HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012.10.29 Council Special Meeting PacketAGENDA
PASCO CITY COUNCIL
Special Meeting 7:00 p.m. October 29, 2012
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. ROLL CALL
(a) Pledge of Allegiance.
3. BUSINESS ITEMS
(a) Area #2 Annexation:
1. Agenda Report from Gary Crutchfield, City Manager dated October 25, 2012.
2. Map, Annexation Options 2012.
3. Map, Annexation Area #2.
4. Incorporation Process.
5. Area #2 Fiscal Impact Table.
6. Proposed Ordinance.
7. Annexation Facts Comparison.
CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING
Ordinance No. , an Ordinance of the City of Pasco, Washington relating to
annexation and annexing certain real property to the City of Pasco.
MOTION: I move to adopt Ordinance No. , annexing certain real property to the
City of Pasco and, further, to authorize publication by summary only.
4. ADJOURNMENT
TO: City
FROM: Gary
SUBJECT: Area
I. REFERENCE(S):
AGENDA REPORT
I . Map, Annexation Options 2012
2. Map, Annexation Area #2
3. Incorporation Process
4. Area 42 Fiscal Impact Table
5. Proposed Ordinance
6. Annexation Facts Comparison
October 25, 2012
Special Mtg.: 10/29/12
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
10/29: CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING
10/29: MOTION: I move to adopt Ordinance No. annexing certain real
property to the City of Pasco and, further, to authorize publication
by summary only.
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
Certain taxes and fees will be received by the City for the annexation area and the City
will spend more for certain service functions. Overall, the City will receive more than it
expends on this area alone, as some of the major service functions (police and fire
services) are already in place and sufficient to absorb the new service area without
additional expense.
See table (Reference No. 4).
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
A) At the invitation of the City, Franklin County Fire District #3 and Franklin County
Commission entered into negotiations for an agreement covering the eventual
annexation of the donut hole area of Pasco's UGA in late summer 2011. As a part
of the negotiation process, Franklin County desired the preparation of a matrix to
compare the regulatory and cost considerations for affected residents. The matrix,
clearly reflecting no meaningful difference in regulatory matters (except dog
control), very similar annualized household costs and (arguably) improved service
levels (police, fire, garbage, etc.), was completed in May. A group of donut hole
residents filed notice of intent to incorporate (rather than be annexed) with
Franklin County on May 21, 2012.
B) On June 18, 2012, the City Council passed Resolution No. 3407 establishing an
annexation boundary for the proposed Area #2 annexation. Council chose to
initiate annexation of Area #2 rather than allow the incorporation of a "city within
the city" together with the numerous problems that would be created by such a
scenario, including:
• Perpetuation of gross inefficiencies in Pasco's daily operations (police,
utilities, parks and streets) associated with the requirement to drive through
another city to serve portions of Pasco west and north of the donut hole;
• Potential dead - ending of the City's utility systems (water and sewer) and/or
exorbitant franchise fees /onerous conditions required by the new city;
3(a)
• Relocation of the City's Fire Station #3 (Road 68 and Argent) so that it is not
on the edge of Pasco;
• Continued impact on the City's traffic system without contribution by new
development in the new city via traffic impact fees;
• Use of Pasco facilities created and maintained at Pasco taxpayer expense
without financial participation by residents of the separate city (senior
citizens' center, Chiawana Park, etc.).
C) Annexation Area 42 contains 608 acres, an estimated 528 dwelling units and a
population of approximately 1500. The current assessed value of the proposed
annexation area is $120,865,200.
D) As discussed by Council in June, completion of annexation of Area #2 will reduce
the number of possible residents of the proposed new city to less than 3,000, the
minimum requirement. While incorporation proponents have represented that the
proposed new city would be able to function without any new taxes or rate
increases above those currently imposed in the unincorporated area and would be
able to purchase all required services by contract, no details or specifics have been
released (to the knowledge of staff). The City has developed a fiscal impact
analysis of the effect of the annexation of Area #2, as attached. Due to
investments that the City has already made and given the ability to absorb most of
the relatively small workload with existing staff resources, the City would realize
net positive financial benefits from the annexation.
E) A 60% petition for the annexation boundary approved in Resolution 3407 was
prepared and submitted to the County Assessor for certification. The petition has
been reviewed by the County Assessor and has been determined to be sufficient to
constitute a legally acceptable petition under the 60% petition method of
annexation. The next step in the annexation process requires the City Council to
hold a public hearing on the proposed annexation.
F) Before proceeding with a public hearing on the proposed annexation, the City
solicited input from affected citizens in Area #2 and formed an "Annexation Facts
Committee," consisting of 12 area residents, to review and refine the previously
completed cost and regulatory matrix. The completed matrix and statement,
approved by 10 of the 12 members of the Committee, was mailed to Area #2
residents on October 2, 2012. The mailing also included an invitation to attend a
neighborhood meeting to discuss the various regulation and cost items, plus any
other issues related to annexation. The neighborhood meeting was held on
October 17; it was attended by most of the Committee members, Mayor Watkins
and Councilmember Hoffmann and approximately 80 Area #2 residents.
G) On October 18, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider the
zoning plan for the area. The Commission's recommendation will be forwarded
for separate Council action in November.
V. DISCUSSION:
A) The proposed annexation ordinance, if adopted, will cause the properties in
question to be annexed to the City on January 1, 2013 subject to the following
conditions:
1. The Comprehensive Plan of the City will continue to be applicable to the area.
2. The annexation area will not assume any existing bonded indebtedness.
3. The annexation area will be assigned to Voting District #5.
B) The delayed effective date is recommended to provide ample time for notice to
residents and utility providers alike, so the transition can be as smooth as
practicable. Zoning must be assigned by separate ordinance and Council action in
November.
Annexation Options, 2012
4
,
,
3
Oil
Annexation Area #2 -�-
i
. �a
Incorporation Process
1. Notice filed with County Commission.
2. Within 30 days of filing, Commission holds public meeting (scheduled for 6/13).
3. Within 180 days of meeting, Petition equal to 10% of voters must be filed with auditor.
4. City Annexation may be initiated any time prior to or 90 days following filing of
incorporation petition.
5. Within 30 days of receipt of petition, Auditor determines petition validity.
6. Within 60 days of notice of publication validity by Auditor, County Commission holds
public hearing.
7. Election at next special election date that is more than 60 days following public hearing.
AREA #2 ANNEXATION FISCAL IMPACT
Estimated: Population
Annexation Details: Assessed Val
# homes
CITY REVENUE IMPACTS
State Shared Revenue'
Gas Tax
Liquor Fees
Liquor Tax*
Crim Justice Sp
Crim Justice Pop
Sub -total
Taxes
Property
Sales Tax Const
Public Safety
Misc Taxes Z
City Area #2 %
62,670 1584 2.53%
3,214,780,310 121,165,400 3.77%
16,000 528 3.30%
P/C Amt
$20.64
$8.97
$3.00
$0.89
$0.26
$33.76
Rate (2012)
1.968
0.85%
Utility Est /hh
General Fund
Telephone
$46
Electricity
$138
Water /sewer $
(12)
S. Waste
$14
Cable (5 %)
$43
Cable (8.5 %)
$61
Sub-total
$ 291
Fees
4,752
Ambulance
$75
Stormwater
$36
Bldg Permit Fees3
1,410
Water Fees
(124)
TOTALREVENUE
Total Impact
General Fund
Streets
Utility Ambulance
$
32,694
$
32,694
$
14,208
$
14,208
$
4,752
$
4,752
$
1,410
$
1,410
$
412
$
412
$
238,454
$
238,454
$
34,144
$
34,144
$
28,000
$
28,000
$
5,980
$
5,980
$24,288
$
21,471
$2,817
$72,864
$
64,412
$8,452
(4,250)
(4,250)
$7,392
$
6,535
$857
$6,819
$6,819
$9,662
$
8,542
$1,121
$116,775
$
96,708
$20,067
$39,600
$39,600
$19,008
$19,008
$
28,842
$
28,842
(45,830)
(45,830)
$
635,223
$
549,617 $
72,828 $
(26,822) $ 39,600
CITY OPERATING EXPENSE IMPACTS
Animal Control
Jail ° $1,164,473.80
Dispatch 6 $888,584.53
DEM 6 2010
Voter Reg 2010
Streets
Park Maint
Misc Exp (AWC, BFCC)
CITY CAPITAL EXPENSE IMPACTS (Syr Amortization)
Park Development'
Arterial Streets 8
Fire Hydrants
TOTAL EXPENSE
NET FINANCIAL IMPACT
NOTES
1. 2013 Estimates MRSC *Est for 2013 is $.84; 2014 is $3.24
2. PUD Priv;Nuclear,City- County; Sales Tx Mit ($590K est 2013)
3. Construction in UGA county has averaged (2011 -2012 YTD)
3.2 SFR permits /mo; 39 /yr; avg val: $308,993
For est. use 1/3 =13; Taxable Val= $4,016,909
Permit on $308k = $2168; Add $50 pin ck
4. Jail Cost 2011: $1,135,767
5. Dispatch Cost 2011: $866,679
6. DEM (County -79k, City 60K) Assessment is approx $10.7K
Capital Expense
7. New park land /development est. $500,000
8. Possible improvements to Argent, Court or Sylvester Streets $500,000
9. Fire hydrant upgrades; est. 30ea @ $5,000
Total Impact
General Fund
Streets Utility Ambulance
$
(7,000)
$
(7,000)
($28,707)
$
(28,707)
($21,906)
$
(21,906)
$
(185)
$
(185)
$
(1,442)
$
(1,442)
$
(20,000)
$
(20,000)
$
(20,000)
$
(20,000)
$
(1,600)
$
(1,600)
$
(100,000)
$
(100,000)
$
(100,000)
$
(100,000)
$
(150,000)
$
(150,000)
$
(450,839)
$
(330,839)
$
(120,000) $ - $
$
184,384
$
218,778
$
(47,172) $ (26,822) $ 39,600
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE of the City of Pasco, Washington relating to annexation
and annexing certain real property to the City of Pasco.
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Pasco has declared its intent to annex the
following described territory known as Riverview Annexation Area #2 to the City of Pasco pursuant
to RCW Chapter 35A.14; and
WHEREAS, a legally sufficient intent to commence annexation proceedings by the petition
method of annexation was prepared by City officers and received by the City; and
WHEREAS, the Pasco City Council passed Resolution No. 3407 on June 18, 2012 accepting
the proposed territory for annexation, determining that zoning will be established with input from
affected property owners and that the annexation area will not require the assumption of existing City
bonded indebtedness; and
WHEREAS, the Franklin County Assessor on October 23, 2012 officially certified the
sufficiency of the petitions prepared and filed by City officers as representing more than 60% of the
assessed value of the Riverview Annexation Area #2; and
WHEREAS, the Riverview Annexation Area #2 is situated within the designated Pasco
Urban Growth Area; and
WHEREAS, City of Pasco utilities, police, fire and other services are adequate and available
to serve the proposed annexation area; and
WHEREAS, notice of the public hearing on the proposed annexation has been published and
posted as required by law; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing on the proposed annexation was held on October 29, 2012;
and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that annexation of Area #2 will improve the
efficiency and distribution of necessary municipal services within the City's designated
Urban Growth Area, to the benefit of all Pasco residents and taxpayers; NOW,
THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON DO ORDAIN AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That the following described area, situated in Franklin County, Washington
to -wit, shall be annexed to the City of Pasco:
Beginning at the southwest corner of Lot 4, Lamb Estates, said comer being the
TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; Thence easterly along the south line of Lots 4, 3, 2
and 1 of Lamb Estates to the intersection with the west right -of -way line of Road 62;
Thence easterly along the easterly projection of the south line of Lot 1, Lamb Estates
to the east right -of -way line of Road 62; Thence northerly along said east right -of-
way line to the north line of Lot 8, Sunflower Estates; Thence easterly along the north
line of said Lot 8 to the intersection with the west right -of -way line of Road 60;
Thence easterly along the easterly projection of the north line of said Lot 8 to the
intersection with the east right -of -way line of Road 60; Thence southerly along the
east right -of -way line of Road 60 to the intersection with the north right -of -way line
of Sylvester Street; Thence easterly along the north right -of -way line of Sylvester
Street to the intersection with the east right -of -way line of Road 52; Thence northerly
along the east right -of -way line of Road 52 to the intersection with the easterly
projection of the south right -of -way line of West Agate Street; Thence westerly along
the easterly projection of the south right -of -way line of West Agate Street to west
right -of -way line of Road 52; Thence westerly along the south right -of -way line of
West Agate Street to the northwest comer of Lot 7, Farrell Addition said northwest
corner being on the east line of the west half of the southeast quarter of the southeast
quarter of Section 22, Township 9, North, Range 29 East W.M.; Thence northerly
along the east line of west half of the southeast quarter of the southeast quarter of
Section 22, Township 9, North, Range 29 East W.M to the intersection with the
northeast corner of Lot 4, Bales Place; Thence westerly along the north line of Lots,
4, 3, 2, and 1 of Bales Place to the intersection with the east right -of -way line of Road
56; Thence northerly along the east right -of -way line of Road 56 to the intersection
with the easterly projection of the north line of Lot 1, Block 2, Jensen Estates; Thence
westerly along the easterly projection of the north line of said Lot 1 to the intersection
with the west right -of -way line of Road 56; Thence northerly along the west right -of-
way line of Road 56 to the intersection with the easterly projection of the south line
of Lot 13, Park Knoll Subdivision ; Thence easterly along the easterly projection of
said Lot 13, to the point on the north right -of -way line of West Wernett Road said
point being 89.71 feet west of the southeast corner of Lot 40, Park Knoll Subdivision;
Thence easterly along the north right -of -way line of West Wernett Road to the
intersection with a point on the north right -of -way line of West Wemett Road said
point being 101.28 feet east of the southwest corner of Lot 1, Diamond Ridge;
Thence along a 25 foot radius to the left having an arc distance of 38.81.feet and a
central angle of 88 degrees, 57 minutes, and 2 seconds to a point on the west right -of-
way line of Road 52 said point being 174.49 feet south of the northeast corner of said
Lot 1; Thence northerly along the west right -of -way line of Road 52 to a point on
said right -of -way being 245.23 feet north of the southeast corner of Lot 2 , Short Plat
2008 -13; Thence along a 25 foot radius to the left having an are distance of 39.75 feet
and a central angle of 91 degrees, 05 minutes and 31 seconds to a point on the south
right -of -way line of Richardson Road, said point being 155.12 feet east of the
northwest corner of Lot 2, Short Plat 2008 -13; Thence westerly along the south right -
of -way line of Richardson Road to a point 223.49 feet west of the northeast comer of
Lot 9, Diamond Ridge; Thence north to the north right -of -way line of Richardson
Road; Thence westerly along the north right -of -way line of Richardson Road to the
intersection with the southerly projection of Lot 7, Riverhills Addition; Thence
northerly along the southerly projection of said Lot 7, to the southeast corner of said
Lot 7; Thence northerly along the east line of said Lot 7 , and northerly along the east
line of Lot 5, Riverhills Addition to the south right -of -way line of West Livingston
Road; Thence northerly along the northerly projection of the east line of said Lot 5, to
a point on the north right -of -way line of West Livingston Road, said point being the
southeast comer of Lot 3, Riverhills Addition; Thence northerly along the east line of
said Lot 3, and northerly along the east line of Lot 1, Riverhills Addition to the south
right -of -way line of West Dradie Street; Thence northerly along the northerly
projection of said Lot 1, to the intersection with the northwest corner of Lot 1, Short
Riverview Annexation Area #2
Page 2
Plat 76 -23, said northwest corner being on the south right -of -way line of West Dradie
Street; Thence easterly along the south right -of -way line of West Dradie Street to the
intersection with the southerly projection of Lot 1, Bosch Estates II; Thence northerly
along the southerly projection of said Lot 1 to the southeast comer of said Lot 1:
Thence northerly along the east line of said Lot 1 and the east line of Lots 2, 3, and 4
Bosch Estates Il to the south right -of -way line of West Argent Road; Thence
northerly along the northerly projection of the east line of Lot 4 , Bosch Estates to the
north line of West Argent Road; Thence easterly along the north right -of -way line of
Argent Road to the intersection with the east line of Section 15, Township 9 North,
Range 29 East W.M.; Thence northerly along the east line of said Section 15 to the
south right -of -way line of the Franklin County Irrigation District No. 1 canal; Thence
westerly along the south line of said irrigation canal right -of -way to the intersection
with northeast corner of Lot 2, Binding Site Plan 2006 -06. Thence southerly along
the east line of said Lot 2 to the north right -of -way line of West Argent Road; Thence
easterly along the north right -of -way line of West Argent Road to the intersection
with the northerly projection of the North 210' of East 150' of the east half of the
northeast quarter of the northwest quarter of the northwest quarter of Section 27,
Township 9 North, Range 29 East, W.M.; Thence southerly along the northerly
projection of said line to the south right -of -way line of West Argent Road; Thence
easterly along the south line of West Argent Road to the intersection with the
northerly projection of the west line of Lot 1, Quail Run; Thence southerly along said
northerly projection to a point on the east right -of -way line of Road 64 said point
being 221.81 feet from the southwest comer of said Lot 1; Thence southerly along the
east right -of -way line of Road 64 to the intersection with the southwest comer of Lot
4, Quail Run; Thence easterly along the south line of said Lot 4 and easterly along the
south line of Lot 5, Quail Run to the southwest comer of Lot 5, Shaundee Estates;
Thence easterly along the south line of said Lot 5, to the intersection with the west
right -of -way line of Road 61; Thence easterly along the easterly projection of the
south line of said Lot 5 to the southwest corner of Lot 6, Shaundee Estates; Thence
easterly along the south line of said Lot 6 and easterly along the south line of Lot 7,
Shaundee Estates to the west right -of -way line of Road 60; Thence northerly along
the west right -of -way line of Road 60 to the intersection with a point on the west
right -of -way line of Road 60 said point being 115.73 feet north of the southeast
corner of Lot 10, Shaundee Estates; Thence easterly to the east right -of -way line of
Road 60; thence northerly along the east right -of -way line of Road 60 to the south
right -of -way line of West Argent Road; Thence easterly along the south right -of -way
line of West Argent Road to the intersection with a line 825 east of the west line of
the northwest quarter of the northeast quarter of Section 22, Township 9 North,
Range 29 East W.M.; Thence southerly along said line to the intersection with the
westerly projection of the south line of Lot 4, Bosch Estates said intersection being
on the west right -of -way line of Road 57; Thence southerly along the west right -of-
way line of Road 57 to the intersection with the south line of the northwest quarter of
the northeast quarter of Section 22, Township 9 North, Range 29 East W.M.; Thence
westerly along said south line to the west right -of -way line of Road 57; Thence
southerly along the west right -of -way line of Road 57 to the intersection with the
north line of Lot 1, Short Plat 2000 -09; Thence westerly along the north line of said
Lot 1 to the intersection with the northeast corner of a parcel described as follows:
The south 594.16 feet of the west 227.73 feet of the east 495 feet of the west 825 feet
of southwest quarter of the northwest quarter of Section 22, Township 9 North,
Range 29 East W.M., except 30 feet for Wemett Road; Thence westerly along the
Riverview Annexation Area #2
Page 3
north line of said described parcel to the northwest comer thereof, Thence southerly
along the west line of said described parcel to the intersection with the northeast
corner of Lot 1, Short Plat 76 -9; Thence westerly along the north line of said Lot 1 to
the east right -of -way line of Road 60; Thence westerly along the westerly projection
of the north line of said Lot 1 to the intersection with the west right -of -way line of
Road 60; Thence northerly along the west right -of -way line of Road 60 to the
intersection with the northeast comer of Lot 6, Block 2, Deschane's Subdivision the
same being the intersection of Road 60 and West Richardson Road; Thence westerly
along the south right -of -way line of West Richardson Road to a point on the north
line of Lot 1, Block I Buttercreek Estates Phase 1 said point being 133.70 feet west
of the northeast comer of said Lot 1; Thence along a 25 foot radius to the left having
an are distance of 38.68 feet and a central angle of 88 degrees, 39 minutes, and 10
seconds to a point on the east right -of -way line of Road 68 said point being 127.66
feet north of the southwest corner of said Lot 1; Thence southerly along the east
right -of -way line of Road68 to the intersection with the westerly projection of the
south line of Buttercreek Estates Phase 2; Thence easterly along said westerly
projection and along the south line of Buttercreek Estates Phase 2 to the east line of
Buttercreek Estates Phase 2; Thence southerly bearing south 00 degrees, 47 minutes
and 36 seconds west for a distance of 15 feet; Thence easterly bearing north 89
degrees, 36 minutes and 44 seconds to the intersection with the east right -of -way line
of Road 64; Thence southerly along the east right -of -way line of Road 64 to the
intersection with the westerly projection of the north line of Binding Site Plan 2001-
05; Thence easterly along the north line of said Binding Site Plan to the east right -of-
way line of Road 64; Thence southerly along the east right -of -way line of Road 64 to
the point of beginning.
Section 2. That the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Pasco be and the same is hereby
adopted for the above described properties.
Section 3. That the above described properties shall not assume any portion of the
existing bonded indebtedness of the City of Pasco.
Section 4. That the above described properties shall be in Voting District #5.
Section 5. That a certified copy of this ordinance be and the same shall be filed with the
Franklin County Commissioners.
Section 6. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect on January 1, 2013.
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco this 29th day of October, 2012.
Matt Watkins, Mayor
ATTEST:
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Debra L. Clark, City Clerk Leland B. Kerr, City Attorney
Riverview Annexation Area #2
Page 4
ANNEXATION FACTS
COMMITTEE STATEMENT
The "Cost and Regulatory Comparison" document dated
September 12, 2012 has been reviewed in detail over the
course of six weeks and revised as appropriate by the
Annexation Facts Committee, consisting of 12 residents of
the unincorporated island. The Committee believes the
comparison is an accurate summary of the key cost and
regulatory considerations one should use when comparing
daily life under Franklin County or City of Pasco rules.
While the Committee takes no position regarding the
question of annexation, we do encourage residents of the
island to use this written factual comparison rather than
perceived misconceptions regarding annexation.
COMMITTEE MEMBERS
Anthony Bachart
Len Harms
Robert Kiddy Il
Mark MacFarlan*
Gabriel Portugal
Don Story*
Leo Faust
Jeff Hendler
Samuel Kniveton
Sally Merk
Curt Rabideau
Davida Wright
* Participated in document review but declined to endorse Committee Statement
COST AND REGULATORY COMPARISON
FRANKLIN COUNTY ISLAND vs. CITY OF PASCO
(September 12, 2012)
Service / Issue
Unincorporated County
Fann animals are permitted in the county's residential
city
Farm animals are permitted in the city's RS12 and
Notable
Differences
City limits
Farm Animals
zones. Each property is permitted to house one
RS20 zones. Each property is permitted to house one
number of
"animal unit" (horse, cow, three sheep, etc.) for each
"animal unit" (horse, cow, three sheep, etc.) for each
chickens, fowl or
10,000 sq. ft. of land area exceeding the first 12,000 sq.
10,000 sq. ft. of land area exceeding the first 12,000 sq.
rabbits to 40;
ft. (Examples: a one -acre site could house one horse,
ft. (Examples: a one -acre site could house one horse,
County has no
one cow and three sheep; or three horses or three cows
one cow and three sheep; or three horses or three cows
limit in RS -20
or nine sheep. A five -acre site could house 20 horses
or nine sheep. A five -acre site could house 20 horses
zone.
or any combination of cows and horses up to 20; or 60
or any combination of cows and horses up to 20; or 60
Otherwise, no
sheep). County limits number of chickens, fowl or
sheep). City limits number of chickens, fowl or rabbits
difference on
rabbits to two animal units (40) in RS -12 zone but has
to two animal units (40) in RS -12 and RS -20 zones.
farm animals.
no limit in RS -20 zones.
Pasco Municipal Code 25.12
Franklin County Cade 17.28.030(E)
Dogs
No annual license requirement; limits number of dogs
Annual license required ($10 altered; $45 unaltered);
City requires
to three (unless licensed as a kennel). No leash law.
limits number of dogs to three (unless licensed as a
annual license;
Sheriff responds to dog complaints; "potentially
kennel); has leash law (when off owner's property);
leash law;
dangerous dog" is one which acts aggressive toward or
"potentially dangerous dog" is one which acts
requires
bites a human and Sheriff notifies owner in writing —
aggressive toward or bites human once (regardless of
enclosure, permit
no restrictions required of dog; "dangerous dog" is one
need for stitches) or any pit bull - all required to get
and insurance for
which a) has been previously classified as a
special license, and provide insurance and enclosure of
"potentially
"potentially dangerous dog" and acts aggressive or
dog on property. "Dangerous dog" is one which kills a
dangerous"
bites a human a second time or b) bites a human for the
domestic animal or livestock; enclosure, permit and
dogs; regular
first time and the injury is severe (multiple stitches) or
insurance required. Enforcement under direction of Tti-
patrols for
c) kills a domestic animal or livestock. Enclosure of
Cities Animal Control Authority with regular patrol by
pickup of stray
dog on property and insurance and permit required for
animal control officers.
dogs.
"dangerous dog."
Pasco Municipal Code Title 8
RCW 16.08.070(2) and (3) and Franklin County Code
17.38.030
9/12/12
Page 1
Service/ Issue
Unincorporated
Existing wells may continue to be used, maintained
Existing wells may continue to be used, maintained
��
Differences
None
Domestic Wells
and repaired, per health department and Department of
and repaired per health department and Department of
Ecology requirements.
Ecology requirements. No new wells allowed for new
development, unless waiver allowed for extenuating
circumstances.
City Water
If property owner desires connection to city water,
Connection to city water is not required if well exists
Reduced rate in
owner must pay proportionate share of city waterline
or property does not contain habitable building. At
city; new
extension. A $23.75 base fee per month is charged
time of building permit (habitable building), owner
development or
outside city, with a use charge of $1.24 per 100 cubic
may elect to continue to use well, but must pay
connection must
feet of water used (monthly charges do not apply if
proportionate share of city water line extension (PMC
pay
using existing well).
16.06). A $12,50 base fee per month is charged inside
proportionate
the city, with a use charge of $0.65 per 100 cubic feet
share of water
of water used (monthly charges do not apply if using
line extension.
existing well).
Pasco Municipal Code 3.07.160(B)
Irrigation
Franklin County Irrigation District (FCID) water is
Franklin County Irrigation District (FCID) water is
None
Water
available to properties that are within the district
available to properties that are within the district
boundaries.
boundaries.
Septic Tanks
State law (WAC 246 -272A -0025) requires connection
State law (WAC 246 -272A -0025) requires connection
None
to sewer if sewer line is within 200 feet of house served
to sewer if sewer line is within 200 feet of house served
by failed septic system and is deemed necessary by
by failed septic system and is deemed necessary by
local health officer. Installation of new septic tank is
local health officer. Installation of new septic tank is
allowed on property over 1 acre in size regardless of
allowed per health department rules if sewer is not
water source and on % acre site if property connected
available and city grants waiver from sewer connection
to city water system (per health department). Existing
requirement. Existing septic tanks can continue to be
septic tanks can continue to be used in accordance with
used in compliance with health department rules.
health department rules.
9/12/12
Page 2
Service Issue
Unincorporated
Connection to city sewer is not required if septic
Differences
Reduced rate in
Sewer
If property connects to city sewer, owner must pay
proportionate share of city sewer line extension. Must
system is operational or property does not contain
city; otherwise,
connect to sewer if within 200 feet of sewer line and no
habitable building. At time of building permit (new
no change.
operational septic system. Sewer use rate is
habitable building), must connect to sewer only if
$37.20 /month.
within 200 feet of sewer line and no operational septic
system. City Code (PMC 16.06) allows waivers for
extenuating circumstances. Sewer use rate is
$24.80 /month.
Pasco Municipal Code 3.07.170(A)(1)
RID/LID
Road Improvement District (RID) is a method of
Local Improvement District (LID) is a method of
Street and utility
financing local street improvements in unincorporated
financing local public improvements like streets, water
improvements
neighborhoods.
lines, sewer lines, etc., in city neighborhoods. An LID
may be financed
A RID occurs only when qualified improvements are
can be proposed by affected property owners or the
by city, if
proposed and, after a public hearing, the proposed
City of Pasco. An LID occurs only if, after a public
majority of
street financing plan is approved by a majority of the
hearing and notice to affected property owners, the
owners desires.
affected property owners and the County Commission.
proposed financing plan is approved by a majority of
the affected property owners and the City Council.
See Exhibit D.
Solid Waste
Solid waste service is provided by Basin Disposal but
All households/businesses are obligated to subscribe to
Lower cost in
subscription is optional to resident. The service option
the solid waste service provided by Basin Disposal Inc.
city; free pickup
is one 96 gallon can weekly for $17.85 /month; each
(BDI). The service provides a 96 gallon can for
of certain items;
additional can is $17.85 /month. This rate excludes any
weekly automated pickup at the street edge for
two free trips to
"extra" bags or bundles; each bag or bundle not in a
$15.00 /month; each additional can is $2.00. Pick -up of
transfer station
can costs $2.27. Pickup of appliances with Freon cost
appliances and four tires each year are free. This rate
annually;
$15.00, each. Pickup of old tires cost $2.72 each.
includes "unlimited" pickup service so long as the
compulsory
Tariff No. 92 of Basin Disposal Co.
extra waste is bundled or bagged and at the street edge.
service.
Effective. 217103
hi addition, each household can use the BDI transfer
station twice each year at no charge.
Pasco Municipal Code 6.04
9/12/12
Page 3
Service / Issue
Unincorporated 1
Notable
Differences
Fire Services
Fire District No. 3 currently serves the island as well as
Pasco fire department will become first responder to
Quicker
the rest of Fire District No. 3 from six stations, two of
fire calls. The city's fire stations at Road 68 and at the
response with
which are located in the island. Average response time
Tri- Cities airport will respond to the area. Average
full crew;
district- wide is just over 11 minutes. Fire insurance
response time with a four - person city crew is under 6
probable
rating is "Class 7."
minutes, city wide. Fire insurance rating is "Class 5"
reduction of fire
(about 15% reduction in fire insurance premium).
insurance
premium in city.
Ambulance
City fire department currently provides first - response
City fire department provides first response ambulance
For those with
Service
ambulance service to district under contract with Fire
service to city. Monthly 2013 fee will be $6.25 ($75
property value
District #3. No monthly or annual fee to residents.
annual). Transport charge is $660.
higher than
(EMS levy expected in 2013; median annual property
Pasco Municipal Code 3.07.010(A)(2)
$200,000, lower
tax of $77 for ambulance services.) Transport charge is
annual cost in
$990.
city.
Sheriff (27 commissioned officers for 1200 square
Police department (73 commissioned officers for 34
Law
miles of county) provides law enforcement in the
square miles of city) provides law enforcement in the
Enforcement
island. The island is part of the south county patrol
City. The island would be part of two city patrol zones,
zone; the south zone is about 380 square miles in size
each about 6 square miles in size and containing at
and usually has 2 -3 officers on duty in that zone.
least one officer on duty; will result in at least 2
officers on duty in the island.
Building
County uses International Building Code (IBC)', same
City uses International Building Code (IBC), same
No change,
Permits
code state wide. County requires dedication of half
code state wide. City requires dedication of half
except addition
standard right -of -way (30 feet)' for residential street
standard right -of -way (30 feet) for residential street
of impact fees
adjacent subject property. County requires source of
adjacent subject property.
(see references,
potable water for habitable buildings per health
(See also Domestic Wells; City Water; Septic Tanks;
page 5).
department (well or city water)' and provision for
Sewer)
sanitary waste water per health department (on -site
Pasco Municipal Code 1606
septic system or city sewer connection).
(See also Domestic Wells; City Water, Septic Tanks;
Sewer)
'- Franklin County Code 15.12.020 -070
?- Franklin County Resolution No. 2002 -270
'- Franklin County Code 1628.020(B)
9/12/12
Page 4
Service / Issue
Unincorporated
Notable
Differences
Non -
Any lawfully existing land use /structure which does
Any lawfully existing land use /structure prior to
None
Conforming
not conform to applicable development regulations
annexation which does not conform to applicable
Property Uses
may continue to exist and be maintained but not
development regulations may continue to exist and be
expanded. Can be transferred to a new owner provided
maintained but not expanded. Can be transferred to a
it is not discontinued for one year or more. Cannot be
new owner provided it is not discontinued for one year
rebuilt if destroyed more than 50% of tax assessed
or more. Cannot be rebuilt if destroyed more than 50%
value by fire, etc,
of tax assessed value by fire, etc.
Franklin County Code 17.70.040
Pasco Municipal Code Title 25
Park Impact
$300 for new (2002 or later) residential lots in a short
$687 per lot assessed at time of building permit
Higher fee in
Fee
plat or subdivision. No park fee for a new home on a
issuance for each new residential unit, regardless of
city.
lot platted prior to 2002.
when the vacant lot was created.
Franklin County Ordinance No. 2 -2008 (Chapter 13)
Traffic Impact
None.
$709 per lot assessed at time of building permit
Additional fee in
Fee
issuance for each new residential unit, regardless of
city.
when the vacant lot was created.
School Impact
None.
$4,700 per single - family unit and $4,525 per multi-
Additional fee in
Fee
family unit at time of building permit issuance
city.
regardless of when the lot was created.
Road Standards
Hard surface road standards require a minimum of 28
Hard surface street standards require minimum of 38
Possible wider
feet width (no parking), 32 feet width (one -side
feet width (both sides parking). Curb, gutter,
streets in city.
parking), or 38 feet width (both sides parking). Wider
sidewalks and street lights are not required for
streets, sidewalks, curbs, gutters, and street lights are
residential but some or all may be installed at
not required but some or all may be installed at
developer discretion. City may require school district
developer's discretion.
or developer to install sidewalks in school zones and
Franklin County Code 1612.020(A)
commercial or other high traffic areas.
Franklin County Resolution No. 2002 -270 (Roadway
Width)
Property Tax
See Exhibit A
See Exhibit A
See Exhibit A
2012 Property Tax Levies
2012 Property Tax Levies
9/12/12
Page 5
Service / Issue
Unincorporated
See Exhibit B
See Exhibit B
Differences
See Exhibit B
Household
Costs
Household Fees and Taxes Comparison
Household Fees and Taxes Comparison
Zoning,
See Exhibit C
See Exhibit C
No difference in
Development
Residential Zoning Comparison Chart
Residential Zoning Comparison Chart
RS -1, RS -12 and
Density, Set
RS -20 zones
Back Distances,
Other
Development
Standards
9/12/12
Page 6
EXHIBIT A
2012 Property Tax Levies
State Schools
$2.293
$2.293
County Regular Levy
$1.439
$1.439
City Regular Levy 2
- - -
$1.968
TRAC Bonds (expire 12/1/2013)
$0.065
$0.065
Courthouse Remodel Bond (expire 12/1/2022)
$0.149
$0.149
City Library Bond (expire 12/1/201 9) 3
- - -
- - -
City Fire Station Bond (expire 12/1/201 9) 3
- - -
- - -
City Hall Bond (expire 12/1/2013) 3
- - -
- - -
Fire District No. 3
$1.035
- - -
County Road
$1.441
- - -
Mid- Columbia Library 4
$0.380
- - -
School
$6.602
$6.602
Port of Pasco
$0.332
$0.332
Mosquito Control
$0.178
$0.178
Miscellaneous Assessments 5
- - -
- - -
TOTAL
$13.914
$13.026
1. County's Regular Levy rate is $1.439, but can go up to a statutory maximum of $1.80 depending on the overall assessed value of the County.
2. City's Regular Levy rate is $1.968, but can go up to a statutory maximum of $3.60 depending on the overall assessed value of the City.
Effective maximum rate for 2012 is $2.37.
3. City does not require annexed properties to pay for bonds approved by voters prior to annexation (City Resolution No. 3403).
4. City provides library service through contract with Mid - Columbia Library District without additional property tax.
5. Miscellaneous Assessments apply as follows:
• Weed Assessment: paid by both County and city - $5.00 per parcel and $0.30 per acre.
• Pest Assessment: paid by both County and City - $1.50 per parcel.
• Ground Water Management Area Assessment: paid by the County only - $5.00 per parcel and $0.10 per acre.
9/12/12
Page 7
EXHIBIT B
2012 Fees and Taxes Comparison
70% of the homes in the island are connected to City water and use a septic tank.
—List of Costs
Property Tax
City Water & Septic
County City
$2,962 1 $2,773
Well & Septic
County City
$2,962 $2,773
City Water & Sewer
County City
2,962 1 1
Well & Sewer
County City
,962 $2,773
Well
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Water
$285
$150
0
0
$285
$150
0
0
Septic Tank 3
$81
$81
$81
$81
0
0
0
0
Sewer
0
0
0
0
$446
$298
$446
$298
Ambulance °
0
$70
0
$70
0
$70
0
$70
Stormwater
0
$36
0
$36
0
$36
0
$36
Solid Waste
$219
$180
$219
$180
$219
$180
$219
$180
Utility Tax on Cable TV 5
0
$61
0
$61
0
$61
0
$61
Utility Tax on Phone 6
0
$46
0
$46
0
$46
0
$46
Utility Tax on
Electricity/Natural Gas'
0
$138
0
$138
0
$138
0
$138
$3,547
$3,535
$3,262
$3,385
$3,912
$3,752
$3,627
$3,602
1. Property tax calculated using median value of residential property in the island ($212,900), April 2012.
2. Well costs for maintenance and electrical use depend on equipment and other factors and are, therefore, not estimated.
3. Benton Franklin Health Department recommends septic tank pumping (depending on household size) every three -five years. Pumping
cost is estimated at $325 with tax; assume pumping every four years.
4. City ambulance fee goes to $75 per year on Jan. 1, 2013. Fire District EMS levy for 2013 will establish median annual tax of $77
annually for households outside city.
5. 8.5% City Tax. Assumes expanded basic cable rate ($60 /month); utility tax does not apply to satellite TV service or to cable internet
service.
6. 8.5% City Tax. Assumes the monthly taxable phone charge is $45 (Quest land line); utility tax applies to cell phones and land lines, but
does not apply to long distance charges or internet phone service.
7. 8.5% City Tax. Assumes median residential electricity bill per the Franklin PUD (2011); also assumes natural gas energy cost offsets
equivalent electricity cost (tax does not apply to propane).
10/4/12
Page 8
EXHIBIT C
Residential Zoning Comparison
City County City County City I County
Permitted Use(s)
SFD
SFD
SFD
SFD
SFD
SFD
Density (units/ft)
1/20,000
1/20,000
1/12,000
1/12,000
1 /10,000
1 /10,000
Lot Coverage
40%
40%
40%
40%
40%
40%
Accessory Structures
Permitted
Permitted
Permitted
Permitted
Permitted
Permitted
Minimum Lot Area
20,000
20,000
12,000
12,000
10,000
10,000
Front Setback
25'
25'
25'
25'
20'
20'
Side Setback
10'
10'
10'
10'
10'
10'
Rear Setback
25'
25'
25'
25'
Ht of bldg
Ht of Bldg
Maximum Height
35'
35'
35'
35'
25'
25'
Farm Animals
Permitted
Permitted
Permitted
Permitted
Permitted
Permitted
City I County I City I County I City I County
Permitted Use(s)
SFD
SFD
SFD /MFD
SFD /MFD
SFD /MFD
SFD /MFD
Density (units/ft)
1/7,200
1/7,200
115,000
1 15,000
1/3,000
1/3,000
Lot Coverage
40 %
40%
40%
40 %
60%
60%
Accessory Structures
Permitted
Permitted
Permitted
Permitted
Permitted
Permitted
Minimum Lot Area
7,200
7,200
5,000
5,000
5,000
5,000
Front Setback
20'
20'
20'
20'
20'
20'
Side Setback
5'
5'
5'
10'
5'
5'
Rear Setback
Ht of bldg
Ht of bldg
Ht of bldg
Ht of bldg
Ht of bldg
Ht of Bldg
Maximum Height
25'
25'
35'
35'
35'
35'
Farm Animals
3 chickens
No
3 chickens*
No
3 chickens*
No
• SFD = Single Family Dwelling
• MFD = Multiple Family Dwelling
* Single Family lots only
9/12112
Page 9
EXHIBIT D
LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT
A Local Improvement District (LID) is a mechanism used by cities to finance public improvements that benefit adjacent
private properties (such as streets, water and sewer lines, etc). Formation of an LID is subject to approval of the
property owners that would pay the majority of the project cost — it is not automatically formed by the city and it is not
required in conjunction with or following annexation to the city. The outline below explains the general process used
by cities to consider forming an LID, how the decisions are made and your role in making the decisions.
Resident requests sewer or water extension via Local Improvement District (LID). Staff determines potential extension project and
reviews with affected property owners by conducting a neighborhood meeting (inviting all owners of property within the potential
LID area).
If general desire to move forward, staff proposes formation of LID to City Council. Council discusses at workshop and staff sends
notice to each property owner of potential LID, estimated cost and public hearing date. Unless strong opposition at hearing, City
Council will usually form the LID.
If LID is formed by City Council action, 30 -day protest period starts. If owners representing 60% or more of the estimated
LID assessments file written protests within the 30 -day protest period, City Council must terminate LID. If less than 60%
but more than 50% object, City Council will typically choose to terminate the LID (majority rule concept). If less than 50%
protest, project will likely move forward (though the project can be modified to delete properties if deemed appropriate by City
Council after the public hearing).
• If LID project moves forward, staff designs and bids the project; construction follows and is temporarily financed by the city,
Once the construction is complete, written notice is provided to property owners for "final assessment hearing." City Council
approves final assessments (if construction costs exceed the preliminary assessments, city usually absorbs the extra costs so final
assessments do not exceed preliminary assessments).
After approval of final assessments, owners have 30 -day "prepay" period in which all or any portion of the assessment can be
paid. Any portion of the assessment remaining unpaid at the end of the 30 -day period will be financed by the selling of municipal
bonds maturing in 10 or 15 years (sewer projects can be financed over 15 years). The first of annual payments is due one year
after the bond sale and will carry interest on the declining balance at a "tax- free" rate fixed at the time of bond sale (the rate is
usually about one -third less than typical taxable rate). Total time between start of LID and first payment requirement is two years
(typical).
9/12/12
Page 10