HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014.01.27 Council Workshop PacketAGENDA
PASCO CITY COUNCIL
Workshop Meeting 7:00 p.m. January 27, 2014
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. ROLL CALL:
(a) Pledge of Allegiance.
3. VERBAL REPORTS FROM COUNCILMEMBERS:
4. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION:
(a) Stormwater Management:
1. Agenda Report from Ahmad Qayoumi, Public Works Director dated January 22, 2014.
(b) Code Amendment (MF #CA2013 -003) Detached Shop /Garage Height and (MF #CA2013-
008) Detached Shop /Garage Floor Area:
1. Agenda Report from Shane O'Neill, Planner I dated January 16, 2014.
2. Proposed Ordinance.
3. Planning Commission memo dated 12/19/13.
(c) Code Amendment (MF #CA2013 -006) Auto Sales in C -1 Zones:
1. Agenda Report from Dave McDonald, City Planner dated January 21, 2014.
2. Proposed Ordinance.
3. Memos to the Planning Commission.
4. Planning Commission Minutes.
5. Buffer Maps for Locations of New Auto Sales Lots.
(d) Water System Extension Agreement (Canter Club Estates, Road 64):
1. Agenda Report from Mike Pawlak, City Engineer dated January 22, 2014.
2. Vicinity Map.
3. Proposed Agreement.
(e) Water System Extension Agreement (Commercial - Kahlotus Service Area):
1. Agenda Report from Mike Pawlak, City Engineer dated January 22, 2014.
2. Vicinity Map.
3. Proposed Agreement,
5. OTHER ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION:
(a)
(b)
(c)
6. EXECUTIVE SESSION:
(a)
(b)
(c)
7. ADJOURNMENT
1. 7:30 a.m., Tuesday, January 28, 7130 W. Grandridge Blvd — Tri- Cities Visitor & Convention Bureau
Board Meeting. (COUNCILMEMBER MIKE GARRISON, Rep.; TOM LARSEN, Alt.)
AGENDA REPORT NO.2
FOR: City
TO: Gary
FROM: Ahmad Qayourli, Tfub'l c Works Director
SUBJECT: Stormwater Management
I. REFERENCE(S):
January 22, 2014
Workshop Mtg.: 1/27/14
1. Powerpoint Presentation
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
01/27: Discussion
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
A) The City has two types of drainage facilities: pipes that discharge to surface waters and ground
infiltration catch basins. Most areas of the City are using the infiltration process. There are only
five drainage basins, mostly located in the downtown area, that have surface water discharges
to the Columbia River. Discharge from these five basins is controlled by the Eastern
Washington Phase II Municipal Stormwater National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
( NPDES) permit program.
B) The new 2014 -2019 Eastern Washington Phase 11 Municipal Stormwater NPDES Permit will
add several program components. Two of the key elements and their deadlines are: 1) Post
Construction Stormwater Management — Continue education and training, compliance
strategies, and enforcement actions. Update Stormwater Ordinance to allow Low Impact
Development (LID) by December 31, 2017, and 2) Effectiveness Studies — Eastern Washington
permittees must collaborate to create a total of 8 to 12 detailed effectiveness study proposals to
submit to Ecology for review /approval. After approval, the permittees must create Quality
Assurance Project Plans (QAPPs), implement the studies, and submit the findings and
recommendations report to Ecology July 19, 2019.
C) There is every indication that the 2019 NPDES permit will include monitoring requirements
resulting from the outcome of the effectiveness studies and more stringent water quality
standards based upon fish consumption rates. Compliance with these two potential additions to
the 2019 permit has the potential to become extremely expensive.
V. DISCUSSION:
A) The City needs to plan for long -term stormwater improvements to meet the potential impacts of
the upcoming regulatory requirements required by the Department of Ecology's NPDES permit.
B) It is important to eliminate all City -wide surface water discharges to the Columbia River and
reduce the City's exposure to fines and expensive mitigation measures that accompany
Ecology's NPDES Permit.
C) The City has been awarded the $170,000 grant dollars received in 2013, to begin developing
engineering plans to eliminate surface water discharges to the Columbia River. The design
efforts will be performed both in -house and by consultants. This would result into a CIP
program that would entail a one -time, major improvement project that will take two to three
years to accomplish and will reduce the City's exposure to additional NPDES mitigation
measures in 2019 and beyond.
4(a)
AGENDA REPORT
FOR: City Council January 16, 2014
TO: GaryCrutc anager WorkshopMtg: 1/27/14
Rick White,
Community & conomic Development Director
FROM: Shane O'Neill, Planner I
SUBJECT: Code Amendment: (MF # CA2013 -003) Detached Shop /Garage Height and (MF #
CA2013 -008) Detached Shop /Garage Floor Area
I. REFERENCES
1. Proposed Ordinance
2. Planning Commission memo dated 12/19/2013
H. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
1/27: Discussion
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
NONE
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
A. Earlier this year the Council considered a number of zoning text amendments. These text
amendments included provisions for special permit review for requests to construct
detached shops and garages in in excess of eighteen (18) feet in height for properties
located in RS -12 and RS -20 zones. During the final stages of adopting a broader Zoning
Code update Council directed the Planning Commission to further analyze the height and
size regulations for detached residential shops and garages in the remaining residential
zones.
B. The Planning Commission held a series of workshops in 2013 to develop a
recommendation dealing with increasing the height of detached residential shops and
garages. Following the October workshop the Planning Commission held a public
hearing in November to consider a code amendment to increase the maximum height of
detached residential shops and garages in the RS -1, R -1, R -2, R -3 and R -4 zoning
districts on lots over 12,000 square feet by way of special permit review.
C. During the December 5, 2013 Council Workshop Council recommended the Planning
Commission also consider including provisions to allow an increase in floor area for
detached residential shops /garages in the R -2, R -3 and R -4 zones by way of special
permit review.
D. At their regular December 19, 2013 meeting the Planning Commission recommended
City Council amend zoning language of the R -2, R -3 and R -4 zones to allow an increase
in floor area of up to two- hundred (200) square feet for detached residential garages on
lots 12,000 square feet or greater by way of special permit review.
V. DISCUSSION:
A. The Planning Commission saw the special permit process as the appropriate tool to use in
reviewing increases in garage floor area in the R -2, R -3 and R -4 zones; particularly to
analyze impacts to neighboring properties.
B. The proposed ordinance also includes a revision to PMC Chapter 25.86 Supplemental
Findings of Fact and Conclusions by Planning Commission for Sho /n Garages, to
reference the criteria used for requests of an increase in floor area through the special
permit process.
4(b)
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE relating to zoning and amending PMC Title 25 dealing with the
height and area of detached shops and garages in R -S -1, R -1, R -2, R -3 and R -4
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 father 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 1. 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 R -S -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 1,600 square feet in area. For each
additional 20,000 square feet of lot area, the gross floor area of detached shops and garages can
be increased by 400 square feet. A greater height may be approved by special permit based upon
the review criteria listed in Sections 25.86.060 and 25.86.065;
(2) Home occupations as defined in Section 25.12.220;
(3) Storage buildings cumulatively 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
Page 1 of 7
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;
(8) Accessory dwellings.
(9) Family home preschool in conformance with PMC Chapter 25.66; and
(10) 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 each additional 12,000 square feet
of lot area, the gross floor area of detached shops and garages can be increased by 260 square
feet. A greater height may be approved by special permit b_ ased upon the review criteria listed in
Sections 25.86.060 and 25.86.065;
(2) Home occupations as defined in Section 25.12.220;
(3) Storage buildings cumulatively 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;
Page 2 of 7
(7) Family day care home in conformance with WAC 388 -73 as now existing and as
amended and Chapter 25.66;
(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. 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; and
(10) Family home preschool in conformance with PMC Chapter 25.66.
Section 3. That Section 25.26.030 of the Pasco Municipal Code be and the same is
hereby amended to read as follows:
25.26.030 PERMITTED ACCESSORY USES. The following uses shall be permitted as
accessory to a permitted use in the R -S -1 suburban district:
(1) Detached residential garages as defined in Section 25.12.200, provided they do
not exceed 15 feet in height and 1,000 square feet in area; except on lots that are 12,000 square
feet or more the height may be increased by 3 feet and the area may increase by 200 square feet;-.
On lots over 12,000 square feet in area detached residential garages in excess of 18 feet in height
may be permitted by pecial Permit based upon the review criteria listed in Sections 25 86 060
and 25.86.065;
(2) Home occupations as defined in Section 25.12.220;
(3) Storage buildings cumulatively not exceeding 200 square feet of gross floor area
and fifteen feet in height; provided no container storage, as defined in Section 25.12.430, will be
permitted;
(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 or abutting 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;
Page 3 of 7
(8) Accessory dwellings;
(9) Family home preschool in conformance with PMC Chapter 25.66;
(10) 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 4. That Section 25.28.030 of the Pasco Municipal Code be and the same is
hereby amended to read as follows:
25.28.030 PERMITTED ACCESSORY USES. The following uses shall be permitted as
accessory to a permitted use in the R -1 low density residential district:
(1) Detached residential garages as defined in Section 25.12.200, provided they do
not exceed 15 feet in height and 1,000 square feet in area; except on lots that are 12,000 square
feet or more the height may be increased by 3 feet and the area may increase by 200 square feet;.
On lots over 12,000 square feet in area detached residential garages in excess of 18 feet in height
may be permitted by special permit based upon the review criteria listed in Sections 25 86 060
and 25.86.065,
(2) Home occupations, as defined by Section 25.12.220;
(3) Storage buildings cumulatively not exceeding two hundred 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;
(4) The renting of rooms for lodging purposes only; provided, however, such
accommodations shall not exceed two persons in a single - family dwelling. One off - street parking
space, per roomer, must be provided in addition to the requirement set forth under Section
25.78.170(5);
(5) The keeping of dogs and cats, provided such number of animals does not exceed
three dogs and three cats;
(6) Family day care homes in conformance with WAC 388 -73 as now existing and as
amended and Chapter 25.66;
(7) Accessory Dwellings;
(8) On lots with a minimum of 5,000 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; and
(9) Family home preschool in conformance with PMC Chapter 25.66.
Page 4 of 7
Section 5. That Section 25.34.030 of the Pasco Municipal Code be and the same is
hereby amended to read as follows:
25.34.030 PERMITTED ACCESSORY USES. The following uses shall be permitted as
accessory to a permitted use in the R -2 district:
(1) Detached single family residential garages, as defined in Section 25.12.200,
provided they do not exceed fifteen feet in height and 1,000 square feet in area;. On lots over
12,000 square feet in area detached residential garages in excess of 15 feet in height and/or
increase in floor area of up to 200 square feet may be permitted by special permit based upon the
review criteria listed in Sections 25.86.060 and 25.86.065•
(2) Home occupations as defined by Section 25.12.220;
(3) Storage buildings cumulatively not exceeding two hundred 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;
(4) The keeping of dogs and cats provided such number of animals does not exceed
three dogs and three cats;
(5) Family day care homes in conformance with WAC 388 -73 as now existing and as
amended and Chapter 25.66;
(6) The renting of rooms for lodging purposes only; provided, however, such
accommodations shall not exceed two persons in a single family dwelling. One off - street
parking space per roomer must be provided in addition to the requirement set forth under Section
25.78.170(5);
(7) Family home preschool in conformance with PMC Chapter 25.66;
(8) Accessory dwellings in single family homes; and
(9) On lots with a minimum of 5,000 square feet and containing only one single -
family dwelling unit, the keeping of up to three rabbits or three chicken hens for personal use,
provided the total number of animals (including dogs, cats, rabbits, and chicken hens) does not
exceed six; in all cases, animals shall not be allowed to roam or fly to other properties; roosters
are not allowed.
Section 6. That Section 25.36.030 of the Pasco Municipal Code be and the same is
hereby amended to read as follows:
25.36.030 PERMITTED ACCESSORY USES. The following uses shall be permitted as
accessory to a permitted used in the R -3 district:
(1) Detached single family residential garages, as defined in Section 25.12.200,
provided they do not exceed fifteen feet in height and 1,000 square feet in area;. On lots over
12,000 square feet in area detached residential garages in excess of 15 feet in height and /or
increase in floor area of up to 200 square feet may be permitted by special permit based upon the
review criteria listed in Sections 25.86.060 and 25.86.065•
(2) Home occupations as defined by Section 25.12.220;
(3) Storage buildings cumulatively not exceeding two hundred 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;
Page 5 of 7
(4) The keeping of dogs and cats, provided such number of animals does not exceed
three dogs and three cats;
(5) Family day care homes in conformance with WAC 388 -73 as now existing and as
amended and Chapter 25.66;
(6) The renting of rooms for lodging purposes only, provided such accommodations
shall not exceed two persons in a single - family dwelling. One off - street parking space per
roomer must be provided in- addition to the requirement set forth under Section 25.78.170(5);
(7) Family home preschool in conformance with PMC Chapter 25.66;
(8) Accessory dwellings in single family homes; and
(9) On lots with a minimum of 5,000 square feet and containing only one single -
family dwelling unit, the keeping of up to three rabbits or three chicken hens for personal use,
provided the total number of animals (including dogs, cats, rabbits, and chicken hens) does not
exceed six; in all cases, animals shall not be allowed to roam or fly to other properties; roosters
are not allowed.
Section 7. That Section 25.38.030 of the Pasco Municipal Code be and the same is
hereby amended to read as follows:
25.38.030 PERMITTED ACCESSORY USES. The following uses shall be permitted as
accessory to a permitted use in the R -4 district:
(1) Detached single family residential garages, as defined in Section 25.12.200,
provided they do not exceed fifteen feet in height and 1,000 square feet in area;. On lots over
12,000 square feet in area detached residential garages in excess of 15 feet in height and /or
increase in floor area of up to 200 square feet may be permitted by special permit based upon the
review criteria listed in Sections 25.86.060 and 25.86.065•
(2) Home occupations as defined by Section 25.12.220;
(3) Storage buildings cumulatively not exceeding two hundred 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;
(4) The keeping of dogs and cats, provided such number of animals does not exceed
three dogs and three cats;
(5) Family day care homes in conformance with WAC 388 -73 as now existing and as
amended and Chapter 25.66;
(6) The renting of rooms for lodging purposes only, provided such accommodations
shall not exceed two persons in a single - family dwelling. One off - street parking space per
roomer must be provided in addition to the requirements set forth under Section 25.78.170(5);
(7) Family home preschool in conformance with PMC Chapter 25.66;
(8) Accessory dwellings in single family homes; and
(9) On lots with a minimum of 5,000 square feet and containing only one single -
family dwelling unit, the keeping of up to three rabbits or three chicken hens for personal use,
provided the total number of animals (including dogs, cats, rabbits, and chicken hens) does not
exceed six; in all cases, animals shall not be allowed to roam or fly to other properties; roosters
are not allowed.
Page 6 of 7
Section 8. That Section 25.86.065 of the Pasco Municipal Code be and the same is
hereby amended 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
and/or floor area 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 topography and elevation of the site and surrounding property
exacerbate or attenuate the height of the proposed shop /garage;
(3) Will the proposal include landscaping features or berms to ameliorate the height
and/or floor area 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 9. 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
.2014.
Matt Watkins
Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Debra L. Clark
City Clerk
Leland B. Kerr
City Attorney
Page 7 of 7
MEMORANDUM
DATE: December 19, 2013
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Shane O Neill, Planner I
SUBJECT: Accessory Structure Floor Area (MF# CA2013 -008)
This year Council adopted a broad update to the Zoning Code. The update
included increases to the maximum floor area allowed for detached shops and
garages in the RS -20, RS -12, RS -1 and R -1 zoning districts. Specifically, in the
RS -20 zone the allowable floor area was increased from 1,200 square feet to 1,600
square feet and a provision was added to allow an additional 400 square feet on
parcels over 40,000 square feet. In the RS -12 zone the generally permitted
maximum allowable floor area remained 1,200 square feet but a provision was
added to allow an additional 260 square feet on parcels over 24,000 square feet. In
the RS -1 and R -1 zones a provision was added allowing the floor area of shops and
garages to be increased by 200 square feet on parcels over 12,000 square feet.
While reviewing a separate matter dealing with maximum allowable heights for
shops and garages, Council inquired as to why floor area increases similar to those
discussed above, were not provided for the multi - family zoning districts (R -2, R -3
and R -4) on lots containing 12,000 square feet or more. The purpose of this memo
is to gain the Planning Commission's view on the matter of detached shop and
garage floor area in multi - family zones and whether or not an increase in floor area
should be provided based on parcel size and if so, what parcel size, how much
floor area and if such an increase in shop /garage area should be subject to review
through the special permit process.
It is important to know that the multi - family zones have a smaller minimum parcel
size of 5,000 square feet and those larger parcels with a multi - family zoning are
relatively rare. To help gauge the implication of a code amendment staff has
included two maps illustrating all parcels zoned R -2, R -3 and R -4 which are
12,000 square feet in area or greater and which are 10,000 square feet in area or
greater. The larger parcels shown on the maps contain larger apartment complexes
and the smaller parcels ore those which will be primarily affected by a code
amendment.
Given the small "pool" of potential R -2, R -3 and R -4 parcels with lot areas greater
than 12,000 square feet and the ability to review an application for a larger
detached shop /garage through a special permit; staff recommends that the
Planning Commission concur with the opportunity to use the special permit
process for review of larger shops /garages in the R -2, R -3 and R -4 districts with
lots over 12,000 square feet in area.
AGENDA REPORT
FOR: City Council January 21, 2013
TO: Gary Crutchfiel3 nager Workshop Mtg: 1/27/14
Rick White,
Community & Economic Development Director pvv
FROM: Dave McDonald, City Planner
SUBJECT: Code Amendment: (MF # CA2013 -006) Auto Sales in C -1 Zones
I. REFERENCES
1. Proposed Ordinance
2. Memos to the Planning Commission
3. Planning Commission Minutes
4. Buffer Maps for Locations of new Auto Sales Lots
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
1/27: Discussion
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
NONE
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
A. In May of 2013 the Council held a close record hearing on an appeal of a Planning
Commission recommendation related to a used automobile sales lot in a C -1 zone on
Burden Boulevard. Following this hearing the Council asked the Planning Commission
to review the special permit code provisions dealing with auto sales in C -1 zones to
determine if the code needed to be updated.
B. Following the Council's instructions the Planning Commission held a series of
workshops in the fall of 2013 followed by a public hearing in November and December.
At the conclusion of the final hearing the Planning Commission recommended a few
modifications for the code dealing with auto sales in C -I zones. The proposed ordinance
attached under the references contains the recommended code language.
V. DISCUSSION:
A. The conditional use provisions allowing auto sales lots in C -1 zones through special
permit review were added to the code in the early 1980's. The intent at the time was to
assist with the adaptive reuse of old service stations generally located on the comers of
arterial streets. The community problem of vacant service station at key intersections has
been significantly reduced and the special permit provisions have been used to assist with
the development of vacant land in the central core of the community. Para Auto Sales at
10`h and "A" Street and Inca Auto Sales at 10 h and Ainsworth are both examples of
vacant C -1 parcels that have developed as the result of special permit approvals.
B. Since 1981 there have been several hundred acres of land added to the C -1 inventory.
Much of it in and around the Road 68 and Road 100 interchanges. The commercial areas
around these two interchanges were never initially intended to be developed with used
auto sales lots. Vacant commercial land in these areas is still in the process of being
developed. There are no service station properties in these developing areas that are in
need of redevelopment.
C. Taking in consideration the original intent of the code and development patterns of the
community the Planning Commission developed separate recommendations for the
developing portions of the community verses the central core area. Essentially for those
areas located east of Highway 395 the Commission maintained the provision for special
4(c)
permits for properties near the intersection of two arterial streets or adjacent to a single
arterial street and added a provision related to under - utilized land. For the developing
areas west of Highway 395 the Planning Commission recommended provisions for the
development of new auto dealerships only.
D. Following Council review and discussion staff will prepare a final ordinance for
adoption.
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING PMC TITLE 25 DEALING SPECIAL PERMITS FOR AUTO
SALES IN THE C -1 DISTRCIT.
WHEREAS, cities have the responsibility to regulate and control 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 encourage orderly growth and
development of the City; and,
WHEREAS, the zoning regulations contain special permit provisions for certain uses
that require public review and city council approval prior to locating in the city; and,
WHEREAS, PMC 25.42 has contained special permit provisions for retail automobile
sales in the C -1 District; and,
WHEREAS, the special permit provision for automobile sales in the C -1 District was
included in the code in 1981 to address a specific concern about underutilized and vacant service
station properties within the city; and,
WHEREAS, the city has changed considerably since 1981 and the thirty years old code
provisions for automobile sales in the C -1 District by special permit no longer addresses the
original intent of the code provisions; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission determined redevelopment needs and use of
vacant property within the established central core of the community east of Highway 395 are
different than the needs of the new developing areas of the community west of Highway 395;
and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission develop a code amendment that recognizes the
different development needs of the established core of the city verses the needs of the newly
developing areas of the city; and,
WHEREAS, on October 17, 2013 the Planning Commission held a public workshop to
review the costs of park construction. Information about said workshop was made available to
the public through the City's website; and,
WHEREAS, on November 21, 2013 the Planning Commission held a public hearing to
consider amending Special Permit provisions for Auto Sales uses in the C -1 District. Notice of
said hearing being provided in the Tri-City Herald and through the City's website; and,
WHEREAS, on January 27, 2014 the City Council conducted public workshops to
review the proposed Special Permit amendments; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that to further the purposes of maintaining
a quality 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 1. That PMC Chapter 25.12 be and the same is hereby amended to include a
new Subsection 25.12.087 to read as follows:
25.12.087 AUTO DEALERSHIP NEW "New Auto Dealership" means a business that is
franchised or sanctioned through a dealership contract with an automaker or its sales subsidiary
(eg. Ford, Chrysler, Honda, BMW etc.) to sell new vehicles at the retail level. Said dealership
must include an on -site building greater than 8,000 square feet, with offices, a showroom, a parts
department, service bays and indoor maintenance facilities. No more than thirty -three percent of
a New Auto Dealership sales lot may be devoted to the display of pre -owned vehicles.
Section 2. That PMC Chapter 25.12 be and the same is hereby amended to include a
new Subsection 25.12.462 to read as follows:
25.12.462 UNDER- UTILIZED PROPERTY "Under- utilized property" means vacant land or
land with one or more vacant buildings which have been vacant for the past 10 consecutive
years.
Section 3. That PMC Chapter 25.42 be and the same is hereby amended to read as
follows:
25.42.040 PERMITTED CONDITIONAL USES. The following uses are permitted
subject to the approval of a special permit:
(1) Dwelling units, provided the units are within the principal building, are all above
the ground floor of said building, and the ground floor of said building is designed or intended to
be used for a use permitted in Section 25.42.010. However, a building originally constructed on-
site for residential purposes may be utilized as a dwelling unit without a special permit provided:
(a) The structure does not have to be reconstructed, altered or converted from
an office /commercial use such that the cost of the alteration exceeds 25% of the assessed
value of the structure at the time of the alteration.
(2) Retail automobile sales, including rental or lease, provided the property is:
(a) Located east of Highway 395 and is;
(i) "Under- utilized property" as defined in 25.12;
(a) —(ii) Adjacent the intersection of two arterial streets, or adjacent a single
arterial street; provided it is not adjacent to or across a public street right -of -way from a
residential district not be leeated e4eser the inn feet t any existing ,
iii Not located closer than 300 feet to any existing car lot.
(b) Located west of Highway 395 and north of I -182 provided any point of the
property is within 1,000 of the I -182 WSDOT right -of -way for a distance of 2,500
feet east and west of the center line of Road 68 and Road 100713roadmoor
Boulevard, except properties zoned for residential uses and is:
(i) A new auto dealership
(ii) "Under- utilized property" as defined in 25.12, •
(3) Parking lots;
Section 4. - 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
.2014.
Matt Watkins
Mayor
ATTEST:
Debra L. Clark
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Leland B. Kerr
City Attorney
3
MEMORANDUM
DATE: September 19, 2013
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Dave McDonald, City Planner
SUBJECT: Auto Sales in C -1 Zones (MF# CA2013 -006)
Earlier this year the Planning Commission held a hearing to consider an
application (Warner Auto Sales) for an auto sales lot in the 6300 block of
Burden Boulevard. Public testimony at the hearing suggested there was an
unintended flaw in the code that made it possible for auto sales businesses to
apply for a special permit in any C -1 area of the community, counter to the
original intent of the code. The City Council recognized this during their
closed record hearing on the Warner Auto Sales application and asked the
Planning Commission to review the code provisions related to specials
permits for auto sales uses in C -1 zones for possible amendment.
The C -1 zone was established to provide locations for commercial activities to
meet the retail shopping and service needs of the community. Banks,
restaurants, offices, and retail stores are some of the most common uses
permitted within the C -1 zone. These businesses typically conduct business
activities indoors.
Auto sales lots and auto dealerships are permitted uses in the C -3 zone.
Other permitted uses within the C -3 zone include mobile home and trailer
sales, heavy machinery sales, lumber sales, contractor's yards and similar
uses where business activities often occur outdoors. The auto sales use was
included in the C -3 zone because it was deemed to be a higher intensity use
that would not be appropriate in a typical C -1 zone. C -1 zones are often used
as an intermediate zone between more intense commerce areas (such as C -3)
and low- intensity uses such as residential.
The special permit provisions for auto sales in the C -1 zone were added to the
code in the early 1980's. It was about the time when many of the old service
stations in town were closing. After closing, it was difficult for the old gas
stations to be reused because they were built for a single purpose related to
servicing vehicles. Most of these old service stations were located on the
corner of two busy arterial streets; in the central core of the community. In an
effort to assist with the reuse of the old gas stations the zoning code was
amended with narrow locational requirements to ensure only the old service
stations would qualify for a special permit. The qualifying requirements are
listed in PMC 25.42.040(2) as follows:
(a) Adjacent the intersection of two arterial streets, or
(b) Adjacent a single arterial street; provided it is not adjacent to or
across a public street right -of -way from a residential district, and
would not be located closer than 300 feet to any existing car lot.
The community has changed considerably since 1981. Many of the old
service stations have been replaced with new buildings or have been
transitioned to uses other than auto sales. The need for the 1981 code
provision is now significantly diminished. The community problem (vacant
service station properties) addressed by the code no longer exists. Another
change that has occurred in the City since 1981 is the addition of several
hundred acres of land to the C -1 inventory. The developing C -1 properties
around Road 68 and Road 100 were never intended to be developed with auto
sales lots (except for properties on Saint Thomas Drive). There are no vacant
service stations in need of redevelopment in the I -182 area. Vacant
commercial land in this area is still in the process of being developed.
The Planning Commission should determine if there is a need to retain the
current special permit provisions or whether or not they need to be modified
to support the intent of helping to develop underutilized properties within the
central core of the community. An example of a recent use of the special
permit process for assisting development of underutilized property is the
development of Para's Auto Sales at the corner of 10th Avenue and "A" Street.
Staff has scheduled a workshop for the Planning Commission meeting of
September 19, 2013 for discuss the need to amend or refine the special
permit provisions for auto sales in the C -1 zone.
2
MEMORANDUM
DATE: October 17, 2013
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Dave McDonald, City Planner
SUBJECT: Auto Sales in C -1 Zones (MF# CA2013 -006)
At the last regular meeting the Planning Commission held a workshop to
discuss the need to modify the special permit provisions related to the
location of auto sales lots in C -1 areas of the city. The City Council had
earlier asked the Commission to review the matter in light of the recent
hearing for the Warner Auto Sales lot proposed for the 6300 block of Burden
Boulevard.
It was explained last month that the special permit provisions for auto sales
in the C -1 zone were added to the code in the early 1980's. It was about the
time when many of the old service stations in town were closing. After closing,
it was difficult for the old gas stations to be reused because they were built
for a single purpose related to servicing vehicles. Most of these old service
stations were located on the corner of two busy arterial streets; in the central
core of the community. In an effort to assist with the reuse of the old gas
stations the zoning code was amended with narrow locational requirements to
ensure only the old service stations would qualify for a special permit. The
qualifying requirements are listed in PMC 25.42.040(2) as follows:
(a) Adjacent the intersection of two arterial streets, or
(b) Adjacent a single arterial street; provided it is not adjacent to or
across a public street right -of -way from a residential district, and
would not be located closer than 300 feet to any existing car lot.
The community has changed considerably since 1981. Many of the old
service stations have been replaced with new buildings or have been
transitioned to uses other than auto sales. The need for the 1981 code
provision is now significantly diminished. The community problem (vacant
service station properties) addressed by the code no longer exists. Another
change that has occurred in the City since 1981 is the addition of several
hundred acres of land to the C -1 inventory. The developing C -1 properties
around Road 68 and Road 100 were never intended to be developed with auto
sales lots. There are no vacant service stations in need of redevelopment in
the I -182 area. Vacant commercial land in this area is still in the process of
being developed.
Much of the Planning Commission's discussion on this issue centered on
encouraging the use of under - utilized properties for auto sales lots in the C -1
zone and limiting special permits to areas that have been skipped over by
development. On the other hand there was some minor interest in providing
standards to permit "quality" auto sales facilities in some of the developing
areas of the community.
Staff was asked to prepare a definition of the term "under- utilized" and
prepare code language that would allow under - utilized properties within
geographic areas to qualify for special permit applications. Staff was also
encouraged to provide language that ensures areas that permitted auto sales
would not become overrun with used car sales lot.
The attached proposed code amendment modifies the current code by limiting
special permit applications for new and used cars to under - utilized properties
located east of Highway 395. The spatial requirement separating proposed
car lots by 300 feet was retained to prevent the over concentration of sales
lots in one area. In addition staff has included some standards, for
discussion purposes, that would allow "new auto dealerships" to apply for
special permits in the vicinity of Road 68 and Road 100.
2
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
November 21, 2013
TO:
Planning Commission
FROM:
Dave McDonald, City Planner
SUBJECT:
Auto Sales in C -1 Zones (MF# CA2013 -006)
During the past two meetings the Planning Commission held workshops to
discuss the need to modify the special permit provisions related to the
location of auto sales lots in C -1 areas of the city. The City Council had
earlier asked the Commission to review the matter in light of the recent
hearing for the Warner Auto Sales lot proposed for the 6300 block of Burden
Boulevard.
As previously explained the special permit provisions for auto sales in the C -1
zone were added to the code in the early 1980's. It was about the time when
many of the old service stations in town were closing. After closing, it was
difficult for the old gas stations to be reused because they were built for a
single purpose related to servicing vehicles. Most of these old service stations
were located on the corner of two busy arterial streets; in the central core of
the community. In an effort to assist with the reuse of the old gas stations the
zoning code was amended with narrow locational requirements to ensure only
the old service stations would qualify for a special permit. The qualifying
requirements are listed in PMC 25.42.040(2) as follows:
(a) Adjacent the intersection of two arterial streets, or
(b) Adjacent a single arterial street; provided it is not adjacent to or
across a public street right -of -way from a residential district, and
would not be located closer than 300 feet to any existing car lot.
The community has changed considerably since 1981. Many of the old
service stations have been replaced with new buildings or have been
transitioned to uses other than auto sales. The need for the 1981 code
provision is now significantly diminished. The community problem (vacant
service station properties) addressed by the code no longer exists. Another
change that has occurred in the City since 1981 is the addition of several
hundred acres of land to the C -1 inventory. The developing C -1 properties
around Road 68 and Road 100 were never intended to be developed with auto
sales lots. There are no vacant service stations in need of redevelopment in
1
the I -182 area. Vacant commercial land in this area is still in the process of
being developed.
Much of the Planning Commission's discussion on this issue centered on
encouraging the use of under - utilized properties for auto sales lots in the C -1
zone and limiting special permits to areas that have been skipped over by
development. On the other hand there was some interest in providing
standards to permit "quality" auto sales facilities in some of the developing
areas of the community.
Staff was asked to prepare a definition of the term "under- utilized" and
prepare code language that would allow under - utilized properties within
geographic areas to qualify for special permit applications. Staff was also
encouraged to provide language that ensures areas that permitted auto sales
would not become overrun with used car sales lot.
The attached proposed code amendment modifies the current code by limiting
special permit applications for new and used cars to under - utilized properties
located east of Highway 395. The spatial requirement separating proposed
car lots by 300 feet was retained to prevent the over concentration of sales
lots in one area. In addition some additional standards have been added to
permit new auto dealerships in limited areas around the Road 100 and Road
68 Interchanges. The new dealerships would be required to include at least
an 8,000 square foot building with their development. The attached maps
(Exhibit 1 & 2) illustrate the locations around Road 100 and Road 68 that
would permit new auto dealerships in the I -182 area by special permit review.
FINDINGS
1) In the early 1980's many of the long established services stations located
at major intersections in the city were closing.
2) Redevelopment of the closed service station proved difficult due to the
single purpose for which the service station properties were built.
3) To help address the vacant service station issue the city develop special
permit provisions within the zoning regulations in 1981 to permit the
adaptive reuse of the old service station as auto sales facilities.
4) The current special permit provisions in PMC 25.42 acted as a catalyst to
enable old service station properties to transition from vacant properties
to productive occupied properties.
5) Pasco's population has grown from 18,400 in 1980 to over 65,000 today.
6) The I -182 Corridor (Plateau Area) was not part of the city in 1980.
7) Several hundred acres of new commercial land around Road 68 and
Road 100 have been added to the city since 1980.
8) The new commercial areas in the I -182 Corridor do not contain vacant
and underutilized buildings a major street intersection.
2
RECOMMENDATION
MOTION: I move the Planning Commission adopt the findings of
fact as contained in the November 21, 2013 staff memo on Auto Sales
in C -1 Zones.
MOTION: I move the Planning Commission recommend the City
Council adopt the proposed C -1 special permit code amendments as
attached to the November 21, 2013 staff memo to the Planning
Commission.
3
MEMORANDUM
DATE: December 19, 2013
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Dave McDonald, City Planner
SUBJECT: Auto Sales in C -1 Zones (MF# CA2013 -006)
Following the Council's direction the Planning Commission held a number of
workshops and one public hearing on the issue of auto sales in C -1 zones. At
the November hearing staff reviewed a proposed code amendment on this
issue and asked that the hearing be continued allow time to tighten up the
language in the code. The code language has been modified slightly by
reducing the distance of the area of applicability from 1,600 feet north of the
freeway right -of -way to 1,000 feet. This change will limit the possible impact
to residential areas and will still provide site options within a convenient
distance from the freeway interchanges. Additionally the language dealing
with buffering across the street from residential areas was deleted because
the areas of concern for the buffering are no longer within the impact area.
Any needed buffering and additional landscaping can be required through
special permit conditions.
The following paragraphs provide the historical background and findings
necessary for the Planning Commission to make a reasoned decision on this
matter.
As previously explained the special permit provisions for auto sales in the C -1
zone were added to the code in the early 1980's. It was about the time when
many of the old service stations in town were closing. After closing, it was
difficult for the old gas stations to be reused because they were built for a
single purpose related to servicing vehicles. Most of these old service stations
were located on the corner of two busy arterial streets; in the central core of
the community. In an effort to assist with the reuse of the old gas stations the
zoning code was amended with narrow locational requirements to ensure only
the old service stations would qualify for a special permit. The qualifying
requirements are listed in PMC 25.42.040(2) as follows:
(a) Adjacent the intersection of two arterial streets, or
(b) Adjacent a single arterial street; provided it is not adjacent to or
across a public street right -of -way from a residential district, and
would not be located closer than 300 feet to any existing car lot.
The community has changed considerably since 1981. Many of the old
service stations have been replaced with new buildings or have been
transitioned to uses other than auto sales. The need for the 1981 code
provision is now significantly diminished. The community problem (vacant
service station properties) addressed by the code no longer exists. Another
change that has occurred in the City since 1981 is the addition of several
hundred acres of land to the C -1 inventory. The developing C -1 properties
around Road 68 and Road 100 were never intended to be developed with auto
sales lots. There are no vacant service stations in need of redevelopment in
the I -182 area. Vacant commercial land in this area is still in the process of
being developed.
Much of the Planning Commission's discussion on this issue centered on
encouraging the use of under - utilized properties for auto sales lots in the C -1
zone and limiting special permits to areas that have been skipped over by
development. On the other hand there was some interest in providing
standards to permit "quality" auto sales facilities in some of the developing
areas of the community.
Staff was asked to prepare a definition of the term "under- utilized" and
prepare code language that would allow under - utilized properties within
geographic areas to qualify for special permit applications. Staff was also
encouraged to provide language that ensures areas that permitted auto sales
would not become overrun with used car sales lot.
The attached proposed code amendment modifies the current code by limiting
special permit applications for new and used cars to under - utilized properties
located east of Highway 395. The spatial requirement separating proposed
car lots by 300 feet was retained to prevent the over concentration of sales
lots in one area. In addition some additional standards have been added to
permit new auto dealerships in limited areas around the Road 100 and Road
68 Interchanges. The new dealerships would be required to include at least
an 8,000 square foot building with their development. The attached maps
(Exhibit 1 & 2) illustrate the locations around Road 100 and Road 68 that
would permit new auto dealerships in the I -182 area by special permit review.
1) In the early 1980's many of the long established services stations located
at major intersections in the city were closing.
2) Redevelopment of the closed service station proved difficult due to the
single purpose for which the service station properties were built.
2
3) To help address the vacant service station issue the city develop special
permit provisions within the zoning regulations in 1981 to permit the
adaptive reuse of the old service station as auto sales facilities.
4) The current special permit provisions in PMC 25.42 acted as a catalyst to
enable old service station properties to transition from vacant properties
to productive occupied properties.
5) Pasco's population has grown from 18,400 in 1980 to over 65,000 today.
6) The I -182 Corridor (Plateau Area) was not part of the city in 1980.
7) Several hundred acres of new commercial land around Road 68 and
Road 100 have been added to the city since 1980.
8) The new commercial areas in the I -182 Corridor do not contain vacant
and underutilized buildings a major street intersection.
MOTION: I move the Planning Commission adopt the findings of
fact as contained in the November 21, 2013 staff memo on Auto Sales
in C -1 Zones.
MOTION: I move the Planning Commission recommend the City
Council adopt the proposed C -1 special permit code amendments as
attached to the November 21, 2013 staff memo to the Planning
Commission.
Q
Planning Commission Minutes
9/19/2013
B. Code Amendment Special Permits for Auto Sales in C -1 (Retail
Business ) Zones IMF# CA2013 -006
Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff.
David McDonald, City Planner, discussed a possible code amendment for auto
sales in C -1 (Retail Business) Zones. Earlier this year the Planning Commission
held a public hearing for a used car lot proposed for a C -1 Zone on Burden
Boulevard. During the hearing an individual provided testimony suggesting that
there may have been an unintended flaw in the code that would allow someone to
develop a used car lot in new developing areas of the community.
The City Council asked the Planning Commission to review the code and consider
developing a code amendment to address the concern about permitting auto sales
lots under Special Permits in developing areas of the city. It was explained the
current code was adopted in 1981, designed to address a specific concern in the
community related to the reuse of old gas stations. Most of those gas stations
have been repurposed into different uses and there doesn't seem to be a need to
address the vacant service station problem in new areas, such as around Road
68.
Mr. McDonald briefly discussed a few options for the Planning Commission to
consider. One option would be to eliminate auto sales altogether in C -1 Zoning
Districts eliminating the special permit approval process. Another option would be
to modify the code somewhat to allow auto sales in C -1 Zoning Districts only in
certain areas of Pasco. Some examples were discussed.
Commissioner Bachart stated that he hesitates to completely eliminate the option
for auto sales in C -1 Zoning Districts as it could benefit many vacant properties.
Commissioner Kempf asked if there was a way to condition special permits that
would apply to pre - existing abandoned structures, that they can't construct a new
building on an empty lot.
Mr. McDonald responded that provisions could be added to the special permit
process; however, there have been cases where empty lots have been utilized for
auto sales lot with some success.
Commissioner Polk added to Commissioner Kempf's suggestion and stated that
she would like to define "under- utilized spaces" or "underdeveloped ". This would
then include those properties with or without a building.
Chairman Cruz agreed with Commissioner Polk and in the case of the request for
the auto sales lot on Burden Road, it was not an underdeveloped area.
1
Commissioner Hilliard liked the term staff used, "repurposed ".
Commissioner Kempf would like to see the term "under- utilized" defined in the
code.
Chairman Cruz asked if there was a definition of under - utilized anywhere for the
Planning Commission to use.
Mr. McDonald stated there was not one in the code.
Chairman Cruz asked the Commission if they wished to draw a geographic line of
under - developed or under - utilized.
Commissioner Hilliard wanted to keep the special permit process and maybe at
this time not be too specific to see how the City evolves.
Chairman Cruz responded that some decisions need to be made to move forward.
Chairman Bachart asked if the code only applied to outdoor auto sales. He was
not sure it would be a good idea, but there are indoor auto sales.
Chairman Cruz gave a hypothetical scenario that if Lowe's on Road 68 went out of
business, would the Planning Commission entertain the idea of indoor auto sales
at the location. It would not be ideal.
Commissioner Hilliard answered that this comes back to the idea of a special
permit so that the applicant can come forward and community members can
participate.
Commissioner Polk responded in going back to drawing a geographical line as to
where auto sales could locate in under - utilized areas to be careful and to not let
the area become overtaken with auto sales. Commissioner Polk suggested that
there should be a condition stating that there can only be so many auto sale lots
within a certain distance of each other.
Mr. McDonald replied that there is currently a provision in the code prohibiting
lots from being 300 feet from each other.
Chairman Cruz briefly summed up the discussion from the Planning Commission
members.
Mr. McDonald stated that staff now has direction and will come back at the next
Planning Commission Meeting for another workshop.
Commissioner Hoekstra asked if there should be an effort in the special permit
process to do something else to help develop an under - utilized area rather than an
auto sales lot.
Commissioner Hoekstra stated that a lot may need to be vacant for a specific
amount of time to allow for other development first.
Chairman Cruz responded that he wouldn't know how that would be written into a
code amendment.
Commissioner Hoekstra asked if the length of time the property was left vacant
could be added to the conditions.
Mr. White answered that at this time he does not know how to write that but it
could be looked at in defining "under- utilized ".
Planning Commission Minutes
10/17/2013
B. Code Amendment Special Permits for Auto Sales in C -1 (Retail
Business) Zones IMF# CA2013 -0061
Chairwoman Kempf read the master file number and asked for comments from staff.
David McDonald, City Planner, discussed the code amendment for special permits for
auto sales in C -1 (Retail Business) Zones.
Mr. McDonald stated that in previous discussion on this code amendment centered
upon keeping the special permit requirements for auto sales in areas of the
community that have been "skipped over" for development, particularly those areas
east of Highway 395. Examples were presented at the last meeting of vacant lots that
had benefited from the use of the current provisions within the code. There was some
discussion from the last meeting related to the need to provide a definition for "under-
utilized property ". Staff included a definition in the proposed code amendment,
stating, Under - utilized property would be defined as vacant land or land with one or
more vacant buildings which have been vacant for the past 10 consecutive years.
There was also previous discussion regarding opportunities for automobile sales in
other parts of the community and not just restricting automobile sales to the
geographical area east of Highway 395. For discussion purposes, Staff prepared code
language that would allow new auto dealerships on under - utilized property within a
certain distance of both of the interchanges along I -182.
Mr. McDonald asked for direction from the Planning Commission.
Commissioner Hilliard asked if the land is vacant if a dealership could be placed on
the property in the areas specified.
Mr. McDonald answered yes, the land would have to be vacant and in the areas
shaded on the map.
Commissioner Hilliard stated that his vision would be to allow for showrooms along
the Road 100 /I -182 corridor. He thinks that the areas on the maps that staff
prepared are good areas to allow for auto sales.
Commissioner Polk agreed with Commissioner Hilliard and liked the definition for
"under- utilized" property. She asked where the 300 feet of separation between
existing car lots came from and if it has ever been a greater amount of distance.
Mr. McDonald responded that the 300 feet of separation could be changed. It is
currently in the code as 300 feet, has been there for many years, and that is why that
number was used. It is the typical distance used for notification for rezones or special
permits.
Commissioner Anderson stated he didn't have an issue with the 300 feet of separation
between car lots. He asked how 8,000 square feet was determined to be the minimum
for the required on -site building.
Mr. McDonald answered that 8,000 square feet is actually typically smaller than most
on -site buildings for car lots. Eight thousand square feet would be large enough to
have repair facilities, a showroom and offices but not too large to make it over -
burdensome but still have significant development with the car lot.
Chairwoman Kempf asked for the zoning near Tri- Cities Prep and Road 100.
Mr. McDonald answered that it is zoned CR (Regional Commercial) which allows auto
sales, RV.
Chairwoman Kempf asked for clarification from staff on what is being proposed.
Mr. McDonald responded that what staff is proposing in the I -182 Corridor Area would
allow new auto dealerships on vacant lots in C -1 zones. The proposal would encourage
the reuse of properties in the older areas that have been skipped over by development
whereas the corridor area is still developing and the development there should be new
and substantially -more than just paved lots with a few cars.
Chairwoman Kempf stated that the Planning Commission is in agreement of the
proposed code amendment.
There were no further comments.
Planning Commission Minutes
11/21/2013
D. Code Amendment Special Permits for Auto Sales in C -1 (Retail
Business) Zones IMF# CA 2013 -0061
Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff.
Rick White, Community 8s Economic Development Director, discussed the code
amendment for special permits for auto sales in C -1 Zones. This item was returned to
the Planning Commission after a City Council Workshop Meeting. Staff asked the
Planning Commission to continue this item until the December meeting to allow staff
time to tighten up the language in the code. The code amendment itself reaffirms the
longstanding allowance for used car sales and new car sales east of Highway 395 in C-
1 Zones, however west of Highway 395 there is a recommendation for new car sales
only near the intersections of the freeway at Road 68 and Road 100.
Commissioner Greenaway moved, seconded by Commissioner Hoekstra, to continue
the public hearing until the December 19, 2013 Meeting. The motion passed
unanimously.
Planning Commission Minutes
12/19/2013
B. Code Amendment Special Permits for Auto Sales in C -1 (Retail
Business) Zones (MF# CA 2013 -0061 Continued
from November 21, 2013 meetine
Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff.
Dave McDonald, City Planner, discussed the code amendment for special permits for
auto sales in C -1 Zones. The public hearing for this item was continued from the
previous meeting to enable staff to tighten up some language in the code and bring it
back for consideration. Last month, staff was recommending the area of impact for
new auto dealerships on the western part of the community to have buffer strips of
1,600 feet northerly of the freeway and 2,500 feet on either side of Road 68 and Road
100. Looking at that in more detail, the impact of the buffer areas on residential
neighborhoods could be lessened by moving that line about 600 feet south and still
capture most of the high visibility sites along Burden and Sandifur Parkway to
achieve the original goal.
Another item staff modified since the previous meeting was the definition of "new
dealerships ". A sentenced was added to the end of the definition stating, "No more
than 33 percent of a new auto dealership sales lot may be devoted to the display of
pre -owned vehicles." This will ensure the dealerships will be in fact, new dealerships,
although all dealerships have a certain percent of used vehicles.
Staff requested feedback regarding the provision dealerships should "Not located
closer than 300 feet to any existing car lot." This has been a longstanding
requirement in the older part of the community to prevent long strips of used car
dealerships along arterial streets. However, when dealing with new dealerships, staff
asked the Planning Commission if they should be dispersed or have them all together,
much like the Auto -Plex.
5
Commissioner Anderson responded that with new dealerships he didn't see a problem
with them being next to each other like the Auto -flex and doesn't feel the need to have
the 300 foot buffer.
Commissioner Hilliard stated that he was in agreement with Commissioner Anderson.
Commissioner Hoekstra asked for an example to represent 300 feet.
Mr. McDonald answered that 300 feet is about a typical residential block.
Commissioner Hoekstra stated that he didn't see a necessity for the 300 feet with the
new dealerships.
Commissioner Kempf voiced initial concern for the Auto -Plea relocating to West Pasco,
however since they are currently upgrading, she doesn't foresee a problem.
Commissioner Bachart did not have a problem with what staff proposed.
Chairman Cruz stated that he did not have a problem with what staff proposed.
Commissioner Anderson discussed potential tax revenue that could be generated from
having new auto dealerships in West Pasco.
With no further comments the public hearing closed.
Commissioner Hilliard moved, seconded by Commissioner Kempf, the Planning
Commission adopt the findings of fact as contained in the December 19, 2013 staff
memo on Auto Sales in C -1 Zones. The motion passed unanimously.
Commissioner Hilliard moved, seconded by Commissioner Kempf, the Planning
Commission recommend the City Council adopt the proposed C -1 special permit code
amendments as attached to the December 19, 2013 staff memo to the Planning
Commission, with the amendment to strike (iii) Not Located closer than 300 feet to any
existing car lot. The motion passed unanimously.
skT
U.L' $ i.
CN
_ YAd
O� ft �. � .r.: w .. � ?b ,fie „- �• a� f/
I A poad6g
ct
" w^
ivJ?,
, D �
N 1'
�I auiwb`
U
(1)
OF"
OF
OF*
t:=44'
t�7
cm
St
..... .......
v
01
V, i
FOR: City Council
TO: Gary C
Ahmad
AGENDA REPORT No. 3
Works Director
January 22, 2014
FROM: Michael A. Pawlak, PE, City Engineer Workshop Mtg.: 01/27/14
Regular Mtg.: 02/03/14
SUBJECT: Water System Extension Agreement (Canter Club Estates, Road 64)
I. REFERENCE(S):
1. Vicinity Map
2. Proposed Agreement
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
01/27: Discussion
02/03: MOTION: I move to approve the water system extension agreement with J &J
Kelly Construction, Inc. and, further, authorize the City Manager to
sign the agreement.
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
Water Utility Fund ($78,638)
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
A) The Owner of a parcel of land along Road 64, north of Court Street is planning for the
subdivision and development of single family residences on the parcel. The parcel
lies within the "doughnut hole" portion of the boundaries of the Pasco UGA.
Consequently, they have determined it most appropriate for their development to
connect to City water for domestic use.
B) The City also recognizes the immediate and long -term need to continue to provide
domestic water service to the new developments within the area. The City's
watermain system in the immediate area requires an extension in order to provide
more consistent and reliable service to current and future customers.
C) The Property Owners (Chuck & Julie Harrison) and their Developer (J &J Kelly
Construction, Inc.) have coordinated with City staff over the past several months to
identify an appropriate connection point to the City's water system. A water
extension agreement has been drafted to memorialize the obligations of the Developer
and the City, respectively, in terms of cost - reimbursement for the construction of the
waterline extension along Road 64. hi essence, the Developer will pay the costs of
design, review, permitting, and inspection typical for any development; and the City
will pay the construction costs of installing the waterline extension along Road 64.
D) The City's reimbursement amount to the Developer will not exceed $78,638. The
Developer will be responsible for the costs associated with the waterlines within the
development.
4(d)
V. DISCUSSION:
A) The proposed agreement ensures appropriate extension of the City's water system to a
portion of its UGA that is currently experiencing infill development / growth. The
extension of the Road 64 waterline actually completes a "missing link ", provides for a
more reliable looped system, and enhances the City's capability to provide high level
service to all customers within that geographic area of the UGA.
B) Staff recommends approval of the water system extension agreement as presented.
VICINITY MAP
WATER SYSTEM EXTENSION AGREEMENT
THIS WATER SYSTEM EXTENSION AGREEMENT is entered into this day
of January, 2014, by and between J&J Kelly Construction, Inc. a Corporation (hereinafter
referred to as "Developer "), and the City of Pasco, Washington, a Washington Municipal
Corporation (hereinafter referred to as "City"), for the purpose of extending water system
improvements for the benefit of the properties to be developed by Developer.
WHEREAS, Developer has entered into an agreement with property owners Chuck &
Julie Harrison to develop certain real property adjacent to Road 64, north of Court Street for
residential use, known as Canter Club Estates, and said real property is situated within the Pasco
Urban Growth Area as designated by Franklin County; and
WHEREAS, Developer desires to have City of Pasco water service extended to the
developed properties for domestic use; and
WHEREAS, Developer is committed to constructing a water system line extension in
order to loop the system and provide consistent water flows to the proposed development as
described in Exhibit A, and then dedicate the waterlines and appurtenances to the City; and
WHEREAS, the City of Pasco possesses the capacity to provide water utility services to
citizens and real properties within its municipal boundaries and its urban growth boundaries; and
WHEREAS, the City of Pasco's long range water plan provides for the systematic
extension of water utilities throughout the City's urban growth area; and
WHEREAS, the parties desire, by this cooperation agreement, to jointly participate in
the cost of the waterline construction that provides benefits to all parties and their respective
properties.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein, the
parties agree as follows:
1. DEVELOPER OBLIGATIONS. Developer shall:
A. Provide the complete design of the proposed water system extension, as
described in Exhibit A and Exhibit B, by a Professional Engineer registered to practice
Engineering in the State of Washington. The water system design shall include pipe and
all appurtenances from a connection point with the City's existing system approximately
265 feet north of the new entrance to Canter Club Estates and 690 feet south of the same
entrance. The design of the water system extensions shall be in accordance with the
latest City of Pasco requirements and standards including any adopted or referenced state
and federal requirements and standards. The engineering design, construction plans and
specifications shall be submitted to the City for review and/or approval at the 60% and
Final stages of design.
Water System Extension Agreement — J&J Kelly Construction, Inc. (Canter Club Estates) Page 1
January 8, 2014
B. From the design, as approved by the City, construct the system extensions
including all valves, hydrants and appurtenances in accordance with applicable City, state
and federal standards and requirements.
C. Be responsible for the cost of the design of the water system extension,
plan review fees and construction inspection fees and testing.
D. Be responsible for the costs associated with the famishing of materials
and labor, and construction of an 8 -In. diameter pipeline including valves, hydrants and
associated appurtenances necessary to provide adequate domestic water service to the
proposed development prior to the measurement of actual quantities and reimbursement
from the City.
E. Shall at its own cost and efforts secure all reviews, approvals and permits
from any and all applicable jurisdictions, and pay all associated fees.
F. Shall have the property owners execute all deeds, documents, permits,
annexation agreements and checklists necessary for the permitting and conveyance of
property and construction of the system extension described above and the performance
of this Agreement.
2. CITY OBLIGATIONS. City shall:
A. Process in its usual course, Developer's applications for plan review and
permits associated with the water system extension project as described above and in
Exhibit A, in a timely manner.
B. Provide project design criteria, and determine the size of pipe, spacing of
isolation valves and hydrants and other appurtenances required to maintain the integrity
of the City's water system.
C. Provide timely reviews of the engineering design, construction plans and
specifications at the 60% and Final submittals.
D. Provide inspection services during the course of construction consistent
with the level of effort utilized on other capital and development projects within the City,
or as may be required to ensure the required quality of the completed work.
E. Be responsible for reimbursement of the actual construction costs of the
waterline system extensions along Road 64, associated with this Agreement, including
pipe, valves, hydrant assemblies, road restoration per City standards, and incidentals as
described hereinbefore, not to exceed $78,638, except as may be negotiated and agreed
upon by both parties, in writing, by amendment to the Agreement.
Water System Extension Agreement — J &J Kelly Construction, Inc. (Canter Club Estates) Page 2
January 8, 2014
F. Upon satisfactory completion of the improvements described above,
accept the dedication of the water system improvements as described in Exhibit A and
Exhibit B, and by Council resolution accept ownership thereof, and maintenance and
operation of the improvements thereafter.
4. TERM. This Agreement shall be effective commencing on the day of
January, 2014, and all improvements, conveyances and obligations of the parties shall be
complete on or before July 1, 2014. The Agreement shall terminate on August 1, 2014, or with
the completion and acceptance of the water system extension improvements, whichever is
sooner.
5. AUTHORITY TO APPROVE AGREEMENT. The parties represent and
warrant that all steps necessary for the approval of this Agreement have been completed by:
A. J &J Kelly Construction, Inc. by its President.
B. City of Pasco by the Pasco City Council.
The officers signing below are authorized to do so and that the execution of this Water
System Extension Agreement is valid and binding for all purposes.
6. DISPUTE RESOLUTION. In the event of a dispute between the parties
regarding the interpretation, breach or enforcement of this Agreement, the parties shall first meet
in a good faith effort to resolve the dispute by themselves or with the assistance of a mediator.
The remaining dispute shall be resolved by arbitration pursuant to RCW 7.04A, the Mandatory
Rules of Arbitration (MAR), with all parties waiving the right of a jury trial upon de novo
review, with the substantially prevailing party being awarded its reasonable attorney fees and
costs against the other.
7. INDEMNITY. The Developer shall assume the risk of, be liable for, and pay for
damage, loss, cost and expense of any party arising out of the performance of this Agreement,
except that caused by negligence and/or willful misconduct solely of the City and its employees
acting within the scope of employment. The Developer shall hold harmless from and indemnify
the City against all claims, losses, suits, action, cost, counsel fees, litigation costs, expenses,
damages, judgments, or decrees by reason of damage to any property of business, and/or any
death, injury or disability to or of any person or parry, including any employee, arising out of or
suffered, directly or indirectly, by reason of or in connection with the performance of the
Contract or any act, error or omission of the Developer, Developer's employees, agents,
contractors or subcontractors, whether by negligence or otherwise. The Developer's obligation
shall include but not be limited to investigation, adjusting, and defending all claims alleging loss
from action, error or omission or breach of any common law, statutory or other delegated duty of
the Developer, Developer's employees, contractors, agents or subcontractors.
Water System Extension Agreement — J &J Kelly Construction, Inc. (Canter Club Estates) Page 3
January 8, 2014
8. GENERAL PROVISIONS.
A. This Water System Extension Agreement constitutes the entire agreement
between the parties, and no prior oral or written agreement shall be valid, and any
modifications of this Agreement must be in writing signed by all parties.
B. This Water System Extension Agreement shall be binding on the parties,
and their heirs, successors and assigns.
C. For the purpose of this Agreement, time is of the essence.
4. MUTUAL COOPERATON AND FURTHER AGREEMENTS. The parties
agree to cooperate in good faith, with regard to each and every aspect required for the
completion of the construction of the roadway which is the object of this Agreement, and the
transfer of property, and to further sign all documents, deeds and permits reasonably necessary to
accomplish the purposes of this Agreement.
DATED this day of 12014.
CITY OF PASCO
Gary Crutchfield
City Manager
J &J KEL3,rCON T �CTION, INC.
.� II
l �r U �5
L
Jeff Kelly `0
President
Water System Extension Agreement — J &J Kelly Construction, Inc. (Canter Club Estates) Page 4
January 8, 2014
Canter Club Estates EXHIBIT A
Road 64 Waterline Extension
No.
Description Quantity
Units
Cost /Unit
Total Cost
Estimate of Construction Costs for Waterline Extension
1
Mobilization
1
EST
1,000.00
1,000.00
2
Layout Survey & GPS Control
1
EST
1,000.00
1,000.00
3
Clearing & Grubbing
1
EST
1,000.00
1,000.00
4
Erosion Control
1
EST
1,000.00
1,000.00
5
Traffic Control
1
EST
3,500.00
3,500.00
6
Sawcut Existing Pavement
969
LF
2.75
2,664.75
7
Trench Excavation - Rd 64 Waterline
969
LF
2.58
2,500.02
8
Pipe Bedding
1
EST
500.00
500.00
9
Water for Compaction
1
EST
500.00
500.00
10
Disposal of Unsuitable Backfill
1
EST
500.00
500.00
11
Connect to City Watermain
1
EST
1,400.00
1,400.00
12
8 -In. D.I. Pipe, installed including fittings
969
LF
34.00
32,946.00
13
Valves & Fittings
1
EST
3,200.00
3,200.00
14
Fire Hydrant Assembly
2
EA
4,000.00
8,000.00
15
4 In. CSBC for Trench Repair (50- inches width)
4,000
SF
1.00
4,000.00
16
2 In. HMA for Trench Repair (50 inches width)
4,000
SF
1.50
6,000.00
17
Shoulder Restoration
1
EST
2,500.00
2,500.00
18
Record Drawings - Waterline
1
LS
200.00
200.00
Estimated SubTotal
72,410.77
WSST @ 8.6%
6,227.33
TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COSTS
78,638.10
1
EXHIBIT B
FOR: City Council
TO: Gary C:
Ahmad
AGENDA REPORT No. 4
Works Director
January 22, 2014
FROM: Michael A. Pawlak, PE, City Engineer' Workshop Mtg.: 01/27/14
Regular Mtg.: 02/03/14
SUBJECT: Water System Extension Agreement (Commercial- Kahlotus Service Area)
I. REFERENCE(S):
H.
III.
IV.
1. Vicinity Map
2. Proposed Agreement
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
01/27: Discussion
02/03: MOTION: I move to approve the wate r
Oregon Potato Company and,
to sign the agreement.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Water Utility Fund ($83,744)
HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
system extension agreement with
further, authorize the City Manager
A) Owners of several parcels of land in the Commercial - Kahlotus Service Area of Pasco
are planning for future development and expansion of their existing industrial
facilities. Realizing the need and benefit of having domestic water and sewer service
to the properties, the property owners petitioned the City for annexation. The City
approved that annexation request on December 17, 2012.
B) The City has also recognized the immediate and long -term need to provide domestic
water and sewer service to the area and previously entered into a sewer extension
agreement with Fifties I, LLC for extension of sewer mains to the area, on December
16, 2013.
C) The area Property Owners (Fifties I, LLC, Oregon Potato (Freeze- Pack), Carson Ag,
LLC (Agri-Pak), and Pasco Industrial Properties, LLC) have coordinated with City
staff over the past several months to identify an appropriate extension of the City's
water system. A water extension agreement has been drafted to memorialize the
obligations of the Property Owners and the City, respectively, in terms of cost - sharing
for the extension including, design requirements, plan review, permitting and
inspection. In essence, the developers will pay the cost equivalent to a 10" diameter
water line (minimum size) the entire length of the extension, while the City will pay
the equivalent cost of "oversizing" the water line to 16" so it can function as a
distribution main to serve the larger vicinity in the future (this will avoid duplicate
line installations in the future).
D) The City's share of the extension project will not exceed $83,744, and includes the
cost of upsizing the waterline and that portion of the extension along the frontage of
non - participating property owners. The City will recoup its investment from future
frontage and area charges received from non - participating property owners and future
4(e)
development. Participation in the Property Owners' extension results in a much
lower cost project, as it is a private project not subject to prevailing wages;
consequently, the City's cost is likewise lower.
V. DISCUSSION:
A) The proposed agreement ensures appropriate extension of the City's water system to a
portion of its UGA that is quite likely to experience growth over the next decade. If
not extended, the existing industrial facilities will be limited on their long -term
expansion potential and future development will either not occur at all or will
randomly occur with individual well systems. The latter scenario would frustrate the
logical extension of the water system over time, eventually increasing costs for rate
payers and retarding development values.
B) Staff recommends approval of the water system extension agreement as presented.
VICINITY MAP
WAMUME EXTENSION,
L
i
J F-
WATER SYSTEM EXTENSION AGREEMENT
THIS WATER SYSTEM EXTENSION AGREEMENT is entered into this day
of January, 2014, by and between Oregon Potato Company, Inc. a Corporation, (hereinafter
referred to as "Owner "), and the City of Pasco, Washington, a Washington Municipal
Corporation (hereinafter referred to as "City "), for the purpose of extending water system
improvements for the benefit of the Owner's property.
WHEREAS, Owner has certain real property adjacent to Commercial Avenue Loop
(Old Kahlotus Highway), and said real property is situated within the limits of the City of Pasco;
and
WHEREAS, Owner desires to have City of Pasco water service extended to the
developed properties for domestic use; and
WHEREAS, Owner is committed to constructing a water system line extension in order
to provide consistent water flows to the proposed property as described in Exhibit A, and then
dedicate the waterlines and appurtenances to the City; and
WHEREAS, the City of Pasco possesses the capacity to provide water utility services to
citizens and real properties within its municipal boundaries and its urban growth boundaries; and
WHEREAS, the City of Pasco's long range water plan provides for the systematic
extension of water utilities throughout the City's urban growth area; and
WHEREAS, the parties desire, by this cooperation agreement, to jointly participate in
the cost of the waterline construction that provides benefits to all parties and their respective
properties.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein, the
parties agree as follows:
1. OWNER OBLIGATIONS. Owner shall:
A. Provide the complete design of the proposed water system extension, as
described in Exhibit A and Exhibit B, by a Professional Engineer registered to practice
Engineering in the State of Washington. The water system design shall include pipe and
all appurtenances from a connection point with the City's existing system at the south end
of Commercial Avenue and then extending approximately 1,422 LF north along
Commercial Avenue Loop. The design of the water system extensions shall be in
accordance with the latest City of Pasco requirements and standards including any
adopted or referenced state and federal requirements and standards. The engineering
design, construction plans and specifications shall be submitted to the City for review
and/or approval at the 60% and Final stages of design.
Water System Extension Agreement — Oregon Potato Company, Inc. Page 1
January 8, 2014
B. From the design, as approved by the City, construct the system extension
including all valves, hydrants and appurtenances in accordance with applicable City, state
and federal standards and requirements.
C. Be responsible for the cost of the design of the water system extension,
plan review fees and construction inspection fees and testing.
D. Be responsible for the costs associated with the furnishing of materials
and labor, and construction of the equivalent of a 10 -In. diameter pipeline including
valves, fittings, hydrants and associated appurtenances necessary to provide adequate
domestic water service to the proposed development prior to the measurement of actual
quantities and reimbursement from the City.
E. Shall at its own cost and efforts secure all reviews, approvals and permits
from any and all applicable jurisdictions, and pay all associated fees.
F. Shall execute all deeds, documents, permits, and checklists necessary for
the permitting and conveyance of property and construction of the system extension
described above and the performance of this Agreement.
2. CITY OBLIGATIONS. City shall:
A. Process in its usual course, Owner's applications for plan review and
permits associated with the water system extension project as described above and in
Exhibit A, in a timely manner.
B. Provide project design criteria, and determine the size of pipe, spacing of
isolation valves and hydrants and other appurtenances required to maintain the integrity
of the City's water system.
C. Provide timely reviews of the engineering design, construction plans and
specifications at the 60% and Final submittals.
D. Provide inspection services during the course of construction consistent
with the level of effort utilized on other capital and development projects within the City,
or as may be required to ensure the required quality of the completed work.
E. Be responsible for reimbursement of the incremental increase in cost
between a 10 -Inch pipe system and a 164nch pipe system, as estimated in the
construction cost estimate prepared by Sharpe & Preszler Construction Company, Inc.,
dated November 4, 2013, and included in Exhibit A. The City's share of the construction
costs shall not exceed $83,744, including Washington State Sales Tax..
F. Upon satisfactory completion of the improvements described above,
accept the dedication of the water system improvements as described in Exhibit A and
Water $ystem Extension Agreement — Oregon Potato Company, Inc. Page 2
January 8, 2014
Exhibit B, and by Council resolution accept ownership thereof, and maintenance and
operation of the improvements thereafter.
4. TERM. This Agreement shall be effective commencing on the day of
January, 2014, and all improvements, conveyances and obligations of the parties shall be
complete on or before July 1, 2014. The Agreement shall terminate on August 1, 2014, or with
the completion and acceptance of the water system extension improvements, whichever is
sooner.
5. AUTHORITY TO APPROVE AGREEMENT. The parties represent and
warrant that all steps necessary for the approval of this Agreement have been completed by:
A. Oregon Potato Company, Inc. by its President.
B. City of Pasco by the Pasco City Council.
The officers signing below are authorized to do so and that the execution of this Water
System Extension Agreement is valid and binding for all purposes.
6. DISPUTE RESOLUTION. In the event of a dispute between the parties
regarding the interpretation, breach or enforcement of this Agreement, the parties shall first meet
in a good faith effort to resolve the dispute by themselves or with the assistance of a mediator.
The remaining dispute shall be resolved by arbitration pursuant to RCW 7.04A, the Mandatory
Rules of Arbitration (MAR), with all parties waiving the right of a jury trial upon de novo
review, with the substantially prevailing party being awarded its reasonable attorney fees and
costs against the other.
7. INDEMNITY. The Owner shall assume the risk of, be liable for, and pay for
damage, loss, cost and expense of any party arising out of the performance of this Agreement,
except that caused by negligence and/or willful misconduct solely of the City and its employees
acting within the scope of employment. The Owner shall hold harmless from and indemnify the
City against all claims, losses, suits, action, cost, counsel fees, litigation costs, expenses,
damages, judgments, or decrees by reason of damage to any property of business, and /or any
death, injury or disability to or of any person or party, including any employee, arising out of or
suffered, directly or indirectly, by reason of or in connection with the performance of the
Contract or any act, error or omission of the Owner, Owner's employees, agents, contractors or
subcontractors, whether by negligence or otherwise. The Owner's obligation shall include but
not be limited to investigation, adjusting, and defending all claims alleging loss from action,
error or omission or breach of any common law, statutory or other delegated duty of the Owner,
Owner's employees, contractors, agents or subcontractors.
8. GENERAL PROVISIONS.
A. This Water System Extension Agreement constitutes the entire agreement
between the parries, and no prior oral or written agreement shall be valid, and any
modifications of this Agreement must be in writing signed by all parties.
Water System Extension Agreement — Oregon Potato Company, Inc. Page 3
January 8, 2014
B. This Water System Extension Agreement shall be binding on the parties,
and their heirs, successors and assigns.
C. For the purpose of this Agreement, time is of the essence.
9. MUTUAL COOPERATON AND FURTHER AGREEMENTS. The parties
agree to cooperate in good faith, with regard to each and every aspect required for the
completion of the construction of the roadway which is the object of this Agreement, and the
transfer of property, and to further sign all documents, deeds and permits reasonably necessary to
accomplish the purposes of this Agreement.
DATED this day of 2014.
CITY OF PASCO
Gary Crutchfield
City Manager
OREGON POTATO COMPANY, INC.
President
Water System Extension Agreement — Oregon Potato Company, Inc. Page 4
January 8, 2014
Memo
To: Mike Pawlak, P.E., City Engineer
From: Kate Thompson, P.E., Associate Engineer
Date: November 22, 2013
Re: Commercial Avenue Waterline Cost Proration
Public Works Department
Engineering Division
The Commercial Avenue Waterline which was installed by the City earlier this summer, is going to be
extended approximately 1,422 LF by Carson Ag and the Oregon Potato Company. These two property
owners do not own all of the land fronting the waterline expansion. Powell- Christensen Inc. and BPA also
own land fronting the proposed waterline extension.
The proposed water usage by Carson Ag and the Oregon Potato Company will necessitate a 10 -In water
main. The existing main which will be extended is 16 -In., which is what the City would like to have continued
with the extension.
The proposal being considered would have the City pay the upsize from the 10 -In. main to the 16 -In. main,
and pay for the main fronting BPA and Powell Christensen Inc. BPA is not connecting to the line at this time
and Powell - Christensen's property fronts along the previously installed water main. The frontages and
percentage of total frontage for the project length for each of the property owners is shown in the table below.
Property Owner
Side of Road
Frontage (LF)
%
POWELL - CHRISTENSEN INC
W
1000
36%
OREGON POTATO COMPANY
W
370
13%
CARRSON AG LLC
E
1270
46%
BPA
E
147
5%
The above frontages are based on ending the water main at the northern property line for Carson Ag, which is
approximately 100' south of the Northern property line for the Oregon Potato Company. A deferral agreement
would be needed with Oregon Potato Company for the remaining 100' of waterline for their frontage.
Carson Ag and Oregon Potato Company provided cost estimates from their contractor to install a 10 -In water
main and a 16 -In water main. The difference in cost between the 16 -In. main and the 10 -In. main is
approximately $39,711. The City would be responsible for this difference plus 41 % of the cost of the 10 -In.
line (to account for the BPA and Powell Christensen Inc. frontages). This would make the City's total
contribution $83,744including 8.6% sales tax. Then the Oregon Potato Company would pay for 13% of the
cost of the 10 -In main, which is approximately $12,879 including 8.6% sales tax. Carson Ag would be
responsible for the remaining 46% of the cost of the 10 -In. main, approximately $45,571 including sales tax.
This breakdown is shown in more detail on the attached spreadsheet.
EXHIBITA
Q
F
m_
2
x
W
O
w
h
o �
� Y
i a
@ c i
v m
c m
J d y
= L O
v v
a
N d Y
a c
L � o
Y y_
O h v
C �
C O
c � v
N
v u
L c ,
C O
� c s
w v Y
v
u = O
L w
C _ O
v u
� 3 v
u
d d Y
v
Q �
3
� U
L N Y
O
4! O u
� w C
u
v
u m
c Y a
Y O p
V
O
U O
o J o
V YO
a
O O O
aT+ v N
U Y O
d
0
n
Y
O
v
oq
c
O
w
v
O
w
v
C
J
C
O
v
L
O
Y
O
N
L
v
u
Y
O
V
a
O
V
m
m
00
Oa
m
�p
O
m
M
N
a
O
N
�'�
M
lD
M
Ol
N
C
m
o
�
v
C
_o
N
ry
Ol
m
01
w
O
O
O1
00
O
C
�
N
N
N
a
@
n
I
E
U
O
U
o
o
m
c
O
Y
u
0
3
C
c
w
v
u
O
ti
ti
m
v
U
r
co
v
ti
�
N
W
C
N
Ol
M
v
�
N
v
Q
�
O
M
�
v
a
C
�
O
M
s
c
N
m
ti
0
u
C
O
C
N
N
N
�
U
J
C
�
�
O
NINE
0
v
O
C
N
u
>
Q
,n
C
O
u
C
O
u
N
w
y
9
E
O
O
C
O
J
6
C
F
H
Q
F
a
u
D
U
vt
>n
>
O
d
O
w
h
o �
� Y
i a
@ c i
v m
c m
J d y
= L O
v v
a
N d Y
a c
L � o
Y y_
O h v
C �
C O
c � v
N
v u
L c ,
C O
� c s
w v Y
v
u = O
L w
C _ O
v u
� 3 v
u
d d Y
v
Q �
3
� U
L N Y
O
4! O u
� w C
u
v
u m
c Y a
Y O p
V
O
U O
o J o
V YO
a
O O O
aT+ v N
U Y O
d
0
n
Y
O
v
oq
c
O
w
v
O
w
v
C
J
C
O
v
L
O
Y
O
N
L
v
u
Y
O
V
a
O
V
Sharpe & Preszler Construction Co. Inc.
605 E. Kennewick Ave.
Kennewick, WA 99336
November 4, 2013
Tim Tippett
Oregon Potato Company
PO Box 3110
Pasco, WA 99302
Dear Tim,
7
Lie.# SHARPPC280JF
Listed below Is the breakdown Mike with the City of Pasco was looking for:
16" Water Line
3 EA - Connect to existing water line
1,422 LF - 16" CL -52 water line
1 EA - 16" restrained joint tee
4 EA - 16" restrained joint butterfly valve
1 EA - 16" restrained joint cap
1 EA - 16" restrained joint 1134"
1 EA - 16" x 10" restrained joint tee
1 EA - 16" x 8" restrained joint tee
1 EA - 16" blowoff assembly
LS - Traffic control
4 EA - Fire hydrants
16 EA - Guard posts
i0" Water Line
Same as above with 30 pipe, fittings, hydrants, guard post
EXHIBIT A
Telephone 1 -509 -586 -1138
Fax 1- 509 -586 -9141
Without tax$130,934.00
Without tax $ 91,223.00
If we were to terminate the 16" water line at sta 13 +55, the cost savings to delete 92 lineal feet of 16"
ductile iron and asphalt patching at the northern driveway would be $6,164.00.
If you have any questions, please contact me at our office.
Sincerely,
Brian Preszler
bp:hf
EXHIBIT B