Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009.02.23 Council Workshop Packet AGENDA PASCO CITY COUNCIL Workshop Meeting 7:00 p.m. February 23,2009 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL: (a) Pledge of Allegiance. 3. VERBAL REPORTS FROM COUNCELMF,MBERS: 4. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION: (a) Tri-Cities Visitor & Convention Bureau. (NO WRITTEN MATERIAL ON AGENDA) Presented by Kim Shugart, Vice President of Operations, Tri-Cities Visitor and Convention Bureau. (b) Process Water Reuse Facility Irrigation Pivot: 1. Agenda Report from Robert J.Alberts, Public Works Director dated February 18, 2009. 2. Bid Summary. 3. Vicinity Map. (c) Amendment No. 1 to Professional Services Agreement Amendment with CH2MHill: 1. Agenda Report from Robert J. Alberts,Public Works Director dated February 18,2009. 2. Amendment No. 1 to Professional Services Agreement. (d) Appointment to Regional Hotel/Motel Commission: 1. Agenda Report from Gary Crutchfield, City Manager dated February 17, 2009. 2. Letter from Tri-Cities Hotel and Lodging Association dated 2/5/09. (e) Abatement at 827 S. Elm Street: 1. Agenda Report from Gary Crutchfield, City Manager dated February 20, 2009. 2. Vicinity Map. 3. Memo from City Attorney to City Manager dated 2/18/09. 4. Proposed Ordinance. 5. OTHER ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION: (a) (b) (c) 6. EXECUTIVE SESSION: (a) (b) (c) 7. ADJOURNMENT. REMINDERS: 1. 4:00 p.m., Monday, February 23, Port of Benton - Hanford Area Economic Investment Fund Committee Meeting. (COUNCILMEMBER MATT WATKINS, Rep.; AL YENNEY,Alt.) 2. 6:00 p.m., Monday, February 23, City Hall, Conference Room #1 - LEOFF Disability Board Meeting. (MAYOR JOYCE OLSON and COUNCILMEMBER MATT WATKINS) 3. 6:30 p.m., Tuesday, February 24, TRAC - Joint meeting with Franklin County Commissioners. (ALL COUNCILMEMBERS) 4. 7:30 a.m., Thursday, February 26, 7130 W. Grandridge Blvd. - Tri-Cities Visitor& Convention Bureau Board Meeting. (COUNCILMEMBER MIKE GARRISON,Rep.;TOM LARSEN, Alt.) 5. 4:00 p.m., Thursday, February 26, 7130 W. Grandridge Blvd. - TRIDEC Board Meeting. (COUNCILMEMBER MIKE GARRISON, Rep.;TOM LARSEN,Alt.) 6. 6:00 p.m., Friday, February 27, TRAC-Benton Franklin Community Action Committee Annual Awards Banquet. (MAYOR JOYCE OLSON and COUNCILMEMBER AL YENNEY) AGENDA REPORT NO. 13 FOR: City Council February 18, 2009 TO: Gary Crutchfi y Manager FROM: Robert J. Albe forks Director Workshop Mtg.: 02/23/09 Regular Mtg.: 03/02/09 SUBJECT: Award Process Water Reuse Facility Irrigation Pivot I. REFERENCE(S): I. Bid Summary 2. Vicinity Map II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL/STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: 02/23: Discussion: 03/02: MOTION: I move to award the low bid for the Process Water Reuse Facility Irrigation Pivot, Project #09-7-02 to Valmont Northwest in the amount of $86,357.98 plus applicable sales tax, and further, authorize the Mayor to sign the contract documents. 111. FISCAL IMPACT: Utility Fund IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF: A) The City owns fourteen irrigation circles at the Process Water Reuse Facility. These irrigation circles or pivots have been on a replacement schedule shown in the City's Capital Improvement Plan. Ten circles have been replaced since 1998. V. DISCUSSION: A) Staff received three bids for replacing an irrigation circle for 2009. A low bid of $86,357.98 plus applicable sales tax was received from Valmont Northwest. The replacement budget is$110,000.00. Staff recommends award of replacing the irrigation circle to Valmont Northwest. 4(b) City of Pasco Process Water Reuse Facility Irrigation Upgrade Project No. 09-7-02 BID SUMMARY 1 . Reinke $995817.68 2. Irrigation Specialist $865415.31 3. Valmont Northwest $86,357.98 r �1 rq M Wlt 4 1 r' 04 "„'i � yl AGENDA REPORT NO. 12 FOR: City Council February 18, 2009 TO: Gary Crutchfie Manager FROM: Robert J. Albe s, Public Works Director Workshop Mtg.: 02/23/09 Regular Mtg.: 03/02/09 SUBJECT: Amendment No. 1 to Professional Services Agreement Amendment with CH2MH111 1. REFERENCE(S): 1. Amendment No. 1 to Professional Services Agreement 11. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL/STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: 02/23: Discussion: 03/02: MOTION: I move to approve Amendment No. 1 to the July 21, 2008 Professional Services Agreement with CH2MHill authorizing additional engineering services not to exceed $115,000 and further, authorize the Mayor to sign the agreement. III. FISCAL IMPACT: General Fund $115,000 IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF: A) In 2000 the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2532 adopting the Lewis Street Corridor Study. In July 2007 Council approved the Engineering Agreement with CH2MH111 (consultant) to provide Funding Technical Services, Concept Development and Environmental Scan and identify NEPA requirements. V. DISCUSSION: A) The work to be performed by the Consultant is to assist the City and the City's lobbyist to pursue federal funds for the new Lewis Street Overpass. It was understood that in order to construct the project that the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) would need to be met. The consultant has identified the NEPA requirements for the project. Staff believes that NEPA needs to be done in order to meet any funding requirements if funds are made available. The proposed amendment to the Consultant agreement is to perform the NEPA on a time and material basis not to exceed the amount of $115,000. Mr. Paul Sobeleski of CH2MHill will be available to explain the NEPA process and answer any questions. 4(c) AMENDMENT NUMBER 1 to PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WHEREAS, the City and The CH2M Hill entered into a Professional Services Agreement on July 21,2008, to provide engineering services with respect to Lewis Street Overpass project. NOW, THEREFORE, this agreement is amended to allow The CH2MHiI1 to provide additional engineering services as described on Exhibit A. 1. Scope of Work: Scope of services includes professional services required for the Lewis Street Overpass Project's NEPA Phase(Phase 2). 2. Fee: The compensation for the work is based on a time and material basis not to exceed the amount of$115,000. 3. Time of performance: The services shall be complete for the project on or before September 1, 2009. DATED THIS DAY OF ,2009. CITY OF PASCO: CONSULTANT—CH2M Hill: Joyce Olson, Mayor Anthony Krutsch, Principle Project Manager ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: Debbie Clark, City Clerk Leland B. Kerr, City Attorney MIAMI] 1 Amendment No. 1 Professional Services Agreement—Lewis Street Overpass RECEIVED V FEB o 5 2009 Exhibit A PUBLIC MRKS ADMIN. Phase 2 Scope of Services - Lewis Street Overpass General This scope of work is to establish the professional services required for the Lewis Street Overpass Project's NEPA phase (Phase 2 of the overall Project), and to establish the basis for compensation as part of the agreement between CH2M HILL and City of Pasco (City). Additional scoping for further services and design work may be added through a supplemental agreement.CH2M HILL will notify the City in writing prior to the occurrence of a change and will provide an estimate of the cost impact.Work will not be started on out- of-scope work until written authorization from the City has been received. This scope of work is based on the use of federal dollars for construction of the Lewis Street Overpass project.Therefore,the National Environmental Policy Act(NEPA)environmental review process must be followed throughout the implementation of this project,which includes preparation of an Environmental Classification Summary (ECS)for the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). It is assumed that an environmental review will result in a Documented Categorical Exclusion (DCE) for compliance under NEPA, and an Environmental Checklist to comply with the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). After the SEPA/NEPA environmental review is completed,applications for environmental permits can be submitted to regulatory agencies, i.e.,stormwater and air quality notices of construction. General Considerations General considerations related to the entire scope of work: 1. This scope of work is intended to meet requirements of the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) Local Agency Guidelines(LAG)Manual Section 24.4, for Class II projects (DCE).The goal of this work will be to evaluate environmental concerns, determine impacts (if any),and suggest design mitigations to address those impacts. 2. It is assumed that a DCE will meet the requirements of NEPA, resulting in a Finding of No Significant Impacts(FONSI). However,if the NEPA lead agency determines that an Environmental Assessment(EA)or an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is needed, an EIS would be conducted under a separate scope of work. 3. All deliverables (discipline reports, ECS, SEPA Checklist)will be provided to the City with 5 bound hard copies, 1 unbound hard copy,and 1 electronic file in Microsoft Word 2003 format. 4. Public notice and a public comment period will be conducted as standard NEPA/SEPA procedure by the City. It is assumed that CH2M HILL will prepare the Determination of Nonsignificance for SEPA, and WSDOT or FHWA will prepare the FONSI. SPWB"581051400010 1 5. There are no plans for a public meeting or hearing,and if one should be imposed by an interested governmental agency reviewing the project or for any other reason, any preparation or participation at the meeting/hearing is out of this scope of work. 6. This scope of work does not include environmental permit applications or fees thereof. Task 1 .0 Project Management and Coordination A chartering session will occur within the first 2-3 weeks of the project with the City. CH2M HILL's project manager and four task leaders will attend and visit the project site/footprint.At the meeting,CH2M HILL will: 1. Present and confirm project goals,expectations and objectives. 2. Present and confirm the project workplan and schedule. 3. Further identify and confirm stakeholders,including governmental agencies. 4. List potential stakeholder issues,Critical Success Factors, fatal flaws/roadblocks, benefits for this project with attendees. 5. Confirm design parameters and evaluation criteria with attendees. 6. Present and confirm the SEPA/NEPA process and schedule. CH2M HILL will provide project management services that will include preparation of monthly invoices and progress reports, coordination and allocation of staff resources,and administration of overall quality on project deliverables. Assumptions: • It is assumed that all information and data needs from governmental agencies for the ECS,DCE and the SEPA Checklist can be obtained by phone without any personal or office meetings. Deliverables: • Participation at project meetings and summary of key issues and resolutions. • One (1)chartering meeting. • Monthly invoices and progress reports. Task 2.0 Environmental Classification Summary CH2M HILL will coordinate with WSDOT and FHWA to confirm a DCE is the appropriate level of NEPA documentation. Upon confirmation,CH2M HILL will prepare a draft ECS for the preferred alignment using the Local Agency ECS form. For budgeting purposes,it is anticipated that the draft ECS will be approved without further documentation. Assumptions: • Meeting with WSDOT/FHWA will be held in Pasco. • It is assumed that the City will submit the ECS to WSDOT/FHWA for approval. Deliverables: • Participation at one (1)meeting with WSDOT/FHWA and summary of key issues and resolutions. 2 • Drafts and Final (if necessary)copies of the ECS will be prepared and submitted to the City. Task 3.0 Discipline Reports The draft ECS will summarize information for all environmental elements evaluated under NEPA and will be supported with the following discipline reports: 1) Noise Analysis 2) Environmental Justice 3) Visual Quality,Aesthetics, Light and Glare 4) Section 4(f) Evaluation and Recreation 5) Historic,Cultural,and Archeological Resources The Environmental Scan Report prepared under Phase I and dated November 2008 will be used as a reference regarding preparation of the environmental discipline reports listed above and the ECS.These discipline reports will be appended to the ECS. In addition,CH2M HILL's project manager and task leaders will attend up to four(4) coordination meetings after the chartering meeting.These meetings will be conducted by phone to discuss: • Meeting 1: Final Discipline Reports-First of April,2009 to discuss issues and concerns identified by the environmental evaluations. • Meeting 2: Final ECS-First of May, 2009 to discuss the mitigation measures proposed for the road/overpass design to be incorporated into the preferred road design. • Meeting 3: WSDOT Review of ECS-Mid June,2009 to discuss WSDOT comments on ECS. • Meeting 4: FHWA Review of ECS-Mid July,2009 to discuss FHWA comments on ECS. Assumptions: • It is assumed that a hazardous materials discipline report is not required because of the Phase 1 work that was conducted as part of an environmental scan for this project. • This scope of work does not include a Phase 2 investigation (identifying properties with potentially contaminated soils, selecting sampling sites,excavating holes, sampling soils and testing for contamination). • It is assumed that the project footprint avoids property that may contain hazardous materials. • If, in the course of construction, a contaminated site is found,site testing and remediation would be conducted under a separate scope of work. Task 3.1 Noise Analysis Discipline Report A noise analysis discipline report will document noise monitoring, modeling,and analyses,including existing baseline conditions and predicted changes in noise levels resulting from the relocated roadway at noise-sensitive locations.The analysis will 3 determine whether the raised roadway will lessen traffic noise to acceptable levels.In addition,the report will address modeling of existing and future park locations and determine what noise impacts might affect park receptors in the future. Commercial, residential,and public facility receptors will be modeled to predict noise impacts with the overpass in place and operating. In all cases,appropriate noise abatement measures will be evaluated for effectiveness at locations where impacts are predicted to occur. Assumptions: • A separate,additional trip to the project site will be required to set up baseline sampling stations and to obtain results from these stations. • It is assumed that no more than four(4)baseline sampling stations will be required for modeling purposes. Deliverables: • Draft and Final Noise Analysis discipline report. Task 3.2 Environmental Justice Discipline Report An Environmental Justice discipline report will describe existing conditions;discuss impacts resulting from relocations,access restrictions,noise, aesthetics,and loss of park land;and describe mitigation measures. It will also discuss benefits to low-income and minority populations related to community cohesion and connectivity enhancements from a safer mode of transportation linking east and west Pasco. The environmental justice analysis will review potentially adverse effects based on the discipline reports,environmental document sections, and results of any public outreach activities prepared and conducted as part of the NEPA review of the project,taking into account the demographics of the affected areas,as appropriate.The following is an outline of the Environmental Justice discipline report including a brief description of the work to be conducted and documented in each section of the technical report. • Introduction and Regulatory Framework:This section will present a brief discussion of the purpose of the analysis,brief background discussion on Presidential Executive Order 12898, US DOT Order 5610.2,and FHWA Order 6640.23; and the relationship of Executive Order 12898 to Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. • Description of the Proposed Action:Text for this section will be obtained from the NEPA environmental document. • Methodology and Approach: This section will describe how the analysis will be conducted and provide definitions of terminology,regulatory citations,and a list of data sources to be used. • Study Area Demographics:This section will provide an understanding of the environmental justice context and include data and maps on minority populations and low-income populations using 2000 U.S. Census data. Demographic data from a source more recent than the U.S.Census(e.g.,public school data)will also be used to identify potential changes in the study area demographics. • Outreach to Minority and Low-Income Populations: This section will describe the measures implemented by the City to involve minority and low-income populations in the decision-making process.A summary of effects identified by minority and 4 low-income populations within the study area will be provided,if any have been so identified. • Project Effects,Mitigation,and Benefits:This section will review the location, intensity,and duration of the anticipated effects, summarize who (from a race and income perspective) would be affected by these effects, summarize proposed mitigation for the identified effects,and summarize anticipated project benefits. A qualitative assessment will be made of the project's likelihood for causing disproportionately high and adverse effects on minority and/or low-income populations. Key analyses to be conducted include the following: a review of anticipated project effects, as identified in the project's discipline reports,NEPA environmental document sections,and results of the outreach activities,will be conducted to identify effects to all populations,including minority and low-income populations;a comparison of effects to minority and low-income populations versus effects to the general population will be conducted where appropriate;and discussion of whether proposed avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures will be effective in addressing potential effects to minority and low-income populations will be provided. • Final Determination and Conclusion:This section will present the final determination and conclusion of whether or not the project would result in disproportionately high and adverse effects on minority and/or low-income populations. If disproportionately high and adverse effects on minority and/or low- income populations are identified, the analysis will also recommend,after consultation with the Project Management Team,measures to avoid,minimize, or mitigate these effects. Assumptions: • The following documents will be used as guides for this analysis:Presidential Executive Order 12898(EO 12898), Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations,dated February 11, 1994; FHWA Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low- Income Populations (FHWA Order 6640.23), dated December 2,1998. Section 458 Environmental Justice from the March 2006 WSDOT Environmental Procedures Manual, M31-11,and Environmental Justice: What You Should Know (June 13, 2003),FHWA Washington Division. • Meaningful involvement of low-income and minority populations in the decision- making process is a core principle of environmental justice. However, specific public involvement outreach activities geared to reach minority and low-income populations will not be conducted as part of the Environmental Justice task. Rather, these activities will be conducted by others,as needed,for this project. Sources in the local community will be contacted regarding the project effects and written summaries of the results of the public outreach activities that specifically focused on minority and low-income populations,will be prepared to be summarized and used in the final Environmental Justice discipline report. • The analysis detailed in this scope of work is dependent on reviews of work products prepared by others (e.g., discipline reports,NEPA environmental document sections,and results of the outreach activities). Timely completion of the 5 Environmental Justice analysis is dependent on timely receipt of the results of these work products prepared by others. • CH2M HILL will finalize the Environmental Justice discipline report,incorporating one round of comments on the draft as received from the City and WSDOT. Deliverables: • Draft and Final Environmental Justice discipline report. Task 3.3 Visual Quality, Aesthetics, Light and Glare Discipline Report A Visual Quality discipline report will identify up to three key observation points experienced by receptors (such as views from nearby residences,commercial properties, and highway vantage points),document baseline conditions,determine visual impacts, and evaluate the need for mitigation measures and feasible solutions. Views toward and away from the project area will be assessed for visual quality (vividness, intactness,and unity). The Visual Quality discipline report will also address light and glare impacts. Three simulations that present the physical featuxes of the site in a way that will show how the proposed overpass will appear relative to its surroundings will be used for the visual analysis. One will be a cross section simulation that was prepared during Phase 1 of the Lewis Street Overpass project.Another simulation will be prepared for the view looking from downtown towards the proposed overpass rising above downtown to the east.The third will be a view from the residential neighborhood north of the Clark Street couplet looking south toward the ramp/couplet. Deliverables: • Three simulations of the proposed overpass relating to downtown views. • Draft and Final Visual Quality discipline report. Task 3.4 Section 4(f) Evaluation and Recreation Discipline Report A Section 4(f)evaluation is required under NEPA whenever recreational properties are impacted by a project.Because of the effects of the project upon Wayside Park, a Section 4(f) Evaluation will be prepared under 23 CFR 771.135,Section 4(f) and summarized in the recreation discipline report. It will characterize existing conditions at Wayside Park, describe expected project impacts on recreation,including relocating Wayside Park,and explain how the city park relocation and replacement meets the needs of the community and complies with Section 4(f) requixements. A Recreation discipline report will describe existing conditions;discuss impacts resulting from the relocation of Wayside Park, and describe mitigation measures. Assumptions: • It is assumed that there are no impacts to Section 6(f)properties. Deliverables: • Draft and Final Section 4(f) Evaluation and Recreation discipline report. 6 Task 3.5 Historic, Cultural, and Archaeological Resources Discipline Report CH2M HILL will identify the Area of Potential Effect(APE).CH2M HILL will prepare letter templates and initial coordination documents to be submitted to WSDOT for their use in conducting government-to-government tribal consultation and Washington State Historical Preservation Office (SHPO)consultation. A Cultural Resource discipline report will describe the historical cultural context of the area (e.g. tribal and railroad cultures), will identify potential impacts to these resources as a result of the overpass project, and will discuss feasible alternatives and mitigation measures to address,avoid,or reduce those impacts. Department of Archeological and Historical Preservation (DAHP) regulations require subsurface testing(shovel or backhoe)prior to construction for all Section 106 projects,along with a thorough global positioning system (GPS)documentation of surveyed areas and subsurface testing areas. Any archaeological findings will be discussed in this report. Assumptions: • Once identified,the APE will not move or change. • No human remains will be encountered or dealt with. • CH2M HILL will not directly consult with the Tribes (this must be government-to- goven-iment,as per law). • No cultural resources are expected and none will be documented. • No additional studies will be required related to Traditional Cultural Properties (TCPs). • Consult with SHPO and the City when developing the APE,scope, and assumptions to ensure that the SHPO agrees that enough investigation has been completed to determine project effects and impacts. • Consult with SHPO and the Tribes to develop an adequate subsurface testing program. Up to 3 days will be needed for development of the subsurface "research design"which will include identification of target testing areas through GIS overlay of historic maps and historic aerial photos onto the project footprint. • CH2M HILL will observe subsurface testing (by hand or with mechanized equipment). Up to 6 backhoe trenches will be examined for cultural resources. Specific areas proposed for overpass footings should be the target of the subsurface investigation,once identified. GIS will determine through overlay of historic maps and aerial photographs,where high probability areas are located in relation to the project design and footprint.Backhoe trenches will measure up to 10 feet long by 10 feet deep by 40 inches wide. • Backhoe testing will take up to 3 days. • The City will secure all landowner permissions and rights of entry,and will call for locates of all underground utilities prior to backhoe excavation work. • GPS positions,photographs,and written descriptions will be collected for each subsurface investigation.The results will be reported using graphics, tables, maps, and written descriptions. • The City will supply the backhoe,backhoe operator, and any traffic control,if needed. 7 • Prehistoric sites will be considered eligible unless subsurface testing proves otherwise. • CH2M HILL will include a map or map books (depending on the project area) on USGS topographic background,showing the project components in relation to cultural resources in order to identify impacts. Deliverables: • Draft and Final Historic,Cultural and Archaeological discipline report. 6.0 SEPA Checklist A SEPA Checklist will be prepared to satisfy SEPA, and the discipline reports will be attached to the SEPA Checklist as supporting documentation. SEPA must be satisfied before state or local regulatory agencies will issue permits for stormwater control, air quality control, and other permits or approvals. Deliverables: Draft and Final SEPA Checklist. Estimated Budget All work to be undertaken shall be expressly authorized by the City in writing prior to commencement of work.The estimated budget for this Scope of Services for Phase 2 is $115,000.00.This amount will not be exceeded without prior authorization of the City.The budget shall not be amended without mutual agreement of both parties. For CH2M HILL staff that perform per diem services on this project;the hourly rate for these staff shall be calculated based on a raw salary multiplier of 3.10.Further, the hourly rates are subject to annual adjustment based on any cost of living increase with the adjusted hourly rate based on a raw salary multiplier of 3.10. Schedule The timeline for completion of Phase 2 services is anticipated to take approximately six (6) months. Assumptions: • Notice to Proceed from the City is received by end of February 2009. • City reviews of documents/deliverables are conducted in a week or less. • WSDOT and FHWA reviews of documents/deliverables are conducted in 30 days or less. • There is public acceptance of the project,thereby avoiding project delays. Key milestone dates are listed below: • Final Discipline Reports—First of April,2009 • Final ECS—Mid April,2009 • WSDOT Review of ECS—Mid May,2009 8 • FHWA Review of ECS-Mid June, 2009 • Agencies Sign ECS-First of July,2009 • Final SEPA Checklist-First of August, 2009 • FONSI and Determination of Nonsignificance-End of August,2009 s AGENDA REPORT TO: City Council February 17, 2009 FROM: Gary Crutchfi Manager Workshop Mtg.: 2/23/09 Regular Mtg.: 3/2/09 SUBJECT: Appointments to Regional Hotel/Motel Commission I. REFERENCE(S): 1. Letter from Tri-Cities Hotel and Lodging Association dated 2/5/09 II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL/STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: 2/23 Discussion 3/2 MOTION: I move to appoint Monica Hammerberg (Pasco Red Lion) to complete an unexpired two-year term on the Tri-Cities Regional Hotel/Motel Commission, to expire 8/30/2010. III. FISCAL IMPACT: None IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF: A) Pasco, along with the cities of Kennewick and Richland, entered into an interlocal agreement in June 2004 to create a regional "Tourism Promotion Area" (TPA). The TPA is an organization formed as authorized by recent state law to levy special assessments for the use of lodging facilities within the respective area. In the case of the Tri-Cities, all hotels/motels within the boundaries of the three cities are required to collect from users of their facilities the fee of $1.50 for each room night used. That fee is remitted by each of the hotels/motels to the state; the state, in turn, distributes the funding back to the respective cities within which it was collected (much like the long-standing 2% hotel/motel tax) and the cities distribute it to the TPA for expenditure in accordance with the business plan and budget established by the Regional Hotel/Motel Commission. B) The Regional Hotel/Motel Commission is established under Section 5 of the lnterlocal Agreement. The Commission consists of six voting members; two appointed by each of the three cities from nominees offered by the Tri-City Hotel Lodging Association. Any vacancy is to be filled by the respective city from a list of nominees offered by the Association. C) Pasco's appointment, Hermann Haastrup, has recently moved from the area and has been replaced at the Pasco Red Lion by Ms. Monica Hammerberg. D) The Tri-Cities Hotel Lodging Association recommends that Monica Hammerberg (manager of the Pasco Red Lion) be appointed. V. DISCUSSION: A) Mayor Olson recommends that City Council appoint Ms. Hammerberg as recommended by the Tri-Cities Hotel Lodging Association, without interview. 4(d) i1Nm twsww+.a.�. • I' PASCG C.T Y HAI I Prf`.�f11�.r� FEB 0 9 2009 CITY iviF,tj LR'; P.O. Box 2039 Richland, WA 99352 February 5, 2008 Mr. Gary.Crutchfield Third Floor 525 N. Third Ave Pasco, WA 99301 Dear Mr. Crutchfield: This letter is in reference to the Pasco TPA Commissioner position, currently held by Hermann Haastrup from the Pasco Red Lion. Hermann moved out of the area and was replaced by Monica Hammerberg. The Tri-Cities Hotel & Lodging Association has nominated Pasco Red Lion General Manager Monica Hammerberg to serve the remainder of Hermann's term on behalf of Pasco as our first choice. General Manager Amy Riner from the Holiday Inn Express & Suites in Pasco was nominated as the alternate candidate. If you have any questions regarding this issue, please do not hesitate to contact me at 509-942-9400. Si rel by re Presid Tri-Cities Hotel & Lodging Association Cc Kris Watkins—President CEO Tri-Cities visitors&Convention Bureau Monica Hammerberg—General Manager,Red Lion Pasco Amy Riner—General Manager,Holiday Inn Express&Suites AGENDA REPORT TO: City Council February 20, 2009 FROM: Gary Crutchfi Manager Workshop Mtg.: 2/23/09 Regular Mtg.: 3/2/09 SUBJECT: Abatement at 8 7 S. Elm Street I. REFERENCE(S): 1. Vicinity Map 2. Memorandum from City Attorney to City Manager dated 2/18/09 3. Proposed Ordinance II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL/STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: 2/23: Discussion 3/2: MOTION: I move to adopt Ordinance No. , authorizing abatement of property at 827 S. Elm Street. III. FISCAL IMPACT: Approximately$90,000; abatement fund; recoverable via abatement lien. IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF: A) The property surrounding the old meat packing plant at 827 S. Elm Street (approximately 20 acres) has been in a poor state of maintenance for several years and getting worse over time. The acreage now contains several hundred bales of rotting hay as well as hundreds of tires and other discarded items. Some outbuildings are dilapidated beyond repair and represent safety hazards. The accumulation represents a health and safety hazard to the surrounding neighborhood as well as deterrent to appropriate development of adjacent properties. B) Cities are afforded the opportunity (via RCW 35.80) to abate such property conditions provided the state-prescribed process is utilized (please see reference 2). Use of the procedure afforded by RCW 35.80 permits the city to recover its abatement expenditures by way of a lien on the property that will be second only to taxes. V. DISCUSSION: A) Having complied with all of the statutory procedures and having provided the property owner more than ample opportunity to clean up the subject property, staff recommends Council approval of the recommended action. 4(e) tyti•- �. sw / I j Y tst�.utr^M A 1•'�r:fit• t — �- . -' 4� t i"•sty. _ Wiwi.�� "14 P61 r �Lv it, � st`.� �,i14• t� �� KERR LAW GROUP 7025 West Grandridge Blvd., Suite A Kennewick, Washington 99336-7724 (509) 735-1542 MEMORANDUM TO: Gary Crutchfield, City Manager City of Pasco FROM: Bronson J. Brown Attorney at Law DATE: February 18, 2009 RE: KF, Inc. Ordinance For several years now, there have been serious concerns regarding the property located at 827 South Elm Street, which is owned by KF, Inc. Since 2006, this property has been subject to numerous code violations and the building and structures on the property constitute a hazard to the health and welfare of the citizens of the City of Pasco. Abatement has been delayed by bankruptcy, foreclosure actions and lack of cooperation by the owner. RCW 35.80 authorizes the City to adopt an ordinance for the abatement of properties. The proposed Ordinance meets the requirements outlined in RCW 35.80, including the findings that: 1. A preliminary investigation was completed and a hazardous nuisance exists. 2. Notice was made to the property owner. 3. Notice was posted on the property. 4. The property owner was notified of a right to a hearing. 5. A complaint was issued by the enforcement officer. 6. The nuisance needs to be abated and the building demolished. 7. The Order of Abatement was served on the property owner and all interested parties via certified mail. 8. The Order of Abatement was filed with the Franklin County Auditor. Gary Crutchfield February 18, 2009 Page 2 The Ordinance also authorizes abatement costs be assessed against the property. The assessment will be entered on the tax rolls against the property for the current year. The assessment is to be paid at the same time as the other property taxes. The abatement assessment will constitute a lien against the property of equal rank with all State, County and municipal taxes. By adopting this proposed Ordinance, the City may enter the property, remove the hazards, and render it safe, secure and in compliance with City codes. The costs of abatement will be paid from the Revolving Abatement Fund and reimbursed from the proceeds of the tax sale. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact our office. BJB Isla ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE of the City of Pasco, Washington, Adopting RCW 35.80, Relating to the Abatement of Property Located at 827 South Elm Street, owned by KF, Inc. and Implement and Adopt the Powers Authorized by RCW 35.80 for Abatement. WHEREAS, for several years that have been urgent concerns regarding the property located at 827 South Elm Street, Pasco, Franklin County, Washington (hereinafter referred to as "Property"), and the detrimental effects it has on public health, safety and welfare stemming from unkept, deteriorated and abandoned dwellings, structures, and premises; and WHEREAS, the Property constitutes an immediate and emergent threat to public health and safety; and WHEREAS, RCW 35.80 provides for the abatement of dwellings which are unfit for human habitation, and buildings, structures, and premises or portions thereof which are unfit for other uses due to dilapidation, disrepair, structural defects, defects increasing the hazards of fire, accidents, or other calamities, uncleanliness, inadequate light or sanitary facilities, or other conditions which are a hazard to the health and welfare of the residents of the City; and WHEREAS, RCW 35.80 authorizes the City to adopt ordinances and procedures relating to the abatement of the Property; and WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of the City to implement the processes and acquire the powers authorized by Chapter 35.80 RCW to address the conditions which render the building and premises located on Property unfit for human habitation and other uses; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Permissible Ordinance. A. The Pasco Code Enforcement Board (CEB) has been established as the "code improvement board" per the statute, and serves as the appeal board for the abatement of the Property described in Section 6 below. B The Director of Community & Economic Development for the City will work through and with the Inspection Manager and will be in charge of the enforcement of building regulations and activities concerning the dwellings, buildings, structures and premises associated with this abatement. Ordinance—Abatement of KF,Inc. Property- 1 Section 2. Investigation and Complaint A. The City finds that there is a preliminary investigation of the dwelling at the Property that was performed on April 25,2007, and again on September 3, 2008. B That on October 24, 2008, a notice and complaint was given to the owner of the Property, Kevin Koelzer/KF, Inc., via certified mail; the Order of Abatement was posted in a conspicuous place on the Property; and the Order of Abatement was recorded with the Franklin County Auditor on November 24, 2008. C. Pursuant to the Order of Abatement, the owner of the Property was notified of the right to appeal the decision, the right to a hearing within twenty-one (21) days, and the right to answer the abatement and appear at the hearing to give testimony. D. Property owner failed to request or appear at a hearing to contest the complaint for Order of Abatement. Section 3. Officer Findings. A. The appointed public officer, the Director of Community & Economic Development, finds that the Property is unfit for human habitation, and that the conditions are such that the building is dangerous and injurious to the health and safety of any occupants and no occupants of neighboring dwellings and residents of the City. B. The officer finds the following conditions: 1) The structural strength and/or stability of the structure or any portion thereof are less than the minimum requirements of the building code for new buildings of similar structure, purpose or location. 2) Substantial portions of the building are likely to fail, or to become detached or dislodged, or to collapse and, thereby, injure persons or damage property. 3) More than 30% of the building supports, exclusive of the foundation, have been damaged by vandalism, rot, decay and weathering. 4) The unsecured and abandoned premises and building are a harbor for vagrants, criminals or other persons, and has the potential of enabling persons to resort thereto for the purpose of committing unlawful or immoral acts. 5) The building presently has in any non-supporting part, member, or portion, less than 50%of the strength, fire resisting qualities or characteristics, or weather resisting qualities or characteristics required by law in the case of a newly constructed building of like area, height and occupancy in the same location. The building presently has in it supporting parts, members or portions, less than 66% of the strength, fire resisting qualities or characteristics, or weather resisting qualities or characteristics Ordinance—Abatement of KF,Inc. Property-2 required by law or in the case of a newly constructed building of like area, height and occupancy in the same location. 6) The building and premises have been determined by the Building Official, because of its abandoned, dilapidated condition, deterioration and damage to be unsanitary and unfit for human habitation. 7) The building and premises, due to their dilapidated condition, deterioration, and accumulated combustible material have been determined by the Fire Marshal to be a fire hazard. 8) The unsecured building and premises have been and continue to be damaged by vandalism so as to constitute an attractive nuisance or hazard to the public. 9) All building and premises maintenance and reconstruction efforts have been abandoned for a period exceeding 12 months(1 year). 10) Due to the immediate and emergent threat to the public health, safety and welfare, and to the environment created by the condition of the abandoned building, structure and premises shall be abated as follows: a) All structures shall be vacated and secured from casual and unauthorized entry. b) All junk vehicles, vehicle parts,junk, trash, combustible debris and hay shall be removed. C) All structures shall be demolished and removed. Section a. Notice of Intent to Abate. The officer has determined that the Property owner, and others in interest, has failed to abate within the required timelines. On December 2, 2008, the Inspection Services Manager served a Notice of Intent to Abate on Property owner and all interested parties via certified mail. Section 5. Order of Abatement. The officer is now authorized to abate the subject Property and take the following actions: A. Demolish and remove all dilapidated accessory structures, remove all junk vehicles, vehicle parts,junk, trash, combustible debris, weeds and hay. B. Secure the primary structure from casual entry and remove all gang graffiti. C. Assess all abatement costs, estimated in the amount of $90,000.00 as a lien against the subject Property to provide reimbursement of said abatement costs to the City. Ordinance—Abatement of KF,Inc. Property-3 Section 6. Abatement Assessment. A. The amount of costs, repairs, alterations and abatement shall be assessed against the real property legally as follows: Assessor's Parcel Nos.: 112-462-023, 112-461-015, 112-462-014, 112- 461-033, 112-461-024, 112-462-04 and 112-462-069 Parcel A: All of Blocks 1 and 2, ELLIOTT'S ADDITION, according to the plat thereof recorded in Volume "C" of Plats, page 54, records of Franklin County, Washington, AND ALL that portion of Blocks 1, 2, 3, and 4 of Willetta's Addition, according to the plat thereof recorded in Volume "B" of Plats, Page 57, records of Franklin County Washington, TOGETHER WITH that portion of vacated EIm Street, Sycamore Street, Whrokmow Street(nka Waldemar Avenue), Laurel Street and Cedar Street lying North of center line of"B" Street and South of South line of"A" Street and the North half of vacated "B" Street adjoining said Blocks 1, 2, 3 and 4, EXCEPT any portion thereof lying within said Elliot's Addition. Parcel B: Lots 1 through 26, both inclusive and lots 29 through 32, both inclusive, Block 8, Willetta's Addition to Pasco, according to the plat thereof recorded in Volume "B" of Plats, page 57, records of Franklin County, Washington, and Lots 1 through 32, both inclusive, Block 7, Willetta's Addition to Pasco, according to the plat thereof recorded in Volume "B" of Plats, page 57, records of Franklin County, Washington. B. The assessments for abatement costs will be filed with the Franklin County Auditor to be entered as an assessment upon the tax rolls against the above-described property for the current year, and the same shall become a part of the general taxes for that year to be collected at the same time and with interest at such rates and in such a manner as provided for in RCW 84.56.020 for delinquent taxes, and collected to be deposited to the credit of the general fund of the City. The abatement assessment shall constitute a lien against the property which shall be of equal rank with State, County and Municipal taxes. C. City will allocate the funds from the Revolving Abatement Fund for the purposes of accomplishing this abatement. Section 7. Pasco Code Enforcement Board. The appeals commission provided for per RCW 35.80 shall be the Pasco Code Enforcement Board. Ordinance—Abatement of KF,1nc.Property-4 Section 8. Severability. Any section, subsections, paragraphs and other clause or phrase of this Ordinance or any provision of the Pasco Municipal Code established by this Ordinance is declared invalid or unconstitutional for any reason, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance or other provisions of the Pasco Municipal Code established by this Ordinance. Section 9. 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 day of , 2009. Joyce Olson, Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: Debbie Clark, City Clerk Leland B. Kerr, City Attorney Ordinance--Abatement of KF, Inc.Property-5