HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017.02.21 Council Meeting PacketRegular Meeting
AGENDA
PASCO CITY COUNCIL
7:00 p.m.
February 21, 2017
Page
Please note that our Council Meeting will take place on Tuesday, February 21
as City Hall will be closed Monday, February 20 in honor of Presidents’ Day
1. CALL TO ORDER:
2. ROLL CALL:
(a) Pledge of Allegiance
3. CONSENT AGENDA: All items listed under the Consent Agenda are considered
to be routine by the City Council and will be enacted by roll call vote as one motion
(in the form listed below). There will be no separate discussion of these items. If
further discussion is desired by Council members or the public, the item may be
removed from the Consent Agenda to the Regular Agenda and considered
separately.
4 - 7 (a) Approval of Minutes
To approve the Minutes of the Pasco City Council Meeting dated February
6, 2017.
8 - 10 (b) Bills and Communications
To approve claims in the total amount of $1,979,717.25 ($1,232,669.13 in
Check Nos. 214377-214655; $747,048.12 in Electronic Transfer Nos.
814050-814052, 814124-814127, 814193, 814208-814209); $32,959.87 in
Check Nos. 50186-50212; $626,107.46 in Electronic Transfer Nos.
30103832-30104319; $5,955.75 in Electronic Transfer No. 340 -343.
To approve bad debt write-off for Utility Billing, Ambulance, Cemetery,
General Accounts, Miscellaneous Accounts, and Municipal Court (non-
criminal, criminal, and parking) accounts receivable in the total amount of
$74,569.09 and, of that amount, authorize $30,180.54 be turned over for
collection.
(RC) MOTION: I move to approve the Consent Agenda as read.
4. PROCLAMATIONS AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS:
5. VISITORS - OTHER THAN AGENDA ITEMS: This item is provided to allow
citizens the opportunity to bring items to the attention of the City Council or to
Page 1 of 104
Regular Meeting February 21, 2017
express an opinion on an issue. Its purpose is not to provide a venue for debate or
for the posing of questions with the expectation of an immediate response. Some
questions require consideration by Council over time and after a deliberative
process with input from a number of different sources; some questions are best
directed to staff members who have access to specific information. Citizen
comments will normally be limited to three minutes each by the Mayor. Those with
lengthy messages are invited to summarize their comments and /or submit written
information for consideration by the Council outside of formal meetings.
6. REPORTS FROM COMMITTEES AND/OR OFFICERS:
(a) Verbal Reports from Councilmembers
7. HEARINGS AND COUNCIL ACTION ON ORDINANCES AND
RESOLUTIONS RELATING THERETO:
11 - 78 (a) Q* Rezone Appeal: C-1 to C-3 Rezone Under MF # Z 2016-005 (MF#
APPL 2017-001)
CONDUCT A CLOSED RECORD HEARING:
MOTION for Findings of Fact: I move to adopt findings of fact and
conclusions therefrom as contained in the Planning Commission Report
dated December 15, 2016.
MOTION on the Rezone: I move the City Council accept the Planning
Commission recommendation and deny the rezone for the Loyalty Inn.
8. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS NOT RELATING TO HEARINGS:
79 - 81 (a) Removal of Convenience/Payment Fees
MOTION: I move to adopt Ordinance No. 4338, repealing Section
3.112.040 "Miscellaneous Payment Processing Charges" and amending
Section 3.07.090 "Miscellaneous" and, further, authorize publication by
summary only.
82 - 84 (b) Assigning Council Representation to Districts
MOTION: I move to approve Resolution No. 3752, assigning Council
representation to Districts and identifying position numbers.
85 - 97 (c) * Land Sale to Direct Staffing, LLC, Becky Ochoa
MOTION: I move to approve Resolution No. 3753, approving the sale of
certain real property on Cedar Avenue, north of Lewis Street.
Page 2 of 104
Regular Meeting February 21, 2017
9. UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
10. NEW BUSINESS:
98 - 104 (a) Code Amendment: Mini-Pigs in Residential Zones (MF# CA 2016-005)
MOTION: I move the City Council concur with the Planning Commission
and continue to classify all pigs as farm animals in the Pasco Municipal
Code.
11. MISCELLANEOUS DISCUSSION:
12. EXECUTIVE SESSION:
13. ADJOURNMENT.
(RC) Roll Call Vote Required
* Item not previously discussed
Q Quasi-Judicial Matter
MF# “Master File #....”
REMINDERS:
6:00 p.m., Tuesday, February 21, City Hall Conference Room #1 – LEOFF Disability
Board Meeting. (MAYOR MATT WATKINS and COUNCILMEMBER REBECCA
FRANCIK)
7:30 a.m., Wednesday, February 22, 7130 W. Grandridge Blvd – Visit Tri-Cities
Board Meeting. (COUNCILMEMBER CHI FLORES, Rep.; COUNCILMEMBER
TOM LARSEN, Alt)
4:00 p.m., Thursday, February 23, Springhill Suites, Vista Conference Room –
TRIDEC Board Meeting. (COUNCILMEMBER CHI FLORES, Rep.;
COUNCILMEMBER TOM LARSEN, Alt.)
This meeting is broadcast live on PSC-TV Channel 191 on Charter Cable and streamed
at www.pasco-wa.gov/psctvlive .
Audio equipment available for the hearing impaired; contact the Clerk for assistance.
Page 3 of 104
AGENDA REPORT
FOR: City Council February 14, 2017
TO: Dave Zabell, City Manager Regular Meeting: 2/21/17
FROM: Rick Terway, Director
Administrative & Community Services
SUBJECT: Approval of Minutes
I. REFERENCE(S):
Minutes 02.06.17
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
To approve the Minutes of the Pasco City Council Meeting dated February 6, 2017.
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
V. DISCUSSION:
Page 4 of 104
REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
PASCO CITY COUNCIL FEBRUARY 6, 2017
CALL TO ORDER:
The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Matt Watkins, Mayor.
ROLL CALL:
Councilmembers present: Chi Flores, Rebecca Francik, Robert Hoffmann, Tom
Larsen, Saul Martinez, Matt Watkins and Al Yenney.
Staff present: Dave Zabell, City Manager; Stan Strebel, Deputy City Manager;
Leland Kerr, City Attorney; Richa Sigdel, Finance Director; Bob Metzger,
Police Chief; Bob Gear, Fire Chief; Dave McDonald, City Planner and Dan
Ford, City Engineer.
The meeting was opened with the Pledge of Allegiance.
CONSENT AGENDA:
Approval of Minutes
To approve the Minutes of the Pasco City Council Special Meeting dated
January 23, 2017.
Bills and Communications
To approve claims in the total amount of $4,304,765.27 ($2,994,983.18 in
Check Nos. 214077-214376; $1,309,782.09 in Electronic Transfer Nos.
813707-813763, 813766-813814, 813818-814044); $30,451.20 in Check Nos.
50158-50185; $655,097.75 in Electronic Transfer Nos. 30103336-30103831;
$2,000.00 in Electronic Transfer No. 337.
Final Plat: Linda Loviisa Division 2, Phase 7 (MF# FP 2016-014)
To approve the Final Plat for Linda Loviisa, Division 2, Phase 7.
MOTION: Ms. Francik moved to approve the Consent Agenda as read. Mr.
Yenney seconded. Motion carried by unanimous Roll Call vote.
Mr. Martinez arrived at 7:05 p.m.
VISITORS - OTHER THAN AGENDA ITEMS:
Dave Cortinas, 4116 Road 105, thanked Council and the City Manager for
working positively with the community and ACLU on the voting district issue.
REPORTS FROM COMMITTEES AND/OR OFFICERS:
Mr. Yenney reported on the TRAC Advisory Board meeting and the Hanford
Area Economic Investment Fund meeting. He also completed 4 hours of State
required contract training.
Mr. Martinez reported on the Hanford Communities Governing Board meeting.
Mr. Flores attended the Visit Tri-Cities Board meeting and the TRIDEC Board
of Directors meeting.
Page 1 of 3 Page 5 of 104
REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
PASCO CITY COUNCIL FEBRUARY 6, 2017
ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS NOT RELATING TO HEARINGS:
Taxicab and Transportation Network Company Licensing
Council and staff discussed the details of the proposed ordinance.
Colin Miller, local Uber driver, spoke in favor of not requiring fingerprinting.
He stated Uber will not operated in jurisdictions that require fingerprinting and
he believes tourism has been harmed in Austin, Texas which requires
fingerprinting. He noted his passengers are overwhelmingly positive about
Uber services and negative about Taxi services.
Jesus, 9621 Vincenzo Dr., hopes the City will work with Uber on the
fingerprinting issue.
Dave Cortinas, 4116 Road 105, wants Council to be business friendly and
urged them not to require fingerprinting.
MOTION: Ms. Francik moved to adopt Ordinance No. 4335, regarding PMC
Chapter 5.45 and creating Chapter 5.45A Taxicab and Transportation Network
Company Licensing and amending PMC Section 3.07.050 to establish License
Fees and, further, to authorize publication by summary only. Mr. Yenney
seconded.
Council and staff continued discussion.
MOTION: Mr. Flores moved to amend the motion to remove the fingerprint
requirement for TNC's only. Mr. Martinez seconded. Motion failed by the
following Roll call vote: Yes - Flores, Hoffmann, Martinez. No - Watkins,
Yenney, Francik, Larsen.
Original motion failed by the following Roll Call vote: Yes - Watkins, Yenney,
Francik. No - Martinez, Flores, Hoffmann, Larsen.
Council directed staff to work with Uber on the fingerprinting issue.
Chronic Nuisance Ordinance
MOTION: Ms. Francik moved to adopt Ordinance No. 4336, amending PMC
Section 9.63.020 "Definitions" and, further, authorize publication by summary
only. Mr. Martinez seconded. Motion carried unanimously.
Rezone: C-1 (Retail Business) to R-3 (Medium Density Residential) (MF#
Z 2016-006)
Mr. McDonald explained the details of the proposed Ordinance.
MOTION: Ms. Francik moved to adopt Ordinance No. 4337, rezoning Lot
"B" Majestia Place from C-1 (Retail Business) to R-3 (Medium Density
Residential) and, further, authorize publication by summary only. Mr. Yenney
seconded. Motion carried unanimously.
Special Permit: Location of a Church in a C-1 Zone (MF# SP 2016-016)
Mr. McDonald explained the details of the proposed Resolution.
Page 2 of 3 Page 6 of 104
REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
PASCO CITY COUNCIL FEBRUARY 6, 2017
MOTION: Ms. Francik moved to approve Resolution No. 3751, accepting the
Planning Commission's recommendation and approving a Special Permit for the
location of a church at 5202 Outlet Drive. Mr. Martinez seconded. Motion
carried unanimously.
NEW BUSINESS:
Upgrade of TV Broadcast Equipment
Mr. Strebel explained the details of the proposed purchase.
MOTION: Ms. Yenney moved to approve the purchase and installation of TV
broadcast equipment per the proposal from Advanced Broadcast Solutions, in
the amount of $116,649.10 including sales tax and, further, to authorize the
City Manager to execute the contract. Mr. Martinez seconded. Motion carried
unanimously.
MISCELLANEOUS DISCUSSION:
Mr. Zabell noted Debbie Clark, long time City Clerk has retired and Sandy
Kenworthy has been appointed Interim City Clerk.
Mr. Zabell and Chief Metzger explained current City policy pertaining to
immigration status.
Mr. Martinez excused himself from the remainder of the meeting.
EXECUTIVE SESSION:
Council adjourned to Executive Session at 8:40 p.m. for approximately 50
minutes to establish sales price or lease amount of Real Estate and discuss
litigation or potential litigation with the City Manager, Deputy City Manager
and City Attorney.
Mayor Watkins called the meeting back to order at 9:22 p.m.
ADJOURNMENT:
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:22 p.m.
APPROVED: ATTEST:
Matt Watkins, Mayor Sandy Kenworthy, Interim City Clerk
PASSED and APPROVED this 21st day of February, 2017
Page 3 of 3 Page 7 of 104
AGENDA REPORT
FOR: City Council
TO: Dave Zabell, City Manager Regular Meeting: 2/21/17
FROM: Richa Sigdel, Director
Finance
SUBJECT: Bills and Communications
I. REFERENCE(S):
2017 Accounts Payable 02.21.17
Bad Debt Write-off/Collection 01.31.17
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
To approve claims in the total amount of $1,979,717.25 ($1,232,669.13 in Check Nos.
214377-214655; $747,048.12 in Electronic Transfer Nos. 814050-814052, 814124-
814127, 814193, 814208-814209); $32,959.87 in Check Nos. 50186-50212;
$626,107.46 in Electronic Transfer Nos. 30103832-30104319; $5,955.75 in Electronic
Transfer No. 340-343.
To approve bad debt write-off for Utility Billing, Ambulance, Cemetery, General
Accounts, Miscellaneous Accounts, and Municipal Court (non-criminal, criminal, and
parking) accounts receivable in the total amount of $74,569.09 and, of that amount,
authorize $30,180.54 be turned over for collection.
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
V. DISCUSSION:
Page 8 of 104
February 21, 2017
Claims Bank Payroll Bank Gen'l Bank Electronic Bank Combined
Check Numbers 214377-214655 50186-50212
Total Check Amount $1,232,669.13 $32,959.87 Total Checks 1,265,629.00$
Electronic Transfer Numbers 814050-814052 30103832-30104319 340-343
814124-814127
814193
814208-814209
Total EFT Amount $747,048.12 $626,107.46 $5,955.75 Total EFTs 1,379,111.33$
Grand Total 2,644,740.33$
Councilmember
283,956.69
151,680.65
0.00
0.00
4.07
0.00
0.00
3,400.41
16,499.04
1,346.99
3,598.98
33,188.99
1,250.70
2,818.78
0.00
208.49
0.00
493.60
3,729.42
18,045.00
0.00
39,460.17
76.00
0.00
115,441.90
470,278.66
47,578.17
12,629.05
0.00
0.00
172,096.58
12,650.44
1,254,307.55
GRAND TOTAL ALL FUNDS:2,644,740.33$
The City Council
C I T Y O F P A S C O
Council Meeting of:
Accounts Payable Approved
STREET OVERLAY
City of Pasco, Franklin County, Washington
We, the undersigned, do hereby certify under penalty of perjury the materials have been furnished, the services rendered or the labor performed as
described herein and the claim is a just, due and unpaid obligation against the city and we are authorized to authenticate and certify to such claim.
Dave Zabell, City Manager Richa Sigdel, Finance Director
We, the undersigned City Councilmembers of the City Council of the City of Pasco, Franklin County, Washington, do hereby certify on this
21st day of February, 2017 that the merchandise or services hereinafter specified have been received and are approved for payment:
Councilmember
SUMMARY OF CLAIMS BY FUND:
GENERAL FUND
STREET
ARTERIAL STREET
RIVERSHORE TRAIL & MARINA MAIN
C.D. BLOCK GRANT
HOME CONSORTIUM GRANT
NSP GRANT
MARTIN LUTHER KING COMMUNITY CENTER
AMBULANCE SERVICE
CEMETERY
ATHLETIC PROGRAMS
GOLF COURSE
SENIOR CENTER OPERATING
MULTI-MODAL FACILITY
SCHOOL IMPACT FEES
EQUIPMENT RENTAL - OPERATING BUSINESS
SPECIAL ASSESSMENT LODGING
LITTER ABATEMENT
REVOLVING ABATEMENT
TRAC DEVELOPMENT & OPERATING
PARKS
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
STADIUM/CONVENTION CENTER
LID
GENERAL CAP PROJECT CONSTRUCTION
UTILITY, WATER/SEWER
EQUIPMENT RENTAL - OPERATING GOVERNMENTAL
EQUIPMENT RENTAL - REPLACEMENT GOVERNMENTAL
EQUIPMENT RENTAL - REPLACEMENT BUSINESS
MEDICAL/DENTAL INSURANCE
FLEX
PAYROLL CLEARING
Page 9 of 104
BAD DEBT WRITE-OFF/COLLECTION
January 1 – January 31, 2017
1. UTILITY BILLING - These are all inactive accounts, 60 days or older. Direct write-off are
under $10 with no current forwarding address, or are accounts in "occupant" status. Accounts
submitted for collection exceed $10.00.
2. AMBULANCE - These are all delinquent accounts over 90 days past due or statements are
returned with no forwarding address. Those submitted for collection exceed $10.00. Direct
write off including DSHS and Medicare customers; the law requires that the City accept
assignment in these cases.
3. COURT ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE - These are all delinquent non-criminal and criminal
fines, and parking violations over 30 days past due.
4. CODE ENFORCEMENT – LIENS - These are Code Enforcement violation penalties which
are either un-collectable or have been assigned for collections because the property owner
has not complied or paid the fine. There are still liens in place on these amounts which will
continue to be in effect until the property is brought into compliance and the debt associated
with these liens are paid.
5. CEMETERY - These are delinquent accounts over 120 days past due or statements are
returned with no forwarding address. Those submitted for collection exceed $10.00.
6. GENERAL - These are delinquent accounts over 120 days past due or statements are
returned with no forwarding address. Those submitted for collection exceed $10.00.
7. MISCELLANEOUS - These are delinquent accounts over 120 days past due or statements
are returned with no forwarding address. Those submitted for collection exceed $10.00.
Direct
Write-off
Referred to
Collection
Total
Write-off
Utility Billing $ 1,351.16 140.36 1,491.52
Ambulance $ 61,548.73 14,810.77 76,359.50
Court A/R $ .00 122,865.00 122,865.00
Code Enforcement $ .00 42,912.00 42,912.00
Cemetery $ .00 .00 .00
General $ .00 .00 .00
Miscellaneous $ .00 .00 .00
TOTAL: $ 62,899.89 180,728.13 243,628.02
Page 10 of 104
AGENDA REPORT
FOR: City Council February 3, 2017
TO: Dave Zabell, City Manager
Rick White, Director
Community & Economic Development
Regular Meeting: 2/21/17
FROM: Dave McDonald, City Planner
Community & Economic Development
SUBJECT: Rezone Appeal: C-1 to C-3 Rezone Under MF # Z 2016-005 (MF# APPL
2017-001)
I. REFERENCE(S):
Rezone Application
Loyalty Inn Appeal
Report to Planning Commission
SEPA Checklist
Application & SEPA Notice
SEPA DNS
Transcript of Planning Commission Hearing Dated: 11/17/16
Transcript of Planning Commission Deliberations Dated: 12/21/16
Link to the Planning Commission Hearing Dated: 11/17/16 - http://bit.ly/2hdQyJa
Link to the Planning Commission Deliberations Dated: 12/21/16 - http://bit.ly/2lgT2Jb
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
CONDUCT A CLOSED RECORD HEARING:
MOTION for Findings of Fact: I move to adopt findings of fact and conclusions
therefrom as contained in the Planning commission Report dated December 15, 2016 .
MOTION on the Rezone: I move the City Council accept the Planning Commission
recommendation and deny the rezone for the Loyalty Inn.
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
On November 17, 2016 the Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider an
application for changing the zoning of the Loyalty Inn on West Lewis Street from C -1
Page 11 of 104
to C-3. After deliberations at the December 21, 2016 meeting, the Planning
Commission recommended the rezone be denied.
Following the Planning Commission recommendation a written appeal was filed. The
attached appeal explains the reasoning behind the appeal.
Following the appeal the City Council set February 21, 2017 as the date to conduct a
Closed Record Hearing to consider the appeal.
V. DISCUSSION:
Consideration of an appeal occurs in the form of a “Closed Record Hearing” consisting
of a review of the written record of the rezone application including the Planning
Commission’s deliberation.
When considering this appeal, the City Council has the option of accepting the
Planning Commission’s recommendation, denying the application, approving the
application, approving the application with conditions or remanding the matter back to
the Planning Commission for further review on a specific issue.
In acting on the rezone application as per the criteria of PMC 25. 88.060 Council
should determine whether or not:
1. Is the proposal in accord with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive
Plan;
2. Will the effect of the proposal on the immediate vicinity be materially
detrimental;
3. Is there merit and value in the proposal for the community as a whole;
4. Should conditions be imposed in order to mitigate any significant adverse
impact from the proposal;
5. Is a concomitant agreement required and if so what should be the terms and
conditions?
Any option the Council chooses to select for the Rezone application will need to be
supported by Findings of Fact. The Findings identified in the staff report to the
Planning Commission can be used as Findings to support denial of the Rezone as
recommended by the Planning Commission. Said Findings should be adopted prior to
Council action on this matter. For any action other than denial of the rezone the
Council will need to develop a separate list of findings.
If the Council decides not to accept the Planning Commission recommendation, staff
recommends the Council continue the closed record hearing for two weeks to enable
staff to prepare a set of findings to support Council act on this matter.
Page 12 of 104
IO N995 §
FEE:$700.00
I "7
'CITY OF PASCO
‘
5’5
I
PETITION FOR CHANGE OF LAND USE CLASSIFICATION ‘
MASTER FILE #Z ZXJIIDT09*‘DATE SUBMITTED:/“(Z41/6
PLEASE COMPLETE APPLICATION NEATLY
JERRY HUDNALL MOHINDER SOHAL
(Name of Applicant)(Name of Owner,(if other than Applicant))
1800 W LEWIS ST PASCO,WA 99301 16733 168TH TER SE RENTON,W 98058
(Address)(Address)
509 547 0791 2066943339
(Phone)(Phone)
General Location of property:1800 w LEWIS ST IN BETWEEN 18TH AND 20TH WITH
(Give location in relation to streets,intersections,etc.)
BONNEVILLE TO THE NORTH AND LEWIS TO THE SOUTH.
Legal Description;WE ARE REQUESTING TO BE ZONED C-3 IN ORDER TO RENT U-HAUL
(Attach to Application if too Lengthy)
TRUCKS AND TRAILERS.THE U-HAUL EQUIPMENT WILL ONLY BE PARKED FACING LEWIS ST.
Square Feet/Accessof Property:
Current Classi?cation:0'1
Requested Classi?cation:C'3
1.Brie?y describe the nature and effect of the proposed change:
THE CHANGE WOULD ALLOW US TO RENT U-HAUL EQUIPMENT.
2.Estimated timeframe of development:WA ND DEVELOPMENT NEEDED
3.Date existing classi?cation became effective
4%"I0T\I-3;ms‘
Page 13 of 104
FEE:$700.00
4.What changed or changing condition warrant the proposed change?
THE ADDITION OF U—HAULPRODUCTS TO OUR EXSISTING BUSINESS.
5.How will the proposed change advance the health,safety and general
welfare if the community?
THIS WILL OFFER RESIDENTS MORE OPTIONS FOR THEIR MOVING NEEDS.
6.What effect will the proposed change have on the value and character of
adjacent property?NO EFFECT TO ADJACENT PROPERTY AS PER TRUCKS AND
ACROSS THF STRFFT
7.How does the proposed change relate to City’s Comprehensive Plan?
NO IMPACT FORSEEABLE.
8.Other circumstances:
9.What effect will be realized by the owner(s)if the proposed change is not
granted?WE WILLBE UNABLE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH DESIRED IMPROVMENTS.
10.List any maps,drawings or other exhibits attached to this application:
ZONE MAP
.AFFIDAVIT
I,3 I J IIII ,being duly sworn,declare that I am the legal
owner of the property involved in this application and that the foregoing
statements are answers herein contained and the application herewith
submitted are in all respects the true and correct to the best of my knowledge
and belief.M
(Signature of Owner)
.Ito
d sworn before me this9_Iday of
,
fl’?/Thing“?0LWZ</I/M/[/LS §{2zy~/aoiL2
Page 14 of 104
FEE:$700.00
NOTE:Variance report giving a list and mailing address of owners of all
property within 300 feet of the applicant’s property,as shown by a local
title company Q13 payment of which shall be utilized to
purchase an ownership listing from e Franklin County Assessor’s
Office must be included.g;5{//‘(@
Page 15 of 104
mmzvo.
8E<o_8o$35
><>>lmO|15.5.1.C—
M.o.
W.
M...on
_
M
_
_
-ii.
W.p_.
mu__
9u.2and.#.Camwood..._
$2.3f<N._.o..
N4:23.n_.o.o.9u.~n.mr$m..2.nn~.
_
...._mmwp.mr....:
J
W.
_
rA;E02$8
.Ew?m?m
H.‘I:|al
Iull.4
3
IIIIn:1IN
3
Page 16 of 104
£0ya[ty Inn
1800 W.LEWIS STREETPASCO,WA 99301
5‘!
(509)93-0791
loyaltyinnpasco@gmail.com
12/28/2016
Dear City of Pasco City Attorney,
I am writing you in reference to Rezone Request MF#Z 2016-005;a request to rezone 1800 W
Lewis Street in Pasco,WA from C-1 to C-3.
The owner Mohinder Sohal placed good faith in city procedure and fairness thereby paying
$825.00 for the process fees required for a rezone.
Judicially established in Washington State in 1969,doctrine requires public hearings that are
adjudicatory or quasi-judicial in nature meet two requirements:hearings must be procedurally
fair,and must appear to be conducted by impartial decision-makers (Buell v.Bremerton,80
Wn.2d 518,523,495 P.2d 1358,1972).
During The Planning Commission Regular Meeting on 11/17/2016,a fair and impartial hearing
did not take place and thereby Washington State Law was violated against Jerry Hudnall whom
was representing The Rezone Request of Mohinder Sohal.This occurred when The
Commissioners failed to give Mr.Hudnall a three-minute rebuttal to objections for the rezone.
The fact cannot be denied that all five previous applicants where allotted a rebuttal except Mr.
Hudnall.These rebuttals generally exceeded three minutes as well and little control was placed
over timing.
Mr.Sohal is seeking to add U-Haul equipment rentals to his existing business.This is the only
reason for this request.He is not seeking any other type of use that could have a negative
impact on the neighborhood and aesthetics there in the surroundings.
The report to The Planning Commission does not give language recommending a denial
exclusively.in reference to page 1,paragraph 6 a determination of non-significance was issued
under WAC 197-11-158.Page 3,paragraph 2 states "Lewis Street is no longer the main
highway through Pasco....”Which has had a negative financial impact on Mr.Sohal’s Property
making it a financial burden to keep and upkeep the property as well as make the
improvements that are so desired.The fact being that the improvements being done are
having to be financed at Mr.Soha|’s personal expense.On page 3,paragraph 4 it also states
"Rezoning the property to C-3 may help the property to transition partially to other commercial
uses that could provide funding to stop the physical decline that is occurring on the property at
the present time."Page 5,paragraph 1 states that ’"l'he proposal is consistent with the
Page 17 of 104
Comprehensive Pan.”On the same page,paragraph 2 says "The proposed C-3 zoning will
permit additional commercial uses to locate on the site which may make it possible for the
property to be better maintained and have less of a detrimental impact on the surrounding
neighborhood.”Still on page 5,paragraph 3 continues in saying that ”There is merit in
providing an opportunity for a greater range of commercial uses on the property that my lead
to a better maintenance and upkeep.”
ln conclusion,we hereby object to an appeal fee of $700 as per a fair and impartial hearing did
not take place and thereby Washington State Law was violated.We request the fee be waived
and this be accepted as statement of findings for the appeal committee.
err dnall,D.D.
General Manager for Loyalty Inn
Page 18 of 104
1
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
MASTER FILE NO: Z 2016-005 APPLICANT: Mohinder Sohal
HEARING DATE: 11/17/2016 1800 W Lewis St
ACTION DATE: 12/15/2016 Pasco, WA 99301
BACKGROUND
REQUEST: REZONE: Rezone from C-1 (Retail Business) to C-3 (General
Business)
1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:
Legal: Lots 2 & 3 Short Plat 2010-08
General Location: 1800 W. Lewis Street
Property Size: 3.37 acres.
2. ACCESS: The parcel is accessible from Lewis Street and 18th Avenue
3. UTILITIES: All municipal utilities are currently available to serve the site
from Road 92.
4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The lot is currently zoned C-1 (Retail
Business) and developed with the Loyalty Inn. Surrounding properties
are zoned and developed as follows:
NORTH: R-1, R-2 & R-3 – Single & Multi-Family Residential
SOUTH: C-1 – Offices
EAST: C-1 & “O” – Offices & Commercial
WEST: C-1 –Offices
5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan designates the site
for commercial uses. Those portions of the community designated for
commercial development by the Comprehensive Plan could be zone “O”,
C-1, C-2, C-3 CR and BP. Land Use Goal ED-2 encourages the
appropriate location and design of commercial facilities within the City.
ED-2-B encourages the development of a wide range of commercial uses
strategically located to support local and regional needs.
6. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The City of Pasco is the lead
agency for this project. Based on the SEPA checklist, the adopted City
Comprehensive Plan, City development regulations, the Notice of
Application and other information, a threshold determination resulting in
a Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) has been issued for this
project under WAC 197-11-158.
Page 19 of 104
2
ANALYSIS
The owner of the Loyalty Inn at 1800 West Lewis Street has petitioned to have
the zoning for his motel property changed from C-1 to C-3. The motel has been
struggling for many years to capture a reasonable share of the regional motel
traffic. As a result the owner has been exploring various options to create
additional revenue to maintain his property investment. One of the business
options included renting U-Haul equipment as a means of generating
additional funds to maintain his property. The U-Haul equipment created a
problem because the property is not zoned correctly for a U-Haul facility. U-
Haul rental facilities are required to be located in a C-3 or Industrial zone.
Upon receiving notice to remove the U-Haul equipment from his property the
owner applied for a rezone. There are currently no rental trailers or trucks on
the applicants property.
The site was annexed in 1961 and developed in 1966 with a motel. In 1966 Lewis
Street was a main route through the community and consequently the applicant’s
property was well suited for a motel. Six of the original eight motels along Lewis
Street have been demolished or mostly converted to other uses.
In addition to the decline in room rentals at the motel property management
issues have also been a concern. There have been 22 code enforcement cases
filed against the property in the past six years. Most of the cases are nuisance
cases involving unsanitary conditions, weeds trash and general property
maintenance issues. There have also been building and licensing issues at the
property.
The Comprehensive Plan designates the property for commercial land uses but
does not identify what it should be zoned. The actual zoning of a parcel is
determined thought the hearing process. Any one of the six commercial zoning
districts could be considered for the property. The applicant is specifically
requesting C-3 zoning because that is the only zoning district that will permit
U-Haul rental facilities.
The requested C-3 zone permits a number of uses that may not be appropriate
for the surrounding neighborhood. Uses such as heavy machinery sales and
service, mobile home and RV sales, landscape gardening and storage yards for
equipment and materials, contractor storage and material yards, lumber yards,
auto body shops, trucking and express storage yards and others uses that may
not add to the value and character of the neighborhood. These uses could
become nuisances in the neighborhood due to loud noises, vibrations, dust and
other externalities associated therefrom. Because of these secondary effects it
would be necessary to condition a rezone to C-3 by prohibiting the types of
uses listed above. However, a conditioned rezone would still allow the storage
and display of U-Haul or rental equipment adjacent one of the main gateway
corridors into and out of the City. Fifteen to twenty years ago the City invested
Page 20 of 104
3
considerable public funds to enhance the West Lewis Street entrance to the
City by installing irrigation and landscaping along both sides of the street from
18th Avenue west to the freeway.
The initial review criteria for considering a rezone application are explained in
PMC. 25.88.030. The criteria are listed below as follows:
1. The date the existing zone became effective:
The current zoning classification was established on or before 1966. The
property was annexed in 1961 but not developed with a motel until 1966.
2. The changed conditions, which are alleged to warrant other or additional
zoning:
Lewis Street is no longer the main highway through Pasco and as a result six of
the original eight motels along Lewis Street have either been demolished or
converted to another use. New Hotels/motels within Pasco are all located within
a convenient distance to Highway 395 or I-182. However, Lewis Street is still an
important gateway into the community and the City has invested considerably to
enhance the appearance of the Lewis Street gateway.
3. Facts to justify the change on the basis of advancing the public health,
safety and general welfare:
The Loyalty Inn is no longer a first stop motel site. Without active marketing,
management and upkeep the property will continue to decline increasing the
possibility of public nuisances impacting neighboring property values. Rezoning
the property may not address broader management issues.
4. The effect it will have on the value and character of the adjacent property
and the Comprehensive Plan:
The property is currently commercial in nature. Rezoning the property to C-3
may help the property to transition partially to other commercial uses that could
provide funding to stop the physical decline that is occurring on the property at
the present time. However that is not guaranteed. The property has been the
subject of numerous housing, property and nuisance code violations in recent
years. Rezoning the property could alter the character of the neighborhood which
consists of residential uses to the north and recently redeveloped commercial
and offices uses to the east. The redeveloped properties to the east are zoned
“O” and C-1.
5. The effect on the property owner or owners if the request is not granted:
Page 21 of 104
4
The owner has several options including upgrading the quality of the premises
by actively managing tenants; creating retail pad sites for permitted retail uses,
modifying the existing structures to include office space and investing in physical
upgrades to the structures and property.
STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT
Findings of fact must be entered from the record. The following are initial
findings drawn from the background and analysis section of the staff report.
The Planning Commission may add additional findings to this listing as the
result of factual testimony and evidence submitted during the open record
hearing.
1. The site contains the Loyalty Inn Motel.
2. The site was developed in 1966 with a motel when Lewis Street was one
of the major highway routes through the community.
3. Lewis Street is no longer the main travel route through town however; it
is still a major gateway into the community.
4. The City invested heavily into enhancing the Lewis Street gateway several
years ago by improving landscaping and irrigation from 18th Avenue west
to the freeway.
5. Most of the motels in Pasco are now located within a short distance of
Highway 395 or I-182.
6. Six of the original eight motels along Lewis Street have been demolished
or mostly converted to other uses.
7. The property is showing signs of disrepair.
8. The property has been the subject of numerous code cases (22) in the
past six years mainly as the result of poor management practices.
9. Rezoning the property could alter the character of the neighborhood
which consists of residential uses to the north and recently redeveloped
commercial and offices uses to the east. The redeveloped properties to
the east are zoned “O” and C-1.
10. The Comprehensive Plan designates the property for commercial land
uses.
11. There are six commercial zones that could be permitted under the
commercial land use designation. C-3 is one of those zones.
12. The site is currently zoned C-1 (Retail business).
13. Properties to the south, east and west are zoned C-1 or “O”.
14. Properties to the north are zoned R-1, R-2 and R-3.
Page 22 of 104
5
15. The C-3 zone permits heavy machinery sales and service, mobile home
and RV sales, landscape gardening and storage area for equipment and
materials, contractor storage and material yards, lumber yards, auto
body shops, trucking and express storage yards and others uses that
may not add to the value and character of the neighborhood.
16. A rezone with a concomitant agreement will still permit the location of
rental trucks and trailers to be located along a gateway entrance to the
City. A concomitant agreement will not address on going management
issues with the property.
CONCLUSIONS BASED ON STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT
Before recommending approval or denial of a special permit the Planning
Commission must develop findings of fact from which to draw its conclusions
based upon the criteria listed in PMC 25.86.060. The criteria are as follows:
1. The proposal is in accordance with the goals and policies of the
Comprehensive Plan.
The proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and
several Plan policies and goals. The Comprehensive Plan designates the site for
commercial uses. Those portions of the community designated for commercial
development by the Comprehensive Plan could be zone “O”, C-1, C-2, C-3 CR and
BP. Land Use Goal ED-2 encourages the appropriate location and design of
commercial facilities within the City. ED-2-B encourages the development of a
wide range of commercial uses strategically located to support local and regional
needs.
2. The effect of the proposal on the immediate vicinity will not be materially
detrimental.
The proposed C-3 zoning will permit additional commercial uses to locate on the
site which may make it possible for the property to be better maintained and
have less of a detrimental impact on the surrounding neighborhood. Without a
rezone the property could continue to deteriorate. However, not all of the issues
related to code enforcement cases on the property are related to zoning. Many of
the code issues can be traced to poor management of the property.
3. There is merit and value in the proposal for the community as a whole.
There is merit in providing an opportunity for a greater range of commercial uses
on the property that may lead to better maintenance and upkeep. Maintaining
the property at a higher level could provide value to the neighborhood and
community as a whole. Maintaining the property to a higher standard can also
be achieved through improved management.
Page 23 of 104
6
4. Conditions should be imposed in order to mitigate any significant
adverse impacts from the proposal.
If the property were to be rezoned conditions should be imposed to preclude the
location of heavy commercial uses that would not be appropriate for this portion
of Lewis Street. However, a concomitant agreement will not address ongoing
management issues with the property.
5. A Concomitant Agreement should be entered into between the City and
the petitioner, and if so, the terms and conditions of such an agreement.
A rezone with or without a concomitant agreement will not solve the ongoing
issues dealing with property management.
RECOMMENDATION
MOTION for Findings of Fact: I move to adopt findings of fact and
conclusions therefrom as contained in the December 15, 2016 staff
report.
MOTION for Recommendation: I move, based on the findings of
fact and conclusions as adopted, the Planning Commission
recommend the City Council deny the proposed rezone of Lots 2 &
3 Short Plat 2010-08 from C-1 to C-3.
Page 24 of 104
Vi
c
i
n
i
t
y
Ma
p
It
e
m
:
R
e
z
o
n
e
f
r
o
m
C
-
1
t
o
C
-
3
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
:
M
o
h
i
n
d
e
r
S
o
h
a
l
Fi
l
e
#
:
Z
2
0
1
6
-
0
0
5
SI
T
E
Page 25 of 104
It
e
m
:
R
e
z
o
n
e
f
r
o
m
C
-
1
t
o
C
-
3
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
:
M
o
h
i
n
d
e
r
S
o
h
a
l
Fi
l
e
#
:
Z
2
0
1
6
-
0
0
5
SI
T
E
Va
c
a
n
t
SF
D
U
s
SF
D
U
s
Mu
l
t
i
-
SFDUs
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
La
n
d
U
s
e
Ma
p
Page 26 of 104
C-
3
C-
1
It
e
m
:
R
e
z
o
n
e
f
r
o
m
C
-
1
t
o
C
-
3
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
:
M
o
h
i
n
d
e
r
S
o
h
a
l
Fi
l
e
#
:
Z
2
0
1
6
-
0
0
5
SI
T
E
C-
3
R-
1
R-1
R-
3
Z
o
n
i
n
g
Ma
p
C-3
C-
1
C-
1
I-
1
R-
2
R-1 R-3
I-
1
R-
1
"O
"
Page 27 of 104
Lo
o
k
i
n
g
N
o
r
t
h
Page 28 of 104
Lo
o
k
i
n
g
E
a
s
t
Page 29 of 104
Lo
o
k
i
n
g
S
o
u
t
h
Page 30 of 104
Lo
o
k
i
n
g
W
e
s
t
Page 31 of 104
Si
t
e
Page 32 of 104
Si
t
e
Page 33 of 104
SEPA Z0/t>—0;:
yr;I‘.
CITY OF
PASCO 4'
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
P.O.Box 293,525 North Third Avenue,Pasco,Washington 99301
(509)545-3441/Fax (509)545-34991.
SEPA ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
Purpose of checklist:
Governmental agencies use this checklist to help determine whether the environmental impacts
of your proposal are significant.This information is also helpful to determine if available
avoidance,minimization or compensatory mitigation measures will address the probable
significant impacts or if an environmental impact statement will be prepared to further analyze
the proposal.
Instructions for applicants:
This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal.
Please answer each question accurately and carefully,to the best of your knowledge.You may
need to consult with an agency specialist or private consultant for some questions.You may
use “not applicable”or "does not appj"only when you can expliirt why it does not apply and not
when the answer is unknown.You may also attach or incorporate by reference additional
studies reports.Complete and accurate answers to these questions often avoid delays with the
SEPA process as well as later in the decision—makingprocess.
The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal,even if you plan to do them over a
period of time or on different parcels of land.Attach any additional information that will help
describe your proposal or its environmental effects.The agency to which you submit this
checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably
related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact.
Instructions for Lead Agencies:
Please adjust the format of this template as needed.Additional information may be necessary to
evaluate the existing environment,all interrelated aspects of the proposal and an analysis of
adverse impacts.The checklist is considered the first but not necessarily the only source of
information needed to make an adequate threshold determination.Once a threshold
determination is made,the lead agency is responsible for the completeness and accuracy of the
checklist and other supporting documents.
Use of checklist for nonproject proposals:
For nonproject proposals (such as ordinances,regulations,plans and programs),complete the
applicable parts of sections A and B plus the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS
(part D).Please completely answer all questions that apply and note that the words
"project,applicant,"and "property or site"should be read as "proposa|,proponent,"and "affected
geographic area,"respectively.The lead agency may exclude (for non-projects)questions in
Part B -Environmental Elements —thatdo not contribute meaningfully to the analysis of the
proposal.
WAC 197-1 1-960 Environmental checklist guidance updated June 20l 1
Page 34 of 104
A.Background
1.Name of proposed project,if applicable:LOt)ClHv'00
2.Name of applicant:Hudnqn
3.Addressand phone numberofapplicantand contact person:I800
5 /to/2://to ,__.gency requesting checklist.
€2230*W0
6.osed timing or schedule (including phasing,if applicable):
lo Iwe?7.Do you a’v<eSanyplansforfuture additions,expansion,or further activity related to or
connected with this proposal?If yes,explain.
NO
8.List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared,or will
beprepared,‘direct|yrelated to this proposal.
6hOF3TPam .5un[e\_Reporzg9.Do you know whether applrca Ions are pen mg for governmental approvals of other
proposals directly a ecting the property covered by your proposal?If yes,explain.,.
O10.I\|j_Q.{\a?F1y’g‘§>\r/2err£%‘r12entapprovalsor_pem1itsthat will beneededfor your propo al,if
lériown.Cityor PASCO<l>€"tll1’(‘;l\)lb?’C noQ96OF LCm U86’
BSSW ‘qt11.Give brief‘,Ccqr}rl1peedescriptionofyour proposal,including the proposed uses and
the size of the project and site.There are several questions later in this checklist
that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal.You do not need to repeat
those answers on this page.(Lead agencies may modify this form to include
additional speci?c information on project description.)USQOg llifg-r (Q0 tp_r\)y-K,,:9spacesor)Lewis 51.side for umul ~rro_u-<
and +m.leRRentals.Sales of WlO\;‘lY798uPPl5€§and
renlcll S€WliC9S)»{‘rom m(_~,1m lobby
12.Location of the proposal.Give sufficient information for a person to understand the
precise location of your proposed project,including a street address,if any,and
section,township,and range,if known.if a proposal would occur over a range of
area,provide the range or boundaries of the site(s).Provide a legal description,site
plan,vicinity map,and topographic map,if reasonably available.While you should
submit any plans required by the agency,you are not required to duplicate maps or
detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist.
Lager/#9/m /3710W Lew/5ST P6560,LU/t0956.4.weare
requesmvq Chargg{mm zone 0)‘TO03 so ~+hct+we
(W19Odd U-haul emql SEYVICQour €x5.*s7*rnJ(-~,Pq(',/,'-;,g5_
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960)May 2014 Page 2 of 14
Page 35 of 104
B.Environmental Elements
1.Earth
a.
2.
General descrition of the site:
(circle one)olling,hilly,steep slopes,mountainous,other
What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)?
N0 S‘0P1:,5i+<1‘«5uP/wadtaming car.
What general types of soils are found on the site (for example,clay,sand,gravel,
peat,muck)?If you know the classi?cation of agricultural soils,specify them and
note any agricultural land of long-term commercial signi?cance and whether the
proposal results in removing any of these soils.
Mixed mesic-xeric torripsamments
Quincy sandy loam
Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate
vicinity?If so,describe.
MonaDnasanf
Describe the purpose,type,total area,and approximate quantities and total
affected area of any filling,excavation,and grading proposed.Indicate source of
fill.
No change +9 4‘¢)<&iStin9IOT,groundor s+mc+urae_
Could erosion occur as a result of clearing,construction,or use?If so,generally
describe.
NO
About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after
project construction (for example,asphalt or buildings)?
NO naw CC3W§‘l\’\K:l'tC>?in not Plan
Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion,or other impacts to the earth,if
any:
Nolm'1>QCflbrseuisioas Pcr no Constructor)involved.
Air
a.What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal during
construction,_operation,and maintenance when the project is completed?If any,
generally describe and give approximate quantities if known.
Limi-fQdvehicleemissions in -the dispcncn.rg of
'\‘emC\l +ruCl<S,
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 191-11-960)May 2014 Page 3 of 14
Page 36 of 104
b.Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your
proposal?If so,generally describe.
/voila
c.Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air,if any:
vahscK25wculd COIL)be on longenough‘T0 (1iSPCt‘r(h
3.Water
a.Sun‘aceWater:
1)Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site
(including year-round and seasonal streams,saltwater,lakes,ponds,
wetlands)?if yes,describe type and provide names.If appropriate,state what
stream or river it ?ows into.
NONQ
2)Will the project require any work over,in,or adjacent to (within 200 feet)the
described waters?If yes,please describe and attach available plans.
NO
3)Estimate the amount of?ll and dredge material that would be placed in or
removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that
would be affected.Indicate the source of fill material.
NONQ
4)Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions?Give general
description,purpose,and approximate quantities if known.
NO
5)Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain?If so,note location on the
site plan.
ND
6)Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters?
If so,describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge.
NC
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960)May 2014 Page 4 of 14
Page 37 of 104
b.Ground Water:
1)Will groundwater be withdrawn from a well for drinking water or other purposes?
if so,give a general description of the well,proposed uses and approximate
quantities withdrawn from the well.Will water be discharged to groundwater?
Give general description,purpose,and approximate quantities if known.
NO
2)Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic
tanks or other sources,if any (for example:Domestic sewage;industrial,
containing the following chemicals...;agricultural;etc.).Describe the general
size of the system,the number of such systems,the number of houses to be
served (if applicable),or the number of animals or humans the system(s)are
expected to serve.
NO aclcliluom)Cll.SCV)Clr9Q(Um be Creomgzl
c.Water runoff (including stormwater):
1)Describe the source of runoff (including storm water)and method of collection
and disposal,if any (include quantities,if known).Where willthis water flow?
Will this water ?ow into other waters?If so,describe.
Pml>”*‘9“*9 <9 1"V¢’?€hdrainsfor run 0+1?
2)Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters?If so,generally
describe.
NO
3)Does the proposal alter or otherwise affect drainage patterns in the vicinity of
the site?If so,describe.
No
d.Proposed measures to reduce or control surface,ground,and runoff water,and
drainage pattern impacts,if any:
N0 CtddilionalCcmmls forsemas ?éétl?l
SEPA Environmenml checklist (WAC 197-11-960)May 2014 Page 5 of14
Page 38 of 104
4.Plants
a.Check the types of vegetation found on the site:
/Lleciduoustree:a|der,<map|e)aspen,other _
evergreen tree:?r,cedar,pine,other [5|TC\’\,(Um)
34 shrubs '
T
grass
T
pasture
T
crop or grain
T
Orchards,vineyards or other permanent crops.
wet soil plants:cattail,buttercup,bullrush,skunk cabbage,other
T
water plants:water lily,eelgrass,milfoil,other
T
other types of vegetation
b.What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered?
Nona
0.List threatened and endangered species known to be on or near the site.
NO?(2Hmum
d.Proposed landscaping,use of native plants,or other measures to preserve or
enhance vegetation on the site,if any:
Cmem ucxndscqpirgwillnot becilro?zcl.
e.List all noxious weeds and invasive species known to be on or near the site.
I/VOWQ
5.Animals
a.g_s_tany birds and other animals which have been observed on or near the site or
are known to be on or near the site.
Examples include:
birds:hawk,heron,eagle,songbirds,other:
mammals:deer,bear,elk,beaver,other:
?sh:bass,salmon,trout,herring,shellfish,other:
$€a3uliS,Var/OMSCommonbirdsO((a8;onaig
b.List any threatened and endangered species known to be on or near the site.
Newl/maxim
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960)May 2014 Page 6 of 14
Page 39 of 104
c.is the site part of a migration route?If so,explain.
Yes,Pasco is within the Paci?c Flyway
d.Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife,if any:
Nona
e.List any invasive animal species known to be on or near the site.
Nona Hooch
6.Energy and Natural Resources
a.What kinds of energy (electric,natural gas,oil,wood stove,solar)will be used to
meet the completed project's energy needs?Describe whether it will be used for
heating,manufacturing,etc.
Someelecmc For eperctlmg ('On’)pr€SSOi’-loinfirm‘tinrs
b.Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent
properties?If so,generally describe.
l\}C
c.What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this
proposal?List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts,if
any:
Comprrssor mil onl be Pluccgzcl‘rt 00 the Cccassions
it l$naaclad
'3 U ‘
7.Environmental Health'
a.Are there any environmental health hazards,including exposure to toxic
chemicals,risk of ?re and explosion,spill,or hazardous waste,that could occur
as a result of this proposal?If so,describe.
NO
1)Describe any known or possible contamination at the site from present or past
uses.
Nom Hnow’?
2)Describe existing hazardous chemicals/conditions that might affect project
development and design.This includes underground hazardous liquid and gas
transmission pipelines located within the project area and in the vicinity.
Nmwlmww?
3)Describe any toxic or hazardous chemicals that might be stored,used,or
produced during the project's development or construction,or at any time
during the operating life of the project.
Nona
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960)May 2014 Page 7 of 14
Page 40 of 104
4)Describe special emergency services that might be required.
Nona-Foraseeabia
5)Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards,if any:
Nona
b.Noise
1)What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example:
traf?c,equipment,operation,other)?
NOHQ
2)What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the
project on a short-term or a |ong—termbasis (for example:traffic,construction,
operation,other)?Indicate what hours noise would come from the site.
Occcisioml4mc1<depanura man-~Sm.q—5)>M
3)Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts,if any:
Nona
8.Land and Shoreline Use
a.What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties?Will the proposal
affect current land uses on nearby or adjacent properties?If so,describe.
Ovarflovu‘l>ciri<m9.Mootfraci-+0 C|Cl_jGCei’)"r,DrUP€rw§,
b.Has the project site been used as working farmlands or working forest lands?If
so,describe.How much agricultural or forest land of long-term commercial
significance will be converted to other uses as a result of the proposal,if any?if
resource lands have not been designated,how many acres in farmland orforest
llsndtaxstatus will be converted to nonfarm or nonforest use?
1)Will the proposal affect or be affected by surrounding working farm or forest land
normal business operations,such as oversize equipment access,the
application of pesticides,tilling,and harvesting?if so,how:
NO
c.Describe any structures on the site.
LlAmi bviidmgsLinQouter jberimatar
d.Will any structures be demolished?If so,what?
e.What is the current zoning classification of the site?
SEPA Environmental checklist MAC 197-11-960)May 2014 Page 8 of 14
Page 41 of 104
f.What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site?
Commercel
g.If applicable,what is the current shoreline master program designation of the
site?
N//l
h.Has any part of the site been classified as a critical area by the city or county?If
so,specify.
Notto meKmudledqa
i.Approximatelyhow many peoplewould reside or work in the completed project?
j.Approximately how many people would the completed project displace?
+3“
k.Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts,if any:
None necessary
I.Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and
projected land
uses and plans,if any:
Planhas minimal ImPo(+
m.Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with nearby agricultural
and forest lands of long-term commercial signi?cance,if any:
NOQWQGEwforgaqn,
9.Housing
a.Approximately how many units would be provided,if any?Indicate whether high,
mid-dle,or low-income housing.
N0lW?i3hCO§V@
b.Approximately how many units,if any,would be eliminated?Indicate whether
high,middle,or low-income housing.
Nona
c.Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts,if any:
Noneneeded
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960)May 2014 Page 9 of 14
Page 42 of 104
10.Aesthetics
a.What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s),not including antennas;
what is the principal exterior building materia|(s)proposed?
NoChanges,hlgmsf Struaura is 5 Slams wood
b.What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed?
Nona
c.Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts,if any:
Norm nzaclqd
11.Light and Glare
a.What type of light or glare will the proposal produce?What time of day would it
mainly occur?
NOUQ
b.Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with
views?
NO
c.What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal?
Norm
d.Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts,if any:
Nona
12.Recreation
a.What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate
vicinity?
NOYW,
b.Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses?If so,
describe.
N0
c.Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation,including
recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant,if any:
NOHQnaadrzcl
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960)May 2014 Page 10 of 14
Page 43 of 104
13.Historic and cultural preservation
a.Are there any buildings,structures,or sites,located on or near the site that are
over 45 years old listed in or eligible for listing in national,state,or local
preservation registers located on or near the site?If so,specifically describe.
NOD12
b.Are there any landmarks,features,or other evidence of Indian or historic use or
occupation?This may include human burials or old cemeteries.Are there any
material evidence,artifacts,or areas of cultural importance on or near the site?
Please list any professional studies conducted at the site to identify such
resources.
NO
c.Describe the methods used to assess the potential impacts to cultural and
historic resources on or near the project site.Examples include consultation with
tribes and the department of archeology and historic preservation,archaeological
surveys,historic maps,GIS data,etc.
ExsistingCommercial13TO\1’i’-lj,no nan)SurveyDQQd(<l.
d.Proposed measures to avoid,minimize,or compensate for loss,changes to,and
disturbance to resources.Please include plans for the above and any permits
that may be required.
NO torseecilolq‘impacts.
14.Transportation
a.Identify public streets and highways serving the site or affected geographic area
and describe proposed access to the existing streetsystem,Show on s'te plans,,1 tifany.W.BonnwiiizST,~10 ihc Norm (no c\ccess5.N.l8‘’/‘M7
"*0 “rm acisi iexnsimgaccess)w.uzusis St.is -ma south
(QXi8l_il C ccgss).__,b.Is the site r a ecte geographic area currently served by public transit?If so,
generally describe.If not,what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit
stop?3%,B€n1‘rcxi‘ila\§(\TrciriSi’rStops on L?wi?37.
c.How many additional parking spaces would the completed project or non-project
proposal have?How many would the project or proposal eliminate?
Namciddsiional
d.Will the proposal require any new or improvements to existing roads,streets,
pedestrian,bicycle or state transportation facilities,not including driveways?if
so,generally describe (indicate whether public or private).
NO
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960)May 2014 Page 11 of 14
Page 44 of 104
e.Will the project or proposal use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of)water,rail,
or air transportation?If so,generally describe.
No
f.How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project
or proposal?If known,indicate when peak volumes would occur and what
percentage of the volume would be trucks (such as commercial and
nonpassenger vehicles).What data or transportation models were used to make
theseestimates?/N6,»U_\_)9U‘(..€n€,‘_O‘hy586aCoo?e Cigromarsoxdogor less
3 J
g.Will the proposal interfere with,affect or be affected by the movement of
agricultural and forest products on roads or streets in the area?If so,generally
describe.
ND
h.Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts,if any:
None ?Q(Zd(ZCl
15.Public Services
a.Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example:
fire protection,police protection,public transit,health care,schools,other)?If so,
generally describe.
No
b.Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services,if any.
no ¥ofS€€Clb|€In PC\Cton waslCcameos.
16.Utilities
a.C'rcle utilities currently available at the site:V
».e|ectrit@\?atura@Wate??use service telephon,sanitary sewer,septic
system,other
b.Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project,the utility providing the
service and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate
vicinity which might be needed.
No militias neededfor mmadram)\/éhlclzs,
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960)May 2014 Page 12 of 14
Page 45 of 104
C.Signature
The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge.I understand that
the lead agency is relying on them to make its decisi?n.Signature:(A6 Abggl??gl
Name of signee:i ‘
Position and Agency/Organization:
Date Submitted:1WZBJZ/,9
Community &Economic Development Department
This application was reviewed by the Planning Division of the Community &Economic
Development Department.Any comments or changes made by the Department are entered in the
body of the checklist and contain initials of the eviewer.
\X D Date/(0 /J//;,,«,6ReviewerSignature
0/wry Fwwlvéc
Diva M ‘Qn/hm:
D.Supplemental sheet for nonproject actions
(IT IS NOT NECESSARY to use this sheet for project actions)
Because these questions are very general,it may be helpful to read them in conjunction
with the list of the elements of the environment.
When answering these questions,be aware of the extent the proposal,or the types of
activities likely to result from the proposal,would affect the item at a greater intensity or at faster
rate than if the proposal were not implemented.Respond briefly and in general terms.
1.How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water;emissions to air;pro-
duction,storage,or release of toxic or hazardous substances;or production of noise?
NolmP0lU'liofgeolol-e
Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are:
2.How would the proposal be likely to affect plants,animals,fish,or marine life?
Ne affect
Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants,animals,fish,or marine life are:
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960)May 2014 Page 13 of 14
Page 46 of 104
3.How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources?
nonaiorseaioie
Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are:
4.How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or
areas designated (or eligible or under study)for governmental protection;such as parks,
wilderness,wild and scenic rivers,threatened or endangered species habitat,historic or
cultural sites,wetlands,floodplains,or prime farmlands?
00 impact
Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are:
5.How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use,including whether it
would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans?
no Wear
Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are:
6.How would the proposal be likely to increase demands ontransportation or public
services and utilities?
lib -forseabiedewrwl‘increase
Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s)are:
7.identify,if possible,whether the proposal may conflict with local,state,or federal laws or
requirements for the protection of the environment.
Ho CONFIiC~iS1pOV5€Clx‘>l6‘
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960)May 2014 Page 14 of14
Page 47 of 104
(I().’l/1ML»".\i’I'lT I)I€VI-fI.()I7’l/II-3N1’1)1i1HR'1‘ME "T50‘)-545-3-141 F.—\X509545-3490
ho.BOX 293,525 N()R'I‘H Tiiiiip AVENUE.msco,VTTA-SHINGTON99301
CITYOF PASCO NOTICEOF APPLICATION
Proposal:Mohnder Sohal has applied for a rezone for the Loyalty Inn property located at 1800 W.Lewis
Street in Pasco,Washington.Mr.Sohal is requesting to change his zoning from C-1 (Retail Business)to C-
3 (General Business).The proposal is subject to regulations contained in the Pasco Municipal Code.
Public Comment Period:Written comments submitted to The Community Development Department by
5:00 p.m.on November 17 2016 will be included in the Planning Commission's meeting packet.You
may also submit comments at the Planning Commission meeting advertised below.If you have
questions on the proposal,contact the Planning Division at (509)545 —3441 or via email to:
mcdona|dd@pasco-wa.gov
Open Record Hearing:The Pasco Planning Commission will conduct an open record hearing at 7:00
p.m.on November 17 2016 in the Council Chambers in Pasco City Hall at 525 N 3”’Avenue in Pasco,
Washington.The Planning Commission will consider public testimony concerning the above application
at this meeting.
Determination of Completeness:The application has been declared complete for the purpose of
processing.
Environmental Documents and/or Studies Applicable to this Application:Environmental
Determination No.SEPA2016-055 has been assigned to this proposal.It is probable that a
Determination of Non-Significance or Mitigated Determination of Non-Significance will be issued for this
proposal (WAC 197.11.355 optional DNS process).The open record hearing on The Special Permit
application may be the only opportunity to comment on the environmental impacts of this proposal or
to appeal any State Environmental Policy Act related decisions.
Project Permits Associated with this Proposal:No other permits are currently in process.A building
permit will be needed for future remodel work or parking lot modifications.
Preliminary Determination of Regulations Used for Project Mitigation:Titles 12 (Streets and
Sidewalks),16 (Buildings and Construction),25 (Zoning)and 26 Subdivision Regulations of the Pasco
Municipal Code and the land use policies contained in the Pasco Comprehensive Plan.
Estimated Date of the Recommendation:The Pasco Planning Commission is estimated to make a
recommendation on the application on November 17,2016.
To Receive Notification of the Recommendation,Decision and/or the Environmental Determination:
Contact the Planning Division at the address or telephone number below.
Appeal:Any person aggrieved by the recommendation of the Pasco Planning Commission on this
proposal may appeal to the Pasco City Council within ten (10)days of the date of the recommendation.
Page 48 of 104
Prepared @951 Q .;61¢by:
Dave McDonald,City Planner,PO Box 293 Pasco WA 99301 (509)545-3441 mcdonaldd@pasco-wa.gov
The City of Pasco welcomes full participation in public meeting by all citizens.No quali?ed individual with a disability shall be
excluded or denied the benefit of participating in such meetings.If you wish to use auxiliary aids or require assistance to
comment at this public meeting,please contact the Community development Department at (509)545 -3441 or TDD (509)585-
4425 at least ten days prior to the date of the meeting to make arrangements for special needs.
Page 49 of 104
CITY OF
COMMUNITYDEVELOPMENTDEPARTMENT (509)545-3441 I Fax (509)545-3499,P.O.Box 293.525 North Third Avenue,Pasco.Washington 99301
Description of Proposal:Sohal Rezone for a U—Haul facility:C-1 to C-3.
DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE
Proponent:Sohal Development LLC
16733 l68th Terrace SE
Renton,WA 98058
Location of Proposal:1800 W Lewis Street
Lead Agency:City of Pasco
The lead agency for this proposal has determined that it does not have a
probable signi?cant adverse impact on the environment.An environmental
impact statement (EIS)is not required under RCW 43.2lC.O30(2)(c).This
decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and
other information on ?le with the lead agency.This information is available to
the public on request.
El There is no comment period for this DNS.
This DNS is issued under WAC 197-1 1—340(2);the lead agency will not act
on this proposal for 14 days from the date below.Comments must be
submitted by:Comment Period ended December 15,2016
Responsible Official:David I.McDonald
Position/Title:CITY PLANNER
Address:P.0.BOX 293,PASCO,WA 99301-0293
Phone:(509)545-3441
Date:12/12/2016
Signature:S;‘:~
ED Number:SEPA2016-055
Master File Number:Z 2016-005
Page 50 of 104
1
Krystle Shanks, Administrative Assistant II
City of Pasco – Community & Economic Development Department
1
2 STATE OF WASHINGTON
3 CITY OF PASCO
4 In Re: Rezone from C-1,)
5 (Retail Business) to C-3,)
6 (General Business))Master File # Z 2016-005
7 Loyalty Inn/Mohinder Sohal )
8
9
10 EXCERPT OF THE PASCO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
11
12
13 TIME:7:00 p.m., Thursday, November 17, 2016
14 TAKEN AT:Pasco City Hall
15 Pasco, Washington
16 CALLED BY:City of Pasco
17 REPORTED BY:Krystle Shanks, Administrative Assistant II
18 City of Pasco
19 Community & Economic Development Department
Page 51 of 104
2
Krystle Shanks, Administrative Assistant II
City of Pasco – Community & Economic Development Department
1
2 APPEARANCES
3 FOR THE PASCO PLANNING COMMISSION:
4 CHAIRWOMAN ZAHRA ROACH
5 COMMISSIONER PAUL MENDEZ
6 COMMISSIONER ALECIA GREENAWAY
7 COMMISSIONER LOREN POLK
8 COMMISSIONER PAM BYKONEN
9 COMMISSIONER GABRIEL PORTUGAL
10
11 ALSO PRESENT:
12 MR. RICK WHITE
13 MR. DAVID MCDONALD
14
Page 52 of 104
3
Krystle Shanks, Administrative Assistant II
City of Pasco – Community & Economic Development Department
1
2 BE IT REMEMBERED that on Thursday, November 17, 2016 at 7:00 p.m.,
3 at Pasco City Hall, Pasco, Washington, the Pasco Planning Commission
4 Meeting was taken before Krystle Shanks, Administrative Assistant II
5 of the Community & Economic Development Department for the City of
6 Pasco. The following proceedings took place:
7
8 PROCEEDINGS
9
10 CHAIRWOMAN ROACH: Item F, rezone from C-1 to C-3, Master File # Z
11 2016-005. So, staff? Can you tell us about this?
12 MR. WHITE:This is not a special permit. It is a rezone from C-1
13 (Commercial Retail) to C-3 (General Business) and as the Commission is
14 aware, of course, C-3 is the heavier or the heaviest of the commercial
15 zoning districts that the City has in the zoning scheme. The property
16 is 1800 W. Lewis, 18th and Lewis Street. The property size is a
17 little less than 3 ½ acres. You can view the staff report – to the
18 north you have residential properties in varying densities. To the
19 south east and west you have C-1 or the Retail Commercial zone and a
20 little bit of Office zoning as well.
21 The owner has petitioned the Planning Commission for a change
22 of zones so that the use could be, one of the uses on the site in
Page 53 of 104
4
Krystle Shanks, Administrative Assistant II
City of Pasco – Community & Economic Development Department
1 addition to what’s there now, would be a U-Haul distribution, well may
2 it’s not a U-Haul distribution center, but a U-Haul center similar to
3 the one that’s located on Court Street just west of Highway 395.
4 Again, this in many respects is similar to the property the Commission
5 just heard about with the previous public hearing. There are, there
6 is, a declining quality of the property at this address. There have
7 been numerous code enforcement issues over the past several years.
8 There have also been licensing issues on this property over the past
9 several years. The staff report expresses a suggestion that as in the
10 similar property, it’s not simply a matter of its physical location
11 but a management issue, and would suggest with Conclusion No. 3, that
12 rezoning the property doesn’t necessarily address the broader
13 management issues relating to either the tenants themselves, quality
14 of the property or overall benefit to the community.
15 Of course the C-3 zone allows uses that simply would not be
16 appropriate at this location. In the past the Commission has
17 recommended zoning changes to City Council, sometimes based with
18 concomitant agreements that would prohibit particularly negative uses
19 and at the same time allow limited C-3 uses. Staff would suggest
20 given the City’s investment, the public’s investment on the aesthetics
21 of Lewis Street, that the landscape strips and street improvements
22 including the sidewalks that were installed at public expense several
Page 54 of 104
5
Krystle Shanks, Administrative Assistant II
City of Pasco – Community & Economic Development Department
1 years ago, that a U-Haul distribution site at this location doesn’t
2 necessarily adjust itself very well with the uses that are there now
3 and would certainly detract from the City’s entryway. Albeit wasn’t
4 what it was decades ago but it is still a major entryway into and out
5 of Pasco. And I would leave the Commission with the thought that the
6 recommendation, at least from the Staff’s perspective, in December if
7 this goes to a December recommendation, would be to recommend denial.
8 CHAIRWOMAN ROACH:Thank you. Any questions for Staff before we
9 proceed to public hearing? No? Ok, so let’s have the applicant come
10 forward and speak on this item. Please state your name and address
11 for the record. Thanks for being patient with us today. It’s been a
12 long night.
13 MR. HUDNALL:Good evening, Council. My name is Jerry Hudnall.
14 My address is 1800 W. Lewis Street, #157 here in Pasco. And I
15 apologize if I’m a little sleepy. It’s a little past my bedtime. I’m
16 here on behalf of Mr. Mohinder Sohal who is receiving cancer
17 treatments and cannot be with us. And also with me is Don Rickard
18 from U-Haul who is joining me. So what we are applying for is a
19 rezone from C-1 to C-3. The purpose simply of the rezone is to be
20 able to rent/add to our services of a U-Haul retail. Not like the one
21 of Court Street, as stated by Mr. White. It would be much smaller
22 scale. At our property in its hay day it had dual counters because we
Page 55 of 104
6
Krystle Shanks, Administrative Assistant II
City of Pasco – Community & Economic Development Department
1 were that busy. Our proposal is simply to switch one of the counters
2 to U-Haul and have approximately 5 trailers and 5 trucks parked facing
3 Lewis Street. As far as the other concerns that were mentioned, I
4 have managed this property for a year last month. To be quite honest
5 I have a long standing relationship with Mr. Sohal. I walked onto
6 this property from Oregon. I almost turned around and walked away.
7 This was a nuisance property. And the properties I have managed for
8 him before were not so this was something very new to me but I am a 5
9 year substance abuse student and I have somewhat intellect to be able
10 to handle the problem so I have been working very diligently to take
11 care of the issues.
12 As far as aesthetics, well, I didn’t know I could send in my
13 pictures. We recently had a grand opening of our renovated building.
14 One of our buildings we just completely fully re-did. We bought out
15 the entire stock of the W Hotel in Seattle and repainted the outside
16 of the building and had the Tri-Cities Chamber out there and we had a
17 grand opening just…um, I could be able to show that. We spent a lot
18 of money. My point being is that when I came on board and took over,
19 there were a lot of problems and the problems were again, because Mr.
20 Sohal was going through cancer treatment and he had an inefficient
21 manager on board. I’ve come on board and there were a lot of problems
22 and every day, a property like this where generally most of your
Page 56 of 104
7
Krystle Shanks, Administrative Assistant II
City of Pasco – Community & Economic Development Department
1 customers are low income, there is problems. But on top of that,
2 managing that, there is managing of property with issues. This was
3 built back in the 60’s so we’re constantly having to upgrade
4 constantly and have to fix things. We had some City code issues. We
5 did take care of those. Mr. Fred Wagmen from the State of Washington
6 was out last week and passed us. He inspected the renovation and he
7 came and did a re-inspection inside the main lobby building so we are
8 in compliance there. It’s a day to day job. I think U-Haul to some
9 people sounds a bit strange to add a U-Haul onto a motel. I don’t
10 think it’s strange at all. I emailed to the City, which I don’t know
11 if you got in your packet or not, a list of 500 motels and hotels that
12 have U-Hauls as part of them. And we’re not talking just run of the
13 mill…everything from Quality Inn’s to Luxury Inn’s, Westmont Inn,
14 there is another Loyalty Inn in Virginia with U-Hauls. Mr. McDonald,
15 did you put this in the packet that I emailed to you?
16 MR. MCDONALD:I don’t believe it’s in the packet but you
17 can leave it with us.
18 MR. HUDNALL:I would be happy to leave this with you. But
19 just to show an example that it’s not an odd thing. I apologize for
20 not sending a picture when originally when I approached U-Haul, me and
21 Mr. Sohal did, about opening up a dealership our understanding of city
22 code was that since it was an addition to our business we did not need
Page 57 of 104
8
Krystle Shanks, Administrative Assistant II
City of Pasco – Community & Economic Development Department
1 anything. So we did a dry run and we had trucks and trailers out and
2 ready to rent for approximately a week until the City told us no, so
3 we had them removed. But I have a picture on my phone, which I
4 apologize I did not email to Mr. McDonald for the presentation. We
5 are only looking at putting stuff at the front area along the side.
6 I’ll use the mouse [referencing to the presentation on the screen]
7 just along this area along here is the only place we’re looking at
8 housing trucks. We’re not looking at starting an automotive business.
9 We’re not looking to have industrial. We’re simply looking to rent
10 trucks and trailers. And as far as the concerns as afar as it being a
11 nuisance property, I think I have done a darn good job of getting it
12 to where it is today. And I don’t think that anybody could argue that
13 I haven’t. I’ve had a zero tolerance for nuisance. If somebody is
14 causing a problem, I’ll get up in the middle of the night and kick
15 them out. I live on the property because I have to. In this type of
16 a setting, Lewis Street, an older facility, I’m not going to attract
17 people from the Hamptons. Yet I still have to maintain a functional
18 business. I have to be profitable. I have to be able to survive
19 because this is a multi-million dollar piece of property even if it
20 was built in the 60’s. And I’m going to go ahead and stop right
21 there.
Page 58 of 104
9
Krystle Shanks, Administrative Assistant II
City of Pasco – Community & Economic Development Department
1 CHAIRWOMAN ROACH:Ok, so I’ll let you catch your breath
2 and just ask you a question and then hand it over to Commissioner
3 Portugal. The U-Haul that you had parked there for that week, was it
4 successful? Did people come in or take interest in renting those
5 vehicles from you?
6 MR. HUDNALL:We actually started getting phone calls
7 before it was even open just because U-Haul had put us in the system.
8 There was a huge interest. It is a wonderful, wonderful location for
9 displaying U-Hauls and it has high visibility. There is another U-
10 Haul, there is a storage unit just up the street with U-Haul, Security
11 Mini-Storage, but they don’t have the visibility we had. And I also
12 have 5 years of U-Haul management experience under my belt so I was
13 able to take the reins and run with it and there was a lot of
14 interest.
15 CHAIRWOMN ROACH:Thank you.
16 MR. HUDNALL:And I did receive, I didn’t think I would
17 receive compliments about it but I did receive compliments that seeing
18 something extra here is nice. To see something else going on here
19 because we have a Panda Wok Restaurant which we sold and has not
20 gotten off the ground because of code issues and stuff like that like
21 we hoped it would. But we are trying to bring back this property.
22 You know, we’re bringing in extra business to make it financially
Page 59 of 104
10
Krystle Shanks, Administrative Assistant II
City of Pasco – Community & Economic Development Department
1 feasible while controlling the nuisance and beautifying the property.
2 You can see, this is what I call Building 3 right here, you see boards
3 on the windows and everything. I have in the fenced area a stick this
4 high of windows that we hired Profection Glass I think it is. They
5 are going through and doing all the windows, getting rid of the boards
6 and we’re putting curtains in there. So it doesn’t look like an eye
7 sore. And unfortunately we got a late start on the painting so we got
8 the renovated building painted. It looks just awesome but it’s
9 raining so we can’t work on the rest of it yet but we do care. We are
10 part of the community. I personally don’t want to have on my resume
11 that I failed. I really care about the place and I want to be able to
12 make is something special. And I know this is just a rezone request
13 but you know, it’s personal that I take care of the property and make
14 it a functional business.
15 CHAIRWOMAN ROACH:Thank you. And Commissioner Portugal
16 has a question for you.
17 COMMISSIONER PORTUGAL:Yes. Have you done any multi-
18 housing training that sometimes the Police Department provides? And
19 have you went through the whole training?
20 MR. HUDNALL:Yes. I went to the last Tri-Cities Police
21 Training, the Safe Community Housing Training and I have that
22 certificate up on the wall by the front desk when you walk in. And
Page 60 of 104
11
Krystle Shanks, Administrative Assistant II
City of Pasco – Community & Economic Development Department
1 that was very beneficial. I learned a lot from that and I think that
2 gave me extra motivation as well. It was a great experience.
3 COMMISSIONER MENDEZ:I’m just curious, are those short-term
4 rentals or long-term rentals?
5 MR. HUDNALL:We only do short-term rentals be we do have
6 kitchenette units so people tend to stay a little bit longer there.
7 We did have it zoned for apartments rather recently and that is not
8 economically feasible and the City of Pasco agreed with us. It’s just
9 not an economically feasible thing to have long-term renting in a
10 situation combined with a motel, with all respect to the previous
11 person. For us it just wasn’t a good thing because you can’t simply
12 go to a long-term person. If “Don” had stayed over 30 days in my
13 unit. I can’t go to him and say, “Don, police got called. You have
14 to get out.” He could tell me to go jump off a cliff. You have to go
15 through court and it costs quite a bit. It’s a long process. And
16 then you still have a nuisance tenant there the whole time that is
17 going on which is detrimental to everybody else.
18 CHAIRWOMAN ROACH:Thanks for that information. Any other
19 questions from Commissioner’s? (There were no questions.)
20 Ok, go ahead.
21 DON RICKARD: My name is Don Rickard, I live at 7208 W.
22 Arrowhead in Kennewick. My job is the Area Field Manager for U-Haul.
Page 61 of 104
12
Krystle Shanks, Administrative Assistant II
City of Pasco – Community & Economic Development Department
1 Seventeen locations in the Tri-Cities and I consider West Richland and
2 Benton City also. So 17 in the area. The only one I don’t work with
3 is the center on Court Street. That is a corporate store. Big
4 difference. Ok? As of this morning, my 17 stores in the Tri-Cities
5 averaged 1.5 trucks per location and 2 ½ trailers. So we’re small.
6 And that’s what we’re asking to do. We’re not going to be like the
7 one on Court. That’s company. Those guys work for U-Haul, you know,
8 just like I do, and these guys, independent dealers, we pay them a
9 commissioner. They work hard for it. It’s not a lot but it helps.
10 So we’d like it. He does a great job. It was very short term but
11 he’s got a bright future. Thanks.
12 CHAIRWOMAN ROACH:Thank you. Any questions? Ok, well
13 thank you for coming. We appreciate your statements. Anybody else
14 that would like to come forward and speak to this item now would be
15 the time. It looks like we have a taker.
16 MR. RODRIGUEZ:Good evening, Commissioner’s. My name again
17 is, Rolando Rodriguez. My address is 7909 W. Dradie, Pasco, WA. I’m
18 here, I drive by this facility every day at least twice. I did see it
19 when it had the U-Hauls. Although the management has tried to improve
20 the property, I have to encourage this body to take the recommendation
21 that your Staff has recommended and deny it. I think that there’s
22 many other issues that need to be addressed first before we add one
Page 62 of 104
13
Krystle Shanks, Administrative Assistant II
City of Pasco – Community & Economic Development Department
1 more business to this site and make situation even worse. Thank you.
2 Questions?
3 CHAIRWOMAN ROACH:Are there any questions?
4 So, I do have a question. Are you on the Code Enforcement
5 Board?
6 MR. RODRIGUEZ:No, ma’am. I am a property owner in Pasco.
7 I have several properties in Pasco. I’m also a business owner in
8 Downtown Pasco. I own 117 S. 3rd Avenue in Pasco so I’m a business
9 owner. I’m a proud resident of Pasco. I’ve been here for over 20
10 years. Pasco is home. I left Kennewick years ago. I’ve crossed the
11 river and I’ve been here since then and I enjoy it. My kids both have
12 graduated and have pride for the Pasco School District. One just
13 graduated two years ago the other is in 10th grade. So I’m a proud
14 Pasco resident and I want to make Pasco a better place. Especially
15 Downtown Pasco. So any business that’s not living up to the standards
16 that we want to improve the quality of our kids, our tax base and
17 encourage other business to come to Downtown Pasco…I’m tired. I’m of
18 other cities thinking that we’re the last place that they should look
19 at. Pasco, I think in my opinion, is the best city in the Tri-Cities
20 and we need to make it better. It is important for this property to
21 take that forward to make Pasco better for our community and
Page 63 of 104
14
Krystle Shanks, Administrative Assistant II
City of Pasco – Community & Economic Development Department
1 businesses. So again, I encourage you, not only to take Mr. White’s
2 recommendation and deny this request.
3 CHAIRWOMAN ROACH:Thanks for coming down. Appreciate it.
4 So, any other takers on this? Going once, going twice, going
5 three times. Let’s close the public hearing on it and deliberate.
6 Any comments, any questions for Staff from Commissioner’s? I know
7 it’s late. This is the latest we’ve gone in a very long time.
8 COMMISSIONER MENDEZ:I just want a clarification. I’m not
9 sure, I’ve been reading this and I’m a little bit confused. I’m not
10 sure they’re recommending denial or some kind of concomitant agreement
11 if we choose to go forward.
12 MR. WHITE:Well, right now there’s no recommendation from
13 Staff. But if it were a month from now, based on the testimony and
14 based on the facts presented in an agenda report, it would be a
15 recommendation for denial.
16 CHAIRWOMAN ROACH:So, how are Commissioner’s feeling
17 about, well, I guess we have to move this. Let’s move it then.
18 Anybody else have any questions?
19 COMMISSIONER POLK:We have to question if it’s a benefit to
20 give feedback so Staff knows?
21 CHAIRWOMAN ROACH:Exactly. That’s why we should give them
22 comments right now. We’re all mentally struggling right here. Ok.
Page 64 of 104
15
Krystle Shanks, Administrative Assistant II
City of Pasco – Community & Economic Development Department
1 So, question for Staff – part of the consideration here is that this
2 is a main thoroughfare and that there’s concern for how this
3 particular business/sub-business would affect Lewis Street. Is that
4 accurate?
5 MR. WHITE:Yeah. The U-Haul’s, as the applicant testified,
6 would be located right where we’re looking. So, they’ll be there.
7 And they’ll be there all the time. So it’s just a matter of, is that
8 an appropriate look for the publicly improved entryway into Pasco.
9 CHAIRWOMAN ROACH:Ok. Does anybody else have anything
10 they want to get into the record right now?
11 COMMISSIONER BYKONEN:My main concern is when you’re changing
12 the zoning, it might be, the reason behind it is for the addition of a
13 U-Haul facility but it changes the zoning for the property. So that
14 means any other time, whatever use is allowed in that C-3 zone, could
15 occur on that property. There’s no, it’s not written in stone, that
16 that will always be the Loyalty Inn with the U-Haul in front of it.
17 So we have to look at the intensity of other uses that could
18 potentially take place on that property because we change the zone.
19 That’s just my thought.
20 CHAIRWOMAN ROACH:I think you made a good point,
21 Commissioner Bykonen. When I read this report my understanding of it
22 was that the property owner was wanting to change businesses from
Page 65 of 104
16
Krystle Shanks, Administrative Assistant II
City of Pasco – Community & Economic Development Department
1 hotel to U-Haul, not that this was going to be an addition to the
2 hotel business. So that it was became clear in this public testimony.
3 COMMISSIONER POLK:Additionally, there is talk both in the
4 Staff findings of fact and in the conclusions that we could consider a
5 concomitant agreement, which would allow it to be C-3 zone but would
6 restrict other C-3 uses and only permit specific ones. I don’t know
7 if that makes a difference necessarily but that would ensure it
8 couldn’t be a lumber yard or something.
9 CHAIRWOMAN ROACH:Ok. Are we good to go then? Ok, go for
10 it.
11 COMMISSIONER GREENAWAY: I move to close the hearing and
12 proposed rezone and set December 15, 2016 as the date for deliberation
13 and development of the recommendation for City Council.
14 COMMISSIONER POLK:I second.
15 COMMISSIONER ROACH:All in favor?
16 COMMISSIONERS:Aye. (unanimously)
17 CHAIRWOMAN ROACH:Any opposed?
18 COMMISSIONER PORTUGAL:Abstained.
19 CHAIRWOMAN ROACH:Ok, we have Commissioner Portugal
20 abstaining.
21 COMMISSIONER PORTUGAL:I am a friend of Rolando Rodriguez
22 and I will probably recuse myself.
Page 66 of 104
17
Krystle Shanks, Administrative Assistant II
City of Pasco – Community & Economic Development Department
1 CHAIRWOMAN ROACH:Ok, so moved by Commissioner Greenaway,
2 seconded by Commissioner Polk. The motion passed with one abstaining
3 and we will see it in December.
4 (CONCLUDED.)
5
Page 67 of 104
1
Krystle Shanks, Administrative Assistant II
City of Pasco – Community & Economic Development Department
1
2 STATE OF WASHINGTON
3 CITY OF PASCO
4 In Re: Rezone from C-1,)
5 (Retail Business) to C-3,)
6 (General Business))Master File # Z 2016-005
7 Loyalty Inn/Mohinder Sohal )
8
9
10 EXCERPT OF THE PASCO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
11
12
13 TIME:7:00 p.m., Wednesday, December 21, 2017
14 TAKEN AT:Pasco City Hall
15 Pasco, Washington
16 CALLED BY:City of Pasco
17 REPORTED BY:Krystle Shanks, Administrative Assistant II
18 City of Pasco
19 Community & Economic Development Department
Page 68 of 104
2
Krystle Shanks, Administrative Assistant II
City of Pasco – Community & Economic Development Department
1
2 APPEARANCES
3 FOR THE PASCO PLANNING COMMISSION:
4 CHAIRWOMAN ZAHRA ROACH
5 COMMISSIONER KURT LUKINS
6 COMMISSIONER PAUL MENDEZ
7 COMMISSIONER ALECIA GREENAWAY
8 COMMISSIONER LOREN POLK
9 COMMISSIONER PAM BYKONEN
10 COMMISSIONER GABRIEL PORTUGAL
11
12 ALSO PRESENT:
13 MR. RICK WHITE
14 MR. DAVID MCDONALD
15 MS. KRYSTLE SHANKS
16
Page 69 of 104
3
Krystle Shanks, Administrative Assistant II
City of Pasco – Community & Economic Development Department
1
2 BE IT REMEMBERED that on Wednesday, December 21, 2016 at 7:00 p.m.,
3 at Pasco City Hall, Pasco, Washington, the Pasco Planning Commission
4 Meeting was taken before Krystle Shanks, Administrative Assistant II
5 of the Community & Economic Development Department for the City of
6 Pasco. The following proceedings took place:
7
8 PROCEEDINGS
9
10 CHAIRWOMAN ROACH: And on to the last item of Old Business, a
11 rezone from C-1 (Retail Business) to C-3 (General Commercial), Master
12 File # Z 2016-005. Staff, anything additional on this item?
13 MR. WHITE:There’s no changes to the report and, although the
14 public hearing was closed, one of the Commissioner’s at the last
15 month’s meeting asked for, or at least accepted the offer, from the
16 applicant to review locations of hotels that apparently had U-Haul
17 distribution operations with them and that information, as developed
18 by the applicant, has been distributed to the Planning Commission.
19 CHAIRWOMAN ROACH:Thank you. Are there any questions that the
20 Commissioner’s have for Staff at this time?
21 COMMISSIONER MENDEZ:Is the City still proposing or recommending
22 denial?
Page 70 of 104
4
Krystle Shanks, Administrative Assistant II
City of Pasco – Community & Economic Development Department
1 MR. WHITE:Yes.
2 CHAIRWOMAN ROACH:Are there any Commissioner’s that would like
3 to make…
4 COMMISSIONER PORTUGAL:I didn’t hear…
5 CHAIRWOMAN ROACH:Commissioner Mendez asked if the City’s
6 recommendation was to deny the applicant of the U-Haul rental at their
7 business location.
8 Any other questions from Commissioners?
9 How about we deliberate on this one? We really have a chance to at
10 the last month’s meeting and so it’s a good time to have a
11 conversation as to whether we are in alignment with the City’s
12 recommendation or the applicants. So, conversation can start with
13 anybody that has an opinion on the matter.
14 COMMISSIONER MENDEZ:So it appears that the applicant provided
15 additional information for our consideration regarding a number of
16 hotels that had a supplemental business related to U-Haul I believe.
17 CHAIRWOMAN ROACH:That is correct. Throughout the U.S.
18 COMMISSIONER MENDEZ:Throughout the U.S.
19 COMMISSIONER BYKONEN:And Canada.
20 COMMISSIONER MENDEZ:And Canada. Ok. But I think the City’s
21 position is that it’s not a proper place to have that kind of activity
22 in its interest to the City. I was also under the impression that the
Page 71 of 104
5
Krystle Shanks, Administrative Assistant II
City of Pasco – Community & Economic Development Department
1 reason why this applicant wanted to establish this business was as an
2 additional stream of revenue not because so much that there was a
3 demand for this type of activity. So, those are my thoughts on the
4 matter.
5 CHAIRWOMAN ROACH:I do have a question for Staff. So, just
6 down the road is Columbia Grain & Feed and some type of industrial
7 equipment, like tractors and other such equipment that’s on sale in
8 that property facing Lewis Street. And so I was wondering how
9 that…that isn’t conforming with our goals of keeping Lewis Street, the
10 entrance into our City…do you know what I’m talking about? It’s
11 adjacent to Columbia Grain & Feed.
12 MR. WHITE:Yes, I do. Although that…
13 CHAIRWOMAN ROACH:The appliance store.
14 MR. WHITE:The appliance store and the feed store have been there
15 for many, many, many years. I don’t know how long. Many decades.
16 And then the improvements to Lewis Street happened fairly recently.
17 Probably no more than a decade or so ago. But yes, that is correct.
18 There is an operation that sells lawn tractors on 20th and Lewis.
19 CHAIRWOMAN ROACH:Alright. Thank you.
20 COMMISSIONER POLK:So I’ll just put in my feelings about this.
21 I don’t feel like having this kind of business would be so awful to
22 have on the property but I’m not really in favor of zoning all of that
Page 72 of 104
6
Krystle Shanks, Administrative Assistant II
City of Pasco – Community & Economic Development Department
1 site C-3. And if we were to I imagine we would also be then talking
2 about a concomitant agreement that would prohibit the use of any of
3 that property for anything but one specific use. And ideally I think
4 hotels are C-1 uses and we want to see the majority of that property
5 used as a C-1 use so I’m kind of in agreement with the City.
6 Unfortunately I don’t feel like the specific case that they’re making
7 is against the City’s desire to keep that street looking nice but I
8 also don’t feel like the remedy of rezoning the entire C-3 is the
9 correct path that we want to take. Does that make sense?
10 CHAIRWOMAN ROACH:I agree with you. I think that I rezone
11 isn’t the answer. I do agree with that. And that a concomitant
12 agreement would be more appropriate in this case.
13 CHAIRWOMAN POLK:Well, I think that we would have to rezone it
14 C-3 and have them sign a concomitant agreement to say that it was only
15 limited to that specific C-3 use.
16 CHAIRWOMAN ROACH:Right.
17 COMMISSIONER POLK:But I don’t know if that’s the right
18 direction for Lewis Street, as City Staff has suggested. I don’t know
19 if that is the right way to go.
20 CHAIRWOMAN ROACH:Are there any other thoughts or opinions from
21 other Commissioner’s about this? You know, looking at the…if you’ve
22 passed by this location before, it’s a pretty deep parking lot. And
Page 73 of 104
7
Krystle Shanks, Administrative Assistant II
City of Pasco – Community & Economic Development Department
1 so I don’t…I am sympathetic to the business owner because of the
2 hardship they are having with the tenants. I heard that and we heard
3 a similar applicant who came last month who said similar things about
4 finding reliable tenants and business in this area. And we know about
5 the Chinese, what was formerly Panda Woks, restaurant also struggling.
6 So I understand that they’re looking for an alternative source of
7 revenue here and having, you know, that parking lot may be ok to do
8 something like a U-Haul there as long as it wasn’t abutting the street
9 side in my opinion but I do agree with Staff in that it’s not going to
10 look pretty for Lewis Street. It’s not going to be an inviting
11 thoroughfare if it’s lined with U-Hauls on the street side or abutting
12 the sidewalk. So it’s kind of a toss up for me. I can be swayed.
13 That’s why I’m interested in the deliberations of other Commissioner’s
14 on this one. So conversation would be good.
15 COMMISSIONER LUKINS:Looking at this…I wasn’t here last month. I
16 looked at the report from last month and the minutes and looking at
17 this, what was provided for this month. It just seems, I understand
18 Staff’s concern about the appearance of it, but it also…some of the
19 analysis is complaining about what the site currently looks like even
20 without the U-Haul and it seems almost a bit punitive. At least that
21 is the vibe I’m getting and I don’t think that’s appropriate or the
22 role. And you know, quite honestly as a business owner, I tend to
Page 74 of 104
8
Krystle Shanks, Administrative Assistant II
City of Pasco – Community & Economic Development Department
1 agree with what Commissioner Khan [CHAIRWOMAN ROACH] stated. I would
2 be in favor of allowing this use, this specific use. Maybe pull back
3 a little bit with a specific type of agreement.
4 CHAIRWOMAN ROACH:Are there other Commissioner’s that would
5 like to speak to this right now. This would be a good time, where you
6 stand on this matter.
7 COMMISSIONER PORTUGAL:I’m also in favor of creating jobs,
8 opportunities, more revenue. But at the same time balancing with how
9 our City is looking. But I think that maybe in this case, creation of
10 jobs would be more important than the look of the street. So I’m
11 split on that too.
12 CHAIRWOMAN ROACH:Thank you, Commissioner Portugal. The other
13 thing that I remember the applicant stating about this when we had him
14 up was that it wouldn’t be the main distribution center and so they
15 wouldn’t have the same quantity and size of U-Haul vehicles as the
16 regional or main hub. So that also alleviated some of my worry about
17 the size of vehicles they would have there.
18 Commissioner Bykonen or Commissioner Mendez, any additional
19 thoughts?
20 COMMISSIONER BYKONEN:Well, I do drive by this quite regularly.
21 It’s my back road in from the gym so I do drive by it, I would
22 probably say 3-4 times a week at least. And I am always concerned
Page 75 of 104
9
Krystle Shanks, Administrative Assistant II
City of Pasco – Community & Economic Development Department
1 about the condition, the current condition of the property. And
2 I’ve…since this was brought before I’ve struggled with would a U-Haul
3 lot make the property better? Would it benefit the area? And I
4 just…based on a visual perception, I’m not leaning towards that it
5 would. This list of hotels/motels that run the U-Haul distribution
6 center out of their businesses, I’m not familiar with all of them but
7 I am familiar with Garden Suites in Des Moines. I used to live out
8 there. And that’s along Highway 99, which is a very busy, unappealing
9 road. And that was back in the 80’s so I can just imagine what it
10 looks like now. And I don’t want Lewis Street to look like Highway
11 99. So, if the parking lot that the vehicles would be stored in would
12 be behind the business, so away from that street facing side and some
13 sort of visual blocking it, which goes against what you’re doing…you
14 know, more visual is better for business because that will catch
15 people’s eye…I get that but some of these businesses I’m sure have
16 their offices up close to the street and the vehicles parked behind
17 and if that were the case, I would be more on board with approving
18 this change in zoning. But I am concerned about…and I understand
19 about a concomitant agreement and everything. But still to me, I see
20 C-3 and looking at a list of things that can go on in C-3 and knowing
21 that there’s residential right across the street, that’s a concern to
Page 76 of 104
10
Krystle Shanks, Administrative Assistant II
City of Pasco – Community & Economic Development Department
1 me. So I am leaning…I can’t support it completely. So that’s just my
2 position on it.
3 CHAIRWOMAN ROACH:Thank you. Commissioner Greenaway, we
4 haven’t heard from you.
5 COMMISSIONER GREENAWAY:I’m backing the City on this one.
6 CHAIRWOMAN ROACH:Ok, thanks. Commissioner Mendez, any?
7 COMMISSIONER MENDEZ:I looked at the listing and it doesn’t really
8 say what this location is in a C-3 or C-1 zoning…and I can’t tell what
9 locations are a main thoroughfare or not, so based on what I heard I
10 don’t think I can support the zoning from C-1 to C-3 at this
11 particular location for this particular business.
12 CHAIRMWOMAN ROACH:Ok, so should we take an informal vote or
13 should we just go ahead and…let’s just do it.
14 I’ll entertain a motion.
15 COMMISIONER GREENAWAY:I move to adopt the findings of fact and
16 conclusions, therefrom, as contained in the December 15, 2016 staff
17 report.
18 COMMISSIONER BYKONEN:Second.
19 CHAIRWOMAN ROACH:All those in favor?
20 COMMISSIONERS:Aye.
21 CHAIRWOMAN ROACH:Any opposed?
22 COMMISSIONER LUKINS:Nay.
Page 77 of 104
11
Krystle Shanks, Administrative Assistant II
City of Pasco – Community & Economic Development Department
1 CHAIRWOMAN ROACH:Let the record show that there was one,
2 Commissioner Lukins, in opposition.
3 COMMISSIONER GREENAWAY:I moved based on the findings of fact
4 and conclusions as adopted, the Planning Commission recommend to the
5 City Council denial of the proposed rezone of lots 2 and 3, short plat
6 2010-08 from C-1 to C-3.
7 COMMISSIONER BYKONEN:Second.
8 CHAIRWOMAN ROACH:All those in favor?
9 COMMISSIONERS:Aye.
10 CHAIRWOMAN ROACH:Any opposed?
11 COMMISSIONER LUKINS:Nay.
12 CHAIRWOMAN ROACH:Let the record show that it was moved by
13 Commissioner Greenaway, seconded by Commissioner Bykonen, and there
14 was one in opposition, Commissioner Lukins.
15 And what happens to this next?
16 MR. WHITE:This goes to the January 16th Council Meeting unless an
17 appeal is received, in which case, a closed record hearing will be
18 scheduled.
19
20 (CONCLUDED.)
Page 78 of 104
AGENDA REPORT
FOR: City Council February 14, 2017
TO: Dave Zabell, City Manager Regular Meeting: 2/21/17
FROM: Richa Sigdel, Director
Finance
SUBJECT: Removal of Convenience/Payment Fees
I. REFERENCE(S):
Proposed Ordinance
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
MOTION: I move to adopt Ordinance No. _______, repealing Section 3.112.040
"Miscellaneous Payment Processing Charges" and amending Section 3.07.090
"Miscellaneous" and, further, authorize publication by summary only.
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
While the recommendation reduces General Fund revenue, annually by approximately
$5,600, it eliminates unnecessary staff processing and data entry time by an equivalent
amount.
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
In early 2016, the City changed its utility bill payment service to a new vendor,
Paymentus Inc., which has resulted in improved service and reduced fees. A number of
fees, which were charged by and payable directly to the former vendor, have been
eliminated (see table) resulting in savings to customers.
The City has received revenue only from the debit card (walk up) convenience fees. As
this is the only payment fee that is currently imposed, and must be collected through an
entirely separate program, the extra staff time required to process and collect the $5,600
annual revenue does not justify the staff time or expense.
Bill Pay Service
Prior Vendor
Xpress
Current
Vendor
Page 79 of 104
Paymentus
Debit Payment Online $1.50 Free
Phone/Assist $3.50 - $4.50 Free
Walk-up $0.50 $0.50
Credit Payment Online $1.50 Free
Phone/Assist $3.50 - $4.50 Free
Walk-up $3.00 Free
Checking/Savings/Cash Online Free Free
Phone/Assist $2.00 - $3.00 Free
Walk-up Free Free
V. DISCUSSION:
This item was discussed at the February 13 Workshop meeting.
Staff recommends adoption of the ordinance to repeal the convenience fees which are
no longer applicable or cost efficient.
Page 80 of 104
ORDINANCE NO. ________
AN ORDINANCE of the City of Pasco, Washington, repealing Section
3.112.040 “Miscellaneous Payment Processing Charges” and amending Section
3.07.090 “Miscellaneous.”
WHEREAS, the City provides a variety of services whereby the customer is billed for
services rendered; and
WHEREAS, some fees are no longer relevant; NOW, THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON, DO HEREBY
ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That Section 3.112.040 “Miscellaneous Payment Processing Charges” of the
Pasco Municipal Code shall be and hereby is repealed in its entirety.
Section 2. That Section 3.07.090 “Miscellaneous” of the Pasco Municipal Code, shall be and
hereby is amended to read as follows:
3.07.090 MISCELLANEOUS: Fee/Charge Reference
A) Photocopy Fees – per copy $0.15 Admin. Order 42
B) Returned Payment Fee $25.00 3.112.010
C) Debit Card Convenience Fee
(Counter) $0.50 3.112.040(A)
D) Debit/Credit Card Convenience Fee
(Web) $1.50 3.112.040(A)
E) Phone Operator Assist Payment Fee $3.00 3.112.040(B)
F) Phone No Assist Payment Fee $2.00 3.112.040(B)
G) Late Pay Penalty $10.00 3.300.050(A)
H) Phone & Collection Fee $10.00 3.300.050(B)
I) Pre-Collection Fee $10.00 3.300.050(C)
J) Collection Turnover Fee
(charges, penalties & fees) 5% 3.300.050(D)
K) Installment Plan Origination Fee
($10 min) 3% 3.300.070(D)
L) Installment Plan Monthly Bill Fee $5.00 3.300.070(D)
Section 3. This Ordinance shall take effect March 6, 2017.
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco this 21st day of February 2017.
Matt Watkins, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Sandy Kenworthy, Interim City Clerk Leland B. Kerr, City Attorney
Page 81 of 104
AGENDA REPORT
FOR: City Council February 14, 2017
TO: Dave Zabell, City Manager Regular Meeting: 2/21/17
FROM: Stan Strebel, Deputy City Manager
Executive
SUBJECT: Assigning Council Representation to Districts
I. REFERENCE(S):
Proposed Resolution
District Map
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
MOTION: I move to approve Resolution No. _____, assigning Council representation
to Districts and identifying position numbers.
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
State law (RCW 35A.12.180) provides that in the event of re-districting, if a vacancy in
a district occurs, that an appropriate assignment of district representation should be
made by the Council. The recent ruling and Order by Judge Suko in the ACLU lawsuit
has resulted in a vacancy in District No. 1, as well as some members of Council
residing in districts to which they were not originally elected.
The attached proposed resolution designates one Councilmember for each
district/position for the interim period, until new elections result in proper alignment.
V. DISCUSSION:
This item was discussed at the February 13 Workshop meeting.
Staff recommends approval of the proposed resolution.
Page 82 of 104
RESOLUTION NO. ________
A RESOLUTION of the City of Pasco, Washington, assigning Council
representation to districts and identifying position numbers.
WHEREAS, the City Council has by Ordinance No. 4315, re-established its voting
district boundaries as a result of a Partial Consent Order entered on September 2, 2016, by
Federal Judge Lonnie Suko of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of
Washington; and
WHEREAS, the Federal Court by Decision of January 27, 2017, confirmed the
redistricting as provided in Ordinance No. 4315, with new boundaries as described in PMC
1.10.020 through 1.10.070; and
WHEREAS, the result of the re-establishment of district lines has resulted in the
displacement of City Councilmembers from the districts from which they were elected; and
WHEREAS, RCW 35A.12.180 requires that as the result of such redistricting,
Councilmembers shall be assigned to such districts where a vacancy occurs, and the
Councilmember so assigned shall be deemed to be residents of those districts. NOW,
THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON, DO
RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Pursuant to RCW 35A.12.180, the following Councilmembers are
assigned as representatives to those districts and position numbers preceding their names:
Position 1 - District 1 Councilman Tom Larsen
Position 2 - District 2 Councilman Al Yenney
Position 3 - District 3 Councilman Saul Martinez
Position 4 - District 4 Councilman Chi Flores
Position 5 - District 5 Councilwoman Rebecca Francik
Position 6 - District 6 Councilman Robert Hoffmann
Position 7 - At-large Councilman Matt Watkins
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco, Washingto n, as its regular meeting
dated this _____ day of ____________, 2017.
___________________________________
Matt Watkins, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
___________________________________ ___________________________________
Sandy Kenworthy, Interim City Clerk Leland B. Kerr, City Attorney
Page 83 of 104
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
Al YennyTom Larsen
Bob Hoffman
Matt Watkins Saul Martin ez
Rebecca Francik 001
002
008
058
004
049
039
102
032
047
062
041
037
059
013
046
067
066
051
048
036 017
040
065
003
063
018
045
023
006
035
050
024
022
055
015
012
016020
031
005
056 053
026
044
027
033
043
057
019
052
025
007
034
011
038
029
054
042
009
021
014
010
060
030 028
District
1
2
3
4
5
6
Pasco Mission 8
P
a
g
e
8
4
o
f
1
0
4
AGENDA REPORT
FOR: City Council February 15, 2017
TO: Dave Zabell, City Manager Regular Meeting: 2/21/17
FROM: Stan Strebel, Deputy City Manager
Executive
SUBJECT: Land Sale to Direct Staffing, LLC, Becky Ochoa
I. REFERENCE(S):
Proposed Resolution
Purchase and Sale Agreement
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
MOTION: I move to approve Resolution No. _____, approving the sale of certain real
property on Cedar Avenue, north of Lewis Street.
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
$43,000
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
The City acquired the property through a tax deed in 1991 and has no plans for its use.
The City was recently approached by a neighboring property owner with a purchase
proposal for the .78 acre property. An appraisal was conducted resulting in a value of
$43,000 for the property.
V. DISCUSSION:
As the City is not in need of the property, and the value appears to be reasonable and
the offer to purchase is the same as the appraisal value, staff recommends approval of
the resolution which authorizes the sale and execution of the purchase and sale
agreement.
Page 85 of 104
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION of the City of Pasco, Washington, approving the sale
of certain real property on Cedar Avenue, north of Lewis Street.
WHEREAS, the City owns approximately .78 acre of real property near the intersection
of Cedar Avenue and Lewis Street; and
WHEREAS, Direct Staffing LLC, Becky Ochoa, has petitioned the City to sell the
property; and
WHEREAS, an appraisal of the property has been made showing a value of $43,000 for
the City-owned parcel, which the City Council accepts as an appropriate price for the property;
and
WHEREAS, the proposed use of the property advances the economic development goals
of the City. NOW, THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON, DOES
RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That the City sale of certain real property consisting of .78 acres to Direct
Staffing LLC, Becky Ochoa, as described in the Purchase and Sale Agreement attached hereto as
Exhibit A, is hereby approved.
Section 2. That the City Manager is hereby authorized to execute all documents
necessary to effect the sale of the property in accordance with the Purchase and Sale Agreement.
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco at a regular meeting this 21st day of
February, 2017.
Matt Watkins, Mayor
ATTEST:
Sandy Kenworthy, Interim City Clerk Leland B. Kerr, City Attorney
Page 86 of 104
Exhibit A
Avery’s Addition, Lots 11 to 19, Block 1; Together with Vacated Streets and Alleys
ALVINA ST ALVINA ST
Page 87 of 104
PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT
THIS PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT (hereinafter "Agreement") is entered into on
this I ~ day o , 2017, between the City of Pasco, a Washington Municipal
Corporation (hereinafter " ity") and Direct Staffing LLC, Becky Ochoa (hereinafter
"Purchaser") for estab li shing the terms and conditions for the sale of real property (hereinafter
"Property") described as set forth below:
Parcel ID Number 113774042, consisting of approximately 34,000 square feet
(.78 acre); Legally descri bed as: Avery's Addition, Lots 11 to 19, Block 1, as
shown in Exhibit A which is attached hereto and incorporated by reference.
RECITALS
WHEREAS, City is the owner of real property located in Franklin County, Washington, which
real property is described more particularly above; and
WHEREAS, City wishes to sell such real property and Purchaser wishes to purchase such
property under certain terms and conditions as set forth below; NOW, THEREFORE,
The parties covenant and agree as follows:
1. Purchase and Sale. City agrees to sell , and Purchaser agrees to purchase:
(a) That certain parcel of real property described above;
(b) All development rights relating to the real property: (i) all rights to obtain utility
service in connection with the real property; (ii) assignable licenses and other
govemmental permits and permissions relating to the real property and the
operation thereof.
(c) The land, improvements, and appurtenances which constitute real property are
hereafter collectively defined as the "Real Property." All ofthe Property included
by reference within the foregoing paragraphs 1(a) through 1(c), both real and
personal, is hereinafter coll ectively referred to as the "Property."
2 . Purchase Price/Financing. The purchase price for the Property is Forty Three Thousand
Dollars ($43 ,000). The purchase price is payable in cash to the City at closing.
3. Method of Payment. Within five (5) business days following the last party's execution of
this Agreement and delivery of a fully executed original thereof to the othe r party,
Purchaser will deposit with an escrow agent (Benton-Franklin Title Company), Five
Thousand and 00/lOOths Dollars ($5 ,000.00), which shall constitute a deposit and be held
in an interest bearing trust account. This deposit shall be applied to the purchase price.
(a) Purchaser agrees that the deposit/earnest money shall be paid to City if the sale
does not close after Purchaser has removed all contingencies in writing.
Purchase and Sale Agree ment, City of Pasco & Direct Staffin g LLC Becky Ochoa -Page I
Page 88 of 104
(b) Upon closing , Purchaser shall electronically transfer proceeds of Purchaser's
financing for the balance of the purchase price or issue a cashier 's check in the
amount of the purchase price.
4. Inspection Period:
(a) Between the effective date of this Agreement and closing, or the earlier termination of
this Agreement, Purchaser and their authorized agents, contractors, and consultants,
shall have the right to go upon the Property at reasonable times for the purpose of
inspecting each and every part thereof to determine its present condition and, at
Purchaser's sole cost and expense, to prepare such reports , tests, and studies as
Purchaser deems appropriate, including but not limited to surveys , soil tests ,
engineering studies and environmental tests. Before conducting any invasive or
intrusive testing such as borings or test holes, Purchaser shall give City at least forty-
eight ( 48) hours prior written notice, and shall coordinate the date and time of such
testing to enable City 's representatives and/or consultants to be present to take
duplicate samples and record the methods used by the Purchaser's consultants. The
Purchaser's inspection period shall not exceed thirty (90) days from the effective date
of the Agreement unless otherwise agreed to by both parties in writing.
(b) Purchaser agrees to repair any damage to the Property resulting from any activities of
Purchaser or his agents or consultants on the Property before closing. Purchaser
agrees to defend, indemnify and hold the City harmless from any and all damages ,
expenses, claims, or liabilities (including but not limited to attorney's fees and costs)
arising out of any activities of Purchaser or his agents or consultants on or about the
Property before closing , except to the extent that the same re sults from the City's
negligence. Purchaser shall not be liable for any inspection claim resulting from
Purchaser's discovery of any pre-existing condition (including , but not limited to, the
existence of any hazardous materials) in , on, under or about the Property or any
exacerbation of a pre-existing condition in, on, under or about the Property, except to
the extent that the exacerbation results from the negligent act or omission of
Purchaser or his agents or consultants .
5. Title. Title to the Property is to be so insurable at closing under terms of the title policy
required to be delivered by City under terms of paragraph 6 hereof. All title insurance
charges for the policy referenced in paragraph 6 below in the amount of the purchase
price shall be equally divided between the parties, except for the cost of any special
endorsements requested by Purchaser and cancellation fees shall be paid by Purchaser.
6 . Preliminary Commitment. Within fifteen (15) days from the last party's execution of this
agreement, City shall furnish Purchaser with a preliminary report/commitment from
Benton-Franklin Title for an ALTA owner's policy of title insurance with respect to the
Real Property, together with a copy of each document forming the basis for each
exception referenced therein. Purchaser shall advise City of any title objections within
five (5) days of its receipt of the report/commitment to remove all exceptions or
conditions in the title commitment. If within ten (10) days after its notice to City,
Purchaser have not received evidence satisfactory to it that such unsatisfactory items can
Purchase and Sale Agreement, City of Pasco & Direct Staffing LLC Becky Ochoa -Page 2 @
Page 89 of 104
and will be removed at or prior to closing at City's sole cost and expense, then Purchaser
may elect to (a) terminate this Agreement and receive a full refund of the deposit, (b)
waive such defects, or (c) continue this Agreement in effect pending their removal.
Removal of unsatisfactory items or their waiver shall b e a condition of closing. If
Purchaser does not make an election within thirty (90) days of its execution of this
Agreement, Purchaser shall be de emed to have waived the defects.
7. Due Diligence: Inspection Period.
(a) Within fifteen (15) days following the last party's execution of this Agreement,
City shall provide Purchaser with the title commitment described in paragraph 6
above , together with all relevant documents relating to the Property, including but
not limited to copies of all easements, and all other covenants and restrictions
with respect to all or portions of the Property; and all ex isting surveys and other
reports and studies relating to the Property or its use or development in the
possession of City.
(b) Purchaser shall have thirty (90) days from the date the last party executes this
Agreement (the "Inspection Period") within which to conduct an examination of
the Property, includin g examinations of title, engineering tests, soils tests, water
percolation tests, ground water tests, environmental examinations, market studies,
appraisals, and any other tests or inspecti ons whic h Purchaser shall have deemed
necessary or desirable for the purpose of determining whether the Property is
suitab le for his intended uses. On or before the expiration of the Inspection
Period, the Purchaser shall notify City in writing, with a copy to Escrow Agent,
whether Purchaser intends to purchase the Property or terminate this Agreement.
If Purchaser elects to purchase the Property, then the Inspection Period shall
terminate and Purchaser's ob li gation to purchase and City's obligation to sell the
Property shall remain , subject to the other terms and conditions of this
Agreement. If Purchaser elects not to purchase the Property, then this Agreement
shall be void and of no furthe r force and effect, and the deposit shall be returned
to Purchaser. In the event Purchaser fails to notify City in writing of its election to
purchase the Property or terminate this Agreement prior to the expiration of the
Inspection Period , then Purchaser shall be deemed to have elected to terminate
this Agreement.
8. Pro-rat ions. Real Property taxes , assessments , water and other utilities, and all other
expenses for the month of closing, shall be prorated as of closing. All expenses, fees and
sums owing or incurred for the Property for periods prior to closing shall be paid by City,
when and as due.
9. Possession . Purchaser shall be entitled to sole possession of the Property at closing,
subject only to the rights, if any, of tenants in possession under the leases.
10. Clo sing. Clo sing shall occur within ten (1 0) days of the conclusion of Purchaser 's
inspection period as provided in Section 7 above.
Purchase and Sa le Agree me nt, C ity o f Pasco & Dire ct Staffmg L LC Becky Ochoa -Page 3
Page 90 of 104
(a) At closing City will deposit in escrow a duly executed statutory warranty deed
covering the Property; a FIRPT A affidavit; and all other documents and monies
required of it to close this transaction in accordance with the terms hereof. All
such documents shall be in form satisfactory to Purchaser's counsel.
(b) At closing Purchaser will deposit in escrow the monies required of it to close the
transaction in accordance with the terms hereof.
11. Closing Costs. All excise, transfer, sales and other taxes, if any, incurred in connection
with the sale, the title insurance premium, recording fees on the deed and the escrow fee
shall be equally divided between the parties. Each party shall bear its own attorneys '
fees , except as otherwise expressly provided herein.
12. Counterparts. This Agreement may be signed in counterparts which , taken together, shall
constitute the complete Agreement.
13. Actions During Term. During the term hereof, City shall not enter into any lease or other
agreement affecting the Property or its operation, or modify, extend or otherwise change
the terms of any lease or other agreement affecting the Property or its operation or
otherwise permit any change in the status of title to the Property without Purchaser's
prior written consent.
14. Assignment. Purchaser may not assign Purchaser's interest in this Agreement without
City's prior written consent.
15 . City's Warranties; Indemnity. City makes the following representations and warranties,
which shall be deemed remade as ofthe closing date:
(a) The Property and improvements are not in violation of any applicable covenant,
condition or restriction or any applicable statute, ordinance, regulation, order,
permit, rule or law, including, without limitation, any building, private restriction,
z oning or environmental restriction.
(b) Other than the obligations of record , there are no obligations in connection with
the Property , which will be binding upon Purchaser after closing other than
liability for the payment of real estate taxes and utility charges.
(c) There are no claims, actions, suits or governmental investigations or proceedings
existing or, to the best of City's knowledge, threatened against or involving City
or the Property (including, without limitation, any condemnation or eminent
domain proceeding or matter related to the formation of or assessment by a local
improvement district) and City has received no written notice thereof.
(d) All insurance policies now maintained on the Property will be kept in effect, up to
and including the closing. City has received no notice from any insurance
company or rating organization of any defects in the condition of the Property or
of the existence of conditions which would prevent the continuation of existing
coverage or would increase the present rate of premium.
Purchase and Sale Agreement, City of Pasc o & Direct Staffi ng LL C Becky Ochoa-Page 4
Page 91 of 104
(e) There are no leases affecting the Property.
(f) All such representations and warranties shall be reaffirmed by City as true and
correct as of the Closing Date and shall survive the Closing for a period of two (2)
years.
If, prior to closing, City becomes aware of any fact or circumstance which would change
a representation or warranty, then Ci t y will immediately give notice of such changed fact
or circumstance to Purchaser, but such notice shall not relieve the City of its obligations
hereunder.
16. Environmental Indemnification.
(a) City will defend, indemnify, and hold Purchaser and his partners, agents and
employees and assignee (collectively, the "Indemnified Parties") harmless from
and against any and all claims, obligations, damages, causes of action, costs and
expenses, losses, fines , penalties, and liabilities, including, without limitation,
attorneys ' fees and costs, imposed upon or incurred by or asserted against an
Indemnified Party arising out of or in connection with the occurrence of any of
the following: (i) prior to closing: (A) any Environmental Matter affecting or
relating to the Property arising out of City's use and ownership of the Property; or
(B) any violation of any Environmental Law by C ity with resp ect to the Property;
and (ii) subsequent to closing: (C) the manufacture, storage, sale, use, disposal,
release, or discharge of Hazardous Substance in, on or under the Property by City;
or (D) any violation of any Environmental Law by City with respect to the
Property. City shall also be responsible for all costs, expenses, fines , and penalties
arising out of or in connection with the investigation, removal, remediation, clean-
up, and restoration work resulting from the matters described in the preceding
sentence. City 's obligations under this Section 22 shall survive closing.
(b) "Environmental Laws" shall mean any federal, state or local laws, ordinance,
permits or regulations, or any common law, regarding health, safety, radioactive
materials or the environment, including but not limited to, the following federal
statutes : Clean Air Act (42 U .S. C. §§ 7401 et seq.) ("CAA"), Clean Water Act
(33 U.S .C. §§ 1251 et seq.) ("CWA"), Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
(42 U.S.C. §§ 609 1 et seq.) ("RCRA"), Comprehensive Environmental Response
Compensation and Liability Act (42 U .S.C. §§ 960 1 et seq.) ("CERCLA"),
Emergency Planning and Community Right-To-Know Act (41 U.S.C. §§ 11001 et
seq.) ("EPCRA"), Safe Drinking Water Act (42 U.S.C. §§ 300f et seq.)
("SDWA''), Hazardous Material Transportation Act of 1975 (49 U.S.C. §§ 1801
et seq.) ("HMTA"), Toxic Substances Co ntrol Act (15 U.S .C. §§ 2601 et seq.)
("TSCA"), Endan gered Species Act of 1973 (16 U .S.C. §§ 1531 et seq.) ("ESA"),
Federal Insecticide, F ung icide and Rodenticide Act (7 U.S.C . §§ 136 et seq.)
("FIFRA"), the Occupational Safety and Health Act (29 U.S.C. §§ 651 et seq.)
("OSHA"), the Washington Model Toxics Control Act (RCW Chapter 70.150D)
("MTCA"), or the Hazardous Waste Management Act (RCW Chapter 70.1 05)
("HWMA"), each as amended, and any regulations promulgated thereunder,
Purchase and Sale Agree ment, C ity of Pasco & Direct Staffing LLC Becky Ochoa-Page 5
Page 92 of 104
guidance and directives iss ued with respect thereto , or polic ies adopted by the
applicable authorities thereunder.
(c) "Hazardous Substances" shall mean.: (i) any radioactive materials; (ii) any
substance or material the transportation, storage, treatment, handling , use,
removal or release of which is subj ect to an y Environmental Law; or (iii) any
substance or material fo r which standards of conduct are imposed under any
Environmenta l Law. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, "Hazardous
Substances" shall include: asbestos and as bestos-conta ining materials (whether or
n ot friable); urea-formaldehyde in any of its forms ; polychlorinated biphenyls; o il ,
u sed oil; petrol eum products and their by-products ; lead-based paint; radon; and
any substance s defined as "hazardous waste," "hazardous substances," "pollutants
or contaminants," "tox ic substances," "hazardous chemicals," "hazardous
pollutants," or "toxic c hemicals "under the CAA, CWA, RCRA, CERCLA,
E PCRA , SDWA, HMTA, TSCA, OSHA, MTCA or HWMA.
(d) "Environmental Matter" shall mean any of the following: (i) the release of any
Hazardous Substance on or at the Property or any other property ; (ii) the
migration of any Hazardous Substance onto or from the Property; (iii) the
environmental , health or safety aspects of transportation, storage, treatment,
handling, us e or release, whether any of the foregoing occurs on or off the
Property, of Hazardous Substances in connection with the operations or past
operations of the Property; (iv) the vio lati on , or a ll eged violation with respect to
the Property, of any Env ironmental Law, order, permit or license of or from any
gove rnmental autho rity, agency or court relating to enviro nmental , hea lth or
safet y matters; (v) the presence of any underground storage tanks within the
confines of the Property; (vi) the presence of wetlands within the confines of the
Property; (v ii) the presence of any en dan gered species on, in or around the
Property; or (v iii ) soil, gro undwater and surface condit ions on , in or around the
Property which may have an adverse affect upon the use or value of the Property.
17 . Costs and Expen ses. Except as otherwise expressly provided herein, each party hereto
will bear its own costs and expenses in connection with the negotiation, preparation and
execution of thi s Agreement, and other docum entation re lated hereto, and in the
performance of its duties hereunder.
18 . Notices. All notices provided for he rein may b e delivered in perso n , sent by commercial
overnight co ur ier, te lecop ied or mailed by U .S. reg istered or certified mail , return receipt
requested , and, if mailed, shall be considered delivered three (3) business days after
depo sit in such mail. The addresses to be used in connection with such correspondence
and notices are the following , or such other address as a party shall fro m time-to-time
direct:
City:
C ity of Pasco
525 North 3rd
P asco , WA 99301
Attn: Dave Zabell , City Manager
Purcha se and Sale Agreement, C ity of Pasco & Direct Staffing LLC Becky Ochoa -Page 6
Page 93 of 104
Purchaser:
19. Miscellaneous.
(509) 545-3404
Direct Staffing LLC, Becky Ochoa
(509) 551-2223
(a) Further Documentation. Each of the parties agrees to execute, acknowledge , and
deliver upon request by the other party any document which the requesting party
reasonably deems necessary or desirable to evidence or effectuate the rights
herein conferred or to implement or consummate the purposes and intents hereof,
so long as such imposes no different or greater burden upon such party than is
otherwise imposed hereunder.
(b) Headings. The headings in this Agreement are for convenience only and do not in
any way limit or affect the terms and provisions hereof.
(c) Calculation of Time Periods. Unless otherwise specified, in computing any
period of time described in this Agreement, the day of the act or event after which
the designated period of time begins to run is not to be included and the last day
of the period so computed is to be included, unless such last day is a Saturday,
Sunday or legal holiday. The final day of any such period shall be deemed to end
at 5 p.m., Pacific Time.
(d) Time of Essence. Time is of the essence of this Agreement.
(e) Gender. Wherever appropriate in this Agreement, the singular shall be deemed to
refer to the plural and the plural to the singular, and pronouns of certain genders
shall be deemed to include either or both of the other genders.
(f) Exhibits. The Exhibits referred to herein and attached to this Agreement are
incorporated herein as if set forth in full.
(g) Unenforceability. If any provision of this Agreement is held to be invalid, illegal
or unenforceable in any respect , such invalidity, illegality or unenforceability
shall not affect the remainder of such provision or any other provisions hereof.
(h) Amendment, Modifications. This Agreement may not be altered , amended,
changed, waived, terminated or modified in any respect or particular unless the
same shall be in writing and signed by or on behalf of the party to be charged
therewith.
20. Attorneys ' Fees. If any lawsuit or arbitration arises in connection with this Agreement,
the substantially prevailing party therein shall be entitled to receive from the losing party ,
the substantiall y prevailing party's costs and expenses, including reasonable attorneys '
fees incurred in connection therewith , in preparation therefore and on appeal therefrom ,
which amounts shall be included in any judgment entered therein.
Purchase and Sale Agreement, City of Pasco & Direct Staffing LLC Beck y Ochoa -Page 7 ~
Page 94 of 104
21. Waiver. A party may, at any time or times , at its election, waive any of the conditions to
its obligations hereunder, but any such waiver shall be effective only if contained in
writing signed by such party. No waiver shall reduce the rights and remedies of such
party by reason of any breach of any other party. No waiver by any party of any breach
hereunder shall be deemed a waiver of any other or subsequent breach.
22. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be construed and enforced in accordance with the
laws ofthe State of Washington.
23. Facsimile Signatures. Each party (a) has agreed to permit the use, from time-to-time and
where appropriate, of telecopied signatures in order to expedite the transaction
contemplated by this Agreement, (b) intends to be bound by its respective telecopied
signature , (c) is aware that the other will rely on the telecopied signature, and (d)
acknowledges such reliance and waives any defenses to the enforcement of the
documents effecting the transaction contemplated by thi s Agreement based on the fact
that a signature was sent by telecopy.
24. REMEDIES. IF PURCHASER FAILS, AFTER THE REMOVAL OF ITS
CONTINGENCIES, AND WITHOUT LEGAL EXCUSE, TO COMPLETE THE
PURCHASE OF THE PROPERTY, THE DEPOSIT SHALL BE FORFEITED TO CITY
AS LIQUIDATED DAMAGES AND THE SOLE AND EXCLUS IVE REMEDY TO
CITY FOR SUCH FAILURE. IN THE EVENT OF CITY'S DEFAULT, PURCHASER
MAY PU RSUE ANY REMEDY AVAILABLE AT LAW OR IN EQUITY,
INCLUDING SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE.
City's Initial s __ _
25. Entire Agreement. This Agreement and the exhibits hereto constitute the entire
agreement among the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof and supersede all
prior agreements , oral or written , express or implied , and all negotiations or discussions
of the parties, whether oral or written, and there are no warranties, representations or
agreements among the parties in connection with the subject matter hereof except as set
forth herein.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the dates noted
below.
PURCHASER
Purchase and Sale Agreement, C ity of Pasco & Direc t Staffing LLC Becky Ochoa -Page 8
Page 95 of 104
Direct Staffing LLC, Becky Ochoa Date
Dave Zabell, City Manager Date
Attest: Approved as to form:
Sandy Kenworthy , Interim C ity Clerk Leland Kerr, City Attorney
Purchase and Sale Agreement, City of Pasco & Direct Staffing LLC Becky Ochoa -Page 9
Page 96 of 104
STATE OF WASHINGTON)
) ss.
County of Franklin )
On this day personally appeared before me Dave Zabell, City Manager of the City of
Pasco, Washington, to me known to be the indi vidual described in and who executed the within
and foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he signed the same as his free and vo luntary
deed for the uses and purposes therein mentioned.
SUBSCRIBED and sworn to before me this __ day of _______ , 2017.
STATE OF WASHINGTON )
-) ss.
County of Pia ,Jut~<-)
Notary Public in and for the State of Washington,
Residing at---------------
My Commission Expires: ________ _
On this day personally appeared before me Direct Staffing LLC,
Becky Ochoa, to me known to be the individual described in and who
executed the within and foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he
signed the same as his free and voluntary deed for the uses and purposes
therein mentioned.
, 2017.
Purchase and Sale Agreement, C ity of Pasco & Direct Staffing LLC Becky Ochoa -Page I 0
Page 97 of 104
AGENDA REPORT
FOR: City Council February 14, 2017
TO: Dave Zabell, City Manager
Rick White, Director
Community & Economic Development
Regular Meeting: 2/21/17
FROM: Jeff Adams, Associate Planner
Community & Economic Development
SUBJECT: Code Amendment: Mini-Pigs in Residential Zones (MF# CA 2016-005)
I. REFERENCE(S):
Planning Commission Memo
Planning Commission Minutes Dated: 12/21/16 and 1/19/17
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
MOTION: I move the City Council concur with the Planning Commission and
continue to classify all pigs as farm animals in the Pasco Municipal Code.
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
None
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
A City of Pasco resident has requested that the Municipal Code be changed to allow for
the keeping of miniature pigs as pets. Staff has reviewed the issue and offers the
information below for Council's consideration.
On September 26, 2016 the City Council held a workshop where they discussed a code
amendment for the keeping of mini-pigs, and requested the Planning Commission
consider several options related to the issue, as follows:
1. Permit mini-pigs as pets outright;
2. Permit mini-pigs as pets via Special Permit; or
3. Prohibit mini-pigs as pets.
On December 21, 2016 the Planning Commission conducted a workshop on the issue,
Page 98 of 104
and subsequently held a hearing on January 19, 2017 where they recommended the
City Council decline to amend the Pasco Municipal Code regarding the keeping of
mini-pigs.
Council discussed this item at their workshop meeting on February 13, 2017.
V. DISCUSSION:
Mini-pigs are miniature size pigs as recognized and registered by the American Mini
Pig Association (AMPA). Mini-pigs (AKA: Teacup, Micro, Pixie, and Pocket Pig) are
not breeds, but size classifications, often misleading to customers who expect their
“mini-pig” to remain tiny over their lifespan. However, even AMPA-recognized mini-
pigs can grow to over 18 inches in height and weigh in up to 150 lbs.
Both Kennewick and of Richland advised that the issue of mini-pigs should be
addressed carefully for many of the same reasons listed above. Kennewick also noted
that they have received a few requests to have mini-pigs/pot-bellied pigs as pets in the
last 2 years and have denied them all. They continue to be classified as farm animals.
The Animal Control Agency for the Tri-Cities has noted that mini pigs do get large and
can create quite a mess in a yard; they have also indicated that they do not have the
proper facilities to house surrendered/abandoned pigs.
For the reasons noted above, the Planning Commission recommends that the Pasco
Municipal Code not be amended regarding the keeping of mini-pigs.
Page 99 of 104
Page 1 of 2
M E M O R A N D U M
DATE: January 23, 2017
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Jeffrey B. Adams, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: Small-Breed Pigs or Mini Pigs as Pets (MF# CA 2016-005)
A City of Pasco resident has requested that the City Code be changed to allow
for the keeping of mini pigs as pets.
On September 19, 2016 the City Council held a workshop where they
discussed a code amendment for the keeping of mini-pigs, and requested the
Planning Commission consider several options related to the issue, as follows:
a. Permit mini-pigs as pets outright;
b. Permit mini-pigs as pets via Special Permit; or
c. Prohibit mini-pigs as pets.
At a December 21, 2016 Planning Commission workshop meeting the
Commission by consensus indicated it did not want to pursue establishing
mini pigs as pets in the City of Pasco either through the special permit process
or by permitting them outright with conditions.
Findings of Fact
1) In mid-2016 a City resident requested that the City Code be changed to
allow mini pigs as pets.
2) Mini Pigs are a miniature size pig as recognized and registered by the
American Mini Pig Association.
3) Mini Pigs are usually a product of interbreeding Vietnamese potbellied
pigs with several breeds, including Juliana, Gottengin/Guttengin,
African Pygmy, Yucatan Micro, and/or Swedish White.
4) Mini pigs recognized and registered by the American Mini Pig Association
average 12-18 inches in height, and typically weigh in between 50 to 150
lbs.
5) Unspayed mini pig females suffer from "PMS" and strong mood swings;
6) Intact male mini pigs produce a pungent odor in addition to displaying
other unpleasant traits;
7) Neither unsprayed female or intact male mini pigs are desirable pets.
Page 100 of 104
Page 2 of 2
8) The American Mini Pig Association identifies King County, Palouse,
Prosser, Seattle, and Vancouver in the State of Washington as having
adopted provisions for mini pigs.
9) There have been 7 verified pig-related complaints, resulting in 5 Code
Enforcement Board cases between 2008 and 2016.
10) Staff is unaware of other requests for mini pigs in the last several years.
11) Titles 8 (Animal Control; Licensing), 9 (Specific Nuisances), and 25
(Zoning) would need to be amended.
12) Many people purchase mini-pigs thinking they will remain the size of a
toy poodle but abandon them when they become full-sized.
13) Animal Control will not accept surrendered pigs as they do not have the
proper facilities to deal with them.
14) The Planning Commission indicated at its December 21, 2016 workshop
that it did not want to pursue establishing mini pigs as pets in the City of
Pasco either through the special permit process or by permitting them
outright.
15) The Planning Commission felt that prohibiting pigs as pets should be the
recommended course of action for the City to advance the public health
and welfare.
RECOMMENDATION:
MOTION: I move the Planning Commission adopt the findings of fact as
contained in the January 19, 2017 staff memo on Small-Breed Pigs or Mini
Pigs.
MOTION: I move the Planning Commission recommend the City Council
decline to amend the Pasco Municipal Code regarding the keeping of mini pigs.
Page 101 of 104
-1-
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
12/21/16
WORKSHOP:
A. Code Amendment Mini-Pigs in Residential Zones (MF# CA 2016-005)
Chairwoman Roach read the master file number and asked for comments from staff.
Rick White, Community & Economic Development Director, discussed the proposed code
amendment. The City received a request for the municipal code to be amended to allow
mini-pigs to be kept as pets. Currently pigs of any kind are classified as farm animals.
Some research was conducted and mini-pigs while not approaching 1,000 lbs. like a
commercial pig might, they do get to be roughly 50-100 lbs. They are different than a dog
or cat in that they need to be spayed or neutered to be kept as pets. The neighboring
jurisdictions were consulted and they both suggested using caution because most people
that buy mini-pigs think they will stay little forever but they don’t. Many people that buy
mini-pigs end up having a full size pig on their hands and then Animal Control will not
accept surrendered mini-pigs as they do not have the proper facilities. The request was
presented to City Council and they have asked the Planning Commission to consider three
options: (1) Allow them outright with conditions, (2) Allow them through the special permit
process or (3) Prohibit them outright as the City does now. Staff does not recommend
Option 2 (Special Permit process) as that would take up the Planning Commission’s time
with matters that aren’t all that important for the overall public health and welfare of the
community. Staff would suggested the Commission either allow permitting them outright
with conditions or prohibiting them outright, which Staff feels is the logical option.
Commissioner Mendez asked if Staff had any pictures.
Mr. White said no but added staff searched the database for complaints related to pigs
and there have been 7 pig related complaints, not necessarily mini-pigs, but pig related
complaints in general, which are not allowed depending on lot sizes.
Commissioner Polk noticed that in the staff report and wondered if it was people who had
pigs for food use or for pets. She asked if someone were to get a pig right now and it isn’t
in compliance, what would happen to the pig and if Animal Control would have to come
take the pig.
Mr. White replied that Animal Control won’t take the animal because they’re not
contracted to take pigs. The property owners would have to go through the Code
Enforcement Board process.
Commissioner Polk asked if the owner would be required to get rid of the pig.
Mr. White answered that they would have to get rid of it or put it on a parcel that was
large enough to allow farm animals and of the right zoning.
Commissioner Bykonen noted that the staff report identified King County, Palouse,
Prosser, Seattle and Vancouver as allowing pigs. She asked if staff had spoken to staff at
Page 102 of 104
-2-
any of those locations.
Mr. White said no, but there were copies of ordinances that allow it, however, staff was not
contacted.
Commissioner Bykonen was interested in knowing how it works in cities that currently
allow pigs.
Mr. White replied that his impression was that they don’t get a high degree of attention
from municipalities because it is a fairly small portion of their overall workload.
The Commissioners discussed the options. The Commissioners voted 5 to 2 of being in
favor of Option 3 (Outright prohibiting mini-pigs in residential zones), with Commissioner
Greenaway and Commissioner Polk in favor of Option 1 (Outright allowing mini-pigs in
residential zones). There were no Commissioners in favor of Option 2 (Special Permit
Process).
With no further discussion or business, the Planning Commission was adjourned at
8:17 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
David McDonald, City Planner
Page 103 of 104
-1-
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
1/19/17
C. Code Amendment Mini-Pigs in Residential Zones (MF# CA 2016-005)
Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff.
Rick White, Community & Economic Development Director, discussed the proposed code
amendment for mini-pigs in residential zones. The Planning Commission heard this item
at a previous workshop meeting prior to recommending it to City Council. It was brought
to City Council for discussion prior to coming back to the Planning Commission for a
hearing.
Chairman Cruz briefly discussed the different options for the code amendment; (1)
Allowing mini-pigs in residential zones outright, (2) Allowing mini-pigs in residential zones
through the special permit process or (3) Banning mini-pigs in residential zones outright.
With no further comments the public hearing closed.
Commissioner Mendez moved, seconded by Commissioner Portugal, the Planning
Commission adopt the findings of fact as contained in the January 19, 2017 staff memo
on Small-Breed Pigs or Mini-Pigs. The motion passed 4 to 1 with Commissioner
Greenaway dissenting.
Commissioner Mendez moved, seconded by Commissioner Portugal, recommend the City
Council decline amending the Pasco Municipal Code regarding the keeping of mini-pigs.
The motion passed 4 to 1 with Commissioner Greenaway dissenting.
With no further discussion or business, the Planning Commission was adjourned at
7:27 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
David McDonald, City Planner
Page 104 of 104