Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008.04.28 Council Workshop Packet AGENDA PASCO CITY COUNCIL Workshop Meeting 7:00 p.m. April 28, 2008 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. VERBAL REPORTS FROM COUNCILMEMBERS: 3. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION: (a) Swimming Pools: 1. Agenda Report from Stan Strebel, Administrative and Community Services Director dated April 22, 2008. 2. Sketch of Proposed New Facility 3. Comparison of Operating Costs 4. Construction Financing Options (b) Code Amendment—Driveway and Sidewalk Standards (MF#CA-08-001): 1. Agenda Report from David McDonald, City Planner dated April 24, 2008. 2. Proposed Ordinance. 3. Memo to Planning Commission. 4. Planning Commission Minutes dated March 20, 2008 &April 17, 2008. (c) Senior Services Advisory Committee: 1. Agenda Report from Gary Crutchfield,City Manager dated April 23, 2008. 2. Memorandum from A&CS Director dated April 22, 2008. (d) Council Goals: 1. Agenda Report from Gary Crutchfield, City Manager dated April 22, 2008. 2. Proposed Resolution. 4. OTHER ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION: (a) (b) (c) 5. EXECUTIVE SESSION: (a) (b) (c) 6. ADJOURNMENT. REMINDERS: 1. 4:00 p.m., Monday, April 28, Port of Benton — Hanford Area Economic Investment Fund Committee Meeting. (COUNCILMEMBER MATT WATKINS,Rep.; AL YENNEY,Alt.) 2. 5:30 p.m., Tuesday, April 29, Stone Ridge Event Center— Jean Ryckman Retirement Celebration. (ALL COUNCILMEMBERS INVITED TO ATTEND) 3. 6:00 p.m., Thursday, May 1, Senior Center — City of Pasco Volunteer Reception. (ALL COUNCILMEMBERS INVITED TO ATTEND) 4. 11:00 a.m., Saturday, May 3, Downtown Pasco — Cinco de Mayo Parade (staging at 2nd & Columbia Streets at 9:00 a.m.). (MAYOR JOYCE OLSON, COUNCILMEMBERS TOM LARSEN and AL YENNEY) AGENDA REPORT FOR: City Council April 22, 2008 TO: Gary Crutchf i (Ma nage FROM: Stan Strebel, mipi i and Community Workshop Mtg.: 4/28108 Services Directo� Regular Mtg.: 515108 SUBJECT: Swimming Pools I. REFERENCE(S): 1. Sketch of Proposed New Facility 2. Comparison of Operating Costs 3. Construction Financing Options 11. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL /STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: 4128: Discussion III. FISCAL IMPACT: IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF: A) At its meeting of April 14, Council again reviewed the various swimming facility alternatives together with the letter received from the Public Facilities District Board encouraging the Council to move forward with Option "A", the original plan, including a new outdoor leisure pool, as recommended by the ad hoc pools committee. B) As Council discussed the options, the question of the attraction of an indoor facility, for tourism, was asked. Staff has reviewed this question with our aquatic facility consultants and offers the following: Summary: An indoor leisure pool of the size contemplated in Option "B" (16,000 sq. ft. natatorium) would not be large enough to constitute a significant "draw" for tourists. It would be an important"amenity", among others in the Tri-Cities, that could influence and support efforts to market the area to visitors. V. ' DISCUSSION: A) For the summer season, both an outdoor and an indoor leisure pool (if configured the same) would have similar attraction. This is primarily because school aged children are not generally in school and many families tend to schedule vacations at that time. The opportunity for families to recreate together is probably more of a critical factor than whether the facility is indoor or outdoor. B) During the traditional school year (times when outdoor facilities are typically not available) an indoor facility would continue to be available, however, due to conflicts with school and school-related activities, fewer, shorter vacations, etc., most users of an indoor facility would be expected to come from the surrounding Tri-Cities community. While there are any number of conventions, expos and tournaments held in the area during the non-summer months, which attract thousands of attendees from out of the area, with a few exceptions, these are usually not family related vacations where a day or half-day at the water park would be a natural choice. 3(a) C) Our consultants advise that a facility much larger than is contemplated under Option `B" would typically be necessary to serve as a significant "tourist draw". An indoor facility would definitely be an "amenity", among others in the Tri- Cities, that could be used to market the area, however. It would be expected that weekend, holiday and evenings would be popular use times throughout the year. D) While an indoor facility, as contemplated in Option `B", would not be expected to be a significant tourist"draw", the advantages over an outdoor facility for"quality of life" activities would be realized in the form of programming which would allow residents to recreate, exercise, learn and use the facility on a regular basis throughout the year. Of course, this would not be available without the extra capital cost for construction and the additional operational costs which have been earlier provided. Council must determine if the community is able and likely willing to pay the cost. E) Under either Option "A" or "B" voter approval (60%) of bonds would be required. Forty (40%) percent of those voting in the last previous general election would be required to validate the vote. An election in conjunction with the August 14, 2008 primary election would require notice (a resolution) filed with the County Auditor by May 27th. The November 4, 2008 general election would `n require notice filed by August 12 Exhibit 1 1?0 too $�t�.K�k rtotaS� f�rtt��E. WA��tz- SLrt� 1 I w�rr�c�- rtr�rutr�5 I f { Tirh�.t�+xy tr�o4.. � I o•r•b Exhibit 2 Pool Outdoor/Indoor Analysis Admission Assumed: $2.00 Outdoor Facility Indoor Facility** Est Swimmer Days 84,500 221,000 Water Surface Area 8,500 8,500 Building Size * 5,000 24,500 REVENUE Admission @ $2.00 $169,000.00 $442,000.00 Concessions @ $0.10 $8,450.00 $22,100.00 Lesson/Classes $10,000.00 $40,000.00 Rentals $1,000.00 $5,000.00 TOTAL REVENUE $188,450.00 $509,100.00 EXPENSE Personnel $98,300.00 $296,000.00 Ad/Prof/Misc $11,500.00 $40,500.00 Maint/Repair @ /sf water outdoor $0.50 $4,250.00 fsf bldg indoor $3.20 $78,400.00 Chemicals Isf water outdoor $1.50 $12,750.00 Isf water indoor $2.00 $17,000.00 Utilities Isf water outdoor $0.50 $4,250.00 Isf bldg indoor $9.00 $220,500.00 TOTAL EXPENSE $131,050.00 $652,400.00 NET OPERATING $57,400.00 -$143,300.00 * Natatorium=16,000, Bath house= 5,000, Mech=3,500 ** Indoor Facility assumes 54% of summer quarter(outdoor facility) use; 67% of summer quarter personnel cost for balance of year Exhibit 2 Pool Outdoor/indoor Analysis Admission Assumed: $3.00 Outdoor Facility Indoor Facility— Est Swimmer Days 84,500 221,000 Water Surface Area 8,500 8,500 Building Size ` 5,000 24,500 REVENUE Admission @ $3.00 $253,500.00 $663,000.00 Concessions @ $0.10 $8,450.00 $22,100.00 Lesson/Classes $10,000.00 $40,000.00 Rentals $1,000.00 $5,000.00 TOTAL REVENUE $272,950.00 $730,100.00 EXPENSE Personnel $98,300.00 $296,000.00 Ad/Prof/Misc $11,500.00 $40,500.00 Maint/Repair @ /sf water outdoor $0.50 $4,250.00 isf bldg indoor $3.20 $78,400.00 Chemicals /sf water outdoor $1.50 $12,750.00 /sf water indoor $2.00 $17,000.00 Utilities /sf water outdoor $0.50 $4,250.00 /sf bldg indoor $9.00 $220,500.00 TOTAL EXPENSE $131,050.00 $652,400.00 NET OPERATING $141,900.00 $77,700.00 Natatorium=16,000, Bath house= 5,000, Mech=3,500 Indoor Facility assumes 54% of summer quarter(outdoor facility) use; 67% of summer quarter personnel cost for balance of year >C a� (1) cry O o O o 6q 64 a� a� o N bs U t*- 6s 601) v� Z �3 {� O U > U > U a o E E z � � � °4 � °4 °> M ng A -rl ICI U � h O' O cl o o o a > > ° > ° O ¢" o V r.. ozai m ai 3 � ca o P. . 0� C% I.. as b 0 3 92, Q G� U AGENDA REPORT NO. 14 FOR: City Council April 24, 2008 TO: Gary Crutchfie anager REGULAR: 4/28/08 FROM: David 1. McD iald, City Plannerv�__c SUBJECT: CODE AMENDMENT- Driveway and Sidewalk Standards (MF #CA-08-001) I. REFERENCE(S): A. Proposed Ordinance B. Staff Memo on Proposed Ordinance C: Memo to Planning Commission D. Planning Commission Minutes dated: 3/20/08 &4117/08 11. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL/STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Discussion: 4/28108 MOTION: 5/5/08 1 move to adopt Ordinance No. , amending PMC Title 12 dealing with sidewalks and driveways and, further, to authorize publication by summary only. I1I. FISCAL IMPACT: NONE IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF: A. At their regular meeting of March 20, 2008 the Planning Commission held a workshop to discuss the need for updating the city's driveway standards. Following a public hearing on April 17, 2008 the Planning Commission made a recommendation to the City Council for amendments to the standards. B. The Planning Commission recommendations are contained in the proposed ordinance Attachment to this report. V. DISCUSSION: The current sidewalk and driveway standards contained in PMC 12.04 were enacted in 1969. A few minor amendments have been made since 1969, but the code standards have essentially remained the same for 39 years. While the sidewalk and driveway standards have remained constant for many years, the size of service vehicles and freight trucks and the number of personal vehicles in use have changed in size or increased in number. As the number of vehicles has changed per household there has been a corresponding change in the way houses are built. Forty years ago single-car and 2-car garages were the norm. Today many homes are constructed with 3-car garages and occasionally with 4-car garages. The proposed code amendments are designed to address the changes in driving habits and vehicle sizes as well as taking care of a number of housekeeping issues related to the administration of the code. Additional information on the proposed code amendments are provided in the attached staff memo. If Council concurs with the attached recommendations, the proposed ordinance will be placed on the May 5h agenda for Council action. 3(b) ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE amending Title 12 dealing with sidewalk and driveway improvements. WHEREAS, cities have the responsibility to regulate and control the physical development within their borders and ensure the public health, safety and welfare are maintained; and, WHEREAS, driveways provide access points to private property and control turning movements on and off public streets; and, WHEREAS, the proper location of driveways can aid in the efficient movement of traffic on city streets, lessen congestion and enhance the safety of motorists and pedestrians; and, WHEREAS, the public streets are designed to contain primarily street drain only, therefore it is necessary to limit drainage from hard surfaces of private property such as from driveways; and, WHEREAS, the unmanaged placement and size of driveways limits the availability of on-street parking, creating potential for neighborhood conflicts; and, WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that to protect public infrastructure, avoid neighborhood conflicts and further the purposes of maintaining the public health, safety and welfare of the community, it is necessary to amend PMC Title 12; and, NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That section 12.04.010 of the Pasco Municipal Code be and the same is hereby amended to read as follows: 12.04.010 SCOPE OF- CH n PT-E-W PURPOSE. It is the_p,I. ese of this e ., ter to e ua&n:n development 6�eurbs, sidewalks and driveways within the City, but shall Red alter- or- a feet-these-euFb J, sidewalks and dr-i-veways pr-esefAly 7 modified, ) , ffledifieafie 7 7 of rehange shall be in aeeer-danee w4h the previsions he i e4wined The purpose of the chapter is to establish provisions for the uniform development and construction of curbs sidewalks and driveways within the city. 1 Section 2. That section 12.04.020 of the Pasco Municipal Code be and the same is hereby amended to read as follows: 12.04.020 DEFINITIONS. (a) "Abutting property" means all property having a frontage on a public street right-of-way. e— (b) "Commercial driveway ese" means any driveway intended to serve property located in a commercial or industrial zoning district. 1°'T"11" Fene , being used for business commercial or industrial purposes. (c) "Residential note-driveway" means any driveway intended to serve property located in a residential zoning district or property actually being used for residential purposes. for use by the areeapant as aeoess to his pr-epeFty. (d) "Residential e" means r.°rt,. ether- ., ned or aet„olly 4.., r... . e (e) "Sef�viee driveway" means any dfiveway ifAended far- use by the publie as (f)(d) "Sidewalk" means a an improved walkway improved with concrete or other approved material located in the public ri t-of-way eg nerally parallel to bordering private abutting property for pedestrian use. (e) "Public Right-of-Way" means M publicly owned land set aside and dedicated for surface transportation purposes, including vehicular, bicycle and pedestrian transportation, whether improved or unimproved. Section 3. That section 12.04.030 of the Pasco Municipal Code be and the same is hereby amended to read as follows: 12.04.030 RIG14T OF ABUTTERS RESPONSIBILITY OF ABUTTING PROPERTY. Any All abutting property is responsible far ^ nted the right to constructiqg sidewalks, handicapped ramps, crosswalks, curbs, gutters or driveways along the entire frontage of the abutting_property i-n front of thei . . .I ,,,he ^ nstr„^+°,l in conformity with this chapter, and the city's current standard specifications. regulations as met),be prescribed f fe time to time by the City Couneil. Section 4. That section 12.04.040 of the Pasco Municipal Code be and the same is hereby repealed: 12.04.04('--Il,4PR$A,�4ENTS T-$BE Co j`!CPrET:-E SUPERVISION. All eenstr-us E)f an inspee4er-appointed by the Gib,. Section 5. That section 12.04.050 of the Pasco Municipal Code be and the same is hereby amended to read as follows: 12.04.0-50 040 PERMIT REQUIRED. Before any person, firm or corporation commences to improve any of 4he public right-of-way sired within eer-perate lifntts-e the City by the er-eetion a construction of sidewalks, handicapped ramps, 2 crosswalks, curbs, or driveways, or to do any work in or upon the public right-of-way °t--°°t° And- 811eys whatsoever, he or they must first obtain a right-of-wax permit from the City Building iffsperatef. No permit will be issued for any such work upon any up blic right-of-way stfee+ o alley within the e mte lifn:+s of the City when the grade has not been properly established. ..hill a pr-epositien to alter- «d the grade the°^f� pending be fi ft the City !''..tmei1 after- the City (�ewwil has r:rnr�4�d .� .t:+:.�« , acrvrr, of adopted-n-resolution to-improve-the siFeets er alley-rn-. Iy he-o��an of a 1......1 improvement distri 4 and no ... it ..hEdl be issued :f in the judgment of the Celunefl- the impr-eve td to be made, is not a suitable ene or- will net h the ; ead:..te vieinity of the proposed imprevements. Section 6. That section 12.04.060 of the Pasco Municipal Code be and the same is hereby repeated: 12nn 060 n> r�n>?n n>~ >z>✓ r rT�r_t»✓nr-rrl� n r+ ha l be the d„t.. f the City �..vrva�z.� - - rc 9rTCCr:--vc-cnc-crarT�or-crr�crcT Building l«r«°.. er- to keep a r-eeerd of all fmits issued_for- nstituefien «de- tt,° issued,. ions of this ehapter-, whieh feeor-ds sW1 show the date of issue thereof-, te wheffi made, the , fees > and when aeeepted by the City Building insperatef:, and t4e "e of aeeeptanee. Section 7. That section 12.04.070 of the Pasco Municipal Code be and the same is hereby amended to read as follows: 12.04.07-0 060 PERMIT FEE SCHEDULE. The permit fee for a ri -of-w permit shall be the minimum fee listed for a building permits under PMC 3 0 030 Bj 11Y. GJAY 303A, Table Ne.3 A. Section 8. That section 12.04.080 of the Pasco Municipal Code be and the same is hereby repeated: 12.04,080 SURVEY S"'r I A44ONS.Upon the-granting of a permit by G� Building inspeeter-, it shall be the duty of "s effirae, in eei�uaetien ;A'444- aht-Q. City thereof-, and fiamish-da4a and speeifieatiens—te--w-hieh—the-a�11—�..�°...t MUst eeafer-m. The per-son or PeFSen:S peffeffflittg the work shall take pr-epef pfeeaUti6ft tO pfeteet the stakes set by the Building inspeeter or- C4y Engineer-, and any and all stakes lost or-destroyed shall be replaced only by the City Building hispeeter-or City Engine the expense of the per-son obtaining the peFmit. Section 9. That section 12.04.090 of the Pasco Municipal Code be and the same is hereby amended to read as follows: 3 12.04.8 8 070 SIDEWALKS - WIDTH M T>PJA c 4.1-1- in +ham, have the eur-b integrated with the walk, although the eurb sheuld be eleafly defined wi an apprep6ate mar-king in the eement; ftwther-, sueh sidewalks in a residential afea shall be five feet : width, ineluding the width of the e ,r1, with , nt p ;a°a ,+ least every fbi4y fe�; and in busifiess and industfial ze es;, -sueh sid-tea;,L—Alkss —shia-11 extend F«.,m the pr-epeft),line ie the fb 4+1 e*pansien is .,r I I I f fty For_ 1) Residential sidewalks shall be five (5) feet in width inclusive of the curb. 2) Commercial sidewalks shall be seven (7) feet in width inclusive of the curb. Where a commercial sidewalk is offset from the curb by a landscaped planting strip of three feet or more a commercial sidewalk may be five (5) feet in width. The Public Works Director or designee is authorized to permit the construction of commercial sidewalks at variance with the seven(7) foot standard under following circumstances: i) where existing conditions may make it impracticable ii) where there is insufficient right-of-way iii) where surrounding land uses may require an altered standard Provided that should the r-egulatiens presef-ibed in this seetion be ifftpr-aefieable or-though to be against the best interest of 4he City, the Direeter of Community Develepfnen4 shall be "�her-ized te give speeial permits fer-the reenstruetion of such walks after- eNafflin ef the premises and deteHnifiing that the k4er-est of the City will be be54 sefyed by Ring sidewalk e, .,trued.n at var-ianee .;ih "s s°„+;,..,_ Section 10. That section 12.04.110 of the Pasco Municipal Code be and the same is hereby amended to read as follows: 12.04.4-W 080 DR4VEW n v LEVEL.: the City twlesss the Sa—me shal-I bea, upon the level of �,4e sidewalk 4am a poin! fiet. exceeding f. feet f.,..,., the . Fb 1;«°.,f +h° Sidewalk Section 11. That section 12.04.120 of the Pasco Municipal Code be and the same is hereby amended to read as follows: 12.04.428 080 DRIVEWAY STANDARDS NUMBER OF PP,4V~A'n ve PER LOT. All driveways shall comply with the respective general standards in addition to applicable standard engineering specifications adopted by the Public Works Director to the city's current standard specification and the following: A) Residential Driveways: 1. Driveway widths shall be measured at the curb flow line exclusive of the transitions. Where there is no curb line the drivewa y width shall be 4 measured at the points where the extension of the two outer edges of the driveway intersect the street right-of-way. 2. Only one driveway shall be permitted for each lot unless otherwise provided herein. 3. No single driveway shall be wider than 34 feet or 50 percent of the lot frontage, whichever is smaller. 4. Circular driveways are only permitted on lots with 100 feet or more of frontage on the street that carries the lot address. 5. The combined widths of all driveways creating a circular driveway must not exceed a total of 40 feet. 6. Lots with double frontage may have a secondary driveway off the flanking or side street, but no more than 22 feet in width. 7. No driveway shall be located closer than 25 feet to an intersection of two streets unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Director or designee 8. No drivewav shall encase a water meter box or irrigation meter box. 9. Driveways must conform to the provisions of PMC.70.085 (p). 10. Driveways must be positioned to avoid interfering with fire hydrants, utility boxes and equipment. The cost of relocating any utilities to accommodate a driveway shall be borne by the permit holder. B) Commercial Drivewa s: 1. Driveway widths shall be measured at the curb flow line exclusive of the transitions. 2. No single driveway may exceed 35 feet unless the Public Works Director or designee determines a greater width is necessary, based on one or more of the following considerations: i) Street classification ii) Street speed limit iii) Traffic volume and tuming movements iv) Number of parking spaces within the parking lot served by the drivewa V) Whether or not the ro osed drivewa will serve multiple businesses vi) Safety of pedestrians and motorists vii) Type of vehicles typically using the proposed driveway 3. The location and number of driveways permitted to serve a commercial propgM will be determined by the Public Works Director or designee . The determination on the location and number of drivewa s shall be based upon the review criteria of PMC 12.04.080 B 2 and shall consider reasonable traffic enjzineeriniz issues deemed necessary to ensure safety to pedestrian users of the public ways to preclude hazardous or congestive traffic movements, to maintain desirable traffic flow along the arterial corridors or 5 for any other reason related to public safety. The decision of the Public Works Director is final unless appealed to the Hearing Examiner, in writing and stating the reasons therefore, within ten days of the Director's decision. (A) O ffivale driveway, of° °ending t . a4 y feet in width, shall be pefmiaed zone. (B) Fe eaeh fifty feet of eentinuees f entn per, n street or avenue, f , 1,.,,.,t:,,., of . ° rl.:.,°,., , r to issuanee of a building .-.°.mit as dv°rr, anerial ee ff a,,,., e4her-reason rested-te publie saz°. The-decision of the Community Development Direeter- is final tinless appealed to the City Couneil, i Section 12. That section 12.04.130 of the Pasco Municipal Code be and the same is hereby amended to read as follows: 12.04.--3.0 110 ABANDONED DRIVEWAY DUTY OF 03AINE When an driveway has been abandoned, or becomes unused for any reason, it shall be closed and the abutting property owner shall replace it with a standard curb and sidewalk constructed to the city's current standard specifications. In the event that any driveway shall abandoned or diseentinued, the e-Ane-r- of the pr-ope4y abut4ing thereen shall restore the same to the level ef the adjoining sidewalk In the event of&ilufe te de so, the abutting property owner fails to replace an abandoned or unused driveway with standard curb and sidewalk, the cit y mgy order the curb and sidewalk be constructed as , the ,.feeedur° shall be the same provided by the laws of the State of Washington. r-eWing to the _°.air- e sidewalks. Section 13. That section 12.04. of the Pasco Municipal Code be and the same is hereby amended to include a new subsection 12.04.135 to read as follows: EXISTING DRIVEWAYS: Existing driveways that do not conform to the standards_of this chapter or other standards or regulations of the city of Pasco must be brought into conformance when a permit is issued for work on the affected prgpe where said work exceeds 33 percent of the assessed value of the improvements upon the property. Permit applications for anv alterations or repair to nonconforming driveways other than ordinary maintenance will require the driveway to be brought into conformance with current standards, Notwithstanding, the Public works Director may permit the modification or improvement of an existing driveway without full compliance with cit sods where the strict application of the standard would result in substantial hardship to the property owner, Provided however, the modification or improvement does not impeded the movement of traffic or increase hazards to pedestrians or motorists. 6 Section 14. That Chapter 12.04.140. of the Pasco Municipal Code be and the same is hereby repealed: 12.04.140 SUPERVISION OF CONSTRUCTION. The per-sonmaking -sue-h eampleted and!he fi)rms set ready for plaeing eener-ete. The City Building hispe shall ,.heek up the ferms as to line and glade and plaee an inspeetef in ,har-ge „f the n 1..e tie of the job a4 the time s eh °..+ is ..,.+..all., installed. Section 15. That Chapter 12.04.150 of the Pasco Municipal Code be and the same is hereby repealed: 1-2104.150 SAFETY FETV PREC A F TTIONS g4ie eentraEt"vF 8r- pefsen having vzharge of the shall be kept a .,rl s.;1-le-h- ...-1, a4 A times, and o uffieient......«L.°"e f red lights shall be plaeod at proper-intervals upon sueh wogE 4ur-ift the nig14 fifne as a wafning to all per-so Section 16. That Chapter 12.04.160 of the Pasco Municipal Code be and the same is hereby amended to read as follows: 12.04.160 INSPECTION - CONFORMANCE TO PLAN. No improvement will be accepted until the City Building Construction Inspector is satisfied that the work has been performed according to the approved plans, profiles and current standard specifications f6mished by him and to the lines and gr-ades established. Section 17. This ordinance shall be in full force and effective after its passage and publication as required by law. PASSED this day of 2008. Joyce Olson Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: 7 Section 14. That Chapter 12.04.140. of the Pasco Municipal Code be and the same is hereby repealed: 12.04.14 0 SUPER-VISION OF CONSTRUCTION The pe fs f .„nL,ag such ..+ r his r.+r.ete .,+ shall notify the City Building ing T,�.spec er- 'n shall eheek tip the fei:ms —A,; *--A 11in-ea—And gr-ade and plaee aft insperater in ehafge of the 0 0 � r. o > > Section 15. That Chapter 12.04.150 of the Pasco Municipal Code be and the same is hereby repealed: �7 04 1 50 SAFETY PRECAUTIONS The o ., ha F the ..�����-�-,�lt� Y��c�iicruvt��p �b�°r-crrc a and asuffieiepAnuffiber- efr-ed lights shall plaeed at pfeper-intervals upon such wedE dufing the night tifne as a warning to all pefsen Section 16. That Chapter 12.04.160 of the Pasco Municipal Code be and the same is hereby amended to read as follows: 12.04.160 INSPECTION - CONFORMANCE TO PLAN. No improvement will be accepted until the Cky Bttilding Construction Inspector is satisfied that the work has been performed according to the Uproved plans, profiles and current standard specifications L Ul3I1JLSLK by il.liii and L established. Section 17. This ordinance shall be in full force and effective after its passage and publication as required by law. PASSED this day of 2008. Joyce Olson Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: Sandy Kenworthy Leland B. Kerr Deputy City Clerk City Attorney 7 Memorandum For : City Council To: Gary Crutchfield, City Manager From: Dave McDonald, City Planner Subject: Proposed Sidewalk & Driveway Code Amendments Date: April 24, 2008 Introduction The proposed code amendment contains a number of introductory whereas similar to findings that explain many of the reasons why it is important to maintain standards, particularly for driveways. There are at least three reasons why it is important to have standards for driveways. These reasons include: public safety, protection of public infrastructure, and reduction of property owner conflicts. The proper location, width and design elements of driveways, particularly for commercial driveways, help control turning movements on and off public streets and aid in the movement of traffic on those streets by reducing congestion and enhancing safety. Public streets are designed to control and contain storm water runoff that is collected in the street right-of-way. Exfiltration trenches under streets and/or stormwater collection ponds are not designed to take care of significant amounts of drainage from adjoining private property. Unmanaged construction of driveways can lead to significant increases in the amount of water draining onto city streets. Overloading the street drainage system increases siltation and shortens the useful life of the system. In addition to increasing street drainage problems wide driveways in residential neighborhoods impact the available space for on-street parking. If one property owner has most of his or her street frontage devoted to driveway visitors, guests or family members will tend to park in front of other properties. While not against the law, constantly parking vehicles in front other homes may lead to neighborhood conflicts. Code Amendment Summary Section 1 modifies the current purpose statement. The current purpose statement is a combination of a purpose statement and regulations. Section 2 clarifies existing definitions and adds a definition for sidewalk and public right- of-way. 1 Section 3 modifies the current code making it consistent with other code requirements and current practice by clearly explaining property owner responsibilities for construction of curbing and sidewalks. Section 4 repeals the current code requiring appointment of an inspector to supervise construction of sidewalks, curbs or driveways. Current standards and practices call for permits and inspections by the city but not direct supervision of the construction. Sections 5, 6 & 7 modify the current code by clarifying the permitting process, eliminate City Council responsibility for setting or altering street grades for construction and set a permit fee consistent with the newly establish minimum fee of$50. Section 8 repeals the current code that requires the City Engineer and or Building Inspector to set construction stakes for improvements in the right-of-way. The building inspectors typically donot have the training to set stakes and the City Engineer does not have the time or manpower to take on this work. Developers and builders have been responsible for construction staking for 30 years or more. Section 9 repeals the current code provisions for sidewalks. The construction standards for sidewalks have not required an integrated curb and sidewalk system for 30 years. Curbs and sidewalks are constructed separately to the requirements of the standard specification established by the Engineering Office. The proposed provisions under this section provide criteria for the Public Works Director to waive the width requirements for commercial sidewalks where circumstances warrant a waiver. Section 10 repeals existing provisions dealing with building inspector responsibilities related to issuing permits for driveways. Driveway standards are illustrated in the standard engineering specifications, and as such, driveway plans are reviewed by the engineering office and not the building inspector. Section 11 replaces the existing standards for driveways with specific requirements for both residential and commercial driveways. This section clearly explains the number of permitted driveways, the width of driveways, and addresses issues of meter boxes and utilities that are not currently addressed in the code. Section 12 clarifies language dealing with eliminating abandoned driveways. Section 13 adds new provisions requiring existing nonconforming driveways to be brought into conformance whenever permits are issued for projects that exceed 33 percent of the assessed value of the property for which the permit is issued. Section 14 & 15 repeal existing provisions related to building inspector responsibility for inspections and safety precautions. Call in procedures are in place for inspections and red lights are no longer used for warning lights on construction projects. Section 16 clarifies who is to inspect driveways and sidewalk construction. 2 MEMORANDUM DATE: April 17, 2008 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Dave McDonald, City Planner SUBJECT: Driveway Standards The current driveway standards relating to the number of driveways and width of driveways per lot were developed in the late 1960's. Since the late 60's the size of service vehicles and the number of personal vehicles have all increased. Speeds on major streets may have also increased. In the sixties single-car garages were prevalent. The single-car garage gave way to the two-car garage while many homes today are constructed with three-car garages. A site plan was submitted last week for a house with a four-car garage. While driving habits, the size of vehicles and the number of residential garages has evolved over the years, Pasco's driveways standards have not. The current standard permits one private residential driveway not exceeding 20 feet in width for every 50 feet of frontage. Commercial driveways are limited to 30 feet in width for every 50 feet of frontage. However for commercial driveways the number and location can be modified by the Community Development Director. For public safety reasons and to accommodate service vehicles, commercial driveways have been permitted in excess of 30 feet on major streets. Residential driveways have also expanded over time to complement the growing trend for three-car garages. Residential driveways are now typically 34 feet in width. Due to changing conditions related to the evolution of the size of commercial service vehicles and the way houses are typically constructed, there is a need to reconsider the current driveway standards. A public hearing has been scheduled during the regular April 17th meeting to consider proposed amendments to the city's driveway standards. The attached proposed code amendment provides specific standards for both residential and commercial driveways. These standards are designed to address the items discussed in the workshop of March 17th. These items included i driveway widths, number of driveways, circular driveways, distance from side streets, location of meters and utilities and general public safety issues. A public hearing has been scheduled the regular meeting of April to consider proposed driveway amendments. Recommendation MOTION: I move the Planning Commission recommend the City amend the driveway standards of Title 12 as indicated in proposed ordinance. 2 Planning Commission Minutes 3/20/08 WORKSHOP: A. Driveway Standards Review proposed changes to PMC Title 12 regarding number, location, and widths of driveways. Chairman Samuel asked staff for comments under the workshop item. Staff explained current driveway standards were developed in the late 1960's and have not been revised or update since. Since the 1960's vehicles have changed in size, and over the years driveways have gotten large to accommodate three-car garages. While the PMC limits residential driveways to 20ft. in width many driveways have been developed at a width greater than 20ft. Commercial driveways have been restricted to 30 feet in width. However over the years, in the interest of safety, commercial driveways have been permitted to exceed 30 feet. Staff explained some of the problems associated with narrow commercial driveways on major streets. Staff explained that in preparing for the workshop, driveway requirements from neighboring cities such Richland, Kennewick, Walla Walla, Yakima, and Spokane were reviewed. Staff provided a brief overview of the different requirements for surrounding communities. It was explained that there were at least three important reasons to control driveway widths. The first important issue that needed to be considered was the width of the driveway as it relates to the street design for storm water drainage. The absorption areas under the streets for storm water are design to accommodate a limited amount of runoff from adjacent properties. Increasing the driveway widths increases the amount of runoff from a property, possibly overusing the street drainage system. Also, neighborly peace should be considered, as increased driveway widths prevent parking in front of the property and causes visitors to park in front of neighboring properties, which could potentially create conflict. Finally, standard practice is inconsistent with current City codes. Commissioner Rose felt that shrubbery adjacent to driveways needs to be addressed. Commissioner Schouviller asked staff for recommendations on driveway widths. Staff stated that changes definitely need to occur for commercial driveways along arterial streets. For smaller developments 35-40 foot driveways may be OK but for large projects located on major streets flexibility is needed to allow the City Engineer to modify driveway widths for traffic safety reasons. For residential driveways Staff recommended nothing greater than 34ft. Commissioner Rose agreed that commercial areas needed to have wider driveways. Residential lots also need more flexibility because of the various shapes of the lots throughout the community, especially on cul-de-sac lots. Staff requested direction on width of driveways for lots large enough to have circular driveways Commissioner Schouviller suggested 20 ft. because that is enough room for two vehicles. At the conclusion of the discussion Staff explained they would schedule a public hearing for the next Planning Commission meeting to consider changes to the driveway standards. Planning Commission Minutes 4/17/08 B. Code Amendment Driveway StandardsJCity of Pascol (MF#CA08-001_) Chairman Samuel read the master file number and asked staff for a report. Staff explained this item was discussed in a workshop last month. The current driveway and sidewalk code was developed in 1969 and has not been revised significantly since. While driving habits, size of motor vehicles, school buses and service vehicles for commercial use have increased in size no changes have been Staff explained there were several reasons why the city should be concerned with managing driveways. First, streets are designed to contain a certain amount of stormwater runoff. The current storm drainage system is not designed for increased stormwater from large driveways. Second, municipal codes are enacted in part to help reduce conflicts within the community. Unrestricted driveway sizes in residential neighborhoods limits on-street parking. This can lead to neighborhood conflicts when visitors and guests to one house constantly park in front of another house because there is no street frontage for parking as the result of driveways. Third, commercial driveways are a concern, because the location and size of commercial driveways can impact traffic safety on major streets. Staff pointed out the first two pages of the proposed ordinance was not discussed last month and needed to be considered. These pages dealt with definitions, permitting, construction staking and other matters. Staff stated developers are required to provide their own surveying and staking for construction rather than the City Engineer or Building Inspector as provided for in the current code. Staff explained Section 9 of the proposed ordinance dealing with sidewalks modifies the existing code by providing specific circumstances under which the Public works Director may alter the requirement for a standard 7-foot sidewalk in a commercial area. Staff explained Section 11 of the proposed ordinance dealing with standards for driveways. These'standards included driveways widths, location of driveways in relation to utilities, the number of permitted driveways and standards for circular driveways. The proposed code provides specific criteria for the Public Works Director to review when considering the width for commercial driveways. Commissioner Samuel questioned if there is a non-conforming house was being remodeled, would the driveway have to meet this new code. Staff explained that if the remodel exceeds 33% of the value of the house, the house would have to comply with the updated regulations. The 33% standard is found throughout the code. it is found for example in the landscaping regulations. Chairman Samuel asked if this would be something that would actually be enforced by the construction inspectors. Staff explained that it would be tied to a building permit and enforced during that process. Commissioner Little asked about the converting of garages into living areas. Staff explained that is no longer permitted as per the residental design standards that were adopted in 2005. Staff explained that under the rules adopted in 2005; the primary driveway must terminate into a garage or carport. Thus, in order to convert a garage into a recreation room there would have to be sufficient area on the lot to build a new garage or carport for the primary driveway to terminate into. Commissioner Anderson stated the revised proposal did not contain the section regarding the 33% rule but the ordinance mailed with the packet did. Staff's recommendation was for the 33% rule to be included in the ordinance and should be so considered when the Planning Commission makes a recommendation to the City Council. Chairman Samuel asked for further clarification on the impact of the 33% rule on the conversion of garages to a living area and the driveway did not terminate in a garage or carport. Staff explained the proposed 33% rule does not impact the current application of the code. When the code was amended in 2005 to address state requirements on manufactured homes the residential design standards required driveways to terminate into a garage or carport. Remodeling the garage into a living space causes the driveway to be in violation of the code. Commissioner Little asked if a garage was remodeled would the home owner be required to eliminate the driveway. Staff explained that at least a portion of the driveway would have to be removed and an alternate garage would have to be provided. Following a brief discussion on commercial driveways Chairman Samuel stated he was of the opinion that larger driveways should be encouraged for commercial driveways along major streets. And he thought that the proposal encourages the restriction of commercial driveways to 35ft. Staff noted the suggestion and stated that by providing a set of review criteria the Public Works Director would be granted the flexibility of approving commercial driveways with larger widths as conditions warrant. Commissioner Anderson agreed that provision #2 provides Public Works with the needed flexibility to approved wider driveways when needed. Commissioner Cruz asked about replacement of abandoned driveways. If there is a required time frame the replacements to occur as required in section 12. Staff explained that this provision is typically applied when property owners are notified that repairs are needed in the sidewalks or when permits are issued for alteration or repairs or new construction. Chairman Samuel asked if there were additional other comments. Chairman Samuel opened the public hearing. Following three calls for public comment the hearing was closed. Commissioner Anderson moved seconded by Commissioner Hay that the Planning Commission recommends the City Council amend the driveway standards of Title 12 as presented by Staff including the 33 % rule. The motion was unanimously approved. AGENDA REPORT TO: City Council April 23, 2008 FROM: Gary Crutchfi Manager Workshop Mtg.: 4/28/08 SUBJECT: Senior Service Advisory Committee I. REFERENCE(S): I. Memorandum from A&CS Director dated 04/22/08. IL ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL/ STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: 04/28: Discussion and direction. III. FISCAL IMPACT: None. IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF: A) Please refer to the attached memorandum from Stan Strebel, Administrative and Community Services Director, explaining the current composition of the Senior Services Advisory Committee. Included with the memorandum is a copy of P.M.C. Chapter 2.30, reflecting the municipal code provisions regarding the committee. V. DISCUSSION: A) Given the increasing difficulty of filling the eight appointed seats on the Senior Services Advisory Committee, reducing the number of seats to five or seven is a practical way to mitigate the problem. A smaller committee would not appear to pose a reduction in effectiveness, as there already exists a strong Senior Citizens Association (private, non-profit association) which is very capable of expressing issues on behalf of Pasco seniors. Thus, the City's advisory committee acts more as a filter for those issues relating to City facilities and/or policies; as such it would not appear to require nine seats and should be able to fulfill its mission with five or seven seats. B) Staff requests City Council provide direction as to whether or not the committee should be reduced in size. If so, an appropriate ordinance can be prepared for council action on May 5. 3(c) FASCO Cl.�.., yAL.L. MEMORANDUM -APR 22 2008 CITY MnANAGER'S TO: Gary Crutchfield, City Manager L)FFICE FROM: Stan Strebel, A, i five and Community Services Director DATE: April 22, 2008 RE: Senior Services Advisory Committee Chapter 2.30 of the PMC establishes the Senior Services Advisory Committee (see attached)at nine members, eight of which are appointed by the Mayor. One seat on the committee is allocated for the President of the Senior Citizen Association. Additionally, there is a City Council liaison, so the size of the group is ten,plus staff. Over the last several years, it has grown more difficult to find citizens willing and interested in serving on the Advisory Committee. This fact, coupled with the fairly large size of the committee, suggests that it may be prudent to reduce the size of the committee. There are currently two incumbents on the committee, plus the Senior's President, so there would seem to be plenty of flexibility in making a restructuring decision. Staff is supportive of reducing the size to either five or seven. A five member committee would consist of four mayor appointments. If the committee were reduced to seven, there would be six appointees. Thank you. CHAPTER 2.30 SENIOR SERVICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE Sections: 2.30.010 COMMITTEE CREATED ................................................................. 25 2.30.020 MEMBERSHIP. ............................................................................. 25 2.30.030 TERM OF OFFICE. ........................................................................ 25 2.30.040 RULES OF PROCEDURE ................................................................ 25 2.30.050 COMPENSATION. ......................................................................... 25 2.30.060 STAFF SUPPORT. ......................................................................... 26 2.30.070 COMMITTEE RESPONSIBILITIES. .................................................. 26 2.30.010 COMMITTEE CREATED. There is hereby created an advisory committee to be known as the "Senior Services Advisory Committee". (Ord. 3317 Sec. 1, 1998.) 2.30.020 MEMBERSHIP. The Senior Services Advisory Committee shall consist of nine voting members, eight of which shall be Pasco citizens at least 50 years-of-age. These members of the Senior Advisory Committee shall be appointed by the Mayor, subject to confirmation by the City Council. The President of the Pasco/Franklin County Senior Citizens Association, by virtue of his/her office, shall automatically be a voting member of the committee and shall serve on the committee during the term of his/her tenure. (Ord. 3317 Sec. 1, 1998.) 2.30.030 TERM OF OFFICE. Members shall serve for a term of three years or until appointment of a successor member, whichever is later; provided, however, the initial appointments shall be for one, two, and three years respectively, so as to create staggered terms of office with the ultimate objective of having not more than three terms expire each year. A member absent without prior notification or excuse from three consecutive regularly scheduled meetings of the committee may be removed by majority vote of the committee and a new member appointed pursuant to Section 2.30.020. (Ord. 3317 Sec. 1, 1998.) 2.30.040 RULES OF PROCEDURE. At the first meeting of each calendar year, the committee shall elect its own chairperson and vice chairperson. The committee shall keep records of its proceedings. A majority of the members of the committee shall constitute a quorum for its meetings. The committee may establish procedures and bylaws for the conduct of its meetings and the transaction of business before it; provided, however, meetings of the committee shall be conducted in a manner consistent with the Open Meetings Act (RCW 42.17) and records of its proceedings shall be open to public inspection. (Ord. 3317 Sec. 1, 1998.) 2.30.050 COMPENSATION. Committee members shall not receive any salary or other compensation for services performed. (Ord. 3317 Sec. 1, 1998.) PMC.Title 2 2/20/2007 25 2.30.060 STAFF SUPPORT. A staff member appointed by the City Manager shall be the staff liaison officer for the committee and, in this capacity, shall represent the day-to-day interests of the City as they relate to senior citizen matters. The staff liaison officer shall serve as secretary for the Committee, including preparation of agendas and minutes of meetings, and other related clerical duties. (Oord. 3317 Sec. 1, 1998.) 2.30.070 COMMITTEE RESPONSIBILITIES. The senior Services Advisory Committee shall work with the staff liaison officer to: Act as an advisory body to the City Council and City Manager on issues relating to senior citizens; provide increased opportunities for community involvement by senior citizens and the community in general; and advise the City Council and City Manager regarding the content and delivery of senior citizen programs and activities. The committee shall perform such other specific advisory functions as may be assigned to it from time to time by the City Council. All recommendations of the committee shall be in writing and shall be signed by the Chair of the committee. (Ord. 3317 Sec. 1, 1998.) PMC Title 2 2/20/2007 26 AGENDA REPORT TO: City Council April 22, 2008 FROM: Gary Crutchfi Manager Workshop Mtg.: 4/28/08 Regular Mtg.: 5/5/08 SUBJECT: Council Goals I. REFERENCE(S): 1. Proposed Resolution II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCILISTAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: 4/28: Discussion 5/5: MOTION: I move to approve Resolution No. , establishing primary goals for the city for calendar years 2008-2009. III. FISCAL IMPACT: IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF: A) Over the past 18 years, City Council has conducted biennial retreats in the spring of each even numbered year (following the municipal election in the odd number year). The purpose of the retreat is to consider the community input along with staff advice and develop a list of specific and measurable goals to be pursued by the city organization over the ensuing two years. B) The Council conducted its retreat on April 18 & 19 following a Community Forum to collect community advice on February 21. The result of the retreat is reflected in the proposed resolution. V. DISCUSSION: A) Approval of the resolution will formally establish the list of goals as the primary work plan for the organization over the ensuing two years. It will be reflected in budget recommendations as well as day to day administrative actions, all designed to achieve those goals before the next biennial retreat (spring 2010). 3(d) RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION establishing primary goals of the City of Pasco for the ensuing calendar years 2008-09. WHEREAS, the City of Pasco organization desires to focus the allocation of its resources toward primary goals selected to fulfill the vision of Pasco's future, as held by its elected representatives; and WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a Community Forum on February 21, 2008 to elicit the concerns of residents about the present condition of the city, as well as thoughts and suggestions for Pasco's future; and WHEREAS, the city collected citizen opinion about many city conditions, services and characteristics as well as certain policy questions by way of the 2007 National Citizen Survey conducted in November 2007; and WHEREAS, the city managerial staff has shared with the City Council its concerns for the present as well as visions for the future of the Pasco community; and WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a goal setting retreat on Saturday, April 19, 2008 to discuss all the various concerns for the present as well as visions for the future; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON,DO RESOL VE AS FOLLOWS. Section 1. That the following goals shall be considered primary goals for the City of Pasco for the ensuing two years(calendar years 2008 and 2009); ■ Industrial Development: the Pasco community and its school district rely on one of the lowest"per capita"assessed value(total taxable property value) in the state. The recent surge in residential growth has increased demands particularly on the school district, without correspondingly sufficient increases in property tax base. The City will work with the Port, TRIDEC and other entities to foster more industrial development (rather than residential), thus increasing the non-residential tax base and, in turn, expanding the school district's financial capacity. The City will focus particular effort in the following geographic areas: o Heritage Industrial Center: approximately 600 hundred acres of land lying south of East "A" Street is classified for industrial use. The City will work with other entities, particularly the Port and BNRR, to assure rail service is available to future industries and will assure appropriate transportation and utility improvements are completed. o Foster Wells Area: approximately 400 hundred acres of land lying east of SR-395 between Hillsboro and Foster Wells is served by an interchange and zoned for industrial use. The City will collaborate with other entities, particularly grant agencies and affected property owners, to extend Commercial Avenue and associated utilities north to Foster Wells Road, thus fostering industrial investment in the affected lands. o SR-12 Corridor: substantial acreage along the SR-12 corridor between SR-395 and the Snake River Bridge is zoned and available for industrial use. WSDOT is planning to study the possibility of an interchange near the Snake River Bridge. The City should assure the utility and transportation system will accommodate the industrial potential of the SR-12 corridor. • Emergency Communications: for more than 30 years, the City has relied on the Franklin County Sheriff for emergency communications services(police and fire). The aging communications equipment and constrained VHF radio frequencies, combined with the rapid physical expansion of the City,present an increasingly ineffective and potentially dangerous communications system for the City's emergency service personnel and, in turn, Pasco's citizens. The City will employ an appropriate consultant, analyze its options and complete implementation of a definitive action plan to upgrade the City's emergency communications system. • Public Safety Building: the explosion of residential growth in the City over the past decade has led to a rapid increase in City staff, necessary to sustain and improve municipal services. The Police Department is now over-crowded and the Municipal Court lease at the Franklin County Courthouse will expire in 2012; construction of a"public safety building" to house both functions will solve immediate space problems and concurrently provide long-term solutions for the balance of City Hall space needs. To that end, the City will complete design of a public safety building on the City Hall campus and approve a funding plan for construction to commence not later than 2011. • Road 68 Congestion: the extent and nature of urban growth on the plateau, combined with the limitations imposed by the current configuration of the Road 68 interchange at I-182, have led to a pattern of intolerable congestion at the intersection of Road 68 and Burden Blvd. The City will develop (and formally adopt) a long-range plan to relieve the growing congestion problem associated with the Road 68 corridor north of I-182. • Lewis Street Overpass: the underpass (now 70 years old) is showing signs of deterioration, posing an eventual threat to public safety as well as potential harm to the BNRR system extending over it. A replacement overpass has been planned, representing not only a solution to the public safety and railroad integrity concerns but a significant positive influence for downtown revitalization as well; however, the project cost($15 million) is well beyond the City's financial capacity. Because it is an essential public facility, the City will complete preliminary design of the overpass and diligently pursue federal and state funding assistance for the project. • UGA Development Standards: development within the City's boundaries must comply with the City's urban development standards; Franklin County, responsible for managing urban development in the unincorporated portion of the Urban Growth Area(UGA), does not apply Pasco's standards. Consequently,portions of the UGA are being developed in a fashion which, after annexation, will require additional public (taxpayer)expenditures to correct the development deficiencies permitted by Franklin County. The City will make every effort to establish an agreement with Franklin County whereby the County will apply Pasco development standards within the UGA. • City Aquatics Plan: the three swimming pools owned and operated by the City are in need of complete renovation or replacement, either of which is expensive. The 2007 Citizen Primary Goals—2006-2007 Page 2 Survey reflected strong citizen support for the notion of developing a contemporary water park on the plateau and a study committee of Pasco citizens recently recommended that such a water park be established on the plateau and that Memorial Pool be renovated. Given the extreme age and obvious deterioration of the existing public pools, it is imperative that a solution be implemented soon; thus, the City Council will complete its consideration of options, adopt a City action plan for aquatics facilities and implement it. • Utility System: with the rapid expansion of the City on the plateau and an official population projection of 87,000 in 2027, the Franklin County Commission recently expanded the City's Urban Growth Area (UGA) to the northwest and further expansion to the northwest is expected as time goes by. To fulfill the City's obligation to prepare for extension of urban services,particularly utilities, the City will adopt updated water and sewer system plans to reflect the anticipated growth patterns. • Regional Centers: each of the Tri-Cities (Kennewick, Richland and Pasco) has created its own public facilities district (authorized to develop and operate "regional centers", such as convention centers, stadiums,performing art centers, etc.); however, none of the PFDs possesses the financial capacity to individually finance the kind of regional facilities which would improve the quality of life within the region. It is the express intent that Pasco work collaboratively with its neighboring cities to,jointly plan for development of"regional centers" through existing PFDs and other appropriate mechanisms. • Broadmoor Interchange: in view of its geographic setting in the region and its ease of access afforded by the adjacent I-182 freeway, the vacant and underutilized lands north of the Broadmoor interchange present great potential for regional scale development. The City will complete a strategic development plan for the Broadmoor interchange area and surrounding urban lands and market it for implementation by the private sector. • Neighborhood Improvement Action Program: many older Pasco neighborhoods show signs of aging, in the form of deteriorating infrastructure and, in some cases, substandard streets and significant gaps in the sidewalk system. These physical conditions tend to have a deleterious effect on the quality of life in those neighborhoods and can adversely affect associated property values. Working with individual neighborhoods to define appropriate improvements,the City will foster code compliance and improvement of neighborhood infrastructure while minimizing impact on low income households. • Downtown: as have many older urban centers, the downtown business district continues to struggle in its effort to revitalize itself. Generally, Pasco citizens want to see a more active effort by the City to foster improvement of the downtown business area. To that end, the City will formally adopt a definitive action plan for City involvement in revitalization of downtown Pasco. • Corridor Enhancement: more than 10 years ago, the City approved a"Gateways and Corridors"enhancement plan, but has implemented only two of the projects recommended by it. In conjunction with new residential development on the plateau, the City has established a contemporary standard for arterial corridor enhancements and the 2007 Citizen Survey reflected strong citizen support for the use of public funds to enhance the older corridors in the City. The City Council will approve an updated "Corridor and Gateway" enhancement plan,to include potential undergrounding of associated overhead utilities, and begin implementation of the plan. Primary Goals—2006-2007 Page 3 ■ Rivershore: over the past decade the City has made notable improvements along its shoreline, lowering the levees and widening the pathway so citizens of all ages can enjoy the Columbia River. Yet more can be done to foster more use of the shoreline and take better advantage of the unique asset the river represents. To that end, the City will update its "master plan"for rivershore improvement. Section 2. The City Manager is hereby directed and authorized to formulate appropriate implementation strategies to achieve the goals set forth hereinabove, consistent with appropriation policies and procedures. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco at a regular meeting this 5th day of May 2008. Joyce Olson, Mayor ATTEST: Sandy Kenworthy Leland B. Kerr Deputy City Clerk City Attorney Primary Goals—2006-2007 Page 4