HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014.04.28 Council Workshop PacketAGENDA
PASCO CITY COUNCIL
Workshop Meeting 7:00 p.m. April 28, 2014
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. ROLL CALL:
(a) Pledge of Allegiance.
3. VERBAL REPORTS FROM COUNCILMEMBERS:
4. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION:
(a) Recreational Marijuana (MF #CA2013 -005):
1. Agenda Report from Rick White, Community & Economic Development Director dated
April 22, 2014.
2. Recreational Marijuana - Work Plan of October 2013.
(b) Sylvester's Addition Neighborhood Revitalization Plan (ME #PLAN2013 -003):
1. Agenda Report from Shane O'Neill, Planner I dated April 23, 2014.
2. Sylvester's Addition Neighborhood Revitalization Plan - Draft.
(c) Fencing Standards - I -182 Overlay District:
1. Agenda Report from Rick Terway, Administrative & Community Services Director dated
April 22, 2014.
2. Fencing Standards - Vicinity Map.
3. Fencing Standards - Proposed Ordinance.
4. Fencing Standards - Proposed Resolution.
5. Fencing Standards - Current Photos of I -182 Fence.
(d) Industrial Pre - Treatment Program:
I. Agenda Report from Ahmad Qayoumi, Public Works Director dated April 23, 2014.
2. Industrial Pre- Treatment Program - Amended Administrative Order from W SDOE.
3. Industrial Pre- Treatment Program - Draft Ordinance (Council packets only; copy available
for public review in the Public Works office, the Pasco Library and on the City's webpage
at www. pasco- wa.gov /citycouncilreports).
(e) Waste Water Treatment Plant 3rd Primary Clarifier:
1. Agenda Report from Ahmad Qayoumi, Public Works Director dated April 23, 2014.
2. Waste Water Treatment Plant 3`d Primary Clarifier - Vicinity Map.
3. Waste Water Treatment Plant 3`d Primary Clarifier - Professional Services Agreement
Summary Sheet.
4. Waste Water Treatment Plant 3`d Primary Clarifier - Scope of Services.
(f) Latecomer's Agreements Amendments to PMC:
1. Agenda Report from Stan Strebel, Deputy City Manager dated April 24, 2014.
2. Latecomer's Agreements - Proposed Ordinance.
(g) Hanford Communities Interlocal Agreement:
1. Agenda Report from Gary Crutchfield, City Manager dated April 23, 2014.
2. Hanford Communities - Proposed Interlocal Agreement.
5. OTHER ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION:
(a)
(b)
(c)
6. EXECUTIVE SESSION:
(a)
(b)
(c)
7. ADJOURNMENT
REMINDERS:
1. 5:30 p.m., Thursday, May 1, P &R Classroom - Parks & Recreation Advisory Board Meeting.
(COUNCILMEMBER SAUL MARTINEZ, Rep.; MIKE GARRISON, Alt.)
AGENDA REPORT
FOR:
City Coun
TO:
Gary Crut' ianager
FROM:
Rick White, Di ector
Community & Economic Development
SUBJECT: Recreational Marijuana (MF# CA2013 -005)
I. REFERENCE(S):
Recreational Marijuana — Work Plan of October 2013
April 22, 2014
Workshop Mtg.: 4/28/14
H. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
4/28: DISCUSSION
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
A. The 2011 State Legislature passed Engrossed Second Substitute Senate Bill 5073. This
bill provided for collective gardening of medical marijuana and allowed local cities and
counties to adopt zoning and health regulations governing the production and distribution
of medical marijuana.
B. In response to the conflict between Federal law (Controlled Substance Act) and State law,
the City amended the Zoning Code in June of 2012 to prohibit uses that are in violation
of State and Federal law.
C. In November of 2012, Initiative 502 (I -502) legalizing the recreational use of marijuana
was approved by the electorate. I -502 establishes a system, overseen by the State Liquor
Control Board (LCB), to license, regulate and tax the production, processing and sale of
marijuana. The licensing of marijuana production, processing and sales will be handled
by the LCB similar to the process for liquor licenses.
D. In August of 2013, the Federal Government indicated that in the presence of a strong and
effective state system for regulation, it may not prosecute use and possession of small
amounts of marijuana by adults.
E. The City Council also approved Resolution 3507 on September 3, 2013 establishing a
moratorium on City issuance of all types of licenses related to recreational marijuana.
This moratorium was extended until September 1, 2014 by Resolution 3516 in October of
2013. Through Resolution 3516, a work plan was also adopted describing the steps
necessary to proceed with local legislation for licensing recreational marijuana.
F. The State operating budget directed the LCB to work with the Departments of Revenue
and Health to develop recommendations to the Legislature regarding the interaction of
medical marijuana and the recreational marijuana system. Although these
recommendations were developed, the 2014 Legislative session did not produce any
reconciliation of medical and recreational marijuana laws.
G. The LCB began accepting applications for production, processing and retail sales of
marijuana in November 2013 and began issuing licenses in March of this year.
V. DISCUSSION:
A. Although the 2014 Legislative session did not produce any regulation for reconciling the
issues of medical and recreational marijuana, a key legal opinion and court case has
provided guidance on options available to the City.
4(a)
B. The State Attorney General has provided an opinion that indicates cities and counties
may ban recreational marijuana uses and a Court of Appeals decision indicates that cities
and counties may also ban collective gardens. Several cities (Yakima and Wenatchee)
have also decided to outright ban recreational uses of marijuana.
C. Staff requests direction from City Council prior to bringing forward options to the
Planning Commission for study and deliberation. In particular Council direction on the
following decision points is requested:
• Collective Gardens. Collective gardens are unregulated growing operations for
medical marijuana that may contain up to 45 plants for as many as 10 patients.
Given the nearly impossible task of policing collective gardens and the potential
for criminal activity related to residential collective gardens, staff requests
Council direction on the banning of collective gardens.
• Recreational Marijuana. Should the Planning Commission recommend a zoning
framework for allowing production, processing and retail sales of recreational
marijuana through the Special Permit process in appropriate zoning districts?
OR
Prohibition. Does Council wish to provide direction to staff to prepare for a
legislative ban on the production, processing and retail sales of recreational
marijuana within Pasco?
D. Based on Council discussion and direction, staff will begin preparing regulatory
alternatives for consideration.
EXHIBIT "A"
October 2013 Recreational Marijuana Work Plan
The following steps are intended to identify the expected process of creating legislation unique to the City
of Pasco's needs and legislative priorities.
1. Research cities /states with similar circumstances /laws pertaining to recreational marijuana.
2. Research Washington Cities Insurance Association, Association of Washington Cities and the
Municipal Research and Service Center to determine latest developments, cautions, examples and
experiences in regulation of recreational marijuana.
3. Research current State law and reconcile the discrepancy of federal laws concerning
cultivation/production, processing and retail sale of recreational marijuana, the question of
precedence of State versus federal law and the risk of prosecution to City personnel implementing
State law.
4. Involve City Departments to determine the extent and degree of intervention needed from
permitting, licensing, taxation, code enforcement, crime prevention, public safety (police and fire
protection) and zoning standpoints.
5. Research the degree of consistency for regulation desired/needed from Benton and Franklin
counties and the cities if Kennewick, Richland and West Richland, and meet with these
jurisdictions as necessary to coordinate efforts.
6. Prepare interim report to City Council on progress of the work plan and anticipated timeline for
completion, and present to City Council after the conclusion of the 2014 State legislative session.
7. Develop draft legislative alternatives for regulating the production, processing and sale of
recreational marijuana.
8. Review with City management and revise as directed.
9. Conduct public workshops with the Planning Commission and revise draft regulatory alternatives
as needed.
10. Review developing State legislative amendments to State law concerning the production,
processing and sale of recreational marijuana. Consider extension of the moratorium and
adjustment of the work plan as necessary.
11. Conduct formal public hearing(s) with the Planning Commission to determine the Commission's
recommendation to City Council.
12. Present the recommended legislation to City Council at a Workshop.
13. Return to City Council for formal action as directed.
FOR: City
TO: Gary Crutchfk
Rick White, a
Community &
FROM: Shane O'Neill, Planner I
AGENDA REPORT
.? (jkd
Development Director
April 23, 2014
Workshop Mtg.: 4/28/14
SUBJECT: Sylvester's Addition Neighborhood Revitalization Plan (MF# PLAN2013 -003)
I. REFERENCE(S):
I . Sylvester's Addition Neighborhood Revitalization Plan-Draft
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
4/28:
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
A. Council's adopted 2012 -2013 goals included development and implementation of a
neighborhood revitalization plan east of l Oth Avenue and west of the BNRR mainline.
B. In 2012, staff began surveying the condition of city streets and sidewalks east of 10th
Avenue to identify those that would benefit from the development of a revitalization plan.
Based upon results from the field surveys, a project area was defined and includes
Margaret, Park, Sylvester and Nixon Streets bound by 5th Avenue to the east and by 10th
Avenue to the west. Within the overall project area, Park Street contains the highest level
of sidewalk damage and the highest number of large street trees causing sidewalk
damage.
C. In 2013, staff began the scoping process by mailing information and holding a series of
neighborhood meetings with affected property owners. To date, five neighborhood
meetings have been held.
V. DISCUSSION:
A. Throughout the public involvement process, property owners were relatively agreeable to
the need for sidewalk repairs but were discouraged by the need to remove the large
existing street trees that give the neighborhood much of its character. However, several
property owners provided perspective on the dangerous condition of many of the street
trees and the high cost for their individual removal.
B. The Draft Plan recommends that the priority repair area with the most severe tree and
sidewalk issues (Park Street between 5th and 7`h Avenues) apply for CDBG funds to
remove and replace the sidewalk and street trees. An application for 2015 Community
Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds would be prepared by staff for this purpose.
C. The Draft Plan also recommends that dry irrigation lines be installed in conjunction with
the sidewalk repairs so adjacent property owners will have the ability to provide
underground irrigation to the planting strips adjacent their property. Currently few
properties within the project area have underground irrigation systems to the street
landscaping. Maintenance of the planting strips is the responsibility of the adjacent owner
per existing Pasco Municipal Code provisions.
D. As noted in the Draft Plan, there is far less sidewalk damage and far fewer problematic
large trees on Margaret and Nixon Streets. Staff feels that an adaptive approach should be
taken whereby outcomes of the first priority phase of repair are incorporated into the Plan
language to better guide these future phases.
E. If Council concurs with the overall direction of the Draft Plan - particularly in assigning
priority to the most problematic street section (Park Street) and the use of CDBG funds
for repair - staff will forward the Draft Plan to the Planning Commission for workshop
review, public hearing(s) and a formal recommendation to Council.
4(b)
Sylvester's Addition Neighborhood
Revitalization Plan
City of Pasco
Community & Economic Development Department
April - 2014
Table of Contents
Sylvester's Addition Neighborhood Revitalization Plan .............................................. ..............................1
Tableof Contents ........................................................................................................... ..............................z
Introduction.................................................................................................................... ..............................3
History............................................................................................................................. ..............................4
ProblemStatement ........................................................................................................ ..............................5
PlanGoals ....................................................................................................................... ..............................5
Background.................................................................................................................... ..............................5
Scoping& Public Involvement ....................................................................................... ..............................5
AlternativesProposed ................................................................................................. ............................... 6
AlternateI ......................................... ...............................
Alternatez ........................................ ...............................
Alternate3 ........................................ ...............................
NeighborhoodMeetings ...................... ...............................
NeighborhoodMeeting #1 (2/2013) ......................................................................... ............................... 6
NeighborhoodMeeting #z ( 4/ 2013) ........................................................................ ............................... 6
Neighborhood Meeting #3 ( 6/ 2013) .......................................................................... ..............................7
NeighborhoodMeeting #4 ( 12/ 2013) ......................................................................... ..............................7
NeighborhoodMeeting #5 ( 3/ 2014) .......................................................................... ..............................7
ConstructionComponents ........................................................................................... ............................... 8
Trees.............................................................................................................................. ............................... 8
Parking.......................................................................................................................... ............................... 9
Irrigation....................................................................................................................... ............................... 9
PriorityAreas ................................................................................................................ ............................... 9
ParkStreet .................................................................................................................... ............................... 9
MargaretStreet ........................................................................................................... ............................... io
Sylvester& Nixon Streets ........................................................................................... ............................... to
HenryStreet ................................................................................................................. ............................... 11
PathForward .................................................................................................................. .............................ii
MaintenanceResponsibility ........................................................................................... .............................ii
Funding........................................................................................................................ ............................... iz
Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Funding ........................................... ............................... iz
Appendix........................................................................................................................ .............................13
Introduction
Typical of western railroad towns, the original Town Plat of Pasco recorded in April of 1886
was laid out with street rights -of -way 8o feet in width. The plats that followed continued
the same theme with streets forming the nucleus of the City by 1921 laid out with 8o -foot
wide street rights -of -way. In early plats the streets were improved with 30 to 40 foot road
surfaces typically centered in the 8o foot right -of -way. On either side of the road surface
was another 20 to 25 feet of right -of -way developed with large planting strips (lawn and
large trees) and five -foot wide sidewalks. The sidewalks were often placed near the outer
edge of the right -of -way adjacent to the abutting lots. Streets were designed in this manner
to allow for the gradual increase in pavement width as neighborhoods grew. Once built
however, the streets in the subject project area were not changed.
As the original Pasco neighborhoods aged and automobile ownership per household
increased so did the demand on on- street parking availability. As a result the large planting
strips became an area for the storage of vehicles, equipment and other items. Responding
to citizen complaints about the lack of planting strip maintenance, the City Council amended
the municipal code in 1994 to require all planting strips to be maintained with lawn, trees
and ground cover. The parking of motor vehicles, boats, campers and trailers was also
prohibited along with the storage of lumber, firewood and other items generally.
The neighborhoods referenced above (located in the central core of the community west of
the BNSF rail mainline and loth Avenue) were established just before and after the year
1900. Many of the homes in these neighborhoods are approaching 75 years of age.
Designed for a different age, the narrow streets and smaller lots create parking constraints
for residents today who rely heavily on automobiles for everyday activities. The once
attractively landscaped planting strips with large shade trees now create another set of
issues for the neighborhoods. The purpose of this study is to develop a neighborhood
revitalization plan to address the issues of mature and failing street trees, damaged
sidewalks and parking availability.
Over the past 75 — loo years, the trees originally planted in the right -of -way as part of the
streetscape design have grown substantially. Mostly Silver Maples, the trees have reached
over fifty feet in height. These trees have reached their maturity and have begun failing in
terms of structure and overall appearance. Woody debris consistently falls into the right -of-
way and as much as co- dominant stems or entire trees have begun to fall during high wind
events. This condition is hazardous to people and property; cars can be damaged and people
may be harmed by the falling debris.
3
(Vehicle damaged by a tree in 2012)
History
A series of sidewalk damage field surveys conducted during 2012 revealed concentrations of
damage to city sidewalks. The predominant type of sidewalk damage observed was
upheaval caused by trees located within City right -of -way planting strips. Generally,
neighborhoods containing more large/mature trees are those with the most sidewalk
damage. Only moderate to severe levels of damage were noted as needing repair and
appear as individual points shown in the attached maps.
Much of the damage surveyed occurs within an area of town (illustrated in the Area Priority
Ranking Map, see appendix) originally platted in Sylvester's Addition [also known as
Sylvester's Second Addition (1889)] and Sylvester's Third Addition (1891). All rights -of -way
contained in these Plats are eighty (80) feet wide, fifty feet of which is occupied by
sidewalks and landscaping strips containing medium to large sized trees. The remaining
thirty (30) feet of the right -of -way contains the road surface. Despite the relatively wide
rights -of -way, the roads themselves are fairly narrow. The narrow road issue is further
compounded by the use of on- street parking.
Because many of the homes in the Sylvester's Addition were constructed without driveways,
the on- street parking in the area is heavily used. Access to these properties was limited to
alleys only. As a result on street parking is heavily used often reducing the travel lane widths,
creating congestion and a cluttered streetscape view.
4
Problem Statement
Well- functioning residential neighborhoods contain uniform and predictable sidewalk
surfaces without abrupt changes. Sidewalk surfaces should be flat and even without large
cracks, uplift or sinkholes.
Unfortunately the Sylvester's Addition neighborhood contains a high concentration of
sidewalk damage caused by trees, vehicles and unauthorized repairs. Repairs to damaged
sidewalks can be expensive and involve the use of heavy machinery. Sidewalk repairs are
the responsibility of the adjacent property owner, but can often be expensive and inefficient
if done in a piecemeal fashion.
If the sidewalk damage in residential areas persists or increases it may lead to an increase in
civil lawsuits at a significant cost to both property owners and the City.
Plan Goals
The purpose of this study is to develop a neighborhood revitalization plan to address the
issues of damaged sidewalks and parking availability. Accomplishing the goals may involve
the following types of activities: physical changes to the right -of -way configuration, removal
of mature street trees, modification to right -of -way irrigation systems and sidewalk
replacement. This Plan aims to outline how and where these activities should be applied.
Background
Scoping & Public Involvement
Neighborhood meetings were held in February, April, June and December of 2013 and March
of 2014, to allow property owners within the project area opportunities to provide staff with
input and information relevant to various aspects of the proposed projects' goals and
objectives. Throughout the scoping process some property owners expressed opposition to
any proposals involving widening road surfaces; citing the example of the W. Henry Street
road widening project where vehicle speeds increased as a result. Residents view the faster
traveling vehicles as a nuisance and/or hazard.
5
Alternatives Proposed
Originally staff presented a set of five alternate project goal statements to be used in
guiding path forward for project activities. Early on staff narrowed it down to a set of three
project goal alternates which were then presented to the neighborhood. During the first
couple of neighborhood meetings it became clear that the stakeholders were most closely
aligned with the goals contained in Alternate #1. The three proposed project goal alternates
are listed below.
Alternate i
Remove problem trees, repair damaged sidewalk and replant street friendly trees.
Alternate z
Remove problem trees, repair sidewalks and revise planting strips to include on- street
parallel parking.
Alternate 3
Remove problem trees, repair sidewalks and revise planting strips to include on- street
angled parking.
Neighborhood Meetings
To date, a series of five neighborhood involvement meetings were held at the Pasco Senior
Center. Prior to each meeting notices were mailed to affected property owners inviting
them to attend. Initially all property owners within the larger project area received meeting
notices but as the project focused more narrowly upon project sub -area 1, meeting notice
mailings were sent only to sub -area 1 property owners.
Neighborhood Meeting #1 (2 /2013)
During the first meeting, discussions addressed a broad scope of issues and concerns; not all
issues discussed pertained to the objectives of the Plan. The input received was useful to
develop a better understanding of the project area as the residents perceive it and how they
would like to see it in the future.
Neighborhood Meeting #2 (4/2013)
For the second meeting staff had prepared a set of three possible project alternatives aimed
at fixing damaged sidewalks and alleviating congested on- street parking. At the second
meeting residents initially indicated their overall preference for Alternate #1 which replaces
both broken sidewalks and trees associated with the damage; this alternate does not
address parking related problems.
I
Neighborhood Meeting #3 (6/2013)
The outcome of the third meeting was similar to that of the second meeting in that people
preferred alternate #1. At the third meeting the issue of aging utility systems was
mentioned. The study area was originally constructed over eighty (8o) years ago; municipal
utilities are on a 75 -year replacement schedule, so if it foreseen that the city intends to
update sewer /water lines the residents urged the city to possibly consolidate these projects
to eliminate or reduce multiple disturbances in the neighborhood.
Neighborhood Meeting #4 (12 /2013)
The fourth meeting was the first time project construction cost estimates were provided to
the affected property owners. The cost estimates were provided for tree removal and
replacement, stump removal, sidewalk removal and replacement and for the installation of
new landscape irrigation lines.
During the fourth meeting one or more property owners requested the option for a tree
installation waiver whereby a property owner could choose not to have a new tree planted
in front of their home. At the time of the meeting many stakeholders were under the
impression that property owners would be bearing the full cost of the project; because of
this they expressed a want to be responsible only for costs associated with construction
adjacent to each parcel. In other words, property owners did not like the idea of paying an
average cost rate based solely on their linear length of road frontage. Additionally, property
owner desired that the replacement trees be similarly large trees.
Neighborhood Meeting #5 (3/2014)
During the fifth meeting staff presented the few attendees with a diagram showing the
proposed finished streetscape layout including underground irrigation lines, trees and
sidewalks. Staff also presented a list of proposed tree species to be used as new plantings.
The tree species list was generated based on some research into individual species growth -
form and behavior and the list was also based upon a site visit to Job's Nursery. The final
species chosen are well stocked at the nursery and are of similar caliper and height to ensure
some degree of uniformity at the time of planting. All fruit bearing trees (including trees
with ornamental fruit) were excluded from consideration to avoid a variety of nuisances
associated with falling and rotting fruit.
Also during the meeting staff informed the attendees of the city's intent to secure project
funding entirely through Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funding sources and
that it is possible property owners may not be assessed for the expenses.
7
Construction Components
Trees
Over the past 75 — goo years, the trees originally planted in the right -of -way as part of the
streetscape design have grown substantially. Mostly Silver Maples, the trees have reached
over fifty feet in height. These trees have reached their maturity and have begun failing in
terms of structure. Woody debris as large as co- dominant stems and even entire trees have
begun to fall during high wind events. This condition is hazardous to people and property;
cars can be damaged and people can be hurt by the falling woody debris.
Although neighborhood residents expressed their enjoyment of the trees, retention of the
mature trees may be a detriment to the improvement project at hand. A majority of the
trees must be removed due to their interference with sidewalk replacement. For those
trees which are not an immediate threat to sidewalks, growth form is the greater concern.
Due to the propensity for the larger trees to fail and drop debris staff proposes to replace
them with more suitable tree species.
Some of the preferred tree species suitable for plantings along roadways in the project area
and which are locally available include but are not limited to the following:
Greenspire Littleleaf Linden (Tilia cordata)
Armstrong Maple (Acer freemanii)
Tulip Tree (Liriodendr_on tulip_ ifera)
Crimson Sentry Maple (Acer platanoides)
Quaking Aspen (Populus tremulo_i_des)
Corinthian Linden (Tili_a cordata)
Summer Sprite Linden (Tilia co_ rdata_`Halkar')
Variegated Boxelder (Acer negundo var.variegatum)
Using a well distributed combination of the species listed above is intended to create a
staggered tree canopy structure which will appear fuller at all heights. Combining low,
medium and tall trees will provide a tree canopy better able to resist wind from ground -level
upwards.
A comprehensive list of the City's preferred street trees is included in the appendix of this
Plan.
A
Parking
The neighborhood meeting component of the scoping process revealed the property
owner's general priority level for additional parking. From the meetings, staff's impression
is that the property owners (in attendance) do not value additional parking enough to justify
assessing the costs of modifying the right -of -way to provide it. Revisions to the existing
parallel on- street parking configuration are not proposed. Property owners saw that having
an on- street parking space in front of their home does not guarantee that the parking space
would remain available to them. Due to the perceived high number of vehicles per
household, the property owners felt that additional on- street parking would quickly fill up
with vehicles, many non - operational or infrequently used.
Irrigation
Installation of landscaping irrigation lines is a project component which has been presented
to property owners during the neighborhood meeting phase. The proposal for new
landscape irrigation includes installation of i -inch PVC lines leading from the front property
line of each home to the roadside landscape strip and then extending in either direction to
cover the full width of the parcels' landscape strip. As part of this project irrigation lines are
not proposed to be connected to the private municipal water line(s) belonging to each
parcel. For reference, an example of the proposed irrigation layout designed for a single
block of Park Street is included in the appendices of this Plan.
Priority Areas
The study area is divided into sub -areas organized by east -west oriented roadways using
alleys as convenient dividing lines. This grouping coincides well with the degree of sidewalk
damage observed and thus allowing priority to be assigned to each based on the amount of
work required to make repairs. Each sub -area is listed below in order of damage severity
with the first (Park Street) being having the highest degree of sidewalk damage and the
most large street trees.
Planning Department staff worked with Engineering Department staff to develop a certain
threshold for assessing sidewalk replacement and deciding when it is appropriate to retain
undamaged existing sidewalk. The threshold used is '/ of a city block. In other words,
sidewalk may be retained when it is contiguously undamaged for one half of one block or
more. There is no economy in retaining less than a %2 block; meaning it may increase costs to
attempt to retain portions of undamaged sidewalk less than a'' /2 block in length.
Z
Park Street
The Park Street project sub -area hereinafter referred to as "sub -area t", ranks first on the
Area Priority Ranking-". This sub -area contains that portion of Park Street bound by Stn
Avenue to the east and by Loth Avenue to the west. Sub -area t contains the highest number
of large /mature street trees in the study area and consequently also has the highest degree
of sidewalk damage. Sub -area 1 contains 3,800 linear feet of private property frontage; zoo
linear feet of which belong to the Lourde's Hospital parking lot and needs no work to
correct sidewalk damage. For discussion purposes Sub -area t contains 3,56o linear feet of
(residential) frontage applicable to improvements of this Plan.
Field studies revealed twenty five (25) mature and failing street trees on Park Street; all of
which are proposed to be replaced. These trees are primarily Silver Maples ranging in size
from 3 -5 feet in diameter and approximately 40 -50 feet in height. The trees have passed
their prime in terms of growth rate and appearance. The trees are in a state of decline,
dropping significantly sized woody debris such as co- dominant stems. These large fall -outs
damage property below the tree permanently altering the tree's balance. With every passing
year the likelihood the entire tree will fall during one of our region's high -wind events
increases.
Based on the % block survey standard mentioned above, all sidewalks fronting Park Street
(2,30o LF) must be replaced. In sub -area 1 staff found no need to replace sidewalks fronting
the numerically named roadways (5th 7th 8th and loth Avenues). These north -south oriented
roadways generally lack landscaping, including trees; as a result the sidewalks are
undamaged. These roadways are proposed to receive new street tree plantings.
Margaret Street
The Margaret Street project sub -area hereinafter referred to as "sub -area z ", ranks second
on the Area Priority Ranking Mao. Sub -area z contains far fewer large mature trees and far
less sidewalk damage than Park Street. Sub -area z is nearly identical in size to the Park Street
sub -area 1 but may require significantly fewer tree removals and possibly less sidewalk
replacement.
Sylvester & Nixon Streets
Properties fronting Sylvester Street have been grouped with properties fronting Nixon
Street. This sub -area hereinafter referred to as "sub -area 3 ", ranks third on the Area Priority
Ranking Map. Sub -are 3 is the largest of the three sub -areas and contains the highest
number of individual parcels. Despite its large size sub -area 3 contains the lowest
10
occurrence of damaged sidewalks in need of repair. For this reason it is assigned the lowest
priority for construction activity needs.
Sub -area 3 contains Sylvester Park which is an approximately z -acre city park containing
three tennis courts, two full basketball courts and a child's playground.
Henry Street
Originally the project area of this Plan included properties fronting Henry Street, between
5th and both Avenues. Staff surveys the project area revealed minimal to no sidewalk damage
along Henry Street. Due to the lack of remarkable damage to the Henry Street sidewalks or
other right -of -way infrastructure, the Henry Street sub -area has been excluded from further
proposed project construction activities and removed altogether from the Area Priority
Ranking Map.
Path Forward
To date a comprehensive planning analysis of construction needs has only been completed
for Sub -area i (Park Street). Following the completion of the first phase of construction
activities planning staff will repeat the planning and scoping processes within sub -areas z &
3. The intent behind waiting until sub -area t construction is complete before proceeding to
sub -areas z & 3 is to allow staff to modify certain strategies and concepts by adapting to the
outcomes and lessons learned from the first phase of construction. This delayed approach
will provide property owners an opportunity to visualize proposed project activities by
visiting Park Street to see an example of the final product.
Maintenance Responsibility
Currently, property owners within the project area maintain the roadside landscaping areas
in front of their homes, as has been the case since the creation of the neighborhood. The
city intends to continue with the assignment of right -of -way landscape maintenance to the
adjacent property owners.
Following the completion of right -of -way construction activities, property owners are to
continue maintaining their portion of the adjoining improvements. The term maintenance
means the proper upkeep of all infrastructure and living vegetation contained in that area
11
between the front property line and street curb, bound by parallel lines projecting forward
from the side property lines of each parcel.
Funding
Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Funding
It is the intent of the Community & Economic Development Department to fund project
costs by securing CDBG funds and in the future to possibly leverage funding from the
Sidewalk Improvement Program (CIP project). Staff will file a CDBG application in May (2014)
with the hopes of receiving grant funding for the 2015 project year.
CDBG entitlement grants may be used for infrastructure projects which provide a suitable
living environment (i.e. residential neighborhoods) in areas which primarily benefit low to
moderate income households. This Plan's project area is contained within a US Census Block
which qualifies as low to moderate income.
Appendix
1) Sylvester's Addition Neighborhood Improvement Plan Area Priority Ranking Map
z) Sylvester's Addition Neighborhood Improvement Plan Phase 1 Proposal Map
3) Recommended Trees for the Mid - Columbia Region
12
a
a
o a
z •o
o a'
T-
"M
HAV xis
HAV HIS
HAS' HZ8
HAd HIO i
a Q
� 3
a b
CIO
•
cn
w
0
Ll
HAV HIS
HAS' HZ8
HAd HIO i
a Q
� 3
a b
CIO
•
cn
w
z
'dAV
H1S
0
� W
G� F
a
W
a
w
3
a
3
N
a
a
3
N
n
i--V
0
�-1
b �
°0 0
zcj
a
o
a
'd
cu
W
j
C4
CIA
HAV H.LL
P.
a
0
r
a
3
3
a
a
z
0
� W
G� F
a
W
a
w
3
a
3
N
a
a
3
N
n
('e '� y a a n 2 t m = .2 m 3 .9 M c
Ed d d CO 'W
V ¢ ¢¢ ¢ m E ¢ ¢ ¢ g m U U
0
m
C
c
LL
N
o.
E M
M c H
H M
M z w
w "
"gin
c �
�° K
K .
.. g
g `o
y d
d °
°c a
a E
a a
a N E
E°
w £
£ E
E W
W d
E a
= =
= 3
3
N C
C 3
3
6 N
c 3
d N
N W
W d >
N W
c C
C
7 0
0 T
yy
O O
Ot v C
C« C
C C
C O C
C y 3
3 E
E L^ o
oN
O W
W
yy d
T
N O T
Ty'C
Q
y
.��yc.�.�
E d
O a
Olr
W W
N
>m
��m
.
E
v
E
9
a
2
yZ� a
N. N
N N
d m
C
W
E
9
O
p
p d
N
N N
N d
m
p C Q
Qi E
E W O
Ol Y
Y d F
FC m
YE d C
C N
NN N
N O
O
.
N L" J
W 3
3 E t
O W
« >
> Q
W o d
C
.92 L
ti O
t d
w
c�M L
L° _v 1
12 L
L°d m
m�� c
c Ec w
EL
LL U U
U' R
R a I
IOi 5. I
ILL 6
lLL C L
LL 6 >
>« U
U' U 0
0 L O
O
•
C.. W
W
•� W
C C
C
20 E
d W
W L
LD
p o
o c
N C
L
E y V
V o
o a
a
O C 1
a o
12 a
N £
o
o o
o
ma m
m a
a �
�a a
a Q
Q Q
Q Q
Q m
m
eaQ m
� Z
V! ¢
¢ o
NW f
o
�O
c �
f0 �
L
d L
C
d N
N V
V r
r O
O
C V
VJ M
M N
N O
O N
N N
N N
N l
l4
N c
c
th
$
C d
d
Q d
d C
o °
a
0 0
° a
V a
0 v
v o
v
r
a9i i
i° d
d a
a c
c N
N a
a
€2` c
AUd m
m €
` d
a
a
Z m
c
d
a Z
Ci Z
E a
Z
d
ti E
E o
o r
3 x
x r
E
rn 3
o E
r H
H E
2
d o
o
Z
E
E c
c
z C i
ip u
u o
f c
c 0
c° ¢
¢ N
N c
c
r% z
o f
0 c
E L
LL
Q U L O
O N
N N
N €
€ C
C >
> >
> E
E N
N
cc E
E
zW Z m
m m
m C
Co o
oC E
E `
`d_
M — E
E n
n v
v u
u E
E .
.W N
N
0
m
C
c
LL
N
o.
W
LL
d
m
a
«
w
�
E
O
p
H O
'O
�•
N
W
LC
W
fEll
N F
U) C
y
OI
C
OW
`+
C
N
w
0
d
m
� J
>
W `+
L
d
_
n
m E
m
m'
N
U m
a
c
'
°
0
��ee
E�
V5
C
L° ;
U'
F; E
C
N N
d
C O
6
d
dy
dy
c�
c
z m
w'L
o
sp
C C
O
12
L°
O
�Q N
W T
O Cj
W
O"
N W
E
O
C
-
c E
°>
c o
r
y
3
rc
m
@>
d
N
v
�
d o
C
C
d
G
°y
p
d
w m
m
m�E
nm
E
'dQ
my
e
c
Yna
nm
Lm
9
O N
W O
r
°1
m
O
C J
a
N
"Q'
>
W
; m Lo
3
J
z
m d
c
6G
r
3
C
v
b
N
C
N
C
`1
N=
d
c
m
'
MC m
C C
N
d
W
N
c
N$�
c
N
c
m Ol
N
O>
d W
..0.
N
E S
d '>
C
m F«
.�
j
O W
d y
d
a 6
y
E' m
O
G
N
E
0;
N O
E m
d
o o
m
o 3
3
mn o
N
NC
G
_
c `m y
°—
° E$
��°O
m
3
�Cd7S
0
E@
W
W
v E°
E �omN
d°OOc
�m0O
;
x
0_ 0
9 0
'�Ey y
dv� rn
E
(d 7
Ud w°G
va
�c
a0
�o -9
o'cS8
c�
cn(7@
ai
a
0
O
gcg
E
€
0
0
0o
E
E
y
b
«
b
b
0 1
C
N
?
N
>
N
?
A
o
c
a
a
U
O N
U
2
N
2
2
2
d
0 y
7
N
co U
N
H
O
m
<
<
m
m
a
<
<
m
m
<
<
Q
<
<
m
o°
2
ad
m
N
O
m
O
N
N
N
op
T
�4
m
W
w
�
w
h
u1
N
C
W
O
r
cs
N_
�
7
m
C
�
7
E
d
rn
m
a
c
z
0
v
m
E
d
w
E
o
o
o
E
3U0
c
c
y
m
m
�V
N
Wn
y
O.
c
c
W
pcprr
3
Y
n
U
c
V
O
t
O
m
N
9
d
p
o
o
c
m.
d
d
E
o
m
c
t
mp
U
U
U
U
C
O
LL
p
2
a
wCC
U)
Z
U
U
U
L)
J
J
m
J
U
C
C
7
'2
C
C
`a
O1
c
d
a=
E
rn°
c
U
N
0
m
w
O
-Om
o
m
c
m
2
c
d
'c
C7
m
m
c
g<
p
d
C
a
m
c
d
'°
m
o°
'�
V
c
N
2
m
m
a
m
N
Tic
0
W
c
�
E
m
m
�
N
W
ami
Ol
E
v
c
LX
E
N L
'Q
A
E
g
L°
2
V
U
u°.
<7
�
O
a
a
dU
K>
N
N
fn
r
W
LL
d
m
a
0
x
0
mo
m
v
rn
m
a
M
N
O
a
m
Ol
a
n
4
me
a
u
c
o
w
a
E
y
N
W
O ry
a C
n
c
LL c Lm
m
-a
w
c:�in
m
a
Na
cc
c
y
yuia
Q
y
=
H@
c
y
T E
_
m
3
�3 E
-O
m
E
m
,P
z
'L
w
L
- E
_
_
m:
'L°
m«
m m
c
-0-
d `o c
@
--
me
m
E
Ec
mrna
=mmyO
.E3C
S
cLf'} m
>
3
�
. N
N
.
O
La
'
m
m
Lc°m
_0
y 3
c.TN>
aoE
o
O
O
m
Q
O
—d
U`
9
d
y
p
E
y
EpC «R T
•J
N0
m«�
m
E!?
mm
VOOO
—Taw
P.
O
�m
O'OO(�%
m
mN
amC}%yy
—C
m
'
m
�Oi
L,
°m
Om��
EE
EEy
@y
E
a
E
Emvo
m>
a
c
°
0?
m
e
rn m
0 3
E
E««««
y
«
E
a
= m
a E
m m
3
r
5
UN
Z E '
LL
cm
=
�
W
««
y
N
N
>iE
N d
N
y
m
y
°mmm-
m
E
y
E
mm
mm
WE
mwm
£S
E LD
m
z
°m
E
m
C E
b
m
J
m@ O
wa
m
�myO
°a
W
m
6-
J
Yni
m U N
C
w
O
C
m
N
�
a
E
E
�0
o F
c
0
c
�j my
m
Q
m
E 3
na
€
a
n�
E
E
m e
a W
m
m
y
m
c
Z rJn
f
z m
pcU
G
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
a
m
�
_N
O
N
O
N
N
N
-
O
N
N
N
t0
C?
O
N
O
N
N
O
N
O
N
d
In
N
O
O
O
O
ab
N
O
O
N
10
O
OS
O
In
L
N
M
N
N
N
O
N
N
N
m0
SN
Nh
thr
O
N
N
00000CS
H
C'�O
V
V
N
Ow
V
V
ON
ON
O
N
hObm
N�
Y1
U
d
U
m
J
Yrym
m
'C
m
G
Y
J
T
0
m
C
NI
0
T
N
C
gi
T
T
m
N
G
E
N
a
v
m
o
y
E
c
°c
a
o
m
?
a
d
E
U
V
E
U
_v
a
¢
L
•�
2
a
v
n
y
Q
L°
E
m
r
o
c
m
m
x¢
E
w
a
N
o
ozw
p
W
y
wires
m
m
W
E
m
U
m
d
a
E
W
F
-�
'O
A
E
y=
d
=
=
a
d
ai
v.2
d
ai
c_¢Uma
�___
u
v
'Z
a'
rn
°o
3
y,`ii
E.o
au
a
a
o
m����ii
nnn
naa
aaaz
E9
c
rn
x
xmiiii
y
iciu`
o
a
b
N
O.
d
m
OI
fq
N
W
C
O
m w
c-
'�
y
C
C
N
m
Q1
a
6
C
m
.0
C
m
C
._
w
a•
n
m
m
oaQm
°c
co
E
E
E
E
m
v
m
m
W
w
10
°-'
x
x
`m_
m
c
N
a
-
_Z
m
w
E
c
"
E
m
m
a
n
a
u
v
N
a
c44
y
c
a
m<
rn
n
n
n
2
2
2
S
,k
x
.m".
x
x_
-
c
n
w
V
a
m
m
m
¢
°F4
.Q
E
m¢aa
¢
¢
¢¢¢¢¢
d¢¢
ci
ci
cLi
ci
M
N
O
a
m
Ol
a
M
N
O
N
@
at
a
N
C
C Y
C
�O
6y
y
6
a
>W
>
L_
N
O@
N C
C y
L
LL
3 E
EL
Qa
N
E
y
wwm
ca
Wj
rnNd
'ernc
a
c
y
12 N
G
E
-0 N
to
o�
E
E
1y�
C
N
o�
w
c
pc
c
E
ONy�
E Q ' «E
a «
E C
;
a
p 8
2 E
E
E
Q
E
'a
-_
LX
@ p
W
E
d
j O
y O C
C
0
Q
W
W-
@> L
T
OI W
D-
N
>
W
1i N�
O O]
T.
>
A d
@ Y
W
N12@
>; m
N
LL
E
L^
W .� W«
y_«
L9
U L
"
m�
N
'C
Q
L�
t
C
W Q
EZC
oc
p_o
aW
c
J�aai
N
i>m
°
C
QED
C a W
r�mE
E
ctWy
N
cF
�E
�°f7
U
@o °mom
°a
m.%@..
`off
�a
waW W
m`° W
E'ESi
2'c
$qq
$
y$On1
N
J
0 c
'p
$$J
n
v°
m
mn
a@i
v°
@ 3 3
'C W t
j5 rn
.
❑'2
W
C
O
C
C
,C
C
N
GC
S
�
L
O
W
OI
�
J
N
C
O
C
t.
W
D
.W
js@
N
p
W
2
C
N >
n
>
>
W
O W
n E
yK-..
c
p
c
K
N
n m
N
m
N
m
E
a°Ni @
`°
o
« U
U
U
U
Z in
Q
Z
w
2
Z M
N
1p
Q
Q
Q
a
N
�
"=
v
N
N
N
o
M
s
M
M
_
WO
ON
4N'
N
N
(7
N
ON
O
r
O
N
O
M
ip
V
N
S
N
j
C
E
E
J
m
T
2
C
N
@
N
Y
C
Q
d
C
9
0
V
D
:E
7
S
@
O
« U
C y
LD
V
W
E
W
_
=
'
E
°c
o
>
c
'a
c
m
yc
c
:�
y�t0
'3
W
2
Y
O
U
W
@
c
A
p
E
N
U
W@
°
@
3
0
LL
3
H«
t
W
(/I
N
0
0
°o
N
°o
�Q
n
m
a
fn
LL,
E
o
W
L
c
°cr
E
A
E
o
o@
c
0:2
A
n
n
e
o
c
@
E
o c
v
LL
m U
U
O
0
O
m
O
E
O
W
@
@
L
{yp
p,UO
Y
Om
(9iU
H
a
¢U
Oa
zU
U
a
Um
O
N
v
p
�
w
N
=
Ul
j
E
C
C
a
L
W
W
N
m
<
C
W
d
aZV@,
3��
N<
E
C
C
c
m-
o
Na
W
rn
x
@
_q
W
W
T
n
LL
0
E
N
N
W
7
y
N
O
>C
>
J
J
UN
U
1`t N
p
`
°a
U
m
UO
v
0
22
a
do
M
N
O
N
@
at
a
0
v
a
M
O
w
a
m
C T
w
>
O
O
w
C 'C
m Q
N
N
N
O
ail
N
_
rn
�"
c
c
m
rn
n
3
3
.m
N
@
_O 3
t;«
ai
.c,
E
m y
a�i
$' Q
m
m
m
m
O
N>
s
C
O1
01
ZE
i
N W
j
C n
m
'O
a
a
a
y
T
L
T
W d
T
NOy
T
«O• L
.p
jp
O
C
«
§
aEc
°''�
aei
aei�c
.te
«�
`mm
_c
E
y
P
3
0 �°
w
m
«
n d
« cw
m
w
m
o
w
w
�w
o
rn
o'
rn
E
>o
w
rno
°Q .�
EE
a
a
a
a
c
�ww
m =E
E�'N
a
y_c
10�
m�,�3o
N C
c
c
w
0 a
w
N E
a
W =
a
m_
m
a
W
N
mace
c «v
vm�
awi
awim
v
i�mof
-°ow
2
e
o
m
rn
E
E c
c a
m
w
mat
°
9
cc
w
m
m
mm ao
w
iC
Me
3Y343(
.0 v ':E=E?
3s
3
<
o
L'i
N
a
a
o
`o
0
m
a
a
o
a
$
0
a
w
c
u
rd
v
u
a
a
a
a
a
p
c
a�
c
E
y
@
w
8
a
w
a
m
c
a
m
a
N
W
m
C
E
V
c
U
x
lu
m
2
m
2
m
x
m
2
m
S
m
2
V
L
a
O
.am.
O
h
O
N
O
y
0
0
IN
d
N
1�OO
O
O
O
a16
N
O
N
O
h
mthN
N
M
N(�l
M
V
M
V
M
MM
N
V
N
M
N
H
V
V
=
y
p
m
2
O
th
0
N
i 0
!h
O
N
O
V'
O
V'
O
N
O
IO
O
N
l0
V'
lO
V
t0
10
t0
th
O
.j
O
N
y
v
w
m
c
w
E
o
O
>
t
v
aci
ii
p
N@
c
c
C7
a
o
G
t
O
y
o
T
w
O O
E
w
a
m
v
]
m
c
c
a
E
ti
E
m
c
O
w
T
x
a
N
O
y f
m
U
C
E
m
mw
v
w
Nwe
C
w
C
w
O
Y
w
IC
y
0N
205
0()
05
_
ai
ai
a
E
K
LL
LL
y
n
n
0
o
M
M
a
E
m
m
w
w
w
W
w
w
o
u
a
Q
0
M
wU2
2
¢
¢m
om
m
m
m
2w
c
C
'm
Q
o
3O
U
O
d
p
Q'
M
Q
O
E
hm
i
d
0
v
0
awi
o
c
c
m
w
E
W
L
1
n
a
a°
c
c
c
E
m
m
v
n
N�Ei,�
mw
ma
c
y
A
`w
m
`wv
m
o
'n
c�ma¢a
as
°�
I
I
w
I
I
l<
a`�
3
3
as
M
O
w
a
m
0
w
m
6
E
E
E2
2
m
_c
cdLL$
c
o
wm
it
.ac
fin=
�
Et
Hv
E
Y�''U'
om
oii
L°
20
v�L
�i
ai
m
�w
wm
a3
m o
t°
`m
3
w
cm
a
i.wE"
c
W
m
cc
@
w
° nm o
n
•r.m °�
me
;
A
;"
m
_
a
�
oh
I?
!
w
y
s�
"
un'i
o
cc
•vC
c
'« Eo
n
oxU
'co
�c
.o
L.6n_Z
a
� �
°mN
$ e
mC
OR
12
0
0
�t c
;
cC
c
5
_
'�° .N
v
m
oL
m
o
c
N
v
i
c
g
]E:E
c
°r
'
mm.
L
m
c
'n
o
n
m
"
b L
«dd
c
m
'
2 2
e
B
y�
m
12
�L
m
'L E
m
G
9H
N
am
°n
N
T ?c
2
m m
��°ac
m v
wi m
E
c
ymm�
c
O_ u
o —
m m
?> '
o
nw
ime
i�wacL° �i
w
i�m
m
m
m
0
� 1u
u'
-
Fv w
M
�.-m
>Da
00
O
.�
w
W
N
w
m
N
m
m
c
9
y
o
E
o
c
e
y
y
=
m
a
c
E
E
;
c
m
c0zm
°
z
a
V
Z
®
•O
M
M
IOm
N
N
M
M
m
N
N
N
N
M
M
N
N
N
M
c0'1
to
VM
O
O
O
(°
n
�°n
s
y
d
o
x
o
c
A
u
m
�
c
y
a
o
u
V
t
c
U
cm
C
O
C
E
o
E
E
m
x `m
y
3
°c
>
v
m
o
p
?
U
a m
Y
C
N
L�
N
y
N
Cv 7
y
S
m
m
4
S_ S
°
o
E
2
CF
.6
m
c
e
m
o
W
E
x
E c
m
c
mm
c
i
€
c
m
C
a
y
O
m
9
a
5 c
o
0
i
9oam
o
m
m
E
Q
Um
U
xm
t
OJ¢m
x
v
cm 7
!
xn
ac
0
m
m0
tt�
m'w
cc
c
w
Z
€
d
IL
c
E
a
>
E
d
m
w
.c
E
o
c
em=u
H
'�
g
w
E
m
R
n
(p
9
>�.
2
m
w
y
N
6
'uU
c
N
V
g
C
y
9
rypC
N
j
OI
U
w
J
05
Aom
c
y
m
'o
w«
5'
«m-e
2
,°�
m
°
me
°
Oa
0
1m
F
r
S
m
0
w
m
6
M
.-I
O
W
m
N
d
M
0
O
w
W
a
Lo
u
3
N
N
w
o
0
w
c
'
o
�'.
�'
E
v
06
Wn
..
`-
w
e
E
W
>
W
'�
c
F
_
m
E0 W
`o
m
o
m
ai
v
>
W
E
'E
v
m
•q
;�
c
m
o
9
p
m
c
y
aF_
o
3
=
!`
'5 o
t
w
c
0
c
r 3 b
N c
c
m
E
o
er
m
c
w 0
Ei
:2
m
>;
o
W
g
N
209
>
SO
O
�E
v
a0i
�S'c
0
d
°m E
52
W
m
E«
°
�•m
?c
ma
�•A
E °n
W
5
m
E
8
Nom
>
mn
N=
0£
E3
N
L
5£
N
N m
w w
N
N
d
m
O C
01 ;Ew
O y
N
nS.L.
WN
NN
>
>C�
>N
>
>
0m0d
m=
WO
'0
W
�oC7
W
N
(Imo
O %H
rnU'
600
0
U'
DU'
f7
E
y
a
n
=
E
c
P1
W W
c
00
L
Qc
E
«°
0LD
0
o
o
;
Wy
dy
E
'2
rEi
E
0
W
d
U
2
o
Z
Q
c
0
c
lom
•C
¢ E
tp
i
0
O
°
V
a?
M
n
ut
m
p
m
O
10
Yf
N
O
O
O
O
O
p
N
N
O
t
O
O
Q
O
O�pp
O
m
O
E
3
h
0
o
E
o
m
o
0
0
o
m
nmmmm
o
O
d
0
O
C
a6
a
c
O
0
v°
0
0
3
0
d
0
�
m
�
•�
�
Y
0
�
O
N
U
•n
0
w
0
z
a
�
E
2
a
E
0
ai
C
'c c 0
N
m o u
E
o
o
O
z
Q
°
Q
>
S
E E
mmUZ
d
c
dO
w
N
m
o
m
g
32
w
C
E
O
O
O
a
W
W
00'UO
U
m
J
W
li
W
C
Qi
w
O
_FN
C
O
O
°o
m
W
N
8
c
w
N
J
_W
W
m
0
0
0
o
3,
ex
E
a
c
E
tWi
c
c
°m
m
x
W
n
S
E
°c
xis
H
E
E
2�
Z
c E
2
�
N
N
Fc
w
o
Vm¢U
wWLL
C7
U
:3
o.ay
ddddrn
F
S
S
M
0
O
w
W
a
M
N
W
O
N
d
T
@
a
c
C
d
d
s
s
L
t
a
v
i
c
c
c
a
c_
a
c
d
W
c
'c
c
c
c
•e
3
a
d
10
3
3
t0
N
�
W
CC
CC
CC
aj
Eg
�
N
a
N
N
pNp
p,
d
V
K
Z
Z
N
Z
ii1
C
CmS7
m
6
K
U
G
O
N
M
N
M
N
M
O_
N
N
N
N
N
O'
N
N
O
O
0
6
0
IN
d
O
O
^
O
w
[O')
N
O
_
V
9
h
T
O
M
M
C?
N
N
N
lh
N
M
d
O
G
0
0
0
0
0
N
C
a
O
O
O
N
O
O
O
O
d
S
nMaaa
Nt0
�(hN
N
NCO
e'(O
N
NN
N
c
'n
v
m
�
3
u
m�
m
d
y
a m
a n
d
o
Z
m
�'
s
c
E
E
'in
am
2
y
m
m
_
N
C
O
C
a
C
O
K
m1
L
L
W
Q
O@
L
N
m
C
Q
N
9
ry
d
6
0
0
`
C
C C
d
d
Z
c
b
L'
U'
v
E
�'
'o
v
adi
c
`v
y
o
S
d
IM
v
c
@�
C
C
N
O
w U
L
�Lm
>m
Q c
F
°
ay
v
°v
aa
n
2
c
c
c
c d
c
U
L
0
cam
yUay
U
0
U
U
=E�
`n
LLm
m
0
a
d
b
E
"v
ad
tQ
d
d
a
O
N
�t
oC
J
C
C
c
d
c
N
�j
`•
O
0
2
9
d
N
m
F
E
O
U
N
N
Q
U
N
N
7
2
N
d
W
C
W
C
y
N
a
C
a
C
- 8
0
0804.
C
'W
!
d
d
m
u
w
o
9@
C
WE
•,
e
U
N
C
6
C
N
O.
�'
Y O
@
a
N
W
W O
m
W
2
E
O
N
d
C
d
c
9
v
v
@
>>
'c
W.
i
a
E
E
n
W
@
>
>>
>
>
O
O
o
a
a=
—O
d
d
d
L d
L
c
c
c
C
U
W
m
LL
QUO.
dafAF
s
LL
QmUU
U
Ua
U�
d
a
'a
as
as
m
m
M
N
W
O
N
d
T
@
a
E
)))
0�C
{2«
kkk
m
mmm
j
F
EEE
EEE
X22
_
�\[
�2�=
[
ƒ(
(((
7
\
E
)
\]]7
]]]
\
�
�f
\k
//
k
{k
�§
�kifff
°ee
3E
K2Go>
)
kkk
§J
■334
E
2
0
L
o
&
o
U-
U.
LL
o
o
U-
U-
o
U-
o
U-
o
U-
U-
o
U-
U-
o
U-
.
k
■
2
v
�
■
k
k�
E
0
k
\k�C
2§
))
���Fr
mE
sec
l
�
75
)LL
U—
2)
/
�
)
!
00;66
®$$4e§�°§&
[�
q
>0
EUL
nm��Ezz
§eee
®
\
§
§(ƒƒ22
~
<w�
=
-��
«w�®
-n
2§2clCLCL
ee\
§)a)0)a)
\
Qu<
<1
<<
000=aaaa.
(L
EEEa-
AGENDA REPORT
FOR: City Council April 22, 2014
TO: Gary Crutchfie anager Workshop Mtg.: 4/28/14
Regular Mtg.: 5/5/14
FROM: Rick Terway, rector, Administrative & C in ty Services
SUBJECT: Fencing Standards - I -182 Overlay District
I. REFERENCE(S):
1. Fencing Standards — Vicinity Map
2. Fencing Standards — Proposed Ordinance
3. Fencing Standards — Proposed Resolution
4. Fencing Standards — Current Photos of I -182 Fence
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
4/28: Discussion
5/5: MOTION: I move to adopt Ordinance No. , amending PMC
25.75.050 "Design Standards" to provide for Uniform Fencing Standards in the
I -182 Corridor, and, further, authorize publication by summary only.
MOTION: I move to approve Resolution No. , providing for the
replacement of nonconforming I -182 Overlay District fences.
HI. FISCAL IMPACT:
See Below.
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
A) In 2011, the city organized an Estate Fence Committee and held public meetings
to make recommendations for alternatives to the failed "Surewood" fence
material. The material was becoming brittle and easy to break and due to the
inferior product it is no longer manufactured. Several types of fence materials
were considered and it was determined that cedar would be the best due to its
strength, the ability to power wash to remove graffiti and the ability to re -stain to
maintain a consistent appearance.
B) In 2012, Council approved an Ordinance & Resolution requiring the replacement
of the "Surewood" fencing material along Road 100 and Road 84 with the cedar
material. That replacement effort has been largely accomplished, resulting in the
desired outcome.
V. DISCUSSION:
A) The section of fence along I -182, which is highly visible from the interstate, is in
poor condition. This appearance is substandard and harms the perception and
value of the community. Several neighborhood meetings were held to discuss the
condition of the fence with little turn out. However, most who did attend favored
replacing the fence with assistance from the city similar to the Road 100 and Road
84 experience.
B) Staff is recommending the same method that was used along Road 100 and Road
84 where the city removed and disposed of the old "Surewood" and installed the
new cedar material. Residents would be responsible for the cost of the new cedar
fencing material and have the choice of a one -time payment or 12 monthly
installments to the city. The price per foot for this fence project is $5.00, the same
4(c)
as it was for the fence along Road 100 and Road 84. Lots in this area range from
20 feet at a cost of $100 to 163 feet at a cost of $815. Current staff and/or
volunteers can complete the project at no additional cost to the city or residents.
In order to accomplish the replacement, however, the city's ordinance for fencing
standards must be amended first.
C) Staff recommends approval of the proposed ordinance and resolution.
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE of the City of Pasco, Washington,
Amending Section 25.75.050 "Design Standards" to Provide
for Uniform Fencing Standards in the I -182 Corridor
WHEREAS, the City has pursuant to PMC 25.58.020 identified the I -182 Overlay
District as significant to the well -being and image of the City requiring additional development
regulations to create an aesthetically attractive area within the City, including its visual
appearance from the I -182 freeway; and
WHEREAS, the visual attractiveness of this area contributes to the economic and
residential value of this area; and
WHEREAS, the residential areas within this Corridor adjacent to the freeway have
installed estate fences known as "Surewood" fences; and
WHEREAS, the City has found such fences have experienced rapid deterioration,
including slats that are easily broken or removed with a very light impact, as well as susceptible
to stains, discoloration, and the difficult removal of graffiti, and is no longer available in the
market for replacement of damaged or destroyed slats; and
WHEREAS, the City has previously organized an Estate Fence Committee to make
recommendations for alternatives to the failed fencing material and, having conducted public
hearings in this regard, has declared such fences nuisances and nonconforming to the purposes
for which they were intended; and
WHEREAS, it is recognized by the City Council that those fences within the I -182
Overlay Corridor represent a public interest in maintaining aesthetic attractiveness for this
district. NOW, THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON; DO ORDAIN
AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That Section 25.75.050 entitled "Design Standards" of the Pasco
Municipal Code shall be and hereby is amended and shall read as follows:
25.75.050 DESIGN STANDARDS.
(1) Fences, Walls and Hedges.
(a) The height of fences, walls and hedges located between a structure and
street or alley shall be measured from the street curb or alley grade except in those cases
where topographical irregularities occur. The height of fences, walls and hedges between
Ordinance Amending
PMC 25.75.050 - 1
a structure and a common lot line shall be measured from the grade along the common lot
line or top of any structural retaining wall occurring at the common lot line;
(b) Fences and walls in commercial districts shall complement the materials
used in any principal on -site structures;
(c) The height of fences, walls and hedges shall be limited to 3.5 feet within
the front yard area of residentially zoned lots, retail business and office zoned lots;
provided, when two contiguous corner lots, or two corner lots separated only by an alley
right -of -way, form the entire frontage between parallel or nearly parallel streets, the
height of fences, walls and hedges shall be limited to 6 feet within the front yard adjacent
to the side street; except where the front door of a house faces the side street all fences
greater than 3. 5 feet in height must be set back to the building line of the house facing
the side street;
(d) The height of fences, walls and hedges within the side and rear yards of
residentially zoned lots, retail business and office zoned lots shall be limited to 6 feet. A
gate or opening with a minimum 3 foot width leading into at least one side yard shall be
provided;
(e) Fences shall not be constructed out of tires, pallets, bed springs, multi-
colored materials, tarps, plastic sheets, corrugated sheet metal, except in industrial
districts, wheel rims and similar or like materials not traditionally manufactured or used
for fencing purposes. Hog wire, chicken wire, horseman wire mesh, v -mesh, field fence,
woven field fence, welded utility fence, or any similar or like wire fencing material is not
permitted in residential or commercial zones. Horseman wire mesh and the other wire
fencing listed above may be permitted in suburban residential districts on tracts larger
than one acre that are used for animal husbandry. Fences built with valid permits prior to
the effective date of this chapter or fences on properties annexed to the City after the
effective date of this chapter are exempt from this subsection;
(f) Fences constructed of wrought iron with interspersed brick or block
columns of up to 5 feet in height may be permitted within front yards in the R -S -20 & R-
S-12 districts provided said fencing is 85 percent transparent;
(g) Barbed and razor wire fencing is prohibited in all Residential districts, in
the Office district and the Central Business district. Barbed wire may be permitted in
suburban residential districts on tracts larger than one acre that are used for animal
husbandry. In the C -1 Retail Business district only one strand of barbed wire is permitted
along the top rail or within 2 inches of the top rail;
(h) Electrified fences are not permitted in residential districts except as a
secondary means of securing property where the electrified fence is located behind an
existing fence or in suburban districts to contain permitted farm animals;
Ordinance Amending
PMC 25.75.050 - 2
(i) In all front yards, whether on properties with single, double, or triple
frontage, rails, posts and other structural fence supports shall not be visible from a public
street; except that posts and rails that are an integral part of the fence design and
aesthetics and not used solely for structural support may be visible from a public street;
0) All fencing in commercial and industrial districts shall be placed on the
inward side of any required perimeter landscaping; with landscape treatments occurring
along the street frontage.
(k) No fence, wall or hedge, landscape material or foliage higher than 3 feet
above curb grade shall be located or planted within an area 20 feet along the property
lines from the intersection of two streets including the area between such points, or 15
feet from the intersection of a street and an alley; provided however, if an alternative
fence material is used such as masonry, wrought iron, wood, or combination there -of
then the fence must be 75 percent transparent and may be a maximum 6 feet in height, or
a smaller, 75% transparent fence set upon a maximum 3 -foot wall or other structure not
exceeding a combined height of 6 feet, may be erected within said area of intersection of
street and alley so long as the fence is at all times unobstructed by foliage or other matter;
(1) Fences constructed in any zoning district may be permitted at the back of
sidewalks in public right -of -way upon approval of the City Engineer, except as provided
in 25.75.050(1)0);
(m) All residential fencing within the I -182 Overlay District as defined by
PMC 25.58.020 adiacent to the I -182 right -of -way shall be constructed of masonry block
Replacement of pre- existing "Surewood" fences within the district shall use masonry
block or cedar material prescribed by the city as pre - stained, knotless cedar 23/32s thick
and 5.5 inches wide and 6 feet tall.
(nm) No fence or wall shall be erected without first obtaining a building permit
from the building inspector.
(2) Clearance Distances. Where a fire hydrant is located within a landscape area it
shall be complemented by a minimum clearance radius of 3 feet; No tree, as measured from its
center, shall be located within 10 feet of a street light standard, within 5 feet of a driveway or a
fire hydrant;
(3) Commercial and Industrial Districts.
(a) The first 10 feet of all commercial and industrial property abutting an
arterial street and the first 5 feet of all commercial and industrial property abutting a local
access street shall be treated with landscaping at the time the property is developed. No
less than 65 percent of the landscaped area must be treated with live vegetation at the
time of planting.
Ordinance Amending
PMC 25.75.050 - 3
(b) In addition to the requirements contained in this chapter and unless
specified otherwise in Chapter 25.58, commercial and industrial zoned properties
adjacent to properties in less intense zoning districts shall have a 10 foot landscape buffer
on the side immediately adjacent to less intense zoning district. The landscaped buffer
shall meet the following standards:
(i) Live vegetation within the landscape buffer shall be planted with a
mix of evergreen and deciduous trees and shrubs interspersed throughout the
landscape buffer;
(ii) The live vegetation shall consist of 40 percent evergreen trees.
(iii) Trees shall be provided at a minimum rate of one tree for every 20
linear feet of property line and spaced no more than 30 feet on center spacing
along each property line, unless planted in groupings of 3 trees, with groupings
spaced no more than 50 feet on center along each property line.
(iv) Shrubs shall be provided at a minimum rate of 1 per 8 linear feet of
property line and spaced no more than 16 feet apart on center.
(v) Parking lots located adjacent to properties in less intense zoning
districts require 100 percent of the landscape buffer to be planted with live
vegetation.
(C) The area between property lines and the back edge of street curbs, within
right -of -way and exclusive of sidewalks and driveways for ingress /egress, shall be treated
with landscape materials.
(4) Residential Districts. At least 50 percent of the required front yard area for all
residential property including right -of -way but, excluding driveways, shall be treated with live
vegetation. Planting strips shall be treated as per PMC Section 12.12.047; and
(5) All areas of a lot or parcel not landscaped or covered with improvements, shall be
maintained in such a manner as to control erosion and dust. Gardens within established
landscapes are excluded from this provision in Residential Districts. Front yard areas not
covered by the required 50 percent live vegetation must be covered by mulches or decorative
rock. (Ord. 4110, 2013.)
Section 2. The City Council finds that Surewood fences within the I -182 Overlay
District are defective and constitute a public nuisance requiring their removal and replacement.
The City Council, by Resolution, shall provide a procedure for the transition from the
nonconforming " Surewood" fences to fences consistent with the standards provided in Section 1
above.
Ordinance Amending
PMC 25.75.050 - 4
Section 3. This Ordinance shall take full force and effect five (5) days after its
approval, passage and publication as required by law.
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco, Washington, and approved as
provided by law this _ day of 2014.
Matt Watkins, Mayor
Attest:
Approved as to Form:
Debbie Clark, City Clerk Leland B. Kerr, City Attorney
Ordinance Amending
PMC 25.75.050 - 5
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION of the City of Pasco, Washington, providing for the
replacement of nonconforming I -182 Overlay District fences.
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the "Surewood" fences located within
the I -182 Overlay District have experienced rapid deterioration and are susceptible to stains and
discoloration, thereby, constituting a public nuisance; and
WHEREAS, the "Surewood" product is no longer in production, and no longer available
for replacement resulting in a mismatch of colors, texture, and size defeating the goal of an
attractive, consistent district; and
WHEREAS, the City Council had established a standard for fencing for this district and
seeks a rapid replacement of the existing nonconforming fencing with fencing consistent with the
standards established and that the "Surewood" fences have exceeded their useful life as a result
of their defective condition. NOW, THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON, DO
RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The "Surewood" fencing materials previously used as components for
fencing along the I -182 freeway have proven to be defective for its intended purposes, and is
prohibited from use with the I -182 Overlay District. All existing "Surewood" fences within said
District are declared to be nonconforming and constitute a public nuisance and must be replaced.
Section 2. Nonconforming "Surewood" fences exist within that area generally
described as Broadmoor Place Phase 2, Block 1, Lots 14 -17 and Broadmoor Place Phase 3, Lots
12, 13 14 and 22 -30 along the I -182 gateway. All "Surewood" fence materials (slats) shall be
replaced with those complying with the standards established by PMC 25.75.050(1)(m) as
amended by Ordinance No.
Section 3. The . reasonable time for the replacement of the nonconforming
"Surewood" fence shall occur on or before October 1, 2014. Any "Surewood" fences remaining
after such date shall constitute a violation of PMC 25.75.050, and may be subject to abatement.
Except as provided below, the property owners upon which the nonconforming "Surewood"
fence is located shall be responsible for the full costs of the fence's replacement and the full
responsibility to have such replacement completed before the deadline specified above.
Section 4. To encourage and assist in the prompt transition to conform with the
prescribed standard in an orderly fashion, the City shall assist with installation of new cedar and
disposal of old materials. The City will also allow for 12 monthly payments for the cost of the
material only.
Resolution - 1
Section 5. Administrative Appeal. Any property owner aggrieved as a result of the
adoption of the new standard as provided above, due to the condition of their fence, recent
installation, or extraordinary circumstances, may appeal the application of the prescribed
standard to their property to the City Manager, or his designee, within sixty (60) days of date of
receipt of notice from the City of the nonconforming fence.
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco, Washington, as its regular meeting
dated this day of , 2014.
Matt Watkins, Mayor
ATTEST:
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Debra L. Clark, City Clerk Leland B. Kerr, City Attorney
Resolution - 2
loll%
AGENDA REPORT NO. 15
FOR: City Council April 23, 2014
TO: Gary Crutchfe Manager
FROM: Ahmad Qayou i, Public Works Directo 1 Workshop Mtg.: 04/28/2014
SUBJECT: Industrial Pre - Treatment Program
I. REFERENCE(S):
1. Industrial Pre - Treatment Program — Amended Administrative Order from WSDOE
2. Industrial Pre- Treatment Program — Draft Ordinance
(Council packets only; copy available in Public Works office, the Pasco Library or
on the city's website at www.pasco - wa.gov for public review)
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
04/28: Discussion
HL FISCAL IMPACT:
Sewer Funds $184,000 / PWRF $200,000
Pre - Treatment Permit Cost Recovery $200,000 (2015)
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
A) The City has been going through rapid growth in the past 15 years in both residential and
commercial development. The growth has increased sewer flows to the Waste Water
Treatment Plant (WWTP). Currently flows to the WWTP are over 5 MGD (peak).
B) The Washington State Department of Ecology ( WSDOE) issues the National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System ( NPDES) and the City operates under its guidelines and
conditions. Before reaching the threshold of 5 MGD, WSDOE was managing the pre-
treatment permits, municipal requirements and compliance for the Food Processors.
C) WSDOE issued Administrative Order (AO) Docket No. 9737, dated February, 2013 stating that
the City must comply with Title 40 — Protection of Environment, Code of Federal Regulations
(40 CFR). The AO requires the City of Pasco to begin IMMEDIATE implementation of an
"Industrial Pretreatment Program" and comply with the regulations `promulgated in 40 CFR
Part 403 " (General Pretreatment Regulations for Existing and New Sources ofPollution) "and arty
additional regulations that may be promulgated wider Section 307(6) (pretreatment) and 308
(reporting) of the Federal Clean Water Act" in order to protect the City's Publicly Owned
Treatment Works (POTWs). Failure to comply with the AO "may result in the issuance of civil
penalties or other actions "to enforce the terms ofthe AO. (see reference 1)
D) The WSDOE Administrative Order requires the City to manage the pre - treatment for
both Industrial and Municipal facilities by January, 2015. The Order outlines a number of
items that need to be in place such as staffing and an ordinance. Staff has been meeting
with WSDOE to go over the requirements and will continue to work with WSDOE
during the transition. The City is required to comply with orders; failure to comply will
result in penalties from Ecology against the City.
V. DISCUSSION:
A) Staff has prepared a draft ordinance to meet the minimum requirements established by
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Department of Ecology (DOE).
B) The City is required to adopt a pretreatment ordinance that requires a number of regulatory
implementations. One of the important aspects of this ordinance is to protect and keep the City in
compliance with the NPDES permit for the waste water treatment plant.
C) The City owns and operates a biological waste water treatment plant that is very cost efficient, yet
at the same time any deviations from customers will have a major impact to the plant, resulting in
violations to the NPDES permit. The City has received recognition for one of the best WWTP in
Washington State and we want to continue to operate the plant efficiently.
D) Staff will bring this ordinance back for Workshop in June after comments from DOE have been
received and incorporated.
4(d)
STATE Of WASHINGTON
DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY
4t,111 h' Monroe Street - Spokane, Washington 99205 -1295 - (509)329.3400
October 2, 2013
Mr. Abroad Qayoumi, P.E.
City of Pasco Public Works Director Amended Order Docket # 10241
PO Box 293 Order Docket # 9737
Pasco, WA 99301
Re: Amended Administrative Order
Dear Mr. Qayoumi:
The Department of Ecology (Ecology) has issued the enclosed amended Administrative Order (Order)
requiring the City of Pasco (City) to comply with:
• Chapter 90.48 Revised Code of Washington (RC W) — Water Pollution Control
• Chapter 173 -208 Washington Administrative Code (WAC) — Grant of Authority
Sewerage Systems
• Chapter 173 -240 Washington Administrative Code (WAC) — Submission of plans
and reports for construction of wastewater facilities
• Chapter 40 CFR Part 403 General Pretreatment Standards and New Sources of
Pollution
• City of Pasco National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Waste
Discharge Permit No. WA- 004496 -2
• Cih of Pasco State Waste Discharge Permit No. ST005369.
This Order Amendment changes the schedule dates in Order #9737 per your July 22, 2013 request. If you
have questions please contact Scott Mallery at (509) 329 -3473 or smal46I@ecy.wo.gov.
Sincerely,
I
James M Bellatty
Section Manager
Water Quality Program
Eastern Regional Office
CERTIFIED MAIL 7010 0290 0003 5679 0584
1MB:MH:red
Enclosure: Amended Administrative Order Docket #10241
WQ —Order Amend (9/2011)
STATE OF WASHINGTON
DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY
IN THE MATTER OF AN
ADMNNDED ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER
AGAINST
City of Pasco
Ahmad Qayoum i
To: Ahmad Qayoumi, P.E.
City of Pasco Public Works Director
PO Box 293
Pasco, WA 99301
Amended Order Docket # 10241
Order Docket # 9737
AMENDED ADMINISTRATIVE
ORDER DOCKET #10241
ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER
DOCKET #9737
The Department of Ecology (Ecology) has issued this amended Administrative Order (Order)
Docket #10241 to amend Order Docket #9737 dated February 1, 2013 issued to the City of Pasco.
This Order Amendment describes the corrective actions rewired at the location known as the City
of Pasco Public Works Department located at 525 North 3 Avenue, Pasco, WA. This Order
Amendment changes the schedule dates in Order#9737 per your July 22, 2013 request.
Ecology's determination that a violationlviolations has/have occurred is based on the
violations listed below.
Violation(s) and associated corrective action(s):
Violation(s) description:
Chapter 40 C.F.R. § Part 403.8 requires a Publicly Owned Treatment Works (POTWs) (or
combination of POTWs operated by the same entity) with a total design flow of greater than 5
MGD and receiving wastewater from industrial users subject to pretreatment standards to
establish a pretreatment program unless the state exercises its option to assume authority for
pretreatment. Effective January 1, 2015, Pasco needs to take authority for their pretreatment
program because on that date Ecology will no longer assume authority for pretreatment for the
City.
Corrective actions required:
For these reasons and in accordance with RCW 90.48.120(2) Ecology orders that the City of
Pasco take the following actions. Ecology requires these actions at the location known as City
of Pasco Public Works Department located at525 N. Third Ave., Pasco, WA 99301. Ecology
WQ —Order Ammd (92011)
Amended Administrative Order Docket #10241
September 24, 2013
Page 2
revised the submittal dates in Order #9737 to those in this Order per the DATE request of the
City of Pasco.
On or before January 1, 2015, the City must implement an Industrial Pretreatment Program in
accordance with the legal authorities, policies, procedures, and financial provisions described in
a pretreatment program approved by Ecology.
The following pretreatment implementation activities must occur starting immediately:
A. General Requirements
The City must work with Ecology to ensure all commercial and industrial users
of the POTWs comply with the pretreatment regulations promulgated in 40
CFR Part 403 and any additional regulations that may be promulgated under
Section 307(b) (pretreatment) and 308 (reporting) of the Federal Clean Water
Act.
2. This order requires the development of a program under which the City administers
the Federal Pretreatment Program and State Waste Discharge Permit program for
control of discharges to the publicly owned municipal and industrial sewer from
tributary industries. Section E through I contains a schedule of submittals related to
pretreatment program development. Sections B, C, and D apply until program
delegation. Upon delegation the City takes over implementation of the pretreatment
program. The City must then submit copies of permits to Ecology upon issuance
providing the basis for Ecology to terminate its permits for indirect discharges.
Ecology updates the Cities discharge permits to include conditions and
requirements for the delegated systems.
B. Wastewater Discharge Permit Required
Until delegated, the City must not allow Significant Industrial Users (SIUs) to
discharge wastewater to the City's sewerage system until such user receive a
wastewater discharge permit from Ecology in accordance with Chapter 90.48 RC W
and Chapter 173 -216 WAC, as amended.
C. Identification and Reporting of Existing. New. and Proposed Industrial Users
1. The City must take continuous, routine measures to identify all existing, new, and
proposed SIUs and Potential Significant Industrial Users (PSIUs) discharging or
proposing to discharge to the City's sewerage system.
2. Within 30 days of becoming aware of an unpennitted existing, new, or proposed
industrial user who may be an SIU, the City must notify such user by registered mail
that, if classified as an SIU, they must apply to Ecology and obtain a State Waste
Discharge Permit. A copy of this notification letter must also be sent to Ecology within
this same 30 -day period.
3. The City must also notify all PSIUs, as identified, that if their classification should
Amended Administrative Order Docket #10241
September 24, 2013
Page 3
change to an SIU, they must apply to Ecology for a State Waste Discharge Permit
within 30 days of such change.
D. Duty to Enforce Discharge Prohibitions
1. In accordance with 40 CFR 403.5(a), the City must not authorize or knowingly allow
the discharge of any pollutants into its POTWs which cause pass through or
interference, or which otherwise violates general or specific discharge prohibitions
contained in 40 CFR Part 403.5 or WAC- 173 - 216 -060.
2. The City must not authorize or knowingly allow the introduction of any of the
following into their treatment works:
a. Pollutants which create a fire or explosion hazard in the POTWs (including, but
not limited to waste streams with a closed cup flashpoint of less than 140 degrees
Fahrenheit or 60 degrees Centigrade using the test methods specified in 40 CFR
261.21).
b. Industries with pollutants which cause corrosive structural damage to the POTWs,
must not discharges pH lower than 5.0, or greater than 11.0 standard units, unless
the works are specifically designed to accommodate such discharges.
c. Solid or viscous pollutants in amounts that could cause obstruction to the flow in
sewers or otherwise interfere with the operation of the POTWs.
d. Any pollutant, including oxygen demanding pollutants, (BOD, etc.) released in a
discharge at a flow rate and/or pollutant concentration which will cause
interference with the POTWs.
d. Petroleum oil, non - biodegradable cutting oil, or products of mineral origin in
amounts that will cause interference or pass through.
e. Pollutants which result in the presence of toxic gases, vapors, or fumes within the
POTW in a quantity which may cause acute worker health and safety problems.
f Heat in amounts that will inhibit biological activity in the POTWs resulting in
interference but in no case heat in such quantities such that the temperature at the
POTW headworks exceeds 40 °C (104 °F) unless Ecology, upon request of the City,
approves, in writing, alternate temperature limits.
g. Any trucked or hauled pollutants, except at discharge points designated by the
City.
It. Wastewaters prohibited to be discharged to the POTWs by the Dangerous Waste
Regulations (Chapter 173 -303 WAC), unless authorized under the Domestic
Sewage Exclusion (WAC 173 - 303 -071).
3. All of the following are prohibited from discharge to the POTWs unless approved in
writing by Ecology under extraordinary circumstances (such as a lack of direct
discharge alternatives due to combined sewer service or the need to augment sewage
flows due to septic conditions):
a. Noncontact cooling water in significant volumes.
Amended Administrative Order Docket #10241
September 24, 2013
Page 4
b. Stormwater and other direct inflow sources.
c. Wastewaters significantly affecting system hydraulic loading, which do not
require treatment, or would not be afforded a significant degree of treatment by
the system.
4. The City must notify Ecology if any industrial user violates the prohibition listed in
this section.
The following information must be submitted by the dates indicated in order to constitute a
complete application for a pretreatment program delegation.
E. Industrial User Survey .
The City must complete and submit to Ecology an Industrial User Survey listing all
Sills and PSIUs discharging to the POTW. The survey must be received by the Water
Quality Program at ERO by March 1, 2014. At a minimum, the list of SIUs and PSIUs
must be developed by means of a telephone book search, a water utility billing records
search, and a physical reconnaissance of the service area. Information on PSIUs must
at least include: the business name; telephone number; address; description of the
industrial process(es); and, the known wastewater volumes and characteristics. For
assistance with the development of the Industrial User Survey, the City must refer to
Ecology's guidance document entitled "Performing an Industrial User Survey."
F. Local Limits Evaluation
1. Sampling to Determine Local Limits
a. The City must analyze for the priority pollutants listed in Tables II and III of
Appendix D of 40 CFR Part 122 as amended. The City must conduct sampling
quarterly starting 41" Quarter 2013 (October- December) for one year at both of the
City's POTWs. Each quarter will have a minimum of two samples per quarter. The
City must conduct semiannual sampling once during the wet season and once during
the dry season, approximately six months apart.
b. The City must sample the influent and effluent on days when industrial
and commercial discharges occur at normal to maximum levels.
c. The City must use the procedures listed in 40 CFR 136 for collections,
preservation, storage, and analysis of samples.
d. Sludge
1) The City must take sludge samples as the sludge leaves the dewatering device
or digesters before mixing with sludge of different ages.
2) The City must report sludge analytical results in mg/kg (dry weight)
Amended Administrative Order Docket 410241
September 24, 2013
Page 5
e. The City must sample as described in Table 1.
Table 1: Local Limits Sampling
Parameter
Sample Point
Sample Type
Minimum Number of
Samples Per
Sampling Event
Three discrete 24-
Conventional Pollutants,
Influent
24 -hour Composite
Metals, Acid
hour samples within
Compounds,
Base /neutral and
a week (Mon -Fri)
(2)(3)
Pesticides t'1
Effluent
24 -hour Composite
Three discrete 24-
hour samples within
a week (Mon -Fri)
(2 )(3)
Sludge
Grab
Once, during the
same time period
influent and effluent
samples are taken.
Hauled Waste
Grab
Once, during the
same time period
that influent and
effluent samples are
taken (5)
Volatile Organics
Influent
Eight grab samples
Three 24 -hour
collected over 24-
samples within a
hours
week (Mon -Fri) (2)(4)
Effluent
Eight grab samples
Three 24 -hour
collected over 24-
samples within a
hours
week Mon -Fri (2 )(4)
Sludge
Grab
Once, during the
same time period
influent and effluent
samples are taken.
Hauled Waste
Grab
Once, during the
same time period
influent and effluent
samples are taken
ls>
Note:
(1) Influent and effluent samples for cyanide must'be collected and analyzed as required
in paragraph F.1.g. 4).
(2) Sample days need not be contiguous.
(3) Each 24 hour composite sample must be analyzed and reported as a discrete
sample.
4 A single analysis for volatile pollutants may be run for each 24 -hour monitoring day.
Amended Administrative Order Docket # 10241
September 24, 2013
Page 6
(See paragraph F.i.h, 2).
(5) Need to be sampled if considering to authorization of discharging hauled waste at the
POTWs
f. Metals, Cyanide, Percent Solids
1). The City must sample influent, effluent, and sludge from its facility for arsenic,
cadmium, chromium, copper, cyanide, lead, mercury, molybdenum, nickel,
selenium, silver, and zinc and report percent solids for the sludge.
2). The City must analyze and report Metals as total metals.
3). For pretreatment sampling, the City must use EPA - approved analytical
methods that achieve the method detection limits (MDLs) in Table 2, unless
higher detection limits are approved by the Water Quality Program at the
Eastern Regional Office (ERO). Requests for higher MDLs must be
submitted in writing to the ERO Pretreatment Engineer at the address below.
4). Cyanide sampling: Influent and effluent sampling for cyanide must be conducted
as follows. Eight discrete grab samples must be collected over a 24 -hour day.
Each grab sample must be at least 100 ml. Each sample must be checked for the
presence of chlorine and/or sulfides prior to preserving and compositing (refer to
Standard Methods, 4500 -CN B).
Table 2: Method Detection Limits
Parameter
MDL, u /I
Arsenic
1.0
Cadmium
0.2
Chromium
1.0
Copper
1.0
Cyanide
10.0 1)
Lead
1.0
Mercury
0.1
Molybdenum
4.0
Nickel
1.0
Selenium
2.0
Silver
0.2
Zinc
4.0
Note:
(1) This value represents a minimum level,
not an MDL.
Amended Administrative Order Docket #10241
September 24, 2013
Page 7
g. Toxic Organics
1) The City must perform chemical analyses of its influent, effluent, and sludge
for all specific toxic organic pollutants listed in Table Ii o f Appendix D of 40
CFR 122.
2) Volatile Organic Sampling: eight discrete samples must be collected over the 24
hour day using 40 ml VOC vials with Teflon septa. During sampling, the flow
from the discharge will be controlled to produce smooth laminar flow to prevent
agitation and aeration of the sample. The VOC vials will be filled to the top
such that there is a meniscus present. There must be no visible air space or air
bubbles in the VOC vials when capped. A single analysis for volatile pollutants
may be run for each monitoring day by compositing equal volumes of the
individual discrete VOC vials (at the analytical laboratory using extreme care
not to introduce air /air bubbles) directly into the GC purge and trap apparatus,
with no less than 1 ml of each grab included in the composite. The composite
sample must be analyzed immediately.
3) In addition to priority pollutants, a reasonable attempt must be made to
identify and quantify the ten most abundant substances of each fraction
(excluding priority pollutants and un- substituted aliphatic compounds) shown to
be present by peaks on the total ion plots (reconstructed gas chromatogram)
more than ten times higher than the adjacent background noise which
produces an identifiable spectra, and more than five scans wide. Identification
must be attempted by a laboratory whose computer data processing programs are
capable of comparing the sample mass spectrum to a computerized library of
mass spectra, with visual confirmation by an experienced analyst. Quantification
may be an order of magnitude estimate based on comparison with an internal
standard.
4) Sample Handling: All samples must be prepared, preserved, shipped, and
analyzed in accordance with USEPA Methods 624 and 625.
2. Local Limits Evaluation Requirements
a. By June 1, 2014, the City must submit a complete local limits evaluation to the
Water Quality Program at ERO.
b. The evaluation must propose limits that protect water quality in the receiving
stream, biological processes in the treatment plant, and sludge quality goals.
c. At a minimum, the evaluation must address fats, oils & grease, conventional
pollutants (i.e. BOD and TS S), pH, TKN, and propose limits for each metal (above)
and each priority pollutant listed in Tables II and III of Appendix D of 40 CFR Part
122 which has been observed to he entering the POTWs at levels of concern for pass
through or interference.
WQ — Order Amend (92011)
Amended Administrative Order Docket #10241
September 24, 2013
Page 8
d. The submittal must include proposed local limits, maximum allowable headworks
loading, all supporting calculations, data from which calculations were based, and
clear explanations of all assumptions.
e. The monitoring to support development of these local limitations must be
conducted as required in section F.1.
f. For assistance with the development of Local Limits, the City must refer to Ecology's
guidance document entitled, "Model Guidance Manual for Using NEWLL8.xls to
Develop Local Discharge Limitations" and EPA's "Local Limits Development
Guidance" dated July 2004.
g. The City can request for a waiver from Water Quality Program at ERO if their
current local limits meet the requirements in sections F.1 and F.2.
G. Sewer Use Ordinance
The City must develop and adopt a sewer use ordinance according to the following
schedule:
1. By April 1, 2014, the City must submit a proposed sewer use ordinance and evaluation
of legal authority to the Water Quality Program at ERO.
a. The ordinance must incorporate the local limits developed under paragraph S6.17
and the general pretreatment requirements of 40 CFR 403.
b. The evaluation of legal authority, as minimum, will be an evaluation by the City's
attorney of the legal authorities to be used by the City to apply and enforce the
requirements of Sections 307(b) and (c) and 402(bx8) of the Clean Water Act,
including those requirements outlined in 40 CFR 403.8(f)(1). The ability of the
POTW's program to administer the program to any tributary industries outside
(i.e. Port of Quincy) the City limits through adequate multijurisdictional agreements
must also be addressed.
2. Within three months of approval of the proposed sewer use ordinance by the Water
Quality Program at ERO, the City must codify the ordinance, incorporation with such
modifications as required by Water Quality Program at ERO.
3. For assistance with the development of Sewer Use Ordinance, the City must refer to
Ecology's guidance document entitled, "Model Pretreatment Ordinance" and EPA's
"Model Ordinance for Pretreatment ".
4. The City can request for a waiver from the Water Quality Program at ERO if their
current Sewer Use Ordinance meets the requirements in section G. La and b.
H. Mercury Control Plan
The City must revise and submit to Ecology an updated Mercury abatement and control
plan. The plan must be expanded as Ecology develops and releases further guidance.
The Mercury Control Plan must be submitted to Ecology by June 1, 2014
Mercury Plan development guidance can be found at the following locations:
Amended Administrative Order Docket 410241
September 24, 2013
Page 9
Ecology mercury web site
For Dental Plan guidance
Reduction plan guidance
1. Program Procedures Manual
httl2://www.egy.wa. gov /mercurv/
http: / /www. ecv.wa. gov /dentalbmps /index. html
htti): / /www. ecv.wa. gov /biblio /0303001. html
The City must develop and adopt a Program Procedures Manual (PPM) according to the
following schedule:
1. By June 1, 2014, the City must submit a draft PPM to the Water Quality Program at
ERO. The manual will contain, at a minimum, provisions implementing State Waste
Discharge Permit program of Chapter 173 -216 WAC, Plans for Pollution Control
Facilities of Chapter 173 -240 WAC, and the federal pretreatment program requirements
of 40 CFR 403.
2. Upon Ecology's review and feedback, the City will resubmit the final PPM and
addresses Ecology feedback by August 1, 2014.
3. At a minimum, the PPM will contain the following:
a. An evaluation of the financial programs, staffing, and revenue sources, as
required by 40 CFR 403.8(f)(3), required to implement the pretreatment
program;
b. Policies and procedures(e.g. locating industries, notification, engineering,
permitting, inspection, data management, handling hauled waste, sampling, spill
plan review, and enforcement—Enforcement Response Plan), needed to implement
local, state, and federal pretreatment standards and requirements in particular those
of 40 CFR 403.8 and 403.12;
c. List of monitoring equipment required by the POTWs to implement the pretreatment
program and a description of municipal facilities to be constructed or acquired for
monitoring or analysis of industrial wastes; and,
d. Procedures for submitting, reviewing, and approving Engineering Reports, Plans
and Specifications, and Operational Manuals as outlined in WAC 173 -240 for
industrial facilities.
J. Schedule for Pretreatment Program Development
1. By November 1, 2014, the City must submit three copies of their Pretreatment
Program to the Water Quality Program at ERO for approval in accordance with the
general pretreatment regulations (40 CFR 403).
2. At a minimum, the pretreatment program must include the following:
a. Results of an industrial waste survey (Industrial User Survey) as required by
40 CFR 403.8(f)(2)(i -iii), including identification of non - domestic users and
Amended Administrative Order Docket # 10241
September 24, 2013
Page 10
the character and volume contributed to the POTWs by the non - domestic
users and developed as required in paragraph E.;
b. Local limits for pollutants, developed as required in section F.2;
c. The City's sewer use ordinance, developed as required in section G;
d. An evaluation by the City's attorney of the legal authorities used by the City to
apply and enforce the requirements of Sections 307(b) and (c) and 402(b)(8) of
the Clean Water Act, including those requirements outline in 40 CFR
403.8(f)(1). The City must address multijurisdictional issues as required in
paragraph G;
e. An evaluation of the financial programs, staffing, and revenue sources,
as required by 40 CFR 403.80(3) and paragraph 1, employed to
implement the pretreatment program;
f. Policies and procedures (e.g. permitting, inspections, compliance and
enforcement — Enforcement Response Plan), required to implement the
Chapter 40 CFR 403 and in particular those requirements in 40 CFR 403.8
and 403.12 and as required by section l;
g. List of monitoring equipment required by the POTWs to implement the
pretreatment program and a description of municipal facilities to be
constructed or acquired for monitoring or analysis of industrial wastes and as
required by sections F. and l;
h. Copy of any statutes, ordinances, regulations, agreements, or other authorities
relied upon by POTWs for City's administration of their Pretreatment
Program;
i. Mercury Control Plan and as required by section H; and,
Procedures for submitting, reviewing, and approving Engineering Reports,
Plans and specifications, and Operational Manuals as outlined in Chapter
WAC 173240 for industrial facilities.
K. Continuing Monitoring for Pollutants of Concern
1. Following the completion of the local limit sampling required under Section F, the
City must continue to monitor for pollutants of Concem identified in the local limits
evaluation on a semi - annual basis. Sampling events must be once during the wet
season and once during the dry season, approximately six months apart.
2. The influent and effluent must be sampled on days when industrial and commercial
discharges are occurring at normal to maximum levels.
3. The City must sample as described in Sections F.3 through F.6 above.
Amended Administrative Order Docket # 10241
September 24, 2013
Page 11
L. Reports and Information
All reports and information required to be submitted under this part must be
submitted to the following addresses:
Original: Pretreatment Engineer
Department of Ecology, Eastern Regional Office
Water Quality Program
4601 N. Monroe Street
Spokane, WA 99205
SUMMARY OF NECESSARY SUBMITTAL DATES
Section
Submittal
Frequency
Submittal Due Date
E
Industrial User Survey
Once
March 1, 2014
F.1
Sampling to Determine Local
Limits
Twice a quarter for
four quarters in 2013
Begin e Quarter 2013
F.2.a
Submit Local Limits Evaluation
Once
June 1, 2014
G.l
Submit Proposed Sewer Use
Ordinance
Once
April 1, 2014
H.
Mercury Control Plan
Once
June 1, 2014
I.1
Submit draft Program
Procedures Manual
Once
June 1, 2014
I.2
Submit Final Program
Procedures Manual
Once
August 1, 2014
J.1
Submit Pretreatment Program
Once
November 1, 2014
No other condition or requirement of Order Docket #9737 is hereby affected by this amendment.
Under RC W 34.05.110, small businesses are eligible for a waiver of a first -time paperwork
violation and an opportunity to correct other violations. We have made no determination as to
whether you meet the definition of a "small business" under this section. However, we have
determined that the requirements of RCW 34.05.110 do not apply to the violation(s) due to a
conflict with federal law or program requirements, including federal requirements that are a
prescribed condition to the allocation of federal funds to the state.
Failure to comply with this Order may result in the issuance of civil penalties or other actions,
whether administrative or judicial, to enforce the terms of this Order.
3tis �3 c h
'R;�m t:_I z,�i ��'. �e.a�4,p , f00�*�:",taals�F;','�'b.
Amended Administrative Order Docket #10241
September 24, 2013
Page 12
'; :QY�7K,'R��dA�.��Q. .. ' �c�mi�fs' �f, t�ih,+" �Iltf�'. ��11" s��.' r�a�' �" Y. a! P" ipl' d '�cl�t�"'�T'.orv'x�'•s_'F3S'zrF
You have a right to appeal this Order to the Pollution Control Hearing Board (PCHB) within 30
days of the date of receipt of this Order. The appeal process is governed by Chapter 43.21 B
RCW and Chapter 371 -08 WAC. "Date of receipt" is defined in RCW 43.21B.001(2).
To appeal you must do both of the following within 30 days of the date of receipt of this Order:
• File your appeal and a copy of this Order with the PCHB (see addresses below).
Filing means actual receipt by the PCHB during regular business hours.
• Serve a copy of your appeal and this Order on Ecology in paper form - by mail or
in person. (See addresses below.) E -mail is not accepted.
You must also comply with other applicable requirements in Chapter 43.21B RCW and Chapter
371 -08 WAC.
Your appeal alone will not stay the effectiveness of this Order. Stay requests must be submitted
in accordance with RCW 43.21B.320.
6�rY{ittC ,c 'G
M 71
Street Addresses
I Mailing Addresses
Department of Ecology
Department of Ecology
Attn: Appeals Processing Desk
Attn: Appeals Processing Desk
300 Desmond Drive SE
PO Box 47608
Lacey, WA 98503
Olympia, WA 98504 -7608
Pollution Control Hearings Board
Pollution Control Hearings Board
11 11 Israel Road SW
PO Box 40903
STE 301
Olympia, WA 98504 -0903
Tumwater, WA 98501
Please direct all questions about this Order to:
Scott Mallery
Department of Ecology
Eastern Regional Office
4601 North Monroe
Spokane, WA 99205
Phone: (509) 329 -3473
Email: smal461 @ecy.wa.gov
Amended Administrative Order Docket #10241
September 24, 2013
Page 13
Pollution Control Hearings Board Website
www.cho.wa.gov/Boards—PCHB.aspx
Chapter 43.21B RCW - Environmental and Land Use Hearings Office — Pollution
Control Hearings Board
http: // apps. leg.wa.gov /RCW /default.aspx ?cite =43.21 B
Chapter 371 -08 WAC — Practice and Procedure
http: / /apps.leg.wa.gov /WAC /default.aspx ?cite =371 -08
Chapter 34.05 RCW — Administrative Procedure Act
http: // apps .leg.wa.gov /RCW /default.aspx ?cite =34.05
Laws: www.ecy.wa.gov /laws - rules /ecyrcw.html
Rules: www.ecy.wa.gov /laws - rules /ecywa.htrnl
I.1!!'' 1iSy s..ti
I
James M. Bellatty
Water Quality Section Mana
Department of Ecology
Eastern Regional Office
,01� 13
Date
AGENDA REPORT NO. 13
FOR: City Counc'
TO: Gary Crutchfre anager
FROM: Ahmad Qayo ublic Works Director
SUBJECT: Waste Water Treatment Plant 3`d Primary Clarifier
I. REFERENCE(S):
April 23, 2014
Workshop Mtg.: 04/28/2014
Regular Mtg.: 05/05/2014
1. Waste Water Treatment Plant 3`d Primary Clarifier - Vicinity Map
2. Waste Water Treatment Plant 3`d Primary Clarifier - Professional Services
Agreement Summary Sheet
3. Waste Water Treatment Plant 3`d Primary Clarifer— Scope of Services
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
04/28: Discussion
05/05: MOTION: I move to approve the Professional Services Agreement from
HDR Engineering, Inc. authorizing design and engineering
services with respect to the Wastewater Treatment Plant
Improvements 3`d Primary Clarifier, not to exceed $238,980
and further, authorize the City Manager to sign the agreement.
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
A) $238,980 ; Sewer Utility Account
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
A) In June 2010, the City received a renewal permit from the Department of Ecology for
the Wastewater Treatment Plant with a condition that the City complete a
Comprehensive Engineering Study to optimize operations of the plant to meet
Department of Ecology (DOE) requirements.
B) Murray Smith & Associates completed a Draft Comprehensive Sewer Plan (reviewed
by Council on March 31) that identifies a number of capital improvements. The Sewer
Plan has recommended that the current WWTP be expanded to treat up to 12 MGD in
the next 10 -15 years to meet the upcoming regulations. The current primary clarifier
has a total capacity of 5 MGD. As of 2013 we are at 95% capacity of the first and
second primary clarifiers. It is imperative to construct a third clarifier.
C) To address growth and a future 12 MGD capacity improvement to the W WTP, the new
3`d clarifier will have capacity of 7 MGD. Adding the third clarifier will be cost
effective at this time, while providing additional efficiencies to help reduce energy for
second and tertiary waste removal treatments.
V. DISCUSSION:
A) In February 2014, the City solicited consultants for the clarifier design work. Three
responses were received. In March staff interviewed CH2M1Ii11, HDR and MSA.
Staff included a panel of 5 staff members who scored the consultants understanding of
the project and project approach. Panel members recommend HDR as their top choice.
B) Staff negotiated the scope and fees with HDR. After extensive negotiations staff
recommends award of the professional services agreement for the Wastewater
Treatment Plant Improvements 3`d Primary Clarifier to HDR.
4(e)
- �:� --«z
Professional Services Agreement
(Summary Sheet)
Wastewater Treatment Plant Improvements 3rd Primary Clarifier
HDR
2805 Saint Andrews Loop, Suite A. Pasco, WA 99301
Scope of Services: attached Exhibit A
Term: 8 months Completion Date: 12/31/2014
Payments to Consultant:
❑ Hourly Rate: $
IN Fixed Sum of; $ 238,980
❑ Other:
Insurance to be Provided:
1. Commercial General Liability:
❑ $1,000,000 each occurrence;
❑ $2,000,000 general aggregate; or
® $1,000,000 each occurrence; and $ 2,000,000 general aggregate
2. Professional Liability:
IN $1,000,000 per claim;
❑ $1,000,000 policy aggregate limit; or
❑ $ per claim; and $ per policy aggregate limit
Other Information:
Exhibit A
City of Pasco
Third Primary Clarifier
Scope of Services
April 23, 2014
fal2805 Saint Andrews Loop
Suite A
Pasco, WA 99301 -6121
(509) 546 -2040
J �
Contents
Scopeof Services .......................................................................... ............................... 1
EXHIBIT A: SCOPE OF SERVICES ................................................ ..............................1
New Primary Sedimentation Facilities ........................................... ..............................1
Description of Project Design Elements ...............................
............................... 1
General Design Assumptions ...............................................
............................... 2
DesignMethodology ............................................................
............................... 3
Task100 — Project Management ....................................................
..............................3
Objective..............................................................................
............................... 3
ConsultantServices .............................................................
............................... 4
CityResponsibilities .............................................................
............................... 4
Assumptions........................................................................
............................... 4
Deliverables.........................................................................
............................... 4
Task 200 — Preliminary Engineering .............................................. ..............................5
Objective.............................................................................. ............................... 5
Task 201 Primary Sedimentation Tank CFD Model ................. ..............................5
Consultant Services ............................................................. ............................... 5
CityResponsibilities ............................................................. ............................... 5
Assumptions........................................................................ ............................... 5
Deliverables......................................................................... ............................... 6
Task 202 Preparation of 30% BIM Model and Engineering Report ......................6
ConsultantServices .............................................................
............................... 6
CityResponsibilities .............................................................
............................... 6
Assumptions........................................................................
............................... 7
Deliverables.........................................................................
............................... 7
Task300 — Final Design .................................................................. ..............................7
Objective..............................................................................
............................... 7
Task 301 Drawings and Specifications .................................... ..............................7
Consultant Services ............................................................. ............................... 7
CityResponsibilities ............................................................. ............................... 8
Assumptions........................................................................ ............................... 8
Deliverables......................................................................... ............................... 8
Task 302 Opinion of Probable Construction Cost ( OPCC) ..... ..............................9
Consultant Services ............................................................. ............................... 9
Task 400 — Additional Services ...................................................... ..............................9
ConsultantServices ............................................................. ............................... 9
EXHIBIT B: Drawing List ...............................
EXHIBIT C: Specification List.
................... .............................11
................... .............................13
EXHIBIT D: Milestone Schedule ................................................... .............................17
Q
EXHIBIT A: SCOPE OF SERVICES
Background
The City of Pasco, Washington (City) will be expanding primary treatment capacity to
accommodate continuing community growth and maintain high - quality effluent discharge. A
new 7 MGD clarifier(s), with an expanded hydraulic distribution structure, will be provided to
achieve the necessary capacity. In addition, new primary sludge pumping will be provided to
incorporate the new clarifier as well as improve reliability of the existing primary sludge pumping
system.
The scope of services is organized into the following tasks:
Task Series 100 — Project Management and QA/QC
Task Series 200 — Preliminary Engineering
Task Series 300 — Final Design
Task Series 400 — Permitting and Public Involvement Support
Task Series 500 — Additional Services
New Primary Sedimentation Facilities
The new primary sedimentation tank will be designed, along with necessary support facilities, as
defined below.
Description of Project Design Elements
Major design components to be included in the design of the new clarification system will
consist of the following:
• Primary Sedimentation Tanks. A new rectangular primary sedimentation tank, using
two clarifier mechanisms and a central dividing wall to allow for isolation of each sub -
tank, will be designed to treat a peak flow capacity of 7 million gallons per day. The
tanks will have open tops (no covers or superstructure), manual scum troughs, spray
water for scum control, safety railing, and wash down hoses located along the perimeter.
The south wall of the new tankage will be designed to support building columns for
extension to the metal building structure to the clarifier.
Primary Sedimentation Hydraulic Distribution Structure. The existing weir /launder
flow distribution control system in the headworks building, which feeds Primary influent to
the existing sedimentation tanks, will be expanded to provide a new weir /launder system
and two isolation slide gates to the new sedimentation tank. Two new primary influent
pipelines will connect the hydraulic structure to the new primary sedimentation tank.
Flow or level instrumentation will not be included. Additional HVAC or other
modifications to the headworks building are not be included.
Primary Sludge Pumping. A new sludge pumping room will be designed immediately
east of the existing primary sludge room. This new room will be designed based on the
HDR 2011 W WTP Improvements Project, which included the structural design for this
room which was not implemented as part of the final construction. Two new rotary lobe
sludge pumps (one duty, one standby) will draw sludge from the new and existing
sedimentation tanks. Electrically actuated automatic control valves on each sludge
suction line, controlled via a programmed timing sequence, will actuate to sequentially
draw sludge from each tank. A sludge flow meter, local pressure gauges /switches, and
Pasco Third Clarifier 1 April 23, 2014
a site glass will be provided for operators to monitor the system, as well as hose bibs for
wash down in the room. The roof of the structure will include access hatches for
removing equipment. HVAC will be provided at 6 air exchanges per hour with freeze
protection heating of the space. It is assumed that a sprinkler system will not be
required.
• Yard Piping. Additional yard piping will include:
• Plant non - potable water service to the new primary tanks
• Relocation of the existing 4" sludge /scum lines in conflict with the new primary
sedimentation tank footprint
• Connection of the new sludge pumps to the existing sludge discharge piping
• Routing of the new primary scum piping
• Existing Primary Sedimentation Tank Excavation Support. A shoring system and
sidewall support will be provided by the construction contractor to protect the south end
of the existing primary clarifier tanks during excavation and construction of the new
primary sedimentation tanks. The Consultant will prepare design criteria drawing notes
and specifications to delineate the requirements for the shoring design.
• Stormwater Management. New stormwater utilities will be provided, if necessary, to
account for changes in the drainage pattern of the site created by the new facilities. It is
assumed these modifications will be minimal and no additional impervious area will be
included in the design outside of the building expansions and tankage described in this
scope of work.
• Site Lighting. Additional lighting for the new primary sedimentation tanks will be
provided to accommodate work at night. No new lighting will be provided for the sludge
pumping room or hydraulic distribution structure.
• Electrical. Power supply, lighting and electrical facilities to serve the new and modified
facilities included in the expansion.
• Instrumentation and Control. Instrumentation and controls, including hardware,
software, control loop descriptions, and related facilities needed to serve the new and
modified facilities included in the expansion.
• Sitework. Site grading to include structural fill to grade and restoration of the existing
surface around the new primary sedimentation tanks. New landscaping and impervious
surface (roadways /sidewalks) will not be part of the design.
General Design Assumptions
The following general assumptions were used to develop project design scope and budget:
• New Primary Sedimentation Tank Foundation. Pilings and grade beams will not be
required to support the new primary sedimentation tanks.
• Survey and Record Drawings. Complete survey data (utilities, topography, structures,
surface features, benchmarks) is available in AutoCAD and will be provided by the City.
Record drawings of the existing plant facilities (electrical, civil, mechanical, structural)
are available in AutoCAD and will be provided by the City except for the original plant
drawings which will be provide in a paper or ".pdf" format.
Pasco Third Claritier 2 April 23, 2014
J Y
• Geotechnicai. The City will be responsible to provide all necessary geotechnical
information to the Consultant, including an updated Geotechnical Report, for use in the
design.
• Existing Primary Sedimentation Tank Safety Modifications. All safety modifications
if required to the existing primary sedimentation tanks will occur as part of a separate
contract.
• Construction Management. Contractor bidding assistance, submittal review,
inspection, and startup, if desired, will be included as part of a future construction
administration services contract with the Consultant.
• Control Systems. Field panels and instrumentation will be tied into the existing plant
control system. Modification of the existing control system is not required beyond
programming to accommodate the new equipment and systems.
• Electrical System. Existing MCC's have sufficient capacity and cabinet space for new
primary clarifier equipment. New primary distribution wiring and load centers will not be
required.
Design Methodology
The design documents will be prepared using Building Information Modeling (BIM), also referred
to as intelligent three - dimensional design. The initial design process is to create the building
information model. Final deliverable documents will be a combination of 2D plan views and
renderings /isometrics from the BIM model to provide spatial context. To minimize costs,
Traditional 2D section cuts will not be used for the process design, except where needed to
convey structural design information for the new sedimentation tanks and associated structures.
In addition, the BIM model (in conjunction with the P &IDs, electrical one -line diagrams, and site
civil drawings) will be used as the primary deliverable for the 30% and 60% milestones to
provide for more efficient review by City staff and reduce drawing production costs during the
early stages of design.
In the scope and budget information presented below, a conventional 2D drawing list (Exhibit B)
and preliminary specification list (Exhibit C) that represent the final bid documents is used to
identify the scope and complexity of the project, and the effort required to prepare the design.
However, the work flow will actually rely on the 3D model for most of the design schedule. A
preliminary schedule is provided in Exhibit D and reflects anticipated milestones that will be
required to maintain the budget.
Task 100 — Project Management
Objective
Meet with City staff to establish project goals and objectives, review the decision making
process, define anticipated work products, identify information needed to provide the
engineering services, refine the schedule, and establish points of contact and project
communications. Incorporate the results of this meeting into a Project Management Plan which
will be distributed to all key members of Consultant's team. The plan will also include
administrative procedures, such as invoicing, communication protocol, and formats. Update the
Management Plan if major changes are made to the scope or schedule.
Pasco Third Clarifier 3 April 23, 2014
Consultant Services
1. Prepare a Project Management Plan (Project Guide) outlining the project scope, team
organization, schedule, and communications information.
2. Coordinate and manage the Consultant's team.
3. Prepare monthly status reports describing with the following:
a. Services completed during the month
b. Services planned for the next month
c. Needs for additional information
d. Scope /schedule /budget issues
e. Schedule update and financial status summary
4. Prepare monthly invoices.
5. Project Manager will attend monthly project management meetings with the City Project
Manager to review project scope, schedule, and budget issues. Meetings will be
coordinated with other design meetings and may occur electronically via net/live meeting.
6. Implement Consultant's QA/QC practices for project deliverables.
City Responsibilities
1. Attend project management meetings.
2. Timely processing and payment of invoices.
3. Review and process contract change requests and amendments, if needed.
4. Respond in a timely manner to issues brought out in the progress reports and through direct
communication with the Consultant.
Assumptions
1. One project management meeting will be held per month during the design process with 2
hours of project manager time required for each meeting preparation, attendance, follow -up,
and notes. A maximum of 6 meetings will be held based on Exhibit D.
2. Invoices will be Consultant's standard invoice listing personnel and the hours they have
worked on each task. Monthly progress report will be a one page summary of the work
completed to date, work anticipated for next month, outstanding issues and budget
summary.
3. Expense backup will not be provided with invoices but will be available for review at
Consultant's office.
Deliverables
1. Scope of services, schedule (Gantt chart or project milestones), and budget (PDF file and
two copies)
2. Project Management Plan (Project Guide) (PDF file)
3. Monthly reports and invoices (one copy with invoice can be mailed or e- mailed PDF file)
4. Monthly project schedule and budget updates.
Pasco Third Clarifier 4 April 23, 2014
5. Project management meeting agenda and notes (e- mailed PDF files).
Task 200 — Preliminary Engineering
Objective
Preparation of 30% design documents and a project engineering report that will document the
appropriate sizing, equipment selection, design standards and layout for the major project
design elements. The project engineering report will serve as both a deliverable to the City as
well as to the Department of Ecology.
Task 201 Primary Sedimentation Tank CFD Model
Consultant Services
Consultant will utilize computational fluid dynamic (CFD) modeling to determine the size, layout,
and treatment efficiency of the new primary sedimentation tank. The results and a summary of
the model will be included in the Engineering Report. The CFD model will be partially based on
field data collected by the City regarding the settling characteristics of the primary influent
wastewater.
The CFD analysis will provide or confirm the following information for use in the 30% BIM
design:
1. Overall size of the clarifier (length and width)
2. Overflow rate and expected treatment efficiency (based on field data provided by the City)
3. Layout of effluent launders and weirs
4. Design of the sludge hopper (based on sludge density design criteria confirmed by the City)
and determination if a cross collector is needed
5. Location and type of internal flow baffling
6. Layout of influent flow distribution system /requirements
City Responsibilities
1. Complete the field testing, analytical analysis, and data collection required for the CFD
model work utilizing the protocol and equipment recommended by the Consultant. In order
to reduce project cost, the Consultant will be available by phone to discuss or assist in the
field testing, but will not make a site visit to conduct the testing in person.
2. Provide electronic copies of all available data regarding solids removal performance of the
existing primary clarifiers.
3. Provide electronic copies of all available data regarding solids concentration of primary
sludge pumped from the existing primary clarifiers.
4. Based on discussions with the Consultant, confirm the preferred sludge concentration
desired from the new sedimentation tanks.
Assumptions
1. All field testing, analytical analysis, and data collection will be performed by the City. Data
will be made available to the Consultant as noted under City Responsibilities.
Pasco Third Clarifier 5 April 23, 2014
Deliverables
1. Summary of CFD model results and recommended primary sedimentation tank design
(included in the Engineering Report, Task 202).
Task 202 Preparation of 30% BIM Model and Engineering
Report
Consultant Services
Produce a 30% level design and review this design with the City to confirm the primary sizing,
layout, equipment, and design criteria for the project. The results of this deliverable and review
will allow the Consultant to efficiently produce final design documents that meet the intent of the
City. The 30% level design will include the following elements:
1. Produce a 30% level BIM model that includes all the major components of the project
(primary sedimentation tanks, hydraulic distribution structure, primary sludge pumping room,
influent mains from the headworks to the new primary, and sludge /scum piping). Small
diameter piping and detailing will not be included at this point. The model will be intended to
provide a broad overview
2. Prepare the pipe and pipe fitting basic requirements specification (specification 15060).
3. Develop an Engineering Report (maximum of 30 pages, not including appendices) that
addresses each of the following items:
a. Project intent and design criteria
b. Review of design standards and codes
c. Hydraulic capacity calculations and profile
d. CFD model results and primary sedimentation tank design recommendations
e. Sludge and scum handling
f. Hydraulic distribution structure design recommendation
g. Electrical and Instrumentation design criteria and preliminary load analysis
h. Structural design criteria and preliminary shoring plan for the existing primary
sedimentation tanks
i. Recommended equipment manufacturers for major components
j. Preliminary 2D plan view drawings: P &IDs, electrical one -line diagrams, site plan
4. Conduct a 30% review workshop with the City to review the key design criteria and the 30%
BIM model.
5. Finalize the engineering report, based on comments from the City during the review
workshop, and provide a final version as the basis of design.
City Responsibilities
1. City's project manager and operations staff will attend the 30% design workshop and
provide comments on the BIM model.
2. Timely review of the Engineering Report and consolidated comments provided to the
Consultant in spreadsheet format on the day of the review workshop.
Pasco Third Clarifier 6 April 23, 2014
3. Confirm technology selection and design criteria to proceed to final design. Provide the
Consultant with any requirements or preferences for mechanical and electrical equipment
for incorporation into the 30% design.
4. Provide all necessary geotechnical and survey information prior to initiation of the 30%
design effort.
5. Coordinate with the Department of Ecology and submit the Engineering Report and any
other requested information as needed.
Assumptions
1. The Consultant will conduct one all day site visit during the early phase of the 30% design to
review the site conditions with the structural, electrical, and process engineers for the
project.
2. The review workshop will be over the course of one half day and will include 3 staff from the
Consultant.
3. Comments at 30% will be dispositioned for final design.
4. The Engineering Report will follow a simple, bullet point format to address the necessary
design criteria and intent.
Deliverables
1. 30% BIM model (electronic file provide to the City)
2. Electronic (pdf) copy of the draft Engineering Report
3. 30% design review workshop comment response
4. Electronic (pdf) copy of the final Engineering Report
Task 300 — Final Design
Objective
Prepare construction bid documents based on results of the 30% design workshop
Task 301 Drawings and Specifications
Consultant Services
1. Prepare final Drawings and Specifications indicating the scope, extent, and character of the
Work to be performed and furnished by Contractor. Exhibit B provides the listing of the
drawings that are anticipated to be prepared for the construction contract. The final design
documents will be provided in the following stages:
a. A 90% design submittal will include a final BIM model, a complete draft of all 2D
drawings, and a complete set of technical specifications for review by the City.
b. Prepare and furnish final bidding documents for review by the City, its legal counsel, and
other advisors prior to bidding. Comments to the 90% design will be incorporated as
part of the final bid documents.
2. The technical specifications will be prepared in CSI format using the Consultant's standard
master specifications. Divisions 0 and 1 will be taken directly from the 2011 WWTP
Pasco Third Clarifier 7 April 23, 2014
improvement project to reduce costs for preparation by the Consultant and review time by
the City.
3. A review workshop will be conducted for the 90% design to review the BIM model and
associated documents.
City Responsibilities
1. City's project manager and operations staff will attend the 90% design workshop and
provide comments on the BIM model.
2. Review the design deliverables in a timely fashion and provide consolidated comments to
the Consultant in spreadsheet format on the day of the review workshop.
3. The City will submit documentation to the Building Department and Department of Ecology
as needed. All permitting will be the responsibility of the City.
Assumptions
1. Drawing production and detail will be in accordance with the Design Methodology outlined in
at the beginning of this scope.
2. Plan views will be annotated with dimensions and elevations, but sections will be limited to
BIM isometrics. Sections will be non - annotated or with limited information that cannot
otherwise be obtained from the model view.
3. Digital photographs will be used to supplement existing background drawings to illustrate
the extent and character of the proposed improvements.
4. Multiple disciplines ( structural - process - mechanical - electrical- instrumentation) will be shown
on the same plan drawing whenever possible.
5. Structural sections will include dimensions and annotations.
6. The City will distribute plans and specs and advertise for bid.
7. Instrumentation and automation of the sludge pumps will be limited to PLC / SCADA on /off
control and flow measurement of sludge and scum.
8. Programing of PLC and SCADA (Wonderware) will be by City Staff or third party
9. Standard Details will be published in a separate 8 Y2 x 11 volume and will not be shown on
drawings.
10. The review workshop (90 %) will be over the course of one half day and will include up to 3
staff from the Consultant.
Deliverables
1. 90% BIM model (electronic file provide to the City)
2. Electronic (pdf) copy of the draft 90% Drawings and Specifications
3. Electronic (pdf) copy of the final Contract Documents (forbidding). Drawing pdf files will be
provide as both full and half size sheets.
Pasco Third Clarifier 8 April 23, 2014
Task 302 Opinion of Probable Construction Cost (OPCC)
Consultant Services
1. Prepare opinions of probable construction cost at the 90% design stage and update with the
submission of the bid documents. Cost estimates will be pursuant to the characteristics of
Association for Advancement of Cost Engineering Class 2 estimates.
Task 400 — Additional Services
Consultant Services
If authorized in writing or electronic means by the City, Engineer shall furnish or obtain from
others Additional Services of the types listed below. At the time of any such request for
Additional Services, Consultant shall prepare an estimate of the budget required.
1. Preparation of applications and supporting documents for private or governmental grants,
loans, or advances in connection with the Project; preparation or review of environmental
assessments and impact statements; review and evaluation of the effects on the design
requirements for the Project of any such statements and documents prepared by others;
and assistance in obtaining approvals of authorities having jurisdiction over the anticipated
environmental impact of the Project.
2. Services to make measured drawings of or to investigate existing conditions or facilities, or
to verify the accuracy of drawings or other information furnished by the City or others.
3. Services resulting from significant changes in the scope, extent, or character of the portions
of the Project designed or specified by Engineer or its design requirements including, but not
limited to, changes in size, complexity, City's schedule, character of construction, or method
of financing; and revising previously accepted studies, reports, Drawings, Specifications, or
Contract Documents when such revisions are required by changes in Laws and Regulations
enacted subsequent to the Effective Date or are due to any other causes beyond Engineer's
control.
4. Services required as a result of the City providing incomplete or incorrect Project information
to Engineer.
5. Providing renderings or graphics for City use beyond the Contract Documents listed in
Exhibits B and C.
6. Undertaking investigations and studies including, but not limited to, detailed consideration of
operations, maintenance, and overhead expenses; the preparation of financial feasibility and
cash flow studies, rate schedules, and appraisals; assistance in obtaining financing for the
Project; detailed quantity surveys of materials, equipment, and labor; and audits or
inventories required in connection with construction performed by the City.
7. Services during out -of -town travel required of Engineer other than for visits to the Site or City
office.
8. Preparing for, coordinating with, participating in and responding to structured independent
review processes, including, but not limited to, construction management, cost estimating,
project peer review, value engineering, and constructability review requested by City; and
performing or furnishing services required to revise studies, reports, Drawings,
Specifications, or other Bidding Documents as a result of such review processes.
Pasco Third Clarifier 9 April 23, 2014
9. Preparing additional Bidding Documents or Contract Documents for alternate bids or prices
requested by the City for the Work or a portion thereof.
10. Provide assistance during bidding and services during construction.
11. Provide permitting assistance with regard to building permits, SEPA checklist, or
Department of Ecology submittals.
12. Provide geotechnical or survey services to supplement or expand the existing information.
13. Providing assistance in responding to the presence of any Constituent of Concern at the
Site, in compliance with current Laws and Regulations.
14. Preparing to serve or serving as a consultant or witness for Owner in any litigation,
arbitration, or other dispute resolution process related to the Project.
15. Providing more extensive services required to enable Engineer to issue notices or
certifications requested by Owner.
16. Assistance to Owner in developing procedures for (a) control of the operation and
maintenance of Project equipment and systems, and (b) related record - keeping. Overtime
work requiring higher than regular rates.
17. Other services performed or furnished by Engineer not otherwise provided for in this
Agreement.
Fee
The estimated fee for completing the scope of services as described above is shown in the table
below. This fee is based on the assumptions and deliverables listed in this scope of services.
Third Primary larifier
Y
Labor
Expenses
Estimated
Fee
Task 100 — Project Management
$22,360
$500
$22,860
Task 200— Preliminary Engineering
$58,540
$7,780
$66,320
Task 300 —Final Design
$142,200
$7,600
$149,800
Task 400— Additional Services
$0
$0
$0
Total
$223100
$15,880
$238,980
Pasco Third Clarifier 10 April 23, 2014
EXHIBIT B: Drawing List
APPENDIX B
Wastewater Treatment Plant Improvements Sheet Index
Sheet
No.
Group Sheet
No.
Sheet Description
SERIES 000 - GENERAL
1
OOG -01
COVER SHEET, VICINITY AND LOCATION MAP, INDEX
2
OOG -02
GENERAL ABBREVIATIONS
3
OOG -03
GENERAL LEGEND
4
OOG -04
DESIGN DATA TABLE AND GENERAL LIQUID PROCESS
FLOW SCHEMATIC
5
OOG -05
MODIFIED HYDRAULIC PROFILE
6
OOC -01
GENERAL CIVIL LEGEND
7
OOC -01
EXISTING SITE PLAN AND CONSTRACTOR'S STAGING AREA
8
OOCE -01
EXPANDED SITE PLAN PIPING AND GRADING
9
OOA -01
CODE REVIEW AND SCHEDULES
10
OOS -01
GENERAL STRUCTURAL NOTES
11
OOS -02
GENERAL STRUCTURAL DETAILS -1
12
OOS -03
GENERAL STRUCTURAL DETAILS -2
13
OOS -04
GENERAL STRUCTURAL DETAILS -3
14
OOM -01
MECHANICAL SYMBOLS
15
OOM -02
GENERAL HVAC SCHEDULES AND DETAILS
16
OOE -01
ELECTRICAL LEGEND
17
OOE -02
ELECTRICAL CONTROL DIAGRAMS
18
OOE -03
ELECTRICAL CONTROL DIAGRAMS AND SCHEDULES
19
OOE -04
CONDUIT LIGHTING AND PANEL SCHEDULES
20
OOY -01
GENERAL INSTRUMENTATION LEGEND
SERIES 100 - HEADWORKS MODIFICATION
21
OISDME -01
PLAN AND SECTION SPUTTER BOX MODIFICATIONS
22
OISDME -02
BIM ISOMETRIC DETAILS
SERIES 200 - PRIMARY CLARIFIER
23
02S -01
SHORING DESIGN NOTES
24
02S -02
FOUNDATION AND UPPER LEVEL STRUCTURAL PLAN
25
02S -03
WALL SECTIONS AND DETAILS
26
02Y -01
P &ID PRIMARY CLARIFIER
27
02Y -02
P &ID PRIMARY SLUDGE AND SCUM PUMPING
28
02DE -01
CLARIFIER PIPING AND POWER PLAN
Pasco Third Clarifier 11 April 23, 2014
29 1 02SDME -02 I PUMPING ROOM PLAN AND SECTION
30 02E -01 ONE -LINE DIAGRAM MODIFICATIONS AND MCC
ELEVATIONS
Pasco Third Clarifier 12 April 23, 2014
EXHIBIT C: Specification List
APPENDIX C
Specification Listing
SPEC NO.
SPEC NAME
DIVISION 0 - PROCUREMENT AND CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS
00020
Invitation to Bid
00100
Instructions to Bidders
00101
Bidder's Checklist
00300
Bid Form
00340
Bid Bond
00390
EPA Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension, and Other Responsibility Matters
00391
Equal Em to ment Opportunity (EEO -1) Certification
00400
Proposed Subcontractors
00410
Propos ed Suppliers
00430
Bid Bond
00450
Statement of Qualifications
00460
Anti- Discrimination Certificate
00470
Contractor's Non- Collusion Affidavit
00500
Agreement
00510
Notice of Award
00610
Performance Bond - Construction
00615
Payment Bond - Construction
00620
Notice to Proceed
00630
In Lieu of Retention Bond
00700
Standard General Conditions of the Construction Contract
00805
Su lemen Conditions to EJCDC General Conditions, Construction contract
DIVISION 1 - GENERAL REQUIREMENTS
01010
Summary of Work
01060
Special Conditions
01150
Measurement and Payment
01340
Submittals
01342
O &M Manuals
01370
Schedule of Values
01400
1 Quality Assurance
01560
Environmental Protection and Special Controls
01600
Product Delivery, Storage, and Handling
01640
Product Substitutions
01650
Facility Startup
01710
Cleaning
01800
Openings and Penetrations in Constructions
DIVISION 2 - SITE WORK
02072
Demolition, Cutting and Patching
Pasco Third Clarifier 13 April 23, 2014
02200
Earthwork
02221
Trenching, Backfillin , and Compacting for Utilities
02260
To Soil and Finish Grading
02270
Soil Erosion and Sediment Control
02515
Precast Concrete Manhole Structures
02278
Geotexties
02930
Seeding, Soddin and Lansdca in
DIVISION 3 - CONCRETE
03108
Formwork
03208
Reinforcement
03308
Concrete, Materilas and Proportioning
03311
Concrete Mixing, Placing, Jointing, and Curing
03348
Concrete Finishing and Repair
03350
Testing
03431
Precast and Prestressed Concrete
DIVISION 4 - MASONRY NOT USED
DIVISION 5 - METALS
05505
1 Metal Fabrications
DIVISION 6 - WOOD PLASTICS, AND COMPOSITES
06100
Rough Carpentry
06610
Fiber lass Reinforced Plastic Fabrications
DIVISION 7 - THERMAL AND MOISTURE PROTECTION
07190
Underslab Vapor Retarder
07210
Building Insulation
07410
Preformed Factory-Insulated Metal Wall Panels
07534
Adhered Elastomeric Sheet Roof
07600
Flashin and Sheet Metal
07900
Joint Sealants
DIVISION 8 - DOORS AND WINDOWS
08110
Metal Doors and Frames
08700
Finish Hardware
DIVISION 9 - FINISHES
09905
FPainting and Protective Coatings
DIVISION 10 - SPECIALTIES
10200
Louvers and Vents
10400
Identification Devices
10444
Si na e
DIVISION 11 - EQUIPMENT
11005
Equipment: Basic Requirements
11060
Pumping ui ment: Basic Requirements
11081
Pumping ui ment: Lobe
Pasco Third Clarifier 14 April 23, 2014
11150
Fiberglass Reinforced Plastic Baffles
11336
Primary Sedimenation Clarifier Solids Collection Equipment
DIVISION 12 - FURNISHINGS NOT USED
DIVISION 13 - SPECIAL CONSTRUCTION
13440
Instrumentation for Process Control: Basic Requirements
13441
Control Loop Descriptions
13442
Primary Elements and Transmitters
13446
Control Auxiliaries
13448
Control Panels and Enclosures
13449
Surge Protection Devices for Instrumentation and Control Equipment
13500
Programmable Logic Controller Control Systems
DIVISION 14 - CONVEYING SYSTEMS
14301
1 Hoists, Trolleys, and Monorails
DIVISION 15 - MECHANICAL
15060
Pipe and Pipe Fittings: Basic Requirements
15061
Pipe - Steel
15062
Pipe - Ductile
15063
Pipe - Copper
15064
Pipe - Plastic
15067
Pipe - HDPE
15073
Pipe Cast Iron Soil
15090
Pipe, Duct and Conduit Support Systems
15100
Valves: Basic Requirements
15102
Plug Valves
15104
Ball Valves
15105
Globe Valves
15106
Check Valves
15114
Miscellaneous Valves
15115
Water Control Gates
15183
Pipe, Duct and Equipment Insulation
15440
Plumbing Fixtures and Equipment
15605
HVAC: Equipment
15890
HVAC: Ductwork
15970
Instrumentation and Control for HVAC Systems
15990
HVAC Systems: Balancing and Testing
DIVISION 16 - ELECTRICAL
16010
Electrical: Basic Requirements
16012
Seismic Bracing Systems
16060
Grounding
16080
Acce Lance Testing
16120
Wire and Cable: 600 Volt and Below
Pasco Third Clarifier 15 April 23, 2014
16125
Heat Tracing Cable
16130
Raceways and Boxes
16135
Electrical: Exterior Underground
16140
Wiring Devices
16260
Static Uninterru tible Power Supply System
16265
Variable Frequency Drives
16410
Safety Switches
16412
Se aratel Mounted Circuit Breakers
16432
Arc Flash Report
16441
Panelboards
16442
Motor Control Equipment
16460
D -T a Transformers
16470
Package Power Supply
16490
Overcurrent and Short Circuit Protective Devices
16491
Low Voltage Sure Protection Devices (SPD)
16493
Control Equipment Accessories
16500
Indoor and Exterior Lighting
Pasco Third Clarifier 16 April 23, 2014
EXHIBIT D: Milestone Schedule
Third Primary Clarifier
Date
Notice to Proceed
May 6, 2014_
City provides necessary survey, geotechnical,
W _
and existing as -built files and information
May 9, 2014
Initial Site Visit by Consultant
May 15, 2014
City completes initial testing and data
collection to support the CFD modeling
effort
May 19, 2014
_
Submit 30% BIM model and Draft
Engineering Report
July 11, 2014
_ _
City completes second round of testing and
data collection to support the CFD modeling
effort
Juiy 11, 2014
30% Workshop and Comments
July 16, 2014
Submit Final Engineering Report and
Comment Responses
July 16, 2014
Submit 90% BIM model and Contract
_
Documents
November 7, 2014
90% Workshop and Comments
November 12, 2014
Submit Bid Documents
December 6, 2014
Pasco Third Clarifier 17 April 23, 2014
Pasco Third Clarifier 18 April 23, 2014
AGENDA REPORT
FOR: City Council
TO: Gary Crutch$Duty Manager
FROM: Stan Strebel, City Manage
SUBJECT: Latecomer's Agreements Amendments to PMC
I. REFERENCE(S):
1. Latecomer's Agreements - Proposed Ordinance
April 24, 2014
Workshop Mtg.: 4/28/14
Regular Mtg.: 5/5/14
H. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
4/28: Discussion
5/5: MOTION: I move to adopt Ordinance No. , amending Chapter 14.12;
amending Section 13.76.040; repealing Section 13.36.050 and
amending Chapter 3.07 of the Pasco Municipal Code regarding
Latecomer's Agreements and, further, authorize publication by
summary only.
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
N/A
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
A) The City developed and codified Chapter 14.12 of the PMC regarding street and
utilities assessment reimbursement agreements or "Latecomer Agreements" in
2004, based upon then applicable state law. In 2013, the state legislature made
several changes to RCW 35.91 dealing with utility agreements, which changes are
effective July 1, 2014. Staff and the City Attorney have worked over the last
several months to prepare revisions to PMC Chapter 14.12 to incorporate the new
changes and to refine the City's process for review, approval and administration
of the latecomer process, in conformance with the statute.
B) To eliminate other inconsistencies in the Code, Section 13.36.040 regarding line
extensions, is proposed for amendment and Section 13.36.050, regarding
installation costs, is proposed for repeal.
C) Administrative fees as well as engineering review costs associated with
latecomer's agreements are also incorporated in Chapter 3.07 as part of the
ordinance.
V. DISCUSSION:
A) The attached, proposed ordinance has been completed with strikeout and
underline format to enable Council to see the numerous changes proposed.
Following Council review and discussion of any questions, staff recommends
approval of the ordinance.
4(f)
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE of the City of Pasco, Washington, Amending
Chapter 14.12 "Street and Utilities Assessment Reimbursement Agreements -
Latecomers Agreements "; and Amending Section 13.36.040 "Extension of
Lines - Installation by Requesting Party"; Repealing Section 13.36.050
"Installation Costs - Reimbursement of Costs by Subsequent Users "; and
Amending Section 3.07.180 "Fee Summary"
WHEREAS, the City has established an application and procedure for Development
Reimbursement (Latecomer) Agreements to encourage property Developers to install City
utilities and roadways; and
WHEREAS, the Washington legislature, effective July 1, 2014, made substantial
revisions to the statutory requirements for reimbursement agreements for utilities and to
incorporate these changes within the consolidated procedure adopted by the City for
Development Reimbursement Agreements, it is necessary for Chapter 14.12 of the Pasco
Municipal Code to be amended and updated, Section 13.36.040 of Pasco Municipal Code to be
amended, and Section 13.36.050 of the Pasco Municipal Code to be repealed to be consistent
with the consolidated procedure under this Ordinance. NOW, THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN
AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That Chapter 14.12 entitled "Street and Utilities Assessment
Reimbursement Agreements - Latecomers Agreements" of the Pasco Municipal Code, shall be
and hereby is amended and shall read as follows:
14.12.010 PURPOSE. The purpose of this Chapter is to provide prep", owners; the
conditions and procedures under which Developers, including the City, who installed qualifying
improvements requisite for future development and pursuant to the City's development
ordinances and policies, may be partially reimbursed for the expenses of such improvements by
noncontributing benefited owners of adjacent properties, es4ablishifig a pfee in compliance
with Chapters 35.72 and 35.91 RC W, and erecting ee ntmet er the aee lishme t of •'
F, 'nY . .:. -o. -sac
This Chapter is intended to apply to all ai4erial stfeet system improvements wWeh are the
Al Street Improvements: Street improvements include all arterial street system
improvements which are the result of a City ordinance that requires such improvements as a
Amending PMC 14.12; Amending PMC 13.36.040;
Repealing PMC 13.36.050; and Amending PMC 3.07.180 1
Plan are hereby declared to be prerequisites to further property development for the plUoses of
RCW 35.72.010.
B Utility System Improvements: Utility system improvements include all utility_
system improvements which are the result of a City ordinance that requires such improvements
as a prerequisite to further property development Utility system improvements constructed in
order to comply with the City's Comprehensive Plan development regulations and permitting
requirements are hereby declared to be prerequisites to further property development within the
City, or as provided in RCW 35.91.020. (Ord. 3709 Sec. 1, 2004).
14.12.020 DEFINITIONS.
A) "Adjacent" means abutting on public roads, streets, right -of -way or easements in
which street system improvements are installed or directly connecting to street system
improvements through an interest in real property such as an easement or license.
B) "Assessment" means an equitable pro rata charge to be paid by an owner of
property within the assessment reimbursement area for the cost of private construction of public
street and/or utility system improvements made pursuant to a Developer Reimbursement
Agreement.
C) "Assessment reimbursement area" means that area which includes all parcels of
real property adjacent to street system improvements or likely to require connection to or service
by utility system improvements constructed by a Developer.
D) "Cost of construction" is the sum of the direct construction costs incurred to
construct the street and/or utility system improvements plus the City latecomer administrative
fee. "Direct construction costs" include environmental mitigation, relocation and/or new
construction of private utilities as required by the City (i.e., power, telephone, cable and gas),
relocation and/or installation of street lights, relocation and/or installation of signage, acquisition
of right -of -way and/or easements and the actual labor and material construction costs incurred by
the Developer.
E) "Developer" is the individual or entity that contracts with the City for the
construction of street and/or utility system improvements, where such improvements are a
requirement for development of real property owned by such entity or individual. As permitted
by RCW 35.72.050 and RCW 35.91.020, the City, or other public entity, may ioin with or be
construed as a "Developer" for the purpose of recovery of read a street or utility system
improvement costs.
F) "Developer Reimbursement Agreement" means a written agreement between the
City and one or more Developers providing partial reimbursement for cost of construction of
street system improvements and/or utility system improvements to the Developer by owners of
property who are likely to utilize the improvements and who did not contribute to the original
cost of construction. Where the City has elected an alternative financing ltenaeee method as
provided in RCW 35.72.050 or RCW 35.91.020 the Developer Reimbursement Agreement shall
Amending PMC 14.12; Amending PMC 13.36.040;
Repealing PMC 13.36.050; and Amending PMC 3.07.180 2
be between the City, as the Developer, and the adjacent property owners for the construction or
improvement of street system or utility vstem imnrovementsarterial-sadivays within the City.
G) "Direct connection" means a service connection, to be owned and maintained by
the property owner and not the City, from existing or new utility improvements.
H) "Latecomer fee" means a charge collected by the City against a real property
owner who:
1) Connects to or uses the utility system improvement where fees are
separately stated. or is a part of a connection fee or other fee for providing access to the
City's utility s3 em. or
2) Receives a building or development permit for real property located within
the assessment reimbursement area which is subject to an Agreement created under this
Chapter.
14D "Street system improvements" means public street and alley improvements made
in existing or subsequently dedicated or granted rights of way or easements and any
improvements associated therewith including but not limited to such things as acquisition of
right -of -way and/or easements, design, engineering, surveying, inspection, grading, paving,
installation of curbs, gutters, pedestrian facilities, street lighting, bike lanes, and traffic control
devices, relocation and/or construction of private utilities as required by the City (i.e., power,
telephone, cable and gas), relocation and/or construction of street lights, traffic control devices,
signage and other similar improvements.
11) "Utility system improvements" means public water, sewer and storm drainage
system improvements 4ieluding, as defined by RCW 35.91.015 which shall include, but not be
limited to the acquisition of right -of -way and/or easements, design, engineering, surveying,
inspection, testing, connection fees, and installation of improvements as required by the City and
includes but is not limited to the following, by utility type:
1) Water system improvements including but not limited to such things as
treatment facilities, reservoirs, wells, mains, valves, fire hydrants, telemetry systems,
pumping stations, and pressure reducing stations;
2) Sewer system improvements including but not limited to such things as
treatment plants, gravity mains, lift stations, force mains, and telemetry systems; and
3) Storm sewer system improvements including but not limited to such things
as water quality structures and systems, detention and retention facilities, and storm water
collection and conveyance facilities. (Ord. 3709 Sec. 1, 2004.)
Amending PMC 14.12; Amending PMC 13.36.040;
Repealing PMC 13.36.050; and Amending PMC 3.07.180 3
14.12.030 APPLICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT REIMBURSEMENT
AGREEMENT.
A) Street System Improvements.
to the water nttd sewer f4eilitiaa a t m to ^ the c i. a t • t.•
__ ____ ••____ »._ ».._.. ».. » »..... ».. ..� ........ ... ......� ..... ... i....i.��i.� ... ui,. vYviy��icuxiz
the City . itMn the Git• 's e filit. a ri a ply t,. the City f r a Developff
ReimbtffsemefA ..� ate u� n' «n
Jt the Developer's request by written application the City
may enter into a Developer Reimbursement Agreement for the construction of qualifvin¢
street system improvements required as a prerequisite for further nronertv development in
order to recover a pro rata share of the costs of construction from other property owners
that will later derive a benefit from the street andfer- utility system improvements made by
Developer.
a) Provision of sufficient security to the City to ensure completion of
the street system improvements and other performance under the Agreement
b Payment by the Developer to the City of all of the City's costs
associated with the street system improvement including, but not limited to,
engineering, eering, legal, and administrative costs.
C) Developer Reimbursement Agreements for read —e street construction
shall meet the following criteria:
4-a) New street or reconstruction of existing streets meeting the Arterial
Street Standards to include concrete curb and gutter; or
2b) Partial new street construction or reconstruction of an existing
street to City Arterial Street Standards where the mininmm improvements eefisi
of a 28 n feet wid4h of ern with 2 feet ,..vet she..taers
on streets that do not abut
real property owned by the Developer.
c) Unless the City provides written notice to the Developer of its
intent to request a comprehensive plan aunroval, the Developer must request a
comprehensive plan approval for street system improvements if required and
acceptance of the street system improvement must be conditioned upon:
Amending PMC 14.12; Amending PMC 13.36.040;
Repealing PMC 13.36.050; and Amending PMC 3.07.180
ilmolo
C) Developer Reimbursement Agreements for read —e street construction
shall meet the following criteria:
4-a) New street or reconstruction of existing streets meeting the Arterial
Street Standards to include concrete curb and gutter; or
2b) Partial new street construction or reconstruction of an existing
street to City Arterial Street Standards where the mininmm improvements eefisi
of a 28 n feet wid4h of ern with 2 feet ,..vet she..taers
on streets that do not abut
real property owned by the Developer.
c) Unless the City provides written notice to the Developer of its
intent to request a comprehensive plan aunroval, the Developer must request a
comprehensive plan approval for street system improvements if required and
acceptance of the street system improvement must be conditioned upon:
Amending PMC 14.12; Amending PMC 13.36.040;
Repealing PMC 13.36.050; and Amending PMC 3.07.180
(i) Construction of the street system improvements according
to the plans and specifications approved by the City.
(ii) Insroection and approval of the street system improvements
by the Cites
(iii) Transfer to the City of the street system improvements
without cost to the City , upon acceptance by the City of the street system
improvements:
(iv) Full compliance with the Developer's obligations under the
Agreement and with the City's rules and regulations:
(v) Provision of sufficient security to the City to ensure
completion of the street system improvements and other performance
under the Agreement:
NO Payment by the Developer to the City of all of the City's
costs associated with the street system improvements including but not
limited to, engineering, legal, and administrative costs:
(vii) Verification and approval of all Agreements and costs
related to the street system improvements: and
(viii) Within one hundred twenty days of acceptance by the City
of the street system improvements, the Developer must submit the total
costs of the street system improvements to the City. This information will
be used as the basis for determining reimbursements by future users who
benefit from the street system improvements, but who did not contribute to
the original cost of such improvements.
133) The application for a Developer Reimbursement Agreement shall be made
have been aceepted by the-Qty- prior to approval by the Citv. AeeeptefteApproval by
the City shall mean, for purposes of this section, the date the publ e c ,..'...,....._
ee i7..yed to the `.ty by fi y.,i plat a .e1 e deed of e or other eqaivalea
wr-iaen authorizes the extension to occur by the grantine of a roermit.
extension agreement, or written authorization to proceed. Application shall be made on
forms prepared by the Public Works Department and shall be accompanied by all City
fees. The application shall contain the following information which shall be approved by
a State of Washington licensed engineer.
3a) A legal description of the Developer's property.
2lh) A legal description of the properties within the Developer's
proposed Assessment Reimbursement Area together with the name and address of
Amending PMC 14.12; Amending PMC 13.36.040;
Repealing PMC 13.36.050; and Amending PMC 3.07.180
the owners of each property as shown in the records of the Assessor's Office of
Franklin County.
3c) Vicinity maps of Developer's property.
4d) The Developer's proposed Assessment Reimbursement Area and
general location of the street anWeriatility system improvements.
6e The Developer's proposed allocation of the cost of construction to
the individual properties within the proposed Assessment Reimbursement Area
and the method used for such allocation.
7ta Construction drawings or as -built drawings as required by the
Public Works Department.
B) Utility Salem Improvements.
1) At the Developer's request by written application the City will enter into
a Developer Reimbursement Agreement for the construction or improvement of
qualifying utility system improvements or facilities in order to recover a pro rata share of
the costs of the construction of such improvements or facilities from other propert y
owners that will later connect to and derive a benefit from the improvements made by a
Developer.
2) Developer requests must meet the following criteria:
a) The Developer must submit a request upon the form provided by
the City for a Development Reimbursement Agreement prior to the City's
approval of the utility system improvements City approval shall consist of the
execution of a utility extension agreement, or written authorization to proceed
The application shall contain the following information which will be approved
by a State of Washington licensed engineer:
(i) A legal description of the Developer's property.
address of the owners of each pwperty as shown in the records of the
Assessor's Office of Franklin County.
(iii) Vicinity maps of Developer's property.
Amending PMC 14.12; Amending PMC 13.36.040;
Repealing PMC 13.36.050; and Amending PMC 3.07.180
(iv) The Developer's proposed Assessment Reimbursement
Area and general location of the utility system improvements
V) The Developer's proposed allocation of the cost of
Vi) Construction drawings or as -built drawings as required by
the Public Works Department.
b) Utility system improvements constructed or improved in
accordance with this subsection must be located within the City's corporate limits
or, except as provided otherwise by this subsection, within ten miles of the City's
coruorate limits.
C) Unless the City provides written notice to the Developer of its
intent to request a comprehensive plan approval the Developer must request a
comprehensive plan approval for utility system improvements if required and
connection of the water or sewer facility to the municipal system must be
conditioned upon:
i) Construction of the utility system improvements according
to plans and specifications approved by the Cites
ii) Inspection and approval of the utility system improvements
by the City;
iii) Transfer to the City of the utility system improvements
without cost to the City, upon acceptance by the City of the utility system
improvements:
iv) Full compliance with the Developer's obligations under the
Agreement and with the City's rules and regulations:
v) Provision of sufficient security to the City to ensure
completion of the utility system improvements and other performance
under the Agreement:
vi) Pgyment by the Developer to the City of all of the City's
costs associated with the utility system improvements including but not
limited to, en intg eering. legal, and administrative costs:
vii) Verification and approval of all Agreements and costs
related to the utility system improvements: and
Amending PMC 14.12; Amending PMC 13.36.040;
Repealing PMC 13.36.050; and Amending PMC 3.07.180
viii) Within one hundred twenty days of the completion of
utility system improvements. the Developer must submit the total cost of
the utility system improvements to the City. This information will be used
as the basis for determining reimbursements by future users who benefit
from the water or sewer improvements, but who did not contribute to the
original cost of such improvements.
3) The City shall not permit a Developer Reimbursement Agreement under
this subsection until determination has been made by the City for payment of utility
oversizing costs or reimbursement of the Developer for the construction costs of all or a
portion of the improvements.
4) Except as provided in subsection 3) above, all costs of the construction of
the improvements and facilities of utility system improvements shall be borne by the
Develop.,
EC) The Public Works Department will preiide the ap shall within twenty-eieht
(28) days after receipt of the reauesrovide the Developer written notice whether the
application is complete and, if incomplete, what must be done for the application to be
considered complete. The applieaetDeveloper shall within thirty (30) days from the date of the
written notice, respond and provide the information required to complete the application or, if the
applisaatDeveloper cannot submit the required information within the thirty (30) day period, the
applieantDeveleper shall provide the City a written explanation of why they cannot provide the
information within the designated time period and a date that the requested information will be
submitted. In its discretion, the Public Works Department may grant the applieantDeveloper an
extension of not more than sixty (60) days to submit the required information. If the
applieaaQgygloper fails to meet the foregoing time frame, the Public Works Department may, in
its discretion, reject the application as untimely.
El) The Public Works Director shall establish policies and procedures for processing
applications and complying with the requirements of this Ordinance.
E) The City, prior to approval, shall provide notice of the City's intent to participate,
in the funding of the improvements either under RCW 35.72.050, RCW 35.91.020 or under
subsection B2L above. (Ord. 3709 Sec. 1, 2004.)
14.12.040 PRELIMINARY DETERMINATIONS. The Public Works Department shall
formulate a preliminary assessment reimbursement area and preliminary assessment for real
property benefited by the street and/or utility system improvements based on the following and
provide the same to the Developer:
A) The likelihood that benefited property will be developed within fifteen (15) years
(in the case of street system improvements ) or twenty (20) Years (in the case of utility system
improvements) from the "° effective date of the Developer Reimbursement
Agreement.
Amending PMC 14.12; Amending PMC 13.36.040;
Repealing PMC 13.36.050; and Amending PMC 3.07.180
B) The likelihood, that at the time of development of the benefited property, such
property will not be required to install similar street and/or utility system improvements because
they were already installed by the Developer.
C) For street system improvements, that benefited parcels are adjacent to such street
system improvements.
D) For utility system improvements, the likelihood:
1) That such improvements will be tapped into or used (including not only
direct connections but also connection to laterals or branches connecting thereto) by
properties within the assessment reimbursement area; or
2) That such properties will receive a special benefit from the utility system
improvements such as, but not limited to pump stations, sewer lift stations, and additional
utility pipe depth to accommodate future utility expansion.
E) An equitable allocation of the cost of construction among the properties within the
assessment reimbursement area, so that each pays for benefits attributable to those
improvements. The method or methods used to calculate the allocation of the assessment may be
either front footage, number of units, square footage, or may be the zone and termini method or
other recognized methods reasonably calculated to equitably allocate the assessment. (Ord. 3709
Sec. 1, 2004.)
14.12.050 PRELIMINARY DETERMINATION NOTICE.
A) The preliminary assessment reimbursement area and the preliminary assessment
formulated by the Public Works Department, including the preliminary determination of area
boundaries, assessments and a description of the property owner's rights and o to ions, shall be
sent by certified mail to the property owners of record within the preliminary assessment
reimbursement area.
B) The applieantDeveloper or any property owner within the preliminary assessment
reimbursement area may, in writing within twenty (20) days of the date of mailing the notice,
request a hearing to be held before the City Council to contest the preliminary assessment
reimbursement area and preliminary assessment. Notice of such hearing shall be given to all
property owners within the preliminary assessment reimbursement area and the hearing shall be
conducted as soon as is reasonably practical. The City Council is the final authority to establish
the assessment reimbursement area and the assessment for each property within the assessment
reimbursement area.
C) In the event no written request for a hearing is received as required, the
determination of the Public Works Department shall be final. (Ord. 3709 Sec. 1, 2004.)
14.12.060 DEVELOPER REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT.
Amending PMC 14.12; Amending PMC 13.36.040;
Repealing PMC 13.36.050; and Amending PMC 3.07.180 9
A) Based upon the preliminary assessment reimbursement area and the preliminary
assessment, if no hearing is requested, or based upon the City Council's determination of the
assessment reimbursement area and assessment if a hearing is requested, the Public Works
Department shall prepare and give to the appliesntDeveloper a Developer Reimbursement
Agreement.
B) Each Agreement shall include a provision requiring that every two years from the
date the Agreement is executed the Developer entitled to reimbursement under this section shall
provide the City with information regarding the current contact name address and telephone
number of the person company, or partnership that originally entered into the agreement If the
Developer fails to comply with the notification requirements within sixty days of the s ecn ified
time, then the City may collect any reimbursement funds owed to the Developer under the
Agreement. The funds collected under this subsection shall be deposited in the capital
expenditure account of either the City's utility fund or street fund as appropriate (Ord. 3709
Sec. 1, 2004.)
14.12.070 CITY AS DEVELOPER. As an alternative to financing projects under this
Chanter solely by a Developer. the City may join in the financing of improvement projects and
may be reimbursed in the same manner as the Developer who parti4ates in the projects As
another alternative. the City may create an assessment reimbursement area on its own initiative
contributed. The City will only seek to be reimbursed for the costs of improvements that benefit
that portion of the public who will use the improvements within the assessment reimbursement
area established pursuant to state law. No costs for improvements that benefit the general public
may be reimbursed.
14.12.880070 IE GGRD4N C EFFECTIVE DATE/PAYMENT OF ASSESSMENT/
LIEN FOR NONPAYMENT.
A) The Developer Reimbursement Agreement shall be feeerded by the City •°:., t
upon its execution and recording as provided in PMC 14.12.120.
B) The City shall not issue a building permit or development permit or approval nor
grant permission to use water or sewer service unless the City has received full payment of the
assessment applicable to the property connecting to or using the street and/or utility system
improvements constructed by Developer; provided, if the Developer Reimbursement
Agreement's validity is being challenged, the City reserves the right to issue a permit, approval
or permission without liability or prejudice to the City and without prejudicing the Developer's
rights or remedies under this Chapter or otherwise at law or in equity.
C) If improvements are made to a property adjacent to a street improvement or if a
property connects to a utility system improvement without payment of an assessment otherwise
due, the amount of such assessment shall be a binding obligation upon the owner of record (and
successors) of the affected property. (Ord. 3709 Sec. 1, 2004.)
Amending PMC 14.12; Amending PMC 13.36.040;
Repealing PMC 13.36.050; and Amending PMC 3.07.180 10
14.12.GN090 SEGREGATION. The Public Works Department shall, upon the request
of any property owner within the assessment reimbursement area, segregate the assessment. The
segregation shall be based upon the same factors applied when the assessments were originally
established. The property owner seeking segregation of the assessment shall pay an
administrative fee In us any costs and expenses of the City as set forth in Chanter 3 07 of the
Pasco Municipal Code for such te the City based iipen segregation, calculation and recording
as necessary . (Ord. 3709 Sec. 1,
2004.)
14.12.GW100 TERM OF DEVELOPER REIMBUSEMENT AGREEMENTS.
A) Each Developer Reimbursement Agreement shall be vand for a period net W
emeeed fifteen (IS) . s fre fa the date of its final emeeefie for:
1) Street system improvements shall be valid for a period not to exceed
fifteen 0 5) years from the effective date of the Agreement; and
2) Utility system improvements shall be valid for a period not to exceed
twenty (20) years from the effective date of the Agreement.
B) The Developer Reimbursement Agreement may provide for an extension of the
reimbursement periods as provided above, for a time not to exceed the duration of any
moratorium, phasing ordinance, concurrent designation or other governmental action that
prevents making applications for, or the approval off, any new development within the benefit
area for a period of six months or more.
C) Upon the extension of the reimbursement period pursuant to this section the
Agreement must specify the duration of the Agreement extension and must be filed and recorded
with the county auditor. (Ord. 3709 Sec. 1, 2004.)
14.12.4-00110 REMOVAL OF UNAUTHORIZED CONNECTIONS OR TAPS.
Whenever any tap or connection is made into any utility improvement without payment of the
assessment being made as required by this Chapter, the Public Works Department is authorized
to remove and disconnect, or cause to be removed and disconnected, such unauthorized tap or
connection including all connecting tile or pipe located in the right -of -way and to dispose of such
unauthorized material without liability. The owner of the property where the unauthorized
connection is located shall be liable for all costs and expenses of any type incurred to remove,
disconnect, and dispose of the unauthorized tap or connection. (Ord. 3709 Sec. 1, 2004.)
14.12.4-10120 CITY ADMINISTRATIVE FEE, COSTS AND RECORDING. The City
shall charge a fee for processing Development Reimbursement Agreements, including
engineering costs and the cost of recording, as identified in Chapter 3.07 of the Pasco Municipal
Amending PMC 14.12; Amending PMC 13.36.040;
Repealing PMC 13.36.050; and Amending PMC 3.07.180 11
Code. Developer Reimbursement Agreements and extensions thereof, shall be recorded with the
Franklin County Auditor within thirty (30) days of the final execution of the Agreement, and
shall be binding on owners of record within the assessment area who are not parties to the
Agreement. (Ord. 3709 Sec. 1, 2004.)
14.12.4-20130 PAYMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REIMBURSEMENT CHARGE. Each
assessment shall be due in its entirety upon connection to or use of a street and/or utility system
improvement by a property subject to an assessment, and shall be paid to the City. The City will
pay over to Developer the amounts collected within sixty (60) days of receipt.
When the assessment for any property has been paid in full, the Public Works Director
shall issue a certification of payment that will release such property from the Developer
Reimbursement Agreement which maybe recorded by the owner. (Ord. 3709 Sec. 1, 2004.)
14.12.4-30140 ENFORCEMENT OF LATECOMER OBLIGATIONS.
A) Nothing in this Chapter is intended to create a private right of action for damages
against the City for failing to comply with the requirements of this Chapter. The City, its
officials, em llooyees, or agents may not be held liable for failure to collect a reimbursement
assessment or latecomer fee unless the failure was willful or intentional Failure of the City to
comply with the requirements of this Chapter does not relieve the City of any future requirement
AD In processing and imposing obligations in this Chapter for reimbursement of
Developers, the City in no way guarantees payment of assessments by latecomers, or
enforceability of assessment, or enforceability of the Development Reimbursement Agreement,
or the amount(s) thereof against such persons or property. Nor will the offices or finances of the
City be used for enforcement or collection of latecomer obligations beyond those duties
specifically undertaken by the City herein. It shall be the obligation of a Developer to take
whatever authorized means are available to enforce payment of latecomer assessments and
Developers are hereby authorized to take such actions. The City shall not be responsible for
locating any beneficiary or survivor entitled to any benefits by or through a Developer
Reimbursement Agreement. (Ord. 3709 Sec. 1, 2004.)
��eerrr.
Section 2. That Section 13.36.040 entitled "Extension of Lines - Installation by
Requesting Party" of the Pasco Municipal Code, shall be and hereby is amended and shall read
as follows:
13.36.040 EXTENSION OF LINES - INSTALLATION BY REQUESTING
PARTY. When an extension of the City system is required and such is requested of and agreed
to by the City and it is further agreed that the requesting party will extend the line(s). The
Amending PMC 14.12; Amending PMC 13.36.040;
Repealing PMC 13.36.050; and Amending PMC 3.07.180 12
requesting party shall install the line extension at their sole cost and expense, subject to the
remaining provisions of this section.
A) The front footage charge under §13.36.020 shall be waived for connection to the
newly installed line by the party to the parcel(s) of property owned by the installing party.
B) The installing party when connecting his or her parcel(s) of property to the
extension shall pay square footage charges for the parcel(s) of the property served as provided
under §133.36.020, except that, if the extension passes by one or more parcels of property under
other ownership already connected to an existing line, there shall be a deduction in the amount of
front footage and square footage charges previously paid for such parcel(s) of property at the
time of their connection. In some cases the deduction may be sufficient to result in a cash
payment from the City to the party making the extension.
C) The City may eentfaef with the p", ... "b
the lire extension and .. he ....1.,.,,,.. eat4.. tap ....4.. ,. h a the provisions of
eentfa� as K J r
provided r _ in §13.36 ncn The City may enter into Developer Reimbursement
Agreement as provided in PMC 14.12. (Ord. 3608 Sec. 19, 2003; Ord. 2961, Sec. 9, 1993.)
Section 3. That Section 13.36.050 entitled "Installation Costs - Reimbursements of
Costs by Subsequent Users" of the Pasco Municipal Code, shall be and hereby is repealed in its
entirety.
Amending PMC 14.12; Amending PMC 13.36.040;
Repealing PMC 13.36.050; and Amending PMC 3.07.180 13
ORION
Y.
Amending PMC 14.12; Amending PMC 13.36.040;
Repealing PMC 13.36.050; and Amending PMC 3.07.180 13
Section 4. That Section 3.07.180 entitled "Public Works Inspections" of the Pasco
Municipal Code shall be and hereby is amended and shall read as follows:
3.07.180 PUBLIC WORKS AGREEMENTS AND INSPECTIONS:
Fee /Charge Reference
A) Development Reimbursement Agreements $100.00 14 12 120
(Latecomer's) Administrative Fee
B) Developer Reimbursement Agreements $30.00 14 12 090
Segregation
C) Engineering Staff Time-Review
Developers Reimbursement Agreements
AD) Water Crews on Contractor Site
(after 1 st visit) (per hour)
BE) Sewer Crews on Contractor Site
(after 1 st visit) (per hour)
GE) Public Works Construction
Development Inspection
Minimum Fee $90 14.12.120
for first hour.
thereafter. $60/Ilr
$160.00 Ord.3543
$160.00 Ord.3543
Minimum Fee: $90 14.08.030
for first hour;
thereafter, $60/hr
Section 5. This Ordinance shall take full force and effect on the 1st day of May,
2014, or after its approval, passage and publication as required by law, whichever shall last
occur.
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco, Washington, and approved as
provided by law this _ day of 12014.
Matt Watkins, Mayor
Attest:
Debbie Clark, City Clerk
Approved as to Form:
Leland B. Kerr, City Attorney
Amending PMC 14.12; Amending PMC 13.36.040;
Repealing PMC 13.36.050; and Amending PMC 3.07.180 14
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Council April 23, 2014
FROM: Gary Crutch Manager Workshop Mtg.: 4/28/14
Regular Mtg.: 5/5/14
SUBJECT: Hanford Comm 'ties hiterlocal Agreement
I. REFERENCE(S):
Hanford Communities - Proposed Interlocal Agreement
H. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL /STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
4/28: Discussion
5/5: MOTION: I move to approve the Hanford Communities Interlocal Agreement
and, further, authorize the Mayor to sign the Agreement.
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
Approximately $17,500 annually.
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
A) The Cities of Pasco, Kennewick, Richland and West Richland, along with Benton
County, have operated what is known as the Hanford Communities organization
for the past 20 years. The purpose of the organization is to provide a forum for
local government monitoring of activities at the Hanford site as they might affect
a wide variety of community issues (emergency services, economy, health and
safety, etc.). Through the interlocal and operating contract, the entities employ
the services of an individual specifically assigned to monitor Hanford activities
and brief the member representatives on a continuing basis. The effort has proven
quite valuable to the member jurisdictions in terms of being cognizant of site
activities and their anticipated effects on the community; likewise, that awareness
has permitted the local jurisdictions to exert greater influence on Hanford site
activities than the cities were able to prior to that time.
V. DISCUSSION:
A) The annual budget for this program is about $150,000 but an Ecology grant
covers about $30,000 and Richland (which houses the employee) absorbs 40% of
the remainder and share the 60% balance with the other cities and counties. That
60% is shared on the basis of official population each year, as many other
regional agreements do. Pasco's share of costs for 2014 is $17,287.
B) The ability to monitor Hanford site activities and the improved ability to influence
those activities are well worth the relatively modest expense (assigning one -half
FTE would cost much more). The organization functions well and has proven to
be effective; thus, staff recommends the agreement be extended for another five -
year term.
4(g)
AN INTERLOCAL COOPERATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN ELIGIBLE LOCAL
GOVERNMENTS TO REVIEW, EVALUATE, AND MONITOR CONDITIONS AND
OPERATIONS AT THE HANFORD NUCLEAR RESERVATION ( HANFORD)
THAT DIRECTLY AFFECT THESE
" HANFORD COMMUNITIES"
This INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT, effective the 1st day of January, 2015, is hereby
entered into by and between the City of Richland, City of Kennewick, City of Pasco, City of
West Richland, and the Counties of Benton and Franklin (hereinafter referred to as
"Participating Jurisdictions ").
WHEREAS, the Interlocal Cooperation Act, RCW 39.34 allows public agencies to make
the most efficient use of their powers by enabling them to cooperate with each other on the
basis of mutual advantage to provide services and facilities that will best meet the needs of
each community; and
WHEREAS, environmental contamination at Hanford and the U.S. Department of
Energy's consequential environmental remediation and waste management activities impose
numerous health, safety, and socio- economic impacts on the well -being of the residents of
Richland, Kennewick, Pasco, West Richland, and unincorporated portions of Benton and
Franklin Counties; and
WHEREAS, the vast majority of those who work at Hanford live in and around the Cities
of Richland, Kennewick, Pasco, and West Richland; and the counties therein; and
WHEREAS, although each jurisdiction fully reserves the right to pursue its own interests
with regard to Hanford, through joint utilization of personnel and other resources these
jurisdictions are desirous of entering into a program to review, evaluate and monitor conditions
at Hanford and policies, programs and operations of the Department of Energy (DOE) and
others in regard to Hanford,
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein, it is
agreed in accordance with the provisions of RCW 39.34.030 as follows:
I. PURPOSE
The purpose of this Agreement is to make available jointly to the Participating
Jurisdictions technical, analytical, and other resources to review, evaluate and monitor
conditions at Hanford such as cleanup, workforce and community transition. Information will
also be made available regarding policies, programs and operations of the DOE and others with
regard to Hanford, and to enhance citizen understanding of such. To that end, the Participating
Jurisdictions have established and periodically renew this Interlocal Cooperation Agreement
creating an organization to be known as the " HANFORD COMMUNITIES" to:
1. Coordinate efforts concerning Hanford activities and issues requiring local
government interaction or participation between the Hanford Communities, the
DOE, local, state, and national agencies;
Hanford Communities
Interlocal Agreement
Page 2
2. Interact with the DOE, the Washington State Department of Ecology, the U. S.
Environmental Protection Agency, and others regarding Hanford environmental
contamination, remediation, waste management, response to emergencies, and
work force and site transition issues;
3. Evaluate reports, findings, and recommendations regarding ongoing, planned
and possible cleanup and waste management activities at Hanford, including
actual or potential environmental and socio- economic impacts on the Hanford
Communities or individual Participating Jurisdictions;
4. Prepare special studies, assessments, surveys, and related efforts regarding
Hanford for the use of the Hanford Communities or individual Participating
Jurisdictions and /or to further public information and enhance citizen
understanding of Hanford - related issues; and
5. Prepare and issue position papers, give testimony, and sponsor other activities
designed to inform the public about environmental, waste management,
emergency management, and site transition activities; and
6. Prepare and present issue papers and sponsor activities in support of workforce
and community transition issues.
II. ORGANIZATION
A. Eligibility: Full membership in the Hanford Communities Interlocal is limited to the cities
of Richland, Kennewick, Pasco, West Richland, Benton and Franklin Counties. Affiliate
memberships are open to local government entities other than general purpose
governments. Affiliate members will not have voting seats on the Governing or
Administrative Boards.
B. Governing Board: The governing bodies of each Participating Jurisdiction shall identify
one (1) elected legislative representative from its governing body to serve on the
Governing Board of the Hanford Communities. Governing Board members shall focus
on addressing issues at the policy level and shall advocate positions consistent with the
annual Issue Agenda.
C. Administrative Board: The chief administrative officers, or designees, of the
Participating Jurisdictions shall constitute the Administrative Board of the Hanford
Communities. Administrative Board members shall address the day -to -day activities of
the Hanford Communities consistent with executing the policy decisions made by the
Governing Board.
D. Operating Jurisdiction: One of the Participating Jurisdictions shall be designated as
the Operating Jurisdiction and assigned responsibilities for carrying out the items
enumerated in "Section I — Purpose" on behalf of the Hanford Communities. The
Operating Jurisdiction's rules, regulations, and ordinances, unless otherwise specifically
provided for, apply to the Interlocal. Employees of the Interlocal are employees of the
Operating Jurisdiction, which shall provide all necessary support services. The
Operating Jurisdiction shall administer the Hanford Communities budget, from which
authorized program expenses shall be reimbursed. The Operating Jurisdiction shall
Hanford Communities
Interlocal Agreement
Page 3
provide these reimbursed services at no administrative charge to participants of this
Interlocal Agreement.
E. Officers: There shall be a Chairperson and Vice - chairperson for the Governing Board
and the Administrative Board, respectively. The Chairperson and Vice - chairperson shall
be elected from among the membership of each board to serve one -year terms effective
January 1 of each year.
III. ADMINISTRATION
A. Budget Preparation: The Operating Jurisdiction shall prepare a budget in accordance
with its budget cycle based upon policies adopted by the Governing Board. The budget
shall be approved by the Governing Board of the Hanford Communities.
B. Funding: Funds necessary to carry out this Agreement shall come from Participating
Jurisdiction assessments and federal, state, and other grants. Assessments shall be
based on a funding formula approved by the Hanford Communities Administrative
Board.
C. Meetings: The Governing Board shall meet annually to approve the Hanford
Communities budget and Issue Agenda for the coming year, and other times as needed.
The Administrative Board will meet as needed, however, in no event less frequently than
quarterly during each calendar year. Meetings of the Hanford Communities Governing
Board shall be subject to the Washington Open Public Meetings Act.
D. Dispute Resolution: Disputes between or among the Participating Jurisdictions and
affiliated members regarding the breach, interpretation or enforcement of this
Agreement shall be first addressed by the parties in a good faith effort to resolve the
dispute. Any remaining disputes shall be resolved by binding arbitration in accordance
with RCW 7.04A and the Mandatory Rules of Arbitration.
E. Liabilitv: To the extent any liability exceeds the insurance coverage of the Operating
Jurisdiction, each remaining Participating Jurisdiction shall be jointly liable for the
balance of claim in the same ration as their percentage contribution is to the annual
budget.
IV. DURATION OF THE AGREEMENT
This Agreement shall be effective the 1st day of January, 2015 when signed by the
Participating Jurisdictions and shall continue through December 31, 2019. The term of this
Agreement may be extended thereafter with the written approval of the Participating
Jurisdictions.
V. OWNERSHIP OF PROPERTY
All property, real and personal, acquired with Hanford Communities funds to carry out
the purposes of this Agreement shall be the property of the Hanford Communities. Real and
personal property owned by the Operating Jurisdiction and used to service its contract with the
Hanford Communities shall remain the property of the Operating Jurisdiction. In the event any
property becomes surplus or upon partial or complete termination of this Agreement, property
of the Hanford Communities shall be sold and the proceeds shall be divided between the
Hanford Communities
Interlocal Agreement
Page 4
Participating Jurisdictions in the same ratio as their percentage of contribution is to the annual
budget.
All documents, studies, and issue papers prepared for or on behalf of the Hanford
Communities shall be available to Participating Jurisdictions and affiliates for all purposes, and
shall constitute a public record pursuant to Title 42.56 RCW upon its public citation in
connection with any action of Participating Jurisdictions or affiliates. The Operating Jurisdiction
shall serve as the public records officer.
Board.
VI. AMENDMENT
The Agreement may be amended upon written approval of a majority of the Governing
1T11 =49 Y d : 111 [Z\Ti %p
A jurisdiction may withdraw without penalty from this Agreement effective December 31
of any year, provided written notice is given to the Administrative Board no later than the
preceding June 30.
Mayor David W. Rose
City of Richland
'2014
, 2014
Mayor Matt Watkins
City of Pasco
'2014
Chairman James R. Beaver
Benton County Board of Commissioners
'2014
Cynthia D. Johnson
Richland City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM
Heather Kintzley
Richland City Attorney
Mayor Steve C. Young
City of Kennewick
, 2014
, 2014
Chairman Rick Miller
Franklin County Board of Commissioners