HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009.07.27 Council Workshop Packet AGENDA
PASCO CITY COUNCIL
Workshop Meeting 7:00 p.m. July 27,2009
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. ROLL CALL:
(a) Pledge of Allegiance.
3. VERBAL REPORTS FROM COUNCILMEMBERS:
4. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION:
(a) Kurtzman Park Neighborhood Improvements:
1. Agenda Report from Rick White, Community & Economic Development Director dated
July 21,2009.
2. Vicinity Map.
3. Kurtzman Park Neighborhood Action Plan.
4. Vicinity Map with Estimated Costs and Potential Phasing.
5. Proposed Resolution.
(b) Changes to Stormwater Municipal Code Due to NPDES Permit:
1. Agenda Report from Doyle L. Heath, Utility Engineer dated July 23, 2009.
(c) Police Traffic Enforcement Unit Update:
1. Agenda Report from Denis Austin, Police Chief dated July 23, 2009.
(d) Community Survey"Policy" Questions:
1. Agenda Report from Gary Crutchfield, City Manager dated July 22, 2009.
(e) Report on State Legislative Effort. (NO WRITTEN MATERIAL ON AGENDA)
Information to be presented by Gary Crutchfield,City Manager.
5. OTHER ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION:
(a)
(b)
(c)
6. EXECUTIVE SESSION:
(a)
(b)
(c)
7. ADJOURNMENT
REMINDERS:
1. 4:00 p.m., Monday, July 27, Port of Benton— Hanford Area Economic Investment Fund Committee
Meeting. (COUNCILMEMBER MATT WATKINS, Rep.; AL YENNEY,Alt.)
2. 7:30 a.m., Friday, July 31, Richland City Council Chambers — Hanford Communities Governing
Board Meeting. (COUNCILMEMBER MIKE GARRISON, Rep.; AL YENNEY, Alt.)
AGENDA REPORT
FOR: City Council July 21, 2009
TO: Gary Crutchfield, ager Workshop Mtg.: 7/27/09
Regular Mtg.: 8/3/09
FROM: Rick White, 12
Community &Economic Development Director
SUBJECT: Kurtzman Park Neighborhood Improvements
I. REFERENCE(S):
I. Vicinity Map
2. Kurtzman Park Neighborhood Action Plan
3. Vicinity Map with estimated costs and potential phasing.
4. Proposed Resolution
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL/STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
7/27: Discussion:
8/3: MOTION: I move to approve Resolution setting Monday, September 8,
2009 as the Public Hearing date for the purpose of creating a
Local Improvement District for infrastructure improvements in
the Kurtzman Park neighborhood.
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
A. Following a public outreach effort in 2006, the City accepted the Kurtzman Park
Action Plan in early 2007. The Plan was developed as a result of neighborhood input
and established a priority system for neighborhood improvements including
infrastructure (sidewalks, curbs, gutters, street lights and in some cases utilities),
increased Code Enforcement efforts and an increased Police presence.
B. To date, approximately $300,000 in CDBG funds has been set aside from 2007/2008
allocations as a means of financing the missing infrastructure in Phase I of this
neighborhood. The cost for curb, gutter, sidewalk, street lights and street paving is
estimated at $615,000 for Phase I. CDBG funds can be used to pay assessments for
lower income residents similar to a program that is now in place for the payment of
utility LID's. Over the next three to four years, it is expected that a combination of
additional CDBG funds from future allotments and LID strategies could also
complete these improvements for Phases II and III.
C. Two neighborhood meetings were conducted in June and July this year to explore the
level of neighborhood interest in an LID for neighborhood infrastructure in Phase I.
Almost all residents attending were interested in moving forward with the LID
process — reserving however, any written commitment until more formal cost
estimates for individual properties are known.
V. DISCUSSION:
A. The infrastructure costs shown on the attachment are preliminary estimates. Formal
cost estimates in the LID process are obtained by preparation of a preliminary
assessment roll after Council conducts a public hearing on the LID. Most residents
attending the neighborhood meetings are anticipating a public hearing as the first step
in order to learn estimated costs and the potential for individual CDBG assistance.
B. The phasing shown in the attachments is also preliminary. The boundaries of the
actual LID are subject to change based on public interest, engineering design of the
improvements and costs.
C. Neighborhood improvement in areas lacking or experiencing decay of infrastructure
is a Council goal for 2008/09. The use of CDBG monies can minimize the impact of
improving neighborhood infrastructure on low income households.
4(a)
-JA,Worw-s j �
:
' .h :;�{.,1._ .••� „3;. � 7•.i: '! '"i•:.'��,r"rfdy:�i il�;ftt��
�. •S 5 S y�
ll ,•'lV ., •7,- `S"J ♦i t
! r_
sp
AA
Pa {
%4 C :f� cr'..T q � .. ''7'e�"ice 'j yt• '
fif^t Y.� ..� ifs'.;`.. t .A tl r� .. •��17i1�i• -.w«<:«R Y
ti. '}�p ?p'' „j
`'��r. lI!`N'µ4{, �� ], � 1 .a <✓,4!•- 1, ;S i'�.°'-
'•�.+�r'wra�f}. �l�,� _.l''..,. Sf1. � --'II _i�„�� !~.�;����j"• •�jl�.'1__�1 a''
. Y _
r:k •�...�'��: i�',:i ;: `�.yff:: :�- ?� •' •4 ,� ,��k.�1,':.�'t ter:°"�;. '',,� ,�:..
N�*l��.....�,:eery t.�4 ,.. ,+C�rr '. t•�."•-%' .5-e•y";.--, k,•���5
^` 7{
4�.,cus.yik,,.�� .- .{:S'.. �"•4-��^'i,�•..C1 aye♦ y:E*, •r•+' .i' y a:S.., .Y`�•y��} Y I
Lw! � .♦ ��» �'. •f`CA•:.i iAl.w!? .i ��Fi�. .I'• -.�,�' #y 1..,., '�,•� `,' d4.
� � 1`.' � iii. lr '� �SY•" io;R(� 1
3}: ' •,.G may,
f
of• -r:.•''
KU RTZMAN PARK
NEIGHBORHOOD IMPROVEMENT ACTION PLAN
FINAL REPORT
Prepared by:
Community & Economic Development Department
City of Pasco
525 North 3 d Avenue
Pasco, Washington 99301
(509) 545-3441
January 8, 2007
Table of Contents
I. Background ....................................................................................................... 1
11. Neighborhood Selection...................................................................................... 1
III. Action Plan Methodology .................................................................................... 2
A. Meeting #1 ................................................................................................... 2
B. Meeting #2................................................................................................... 3
C. Council Review ............................................................................................ 3
IV. Kurtzman Park Action Area................................................................................ 4
A. Recent Improvements................................................................................... 4
B. Population Characteristics ........................................................................... 4
V. Kurtzman Park Action Area Plan Development ................................................... 5
VI. Conclusions ....................................................................................................... 8
VII. Recommendations............................................................................................ 10
- i -
KURTZMAN PARK
NEIGHBORHOOD IMPROVEMENT ACTION PLAN
I. Background
At the City Council Retreat held on March 24 & 25, 2006, the staff presented a
proposal for a new program intended to identify and then address issues of
concern to residents, particularly families living in older neighborhoods near
the center of the City.
Over time, residents have lodged complaints about such matters as the
condition of sidewalks, inadequate street lighting, overgrown lots, poor upkeep
of some private residences, criminal activity, speeding cars and the need for
more City services in general. The City lacks the financial resources to
comprehensively address all of these problems at once.
The purpose of the Neighborhood Improvement Action Plan is to allow residents
to identify the problems of most concern to them and then to establish
priorities. This would enable the City to allocate limited resources to
immediately address the matters of most concern to residents and provide
funding to address lesser concerns over a period of time.
In April, 2006, The Council established primary goals for the Calendar Year
2006-2007. The implementation of the Neighborhood Improvement Action Plan
Program was one of the goals that was adopted.
II. Neighborhood Selection
The first step in the process was to identify neighborhoods for inclusion in the
program. In June, 2006, staff presented a plan to the City Council delineating
six areas (based on census block group divisions) characterized by older homes
- 1 -
and located in the central and eastern sections of the City (see Exhibit 1). Staff
suggested, and Council concurred, that the initial focus should be on Area 1, a
relatively compact area of approximately 380 homes with a population of 1,260
people (see Exhibit 2). Kurtzman Park is a prominent public facility in the
neighborhood. This area will be referred to as the Kurtzman Park Neighborhood
for the balance of the report.
III. Action Plan Methodology
The second step in the process was to develop a mechanism for the residents to
identify their needs and set priorities. The methodology is described below. To
solicit citizen input on area problems, all property owners and residents of the
Action Area being evaluated will be notified by mail of the meeting. Notices will
be in English and Spanish. The planning process requires two neighborhood
meetings followed by City Council review. More Specifically:
A. Meeting #1
Step 1 - A member of the Planning Staff, acting as facilitator, opens the
meeting by asking the audience what they view as the most desirable
characteristics of a "good neighborhood". Examples would be:
1. Safety for persons and property,
2. Attractive landscaping and well maintained residences,
3. Recreational opportunities/parks,
4. Nearby quality schools,
5. Convenient shopping,
6. Well maintained infrastructure.
All responses would be listed on a sheet of paper for all to view.
- 2 -
Step 2 - The residents would then be asked to rank the top three "good
neighborhood" characteristics that they most valued. These top three
characteristics would then be listed on separate sheets of paper.
Step 3 - in this step of the process, residents are asked to identify
specific actions that the City could take to bring the neighborhood more
closely into alignment with the previously identified good neighborhood
characteristics. For example, actions that would enhance neighborhood
safety could include setting up a neighborhood watch or enhanced street
lighting.
After the conclusion of the initial meeting, City staff analyzes the
information collected and identifies projects that can realistically be
undertaken to meet the priority needs of the neighborhood. Possible
funding sources would be identified.
B. Meeting #2
A second meeting is then scheduled. Again, all residents and property
owners are notified.
At this meeting, the staff will outline some specific action programs and
discuss possible funding. Funding scenarios can include cost sharing
with the residents and discussion of actions they can take, such as the
formation of neighborhood associations or block watches. The purpose of
the meeting is to identify programs, projects, and funding sources which
are generally acceptable to the residents.
C. Council Review
A Neighborhood Improvement Action Plan is then prepared for City
Council review. Residents of the Action Plan area are invited to attend
the presentation to the City Council.
- 3 -
Upon Council approval, the action plan is implemented.
IV. Kurtzman Park Action Area
The balance of this report will focus on the Neighborhood Improvement Action
Planning Process and Conclusion reached for the Kurtzman Park
Neighborhood. This Area is bounded on the west by South Wehe Avenue,
Highway 12 on the East, East Lewis Street on the North and "A" Street to the
South (see Exhibit 2).
The resident population of Kurtzman Park is largely concentrated on the
western side of the neighborhood in the vicinity of Krutzman Park and the
Martin Luther King Center. The Arbor Elms Apartment complex, with 104
units, is also located in this area. The balance of the Kurtzman Park
Neighborhood is characterized by vacant lands and industrial development.
A. Recent Improvements
The City recently completed the enhancement of the section of East
Lewis Street which forms the northern boundary of the Area. The
enhancements consisted of the installation of curbs/gutters/sidewalks
where none previously existed, installation of irrigation, landscaping and
the undergrounding of overhead utility lines. The City also recently
completed street overlays and installed handicapped ramps in the area
(see Exhibit 3).
B. Population Characteristics
The U.S. Census for the year 2000 was researched to provide some
information on the characteristics of the population of Kurtzman Park
(see Exhibit 4):
- 4 -
Income - In 2000, the median average family income was $28,173. This
is almost 25% less than the City-wide median income of $37,342 and
45% less than the Tri-City metro area average of$51,273.
Occupancy Status - Of the 325 occupied units, 195 or 60% are rentals.
It should be noted, however, that 104 rental units in the Arbor Elms
Apartment complex are included in this figure. It is, thus, fair to
conclude that a majority of the families living in the single family
detached units are owner-occupants.
Finally, the Census noted that 14% of the dwelling units in the Kurtzman
Park Neighborhood were vacant.
Ethnic Composition .- Approximately one-fourth of the residents of
Kurtzman Park declared themselves to be white. About 20 percent were
black/African-American and over 65 percent were Hispanic,
predominately Mexican.
V. Kurtzman Park Plan Development
The action planning process for the Kurtzman Park Neighborhood began with
two meetings. The results are outlined below.
First Neighborhood Meeting
On July 25, 2006, a Neighborhood Meeting was held at 7:00 p.m. in the
Kurtzman Building. A bilingual announcement of the meeting was mailed to
residents and property owners in Kurtzman Park. The meeting was attended by
several staff members and approximately 18 members of the community.
During the course of the meeting, community residents were invited to
participate in a discussion to determine what improvements they would like to
see in their neighborhood. It was explained that after gathering their opinions,
- 5 -
Planning Department staff would consult other City departments regarding
implementation costs and available funding.
Characteristics of a "Good Neighborhood"
The group began by identifying characteristics of a "good neighborhood."
Characteristics listed included personal safety, recreational opportunities,
attractive appearance, affordability (of both housing units and utilities),
shopping opportunities, infrastructure (including sidewalks, curbs, street
lights, storm drains, traffic control, sewer hookups, trash/garbage service,
street maintenance), open space and information resources/referrals. The
group then identified, in order of importance, their top "good neighborhood"
characteristics. The selections were clustered in the top three choices. They are
as follows:
1. Safety for persons and property.
2. Presence and maintenance of public infrastructure.
3. Overall appearance of the area.
Action Items
The group was then asked to identify specific action items that the City could
take to make Kurtzman Park more in alignment with the identified good
neighborhood characteristics. The results are as follows:
1. Safety of Persons and Property
The top two action items in order of priority are as follows:
a. Police officers should be more visible in the neighborhood. This would
entail more time on patrol and less time at the mini-station.
b. Additional street lights.
- 6 -
2. Presence and Maintenance of Public Infrastructure
The top two action items in order of priority are as follows:
a. Installation of curb/gutter/sidewalks in areas where they are now
absent.
b. Better traffic control through the installation of additional stop signs
and crosswalks.
3. Appearance
The group was almost unanimous that litter on streets and vacant lots was
a major problem. They were particularly concerned about illegal dumping
and the seeming inability of the City to identify the perpetrators.
Staff Analysis
After the conclusion of the meeting, staff conducted field inspections of the
Neighborhood to determine the location and/or absence of street lights and
sidewalks. The Code Enforcement Division also identified vacant lots that were
overgrown and/or had debris on them.
During the CDBG annual budget process, the staff recommended and Council
approved the use of $130,000 in Federal CDBG funds for improvements in the
Neighborhood Improvement Area.
Second Neighborhood Meeting
A second neighborhood meeting was held on October 26, 2006 at the Vergie
Robinson Elementary School. This meeting was attended by approximately 16
residents. Staff first summarized the prioritized community values identified at
the first meeting. These priority values consisted of Safety, Infrastructure and
Neighborhood Appearance. It was noted that City staff had consulted with
- 7 -
other City departments regarding implementation costs and available funding
for each item on the list.
The meeting continued with a discussion of actions that would enhance safety.
Most participants said they wanted, above all else, street lights in areas now
without them.
Next, the group tackled the issue of sidewalks. Except for two owners of vacant
property along S. Cedar Avenue, the attendees were largely in favor of installing
sidewalks in the neighborhood. There was general agreement that a cost
sharing formula that would cap the cost to residents at $10 per linear foot was
acceptable.
Finally, staff addressed concerns about litter on vacant lots, noting that a
common misconception was that the poorly maintained properties in question
were City- or County-owned. The group was presented with a map prepared by
staff which identified all government-owned properties in their neighborhood.
Besides Kurtzman Park, the only City-owned land is that designated for the
new truck rout from E. Lewis Street to "A" Street. A large number of privately
owned lots were identified as overgrown and/or containing debris. The
responsibility of cleaning up the properties would rest with the property
owners. The Code Enforcement Office can take action to ensure the compliance
of all the property owners in the neighborhood.
A. Conclusions
The Neighborhood meetings in Kurtzman Park were well attended and the
people at the meetings were active participants. The specific actions that the
residents would like the City to undertake were as follows:
1. Sidewalks
- 8 -
Install curbs, gutters and sidewalks in areas where they do not now exist
(see Exhibit 5). A substantial majority of the people attending the meeting
were agreeable to a cost sharing program whereby their costs would be
capped at $10.00 per linear foot.
Installing curbs, gutters and sidewalks along the entire area where they are
not now in place would cost approximately $875,000 (at $31 per linear foot).
If property owners agreed to pay $10.00 per linear foot, the balance needed
would still total $685,000. Given the monetary short fall, funding should be
directed to the areas of most immediate concern. They would be the
completion of sidewalks on South Elm Avenue and the largely developed
area on the southern edge of the neighborhood (see Exhibit 5). This would
enable people to travel on sidewalks from "A" Street all the way to East
Lewis Street and the new elementary school.
2. Street Lights
The City would need to install five (5) additional street lights if placed in
accordance with current City engineering standards (see Exhibit 6). It is City
policy to place street lights at intersections only. The cost of bringing
Kurtzman Park up to this standard would total $7,500 (three lights on
existing power poles at $500 each and two new poles and lights at $3,000
each).
3. Vacant Lots
The staff identified 27 vacant lots which were overgrown and/or were being
used as illegal dumpsites (see Exhibit 7). Responsibility for clearing the sites
is the responsibility of the individual property owners.
The residents also ask that the City take action to find out who is illegally
dumping on the vacant lots and prosecute them.
- 9 -
The residents feel that stop signs and crosswalks are needed to slow traffic
and enhance pedestrian safety. The Engineering Department could evaluate
the area and determine, according to accepted traffic engineering principles,
if more stop signs/crosswalks are needed or if there are alternative means of
calming traffic.
5. Enhanced Police Presence
The residents want to see more patrol cars on the streets and that the Police
place more emphasis on stopping illegal dumping that occurs in the area.
VII. Recommendations
Due to limited manpower and financial resources, the City cannot immediately
address all citizens concerns. At present, only $130,000 in Federal CDBG
funds is set aside for this project.
It is recommended that we proceed as follows:
1. Code Enforcement staff should take immediate action to quickly bring the
identified 27 overgrown/trash strewn lots into compliance with applicable
codes.
2. Community Development staff should initiate a process in 2007 to have
sidewalks, curbs, and gutters installed in the priority areas delineated on
Exhibit 5. This process, identical to that used for the East Lewis Street
enhancement, would involve notification of residents of the City Council's
intent to order the installation of sidewalks. In order to complete the
installation of sidewalks in the established priority areas, it is likely that
residents may be asked to pay more than $10.00 per linear foot. Staff will
work with the property owners in an effort to arrive at a consensus in
regards to an improvement program benefiting the greatest number of
- 10 -
property owners at cost they feel is reasonable. A plan would be brought
back to City Council for formal approval.
3. Engineering staff should formally evaluate the neighborhood to determine if
additional stop signs and crosswalks are needed per professional
engineering standards.
4. The Police Department should meet with the residents to discuss patrol
procedures, neighborhood watch programs and strategies to curtail illegal
dumping.
- ll -
4g k
Ml
� .w-•:.. :a lleal,fw, + Vii; ,. l.,{. >.... j j:
q,i±9Js"a�'!7„� t'” i �.ti,'1: .•).�,•,.•''� ,.,,, _ F `1.r,
////� �, � ., •' , - i• ,t'.?.,r+, ^. `+.1;3 ..;§ .i.:4. .r,r.', l ,� iii
— r 100, rlR f. .. ...i mss'[, il,, :, y ;.
. ��'✓y, ,.. _ dA:•><.• «.. - �,r•..�',tea b{i a.y:
tA�yf i -:7,: '
v:.-1:f[#. 'g[�: N: E, 1• :3:.3.. r�r „b''1. _sKr.:� ,`.. f
.,'� r.it��.>_-- s ''tt:f5!':_•?t' r _.0". _s.Y,:.rs^•_.' �t.;��3L� .. ___ ,r:� ,�
att�,�1► *,,�' „...,�•�iiDa,"~ ta,'+'r:•., ..)." ..r,,.''•J' .:,:5.:,rT. ' ji•fs •. J��°°AA
s.Sl�{E3iEEElE4iEigtf�i •• :i.", y ° :�.+`��+e:•Irs sr` �;•.�!! "'d
r1YjE[EkEkf 3iEE13E1E W. 'el4 1+ i fr, -A c.
1�xr-•z.w.' y:' a •,.,• i•�r. py.' �i► �T'Yt^„{y;7."s::t;i r .t �. r..
1.1 � r��.. .,,. _ i ¢; :msµ:`, °'.•R t.•4.i.sMp�'�"���yX?� ;.i'^'T',t
1t ?fit a¢�t' iti{•Wwlli `k
y 4. t!• 4�.; � }.tf 4R:�>t
" •}
yi •. :". � � A ,��+� ,•.�- r8���i rr� tea;„3.;-•, 1� i fA�a �• �.
•i ...tp a,. R�•rRM��";,:+i,':!•7,�1woa�s,•gl/'
x-..14',
k •�i�'a!,ysna� � •,r +�•:�c,�i'ATG[y;_ � i.!'T•iR �{'�t .''_�r iGa�:�^•w•ice: :.. 7 ,I
r; 'la". .7.` r �:.+ r` +�'�. 'tlP .r.¢• V 91[ ',L , 1113 �� �JgX
ar:
r
=9-x w.� ;�'i.•`Iy'
: :.. --'i"' 't: ' .. ��.,_ rr•• i{':� :�'■■+, `-tt92+ _ r; j
4y:• �,..i„!"'n.- 'g1L�i!'' ' _� ,„, _ .. •:'!:°'"=t,;,1{•t'�i :+!v L-�:.f,,,:rc+i9"., .�i�� :,u=tr �
d .y i•,. [,.+tr�^�;�'r d i IMP 7��:..•y_7��, 3333 T`•
• {, " i•r �+� Vie' +,}•• '° �-•1',, �Y..� 1:' irf`-A
s 7i' f; - •- '�:. i,"ti n:�jN.•;. •'-' Ar.., .,• ':..: l..ice.
�.: l fir', (r e.�.ar �' ,•'{.':^'4:_'�.r•
alp#�1� iC'..! " :dai►� tyl..b:r:
J1yy¢,{,!1t.. !►,••,_ t-c 3-' '• ✓- '• Iy �� l �i;,1.t::-Jdj�Q'
1 -f a�- k u"); f av�t^�rF 'Y'.:..- R," y j�; ..4_ar'j .q.•�••v^••
�llP;: f T,3 t :9.T 1•.�?Ir:y. :'I .n'!. _.,rr�•^r.a.... .�►,.'.
*. '�, +;`.•..fie�G 4..�.� r� - 1.rsj.•.r:,ltit4t ,� ,4k4''�
'try ����j.j„R,.y_.. i.,r t :�' • 5C r c'.i 15 4i11�'• (J(f(
'Lt;i.��6 x. i1NIRSAI�8�'•lc�jk '��• •"�,+ _y° ���� •�tt'�'• �e �" �f
�[ t�y7�•�`"�;.:aal,ntk ''��frr f,j ��'�M.�.� ,-',.wt �,� :o' '� ��
%}: fir. ..l,:,fi• ^ .i. .Y 1,'i6:,':t L:
•'Y,`.�`,g y . r _ ,ri '�u;:g;1:!! - �`.�• °���Hj} J�,•� .IA'r
Ti.2 sk';�
= c.A,�,' _1'-,;t- !,i: .. veEl �e� ..; R�' �:...,yr1r•i�ils:."' '! `71a.. '.at.''� ��
e,GA�` ';�
� j �rF.'- •� •,e'. �:>�F „� sr :!aqR..�ys���±".'�r j yl,•'.7 s .,1 `. '�)' � X4"44
_fl4 i• t.rn' hy:. ,r�..� 'u.Pii -'{`i•` ',.':1'J`�''11t •+r„ qa.h s r. t�
Y Yi "�•Ny�izi; !}:- '..: .• r y• _ ^• �• �Y.°j:•w 4t 4 r+i; .` �• a -
v<i k•�y�i.f n.�. t- .s•Irv.g. r•I, .'a.v ,r�.:. �,' r{,'':j!�a�s.l� j� �_ .�N1�1 i s':�'V9R`St3 ��f y
..w�•• '.i ,,yr,Mi' -_ �� '{i; .sr.:,e.r_,.1s'' ••i �rl�t`L«'' �/. `�"1Y fib: 1m' si
;y J:rlS+s.,,`4'L�' t-)'•; ! . ',,'....•. � y 1r:w�° -: _ v iii �•: '�,/
rSti,. i., E.-ii� •i.,✓. ,Ie O.. ;:: t �j s..._s76:S$`:s�- •.^ :P`-'•,�fyl
,'�r�:.�. �'� p{} :N::;: - ,•:v, .i:J-K y.;_gg 1•^ � c• s • *• s•_
i4 .g�• .g. ::y1n •
^i .:� 1.A. _ a••••..r. 'j i!'�.�E• .w7 rr,'�.`r:r!'::ti" ' x.
. W alt,{/[." '. w:.J. •{W` i 'M (p fJy
11 r�-y i�-'wl� •1 •Ai `;•' •"1:� ).:`! - IF;��
yD j,-_'"�"•i1�-t..,w',.:'w � "i� �7••,�f _ .' jj tLali r.s SI ��'�.
t� ini�ri.�';Ir+�`.,.,.i.=�� �_"Y; i .'r*, .•.,,'r.•,t�rlrt�el��f. - fr
� %j��•,"�•,'1i•f a' ,.; .��'',' �', `...'..�6ff�*.���il�/`l�A.�"s,:' � x
7, • ,�`:R!. .:�'`�ii... 4 r,w[. ..411'
'.{j •f...�.a`- '��"''ij'"•': �a1°•,: .!+r�,tiR�',.?:4 �#'.f� {� r:it,�':"''AIL'`. �,t', ����::;:a�°.,,i,#1••�t.'
.1 ', ftal' r .i 'r-'.1.�::tiy °•.T.,",t•. ��o!- :C_:A►,T'•'.• . 'cw."... 1„
:..j• a`..'$ 1 :*�' 3,'.V;lpyiti3 ".''�Yx11r-: i'�_ _.""'Y t •.F�:a*.. '.oz. ,
.';7A�
•wei,. �Zaa'�i,a„-s:.,��,"s- i
i„
� 5 �is,-'t�r '! I ! :r ��!•5�� �+'�
< vi �1 rY
hit; � ���,,>� �,p•. ,� ':/ ''}>` � � �
y 'may
ON
u5:°rY
�� .,. .,wry f l!&. 'f: .., ••f h. '7t' >`
�►IiTTAi - „� »r(r�<rJ...'fr'.'3'n.� 5� y ��`y,, �.
Yi.. r ., r iL r ef' Y� �!e �• ,x#..t'R,j;fw.e'S �'-i'k
5
, , a+�•.
k :. ✓'f
�, � ��. �. ... i. f �efwk�i� - r #(, te'}, -+ rfi°�y;�•.
too
oofFliXlt�T f T y+� 31 s: �,"nqu`• - r` v � sVa_£.�,r r L: R :
fit. "�!� '�• fin-•`°-[s� �{ E'i
lB�� � i1��r ��.r a4 ���y,: � ��':�'�r.;�•:�«�'' fi;r: q�► �y N i��� �' I//r 1 z.:.
1 !"� ..#� a,a:'r fityt•.�:F.:]s. y i'i.'b -. 4�'T#�
�*' � ����•B� .�Sl�'i �ciiiY ..ktd S•..y, .: :!'-'p' F <
•�i� �LlY::��1 �9r 5yy,�,��r' t �1. S «'� 1��'��5�� ....'`,r
�� � rf 3 asr;lHJ �qlt fwti�5. p�r x�e� � �•, {. �'' ti'• /itr,max �rc`�}tz• �r ' ,:
pp 1{ �j t7., ■ t Mfr...,;v,o- ark". x
.7.
,« 19
7 E ..� f WI SC^�� Siii■
�i��i1!� SRS °���► �+/ �a4�#r J� �y�� — y ar :�iFi� '' .z.. r '
w�•ft.: •' j ! <�AM3 y ( ly��!��<.y�a,t��wwa��s��r�}}�y�y��II,, 'T�• .`���w`gyx■"�, "L lI,y,�i k
a9�.�� �i �. 9, xi<i;Lk',�.YY::CRTi��� 1f ��s V.
�RF'M� � A7IMi��
rNTAww� ►" .vim �
eliM 7r�er�
7{:g�• � :e• p �_�r�t�;�I '"r i'���� �r�+i1 a ' "f�•,��i"#�'ii3 i►�.w�i�3� 'J'�;i�►�� I
.. �• 4Tr i } (� s �.. ,may
ijl�F `AxS���/•���[•il. �1��w�Y�..� x•�!-`S l '�'K✓�`±(�It� �7
alt �����'� fN. �+Tti'rF�Yi �� ]y!!►.A,y l�74A�9 ,�!!+ T�if I� :� �I�''♦ s �'J«•�.� >!i H[ -r:�'#i.'�� RY�i.�f�'� .,��.• � .
I�' � «i�..A t�����?�>� � .v r• y-�,: • .r. ��� il� a+1�lRa1 i j��x 7�'' S���G3.1' 3' •�:ins 1..:•i,
�,:"�t�u�t�s ���K:i�'�,�iaa �� 3i'�'�>)��d .'•�•'�r�'7 j.�.,�, ` .� "� .: =,�x�:�'�,� 111=<il�Ew: �;:.•-�1� r;,�.,:.,,'
■ #441s:�i��.i� a
?! �.r#A �"�.=i,"t�TF_�R!`'fi.*,►P�7:;1 'f tA'_x S�.s�:y�"�fA r,'.f yf�Y. ii2 i•i�. 'Me�_ -I 5{-'t'>c:JY'
NAVIN
faK d s.I
too. -"
5
f111y
I r,3i wq.wc#':.• M A t,##;t 'y ..1 .;C '"+1�°Nilit:'�.�#/�I { .-mewls {�1 •! •:'a il�r.L:I�S�►� �� tltM� m. :. ��'.
' L,.,r..«.•.....r-.i -"t"'"',�- � ■ , `sac-.+.aw•i- n w „s°
4W L
M
W
a
N
N
W
U7
g a
U r
O
O
Ir Y
0 5
z o �
0
� U
G
G p
i O
l II II a
1 1 -1-in-
-1— _ - - - - - - - - -
30
- H1L- ;
T _T !Ll_I T 1 J-1
f.IotO't �-IotO 1
X1.1 I Hl , 1 -1i-1 _I Il
1
F ;G -ITT 11 - -i 'l 111 i 1x o
-1 -
tn
CIA
Exhibit 4
Kurtzman Park Census Data
Occupancy Status as per 2000 US Census Data
Total For
OCCUPANCY housing Owner- Renter- For sale
STATUS units Occupied Vacant occupied occupied rent only
Number 378 325 53 130 195 19 23
Percent 100 86 14 40 60 35.8 43.4
Ethnic Composition:
American Hispanic
Occupied Black or Indian Some or
housing White African and Asian other Latino
units American Alaska race (of any
Native race)
Total 325 85 64 7 1 158 213
Percent 100* 26.2 19.7 2.2 0.3 1 48.6 1 65.5
*Total percent does not account for overlaps in occupancy composition.
Legend
J Kurtzman Phase 1 Parcels Pnonty Improvement Areas
Kurtzman Phase 2 Parcel Missmg_Sidewalk t
l
3 P
Phase ase arces
� I
LEWIS ST
j
I � ...1- ._..._.{�...-_.. ..v'• -."T-:--"ems,-R —.. ' I
1 Phase III
s r $3509792
� �;. tie �$, •.
i
NA ST—
LU
k {S ,� }� Q, �,'}
r, a a gF: i KALISPELL CT r—
Uj
BUTTE ST
BUTTE CT \ -
IF
"A" ST
Improvements pending through LID 145
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF COUNCIL OF PASCO,;
DECLARING IT'S INTENTION TO CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING FOR
THE PURPOSE OF CREATING A LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT FOR
INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS IN THE KURTZMAN PARK
NEIGHBORHOOD.
WHEREAS, the City accepted the Kurtzman Park Neighborhood Plan in January of
2007; and,
WHEREAS, the Kurtzman Park Neighborhood Plan identified needed public
infrastructure and established a priority for that infrastructure; and,
WHEREAS, the City has held two neighborhood meetings in the priority improvement
areas and the sentiment of the majority of those property owners attending was to proceed with
the Local Improvement District process; and,
WHEREAS, the public hearing provides an opportunity for property owners within the
Kurtzman Park neighborhood to express support or opposition to the formation of a Local
Improvement District for infrastructure improvements; and,
WHEREAS, staff will develop preliminary assessment figures based on Council
direction after conduct of the public hearing;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO, DOES
RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
That the City set the date of Monday, September 8, 2009 as the public hearing date for
the purpose of allowing expression of support or opposition for the creation of a Local
Improvement District in the Kurtzman Park neighborhood for infrastructure
improvements.
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco this 8th day of September, 2009.
Joyce Olson, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Sandy Kenworthy, Deputy City Clerk Leland B. Kerr, City Attorney
AGENDA REPORT NO. 24
FOR: City Council July 23, 2009
TO: Gary Crutchfiel C'ty M
Robert J. Albe 'f� `, ork irector
FROM: Doyle L Heath, Utility Engine40 Workshop.: 07/27/09
SUBJECT: Changes to Stormwater Municipal Code due to NPDES Permit
I. REFERENCE(S):
1. None
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL/ STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
07/27: Discussion of the requirements relating to the City of Pasco
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
A) The State Department of Ecology created the Eastern Washington Phase II
Municipal Stormwater Permit that became effective on February 16, 2007. This
Permit created regulations for cities in "urbanized areas." The City of Pasco, the
City of Kennewick, the City of Richland, and the City of West Richland were
identified by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as being an "urbanized
area." The City of Pasco was impacted by the Permit.
V. DISCUSSION:
A) The Eastern Washington Phase II Municipal Stormwater Permit includes a
number of requirements for the City. The requirement of the Permit that is being
addressed at this time is to prohibit non-stormwater discharges to the stormwater
system. The Permit states that the requirements are to be approved by an
ordinance. Some of the requirements are already a part of the Municipal Code.
Staff will give a presentation about the Permit requirements. Staff will then return
to the Council with an ordinance for further action.
4(b)
AGENDA REPORT
FOR: City Council Date: July 23, 2009
TO: Gary Crutchfiel t nag ' Workshop Mtg.-: July 27, 2009
FROM: Denis Austin, P lice Chie Regular Mtg.:
SUBJECT: Police Traffic Enforcement Unit Update
1. REFERENCE(S):
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL/STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Discussion on traffic enforcement program
MOTION:
None
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
None
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
In January 2008, the Pasco Police Department received a State traffic grant to initiate a
traffic enforcement unit. The Department dedicated two new officers to focus on traffic
safety, education and enforcement. This effort was in direct response to citizen survey's
which identified traffic safety as a major concern. Additionally, the increase in traffic
volume in the city, specifically the Road 68 corridor made a dedicated traffic
enforcement unit a prudent response to the communities concerns.
V. DISCUSSION
Traffic Enforcement Officers have been focusing on collision reduction, education and
enforcement of traffic laws since the program's inception. Staff will present statistical
information at the meeting to illustrate/measure the results of the traffic unit thus far.
4(c)
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Council July 22, 2009
FROM: Gary Crutchfiel anager Workshop Mtg.: 7/27/09
SUBJECT: Community Su ey" olicy" Questions
I. REFERENCE(S):
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL/STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
7127: Discussion
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
None
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
A) The city is contracting again with the National Research Center (NRC) to conduct the
biennial community survey, consisting primarily of standard questions designed to
elicit perceptions of municipal service quality. In addition, though, the city may
include up to three "policy" issues to be framed as questions in the survey.
B) The past two surveys (2005 and 2007) included the following policy issues/questions:
2005 Survey:
1. To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statement: "The City
of Pasco should assume all the cost of maintaining and operating Chiawana
Park"?
2. To what extent do you support or oppose an increased sales tax of 1110 of one
percent (one extra penny on each $10 purchase) to have a regional aquatic center
in the Tri-Cities?
3. The City has a history of supporting Pasco School District programs and facilities
with City funds. To what extent do you support or oppose the City of Pasco
continuing to support Pasco School District programs and facilities with City
funds?
2007 Survey:
1. To what extent do you support or oppose the City taking a more active role in
working to improve the downtown business area?
2. To what extent do you support or oppose the City installing and maintaining
landscaping along select major street corridors to improve the appearance of the
community?
3. As you may know, the three public pools in Pasco are in need of complete
renovation. As an alternative, to what degree would you support or oppose the
City building a new water park (including a pool slide and other water features)
that would replace one(or possibly two) existing swimming pools?
C) The city must submit its policy question(s) to NRC by September for inclusion in the
survey design.
V. DISCUSSION:
A) Staff offers the following subjects for consideration:
• Curbside recycling: occasional citizen requests for curbside recycling suggests
some level of interest in the community; however, curbside recycling represents
additional cost. Perhaps a question could be fashioned to gauge the willingness of
citizens to pay for the additional service.
• Water Rate Structure: Council will need to address in the near future the need to
encourage conservation of water (state emphasis); perhaps a policy question could
be framed to gauge citizen support for a water rate structure which encourages
water conservation(the more you use, the more you pay).
• Camera Traffic Enforcement: many cities are using camera systems for "red light"
enforcement and school speed zones, as authorized by state law. Perhaps citizens
could be asked of their support for such enforcement aids.
• City Council Districts: perhaps a policy question could be framed to gauge citizen
support for fewer Council districts (to help solve the biennial redistricting
frustration).
4(d)