HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017.05.01 Council Meeting PacketRegular Meeting
AGENDA
PASCO CITY COUNCIL
7:00 p.m.
May 1, 2017
Page
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.
6 - 9 (a) Approval of Minutes
To approve the Minutes of the Pasco City Council Meeting dated April 17,
2017.
10 - 11 (b) Bills and Communications
To approve claims in the total amount of $2,624,085.47 ($1,050,104.94 in
Check Nos. 215604-215857; $813,994.28 in Electronic Transfer Nos.
814940-815117, 815120-815156, 815158-815383; $41,512.84 in Check
Nos. 50331-50372; $716,473.41 in Electronic Transfer Nos. 30106275-
30106770; $2,000.00 in Electronic Transfer No. 358.)
12 (c) Planning Commission Appointments
To appoint Joe Campos to Position No. 2 (term expiration date 2/2/22), and
Ruben Alvarado to fill Position No. 6 (term expiration date 2/2/19) to the
Planning Commission.
13 - 17 (d) City and Port Interlocal Agreement
Toapprove the Interlocal Agreement with the Port of Pasco for economic
development services, and further, authorize the City Manager to execute the
Agreement.
18 - 23 (e) HOME Consortium Agreement Amendment 2 (MF# AGRMT2017-008)
To approve Amendment 2 to the Tri-Cities HOME Consortium Cooperative
Page 1 of 175
Regular Meeting May 1, 2017
Agreement and further authorize the City Manager to execute the revised
agreement.
24 - 27 (f) Interlocal Procurement Agreement
To approve Resolution No. 3766, approving the Interlocal Agreement with
the City of Tacoma, and further, authorize the City Manager to execute the
Agreement.
(RC) MOTION: I move to approve the Consent Agenda as read.
4. PROCLAMATIONS AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS:
28 (a) Presentation of Proclamation for "Cinco de Mayo ~ Latino Cultural
Awareness Week"
Council to present Proclamation to Luke Hallowell, DPDA Executive
Director and Gabriel Portugal, DPDA Cinco de Mayo Committee Chair.
29 (b) Presentation of Proclamation for "Public Service Recognition Week"
Council to present Proclamation to Matt McGetrick, Tri-City Public Service
Recognition Week Planning Committee Chair.
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
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:
30 - 40 (a) Q Street Vacation: A Portion of Commercial Ave. (MF# VAC 2017-002)
CONTINUE PUBLIC HEARING:
MOTION to Accept Deed: I move to accept the deed from TSK LLC for
Page 2 of 175
Regular Meeting May 1, 2017
the PK Highway lift station property.
MOTION for Vacation: I move to adopt Ordinance No. 4345, vacating a
portion of Commercial Avenue and, further, authorize publication by
summary only.
8. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS NOT RELATING TO HEARINGS:
41 - 50 (a) Council Voting Districts
MOTION: I move to adopt Ordinance No. 4346, amending Chapter 1.10 of
the Pasco Municipal Code regarding Voting Districts and, further, authorize
publication by summary only.
51 - 58 (b) PMC Amendment Regarding Revocation of Business License
MOTION: I move to adopt Ordinance No. 4347, amending PMC 2.19.080
"Powers" of the Hearing Examiner; amending PMC 5.04.110 "Revocation of
License" providing for an appeal hearing before the Hearing Examiner;
amending PMC 5.04.115 "Reinstatement Procedures and Standards for
Reviewing an Application for Reinstatement" (and Business License); and
amending PMC 11.02.010 "Applicability of Chapter" and, further, authorize
publication by summary only.
59 - 85 (c) Q* Rezone: Loyalty Inn, C-1 (Retail Business) to C-3 (General Business)
(MF# Z 2016-005)
MOTION: I move to adopt Ordinance No. 4348, rezoning Lots 2 and 3
Short Plat 2010-08 from C-1 (Retail Business) to C-3 (Retail Business), and
further, authorize publication by summary only.
86 - 109 (d) Q* Special Permit: Shop Height Variance (MF# SP 2017-005)
MOTION: I move to approve Resolution No. 3767, accepting the
Planning Commission's recommendation and granting a special permit for an
increase in shop height at 1125 Road 44.
110 - 142 (e) Q* Special Permit: Maria Segura Beauty School (MF# SP 2017-004)
MOTION: I move to approve Resolution No. 3768, approving a special
permit for the location of a beauty school in a C-3 Zoning district at 2508 W
Sylvester Street, Suite E, as recommended by the Planning Commission.
143 - 171 (f) Q* Preliminary Plat: Chiawana Heights (MF# PP 2017-002)
MOTION: I move to approve Resolution No. 3769, approving the
Preliminary Plat for Chiawana Heights.
Page 3 of 175
Regular Meeting May 1, 2017
9. UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
10. NEW BUSINESS:
172 - 175 (a) Bid Award: Traffic Signal Improvements - City Wide Phase 1
(RC) MOTION: I move to award the Traffic Signal Improvements - City
Wide Phase 1 project to Sierra Electric, Inc. in the amount of $1,399,982.00
and, further, authorize the City Manager to execute the contract documents.
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:
1. 4:00 p.m., Monday, May 1, Ben-Franklin Transit Office – Hanford Area Economic
Investment Fund Committee Meeting. (COUNCILMEMBER AL YENNEY, Rep.;
SAUL MARTINEZ, Alt.)
2. 5:00 p.m., Tuesday, May 2, TRAC – TRAC Advisory Board Meeting.
(COUNCILMEMBER CHI FLORES and COUNCILMEMBER AL YENNEY)
3. 12:00 p.m., Wednesday, May 3, 2601 N. Capitol Avenue – Franklin County Mosquito
Control District Meeting. (COUNCILMEMBER BOB HOFFMANN, Rep.; AL
YENNEY, Alt.)
4. 5:30 p.m., Thursday, May 4, P&R Classroom – Parks & Recreation Advisory Board
Meeting. (COUNCILMEMBER SAUL MARTINEZ, Rep.; CHI FLORES, Alt.)
5. 7:30 p.m., Friday, May 5, Downtown Pasco – Cinco de Mayo Parade.
(COUNCILMEMBERS REBECCA FRANCIK, BOB HOFFMANN, SAUL
MARTINEZ and AL YENNEY)
This meeting is broadcast live on PSC-TV Channel 191 on Charter Cable and streamed
at www.pasco-wa.gov/psctvlive.
Page 4 of 175
Regular Meeting May 1, 2017
Audio equipment available for the hearing impaired; contact the Clerk for assistance.
Page 5 of 175
AGENDA REPORT
FOR: City Council April 20, 2017
TO: Dave Zabell, City Manager Regular Meeting: 5/1/17
FROM: Rick Terway, Director
Administrative & Community Services
SUBJECT: Approval of Minutes
I. REFERENCE(S):
Minutes 04.17.17
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
To approve the Minutes of the Pasco City Council Meeting dated April 17, 2017.
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
V. DISCUSSION:
Page 6 of 175
REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
PASCO CITY COUNCIL APRIL 17, 2017
CALL TO ORDER:
The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Rebecca Francik, Mayor Pro-
tem.
ROLL CALL:
Councilmembers present: Chi Flores, Rebecca Francik, Robert Hoffmann, Tom
Larsen, Saul Martinez and Al Yenney. Excused: Matt Watkins.
Staff present: Dave Zabell, City Manager; Stan Strebel, Deputy City Manager;
Leland Kerr, City Attorney; Richard Terway, Interim Public Works Director;
Rick White, Community & Economic Development Director; Richa Sigdel,
Finance Director; Bob Metzger, Police Chief; Bob Gear, Fire Chief; Dan Dotta,
Acting Administrative & Community Services Director; Dan Ford, City
Engineer and Michael Morales, Economic Development Program Manager.
The meeting was opened with the Pledge of Allegiance.
CONSENT AGENDA:
Approval of Minutes
To approve the Minutes of the Pasco City Council Meeting dated April 3, 2017
and the Special Meeting dated April 10, 2017
Bills and Communications
To approve claims in the total amount of $1,880,741.84 ($1,331,576.47 in
Check Nos. 215421-215603; $549,165.37 in Electronic Transfer Nos. 814934-
814939, 815118-815119, 815157); $38,235.88 in Check Nos. 50299-50330;
$677,522.81 in Electronic Transfer Nos. -30105780-30106274; $6,296.05 in
Electronic Transfer No. 351-357.
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
$182,054.35 and, of that amount, authorize $84,265.12 be turned over for
collection.
Appointments to Code Enforcement Board
To appoint Thomas Granbois to Position No. 1, and reappoint Daniel
Gottschalk to Position No. 2 (both with the expiration date of 1/1/21) to the
Code Enforcement Board.
Final Plat: Sunrise Estates, Phase 2 (MF# FP 2017-003)
To approve the Final Plat for Sunrise Estates, Phase 2.
MOTION: Mr. Martinez moved to approve the Consent Agenda as read. Mr.
Yenney seconded. Motion carried by unanimous Roll Call vote.
REPORTS FROM COMMITTEES AND/OR OFFICERS:
Mr. Martinez reported on the Park & Recreation Advisory Board meeting.
Page 1 of 3 Page 7 of 175
REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
PASCO CITY COUNCIL APRIL 17, 2017
Mr. Hoffmann attended the Franklin County Mosquito Control District meeting
and the Good Roads & Transportation Association and BFCG Tri-Mats Policy
Advisory Committee meeting.
Mr. Yenney welcomed the new Code Enforcement Board member, Thomas
Granbois.
Mr. Larsen attended the Emergency Medical Services Board meeting.
HEARINGS AND COUNCIL ACTION ON ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS
RELATING THERETO:
Street Vacation: A Portion of Commercial Ave. (MF# VAC 2017-002)
Mr. White explained the details of the proposed vacation.
Mayor Pro-tem Francik declared the Public Hearing open to consider the
proposed vacation.
MOTION: Mr. Martinez moved to continue the public hearing on the proposed
Commercial Avenue vacation to May 1, 2017. Mr. Yenney seconded. Motion
carried unanimously.
Street Vacation: A Portion of Road 72 (MF# VAC 2017-001)
Mr. White explained the details of the proposed vacation.
Mayor Pro-tem Francik declared the Public Hearing open to consider the
proposed vacation.
Richards Rogers, representing the property owners, spoke in favor of the
vacation.
Following three calls for comments, Mayor Pro-tem Francik declared the Public
Hearing closed.
MOTION: Mr. Martinez moved to adopt Ordinance No. 4343, vacating a
portion of Road 72, and further, authorize publication by summary only. Mr.
Yenney seconded. Motion carried unanimously.
ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS NOT RELATING TO HEARINGS:
Amending PMC 3.200.120 “Lien for Utility Charges/Release of Lien”
Ms. Sigdel explained the details of the proposed ordinance.
MOTION: Mr. Martinez moved to adopt Ordinance No. 4344, amending
PMC 3.200.120 “Lien for Utility Charges/Release of Lien”, and further,
authorize publication by summary only. Mr. Yenney seconded. Motion carried
unanimously.
NEW BUSINESS:
Professional Services Agreement for the Alternatives Analysis for the
Kahlotus Highway Sewer Force Main (Dietrich Lift Station) Project
MOTION: Mr. Martinez moved to approve the Professional Services
Agreement with BergerABAM, Inc., for the Alternatives Analysis for the
Kahlotus Highway Sewer Force Main (Dietrich Lift Station) Project and,
further, authorize the City Manager to execute the agreement. Mr. Yenney
seconded. Motion carried unanimously.
Page 2 of 3 Page 8 of 175
REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
PASCO CITY COUNCIL APRIL 17, 2017
Professional Services Agreement for the Construction Management and
Inspection Services for the Columbia Water Supply Project
Council and staff discussed the details of the proposed project.
MOTION: Mr. Martinez moved to approve the Professional Services
Agreement with Gray & Osborne, Inc., for the Construction Management and
Inspection Services for the Columbia Water Supply Project and, further,
authorize the City Manager to execute the agreement. Mr. Yenney seconded.
Motion carried unanimously.
Bid Award: Reroof City Buildings
MOTION: Mr. Martinez moved to award the City Buildings Reroof project to
Elite Construction and Development LLC in the amount of $243,371.62 and,
further, authorize the City Manager to execute the contract documents. Mr.
Yenney seconded. Motion carried by unanimous Roll Call vote.
Reject Bids - Fire Station 84 Remodel
Council and staff discussed the details of the bids.
MOTION: Mr. Martinez moved to reject the bids received for the Fire Station
84 Remodel project in as much as the bids received exceeded the Engineer's
Estimate and approved project budget. Mr. Yenney seconded. Motion carried
unanimously.
MISCELLANEOUS DISCUSSION:
Mr. Zabell updated Council on the continuing discussions with Mobilitie
regarding their franchise application, the planned Disc Golf Course on Road 36,
the 22nd Annual Pasco Jaycees Easter Egg Hunt and the upcoming 4th of July
Events. He also noted the sewer main construction at Broadmoor Blvd. and
Dent Road is underway with parts of the Broadmoor Blvd. closed until June 17.
Ms. Francik thanked Mr. Dotta for his response to a citizen's inquiry about the
possibility of a dog park in Pasco.
Mr. Martinez thanked Police Officers for their good work and noted the 4th of
July Fireworks show will be a longer, brighter show than in the past.
ADJOURNMENT:
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 7:36 p.m.
APPROVED: ATTEST:
Matt Watkins, Mayor Sandy Kenworthy, Interim City Clerk
PASSED and APPROVED this 1st day of May, 2017
Page 3 of 3 Page 9 of 175
AGENDA REPORT
FOR: City Council April 26, 2017
TO: Dave Zabell, City Manager Regular Meeting: 5/1/17
FROM: Richa Sigdel, Director
Finance
SUBJECT: Bills and Communications
I. REFERENCE(S):
Accounts Payable 05.01.17
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
To approve claims in the total amount of $2,624,085.47 ($1,050,104.94 in Check Nos.
215604-215857; $813,994.28 in Electronic Transfer Nos. 814940-815117, 815120-
815156, 815158-815383; $41,512.84 in Check Nos. 50331-50372; $716,473.41 in
Electronic Transfer Nos. 30106275-30106770; $2,000.00 in Electronic Transfer No.
358.)
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
V. DISCUSSION:
Page 10 of 175
May 1, 2017
Claims Bank Payroll Bank Gen'l Bank Electronic Bank Combined
Check Numbers 215604-215857 50331-50372
Total Check Amount $1,050,104.94 $41,512.84 Total Checks 1,091,617.78$
Electronic Transfer Numbers 814940-815117 30106275-30106770 358 N/A
815120-815156
815158-815383
Total EFT Amount $813,994.28 $716,473.41 $2,000.00 $0.00 Total EFTs 1,532,467.69$
Grand Total 2,624,085.47$
Councilmember
424,722.31
6,189.95
0.00
0.00
237.53
10,000.00
0.00
835.99
34,384.98
3,109.86
1,755.71
79,223.14
3,880.80
2,084.33
0.00
599.27
20,642.63
752.75
789.28
18,045.00
0.00
63,352.53
0.00
0.00
288,870.80
280,524.05
13,083.39
17,826.15
0.00
21,126.93
234,599.33
8,070.00
8,860.23
1,080,518.53
GRAND TOTAL ALL FUNDS:2,624,085.47$
EQUIPMENT RENTAL - REPLACEMENT GOVERNMENTAL
EQUIPMENT RENTAL - REPLACEMENT BUSINESS
MEDICAL/DENTAL INSURANCE
FLEX
PAYROLL CLEARING
OLD FIRE OPEB
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
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
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
1st day of May, 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
The City Council
C I T Y O F P A S C O
Council Meeting of:
Accounts Payable Approved
Page 11 of 175
AGENDA REPORT
FOR: City Council April 27, 2017
TO: Dave Zabell, City Manager Regular Meeting: 5/1/17
FROM: Stan Strebel, Deputy City Manager
Executive
SUBJECT: Planning Commission Appointments
I. REFERENCE(S):
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
MOTION: I move to appoint Joe Campos to Position No. 2 (term expiration date
2/2/22), and Ruben Alvarado to fill Position No. 6 (term expiration date 2/2/19) to the
Planning Commission.
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
The Planning Commission is composed of nine members; terms are for six years. The
Commission meets on the third Thursday of each month at 7:00 pm.
The Planning Commission conducts workshop meetings and public hearings on land-
use policy and development proposals and issues recommendations for the City
Council.
V. DISCUSSION:
Interviews were conducted at the Workshop meeting of April 24.
Mayor Watkins requests Council's concurrence in his appointment of Joe Campos and
Ruben Alvarado to the Planning Commission.
Page 12 of 175
AGENDA REPORT
FOR: City Council April 25, 2017
TO: Dave Zabell, City Manager Regular Meeting: 5/1/17
FROM: Rick White, Director
Community & Economic Development
SUBJECT: Interlocal Agreement for Economic Development Services
I. REFERENCE(S):
Interlocal Agreement
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
MOTION: I move to approve the Interlocal Agreement with the Port of Pasco for
economic development services, and further, authorize the City Manager to execute the
Agreement.
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
Fund 194 - Economic Development Fund
Estimated $20,000 - $30,000 annually (per adopted budget)
Reimbursement to the Port of Pasco per the terms of the proposed interlocal agreement
for Port staff time and expenses utilized on the City's behalf.
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
Both the City and the Port have the authority to engage in economic development
activities through State law and the City and the Port share similar economic
development goals. The Port has existing and seasoned staff with considerable
economic development expertise while the City is temporarily filling an economic
development position approved by Council in the 2017 budget.
The City and Port entered into a partnership in March of 2016 through an Interlocal
Agreement whereby Port Staff provided specific economic development services,
marketing and creation of specific economic development products. Through this
Agreement, the City and Port have cost-shared attendance at various trade shows and
commercial expositions and cooperated in preparation and execution of economic
Page 13 of 175
development activities, all of which has been beneficial not just for the residents of
Pasco but also for the greater Pasco community.
The interlocal agreement established the parameters for oversight of this effort and the
reimbursement amount to the Port for the staff services (flat fee of $96 per hour). C osts
for this cooperative economic development effort in 2016 was very economical at
$19,100.
City Council discussed the Interlocal Agreement at the Council Workshop Meeting of
April 24, 2017.
V. DISCUSSION:
The aforementioned agreement expired at the end of 2016. The term of the initial
agreement was short in duration to provide an opportunity for evaluation of the
program to determine success in terms of value and cost.
Said evaluation reveals that continued use of the Interlocal Agreement for shared staff
to accomplish specific activities for economic development has proved to be a cost
effective way to maintain momentum, increase the effectiveness of recruitment efforts,
interact with TRIDEC and the State in pursuing leads on facility location and develop
timely and effective marketing materials.
Given the positive result and value from this partnership, staff recommends continuing
the Agreement with the Port indefinitely subject to termination by eit her party, with the
amount reviewed annually as part of the budget process.
Page 14 of 175
INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT
between
the City of Pasco and the Port of Pasco
for
the Promotion of Economic Development in Pasco
This INTERLOCAL COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT (“Agreement”) is entered into pursuant to
RCW 39.34, as of this _____day of _____________, 2017, by the City of Pasco, a municipal
corporation of the State of Washington, hereinafter the “City”, and Port of Pasco, a public
body corporate of the State of Washington, hereinafter “Port”, collectively referred to in this
Agreement hereafter as the “Parties”.
WHEREAS; The City has authority to engage in economic development per RCW
35.21.703; and
WHEREAS; The City contains a division of operations in the Community and Economic
Development Department that operates programs and efforts to promote economic
development and expansion of the tax base within the City. Currently this division is not
staffed with personnel exclusively devoting time and effort towards economic development;
and
WHEREAS; the City 2016 Budget has an approved funding amount of $60,000 to engage
in economic development; and
WHEREAS; The Port has authority to engage in economic development per RCW
53.08.245; and
WHEREAS; The Port's mission is to develop the economy of the Port District in a manner
that creates sustainable jobs and a healthy tax base and the Port has dedicated staff to
promote that mission; and
WHEREAS; Both the Port and the City share similar economic development goals and are
pursuing similar activities to promote economic development; and
WHEREAS; The City and the Port desire to better achieve these goals and objectives by
leveraging resources and staff to maximize the results of economic development efforts;
NOW THEREFORE; The City and Port agree to the following:
1.The City may request the assistance of Port staff with the following economic
development tasks on an “as needed” basis:
Page 15 of 175
Business Retention & Expansion, including but not limited to:
Meet with major employers in Pasco
Workforce/talent development
Industrial and Retail Recruitment efforts
Recruitment efforts, including but not limited to:
Retail Recruitment and development of marketing materials
Industrial Recruitment and development of marketing materials
Food Processing and Manufacturing Recruitment
Project Development
TRIDEC and interaction/response with State generated leads
Attendance/assistance with trade shows, expositions and similar marketing events
2.The City agrees to reimburse the Port at an hourly flat rate of $96.00 for this staff
assistance. This rate includes all associated staff costs including benefits and
overhead. The Port shall invoice the City on a monthly basis.
3.Costs for materials, professional assistance outside that of Port staff and specific
travel costs (pre-approved) will be the responsibility of the City.
4.Work performed per this Interlocal Agreement shall be approved by the Community
and Economic Development Director.
5.Either the City or the Port may terminate this Interlocal Agreement with 30 days
notice to other party. Notice to the City shall be directed to the Pasco City Manager
and notice to the Port shall be directed to the Port Executive Director. In the event
the Interlocal Agreement is terminated, neither the City nor the Port will pursue an
action to recover costs incurred by either party, with exception that costs necessary
for services approved by the City and incurred by the Port prior to the termination
will be reimbursed per the terms of this Interlocal Agreement.
6.Term of Agreement and Termination. This Agreement is effective upon the
signature of all Parties and terminates upon notice as described by Section 5 above.
7.The records and documents associated with all matters covered by this Agreement
shall be jointly owned by the City and the Port and all non-privileged records and
documents shall be subject to inspection by any Party during the term of this
Agreement.
8.No Separate Legal Entity. No new, separate administrative or legal entity is to be
established in association with this Agreement nor to conduct the cooperative
Page 16 of 175
undertaking described herein. The Community and Economic Development Director
of the City and the Director of Economic Development of the Port shall be joint
administrators of this cooperative undertaking.
9.Severability. In the event that any term or condition of this Agreement or
application thereof to any person, entity, or circumstance is held invalid; such
invalidity shall not affect any other terms, conditions, or applications of this
Agreement which can be given effect without the invalid term, condition, or
application. To this end, the terms and conditions of this Agreement are declared
severable.
10.Recording. This Agreement shall be filed with the Franklin County Auditor or posted
on each Parties web site.
In Witness Whereof, the Parties have signed this Agreement as of the day and year
written below.
PORT OF PASCO CITY OF PASCO
______________________________________________________
By: Randy Hayden By: Dave Zabell
Its: Executive Director Its: City Manager
Date: __________________Date: ________________________
APPROVED AS TO FORM:APPROVED AS TO FORM:
______________________________________________
Page 17 of 175
AGENDA REPORT
FOR: City Council April 24, 2017
TO: Dave Zabell, City Manager
Rick White, Community & Economic
Development Director
Regular Meeting: 5/1/17
FROM: Angie Pitman, Urban Development
Coordinator
Community & Economic Development
SUBJECT: HOME Consortium Agreement Amendment 2 (MF# AGRMT2017-008)
I. REFERENCE(S):
Proposed Resolution
HOME Consortium Cooperative Agreement of the Tri-Cities HOME Consortium
Program Years 2017-2019
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Motion: I move to approve Amendment 2 to the Tri-Cities HOME Consortium
Cooperative Agreement and further authorize the City Manager to execute the revised
agreement.
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
None
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
Pasco entered into a HOME consortium agreement with Richland and Kennewick in
1995, making the City eligible for federal HOME funds. The populations of the
individual cities alone do not meet the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) minimum. By joining together in a consortium, funds are
available to the three cities.
In 2014, the HOME Consortium limited activities to down payment assistance only.
This resulted in timeliness issues for Kennewick and Richland. Both have requested
that development and construction of affordable housing be returned to the list of
eligible activities for consortium funds.
Page 18 of 175
V. DISCUSSION:
This amendment restores development and construction of affordable housing for
timely expenditure of funds. The City of Richland, as lead entity, will be responsible
for carrying out construction projects.
The revision provides that HOME funds will include development and construction of
affordable housing as follows:
"iv. When one or more Members has $100,000 or more in unspent uncommitted
down payment assistance funds and/or returned program income, said funds may be
used for the development and construction of affordable housing. Members will work
together to identify potential Public Housing Authority (PHA), acting as sponsor,
owner or developer of rental development projects. Projects will be reviewed and
selected based on developer financial capacity, experience, project feasibility,
readiness to proceed and community impact. Members will aim to rotate City location
of projects when possible and/or INFILL Homebuyer development with Member
majority rules for the project location. After Members identify affordable housing
project(s), Lead Entity will act as project manager, perform required administrative
duties to assess, approve, and fund projects."
The proposed resolution provides for the City Manager to execute a revised
cooperative agreement for the consortium members upon Council's approval. This item
was discussed at the April 24, 2017 workshop.
Page 19 of 175
RESOLUTION NO. __________
A RESOLUTION APPROVING AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO THE HOME
COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT FOR TRI-CITIES HOME CONSORTIUM OF
KENNEWICK, PASCO, AND RICHLAND UNDER THE NATIONAL AFFORDABLE
HOUSING ACT
WHEREAS, the Cities of Kennewick, Pasco and Richland entered into a cooperative
agreement to form a consortium to increase the local supply of decent affordable housing to low
income residents as authorized by Public Law 101-625, the National Affordable Housing Act of
1990 (NAHA); and
WHEREAS, the members of the Consortium desire to amend the cooperative agreement
to reverse changes previously agreed upon to limit activities to down payment assistance and
restore development and construction of affordable housing activities, and
WHEREAS, the Term of the Cooperative Agreement, limits exposure to the members of
the consortium to the length of time necessary to carry out all the activities that will be funded
from funds awarded for three federal fiscal years 2017, 2018, 2019; NOW THEREORE,
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO:
That the City Council approves Amendment No. 2 to the HOME Consortium
Cooperative Agreement with the Cities of Kennewick and Richland and authorizes the City
Manager to execute the agreement.
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco this _______ day of May, 2017.
_____________________________
Matt Watkins
Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
Sandy Kenworthy
Interim City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
___________________________
Leland B. Kerr
City Attorney
Page 20 of 175
After recording please return to:
City of Richland, Housing and Redevelopment
Attn: Michelle Burden
505 Swift Blvd., MS-19
Richland, WA 99352
AMENDMENT #2 TO
COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT
THE TRI-CITIES HOME CONSORTIUM
FORMED UNDER THE
NATIONAL AFFORDABLE HOUSING ACT
PROGRAM YEAR 2014-2015-2016
AS EXTENDED 2017-2018-2019
This Second Amendment to the above-referenced Agreement (“Original Agreement”) is
entered into between the Cities of Kennewick, Pasco, and Richland, municipal corporations of
the State of Washington (Members), for the purpose of amending the Cooperative Agreement of
the Tri-Cities HOME Consortium, which was originally formed in 1996 under the HOME
Investments Partnership (HOME) Program. This Second Amendment will become effective
upon adoption by the parties and approval by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD).
NOW THEREFORE, in exchange for good and valuable consideration, the receipt and
sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties hereby agree that Section 4. d. of the
Tri-Cities Home Consortium Cooperative Agreement for Program Year 2014-2015-2016 as
extended for 2017-2018-2019 is replaced in its entirety with the following:
SECTION 4: PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION
d. Allocation of HOME Funds. HOME funds will be allocated between the Members in the
following manner:
i.Ten percent (10%) of the overall allocation, or a higher amount if allowed by the
HOME program, will remain with the Lead Entity for administrative costs.
ii.Fifteen percent (15%) of the overall allocation will remain with the Lead Entity to be
utilized for CHDO Set-Aside activities. CHDO projects will be identified by Members
on a rotating basis, as described in Section 4.f. below.
iii.The remaining balance of the overall allocation shall be invested in down payment
assistance. These funds shall be divided equally among Members. Each member is
entitled to plan for the expenditures of funds in an amount equal to their share of the
HOME grant award, as is determined during each fiscal year of this agreement and
identified in the Annual Action Plan. If desired and applicable, the Cities of
Kennewick and Pasco may serve as Subrecipient Administrators to the Lead Entity
to oversee investment of their respective portion of HOME funds in down payment
assistance.
iv.When one or more Members has $100,000 or more in unspent uncommitted down
payment assistance funds and/or returned program income, said funds may be used
Page 21 of 175
for the development and construction of affordable housing. Members will work
together to identify potential Public Housing Authority (PHA), acting as sponsor,
owner or developer of rental development projects. Projects will be reviewed and
selected based on developer financial capacity, experience, project feasibility,
readiness to proceed and community impact. Members will aim to rotate City location
of projects when possible and/or INFILL Homebuyer development with Member
majority rules for the project location. After Members identify affordable housing
project(s), Lead Entity will act as project manager, perform required administrative
duties to assess, approve, and fund projects.
Except as expressly amended and modified by this Second Amendment, the Original
Agreement, as amended by the First Amendment dated March 2, 2015, is and shall continue to
be in full force and effect in accordance with the terms thereof.
This Amendment shall be construed in accordance and governed by the laws of the state of
Washington.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Second Amendment on the
date provided next to the last-signing party.
SECOND AMENDMENT - COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT
THE TRI-CITIES HOME CONSORTIUM
_________________________________________________
Marie E. Mosley, City Kennewick Date
City of Kennewick
_________________________________________________
Dave Zabell, City Manager Date
City of Pasco
_________________________________________________
Cynthia D. Reents, City Manager Date
City of Richland
APPROVED AS TO FORM BY LEGAL COUNSEL:
Heather Kintzley, City Attorney Lisa Beaton, City Attorney
City of Richland City of Kennewick
Page 22 of 175
Lee B. Kerr, City Attorney
City of Pasco
Page 23 of 175
AGENDA REPORT
FOR: City Council April 26, 2017
TO: Dave Zabell, City Manager Regular Meeting: 5/1/17
FROM: Richa Sigdel, Finance Director
Finance
SUBJECT: Interlocal Procurement Agreement
I. REFERENCE(S):
Proposed Resolution
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
MOTION: I move to approve Resolution No. _____, approving the Interlocal
Agreement with the City of Tacoma, and further, authorize the City Manager to
execute the Agreement.
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
None
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
Under Chapter 39.34 RCW, local government agencies may make purchases using
another agency’s purchasing contract. This cooperation among agencies saves time and
maximizes savings through better pricing and terms.
V. DISCUSSION:
The Council has appropriated $101,900 for the Fire Department to purchase Mobile
Data Terminals (MDT) in 2017, to be used in emergency vehicles to communicate with
a central dispatch office. The interlocal agreement will allow the City to save
approximately 5% to 8% on all computers, and 35% to 40% on all hardware. The City
Attorney has reviewed the arrangement and believes it meets purchasing requirements
of state law. To maximize savings, staff is requesting that Council approve the
interlocal agreement.
Page 24 of 175
RESOULTION NO.__________
A RESOLUTION of the City of Pasco, Washington,
authorizing the City Manager to execute an Interlocal
Procurement Agreement with the City of Tacoma, Washington.
WHEREAS, the City of Pasco, Washington, and the City of Tacoma, Washington, each
possess the power to procure goods and services; and
WHEREAS, the City of Pasco and the City of Tacoma desire to enter into an Interlocal
Procurement Agreement to make the most efficient use of their powers; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Pasco has after due consideration,
determined that it is in the best interest of the City of Pasco to enter into an lnterlocal
Procurement Agreement with the City of Tacoma; NOW, THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON, DO
RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The City Council of the City of Pasco approves the terms and conditions of the
Interlocal Procurement Agreement between the City of Pasco and the City of Tacoma,
Washington, as attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit A.
Section 2. The City Manager of the City Pasco, Washington, is hereby authorized,
empowered, and directed to execute said Agreement on behalf of the City of Pasco.
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco, Washington, and approved as
provided by law this _____ day of __________________, 2017.
__________________________________
Matt Watkins, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
___________________________________ ___________________________________
Sandy Kenworth y, Interim City Clerk Leland B. Kerr, City Attorney
Page 25 of 175
INTERLOCAL JOINT PURCHASING AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT is between the CITY OF TACOMA, a political subdivision of the State of
Washington, and the CITY OF PASCO, a political subdivision under the laws of the State of Washington.
W I T N E S S E T H:
WHEREAS, the Interlocal Cooperation Act, as amended, and codified in Chapter 39.34 of the
Revised Code of Washington provided for interlocal cooperation between governmental agencies; and
WHEREAS, Chapter 39.33 of the Revised Code of Washington provides for intergovernmental
disposition of property; and
WHEREAS, the parties desire to utilize each other's procurement agreements when it is in their
mutual interest; --
NOW, THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows:
1.PURPOSE: The purpose of this agreement is to acknowledge the parties' mutual interest to jointly
bid the acquisition of goods and services where such mutual effort can be planned in advance and to
authorize the acquisition of goods and services and the purchase or acquisition of goods and services
under contracts where a price is extended by either party's bidder to other governmental agencies.
2.ADMINISTRATION: No new or separate legal or administrative entity is created to administer the
provisions of this agreement.
3.SCOPE: This agreement shall allow the following activities:
A.Purchase or acquisition of goods and services by each party acting as agent for either or both
parties when agreed to in advance, in writing;
B.Purchase or acquisition of goods and services by each party where provision has been provided
in contracts for other governmental agencies to avail themselves of goods and services offered
under the contract and/or where either party's bidder is willing to extend prices to other
governmental agencies.
4.DURATION AGREEMENT - TERMINATION: This agreement shall remain in force until canceled by
either party in writing.
5.RIGHT TO CONTRACT INDEPENDENT ACTION PRESERVED: Each party reserves the right to
contract independently for the acquisition of goods or services without notice to the other party and
shall not bind or otherwise obligate the other party to participate in the activity.
6.COMPLIANCE WITH LEGAL REQUIREMENT: Each party accepts responsibility for compliance with
federal, state or local laws and regulations including, in particular, bidding requirements applicable to
its acquisition of goods and services.
7.FINANCING: The method of financing of payment shall be through budgeted funds or other available
funds of the party for whose use the property is actually acquired or disposed. Each party accepts no
responsibility for the payment of the acquisition price of any goods or services intended for use by the
other party.
8.FILING: Executed copies of this agreement shall be filed as required by Section 39.34.040 of the
Revised Code of Washington prior to this agreement becoming effective.
1
Interlocal Agreement
Page 26 of 175
9. INTERLOCAL COOPERATION DISCLOSURE: Each party may insert in its solicitations for goods a
provision disclosing that other authorized governmental agencies may also wish to procure the goods
being offered to the party and allowing the bidder the option of extending its bid to other agencies at
the same bid price, terms and conditions.
10. NON-DELEGATION/NON-ASSIGNMENT: Neither party may delegate the performance of any
contractual obligation, to a third party, unless mutually agreed in writing. Neither party may assign
this agreement without the written consent of the other party.
11. HOLD-HARMLESS: Each government party purchasing using a contract let by another government
party shall be solely responsible for negligent or wrongful acts arising out of or related to its use of the
contract, and shall defend and indemnify the party which awarded the original contract from any
claim, cost or expense, including reasonable attorney's fees, arising there from, except that the party
which awarded the original contract shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless other government
parties using the contract from any claim, cost or expense, including attorney's fees, caused by or
related to the originally awarding party's erroneous representation to the using party that the original
award of the contract complied with the requirements of RCW 39.34.030(5)(b) as now or hereafter
amended.
12. SEVERABILITY: Any provision of this agreement, which is prohibited or unenforceable, shall be
ineffective to the extent of such prohibition or unenforceability, without invalidating the remaining
provisions or affecting the validity or enforcement of such provisions.
APPROVED: CITY OF PASCO APPROVED: CITY OF TACOMA
Printed name
Patsy Best Date
Procurement and Payables Manager
Signature Date APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Title Martha Lantz Date
Deputy City Attorney
Signature (if needed) Date Andrew Cherullo
Director of Finance Date
Title
2
Interlocal Agreement
Page 27 of 175
Proclamation
“Cinco de Mayo ~ Latino Cultural Awareness Week”
May 1-6, 2017
WHEREAS, on May 5, 1862 in the rural township of Puebla Mexico, a rugged untrained and under -equipped
small army of indigenous people, mostly farmers, defeated the invading French Army, a well -armed professional
force, that proved to be the catalyst which provided the Mexican people with confidence to persevere in ultimate
triumph over the French in 1867; and
WHEREAS, the people of Mexican heritage have brought these same values of self-reliance and determination
to the United States and, more importantly, to Pasco and the Tri-Cities; and
WHEREAS, many Mexican/Latino/Hispanic community members have served valiantly and courageously in
the US Armed Forces in defending our great nation, and continue to contribute to the community; and
WHEREAS, the Mexican/Latino/Hispanic community in Pasco has enriched the cultural diversity in education,
arts, and business and wishes to acknowledge their culture and strong family values with the entire community for
better understanding of all cultures; and
WHEREAS, festivals contribute to tourism as an important economic development tool for Pasco and, more
specifically, for downtown revitalization; and
WHEREAS, the City of Pasco recognizes the cultural and economic contributions of the
Mexican/Latino/Hispanic community; and
WHEREAS, the City of Pasco, Port of Pasco, the Tri-Cities Hispanic Chamber of Commerce and Visit Tri-
Cities support the efforts of the Downtown Pasco Development Authority to enhance downtown by hosting the
Annual Cinco de Mayo Festival on Friday and Saturday, May 5 and 6, 2017, as well as other related activities
throughout the week.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED THAT I, Matt Watkins, Mayor of the City of Pasco,
Washington, designate the week of May 1-6, 2017 as
“Cinco de Mayo ~ Latino Cultural Awareness Week”
in the City of Pasco and urge all citizens to join us in recognizing and participating in this cultural event.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the Official Seal of the City of Pasco,
State of Washington, to be affixed this 1st day of May 2017.
Matt Watkins, Mayor
City of Pasco
Page 28 of 175
Proclamation
” “Public Service Recognition Week
May 7-13, 2017
WHEREAS, Americans are served every single day by public servants at the federal, state, county and
city levels. These unsung heroes do the work that keeps our nation working; and
WHEREAS, public employees take not only jobs, but oaths; and
WHEREAS, many public servants, including military personnel, police officers, firefighters, border
patrol officers, embassy employees, health care professionals and others, risk their lives each day in
service to the people of the United States and around the world; and
WHEREAS, City of Pasco employees (currently some 320 in number) represent numerous
occupations and trades, possess a broad array of skills and expertise and put these to use with efficiency
and integrity for all who reside in or visit our City; and
WHEREAS, without these public servants at every level, continuity would be impossible in a
democracy that regularly changes its leaders and elected officials; and
WHEREAS, we all owe a substantial debt of gratitude to City of Pasco employees; and
NOW, THEREFORE, I, Matt Watkins, Mayor of the City of Pasco, Washington, encourage all
citizens to recognize the accomplishments and contributions of government employees at all levels, and
to observe the week of May 7-13, 2017 as
“Public Service Recognition Week”
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the Official Seal of the City of
Pasco, State of Washington, to be affixed this 1st day of May 2017.
Matt Watkins, Mayor
City of Pasco
Page 29 of 175
AGENDA REPORT
FOR: City Council April 26, 2017
TO: Dave Zabell, City Manager
Rick White, Director
Community & Economic Development
Regular Meeting: 5/1/17
FROM: Dave McDonald, City Planner
Community & Economic Development
SUBJECT: Street Vacation: A Portion of Commercial Ave. (MF# VAC 2017-002)
I. REFERENCE(S):
Proposed Vacation Ordinance
Overview Map
Vicinity Map
Lift Station Site Map
Deed for Lift Station Property
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
CONTINUE PUBLIC HEARING:
MOTION to Accept Deed: I move to accept the deed from TSK LLC for the PK
Highway lift station property.
MOTION for Vacation: I move to adopt Ordinance No. _______, vacating a portion
of Commercial Avenue, and further, authorize publication by summary only.
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
None
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
The owner of most of the property abutting the east side of Com mercial Avenue south
of the PK Highway adjacent to Binding Site Plans 2013-04 and 2016-01 has petitioned
for the vacation of a portion of the excess right-of-way along his property. The
requested vacation width varies in width from 15 to 30 feet. The current right-of-way
width varies from 112 to 150 feet.
Page 30 of 175
As previously recommended, Council set April 17, 2017 as the date to consider the
proposed vacation. Since the hearing date was initially set staff has been working with
the applicant to obtain property for a lift station as a part of the vacation process. The
April 17th hearing was continued to May 1, 2017 to allow time for staff to work with
the applicant on obtaining a deed for the PK Highway lift station property which was to
be exchanged in consideration of the right-of-way being vacated on Commercial
Avenue.
V. DISCUSSION:
Over the past few years three buildings have been constructed along the east side of
Commercial Avenue south of the PK Highway. During the time these buildings were
constructed the applicant was working with the City to locate a new street through his
property to connect Commercial Avenue with Venture Road. One proposal involved
the realignment of Commercial Avenue. Due to efforts to establish the alignment for
the new street (now called Kendall Dr.) the applicant was unable petition for the
vacation of excess right-of-way on Commercial Avenue earlier.
Under the provisions of (PMC 12.40), individuals requesting street vacations may be
required to compensate the City for publicly owned right-of-way being vacated. The
City Council may waive compensation in whole or in part if one or more of the
following conditions apply:
1. The vacation is initiated by the City Council by Resolution;
2. The vacation is at the request of the City;
3. The right-of-way to be vacated was previously determined by the City Council
as non-essential to public traffic circulation;
4. The grant of substitute public right-of-way which has a value as a right-of-way
at least equal to that right-of-way to be vacated; and
5. The resulting benefit to the community of the project requiring the v acation
outweighs the appraised value of the right-of-way to be vacated.
Staff's evaluation of this request leads to a recommendation that compensation for the
subject right-of-way be waived as condition 5 above has been met in two ways. First,
the applicant had provided the City a perpetual exclusive easement with an adjoining
access easement for the PK Highway lift station at no cost to the City. Secondly, the
proposed vacation involves about 29,500 square feet of land. Based on the assessed
value of the adjoining property the excess right-of-way would be valued at about
$59,000. The City's continued ownership of the subject right-of-way is unnecessary in
order to implement future plans of the City or to serve other nearby private or public
properties.
Further, the level of investment, approximately $2,670,000 in new construction value,
the corresponding benefit to the community in terms of added property valuation,
Page 31 of 175
economic development and permit fees (approximately $38,274) far outweigh the
estimated value of the unneeded right-of-way.
In addition to the value created by the new buildings along Commercial Avenue the
applicant has provided the City with a deed for 1.4 acres for the PK Highway lift
station. The property described in the deed contains 60,984 square feet while the right-
of-way being vacated represents only 29,310 square feet.
Page 32 of 175
1
WHEN RECORDED PLEASE RETURN TO:
City of Pasco
Attn: City Planner
525 North 3rd
Pasco, WA 99301
ORDINANCE NO. __________
AN ORDINANCE VACATING A PORTION OF COMMERCIAL AVENUE.
WHEREAS, a qualified petition has been submitted to the City Council of the City of
Pasco requesting vacation of certain public rights-of-way within the City of Pasco; and
WHEREAS, from time to time in response to petitions or in cases where it serves the
general interest of the City, the City Council may vacate rights-of-way; and
WHEREAS, the street vacation process provided in PMC 12.40 requires a title report
and an appraisal of value and compensation unless waived by the City Council; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council may waive the requirement for a title report, an appraisal
of value and compensation if there is a grant of a substitute right-of-way which has a value at
least equal to the right-of-way being vacated; and,
WHEREAS, the applicant has deeded 60,984 square feet of land to the City for a lift
station and the vacation represents 29,310 square feet of right-of-way. Based on the assessed
value of surrounding properties the value of lift station property dedication is about twice that of
the right-of-way to be vacated; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 1 of Resolution 3760 the City Council waived the
requirement for an appraisal, title report and payment of compensation for the proposed vacation
of a portion of Commercial Avenue; and,
WHEREAS, all steps and procedures required by law to vacate said right-of-way have
been duly taken and performed; NOW, THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN
AS FOLLOWS:
Page 33 of 175
2
Section 1. That the East 30 feet of North Commercial Avenue adjacent to the Westerly
line of Lot 1 Binding Site Plan 2013-04 and Binding Site Plan 2016-01 to a point 61.4 feet South
of the Northwest corner of Lot 2, Binding Site Plan 2016-01 also the East 15 feet of North
Commercial Avenue adjacent to the Westerly line of Binding Site Plan 2016-01 and Binding Site
Plan 2013-04 except the northerly 61.4 feet of Lot 2, Binding Site Plan 2016-01, and except Lot
1, Binding Site Plan 2013-04, as depicted in Exhibit “1” be and the same is hereby vacated,
subject to the easement retained in Section 2 hereof.
Section 2. That the City shall retain an easement and the right to exercise or grant easements with
respect to the right-of-way vacated in Section 1, above for the construction, repair and maintenance of
public utilities and services.
Section 3. That a certified copy of this ordinance be recorded by the City Clerk of the
City of Pasco in and with the office of the Auditor of Franklin County, Washington.
Section 4. This ordinance shall take full force and effect five (5) days after approval,
passage and publication as required by law.
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco, this 1st day of May 2017.
_____________________________
Matt Watkins, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_____________________________ ___________________________
Sandy Kenworthy, City Clerk Leland B. Kerr, City Attorney
Page 34 of 175
15'
Item: Street ROW Vacation
Applicant: Tom Kidwell
File #: VAC 2017-002
SITE1,
3
8
5
'
30'
Exhibit
#1
Page 35 of 175
It
e
m
:
S
t
r
e
e
t
R
O
W
V
a
c
a
t
i
o
n
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
:
T
o
m
K
i
d
w
e
l
l
Fi
l
e
#
:
V
A
C
2
0
1
7
-
0
0
2
O
v
e
r
v
i
e
w
Ma
p
SI
T
E
Page 36 of 175
Item: Street ROW Vacation
Applicant: Tom Kidwell
File #: VAC 2017-002
Vicinity
Map
SITE
15'
1,
3
8
5
'
30'
Page 37 of 175
It
e
m
:
P
a
s
c
o
-
K
a
h
l
o
t
u
s
H
i
g
h
w
a
y
L
i
f
t
S
t
a
t
i
o
n
S
i
t
e
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
:
T
o
m
K
i
d
w
e
l
l
Fi
l
e
#
:
V
A
C
2
0
1
7
-
0
0
2
S
i
t
e
M
a
p
Ea
s
t
4
4
8
.
5
3
2
'
1.
4
1
8
A
C
.
Page 38 of 175
.\H\§<c§/C
rag:-=:\\\.,,,.,..,.q..m._.u.n.Vww
L,§..._vwosmna..S\H
l.lUH
VyxJNn\umozmxm:o_mm_EEoU32s\.Z<.rO1%...1IH
«I\vu..U,mvVNumwE.Emom=o..mm..:Em:Emm>>.82%of.8Ea=_Au.3m=E5.502Q\¥.n¢.mLIII
,\
-BENZEBA\S:..:.:,
(K\_gW.QJT..J~,.v~wxiasmdtml
SEN.
A7»W?k?mo5%NW.£5RomEo?ocan95:as$.35Zm_>_O
,.EuE:.wm:_E32:8.5388uumto?sm282?_%.E2_:2:u??m
Ecosocan6o:o::oEE22:momoahaEamom:2:.8“BowwasSmbS:=_o>
canooc:o£\$£mEma2:82:_§_m_m\$£\o?\u._$62:8comwu_3oS_aa
was“Econ:moAmrockoofno2%“anweEuE=:m:_wiowmzomwas:_?_>>
2:n?sooxo2.335«SonsuugcomouAmV_m:E>:u:_~2ton8E>oE_2:9
\L(_.4.\~SM~.V.F404.)Xlxvl?b
cobwohiab_m:om$mW(.m.o>>m4/E.v.:o_mV,.e:_EooEst._uo:m_m._ou:=
2:.2:2953“How.2,$0but£5:0
A:=w_:s..r.~no@580
A
AZOHUZ:.~m<>>KOH,H<.—.m
03rzzfawymv.
$8.21%wo m_:wnme<:
.L8o5?
BumWwvvbsummo05E088E9w:Emm>>5350szxc?mmomwzooom
+3“mam£83:25weHvsomE8282mm8.283:teamv.84
E65:SE80
2:mo258:33Eta=m53>E?owoad8msEmm>>moB?mdzvi?mmo5:50005
EwBmoo_25$E8uoniomowmE>>o:£2:dou?o?oo_m&oE:EB?m:o..mcEmE,>
m..a.m—m:Z<-U08.8mE8_o:1.canm>o>:oo@38005:534
5.552%qew?aaN
..moez<mumay
mam:2:59H50
Ema<353$
amSmom
commawe55
8625$103oznsmuoma?hvii
"OHZMDHHKUZ~Q~—OUHy—mmE<
Pa
g
e
3
9
o
f
1
7
5
\“3/xv wvnoaawwoo
<-—-.zs9'sw zsea-—’
CIH HOIELLEIICI
ZO0'LIOZOVA 3#911:1 I#
3 +M [19/yxp1)111101:1u12o;[ddV
uqlqxa
N 9113uop,121g gm 1{12mq3;HST1],0[L[t3)I-OOSBCI:u1911 --
Pa
g
e
4
0
o
f
1
7
5
AGENDA REPORT
FOR: City Council April 26, 2017
TO: Dave Zabell, City Manager Regular Meeting: 5/1/17
FROM: Stan Strebel, Deputy City Manager
Executive
SUBJECT: Council Voting Districts
I. REFERENCE(S):
Court Approved Map (Mission 8)
Proposed Map Changes
Proposed Revised Map
Proposed Ordinance
Proposed County Precinct Map
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
MOTION: I move to adopt Ordinance No. _____, amending Chapter 1.10 of the Pasco
Municipal Code regarding Voting Districts and, further, authorize publication by
summary only.
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
Following the Federal Court's approval of the City's proposed Council District Plan,
Mission 8, in late January, staff provided a copy to the County Auditor for a
determination as to whether the Auditor would be able to revise voting precincts to
accommodate the new districts or if splits in precincts (as created by the Court ordered
plan) would remain to work around.
The Auditor has a number of considerations to make in addition to balancing the
number of registered voters. These include the ability to draw discernable boundary
lines for districts for state legislative seats as well as those for County Commissioners,
PUD Directors, etc.
As staff recently met with the Auditor's staff to review the results of their analysis, it
was reported that, with a few small adjustments to the adopted Pasco Council District
Page 41 of 175
boundaries, the Auditor could align voting precincts and the necessary district
boundary lines for the several elected officials without the need to have split precincts
going forward.
With the ability to describe the City Council Districts in terms of precinct numbers, the
City's ordinance which describes boundaries is greatly simplified and there is much
less prospect for error or misunderstanding.
In order to facilitate the Auditor’s efforts in realigning precincts, four minimal changes
are suggested:
1. Precinct 25. This precinct has been bisected by I-182. The north portion of the
precinct contains only the small golf course on Port of Pasco property. There
are no residential properties located in this portion of the precinct. The
demographers who prepared the Mission 8 map included the north portion of
the precinct, above the interstate, in District 3 and the south portion in District 5
in order to show cleaner boundaries. Maintaining the golf course property in
District 5 will assist the Auditor with precinct/boundary lines and will have no
effect on voters in the City.
2. A small piece of residential property, 10 lots, has historically been in precinct 1.
Located east of Cedar Avenue and north of Highland Street, the parcel was split
into two different census blocks before it was developed. This resulted in the
demographer using the census boundary to draw the Mission 8 map even
though now, with development of the property into residential units, the census
boundary cuts through houses and lots. The most logical solution is to shift this
small neighborhood into District 2. The population and registered voter shift
represented by 10 homes is insignificant; however, the neighborhood will,
following the shift, be in the same district as virtually the entire balance of its
larger neighborhood. This shift will also assist the Auditor with its precinct and
boundary lines.
3. Kahlotus Highway. This property was part of a fairly recent annexation, is
zoned industrial and contains no residential properties. The demographer drew
a line to include the area in District 3, using the natural boundary of the
Kahlotus Highway. The Auditor relies upon a precinct boundary line along
Dietrich Road to better define boundaries for other jurisdictions. Moving this
parcel from District 3 to District 2 will have no effect on voters in the City.
4. Donut Hole--Precinct, city limit lines and census block differences. The
Auditor has maintained voting precincts in and around the so-called donut hole
to identify in-City voters and unincorporated area voters. City annexations do
not typically follow precinct lines but are usually drawn along street or property
lines. Minor boundary discrepancies with City limits/districts, census blocks
and precincts can be seen in this general area in the Mission 8 map which was
developed using census block boundaries. The proposed corrections provide
for precinct realignment in light of recently revised City limit lines, due to
annexation. No voters are moved from the District originally designated, the
lines are merely drawn to correspond together accurately.
Page 42 of 175
As indicated earlier, the ability to describe Council Districts by precinct greatly
simplifies the City's ordinance which establishes district boundaries. The attached,
proposed Ordinance incorporates new district descriptions based on the new precincts.
The County Commission gave approval to the new precincts on April 26.
Council will recall that the Federal Court retained jurisdiction in the case with the
ACLU until 45 days after certification of the results of the 2017 election. Last week,
the City Attorney received concurrence of the ACLU regarding the proposed changes.
A joint petition to the Court is currently pending and we are waiting for the anticipated
approval of the Court soon. In the event that formal approval has not been received by
the meeting of May 1, it may be wise to postpone the formal adoption until May 8.
V. DISCUSSION:
This item was discussed at the April 24 Workshop meeting.
The district boundary maps which are (and have been for several weeks) on the City's
website are 99.9% accurate. There is only the possibility that from 10-20 voters in the
entire City could plan to file for election, only to find out that the district in which they
thought they resided was different than previously shown.
Page 43 of 175
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
014010
060
030 028
Precinct
1
2
3
4
5
6
Pasco Mission 8 Precinct Map
P
a
g
e
4
4
o
f
1
7
5
Ci
t
y
o
f
P
a
s
c
o
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
D
i
s
t
r
i
c
t
s
Ap
r
i
l
2
0
1
7
Pr
o
p
o
s
e
d
C
h
a
n
g
e
s
Co
u
n
c
i
l
V
o
t
i
n
g
D
i
s
t
r
i
c
t
s
:
Pa
s
c
o
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
D
i
s
t
r
i
c
t
1
Pa
s
c
o
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
D
i
s
t
r
i
c
t
2
Pa
s
c
o
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
D
i
s
t
r
i
c
t
3
Pa
s
c
o
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
D
i
s
t
r
i
c
t
4
Pa
s
c
o
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
D
i
s
t
r
i
c
t
5
Pa
s
c
o
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
D
i
s
t
r
i
c
t
6
1)
M
o
v
e
G
o
l
f
C
o
u
r
s
e
Dr
i
v
i
n
g
R
a
n
g
e
(
n
o
re
g
i
s
t
e
r
e
d
v
o
t
e
r
s
)
fr
o
m
D
i
s
t
r
i
c
t
3
t
o
Di
s
t
r
i
c
t
5
.
3) Move Industrial Area (no registered voters) from District 3 to District 2.2) Move 10 residential parcels from District 3 to District 2.
4)
N
O
T
E
:
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
Di
s
t
r
i
c
t
5
B
o
u
n
d
a
r
i
e
s
to
a
l
i
g
n
w
i
t
h
C
i
t
y
L
i
m
i
t
Li
n
e
s
,
r
a
t
h
e
r
t
h
a
n
20
1
0
C
E
N
S
U
S
B
l
o
c
k
s
Page 45 of 175
Pr
o
p
o
s
e
d
C
i
t
y
o
f
P
a
s
c
o
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
D
i
s
t
r
i
c
t
s
Ap
r
i
l
2
0
1
7
Co
u
n
c
i
l
V
o
t
i
n
g
D
i
s
t
r
i
c
t
s
:
Pa
s
c
o
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
D
i
s
t
r
i
c
t
1
Pa
s
c
o
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
D
i
s
t
r
i
c
t
2
Pa
s
c
o
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
D
i
s
t
r
i
c
t
3
Pa
s
c
o
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
D
i
s
t
r
i
c
t
4
Pa
s
c
o
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
D
i
s
t
r
i
c
t
5
Pa
s
c
o
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
D
i
s
t
r
i
c
t
6
Page 46 of 175
ORDINANCE NO.________
AN ORDINANCE of the City of Pasco, Washington amending Chapter
1.10 of the Pasco Municipal Code regarding “Voting Districts.”
WHEREAS, The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Washington, in March
2016, notified the City that it believed the City’s then election system violated the federal Voting
Rights Act (VRA); and
WHEREAS, following a lawsuit filed by the ACLU, the City and ACLU jointly entered
a proposed a “Partial Consent Decree” which identified the likely violation of the VRA and
sought to establish jurisdiction of the Federal Court to order an appropriate remedy to address the
violation; and
WHEREAS, on September 2, 2016 Judge Lonny Suko of the United States District
Court for the Eastern District of Washington granted the Partial Consent Decree thereby ordering
that the City must, in order to remedy a violation of Section 2 of the Federal Voting Rights Act,
implement a new election system; and
WHEREAS, the City Council held, after due notice, a public hearing on September 6 to
take comments and evaluate the options for district-based voting and the Council determined that
the six-district/one at-large alternative was preferred due to its providing three Latino citizen
voter-age majority districts, the same number as possible under the ACLU’s preferred seven
district plan; and
WHEREAS, on October 3, 2016, the City Council held, after due notice, a public
hearing on the six-district plan boundary alternatives, to receive and consider public comment on
the alternative boundary plans; and
WHEREAS, the Council, after due and deliberate consideration, adopted Ordinance No.
4315, establishing a six-district/one at-large plan for City Council elections; and
WHEREAS, on January 27, 2017 Judge Suko issued an order approving the City
Council election plan as submitted; and
WHEREAS, the Franklin County Auditor, in order to efficiently conduct elections for
several jurisdictions where each jurisdiction contains a number of district boundaries, has
requested that minor adjustments be made to Pasco’s City Council District boundaries, in order
to simplify and minimize disruption in the boundaries for districts in other jurisdictions in the
creation of the voting precincts essential to the conduct of elections; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the adjustments affect only a limited
number of potential voters and maintain the intent and purpose of the six-district/one at-large
plan as approved by the Federal Court; and
Page 47 of 175
WHEREAS, in the January 27, 2017 order, Judge Suko retained the Court’s jurisdiction
over the City’s voting districts until 45 days after certification of the November 2017 election
results; and
WHEREAS, the City and the ACLU have jointly petitioned the Court for approval of the
district boundary adjustments requested by the County Auditor; and
WHEREAS,
NOW, THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON, DOES
ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That Section 1.10.020 entitled “District One” of the Pasco Municipal Code,
shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows:
1.10.020 DISTRICT ONE. Voting district one shall encompass the area within the City
of Pasco comprised of precinct numbers five, nine, ten, fourteen and fifteen (5, 9, 10, 14 and 15);
as those precincts are described on the maps and property descriptions on file with the Auditor of
Franklin County.
Section 2. That Section 1.10.030 entitled “District Two” of the Pasco Municipal Code,
shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows:
1.10.030 DISTRICT TWO. Voting district two shall encompass the area within the City
of Pasco comprised of precinct numbers two, three, thirteen, seventeen and eighteen (2, 3, 13, 17
and 18); as those precincts are described on the maps and property descriptions on file with the
Auditor of Franklin County.
Section 3. That Section 1.10.040 entitled “District Three” of the Pasco Municipal Code,
shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows:
1.10.040 DISTRICT THREE. Voting district three shall encompass the area within the
City of Pasco comprised of precinct numbers one, eight, twenty-two, twenty-three, twenty-four,
thirty-two, thirty-three, thirty-four, thirty-five, thirty-seven, thirty-eight, thirty-nine, forty-two,
forty-three, forty-four and one-hundred and two (1, 8, 22, 23, 24, 32, 33, 34, 35, 37, 38, 39, 42,
43, 44 and 102); as those precincts are described on the maps and property descriptions on file
with the Auditor of Franklin County.
Section 4. That Section 1.10.050 entitled “District Four” of the Pasco Municipal Code,
shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows:
1.10.050 DISTRICT FOUR. Voting district four shall encompass the area within the City
of Pasco comprised of precinct numbers forty, forty-five, forty-six, forty-seven, fifty, fifty-one
fifty-two, fifty-three, fifty-four and fifty-five (40, 45, 46, 47, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, and 55); as those
Page 48 of 175
precincts are described on the maps and property descriptions on file with the Auditor of
Franklin County.
Section 6. That Section 1.10.060 entitled “District Five” of the Pasco Municipal Code,
shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows:
1.10.060 DISTRICT FIVE. Voting district five shall encompass the area within the City
of Pasco comprised of precinct numbers nineteen, twenty, twenty-one, twenty-five, twenty-six,
twenty-seven, twenty-eight, twenty-nine, thirty, thirty-one, thirty-six, forty-one, forty-eight,
forty-nine, fifty-six, fifty-seven, fifty-eight, fifty-nine, sixty, sixty-two, sixty-three, sixty-five,
sixty-six, and sixty-seven (19, 20, 21, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 36, 41, 48, 49, 56, 57, 58, 59,
60, 62, 63, 65, 66 and 67); as those precincts are described on the maps and property
descriptions on file with the Auditor of Franklin County.
Section 7. That Section 1.10.070 entitled “District Six” of the Pasco Municipal Code,
shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows:
1.10.070 DISTRICT SIX. Voting district six shall encompass the area within the City of
Pasco comprised of precinct numbers four, six, seven, eleven, twelve and sixteen (4, 6, 7, 11, 12
and 16); as those precincts are described on the maps and property descriptions on file with the
Auditor of Franklin County.
Section 8. This ordinance shall take full force and effect five days after its approval,
passage and publication as required by law.
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco, Washington, and approved as
provided by law this ______ day of _______________, 2017.
Matt Watkins, Mayor
ATTEST:APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Sandy Kenworthy, Interim City Clerk Leland B. Kerr, City Attorney
Page 49 of 175
W
C
O
U
R
T
S
T
W C O U R T S T
BU
R
N
S
R
D
I
-
1
8
2
ROAD 100
I -1 8 2
BU
R
N
S
R
D
D
E
N
T
R
D
B
Y
E
R
S
R
D
I R I S L N
DE
N
T
R
D
R I C H V I E W
E
A
S
Y
S
T
ROAD 68
WE
R
N
E
T
T
R
D
ROAD 44
I -1 8 2BU
R
D
E
N
B
L
V
D
SA
N
D
I
F
U
R
P
K
W
Y
U
S
3
9
5
L E W I S S T
SY
L
V
E
S
T
E
R
S
T
I -1 8 2
WE
R
N
E
T
T
R
D
I-
1
8
2
20TH AVE
A
S
T
O R E G O N A V E
W
C
O
U
R
T
S
T
4TH AVE
R A I L R O A D A V E
U S 3 9 5
CAPITAL AVE
R O A D 6 8
T
A
Y
L
O
R
CL
A
R
K
R
D
G L A D E N O R T H R D
R A I L R O A D A V E
U
S
3
9
5
LEWIS STUS 1 2DIETRICH RD P A S CO KA H L O T U S R D S R I -1 8 2ALDERSON R DPASCO KA HE FOSTER WELLS RDBLASDEL RDVOSS
#4
9
#6
7
#5
9
#6
0
#5
7
#6
8
#5
8
#6
6
#5
4
#5
6#5
2
#5
5
#5
3
#5
1
#6
5
#4
8
#6
4
#4
1
#6
3
#6
2
#1
0
3
#4
7
#1
0
4
#4
6
#4
5
#4
0
#3
9
#1
0
2
#4
4
#4
3
#4
2
#6
9
#3
8
#5
0
#3
7
#3
1
#3
6
#2
9
#3
0
#2
8
#6
1
#2
7
#2
6
#2
5
#2
1
#1
7
#1
8
#2
0
#1
9
#1
5
#1
6
#3
5
#3
4
#2
4
#3
3
#2
3
#2
2
#1
2
#1
3
#7
#1
1
#1
0
#1
4
#6
#9
#4
#5
#3
2
#7
3
#8
#7
0
#7
2
#1
#2#3
Fr
a
n
k
l
i
n
C
o
u
n
t
y
R
e
g
i
o
n
a
l
I
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
S
y
s
t
e
m
10
1
6
N
o
r
t
h
4
t
h
A
v
e
n
u
e
Pa
s
c
o
,
W
a
s
h
i
n
g
t
o
n
9
9
3
0
1
Te
l
e
p
h
o
n
e
:
(
5
0
9
)
5
4
5
-
3
5
8
5
F
a
x
:
(
5
0
9
)
5
4
6
-
5
8
7
1
DA
T
E
P
R
I
N
T
E
D
ht
t
p
:
/
/
w
w
w
.
c
o
.
f
r
a
n
k
l
i
n
.
w
a
.
u
s
gi
s
@
c
o
.
f
r
a
n
k
l
i
n
.
w
a
.
u
s
DI
S
C
L
A
I
M
E
R
A
N
D
T
E
R
M
S
O
F
U
S
E
:
A
l
l
i
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
d
e
p
i
c
t
e
d
h
e
r
e
i
n
i
s
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
d
a
s
-
is
,
w
i
t
h
n
o
w
a
r
r
a
n
t
y
,
e
x
p
r
e
s
s
e
d
o
r
i
m
p
l
i
e
d
.
N
o
g
u
a
ra
n
t
e
e
o
f
in
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
u
s
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
,
a
c
c
u
r
a
c
y
o
r
s
u
i
t
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
i
s
i
nf
e
r
r
e
d
,
i
m
p
l
i
e
d
,
o
r
e
x
p
r
e
s
s
e
d
.
N
e
i
t
h
e
r
F
r
a
n
k
l
i
n
C
ou
n
t
y
Re
g
i
o
n
a
l
I
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
S
y
s
t
e
m
(
F
R
I
S
)
,
n
o
r
an
y
m
e
m
b
e
r
a
g
e
n
c
y
,
s
h
a
l
l
b
e
l
i
a
b
l
e
f
o
r
a
n
y
e
r
r
o
r
o
r
e
r
r
o
r
s
w
i
t
h
i
n
,
o
r
im
p
l
i
e
d
b
y
,
t
h
e
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
d
i
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
.
F
R
I
S
a
n
d
i
t
s
me
m
b
e
r
a
g
e
n
c
i
e
s
s
h
a
l
l
b
e
h
e
l
d
h
a
r
m
l
e
s
s
f
o
r
a
n
y
l
o
s
s
,
di
r
e
c
t
o
r
i
n
d
i
r
e
c
t
,
i
m
m
e
d
i
a
t
e
o
r
s
u
b
s
e
q
u
e
n
t
,
r
e
l
a
t
e
d
t
o
t
h
e
u
s
e
o
f
t
h
i
s
i
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
o
r
a
n
y
i
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
d
e
r
i
v
e
d
fr
o
m
t
h
i
s
i
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
.
Th
i
s
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
i
s
C
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t
2
0
1
1
,
F
R
I
S
,
A
l
l
R
i
g
h
ts
R
e
s
e
r
v
e
d
.
PR
E
L
I
M
I
N
A
R
Y
V
O
T
I
N
G
P
R
E
C
I
N
C
T
S
LE
G
E
N
D
VO
T
I
N
G
P
R
E
C
I
N
C
T
S
Co
u
n
c
i
l
D
i
s
t
r
i
c
t
1
Co
u
n
c
i
l
D
i
s
t
r
i
c
t
2
Co
u
n
c
i
l
D
i
s
t
r
i
c
t
3
Co
u
n
c
i
l
D
i
s
t
r
i
c
t
4
Co
u
n
c
i
l
D
i
s
t
r
i
c
t
5
Co
u
n
c
i
l
D
i
s
t
r
i
c
t
6
Page 50 of 175
AGENDA REPORT
FOR: City Council April 26, 2017
TO: Dave Zabell, City Manager Regular Meeting: 5/1/17
FROM: Stan Strebel, Deputy City Manager
Executive
SUBJECT: PMC Amendment Regarding Revocation of Business License
I. REFERENCE(S):
Proposed Ordinance
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
MOTION: I move to adopt Ordinance No. ______, amending PMC 2.19.080
"Powers" of the Hearing Examiner; amending PMC 5.04.110 "Revocation of License"
providing for an appeal hearing before the Hearing Examiner; amending PMC 5.04.115
"Reinstatement Procedures and Standards for Reviewing an Application for
Reinstatement" (and Business License); and amending PMC 11.02.010 "Applicability
of Chapter" and, further, authorize publication by summary only.
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
The Pasco Municipal Code currently provides procedures for the revocation of a
business license. While staff cannot recall an instance within the last 15+ years in
which a business license has been revoked, the PMC outlines a number of instances
where such may be necessary. The code provides the City Council as the primary body
to decide on a license revocation, except in limited circumstances (with 72 hours of
issuance) where the City Manager may revoke subject to appeal to the Council.
A business license, when issued, becomes a property interest and is therefore subject to
certain protections. A proceeding to consider revocation or cancellation of a property
interest must be conducted under strict guidelines and, given rules of evidence and the
probable appearance of witnesses, requirement of a court reporter; the process can be
time consuming and procedural very complex.
The City Attorney advises that in today's climate, such a proceeding would be difficult
to conduct within a typical City Council meeting and would require considerable
Page 51 of 175
advanced preparation on the part of Council, staff and from a facility logistics
standpoint. In contrast, the City's Hearing Examiner regularly operates under these
conditions for matters such as; administrative, land use, animal, seizure and forfeiture
cases/decisions.
Accordingly, it is recommended that this responsibility be assigned to the City's
Hearing Examiner. Settings where a a person or corporation's property interest, in the
form of a business license and perhaps livelihood, are at stake, are often charged by
politics or passion, and can serve as a prelude to future litigation. As the result of
extensive training, experience and the nature of the position, the Hearing Examiner is
able to conduct such hearings in a more judicial and formal setting.
V. DISCUSSION:
As there is currently no specific license issue before the City, the attorney recommends
that the proposed changes be adopted now in order to protect the City from potential
problems and complications that could arise in the future given the current PMC
provisions.
This item was discussed at the April 24 Workshop meeting.
Page 52 of 175
Ordinance – Hearing Examiner
Page 1 of 6
ORDINANCE NO.__________
AN ORDINANCE of the City of Pasco, Washington Amending PMC
2.19.080 “Powers” of the Hearing Examiner; Amending PMC 5.04.110
“Revocation of License” providing for an appeal hearing before the Hearing
Examiner; Amending PMC 5.04.115 “Reinstatement Procedures and Standards
for Reviewing an Application for Reinstatement” (and Business License); and
Amending PMC 11.02.010 “Applicability of Chapter.”
WHEREAS, the City of Pasco, as authorized by Washington law, has pursuant to
Chapter 2.19 PMC, adopted the Hearing Examiner’s system for the purpose of conducting public
hearings and rendering decisions for recommendation by a professional trained Hearing
Examiner to provide an efficient and reliable process for adjudication of claims; and
WHEREAS, the present business code (PMC 5.04.110), presently provides that a
revocation of a business license and the hearing of any appeal thereof, be before the City
Council; and
WHEREAS, revocation of hearings and appeals may be more efficiently heard before a
Hearing to permit the Council to better address its primary policy making and administration
responsibilities and reduce potential liability exposure for quasi-judicial decisions. NOW,
THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN
AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That Section 2.19.080 entitled "Powers” regarding the Hearing Examiner
for the City of Pasco of the Pasco Municipal Code shall be and hereby is amended and shall read
as follows:
2.19.080 POWERS. The examiner shall receive and examine available
information, conduct public hearings and prepare a record thereof, and enter decisions as
provided for herein. The examiner, subject to the appropriate conditions and safeguards as
provided by the Pasco Municipal Code, shall hear and decide:
A) Land use decisions including variances, review of administrative actions, waiver
of violations, extension of use on border of district, and administrative exceptions as provided in
PMC 25.84.020.
B) Administrative Decisions. Appeals of administrative decisions or determinations
may be heard by the examiner as directed by the City Manager, City Council or by Ordinance.
C) SEPA Appeals. Appeals or administrative decisions and determinations made
pursuant to Chapter 43.21C RCW may be heard by the examiner.
D) Vehicle Impounds. The examiner shall conduct vehicle impound hearings as
provided in PMC Chapter 10.18.
Page 53 of 175
Ordinance – Hearing Examiner
Page 2 of 6
E) Criminal Seizure and Forfeiture Hearings. The examiner may, as designee of the
Chief Law Enforcement Officer of the City of Pasco, conduct seizure and forfeiture hearings as
provided in RCW 10.105.010.
F) Animal Code - - Wild, Potentially Dangerous or Dangerous Animals. The
examiner shall hear the appeal of any owner of an animal determined by the Poundma ster to be a
dangerous or potentially dangerous animal as provided in Chapter 8.02 of the Pasco Municipal
Code.
G) Hear revocations, appeals, and requests for reinstatement of business licenses
under Title 5 PMC.
GH) Other Powers. In the performance of duties prescribed by this Chapter or other
ordinances, examiners may:
1) Administer oaths and affirmations, examine witnesses, rule upon offers of
proof, receive relevant evidence, and conduct discovery procedures which may include
propounding interrogatories and taking oral depositions pursuant to Washington State
Court Rules; PROVIDED, that no person shall be compelled to divulge information
which he could not be compelled to divulge in a court of law.
2) Upon the request of any other party, or upon his own volition, issue, and
cause to be served subpoenas to the attendance of witnesses and for production of
examination of any books, records, or other information in the possession or under the
control of any witness; PROVIDED, that such subpoenas shall state the name and address
of the witness sought, and if for production of books, documents or things, shall
specifically identify the same and the relevance thereof to the issues involved.
3) Regulate the course of the hearing in accordance with this and other
applicable ordinances.
4) Hold conferences for the settlement or simplification of the issues by
consent of the parties.
5) Dispose of procedural requests or similar matters.
6) Take any other action authorized by ordinance. In case of failure or
refusal without lawful excuse of any person duly subpoenaed to attend pursuant to said
subpoena, or to be sworn, or to answer any material and proper question, or to produce
upon reasonable notice any material of proper books or records or other information in
his possession and under his control, the examiner may invoke the aid of the City
Attorney who shall apply to the appropriate court for an order or other court action
necessary to secure enforcement of the subpoena.
7) The examiner is hereby empowered to act in lieu of the Board of
Adjustment, and such officials, boards or commissions as may be assigned. Wherever
existing ordinances, codes or policies authorize or direct the Board of Adjustment, or
Page 54 of 175
Ordinance – Hearing Examiner
Page 3 of 6
other officials, boards or commissions to undertake certain activities which the examiner
has been assigned, such ordinances, codes or policies shall be construed to refer to the
examiner.
Section 2. That Section 5.04.110 entitled “Revocation of License” regarding the
revocation of business license of the Pasco Municipal Code shall be and hereby is amended and
shall read as follows:
5.04.110 REVOCATION OF LICENSE.
A) The City Council Manager may revoke any license issued under this Title after it
has been issued, or any person’s privilege to do business in the City of Pasco, when after
investigation by City staff, any one or more of the following grounds are found to exist:
1) Illegal issuance of the permit.
2) Issuance of the permit without authority or power.
3) Issuance under an unauthorized ordinance or under an ordinance illegally
adopted.
4) Issuance in violation of an ordinance.
5) When the business license was procured by fraud or false representation of
facts.
6) When issued through mistake or inadvertence.
7) When the license application contains false or misleading statements,
evasions or suppression of material facts. (Ord. 2922 Sec. 1, 1993.)
B) Other grounds for revocation in addition to those stated in the previous subsection
are:
1) Substantial violations of the terms and condition on which a license or
permit is issued.
2) Violation of ordinances or law authorizing or regulating the license or
permit, or regulating the business, activity or thing for which it is issued.
3) Conviction of infractions of or offenses under such an ordinance or law.
4) Wrongful behavior of a substantial character and of a public concern in
relation to the licensed activity.
5) When reasonably necessary in the interest of protection of the public
health, safety, peace, or welfare.
Page 55 of 175
Ordinance – Hearing Examiner
Page 4 of 6
6) When a business becomes an instrument of or a cover for public disorder,
crime, or other danger to public safety, morals or health. (Ord. 2675 Sec. 1, 1988.)
C) Before any such license or licensing privilege shall be canceled or revoked, the
holder of such license or privilege shall be given two weeks’ notice of a hearing to be held by the
City Council before the City Hearing Examiner at which time the applicant must show cause
why such license and for privilege to do business should not be revoked. The notice to be given
to the applicant must state the grounds and the reasons for the forfeiture and revocation and also
the date set for the hearing thereon. PROVIDED, HOWEVER, the City Manager may deny the
issuance of a license or immediately revoke the license of any business for any of the grounds set
forth, when any such license has been issued for a period of less than 72 hours; any such
determination by the City Manager shall be deemed conclusive unless the applicant appeals to
the City Council Hearing Examiner within five (5) calendar days of notice of the revocation.
Pending any such appeal to the City Council Hearing Examiner, the business license shall remain
revoked or denied. (Ord. 2922 Sec. 1, 1993.)
D) The decision of the City Council Hearing Examiner to revoke a business license
or licensing privilege or to sustain the decision of the City Manager revoking a license on an
appeal, shall be supported by written findings of fact in support of the decision. Each decision of
the City Council Hearing Examiner to revoke a business license and/or business licensing
privilege shall set forth a minimum period of time for which the business license and/or business
licensing privilege is to be revoked. The minimum time period for the duration of the revocation
of a business license and/or the business licensing privilege shall be one (1) year unless the City
Council Hearing Examiner determines that extraordinary circumstances exist justifying a shorter
period of time, in which case the justification for such decision shall be set forth by the City
Council Hearing Examiner in writing. In determining the minimum time of the revocation
during which reinstatement of a business license and/or business license privilege shall not be
considered, the City Council Hearing Examiner will consider among other factors:
1) The degree of the person’s culpability and the conduct leading to the
revocation;
2) The criminal nature of the conduct, if any;
3) The conduct’s effect on the community; and
4) The licensee’s acceptance of the responsibility for their actions or
conversely their failure to accept responsibility or admit their wrongdoing (Ord. 2922
Sec. 1, 1993; Ord. 2569 Sec. 1, 1985; prior code Sec. 3-1.64.)
Section 3. That Section 5.04.115 entitled “Reinstatement Procedures and Standards
for Reviewing an Application for Reinstatement” regarding business license of the Pasco
Municipal Code shall be and hereby is amended and shall read as follow:
Page 56 of 175
Ordinance – Hearing Examiner
Page 5 of 6
5.04.115 REINSTATEMENT PROCEDURES AND STANDARDS FOR
REVIEWING AN APPLICATION FOR REINSTATEMENT.
A) Procedures. At any time following the minimum time period for revocation of a
business license and/or business licensing privilege set forth by the City Council Hearing
Examiner in their decision to revoke a license and/or business licensing privilege, reinstatement
of the license and/or licensing privilege may be sought utilizing the following procedures:
1) A written application shall be completed on a form available from the City
Clerk.
2) The application when completed shall be filed with the City Clerk, with a
copy to the City Attorney and the City Manager.
3) The City Council Hearing Examiner shall set forth a public hearing date
with at least two (2) weeks’ notice to the applicant to consider the application for
reinstatement.
4) The public hearing shall be advertised by the City Clerk in a newspaper of
general circulation in the City of Pasco at least once and at least five (5) days prior to the
public hearing.
5) At the public hearing, the City Council Hearing Examiner shall receive
testimony from the applicant, City Staff and interested members of the public.
6) Upon conclusion of the public hearing the City Council Hearing Examiner
shall decide, by motion, whether to approve the application for reinstatement with or
without conditions, or to deny the application for reinstatement. or not to grant approval
of the application. Approval of the application shall require an affirmative vote by a
majority of the members of the City Council present and voting on the application.
7) All approvals or denials of an application shall be supported by written
findings of fact.
B) Standards for Review. In making their determination on an application for
reinstatement of a business license and/or the business licensing privilege, the City Council
Hearing Examiner shall consider all relevant factors brought to their attention, which shall
include:
1) The time since the revocation action was taken;
2) The degree of applicant’s culpability and the conduct leading to the
revocation and the criminal nature of the conduct, if applicable;
3) The effect on the community of the conduct leading to the revocation of
the licensing privilege and any lingering effects still experienced by the community;
Page 57 of 175
Ordinance – Hearing Examiner
Page 6 of 6
4) The steps taken by the applicant to reform him/herself or insure that if
placed in a similar business ownership position, he/she would not revert to the prior
conduct which lead to the revocation of his/her license and/or business licensing
privilege; and
5) Any additional means by which the applicant can demonstrate to the
Council Hearing Examiner that if allowed a new business license, the prior wrongful
conduct would not reoccur. (Ord. 3394 Sec. 1, 1999; Ord. 2922 Sec. 2, 1993.)
Section 4. That Section 11.02.010 entitled “Applicability of Chapter” regarding
violations and procedures for code enforcement of the Pasco Municipal Code shall be and hereby
is amended and shall read as follows:
11.02.010 APPLICABILITY OF CHAPTER. The provisions of this Chapter shall
apply to enforcement of Title 5 (excluding Sections 5.04.110 – Revocation of License, Section
5.04.115 – Reinstatement Procedures and Standards for Reviewing an Application for
Reinstatement, Chapters 5.12 – Pawnbrokers and Second-Hand Dealers and 5.46 – Private
Detective Agencies, Private Detectives, Private Security Guards, and Private Security
Companies), Title 6 – Health and Sanitation, Chapter 10.52 – Parking, Title 12 – Streets and
Sidewalks, Title 13 – Water and Sewers, Title 16 – Building Code, Title 17 – Sign Code, Title 19
– Mobile Homes, Title 25 - Zoning, and Chapters 8.02 (excepting Sections 8.02.130, 8.02.170
and 8.02.320 – Animal Control), 9.60 – Public Nuisances, 9.61 – Noise Regulation, 9.62 –
abandoned Vehicles and Vehicle Hulks, and 9.63 – Chronic Nuisances. The Code Enforcement
Board is also designated as the “Improvement Board” for the purposes of RCW 35.80.030. (Ord.
4289, 2016; Ord. 4017, 2011; Ord. 3534 Sec. 2, 2002; Ord. 3190 Sec. 1, 1996.)
Section 5. This Ordinance shall take full force and effect five (5) days after its
approval, passage, and publication as required by law.
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco, Washington, and approved as
provided by law this ____ day of _________________, 2017.
_____________________________
Matt Watkins, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
______________________________ ____________________________________
Sandy Kenworthy, Interim City Clerk Leland B. Kerr, City Attorney
Page 58 of 175
AGENDA REPORT
FOR: City Council April 25, 2017
TO: Dave Zabell, City Manager
Rick White, Director
Community & Economic Development
Regular Meeting: 5/1/17
FROM: Dave McDonald, City Planner
Community & Economic Development
SUBJECT: Rezone: Loyalty Inn, C-1 (Retail Business) to C-3 (General Business) (MF# Z
2016-005)
I. REFERENCE(S):
Proposed Rezone Ordinance
Vicinity Map
Memo to Planning Commission (Original reports and transcripts have previously been
reviewed by the Council)
Planning Commission Minutes March 16, 2017
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
MOTION: I move to adopt Ordinance No. _______, rezoning Lots 2 and 3 Shot Plat
2010-08 from C-1 (Retail Business) to C-3 (Retail Business), and further, authorize
publication by summary only.
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
None
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
On November 17, 2016 the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing to
determine whether or not to recommend rezoning the Loyalty Inn property at 1800 W
Lewis Street from C-1 to C-3.
Following the conduct of a public hearing, the Planning Commission reasoned it would
not be appropriate to rezone the property and recommended denial of the requested
rezone.
The Planning Commission’s recommendation was appealed. The Council then
Page 59 of 175
considered the matter in a closed record hearing on February 3, 2017 and remanded the
matter to the Planning Commission with instructions to consider the rezone with a
concomitant agreement.
V. DISCUSSION:
The Planning Commission considered the remand on March 16, 2017 and concluded
many of the permitted uses in the C-3 District were not appropriate for the Loyalty Inn
site. The Commission determined that uses such as heavy machinery sales and service,
lumber yards, landscape storage yards, contractor facilities, mobile homes sales,
trucking firms, truck stops, towing impound yards and related or similar uses should be
excluded from the site. These types of uses are generally found near industrial centers
but not adjacent to residential neighborhoods. Restricting the more intense C-3 uses
would essentially cause the rezoned to similar to C-1 zoning.
Following additional discussion on the matter the Commission recommended the
Loyalty Inn property be rezoned from C-1 to C-3 with a concomitant agreement
limiting uses on the property to all "O" and C-1 Districts plus the rental of domestic
trucks and trailers not exceeding 26 feet in length. The Commission further
recommended that no more than 12 rental vehicles be permitted on-site per day and all
other C-3 uses be prohibited.
The applicant is in agreement with the Planning Commission's recommendation.
Page 60 of 175
ORDINANCE NO. ________
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON, REZONING LOTS 2 AND 3 SHORT
PLAT 2010-08 FROM C-1 (RETAIL BUSINESS) TO C-3 (GENERAL BUSINESS) WITH A
CONCOMMITANT AGREEMENT.
WHEREAS, a complete and adequate petition for change of zoning classification has been
received and an open record hearing having been conducted by the Pasco Planning Commission upon such
petition; and,
WHEREAS, during the hearing process the Planning Commission adopted findings supporting
a change of zoning and that said findings contained within the Memo to the Planning Commission under
Master File # 2016-005 are hereby adopted by the Pasco City Council; and,
WHEREAS, that the effect of the requested change in zoning classification shall not be
materially detrimental to the immediate vicinity; and,
WHEREAS, based upon substantial evidence and demonstration of the Petitioner, that: (A) the
requested change for the zoning classification is consistent with the adopted Comprehensive Plan; (B) the
requested change in zoning classification is consistent with or promotes the goals and objectives of the
Comprehensive Plan serving the general public interest in the community; and (C) there has been a change in
the neighborhood or community needs or circumstances warranting the requested change of the zoning
classification; and, NOW, THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON DO ORDAIN AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That the Zoning Ordinance for the City of Pasco, Washington, and the Zoning Map,
accompanying and being part of said Ordinance shall be and hereby is changed from R -1 (Retail
Business) to C-3 (General Commercial) for the real property as shown in the Exhibit “1” attached hereto
and described as follows:
Lot 2 & 3, Short Plat 2010-08
Section 2. That the change of the zoning classification as provided in Section 1 is contingent,
and conditioned upon the execution and compliance with a Concomitant Agreement entered into
between the Petitioner and the City which will attach to and run with the real property described in
Section 1 above. Said Concomitant Agreement is attached to this Ordinance as Exhibit No “2”.
Section 3. This ordinance shall take full force and effect five (5) days after its approval, passage
and publication as required by law.
Passed by the City Council of the City of Pasco this 1st day of May, 2017.
_______________________________
Matt Watkins, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_______________________________ _______________________________
Sandy Kenworthy, Interim City Clerk Leland Kerr, City Attorney
Page 61 of 175
Page 62 of 175
Page 63 of 175
Page 64 of 175
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 65 of 175
1
M E M O R A N D U M
DATE: March 16, 2017
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Dave McDonald, City Planner
SUBJECT: Rezone: Loyalty Inn C-1 (Retail Business) to C-3 (General Business)
(MF# Z 2016 -005)
On November 17, 2016 the Planning Commission held a hearing to consider
rezoning the Loyalty Inn property on West Lewis Street from C-1 to C-3. The
property owner requested the rezone to operate a U-Haul business in
conjunction with the motel. U-Haul businesses require C-3 or industrial
zoning to be licensed in the City.
Following the hearing the Planning Commission recommended the Loyalty
Inn rezone be denied. The denial was based on the findings listed in the
attached staff report. The applicant then appealed the recommendation and
the Council held a hearing on the appeal at their February 3, 2017 meeting.
Following Council debate the matter was remanded to the Planning
Commission with instructions to consider a rezone with a concomitant
agreement.
The Loyalty Inn property is located on a gateway street and as such many of
the high intensity land uses permitted in the C-3 district may not be
appropriate for the site. When considering a concomitant agreement the list
of permitted uses should exclude heavy machinery sales and service, lumber
yards, landscape storage yards, contractor facilities, mobile homes sales,
trucking firms, truck stops, towing impound yards and related or similar
uses. These types of uses are generally found near industrial centers but not
adjacent to residential neighborhoods. Restricting the more intense C-3 uses
would essentially cause the rezoned to similar to C-1 zoning.
A concomitant agreement for the property should include the following:
• All uses permitted in the “O” and C-1 Districts plus the rental of
domestic trucks and trailers not exceeding 24 feet in length. No
more 12 rental vehicles are permitted on-site per day. All other
C-3 uses are prohibited.
Page 66 of 175
2
Any action taken by the Council to rezone the property will need to be
supported by findings. The following findings can be used to support a
concomitant agreement for a rezone to C-3.
1. The site contains the Loyalty Inn.
2. The site is currently zoned C-1.
3. The Comprehensive Plan designates the property for commercial
uses.
4. Commercial uses include all uses contained the in “O”, C-1, CBD,
C-3, BP and CR Districts.
5. Comprehensive Plan Policy ED-2B encourages the development of
a wide range of commercial uses strategically located to support
local and regional needs.
6. When the site was developed in 1966 Lewis Street was one of the
major highway routes through the community.
7. Lewis Street is no longer a main highway through Pasco. As a
result the Loyalty Inn is no longer a first stop motel site.
8. The property is showing signs of disrepair.
9. Providing an opportunity for a greater range of commercial uses
through a rezone may lead to better maintenance and upkeep on
the property.
10. Six of the original eight motels located along Lewis Street have
been demolished or mostly converted to other uses.
11. Most of the motels in Pasco are now located within a short
distance from Highway 395 or I-182.
12. Rezoning the property to permit additional uses may help the
property to transition to other commercial uses that could
provide funding to help arrest the physical decline that had
occurred on the property.
13. The C-3 zone permits heavy machinery sales and service, lumber
yards, landscape storage yards, contractor facilities, mobile
homes sales, trucking firms, truck stops, towing impound yards
and related or similar uses that may not add value and character
to the neighborhood.
14. A concomitant agreement would be needed protect the general
character of the neighborhood from the more intense uses
permitted in the C-3 zone.
RECOMMENDATION
Motion for Findings of Fact: I move to adopt findings of
fact as contained in the March 16, 2017 staff memo.
Page 67 of 175
3
Motion for Recommendation: I move, based on the
findings of fact as adopted, the Planning Commission
recommend the City Council rezone the Loyalty Inn property
from C-1 to C-3 with a concomitant agreement limiting uses
on the property to all “O” and C-1 Districts plus the rental of
domestic trucks and trailers not exceeding 26 feet in length.
No more 12 rental vehicles are permitted on-site per day. All
other C-3 uses are prohibited.
Page 68 of 175
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 69 of 175
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 70 of 175
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 71 of 175
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 72 of 175
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 73 of 175
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 74 of 175
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 75 of 175
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 76 of 175
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 77 of 175
Lo
o
k
i
n
g
N
o
r
t
h
Page 78 of 175
Lo
o
k
i
n
g
E
a
s
t
Page 79 of 175
Lo
o
k
i
n
g
S
o
u
t
h
Page 80 of 175
Lo
o
k
i
n
g
W
e
s
t
Page 81 of 175
Si
t
e
Page 82 of 175
Si
t
e
Page 83 of 175
Planning Commission Minutes
3/16/2017
A.Rezone Rezone from C-1 to C-3 (Mohinder Sohal) (MF# Z
2016-005) (Remanded)
Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff.
Rick White, Community & Economic Development Director, discussed the remanded
rezone application from C-1 (Retail Business) to C-3 (General Business). This
application was considered by the Commission in November. The recommendation to
City Council was for denial. The applicant appealed the recommendation which was
forwarded to City Council. City Council held a closed record hearing and has
remanded the issue back to the Planning Commission with instructions to consider
the approval of the zone change through a concomitant agreement. The staff report
was prepared with essentially the same staff report from November with the addition
of a memorandum attached to it. The key takeaways are the conditions of the
concomitant agreement. Staff has taken prepared a list of conditions which include
prohibiting all uses in the C-3 zone with the exception of truck and trailer rentals and
has included a maximum number of trucks and trailers at 12. Staff would like the
Commission’s input on the adequacy of that condition and if anything else should be
included as a condition.
Chairman Cruz asked what would be the duration of the concomitant agreement.
Mr. White responded that it would be done through the rezone so it may be passed
onto a future property owner.
Jerry Hudnall, 1800 W. Lewis Street, spoke in support of the rezone application. He
stated that the concomitant agreement is reasonable. He stated that 12 vehicles
would be a high average of what they would typically have on the lot at one time –
there will likely only be 6 trucks and 6 trailers. He addressed a concern about the
length restriction of the trucks. The staff report stated a limit of 24’ in length but the
newer U-Haul trucks are 26’ in length. There are 24’ trucks available through U-Haul
but they are lesser condition since U-Haul is phasing them out so 26’ trucks would
look nicer on the property. He preferred not to keep 24’ trucks on the property since
they are an eye sore. Otherwise, he said that he accepted the conditions of the
concomitant and felt that this would give the property a chance to pull in extra income
to make improvements to the property and to bring new jobs.
Commissioner Bowers asked where the nearest U-Haul was located to the proposed
site.
Mr. Hudnall stated that the nearest U-Haul is roughly ½ mile away at a storage
facility. There is also a large U-Haul on Court Street, however, it was a much larger
operation because it is corporate.
Page 84 of 175
Commissioner Bowers asked what the operating hours would be.
Mr. Hudnall responded Monday-Saturday, 8:00am-7:00pm.
Commissioner Mendez asked what type of signage would be used.
Mr. Hudnall answered that most of the signage would be inside of the Loyalty Inn.
There may be a small sign hanging from the existing Loyalty Inn sign. There will not
be any banners – the trucks speak for themselves.
Chairman Cruz reminded the Commission that there would have to be a permit for the
sign.
Commissioner Bykonen asked staff if the requirement could be changed from 24’
trucks to 26’ trucks since the 26’ trucks are in better shape and less of an eye sore.
Mr. White responded that it would not be a problem and that 24’ was a typo.
Commissioner Bowers moved, seconded by Commissioner Greenaway, to adopt
findings of fact as contained in the March 16, 2017 staff memo. The motion passed
unanimously.
Commissioner Bowers moved, seconded by Commissioner Greenaway, based on the
findings of fact as adopted, the Planning Commission recommend the City Council
rezone the Loyalty Inn property from C-1 to C-3 with a concomitant agreement limiting
uses on the property to all “O” and C-1 Districts plus the rental of domestic truck and
trailers not exceeding 26 feet in length. No more than 12 rental vehicles are permitted
on site per day. All other C-3 uses are prohibited. The motion passed unanimously.
Page 85 of 175
AGENDA REPORT
FOR: City Council April 25, 2017
TO: Dave Zabell, City Manager
Rick White, Director
Community & Economic Development
Regular Meeting: 5/1/17
FROM: Dave McDonald, City Planner
Community & Economic Development
SUBJECT: Special Permit: Shop Height Variance (MF# SP 2017-005)
I. REFERENCE(S):
Proposed Resolution
Vicinity Map
Report to Planning Commission
Planning Commission Minutes Dated: 3/16/17 &4/20/17
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
MOTION: I move to approve Resolution No._____, accepting the Planning
Commission's recommendation and granting a special permit for an increase in shop
height at 1125 Road 44.
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
None
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
On March16, 2017 the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing to determine
whether or not to recommend a special permit to increase the height of a shop at 1125
Road 44 by 1 foot, 10 inches at 1125 Road 44.
Following the conduct of the public hearing, the Planning Commission reasoned that
with conditions, it would be appropriate to recommend approval of a special permit to
increase the height of a new shop to be built at 1125 Road 44.
The recommended conditions are contained in the attached Resolution.
Page 86 of 175
No written appeal of the Planning Commission’s recommendation has been received.
V. DISCUSSION:
The proposed shop will be placed on the applicant's property to minimize potential
impacts on neighboring properties. The front yard setback will be 125 feet. The side
yard to the north will be 22 feet. The side yard to the south will be 63 feet and the rear
year will be 131 feet. These generous setbacks will help ameliorate the additional
height requested by the applicant.
Page 87 of 175
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION GRANTING A SPECIAL PERMIT FOR AN INCREASE
IN SHOP HEIGHT AT 1125 ROAD 44.
WHEREAS, Jacob Huston submitted an application for an increase the height of
a shop to be located at 1125 Road 44 (Tax Parcel 119502206).
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on March 16,
2016 to review the Huston special permit application; and,
WHEREAS, following deliberations on April 20, 2017 and the adoption of
findings the Planning Commission recommended approval of a Special Permit to
increase the Huston shop by 1 foot and 10 inches with certain conditions;
WHEREAS, the City Council hereby adopts the Planning Commission findings
for the CLUE Church application; and, NOW, THEREFORE,
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO:
1. That a Special Permit is hereby granted to Jacob Huston for a shop
height increase under Master File # SP 2017-05 with the following
conditions:
a) The special permit shall apply to Franklin County tax parcel # 119502206,
addressed 1125 Road 44;
b) The garage must be developed in substantial conformance with the site plan
submitted with this special permit application:
c) The garage shall not exceed 17 feet 10 inches in height as measured at the
peak of the roof;
d) The special permit shall be null and void if a building permit has not been
obtained by May 31, 2018.
Passed by the City Council of the City of Pasco this 1st day of May 2017.
Matt Watkins, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Sandy Kenworthy, City Clerk Leland B. Kerr, City Attorney
Page 88 of 175
Vi
c
i
n
i
t
y
Ma
p
It
e
m
:
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
P
e
r
m
i
t
-
S
h
o
p
H
e
i
g
h
t
V
a
r
i
a
n
c
e
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
:
J
a
c
o
b
H
u
s
t
o
n
Fi
l
e
#
:
S
P
2
0
1
7
-
0
0
5
SI
T
E
Page 89 of 175
1
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
MASTER FILE NO: SP 2017-005 APPLICANT: Jacob Huston
HEARING DATE: 3/16/2017 1125 Road 44
ACTION DATE: 4/20/2017 Pasco, WA 99301
BACKGROUND
REQUEST: SPECIAL PERMIT: Detached garage height increase in an RS-12
(Suburban) Zone
1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:
Legal: Lot 11 Arlene’s Addition
General Location: 1125 Road 44
Property Size: 34,064 sq. ft.
2. ACCESS: The site is accessible from Road 44.
3. UTILITIES: Municipal utilities currently do not serve the site. Water from
the FCID irrigation canal is currently available to the site.
4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The site is currently zoned RS-12 (Suburban)
and contains a single family residence a well house and a shed.
Surrounding properties are zoned and developed as follows:
NORTH: RS-12 – Single-Family Residence
SOUTH: RS-12 – Single-Family/School Track Field
EAST: RS-12 – Single-Family Residence
WEST: RS-12 – Single-Family Residence
5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan designates the site
for Low-Density Residential uses.
6. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The City of Pasco is the lead agency
for this project. An environmental determination will be made after the public
hearing for this project. A Determination of Non-Significance or Mitigated
Determination of Non-Significance is likely for this application (WAC 197-11-
355).
ANALYSIS
The applicant has applied to construct a detached residential garage in excess
of the height of his house. Pursuant to PMC 25.22.030(1), detached residential
garages in RS-12 zones are permitted to be up to 18 feet in height but are not
to be taller than the house. In this case the proposed shop is slightly taller
than the house. In 2013 the zoning regulations were amended to allow for
Page 90 of 175
2
special permit review of shops and garages that may be taller than the height
specified in the code.
In this case the applicant is proposing to construct a 17’ 9” garage, just under
the 18 foot limitation for the RS-12 zone, but 1’ 9’’ taller than the house on the
lot. The maximum allowable height for a house in an RS-12 zone is 35 feet.
The applicant’s house is 16 feet tall and as a result the garage should be 16
feet tall unless an increase in height is granted through the special permit
process.
The existing shop/shop will be removed and replaced by the proposed 30’ by
40’ garage. The new garage will be located 125 feet east of Road 44 about 47
feet from the existing house. The nearest side property line will be 22 feet to the
north. The garage will also be setback 131 feet from the rear property line and
63 feet from the south property line. Minimum setbacks permitted the garage
to be located 25 feet from the front property line and 10 feet from any side
property line.
The generous setbacks proposed for the garage will ameliorate the minor height
difference between the house and the garage. For example with the garage
being locate 125 feet from Road 44 and 47 feet behind the house the angle of
sight over those distance will cause the garage to appear about the same height
as the house. Additionally the row of trees in front of the house and to the rear
of the house will also reduce the visual impacts of the height of the garage. The
yard directly to the north of the proposed garage also has a row of pine trees
separating the two properties.
The existence of larger than normal setbacks, surrounding pine trees and
location of the Tri City junior Academy track all are contributing factors that
will amelioration of the minor height increase of the proposed garage.
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 parcel contains just over three quarters of an acre.
2. The site is zoned RS-12 (Suburban).
3. The site fronts Road 44.
Page 91 of 175
3
4. The proposed garage will be located 125 feet from Road 44, 22 feet from
the north property line, 62 feet from the south property line and 131 feet
from the rear property line.
5. Pursuant to PMC § 25.22.030(1) the maximum height of detached
structures in the RS-12 zone is eighteen (18) feet.
6. Pursuant to PMC § 25.22.030(1) detached shops and garages exceeding
eighteen (18) feet in height may be approved by special permit.
7. The shop is proposed to be 1’ 9” feet taller than the house measured from
peak to peak.
8. The maximum dwelling height of the RS-12 zone is 35 feet.
9. The site is relatively flat and generally matches the elevation of Road 44.
10. The RS-12 zone requires minimum side and rear yard setbacks of ten
(10) feet each.
11. A row of trees in front of the house and to the rear of the house reduces
the visual impacts of the height of the proposed garage from Road 44 and
some properties to the south.
12. The yard directly to the north of the proposed garage has a row of pine
trees visually screening the applicant’s property from the property to the
north.
13. The Tri City Junior Academy running tack and sports field is located to
the south of the applicant’s 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) Will the proposed use be in accordance with the goals, policies, objectives
and text of the Comprehensive Plan?
Though the Plan does not specifically address detached residential shops and
garages, Plan Policy H-4-A encourages innovative techniques in the design of
residential neighborhoods to provide character and variety in the community.
The availability of the special permit review process to increase shop and
garage heights is a new zoning provision aimed at providing a location specific
evaluation of such requests. No aspect of the application conflicts with the
Comprehensive Plan.
(2) Will the proposed use adversely affect public infrastructure?
Page 92 of 175
4
Permitting an increase in garage height by 1’ 9’ will have no impact on public
infrastructure.
(3) Will the proposed use be constructed, maintained and operated to be in
harmony with existing or intended character of the general vicinity?
The RS-12 District provides for low density residential environments permitting
single-family homes and accessory structure on large suburban lots. The
applicant’s immediate neighborhood area contains 12,000 square foot lots and
a private school sports field. Residents in this part of the community commonly
request building permits for large detached shops and garages. Most recently a
shop was built directly south of the applicant’s property. The proposed garage
will be sited constructed and maintained in general harmony with the
character of the neighborhood.
The proposed garage will be built with exterior finishes and roofing to match
the details on the applicant’s home. These design standards will cause the
garage to be built in harmony with the existing character of the neighborhood.
(4) Will the location and height of proposed structures and the site design
discourage the development of permitted uses on property in the general
vicinity or impair the value thereof?
The proposed structure will be 17 feet lower than the maximum structure
height for the neighborhood. RS-12 zone allows homes to be constructed up to
thirty five (35) feet tall measured at the roof mid-point. The 35-foot height limit
to the mid-point of the roof could very well result in a home which is forty (40)
feet tall measured at the peak. There are a number of detached shops or
garages in the neighborhood. The shop located on the lot to the east of the
applicant’s has a shop/garage that exceeds the height of the dwelling on the
lot.
(5) Will the operations in connection with the proposal be more objectionable to
nearby properties by reason of noise, fumes, vibrations, dust, traffic, or
flashing lights than would be the operation of any permitted uses within
the district?
It is unlikely that there will be any difference in terms of use between a garage
that is 16 feet tall verses a 17’ 9’’ tall garage. Staff sees no reason why
structure height would increase the potential for objectionable effects such as
noise, fumes, vibrations, dust, traffic or flashing lights. The use of the site will
remain low-density single-family residential.
Page 93 of 175
5
(6) Will the proposed use endanger the public health or safety if located and
developed where proposed, or in any way become a nuisance to uses
permitted in the district?
Requirements of the International Building Code will ensure the garage will be
built to conform to all public health or safety standards. The building code
standards coupled with setback requirements will ensure the garage will not be
a nuisance to the neighborhood.
SUPPLEMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS BY PLANNING
COMMISSION FOR SHOPS/GARAGES.
In addition to making and entering conclusions from the record for special
permits based on the criteria in 25.86.060 the Planning Commission shall
consider the following for special permits dealing with increased heights for
detached shops and garages:
(1) Will the shop/garage match the principle structure in design and exterior
treatments such as roofing materials, siding, color, window and door
openings, eave overhangs, fenestrations and other architectural features?
Residential detached shops and garages are required to be compatible and
consistent with the house on the lot. That means either the garage needs to
have similar siding and roofing materials matching the home or in the case of
pole buildings eave overhangs are required along with colors that are similar to
the house. As a condition of approval the Planning Commission could require
additional architectural features to help offset the additional height.
(2) Will the existing topography and elevation of the site and surrounding
property exacerbate or attenuate the height of the proposed shop/garage?
The site is relatively flat and more or less level with the grade of Road 44.
There are no features on the site that would tend to exacerbate the proposed
height of the garage.
(3) Will the proposal include landscaping features or berms to ameliorate the
height of the shop/garage?
There are no landscaping features indicated on the proposed site plan however,
the existing trees on the lot will screen the proposed garage from the west and
south west. The neighboring property to the north also has a row of pine trees
along the property line separating the applicant’s property from the
neighboring property.
Page 94 of 175
6
(4) Will the shop/garage be erected on the property utilizing minimum
setbacks?
Based on the site plan (Exhibit ‘1’) the garage placement will substantially
exceed all minimum setbacks for the RS-12 zone. The garage will setback 125
feet from Road 44, 22 feet from the north property line, 63 feet from the south
property line and 131 feet from the rear property line.
(5) Is the site larger than the minimum lot size requirement for the zoning
district?
The RS-12 zone requires parcels be a minimum of 12,000 square feet. The site
is 34,064 square feet; over twice the minimum area. Larger lots allow for the
provision of greater setbacks.
APPROVAL CONDITIONS
1. The special permit shall apply to Franklin County tax parcel #
119502206, addressed 1125 Road 44;
2. The garage must be developed in substantial conformance with the site
plan submitted with this special permit application:
3. The garage shall not exceed 17 feet 10 inches in height as measured at
the peak of the roof;
4. The special shall be null and void if a building permit has not been
obtained by June 30, 2017.
RECOMMENDATION
MOTION for Findings of Fact: I move to adopt Findings of Fact and
Conclusions therefrom as contained in the April 20, 2017 staff report.
MOTION for Recommendation: I move, based on the Findings of
Fact and Conclusions therefrom, the Planning Commission recommend
the City Council grant a special permit to Jacob Huston for the location
of a shop at 1125 Road 44 with conditions as contained in the April 20,
2017 staff report.
Page 95 of 175
Vi
c
i
n
i
t
y
Ma
p
It
e
m
:
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
P
e
r
m
i
t
-
S
h
o
p
H
e
i
g
h
t
V
a
r
i
a
n
c
e
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
:
J
a
c
o
b
H
u
s
t
o
n
Fi
l
e
#
:
S
P
2
0
1
7
-
0
0
5
SI
T
E
Page 96 of 175
It
e
m
:
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
P
e
r
m
i
t
-
S
h
o
p
H
e
i
g
h
t
V
a
r
i
a
n
c
e
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
:
J
a
c
o
b
H
u
s
t
o
n
Fi
l
e
#
:
S
P
2
0
1
7
-
0
0
5
SI
T
E
SF
D
U
s
SF
D
U
s
Church/Private School
La
n
d
U
s
e
Ma
p
SF
D
U
s
Page 97 of 175
It
e
m
:
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
P
e
r
m
i
t
-
S
h
o
p
H
e
i
g
h
t
V
a
r
i
a
n
c
e
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
:
J
a
c
o
b
H
u
s
t
o
n
Fi
l
e
#
:
S
P
2
0
1
7
-
0
0
5
SI
T
E
RS
-
1
2
RS
-
1
2
RS
-
1
2
Z
o
n
i
n
g
Ma
p
RS
-
1
2
Page 98 of 175
Lo
o
k
i
n
g
N
o
r
t
h
Page 99 of 175
Lo
o
k
i
n
g
N
o
r
t
h
f
r
o
m
H
e
n
r
y
S
t
r
e
e
t
Page 100 of 175
Lo
o
k
i
n
g
E
a
s
t
Page 101 of 175
Lo
o
k
i
n
g
S
o
u
t
h
f
r
o
m
M
a
r
i
e
S
t
r
e
e
t
Page 102 of 175
Page 103 of 175
Page 104 of 175
Page 105 of 175
Page 106 of 175
Page 107 of 175
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
3/16/2017
D.Special Permit Shop Height Variance (Jacob Huston) (MF# SP
2017-005)
Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff.
Dave McDonald, City Planner, discussed the special permit for the variance of a shop
height. The applicant wishes to place a shop in the rear yard of the site. A few years
ago the City Council had the Planning Commission work on a code amendment
allowing an option for individuals that have shorter houses versus shop sizes to apply
for special permits to increase the height. The applicant owns the property on Road 44
and the home is an older home set in a depression lower than the road which makes it
difficult for anyone trying to build a reasonably sized shop in the backyard. However,
with the applicant’s request, he is only asking for a little under 2’ for his height
extension and given the shape of the lot, distance from the street and the landscaping
on his site it would be difficult to see the proposed shop from the street. The only
person that would be impacted to the north has already planted a row of trees and
provided the Planning Commission with a letter of support of the proposed shop
because the trees she has planted will provide a buffer or screen and won’t bother her
views.
Commissioner Roach asked for clarification of the site shown on the overhead.
Mr. McDonald responded that the grey shed on the property will be removed and the
proposed shop will be in front of the pine trees, 22’ from the property line. In this
zone, it could be within 10’ of the property line but he will be 12’ in excess of the
minimum setback.
Commissioner Bowers asked if the school was concerned or if they had any feedback.
Mr. McDonald said that he hadn’t heard from them. There are shops all throughout
the neighborhood of various shapes and heights.
Jacob Huston, 1125 Road 44, spoke on his special permit application. He stated that
he had spoken to 3 out of 5 of his neighbors and hadn’t heard any objections to his
proposal.
David Hurley, 4311 W. Marie Court, spoke in favor of the shop height proposal. He
said that he was a neighbor and had no issues with the proposal.
Commissioner Lukins moved, seconded by Commissioner Greenaway, to close the
hearing on the proposed special permit application and set April 20, 2017 as the date
for deliberations and the development of a recommendation for the City Council. The
motion passed unanimously.
Page 108 of 175
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
4/20/2017
C.Special Permit Shop Height Variance (Jacob Huston) (MF# SP
2017-005)
Chairwoman Polk read the master file number and asked for comments from staff.
Dave McDonald, City Planner, stated there were no additional comments.
Commissioner Bykonen moved, seconded by Commissioner Greenaway to adopt the
findings of fact and conclusions therefrom as contained in the April 20, 2017 staff
report. The motion passed unanimously.
Commissioner Bykonen moved, seconded by Commissioner Greenaway, based on the
findings of fact and conclusions as adopted, the Planning Commission recommend the
City Council grant a special permit to Jacob Huston for the location of a shop at 1125
Road 44 with conditions as contained in the April 20, 2017 staff report. The motion
passed unanimously.
Page 109 of 175
AGENDA REPORT
FOR: City Council April 21, 2017
TO: Dave Zabell, City Manager
Rick White, Director
Community & Economic Development
Regular Meeting: 5/1/17
FROM: Jeff Adams, Associate Planner
Community & Economic Development
SUBJECT: Special Permit: Maria Segura Beauty School (MF# SP 2017-004)
I. REFERENCE(S):
Vicinity Map
Proposed Resolution
Report to Planning Commission
Planning Commission Minutes: Dated 3/16/2017 and 4/20/2017
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
MOTION: I move to approve Resolution No._______, approving a special permit for
the location of a beauty school in a C-3 Zoning district at 2508 W Sylvester Street,
Suite E, as recommended by the Planning Commission.
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
None
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
On March 16, 2017 the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing to determine
whether or not to recommend the location of a beauty school at 2508 W. Sylvester
Street, Suite E.
Following the conduct of a public hearing, the Planning Commission reasoned it would
be appropriate to recommend locating a beauty school at 2508 W. Sylvester Street,
Suite E.
No written appeal of the Planning Commission’s recommendation has been received.
Page 110 of 175
V. DISCUSSION:
Applicant is proposing to establish a beauty school in a commercial retail mall located
at 2508 W Sylvester Street, Suite E. The location is in a C-3 (General Business) zoning
district.
The beauty school will provide training for up to 20 full-time or 40 part-time students.
Page 111 of 175
Vi
c
i
n
i
t
y
Ma
p
It
e
m
:
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
P
e
r
m
i
t
-
B
e
a
u
t
y
S
c
h
o
o
l
i
n
a
C
-
3
Z
o
n
e
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
:
M
a
r
i
a
S
e
g
u
r
a
Fi
l
e
#
:
S
P
2
0
1
7
-
0
0
4
SI
T
E
Page 112 of 175
…
RESOLUTION NO._______
A RESOLUTION GRANTING A SPECIAL PERMIT FOR THE LOCATION OF A BEAUTY
SCHOOL IN A C-3 ZONING DISTRICT AT 2508 W SYLVESTER STREET, SUITE E.
WHEREAS, Maria Segura submitted an application for the location of a Beauty School located
at 2508 W Sylvester Street, Suite E (Tax Parcel #119 461 100); and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on March 16, 2017 to review a
special permit for the proposed Beauty School; and,
WHEREAS, following deliberations on April 20, 2017 the Planning Commission recommended
approval of a Special Permit for the Beauty School with certain conditions;
NOW, THEREFORE,
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO:
1. That a Special Permit is hereby granted to Maria Segura for a Beauty School in a C-3
Zoning district under Master File # SP 2017-004 with the following conditions:
a. The special permit shall apply to Parcel #119 461 100.
b. The Beauty School shall comply with all requirements found in RCW 18.16 and
308-20 relating to beauty schools.
c. No more than 20 full-time or 40 part-time students, or any equivalent
combination thereof, shall be allowed.
d. The special permit shall be null and void if all necessary licenses have not been
obtained by March 1, 2018.
2. Passed by the City Council of the City of Pasco this 1st day of May, 2017.
_______________________________
Matt Watkins, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
________________________________ _____________________________
Sandy Kenworthy, Interim City Clerk Leland B. Kerr, City Attorney
Page 113 of 175
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
MASTER FILE NO: SP 2017-004 APPLICANT: Maria E. Segura
HEARING DATE: 03/16/2017 1901 S. Dilley Ave
ACTION DATE: 04/20/2017 Moses Lake, WA 98837
BACKGROUND
REQUEST: SPECIAL PERMIT: Location of a Beauty School in a C-3 Zone
(2508 W Sylvester Street, Suite E)
1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:
Legal: That Portion of the West ½ of the Northeast ¼ of the Northwest ¼
of the Southeast ¼ of Section 25, Township 29, Range 9 as
follows: Beginning at the northeast corner of said subdivision,
thence S 89 D20' W along the north line of said subdivision 165';
Thence S00D26'W parallel with the east line of said subdivision
246.92'; Thence N89D20'E parallel with the north line of said
subdivision 165' to a point on the east line of said subdivision;
thence N00D26'E along the east line of said subdivision 246.92'
to the Point of Beginning (Parcel #119 461 100).
General Location: 2508 W Sylvester Street, Suite E
Property Size: 35,785 square feet (.82 acres)
2. ACCESS: Access to the site is available from W. Sylvester Street
3. UTILITIES: The property is served by utilities located in Sylvester Street.
4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The property is currently zoned C-3 (General
Business). Surrounding properties are zoned C-1, C-3 and R-4 and are
fully developed. Surrounding properties are zoned and developed as
follows:
NORTH: C-1 – Commercial
SOUTH: C-3 – Storage
EAST: R-4 – Apartments
WEST: R-4 – Apartments
5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan designates the site
for commercial development. Goal CF-5 suggests adequate provisions
should be made for educational facilities located throughout the urban
Page 114 of 175
2
growth area. Policy CF-5-A encourages the appropriate location and
design of schools throughout the community.
6. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The City of Pasco is the lead agency
for this project. An environmental determination will be made after the public
hearing for this project. A Determination of Non-Significance or Mitigated
Determination of Non-Significance is likely for this application (WAC 197-11-
355).
DISCUSSION
Applicant is proposing to establish a Beauty School in a commercial retail mall
located at 2508 W Sylvester Street, Suite E. The location is in a C-3 (General
Business) zoning district.
There is not specific zoning for beauty schools; however the code does make
provision for schools/educational facilities in the community through the
special permit process. Beauty schools have been permitted within the City in
the past and licensed as private schools. Clare's Beauty College for example
was located at the northwest corner of 4th Avenue and Lewis Street in the
downtown area. Lupita’s Beauty Salon recently received a Special Permit to
operate at 915 West Court Street.
The beauty school will be new to the area. Training will be provided for up to 20
full-time or 40 part-time students. The suite has been divided into office,
classroom, and hands-on training areas with two manicure stations, three
shampoo sinks and three hair-cutting training stations. A single restroom is
also provided.
Suite E contains 940 square feet of floor area. Beauty schools require one
parking space for each 300 square of floor area. As such, the proposed facility
would require 4 parking stalls. This commercial mall has 48 spaces which are
shared between 6 suites, thus providing 8 shared spaces per unit.
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
and comments made at the public hearing. The Planning Commission may
add additional findings as deemed appropriate.
1. Applicant is proposing a Beauty School at 2508 W Sylvester St. #E.
2. The location is in a C-3 zone.
3. Schools/educational facilities require special permits regardless of the
zoning.
Page 115 of 175
3
4. Beauty schools have been permitted within the City in the past and
licensed as private schools, including a recent one at 915 W. Court
Street.
5. Training will be provided for up to 20 full time students at one time, or
up to 40 part time students throughout the day, depending on number
and type of enrollment.
6. The suite has been divided into office, classroom, manicure stations,
shampoo sinks, hair-cutting training stations, and a restroom.
7. Suite E contains 940 square feet of floor area.
8. Beauty schools require one parking space for each 300 square of floor
area; the proposed facility would require 4 parking stalls.
9. This 6-suite mall provides 8 shared spaces per unit and 48 parking
spaces overall.
CONCLUSIONS BASED ON STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT
Before recommending approval or denial of a special permit the Planning
Commission must draw its conclusion from the findings of fact based upon the
criteria listed in P.M.C. 25.86.060. The criteria and staff listed conclusions are
as follows:
1) Will the proposed use be in accordance with the goals, policies, objectives
and text of the Comprehensive Plan?
The proposed use is supported by Plan goals CF-5 which suggests
adequate provisions be made for educational facilities throughout the
Urban Growth Area.
2) Will the proposed use adversely affect public infrastructure?
Public streets and utilities are in place to serve the property. Demands
on infrastructure would increase with the addition of the beauty school
to the retail shopping center, but would likely not exceed the design
standard of the center.
3) Will the proposed use be constructed, maintained and operated to be in
harmony with existing or intended character of the general vicinity?
The proposed Beauty Salon will operate in a commercial mall containing
six 900+ square-foot suites and 48 parking spaces. With 20 full-time
students at least 20 parking spaces could be utilized at a time. For
comparison, a small restaurant using the same size suite would require
Page 116 of 175
4
10 parking spaces. The property is currently underutilized and the
available parking is more than adequate for the proposed use. However
reserving 20 or more spaces for a single suite out of six would hobble
the owner when recruiting other, more parking-intense uses for the
other five suites.
4) Will the location and height of proposed structures and the site design
discourage the development of permitted uses on property in the general
vicinity or impair the value thereof?
The height and footprint of the building will not change with the
conversion to the Learning Center. Parking is more than adequate for
the proposed use.
5) Will the operations in connection with the proposal be more objectionable
to nearby properties by reason of noise, fumes, vibrations, dust, traffic, or
flashing lights than would be the operation of any permitted uses within
the district?
There will be an increase in vehicular traffic due to the addition of up to
20 full-time or 40 part-time students (or any combination of these). The
property will operate as a beauty school. The increased traffic would
likely not exceed the design standard of the currently underutilized
retail shopping center.
6) Will the proposed use endanger the public health or safety if located and
developed where proposed, or in anyway will become a nuisance to uses
permitted in the district?
The addition of up to 20 full-time or 40 part-time students (or any
combination of these) within the beauty school would create an increase
in traffic throughout the day. The increased traffic would likely not
exceed the design standard of the currently underutilized retail
shopping center.
Proposed Approval Conditions
1. The special permit shall apply to Parcel #119 461 100.
2. The Beauty School shall comply with all requirements found in RCW
18.16 and 308-20 relating to beauty schools.
3. No more than 20 full-time or 40 part-time students, or any
equivalent combination thereof, shall be allowed.
Page 117 of 175
5
4. The special permit shall be null and void if all necessary licenses
have not been obtained by March 1, 2018.
RECOMMENDATION
MOTION: I move to adopt findings of fact and conclusions
therefrom as contained in the April 20, 2017 staff report.
MOTION: I move, based on the findings of fact and conclusions
therefrom, the Planning Commission recommend the City
Council grant a special permit for the location of a Beauty
School at 2508 W Sylvester Street, Suite E (Parcel #119 461 100)
with conditions as listed in the April 20, 2017 staff report.
Page 118 of 175
Vi
c
i
n
i
t
y
Ma
p
It
e
m
:
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
P
e
r
m
i
t
-
B
e
a
u
t
y
S
c
h
o
o
l
i
n
a
C
-
3
Z
o
n
e
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
:
M
a
r
i
a
S
e
g
u
r
a
Fi
l
e
#
:
S
P
2
0
1
7
-
0
0
4
SI
T
E
Page 119 of 175
It
e
m
:
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
P
e
r
m
i
t
-
B
e
a
u
t
y
S
c
h
o
o
l
i
n
a
C
-
3
Z
o
n
e
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
:
M
a
r
i
a
S
e
g
u
r
a
Fi
l
e
#
:
S
P
2
0
1
7
-
0
0
4
SI
T
E
It
e
m
:
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
P
e
r
m
i
t
-
B
e
a
u
t
y
S
c
h
o
o
l
i
n
a
C
-
3
Z
o
n
e
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
:
M
a
r
i
a
S
e
g
u
r
a
Fi
l
e
#
:
S
P
2
0
1
7
-
0
0
4
La
n
d
U
s
e
Ma
p
Co
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
Co
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
SF
D
U
s
Mi
n
i
-
St
o
r
a
g
e
A
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
s
M
i
n
i
-
S
t
o
r
a
g
e
SF
D
U
Condos
Ap
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
s
SI
T
E
Page 120 of 175
It
e
m
:
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
P
e
r
m
i
t
-
B
e
a
u
t
y
S
c
h
o
o
l
i
n
a
C
-
3
Z
o
n
e
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
:
M
a
r
i
a
S
e
g
u
r
a
Fi
l
e
#
:
S
P
2
0
1
7
-
0
0
4
SI
T
E
It
e
m
:
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
P
e
r
m
i
t
-
B
e
a
u
t
y
S
c
h
o
o
l
i
n
a
C
-
3
Z
o
n
e
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
:
M
a
r
i
a
S
e
g
u
r
a
Fi
l
e
#
:
S
P
2
0
1
7
-
0
0
4
C-
1
C-
1
C-
3
R-4 R-4
SI
T
E
R-
4
C-
1
C-
3
C-
3
Zo
n
i
n
g
Ma
p
Page 121 of 175
Lo
o
k
i
n
g
N
o
r
t
h
Page 122 of 175
Lo
o
k
i
n
g
E
a
s
t
Page 123 of 175
Lo
o
k
i
n
g
S
o
u
t
h
Page 124 of 175
Lo
o
k
i
n
g
W
e
s
t
Page 125 of 175
Si
t
e
Page 126 of 175
Su
i
t
e
“
E
”
Page 127 of 175
Page 128 of 175
Page 129 of 175
Page 130 of 175
Page 131 of 175
Page 132 of 175
Page 133 of 175
Page 134 of 175
Page 135 of 175
Page 136 of 175
Page 137 of 175
Page 138 of 175
Page 139 of 175
-1-
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
3/16/17
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
C. Special Permit Location of a Beauty School in a C-3 Zone (Maria
Segura) (MF# SP 2017-004)
Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff.
Rick White, Community & Economic Development Director, discussed the special permit
application for the location of a beauty school in a C-3 zone. The property is located on
Sylvester Street between 26th Avenue and 24th Avenue. It is a straight-forward application.
The proposal is for a 2 student beauty school in an existing commercial retail mall. The
code requires special permits for educational facilities. The Planning Commission has
seen a number of beauty schools as of recently. There is required parking available and
would be a good use at this site.
Claudia Becerra, 902 S. Ione Street, Kennewick spoke on her special permit application.
She explained that the school will have a purpose of bringing opportunities to individuals
needing to learn skills in hair, nails and make up. Their focus would be on the youth –
many who either drop out of high school or have just finished high school and need
licenses and skills and they don’t know where to go.
Chairman Cruz asked if they had a chance to look at the staff report prepared by staff and
if they were fine with the rules.
Ms. Becerra said yes. She noted that they have 45 parking spaces and the school would
host 15-20 students so there would be enough parking and they have enough room for
emergency situations in the back and front of the building.
Commissioner Roach asked if they had spoken to any of the neighboring business owners
to see if they had any issues.
Ms. Becerra responded that she had not. She knew that letters would be sent out to the
neighboring property owners but she had not spoken to any of the neighbors.
Commissioner Bowers asked where their current barber shop was located.
Ms. Becerra answered that it was located at 746 W. Court Street, Suite B.
Commissioner Bowers asked what uses are next to the proposed site in the mall.
Ms. Becerra replied that one is an accountant and the other has music. The accounting
office does not generate much parking even during tax season so this school will not be
over utilizing the parking.
Commissioner Greenaway asked for clarification on the number of students because the
staff report said there would only be 2 students.
Page 140 of 175
-2-
Ms. Becerra responded that they would have 15-20 students. It would be open from
10am-7pm, Monday-Friday and 9am-4pm, Saturday. The number of students would be
determined on appointment times. It could not be 15-20 students at one time.
Commissioner Greenaway replied that it would fluctuate.
Mr. White responded that it was staff’s understanding that there would only be 2 students
at a time. He would be surprised if the space was large enough for more than 2-4 at one
time.
Ms. Becerra explained that at the time of the application there were only 2 registered
students which is why there was confusion for the number of students.
Commissioner Bykonen asked the applicant if they could submit a floor diagram of how
they intend to use the space.
Ms. Becerra said that she could submit that.
Chairman Cruz explained to the applicant that she has to work some things out with city
staff prior to the next meeting.
With no further questions or comments the public hearing closed.
Commissioner Roach asked what the maximum capacity was for the unit.
Mr. White replied that it would be confusing because many people could fit if standing but
perhaps not for the use.
Chairman Cruz added that with a 940 square foot unit, with chairs installed there
wouldn’t be room for probably more than 10 people.
There was general discussion on how many students would likely attend.
Commissioner Roach asked is the parking would need to take into consideration of the
neighboring businesses that share the parking lot.
Mr. White said the code doesn’t distinguish business hours for parking.
Commissioner Bowers moved, seconded by Commissioner Mendez, to close the public
hearing and schedule deliberations, the adoption of findings of fact and development of a
recommendation for the City Council for the April 20, 2017 Planning Commission Meeting.
The motion passed unanimously.
Respectfully submitted,
David McDonald, City Planner
Page 141 of 175
-1-
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
4/20/17
B. Special Permit Location of a Beauty School in a C-3 Zone (Maria
Segura) (MF# SP 2017-004)
Chairwoman Polk read the master file number and asked for comments from staff.
Rick White, Community & Economic Development Director, discussed the special permit
application for the location of a beauty school in a C-3 zone. At the previous meeting
there was a misunderstanding of how many students would be present in the school at
one time and how many would be able to fit in the building per building code. Staff
worked with the applicant, who submitted a floor plan, and the applicant confirmed they
would have 20-30 students at any given time. The building had adequate parking and
enough room to fit the number of students with the configuration the applicant had
submitted and was within the parameters of the building code.
Commissioner Greenaway asked if someone from the State would come out to inspect to
insure they had a separate sink to mix the chemicals.
Mr. White responded that he didn’t believe anyone from the State would be required to
come inspect, however, the City of Pasco Inspection Services Division would inspect the
property.
Commissioner Bowers asked if they had enough bathroom stalls required.
Mr. White stated that the building was in compliance with the applicant’s request.
Commissioner Polk asked for clarification on the classroom and training area that was
depicted in the applicant’s plans that were submitted.
Mr. White responded that the training area would be where the actual haircuts would take
place.
Commissioner Roach moved, seconded by Commissioner Bykonen to adopt the findings of
fact and conclusions therefrom as contained in the April 20, 2017 staff report. The motion
passed unanimously.
Commissioner Roach moved, seconded by Commissioner Bykonen, based on the findings
of fact and conclusions therefrom the Planning Commission recommend the City Council
grant a special permit for the location of a beauty school at 2508 W. Sylvester Street, Suite
E (Parcel # 119-461-100) with conditions as listed in the April 20, 2017 staff report. The
motion passed unanimously.
Respectfully submitted,
David McDonald, City Planner
Page 142 of 175
AGENDA REPORT
FOR: City Council April 25, 2017
TO: Dave Zabell, City Manager
Rick White, Director,
Community & Economic Development
Regular Meeting: 5/1/17
FROM: Dave McDonald, City Planner
Community & Economic Development
SUBJECT: Preliminary Chiawana Heights (MF# PP 2017-002)
I. REFERENCE(S):
Proposed Resolution
Overview Map
Vicinity Map
Preliminary Plat
Report to the Planning Commission
Planning Commission Minutes Dated: 3/16/17 & 4/20/17
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
MOTION: I move to approve Resolution No.________, approving the Preliminary
Plat for Chiawana Heights.
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
None
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
On March 16, 2017 the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing to develop a
recommendation for the City Council on the preliminary plat for Chiawana Heights.
The proposed plat is located at the southwest corner in the 4200 block of Road 84.
Following the hearing, the Planning Commission determined that with conditions, the
preliminary plat should be recommended for approval. The recommended conditions
are contained in the attached resolution.
No written appeal of the Planning Commission’s recommendation has been received.
Page 143 of 175
V. DISCUSSION:
This site contains approximately 21 acres that will be divided into 80 lots. The lots
will range in size from 7,215 square feet to over 12,000 square feet with an average lot
size of 8,205 square feet. This plat will be the first plat to develop on the D NR
property located between Road 84 and Road 68 south of I-182.
Page 144 of 175
1
RESOLUTION NO.______
A RESOLUTION APPROVING A PRELIMINARY PLAT
FOR CHIAWANA HEIGHTS.
WHEREAS, RCW 58.17 enables the City to uniformly administer the process of
subdividing property for the overall welfare of the community; and,
WHEREAS, owners and developers of property situated in the south half of the southwest
quarter Section 5, Township 9 North, Range 29 East, W.M., have requested approval of a
preliminary plat; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposed Chaiwana
Heights plat and developed findings related thereto and said findings are hereby adopted by the
City C ouncil; and,
WHEREAS, following a public hearing, the Planning Commission found the proposed
plat promoted the general welfare of the community and recommended said preliminary plat be
approved with conditions; NOW THEREFORE,
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO:
That the preliminary plat for Chiawana Heights located in the south half of the northwest quarter
Section 16, Township 9 North, Range 29, East W.M., is hereby approved with the following
conditions:
1. No utility vaults, pedestals, or other obstructions will be allowed at street intersections.
2. All corner lots and other lots that present difficulties for the placement of yard fencing
shall be identified in the notes on the face of the final plat(s).
3. The developer shall install a common "Estate Type" fence six-feet in height along the
west line of the plat as a part of the infrastructure improvements associated with the plat.
The fence must be constructed of masonry block. A fencing detail must be included on
the subdivision construction drawings. Consideration must be given to a reasonable
vision triangle at the intersection of streets. The City may make repairs or replace the
fencing as needed. Property owners adjoining said fence shall be responsible for
payment of all costs associated with maintenance and upkeep. These fencing
requirements shall be noted clearly on the face of the final plat(s). A concrete mow strip
shall be installed under any common fence as directed by the City Parks Division and
shall be approved by the Parks Department prior to installation.
4. A common solid fence must be installed along the southern boundary of the proposed plat
adjacent to the school site. (A common solid fence means a cedar, vinyl, or block fence
across the south line of all lots abutting the school property. The fence must be installed
before or during construction of each home.)
Page 145 of 175
2
5. Excess right-of-way along Road 84 must be landscaped to match the landscaping on the
west side of Road 84. All landscaping and irrigation plans shall be reviewed and
approved by the Parks Department prior to installation.
6. The developer/builder shall pay the City a "common area maintenance fee" of $475 per
lot upon issuance of building permits for homes. These funds shall be placed in a fund
and used to finance the maintenance of arterial boulevard strips. The City shall not accept
maintenance responsibility for the landscaping abutting said streets until such time as all
fees are collected for each phase that abut said streets.
7. Lots abutting Road 84 shall not have direct access to Road 84. Access shall be prohibited
by means of deed restrictions or statements on the face of the final plat(s).
8. The final plat(s) shall contain a 10-foot utility easement parallel to all streets unless
otherwise required by the Franklin County PUD.
9. The final plat(s) shall contain the following Franklin County Public Utility District
statement: “The individual or company making improvements on a lot or lots of this Plat
is responsible for providing and installing all trench, conduit, primary vaults, secondary
junction boxes, and backfill for the PUD’s primary and secondary distribution system in
accordance with PUD specifications; said individual or company will make full advance
payment of line extension fees and will provide all necessary utility easements prior to
PUD construction and/or connection of any electrical service to or within the plat”.
Passed by the City Council of the City of Pasco this 1st day of May, 2017.
__________________________
Matt Watkins, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_________________________ _____________________________
Sandy Kenworthy, City Clerk Leland B. Kerr, City Attorney
Page 146 of 175
It
e
m
:
C
h
i
a
w
a
n
a
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
8
0
-
L
o
t
P
r
e
l
i
m
i
n
a
r
y
P
l
a
t
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
:
R
o
n
A
s
m
u
s
H
o
m
e
s
I
n
c
.
Fi
l
e
#
:
P
P
2
0
1
7
-
0
0
2
SI
T
E
Vi
c
i
n
i
t
y
Ma
p
Page 147 of 175
It
e
m
:
C
h
i
a
w
a
n
a
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
8
0
-
L
o
t
P
r
e
l
i
m
i
n
a
r
y
P
l
a
t
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
:
R
o
n
A
s
m
u
s
H
o
m
e
s
I
n
c
.
Fi
l
e
#
:
P
P
2
0
1
7
-
0
0
2
Ov
e
r
v
i
e
w
Ma
p
SI
T
E
Page 148 of 175
It
e
m
:
C
h
i
a
w
a
n
a
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
8
0
-
L
o
t
P
r
e
l
i
m
i
n
a
r
y
P
l
a
t
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
:
R
o
n
A
s
m
u
s
H
o
m
e
s
I
n
c
.
Fi
l
e
#
:
P
P
2
0
1
7
-
0
0
2
SI
T
E
Vi
c
i
n
i
t
y
Ma
p
Page 149 of 175
IHE PREUMINARY PLAY or
CH
I
A
WANA HEIGHTS’
NW
.
1/
4
or SEC 16.Y.O9N.R.29E..w.M..cm’or FASCO1
.
FR
A
N
K
L
I
N
coumv.WASHINGTON
ES
RI
P
T
I
M
1
..
.
1
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
.
.
1
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
V,
,
‘
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
_1
u
,
,
.
.
W
T
1
1
..
..
..
1
..
..
"
1
w
-r
-r
-
-'
-'
1
W
1
3
D
1
ml
mv
u
.
mv
u
.
11
3
"M
M
..
‘
é
‘
V
.3
5
,
_
1
1
1,
V
1
-
‘‘
1
1 1
1’
1 1
a
1 1
-j
1
J
9
1 1
4
'1
y
3‘.....
w
~.1.......1
1
V
1......................
Eu
“"
3
'
‘
,11 9 $2132....
..
1
.1..11..1 -1 1 M“K
1
1‘
z
"
v
'
;
'
§
E
#3
3
3
’
;
""'1 1 T?f“,,’‘_”f‘,[,‘[if
2.
.
1~
,
»
.
~
1
«
.
,1
.
1
‘.
1.1
3
1.
1
.
19
.
1
1.
.
.1
.
~
"=--1»1 1
.2
TL
1 1
"
12
1
:
2
.
.
1.
1
1
.
"
.
‘
'1‘Ir“
.
1 1 1 1
/
p
1.21.‘:5 1 ‘
—
—
or
—
—
—
wr
—
1
W1
1 1 1
:1
.
:
K
_/
W!‘1 1
E‘
1
,
.1
»
yr
.1“:'.*.2
:;
—
1
—
r
“—
—'
*
—
*"
*
‘
J
'
~
/
1..11..s.1_
5?
3
‘V
-m
“
W;
1-
.
°
.
'
.
=
;
.
:
:
:
:
.
'
.
=
;
:
=
1:
1
1
.
2
2
»
1-
:
'
.
:
;
.
.1
.
...'.1..
—~
..
.
'“
‘
‘
’
We’:31%
..
..
..
1
..
‘
7,"&-.5.-*‘
11
‘
§,
$
v
*
°
LE
G
E
N
D
-
-
-m
u
-
a
n
-
1
:
...................no/v A51!!!
5
.1S7/z.47r17/V smzumvc 4-mpmm,/-c 1..1...1 1......
W.
”
W
1,
w
2:
.
“
$.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
'"""i;:_;"‘M
m
2»
":
.
;
.
:
1
*
'
"5
:"
.
*
.
;
.
-
'
.
:
'
1
*
.
'
.
"
.
:
.
.
-
2
.
-
'
;
'
:
.
1
*
.
;
-
.
1
.
'
.
*
'
.
.
.
w m
..
.
.
.
.
1
.
.
.
.
1
.
.
.
..
1
.
.
1
.
.
.
W
W 5257
Page 150 of 175
1
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
MASTER FILE NO: PP 2017-002
HEARING DATE: 3/16/2017
ACTION DATE: 4/20/2017
APPLICANT: Ron Asmus Homes, Inc.
2810 W. Clearwater Ave
Suite 102
Kennewick, WA 99336
BACKGROUND
REQUEST: Preliminary Plat: Chiawana Heights, 80-Lots
1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:
Legal: Lot 3 of Record Survey 1847849
General Location: 4200 Block of Road 84.
Property Size: 21.44 Acres
Number of Lots Proposed: 80 single-family lots
Square Footage Range of Lots: 7,215 ft² to 12,354 ft²
Average Lot Square Footage: 8,205 ft²
2. ACCESS: The property will have access from Road 84 and a future north
south road to the east.
3. UTILITIES: Municipal water service is located in Road 84 and sewer
service is located in Galway Lane to the west and along the eastern edge
of the proposed plat.
4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The site is zoned R-1 (low-Density
Residential). Surrounding properties are zoned and developed as follows:
NORTH: R-1 – Single-Family
SOUTH: R-1 – Vacant (Future school site))
EAST: R-1 – Single-Family
WEST R-1 – Single-Family
5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan indicates the site is
intended for low-density residential development. According to the
Comprehensive Plan, low-density residential development means 2 to 5
dwelling units per acre. The criteria for allocation under the future land
use section of Volume II of the Comprehensive Plan (Vol. II, page 17)
encourages development of lands designated for low-density residential
uses when or where: sewer is available, the location is suitable for home
sites, and there is a market demand for new home sites Policy H-1-E
encourages the advancement of home ownership and Goal H-2 suggests
the City strive to maintain a variety of housing options for residents of
Page 151 of 175
2
the community. Goal LU-2 encourages the maintenance of established
neighborhoods and the creation of new neighborhoods that are safe and
enjoyable places to live.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The City of Pasco is the lead
agency for this project. An environmental determination will be made
after the public hearing for this project. A Determination of Non-
Significance or Mitigated Determination of Non-Significance is likely for
this application (WAC 197-11-355).
ANALYSIS
The project site is located immediately east of Road 84 north of the FCID
irrigation canal on the former DNR property. In 2013 the DNR was directed by
the State legislature to work with the City of Pasco to rezone all of the DNR
property south of I-182 based on a refinement of the City’s land use map
contained in the Comprehensive Plan. The City’s Comprehensive Plan has
called for the property in question to be developed with low-density single-
family homes since 1982. The property was zoned R-1 in 2014 and sold to
developers last year.
Chiawana Heights is the first of several plats that will be proposed for former
DNR property. The proposed plat is consistent with both the zoning
regulations and the Comprehensive Plan.
LOT LAYOUT: The proposed Plat contains 80 residential lots. The lots vary in
size from 7,215 square feet to 12,354 square feet. The proposal is consistent
with the density requirements of the R-1 zoning on the site.
RIGHTS-OF-WAY: All lots have frontage on streets which will be dedicated.
UTILITIES: Municipal water and irrigation lines are located in Road 84.
Sewer lines are located to the west in Galway Lane and along the eastern edge
of the proposed plat. The developer will be responsible for extending utilities
into the Plat.
A utility easement will be needed along the first 10 feet of street frontages of all
lots. The final location and width of the easements will be determined during
the engineering design phase. The front yard setbacks for construction
purposes are larger than the requested easements; therefore the front yard
easements will not diminish the buildable area of the lots.
The City Engineer will determine the specific placement of fire hydrants and
streetlights when construction plans are submitted. As a general rule, fire
Page 152 of 175
3
hydrants are located at street intersections and with a maximum interval of
500 feet between hydrants on alternating sides of the street. Streetlights are
located at street intersections, with a maximum interval of less than 300 feet
on residential streets, and with a maximum interval of 150 feet on arterial
streets. The intervals for street light placements are measure along the
centerline of the road. Street lights are placed on alternating sides of the
street.
STREET NAMES: All streets will be named prior to approval of final plats.
IRRIGATION: The municipal code requires the installation of irrigation lines
as a part of the infrastructure improvements.
WATER RIGHTS: The assignment of water rights is a requirement for
subdivision approval per Pasco Municipal Code Section 26.04.115(B) and
Section 3.07.160. If no water rights are available to transfer to the City the
property owner/developer must pay a water right fee in lieu thereof.
FINDINGS OF FACT
State law (RCW 58.17.010) and the Pasco Municipal Code require the Planning
Commission to develop Findings of Fact as to how this proposed subdivision
will protect and enhance the health, safety and general welfare of the
community. The following is a listing of proposed "Findings of Fact":
Prevent Overcrowding: Density requirements of the R-1 zone are designed to
address overcrowding concerns. The Comprehensive Plan suggests the property
in question be developed with 2 to 5 dwelling units per acre. The proposed Plat
has a density of approximately 3.7 units per acre. No more than 40 percent of
each lot is permitted to be covered with structures per the R-1 standards.
Parks Opens Space/Schools: The nearest City Park is located half a mile to
the west in the Loviisa Farms neighborhood. The City is required by RCW
58.17.110 to make a finding that adequate provisions are being made to
ameliorate the impacts of the proposed subdivision on the School District. At
the request of the School District the City enacted a school impact fee in 2012.
The imposition of this impact fee addresses the requirement to ensure there are
adequate provisions for schools. A school impact fee in the amount of $4,700
will be charged for each new dwelling unit at the time of building permit
issuance.
Effective Land Use/Orderly Development: The Plat is laid out for single-
family development as identified in the Comprehensive Plan. The maximum
density permitted under the Comprehensive Plan is 5 dwelling units per acre.
Page 153 of 175
4
The developer is proposing a density of 3.7 units per acre. The proposed
development will include improvements to Road 84.
Safe Travel & Walking Conditions: The plat will connect to the community
through the existing network of streets. Sidewalks are installed at the time
homes are built on individual lots. The sidewalks will be constructed to
current City standards and to the standards of the American’s with Disabilities
Act (ADA). The ADA ramps at the corners of all intersection will be installed
with the construction of the road improvements.
Adequate Provision of Municipal Services: All lots within the Plat will be
provided with water, sewer and other utilities.
Provision of Housing for State Residents: This Preliminary Plat contains 80
residential building lots, providing an opportunity for the construction of 80
new dwelling units in Pasco.
Adequate Air and Light: The maximum lot coverage limitations, building
height restrictions and building setbacks will assure that adequate movement
of air and light is available to each lot.
Proper Access & Travel: The streets through and adjoining the Plat will be
paved and developed to City standards to assure proper access is maintained
to each lot. Connections to the community will be provided by Road 84Road
and Broadmoor Boulevard. The Preliminary Plat was submitted to the Transit
Authority for review. (The discussion under “Safe Travel” above applies to this
section also.)
Comprehensive Plan Policies & Maps: The Comprehensive Plan designates
the Plat site for low-density residential development. Policies of the
Comprehensive Plan encourage the advancement of home ownership and
suggest the City strive to maintain a variety of housing for residents.
Other Findings:
• The site is within the Pasco Urban Growth Boundary.
• The State Growth Management Act requires urban growth and urban
densities to occur within the Urban Growth Boundaries.
• The site slopes slightly to the south.
• The site is currently vacant and no longer being farmed.
• The site is not considered a critical area, a mineral resource area or a wet
land.
Page 154 of 175
5
• The Comprehensive Plan identifies the site for low-density residential
development.
• Low-density residential development is described in the Comprehensive
Plan as two to five dwelling units per acre.
• The site is zoned R-1 (Low-Density Residential).
• The site was zoned R-1 in cooperation with the DNR in 2014.
• The Housing Element of the Comprehensive Plan encourages the
advancement of programs that promote home ownership and
development of a variety of residential densities and housing types.
• The Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan encourages the
interconnection of neighborhood streets to provide for the disbursement
of traffic.
• The interconnection of neighborhood streets is necessary for utility
connections (looping) and the provision of emergency services.
• Per the ITE Trip Generation Manual 8th Addition the proposed
subdivision, when fully developed, will generate approximately 800
vehicle trips per day.
• The current traffic impact fee is $709 per dwelling unit. The impact fees
are collected at the time permits are issued and said fees are used to
make traffic improvements and add traffic signals in the I-182 Corridor
when warranted.
• The current park impact fee is $1,432 per dwelling unit. The fee can be
reduced by 58 percent if a developer dedicates a five acre park site to the
City. The dedication of a fully constructed park reduces the fee by 93
percent.
• RCW 58.17.110 requires the City to make a finding that adequate
provisions have been made for schools before any preliminary plat is
approved.
• The City of Pasco has adopted a school impact fee ordinance compelling
new housing developments to provide the School District with mitigation
fees. The fee was effective April 16, 2012.
• Past correspondence from the Pasco School District indicates impact fees
address the requirement to ensure adequate provisions are made for
schools.
• Plat improvements within the City of Pasco are required to comply with
the 2015 Standard Drawings and Specification as approved by the City
Engineer. These improvements include but are not limited to water,
sewer and irrigation lines, streets, street lights and storm water
retention. The handicapped accessible pedestrian ramps are completed
with the street and curb improvements prior to final plat approval.
Sidewalks are installed at the time permits are issued for new houses.
Except sidewalks along major streets, which are installed with the street
improvements.
Page 155 of 175
6
• All engineering designs for infrastructure and final plat(s) drawings are
required to utilize the published City of Pasco Vertical Control Datum.
• All storm water generated from a developed plat is required to be
disposed of per City and State codes and requirements. Prior to the City
of Pasco accepting construction plans for review the developer is required
to enter into a Storm Water Maintenance Agreement with the City. The
developer is responsible for obtaining the signatures of all parties
required on the agreement and to have the agreement recorded with the
Franklin County Auditor. The original signed and recorded copy of the
agreement is presented to the City of Pasco at the intake meeting for
construction plans.
• The City has nuisance regulations (PMC 9.60) that require property
owners (including developers) to maintain their properties in a manner
that does not injure, annoy or endanger the comfort and repose of other
property owners. This includes controlling dust, weeds and litter during
times of construction for both subdivisions and buildings including
houses.
• Prior to acceptance of final plats developers are required to prepare and
submit record drawings. All record drawings shall be created in
accordance with the requirements detailed in the Record Drawing
Requirements and Procedure form provided by the Engineering Division.
This form must be signed by the developer prior to construction plan
approval.
CONCLUSIONS BASED ON INITIAL STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT
Before recommending approval or denial of the proposed Plat the Planning
Commission must develop findings of fact from which to draw its conclusion
(P.M.C. 26.24.070) therefrom as to whether or not:
(1) Adequate provisions are made for the public health, safety and
general welfare and for open spaces, drainage ways, streets, alleys,
other public ways, water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks,
playgrounds, transit stops, schools and school grounds, sidewalks for
safe walking conditions for students and other public needs;
The proposed plat will be required to develop under the standards of the Pasco
Municipal Code and the standard specifications of the City Engineering
Division. These standards for streets, sidewalks, and other infrastructure
improvements were designed to ensure the public health; safety and general
welfare of the community are secured. These standards include provisions for
streets, drainage, water and sewer service and the provision for dedication of
right-of-way. The preliminary plat was forwarded to Franklin County PUD, the
Page 156 of 175
7
Pasco School District, Cascade Gas, Charter Cable and Ben-Franklin Transit
Authority for review and comment.
Based on the School Districts Capital Facilities Plan the City collects school
mitigation fees for each new dwelling unit. The fee is paid at the time of
building permit issuance. The school impact fee addresses the requirements of
RCW 58.17.110.City parks are located in the subdivisions to the west of the
site. All new developments participate in establishing parks through the
payment of park fees at the time of permitting.
(2) The proposed subdivision contributes to the orderly development and
land use patterns in the area;
The proposed Plat makes efficient use of vacant land and will provide for the
looping of utilities and interconnectivity of streets as supported in the
Comprehensive Plan. The proposed subdivision will provide arterial street
improvements along Road 84.
(3) The proposed subdivision conforms to the policies, maps and
narrative text of the Comprehensive Plan;
The Comprehensive Plan land use map designates the site for low-density
residential development. Low-density residential development is described as 2
to 5 dwelling units per acre in the Comprehensive Plan. The Housing Element
of the Plan encourages the promotion of a variety of residential densities and
suggests the community should support the advancement of programs
encouraging home ownership. The Transportation Element of the Plan suggests
major streets should be beautified with trees and landscaping. The Plan also
encourages the interconnection of local streets for inter-neighborhood travel for
public safety as well as providing for traffic disbursement.
(4) The proposed subdivision conforms to the general purposes of any
applicable policies or plans which have been adopted by the City
Council;
Development plans and policies have been adopted by the City Council in the
form of the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed subdivision conforms to the
policies, maps and narrative text of the Plan as noted in number three above.
(5) The proposed subdivision conforms to the general purposes of the
subdivision regulations.
The general purposes of the subdivision regulations have been enumerated and
discussed in the staff analysis and Findings of Fact. The Findings of Fact
indicate the subdivision is in conformance with the general purposes of the
Page 157 of 175
8
subdivision regulations provided certain mitigation measures (i.e.: school
impact fees are paid.)
(6) The public use and interest will be served by approval of the proposed
subdivision.
The proposed Plat, if approved, will be developed in accordance with all City
standards designed to insure the health, safety and general welfare of the
community are met. The Comprehensive Plan will be implemented through
development of this Plat. These factors will insure the public use and interest
are served.
TENTATIVE PLAT APPROVAL CONDITIONS
1. No utility vaults, pedestals, or other obstructions will be allowed at street
intersections.
2. All corner lots and other lots that present difficulties for the placement of
yard fencing shall be identified in the notes on the face of the final
plat(s).
3. The developer shall install a common "Estate Type" fence six-feet in
height along the west line of the plat as a part of the infrastructure
improvements associated with the plat. The fence must be constructed
of masonry block. A fencing detail must be included on the subdivision
construction drawings. Consideration must be given to a reasonable
vision triangle at the intersection of streets. The City may make repairs
or replace the fencing as needed. Property owners adjoining said fence
shall be responsible for payment of all costs associated with maintenance
and upkeep. These fencing requirements shall be noted clearly on the
face of the final plat(s). A concrete mow strip shall be installed under any
common fence as directed by the City Parks Division and shall be
approved by the Parks Department prior to installation.
4. A common solid fence must be installed along the southern boundary of
the proposed plat adjacent to the school site. (A common solid fence
means a cedar, vinyl, or block fence across the south line of all lots
abutting the school property. The fence must be installed before or
during construction of each home.)
5. Excess right-of-way along Road 84 must be landscaped to match the
landscaping on the west side of Road 84. All landscaping and irrigation
plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Parks Department prior to
installation.
6. The developer/builder shall pay the City a "common area maintenance
fee" of $475 per lot upon issuance of building permits for homes. These
funds shall be placed in a fund and used to finance the maintenance of
arterial boulevard strips. The City shall not accept maintenance
Page 158 of 175
9
responsibility for the landscaping abutting said streets until such time as
all fees are collected for each phase that abut said streets.
7. Lots abutting Road 84 shall not have direct access to Road 84. Access
shall be prohibited by means of deed restrictions or statements on the
face of the final plat(s).
8. The final plat(s) shall contain a 10-foot utility easement parallel to all
streets unless otherwise required by the Franklin County PUD.
9. The final plat(s) shall contain the following Franklin County Public Utility
District statement: “The individual or company making improvements on
a lot or lots of this Plat is responsible for providing and installing all
trench, conduit, primary vaults, secondary junction boxes, and backfill
for the PUD’s primary and secondary distribution system in accordance
with PUD specifications; said individual or company will make full
advance payment of line extension fees and will provide all necessary
utility easements prior to PUD construction and/or connection of any
electrical service to or within the plat”.
RECOMMENDATION
MOTION: I move to adopt Findings of Fact and Conclusions therefrom as
contained in the April 20, 2017 staff report.
MOTION: I move based on the Findings of Fact and Conclusions, as adopted,
the Planning Commission recommend the City Council approve the
Preliminary Plat for Chiawana Heights, with conditions as listed in
the April 20, 2017 staff report.
Page 159 of 175
It
e
m
:
C
h
i
a
w
a
n
a
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
8
0
-
L
o
t
P
r
e
l
i
m
i
n
a
r
y
P
l
a
t
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
:
R
o
n
A
s
m
u
s
H
o
m
e
s
I
n
c
.
Fi
l
e
#
:
P
P
2
0
1
7
-
0
0
2
Ov
e
r
v
i
e
w
Ma
p
SI
T
E
Page 160 of 175
It
e
m
:
C
h
i
a
w
a
n
a
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
8
0
-
L
o
t
P
r
e
l
i
m
i
n
a
r
y
P
l
a
t
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
:
R
o
n
A
s
m
u
s
H
o
m
e
s
I
n
c
.
Fi
l
e
#
:
P
P
2
0
1
7
-
0
0
2
SI
T
E
Vi
c
i
n
i
t
y
Ma
p
Page 161 of 175
It
e
m
:
C
h
i
a
w
a
n
a
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
8
0
-
L
o
t
P
r
e
l
i
m
i
n
a
r
y
P
l
a
t
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
:
R
o
n
A
s
m
u
s
H
o
m
e
s
I
n
c
.
Fi
l
e
#
:
P
P
2
0
1
7
-
0
0
2
SI
T
E
SF
D
U
s
Va
c
a
n
t
Va
c
a
n
t
(F
u
t
u
r
e
P
S
D
S
c
h
o
o
l
)
La
n
d
U
s
e
Ma
p
Page 162 of 175
It
e
m
:
C
h
i
a
w
a
n
a
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
8
0
-
L
o
t
P
r
e
l
i
m
i
n
a
r
y
P
l
a
t
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
:
R
o
n
A
s
m
u
s
H
o
m
e
s
I
n
c
.
Fi
l
e
#
:
P
P
2
0
1
7
-
0
0
2
SI
T
E
R-
1
R-
1
R-
1
Zo
n
i
n
g
Ma
p
Page 163 of 175
Page 164 of 175
Lo
o
k
i
n
g
N
o
r
t
h
Page 165 of 175
Lo
o
k
i
n
g
E
a
s
t
Page 166 of 175
Lo
o
k
i
n
g
S
o
u
t
h
Page 167 of 175
Lo
o
k
i
n
g
W
e
s
t
Page 168 of 175
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
3/16/2017
B.Preliminary Plat Chiawana Heights, 80 Lots (Ron Asmus) (MF# PP
2017-002)
Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff.
Dave McDonald, City Planner, discussed the preliminary plat application for Chiawana
Heights. The site is about 21-22 acres and the developer is proposing to develop 80
single-family lots. The staff report addressed the items required to be reviewed. It is a
straightforward single-family subdivision with connections to existing streets and
connections to future streets. There is another developer in the process of developing
a preliminary plat that would wrap around this plat and those streets would connect.
Commissioner Roach asked for clarification on block wall fencing and the irrigation
canal.
Mr. McDonald responded that there is quite a distance from the irrigation canal. The
School District owns 24 acres to the south prior to running into the irrigation canal.
The block wall is to go along Road 84 – the code requires masonry walls on arterial
streets now instead of wood.
Commissioner Roach asked if that was because of graffiti problems.
Mr. McDonald answered that it was due to durability and maintenance. Most other
products don’t last as long as concrete.
Commissioner Polk asked if all of the homes would be exiting out onto Road 84 and
for clarification on another developer who would be developing in the area.
Mr. McDonald said that was correct.
Commissioner Polk asked if there were any plans to allow additional outlets onto any
other roads that would eventually connect.
Mr. McDonald replied, yes and briefly explained where there will be future roads.
Commissioner Polk asked if this site as well as the other sites soon to develop were
sold at the same time.
Mr. McDonald said that all the sites were auctioned off at the same time.
Commissioner Polk asked if development of the other sites will occur soon after this
proposal.
Page 169 of 175
Mr. McDonald responded, yes, and that the Planning Commission will be seeing it all
soon.
Commissioner Roach asked who owned the water rights to the property – if it was DNR
or privately owned.
Mr. McDonald answered that DNR (Department of Natural Resources) owns the water
rights as well as the State and they have banked them somewhere. He is unsure if we
can get them back. If not, the developers will be paying a fee of about $1,700/acre.
Commissioner Mendez said there would be another 80 homes and asked about
potential impacts, such as traffic.
Mr. McDonald stated that with the first 80 homes the developer won’t have to do a
whole lot but he will have to widen Road 84 – it will become a 3-lane road. The
developer to the north will have to widen it up to Chapel Hill. And the new road on the
east side of the site will help alleviate traffic and disperse traffic in other directions.
Traffic impact fees will be collected.
Ron Asmus, 802 S. Dawnes, Kennewick, spoke on his preliminary plat application.
He stated that he has been working with the city and the surveyor to make sure
everything is in order. Phase 2 or 3 may be done together and there may still be some
small changes to the lots. There will be a nice wall as well as a nice entry to the
development. He addressed the water rights.
Jesse Rogers, 7309 Wernett Road, asked what will be done about the streets that will
have to handle all of the excess traffic.
Mr. McDonald explained the future road connections and how there will be diffusion of
traffic as well as future traffic lights.
Chairman Cruz added that Road 84 will be widened to be 3 lanes.
Mr. Rogers said a 3 lane road will not handle all of the traffic from the new homes.
With no further questions or comments the public hearing closed.
Commissioner Roach asked if it would even be possible to put in 4 lanes in this area.
Mr. McDonald responded that there is enough right of way there but he was unsure if
it would ever be needed. Sandifur Parkway is a 3 lane road and disperses traffic quite
nicely and handles a heavy load of traffic.
Commissioner Roach asked if there was a light already located at Argent Road and
Road 84.
Mr. McDonald said, yes and discussed other locations for traffic lights.
Page 170 of 175
Rick White, Community & Economic Development Director, added that it is important
to know that as Riverview has gone from 2.5-5 acre parcels, very few through roads
have been developed. There is congestion on Argent and Road 68 because the existing
county roads had not been developed and expanded upon. The key to planning is
dispersion of traffic. The proposed subdivision will connect with Chapel Hill
Boulevard, will connect along the canal with some crossings at Road 76 and possibly
another through street connecting to Road 76 for traffic to go north or south to Argent
or Chapel Hill. Things don’t happen overnight but as the properties develop, impact
fees are collected to help pay for the improvements and as the properties develop
dispersion of traffic will occur. Sandifur Parkway, as an example, does a good job
moving traffic with only 3 lanes.
Chairman Cruz added that he lives on Argent and drives up to Sandifur frequently
because it moves traffic so well.
Commissioner Bowers asked for clarification on where the Riverview Area is located.
Chairman Cruz responded that it is the general area from Highway 396 west and
south of the canal.
Commissioner Roach moved, seconded by Commissioner Polk, to close the hearing on
the proposed preliminary plat and set April 20, 2017 as the date for deliberations and
the development of a recommendation for the City Council. The motion passed
unanimously.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
3/16/2017
A.Preliminary Plat Chiawana Heights, 80 Lots (Ron Asmus) (MF# PP
2017-002)
Chairwoman Polk read the master file number and asked for comments from staff.
Dave McDonald, City Planner, stated staff had no additional comments.
Commissioner Roach moved, seconded by Commissioner Greenaway to adopt the
findings of fact and conclusions therefrom as contained in the April 20, 2017 staff
report. The motion passed unanimously.
Commissioner Roach moved, seconded by Commissioner Greenaway, based on the
findings of fact and conclusions as adopted, the Planning Commission recommend the
City Council approve the preliminary plat for Chiawana Heights, with conditions as
listed in the April 20, 2017 staff report. The motion passed unanimously.
Page 171 of 175
AGENDA REPORT
FOR: City Council April 24, 2017
TO: Dave Zabell, City Manager
Rick Terway, Interim Public Works Director
Regular Meeting: 5/1/17
FROM: Dan Ford, City Engineer
Public Works
SUBJECT: Bid Award: Traffic Signal Improvements - City Wide Phase 1
I. REFERENCE(S):
Vicinity Map
Bid Tabulation
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
MOTION: I move to award the Traffic Signal Improvements - City Wide Phase 1
project to Sierra Electric, Inc. in the amount of $1,399,982.00 and, further, authorize
the City Manager to execute the contract documents.
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
$1,212,028 - Surface Transportation Program (STP) and Transportation Alternatives
Program (TAP) federal grants
$ 300,000 - Traffic Impact Fees and Arterial Street Fund, for local match grant
requirements and coverage of remaining balance
$1,512,028 - Total
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
This project originally began as a single, but larger, Citywide Traffic Signal
Improvements Project. City Council approved the division of the project into two
phases at the January 4, 2016 Regular Meeting after Benton Franklin Council of
Governments' (BFCOG) request to do so due to their over-obligations of Surface
Transportation Program (STP) funds in previous years. This project, Phase 1 includes
upgrades to 11 signalized intersections that were identified to have no right-of-way
impacts. Phase 2 includes upgrades to 22 signalized intersections and is anticipated to
start in 2018 depending on funding.
Page 172 of 175
The project scope for this project, Phase 1 include five signalized intersections along
Court Street corridor, five along Lewis Street corridor, and one on Clark Street. This
project includes traffic signal upgrades, including new cabinets, controllers, detection
system, and emergency preemption system. It also includes upgrades to the
intersections including pedestrian signals by providing accessibility that meets current
ADA requirements. These much needed upgrades will also help reduce traffic delays,
improve left turn safety with flashing yellow arrow signals, improve emergency
response times, and provide better corridor coordination improving travel times.
V. DISCUSSION:
On April 11, 2017, the City received three (3) bids for the project. The lowest bid was
from Sierra Electric, Inc., in the amount of $1,399,982. The Engineer's Estimate was
$1,317,205, which did not include project management and inspection hours taken into
consideration for total project budget approved by Council of $1,442,000.
This project is included in the City's 2017-2022 Capital Improvements Plan. After
award of the contract, the starting date of construction will be coordinated with the
contractor. The project includes 40 working days for completion.
Staff reviewed the bid submittal and found no exceptions or irregularities and,
therefore, recommends award of the contract to Sierra Electric, Inc., of Pasco,
Washington.
This item was discussed at the April 24, 2017 Council Workshop.
Page 173 of 175
TRAFFIC SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS
CITY WIDE PHASE 1
COL
U
M
B
I
A
R
I
V
E
R
COURT ST
SYLVESTER ST
"A" STREET
CLAR
K
S
T
US
-
3
9
5
I-182
26
T
H
A
V
E
20
T
H
A
V
E
14
T
H
A
V
E
5T
H
A
V
E
4T
H
A
V
E
LEWIS
S
T
1
0
T
H
A
V
E
7
T
H
A
V
E
B
N
S
F
WE
H
E
A
V
E
Page 174 of 175
BID SUMMARY
Traffic Signal Improvements 'City wide Phase 1
ENGINEERS Sierra Electric,Inc.Northeast Electric,LLC Transportation Systems,Inc
Project No.13006 ESTIMATE Pasco,WA Woodland,WA Sumner,WA
Cit Contract Number:CP5-ST-4A-13-03 Fed.Aid No.:STPUL-9911 010
Bid Security 5%Bid Bond 5%Bid Bond 5%Bid Bond
4-ITEM UNITPRICE AMOUNT UNITPRICE AMOUNT UNITPRICE AMOUNT UNITPRICE AMOUNT
Mobilization $90 000 00 $90 OOCTUI$69,160.00 $69,160.00|$125,000.00 $125,000.00 $150,000.00 $150,000.00
Removing Plastic Line 82.00 $430 00 $5.60 $1,204.00 $5.00 $1,075.00 $6.00 $1,290.00
Removing Plastic Crosswalk Line 82.50 $2.475 UOI$6.70 $6,633.00 $6.00 $5,940.00 $5.50 $5,445.00
Plastic Stop Line 315 00 82.700 00 $15.00 $2,700.00 $13.00 $2,340.00 $11.00 $1,980.00
Plastic Crosswalk Line 8 10 00 S12,3()0 00 $18.00 $22,140.00 $16.00 $19,680.00 $12.00 $14,
760.00|
Signal Modifications Complete,W Court St and N 4th Avenue 885 450 00 885.450 0%$102,723.00 $102,723.00 $98,778.00 $98,778.00 107,000.00 107,000.00
Signal Modifications Complete,W Court St and N 5th Avenue $07,300 00 $97 300 00 $108,225.00 $108,225.00 $105,305.00 $105,305.00 107,660.00 107,660.00
Signal Modifications Complete,W Court St and N 10th Avenue $82,300.00 882,300 00 $90,709.00 $90,709.00 $90,418.00 $90,418.00 $97,000.00 $97,000.00
Signal Modifications Complete,W Court St and N 14th Avenue 890 900 00 $90,900 00 $104,042.00 $104,042.00 $102,726.00 $102,726.00 100,439.00 100,439.00
4SignalModifications Complete,W Court St and N 26th Avenue
N»
894300 00 $94.3(J0 00 $109,785.00 $109,785.00 $105,606.00 $105,606.00 107,000.00 107,000.00
Signal Modifications Complete,W Clark St and N 4th Avenue 8111.600 00 $111600 00 $124,063.00 $124,063.00 $123,780.00 $123,780.00 119,985.00 119,985.00
Signal Modifications Complete,E Lewis St and S Wehe Avenue 8108.000 00 $108000 00 $122,158.00 $122,158.00 $123,806.00 $123,806.00 119,472.00 119,472.00
Signal Modifications Complete,W Lewis St and N 4th Avenue 8114.800 00 S114 800 00'$128,370.00 $128,370.00 $124,777.00 $124,777.00 122,970.00 122,
970.0q
29G>\lO>0'l-l>(a)l\J—\I:_I_
$111,200.00 811120000 $126,184.00 $126,184.00 $123,266.00 $123,266.00 120,913.00 120,913.00
$110 650 00 S110 650 00 $122,119.00 $122,119.00 $122,202.00 $122,202.00 113,000.00 113,000.00
3105.800 00 $105,800 00 $123,807.00 $123,807.00 $120,662.00 $120,662.00 118,056.00 118,056.00
890.000 00 890.000 00 $30,800.00 $30,800.00L$56,000.00 $56,000.00 $93,700.00 $93,700.00
5225 00 81.80000 $170.00 $1,360.00 $200.00 $1,600.00 $500.00 $4,000.00
$2 35000 $4,700 00 $1,650.00 $3,300.00 $2,200.00 $4,400.00 $12,500.00 $25,000.00
8500 00 $500.00 $500.00 $500.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 $2,000.00 $2,000.00
ElgnalModifications Complete,W Lewis St and N 5th Avenue
Signal Modifications Complete,W Lewis St and N 7th Avenue
Signal Modifications Complete,W Lewis Stand N 10th Avenue
Project Temporary Traffic Control
Cement Conc.Sidewalk
_tNoo_;_;_x_x_.._x_t_x_;_x_x
Cement Conc.Curb Ramp Type Perpendicular A
SPCC Plan
,_
S1.317,205 00 $1,399,982.00 $1,459,861.00 $1,531,670.00
CITYENGINEERSREPORT
COMPETITIVEBIDSWEREOPENEDONAPRIL11,2017.
ALLBIDSHAVEBEENREVIEWEDBYTHISOFFICE.
I RECOMMENDTHECONTRACTBEAWARDEDTO:III.“APPROVALBYPUBLICWORKSDIRECTOR
____
C I TY 0 F Traffic Signal |mprovements—C|ty Wide Phase 1SierraElectric,Inc.1 I Pr°jectN°_13o06
.“//07$_
‘'m]X Contract No.:CP5-ST-4A-13-03 Fed.Aid No.:STPUL-9911(010)
‘BID DATE:APRIL 11,2017¢/Z5/Z /5"
I F||_E;City Wide Phase 1 Bid SummarypubCITYENGINEERDATEPUBLICWORKSDI
SHEET 1 of 1
P
a
g
e
1
7
5
o
f
1
7
5