Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-20-2013 Planning Commission Packet PLANNING COMMISSION - AGENDA REGULAR MEETING 7:00 P.M. Jung; 20, 2013 I. CALL TO ORDER: II. ROLL CALL: Declaration of Quorum III. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: May 16, 2013 V. OLD BUSINESS: A. Special Permit Location of a cellular tower (AT&T) (MF# SP 2013-009) B. Special Permit Location of a Water Intake Facility (City of Pasco) (MF# SP 2013-011) C. Zoning Rezone from RT (_Residential. Transition) to R-1 (Low Density Residential) (Hayden Homes) (MF# Z 2013-001) D. Zoning Rezone from R-3 (Medium Density Residential) with density limit of 30-units to R-3 (Medium Density_ Residential) without density limit fRonald Grate MF# Z 2013-002) E. Plan Automobile Repair in Commercial Zones (MF# PLAN 2012-006) VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. Special Permit Location of an automotive body shop in a C-3 General Business Zone Russell Dean MF# SP 2013-012 B. Rezone Rezone from R-2 (Medium Density Residential) to C-1 (Retail Business) (Jeff McClureL[MF# Z.2013-003) C. Preliminary Plat Aintree Pre-Plat (Nathan Machiela of Hay_ den Homes) (MF# PP 2013-001) D. Block Grant 2014 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Fund Allocations (MF# BGAP 2013-0021 E. Block Grant 2014 HOME Fund Allocations (MF# BGAP 2013-003) F. Block Grant 2014 NSP Fund Allocations MF# BGAP 2013-004 G. Code Amendment Building; Heights for Detached Garages VII. OTHER BUSINESS: VIII. WORKSHOP: IX. ADJOURNMENT: REGULAR MEETING May 16, 2013 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 7:00pm by Chairman Cruz. POSITION MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT No. 1 Tim Hoekstra No. 2 Tony Bachart No. 3 Andy Anderson No. 4 Alecia Greenaway No. 5 Joe Cruz No. 6 Loren Polk No. 7 Zahra Khan No. 8 Jana Kempf No. 9 Paul Hilliard APPEARANCE OF FAIRNESS: Chairman Cruz read a statement about the appearance of fairness for hearings on land use matters. Chairman Cruz asked if any Commission member had anything to declare. There were no declarations. Chairman Cruz then asked the audience if there were any objections based on a conflict of interest or appearance of fairness question regarding the items to be discussed this evening. There were no objections. ADMINISTERING THE OATH: Chairman Cruz explained that state law requires testimony in quasi-judicial hearings such as held by the Planning Commission be given under oath or affirmation. Chairman Cruz swore in all those desiring to speak. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Commissioner Greenaway moved, seconded by Commissioner Hilliard, that the minutes dated April 25, 2013 be approved as mailed. The motion passed unanimously. OLD BUSINESS: A. Special Permit Location of a church in an R-1 District (Samuel Nunez) (MF# SP 2013-0103) Chairman Cruz read the master fide number and asked for comments from staff. Rick White, Community & Economic Development Director, stated that there were no further comments on this special permit application for the location of a church in an R-1 District since the previous meeting. Commissioner Anderson moved, seconded by Commissioner Greenaway, to adopt the -I- findings of fact and conclusions therefrom as contained in the May 16, 2013 staff report. The motion passed unanimously. Commissioner Anderson moved, seconded by Commissioner Greenaway, based on the findings of fact and conclusions as adopted the Planning Commission recommend the City Council grant a special permit to Samuel Nunez for the location of a church at 217 N. Douglas Avenue with conditions as listed in the May 16, 2013 staff report. The motion passed unanimously. Mr. White explained that this item will go to Council at the June 3, 2013 meeting unless an appeal has been received. B. Special Permit Location of a church in a CR (Regional Commercial) Zone (World Life Christian Center) {MF# SP 2013-0051 Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Rick White, Community & Economic Development Director, discussed the special permit application for the location of a church in a CR (Regional Commercial) Zone. He stated that two conditions have been added since the previous meeting; the prohibition of uses such as, amusement game centers, recreation centers and the use of outdoor speakers and public announcement systems of any kind and design controls that shall apply that outdoor lighting must be strictly shielded to prevent lighting from encroaching on adjoining residential properties and all new development and site improvements shall comply with the 1-182 Corridor Design Standards as identified in P.M.C. 25.58 as existing and hereafter amended. These conditions currently apply to the property but were added as conditions to become uniform. Commissioner Kempf moved, seconded by Commissioner Hilliard, to adopt the findings of fact and conclusions therefrom as contained in the May 16, 2013 staff report. The motion passed unanimously. Commissioner Kempf moved, seconded by Commissioner Hilliard, based on the findings of fact and conclusions therefrom. the Planning Commission recommend the City Council grant a special permit for the location of a church operation at 3315 W. Court Street, with conditions as listed in the May 16, 2013 staff report. The motion passed unanimously. Mr. White explained that this item will go to Council at the June 3, 2013 meeting unless an appeal is received. C. Special Permit Location of a high school in a C-1 (Retail Business) Zoning District (Pasco School District) IMF# SP 2013-008) Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Rick White, Community & Economic Development Director, discussed the special permit application for the location of a high school in a C-1 (Retail Business) Zoning District. He explained that the site sketch has slightly changed since the previous -2- meeting. The revised site sketch locates the Delta High building further south to increase the separation from Mediterranean Villas and moved the delivery and other busy areas have also been moved to the south. This puts the busier uses closer to the commercial properties rather than the residential properties. Commissioner Greenaway asked if the school being closer to the road in the revised site sketch will present any problems with safety. Mr. White answered that it will not present any problems and it is a typical setup for a commercial zone and the sketch is slightly misleading because it is actually about 60' from the road. Commissioner Kempf moved, seconded by Commissioner Anderson, to adopt findings of fact and conclusions therefrom as contained in the May 16, 2013 staff report. The motion passed unanimously. Commissioner Kempf moved, seconded by Commissioner Anderson, based on the findings of fact and conclusions therefrom the Planning Commission recommend the City Council grant a special permit for the location of a regional high school operation at Lot 1, Binding Site Plan 20012-05, except that portion deeded for Lot 2, Binding Site Plan 2003-09, with conditions as listed in the May 16, 2013 staff report. The motion passed unanimously. Mr. White explained that this item will go to Council at the June 3, 2013 meeting unless an appeal is received. D. Plan Auto Repair in Commercial Zones LMF# PLAN 20120061 Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Rick White, Community & Economic Development Director, discussed automobile repair operations in commercial zones. He stated that staff was not looking for a recommendation although a motion was prepared. Staff would like another opportunity to notify property owners and business operators of the draft ordinance. Staff asked for Planning Commission input on two items in the ordinance; (1) The definition of "minor automobile repair" and (2) The notation of the business day proposed from 6:00 AM till 6:00 PM. Commissioner Kempf asked what the noise ordinance is for a C-1 Zone. Mr. White responded that the noise levels can be slightly higher than residential but the real trigger is what is on the other side of the property line. if there is residential property adjacent to the commercial property line, those are the noise levels that apply. Commissioner Anderson asked what hours apply for the noise ordinance. Mr. White answered that the hours where the noise decibels drop is from 10:00 PM until 7:00 AM. -3- Commissioner Anderson suggested that the hours of operation for automobile repair should match with the noise ordinance and be from 7:00 AM until 6:00 PM. Chairman Cruz stated that an 11 hour work day is acceptable and the hours of 7:00 AM till 6:00 PM are reasonable. He also stated that he was in agreement with the proposed definition of"minor automobile repair". Commissioner Polk stated that the 6:00 AM till 6:00 PM hours could mean less than a 12 hour timeframe for auto repair because some of the cars are going to be parked on the lot prior to work being done but if the cars are not allowed on until the start time then it might not end up giving the owners the 11-12 hour workday. Commissioner Greenaway moved, seconded by Commissioner Kempf, to continue the automobile action plan until the June 20, 2013 Planning Commission Meeting. The motion passed unanimously. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. Special Permit Location of a cellular tower (AT&T) (MF# SP 2013-009) Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Rick White, Community & Economic Development Director, discussed the special permit application for the location of a cellular tower. He explained that this applicant has already been issued a special permit for their temporary cellular antennae and this application is for the permanent structure. It will be enclosed a 120' tower disguised as a flag pole just like another cell phone tourer directly next to it. The flag that will be displayed will be the Washington State flag since the other flag pole already has the United States of America flag. The U.S. flag should fly higher than any other flags just for good flag etiquette and should be added as a condition. Cynthia Sapp, 3301 Burke Avenue, Ste. #100, Seattle, WA, spoke on behalf of the cell phone tower and was welcome to answer any questions. With no further comments the public hearing closed. Commissioner Hilliard moved, seconded by Commissioner Greenaway, to close the hearing on the proposed temporary cellular tower and initiate deliberations and schedule adoption of findings of fact, conclusions and a recommendation to the City Council for the June 20, 2013 meeting. The motion passed unanimously. B. Special Permit Location of an automotive sales dealership (Dave Warner) (MF# SP 2013-0101 Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. David McDonald, City Planner, discussed the special permit application for an automotive sales lot in a C-1 (Retail Business) Zone. He explained that the location -4- was in the Sunny Meadows Business Center on the north side of Burden. Boulevard. The property is zoned C-1 and was zoned C-1 in 1994 when the Sunny Meadows development was first platted. The C-1 Zone is meant for retail, indoor retail uses and typically one would find banks, restaurants, shops and offices in that zoning. Auto sales and truck sales are permitted only in the C-3 Zoning Districts and are deemed to be of a higher density than C-1. The reason for a provision for car sales in a C-I Zone when they are only permitted in a C-3 Zone was due to old services stations sites in Pasco that were going out of business. The business model changed and convenient stores replaced the old service stations. Pasco had a number of these sites, mainly in the central core area on Court Street, Sylvester Street and at intersections of major arterials. To try to find a use for those buildings, the code was amended to allow special permits for car sales. This means that by going through the special permit review it is possible to locate car sales in a C-1 Zone, however just because an applicant or site meets the criteria for a special permit or conditional use permit, does not mean the application is automatically approved. This is what the Planning Commission review process is for. When the Sunny Meadows Center was developed, there was a corner held out for a future pad site for some type of building, perhaps a restaurant. That site has never been developed. The site itself contains roughly five different buildings and a common parking lot. The buildings are on separate parcels and some of the parking lot straddles different parcels. The proposed location for the car sales lot is removed from the buildings and the sales office is to be in one of the buildings. The buildings are roughly 120 feet away from the location of where the cars would be displayed which would mean customers would have to walk through an operating parking lot to get to the sales office and car lot. Mr. McDonald also wanted the Planning Commission to consider that the proposed site is located within the 1-182 Overlay District which was created to establish a higher set of development standards for commercial activity or development. Back in 2010, regulations were amended somewhat relating to temporary outdoor activities. The City had received a number of complaints about the haphazardness of some of the operations of special event sales people and itinerant merchants, and the code was amended to provide more "teeth" to help maintain the look that the community expects in this area. Mr. McDonald addressed what typical car sales lots look like, often filled with balloons tied from the cars, flags, streamers and catchy advertising. This type of activity is counter to what the Planning Commission and City Council instituted with the the 1- 182 Overlay District. Mr. McDonald also briefly discussed the findings of fact contained in the staff report. Chairman Cruz asked if there would be a difference if this was an indoor car lot. Mr. McDonald responded that it plight but it would still be a C-3 use and not a C-1 -5- use. Commissioner Hilliard asked if the applicant were to build a building on the lot and then have the car sales if that would make the proposal more attractive. Mr. McDonald answered that it would solve the issue of customers walking back and forth through and operating parking lot but there would still be the outdoor sales aspect. Commissioner Polk asked if the owner of the lot has any intention of making improvements to the parking lot. Mr. McDonald stated that he didn't know but the applicant might be able to address that question. Dave Warner, 4318 Des Moines Lane, Pasco, WA spoke on behalf of his proposed special permit application. He presented the Commissioners with a site map that he had marked up with his plans for the lot. Mr. Warner stated that he would only be utilizing 19,000 square feet of space on the site with 10-12 customer parking stalls. He addressed the concern of customers walking through an operating parking lot to get to the sales lot or sales office and stated that he did not see it being a problem. H explained that there would be a parking area for the customers, a sales area and a demonstration area. He stated that the sales office would not be far from the sales lot. Mr. Warner explained that he has been in the car business for 20 years and owns and operates Warner Auto Sales in Kennewick. He said that he always maintains a clean, upscale operation because people don't want to buy cars where they don't feel comfortable. He is looking to sell upscale units, late models, three years or newer. All of the mechanical work, such as detailing and reconditioning, will be done at his Kennewick facility. Mr. Warner stated that his business would help support other businesses in the area, such as Discount Tire and Shell Gas Station. Mr. Warner stated that the location in Kennewick on Columbia Drive is now a high mile used vehicle sales lot so he is ready to get out of that area and market a nicer newer dealership. Mr. Warner addressed concerns about the public nuisance of balloons and banners that typically come with car lots. He stated that there won't be any more banners or signs that any other business in the area. He will not use loud speakers at all. Commissioner Hilliard asked if the applicant if he intended to make site improvements to prove longevity in the area. -6- Mr. Warner answered that he is working with Mr. Pratt, the property owner. There will be full paving, lighting and signage. Commissioner Hilliard asked if in the 20 year plan if he has a vision of building a showroom. Mr. Warner responded that at this time he does not have plans for a showroom. Commissioner Hilliard stated that he is pro-business and wants to see the community expand but there is concern with the viability of this locations. Commissioner Kempf asked the applicant how many tow trucks would be used on Burden Road to get vehicles back and forth from the Kennewick facility where the detailing and maintenance will take place. Mr. Warner replied that no tow trucks would be used. Commissioner Anderson asked the applicant what his plans were for business hours. Mr. Warner answered from 9:00 a.m. until 7:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday. He would like to stay closed on Sunday if possible. Commissioner Bachart asked if there were any plans to set the car lot apart from the regular parking lot so that sales people won't bother those who are trying to shop at the other businesses. Mr. Warner answered that there will be a curbed area designated for automobiles inside for sale. If people walk through the parking lot outside of the designated area then nobody will run after them. Commissioner Bachart asked the applicant how they would handle security and if security is a problem. Mr. Warner responded that he currently employs Moon Security at his Kennewick location with a camera system that monitors and records for 24 hours as well as drive-thru or walk-thru inspections each night and would most likely do the same at the proposed location. Commissioner Bachart asked the applicant if he sees growth and expansion at the proposed site in the future. Mr. Warner stated that he doesn't see growth or expansion happening at that location. Commissioner Bachart asked Mr. McDonald if this special permit application is approved then will future special permit applications in the C-1 Zone have to be approved in this area. -7- Mr. McDonald stated that no, there is a code proxiision that the applicant would have to be at least 300 feet apart so there's a spacing requirement. Commissioner Greenaway asked the applicant if he had any plans of building a building on the east side of the proposed site for the sales office in the future of his lease at the location. Mr. Warner stated that there are currently no plans to build a sales office or any other building on the site. Commissioner Hilliard asked the applicant if he had any plans for fencing. Mr. Warner responded that he did not have any plans for any type of fencing. It doesn't look good and makes the site look closed in. Commissioner Anderson asked what the plan would be for lighting. Mr. Warner responded that the plan is to have seven light polls. Don Pratt, 7535 W. Kennewick Avenue, the property owner, spoke on behalf of this special permit application. He stated that at first he was opposed to the idea of a car lot at this location but after looking at his other properties and talked about the type of cars he is going to sell all his fears were alleviated. Mr, Pratt stated he spoke to business owners his tenants and they would like to see this business at this location. He addressed pedestrian traffic and that there haven't been any problems and doesn't foresee any in the future. Commissioner Greenaway asked Mr. Pratt if he has spoken to any business owners against this proposal. Mr. Pratt said that he had not heard from anyone opposed to it, Commissioner Polk asked Mr. Pratt if he would consider altering the parking lot area to create a pathway or speed bumps to assist with safety with pedestrian safety. Mr. Pratt answered that he would consider it and would likely do some striping but would rather not take away parking spots, Pablo Perez, 8906 Wilshire Drive, spoke in regards to this item. He discussed the idea of the lot in Kennewick seeing some reduction in quality of the vehicles and voiced concern of that happening over time in Pasco, He also felt that it would be inefficient to have vehicles transferred back and forth between this site and the Kennewick location for maintenance and detailing. Larry Peterson, 8427 Kensington Court, spoke in regards to his concern with the proposed car lot. After looking at the Pasco Municipal Code, he did not feel that this proposal matches what was envisioned in the code and isn't harmonious to the area. -8- He questioned if this is the right type of use for this area. He addressed the special events held at the TRAC and how it is a unique situation and doesn't apply to this special permit application. Tom Russell, 8814 Wilshire Drive, spoke in concern of this special permit application. He voiced concern about the area having more used car lots coming in later if this application is approved. Judith Homewood, 2601 S. Irving Street, Kennewick, spoke in support of this special permit application. She stated she was a commercial realtor with Coldwell Banker Commercial and has worked with Mr. Pratt for several years. She believes part of the attractiveness of this site is that the tenants and buildings are set back off of the street. As for the code, it would not allow for more than one car lot within 300 feet and she said that there wouldn't even be a site in the area that would meet that. As for traffic, Dutch Brothers to the west has much more traffic than the proposed car lot would generate_ She stated that the concept is much like Archibald's in Kennewick and she has never been offended by them. With no further comments, the public hearing closed. Commissioner Hilliard suggested that with the passion and testimony from some of the citizens who came forward if the applicant would be better off resubmitting with a site plan that would show his vision and come back to the Planning Commission to re- present. Commissioner Polk asked Mr. McDonald if it was possible to change the curbing of the entrance that comes from Burden to help with traffic. Mr. McDonald answered that the binding site plan that set the business center up specified where the driveways would be located. It would not be approved by Engineering to change the curbing. Chairman Cruz stated that the concept is not bad but he didn't see how the concept fits in and is discontinuous with the area. He felt that if the car lot were indoors he would not have an issue with it but as it is he could not feel comfortable with it. Commissioner Anderson agreed with Chairman Cruz and added that the City has worked hard to develop that area and to maintain standards there and putting a car lot at that site is not in the vision. Commissioner Anderson moved, seconded by Commissioner Greenaway, to adopt the findings of fact as contained in the staff report of May 16, 2013. The motion passed unanimously. Commissioner Anderson moved, seconded by Commissioner Greenaway, the Planning Commissioner recommend the City Council deny the special permit request for an auto sales lot on parcel 116-273-765, at 6411 Burden Boulevard. The motion passed four to three with Commissioners Hilliard, Polk and Bachart dissenting. -9- C. Special Permit Location of a Water Intake Facility (City of Pasco) (MF# SP 2013-0111 Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. David McDonald, City Planner, discussed the special permit application for the location of a water intake facility. Late last fall the Planning Commissioner held a hearing to develop a zoning determination for this piece of property in the event that it became annexed. The property was annexed by the City in December of last year. The property was purchased and annexed for the purpose of locating a water intake facility. The facility is a part of the City's long-term water comprehensive plan to provide water needs for the community. The new intake facility will accommodate future growth.. Mr. McDonald briefly discussed the design of the water intake facility. The structure itself will be built to look like a house. There will be about 17 faux for aesthetics. The site will be extensively landscaped in the front yard. Mr. McDonald stated that staff received an email from a nearby property owner which was handed out to the Planning Commissioner's prior to the meeting for submittal in the public hearing. Chairman Cruz asked if there were any issue's with that property owners request regarding access and protection of the facility. Mr. McDonald replied that none of that would be changed or altered. Commissioner Hilliard asked how this site would impact the Bike Plan. Mr. McDonald answered that this site would not have a bike path since the path goes along the freeway. Mr. McDonald pointed out that two staff member from the Engineering Department were present to answer any questions. With no further comments the public hearing closed. Commissioner Hilliard moved, seconded by Commissioner Bachart, to close the public hearing and schedule deliberations, the adoption of findings of fact and development of a recommendation for City Council for the June 20, 2013 Planning Commission Meeting. The motion passed unanimously. D. Zoning Rezone from RT (Residential Transition) to R-1 (Low Density Residentiall (Nathan Machiela) (MF# Z 2013-001) -10- Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Mr. McDonald discussed the rezone application from RT Zoning District to R-1 Zoning District. The proposed location is a 5 acre site remaining from the Chapel Hill development. Hayden Homes would like to purchase this site, put in a road and plat out roughly 14 lots to use for single-family development. Masan Maddox, 6115 Burden Boulevard, with HDJ Design Group, spoke on behalf of the applicant who was unable to be at the meeting. He stated that Hayden Homes currently owns the lots north of the property and would like to develop this for single- family homes under the R-1 zoning designation. He stated that most of the lots would be slightly larger than the minimum 7,200 square feet. Once the rezone process is done they will have to come back to the Planning Commission through the platting process. Commissioner Hilliard moved, seconded by Commissioner Polk, to close the public hearing on the proposed rezone and initiate deliberations and schedule adoptionn of findings of fact, conclusions and a recommendation to the City Council for the June 20, 2013 meeting. The motion passed unanimously. E. Zoning Rezone from R-3 (Medium Density Residential) with density limit of 30-units to R-3 (Medium Density Residential) without density limit (Ronald Grate) MF# Z 2013-002! Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Rick White, Community & Economic Development Director, discussed the rezone application from R-3 Zoning District with a density limit of 30-units to R-3 Zoning District without a density limit. This rezone application is to remove the concomitant agreement that the Planning Commission approved in 2012. Mr. White briefly explained the details of the proposed application and conditions contained in the staff report. The applicant has submitted a concept for the Planning Commission's consideration, limiting the site to one story single-family homes. Commissioner Bachart stated that there are a lot of houses on the proposed concept the applicant submitted. He asked if staff has looked into traffic issues that might be generated by so many homes as well as the new Delta High School location. Mr. White responded that there is not a proposal to look at traffic as a result of this application. The applicant indicated he is giving consideration to a one-way street system in and out of the property with a narrow private street system with easements for the utilities. Commissioner Polk asked if there are any specific interests in limiting the property to those of retirement age, such as an age specific housing development. -11- Mr. White answered that he believes there is and can be confirmed with the applicant. It could become part of the conditions in a concomitant agreement should this application move further. Commissioner Bachart asked if there were rules on fair housing to where age limit could not be limited. Mr. White answered that age can legally be restricted. It would be a deed restriction, not a result of the law or ordinance. Robert Grate, 540 Rayburn Road, Othello, WA, spoke in favor of the rezone. He stated he had provided architectural drawings of his proposal prior to the meeting. Before designing the project he looked at staff recommendations and the minutes from last year. He stated he took the concerns about schools and building height into consideration. Instead of building two-story four-plexes as the previous, he is proposing one-story single-family homes. One of the units will be donated to Kadlec Hospital for a house like a Ronald McDonald Home. The community would be gated with a block wall along road 90. All of the homes will be two bedrooms, two bath and two car garage. Mr. Grate stated that he spoke to as many neighbors that he could and gave therm a copy of the layout and architectural drawings. He received no negative feedback but there were a few neighbors he could not contact. In the center of the complex will have a community building with an indoor pool, clubhouse and an exercise room. He discussed the setbacks, density, sound barriers and construction. He believes his plan is more suitable than what the concomitant agreement requires. Tom Russell, 8814 Wilshire Drive, spoke on behalf of this item. He stated he appreciates the applicant dropping off the plans. They had asked the previous applicant to do the same and he never responded. His concerns axe with rear setbacks and with the block wall along Road 90. He feels the structures that are proposed look great but the block wall does not seem cohesive with the neighborhood and was worried about graffiti. Pablo Perez, 8906 Wilshire Drive, spoke on behalf of this item. He also appreciated the single-story homes and felt they fit better with the community. He was also concerned about the rear setback. He felt 58 units might be a significant increase in the traffic flow. The block wall does not flow with the neighborhood and would like to see more landscaping instead. He asked if the age limit ever be removed. He felt traffic was already a slight problem and is worried about additional traffic. Larry Peterson, 8427 Kensington Court, spoke on behalf of this item. He wanted the project conditioned like Mediterranean Villas. He posed a question as to what would happen if no school impact fees were paid and the age restriction was later removed. He was also concerned about the future upkeep of the project. Mr. White said the impact fee ordinance states that if deed restrictions are enforced are removed then the impact fee has to be paid for each unit, which would expensive. -12- Mr. Grate stated that he did not have a problem with the deed restrictions. He is concerned about the one unit that is going to be donated to Kadlec Hospital. He stated if he needs to pay the school impact fee for that one unit he would not have a problem. As for the other units they do not wish to have children due to liabilities. He has visited Mediterranean Villas and noted that they have duplexes, four-plexes and single-family homes. He would like to keep his development more uniform. He addressed the setbacks and how the architect did not make the drawings to scale but there will be more than the required 15 feet in the rear, hopefully 25-30 feet. He the block wall was intended to block sound but he is not open to other options. Commissioner Polk asked the applicant what the setback would be for the homes on Road 90 between the wall and the homes. Mr. Grate responded that the setback would be 5 feet from the wall, 25 feet from the road. Chairman Cruz asked for clarification on the standard width of roads. David McDonald, City Planner, stated that the standard road is 38 feet for pavement with 1 foot of curb on each side but for context, Sun Willows, the development inside the golf course with private streets, has 26 foot wide streets with two-way traffic. Pablo Perez, 8906 Wilshire Drive, asked for clarification as to where the 15 foot setback starts and ends. Chairman Cruz answered that the setback is generally from the property line to the structure. Mr. Perez asked the applicant is he is planning to have the setback be 25-30 feet. Mr. Grate answered that is correct. Jaime Blank, 8707 Studebaker Drive, stated gate looks very close to Road 90. Mr. Grate stated there would be a code to punch in. With no further comments the public hearing closed. Commissioner Anderson moved, seconded by Commissioner Hilliard, to close the public hearing and schedule deliberations, the adoption of the findings of fact and the development of a recommendation for the City Council for the June 20, 2013 Planning Commission Meeting. The motion passed 6 to 1 with Commissioner Greenaway dissenting. -13- F. Code Amendment Building Heights for Detached Garages Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. David McDonald, City Planner, stated the Planning Commission has discussed this issue in the past but due to the recent annexation the The City is receiving inquiries from people wanting to build large shops and garages. In the City of Pasco detached shops/garages are alloyed in RS-20 Districts provided they aren't taller than 18 feet or in no case taller than the house. Currently the only way to accommodate taller shops they need to be attached to the house so that it becomes part of the house. The other option is to provide a connection between the house and the shop to make it an intricate part of the house. Both options can be expensive and aren't always good options for the people trying to build the shops. The County also limits shops to 18' in height but they do not have a restriction on the height of the shop versus the house which means if you have a 12' tall home a shop can still be up to 18'. The reasoning why the City doesn't allow for shops taller than the home is because typically in residential zones the house is supposed to be the dominate feature on the lot. If the shop becomes bigger than the home then the principal use changes. However on larger lots, such as 1/2 acre or larger because of the topography there might be opportunities where shops can be built a little taller and still not impact neighbors. Mr. McDonald provided the following options to consider; (1) Do nothing and keep the height limitation in place, (2) Increase the height limit but keep it under the maximum allowed in the district, (3) Allow a greater height if a larger setback is provided, (4) Allow a greater height if the lot exceeds a certain square footage and (5) Allow an increase in height only through the Special Permit review process. Commissioner Bachart stated that he felt keeping the City's current code would be detrimental because the people were annexed should have things align as close to the County as possible. Commissioner Grcenway agreed with Commissioner Bachart and would like the code to reflect what the County is doing to keep things consistent as promised to the people in the County and that the special permit process should be used. Commissioner Polk agreed that the City standards should be changed believed the Special Permit process might not be as uniform and that it would be nice to create consistency. Chairman Cruz stated that he is open to rules that preserve the harmony of the neighborhood and keep it most like the County. Rick White, Community 8& Economic Development Director, suggested exploring the special permit process but also writing some other standards that might be considered should that option be used. -14- Chairman Cruz responded that he would like enough guidance for people to feel like they have a decent shot because having a special permit process where 80% of the people get turned down is not successful. Commissioner Barchart stated that the timeframe of the special permit process is a little restrictive. Commissioner Anderson agreed with the special permit but would also like to see what the parameters would be for a greater height, larger setbacks and square footage suggestion. Perhaps those could be included in the definitions for a special permit. Mr. McDonald stated the County does less than six special permits per year. Chairman Cruz stated that the process needs to remain easy for people just trying to build a shop. Commissioner Anderson moved, seconded by Commissioner Hilliard, to continue the public hearing until the June 20, 2013 Planning Commission Meeting. The motion passed unanimously. OTHER BUSINESS: Rick White, Community 8, Economic Development Director, reminded the Planning Commission that the June 20, 2013 meeting there will be public hearings for 201+ Community Development Block Grant Funds so attendance will be important. COMMENTS: With no further discussion or business, the Planning Commission was adjourned at 9:25 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Dave McDonald, City Planner -15- REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION MASTER FILE NO: SP2013-003 APPLICANT: AT&T Wireless c/o Vinculums HEARING DATE: 5/16/2013 3301 Burke Ave. Ste#100 ACTION DATE: 6/20/2013 Seattle, WA 98103 BACKGROUND REQUEST: SPECIAL PERMIT. Location of a Cellular Antenna Tower in a C-1 (Retail Business) Zone 1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Parcel #117-380-022: The northwest 1/4 of the northwest 1/4, Section 15, Township 9 North, Range 29 East, WM. General Location: 6600 Burden Boulevard Property Size: The parcel is approximately 27.6 acres 2. ACCESS: The site is accessed from Burden Boulevard, Homerun Road and Convention Place. 3. UTILITIES: All municipal utilities currently serve the site. 4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The site is currently zoned C-1 (Retail Business) and contains TRAC event center and recreation facility. Surrounding properties are zoned and developed as follows: NORTH: C-1 - Commercial Businesses SOUTH: C-1 - TRAC EAST: C-1 & RT - TRAC WEST: C-1 - Vacant 5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan designates the site for Government/Public uses. Goal OF-2 suggests the City ought to maintain land use flexibility in regard to placement of infrastructure for public and private utilities. Policy OF-2-A encourages the sound management of all energy and communication utilities through coordination and cooperation dealing with construction of such facilities. Policy OF-2-B encourages the placement of utility substations which are necessary for the surrounding neighborhood. 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 AT&T Wireless is requesting special permit approval to locate a permanent cellular antenna tower within the TRAC campus allowing AT&T to expand their fourth generation (4G) mobile data coverage area and to support more users. The requested tower is proposed to be 120 feet tall; located directly adjacent to the existing Verizon cellular tower. The two towers will share an existing equipment enclosure (see Exhibit 3). The tower will be designed to resemble a flag pole by housing all antennae within an outer sheath. This method increases the outer diameter of the tower but hides unsightly above-ground equipment from public view. The tower is proposed to display a large Washington State flag. The adjacent Verizon tower currently flies the United States flag; by displaying a Washington State flag the proposed tower will complement the existing one. The outer pole sheath is conditioned to be painted to match the color of the existing tower. This will create unity in appearance, blending in with one another. The C-1 zone permits structures to reach a maximum height of thirty five (35) feet "except a greater height may be approved by special permit" [PMC25.42.050(4)]. The proposed tower would exceed the 35 foot height limit by eighty five (85) feet. The proposed location of the wireless communication antenna and equipment meets the requirements listed under the provisions of PMC 25.70.070, which requires wireless facilities to be located on or within a publicly owned facility. Wireless Facility zoning regulations were specifically developed to permit (through special permit review) cellular tower/antenna equipment on taller buildings within the community. The PMC special permit review criteria for wireless facilities are written as follows: 25.70.475 WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES. Wireless Communication Facilities are permitted under the fallowing conditions: (1) Such structures shall be permitted in all industrial or C-3 zoning districts provided the location is 500 feet or more from a residential district. Any location closer than 500 feet requires special permit approval. (2) Such structures maybe permitted by special permit in all other zoning districts provided said structures are: (a) Attached to or located on an existing or proposed building or structure that is higher than thirty-five (35)feet; or (b) Located on or with a publicly owned facility such as a water reservoir, fire station, police station, school, county or port facility. (3) All wireless communication facilities shall comply with the following standards 2 (a) Wireless facilities shall be screened or camouflaged by employing the best available technology. This may be accomplished by use of compatible materials, strategic location, color, stealth technologies, and/or other measures to achieve minimum visibility of the facility when viewed from public rights- of-way, and adjoining properties such that a casual observer cannot identify the Wireless Communication Facility. (b) Wireless facilities shall be located in the City in the following order of preference: i) Attached to or located on buildings or structures higher than 35 feet. ii) Located on or with a publicly owned_facility iii)Located on a site other than those listed in a) or b). The proposal meets the criteria above in that the tower is proposed within a public facility complex. The TRAC property is owned by Franklin County. Commonly, cellular providers locate the equipment cabinets within a fenced area surrounding the base of a pole; in this case the entire tower with its equipment will be located within an existing sight-obscured equipment enclosure at the base of an existing tower. The zoning regulations were specifically developed to permit (through special permit review) cellular tower/antenna equipment on publicly owned property. The design of the tower will conceal the fact that it is a cellular tower. The antennas will have no visual impact on the community because they will be located inside the pole. A portion of the height of the pole will be mitigated due to the height and bulk of the TRAC building. There are also a number of very tall light poles on the surrounding sports fields that will tend to moderate the height of the pole. 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 zoned C-1 (Retail Business). 2. The Comprehensive Plan identifies the site for Government/Public uses. 3. The site contains TRAC, an event center and recreation facility. 4. The site is 27.6 acres in area. 5. All municipal utilities currently serve the site. 6. In the C-1 zone cellular towers may be permitted by special permit provided the tower is either: 3 i) Attached to or located on an existing or proposed building or structure that is higher than thirty-five (35) feet; or ii) Located on or with a publicly owned facility such as a water reservoir, fire station, police station, school, county or port facility. 7. The cellular tower is proposed to be outside of the existing cellular equipment enclosure. 8. The equipment serving the proposed tower will be located within the existing equipment enclosure. 9. The Comprehensive Plan suggests the City ought to maintain land use flexibility with regard to placement of infrastructure for public and private utilities. 10. The Comprehensive Plan does not specifically address cellular equipment. 11. Cellular equipment creates minimal demands on City infrastructure. 12. The cellular tower will be camouflaged as a flag pole. The outer sheath of the tower will be painted to match the existing adjacent tower and will display a Washington State flag. CONCLUSIONS BASED ON STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT Before recommending approval or denial of a special permit the Planning Commission must develop findings of fact from which to draw its conclusions based upon the criteria listed in P.M.C. 25.86.060. The criteria are as follows: (1) Will the proposed use be in accordance with the goals, ,policies, objectives and text of f the Comprehensive Plan? The Comprehensive Plan does not specifically address cellular equipment. The Comprehensive Plan goal OF-2 and policy OF-2-A discuss the need for sound management and coordination in the location of utilities and community facilities. Policy ED-1-C promotes the need to support Pasco's urban area as a good business environment by enhancing the infrastructure of the community. The applicability of policy ED-1-C is enhanced due to the fact that the new tower will provide more/better service primarily to commercially zoned properties. Policy UT-1-C encourages coordination of utility providers' functional plans with the City's land use and utility plans to ensure long term service availability. (2) Will the proposed use adversely affect public infrastructure? The proposed use is a part of the communication network utilized by the general public. The proposed equipment will be located in such a manner so as not to impact other public utilities or services. The proposed use does not require water and sewer. 4 (3) Will the proposed use be constructed, maintained and operated to be in harmony with existing or intended character of the general vicinity? The character of the vicinity is dominated by the TRAC event center and recreation facility. The addition of an antennae tower in the parking lot will not alter or affect the existing or intended character of TRAC. The proposed equipment will look and function more or less as a part of the TRAC complex (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? The proposed 120-foot tall antenna tower will be located amid a vast parking lot and will not generally be noticed by the public and is unlikely to discourage development in the vicinity. The tower will be designed to appear as a flagpole and will fly a State of Washington flag. This flagpole design will blend in with the existing flag-pole (Verizon) tower which flies a United States flag. Lighting at the base of the flag pole/tower will shine upwards; illuminating the flag at night. There will be no impacts to surrounding publicly owned properties. (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 cell tower will create no fumes, dust or noise. Cell towers facilities have been located throughout the community in residential, commercial and industrial zones without generating any complaints received by the City. (6) Will the proposed use endanger the public health or safety if located and developed where proposed, or in any way become a nuisance to uses permitted in the district? The proposal is required to be designed by a professional engineer to withstand the forces of nature. The applicant is also required to coordinate with the FAA and FCC prior to obtaining a building permit. Cell tower radio waves have not been proven to be harmful to human health. Radio wave activity is focused on the antennas which are elevated approximately 120 feet above grade away from human activity. The most noticeable impact will be visual. The tower poses no true threat to public health and safety. A Determination of No Hazard to Air Navigation for the tower has not yet been issued by the FAA. 5 APPROVAL CONDITIONS 1) The special permit shall apply to Parcel # 117-380-022; 2) The property shall be developed in substantial conformity with the site plan and elevations submitted with the application.; 3) The cellular antenna tower shall not exceed 120 feet in height; 4) The cellular antenna tower shall be designed to resemble a flag pole and shall continuously display a flag kept in good condition and appearance and mounted to be lower than the U.S. flag on the adjacent cellular tower; S) The cellular antenna tower shall be painted to match the color of existing flag pole cellular antenna tower which shares an equipment enclosure with the proposed tower; 6) The cellular equipment shall be located within a sight obscuring enclosure; 7) The wireless communication antenna shall not be used for advertising or other non-communication purposes; 8) A Determination of No Hazard to Air Navigation from the FAA for the tower must be submitted to the Planning Department prior to location of the tower; and 9) The proposed cellular facility must comply with all FCC regulations regarding radio frequency emissions. RECOMMENDATION MOTION for Findings of Fact: I move to adopt findings of fact and conclusions therefrom as contained in the June 20, 2013 staff report. MOTION for Recommendation: I move based on the findings of fact and conclusions as adopted the Planning Commission recommend the City Council grant a special permit to AT&T for the location of a cellular tower at 6600 Burden Boulevard with conditions as listed in the June 20, 2013 staff report. 6 Vicinity Item: Special Permit AT&T Cell Tower.0 Applicant: AT&T Map File #: SP2013 -009 . A 5RISAWSPAd w ` NCO 1 ..� 41..-.' .. i Land Use Item: Special Permit AT&T Cell Tower A in plicant: AT&T Map ' 'F FI* le -#: 1 11 • !r ■■■■��. Commercial IND Public Recreation ,��� ■ ■ a M i (TRAQ Zonin Item: . Special Permit - AT&T Cell Tower A llcant: AT&T N Map File #: SP2013 -009 F� 0 1 1r; R-1 © (Low Density Residential) C-1 (Retail Business) a BURDEN BLVD _1 O E(Retail' Business) C-1 RODEO DR O SIT U d R-1 H©MERLIN RD F JU RT (Residential Transition) 0 RO C-1 Retail Business) Lon- Looking x1sting Tower . . y E ilk" +�y 3•�b �Yy �30<^'A � � lll • \ .. t _ �NZ 444 a e 1 IL _ ,�.-=,,.-�,.., ��.���,- -�7 are alp 1 1� t F � 1 k ° �..� s �1 , � ,J��II "+�"i�:^>.-•�� � - 5� --___-. ice,^+' „3 Looking West TMI s e EXHIBIT 1 Section 4 Give a detailed descrlotion of the proposed use that requires a special permit(gtt ca h separate sheet if more sr�re i5 necess AT&T Mobility is proposing a new stealth monopole adjacent to the existing; fenced compound.The stealth monopole will resemble a flag pole &will be 120' tail; 36" in diameter from base to tip and shall be painted to match the existing Verizon pole.The new proposed flag pole will fly a Washington State Flag. Currently, AT&T is located within the existing Verizon flagpole. Due to necessary upgrades in technology, the current Verizon pole is not able to support the new antennas needed for the LTE (Long Term Evolution) project,thus AT&T is proposing a new stealth monopole at this site. AT&T will transfer all existing antennas from the Verizon structure as well as add new antennas to the new AT&T stealth monopole. AT&T is also proposing to install a 50 gallon diesel generator, which will be placed in the AT&T's existing, leased area of the fenced compound. EXHIBIT 1 (RESPONSE TO SECTION: 25.86.060 FINDING OF FACT BY PLANNING COMMISION The proposal to install a new stealth monopole will be located at 6600 Burden Boulevard. The monopole will resemble a flag pole, flying the Washington State flag (the Verizon stealth flag pole flies a United States flag) and will be located in an area adjacent to existing wireless equipment. AT&T is also proposing the addition of a new 50 gallon diesel generator. The generator will only be in used during emergency purposes, and power failure. The generator will be located within the existing fenced compound located on site. Currently, AT&T is located within the existing Verizon flagpole. Due to necessary upgrades in technology, the current Verizon pole is not able to support the new antennas needed for the LTE (Long Term Evolution) project, thus AT&T is proposing a new stealth monopole at this site. AT&T will transfer all existing antennas from the Verizon structure as well as add new antennas to the new AT&T stealth monopole. AT&T will utilize their existing equipment onsite and will add a new Purcell cabinet on a new H-frame, as well as add equipment on an existing H-Frame. This will all be located within the existing fenced equipment compound. The existing Verizon monopole was approved in 2004, and AT&T's proposal will be similar in design and function. The parcel is zoning C-1 Retail Business District and contains an RV park, indoor arena, an exhibit hall, ice skating rink, parking and offices. AT&T's new stealth monopole will be located in the south east portion of the property and will not affect the current use of the site. The immediate parcels to the south and east of the site are public use, with the site to the east used as a parking lot, and the site to the south used as a baseball field. The construction of the proposed stealth flag pole will take approximately two months. During that time there will be minimal traffic, noise, and dust in the area. Construction will be conducted during business hours and no additional traffic will be created once the proposed monopole is constructed as this is a current AT&T site and an AT&T technician visits the site on a monthly basis. The stealth monopole will be lit during evening hours; however, the light will be aimed towards the flag. With the installation of the new AT&T stealth monopole, wireless customers will have increased coverage for public health and safety especially with the numerous public uses in the surrounding area. Please refer to the photosims as well as drawings for additional details on the proposed AT&T stealth monopole. EXHIBIT )kcULUMS FOR aw April 16, 2013 City of Pasco Planning Department Shane O'Neill, Planner 1 525 N. Third Ave., Second Floor Pasco, WA 99301 VIA EMAIL RE: Supplemental Narrative— Master File #SP2012-023 AT&T Proposed Permanent Facility—Franklin County TRAC Center 6600 Burden Boulevard, Parcel # 117-380-022 Dear Shane: The purpose of this letter is to provide additional background and information regarding AT&T's proposal to install a stealth monopole adjacent to its existing facility at the Franklin County TRAC Center, located at 6600 Burden Boulevard, in Pasco, WA. The permanent site is needed due to necessary upgrades in technology, the Verizon pole is not able to support the new antennas needed for AT&T's cell site. Background: AT&T currently operates and maintains a Wireless Communication Facility("WCF") located within a stealth flagpole owned by Verizon at the Franklin County TRAC Center. The flagpole was approved and constructed in 2004 and intended to provide for collocation of additional carrier antennas and equipment. As originally intended, AT&T collocated and maintained its facility at this location for several years, and was able to successfully incorporate 2.5G and 3G technologies within the space that was available on the tower. Because AT&T is collocated on a Verizon pole, it only has a single elevation space it has leased from Verizon for its antennas and related coaxial/fiber runs. The diameter of the flagpole constrains the space available, since the antennas have to be wholly enclosed within a fiberglass cylinder that maintains the profile and stealth appearance of the pole. With the purchase of new frequencies from the FCC and introduction of new technologies, including LTE broadband data (4G) services, AT&T needs to upgrade this existing facility to support them. It has determined that it cannot consolidate the all of the frequencies (700MHz, 850MHz, 1900MHz—FCC Licenses attached) and technologies EXHIBIT 1 )kCULUMS aw FOR (GSM, UMTS, LTE, etc) into single antennas per sector that can fit inside of the existing flagpole. Planning Commission Decision Criteria: The following is an analysis of the Planning Commission decision criteria for Special Use Permits, found in PMC Section 25.86.060. PMC Section 25.86.060 FINDINGS OF FACT BY PLANNING COMMISSION. Upon conclusion of the open record pre-decision hearing,the Planning Commission shall make and enter findings from the record and conclusions thereof as to whether or not: 1. The proposal is in accordance with the goals, policies, objectives, maps and/or narrative text of the Comprehensive Plan; Comment: The proposed new stealth facility is consistent with the goals policies, and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan does not specifically address wireless facilities, but provides several goals and policies that discuss the benefits that such facilities and can provide, along with guidance for "utility providers," of which wireless facilities are a part. FD-1-A: Provide a governmental atmosphere which is conducive to the development and expansion of business opportunities. ED-1-C: Support the promotion of Pasco's urban area as a good business environment by enhancing the infrastructure of the community. UT-1-C: Coordinate utility providers' functional plans and the city's land use and utility plans to ensure longterm service availability. UT-2-A: Coordinate private utility providers' plans for energy and communication utilities with city land use plans and development permit applications. Quality, reliable wireless communications service in Pasco is not only desirable--it is critical to Pasco's public safety, economy, and quality of life. According to the FCC, approximately 70% 1 of emergency calls are placed on wireless phones, a percentage that is growing. The National Center for Health Statistics z estimates that US residents are increasingly choosing wireless phones as their primary, and often sole, source of communication. In Eastern Washington, over 31% of residents are estimated to be "wireless-only". When expanded to include "wireless mostly" (20.9%) and "dual use" (24.2%), an estimated 77% of Eastern Washington (including Pasco) residents clearly depend on their wireless phones and services for communications. Once thought of as EXHIBIT I )gtNCULUMS 61k:-� FOR aw an "optional"technology, wireless services are now a critical communications backbone in the Pasco community. Rapid adoption of wireless technology is driving demand for a new generation of wireless infrastructure to support it. In the past four years alone, AT&T has seen the demand for data on its network grow exponentially, by 8,000% 3, a trend that appears to be accelerating. AT&T is currently in the process of upgrading its network in the City of Pasco to the latest wireless 4G technology, known as Long Term Evolution ("LTE"). LTE is capable of providing data speeds up to ten times faster than 3G (comparable to most cable internet connections), providing a new broadband option for Pasco's businesses and residents. Z. The proposal will adversely affect public infrastructure; Comment: AT&T's new stealth facility will not adversely affect public infrastructure. A full range of public facilities (roads, utilities, etc.) and services already serve the existing Franklin County TRAC Center. The new stealth facility will be located adjacent to AT&T's existing equipment area and will not disrupt or impact the operation of public infrastructure. The facility is unmanned —it will not add a significant amount of traffic to existing streets or load on existing utility systems. Please see the SEPA Environmental Checklist for additional information. 3. The proposal will be constructed, maintained and operated to be in harmony with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity; Comment: The existing facility and proposed stealth facility are located on the TRAC facility, in a C-1 (Retail Business) zone. The new stealth facility will be the same height as the existing Verizon flagpole (120'), and not dissimilar in height to other features of the property, including light standards and buildings. The new stealth facility is intended to be in service for the term of the current lease alongside Verizon's pole. The emergency diesel generator will be located in the fenced compound and will not affect the existing or intended character of the general vicinity. 4. The location and height of proposed structures and the site design will discourage the development of permitted uses on property in the general vicinity or impair the value thereof; Comment: The existing TRAC site is already developed and heavily used. The location of the new stealth facility is directly adjacent to an area already used for wireless communication facility services (both by Verizon and AT&T) at the edge of a large parking lot. It will not discourage development or impair property values on the existing property or in the vicinity. Enhanced 4G LTE services will provide a new amenity and EXHIBIT 1 )kCULUMS FOR aut broadband option for Pasco residents and businesses that are nearby. The facility will be a new stealth structure, and will be adjacent to AT&T's existing eq uipment. It will be consistent with the development pattern and aesthetics established for the area. 5. The operations in connection with the proposal will 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; and Comment: The operation of the new stealth facility will not result in any additional noise (AT&T's equipment is already located at the site), fumes, vibrations, dust, or traffic than what currently exists on site. The 120' new stealth facility will not have any flashing lights; however, it will be lit during evening hours.The emergency diesel generator will only be operational during a power failure at the site. 6. The proposal will endanger the public health, or safety if located and developed where proposed, or in anyway will become a nuisance to uses permitted in the district. Comment: The proposal will not endanger public health or safety,or become a nuisance to uses permitted in the C-1 zone. As described above,the facility benefits public safety —residents and business depend on wireless facilities to connect with 911 services. The new stealth facility will be structurally capable of supporting the antennas/equipment proposed. The location of the proposed new stealth wireless tower will be adjacent to AT&T's existing equipment and will be out of the way of the intended use of the property and neighboring properties. Conclusion: This proposal is consistent with the Planning Commission criteria found in PMC Section 25.86.060 and should be approved. Given the presence of AT&T's existing facility at this location, the need to protect its FCC licenses by the June 13, 2013 deadline, the alternatives explored, and the significant gap in service (700MHz band) demonstrated in this narrative and the attached documentation, the new stealth facility proposed is a reasonable solution to address the issues that have been outlined If you have any questions, feel free to contact me at 206-213-9932 ext 229-or at csapp @vinculums.com Sincerely, 1 el E C Y Sapp,ndi Real Estate Specialist/Vinculums WA342 Island View 6600 Burden Blvd. Pasco, WA 99302 Existing 120'-0" Stealth Monopole 'I Proposed 124'-0"— Existing 120'.0"- Monopole \, Stealth Monopole Before Installation Looking-South After Installation atstt wEsr4 1 " COMMUMI 4T1 N mr)RRISI3N HFR.^-HFIFI r, AT&T Mobility 7525 SE 24th Street 10900 NE 8th, Suite 810 RTC Building 3 Mercer Island,WA 98040 Bellevue.WA 98004 16221 NE 72nd Way PH: (206)236-4207 Tel: 425.451.1301 Fax:425.289.5958 Redmond,WA 98052 www rnorrisonhershfleld.com WA342 Island View 6600 Burden Blvd. Pasco, WA 99302 l Existing 120'-0" Stealth Monopole-NOR$" Proposed l20'-0"—, Existing 120'-0 Stealth Monopole ` Stealth Monapote W Before Installation Looking East ,After Installation at&t IMESTivHr04 GQMMrJ1MlGAT M Mc-jRRt--,nN HFRF;HFrlF_Lri AT&T Mobility 7525 SE 24th Street 10900 NE 8th, Suite 810 RTC Building 3 Mercer Island,WA 98040 Bellevue,WA 98004 16221 NE 72nd Way PH: (206)236-4207 Tel:425.451.1301 Fax:425.289.5958 Redmond.WA 98052 www.morrisonhershfield.com WA342 Island View 6600 Burden Blvd. Pasco, WA 99302 Existing 120'-0 Stealth Monopole , i. Y Ar i D Existing 120A" Proposed 120'-0°' _ Stealth Monopole Stealth Monopole Before Installation Looking West After Installation_ at&t W $Tg,C#l'�NR MORRI.RON HFR.cSHiFIFI n AT&T Mobility 7525 SE 24th Street 10900 NE 8th,Suite 810 RTC Building 3 Mercer Island,WA 98040 Bellevue,WA 98404 16221 NE 72nd Way PH: (206)236-4207 TeL 425.451.1301 Fax:425.289.5958 Redmond,WA 98052 'www.morrisonhershfieid.com Without WA342- RSRP (Before) + Legend Best Coverage .. Good Coverage............._.... .. I , Fair Coverage................. .... Bad Coverage Worst or No Coverage SL + ' r I T WaLDoa» ` 7F a A ti6 ALDtl±i21 — L 1111 LTE OVERAGE WA342 Final Build @120' - RSRP (After) Legend Best Coverage ... . . ................................. "Good Coverage .................. ..........-.................... .......... Fair Coverage IL t3ad Coverage • Worst or No Covers e 04t3 � w Wlllfl0410 &o. IL OF- 428 AL r t 439`1 LTE COVERAGE EXHIBIT 3 mF.,. dmN"n.a n� woa�i.a n y, I Y •.- � — —SlBfPT FROFRn IMF,Tm — — � � — — — — a M I \ A,IFIIMG avw f I ' v..E%6TMG 1 IIII+[{' I fY.■ M.4 `OFL11. ! MORRIiON HKMHFIELP LOT \ I rnE rR � I as Ia ! Z w A124 z �PC:, I —MG✓:ESS eMnoI�HB� I ��x"FC ion� I f t 1.F161MC - { BUgpmtG� I -EMISiiNG l r ISLAND VIEW WA342 6500 BORON 9LV0 PASCO.WA 9976] `E%ISIMG I LOT - - gLIILOIMC l 1 ` I �E%srnc �_ REYtSIilNS ' s — — S1.4lETi PRWFk1T LIiE,TTP — � ' i UB[LL�L tttTnuLT�ml�ffE w — — N4MERUN RO RRIRTRT V-E.TW OaSTMG.apa'-O'STEALTH - lll NCnOPULE J 5 NOT•S mw P.R.m TH LINE MfESM 'SN WQ STRtcM,RE i I tauTror+AoE osruNEu EROH THE ps ASSESS0R5+rtB oAa[AidD Exsrr+G tt4EC([A4M1C51w SHEEI mLE A9[APPACTM TE. OONFM/ND gliH FTUMT[. S!IT plA'N 3- ERE,MLL BE NO PROPOSED/ICMYW ON ER6TNG bN4AE55/CLR65 ACass,G rHE WACEL a NO J. WHOM W L MR„ PP YAIIEFL�ERAHON TO THE Eghi1NG fptp Ep ATYT 1[R'-a' STFAUH MOII➢PmE SHEEP r mtER .MIL PLAN ( C—1 '.14 NCav�LWI C6'+`s+HO x�6 5.,D•CPS�mriar OCf�-L,•i 5 T=..aenKl.w Er•.bNe[ wt•VSE!4 ASG:PIS, OsHFR.,N.v t♦,n++Fw a[U,[S,c G�R[R SCMNCLS 6 S,Pf•I+' EXHIBIT 3 Pau^POsw NRi UA.xC NCA'-- ypppp$E6 litT IlE PANEL R^vr�% rersq..,Mnr.q° fi41'-0'Su-F[) NRFMOS.R(yMf®1nn4N •r h 9«w.a - E.wsnlc s*GLIII xarWpotE _� %,,�r:.�l��r N, f,+P 9F W.,WEa SE9[OR) .vs N�Ir b noa rs,.a, Elusltld mVEL rd ae -� rw:..a`canLL,�a�.r..+d+�wr::aari nr11 mASS '-�- udf (Tt�stP[sir�) � :r *, + aut room i Ft6TINW wu�� ,w1 WAS-0 WE f Cw W CMN LI1NC i \/��/,��/�/��/�J tQp NEh Rpl6t>N HC1t9NFIElb� IENCE 1Yff11 YMIL �y � V `p rGWGKpN tI�l�ltW Pfv+%CV SlA x i\ J 4 lI:IW5AN.iX,Is4eM,,,a ww�erltsalMa+,m: R CAO Al'tl EWOLL[M n6[WRx[[.rcc.Ma E.WINEIS.iiVVR i % J Exrs*WaC ArtT L9NCRETE WINIENT w9 t E x _ /+ _ x - Irmco�9 awl EWIS.m -~-Ifmv95m ATtt P9tfA + rt,lw�va •( YDWVI l i ISLAND VIEW coc.nwPp ' WA3 2 IWY 99FIER5)J 4 eboo BURDEN BLVD d I PAWL,%'A 99702 ri TrkAPUEN,SNE-M IRFV"ISIONS / feT 9rx[RS)y4 x rIk IEMIWNAW4[LLL .ICM',O, +:9>H, r!l qp ry "i1W51PIG untnY a%xw SH PUN TST Cg4[POUNC UN I S SHEET NUMBER COMPauN:D:MN I A-1 a"SWNE:1Jt' t''-0' Z ? d +' FS'd SARr+dR CEt�:CES.e+rcr;1 vWnniW'[d ....e:.¢w.ax.rgiNa[d N IrSrSfr P.Cons"4uC*C�'DC"ue.KtYS�5 PxF>4'.[V.i•c"',ef uC[ P\r EGE M�5(/nsuk[OInCR THAk.,HA+r 1iEF'4:La, EXHIBIT 3 N"M. SUM Nmee: x0 .Re Swc.CL!F'FxCf wfObT IFE Ma10lE] ICNVa rJ!)k{NI aWtYSK.N(Eiilll xu Wp�Nru m.t� 1CxEP arq SEN[o�M,0u0m R•p1.r�G5 uNryw cmnrr.cnve.w.wkitl.er �exAw IRKtPR Prpu,o GpterxtElCN M,v(s}KLAPRRP'IIP sL�CR SIRUC1tR4 pis sw�.m e..+rt w+roctx.^<anua4v. evv.rarrr rausLRt�.mu*w� rtn �1 RR'w p eawACtra�tr (cad xvp COtr G?,f4 itlP OF gLpapREP _ �JJ,,__d��'nT FS(�1�uG 5n'wAM AAON.�LE t- �/ Ylt NGFOPO,k _ xi itNC ST 'YAP-p'Aft kM -0 /GL t2o-o eGt �..` E snxc 1-1 ArLIIFFas /� E,r41nG PH,E\AkTENNAS'i-.v II "J @HER Ce R) E At&t PAp GW,I'A pR a16 CEI+IEY,[.Cx6nxt; 1 d� pappp9Ep 1rTt TC i I _ Nor-[ AM NFUCr..wlEnn.s g 11/C K Exxpxc Artr vu[L WsT R /•NIA m "ab'FO C UMlCA 8 {Ira IX x k RE SE, trnMOrpLC ST1P ov a.,vat sESYaa1 WA MORgIbN M6RiHPIfiLD ,0[Oefh i,Nefa�,�EnO 'KAItNS. wwu..•xRwwVMElrpn rr�rrySbx tt'e^MKa.Pr E%i5nuc r2p'-P"N,Gx Ex6TMG kip''o"NCH 3iFKTF WO`r>'pLE —PP�Pp94D Aret[114-4' S,E41M u]LrpPPL[ srrrLlF a1>raratE [SLAND VIEW WA342 CEO 81 ROM utw 11 PASCC.WA 89303 I REIA IONS ]i ` pthiNG SkFUERS ry}ry 9 >/¢'/'1 U•Y.mr r ,._E 61RJG SMKLIOIB .�1 (x.'i�}c L+u•N tiHU JC (e'Y p1HFA5 I eas®+e a.«w tRm , fie,•o„SRS] Ex-s W„�wkn eL1VGE Y(aF Mx+L \ [?•NaC�M"+ I Prtn+c stirs ,\ I � �� I FPI ruR m+snucln+alai uenao es CG+STRUCTC.sE1 r Ndr+o SNEEI TRtE [N�TkNG ANO 1NTE[.:°d " 16W€R PROF4E5 NR I E NO' 6LE E�.111T G9 AE.01 SIDLE lt CA sFEET NUMBEN MROU pn d HENCE AcC/' JAi •EI.•carte tro •r_R- Pll+f\MLD 10WCR PRlULL z, nYa'ewE:„'e”-,•-o L741571NG It WCit I'ftCYY.� ! k— ,iv.s+"�'+A•P\LE'.0[0 ry,x'S SE1 6t F[v}n'.IL,Cx 3nCV'+EMS r,�.goge•Mr f.N•t:[ a_ ..i oR II4ttD5,rRF P1r4R ixt�,.hs RYN RLNItS,®LASxp+'Sern^CLS 5 FRY'\w—tM[0 REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION MASTER FILE NO: SP 2013-011 APPLICANT: City of Pasco HEARING DATE: 5/16/13 Public Works Dept. ACTION DATE: 6/20/13 Pasco, WA 99301 BACKGROUND REQUEST: SPECIAL PERMIT: Location of Water Intake Facility in an RT Zone. 1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Legal: Lot 11, Harris Subdivision Except that portion deeded for I-182 right-of way. Location: 11416 W. Court St Property Size: .27 acres 2. ACCESS: The property has access from West Court Street. 3. UTILITIES: All utilities are available to the site. 4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The site is currently zoned RT (Residential Transition). The site is vacant. Surrounding properties are zoned and developed as follows: North RT-- Corn field South No zoning - Columbia River East RT-Parking lot and vacant lots under the I-182 Bridge West R-S-20 - Residential/Harris vegetable stand 5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan encourage the extension or expansion of water service throughout the Urban Growth Area (UT-1 & UT-1-A). Policy UT-1-D encourages the leveraging of irrigation water to ease the use of potable water for the maintenance of landscaping. 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 Public Works Department has applied for a Special Permit to locate a water intake and pumping facility at 11416 West Court Street. The City currently has an existing water intake and pumping facility adjacent to the proposed site where water is pumped from the River to the West Pasco Treatment Plant (11315 W Court St) where it is treated and pumped into the City's potable water system. The remaining water is pumped directly into the municipal irrigation system. The proposed intake and pumping facility will be dedicated solely to providing water to the West Pasco Treatment Plant. The new intake will include a circular concrete structure approximately 30 feet in diameter extending 75 feet below the ground (wet well) with a 36-inch diameter pipe extending up to 220 feet into the River. A building will be constructed over the wet well at ground level. The building will house the pumping and electrical equipment. The building will be constructed to match the scale and look of a residential structure. The site will also be developed with a two-car parking pad, front yard landscaping and a wrought iron type perimeter fence. This project is part of the City's ongoing efforts to keep the water utility system current with the growing population of the community and to meet future needs. Pasco's population has increased from 32,066 in 2000 to over 65,000 in 2013; an increase of 32,934 over the past 13 years. Corresponding with this population growth has been the ever present need to increase the capacity of the City's water utility system to accommodate the growth. In 2009 the City constructed the West Pasco Treatment Plant to help meet current and future demands for potable water and fire protection. Construction of the proposed water intake and pumping facility is part of the ongoing plans to provide community water service to the community. The West Pasco Treatment Plant has an ultimate treatment capacity of 18 million gallons a day (mgd) when four more membrane filter racks and two more raw water strainers are added. Currently, the plant can treat up to 6 mgd. The current water intake facility has a maximum capacity of 7.8 mgd and a "firm capacity" of just 3.9 mgd. "Firm capacity" is defined as the capacity when one pump is not in service. Hence the existing water intake facility has neither the firm capacity to support the existing production capability of the West Pasco Treatment Plant nor the total capacity to support the ultimate treatment capability of the plant. The proposed intake facility will be designed to provide a firm capacity to meet the current treatment plant capacity and to be expandable to support the ultimate capacity of the treatment plant. Following the completion of the proposed water intake and pumping facility and connection to the West Pasco Treatment Plant, the existing water intake facility will be converted to an irrigation intake and pumping facility only. 2 All pumping equipment and electrical equipment will be housed in a CMU block building that will have an exterior wainscot of split-faced block above which will be placed HardieFlank lap siding on the main walls along with HardieShingle shingle siding above the walls on the gable ends. To aid in creating a residential look for the building, the building will have the following features: + a rectangular wing extending from the main structure with a wall height 2 feet less than the wall height of the main structure; a 5/12 pitched roof on the main structure, a 4/12 pitched roof on the wing and a dormer with windows facing West Court Street on the main structure; • 17 faux windows sized and located to balance the appearance of ventilation intake louvers on two elevations and to give the appearance of interior residential spaces on the other elevations; The engineers designing the facility have selected 250 horsepower pumps rather than 300 horsepower pumps to reduce the size of the building, size of the electrical equipment, cooling requirements and to reduce noise. Intake and exhaust louvers will be sound attenuating and an in-line silencer will be included in the compressor room to reduce noise emanating from the exhaust louvers. The FCID pumping station is located at 11100 West Court Street, 1,200 feet down-river from the proposed intake and pumping facility. The FCID pumping station is located 160 feet from the nearest dwelling and operates with a 125 horsepower pump, a 300 horsepower pump and a 450 horsepower pump. The pump house does not contain any noise abatement features and runs all season with the doors and windows open to provide cooling to the building. A fourth booster pump is located near the corner of Road 111 and West Court Street. The City has never received a complaint about noise from the pumping station. An online search of the Franklin County property records indicates homes located in the vicinity of the FCID pumping station have maintained their values or improved in value over the past few years. The front yard area of the proposed site will be extensively landscaped with 11 trees, 38 shrubs, 1470 yarrow plants and 700 Potentilla. The existing arborvitae hedge along the easterly edge of the site will be removed and the hedge on the riverside of the property will remain. Residential setbacks consistent with the neighboring RS-20 zoning will be maintained around the proposed building. The proposed facility will be remotely monitored and as a result less than a dozen vehicle trips per week will be generated by the facility. A typical single-family dwelling will generate about 10 vehicle trips a day (ITE Traffic Manual 8th Addition). The 1-182 Bridge is located over and slightly south of the proposed site. The WSDOT traffic counter near the east end of the bridge indicates 56,000 vehicles pass over the site every day. The noise resulting from this traffic has a significant impact on the surrounding neighborhood. 3 The three parcels to the south of the proposed facility are part of the I-182 right- of-way and will never be developed with residential dwellings. Pasco Municipal Code 25.86.020(l 1) classifies the proposed water utility facility as an "Unclassified Use" requiring special permit approval prior to location anywhere in the city, regardless of zoning. 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 Findings to this listing as the result of factual testimony and evidence submitted during the open record hearing. 1. The site is vacant and currently being used as a garden. 2. The site was annexed by the City of Pasco in 2012 (Ordinance #4088). 3. The site is zoned RT (Residential Transition). 4. The proposed water intake and pumping facility is an unclassified use requiring special permit approval prior to location anywhere in the city, regardless of zoning. 5. The Comprehensive Plan designates the site for low-density residential uses. 6. Comprehensive Plan Goals and Policies encourage the extension or expansion of water service throughout the Urban Growth Area. (UT-1 & UT- 1-A). 7. Policy UT-1-D encourages the leveraging of irrigation water to ease the use of potable water for the maintenance of landscaping. 8. The site is located more or less under the 1-182 Bridge. 9. The site is adjacent to the existing water intake facility that provides raw water to the West Pasco Treatment Plant and irrigation water for the municipal irrigation system. 10. The West Pasco Treatment Plant was constructed in 2009 and is on a parcel of land addressed 11315 West Court Street; located 425 feet from the proposed intake facility site. 11. The new water intake and pumping facility is needed to supply enough raw water to meet the design demands of the Vest Pasco Treatment Plant. 12. The proposed facility is designed to provide 25 million gallons of raw water to the West Pasco Treatment Plant every day. 13. The new water intake facility will enable the existing water intake facility to be converted to an irrigation only facility that will pump directly into the municipal irrigation system thereby leveraging irrigation water to reduce the use of potable water for yard maintenance. 14. The proposed pump and equipment structure will be built to resemble a residential structure with a 5/12 pitched roof, lap siding, shingle siding on the gable ends and 17 faux windows. Every elevation will have one or more windows. 4 15. The facility has been designed with 250 horsepower pumps rather than 300 horsepower pumps to reduce the size of the building, size of the electrical equipment, cooling requirements and to reduce noise. 16. Intake and exhaust louvers will be sound attenuating and an in-line silencer will be included in the compressor room to reduce noise emanating from the exhaust louvers. 17. The FCID intake and pumping station in the 11100 block of West Court Street operates with a 125 horsepower pump, a 300 horsepower pump and a 450 horsepower pump. The pump house does not contain any noise abatement features and runs all season with the doors and windows open to provide cooling to the building. The City has never received a noise complaint about the operation of the FCID pumping station. 18. Properties in the vicinity of the FCID pumping station have maintained their values or improved in value over the past few years. 19. Residential setbacks consistent with the neighboring RS-20 zoning will be maintained around the proposed building. 20. The site will be heavily landscaped with a total of 2,919 plants. 21. Only two parking spaces will be provided on the site, meeting the minimum requirement for a single-family dwelling. 22. The facility will generate less than a dozen vehicle trips per week. 23. A typical single-family dwelling will generate about 10 vehicle trips per day (ITE Traffic Manual 8th Addition). 24. Approximately 56,000 vehicles pass over the site on the I-182 Bridge every day. 25. Pasco's population has increased from 32,066 in 2000 to over 65,000 in 2013. 26. The three parcels to the south of the proposed facility are part of the I-182 right-of-way and will not be developed with residential dwellings. CONCLUSIONS BASED ON 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: (I) Will the proposed use be in accordance with the goals, policies, objectives and text of the Comprehensive Plan? Comprehensive Plan Goals encourage the provision of adequate utility services throughout the Urban Growth Area to accommodate population increases as anticipated in the Plan. Plan Policy UT-1-A suggests public water and sewer services are to be available concurrently with development in the urban growth area. Policy UT-1-D encourages the leveraging of 5 irrigation water to ease the use of potable water for the maintenance of landscaping. The proposed facility is consistent with and supports policies of the Plan and helps implement the Comprehensive Water Plan for the City. (2) Will the proposed use adversely affect public infrastructure? The proposed facility will have a positive impact on the potable water system and the municipal irrigation system. The new intake and pumping facility is designed to supply enough water to the West Pasco Treatment Plant to enable the plant to operate at it full capacity of 25 million gallons per day. The current intake and pumping can only supply water for about a quarter of the plant's capacity. Operating the proposed facility will enable the existing intake and pumping facility to be converted to pump irrigation water only; thereby benefiting the municipal irrigation. (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 Public Works Department has gone to great lengths to design a facility that will be constructed and maintained in harmony with the intended character of the neighborhood. The building will be built to resemble a residential structure with a 5/12 pitched roof, lap siding, shingle siding on the gable ends and 17 faux windows. Every elevation will have one or more windows. The property will be heavily landscaped with a total of 2,919 plants. Fencing will be wrought iron in nature rather than chain link. The overall design has incorporated a number of features to minimize noise impacts on the area. (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 thereop The existing pumping facility and the FCID pump house have not discouraged development in the area nor have they impaired the value of nearby homes. The proposed height of the structure and site design have been prepared to reflect the future residential character of the neighborhood. The proposed building will resemble a single-story single- family dwelling with a residential style driveway, heavy front yard landscaping, exterior residential construction materials, a 5/12 pitched roof and a wrought iron type fence. 6 (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 is located more or less underneath the I-182 Bridge that carries 56,004 vehicles across the Columbia River each day. The bridge traffic creates considerable noise, vibrations and fumes in the neighborhood. The standard operation of the proposed facility will create no dust, fumes, odors, vibrations and less traffic on a weekly basis than a single-family dwelling generates on a daily basis. The operation of the standby generators will create occasional fumes. The facility may create noise similar to the FCID pumping station but that noise will be contained within the building that has specific design features to minimize noise beyond the property boundaries. (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 facility will be constructed to meet the current International Building Code and American Water Works Standards. Once constructed, the facility will be professionally operated and maintained to be in harmony with the general character of the neighborhood. Extra care has been taken to incorporate design features that will ensure the facility does not become a nuisance to the neighborhood. Air intake and exhaust louvers will be sound attenuating and an in-line silencer will be included in the compressor room to reduce noise emanating from the exhaust louvers. All equipment will be located inside the building and the building will be built to resemble a single-family structure. Extensive landscaping will also be included to provide a residential look to the property. APPROVAL CONDITIONS 1. The special permit shall apply to Parcel No. 118221111; 2. The water intake and pumping facility shall be developed in substantial conformance with the site plan and building elevations submitted with the special permit application; 7 3. Landscaping shall conform to the landscape plan submitted with the application; 4. Construction of the building must conform in every detail related to the installation of noise attenuating devices and equipment; 5. The special permit shall be null and void if a building permit has not been obtained by January 1, 2015. RECOMMENDATION MOTION for Findings of Fact: I move to adopt findings of fact and conclusions therefrom as contained in the June 20, 2013 staff report. MOTION for Recommendation: I move based on the findings of fact and conclusions as adopted the Planning Commission recommend the City Council grant a special permit for the construction of a municipal water intake facility on a portion of Lot 11, Harris. Subdivision with conditions as listed in the June 20, 2013 staff report. 8 Vidn'ty Item: Water Intake FaciliWublic Applicant: City of Pasco Works N Map File #: SP 2013 -01 l t •f ,{'� '�" , Aft-�,.a,! �'• ;7 ,r OP 1 71 SITE . 4 s 4 f j e Land Item: Water Intake Facilit Use Applicant: City of Pasco Public Works x Map File #: SP 2013-011 Agriculture �o�RT (County) � ti Vac. SITE co�G H2O aRi�e� Treatment �s Zoning Item: Water Intake Facilit Applicant: City of Pasco Public Works rr Map File #: SP 2013-011 RT (County) SITE RS-12 e,. I� PUMP HAfiCFL (rip OF 5) °TANpIHG SEAM MEYAL, // 12 _ _! / ROOFING PER'SPECIFICATION -- SECTION)W=.TYP _jI - I _ F � 48".45"WINDOW FAUX 5"TRIM(TYP) �3}UX WINDOW I F L=3$5 DOUBLE DOOR NODS LAC .� 24yp48F FAUX WINDOW DOUBLE-�O DOOR 8°SMOOTH FACE CMU SLOG( - 6-LOURSE4 12`SPLIT W/ REVEAL" MD HAMiE°PLANN NORTHWEST ELEVATION FACE c (TYP) NORTHEAST ELEVATION LAP SIDING ATTA�O(TYP) SCALE: _�-ax SCALE' IV- -Q Y COLOR SCHEDULE SPLIT FACE CMU MUTUAL MATFRIALS BURGUNDY RED SMOOTH FACE CMU NATURAL _ HAAOVSHINGLE STAGGERED EDGE PANELS ON CABLE ENDS LAP SIDING d[SHINGLE SIDING SPICED CIDER - AND DORMER ROOFING GRAY EXHAUST GUTTERS"FASCIA&DOWNSPOUTS GREY u LOUVER r 12 DOORS GREY ��• _ _ - �I ROOF PUMP ACCESS HATCHES TO MATCH ROOFING - J . 12 IXHAUS7 5r— LOUVER I..�.r I •S "I ❑❑ 00 ( I_r u oo 48"x4B"FAU%WINDOW -48°x4®'FAU% 5"-<"x7'-Q ACOUSTICAL -ROLL-UP DOOR �4O"x4O"FAU% (TYP OF 3) WINDOW DOUGU DOOR INTAKE LOUVER 6'WIDE x B'HIGH WINDOW SOUTf�_PT ELEVATION SOUTHE-0 AST ELEVATION a SCALE: =1-0 SCALE: =I SPECIAL PERMIT a R oesrcNm edxmxlEaaamxunArl — ITT-rr`. CIP#C1-11-OS-VVM g L As = / ARCHITECTURAL ELEVATIONS -- MAY 2x13 = _ ' { COLUMBIA WATER A—1 g - =.IfI s�.�s�soa sF�"-r-ypl¢ SUPPLY PROJECT azcxm a„ ....".,.a... - Po04A Tea Tana FU 51s- NO. DATE BY REVISION — PROJECT W:r I-126),01 vy e: AS SHOWN tm E NAY M.3 2 0(4 SOWO ATTENUATING 7 (ACgUSTICAL) INTAKE I f 6 AIR COMPRESSORS r` II E- D,ECTRICAi COMPRESSED AIR ROOM RCGL W FUTURE ViWS�I COMPRESSED AIR TANK I L_ �r— I L I II'i f SOUND AT7ENUATING PIMP ROOM (ACOUSTICAL) INTAKE LOUVERS ER i t i '--ACCESS NATC#7 70 WET WELL SCALP q SPECIAL PERMIT - _ ShfEt - AS PRELIRtINARY QNLY T�" �w« t A ri CIP#Cy t -06 WTR AS _ INTAKE BUILDING FLOOR PLAN w war 2013 FI�III [)Allle]� COLUMBIA WATER A-2 SUPPLY PROJECT Imo.,<:uxi Tre a T77 .- � S fi NO GATE 9Y' ... — nEwSwn - .� -Farflmtl.cLgac 47?U It1 6-!it.qL_ awfTn Iao:Ii-i�»nl spec •5 vlaxr Mr[: wnr 7017 a n LA NT LIST _ '•:x:111 NfME CUANTIA� .ANTfNI 612E {4 NTAINER •PnCINti rwrrrtb r f i .� .!�t•<f� �� `° �" •- � t =rsNeomAS�.r reI.ELPU�€ow e:L�^tn IwI N..�,.,,,Pn.ro a.wow wr _. r > GENERAL NOTE$: TREE FRIHI9N(A, - ��2 ..0 ,r -i'" .tea.,.. a'� W sc •^e�. +o. - s ..�,..� �� �"'��� _. •__ .sr.a�.an.rr. -�Y�,,a., Eers c'�m...r+w+.,,a.o.kol.....,:vs,•arl.M.r.+a.e•..<. trtrtr"`�,r{ � .er Iw ma•a.n:aa�,am....,ar f `'-. -+' {y-.,w.wr,e Ylr .wae aIW neuwaw!!••,t.aL TREE NRU&GN61;R0 Nu q NWG PLANTING NOTES: .� } r OWN RS RESPOHSIBIUTY FOR MAINTENANCE-.-, .. p„ql.nail raa w... e.ui •nu.+•wek, y ✓• '-' wren, .a,µ. Ins eb e+4 .0 IRRIGATION NOTES: �� �_ � ��. � -°�� OWNERS RESPONSIBYISIES a •r b,.r+..v--ac J� ...>s.,.�,.rwn.Wee•m1y �I.- b,eea +ort INSTALLATION: n..p IrmrcwEan m+.r erro r.ewnwmnxnlu;.ru•v. n,:m x r rnMin Yrcsla.ue®.w.rasNlo taw p4.—N ru-a..rxyey, 'V- W wrre !'Iw.°9 a^.vN rsm yFpe wave. . !I {�. • ;. � r.6 J10+�MM.au. rNnr+Y,n enrxs% f.en*l Y'e�++eNrip9+ln aNncee,M werrK mnvlew� �eiw.s�eme ���a°�'= i. (k� ,E�ie°E.�._ ^, .: Nr Frvn•r:.-r iepnM ese.a �~ . r , rlw'nwwlM• �sewlnawwv x bra '.A.f.._ r r - I#Rx9hCAMn;r. a' •='k••'PNn MlSTALLAT40N ra>w.en.OZ.-re.+ �aw..won...uwu .u,T,•.rk.o.Nrm. """° ran w•.w�, �rra�jme�rt•Ja.+1 alwa,ia.9 ,ea-mrn.ol.., ✓ I>�..x'.m urerquuan ey d' +Ibm.eere IRNIG nl�'BPEGF[tpfpuS ANp uETAN,®: - - ,vN,rn.....b+t.rAwra•=..ae Nl Nn.arr..cA n e .mlaee.�•velr!-ina-.•cpcelb tl•M•Ye.e s•rym.,Yris.�w F,•.•a+.u.el.Mmsnenaew+..mp.r - „M.xIb L-Fyry•.J awrsw_A-mN.�Mno•KW ek,lMrry wvAEtP1,-a. i r mmeMtmesMarn..._...r..aewnyawe OOOS:OWATN]N: - •.a-+,A,aeryr.uev:,,N+r::,waew, rm'Nea.+ea ee.�aaea.M Mo•.ecn.-.a¢w,ma r4wP.•.waa=a. �{7yy i.u.e,elf 4t.Rep.IA VWe N:,e•-.h eNlvm•w+e '+rq.•e P4AMING LIST SPECIFICATIONS AND OETAILS - �ro _r fin+l .Mann I eS,v o. F.evNrv•el .w.,,a.r�.a m m1••. M Nltl{Ik '.•Jle 1`=h• -:.r...�..e,r.rrislM.a'e=,.we4walrnJw•e.+-+�+,,. SPECIAL PERMIT C.(P#Ci JAN t i MR - LANDSCAPE PLANTING PLAN LCOLUM61A WATER SUPPLY PROJECT hr I.ti0"p.X-11400 PBrNf -'rr.'..931V n fiff7ied.fgegea 7rSl F,G w { rr p. 4 s -1 rt r : - � - �-- - - - - -_ . . _ _ . f - -. - n Tom . _ _ - ,.r., , a , �. � ' � _ t , r� JI IIIIIWAN do 1Pi'M s I. dp via . w _>, �) A „�,u'ii'n - J � � � 1 � V111AV1 1 1A \ Or 1 w Ol aF ♦ \ 'r JCr,✓ 1 r _ r LL a# qo� KC1 At ppp r - - --- -- =mow'_. 4,✓ ,1��• '+,:-c�. . ep r y+ a!L �! ; REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION MASTER FILE NO. Z 2013-001 APPLICANT: Nathan Machiela HEARING DATE: 5/ 16/13 2464 SW Glacier Place STE# 110 ACTION DATE: 6/20/ 13 Redmond, OR 97756 BACKGROUND REQUEST: REZONE Rezone from RT (Residential Transition) to R-1 (Low- Density Residential). 1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Legal: That portion of the SW quarter of the SW quarter of Section 15, Township 9 North, Range 29 East, WM. lying northerly of the FCID canal except that portion platted as Chapel Hill Division 2 and that portion platted as Short Plat 2010-14. General Location: 6720 Aintree Drive Property Size: The parcel is approximately 5 acres. 2. ACCESS: The property will have access from Aintree Drive along the north property line. 3. UTILITIES: All utilities are available to the site. Utilities will need to be extended into the site prior to development. 4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The site is currently zoned RT (Residential Transition). The site contains a single-family residence with an accessory structure. Surrounding properties are zoned and developed as follows: North R-1 - SFDUs South C-1 - Fire Station/Commercial Business East R-1 - SFDUs West County RS-20 -- SFDUs 5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan designates this area for Mixed Residential uses. Land Use Policy LU-3-B encourages "infill" development. Other goals and policies suggest the City permit a full range of residential environments including single family homes (H-2-A) and standards that control the scale and density of accessory buildings and homes to maintain compatibility with other residential uses (H-4-13). 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 I Non-significance (DNS) has been issued for this project under WAC 197- 11-158. ANALYSIS The property in question was annexed to the City in 1982 and was a remnant parcel of the original farm circle that occupied the area between the FCID canal and I-182 east of Road 68. Because this 5 acre parcel was held under separate ownership from the farm circle it was not rezoned when the Chapel Hill development was being planned. Consistent with the RT zoning classification the site was developed with one single-family house and a shop/barn. In 2003 the surrounding farm circle was rezoned to R-1, R-3 and R-4 and developed as the Chapel Hill Subdivision. The site has remained minimally developed since that time. The applicant is requesting a rezone for the subject property to allow single-family residential development consistent with the single-family zoning in the Chapel Hill development. The City's land use plans for the past 30 years have indicated the property in question should be utilized for Mixed Residential uses. The "Description and Allocation of Land Uses" table in the Land Use Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan indicates the Mixed Residential classification permit's single-family through multi-family zoning with densities ranging from 5 to 20 dwelling units per acre. Following the direction of the land use plan, most of the community's residential development over the last two decades has occurred in the I-182 corridor. Rezoning the site would support past community development efforts related to infrastructure improvements. The applicant is seeking a zone change from RT (Residential Transition) to R-1 (Low-Density Residential) to match the zoning of the single-family portion of the Chapel Hill subdivision to the north and east. The R-1 zone allows for up to one dwelling per 7,200 square feet, with up to 40% lot coverage and building heights up to 25 feet without a special permit. R-1 zoning permits up to 4.5 dwelling units per net acre after accounting for the areas occupied for public roadways. The proposed rezone will essentially facilitate a residential infill development that is encouraged by the Comprehensive Plan (LU-3-B). The R-1 zoning will permit the development of single-family homes at a scale and density to match the scale and density of the Chapel Hill development. The initial review criteria for considering a rezone application are explained in PMC. 25.88.030. The criteria are listed below as follows: 1. The changed conditions in the vicinity which warrant other or additional zoning: Adjacent residential development and growth within the City make the zone change appropriate, timely, and consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. 2 Properties to the north and east have been zoned to R-I and developed with single-family residences. Changed conditions in the neighborhood include installation of all utilities in the surrounding subdivision as well as the construction of homes, apartments and commercial buildings 2. Facts to justify the change on the basis of advancing the public health, safety and general welfare: The rezone will cause the existing home on the site to be fully connected to city utilities thereby eliminating the need for a septic tank and causing the home to fully contribute to the cost of maintaining the utility system. The rezone will also facilitate the development of new single-family dwellings in a safe and sanitary development providing housing for Pasco residents. 3. The effect it will have on the nature and value of adjoining property and the Comprehensive Plan:. Based on past experience with rezoning vacant land adjacent to existing subdivisions, and evidence provided by tax records of Franklin County, the proposed rezone will not negatively impact adjoining properties. Rezoning the property will assist with the implementation of the Comprehensive Plan. 4. The effect on the property owners if the request is not granted: If the request is not granted it is probable the property will continue to remain underdeveloped. 5. The Comprehensive Plan land use designation for the property: The Comprehensive Plan designates the site for Mixed Residential uses which include single-family dwellings. The proposed rezone is consistent with the Plan. 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 Findings to this listing as the result of factual testimony and evidence submitted during the open record hearing. 1, The site is currently zoned RT (Residential Transition) and has been zoned RT for approximately 30 years. 2. The site borders R-1 Zones to the north and east, which are developing with single-family homes as a part of the Chapel hill development. 3. The Comprehensive Plan designates the site for mixed residential uses. 4. The surrounding Chapel Hill subdivision was rezoned for multi-family, single-family and commercial development in in 2003. 5. A fully developed street (Aintree Dr.) now borders the property. 3 6. Aintree Drive and the other streets within the Chapel Hill subdivision contain all municipal utilities required to serve residential development. 7. The site contains a single-family residence and a small barn. 8. The site was annexed by the City of Pasco in 1982. 9. Applicant is requesting a change of zoning from RT to R-1. 10. Properties to the west are zoned RS-20 and have been developed with single-family homes. 11. The R-1 zone allows one dwelling per 7,200 square feet of land permitting net densities of 4.5 dwelling units per acre. 12. The R-1 zone allows for building heights up to 25 feet without a special permit. 13. The rezone will facilitate an infill development which is encouraged by the Comprehensive Plan. CONCLUSIONS BASED ON STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT Before recommending approval or denial of a Rezone, the Planning Commission must develop its conclusions from the Findings of Fact based upon the criteria listed in P.M.C. 25.88.060 and determine whether or not: 1. The proposal is in accordance with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. The proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and several Plan policies and goals. Land Use Policy LU-3-B encourages "infill" development while H-2-A suggests the City permit a full range of residential environments including single-family homes. Housing Policy (H-B A) encourages standards that control the scale and density of accessory buildings and homes to maintain compatibility with other residential uses. The standards of the proposed rezone are identical to the standards for the single-family portion of the Chapel Hill subdivision. 2. The effect of the proposal on the immediate vicinity will not be materially detrimental. The proposed R-1 zoning matches the R-1 zoning in the Chapel Hill subdivision and will permit the development of single-family dwellings under the same development standards that apply to the Chapel Hill development. 3. There is merit and value in the proposal for the community as a whole. Adjacent residential development and growth within the City make the zone change appropriate, timely and consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. The rezone will facilitate a residential infill project that will utilize the existing traffic circulation system and utility systems. 4. Conditions should be imposed in order to mitigate any significant adverse impacts from the proposal. 4 The proposed zoning is identical to the zoning in the Chapel Hill development and as a result there is no need for conditions. S. A Concomitant Agreement should be entered into between the City and the petitioner, and if so, the terms and conditions of such an agreement. A Concomitant Agreement is not needed. RECOMMENDATION MOTION for Findings of Fact: I move to adopt findings of fact and conclusions therefrom as contained in the June 20, 2013 staff report. MOTION for Recommendation: I move based on the findings of fact and conclusions as adopted the Planning Commission recommend the City Council approve the rezone from RT (Residential Transition) to R-1 (Low-Density Residential). 5 . . Item: Rezone RT to R- 1 Vicinity Map 2013 -001 Applicant: Nathan Machiela N File #: Z CHAPEL HILL BLVD VIC P '' 'f1 A I FF (�' 1 �� Iif r - \ F rL .DEL hilAR CT , Moak r _ E �i a ;a' -° — �a gyres a a�(Fd e r F� '�➢, � Fw �, _� � �" ' V� + � ` VALLEY VIEW PL R i �o r REE p,�, �p�el jr � - - SITE TRfi Olk r r. -S LA,1 roll AtAI yhS Q e L - - ARGENT RD..- r n Item: Rezone RT to R- 1 Land Use • Applicant. Nathan Machiela N Map File ##: Z 2013-001 CHAPEL HdLL BLVD DEL MAR CT Vacant Multi=Family a a v -.r N VALLEY VIEW PL ?� A� rR� oR '' ,� �p©D SFDUs cy a J SITE � � SURF pqR SFDUs Q Aas�aR U p�M�EC�o R Fire C0 Station Vacant C®m. ARGENT RD �I II + �I - -- 0-- Item: Rezone RT to R- I Zoning Applicant: Nathan Machiela N Map File #: Z 2013 -001 + RS-20 (County) r SION 041061 NEW --40 r -µa e '1 � �p �J 1.iicl i . . ni 11 4 70;12TAL winvigliwoolm, - L F: ® �, � -- _ _1 . ; _ __ _,__ _ z_ _.. -- �r, �_ - ' , - � i i � , ,, y -�.r e % .. _ . . .. _. _ � _A. y ' .i 9 .L ti ,_, z` IYN IN 3 1 i W a, IN 3 L + - + ���� - IN 1 s 6L IN IN I IN J i n . Y D tm • a I Pill 1.261M, If 4 a ot `-� To IL wIT IT I I IT REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION MASTER FILE NO. Z 2013-002 APPLICANT: Ronald Grate HEARING DATE: 5/16/2013 540 S. Rayburn Rd ACTION DATE: 6/20/2013 Othello WA 993334 BACKGROUND REQUEST: REZONE Remove 30 unit density limit requirements from concomitant agreement in R-3 (Medium-Density Residential) Zone. 1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Legal: Cole's Estates Lot S. Location: The 5900 Block of Road 90 Property Size: Approximately 4.7 acres 2. ACCESS: The property has access from Road 90 along the west property line. 3. UTILITIES: All utilities are available to the site. 4, LAND USE AND ZONING: The site is currently zoned R-3 (Medium-Density Residential) with a concomitant agreement limiting density on the site to 30 units maximum. The site is vacant. Surrounding properties are zoned and developed as follows: North R-1 (Low Density Residential) - SFDUs South C-1 (Commercial) - Vacant East R-1 (Low Density Residential) - SFDUs West RT (Residential Transition) - Vacant 5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designates this area for mixed residential 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 property is approximately 4.7 acres fronting on Road 90 along the west property line. The lot was platted under Franklin County zoning as part of a large-lot rural subdivision in 1967, before the City annexed the area in 1982. The residential subdivisions to the north and east were subsequently rezoned to R-1 and have largely been built out with single-family residences. Properties to the west were rezoned with higher density R-3 zoning and developed with the Mediterranean Villas condominiums. Adjacent properties to the south were rezoned to C-1 and are vacant. Properties further to the south have been developed with a mini-storage and a few 1 professional office buildings. The C-1 District permits the development retail, office and commercial services such as retail stores, automotive repair shops, tire stores, restaurants and taverns. The subject property was rezoned in 2012 to R-3 with a concomitant agreement with the following conditions: Conditions: A. No more than 30 residential units shall be permitted on the property; B. Maximum building heights shall be limited to 30 feet; C. No Special Permits shall be authorized for increases in building height over the allowable 30 feet; D. Where side yard areas abut the northern and eastern lines of said Lot 5 the setback shall be at least 15 feet; Applicant wishes to rezone the subject property to eliminate the 30-unit limitation, while retaining the other conditions. Applicant has also expressed willingness to accept a design standard that limits the zoning to one-story detached single-family dwellings with stucco exterior. The City of Pasco Comprehensive Plan shows the property to be within a mixed- density residential designation. The R-3 Zone allows for up to one dwelling per 3,000 square feet for multiple family dwellings, with up to 60% lot coverage and building heights up to 35 feet without a special permit. The City's Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map indicates the property in question should be utilized for mixed residential uses. Land Use Policy LU-3-B encourages "infill and density including planned unit developments to protect open space and critical areas, and provide recreational areas and amenities in support of more intensive, walkable neighborhoods." Land Use Policy LU-3-E calls for designating "areas for higher-density residential development where utilities and transportation facilities enable efficient use of capital resources." Housing Policy H-1-B encourages "the location of medium and high density housing in locations that will avoid the need for access through lower density residential neighborhoods." Housing Policy H-1-D directs the City to "avoid large concentrations of high-density housing." Housing Policy H-2-A calls for the City to "Allow for a full range of residential environments including single family homes, townhouses, condominiums, apartments, and manufactured housing." Housing Policy H-4-B requires the City to "Maintain development regulations and standards that control the scale and density of accessory buildings and homes to maintain compatibility with other residential uses." The initial review criteria for considering a rezone application are explained in PMC. 25.88.030. The criteria are listed below as follows: 1. The changed conditions in the vicinity which warrant other or additional zoning: Adjacent residential development and growth within the City make the zone change appropriate, timely, and consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. Properties to the north and east have been rezoned to R-1 and developed with Single-Family residences. The property to the south has been recently rezoned C-1 in anticipation of future commercial development. Properties to the west have been rezoned R-3 zoning and 2 developed with condominiums. Applicant has expressed a willingness to limit development to one-story detached single-family dwellings with stucco exteriors in exchange for an increase of density to 58 units, total. 2. Facts to justify the change on the basis of advancing the public health, safety and general welfare: The rezone will create a medium-density transition or buffer between residential areas to the east and north and commercial zones to the south. The original rezone from RT to R-3 was designed to encourage "infill and density including planned unit developments to protect open space and critical areas," as per Land Use Policy LU 3-B, and allow for "higher-density residential development where utilities and transportation facilities enable efficient use of capital resources," in keeping with Land Use Policy LU-3-E. This rezone would still align with that intended goal and also "Allow for a full range of residential environments including single family homes, townhouses, condominiums, apartments, and manufactured housing," consistent with Housing Policy H-2-A. Applicant has expressed a willingness to limit development to one-story detached single- family dwellings with stucco exteriors in exchange for an increase of density to 58 units, total. 3. The effect it will have on the nature and value of adjoining property and the Comprehensive Plan: The concept provided by applicant shows 58 one-story detached single-family dwellings with stucco exteriors. This development would create a medium-density transition or buffer between residential areas to the east and north and commercial zones to the south. 4. The effect on the property owners if the request is not granted: If the request is not granted it is probable the property will continue to remain vacant, and/or the owner may submit a rezone for a different residential designation. 5. The Comprehensive Plan land use designation for the property: The Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designates the site for medium-density residential uses. The proposed density increase would not contravene the Comprehensive Plan. 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 Findings to this listing as the result of factual testimony and evidence submitted during the open record hearing. 1. The site is currently zoned R-3 (Medium-Density Residential) with a concomitant agreement with the following conditions: a. No more than 30 residential units shall be permitted on the property; b. Maximum building heights shall be limited to 30 feet; c. No Special Permits shall be authorized for increases in building height over the allowable 30 feet; d. Where side yard areas abut the northern and eastern lines of said Lot 5 the setback shall be at least 15 feet; 3 2, Applicant is requesting a removal of the 30-unit density limitation of the R-3 Rezone concomitant agreement. 3. The site was rezoned to R-3 in 2012 4. The site was zoned RT for approximately 30 years previous to the current rezone. 5. The site borders R-1 Zones to the north and east, which are developed with single-family homes. 6. The Comprehensive Plan designates the site for medium-density residential uses. 7. The property was platted in 1967 as part of a rural, large-lot subdivision. 8. The site is vacant. 9. The site was annexed by the City of Pasco in 1982 (ORD #2388). 10. The purpose of the Mixed Residential area is to serve as a buffer or transition between low-density residential and commercial districts. 11, Properties to the west are zoned R-3 and have been developed with condominiums. 12. The R-3 Zone allows for one dwelling per 3,000 square feet for multiple family dwellings, or up to 68 units. 13. The R-3 Zone allows for building heights up to 35 feet without a special permit. The current R-3 Zoning with concomitant agreement limits building heights to 30 feet. Applicant is proposing one-story buildings. 14. Single-family residential homes developed in the Loviisa Farms subdivision across Chapel Hill Boulevard from the 200 unit Silver Creek Apartment complex and the Sandy Heights RV park have increased in value (per Franklin County records 2013) in recent years. 15. The single-family homes on Klickitat Lane sharing a common property line with the 200 unit Stonegate apartment complex were constructed after the Stonegate Apartments were constructed. The homes on Klickitat lane have increased in value (per Franklin County records 2013) in recent years. 16. A development plan has been submitted depicting 58 one-story detached single-family dwellings with stucco exteriors. CONCLUSIONS BASED ON INITIAL STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT Before recommending approval or denial of a Rezone, the Planning Commission must develop its conclusions from the Findings of Fact based upon the criteria listed in P.M.C. 25.88.060 and determine whether or not: 1. The proposal is in accordance with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. The proposal is consistent with many of the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan also encourages the development of a variety of residential environments (Goal H-2) and the Plan and supports efforts to provide affordable housing to meet the needs of low and moderate income households (Goal H- 5). Applicant has submitted a concept showing 58 one-story detached single family dwellings with stucco exteriors in conformance with H-4-B requiring "development . . . standards that control the scale and density of accessory buildings and homes to maintain compatibility with other residential uses." 4 2. The effect of the proposal on the immediate vicinity will not be materially detrimental.. The concept provided by applicant shows 58 one-story detached single-family dwellings with stucco exteriors. This development would create a medium-density transition or buffer between residential areas to the east and north and commercial zones to the south. 3. There is merit and value in the proposal for the community as a whole. Adjacent residential development and growth within the City make the zone change appropriate, timely, and consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. The rezone will create a medium density transition between residential areas to the east and north and commercial zones to the south. The proposed development of 58 one-story detached single-family dwellings would be targeted toward a retirement demographic, with higher likelihood of owner-occupied units and thus superior home and yard maintenance. 4. Conditions should be imposed in order to mitigate any significant adverse impacts from the proposal. Conditions should address concerns aver privacy encroachment and free flow of air and light near the established R-1 zone. 5. A Concomitant Agreement should be entered into between the City and the petitioner, and if so, the terms and conditions of such an agreement. The site is currently zoned R-3 (Medium-Density Residential) with a concomitant agreement with the following conditions: a. No more than 30 residential units shall be permitted on the property; b. Maximum building heights shall be limited to 30 feet; C. No Special Permits shall be authorized for increases in building height over the allowable 30 feet; d. Where side yard areas abut the northern and eastern lines of said Lot 5 the setback shall be at least 15 feet; Applicant wishes to remove condition "a" which limits density to 30 units. Applicant is willing to enter into a concomitant agreement with the following conditions: Concomitant Agreement for Master File No. Z2013-002 1. No more than 58 residential units shall be permitted on the property. 2. All residential units shall be single-family detached structures with two car garages. 3. The maximum height of all residential structures shall be limited to 18 feet. 4. No special permits shall be authorized for increases in height over the 18 feet. 5. A clubhouse structure may be permitted but is not required. 6. The exterior walls of all structures shall be stucco. 5 7. The architectural block wall along Road 90 shall be set back to the standard 20 foot setback line and treated with an anti-graffiti coating approved by the City of Pasco Community & Economic Development Director. 8. The front yard setback area between the block wall and Road 90 must be landscaped and maintained to meet the residential standards of PMC 25.75 and contain at least 7 trees. 9. A minimum setback of 15 feet shall be provided along the northern and eastern boundaries of the parcel. 10. The property, including all structures, walls, fences, access roads, and common areas shall be developed and maintained in good order, and all landscaping shall be installed and maintained in a healthy and growing condition in perpetuity. 11. The parcel may not be further subdivided. RECOMMENDATION MOTION for Findings of Fact: I move to adopt findings of fact and conclusions therefrom as contained in the June 20, 2013 staff report. MOTION for Recommendation: I move based on the findings of fact and conclusions as adopted the Planning Commission recommend the City Council approve the applicants request to rezone Cole's Estates, Lot 5, to R-3 (Medium-Density Residential) Zone, with a concomitant agreement containing the conditions listed in the June 20, 2013 staff report. 6 Looking North Looking South Looking East 4 AL A. -=:.•, . - >.�y ^dam mss- - ...r5. 4i-'u'' f '.- ' = K �f'i. tiailw ,::tJ�, : .,�, _ . , • - �, - i4 . •s ' ri .,�.. y RA�i 111111 PTURE COVE, PA5CO3 WA i RENDERING i t , s' v MEMORANDUM DATE: June 20, 2413 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Rick White, Director Community & Economic Development SUBJECT: Automobile Repair Operations One of the issues of City Council concern noted during Council's biennial retreat in 2012 was the outdoor occurrence of major auto repair and dismantling operations. These operations are often, but not always, located in former service stations that that have been converted to full-time repair shops. Typically, the issues surrounding automobile repair operations include: • The use of the public right-of-way for parking and storing business related vehicles and equipment; • Depositing oil, grease and other automobile fluids on the public street; • Parts salvaging and storage of automobile hulks; + Outdoor dismantling and repair of vehicles; and • A scale of auto repair that is outside that allowed by the C-1 (Retail Business) Zoning District, Council Resolution 3441 tasked the Planning Commission to develop an action plan for a solution. At the Planning Commission meeting of April 25t", the Commission recommended that City Council accept an Action Plan for automobile repair operations in various commercial districts. The Commission also opened a public hearing on the issue and continued the hearing to allow any further testimony or comments, noting that staff would be preparing an ordinance reflecting the Action Plan for the Planning Commission's consideration. City Council accepted the Action Plan from the Planning Commission and the Commission discussed the proposed regulations at the Planning Commission meeting of May 16. At that meeting, the public hearing was continued to allow an additional opportunity for testimony from owners and operators of automobile repair businesses. The Commission also provided direction to coordinate the definition of "minor automobile repair" with the existing noise ordinance regulations to better accommodate consistent enforcement procedures. The proposed attached ordinance amending the Zoning Code contains the specific language to implement the Action Plan. The Planning Commission is requested to again review the proposed ordinance and provide suggestions or comments. The report also contains attachments of PMC 25.12.475 (definition of inoperable vehicles) 25.70.150 (3) (adding required screening) and 25.75.040 (definition of required screening) as these are referenced in the proposed ordinance. Findings of Fact 1. Automobile repair operations are permitted in various degrees in the C-1 (Retail Business), C-3 (General Business) and Industrial Zoning Districts. 2. The Pasco Municipal Code contains both zone-specific and general regulations governing the conduct of automobile repair that have been inconsistently enforced over the course of time. 3. Automobile repair in many locations and sites has evolved to include operations that are in conflict with applicable regulations of the Pasco Municipal Code including the use of the public right-of-way for storage and parking repair business vehicles, outdoor repair operations, outdoor dismantling of vehicles, parts salvaging and automobile hulls storage in public view and depositing oil, grease and similar substances on City Streets. 4. Operations occurring in violation of the Pasco Municipal Code have an adverse effect on the health and safety of nearby businesses and residents, discourage private investment in commercial and industrial areas and present a negative perception of the City as a whole to the general public. 5. The Pasco City Council has directed the Planning Commission to develop an action plan for resolving code conflicts and preparing code revisions and options for enforcement regarding auto repair operations. {. The Planning Commission created a committee of Planning Commissioners and business operators to prepare an action plan for addressing the issue. 7. The Planning Commission has notified affected business operators and land owners involved in automobile repair operations of the task directed by the City Council and of the various meetings and preliminary strategies of the Commission on this matter. 8. The proposed ordinance amends Title 25 of the PMC to establish definitions for minor automobile repair and applicable regulations governing such repair in the C-1 (Retail Business) Zone. 9. The proposed ordinance amends Title 25 of the PMC to establish a screening requirement for inoperable automobiles in the C-3 (General Business) and 1-1 (Light Industrial) Zones. 10. The proposed ordinance is necessary- to protect the safety and economic vitality of business districts within Pasco. If the Planning Commission is satisfied that the Findings and proposed ordinance addresses the issues with auto repair operations, the following motions are in order: Recommendation MOTION: I move the Planning Commission adopt the Findings of Fact as contained in the .tune 20, 2013 staff memo on automobile repair operations. MOTION: I move the Planning Commission recommend the City Council adopt the proposed ordinance amending Title 25 of the PMC as contained in the June 20, 2013 staff memo. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO AUTOMOBILE REPAIR OPERATIONS AND LAND USE AMENDING TITLE 25 OF THE PASCO MUNICIPAL CODE WHEREAS, cities have the responsibility to regulate and control the physical development within their borders and to ensure public health, safety and welfare are maintained; and, WHEREAS, the City of Pasco has zoning regulations that limit vehicle repair in commercial zoning districts;and WHEREAS, over time, conditions involving minor vehicle servicing and repair operations have evolved so that enforcement of Title 25 has revealed the need to address changing conditions in the community; and, WHEREAS, over time, changed conditions within the community and the need for revising applicable regulations concerning vehicle repair have caused the need for revised regulations and additional definitions within Title 25; and, WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that to further the purposes of comprehensive planning and to maintain and protect the welfare of the community, it is necessary to amend PMC Title 25, NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That Chapter 25.12 entitled "Definitions" of the Pasco Municipal Code shall be and hereby is amended and shall read as follows: 25.12.093 "Auto Repair Facilities" means the machinery permanently installed on-site to facilitate automobile repair such as hydraulic lifts, hoists or repair pits. 25.12.311 "Minor Automobile Repair" means re airs that are started and completed in one business day, which is defined as the 12 hour period from 7 AM until 7 PM, and do not involve vehicle disassembly, dismantling, salvage or recycling; and include belt and bulb replacement, oil changes and lubrication, fluid flushes, tire and rim replacement or mounting, muffler and exhaust replacement, filter and hose replacement, audio and alarm system installation and glass or wiper replacement or other similar activities. Section 2. That Section 25.42.020 entitled "Permitted Uses" of the Pasco Municipal Code shall be and hereby is amended and shall read as follows: 25.42.020 PERMITTED USES.The following uses shall be pennitted in the C -I district: (1)Auto Detail Shops; (2) Banks; (3) Dancing schools; (4) Hotels and motels; (5) Printing shops; (6) Restaurants; (7) Stores and shops for the conduct of retail business; (S)Stores and shops for repair and similar services such as: (a) Bakeries, retail for distribution from the premises. (b) Barbershops and beauty shops. Ordinance Amending Title 25 Page I of I (c)Catering establishments. (d)Garage and filling stations, provided: 0)- k ; +armed Out of doer°, All outdoor repair work is"minor"as defined by 25.12.311, and (ii) the number of vehicles undergoing; outdoor repair does not exceed the capacity of the outdoor repair facilities,and (iii) the number of vehicles awaiting customer pick-up cannot exceed the capacity of the indoor and outdoor auto repair facilities, and further provided that all vehicles must be kept on the businesspremises, and (iv) Pumps, lubrication or other devices are located at least fifteen feet from any street property line, and (v) All stored automobiles, automobile parts and storage and dismantled inoperative automobiles are stared contained within the building, except outdoor display racks. (e) Laundromats and dry -cleaning establishments employing not more than five persons, (f) Locksmith shops, (g) Offices, (h) Membership clubs, (i) Photo shops, 0) Shoe repair shops; (9) Sign shops, commercial (no outdoor storage of materials); (10)Theaters; (11) Veterinarian clinics for household pets(no boarding or outdoor treatment (12) Upholstery shops; and (13) Parking lots within 500 feet of a C -2 district boundary, provided such lots are paved and half of the required landscape is live vegetation and, provided further, that any such property adjacent a residential zoned parcel shall provide a site obscuring fence along the common lot line(s) in accordance with residential fence height requirements. Section 3. That Section 25.70.150 entitled "Vehicle Related Uses"of the Pasco Municipal Code shall be and hereby is amended and shall read as follows: 25.70.150 VEHICLE RELATED USES- (])Any building to be used as an AUTO BODY SHOP, as defined in Section 25.12.085, shall have a spray paint room or spray paint booth which complies with the requirements of the International Fire Code and /or International Building Code; (2) INOPERABLE VEHICLES, as defined in Section 25.12.475 are permitted within the R-T, R -S - 20, R -S -12, R-S -1, R -I, R -2, R -3, R-4, and RFA -1 /1 -A Districts and on all non-conforming residential uses in other districts subject to the following conditions: (a) Only one (1) inoperable vehicle may be stored outside of a fully enclosed building on the property,as an accessory use to a dwelling unit. (b)The inoperable vehicle stored outside shall not be stored upon a public right-of-way or in the front or side yard areas of the property, and shall not conflict with other residential requirements such as off- street parking and lot coverage. (c) The trunk of the outside inoperable vehicle shall be removed or locked at all times it is unattended, and the unattended vehicle shall be completely enclosed within a six(6) foot fence, which is fully site obscuring. (d) All vehicle parts not properly installed upon a vehicle shall be stored inside a fully enclosed building except that parts may be stored within the outside inoperable vehicle. (3) In the C-3 and 1-1 Zoning Districts, inoperable vehicles as defined in Section 25.12.475 and vehicle parts tires and accessories that are not readily moveable and for immediate sale shall be stored or parked behind screening as defined by 25.75.040 (1)(d). Ordinance Amending Title 25 Page 2 of 2 PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco, Washington, and approved as provided by la" this day of 92013. Matt Watkins, Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: Debbie Clark, City Clerk Leland B. Kerr, City Attorney Ordinance Amending Title 25 Page 3 of 3 25.12.475 VEHICLE, INOPERABLE. "Inoperable vehicle" means a vehicle which is apparently inoperable and is extensively damaged, including but not limited to. a broken window or windshield; is absent a tire, wheel, engine, transmission, rear end, axle or driveline; or a vehicle or part thereof which is placed upon jacks, blocks or other support. Amend 25.7 0,150 by adding a Section 3 to read as follows: 25.70.150 VEHICLE - RELATED USES. (1) Any building to be used as an AUTO BODY SHOP, as defined in Section 25.12.085, shall have a spray paint room or spray paint booth which complies with the requirements of the International Fire Code and /or International Building Code; (2) INOPERABLE VEHICLES, as defined in Section 25.12.475 are permitted within the R -T, R -S -20, R -S -12, R -S -1, R -I, R -2, R -3, R -4, and RFA -1 /1 -A Districts and on all non - conforming residential uses in other districts subject to the following conditions: (a) Only one (1) inoperable vehicle may be stored outside of a fully enclosed building on the property, as an accessory use to a dwelling unit. (b) The inoperable vehicle stored outside shall not be stored upon a public right -of-way or in the front or side yard areas of the property, and shall not conflict with other residential requirements such as off- street parking and lot coverage. (c) The trunk of the outside inoperable vehicle shall be removed or locked at all times it is unattended, and the unattended vehicle shall be completely enclosed within a six (6) foot fence, which is fully site obscuring. (d) All vehicle parts not properly installed upon a vehicle shall be stored inside a fully enclosed building except that parts may be stored within the outside inoperable vehicle. (3) In the C-3 and I-1 Zoning Districts, inoperable vehicles as defined in Section 25.12.475 and vehicle parts, tires and accessories that are not readily moveable_and-for immediate sale shall be stored or parked behind screening as defined by 25,75.040 (1) (d). NOTE.- existing "Outdoor Storage-regulations in 25.75 030(6) (a) exempt automobiles from storage restrictions-see below 6) 'Outdoor storage"means all materials, equipment, merchandise or objects kept or placed on the lot or not within an enclosed structure, for preservation or later use or disposal; it is not intended, however, to include the following exceptions. (a) Those objects customarily stored outside an enclosed structure due to their size and due to their being of such character as to not readily deteriorate when exposed to the elements, such as automobiles, mobile homes, boats and other vehicles, farm machinery, irrigation and heavy construction equipment, and those objects which are themselves enclosures;provided, however, said objects are being kept primarily for immediate sale or rental to others, (b) Neat and orderly outdoor displays of items or objects for immediate sale when such displays are incidental or accessory to an established commercial principal activity conducted from an enclosed structure, and further provided that the area consumed by said displays does not exceed an amount equal to ten percent of the net lot area 25.75.040 SCREENING REQUIRED: 1) Outdoor storage and trash collection areas shall be screened as follows: (a) Outdoor storage and trash collection areas located in a commercial or industrial zone with existing or new development shall be screened from any adjacent residential zones and from residential zones across a public street or alley, (b) Outdoor storage and trash collection areas in C -1 (Retail Business) zones shall be sight screened from all adjoining properties; (c) Outdoor storage and trash collection areas located in a commercial or industrial zone with existing or new development and upon a lot adjacent to or visible from the following streets shall be so screened as to obscure vision of such outdoor storage afforded from said streets. (1) "A" Street. (2) Columbia Street, between 1st Avenue and 10th Avenue. (3) Lewis Street. (4) West Clark Street. (5) Sylvester Street. (6) Court Street. (7) Highway #395. (8) Oregon Avenue. (9) First Avenue, north of "A" Street. (10) Third Avenue, north of "A" Street. (11) Fourth Avenue, south of Highway 395. (12) Fifth Avenue, between "A" Street and Court Street. (13) Sixth Avenue, between "A" Street and Court Street. (14) Tenth Avenue. (15) Fourteenth Avenue. (16) Twentieth Avenue. (17) Twenty- Eighth Avenue. (18) Thirty- Fourth Avenue. (19) Thirty -Sixth Avenue. (26) Interstate 182. (21) Highway #12. (22) Road 68. (23) Broadmoor Boulevard. (24) Broadway Street, west of Wehe Avenue. (25) Sandifur Parkway. (26) Burden Boulevard. (27) Chapel Hill Boulevard. (d) Screening of outdoor storage and trash collection areas shall be accomplished by one or both of the following methods: (1) Dense evergreen shrubs and /or trees planted to provide a year -round sight obscuring screen to achieve a minimum height of 6 feet, within 2 years of planting; or 2) A solid or otherwise sight- obscuring fence or wall at least 6 feet in height. REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION MASTER FILE NO: SP2013-012 APPLICANT: Russell Dean HEARING DATE: 6/20/2013 3200 W. Octave St. ACTION DATE: 7/ 18/2013 Pasco, WA 99301 BACKGROUND REQUEST: SPECIAL PERMIT: Location of an automotive body shop in a C-3 (General Business) Zone 1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Legal: The south 200.04 feet of Parcel #119-370-191 General Location: 3306 West Marie Street Property Size: The parcel is approximately 2.6 acres with about 52,000 square feet (1.2 acres) available for the proposed auto body shop. This application is running concurrently with a Short Plat application to divide the existing lot into two parcels. 2. ACCESS: The site is accessible from both Road 34 and W. Octave Street. 3. UTILITIES: All municipal utilities are currently available to serve the site. 4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The site is currently zoned C-3 (General Business). The north portion of the site contains an automotive parts/accessories wholesale warehouse and distribution center while the south portion is vacant. Surrounding properties are zoned and developed as follows: NORTH: C-3 - Commercial wholesale distribution SOUTH: C-3 - Commercial wholesale distribution EAST: C-3 - Commercial RV sales WEST: C-3/RS-1 - Post office/church 5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan designates the site for Commercial uses. LU-4-B promotes planning for major commercial centers which promote functional and economical operations to produce sustainable clusters of shopping and services. The Auto-Plea area of the community is dominated by automotive sales and service facilities; the proposed auto body shop is functionally similar to the surrounding businesses. Goal LU-1-C encourages cluster commercial development. The proposed use is geographically consolidated with many other automotive sales and service businesses. LU-4-C encourages the application of standards and guidelines that will result in attractive and efficient commercial centers. 1 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 WAG 197- 11-158. ANALYSIS The applicant is requesting special permit approval to locate an automotive body shop with a large scale spray booth in a C-3 (General Business) zone located at the intersection of Road 34 and Octave Street. The north half of the site in question currently contains a commercial/industrial parts and accessories wholesale warehouse and distribution center; the southern portion is a gravel parking area. The proposal involves construction of a 6,820 square foot commercial shop structure to house the spray booth and to provide enclosed working space. The site plan submitted also indicates a proposed future shop addition equal to the area of the currently proposed structure, for a total floor area of approximately 13,640 square feet. The Planning Division is currently processing a Short Plat application (MF# SPLAT2013-006) to subdivide the site into two similarly sized parcels. Once processed, the site (Lot 2) proposed to contain the auto body shop will be approximately 52,000 square feet in area; occupying the northeast corner of the intersection of Octave Street and Road 34. Lot 2 (of SPLAT2013-006) is largely undeveloped in its current state. Lot 2 functions as a fenced gravel parking lot and is used for RV parking by Russ Dean RV dealership. The frontage areas, typically required to be landscaped, contain only gravel. The western frontage on Road 34 contains sidewalk while the south frontage on Octave Street does not. The potential impacts to nearby residential zone can be compared to the Action Auto special permit (MF# SP2013-007) where special permit approval was granted for a body shop directly across the right-of-way from a residential neighborhood. Since its construction there have been no complaints received by the City from nearby residents of the adjacent neighborhoods. This is one example chosen to illustrate a case where an auto body shop is located less than 200 feet away from residential units. In another circumstance, an auto body shop located adjacent to a residential area on "A" Street has been the source of long-standing yet unverified complaints of fumes and odors. Impacts of primary concern are that of noise and fumes. The issue of fumes, monitoring and enforcement will be the responsibility of the State Department of Ecology permitting. Paint booth manufactures' product details submitted with the application includes high volume ventilation and filtration equipment 2 to help meet air quality standards. Regarding noise, the residence nearest to the site is approximately 500 feet to the southwest. The body shop will be open during normal business hours when people are commonly away from home. Based on experience with other auto body shops near residential units there appears to be sufficient distance between the body shop and the nearest residences to diffuse noise to an appropriate level. 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 parcel is currently 2.6 acres in area. 2. Parcel number 119-370-191 is zoned C-3 (General Business). 3. Auto body shops are listed as a Permitted Conditional Use in the C-3 (General Business) zone [PMC 25.46040(2)]. 4. The Comprehensive Plan identifies the parcel for commercial uses. 5. The Comprehensive Plan encourages the grouping of similar types businesses. There are other automotive sales or related business located in the immediate vicinity of the Auto-Plex. 6. The site is surfaced with gravel. 7. The sites' frontage on Octave Street lacks sidewalks. 8. The site lacks required right-of-way landscaping on both Road 34 and Octave Street frontages. 9. The north half of the parcel contains a commercial wholesale distribution warehouse with parking and required landscaping. 10. Currently the site has an active Short Plat (MF# SPLAT2013-006) application to divide the parcel into two lots. The resulting "Lot 2" will be 52,000 square feet in area and is the site for which this Special Permit application applies. 11. The 52,000 square foot (approximately 1.2 acre) site proposed to contain the body shop is the south 200.04 feet of parcel number 119-370-191. 12. The proposed auto body site is located easterly of and across the street from existing residential areas. 3 TENTATIVE CONCLUSIONS BASED ON INITIAL STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT Before recommending approval or denial of a special permit the Planning Commission must develop findings of fact from which to draw its conclusions based upon the criteria listed in P.M.C. 25.86.060. The criteria are as follows: (1) Will the proposed use be in accordance with the goals, policies, objectives and text of the Comprehensive Plan? The Comprehensive Plan designates the proposed site for commercial development. The Comprehensive Plan encourages urban development within the Pasco Urban Growth Boundary. The proposal involves the establishment of a commercial business. Comprehensive Plan policy LU- 4-B encourages concentration of commercial activities, which are functionally and economically beneficial. The proposed use is functionally similar to other automotive related business located around the site. (2) Will the proposed use adversely affect public infrastructure? The proposed use will not create a significant impact on infrastructure. The proposed auto body shop will utilize existing infrastructure consistent with its intended use. Sewer and water usage for an auto body shop is minimal. (3) Will the proposed use be constructed, maintained and operated to be in harmony with existing or intended character of the general vicinity? The existing character and intended character of the vicinity is automotive in nature. The site is part of a conglomeration of automotive businesses commonly referred to as the Pasco Auto-flex. The proposed body shop will support some of the existing auto dealerships, especially Russ Dean RV, and will blend in with automotive sales and service character of the vicinity. (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 Surrounding properties are zoned to permit commercial development. .Buildings on surrounding lots and on the lot in question are permitted to be 45 feet in height. According to the construction details provided with the application, the auto shop will be 26 feet tall not including the height of ancillary ventilation stacks. Development on the lot in question and on surrounding lots must comply with all municipal codes including landscaping, zoning and building codes. These codes are intended to 4 support property values and encourage compatibility within neighborhoods. (6) 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? Impacts of primary concern are that of noise and fumes. The issue of fumes, monitoring and enforcement will be the responsibility of the State Department of Ecology permitting. City staff does not have the capability to measure violations of the Department of Ecology air quality permit associated with the spray booth. Any monitoring/enforcement related to air quality will be conducted by the Department of Ecology which provides "complaint driven" enforcement at best. Faint booth manufactures' product details submitted with the application includes high volume ventilation and filtration equipment to help meet air quality standards. Regarding noise, the residence nearest to the site is over 600 feet to the southwest. The body shop will be open during normal business hours when people are commonly away from home. Based on experience with other auto body shops near residential units there appears to be sufficient distance between the body shop and the nearest residences to diffuse noise to an appropriate level. The site is currently in a graveled condition; development of the site will include paving all surfaces not occupied by the shop building. This means the proposal will reduce or eliminate dust generated by the site. Traffic generated by the body shop will be much lower than some of the regularly permitted uses both in the C-1 and C-3 zones. Grocery stores, restaurants and express trucking yards are examples of high-traffic uses not requiring special permit review in the C-3 zone. Unfortunately the ITE Vehicle Trip Generation Manual does not provide a traffic analysis for auto body shops. (6) Will the proposed use endanger the public health or safety if located and developed where proposed, or in any way become a nuisance to uses permitted in the district? Auto body shops possess qualities which would be inherently disruptive to nearby residences. Impacts most commonly include high noise levels due to metal shaping activities, and noxious fumes and airborne particulates produced by painting and paint removal. The Washington State Department of Ecology (DOE) administers the Federal Clean Air Act by imposing regulations on paint booth emissions through permitting. 5 The applicant must obtain the proper DOE permits to address air quality. The residence nearest to the site is approximately 500 the southwest and is usually upwind of the site. Noise generated by the body shop will be during typical business hours when people are typically away from home. It is the opinion of staff that in the case of people at home during normal business hours; there is sufficient distance between the body shop and the nearest residences to diffuse noise to an appropriate level for that time of day. TENTATIVE APPROVAL CONDITIONS 1. The special permit shall apply to the south 200.04 feet of Lot 1, Short Plat 77-27; 2. The site shall be developed in substantial conformance with the site plan submitted with the Special Permit application; 3. Landscaping strips meeting the requirements of PMC 25.75 must be installed on both the Octave Street and Road 34 frontages; 4. Sidewalk must be installed along the entire Octave Street frontage per City standards; 5. The applicant shall be responsible for obtaining all required Department of Ecology air quality permits for the paint booth; 6. No painting, metal bending, fabrication, priming or grinding shall occur outside of an approved building; 7. All impervious surface improvements shall be designed to drain, confine and/or impound storm water or site-generated water within the private property upon which the improvement is to be located; 8. The pedestrian ramp at the corner of Octave Street and Road 34 must be replaced to meet current ADA requirements; 9. The special permit shall be null and void if a building permit for required paint booth improvements has not been obtained by March 3, 2014; and 10. Prior to issuing a Certificate of Occupancy the proposed facility, the applicant shall provide 24-hour contact information. RECOMMENDATION MOTION: I move to close the public hearing and schedule deliberations, the adoption of findings of fact, and development of a recommendation for City Council for the July 18, 2013 Planning Commission meeting. 6 • V�.cini Item: Special Permit - Auto Body in C-3 Applicant: Russ Dean Map File #. SP2013 -012 w 4fi �1111�y,�•pt. 't -'° - 1 / 1 '- 1�" lia,e lH#!R'Rf iRIt 1191k1 _ YC w I V { r 1 If het r r dftL �. *�_� Ian •X. t'R � � s - ' SITS lam • :i __ '�/ '♦s'!r� !Vr fir / IS ( ! t eY` y ' ► • F m Y J I / 4 1 f 1, 1 li 9ft a,vrl 1 r f lie Pk .-� SOL tea- �� I+r� �� . � r � , • W I�TARGAR'ET ST r— 1, y ,.:�, WL r � F Isar ,�,. Sri �11a.•S 4 E;:K I \ .s %p{ mono&1 IF, IL rL IF Land Useltem: Special Permit - Auto Body in C-3 Map Applicant: Russ Dean File SP2013 -012 r jar= mom Commercia Post Office Commercial low do QCTAVEST- Residential -A Zoning Item: Special Permit - Auto Body in C-3 N Applicant: Dean Map / 1 File ff: SP2013 -012 I■ tail iness E:1 WIU22* Suburban 4 II �� �■11 II■11 I�I,I�I��T�� . ■■� 101■ MENEM I� ______ x g� J WWI � 1 q N i y a P RUSS DEAN FAMILY RV � AED ARCHITECTS,PS 8 a F m w a �`�' 68�SymWA dm[ T.5..3.11 � � � ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLAN SERVICE CENTER p�f���t w�ni.�e,WA nessa I F:ws.sea,Irse x 3201 W OCTAVE ST PASCO.WA f gRV —ALCarcM1lecb am s> e MAXFRANGE INDUSTRIAL PAINT BOOTHS THE LEADER IN SPRAY B 00TH APPEicAr1oNs NOVA `I ERTA MAXI-RANGE INDUSTRIAL PAINT BOOTHS F ` f fl Truck and Prep Combination it Mulople Door Options and Booth Cons<guratons Whether you're painting painting system tailored quality craftsmanship of industrial trucks and to your specific needs. Nova Verta's modular equipment, boats, rail, or From solutions that components are designed aircraft, the flexibility of provide short-term for year-in, year-out Nova Verta's Maxi-Stange payback, long-term performance. Industrial Paint Booths lets operational cost savings, you create a large-scale or systems in between,the P 11 II 11 H jik Side Downdraft Bifold Front Post Filtration System y lOptionalJ Dired-Dove Turbine Exhaust Fan • k K� Yacht Building Pre-Wires!Finger Safe Controls VFQ is Rated NEMA 4X Twin Dual inlet Hi-Capacity Law DB imake up air fans) J Horizontal Lighting Package 304 Stainless Steel Heat Exchanger SHORT PLAT NO. MARIE STREET E+K AewolTn arT Snrtrl N.W.1/4, N.W.1/4, SEC. 25, T.9 N., R.29 E., W.M. — --_S 564'S6'21''E -- —00,07- - — — CITY OF P'ASCO FRANKLIN FWNO>, x COUNTY, WASHINGTON 510ErHAR NlMSEWN 160,0 Pri 1/2'RE f I 1 1 T] I r 1 LOT 1 yICINITY Zv4AP .H I 6o.79P.SOFT- n --- n l 1.36 KHTC3 a DESCRIPTION 1 lLT 1,AS 0[HtATAT16 6A 7,HOKI rtiwl M0 T7-xT,KCSA00 u.HIFr/AAtT¢L,[6ulT CXISTING UUII.UING r'".AAA1o,a me.1%­3 MsAA AK10.d i To eucATOr+Ktrnne.x v0,Wi n ff n twee.•.HR'�'.m'C�rAanµw e.rt;nsmcHw.tsrsugv wr+eeor aaaAe1101AV Ne'A ATSCIInvJ.7. II C9HhttrL u9 srcwcnCK V T[Cio W N66.6'i T`HV — S co' s z E s s LOT 2 r 04.00e SF}FT, Lr6 ACRES SCALC t'-A6 r.l I 0 40 00 120 L_r+E+e_iD' AT f SORT P LAT 40,77-2 7 ramEMENT Usm A 11KTEE-SECOM 10TµSIATN61 TOPM RTK CPS I I- --- --- ---- -- - - - - - LEGEND R+6 a -SO 5eSr WAR N/ORAN2 FLAW CAP Oum KIN S 04'A6'i7•E 700.00' vARKM'STRATTON AA0 36071` SIOEIIAIK &. ♦ ..rnkm AS K1MATCO FNS• -61)10 516''STRATTON 14170• • -r10t1N0 LION Ut CAS OCTAVE STREET HLae.-eAAS a ncAfNNe I IAV--WAD arc sxan) EHII-A E53E5 Z:iVKVtTUK t. {UtK M 11,A I t SHORT PLAT FOR INDE25 AUDITOR'S CERTIFICATE SMMOW SURFE) W 1,AARQI A DY8[.A PR:CaS1EREa EAtO ARl IEYOR.NERF�T MRWY 7%AT +' A _ t.YA/xP/KG. PC a d �. _ hE0 TaR IIEC010 THIS DAe OF TNE.SNORT PLAT AS SNOTIX IS PA9Ea LOON ACTUAL MELD SUR"7 OF t i A N 91 SEC T. ' R. 401.7 AT_VINUYCS PASI�, a n04 n LrA7L 1x1 LAxO VESC106TO AND THAT ALL ANGLES.DR5TANCES.AND COURR'S i rJ �1` .N.AND RECORDED 6T WLWC_OF 170,)7]f-ixM ART,1H[REUH CVRRECTLY 74T01R7 ANa THAT THE LOT OCRNERS"AVE BEfN R(.A�AJ � � SHORT PLATS PAGE_AT THE Rc00EST OF FAtI[7NT TS-1lAO 25 0 N I M ,tr.sIN6,VN/WMMrYr. STANCO am THE CROUND AS SHORN ON TIE YAP. AARON A DYfYt, 771fSP1AM. •3013 ANKLNT 4N)QUO. ,DATE:05/116/7013 S H1.1 OF 2 DATE �'l,��. OEPVTT Rr li ONA,W , AA0 BUR 6 1789 _ t J � 1 I Not sp IV - IV - lp ,p,., NOW � y ..Y r X F` ;. .dam v e..;���'�. % � v:8 r�.� yr �lTt T x 4 p .n. L .� � . - _ .G ..ss i 3-.•"- yx _ K ^' {" ?Y - Yz-y. h V.T +ta ^ .z f r9"' v� X 1` yY�, - '4: '. ✓ �....t ,>U,. cT 1 .F- # '.� .-�. tea."' k .l ^t -: . x ,T - 'v.v t `f; Y Sr -fa t J 'lam 2F 1 ,x= i)' y. c^ Y -v a +.t z s i X ]{: f ,.r./rt Y'" 2'.�i' .r xa ,.r s x is vi > . r� ti S a L S h Kam'' s Vp .y„"' � ..- - -� J f / k >3 - .3 � 'v' X � Sti. "Ett i� � ? .» RT�•{ M.''t.,W .F t tee. `�Y5'�r ,�y`�" y '�' ".� < Y � K .z" � -:x �� '°. 2 -� ✓ �.'!'3K �- �n ,w. t £> n r 5 fr Y ° ao - .. t� c F T "q `� - 1i � -y x k.. ". � A \ ='Yc tvr v `�'" �S'(i P,? X.p�- `Trr' ^+r cc '. .f �s..f'''. . rc37` n2.�J . ;.e-9*� 'k a ,� 't s f 3 +h.•l �'�lr`3►c, .r A x � �. sue, a s 4 r-.- �'a - a` �/ 1.t1�i y S F..j T. b� "•. .L �. � 1 ?r 'l' '-�, <'q1 -s "• � 1 1 r � Y?a. \ '> �' ,� 3� rL'1 .a "v 1°�ys e� a+ s r+.r > � � i>�y of � 4 •v zL t Y �.�� '..�� s��� i �r ♦ .tea it Ste, sc . r \s.. �"S �\^ n. "� 'l+ - +�".,k t* z- l .^f, %}.ac g`y-4 a'��'4^✓<.e Y ., LY>�+ n��' '�'i$,.-ilS.. 5 `�`9"� . 2 td �l �� v5 � >•` \ 7 '' � } - r `�`. ` _'h ,a � '� `� "" tN � ✓� Sri s a� S z S � t �' • 7. plc � ,Ki �t s c , \f >` ��; i \ t`. ? P . r >• .� .. .. y ,,,C f� _�x � � 1 �.d � � .. : �\ aec �TY r 9 `i .,, r �� d i �" 1, a� � .� a c'� � �;�. ✓. . x" ., X c ..:.�- ' - ..' ... �. .. :< . , ie ua R ? i ,� v �.av�'S.-.'41" � �'.�.C.4 n o 4 i�a I , . ^ /U / r . ��� „ �ys�a ��� �d %' .� / ftf.AB�♦ JJ�IIdJ// riJ lJrt 4d *.¢" 5'+.. _- I J I / J / 1 l r r � ,✓,11/ll/lJI%lull' , pinln � �""'� ' s � i 4. — –��a._ i lrrl -) , ll1 � i )P sa�'0.�` "` ��-��Sk. Ih•T m � l.% 1 / l1ll ulJnu t ,� — l 1_ ' / Il /) lI1Jlll1Jll ' illlllJl�rJlu i � ry a,. ✓� �� - __ l JII, / / !�¢ j/1 If mm I ra �� al 11 1, it `r a .Fi r >— —•- ° .; 4 � t 1 3 F�lfrn��cv�. �a�>r•v�.������+44�K 1 .� y r Ayy's'`;"s� V -. T ,� � .. ! a,`�i f / r.��„ ,,��y,,�ya r�� ��� P,��� wt`<�a�fy / � 1�*�' Za.-` � �' r - •y,C � mil. �� dfi � '�W r rY � , �� �' �"� � � �y• '.`fiP.`< � ��3.: S '�• i Al VPT h, �5. T^' 'x. •, rts may, � - +�.� `a :� t ry� f A °' - n y■ ^ Nor 4W or Q 6L ' r Al sa L 4 Nt-y ' Zbo .�. :� -�'�' ^:.,-_.x:.::1�k#.��-��1.•s..s;-u� -.tug.K:�.�r�.«�AS a�"�' _ a� �`�� ..� ^T � w �L§e' .ate.*•� R M1 J '= 3 s x r' ,.,,, . - = _ : �- 4� J= � f ._ _ •n�- - — _ -._ i-- - - . v � �� � . , . ` ¢� -_ � ,_ _ _ . �� - � . � , , .� - �r MEMORANDUM DATE: January 12, 2012 TO: Pro�cct File FROM: Dave McDonald, City Planner SUBJECT: McCurley Detail Building Bill McCurley applied to build a new auto detail building at 3,302 W. Marie Street. The building will connect at the southeast corner of the dealership car wash. Part of the detail building will contain a paint booth to satisfy requirements of the Dept. of Ecology. Mr. McCurley applied to the State for portable spray equipment to touch up small areas of vehicles following detailing. While such equipment is permitted in Benton County under the Benton County Glean Air Authority, .DOE, does not permit the same in Franklin County. As a result a full spray booth has been included in the detailing building. The detail building only has room enough for the booth, paint storage and the work area for detailing. No auto body work can occur in the building and none is planned For zoning purposes the proposed building will be classified as a detail shop accessory to the car wash and auto dealership functions that occur on the McCurley Subaru-Mazda Property. The building is not large enough to include auto body repair work, only detailing and touch up painting will occur in the building. The property is zoned C-3 and is part of the larger Pasco Auto-Plea. Most of the businesses surrounding the site are autornotive related, All detailing work including the spray booth will be contained inside the building and will conform to all building and fine code requirements. The proposed building will also conform to the recent Zoning Code Amendment dealing with spray booths for .RV sales and service. The proposed booth/building will be setback at least 30 feet from tht street right-of-way, it is more than 300 feet from any residential zone, the property is part of a complex that is used primarily for automotive sales and serv=ice and no vehicle parts are involved because no auto body work v ill take place. REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION MASTER FILE NO. Z 2013-003 APPLICANT: Jeff McClure HEARING DATE: 6/20/ 13 29 Wayne Ct ACTION DATE: 7/18/13 Burbank, WA 99323 BACKGROUND REQUEST: REZONE Rezone from R-2 (Medium-Density Residential) to C- 1 (Retail Business). 1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Legal: That portion of Section 28, Township 9 North, Range 30 East W.M. described as follows; the north 248.71' of the west 22$.71' of the northwest quarter of the northwest quarter of the southeast quarter of Section 28, Township 9 North, Range 30 East W.M. General Location: 2302 East Lewis Street Property Size: The parcel is approximately 1.15 acres. 2. ACCESS: The property has access from both Lewis Street and Cedar Avenue. 3. UTILITIES: All utilities are available to the site. Utilities will need to be extended into the site prior to development. 4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The site is currently zoned R-2 (Medium- Density Residential). The site contains a 2,400 metal structure. Surrounding properties are zoned and developed as follows: North C-3 — Commercial South R-2 — Vacant East R-2 — Residential West C-1 — Vacant 5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan designates this area for Commercial uses. Most of the parcels fronting Lewis Street east of Sycamore Avenue are designated 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 (Mr. McClure) has requested a change of zoning for his parcel located on the southeast corner of Lewis Street and Cedar Avenue. After a lengthy history of Code Enforcement activity related to commercial uses in a residential zone, Mr. McClure has applied to change the parcel's zoning from R- 2 (Medium Density Residential) to C-1 (Retail Business). The site in question previously contained a gas station which was demolished many years ago. In 1970, a 2,400 square foot metal shop building was constructed on the site. Currently, the site is being used for storage of various items; most of which are items typically associated with commercial bee keeping. Some time ago the applicant located commercial/industrial cargo storage containers on the property. The parcel is fenced with metal wire fencing and from the roadway appears to be a type of commercial storage yard. By Code, the fore mentioned conditions are not suitable in the R-2 district, nor would said conditions be permitted in the C-1 zone. As a strategy to bring some of the Code violations into conformance, the owner wishes to apply commercial zoning to the parcel. A change in zoning classification alone however will not simply eliminate all existing Code violations; there are certain site development standards that would need to be met before a commercial business may be formally established and licensed. It should be noted that the site is adjacent to the Bonnie Brae residential park to the east. Special consideration should be taken when proposing commercial zoning adjacent to residential uses. In terms of use, Bonnie Brae conforms to its respective zoning and Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation. The initial review criteria for considering a rezone application are explained in PMC. 25.88.030. The criteria are listed below as follows: 1. The date the existing zone became effective: The current zoning classification was established when the property was annexed in 1994. 2. The changed conditions in the vicinity which warrant other or additional zoning: The Lewis Street freeway interchange was built from 1996 to 1997 adding to the volume of commercial vehicle traffic on Lewis Street. Since 1994 right-of-way improvements have been made to Lewis Street between Oregon Avenue and Cedar Avenue. Those improvements included the installation of sidewalks, street trees and roadside landscaping strips. Recently, an L.I.D. in this vicinity was completed, adding curbs, gutters, sidewalks, etc. to much of the residential roadways directly south of the site. The owner of this property did not 2 participate in the L.I.D. Since 1994 several hundred residential units were built in the vicinity which adds to the customer base in this part of the community. 3. Facts to justify the change on the basis of advancing the public health, safety and general welfare: The rezone would facilitate development of a commercial land use on Lewis Street which is a main arterial road serving fairly dense residential neighborhoods to the north and south. Much of the land fronting on the south side of Lewis Street east of Oregon Ave contains non-residential uses. The site was developed as a commercial gas station before being annexed into the city. Upon annexation in 1994 a relatively large area of land, which included the subject site, was designated with the R-2 zoning classification. The R-2 zone was applied to the annexed land because at the time that area contained the Bonnie Brae trailer park. Since 1994 other non-residential development has occurred on Lewis Street. Rezoning the site may facilitate the property becoming fully developed with the necessary infrastructure, landscaping and building improvements. The proposal could have a positive impact upon the general public and the welfare of the community by enhancing the eastern entrance to the City. Such development supports past public expenditures for streetscape improvements along Bast Lewis Street. Additionally the rezone will provide more area for the development of retail services serving many of the new homes in the area. 4. The effect it will have on the nature and value of adjoining property and the Comprehensive Plan: Based on past experience with rezoning underutilized land and evidence provided by tax records of Franklin County, the proposed rezone will not negatively impact adjoining properties. Rezoning the property will assist with the implementation of the Comprehensive Plan. In May, 2013 staff researched the tax record history for homes located adjacent to parcels zoned C-1 compared to homes not abutting C-1 zones. The tax records indicate no significant difference between the two categories; homes adjacent to C-1 zoned parcels held the same patterns in assessed value as the homes not abutting C-1 zones. 5. The effect on the property owners if the request is not granted: Retaining the residential zoning for the parcel would require the owner cease all on-site commercial and/or industrial business activity. The existing metal building could not be used until a residential use is established. It may also be a requirement that any proposed residential structure be larger in floor area than the existing 2,400 square foot metal building or to remove the metal building before residential construction would be permitted. 6. The Comprehensive Plan land use designation for the property: The Comprehensive Plan designates the site for Commercial uses. A change in zoning classification from R-2 (Medium-Density Residential) to C-1 (Retail Business) is consistent with the Plan's Land Use Map. Plan Policy LU-4-B 3 encourages the location of commercial facilities at major street intersections to avoid commercial sprawl and avoid disrupting residential neighborhoods, and to leverage major infrastructure availability. The site in question is located on Lewis Street (major arterial) very near the intersection of Heritage Boulevard which ultimately serves as a freeway on-ramp. The sites' locational circumstance may best serve the city in a commercial capacity. 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 Findings to this listing as the result of factual testimony and evidence submitted during the open record hearing. 1. The site is approximately 1.15 acres in area. 2. The site is currently zoned R-2 (Medium-Density Residential). 3. The Comprehensive Plan designates the site for Commercial uses. 4. The proposed change of zoning is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 5. The site previously contained a gas service station which also distributed bulk oil products. 6. The site was developed with an automotive service station and bulk oil distribution facility while in Franklin County's jurisdiction. 7. The site fronts both Lewis Street and Cedar Avenue. 8. The Commercial Land Use Designation in the Comprehensive Plan includes the C-1 (Retail Business) zone. 9. City records indicate the property owner has been conducting non- residential activity on the site for the past few years. 10. The existing 2,400 square foot metal shop structure was constructed in 1970. 11. The site was annexed into the city in 1994 by Ordinance #3033. 12. The R-2 zone was applied to the site upon annexation. 13. East Lewis Street between Oregon Avenue and Cedar Avenue was treated with right-of-way improvements including sidewalks, street trees and roadside landscaping strips. 14. Since 1994 several hundred residential housing units were established in that area of the community east of Oregon Avenue. CONCLUSIONS BASED ON INITIAL STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT Before recommending approval or denial of a Rezone, the Planning Commission must develop its conclusions from the Findings of Fact based upon the criteria listed in P.M.C. 25.88.060 and determine whether or not: 1. The proposal is in accordance with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. 4 The proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and several Plan policies and goals. The request for C-1 zoning is consistent with the Commercial Land Use Designation. Land Use Policy ... 2. The effect of the proposal on the immediate vicinity will not be materially detrimental. The application of the C-1 zone alone will not authorize the owner to continue his current business activity without developing the site to current standards. The nature of the current non-residential activity detracts from the appeal of the vicinity. The C-1 zone in this location will not inherently be a detriment to the immediate vicinity. Many uses permitted in the C-1 zone would be beneficial in serving the surrounding neighborhoods. 3. There is merit and value in the proposal for the community as a whole. Surrounding residential neighborhoods may support increased commercial developments fronting Lewis Street. The C-1 zone in this location is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. The rezone will facilitate the establishment of additional commercial services on Lewis Street. Considering the dense residential development, primarily to the north, there may be value and merit to increasing the commercial land bordering the main arterial road which serves the vicinity. Due to its ease of access, the most suitable use of land immediately surrounding the Lewis Street freeway interchange may be that of a commercial node. 4. Conditions should be imposed in order to mitigate any significant adverse impacts from the proposal. The applicant has not proposed any specific development plan to be considered for the application of any special conditions or restrictions beyond those built into the C-1 zoning language. The C-1 zone contains requirements for special permit review for uses which may be disruptive to adjacent or nearby residences. C-1 permitted uses were developed with consideration to the fact that C-1 zones commonly abut residential zones throughout the city. No special site-specific conditions are proposed by staff. 5. A Concomitant Agreement should be entered into between the City and the petitioner, and if so, the terms and conditions of such an agreement. A Concomitant Agreement is not proposed by staff. RECOMMENDATION MOTION: I move to close the hearing on the proposed rezone and initiate deliberations and schedule adoption of findings of fact, conclusions and a recommendation to the City Council for the July 18, 2013 meeting. 5 Vicinity• Item: Rezone - R-2 to C- 1 A plicant: Jeff McClure N MaP File #: Z2013 -003 Ilk s C ,Y z SITES F , 6 tl p.f� F -d Land Use Item: Rezone - R-2 to G 1 A licant: Jeff McClure Map File #.i Z2013 -003 I I 7 � I I I I I I I Single Family Residential Single Family Residential Vacant Vacant LEWIS ST w � Commercial Vacant a SITEw o w Residential Vacant U x Residential Vacant Vacant Item : Rezone - R-2 to C- 1 Zoning . . Map A licant. Jeff McClure N • File #. 22013 -003 R-1-A (Low-Density Residential Alternate) R 2 R-1-A (Low-Density Residential Alternate) C-1 C-1 (Retail Business) (Retail Business) C-3 LEWIS ST C-3 C-1 c_1 SITE W A � w H U R-1 R-2 (Low-Density Residential) (Medium-Density Residential) i f f[ .�iJ �. �Y t � Yl.�B1 lF'• w 4i 15 '+�� to a..,y � a :r ry 48�,� rA��:✓� s ,s Ago NI 1 All ,4 :!. _ - ✓ cer 'Fi r. e,y ILA PF UI L.,' _ IL I Looking South �� Ih u' �, •4'r rr ,� �. f.: r0. ar— A ''�t�b; �#� ;, ,��`• '�, � ��,� ►�� �° �y { : ,�Rk�;,� _ ti �• ,tad;,; �4a;. R ,.�� i4, 4 �yy� q � i i 't °�.. rypdQ '• � „� � , v•^ �'Y � �;,.1 4n. t �' '"'Ny!•'t.�l".l. ��I{ �1V 1'��� ti- v x �. 0�is fir; `L ,l• ' I s REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION MASTER FILE NO: PP 2013-001 APPLICANT: Hayden Homes HEARING DATE: 6/20/2013 2464 SW Glacier PI #110 ACTION DATE: 7/18/2012 Redmond, OR 97756 BACKGROUND REQUEST: Preliminary Plat: Aintree Preliminary Plat, 15-Lots (Single- Family) 1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Legal: That portion of the SW quarter of the SW quarter of Section 15, Township 9 North, Range 29 East, WM. lying northerly of the FCID canal except that portion platted as Chapel Hill Division, 2 and that portion platted as short Plat 2010-14 General Location: 6720 Aintree Drive Property Size: 5.05 Acres Number of Lots Proposed: 15 lots Square Footage Range of Lots: 7,803 ft' to 22,058 ft' Average Lot Square Footage: 12,033 ft2 2. ACCESS: The property will have access from Aintree Drive. A 60 foot wide public road will provide access to each lot. 3. UTILITIES: Municipal sewer and water services are currently available from the mainlines in Aintree Drive. 4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The site is in the process of being zoned R-1 (Low-Density Residential) from RT (Residential Transition). Surrounding properties are zoned and developed as follows: NORTH: R-1 - Single Family Residences SOUTH: C-1 - Fire Station/Commercial Business EAST: R-1 - Single Family Residences WEST County RS-20 - Single Family Residences 5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan designates this area for Mixed Residential uses. Land Use Policy LU-3-B encourages "infill" development. Other goals and policies suggest the City permit a full range of residential environments including single family homes (H-2-A) and standards that control the scale 1 and density of accessory buildings and homes to maintain compatibility with other residential uses (H-4-B). 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 is proposing to subdivide the 5.05 acre site in question into 15 lots to allow the construction of 15 single-family residences. Currently zoned RT (Residential Transition), the site is in the process of being rezoned to the R-1 (Low-Density Residential) zone consistent with surrounding properties in the Chapel Hill subdivision. This property was part of the original farm circle that occupied the area between the FCID canal and I-182 east of Road 68. Because the parcel was held under separate ownership from the farm circle it was not rezoned and platted when the Chapel Hill subdivision was being planned. Consistent with the RT zoning classification the site was developed with one single-family house and a shop/barn. In 2003 the surrounding farm circle was rezoned to R-1, R-3 and R-4 and developed as the Chapel Hill Subdivision. The site has remained minimally developed since that time. Due to the irregular shape of the parcel development options are limited to a single cul-de-sac surrounded by lots. In addition to the shape of the parcel the steep slopes will also impact the layout of the subdivision causing a wide variation in the size of the lots. This subdivision is considered an infill development that is consistent with the purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and is supportive of past development in the Chapel Hill Subdivision. LOT LAYOUT; The proposed plat contains 15 lots; with lots varying in size from 7,803 to 22,058 square feet; the average size being 12,033 square feet. RIGHTS-OF-WAY: The Plat fronts Aintree Drive which is currently developed to City standards. The one cul-de-sac proposed for the plat will be developed to City standards. The Franklin County Irrigation District canal borders the southern side of the parcel. 2 UTILITIES: The developer will be responsible for extending utilities into the Plat. A common utility easement will be needed along either side of the cul-de-sac. The easement will be used by the PUD and other utility providers. The PUD permits common use of utility trenches which enables the easement to be used by other utility providers. The City Engineer will determine the specific placement of fire hydrants and streetlights when construction plans are submitted. STREET NAMES: Aintree Drive is already named. A name of the future public road will be assigned during the final platting process. IRRIGATION: Municipal Code requires installation of irrigation lines as a part of infrastructure improvements. WATER RIGHTS: The assignment of water rights is a requirement for subdivision approval. Water rights have not yet been assigned to the City. FINDINGS OF FACT State law (RCW 58.17.010) and the Pasco Municipal Code require the Planning Commission to develop Findings of Fact as to how this proposed subdivision will protect and enhance the health, safety and general welfare of the community. The following is a listing of proposed "Findings of Fact": Prevent Overcrowding: Density requirements of the R-1 zone are designed to address overcrowding concerns. The proposed plat has a density of approximately 3 units per acre. No more than 40 percent of each lot is permitted to be covered with structures. Parks Opens Space/Schools: A City park will be located at the corner of Chapel Hill Boulevard and Saratoga Lane. Hayden Homes recently submitted plans for the street and utilities necessary to serve the park. The proposed subdivision is served by Mark Twain Elementary, McLoughlin Middle School and Chiawana High School. The City is required by RCW 58.17.110 to make a finding that adequate provisions are being made to ameliorate the impacts of the proposed subdivision on the School District. Based on the School Districts Capital Facilities Plan the City collects school mitigation fees for each new dwelling unit. The fee is paid at the time of building permit issuance. In response to past subdivision proposals the School District by letter dated August 30, 2012, has explained that the collection of impact fees addresses the requirements of RCW 58.17.110. 3 Effective Land Use/Orderly Development: The plat is laid out to effectively utilize the site consistent with the rezone approval set to occur in July 2013. The rezone will apply the R-1 zone to the site which allows approximately 6 units per acre. The Plat is designed for 15 units. Safe Travel & Walking Conditions: The Plat is connected to the community by Aintree Drive which leads to Road 68. Sidewalks are a part of the development requirements for the property and must conform to current City standards and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements. Adequate Provision of Municipal Services: All lots within the Plat will be provided with water, sewer and other utilities. Provision of Housing for State Residents: The proposed Preliminary Plat contains 15 single-family building lots, providing an opportunity for the construction of 15 dwelling units. Adequate Air and Light: The maximum lot coverage limitations and building setbacks will assure that adequate movement of air and light is available to each lot. Proper Access & Travel: Aintree Drive has been developed to City standards. The Preliminary Plat was submitted to the Transit Authority for review. (The discussion under "Safe Travel" above applies to this section also). Comprehensive Plan Policies & Maps: The Comprehensive Plan designates the Plat site for mixed residential development. Policies of the Comprehensive Plan suggest the City strive to maintain a variety of housing for residents. Other Findings: 1. The site is within the Pasco Urban Growth Boundary. 2. The State Growth Management Act requires urban growth and urban densities to occur within the Urban Growth Boundaries. 3. The Comprehensive Plan identifies the site for mixed residential development. 4. The site is zoned RT (Residential Transition). 5. The site is anticipated to be rezoned to R-1 in July, 2013. 6. The developer is proposing to build 15 dwelling units on the site. 4 7. The Housing Element of the Comprehensive Plan encourages the development of a variety of residential densities and housing types. 8. The preliminary plat approval will facilitate an infill development which is encouraged by the Comprehensive Plan. 9. The Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan encourages the interconnection of neighborhood streets to provide for the disbursement of traffic. 10. Aintree Drive provides access to the site in the northwest corner of the parcel. 11. The School District impact fees will be collected at the time at building permit is issued for each home. 12. The School District recently passed a bond levy to further mitigate the impact created by additional enrollment. 13. RCW 58.17.110 requires the City to make a finding that adequate provisions have been made for schools before any preliminary plat is approved. 14. The School District indicated by previous correspondence dated February 3, 2012, that impact fees address the requirement to ensure adequate provisions are made for schools. 15. The proposed development is adjacent to the Franklin County Irrigation District canal. 16. The Chapel Hill development to the east of the proposed plat was required to install a common fence along the canal right-of-way as part of the subdivision improvements.. CONCLUSIONS BASED ON THE FINDINGS OF FACT Before recommending approval or denial of the proposed Plat the Planning Commission must develop Findings of Fact from which to draw its conclusion (P.M.C. 26.24.070) therefrom as to whether or not. (1) Adequate provisions are made for the public health, safety and general welfare and for open spaces, drainage ways, streets, alleys, other public ways, water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks, playgrounds, transit stops, schools and school grounds, sidewalks for safe walking conditions for students and other public needs; The proposed Plat will be required to develop under the standards of the Municipal Code and the standard specifications of the City Engineering Division. These standards include all infrastructure improvements designed to ensure the public health, safety and general welfare of the community are secured. These standards include provisions for access, 5 drainage, water and sewer service and fire safety. The Preliminary Plat was forwarded to the Franklin County PUD, the Pasco School District and Ben-Franklin Transit Authority for review and comment. Based on the School Districts Capital Facilities Plan the City collects school mitigation fees for each new dwelling unit. The fee is paid at the time of building permit issuance. In response to past subdivision proposal the School District, by letter dated August 30, 2012, has explained the collection of impact fees addresses the requirements of RCW 58.17.110. A neighborhood park will located at the corner of Chapel. All new developments participate in establishing parks through the payment of park fees at the time of permitting. The development will be required to pay a traffic mitigation fee with each permit for the development's share of future street improvements including the installation of new traffic signals. (2) The proposed subdivision contributes to the orderly development and land use patterns in the area; The proposed Plat makes efficient use of vacant land and will provide for additional housing following the designation of the Comprehensive Plan and the established zoning. The proposed subdivision is an infill development that will utilize vacant land within the Pasco Urban Growth Boundary thereby contributing to the orderly development of the community. (3) The proposed subdivision conforms to the policies, maps and narrative text of the Comprehensive Plan; The Comprehensive Plan land use map designates the site for mixed residential development. The Housing Element of the Plan encourages the promotion of a variety of residential. The completion of the plat will provide building lots for single-family dwellings, one of the types of housing identified as appropriate in the mixed residential areas of the community. (4) The proposed subdivision conforms to the general purposes of any applicable policies or plans which have been adopted by the City Council; Development plans and policies have been adopted by the City Council in the form of the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed subdivision conforms to the policies, maps and narrative text of the Plan as noted in number three above. 6 (5) The proposed subdivision conforms to the general purposes of the subdivision regulations. The general purposes of the subdivision regulations have been enumerated and discussed in the staff analysis and Findings of Fact. The Findings of Fact indicate the subdivision is in conformance with the general purposes of the subdivision regulations provided certain mitigation measures are provided for (i.e. school impact mitigation, park fees and traffic fees). (6) The public use and interest will be served by approval of the proposed subdivision. The proposed Plat, if approved, will be developed in accordance with all City standards designed to insure the health, safety and general welfare of the community are met. The Comprehensive Plan will be implemented through development of this plat. These factors will insure the public use and interest are served. PLAN' APPROVAL CONDITIONS 1. The developer shall install a properly designed irrigation system with stubs to all lots in the subdivision for future irrigation needs. All easements/rights of way necessary to convey an irrigation system to and through the proposed plat must be conveyed to the City of Pasco. The irrigation lines shall run in easements/rights of way as directed by the City Engineer; 2. At the time lots are developed, all abutting roads and utilities shall be installed to City standards as approved by the City Engineer. This includes, but is not limited to water and sewer lines, streets, street lights and storm water retention. The handicapped accessible pedestrian ramps must be completed with the street and curb improvements prior to final Plat approval. All proposed utilities must be installed underground by the developer at the developer's expense; 3. The developer/builder shall pay the "traffic impact fee" established by ordinance at the time of issuance of building permits for homes. Fees collected shall be placed in a fund and used to finance signalization and other improvements necessary to mitigate traffic impacts on the circulation system within the 1-182 corridor; 4. The developer/builder shall mitigate impacts to the Public School System by the "school impact fee" established by Ordinance at the time of issuance of building permits for homes; 7 5. No utility vaults, pedestals, or other obstructions will be allowed at street intersections; 6. All storm water is to be disposed of per City and State codes and requirements; 7. The developer shall insure active and ongoing dust, weed and litter abatement activities occur during the construction of the subdivision and construction of dwellings thereon; S. The developer shall install a common fence along the Franklin County Irrigation District canal to match the common fence in the Chapel Hill subdivision to the east. No access shall be permitted through the common fence to the irrigation canal right-of-way; 9. The developer shall be responsible for the creation of record drawings. All record drawings shall be created in accordance with the requirements detailed in the Record Drawing Requirements and Procedure form provided by the Engineering Division. This form shall be signed by the developer prior to construction plan approval; 10. All engineering designs for infrastructure and Final Plat drawings shall utilize the published City of Pasco Vertical Control Datum and shall be identified on each such submittal; 11. The Final. Plat shall contain a 10-foot utility easement parallel to all streets; 12. The Final Plat shall contain the following Franklin County Public Utility District statement: "The individual or company making improvements on a lot or lots of this Plat is responsible for providing and installing all trench, conduit, primary vaults, secondary junction boxes, and backfill for the PUD's primary and secondary distribution system in accordance with PUD specifications; said individual or company will make full advance payment of line extension fees and will provide all necessary utility casements prior to PUD construction and/or connection of any electrical service to or within the Plat"; 13. Water rights shall be assigned to the City, if no water rights exist; the developer is required to pay a fee of $1,500 an acre to the City of Pasco prior to acceptance of any subdivision construction plans. 14. Street lighting must be installed to the City of Pasco/Franklin County PUD standards and as directed by the City Engineer. Residential street lights are typically installed every 300 feet, and collector/arterial type street lights are typically installed every 150 feet. Street light positioning is alternating and is measured along the centerline of the road, 8 15. Prior to the City of Pasco accepting construction plans for review the developer must enter into a Storm Water Maintenance Agreement with the City. The developer will be responsible for obtaining the signatures of all parties required on the agreement and to have the agreement recorded with the Franklin County Auditor. The original signed and recorded copy of the agreement must be presented to the City of Pasco at the intake meeting for construction plans; 16. The developer will be required to conform to all conditions set forth in the Storm Water Maintenance Agreement including, but not limited to, regular cleaning and maintenance of all streets, gutters, catch basins and catch basin protection systems. Cleaning shall occur on a regular basis to ensure that no excess buildup of sand, trash, grass clippings, weeds or other debris occurs in any portion of the streets, gutters, or storm water collection facilities. Cleaning and upkeep of the streets, gutters, and storm water collection facilities must be to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The developer will be responsible for operating and maintaining the storm drain system in accordance with the Storm Water Maintenance Agreement for a period of up to five years from the date of Final Plat approval depending on the build out schedule for homes on the lots; and, 17. The developer will be required to comply with the City of Pasco Civil Plan Review process. RECOMMENDATION MOTION: I move to close the hearing on the proposed subdivision and initiate deliberations and schedule adoption of Findings of Fact, Conclusions and a Recommendation to the City Council for the July 18, 2013 meeting. 9 Vicinity Item: Preliminary Plat ( 15-Lots Applicant: H Homes N Map File #. PP2013 -001 - Fi r4 X f , City Limits .SITE�\� r r S w .. y��-±�.•>��... fig^ F R ,S k► � M n 1 '" Land Use Item: Preliminary Plat ( 15-Lots) A licant: Hayden Homes N Ma File #: PP2013 -001 CHAPEL HILL BLVD ti_EL=MARCT Multi-Family Residences F�ngle-Family Residences �, �, `-� ��� EY vlEw PL ���� �� ' S1llle-FaIl111y Residences ,� s SITE p7 FR's 1 Fire a Station a4 ti oVacant Vacant Comm Single-Family Residences a a C Zoning Item: Preliminary Plat ( 15-Lots) Applicant. Hay den Homes 1' a • p File . PP2013 -001 CHAPEL HILL BLVD R-4 EL BAR Cr - � RT Haigh-Density Residential Transition 'f` Residential 4�' 1° '77, VALLEY VIEW PL rI ' l County RS-20 q�l " Law-Density i 'Q Residential SITE N RS-12 Suburban c ' C-1 RS-20 V Retail Business Suburban RS-12 Suburban I r e. rr . r s • ✓ , ' `�' r ' •c r .+a: . .= N� �s"^ ��"r .%� r. -r rig,'., , W �" n , � 1 � e S r Y tit �'F 3 . -. � .s 1 _ � � �5. ..=.� � n ' l'-.. .+Y�' `F 1 HC � i i• .� t ✓ f �vt+� /• {� �x "v4'��' F i hff_ilti u' _ ; • V i � �'I ,V �. � � .�� _�-� © IJ ° >TIi �' I hl Fl. _ l Eti �h h� � ' . �� �r�� �wwwwwaww�r�■•w��"�nnw(wrenrrwrrwwrrrrrr�wRw rrrn��tl� ��11� �!�r'rrrwria��n �. L M. - =L� C - f i s ,: w - - - - - _ 4 a- 0i � � u i � .' .- , p.V . .. r' ... 'jti. .�" �a.�s. 'i+e„�i7�-a t..`.,�`�•�. . s a ...ryt•-•+ � '�...: .,, -_ �._+.spa+-.+. _ l f IFFW AIR, »�. y .� w' ,'4 l�hr .a.` y k�� -31 � � . T " ..€.. . 7jq#"✓>xoA3.«v4"'.T" .�' Es' . . r--e� S" • sue°' - "r di 7=' ,.x P k 4 .ti M -r eY«� +� J "4t-^e•.--a..- z,. 4(. , � - i 4' _'ts+ MEMORANDUM DATE: June 11, 2013 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Angela R. Pitman, Block Grant Administrator SUBJECT: 2014 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) PROGRAM ALLOCATION(MF#BGAP2013-003) Requests for Funding Attached for your review and consideration are the CDBG Fund and Proposal Summaries (Attachments I & 2) relating to our Community Development Block Grant Program for program year 2014. Fifteen (15) requests for funds were submitted totaling $1,470,344.89. Each applicant will present their proposal before the Planning Commission,June 20, 2013. Estimated Funds Available It is estimated that the 2014 annual entitlement grant will be $619,417 based on the award for program year 2013. Prior year funds available for commitment are $36,339 malting a total of $655,756 in funds available for use in 20I4. There is always some question regarding actual funding levels approved by Congress. Actual available funding for these FY 2014 activities will remain in question until the earl} part of the year when the CDBG allocation is made by Congressional Resolution. If funding levels are lower than estimated, activity funding may need to be reallocated accordingly. Public Service Casa HUD regulations state that the amount of CDBG Funds obligated within a program year to support public service activities may not exceed 15% of the combined total of the entitlement plus the prior yew's program income. For 2014,the estimated entitlement of$619,417, and estimated 2014 program income of $2,000 makes the maximum available for public service activities $87,000. Current requests for public services total $112,500. Staff recommends a maximum of$70,000 for public services(1 I%). Planning& Administration Can HUD regulations state that the amount of CDBG Funds obligated within a program year to support planning and administration activities may not exceed 19% of the combined total of the entitlement plus the current year's program income. For 2014, the estimated entitlement of$619,417 makes the maximum available for planning and administration $120,000. Current requests for planning and administration total $120,000. Staff recommends a maximum of$120,000 for planning and administration (19%). The City Staff would like to thank the members of the Planning Commission for your time and assistance. MOTION: 1 move to close the public hearing and schedule deliberations and development of a recommendation for City Council for the July 18, 2013 Planning Commission Meeting. /arp Attachments: 1. 2014 CDBG Fund Summary 2. 2014 CDBG Proposal Summary 3. 2014 CDBG Request for Proposal Applications Attachment 1 2014 CDBG Fund Summary-6.20.13 Attachment 1 Planning Commission Meeting Page 1 Proposals-Recommendations LOCI NonCDBG Agency Staff PC City Council Goal3trat Pill) D RECIPIENT ACTIVITYlAGFNCYNAME Match Requested Recommend Recommend A roval Ob Risk Priority 0001 01 City of Pasco-Community&Economic Development CDBG Program Administration $0.00 $120,000.00 0 0 0002 02 City f Pasco-Administrative&Community Services Martin Luther King Community Center Recreation y v $10O,500.00 $37,500.00 v.2 ez Specialist 0002 03 City of Pasco-Administrative&Community Services Civic Center-Youth Recreation Specialist $45,500.00 $37,500.00 V.2 B2 0002 C4 City of Pasco-Administrative&Community Services Senior Citizen's Center Recreation Specialist $200,506.00 $37,500.00 V.2 02 0003 05 Downtown Pasco Development Authority Pasco Specialty Kitchen $44,200.00 $60,000.00 I.1-5 A2 0003 06 Downtown Pasco Development Authority Downtown Fagade Improvement Program $15,000.00 $60,000.00 1.5 Al 0003 07 Friendly Temple Ministries&Trotter Enterprises Friendly Temple Job Training Program $0.00 $60,000.00 1.4 A2 0004 08 Benton Franklin CAC-CHIP Minor Rehab&Repairs Community Housing Improvement Minor Rehab $5,00o.00 $50,000.00 IV.2 Cl Program 0004 09 Catholic Family&Child Services-Pasco Catholic Family Volunteer Chore Services(7) $65,500.00 $4,000.00 IV.2 81 0004 10 CBVC,Inc Veteran Supportive Housing $10,000.00 $100,000.00 V.2 131 0005 11 City of Pasco-Administrative&Community Services Memorial Park Shelter Remodel&ADA Path $0.00 $100,000.00 I1.2 Al 0005 12SEWSCDHH Renew SEWSCDHH Facility Improvement $0-00 $255,844.89 111.1 Al 0006 13 City of Pasco-Community&Economic Development Cade Enforcement Officer $147,000.00 $48,000.00 IV.2 Al 0007 14 City of Pasco-Publlc Works ADA Improvements $250,000.00 $250,000.00 11.2 Al 0007 15 Pasco Housing Authority Fourth and Pearl Family Housing, $7,852,457.00 $250,000.00 11.1 Al 81735,657.00 1,470,344.89 0.00 0.00 Estimated Entitlement 2014 $ 619,417 Estimated PI 2014 $ - Avaita4le to Commit $ 36,339 Total Funds Available $ 656,756 Proposals Received $ 1,470,345 SURPtUSIDEF1CiT _ ,_ Proposals Recommended $ - Funds available for Commitment 655,756 61122013 Attachment 2 CITY OF PASCO 2014 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROPOSAL SUMMARY—JUNE 20, 2013 1 CDBG Program Administration —Requested: $120,000 Recommended: Plan, administer and deliver housing and community needs, ensure compliance \N-ith local, state and federal rules, regulations and laws, and provide for the successful delivery of programs that primarily benefit low to moderate income people. PIanning and Administration is capped at no greater than 20%. 2 Martin Luther King Community Center Recreation Specialist— Requested_ : $ 37,500 Recommended: This facility's program is coordinated with the YMCA, Salvation Army and Campfire USA, who all collaborate to provide education and physical activities to school age children. City of Pasco Martin Luther King Center Program 3 Civic Center-Youth Recreation Specialist—Requested: $ 37,500 Recommended: Provide a portion of the salary and benefits for recreation specialist at the Youth Civic Center. This facility's program is to provide recreation programs for youth at risk and families in low-to-moderate income Census Tract (202). Public services are capped at no greater than 15% of current entitlement plus prior year program income. 4 Senior Citizen's Center Recreation Specialist—Requested: S 37,500 Recommended: Portion of the salary and benefits for recreation specialist to oversee and operate program at Pasco's senior center. This facilit}'s program provides supervision and leadership necessary for programs serving the elderly of Pasco with support services, nutrition, health and living skills support. Public services are capped at no greater than 15% current entitlement plus prior year program income. 1 CITY OF PASCO 2014 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROPOSAL SUMMARY—JUNE 20, 2013 5 Pasco Specialty Kitchen—Requested: $ 60,000 Recommended: Continue operations of the Pasco Specialty Kitchen, a certified commercial incubator kitchen. By providing technical support to small food-related businesses the Pasco Specialty Kitchen improves their success rate by helping them to establish and achieve their goals. In consideration for technical assistance, the startup businesses agree to make jobs created available to low-to-moderate income persons in Pasco (Census Tract 202). 6 Downtown Facade Improvement Program —Requested: $ 60,000 Recommended: Support downtown businesses with fagade improvements (Census Tract 202). It is estimated that 2 business will be assisted with fagade improvements. 7 Friendly Temple Job Training Program—Requested: $ 60,000 Recommended: Support training and work-skills programs/projects that prepare lower-income workers to be gainfully employed in local industrites and businesses. Equipment requires extended accounting. Facility Improvement, vehicles, landscaping equipment, kitchen/restaurant equipment. $ Community Housing Improvement Minor Rehab Program —Requested: $ 50,000 Recommended: Minor household repairs, energy efficient upgrades and hazardous material removal for low to moderate income households. Recommend this project for minor rehabilitation/repair for those with housing costs over 30% of monthly income, and income below 50%AMI. 9 Catholic Family Volunteer Chore Services (7)—Requested: $ 4,000 Recommended: Provide minor ADA accessibility remodels,repairs and construct wheelchair ramps for very low to low income households. This population includes elderly and disabled (City-wide). It is estimated that 7 elderly households, typically very low income, will be assisted. 2 CITY OF PASCO 2014 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROPOSAL SUMMARY—JUNE 20, 2013 10 Veteran Supportive Housing—Requested: $100,000 Recommended: Support activities that provide for approprately located, effective and timely service to priority needs populations. Supportive Housing for Veterans. 11 Memorial Park Shelter Remodel & ADA Path — Requested: $100,000 Recommended: Retrofit handicap access ramps for disabled persons with ramps that meet current ADA accessibility codes. Handicap ramps retrofit city-wide. 12 Renew SEWSCDHH Facilily Improvement—Requested: $255,845 Recommended: Support revitalization of neighborhoods by improving and supporting public facilities that serve low and moderate income neighborhoods and housholds. Facility Improvements. 13 Code Enforcement Officer—Requested: $ 48,000 Recommended: Provide partial salary for one of three code enforcement officers to help improve neighborhood appearance and for compliance with rules and regulations dealing with homeowner needs in primarily low to moderate income neighborhoods (Census 'Tracts 201, 202, 203 and 204). 14 ADA Improvements—Requested: $250,000 Recommended: Retrofit handicap access ramps for disabled persons with ramps that meet current ADA accessibility codes. Handicap ramps retrofit city-wide. CITY OF PASCO 2014 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROPOSAL SUMMARY--JUNE 20,2013 15 Fourth and Pearl Family Housing— Requested: $250,000 Recommended: Provide city wide ramps to assist the elderly and disabled persons in the City of Pasco and comply with Fair Housing issue.s Infrastructure Improvements of streets. 4 2014 APPLICATION FOR CITY OF PASCO COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) FUND 1, �ECEIVED AGENCY: City of Pasco-Community&Economic Development PROJECT TITLE: CDBG Program Administration 013 ADDRESS: 525 N Third Avenue comp'11M17-Y PROPOSED PROJECT LOCATION: City-Wide VEIOPf,1E147 AUTHORIZED OFFICIAL Rick White,Community& Economic Development Director E-MAIL: whiter(a,pasco-w PHONE: 509-545-3441 FAX: 509-545-3499 AMOUNT OF CDBG FUNDS REQUESTED: $ 120,000 AMOUNT OF NON-CDBG MATCH:$ 0 1. DESCRIBE THE PROBLEM OR NEED(AS RELATED TO THE STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN ATTACHED): All CDBG activities in Pasco benefit primarily low-moderate income persons. Census tracts 201, 202, 203 BG 3& 4 and 204 are 71% LMI, there are 24,190 persons, 17,171 of which are LMI. 2, EXPLANATION OF PROPOSAL-Give a complete detailed description of your proposal including a description of the clientele you will be serving: CDBG funds are used to plan, administer and deliver housing and community needs, ensure compliance with local, state and federal rules, regulations and laws, and provide for the successful delivery of programs that primarily benefit low to moderate income people. 3. CONSOLIDATED PLAN: The City of Pasco is required to adopt a long-range community action plan to determine where the use of Block Grant funds should be focused. List the identified objective(s)listed in the Tri-Cities 5-Year Consolidated Plan that the proposal addresses and explain how your proposal meets that need. (See STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN GOALS attached) ALL GOALS 4. ALLOCATION POLICY: Projects will be ranked according to the attached Allocation Policy. Identify the priority(A,B,C or D)that matches your project(see Section II in Allocation Policy): Priority: ❑A ®B ❑C ❑D and explain how your proposal satisfies that priority: ALL PRIORITIES This activity serves every tae of eligible activity allowable under CDBG/HOME/NSP regulations. 5. GENERAL SCHEDULE FOR PROJECT COMPLETION: Opzgoing Op—going activity 6. SPECIFY EXACTLY WHAT CDBG FUNDS WOULD BE USED FOR: CDBG entitlement grant planning and administration costs such as salaries and sUplies. 7. DOES YOUR PROJECT CREATE INDIVIDUAL/BUSINESS DISPLACEMENT OR RELOCATION?❑YES ED NO 8. ELIBIBILITY: How does your proposal meet Eligibility criteria of 24 CFR 570 below? (SELECT ONLY ONE)— E] Public Acquisition of Propojy 24 CFR 570.201(a): ❑ Public Facilities(new construction or capital improvements)24 CFR 570.201(c): ❑ Public Services 24 CFR 570.201(e): ❑ Economic Development 24 CFR 570.201(0)/24 CFR 570.203: 2014 CDBG Application-Merge °' ❑ Housing rehabilitation and preservation 24 CFR 570.202: Code Enforcement 24 CFR 570.202(c): Planning 24 CFR 570.205; ❑ Other(describe): 9. NATIONAL OBJECTIVE: How does your proposal meet the National Objective of benefiting low and moderate-income persons below? (SELECT ONLY ONE) N/R 1)❑ You receive household/family income and size data from each participant in the program(LMH)(LMC) 2)❑ Your project serves a limited area that is proven by census tract or survey to be a low-income area(LMA): ❑Downtown Revitalization Zone []Census Tract# 3)❑ Your project serves ONLY the following clientele(check appropriate box)(LMC): ❑Elderly person's ❑Homeless persons ❑ Severely disabled adults ❑ illiterate persons ❑Abused children ❑Persons living with AIDS ❑Battered spouses ❑Migrant farm workers ❑At Risk Youth ❑Other- 4)[] Your project will create or save jobs for low/moderate income employees(LMJ) 5)❑ Your project addresses a slum/blight condition(SBA/SBS) LMA—Low-moderate income area(Census Tract or Survey Area) LMC—Low-moderate income clientele LMH—Low-moderate income household/family LMJ—Low-moderate income job creation/retention SBA/SBS—Slum&Blight Area/Spot(as designed by local government) 10. LENGTH OF SERVICE Is this the first year for the program? ❑Yes ®No Year program began? Pasco has been an entitlement since 1994 If you receive funding for 2014,how will your program be funded in 2014? As long as Pasco is an entitlement city, CDBG funds will be utilized for planning and administration of the grant. 11. PUBLIC SERVICE AGENCIES To be eligible for CDBG assistance,a public service must be continuation of a service that is currently CDBG-funded,a new service,or a quantifiable increase in the level of an existing service that is not currently CDBG-funded. Explain how your application qualifies: ❑ Continuation of Services ❑New Service ❑Increase in Service 12. WHAT AMOUNT OF BLOCK GRANT FUNDING FROM ALL SOURCES HAS YOUR AGENCY OR DEPARTMENT RECEIVED IN THE PAST THREE YEARS? 2013 2012 2011 Pasco $ 116,000 $ 104,000 $ 112,000 Richland $ $ $ Kennewick $ $ $ Other Federal Source(s) - $ $ $ To what other agencies have you applied for funding and what commitments have you obtained for this proposal? Funding is provided from other Grantors such as NSP and HOME for administration of those projects 01 CDBG Administration rrt r . • t t . . t t• r �1 CEIVSUS BLOCK f ' If GROUP TRACT 201 ALL 74.6 ri r 200 69.7 300 90.5 rr ►r err 202 ALL 75.0 loo 86.1 200 5&3 300 78.9 f -00, ` 20 r �J /r 76.9 r r i t 75.0 400 46.0 j 1A X, 100 823 zy r2 I / �,e 200 525 500 528 6W 564 l✓ s/ +r}f ♦ All, _. o / / J //f/rr/riiArJ/ f rrrlf <I lr+.rii,rrl/ •J - r /0 /o M,��i JlMA EA 4' r 1/! /f -IfY#aw 3V�/�r Iflr 121, 11/'!///,.%./r/ /o / r//! //1i%%/ � f 'f, ,re.•er/;rJ.�.f rr+JI f.��r �/r'i• rf:'.t/ /r%J� ��� �lfJ.�/i�//}.;'/� '//% _%/�r///�r���J J q!� / r► 'i J r i I1�e I!. t f -Ar V-'r., rats/ rI'f r /jllr�'I• '1,// e / ./+/ �.r�J/✓1/f��I �ell,e//if •e�/r,/��� r1' /%�///�j�%!J//r�� rJ f ��It�/'/��r/i r: 1/i�,'/r%�r�/efr`'•j'�i,.'% � - �I�J//�%,� ! -... f•fir �i' _.,, /� ,� or � .. J, 1 001. 14. PROJECT TIMELINE-Establish milestones or goals of accomplishments by calendar quarter from the start of the project until completion: Dates or Date Range Milestone/Goal(include numerical performance progress if an 1-2014 Jan-Mar Closeout prioryear grant and prepare Consolidated Plan Evaluation Report Complete environmental review for current program year awarded projects Execute subreci ient agreements and fund activities for drawdown 2-2014 Apr-Jun Prepare Request for Proposal for next ant year 3-2014 Jul-Sep Desk and Site Monitorin of all activities Reporting Budget 4-2014 Oct-Dee Submit Annual Action Plan_ for next rant year Timeliness 15. BUDGET-Give a detailed breakdown of the total budget for this project including major expense line items(salaries, rent/supplies,office equipment,capital expenses,new construction/vehicles etc.). Show how the CDBG funds will be applied toward expenses and the amount and source of any other revenue you will be using. Total expenses should equal the total of CDBG plus Other Revenue. Be prepared to explain the budget and provide a copy of full agency budget upon request. EXPENSES REVENUES LINE ITEM $TOTAL BUDGET $CDBG FUNDS $OTHER FUNDS SOURCE OF OTHER FUND S PERSONNEL: Salaries&Benefits(CDBG) 75,075 Salaries&Benefits(HOME) 10,000 OPERATIONS: 0 Admin Services Fees $12,000 Advertising 950 Utilities 1,000 Supplies 3,050 Professional Development 5,800 CONSTRUCTION: 0 Architectural 0 Engineering 0 Materials 0 Project Delivery 0 Professional Services 12,125 PROPERTY: 0 Purchase price 0 Closing cost 0 OTHER: (describe) 0 Administrative Expenses 0 TOTAL $ $120,000.00 S $ Additional explanation of the above budget: Salaries and benefits include staff hours for environmental review, rocp uzement, project and contract administration,labor compliance,etc..The HOMEproaram will utilize$10,000 in CDBG funds for Admin. If you do not receive the requested funds or receive only a portion of what you request,how will the goals of your project be adjusted? What portion of your project will be abandoned,will fewer persons be served,etc.? HUD allows for up to 20%of the entitlement to be utilized for planning and administrating the Block Grants.Networking and training are 111 A rrnRn A--li—f; n-M-1 verve important aspects of this activity,however,professional development/professional services may need to be abandoned 16. PROJECT BENEFICIARIES-List the client data of persons whom you ESTIMATE you will serve with this project. Is your count by: ❑Person,or by(QPlousehold(family)? Number of clients below 30%median Number of clients below 50%median Number of clients below 80%median Number of elderly clients Number of minority clients Total Number of Pasco residents served (Should=total#above) What is the data source for the information provided above? 2013}IUD income Limit Guidelines for Kennewick-Pasco--Richland 1 Person 2 People 3 People 4 People 5 People 6 People 7 People 8 Peo le 30% $14,050 $16,050 $18,050 $20,050 $21,700 $23,300 $24,900 $26,500 50% $23,400 $26,750 $30,100 $33,400 $36,100 $38,750 $41,450 $44,100 80% $37,450 $42,800 $48,150 $53,450 $57,750 $62,050 $66,300 $70,600 Median $46,800 $53,500 $60,200 $66,800 $72,200 $77,500 $82,900 $88,200 For Information Only, 2014 Income Limits will apply. 17. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS ONLY- Show the number of new/permanent jobs to be created through block grant funding and the number of jabs to be staffed by or made available to low-moderate income individuals this program year. Total to Date This Program Year Number of new jobs expected to be created/retained Number of new jobs expected to be filled or offered to Iow-or moderate-income persons (Must be at least 51%) Position Titles Expected to be Created this program year(Use EDA Classifications) 18. CONTACT INFORMATION Authorized Official Contract Administrator Project Manager Name/Title Rick White,Comm&Ec Dev Director Anizela Pitman,Block Grant Admin Mailing Address 525 N Third Avenue 525 N Third Avenue City/State Pasco,WA 99301 Pasco,WA 99301 Phone/Fax 509-545-34411509-545-3499 509-543-5739 Email whiterna,pasco-wa.�oy SUBMITTED BY: T Rick White �� Community&Econ Development Director X12--)ref� Signature of Authorized Official Title Date RECEIVED 2014 APPLICATION FOR CITY OF PASCO 9a, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT(CDBG) FUND MAY 2 AGENCY: City of Pasco - Administrative & Community Services cbfvll'tlM17 y& ]:CONONIC DEVELOP14E147 PROJECT TITLE: Martin Luther King Community Center- Recreation Specialist ADDRESS: 525 N 3rd Ave PROPOSED PROTECT LOCATION: 205 S Wehe (21.2011 AUTHORIZED OFFICIAL Rick Terway, Director Administrative & Community Services E-MAIL: terwayrC pasco-wa.gov PHONE: 508-543-5757 FAX: 5019-543-5758 AMOUNT OF CDBG FUNDS REQUESTED: $ 37,500 AMOUNT OF NON-CDBG MATCH:$ 100,500 1. DESCRIBE THE PROBLEM OR NEED(AS RELATED TO THE STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN ATTACHED): There are a significant number of youth from low to moderate income families who are considered at-risk that benefit from participating in supervised recreation programs. 2, EXPLANATION OF PROPOSAL-Give a complete detailed description of your proposal including a description of the clientele you will be serving: Salary for staff to coordinate and operate recreation programs for youth and adults at the Martin luther King Community Center. Clients are primarHy from low-moderate income neighborhoods. 3. CONSOLIDATED PLAN: The City of Pasco is required to adopt a long-range community action plan to determine where the use of Block Grant funds should be focused. List the identified objective(s)listed in the Tri-Cities 5-Year Consolidated Plan that the proposal addresses and explain how your proposal meets that need. (See STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN GOALS attached) Goal Support Priority Public Services Strategy V.2 4. ALLOCATION POLICY: Projects will be ranked according to the attached Allocation Policy. Identify the priority(A,B,C or D)that matches your project(see Section 11 in Allocation Policy): Priority: ❑A ❑■B ❑C ❑D and explain how your proposal satisfies that priority: 5, GENERAL SCHEDULE FOR PROJECT COMPLETION: January 1 - December 31, 2014 6. SPECIFY EXACTLY WHAT CDBG FUNDS WOULD BE USED FOR: Staff salary & benefits 7. DOES YOUR PROJECT CREATE INDIVIDUAL/BUSINESS DISPLACEMENT OR RELOCATION? ❑YES NO S. ELIBIBIL.ITY: How does your proposal meet Eligibility criteria of 24 CFR 570 below? (SELECT ONLY ONE) Public Acquisition of Property 24 CFR 570.201(a): ❑ Public Facilities(new construction or capital improvements)24 CFR 570.201(c): ❑■ Public Services 24 CFR 5 70.20 1(el: ❑ Economic Development 24 CFA 570.201(o)/24 CFR 570.203: ❑ Housing rehabilitation and reserv_ation 24 CFR 570.202: 2014 CDBG Application Page l Q Code Enforcement 24 CFR 570.202(c): Plan Liz 24 CFR 570.205: ❑ Other(describe): 9. NATIONAL OBJECTIVE: Haw does your proposal meet the National Objective of benefiting low and moderate-income persons below? (SELECT ONLY ONE) I)❑ You receive household/family income and size data from each participant in the program(LMH)(LMC) 2)9 Your project serves a limited area that is proven by census tract or survey to be a low-income area(LMA): ❑Downtown Revitalization Zone ❑ Census Tract# 201 3)Q Your project serves ONLY the following clientele(check appropriate box)(LMC): ❑Elderly person's ❑Homeless persons ❑ Severely disabled adults ❑Illiterate persons ❑Abused children ❑Persons living with AIDS ❑Battered spouses ❑Migrant farm workers ®At Risk Youth ❑Other: 4)❑ Your project will create or save jobs for low/moderate income employees(LMI) 5)❑ Your project addresses a slum/blight condition(SBA/SBS) LMA—Low-moderate income area(Census Tract or Survey Area) LMC—Low-moderate income clientele LMH—Low-moderate income household/family LMJ—Low-moderate income job creation/retention SBA/SBS—Slum&Blight Area/Spot(as designed by local government) 10. LENGTH OF SERVICE Is this the first year for the program? ❑Yes QNo Year program began? If you receive funding for 2014,how will your program be funded in 2015? Anticipate CDBG funding in 2 015 11. PUBLIC SERVICE AGENCIES To be eligible for CDBG assistance,a public service must be continuation of a service that is currently CDBG-funded,a new service,or a quantifiable increase in the level of an existing service that is not currently CDBG-funded. Explain how your application qualifies: K Continuation of Services ❑New Service ❑Increase in Service 12, WHAT AMOUNT OF BLOCK GRANT FUNDING FROM ALL SOURCES HAS YOUR AGENCY OR DEPARTMENIT RECEIVED IN THE PAST THREE YEARS? 2013 2012 2011 Pasco $20,000 _ _ $ 20,000 S20,000 Richland $ $ S Kennewick $ $ Other Federal Source(s) $ $ $ To what other agencies have you applied for funding and what commitments have you obtained for this proposal? 2014 CDBG Application Page 2 P 3. PROVIDE A MAP SHOWING THE LOCATION OF THE PROJECT OR SERVICE AREA: 2014 CDBG Application Page 3 14. PROJECT TIMELINE-Establish milestones or goals of accomplishments by calendar quarter from the start of the project until completion: Dates or Date Range Milestone/Goal(include numerical erforrnance ro ress if an Jan 1-Dec 31,2014 Providing after school and non school day activities with the goal of building strong kids,strong families,and a strong community through individual and team games,activhies and special events.Supervisors stress four cour values which are caring,honesty,respect and responsibility. 15. BUDGET-Give a detailed breakdown of the total budget for this project including major expense line items(salaries, rent/supplies,office equipment,capital expenses,new construction/vehicles etc.). Show how the CDBG funds will be applied toward expenses and the amount and source of any other revenue you will be using. Total expenses should equal the total of CDBG plus Other Revenue. Be prepared to explain the budget and provide a copy of full agency budget upon request. EXPENSES REVENUES LINE ITEM $TOTAL BUDGET $CDBG FUNDS $OTHER FUNDS SOURCE OF OTHER FUNDS PERSONNEL: Salaries 49,000 37,500 11,500 City Gen Funds Benefits 17,500 17,500 City Gen Funds OPERATIONS: Rent/Lease Utilities 36,500 35,500 City Gen Funds Supplies 4,500 4,500 City Gen Funds CONSTRUCTION: Architectural Engineering Materials Labor/Contracts PROPERTY: Purchase price Closing cost OTHER:(describe) M&O Acct, Insurance 30°500 30,500 City Gen Fund TOTAL $ 138,000 $37500 100,500 Additional explanation of the above budget: If you do not receive the requested funds or receive only a portion of what you request,how will the goals of your project be adjusted? What portion of your project will be abandoned,will fewer persons be served,etc.? 2014 CDBG Application Page 4 16. PROJECT BENEFICIARIES-List the client data of persons whom you ESTIMATE you will serve with this project. Is your count by: *Person,or by Household(family)? Number of clients below 30%median 400 Number of clients below 50%median 2000 Number of clients below 80%median 1050 Number of elderly clients 200 Number of minority clients 3000 Total Number of Pasco residents served 3500 (Should=total#above) What is the data source for the information provided above? Program Registration 2013 1IUD income Limit Quidelines for ennewick-Pasco-Richland 1 Person 2 People 3 People 4 People 5 People 6 People 7 People 8 People 30% $14,250 $16,300 $18,350 $20,350 $22,000 $23,650 $25,250 $26,900 50% $23,750 $27,150 $30,550 $33,900 $36,650 $39,350 $42,050 $44,750 80% $38,000 $43,400 $48,850 $54,250 $58,600 $62,950 $67,300 $71,650 Median $47,500 $54,300 $61,100 $67,800 $73,300 $78,700 $84,140 $89,500 For Information Only, 2014 Income Limits will apply. 17. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS ONLY-Show the number of new/permanent jobs to be created through block grant funding and the number of jobs to be staffed by or made available to low-moderate income individuals this program year. Total to Date This Program Year Number of new jobs expected to be created/retained Number of new jobs expected to be filled or offered to low-or moderate-income persons (Must be at least 51%) Position Titles Expected to be Created this program year(Use EDA Classifications) 18. CONTACT INFORMATION 1/�' r Authorized Official Contract Administrator Project Manager Name/Tttl e e LCD[ I vVa �L Mailin Addre Ci /State Phone/Fax 'ts> Email r ! '.'W"1 0 hen S(, � 1q , DEE530 V SUBMITTED BY: r0'1a4'__ Director, Admin & Comm Services -2 Signature of Author d Official Title Date 2014 CDBG Application Page 5 2014 APPLICATION FOR CITY OF PASCO COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) FUND AGENCY: City of Pasco- Administrative & Community Services RECEIVED PROJECT TITLE: Civic Center- Youth Recreation Specialist ADDRESS: 525 N 3rd Ave MAY 2 9 2013 PROPOSED PROJECT LOCATION: 525 N 3rd Ave Rick Terwa C(71`1ihlUWFY& ECGWUf,flU OEUELCNIEfJi AUTHORIZED OFFICIAL y, Director A&CS E-MAIL: terwayr @pasco-wa.gov PHONE: 509-543-57587 FAX: 509-543-5758 AMOUNT OF CDBG FUNDS REQUESTED: $ 37,500 AMOUNT OF NON-CDBG MATCH:$ 45,500 1. DESCRIBE THE PROBLEM OR NEED(AS RELATED TO THE STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN ATTACHED): The are a significant number of youth from low to moderate income families who are considered at-risk that benefit from participation in supervised recreation programs 2, EXPLANATION OF PROPOSAL-Give a complete detailed description of your proposal including a description of the clientele you will be serving: Salary for staff to operate programs for at-risk youth. Clientele are low-moderate income minority youths. 3. CONSOLIDATED PLAN: The City of Pasco is required to adopt a long-range community action plan to determine where the use of Block Grant funds should be focused, List the identified objective(s)listed in the Tri-Cities 5-Year Consolidated Plan that the proposal addresses and explain how your proposal meets that need. (See STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN GOALS attached) Goal Support Priority Public Services - Strategy V.2 4. ALLOCATION POLICY: Projects will be ranked according to the attached Allocation Policy. Identify the priority(A,B,C or D)that matches your project(see Section U in Allocation:Policy): Priority: ❑A dB ❑C ❑D and explain how your proposal satisfies that priority: B2 5, GENERAL SCHEDULE FOR PROJECT COMPLETION: January 1 - December 31, 2014 6, SPECIFY EXACTLY WHAT CDBG FUNDS WOULD BE USED FOR: Staff salary & benefits 7. DOES YOUR PROJECT CREATE INDIVIDUAL/BUSINESS DISPLACEMENT OR RELOCATION? ❑YES ©NO g. ELIGIBILITY: How does your proposal meet Eligibility criteria of 24 CFR 570 below? (SELECT ONLY ONE) ❑ Public Acquisition of Property 24 CFR 570,201(a): ❑ Public Facilities(new construction or capital improvements)24 CFR 570.201(c): Public Services 24 CFR 570.201 e ❑ Economic Development 24 CFR 570.201(0)/24 CFR 570.203: Housina rehabilitation and preservation 24 CFR 570.202: 2014 CDBG Application Page 1 ❑ Code Enforcement 24 CPR 570.202(c): [] Plannina 24 CFR 570.205: ❑ Other(describe l: 9. NATIONAL OBJECTIVE: How does your proposal meet the National Objective of benefiting low and moderate-income persons below? (SELECT ONLY ONE) I)❑ You receive household/family income and size data from each participant in the program(LMH)(LMC) 2)■® Your project serves a limited area that is proven by census tract or survey to be a low-income area(LMA): Downtown Revitalization Zone 0 Census Tract#202 3)❑ Your project serves ONLY the following clientele(check appropriate box)(LMC): ❑Elderly person's ❑Homeless persons Severely disabled adults ❑Illiterate persons ❑Abused children ❑Persons living with A11DS ❑Battered spouses ❑Migrant farm workers ❑At Risk Youth ❑Other: 4)❑ Your project will create or save jobs for low/moderate income employees(LMJ) 5)❑ Your project addresses a slum/blight condition(SBAJSBS) LMA—Low-moderate income area(Census Tract or Survey Area) LMC—Low-moderate income clientele LMH—Low-moderate income household/family LMJ—Low-moderate income job creation/retention SBA/SBS—Slum&Blight Area/Spot(as designed by local government) 10. LENGTH OF SERVICE Is this the first year for the program? []Yes KNo Year program began? If you receive funding for 2014,how will your program be funded in 2015? Anticipate CDBG funding in 2015 11, PUBLIC SERVICE AGENCIES To be eligible for CDBG assistance, a public service must be continuation of a service that is currently CDBG-funded,a new service,or a quantifiable increase in the level of an existing service that is not currently CDBG-funded. Explain how your application qualifies: N Continuation of Services ❑New Service ❑Increase in Service 12. WHAT AMOUNT OF BLOCK GRANT FUNDING FROM ALL SOURCES HAS YOUR AGENCY OR DEPARTMENT RECEIVED IN THE PAST THREE YEARS? 2013 2012 2011 Pasco $ 20,000 $ 20,000 $ 20,000 Richland S $ S Kennewick S $ $ Other Federal Source(s) $ $ $ To what other agencies have you applied for funding and what commitments have you obtained for this proposal? 2014 CDBG Application Page 2 13. PROVIDE A MAP SHOWING THE LOCATION OF THE PROJECT OR SERVICE AREA: 2014 CDBG Application Page 3 14. PROJECT TIMELINE-Establish milestones or goals of accomplishments by calendar quarter from the start of the project until completion: Dates or Date Range Milestone/Goal include numerical perforrnance progress if any) Jan 1-Dec 31,2014 Pasco City Hall after school program serves youth who are low to moderate income with a variety of meaningful team and Individual activities such as rock wall climbing,basketball,soccer and board games. Thls program provides youth in the community an opportunfty to gather in a place that is clean,safe and positive place to be. I S. BUDGET-Give a detailed breakdown of the total budget for this project including major expense line items(salaries, rent/supplies,office equipment,capital expenses,new construction/vehicles etc.). Show how the CDBG funds will be applied toward expenses and the amount and source of any other revenue you will be using. Total expenses should equal the total of CDBG plus Other Revenue. Be prepared to explain the budget and provide a copy of fall agency budget upon request, EXPENSES REVENUES LINE ITEM $TOTAL BUDGET $CDBG FUNDS $OTHER FUNDS SOURCE OF OTHER FUNDS PERSONNEL: Salaries 55,000 37,500 17,500 City Gen Funds Benefits OPERATIONS: Rent/Lease Utilities 28,000 28,000 City Gen Funds Supplies CONSTRUCTION: Architectural Engineering Materials Labor/Contracts PROPERTY: Purchase price Closing cost QTBER: (describe) TOTAL T83,000 37,500 $ 45,500 $ Additional explanation of the above budget: If you do not receive the requested funds or receive only a portion of what you request,how will the goals of your project be adjusted? What portion of your project will be abandoned,will fewer persons be served,etc.? 2014 CDBG Application Page 4 16, PROJECT BENEFICIARIES-List the client data of persons whom you ESTIMATE you will serve with this project, Is your count by: HPerson,or by❑Household(family)? Number of clients below 30%median 38 Number of clients below 50%median 300 Number of clients below 80%median 60 Number of elderly clients 0 Number of minority clients 295 Total Number of Pasco residents served 298 (Should=total#above) What is the data source for the information provided above? Daily roster sheets 2013 HUD income Limit Guidelines for Kennewick-Pasco-Richland 1 Person 2 People 3 Peo 1e 4 People 5 People 6 People 7 People 8 People 30s/o $14,250 $16,300 $18,350 $20,350 $22,000 $23,650 $25,250 $26,900 0% $23,750 $27,150 $30,550 $33,900 $36,650 $39,350 $42,050 $44,750 80% $38,000 $43,400 $48,850 $54,250 $58,600 $62,950 $67,300 $71,650 Median $47,500 854,300 $61,100 $67,800 $73,300 1 $78,700 $84,100 $89,500 For Information Only, 2014 Income Limits will apply. 17. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS ONLY-Show the number of new/permanent jobs to be created through block grant funding and the number of jobs to be staffed by or made available to low-moderate income individuals this program year. Total to Date This Program Year Number of new jabs expected to be created/retained Number of new jobs expected to be filled or offered to low-or moderate-income persons (Must be at least 51%) Position Titles Expected to be Created this program year(Use EDA Classifications) 18. CONTACT INFORMATION Authorized Official Contract Administrator Project Manager Name/Title C � � - n Mailing-Address r City fState Phone/Fax Email � � C(.�GQ "` ��il Q V Q� C%J�'►1� � �' SUBMITTED BY: C_ / Director, Admin & Comm Services -�}-k�13 Signature of Authorize Official Title Date 2014 CDBG Application Page 5 4 2014 APPLICATION FOR CITY OF PASCO COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT(CDBG) FUND RECEIVED AGENCY: City of Pasco - Administrative & Community Services MAY 2 9 2013 PROJECT TITLE: Senior Citizen's Center Recreation Specialist ur ,au ADDRESS: 525 N 3rd Ave ra+iY CO1J{7f,11C oEVElOPf1E117 ); PROPOSED PROJECT LOCATION: 1315 N 7th Ave (21.201, 202, 203, 234) AUTHORIZED OFFICIAL Rick Terway, Director A&CS E-MAIL: terwayr @ pasco-wa.Cgov PHONE: 509-543-5757 FAX: 509-543-5758 AMOUNT OF CDBG FUNDS REQUESTED: $ 37,500 AMOUNT OF NON-CDBG MATCH:$ 200,500 1. DESCRIBE THE PROBLEM OR NEED(AS RELATED TO THE STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN ATTACHED): Provide the supervision and leadership necessary for programs serving the elderly with support services, -nutrition, health and livingl skills suppo . 2. EXPLANATION OF PROPOSAL-Give a complete detailed description of your proposal including a description of the clientele you will be serving: Salary for staff to oversee and operate programs serving senior citizens 3. CONSOLIDATED PLAN: The City of Pasco is required to adopt a long-range community action plan to determine where the use of Block Grant funds should be focused. List the identified objective(s)listed in the Tri-Cities 5-Year Consolidated Plan that the proposal addresses and explain how your proposal meets that need. (See STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN GOALS attached) Goal Support Priority Public Services - Strategy V.2 4. ALLOCATION POLICY: Projects will be ranked according to the attached Allocation Policy. Identify the priority(A,B,C or D)that matches your project(see Section II in Allocation Policy): Priority: ❑A nB ❑C ❑D and explain how your proposal satisfies that priority: B2 5. GENERAL SCHEDULE FOR PROJECT COMPLETION: January 1 - December 31, 2014 b, SPECIFY EXACTLY WHAT CDBG FUNDS WOULD BE USED FOR: Staff salary & benefits 7. DOES YOUR PROJECT CREATE INDIVIDUAL/BUSINESS DISPLACEMENT OR RELOCATION? ❑YES O NO $. ELIBIBILITY: How does your proposal meet Eligibility criteria of 24 CFR 570 below? (SELECT ONLY ONE) ❑ Public Acquisition of Property 24 CFR 570.2011a1: ❑ Public Facilities(new construction or capital improvements)24 CFR 570.201(cl: Q Public Services 24 CFR 570.2010e ❑ Economic Development 24 CFR 570,201(o)/24 CFR 570.203: ❑ Housing rehabilitation and preservation 24 CFR 570,202: 2014 CDBG Application Page 1 ❑ Code Enforcement 24 CFR 570.202(c): ❑ Plannina 24 CFR 570.205: ❑ Other describe 4. NATIONAL OBJECTIVE: How does your proposal meet the National Objective of benefiting low and moderate-income persons below? (SELECT ONLY ONE) 1)7 You receive household/family income and size data from each participant in the program(LMH)(LMC) 2)❑ Your project serves a limited area that is proven by census tract or survey to be a low-income area(LMA): ❑Downtown Revitalization Zone ❑Census Tract# 3)■❑ Your project serves ONLY the following clientele(check appropriate box)(LMC): X Elderly person's ❑Homeless persons ❑ Severely disabled adults ❑Illiterate persons ❑Abused children ®Persons living.with AIDS ❑Battered spouses ❑Migrant farm workers ❑At Risk Youth ❑Other: 4)❑ Your project will create or save jobs for low/moderate income employees(LMT) 5)❑ Your project addresses a slum/blight condition(SBA/SBS) LMA—Low-moderate income area(Census Tract or Survey Area) LMC—Low-moderate income clientele LMH—Low-moderate income household/family LM3—Low-moderate income job creation/retention SBA/SBS—Slum&Blight Area/Spot(as designed by local government) 10. LENGTH OF SERVICE Is this the first year for the program? ❑Yes QNo Year program began? If you receive funding for 2014,how will your program be funded in 2015? Anticipate CDBG funding in 2015 11. PUBLIC SERVICE AGENCIES To be eligible for CDBG assistance,a public service must be continuation of a service that is currently CDBG-funded,a new service,or a quantifiable increase in the level of an existing service that is not currently CDBG-funded. Explain how your application qualifies: Q Continuation of Services ❑New Service Q Increase in Service 12. WHAT AMOUNT OF BLOCK GRANT FUNDING FROM ALL SOURCES HAS YOUR AGENCY OR DEPARTMENT RECEIVED IN THE PAST THREE YEARS? 2013 2012 2011 Pasco $30,000 $ 30,000 $ 40,000 Richland $ $ $ Kennewick $ $ $ Other Federal Source(s) $ $+ $ To what other agencies have you applied for funding and what commitments have you obtained for this proposal? 2014 CDBG Application Page 2 13. PROVIDE A MAP SHOWING THE LOCATION OF THE PROJECT OR SERVICE AREA: 2014 CDBG Application Page 3 14. PROJECT TIMELINE-Establish milestones or goals of accomplishments by calendar quarter from the start of the project until completion: Bates or Date Range Milestone/Goal include numerical performance progress if an Jan 1-Dec 31,2014 Facility for persons 50 and older who can congregate for social,meeting,fitness,healthcare,toot care,meals,educational presentations,arts and crafts,plus a number of other leisure activities. 15. BUDGET-Give a detailed breakdown of the total budget for this project including major expense line items(salaries, rent/supplies,office equipment,capital expenses,new construction/vehicles etc.). Show how the CDBG funds will be applied toward expenses and the amount and source of any other revenue you will be using. Total expenses should equal the total of CDBG plus Other Revenue. Be prepared to explain the budget and provide a copy of full agency budget upon request. EXPENSES REVENUES LINE ITEM $TOTAL BUDGET $CDBG FUNDS $OTHER FUNDS SOURCE O1~ OTHER FUNDS PERSONNEL: Salaries 98,000 37,500 00,500 City Gen Funds Benefits 34,000 34,000 City Gen Funds OPERATIONS: Rent/Lease Utilities 35,000 35,000 City Gen Funds Supplies 12,000 12,000 City Gen Funds NSTRUCTION: Architectural Engineering Materials Labor/Contracts PROPERTY: Purchase price Closing cost OTHER: (describe) 59,000 59,000 City Gen Funds TOTAL $238,000 37,500 $200,500 $ Additional explanation of the above budget: If you do not receive the requested funds or receive only a portion of what you request,how will the goals of your project be adjusted? What portion of your project will be abandoned,will fewer persons be served,etc.? 2014 CDBG Application Page 4 16. PROTECT BENEFICIARIES-List the client data of persons whom you ESTIMATE you will serve with this project. Is your count by: Werson,or by[]Household(family)? Number of clients below 30%median Number of clients below 50%median 8,000 Number of clients below 80%median 19,000 Number of elderly clients 28,000 Number of minority clients 7,500 Total Number of Pasco residents served 32,000 (Should=total#above) What is the data source for the information provided above? Program Registration 2013 HUD income Limit Guidelines for Kennewick-Pasco--Richland 1 Ferson 2 People 3 People 4 People 5 People 6 People 7 People 8 People 30% $14,250 $16,300 $18,350 $20,350 $22,000 $23,650 $25,250 $26,900 50% $23,750 $27,150 $30,550 $33,900 $36,650 $39,350 $42,050 $44,750 80% $38,000 $43,400 $48,850 $54,250 $58,600 $62,950 $67,300 $71,650 Median $47,500 $54,300 $61,100 $67,800 $73,300 $78,700 $84,100 $89,500 For Information Only, 2014 Income Limits will apply. 17. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS ONLY-Show the number of new/permanent jobs to be created through block grant funding and the number of jobs to be staffed by or made available to low-moderate income individuals this program year. Total to Date This Program Year Number of new jobs expected to be created/retained Number of new jobs expected to be filled or offered to low-or moderate-income persons (Must be at least 51%) Position Titles Expected to be Created this program year(Use EDA Classifications) 18. CONTACT INFORMATION Authorized Official Contract Administrator Project Manager p Name/Title �I ( '`at�`-'" �' a5 Mailin Addr '1 AJ Cit /State 6 Phone/Fax 4 Email I Alva � SG© �'� � CL n S CCi K� Q Qz SUBMITTED BY: (94 Director, Admin & Comm Services -yr 13 s Signature of Authori&d Official Title Date 2014 CDBG Application Page 5 2013 APPLICATION FOR CITY OF PASCO COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) FUND AGENCY: Downtown Pasco Authority ee *�CC PROJECT TITLE: Pasco Specialty Kitchen 9 G C G I V E D ADDRESS: 110 S.4h Pasco Washington 99301 _. a 2 oy - PROPOSED PROJECT LOCATION: same AUTHORIZED OFFICIAL Victoria Silvernail 59�1t,lOfila�Y $,_ECOnr.7ir riFlrFi ri�,.lfirf E-MAIL: Victoria@pascospecialtykitchen.com PHONE: 509-545-1172 FAX: 509-545-1174 AMOUNT OF CDBG FUNDS REQUESTED: $ 60,000.00 AMOUNT OF NON-CDBG MATCH:$ 44,200.00 1. DESCRIBE THE PROBLEM OR NEED(AS RELATED TO THE STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN ATTACHED): 2003 the Pasco Specialty Kitchen was created as an incubator kitchen to create specialty food businesses. The location is 110 SA ffi Ave.Pasco Washington.This property replaced two blighted properties and brought the possibility of new jobs and small businesses to a low to moderate-income population. PSK helps small businesses with an affordable infrastructure,educational support and guidance with small business decisions and marketing plans. PSK offers technical assistance to client in the following area: • Local, State and Federal Licensing • Insurance Requirements • Permits • Labeling and Packaging • Training Facility for Special Permits • Marketing • Business&Marketing Planning • Business Classes • Manufacturing PSK has developed an excellent working relationship with local commerce resources such as Columbia community Business Center,Benton Franklin Development Council and TriDec thusly providing a unique one-stop shop for new businesses. Assistance is provided to help clients understand their position in the market.Ongoing marketing by PSK provides client product exposure in both retail and wholesale markets in the Pacific Northwest and the world by way of PSK's WEB site.PSK has the following Certifications and approval from the state of Washington; • Department of Health • Department of Agriculture • Organic Certification For Food Preparation and Processing Our kitchen serves both Pasco High School Commercial Foods Academy that provides educational training related to the food industry and entrepreneurship. Our Pasco High Schools have 68%of their students that are low to moderate-income. We continue to work with local restaurants and local hotels to create an internship positions that could be filled with our best performers with good attendance and give them a soft step to the workforce with experience.Our clients sign an agreement to consider low to moderate income persons for their created j obs. CDBG 2014 Application Complete Final Page 1 2. EXPLANATION OF PROPOSAL-Give a complete detailed description of your proposal including a description of the clientele you will be serving: PSK offers potential new businesses an affordable certified commercial kitchen to develop and perfect their products. Commercial food preparation equipment can be costly in a startup business; it can be the deciding point of not developing a business.Funding for food service businesses is extremely difficult to obtain from lending institutions for experienced food businesses and near impossible for startup operators. PSK is a Low Cost Pay Per Hour concept permitting people with very little available capital to incrementally develop and market food products in a real commercial kitchen 24hours 7days a week.This has permitted PSK clients to bootstrap themselves into a self sustaining food service venture be it retail or as a wholesaler to grocery outlets. Without PSK's resources these small business individuals would find it impossible to experience success as an entrepreneur.PSK's clients represent a wide ethnicity with African American, Hispanic,Asian and Caucasian present. The PSK facility is an 11,000 square foot building located in downtown Pasco.The building houses the equipment and resources shown below: • 4 Convection Ovens • Walk-In Freezer • Walk-Refrigerator • Commercial Bread Mixer • Compartmentalized Lockable Storage Space • 3 Stovetop Ranges with Lower Ovens • 60 Gallon Steam Kettle • Filler caper&Compressor The funding is critical for the growth of our clients and the continued operation of PSK. This grant helps pay the following expenses: • I Full Time Salary and 1 Part Time Hourly • Payroll Taxes • Administration Expenditures • Administrative Service Contract This grant makes it possible for small businesses to keep their start-up cost affordable. We charge the clients an affordable fee for kitchen time, freezer and refrigerator space and dry storage. Keeping these costs affordable is vital to the success of our small business clients. We need to keep this valuable asset in operation for the City of Pasco and our local economy We have clients that are Low to Moderate-income; Pasco High Students,Elderly and Retired Owners,Women Head of Household and Minorities.The kitchen serves as a base for Pasco High Schools Commercial Foods Academy that provides educational training related to the food industry and entrepreneurship.Our students receive grades for this class that is taught in our kitchen.This program is a base for future small businesses in our area to open the prospect of future business growth and the creation of more low to moderate jobs.This contract with the Pasco School District add to our revenue for the administration of the kitchen. This is an economic development tool designed to create jobs and accelerate growth and success of small businesses through business support,resources and services. Our incubator food business kitchen creates jobs,revitalize neighborhoods,adds new products to the market and strengthen our local economy. 3. CONSOLIDATED PLAN: The City of Pasco is required to adopt a long-range community action plan to determine where the use of Block Grant funds should be focused. List the identified objective(s)listed in the Tri-Cities 5-Year Consolidated Plan that the proposal addresses and explain how your proposal meets that need. (See STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN GOALS attached) By providing an affordable commercial incubator kitchen food business facility and assistance related to businesses development,marketing, and training.The kitchen(located downtown Pasco)meets the following; Strategic Action Plan goals;l. Strategy#1 Support businesses that create jobs for low to moderate income residents.Objective 1.1 provides assistance to existing or new micro enterprises and other businesses to hire or retain low-moderate income workers and low- income business owners.Goal 1 Strategy#4 Support activities that improve the quality of the local workforce and prepare lower income and special needs workers to access living wage jobs.Objective 4.1 Support training and work skills programs/projects that prepare lower income workers to be gainfully employed in local industries and businesses.Goal 1. Strategy#5 Support facilities, infrastructure or other eligible improvement to assist businesses that need economic development assistance by virtue of their qualifying,physical environment or demographic conditions;to create a living wage jobs and/or economic opportunities.Objective 5.1 support a range of eligible special economic development activity,to address development needs in the following targeted re-development strategy area: Pasco bowntown Area CDBG 2014 Application Complete Final Page 2 4. ALLOCATION POLICY: Projects will be ranked according to the attached Allocation Policy. Identify the priority(A,B,C or D)that matches your project(see Section II in Allocation Policy): Priority:XA ❑B ❑C [ID and explain how your proposal satisfies that priority: 5. GENERAL SCHEDULE FOR PROJECT COMPLETION: Ongoing 6. SPECIFY EXACTLY WHAT CDBG FUNDS WOULD BE USED FOR. The funding is critical for the growth of our clients and the continued operation of PSK. This grant helps pay the following expenses: • 1 Full Time Salary and 1 Part Time Hourly • Payroll Taxes • Administration Expenditures • Administrative Service Contract This grant makes it possible for small businesses to keep their start-up cost affordable.We charge the clients an affordable fee for kitchen time, freezer and refrigerator space and dry storage.Keeping these costs affordable is vital to the success of our small business clients. We need to keep this valuable asset in operation for the City of Pasco and our local economy 7. DOES YOUR PROJECT CREATE INDIVIDUALBUSINESS DISPLACEMENT OR RELOCATION?❑ YES NO 8. ELIBIBILITY: How sloes your proposal meet Eligibility criteria of 24 CFR 570 below? (SELECT ONLY ONE) ❑ Public Acquisition of Property 24 CFR 570.201(a): ❑ Public Facilities(new construction or capital improvements)24 CFR 570.201(c): 0 Public Services 24 CFR 570.201(e): Z Economic Development 24 CFR 570.201(o)/24 CFR 570.203: ❑ Housing rehabilitation and preservation 24 CFR 570.202: ❑ Code Enforcement 24 CFR 570.202(c): ❑ Planning 24 CFR 570.205: ❑ Other(describe): 9. NATIONAL OBJECTIVE: How does your proposal meet the National Objective of benefiting low and moderate-income persons below? (SELECT ONLY ONE) 1)❑ You receive household/family income and size data from each participant in the program(LMH)(LMC) 2)❑ Your project serves a limited area that is proven by census tract or survey to be a low-income area(LMA): ❑ Downtown Revitalization Zone ❑Census Tract# 3)7 Your project serves ONLY the following clientele(check appropriate box)(LMC): ❑ Elderly person's ❑Homeless persons ❑ Severely disabled adults ❑Illiterate persons ❑Abused children ❑Persons living with AIDS ❑ Battered spouses ❑Migrant farm workers ❑At Risk Youth ❑Other: 4)M Your project will create or save jobs for low/moderate income employees(LMJ) 5)❑ Your project addresses a slum/blight condition(SBA/SBS) CDBG 2014 Application Complete Firtal Page 3 LMA--Low-moderate income area(Census Tract or Survey Area) LMC--Low-moderate income clientele LMH--Low-moderate income household/family LMJ—Low-moderate income job creation/retention SBA/SBS—Slum&Blight Area/Spot(as designed by local government 10. LENGTH OF SERVICE Is this the first year for the program.? ❑Yes [ZNo Year program began?2003 If you receive funding for 2014,how will your program be funded in 2015? Same 11. PUBLIC SERVICE AGENCIES To be eligible for CDBG assistance, a public service must be continuation of a service that is currently CDBG-funded,a new service,or a quantifiable increase in the level of an existing service that is not currently CDBG-funded. Explain how your application qualifies: ® Continuation of Services ❑New Service []Increase in Service 12. 'WHAT AMOUNT OF BLOCK GRANT FUNDING FROM ALL SOURCES HAS YOUR AGENCY OR DEPARTMENT RECEIVED III THE PAST THREE YEARS? 2013 2012 2011 Pasco $ 50,000.00 50,000.00 $ 50,000.00 Richland S $ $ Kennewick $ Other Federal Source(s) $ $ $ To what other agencies have you applied for funding and what commitments have you obtained for this proposal? None at this time but always researching other options CDBG 2014 Application Complete Final Page 4 13. PROVIDE A MAP SHOWING THE LOCATION OF THE PROJECT OR SERVICE AREA: PSK's Location... Sk W tex.v � e •� - Ave Pasco, WA as and Journey Past f IP:CiAC i t 1+l1(.'t{r'• Today 2014—CDBGApplication 5 14. PROJECT TIMELINE-Establish milestones or goals of accomplishments by calendar quarter from the start of the project until completion: Dates or Date Range Milestone/Goal(include numerical performance progress if an MARCH 3FULL I PART TIME JUNE 4 FULL 3 PART TIME SEPTEMBER 4 FULL 2 PART TIME DECEMBER 3 FULL TIME 2 PART TIME 15. BUDGET-Give a detailed breakdown of the total budget for this project including major expense line items(salaries, rent/supplies,Office equipment,capital expenses,new construction/vehicles etc.). Show how the CDBG funds will be applied toward expenses and the amount and source of any other revenue you will be using, Total expenses should equal the total of CDBG plus Other Revenue. Be prepared to explain the budget and provide a copy of full agency budget upon request. EXPENSES REVENUES LINE ITEM $TOTAL BUDGET $CDBG FUNDS $OTHER FUNDS SOURCE OF OTHER FUNDS PERSONNEL: 1)FULL TIME Pasco School 1)PART TIME/LM District Contract: Commercial Foods Academy Salaries 44,900.00 38,000.00 6,900.00 Payroll Taxes 6,500,00 6,500.00 OPERATIONS: Clients Hourly All other Expenses 12,748.00 12,748.00 Charges and Facility Rent Retail Shop NW Food Hub Utilities 17,652.00 17,652.00 Supplies 3,900.00 3,900.00 CONSTRUCTION: Labor/Contracts PROPERTY: Purchase price Closing cost OTHER: (describeEDC/Admin 12,000 12,000.00 Mktg/Advt Fee Equipment Repair 3,544.00 3,544.00 Chambers Dues Small Equipment 2,956.00 2,956.00 Used as Marketing Tool TOTAL $104,200.00 $50,000.00 $54,200.00 $ Additional explanation of the above budget: Other expenses include advertising and Marketing Membership all 4 Chambers(Pasco Chamber, Tri-Cities Regional Chamber, Hispanic Chamber, West Richland Chamber,TVCB Conventions these CDRG 2014 Application Complete Final Page 6 help bring awareness of our facility. Our clients use these Chambers as a marketing tool. The other expenses relate to memberships and the operation of the kitchen. If you do not receive the requested funds or receive only a portion of what you request,haw will the goals of your project be adjusted? What portion of your project will be abandoned,will fewer persons be served,etc.? Our goal is to keep the costs affordable to our small business clients.This is vital for their success. My goal is to increase the number of clients that use the kitchen. I will continue to research farmers looking to add value to their products.Manufacturing is an area we are continuing to develop. We have added some equipment to reach these goals. I will always be looking for revenue sources even in this economic time of crisis. 16. PROJECT BENEFICIARIES-List the client data of persons whom you ESTIMATE you will serve with this project. Is your count by: OPerson,or by OHousehold(family)? Number of clients below 30%median 22 Number of clients below 50%median 16 Number of clients below 80%Q median 10 Number of elderly clients 12 Number of minority clients 16 Total Number of Pasco residents served 20 (Should=total##above) What is the data source for the information provided above? Tax_Forms/Job Profiles/Signed Contracts 2012 HUD income Limit Guidelines for cnnewick-Pasco-Richland 1 Person 2 People 3 People 4 People 5 People 6 People 7 People 1 8 People 300/. $14,054 $16,050 $18.050 $20,050 $21,700 $23,300 $24,900 $26,500 500/0 $23,400 $26,750 $30,104 $33,400 $36,100 $38,750 $41,450 $44,100 80% $37,450 $42,800 $48,150 $53,450 $57,750 $62,050 $66,300 $70,600 Median $46,840 $53,500 $60,200 $66,800 $72,200 $77,500 $82,900 $88,200 For Information Only,2013 Ineome Limits will apply. 17. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS ONLY-Show the number of new/permanent jobs to be created through block grant funding and the number of jobs to be staffed by or made available to low-moderate income individuals this program year. Total to Date This Program Year Number of new jobs expected to be Current Clients with added created/retained employees 55 (32)FTE add the 24 High School students from Pasco High Schools 79 Number of new jobs expected to be filled or All our added Employees are LM offered to low-or moderate-income persons 65% (Must be at least 51%) Position Titles Expected to be Created this Owner/Managers Cooks program year(Use EDA Classifications) Manufacturing,Workforce CDBG 2014 Application Complete Final Page 7 18. CONTACT INFORMATION Authorized Official Contract Administrator Project Manager Name/Title Victoria Silvernaii Manager Victoria Silvernail Manager Victoria Silvernail Manager Mailine;Address 110 S 4t'Ave City/State Pasco Washin on 99301 Phone/Fax 509-545-1172 phone 509-545-1174 Fax )Email victoria(-a,Dascosgecialtykitchen.com SUBMITTED BY: Manager 5/28/2013 Signature of Aut rized Official Title Date CDBG 2014 Application Complete Final Page 8 2:23 PM Pasco Specialty Kitchen 05/28/13 Profit & Loss Budget vs. Actual Cash Basis January through May 2013 Jan-May 13 Budget $Over Budget %of Budget Ordinary Income/Expense Income 4000G-Key Fee 200.00 300.00 -100.00 66.7% 4000E-Equipment Rentais 5,726.03 8,541.62 -2,815.59 67.0% 4000C-Facility Rental Fees 10,306.22 12,500.00 -2,193.78 82.4% 4000D-Prof Service Agreement 16,666.52 20,833.31 -4,166.79 80.0% 4000E-Mktg]Advt. Fee Income 290.00 833.31 -543.31 34.8% Total Income 33,188.77 43,008.24 -%819.47 772% Gross Profit 33,188.77 43,008.24 -9,819.47 77-2% Expense 6008 Membership and Dues 350.00 5037P-Administration/EDC 0.00 6,250.00 -6,250.00 0.0% 6009 PDDA Membership 362.50 6050 .Operating Expense-PSK 1,909.85 1,041.62 868.23 1814% 6070A-PSK Advertising/Marketi 1,191.00 833.31 357.69 142.9% 6550 •6070C-PSK Office Supplies 39.32 416.62 -377.30 9.4%Q 60700-PSK Janitorial Supplies 450.62 83331 -382.69 54.1% 6090A-PSK Garbage 598.43 750.00 -151.57 79.8% 6400 •6090B-PSK Gas 2,501,59 1,51543 986.16 1651% 60900 PSK Electric 2,208.84 3,125,00 -916.16 70.7% 6410 6090D-PSK Water 377.72 62500 -247,28 60A% 6160 -6090S Dues and Subscriptions 0.00 104.12 -104.12 0.0% 6250 6095-PSK Postage&Frieght 0-00 50.00 -50.00 0.0% 6650 70001-PSK Accounting/Legal 0.00 298.00 -298.00 0.0% 6450 7000)-PSK Contractl-br-Janitor 1,416.01 3,333.31 -1,917.30 42.5% 6310 7050A-PSK Building Repairs 0.00 416.62 -416.62 0.0% 6330 •70506-PSK Equipt Repair/Service 3,909.34 2,083.31 1,826.03 187.7% 7050C Maintanance 0.00 83.31 -83.31 0.0% 6340 • 7075P-PSK Telephone 350.12 500.00 -149.88 70.0% 7075Q-PSK Internet Services 352.16 416.62 -64.46 84.5% 75750 Cell Phone 0.00 250.00 -250.00 0.0% 7585 PSK Travel&Meals 0.00 250.00 -250.00 00% 7595 PSK Small Equipment -150.40 669.68 -820.08 -22.5% 6560 • Payroll Expenses 14,620.00 17,500.00 -2,880.00 83.5% Payroll Tax Expense -2,457.66 1,458.31 -3,915.97 -168.5% Total Expense 28,029.44 42,803.57 -14,774.13 65.5% Net Ordinary Income 5,159.33 204.67 4,954.66 2,520.8% Net Income 5,159.33 204.67 4,954.66 2,520.8%a Page 1 2:21 PM Pasco Specialty Kitchen 05/28/13 Profit & Loss Budget 'dl's. Actual Cash Basis January through December 2012 Jan-Dec 12 Budget $Over Budget %of Budget Ordinary Income/Expense i Income 4000G-Key Fee 370.00 550.00 -180.00 67.3% 4000A-Retail Sales 0.00 7.53 -7.53 0.0% 4000B-Equipment Rentals 16,691.66 21,581.00 -4,889.34 77.3% 40000-Facility Rental Fees 27,642.15 45,016.50 -17,374.35 61.4% 4000D-Prof Service Agreement 50,000.00 50,000.00 0.00 100.0% 4000E-Mktg/Advt.Fee Income 1,684.58 1,650.00 34.58 102.1% 4150•4000M-Miscellaneous income 0.00 216.72 -216.72 0.0% Total Income 96,388.39 119,021.75 -22,633.36 81.0% Gross Profit 96,388.39 119,021.75 -22,633.36 81.0% Expense 6008 Membership and Dues 300.00 1,600.00 -1,300.00 18.8% 5037P-Administration/EDC 12,333.36 16,000.00 -3,666.64 77.1% 6050-Operating Expense-PSK 3,515.40 2,500.00 1,015.40 140.6% 6070A-PSK Advertising/Marketi 2,211.26 4,000.00 -1,788.74 55.3% 6070B-PSK Computer 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0% 6550•6070C-PSK Office Supplies 1,422.15 1,000.00 422.15 142.2% 6070D-PSK Janitorial Supplies 2,221.19 3,000.00 -778.81 74.0% 6090A-PSK Garbage 1,796.88 1,800.00 -3.12 99.8% 6400•60908-PSK Gas 3,514.01 6,893.02 -3,379.01 51.0% 6090C-PSK Electric 7,5£1,36 8,990.41 -1,429.05 84.1% 6410 60900-PSK Water 2,020.27 1,500.00 520.27 134.7% 6160 60905 Dues and Subscriptions 200.00 525.00 -325.00 38.1% 6250-6095-PSK Postage&Frleght 109.36 120.00 -10.64 91.1% 6650-70001-PSK Accounting/Legal 865.00 1,006.25 -14115 86.0% 6450•7000J-PSK Contractt-br-Janitor 7,834.99 10,500.00 -2,665.01 74.6% 6310.7050A-PSK Building Repairs 0.00 432.66 -432.66 0.0% 6330•7050B-PSK Equipt Repair/Service 4,375.90 2,500.00 1,875.90 175.0%© 7050C Maintenance 156.28 171.34 -15.06 91.2% 6340 -7075P-PSK Telephone 1,180.29 921.26 259.03 128.1% 7075Q-PSK Internet Services 966.60 717.96 248.64 134.6% 7575C Cell Phone 408.47 1,200.00 -791.53 34.0% 7585 PSK Travel&Meals 833.91 1,500.00 -666.09 55.6% 7595 PSK Small Equipment 3,715.48 2,000.00 1,715.48 185.8%© Maintenance 0.00 29.23 -29.23 0.0% 6560• Payroll Expenses 42,646.78 39,850.91 2,795.87 107.0% Payroll Tax Expense 7,165.64 7,491.90 -326.26 95.6% Void 0.00 Total Expense 107,354,58 116,249.94 - 8,895.36 92.3% Net Ordinary Income -10,966.19 2;771.81 -13,738.00 -395.6% Page 1 2:21 PM Pasco Specialty Kitchen 05,28/13 Profit & Loss Budget vs. Actual Cash Basis January through December 2012 Jan-Dec 12 Budget $Over Budget %of Budget Other Income/Expense Other Income 7010- Interest Income 238 33.29 -0.91 72.3% 7030 -Other Income 0.00 1,514.78 -1,514.78 0.0% Total Other Income 2.38 1,518.07 -1,515.69 0.2% Other Expense 8010• Other Expenses 53.72 419.39 -365.67 12.8%Q Total Other Expense 53.72 419.39 -365.67 i 12.8% Net Other Income -51.34 1,098.68 -1,150.02 -47% Net Income -11,017.53 3,870.49 -14,888.02 -284.70% Page 2 Downtown Pasco Development Authority 4/17/2013 Specialty Kitchen FINAL 2073 Jan Feb March April May June July August Sept Oct Nov Dec Total Income: "� Admin:Farmers Market Admin:Specialty Kitchen - - - - - - - - - _ _ Block grant - 8,333 4,167 4,167 4,167 4,167 4,167 4,167 4,167 4,167 4,167 4,167 50,000 City of Pasco contributions - - - - - - - - - - _ _ - Daily fees - - - - - - - - - _ _ _ _ Equipment rentals 1,500 1,000 2,000 1,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,500 1,000 21,000 Facility rental fees 1,000 1,000 6,000 4,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 5,000 2,000 31,000 Marketing fees - 100 100 - 100 100 100 100 200 800 100 - 1,700 Interest income - - - - - _ _ - - _ Misc income 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 500 Public donations Reserved fees - - - - - - - - _ - Retail sales - - Unreserved fees - - - - - - - - - - - - Totaf Income 2,550 10,483 12,317 9,217 8,317 8,317 8,317 8,317 8,417 9,017 11,767 7,167 104,200 Expenses: Advertising expense - - 300 - - 200 - - - - - - 500 Administration fees 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 12,000 Bank fees - - - - - - - - - - - - - Client marketing 200 300 - - 200 - 500 150 - 150 1,500 Committee projects - - - - - - - - - Dues&subscriptions 200 - - 50 - 250 Equipment leases - - - - - Insurance - - 1,000 - - - 1,000 Janitorial 300 200 300 400 200 100 400 3,000 1,000 300 300 500 7,000 Kitchen equipment - - - - - - - - - - - - - Legal&professional - - - 250 250 250 - 250 1,000 Licenses&permits - - - - - - 100 - 100 Meetings&travel - 100 - 100 100 - 100 100 100 600 Misc expense - - - - - - 200 - 200 Office expenses - 100 - 200 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 - 1,000 Operating supplies 500 100 100 200 700 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 3,000 Payroll taxes 350 350 360 360 360 550 360 360 360 360 360 360 4,490 Rent expense - - - - - - - - - - - Repairs&maintenance 1,500 400 1,600 - - - 1,500 - 1,500 - 6,500 Salaries&wages 3,740 3,740 3,742 3,742 3,742 3,742 3,742 3,742 3,742 3,742 3,742 3,742 44,900 "telephone&internet 255 255 255 255 255 255 255 255 255 255 255 255 3,060 Utilities 2,000 1,000 2,000 1,500 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,500 15,000 Total Operating Expenses 9,845 7,545 8,057 9,457 7,457 7,597 8,057 10,507 9,407 7,357 8,757 8,057 102,100 Monthly Gain(Loss) _ (7,2.95) 2,938 4,260 (240) 860 720 260 (2,190) {990) 1,660 3,010 {890) 2,100 Beginning cash 18,620 11,325 14,263 18,523 18,283 19,142 19,862 20,121 17,931 16,941 18,600 21,610 Ending cash 11,325 14,263 18,523 18,283 19,142 19,862 20,121 17,931 16,941 18,600 21,610 20,720 Page 4 of 4 RECEIVED 2014 APPLICATION FOR CITY OF PASCO V 2 8 2013 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) FUND �UM11Ut11TY? EC0N01,1t�; DEUE�oPt�7E1`lI AGENCY: Downtown Pasco Development Authority PROJECT TITLE: Downtown Faeade Improvement Program(2+facades) ADDRESS: P.O. Box 688,Pasco, WA 99301 PROPOSED PROJECT LOCATION: 4'h Avenue&Lewis Street(21.201,202); see map in Item 13 AUTHORIZED OFFICIAL Amy Kuchler, Executive Director E-MAIL: amy@downtownpasco.com PHONE: (509)546-1304 FAX: n/a AMOUNT OF CDBG FUNDS REQUESTED: $ 60,000 AMOUNT OF NON-CDBG MATCH:$ Will vary on cost of individual facades(estimated$15,000-$60,000) 1. DESCRIBE THE PROBLEM OR NEED(AS RELATED TO THE STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN ATTACHED): Downtown Pasco's retail buildings need physical improvements to increase retail traffic,to create jobs,to eliminate blight,and to aid in the continued economic revitalization of Downtown Pasco. Faeade improvements make downtown buildings more attractive and support small businesses in providing living-wageJobs to their employees. Goal 1, Strategy 5, Objective 5.1. 2. EXPLANATION OF PROPOSAL-Give a complete detailed description of your proposal including a description of the clientele you will be serving: Property owners desire to improve their storefronts but lack the capital to make improvements independently. The Faeade Improvement Program seeks to help property owners in repairing and/or replacing storefronts on existing retail buildings in facade improvement focus area(see map in Item 13). CDBG funding allows Downtown Pasco to provide matching funds to supplement the property owner's investment. Property owners are eligible for up to 75%of their total project cost with a maximum of$25,000 per storefront. DPDA will market the Faeade Improvement Program,work with property owners to complete program requirements,and assist in managing individual projects. Clientele served are low/moderate income persons and employ additional low/moderate income individuals through their small business. The Faeade Improvement Program improves the physical appearance of Downtown, increases retail traffic,and creates jobs by enabling small business owners to employ additional staff. 3. CONSOLIDATED PLAN: The City of Pasco is required to adopt a long-range community action plan to determine where the use of Block Grant funds should be focused. List the identified objective(s)listed in the Tri-Cities 5-Year Consolidated Plan that the proposal addresses and explain how your proposal meets that need. (See STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN GOALS attached) Goal 1: Improve local economies; Strategy 5: Support eligible improvements that create living wage jobs and need economic development assistance by virtue of their physical,economic,and demographic conditions; Objective 5.1: Support eligible economic development activities to address economic development needs in Pasco's downtown area,a targeted strategy area_ 4. ALLOCATION POLICY: Projects will be ranked according to the attached Allocation Policy. Identify the priority(A, B,C or D)that matches your project(see Section 11 in Allocation Policy): Priority: NA ❑B ❑C ❑D and explain how your proposal satisfies that priority: Facade Improvement projects result in visual physical improvements to brick and mortar buildings in Downtown Pasco. These phvsical,visual improvements assist with neighborhood preservation and revitalization, as well as help to create jobs through increased retail traffic. 5. GENERAL SCHEDULE FOR PROJECT COMPLETION: Late Autumn 2014 6. SPECIFY EXACTLY WHAT CDBG FUNDS WOULD BE USED FOR: Design assistance, construction materials, and labor 7. DOES YOUR PROJECT CREATE INDIVIDUAL/BUSINESS DISPLACEMENT OR RELOCATION? ❑ YES Z NO 2014 CDBG Application DRAFT Page I 8. ELIBIBILITY: How does your proposal meet Eligibility criteria of 24 CFR 570 below? (SELECT ONLY ONE) ❑ Public_Acguisition of Property 24 CFR 570.201(a): Public Facilities{new construction or capital improvements)24 CFR 570.201(c): ❑ Public Services 24 CFR 570.201(e}: Z Economic Development 24 CFR 570.201(0)/24 CFR 570.203: ❑ Housing rehabilitation and preservation 24 CFR 570.202: ❑ Code Enforcement 24 CFR 570.202(c); ❑ Planning 24 CFR 570.205: ❑ Other(describe): 9. NATIONAL OBJECTIVE. How does your proposal meet the National Objective of benefiting low and moderate-income persons below? (SELECT ONLY ONE) 1)❑ You receive household/family income and size data from each participant in the program(LMH)(LMC) 2)Z Your project serves a limited area that is proven by census tract or survey to be a low-income area(LMA): ED Downtown Revitalization Zone Downtown Pasco ❑ Census Tract# 3)❑ Your project serves ONLY the following clientele(check appropriate box)(LMC): ❑ Elderly person's ❑ Homeless persons ❑ Severely disabled adults ❑ Illiterate persons ❑ Abused children ❑ Persons living with AID'S ❑ Battered spouses ❑ Migrant farm workers ❑ At Risk Youth ❑ Other: 4)❑ Your project will create or save jobs for low/moderate income employees(LMJ) 5)❑ Your project addresses a slum/blight condition(SBA/SBS) LMA—Low-moderate income area(Census Tract or Survey Area) LMC—Low-moderate income clientele LMH—Low-moderate income household/family LMJ—Low-moderate income job creation/retention SBA/SBS—Slum&Blight Area/Spot(as designed by local government) 10. LENGTH OF SERVICE Is this the first year for the program? ❑Yes ®No Year program began? 2007 If you receive funding for 2014,how will your program be funded in 2015? CDBG funds will be requested for 2015 projects. Additional funding is continually sought from private investors, commercial lending sources Benton-Franklin Council of Governments, and local service clubs. Funds may also become available through DPDA's fundraising efforts. forts 11. PUBLIC SERVICE AGENCIES To be eligible for CDBG assistance, a public service must be continuation of service that is currently CDBG-funded,a new service,or a quantifiable increase in the level of an existing service that is not currently CDBG-funded. Explain how your application qualifies: ❑ Continuation of Services ❑New Service ❑ Increase in Service Not applicable:not a public service auency 12. WHAT AMOUNT OF BLOCK GRANT FUNDING FROM ALL SOURCES HAS YOUR AGENCY OR DEPARTMENT RECEIVED IN THE PAST THREE YEARS? 2013 2012 2011 Pasco $ 0 S 60,000 $ 0 2014 CDBG Application DRAFT Page 2 Richland $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 Kennewick $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 Other Federal Source(s) $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 To what other agencies have you applied for funding and what commitments have you obtained for this proposal? Pasco-Kennewick Rotary. We received$500 in funding designated for Downtown Pasco's Facade Improvement Program. 2014 CDBG Application DRAFT Page 3 l i Lair rGp�-.:fr• . .f tl•ric3,>}� LN... Yn --�++ VsatF ,C 0,0,4 i e pia •i f:,.r - • �- Vo _ - f eta Ck *i ,Le 14. PROJECT TIMELINE-Establish milestones or goals of accomplishments by calendar quarter from the start of the project until completion: Dates or Date Range Milestone/Goal include numerical performance progress if an January-May 2014 Marketin of program,application by roe owners June 2014 Designs completed,approved September 2014 Bidding complete;contracts awarded. October- December 2014 Construction complete. 15. BUDGET-Give a detailed breakdown of the total budget for this project including major expense line items(salaries, rent/supplies, office equipment, capital expenses,new construction/vehicles etc.). Show how the CDBG funds will be applied toward expenses and the amount and source of any other revenue you will be using. Total expenses should equal the total of CDBG plus Other Revenue. Be prepared to explain the budget and provide a copy of full agency budget upon request. EXPENSES REVENUES LINE ITEM $TOTAL BUDGET $CDBG FUNDS $OTHER FUNDS SOURCE OF OTHER FUNDS PERSONNEL: Salaries $0 $0 $0 Benefits $0 $0 $0 OPERATIONS: Rent/Lease $0 $0 $0 Utilities $0 $0 $0 Supplies $0 $0 $0 CONSTRUCTION: Architectural $6,000 $6,000 Engineering $4,000 $4,000 Materials $50,000 $50,000 $500 P-K Rotary Club Labor/Contracts $15,000 to 60,000 $0 $15,000-60,000 Owner Matches PROPERTY: Purchase price $0 $0 $0 Closing cost $0 $0 $0 OTHER: (describe) $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $75,000 to 120,000 $60,000 $15,500-60,500 Additional explanation of the above budget: Project costs,while they never exceed the budgeted amounts,are difficult to estimate as they depend so heavily on what is needed/desired for individual facades (for example:paint only vs. new stucco). With regards to the potential range in property owner matching funds: On projects totaling$5,000 to$34,000,matching funds by property owners range from $I,250 to$9,000 respectively(per storefront). On projects totaling more than$34,000, matching funds by property owners begin at$9,000 and must be sufficient to cover all additional project costs. For example, on a large-scale project such as Viera's Bakery($70,000+total),matching funds exceeded $45,000. If you do not receive the requested funds or receive only a portion of what you request,how will the goals of your project be adjusted? What portion of your project will be abandoned,will fewer persons be served,etc.? Without CDBG funding,the Facade Improvement Program will not be able to continue full-scale physical revitalization of Downtown Pasco. If we do not receive any CDBG funds, our budget will be limited to$500. Any costs beyond this buffet will fall entirely upon the property owner's ability to pay or finance their project. If we receive less funding than requested,we will be able to complete fewer Facade Improvement projects. 2014 CDBG Application DRAFT Page 5 16. PROJECT BENEFICIARIES-List the client data of persons whom you ESTIMATE you will serve with this project. Is your count by: ®Person,or by❑Household(family)? Number of clients below 30%median I (new/saved jobs) Number of clients below 50%median 2(new/saved jobs) Number of clients below 80°o median Number of elderly clients Number of minority clients 2(new/saved jobs) Total Number of Pasco residents served 3 (new/saved jobs) (Should—total 4 above) What is the data source for the information provided above? Census data 2013 HUD income Limit Guidelines for Kennewick—Pasco—Richland I Person 2 People 3 People 4 People 5 People 6 People 7 People $Peo le 30% $14,250 $16,300 $18,350 $20,350 $22,000 $23,650 $25,250 $26,900 50% $23,750 $27,150 $30.550 $33,900 $36,650 $39,350 $42050 $44,750 80% $38,000 $43,400 $48,850 $54,250 $58.600 $62,950 $67,300 $71,650 Median $47,500 $54,300 $61,100 $67,800 $73,300 $78,700 $84,100 $89,500 For Information Only,2014 Income Limits will apply. 17. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS ONLY - Show the number of new/permanent jobs to be created through block grant funding and the number of jobs to be staffed by or made available to low-moderate income individuals this program year. Total to Date This Program Year Number of new jobs expected to be 4 3 created/retained Number of new jobs expected to be filled or 4 3 offered to low-or moderate-income persons (Must be at least 51%) Position Titles Expected to be Created this Sales, Office&Clerical, and/or Sales,Office&Clerical,and/or program year(Use EDA Classifications) Service Workers Service Workers 18. CONTACT INFORMATION Authorized Official Contract Administrator Project Manager Name/Title Amy Kuchler Mailing_Address P.O. Box 688 CitLState Pasco,WA Phone/Fax (509)546-1304 Email amys'a�downtownpasco.com SUBMITTED BY: ov, Executive Director May 28,2013 Signatur6 of Authorized Official Title Date 2014 CDBG Application DRAFT Page 0 U MffA PIL 0 FA _ FA 0 BEFORE K 0 C M 0 r* ;4 Q t �Q s v J� — _ e AFTER - December 2012 e J�awtoW Columbia Basin PA iC 0 College Development Author4ty 1 *4`* rook file - BEFORE LQ AFTER - December • i .a as _ r -- i - Columbia CITY 6F • • PASCO .� i ��: � r ti College Development 2014 APPLICATION FOR CITY OF PASCO COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT(CDBG) FUN E C E I V E C AGENCY: Friendly Temple Ministries&Trotter Enterprises MAY 2 8, 2N' PROJECT TITLE: Job Training Program ADDRESS: 316 North 4`h Avenue,Pasco, WA 99301 CONII+!IJNI'I Y n ECU;101,11[- OEVEI.OPfJFN PROPOSED PROJECT LOCATION: 316 North O'Avenue, Pasco, WA 99301 AUTHORIZED OFFICIAL Amy Kuchler for Reverend Samuel Trotter E-MAIL: Not applicable PHONE: (509)492-8209 FAX: Not applicable AMOUNT OF CDBG FUNDS REQUESTED: $ 60,000 AMOUNT OF NON-CDBG MATCH:$ Unknown at present 1. DESCRIBE THE PROBLEM OR NEED(AS RELATED TO THE STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN ATTACHED): Job training programs and opportunities are needed for unemployed individuals that lack marketable skills. This project will principally benefit lower income persons,eliminate blight,and assist in creating jobs for low/moderate income persons. 2. EXPLANATION OF PROPOSAL-Give a complete detailed description of your proposal including a description of the clientele you will be serving: Our goal is to offer a Job Training Program to prepare low-income individuals to obtain living wage jobs in the areas of landscaping and restaurant management. CDBG funds would provide the start-up capital necessary to begin these programs.. Once funded,we will begin acceptin _applications to participate in our job training program. We will offer two main focuses: 1)Restaurant management/food service-Participants learn to make and bake pies, as well as operate retail pie shop/restaurant. _2)Landscaping—Participants learn to do lawn care and landscaping, as well as operate a professional landscaping business. This program is specifically designed to serve to those recently incarcerated or otherwise at-risk due to gang affiliation,drug/ alcohol abuse,or criminal history. Such individuals often struggle to find employment and job-training opportunities. 3. CONSOLIDATED PLAN: The City of Pasco is required to adopt a long-range community action plan to determine where the use of Block Grant funds should be focused. List the identified objective(s)listed in the Tri-Cities 5-Year Consolidated Plan that the proposal addresses and explain how your proposal meets that need. (See STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN GOALS attached) Goal 1: Improve local economies;Strategy 4: Support activities that improve the skills of the local workforce and prepare lower-income workers for access to living wage jobs;Objective 4.1: Support training and work-skills programs that prepare lower-income workers for obtaining or retaining living wage employment in local industries and businesses. 4. ALLOCATION POLICY: Projects will be ranked according to the attached Allocation Policy. Identify the priority(A, B,C or D)that matches your project(see Section It in AIlocation Policy): Priority: ❑A ZB ❑C ❑D and explain how your proposal satisfies that priority: Job Training Prop-ram will result in visual physical improvement to a brick and mortar building contributing to neighborhood preservation and revitalization. The Job Training Program will also result in job creation,as it provides jobs and training for unemployed persons. 5. GENERAL SCHEDULE FOR PROJECT COMPLETION: December 2014 6. SPECIFY EXACTLY WHAT CDBG FUNDS WOULD BE USED FOR: Improvements to building.2 business vehicles, landscaping equipment,and kitchen/restaurant equipment. 7. DOES YOUR PROJECT CREATE INDIVIDUAL/BUSINESS DISPLACEMENT OR RELOCATION?❑YES ® NO Trotter Enterprises 2014 CDBG Application DRAFT Page I 8. ELIBIBILITY: How does your proposal meet Eligibility criteria of 24 CFR 570 below? (SELECT ONLY ONE) ❑ Public Acquisition of Property 24 CFR_570.201(a): ❑ Public Facilities(new construction or capital improvements)24 CFR 570.201(e): ❑ Public Services 24 CFR 570.201(e): Economic Development 24 CFR 570.201(o)/24 CFR 570.203: ❑ Housing rehabilitation and preservation_24 CFR 570102: ❑ Code Enforcement 24 CFR 570.202(c): ❑ Planning 24 CFR 570.205: ❑ Other(describe): 9. NATIONAL OBJECTIVE: How does your proposal meet the National Objective of benefiting low and moderate-income persons below? (SELECT ONLY ONE) 1)❑ You receive household/family income and size data from each participant in the program(LMH)(LMC) 2)❑ Your project serves a limited area that is proven by census tract or survey to be a low-income area(LMA): ❑ Downtown Revitalization Zone ❑ Census Tract# 3)❑ Your project serves ONLY the following clientele(check appropriate box)(LMC): ❑ Elderly person's ❑ Homeless persons ❑ Severely disabled adults ❑ Illiterate persons ❑ Abused children ❑ Persons living with AIDS ❑ Battered spouses ❑ Migrant farm workers ❑At Risk Youth ❑Other: 4)® Your project will create or save jobs for low/moderate income employees(LMJ) 5)7 Your project addresses a slum/blight condition(SBA/SBS) LMA—Low-moderate income area(Census Tract or Survey Area) LMC—Low-moderate income clientele LMH—Low-moderate income household/family LMJ—Low-moderate income job creation/retention SBA/SBS—Slum&Blight Area/Spot(as designed by local government) 10. LENGTH OF SERVICE Is this the first year for the program? EYes []No Year program began? Landscaping program in Yakima since 2006 If you receive funding for 2014,how will your program be funded in 2015? Following,g tart_u„g the Job Training Program is financially self-sustaining through key-for-service revenues from the landscaping M rg am and retail pie shy/restaurant. 11. PUBLIC SERVICE AGENCIES To be eligible for CDBG assistance,a public service must be continuation of a service that is currently CDBG-funded,a new service,or a quantifiable increase in the level of an existing service that is not currently CDBG-funded. Explain how your application qualifies. ❑ Continuation of Services ❑New Service ❑ Increase in Service Not applicable,not a public service agency 12. WHAT AMOUNT OF BLOCK GRANT FUNDING FROM ALL SOURCES HAS YOUR AGENCY OR DEPARTMENT RECEIVED IN THE PAST THREE YEARS? 2013 2012 2011 Pasco $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 Trotter Enterprises 20I4 CDBG Application DRAFT Page 2 Richland $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 Kennewick $ 0 0 $ 0 Other Federal Source(s) $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 To what other agencies have you applied for funding and what commitments have you obtained for this proposal? We have not applied for other funding nor received commitments of funding. Trotter Enterprises 2014 CDBG Application DRAFT Page 3 13. PROVIDE A MAP SHOWING THE LOCATION OF THE PROJECT OR SERVICE AREA: �rlir r ABOVE: 316 N.4h Ave., Pasco, WA 99341 —Location for Job Training Program—Also shown by Marker A on map below. w ABOVE: Area to be served by Job Training Program—Low income individuals in Pasco, WA. Trotter Enterprises 2014 CDBG Application DRAFT Pace 4 14. PROJECT TIMELINE-Establish milestones or goals of accomplishments by calendar quarter from the start of the project until completion: Dates or Date Range Milestone/Goal include numerical performance progress if an January-May 2014 Begin ro ram a lication rocess,market proEam in community,plan building renovation May 20141 Funds received Purchase needed equipment, select initial Landscaping ro am participants, launch program June 2014 Launch buildin renovation: finalize,obtain qualified bids July 2014 Select winnin bid finalize contract,begin building renovation August 2014 Complete building renovation project,purchase remaining needed equipment September 2014 Select initial Restaurant program participants, launch prograrn 15. BUDGET-Give a detailed breakdown of the total budget for this project including major expense line items(salaries, rent/supplies,office equipment,capital expenses,new construction/vehicles etc.). Show how the CDBG funds will be applied toward expenses and the amount and source of any other revenue you will be using. Total expenses should equal the total of CDBG plus Other Revenue. Be prepared to explain the budget and provide a copy of full agency budget upon request. EXPENSES REVENUES LINE ITEM $TOTAL BUDGET $ CDBG FUNDS $ OTHER FUNDS SOURCE OF OTHER FUNDS PERSONNEL: Salaries $0 $0 $0 Benefits $400 $400 $0 OPERATIONS: Rent/Lease $0 $0 $0 Utilities $0 $0 $0 Supplies $47,100 $47,100 $0 CONSTRUCTION: Architectural $0 $0 $0 Engineering $0 $0 $0 Materials $6,250 $6,250 $0 Labor/Contrasts $6,250 $6,250 $0 PROPERTY: Purchase price $0 $0 $0 Closing cost $0 $0 $0 OTHER: (describe) $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $60,000 $60,000 $0 Additional explanation of the above budget: Please see Page 7 for complete, itemized budget If you do not receive the requested funds or receive only a portion of what you request,how will the goals of your project be adjusted? What portion of your project will be abandoned,will fewer persons be served,etc.? Without CDBG funding, we will be unable to conduct this program for the time being. If we receive partial funding, we will complete the portion that was funded. For example, if only the building remodel is funded, we will complete that portion of the project. If only the Landscaping portion of the Job Training Program is completed, we will launch that portion of the program. Trotter Enterprises 2014 CDBG Application DRAFT Pace 5 16. PROJECT BENEFICIARIES- List the client data of persons whom you ESTIMATE you will serve with this project. Is your count by: EPerson,or by©Household(family)? Number of clients below 30%median 2 Number of clients below 50%median 3 Number of clients below 80%median Number of elderly clients Number of minority clients 3 Total Number of Pasco residents served 5 (Should=total#above) What is the data source for the information provided above? Census information 2013 HUD income Limit Quidelines for Kenne�N ick—Pasco—Richland Person 2 People 3 People 4 People 5 People 6 People 7 People 8 People 30% $14,250 $16,300 $18,350 $20,350 $22,000 $23;650 $25,250 $26,900 50% $23,750 $27.150 $30,550 $33,900 $36,650 $39,350 $42,050 $44,750 80% $38,000 $43,400 $48,850 $54,250 $58,600 $62,950 $67,300 $71,650 Median $47,500 $54,300 $61,100 $67,800 $73,300 $78,700 $84,100 $89 500 For Information Only, 2014 Income Limits will apply. 17. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS ONLY- Show the number of new/permanent jobs to be created through block grant funding and the number of jobs to be staffed by or made available to low-moderate income individuals this program year. Total to Date This Program Year Number of new jobs expected to be 0 5 created/retained Number of new jobs expected to be filled or 0 5 offered to low-or moderate-income persons (Must be at least 51%) Position Titles Expected to be Created this Office and Clerical,Operatives, program year(Use EDA Classifications) Laborers,and Service Workers 18. CONTACT INFORMATION Authorized Official Contract Administrator& Project Manager Name/Title Amy Kuchler Reverend Sammy Trotter Mailing Address P.O. Box 688 4716 W. Margaret St. City/State Pasco, WA 99301 Pasco, WA 99301 Phone/Fax (509)546-1304 (509)492-8209 cell Email amy a�downtownpasco.com SUBMITTED BY: Lc� Technical assistance wl CDBG Application Executive Director,DPDA May 28,2013 Signaturb of Authorized Official Title Date Trotter Enterprises 2014 CDBG Application DRAFT pane F, Job Training Program Budget A. Gardening & Landscaping Training Program 1. Truck $8,000 2. Business & Auto Insurance $150 3. License & Taxes $400 4. Medical Insurance $3,000 5. Working Capital $4,300 6. Equipment a. Leaf Air Vac. Machine $2,000 b. 2 Self-Propelled Mowers $3,000 c. Hedge Trimmer $600 d. Lawn Edger $500 e. Air Blower $400 f. Weed Fertilizer $300 S. Small Tools & Misc. Supplies $1,000 TOTAL $25,000 B. Food Service/Restaurant Management Training Program: Retail Pie Shop/Restaurant 1. Building Renovation Cost: a. Electrical work, wiring, plugs, lighting, etc. b. Air& heating system, fans, etc. c. Carpets, flooring, windows, and doors Renovation Total $12,500 2. Equipment a. Restaurant stove, oven, pie racks, etc. b. Refrigerator, freezer, 3-compartment sink,microwave c. Tables, chairs, cash register, and restaurant supplies Equipment Total $12,500 3. Delivery Van $5,000 4. Miscellaneous Items & Start-Up Supplies $5,000 TOTAL $35,000 TOTAL Amount Needed: 560,000 Trotter Enterprises 2014 CDBG Application DRAFT pa„., 1. 2014 APPLICATION FOR CITY OF PASCO COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) FUND AGENCY: Benton Franklin Community Action Committee DBA Community Action Connections PROJECT TITLE: Community Housing Improvement Program Minor Rehab/Repairs R E P j V C D ADDRESS: 720 W.Court Street—Pasco, WA 99301 PROPOSED PROJECT LOCATION: Multiple sites within the City of Pasco MAY 9 2013 AUTHORIZED OFFICIAL Judith A. Gidley,Executive Director nE„r �'ITr7iJT�il- � J��?.j' r:1�c OEUELOPP.iEfa i E-MAIL: jgidley a bfcac.org PHONE: 509-545-4042 FAX: 509-544-9691 AMOUNT OF CDBG FUNDS REQUESTED: $ 50,000 AMOUNT OF NON-CDBG MATCH:$ 5,000 1. DESCRIBE THE PROBLEM OR NEED(AS RELATED TO THE STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN ATTACHED): There is a gap in housing services to provide low or zero percent interest loans to homeowner for owner-occupied and rental properties for emergency/energy efficient repairs,lead-hazard reductions,and connections to city water.A minor rehabilitation/repair program is needed to assist with efforts to sustain and improve existing housing stock. 2. EXPLANATION OF PROPOSAL-Give a complete detailed description of your proposal including a description of the clientele you will be serving: Provide funds for minor rehabilitations/repairs as required sustaining or improving existing housing stock occupied by households that are 80% or below area median income. Depending on income level Pasco citizens may receive a zero or low interest installment loan if they are not burdened with housing costs that exceed 30% of their income,a deferred loan if housing costs are greater than 30%of their income,and a grant if their income is lower than 50% of median area income. The funds may be used to repair or replace failed HVAC units, roofs,and windows with energy efficient systems. Remove lead or asbestos hazards for a qualified rehabilitation project, hook-up to city sewer/water when it is available in the area and the existing system has failed or is failing and/or any other eligible minor rehabilitation activity for qualified households. 3. CONSOLIDATED PLAN: The City of Pasco is required to adopt a long-range community action plan to determine where the use of Block Grant funds should be focused. List the identified objective(s)listed in the Tri-Cities 5-Year Consolidated Plan that the proposal addresses and explain how your proposal meets that need. (See STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN GOALS attached) Sustain or improve the quality of existing affordable housing stock Strategy IV.2 - ---- ---- -- 4. ALLOCATION POLICY: Projects will be ranked according to the attached Allocation Policy. Identify the priority(A, B, C or D)that matches your project(see Section II in Allocation Policy): Priority: ❑A ❑B ®C ❑D and explain how your proposal satisfies that priority: C1 -Bricks&Mortar Project resulting in preservation of affordable housing through rehabilitation or acquisition/rehabilitation (engineering& architectural design and inspection costs are allowed but limited to 15% of funded project cost. 5. GENERAL SCHEDULE FOR PROJECT COMPLETION: December 31 2414 6. SPECIFY EXACTLY WHAT CDBG FUNDS WOULD BE USED FOR: Construction hard costs soft costs and rgject delivery. 7. DOES YOUR PROJECT CREATE INDIVIDUAL/BUSINESS DISPLACEMENT OR RELOCATION?❑ YES Z NO 013 CDBG Application-Merge 8. ELIGIBILITY: How does your proposal meet Eligibility criteria of 24 CFR 570 below? (SELECT ONLY ONE) ❑ Public Acquisition of Property 24 CFR 570.201 fa): ❑ Public facilities(new construction or capital improvements)24 CFR 570.201(c): ❑ Public Services 24 CFR 570.201(e): ❑ Economic Development 24 CFR 570.241(0)/24_CFR 570.203: Housing rehabilitation and preservation 24 CFR 570.202: Code Enforcement 24 CFR 570.202(c): ❑ Planning 24 CFR 570.205: ❑ Other(describe): 9. NATIONAL OBJECTIVE: How does your proposal meet the National Objective of benefiting low and moderate-income persons below? (SELECT ONLY ONE) 1)Z You receive household/family income and size data from each participant in the program(LMH) 2)❑ Your project serves a limited area that is proven by census tract or survey to be a low-income area(LMA): Downtown Revitalization Zone ❑ Census Tract# 3)❑ Your project serves ONLY the following clientele(check appropriate box)(LMC): EIderly person's ❑Homeless persons ❑Severely disabled adults ❑ Illiterate persons ❑Abused children ❑Persons living with AIDS ❑Battered spouses ❑ Migrant farm workers ❑At Risk Youth ❑Other: 4)❑ Your project will create or save jobs for low/moderate income employees(LMJ) 5)❑ Your project addresses a slum/blight condition(SBA/SBS) LMA—Low-moderate income area(Census Tract or Survey Area) LMC—Low-moderate income clientele LMH—Low-moderate income household/family LMJ—Low-moderate income job creation/retention SBA/SBS—Slum&Blight Area/Spot(as designed by local government) 10. LENGTH OF SERVICE Is this the first year for the program? ❑Yes ZNo Year program began? 2013 If you receive funding for 2013,how will your program be funded in 2014? Combination of federal,state,local funds until program develops revolving loan propuam that is self-sustaining 11. PUBLIC SERVICE AGENCIES N/A To be eligible for CDBG assistance, a public service must be continuation of a service that is currently CDBG-funded, a new service,or a quantifiable increase in the level of an existing service that is not currently CDBG-funded. Explain how your application qualifies: ❑ Continuation of Services 0 New Service Q Increase in Service 12. WHAT AMOUNT OF BLOCK GRANT FUNDING FROM ALL SOURCES HAS YOUR AGENCY OR DEPARTMENT RECEIVED IN THE PAST THREE YEARS? 2013 2012 2011 Pasco $ 50,000 $ $ 2013 CDBG Application-Merge • • - • 1 1i 1 • ' • i i 11ATA I MAN W"I W1,914WIMSIV1 I• UMMONZWK91M 1 r r! rl rr Il rl ►r le rrr r r �/ ///���///%/jam/////�/// /�,r'/rl 1 r• . �fjyv� •//rl� r� t�IN ✓� ���f//fir/f// �� r /r i , c / MOO P/rr / IT 1� ./�/P�/�}�j/:•rr irrr/rrrrl%/rliiilr/ /,'• rrr// •, V2 �.: Inr�r. ��irir �rlr•� � �'../- /ri7r�1! �/ A"�R I��.ir.!✓ir � ,rllL�. JIeL. � si rr r %�,/ Ifi►/l /jt riririrrr.I rrr�� r/v - ��i r /�/� trvyir�/Prrr �yr r rrr rr tl�v /f� rI�/1r/�/ir iiI%.%II°•+y' j f! rlfr,tr',.r .rr r/rfr rrr ,�;.r Iff/�/�J/• �"'/'/.r/'r/�r_'�../�',//ftJj'y/�rJ///// v fI /f r/�,,`;'l/��r�%'�•/il,+�'�l/J/�f,%it//,fl/...+���._`9q°.. %'//��:/� Y/�f���:' //�� 1' Sri r✓,��� r,'////����. �* 11 r 14. PROJECT TIMELINE-Establish milestones or goals of accomplishments by calendar quarter from the start of the project until completion: Dates or Date Range Milestone/Goal(include numerical performance progress if any) 1"Quarter Perform tier Environmental Review 2° Quarter Marketing and identify project site 3' Quarter Perform Site specific environmental review 4 Quarter Completion 15. BUDGET-Give a detailed breakdown of the total budget for this project including major expense line items(salaries, rent/supplies,office equipment, capital expenses,new construction/vehicles etc.). Show how the CDBG funds will be applied toward expenses and the amount and source of any other revenue you will be using. Total expenses should equal the total of CDBG plus Other Revenue. Be prepared to explain the budget and provide a copy of full agency budget upon request. EXPENSES REVENUES LINE ITEM $TOTAL BUDGET $ CDBG FUNDS $OTHER FUNDS SOURCE OF OTHER FUNDS PERSONNEL: Salaries $5,000.00 $5,000.00 Benefits OPERATIONS: Rent/Lease Utilities Supplies CONSTRUCTION: Project Delivery $4,000.00 $4,000.00 Soft Costs $2,000.00 $2,000.00 Materials Labor/Contracts $40,000.00 $40,000.00 PROPERTY: Purchase price Closing cost. OTHER: (describe) TOTAL $55,000.00 $50,000.00 $5,000.00 $00.00 Additional explanation of the above budget: Minimum two units at$22,250 for minor rehabilitation construction,soft costs and project delivery up to a maximum of 5 units provided$10,000 for energy efficient system repairs or replacement. If you do not receive the requested funds or receive only a portion of what you request, how will the goals of your project be adjusted? What portion of your project will be abandoned, will fewer persons be served, etc.? If fewer funds are received the fewer households will be assisted. 16. PROJECT BENEFICIARIES-Estimate the client data of persons whom you ESTIMATE you will serve with this project. Is your count by: 0 Person,or by ZHousehold(family)? Number of clients below 30%median 2 Number of clients below 50%median 2 2013 CDBG Application-Merge Page 4 Plumber of clients below 80%median 1 Plumber of elderly clients I Number of minority clients 2 Total Number of Pasco residents served 5 Households (Should=total#above) What is the data source for the information provided above? Estimated 2013 HUTS income Limit Quidelines for Kennewicl -Pasco-Richland I Person 2 People 3 People 4 People 5 People 6 People 7 People 8 People 30% $14,050 $16,050 $18,050 $20,050 $21,700 $23,300 $24,900 $26,500 50% $23,400 $26,750 $30,100 $33,400 $36,100 $38.750 $41,450 $44,100 80% $37,450 $42,800 $48,150 $53,450 $57,750 $62,050 $66,300 $70,600 Median $46,800 $53,500 $60,200 $66,800 $72,200 $77,500 $82,900 $88,200 For Information Only, 2014 Income Limits will apply. 17. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS ONLY-Show the number of new/permanent jobs to be created through block grant funding and the number of jobs to be staffed by or made available to low-moderate income individuals this program year. Total to Date This Program Year Number of new jobs expected to be NIA created/retained Number of new jobs expected to be filled or offered to low-or moderate-income persons (Must be at least 51%) Position Titles Expected to be Created this program year(Use EDA CIassifications) 18. CONTACT INFORMATION Authorized Official Contract Administrator Project Manager Name/Title Judith A. Gidley,Executive Director Judith A. Gidley,Executive Director Dark Francis,Pram.Dev.Mgr. Mailing Address 720 W.Court Street 720 W. Court Street 720 W. Court Street _ City/State Pasco,WA 99301 Pasco, WA 99301 Pasco, WA 99301 Phone/Fax 509-545-4042 509-545-4042 509-545-4042 Email j gidlgy&bfcac.org SUBMITTED BY: Judith A. Gidley, Executive Director May 29,2013 i of Authorized Official Title Date 2013 CDBG Application-Merge Paw.a 2014 APPLICATION FOR CITY OF PASCO �� COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) FUI��t1E C E I V E D AGENCY: Catholic Family&Child Service MAY 2 9 2013 PROJECT TITLE: Volunteer Chore Services ADDRESS: 2110 West Henry Pasco, WA 99301 PROPOSED PROJECT LOCATION: City of Pasco, WA AUTHORIZED OFFICIAL Darlene Darnell E-MAIL: ddarnell@u,ccyakima.org PHONE: 509-965-7100 FAX: 509-966-9750 AMOUNT OF CDBG FUNDS REQUESTED: $ 4000 AMOUNT OF NON-CDBG MATCH:$ 65,500 1. DESCRIBE THE PROBLEM OR NEED(AS RELATED TO THE STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN ATTACHED): As people age they often experience obstacles that make it more difficult for them to continue living independently. Adults with disabilities,including those often associated with aging,may encounter a barrier to accessibility to their own homes. Limited mobility and the subsequent use of a walker or wheelchair can make safe and easy ingress and egress from the home an overwhelming challenge to their continued independence. Rising home repair costs,the inability to physically be able to make needed repairs themselves, and a lack of familiarity with local resources and building codes make it difficult for elders and adults with disabilities with a low to moderate income to maintain and modify their living areas to meet their special needs. The primary goal of Volunteer Chore Services is to help individuals with limited monetary resources and who often have a limited support system to continue living independently and safely and to prevent premature placement in congregate living facilities. The construction of a wheelchair ramp or the installation of grab bars are frequent requests made to VCS. 2. EXPLANATION OF PROPOSAL-Give a complete detailed description of your proposal including a description of the clientele you wilt be serving: Volunteer Chore Services serves low-income elders over 60 and adults with disabilities in the City of Pasco. These individuals,with an income of no more than$1000 per month or$1500 per month for a couple,are in danger of being displaced or losing their independence due to obstacles that can be cost-effectively overcome. Volunteer Chore Services recruits community volunteers to serve eligible clients,and they are dispatched to clients'homes throughout the City of Pasco. Services to be provided with this grant will include projects that reduce physical barriers and enhance the safety of physically impaired individuals, such as the installation of hand rails or grab bars,construction of wheelchair ramps or special-sized steps to accommodate a walker,and other appropriate minor home repairs or modifications at the clients' homes. Volunteers are screened and receive appropriate training,including building code requirements,prior to beginning their volunteer service. All clients served with CDBG funds will meet the eligibility requirements of Volunteer Chore Services and CDBG_ 3. CONSOLIDATED PLAN: The City of Pasco is required to adopt a long-range community action plan to determine where the use of Block Grant funds should be focused. List the identified objective(s)listed in the Tri-Cities 5-Year Consolidated Plan that the proposal addresses and explain how your proposal meets that need. (See STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN GOALS attached) Goal II: Improve Community Infrastructure; Strategy 1: Expand or improve basic community infrastructure in lower-income neighborhoods; Objective 1.1:Provide assistance to lower-income households(reducing physical barriers in clients' homes) Volunteer Chore Services will improve the infrastructure and safety of individual homes so that accessibility is improved for low to moderate income physically impaired adults. 4. ALLOCATION POLICY: Projects will be ranked according to the attached Allocation Policy. Identify the priority(A, B,C or D)that matches your project(see Section II in Allocation Policy): 2014 CDBG Application Page 1 Priority: ETA ❑B ❑C ❑D and explain how your proposal satisfies that priority: This is a High Priority project as all services rendered under this grant(construction of wheelchair ramps or larger steps for walkers, installation of grab bars and railings,or other minor home modifications)will help reduce barriers for physically impaired individuals. 5. GENERAL SCHEDULE FOR PROJECT COMPLETION: December 31,2014 6. SPECIFY EXACTLY WHAT CDBG FUNDS WOULD BE USED FOR: Materials for the construction of wheelchair ramps, `'super steps",handrails, grab bars,or other appropriate minor home modifications; volunteer mileage reimbursement for approved projects,required building permits 7. DOES YOUR PROJECT CREATE INDIVIDUAL/BUSINESS DISPLACEMENT OR RELOCATION?❑YES LKNO 8. ELIBIBILITY: How does your proposal meet Eligibility criteria of 24 CFR 570 below? (SELECT ONLY ONE) ❑ Public Acquisition of Property 24 CFR 570.201(a): ❑ Public Facilities(new construction or capital improvements)24 CFR 570.201(c): ❑ Public Services 24 CFR 570.201 e : ❑ Economic Development 24 CFR 570.201(o)/24 CFR 570.203: Housing rehabilitation and preservation 24 CFR 570.202: Code Enforcement 24 CFR 570,202(c): ❑ Planning 24 CFR 570.205: ❑ Other(describe: 9. NATIONAL OBJECTIVE: How does your proposal meet the National Objective of benefiting low and moderate-income persons below? (SELECT ONLY ONE) 1)❑ You receive household/family income and size data from each participant in the program(LMH)(LMC) 2)❑ Your project serves a limited area that is proven by census tract or survey to be a low-income area(LMA): ❑ Downtown Revitalization Zone ❑ Census Tract# 3)t�] Your project serves ONLY the following clientele(check appropriate box)(LMC): Elderly person's ❑ Homeless persons Q Severely disabled adults ❑Illiterate persons ❑ Abused children ❑ Persons living with AIDS ❑ Battered spouses ❑ Migrant farm workers ❑At Risk Youth ❑ Other: 4)❑ Your project will create or save jobs for low/moderate income employees(LMJ) 5)❑ Your project addresses a slum/blight condition (SBA/SBS) LMA—Low-moderate income area(Census Tract or Survey Area) LMC—Low-moderate income clientele LMH—Low-moderate income household/family LMJ—Low-moderate income job creation/retention SBA/SBS--Slum&Blight Area/Spot(as designed by local government) 10. LENGTH OF SERVICE Is this the first year for the program? []Yes QNo Year program began? 1999 or 2000 If you receive funding for 2013,how will your program be funded in 2014? VCS State contract, community donations 2014 GDBG Application Page 2 If. PUBLIC SERVICE AGENCIES To be eligible for CDBG assistance,a public service must be continuation of a service that is currently CDBG-funded,a new service, or a quantifiable increase in the level of an existing service that is not currently CDBG-funded. Explain how your application qualifies; ❑ Continuation of Services ❑New Service ❑ Increase in Service 12. WHAT AMOUNT OF BLOCK GRANT FUNDING FROM ALL SOURCES HAS YOUR AGENCY OR DEPARTMENT RECEIVED IN THE PAST THREE YEARS? 2013 2012 2011 Pasco $ 3986 $ 4000 $ 6000 Richland $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 Kennewick $ 0 $ 0 $ 6000 Other Federal Source(s) $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 To what other agencies have you applied for funding and what commitments have you obtained for this proposal? None 2014 CDBG Application Page 3 13. PROVIDE A MAP SHOWING THE LOCATION OF THE PROJECT OR SERVICE AREA: City of Pasco, WA 2014 iCDBG Application Page 4 14. PROJECT TIMELINE-Establish milestones or goals of accomplishments by calendar quarter from the start of the project until completion: Dates or Date Range Milestone/Goal(include numerical performance progress if an 2° Quarter: I project—to reduce physical barriers and enhance the safety of physically impaired A ril I —June 30,2014 individuals,as outlined in#2 above 3"Quarter: 3 projects—to reduce physical barriers and enhance the safety of physically impaired July I —September 30,2014 individuals,as outlined in 42 above 4` Quarter: 3 projects—to reduce physical barriers and enhance the safety of physically impaired October I —Dec 31,2014 individuals,as outlined in 92 above 15. BUDGET-Give a detailed breakdown of the total budget for this project including major expense line items(salaries, rent/supplies,office equipment,capital expenses,new construction/vehicles etc.). Show how the CDBG funds will be applied toward expenses and the amount and source of any other revenue you will be using. Total expenses should equal the total of CDBG plus Other Revenue. Be prepared to explain the budget and provide a copy of full agency budget upon request. EXPENSES REVENUES LINE ITEM $TOTAL BUDGET $ CDBG FUNDS $OTHER FUNDS SOURCE OF OTHER FUNDS PERSONNEL: Salaries 29,093 Benefits 10,434 OPERATIONS: Rent/Lease 1500 Utilities 1150 Supplies 148 CONSTRUCTION: Architectural Engineering Materials Labor/Contracts PROPERTY: Purchase price Closing cost OTHER: (describe) Volunteer expenses, agency 27,175 admin, professional fees, travel,client assistance TOTAL $69,500 $ $ Additional explanation of the above budget: if you do not receive the requested funds or receive only a portion of what you request,how will the goals of your project be adjusted? What portion of your project will be abandoned,will fewer persons be served,etc.? The number of clients served may be reduced if no other funding for materials is available 2014 CDBG Application Page 5 16. PROJECT BENEFICIARIES-List the client data of persons whom you ESTIMATE you will serve with this project. is your count by: INPerson, or by❑Household(family)? Number of clients below 30%median 5 Number of clients below 50%median 2 Number of clients below 80%median 0 Number of elderly clients 5 Number of minority clients 2 Total Number of Pasco residents served 7 (Should=total#above) What is the data source for the information provided above? Client records 2013 HUD income Limit E uidelines for Kennewick—Pasco—Richland I Person 2 People 3 Peo le 4 People 5 People 6 People 7 People 8 People 30% $14.230 $16,300 $18,350 $20,350 $22.000 $23,650 $25,250 $26,900 50% $231750 $27,150 $30,550 $33,900 $36,650 $39.350 $42,050 $44,750 80% $38,000 $43,400 $48:850 $54,250 $58,600 $62,950 $67,300 $71,650 Median $47500 $54,300 $61,100 $67,800 $73,300 $78,700 $84,100 $89,500 For Information Only, 2014 Income Limits will apply. 17. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS ONLY- Show the number of new/permanent jobs to be created through block grant funding and the number of jobs to be staffed by or made available to low-moderate income individuals this program year. Total to Date This Program Year Number of new jobs expected to be created/retained Number of new jobs expected to be filled or offered to low-or moderate-income persons (Must be at least 51%) Position Titles Expected to be Created this program year(Use EDA Classifications) 18. CONTACT INFORMATION Authorized Official Contract Administrator Project Manager Name/Title Darlene Darnell, Vice President Catholic Charities Dorothy Morales,Regional Director Lauren Mathis, Coordinator Mailing Address 5301 Tieton Drive, Ste C 5301 Tieton Drive, Ste C 2110 West Henry City/State Yakima, WA Yakima, WA Pasco, WA Phone/Fax (509)965-7100/(509)966-9750 (509)965-7100/(509)972-0I67 (509)545-6145/(509)542-0219 Email ddarneli0ccyakima.ora dmoralesAccyakima.onz lmathisna,ccyakima.org SUBMITTED BY: V �-Ci '�t {.v' May Z8,2013 Signature of Authorized Official Title Date 2014 CDBG Application Page 6 v 2014 APPLICATION FOR CITY OF PASCO COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) FUND AGENCY: CBVC,Inc PROJECT TITLE: Veteran Supportive Housing ADDRESS: 1500 N 20't Ave, Ste A Pasco WA 99301 r 4 PROPOSED PROJECT LOCATION: Pasco WA RECEIVED E AUTHORIZED OFFICIAL Skip Novakovich,President MAY Z 8 1013 E-MAIL: info(dNveterancoalition-cb.org PHONE: 509-545-6558 FAX: 509-545-5722 COtvMIUNITY& ECOfJ0101C DEVE1.0f>l; U41 AMOUNT OF CDBG FUNDS REQUESTED: $ 100,000 AMOUNT OF NON-CDBG MATCH:$ 10,000 1. DESCRIBE THE PROBLEM OR NEED(AS RELATED TO THE STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN ATTACHED): Please see attached resnonse- 2. EXPLANATION OF PROPOSAL-Give a complete detailed description of your proposal including a description of the clientele you will be serving: Please sap attached re snonse- 3. CONSOLIDATED PLAN: The City of Pasco is required to adopt a long-range community action plan to determine where the use of Block Grant funds should be focused. List the identified objective(s)listed in the Tri-Cities S-Year Consolidated Plan that the proposal addresses and explain how your proposal meets that need. (See STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN GOALS attached) Please see attached response- 4. ALLOCATION POLICY: Projects will be ranked according to the attached Allocation Policy. Identify the priority(A,B, C or D)that matches your project(see Section II in Allocation Policy): Priority: ❑A ZB ❑C ❑D and explain how your proposal satisfies that priority: Please see attached res onse- 5. GENERAL SCHEDULE FOR PROJECT COMPLETION: December 2014 6. SPECIFY EXACTLY WHAT CDBG FUNDS WOULD BE USED FOR: To acquire for the purpose of rehabilitation,and to rehabilitate properties, for use for residential purposes._ 7. DOES YOUR PROJECT CREATE INDIVIDUALBUSINESS DISPLACEMENT OR RELOCATION? ❑YES ,�NO 8. ELIBIBILITY: How does your proposal meet Eligibility criteria of 24 CFR 570 below? (SELECT ONLY ONE) ❑ PubIic Acquisition of Property 24 CFR 570.201(x): ❑ Public Facilities(new construction or capital improvements)24 CFR 570.201(c): ❑ Public Services 24 CFR 570.201(e): ❑ Economic Development 24 CFR 570.201(0)/24 CFR 570.203: (S. Housing rehabilitation and preservation 24 CFR 570.202: CBVC Inc. 2014 CDBG Application Page 1 ❑ Code Enforcement 24 CFR 570.202(c): ❑ Planning 24 CFR 570.205; ❑ Other{describe): 9. NATIONAL OBJECTIVE: How does your proposal meet the National Objective of benefiting low and moderate-income persons below? (SELECT ONLY ONE) 1)7 You receive household/family income and size data from each participant in the program(LMH)(LMC) 2)❑ Your project serves a limited area that is proven by census tract or survey to be a low-income area(LMA): ❑ Downtown Revitalization Zone ❑ Census Tract# 3)2] Your project serves ONLY the following clientele(check appropriate box)(LMC): ❑Elderly person's ❑Homeless persons ❑ Severely disabled adults ❑Illiterate persons ❑Abused children ❑Persons living with AIDS ❑Battered spouses ❑Migrant farm workers ❑At Risk Youth Q Other. V cjer-k�_ 4)❑ Your project will create or save jobs for low/moderate income employees(LMJ) 5)❑ Your project addresses a slum/blight condition(SBA/SBS) LMA—Low-moderate income area(Census Tract or Survey Area) LMC—Low-moderate income clientele LMH—Low-moderate income household/family LMJ—Low-moderate income job creation/retention SBA/SBS—Slum&Blight Area/Spot(as designed by local government) 10. LENGTH OF SERVICE Is this the first year for the program? ❑Yes QNo Year program began? 2010 If you receive funding for 2013,how will your program be funded in 2014? - Through grants(private,state and/or federal) and donor directed funding to assist low income for housing 11. PUBLIC SERVICE AGENCIES To be eligible for CDBG assistance,a public service must be continuation of a service that is currently CDBG-funded,a new service, or a quantifiable increase in the level of an existing service that is not currently CDBG-funded. Explain how your application qualifies: ❑Continuation of Services ❑New Service ["Increase in Service 12. WHAT AMOUNT OF BLOCK GRANT FUNDING FROM ALL SOURCES HAS YOUR AGENCY OR DEPARTMENT RECEIVED IN THE PAST THREE YEARS? 2013 2012 2011 Pasco $ $ $ Richland $30.000 $ $ Kennewick $ $ $ Other Federal Source(s) $ $ $ To what other agencies have you applied for funding and what commitments have you obtained for this proposal? Home Depot Foundation May 2013. There are private contributions for funding a homeless women's veteran house CBVC Inc. 2014 CDBG Application Page 2 13. PROVIDE A MAP SHOWING THE LOCATION OF THE PROJECT OR SERVICE AREA: No property has been identified for acquisition for rehabilitation for residential purposes. CBVC Inc. 2014 CDBG Application Page 3 14. PROJECT TIMELINE-Establish milestones or goals of accomplishments by calendar quarter from the start of the project until completion: Dates or Date Ran e Milestone/Goal(include numerical performance progress if an May 29,2013 Submit application for funding June 20,2013 Presentation of proposal to Planning Commission July 18,2013 Public Hearing Planning Commission August 12,2013 City Council Workshop August 19,2013 City Council Action August 20,2013 Begin identifying ro e -April 2014 Finalize negotiations for property -May 2014 Acquire property and rehab/remodel for tenants duly 2014 enant move in 15. BUDGET-Give a detailed breakdown of the total budget for this project including major expense line items(salaries, rent/supplies,office equipment,capital expenses,new construction/vehicles etc.). Show haw the CDBG funds will be applied toward expenses and the amount and source of any other revenue you will be using. Total expenses should equal the total of CDBG plus Other Revenue. Be prepared to explain the budget and provide a copy of full agency budget upon request. EXPENSES REVENUES LINE ITEM $TOTAL BUDGET $CDBG FUNDS $ OTHER FUNDS SOURCE OF OTHER FUNDS PERSONNEL: Salaries B enefits OPERATIONS: Rent/Lease Utilities Supplies CONSTRUCTION: Architectural Engineering Materials Labor/Contracts PROPERTY: $100,000 (inclusive) $10,000 $110,000 Donor funds Purchase price Closing cost OTHER:(describe) TOTAL $$100,000 $$10,000 M10,000 $ Additional explanation of the above budget: CBVC's personnel and benefits will be covered through donations and grants/contracts If you do not receive the requested funds or receive only a portion of what you request,how will the goals of your project be adjusted? What portion of your project will be abandoned, will fewer persons be served, etc.? If CBVC receives a portion of CDBG funds and private donations make up the shortage, the project will serve the same number of veterans. if then; is not adequate funding (e-DB6 aird/w donuis) fai the Pi0ject, it will no' bru 7rbrtt; to bu cumpleted in . CBVC Inc. 2014 CDBG Application Page 4 16. PROJECT BENEFICIARIES-List the client data of persons whom you ESTIMATE you will serve with this project. Is your count by: OPerson,or by (Household(family)? Number of clients below 30%median 1 Number of clients below 50%median 1 Number of clients below 80%median 1 Number of elderly clients Number of minority clients 1 Total Number of Pasco residents served 4 (Should=total#above) What is the data source for the information provided above? 2012 Benton and Franklin Point in Time Count 2013 HUD income Limit Guidelines for Kennewick-Pasco-Richland I Person 2 People 3 People 4 People 5 People 6 People 7 People 8 People 30% $14,250 $16,300 $18,350 $20,350 $22,000 $23,650 $25,250 $26,900 50% $23,750 $27,150 $30,550 $33,900 $36,650 $39,350 $42,050 $44,750 80%0 $38,000 $43,400 $48,850 $54,250 $58,600 $62,950 $67,300 $71,650 Median $47,500 $54,300 $61,100 $67,800 $73,300 $78,700 $84,100 $89,500 For Information Only,2014 Income Limits will apply. 17, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS ONLY-Show the number of new/permanent j obs to be created through block grant funding and the number of jobs to be staffed by or made available to low-moderate income individuals this program year. Total to Date This Program Year Number of new jobs expected to be created/retained Number of new jobs expected to be filled or offered to low- or moderate-income persons (Must be at least 51%) Position Titles Expected to be Created this program year(Use EDA Classifications) 18. CONTACT INFORMATION Authorized Official Contract Administrator Project Manager Name/Title Skip Novakovich/President Johan Curtiss,Executive Director Johan Curtiss, Executive Director Mailing Address 1600 N 20th Ave Suite A City/State Pasco WA 99301 Phone/Fax 509-545-6558/509-545-5722 Email johancurtisslaveterancoalitoin-eb.org SUBMITTED BY: Agnatfure of Authorized Official Title Date CBVC Inc. 2014 CDBG Application Page 5 Response Q1-DESCRIBE THE PROBLEM OR NEED The Congressional Research Service reported"approximately 1.40 million OEF/OIF/OND troops have been separated from active duty and become eligible for VA health benefits since 2003. Although researches have not found that military service alone is associated with homelessness,it may be associated with other factors that contribute to homelessness." The Benton and Franklin Counties 2012 Point in Time Count reported 32 homeless veterans. Veterans represented five percent(5%)of the homeless population. The 2012 Benton and Franklin County Housing Inventory reported the number of beds for veterans was two percent(2%). This project will expand the supply housing options for the special needs population of low income veterans. Q2-EXPLANATION OF PROPOSAL CBVC has the staffing and community connections to be as successful with permanent supportive housing. The veteran does not need to be homeless for the program. CBVC has been successful with its transitional housing program. CBVC's veteran housing services will help increase the client's level of skill or self-sufficiency through case management. Veterans coming through the Coalition office are assessed for transition issues that may be making it difficult to integrate back into"civilian life." The Coalition office makes available to veterans mentoring support,access to employment services,a math proficiency lab for education and employment. CBVC has in place partnerships and agreements with organizations that can provide"wrap around"services for the veterans. The Coalition office in Pasco provides access to several veteran support programs. The Vietnam Veteran Association and Disabled Veterans of America provide assistance with benefit applications for veterans and their families. The Walla Walla Veteran Center offers counseling combat veterans and their families. Washington State Employment Security Department can be accessed through our office. The Walla Walla Housing Authority uses our office for new HUD-VASH clients. CBVC has a Memorandum of Understanding with Catholic Family and Child Services for the Supportive Services for Veteran Families(SSVF)to assist veterans with children. It is anticipated potential clients may come from these partnerships and agreements. Q3-CONSOLIDATED PLAN Goal V: Strategy 2,Object 1. This proposal will support veterans. CBVC,Inc. assists Veterans to gain access to the services and benefits they have earned by their Service to our county and to support their social wellbeing as Veterans and their families when transitioning back to civilian life. CBVC assists the client to obtain veteran or civilian benefits. The clients may include one or more of these benefits including medical/mental health,housing,financial support, disability,and/or educational. CBVC's case management will help increase the client's level of skill or self-sufficiency. These resources should help the veteran increase their income through employment or entitlements,and/or increasing educational level over the long term. Q4-ALLOCATION POLICY The project is rated B1. CBVC would identify a property that would be able to be acquired and rehabilitated for permanent supportive housing. CBVC Inc. 2014 CDBG Application Page 6 2014 APPLICATION FOR CITY OF PASCO COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT(CDBG) FUND RE „EI VE rr AGENCY: City of Pasco MAY 2 9 2013 PROTECTTITLE: Memorial Park Shelter Remodel and ADA Path �coNOr,�lc ,l�tj7 ADDRESS: 1520 W Shoshone DEVELGPf PROPOSED PROJECT LOCATION: Memorial Park - 1520 W Shoshone AUTHORIZED OFFICIAL Dan Dotta EMAIL: dottad @ pasco-wa.gov PHONE: 509-543-5757 FAX: 509-543-5758 AMOUNT OF CDBG FUNDS REQUESTED: $ 100,000 AMOUNT OF NON-CDBG MATCH:$ 0 i DESCRIBE THE PROBLEM OR NEED(AS RELATED TO THE STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN ATTACHED): The community shelter needs to be remodeled to provide a better environment for the citizens of Pasco plus provide an ADA path throughout the park. 2. EXPLANA'T'ION OF PROPOSAL-Give a complete detailed description of your proposal including a description of the clientele you will be serving: The shelter needs to be have open sides to allow the citizens to use the shelter without hesitation. This was completed to the Kurtzman shelter in 2005. The results were well received. The primary The primary population that utilizes Memorial Park is low to moderate income. 3, CONSOLIDATED PLAN: The City of Pasco is required to adopt a long-range community action plan to determine where the use of Block Grant funds should be focused. List the identified objective(s)listed in the Tri-Cities 5-Year Consolidated Plan that the proposal addresses and explain how your proposal meets that need. (See STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN GOALS attached) Goal III 2.1 4, ALLOCATION POLICY: Projects will be ranked according to the attached Allocation Policy. Identify the priority(A,B,C or D)that matches your project(see Section 11 in Allocation Policy): Priority. aA ❑B ❑C ❑D and explain how your proposal satisfies that priority: Improvements to public facility 5. GENERAL SCHEDULE FOR PROJECT COMPLETION: 2014 (i. SPECIFY EXACTLY WHAT CDBG FUNDS WOULD BE USED FOR: Construction-Take out walls to open up bldg and ADA patty 7. DOES YOUR PROJECT CREATE INDIVIDUAL/BUSINESS DISPLACEMENT OR RELOCATION? ❑YES 9 NO 8, ELIBIBILITY: How does your proposal meet Eligibility criteria of 24 CFR 570 below? (SELECT ONLY ONE) ❑ Public Awn of Property 24 CFR 570.201(al: Public Facilities(new construction or capital improvements)24 CFR 570.201(c): ❑ Public Services 24 CFR 570.201(e): ❑ Economic Development 24 CFR 570.201(o)/24 CFR 570.203: ❑ HausinP rehabilitation and preservation 24 CFR 570.202:. 2014 CDBG Application Page 1 r ❑ Code Enforcement 24 CFR 570.202(c): ❑ Planning 24 CFR 570.205: ❑ Other(describe): 9. NATIONAL OBJECTIVE: How does your proposal meet the National Objective of benefiting low and moderate-income persons below? (SELECT ONLY ONE) 1)❑ You receive household/family income and size data from each participant in the program(LMH)(LMC) 2)Q Your project serves a limited area that is proven by census tract or survey to be a low-income area(LMA): ❑Downtown Revitalization Zone ❑Census Tract#201,. 202,203J2_04 3)❑ Your project serves ONLY the following clientele(check appropriate box)(LMC): ❑Elderly person's ❑Homeless persons ❑ Severely disabled adults ❑Illiterate persons ❑Abused children ❑Persons living with AIMS ❑Battered spouses ❑Migrant farm workers ❑At Risk Youth ❑ Other: 4)7 Your project will create or save jobs for low/moderate income employees(LMJ) 5)❑ Your project addresses a slum/blight condition(SBA/SBS) LMA—Low-moderate income area(Census Tract or Survey Area) LMC Low-moderate income clientele LMH—Low-moderate income household/family LMJ—Low-moderate income job creation/retention SBA/SBS—Slum&Blight Area/Spot(as designed by local government) 10. LENGTH OF SERVICE Is this the first year for the program? []Yes *No Year program began? If you receive funding for 2014,how will your program be funded in 2015? 11. PUBLIC SERVICE AGENCIES To be eligible for CDBG assistance,a public service must be continuation of a service that is currently CDBG-funded,a new service,or a quantifiable increase in the level of an existing service that is not currently CDBG-funded. Explain how your application qualifies: ©Continuation of Services ❑New Service ❑Increase in Service 12. WHAT AMOUNT OF BLOCK GRANT FUNDING FROM ALL SOURCES HAS YOUR AGENCY OR DEPARTMENT RECEIVED IN THE PAST THREE YEARS? 2013 2012 2011 Pasco 250,000 $ $ Richland $ $ $ Kennewick $ $ $ Other Federal Source(s) $ $ $ To what other agencies have you applied for funding and what commitments have you obtained for this proposal? 2014 CDBG Application Page 2 CENSUS BLAOCK rr / • ► E ooms 201 ALL 74.6 J/ a: Jr r J r rf ar rr rf 2r J AW 86.1 q 300 :I r . i 114r' 100 769 21 124 zo /.f�''/!; / F,`lrr�//'/f•�/fiI r' : m r r/ //f�%�'fJ"�,//'�f///,: 204 ALL . for 100 :I 200 Z Z, Z f f ts1&A+ G�:1i/r.1,/.l...,. � / t fv'o W -1 �:'od:�i • /���/��f'���I' ,rJ:�i:.L '�,j. a�.I� !' "a+�!1 �!'rr""';-/f"/fig//'�J���If�l._ �ilir r//-��J'%rrl:�ir, i� �■ �+�y�,,/1 �j✓x�,ra'�rJ//f �,.����.�/Jr, /! %ri/•l.`.rlf/r1j/I/r�l✓� �� ri` {fff Mfr,/' %.l yfi r,/1, fii �! rJI.*''.r fa•r�'i or so �� mar ItJJi. _• rt" � � rta+'+j, r/.��J/ ���/�`li 'r/��r/�%j �/f�'rriri r-' r .'-�'F,r�l �*} , ./J+`I,�i. r -•7/r J fj a� !l� 9� n � e N 4 ' 1 e ; \ 4 2 ti t t � s w It *A015 14. PROTECT TIMELINE-Establish milestones or goals of accomplishments by calendar quarter from the start of the project until completion: Dates or Date Range Milestone/Goal include numerical performance progress if an Soring 2014 Receive Fundin Summer 2014 Put project out to bid Fall 2014 Complete construction 15. BUDGET-Give a detailed breakdown of the total budget for this project including major expense line items(salaries, rent/supplies,office equipment,capital expenses,new construction/vehicles etc.). Show how the CDBG funds will be applied toward expenses and the amount and source of any other revenue you will be using. Total expenses should equal the total of CDBG plus Other Revenue. Be prepared to explain the budget and provide a copy of full agency budget upon request. EXPENSES REVENUES LINE ITEM S TOTAL.BUDG1'T S CDBG FUNDS $ OTHER FUNDS SOURCE OF OTHERFUNDS PERSONNEL: Salaries Benefits OPERATIONS: Rent/Lease Utilities Supplies 110M 100,000 100,000 Architectural Engineering Materials Labor/Contracts PROPERTY: Purchase price Closing cost OTHER: (describe) TOTAL. 100,000 100,000 $ Additional explanation of the above budget: If you do not receive the requested funds or receive only a portion of what you request,how will the goals of your project be adjusted? What portion of your project will be abandoned,will fewer persons be served,etc.? The aroiect would be abandoned. 2014 CDBG Application Page 4 16. PROJEC-�,BENEFICIARIES-List the client data of persons whom you ESTIMATE you will serve with this project. Is your count by: Person,or by[]Household(family)? Number of clients below 30%median Number of clients below 50%median Number of clients below 80%median Number of elderly clients Number of minority clients Total Number of Pasco residents served Q (Should total#above) What is the data source for the information provided above? 6�- 2013 HUD income Limit uidelines for Kennewick-Pasco-Richland 1 Person 2 People 3 People 4 People S People 6 Pen le 7 People 8 People 30% $14,250 $16,300 $18,350 $20,350 $22,000 $23,650 $2.5,250 $26,900 50% $23,750 $27,150 $30,550 $33,900 $36,650 539,350 $42,050 $44,750 80% $38,000 $43,400 $48,850 $54,250 $58,600 $62,950 $67,300 $71,650 Median $47,500 $54,300 $61,100 $67,800 $73,300 $78,700 $84,100 i 59,500 For Information Only, 2014 Income Limits will apply. 17. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS ONLY-Show the number of new/permanent jobs to be created through block grant funding and the number of jobs to be staffed by or made available to low-moderate income individuals this program year. Total to Date This Program Year Number of new jobs expected to be created/retained Number of new jobs expected to be filled or offered to low-or moderate-income persons (Must be at least 51%) Position Titles Expected to be Created this program year(Use EDA Classifications) I&. CONTACT INFORMATION Authorized Official Contract Administrator Project Manager Name/Title Rick Terway Dan Dotta Mailing-Address 525 N 3rd Ave City/State Pasco WA 99301 Phone/Fax 509-543-5757 Emaildotta@pasco-wa.gov SUBMITTED BY: Signature of Autlui zed Official 'le � Date-f-C&uAkKU14 2014 CDBG Application Page 5 Resource Library, and access to our technology, we are able to provide great tools to our clients we serve and their families, friends,coworkers,and local students. 4. ALLOCATION POLICY: Projects will be ranked according to the attached Allocation Policy. Identify the priority(A, B,C or D)that matches your project(see Section 11 in Allocation Policy): Priority: ®A and explain how your proposal satisfies that priority: B:Acquisition,construction or improvements to public facilities and infrastructure. SEWSCDHH's 121an aligns with Priority A due to the nature of the work that needs to be completed (related to safety)and the work is construction related. 5. GENERAL SCHEDULE FOR PROJECT COMPLETION: Please see attached schedule of construction. 6. SPECIFY EXACTLY WHAT CDBG FUNDS WOULD BE USED FOR: Please see timeline and question 15 budget, 7. DOES YOUR PROJECT CREATE INDIVIDUALIBUSINESS DISPLACEMENT OR RELOCATION?® NO 8. ELIGIBILITY: How does your proposal meet Eligibility criteria of 24 CFR 570 below? (SELECT ONLY ONE) Public Facilities(new construction or capital improvements)24 CFR 570201(c): 9. NA'T'IONAL OBJECTIVE: How does your proposal meet the National Objective of benefiting low and moderate-income persons below? (SELECT ONLY ONE) 3)N Your project serves ONLY the following clientele(check appropriate box)(LMC): ❑ Elderly person's ❑ Homeless persons ❑ Severely disabled adults ❑ Illiterate persons ❑ Abused children ❑ Persons living with AIDS ❑ Battered spouses ❑ Migrant farm workers ❑At Risk Youth Z Other: Deaf Hard of Hearin Deaf-Blind individuals with hearing loss 10. LENGTH OF SERVICE Is this the first year for the program? ®Ycs Year program began? We started applying for funding to fix our facility in 2013 if you receive funding for 2014,how will your program be funded in 2015?If awarded a grant, we plan to complete the work on our facility in a one year time period This allows us to be less of burden to organizations helping us and would help stop us from askinp,others for further funding. 11. PUBLIC SERVICE AGENCIES To be eligible for CDBG assistance, a public service must be continuation of a service that is currently CDBG-funded,a new service,or a quantifiable increase in the level of an existing service that is not currently CDBG-funded. Explain how your application qualifies: ❑ Continuation of Services ❑New Service 0 Increase in Service NON APPLICABLE 12. WHAT AMOUNT OF BLOCK GRANT FUNDING FROM ALL SOURCES HAS YOUR AGENCY OR DEPARTMENT RECEIVED IN THE PAST THREE YEARS? 2013 2012 2011 Pasco $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 Richland $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 Kennewick $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 Other Federal Source(s) $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 2014 CDBG Application Paee 2 To what other agencies have you applied for funding and what commitments have you obtained for this proposal? Applied to: Sunderland Foundation, Coleman Foundation, Baker Foundation,Clowes Fund, Fidelity Foundation,HAII Charitable Foundation, PACCAR Foundation, and others. We have no commitments at this time but continue to apply for other grants. 2014 C)BG Application Page 3 13. PROVIDE A MAP SHOWING THE LOCATION OF THE PROJECT OR SERVICE AREA: Please see attached map. 2014 CDBG Application Page 4 14. PROJECT TIMELINE- Establish milestones or goals of accomplishments by calendar quarter from the start ofthe project until completion: Please see attached timeline_ Dates or Date Range Milestone/Goal(include numerical erforrnance progress if an 15, BUDGET-Give a detailed breakdown of the total budget for this project including major expense line items(salaries, rent/supplies,office equipment,capital expenses,new construction/vehicles etc.). Show how the CDBG funds will be applied toward expenses and the amount and source of any other revenue you will be using. Total expenses should equal the total of CDBG plus Other Revenue. Be prepared to explain the budget and provide a copy of full agency budget upon request. EXPENSES REVENUES LINE ITEM S TOTAL BUDGET $ CDBG FUNDS $OTHER FUNDS 'SOURCE OF OTHERFUNDS PERSONNEL: Salaries 0 0 0 NA Benefits 0 0 0 OPERATIONS: Rent/Lease 0 0 0 NA Utilities 0 0 0 Supplies 0 0 0 Architectural 24,500 24,500 0 Apply for other Engineering Combined with arch. 0 Grants and Materials Built in to costs 0 Support now Labor/Contracts 187,595 187,595 0 PROPERTY: Purchase price 0 0 0 NA Closing cost 0 0 0 OTHER: (describe) 0 0 Contingency 21,031 21,031 0 NA Permit 1460.15 1460.15 0 Bond 5000 5000 0 WA Sales Tax 16,258.74 16,258.74 0 TOTAL $255,844.89 $255,844.89 0 Additional explanation of the above budget: Electrical: $36.500. Needs an entirely new service panel since the current installation is ungrounded and very unsafe. Miscellaneous drywall throughout(ceilings and walls)will need to be removed and replaced as needed to allow electrical wiring for lights switches and receptacles to be replaced to bring the building up to code. Drywall: $10.000. Will end up demolishing most of the existing drywall for electrical. Roof: $34,220, Includes parapet cap flashings,needed to keep out water.The existing roof needs to be removed and replaced as it is extremely old,weathered,and has caused part of the ceiling to cave in due to constant leaks The existing metal f7ashings on parapet walls need to be replaced as they are undoubtedly contributing to some of the leaks The old clay tiles on the roof are falling off onto the ground where the community and staff frequently travel.ADA Bathroom: $5000. Remodel the existing bathroom and make it ADA accessible. Includes new fixtures, grab bars, flooring,moving the 2014 CD13G Application Page 5 wall,drywall, framing, electrical,fan,paint, signage,new door that swims out. Fire doors and extinguishers: $8000 Four exterior doors that swing in and should swing out for fire code. Two back doors hollow metal doors and frames with panic devices installed ($4000). Two aluminum_storefront entrance doors for the front installed($3500). Fire extinguishers($500) The exterior doors needs to be replaced as they open inward,not outward as current fire safety codes dictate. Fire extinguishers are not up to code and need to be replaced. HVAC Units: $18,000. HVAC has two roof top units that need to be replaced. One does not work at all and the other i i heading down the same path. Miscellaneous drywall throughout will need to be removed and re laced as needed to allow HVAC ducts, grills(some of these have already been falling out of the ceiling)and thermostats to be replaced as needed -General contractor costs(project manager/misc. labor_: $40,000; iobsite consumables and misc:$10,000). -Architectural& Engineering: budgetary proposal is architectural,structural, mechanical,plumbing and electrical engineering. Construction documents for our roject are a fixed price of$24,500.-Bond for work: $5000. Contingency plan cost: $21,03 1 Permit fee: $1460.15. WA Sales tax at 8.6%: $16258-74. We as an agency are not looking for equipment or general operating funds-Renew SEW SCD14H's goal is solely to look at our emergency needs and the costs to get the work done. SEWSCDHH is in desperate need of many upgrades for both updated ADA codes as well as client and worker safety. Areas where we have tried to cut costs: we are going to leave as many interior doors,walls,and drywall as possible to minimize replacement cost. We are not intending to install any lavish fixtures,finishes, or equipment but instead just quality products that will allow SEWSCDHH to operate in a safe work environment for both staff and the community. With a building as old as ours,too much cutting;of costs would almost be counterproductive. If you do not receive the requested funds or receive only a portion of what you request,how will the goals of your project be adjusted? What portion of your project will be abandoned,will fewer persons be served, etc.? If SEWSCDHH receives only part of the funds needed to fix our building and bring it up to code, we would compile a list of priority work(the work that needs to occur first to ensure safety)and look at what is putting clients and staff at the highest risk. We would then complete the projects in that order with the Fundin we receive. Things we do not have funding for would have to wait until we could make more connections,as our organization cannot fund all the work that needs to be done. Portions would be abandoned while others would be postponed until a later date. Staff and Board would continue to pursue grants but if the facility remains unsafe and uncomfortable for clients,there is the potential for decreased client hours and services provided. 16. PROJECT BENEFICIARIES - List the client data of persons whom you ESTIMATE you will serve with this project. Is your count by: ®Household(family)? Number of clients below 30%median 2 Number of clients below 50%median 3 Number of clients below 80%median I Number of elderly clients 3 Number of minority clients 10 Total Number of Pasco residents served 14 (others did not provide income (Should=total#above) information. Please see attachment of client addresses). What is the data source for the information provided above? ODHH client Form 64;poll of clients. Please see attached list for addresses and further data on Pasco clients served. 2013 11UD income Limit Guidelines for Kennewick-Pasco-Richland I Person 2 People 3 People 4 People 5 People 6 People 7 People 8 People 30% $14,250 $16,300 $18,350 $20,350 $22,000 $23,650 $25,250 $26,900 50% $23,750 $27,I50 $30,550 $33,900 $36,650 $39,350 $42,050 $44,750 80% $38,000 $43,400 $48,850 $54,250 $58,600 $62,950 $67,300 $71,650 Median $47,500 $54,300 $61,100 $67,800 $73,300 $78,700 $84,100 $89,500 For Information Only, 2014 Income Limits will apply. 17. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS ONLY-Show the number of new/permanent jobs to be created through block grant funding and the number of jobs to be staffed by or made available to low-moderate income individuals this program year. Total to Date This Program Year 2014 CDBG Application Page 6 Number of new jobs expected to be NA created/retained Number of new jobs expected to be filled or NA offered to low-or moderate-income persons (Must be at least 51%) Position Titles Expected to be Created this NA program year(Use EDA Classifications) 18. CONTACT INFORMATION Authorized Official Contract Administrator Project Manager Name/Title Cori]ones Executive Director Mailing Address 124 N 5U'Ave City/State Pasco WA 993011 Phone/Fax 509-543-9644 Email corinsewsedhh org SUBMITTED BY: L Ata 5,2Z 201 Sil atur4fAuthorized Official Title Date 2014 CDBG Application Pa=ge 7 SoethEastern Washington Service Center of the Deaf and Hard of Hearing 124 N. 5th Ave. Masco, WA 99301 Acl Description Cl RM Early Early JUN 00 hev 10 E)l Cur Start Finish 17 14 �. 0990 ArchilacluaVEnginaering Design 20dI 20d 17JUN13 15JUL93 �� -�� '-"``-'�"�ArchitecivaVEngineering Design 0985 1Biilding Pelmet AppBnlian €5d 15d iBJUL13 OSAUGi3 I r+t^"�LL'-�BVikling Pew it Appl'calmn 1 �. e-� 1DOD Mabllizakion 9d. 1d OBAUGI3 C5AUG13 -�f♦MoM9iTelion � 11020 -�[Fol Excavation ld, to'07AUG13 07AO513 lFooting E�-avaiion 1030 Form b Place FaolinglStem Vial 3d� 3d II08AUG13 12AUG13 I-►[-= Form 8 Plata FooSroglSlem Wall 1040 I ock"&CompacBon -�I1 1d1 id I13AUG13 13AUG13 i.�I Back011&Compaction i 1054 Underslab EleciriCgUPlumbing 5dl SdI14AUG73 2CAUG13 '-►I Undoreleb ElocificaUPiullbing Prep 1080 Stab On Grade Prep � 1d id 21A1FG13 29RU013 F►k Slab On Grade 1070 Place Stab On Grade Id 1d 22AUG13 22AUG33 �wjllplaCe Slab On Grade 1080 Weod Stud FrarltingfTrrrs.ses Sd 5d 23AUG13 29AUC73 Stud FraminglTrugses 1090 SOUTH HALF Real Demo 2d 2d 28AUG13 29AUG13 "+q SOUTH HALF Real'Dame { ,. 1100 SOUTH HALF New TPO Rooting i 3d 3d 30AUG13 03SEP13 r.0 SOUTH HALF Nev,TPO Roofrng 1110 SOUTH HALF Install New Sruew Syslam I 3d 3d 04SEP13 06SLP13 E�''SOUTH.HALF Install New Stucco Sys ern 41120 NORTH Sa lh Coal SluceorGraffdi Proof 2d 20 09SEP13 10SEP13 i ►©NORTH Smaol6�Coat Slater-'Gralli;i proof 11125 SOUTH HALF Selective Uemalition 6d Sd 21AUG13 03SEP93 mil^ SOUTH HALF Selective Demoglign 1130 SOUTH fAFP Rough-In 5d 5d 04SEP13 10SEP13 L�SOUTH NEP Rough-in 1,140 SOUTH HangRapdRerturalRCpairGWl3 .d 54 11SEP13 17SEP13 '.G.;'�:�SOUTH HanglTaw/TeriurelRepair GWB 11159 1SOU TH HALF Paint 1d to 18SEP13 18$EP13 ♦1 SOUTH HALF Paint 11150 SOUTH Floorcoverings 24 2d 1g5EP13 20SEPi3 •►C�SOUTH Flaorcaverings 1170 (SOUTH MEP Trims 16 td 23SEP13 23SEP73 --(SOUTH MEP Trims 3180 SOUTH Bathroom AccassodesrDgars 1d 1d 24SEP13 24SEPi3� -SOUTH Barryroom AccessarieslD003 1194 TEMPORARY OCCUPANCY SOUTH HALF id ld 29SEP13 25SEP13 I+ITEMPORARY OCCUPANCY SOUTH HALF _. .. Y —V---=.OWner Move From North To South Half 1200 I O:vnar Move From North TO Soups Hall 5d 5d 28SEP73 4200733 CT'I —I NORTH HALE=Seleu'We Dgmokion 1290 NORTH HALF Selective E)ame4fiael 5d �0340713 090GT13 -" 1220 ORTH HALF Rao1 demo 26 2d 0300TH 040GT13 ►NORTH HALF ROOT DMO _....IN-. _.. _ ---- - 1230 INORTH HALF Nov,TPO Roofing 3d 2d OJOCTI3 ODOCTi3_ .f NCRiH HALF New TPO RaoOng --i I NORTH Window Replacement 1235 NORTH Wil Rapl iclanl t id Id 1DOCT13 IOOCT13 1240 NORTH MEP Rough T. 5d 5d IOOCT13 160CTI3 iG=JNQRTH Ill ROUgh-In 1250 INORTH Patch&RepairGWB 5d 5d 170CT13 2300713 r+1µ=.�NCRTH Patch&RepaG GWB 1260 (NORTH Paint 1d 1tl 24pGT13 2400713 NOTH Pain, 1270 NORTH Flourcaverin,s 3d 3d 25OCTI3 29OCT33 .C.'e NORTH Fiaarcoverings 1280 NORTH MEP Tdens td 1d 3DtlCTi3 3400713 NORTH f.1EP Trims 1790 BUILDING OCCUPANCY ld! 1431OCT13 310CT13 ►I BUILDING OCCUPANCY Start data 17JUN13 =Early bar Finish date 31 OGT13 Progress bar Data_date.....___17JUN13_...._ G2 Const.ruction Run data 28FEBt3 .7 Cdfleal bee Pa enumber 1A SE=WSCDHH �Svmrnary bat Stars milaslone pains C Primavera S tarns,InC. — c7 Finish rnileslanc pain.[ SUBCONTRACTOR COSTS: Electrical: $36.500 Drywall: $10,000 Roof: $34, 220 ADA Bathroom: $5000 Eire doors and extinguishers: $8000 HVAC Units: $18,000 Total. $111,720 GENERAL CONTRACTOR COSTS: Project Manager/Superintendent/Misr Labor: $40,000 Jobsite Consumables & Misc: $10,000 Total: $50,000 Overhead& Profit(This varies contractor to contractor but figure 16% is a safe number): $25,875 Total Contractors Cost: $187,595 MISCELLANEOUS COSTS: Pasco Permit Fee: $1,460.15 WA Sales Tax 8.6%: $16,258.74 Bond for work: $5000 Total CONSTRUCTION Cost: $210,313.89 DESIGN/CONTINGENCY COSTS: Contingency: $21,031 Architectural & Engineering: $24,500 GRAND TOTAL: 255 844.89 d.•� y y .►" �� A TerraScan MapSifter-Franklin County Washington - Print Page http://frank[inwa.mapsifter com/Print/Landscape.aspx?key=I9dbc83... Ow t �dW Yy � 5 0000* 1 04 lop ■ y �y „'�` �_. 1,�L�P � r' �"'�' _ �•�, �''M. ' 're's`:.•F.^ +r t pub 5- 1' r Or � 5 f . t1 �4+14�dh`. r r .✓ i, Y of 2 2/7/2013 11:06 AM 442'11"► 42'6"... . . .. _ WZ i �I CICI I. I �d'1"—10VI, -4– — 1 w ow � o � 116'3"► °? '--� Ii 1;1 Wo. e i 21'6" i I I 417'0"► 18'9"► – o N g f g ti f u i c'_ m m m m i 21,2„ i Is'a"► � I o. 'Pr V '42'6' __...__ __.. .. ._... w N Existing Building 11RFl W N BY DATE sEwscaHH J Construction 2.'1112012 124 M 5th Ave. Pasco, WA 99301 DRAIMMG SCALE SHEETNO Existing Floor Plan N 1'& i of] 17'1" i48'10"/ i A DRAWN BY DATE SEWSCDHH 2/1112012 121 N. 5th Ave. Pasco, WA 39304 DRAWING SCALE SHEETNO. Existing Basement Floor Plan N.TS, 1 Of] 'IerraScan TaxSifter-Franklin County Washington http://terra.co,franklin.wa,us/'1'axSifter/'Freastirer.aspx?keyld=1030,.. FRANKLIN COUNTY WASHINGTON TAXSIFTER SIMPLE SEARCH SALES SEARCH REETSIFTER C40NTY HOME PAGE CONTACT DISCLAIMER Dosie Koelzer Franklin County Treasurer PO Box 1011 Pasco,WA 99301 Assessor Treasurer Appraisal MapSifter Parcel Parcel#: 112043011 Owner Name: MICHAEL LINGG Land Use Code: 62 - Services- Personal Addressl: DEAF SERVICE CENTER INC Situs: 124 N 5TH AVE Address2: 124 N 5TH AVE Map Number: 093029-23-GERRYS-015-0010 City,State: PASCO WA Status: Zip: 99301-5512 Description: GERRYS ADD N 25.75'OF LOTS i &2 131-15 Comment: Current Tax Year Details Type Statement# Gross Tax Tax Exempt Net Tax Assessments Total Tax Real Property 2013-11 20430 11 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $37.50 $37.50 Balances Due Type Statement# Tax Amount Fees Interest Due Balance(s) Due* Real Property $37.50 $0.00 $0.00 Pay$37.5 Please expect a delay of 3-5 business days for your payment to past.Note:The receipt date will reflect the day the Payment was initiated. 5 Year Tax History Type Statement Number Taxes Assessments Fees Balance Due Real Property 2013-112043011 $0.00 $37.50 $0.00 $37.50 Type Statement Number Taxes Assessments Fees Balance Due Real Property 2012-112043011 $0.00 $6.50 $0.00 $0.00 Receipt Number Receipt Date Taxes/Fees Interest Paid Total Paid 2012-241817 03/14/2012 $6.50 $0.00 $6.50 Type Statement Number Taxes Assessments Fees Balance Due Real Property 2011-112043411 $0.00 $6.50 $0.00 $0.00 Receipt Number Receipt Date Taxes/Fees Interest Paid Total Paid 2011-176031 02/25/2011 $6.50 $0.00 $6.50 Type statement Number Taxes Assessments Fees Balance Due Real Property 2010-112043011 $0.00 $6.50 $0.00 $0.00 Receipt Number Receipt Date Taxes/Fees Interest Paid Total Paid 2010-113708 03/02/2010 $6.50 $0.00 $6.50 Type Statement Number Taxes Assessments Fees Balance Due Real Property 2002-11 X043011 $0.00 $6.50 $0.00 $0.00 1 of 2 2,`19/2013 9:01 AM TerraScan TaxSiffer- Franklin County Washington http://terra.co.fi°anklin.wa.us/TaxS fter/Treasurer.aspx?keyld=1030... Receipt Number Receipt Date Taxes/Fees Interest Paid Total Paid 2009-54444 04/01/2009 $6.50 $0.00 $6.50 Type Statement Number Taxes assessments Fees Balance Due Real Property 2008-112043011 $0.00 $6.50 $0.00 $0.00 Receipt Number Receipt Date Taxes/Fees Interest Paid Total Paid 2008-0136841 03/10/2008 $6.50 $0.00 $6.50 Property Images Click on an image to enlarge it. v i+.dr I 1.6.4776.17257 TX_R011Yaar_TR:2013 oft 2/19/2013 9:01 AM TerraScan TaxSifter-Franklin County Washington http://terl'a.co.Franklin.wa.us/TaXSifter/Treasurer.aspx?keyId=1030... FRANKLIN COUNTY WASHINGTON TAXSIFTER SIMPLE SEARCH SALES SEARCH REETSIFTER COUNTY HOME PAGE CONTACT DISCLAIMER 3osie Koelxer Franklin County Treasurer PO Box 1011 Pasco,WA 99301 Assessor Treasurer Appraisal MapSifter Parcel Parcel#: 112043066 Owner Name: MICHAEL LINGG Land Use Code: 91 - Undeveloped - Land Addressi: DEAF SERVICE CENTER INC Situs: Address2: 124 N 5TH AVE Map Number: 093029-23-GERRYS-015-0030 City,State: PASCO WA Status: Zip: 99301-5512 Description: GERRYS ADD LOT 3 &E 15'OF LOT 4, BLK 15 Comment: Current Tax Year Details Type Statement# Gross Tax Tax Exempt Net Tax Assessments Total Tax Real Property 2013-112043066 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $37.50 $37.50 Balances Due Type Statement# Tax Amount Fees Interest Due Balance(s) Due* Real Property 2013-112043066 $37.50 $0.00 $0.00 Pay$37.50 *Please expect a delay of 3-5 business days for your payment to post Note:The receipt date will reflect the day the payment was initiated. 5 Year Tax History Type Statement Number Taxes Assessments Fees Balance Due Real Property 2013-112043066 $0.00 $37.50 $0.00 $37.50 Type Statement Number Taxes Assessments Fees Balance Due Real Property 2012-112043056 $0.00 $6.50 $0.00 $0.00 Receipt Number Receipt Date Taxes/Fees Interest Paid Total Paid 2012-254012 04/16/2012 $6.50 $0.00 $6.50 Type Statement Number Taxes Assessments Fees Balance Due Real Property 2011-112043066 $0.00 $6.50 $0.00 $0.00 Receipt Number Receipt Date Taxes/Fees Interest Paid Total Paid 2011-176056 02/25/2011 $6.50 $0.00 $6.S0 Type Statement Number Taxes Assessments Fees Balance Due Real Property 2010-112043066 $0.00 $6.50 $0.00 $0.00 Receipt Number Receipt Date Taxes/Fees Interest Paid Total Paid 2010-113713 03/02/2010 $6.50 $0.00 $6.50 Type Statement Number Taxes Assessments Fees Balance Due Real Property 700 -y j 4{2 3066_ $0.00 $6.50 $0.00 $0.010 1 of 2 2/19/2013 9:01 AM TerraScan TaxSifter- Franklin County Washington http://terra,co.franklin.wa.us/TaxSifter/Treasui-er.aspx?keyld=1030... Receipt Number Receipt Date Taxes/Fees Interest Paid Total Paid 2009-54446 04/01/2009 $6.50 $0.00 $6.50 Type Statement Number Taxes Assessments Fees Balance Due Real Property 2008-112043066 $0.00 $6.50 $0.00 $0.00 Receipt Number Receipt Date Taxes/Fees Interest Paid Total Paid 2008-0136843 03/10/2008 $6.50 $0.00 $6,50 Property Images Click on an image to enlarge it. 1.0,4776 17257 TX-RollYear TR:2013 of 2 9,1]Q/101,3 Q•(11 AM Client Home Address A 4620 Appalossa Ln Pasco, WA B 4405 Ivy Road Pasco, WA C PO Box 5706 Pasco, Wa D 708 N 8th Ave Pasco, Wa E 1716 W Marie St Pasco, WA F 3610 Tierra Vida Lane Pasco, Wa G 820 N 1st Ave#407 Pasco, WA H 1712 N 24th Ave Apt G2 Pasco, WA 1 3313 Hawthorne Lane Pasco, WA J PO Box 676 Pasco, WA Interval Revenue Service Department off'the 1,1-easury Director,EO Rulings QCs Agresment P.O.Box 2i us Cincinnati,0114520 1 Employer Identification Number: 91-18I21?3 Date: April 17,, 2002 Document Loca-torNumbez-: 17053-096-74905-2 `foil FreeNurlber: 877-829-5500 EW5C1 H :CE CENTER OF THE FAX NLIMber: 513.263-3756, '`. 124 N. 5th Ave Pasco, WA 99301 Acklowlerl,ernerzt of fourReffue,st We received your roan 8734, Support Schedule for�our Advance Ruling,or otber inforrxr.ation renarcling your public,support status. When conununicating with Las,please refel' to the eMPloyer identifaration na.unber and docurnent Iocdtur r )n)ber shown above_ 1'oLirtr3x escemet stlnms Under section 501(ci(3)of the Internal Rcev=un Code reriaains 1n effect. if/,,at Happens XYY The information you submitted was entered into our con-mputer syster»at our praacessing center in Covington, Kentucky,and has been sentto our Cincinnati office for initial review_ We approve sonic cases based on rhis review. if this is the case, you will receive a letter stating that you are a publicly supported organization. If the review indicates that additional informnation or changes are necessary,your ease will be assigned to arc ;exempt Organization Specialist in Cincinnati who «will call cr write you- We assign cases in the orcier wt; receive them. t Ifthe additi0npi inform n atio indicates that you ineet ont of the public Stlpp03t teSLS, you will rwCeive a letter' stating that you are a publicly supported oryrazrization. If the public•sup port tests are.-not mtmet, we Will send you a etterre-classifjring you as a private foundation- 71ix lettex will tell you why ,ve believe you do not meet the public support tests, and will include a complete explanation of your appeal rights_ tTl of+ lrurb w ill th e process take? Nortnally,you may expac:l.to hem-front us within 120 Clays. If you c10 not, you n1ay call our toU free rmurnbeI- between the hours of 9 a.ra. and 6:30 pnn_Eastern Tin-me. Please have your identification numbers available so tlmaiwe can identify your case. lfyouwould ratherwritethan call,please include a copy of this notice with your con-espo nden ce. Nnticc.3,iG9 (c-g') - Me i. 12/20g)) 9 1 9 A photograph of the damage done to our roof, Fall 2012. ti arid Hard of r A photograph of the sign which identifies our building to the community_ A photograph of our four staff, who work to serve ten counties in Washington and the large Deaf, Deaf-Blind, and Hard of Hearing communities within those counties. r e �y A• ", �i 1y .Y At A photograph of the front of our building. One can easily see the wear and tear of an old facility, but the cracks, covering of gang tags, and many other building issues cannot be seen as easily. y `�AC'c( enter pr t t f V p a r 1, ri 1 f J J 3E' RECEIVER MAY 2 2 2013 come, UNITY& ECONor.iic DEVELOPOPI Renew SEW Creating a safer SEWSCDHH facility for the hearing loss community to continue reaching goals and learning self-empowerment. South Eastern Washington Service Center of the Deaf and Hard of Hearing SEWSCDHH 124 N 5h Ave Pasco, WA 99301 infogsewscdhh.org www.sewscdhh.org 509-543-9644 SEWSCDHH Table of Contents,CDB,C Cover Page Page 1 Table of Contents Page 2 Letter of Interest Page 3, 4, 5 CDBG Application Page 6-12 Timeframe/Schedule of Project Page 13 Overall Budget Page 14 Maps Page 15, 16 Construction Drawing Page 17, 18 Franklin County Parcel Information Page 19-22 Client Addresses Page 23 501c3 Letter Page 24 Photos Page 25, 26 INTRODUCTION The South Eastern Washington Service Center of the Deaf and Hard of Hearing (SEWSCDHH) serves individuals with hearing loss of any degree. Deaf, Deaf-Blind, and Hard of Hearing alike can come to our Center to receive free one-on-one client services to achieve their life goals and breakdown barriers they may have. Our goal is empowerment and communication access for all. Located in Pasco, Washington we serve a very small and rural community. Our staff of four serves ten counties in Southeastern Washington and serve anywhere from 20-40 clients at one time. Because we are surrounded by so many small towns, we often serve individuals that have been isolated or have no means to travel to us. Equality and communication access are some of the barriers are clients face. Our job is not only to work with the clients themselves on removing these barriers, but to work with business, organizations, and other groups to ensure they are complying with the American's with Disabilities Act. We aim to be a resource hub and to provide informational support to any in need. We also work to continuously build our relationships with other service providers, because we know we cannot handle all tasks our clients might need to work on— appropriate referral is crucial in this time of budget cuts. Our Mission Statement appropriately summarizes the work we do on a daily basis; Our mission is to enhance the quality of life by empowering Deaf, Deaf-Blind, and Hard of Hearing individuals and their families. This is accomplished through the provision of appropriate services, opportunities and programs. We strive to promote greater understanding and acceptance of hearing loss and Deaf Culture through education and sensitivity training. STATEMENT OF NEED Due to the fact that we focus so much on our clients and their accessibility needs, we find ourselves in a situation of self-neglect—our facility, while wonderful, is in need of many repairs. Recently, the issues SEWSCDHH are facing are related to our electrical, our HVAC unit, and the structure of the building itself. For more than one year and a half, one of our HVAC units has not been functioning properly. While our building has two HVAC units (one for each half of the building), the unit that is not working is on the side of the building with the staff offices and where our clients work on their goals. During Spring and Fall, this issue is not as grave, but when our office reaches almost 105- 114 degrees in the summer and low 40s in the winter, it is nearly impossible to do our work properly. Why would clients want to come to an office that is hotter or colder than the weather outside? We have tried several times to get quotes on the work but each company sees a different issue and we do not have the fiends to cover the work. Another issue we are noticing is our electrical and wiring. As technology changes and improves, we are recognizing that our outdated wiring system might not be appropriate to house these upgrades. The community we serve (Deaf and Hard of Hearing) use technology every day to communicate —whether through a captioned phone, a videophone, or wireless internet on a tablet, our facility is struggling to satisfy this important communication need. We also struggle with shorts and safety related to our wiring. If our copier is on, nothing can be plugged in near our fax, if all four computers are on, we blow a breaker; many switches do not work and many plugs and wires are falling apart—we need assistance to ensure we are up to code with our electrical and that no staff member or client is at any risk. The building itself needs work as well. In October of last year we had a partial roof collapse and this event was the catalyst event to show us the work we needed to take care of, as soon as possible. In December of 2012 we started to see our heating vents fall out of the ceiling. This is making our classroom/meeting room unsafe for individuals to use and people are noticing the issue. Our office is on a street corner and is very visible, leading to many taggings by local gangs. Several times a year we find ourselves outside painting our office to deter further damage. While there is an unspoken norm of working at nonprofits and putting up with less than desirable atmospheres, our office is past this point and we now find ourselves in dire need of facility maintenance. We cannot expect staff to want to work in such an environment and we are not doing our job in looking out for our clients if our offices are unsafe. ORGANIZATIONAL HISTORY SEWSCDHH was established in 1995 and has been providing client services to those in the Deaf and Hard of Hearing community ever since. From economic times of plenty with 10 or more staff and a hardy board, to our current financial situation with a staff of four and a board of five, SEWSCDHH has maintained and found ways to stay open for the community. We paid off our office in April of 2012 and it was at this time that we started to notice the condition of our facility. In the past, we have had many volunteers do patch work to keep our doors open, but this effort can only last so long. While it may be obvious to say that the economic times are different from those in the 1990's, we find ourselves with fewer staff but still achieving great results with our clients. Our contract holder, the Office of the Deaf and Hard of Hearing (ODHH) has seen great improvement in our record keeping and number of client hours. Our last 5 Site Reviews have shown we are in full contract compliance and maintaining steady services to the communities we serve. Times will continue to be hard financially but our quality of services has not changed. PROJECT NARRATIVE Renew SEW is a simple project of facility maintenance that ensures doors can remain open for clients and service providers alike. Overall, our facility is in need of serious repairs to ensure that staff and clientele can work on their goals together in a safe environment. The purpose of the Center and its building is for community use, and at this time we are not satisfying our end by providing the space to grow and learn. The project would focus on several aspects of safety, but also bring our facility up to code. For example, our bathroom for clients is not up to ADA code and our fire extinguishers need maintenance. Our roof has not been worked on for several years, our electrical is possibly ungrounded, and our doors do not open in the manner necessary to satisfy fire code. Renew SEW is beyond wanting an improved center—it comes down to safety. Please review the attached application and notes to learn more about the specific projects we would like to work on with CDBG funds. FUNDING STRATEGY While we desire to work with the City of Pasco and the CDBG group the most, we are also currently applying for many other grants to find funds to do this work. Our aim for Renew SEW is to complete the work in one years' time. While we may extend our timeline by separating the work into sections, we also enable ourselves to remain open so we can support clients as necessary. This ensures staff can work, clients can receive the assistance they request, and we maintain our mission of being a resource for the community, We at SEWSCDHH struggle to ask for funds, as we know how lucky we are- even with a less- than-perfect facility. Our hope in making the project only one year in length is that we would not have to approach any other groups for funding and that others monies can help other organizations and we can be self-sufficient from that point forward. We fully believe that if we receive funding for this project that we will not have to burden any other organizations for funding requests for many, many years. Thank you for your time in reading our letter of interest. Please do not hesitate to contact Cori Jones, Executive Director with any further questions. Sincerely, Cori Jo es Executive Director, SEWSCDHH CDBG SEWSCDHH Proposal Agency: South Eastern Washington Service Center of the Deaf and Hard of Hearing Project Title: Renew SEWSCDHH Address: 124 N 5ch Ave Pasco, WA 99301 Proposed Project Location: 124 N 5th Ave Pasco, WA 99301 Authorized Official: Cori Jones, Executive Director Email: cori@sewscdhh.org Phone: 509-543-9644 Fax: 509-543-3329 Amount of CDBG Funds Requested: $298,500 Amount of NON-CDBG Match: Non at this time, have applied for many grants and waiting to hear back. 1. Describe the problem or need (related to the Strategic Action Plan attached): At this time SEWSCDHH is working in what is accurate to call an 'unsafe facility'. SEWSCDHH's staff, the community we serve, and those who stop by for information or classes are not being provided with the best facility for them to reach their goals and accomplished independence. Our hopes in applying for grants, including a Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) would align with several points in the City of Pasco's Strategic Plan. Related to Goal 3, Strategy 1: We are a community center and our goal has always been to be an established hub for resources, meetings or activities, and working on empowering others. By improving our facility, we could see a potential rise in client numbers, have a safer place to work with individuals, and encourage new people to come and see what the Service Center has to offer. Our goals for improving the Center also align with Goal 5, Strategy 1:This is relevant to our Center because often our clients can be in situations of emergency or crisis. We aim to have the tools and resources available to help them out of their undesirable situation and into an improved one. Strategy 2 is also applicable: We work daily with individuals with hearing loss and work on matters related to food, utility assistance, transportation, access to medical care, etc. Overall, there are many reasons why Renew SEWSCDHH would qualify for a Community Development Block Grant and why we align with the Strategic Plan for the City of Pasco. 2. Explanation of Proposal-Give a complete detailed description of your proposal including a description of the clientele you will be serving: We at the South Eastern Washington Service Center of the Deaf and Hard of Hearing serve ten counties in the south eastern region of the State of Washington. From the outskirts of Ellensburg to the Oregon border and across the Columbia Basin to Idaho, any individuals with hearing loss can be served by our Center. Our clientele includes Deaf, Hard of Hearing, late-deafened, Deaf-Blind and individuals that use technology like a cochlear implant or hearing aids. As long as a person has some degree of hearing loss and it is impacting their life,they can become a client of SEWSCDHH. The amount of hearing loss does not matter and while working with this spectrum of clients, we aim to remove any communication barriers and improve the individual's empowerment skills. Because we are a non-profit who is funded by a state contract, we are facing major funding cuts at this time in our organization's history. While we are used to working with very little capital and have become creative on how we resolve issues, our facility is to the point where it is unsafe. Staff travel to work every morning hoping the roof sustained the winds overnight or that there were no shorts in our electrical to cause a fire. Our dream, if awarded a CDBG grant, would be to improve and replace needed electrical materials so that we can work safely with clients and be able to house the increasing technology that the Deaf community uses on a daily basis. We envision improving portions of the building structure that are in need of repair, like our roof, which partially collapsed this Fall. Working on or replacing our HVAC units would be a tremendous benefit to SEWSCDHH and the community, so staff are not working with clients in the freezing cold temperatures of Winter or the sweltering heat of the Summer. With facility improvements we can work more efficiently with clients as well as make the Center a more welcoming place for the community to come when they are in need. 3. Consolidated Plan—the City of Pasco is required to adopt a long-range community action plan to determine where the use of Block Grant funds should be focused. List the identified objective(s) listed in the TriCities S year Consolidate Plan to the proposal addresses and explain how your proposal meets that need (see Strategic Action Plan Goals attached). -Goal III, improve Public Facilities -Strategy 1: Support the revitalization of neighborhoods by improving and supporting public facilities that serve lower-income neighborhoods. Objective: Support development or improvement of community and/or neighborhood centers that provide a variety of supervised activities, resources, and community programs. The above state goal is applicable to SEWSCDHH for many reasons. While we may focus on individuals with hearing loss, we still serve the community of the TriCity area. Our office is located in a lower- income neighborhood and we serve many clients who are also lower income. Through our classes of American Sign Language (for both children and adults), our Resource Library, and technology access we are able to provide great tools to the clients we serve and their families, friends, coworkers, and local students as well. -Goal V, Support Priority Public Services -Strategy 1: Strategically support public services activities that respond to the immediate needs of persons in crisis. -Objective:Support public service activities that provide: 2. Program assistance that provides the tools or resources to assist the client from crisis modes to increasing self-sufficiency. We at SEWSCDHH serve many clients with many different backgrounds and circumstances. It is unfortunate, but we very frequently serve clients in a time of crisis—whether it is related to shelter, family issues, communication access, etc. it does happen to the community we serve and staff are well aware of how to handle these situations when they arise. We strive to maintain current resources available for not only our clients, but for service providers as well so that everyone may be educated throughout the process. Our mission statement focuses on empowerment of our clients and helping them becoming more confident in their ability to help themselves, so this goal is very applicable to the work done at SEWCDHH. -Strategy 2: Support regional efforts to meet the basic living needs of lower-income households and individuals.. -Objective: Support coordinated efforts to provide effective public services for individuals and households by addressing one or more of the following needs: -lower income and special needs persons: food, utilities assistance, parenting skills, public transportation, access to health/dental care and/or insurance, information on lead-based paint hazards, fair housing rights. -persons with disabilities: recreational programs, living skills training and support, obtaining housing with needed supports or access features. SEWSCDHH is coined by the state as a Regional Service Center, as we serve a specific portion of the State of Washington. Because the individuals we served are labeled with having a disability, we appropriately match Goal V, Strategy 2. Most of our clients are considered low income, because they struggle to find employers that will hire a Deaf individual.. We are consistently working on goals with clients related to food access, learning about the transportation systems, gaining communication access to health care, and give support during the housing process.This strategy aligns with the work we do and gives a clear picture on how we support our clients while they accomplish the goals they have established for themselves. 4.Allocation Policy- Projects will be ranked according to the attached Allocation Policy. identify the priority(A, B, C, or D) that matches your project (see Section II in allocation Policy): A-High Priority b—Acquisition, construction, or improvements to public facilities and infrastructure. c—Neighborhood preservation and revitalization B—Average priority 2. Social Service projects to address community needs a—Projects to assist special needs population 5. General Schedule for project Completion: see attached 6. Specify exactly what CDBG funds would be used for: See timeline and 15) Budget. 7. Does your project create individual/business displacement or relocation? NO 8. Eligibility—How does your proposal meet Eligibility criteria of 24 CFR 570 below (select only one): Public facilities (new construction or capital improvements) 24 CFR 570.201 (c) Public Services 24 CFR 570.201(e) 9. National Objective—How does your proposal meet the National Objective of benefiting low and moderate-income persons below? (select only one): 3)Your project serves ONLY the following clientele(check the appropriate box) (L11/Q Other: Deaf, Hard of Hearing, Deaf-Blind, individuals with hearing loss 10. Length of Service Is this your first year from the program? NO If you receive funding for 2014, how will your program be funded in 2015? We would like to complete the work on our facility in a one year time period so that we do not have to burden others by asking for further funding. 11. Public Service Agencies—To be eligible for CDBG assistance, a public service must be continuation of a service that is currently CDBG funded, a new service, or a quantifiable increase in the level of existing service that is not currently CDBG funded. Explain how your application qualifies: -Continuation of Services -Increase in Service Our services have been available to the hearing loss community since 1995, but Renew SEWSCDHH could lead to an increase in our services because having a new, safer facility may make our office more inviting to the community. Client numbers and client hours could potentially increase. 12. What amount of Block Grant funding from all sources has your agency or department received in the past three years? 2012 2011 2010 Pasco 0 0 0 Richland 0 0 0 Kennewick 0 0 0 Other federal sources 0 0 0 To what other agencies have you applied forfunding and what commitments have you obtained forthis proposal? Applied for/Sent LOI: Dennis and Phyllis Washington Foundation, Ashland Corporation Contributions Program, Cathay Bank Foundation, Pacific Power Foundation, Coleman Foundation, Wells Fargo, American Express, Enterprise Community Partners, Paul Allen Family Foundation and others. Commitments: Still awaiting responses. 13. Provide a map showing the location of the project or service area: See attached 14. Project Timeline—Establish milestones or goals of accomplishments by calendar quarter from the start of the project until completion: See attached 15. Budget—Give a detailed breakdown of the total budget for this project including major expense line items (salaries, rent/supplies, office equipment, capital expenses, new construction/vehicles, etc.). Show how the CDBG funds will be applied toward expenses and the amount and source of any other revenue you will be using.Total expenses should equal the total of CDBG plus other revenue. Be prepared to explain the budget and provide a copy of full agency budget upon request. -Material: $36,000 -Labor: $66,000 (Labor is expensive because I am assuming this will have to be a prevailing wage job. since they are state funds. If it is not required then you could almost chop that in half.) Another good question for her. -Subcontractors: $167,000 1 don't have labor and material broken out for these. If you needed something ball park I would say 65%of that is labor$108,550 (again, at the prevailing wage rate) and $58,450 is materials. -Other: Probably want to have a contingency plan for unforeseen conditions that could be encountered during the course of construction or an unknown requirement by the city review. Typically 10% is used, $26,900. -Might want to touch on sales tax as well? WA State Sales Tax is 8.3%. -Is a bond required? If so, approx. $6,000. -Permit fee in Pasco is for projects$100,001 to$500,000 it is$993.75 for first$100,000+$5.60 for each additional $1,000. So if my math is correct, Total Project cost (minus arch/engineer) is$269,000, which is a$1,940.15 permit fee. I would suggest checking this with the city though. -Architectural& Engineering:ALD Architects budgetary proposal : architectural,structural, mechanical, plumbing and electrical engineering under them. Construction documents for your project is a fixed price of$24,000. Construction administration services, which means answering questions and providing further direction during the project, they would do this on an hourly basis as need not to exceed $5,500. Additional explanation of budget: We as an agency are not looking for capacity funding or equipment for our facility. Renew SEWSCDHH's goal is soley to look at the work done, the cost of labor, materials, and taxes included. SEWSCDHH is in desperate need of many upgrades for both updated ADA codes as well as client and worker safety. Additionally, an expansion, as shown on floor plan, would allow SEWSCDHH more space for storage and work space to better serve the community. Demolition of west parking lot behind south half of building would allow the expansion of approx. 425 square feet (concrete foundation, wood framed) of additional space with code compliant ADA restrooms to better serve the community. The existing roof needs to be removed and replaced as it is extremely old and weathered and has caused part of the ceiling to cave in due to constant leaks. The existing metal flashings on parapet walls need to be replaced as they are undoubtedly contributing to some of the leaks. The old clay tiles on the roof are falling off onto the ground where the community and staff frequently travel. Windows on north side of building need to be replaced to keep the building weather tight and energy efficient. Carpet is old and worn and needs to be replaced. Paint is needed throughout. Exterior doors need to be replaced as they open inward, not outward as current fire safety codes dictate. Fire extinguishers are not up to code and need to be replaced. Electrical needs an entirely new service panel since the current installation is ungrounded and very unsafe. Miscellaneous drywall throughout(i.e. ceilings and walls)will need to be removed and replaced as needed to allow electrical wiring for lights, switches, and receptacles to be replaced to bring the building up to code and safe. HVAC has 2 roof top units that need to be replaced, one does not work and the other is heading down that same path. Miscellaneous drywall throughout will need to be removed and replaced as needed to allow HVAC duct, grills(some of these have been falling out of the ceiling) and thermostats to be replaced as needed. Plumbing fixtures (sinks/toilets) are outdated and should be replaced. New restrooms need to have new fixtures that are ADA compliant. There is miscellaneous drywall throughout that will need to be removed and replaced as needed to demolish old shower, toilet and sink stubs that currently are in an office. Exterior of building needs a new stucco system to give the building a modern and inviting curb appeal to the community. Additionally, the west and north sides are constantly being repainted due to graffiti. We will install a graffiti finish over the stucco to allow graffiti to wash off. Areas we have tried to cut costs and save money: We are going to leave as many interior doors, walls and drywall as possible to minimize replacement cost. We are not intending to install any lavish or top of the line fixtures, finishes or equipment, but instead just quality products that will allow SEWSCDHH to operate in a safe work environment for both staff and the community. With a building as old as ours, too much cutting of costs would almost be counterproductive. If you do not receive the requested funds or receive only a portion of what you request, how will the goals of your project be adjusted? What portion of your project will be abandoned, will fewer persons be served, etc.? If we receive only part of the funds we need to fix our building and bring it up to code, we would compile a list of priority work (work that needs to occur to ensure safety), and looking at what puts clients and staff at the highest risk, down to the smallest risk. We would then complete those projects in that order with the funding we received.Things we did not have funding for would have to wait until we could make more connections, as our organization cannot fund all the work that needs to be done. Portions would be abandoned, others would be held off on until a later date. Staff and board would continue to pursue grants but if the facility remains unsafe and uncomfortable for clients, there is the potential for decreased client hours and services provided. 16. Project Beneficiaries—List the client data of person who you ESTIMATE you will serve with this project. Is your count by person or household (family)? PERSON Number of clients below 30% median: Number of clients below 50% median: Number of clients below 80% median: Number of elderly clients: 3 Number of minority clients: 10 Total number of Pasco residents served:14 What is the data source for the information provided above? DSHS ODHH Form 64. *Another young client, unsure of where fits on the chart. Have ideas on income but not sure if we can assume which category they fall into. Served 41 clients in the last fiscal year, but this does not include information and referral and clients move frequently between Pasco and Kennewick. 17. NA 18. Contact Information Authorized Official Contract Administrator Project Manager Name/Title Cori Jones, Executive Mailing Address 124 N 5th Ave City/State Pasco, WA 99301 Phone/Fax 509-543-9644p, 509-543-3329f Email cori(@sewscdhh.org RECEIVED 2014 APPLICATION FOR CITY OF PASCO MAY 2 s 2013 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT(CDBQ)[)Fj y& ECU�dol,ilC DEVE10f'f lEt4i AGENCY: City of Pasco-Community&Economic Development PROJECT TITLE: Code Enforcement Officer ADDRESS: 525 North 3xd Avenue,Pasco,WA 99301 PROPOSED PROJECT LOCATION: Census tracts 201,202,203 and 204 AUTHORIZED OFFICIAL: Mitch Nickolds,Inspection Services Manager E-MAIL: nickoldsm@pasco-wa.gov PHONE: 509-545-3441 Ext. 6311 FAX: 509-545-3499 AMOUNT OF CDBG FUNDS REQUESTED: $ 48000 AMOUNT OF NON-CDBG MATCH: $ 147000 1. DESCRIBE THE PROBLEM OR NEED(AS RELATED TO THE STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN ATTACHED): Blight conditions,property nuisances and fire hazards in homes and upon properties owned and/or occupied by low to moderate income families and lack of education of minimum housing and property maintenance standards for low to moderate income households. Property and housing conditions in older neighborhoods will continue to decline without constant code enforcement and education efforts. 2. EXPLANATION OF PROPOSAL-Give a complete detailed description of your proposal including a description of the clientele you will be serving: Mitigation of blighted/substandard housing conditions,property nuisances and fire _hazards and property maintenance and blight elimination education of residents of low to moderate income areas. 3. CONSOLIDATED PLAN: The City of Pasco is required to adopt a long-range community action plan to determine where the use of Block Grant funds should be focused. List the identified objective(s)listed in the Tri-Cities 5-Year Consolidated Plan that the proposal addresses and explain how your proposal meets that need. (See STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN GOALS attached) Goal Improve_affordable housing opportunities for lower-income individuals and households. - Strategy W.2 4. ALLOCATION POLICY: Projects will be ranked according to the attached Allocation Policy. Identify the priority(A, B,C or D)that matches your project(see Section II in Allocation Policy): Priority: ❑A ZB ❑C ❑D and explain how your proposal satisfies that priority: BI 5. GENERAL SCHEDULE FOR PROJECT COMPLETION:January 1,2014 through January 31.2014 6. SPECIFY EXACTLY WHAT CDBG FUNDS WOULD BE USED FOR: Paying a portion of the salary and benefits for a code enforcement officer. 7. DOES YOUR PROJECT CREATE INDIVIDUALBUSINESS DISPLACEMENT OR RELOCATION? ❑ YES Z NO 2012 CDBG Application-Merge D- ' 8. ELIGIBILITY: The proposed project benefits low-moderate income persons by meeting the CDBG Goals&Objectives (See ELIGIBILITY attached): ❑ Public Acquisition of Property 24 CFR 570.201(a): [] Public Facilities(new construction or capital improvements)24 CFR 570.201(c): Public Services 24 CFR 570.201(e): ❑ Economic Development 24 CFR 570.201(0)/24 CFR 570.203: ❑ Housing rehabilitation and preservation 24 CFR 570.202: Z Code Enforcement 24 CFR 570.202(c): ❑ Planning 24 CFR 570.205: ❑ Other(describe): 9.. NATIONAL OBJECTIVE: How does your proposal meet the National Objective of benefiting low and moderate-income persons below?(SELECT ONLY ONE!) 1)❑ You receive household/family income and size data from each participant in the program(LMH)(LMC) 2)® Your project serves a limited area that is proven by census tract or survey to be a low-income area(LMA): Downtown Revitalization Zone ❑Census Tract#201.202,203 and 204 3)❑ Your project serves ONLY the following clientele(check appropriate box) (LMC): ❑ Elderly person's ❑Homeless persons ❑ Severely disabled adults ❑Illiterate persons Abused children ❑Persons living with AIDS ❑Battered spouses 0 Migrant farm workers At Risk Youth ❑ Other: 4)❑ Your project will create or save jobs that employ low/moderate income employees(LMJ) 5)❑ Your project addresses a slum/blight condition(SBA/SBS) LMA—Low-moderate income area(Census Tract or Survey Area) LMC—Low-moderate income clientele LMH—Low-moderate income household/family LMJ—Low-moderate income yob creation/retention SBA/SBS—Slum&Blight Area/Spot(as designed by local government) 10, LENGTH OF SERVICE Is this the first year for the program? ❑Yes ENo Year program began? 1997 If you receive funding for 2014,how will your program be funded in 2015?City of Pasco general funds and CDBG Qrant, 11. PUBLIC SERVICE AGENCIES: To be eligible for CDBG assistance, a public service must be continuation of service that is currently CDBG-funded, a new service, or a quantifiable increase in the level of an existing service that is not currently CDBG-funded. Explain how your application qualifies: M Continuation of Services ❑New Service ❑ Increase in Service 12. WHAT AMOUNT OF BLOCK GRANT FUNDING HAS YOUR AGENCY OR DEPARTMENT RECEIVED IN THE PAST THREE YEARS? 2013 2012 2011 Pasco $48,000 $ 48,000 $ 48,000 Richland $ $ $ Kennewick Other Federal Sources $ $ $ To what other agencies have you applied for funding and what commitments have you obtained for this proposal?None. ?tit's C DRG Annlication-Meree n CEIVSVS I I II CT G TRA `I I J L 201 ALL r !! 1i .9 " !/ ri !l 1/ 600 7Z8 202 ALL 75.0 200 58.3 i � G fS � 1 '" 100 76.9 r��'•" ! '?'fit:s`s" j+�.��f/ ///jjj „ 460 204 ALL 69.8 100 SZ3 300 8&4 f *��r///� /��f► 600 f �'=V_�IJ �r1.�''r ��<�i+ �J+► .fir/!j/JII,.!ri� I' rirE s� � iir ✓' �` �Y Poo i%7 Vi/i"1►�5� fir �i iawit/��f�7liri�'/.f=r•Y�//Af �i/�r►� rte, M;—.;. .F FFAV4Z �� �7►/ %� � J IMF rrxarrlloil /► ^Y,fr irir /r► spo's'U'lla lllrl� ri 111/I!!t r i1 VIA r p r#. +i �•/iF/r y+ti fr/ I4 f/ I t Iis �'/f. � a 1 /'�i ,i/yY�.. oil 110- visol, i� 1 14. PROJECT TIMELINE-Establish milestones or goals of accomplishments by calendar quarter from the start of the project until completion: Dates or Date Range Milestone/Goal include numerical performance progress if an I"Ouarter 125 Houses/properties served 2°d Quarter 125 Houses/properties served 3`d Quarter 125 Houses/properties served 4'h Quarter 125 Houses/ ro erties served TOTAL 500 Homes/properties served 15. BUDGET-Give a detailed breakdown of the total budget for this project including major expense line items(salaries, rent/supplies,office equipment,capital expenses,new construction/vehicles etc.). Show how the CDBG funds will be applied toward expenses and the amount and source of any other revenue you will be using. Total expenses should equal the total of CDBG plus Other Revenue. Be prepared to explain the budget and provide a copy of full agency budget upon request. EXPENSES REVENUES LINE ITEM $TOTAL BUDGET $CDBG FUNDS $OTHER FUNDS SOURCE OF FUNDS PERSONNEL: 65,025 48,000 17,025 Local Salaries Benefits OPERATIONS: RentlLease Utilities Supplies CONSTRUCTION: Architectural Engineering Materials Labor/Contracts PROPERTY: Purchase price Closing cost OTHER: (describe) TOTAL $65,025 $4$,000 $17,025 Local Additional explanation of the above budget:Yes.The other funds will be Paid from the City's general fund. If you do not receive the requested funds or receive only a portion of what you request,how will the goals of your project be adjusted? What portion of your project wilt be abandoned,will fewer persons be served,etc.? Nniciance conditions in census tract properties occupied by low-to-moderate income families haimA Fh® ine;ahharoads wicauUnv to dottlAnruto a fowgr a n n�r.rcn-nom -04 feewwsin—will be served. '7!717!^f1Rl: Annlir nfinn_rvlrror PROJECT BENEFICIARIES-List the client data of persons whom you ESTIMATE you will serve with this project. Is your count by: Z Person,or by ❑Household(family). Explain how your application qualifies: Z Continuation of Services ❑New Service ❑Increase in Service 16. Person,or by❑Household(family)? Number of clients below 30%median 24,444 Number of clients below 50%median 7,034 Number of clients below 80%median 10,024 Number of elderly clients 1,998 Number of minority clients 16,731 Total Number of Pasco residents served 24,444 (Should=total#above) What is the data source for the information provided above? 2010 Census 2013 HUD income Limit Guidelines for Kennewick-Pasco-Richland I Person 2 People 3 People 4 People 5 People 6 People 7 People 8 People 30% $14,250 $16,300 $18,350 $20,350 $22,000 $23,650 $25,250 $26,900 50% $23,750 $27,150 $30,550 $33,900 $36,650 $39,350 $42,050 $44,750 80% $38,000 $43,400 $48,850 $54,250 $58,600 $62,950 $67,300 $71,650 Median $47,500 $54,300 $61,100 1 $67,800 $73,300 $78,700 $84,100 $89,500 For Information Only, 2014 Income Limits will apply. 17. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS ONLY-Show the number of new/permanent jobs to be created through block grant funding and the number of jobs to be staffed by or made available to low-moderate income individuals this program year. Total to Date This Program Year Number of new jobs expected to be created/retained Number of new jobs expected to be filled or offered to low-or moderate-income persons(Must be at least 51%) Position Titles Expected to be Created this program year(Use EDA Classifications) 18. CONTACT INFORMATION Authorized Official Contract Administrator Project Manager Name/Title Mitch Nickolds/Inspection Services Manager Mailing Address Ci1y of Pasco Inspection Services Division PO Box 293 Pasco WA 99301 !City/State Pasco,Washington Phone/Fax (509)545-3441 Ext 6311/(509)545-3499 Email NickoldsM )pasco-wa.gov SUB E� �' � r 5Z Z S u riz ed Official Title Date 2013 CDBG Application-Merge 2014 APPLICATION FOR CITY OF PASCO COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT(CDBG) FUND AGENCY: -City of Pasco PROJECT TITLE: ADA Improvements t r ADDRESS: 525 N.P Avenue,Pasco,WA 99301 MAY PROPOSED PROJECT LOCATION: Various Locations AUTHORJZED OFFICIAL Ahmad Qayourni- - COMMUNITY& EGONOb?IC 17EVE1 pr"E11i E-MAIL. gayoumia@12asco-wa.aov PHONE: 509-545-3446 FAX: 509-543-5737 AMOUNT OF CDBG FUNDS REQUESTED: $ 250,000 AMOUNT OF NON-CDBG MATCH:$ I. DESCRIBE THE PROBLEM OR NEED(AS RELATED TO THE STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN ATTACHED): Under Title 1I,ADA facilities in the public right-of-way are considered a program and are required to meet ADA standards. Based on current inventory,the City of Pasco does not currently meet ADA standards on a number of the City's ramps. The City would like to perform construction of ADA Ramps that meet current standards as part of the Transition Plan. 2. EXPLANATION OF PROPOSAL-Give a complete detailed description of your proposal including a description of the clientele you will be serving: Continuation of sidewalk inventory,ADA inventory,Transition plan and final implementation into our current resurfacing and /or overlay proylam. 3. CONSOLIDATED PLAN: The City of Pasco is required to adopt a long-range community action plan to determine where the use of Block Grant funds should be focused. List the identified objective(s) listed in the Tri-Cities 5-Year Consolidated Plan that the proposal addresses and explain how your proposal meets that need. (See STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN GOALS attached) Goal 11 Strategy 2-City of Pasco will improve access for persons with disabilities by improving streets and sidewalk systems. 4. ALLOCATION POLICY: Projects will be ranked according to the attached Allocation Policy. Identify the priority(A, B,C or D)that matches your project(see Section II in Allocation.Policy): Priority: NA OB ®C []D and explain how your proposal satisfies that priority: Will improve public facilities within public right-of-way to meet current ADA standards. 5. GENERAL SCHEDULE FOR PROJECT COMPLETION: continuous 6. SPECIFY EXACTLY WHAT CDBG FUNDS WOULD BE USED FOR: ADA Improvements 7. DOES YOUR PROJECT CREATE INDIVIDUAL/BUSINESS DISPLACEMENT OR RELOCATION?❑ YES NO 8. ELIBIBILITY: How does your proposal meet Eligibility criteria of 24 CFR 570 below? (SELECT ONLY ONE) �f Public Acquisition of Property 24 CFR 570.201(a): ® Public Facilities(new construction or capital improvements)24 CFR 570.201_(0: 50 ramps to be completed Public Services 24 CFR 570.201(e): ® Economic Development 24 CFR 570.201(o)/24 CFR 570.203: 2014 CDBG Application 5.29.13 n °" 0 flousing rehabilitation and preservation 24 CI R 570.202: [� Code Enforcement-24 CFR 570.202(c): Planning 24 CFR 570.205: Q Other des ribe): NATIONAL OBJECTIVE: How does your proposal meet the National Objective of benefiting low and moderate-income persons below? (SELECT ONLY ONE) I)[] You receive household/family income and size data from each participant in the program(LMH)(LMC) 2)0 Your project serves a limited area that is proven by census tract or survey to be a low-income area(LMA): ❑ Downtown Revitalization Zone ® Census Tracts 201,202,203 and 204_ _ 3)C1 Your project serves ONLY the following clientele(check appropriate box)(LMC): (Census Tracts 205&206) [ Elderly person's [] Homeless persons ® Disabled persons M Illiterate persons ©Abused children [ Persons living with AIDS © Battered spouses © Migrant farm workers []At Risk Youth Other: 4)7 Your project will create or save jobs for low/moderate income employees(LMJ) 5)E1 Your project addresses a slum/blight condition (SBA/SBS) LMA—Low-moderate income area(Census Tract or Survey Area) LMC—Low-moderate income clientele LMH—Low-moderate income household/family LMJ—Low-moderate income job creation/retention S.BA/SB9--Slum &Blight Area/Spot(as designed by local government) 9. LENGTH OF SERVICE Is this the first year for the program? CYes ZNo Year program began?2012 if you receive funding for 2013,how will your program be funded in 2014? Overlay and local funds 10. PUBLIC SERVICE AGENCIES To be eligible for CDBG assistance, a public service must be continuation of a service that is currently CDBG-funded,a new service,or a quantifiable increase in the level of an existing service that is not currently CDBG4unded, Explain how your application qualifies: [] Continuation of Services © New Service ❑ Increase in Service IL WHAT AMOUNT OF BLOCK GRANT FUNDING FROM ALL SOURCES HAS YOUR AGENCY OR DEPARTMENT RECEIVED IN THE PAST THREE YEARS? 2013 2012 201 Pasco $ $$,240 $ 568,240 $ 340,000 Richland $ $ $ Kennewick $ $ S Other Federal Source(s) ---- S $ $ To what other agencies have you applied for funding and what commitments have you obtained for this proposal? 1014 rDRG Annlication 5.23.13 12. PROVIDE A MAP SHOWING THE LOCATION OF THE PROJECT OR SERVICE AREA; 101.1(DR(77.�nnlication 5.24.13 „—__ 13. PROJECT TIMELINE-Establish milestones or goals of accomplishments by calendar quarter from the start of the project until completion: Dates or Date Range Milestone/Goal(include numerical perforrnancUro ress if an 4/2013— 11/2014 Com lete construction of identified ADA ramps 14. BUDGET-Give a detailed breakdown of the total budget for this project including major expense line items(salaries, rent/supplies, office equipment,capital expenses,new construction/vehicles etc.). Show how the CDBG funds will be applied toward expenses and the amount and source of any other revenue you will be using. Total expenses should equal the total of CDBG plus Other Revenue. Be prepared to explain the budget and provide a copy of full agency budget upon request. EXPENSES REVENUES LINE ITEM $TOTAL BUDGET $CDBG FUNDS $OTHER FUNDS SOURCE OF OTHER FUNDS PERSONNEL: Salaries General Funds/ Other Benefits $5,000 $3,500 $1,500 OPERATIONS: Rent/Lease Utilities Supplies. CONSTRUCTION: Architectural Engineering $35,000 $25,000 $10,000 General Funds/ Other Materials Labor/Contracts $221,500 $221,500 PROPERTY: Purchase price Closing cost OTHER: (describe) TOTAL $261,500 $250,000 $11,500 $ Additional explanation of the above budget: If you do not receive the requested funds ar receive only a portion of what you request,how will the goals of your project be adjusted? What portion of your project will be abandoned,will fewer persons be served,etc.? There is a fixed cost on each ramp. When less funds are received there will be less ramps constructed and less accessibility for the ADA community. ($5,000 per ramp,50 ramps to be completed) '2014 rr)nO,Annfication 5.29.13 n 16. PROJECT BENEFICIARIES-List the client data of persons whom you ESTIMATE you will serve with this project. Is your count by: ]Person,or by Household(family)? Number of clients below 30%median J-200 Number of clients below 50%median 400 Number of clients below 80%median j n n v Number of elderly clients i gB Number of minority clients i h Total Number of Pasco residents served h.i gB (Should=total 4 above) What is the data source for the information provided above? _ _ 2013 HUD income Limit Guidelines for Kennewick—Pasco—Richland 1 Person 2 People 3 People 4 People 5 People 6 People 7 People :S44,750 o le 30% $14,250 $16,300 $18,350 $20,350 $22,000 $23,650 $25,250 900 50% $23,750 $27,150 $30,550 $33,900 $36,650 $39,350 $42,050 80% $38,000 $43,400 $48,850 $54,250 $58,600 $62,950 $67,300 650 Median $47,500 $54,300 $61,100 $67,800 $73,300 $78,700 $84,100 500 For Information Only, 2014 Income Limits will apply. 17. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS ONLY-Show the number of new/permanent jobs to be created through block grant funding and the number of jobs to be staffed by or made available to low-moderate income individuals this program year. Total to Date This Program Year Number of new jobs expected to be created/retained Number of new jobs expected to be filled or offered to low-or moderate-income persons (Must be at least 51%) Position Titles Expected to be Created this program year(Use EDA Classifications) I$. CONTACT INFORMATION Authorized Official Contract Administrator Project Manager Name/Title Ahtnad 08yoUMi - Mailing Address __525 I1 . 3rd Ave - City/State P a S r o, WA Phone/Fax 509-545-3446 Email � rlurrxi �r n-wa _ gov SUBMITTED BY: Signature of Au o ed Offic' Title D to 15. PROJECT BENEFICIARIES-Dist the client data of persons whom you ESTIMATE you will serve with this project. Is your count by: NPerson,or by ZHousehold (family)? Number of clients below 30%median 1200 Number of clients below 50%median 400 Number of clients below 80%median 100 Number of elderly clients high Number of minority clients high Total Number of Pasco residents served high (Should=total #above) What is the data source for the information provided above? estimates 2012 HUD income Limit Guidelines for Kennewick-Pasco-Richland 1 Person 2 People 3 People 4 People 5 People 6 People 7 People 8 People 30% $14,050 $16,050 $18,050 $20,050 $21,700 $23,300 $24,900 $26,500 50% $23,400 $26,750 $30,100 $33,400 $36,100 $38,750 $41,450 $44,100 80% $37,450 $42,800 $48,150 1 $53,450 $57,750 $62,050 $66,300 $70,600 Median $46,800 $53,500 $60,200 $66,800 $72,200 $77,500 $82,900 $88,200 For Information Only,2014 Income Limits will apply. 16. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS ONLY-Show the number of new/permanent jobs to be created through block grant funding and the number of jobs to be staffed by or made available to low-moderate income individuals this program year. Total to Date This Program Year Number of new jobs expected to be created/retained Number of new jobs expected to be filled or offered to low-or moderate-income persons (Must be at least 51%) Position Titles Expected to be Created this program year(Use EDA Classifications) 17. CONTACT INFORMATION Authorized Official Contract Administrator Project Manager Name/Title Ahmad Qayourni Mailing Address 525 N.3`d Ave City/State Pasco,WA Phone/Fax 509-545-3446 Email gavoumiat'a pasco-wa Gov SUBMITTED BY: Signature of Authorized Official Title Date 2014 CDBG Annlication 5.29.13 1 L , as _ \ ~ fl� . •y� III' � ', �T v' . � � ° ■'��H �Y ice' i"''�e9'�� - ., r ..v. .rerl lr�57t y Y� ke. II4 IR �IrIn�rA%.d rL!.�ila I � 4�IYyp's�ry a. ��� ivy�/aY��/�f'�+%��.bhry1•'!�� � 665' 45'i. �\ �_ p. � �Qe utar� �„an_„7.vs,I. A 9L4GY395' ¢ I%b1I a�gg'��1 Rx��R �i• •4I' co RECEIVED AN' IM SAY 2 9 2013 2014 APPLICATION FOR CITY OF PASCO r'nP,'i"lUtal'rY �C"Of,11C DEUELOPI;II_PiT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) FUND AGENCY: Housing Authority of the City of Pasco and Franklin County PROJECT TITLE: Fourth and Pearl Family Housing ADDRESS: 2505 West Lewis Street,Pasco, WA 99301 PROPOSED PROJECT LOCATION: Fourth and Pearl Streets AUTHORIZED OFFICIAL F.J.Andy Anderson E-MAIL: aanderson @hacpf.org PHONE: (509)547-3581 FAX: (509)547-4997 AMOUNT OF CDBG FUNDS REQUESTED: $ 250,000 AMOUNT OF NON-CDBG MATCH:$ 7,852,457 1. DESCRIBE THE PROBLEM OR NEED(AS RELATED TO THE STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN ATTACHED): In order to support the revitalization of lower-income neighborhoods there is a need to improve the public infrastructure. 2. EXPLANATION OF PROPOSAL-Give a complete detailed description of your proposal including a description of the clientele you will be serving: Improve the public infrastructure along Fourth Ave and Pearl Street, including new curb, gutters and sidewalk asphalt, storm drainage, sanitary sewer manholes, and connections to existing sewer and main water lines (see attached). 3. CONSOLIDATED PLAN: The City of Pasco is required to adopt a long-range community action plan to determine where the use of Block Grant funds should be focused. List the identified objective(s)listed in the Tri-Cities 5-Year Consolidated Plan that the proposal addresses and explain how your proposal meets that need. (See STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN GOALS attached) improve public facilities. 4. ALLOCATION POLICY: Projects will be ranked according to the attached Allocation Policy, Identify the priority(A,13,C or D)that matches your project(see Section II in Allocation Policy): Priority: DA ❑B ❑C ❑D and explain how your proposal satisfies that priority:Construct new public infrastructure that supports new affordable housing for large families. 5. GENERAL SCHEDULE FOR PROJECT COMPLETION: 4/201 6. SPECIFY EXACTLY WHAT CDBG FUNDS WOULD BE USED FOR: infrastructure 7. DOES YOUR PROJECT CREATE INDIVIDUAL/BUSINESS DISPLACEMENT OR RELOCATION? ❑YES ❑NO 8. ELIBIBILITY: How does your proposal meet Eligibility criteria of 24 CFR 570 below? (SELECT ONLY ONE) ❑ Public Acquisition of Property 24 CFR 570.201 a : ❑■ Public Facilities(new construction or capital improvements)24 CFR 570.201(c): ❑ Public Services 24 CFR 570.201(e): ❑ Economic Development 24 CFR 570.201(0)/24 CFR 570.203: ❑ Housing rehabilitation and preservation 24 CFR 570102: 2014 CDBG Application Page 1 ❑ Code Enforcement 24 CFR 570.202(c): ❑ Planning 24 CFR 570.205: ❑ Other(describe): 9. NATIONAL OBJECTIVE: How does your proposal meet the National Objective of benefiting low and moderate-income persons below? (SELECT ONLY ONE) I)0 You receive household/family income and size data from each participant in the program(LMH)(LMC) 2)❑ Your project serves a limited area that is proven by census tract or survey to be a low-income area(LMA): ❑Downtown Revitalization Zone ❑ Census Tract# 3)❑ Your project serves ONLY the following clientele(check appropriate box)(LMC): ❑Elderly person's ❑Homeless persons ❑ Severely disabled adults ❑ IIliterate persons ❑Abused children ❑Persons living with AIDS ❑Battered spouses ❑Migrant farm workers ❑At Risk Youth ❑Other: 4)❑ Your project will create or save jobs for low/moderate income employees(LMJ) 5)❑ Your project addresses a slum/blight condition(SBA/SBS) LMA—Low-moderate income area(Census Tract or Survey Area) LMC—Low-moderate income clientele LMH—Low-moderate income household/family LMJ—Low-moderate income job creation/retention SBA/SBS—Slum&Blight Area/Spot(as designed by local government) 10. LENGTH OF SERVICE Is this the first year for the program? ■❑Yes ❑No Year program began? If you receive funding for 2013,how will your program be funded in 2014? Funding is for capital improvements. No ongoing funding is required. 11. PUBLIC SERVICE AGENCIES To be eligible for CDBG assistance,a public service must be continuation of a service that is currently CDBG-funded,a new service,or a quantifiable increase in the level of an existing service that is not currently CDBG-funded. Explain how your application qualifies: ❑ Continuation of Services ❑New Service ❑ Increase in Service 12, WHAT AMOUNT OF BLOCK GRANT FUNDING FROM ALL SOURCES HAS YOUR AGENCY OR DEPARTMENT RECEIVED IN THE PAST THREE YEARS? 2013 2012 2011 Pasco $ 0 S 0 $0 Richland $ 0 $ 0 $ Kennewick $ Q S 0 $0 Other Federal Source(s) $ 0 $ © $ To what other agencies have you applied for funding and what commitments have you obtained for this proposal? The WA Department of Commerce awarded the project$5.25M in May 2013. 2014 CDBG Application Page 2 13, PROVIDE A MAP SHOWING THE LOCATION OF THE PROJECT OR SERVICE AREA: Yrr-casalt � ys � � Tarpon � f°�, c 9� leal Rd W Argent Rd Argent Rd 411,11, z �� rte; E S1�''su+crs5t S4 z oe Z 3 Sett wtstem Pk* '� g W Paco Im d suites °a E Adams St Q Sw Red v w"hFlowPaco kv Ivey� Empke Ol � z W Jay$4 trncoint9 z A. Lucas Park IN Jay St �c6` W Jan St W Ella$t 2 W Jan st ionAcRO z z ' z rr]tt x g ,y z se�rvic�en� z :ary �` W teola St ` Tttie hwoora If - Arena* A A City View Richardson Pearl St ° i A Cemetery Para z W Pearl St Cente lag as Pa d W�3Aet K W ppal St z F � = AstnrWay c s W AQak St z a; z WA a 4I I t fourth and Pearl � Ott sate ,, g W st Center z z z z z W coat so z W C4XA St z W coot Sr W court st x St Cartm2i Sit z y' t w Brown St 9 W Brown St a Brown$t W Brower St { x -9 Pasco k+.r�e W Mwe St w St z av octave St W octave sit Pasco 1Mobk, Home Park St W Henry St W Ffien►]r St W furry St iSl o Va�tid4� Pasto W ri arQaret St W Idxgfret St Q W Margaret St z • Ss tnenrrrtedat Ell z id Vownteer NtOcA N Pwk St Edgar Broom W Park St z � W Palk St Park gt Memonal z z L,vxeke W NINan S! ° $Yntlrum < w tt� St C,-rjlrr St 3 dvester St W$*&*ter St * x W Syyey Sylvester Park St z _ Tenrus Courts �r ip z W St z W kvatq St ? , I �+ y IN Yakrna Sl St Neclariot a Cork 5t 1 o Greek oatwdow Ai Oh FEW c ar �St �.'. z �V W Slrrstxrsa St z W Shosharte St 2 Gods New Germrallim rkt o ai W Hopkins St tN kk>4 *$t � � Ctrtrsh Downtown G z Memanai n � ,� W aonrev&e at N Psrk r Si zGx 2 k St 9 w L ` ors Sj ' c W cl.*5t 14, PROJECT TIMELINE-Establish milestones or goals of accomplishments by calendar quarter from the start of the project until completion: Dates or Date Range Milestone/Goal(include numerical performance progress if any) August 2013 Schematic Design Complete October 2013 Design Development/Financing Development/Financing Complete February 2014 Construction Drawings and Permitting Complete April 2014 Close Financing and Start Construction April 2015 Construction Complete and Lease-Up 15. BUDGET-Give a detailed breakdown of the total budget for this project including major expense line items(salaries, rent/supplies,office equipment,capital expenses,new construction/vehicles etc.). Show how the CDBG funds will be applied toward expenses and the amount and source of any other revenue you will be using. Total expenses should equal the total of CDBG plus Other Revenue. Be prepared to explain the budget and provide a copy of full agency budget upon request. EXPENSES REVENUES LINE ITEM[ $TOTAL BUDGET $CDBG FUNDS $OTHER FUNDS SOURCE OF OTHER FUNDS PERSONNEL: Salaries Benefits OPERATIONS: Rent/Lease Utilities Supplies CONSTRUCTION: Architectural $358,805 $0 $358,805 See note below. Engineering $35,000 $0 $35,000 " Materials $2,580,750 $125,000 $2,455,750 " Labor/Contracts $2,580,750 $125,000 $2,455,750 " PROPERTY: Purchase price Closing cost OTHER:(describe) $2,597,152 $0 $2,597,152 See note below TOTAL S 8,152,457 $250,000 $7,852,457 $ Additional explanation of the above budget: Other sources include: State of WA Housing Trust Fund, Low Income Housing Tax Credit equity, deferred developer fee, and private debt. See attached budget for more detail. If you do not receive the requested funds or receive only a portion of what you request,how will the goals of your project be adjusted? What portion of your project will be abandoned,will fewer persons be served,etc.? If there are no or fewer CDBG funds to cover the costs of the public infrastructure,we would likely have to reduce the scope of the project or may have to increase the affordability targets. We typically use higher quality materials in order to ensure our projects can last through their affordability period. Fewer public sources will require us to maximize rents to ensure we can make the debt payments to the private lender. 2014 CDBG Application Page 4 16. PROJECT BENEFICIARIES -List the client data of persons whom you ESTIMATE you will serve with this project. Is your count by: ❑Person,or by❑Household(family)? Number of clients below 30%median Number of clients below 50%median 138 Number of clients below 80%median Number of elderly clients Number of minority clients Total Number of Pasco residents served 138 (Should=total 4 above) What is the data source for the information provided above? Tenants will be income certified at lease-up. 2013 HUD income Limit Quidelines for Kennewick-Pasco-Richland 1 Person 2 People 3 People 4 People 5 People 6 People 7 People 8 People 30% $14,250 $16,300 $18,350 $20,350 $22,000 $23,650 $25,250 $26,900 50% $23,750 $27,150 $30,550 $33,900 $36,650 $39,350 $42,050 $44,750 80% $38.000 $43,400 $48,850 $54,250 $58,600 $62,950 $67,300 $71,650 Median $47,500 $54,300 $61,100 $67,800 $73,300 $78,700 $84,100 $89,500 For Information Only, 2014 Income Limits will apply. 17. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS ONLY-Show the number of new/permanent jobs to be created through black grant funding and the number of jobs to be staffed by or made available to low-moderate income individuals this program year. Total to Date This Program Year Number of new jobs expected to be created/retained Number of new jobs expected to be filled or offered to low-or moderate-income persons (Must be at least 51%) Position Titles Expected to be Created this program year(Use EDA Classifications) 18. CONTACT INFORMATION Authorized Official Contract Administrator Project Manager Name/Title F.J. Andy Anderson same same Mailing Address City/State Pasco,WA Phone/Fax(509)547-35811 (509) 547-4997 Email aanderson @hacpf.org SUBMITTED BY: n 4 Executive Director ( 2 c111 Sig re of Authorized Official Title Date 2014 CDBG Application Page 5 Form 6A Residential Development Budget 2011-2012 HTF Application Update Residential Development Budget Instructions: •Enter residential costs by source in Columns H, I,J,K,etc. The yellow total cells will autocalculate. •Add an extra page if more columns are needed. Please do not combine funding sources in a column. RESIDENTIAL COSTS ONLY Residential HTF LIHTC-4% Tax Exempt Pasco- CDBG Deferred Fee Total Bond Debt Funds Acquisition Costs: Land Existing Structures Liens - Closing,Title&Recording Costs 6,000 $ 6,000 Extension payment _ Other: Appralsal SUBTOTAL $ 8,500 is 8,500 $: $ $ Construction: Demolition - New Building 4,911,500 3,518,378 1,260„435 132,687 Rehabilitation Contractor Profit Contractor Overhead - New Construction Contingency 491,150 491,150 Rehab Contingency - Accessory Building Site Work 1 Infrastructure - Off site Infrastructure 250,000 250,000 Environmental Abatement(Building) - Environmental Abatement(Land) Sales Tax 105,597 105,597 Bond Premium Equipment and Furnishings 35,000 35,000 ..........~......esti................. Other Construction Costs: Con .... Construction Testing I 25,000 25,000 SUBTOTAL $ 5,818,247 $ 4,175,125 S 1,260,435 S 132,687 $ 250,000 S Form 6A Residential Development Budget Form 6A Residential Development Budget RESIDENTIAL COSTS ONLY Residential HTF LIHTC-4% Tax Exempt Pasco- CDBG Deferred Fee Total Bond Debt Funds Soft Costs: Buyer's Appraisal Market Study 7,500 7,500 Architect 358,805 358,805 Engineering Environmental Assessment 10,000 10,000 Geotechnical Study 10,000 10,000 Boundary&Topographic Survey 15,000 15,000 Legal-Real Estate 23,000 23,000 Developer Fee 714,818 200,000 351,270 163,548 Project Management 1 Development Consultant Fees - Other Consultants: .......ofcots.......,._............................................_.................. ...._. S BITOTAL 5.,..,...._........................_......_...._..,..._.........__...__..._......,... 29,745 29,745 $ 1,168,867 $ 601.305 1S 404,014 1 $ -is - $ 163,548 Pre-Development/Bridge Financing Bridge Loan Fees - Bridge Loan Interest SUBTOTAL $ - $ $ $ - $ $ Construction Financing Construction Loan Fees 65,000 65,000 Construction Loan Expenses(Appraisal,3rd Party Rpts) 15,000 15,000 Construction Loan Legal Construction Period Interest 153,563 153,563 Lease-up Period Interest - SUBTOTAL $ 233,563 $ S IS 233,563 1$ Permanent Financing Permanent Loan Fees 8,250 8,250 Permanent Loan Expenses(Appraisal,3rd Party Rpts) 15,000 15,000 Permanent Loan Legal LIHTC Fees 37,840 37,840 LIHTC Legal(SyndicationlOrganizational) 65,000 65,000 LIHTC Owners Title Policy State HTF Fees 105,000 105,000 .....................................,.,.............................. .. .,.._......... Other: Syndication Consultant 15,000 15,000 W...._._.._........._.... SUBTOTAL $ 246,090 $ 142,840 IS 15,000 IS W250 S $ Form 6A Residential Development Budget Form 6A Residential Development Budget ESIDENTIAL COSTS ONL Residential HTF LIHTC a 40A Tax Exempt Pasco- CDBG Deferred Fee Total Bond Debt Funds Capitalized Reserves Operating Reserves 126,503 124,503 Replacement Reserves 13,300 13,300 ............... _.... - Other Reserves: Soft Cost Contingency 50,000 50,000 ........................................................ ..._.,............: SUBTOTAL $ 189,803 $ $ 189,803 $ $ $ Other Development Costs Real Estate Tax 5,000 5,000 Insurance 40,000 40,000 Relocation Bidding Costs 8,000 8,000 Permits,Fees&Hookups 98,230 98,230 Impact/Mitigation Fees 171,000 171,000 Development Period Utilities Nonprofit Donation 19,657 19,657 AccountinglAudd 20,000 20,000 Marketing/Leasing Expenses 30,000 30,000 Carrying Costs at Rent up/Lease Up Reserve SUBTOTAL $ 391,887 IS 322,230 $ 69,657 $ $ $ Bond Related Costs of Issuance(4%tax CreditlSond Projects Only) Issuer Fees&Related Expenses 40,500 40,500 Bond Counsel 40,000 40,000 Trustee Fees&Expenses Underwriter Fees&Counsel Placement Agent Fees&Counsel Borrower's Counsel-Bond Related 15,000 15,000 Rating Agency SUBTOTAL $ 95,500 1$ - $ - $ 95,500 S - $ Total Development Cost. IS 8,152,457 Total Sources: IS 8,152,457 1$ 5,250,000 $ 1,938,909 $ 550,000 $ 250,000 $ 163,548 5,250,000 1,938,909 650,000 250,000 163,548 (0) )0) 1 Form 6A Residential Development Budget Form 6A Residential Development Budget RESIDENTIAL COSTS ONLY Residential HTF LIHTC-411. Tax Exempt Pasco- GDBG Qeferred Fee Total Bond Debt Funds For Funders°Use Only Summary Roll-ups Residential Total Purchase Price $ - Totai Construction Cool $ 4,911,500 Total Contingency $ 491,150 Total Legal Fees $ 88,000 Total Financing $ 575,153 Soft Costs $ 1,233,867 (as defined pre-2012) Other(as $ 1,091,843 defined pre- 2012) Form 6A Residential Development Budget 4th and Pearl ZBA Architecture,PS Road Utility Improvements 421 West Riverside#860 Housing Authority of the City of Pasco and Franklin County Spokane,WA 99201 May 28,2013 Estimate of Probable Costs Work Division Cost General Conditions:4th Avenue $5,192,00 General Conditions: Pearl $9,408.80 Site:4th Avenue $64,900.00 Site:Pearl $117,610.00 SUBTOTAL $197,110.80 General Contractor Overhead 8.00% $15,768.86 SUBTOTAL $212,879.66 Bonds and Insurance 2,50% $5,321.99 SUBTOTAL $218,201.66 General Contractor Profit 4.00% $8,728.07 TOTAL $226,929.72 Design Contingency 10.00% $22,692.97 GRAND TOTAL $249,622.69 PROJECTED ESCALATED CONSTRUCTION COSTS 1.0% Increase per Quarter Total Construction Cost for 4th Quarter 2013: $252,118.92 Total Construction Cost for 1st Quarter 2014: $254,640.11 Total Construction Cost for 2nd Quarter 2014: $257,186.51 Total Construction Cost for 3rd Quarter 2014: $259,758.38 Notes: 1) Cost Estimate incorporates Davis Bacon Prevailing Wage Rates. 2)Construction Cost does not include Building Permit, Hook-up Fees, Impact Fees if any,State Sales Tax if Applicable, or AfE Fees. 1219 Page 1 of 1 4th Avenue Frontage ZBA Architecture,PS Road Utility Improvements 421 West Riverside#860 Housing Authority of the City of Pasco and Franklin County Spokane,WA 99201 May 28,2013 Estimate of Probable Costs Work Description Quantity Unit Price Subtotal Total General Conditions General Conditions 6% $3,894,00 Mobilization 2% $1,298.00 TOTAL GENERAL CONDITIONS $5,192.00 Site Earth Work 1,000 cy $8.50 Cy $8,500.00 Concrete curb.Gutters&Sidewalks 480 If $20.00 If $9,600.00 Aspha It Paving 640 sy $25.00 sy $16,000.00 Storm Drainage Systems 1 Is $10,000.00 Is $10,000.00 Sanitary Sewer Manholes 2 ea $3,400.00 ea $6,800.00 Connection to Existing Public Sewer 2 ea $3,600.00 ea $7,200.00 Connection to Public Main $2.00 ea $3,400.00 $6,800.00 TOTAL SITE $64,900.00 Page 2 of 3 Pearl Street Frontage 78A Architecture,PS Road Utility Improvements 421 West Riverside 4860 Housing Authority of the City of Pasco and Franklin.County Spokane,WA 99241 May 28,2013 Estimate of Probable Costs Work Description Quantity Unit Price Subtotal Total General Conditions General Conditions 5% $7,056.60 Mobilization 2% $2,352.20 TOTAL GENERAL CONDITIONS $9,408.80 Site Earth Work 1,000 cy $8.50 cy $8,500.00 Concrete curb.u+tiers&Sidewalks 360 If $20.00 If $7,200.00 Asphalt Paving 650 sy $25.00 sy $16,250.00 Storm drainage Systerns 1 Is $7,500.00 Is $7,500.00 Fire Hydrants 2 ea $4,200.00 Is $8,400.00 8"Sanitary Sewer 720 If $36.00 Is $25,520.00 Sanitary Sewer Manholes 2 ea $3,400.00 ea $6,800.00 8"Water Service 720 if $42.00 Is $30,240.00 Connection to Public Main 2 ea $3,400.00 $6,800.00 TOTAL SITE $117,610.00 Page 3 of 3 MEMORANDUM DATE: June 13,2013 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Angela R. Pitman, Block Grant Administrator SUBJECT: 2014 HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIPS (HOME) PROGRAM ALLOCATION AND ANNUAL WORK PLAN(MF#BGAP2013-004) Background Pasco entered into a HOME Consortium Agreement with Richland and Kennewick in 1996 making the City eligible for Federal HOME funds. The Tri-Cities HOME Consortium Agreement is currently being revised and renewed through 2016. Each November an annual action plan is required to be prepared and submitted to HUD for use of estimated funds for the following program year. Estimated Funds Available It is estimated that the 2014 annual entitlement grant to the HOME Consortium will be $453,764, based on the award for program year 2013. Each member city is allocated a share of the entitlement utilizing tine same formula used to allocate the CDBG entitlement grants. Pasco's share of the entitlement for 2014 is estimated to be $149,723 based on 2013 allocations There is always some question regarding actual funding levels approved by Congress. Actual available funding for these FY 2014 activities will remain in question until the early part of the year when the HOME allocation is made by Congressional Resolution. If ftinding levels are lower than estimated, activity funding may need to be reallocated accordingly. Planning & Administration HUD regulations state that the amount of HOME Funds obligated within a program year to support planning and administration activities may not exceed 10% of the entitlement. This is awarded to Richland annually as the Lead Agency of the HOME Consortium to manage all activities. Member cities are provided funds for planning and administration from 10% of program income received from completed projects within their jurisdiction. CHDO Set-Aside Each year 15% of the entitlement grant must be set-aside to help Community Housing Development Organizations (CHDO) add to the permanent affordable housing stock. The member cities receive these funds every third year, In 2013, Pasco and Kennewick exchanged CHDO funds for program years 2011 and 2014. Pasco will also receive CHDO funds in 2015. Current Balances Pasco's HOME budgeted funds as of June 13, 2013 through Program Year 2013 is $435,513.34. The budget amount is approved by Council Resolution each year and includes HOME entitlement funds and estimated program income anticipated from acquisition/infill projects. Proposed units of housing that remain to be completed through program year 2013 with these restricted funds total 25. Any change to the budgeted amounts below that exceed 10% of the entitlement or changes the scope of the activity requires preparation of substantial amendment to the annual action plan in compliance with the Citizen Participation Plan. Contracted/ Reserved/ Units Budgeted Obligated Application Pending 2012/2013 First Time Homebuyer Assistance $ 131,126 $ - $ 131,126 23 2011/2012/2013 Infill Projects $ 244,280 $ - $ 295,449 2 2013 Administration from P1 $ 8,939 $ - $ 8,939 2013 Program Income $ 51,169 $ 435,513 $ - $ 435,514 25 Proposed Activities HOME funds are based on need and income eligibility and may be used anywhere within the city limits, however, neighborhoods designated as priority by Pasco City Council receive first consideration. Funding is first targeted in the Longfellow and Museum neighborhoods, then within low-moderate income census tracts (201, 202, 203 and 204). If HOME funds cannot be applied to those areas, then they are used as needed within the Pasco City limits for the benefit of eligible low-moderate income families. The City is able to use HOME funds for acquisition and rehabilitation of vacant/foreclosed properties, or developing vacant property through "infill" new construction projects. Program income anticipated from the resale of prior year construction projects in addition to outstanding balances will continue to fund program activities through 2014. Staff recommends that anticipated 2014 HOME entitlement funds and program income is allocated to the proposed activities per annual work plan below: Proposed Activities Budget Units First Time Homebuyer Assistance $ 145,236 13 $ 145,236 13 Recommendations After discussions and staff evaluation, it is recommended that the activities set forth above would best meet the City's Consolidated Plan and be most effective in carrying out the objectives for the City in 2014. Your review and recommendation to the City Council would be appreciated. Therefore, we propose the following Motion: MOTION: I move to close the public hearing and schedule deliberations and development of a recommendation for City Council for the July 18, 2013 meeting. The City Staff would like to thank the members of the Planning Commission for your time and assistance. /arp MEMORANDUM DATE:June 13,2013 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Angela R. Pitman, Block Grant Administrator SUBJECT: 2014 NEIGHBORHOOD STABILIZATION PROGRAM (NSP) ALLOCATION AND ANNUAL WORK PLAN (MF#BGAP2013-005) Background The City received a total of $426,343 in CDBG funding for the Neighborhood Stabilization Program through 2010. To date,the City has recovered 1 I foreclosed properties. Down payment assistance has been provided to 8 homebuyers, three are below 50% of median income which accounts for 43% of the funds used. The City has also purchased and rehabilitated 3 houses. Two of these have been resold to income eligible households. The third is currently under contract to be sold. Three NSP acquisitions were rehabilitated using HOME funds. The LISP share of program income for the two houses sold is $176,895. Estimated Funds Available Pasco°s NSP unexpended grant balance as of March 31, 2013 is $41,688, and program income remaining to be expended from the two houses sold is$144,614, for a total of$186,302. Funds totaling $196,024 are reserved for Administration ($15,926), expenditures not drawn ($30,098). and one acquisition/rehabilitation ($150,000) for 2013 pending. Approximately, $163,528 will be available for projects in 2014. The budget amount is approved by Council Resolution each year for following program year activities. Proposed Activities The City is able to use NSP funds for down payment assistance, acquisition and rehabilitation of foreclosed properties. Staff proposes the funds be allocated to one acquisition/rehabilitation for the 2014 annual work plan. 2014 Funding Sources Budget Units Entitlement Funds & Program Income Remaining $ 186,302.00 Estimated Program Income Pending $ 173,250.00 $ 359,552.00 2014 Proposed Activities Committed Funds $ 196,023.66 Acquisition/Rehabilitation $ 163,528.34 1 $ 359,552.00 1 MOTION: I move to close the public hearing and schedule deliberations and a recommendation for City Council for the July 18, 2013 meeting. The City Staff would like to thank the members of the Planning Commission for your time and assistance. /arp MEMORANDUM DATE: June 20, 2013 TG: Planning Commission FROM: Dave McDonald, City Planner SUBJECT: Accessory Structure Heights (MF# CA2013-003) At the regular meeting on May 16th the Planning Commission held a combination workshop/hearing to discuss the issue of accessory structure heights (see attached Memorandum for additional background) in RS-20 zones. During the May 16th meeting the Planning Commission considered the following options for addressing the accessory structure height questions: • Do nothing and keep the height limitation in place. • Increase the height limit but keep it under the maximum allowed in the district. • Allow a greater height if a larger setback is provided. • Allow a greater height if the lot exceeds a certain square footage. • Allow an increase in height only through the Special Permit review process. Following discussion on this matter the Planning Commission was in favor of utilizing the special permit process for responding to property owners who wanted to build shops and garages taller than the permitted 18 feet. The County utilizes the special permit process for permitting shops and garages with heights greater than 18 feet. Using the same process in the City would create greater consistency for development regulations between the City and County. The proposed ordinance attached hereto provides for the special permit review as suggested by the Planning Commission and also creates an additional list of review items to assist with developing conclusions and conditions necessary for approving greater building heights for accessory structures. FINDINGS 1) The City annexed 608 acres of Riverview on January 1, 2013. 2) Approximately 1,400 acres of Riverview remain in the County but are located within the Pasco Urban Growth Boundary. 1 3) The Riverview Annexation Area # 2 was primarily zoned RS-20 to preserve the development patterns of the area. 4) Large shops and detached garages are a customarily found within the Riverview area and on large lots within the City. 5) The current zoning regulations limit the height of shops and detached garages to 18 feet. 6) County zoning regulations permit shops and detached garages to be over 18 feet high provided a special permit has been granted. 7) The Growth Management Act encourages consistency between City and County development regulations within the Urban Growth Boundary. RECOMMENDATION MOTION: I move the Planning Commission adopt the findings of fact as contained in the June 20, 2013 staff memo on Code Amendments for PMC Chapter 25.58. MOTION: I move the Planning Commission recommend the City Council adopt the proposed Code Amendments modifying PMC Chapters 25.22, PMC 25.24 and PMC 25.86 as attached to the June 20, 2010 staff memo to the Planning Commission. MEMORANDUM DATE: May 16, 2013 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Dave McDonald, City Planner SUBJECT: Accessory Structure Heights (MF# CA2413-0031 On January I st of this year the City annexed 608 acres of land located in West Pasco (Riverview Annexation Area # 2) generally between Road 68 and Road 52 south of the FCID Canal and north of Sylvester Street. Over 500 dwelling units were included in this area. Much of the annexation area is developed with low- density single-family homes on large suburban lots. The area was zoned mostly RS-20 following the annexation in an effort to protect the suburban nature of the area. Due to the size of the properties and suburban nature of the area it is not uncommon to find properties with large detached garages and shops. The current City zoning standards limit detached garages/shops heights to 18 feet and in no case can a shop be built higher than the house it shares a lot with. If a shop is to be built on a lot with a house that is only 14 feet tall the shop height will be limited to 14 feet. The County zoning standards also permit detached garages/shops to a height of 18 feet. There is no limit based on the height of the house. Additionally, the County permits a height greater than 18 feet through the approval of a special permit. Several inquiries have been made by recently annexed property owners on what options are available to allow a shop to be taller than the 18 foot limitation. Currently the only means of exceeding the accessory building height limit is to attach the shop/garage to a house making the garage part of the house thereby eliminating the height restriction, The overall height limitation within the zoning district still applies. Most people do not review this as an option because it adds expense to the project or requires modification to their home. The purpose for the shop height limitation was to protect the integrity and nature of single-family zoning districts. Residential zoning districts are the most restrictive zoning districts in the city and are designed to protect the value of property. Single-family dwellings are the principle or primary uses permitted on low-density or suburban lots. The dwelling must be the prominent feature on a lot. Accessory buildings are subordinate to the principle use. Permitting shops to be taller or large than a house on the same I lot causes the shop to be the dominate feature turning the intent of the zoning regulations upside down. The height limitations on accessory structures was placed in the code as a result of homeowner complaints about tall and over bearing garage/shop built in neighboring back yards. The neighbors perceived large garages as a detriment to the character and value of their residential neighborhood. This reaction is not uncommon. As the Planning Commission will recall early last year a property owner submitted a letter of complaint to the Planning Office about the height and size of a shop/garage that was constructed on the lot behind his house. The large shop was viewed as something obnoxious and "reminiscent of an industrial complex, not a residential neighborhood". The problem with the excessively large garages/shops is more acute in neighborhoods with smaller lots. The scale and bulk of a large garage in relationship to a small lot makes the garage overbearing and decreases the aesthetic appeal of a neighborhood. The open feeling one expects to find in a residential neighborhood is diminished by the large garages. Permitting the construction of these oversized accessory structures is counter to the purposes of the zoning ordinance. The zoning ordinance was enacted to provide open space for light and air and to prevent the overcrowding of land. It is not uncommon for staff to receive complaints about the size and height of garages and shop in RS-12 zones. The complaint about the garage discussed in the paragraph above was from a neighborhood with 12,000 square foot lots. The issues of architectural scale and bulk become less of a concern as the size of lots increase. Larger lots afford greater distances between houses and accessory buildings eliminating some of the aesthetic problems experienced with the smaller lots including, 12,000 square foot lots. In addition to inquiries made to staff about how to build shops beyond the 18 foot limit the City Council has also received similar inquires. As a result the Planning Commission is again being asked to review the matter. In reviewing this matter the Planning Commission may want to consider the following: • Do nothing and keep the height limitation in place. • Increase the height limit but keep it under the maximum allowed in the district. • Allow a greater height if a larger setback is provided. • Allow a greater height if the lot exceeds a certain square footage. • Allow an increase in height only through the Special Permit review process. This matter has been scheduled for a public hearing on May 16th. While the Special Permit process may be the simplest option to pursue, other options listed above may also have some merit. Staff is recommending the scheduled public hearing be opened and treated more like a workshop to provide staff with some direction to assist with preparing a code amendment. The hearing could then be continued until the Junc meeting at which time a code amendment could be considered. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE relating to zoning and amending PMC Title 25 dealing with the height of shops and detached garages in RS-20 and RS-12 Districts. WHEREAS, cities have the responsibility to regulate and control the physical development within their borders and ensure the public health, safety and welfare are maintained; and, WHEREAS, the City of Pasco has zoning regulations that encourage orderly growth and development of the City; and, WHEREAS, from time to time, the City Council causes the zoning regulations to be reviewed to ensure they fulfill their intended purposes; and, WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that to further the purposes of maintaining the public health, safety and general welfare community, it is necessary to amend PMC Title 25; NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section I. That Section 25.22.030 of the Pasco Municipal Code be and the same is hereby amended to read as follows: 25.22.030 PERMITTED ACCESSORY USES. The following uses shall be permitted as accessory to a permitted use in the RS-20 suburban district: (1) Detached residential garages as defined in Section 25.12.200, provided they do not exceed the height of 18 feet and are no larger than 1,200 square feet in area. A greater height ma be approved by special permi t; (2) Home occupations as defined in Section.25.12.220; (3) Storage buildings not exceeding 480 square feet of gross floor area and fifteen feet in height; provided no container storage, as defined in Section 25.12.430, shall be permitted. For each additional 20,000 square feet of lot area, the gross floor area of storage sheds can be increased by 400 square feet; (4) Agricultural uses (limited), as defined in Section 25.12.040, (except that the keeping of animals shall be permitted on parcels consisting of ten thousand (10,000) square feet over and above an area equal in size to 12,000 square feet set aside for the dwelling on the parcel); (5) One animal unit (as defined in Section 25.12.065) shall be allowed for each full ten thousand square foot increment of land over and above an area equal in size to 12,000 square feet set aside for the dwelling on the same parcel; provided that all barns, barnyards, chicken houses, or corrals shall be located not less than twenty-five feet from a public roadway and not less than ten feet from any adjoining property held under separate ownership; and provided said number of chickens, fowl or rabbits does not exceed 2 animal units; (6) The keeping of dogs and cats, provided such number of animals does not exceed three dogs and three cats; (7) Family day care home in conformance with WAC 388-73 as now existing and as amended and PMC Chapter 25.66; and (8) Accessory dwellings. (9) For lots with a minimum of 5,000 square feet but less than 22,000 square feet and containing only one single-family dwelling unit, the keeping of dogs, cats, rabbits, and chicken hens, provided such number of animals does not exceed three dogs, and/or three cats, and/or three rabbits and/or three chicken hens, the total number of animals not to exceed six; in all cases, animals shall not be allowed to roam or fly to other properties; roosters are not allowed. Structures related to rabbits and/or chicken hens, such as rabbit hutches and/or chicken coops, must be at least ten (10) feet from any property line, may not exceed six (6) feet in height and thirty (30) square feet in size, and must be located behind the rear line of the dwelling. Property owners shall not allow such structures to become a nuisance due to noise or odor. Section 2. That Section 25.24.030. of the Pasco Municipal Code be and the same is hereby amended to read as follows: 25.24.030 PERMITTED ACCESSORY USES. The following uses shall be permitted as accessory to a permitted use in the R-S-12 suburban district: (1) Detached residential garages as defined in Section 25.12.200, provided they do not exceed 18 feet in height and 1,200 square feet in area. For properties with 20,000 square feet or more a greater height maybe approved by pecial permit; (2) Home occupations as defined in Section 25.12.220; (3) Storage buildings not exceeding 260 square feet of gross floor area and fifteen feet in height; provided no container storage, as defined in Section 25,12.430, shall be permitted. For each additional 12,000 square feet of lot area the gross floor area of storage sheds can be increased by 260 square feet; (4) Agricultural uses (limited), as defined in Section 25.12.040, (except that the keeping of animals shall be permitted on parcels consisting of ten thousand (10,000) square feet over and above an area equal in size to 12,000 square feet set aside for the dwelling on the parcel); (5) One animal unit (as defined in Section 25.12.065) shall be allowed for each full ten thousand square foot increment of land over and above an area equal in size to 12,000 square feet set aside for the dwelling on the same parcel; provided that all barns, barnyards, chicken houses, or corrals shall be located not less than twenty-five feet from a public roadway and not less than ten feet from any adjoining property held under separate ownership; and provided said number of chickens, fowl or rabbits does not exceed 2 animal units; (6) The keeping of dogs and cats, provided such number of animals does not exceed three dogs and three cats; (7) Family day care home in conformance with WAC 388-73 as now existing and as amended and Chapter 25.66; (8) Accessory dwellings; and (9) For lots with a minimum of 5,000 square feet but less than 22,000 square feet and containing only one single-family dwelling unit, the keeping of dogs, cats, rabbits, and chicken hens, provided such number of animals does not exceed three dogs, and/or three cats, and/or three rabbits and/or three chicken hens, the total number of animals not to exceed six; in all cases, animals shall not be allowed to roam or fly to other properties; roosters are not allowed. Structures related to rabbits and/or chicken hens, such as rabbit hutches and/or chicken coops, must be at least ten (10) feet from any property line, may not exceed six (6) feet in height and thirty (30) square feet in size, and must be located behind the rear line of the dwelling. Rabbit hutches and/or chicken coops adjacent an alley may be placed within five (5) feet of the alley line provided there are no openings in the wall parallel to the alley. Property owners shall not allow such structures to become a nuisance due to noise or odor. Section 3, That Chapter 25.86. of the Pasco Municipal Code be and the same is hereby amended include a new section 25.86.065 to read as follows: 25.86.065 SUPPLEMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS BY PLANNING COMMISSION FOR SHOPS/GARAGES. In addition to making and entering conclusions from the record for special permits based on the criteria in 25.86.060 the Planning Commission shall consider the following for special permits dealing with increased heights for detached shops and garages: (1) Will the shop/garage match the _principle structure in design and exterior treatments such as roofing materials, siding, color, window and door openings, eave overhangs, fenestrations and other architectural features; (2) Will the existing topoogrWhy and elevation of the site and surrounding_propert y exacerbate or attenuate the height of the 12rol2osed shop/garage; (3) Will the proposal include landscaping features or berms to ameliorate the height of the shop/garage; (4) Will the shop/garage be erected on the property utilizing minimum setbacks; (5) Is the site larger than the minimum lot size requirement for the zoning district; Section 3. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect five days after passage and publication as required by law. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco, at its regular meeting of 2013. Matt Watkins Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: Debra L. CIark Leland B. Kerr City Clerk City Attorney