Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017.10.09 Council Workshop PacketWorkshop Meeting AGENDA PASCO CITY COUNCIL 7:00 p.m. October 9, 2017 Page 1. CALL TO ORDER: 2. ROLL CALL: (a) Pledge of Allegiance 3. VERBAL REPORTS FROM COUNCILMEMBERS: 4. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION: 3 - 9 (a) Utility Rate Study Presentation (Irrigation and Stormwater) 10 - 22 (b) Dog License Program Improvement 23 - 25 (c) Deputy Police Chief Position 26 - 39 (d) Central Business District Zoning Regulations 40 - 62 (e) Code Amendment: Residential Design Standards Regarding False Dormers & Flat Roofs (MF# CA 2017-004) 63 - 68 (f) Chronic Nuisance Ordinance 69 - 76 (g) Lodging Tax Advisory Committee Recommendations 77 - 79 (h) National Citizen's Survey 5. MISCELLANEOUS COUNCIL DISCUSSION: 6. EXECUTIVE SESSION: 7. ADJOURNMENT. REMINDERS: a. 11:45 a.m., Monday, October 9, Pasco Red Lion - Pasco Chamber of Page 1 of 79 Workshop Meeting October 9, 2017 Commerce Membership Luncheon. (Pasco Council Candidate Forum) b. 6:00 p.m., Monday, October 9, Conference Room #1 - Old Fire Pension Board Meeting. (COUNCILMEMBER REBECCA FRANCIK, Rep.; SAUL MARTINEZ, Alt.) c. 5:45 p.m., Wednesday, October 11, Anthology Event Center, 706 Williams Blvd, Richland - Association of Washington Cities Regional Meeting. (MAYOR MATT WATKINS) d. 7:00 a.m., Thursday, October 12 - BFCG Tri-Mats Policy Advisory Committee Meeting. (COUNCILMEMBER BOB HOFFMANN, Rep.; REBECCA FRANCIK, Alt.) e. 7:00 p.m., Thursday, October 12 - Ben-Franklin Transit Board Meeting. (MAYOR MATT WATKINS, Rep.; COUNCILMEMBER CHI FLORES, Alt.) This meeting is broadcast live on PSC-TV Channel 191 on Charter Cable and streamed at www.pasco-wa.gov/psctvlive. Audio equipment available for the hearing impaired; contact the Clerk for assistance. Page 2 of 79 AGENDA REPORT FOR: City Council October 4, 2017 TO: Dave Zabell, City Manager Workshop Meeting: 10/9/17 FROM: Richa Sigdel, Finance Director Finance SUBJECT: Utility Rate Study (Irrigation and Stormwater) I. REFERENCE(S): Presentation by Financial Consulting Solutions Group (FCS Group) Ordinance with Title 3 Revisions II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Discussion III. FISCAL IMPACT: Utility Rates IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF: The Council approved the Utility Rate Study Professional Services Agreement with FCS Group in May of 2015 to perform utility rate studies. The rate study was necessary as it has been many years since the City performed a comprehensive utility rate study to ensure that revenues collected through rates, grants and other sources were sufficient to cover the costs of operating the utility in compliance with all applicable laws and regulations, meet debt service and bond covenant obligations, and provide sufficient funding for future planned capital needs and system renewal. Each of the four City-owned utilities - water, sanitary sewer, stormwater and irrigation - are operated as enterprise funds. FCS Group, a professional economic and accounting firm with extensive expertise in public sector rate studies and cost allocation, assisted the City in reviewing all aspects of City-owned utilities, including operational cost, future utility capital needs as identified in the various adopted plans, and funds allotted to each utility. The group recommended revised rates for Water and Sewer utilities, adopted by the Council in November of 2015. Page 3 of 79 V. DISCUSSION: Since 2002, the City's population has more than doubled from approximately 30,000 to over 70,000. The City has been keeping up with the growth, but has deferred maintenance of its infrastructure. IRRIGATION The City provides irrigation service to over 7,400 customers north of the Franklin County Irrigation District canal (see below). Since 2002, there have been four changes to the irrigation rates. During this period, the irrigation service cost to customers has decreased by $4.70 per month. The current rate for standard residential irrigation service is $27.30 per month during the six month irrigation season. While much of the distribution system has been installed through new development occurring in the irrigation service area over the past twenty years, production (wells and appurtenances) and transmission (larger diameter mains) facilities are much older and are beginning to demonstrate their age through failures and the need for higher maintenance levels. To improve system integrity and assure continued reliable operation of the system, the 2018-2023 Capital Improvement Plan envisions approximately $827,000 in capital expenditures through 2023. Implementing the Page 4 of 79 planned capital projects will require an interfund loan of $750,000 in 2019, which the irrigation fund will pay back over time at market rate interest. While the interfund loan necessitates added annual debt service costs until retired, this will avoid the additional costs associated with more traditional methods of borrowing money, such as a revenue bond or a bank loan. As a result of the need for increased maintenance and capital investment, the revenues generated by the current irrigation rates will be insufficient to cover anticipated expenses. Rates in this utility have been relatively flat for a decade and a half as costs of labor, materials and electricity necessary to operate the utility have continued to increase. The Irrigation fund budget is relatively small with no practical opportunities for compensating reductions. Staff and FCS Group have conducted a thorough analysis of the financial condition of the irrigation utility and its future needs and recommends irrigation service rate increases as follows: STORMWATER In 2012, the Washington State Department of Ecology, having worked collaboratively with local government agencies to meet the requirement of the federal Clean Water Act and develop a regulatory framework by which to implement stormwater discharge requirements, issued the Eastern Washington Phase II Municipal Stormwater Permit, which is essentially a general National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit covering the period 2012-2019 applying to municipal stormsewer systems in Eastern Washington. The NPDES permit expires in 2019 and as Council will recall from the recently adopted Stormwater Comprehensive Plan, the 2020-2026 permit will impose higher standards on the City in the operation of its stormwater system. While there may be opportunities in the coming years to compete for grant funds, these new regulations are unfunded. The City's stormwater utility is funded through rates assessed to property owners. Since 2002, there have been five changes to the stormwater rates. During this period, the stormwater service cost to customers has increased by $3.10 per month. The current monthly rate for standard residential stormwater service is $4.90 per month. As identified in the Stormwater Comprehensive Plan and discussed at length with Council during its review, aside form the aforementioned costs associated with new regulations and requirements (water quality testing, illicit discharge, control of public/private retention/detention systems and public education), the City's stormwater collection system east of SR-395 is aging. Maintenance has been deferred for some time and the time has come for some significant rehabilitation projects. West of SR - Page 5 of 79 395, particularly in the areas annexed over the past decade or so, revenues in large lot developed areas are low when compared to system needs. And the system continues to expand with development and street improvements. Development also serves to increase revenues and generate economies of scale. Staff and FCS Group have conducted a thorough analysis of the financial condition of the stormwater utility and its future needs and recommend stormwater rate increases as follows: SUMMARY The following graphic depicts the City's history of rate changes for the Irrigation and Stormwater utilities: With the proposed rate adjustments, the City's overall utility rates would still compare favorably to those of the neighboring cities as shown below: Page 6 of 79 Irrigation Stormwater Page 7 of 79 ORDINANCE NO AN ORDINANCE of the City of Pasco, amending Pasco Municipal Code Sections 3.07.190 (Stormwater Utility), and 3.07.210 (Irrigation Water Utility). WHEREAS, The City completed a rate study with the assistance of FCS in September of 2017 to determine the impact of needed improvements and system expansion for regulatory compliance and to provide continuous service to customers. WHEREAS, The City Council has determined that certain amendments to the stormwater and irrigation are needed. The rate changes will be effective for five years, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, and 2022, with certain rates for irrigation and stormwater each year. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Pasco, Washington, does ordain an irrigation rate increase of 10% for each of the five years and a stormwater rate increase of 15% for 2018, and a 5% increase for 2019, 2020, 2021, and 2022, as follows: Section 1. PMC Section 3.07.190, subsections A), and B) are amended to read as follows: 3.07.190 STORMWATER UTILITY EFFECTIVE 01/01/2018: A) Residential Fee/Charge Reference 1) Single-Family Residential (unit) $4.90 5.64 13.60.070 2) Multi-Family Residential (per unit) $2.45 2.82 13.60.070 3) Apartments (per unit) $2.45 2.82 13.60.070 4) Undeveloped parcel (per month) $0.00 13.60.070 5) Vacant building (per month) $4.90 5.64 13.60.070 B) Industrial/Commercial: Fee/Charge Reference 1) Parking for 0 to 5 vehicles (per month) $4.90 5.64 13.60.070 2) Parking for 6 to 10 vehicles (per month) $9.80 11.27 13.60.070 3) Parking for 11 to 15 vehicles (per $19.60 22.54 13.60.070 month) 4) Parking for 16 plus vehicles (per month) $24.50 28.18 13.60.070 5) Additional Charges - property $96.66 111.16 13.60.070 runoff to City system ($1.39 Min) per acre 6) State highway right-of-way $23.45 26.97 13.60.070 (WSDOT) ($0.84 Min) per acre Page 8 of 79 Section 2. PMC Section 3.07.210 subsection A) is amended to read as follows: 3.07.210 IRRIGATION WATER UTILITY EFFECTIVE 01/01/2018: A) Irrigation water service; monthly rate, Fee/Charge Reference during irrigation season: 1) Base rate, per unit, for single $27.30 $30.03 13.61.190(A) family residential properties 2) Base rate, per unit, for non-single $27.30 $30.03 13.61.190(8) family residential property 3) Per irrigation unit $8.53 $9.38 13.61.190(() 4) Per irrigated acre (public parks, $79.60 $87.56 13.61.190(D) playgrounds and open spaces) Section 3. This Ordinance shall take effect January 1, 2018. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco this 16th day of October 2017. Matt Watkins, Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: ____________ __________________ Daniela Erickson, City Clerk Leland B. Kerr, City Attorney Page 9 of 79 AGENDA REPORT FOR: City Council October 4, 2017 TO: Dave Zabell, City Manager Workshop Meeting: 10/9/17 FROM: Richa Sigdel, Finance Director Finance SUBJECT: Dog License Program Improvement I. REFERENCE(S): PMC Title 3 - pertinent pages PMC Title 8 - pertinent pages Ordinance with Title 3 and Title 8 Revisions II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Discussion III. FISCAL IMPACT: None IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF: Title 8 of the Pasco Municipal Code was adopted by the City Council in 1998 to provide regulations for use by Code Enforcement and Finance for pet licensing. The licenses are issued annually by the City and all expire on the last day of December. All licenses must be renewed before the last day of February of the following. The citizens can renew licenses at the City Hall or via mail. The City has experienced tremendous growth in the last two decades. The population of the City in 1998 when this policy was implemented was 27,000. The current population of the City is approaching 72,000. The percentage growth of the number of pets in the City has surpassed the percentage of population growth, with the current licensed pet population at approximately 8,500. Page 10 of 79 V. DISCUSSION: Growth in human and pet population, small window for renewals, and the lack of an online payment method has resulted in long lines at City Hall during the months of January and February. The average wait times during these months for all citizens conducting business is about 15 minutes. During certain hours and days, the wait time has been as long as an hour. Staff is proposing that the City change its municipal code to allow for: 1. A three year pet license with proof of a three year rabies vaccination; and 2. Pet licenses to be valid from the date on which the license is issued or scheduled to be issued In addition to proposed regulatory changes to the the annual license, staff is proposing that the City partner with "PetData, Inc.", a private company, to provide an online platform for licensing services. Numerous cities across the state and nation utilize a third party for this service with excellent results and improved customer service and satisfaction. Analysis of providing online payments, a 3-year license option, and rolling renewal periods shows that the additional cost to be incurred by the City due to the proposed changes will be offset by savings in overtime labor cost. Page 11 of 79 CHAPTER 3.07 FEE SUMMARY Sections: 3.07.010 AMBULANCE.......... 3.07.020 ANIMALCONTROL. 3.07.030 BUILDINGPERMITS.. 3.07.040 RECREATIONFACILITYRENTAL 3.07.050 BUSINESS LICENSES.................... (‘FMFFFDV 3.07.070 CODE ENFORCEMENTPROGRAM....................................................26 3.07.075 STATE AND FEDERALBACKGROUNDINVESTIGATIONCRIMINAL HISTORY CHECK............... 3.07.080 GOLF COURSE... 3.07.090 MISCELLANEOUS...... 3.07.100 PLANNINGPERMITS. 3.07.110 POLICE..................... 3.07.120 RECREATIONPROGRAMS 3.07.130 STREETS............... 3.07.140 SWIMMING POOLS 3.07.150 UTILITIES—BILLING 3.07.160 WATER USER FEES SEWER USE FEES 3.U/..lI5U 3.07.185 3.07.190 3.07.200 3.07.210 3.07.220 3.07.230 3.07.240 I-’U|:$L1L WUKKS I-\LJKCC|VI|:N IS ANL)lNbI-’|:L I lUNb... STORMWATER CONSTRUCTIONPERMIT. STORMWATER UTILITY.......................... PROCESS WATER REUSE FACILITYCHARGES IRRIGATION WATER UTILITY:......... TRANSPORTATIONIMPACT FEES . SCHOOL IMPACT FEES...................... PARKIMPACT FEES........................................................................38 3.07.010 AMBULANCE: A)Ambulance Service Rates: 1)Resident Rate 2)Non—ResidentRate Reference 3.05.040 3.05.040 Feelchame $600.00 $1050.00 3)Mileage Rate,per mile $11.00 4)Non—Transport Medical Services Rate $250.00 B)Monthly Ambulance Service Fees: 1)Family Residential Ambulance Utility $14.55 Fee PMC Title 3 4/17/2017 3.05.040 3.05.040 3.05.025 18 Page 12 of 79 2)Multi—Fami|yResidential Ambulance $14.55 3.05.025 Utility Fee 3)Commercial/BusinessAmbulance Utility $14.55 3.05.025 Fee 4)Industrial Ambulance Utility Fee $$14.55 3.05.025 C)Ambulance Service Business License $150.00 5.05.030 (Ord.4322,2016;0rd.4253,2015;0rd.4139,2014;0rd.4053,2012;0rd.3913, (mi (‘Irrl suva,\/u 3645,2003;0rd.3610,2003 3.07.020 ANIMALCONTROL: A) B) 1) 2) 3) 4) 1) Penalty Provisions: First Offense w/in5—years Second Offense w/in 5—years Third Offense w/in 5-years Four or more w/in5—years Penalty (Civil Penalty)Potentially Dangerous Animal (RCW 16.30.060) ..Nm..,Avvv,vu.....L\l’-uu..,\/li.I-..vv,LUV .,\/l\.l-...,. Fee(Chagge $50.00 $100.00 $200.00 $400.00 ¢;snn,nn .,LUV!’\/I\.l- Reference 8.02.360 8.02.360 8.02.360 8.02.360 C) 2) 3) 4) 1) 2) 3) 4) -,-_.- Second Offense w/in 5—years Third Offense w/in 5—years Fourth Offense or more w/in5—years Annual License Fees: Unaltered Altered,spayed or neutered Replacement Tags Senior Replacement Tags (‘at-terv T ....-- $1000.00 $1500.00 $2000.00 $55.00 $15.00 $5.00 $3.00 8.02.360 8.02.360 8.02.360 8.02.365 8.02.365 8.02.365 8.02.365 -,..-....-.-..---..-., T ........_..-- 6)Potentially Dangerous or Dangerous $250.00 8.02.365 Animal Permit 7)Late Fee:$10.00 8.02.365 8)Discounts to low income Senior $3.00 8.02.365 Citizens-(altered,spayed or neutered) PMC Title 3 4/17/2017 Page 13 of 79 D) 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) Impound Fees: First Offense w/in12-months Second Offense w/in 12-months Three or more w/in 12-months Boarding Fee (per day) Vaccination Fee $35.00 $50.00 $100.00 $10.00 $15.00 8.02.080 8.02.080 8.02.080 8.02.080 8.02.320 (Ord.4320,2016;0rd.4067,2012;0rd.3871,2008;0rd.3715,2005;0rd.3610, 2003) 3.07.030 BUILDINGPERMITS: A)State:Feelcharge Reference 1)State Bldg Code Council —charged on $4.50 16.04.04O all building permits issued. B)Building:Fee[Charge Reference 1)Building Permit Based on Improvement 16.04.04O Value.Value of Improvement:Permit Fee: $1 to $10,000 $50.00 $10,001 to $11,000 $195.25 $11,001 to $12,000 $12,001 to $13,000 $13,001 to $14,000 $14,001 to $15,000 $15,001 to $16,000 $16,001 to $17,000 $17,001 to $18,000 $18,001 to $19,000 $19,001 to $20,000 $209.25 $223.25 $237.25 $251.25 $265.25 $279.25 $293.25 $307.25 $321.25 $20,001 to $21,000 $21,001 to $22,000 $22,001 to $23,000 $23,001 to $24,000 $24,001 to $25,000 PMC Title 3 4/17/2017 $335.25 $349.25 $363.25 $377.25 $391.25 20 Page 14 of 79 CHAPTER 8.02 ANIMAL CONTROL Sections: 8.02.010 DEFINITION OF TERMS................................ 8.02.030 ANIMALSINJURING PROPERTY UNLAWFUL.. 8.02.040 STRAYANIMALA NUISANCE.. 8.02.050 DOGCONTROL...................... IMD(‘nl Jxinininiu 8.02.070 NOTICE OF IMPOUNDING.................. 8.02.080 REDEMPTIONOF IMPOUNDEDANIMAL 8.02.100 DISPOSITION OF UNCLAIMEDANIMALS. 8.02.120 DESTRUCTIONOF ANIMALS... 8.02.130 INTERFERENCE WITH OFFICE 8.02.135 REFUSALTO REDEEM.. 8.02.140 WARNINGTICKETS... 8.02.150 VIOLATIONTICKETS. 8.02.160 CONFINEMENT......... 8.02.170 CRIMES AGAINSTANIMALS 8.02.175 REMOVALOF ANIMAL—NOTICE... 8.02.180 DUTIES UPON INJURIES OR DEATHOF AN ANIMAL 8.02.190 LICENSE-DOGS,REQUIRED.. »-I-I-.........EE~oooLoxooooooooooo\:\|<n<E5.ULl91 8.02.200 8.02.210 8.02.220 8.02.230 8.02.240 8.02.250 8.02.255 LlL|:Nb|:-LA|§,UPIIUNAL ......... LICENSE-RECEIPTS AND TAGS LICENSEPROCEDURES-RECEIPTS ANDTAGS. LICENSEPROCEDURES-AFFIXINGTAGS ......... LICENSE—NO COST FORADOPTEDANIMALS.. LICENSETAGS NOT TRANSFERABLE................ KENNELS-LICENSINGPROVISION -COMMERICAL... KENNEL—STANDARDSAND INSPECTION—COMMERCIALKENNELS. 8.02.260 8.02.270 8.02.280 8.02.290 8.02.300 ALTERING,COUNTERFEITINGOR TRANSFEROF TAGS.. ANIMALBITES -IMPOUNDING........ KENNEL-DOG LICENSINGAND VACCINATION UNLICENSEDANIMALS-ANNUALSURVEY. HEALTHOFFICERT0 . 8.02.310 NOTICE OF QUARANTINE................................................ 8.02.320 POTENTIALLYDANGEROUSAND DANGEROUSANIMALS... 8.02.330 RCW SECTIONS ADOPTED—POSSESSION OF POTENTIALL DANGEROUSWILDANIMALSPROHIBITED...... 8.02.340 ANIMALSDISTURBINGTHE PEACE. 8.02.350 RESPONSIBILITYOF OWNER.. 8.02.360 PENALTYPROVISIONS. 8.02.365 LICENSEFEES............. PMCTitle 8 1/19/16 2 Page 15 of 79 8.02.370 VOUCHERFOR NEUTERING............................................................19 8.02.010 DEFINITIONOF TERMS.As used in this chapter,unless the context indicates othen/vise: (1)“Abandon”means the knowing or reckless desertion of an animal by its owner or the causing of the animal to be deserted by its owner,in any place,without making provisions for the animal's adequate care.An animal left without adequate care for three or more days shall be prima facie evidence that the animal has been (2)"Animal"includes,but is not limited to dogs and cats. (3)"Animal Control Authority"means the joint power authority formed by interlocal agreement,of the cities of Richland,Pasco and Kennewick,to implement and provide animal control and sheltering services within the respective cities. (4)"AnimalControl Of?cer"refers to that person employed by or under contract to the City to enforce the provisions of this title. (5)“At Heel."A dog shall be deemed to be "at heel"during such times as the dog is positioned and controlled in such a manner so as to remain within a distance of two feet from its owner or other competent person having charge of such dog. (6)"At Large"means off the premises of the owner or upon the public streets,alleys,public grounds,school grounds or parks within the city.A dog shall not be deemed at large if: (a)It is attached to a leash or chain of suf?cient strength to restrain the dog and not more tnan eignt tee:in length,wnen saia ieasn or cnain IS new by a person competent to restrain and control the dog off the owner's premises; (b)It is properly restrained within a motor vehicle or housed in a veterinary hospital; (c)It is accompanied by and "at heel"beside the owner or a competent responsible person; (d)The dog or dogs are left unattended on the owner's premises,and it or they shall be so con?ned,tied or restrained as to be unable to range beyond the owner's premises. (7)"Cat"means and includes female,neutered female,male and neutered male cats. (8)“Commercial Kennel"means any lot,premises,building or structure where four or more dogs or four or more cats over six months of age are kept. (9)"Competent Person"means any person who,by reason of age and physical ability,and training,is capable of maintaining control of an animal to the extent required by this chapter. (10)"Dangerous Animal"means any animal that (a)has inflicted severe injury on a human being without provocation,(b)has killed a domestic or livestock animal without provocation,or (c)has been previously found to be potentially dangerous,the owner having received notice of such and the animal again aggressively bites,attacks, or endangers the safety of humans or domestic animals. PMCTitle 8 1/19/16 3 Page 16 of 79 omission by which unjusti?able pain,distress,suffering or death is caused or permitted to any animal or animals,whether the acts or omission herein contemplated be committed either maliciously,willfully or negligently,or knowingly permit such act or omission,or shall cause or procure the same to be done shall be deemed guilty of a gross misdemeanor. (5)It is unlawful for any person to abandon any domestic animal by dropping off or leaving such animal on the street,road or highway,or in any other public place, or on the private propeny of the owner or another,including unauthorized zhan?nnmnnt (6)This section does not apply to the killing of any animal by a police officer, animal control of?cer,a licensed veterinarian,the owner of such an animal or a person authorized by him to destroy such animal;provided,however,that the death of such an animal is accomplished in a humane manner and for lawful purpose. (7)Every person,?rm or corporation convicted of violating subsections (1), (3)or (4)of this section shall be punished by a mandatory ?ne of not less than $500.00 per animal.Conviction under this section does not bar prosecution and conviction under any other section of this code or any other law or ordinance.(Ord.3870,2008;0rd. 3326 Sec.1,1998.) 8.02.175 REMOVAL OF ANIMAL—NOTICE.If a law enforcement of?cer or animal control of?cer has probable cause to believe that an owner of a domestic animal has violated PMC 8.02.170 and no responsible person can be found to assume the animars care,tne omcer may autnorize,witn a warrant,me removal or me animal to a suitable place for feeding and care,or may place the animal under the custody of the poundmaster (RCW16.52.085).An of?cer may remove an animal under this subsection without a warrant only if the animal is in an immediate life—threatening condition.In all cases,the of?cer shall make a good faith effort to notify the owner prior to the animal's removal.If contact cannot be made,notice shall be given by posting the place of the seizure,by delivering to a person residing at the place of seizure,or by registered mail if the owner is known.(Ord.3870,2008.) 8.02.180 DUTIES UPON INJURIES OR DEATH OF AN ANIMAL.It shall be the duty of every person operating or driving a vehicle involved in an accident resulting in an injury or death to a dog,cat or other animal to report the same immediately to the police division by telephone,and to report the same in writing within twenty—four hours after the occurrence of such accident to the police division,giving the relevant information concerning the accident,the report to be made on forms provided by the police division.(Ord.3326 Sec.1,1998.) 8.02.190 LICENSE-DOGS,REQUIRED.Except as provided in Section 8.02.260, no person may keep,harbor or permit to be kept any dog over seven months of age unless it is licensed. PMCTitle 8 1/19/16 10 Page 17 of 79 (1)Licenses will be issued annually by the City.The license fee must be paid after January 1st of each year but before expiration of the existing license.Each license is valid until the ?nal day of February of the following year. (2)Before a license is issued for any dog,the owner must prove,by a certi?cate of vaccination signed by a licensed veterinarian that the dog has been vaccinated against rabies at the time of licensing;provided,however,the animal control of?cer may issue a temporary ten (10)day license contingent upon the owner securing a veterinarian‘s certi?cate of vaccination required under this chapter prior to the \JI .............,..,.....,-..,..,...-..........--.---,.., late fees,have been paid.If a certi?cate is not presented within ten (10)days,it shall be another separate violation of this chapter for each day over ten (10)days that proof is not presented. (3)A veterinarian‘s certi?cate is necessary to prove that a dog has been neutered or spayed. (4)Newly acquired dogs over the age of seven months must be vaccinated and licensed within 30 days of acquisition.Owners of dogs which need not be licensed until after July 1st will pay 50%of the applicable fee. (5)Fees for licenses will be established by the City Council from time to time and must be paid before the license is issued. (6)No license is required of non-residents staying temporarily within the City for not more than thirty days.Licenses must be obtained within thirty days of the owners establishing residence within the City. U)Any aog reacning seven months or age oerore me last aay or i-enruary must be licensed by that date.(Ord.3385 Sec.4,1999;0rd.3326 Sec.1,1998.) 8.02.191 LICENSE—CATS,OPTIONAL.Any owner of a cat may obtain a license for their cat for the purpose of identi?cation upon payment of a license fee plus proof that the animal has been given a rabies vaccination.(Ord.3326 Sec.1,1998.) 8.02.200 LICENSE—RECEIPTS ANDTAGS.(1)License receipts shall provide space for the following information:sex,color,breed,other identifying marks (if any), approximate age,date and serial number of vaccination,name and address of owner, date of issuance,and amount of license fee. (2)License tags shall bear numbers corresponding with those of the license receipts and indicating the expiration date of such license.The shape of the tags shall vary from year to year,and they shall be of a suitable size.(Ord.3326 Sec.1,1998.) 8.02.210 LICENSE PROCEDURES-RECEIPTS AND TAGS.Upon the payment of the license fee and ful?llment of the licensing requirements,the original of the receipt, together with a license tag as provided for in this chapter,shall be delivered to the applicant.A copy shall be retained by the City and a copy delivered to the poundmaster.(Ord.3326 Sec.1,1998.) PMCTitle 8 1/19/16 11 Page 18 of 79 8.02.220 LICENSE PROCEDURES -AFFIXING TAGS.The owner shall cause a valid license tag to be permanently af?xed to the collar of the animal so that such license tag is in such a position that it may be easily seen by the animal control of?cer. The owner shall cause the tag to be worn by such animal at all times.(Ord.3326 Sec. 1,1998.) 8.02.230 LICENSE —NO COST FOR ADOPTED ANIMALS.The poundmaster is authorized to issue a no-cost animal license for an impounded,stray animal upon its :h2||Qnrh......,,......,................-..,.,....,.....,......-......Cu..-.....,..............,..,...,.-....... license shall only be valid until the ?nal dayin February in the yearnfollowingtheyear of issuance.(Ord.3536 Sec.1,2002.) 8.02.240 LICENSE TAGS NOT TRANSFERABLE.License tags shall not be transferable.No refund shall be made of any dog license fee for any reason.(Ord. 3326 Sec.1,1998.) 8.02.250 KENNELS -LICENSINGPROVISION-COMMERICALKENNELS.No person,?rm or corporation shall maintain a commercial kennel within the City without having a current business license and valid commercial kennel license therefor posted in plain view on the premises.The City Clerk shall issue an annual business license and commercial kennel licenses upon the payment of an annual fee as established by the City Council in Chapter 3.07 of this Code and upon receipt of an annual Certi?cate of Inspection rrom me inspection bel'V|CeS Manager.No license snail be issued ror a commercial kennel located in violation of any zoning regulations governing the location of commercial kennels,or operated in violation of any other law.(Ord.3829,2007; 0rd.3326 Sec.1,1998.) 8.02.255 KENNEL—STANDARDSAND INSPECTION—COMMERCIALKENNELS. (1)Construction and maintenance:All facilities shall be so constructed and maintained as to provide comfort and safety for animals.All areas of the premises shall be maintained in a clean and orderly condition,free of objectionable odors.All facilities shall comply with applicable state and municipal laws,ordinances and regulations. (2)Ventilation:Adequate heating and cooling shall be provided for the comfort of the animals,and the facility shall have sufficient ventilation in all areas.Kennels and animal shelters must provide for a minimum of three air changes per hour. (3)Lighting:Proper lighting shall be provided in all rooms utilized for the care and con?nement of animals.Outside lighting shall be adequate to identify the building and to assist the animal caregivers and clients. (4)Water:Potable water shall be provided. (5)Basic sanitation:Any equipment,instruments or facilities used in the con?nement and treatment of animals shall be clean and sanitary at all times to protect against the spread of diseases,parasites and infection. PMCTitle 8 1/19/16 12 Page 19 of 79 ORDINANCE NO. ________ AN ORDINANCE of the City of Pasco, Washington, amending Sections 8.02.190 “License - Dogs, Required”, 8.02.200 “License – Receipts and Tags”, 8.02.210 “License Procedures– Receipts and Tags”, 8.02.230 “License – No Cost for Adopted Animals”, and 3.07.020 “Animal Control”. WHEREAS, the City provides pet licensing services whereby the customer is billed for services rendered; and WHEREAS, the City desires to amend its municipal code regarding pet licensing requirements; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON, DO HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That Section 8.02.190 of the Pasco Municipal Code entitled “License - Dogs, Required” shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: (1) New licenses will be issued annually by the City on a one or three year period. Citizens may opt to license for only one year, even if the animal has a three-year rabies vaccination. To qualify for the three year license, rabies vaccination should be administered less than 60 days prior to the issuance of the new license. The license fee must be paid after January 1st of each year but before expiration of the existing license within 30 days after the expiration of the current license. Each license is valid until the final day of February of the following year for one or three years based on the expiration date of the current license. No refund shall be made of any dog license fee for any reason. (2) Before a license is issued for any dog, the owner must prove, by a certificate of vaccination signed by a licensed veterinarian that the dog has been vaccinated against rabies at the time of licensing; provided, however, the animal control officer may issue a temporary ten (10) day license contingent upon the owner securing a veterinarian's certificate of vaccination required under this chapter prior to the expiration of the temporary license and further providing that all license fees, including late fees, have been paid. If a certificate is not presented within ten (10) days, it shall be another separate violation of this chapter for each day over ten (10) days that proof is not presented. (3) A veterinarian's certificate is necessary to prove that a dog has been neutered or spayed. (4) Newly acquired dogs over the age of seven months must be vaccinated and licensed within 30 days of acquisition. Owners of dogs which need not be licensed until after July 1 st will pay 50% applicable fee. Page 20 of 79 (5) Fees for licenses will be established by the City Council from time to time and must be paid before the license is issued. (6) No license is required of non-residents staying temporarily within the City for not more than thirty days. Licenses must be obtained within thirty days of the owners establishing residence within the City. (7) Any dog must be licensed before reaching seven months of age before the last day of February must be licensed by that date. Section 2. That Section 8.02.200 of the Pasco Municipal Code entitled “License – Receipts and Tags” shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: (1) License receipts shall provide space for the following information: sex, color, breed, other identifying marks (if any), approximate age, date and serial number of vaccination, name and address of owner, date of issuance, and amount of license fee. (2) License tags shall bear numbers corresponding with those of the license receipts and indicating the expiration date of such license. The shape and color of the tags shall may vary from year to year, and they shall be of a suitable size. Section 3. That Section 8.02.210 of the Pasco Municipal Code entitled “License Procedures– Receipts and Tags” shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: Upon the payment of the license fee and fulfillment of the licensing requirements, the original of the receipt, together with a license tag as provided for in this chapter, shall be delivered to the applicant. A copy shall be retained by the City and a copy said information will be delivered to the poundmaster. Section 4. That Section 8.02.230 of the Pasco Municipal Code entitled “License – No Cost for Adopted Animals” shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: The poundmaster is authorized to issue a no-cost animal license for an impounded, stray animal upon its adoption under the approved process. All other license requirements shall apply. Such license shall only be valid until one year from the date of issuance the final day in February I the year following the year of issuance. Section 5. That Section 3.07.020 of the Pasco Municipal Code entitled “Fee Summary – Animal Control” shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: A) Penalty Provisions: Fee/Charge Reference 1) First Offense w/in 5-years $50.00 8.02.360 2) Second Offense w/in 5-years $100.00 8.02.360 3) Third Offense w/in 5-years $200.00 8.02.360 4) Four or more w/in 5-years $400.00 8.02.360 B) Penalty (Civil Penalty) Potentially Page 21 of 79 Dangerous Animal (RCW 16.30.060) 1) First Offense w/in 5-years $500.00 8.02.360 2) Second Offense w/in 5-years $1000.00 8.02.360 3) Third Offense w/in 5-years $1500.00 8.02.360 4) Fourth Offense or more w/in 5-years $2000.00 8.02.360 C) Annual License Fees: 1) Unaltered – 1 yr $55.00 8.02.365 2) Unaltered – 3 yr $160.00 8.02.365 2) Altered, spayed or neutered – 1 yr $15.00 8.02.365 3) Altered, spayed or neutered – 3 yr $40.00 8.02.365 3) Replacement Tags $5.00 8.02.365 4) Senior Replacement Tags $3.00 8.02.365 5) Kennel and Cattery $50.00 8.02.365 6) Potentially Dangerous or Dangerous Animal Permit $250.00 8.02.365 7) Late Fee: $10.00 8.02.365 8) Discounts to low income Senior Citizens- (altered, spayed or neutered) $3.00 8.02.365 D) Impound Fees: 1) First Offense w/in 12-months $35.00 8.02.080 2) Second Offense w/in 12-months $50.00 8.02.080 3) Three or more w/in 12-months $100.00 8.02.080 4) Boarding Fee (per day) $10.00 8.02.080 5) Vaccination Fee $15.00 8.02.320 Section 6. This Ordinance shall take effect January 1, 2018. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco this 16th day of October 2017. Matt Watkins, Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: Daniela Erickson, City Clerk Leland B. Kerr, City Attorney Page 22 of 79 AGENDA REPORT FOR: City Council September 27, 2017 TO: Dave Zabell, City Manager Workshop Meeting: 10/9/17 FROM: Bob Metzger, Police Chief Police Department SUBJECT: Deputy Police Chief Position I. REFERENCE(S): Proposed Organizational Chart 2017 II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Discussion III. FISCAL IMPACT: Negligible IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF: In October 2015, the department presented and reviewed with Council a strategic plan for the department which: • Provided and assessment of the of the department at that time • Described and inventoried efforts in progress • Identified near and long-term objectives • Established desired outcomes Upon adoption of the plan, the department set about implementing the plan which has included policy decisions by Council, particularly within the 2016 and 2017 budget, through internal efforts such as updating training curriculum, enhancing social media presence, achieving WASPC accreditation, revamping the citizens academy in addition to external efforts in partnership with the community such as the review and modification of Police Policy Manual. Since adoption, most of the recommended actions in the plan have been completed or are well underway. Page 23 of 79 Currently the department is authorized 88 positions of which 78 are commissioned officers – 10 Sergeants, 3 Captains and the Chief of Police – and 10 non-commissioned administrative and professional support positions. The department is currently divided into 14 separate operational activities. The current senior command structure was developed and implemented in the early 1990s. The City has since grown dramatically in terms of size, population and need, and at the same time, the science of community policing has evolved significantly. The department has progressed and evolved correspondingly in terms of scope and complexity to meet the needs of our growing community, with the past two years being a period of remarkable progress by any measure. Significant changes in conditions require reevaluation of assumptions at all levels. While the Strategic Plan did identify the need to review the department command structure, the analysis was left to a future effort. The City Manager and Senior Command staff has since completed said review which reveals the need and benefits of a modification to the current structure by eliminating one of the Captain positions and creating the position of Deputy Chief. This recommended change will not increase the number of command staff or FTEs but as the attached department structure illustrates, the change better aligns the functions of the department to the scope and complexity of the agency. Further, the change allows for future growth of the command structure as the community grows and the department grows correspondingly. Finally, the Deputy Chief position aligns with the City Manager’s directive that departments plan for succession and continuity in times of transition. V. DISCUSSION: Page 24 of 79 Organizational Chart 2017 POLICE CHIEF Policy Analyst Administrative Assistant II Citizens Advisory Captain Field Ops DEPUTY CHIEF Captain Support Ops Sergeants Days Sergeants Afternoons Sergeants Nights Officers Officers Officers K-9 Sergeant Resource s Sergeant Admin. PSS Lead ARO SRO Background I.A. Training Equip. Records Sergeant SCU Sergeant ISD METRO Detective DEA Detective FBI Detective Detectives Detectives Crime Analyst SIU SWAT Admin Asst. Page 25 of 79 AGENDA REPORT FOR: City Council October 4, 2017 TO: Dave Zabell, City Manager Workshop Meeting: 10/9/17 FROM: Rick White, Director Community & Economic Development SUBJECT: Central Business District Zoning Regulations I. REFERENCE(S): Proposed Ordinance Memorandum to the Planning Commission Planning Commission Minutes Dated: 5/18/17, 8/17/17 and 9/21/17 II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Discussion III. FISCAL IMPACT: IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF: The Central Business District zoning requirements were adopted by the City in 1999. The purpose of the CBD Zone was to recognize the common wall construction of the Downtown area; the opportunity for pedestrians to have easy access to a variety of retail establishments and to reverse the decline of property values in the Downtown core. Since that time revisions have been suggested to establish additional flexibility in the zoning district or to clarify existing regulations. The proposed ordinance offers revisions to the permitted uses and was vetted through the Downtown Pasco Development Authority. The Board of the DPDA has recommended its adoption. The Planning Commission considered the proposed amendments at a workshop meeting in May and at a public hearing in August. The Commission deliberated on the proposed ordinance in September and has recommended its adoption by Council. V. DISCUSSION: Page 26 of 79 The proposed revisions accomplish the following: • It more clearly indicates that “antique sales” are allowed as a permitted use and establishes a code citation to reinforce the existing definition of an “antique”; • It provides flexibility for wine, beer and alcohol sales as an accessory use (e.g. tasting rooms); • It allows dwelling units outright subject to several parameters;It restates the inclusion of consignment sales and thrift shops as a permitted use subject to existing parameters identified under “Use Regulations” in PMC 25.70; • It establishes “electronic sales and repairs” subject to similar parameters for consignment sales and thrift shops; • Allows "drug stores" as a permitted use; and • Prohibits commissaries for the preparation of food to be sold elsewhere. Staff requests Council discussion and direction on this issue. Page 27 of 79 ORDINANCE NO. _______ AN ORDINANCE of the City of Pasco, Washington, Amending Chapter 25.44 “Central Business District” of the Pasco Municipal Code WHEREAS, Section 25.44.010 of the Pasco Municipal Code reflects the purpose of the Central Business District Zone; and WHEREAS, Sections 25.44.020 and 25.44.030 reflect the permitted uses and accessory uses within the District; and WHEREAS, Section 25.44 reflects the prohibited uses within the District; and WHEREAS, Administration of the regulations within these Sections of the Pasco Municipal Code have suggested needed adjustments and clarity to the variety of such permitted, accessory and prohibited uses; and WHEREAS, The proposed revisions have been considered by the Downtown Pasco Development Authority; and WHEREAS, The proposed revisions have been considered by the Pasco Planning Commission at a public hearing and the Commission has recommended City Council approve the revisions; and WHEREAS, The revisions reflect the best interests of the public for safety, welfare and betterment of the economic environment in Downtown Pasco; NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That Section 25.44.010 of the Pasco Municipal Code, shall be and hereby is amended and shall read as follows: 25.44.010 PURPOSE. The C-2 Central Business District is established to promote the centralization of business and reinforce a positive public image and confidence in the Downtown core commercial revitalization, within a compact commercial area having primarily common-wall building construction. Such construction offers the unique opportunity within the Pasco Urban Area to cluster together types of retail business and retail services which functionally interact well together, and will economically fare better, as a result of close proximity by cumulatively attracting more persons than as individual destination points. It is intended that the commercial clustering concept be fostered by emphasizing pedestrian access and circulation within the district, in a manner which is healthy, safe, uninhibited and convenient for employees and visitors of all ages. Public and private off-street parking shall be located to encourage the transition from automobile to pedestrian movement. On-street parking should be shared by vicinity businesses and be oriented to short duration convenience parking for customers in the vicinity. In order to preserve the public health, safety and welfare in central business district redevelopment, protect public and private investment in property and infrastructure improvements and improve stabilize declining property values, certain uses of the land may be restricted or prohibited. Section 2. That Section 25.44.020 of the Pasco Municipal Code, shall be and hereby is amended and shall read as follows: Page 28 of 79 25.44.020 PERMITTED USES. The following uses shall be permitted in the C-2 district: (1)Antique stores as defined by 25.12.070 and 25.12.075 (2) Artist and office supplies; (3) Bakeries; (4) Banks and financial institutions; (5) Barber and beauty shops; (6) Bookstores, except adult bookstores; (7) Clothing, shoes and accessories, and costume rentals (new/unused materials only); (8) Consignment Stores (25.70.131) and Thrift Shops (25.70.132); (9) Crafts, stationary and gift shops; (10) Department and drug stores; (11) Electronic sales and repair stores with at least 50% of the stock and floor space devoted to the sale of new equipment; (12) Fresh and frozen meats, including seafood; (13) Florists; (14) Furniture and home appliance stores; (15) Galleries for art and restored or refinished antiques; (16) Grocery stores with less than 10,500 square feet of gross floor area; (17) Hardware and home improvement stores; (18) Import shops; (19) Jewelry and gem shops, including custom work; (20) Offices for medical and professional services; (21) Restaurants, sandwich shops, cafeterias and delicatessens; (22) Sporting goods; (23) Tailoring and seamstress shops; (24) Theaters for movies and performances, except adult theaters; (25) Public markets for fresh produce and craft work; (26) Parking lots; (27) Micro-breweries, and micro-wineries and associated tasting rooms; (28) Research, development and assembly facilities for component devices and equipment of an electrical, electronic or electromagnetic nature; and (29) Home brewing and/or wine making equipment sales. (30) Dwelling units, provided the units are within the principle building, are all above the ground floor of said building, the ground floor of said building is designed or intended to be used for a use permitted in Section 25.44.020 and there is at least one dedicated and off-street parking space for each unit. Section 3. That Section 25.44.030 of the Pasco Municipal Code shall be and hereby is amended and shall read as follows: 25.44.030 PERMITTED ACCESSORY USES. The following accessory uses and buildings, as respectively defined in Sections 25.12.020 and 25.12.115, shall be permitted in the C-2 district: (1) Parking lots; (2) Alcoholic beverage sales provided it is for on-site consumption and located within a restaurant; (3) Other uses clearly incidental or secondary to a principal use; (4) Beer/wine/alcohol beverage sales for on-site and off-site consumption provided the product is produced in Franklin, Walla Walla, Yakima and/or Benton County or on-site in a micro- brewery/winery/distillery and/or micro-winery; Page 29 of 79 (5) Sales of micro-brewery products and non-fortified wines for off-site consumption provided such sales are in conjunction with an establishment selling predominately, based upon floor area, home brewing and/or wine making equipment as permitted in Section 25.44.020. (6) Storage buildings; excluding container storage, as defined in Section 25.12.430 are permitted. Section 4. That Section 25.44.040 of the Pasco Municipal Code shall be and hereby is amended and shall read as follows: 25.44.040 CONDITIONAL USES. The following uses are permitted subject to the approval of a special permit: (1) Dwelling units, provided the units are within the principle building, are all above the ground floor of said building, and the ground floor of said building is designed or intended to be used for a use permitted in Section 25.44.020. (1) Unclassified uses per Section 25.86.020. Section 5. That Section 25.44.030 of the Pasco Municipal Code shall be and hereby is amended and shall read as follows: 25.44.050 PROHIBITED USES. Evidence received by the Planning Commission and contained in previous studies and Pasco Police Crime Reports demonstrates that certain uses make the Central Business District less desirable or attractive to the public due to a demonstrated history of contribution to general public disorder, loitering, nuisance and other acts detrimental to the public image of the area. Certain other uses provide entirely, or predominately, automobile services and, thereby, do not foster the clustering concept intended to attract pedestrian visitors. Other uses may, by their inherent nature, require a disproportionate amount of the limited vicinal on-street parking, for an extended time, which is intended to be available and shared by all business for the short duration convenience of customers. The following listed businesses, for the reasons above, inhibit new business growth, contribute to business loss and decline of property values, inhibit convenient access to vicinal businesses, do not foster the clustering concept intended to orient the business environment to pedestrians, or perpetuate a public image which is undesirable or unattractive and detrimental to public and private investment in revitalization efforts and, therefore, are prohibited within the C-2 district: (1) Gasoline and service stations, automobile services or repair, except tire stores; (2) Outdoor storage of goods or materials; (3) Membership clubs; (4) Taverns; (5) Billiard and pool halls; (6) Amusement game centers; (7) Pawn shops; (8) Card rooms, bingo parlors, dance halls, nightclubs and similar places; (9) Adult theaters, adult bookstores, tattoo parlors, bathhouses and massage parlors; (10) Community service facilities level two; (11) Secondhand dealers. Similar or like uses although not specifically listed are also prohibited; and (12) Commissaries for the preparation of food to be served elsewhere; and (123) Adult Business Facilities. Section 6. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect five days after passage and publication as required by law. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco, at its regular meeting of ________________, 2017. Page 30 of 79 Matt Watkins, Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: Daniela Erickson, City Clerk Leland B. Kerr, City Attorney Page 31 of 79 MEMORANDUM DATE:September 15, 2017 TO:Planning Commission FROM:Rick White, Director Community & Economic Development SUBJECT:Revisions to the Central Business District Zoning The Central Business District zoning requirements were adopted by the City in 1999. Since that time a number of revisions have been suggested to establish additional flexibility in the zoning district or to clarify existing regulations. The proposed ordinance does the following: It more clearly indicates that “antique sales” are allowed as a permitted use and establishes a code citation to reinforce the definition of an “antique”; It provides flexibility for wine, beer and alcohol sales as an accessory use (e.g. tasting rooms); It allows dwelling units outright subject to several parameters; It restates the inclusion of consignment sales and thrift shops as a permitted use subject to parameters identified under “Use Regulations” in PMC 25.70; It establishes “electronic sales and repairs” subject to similar parameters for consignment sales and thrift shops; and, It prohibits commissaries (kitchens for the preparation of food to be sold elsewhere) outright. The proposed ordinance has been discussed several times with the Downtown Pasco Development Authority Board and various City staff. Their input is included in this final draft version for public comment that is before the Commission. The Commission may find the following definitions contained in Title 25 helpful as these terms are contained in the proposed ordinance: 25.12.070 ANTIQUE. “Antique” means a piece of furniture, glassware, silverware, art work or other items that are at least sixty years old and are distinguished from general secondhand personal property, and collectibles by educational value, historic value, artistic value, ornamental character or intrinsic aesthetic merits. (Ord. 3354 Sec. 2, 1999 25.70.131 CONSIGNMENT STORES. (1) “Consignment stores” as the term is defined in this chapter, may operate in the C-1 (Retail Business District) and C-2 (Central Business District) Zones; however no new consignment store may locate closer than 1,000 feet from an existing consignment store, thrift store, or pawn shop; and, (2) Consignment stores may operate in the C-3 (General Business District) and in the I-1 (Light Industrial District) Zones; however no new consignment store may locate closer than 1,000 feet from an existing consignment store, thrift store, or pawn shop; and, (3) All business activities of consignment stores located in the C-1 (Retail Business District), C-2 (Central Business District), and C-3 (General Business District) Page 32 of 79 Zones shall be conducted entirely within an enclosed structure. (Ord. 4066, 2012.) 25.70.132 THRIFT SHOPS. (1) “Thrift shops” as the term is defined in this chapter, may operate in the C-1 (Retail Business district) and C-2 (Central Business District) Zones upon issuance of a Special Permit, as per the requirements found in PMC 25.86; however no new thrift shop may locate closer than 1,000 feet from an existing consignment store, thrift store, or pawn shop; and, (2) Thrift shops may operate in the C-3 (General Business District) and in the I-1 (Light Industrial District) Zones; however no new consignment store may locate closer than 1,000 feet from an existing consignment store, thrift store, or pawn shop; and, (3) All business activities of thrift shops in the C-1 (Retail Business District), C-2 (Central Business District), and C-3 (General Business District) Zones shall be conducted entirely within an enclosed structure. (Ord. 4066, 2012) MOTION: I move the Planning Commission recommend to City Council the adoption of the proposed amendments to the Central Business District Zone as contained in the September 21, 2017 Planning Commission staff report. Page 33 of 79 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MAY 18, 2017 C. Code Amendment Revisions to the Central Business District Zoning (MF# CA 2017-005) Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Rick White, Community & Economic Development Director, discussed the workshop item for revisions to the Central Business District zoning code. This item has been discussed by Staff and recently with the Downtown Pasco Development Authority (DPDA). This code revision would clarify the permitted uses regarding antique stores. There has been a misunderstanding that antique stores are not permitted downtown, however they are allowed downtown. The consignment store issues that pertained to Goodwill a few years ago, has been inserted into the proposed ordinance. They are allowed but it will now be more clearly stated. Drug stores has been inserted as a permitted use. And Staff, with the concurrence of the DPDA also inserted electronic sales and repairs as long as a substantial portion of their stock was new equipment. Dwelling units, which were previously permitted through the special use permit process, have been added as a permitted use provided some parameters can be met, particularly parking, and that the ground level is used as commercial. The idea would be to increase the population downtown which would then increase the need for stores and services to be located downtown, making the downtown more active and lively putting people on the street which would ultimately lead to more security. There were provisions added for wineries, distilleries and tasting rooms. The prohibition for commissaries was added because there has been a problem with buildings being used for food preparation to be sold elsewhere and the potential retail space is taken up and not used as it should be and it does not contribute to the vitality of the downtown by taking their product and selling it elsewhere. Staff requested input and discussion from the Planning Commission. Commissioner Roach asked if the last item regarding commissaries would exclude the Pasco Specialty Kitchen. Mr. White said it wouldn’t and would in fact, help the Specialty Kitchen because they are an incubator use and the commissaries would now be able to use the Specialty Kitchen or use an existing restaurant. Chairman Cruz asked what the difference was between all of the different adult uses that were prohibited. He asked what an adult business facility would be if it’s not an adult theater, adult bookstore, etc. Mr. White responded that it has to do with sexually-oriented merchandise. He couldn’t say offhand but the zoning code has all of these definitions, which was a throwback to a different era when there was a time when certain locations lent themselves to those kinds of uses. There were legal issues with these types of establishments years ago with all three cities and attorneys were hired to define all of the terms. Page 34 of 79 Commissioner Bowers asked about the permitted use for electronic sales and repair in which 50% of the stock must be devoted to the sales of new equipment. She asked if it would preclude a vacuum repair store or a computer repair shop from existing. Mr. White responded that it would allow for those items as long as 50% of the stock is new merchandise as well as consignment stores. Commissioner Bowers asked if there was less than 50% if they could exist in the downtown, and if not, why. Mr. White responded that they could not and that is because it is not good for the downtown for a repair shop alone to exist where there should be retail activity. Downtown should be retail oriented and you will get what you allow. Chairman Cruz added that it’s no different from a commissary from that aspect in that you will not get the business culture that you desire. Commissioner Roach asked about the prohibited use for taverns and felt that it was inconsistent with the permitted uses of tasting rooms, microbreweries and distilleries – that one is allowed and not the other. She asked if a tavern was the same thing as a microbrewery. Mr. White responded that they actually make their beer at a microbrewery. There is an investment of their product fabrication and the ability to serve food. There is a tavern downtown that attracts clients that are often problems with law enforcement and the perception of downtown because they have no investment in their product despite the sales of alcoholic beverages. Chairman Cruz briefly discussed the history of taverns in Downtown Pasco. He understood where Staff was going but did feel that it could be inconsistent. Commissioner Roach said that part of the appeal of a downtown is the nightlife and this would be limiting. She stated that she understood the problematic business that currently exists but explained that Downtown Kennewick has many bars and while they probably have their fair share of problems, it is also a center of business. Chairman Cruz said he believed that Downtown Kennewick billed theirs as an entertainment district not a business district, which may be the difference. Commissioner Campos added that he is familiar with a distillery in Richland. They have very limited hours for the purpose of tastings and selling of their product but close early to not cause problems in the evenings. It would attract people to the area as well as the surrounding area. There are other great opportunities that could come with a tasting room as opposed to a tavern. Commissioner Roach responded that she is not opposed to a tasting room or distillery but felt it was a bit inhibiting to not allow bars or taverns. Chairman Cruz addressed the density of these types of establishments and that could be used as a tool to not oversaturate the downtown with taverns. He agreed with Page 35 of 79 Commissioner Roach that he didn’t want to completely prohibit that kind of use. However, a tavern isn’t the same as a bar and grill and in the downtown, a bar and grill is permitted. Mr. White added that yes, bar and grills are allowed in the downtown under accessory uses. Chairman Cruz said that was a good way to mitigate it then. Commissioner Roach agreed. Chairman Cruz asked how much food had to be offered at a tavern. Mr. White answered that he wasn’t sure but it was far less than a bar and grill. Commissioner Roach said that helped and was a good distinction to make. Commissioner Polk asked Chairman Cruz if he was suggesting that a tavern be moved from prohibited to conditional. Chairman Cruz said he wouldn’t be opposed to it as long as there was a distance requirement. Commissioner Bowers asked about allowing billiards or pool halls and said that could be a good recreational use. Dave McDonald, City Planner, said that back in the late 1980’s one of the worst place in town was Marty’s Pool Hall that served alcohol and minimal food and attracted all sorts of problems. The drug task force actually rented the top floor of the bank to look across the street to check the people going in and out of it. Every other tavern downtown had the same type of problems; drugs, prostitution, murders and gangs. All of that cleared up when the taverns were closed and prohibited. Marty’s Pool Hall had to be shut down. There was another place that had to be shut down as well. A Council meeting was held to revoke the business license because the owner was selling drugs behind the counter along with the beer. The whole zoning code was changed to address all of the problems. Chairman Cruz said an amusement/game center came into question at one time. Mr. McDonald said that there were problems there too. Chairman Cruz responded that he was aware but he would like to readdress some of these issues from the past because he would like to see more family friendly things to do in Pasco. He said that he is inclined to revisit some of those items as a code amendment so that someday there could be more youth-oriented places. Commissioner Campos asked if there was anything that distinguished a pool hall or a bar with a pool table. Mr. McDonald responded that pool halls are allowed in other parts of town, just not in Page 36 of 79 the Central Business District. There was one over by Andy’s Restaurant but is no longer there. They didn’t serve beer but they were strictly a pool hall. Commissioner Polk wanted to add that she liked that the dwelling allowance has been moved from conditional to permitted, as that could draw more traffic to the downtown and add more of a mixed-use space. Chairman Cruz agreed with Commissioner Polk. There were no further questions or comments. Page 37 of 79 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES AUGUST 17, 2017 H. Code Amendment Revisions to CBD Zoning (City of Pasco) (MF# CA 2017-005) Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Rick White, Community & Economic Development Director, discussed the code amendment for revisions the Central Business District (CDB) Zoning. The Planning Commission has seen this item before so Mr. White directed their attention to the proposed revised ordinance. The main changes were highlighted in the memorandum. It clarifies that antique sales are permitted; it provides flexibility for wine, beer and alcohol sales as an accessory use, it allows dwelling units outright subject to several parameters; it restates the inclusions of consignment sales and thrift shops; it establishes “electronic sales and repairs” subject to similar parameters for consignment sales and thrift shops; and it prohibits commissaries outright. Commissioner Bowers asked if the Pasco Specialty Kitchen was a commercial kitchen. Mr. White responded that it is a commercial incubator. Commissioner Bykonen moved, seconded by Commissioner Campos, to close the public hearing on the proposed amendments to the Central Business District Zone and schedule deliberations and a recommendation to City Council for the September 21, 2017 meeting. The motion passed unanimously. Page 38 of 79 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES SEPTEMBER 21, 2017 E. Code Amendment Revisions to CBD Zoning (City of Pasco) (MF# CA 2017-005) Chairwoman Roach read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Rick White, Community & Economic Development Director, discussed the code amendment for revisions to the Central Business District (CBD) Zoning. There were no additional comments from staff. Chairwoman Roach asked if this would exclude the Pasco Specialty Kitchen. Mr. White said no because it didn’t qualify. Chairwoman Roach asked if consignments stores used to have to be only 300-500 feet from another and not 1,000 feet from each other and if that changed. Mr. White said no, it hadn’t changed and 1,000 feet is what was adopted years ago. Commissioner Mendez asked if this ordinance would prohibit taverns and pool halls in the downtown area. Mr. White replied that this code amendment doesn’t but the one adopted in the 1990’s did and there haven’t been changes made to it since. Commissioner Bowers moved, seconded by Commissioner Portugal, the Planning Commission recommend to City Council the adoption of the proposed amendments to the Central Business District Zone as contained in the September 21, 2017 Planning Commission staff report. The motion passed unanimously. Page 39 of 79 AGENDA REPORT FOR: City Council October 3, 2017 TO: Dave Zabell, City Manager Rick White, Director Community & Economic Development Workshop Meeting: 10/9/17 FROM: Jeff Adams, Associate Planner Community & Economic Development SUBJECT: Code Amendment: Residential Design Standards Regarding False Dormers & Flat Roofs (MF# CA 2017-004) I. REFERENCE(S): Proposed Ordinance Planning Commission Memo Planning Commission Minutes Dated: 08/17/2017 and 9/21/2017 Correspondence Dated: October 2, 2017 II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Discussion III. FISCAL IMPACT: None IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF: On August 17, 2017 the Planning Commission held a hearing to consider amending PMC 25.70.085 to allow flat roofs (roofs with a pitch of 5/12 or less) and/or shed-style roofs with varying pitches, and false dormers as specified in the attached proposed Code Amendment Ordinance. Following the conduct of a public hearing, the Planning Commission reasoned it would be appropriate to recommend an ordinance amending PMC 25.70.085 (see attached Ordinance). V. DISCUSSION: In July of 2005, The Washington State Legislature preempted the City’s ability to Page 40 of 79 regulate the placement of new manufactured homes in the City. However the new State legislation allowed Cities to regulate aesthetics as long as the standards apply to all housing. A result of the State mandate, the City of Pasco crafted standards that require all homes in certain zoning districts to meet a specific level of aesthetic values. Unfortunately, a few of these standards—namely roof pitch, and false dormers— technically preclude architectural features which have been successfully utilized in stick-build construction with an otherwise pleasing aesthetic outcome, and without triggering the “mobile home” stigma. Staff requests Council discussion and direction on this issue. Page 41 of 79 ORDINANCE NO._____ AN ORDINANCE AMENDING PMC TITLE 25 DEALING WITH RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARDS REGARDING FALSE DORMERS & FLAT ROOFS (CA 2017-004). WHEREAS, cities have the responsibility to regulate and control physical development within their borders and to ensure public health, safety and welfare are maintained; and, WHEREAS, the City of Pasco has zoning regulations that encourage orderly growth and development of the City; and, WHEREAS, within the zoning regulations PMC Chapter 25.70.085 contains provisions regarding residential design standards; and, WHEREAS, Many architectural features of manufactured homes, such as low-pitch roofs, lack of integrated porches and landings, and so forth, were historically associated with the transportation requirements of mobile homes, reducing weight and allowing them to pass under low freeway underpasses; and, WHEREAS, standards dealing with roof pitch, and false dormers, technically preclude architectural features which have been successfully utilized in stick-build construction with an otherwise pleasing aesthetic outcome, and without triggering the “mobile home” stigma; and, WHEREAS, several architects have periodically requested to allow for flat roofs (roofs with a pitch of 1/12 or less) and/or shed-style roofs with varying pitches under 5/12 pitch in the City of Pasco as part of their design strategy; and, WHEREAS, While flat roofs and shed-style roofs with pitches under 5/12 pitch are technically in violation of the 5/12 pitch standard specified in the code, they often lend a pleasing appearance when built as part of an architecturally integrated design, as contrasted to the squat- pitched mobile home roof designed to slide under low freeway bridges; and, WHEREAS, fenestrated false dormers placed on a 5/12 roof typically present an aesthetically pleasing façade not resembling mobile home dormers; and, WHEREAS, The Planning Commission considers it appropriate to allow for flat roofs (roofs with a pitch of 1/12 or less) and shed-style roofs with varying pitches under 5/12 pitch as part of an architecturally integrated design; and, WHEREAS, The Planning Commission considers it appropriate to allow false dormers containing windows on roof pitches with at least a 5/12 pitch; and, WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that to further the purposes of maintaining a quality community and to support orderly development within the City of Pasco, it is necessary to amend PMC Title 25.70.085 and adopts by reference the Planning Commission’s findings on this matter; NOW THEREFORE, Page 42 of 79 THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That PMC Section 25.70.085 be and the same is hereby amended to read as follows: 25.70.085 RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARDS. (1) DESIGN STANDARDS. Except for multi-family structures the following design standards shall apply to all newly constructed or newly placed dwellings in RT, R-S-20, R-S-12, R-S-1, R-1, R-2, R-3 and the R-4 Districts: (a) The main entry doors of all dwellings must face the street on which the dwelling is addressed; (b) A minimum of 30 (thirty) square feet of glazing must be on the portion of the dwelling facing the street. Dwellings with less than 32 square feet of glazing must contain covered porches with a minimum of a four-foot overhang; (c) All entry porches/landing areas must be constructed as an integral part of the dwelling architecture; (d) The main roof of all dwellings shall have a minimum 5/12 pitch; except dwellings with less than a 5/12 pitch legally established as of the effective date of this ordinance shall be permitted to be rebuilt, altered, enlarged or remodeled without the roof being changed to a 5/12 pitch; and except for flat-pitched roofs (roofs with a pitch of 1/12 or less) and/or shed-style roofs with varying pitches as part of an architecturally integrated design. (e) Eave overhangs are required and shall be a minimum of 12 inches; (f) Dwellings with 4/12 pitch roofs may be permitted provided the main roof includes one or more secondary roofs intersecting the main roof at right angles. The secondary roof must have a pitch of 5/12 or greater; (g) No false or artificial dormers are permitted except fenestrated false or artificial dormers on roofs with at least a 5/12 pitch; (h) All foundation walls must be poured concrete or masonry block; (i) All dwellings must be permanently connected to foundations, and must meet seismic and wind loading standards for Franklin County, Washington; (j) No more than 12 inches of foundation wall can be exposed on the walls facing a street; (k) All siding must be durable materials, such as brick, masonry, stucco, vinyl, exterior-grade wood, or exterior grade composites, each with a lifespan of at least 20 years under normal conditions; Page 43 of 79 (l) All siding must extend below the top of the foundation 1 ½ to 2 inches. A bottom trim board does not qualify as siding and cannot be used to cover the top of the foundation; (m) All trim materials around windows, doors, corners, and other areas of the dwelling, must be cedar or other City approved materials that are not subject to deterioration; (n) All electric meters must be securely attached to an exterior side wall of the dwelling. Meters are not permitted to face the street upon which the dwelling is addressed; (o) All additions and/or other architectural features must be designed and permanently connected to the dwelling so as to be an integral part of the dwelling; (p) Primary driveways shall terminate into an architecturally integrated garage or carport. No parking pad is permitted in front of a dwelling unless such pad leads to a garage or carport; (q) At least one required off-street parking space must be located behind the front building setback line of the dwelling. (2) EXCEPTIONS. Exceptions to the design standards may be granted through the special permit process based upon review of the criteria listed in PMC 25.86.060. Section 2. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect five days after passage and publication as required by law. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco, at its regular meeting of ___________ 2017. ______________________________ Matt Watkins Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: _____________________________ ____________________________ Daniela Erickson Leland B. Kerr City Clerk City Attorney Page 44 of 79 1 M E M O R A N D UM DATE: September 12, 2017 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Jeffrey B. Adams, Associate Planner SUBJECT: Residential Design Standards Regarding False Dormers & Flat Roofs (MF# CA 2017-004) In July of 2005, The Washington State Legislature preempted the City’s ability to regulate the placement of new manufactured homes in the City through the adoption of SB 6593, which precluded any city in the State of Washington from enacting and/or enforcing any regulations not applicable to all housing types (manufactured and site-built). The new State legislation allowed Cities to regulate aesthetics as long as the standards apply to all housing and did not specifically discriminate against manufactured housing units. Many Pasco citizens opposed placement of manufactured homes in traditional, “stick-build” or site-built neighborhoods for fear that these units would detract from the aesthetic appeal of their neighborhoods and reduce their property values. As part of the campaign to push the bill through the Senate representatives from the manufactured housing industry introduced images of aesthetically pleasing high-end manufactured homes as examples of what the industry was willing to do aesthetically to their units in order to overcome the “mobile home” stigma. In response to the manufactured home industry’s campaign, and as a result of the State mandate, the City of Pasco (and Kennewick/Richland) crafted a set of standards that require all homes in certain zoning districts to meet a specific level of aesthetic values. These standards were crafted so as to reduce the likelihood of homes which would clash with the surrounding architecture in any given neighborhood. These standards are as follows: 25.70.085 RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARDS. (1) DESIGN STANDARDS. Except for multi-family structures the following design standards shall apply to all newly constructed or newly placed dwellings in RT, R-S-20, R-S-12, R-S-1, R-1, R-2, R-3 and the R-4 Districts: (a) The main entry doors of all dwellings must face the street on which the dwelling is addressed; (b) A minimum of 30 (thirty) square feet of glazing must be on the portion of the dwelling facing the street. Dwellings with less than 32 square feet of glazing must contain covered porches with a minimum of a four-foot Page 45 of 79 2 overhang; (c) All entry porches/landing areas must be constructed as an integral part of the dwelling architecture; (d) The main roof of all dwellings shall have a minimum 5/12 pitch; except dwellings with less than a 5/12 pitch legally established as of the effective date of this ordinance shall be permitted to be rebuilt, altered, enlarged or remodeled without the roof being changed to a 5/12 pitch; (e) Eave overhangs are required and shall be a minimum of 12 inches; (f) Dwellings with 4/12 pitch roofs may be permitted provided the main roof includes one or more secondary roofs intersecting the main roof at right angles. The secondary roof must have a pitch of 5/12 or greater; (g) No false or artificial dormers are permitted; (h) All foundation walls must be poured concrete or masonry block; (i) All dwellings must be permanently connected to foundations, and must meet seismic and wind loading standards for Franklin County, Washington; (j) No more than 12 inches of foundation wall can be exposed on the walls facing a street; (k) All siding must be durable materials, such as brick, masonry, stucco, vinyl, exterior-grade wood, or exterior grade composites, each with a lifespan of at least 20 years under normal conditions; (l) All siding must extend below the top of the foundation 1 ½ to 2 inches. A bottom trim board does not qualify as siding and cannot be used to cover the top of the foundation; (m) All trim materials around windows, doors, corners, and other areas of the dwelling, must be cedar or other City approved materials that are not subject to deterioration; (n) All electric meters must be securely attached to an exterior side wall of the dwelling. Meters are not permitted to face the street upon which the dwelling is addressed; (o) All additions and/or other architectural features must be designed and permanently connected to the dwelling so as to be an integral part of the dwelling; (p) Primary driveways shall terminate into an architecturally integrated garage or carport. No parking pad is permitted in front of a dwelling unless such pad leads to a garage or carport; (q) At least one required off-street parking space must be located behind the front building setback line of the dwelling. (2) EXCEPTIONS. Exceptions to the design standards may be granted through the special permit process based upon review of the criteria listed in PMC 25.86.060. Many architectural features of manufactured homes, such as low-pitch roofs, lack of integrated porches and landings, and so forth, were historically associated with the transportation requirements of mobile homes, reducing weight and allowing them to pass under low freeway underpasses. Unfortunately, a few of these standards—namely items “f” and “g” above, dealing Page 46 of 79 3 with roof pitch, and false dormers, respectively—technically preclude architectural features which have been successfully utilized in stick-build construction with an otherwise pleasing aesthetic outcome, and without triggering the “mobile home” stigma. For example, a handful of architects have petitioned to allow for flat roofs (roofs with a pitch of 1/12 or less) and/or shed-style roofs with varying pitches in the City of Pasco as part of their design strategy. While a flat roof is technically less than the 5/12 specified in the code, it does not resemble the squat-pitched mobile home roof designed to slide under low freeway bridges. Similarly, false dormers with windows on a 5/12 roof present an aesthetically pleasing façade not resembling mobile home dormers. Findings 1. SB 6593 preempts cities in the State of Washington from regulating the placement of new manufactured homes. 2. SB 6593 precludes cities from enacting and/or enforcing any regulations not applicable to all housing types (manufactured and site-built). 3. The City of Pasco adopted Title 25.70.085 “RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARDS” in response to the passage of SB 6593. 4. Title 25.70.085 requires all homes in certain zoning districts to meet a specific level of aesthetic values. 5. Title 25.70.085 standards were designed to keep new home designs from clashing with the surrounding architecture in any given neighborhood.  6. Many architectural features of manufactured homes were associated with the transportation requirements; reducing weight and allowing homes to clear low freeway underpasses. 7. The roof pitch and false dormers standards of Title 25.70.085 technically preclude architecturally pleasing flat roofs (roofs with a pitch of 1/12 or less) and/or shed-style roofs with varying pitches, and dormers which have been successfully utilized in stick-build construction without triggering the “mobile home” stigma. 8. A handful of architects have periodically requested to allow for flat roofs and/or shed-style roofs with varying pitches in the City of Pasco as part of their design strategy. 9. False dormers with windows on a 5/12 roof can present an aesthetically pleasing façade not resembling mobile home dormers. Staff recommends that the City allow flat roofs (roofs with a pitch of 1/12 or Page 47 of 79 4 less) and/or shed-style roofs with varying pitches, and false dormers as specified in the attached proposed Code Amendment Ordinance. NOTE: For the sake of consistency this recommendation, along with the language in this report and the draft ordinance represents a slight change from the previous recommendation as follows: 1) Recommending a 5/12 minimum roof pitch rather than 6/12 pitch for roofs with false dormers; and 2) Replacing the minimum 5/12 pitch roof requirement for shed-style roofs with the allowance for unlimited “varying pitches.” RECOMMENDATION: MOTION: I move the Planning Commission adopt the findings of fact as contained in the September 21, 2017 staff memo regarding roof pitch and false dormer requirements. MOTION: I move the Planning Commission recommend the City Council adopt the proposed code amendments regarding roof pitch and false dormer requirements as attached to the September 21, 2017 staff memo to the Planning Commission. Page 48 of 79 ORDINANCE NO._____ AN ORDINANCE AMENDING PMC TITLE 25 DEALING WITH RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARDS REGARDING FALSE DORMERS & FLAT ROOFS (CA 2017-004). WHEREAS, cities have the responsibility to regulate and control physical development within their borders and to ensure public health, safety and welfare are maintained; and, WHEREAS, the City of Pasco has zoning regulations that encourage orderly growth and development of the City; and, WHEREAS, within the zoning regulations PMC Chapter 25.70.085 contains provisions regarding residential design standards; and, WHEREAS, Many architectural features of manufactured homes, such as low-pitch roofs, lack of integrated porches and landings, and so forth, were historically associated with the transportation requirements of mobile homes, reducing weight and allowing them to pass under low freeway underpasses; and, WHEREAS, standards dealing with roof pitch, and false dormers, technically preclude architectural features which have been successfully utilized in stick-build construction with an otherwise pleasing aesthetic outcome, and without triggering the “mobile home” stigma; and, WHEREAS, several architects have periodically requested to allow for flat roofs (roofs with a pitch of 1/12 or less) and/or shed-style roofs with varying pitches under 5/12 pitch in the City of Pasco as part of their design strategy; and, WHEREAS, While flat roofs and shed-style roofs with pitches under 5/12 pitch are technically in violation of the 5/12 pitch standard specified in the code, they often lend a pleasing appearance when built as part of an architecturally integrated design, as contrasted to the squat- pitched mobile home roof designed to slide under low freeway bridges; and, WHEREAS, fenestrated false dormers placed on a 5/12 roof typically present an aesthetically pleasing façade not resembling mobile home dormers; and, WHEREAS, The Planning Commission considers it appropriate to allow for flat roofs (roofs with a pitch of 1/12 or less) and shed-style roofs with varying pitches under 5/12 pitch as part of an architecturally integrated design; and, WHEREAS, The Planning Commission considers it appropriate to allow false dormers containing windows on roof pitches with at least a 5/12 pitch; and, WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that to further the purposes of maintaining a quality community and to support orderly development within the City of Pasco, it is necessary to amend PMC Title 25.70.085 and adopts by reference the Planning Commission’s findings on this matter; NOW THEREFORE, Page 49 of 79 THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That PMC Section 25.70.085 be and the same is hereby amended to read as follows: 25.70.085 RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARDS. (1) DESIGN STANDARDS. Except for multi-family structures the following design standards shall apply to all newly constructed or newly placed dwellings in RT, R-S-20, R-S-12, R-S-1, R-1, R-2, R-3 and the R-4 Districts: (a) The main entry doors of all dwellings must face the street on which the dwelling is addressed; (b) A minimum of 30 (thirty) square feet of glazing must be on the portion of the dwelling facing the street. Dwellings with less than 32 square feet of glazing must contain covered porches with a minimum of a four-foot overhang; (c) All entry porches/landing areas must be constructed as an integral part of the dwelling architecture; (d) The main roof of all dwellings shall have a minimum 5/12 pitch; except dwellings with less than a 5/12 pitch legally established as of the effective date of this ordinance shall be permitted to be rebuilt, altered, enlarged or remodeled without the roof being changed to a 5/12 pitch; and except for flat-pitched roofs (roofs with a pitch of 1/12 or less) and/or shed-style roofs with varying pitches as part of an architecturally integrated design. (e) Eave overhangs are required and shall be a minimum of 12 inches; (f) Dwellings with 4/12 pitch roofs may be permitted provided the main roof includes one or more secondary roofs intersecting the main roof at right angles. The secondary roof must have a pitch of 5/12 or greater; (g) No false or artificial dormers are permitted except fenestrated false or artificial dormers on roofs with at least a 5/12 pitch; (h) All foundation walls must be poured concrete or masonry block; (i) All dwellings must be permanently connected to foundations, and must meet seismic and wind loading standards for Franklin County, Washington; (j) No more than 12 inches of foundation wall can be exposed on the walls facing a street; (k) All siding must be durable materials, such as brick, masonry, stucco, vinyl, exterior-grade wood, or exterior grade composites, each with a lifespan of at least 20 years under normal conditions; Page 50 of 79 (l) All siding must extend below the top of the foundation 1 ½ to 2 inches. A bottom trim board does not qualify as siding and cannot be used to cover the top of the foundation; (m) All trim materials around windows, doors, corners, and other areas of the dwelling, must be cedar or other City approved materials that are not subject to deterioration; (n) All electric meters must be securely attached to an exterior side wall of the dwelling. Meters are not permitted to face the street upon which the dwelling is addressed; (o) All additions and/or other architectural features must be designed and permanently connected to the dwelling so as to be an integral part of the dwelling; (p) Primary driveways shall terminate into an architecturally integrated garage or carport. No parking pad is permitted in front of a dwelling unless such pad leads to a garage or carport; (q) At least one required off-street parking space must be located behind the front building setback line of the dwelling. (2) EXCEPTIONS. Exceptions to the design standards may be granted through the special permit process based upon review of the criteria listed in PMC 25.86.060. Section 2. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect five days after passage and publication as required by law. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco, at its regular meeting of ___________ 2017. ______________________________ Matt Watkins Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: _____________________________ ____________________________ Daniela Erickson Leland B. Kerr City Clerk City Attorney Page 51 of 79 Page 52 of 79 Page 53 of 79 Page 54 of 79 Page 55 of 79 Page 56 of 79 Page 57 of 79 Page 58 of 79 Page 59 of 79 -1-   PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 08/17/2017 G. Code Amendment Revisions to Residential Design Standards for False Dormers & Flat Roofs (City of Pasco) (MF# CA 2017- 004) Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Rick White, Community & Economic Development Director, discussed the code amendment for revisions to the residential design standards for false dormers and flat roofs. The Planning Commission has seen this item before. It would allow for flat roofs provided they are a part of an architecturally integrated plan and clarifies that false dormers are allowed as long as the 6/12 roof pitch is reached. Staff added photographs for the Commission to illustrate what false dormers and flat roofs. Commissioner Bowers asked if tiny houses would fit within this regulation. Mr. White answered that he was unsure but as long as they met all other requirements and design standards then likely. Chairman Cruz added that these items are features not requirements so a tiny home cold take advantage of these items. Commissioner Bowers moved, seconded by Commissioner Alvarado, to close the public hearing and schedule deliberations, the adoption of findings of fact and development of a recommendation for City Council for the August 17, 2017 meeting. The motion passed unanimously. Respectfully submitted, David McDonald, City Planner Page 60 of 79 -1-   PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 9/21/2017 D. Code Amendment Revisions to Residential Design Standards for False Dormers & Flat Roofs (City of Pasco) (MF# CA 2017-004) Chairwoman Roach read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Rick White, Community & Economic Development Director, discussed the code amendment for revisions to residential design standards for false dormers and flat roofs. The Commission has seen this item several times and has had discussion. There has been one change since the previous staff report. The proposed ordinance allows false dormers on roof pitches at least 5/12, however last month it stated 6/12 pitch. Chairwoman Roach asked if there would need to be 30 sq. ft of glazing or 32 sq. ft. and what side of the property. Mr. White clarified that it was only for the front side of the property. And there is an option in case someone doesn’t want that much open window area. Commissioner Mendez asked what “fenestrated false” dormers were. Mr. White responded that it meant those that have openings. Commissioner Alvarado asked if there has been much interest for more flat roofs and if that was the reason for the rezone. Mr. White replied that there has been interest but as of now there hasn’t been a tool to handle those that do want a flat roof. There is the option to apply for a variance which is difficult to get because there is nothing “special” about a lot to justify a flat roof. That is the reasoning for the code amendment. Commissioner Bykonen moved, seconded by Commissioner Greenaway, the Planning Commission adopt the findings of fact as contained in the September 21, 2017 staff memo regarding roof pitch and false dormer requirements. The motion passed unanimously. Commissioner Bykonen moved, seconded by Commissioner Greenaway, the Planning Commission recommend the City Council adopt the proposed code amendment regarding roof pitch and false dormer requirements as attached to the September 21, 2017 staff memo to the Planning Commission. The motion passed unanimously. Respectfully submitted, David McDonald, City Planner Page 61 of 79 1 Jeff Adams Subject:FW: Amendment to Residential Design Standards Regarding False Dormers and Flat Roofs (Master File # CA 2017-004) From: "Martin, Paul W ‐ CHPRC" <Paul_W_Martin@rl.gov>  Date: Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 4:57 PM ‐0700  Subject: Amendment to Residential Design Standards Regarding False Dormers and Flat Roofs (Master File # CA 2017‐ 004)  To: "Rick White" <WHITER@pasco‐wa.gov>    Rick,     My wife and I would like to express our support for the amendment to PMC 25.70.085 coming before the Planning  Commission on October 9th and the Pasco City Council on October 16th.  The current wording of PMC 25.70.085 basically  requires a minimum 5/12 roof pitch.     My wife and I are Kennewick residents and planning to be new Pasco residents in the next few months.  We purchased a  1.25‐acre vacant lot at 809 Road 64 on April 22, 2010, and have been designing our first and last new home since that  time.  Our builder submitted plans for permit approval and we received a “Plan Review on Hold/B17‐2179/809 Road  64/SFDU” dated September 26, 2017, stating:     “Per PMC 25.70.085 main roofs are required to have a 5/12 pitch.”     Our home design is a Modern Prairie Style and was chosen to match the prairie look of the property and surrounding  area.   The basic definition of a Prairie Style home is “low‐pitched hipped or flat roof”, “broad, overhanging eves”, “siding  often stucco, stone or brick” and our home meets the low‐pitched roof definition with a 4/12 roof pitch and also meets  the overall architectural esthetics of a prairie style home.  The 4/12 roof pitch also helps preserve river and territorial  views of homes located nearby since the ridge of the 4/12 roof will be over 2 feet lower than a 5/12 roof.      This new home will be a beautiful addition to the homes in Pasco and our “age in place” home; hence our full support  for amending PMC 25.70.085 to allow for 4/12 roof pitches.     Thanks!     Paul W. Martin  RCRA Subject Matter Expert CHPRC Environmental Protection  Phone (509) 376-6620 / Cell 531-4489 / Fax 373-3891  Paul_W_Martin@RL.Gov  CH2MHill Plateau Remediation Company      Page 62 of 79 AGENDA REPORT FOR: City Council October 4, 2017 TO: Dave Zabell, City Manager Workshop Meeting: 10/9/17 FROM: Rick White, Director Community & Economic Development SUBJECT: Chronic Nuisance Ordinance I. REFERENCE(S): Proposed Ordinance II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Discussion III. FISCAL IMPACT: IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF: In May of 2016, City Council adopted the initial Chronic Nuisance Ordinance to address nuisances which occur on properties in repetitive or chronic episodes. Chronic nuisances are defined to include violations of local codes that are typically not associated with physical property – such as loitering, personal harassment, offenses involving drugs, offenses involving prostitution or indecent exposure and criminal mischief. By way of summary - the Ordinance adopted by Council in May of 2016 provided the following: • Defines chronic nuisances for single family, multi-family, commercial residential (hotels/motels), commercial and industrial properties; • Provides for adequate notice to the property owner or person in control of the property; • Establishes procedures for the City’s responsible official to determine whether a property is a chronic nuisance property; • Establishes a system of remedies, penalties and fines for the existence of a chronic nuisance; and • Provides an appeal process through the Code Enforcement Board if a responsible person or property owner is aggrieved. Page 63 of 79 Council amended the initial Chronic Nuisance Ordinance in January of this year as monitoring the nuisance thresholds and regulations revealed that the "triggers" for implementation of the solutions pertaining to a chronic nuisance were set too high for multi-family commercial properties such as motels and hotels. Further implementation of the Chronic Nuisance Ordinance so far this year seems to support additional refinement of the threshold for chronic nuisances related to search warrants, warrants of arrests or actual arrests. The existing Chronic Nuisance Ordinance treats all property - regardless of land use or number of units - the same for measuring a "chronic nuisance" as it relates to warrants or arrests. Two occurrences of arrests and/or warrants on any property within a 12 month period trigger a determination of "chronic nuisance."In addition, there is inconsistency with the time period involved in measuring arrests or warrants as all other chronic nuisance indicators are measured in a 180 day period versus a 12 month period. At the Council Workshop of September 25th, Council expressed concern that the Ordinance counted "warrants of arrest" as contributing to the calculation of a chronic nuisance on a property when such warrants are not necessarily under the control of a property owner. An example of this would occur when a person with an outstanding warrant is stopped for a traffic violation and happens to pull into the parking lot of a property. Council also expressed concern that an owner/manager may not have knowledge of a bench warrant for an occupant of the building or property. V. DISCUSSION: The proposed ordinance revises the threshold from two occurrences per property for arrests or warrants to the sliding scale indicated in the proposed ordinance and clarifies that the occurrences must be related to the property or to the occupant of the property. The proposed ordinance also revises the time frame for measurement from 12 months to 180 days as that is consistent with the time frame for measuring other chronic nuisance indicators. Based on Council comments from the September 25th Workshop - this version of the Chronic Nuisance Ordinance clarifies that arrests, warrants of arrest or search warrants must arise out of occupants or incidents of the premises in order to be counted as a chronic nuisance and also excludes "bench warrants" from the definitions of actions that count as a chronic nuisance. It is important to note that these proposed changes would not have affected the determination of a chronic nuisance for the several properties currently under compliance orders related to the Ordinance. Page 64 of 79 Staff requests Council discussion and direction on this latest version of the Chronic Nuisance Ordinance. Page 65 of 79 Chronic Nuisances Ordinance - 1 ORDINANCE NO.__________ AN ORDINANCE of the City of Pasco, Washington Amending PMC Section 9.63.020 "Definitions” WHEREAS, the City of Pasco has been granted Constitutional and statutory powers to protect the safety, health and well being of its citizens; specifically providing for the definition, abatement, and punishment regarding nuisances which pose a hazard to public health and safety and pose a disproportionate demand for the City health and safety services; and WHEREAS, it has been determined that when certain properties within the City have been permitted to be used in such a manner that the risk to public health and safety require multiple responses by City emergency services, and in addition, negatively impact the quality of life in the neighborhoods in which they are located; and WHEREAS, City Council in 2016 adopted a “Chronic Nuisance Ordinance” providing remedies for chronic nuisances; and WHEREAS, monitoring the implementation and the effects of the Chronic Nuisance Ordinance over the past year indicate that the definition of a “chronic nuisance” as relates to warrants of arrests, search warrants or actual arrests is adversely generic as applied to multi-family properties and non – residential properties; and WHEREAS, the definition of a “chronic nuisance” as relates to warrants of arrests, search warrants or actual arrests applied to multi-family properties should be revised to quantify the threshold for the determination of a “chronic nuisance” on a more specific scale: NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That Section 9.63.020 of the Pasco Municipal Code shall be and hereby is amended and shall read as follows: 9.63.020 DEFINITIONS. For purposes of this Chapter, the following words and phrases shall mean: A) "Chronic nuisance activity" shall mean any of the following activities, conduct, or behavior, whenever engaged in by owners, managers, operators, tenants, occupants or guests of the premises, or other persons that frequent or are associated with the premises: 1) Violations of Court orders as provided in PMC 9.03.011 and 9.03.012. 2) Violations of PMC Chapter 9.06 including disorderly conduct, failure to disperse, simple assault, malicious harassment, reckless endangerment, and disorderly place. 3) Violations of PMC Chapter 9.08, personal harassment. 4) Violations of PMC Chapter 9.11, indecent exposure and lewd conduct. 5) Violations of PMC Chapter 9.13, prostitution and related activities. Page 66 of 79 Chronic Nuisances Ordinance - 2 6) Violations of PMC Chapter 9.24, firearms and dangerous weapons. 7) Violations of PMC Chapter 9.28, gambling. 8) Violations of PMC Chapter 9.38, offenses involving drugs, or in violation of Chapter 69.50 RCW and Chapter 69.43 RCW. 9) Violations of RCW 9A.40.100 and RCW 9A.88.060, human trafficking. 10) Violations of PMC Chapter 8.02.320 and PMC 8.02.330, dangerous or potentially dangerous animals. 11) Violations of PMC Chapter 9.46, criminal mischief. 12) Execution of criminal arrest warrants, search warrants or criminal arrests on the property (excluding bench warrants). 13) Violations of RCW 9.94A, criminal street gang related offenses. B) "Chronic nuisance property" means a premises, structure, or property, including adjacent sidewalks, parking areas and common areas, on which: 1) A single-family residence where three or more nuisance activities described in subsection A) above have occurred on different days during any 180-day period; or 2) A commercial business which: (a) Sells or serves alcoholic beverages where eight (8) or more nuisance activities described in subsection A) above have occurred on different days during any 180-day period; or (b) All other commercial businesses where four (4) or more nuisance activities described in subsection A) above have occurred on different days during any 180-day period. 3) An industrial property where three or more nuisance activities described in subsection A) above have occurred on different days during any 180-day period. 4) For any type of property where a search warrant or warrant of arrest or arrest arising out of occupants on the premises or arising out of incidents on the premises has occurred twice at such property residence, business or commercial location, or per unit of any multi-family residential property within any 180 day 12-month period; or where a search warrant or warrant of arrest or arrest arising out of occupants on the premises or arising out of incidents on the premises has occurred at any multi-family residential property within any 180 day period according to the following schedule: (a) 0 – 4 units – 2 (b) 5 – 20 units – 3 (c) 21 – 40 units – 5 Page 67 of 79 Chronic Nuisances Ordinance - 3 (d) 41 – 60 units – 6 (e) 61 – 120 units – 8 (f) 120+ units – 9 5) For any multi-family residential property including, but not limited to, apartments, boarding houses, rooming houses, or multi-tenant commercial properties including, but not limited to, hotels and motels having 0.5 or more nuisance activities per unit (occupied or not) having occurred on different days within a 180-day period of time. C) "Person in charge" means any person or entity in actual or constructive possession of the property, including but not limited to an owner as determined by the records of the Franklin County Auditor, lessee, tenant, occupant, agent, or manager with the express or implied control of the property. D) "Responsible official" means the Chief of Police or Director of Community Development, or any applicable department director as defined by PMC 11.02.030(3), or their respective designees. Section 2. 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: ______________________________ ______________________________ Daniela Erickson, City Clerk Leland B. Kerr, City Attorney Page 68 of 79 AGENDA REPORT FOR: City Council September 29, 2017 TO: Dave Zabell, City Manager Workshop Meeting: 10/9/17 FROM: Stan Strebel, Deputy City Manager Executive SUBJECT: Lodging Tax Advisory Committee Recommendations I. REFERENCE(S): 2018 Lodging Tax Requests Sources and Uses, 2014-2017 2014-2017 Lodging Tax Summary Committee Minutes dated 09/26/17 II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Discussion III. FISCAL IMPACT: IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF: State law has authorized collection of the 2% local tax on lodging facilities (hotels and motels) since the mid-1970s. The funds originally could be used for stadiums and for tourism promotion activities. In 1993, like several cities prior to that time, Pasco was granted an additional 2% lodging tax authority to help pay specifically for the City's share of TRAC expenses. Several years later, the legislature increased the base lodging tax to 4% and eliminated the individual taxing authorizations, thus making the use of lodging tax simpler for everyone. The law was also amended to require a Lodging Tax Advisory Committee (LTAC) to review and recommend proposed uses of the lodging tax annually. In 2013, the legislature (in response to the lodging industry) required additional annual reporting on the use of the lodging tax. The new reporting requirement became effective for 2014 tax uses (a copy of the City's 2016 report completed in early 2017 is attached). The Pasco LTAC convened on September 26, 2017 to review six proposals received for use of the 2018 lodging tax receipts. After reviewing historical uses of the lodging tax, and the individual requests, the LTAC recommended allocation as outlined in the LTAC minutes of September 26. Page 69 of 79 • $275,000 (est) TRAC, 50% of actual operating costs • $132,609 (est) Visit Tri-Cities Promotion Services (50% of 2%) • $ 20,000 Pasco Chamber Ag Show • $127,188 Baseball Stadium Debt (will retire debt) • $ 35,000 Baseball Stadium HVAC • $ 7,000 Downtown Pasco Development Authority Event Marketing • $596,797 TOTAL V. DISCUSSION: While the requests and LTAC recommendation total spending in the amount of nearly $597,000 for 2018, annual revenue is estimated at $590,000. The Stadium/Convention Center Fund has a fund balance of approximately $290,000 which can be allocated for any 2018 overage, if needed. The request for HVAC improvements at the baseball stadium is new and represents a one-time expenditure. Additional repairs and upgrades are needed, however, as the facility is now over 22 years old. The LTAC meeting was attended by representatives of the Tri-City Dust Devils who discussed possible future improvements at GESA Stadium, including the possibility of a bond issue secured by lodging tax receipts beginning in 2019. Page 70 of 79 2018 LODGING TAX REQUESTS TRAC * .............................................................................................................$275,000 Baseball Stadium ** .........................................................................................$127,188 Baseball Stadium – HVAC .................................................................................$35,000 Chamber of Commerce .......................................................................................$20,000 Tri-Cities Visitor & Convention Bureau ***....................................................$132,609 Downtown Pasco Development Authority ...........................................................$7,000 TOTAL REQUESTED .................................................$596,797 ANNUAL AMOUNT AVAILABLE (est.) .................................$590,000 ESTIMATED FUND BALANCE STADIUM/CONVENTION CENTER FUND............................$290,000 TOTAL ........................................$880,000 * Interlocal Agreement between City of Pasco and Franklin County ** Final payment on original stadium construction debt *** Interlocal Agreement between cities of Pasco, Kennewick and Richland with Tri-Cities Visitor and Convention Bureau (VCB) to provide 50% of annual 2% lodging tax receipts to VCB. Possible 2019 Lodging Tax Uses TRAC ................................................................................................................$275,000 Chamber of Commerce .......................................................................................$20,000 Tri-Cities Visitor & Convention Bureau...........................................................$147,000 Downtown Pasco Development Authority ...........................................................$7,000 SUBTOTAL USES .......................................................$449,000 Possible Baseball Stadium Improvements Bond ..............................................$160,000 SUBTOTAL USES .......................................................$609,000 Page 71 of 79 2017 2017 2016 2015 2014 Estimated (7/30/17) SOURCE 2% Lodging Tax (TRAC) $ 282,000 $ 262,000 $ 271,529 $ 260,493 $ 251,069 2% Lodging Tax (General) $ 282,000 $ 262,000 $ 271,529 $ 260,493 $ 251,069 TOTAL SOURCES $ 564,000 $ 524,000 $ 543,058 $ 520,986 $ 502,138 USES TRAC * $ 255,000 $ 255,000 $ 273,948 $ 256,366 $ 251,070 Stadium Debt ** $ 127,188 $ 118,305 $ 127,188 $ 127,188 $ 124,283 VCB Promotion Services $ 126,582 $ 125,695 $ 123,181 $ 119,895 $ 116,785 Chamber Visitor Services / Ag Show $ 20,000 $ 20,000 $ 10,000 $ 10,000 $ 10,000 Downtown Pasco Development Authority $ 5,000 $ 5,000 $ 5,000 Stadium Operations*** $ 19,957 $ 7,537 * TRAC Actual Expense (City 1/2) $ 255,000 $ 273,948 $ 256,366 $ 346,507 ** Stadium Actual Debt Service $ 127,187 $ 127,188 $ 127,188 $ 127,188 $ 127,188 $ 520,986 $ 502,138 2014 - 2017 Lodging Tax *** Stadium Actual Operations (above rental income) $ (5,782) $ (9,114) $ (12,694) $ 1,156 $ (264) TOTAL USES Budget Actual Actual Actual $ 533,770 $ 524,000 $ 559,274 Page 72 of 79 Lodging Tax Reporting 2014-2017 (2017 Not Yet Reported)City of Pasco Year Organization Activity Type Activity Name Funds Requested Funds Awarded Total Activity Cost Overall Attendance Projected Overall Attendance Actual Fifty Miles Attendance Projected Fifty Miles Attendance Actual 2014 Pasco Chamber of CommerceEvent/Festival Agricultural Trade Show 10,000$ 10,000$ 15,600$ 3,000 3,158 500 NULL 2015 Pasco Chamber of CommerceEvent/Festival Agricultural Trade Show 10,000$ 10,000$ 15,600$ 1,653 600 794 2016 Pasco Chamber of CommerceEvent/Festival Marketing/Festivals/Events 10,000$ 10,000$ 322,958$ 4,000 4,000 825 700 2017 Pasco Chamber of CommerceEvent/Festival Marketing/Festivals/Events 20,000$ 20,000$ 339,075$ 4,700 825 2014 Tri-Cities Vistor and Convention BureauMarketingDestination Marketing 117,280$ 117,280$ 2,006,401$ NULL NULL NULL NULL 2015 Tri-Cities Visitor and Convention BureauMarketingDestination Marketing 115,806$ 129,895$ 2,006,401$ 880,179 1,829,000 653,000 307,826 2016 Tri-Cities Visitor and Convention BureauMarketingDestination Marketing 123,000$ 123,000$ 2,354,084$ 91,886 38,099 91,886 38,099 2017 Tri-Cities Visitor and Convention BureauMarketingDestination Marketing 125,695$ 125,695$ 2,332,185$ 38,139 38,139 2014 City of Pasco-StadiumFacility Stadium Debt Service 127,000$ 103,000$ 127,188$ NULL 95,940 NULL 7,400 2015 City of Pasco-StadiumFacility Stadium Debt Service 122,000$ 127,188$ 142,691$ 95,940 95,396 7,400 7,200 2016 City of Pasco-StadiumFacility Professional Baseball Stadium Debt Service122,000$ 127,187$ 147,144$ 96,000 100,214 7,400 12,000 2017 City of Pasco-StadiumFacility Professional Baseball Stadium Debt Service118,305$ 127,187$ 152,000$ 96,000 7,400 2014 City of Pasco-TRACFacility TRAC Debt Service and Operations230,000$ 230,000$ 354,000$ NULL 181,331 NULL 1,803 2015 City of Pasco-TRACFacility TRAC Operations/Debt Service240,000$ 256,366$ 512,733$ 250,000 164,706 45,000 4,050 2016 City of Pasco-TRACFacility TRAC - Trade Recreation Agriculture Center255,000$ 273,948$ 273,948$ 181,000 158,304 1,803 3,154 2017 City of Pasco-TRACFacility TRAC - Trade Recreation Agriculture Center255,000$ 255,000$ 165,000 4,000 2016 Downtown Pasco Development AuthorityEvent/Festival Cinco de Mayo-Fiery Foods Festivals5,000$ 5,000$ 39,551$ 10,000 10,000 500 600 2017 Downtown Pasco Development AuthorityEvent/Festival Cinco de Mayo-Fiery Foods Festivals5,000$ 5,000$ 25,000$ 10,000 1,000 Page 73 of 79 Year Out of State/Country Attendance Projected Out of State/Country Attendance Actual Overnight Paid Attendance Projected Overnight Paid Attendance Actual Overnight UnPaid Attendance Projected Overnight UnPaid Attendance Actual Paid Lodging Nights Projected Paid Lodging Nights Actual Notes 2014 350 NULL NULL NULL NULL NULL 2015 335 350 335 700 670 2016 520 450 398 338 112 112 796 612 2017 520 398 112 796 2014 NULL NULL NULL 653,000 NULL NULL 2013 actual numbers. 2015 227179 337000 653,000 1,434,000 144,000 2016 91886 38099 114,858 47,625 ​OOSOOC Attendance and Overnight Unpaid Attendance reported as "not available" 2017 N/A 38139 N/A 47,673 2014 NULL 6,860 NULL 3,400 NULL NULL 2015 6,860 6,700 3540 3250 92,400 92,146 1,040 2016 6,860 7,000 3540 4000 3,400 3,500 2,575 2,000 2017 6,860 3540 3,400 2,575 2014 NULL 930 NULL 90 NULL NULL Franklin County Operation 2015 39,750 738 45000 1014 45,000 202 2016 930 1,413 450 789 90 158 395 2017 800 1000 200 2016 100 180 50 100 - - 150 ​Overnight Unpaid Attendance Unknown 2017 150 100 150 Page 74 of 79 LODGING TAX ADVISORY COMMITTEE September 26, 2017 MINUTES CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 4:00 pm, by Matt Watkins, in conference room #9 at Pasco City Hall. ROLL CALL: Board Members Present: Matt Watkins (Council); Colin Hastings (Chamber); Monica Hammerberg (Hampton Inn); and Hector Cruz (Visit Tri-Cities). Excused: Allison White (Sleep Inn). Also Present: Stan Strebel, Deputy City Manager; and Brent Miles and Derrel Ebert, Tri-City Dust Devils. BUSINESS: Matt Watkins presented the September 19, 2016 minutes of the Lodging Tax Advisory Committee. Motion was made by Colin Hastings and seconded by Monica Hammerberg, to approve the September 19, 2016 minutes as submitted. Motion passed unanimously. Stan briefly reviewed the following: historical allocation of lodging tax receipts; current contractual commitments; 2016 JLARC reporting; 2014-2017 document combining JLARC reporting as well as 2018 tax allocation requests; and possible 2019 requests. Committee discussed the requests for use of the 2018 Lodging Tax receipts, estimated to total $596,797. Stan noted that it is proposed to pay the balance of stadium debt ($127,000) in 2018 to retire that debt. All requests are similar to those approved for 2017, except for: an increase in the TRAC request, due to uncertainty; the DPDA request of an additional $2,000; and a proposed new expenditure, HVAC in visitor’s clubhouse at GESA Stadium, in the amount of $35,000. Brent and Derrel spoke briefly to the HVAC needs. Monica asked if DPDA had been able to track lodging stays associated with their events. Stan noted that while some effort had been made, the fact that tickets were not required for the main DPDA events, made tracking challenging. Monica would like to see some DPDA advertising directed toward out-of-town visitors. Stan will make this request to DPDA. Stan explained that while the 2018 requests slightly exceed expected revenue for the coming year, estimated fund balance in the Stadium/Convention Center fund will cover the projected shortfall, if needed. Page 75 of 79 LTAC Minutes 9/26/17 Page 2 of 2 Motion was made by Monica Hammerberg and seconded by Colin Hastings to recommend the 2018 allocation estimate, as outlined below. Motion carried unanimously.  TRAC, 50% of actual operating costs ............... $275,000 (est)  VCB Promotion Services (50% of 2%) ............. $132,609 (est)  Pasco Chamber Ag Show .................................... $20,000  Baseball Stadium Debt....................................... $127,188 (will retire debt)  Baseball Stadium HVAC ....................................... 35,000  DPDA Event Marketing......................................... $7,000 TOTAL .............................. $596,797 Stan reviewed possible 2019 allocations, noting that the City and Dust Devils had been conferring regarding replacement and upgrade needs at the stadium. A bond, similar to the one structured for original construction (22 years ago), was being considered in the amount of $2 million, with possible debt service over 20 years of approximately $160,000 per year. Brent and Derrel reviewed possible improvements including seating replacements, lighting and sound system upgrades as well as concession and clubhouse improvements. Some improvements are needed to meet professional baseball standards. Monica asked if stadium improvements were prioritized (not yet); Hector and Colin both noted the value of the facility and the need for improvements. Matt expressed appreciation for each sharing their thoughts. Stan indicated that the committee’s recommendation for 2018, as well as a brief discussion on the possible 2019 allocations, and beyond, will be presented to the City Council at their meeting of October 9, with action expected at their October 16 meeting. ADJOURNMENT: Committee meeting adjourned at 4:45 pm. Respectfully submitted. Stan Strebel, Deputy City Manager Page 76 of 79 AGENDA REPORT FOR: City Council October 4, 2017 TO: Dave Zabell, City Manager Workshop Meeting: 10/9/17 FROM: Stan Strebel, Deputy City Manager Executive SUBJECT: National Citizen's Survey I. REFERENCE(S): II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Discussion III. FISCAL IMPACT: $15,750 for standard mail survey (web return option), plus Spanish survey (online) and district-based geographic subgroup reporting IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF: Following discussion at the meeting of September 25, staff understood Council's preference for the National Citizen Survey (NCS) was to conduct the survey primarily by mail (with the option for participants to web return) as in the past, plus to select th e Spanish survey (web only), also as in the past, and district-based geographic subgroup reporting. The opt-in web survey will also be available city-wide, once the random sample survey is completed. For Council's further consideration, an additional policy question, regarding Community Recreation Facilities has been developed, while the Code Enforcement question has been revised. See draft questions under "Discussion" below. (Following is Text from 9/25 Agenda Report): In furtherance of Council's goal of responsive and efficient government, staff is in communication with the National Research Center (NRC) to conduct the NCS in Pasco, a biennial community survey effort consisting primarily of standard questions regarding the availability and quality of municipal services. The City has contracted for this survey to be completed in odd years since 2005. The results of this statistically valid survey have served as a valuable tool for Council Page 77 of 79 in goal-setting efforts and decision making with respect to public investment and programmatic focus areas. With several cycles of experience, Council, staff and the public can identify trend lines where the city is making progress in the opinion of respondents, and where we are losing ground. The survey result s and subsequent analysis provides policy-makers with reliable information on which to make decisions in the public interest and how Pasco compares in terms of performance with other cities utilizing the NCS as a tool. Historically, the City has conducted the NCS in the fall so that the information is available for the Council's post-election cycle goal-setting retreat, in this case, in early 2018. In additional to the questions specific to the major services the City provides, the Council may add up to three "policy" questions to the survey without additional cost. Each of the City's previous NCS efforts included policy questions. Attachment #1 includes those questions asked in prior survey cycles. In order to have the policy questions included in the survey this fall, NRC will need our finalized questions to them by early November. While the base survey has been conducted entirely by mail in the past, NRC is currently offering the alternative of a web-based survey with a scientific sample and invitations by mail. The cost of the web-based survey is 75% of the mailed survey as shown below: • $14,265 - Mailed survey (returns by mail or web; scientific sample of 1,500 households,) The City had 260 responses of a sample of 1,400 households in 2015. • $10,710 - Web only survey (invitation by mail, returns by web; scientific sample of 1,800 households) The database utilized to generate the households is from the City's utility billing data. Both options above include the ability of the City to invite residents to submit survey responses online (in addition to those of the random sample - results to be kept separate to maintain the scientific results of the base random survey). This option produced 327 responses in 2015. There are other survey enhancement options which can be added to the base survey which Council may want to consider as follows: 1. The option for Spanish-only speaking residents to review and submit the survey online would cost $675. This option was also provided in 2015, with five total responses. 2. Providing survey results by geographic areas is also an option. For example, survey results could be made available for each City Council voting district. The cost for this option is $810. V. DISCUSSION: Possible Policy Questions: Page 78 of 79 Code Enforcement The City processes approximately 3,000 code violations per year. Violations are primarily received as complaints from citizens and are predominately related to property maintenance (trash, weeds) or noise (loud music, barking dogs). How do you feel about the City’s code enforcement efforts? Should there be more enforcement or less? 1. Considerably more enforcement 2. Somewhat more enforcement 3. Enforcement about right 4. Somewhat less enforcement 5. Considerably less enforcement 6. Do not know Fire/EMS Facilities: Age, growth and growth patterns in the City over the last several years have created the need to replace two fire protection and emergency medical response facilities. Relocation and replacement of these facilities will result in improved response times throughout the City, and allow adequate space for staffing and modern equipment. If funding of a new fire/EMS station was to be proposed as a property tax bond issue to the voters, would you be: 1. Strongly supportive 2. Somewhat supportive 3. Somewhat opposed 4. Strongly opposed 5. Do not know City Recreation Facilities: The City has been considering if residents support the construction of a community activity center and other recreational facilities. Such facilities could support a number of different recreation interests as summarized below. For each of the recreation categories, please indicate your level of interest: Level of Interest – 0 No Interest / 1 Low Interest / 5 High Interest 1. Aquatic Features 0- 1- 2- 3- 4- 5- 2. Gymnasium 0- 1- 2- 3- 4- 5- 3. Fitness/Exercise 0- 1- 2- 3- 4- 5- 4. Walking/Jogging 0- 1- 2- 3- 4- 5- 5. Meeting/Activity Room 0- 1- 2- 3- 4- 5- Page 79 of 79