HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011.12.05 Council Meeting Packet AGENDA
PASCO CITY COUNCIL
Regular Meeting 7:00 p.m. December 5,2011
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. ROLL CALL:
(a) Pledge of Allegiance
3. CONSENT AGENDA: All items listed under the Consent Agenda are considered to be routine by the
City Council and will be enacted by roll call vote as one motion (in the form listed below). There will be
no separate discussion of these items. If further discussion is desired by Councilmembers or the public,
the item maybe removed from the Consent Agenda to the Regular Agenda and considered separately.
(a) Approval of Minutes:
1. Minutes of the Pasco City Council Meeting dated November 21,2011.
(b) Bills and Communications: (A detailed listing of claims is available for review in the Finance
Manager's office.)
1. To approve General Claims in the amount of $1,057,407.75 ($39,334.71 in the form of
Electronic Fund Transfer Nos. 8072 and 8094; and $1,018,073.04 in the form of Wire
Transfer Nos. 1141, 1142, 1146 through 1148; and Claim Warrants numbered 185215
through 185381).
2. To approve Payroll Claims in the amount of $2,002,245.74, Voucher Nos. 43543 through
43621 and 80090 through 80099; and EFT Deposit Nos. 30048206 through 30048764.
(c) Federal Legislative Consulting Agreement:
1. Agenda Report from Gary Crutchfield, City Manager dated November 21, 2011.
2. Proposed Agreement.
To approve the agreement with Gordon Thomas Honeywell Governmental Affairs for federal
legislative consultant services and,further,authorize the City Manager to sign the agreement.
*(d) Tri-Cities Regional Public Facilities District. (NO WRITTEN MATERIAL ON AGENDA)
To appoint Councilmember Saul Martinez to a three-year term (to expire 10/1/2414) on the Tri-
Cities Regional Public Facilities District Board of Directors, replacing outgoing board member,
John Merk.
*(e) Resolution No. 3357, a Resolution accepting work performed by GameTime for equipment and
installation of the playground at Capital Park.
1. Agenda Report from Rick Terway, Administrative & Community Services Director dated
November 30, 2011.
2. Resolution.
To approve Resolution No. 3357,accepting the work performed by GameTime for equipment and
installation of the playground at Capitol Park.
*(f) Resolution No. 3358, a Resolution accepting work performed by Michels Pipe Services under
contract for the"A" Street Water Line Repair, Project No. M4-11-60-WTR.
1. Agenda Report from Ahmad Qayoumi,Public Works Director dated November 29, 2011.
2. Resolution.
To approve Resolution No. 3358, accepting the work performed by Michels Pipe Services, under
contract for the"A"Street Water Line Repair_
(RC) MOTION: I move to approve the Consent Agenda as react.
4. PROCLAMATIONS AND ACKNOWLEDGMENTS:
(a)
(b)
(c)
5. VISITORS- OTHER THAN AGENDA ITEMS:
(a)
(b)
(c)
Regular Meeting 2 December 5,2011
6. REPORTS FROM COMMITTEES AND/OR OFFICERS:
(a) Verbal Reports from Counciimembers
(b)
(c)
7. PUBLIC HEARINGS AND COUNCIL ACTION ON ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS
RELATING THERETO:
(a) Kurtzman Park Neighborhood Local Improvement District(LID) 149.
1. Agenda Report from Rick White, Community & Economic Development Director dated
December 1, 2011.
2. Vicinity Map.
3. Right of Way Inventory Map.
4. Map of Proposed LTD 149, LID 148 and LTD 146.
5. Preliminary Assessment Roll.
CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING:
MOTION: 1 move: to clusc the public: he riug and table action ou this itcm L1ntiY the Dcucwber
19, 201 1 Cowic.il inecting-
*(b) 2012 Annual Operating and Capital Projects Budgets.
1. Agenda Report from Dunyele Mason, Financial Services Manager dated December
November 29,2011.
2. Proposed 2012 Annual Operating Budget Ordinance.
3. Proposed 2012 Capital Projects Budget Ordinance.
CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING
Ordinance No. ,an Ordinance adopting the City of Pasco Operating Budget for the Year
2012.
MOTION; 1 move for the lust reading of Ordinance Colo. fbr consideration of the 2012
, nnwil Operating Budget.
-AND-
Ordinance No. , an Ordinance adopting the City of Pasco Capital Projects Budget for
the Year 2012.
MOTION: i nnovt: For 11w First n:aidiiig v Ord inanou No. , for consideration of the 2012
Capital Pi-njects RudV.et.
8. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS NOT RELATING TO PUBLIC HEARINGS:
(a) Ordinance No. , an Ordinance of the City of Pasco, amending Title 13 of the Pasco
Municipal Code regarding water and irrigation water utility rules and regulations.
1. Agenda Report from Ahmad Qayoumi,Public Works Director dated November 29, 2011.
2. Proposed Ordinance.
3. Draft Backflow Assembly Tester Policy and Procedure.
MOTION, 1 Tll() C. to mlopt Clydinanc No, regarding water and irrigation water utility
rules and regulritioiiq riiid. further, miithori;zx purl ication by summary only.
Q*(b) Resolution No. , a Resolution accepting the Planning Commission's recommendation and
approving a Special Permit for a Union Gospel Mission men's center, community outreach
facility,and related buildings and activities at 225 South 4t"Avenue.
1. Agenda Report from David 1. McDonald, City Planner dated December 1,2011.
2. Vicinity Map.
3. Proposed Resolution.
4. Report to Planning Commission.
5, Planning Commission Minutes dated 10/20/11 and I1/17/11.
MOTION- I wavu m mppruvr RL'-,;ulwiunNo. . approving a Spacial Permit for the iocation of
a Level Two Community Service Facility (Union GosN. l Mlt ,ion) in an 1-1 (Light Industrial)
Gone at 225 'South 4"' Avenue.
Q*(c) Resolution No. , a Resolution accepting the Planning Commission's recommendation and
approving a Special Permit for a Youth Educational Center at 1202 West Lewis Street,
1. Agenda Report from Shane O'Neill, Planner I dated December 1, 2011.
2. Vicinity Map.
3. Proposed Resolution.
4. Report to Planning Commission.
5. Planning Commission Minutes dated 10 120 111 and 11/17/11.
'19OTION: I move tea approve Resolution No- , approving a Special Permit for the location of
a Lc%el One Community Service Facility (Power Zone) in a C-3 (General Business)Gene at 1202
W. Lewis Strut,
Regular Meeting 3 December 5,2011
9. UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
(None)
10. NEW BUSINESS:
*(a) Wastewater Treatment Plant Optimization Improvements Project,#C3-10-51-SWR:
1. Agenda Report from Ahmad Qayoumi,Public Works Director dated December 1, 2011.
2. Bid Tab Complete List.
3. Bid Tab--Final Selected Items.
4. Supplemental Qualifications Clarification and Engineer's Recommendation.
5. Consultant's Recommendation and Qualifications Determination.
(RC) MOTION: I move to award the low bid for the Pasco Wastewater I reatment PIalit improvements
Prgjcct, 4C3-10-51-SWR to Apollo, Inc., in the amount of 51,0121,919.88, including sales tax and.,
further, authorize the Mayor to sign the contract documents,
(b) Quad Cities Water Permit MOA:
1. Agenda Report from Gary Crutchfield, City Manager dated November 18,2011.
2. Summary of Proposed MOA.
3. Proposed MOA.
MOTION: I move to approve the Quad-Cities Water Supply Memorandum of Agreement.
helween the cities of Pasco, Kcnnuwick, Richland and West Riehluntl anti the Was,,hlugtoit State
Department of Ecology aced. further, authoraae the Public Works Director 10 sign the agrccment.
(c) Ecology Grant for Raw Water Intake and Irrigation Project:
1. Agenda Report from Ahmad Qayoumi,Public Works Director dated November 23, 2011.
2. Vicinity Map.
3. Department of Ecology Interagency Agreement Contract and Project Scope (Council packets
only; copy available for public review in the Public Works office, the Pasco Library or on the
city's webpage at littta_//www.tsasco-wa.;ov/cit�-councilreports).
MOTION: I move to accept the grant offered by Washington State Department ol'Ftoingy in the
Artioant of 52.667,038,00 for the Columbia Water Supply — Raw Water Intake and Irrigation
Project and. farther, authorize the City h7 arrager to sign lire lost raLwiivy Agrec:munt Contract_
(d) WCIA Liability Coverage Deductible:
1. Agenda Report from Stan Strebel, Deputy City Manager dated November 21,2011.
2. WCIA Assessment Comparison.
MOTION: I move to ant horizc staff to specify a 5100.000 deduclfble with WCIA for the 20112
coverage year.
11. MISCELLANEOUS DISCUSSION:
(a)
(b)
(c)
12. EXECUTIVE SESSION:
(a)
(b)
(c)
13. ADJOURNMENT.
(RC) Roll Call Vote Required
* Item not previously discussed
MF# "Master File#......
Q Quasi-Judicial Matter
REMINDERS:
1. 1:30 p.m., Monday, December 5, KGH Emergency Medical Services Board Meeting.
(COUNCILMEMBER TOM LARSEN,Rep.; AL YENNEY, Alt.)
2. 12:00 p.m., Wednesday, December 7, 2601 N. Capitol Avenue — Franklin County Mosquito Control
District Board Meeting. (COUNCILMEMBER BOB HOFFMANN, Rep.; AL YENNEY,Alt.)
3. 5:00 p.m., Wednesday, December 7, 715 W. Court Street—Tri-Cities Community Health Dedication and
Open House. (MAYOR MATT WATKINS)
4. 5:30 p.m.,Thursday, December 8, 710 W. Court Street—Benton-Franklin Community Action Committee
Meeting. (COUNCILMEMBER AL YENNEY, Rep.; REBECCA FRANCIK,Alt.)
5. 7:00 p.m., Thursday, December 8, Transit Facility — Ben-Franklin Transit Board Meeting. (MAYOR
MATT WATKINS, Rep.; COUNCILMEMBER MIKE GARRISON, Alt.)
MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING PASCO CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 21, 2011
CALL TO ORDER:
The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Matt Watkins, Mayor.
ROLL CALL:
Councilmembers present: Rebecca Francik, Mike Garrison, Robert Hoffmann, Tom
Larsen, Saul Martinez, Matt Watkins and Al Yenney.
Staff present: Gary Crutchfield, City Manager; Patrick Galloway, Acting City Attorney;
Stan Strebel, Deputy City Manager; Richard Terway, Administrative & Community
Services Director; Rick White, Community & Economic Development Director; Ahmad
Qayoumi, Public Works Director; Bob Metzger, Police Chief; Bob Gear, Fire Chief and
Michael Pawlak, City Engineer.
The meeting was opened with the Pledge of Allegiance.
CONSENT AGENDA:
(a) Approval of Minutes:
Minutes of the Pasco City Council Meeting dated November 7, 2011.
(b) Bills and Communications:
To approve General Claims in the amount of$625,127.11 ($161,088.64 in the form of
Electronic Fund Transfer Nos. 7883, 7889, 7936, 7937, 7960, 8006 and 8019; and
$464,038.47 in the form of Wire Transfer Nos. 185026 through 185214; and Claim
Warrants numbered 1143 through 1145).
To approve bad debt write-offs for utility billing, ambulance, cemetery, general accounts,
miscellaneous accounts, and Municipal Court (non-criminal, criminal, and parking)
accounts receivable in the total amount of$310,874.34 and, of that amount, authorize
$244,689.44 be turned over for collection.
(c) City Hall Roof Replacement, Project No. C6-11-15-GEN:
To reject all bids received for the City Hall Roof Replacement, Project No. C6-1 1-15-
GEN and, further, authorize staff to rebid the project.
(d) Resolution No. 3352, a Resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute a
co-application agreement with the Port of Pasco for an EDA Grant for completion
of the Heritage Rail Spur Project.
To approve Resolution No. 3352, authorizing the City Manager to sign an agreement
with the Port of Pasco to co-apply for EDA Grant monies to complete the Heritage Rail
Spur Project.
(e) Resolution No. 3353, a Resolution fixing the time and date for a public
hearing to consider the vacation of a portion of Bonneville Street, Clark Street and
Main Avenue.
To approve Resolution No. 3353, setting 7:00 p.m., Monday, December 19, 2011 as the
time and date to conduct a public hearing to consider vacating a portion of Bonneville
Street, Clark Street and Main Avenue.
(f) Resolution No. 3354, a Resolution accepting work performed by Armadillo
Underground, Inc., under contract for the Commercial Avenue Phase 3D-Boring,
SR 395 and Foster Wells Road, Project No. 10-2-01.
1
3(a).1
MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING PASCO CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 21, 2011
To approve Resolution No, 3354, accepting the work performed by Armadillo
Underground, Inc., under contract for the Commercial Avenue Phase 313-Boring, SR 395
and Foster Wells Road, Project No. 10-2-01.
(g) Resolution No. 3355, a Resolution accepting work performed by Sharpe &
Preszler Construction Company, Inc., under contract for the Commercial Avenue
Water Line Extension, Project No. C4-10-05WTR.
To approve Resolution No. 3355, accepting the work performed by Sharpe & Preszler
Construction Company, Inc., under contract for the Commercial Avenue Water Line
Extension, Project No. C4-10-05WTR.
(h) Resolution No. 3356, a Resolution accepting work performed by Sierra
Electric, Inc., under contract for the 2010 Miscellaneous Traffic Signal
Improvements, Project No. 10-4-01 (#M2-10-50STR).
To approve Resolution No. 3356, accepting the work performed by Sierra Electric, Inc.,
under contract for the 2010 Miscellaneous Traffic Signal Improvements, Project No. 10-
4-01 (4M2-10-50STR).
MOTION: Ms. Francik moved to approve the Consent Agenda as read. Mr. Garrison
seconded. Motion carried by unanimous Roll Call vote.
REPORTS FROM COMMITTEES AND/OR OFFICERS:
Mr. Garrison reported on the TRIDEC Board of Directors meeting.
Ms. Francik reported on the WA State Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Board
meeting and attended the Road 68 Improvements Open House.
Mr, Yenney attended the Benton-Franklin Council of Governments meeting and invited
all to the Benton-Franklin Community Action Committee Open House on Tuesday from
3:30 —6:30 p.m.
PUBLIC HEARINGS AND COUNCIL ACTION ON ORDINANCES AND
RESOLUTIONS RELATING THERETO:
2012 Property Tax Levy.
Council and staff discussed the proposed Property Tax Levy.
MAYOR WATKINS DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN TO CONSIDER THE PROPOSED
PROPERTY TAX LEVY.
FOLLOWING THREE CALLS FOR COMMENTS, EITHER FOR OR AGAINST, AND THERE BEING
NODE, MAYOR WATKINS DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED.
Ordinance No. 4026, an Ordinance providing for the 2012 Ad Valorem Tax Levy, a
levy for the 1999 Unlimited Tax General Obligation Bonds and Levy for the 2002
Unlimited General Obligation Refunding Bonds in the City of Pasco in accordance
with state law.
MOTION- Ms. Francik moved to adopt Ordinance 4026, Option#2, providing for the
2012 Ad Valorem Tax Levy, a levy for the 1999 Unlimited Tax General Obligation
Bonds and the 2002 Unlimited Tax General Obligation Refunding Bonds, Mr. Martinez
seconded. Motion carried 6-1. No— Larsen.
Ordinance No. 4027, an Ordinance preserving the Property Tax Levy Capacity, in
the City of Pasco,Washington for fiscal years after 2012 in accordance with state
law.
2
MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING PASCO CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 21, 2011
MOTION: Ms. Francik moved to adopt Ordinance No. 4027, preserving Property Tax
Levy Capacity for fiscal years after 2012 in accordance with State Law. Mr. Garrison
seconded. Motion carried 6-1. No— Larsen.
NEW BUSINESS:
City Council Districts:
MOTION; Ms. Francik moved to select Option #2 as the tentative plan for realigrunent
of City Council district boundaries. Mr. Garrison seconded. Motion carried unanimously.
EXECUTIVE SESSION:
Council adjourned to Executive Session at 7:23 p.m, for approximately 20 minutes to
discuss acquisition of Real Estate with the City Manager.
Mayor Watkins called the meeting back to order at 7:48 p.m.
ADJOURNMENT:
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 7:48 p.m.
APPROVED: ATTEST:
Matt Watkins, Mayor Debra L. Clark, City Clerk
PASSED and APPROVED this 51h day of December, 2011.
3
CITY OF PASCO
Council Meeting of; 'December 5,2011
Accounts Payable Approved
The City Council
City of Pasco, Franklin County,Washington
We, the undersigned,do hereby certify under penalty of perjury that the materials have been furnished,the
services rend or the labor performed as described herein and that the claim is a just,due and unpaid
oblig ion ainst the city and that we are authorized to authenticate and certify to said claim.
Gary Cr7ndersignCed i a ger Dunyele Mas , Finance Services Manager
We,the City Councilmembers of the City Council of the City of Pasco, Franklin County,Washington, do
hereby certify on this 5th day of December,2011 that the merchandise or services hereinafter specified have been received:
Check Numbers and 185215-185381 In 7heAmount Of: $1,018,073.04
Electronic Funds Transfers: 1141 - 1142.
1146-1148
In The Amount Of: $39,334.71
Electronic Funds Transfers: 8072,8094
(Journal Entries) Combined total of $1,057,407.75
Councilmember Councilmember
SUMMARY OF CLAIMS BY FUND:
GENERAL FUND:
Legislative 240.00
Judicial 4,374.90
Executive 9,033.39
Police 66,417.23
Fire 2,975.18
Administration &Community Services 92,979.25
Community Development 2,150.93
Engineering 2,730.67
Non-Departmental 8,043.31
Library 93,143.56
TOTAL GENERAL FUND: 282,088.42
STREET 35,937.12
ARTERIAL STREET 0.00
STRE=ET OVERLAY 0.00
C. D. BLOCK GRANT 87,275.06
KING COMMUNITY CENTER 1,779.26
AMBULANCE SERVICE 5,218.05
CEMETERY 1,981.85
ATHLETIC PROGRAMS 13,495.06
GOLF COURSE 31,738.76
SENIOR CENTER OPERATING 3,075.69
MULTI MODAL_FACILITY 1,685.44
RIVERSHORE TRAIL&MARINA MAIN 246.29
SPECIAL ASSESSMNT LODGING 14,396.37
LITTER CONTROL 1,678.75
REVOLVING ABATEMENT 839.04
TRAC DEVELOPMENT&OPERATING 19,663.00
INDUSTRIAL DEVEL& INFRASTRUCT 5,000.40
STADIUM/CONVENTION CENTER 8,887.24
GENERAL CAP PROJ CONSTRUCTION 66,388,97
WATER/SEWER 299,554.26
EQUIPMENT RENTAL-OPERATING GOVERNMENTAL 18,491.96
EQUIPMENT RENTAL-OPERATING BUSINESS 192.63
EQUIPMENT RENTAL- REPLACEMENT GOVERNMENTAL 0,00
EQUIPMENT RENTAL- REPLACEMENT BUSINESS O.OD
MEDICAL/DENTAL INSURANCE 37,334,71
CENTRAL STORES 0.00
PAYROLL CLEARING 39,172.78
LID CONSTRUCTION 0.00
PUBLIC FACILITIES DIST 32,288,58
TRt CITY ANIMAL CONTROL 48,998.46
SENIOR CENTER ASSOCIATION 0.00
GRANT}TOTAL ALL FUNDS: $ 1,057,407.75
3(b). 1
CITY OF PASCO
Council Meeting of:
Payroll Approval December 5, 2011
The City Council
City of Pasco
Franklin County,Washington
The foil ding is a sum of payroll claims against the City of Pasco for the month of
November 20 1 which ar resen d herewith for your review and approval.
Gary Crutchfield, a ager Rick Terway, Administrative & Community Services Director
I
We,the undersigned City Council members of the City Council of the City of Pasco, Franklin County,
Washington, do hereby certify that the services represented by the below expenditures have been received
and that payroll voucher No's.43543 through 43621 and 80090 through 80099 and EFT deposit
No's. 30048206 through 30048764 and City contributions in the aggregate amount of$2,002,245.74 are
approved for payment on this 51h day of December 2011.
Councilmember Councilmember
SUMMARY OF PAYROLL BY FUND
GENERAL FUND:
Legislative $ 7,658,18
Judicial 76,076.13
Executive C>4,329.68
Police 577,075.10
Fire 285,374,96
Administrative&Community Services 246,104.97
Community Development 74,360.86
Engineering 99,571.38
TOTAL GENERAL FUND 1,430,551.26
CITY STREET 41,591.75
BLOCK GRANT 13,190.98
MARTIN LUTHER KING CENTER 6,007.61
AMBULANCE SERVICE FUND 148,756.16
CEMETERY 14,426.12
ATHLETIC FUND 2,291.31
SENIOR CENTER 13,958.01
STADIUM OPERATIONS 0.00
MULTI-MODAL FACILITY 0.00
BOAT BASIN 0,00
REVOLVING ABATEMENT FUND 0.00
TASK FORCE 0.00
WATERISEWER 297,748.72
EQUIPMENT RENTAL- OPERATING 26,306.09
OLD FIRE PENSION FUND 7,417.73
GRAND TOTAL ALL FUNDS $ 2,002,245.74
Payroll Summary
Net Payroll 932,215.42
Employee Deductions 563,433.80
Gross Payroll 1,495,649.22
City of Pasco Contributions 506,596.52
Total Payroll $ 2,002,245.74
3(b)2
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Council November 21, 2011
FROM: Gary Crutchfield, City Manager Workshop Mtg.: 11/28/11
Regular Mtg.: 12/5/11
SUBJECT: Federal Legislative Consulting Agreement
1. REFERENCE(S):
I. Proposed Agreement
11. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL /STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
11/28: Discussion
12/5: MOTION: I move to approve the agreement with Gordon Thomas Honeywell
Governmental Affairs for federal legislative consultant services and,
further, authorize the City Manager to sign the agreement.
111. FISCAL IMPACT:
$60,000 annually
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
A) The city has contracted with the consulting firm of Gordon Thomas Honeywell
(GTH) for legislative assistance at the state level for several years. In early 2009,
the city entered into a separate agreement with the Washington DC division of
GTH to provide for legislative consulting services specifically geared to federal
funding for the Lewis Street Overpass Project.
B) The agreement with the Washington DC office will expire on 12/31/11 and anew
agreement is needed to sustain the consulting effort on the city's behalf in
Washington DC.
V. DISCUSSION:
A) The proposed agreement is identical to the prior agreements, except for the dates.
The scope of work, as identified in the attachment to the agreement, still focuses
on funding for construction of the Lewis Street Overpass project but also includes
pursuit of EDA funds for the Heritage Industrial Center rail project.
B) The expense of the contract remains at $5,000 monthly ($60,000 annually). The
assistance of the consultant was beneficial in 2009 through Representative
Hastings' effort to obtain a $750,000 allocation for the project in the 2010 federal
budget. It is also critical to work with other legislative offices to assure the best
opportunity to have Pasco's projects included in new federal funding bills
expected sometime within the next 18 months.
C) In view of the substantial financial benefit for this particular project, staff
recommends the agreement continue for another year.
3(c)
CONSULTING AGREEMENT
GORDON THOMAS HONEYWELL & CITY OF PASCO
This Agreement is entered into by and between City of Pasco and any other party hereto, as is
identified in the consultant's signature block below (hereinafter referred to as "Consultant"),
upon the following terms and conditions:
A. Scope of Work. Consultant will advise and assist the City of Pasco in accordance with
Consultant's Scope of Work, described in Attachment "A" hereto and incorporated herein,
and Consultant will do and produce such other things as are set forth in the Scope of Work
(the "Services"), Consultant's Services will be in compliance with applicable laws,
regulations, rules, orders, licenses and permits, now or hereinafter in effect, and Consultant
shall furnish such documents as may be required to effect or evidence such compliance.
B. Compensation; Expenses. The City of Pasco will pay Consultant for satisfactorily
rendered Services in accordance with the specific terms set forth in Attachment "A."
C. Invoices; Payment. Consultant will furnish the City of Pasco invoices at regular intervals,
as set forth in Attachment"A."
D. Term. Consultant shall promptly begin the Services hereunder on the date set forth in
Attachment "A" and shall terminate same on the date set forth in Attachment "A." The
City or Consultant may terminate Consultant services for convenience at any time prior to
the termination date set forth in Attachment "A," provided that the terminating parry
provides 30-days written notice to the other party.
E. Ownership of Work Product. The product of all work performed under this agreement,
including reports, and other related materials shall be the property of the City of Pasco or
its nominees, and the City of Pasco or its nominees shall have the sole right to use, sell,
license, publish or otherwise disseminate or transfer rights in such work product.
G. Independent Contractor. Consultant is an independent contractor and nothing contained
herein shall be deemed to make Consultant an employee of the City of Pasco, or to
empower Consultant to bind or obligate the City of Pasco in any way. Consultant is solely
responsible for paying all of Consultant's own tax obligations, as well as those due for any
employee/subcontractor permitted to work for Consultant hereunder,
H. Release of Claims; ]indemnity. Consultant hereby releases, and shall defend, indemnify
and hold harmless the City of Pasco from and against all claims, liabilities, damages and
costs arising directly or indirectly out of, or related to, Consultant's fault, negligence, strict
liability or produce liability of Consultant, and/or that of any permitted employee or
subcontract or Consultant, pertaining to the Services hereunder.
1. Assignment. Consultant's rights and obligations hereunder shall not be assigned or
transferred without the City of Pasco's prior written consent; subject thereto, this
Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties' heirs and
successors.
J. Governing Law; Severability, This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State
of Washington, U.S.A. (excluding conflict of laws provisions). if any term or provision of
this Agreement is determined to be legally invalid or unenforceable by a court with lawful
jurisdiction hereover (excluding arbitrators), such term or provision shall not affect the
validity or enforceability of any remaining terms or provisions of this Agreement, and the
court shall, so far as possible, construe the invalid portion to implement the original intent
thereof.
K. Arbitration. Any dispute between the parties related to or arising out of the subject matter
of this Agreement shall be resolved exclusively through binding arbitration under the
Commercial Arbitration Rules of the American Arbitration Association in Washington
State.
L. Entire Agreement; Etc. This Agreement, and its incorporated attachments hereto, state the
entire agreement between the parties regarding the subject matter hereof and supersede any
prior agreements or understandings pertaining thereto. Any modification to this Agreement
must be made in writing and signed by authorized representatives of both parties. Any
provision hereof which may be reasonably deemed to survive the expiration or termination
of this Agreement shall so survive, and remain in continuing effect. No delay or failure in
exercising any right hereunder shall be deemed to constitute a waiver of any right granted
hereunder or at law by either party.
CONSULTANT: CITY OF MASCO
Gordon Thomas Honeywell
Governmental Affairs
Sign: Sign:
Print: Tim Schellberg Print: Gary Crutchfield
Title: President Title: City Manager
Date: Date:
Consulting Agreement for Federal Grants re: Lewis Street Overpass
Gordon Thomas Honeywell & City of Pasco
Page 2 of 3
AT'T'ACHMENT "A" TO
CONSULTING AGREEMENT
GORDON THOMAS HONEYWELL & CITY OF PASCO
A. Scope of Work- Consultant shall provide the City of Pasco with the following federal
governmental affair services:
• Identify and track all federal grants and initiatives that are available to the City of
Pasco that impact funding for the Lewis Street Overpass.
• Lobby the Washington State Congressional delegation and others as necessary to
pursue federal grants and initiatives, including various infrastructure packages and the
anticipated highway reauthorization bill: 1) for a road and/or bridge project related to
the Lewis Street Overpass; 2) Department of Commerce funding for the Heritage
Industrial Center Rail Extension.
• Indentify, track and lobby for federal grants and initiatives that benefit the City of
Pasco.
• Work as a liaison between the City of Pasco and federal officials, Members of
Congress, congressional staff and Administration representatives to impact issues and
projects important to the City.
• Organize meetings for City of Pasco officials, local community leaders and business
leaders to support the congressional transportation request,
• Provide the City of Pasco with periodic reports and updates on effort, status and
progress.
B. Com pen sationfExpenses: The City of Pasco shall pay Consultant a monthly fee of$5,000
for the services listed above. Consultant shall only bill communication expenses. The
expenses shall not exceed $2,500 for the term of the contract,
C. Invoiees/Payments: (a) Consultant shall furnish the City of Pasco with invoices for
services performed on a monthly basis, and (b) the City of Pasco shall pay each of
Consultant's invoices within thirty (30) days after the City's receipt and verification of
invoice.
D. Term of Agreement: Consultant's services shall commence on January I, 2012 and shall
terminate on December 31, 2012.
Consulting Agreement for Federal Grants re- Lewis Street Overpass
Gordon Thomas Honeywell & City of Pasco
Page 3 of 3
AGENDA REPORT
FOR: City Counci November 30, 2011
TO: Gary CrutchW, -'i Manager
FROM: Rick Terwa Administrative & Regular Mtg.: 12/5/11
Community Services
SUBJECT: Capitol Park Playground
I. REFERENCE(S):
1, Resolution
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL I STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
1215: MOTION: I move to approve Resolution No , accepting the work
performed by GameTime for equipment and installation of the
playground at Capitol Park.
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
$72,148.02 including sales tax
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
A) In July staff held a neighborhood meeting and the majority of residents chose the
playground presented by GameTime.
B) The purchase and installation of the playground was removed from the park
construction contract as a cost savings measure. Staff estimates approximately
$8-10,000 was saved by having this done independently of the construction.
V. DISCUSSION
A) The installation is now complete and staff recommends acceptance of the work.
3(e)
RESOLUTION NO. 357
A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK PERFORMED BY
GAMETIME FOR EQUIPMENT AND INSTALLATION OF THE
PLAYGROUND AT CAPITOL PARK.
WHEREAS, the work performed by GameTime for Equipment and Installation
of the playground at Capitol Park has been examined by Administrative and Community
Services and been found to be in apparent compliance with City standards, and
WHEREAS, it is Administrative and Community Services' recommendation that the
City of Pasco accept the contractor's work; NOW, THEREFORE,
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO:
That the City Council concurs with Administrative and Community Services'
recommendation and thereby accepts the work performed by GameTime for Equipment and
Installation of the playground at Capitol Park as being completed in apparent conformance with
City standards.
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco this 5th day of December, 2011.
Matt Watkins, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Debra L. Clark, City Clerk Leland B. Kerr, City Attorney
AGENDA REPORT NO. 15
FOR: City Council November 29, 2011
T0: Gary Crutchfie Manager
FROM: Ahmad Qayo i, Public Works Director Regular Mtg.: 12/05/11
SUBJECT: Accept "A" Street Water Line Repair, Project No. M4-11-60-WTR
I. REFERENCE(S):
1. Resolution
11. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL/STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
12/05: MOTION: I move to approve Resolution No.31� accepting the work
performed by Michels Pipe Services, under contract for the "A"
Street Water Line Repair,
111. FISCAL IMPACT:
Utility Fund
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
A) On September 6, 2011, Council awarded the "A" Street Water Line Repair, Project
No. M4-11-60-WTR to Michels Pipe Services for $121,265.00, plus applicable
sales tax.
V. DISCUSSION:
A) The final project cost was $123,228.36, plus applicable sales tax (approximately
1.6% above original contract). The additional cost was due to finding a void
around the water line during excavation. The void was caused by the leak in the
water line. Staff directed the contractor to excavate and compact the area and
patch a small section of the roadway.
The work is now complete and staff recommends acceptance of this work.
3(f)
RESOLUTION NO. 35518
A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK PERFORMED BY MICHELS PIPE
SERVICES, UNDER CONTRACT FOR THE "A" STREET WATER LINE REPAIR,
PROJECT NO. M4-11-60-WTR.
WHEREAS, the work performed by MICHELS PIPE SERVICES, under contract for the
"A" Street Water Line Repair, Project No. M4-11-60-WTR, has been examined by Public Works
Operations and has been found to be in apparent compliance with the applicable project
specifications and drawings, and
WHEREAS, it is Public Works Operations' recommendation that the City of Pasco
formally accept the contractor's work and the project as complete; NOW, THEREFORE,
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO, that the
City Council concurs with Public Works Operations' recommendation and thereby accepts the
work performed by MICHELS PIPE SERVICES, under contract for the "A" Street Water Line
Repair, Project No. M4-11-60-WTR, as being completed in apparent conformance with the
project specifications and drawings, and
Be It Further Resolved, that the City Clerk is hereby directed to notify the Washington
State Department of Revenue of this acceptance, and
Be It Further Resolved, that the final payment of retainage being withheld pursuant to
applicable laws, regulations and administrative determination shall be released upon satisfaction
of same and verification thereof by the Public Works Operations Manager and Finance Manager.
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco this S`h Day of December, 2011.
Matt Watkins
Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Debra L. Clark Leland B. Kerr
City Clerk City Attorney
A STREET WATER LINE REPAIR
I ` 1-1 2
JAMES Scs�,
I
j
N S�Tv
LEw
"A"sp�
� ��Ns '* PROJECT LO ATl N
ao are x VW
worr
OAR sr. fig sane
AGENDA REPORT
FOR: City Counci December 1, 2011
TO: Gary Crutch , lanager Regular Mtg.: 2/5/11
FROM: Rick White
Community & Economic Development Director ev-
S U BJ ECT: Kurtzman Part:Neighborhood Local Improvement District LID 149
I. REFERENCE(S):
1. Vicinity Map
?. Right ofway inventory map
3. Map of proposed LID 149, LID 148 and LID 146
4. Preliminary Assessment Roll
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL/STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Conduct Public Hearing
12/5: MOTION: 1 move to close the public hearing and table action on this item until the
December 19, 2011 Council Meeting.
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. LID 146 was completed in 2010 for the southern portion of the Kurtzman neighborhood
using a combination of federal stimulus and Comm—inity Development Block Grant
(CDBG) funds and owner contributions. LID 148 for the middle portion of the
neighborhood is nearly complete using CDBG funds and owner contributions, This last
portion of the Kurtzman neighborhood was excluded from LID 148 due to lack of
necessary right of way.
C. Two neighborhood meetings were conducted this year (May and July) to explore the
level of neighborhood interest in an LID. Almost all residents attending were interested ill
moving forward with the LID process — with the understanding that cost estimates for
individual properties would need to be developed.
D. Property owners were notified of the hearing and provided with a preliminary assessment
of costs that may be incurred should the LID be formed as required by iaw.
V. DISCUSSION:
A. Neighborhood improvements in areas lacking or experiencing decay of infrastructure is a
longstanding Council goal. The use of CDBG monies for an area-wide benefit and for
LID assistance can minimize the impact of improving neighborhood infrastructure on low
income households.
B. The cost for curb, gutter, sidewalk, street lights and street paving was estimated at
$62%,625 for the original boundaries of the LID. City Council has allocated $200,000 in
2012 CDBG funds as a means of financing a portion of the missing infrastructure in the
proposed LID area. CDBG funds can also be used to pay assessments for lower income
residents similar to a program that is now in place for the payment of utility LTD's. Staff
intends to request CDBG funds in the 2013 allocation process for financial assistance to
qualifying owners if this LID is approved.
C. This phase of the Kurtzman Neighborhood Improvement project is unique in that there is
insufficient right of way on all streets involved. The lack of available right of way
caused exclusion of the properties adjacent Sycamore Aventie from the preliminary
assessment calculation. Most recently, owners on the west side of Cedar have dedicated
the needed right of way, but several on the east side have not. This will require the
exclusion of properties adjacent the east side of Cedar Avenue. The exclusion of these
properties will result in higher individual assessments than provided through the
preliminary assessment roll.
7(a)
D. Staff recommends that the LID process for this phase be coordinated with a substantial
amendment to the 2012 CDBG allocation approved by Council this past September. One
of the construction projects approved in September for CDBG funding (Eastside
Community Park at $230,850) will not go forward because of difficulty in locating a
suitable park site. Staff suggests that a portion of this CDBG; funding be reallocated to the
last phase of the 1Cuttzman Park Neighborhood Improvement Project to equal the value of
the individual assessments before the exclusion of the properties on the east side of Cedar
AvellUe.
E. Coordination of a substantial amendment of the 2012 CDBG process can occur at the
December 19, 2011 City Council Meeting. Staff suggests Council consider a reallocation
of CDBG funds approved in September through Resolution 3339 with a recommendation
from the Planning Commission - consistent with CDBG guidelines. If approved, the
reallocation would be applied to the CDBG portion of proposed LID 149 so the
preliminary assessments remain at or lower than those provided to the affected property
owners in preparation for this December 5"' public hearing. The ordinance creating the
LID could then be considered at the December 19`E' meeting by Council following a
decision on the reallocation of CDBG funds.
F. If both the reallocation of CDBG funds and an ordinance creating LID 149 are approved,
the required 30 day comment period for the reallocation and the 30 day protest period for
the LID formation can run concurrently.
- r� ,l?� ���. �,�+ �� a:� ;•,<'G 5+�e: ! - : � � fit'.,•• ;,��,� +J -
•� _� �,�„ �'ra IRS. ��� � _ ��. �` .T s.... .V► - �j - -��,'�
rp +1 f
I(^ '� .--- • r_ , � l _ ETA � +�` `� �•,�c•-' �.
AMC
r=10,
VMAD
Pow
wool.,
Owl
-a- flail
ALI
. _
, ����e�ai-f � .��A���• �
�e r: _ JJ�r • \\� � �b �1
me
` d!! iiel�' �s '••�4 1 , I ' u9 ms^s, ;
m y_ �• 7RS r: r
YO AA
ug vow
• �� � -'+� t` �j ' . : '� -, wool - � � t�E • �
50' 50' 60'
rw^ NOW N � - ■■■■■■■
N i" CARD IRIBARREN MCCLURE
5 Fee CHAVEZ CARDENAS 5 Feet 20 Feet
J
RADA&
BERTSONI SON
OROZCO CARDENA SFeet 20 Fee S `
MC`NT !S 20 Feet
w0ZC0 5 reet -
�1RfBE MA*EN $ERRAT.
Feet
SILVA e�
� MONTEZ
CAMPBELL 5 Feet
WI �UECG . JAOSON
RAMIREZ HIL
Q
Fe
CAMPBELL GOMEZ -
Feet 0 Feet Q
Wa p BIRRUt ,RAJAS U
CONROY
5 Feet RIZZU0 *CAMPO ZEPEDA
SALGP� SENDEZ j •
HERRW
' GAR -
CAMPBELL LENZ CRUQ 5 F
CAMP&L MANC6iA
NARp,� Legend
5F
GR ER
SCALES LUCA EON Fee L..., Original Boundary
6htFeet Proposed LID 149
so' Al TON - Dedication Received
i 1 ROW Width Needed
Neighborhood Improvement Area Churches
ROW Widths
� Houses
uu uu u�l u{ I I ! T] I ILI
'LE INJ owns%
FF -
N
w _
•
LU Original Estimate: ' •
g a �
$627,625
LU
h1 5T �
_.
z
0
M—HE7A T w UJIE HELEN
a
LISPELL CT v 2: USTE
Legend Z U
0
Original LID Boundary J
^ Ial I TTE CT NDIV IV
41 Proposed LID 149
Q LID 148
LID 146
Houses —
nMn ST
Proposed LID 149
LID 149 Kurtzman Park Area Phase 3 11/18/2011
Original Assessment
Record Number Sidewalk Parcel Number Owner Name Total Assessrent
1 V 113832014 Cardenas,Juan &Adelina S 16,509.72
2 Y 113832023 Cardenas,Juan &Adelina $ 8,021.89
3 N 113832201 Madden, Charles $ 8,021.89
4 Y 113832041 GR8 House LLC $ 5,495.75
5 Y 113832050 1 Delgado,Silvestre&Teresa $ 2,969.61
6 N 113832069 Hill, Celestine $ 2,969.61
7 Y 113832078 Fabela,Joel P& Maria Angelica $ 7,011.44
8 Y 113832268 Birrueta, Rosa(ETAL) $ 4,586.34
9 Y 113832269 Rizzuto, Nichole $ 4,58634
10 Y 113832270 Salagado, Rigoberto(ETAL) $ 4,586.34
11 Y 113832239 Herrera,Jose A(ETAL) $ 4,687.39
12 Y 113832248 Cruz,Antonio $ 4,687.39
13 Y 113832257 Mancera, Salvador $ 4,687.39
14 Y 113832103 Naranjo,Salvador&Carlota $ 5,495.75
15 Y 113832221 Lucatero,Rudolfo&Gloria $ 5,495.75
16 N 113831042 Leon,Jesus $ 13,074.17
17 Y 113831131 Garcia, Erasmo &Maria $ 18,126.45
18 Y 113831205 Mendez, Maria(ETAL) $ 4,687.39
19 Y 113831196 Ocampo,Jesus $ 4,687.39
20 Y 113831187 Barajas,Jose G $ 4,687.39
21 Y 113831159 Gomez,William $ 7,011.44
22 Y 113831060 Mejia, Manuel C I $ 3,980.07
23 Y 113831079 Jackson,Gemella Smith $ 3,980.07
24 Y 113831088 Silva,Veronica(ETAL) $ 6,000.98
25 Y 113831097 Sreeatos,Javier $ 4,990.53
26 Y 113831104 Montes, Rosa I $ 3,980.07
27 Y 113831113 Robertson, Bruce H $ 4,990.53
28 N 113831122 Iribarren,J R(Jamie) $ 18,126.45
29 N 113831015 Rada &Sons,Inc $ 38,335.57
30 Y 113831024 Murphy,Alice B $ 62,586.52
31 Y 113831033 Robinson, Rikie $ 18,126.45
32 Y 113900085 Salinas,Julian $ 31,262.38
33 Y 113900075 Zepeda,Jose&Maria $ 31,262.38
34 N 113900066 Montez,Edward& Elizabeth $ 30,757.15
35 Y 113900057 Amarawest Corporation $ 7,011.44
36 Y 113900048 McClure,Jeffery&Jennifer M $ 20,147,37
Totals $ 427,62439
- - •_ ' .x,1.
S- I fuGO AVE �' � m
Z 4w
ZE
cc: + �1 .r1 r -4 k 3 cc
A.
IN 411�sw-
'
A -HUGO
iW
WAL
Awl
CD
Zn
IN
cr 41
CD
CD
-I'kLON CT
"CEOA -AY +
_ • R
l ! a
V y
AGENDA REPORT
FOR: City Council Date: November 29, 2011
Regular Meeting: December 5, 2011
TO: Gary Crutchfi anager
Rick Terway, . '.ommunity Services Director
FROM: Dunyele Mason, Financial Services Manager
SUBJECT: 2012 ANNUAL OPERATING AND CAPITAL PROJECTS BUDGETS
I. REFERENCE(S):
A) Proposed 2012 Annual Operating Budget Ordinance.
B) Proposed 2012 Capital Projects Budget Ordinance.
11. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIVSTAFF RECOMMENDATION:
A. 12/5: Conduct Public Hearing
B. MOTION: I move for the first reading of Ordinance No. , for
consideration of the 2012 Annual Operating Budget.
C. MOTION: I move for the first reading of Ordinance No. , for
consideration of the 2012 Capital Projects Budget.
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
A) $123,901,197 - Annual Operating Budget
B) $ 13,224,961 - Net Increase to Capital Projects Authority
1V. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
The 2011 Preliminary Budget was discussed at the Council workshop meeting held on
November 8, 2011. General Fund Revenues and Expenditures were discussed as well as
other operating fund budgets, and each City Department Head gave a briefing and
answered questions regarding oversight of their respective operating and capital projects
budgets.
A copy of the 2012 Preliminary Budget document is available for review at the Pasco
Public Library. The document is also available for viewing and printing from the City's
internet site at w.vasco-wa,1,ov, under"Publications" and then clicking on "Financial
Reports" and then clicking on"Budget".
V. DISCUSSION:
Since the November 8'h workshop meeting no change in budgetary appropriations is
necessary.
7(b)
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING THE CITY OF PASCO OPERATING BUDGET FOR THE YEAR 2012.
WHEREAS, subsequent to due notice and public hearing thereon, the City Council of the City of Pasco has approved
an operating budget for the year 2012; NOW,THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO,WASHINGTON DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section One. The following budget containing the totals set forth for each fund for the year 2012 is hereby adopted.
FUND EXPENDITURE REVENUE
GENERAL FUND $ 42,314,656 $ 42,314,656
CITY STREET FUND 2,570,793 2,570,793
ARTERIAL STREET FUND 839,484 839,484
1-1 B2 CORRIDOR TRAFFIC IMPACT FUND 1,078,845 1,076,845
STREET OVERLAY FUND 3,760,455 3,760,455
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT FUND 2,081,308 2,081,308
M.L.KING JR.COMMUNITY CENTER FUND 171,133 171,133
AMBULANCE SERVICES FUND 2,988,495 2,988,495
CONTINGENCY FUND 173,799 173,799
CITY VIEW CEMETERY FUND 250,003 250,003
BOULEVARD PERPETUAL MAINTENANCE FUND 1,764,791 1,764,791
ATHLETIC PROGRAM FUND 324,004 324,004
GOLF COURSE 1,585,188 1,585,168
SENIOR CENTER OPERATING FUND 314,109 314,109
MULTI-MODAL FACILITY FUND 110,720 110.720
BI-CENTENIAL FUND 6,260 6,260
RIVERSHORE TRAIL& MARINA MAINTENANCE FUND 19,935 99,935
SPECIAL LODGING ASSESSMENT FUND 195,790 195,790
LITTERASATEMENT FUND 21,595 21,595
REVOLVING ABATEMENT FUND 295,558 295,558
TRAC DEVELOPMENT&OPERATING FUND 370,850 370,850
PARK DEVELOPMENT FUND 1,600,522 1,600,522
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS FUND 2,655,371 2,655,371
INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT&INFRASTRUCTURE FUND 1,201,897 1,201,897
STADIUM/CONVENTION CENTER FUND 879,126 879,126
LANDFILL REMEDIATION FUND 401,298 401,298
LID 144 SANDIFUR PKWY 60,009 60,009
LID 145A STREET IMPROVEMENTS 396,186 396,186
LID 146 KURTZMAN PRK IMPROVE 70,060 70,060
1999 GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND FIRE/LIBRARY FUND 247,174 247,174
2002 GENERAL OBLIGATION REFUNDING BOND FUND 615,822 615,822
LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT GUARANTY FUND 936,283 936,283
GENERAL CAPITAL PROJECTS 5,962,939 5,962,939
WATER/SEWER UTILITY FUND 30,479,222 30,479,222
EQUIPMENT RENTAL OPERATIONS FUND-GOVERNMENT TYPE 1,153,699 1,153,699
EQUIPMENT RENTAL OPERATIONS FUND-PROPRIETARY TYPE 581,637 581,637
EQUIPMENT RENTAL REPLACEMENT FUND-GOVERNMENT TYPE 4,612,971 4,612,971
EQUIPMENT RENTAL REPLACEMENT FUND-PROPRIETARY TYPE 1,810,856 1,810,856
MEDICAL/DENTAL INSURANCE FUND 57206,165 5,206,165
CENTRAL STORES FUND 20,695 20,695
CITY VIEW CEMETERY ENDOWMENT 412,234 412,234
OLD FIRE MEDICAL(OPEB) 1,947,034 1,947,034
OLD FIREMEN'S PENSION TRUST FUND 1,412,226 1,412,226
GRAND TOTAL ALL FUNDS $ 123,901,197 S 123,901,197
Section Two. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effector!January 1,2012.
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco this 19th day of December,2011.
ATTEST:
Matt Watkins,Mayor
Debra L. Clark,City Clerk
Approved as to Form: Leland B.Kerr,City Attomey
ORDINANCE NO,
AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING THE CITY OF PASCO CAPITAL PROJECTS BUDGET
FOR THE YEAR 2012
WHEREAS,subsequent to due notice and public hearing thereon,the City Council for the City of Pasco
has approved the following capital Project Budget for the year 2012; NOW,THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE C17Y OF PASCO DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section One.
That the capital projects are hereby authorized as detailed. The following schedule
summarizes newly authorized projects as well as continuing projects and constitutes the
Capital Projects Budget. The Budget is adopted at the cumulative project level.
CIP Budget Increase New CIP Budget
Status Prolect Title 2011 (Decrease) o ec 2012
C&ED HOMEMSP(2011 Continued)
Continuing Waldemar/Helena (1 of 3 lots) 132,897 132,897
Continuing Waldemar/Helena (2 of 3 lots) 132,897 132,897
Continuing Waidemar,Hetens (3 of 3 lots) 132,897 132,897
Continuing NSP Project#1 127,000 127,000
Total C&ED Home/NSP 2011 - 525,591 - 525,691
CBED JADMEINSP(New 2012
2012 New HOME - Project#1 52,500 52,500
2012 New NSP-Project#1 127,000 127,004
2012 New NSP-Project#2 - 66,000 66,000
Total C&ED-HOME/NSP 2012 - 245,500 245,500
Ge13erai Pro laos( 011.}
Continuing City Hail Roof Replacement 297,000 - 297,000
Total General (2011) 297,000 - - 297,000
General Protects INew 201,21
2012 New Fire Alterting Systems - 70.000 70,000
2012 New Financial System-HR&Payroll - 170,120 170,120
2012 New Financial System-Financials - 197,940 197,940
2012 New Financial System-Utility& Proj Acctg - 113,230 113.230
Total General (2012) - - 551,290 551,290
Park& F Continue?-01
Continuing Linda Loviisa (Capitol) Park 265,000 79,510 344,510
Continuing Chiawana Park Restroom Upgrades 210,000 41,000 251,000
Total Parks (2011) 475.000 120,510 - 595,510
Park&Fac tl' ' (New 2Q1
2012 New Animal Shelter Facility - 203,000 203,000
2012 New GESA Stadium Overlay - 139,000 139,000
2012 New Chiawana Overlay 73,000 73,000
Total Parks(2012) - - 415,000 415,000
CIP Budget Increase New CIP Budget
Status Protect Title 2011 (Decrease) Project 2012
Street Construction(2011 Continued}
Continuing Lewis St Overpass 5,212,626 1,146,812 6,359,438
2011 Supp New CBC Main Entr&Argent Traffic Signal 346,500 346,500
Continuing A St and SR 12 Interchange 40,000 (40,000) -
Continuing 4th Ave Corridor-North Segment 300,000 170,140 470,140
Continuing 4th Ave South Street Improve 850,000 350,0013 1,200,000
Continuing LID#148 Kurtzman Park Ph. 11 St. Imp. - 732.707 732,707
Continuing Road 68 Improvements(Phase II) 300,000 154,200 454,200
2011 Supp New 2011 STP Grant Overlays 980,1300 980,000
2011 Supp New Oregon Ave(SR397) 220,000 220,000
Continuing 2011 Alley Hard Surfacing(Chip Sealing) 80,000 - 80,000
Total Street Constructlon 2011 6,782,626 4,060,359 - 10,842,985
Street Construction INew 2012}
2012 New 2012 Alley Hard Surfacing(Chip Sealing) - 80,000 80,000
2012 New Powerline Road 65,000 65,000
2012 New Road 68 Widening-Scuth of 1-182 - 80,000 80,000
Total Street Construction 2011 - - 225,000 225,000
WatOr_CorisSLUS.Uan LContinued 201
Continuing West Side Water Treatment Plant 12,000,000 1,365.331 13.365,331
2011 Supp New Columbia Water Supply Project 579,000 579,000
Continuing 2011 Water Distrib Line Ext.(Kurtzman) 58,450 (23,950) 34,500
Continuing 2011 Filtrat Plant Improv(Storage Bldg) 50,000 50,000 100,000
Continuing Water Fill Station 200,000 - 200,000
Continuing Broadmoor Pump Station improvements 600,000 (55,000) 545,000
Total Water Construction 2011 12,908.450 1,915,381 - 14,823,831
WgIgir Qgilstruction(New 2012
2012 New Annual Water Line Distrib Extensions - 150.000 150,000
2012 New 2012 Meter Replace& Cross Connect - 150,000 150,1300
2012 New Water Line Replace-Road 56 204,000 204,000
Total Water Construction 2012 504,000 504,000
Sewer Construction (2011 ConUnuedl -
2011 Supp New Lift Station-Commercial &Kahfotus Hwy - 1,100,ODO 1,100,000
2011 Supp New NW Common Lift Sations - 71,000 71,DO0
Continuing 2010 WWTP Improvements 1,980,000 - 1,980,000
Total Sewer Construction 2011 1,980,000 1,171,000 - 3,151,0013
Sewer CoastMgtoj]&1&20121
2012 New Annual Sewer Line Re-Lining - 410,000 410,000
2012 New Annual Sewer Line Extensions - 200,000 200,000
Total Sewer Construction 2012 - 610,000 510,000
PIWRF CDnstructlon(New 20121 -
2012 New PWRF Farm Related - 170,000 170,000
Total PWRF Construction 2012 - - 170,000 170,C00
5tormwater Construction(20111 -
Continuing Lill Kurtzman Park Ph. II 49,230 49,230
Total Stormwater Const 2011 - 49,230 - 49,230
5tormwater Construction 2
2012 New Annual Drywell Retrofit - 100.000 100,000
Total Stormwater Const 2012 - - 100,000 100,000
Irrigatipri Co ti Continued
CIP Budget Increase New CIP Budget
Status Project Title 2011 {Decrease} Project 2012
Continuing Well Houses 150,000 - 150,000
2011 supp New USBR Irrig Connection 2,402,000 2,402,000
Total Irrigation Construction 2011 150,000 2,402,000 - 2,552,000
Irrigation Construction lNew 2012}
2012 New Annual Irrigation Line Extensions - 100,000 100,000
2012 New Linda Lo+nisa Well House - 60,000 60,000
Total Irrigation Construction 2012 - - 160,000 160,000
TOTAL CIP BUDGET 22,593,076 10,244,171 2,980,790 35,818,037
TOTAL 2011 CONTINUING 22,593,076 10,244,171 - 32,837,247
TOTAL 2012 NEW - - 2,980,790 2,980,790
TOTAL CIP BUDGET 22,593,076 10,244,171 2,980,790 35.8 18,037
Section Two: This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect on January 1.2012
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco this 19th day of December,2011.
ATTEST,
DEBRA L. CLARK, CITY CLERK MATT WATKINS, MAYOR
APPROVED AS TO FORM: LELAND B. KERR, CITY ATTORNEY
AGENDA REPORT
FOR: City Counci November 29, 2011
TO; Gary Crutchfiel nager Regular %4tg.: 12/5/11
FROM: Ahmad Qayoumi Public Works Director
SUBJECT: Water Utilities Amendments
1. REFERENCE(S):
1, Proposed Ordinance
2. Draft Backflow Assembly Tester Policy and Procedure
H. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL/ STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
1215: MOTION: I move to adopt Ordinance No. regarding water and
irrigation water utility rules and regulations and, further, authorize
publication by summary only.
111. FISCAL IMPACT:
N/A
TV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
A) The City implemented a backflow assembly testing/tester program as a
requirement of state law and, to safeguard the City's water system, in the late
1990's. Recent state law requires that the City formalize its policies and
procedures for backflow assembly testers.
B) Staff has also identified two areas where the code should be amended to be in
compliance with the plumbing code (stop and waste cock replaced by shut-off
valve after meter) and to define when irrigation water is available.
V. DISCUSSION:
A) Based on comments at the meeting of November 28, the proposed amendment to
PMC Section 13.16.021 authorizes the City Manager to, after providing prior
written notice to the City Council, issue rules and procedures, not inconsistent
with state law, for backflow assembly testers. This provision will allow
administrative changes as required by experience or due to changes in the
Washington Administrative Code. A draft policy and procedure is attached.
B) Staff recommends adoption of the ordinance.
8(a)
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE of the City of Pasco, amending Title 13 of the Pasco
Municipal Code regarding water and irrigation water utility rules and regulations.
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that certain amendments to Title 13
"Water and Sewer" regarding water and irrigation water utility rules and regulations are
necessary; and
WHEREAS, The Washington Administrative Code (WAC 246-290-490) requires that
water service providers develop and implement a backflow prevention assembly testing quality
control assurance program; and
WHEREAS, the City of Pasco has implemented a cross connection control program to
address high and low risk users; and
WHEREAS, the City desires to establish rules for addressing Backflow Assembly
Testers testing backflow prevention assemblies protecting the municipal water system NOW,
THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN
AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That a new Section 13.08.008 of the Pasco Municipal Code entitled
"Backflow Assembly Tester" shall be and hereby is created and shall read as follows:
13.08.008 BACKFLOW ASSEMBLY TESTER Backflow Assembly Tester means a
person who has met the Washington State Department of Health requirements to test backflow
prevention assemblies and has a current certificate and Backflow Assembly Tester certification
number issued by Washington Certification Services.
Section 2. That a new Section 13.16.021 of the Pasco Municipal Code entitled
"Backflow Assembly Tester" shall be and hereby is created and shall read as follows:
I3.16.021 BACKFLOW ASSEMBLY TESTER The City Manager. afler nrovidin
Prior written notice to the City Council, is authorized to issue rules and procedures not
inconsistent with state law, for Backflow Assembly Testers. Anv aerson desiring to test
backflow assemblies connected with the water su 1 s stem of the City shall make aoolication
with the Water Superintendent on the forms provided. The Backflow Assembly Tester must
a ree to conform to all ordinances rules and regulations now in existence and as hereafter
amended or supplemented governing Backflow Assemble Testers
Section 3. That Section 13.16.170 of the Pasco Municipal Code entitled "Installation of
Stop and Waste Cock" is amended to be entitled and shall read as follows:
13.16.170 INSTALLATION OF STOP :ham'`D WASTE( 0 K SHUT-OFF VALVE It
is unlawful to install water service without a " " eoelt shut-off valve on the
customer line, enabling the owner to shut off water. A "-stap-and w•arte"Lock shut-off valve will
not be permitted inside the meter box. A shut-off valve ahead of the meter is not a "stop
wastes shut-off valve, and the closing of this valve will not protect the plumbing between the
meter and house or within the house, and this valve must not be closed except in the presence of
the Water Superintendent, or his representative, or upon their instructions, or to avoid damage to
property, in which case, it shall be the duty of the water user to notify the Water Department
immediately of such shut-off.
Section 4. That a new Section 13.61.061 of the Pasco Municipal Code entitled
"Irrigation Water Availability" shall be and hereby is created and shall read as follows:
13.61.061 IRRIGATION WATER AVAILABILITY Irrigation water is available when
any of the following exists:
(1) An active irrigation service is on the prope
(2) lrri ation water is being delivered in a pipe adjacent to the property,
(3) Written confirmation of irrigation water availability has been provide_ d by
Franklin County Irrigation District.
Section 5. 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 2011.
Matt Watkins, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM;
Debra Clark, City Clerk Leland R. Kerr, City Attorney
Amending Title 13 PMC "Water and Irrigation Water Utility Rules and Regulations"
Page 2
7/05/2011
CITY OF PASCO
Public Works Department
BACKFLOW ASSEMBLY TESTER
POLICY and PROCEDURES
Sections:
100 Purpose
110 Application
120 Definitions
130 Approved Tester List
140 Backflow Assembly Tester Eligibility Qualifications
150 Test Report Form
160 Eligibility Review
100 PURPOSE. The purpose of this policy is to maintain a list of competent Backflow
Assembly Testers that recognize a high level of customer service is expected when
providing testing and repair services to the City's water customers.To ensure accurate
reporting of backflow prevention assemblies in a timely manner including, but not
limited to installation, testing and repair of backflow prevention assemblies and devices
used to protect the City's potable water system pursuant to Pasco Municipal Code (PMC)
13.16.020.
110 APPLICATION. This policy applies to any person and/or corporation testing backflow
prevention assemblies or devices installed on the City's potable water system.
120 DEFINITIONS.
(1) Accurate means free from errors.
(2) Approved Backflow Assembly Tester means a person that has met the
Washington State Department of Health requirements to test backflow
prevention assemblies and has a current certificate and Backflow Assembly
Tester certification number issued by Washington Certification Services.
(3) BAT means a Backflow Assembly Tester (Tester) holding a valid certification
issued by Washington Certification Services.
(4) Backflow Prevention Assembly means a configuration of one or more check
valves, an air inlet valve, or relief valve and may include shutoff valves that
have been approved for use in the State of Washington to prevent backflow and
is/has been on the Department of Health's published list.
(5) City's Cross Connection Specialist is the person(s) responsible for
administering the City's Cross Connection Control Program.
(6) Code Enforcement Board.The Code Enforcement Board hears alleged violations
of the City codes regarding property maintenance standards.The Board has the
7/05/2011
authority to establish monetary penalties and order water to the premises to be
turned off.
(7) Complete means not omitting information when completing a test report form,
including but not limited to test results, manufacturer, model, size, serial
number, location of the backflow prevention assembly or device, date tested and
Tester.
(8) DOH means the Washington State Department of Health, Office of Drinking
Water and any of the departments within the agency.
(9) Operations Manager is the person responsible for the City's potable water
distribution system and oversees the Cross Connection Division.
(10) Legible means the written information that can be read easily and is free of
stains and smudges.
(11) Potable Water System means the network of piping that carries drinking water
to the City's water customers.
(12) Washington Certification Services under the direction of the Department of
Health, Office of Drinking Water administers the BAT certification program for
the State of Washington.
130 APPROVED TESTER LIST. The City's Cross Connection Division will maintain a list
of Approved Testers for the public to use. This list can be accessed on the City's web site
and is available in printed form upon request. A second list of Approved Testers lists
BATS and companies with Testers that have met the City's requirements to submit test
report forms but do not wish to be on a public list.
140 BACKFLOW ASSEMBLY TESTER ELIGIBILITY QUALIFICATIONS. To qualify as
an Approved Backflow Assembly Tester the following conditions must be satisfied:
(1) BATs shall meet with the City's Cross Connection Specialist to review the
City'sBackflow Assembly Tester Policy and the testing procedures.
(2) A copy of a current Pasco business license or receipt from the City Clerk's
office showing the application fee has been paid.
(3) Calibration report for the test kit used by the Tester to test backflow prevention
assemblies. The report shall be dated no more than one (1) year before the date
of the test.
(4) Current BAT validation card issued by Washington Certification Services
verifying the BAT has met all requirements for eligibility to test backflow
prevention assemblies in the state of Washington.
150 TEST REPORT FORM. Only a City approved test report form shall be used to report the
test and inspection results of backflow prevention assemblies and devices.
(1) The property owner is responsible to have their backflow assemblies tested. A
test report torn shall be submitted and received by the City's Cross Connection
7/05/2011
Specialist within seven (7) days of the test. The test report may include any of
the following: A passing test, a failing test or a test after repair.
(2) Test report forms shall be submitted by hand, fax, U.S. Postal Service or other
commercial delivery service,
160 ELIGIBILITY REVIE'W'. A BAT and/or company may have their testing privileges
revoked for violation of any part of this Policy. The Operations Manager has the
authority to administer action including but not limited to suspension, probation,
notification of action by the City to DOH and removal from the City's approved lists.
(1) Action may be taken as the result of, including but not limited to:
• Inaccurate information,
• FaIsified test results or documentation,
• Incomplete information,
• Test reports submitted beyond the acceptable 7 day time frame,
• A BAT fails to return telephone calls,
• A BAT's action has caused a property owner to be assessed a penalty by
the Pasco Code Enforcement Board
• A test report form is determined to be illegible.
(2) The action taken in succession will include, but is not limited to:
a.) Verbal notification to the BAT when a problem on the test report fonm(s)
is identified.
b.) Witten notice to the Tester after four (4) problem test reports are
identified within twelve (12)months of the first problem test
reportbeingsubmitted.
c.) A written notice will be sent to theemployer of the BAT when the BAT
has caused the Code Enforcement Board to issue penalties against a
property owner.
d.) Letter advising the Tester their testing privileges may be revoked. An
action plan that lists corrective action to be taken by the Tester/company
is required when the Operations Manager determines that the Tester has
not shown reasonable improvement in correcting problems that have been
identified in the written notice.
e.) Revocation of testing privileges shall be at the discretion of the
Operations Manager when it has been determined that the BAT has
violated any part ofthis policy.
Crary Crutchfield, City Manager Date
AGENDA REPORT
FOR; City Council December 1, 2011
TO: Gary Crutchfi*Eonornic anager Regular Mtg.: 12/05/2011
Rick White,
Community & Development Director
FROM: David I. McDonald, City PIanner
SUBJECT: SOCIAL PERMIT - Community Service Facility (Union Gospel Mission) in an
I-I (Licht Industrial) Zone (MF# SP 2011-014)
1. REFERENCE(S):
1. Vicinity Map
2. Proposed Resolution
3. Report to Planning Commission
4. Planning Commission Minutes: Dated 10/20/11 & 11/17/11
11. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
12/5: MOTION: I move to approve Resolution No. , approving a
Special Permit for the location of a Level Two Community
Service Facility (Union Gospel Mission) in an I-1 (Light
Industrial) Zone at 225 South 4th Avenue.
11I. FISCAL IMPACT:
NONE
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
A. On October 20th, 2011 the Planning Commission held a public hearing to
determine whether or not to recommend approval of a Special Permit to allow the
location of a Level Two Community Service Facility in an I-1 (Light Industrial)
Zone at 225 S. 4th Avenue.
B. Following conduct of the October 20'h public hearing, the Planning Commission
recommended the Community Service Facility in question be granted a Special
Permit with a number of conditions.
C. The recommended conditions are contained in the attached Resolution.
D. No written appeal of the Planning Commission's recommendation has been
received.
$(b)
M
Mw
ff
NN,
1 * Vii/ .� _ _ s �M-i ♦�, ��� 1.
�� •• •1 �►
�4
± t ri
- _
SIM
_ K, �� �• '�. .4 �� _ �� ate . s •• � � �� � ' .
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S
RECOMMENDATION AND APPROVING A SPECIAL PERMIT FOR A UNION GOSPEL
MISSION MEN'S CENTER, COMMUNITY OUTREACH FACILITY AND RELATED
BUILDINGS AND ACTIVITIES AT 225 SOUTH 4TH AVENUE
WHEREAS, the Union Gospel Mission submitted an application for the location of a
men's center and related facilities at 225 South 4ie.Avenue (Tax Parcel 11206043 1); and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on October 20, 2011 to
review the proposed men's center and related facilities; and,
WHEREAS, following deliberations on November 17, 2011 the Planning Commission
recommended approval of a Special Permit for the men's center and related facilities with certain
conditions;
NOW,THEREFORE,
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO:
1. That a Special Permit is hereby granted to the Union Gospel Mission for the
location of a Men's Center, Community Outreach facility and related buildings
and activities in an I-1 (Light Industrial) District under Master File# SP2011-014
with the following conditions:
a) The Special Permit shall apply to the westerly 73I feet of Lot 2, Binding
Site Plan 2003-06;
b) The site shall be developed in substantial conformance with the site plan
submitted with the Special Permit application;
c) The site shall be completely fenced with a chain link fence 6 feet in
height along the northern, eastern and southern property lines. Fencing
along 4th Avenue shall be set back from the 4th Avenue property 15 feet
and said fencing must be constructed of masonry pillars or columns
matching the Men's Center on 10 foot centers with tubular metal fencing
located between the pillars;
d) A landscaping screen shall be planted along the west 25 feet of the
east/west alley bordering the north line of the site;
e) No food commodities, clothing or other materials shall be stored outside
of any building;
f) Mission procedures shall clearly prohibit the use of the yard area
westerly of the rear line of the Men's Center, including the parking lot to
the north of the Men's Center for any activity related to providing
services of any kind to Mission patrons and or for day time gatherings.
This restriction does not apply to the outdoor courtyard at the northwest
corner of the Men's Center;
g) The landscaped areas between the Men's Center and northern property
line west of the 3rd Avenue entrance and between the Men's Center and
the northern parking lot shall contain a landscaped berm or wall (a
minimum of three feet in height), to function as a visual barrier;
h) Public restroom facilities shall be available to Mission patrons at all
times while people gather during the day in the court yard or other areas
permitted by this Special Permit. Adequate signage shall be displayed on
the Mission property clearly indicating where restrooms are available;
i) 3rd Avenue shall be paved for a width of 29 feet from Columbia Avenue
to the property. The pavement section shall be 3" of hot mix asphalt
(HMA) with 2" of crushed surfacing top course (CSTC) and 8" of
crushed surfacing base course(CSBC);
j) The driveway entrances shall meet current ALFA and City Standards;
k) To meet fire flow requirements, the applicant must access water by
tapping the 16-inch water main in W. Columbia Street. The applicant
shall extend a 12-inch water main from the tap down S. 3rd Avenue to
the property (approximately 175 feet). This main shall be tapped to
provide water service. The location of the water meter shall be per City
of Pasco standards and Pasco Municipal Code;
1) The existing fire hydrant in S. 3rd Avenue shall be relocated to the
westerly edge of the right-of-way per City of Pasco standards;
m) Additional private fire hydrants may be required on premises, depending
on the final layout of the proposed development;
n) In order to meet premises isolation, a reduced pressure backflow
assembly (RPBA) will be required. The RPBA shall be installed behind
the water meter, behind the right-of-way line, and per City of Pasco
standards;
o) The existing brick manhole in S. 3rd Avenue shall be removed and
replaced per City of Pasco standards;
p) An oil-water separator shall be installed on-site per City of Pasco
standards and Pasco Municipal Code;
q) The special permit shall be null and void if a building permit has not
obtained by December 31,2013.
Passed by the City Council of the City of Pasco this 5't'day of December,2011.
Matt Watkins, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Debra L. Clark, City Clerk Leland B. Kerr, City Attorney
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
MASTER FILE # SP 2011-014 APPLICANT: Union Gospel Mission
HEARING DATE: 10/20/2011 112 N. 2nd Avenue
ACTION DATE: 11/ 17/2011 Pasco, WA 99301
BACKGROUND
REQUEST: SPECIAL PERMIT: Location of a Level Two Community
Service Facility in an 1-1 Li ht
Industrial, Zone
1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:
Legal: The westerly 731 feet of Lot 2, Binding Site
Plan 2003-06
General Location: 225 S. 4th Avenue
Property Size: Approximately 6.70 acres
2. ACCESS: The site has access from 4th Ave. and from the southern
terminus of 3rd Ave.
3. UTILITIES: All municipal utilities currently serve the site,
however fire flow is inadequate. The nearest line capable of
providing the proper fire flow is located in West Columbia Street.
4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The site is zoned I-I (Light Industrial)
and is currently vacant. The zoning and land use of the
surrounding properties are as follows:
NORTH: I-1, C-3 8s C-2 - Warehousing and an old motel
SOUTH: I-1 - Construction supply yard
EAST: I-1 - Warehouses
WEST: I-1 - Construction supply yard and night club
S. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan designates
this area for commercial uses.
6. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The City of Pasco is the
lead agency for this project. Based on the SEPA checklist, the
adopted City Comprehensive Plan, City development regulations,
and other information, a threshold determination resulting in a
Determination of Non.-Significance (DNS) has been issued for this
project under WAC 197-11-158.
1
ANALYSIS
The applicant proposes to relocate the existing Union Gospel Mission
men's shelter and accessory buildings in the 100 block of North 2nd
Avenue to a new site at 225 South 4*2' Avenue. The Mission has been
providing services to the Tri-Cities community for over 57 years, much of
which has been provided through the current Mission facilities in the
100 block of North 2nd Avenue. These services include emergency shelter
(housing), meals, recovery programs, transitional housing programs,
weekly food box distribution, and monthly clothing and furniture
distributions. Services are provided to both transient and permanent
residents. The mission is proposing to relocate all of their services,
except the women and children's shelter, to a 6.70 acre site on South 4th
Avenue.
The Union Gospel Mission plans to construct a 35,990 square foot Men's
Center, a 6,800 square foot Community Outreach Center and a 3,280
square foot maintenance facility on 6.70 acres of BNSF property with
access to both S. 3rd Avenue and & S. 4th Avenue. A majority of the site
will be devoted to the Men's Center which will contain a dining hall,
dormitories, a chapel, office, and related facilities. The Community
Outreach Center will contain a warehouse that will double as a weekly
food bank and clothing distribution center. The development proposal
includes site landscaping, a landscaped parking lot providing 113
parking stalls and four areas dedicated for future expansion. The main
entrance to the facility will be on 4th Avenue with a service or secondary
entrance off 3rd Avenue.
Under PMC 25.12.156 the definition of Community Service Facility -
Level Two includes missions, food banks and other types of non-profit
services; PMC 25.86.050(4) requires special permit approval for the
location of Community Service Facilities anywhere in the City.
As part of the City project to convert the Lewis Street underpass into an
overpass, the City has purchased properties east of 2nd Avenue between
West Clark Street and West Lewis Street. A portion of the existing Union
Gospel Mission property was included in those property purchases. The
Mission needs to replace the two buildings purchased by the City as part
of the overpass right-of-way acquisition. Relocating the Mission
warehouse and maintenance building several blocks away will improve
the efficiency of Mission operations through the elimination of the
problems associated the lack of space and the fact that the buildings are
separated by North 2nd Avenue. The Mission is seeking to replace the two
buildings lost to the City purchase and consolidate most of their
2
operations on one site, hence the application for the new Men's Center
and Community Outreach Center on South 4t-h Avenue.
The current Mission facility on North 2nd Avenue has no outdoor space
where patrons may congregate (hang out) during the day. As a result,
the sidewalk in front of the current Mission building routinely becomes
an extension of the Mission and is used by Mission patrons to congregate
during day or to queue up for services. The sidewalk has been used by
the Mission in the past for locating bins to distribute items to the needy.
Men milling around in front of the Mission walking back and forth across
2nd Avenue between Mission facilities and families queuing up on the
street next to the side walk all tend to create traffic and safety issues on
North 2nd Avenue between Lewis Street and Clark Street.
The proposed facility on South 4th Avenue is designed more efficiently
than the current facility to better accommodate Mission patrons by
providing off-street parking, queuing areas and a fenced courtyard. With
the fenced courtyard, liberal building setbacks and private sidewalk
along the Community Outreach Center there will be no need for Mission
distribution activities and other Mission related functions to occur on
public sidewalks as they now on North 2nd Avenue.
While the proposed new Mission site is located about 500 feet closer to
the downtown center (4th and Lewis) than the current facility, the actual
Men's Center and Community Outreach building are located in the
center rear of the site about the same distance from 4th and Lewis as the
current Men's Facility. The Men's Center is located 108 feet south of the
end of South 3rd Avenue and 250 feet east of South 4th Avenue.
Landscaping and a parking lot serve as buffers between the Men's Center
and South 3rd Avenue and South 4th Avenue; which may help mitigate
the problems associated with the current Mission Facilities where
patrons spend much of the day milling around on City sidewalks and in
2nd Avenue.
The edge of the proposed site is located on south 4th Avenue only 240 feet
south of the Farmers Market parking lot, which is considerably closer to
the Market than the current facilities on North 2gd Avenue. Travel
distances to the proposed Mission buildings will be about 715 feet
(accounting for building setbacks and site entrances) traveling south on
4th Avenue and about 550 feet along Columbia Street then south of south
3rd Avenue. Given past experiences, the Mission has demonstrated a
history of contribution to general public disorder, loitering and other acts
detrimental to the public image [PMC 25.44.050 (Exhibit#1)] of
Downtown Pasco. The Planning Commission will need to give careful
consideration to the possible impacts of this application to downtown
3
revitalization in general and to the operations of the Farmers Market and
downtown Festivals.
INITIAL STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT
Findings of Fact must be entered from the record. The following are
initial findings drawn from the background and analysis section of the
staff report. The Planning Commission may add additional findings to
this listing as the result of factual testimony and evidence submitted
during the open record hearing.
1. The site proposed for the new Men's Center and Community
Outreach Center is located at 225 South 4th Avenue.
2. The proposed site contains 6.70 acres.
3. The proposed site is zoned I-1 (Light Industrial).
4. The Comprehensive Plan designates the proposed site for
commercial uses.
5. The site in question is owned by BNSF Railway Company.
6, The BNSF Railway Company signed the Union Gospel Mission
Special Permit application.
7. Pasco Municipal Code (PMC) Section 25.12.156 defines missions
and related non-profit organizations as Level Two Community
Service Facilities.
8. PMC 25.86.020(4) requires special permit review for Level Two
Community Service Facilities.
9. The Union Gospel Mission has operated at 112 North 2nd Avenue for
over 50 years.
10. The existing Union Gospel Mission properties contain 0.76 acres of
land.
11. The City of Pasco has purchased the Union Gospel Mission
warehouse and maintenance building on North 2nd Avenue in
preparation for the construction of the Lewis Street overpass,
12. The existing Union Gospel Mission facility has no parking facilities
for patrons.
13. The existing Union Gospel Mission contains no staging or queuing
area off public sidewalks for food and clothing distributions.
14. The existing Union Gospel Mission lacks an outdoor gathering
area/courtyard for Mission patrons to gather. City sidewalks are
currently used for that purpose.
4
15. The Union Gospel Mission proposes to construct a new Men's Center
and Community Outreach Center at 225 South 4t' Avenue.
16. The proposed Men's Center is 35,990 square feet in area.
17. The proposed parking lot contains 113 parking stalls.
18. The proposed "Community Outreach Center" is a 6,800 square foot
building located north of the maintenance shop to the east of the
Men's Center.
19. The proposed on-site maintenance building is 3,280 square feet and
is located behind or east of the Men's Center.
20. The proposed Men's Center will be setback approximately 100 feet
from the south end of 3rd Avenue.
21. The proposed Men's Center will be setback over 260 feet from South
4th Avenue.
22. The proposed site is located 240' south of the Farmer's Market
parking lot. The proposed site is separated from the Farmer's Market
by Columbia Street and a row of buildings along the south side of
Columbia and by an alley. Walking distance down 4th Avenue from
the southwest corner of the Farmer's Market parking lot to the front
door of the Men's center is about 715 feet. Walking distance from
the Farmer's Market parking lot to the north side of the Men's
Center (by way of Columbia Street) is 554 feet.
23. Parking lots and landscaping will be located between the Mission
buildings and adjoining street right-of-way.
24. The proposed site layout contains extensive landscaping.
25. The Men' Center contains a walled outdoor courtyard for daytime
gatherings.
26. All outdoor gathering areas and queuing areas will be contained
onsite near the Men's center or along the front of the Community
Outreach Center.
27. The 6 inch water line in the alley to the north of the site is not
capable of providing the necessary fire flow for the proposed
buildings.
28. The nearest water line capable of providing adequate fire flows is
located in West Columbia Street.
29. Access from South 3rd Avenue is impeded to the location of a fire
hydrant near the center line of the roadway.
30. Installing a water line in South 3rd Avenue will require the street to
be excavated causing the road surface to be destroyed.
5
31. The proposed facility will include a maintenance shop for
maintenance activities including the maintenance of mission
vehicles and equipment.
32. Public testimony at the October 20, 2011 hearing indicated that
public restrooms were need for patrons of the Mission.
CONCLUSIONS BASED ON INITIAL STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT
The Planning Commission must make Findings of Fact based upon the
criteria listed in P.M.C. 25.86.060. The criteria and staff listed findings
are as follows:
1. Will the proposed use be in accordance with the goals, policies,
objectives and text of the Comprehensive Plan?
The site is identified in the Comprehensive Plan for commercial
uses. The Commercial Land Use Designation includes all
commercial uses listed in the C-1, C-2 and C-3 zones. Components
(offices, warehouse, maintenance building, motels and parking) of
the proposed facility are similar to permitted uses in the I-1 (Light
Industrial) District.
Policy LU-1-B encourages enhancement of the physical appearance
of development within the City. The proposal would replace a
vacant lot with a well developed facility and parking lot containing
landscaping. Policy LU-2-D requires all development to be
landscaped. Development of the site, including landscaping, will
support policies of the Comprehensive Plan (including LU-2-D) and
enhance the appearance of the immediate vicinity.
2. Will the proposed use adversely affect public infrastructure?
All municipal utilities are currently available to the site from
surrounding streets. Commercial development standards require
right-of-way improvements on all road frontages to bring the
bordering roadways and sidewalks up to current standards. Water
and sewer demands of the proposed use will be similar to a motel
complex with a restaurant. The demands on the utility system may
be less than the demands of a permitted use such as a food
manufacturing or bottling facilities. Impacts to the adjoining
streets will likewise be minimal due to the fact the site has
significant setbacks and a large area for service vehicles and
parking. The proposal will lessen the impacts the current mission
facility has on North 2nd Avenue.
6
3. Will the proposed use be constructed, maintained and operated
to be in harmony with the existing or intended character of the
general vicinity?
The proposed use will be equally or less intensive from an activity
standpoint than other permitted uses in the I-1 zone. Permitted
uses in the I-1 zone such as automotive assembly and repair,
trucking express storage yards, heavy equipment sales and service
and metal fabrication shops all have the potential to generate
higher levels of noise, fumes, vibration and glare than the proposed
use. The food distribution will occur once a week and the clothing
distribution occurs once a month. The design of the current
Mission facilities encourages public loitering and general public
disorder on city sidewalks due to the lack of outdoor courtyards
and the lack of building setbacks. The sidewalk is essentially used
as an extension of the Mission. Liberal building setbacks, building
orientation and an enclosed courtyard may help address past
Mission issues of patrons loitering on and blocking city sidewalks,
but this is not guaranteed. The proposed location of the
Community Outreach buildings with ample onsite queuing space
will also address the issue of food bank patrons lining up on public
sidewalks and streets to receive food boxes and clothing. The
addition of landscaped berms and or landscape walls along the
northern portion of the property near 3rd Avenue may further
address concerns about loitering and general public disorder. If
these design features fail to address issues associated with the
Mission, the proposal will have an adverse impact on downtown
revitalization.
4. Will the location and height of proposed structures and the site
design discourage the development of permitted uses on
property in the general vicinity or impair the value thereof'
Much of the property surrounding the proposed site is zoned I-1
(Light Industrial). There are no height limitations in the I-1 zone.
The height limitation of the commercially zoned properties to the
north is 45 feet. The proposed Men's Center will be about 22 feet in
height which is similar to or less than the height of surrounding
warehouses. The proposed facility will also contain significantly
more improved onsite parking and landscaping than the
surrounding industrial supply facilities. Development of the site,
which is currently a vacant lot, will consist of a paved parking lot,
landscaping and new buildings, which will improve the appearance
of the neighborhood. An online search of the Franklin County
Assessor's records (7/2011) indicate that property values
surrounding the most recently approved food bank (Golden Age
7
Food Share, 504 S Oregon Ave, 2005) have generally increased over
the past few years. Food banks are the most analogous use for
comparison with the Mission.
5. Will the operations in connection with the proposal be more
objectionable to nearby properties by reason of noise, fumes,
vibrations, dust, traffic, or flashing lights than would be the
operation of any permitted uses within the district?
The design of the current of the current Mission facilities
encourages public loitering and general public disorder on city
sidewalks due to the lack of outdoor courtyards and the lack of
building setbacks. The sidewalk is essentially used as an extension
of the Mission. Loitering on public sidewalks has lead to other
problems such as panhandling, verbal abusiveness, public
drunkenness and other behavioral acts predominantly associated
with the presence of transients [Ord # 2684 (Exhibit #2)].
The proposed facility has been designed with liberal building
setbacks, a large onsite parking lot and extensive landscaping.
Onsite queuing space and the enclosed courtyard will eliminate the
need for Mission patrons to loiter on public sidewalks prior to
receiving services from the Mission. The addition of landscaped
berms and or landscape walls along the northern portion of the
property near 3rd Avenue may further address concerns about
loitering and general public disorder. The inclusion of a fence along
the northern property line will provide controlled access to the main
service entrance of the proposed mission buildings.
The operation of the proposed facility will create less noise, fumes,
vibration and dust than the nearby material supply facilities.
6. Will the proposed use endanger the public health or safety if
located and developed where proposed, or in any way will
become a nuisance to uses permitted in the district?
The design of the current of the current Mission facilities
encourages public loitering and general public disorder on City
sidewalks due to the lack of outdoor courtyards and the lack of
building setbacks. The sidewalk is essentially used as an extension
of the Mission, Loitering on public sidewalks has lead to other
problems such as panhandling, verbal abusiveness, public
drunkenness and other behavioral acts predominantly associated
with the presence of transients [Ord # 2684 (Exhibit #2)].
Development of the site with on-site parking, significant buildings
setbacks, on-site queuing and an enclosed courtyard will address
8
many of the safety and nuisance concerns associated with patrons
of the current Mission facilities loitering and congregating on public
sidewalks in front of the Mission.
The addition of landscaped berms and or landscape walls along the
northern portion of the property near 3rd Avenue may further
address concerns about loitering and general public disorder. The
inclusion of a fence around the property will provide access control
to the site and will provide security for both the Mission and
surrounding properties. The fencing will also serve to contain all
Mission activities on site.
APPROVAL CONDITIONS
1. The Special Permit shall apply to the westerly 731 feet of Lot 2,
Binding Site Plan 2003-06;
2. The site shall be developed in substantial conformance with the
site plan submitted with the Special Permit application;
3. The site shall be completely fenced with a chain link fence 6 feet in
height along the northern, eastern and southern property lines.
Fencing along 4th Avenue shall be set back from the 4th Avenue
property 15 feet and said fencing must be constructed of masonry
pillars or columns matching the Men's Center on 10 foot centers
with tubular metal fencing located between the pillars;
4. A landscaping screen shall be planted along the west 25 feet of the
east/west alley bordering the north line of the site;
5. No food commodities, clothing or other materials shall be stored
outside of any building;
6. Mission procedures shall clearly prohibit the use of the yard area
westerly of the rear line of the Men's Center, including the parking
lot to the north of the Men's Center for any activity related to
providing services of any kind to Mission patrons and or for day
time gatherings. This restriction does not apply to the outdoor
courtyard at the northwest corner of the Men's Center;
7. The landscaped areas between the Men's Center and northern
property line west of the 3rd Avenue entrance and between the
Men's Center and the northern parking lot shall contain a
landscaped berm or wall (a minimum of three feet in height), to
function as a visual barrier;
8. Public restroom facilities shall be available to Mission patrons at
all times while people gather during the day in the court yard or
other areas permitted by this Special Permit. Adequate signage
shall be displayed on the Mission property clearly indicating where
restrooms are available;
9
9. 3rd Avenue shall be paved for a width of 29 feet from Columbia
Avenue to the property. The pavement section shall be 3" of hot
mix asphalt (HMA) with 2" of crushed surfacing top course (CSTC)
and 8" of crushed surfacing base course (CSBC);
10. The driveway entrances shall meet current ADA and City
Standards;
11. To meet fire flow requirements, the applicant must access water by
tapping the 15-inch water main in W Columbia Street. The
applicant shall extend a 12-inch water main from the tap down S
3rd Avenue to the property (approximately 175 feet). This main
shall be tapped to provide water service. The location of the water
meter shall be per City of Pasco standards and Pasco Municipal
Code;
12. The existing fire hydrant in S 3rd Avenue shall be relocated to the
westerly edge of the right-of-way per City of Pasco standards;
13. Additional private fire hydrants may be required on premises,
depending on the final layout of the proposed development;
14. In order to meet premises isolation, a reduced pressure backflow
assembly (RPBA) will be required. The RPBA shall be installed
behind the water meter, behind the right-of-way line, and per City
of Pasco standards;
15. The existing brick manhole in S 3rd Avenue shall be removed and
replaced per City of Pasco standards;
15. An oil-water separator shall be installed on-site per City of Pasco
standards and Pasco Municipal Code;
17. The special permit shall be null and void if a building permit has
not obtained by December 31, 2013.
RECOMMENDATION
MOTION: I move to adopt Findings of Fact and Conclusions
therefrom as contained in the November 17, 2011 staff
report.
MOTION: I move based on the Findings of Fact and Conclusions
therefrom the Planning Commission recommend the
City Council grant a Special Permit to the Union
Gospel Mission for the location of a Men's Center,
Community Outreach facility and related buildings
and activities at 225 South 4th Avenue with conditions
as contained in the November 17, 2011 staff report.
10
Vicinity Item: Union Gospel Mission Center N
-�.
Map
File #: SP2011 -014
1•� ' / ..
sk
Elmo
M 1�
AL
� '" ff
Land Use Item: Union. Gospel Mission Center
le #c: SP2 11 014 ospel Mission N Map F
S
o�\3Me�P
Commercial--,
y
� SIT
L
Industrial
X Commercial / Industrial
R` m
"A" ST
Residential
�� = =- I H F] P ± H
Zoning Item: Union Gospel Mission Center
Map Applia#c: SP2011 -014 Gospel Mission N
W C-3
....
s
C-1
C-3 G2
C-3
y IT
I_1 I-1
(Light Industrial) (Light Industrial)
"All ST
m2
Legend
i `lam fop o P� _-^. site Data
Men's Center 35,990 ST
Tree Public Restrom Signage . Community Outreach Center 6,800 ST
Maintenance
Pa Spaces 3.26D S.3
rk
Grass Future Expansion
L__J
Gravel L'7 Railroad Property
�
Asphalt
wool
d
�, �,:✓
W�
f
'T
-- � ,,, rti�wriuot++ernamruranaos#sw�o!� �.
ls�ARES CORPORATION
Applred Research&Engineering Services
New Men's Center and Community Outreach Center - Site Plan NRTNORTH ORT iiooJadwln Avenue,Richland,WA99351
PascoWA/� PH 509.946.3300
Y
, A Scale:1/64" ` V-W ARESRL@ARESCORPORATION.COM
u�
North Elevation
i
w
West Elevation
.4iARES CORPORATION
Applied Research&Engineering Services
New Men's Center and Community Outreach Center- Buildinq Elevations 1aooJadwin Avenue,Richland,WA99351
PH 509-946,3300
ImPasco, WA ARESRLQARESCORPORATION.COM
GUEST
Legend ENTRANCE
4;7—
Crisis Rescue&Recovery
I
i -
Administration GUEST ENTRY I _
COURTYARD I —
Chapel(199 total seats) DYROOM
I — i
Kitchen & Dining
Future Expansion ry FUTURE '
DORMS
Total Square Footage 35,990
ro �
CLQ= ---
®o
FUTURE
ADMIN.
A-_-- CUM=
PVBUC L U- Ir.L' I L L-
ENTRANCE
� aECOVERv
I ArAup1 E DA`'RC�"JA
I
_ - T'
I
1
A �.
H
1 Uf y DINING
L —
ARES CORPORATION
Vl.' Applied Research&Engineering Services
N Center and Community Outreach Center- Floor Plan NORTH 1200JadwinAvenue,Richland,WA99352
PIi fi o0
sco, WA Scale:1132"= V-0n ARE5RL@ARESORPORATT1 N.OM
Looking north
_ t
11 n
ww
n .)
f �
!r
�, rte.— - 'a t ydr' •"(.
' Looking south
too
:.h. Z�
s r f ;i � .� • fi w
' t s
Looks n eas
AAM
r -
t
Looking - west '
Sill
two
? - i ,r� J
Jd
ol
r
i
i
`.
y ,. r fis
.` ` .
r f ,
i
�A
Ai
Exhibit #1
(15) Jewelry and gem shops, including custom work;
(16) Offices for medical and professional services;
(17) Restaurants, sandwich shops, cafeterias and delicatessens;
(18) Sporting goods;
(19) Tailoring and seamstress shops;
(20) Theaters for movies and performances, except adult theaters;
(21) Public markets for fresh produce and craft work;
(22) Parking lots;
(23) Micro-breweries and micro-wineries;
(24) Research, development and assembly facilities for component devices and
equipment of an electrical, electronic or electromagnetic nature; and
(25) Home brewing and/or wine making equipment sales. (Ord. 3354 Sec. 2,
1999.)
25.44.030 PERMITTED ACCESSORY USES. The following accessory uses and
buildings, as respectively defined in Sections 12.12.020 and 12.12.145, shall be
permitted in the C-2 district:
(1) Parking lots;
(2) Alcoholic beverage sales provided it is for on-site consumption and located
within a restaurant;
(3) Other uses clearly incidental or secondary to a principal use;
(4) Beer/wine beverage sales for on-site and off-site consumption provided
the product is produced on-site in a micro-brewery and/or micro-winery; and
(5) Sales of micro-brewery products and non-fortified wines for off-site
consumption provided such sales are in conjunction with an establishment selling
predominately, based upon floor area, home brewing and/or wine making equipment as
permitted in Section 25.44.020.
(6) Storage buildings; excluding container storage, as defined in Section
25.12.430 are permitted. (Ord. 3735 Sec. 5, 2005; Ord. 3354 Sec. 2, 1999.)
25.44.040 CONDITIONAL USES. The following uses are permitted subject to the
approval of a special permit:
(1) Dwelling units, provided the units are within the principle building, are all
above the ground floor of said building, and the ground floor of said building is
designed or intended to be used for a use permitted in Section 25.44.020. (Ord. 3537
Sec. 6, 2005; Ord. 3354 Sec. 2, 1999.)
25.44.050 PROHIBITED USES. Evidence received by the Planning Commission
and contained in previous studies and Pasco Police Crime Deports demonstrates that
certain uses make the Central Business District less desirable or attractive to the public
due to a demonstrated history of contribution to general public disorder, loitering,
nuisance and other acts detrimental to the public image of the area. Certain other uses
provide entirely, or predominately, automobile services and, thereby, do not foster the
clustering concept intended to attract pedestrian visitors. Other uses may, by their
PMC Title 25 12/21/2009 58
inherent nature, require a disproportionate amount of the limited vicinal on-street
parking, for an extended time, which is intended to be available and shared by all
business for the short duration convenience of customers.
The following listed businesses, for the reasons above, inhibit new business
growth, contribute to business loss and decline of property values, inhibit convenient
access to vidnal businesses, do not faster the clustering concept intended to orient the
business environment to pedestrians, or perpetuate a public image which is undesirable
or unattractive and detrimental to public and private investment in revitalization efforts
arid, therefore, are prohibited within the C-2 district:
(1) Gasoline and service stations, automobile services or repair, except tire:
storm;
(2) outdoor storage of goods or materials;
(3) Membership clubs;
(4) Taverns;
(5) Billiard and pool hails;
(6) Amusement game centers;
(7) Pawn shops;
(8) Card rooms, Mingo parlous, dance halls and similar places;
(9) Adult theaters, adult bookstiores, tattoo parlors, bathhouses and massage
parlors;
(10) Community service facilities level two
(11) Secondhand dealers. Similar or like uses although not specifically listed
are also prohibited; and
(12) Adult Business Facilities. (Ord. 3514 Sec 6 2001; Ord. 3354 Sec. 2,
1999.)
25.44.060 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. (1) Minimum lot area: Not required
except for non conforming residential uses which must retain a minimum of five
thousands (5,000) square feet for single family and three thousand (3,000) square feet
for each additional unit;
(2) Lot Coverage: No requirement;
(3) Minimum Yard Setbacks:
(a) Front: None required except where adjoining a residential district
in which case 25.74.030 shall prevail.
(b) Side: None required except where adjoining a residential district in
which case 25.74.030 shall prevail.
(c) Rear: None required except where adjoining a residential district in
which case 25.74.030 shall prevail.
(4) Maximum building height:
(a) Forty-five (45) feet. except a greater height may be approved by
special permit.
(5) Fences and hedges: See Chapter 25.75;
(6) Parking: None required; and
PMC Title 25 12/21/2009 59
Exhibit #2
ORDINANCE NO. 2684
AN ORDINANCE related to zoning, amending PMC Title 21, by
enacting new definitions in Chapter 22.12 , and
amending entirely Chapter 22.44, the C-2 district
regulations.
WHEREAS, the chronic physical deterioration of downtown Pasco is
evidenced by business closures, vacant buildings, vandalism,
property disinvestment and declining property values, all of
which contribute to visual slum, blight and decay; and
WHEREAS, chronic downtown social problems of loitering,
drunkeness, panhandling, solicitation, verbal abusiveness,
lewdness, and other behavioral acts are predominantly associated
with the presence of transients, street persons and other
homeless persons, prostitutes, habitual criminals, and others who
are attracted to certain types of service providers or places
which perpetuate their lifestyle, fill emotional or physical
needs, or otherwise support and increase their presence in the
downtowns and
WHEREAS, the City Council has adopted public policy, through the
community Development Policy Plan and the 3-R Area Action Plan,
which recognizes the aforementioned problems and supports
comprehensive revitalization of the downtown area, of which
revision of zoning regulations is but one implementation
technique; and
wHEREAS, the Planning Commission did undertake an analysis of the
existing C-2 regulations by conducting two workshop sessions,
with participation by citizens, the Pasco Chamber of Commerce and
Pasco Downtown Development Association, and conducted a public
hearing on March 17, 1988, at the conclusion of which a
recommendation for certain revisions was made to City Council;
and
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the recommendation of the
Planning Commission and finds, with further amendment, the
proposal to be appropriate to further the policy of intended
downtown revitalization, and complements the previous expenditure
of public funds for infrastructure and new construction
improvements in the downtown area; NOW THEREFORE
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section I. That a new Section 22 .12. 062 hereby is enacted to
read as follows:
22. 12.062 AMUSEMENT GAME DEVICE. "Amusement game device" means
a machine or other device, whether mechanical, electrical, or
electronic, to be operated by the public for the purpose of
entertainment, amusement or as a game, the object of which is to
score high or low by comparison to the score of other players,
playing concurrently or not, or to demonstrate skill or
competence against an opponent, whether the opponent is the
device or another person. It shall include such devices as pool
tables, billiard tables, pinball machines, and devices which use
a video tube to reproduce symbolic figures and lanes intended to
be representative of real games or activities. This definition
shall not apply to vending machines for products unrelated to
gaming, a device which does not require active participation by
the player in the game, coin-operated machines which only provide
music, or gambling devices regulated by State law.
Section 2. That a new Section 22.12. 063 hereby is enacted to
read as follows:
22.12 .063 AMUSEMENT GAME CENTER. "Amusement game centerff means
any building or portion thereof which contains more than two
amusement game devices upon the premises.
Section 3. That a new Section 22.12 .105 hereby is enacted to
read as follows:
22 .12 .105 BILLIARD AND POOL HALLS. "Billiard or pool halls"
means an establishment wherein the principal use or activity is
billiards, pool, or snooker, regardless of the number of
billiard, pool or snooker tables.
Section 4. That a new Section 22 .12.605 hereby is enacted to
read as follows:
22. 12.605 OUTDOOR STORAGE. "Outdoor storage" means any
materials, equipment, merchandise, objects, artifacts or other
substance kept or placed on the lot, but not within an enclosed
structure, for preservation or later use or disposal.
Section 5. That a new Section 22.12. 615 hereby is enacted to
read as follows:
22 . 12.615 PAWN SHOP. "Pawn shop" means an establishment wherein
a person, firm or corporation is engaged, in whole or in part, in
the business of loaning money on the security of pledges,
deposits, or conditional sales of personal property.
Section 6. That a new Section 22 . 12 .787 hereby is enacted to
read as follows:
22. 12.787 TAVERN. 'Tavern" means an establishment licensed by
Washington State to dispense beer, wine or other alcoholic
beverage for consumption on the premises, the provision of which
is not in any way dependent upon food sales to retain said
license. Such places may also provide packaged alcoholic
products for off-site consumption.
-2-
Section 7. That Chapter 22,44 hereby is amended in its
entirety to read as follows:
CHAPTER 22.44
C-2 CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT ZONE
Sections:
22.44.010 Purpose.
22 . 44.020 Permitted uses.
22.44.030 Permitted accessory uses.
22.44 .040 Conditional uses.
22 . 44.050 Prohibited uses.
22 .44.060 Building Heights
22.44 .070 Lot area.
22 .44.080 Yard requirements.
22.44.010 PURPOSE. The C-2 central Business District is
established to promote the centralization of business and
reinforce a positive public image and confidence in commercial
revitalization, within a compact commercial area having
primarily common-wall building construction. Such construction
offers the unique opportunity. within Pasco to cluster together
types of retail business and retail services which functionally
interact well together, and will economically tare better, as a
result of close proximity by cumulatively attracting more persons
than as individual destination points.
It is intended that the commercial clustering concept be
fostered by emphasizing pedestrian access and circulation within
the district, in a manner which is -healthy, safe, uninhibited and
convenient for employees and visitors of all ages. Public and
private off-street parking shall be located to encourage the
transition from automobile to pedestrian movement. On-street
parking should be shared by vicinal business and be oriented
to short duration convenience parking for customers in the
vicinity.
In order to preserve the public health, safety and welfare in
central business district redevelopment, protect public and
private investment in property and infrastructure improvements
and stabilize declining property valuers, certain uses of the land
may be restricted or prohibited.
-3-
22. 44.020 PERMITTED USES. The following uses shall be
permitted in the C-2 District:
1. Artist and office supplies
2 . Bakeries
3. Banks and financial institutions
4. Barber and beauty shops
5. Bookstores, except adult bookstores
6. Clothing, shoes and accessories, and costume rentals
7. Crafts, stationary and gift shops
S. Department stores
9. Fresh and frozen meats, including seafood
10. Florists
il. Furniture and horse appliance stores
12 . Galleries for art and restored or refinished antiques
13 . Hardware and home improvement stores
14. Import shops
15. Jewelry and gem shops, including custom work
16. Offices for medical and professional services
17. Restaurants, sandwich shops, cafeterias and delicatessens
is. sporting goods
19. Tailoring and seamstress shops
20. Theaters for movies and performances, except adult theaters
21. Public markets for fresh produce and craftwork
22. Parking lots, provided such lots are paved and the
development complies with the landscape and fencing
requirements of the C-1 district, as enumerated in
Subsection 44.42.010(14)
22 .44.030 PERMITTED ACCESSORY USES. The following
accessory uses and buildings, as respectively defined in
Sections 12. 12. 020 and 122.12.130, shall be permitted in the C-2
district:
1. Parking lots
2 . Alcoholic beverage sales provided it is for on-site
consumption and located within a restaurant
3 . Other uses clearly incidental or secondary to a principal
use.
22 . 44 .040 CONDITIONAL USES. The following uses are
permitted subject to the approval of a special permit:
(1) Dwelling units, provided the units are within the
principal building, are all above ground floor of said building,
and the ground floor of said building is designed or intended to
be used for a use permitted in Section 22.42. 010; (Ord. 2280 Sec.
3, 1981) .
-4-
(2) Container Storage, as defined in Section 22.12.750,
authorized in accordance with Section 22..80. 030 .
22.44. 050 PROHIBITED USES. Evidence received by the
Planning Commission and contained in previous studies and Pasco
Police crime reports demonstrates that certain uses make the
central business district less desirable or attractive to the
public due to a demonstrated history of contribution to general
public disorder, loitering, nuisance and other acts detrimental
to the public image of the area. Certain other uses provide
entirely, or predominately, automobile services and,thereby, do
not foster the clustering concept intended to attract pedestrian
visitors. Other uses may, by their inherent nature, require a
disproportionate amount of the limited vicinal on-street parking,
for an extended time, which is intended to be available and
shared by all business for the short duration convenience of
customers.
The following listed businesses, for the reasons above, inhibit
new business growth, contribute to business loss and decline of
property values, inhibit convenient access to vicinal business,
do not foster the clustering concept intended to orient the
business environment to pedestrians,or perpetuate a public image
which is undesirable or unattractive and detrimental to public
and private investment in revitalization efforts and, therefore,
are prohibited within the C-2 district:
1. Gasoline and service stations, automobile services
or repair , except tire stores
2. Outdoor storage of goods or materials
3 . Membership clubs
4 . Taverns
5. Billiard and pool halls
6. Amusement game centers
7. Pawn shops
8. Card rooms, bingo parlors, dance halls and similar places
9 . Adult theaters, adult bookstores, tattoo parlors,bath-
houses and massags'parlors
10. community service facilities
similar or like uses although not specifically listed are also
prohibited.
22.44.060 BUILDING HEIGHTS_: Buildings may be four stories
or forty-five feet in height, except building heights greater
than four stories or forty-five feet may be allowed by special
permit.
Exceptions to height regulations:
(1) chimneys, water tanks, penthouses, towers, monuments,
cupolas, domes, false mansards, and similar structures and
-5-
necessary mechanical appurtenances may be erected to any height
in accordance with existing or hereafter adopted ordinances of
the city, except such features shall not exceed the cross
sectional area of twenty percent of the ground :door area of the
building;
(2) The above exceptions shall not apply to structures within
designated airport hazard zones. (Prior code sec. 11-28.12) .
22.44.070 LOT AREA. The lot area provisions in the C-2 zone
are the same as for the C-1 zone. (Prior code Sec. 11-28. 16) .
22.44.080 YARD REQUIREMENTS. Yard requirements in the. C-2
zone shall be:
(1) Front Yard. No requirements;
(2) Side Yard. No requirements;
(3) Rear Yard. No requirements;
(4) off-Street Parking. No requirements;
(5) Residential Yard. A building erected for residential use
shall have a front,, side, and rear yard as specified for such a
yard in the R-3 district;
(6) Transition. Where a lot in a C-2 district abuts upon a
lot in a residential district, the standards as set forth in
, Chapter 22.76 shall prevail: (Prior code Sec. 11-28.20) .
Section 8. This ordinance shall be in effect after its passage
and publication as required by law. r/
PASSED by the City Council this day of -
1988.
Ed Hend er, Mayor
E n we ls, C ty Clerk
AP7t�7m'Q
Greg R stello, City Attorney
CITY OF PASCO
SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. 2684
ORDINANCE No. 2684 is an ordinance relating to zoning by enacting
certain new def n tions and amending, entirely, the regulations
that apply in the C--2 (Central Business District) zone.
Sections 1-6. Enacts new definitions for ItAmusement game
device, " "Amusement game center, " "Billiard and pool halls, it
"outdoor storage," "Pawn shops," and "Tavern. "
Section 7. Amends the regulations in the C-2 (Central Business
D strict) zone by:
a. Establishing a purpose statement;
b. Revising the list of permitted uses;
c. Revising the list of accessory uses;
d. Establishing reasons for prohibiting certain
types of uses and identifies a minimum list of uses
prohibited in the C-2 zone.
Section 8 . Requires the ordinance, or this summary herein, to be
published before it is in effect.
The full text of ordinance N0.2684 is available free of charge
to anyone who requests it from the City Clerk of the City of
Pasco, (509) 545-3402, P. 0. Box 293- Pasco, Washington 99301.
Evelyn Wells, C ty Clerk
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
10/20/2011
A. Special Permit Location of a Level Two Community Service Facility
in an I-1 (Light Industrial) Zone (Union Gospel
Mission) (112 N. 2nd Ave) IMF# SP 2011-0141
Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff.
City Planner, Dave McDonald, explained the Union Gospel Mission submitted an
application for Special Permit for a Level Two Community Service Facility in an I-1 Zone
located at 225 S 4th Avenue. The catalyst for this application was the fact that the City
of Pasco recently purchased a number of properties between Lewis Street and Clark
Street, east of 2nd Avenue, including two buildings owned by the Mission. They're
proposing to construct a new men's facility which would expand in size, allowing them
to help more men as well as add parking. One of the problems the Mission has now is
that the buildings are built to the property lines and there are no outdoor areas for
patrons to queue up for services. Currently the sidewalk in front of the Mission is used
as an extension of the Mission facilities and creates difficulties for both the Mission and
the City. The new facility would have plenty of space on site for the men services as
well as the community outreach building. If the Mission builds at the proposed location
they will need to extend utilities, which will cause 3rd Avenue to be disrupted, which will
be the responsibility of the applicant to replace that street. When reviewing the
application the Planning Commission was cautioned to consider the possible effects the
new Mission Facility could have on Pasco Downtown investment and revitalization
efforts as well as the Pasco Farmer's Market.
Commissioner Kempf asked staff if there was any consideration for the train tracks
being so close to the southern boundary of the proposed facility.
Mr. McDonald answered the applicant plans to fence the site on all sides, including
along the southern boundary and eventually the rail line will be removed.
Applicant, Donald Porter, 1465 Desert Springs Avenue, Richland, introduced Beth
Bailey with Ares Corporation, Kurt Shaffer from Tippett Company, and Andrew Porter
from the Union Gospel Mission. Mr. Porter asked Mr. Shaffer to make an opening
statement.
Kurt Shaffer, 9116 Tuscany Drive, Tippett Company, said that his firm was retained to
help the Union Gospel Mission find a location that would suit their needs and continue
to help them serve the community. The location being considered would suit their
needs and still allow them to serve the community.
Mr. Porter commented on the sensitivity to the City of Pasco and the change in
homelessness. He described the design of the building and how two entrances would be
created, one for patrons and one for visitors. Many of the homeless people will be
corning by car which is why there will be a parking lot for them by the 3�d Street
entrance. There will also be an area designated for drive-thru food pickup once a week
for the patrons. With all of the additional parking, this could help the Farmer's Market
because the Mission's board could allow parking for the Market.
Beth Bailey, 226 Englewood Drive, Richland, Architect for Ares Corporation, presented
an overview of the architectural design of the proposed building. The proposed design
will have good visibility, safety, and comfort for the patrons and volunteers. The
outdoor courtyard was also discussed.
Mr. Porter then spoke about activities inside the main Center.
JuIi Massingale, 199504 E. 25th Avenue, Kennewick works on the property just south of
the proposed site. She was concerned about the people the Mission turns away due to
failure of a drug or alcohol test. She doesn't want those turned away at her facility for
safety issues because there are only three women that work at the facility.
Rolando Rodriquez, 7909 W. Dradie Street, owner of Case Management located at 117
S. 3rd Avenue, expressed his concerns. If the proposed site was approved he felt it
would be difficult to recruit staff and bring in customers. Mr. Rodriguez is concerned
about the men that are turned away due to failure of drug or alcohol tests. Mr.
Rodriguez has picked up beer bottles and broken glass on several occasions. With
people hanging around his business there's a need to increase security. People have
come in his business just to use the restroom. The merchants in Downtown Pasco
want to improve their area and make Pasco grow positively. He asked for the Special
Permit to be denied due to the possible harm it could have on growth.
Victoria Silvernail, 120 Thayer Drive, from the Pasco Specialty Kitchen, voiced her
concerns for the proposal. She liked the look and design of the new building and
promotes their mission but she would not like to see it downtown. The Specialty
Kitchen is available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week and she was concerned about the
people turned away due to failure of drug or alcohol tests.
Mike Miller, 515 W. Clark Street, Vice-President of Moon Security as well as President
for the Downtown Pasco Development Authority, spoke about his concerns and support_
The DPDA supports the Union Gospel Mission and its goals but there were some issues
with loitering, and the proximately to the Farmer's Market.
Commissioner Levins asked Mr. Miller what could be done to assist with the people
rejected from the Union Gospel Mission to give confidence to address voiced concerns.
Mr. Miller answered extra policing and enforcement for people who are inebriated. Mr.
Miller said turn-aways should not be blamed on the Union Gospel Mission because they
are drinking elsewhere.
Mr. Porter said that not many men are turned away because the people drinking know
not to come to the Union Gospel Mission. He also feels the Mission could bring
business to the downtown because of the amount of volunteers and public that will be
coming to the new facility.
Chairman Cruz asked the applicant if he was aware the proposed property was in the
central business district.
Mr. Porter said they were aware of the business district and that there were Special
Permit considerations, which is why their realtor has been working with the City to
work out concerns.
Commissioner Lukins asked City staff to verify the location was in the central business
district or if it bordered it.
Mr. McDonald answered that it was not zoned Central Business District, just near it.
Chairman Cruz asked the applicant if they had a security team.
Mr. Porter stated the building will have a camera surveillance system. Staff also walks
the property doing checks and a night watchman is on duty from 11:00 p.m. to 7:00
a.m.
Chairman Cruz asked the applicant if he had seen the proposed conditions. Mr. Porter
had seen the conditions and there were no issues and that they were acceptable other
than a water issue that is being worked out,
Mr. Rodriguez spoke again to address some observations regarding private and public
restrooms. He believes there should be public restrooms for use downtown. He
reiterated the focus of the downtown is to create business and jobs.
The Chairman closed the hearing.
Commissioner Levin moved, seconded by Commissioner Greenaway to close the hearing
on the proposed Union Gospel Mission and initiate deliberations and schedule
adoptions of Findings of Fact, Conclusions and a recommendation to the City Council
for the November 17, 2011 meeting. The motion passed unanimously.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
11/17/2011
A. Special Permit Location of a Level Two Community Service
Facility in an I-1 ILight Industrial) Zone 1112
N. 2nd Ave) IMF# SP 2011-014i
Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from
staff.
City Planner, David McDonald, explained that as a result of comments made at
the public hearing the recommended conditions had been modified. Additional
conditions were added for fencing, screening and public restroom signage.
Conditions were also added to reflect the discussion on utilities.
Commissioner Anderson moved seconded by Commissioner Lukins to adopt
the findings, the facts and conclusions contained in the November 17, 2011
staff report. The motion passed unanimously.
Commissioner Anderson moved, seconded by Commissioner Lukins that the
Planning Commission recommended that the City Council grant a Special
Permit to Union Gospel Mission for the development of a level two community
service facility, with conditions as contained in the November 17, 2011 staff
report. The motion was passed unanimously.
Staff explained the recommendation would go to the City Council on December
5, 2011 unless an appeal is filed, in which case a closed record hearing would
be scheduled.
AGENDA REPORT
FOR: City Council December 1, 2011
TO: Gary Crutchfie Manager Regular Mtg.: 12/05/2011
Rick White,
Community & cono sic Development Director
/Z
v.�
FROM: Shane O'Neill, Planner I
SUBJECT: SPECIAL PERMIT - Community Service Facility (Power Zone) in a C-3
(General Business) Zone (MF# SP 2011-013)
I. REFERENCE(S):
1. Vicinity Map
2, Proposed Resolution
3. Report to Planning Commission
4. Planning Commission Minutes: Dated 10/20/11 & 11/17/11
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL/ STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
12/5: MOTION: I move to approve Resolution No. , approving a
Special Permit for the location of a Level One Community
Service Facility (Power Zone) in a C-3 (General Business)
zone at 1202 W. Lewis Street.
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
NONE
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
A. On October 20`t', 2011 the Planning Commission held a public hearing to
determine whether or not to recommend approval of a Special Permit to allow the
location of an after-school youth educational center at 1202 West Lewis Street.
B. Following conduct of the October 200' public hearing, the Planning Commission
recommended the Community Service Facility in question he granted a Special
Permit with a number of conditions.
C. The recommended conditions are contained in the attached Resolution.
D. No written appeal of the Planning Commission's recommendation has been
received.
8(c)
Vicinity Item: Power Zone Youth Center
Applicant: 6
Map �. .-
File #: SP2011 -013 F PL
til, I�•� •rI
IL
� .'}fir •� 4�F�►�`. 1 �' ...' ... -
=i -
�
I
y X111
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S
RECOMMENDATION AND APPROVING A SPECIAL PERMIT FOR A YOUTH
EDUCATIONAL CENTER AT 1202 WEST LEWIS STREET
WHEREAS, Carol Schuh (Power Zone) submitted an application for the location of a
youth educational center at 1202 West Lewis Street (Tax Parcel 200000220); and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on October 20, 2011 to
review the proposed youth educational center; and,
WHEREAS, following deliberations on November 17, 2011 the Planning Commission
recommended approval of a Special Permit for the youth educational center with certain
conditions;
NOW, THEREFORE,
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO:
1. That a Special Permit is hereby granted to Carol Schuh for the location of a youth
educational center in a C-3 (Heavy Commercial) District under Master File #
SP2011-013 with the following conditions:
a) The Special Permit shall apply to Tax Parcel #200000220 for the
building at 1202 West Lewis Street located within BNSF right-of-way;
b) The applicant shall comply with all building code requirements for the
occupancy class applicable to the use;
c) Street frontage and utility improvements meeting City Standards shall be
required if tenant improvements for Power Zone exceed 33% of the
leasehold value as established by the Franklin County Assessor under
Tax Parcel#200000220;
d) The Special Permit shall be null and void if an occupancy registration
has not been obtained by June 30, 2012.
Passed by the City Council of the City of Pasco this 5`'day of December, 2011.
Matt Watkins, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Debra L. Clark,City Clerk Leland B. Kerr, City Attorney
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
MASTER FILE # SP 2011-013 APPLICANT: PowerZone
HEARING DATE: 10/20/2011 P.O. Box 5200
ACTION DATE: 11/ 17/2011 Pasco, WA 99301
BACKGROUND
REQUEST: SPECIAL PERMIT: Location of a Level One Community
Service Facility in a C-3 (General
Business) Zone
1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:
Ley,al: Not Available-within BNSF Right-of-Way
General Location: 1202 W. Lewis Street
Propp-,y-Size: Approximately 0.5 acres
2. ACCESS: The parking lot site has access from Lewis Street 8v 11t11
Avenue (11th Ave is located on Railroad right-of-way)
3. UTILITIES: All municipal utilities currently serve the site.
4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The site is zoned C-3 (General
Business) and contains a commercial structure. The zoning and
land use of the surrounding properties are as follows:
NORTH: C-1 - Pasco School District Administrative Office
SOUTH: C-3 - Vacant
EAST: C-3 - Commercial Businesses
WEST: C-3 - Vacant
S. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan designates
this area for commercial uses.
6. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The City of Pasco is the
lead agency for this project. Based on the SEPA checklist, the
adopted City Comprehensive Plan, City development regulations,
and other information, a threshold determination resulting in a
Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) has been issued for this
project under WAC 197-11-158.
ANALYSIS
The applicant proposes to operate PowerZone, a faith-based, after-school
youth center in an existing commercial structure located in a C-3 zone.
The proposed use is most closely aligned with a Level One Community
1
Service Facility; which is considered an Unclassified Use and thus
requires special permit review. The applicant has indicated that
PowerZone will employ eight (8) staff members who can serve up to 36
students. Students will primarily use public transit to access the center
and a van will be used to transport students home. The youth center will
not occupy the entire structure; rather, a 1,200 square foot portion of the
structure will be used. The center will be open from 3:00 pm to 5:30 pm
Monday-Thursday except on Wednesdays when the center is open
between 3:00 pm and 8:30 pm.
The PowerZone Youth Center will provide an after school tutoring
program to high-risk middle school and high school students. In
addition to providing assistance with homework, the center will provide
opportunities for students to attend retreats and camps with the goal of
increasing personal self-sufficiency. PowerZone currently serves 36
students.
The site is located on right-of-way owned by BNSF Railway and is not
contained within a defined tax parcel. The site is bound by arterial
streets to the north and to the south. Both arterials serve public transit,
which provides convenient access for students traveling to the youth
center from nearby schools.
The proposed youth center adds to the consolidation of education related
uses in the general vicinity. The Pasco School District administration
office is located directly to the north and a few of Pasco's schools are
located nearby. Longfellow Elementary, Pasco High, Emerson Elementary
and Pasco Library are all located within less than one mile of the subject
site.
INITIAL STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT
Findings of Fact must be entered from the record. The following are
initial findings drawn from the background and analysis section of the
staff report. The Planning Commission may add additional findings to
this listing as the result of factual testimony and evidence submitted
during the open record hearing.
1. The site is addressed 1202 West Lewis Street.
2. The site is zoned C-3 (General Business).
3. The site is located on right-of-way owned by BNSF Railway
Company.
2
4. The PowerZone Youth Center is a non-profit organization dedicated
to providing tutoring and mentoring for at risk middle and high
school students.
5. PowerZone will provide tutoring services for 2.5 hours per day four
days per week.
6. PowerZone is defined as a Community Service Facility in the Pasco
zoning code.
7. Community Service Facilities are considered Unclassified Uses and
thereby require special permit review (PMC 25.86.020).
8. The proposed youth center is located approximately 0.7 miles south
of the Pasco High School.
9. The proposed youth center is located directly south of the Pasco
School District administrative offices.
10. The proposed youth center is located on a Benton Franklin Transit
route.
11. The proposed youth center will occupy approximately 1,200 square
feet of the existing commercial structure.
CONCLUSIONS BASED ON INITIAL STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT
The Planning Commission must make Findings of Fact based upon the
criteria listed in P.M.C. 25.86.060. The criteria and staff listed findings
are as follows:
1. Will the proposed use be in accordance with the goals, policies,
objectives and text of the Comprehensive Plan?
Comprehensive Plan Goal CF-5 encourages the fostering of
adequate provisions for educational facilities throughout the urban
growth area. PowerZone is a private educational support facility.
2. Will the proposed use adversely affect public infrastructure?
The proposal will generate little demand for public utilities only
being open to serve students for approximately 2.5 hours per day
for four days per week. Water and sewer demands of the proposed
use will be negligible compared to permitted uses such as
restaurants. Impacts to the adjoining streets will likewise be
minimal due to the fact the facility will only be open a total of 10
hours per week.
3. Will the proposed use be constructed, maintained and operated
to be in harmony with the existing or intended character of the
general vicinity?
3
The building proposed for use by PowerZone is currently in place
and has existed for over 40 years. No changes are planned for the
exterior of this commercial building. The proposed use will have
minimal impact on the existing and intended character of the
neighborhood.
4. Will the location and height of proposed structures and the site
design discourage the development of permitted uses on
property in the general vicinity or impair the value thereof?
PowerZone is proposing to occupy an existing building. No changes
are planned for the height and size of the structure. The current
building has not discouraged development in the general area. The
lack of development between West Lewis Street and West "A" Street
west of 10th Avenue is due to the fact the property is railroad right-
of-way.
5. Will the operations in connection with the proposal be more
objectionable to nearby properties by reason of noise, fumes,
vibrations, dust, traffic, or flashing lights than would be the
operation of any permitted uses within the district?
The proposed facility will only be open for tutoring services 10
hours per week. There will be no fumes, vibrations, dust, noise, or
flashing lights as a result of this activity.
6. Will the proposed use endanger the public health or safety if
located and developed where proposed, or in any way will
become a nuisance to uses permitted in the district?
The proposed tutoring center will be open 2.5 hours per day, four
days per week primarily during the school year. Minimal activity
will occur at the site minimizing any chance for the creation of
nuisance conditions.
APPROVAL CONDITIONS
1. The Special Permit shall apply to Tax Parcel #200000220 for the
building at 1202 West Lewis Street located within BNSF right-of-
way;
2. The applicant shall comply with all building code requirements for
the occupancy class applicable to the use;
3. Street frontage and utility improvements meeting City Standards
shall be required if tenant improvements for PowerZone exceed
4
33% of the leasehold value as established by the Franklin County
Assessor under Tax Parcel # 200000220;
4. The Special Permit shall be null and void if an occupancy
registration has not been obtained by June 30, 2012.
RECOMMENDATION
MOTION: I move to adopt Findings of Fact and Conclusions
therefrom as contained in the November 17, 2011 staff
report.
MOTION: I move based on the Findings of Fact and Conclusions
therefrom the Planning Commission recommend the
City Council grant a Special Permit to PowerZone for
the location of a Level-One Community Service Facility
at 1202 West Lewis Street with conditions as
contained in the November 17, 2011 staff report.
5
Vicinity Item: Power Zone Youth Center N
Map �
File #: SP2011 -013
MUM
I
M _R� - • J
y
law-
i{w• tea. r ^ _— `j � •� �^ � � ,�
Land Use Item: Power Zone Youth Center
Map Applicant: Carole Schuh
File # . SP2011 -013
- --- -- s. , t,Res.�
• al
P.U.D. ��;at
�v � 1
Office
Res. I I `\
Commercial
Commercial M��Ps
0
_ U
Vacant
"A" ST
i Va .
Vac. N7FR's Comm.
Z — -- w
. -� > SFR' s
Commercial= Q Q SFR s
Public = � � � - � w
Comm.
r
Zonin g Item: Power Zone Youth Center
Map Applicant: Carole Schuh N
File #: SP2011 -013
7`r
-R-2 �
�_ `R-2
C-1
`� 5�,a
G
t�
R-3 61 C-1
M C-3
s
- C-3 00
C-3
I-1
"A" ST
W
C-1
CO
CN
r
Cs3 i ' y
R-2 - R-2
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
10/20/2011
B. Special Permit Location of a Level One Community Service
Facility in an C-3 (General Business) Zone
(1202 W. Lewis Street) [Power Zonel IMF# SP
2011-0131
Chairman Cruz read the roaster file number and asked for comments from
staff.
Shane O'Neill, Planner 1 summed up the staff report and explained the
applicant proposed to locate a level one community service facility in a C-3
(General Business) Zone. The site is approximately .5 acres and is part of the
railroad right-of-way. The proposal is for an after-school tutoring center, with
the goal of helping high risk students graduate. The proposed use is closely
aligned with a level one community service facility hence the need for a Special
Permit. The facility has 8 staff members serving up to 36 students for 2 1/2
hours a day, 4 days a week, from the hours of 3:00 p.m. to 5:30 p.m. In
addition to providing assistance with homework the staff will teach personal
self-sufficiency skills. The proposed building is approximately 10,450 square
feet but the applicant only proposes to occupy 1,200 square feet.
Carole Schuh, 1202 W. Lewis Street, Director of Power Zone, stated the
information in the staff report was accurate. On Wednesday's they meet from
3:00 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. It is their goal to help kids make good choices and make
it in life.
Chairman Cruz asked staff if the proposed facility hours were to double would
it change any of the findings significantly.
Mr. O'Neill answered only the finding relating to the hours would change but
the impacts would not change.
Commissioner Lukins asked if the applicant was currently operating at this
location.
Mr. O'Neill stated yes.
Following little additional discussion Commissioner Hay moved, seconded by
Commissioner Kempf to close the hearing and initiate deliberations to adopt
the Findings ,of Facts and Conclusions and a recommendation to the City
Council for the November 17, 2011 meeting. The motion passed unanimously.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
11/17/2011
B. Special Permit Location of a Level One Community Service
Facility in an C-3 _(General Busine Zone
(1202 W. Lewis Street) (Power Zone) (MF# SP
2011-0131
Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from
staff.
City Planner, David McDonald, explained that staff had no additional
comments unless the Commission had questions. No questions or comments
were received.
Commissioner Lukins moved seconded by Commissioner Hay to adopt the
findings, the facts and conclusions contained in the November 17, 2011 staff
report. The motion passed unanimously.
Commissioner Lukins moved, seconded by Commissioner Hay that the
Planning Commission recommended that the City Council grant a Special
Permit to PowerZone for the development of a level one community service
facility, with conditions as contained in the November 17, 2011 staff report.
The motion was passed unanimously.
Staff explained the recommendation would go to the City Council on December
5, 2011 unless an appeal is filed, in which case a closed record hearing would
be scheduled.
AGENDA REPORT NO. I8
FOR: City Council December 1, 2011
TO: Gait' Crutchfie Ianager
FROM: Ahmad Qayoumi Public Works Director. Regular Mtg.: 12/05/11
SUBJECT: Award Pasco Wastewater Treatment Plant Optimization Improvements Project,
#C3-10-51-SWR
I. REFERENCE(S):
I. Bid Tab—Complete List
2. Bid Tab--Final Selected Items
3. Supplemental Qualifications Clarification& Engineer's Recommendation
4. Consultant's Recommendation& Qualifications Detennination
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL/STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
12105: MOTION: I move to award the low bid for the Pasco Wastewater Treatment
Plant Improvements Project, #C3-10-51-SWR to Apollo, Inc. in
the amount of $1,021,919.88, including sales tax, and further,
authorize the Mayor to sign the contract documents.
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
Sewer Utility Fund
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
A) On September 19, 2011 the Council approved the agreement with HDR
Engineering in the amount of $311,011.00 for the design of the Wastewater
Treatment Plant Optimization Improvements recommended in the City of Pasco
wastewater Treatment Plant Capacity Technical //Memorandum submitted to the
City previously on April 15, 2011, to meet the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System permit requirements issued by the Department of Ecology
June, 2010.
B) HDR, in concert with the City of Pasco Public Works Department, developed the
design and a set of construction bid documents. The Project was advertised on
November 13, 2011 with a scheduled bid opening on November 30, 2011 at 2:00
p.m.
V. DISCUSSION:
A) On Wednesday, November 30, 2011, the City received three (3) bids for the
project. Upon opening of the bids, it appeared that Williams Brother
Construction's bid contained certain irregularities with regard to missing
required qualifications information. Williams Brother Construction was the high
bidder, with a Total Contract Lump Sum Price of $4,473,121.40. The apparent
low bidder was Williams Charles West with a Total Contract Lump Sum Price of
$3,545,595.80. The remaining bidder was Apollo, Inc. with a Total Contract
Lump Sum Price of$3,565,886.88.
B) City Public Works staff and the Consultant (HDR) staff reviewed all three bid
packages, including performing a mathematical check of all unit prices,
extensions and totals, completion of the required bid document information, and
statements of experience contained in the bid proposal documents. After careful
review and consultation with the City's legal counsel, it was determined that the
apparent low bidder, Williams Charles West, should be disqualified on the basis
10(a)
that the bidder failed to be responsive to the requirement to provide three
tii;astewater projects similar in scope and work type to the ivork identified herein,
Which have been completed by BIDDER. " The requirements were outlined in
the bid documents and explained in the pre-bid meeting.
C) It is staffs recommendation that Apollo, Inc. be determined the responsive low
bidder with a Total Contract Lump Sum Price in the amount of $3,565,886.88,
including sales tax. The Engineer's estimate was $3,250,000.00, plus sales tax.
After reviewing the bids, staff believes the bidding climate was good and the
bids received represent the best prices that can be received. The requirements for
the design are to renovate the existing wastewater treatment plant. The
Engineer's estimate reflects the estimated total cost prepared in November 2011.
D) Based on limited funding options, the City elected to conduct a bid that allowed
a"menu" style list for bid items. After consideration of the iteins and prices from
the approved low bidder, the total construction cost after reducing the tasks to the
following is $1,021,919,88. Selection of certain items for construction was
explained to contractors in the bid package and in the pre-bid meeting. The
following items are selected based on current available budget and priority:
a. Removal and Replacement of the existing screenings system.
b. Installation of individual aeration basin control valves.
c. Removal and replacement of all aeration diffuser membranes.
d. Piping modifications to the sludge pumping system and replacement of
P914 and P916 Rotary Drum Feed Pumps.
e. Addition of an office to the northeast side of the Operations Building.
f. Trench excavation safety system.
g. Modifications to potablelnon-potable water system for make-up water to
Polymer System.
Bid Tabulations mplete List Project No.
Bid Date:November WWTP Improvments
Contractor: Contractor: Contractor:
Engineering Estimate Williams Charles West Apollo Williams Brother
Item No. Description Quantitiy Unit Total Price Total Price Total Price Total Price
Removal and Replacement ofthe existing
1 screenings system 1 LS $ 385,000.00 $ 451,500.00 $ 571,707.00
Removal and replacement of one(1)high speed
2 turbine aeration blower 1 LS $ 273000.00 $ 235,400.00 $ 304,497.00
Installation of one(1)new high speed turbine
3 aeration blower 1 L5 $ 265,000.00 $ 230,200.00 $ 238,557.00
Installation of individual aeration basin control
4 valves 1 LS $ 222,000.00 $ 213,500.00 $ E04 754.00
Removal and replacement of all aeration diffuser
5 membranes 1 LS $ 63,540.00 $ 60,100.00 $ 360.00
Screw press including load out Screw Conveyor not
6 associated with Boller Building Additon. 1 LS $ 700,00D.00 $ 796,500,00 $ 923,751.00
7 Modifications to the existing'1rre feed system 1 LS $ 213;000.00 $ 185,900.00 $ 164,198.00
F
Steam Boiler system and additional Screw -t
8 Conveyor,associated with Boiler Building Addition. 1 LS $ 597;".00 $ 626,000,00 $ 1,141,734.00
Piping modifications to the sludge pumping system I i
and replacement of P914 and P916 Rotary Drum
9 Feed Pumps. 1 LS $ 123,000.00 $ 116,500.00 $ 119,813.00
Addition of an office to the northeast side of the - A
30 Operations Building 1 LS $ ,245,000'aD $ 91,000.00 105.176.00
Addition of a conference room to the southeast side n A
11 ofthe Operations Building 1 LS t$. 277,0(x0,00 $ 275,000.00 $w. K267,754.00
12 Trench Excavation Safety System 1 LS S 1, 1 .DO $ 1.06 $ 10,000.00
Modifications to potable/non-potable water system r T
13 for make-up water to Polymer System 1 LS $ 39,250.00 $ 11,000,00 $ 25,000.f10
Subtotals: $ 3,273,905.00 $ 3,292,601.00 $ 4,130,306.00
Sales Tax @ 8.3%- $ 271,734.12 $ 273,285.88 $ 342,915.40
TOTALS: $ 3,250,000.00 $ 3,S45,639.12 $ 3,565,886.88 $ 4,473,121.40
v`�
Bid Tabulations Project No.
Sid Date:November 30,2011 WWTP Improvments
Contractor: Contractor. Contractor.
Engineering Estimate WiNiams Charles Westti_ Apollo WlUtsms Btodter
Item No. Description Quantitiy Unit Total Price Total Price Total Price Total Prat
Removal and Replacement of the existing
1 screenings system 1 LS a$ 385,000.00 $ 4S1,500.00 $ 571.707.00
Installation of Individual aeration basin control d
4 valves 1 LS $ 222,000.00 $ 213,SD0,00 f$ 204,754.00
Removal and replacement of all aeration diffuser
5 membranes 1 LS y 63,540.00 $ 60100,DD i$ S3,360.00
Piping modifications to the sludge pumping system '
and replacement of P914 and P916 Rotary Drum
9 Feed Pumps. 1 LS $ 123,000.00 $ 116,500.00 119,818.00
Addition of an office to the northeast side of the
10 Operations Building 1 LS S i 15=Z6 91,000.00 $ 105,176.001
12 Trench Excavation Safety System 1 LS - $ 1,115.00 $ 1.D0 $ 10,000.00
Modifications to potable/non-potable water system
13 for make-up water to Polymer System 1 LS $ 39,250.00 $ 11,000.00 '$. 25000.00
Subtotals: $ 948,905.00 $ 943,6D1.00 $ 1,089,815,00
Sales Tax @ 8.3%: $ 78,759.12 $ 78,318.88 $ 90,454.65
TOTALS: $ 3,250,000.00 $ 1,027,664.12 $ 1,021,919.88 $ 1,180,269.65
PUBLIC WORKS/ENGINEERING DIVISION 509-545-3444/FAX 509-543-5728
lti K_ P.O. BOX 293,525 NORTH THIRD AVENUE, PASCO,WASHINGTON 99301
q1qFPP
December 1, 2011
Mr. Keith Larson, President
William Charles West
5920 West Clearwater Avenue
Kennewick, WA 99336
RE: City of Pasco Wastewater Treatment Plant Optimization Improvements Project
Dear Mr. Larson:
On November 30, 2011 the City opened three (3) bids for the Pasco Wastewater
Treatment Plant Optimization Improvements Project. The apparent low bidder was
William Charles West with a total of$3,545,633.12.
After review of the complete bid package from William Charles West, City staff and HDR
Engineering representatives determined that the Bidder was non-responsive, therefore
the bid was rejected.
Based on Section 00450, "STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS", the Bidder must show
experience in "a minimum of three wastewater projects in similar scope and work type
to the work identified herein, which have been completed by BIDDER", Project
Manager, Project Superintendent, and Project Engineer. William Charles West provided
acceptable qualifications for the Project Manager and Project Superintendent; however,
the qualifications for the Bidder and Project Engineer were determined to be
unacceptable. The "William Charles West Experience" list of projects did not include
wastewater project experience similar in scope and work type to this project. Two of
the projects listed for the Project Engineer were not related to wastewater treatment.
The third project, which was related to wastewater, is not complete at this time and
does not meet the required information.
Linder Article 17.1 of Specification Section 00100:
"OWNER reserves the right to reject any or all Bids, including without
limitation the rights to reject any or all nonconforming, nonresponsive,
unbalanced or conditional Bids and to reject the Bid of any BIDDER if
OWNER believes that it would not be in the best interest of the Project to
make an award to that BIDDER, whether because the Bid is not
responsive or the BIDDER is unqualified or of doubtful financial ability or
fails to meet any other pertinent standard or criteria established by
OWNER."
Williams Charles West
December 1, 2011
Page 2
The supplemental qualifications issued in the specifications are within compliance with
current Washington State law; where a municipality may issue further requirements
that a Contractor must have previous experience with similar projects of scope and size.
After consideration of the second lowest Bidder's package, Apollo, Inc., it was
determined that Apollo, Inc. met all requirements of the specifications. Therefore, the
lowest, responsive, responsible bidder is determined to be Apollo, Inc. with a Total
Contract Lump Sum Price of$3,565,886.88. City staff recommends that Apollo, Inc. be
awarded the Pasco Wastewater Treatment Plant Improvements Project.
Sincerely,
Ahmad Qayoumi
Public Works Director
AQ/m p
xc: L/Project File
PUBLIC WORKS/ENGINEERING DIVISION 509-545-3444/FAX 509-543-5728
Z� rj P.O.BOX 293,526 NORTH THIRD AVENUE, PASCO,R'ASHINGTON 99301
December 1, 2011
Ms. Amy Jenne,Vice President
Apollo, Inc.
1133 W. Columbia Drive
Kennewick, WA 99336
RE: City of Pasco Wastewater Treatment Plant Optimization Improvements Project
Dear Ms. Jenne:
On November 30, 2011 the City opened three (3) bids for the Pasco Wastewater
Treatment Plant Optimization Improvements Project. The apparent low bidder was
William Charles West with a total of$3,545,639.12.
After review of the complete bid package from William Charles West, City staff and HDR
Engineering representatives determined that the Bidder was non-responsive, therefore
the bid was rejected.
Based on Section 00450, "STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS", the Bidder must show
experience in "a minimum of three wastewater projects in similar scope and work type
to the work identified herein, which have been completed by BIDDER", Project
Manager, Project Superintendent, and Project Engineer. William Charles West provided
acceptable qualifications for the Project Manager and Project Superintendent; however,
the qualifications for the Bidder and Project Engineer were determined to be
unacceptable. The "William Charles West Experience" list of projects did not include
wastewater project experience similar in scope and work type to this project. Two of
the projects listed for the Project Engineer were not related to wastewater treatment.
The third project, which was related to wastewater, is not complete at this time and
does not meet the required information.
Under Article 17.1 of Specification Section 00100:
"OWNER reserves the right to reject any or all Bids, including without
limitation the rights to reject any or all nonconforming, nonresponsive,
unbalanced or conditional Bids and to reject the Bid of any BIDDER if
OWNER believes that it would not be in the best interest of the Project to
make an award to that BIDDER, whether because the Bid is not
responsive or the BIDDER is unqualified or of doubtful financial ability or
fails to meet any other pertinent standard or criteria established by
OWNER."
Apollo, Inc.
December 1, 2011
Page 2
The supplemental qualifications issued in the specifications are within compliance with
current Washington State law; where a municipality may issue further requirements
that a Contractor must have previous experience with similar projects of scope and size.
After consideration of the second lowest Bidder's package, Apollo, Inc., it was
determined that Apollo, Inc. met all requirements of the specifications. Therefore, the
lowest, responsive, responsible bidder is determined to be Apollo, Inc. with a Total
Contract Lump Sum Price of$3,565,886.88. City staff recommends that Apollo, Inc. be
awarded the Pasco Wastewater Treatment Plant Improvements Project.
Sincerely,
Ahmad Qayoumi
Public Works Director
AQ/m p
xc: L/Project File
PUBLIC WORKS/ ENGINEERING DIVISION 509-545-3444/FAX 509-543-5728
P.O. BOX 293,525 NORTH THIRD AVENUE,PASCO,WASHINGTON 99301
;I r
December 1, 2011
Mr. John D. Williams
Williams Brother Construction, LLC
5713 W. Garden Springs Road
Spokane,WA 99224
RE: City of Pasco Wastewater Treatment Plant Optimization Improvements Project
Dear Mr. Williams:
On November 30, 2011 the City opened three (3) bids for the Pasco Wastewater
Treatment Plant Optimization Improvements Project. The apparent low bidder was
William Charles West with a total of$3,545,639.12.
After review of the complete bid package from William Charles West, City staff and HDR
Engineering representatives determined that the Bidder was non-responsive, therefore
the bid was rejected.
Based on Section 00450, "STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS", the Bidder must show
experience in "a minimum of three wastewater projects in similar scope and work type
to the work identified herein, which have been completed by BIDDER", Project
Manager, Project Superintendent, and Project Engineer. William Charles West provided
acceptable qualifications for the Project Manager and Project Superintendent; however,
the qualifications for the Bidder and Project Engineer were determined to be
unacceptable. The "William Charles West Experience" list of projects did not include
wastewater project experience similar in scope and work type to this project. Two of
the projects listed for the Project Engineer were not related to wastewater treatment.
The third project, which was related to wastewater, is not complete at this time and
does not meet the required information.
Under Article 17.1 of Specification Section 00100:
"OWNER reserves the right to reject any or all Bids, including without
limitation the rights to reject any or all nonconforming, nonresponsive,
unbalanced or conditional Bids and to reject the Bid of any BIDDER if
OWNER believes that it would not be in the best interest of the Project to
make an award to that BIDDER, whether because the Bid is not
responsive or the BIDDER is unqualified or of doubtful financial ability or
fails to meet any other pertinent standard or criteria established by
OWNER."
Williams Brother Construction
December 1, 2011
Page 2
The supplemental qualifications issued in the specifications are within compliance with
current Washington State law; where a municipality may issue further requirements
that a Contractor must have previous experience with similar projects of scope and size.
After consideration of the second lowest Bidder's package, Apollo, Inc., it was
determined that Apollo, Inc. met all requirements of the specifications. Therefore, the
lowest, responsive, responsible bidder is determined to be Apollo, Inc. with a Total
Contract Lump Sum Price of $3,565,886.88. City staff recommends that Apollo, Inc. be
awarded the Pasco Wastewater Treatment Plant Improvements Project.
Sincerely, '
Ahmad Qayoumi
Public Works Director
AQ/mp
xc: L/Project File
Mr.Ahmad Qayoumi, P.E. December 1, 2011
City of Pasco, Public Works Director
P.O. Box 293
525 N.3rd Avenue
Pasco, WA 99301
Mr. Qayoutni,
On November 30, 2011 the City received and opened three (3) bids for the Pasco
Wastewater Treatment Plant Improvements Project. The apparent ]ow bidder was
William Charles West.
After review of the complete bid package from William Charles West, it was
determined that the Bidder was non-responsive, therefore the bid was rejected,
William Charles West did not meet the requirements of Section 00450,
"STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS".
The lowest, responsive, responsible bidder is Apollo, Inc. with a Bid of
$3,565,886.88.
Sincerely,
John Koch, P.E.
Project Manager
HDR Engineering;
HDREnginaa ring,ino. 26055airlAndrewslaup Phone 15091546.2040
Sune A Fax [50915461090
Pasco.WA 99H1-6121 wwywhdrinc.com
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Counci November 18, 201 1
FROM: Gary Crutch Manager Workshop Mtg,: 11/28/11
Regular Mtg.: 12/5/11
SU[3JE:CT: Quad Cities ter Permit MOA
1. REFFRENCE(S):
I. Summary of Proposed MOA
2. Proposed MOA
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
11/28: Discussion
12/5: MOTION: I move to approve the Quad-Cities Water Supply Memorandum of
Agreement between the cities of Pasco, Kennewick, Richland and
West Richland and the Washington State Department of Ecology and,
further, authorize the Public Works Director to sign the agreement.
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
A) The Quad Cities water permit, issued by Ecology in 2006, under the terms of the
2003 settlement agreement, represented the culmination of a long process (about 8
years) undertaken by the four cities collectively to obtain a "regional" water permit,
rather than wait for uncertain opportunities to obtain individual water permits. In
2005, the four cities approved an MOU detailing how the four cities would manage
their collective rights and responsibilities under the new regional permit.
B) With the development of the new water supply plan for each city, approved by the
State Department of Health in 2010, the Public Works Directors of the four cities
have been working with Ecology to develop an MOA to clarify details associated
with the 2003 settlement agreement (the basis for the regional permit). Those
clarifications include:
• Revision of the "consumptive use" factor, from 80% to 60%;
• Availability of 2,408 acre feet additional water under the Quad Cities Regional
Permit (as a result of the change in consumptive use);
• Resolution of the "pre-settlement holes" asserted by Pasco and West Richland.
V. DISCUSSION:
A) The MOA is necessary to clarify, in writing, the common understanding as to how
Ecology will fulfill its obligations under the settlement agreement. Those provisions
are generally consistent with the historical understandings. The major change is the
consumptive use factor, dropping from 80% to 60%; this change effectively reduces
Ecology's obligation for mitigation water (by 25%) but also makes up to 2,408 acre
feet of water available for municipal use that would have otherwise been consumed
for mitigation purposes. As that segment of water is from the Lake Roosevelt
"bucket," it carries an annual fee (about $40 per acre foot). As Pasco still has a
deficit (about 3,800 acre feet) and the other cities do not, the consumptive use change
allows Pasco to eliminate about two-thirds of its current deficit (at the associated
annual cost).
B) Staff recommends Council approval of the proposed MOA and authorize the Public
Works Director to sign it, as the other three cities are likewise recommending
approval.
io(b)
Quad Cities and the Office of Columbia River
Memorandum of Agreement (MOA):
Securing New Water Supplies for the City of Kennewick, City of Pasco, City of
Richland, and City of West Richland
Summary
1. Purpose
a. Coordinate Water Supply Development Projects
b. Resolve remaining uncertainty in the 2003 Settlement Agreement
2. Buckley Season of Use Transfer
a. Upon written request of the Quad Cities, Ecology will modify the rights to
restore the historic season of use
3. Agreement on Trust Water Holdings for Mitigation of First 10 cfs under 54-30976
a. The Parties agree that Ecology's obligation is to mitigate total 8 cfs and
5,781.6 acre-feet.
b. The Parties agree the appropriate amount of mitigation for the first
increment of growth is 6 cfs and 4,336.2 acre-feet (60% consumptive use).
c. The remaining 2 cfs and 1 ,445.4 acre-feet are available to the Quad Cities
as mitigation for the future increments of growth.
d. Responsibility for costs are divided between Ecology (6 cfs portion) and
Quad Cities (2 cfs portion).
4. Fulfillment of Ecology's obligation to provide 8 cfs and 5,781.6 acre-feet.
a. The difference between Ecology's Buckley and Byerly trust water holdings
and the 8 cfs and 5,781.6 acre-feet described above, is 1 cfs and 4,014.37
acre-feet.
b. Ecology agrees to make 13.25 cfs and 4,014.37 acre-feet available from
Lake Roosevelt Project to fulfill its mitigation obligations.
c. The Parties agree that the Lake Roosevelt water provides equivalent
benefit to the McNary Pool per the 2003 Settlement Agreement
5. Filing of New Applications
a. City-specific applications may be filed that address specific projects.
b. Coordinated application shall be filed for regional growth needs. OCR
may issue new rights as mitigation for S4-30976, or in substitution of S4-
30976 if preferred by Quad Cities.
6. OCR and Quads will coordinate on future water supply projects to meet growth.
7. Pasco and West Richland pre-settlement "holes" are resolved.
11.10-2011 1
Quad Cities and the Office of Columbia River
Memorandum of Agreement (MOA):
Securing New Water Supplies for the City of Kennewick, City of
Pasco, City of Richland, and City of West Richland
Parties: The undersigned Parties, the City of Kennewick, City of Pasco, City of
Richland, and City of West Richland (Quad Cities) and the Washington State
Department of Ecology (Ecology), acting through the Office of Columbia River (OCR),
jointly support this Memorandum of Agreement (2011 Quads MOA).
Purpose: The undersigned Parties are committed to the following objectives;
1 . Coordinate on water supply development projects that will assist the Quad
Cities in meeting the mitigation requirements of Water Right Permit S4-
30976P, or provide alternate, equivalent means of serving the projected
growth for the Quad Cities.
2. Reach a common understanding of issues of uncertainty contained in the
2003 Stipulation, Settlement Agreement and Order of Dismissal of PCHB
Appeal No. 02-216 (2003 Settlement Agreement), relating to Water Right
Permit S4-30976P.
Recitals:
• Whereas OCR has a statutory mandate to pursue developing water supplies
to meet pending municipal needs and develop sources of supply for
interruptible water users on the Columbia River;
i 1-10-201 1 2
• Whereas Water Right Permit S4-30976P is subject to interruption associated
with minimum instream flow requirements on the Columbia River.
• Whereas both Ecology and the Quad Cities are parties to the 2003
Settlement Agreement',
• Whereas Ecology and the City of Kennewick are partnering on an Aquifer
Storage and Recovery (ASR) project, subject to a 2008 Memorandum of
Understanding (2008 Kennewick MOU).
• Whereas Ecology and the City of Pasco are partnering on a water supply
project, subject to a 2011 Memorandum of Understanding (2011 Pasco
MOU).
• Whereas there is a need to coordinate future water supply development
projects consistent with the terms of Water Right Permit S4-30976P.
Now, therefore, the Parties acknowledge and agree to the following:
1. Buckley and Byerly Water Right Trust Transfers: In partial fulfillment of
obligations of the 2003 Settlement Agreement, Ecology acquired and placed
water rights into the State Trust Program (RCW 90.42), termed the "Buckley"
and "Byerly" water rights. Collectively, these water rights total 7 efs and
1,767.23 acre-feet. A summary of the Buckley and Byerly water rights held in
trust under the 2003 Settlement Agreement is provided in Appendix A.
The 2003 Settlement Agreement (Page 3) states in part that "the intent . , , is
The Center for Environmental Law and Policy(CELP) is also a party to the 2003 Settlement Agreement, CELP is
not a party to this MOA and is unaffected by its terms and conditions,
I1-10-2011 3
that trust water rights used for mitigation shall be from McNary Pool and of
equivalent quantity and period as shown in Table 5 of the ROE' (referring to
Table 5 of the Report of Examination, or ROE, for Permit S4-30976P). The
referenced table identified the historic Buckley season of use as year-round,
with water right specific quantities for each season (i.e., summer, fall and
winter/spring). However, Ecology's 2002 ROE for the Buckley water rights
altered the season of use inconsistent with Table 5 in response to comments
from the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife.
Under RCW 90.42.040, Ecology may modify a trust water certificate providing
it does not impair existing water rights. Upon written request of the Quad
Cities, Ecology will process a modification to the subject rights to return the
season of use consistent with the historic exercise thereof, and with the terms
and conditions of Table 5 of the ROE for Permit S4-30976P. While Ecology
cannot prejudge this decision, a return to the historic season of use is not
expected to impair existing water rights, In the event that Ecology's
impairment analysis introduces constraints to the Quad-Cities' requested trust
water certificate modifications other than a return to the historic season of
use, Ecology shall 1) consult with the Quad-Cities to set the modified
certificate to the Quad Cities' maximum benefit; and 2) consult with the Fish
Flow Advisory Group to determine whether the available Lake Roosevelt
mitigation can be used to offset such constraints.
11-10-2011 4
2. Trust Water Mitigation for the First 10 cfs of Diversions Under S4-
30976P: The 2003 Settlement Agreement contains several statements that
are unclear as to Ecology's obligation to hold trust water rights as mitigation
for diversions under the first 10 cfs of Permit S4-30976P.
First, the 2003 Settlement Agreement (Page 4) states: "To determine the
amount of perpetual mitigation for the first increment of water use, Ecology
has used an 80 percent consumptive use estimate". Permit S4-30976P
identifies the first increment of water use as 90 cfs and 7,227 acre-feet. 80
percent of the first increment is 8 cfs and 5,781.6 acre-feet.
Second, the 2003 Settlement Agreement (Page 3) references Table 5 of the
ROE for Permit S4-30976P as "the two groups of water rights Ecology intends
to use as mitigation for the first increment of Quad Cities' water use". Table 5
identified diversions for a suite of water rights (Buckley and Simplot) ranging
from 11 cfs to 20,8 cfs and totaling 6,476.7 acre-feet.
Third, the 2003 Settlement Agreement (Page 4) stated that concurrent with
each 6-year Quad Cities planning update, Ecology "will assure that the
appropriate amount of water-for-water mitigation is in place". In 2008, the
Quad Cities completed its 2008 Regional Water Forecast and Conservation
Plan Update, which identified an annual consumptive use percentage of 48%,
significantly less than the 80% assumption. The "appropriate amount of
11-10-2011 5
water-for-water mitigation" based on 48% consumptive use to offset the first
increment under Permit S4-30976P would be 4.8 cfs and 3,469 acre-feet.
The Parties agree that Ecology's obligations to mitigate for the first increment
of water use total 8 cfs and 5,781.6 acre-feet. The Parties further agree that,
while consumptive use must be calculated during each 6-year planning effort,
and while consumptive use may vary from year-to-year, that the 80%
consumptive use assumption for the first 10 cfs is likely to be significantly
higher than the Quad Cities' actual consumptive use, even during drought
years.
The Parties desire to maximize the trust water holdings for the benefit of the
Quad Cities municipal uses. The trust water holdings will be maximized if 1)
sufficient trust water holdings are maintained to offset consumptive uses in
the first increment across a range of potential water years; and 2) if trust
water holdings surplus to that objective, but within the 8 cfs and 5,781.6 acre-
feet held for such purpose, are made available to the Quad Cities as
mitigation to offset future increments of growth. To that end, the Parties
agree "that the appropriate amount of water-for-water mitigation" for the first
increment of growth is 6 cfs and 4,336.2 acre-feet (60% consumptive use).
The remaining 2 cfs and 1,445.4 acre-feet are available to the Quad Cities as
mitigation for the future increments of growth.
11-10-2011 6
The Parties agree that Ecology is responsible for developing the 8 cfs and
5,781.6 acre-feet of water for the first increment. The Parties agree that
Ecology is responsible for costs associated with the 6 cfs and 4,336.2 acre-
feet of water for the first increment. The Parties agree that Quad Cities is
responsible for costs associated with the 2 cfs and 1,445.2 acre-feet of water
beyond the first increment. However, in the event that consumptive use in the
future increases above 60%, Ecology agrees to assume responsibility for
costs associated with that quantity. The Parties further agree that in the
event that a future planning document estimates consumptive use above
60%, the Parties will meet and negotiate how such data will affect future
increments of growth for which mitigation has already been secured. The
Parties further agree that in the event that a future planning document
estimates consumptive use at a percentage less than the percentage used to
acquire mitigation that the Parties will negotiate a new and expanded
permitted diversion amount commensurate with the lower consumptive use
percentage.
3. Simplot, Byerly and Lake Roosevelt Trust Water Rights: When the ROE
for Permit S4-30976P issued, Table 5 contained a summary of six water
rights Ecology was negotiating with Mr. Buckley to acquire and three water
rights that Ecology was negotiating to acquire from the Simplot Corporation,
The Buckley water rights were secured, totaling 1 ,536,58 acre-feet. However,
negotiations between Simplot and Ecology broke down and those rights were
11-10-2011 7
not acquired.
Since that time, Ecology has acquired two water rights termed the "Byerly"
water rights, totaling 230.65 acre-feet, bringing Ecology's trust water holdings
to 7 cfs and 1,767.23 acre-feet. The difference between Ecology's Buckley
and Byerly trust water holdings and the 8 cfs and 5,781.6 acre-feet described
in Section 2 above, is 1 cfs and 4,014.37 acre-feet.
OCR is beginning a permitting effort for water made available through its Lake
Roosevelt Incremental Storage Release Projects. Ecology holds 25,000
acre-feet of water in trust for municipal, domestic, and industrial purposes.
Mitigation water is available from this project from April to August. Ecology
agrees to make 13.25 cfs and 4,014.37 acre-feet available to fulfill its
mitigation obligations under the Quad Cities permit. These quantities are
shown in Appendix B. While permits issued based on the mitigation provided
by the Lake Roosevelt project are permanent, the mitigation supply is not;
Ecology must replace its 25,000 acre-feet of trust water holdings in the future
with another supply source. In that event, Ecology will notify Quad Cities of
opportunities to participate in the permitting and environmental review for
such decisions. The Parties agree to amend Section 3 and Appendix B of
this MOA at that time to reflect the change in mitigation source, and
potentially the timing of availability; however, the quantities agreed to herein
are expected to remain unchanged.
4. McNary Pool Defined: The 2003 Settlement Agreement (Page 3) states that
the Buckley water rights and Simplot water rights (if acquired) place of use
were to be modified to "the McNary Pool of the Columbia River". Further, if
the Simplot rights were not acquired, then "other water rights from the McNary
Pool" were to be acquired and put into trust. The Buckley and Byerly rights
acquired to-date (and Simplot water not acquired) were originally diverted
from the Walla Walla River, in a location such that the trust water benefit to
McNary Pool accrued on the order of days later. The Parties agree that the
Lake Roosevelt water described above provides equivalent benefit to the
McNary Pool as contemplated in the 2003 Settlement Agreement. Lake
Roosevelt authorizations used for Quad Cities mitigation will reflect delivery of
water to the McNary Pool of the Columbia River from approximately River
Mile 292 to River Mile 346.
5. New Water Right Applications: Section 9 (Page 5) of the 2003 Settlement
Agreement required the Quad Cities to "withdraw all pending applications for
new water rights except for certain groundwater applications that are for
supplemental rights for alternate places of withdrawal'. However, since
execution of the 2003 Settlement Agreement, the legislature passed RCW
90.90 and formed the Office of Columbia River, which created water supply
development and permitting options not originally contemplated by the
11-10-2011 9
Parties.
Under this 2011 Quads MOA, the Parties agree on the following framework
for the submittal of new water right applications:
a. Project-Specific Applications: Any individual city may file-
i. A project-specific water right application associated with a joint
City-OCR water supply development partnership. An example
of a project of this nature is the City of Kennewick — OCR
Aquifer Storage and Recovery project, for which a reservoir
application has been filed and a preliminary permit issued. In
the event that new water supply is made available from such a
project, such quantity in acre-feet shall be allocated in the same
manner as for Non-Project-Specific Applications below.
H. A new water right application for additional instantaneous
capacity only (no additive annual allocation) without affecting
annual allocations amongst the Quad Cities.
b. Non-Protect-Specific Applications: Unless partnering with OCR on
specific projects or filing for source redundancy applications in Section
5a above, the Quad Cities shall file new water right applications jointly
and consistent with the planning demands outlined in the Regional
Water Forecast and Conservation Plan updates, and the 2000 Final
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement. As part of the
11-10-2011 10
negotiation of this MOA, the Quad Cities will file the first of such
applications. The Quad Cities shall reserve the right to allocate water
awarded under such applications amongst themselves consistent with
the planning objectives outlined in the Regional Water Forecast and
Conservation Plan updates. If Project-Specific Applications for
individual cities are also granted, then the Quad Cities shall coordinate
how such individual water right permits affect regional water
availability. Non-Project-Specific Applications are subject to the
following guidelines:
L Mitigation Water: A new water right may be granted to provide
mitigation water for consumptive use impacts associated with
Permit S4-30976P. Such water right may be in the form of a
new water right permit, a trust water certificate, a reservoir
permit, or other appropriate authorization for the project.
ii. In-Lieu Water: Ecology may develop water supplies with
mitigation requirements that are deemed "superior" to those in
Permit 54-30976P. In such cases, the Quad Cities may receive
a permit in exchange for the voluntary cancellation of an equal
amount of Permit S4-30976P.
iii. Priority Date: Consistent with RCW 90.03.340, the priority date
of such applications filed by the Quad Cities or individual cities
that are a party to this 2011 Quads MOA is the date of the filing
of the application. OCR shall follow WAC 173-152 in the
1 1-10-201 I 1 i
processing of water right applications filed. However, if OCR
holds a trust water right, it reserves the right to assign portions
thereof to Quad Cities as mitigation water so long as the
objectives of RCW 90.90.020 are met.
6. Future Water Supply Development Partnership: The Parties agree to
partner opportunistically on water supply development projects that meet the
objectives of this 2011 Quads MOA. It is anticipated by the Parties that water
supply development costs will be project-specific; if Quad Cities elects to
receive water under the OCR Program beyond the 6 cfs and 4,336.2 acre-feet
of water for the first increment described in Section 2, OCR may recover
direct costs for such water supply from the Quad Cities consistent with RCW
90.90. The goal of the Parties is to ensure uninterrupted growth consistent
with Permit S4-30976P, and to have a reasonable, non-speculative quantity
of water in reserve to bridge the gap between water supply development
altematives.
7. City, of Pasco and Cily of West Richland Water Right Deficits Resolved:
In the past, Ecology, the City of Pasco, and the City of West Richland have
disagreed about commitments to resolve water right deficits (aka "holes") that
pre-dated the issuance of Permit S4-30976P and the 2003 Settlement
Agreement. By virtue of a water supply project funded by OCR and the
associated 2011 Pasco MOU, the City of Pasco agrees all "hole" issues have
11-10-2011 12
been resolved to its satisfaction. The City of West Richland agrees all "hole"
issues have been resolved to its satisfaction based on the following:
a. Ecology's processing of numerous change decisions in 2008 providing
for greater source flexibility amongst city sources and water rights.
b. Ecology's issuance of new water right permit G4-35203P to the City in
2010 for 1 ,650 gpm (additive to existing rights) and 2,661 acre-feet
(non-additive to existing rights).
c. Ecology and the City's agreement in this MOA regarding pending City
applications G4-32304 and G4-32395 as follows:
i. Ecology and the City agrees the intent of modifying application
G4-32304 and G4-32395 to a supplemental designation was to
provide an alternate, but non-additive source of water for the
Quads permit (54-30976P).
ii. If a quantity of water is approved by Ecology for application
G4-32304 and G4-32395, then an equal quantity of Permit S4-
30976P would be cancelled and a superseding permit issued.
iii. Ecology agrees it will begin processing application G4-32304
and G4-32395, or will otherwise modify existing Permit
G4-35203P2, to meet the goal of issuing 2,800 gpm and 4,531
acre-feet of water additive to the existing groundwater rights, but
with a commensurate reduction of 2,800 gpm and 4,531 acre-
feet from Permit S4-30976.
If Permit G4-35203P is modified to accomplish this goal, then the face sheet of the permit will reflect that the
2,661 acre-feet authorized is now additive, so long as 2,661 acre-feet of water from Quads Permit 54-30976P is
similarly reduced.
11-10-2011 13
iv. Consistent with RCW 90.03.290, Ecology can only approve
applications where water is available, will not impair other rights
or the public interest, and is for a beneficial use.
v. West Richland understands that the groundwater being
requested is in an area with uncertain recharge and with a
history of complaints regarding declining water levels that have
necessitated deepening of pump depths. If Ecology processes
less than 2,800 gpm and 4,531 acre-feet in new groundwater
applications or permit amendments, Ecology and West Richland
agree to enter into negotiations for OCR-funding of a feasibility
study for a potential aquifer storage and recovery project.
8. Regulatory Actions Not Constrained: To the extent this MOU
contemplates Ecology taking regulatory action on any application, permit,
certificate, or other document, the parties understand that Ecology must make
decisions consistent with legal requirements, notwithstanding this MOU. The
parties further understand that such decisions are subject to possible appeal
by other parties, and that if an appeal alters or reverses a decision by
Ecology, Ecology shall be relieved of any obligation to the contrary under this
MOU.
9. MOU Not a Binding Contract: This MOU is intended only to improve
intergovernmental coordination and is not intended to and does not create a
legally binding contract or any right or benefit, substantive or procedural,
enforceable at law or in equity by any party against another party, its
11-10-2011 14
directors, officers, employees or other persons. This MOU does not
constitute an explicit or implicit agreement by the parties to subject the other
party to the jurisdiction of any federal or state court over and above any rights
or procedures presently available to the parties. This MOU shall not be
construed to create any right to judicial review involving the compliance or
noncompliance of the parties with the MOU.
10.No Commitment Except as Authorized: Nothing in this MOU shall be
construed as committing any party to actions for which it lacks authority. All
actions and schedules called for by this MOU are subject to and contingent
upon the availability and allocation of future appropriations, existing and
future limitations on a party's statutory authorities, and state and federal
regulatory approvals as needed.
11. Principle of Construction: This Agreement has been prepared jointly by
the parties following negotiations between them. The parties were
represented by legal counsel of their choosing. It shall be construed
according to its terms and not for or against any of the parties.
MOU Acceptance By:
Representing the Washington State Department of Ecology:
Date
Derek Sandison, Director
Office of Columbia River
1 1-10-201 1 15
Representing City of Kennewick:
Date
Peter M. Beaudry
Director of Public Works
City of Kennewick
Representing City of Pasco:
Date
Ahmad Qayoumi
Public Works Director
City of Pasco
Representing City of Richland:
Date
Peter Rogalsky
Public Works Director
City of Richland
Representing City of West Richland:
Date
Roscoe C. Slade III
Public Works Director
City of West Richland
11-10-2011 16
Appendix A: Buckley and Byerly Water Rights Summary
Name Water Right Consumptive Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Total
Use
Buckley 4672-A cfs 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.47 1.47 1.47 1.10 0.00 1.10 0.00 0.00 0.00
ac-ft 0.00 0.00 0.00 87.32 90.23 87.32 21.78 0.00 65.34 0.00 0.00 0.00 351.98
Buckley 8416-A cfs 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.39 0.39 0.00 0.00 0.39 0.39 0.00 0.00
ac-ft 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 23.94 23.17 0.00 0.00 23.17 21.62 0.00 0.00 91.89
Buckley 127S-A(A) cfs 0.00 0.00 1 0.00 1.39 1.39 1.39 0.00 0.00 1.02 2.13 0.00 0.00
ac-ft 0.00 0.00 0.00 49.54 85.32 41.28 0.00 0.00 32.31 126.52 0.00 0.00 334.98
Buckley 3099-A cfs 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.00 0.00 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.00
ac-ft 0.00 0.00 0.00 50.49 52.17 50.49 0.00 0.00 50.49 52.17 13.46 0.00 269.28
Buckley 6417-A cfs 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.76 0.76 0.00 0.00 0.76 0.7fi 0.00 0.00
ac-ft 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 46.65 45.14 0.00 0.00 24.08 46.65 0.00 0.00 162.52
Buckley 9537-A cfs 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.77 1.77 0.00 0.00 1.77 1.77 0.00 0.00
ac-ft 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 108.64 52.57 0.00 0.00 56.07 108.64 0.00 0.00 325.93
Byerly 5283 cfs 0.356 0.356 0.356 0.303 0.303 0.303 0.231 0.231 0.231 0.356 0.356 0.356
ac-ft 21.85 19.74 21.85 17.99 18.59 17.99 14.33 14.19 13.73 21.61 21.15 21.85 224.87
Byerly 36058 I cfs 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.007 1 0.007 0.007 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.010 0.010 0.010
ac-f; 0.62 0.56 0.62 0.41 0.43 0.41 0.30 0.30 0.29 0.61 0.60 0.62 5.78
Peak Rate(cfs) 7.00
Monthly Total {ac-ft) 22.47 20.30 22.47 205.75 425.96 318.37 36.42 14.49 265.48 377.82 35.21 22.47 1767.23
11-10-ZOl l 17
Appendix B: Buckley, Byerly and Lake Roosevelt Water Rights Summary
Name Consumptive Ian Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Total
Use
Buckley and
Byerly cfs 0.37 0.37 0.37 4.02 6.94 6.94 1.34 0.24 6.13 6.27 1.22 0.37 6.94
ac-ft 2147 20.30 1 22.47 205.75 425.96 318.37 1 36.42 14.49 1 265.48 377.82 35.21 22.47 1767.23
Lake Roosevelt cfs 0.00 0.00 0.00 13.25 13.25 13.25 13.25 13.25 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 13.25
ac-ft 0.00 0.00 0.00 787.13 813,37 787.13 81337 813.37 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 401437
Total cfs 0.37 037_L0.37 17.27 20.19 20.19 14.59 13.49 6.13 6.27 1.22 0.37 20.19
ac-ft 22.47 20.30 122.47 992.88 1 1239.33 1105.50 849.79 827.86 265.48 377.82 35.21 22.47 5781.60
11-10-2011 18
AGENDA REPORT NO. 16
FOR: City Council November 23, 2011
TO: Gary Crutchfiel '` y Manager Workshop Mtg.: 11/28/2011
Regular Mtg.: 12/05/2011
FROM: Ahmad Qayoumi, Public Works Director
SUBJECT: Ecology Grant for Raw Water Intake and Irrigation Project
1. REFERENCE(S):
1. Vicinity Map
2. Department of Ecology Interagency Agreement Contract and Project Scope
(Council packets only; copy available for public review in the Public Works office,
the Pasco Library or on the city's webpage at htV//,Awwlfasco-
wa.gov/o.encralinfo/cit,vcouncilre;)orts),
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL 1 STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
11/28: Discussion
12/05: MOTION: I move to accept the grant offered by Washington State
Department of Ecology in the amount of $2,667,038.00 for the
Columbia Water Supply — Raw Water Intake and Irrigation
Project and, further, authorize the City Manager to sign the
Interagency Agreement Contract.
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
A) The City currently draws raja- water to supply its new West Pasco Water Treatment
Plant (WPWTP) from an existing intake located immediately west of the 1-182
bridge on the north side of the Columbia River. The existing intake is an older City
irrigation system facility that has been modified to enable pumping through the new
membrane pressure filters at the WPWTP. Both irrigation and potable water is
withdrawn at that Iocation. The existing intake has a maximum hydraulic capacity
of 9 MGD, approximately 3 MGD for irrigation and 6 MGD for potable water.
V. DISCUSSION:
A) The City intends to construct the new intake structure by the end of 2015, including a
pumping facility and raw water pipeline designed and constructed to match the
ultimate capacity of the WPWTP (18 MGD), and construction of a separate irrigation
system supply pipe and booster pump station. The irrigation improvements are
needed to deliver at least 1,000 acre-feet of water from the pending USBR permit.
The project includes approximately 12,000 feet of 16-inch pipeline from the river to
the existing irrigation system in Sandifur Parkway at Road 84 and a booster pump
station near the southerly convergence of Harris Road and I-182, in compliance with
the City's Irrigation Master Plan.
B) The City has received a grant offer from Washington State Department of Ecology in
the amount of$2,677,038.00 for: raw water intake design and property acquisition
for the new intake structure; the new irrigation pipeline and associated booster pump
station. The grant is partly intended to resolve the long-standing dispute between the
city and Ecology as to Ecology's obligation to provide another 2.5 cfs of water in
association with the Quad-Cities regional water permit. If accepted, the grant
constitutes Ecology's fulfillment and the city will regard the matter as resolved.
io(c)
y r ! rit.l rM•esld
Mir sr.�Ci 'iii .+rim
f ,Zr:Fil y'L�• fir
lakam
Zr i�►' `y
i�om„ rn9lesi�n:a u
i C-T.f
Mw
1 / 0
To
WMI
Mpm
� Ri
"AN +"�!,{���� •Sam+Ha�'1.�N
y+tR.��I.K�"f
wp
AGENDA REPORT
FOR: City Council November 21, 2011
TO: Gary Crutch y Manager Workshop Mtg.: 11/28/11
Regular Mtg.: 12/5/11
FROM; Stan Strebel, D- uty City Manager
SUBJECT: WCIA Liability Coverage Deductible
1. REFERENCE(S):
1. WCIA Assessment Comparison
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL/ STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
11128: Discussion
1215: MOTION: I move to authorize staff to specify a $100,000 deductible with
WCIA for the 2012 coverage year.
111. FISCAL EMPACT:
The City's 2012 Liability Assessment will be $375,608 without deductible; $240,389
with the proposed S 100,000 deductible.
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
A) In September, Council reviewed an assessment comparison from WCIA showing the
effects of using either a $25,000, $50,000 or $100,000 liability deductible over the
last five years claim history, Applying a $100,000 deductible over the past five years
would have resulted in savings of approximately $150,000. [It should be noted, as
prior, that, with a typical statutory three-year period within which one must file a
claim, the claims history and experience (including losses) may not be fully ripe. As
time passes, there is the possibility for incurred amounts to change as claims are
actually settled or litigated,]
B. Based on Councils' interest in using a deductible, staff reviewed the existing
insurance allocation methodology (used to divide the WCIA assessment between
funds) to make sure that it reasonably reflected the claims history, as provided by
WCIA, as well as employee hours, the two major factors in the assessment
determination.
In summary, the review showed that the general fund was being charged about 24%
of the assessment but incurring some 85% of the claims. Likewise the utility fund
was paying 55% of the assessment but only incurring 10% of claims.
C) Staff has developed a new allocation formula which is based on employee hours for
allocating the assessment and claims history based in that actual claim costs within
the $100,000 deductible amount will be paid directly from the operating budget of the
fund. This method will more closely reflect actual claims, moving the general fund
assessment share to about 72%. As this method uses actual expenses, it avoids the
"double counting" of claims history in determining the allocation.
D) Based on the 2012 WCIA Assessment with deductible, and estimating annual claim
costs for the year, staff would expect general fund costs to be in the range of
$230,0004240,000. This represents an annual increase of approximately $130,000-
$140,000 for the fund. At the same time, applying the new allocation formula with
deductible, we would expect costs to the utility fund to decrease by $150,000-
$160,000.
Other funds are minimally impacted.
lo(a)
E) Past experience indicates that it is extremely unlikely for one year to incur multiple
events that exceed $100,000. Nonetheless it is possible. Our claims experience
indicates such a claims event would most likely occur from either general fund or
utility fund activities. These two funds carry substantial unreserved fund balances.
Part of the purpose of unreserved fund balance is to provide resources for the city to
recover from significant, unforeseeable, losses. Rather than carving up the
unreserved fund balances into individual pieces (Reserves Designated for XYZ) to
cover all possible contingencies, it is recommended to leave the unreserved fund
balance as being available to cover whatever type of significant, unforeseeable, loss
which may occur.
City of Pasco - Assessment Comparison
11112006- 12/31/2010 as of 815/2011
Note
`Claims capped at $25,000 $50,000 $100,000 respectively
*Multiple claimants for each occurrence considered
*Statutes have not run on all years and not all claims have matured
May be rounding errors as no decimals
(A) Claims (8) ( C) (D) 2006 - 2010 LTD, (>E) - (F)
Total cost of Difference in Cost
Actual F"rt posed Proposed Program
vvlApplicat�te to City (E) -
Year jAssessrreot Asaeasrnent Incurred ear ear
26,000 Deductible
2006 $ 367,234 $ 300,030 $ 95,166 $ 395,196 $ 27,962
2007 $ 341,154 $ 278,723 $ 71,580 $ 350,303 $ 9,149
2008 $ 337,795 $ 275,979 $ 63,701 $ 339,680 $ 1,885
2009 $ 368,321 $ 300,918 $ 59,381 $ 360,299 $ (8,022)
2010 $ 406,038 $ 331,733 $ 72,437 $ 404,170 $ (1,868)
Total $ 1,820,542 $ 1,487,383 $ 362,265 $ 1,849,648 $ 29,106
50,000 Deductible
2006 $ 367,234 $ 271 ,019 $ 138,755 $ 409,774 $ 42,540
2007 $ 341,154 $ 251 ,772 $ 96,580 $ 348,352 $ 7,198
2008 $ 337,795 $ 249,293 $ 75,697 $ 324,990 $ (12,805)
2009 $ 368,321 $ 271,821 $ 69,381 $ 341,202 $ (27,119)
2010 $ 406,038 $ 299,656 $ 72,437 $ 372,093 $ (33,945)
Total $ 1,820,542 $ 1,343,560 $ 452,850 $ 1,796,410 $ (24,132)
100,000 Deductible
2006 $ 367,234 $ 235,030 $ 188,755 $ 423,785 $ 56,551
2007 $ 341,154 $ 218,339 $ 96,580 $ 314,919 $ (26,235)
2008 $ 337,795 $ 216,189 $ 75,697 $ 291 ,886 $ (45,909)
2009 $ 368,321 $ 235,725 $ 69,381 $ 305,106 $ (63,215)
2010 $ 406,038 $ 259,864 $ 72,437 $ 332,301 $ (73,737)
Total $ 1,820,542 $ 1,165,147 $ 502,850 $ 1,667,997 $ (152,545)