Loading...
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