Loading...
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