ST W. ELLA ST
3820 3812 3809 3720 3712 04 - 3612 3604
JU
30 58 43 60 25 6
0 a 13 119.132-2R 19.13E-3SI11938- 119-131-261 119-131-270119.131-289119-13]298119-131-305 119-131-314 1 1 E
r• N 119-132.055 WANOAG RICPROOi TRAVIS JOSE L6 MERLE GLORIA]i CON5T4NEE JESUS M4R1AJ
ALAN HAGE0.MAN ROSAM MILLIARD MARTHA PATTEE ROBERT MARIEE`` BELTRAN PACNECO J~
BULLIS �O (TR) CANTU GUTIERREZ KENNEDY WIWAMS VILLA
N
m 46 it € I� �- _ 1 ,
m fV T p11 50 24 14 27 56 77
r n N ! O iLA 119.132.179 Lal 172.28 8 1119.131-378 119-131-369 119-131.35D 119-171-341 119-131.33
O BBIE A 1N7 1 FLORENII WINFRED JAVIER AMR LIIJA CYNTHIA ! !
j BROGDON THEY(ETAL) GALYFZ R GUERRERO OCHOA B WIS +
t 1) O��U.J 119-61]-073 (FTA1) AU" VAIDE2 1 ( 4
0 C - I 3721 3713 3705 3627. 3623 3605 i ! i
t t
M ® 1 x SANDRA I 1
Z 7 !: --$$
SAWYERS 119-139368 0°= W.LEOLAST j
�+ 1 _ 52 i$ ANTONIO d 3%2 3712 3704 3620 ,' -1 612 36U4'� ° 8
^ HERMNDEZ j 67 35 21 39 47 42
DAN MENDENNALLN111119.133-387 119.331.396 119131103 119-i31d12 119131421 119.131.430' W
Q Z 1 :I CHANIM L LAMES i ]05E F 6 FXIRMAM EMILIO■ HECTOR V �
m TEBAY DENISE MARIA R ADELA E JIMENEZ f?•
Z 1 119-132-395 MALIN OELAMORA HOUGH MARTINEZ E 9
D
s.-A.7rex-- j 1997 L1JR "�f n
O l J FAMILY
Z Q !(2) TRUST ---.yJ --y
.7..,_._.._
m D (T� I 00 34 28 41 9 15 23 33 79 j ' 6
m 40 119-132-091 9-172-108 9-132.377 i �-
(H 41 Fps. aUvY 119-132-386 1- LED RD RANDY 56 FREDERICK i 7119-331494 119-131485 119-131476119-131-467 19-131-458 `
CD .Q JOHN E0.MN Ri ANGELITA CARINA TERRY TRACI A -
•} MARTI" DE EAt4AL JACKSON )
Z I f^' HU'CHlFfff - HANSEN HOYI` t TA MIA LASTRE]ON DE U1 BARBARA WAGNER �y1
1 ( 3 FEL3721 ROSA 1MNE
® 3809„� I. 3721 3 13 3705 3621 3613 3605 1 -
!� !^ ® W. PEARL 57 ULID BOUNDARY W PEARL ST
< - -
__
0 1 -
I� O Z
1
p
4.2 0.0, 4054 ! €
AGENDA REPORT NO. 7
FOR: City Council DATE: January 9, 2007
TO: Gary Crutchfi 1 Manager WORKSHOP:
Richard J. Sm , Di ector REGULAR: 1/16/07
Community an Economic Development
FROM: David I. McDonald, City Planner
SUBJECT: Area Wide Rezone from C-1 (Retail Business) to R-1 8v R-2 (Low &
Medium Density Residential) for properties generally between 51h
and 10th on Clark St. (City of Pasco) (MF# Z06-003)
I. REFERENCE(S):
A. Proposed Rezone Ordinance
B. Planning Commission Report
C. Planning Commission Minutes: Dated 11/16/06 & 12/21/06
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
MOTION: I move to approve Ordinance No. rezoning
various parcels around Clark Street from 5th Avenue to 10th Avenue
from C-1 to R-1 and R-2 as recommended by the Planning
Commission, and, further to authorize publication by summary only.
III. FISCAL IMPACT: NONE
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
A. On November 16, 2006 the Planning Commission conducted a public
hearing to determine whether or not to recommend a rezone from C-1 to
R-1 and R-2 for various lots around Clark Street in Gerrys' Addition and
Pettits Addition. The properties are generally located between 5th Ave. and
10th Ave on the south side of Clark St.
B. Following the conduct of a public hearing, the Planning Commission
determined it would be appropriate to recommend a change in zoning for
the properties in question.
C. No written appeal of the Planning Commission's recommendation has
been received.
V. DISCUSSION:
VI. ADMINSTRATIVE ROUTING:
8(a)
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE of the City of Pasco, Washington, Amending the
Zoning Classification of Certain Real Property
Located within Gerrys Addition and Pettits Addition
from C-1 (Retail Business) to R-1 (Low Density
Residential) and R-2 (Medium Density Residential.
WHEREAS, a complete and adequate petition for change of zoning
classification has been received and an open record hearing having been
conducted by the Pasco Planning Commission upon such petition; and,
WHEREAS, based upon substantial evidence and demonstration of the
Petitioner, that: (A) the requested change for the zoning classification is
consistent with the adopted Comprehensive Plan; (B) the requested change in
zoning classification is consistent with or promotes the goals and objectives of
the Comprehensive Plan serving the general public interest in the community;
and (C) there has been a change in the neighborhood or community needs or
circumstances warranting the requested change of the zoning classification in
that major commercial development has located near 20th Avenue and Court
Street as well as on Road 68 and bypassed the neighborhood in question; (D)
the request for change in zoning classification was issued a Determination of
Nonsignificance under the Washington State Environmental Policy Act; and
(E) the effect of the requested change in zoning classification will not be
materially detrimental to the immediate vicinity, NOW, THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON DO
ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That the Zoning Ordinance for the City of Pasco, Washington,
and the Zoning Map, accompanying and being part of said Ordinance shall be
and hereby is changed from C-1 (Retail Business) to R-1 (Low Density
Residential) for the real property as shown in the Exhibit "1" attached hereto
and described as follows:
Lots 17 and 18 Block 10, Gerry's Addition
Section 2. That the Zoning Ordinance for the City of Pasco, Washington,
and the Zoning Map, accompanying and being part of said Ordinance shall be
and hereby is changed from C-1 (Retail Business) to R-2 (Medium Density
Residential) for the real property as shown in the Exhibit "I" attached hereto
and described as follows:
The west 10 feet of Lot 4 and all of Lots 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14,
15, and 16, Block 15, Gerrys Addition; and,
Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 Block 24, Gerrys Addition; and,
Section 3. This ordinance shall take full force and effect five (5) days after
its approval, passage and publication as required by law.
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco, Washington, and
approved as provided by law this 161h day of January 2007.
Joyce Olson
Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO
FORM:
Sandy Kenworthy Leland B. Kerr
Deputy City Clerk City Attorney
CITY OF PASCO
SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO.
ORDINANCE NO. , rezones certain Lots in Blocks 5, 6, 7, & 8 Pettits
Addition, Lots 17 & 18, Block 10 Gerrys Addition and certain lots in Blocks 15
& 24 in Gerrys Addition from C-1 (Retail Business) to R-1 (Low Density
Residential) & R-2 (Medium Density Residential.)
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.
Sandy Kenworthy, Deputy City Clerk
AVVl
6N�
d
r
� N 3
� $T
O
Z
ct
w
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
MASTER FILE NO: Z06-003 APPLICANT: City of Pasco
HEARING DATE: 11/ 16/06 PO Box 293
ACTION DATE: 12/21/06 Pasco, WA 99301
BACKGROUND
REQUEST: Area wide Rezone from C-1 (Retail Business) to R-1 (Low Density
Residential) and R-2 (Medium Density Residential)
1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:
Legal: Lots 17-18 Blk 10, Lots 4-16 Blk 15 and the North 1/2 of Blk 24,
Gerrys' Add with Lots 4-8, Blk 8, Lots 3-9 Blk 7, Lots 4-10 Blk 6 and
Lots 3-6 Blk 5 Pettits Add.
General Location: Generally the south side of Clark Street from 5th Ave.
to 10th Ave.
Property Size: Approximately 6.5 acres
2. ACCESS: The property has access Clark Street and several side streets.
3. UTILITIES: All municipal utilities are available to the site.
4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The site is currently zoned C-1 (Retail
Business) and developed primarily with residential dwellings units.
Zoning and land use of the surrounding properties is as follows:
NORTH- R-1/Residential (The property at the NW corner of Clark & 7th is
zoned C-1 and contains a commercial building.)
SOUTH- C-1/ Various commercial uses except two old motels being
used for permanent residential purposes.
EAST- C-1/Office and retail uses.
WEST- C-1/ Mini Mart and a single family dwelling.
5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The site is in a transition area between
commercial and residential uses. Comprehensive Plan designates this
area for commercial uses. Goal H-3 suggests the City encourage the
preservation of the existing housing stock for present and future
residents. Policy H-1-A encourages the location of medium density
housing near community shopping and employment centers.
6. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: This proposal has been issued a
determination of nonsignificance in accordance with review under the
State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), Chapter 43.21(c) RCW.
ANALYSIS
Recently Staff reviewed the zoning for all properties located between 5th Ave.
and 10t" Ave, from Clark Street to Lewis Street. Many years ago the properties
encompassed by the referenced streets were zoned C-1 Retail Business.
Staff can only surmise that the commercial was established along Clark Street
to facilitate the expansion of commercial establishments west from the core of
the central business district. While commercial development expanded along
West Lewis Street development along Clark Street has retain much of the
original residential character established years ago. Major commercial
development bypassed Clark Street and occurred near Court and 20th and
more recently on Road 68.
Pasco's early zoning codes were patterned after national model codes that
permitted all uses from less intense zoning districts in more intense district.
Residential uses being less intense than commercial uses were permitted in
commercial zoning districts. This process continued through the zoning code
until all uses had been accumulated in the heavy industrial zone. Industrial
zones that permitted residential, commercial and industrial uses were
sometimes referred to as jackpot zoning because they permitted a property
owner to develop just about any thing he or she desired.
Pasco's pyramidal type zoning code was amended in 1982 to eliminate the
conflicts of mixing residential and commercial uses together. The residential
units along Clark Street that were zoned C-1 became non conforming uses.
Properties that became non-conforming continued to be occupied and sold for
dwelling purposes.
The properties on the south side of Clark Street from 5th Ave. to 10th Ave. have
been zoning C-1 for perhaps 40 years or more. Over the ensuing years the
commercial designation on these properties has not encourage commercial
development. The only notable development in this area in the recent past (late
70's) was the construction of two four-plexs in the 700 block of Clark Street.
About 10 years ago property in the 600 block of Clark was converted from
office space to a church.
Earlier this year staff conducted a survey of properties on the south side of
Clark Street from 5t' to 10th. All properties were C-1 zoning along this portion
2
of Clark. Of those properties three are vacant and one contained a church.
Twenty-eight properties were found to be occupied with some type of dwelling;
either single family or multi-family and two properties are occupied by
commercial establishments.
In 1982 when the zoning code was modernized the fact that the residential
units were made non-conforming had little impact on the properties. Except in
the event of a catastrophic occurrence that damaged a dwelling by more than
50 percent of its value it could continued to remain and be used for dwelling
purposes. Houses could be bought and sold with little difficulty. About 10
years ago the banking industry took a dramatic shift with the treatment of non-
conforming dwelling units. It became very difficult to obtain a conventional
loan for homes located in commercial zoning districts.
Conditions have changed significantly in Pasco since the 1950's and 1960's.
The Central Business District is no longer the main shopping and business
center it once was. Commercial development bypassed Clark Street. Retaining
commercial zoning along Clark Street will not facilitate expansion of
commercial development in the neighborhood. The nature and value of the
neighborhood seems to be well rooted in residential development. Retaining
commercial zoning in this area for another 40 years will not significantly
change the area into a commercial center. Commercial development of these
properties would be difficult due to the limited size of the lots. These lots do
not lend themselves well to today's commercial development standards.
The initial review criteria, for considering a rezone application are explained in
PMC. 25.88.030. The criteria are listed below as follows:
1. The changed conditions in the vicinity which warrant other or additional
zoning:
• The Lewis Street was down graded from a State Highway to an
arterial street when the 395 bypass was constructed.
• In the late 1960's and early 1970's many major retailers in the Tri-
Cities relocated to the newly constructed Columbia Center Mall.
• Properties near the intersection of 20th and Court have developed
into a major commercial center.
• I-182 was constructed in the early 1980's
• Major freeway interchanges were built at Rd 68 and Rd 100 in the
early 1980's
3
• Hundreds of acres of commercial zoning were established at the Rd
68 and R100 interchanges.
• Over 500,000 square feet of new retail and office space has been
developed on Rd 68 in the last 4 years
• Properties at the corner of 20th and Court have recently been
reconstructed or totally rebuilt.
2. Facts to justify the change on the basis of advancing the public health,
safety and general welfare.
The non conforming status of the residential units in the proposed
rezone area does not encourage timely property maintenance. Rezoning
the properties to residential would afford property owners more
opportunities to obtain reasonable finance for major property
maintenance (re-roofing, new HVAC systems, new siding etc)
3. The effect it will have on the nature and value of adjoining property and
the Comprehensive Plan.
The properties in question have been developed with residential dwellings
for decades. Records show that one house was built in 1905 others in
1907, 1910, 1920 and in the 1940's. The nature of the properties in
question has been residential for close to a hundred years. The
commercial properties on Lewis Street were developed after the houses
was constructed on the south side of Clark Street.
4. The effect on the property owner or owners if the request is not granted.
The current zoning permits development of commercial retail and office
buildings. The properties are not of a size that would encourage
commercial development. Not rezoning the property would continue to
make it difficult for property owners to sell or improve their property
5. The Comprehensive land use designation for the property.
Polices of the plan encourage the preservation of the existing housing
stock.
4
INTIAL STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT
Findings of fact must be entered from the record. The following are initial
findings drawn from the background and analysis section of the staff report.
The Planning Commission may add additional findings to this listing as the
result of factual testimony and evidence submitted during the open record
hearing.
1) The properties were originally developed with residential dwellings almost
100 years ago.
2) The site is zoned C-1 (Retail Business).
3) The C-1 zoning was established about 40 years ago.
4) The State highway was relocated off Lewis Street to 395 in the 1960's.
5) I-182 and the Rd 100 and Rd 68 Interchanges were built in the early 1980's.
6) Commercial zoning and development exist at 20,11, and Court
7) Hundreds of acres of commercial zoning is located at Rd 100 and Rd 68.
8) Over 500,000 square feet of commercial office and or retail space has been
developed on Rd 68 in the last 4 years.
9) No retail businesses have ever located on the south side of Clark Street
generally from 5th Ave to 10th Ave.
10) Comprehensive Plan Goal H-3 suggests the City should encourage the
preservation of the existing housing stock for present and future residents.
11) Policy H-1-A encourages the location of medium density housing near
community shopping and employment centers.
CONCLUSIONS BASED ON STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT
Before recommending approval or denial of a rezone the Planning Commission
must develop its conclusions from the findings of fact based upon the criteria
listed in P.M.C. 25.88.060. The criteria are as follows:
5
(1) The proposal is in accord with the goals and policies of the
comprehensive plan.
The goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan encourage the
preservation of the existing housing stock.
(2) The effect of the proposal on the immediate vicinity will be
materially detrimental.
Residential dwellings have been located on the properties in question
for close to 100 years in some cases. This proposal. will cause the
zoning and actual land use to be consistent. Currently the
commercial zoning is not consistent with the residential uses. The
surrounding neighborhoods will not be materially impact by the
proposed change because the land uses will remain the same.
(3) There is merit and value in the proposal for the community as a
whole.
The proposal will help preserve an existing residential area for
current and future Pasco residents.
(4) Conditions should be imposed in order to mitigate any significant
adverse impacts from the proposal.
No conditions are needed.
(5) A concomitant agreement should be entered into between the City
and the petitioner, and if so, the terms and conditions of such an
agreement.
A concomitant agreement is not necessary.
RECOMMENDATION
MOTION: I move the Planning Commission adopt the Findings of Fact as
contained in the December 21, 2006 staff report.
6
MOTION: I move, based on the findings of fact as adopted, the Planning
Commission recommend the City Council rezone the properties on
the south side of Clark Street from C-1 (Retail Business) to R-2
(Medium Density Residential) and the lot on the north side of Clark
Street from C-1 to R-1 (Low Density Residential) all for the areas as
shown on the Vicinity map.
7
Item: Rezone Area Wide
Vicinity
Ma p pp
A licant: City of Pasco N
File #: Z 06-003
•
x ,
Y
r v
.a
.p
i
sr �
I
1'
Rezone Area
Sr
-
-
s
k
- ,,. .• ��° �. ,mot
6t,
��Win` x:4��� '� •� ", � � � � '�v`"��? -
J '"•'_.�� hr's .�. �� . r i � + - �•'Z�°'s
Afi I 1
3 �•
ct
U
ct
cr
;:j `
w
4> �
O �
en
ct
ct
a� N QOA
ILI �
� � U
O
U
U
U
� o
vti
Planning Commission Minutes
11/16/06
WORKSHOP:
A. Clark Street Area Wide Rezone of C-1 to R-1 and R-2 (City of
Rezone Pasco) (Clark Street; Sth Ave. to 10th Ave.) (MF #
Z06-003)
Staff advised the Commission that they recently examined the zoning along
Clark Street between 5th Avenue and 10th Avenue. It was explained that many
years ago this section of Clark Street was zoned as C-1, with the thought that
commercial development would extend west from the CBD. That anticipated
commercial development has not occurred. Commercial development expanded
near 20th and court and now along Rd 68. Most of these properties on Clark
Street are existing residential properties that have never been converted to
commercial uses. The proposed area-wide rezone would bring the existing land
use into compatibility with the zoning. The rezone would allow these
residential properties to be repaired to a greater extent than they are currently
allowed to be repaired due to their legally non-conforming status in the C-1
zone. Staff proposed holding a public hearing regarding the rezone at the
December 21, 2006 meeting.
Commissioner Samuel asked for clarification regarding how the rezone will
allow the existing residential properties to be repaired to a greater extent.
Staff explained that property in a legal non-conforming status could only be
repaired to correct a life-threatening situation and minor remodeling up to 20%
of the value of the structure. In order for the properties to be more
substantially remodeled, a rezone would be required. Additionally it is more
difficult to get a conventional residential loans when the residence is zoned
commercial.
Commissioner Samuel asked if the City had been approached with requests for
rezoning from the property owners.
Staff confirmed that it was citizen requests for rezoning that initiated staff's
review of the area.
Commissioner Samuel asked if there would be tax implications as a result of
the rezone.
Staff responded that they are unaware of possible tax implications.
Commissioner Schouviller asked if there are some offices existing in the area
proposed for rezone.
Staff replied that there are some commercial uses in the area. The proposed
rezone would not change the zoning of properties that have commercial uses.
Commissioner Schouviller asked if the rezone would have impact upon the
existing commercial properties.
Staff responded that any impacts would be related to future development. If a
commercial use on properties to the south along Lewis Street applied for
renovation permits in the future they would be required to provide a buffer
(fence and landscaping) between their property and adjacent residential uses.
Commissioner Samuel asked if it is expensive to rezone.
Staff responded that the costs involved in the rezone are for mail-outs, report
preparation, etc. An application cost $880.00.
Commissioner Little asked if the existing homes could be rebuilt if destroyed by
fire, if they continue to be zoned commercially.
Staff responded that if the zoning does not change, and the property is
damaged by more than 50% of the assessed value, it could not be rebuilt.
The Commission had no objections to Staff setting a Public Hearing to consider
the rezone request.
Planning Commission Minutes 12/21/06
A. Rezone Area Wide Rezone from C-1 to R-1 & R-2 (City of
Pasco) (Clark St. from 5th Ave. to 10th Ave.) (MF#
ZO6-003)
Staff addressed the Commission and explained that the area proposed to be
rezoned had been zoned C-1 approximately forty years ago. The property was
zoned C-1 in the hopes of expanding the downtown area in a westerly
direction. The westerly commercial growth never occurred. The area contains
many homes that were built in the early 1900's and the area has a strong
residential character. The properties are smaller than a typical commercial lot
under today's standards making it very difficult to develop commercial
businesses. The homes are currently considered non-conforming which
creates problems for the owners to obtain mortgages, insurance and
remodeling permits.
Commissioner Little asked if there are any businesses located in the area
proposed for rezoning.
Staff responded that there is one office, but the building is currently vacant.
The building is of a size and shape that it could be conveniently converted to a
home.
Commissioner Samuel asked if Staff has been approached by anyone in the
community about rezoning the area.
Staff replied that they have been approached by residents requesting the
rezone.
Commissioner Samuel asked what would typically be the cost to the City to
rezone an area.
Staff responded that a typical rezone application cost approximately eight-
hundred and eighty dollars.
Commissioner Anderson asked if the old prosecutor's office is located in this
area.
Staff responded that the former prosecutor's office is now owned by a small
church, which is an allowable use (with a special permit) in either the R-1 or R-
2 zone.
Commissioner Anderson then asked if utilizing the property as an office would
require a special permit if the property is rezoned to residential.
Staff responded that if the property was being utilized as an office and is
rezoned to residential, it would become a legally non-conforming use.
Commissioner Rose asked if there is any down-side to rezoning the properties.
Staff replied that any persons who may see a down-side to the rezone will have
the opportunity to speak during the Public Hearing.
The Chairperson opened the Public Hearing and asked if there was anyone
present who wished to speak on this matter.
Oscar Garcia, 119 N. 9th Ave. addressed the Commission and asked how many
people had contacted the City to request the rezone.
Staff responded that there were three or four calls to request the rezone.
Mr. Garcia replied that he had never heard of a request to rezone the property.
He purchased the property because it was commercially zoned and is opposed
to the rezone.
Commissioner McCollum asked Mr. Garcia what his specific concern was about
the rezone.
Mr. Garcia stated that he had hoped to develop the property into a commercial
use in the future.
Commissioner Samuel asked if Mr. Garcia feared his property value would be
decreased by the rezone.
Mr. Garcia responded that he did believe his property value would be
decreased.
Commissioner Anderson asked if Mr. Garcia had plans of building a business
at this location.
Mr. Garcia responded that he hoped to build a business there in four or five
years.
Commissioner Rose asked how large Mr. Garcia's lot is.
Mr. Garcia responded that the lot is approximately 100' X 120'.
Staff noted that the property is too small to allow for landscaping and parking
that would be required of a commercial use.
Commissioner Samuel asked if the Assessor assesses property zoned
commercially at a higher rate.
Staff responded that an answer to the question would have to come from the
Assessor; however it has been his experience that a change in zoning doesn't
always change the valuation of the property.
Commissioner Rose stated that the value of commercial property is determined
by its location; he did not feel that generalizing regarding property value is a
valid consideration.
Commissioner Samuel asked for clarification regarding the process that a
property owner would follow in order to open a business while the property is
commercially zoned.
Staff responded that prior to acquiring a business license, the property owner
would have to install parking facilities, landscaping, drainage, obtain building
permits, etc.
Charlie W. Coleman, 1708 W. Octave St., addressed the Commission and
stated that he has watched this area change over the years, from primarily
residential uses to commercial and now back to residential uses. He added
that property owners are having difficulty selling their properties due to
problems obtaining financing due to the zoning designation. He is in favor of
the proposed zoning change.
Marvin Nelson, 823 N. Elm Ave., addressed the Commission and stated that he
agrees with the rezone. He is however concerned that someone may want to
develop property he owns for a commercial use in the future and will be limited
by the rezone.
Lynn Hyatt, 4615 Ivy Road, Pasco addressed the Commission and stated that
he is in the process of purchasing two lots in the rezone area. She wonders
what the difference may be in the tax rate should the rezone be approved.
Staff responded that rezones typically do not change the tax value; additionally
the rezone would allow owners to obtain second mortgages and perform
remodeling of the properties.
Mr. Hyatt stated that some houses in the area have had improvements; he
would like to know how the rezone would impact property values.
Commissioner Anderson stated he predominant use in the area is residential,
and would remain the same with the rezone.
Commissioner Samuel responded that since the proposal is for an area wide
rezone, he felt that obtaining information regarding possible financial impacts
to the property owners is important prior to making a decision.
Mr. Hyatt asked what type of housing is considered to be low density.
Staff stated that low density housing is two to five units per acre; lot sizes
would be 7200 square feet for R-1 and 5000 square feet for R-2.
Mr. Hyatt asked if there is long range plans to build housing in the area.
Staff responded that the City has no such plans.
Mr. Hyatt asked if there are any properties that could be converted to multiple
housing units, beyond a five-plex.
Staff responded that there are two four-plexes existing in the area. Under
current zoning regulations, a four-plex could not be constructed on a 5000
square foot lot.
Ms, Esperanza, 523 N. 8th Ave., stated that when she purchased her property
she was told it was not zoned commercial. She wishes to retain the use of the
property as residential.
After three calls for public comment the Chairman closed the Public Hearing.
Commissioner Samuel asked if specific properties are left out of the rezone,
and the property owners wish to rezone in the future, would that future rezone
be at their expense.
Staff confirmed that a future rezone would be at the property owner's expense.
Commissioner Little stated that in his opinion, property owners would benefit
from the rezone even if the taxes do go up.
Commissioner McCollum agreed that having the properties in a non-
conforming status (as the residences are now) seriously affects the property
owners.
Commissioner Samuel asked if there is any reason that the two land owners
who have expressed opposition to the rezone would not have their property
removed from the rezone area.
Commissioner Anderson stated that his experience with rezoning has been that
there was no change in taxes. He feels that it is not the job of the Commission
to represent what taxes will be; the issue should not be considered.
Commissioner Rose stated his agreement with Commissioner Anderson's
viewpoint.
Commissioner Anderson stated that he would be in favor of decreasing the size
of the area to be rezoned so that the two property owners who expressed a
desire to remain commercially zoned will be allowed to do so.
Commissioner Samuel moved to adopt the findings of fact and conclusions
there from as contained in the December 21, 2006 staff report. Commissioner
Anderson seconded. Motion carried unanimously.
Commissioner Samuel moved based on the findings of fact and conclusions
there from the Planning Commission recommend the City Council rezone the
properties as proposed with the modification to the limit line as discussed.
Commissioner Anderson seconded. Motion carried unanimously.
AGENDA REPORT NO. 5
FOR: City Council DATE: January 9, 2007
TO: Gary Crutchf ity Manager WORKSHOP:
Richard J. S irector REGULAR: 1/ 16/07
Community an I Economic Development
FROM: David I. McDonald, City Planner 11'�
SUBJECT: Rezone from "O" (Office) to C-1 (Retail Business) at 1712 & 1704 N.
20th (Aissata Sidibe) (MF# Z06-001)
I. REFERENCE(SL
A. Proposed Rezone Ordinance
B. Planning Commission Report
C. Planning Commission Minutes: Dated 11/16/06 8s 12/21/06
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
MOTION: I move to approve Ordinance No. granting a
rezone for 1712 and 1704 North 20th Avenue from "O" to C-1 with a
concomitant agreement as recommended by the Planning
Commission, and, further to authorize publication by summary only.
III. FISCAL IMPACT: NONE
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
A. On November 16, 2006 the Planning Commission conducted a public
hearing to determine whether or not to recommend a rezone from O to C-1
for two parcels (1712 8s 1704) located on North 201h Avenue.
B. Following the conduct of a public hearing, the Planning Commission
reasoned that with conditions it would be appropriate to recommend a
change in zoning for the property in question. The proposed conditions
are included in the attached concomitant agreement.
C. No written appeal of the Planning Commission's recommendation has
been received.
V. DISCUSSION:
VI. ADMINSTRATIVE ROUTING:
8(b)
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE of the City of Pasco, Washington, Amending the
Zoning Classification of Certain Real Property
Located in the Sprouse Addition from O (Office) to
C-1 (Retail Business) with a Concomitant
Agreement.
WHEREAS, a complete and adequate petition for change of zoning
classification has been received and an open record hearing having been
conducted by the Pasco Planning Commission upon such petition; and,
WHEREAS, based upon substantial evidence and demonstration of the
Petitioner, that: (A) the requested change for the zoning classification is
consistent with the adopted Comprehensive Plan; (B) the requested change in
zoning classification is consistent with or promotes the goals and objectives of
the Comprehensive Plan serving the general public interest in the community;
and (C) there has been a change in the neighborhood or community needs or
circumstances warranting the requested change of the zoning classification in
that significant commercial redevelopment has occurred on nearby
properties; (D) the request for change in zoning classification was issued a
Determination of Nonsignificance under the Washington State Environmental
Policy Act; and (E) the effect of the requested change in zoning classification
will not be materially detrimental to the immediate vicinity, NOW,
THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON DO
ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That the Zoning Ordinance for the City of Pasco, Washington,
and the Zoning Map, accompanying and being part of said Ordinance shall be
and hereby is changed from O (Office) to C-1 (Retail Business) for the real
property as shown in the Exhibit "1" attached hereto and described as
follows:
Lots 9, 10, and 11 with Sprouse Addition together with the east half the
adjacent vacated alley.
Section 2. That the change of a zoning classification as provided in
Section 1 is contingent, and conditioned upon execution and compliance with
a Concomitant Agreement entered into between the Petitioner and the City
which will attach to and run with the real property described in Section 1
above. Said Concomitant Agreement is attached to this Ordinance as Exhibit
No. "2".
Section 3. This ordinance shall take full force and effect five (5) days after
its approval, passage and publication as required by law.
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco, Washington, and
approved as provided by law this 16tb day of January 2007.
Joyce Olson
Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO
FORM:
Sandy Kenworthy Leland B. Kerr
Deputy City Clerk City Attorney
CITY OF PASCO
SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO.
ORDINANCE NO. , rezones Lots 9-11 Sprouse Addition from (Office)
to C-1 (Retail Business) with a concomitant agreement.
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.
Sandy Kenworthy, Deputy City Clerk
I I I I I I
RAV H16I N
w
H
o � �D
H
HnV xsoz N �
� o
3
HAV IS i Z N
0
03 HAV QNZZ N
W O �
x
N 201h Ave "Exhibit # 2"
CONCOMITANT ZONING AGREEMENT
WHEREAS, the City of Pasco, Washington, a non-charter code city, under the laws
of the State of Washington (Chapter 35A.63 R.C.W. and Article 11, Section 11 of the
Washington State Constitution) has authority to enact laws and enter into agreements to
promote the health, safety and welfare of its citizens, and thereby control the use and
development of property within its jurisdiction; and
WHEREAS, the Owner(s) of certain property have applied for a rezone of such
property described below within the City's jurisdiction; and
WHEREAS, the City pursuant to R.C.W. 43.12(c), the State Environmental Policy
Act, should mitigate any adverse impacts which might result because of the proposed rezone;
and
WHEREAS, the City of Pasco and the Owner(s) are both interested in compliance
with the Pasco Municipal Code provisions relating to the use and development of property
situated in the City of Pasco, described as follows:
(SEE PAGE 2, #5, LEGAL DESCRIPTION)
WHEREAS, the Owner(s) have indicated willingness to cooperate with the City of
Pasco, its Planning Commission and Planning Department to insure compliance with the
Pasco Zoning Code, and all other local, state and federal laws relating to the use and
development of the above described property; and
WHEREAS, the City, in addition to civil and criminal sanctions available by law,
desires to enforce the rights and interests of the public by this concomitant agreement, NOW,
THEREFORE,
In the event the above-described property is rezoned by the City of Pasco to C-1
(Retail Business) and in consideration of that event should it occur, and subject to the terms
and conditions hereinafter stated, the applicant does hereby covenant and agree as follows:
1. The Owner(s) promise to comply with all of the terms of the agreement in the
event the City, as full consideration herein grants a rezone on the above-described property.
2. The Owner(s) agrees to perform the terms set forth in Section 4 of this agreement.
3. This agreement shall be binding on their heirs, assigns, grantees or successors in
interest of the Owner(s) of the property herein described.
4. Conditions:
1) Uses shall be limited to offices and restaurants;
2) Hours of operation shall be limited to 6:00 am to 9:00pm
cc
3) An additional ingress and egress driveway for lots 10 and 11 shall
be provided through Lot 9 to Agate Street;
4) The 10 landscaping buffer along 201h Avenue shall be bermed a
minimum of 2 feet in the center of the buffer;
5) Parking lot lighting and exterior building lighting shall be designed
to remain on site;
6) Signage shall be limited to wall signs and one freestanding pedestal
sign;
7) Site development must conform to the landscaping code.
8) No taverns, membership clubs, lounges, or similar uses shall be
permitted.
5. Legal Description:
Lots 9, 10 and 11 Sprouse addition together with the east half of the
adjacent vacated alley
The person(s) whose names are subscribed herein do hereby certify that they are the
sole holders of fee simple interest in the above-described property:
Owners:
STATE OF WASHINGTON)
) ss.
County of Franklin )
On this day personally appeared before me
to me known to be the individual(s) who
executed the within and foregoing instrument on the lines above their/his typed names and
acknowledged they/he signed the as their/his free and voluntary act and deed
for the uses and purposes therein mentioned.
Given under my hand and official seal of day of
, 200 .
Notary Public in and for the State
of Washington, residing at
CONCOMITANT ZONING AGREEMENTPAGE 2 OF 3
The agent of the corporation whose name is subscribed herein does hereby certify that
the corporation is the sole holder of fee simple interest in the above-described property.
Owner:
By:
STATE OF WASHINGTON)
) ss.
County of Franklin )
On this day personally appeared before me
to me known to be
the of the corporation that executed the
within and foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that said instrument to be the free and
voluntary act and deed of said corporation for the uses and purposes therein mentioned and
on oath stated that he was authorized to execute said instrument.
Given under my hand and official seal this day of ,
200
Notary Public in and for the State
of Washington, residing at
CONCOMITANT ZONING AGREEMENTPAGE 3 OF 3
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
MASTER FILE NO: Z06-001 APPLICANT: Aissata Sidibe
HEARING DATE: 11/ 16/06 299 Lasiandra Court
ACTION DATE: 12/21/06 Pasco, WA 99301
BACKGROUND
REQUEST: Rezone from O (Office) to C-1 (Retail Business)
1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:
Legal: Lots 9-11, Block 3, Sprouse Add together with the vacated alleys
less street right-of-way.
General Location: Northwest corner of N. 20th Ave. and W. Agate St.
Property Size: Approximately 26,000 sq. ft.
2. ACCESS: The property has access to N. 20th Ave and Agate St.
3. UTILITIES: All municipal utilities are available to the site.
4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The site is currently zoned O (Office District)
as is the adjacent property to the north. The adjacent property to the
west is zoned R-3 (Medium Density Residential). Property across N. 20th
Ave. is currently zoned R-1 (Low Density Residential) and across W.
Agate St. to the south is currently zoned O (Office). The closest property
zoned C-1 (Retail Commercial) is located at the intersection of N. 20th
Ave. and Ruby St., one block south of this location. Land use of the
surrounding properties is as follows:
NORTH- Office
SOUTH- W. Agate St. and an Office building
EAST- N. 20th Ave. and single family residential homes
WEST- Apartment building
5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan designates this area
for commercial uses.
6. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: This proposal has been issued a
determination of nonsignificance in accordance with review under the
State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), Chapter 43.21(c) RCW.
ANALYSIS
The applicant is seeking to rezone the property in question from the office zone
to the retail business zone to allow redevelopment of the property for a
restaurant. The applicant is proposing to remodel the house on Lots 9 and 10,
into a restaurant facility.
In 1998 the property was considered for a possible rezone from a residential
district classification to the C-1 (Retail Business) classification. Following the
conduct of a public hearing the Planning Commission recommended the
property be rezoned to the "O" (Office) classification. The Planning
Commission previously reasoned that the "O" designation was consistent with
the Comprehensive Plan and would have fewer impacts on the surrounding
residential uses than a C-1 designation. Following an appeal by the previous
rezone applicant the City Council rezoned the property to "O".
While the Comprehensive Plan designates the proposed site for commercial
uses the policies of the Plan encourage the nodal concept for commercial
development (commercial development around key intersections rather
stretched out along arterial streets) and the need to protect the value or
character of existing residential neighborhoods.
In reviewing this proposed rezone the Planning Commission will need to
considered whether there have been any changing conditions within the
neighborhood that would warrant the property being rezoned
The initial review criteria for considering a rezone application are explained in
PMC. 25.88.030. The criteria are listed below as follows:
1. The changed conditions in the vicinity which warrant other or additional
zoning:
• The intersection of 20th and Court Street has been significantly
redeveloped since 1998.
• The vacant lot south of the proposed rezone area has been
developed with a commercial office building, parking lot and
landscaping.
• The Chase commercial office complex at the corner of Ruby and
20th Ave. has been remodeled.
2
• The office building (Pasco Vision Clinic) at the northwest corner of
20th and Pearl has been rebuilt and enlarged.
• The house at 1935 West Agate (across 20th from the proposed
rezone site) has been remodeled.
• Since the property was rezoned in 1998 one new office building has
been constructed directly south of the rezone site and two existing
office buildings have been totally rebuilt.
• The property at the northwest corner of 20th and Court St. has
been redeveloped with a Walgreens store
• The property at the northeast corner of 20th and Court St. has
been redeveloped with a small strip center.
2. Facts to justify the change on the basis of advancing the public health,
safety and general welfare.
The character of the area to the south and north has changed
dramatically with the construction or reconstruction of retail and office
buildings.
3. The effect it will have on the nature and value of adjoining property and
the Comprehensive Plan.
In comparison to office uses commercial retail uses involve greater levels
of parking lot illumination, extended hours of evening operations,
weekend activities and heavier traffic. The potential for increased
commercial activity may negatively impact the long established
surrounding residential neighborhoods. The negative effects could be
mitigated by restricting certain uses and hours of operation.
4. The effect on the property owner or owners if the request is not granted.
The current zoning permits office development with ancillary commercial
uses only. If the rezone was not granted the property could remain as it
is with residential dwellings or could be redeveloped with offices.
5. The Comprehensive land use designation for the property.
The Comprehensive Plan designates the site for commercial development.
The current "O" zoning supports the comprehensive Plan designation as
does the C-1 zone.
3
INTIAL STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT
Findings of fact must be entered from the record. The following are initial
findings drawn from the background and analysis section of the staff report.
The Planning Commission may add additional findings to this listing as the
result of factual testimony and evidence submitted during the open record
hearing.
1) The site is zoned "O" (Office).
2) The site was rezoned to the "O" District in 1998.
3) The site is located on 20th Avenue.
4) 20th Avenue is an arterial street.
5) The commercial properties at the corner of 20th and Court have redeveloped.
6) Since 1998 a new office building has been constructed directly south of the
proposed rezone site.
7) The Chase office complex to the south has been remodeled since 1998.
8) The Pasco Vision Clinic at the northwest corner of Pearl and 20th has been
rebuilt and expanded.
9) The Pasco Vision Clinic property was rezoned from residential to Office in
1998 at the same time as the property in question was rezoned to Office.
10) The property on the east side of 20th Ave. is developed with residential
dwellings.
11) Comprehensive Plan Policy LU-4-A encourages commercial development at
in such a manner as to avoid disruption of residential neighborhoods.
12) Comprehensive Plan Policy H-1-13 suggests the city ought to recognize and
protect the character of viable residential neighborhoods.
4
CONCLUSIONS BASED ON STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT
Before recommending approval or denial of a rezone the Planning Commission
must develop its conclusions from the findings of fact based upon the criteria
listed in P.M.C. 25.88.060. The criteria are as follows:
(1) The proposal is in accord with the goals and policies of the
comprehensive plan.
The goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan encourages
commercial development to be located a major intersections on
arterial streets such as at the intersection of Court Street and 20th
Avenue. The site is designated in the Comprehensive Pan for
commercial uses.
(2) The effect of the proposal on the immediate vicinity will be
materially detrimental.
Residential uses are located directly across 20th (single family) and
directly to the west (multi family) of the proposed rezone site. C-1
zoning permits a variety of commercial uses that are more intense by
nature than uses permitted in the existing "O" zone. C-1 uses can
have extended hours of operation and are sometimes open during
weekends. C-1 uses generally attract more traffic and produce
greater commotion, noise, light and glare than uses permitted in the
"O" district. C-1 uses would have to be conditioned to mitigate
possible detrimental impacts to surrounding residential uses.
(3) There is merit and value in the proposal for the community as a
whole.
The expanding commercial development can have a positive impact
upon the city as a whole, through job creation and increasing the tax
base.
(4) Conditions should be imposed in order to mitigate any significant
adverse impacts from the proposal.
Based on the findings of fact a number of conditions would be
necessary to mitigate adverse impacts.
5
(5) A concomitant agreement should be entered into between the City
and the petitioner, and if so, the terms and conditions of such an
agreement.
A concomitant agreement would be necessary to ameliorate any
adverse impacts associated with typical C-1 uses.
RECOMMENDATION
MOTION: I move the Planning Commission adopt the Findings of Fact as
contained in the December 21, 2006 staff report.
MOTION: I move, based on the findings of fact as adopted, the Planning
Commission recommend the City Council rezone the site from "O"
(Office) to C-1 (Retail Business) with conditions restricting uses to
offices and restaurants with hours of operation limited to 6 am
through 9:00 pm. Ingress and egress shall be provided only from
Agate Street to the south; Signage shall be limited to wall signs on
the building and one freestanding pedestal sign; Parking lot
lighting and exterior lighting shall be designed to remain on site;
and finally the landscaping buffer along 20th Ave shall be bermed a
minimum of 2 feet in the center. In all other respects site
development must conform to the landscaping code.
6
z
aAd H161 N
ct
JAd HZOZ N ---- -- _ -
7k
ct
� v anb IS t z N ---- ---
.�' Q, end QNZZ N
ct
NO
ON M
aAV CINZZ N -TA
Zoning Item: Rezone from "O" to C- 1
Map Applicant: Sidibe & Durham N
File #: Z 06-001
W OPAL ST
w
I
R- 1 R-3 j I
I
w
w - SITE w
N > ! R- 1 {
Q W AGATE ST
NI 11 011 � I
1
W RUBY ST
RUBY ST ► I
I I
C
I ` C- 1
fl
W COURT ST
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
11/16/06
A. Rezone Twentieth Avenue Rezone (Aissata Sidibe) (1712
N. 20th Avenue) (MF # Z06-001)
Chairman McCollum read the master file number and asked for the Staff
report.
Staff stated notice of the proposed rezone had been published in the newspaper
and mailed to property owners within 300 feet of the site. The location of the
proposed rezone was the northwest corner of 20th Avenue and Agate Street.
The request was to rezone the property from it's current O (Office) designation
to C-1 (Business Retail), which would allow the property to be developed as a
restaurant.
Staff discussed the recent property improvements that have occurred in the
neighborhood such as at 20th and Court and at 20th and Pearl. Extensive
redevelopment has taken place at the intersection of Court St. and 20th Ave.
South of the proposed rezone site, an existing office complex has been
renovated, and a new office building has been constructed. These changes in
the neighborhood have resulted in expanded commercial uses being located
around the Court Street/20th Ave intersection, with office uses extending north
of Court Street along 20th Avenue. Surrounding land uses include residential
single-family, residential multi-family and office uses.
Staff reviewed the surrounding land uses and discussed Comprehensive Plan
policies. The Comprehensive Plan encourages commercial development to be
located at intersections of arterial streets and specifically discourages strip
development. Staff also explained a similar rezone request involving this
property was submitted in 1998; at that time, it was determined that the
commercial zone should be limited to the area around the intersection of Court
St. and 20th Ave, with the office zoning extending north along 20th Ave.
Commissioner Samuel asked how the property is currently being used.
Staff responded that the property's current use is residential.
Commissioner Schouviller asked if there was a turn lane in front of the
property.
Staff responded that there is no turning lane.
Chairman McCollum opened the Public Hearing and asked if there was anyone
present who wished to speak on this matter.
James Ortega, Kennewick, WA addressed the Commission and explained that
he owns and operates the Sandstone Cafe in Kennewick. Mr. Ortega stated
that he would like to open a similar establishment on the property under
consideration for rezoning. He plans to initially operate the restaurant from
6:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. seven days a week; as they become more established
they would extend their hours to 9:00 p.m., Tuesday through Saturday. He
stated that the existing house on the property was empty.
Commissioner McCollum asked if Mr. Ortega owns the property.
Mr. Ortega responded that he would enter into a long-term lease with the
current owner.
Commissioner Schouviller asked Mr. Ortega to repeat the hours of operation
for the restaurant if it is approved.
Mr. Ortega responded that they would be open 6:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m., seven
days a week. He noted that the only days they would be closed are Christmas
and Thanksgiving. As the restaurant becomes more established, they would
extend the hours to 9:00 p.m.; he added that they would always be a liquor free
establishment.
Commissioner Schouviller asked what the proposed seating capacity would be.
Mr. Ortega stated that his designer believes they can accommodate 84 people.
Commissioner Schouviller then asked how the property is set up for vehicle
parking.
Mr. Ortega responded that there is a large gravel lot in front of the property, as
well as other open space for parking.
Commissioner Samuel asked if the existing house will be demolished or
renovated.
Mr. Ortega stated that they will renovate the existing building.
Clarence Baumgartner, Pasco introduced himself as a the realtor assisting with
the project. He stated that N. 20th Avenue is centrally located and provides
service opportunities to many other areas. He has surveyed residents of the
community and has found them to be supportive of further commercial
development in this area of town.
Aissata Sidibe stated she was the owner of the property. She enjoys having
breakfast at Sandstone Cafe and would like to have a similar restaurant close
to the college, where she works. She believed that along with her tenant they
will create a nice facility for the neighborhood.
Commissioner Samuel asked if Ms. Sidibe knows the property owner to the
north of the site.
Ms. Sidibe responded that the property to the north is being utilized as a
Veterinary Clinic.
Mr. Baumgartner stated that the property owners live in Richland, and that
they are in favor of the rezone.
After three calls for public comment the Chairman closed the Public Hearing.
Commissioner Samuel asked staff if the City has a standard regarding the
amount of parking required for an 84-seat restaurant.
Staff responded that the parking requirements were based upon the square
footage of the building rather than the number of seats. For a restaurant, one
parking space is required for every 100 square feet of floor area.
Commissioner Samuel asked what the square footage of existing building was.
Mr. Baumgartner responded 2400 square feet, including the garage area.
Staff stated the building would require 24 parking spaces, as well as a ten-foot
landscape buffer at the front and rear of the property.
Staff explained the issue under consideration was a rezone from O to C-1, not
to approve a restaurant use on the site. If the property was rezoned, a different
party could purchase the property and put in a tire store, a tavern, or any type
of retail business allowed in a C-1 zone. The Commission could require,
through the zoning recommendation process, a Concomitant Agreement that
would limit the uses allowed on the property.
Mr. Ortega responded that they would be comfortable with restrictive zoning
being applied to the property.
Commissioner Anderson stated that the only way he would consider voting for
the approval of this rezone is with very restrictive language limiting the uses
that would be allowed on the site.
Ms. Sidibe responded that she had no intention of selling the property; she also
does not intend to disturb her neighbors, but rather to serve them.
Commissioner Samuel stated that he agreed with Commissioner Anderson that
strong restrictions would need to be placed upon the use of the site prior to his
voting in favor of the rezone. He also questions the safety of access on and off
of 20th Ave. in this location.
Staff responded that the rezone application includes the property to the south
of the existing residence. A condition could be placed upon the project
eliminating access to the site from 20th Ave., and placing the access to the site
off Agate.
Commissioner Samuel noted that there has been a lot of very positive
development along 20th Ave. He is in favor of continuing to encourage business
in the area, especially in light of the fact that safe access could be provided to
the site off Agate. He added that with strict restrictions on the use, he would
be in favor of approving the project.
Commissioner Samuel moved to close the hearing on the proposed rezone,
initiate deliberations and schedule adoption of Findings of Facts, Conclusions
and a Recommendation to the City Council for the December 21, 2006 meeting.
Commissioner Anderson seconded the motion; motion carried.
Staff reviewed possible conditions that the Commission has requested be placed
upon the rezone: a Concomitant Agreement addressing issues of constricting
allowable uses, hours of operation, ingress and egress, signage, lighting and to
provide general protection to the neighborhood.
Commissioner Little asked for confirmation that these conditions would apply
to anyone who would lease the property.
Staff responded that the agreement would "run with the land" and apply to any
future owners or lessee.
Planning Commission Minutes 12/21/06
A. Rezone Twentieth Avenue Rezone (Aissata Sidibe) (1712
N. 20th Avenue) (MF# Z06-001)
Staff addressed the Commission and reminded them that a Public Hearing
regarding this item was held at the last meeting. As a result of that Hearing,
the Commission directed Staff to develop findings and a recommendation for a
possible rezone of this property with some conditions. At the Hearing, a
question was asked regarding access to the site off of N. 20th Ave. Staff noted
that there is an existing turn lane in N. 20t1, Ave. Staff prepared a concomitant
zoning agreement detailing the conditions to be placed upon the rezone for the
Commission's review.
Commissioner McCollum stated that he felt that the turn lane on N. 20th Ave.
adequately addressed the concerns expressed by the Commission regarding
access to the site.
Staff commented that the volume of traffic that would be utilizing this site
could warrant a secondary access, off of Agate St.
Commissioner Samuel asked of the issue of limiting alcohol had been
addressed.
Staff responded that Item #1 on the concomitant agreement limits the use of
the property to offices and restaurants. A restaurant is allowed to have a
lounge; which would allow the sale of wine and beer at the tables.
Commissioner Anderson stated that the applicant had stated that he would not
have alcohol in his restaurant; he does not feel that this issue needs to be
addressed.
Staff commented that if the applicant sells the restaurant, the new owner could
have a lounge in the restaurant.
Commissioner McCollum stated that he would like to have the use limited to
restaurant only - without alcohol.
Staff responded that an eighth condition could be added to prohibit taverns,
membership clubs, lounges and any similar activity.
Commissioner Anderson moved to adopt the findings of fact and conclusions
there from as contained in the December 21, 2006 staff report. Commissioner
Samuel seconded. Motion carried unanimously.
Commissioner Anderson moved based on the findings of fact as adopted the
Planning Commission recommend the City Council rezone the site from "O"
Office to C-1 Retail Business with conditions as discussed in the attached
Concomitant Agreement. Commissioner Samuel seconded. Motion carried
unanimously.
AGENDA REPORT NO. 6
FOR: City Council DATE: January 9, 2007
TO: Gary Crutchfie y anager WORKSHOP:
Richard J. Smi irector REGULAR: 1/16/07
Community an Economic Development
FROM: David I. McDonald, City Planner
SUBJECT: Rezone from R-T (Residential Transition) to R-1 (Low Density
Residential.) for Coles Estates (Helmes Development) (MF# Z06-002)
I. REFERENCE[SI:
A. Proposed Rezone Ordinance
B. Planning Commission Report
C. Planning Commission Minutes: Dated 11/ 16/06 & 12/21/06
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
MOTION: I move to approve Ordinance No. granting a
rezone for lots in Coles Estates from R-T to R-1 with a concomitant
agreement as recommended by the Planning Commission, and,
further to authorize publication by summary only.
III. FISCAL IMPACT: NONE
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
A. On November 16, 2006 the Planning Commission conducted a public
hearing to determine whether or not to recommend a rezone from R-T to R-
1 for nine lots in Coles Estates. Coles Estates is located north of Sandifur
Parkway and east of the Heritage Village and the Vintage Village
subdivisions.
B. Following the conduct of a public hearing, the Planning Commission
reasoned that with conditions it would be appropriate to recommend a
change in zoning for the property in question. The proposed conditions
are included in the attached concomitant agreement.
C. No written appeal of the Planning Commission's recommendation has
been received.
V. DISCUSSION:
VI. ADMINSTRATIVE ROUTING:
8(c)
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE of the City of Pasco, Washington, Amending the
Zoning Classification of Certain Real Property
Located within Coles Estates from R-T (Residential
Transition) to R-1 (Low Density Residential) with a
Concomitant Agreement.
WHEREAS, a complete and adequate petition for change of zoning
classification has been received and an open record hearing having been
conducted by the Pasco Planning Commission upon such petition; and,
WHEREAS, based upon substantial evidence and demonstration of the
Petitioner, that: (A) the requested change for the zoning classification is
consistent with the adopted Comprehensive Plan; (B) the requested change in
zoning classification is consistent with or promotes the goals and objectives of
the Comprehensive Plan serving the general public interest in the community;
and (C) there has been a change in the neighborhood or community needs or
circumstances warranting the requested change of the zoning classification in
that municipal infrastructure is available to the neighborhood. There has also
been a shifted from agricultural functions to residential within the area; (D)
the request for change in zoning classification was issued a Determination of
Nonsignificance under the Washington State Environmental Policy Act; and
(E) the effect of the requested change in zoning classification will not be
materially detrimental to the immediate vicinity, NOW, THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON DO
ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That the Zoning Ordinance for the City of Pasco, Washington,
and the Zoning Map, accompanying and being part of said Ordinance shall be
and hereby is changed from R-T (Residential Transition) to R-1 (Low Density
Residential) for the real property as shown in the Exhibit "1" attached hereto
and described as follows:
Lots 1, 2, 3, 4 and Lots 13, 14, 15, 16 and 17, Coles Estates
Section 2. That the change of a zoning classification as provided in
Section 1 is contingent, and conditioned upon execution and compliance with
a Concomitant Agreement entered into between the Petitioner and the City
which will attach to and run with the real property described in Section 1
above. Said Concomitant Agreement is attached to this Ordinance as Exhibit
No. "2".
Section 3. This ordinance shall take full force and effect five (5) days after
its approval, passage and publication as required by law.
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco, Washington, and
approved as provided by law this 16th day of January 2007.
Joyce Olson
Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO
FORM:
Sandy Kenworthy Leland B. Kerr
Deputy City Clerk City Attorney
E-
TMb
rA
-- _
o
rn -
Fl j
LI I�L T-
Q
f � �
a
O Z
U �U
1 A2T.W$A00
._ fo
■—
10 NOAHQ t iSIGMA
ZS
1C L d
W
NZ ZIS I3}C3 IS CrdOdagg _
CITY OF PASCO
SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO.
ORDINANCE NO. , rezones Lots 1-4 & 13-17 Coles Estates from RT
(Residential Transition) to R-1 (Low Density Residential) With a concomitant
agreement.
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.
Sandy Kenworthy, Deputy City Clerk
"Exhibit# 2"
CONCOMITANT ZONING AGREEMENT
WHEREAS, the City of Pasco, Washington, a non-charter code city, under the laws
of the State of Washington (Chapter 35A.63 R.C.W. and Article 11, Section 11 of the
Washington State Constitution) has authority to enact laws and enter into agreements to
promote the health, safety and welfare of its citizens, and thereby control the use and
development of property within its jurisdiction; and
WHEREAS, the Owner(s) of certain property have applied for a rezone of such
property described below within the City's jurisdiction; and
WHEREAS, the City pursuant to R.C.W. 43.12(c), the State Environmental Policy
Act, should mitigate any adverse impacts which might result because of the proposed rezone;
and
WHEREAS, the City of Pasco and the Owner(s) are both interested in compliance
with the Pasco Municipal Code provisions relating to the use and development of property
situated in the City of Pasco, described as follows:
(SEE PAGE 2,#5, LEGAL DESCRIPTION)
WHEREAS, the Owner(s) have indicated willingness to cooperate with the City of
Pasco, its Planning Commission and Planning Department to insure compliance with the
Pasco Zoning Code, and all other local, state and federal laws relating to the use and
development of the above described property; and
WHEREAS, the City, in addition to civil and criminal sanctions available by law,
desires to enforce the rights and interests of the public by this concomitant agreement, NOW,
THEREFORE,
In the event the above-described property is rezoned by the City of Pasco to R-1 (Low
Density Residential) and in consideration of that event should it occur, and subject to the
terms and conditions hereinafter stated, the applicant does hereby covenant and agree as
follows:
1. The Owner(s) promise to comply with all of the terms of the agreement in the
event the City, as full consideration herein grants a rezone on the above-described property.
2. The Owner(s) agrees to perform the terms set forth in Section 4 of this agreement.
3. This agreement shall be binding on their heirs, assigns, grantees or successors in
interest of the Owner(s) of the property herein described.
4. Conditions:
1) The minimum lot size for Lots 15, 16, and 17 Coles Estates shall
be 9,000 square feet;
2) The minimum lot size for Lots 13, 14, and Lots 1, 2, 3, and 4 Coles
Estates shall be 8,500 square feet;
5. Legal Description:
Lots 1, 2, 3, 4 and Lots 13, 14, 15, 16, and 17 Coles Estates
The person(s) whose names are subscribed herein do hereby certify that they are the
sole holders of fee simple interest in the above-described property:
Owners:
STATE OF WASHINGTON)
) ss.
County of Franklin )
On this day personally appeared before me
to me known to be the individual(s) who
executed the within and foregoing instrument on the lines above their/his typed names and
acknowledged they/he signed the as their/his free and voluntary act and deed
for the uses and purposes therein mentioned.
Given under my hand and official seal of day of
200_.
Notary Public in and for the State
of Washington, residing at
The agent of the corporation whose name is subscribed herein does hereby certify that
the corporation is the sole holder of fee simple interest in the above-described property.
Owner:
By:
STATE OF WASHINGTON)
) ss.
County of Franklin )
CONCOMITANT ZONING AGREEMENTPAGE 2 OF 3
On this day personally appeared before me
to me known to be
the of the corporation that executed the
within and foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that said instrument to be the free and
voluntary act and deed of said corporation for the uses and purposes therein mentioned and
on oath stated that he was authorized to execute said instrument.
Given under my hand and official seal this day of ,
200
Notary Public in and for the State
of Washington, residing at
CONCOMITANT ZONING AGREEMENTPAGE 3 OF 3
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
MASTER FILE NO: Z06-002 APPLICANT: Helmes Development
HEARING DATE: 11/ 16/06 11815 NE 113th
ACTION DATE: 12/21/06 Vancouver, WA 98662
BACKGROUND
REQUEST: Rezone from R-T (Residential Transition) to R-1 (Low Density
Residential)
1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:
Legal: Lots 1-4 and 13-17 Coles Estates
General Location: North of Sandifur Parkway between Broadmoor
Estates and Heritage Village.
Property Size: Approximately 32 acres
2. ACCESS: The property has access Lasalle Dr. to the east and Wellington
Dr. to the west.
3. UTILITIES: All municipal utilities are located in the adjoining
subdivisions to the east and west. Utilities are also located to the south
in Sandifur Parkway.
4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The site is currently zoned R-T (Residential
Transition). Properties to the north in the county are zoned AP-20
(Agricultural Product) Properties directly to the south in the City are
zoned R-T. The subdivisions to the east and west are zoned R-1 (Low
Density Residential) adjacent property to the west is zoned R-3 (Medium
Density Residential). Land use of the surrounding properties is as
follows:
NORTH- Farm circle
SOUTH- Vacant (Two office buildings are currently under construction
along Sandifur Parkway
EAST- Heritage Village subdivision (single family)
WEST- Boradmoor Estates subdivision (single family)
5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan designates this area
for low density residential uses.
6. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: This proposal has been issued a
determination of nonsignificance in accordance with review under the
State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), Chapter 43.21(c) RCW.
ANALYSIS
The applicant is seeking to rezone the property in question from R-T to R-1
with the goal of continuing the Broadmoor Estates subdivision to the east.
This would essentially be an infill development between two existing
subdivisions (Broadmoor Estates on the west and Heritage Village on the east).
At the time the Comprehensive Plan was developed there was no development
in the I-182 corridor, except for the Desert Plateau/Riverview Heights
neighborhood. The plan envisioned development would occur radially from the
major interchange nodes of Road 68 and Road 100. Through the
implementation of land use regulations development has expanded as planned
from the interchange nodes. In the early 1990's the City extended and
expanded infrastructure facilities to support urban development in the I-182
corridor.
The City's land use plans for the last 25 years have indicated the property in
question should be utilized for low-density (single family) residential
development. Following the direction of the land use plan most of the
community's low density residential development over the last two decades has
occurred in the I-182 corridor. Rezoning the site would support past
community development efforts in infrastructure improvements and land
development and comprehensive planning efforts.
The property is currently zoned R-T (Residential Transition). The R-T zone is
applied to those properties in the city that are essentially undeveloped but
ultimately intended for suburban or urban residential uses (PMC 25.20.010).
Hence the title "Residential Transition". As utility extensions are made and
residential development expands, vacant lands designated for low density
residential uses in the Comprehensive Plan are to be transitioned through the
rezone process from the holding status under the R-T District to a low density
district such as the R-1 low density residential district.
The applicant is proposing to rezone the site in question to R-1 which would
permit residential development on lots that are 7,200 square feet or larger.
While the adjoining subdivisions are zoned R-1 they are developed at a density
lower than the permitted 7,200 square foot level. The average lot size for
2
Heritage village is 8,500 square feet and the average lot size for Broadmoor
Estates is 10,000 with a minimum of no less than 8,500 square feet.
When discussing a possible rezone for the property in question the Planning
Commissions needs to consider the intended and existing character of the
surrounding neighborhoods, in this case the two adjoining subdivisions. To
protect and enhance the establish character of the neighborhood the zoning
establish for the site in question should be compatible with the adjoining
single family zoning with respect to lot size.
In reviewing this proposed rezone the Planning Commission will need to
considered whether there have been any changing conditions within the
neighborhood that would warrant the property being rezoned
The initial review criteria for considering a rezone application are explained in
PMC. 25.88.030. The criteria are listed below as follows:
1. The changed conditions in the vicinity which warrant other or additional
zoning:
• Since 2001 two residential subdivisions have been built to the east
and west of the proposed rezone site.
• In the past five years utilities have been extended through the
adjoining subdivisions.
• Streets have been constructed on properties to the east and west in
the last 5 years.
• Midland Lane has been extended north from Sandifur Parkway.
• All properties east and west of the site have previously been
rezoned for low density residential development and are in various
stages of development.
• Most of the recent growth in the community has been occurring in
the I-182 Corridor.
• A new elementary school has been constructed to the east on Road
84.
2. Facts to justify the change on the basis of advancing the public health,
safety and general welfare.
The character of the area will be maintained by grouping compatible
zoning together. This will ensure any future development on the site in
question will occur at the same densities as adjoining neighborhoods.
3
Rezoning the property will eventually lead to the looping of utilities for
safety and reliability. These improvements will advance the general
welfare of the community.
Development of the property will eliminate wild fire hazards that are
common on weedy vacant tract in the Tri-cities.
3. The effect it will have on the nature and value of adjoining property and
the Comprehensive Plan.
The proposed rezone is supported by the comprehensive plan and would
be considered a proper implementation of the plan. The proposed rezone
would protect the established character of the nearby neighborhoods and
thereby the nature and value of the neighboring properties because the
proposed zoning is identical to zoning on surrounding developed lands.
Pasco has experienced substantial residential growth over the last five
years. Few neighborhoods west of Road 36 have not been impacted by
this growth. A search of the Franklin County Assessor's records in early .
January 2006 revealed that residential property values have risen since
the last County revaluation process over four years ago. Franklin
County Assessor records indicate that even in locations where new
subdivisions have been developed adjacent long established
neighborhoods the values of properties in the established neighborhoods
have risen. Wilson Addition is an example of an established
neighborhood that is now bordered by a new subdivision with smaller
lots. According to Franklin County records property values in the Wilson
Addition increased after the development of an adjacent vacant farm
field. Other neighborhoods such as River Homes also experienced
property value increases after the adjoining field was developed with the
higher density neighborhood of Ivy Glades PUD.
4. The effect on the property owners or owners if the request is not granted.
The existing RT zoning permits the development of one single family
dwelling per five acres. The current zoning severely limits the
opportunity to fully develop the land consistent with the Comprehensive
Plan. Developing one dwelling per five acres is cost prohibitive given the
requirement to connect to water and sewer utilities.
5. The Comprehensive land use designation for the property.
4
The Comprehensive Plan designates the site for low density residential
development. The proposed rezone is for low density residential.
INTIAL STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT
Findings of fact must be entered from the record. The following are initial
findings drawn from the background and analysis section of the staff report.
The Planning Commission may add additional findings to this listing as the
result of factual testimony and evidence submitted during the open record
hearing.
1.) The site is within the Pasco Urban Growth Boundary.
2) Urban growth is to be located within the urban growth boundary.
3) Comprehensive Plans for over 2 decades or more have set the site in
question aside for low density residential development.
4) The applicant petitioned for R-1 (Low Density Residential) zoning for the 32
acres.
5) Surrounding subdivisions are zoned R-1.
6) The R-1 district regulations have a minimum lot size requirement of 7,200
square feet.
7) Properties to the east and west were rezoned for single family development
with minimum lot sizes ranging from 8,500-10,000 square feet.
8) Section 3.15, Volume II of the Comprehensive Plan describes low density
residential development as 2 to 5 dwelling units per acre.
9) Section 3.15, Volume II of the Comprehensive Plan encourages development of
lands designated for low density residential uses when sewer is available, when
there is market demand and where land is suitable for home sites.
10) Utilities and streets have been extended to the east and west of the site.
5
11) The Broadmoor Estates to the west and Heritage Village to the east are zoned
R-1.
12) Broadmoor Estates and Heritage Village were zoned with conditions on lot
size.
13) Comprehensive Plan Policy LU-3-C encourages development to expand in a
progressive and efficient manner.
14) Comprehensive Plan Policy H-3-B encourages the advancement of
homeownership.
15) Comprehensive Plan Policy H-2 suggests the city strive to maintain a
variety of housing options for residents of the community.
16) Comprehensive Plan Policy H-1-B supports the protection and
enhancement of the established character of viable residential
neighborhoods.
17) There is a market demand for housing. Over 1,000 building permits were
issued for single family homes for each of the last two years. Permits for
over 700 new homes have been issued so far this year.
18) The property is currently zoned R-T Residential Transition.
19) The purpose statement of the R-T District (PMC 25.20) indicates that R-T
zoned properties are to ultimately be developed with suburban or urban
residential development.
20) The R-1 District is a suburban residential zoning classification.
CONCLUSIONS BASED ON STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT
Before recommending approval or denial of a rezone the Planning Commission
must develop its conclusions from the findings of fact based upon the criteria
listed in P.M.C. 25.88.060. The criteria are as follows:
(1) The proposal is in accord with the goals and policies of the
comprehensive plan.
6
The proposal is consistent with the land use designations and
policies of the Comprehensive Plan. Low density residential
development on the property in question has been envisioned and
encouraged by the Comprehensive Plan for over two decades. R-1
zoning is consistent with the low density residential land use
designation of the plan. Plan Policy LU-3-C encourages development
to expand in a progressive and efficient manner. This proposal would
permit the extension of single family development easterly and
westerly from the existing development and would act as catalyst for
infill development.
(2) The effect of the proposal on the immediate vicinity will be
materially detrimental.
The uses permitted (single family dwellings) by the proposed zoning
are identical to the uses in the adjacent subdivisions to the east and
west. This rezone will not be materially detrimental to surrounding
properties because it can be considered an extension of the existing
residentially zoning on surrounding properties. As this site develops
the associated improvements will provide secondary benefits to
neighboring subdivisions. For example the looping of the utilities will
provide reliability and safety for neighboring properties.
(3) There is merit and value in the proposal for the community as a
whole.
The proposal has merit because it is consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan and allows a use (single family development)
that was anticipated by the Comprehensive Plan and by the fact that
it was set aside under the R-T district regulations for the ultimate
transition to urban residential zoning district. Comprehensive Plan
Policy H-3-B encourages the advancement of homeownership. This
rezone supports Plan Policy H-3-B by expanding opportunities for the
construction of new housing for the community. The proposal has
merit because it will permit infill development that has been
bypassed by development.
The proposal will lead to residential development as envisioned in
the Comprehensive Plan that will cause the property to contribute
more fully to the support municipal services.
7
(4) Conditions should be imposed in order to mitigate any significant
adverse impacts from the proposal.
To create consistency with the adjoining subdivisions the proposed
rezone should be conditioned to require minimum lot sizes to
complement the adjoining subdivisions.
(5) A concomitant agreement should be entered into between the City
and the petitioner, and if so, the terms and conditions of such an
agreement.
A concomitant agreement should be entered into for the purpose of
establishing minimum lots sizes consistent with adjoining
subdivisions.
RECOMMENDATION
MOTION: I move the Planning Commission adopt the Findings of Fact as
contained in the December 21, 2006 staff report.
MOTION: I move, based on the findings of fact as adopted, the Planning
Commission recommend the City Council rezone the site from RT
(Residential Transition) to R-1 (Low Density Residential) with a
condition that no residential lot be smaller than 8,500 square feet
and the first row of lots adjacent Broadmoor Estates be a
minimum of 9,000 square feet.
8
u � y
W�W O
aG C
U
z ai.t
0
H a -
Q
� � - _ z
00 FF — o
H �
C W
(1) -- - -
LJO
Ko, I v i M H —
o z
a —
a
§iqll x ntanoo
° z
Q � o
5
� � o
o �
Io Nonaa 134 IsiaN3nd z
H�xaxa a is axoaas�
Land Item: Rezone from R-T to R- I
Use Applicant: Helmes Development Inc. N
Map_ File #: Z 06-002
Pasco City Limits _
FAIRFIELD DR
a H FE I
U
LL TON ZEPHYP CT TUCKER CT
A SFDU s z SITE
a
DUNSMUIR 14 DUNSMUIR DR H I S FDU's .H C
Z
A w
0
I
U
BROUGHTON DR
OVERLAND CT HUDSON Cr
VQdCENZO DR Future 1 LIJ
%Condos STUDEBAKER DR
MIA LN
Condos
PACKARD DR
Vacant
Vacant -SFDUs
HUDS N DR I
0 Mini—Storage IDESOTODR
w
Cn
Offices CORDDR
SA IFUR PKWY S,
T
v
0+ ZO
air
U -
d
i F¢,
-
TI
O it
FFTT I A
a� Ub UY-Ut -
o �
c N C) _1
-7P
a
1
b�A I v
a
10 MDASQ I SIQIaAd o M z
xz x x� a silo Loa
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
11/16/06
B. Rezone Broadmoor Estates Ph #4 (Helmes Development)
(various lots in Cole's Estates) (MF # Z06-002)
Chairman McCollum read the master file number and asked for the Staff
report.
Staff stated that notice of the proposed rezone had been printed in the
newspaper and mailed to property owners within 300 feet of the site. The
proposal involved a rezone to change the subject property from RT (Residential
Transition) to R-1 (Low Density Single-Family Residential.). The site is located
north of Sandifur Parkway and west of the new Heritage Village subdivision
and east of the Broadmoor Estates subdivision. The Comprehensive Plan
designates the area for low-density residential subdivisions. Staff explained
the RT zone is a "holding zone" that is applied to properties that are vacant and
do not yet have utilities nearby. As utilities become available, the property
should be transitioned to a low-density single family zoning designation. The
subdivisions adjacent to this site are zoned R-1 with concomitant agreements
regarding their lot sizes. The applicant wishes to rezone the property and
proceed with a preliminary plat for residential lots matching the existing
adjacent subdivisions in size.
Commissioner Samuel asked for confirmation that the hatch mark on the
Exhibit indicates the properties to be rezoned; other property would remain RT.
Staff confirmed that the only areas 'to be rezoned are those indicated by the
hatch marks.
Commissioner Samuel asked if one individual owns all of the subject
properties.
Staff responded that the proponent is acting on behalf of several property
owners, who have signed an agreement regarding rezoning and sale of the sites.
Chairman McCollum opened the Public Hearing and asked if there was anyone
present who wished to speak on this matter.
John Fetterolf of Hopper, Dennis Jelison Engineers, 6303 Burden Blvd. stated
he was present to represent Helmes Development, the proponent, and potential
developer of the properties proposed for rezoning. The supported the rezone
Commissioner Samuel asked for a status on the property west of this location.
Mr. Fetterolf stated that the property is part of Broadmoor Estates.
Staff added that this particular area has not been final platted yet.
Kelly Smith, 913 W 25th, Kennewick, WA introduced himself as one of the
owners of property that is zoned RT in the area, but not currently proposed for
rezoning. He would like clarification regarding future access to the area off of
Roads 90 and 92.
Staff responded that there will be access to the south, however the
configuration has not yet been determined. There will also be access points
connecting east and west into the existing subdivisions. Road 92 will extend
up to the residential area.
After three calls for public comment the Chairman closed the Public Hearing.
Commissioner Samuel moved to close the hearing on the proposed rezone,
initiate deliberations and schedule adoption of Findings of Facts, Conclusions
and a Recommendation to the City Council for the December 21, 2006 meeting.
Commissioner Hay seconded the motion; motion carried.
Planning Commission Minutes 12/21/06
B. Rezone Broadmoor Estates Ph #4 (Helmes Development)
(various lots in Cole's Estates) (MF# ZO6-002)
Staff addressed the Commission and reminded them that a Public Hearing
regarding this item was held at the last meeting. Staff noted that a
Concomitant Zoning Agreement has been prepared for this proposed rezone as
discussed in the public hearing. The agreement to require a minimum lot size
of 8,500 square feet for lots adjacent Heritage village and lots of 9,000 square
feet adjacent Broadmoor Estates.
Commissioner Anderson asked if the applicant is aware and in favor of the
conditions detailed in the concomitant agreement.
Staff responded that the applicant is in favor of the conditions of the
agreement.
Commissioner Samuel moved to adopt the findings of fact and conclusions
there from as contained in the December 21, 2006 staff report. Commissioner
Hay seconded. Motion carried unanimously.
Commissioner Samuel moved based on the findings of fact as adopted the
Planning Commission recommend the City Council rezone the site from "RT"
Residential Transition to R-1 Low Density Residential with conditions as
discussed in the attached Concomitant Zoning Agreement. Commissioner Hay
seconded. Motion carried unanimously.
AGENDA REPORT NO. 110
FOR: City Council Date: December 20, 2006
TO: Gary Crutchfi i Manager p Regular: 1/16/07
Richard J. Sm irector I"V
Community 8v conomic Development
FROM: Dave McDonald, City PlannePLr___
SUBJECT: Special Permit Appeal: Location of a Asphalt Batch Plant in the
Central Pre-Mix Pit (11919 Harris Rd) (MF # SP06-010)
I. REFERENCE(S1:
A. Appeal dated September 29, 2006
B. Staff Memo on the Appeal
C. Planning Commission Hearing Record
Binder 1: Correspondence
Binder 2: Application; SEPA Checklist, Scoping Meetings Notes
and News Articles, Notice of Application 8s DS, Final
EIS, Staff Report and Exhibits
Binder 3: City of Pasco Planning Commission Resource Notebook
Binder 4: Planning Commission Transcripts from the August 17,
2006 Public Hearing, the August 24, 2006 Public
Hearing and the September 29, 2006 Public Meeting
* Note: References and attachments are provided in the Council Packets only.
Copies of references are available in the Planning Office or at the Pasco Library
for public review.
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL/STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
A. Conduct a closed record hearing.
B. Council action based on the record (reports, correspondence,
transcripts) either:
1. Deny the Special Permit as recommended by the Planning
Commission, or
2. Remand the Special Permit back to the Planning
Commission for reconsideration and possible approval with
conditions.
C. Motions for Council Action
1. Motion for Denial (Recommended)
a. Motion for Findings: I move to adopt the findings of
fact and conclusions, as contained in the staff report
to the Planning Commission.
b. Motion on Special Permit: Based on the findings of fact
and conclusions therefrom, as adopted, I move to deny
the request by Central Pre-Mix and Dale Adams to
operate an asphalt batch plant at the Central Pre-Mix
pit off Harris Road.
2. Motion for Remand
a. I move to remand the Special Permit for the operation
of the asphalt plant back to the City Planning
Commission for additional consideration.
10(a)
III. FISCAL IMPACT
None.
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
A. On August 17, 2006 and August 24, 2006 the City Planning
Commission conducted a public hearing to consider a special
permit for the location of an asphalt plant to be operated by
Central Pre-Mix on property owned by Dale Adams. At the
September 21, 2006 meeting, the Planning Commission
recommended that the Special Permit be denied.
B. Attorneys for Central Pre-Mix and Dale Adams have filed a written
appeal of the Planning Commission recommendation of denial. A
closed record hearing has been scheduled for January 16, 2007 at
7:00 p.m.
V. DISCUSSION
A. Consideration of an appeal occurs in the form of a "Closed Record
Hearing" (a review of the written record of the Planning
Commission's deliberation and recommendation) conducted by the
Council at a public meeting. The review is necessarily closed to
additional evidence and testimony, unless Council finds
acceptance of such is essential to correct a substantive deficiency
in the record or a procedural error.
B. If after Council review of the record, they wish to accept the
Planning Commission recommendation and deny the appeal, the
motion for denial can be used.
If Council feels the Planning Commission recommendation is
inappropriate, the case can be remanded back to the Planning
Commission for reconsideration and possible approval with
appropriate findings and conditions.
AGENDA REPORT NO. I
FOR: City Council January 10, 2007
TO: Gary Crutch t Manager Regular Mtg.: 1/16/07
FROM: Robert J. Alber s, Public Works Director
SUBJECT: Acceptance of Transportation Improvement Board (TIB) Grant for
Walkways
I. REFERENCE(S):
1. Vicinity Map
2. Cross Sections
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL/STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
1/16 MOTION: I move to accept the TIB Grant of $231,000 for walkways
along Court Street between Roads 68 and 84.
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
Will save future City expenses of$231,000 for walkways on Court Street.
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
The City has received a TIB grant offer in the amount of$231,000 for walkways
along Court Street between Road 68 and Road 84. The offer requires City
matching funds in the amount of$81,000.
The walkways would be added to the 2007 Capital Improvement Program project
to reconstruct Court Street between Road 68 and Road 84. The road project with
a budget in excess of$600,000 would be the matching funds. The road project
consists of rebuilding Court Street west of Road 76 to two lanes with six foot
shoulders. Court Street east of Road 76 in front of the Ivy Glades Development
would remain a wider road section. In most areas, the walkways would be five
feet or more from the edge of pavement.
Staff recommends acceptance of the grant.
V. ADMINISTRATIVE ROUTING
Project File
10(b)
rx
--� �� �1tS
9c UVOM �T ;D Q i
� i
. 1 ;
W li_"
68 9 OR
�� y
i!
✓� _ /jJj1� r I I�y vv `� '`,F tFrr
t �Q T_ rri 1
kkk � i r 1
I QA'I[l 001 MOM
WGVORII
3
�n 3
x
I'
--- Z � r
f _= ° a
N Ux _
�n r
O
0.
� W
M r7 O
W O
rO N
L O
M� Ml
�LJ W
N Z
r4 5
J
1� Z (-4l =
0
WW w
La
0 C-41 N5
N 5
� O 3
U
W
0
W
O o
2 NZ
rein
N � J
U NU�
p Ox
V/ �
W Y
N Ox
N
f
U u) r
p
}
3
in =
a
rc
}
¢
3
� r
r
0.
3
AGENDA REPORT NO. 1
FOR: City Council Date: January 3, 2007
TO: Gary Crutchf y Manager Workshop: 1/8/017
Regular: 1/16/07
FROM: Richard J. Smi h, Director
Community & Economic De elopment
SUBJECT: North 4th Avenue Corridor Enhancements - Contract for
Engineering/Survey Services
I. REFERENCE(S):
A. Vicinity Map
B. Amendment No.2 to Professional Services Agreement
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL/STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
1/8 DISCUSSION
1/16 MOTION: I move to authorize Amendment No. 2 to the
February 22, 2006 Professional Services Agreement
with CH2M Hill Authorizing additional engineering
services, not to exceed $49,700, for North 41h Avenue
enhancements and authorizing the Mayor to sign the
Agreement.
III. FISCAL IMPACT
Approximately $49,700
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
A. The City and Chamber of Commerce collaborated several years ago to
identify a "Corridor Improvement Plan". The Plan identifies six major
entrance corridors into the City. The North 41h Avenue Corridor is one of
those major entranceways. The Plan calls for each of the entranceways
to undergo substantial improvements to include sidewalks, landscaping,
and street trees. The recommended plan for North 4th Avenue generally
extends the development concept of sidewalk, grass and street trees
utilized on both East and West Lewis Streets.
B. Conceptual sidewalk and landscape plans were developed and meetings
with adjacent property owners were conducted on November 22, 2005,
December 13, 2005, and April 4, 2006 to explain both the project and
the process to the property owners. The plans were revised to
incorporate many of the comments generated during these meetings.
C. The City of Pasco has signed right-of-way encroachment agreements with
three property owners allowing them to use portions of the right-of-way
for customer parking. These agreements were negotiated by City staff as
a response to preexisting conditions associated with the properties and
will have minimal impact on the enhancement plan.
D. On November 6, 2006, the City Council approved a resolution ordering
the installation of curbs/gutters and sidewalks on sections of North 4th
Avenue where they were not currently in place. The cost to adjacent
property owner will not exceed $10.00 per linear foot.
V. DISCUSSION:
A. To implement, the project bid documents and a survey must be
completed. The workload of the Engineering Division precludes them
from preparing documents in-house.
B. CH2M Hill, which is already under contract with the City to provide
engineering services, can provide these documents by April 15, 2006.
10(c)
Exhibit "A"
Oz
0
w �
5 1
r
I.
.wsw
N. 4th Avenue
�. .w
Improvement
Area
�waw :war w
�I
J
xaww
��11 � LWOw waw
..OClaA w
�r
V.i w
r
..rasa `'• .�
Exhibit "B"
AMENDMENT NUMBER 2 TO
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
WHEREAS, the City and CH2M Hill entered into a Professional Services Agreement on
February 22, 2005, with respect to on-going transportation and traffic management services.
NOW THEREFORE, this agreement is amended to allow CH2M Hill to provide
additional engineering services as described on Attachment A.
1. Scope of Work
Task A — Complete the location survey and base mapping on North 4"' Avenue
between Sylvester Street and the I-182 interchange utilizing the services and work
product of Permit Surveying as described in a November 29, 2006 letter from Daniel
Strasser(see Attachment A).
Task B — Provide Consulting services to assemble bid construction documents to
perform work delineated on the landscape architect's plan for North 4"' and described
in more detail in the December 5, 2006 letter from Anthony Krutsch, PE (see
Attachment A).
2. Fee
Task A & B —The added services by the consultant shall be for the lump sum total of
$49,700, including a direct subcontract charge from Permit Surveying of$12,000.
3. Time of Performance
Task A & B —The engineering services shall be complete for the project on or before
April 15, 2007.
DATED THIS DAY OF 12007.
CITY OF PASCO: CONSULTANT: CH2M Hill
Michael L. Garrison Signature Title
Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Sandy L. Kenworthy Leland B. Kerr
Deputy City Clerk City Attorney
CH2M Hill Page 1
Amendment No.2
Professional Services Agreement—On-going Services
Attachment "A"
CH211 HILL
8838 Gage Boulevard Suite 202A
Kennewick,WA 99336
Tel 509.736.9749
CH2M H I LL Fax 509.735.9732
December 5,2006
City of Pasco
525 North 3rd Avenue
Pasco,WA 99301
Subject: 4th Avenue Beautification Consulting Services Proposal
Dear Rich:
CH2M HILL hearby proposes to provide Consulting Services to the City of Pasco,
Washington,on its 4th Avenue Beautification Project from Sylvester Street to I-182 for the
lump sum total of$49,700,including a direct subconsultant charge from Permit Surveying
of$12,000. This work will provide the City with a set of bid documents on or before April
15,2007.
Please see attached Exhibit A for the scope of work that outlines our level of effort and
initial assumptions for this project.
We appreciate the opportunity to serve the City of Pasco. If you have further questions or
concerns about this proposal,please let us know.
cerel
thon H. NO,P.E.
CH2M HILL
12-05-06.4th Ave Proposal letter.doc
12-".4TH AVE PROPOSAL LETTER DOC
COPYRIGHT 2006 BY CH2M HILL,INC.•COMPANY CONFIDENTIAL
EXHIBIT A-PROPOSED SCOPE OF WORK
December 5,2006
The City of Pasco (City)is proceeding with a project to aesthetically improve a section of 4th
Avenue between Sylvester Street and I-182 through street hardscaping and landscaping.
The City retained the services of a landscape architect(LA) to ascertain what work should
be done. A long-plot drawing of the LA's concept has been given to CH2M HILL. This
scope of work is based on the LA's approved and accepted concept layout and content.
CH2M HILL will prepare the plans,technical specifications, and opinion of probable costs
to allow the City to advertise and open bids for construction.
CH2M HILL was asked to provide a estimate for consulting services to assemble bid
construction documents to perform the work similar to what had been done on the East
Lewis Street Beautification Project,and the LA's concept drawing for 4th Avenue.
This scope of work includes providing to the City:
• Complete the location survey and base mapping on 4th Avenue between Sylvester and I-
182 utilizing the services and work product of Permit Surveying
• Prepare a base map in AutoCad for use in the preparation of design drawings for this
project
• Prepare 20 Civil and Irrigation Drawings utilizing the LA's concept drawing for 4th
Avenue. One review will be completed at approximately 50% completion. The City will
have one two-week review period lead by the City starting in early March. Comments
will be incorporated as appropriate and final plans will be prepared. Technical
specifications will be prepared and included with the final plans utilizing the City of
Pasco standard specifications (Pasco standard specifications to be provided to
CH2M HILL in electronic format for editing). Quantities will be developed from the
design drawings based on the specification requirements for bidding. A bid tabulation
spreadsheet will be prepared,and an opinion of probable cost will be prepared at the
time of final submittal
• Telephone,Cable, Electric, and Gas Utilities will be contacted about type,size, and
locations of their main lines in the 4th Avenue Right of Way. Existing data from utility
company's, that may impact construction of the project, will be added to the design
plans for reference during design of the project
• The City is responsible for supplying known locations of Water,Sewer,Storm Drainage,
and City Irrigation along 4th Avenue to CH2M HILL within three weeks after the notice
to proceed is given
• The final submittal will include one set of reproducible Final Drawings,Specifications,
Summary of Quantities,and Opinion of Probable Construction Costs on or before April
15,2007
12-05-06.EXHIBIT A-PASCO 4TH AVE.DOC
COPYRIGHT 2006 BY CH2M HILL,INC.•COMPANY CONFIDENTIAL
Errorl Reference source not found.
Page 2
December 5,2006
Errorl Reference source not found.
This scope of work does not include the following;however,we would be willing to
negotiate on these items at any time if it becomes necessary to the City:
• Street or Utility profiles or grades
• Environmental Permitting or Mitigation
• Meetings with Landowners or Public Involvement
• Title reports,research,right-of-way negotiations,and deed revisions for right-of-way
acquisitions
• Preparation of the Bid Documents and advertisement of the project in accordance with
City policy.
• Assistance with the construction bidding and/or award process
• Preparation of Contract Documents for signatures
• Services During Construction
12-05-06.EXHIBIT A-PASCO 4TH AYE.DOC
COPYRIGHT 2006 BY CH2M HILL,INC.•COMPANY CONFIDENTIAL
vae• I . 4M L :3bNM No•5509 P • 2
PERMIT SURVEYING, INC.
2245 Robertson Drive
Richland,WA 99354
(509)376-4123 OFFICE - (509) 371-0999 FAX
info@permitsurveying.com
November 29, 2006
CH2MHILL
Attn: Tony Krutsch
RE: 0 AVENUE LOCATION SURVEY- PASCO, WA. -SURVEYING SERVICES
Our scope of surveying services for this project will include the following items:
1. 4TH Avenue (5600't), 50' South of Sylvester Street to 50' North of
South Right-of-Way of 1-182
A. As-build existing features- Curb to 5' outside Right-of-Way-
50'+ stations.
B. Survey all monumentation pertinent to establishing Right-of-Ways.
C. Provide maps of above-mentioned location surveys with
hard copy and electronic files.
This estimate does not include title reports, research and deed revisions for right-of-way
acquisitions, due to unknown quantities.
Our estimated cost for this project, as outlined'above is$ 12,000.00
Sincerely,
Daniel L. Strasser, P.L.S.
President
CH2MHILL4th.prp
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Council January 5, 2007
FROM: Gary Crutchfi i Manager Workshop Mtg.: 1/8/07
Regular Mtg.: 1/16/07
SUBJECT: Aerial Photogr phy
L REFERENCE(S):
1. Memorandum from Stan Strebel to City Manager dated 1/2/07
2. Photo example A
3. Photo example B
(NOTE: references no. 2 and 3 are in Council packets only; copies available at the Pasco
Library and in the Information Services office.)
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL/ STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
1/8 Discussion
1/16 MOTION: I move to authorize participation in the Franklin County aerial
photography project at 6 inch pixel imaging level for a total cost of
$30,546 and direct that the expenditure be included in the 2007
supplemental budget.
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
$30,546 (half utility fund and half general fund)
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
A) Franklin County, along with the PUD and South Columbia Basin Irrigation District,
several years ago established a county-wide aerial photography in conjunction with
the County's GIS system. Given the growth in the County, particularly the Pasco
urban area, the aerial photography must be updated frequently (every two or three
years). The photography was last updated in 2004 and Franklin County is preparing
to contract for an updating flight.
B) The County's system uses 12-inch pixels, which is sufficient for its use. If the
photography uses 6-inch pixels (higher level of clarity), the resulting photography is
of greater value to city engineering (in particular, in use of street and utility design
work). Of course, the higher level of clarity is of a higher cost, also. The Pasco
share of the updated flight cost at 12-inch pixels is just under $5,000; the Pasco share
of the flight cost, if the Pasco urban area is photographed at 6-inch pixels, is just
over $30,000.
V. DISCUSSION:
A) The photo examples provide a clear picture of the different level of clarity between
the options. Given the relative quality of the two photography options coupled with
the cost savings associated with engineering projects over the next few years, staff is
inclined to recommend the 6-inch pixel imaging level, even though the cost is
substantially greater than the option.
B) By way of comparison, the city contracted for aerial photography to include
elevation contours of West Pasco a few years ago at a cost of about $100,000; had
we flown the entire city at that level, it would have cost $300,000. The proposed 6-
inch pixel imaging level for the update flight is a much more cost effective way to
get better clarity photography with some benefit for engineering use (reduced costs
for contract surveyors). In addition, other departments are more likely to use the
photography given the better clarity (i.e., planning, code enforcement, police, etc.).
10(d)
1'ASC0 CH Y HALL
"ECEIVED
JAN 0 3 2007
CITY Ib9ANACER'S
Me o OFFICE
Date: 1/2/07
To: Gary Crutchfield, C ity Manager
From: Stan Streb
Re: Updatinra otos
Franklin County has invited the City to participate in a project to update the aerial photos that we use for
numerous purposes within the City. By participating as a group, the costs per entity are shared and
reduced for each participant.As part of a five entity group(Franklin County GIS, Fr. Co Public Works,
Fr. Co. PUD and South Columbia Irrigation District)the City's costs for one foot pixel imaging for photos
covering the entire City would be$4,930.The city could upgrade to 6 inch pixel imaging (see the
comparison of quality, attached) for a total cost of$30,546. Given the growth that the city has
experienced since the photos were updated (2004), this would be a good investment. Thank you.
AGENDA REPORT NO. 3
FOR: City Council DATE: January 11, 2007
TO: Gary Crutch , 1 Manager Regular: January 16, 2007
Robert J. Albe to ' orks Director
FROM: Doug Bramlettey Mponeer
SUBJECT: Award 2007 West Pasco Sewer Extension—Phase I, Project#07-1-01
I. REFERENCE(S):
1. Vicinity Map
2. Bid Summary
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL/STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
1/16: Motion: I move to award the low bid excluding Alternate A for the 2007
West Pasco Sewer Extension Phase 1, Project#07-1-01 to Goodman &
Mehlenbacher,Ent. Inc., in the amount of$1,124,725.94 including sales tax, and
further, authorize the Mayor to sign the contract documents.
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
Utility Fund
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
On January 11, 2007, staff received two sealed bids for the West Pasco Sewer
Extension Phase 1, Project #07-1-01. The lowest bid received was from Goodman&
Mehlenbacher, Ent. Inc. for $1,124,725.94 including sales tax. The second bid was
received from Watts Construction for$1,229,669.18. The Engineer's Estimate for
the project is $1,233,309.27. The budget for the project is $1,500,000.00.
The scope of the project includes the installation of approximately 9000 linear feet
of 8 and 12-inch sewer main, 35 manholes and related street restoration.
Staff recommends award of this contract to Goodman&Mehlenbacher, Ent.Inc.
V. ADMINISTRATIVE ROUTING
Project File
10(e)
2007 WEST PASCO
SEWER EXTENSION
PHASE I PROJECT N0. 07-1-01
URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY
� — I I I I
I �-
SA DFU
� ca BURDEN
ra
I
d p d
° O
xl x
�.f ARGE T R
WERINE TT R�
co
CD
PROJECT LIMITS COLUMBIA R
NR
_ VICINITY MAP
SCALE : NONE
ao Dm 84W
am, 12.14.00
uwww We
94
City of Pasco
2007 West Pasco Sewer Extension-Phase 1
Project No. 07-1-01
January 11, 2007
BID SUMMARY
Total
Engineer's Estimate $1,233,309.27
1. Goodman & Mehlenbacher, Ent. Inc. $1,124,725.94
2. Watts Construction $13229,669.18
AGENDA REPORT NO. 8
FOR: City Council DATE: January 9, 2007
TO: Gary Crutch 1 Manager ,�\ WORKSHOP:
Richard J. Sm i ector REGULAR: 1/16/07
Community an Economic Development
FROM: David I. McDonald, City Plannertr—�....�
SUBJECT: SPECIAL PERMIT: RV Park in a C-1 Zone (2600 Block of E. Lewis)
(MF# SP06-017)
I. REFERENCE(S):
A. Report to Planning Commission
B. Planning Commission Minutes: Dated 11/21/06 & 12/21/06
C. Site Plan (Council Packets only-Copy available in Planning Office for
Public Inspection)
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL/STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
MOTION: I move to approve the special permit for the location of an RV
Park in the 2600 block of East Lewis as recommended by the Planning
Commission.
III. FISCAL IMPACT: NONE
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
A. On November 21, 2006 the Planning Commission conducted a public
hearing to determine whether or not to recommend a special permit for the
location of a RV Park in the 2600 block of East Lewis Street.
B. Following conduct of a public hearing, the Planning Commission
reasoned that with conditions, the property in question could be utilized for
an RV park, without detriment to the community. The recommended
conditions are contained in the attached report.
C. No written appeal of the Planning Commission's recommendation has
been received.
V. DISCUSSION•
VI. ADMINSTRATIVE ROUTING:
10(f)
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
MASTER FILE NO: SP06-017 APPLICANT: All-Pro Contracting
HEARING DATE: 11/16/06 PO Box 4415
ASTION DATE: 12/21/06 Pasco, WA 99301
BACKGROUND
REQUEST: SPECIAL PERMIT: Location and operation of a Recreational
Vehicle Park in a C-1 Zone (Save More RV Park) on East
Lewis Street,
1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:
Legal: "Known as the "Save More RV Park Site" Block 6 and 7,
Avery's Addition lying north of Lewis Street together with vacated
streets and alleys adjacent.
General Location: Between East Lewis and Cindy's Addition east
of Cedar Street.
Property Size: Approximately 4.5 acres
2. ACCESS: The site has access from East Lewis Street
3. UTILITIES: Municipal water service is located in East Lewis
Street. Sewer service was recently extended to the site. Other
utilities are nearby.
4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The property is currently C-1 (Retail
Business) as are the properties to the east and west. There is a
auto repair facility and impound yard to the west of the site (zone
C-3). A mini storage facility and a truck repair firm are located to
the east (Zoned C-1 8v I-1). The land to the north is zoned R-1-A
(Low Density Residential Alternate District) and contains the
Cindy's Addition. Lewis Street is located to the south. The
property south of Lewis Street is zone R-2 (Medium Density
Residential) and is vacant and or contains the Bonnie Brea mobile
home park.
5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan designates
this site and surrounding . properties as commercial.
Comprehensive Plan policy LU-4-13 encourages concentration of
commercial activities, which are functionally and economically
beneficial to each other.
6. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: This proposal has been
issued a determination of nonsignificance in accordance with
review under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), Chapter
43.21(c) RCW.
ANALYSIS
The proposed RV Park was reviewed by the Planning Commission in
December of 2002 and again in April of 2004. Following the hearings in
2002 and 2004 the Planning Commission recommended a special permit
be granted for the RV Park. The City Council acted upon the Planning
Commission recommendations and special permits were granted in 2002
and 2004. The applicant however was unable to complete necessary
improvements and obtain a business license within the time frames of
the approved special permits. The applicant recently made inquiries of
Staff about obtaining permits to begin construction of the proposed RV
Park. Because the Special Permits had lapsed the applicant was
informed it would be necessary to re-apply for a new special permit
before a construction permit could be issued for the RV Park.
The C-1 (Retail Business) District permits a variety of service, retail,
restaurant, and office uses. RV Parks may be permitted on a C-1
property through review by the Planning commission provided the
proposed site is located within 2,000 feet of a State or Interstate highway
and provided the site contains at least 4 acres.
The site meets the initial location criteria established in P.M.C.
25.69.060. The site is zoned C-1 and contains over 4.5 acres and is
1,300 ft from the Lewis Street/SR-12 interchange.
The property's irregular shape and difficulties with access affects the
potential use of the site for typical commercial activities. The site
contains four different parcels with the largest parcel following the curve
of Lewis Street to the north. Development of an RV Park on the site
would allow all four parcels to be developed as a unified unit there by
eliminating the demand for multiple driveways on the curved portion of
Lewis Street. The Municipal Code permits 20 RV pads per acre or 93
units for the whole site. The applicant is proposing 74 units.
Due to the location of the property on East Lewis Street the development
may warrant the need for a deceleration lane and or additional traffic
signage. The need for such items is generally determined by the
2
Engineering Department during the construction plan review stage of a
development.
The special permit criterion requires the Planning Commission to
determine among other things whether the proposal will be harmonious
with the orderly development of the area. Several policies of the
Comprehensive Plan focus on compatibility of land uses and the
functional benefit of locating similar use together. The nearby mini
storage facility and truck repair shop could benefit from the proposed
use. The proposed site is near the new Lewis Street/SR-12 interchange.
Other recently approved RV parks are located near highway interchanges
(Road 68 and Road 100).
INTIAL STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT
Findings of fact must be entered from the record. The following are
initial findings drawn from the background and analysis section of the
staff report. The Planning Commission may add additional findings to
this listing as the result of factual testimony and evidence submitted
during the open record hearing.
1. The site is located in a C-1 zone.
2. RV Parks are permitted in C-1 zones by approval of a special
permit.
3. The C-1 zone permits a variety of retail and office land uses
including auto detail shops, automotive repair and tire shops,
restaurants, taverns, and membership clubs.
4. The site is located 1,300 feet from the Lewis Street interchange.
5. The site is vacant.
6. The site contains 4.66 acres.
7. A 16 inch water line was installed in East Lewis Street in 2005.
8. A 8 inch sewer main was installed in East Lewis Street in 2004.
9. The applicant was granted a Special Permit to locate an RV Park
on the site in 2002 and 2004.
10. An automotive repair shop and impound yard are located to the
west of the site.
11. A manufactured home subdivision is located to the north of the
site.
3
TENTATIVE CONCLUSIONS BASED ON INTIAL STAFF FINDINGS OF
FACT
Before recommending approval or denial of a special permit the Planning
Commission must develop findings of fact from which to draw its
conclusion based upon the criteria listed in P.M.C. 25.86.060. The
criteria are as follows:
1) Will the proposed use be in accordance with the goals, policies,
objectives and text of the Comprehensive Plan?
The site and proposed activity is consistent with Comprehensive Plan
Policy LU-4-B, which encourages concentration of commercial
activities, which are functionally and economically beneficial to each
other.
2) Will the proposed use adversely affect public infrastructure?
Traffic generation and utility demands tend to be lower for RV parks
on a per acre basis than many permitted uses, such as convenience
stores and restaurants.
3) Will the proposed use be constructed, maintained and operated
to be in harmony with existing or intended character of the
general vicinity?
The proposed use is consistent with the established character of the
area, which consists of mini storage development, an auto repair
facilities. Landscaping and screening will create harmony with
adjoining residential uses.
4) Will the location and height of proposed structures and the site
design discourage the development of permitted uses on property
in the general vicinity or impair the value thereof?
The proposed use involves development of at-grade improvements
such as paving and landscaping. The only improvements to be
above grade are landscape elements such as trees, the restroom
building, playground equipment and the management building.
5) Will the operations in connection with the proposal be more
objectionable to nearby properties by reason of noise, fumes
vibrations, dust, traffic, or flashing lights than would be the
operation of any permitted uses within the district?
4
The proposed use will not create more traffic, flashing lights, fumes
or vibrations than many of the permitted uses, such as convenience
stores, fast food restaurants, taverns, auto repair, tire stores etc.
6) Will the proposed use endanger the public health or safety if
located and developed where proposed, or in anyway will become
a nuisance to uses permitted in the district?
The proposed use is less intensive in terms of impact on public
health and safety than many permitted uses such as fuel sales.
The design and screening of the RV Park will help ensure the
compatibility with surrounding uses.
RECOMMENDATION
MOTION for Findings of Fact: I move to adopt findings of
fact and conclusions therefrom as contained in the staff report
dated 12/21/06.
MOTION for Recommendation: I move, based on the findings
of fact and conclusions there from the Planning Commission
recommend the City Council grant a special permit to Bertha
Ramirez for a Commercial Day Care at 403 North 20th Avenue
with the following conditions:
(Proposed) Approval Conditions
1) The Special Permit shall be personal to the applicant;
2) The RV Park shall be developed in accordance with the site plan
submitted and all applicable regulations including the Standard
Specifications of the City Engineer;
3) A block wall shall be erected along the rear property line to the
height of 8 feet;
4) Required fencing along Lewis Street shall be an estate type fence
approved by the Community and Economic Development Director;
5) Landscaping along Lewis Street shall conform to the current East
Lewis Street landscaping plan;
6) Only one freestanding sign shall be permitted on the site. The
height of the sign shall be limited to 30 feet;
5
7) All driveway entrances shall be reviewed by the City Engineering
Department prior to construction for a determination on the need
for deceleration lanes and or special signage;
8) The special permit shall be null and void if a valid City of Pasco
Business License is not obtained by December 31, 2007.
6
a' r�.x1[ T
-
a { fy {
x•A.. Vx.lg.,b..;, � •k
t�4z3:tM1•Y•5ttltl.-4Re � }jl N � �.' 7
�T� •rAµ Y 1r:. P. .:L T �i
K YV
44�n•,ti:l R
r� s E na f f I
l t
ct
par
C�j
FF rxT�
it
' T r T l '� � •� •.
I + Yk +'t^ m' fix• `~i A,.h'r 4y'h� '`r. r a
U r ET t
r p
IUD
ANll��.`_��
A 11
ValU � � "t'•�t b i,
'r
Y • •-N 7dYh .i]Dhxl iti}: r.V :sH w�'. +
.t Mr ��•+ .'.^
law
IV
� p >i ' •. .�f I�+• SV�rT# - fit•}�
C�
c U
c
': O
� U
ct
ct
ct
o � �
ct
. . VAUG11IV W
w �
• N CEDAR AVE
° o Q
U
►Z �, cn
� U
ct
NEW N
0
o
. ct
U • • Q � H
W CA
ct
N
N CEDAR A E
O U U
N
J
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
11/16/06
F. Special Permit RV Park in a C-1 Zone (All Pro Contracting Inc)
(MF # SP06-017)
Chairman McCollum read the master file number and asked for the Staff
report.
Staff stated that notice of the hearing had been printed in the newspaper and
mailed to property owners within 300 feet of the site Staff explained the
proposed application had previously been before the Commission; in 2002 an
application was made for an RV Park at this location. That application was
approved and a Special Permit was issued. The RV Park was not able to be
completed in 2002 due to several circumstances, lack of sewer being one of
them. In 2004 another Special Permit was applied for and approved to create
the RV Park at this location. Between the 2002 and 2004 applications, utilities
have been made available to the site. The 2004 application and approval has
now expired. The applicant would now like to move forward with construction
of the RV Park.
The proposed facility would accommodate 74 units and include recreational
activities, an office, laundry and carwash. The site will need to be developed to
meet current standards. Staff noted that Lewis Street has changed in
configuration over the years and that the Commission may wish to consider
deceleration lanes or other geometric changes to accommodate RV's exiting
Lewis Street. Staff stated that previous approvals for this facility have included
a requirement for an 8-foot fence along the northern boundary line. Staff noted
that rather than a wood fence, a block wall would be appropriate to buffer
newly constructed residences to the north of the site.
Commissioner Samuel asked how different this facility would be from the
existing facility on Broadmoor.
Staff responded that the facilities would be very similar.
Commissioner Samuel asked if curb, gutter and sidewalk would be required to
be installed along Lewis Street as a part of this proposal.
Staff replied that the Engineering Department would review and assess the
requirement for curb, gutter and sidewalk.
Commissioner Samuel asked if the Lewis Street off-ramp from Highway 12 is
designed for trucks to access A Street.
Staff confirmed it was correct.
Chairman McCollum opened the Public Hearing and asked if there was anyone
present who wished to speak on this matter.
Mr. Arnold Haag addressed the Commission and stated that he is the owner of
All Pro Contracting, the applicant on this proposal. He noted that the project
has been on-hold due to the changes made at the A Street interchange. He is
anxious to move forward with the project.
Commissioner Samuel stated that the mini storage facility in the area is very
attractive; he would like to see the development of the other vacant lots in the
area done to a similar level of quality to enhance this gateway to the City.
Al Yenny, 900 N. Avery, Pasco addressed the Commission and stated that this
area, as a gateway to the City, should be treated the same as the Lewis Street
properties that benefited from recent beautification projects. He expressed
additional concerns regarding the speed limit in the area and the conditions of
backyards visible from the overpass.
After three calls for public comment the Chairman closed the Public Hearing.
Commissioner Samuel asked if a turn-out lane or identifying signage will be
provided to mitigate traffic concerns.
Commissioner Samuel stated that he agrees that an 8-foot solid wall (block,
concrete, etc.) would be very appropriate.
Commissioner Little asked who would maintain and/or pays for these street
improvements.
Staff responded that the owner would be required to install the improvements
and the City maintains the streets.
Commissioner Little asked if the rock wall would be installed adjacent to the
residential area.
Staff responded that the rock/block wall would be required along the entire
north property line to provide a buffer between this proposed use and the
adjacent residential properties.
Mr. Yenny noted that the aerial photographs do not correctly indicate the
current configuration of the roads in the area.
Staff responded that aerials are taken every two years and would be updated
accordingly.
Commissioner Samuel stated that he would like to see the proposal include a
requirement for a solid wall along Lewis Street also; to protect residents of the
park and provide an attractive element in this gateway area of the community.
He would also like the conditions of the project's approval to include a means
of addressing safe access for the RV's into the park (a turn-out lane, signage,
etc.)
Commissioner McCollum stated his request that staff consider the costs of the
required improvements, in order not to make the project so expensive as to
prohibit its completion.
Commissioner Samuel stated that providing an attractive wall to screen the
project is an important element in his opinion.
Mr. Yenny stated his opposition to requiring walls to screen the property. He
feels that the area is a gateway to industrial property; he feels that the wall
requirements are excessive.
Staff responded that the requirement for a wall is stated in the Pasco Municipal
Code. A buffer fence is required to surround all RV Parks. It was noted that
the fence on Lewis Street does not have to be a solid block wall; it could be a
cedar or vinyl fence.
Commissioner Hay stated that he feels a fence would be in order to ensure the
safety of children playing in the RV Park.
Commissioner Anderson stated that the fence to the north, adjacent to
residential properties should be a solid block wall; and that the fencing along
Lewis Street should be the appropriate fencing for an RV Park, not a solid block
wall.
Commissioner Schouviller stated that he concurs with Commissioner
Anderson.
Mr. Haag stated that he felt the fence requirements could cause the project to
be not financially feasible.
Commissioner Anderson stated that he continues to believe the fence between
the RV Park and adjacent residences should be a block wall.
Commissioner Hay concurred with Commissioner Anderson as well.
Staff added that there is a block wall north of this property that has been
constructed in a more cost efficient manner, while maintaining the
characteristics of a sound buffer. A fence could be designed with the lower six
feet comprised of block (to block vehicle lights, etc. from adjacent properties)
and the upper two feet could be constructed of an alternative material (vinyl,
etc.)
Commissioner Anderson stated that he would trust staff to come to a comprise
solution regarding the fence.
Commissioner Anderson moved to close the hearing on the proposed special
permit, initiate deliberations and schedule adoption of Findings of Facts,
Conclusions and a Recommendation to the City Council for the December 21,
2006 meeting.
Commissioner Hay seconded the motion; motion carried.
Planning Commission Minutes 12/21/06
E. Special Permit RV Park in a C-1 Zone (All Pro Contracting Inc)
(Save More RV Park) (MF# SPO6-01 7)
Staff addressed the Commission and noted that there had been some
discussion at the Public Hearing about allowing a six-foot high block wall with
vinyl fencing comprising the additional two feet at the top for a total height of
eight feet. The proposed conditions have been written to require an eight-foot
high block wall along the rear property line.
Commissioner Anderson moved to adopt the findings of fact and conclusions
there from as contained in the December 21, 2006 staff report. Commissioner
Hay seconded. Motion carried unanimously.
Commissioner Anderson moved based on the findings of fact and conclusions
there from the Planning Commission recommend the City Council grant a
Special Permit for an RV Park with the conditions as proposed in the December
21, 2006 Staff Report. Commissioner Hay seconded. Motion carried
unanimously.
AGENDA REPORT NO. 9
FOR: City Council DATE: January 9, 2007
TO: Gary Crutchfi i Manager WORKSHOP:
Richard J. Sm i ctor REGULAR: 1/ 16/07
Community an Economic Development
FROM: David I. McDonald, City Planner-Ng . -
SUBJECT: SPECIAL PERMIT: Stadium Sun Shade Structure in Excess of 35
feet (Dust Devil's Stadium) (MF# SP06-019)
I. REFERENCEISI:
A. Report to Planning Commission
B. Planning Commission Minutes: Dated 12/21/06
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL/STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
MOTION: I move to approve the special permit for the construction of a
shade structure at the Dust Devil's Stadium, as recommended by the
Planning Commission.
III. FISCAL IMPACT: NONE
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
A. On December 21 2006 the Planning Commission conducted a public
hearing to consider a special permit application for the construction of an
85-foot tall shade structure at the Dust Devil's Stadium.
B. Following the conduct of a public hearing the Planning Commission
reasoned that with conditions, it would be appropriate to recommend
approval for the construction of the 85-foot tall shade structure. The
recommended conditions are contained in the attached report.
C. No written appeal of the Planning Commission's recommendation has
been received.
V. DISCUSSION:
VI. ADMINSTRATIVE ROUTING:
10(g)
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
MASTER FILE NO: SP-06-019 APPLICANT: City of Pasco
HEARING DATE: 12/21/06 525 N 3rd Ave
ACTION DATE: 12/21/06 Pasco, WA 99301
BACKGROUND
REQUEST: SPECIAL PERMIT: Stadium Shade Structure in Excess of 35 feet
(City of Pasco) (Dust Devil's Stadium.)
1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:
Legal: A portion of the west 1/2 of 15-9-29 north of Highway 1-182, Except
the West 1630 feet.
General Location: 6200 Burden Blvd
Property Size: The Stadium and parking lot occupies about 18 acres of
the Stadium/Soccer property.
2. ACCESS: The site has access from Burden Blvd & Homerun Rd.
3. UTILITIES: Municipal services are available on surrounding streets.
4. 4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The site is zoned R-T (Residential
Transition)) and is developed with the Dust Devil Baseball Stadium and
the Soccer complex. Surrounding zoning and land use is as follows:
NORTH- C-1 The area at the north end of the parking lot is vacant and
an office complex is located across Burden Blvd
SOUTH- R-T/Soccer fields
EAST- R-T/Soccer fields
WEST- C-1/Parking lot and softball complex.
5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan designates the site
for public or quasi public uses. The proposed use or activity is for public
purposes. Goal OF-3 suggests provisions should be made for parks,
sports fields and public buildings. The Baseball Stadium is identified in
the Park & Recreation Plan as a special use facility.
6. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: This proposal has been issued a
determination of nonsignificance in accordance with review under the
State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), Chapter 43.21 (c) (RCW).
DISCUSSION
The City is seeking approval of a Special Permit to allow the construction of a
85 foot tall shade structure at the Dust Devil Baseball Stadium.
The Baseball Stadium was originally built in 1995 on property that bordered
the TRAC Facility. The TRAC building, the City's Softball Complex and the
Soccer Complex more or less surround the baseball stadium. Since the
original construction of the stadium in 1995 the City has consistently made
improvements to the facility for the enjoyment and use of the community.
Due to the orientation of the ball field the spectator seating along the third
base side of the field is exposed to the westerly sun. The direct sun and heat
experienced in the summer months makes watching ball games from the east
side of the stadium very uncomfortable.
The State has recently made enhance funds available for certain publicly
owned stadiums. The City was award direct grant funds for improvements to
the Dust Devils stadium. The City has agreed to use the State grant funds to
erect a sun shade along the western edge of the stadium. The structure as
depicted in the attachments will enhance the usability of the stadium by
providing relief for the intense westerly sun. The east side of the will be able to
be use in relative comfort as a result of the shading from the proposed
structure.
To provide the needed shade relief at the stadium the shade structure will need
to be 85 feet high at the tallest point. The maximum structure height in the R-
T zone is 35 feet. Greater heights are permitted only by approval of a special
permit.
The Baseball Stadium is located about 1,200 feet south of Burden Blvd. and
over 1,000 feet north of I-182. The softball complex stretches about 1,000 feet
west of the stadium and the soccer fields occupy about 550 feet of land to the
east. The stadium is therefore somewhat isolated with respect to neighboring
properties that could be impacted by a tall structure. Even at 85 feet the
proposed structure will not be the tallest feature in the area. The eight ball
field light poles are all over 85 feet tall. The tallest two poles are 100 feet high.
The cellular communication tower located 500 feet (in the TRAC RV Park) to the
2
northwest of the stadium is over 100 feet tall. The field lights in the adjoining
softball complex are also 80-90 feet tall. The proposed shade structure will be
similar in height to the nearby TRAC building and the numerous tall light poles
in the surrounding area.
STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT
Findings of fact must be entered from the record. The following are initial
findings drawn from the background and analysis section of the staff report
and comments made at the public hearing. The Planning Commission may
add additional findings as deemed appropriate.
1. The Dust Devils Stadium is located in an R-T zone.
2. The Dust Devils Stadium is a publicly owned structure.
3. The City was awarded a $1,000,000 State Grant for improvements to the
Stadium.
4. Proposed improvements to the Stadium include a large shade structure
reaching 85 feet in height.
5. The R-T zone permits structures to be 35 feet tall.
6. Structures over 35 feet tall may be approved by Special Permit in the R-T
zone.
7. The TRAC building and surrounding field light poles are all taller than 35
feet.
8. Two Stadium field light poles are 100 feet tall.
9. The Cellular Tower located 500 feet to the northwest of the Stadium is
over 100 feet tall.
10. The Comprehensive Plan identifies the site for public or quasi-public
uses.
11. Comprehensive Plan Goal OF-3 suggests provisions should be made for
parks, sports fields and public buildings
12. The Stadium is at least a 1,000 feet from a major street.
13. The Stadium site is located in the Soccer Complex and Softball Complex.
14. The Soccer Fields Softball Fields are public facilities.
CONCLUSIONS BASED ON STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT
Before recommending approval or denial of a special permit the Planning
Commission must draw its conclusion from the findings of fact based upon the
criteria listed in P.M.C. 25.86.060. The criteria and staff listed conclusions are
as follows:
I) Will the proposed use be in accordance with the goals, policies, objectives
and text of the Comprehensive PlanP
3
The Comprehensive Plan designates the site for public and quasi-public
uses. The Stadium is a public facility. Goal OF-3 suggests provisions
should be made for parks, sports fields and public buildings within the
City. The Stadium is also identified within the Park and Recreation Plan
as a special use facility. The proposed improvements will enhance the
public use of the stadium and therefore will support the Comprehensive
Plan.
2) Will the proposed use adversely affect public infrastructure?
The Dust Devils Stadium site is fully developed. The proposed
improvements to the Stadium will no require additional infrastructure
support. Surrounding streets and utilities have been in place for many
years. These utilities have been sized to accommodate the needs of the
Stadium.
3) Will the proposed use be constructed, maintained and operated to be in
harmony with existing or intended character of the general vicinity?
The Stadium is located in the Soccer/Softball/TRAC complex and has
been beneficially coexisting with these public facilities for almost 10
years. The Stadium is a major part of the general character of the
neighborhood and the proposed structure will not alter the intended
character of the area..
4) Will the location and height of proposed structures and the site design
discourage the development of permitted uses on property in the general
vicinity or impair the value thereof?
All surrounding lands are developed with publicly owned sports facilities
and the TRAC Complex. The proposed structure will not change the site
design of the stadium or surrounding facilities. The proposed structure
will not be taller than the numerous existing field lights current existing
on the site and the adjoining Softball Complex.
5) Will the operations in connection with the proposal be more objectionable
to nearby properties by reason of noise, fumes, vibrations, dust, traffic, or
flashing lights than would be the operation of any permitted uses within
the district?
The addition to the Stadium will not create fumes, dust, noise, flashing
lights etc or in any way be more objectionable to the surrounding sports
fields than the operations of the Stadium without the addition.
4
6) Will the proposed use endanger the public health or safety if located and
developed where proposed, or in anyway will become a nuisance to uses
permitted in the district?
The proposed addition to the Stadium will not create any obnoxious
conditions that would become a nuisance to surrounding sports
activities and TRAC functions. The activities at the Stadium will not
change. The proposed addition will only create more favorable
conditions for the users of the Stadium by properly shading the seating
areas. Enjoyment and use of the Stadium will be enhanced by the
proposal.
RECOMMENDATION
Process: Because this proposal is time sensitive and tied directly to a
significant State Grant the permit for construction needs to be issued
in January 2007. Given the Stadium is surrounded by public
facilities and will not impact any privately owned property and given
the need to comply with the State Grant Staff is recommending this
Special Permit application be acted upon following the close of the
public hearing.
MOTION for Findings of Fact: I move to adopt findings of fact and
conclusions there from as contained in the December 21, 2006 staff
report.
MOTION for Recommendation: I move based on the findings of fact
and conclusions there from the Planning Commission recommend the
City Council grant a special permit for the Stadium Shade Structure
with the following conditions:
(Proposedi Approval Conditions
(1) The special permit is personal to the applicant;
(2) The Shade Struture shall substantially conform to the elevation
drawings submitted with the special permit application;
(3) The Shade Structure is permitted to be 85 feet high.
(4) The special permit shall be null and void if a building permit has not
been obtained by June 30, 2007.
5
✓ r
it q ; Y 1 �1 •tSR f'�.
1 ll l
t
'tad '.�, d� 5i{" �...�. • r +Mf;rfi � _� � �.
V 1 VJ t y,d'It�':.a /w� r II '•rr �G �'''E^ +
TIM
NV
ct
AA
clt ..+F- ti{ I tY,. •F Ella •*..t + M !
ct
� rRy n
uu ,
U O
Ct L/) i
• . . r
D 4 - ;
ki
1�F ' t�-���6�, ¢ w 1 y, � 1.
IV,
Ot �� r�7�t3 ' � ►c,Yi1. s' l 1 ::� 't t� ''+tl
f `r `�• {f(F�Rp�'�+ •A 1 ! 'frk M1 iFd ,^ +r!Ftl'�rrfi�
r
g L a��, 't •�hrr X'w{�` j _tit .�eu6.• i ,K• M, `,.� 1`ttir t, n � I �` �:.
C�
� U
w
CIS
0i
ct
a�
o
U
� U
� � O
• � O
U • •
cl� ,�
C/-j
ct
� U
U v
ct u
O
� F4-�— U
ct
O
z -
x
c
� o
� U
�--� c�3
� � w
ct �
• � O
� C
U . . Z
-Tr
O '
N � '
I
VIM) ,
II � luy �� �l day{JC-1 I Iii
Flip �
q3 1
Vy L
,
{ A1. a}
t��f IG '° II `,i ire r, / ,�\ s:r, I �• '� I }' :s I
I
� ( / �r.I �� � i! ' �,, ! '/�- II11(/'��+,\! I��_y r,, iG'ti '•" a ITt+''• �y. `'
f �� � j/ J � / f 1, ., 1 !& iii d �`' ®(i�11�'p"I }11 •�,
' I' I I :,• k >!/�� (r?S� i �'�5' rlr , � \�-. I ! _.7i�k''�`k�� �.I,?r @It r7 y, i
� �G I, J .� �i� J ►�a IJ �;,� I�' a1Tl�t�, � � �"'�'ul��; it,I,;�Ik' �6�i� 3�
- _. f !r. � •- I , - y -' 11 ` '' Alltl rh dF l; .1- 's`�d�T
M.'(1
rfl�(ll/��JJ�r,��r'(�`
i` � ] �;:� I/ -+'t, 1 n J�� If. �a i„)��(/�1���/��`III•"S .'�1\ �\.� Fi � 's�r � �t 1 ---rn `` (
it'
IJ(
j.,
..'
_• ., ...- _ `,t (�(�(!�j l I"/'/�7��) �/��(. ..J. 4` �r, '� '+ J��,� ii {� it •I
�i,
c�
ro
CL
l >'
1�
f 4 17 �I���C���fi a• ,
i I I I '1 J { •
_
r
f r 1
r ,
I_ FI r
-71
.r`
I
It
QJ I � I
J x
' I I
if1 it` ti 1III
[FI
I .2
if y' J.
I r
LF :f
i
I�
+�,,
I
r, I
l•/� � 15,E � �r I' �/; ..\..•..
s/ � ,; � � ti ,. >.. �• '� '•lam ,
sloe
JET
e
ill,,.,;` 11.{t Jzt
v
r: •I 1 f t..1 ��l'J"A I4� �-
V1 J +/ re 4 gf�y1�� �C7,�
! ''t.' 1� I •r i .
CL {'f �j_ .r{ �Jii.l
�L. a'�t P a. 7e$Itt_ rtR; § ?P
..
a. h
Oh'. j flcl SX E t /
a,'WANa IrI �F� x 1 4 f. I 1 i •9
f f'A �t`T1 t�'� tir•�.�' 37;i� ~•p t.
iu
V'F t�rr
/' 1 .:;, t /. �f ) j!��P tr j lW�jcr y` '.:ii1,Fg" 'µms �{. .•' %t!/
DyF;, ,� �r ✓,� f , ri � �n <4 t
it � � �
I�r{ nttl i rt .sM1.t J/
1�
�1 V,,It i
INN
Planning Commission Minutes 12/21/06
D. Special Permit Stadium Sun Shade Structure in excess of 35
feet (City of Pasco) (6200 Burden Blvd.) (MF#
SPO6-019)
Staff addressed the Commission and explained that due to the fact that the
proposed structure is in excess of thirty five feet tall, a Special Permit is
required. Staff reviewed the surrounding land uses for the benefit of the
Commission. It was noted that there are other structures (light poles and a cell
tower) in the area that are significantly taller than the proposed structure.
Stan Strebel, Director of Administrative and Community Services addressed
the Commission. He explained that the project has been funded by the
Washington State Legislature. The proposed structure has long been sought
by people who utilize the stadium.
Commissioner McCollum asked if the structure will be designed to withstand
wind shear forces.
Mr. Strebel responded that the structure has been designed to withstand the
wind load.
The Chairperson opened the Public Hearing and asked if there was anyone
present who wished to speak on this matter.
After three calls for public comment the Chairman closed the Public Hearing.
Commissioner Anderson moved to adopt the findings of fact and conclusions
there from as contained in the December 21, 2006 staff report. Commissioner
Hay seconded. Motion carried unanimously.
Commissioner Samuel moved based on the findings of fact and conclusions
there from the Planning Commission recommend the City Council grant a
Special Permit for the stadium shade structure with the conditions as
contained in the Staff Report. Commissioner Hay seconded. Motion carried
unanimously.
AGENDA REPORT NO. 10
FOR: City Council DATE: January 9, 2007
TO: Gary Crutch Manager WORKSHOP:
Richard J. S i i ector F4 REGULAR: 1/16/07
Community an Economic Development
FROM: David I. McDonald, City Planner,
SUBJECT: SPECIAL PERMIT: Location of a Day Care at 403 N 20th Ave. (MF#
SP06-016)
I. REFERENCE(S):
A. Report to Planning Commission
B. Planning Commission Minutes: Dated 11/ 16/06 & 12/21/06
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL/STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
MOTION: I move to approve the special permit for a Commercial Day Care
at 403 North 20th Avenue, as recommended by the Planning Commission.
III. FISCAL IMPACT: NONE
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
A. On November 16 2006 the Planning Commission conducted a public
hearing to consider a special permit application for a commercial day care
at 403 North 20th Avenue.
B. Following the conduct of a public hearing the Planning Commission
reasoned that with conditions, it would be appropriate to recommend
approval of a special permit for the location of a commercial day care facility
at403 North 20th Avenue. The recommended conditions are contained in
the attached report.
C. No written appeal of the Planning Commission's recommendation has
been received.
V. DISCUSSION:
VI. ADMINSTRATIVE ROUTING:
10(h)
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
MASTER FILE NO: SP06-016 APPLICANT: Bertha Ramirez
HEARING DATE: 11/ 16/06 403 N 20th Ave
ACTION DATE: 12/21/06 Pasco WA. 99301
BACKGROUND
REQUEST: SPECIAL PERMIT: Location of a Day Care at 403 N 20th Ave.
1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:
Legal: LOT 11, BLOCK 3, COLUMBIA ADDITION
General Location: 403 N 20th Ave.
Property Size: 55.7 ft x 115 ft or 6280.99 square feet
2. ACCESS: The site has access to Yakima and 20th street.
3. UTILITIES: All municipal utilities are available to the site.
3. LAND USE AND ZONING: The site is currently zoned R-1 (Residential
Suburban) and contains a 1,603 square foot home. The property to the
north, south, and east is zoned R-1 (Residential Suburban) and is
similarly developed with single family homes. The property directly to the
west is zoned C-3 (Commercial) and surrounding properties to the north
and south of this property are zoned C-1 (Commercial.).
5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan designates this area
as the transition between commercial and low density residential. The
plan does not specifically address day care centers, but various elements
of the plan encourage protection of the established residential character.
Policies of the plan also encourage locating businesses in appropriate
locations for their anticipated uses and provision of adequate off street
parking. Policies of the plan encourage the provision of services in close
proximity to the residences they serve.
6. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: This proposal has been issued a
determination of nonsignificance in accordance with review under the
State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), Chapter 43.21(c) RCW.
ANALISYS
The site proposed for the day care center is developed with a single-family
home on a 6,440 square foot lot. The home is currently used as a personal
residence with a family day care. A family day care is a day care that provides
service to not more than 12 children. By State law family day care facilities are
permitted in any residential zoning district without the need for a special
permit. Day care centers (commercial day cares) on the other hand are
permitted to serve more than 12 children and can be regulated by special
permit. Family day care facilities require the care giver to live on the property.
The family day care on the property in question has been in business for over 8.
years. The applicant is requesting a special permit to convert the status of the
existing family day care facility to a commercial day care center with no
increase in the number of children. The facility currently provides care for up
to 12 children. (In February of this year the applicant applied for a special permit to
care for up to 25 children. The permit was denied.)
Conversion of the property to a commercial day care with the same number of
children that are currently being served will not alter the residential character
of the property. The day care facility has operated on the site for 8 years with
little or no change in the outwardly appearance of the property. The property
has retained its residential appearance. In the 8 years that the day care has
been in existence at the site in question Staff is unaware of any complaints
from neighboring property owners.
The proposal will not require any changes to the existing parking or yard area.
INTIAL STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT
Findings of fact must be entered from the record. The following are initial
findings drawn from the background and analysis section of the staff report.
The Planning Commission may add additional findings to this listing as the
result of factual testimony and evidence submitted during the open record
hearing.
1. The site is located in an R-1 zone.
2. The property contains a single family dwelling.
3. The property has been used for a family daycare for 8 years or more.
4. A family day care can only be licensed to care for up to 12 children.
5. The applicant applied for a special permit to operate a day care center
with only 12 children.
6. Single-family residences are located to the north, east and south.
7. C-3 and C-1 zones are located across 20th Avenue to the west.
2
8. A State license will be required for the operation of a daycare center.
CONCLUSIONS BASED ON STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT
Before recommending approval or denial of a special permit the Planning
Commission must develop findings of fact from which to draw its conclusion
based upon the criteria listed in P.M.C. 25.86.060. The criteria are as follows:
1) Will the proposed use be in accordance with the goals, policies, objectives
and text of the Comprehensive Plan?
Day-Care Centers are not specifically discussed in the Comprehensive
Plan, but various elements of the plan encourage locating businesses in
appropriate locations for their anticipated uses. The site is located at the
edge of a residential neighborhood.
2) Will the proposed use adversely affect public infrastructure?
The utilities serving the property are sized to serve a single family home.
The property has been used for over 8 years as a day care licensed to
serve up to 12 children.
3) Will the proposed use be constructed, maintained and operated to be in
harmony with existing or intended character of the general vicinity?
The existing character of the dwelling and property will not be altered
with the proposal. The current day care licensed for the care of up to 12
children appears to be operated in harmony with the existing character
of the neighborhood.
4) Will the location and height of proposed structures and the site design
discourage the development of permitted uses on property in the general
vicinity or impair the value thereof?
This proposal involves utilizing an existing single-story house that has
been licensed as a family day care for 8 years.
5) Will the operations in connection with the proposal be more objectionable to
nearby properties by reason of noise, fumes vibrations, dust, traffic, or
flashing lights than would be the operation of any permitted uses within
the district?
3
The current operation will not be expanded in any way. The current day
care has created any conditions that have generated complaints from
neighboring property owners.
6) Will the proposed use endanger the public health or safety if located and
developed where proposed, or in anyway will become a nuisance to uses
permitted in the district?
The existing day care use on the site has not become a nuisance to the
neighborhood. The applicant is not seeking to add more children only to
change the type of license.
RECOMMENDATION
MOTION for Findings of Fact: I move to adopt findings of fact and
conclusions therefrom as contained in the staff report dated
12/21/06.
MOTION for Recommendation: I move, based on the findings of fact
and conclusions there from the Planning Commission recommend the
City Council grant a special permit to Bertha Ramirez for a
Commercial Day Care at 403 North 20th Avenue with the following
conditions:
(Proposed) Approval Conditions
1) The special permit is personal to the applicant;
2) The applicant shall maintain a current Department of Social and
Health Service license at all times for the activities allowed on the
site;
3) The number of children permitted on the site shall be determined
by the strict application of the DSHS day care criteria and shall in
no case exceed 12 children;
4) The applicant shall comply with all DSHS operational requirements
for the day care;
5) The special permit shall be null and void if the applicant has not
obtained a City of Pasco business license by June 30, 2007.
4
ISL. 4 Y.
{ C
�y k
For- I
+ c k .,�.
C'; up•.A
kilt, L�"' � 5 � s.,are•
FLO �G' t
.fit'' ^a• - tN ��.�4' ���� �x.� ., �O 4 -
r ,
vv r
i
- -IIt f` "V S * I X5:,1 '••'1• '
4` 9
�� - k 'J �♦ a� K5 -aia �1l���yw..e��`I1�5
. / a.r.-q.•a'KrN!Y-gib t, 'F"tadt•Nl�1 zV -` �� 5;'�v-.w.� 7�A.�c t..La J �1 '
1 i
..
c 4A
r
WM
Ali
JA
- !{�F'�' d'� �� •� 4 1 ,a .� ;;� EMI
tf '�: �'�`� �;M'�` f�� v �t • � .,ice � .
• t�'.9 1�', M,
}1 4 �,�g�'a ,a.. . 1 t 1 Ar q"!a 9. ttti,yv'��•va � JS+:Ft u -
{�` 7., wo
loud
lot
7 f f• � � •t` r'��� 1�11�1`.� f� 1 �1
I N;:y 5 5 1� t -� � :y•� -
r
1 4
t . 4 .atl �x ....1 t 1. � ,• � ��
� ' ' 1� � v'+.Nt r C� t e � Z,Iw •a .a a,.l. ,,kfC ���
l Y 4 a
5. P _
at r-
N 19TH AVE
bQ
ct w
HAV HIOZ ICI
ct
C� - --�,
E--+ -- -- aA V GN Z Z -N
N 19TH AVE
\7 clt
� `t
C� o FW—+ HAV HZOZ N
ct
-------------
�
� I
QNZZ ICI
,
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
11/16/06
D. Special Permit Daycare Center in a R-1 Zone (Bertha Ramirez)
(403 N. 20th Ave.) (MF # SP06-016)
Chairman McCollum read the master file number and asked for the Staff
report.
Staff stated that notice of the hearing had been printed in the newspaper and
mailed to property owners within 300 feet of the site. Staff explained the
proposed daycare center had been the subject of a pervious hearing before the
Planning Commission. The previous application was for a commercial daycare
center serving more than twelve children. The application was denied by the
Commission and City Council. The applicant is now seeking a special permit
for a commercial day care for 12 children or less. The change in status from a
family day care to a commercial day care would allow the applicant to reside at
another location yet still be licensed at 403 N 20th as a day care. The home day
care license requires the applicant to live on site. The commercial license does
not have the same requirement. The size (number of children) of the day care
under this proposed would be the same as it has been for the past eight years.
Commissioner Samuel asked what would be the maximum number of children
served by the facility.
Staff responded twelve or less children.
Commissioner Samuel asked for confirmation that there are twelve or fewer
children served at the facility currently.
Staff responded that they have had twelve or fewer children at the center for
the last eight years.
Commissioner Samuel asked if there have been any complaints regarding the
operation of the facility.
Staff responded they have not received any complaints.
Commissioner McCollum asked if this application will require additional
fencing or other improvements to the site.
Staff responded due to the fact that the size of the daycare will not change, no
additional fencing is required
Commissioner Little asked if there is any regulation on the hours of operation.
Staff responded that there are no City regulations impacting the hours of
operation.
Commissioner Little asked if they could then have extended hours.
Staff responded that they could have extended hours, and that many of the
daycare facilities do provide extended hours.
Commissioner Schouviller asked if there would be full-time residency by
anyone at the residence.
Staff responded that there would not be a full-time residency requirement.
Chairman McCollum opened the Public Hearing and asked if there was anyone
present who wished to speak on this matter.
Margarita Valtierra, 6702 W 1St, Apt. 3, Kennewick introduced herself as the
applicant's interpreter. She represented that there will be no changes to the
existing business; the same children will continue to come to the center, etc.
The only change would be that the owner would no longer live at the site.
Commissioner Samuel stated that he had observed a sign at the site "beware of
dog". He questioned if the dogs would no longer be living at the site as well.
Ms. Valtierra stated that the dogs would be moving with the owner; they would
not remain at the site.
Commissioner Schouviller asked for clarification regarding the current hours of
operation of the daycare.
Ms. Valtierra responded that currently the daycare operates from 5:30 a.m. to
5:30 p.m. During the asparagus harvest, the hours are extended to 4:30 a.m
to 6:00 p.m.
After three calls for public comment the Chairman closed the Public Hearing.
Commissioner Little moved to close the hearing on the proposed special permit,
initiate deliberations and schedule adoption of Findings of Facts, Conclusions
and a Recommendation to the City Council for the December 21, 2006 meeting.
Commissioner Anderson seconded the motion; motion carried.
\Planning Commission Minutes 12/21/06
D. Special Permit Daycare Center in an R-1 Zone (Bertha Ramirez)
(403 N. 20th Ave.) (MF# SP06-016)
Staff addressed the Commission and reminded them that a Public Hearing
regarding this item was held at the last meeting Staff had no additional
information to discuss.
Commissioner Little moved to adopt the findings of fact and conclusions there
from as contained in the December 21, 2006 staff report. Commissioner Hay
seconded. Motion carried unanimously.
Commissioner Little moved based on the findings of fact and conclusions there
from the Planning Commission recommend the City Council grant a Special
Permit for operation of a commercial daycare with conditions as proposed in
the December 21, 2006 Staff Report. Commissioner Hay seconded. Motion
carried unanimously.