FINAL 2021 0727 Council Agenda PacketMoses Lake City Council
David Curnel, Mayor | Daryl Jackson, Deputy Mayor | Mike Riggs, Council Member | Karen Liebrecht, Council Member
Don Myers, Council Member | David Eck, Council Member| Dean Hankins, Council Member
REMOTE ACCESS OPTION and IN PERSON UPDATE
Citizens can join this meeting remotely by calling the numbers listed at the bottom of the agenda, or via internet
at https://cityofml.zoom.us/j/95160346024. Persons requesting to address the Council from the remote option will
need to complete the online speaker requst form before 3 p.m.. on the day of the meeting. Masks will be required
for in person attendees that are not fully vaccinated, and masks are acceptable to be worn by anyone who is fully
vaccinated.
Study Session
Tuesday, July 27, 2021
Moses Lake Civic Center – 401 S. Balsam or remote access
6:30 p.m. Study Session – EDC Trends – EWU Dr. Patrick Jones
Regular Meeting Agenda
Call to Order – 7 p.m.
Roll Call
Pledge of Allegiance
Approval of the Agenda
Summary Reports:
Mayor’s Report
-Inslee Visit July 15
-Food Bank Dedication
Additional Business
City Manager’s Report
Motion - Budget Reallocation for Museum - pg 4
- Creative District
Citizen’s Communications
July 27, 2021, City Council Meeting Page 2 _________________
Public Hearing
Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, please use the link above to complete a speaker request form or
provide written comments to cityclerk@cityofml.com no later than 3 p.m. on the day of the meeting.
#1
Motion
pg 11
Extend Wireless Facility Interim Controls Ordinance 2978
Presented by Melissa Bethel, Community Development Director
Summary: Take public testimony and consider adoption
Consent Agenda Motion
All items listed below are considered to be routine and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no
separate discussion of these items unless a Council Member requests specific items to be removed
from the Consent Agenda for discussion prior to the time Council votes on the motion to adopt the
Consent Agenda.
#2 pg 32
a.City Council Meeting Minutes Dated July 13, 2021
b.Claims and Payroll
c.Set Hearing for Fox Property Vacate Resolution 3860
Old Business
#3
Motion
#4
Motion
pg 48
Award Zoning Code Update Contract
Presented by Melissa Bethel, Community Development Director
Summary: Council to review and consider approval
pg 79
Water Conservation Extension MLMC 13.07 Ordinance 2980
Presented by Allison Williams, City Manager
Summary: Council to review and consider adoption
New Business
#5
Motion
#6
Motion
pg 83
Update Parking Regulations MLMC 10.12 Ordinance 2979
Presented by Mike Moro, Public Works Director
Summary: Council to review and consider adoption
pg 96
Grove Estates MP #2 Group B Water System
Presented by Richard Law, City Engineer
Summary: Council to review and consider approval
July 27, 2021, City Council Meeting Page 3 _________________
#7
Motion
#8
Motion
pg 104
Lakeshore Dr. Payment Arrangement
Presented by Cindy Jensen, Finance Director Summary:
Council to review and consider approval
pg 108
Accept 2019 State Auditor’s Report
Presented by Cindy Jensen, Finance Director Summary:
Council to review and consider approval
Administrative Reports
-Police - National Night Out
-Fire – Regional Hazardous Materials Team
Council Communications and Reports
Adjournment
Next Regular Council Meeting is scheduled for August 10, 2021
Zoom Meeting – Audio Only Please click the link below to join the webinar:
https://cityofml.zoom.us/j/95160346024
Or iPhone one-tap: US: +12532158782,,95160346024# or +13462487799,,95160346024# Or Telephone: Dial(for
higher quality, dial a number based on your current location):US: +1 253 215 8782 or +1 346 248 7799 or +1 669
900 9128 or +1 646 558 8656 or +1 301 715 8592 or +1 312 626 6799
Webinar ID: 951 6034 6024. International numbers available: https://cityofml.zoom.us/u/aelROcwuzZ
NOTICE: Individuals planning to attend the meeting who require special assistance to accommodate physical, hearing,
or other impairments, please contact the City Clerk at (509) 764-3703 as soon as possible so that arrangements may be
made prior to the meeting time.
STAFF REPORT
To: Allison Williams, City Manager
From: Susan Schwiesow, Parks, Recreation & Cultural Services Director
Date: July 22, 2021
Proceeding Type: Consent Agenda
Subject: Budget Reallocation for Museum
Legislative History:
•First Presentation: July 27, 2021
•Second Presentation:
•Action: Motion
Overview
Parks, Recreation & Cultural Services would like to reallocate $150,775.00 to the museum
budget to redesign three of the permanent exhibits with more interactive features, and
create open/visible storage of the Adam East archaeological collection. The permanent
exhibits have been on display since the opening in 2011 and have become very stagnate. This
additional funding would enable the museum to complete this upgrade and invite our
community back to view the new exhibits which represent Moses Lake’s history. The
redesigned exhibits will feature Spanish language accessibility. The fabrication cost is per pod
and three pods will be redesigned. There will be a cost for research, consulting fees, image use
fees, and translation that would be separate from the other fees.
The museum is proposing to create open/visible storage of the Adam East archaeological
collection in the exhibit space. The Museum’s goal is to put out the majority of this collection
to not only share more of their flagship collection with patrons but to ease space pressure in
their collection room.
Parks budgeted to pay $440,000 in debt service in the General Fund, and another $293,300 from
Hotel/Motel Tax in 2021, for a total in the budget of about $733k, but the total debt service is only
$230,000, because of the delay in the issuance from February to June.
Fiscal and Policy Implications
With adequate funds available to pay the debt services, this is an opportunity to reallocate a
portion of the funds to improve the museum exhibits.
Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2
Council Packet Attachments
A. MIG Design and Fabrication Costs
B. MIG Fabrication Costs
C. Adam East Open Storage Costs
Finance Committee Review N/A
Legal Review N/A
Options
Option Results
•Authorize as presented Exhibits will be redesigned.
•Provide staff with changes Action would require staff to bring a revise
number of exhibits to be redesigned.
•Take no action.Exhibits will stay incomplete and stagnet.
Action Requested
Staff recommends reallocating funds to the Muesum for the exhibit redesign and open storage for
the Adam East archeological collection.
CALIFORNIA
BERKELEY, FULLERTON,
KENWOOD, LOS ANGELES,
PASADENA, RIVERSIDE,
SACRAMENTO, SAN DIEGO,
AND SAN JOSE
COLORADO
DENVER
OREGON
EUGENE AND PORTLAND
TEXAS
SAN ANTONIO
WASHINGTON
SEATTLE
July 21, 2021
Dollie Boyd, Museum & Art Center Manager
City of Moses Lake Museum & Art Center
401 South Balsam St., PO Box 1579
Moses Lake, WA 98837
dboyd@cityofml.com
RE: Request for Fee Proposal for Design Updating of Three Human History Pod Exhibits
Dear Ms. Boyd:
Thank you for contacting us about the opportunity to update three existing exhibit
pods about Moses Lake Early History, Boom Years, and Air Base. We appreciate the
opportunity to work with you and others at the museum on the project!
The following describes the scope we discussed:
»3 PODS: Early History, Boom Years (caused by Columbia Basin Project and Air Base),
and Air Base
»Museum provides the majority of imagery, and may require assistance with finding
early history (native peoples to 1930) images
»Image rights will be secured by the Museum
»Possible mechanical interactives, beyond flip books
»Museum will write and provide interpretive text
»Interpretation will be bilingual, Museum will provide translation
»Files and drawings will be provided to exhibit fabricator,
»Construction Contract Administration Services: questions from fabricator, review of
graphic proofs/shop drawings, one day installation observation trip to Museum
Please see the following page for our fee proposal.
Please contact me email at acraigsundine@migcom.com or 206.579.4118 if you have
questions. We look forward to future discussions with you.
Sincerely,
Allison CraigSundine
Project Director and Graphic and Exhibit Designer
Page 2 of 2
RE: Request for Fee Proposal for Design Updating of Three Human History Pod Exhibits
PLANNING / DESIGN / COMMUNICATIONS / MANAGEMENT / TECHNOLOGY / SCIENCE
Phase Total Professional Fees
Design Development Phase 1
Meetings with Museum Team
Graphic Design
Exhibit Design Drawings
Design Development 1 Documentation
Project Management
SUBTOTAL $9,030
Design Development Phase 2
Meetings with Museum Team
Graphic Design
Exhibit Design Drawings
Design Development 2 Documentation
Files/Documents for Fabricator
Project Management
SUBTOTAL $16,470
Fabrication and Installation Phase
Fabricator Questions
Review Proofs/Drawings
Installation on site (1 day)
Project Management
SUBTOTAL $7,500
TOTAL PROJECT COST $33,000
CALIFORNIA
BERKELEY, FULLERTON,
KENWOOD, LOS ANGELES,
PASADENA, RIVERSIDE,
SACRAMENTO, SAN DIEGO,
AND SAN JOSE
COLORADO
DENVER
OREGON
EUGENE AND PORTLAND
TEXAS
SAN ANTONIO
WASHINGTON
SEATTLE
July 21, 2021
Dollie Boyd, Museum & Art Center Manager
City of Moses Lake Museum & Art Center
401 South Balsam St., PO Box 1579
Moses Lake, WA 98837
dboyd@cityofml.com
RE: Request for Fee Proposal for Design Updating of Three Human History Pod Exhibits
Dear Ms. Boyd:
Thank you for contacting us about the opportunity to update three existing exhibit
pods about Moses Lake Early History, Boom Years, and Air Base. We appreciate the
opportunity to work with you and others at the museum on the project!
The following describes the scope we discussed:
»3 PODS: Early History, Boom Years (caused by Columbia Basin Project and Air Base),
and Air Base
»Museum provides the majority of imagery, and may require assistance with finding
early history (native peoples to 1930) images
»Image rights will be secured by the Museum
»Possible mechanical interactives, beyond flip books
»Museum will write and provide interpretive text
»Interpretation will be bilingual, Museum will provide translation
»Files and drawings will be provided to exhibit fabricator, Construction Contract
Administration Services are not included in estimated fees
Please see the following page for our fee proposal.
Please contact me email at acraigsundine@migcom.com or 206.579.4118 if you have
questions. We look forward to future discussions with you.
Sincerely,
Allison CraigSundine
Project Director and Graphic and Exhibit Designer
Page 2 of 2
RE: Request for Fee Proposal for Design Updating of Three Human History Pod Exhibits
PLANNING / DESIGN / COMMUNICATIONS / MANAGEMENT / TECHNOLOGY / SCIENCE
Phase Total Professional Fees
Design Development Phase 1
Meetings with Museum Team
Graphic Design
Exhibit Design Drawings
Design Development 1 Documentation
Project Management
SUBTOTAL $9,030
Design Development Phase 2
Meetings with Museum Team
Graphic Design
Exhibit Design Drawings
Design Development 2 Documentation
Files/Documents for Fabricator
Project Management
SUBTOTAL $16,470
TOTAL PROJECT COST $25,500
Page 1 of 2
STAFF REPORT
To: Allison Williams, City Manager
From: Melissa Bethel, Community Development Director
Date: July 22, 2021
Proceeding Type: Public Hearing
Subject: Interim Controls Small Wireless Facilities Extension
Ordinance 2978
Legislative History:
• First Presentation: July 27, 2021
• Second Presentation:
• Action: Motion
Overview
On June 23, 2020, City Council adopted Interim Controls establishing specific rules permitting small
cell wireless facilities. City staff is requesting a six-month extension of the Interim Ordinance.
The City is in the process of updating its Comprehensive Land Use Plan, which will be followed by
a complete update of the land development code. The development code update will include a full
public review process and through the Planning Commission, and review and adoption by City
Council. It is expected that the final controls for small wireless facilities will be reviewed and
included in the new development code update.
The City has not received any applications for new small cell wireless facilities since the interim
controls were adopted. The impact of extending the interim controls will be minimal.
This Ordinance adopted interim regulations regarding small wireless facilities and wireless
communication eligible facilities requests in order to comply with federal law and Federal
Communication Commission (FCC) declaratory rulings, entering findings in support of adopting
interim regulations, establishing a work program for permanent regulations, and declaring an
emergency.
In September 2018, the FCC adopted a declaratory Ruling and Order that substantially preempts
the City's authority on the siting of small wireless facilities (also known as "small cell facilities") and
set specific rules for small cell permitting. This ruling affects small cell facilities in the public rights-
of-way and private properties and went into effect in 2019.
Some impacts of the FCC Order related to small wireless facilities include a shortened period of
time in which the City has to process franchise agreements and right-of-way use permits, limits on
City permit applications fees, and limits on the City's ability to regulate design requirements.
Page 2 of 2
After reviewing the Municipal Code, it was necessary to amend the City's regulations to comply
with the FCC Order in these and other areas. Given that 5G deployment has reached Moses Lake,
it was necessary to adopt interim regulations so the City can process applications in compliance
with federal statutes and the FCC Order. The extension of the Interim Ordinance will be in effect
for six months, pursuant to RCW 36.70A.390. In addition, State law requires the City Council to
conduct a public hearing on this interim ordinance within 60 days of adoption. The interim
ordinance was based on a model set of design standards and permitting procedures being utilized
by a number of Washington cities.
Fiscal and Policy Implications
The City controls the installation of many of these facilities through leases. The leases are in need
of updating to be in compliance with FCC regulations, including making sure our fees/leases are
in line with their recommendations. In some cases, it may mean a reduction in lease revenue.
Council Packet Attachments
A. Ordinance
B. Work Plan
Finance Committee Review N-A
Legal Review
Type of Document Title of Document Date Reviewed
Ordinance Interim Controls Small
Wireless Facilities Extension
July 27, 2021
Options
Option Results
• Adopt as presented Staff will have guidance for processing small cell
facility applications or requests for eligible
facilities.
• Provide staff with changes
• Take no action Staff will not have guidance for processing small
cell facility applications or requests for eligible
facilities.
Action Requested
Staff recommends Council conduct hearing and consider adopting the Ordinance to extend the
effectiveness of the interim controls for small cell wireless facilities for six months as presented.
Page 1 of 18
ORDINANCE NO. 2978 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MOSES LAKE, WASHINGTON, RELATING TO WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES, ADOPTING INTERIM LAND USE REGULATIONS AND OFFICIAL CONTROLS PURSUANT TO RCW 35A.63.220 AND RCW 36.70A.390 FOR WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES, DECLARING AN EMERGENCY, ADOPTING FINDINGS OF FACT, AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, in 1934, Congress enacted the Communications Act of 1934, creating the FCC and granting it authority over common carriers engaged in the provision of interstate or foreign communications services;
and WHEREAS, in 1996 Congress enacted Pub. L. No. 104-104, 110 Stat. 70 (the “1996 Act”), amending the Communications Act of 1934 and implementing regulations applicable to both wireless and wireline communications facilities for the purpose of removal of barriers to entry into the telecommunications market while preserving local government zoning authority except where specifically limited under the 1996 Act;
and WHEREAS, in the 1996 Act, Congress imposed substantive and procedural limitations on the traditional authority of state and local governments to regulate the location, construction, and modification of wireless
facilities and incorporated those limitations into the Communications Act of 1934; and WHEREAS, in 2012 Congress passed the “Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012” (the “Spectrum Act”) (PL-112-96; codified at 47 U.S.C. § 1455(a)); and
WHEREAS, Section 6409 (hereafter “Section 6409”) of the Spectrum Act implements additional substantive
and procedural limitations upon state and local government authority to regulate modification of existing wireless antenna support structures and base stations; and
WHEREAS, Congress through its enactment of Section 6409 of the Spectrum Act, has mandated that local
governments approve, and cannot deny, an application requesting modification of an existing tower or base station if such modification does not substantially change the physical dimensions of such tower or base
station; and WHEREAS, on October 21, 2014, the FCC issued its report and order, WT Docket Nos. 13-238, 13-32; WC Docket No. 11-59; FCC 14-153, in the above described proceeding (the “Report and Order” or “Order”)
clarifying and implementing statutory requirements related to state and local government review of infrastructure siting, including Section 6409, with the intent of facilitating and expediting the deployment of
equipment and infrastructure to meet the demand for wireless capacity; and WHEREAS, the Order, among other things, defines key terms utilized in Section 6409, establishes application requirements limiting the information that can be required from an applicant, implements a 60 shot clock and tolling provisions, establishes a deemed approved remedy for applications not timely responded to, requires cities to approve a project permit application requesting modification of an existing
tower or base station that does not substantially change the physical dimensions of such tower or base station, and establishes development standards that govern such proposed modifications; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that it is required under Section 6409 of the Spectrum Act and the Eligible Facility Request Rules established in the Order, to adopt and implement local development and zoning regulations that are consistent with Section 6409 and the Order; and
WHEREAS, the FCC recently adopted the Declaratory Ruling, Order and Regulation 18-133, which imposes limitations on local municipalities including related to review processing timelines and aesthetic requirements for small cell facilities; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the proposed interim development and zoning regulations are
Page 2 of 18
reasonable and necessary in order bring the City’s development regulations into compliance with the mandate imposed upon the City by Congress pursuant to Section 6409 and the regulations imposed upon the City by the FCC pursuant to its Reports and Orders, and are therefore in the public interest;
WHEREAS, Chapter 18.78 MLMC, Personal Wireless Service Facilities, currently governs the City’s regulation of wireless communication facilities; and WHEREAS, some of the existing city regulations for wireless communication facilities are more than fifteen years old and federal laws, regulations, court decisions, wireless technology and consumer usage have
reshaped the environment within which Wireless Communications Facilities, are permitted and regulated; and WHEREAS, the potential conflict between the City’s existing land use review process for wireless
communications facilities and the preemptive federal review requirements for wireless communications facilities create a time sensitive emergency requiring the adoption of an interim zoning ordinance; and
WHEREAS, the City is authorized to impose interim land use controls for up to one (l) year if a work plan is developed for related studies providing for such longer periods pursuant to RCW 35A.63.220 and RCW 36.704.390; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing on these interim regulations was held before ordinance adoption, pursuant to
RCW 35A.63.220 and RCW 36.70A.390. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOSES LAKE, WASHINGTON ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Recitals Incorporated. The Recitals set forth above are hereby adopted and incorporated as Findings of Fact of the City Council.
Section 2. Additional Findings. The Council may adopt further additional findings after the public hearing is held and evidence presented to the City Council. Section 3. Notwithstanding the provisions of MLMC 18.78.030, Small Wireless Facilities and Eligible Facilities Requests shall be regulated through this Ordinance and not Chapter 18.78 MLMC.
Section 4. This purpose of this ordinance is to: A. Establish clear regulations for the siting and design of Wireless Communication Facilities (WCFs) consistent with state and federal regulations;
B. Promote the health, safety, and general welfare of the Moses Lake community by regulating the siting of WCFs; C. Minimize visual, safety, aesthetic, and environmental impacts of WCFs on surrounding areas by establishing standards for location, structural integrity, and compatibility; D. Encourage the location and collocation of communications equipment on existing structures; and E. Accommodate the growing need and demand for communication services. Section 5. The following new Section is hereby adopted: Definitions. A. “Antenna” means any exterior apparatus designed for telephonic, radio, data, Internet, or other communications through the sending and/or receiving of radio frequency signals including, but not limited to, equipment attached to a tower, utility pole, building, or other structure for the purpose of providing wireless services. B. “Co-location” means (1) mounting or installing an antenna facility on a pre-existing structure or (2)
Page 3 of 18
modifying a structure for the purpose of mounting or installing an antenna facility on that structure. Provided that, for purposes of Eligible Facilities Requests, “collocation” means the mounting or installation of transmission equipment on an eligible support structure for the purpose of
transmitting or receiving radio frequency signals for communications purposes. C. “Macro facility” means is a large wireless communication facility that provides radio frequency coverage for a cellular telephone network. Generally, macro cell antennas are mounted on ground-based towers, rooftops, and other existing structures, at a height that provides a clear view over the surrounding buildings and terrain. Macro cell facilities typically contain antennas that are greater
than three cubic feet per antenna and typically cover large geographic areas with relatively high capacity and may be capable of hosting multiple wireless service providers. D. “Small wireless facility” has the same meaning as defined in 47 CFR § 1.6002.
E. “Structure” means a pole, tower, base station, or other building, whether or not it has an existing
antenna facility, that is used or to be used for the provision of wireless communication service (whether on its own or comingled with other types of services). F. “Transmission equipment” means equipment that facilitates transmission for any FCC-licensed or
authorized wireless communication service, including, but not limited to, radio transceivers, antennas, coaxial or fiber-optic cable, and regular and backup power supply. The term includes
equipment associated with wireless communications services included, but not limited to, private, broadcast, and public safety services, as well as unlicensed wireless services and fixed wireless
services such as microwave backhaul.
G. “Unified enclosure” means a small wireless facility providing concealment of antennas and equipment within a single enclosure.
H. “Utility pole” means a structure designed and used primarily for the support of electrical wires,
telephone wires, television cable, traffic signals, or lighting for streets, parking areas, or pedestrian paths.
Section 6. The following new Section is hereby adopted:
Small Wireless General Provisions. A. Small wireless facilities shall not be considered nor regulated as essential public facilities. B. Small wireless facilities located outside of the public rights-of-way may be either a primary or a
secondary use. A different use of an existing structure on the same lot shall not preclude the installation of a small wireless facility. C. Small wireless facilities located within the public right-of-way pursuant to a valid franchise are outright permitted uses in every zone of the City but still require a small wireless facility permit pursuant to this ordinance. Section 7. The following new Section is hereby adopted:
Small Wireless Deployment.
A. Overview. In order to manage its rights-of-way in a thoughtful manner which balances the need to
accommodate new and evolving technologies with the preservation of the natural and aesthetic
environment of the City, the City of Moses Lake has adopted this administrative process for the
deployment of small wireless facilities. The City and applicant for a franchise and other permits
associated with the deployment of small wireless facilities face challenges in coordinating
applicable legislative and administrative processes under the Federal Communications
Commission (FCC) regulations. A franchise for the use of the City’s right-of-way is a contract which
requires approval by the City Council. The small wireless permits are issued by the Municipal
Page 4 of 18
Services Director, or his/her designee. Applicants are encouraged and expected to provide all
related applications in one submittal, unless they have already obtained a franchise.
B. Application Process. The Municipal Services Director, or his/her designee, is authorized to
establish franchise and other application forms to gather the information required by these
ordinances from applicants and to determine the completeness of the application process as
provided herein. The application shall include Parts A, B, and C as described in this subsection
below.
1. Franchise. The process typically begins with and depends upon approval of a franchise for the
use of the public right-of-way to deploy small wireless facilities if any portion of the applicant’s
facilities is to be located in the right-of-way. A complete application for a franchise is designated
as Part A. An applicant with a franchise for the deployment of small wireless facilities in the
City may proceed to directly apply for a small wireless facility permit and related approvals
(Parts B and C). An applicant at its option may utilize phased development. Because franchises
are required by federal law to be competitively neutral, the City has established a franchise
format for use by all right-of-way users.
2. Small Wireless Facility Permits. Part B of the application requires specification of the small
wireless facility components and locations as further required in the small wireless permit
application described in Section 8 of this Ordinance.
3. Associated Permit(s). Part C of the application shall attach all associated permits requirements
such as applications or check lists required under the Critical Areas, Shoreline Management
Plan, or SEPA ordinances. Applicants for deployment of new small wireless poles shall comply
with the requirements in this Chapter.
4. Leases. An applicant who desires to attach a small wireless facility any utility pole or light
owned by the City shall include an application for a lease as a component of its application.
The City Manager, or his/her designee, is authorized to approve leases in the form approved
for general use by the City Council for any utility pole or light pole in the right-of-way. Leases
for the use of other public property, structures, or facilities shall be submitted to the City Council
for approval.
Section 8. The following new Section is hereby adopted:
Small Wireless Permit Application.
The following information shall be provided by all applicants for a small wireless permit:
A. The application shall provide specific locational information including GIS coordinates of all
proposed small wireless facilities and specify where the small wireless facilities will utilize existing,
replacement, or new poles, towers, existing buildings, or other structures. Ground-mounted
equipment, conduit, junction boxes, and fiber and electrical connections necessary for and intended
for use in the deployment shall also be specified regardless of whether the additional facilities are
to be constructed by the applicant or leased from a third party. Detailed schematics and visual
renderings of the small wireless facilities, including engineering and design standards, shall be
provided by the applicant. The application shall have sufficient detail to identify:
1. The location of overhead and underground public utility, telecommunication, cable, water,
sewer drainage, and other lines and equipment in the rights-of-way along the proposed route;
Page 5 of 18
2. The specific structures, improvements, facilities, lines and equipment, and obstructions, if any,
that applicant proposes to temporarily or permanently remove or relocate and a plan for
protecting, replacing, and restoring any areas to be disturbed during construction.
3. Compliance with the aesthetic requirements of this Chapter.
B. The applicant must show written approval from the owner of any pole or structure for the installation
of its small wireless facilities on such pole or structure. Such written approval shall include approval
of the specific pole, engineering and design standards, as well as assurances that the specific pole
can withstand wind and seismic loads, from the pole owner, unless the pole owner is the City.
Submission of the lease agreement between the owner and the applicant is not required. For city-
owned poles or structures, the applicant must obtain a lease from the City prior to or concurrent
with the small wireless permit application and must submit as part of the application the information
required in the lease for the City to evaluate the usage of a specific pole.
C. The applicant can batch multiple small wireless facility sites in one application. The applicant is
encouraged to batch the small wireless facility sites within an application in a contiguous service
area.
D. Any application for a small wireless facility located in the right-of-way adjacent to a parcel zoned
for residential use shall demonstrate that it has considered the following:
1. Whether a small wireless facility is currently installed on an existing pole in front of the same
residential parcel. If a small wireless facility exists, then the applicant must demonstrate that
no technically feasible alternative location exists which is not in front of the same residential
parcel.
2. Whether the proposed small wireless facility can be screened from residential view by choosing
a pole location that is not directly in front of a window or views.
E. Any application for a small wireless permit which contains an element which is not exempt from
SEPA review shall simultaneously apply under Chapter 43.21C RCW and Chapter 16A.23 SMC.
Further, any application proposing small wireless facilities in the Shoreline jurisdiction (pursuant to
Chapter 19.06 MLMC) or in Critical Areas (pursuant to Chapter 19.03 MLMC) must indicate that
the application is exempt or comply with the review processes in such codes.
F. The applicant shall submit a sworn affidavit signed by an RF Engineer with knowledge of the
proposed project affirming that the small wireless facilities will be compliant with all FCC and other
governmental regulations in connection with human exposure to radio frequency emissions for
every frequency at which the Small Wireless facility will operate. If facilities which generate RF
radiation necessary to the Small Wireless facility are to be provided by a third party, then the small
wireless permit shall be conditioned on an RF Certification showing the cumulative impact of the
RF emissions on the entire installation. The applicant may provide one emissions report for the
entire small wireless deployment if the applicant is using the same small wireless facility
configuration for all installations within that batch or may submit one emissions report for each
subgroup installation identified in the batch.
G. The applicant shall provide proof of FCC and other regulatory approvals required to provide the
service(s) or utilize the technologies sought to be installed.
H. A professional engineer licensed by the State of Washington shall certify in writing, over his or her
seal, that both construction plans and final construction of the small wireless facilities and structure
or pole and foundation are designed to reasonably withstand wind and seismic loads as established
by the International Building Code. Further, the construction drawings shall depict all existing
Page 6 of 18
proposed improvements related to the proposed location, including but not limited to poles,
driveways, ADA ramps, equipment cabinets, street trees, and structures within 250 feet from the
proposed site. The construction drawings shall also include the applicant’s plan for electric and
fiber utilities, all conduits, cables, wires, handholds, junctions, meters, disconnect switches and any
other ancillary equipment or construction necessary to construct the small wireless facility.
I. A traffic control plan.
J. The small wireless facilities permit shall include those elements that are typically contained in the
right-of-way use permit to allow the applicant to proceed with the build-out of the small wireless
facility deployment.
K. Recognizing that small wireless facility technology is rapidly evolving, the Municipal Services
Director, or his/her designee, is authorized to adopt and publish standards for the technological
and structural safety of City-owned structures and to formulate and publish application questions
for use when an applicant seeks to attach to City owned structures.
Section 9. The following new Section is hereby adopted:
Small Wireless Review Process.
A. Review. The following provisions relate to review of applications for a small wireless facility permit.
1. Only complete applications for a small wireless permit containing all required submission
elements described in Section 8 of this ordinance shall be considered by the City. Incomplete
applications that are not made complete by the applicant within sixty (60) days of initial
submission of the application materials shall be deemed withdrawn.
2. In any zone, upon application for a small wireless permit, the City will permit small wireless
deployment on existing or replacement utility poles conforming to the City’s generally
applicable development and design standards of this Chapter, except as provided in subsection
B below.
3. Vertical clearance shall be reviewed by the Municipal Services Director, or his/her designee,
to ensure that the small wireless facilities will not pose a hazard to other users of the rights-of-
ways.
4. Small wireless facilities may not encroach onto or over private property or property outside of
the right-of-way without the property owner’s express written consent.
5. The City shall make every reasonable effort, consistent with any applicable provisions of state
or federal law, and the preservation of the City’s health, safety, and aesthetic environment, to
comply with the Federal presumptively reasonable time periods for review of facilities for the
deployment of small wireless facilities to the fullest extent possible.
B. Eligible Facilities Requests. The design approved in a small wireless facility permit shall be
considered concealment elements and such facilities may only be expanded upon an Eligible
Facilities Request described in Section 16 of this ordinance when the modification does not defeat
the concealment elements of the small wireless facility.
C. Review of Facilities. Review of the site locations proposed by the applicant shall be governed by
the provisions of 47 USC §253 and 47 USC §332 and other applicable statutes, regulations and
case law. Applicants for franchises and the small wireless facility permits shall be treated in a
competitively neutral and non-discriminatory manner with other service providers, utilizing
supporting infrastructure which is functionally equivalent, that is, service providers whose facilities
Page 7 of 18
are similarly situated in terms of structure, placement, or cumulative impacts. Small wireless facility
permit review under this ordinance shall neither prohibit nor have the effect of prohibiting the ability
of an applicant to provide telecommunications services.
D. Final Decision. Any decision by the Municipal Services Director, or his/her designee, shall be final
and not be subject to administrative appeals.
E. Withdrawal. Any applicant may withdraw an application submitted pursuant to Section 8 of this
ordinance at any time, provided the withdrawal is in writing and signed by all persons who signed
the original application or their successors in interest. When a withdrawal is received, the
application shall be deemed null and void. If such withdrawal occurs prior to the Municipal Services
Director’s, or his/her designee’s, decision, then reimbursement of fees submitted in association
with said application shall be prorated to withhold the amount of City costs incurred in processing
the application prior to time of withdrawal. If such withdrawal is not accomplished prior to the
Municipal Services Director ‘s, or his/her designee’s, decision , there shall be no refund of all or
any portion of such fee.
Section 10. The following new Section is hereby adopted:
Small Wireless Permit Requirements.
A. The grantee of any permit shall comply with all of the requirements within the small wireless permit.
B. Small wireless facilities installed pursuant to a small wireless facility permit may proceed to install
the approved small wireless facilities without the need for an additional right-of-way use permit if
construction is commenced within thirty (30) days of approval by providing email or written notice
to the Municipal Services Director, or his/her designee. Facilities approved in a small wireless
permit in which installation has not commenced within thirty (30) days of the approval of a small
wireless facility permit shall apply for and be issued a right-of-way use permit to install such small
wireless facilities in accordance with the standard requirements of the City for use of the right-of-
way.
C. Post-Construction As-Builts. Within thirty (30) days after construction of the small wireless facility,
the grantee shall provide the City with as-builts of the small wireless facilities demonstrating
compliance with the permit and site photographs.
D. Permit Time Limit. Construction of the small wireless facility must be completed within six (6)
months after the approval date by the City. The grantee may request one (1) extension to be limited
to three (3) months, if the applicant cannot construct the small wireless facility within the original
six (6) month period.
E. Site Safety and Maintenance. The grantee must maintain the small wireless facilities in safe and
working condition. The grantee shall be responsible for the removal of any graffiti or other
vandalism and shall keep the site neat and orderly, including but not limited to following any
maintenance or modifications on the site.
Section 11. The following new Section is hereby adopted:
Modifications to Small Wireless Facilities.
Page 8 of 18
A. If a grantee desires to make a modification to an existing small wireless facility, including but not
limited to expanding or changing the antenna type, increasing the equipment enclosure, placing
additional pole-mounted or ground-mounted equipment, or modifying the concealment elements,
then the applicant shall apply for a small wireless facility permit.
B. A small wireless facility permit shall not be required for routine maintenance and repair of a small
wireless facility within the rights-of-way, or the replacement of an antenna or equipment of similar
size, weight, and height, provided that such replacement does not defeat the concealment elements
used in the original deployment of the small wireless facility, does not impact the structural integrity
of the pole, and does not require pole replacement. Further, a small wireless facility permit shall
not be required for replacing equipment within the equipment enclosure or reconfiguration of fiber
or power to the small wireless facility. Right- of-way use permits may be required for such routine
maintenance, repair, or replacement consistent with Chapter 12.16 MLMC.
Section 12. The following new Section is hereby adopted:
Small Wireless Consolidated Permit.
A. The issuance of a small wireless permit grants authority to construct small wireless facilities in the
rights-of-way in a consolidated manner to allow the applicant, in most situations, to avoid the need
to seek duplicative approval by both the public works and the community and economic
development departments. If the applicant requires a new franchise to utilize the right-of-way, the
franchise approval may be consolidated with the small wireless facility permit review if requested
by the applicant. As an exercise of police powers pursuant to RCW 35.99.040(2), the small wireless
facility permit is not a right-of-way use permit, but instead a consolidated public works and land use
permit and the issuance of a small wireless facility permit shall be governed by the time limits
established by federal law for small wireless facilities.
B. The general standards applicable to the use of the rights-of-way described in Chapter 12.16 MLMC
shall apply to all small wireless facility permits.
Section 13. The following new Section is hereby adopted:
Small Wireless Fees and Other Costs.
A. Application and Review Fee. Any applicant for a franchise pursuant to this ordinance shall pay an
application and review fee or fee deposit in an amount as determined by the City Council. This
application and review fee covers the actual costs associated with the City’s initial review of the
application; provided, however, that the applicant shall also be required to pay all necessary permit
fees. This application and review fee shall be deposited with the City as part of the application filed
pursuant to this ordinance.
B. Other City Costs. All grantees shall, within 30 days after written demand therefor, reimburse the
City for all direct and actual costs and expenses incurred by the City in connection with any grant,
modification, amendment, renewal, or transfer of any franchise.
C. Permit Fee. Prior to issuance of a right-of-way permit or small wireless facility permit, the applicant
shall pay a permit fee in an amount as determined by the City Council, or the actual costs incurred
by the City in reviewing such permit application.
Section 14. The following new Section is hereby adopted:
Page 9 of 18
Design and Concealment Standards for Small Wireless Deployments. Small wireless facility
deployments whether permitted in the right-of way under a franchise agreement or permitted in
accordance with this chapter shall conform to the following design standards:
A. Small wireless facilities attached to existing or replacement non-wooden light poles and other non-
wooden poles in the right-of-way or non-wooden poles outside of the right-of-way shall conform to
the following design criteria:
1. Antennas and the associated equipment enclosures (including disconnect switches and other
appurtenant devices) shall be fully concealed within the pole, unless such concealment is
otherwise technically infeasible, or is incompatible with the pole design, then the antennas and
associated equipment enclosures must be camouflaged to appear as an integral part of the
pole or flush mounted to the pole, meaning no more than six (6) inches off of the pole, and
must be the minimum size necessary for the intended purpose, not to exceed the volumetric
dimensions of small wireless facilities. If the equipment enclosure is permitted on the exterior
of the pole, the applicant is required to place the equipment enclosure behind any banners or
road signs that may be on the pole, provided that such location does not interfere with the
operation of the banners or signs.
2. The furthest point of any antenna or equipment enclosure may not extend more than twenty
(20) inches from the face of the pole.
3. All conduit, cables, wires, and fiber must be routed internally in the non-wooden pole. Full
concealment of all conduit, cables, wires, and fiber is required within mounting brackets,
shrouds, canisters, or sleeves if attaching to exterior antennas or equipment.
4. An antenna on top of an existing pole may not extend more than six (6) feet above the height
of the existing pole and the diameter may not exceed sixteen (16) inches, measured at the top
of the pole, unless the applicant can demonstrate that more space is needed. The antennas
shall be integrated into the pole design so that it appears as a continuation of the original pole,
including colored or painted to match the pole, and shall be shrouded or screened to blend with
the pole except for canister antennas which shall not require screening. All cabling and
mounting hardware or brackets from the bottom of the antenna to the top of the pole shall be
fully concealed and integrated with the pole.
5. Any replacement pole shall substantially conform to the design of the pole it is replacing or the
neighboring pole design standards utilized within the contiguous right-of-way.
6. The height of any replacement pole may not extend more than ten (10) feet· above the height
of the existing pole or the minimum additional height necessary; provided that the height of the
replacement pole cannot be extended further by additional antenna height.
7. The diameter of a replacement pole shall comply with the City’s setback and sidewalk
clearance requirements and shall, to the extent technically feasible, not be more than a 25%
increase of the existing non-wooden pole measured at the base of the pole, unless additional
diameter is needed in order to conceal equipment within the base of the pole, and shall comply
with the requirements in subsection E(4) of this Section.
8. The use of the pole for the siting of a small wireless facility shall be considered secondary to
the primary function of the pole. If the primary function of a pole serving as the host site for a
small wireless facility becomes unnecessary, the pole shall not be retained for the sole purpose
of accommodating the small wireless facility and the small wireless facility and all associated
equipment shall be removed.
Page 10 of 18
B. Wooden pole design standards. Small wireless facilities located on wooden poles shall conform to
the following design criteria:
1. The wooden pole at the proposed location may be replaced with a taller pole for the purpose
of accommodating a small wireless facility; provided, that the replacement pole shall not exceed
a height that is a maximum of ten (10) feet taller than the existing pole, unless a further height
increase is required and confirmed in writing by the pole owner and that such height extension
is the minimum extension possible to provide sufficient separation and/or clearance from
electrical and wireline facilities.
2. A pole extender may be used instead of replacing an existing pole but may not increase the
height of the existing pole by more than ten (10) feet, unless a further height increase is required
and confirmed in writing by the pole owner and that such height increase is the minimum
extension possible to provide sufficient separation or clearance from electrical and wireline
facilities. A “pole extender” as used herein is an object affixed between the pole and the
antenna for the purpose of increasing the height of the antenna above the pole. The pole
extender shall be painted to approximately match the color of the pole and shall substantially
match the diameter of the pole measured at the top of the pole.
3. Replacement wooden poles must either match the approximate color and materials of the
replaced pole or shall be the standard new wooden pole used by the pole owner in the City.
4. Antennas, equipment enclosures, and all ancillary equipment, boxes, and conduit shall be
colored or painted to match the approximate color of the surface of the wooden pole on which
they are attached.
5. Antennas shall not be mounted more than twelve (12) inches from the surface of the wooden
pole.
6. Antennas should be placed in an effort to minimize visual clutter and obtrusiveness. Multiple
antennas are permitted on a wooden pole provided that each antenna enclosure shall not be
more than three (3) cubic feet in volume.
7. A canister antenna may be mounted on top of an existing wooden pole, which may not exceed
the height requirements described in subsection B(1) above. A canister antenna mounted on
the top of a wooden pole shall not exceed sixteen (16) inches, measured at the top of the pole,
and shall be colored or painted to match the pole. The canister antenna must be placed to look
as if it is an extension of the pole. In the alternative, the applicant may propose a side mounted
canister antenna, so long as the inside edge of the antenna is no more than twelve (12) inches
from the surface of the wooden pole. All cables shall be concealed either within the canister
antenna or within a sleeve between the antenna and the wooden pole.
8. The furthest point of any antenna or equipment enclosure may not extend more than twenty
(20) inches from the face of the pole.
9. An omni-directional antenna may be mounted on the top of an existing wooden pole, provided
such antenna is no more than four (4) feet in height and is mounted directly on the top of a pole
or attached to a sleeve made to look like the exterior of the pole as close to the top of the pole
as technically feasible. All cables shall be concealed within the sleeve between the bottom of
the antenna and the mounting bracket.
10. All related equipment, including but not limited to ancillary equipment, radios, cables,
associated shrouding, microwaves, and conduit which are mounted on wooden poles shall not
Page 11 of 18
be mounted more than six (6) inches from the surface of the pole, unless a further distance is
technically required, and is confirmed in writing by the pole owner.
11. Equipment for small wireless facilities must be attached to the wooden pole, unless otherwise
permitted to be ground-mounted pursuant to subsection of the Section. The equipment must
be placed in the smallest enclosure possible for the intended purpose. The equipment
enclosure and all other wireless equipment associated with the utility pole, including wireless
equipment associated with the antenna and any pre-existing associated equipment on the pole,
may not exceed twenty-eight (28) cubic feet. Multiple equipment enclosures may be acceptable
if designed to more closely integrate with the pole design and does not cumulatively exceed
twenty-eight (28) cubic feet. The applicant is encouraged to place the equipment enclosure
behind any banners or road signs that may be on the pole, provided that such location does
not interfere with the operation of the banners or signs.
12. An applicant who desires to enclose both its antennas and equipment within one unified
enclosure may do so, provided that such enclosure is the minimum size necessary for its
intended purpose and the enclosure and all other wireless equipment associated with the pole,
including wireless equipment associated with the antenna and any pre-exiting associated
equipment on the pole does not exceed twenty-eight (28) cubic feet. The unified enclosure may
not be placed more than six (6) inches from the surface of the pole, unless a further distance
is required and confirmed in writing by the pole owner. To the extent possible, the unified
enclosure shall be placed so as to appear as an integrated part of the pole or behind banners
or signs, provided that such location does not interfere with the operation of the banners or
signs.
13. The visual effect of the small wireless facility on all other aspects of the appearance of the
wooden pole shall be minimized to the greatest extent possible.
14. The use of the wooden pole for the siting of a small wireless facility shall be considered
secondary to the primary function of the pole. If the primary function of a pole serving as the
host site for a small wireless facility becomes unnecessary, the pole shall not be retained for
the sole purpose of accommodating the small wireless facility and the small wireless facility
and all associated equipment shall be removed.
15. The diameter of a replacement pole shall comply with the City’s setback and sidewalk
clearance requirements and shall not be more than a 25% increase of the existing utility pole
measured at the base of the pole.
16. All cables and wires shall be routed through conduit along the outside of the pole. The outside
conduit shall be colored or painted to match the pole. The number of conduit shall be minimized
to the number technically necessary to accommodate the small wireless.
C. Small wireless facilities attached to existing buildings, shall conform to the following design criteria:
1. Small wireless facilities may be mounted to the sides of a building if the antennas do not
interrupt the building’s architectural theme.
2. The interruption of architectural lines or horizontal or vertical reveals is discouraged.
3. New architectural features such as columns, pilasters, corbels, or other ornamentation that
conceal antennas may be used if it complements the architecture of the existing building.
4. Small wireless facilities shall utilize the smallest mounting brackets necessary in order to
provide the smallest offset from the building.
Page 12 of 18
5. Skirts or shrouds shall be utilized on the sides and bottoms of antennas in order to conceal
mounting hardware, create a cleaner appearance, and minimize the visual impact of the
antennas. Exposed cabling/wiring is prohibited.
6. Small wireless facilities shall be painted and textured to match the adjacent building surfaces.
D. Small wireless facilities mounted on cables strung between existing utility poles shall conform to
the following standards.
1. Each strand mounted facility shall not exceed three (3) cubic feet in volume;
2. Only one strand mounted facility is permitted per cable between any two existing poles;
3. The strand mounted devices shall be placed as close as possible to the nearest utility pole, in
no event more than five (5) feet from the pole unless a greater instance technically necessary
or is required by the pole owner for safety clearance;
4. No strand mounted device shall be located in or above the portion of the roadway open to
vehicular traffic;
5. Ground-mounted equipment to accommodate a shared mounted facility is not permitted except
when placed in pre-existing equipment cabinets; and
6. Pole mounted equipment shall comply with the requirements of subsections A and B of this
Section.
7. Such strand mounted devices must be installed to cause the least visual impact and without
excess exterior cabling or wires (other than the original strand).
8. Strand mounted facilities are prohibited on non-wooden poles.
E. General Requirements.
1. Ground-mounted equipment in the rights-of-way is prohibited, unless such facilities are placed
underground or the applicant can demonstrate that pole mounted or undergrounded equipment
is technically infeasible. If ground-mounted equipment is necessary, then the applicant shall
submit a concealment element plan. Generators located in the rights-of-way are prohibited.
2. No equipment shall be operated so as to produce noise in violation of Chapter 173-60 WAC.
3. Small wireless facilities are not permitted on traffic signal poles unless denial of the siting could
be a prohibition or effective prohibition of the applicant’s ability to provide telecommunications
service in violation of 47 USC §§ 253 and 332.
4. Replacement poles and new poles shall comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA),
City construction and sidewalk clearance standards, city ordinance, and state and federal laws
and regulations in order to provide a clear and safe passage within the rights-of-way. Further,
the location of any replacement or new pole must: be physically possible, comply with
applicable traffic signal warrants, not interfere with utility or safety fixtures (e.g., fire hydrants,
traffic control devices), and not adversely affect the public welfare, health or safety.
5. Replacement poles shall be located as near as possible to the existing pole with the
requirement to remove the abandoned pole.
Page 13 of 18
6. No signage, message, or identification other than the manufacturer’s identification or
identification required by governing law is allowed to be portrayed on any antenna or equipment
enclosure. Any permitted signage shall be located on the equipment enclosures and be of the
minimum amount possible to achieve the intended purpose (no larger than 4x6 inches);
provided that, signs are permitted as concealment element techniques where appropriate.
7. Antennas and related equipment shall not be illuminated except for security reasons, required
by a federal or state authority, or unless approved as part of a concealment element plan.
8. Side arm mounts for antennas or equipment must be the minimum extension necessary and
for wooden poles may be no more than twelve (12) inches off the pole and for non-wooden
poles no more than six (6) inches off the pole.
9. The preferred location of a small wireless facility on a pole is the location with the least visible
impact.
10. Antennas, equipment enclosures, and ancillary equipment, conduit, and cable shall not
dominate the structure or pole upon which they are attached.
11. Except for locations in the right-of-way, small wireless facilities are not permitted on any
property containing a residential use in the residential zones.
12. The City may consider the cumulative visual effects of small wireless facilities mounted on
poles within the rights-of-way in when assessing proposed siting locations so as to not
adversely affect the visual character of the City. This provision shall not be applied to limit the
number of permits issued when no alternative sites are reasonably available nor to impose a
technological requirement on the applicant.
13. These design standards are intended to be used solely for the purpose of concealment and
siting. Nothing herein shall be interpreted or applied in a manner which dictates the use of a
particular technology. When strict application of these requirements would unreasonably impair
the function of the technology chosen by the applicant, alternative forms of concealment or
deployment may be permitted which provide similar or greater protections from negative visual
impacts to the streetscape.
Section 15. The following new Section is hereby adopted:
New Poles in the Rights-of-Way for Small Wireless Facilities.
A. New poles, as compared to replacement poles, within the rights-of-way are only permitted if the
applicant can establish that:
1. The proposed small wireless facility cannot be located on an existing utility pole or light pole,
electrical transmission tower or on a site outside of the public rights-of-way such as a public
park, public property, building, transmission tower, or in or on a non-residential use in a
residential zone whether by roof or panel-mount or separate structure;
2. The proposed small wireless facility receives approval for a concealment element design, as
described in subsection C of this Section;
3. The proposed small wireless facility also complies with the City’s Shoreline Master Program,
Title 19 MLMC, and SEPA, Title 14 MLMC, if applicable; and
Page 14 of 18
4. No new poles shall be located in a critical area or associated buffer required by the City’s
Critical Areas Ordinance (Chapter 19.03 MLMC), except when determined to be exempt
pursuant to said ordinance.
B. The Municipal Services Director or his/her designee may approve, approve, with conditions, or
deny an application for a new pole without notice and his or her decision shall be final on the date
issued.
C. The concealment element design shall include the design of the screening, fencing, or other
concealment technology for a tower, pole, or equipment structure, and all related transmission
equipment or facilities associated with the proposed small wireless facility, including but not limited
to fiber and power connections.
1. The concealment element design should seek to minimize the visual obtrusiveness of the small
wireless facility. The proposed pole or structure should have similar designs to existing
neighboring poles in the rights-of-way, including similar height to the extent technically feasible.
Any concealment element design for a small wireless facility on a decorative pole should
attempt to mimic the design of such pole and integrate the small wireless facility into the design
of the decorative pole. Other concealment methods include, but are not limited to, integrating
the installation with architectural features or building design components, utilization of
coverings or concealment devices of similar material, color, and texture - or the appearance
thereof - as the surface against which the installation will be seen or on which it will be installed,
landscape design, or other camouflage strategies appropriate for the type of installation.
Applicants are required to utilize designs in which all conduit and wirelines are installed
internally in the structure. Further, applicant designs should, to the extent technically possible,
comply with the generally applicable design standards adopted pursuant to Section 14 of this
ordinance.
2. If the Municipal Services Director, or his/her designee, has already approved a concealment
element design either for the applicant or another small wireless facility along the same public
right-of-way or for the same pole type, then the applicant shall utilize a substantially similar
concealment element design, unless it can show that such concealment element design is not
physically or technologically feasible, or that such deployment would undermine the generally
applicable design standards.
D. Even if an alternative location is established pursuant to subsection A(1) and A (2), the Municipal
Services Director, or his/her designee, may determine that a new pole in the right-of-way is in fact
a superior alternative based on the impact to the City, the concealment element design, the City’s
Comprehensive Plan and the added benefits to the community.
E. Prior to the issuance of a permit to construct a new pole or ground-mounted equipment in the right-
of-way, the applicant must obtain a site-specific agreement from the City to locate such new pole
or ground-mounted equipment. This requirement also applies to replacement poles that are higher
than the replaced pole, and the overall height of the replacement pole and the proposed small
wireless facility is more than sixty (60) feet.
F. These design standards are intended to be used solely for the purpose of concealment and siting.
Nothing herein shall be interpreted or applied in a manner which dictates the use of a particular
technology. When strict application of these requirements would unreasonably impair the function
of the technology chosen by the applicant, alternative forms of concealment or deployment may be
permitted which provide similar or greater protections of the streetscape.
Page 15 of 18
Section 16. The following additional definitions shall only apply to eligible facilities requests as described
in this Section.
Eligible Facilities Requests.
A. Additional Definitions.
1. “Base Station”: A structure or equipment at a fixed location that enables FCC-licensed or
authorized wireless communications between user equipment and a communications network.
The term does not encompass a tower as defined herein nor any equipment associated with a
tower. Base Station includes, without limitation:
a. Equipment associated with wireless communications services as well as unlicensed
wireless services and fixed wireless services such as microwave backhaul.
b. Radio transceivers, antennas, coaxial or fiber-optic cable, regular and backup power
supplies, and comparable equipment, regardless of technological configuration (including
Distributed Antenna Systems (“DAS”) and small wireless networks).
c. Any structure other than a tower that, at the time the relevant application is filed (with
jurisdiction) under this section, supports or houses equipment described in subparagraph
(i) and (ii) above that has been reviewed and approved under the applicable zoning or
siting process, or under another State or local regulatory review process, even if the
structure was not built for the sole or primary purpose of providing that support.
d. The term does not include any structure that, at the time the Eligible Facilities Request
application is filed with the City, does not support or house equipment described in
subparagraph (l)(a) and (l)(b) above.
2. “Collocation”: The mounting or installation of transmission equipment on an eligible support
structure for the purpose of transmitting and/or receiving radio frequency signals for
communication purposes.
3. “Director”: The Municipal Services Director or designee.
4. “Eligible Facilities Request”: Any request for modification of an existing tower or base station
that does not substantially change the physical dimensions of such tower or base station,
involving:
a. Collocation of new transmission equipment;
b. Removal of transmission equipment; or
c. Replacement of transmission equipment.
5. “Eligible Support Structure”: Any tower or base station as defined in this section, provided that
it is existing at the time the relevant application is filed with the City.
6. “Existing”: A constructed tower or base station is existing if it has been reviewed and approved
under the applicable zoning or siting process, or under another State or local regulatory review
process, provided that a tower that has not been reviewed and approved because it was not in
a zoned area when it was built, but was lawfully constructed, is existing for purposes of this
definition.
Page 16 of 18
7. “Substantial Change”: A modification substantially changes the physical dimensions of an
eligible support structure if it meets any of the following criteria:
a. For towers other than towers in the public rights-of-way, it increases the height of the tower
by more than 10% or by the height of one additional antenna array with separation from
the nearest existing antenna not to exceed twenty (20) feet, whichever is greater; for other
eligible support structures, it increases the height of the structure by more than 10% or
more than ten (10) feet, whichever is greater;
b. For towers other than towers in the public rights-of-way, it involves adding an appurtenance
to the body of the tower that would protrude from the edge of the tower more than twenty
(20) feet, or more than the width of the tower structure at the level of the appurtenance,
whichever is greater; for other eligible support structures, it involves adding an
appurtenance to the body of the structure that would protrude from the edge of the structure
by more than six (6) feet;
c. For any eligible support structure, it involves installation of more than the standard number
of new equipment cabinets for the technology involved, but not to exceed four cabinets; or,
for towers in the public rights-of-way and Base Stations, it involves installation of any new
equipment cabinets on the ground if there are no pre-existing ground cabinets associated
with the structure, or else involves installation of ground cabinets that are more than 10%
larger in height or overall volume than any other ground cabinets associated with the
structure;
d. It entails any excavation or deployment outside the current site;
e. It would defeat the concealment elements of the eligible support structure; or
f. It does not comply with conditions associated with the siting approval of the construction
or modification of the eligible support structure or base station equipment, provided,
however, that this limitation does not apply to any modification that is non-compliant only
in a manner that would not exceed the thresholds identified above.
8. “Tower”: Any structure built for the sole or primary purpose of supporting any FCC-licensed or
authorized antennas and their associated facilities, including structures that are constructed for
wireless communications services including, but not limited to, private, broadcast, and public
safety services, as well as unlicensed wireless services and fixes wireless services such as
microwave backhaul and the associated site.
9. “Transmission Equipment”: Equipment that facilitates transmission for any FCC-licensed or
authorized wireless communication service, including, but not limited to, radio transceivers,
antennas, coaxial or fiber-optic cable, and regular and backup power supply. The term includes
equipment associated with wireless communications services including, but not limited to,
private, broadcast, and public safety services, as well as unlicensed wireless services and fixed
wireless services such as microwave backhaul.
B. Application. The Director shall prepare and make publicly available an application form used to
consider whether an application is an Eligible Facilities Request. The application may not require
the applicant to demonstrate a need or business case for the proposed modification.
C. Qualification as an Eligible Facilities Request. Upon receipt of an application for an Eligible
Facilities Request, the Director shall review such application to determine whether the application
qualifies as an Eligible Facilities Request.
Page 17 of 18
D. Timeframe for Review. Within sixty (60) days of the date on which an applicant submits an Eligible
Facilities Request application, the Director shall approve the application unless it determines that
the application is not covered by this section.
E. Tolling of the Time Frame for Review. The sixty (60) day review period begins to run when the pre-
application or application is filed and may be tolled only by mutual agreement by the Director and
the applicant or in cases where the Director determines that the application is incomplete. The
timeframe for review of an Eligible Facilities Request is not tolled by a moratorium on the review of
applications.
1. To toll the timeframe for incompleteness, the Director shall provide written notice to the
applicant within thirty (30) days of receipt of the application, clearly and specifically delineating
all missing documents or information required in the application.
2. The timeframe for review begins running again when the applicant makes a supplemental
submission in response to the Director’s notice of incompleteness.
3. Following a supplemental submission, the Director will notify the applicant within ten (10) days
that the supplemental submission did not provide the information identified in the original notice
delineating missing information. The timeframe is tolled in the case of second or subsequent
notices pursuant to the procedures identified in this sub-section. Second or subsequent notice
of incompleteness may not specify missing documents or information that was not delineated
in the original notice of incompleteness.
F. Determination That Application Is Not an Eligible Facilities Request. If the Director determines that
the applicant’s request does not qualify as an Eligible Facilities Request, the Director shall deny
the application.
G. Failure to Act. In the event the Director fails to approve or deny a request for an Eligible Facilities
Request within the timeframe for review (accounting for any tolling), the request shall be deemed
granted. The deemed grant does not become effective until the applicant notifies the Director in
writing after the review period has expired (accounting for any tolling) that the application has been
deemed granted.
Section 17. Appeals. Small Wireless Facilities Permit decisions, other than administrative approvals
relating to Small Wireless Facilities and Eligible Facilities Requests, are final decisions. Approvals or denials
of a Small Wireless Facility Permit or Eligible Facilities Requests are administrative approvals and are not
subject to appeal.
Section 18. Public Hearing. Pursuant to RCW 35A.63.220 and RCW 36.70.390, the City Council held a
hearing on this interim ordinance before adoption in order to take public testimony.
Section 19. Duration of Interim Regulations. The interim amendments adopted by this ordinance shall
remain in effect until six (6) months from the effective date and shall automatically expire unless the same
are extended as provided in RCW 36.70A.390 and RCW 35A.63.220 prior to that date, or unless the same
are repealed or superseded by permanent amendments prior to that date.
Section 20. Planning Commission Work Program. The City of Moses Lake Planning Commission is hereby
directed to review the interim regulations in 2021. The Commission shall make a recommendation on
whether said amendments, or some modification thereof, should be permanently adopted. The Moses Lake
Planning Commission is directed to complete its review, to conduct such public hearings as may be
necessary or desirable, and to forward its recommendation to the Moses Lake City Council prior to the
expiration of the interim amendments. The work program shall include input from wireless carriers, existing
franchisees, and City staff.
Page 18 of 18
Section 21. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court, board or tribunal of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause or
phrase of this ordinance. Section 22. Enforcement. Violations of this ordinance are enforceable to the same extent as other violations of Title 18 MLMC and are equally subject to injunctive and other forms of civil relief that the City may seek. Section 23. Conflict. In the event that there is a conflict between the provisions of this ordinance and any
other City ordinance, the provisions of this ordinance shall control. Section 24. Declaration of Emergency. The Moses Lake City Council hereby finds and declares that an
emergency exists which necessitates that this ordinance become effective immediately in order to preserve
the public health, safety and welfare of the City of Moses Lake, pursuant to RCW 35A.13.190.
Section 25. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect and be in full force and effect immediately upon
passage, as set forth herein.
Adopted by the City Council and signed by its Mayor on July 27, 2021.
_____________________________________ David Curnel, Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
______________________________ _______________________________________ Debbie Burke, City Clerk Katherine L. Kenison, City Attorney
Vote: Riggs Liebrecht Myers Jackson Curnel Eck Hankins
Aye
Nay
Abstain
Absent
Date Published: August 2, 2021
Date Effective: August 7, 2021
INTERIM CONTROLS WORKPLAN FOR WIRELESS COMMUNICATION ELIGIBLE FACILITIES 2020:
Interim Controls adoption: June 23, 2020
Public Hearing with Work Plan: August 11, 2020
Staff established procedure to review Wireless facilities: July, 2020
Planning Commission reviewed Interim Controls: August 13, 2020
INTERIM CONTROLS WORKPLAN FOR WIRELESS COMMUNICATION ELIGIBLE FACILITIES 2021:
Interim Controls Renewal Adopted: July 27, 2021
Public Hearing with Work Plan: July 27, 2021
Work Plan:
August 2021: Develop Small Wireless and Eligible Facilities Request application form
Review interim controls with Planning Commission
Ensure staff understands routing of complete applications and adherence to the 60-day
shot clock
October-November 2021: Circulate interim regulations to wireless carriers, existing franchisees,
City staff and impacted utilities for review/comment
Review applicable standards with Planning Commission
Develop updated code provisions
December 2021-January 2022: Circulate updated code for comment
Conduct SEPA review if required
February 2022: Hold Public Hearing with the Planning Commission for adoption of any
changes/modifications
March 2021: Forward to City Council for adoption
MOSES LAKE CITY COUNCIL July 13, 2021
STUDY SESSION
Joint Comprehensive Plan Study Session with Planning Commission – Capital Facilities Element Senior Associate Kevin Gifford with Berk Consulting provided a PowerPoint presentation to review the updates on the Comprehensive Plan’s Land Use and Capital Facilities elements. City Manager Allison Williams added potential funding resources for projects could be with
public/private partnerships or the new Tax Increment Financing that was recently authorized. CALL TO ORDER
The regular meeting of the Moses Lake City Council was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mayor
Curnel with audio remote access. Special notice for attendance and citizen comment were posted
on the meeting agenda. ROLL CALL
Present: Mayor Curnel; Council Members Myers, Eck, Riggs, Liebrecht, and Hankins. Deputy
Mayor Jackson joined the meeting remotely.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Fire Marshal Derek Beach led the Flag Salute.
AGENDA APPROVAL
Action taken: Council Member Riggs moved to approve the Agenda as presented, second by Council Member Hankins. The motion carried 7 – 0.
SUMMARY REPORTS
MAYOR’S REPORT
MLBA Sinkiuse Square Banner Reveal The original unveiling was rescheduled due to high temperatures. The presentation was held on July 6 and was well-attended.
AGCCT Meeting Mayor Curnel and Council Member Liebrecht attended the meeting on June 29. Speakers included Grant County Commissioner Danny Stone, Big Bend College President Dr. Sara Thompson-Tweedy, and there was a legislative update from Attorney Anna Franz.
Exit Interview for 2019 State Audit Staff and Council met with the Auditor’s staff earlier today. This was the first time in the Mayor’s twelve years on Council that there were no findings to correct. Recognition was given to Finance Director Cindy Jensen and her staff for their work during this audit period.
Moment of Silence A moment of silence was held for local resident WA State Senator Joyce Mulliken who passed away on June 26.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES – July 13, 2021
pg. 2
CITY MANAGER’S REPORT
#1 Finance Budget Guidelines Memo The 2022 Guidelines Memo and Calendar were included in the meeting packet. Comment
was made that the Comp Plan will identify Capital Projects that will need to be prioritized.
New Employees A brief introduction was given of the new Finance Accountant Alaina Morgan. Additionally, Officers Alvarado, Arana, Campbell and Zepeda-Lopez were introduced and sworn in.
Municipal Services and Finance Director Interviews Interviews were held last week for both the Municipal Services and Finance Director positions. The City Manager is in hiring negotiations with both applicants.
Human Resources Director Search City Manager Allison Williams requested Council authorization to add a position in
Human Resources and to start a new search for Human Resources Director.
Action taken: Council Member Eck moved to establish the Human Resource Analyst position, second by Council Member Riggs. The motion carried 7 – 0. Perteet Contract Amendment
Additional tasks for the subarea traffic analysis for Mae Valley, Kittleson, Highway 17, and Yonezawa Boulevard will bring the contract just over $72k.
Action taken: Council Member Hankins moved to authorize the City Manager to amend the Perteet Contract, second by Council Member Liebrecht. The motion carried 7 – 0.
Creative District Public Meeting
There will be a public meeting for the Creative District on Friday, July 16, 2021, at 6:00 p.m., to show the community what the effort involves.
CITIZEN’S COMMUNICATION
Freedom Festival Concert Sean Sallis with the Moses Lake Spring Festival and Freedom Festival presented an autographed print of Country Artist Craig Morgan to the Mayor as a thank you for the city’s contribution to this year’s fireworks at the FreedomFest.
Community Gardens Suzi Farley, 1622 S. David St. Moses Lake, WA expressed her concern of the soil at the City’s community gardens. She requested the soil be tested due to issues in growing and thanked the City for being willing to work with the gardeners and conduct soil testing.
CONSENT AGENDA #2 a. City Council meeting minutes dated June 22, 2021 b. Claim Checks 152431 – 152709 in the amount of $1,897,586.15; Payroll Checks 63806 through 63890 in the amount of $37,619.87; Electronic Payments dated
June 25 in the amount of $492,451.81 and July 9, in the amount of $536,362.84
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES – July 13, 2021
pg. 3
c. Accept Sun Terrace Phased 5 Improvements Resolution 3859 Action taken: Council Member Eck moved to approve the Consent Agenda as presented, second
by Council Member Riggs. The motion carried 7 – 0. OLD BUSINESS #3 Longview and Kinder Reconstruction Bid Rejection
One bid was received for the project that was nearly $1 million dollars more than the Engineer’s Estimate. Staff recommends soliciting again in the winter months with hopes for more favorable bids on the project at that time.
Action taken: Council Member Hankins moved to reject any and all bids and to rebid on the proposed timeline, second by Council Member Myers. The motion carried 7 – 0.
NEW BUSINESS
#4 LOCAL Program Intent for Fire Pumper/Tender Council approved the purchase agreement on November 28, 2020. The next step to finance the purchase of the combination pumper/tender fire apparatus currently under
contract to be built is to make an application to the State of Washington LOCAL program. Council will see this transaction one more time when the bond ordinance is presented in late August/early September.
Action taken: Council Member Hankins moved to approve the Notice of Intent to participate in the Washington State LOCAL lending program, second by Council Member Liebrecht. The
motion carried 7– 0.
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS
OFM Population Estimate 2021 The new population of Moses Lake is 25,330. Staff are working to get signs updated at the
entrances to our City.
AWC Annual Conference The AWC Annual conference was held online at the end of June. City Manager Allison Williams, Mayor Curnel, and Council Member Riggs were in attendance. New Board Members were elected during the annual business meeting.
Rate Study Open House Report City Manager Williams commended the Utility Billing team led by Jessica Cole and City Engineer Richard Law for facilitating the open house on June 30. It went very well, logistically, and will occur again in either August or September.
Grant Integrated Services Grant Award for Police Mental Health Professional
There was a grant awarded to Grant Integrated Services that allows for the hiring of a Mental Health Professional that will be housed at the Police Department and available to responding to calls throughout the County.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES – July 13, 2021
pg. 4
Financial Reports Finance Director Cindy Jensen explained that the descriptions on the reports might look different due to the way that they are being pulled from the invoices in the new software.
She said that they try to catch them so that they all have good descriptions, but some have
been missed. Finance Director Retirement City Manager Allison Williams has accepted Finance Director Cindy Jensen retirement
notice. Her letter provided for August 27, 2021, as her official last day.
COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS AND REPORTS
Council Member Liebrecht thanked Finance Director Cindy Jensen for making the difficult finance topics easy to understand. She also acknowledged the Police Department
and thanked Chief Kevin Fuhr for finding excellent candidates for new officers.
Additionally, she requested a follow up of the Marina Dr. issues which City Engineer Richard Law and Chief Fuhr provided. EXECUTIVE SESSION
Mayor Curnel called an Executive Session at 7:50 p.m. to be held for 30 minutes pursuant to
RCW 42.30.110(1)(b) and (i) to discuss property acquisition and potential litigation and there will be no further business to follow. Mayor Curnel extended the Executive Session for five minutes. ADJOURNMENT
The regular meeting was adjourned at 8:25 p.m.
______________________________________ David Curnel, Mayor
ATTEST____________________________________ Debbie Burke, City Clerk
To: Allison Williams, City Manager
From: Cindy Jensen, Finance Director
Council Meeting Date: July 27, 2021
Proceeding Type: Consent Agenda
Subject: Semi-Monthly Disbursement Report
The following amounts were budgeted and sufficient funds were available to cover these payments:
Claim Checks 152710 - 152905 $936,129.21 Payroll Checks 0063891 - 0063892 (reissue from ACH 7/9) Payroll Checks 0063893 – 0063940 $26,258.40 Electronic Payments Payroll ACH – 7/23/2021 $534,852.18
Summary
RCW 42.24 governs the process for audit and review of claims and payroll payments for the City. RCW 42.24.180 requires the review and approval of all payments at a regularly scheduled public meeting on at least a monthly basis. The State Budgeting, Accounting and Reporting Systems (BARS) Manual outlines the above format for approval by the City Council.
RCW 42.24.080 requires that all claims presented against the City by persons furnishing materials, rendering services, or performing labor must be certified by the appropriate official to ensure that the materials have been furnished, the services rendered, or the labor performed as described, and that the claims are just, due and unpaid obligations against the City. RCW 42.24.180 allows expedited processing of the payment of claims when certain conditions have been met. The statute allows the issuance of warrants or checks in payment of claims before the legislative body has acted to approve the claims when: (1) the appropriate officers have furnished official bonds; (2) the legislative body has adopted policies that implement effective internal control; (3) the legislative body has provided for review of the documentation supporting the claims within a month of issuance; and (4) that if claims are disapproved, they shall be recognized as receivables and diligently pursued. The City meets all these conditions. To comply with the requirements, Finance staff schedule payment of claims and payroll for semi-monthly Council approval on the Consent Agenda. The payments listed in the schedule cover all claims and payroll payments during the period prior to the date of the Council meeting. All payments made during this period were found to be valid claims against the City. Details are attached and any questions should be directed to the City Manager or Finance Director. The City’s internal controls include certification of the validity of all payments by the appropriate department prior to submission for payment. The Finance Director has delegated authority for the examination of vouchers and authorization of payments to the Finance, Accounts Payable, and Payroll staff. All payments are reviewed and validated. The Finance Division regularly reviews its processes to ensure appropriate internal controls are in place.
Check Name Check Amount Check Date Invoice Description
152710 Ashely Brown Souza 127.59$ 07/15/2021 Utility Overpayment Refund.
152711 Austin & Heather Massart 153.11 07/15/2021 Utility Overpayment Refund.
152712 Betty Bischoff Rev. Trust 299.74 07/15/2021 Utility Overpayment Refund.
152713 Breana Wertman 116.38 07/15/2021 Utility Overpayment Refund
152714 Brice Lucero 285.60 07/15/2021 Utility Overpayment Refund
152715 Cleva Petrikis 130.99 07/15/2021 Utility Overpayment Refund
152716 Cleva Petrikis 114.40 07/15/2021 Utility Overpayment Refund
152717 Consuelo R. Yarrito 28.08 07/15/2021 Utility Overpayment Refund
152718 Corey Bradshaw 154.45 07/15/2021 Utility Overpayment Refund
152719 D2 Commercial Lending LLC 170.12 07/15/2021 Utility Overpayment Refund
152720 Danyelle Cavadini 55.46 07/15/2021 Utility Overpayment Refund
152721 Debra Lynn Pugh 219.27 07/15/2021 Utility Overpayment Refund
152722 Don & Judith Parham 568.66 07/15/2021 Utility Overpayment Refund
152723 Don & Judith Parham 726.02 07/15/2021 Utility Overpayment Refund
152724 Elaine R Hamilton 281.98 07/15/2021 Utility Overpayment Refund
152725 Enoe Management, LLC 223.02 07/15/2021 Utility Overpayment Refund
152726 Eric L Burck 79.78 07/15/2021 Utility Overpayment Refund
152727 Estate of Lura Chavez 53.88 07/15/2021 Utility Overpayment Refund
152728 Firouzi Development, LLC 66.11 07/15/2021 Utility Overpayment Refund
152729 GRQ Properties 802.92 07/15/2021 Utility Overpayment Refund
152730 James & Carole Johnson 189.53 07/15/2021 Utility Overpayment Refund
152731 James & Stacee Haws 226.70 07/15/2021 Utility Overpayment Refund
152732 Jamie & Michael Olson 81.74 07/15/2021 Utility Overpayment Refund
152733 Jerame & Lexy Burns 444.39 07/15/2021 Utility Overpayment Refund
152734 John & Amy Ellestad 184.86 07/15/2021 Utility Overpayment Refund
152735 John Doonan 100.40 07/15/2021 Utility Overpayment Refund
152736 John Doonan 146.84 07/15/2021 Utility Overpayment Refund
152737 Jorge & Esthela Avalos 327.28 07/15/2021 Utility Overpayment Refund
152738 Joseph W Sauvage 118.57 07/15/2021 Utility Overpayment Refund
152739 Juan Marron Luna 167.96 07/15/2021 Utility Overpayment Refund
152740 Juan Pruneda & Gisela Badillo 213.08 07/15/2021 Utility Overpayment Refund
152741 Kris & Teresa Dexter 192.42 07/15/2021 Utility Overpayment Refund
152742 Kyle McCain 4,000.27 07/15/2021 Replenish PD Controlled Buy Monies
152743 Luciano Martinez Jr 473.60 07/15/2021 Utility Overpayment Refund
152744 Martin McCullough 196.26 07/15/2021 Utility Overpayment Refund
152745 Matt & Kimberly Swann 483.12 07/15/2021 Utility Overpayment Refund
152746 Matthew & Kacie Garza 170.67 07/15/2021 Utility Overpayment Refund
152747 Matthew Couch 100.57 07/15/2021 Utility Overpayment Refund
152748 McClayne & Karly Powers 161.99 07/15/2021 Utility Overpayment Refund
152749 Michael George Daniel 177.91 07/15/2021 Utility Overpayment Refund
152750 Miguel & Rachel Saldana 234.97 07/15/2021 Utility Overpayment Refund
152751 Miguel Reyes & Emily Villafana 105.72 07/15/2021 Utility Overpayment Refund
152752 Moises Medel 550.00 07/15/2021 Utility Overpayment Refund
152753 Northwest Properties Quincy 21.84 07/15/2021 Utility Overpayment Refund
152754 Peter & Tara Hibbard 229.66 07/15/2021 Utility Overpayment Refund
152755 Petra R Hovland 131.81 07/15/2021 Utility Overpayment Refund
City of Moses Lake
Checks Issued with Summary Description
For July 27, 2021 Council Meeting
Check Name Check Amount Check Date Invoice Description
City of Moses Lake
Checks Issued with Summary Description
For July 27, 2021 Council Meeting
152756 Rachel Anne Kilroy 104.93 07/15/2021 Utility Overpayment Refund
152757 Samantha McGhie 171.34 07/15/2021 Utility Overpayment Refund
152758 Scott & Carla Needham 152.65 07/15/2021 Utility Overpayment Refund
152759 Scott & Tiffany Naylor 178.01 07/15/2021 Utility Overpayment Refund
152760 Scott Myers 98.00 07/15/2021 Reimbursement for CDL Physical
152761 Shawn & April Turnbull 33.78 07/15/2021 Utility Overpayment Refund
152762 Steven & Karen Wilkerson 632.00 07/15/2021 Utility Overpayment Refund
152763 Steven & Eric Magnuson 219.19 07/15/2021 Utility Overpayment Refund
152764 Thomas & Cindy Bixenmann 235.30 07/15/2021 Utility Overpayment Refund
152765 Travis Steffler 138.67 07/15/2021 Utility Overpayment Refund
152766 WA St Council Of FF Emp Ben 3,300.00 07/15/2021 Payroll Benefit
152767 William & Raquel Grace 140.37 07/15/2021 Utility Overpayment Refund
152768 AAA Readymix Inc 185.36 07/16/2021 Concrete
152769 Abc Hydraulics 70.28 07/16/2021 Misc Supplies
152770 Ag Supply Ace Hardware 27.07 07/16/2021 Misc Supplies
152771 Airefco Inc 313.54 07/16/2021 Valve
152772 Aquatic Specialty Services Inc 24,872.60 07/16/2021 POOL CHEMICALS
152773 Basin Feed & Supply 18.42 07/16/2021 SUPPLIES
152774 Basin Septic Services Inc 1,566.68 07/16/2021 Port‐a‐potty, sanitation stn service
152775 Bud Clary Ford LLC 106.66 07/16/2021 Vehicle parts
152776 Bud Clary Toyota Chevrolet 95.56 07/16/2021 Vehicle parts
152777 Burke Marketing & Promotion 9,737.33 07/16/2021 LTAC‐Tourism advertising
152778 Business Interiors & Equip Inc 247.44 07/16/2021 Printer Supplies
152779 Central Manufacturing Inc 290.08 07/16/2021 Asphalt Patch
152780 Certified Folder Display Services 1,597.66 07/16/2021 LTAC‐Tourism material
152781 CHS Inc 30,342.55 07/16/2021 Fuel for vehicles/small equipment
152782 Columbia Basin Auto Repair LLC 1,172.89 07/16/2021 Misc Repairs
152783 Columbia Bearing Bdi 51.96 07/16/2021 Variable speed pulley
152784 Consolidated Disposal Service 38.92 07/16/2021 Transfer Station Disposal
152785 Copiers Northwest Inc 494.02 07/16/2021 Equipment Contract Fees
152786 CSWW, Inc 881.66 07/16/2021 Misc Supplies
152787 D & L Supply Company Inc 1,430.88 07/16/2021 Misc parts
152788 Dan Bolyard 100.00 07/16/2021 LECTURE 7/7/21 @ MUSEUM
152789 Databar Inc 1,151.99 07/16/2021 MUSEUM JULY NEWSLETTER
152790 D.Berg‐Trails End Publications 700.00 07/16/2021 LTAC‐ Tourism advertising
152791 Ernies Upholstery Shop LLC 140.92 07/16/2021 SNS REPAIR
152792 Eurofins Microbiology Lab 1,421.80 07/16/2021 Sample Testing
152793 Faber Industrial Supply 162.71 07/16/2021 Misc Supplies
152794 Fastenal Company 170.34 07/16/2021 Misc Supplies
152795 Ferguson Enterprises Inc 459.41 07/16/2021 SUPPLIES
152796 Fishingmagician.com 1,400.00 07/16/2021 LTAC ‐Tourism Advertising
152797 G & A Truck & Auto Repair 121.82 07/16/2021 Vehicle repair
152798 Grainger Parts Operations 556.33 07/16/2021 Misc. Operating Supplies
152799 Hot Springs Spa & Leisure Inc 14.09 07/16/2021 SUPPLIES
152800 Industrial Construction of WA 32,431.43 07/16/2021 Final Pay Est. Westshore Dr Watermain
152801 Ispyfire Inc 2,168.00 07/16/2021 Dispatch Software Support
Check Name Check Amount Check Date Invoice Description
City of Moses Lake
Checks Issued with Summary Description
For July 27, 2021 Council Meeting
152802 Jerrys Auto Supply 302.38 07/16/2021 Vehicle Parts
152803 Kent D. Bruce Co LLC 205.57 07/16/2021 Vehicle Parts
152804 Konica Minolta Business Sol 77.64 07/16/2021 Copy Machine Maint. Contract
152805 Lad Irrigation Company Inc 823.33 07/16/2021 SUPPLIES
152806 Lake Auto Parts 103.45 07/16/2021 Misc Stock Parts
152807 Leon & Keeble, Inc 277,559.83 07/16/2021 Pay Est 3 Larson Rec Center
152808 Les Schwab Tire Center 471.19 07/16/2021 Tires / repair
152809 Momar Inc 263.48 07/16/2021 Truck & Trailer Wash
152810 Moses Lake Booster Club 2,811.00 07/16/2021 SOCCER CAMP FEES
152811 National Industrial Painting 33,088.00 07/16/2021 Final Pay Est‐Reservoir 4 Painting
152812 North Central Laboratories 1,318.54 07/16/2021 Lab Supplies
152813 Northeast Electric LLC 41,800.00 07/16/2021 Pay Est 1‐Valley & Ctrl Signal Cab Rep
152814 Northstar Chemical Inc 7,505.39 07/16/2021 Sodium Hypochlorite Well #11
152815 NW Weekend Getaways LLC 13,563.01 07/16/2021 2021 GUIDES ‐ LTAC
152816 Oreilly Auto Parts 251.67 07/16/2021 Misc supplies
152817 Perteet, Inc. 9,102.50 07/16/2021 Prof Serv‐Yonezawa Blvd Traffic Study
152818 Pollardwater.Com 244.77 07/16/2021 Hydrant meters
152819 Protect Youth Sports 233.80 07/16/2021 Employee Background Checks
152820 Setina Mfg Company Inc 4,075.68 07/16/2021 Fender Wraps
152821 Sherwin‐Williams 331.35 07/16/2021 PAINT
152822 Signs Now/A&W Farris LLC 1,114.90 07/16/2021 Install Door Wraps
152823 Spokane Television, Inc. 1,498.55 07/16/2021 LTAC ADS
152824 Target Solutions LLC 1,177.79 07/16/2021 Annual Software Support
152825 Us Postal Service 558.00 07/16/2021 PO Box Annual Fee 2021
152826 Util Undrgrnd Location Center 114.81 07/16/2021 Underground Utility Locates
152827 Weinstein Beverage Company 2,071.95 07/16/2021 Supplies
152828 Wilbur Ellis Company 3,606.63 07/16/2021 SUPPLIES
152829 Lowes 3,330.62 07/16/2021 Lowes March Statement 2021
152830 A & H Printers Inc 59.62 07/22/2021 business cards
152831 A‐L Compressed Gases Inc 140.92 07/22/2021 HYDROSTATIC TESTS
152832 AAA Readymix Inc 123.58 07/22/2021 Concrete
152833 AAA Washington 5,000.00 07/22/2021 Tourism Advertising‐JOURNEY MAG
152834 Affordable Auto Repair Inc 728.88 07/22/2021 vehicle repairs
152835 Ag Supply Ace Hardware 116.90 07/22/2021 SUPPLIES
152836 Allview Services Inc 6,097.50 07/22/2021 Software updates
152837 American Linen Inc 157.61 07/22/2021 LINEN SERVICE
152838 Atco International 163.80 07/22/2021 Shop Supplies
152839 Basin Refrigeration & Heat Inc 1,800.00 07/22/2021 Freon R‐22‐Building Maint
152840 Basin Septic Services Inc 190.00 07/22/2021 Sanitizer Stations at Sleep Center
152841 Bound Tree Medical LLC 2,215.71 07/22/2021 MEDICAL SUPPLIES
152842 Bud Clary Ford LLC 1,118.34 07/22/2021 Misc supplies
152843 Business Interiors & Equip Inc 206.75 07/22/2021 toner
152844 Cascade Natural Gas Corp 5,068.43 07/22/2021 SERVICE
152845 Caseware International Inc 9,566.31 07/22/2021 Caseware License renewal‐ 5 users
152846 Centurylink 126.63 07/22/2021 Telephone Service
152847 Cobies Fine Dry Cleaning 191.02 07/22/2021 Uniform Repair
Check Name Check Amount Check Date Invoice Description
City of Moses Lake
Checks Issued with Summary Description
For July 27, 2021 Council Meeting
152848 Columbia Basin Herald 590.40 07/22/2021 Public Hearing Notice Ad
152849 Confluence Health 111.00 07/22/2021 PRE EMPLOYMENT TESTING
152850 Consolidated Disposal Service 60.48 07/22/2021 MEDICAL WASTE DISPOSAL
152851 Copiers Northwest Inc 91.86 07/22/2021 Equipment Contract Fees
152852 Crewsense LLC 99.99 07/22/2021 STAFFING SOFTWARE SUPPORT
152853 Crossroads Dog Training 75.00 07/22/2021 boarding for K9 Jester
152854 CSWW, Inc 416.51 07/22/2021 Operating supplies
152855 Culligan/Lindsay 29.54 07/22/2021 MUSEUM WATER
152856 Dept Of Ecology 56.00 07/22/2021 2020 Hazardous Waste Generation Fee
152857 Dobbs Peterbilt‐ Moses Lake 789.15 07/22/2021 Vehicle parts
152858 E F Recovery LLC 3,485.50 07/22/2021 Ambulance Billing
152859 EMS Connect, LLC 280.00 07/22/2021 PARAMEDIC TRAINING PROGRAM
152860 Equifax / Talx UC Express Inc 375.00 07/22/2021 Unemployment Claims Management
152861 Eurofins Microbiology Lab 224.00 07/22/2021 Sample Testing
152862 Fire Service Repair LLC 2,043.34 07/22/2021 YEARLY PUMP TESTING
152863 Frix Technologies LLC 1,222.00 07/22/2021 Laserfiche Implementation Support
152864 Frontier Title & Escrow Co 325.20 07/22/2021 Title Search
152865 Galls LLC 1,317.65 07/22/2021 Uniforms
152866 General Fire Apparatus Inc 174.60 07/22/2021 FIRE SUPPLIES ‐ FLOW TEST KIT
152867 Grainger Parts Operations 712.65 07/22/2021 Operating Supplies
152868 Grant Co Solid Waste 57,184.95 07/22/2021 Solid Waste Tipping Fees
152869 Greenplay, Llc 11,623.13 07/22/2021 Parks & Rec Comp Plan Prof Svc
152870 Home Depot Credit Services 2,298.93 07/22/2021 June 2021 Statement
152871 Hopesource 20,602.29 07/22/2021 Em Housing Funds‐ Sleep Center
152872 Hot Springs Spa & Leisure Inc 44.43 07/22/2021 SUPPLIES
152873 Jerrys Auto Supply 64.20 07/22/2021 SUPPLIES
152874 Katherine Kenison, PS 17,692.30 07/22/2021 City Atty Services June 2021
152875 L N Curtis & Sons 2,423.28 07/22/2021 TRT Dam Supplies
152876 Lance, Soll & Lunghard, LLP 1,683.40 07/22/2021 Accounting Support
152877 Lowes 3,155.92 07/22/2021 June 2021 Statement
152878 Mckesson Dba Moore Medical 648.34 07/22/2021 MEDICAL SUPPLIES
152879 Moon Security Services Inc 230.57 07/22/2021 evidence alarm monitoring
152880 Moses Lake Steel Supply 7.00 07/22/2021 SUPPLIES
152881 Norco Enterprises Inc 816.36 07/22/2021 MEDICAL OXYGEN
152882 Oasis Auto Spa 952.50 07/22/2021 Car Washes‐June
152883 Oreilly Auto Parts 183.51 07/22/2021 Vehicle Parts
152884 Pioneer Veterinary Clinic 94.50 07/22/2021 K9 JESTER VET BILL
152885 Pro Force Law Enforcement 6,151.52 07/22/2021 Rifles
152886 Public Safety Testing Inc 841.00 07/22/2021 Ability Testing Police/Fire
152887 Pud Of Grant County 117,923.66 07/22/2021 Electricity usage
152888 Redflex Traffic Systems Inc 39,930.87 07/22/2021 Redflex ticketing services
152889 RH2 Engineering Inc. 21,458.24 07/22/2021 On‐Call Electrical Engineering Svcs
152890 Shirtbuilders Inc 2,241.62 07/22/2021 Uniforms
152891 Skaug Brothers Glass 81.97 07/22/2021 SUPPLIES
152892 Staples Credit Plan 2,781.00 07/22/2021 Paper for all departments
152893 State Auditors Office 3,370.38 07/22/2021 2019 Financial Statement Audit
Check Name Check Amount Check Date Invoice Description
City of Moses Lake
Checks Issued with Summary Description
For July 27, 2021 Council Meeting
152894 The DOH Associates 12,297.20 07/22/2021 Larson Rec Center Architect Support
152895 The Ice House 470.00 07/22/2021 CAMPGROUND ICE
152896 The Links At Moses Ponte 640.00 07/22/2021 JUNIOR GOLF CAMP
152897 Trophies By Lake Bowl 65.04 07/22/2021 PARKS BOARD PLAQUES
152898 Ups Freight 87.93 07/22/2021 Shipping and Weekly Service Cgs
152899 US Bancorp 7,699.36 07/22/2021 Lease payment for misc. vehicles
152900 Verizon Wireless 10,819.76 07/22/2021 Telephone Service‐ Mobiles
152901 Washington State Patrol 598.75 07/22/2021 Weapons Permits June 21
152902 Weinstein Beverage Company 90.35 07/22/2021 drinking water
152903 William Scotsman, Inc 1,366.09 07/22/2021 Office rental at Sleep Center
152904 Wm Washington Collections 43.63 07/22/2021 MEDICAL WASTE DISPOSAL
152905 Zoll Medical Corp 273.17 07/22/2021 MEDICAL SUPPLIES
Report Totals 936,129.21$
TOTALS BY FUND:
FUND NO FUND NAME AMOUNT
001 GENERAL FUND 186,789.28
102 TOURISM 34,648.54
103 GRANTS AND DONATIONS 7,321.93
110 HOMELESS SERVICES 23,740.42
116 STREET 40,870.16
119 STREET REPR/RECON 233.19
314 PARK & RECREATION IMPROVEMENTS 289,857.03
315 PARK MITIGATION CAPITAL PROJECTS ‐
410 WATER/SEWER 69,629.47
471 WATER RIGHTS ‐
477 WATER SEWER CONSTRUCTION 128,544.48
490 SANITATION 69,280.64
493 STORM WATER 1,717.44
495 AIRPORT 80.65
498 AMBULANCE 10,897.55
501 UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION INSURANCE 375.00
503 SELF‐INSURANCE 0.00
517 CENTRAL SERVICES 5,156.42
519 EQUIPMENT RENTAL 55,568.58
528 BUILDING MAINTENANCE 11,299.18
611 FIRE PENSION ‐
623 DEPOSIT ‐
631 STATE 119.25
TOTAL 936,129.21$
City of Moses Lake
Tabulation of Claims Paid‐Summary by Fund
Council Meeting Date‐7/27/2021
Page 1 of 2
STAFF REPORT
To: Allison Williams, City Manager
From: Melissa Bethel, Community Development Director
Date: July 22, 2021
Proceeding Type: New Business
Subject: Resolution-Set Public Hearing Date for ROW Vacation
Legislative History:
•First Presentation: July 27, 2021
•Second Presentation:
•Action: Motion
Overview
Martin and Charlotte Potter, on behalf of Fox Properties, have requested that City Council vacate
a portion of Right-of-Way (ROW).
Council should set a public hearing date for August 24, 2021, to consider the merits of the vacation
and ordinance vacating the described ROW.
Fiscal and Policy Implications N/A
Council Packet Attachments
A. Resolution 3860
B. Map
C. Vicinity Map
Finance Committee Review N/A
Legal Review N/A
Page 2 of 2
Options
Option Results
•Adopt Public Hearing will be set to consider the request.
•Provide staff with changes
•Take no action Council will not consider the vacation request.
Action Requested
Staff recommends that Council adopt the resolution setting August 24, 2021, as the date for a
public hearing to consider the vacation request.
RESOLUTION NO. 3860
A RESOLUTION INITIATING THE PROCEDURE FOR
VACATING RIGHT-OF-WAY DEDICATED FOR THE
DEVELOPMENT OF THIRD AVENUE ADJACENT TO LEWIS
ELLIOT ADDITION NO. 2.
Recitals:
1. There exists right-of-way dedicated for Third Avenue adjacent to Lewis Elliot Addition No. 2.
2. RCW 35.79 provides that a public street may be vacated upon resolution initiated and passed
by the legislative authority of the jurisdiction where the street is situated and that such
resolution shall fix a time when the petition will be heard and determined and which shall not
be more than sixty dates nor less than twenty days after the passage of such resolution.
Resolved:
1.The vacation of the following described public right-of-way shall be initiated:
BEGINNING AT THE MOST SOUTHERLY CORNER OF LOT 9, LEWIS ELLIOT
ADDITION NO. 2, PER THE PLAT THEREOF, RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 5, PAGE 27,
RECORDS OF GRANT COUNTY, WASHINGTON; THENCE N53°42’00”E ALONG THE
NORTHWESTERTLY BOUNDARY OF THIRD AVENUE, 280.00 FEET TO THE
EASTERLY-MOST CORNER OF LOT 12, OF SAID LEWIS ADDITION NO. 2; THENCE
S36°18’00”E, 30.00 FEET TO THE CENTERLINE OF SAID THIRD AVENUE; THENCE
S53°42’00”W ALONG SAID CENTERLINE OF THIRD AVENUE, 290.00 FEET TO THE
SOUTHERLY-MOST CORNER OF LEWIS ADDITION NO. 2 PLAT; THENCE
N36°18’00”W ALONG THE SOUTHWEST BOUNDARY OF THE PLAT, 30.00 FEET;
THENCE N52°42’00”W, 10.00 FEET TO THE SOUTHERLY-MOST CORNER OF LOT 9,
BEING THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
SUBJECT TO
2.A public hearing to consider the vacation ordinance before the City Council shall be set for
August 24, 2021.
ADOPTED by the City Council on July 27, 2021.
________________________________________
David Curnel, Mayor
ATTEST:
_________________________________________
Debbie Burke, City Clerk
DRESS PLAT AND ROSCWPCA PLATPARKHILL-SCEA ADDLEWIS ELLIOTT ADDMONTY HOLM PLATLEWIS ELLIOTT ADDITION NO. 2ELLIOTTADD NO. 2
Vicinity Map
Page 1 of 2
STAFF REPORT
To: Allison Williams, City Manager
From: Melissa Bethel, CDD
Date: July 27, 2021
Proceeding Type: New Business
Subject: Zoning Code Revision Consultant Contract
Legislative History:
• First Presentation: July 27, 2021
• Second Presentation:
• Action: Motion
Overview
The City is currently in the process of updating its Comprehensive Plan which should be completed
and adopted by fall of 2021. The process has brought to light the need for a whole new
development code which would implement the state mandated housing requirements, fix
outdated code, and implement new streamlined processes.
The City sent out a Request for Proposal to revise the development code and received four
proposals. The selection team was made up of City staff, the City Manager and a Planning
Commissioner. Proposals were evaluated individually by each person and all ranked SCJ Alliance
the highest among the proposals.
Fiscal and Policy Implications:
SCJ Alliance has proposed an amount of $130,178.40 to complete the project.
Council Packet Attachments
A. SCJ Proposal and Fee Estimate
B. Final Score Sheet
Finance Committee Review N/A
Legal Review N-A
Page 2 of 2
Options
Option Results
• Authorize as presented The City Manager will enter into a contract with
SCJ Alliance to perform the work as proposed.
• Authorize with changes
• Take no action Development Code update will not take place in
a timely manner which could put us out of
compliance with the State Growth Management
Act.
Action Requested
Motion to authorize the City Manager to execute a contract with SCJ Alliance for a new Community
Development Code.
Statement of Qualifications
Development Code and Zoning Map Update
Submitted by SCJ Alliance | June 7, 2021
Primary Contact
Rachel Granrath, Project Manager 429 E Sprague Ave Spokane, WA 99202 ph: 509.835.3770 | fax: 360.352.1409 | rachel.granrath@scjalliance.com
Development Code and Zoning Map Update | Statement of Qualifications ii
Statement of Qualifications prepared for
City of Moses Lake
Development Code and Map Update
Table of Contents
Information Page (Cover Letter)............................................................ page 1
Description of Study Understanding................................................... page 2
Methodology................................................................................................. page 4
Scope of Work – Exhibit A........................................................................ page 5
Timetable......................................................................................................... page 7
Personnel......................................................................................................... page 8
Qualifications................................................................................................. page 13
Representative Study Descriptions and Client References ......................................................................................... page 15
Cost Estimate – Exhibit B (submitted separately in sealed envelope)
Development Code and Zoning Map Update | Statement of Qualifications 1
June 7, 2021
Melissa Bethel Community Development Director City of Moses Lake PO Box 1579 Moses Lake, WA 98837
RE: Development Code and Zoning Map Update
Dear Ms. Bethel:
Thank you for the opportunity to present our proposal to partner with Moses Lake to update the City’s Development Code and Zoning Map. This effort will set the framework and provide regulatory guidance to the public, property owners, developers, stakeholders, City staff, and elected officials. SCJ Alliance is an energetic blend of planners, engineers, site designers, and much more. We have worked in both the private and public sides and bring a breadth of experience and knowledge to these efforts. Our team lives in the region, which gives us a unique perspective to provide a comprehensive, on-target, and useful code amendment. We have experience in writing land use codes as well as implementing them as practicing planners reviewing land use applications. We understand the need for a direct, concise, and comprehensive development code.
Our team will also include two attorneys with Piskel, Yahne and Kovarik (PYK), PLLC, well versed in the use and application of zoning and development codes. Their expertise and keen eye from the legal perspective will add an invaluable layer of review and consultation essential to delivering a final product of the highest quality. A high-quality code will have clear, concise, and consistent language that creates foreseeability of outcomes for staff and applicants alike. This is what our team will deliver.
We are committed to providing the services outlined in the request for proposal, providing an extensive and positive working relationship cultivated through effective communication and teamwork. We look forward to discussing our qualifications and approach in more depth as you move forward in the selection process.
Thank you very much for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Rachel Granrath Jean Carr, LEED AP BD+CProject Manager Principal-in-Charge
429 E Sprague Ave Spokane, WA 99202
Ph: 509.835.3770 Fax: 360.352.1409 scjalliance.com
Year Founded: 2006
Staff: 124
Federal ID: 20-4834444
UBI: 602612261
Primary Contact
Rachel Granrath Project Manager ph: 509.835.3770 rachel.granrath@scjalliance.com
Development Code and Zoning Map Update | Statement of Qualifications 2
2. Description of Study Understanding
SCJ Alliance is currently assisting Moses Lake with on-call planning services including development review, shoreline master program updates, shoreline compliance, outreach and meetings, and efforts surrounding the Northern Columbia Basin Railroad project. Our team is intimately involved in the current development code.
Overarching Themes
Moses Lake is currently faced with development pressures and growth. In order to best serve the current and future residents of Moses Lake, it is crucial to overhaul the current code to establish best practices, streamlined processes, and clear design regulations. This gives the city staff and developers a clear path forward to processing and applying for development in Moses Lake. Below is a list of themes that illustrate our team’s understanding of the project and the city’s needs relating to gaps and areas to address in this update:
√Scaled to Central Washington. This code update should explore best practices of other Central Washington communities. Communities such as Ellensburg, Quincy, Grant County, Wenatchee, and others should be cross-referenced for applicable scale, content, and geographic needs. √Code Overhaul. While there are elements of the current code that should be translated into the revised code, the approach to the revised development regulations will be a comprehensive code overhaul rather than retrofitting updates into the existing code framework. √Clear Typology of Land Use Processes. Establish a land use type process based on intensity of review and development—example is a type 1, type 2 etc. process to be determined as either administrative, legislative, or quasi-judicial. √Approval of Expiration and Vesting Limitations. Current codes have no timeline for expiration
◊ There is no timeline to record a Binding Site Plan (BSP), ideally this approval would be limited to one year or the approval is void.
◊ The current code does not define the time of holding an incomplete application from a Notice of Incomplete (NOIC)—if the applicant doesn’t resubmit within 90 days, the application is void. Refund can be prorated.
√Definitions.
◊ Clearly define criteria for a Boundary Line Adjustment (BLA). Example: cannot form a new lot and is intended for minor adjustments to alter or move lot lines, not to create additional parcels.
◊ Define food truck courts.
◊ Assess the parks dedication and cash in lieu assessment and define what land use value means. Address elsewhere in the code if not appropriate for development regulations. √Subdivision Regulations.
◊ Remove any language supporting unplatted remainders (subdivision)—make it clear that a parcel needs to be subdivided in its entirety.
◊ Road maintenance on plats needs to be recorded.
Development Code and Zoning Map Update | Statement of Qualifications 3
√Land Use Procedures.
◊ Remove procedure for a second hearing for a Planned Unit Development to be heard before Council. Assess if Planned Unit Developments are appropriate given new zoning districts.
◊ Establish a clear right of way vacation and dedication process.
◊ Amend the final plat approval to administrative signature by the Community Development Director rather than Hearing Examiner to streamline the process. √Planning Policy Consistency.
◊ Integrate Critical Areas Ordinance updates and Shoreline Master Program updates for compliance with State and Federal regulations and consistency as appropriate with the updated Shoreline Master Program.
◊ Comprehensive Plan goals and policies will be integrated into concrete regulations reflected in appropriate zoning districts, site planning, and development standards.
◊ Integrate Housing Action Plan directives and policies and that of allowed uses, regulations, and standards in the development code. This includes addressing elements such as new zoning regulations and integration of smaller lot sizes and allowed outright uses. √Design regulations and standards in line with the Comprehensive Plan and Smart Growth Initiatives.
◊ Mix of land uses consistent with Comprehensive plan.
◊ Development standards for compact building and site design.
◊ Housing options as outlined in the Housing Action Plan.
◊ Walkable policies.
√Sign Code updates. Draft code for first amendment content using neutral language; clear regulations for signs. √Standards and Criteria.
◊ This code should establish variance review criteria in a clear and concise manner.
◊ Establish site plan review standards above the requirements for binding site plans. √Wireless Communications Facilities. Address current FCC regulations and State guidance on standards for cell towers, wireless communication facilities, and small cells.
Airport Zoning Area at Fairchild Air Force Base in Airway Heights
Development Code and Zoning Map Update | Statement of Qualifications 4
3. Methodology
Project Approach
Our team understands the need for an approach tailored to the unique needs of Moses Lake. We understand this needs to be done on time, on budget, and on target. SCJ Alliance will guide you through a Development Code update utilizing a few key strategies as outlined below:
Iterative drafting: We will work through the code piece by piece, in bitable chunks that are easily digested by the technical committee and staff and can be communicated to the public, as appropriate. This gives us a good planning foundation and provides a series of drafts that have been discussed and understood, and ensures that we have received the necessary feedback along the way.
Problem solving: We have allocated some of our budget towards problem solving. Development code amendments affect private property rights, and as proposed changes or amendments are discussed, sometimes there can be pushback. If no unforeseen or contentious issues arise, these funds can be reallocated towards additional graphics, mapping, or other areas of the amendment the City deems appropriate.
Project Management: Our team understands that communication, project tracking, and quality deliverables make a project successful. SCJ Alliance has a variety of project management tools that maintain scope and timelines, and keep the project on budget.
Modernizing Codes: We understand the need to simplify, condense, and update terminology, and we appreciate the need to provide a streamlined and graphic rich code that is easily used and understood by all.
Growth and Change: Moses Lake is currently faced with growth and development. The City’s zoning framework should facilitate development the way the City wants to grow and can be tailored to local trends.
Consistency: Our team understands State and Federal Regulations and will seamlessly address them. The code will be consistent with the recently adopted Comprehensive Plan and Housing Action Plan (HAP). We will update the code for compliance with the Growth Management Act (GMA), Critical Areas Ordinances (CAO), Shoreline Management Act (SMA), and others as appropriate to maintain consistent framework for the code update. Shown are various ways that SCJ communicates with stakeholderss
Development Code and Zoning Map Update | Statement of Qualifications 5
4. Scope of Work – Exhibit A
Phase 1: Assessment
1.1 Kickoff
We will hold a virtual or in person meeting with the consultant team and staff.
1.2 Strategic Assessment
In this task we will review existing codes, the City’s comprehensive plan, Housing Action Plan, subarea, and strategic plans. We will outline how elements of the current city codes can be included into a restructured and revised code to best streamline, modernize, and amend content as appropriate.
1.3 Joint Meeting
Meet with City Council and Planning Commission to present the assessment outline and approach to the code amendments. This will set the stage for tasks, direction, and buy off on the process from the Planning Commission and City Council.
Deliverables:
»Kick-Off Meeting
»Assessment Outline
»Joint Meeting of Planning Commission and City Council
Phase 2: Outreach
2.1 Technical Committee Meetings
We will engage a technical committee comprised of City staff. This will be discussed at the kickoff meeting, and could include Planning Staff, Public Works representative, City Manager, Parks Department representative, engineering and building representees, as well as other stakeholders deemed appropriate. We anticipate up to four (4) Technical Committee Meetings.
2.2 Planning Commission/Council Workshop Series
We will host a series of joint workshops with the Planning Commission and City Council. These workshops are to address the three big topics of content changes as anticipated by the consultant team and city staff. We anticipate up to three (3) workshops that will be open to the public as a facilitated discussion between the Commission and Council for feedback and input. This series will be used to communicate complex development regulations to the elected officials while educating why these changes are needed to better facilitate development in Moses Lake. These workshops will integrate visual preference polling of a ‘this or that’ discussion to base development regulation decisions in community preferences.
2.3 Stakeholder Group Workshop
This workshop will be a platform for discussion and input from builders, realtors, the downtown association, chamber of commerce and others who are major stakeholders for this code update. We will present the main concepts of the code amendment, purpose to streamline, ease development processes, and create clear and concise regulations in line with Smart Growth concepts.
Deliverables:
»Up to four (4) Technical Committee Meetings
»Up to three (3) Planning Commission/Council Workshop Series
»One (1) Stakeholder Group Workshop
Phase 3: Airport
Compatibility Zoning and
Overlay
3.1 Gather Airport Data
The initial task is to describe the airport’s role, features, and activity, and to identify applicable state laws. We will review Moses Lake Municipal Airport Plan which was adopted in January 2010. Identify key land use, economic development, and planning policies. In this task we will also identify what land uses exist around the airport, identify what land use plans are in place, and identify the initial study area.
3.2 Compatibility Planning Working Group
Initiate and facilitate up to three (3) meetings for the compatibility planning work group. This task includes designing the planning process and identifying stakeholder roles. We will engage city staff, the Municipal Airport Advisory Board, Municipal Airport stakeholders, Port of Moses Lake, Grant County International Airport stakeholders, and other aviation orientated stakeholders as deemed appropriate by the City.
3.3 Delineate the Airport Influence Area
Using the baseline information collected in 3.1, we will define the area under consideration for land use compatibility planning.
3.4 Identify Areas of Impact
In this task we will define the noise, airspace protection, and safety impacts of the airport and know what areas in the airport environment are affected. We will designate the airport influence area, and identify areas of non-conforming land uses, structures, and outline methods to protect private property rights of existing uses within the affected area.
Development Code and Zoning Map Update | Statement of Qualifications 6
3.5 Airport Compatibility Analysis
Determine the land use compatibility of existing land uses in the airport influence area, any potential compatibility conflicts for future development, and identify any areas that require further review.
3.6 Comprehensive Plan Consistency
Depending on the areas of impact, compatible land uses, and mapping, we will need to evaluate strategies, compatibility criteria, and measures to be incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan for consistency if appropriate. This task will be evaluated, and scope can be amended to address needs at this point in the project relating to airport compatibility. An amendment to the Comprehensive Plan is out of the scope of this proposal but could be needed if policies do not line up with the airport analysis.
Deliverables
»Technical memo of the inventory of airport facilities, activities, and services for use in subsequent land use compatibility planning steps, the transportation element of the comprehensive plan, as well as the capital facilities element, when applicable.
»Technical memo of data regarding compatible and incompatible land uses around the airport. This deliverable will list current community policies affecting land use development in the airport influence area. We will address the identification and evaluation of current compatibility statuses and future compatibility conflicts and list specific compatibility issues to be addressed by new policies.
»Mapping to include the following:
Initial study area
Overall boundary of the airport influence area
Compatibility zones applicable to each runway end
»Comprehensive Plan memo on consistency review and recommendations.
Phase 4: Code Drafting
4.1 Iterative Code Drafting
Findings and deliverables from Phases 1-3 will guide the formation of the City’s Development Code and Zoning Map. We will break the code into sections that are sizeable to review and discuss at technical committee meetings. Iterations of drafts, reviews, and revisions will be determined at the time and based on the progress of each section.
4.2 Mapping
Geotechnical analysis will be provided. This can include mapping the City’s zoning, districts, or other spatial analysis studies as identified during the code amendment process.
Deliverables:
»Code drafts
»Zoning Map including airport overlay as assessed in Phase 3
Phase 5: Final Code and
Adoption Proceedings
5.1 Final Code Document
Our team will finalize the proposed code and maps for presentation and adoption.
5.2 Adoption
We will assist in the adoption process through presentations, materials, and noticing as needed. Our team will work with city staff on noticing requirements to adopt the development code. Noticing will include submittal to the Department of Commerce, SEPA checklist draft and noticing, Planning Commission public hearing noticing, Council public hearing noticing, associated presentation materials, and meeting attendance.
Deliverables:
»Final Code document (revised as appropriate during this Phase)
»Proposed zoning map (revised as appropriate during this Phase)
»Attendance or support at Planning Commission/ City Council hearing, as needed
Geographic Information System Analysis Layers
Development Code and Zoning Map Update | Statement of Qualifications 7
5. Timetable
2021 2022
JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR
Phase 1: Assessment
1.1 Kickoff and Project Management
1.2 Strategic Assessment
1.3 Joint Meeting
Phase 2: Outreach
2.1 Technical Committee Meetings
2.2 Planning Commission/Council Workshop Series
2.3 Stakeholder Group Workshop
Phase 3: Airport Compatibility Zoning and Overlay
3.1 Gather Airport Data
3.2 Compatibility Planning Working Group
3.3 Delineate the Airport Influence Area
3.4 Identify Areas of Impact
3.5 Airport Compatibility Analysis
3.6 Comprehensive Plan Consistency
Phase 4: Code Drafting
4.1 Iterative Code Drafting
4.2 Mapping
Phase 5: Final Code and Adoption Proceedings
5.1 Final Code Document
5.2 Adoption
Kickoff Meeting
Meetings and Workshops
Development Code and Zoning Map Update | Statement of Qualifications 8
6. Personnel
We work as a team relying on each other to fill our designated roles. Importantly, each of us remains committed and
supportive resources throughout the plan, doing what’s needed to successfully update the plan.
Rachel Granrath will be the project manager and point of contact. With an undergraduate degree in architecture and
a master’s in planning, Rachel strongly believes that the public planning process is a powerful placemaking tool. She is
committed to working with communities to achieve their visions, and her career in both the public and private sectors has
been dedicated to the creation of effective development policy. Previously a small town planning director, Rachel understands
the private and public roles while being fiscally responsible. She will ensure that project delivery progresses smoothly and
meets the City’s expectations.
Joining Rachel for the City’s Development Code and Map Update are principal-in-charge Jean Carr, Alicia Ayars for outreach,
Aren Murcar for transportation planning and geospatial mapping, and Charity Duffy for municipal planning and compliance.
Rachel will draw on her team to deliver the process and plan Moses Lake needs—creating an energetic, collaborative context
for our work.
Assisting SCJ on this endeavor is the law firm Piskel Yahne Kovarik, PLLC who are able to provide legal expertise for zoning
and development codes.
TRANSP. PLANNING AND GEOSPATIAL MAPPING
Aren MurcarSCJ Alliance
PRINCIPAL-IN-CHARGE
Jean Carr, LEED AP BD+CSCJ Alliance
AIRPORT ASSESSMENT AND OUTREACH
Alicia AyarsSCJ Alliance
ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING/COMPLIANCE
Charity DuffySCJ Alliance
SENIOR LEGAL ADVISOR
Ryan YahnePiskel Yahne Kovarik, PLLC
PROJECT MANAGER
Rachel Granrath, AICPSCJ Alliance
LEGAL REVIEW
Karl GranrathPiskel Yahne Kovarik, PLLC
Development Code and Zoning Map Update | Statement of Qualifications 9
Rachel Granrath, AICP
Project Manager
Rachel is a strong believer in placemaking and assisting clients to realize their potential and vision through the public planning process. She specializes in facilitating and managing complex groups and interests to achieve a comprehensive planning effort. Her skills include development and plan review, downtown planning, economic development, community engagement, long-range planning, redevelopment and infill, grant writing, and floodplain management. Drawing from her experience in rural and urban communities, she excels in developing strategies, visual tools, urban design, and guiding a community from start to finish through an inclusive planning process. She takes great pride in her work and always strives to meet the needs and goals of the community.
Relevant Projects
Zoning, Subdivision, Building, and Stormwater Code Amendment – Cherry Hills Village, CO The City adopted a Code Modernization project to amend and streamline the Zoning, Subdivision, Building, and Stormwater Codes which Rachel managed during her time at the City. Her role included working with consultants facilitating meetings, subcommittee discussions and input, and presenting to Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council.
Downtown Strategic Plan – Airway Heights, WA This planning effort focused on downtown revitalization to establish a strong economic center as well as provide housing options, particularly in the downtown area. Rachel managed virtual outreach and engagement due to COVID-19 measures which included virtual workshops, a visual preference survey, stakeholder interviews, two-day virtual studio, and online engagement materials. The final plan provides a clear community vision, priorities, and implementation actions.
Elizabeth Downtown Strategic Plan 2015 – Elizabeth, CO The Downtown Strategic Plan was a planning update to the Department of Local Affairs (DOLA) Main Street study. As the Town’s Community Development Director, Rachel oversaw the public outreach, public input, visioning, and development of the Downtown Strategic Plan. The Plan was adopted in 2015 and secured Elizabeth’s placement as a Candidate of the Colorado Main Street Program.
Additional Project Experience
Zoning Code Amendment to District Use Chart, Planned Development, and Definitions to Streamline Uses Into Tables – Quincy, WA
Medical Lake Development Regulations Update – Medical Lake, WA
Airway Heights Commercial Zoning Amendment – Airway Heights, WA
Newport Comprehensive Plan, Development Regulations and Critical Areas Ordinance Update – Newport, WA
Hayden Comprehensive Plan – Hayden, ID
Chewelah Comprehensive Plan and Critical Areas Ordinance – Chewelah, WA
Education
MA, Urban and Regional Planning, Eastern Washington University
BS, Architecture, Roger Williams University
Registration
American Institute of Certified Planners #33291
Memberships
American Planning Association (APA)
Experience
12 Years
Office Location
Spokane, Washington
Areas of Expertise
Long Range Planning
Economic Development
Community Engagement
Development Review
Development Code and Zoning Map Update | Statement of Qualifications 10
Jean Carr, LEED AP BD+C | Principal-in-Charge
Jean has extensive experience working with municipalities to create and refine development regulations. She has worked with many jurisdictions to identify key issues surrounding development and to create regulations that are equitable and enforceable. Jean has worked on a wide range of projects addressing issues of transportation, growth management, community involvement, master planning, zoning, special area studies, site planning, and entitlements coordination. Jean has extensive experience conducting environmental analysis and permitting under both NEPA and SEPA regulations. Preparation of clear, concise, and complete documents that provide the certainty needed to facilitate economic development and streamline the permitting process is her passion. Distilling feedback received through community engagement into meaningful input and guidance for each project is one of Jean’s greatest strengths.
Project Experience
City of Olympia Action Plan – Olympia, WA
Low Impact Development Code Update – Olympia, WA
Shelton/Mason County UGA Zoning Standards – Mason County, WA
Woodland District Hybrid Form-Based Code – Lacey, WA
Lacey Gateway Planned Action EIS – Lacey, WA
Tumwater Brewhouse Planned Action EIS – Tumwater, WA
Lord Acres Subarea Plan Transportation Element – Chelan, WA
Education
BS, Environmental Policy and Assessment, Western Washington University
MS, Public Administration, The Evergreen State College
Memberships
American Planning Association (APA)
Alicia Ayars | Airport Assessment and
Outreach
Public engagement is about connecting people to issues that matter to them. Alicia brings an enthusiasm for connecting and engaging people on projects and topics they care about most. Alicia worked in the Neighborhood Services and Business Development Department with the City of Spokane, managing community programs and grants in local neighborhoods. She also led a housing task force made up of local stakeholders, lead agencies, and city officials to identify issues, needs, gaps, and opportunities while addressing quality and affordable housing in Spokane. Her experience in community and stakeholder engagement includes convening people from a wide variety of industries, non-profits, government agencies, and the general public to discuss complex projects and topics. Alicia specializes in facilitating and managing diverse groups and interests to achieve a comprehensive planning effort. With a desire to provide engaging and quality work, she values planning that positively impacts people and their community.
Project Experience
Comprehensive Plan Update – Chewelah, WA
Development Code Update – Millwood, WA
Comprehensive Plan Update – Millwood, WA
Comprehensive Plan Update – Kettle Falls, WA
Central Business District Plan – Airway Heights, WA
Critical Areas Ordinance – Ritzville, WA
Education
BA, Urban and Regional Planning, Eastern Washington University
Memberships
American Planning Association (APA)
Development Code and Zoning Map Update | Statement of Qualifications 11
Charity Duffy | Environmental Planning and
Compliance
Charity is a senior planner who has ample experience contributing to major development projects across the state of Washington. She has over 10 years of experience navigating the complexities of local, state, and federal regulatory compliance. Charity has experience preparing, submitting, and reviewing SEPA documents and conducting code updates with staff. Currently, Charity provides on-call services for Moses Lake, and Quincy, is guiding the update to the City of Moses Lake’s shoreline master program, and has updated several Critical Areas Ordinances including Kettle Falls and Grand Coulee.
Project Experience
Shoreline Master Program Update – Moses Lake, WA
On-Call Planning Services – Moses Lake, WA
Cashmere Comprehensive Plan, Outreach, and Fee Schedule Updates – Cashmere, WA
City of Quincy Fee Schedule Updates and Code Review – Quincy, WA
Odessa Subarea Special Study – Ephrata, WA
Comprehensive Plan and Code Updates – Grand Coulee, WA
CAO Updates – Kettle Falls and Grand Coulee
Education
MS, Natural Resource Management, Central Washington University
BS, Biology Education, Central Washington University
Memberships
Planning Association of Washington (PAW)
Aren Murcar | Transportation Planning and
Geospatial Mapping
Aren enjoys working with people to find creative solutions to a community’s most pressing issues, always aiming for a balance between feasibility and creativity. He has a passion for quantifying information and telling stories using data. With his background in economics, Aren has a knack for integrating this information into his work in planning. Whether it’s interpreting the results from surveys or researching community demographics (i.e. population projections, housing statistics, or transportation metrics), he can extract meaning from the numbers and make sense of it for others to understand more easily. Aren has also worked with different communities to develop engaging and simple virtual outreach programs that provide valuable information about a community’s sentiments. By applying a lens of economic analysis to his work, Aren can also provide a unique and fact-based perspective on the planning issues in a community, which helps maintain clear, engaging, and well-informed communication among elected officials, the city, and the public.
Project Experience
Chewelah Comprehensive Plan Update – Chewelah, WA
Industrial Subarea Plan – Airway Heights, WA
Kettle Falls Comprehensive Plan Update – Kettle Falls, WA
Medical Lake Comprehensive Plan Update – Medical Lake, WA
Millwood Comprehensive Plan Update – Millwood, WA
Helena Growth Policy Update – Helena, MT
Education
MA, Urban and Regional Planning Eastern Washington University
BA, Economics Eastern Washington University
Development Code and Zoning Map Update | Statement of Qualifications 12
Karl J. Granrath | Legal Review
Karl is an Associate Attorney at Piskel Yahne Kovarik, PLLC and focuses his career on land use, real estate, and construction law. Karl is also a Hearing Examiner for Kootenai County, Idaho where his duties as a Hearing Examiner require him to regularly use, interpret, and apply Kootenai County’s Land Use and Development Code and Comprehensive Plan in a variety of contexts and factual scenarios. His representation of clients gives him insight into the difficulties faced from the applicant’s perspective, whether that applicant is a developer or a single homeowner. Karl’s experience representing clients, and as a Hearing Examiner, has provided him with invaluable insight into the unnecessary difficulties created by poorly written, antiquated, or otherwise patchworked and contradictory development codes. Karl knows first-hand the frustration and uncertainty these situations cause and it is one of his professional goals to help cities and counties to improve, update, or replace their development codes.
Education
J.D., Gonzaga University School of Law
BS, Economics, University of Arizona
Licenses and Affiliations
State Bar of Washington #56117
State Bar of Colorado #47305
Hearing Examiners Association of Washington, 2020-Present
Spokane Valley Planning Commission, 2020-Present
Ryan D. Yahne | Senior Legal Advisor
Ryan is a founding member of Piskel Yahne Kovarik, PLLC and focuses his practice on the areas of construction, real estate, and business litigation. In the area of construction litigation, Ryan represents owners, contractors, subcontractors, suppliers, and sureties in all types of commercial and public works matters, with an emphasis on State and Federal construction projects. Ryan’s experience ranges from construction contract formation and review and advising clients on development and land use issues to LEED certification issues, condominium construction and development issues, as well as all types of adversarial matters including litigation, arbitrations, Miller Act claims, bid protests, bond claims, mechanic liens, public works retainage claims, and the Washington Condominium Act claims. Ryan holds a Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design® Accredited Professional (LEED® AP) designation, one of only a few attorneys in Washington or the Eastern Washington/Northern Idaho region to hold the designation.
Ryan also devotes a substantial part of his practice to the area of real estate development and property litigation, including representing developers, property managers, and property owners in all types of disputes and negotiations. His real estate experience includes lease drafting and reviews, development rights, land use issues, evictions, easements, adverse possession, timber trespass, and eminent domain/condemnation litigation.
Education
J.D. cum laude, Pepperdine University School of Law
BA, Business Administration, University of Washington
Licenses and Affiliations
State Bar of Washington #35063
State Bar of California #228621
State Bar of Idaho
US Federal District Court: Eastern Washington District, Western Washington District, and Idaho District
LEED AP
Development Code and Zoning Map Update | Statement of Qualifications 13
SCJ Alliance (SCJ) is a multi-disciplinary planning and engineering firm specializing in solving complex issues that challenge developing communities. We provide a broad range of professional services to public- and private-sector clients including land use and environmental planning, transportation planning and design, outreach facilitation, comprehensive planning, strategic planning, landscape architecture, civil engineering, and construction management.
We enjoy being a part of the creative process and seeking effective and efficient solutions to project challenges. Our responsiveness and ability to communicate, work with you side by side, develop creative solutions, and pay attention to the details are attributes that set us apart in consistently delivering successful projects.
Anticipate. Envision. Create.
When approaching projects, we use a three-step strategy that we know serves our clients well: we anticipate emerging challenges and opportunities, work with clients to envision projects to enhance the livability of their community, and then create a plan that achieves the goals and vision identified through this process.
SCJ knows that the challenges facing local government are increasingly complex and interconnected, and complicated by limited resources and time. Our strength is in not only our recognition of these issues, but in our first-hand experience working as staff in small and mid-sized cities throughout the region. We have broad expertise in the preparation of land use regulations and zoning codes, and seek innovative but practical answers to development proposals. We are committed to partnering with you, anticipating your needs, and achieving your community objectives.
Piskel Yahne Kovarik (PYK) Piskel Yahne Kovarik, PLLC is dedicated to serving the legal needs of businesses, individuals, and other entities in the inland Northwest. PYK primarily serves clients in the areas of commercial business litigation, construction litigation, real estate disputes, property development, financial work-outs, and employment issues. Focused on building strong client relationships, PYK has earned a reputation as aggressive litigators as well as creative problem-solvers. The lawyers at PYK have exceptional backgrounds and have obtained excellent results on behalf of clients. Their focus is to work closely with clients in order to understand and achieve their goals. PYK’s strategic recommendations take into account each individual client’s risk-tolerance, budget constraints, and potential gain or exposure to achieve the best result possible. Most importantly, they pride themselves on being available and responsive to each client’s specific needs.
7. Qualifications
Development Code and Zoning Map Update | Statement of Qualifications 14Zoning and DevelopmentComprehensive PlansStrategic PlansOutreach and EngagementMaster PlansPlanning Suite – Airway Heights, WA
Parks and Recreation Comprehensive Planning – Chelan, WA
Downtown Strategic Plan – Elizabeth, CO
Woodland District Hybrid Form-Based Code – Lacey, WA
Shelton/Mason County UGA Zoning Standards – Mason County, WA
Comprehensive Plan and Outreach – Cashmere, WA
Comprehensive Plan Update – Grand Coulee, WA
Central Business District Plan – Airway Heights, WA
Comprehensive Plan Update – Hayden, ID
Depot District Subarea Plan – Lacey, WA
Downtown Plan, Housing Action Plan, and Code Updates – Chewelah, WA
Economic Revitalization Master Plan – Twisp, WA
Development Regulations and Comprehensive Plan Update – Newport, WA
Growth Policy Update – Helena, MT
Comprehensive Plan Update, Development Regulations, and Critical Areas Ordinance – Medical Lake, WA
On-Call Planning Services – Quincy, WA
Development Code Update – Millwood, WA
Downtown Revitalization Plan – Bridgeport, WA
Zoning, Subdivision, Building, and Stormwater Code Update – Cherry Hills Village, CO
Comprehensive Plan Update – Kittitas County, WA
Comprehensive Plan and Development Codes – Malden, WA
Tumwater Brewhouse Planned Action EIS – Tumwater, WA
Economic Revitalization Master Plan – Twisp, WA
Team Experience
SCJ has been updating zoning and development codes as well us various plans for municipalities including comprehensive, strategic, and master plans—many of which include drafting and adopting coniciding development and zoning code services. The projects below highlight plans that our team members have worked on.
Development Code and Zoning Map Update | Statement of Qualifications 15
Planning Suite
City of Airway Heights, Washington
SCJ has worked for the City of Airway Heights on multiple projects, (2016 - present) including a US 2 corridor plan, a comprehensive plan update, and a public art strategy. Another of our projects is the Industrial Subarea Plan which looked at a comprehensive industrial development strategy, master planning more than four square miles of industrial land to accommodate a wide variety of aviation-related and manufacturing uses. The project also included a full infrastructure analysis, preparing an infrastructure phasing plan and long-range capital projects budget to bring the area online in development phases. Working with a number of agency partners, SCJ completed the project within budget and in time to inform budgeting decisions for the City, Spokane Airport, the City of Spokane, and the Washington Department of Transportation (WSDOT).
Services Provided
Comprehensive Plan Update • Master Planning • Transportation Planning • Economic Development • Public Arts Strategy • Growth Management • Industrial Subarea Plan • Airport Planning and Mapping
Client Reference
Heather Trautman Principal Planner 509.244.2552 htrautman@cawh.org
8. Representative Study Descriptions and Client
References
Downtown Plan, Housing Action Plan, and Code Updates
City of Chewelah, Washington
SCJ has been providing municipal planning services for the Chewelah community for over 15 years. Like other on-call contracts, our role is to serve as the head of the City’s Planning Department, providing long-range and current planning services. We have long been acquainted with the unique recreational opportunities, the vast wilderness, environmental review, and development regulations in Chewelah and Stevens County at large. Our institutional knowledge and long standing relationship with the City has given us the insight needed to win grants on the City’s behalf, update long-range plans, and makes us the go-to person for all things planning related. Our tasks include updates to the City’s Comprehensive Plan, Critical Areas Overlay Zone Ordinance, development review, customer service answering general planning questions and making site visits, and environmental review.
Services Provided
Comprehensive Plan • Zoning Ordinance • Housing Action Plan
Client Reference
Dorothy Knauss Mayor 509.835.8311 mayor@cityofchewelah.org
Development Code and Zoning Map Update | Statement of Qualifications 16
On-Call Planning Services
City of Quincy, Washington
SCJ Alliance serves as the contract planner for the City of Quincy. This includes general planning assistance such as fielding questions from the public, developers, and staff regarding codes, zoning and general permitting. Our team provides development review including but not limited to pre-application meetings, minor and major subdivisions, staff reports and hearings, comprehensive plan amendments, and municipal code updates as needed. Recent projects for Quincy include wireless communication tower conditional use, binding site plans, and an update to the Planned Development Zoning Code.
Services Provided
Zoning Code Update • Comprehensive Plan • Municipal Code Updates • Permitting
Client Reference
Tim Moore Building Inspector/Code Enforcement Officer 509.787.3523 tmoore@quincywashington.us
Development Regulations
and Comprehensive Plan
Update
City of Newport, Washington
Based on outreach that was completed in 2019, the City of Newport worked with a consultant team that included SCJ to update its comprehensive plan and development regulations in accordance with state requirements. SCJ coordinated with the City to meet a compressed schedule in order to meet grant deadlines. The comprehensive plan focused on goals and policies to address growth, economic development, revitalization efforts, and housing options within the city. The development regulations and critical areas updates streamlined city code to be easily understood by residents and developers alike. A critical areas manual was established to guide development submittals and outline specific requirements.
Services Provided
Comprehensive Plan Update • Development Regulations Update • Critical Areas Ordinance
Client Reference
Russ Pelleberg City Administrator 509.447.5611 rpelleberg@newport-wa.org
Development Code and Zoning Map Update | Statement of Qualifications 17
Comprehensive Plan and
Development Codes
Town of Malden, Washington
SCJ is providing planning services for the Town of Malden that includes land use assessment, community engagement, development regulations, housing assessment, GIS analysis, and utilities and infrastructure assessment. SCJ has completed a variety of outreach efforts including 1-on-1 stakeholder interviews, and most recently, a public workshop in the community park with a Zoom attendance component. Our team has submitted a draft Comprehensive Plan and development regulations to establish a zoning, land use, and development code where there has not been regulations guiding the town in the past. This will set the framework for the Town to rebuild in a thoughtful and community driven manner.
Services Provided
Stakeholder Outreach • Development Regulations • Utilities and Infrastructure Assessment
Client Reference
Dan Harwood Mayor 509.569.3771 townofmaldenwa@gmail.com
Zoning, Subdivision, Building,
and Stormwater Code
Amendment
City of Cherry Hills Village, Colorado
The City adopted a Code Modernization project to amend and streamline the Zoning, Subdivision, Building, and Stormwater Codes which project manager Rachel Granrath managed when she worked with the Town of Cherry Hills Village. Her role included working with consultants, facilitating meetings, subcommittee discussions and input, and presenting to Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council.
Services Provided
Zoning Code Update • Development Regulations • Stakeholder Outreach and Technical Committee • Project Management
Client Reference
Jay Goldie Public Works Director/Deputy City Manager 303.783.2731 jgoldie@cherryhillsvillage.com
Consultant Labor Hour Estimate
SCj Alliance SCJ ALLIANCE
Project:
job #:
File Name:
Moses Lake Development Code
P5206.010
Labor Estimate Template Moses Lake.xlsm
Contract Type: Billing Rate Schedule
Jean Carr Rachel
Granrath Alicia Ayars Aren Murcar Charity DufFy
Phase &
Task No. Phase & Task Titje
PHASE 01 Assessment
Task 1.1 Kick off & Project Management
Kick off meeting
2 Project management
Task 1.2 Strategic Assessment
Review existing codes
Senior Project Planner Senior Total Direct LaborP'i"pa'. Planner Manager Planner /4@B75 & (@5( To'a' cos'
Subtotal Hours:
2.0 6.0 4.0 4.0 22.0
2.0
4.0
15.0 2.0 19.0
21.0 8.0 4.0 4.0 41.0
2,990.00
2,790.00
5,780.00
Review Comprehensive Plan, Housing Action Plan, Subarea and Strategic Plans
Assessment Outline
Subtotal Hours:
1.0
1.0
2.0
2.0
5.0
9.0
10.0
20.0
10.0
40.0
20.0
25.0
12.0
57.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
12.0
36.0
51.0
32.0
119.0
4,070.00
5,895.00
3,940.00
13,905.00
Task 1.3 Joint Meeting
City Council/ Planning Commission joint meeting on assessment outline
Subtotal Hours:
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
10.0
10.0
1,375.00
1,375.00
Total Phase Hours: 5.0 35.0 53.0 61.0 16.0
Total Phase Direct Labor: Sl,050.00 S4,900.00 S7,155.00 S5,795.00 S2,160.00
170.0
S21,060.00
170.0
21,060.00
1 of 7 6/4/2021
Consultant Labor Hour Estimate
SCJ Alliance
Client:Enter Client Name
Project:Moses Lake Development Code
Job #:P5206.010
File Name:Labor Estimate Template Moses lake.xlsm
Template Version: 1/29/2021
Contrad Type: Billing Rate Schedule
Jean Carr Rachel
Granrath Alicia Ayars Aren Murcar Charity DufFy
SCJ ALLIANCE
Phase &
Task No.Senior Project Planner Senior rotal oirea taborP""pa' Planner Manager Planner %0g75 & (@5( Tofa' cosf
SubtotalHours: 2.0 11.0 10.0 16.0 39.0 5 4,830.00
Total Phase Hours: 7.0 67.0 46.0
Total Phase Direct Labor: Sl,470.00 S9,380.00 S6,210.00
43.0 14.0
S4,085.00 Sl,890.00
m.o ', xyi.o
S23,035.00 S 23,035.00
Task3.l GatherAirportData
Review Moses Lake Municipal Airport Plan
Identify land use, economic development and policies
tnitial study area
Task 3.2 Compatibility Planning Work Group
Planning Work Group Meeting I
Planning Work Group Meeting 2
Planning Work Group Meeting 3
Task 3.3 Delineate the Airport Influence Area
Subtotal Hours:
Subtotal Hours:
8.0 8.0 16.0
1.0 10.0 6.0 17.0
1.0 1.0 6.0 10.0 18.0
1.0 2.0 24.0 24.0 51.C1
2.0 6.0 8.0 16.0
2.0 6.0 8.0 16.0
6.0 8.0 16.0
18.0 24.0 48.0
1,840.00
2,060.00
2,110.00
6,010.00
1,850.00
1,850.00
1,850.00
5,550.00
3 of 7 6/4/2021
Consultant Labor Hour Estimate
SCj Alliance
Client:
Projed:
job #:
Enter Client Nanie
Moses Lake Development Code
P5206.010
File Name:Labor Estimate Template Moses Lake.xlsm
Task 4.I Iterative Code Drafting
2
Draft Code
Code Graphics
Iterative Drafting
Task 4.2 Mapping
Draft Maps
Task 5.1
1
Final Code Document
Final draft code and maps
Template Version: 1/29/2021
Contrad Type: Billing Rate Schedule
SCJ ALLIANCE
lean Carr
Rachel
Granrath Alicia Ayars Aren Murcar Charity Duffy
Subtotal Hours:
8.0
8.0
40.0
8.0
10.0
58.0
40.0
20.0
60.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
60.0
10.0
6.0
16.0
118.0
28.0
56.0
202.0
15,930.00
3,020.00
6,810.00
25,760.00
Subtotal Hours:
20.0
20.0
2.0
2.0
22.0
22.0
2,170.00
2,170.00
Total Phase Hours: 8.0 58.0 60.0 80.0 18.0
Total Phase Direct Labor: S1,680.00 S8,120.00 S8,100.00 S7,600.00 S2,430.00
224.0
S27,930.00
224.0
27,930.00
Subtotal Hours:
8.0
8.0
20.0
20.0
12.0
12.0
20.0
20.0
10.0
10.0
70.0
70.0
9,350.00
9,350.00
5 of 7 6/4/2021
Consultant Labor Hour Estimate
SCj Alliance
Client:
Project:
Job #:
Enter Client Name
Moses Lake Development Code
P5206.010
File Name:Labor Estimate Template Moses Lake.xlsm
lean Carr Rachel
Granrath Alicia AyarS Aren Murcar Charity Duffy
Principal Senior
Planner
Projed
Manager Planner Senior
Planner
Total Direct Labor
Hours & Cost
Mileage
'ose & Phase & Task Title
Task No.
Template Version: 1/29/2021
Contract Type: Billing Rate Schedule
Expenses Subtotal:
Expenses Markup:
Expenses Total:
Management Reserve:
Total Indirect Costs:
Total:
SCJ ALLIANCE
Total Cost
390.00
1,478.40
1,478.40
S 21,338.40
S 130,178.40
7 of 7 6/4/2021
2020 Code Revision RFP Shortlist Proposal
Eastern Washington
experience/ relevant
references inlcuded?
Berk 36 36
SCJ Alliance 38 38
Beckwith 28 21
Framework 25 27
Total score for B, C and D is up to 10 per category
Timeline/Budget Notes
Total
score
36 108
38 114
25 74
19 71
Page 1 of 2
STAFF REPORT
To: Mayor and Council
From: Allison Williams, City Manager
Date: July 21, 2021
Proceeding Type: Old Business
Subject: Water Conservation Ordinance 2980
Legislative History:
•First Presentation: June 22, 2021
•Second Presentation: July 27, 2021
•Action: Motion
Overview
In 2018, the City Council approved the creation of a water conservation program to be utilized
between July 1 and August 31 of each year essentially requiring residents to utilize domestic water
for irrigation purposes every other day in order to conserve water. This year, Moses Lake is
experiencing a rise in temperatures earlier in the summer creating pressures on the city’s capacity
to maintain water reserves and supply the demand. It is expected this trend will continue for the
foreseeable future. As a result, at the June 22nd meeting of the City Council, a request was made
for staff to return with an Ordinance for the consideration of extending the period of time the
program operates. Ordinance 2980 extends the program to the months of June through
September.
Fiscal and Policy Implications
This would extend the period of time staff would enforce the measures.
Council Packet Attachments
A. Ordinance
Finance Committee Review
N/A
Page 2 of 2
Legal Review
Type of Document Title of Document Date Reviewed
Ordinance Water Conservation June 28, 2021
Options
Option Results
•Adopt Water conservation months would be extended
•Provide staff with changes Staff would make suggested changes
•Take no action Water conservation months would remain as
adopted in 2018
Action Requested
Based on Council direction in June, staff recommends adopting the Ordinance as presented.
ORDINANCE 2980
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE MOSES LAKE MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 13.07.010 TITLED “WATER
CONSERVATION, RESTRICTIONS, AND RATIONING”
Recitals:
1. The State of Washington is currently experiencing an unprecedented heat wave, record high
temperatures, and drought conditions; and
2.The need for water conservation is critical; and,
3.Restrictions on landscape irrigation are necessary in order to conserve water resources within
the City of Moses Lake.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOSES LAKE, WASHINGTON DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Moses Lake Municipal Code Section 13.07.010 titled “Water Conservation, Restrictions, and Rationing” is amended as follows:
13.07.010 Water Conservation, Restrictions, and Rationing.
A.Conservation. To designate the months of July and August June, July, August, and September,as mandatory months of water conservation. Addresses with odd numbers shall be allowed toirrigate and wash vehicles on odd-numbered calendar days. Addresses with even numbers will beallowed to irrigate and wash vehicles on even-numbered calendar days. Properties with irrigation
meters that are two inches (2") and larger will be restricted to irrigate from midnight to 8:00 a.m.or on a schedule approved by the Municipal Services Director. After a warning for the firstoffense, the second offense will incur a C-13 penalty as outlined in the Fee Schedule of Chapter1.08. A third offense will be subject to a C-7 penalty.
B.Notice to Begin Water Restrictions. The Municipal Services Director will place a notice in thelocal newspaper and provide a public announcement on the City’s social media as well as to theradio stations that are in the area. The notice will state the requirements for individuals ororganizations for irrigating and washing vehicles. Water restrictions will be effective immediately
upon publication and broadcast.
C.Restrictions. Water restrictions may be necessary when the Municipal Services Directordetermines that the City water system is insufficient to meet the forecasted demand for any waterdistribution zone of the City water system. Addresses with odd numbers shall be allowed to
irrigate and wash vehicles on odd-numbered calendar days. Addresses with even numbers will be
allowed to irrigate and wash vehicles on even-numbered calendar days. Properties with irrigationmeters that are two inches (2") and larger will be restricted to irrigate from midnight to 8:00 a.m.or on a schedule approved by the Municipal Services Director. After a warning for the firstoffense, the second offense will incur a C-13 penalty as outlined in the Fee Schedule of Chapter
1.08. A third offense will be subject to a C-7 penalty. Further infractions will be a C-4 penalty. D. Rationing. Water rationing will be implemented during emergency conditions as determined by the City Manager and Municipal Services Director.
E. Notice to End Water Restrictions and Rationing. The Municipal Services Director will place a notice in the local newspaper and provide a public announcement on the City’s social media as well as to the radio stations that are in the area that states water rationing is no longer required.
Section 2. Severability. If any section of this ordinance is found to be unconstitutional or invalid as written or as applied to any particular person or circumstances, no other section of the ordinance shall be deemed to be invalid, but rather, should be deemed to have been enacted independently and without regard to the section affected.
Section 3. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force five (5) days after its
passage and publication of its summary as provided by law.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Moses Lake, WA and signed by its Mayor on July 27, 2021.
_____________________________________ David Curnel, Mayor
ATTEST:
_______________________________________ Debbie Burke, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_______________________________________
Katherine L. Kenison, City Attorney Vote: Riggs Liebrecht Myers Jackson Curnel Eck Hankins
Aye
Nay Abstain
Absent
Date Published: August 2, 2021
Date Effective: August 7, 2021
Page 1 of 2
STAFF REPORT
To: Allison Williams, City Manager
From: Michael G. Moro, Public Works Division Director
Date: July 9, 2021
Proceeding Type: New Business
Subject: Ordinance – Amend MLMC 10.12 Parking Regulations
Legislative History:
• First Presentation: July 27, 2021
• Second Presentation:
• Action: Considering Adopting Ordinance
Overview
We received a request from JoBeth Carlson, Safety and Training Coordinator for Grant County
Transit Authority (GTA), regarding parking at the GTA Bus Stop No. 1147 on Juniper Drive, adjacent
to Confluence Health. This stop often requires the use of GTA’s ADA lift or ramp. The ADA lift or
ramp requires the GTA bus to park adjacent to the curb. Often, cars are parked in the GTA bus stop,
preventing the ADA lift or ramp from being utilized.
Staff discussed the area of “No Parking” with Confluence Health, who supports the request, but
requests to reduce the “No Parking” area as small as possible, and requests that this approval does
not inhibit future opportunities for traffic calming and pedestrian improvements.
Staff met GTA on site to review the area needed to park a bus to load with ADA passengers. Staff
believes that the area shown on the attached map is reduced as far as possible.
Attached is an ordinance that amends Moses Lake Municipal Code 10.12, entitled “Parking
Regulations”. This amendment would add no parking on a segment on Juniper Drive at GTA Bus
Stop No. 1147.
Fiscal and Policy Implications
The Street Division will incur costs of installing and maintaining “No Parking” signs and curb paint
on Juniper Drive.
Council Packet Attachments
A. Ordinance amending MLMC 10.12
Page 2 of 2
B. Map
C. Letter from GTA
D. Letter from Confluence Health
Finance Committee Review
N-A
Legal Review
N/A
Options
Option Results
• Approve the attached ordinance The City can proceed with installing “No Parking”
signs and painting the curb.
• Take no action. The status quo will be maintained and parking
will not be restricted on Juniper Drive.
Action Requested
Staff recommends City Council adopting the amendment as presented.
ORDINANCE NO. 2979
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING MOSES LAKE MUNICIPAL CODE
CHAPTER 10.12 TITLED "PARKING REGULATIONS"
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOSES LAKE, WASHINGTON DO ORDAIN AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Subsection 10.12.035(A) of the MLMC titled "Restricted Parking Areas" is amended as
follows:
A. Prohibited Parking: Parking is prohibited at all times on the following named streets:
Street Limits
Broadway Avenue South end to West Third Avenue, both sides
Balsam Street to Alder Street, northwest side
Block Street to north City limits, both sides
Canterbury Lane Wheeler Road to Terrace Avenue, both sides
Central Drive Grape Drive at signalized intersection to 80 feet west,
both sides
Clover Drive Yonezawa Boulevard to SR-17, both sides
Fairbanks Drive to Dahlia Drive, east side
Colonial Avenue Entire length, both sides
Coolidge Street Plum Street to 65 feet northeast, east side and Plum
Street to Terrace Avenue, west side
Division Street Belmont Street to south City limits, both sides
Nelson Road to south City limits, east side
Driggs Drive Broadway Avenue to Interlake Road, both sides
Fifth Avenue Division Street to Pioneer Way, both sides
Grape Drive Oregon Street to SR-17, both sides
Hamilton Road Wheeler Road to the north end, both sides
Hill Avenue Garden Drive to 30 feet west, north side
Ivy Street 270 feet south of B Street to 320 feet south of B Street,
north side
Juniper Drive Southeast side from the intersection at Plum Street 120
feet southwest of the intersection
Street Limits
Knolls Vista Drive Stratford Drive to Northshore Drive, both sides
Lakeland Drive East Oasis Circle to Nelson Road NE, east side
Lakeshore Drive 195 feet south of Wanapum Drive to the north end,
west side
245 feet south of the intersection of Wanapum Drive
to the north end, east side
Marna Drive Gibby Road to Burress Street, northwest (lake) side
350 feet westerly and southerly of the Central
Washington Railroad, both sides
Nelson Road Pioneer Way to 410 feet west of Pioneer Way, both
sides
Clover Drive to 200 feet west of Clover Drive, north
side
Division Street to Baker Street, north side
Division Street to Skyline Drive, south side
Ninth Avenue Balsam Street to 100 feet west of Balsam Street, north
side
Paxson Drive Valley Road to south end, both sides
Pilgrim Street Entire length, both sides
Pioneer Way Entire length, both sides, except for the following
locations:
1.275 feet south of Third Avenue to 500 feet south of
Third Avenue, west side
2.275 feet south of Fifth Avenue to 970 feet south of
Fifth Avenue
Plum Street Coolidge Drive to Juniper Drive, both sides
Road F Entire length, both sides
Roundabouts Entire roundabout
Stratford Road Entire length, both sides
Third Avenue Block Street to East Broadway, both sides
80 feet northeast of Fig
Valley Road Entire length, both sides
Wheeler Road Entire length, both sides
Yonezawa Boulevard Entire length, both sides
B. Two Hour Parking. Parking is prohibited for periods longer than two continuous hours,
between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., except Sundays, at the following locations:
Location Limits
Alder Street Broadway Avenue to Fourth Avenue, both sides
Ash Street Broadway Avenue to Fourth Avenue, both sides
Balsam Street Broadway Avenue to Third Avenue, both sides
Beech Street Third Avenue to Fourth Avenue, both sides
Broadway Avenue Alder Street to Gumwood Street, both sides
Division Street Broadway Avenue to Fourth Avenue, both
sides
Fourth Avenue to Sixth Avenue, west side
Dogwood Street Broadway Avenue to the northwesterly end, entire area
Elder Street Third Avenue to Fifth Avenue, southwest side
Elm Street Third Avenue to Fourth Avenue, both sides
Fifth Avenue Elder Street to Fig, southeast side
Fig Street Fifth Avenue to Wheeler Road, southwest side
Fourth Avenue Alder Street to Beech Street, both sides
Ivy Avenue 500 feet south of C Street to Lakeside Drive, west side
Sinkiuse Square Parking lot
Pioneer Way Parking areas between Third Avenue and Fifth
Avenue, northeasterly of Pioneer Way, and
southwesterly of Elder Street
Third Avenue Balsam Street to Gumwood Street, both sides
Pioneer Way to Elder Street, southeast side
C. School Bus Zones. Parking is prohibited during school hours at the following locations,
except for school buses:
Street Limits
Central Drive Reisner Road to 300 feet southwest of Reisner Road,
southeast side
Clover Drive Turnout lane 265 feet south of Fairbanks Drive to 530
feet south of Fairbanks Drive, west side Dogwood Street 30 feet southeast of Third Avenue to 150 feet southeast of Third Avenue, southwest side
Street Limits
Elm Street Third Avenue to Fourth, northeast side
Fourth Avenue Elm Street to 325 feet southwest of Elm Street, southeast side Ivy Avenue C Street to D Street, west side
Texas Street Michael Street to 255 feet northeast of Michael Street. Northwest side D. Loading Zones. Parking is prohibited at all times upon the following names streets, except
when loading or unloading personal property or passengers:
Street Limits Balsam Street 33 feet northwesterly of Seventh Avenue to 83 feet
northwesterly of Seventh Avenue, northeast side
Beech Street Fifth Avenue to 21 feet northwest of Fifth Avenue, northeast side
Chestnut Street 170 feet northwest of Seventh Avenue to 200 feet northwest of Seventh Avenue, southwest side
Northshore Drive 95 feet southwest of Mattson Drive to 175 feet southwest of Mattson Drive, northwest side
Yonezawa Boulevard 121 feet westerly of the centerline of the access into the Grant County Skill Center to 180 feet west, north side E. Accessible Parking. Parking is prohibited at all times upon the following named streets;
except for vehicles with special parking privileges from the Washington State Department
of Licensing, which vehicles are authorized to park for no more than two (2) consecutive hours, and which vehicles must display all special parking privileges as required by law: Street Limits
A Street Marked accessible parking space 110 feet west of Lakeside Drive, south side Ash Street First two (2) marked accessible parking spaces
southeast of Third Avenue, northeast side
Beech Street First marked accessible space northwest of Fifth Avenue, southeast side
Gumwood Street First two (2) marked accessible parking spaces
northwest of Fourth Avenue, northeast side Sixth Avenue Two (2) marked accessible parking spaces at the curb ramp 123’ southwest of Beech Street, southeast side
Street Limits
Third Avenue First marked accessible parking space southwest of Alder Street, northwest side
F. School Loading Zones. Parking is prohibited during school hours, except for loading and
unloading property or passengers, at the following locations: Street Limits
Knolls Vista Drive Ridge Road to 325 feet southwest of Ridge Road,
northwest side (adjacent to Knolls Vista School) Nelson Road Turnout lane 310 feet west of SR-17 to 635 west of SR-17, south side
Sharon Avenue Monroe Street to 1,120 feet east of Monroe Street, both sides G. GTA and People for People Bus Stops. Parking is prohibited at the following locations,
except for GTA and People for People buses:
Street Limits
Alder Street 100 feet northwest of Fourth Avenue to 135 feet northwest of Fourth Avenue, northeast side Fifth Avenue Turnout lane northeast of Balsam Street, southeast side
Juniper Drive 102 feet north of curb on Hill Avenue to 189 feet north
of curb on Hill Avenue, west side Third Avenue 150 feet northeast of Elder Street to 200 feet northeast of Elder Street, northwest side
Section 2. Severability. If any section of this ordinance is found to be unconstitutional or invalid as
written or as applied to any particular person or circumstances, no other section of the ordinance
shall be deemed to be invalid, but rather, should be deemed to have been enacted independently
and without regard to the section affected.
Section 3. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force five (5) days after its passage and
publication of its summary a as provided by law.
Adopted by the City Council and signed by its Mayor on July 27, 2021.
_______________________________
David Curnel, Mayor
ATTEST:
___________________________________
Debbie Burke, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
______________________________________
Katherine Kenison, City Attorney
Vote: Riggs Liebrecht Myers Jackson Curnel Eck Hankins
Aye Nay
Abstain
Absent Date Published: August 2, 2021 Date Effective: August 7, 2021
»V r.rg"lmmiiatniwia«HP-!kAJ>
v7\2BJ\ 1NCr^'^Shc^vU citS-r^UT'^^ 1 g n V 'I'-c ,\\ o &ci;' ebTIfl-te'"' H^r-lio n , r€'i^'^S''C£.■■h '^^A-f-ende-d t'uv'co r Cir tiv>£. Oh■■a-f-'r^fOr'i^'''^ ■hJ ^ •G'TA >iQiV LoC,Ar!Oi\'
Mike MoroFrom: JoBeth Carlson <jobethc@granttransit.com>Sent: Monday, June 14, 2021 5:28 PMTo: Mike MoroSubject: GTA Bus Stop Request for No Parking Zone.Attachments: 20210614_152604.pdf; Confluence Bus Stop.jpg[Warning! This message was sent from outside your organization and we are unable to Allow sender I Block senderverify the sender. 'Good evening Mike,Attached is the map you requested. This bus stop serves our passengers who use Confluence Health and anyof the surrounding businesses. Our buses have been having trouble getting to one of the two concrete squares{shown in attached picture) that help to make this stop ADA accessible due to cars continually parking in thebus stop zone. We are requesting a yellow curb no parking zone for this bus stop. GTA's sign number 1147.Today as I was measuring the area for the yellow zone, a customer who uses a mobility device approached meto ask if I was going to do something about cars parking at this bus stop. She told me that on several occasionsthe driver has not been able to reach the curb to use the ADA Lift or Ramp when she needed to board the bus.A significant amount of our passengers who board or alight the bus at this location use some form of amobility device and need to be able to use the concrete area to board the bus as their device will not work inthe gravel areas surrounding the stop.We are requesting that the yellow area start on the north side of the driveway of the COVID testing parkingarea (on Juniper) that is 102 feet from the curb at the intersection of Hill and Juniper (northwest corner)heading North to 189 feet from the same curb.Please let me know if you need any more information from me. Please also send me the information causingconcerns at our stop on Marina Dr.Thank you for your time,J&B&t^CcwliOYVSafety & Training CoordinatorGrant Transit Authority(509) 765-0898 ext. IllFax: (509) 398-9510www.aranttransit.comEmail to and from this address may be subject to public disclosure under Washington s Public RecordAct.
oConfluence-^HEALTHMoses Lake ClinicB40E HillAveMoses Lake WA 98837S09 764 6400conlluencehealth.orgJune 28,2021City of Moses LakeMichael G. Moro, PEP.O. Box 1579Moses Lake, WA 98837To Whom It May Concern:Please accept this letter as an Indication of Confluence Health's support for Grant Transit Authority'srequest to create a no parking zone at bus stop 1147 on Juniper Drive in Moses Lake.The attached photo indicates the zone would stretch 87 feet from the parking lot access of ConfluenceHealth's 988 Juniper property to a point North of bus stop 1147. We would ask to make this distance onthe north of the bus stop sign as short as safely possible to maintain bus access to the curb yet providestreet parking for patrons of the area businesses.Confluence Health does not want this change to Inhibit future street alterations which may directlyaffect bus stop 1147. Initial correspondence between Confluence and the City have taken placeregarding future Improvements along Juniper to provide traffic calming measures to that section ofroad in order to create a more pedestrian friendly layout.Sincerely,Gregg Fletcher MT(ASCP)Vice PresidentConfluence HealthMoses Lake
Page 1 of 2
STAFF REPORT
To: Allison Williams, City Manager
From: Richard A. Law PE, City Engineer
Date: July 21, 2021
Proceeding Type: New Business
Subject: Grove Estates Major Plat #2 Group B Water System
Legislative History:
• First Presentation: July 27, 2021
• Second Presentation:
• Action: Motion
Overview
In December of 2016, the Moses Lake City Council adopted a policy allowing group “B” water
systems inside the Urban Growth Area (UGA). A group “B” water system is a public water system
constructed to serve from 3 to 14, inclusive, residential services regardless of the number of
people; or constructed to serve an average non-residential population of less than twenty-five per
day for sixty or more days within a calendar year; or any number of people for less than sixty days
within a calendar year.
The Washington State Department of Health, based on the Municipal Water Law, required the City
to establish an RSA and include a duty to serve requirement in our Water System Plan. The duty to
serve requires the City to provide all new development within the RSA with potable water.
Exceptions to this requirement must be within a written policy. The main purpose of the duty to
serve is to require new development to connect to the City's water system to control the number
of new small water systems. That way, the City's water system will be extended into the RSA in an
orderly way, and when the property annexes it will already be served with city water.
Wayne Ostler, representing Rick Penhallurick, has submitted a request to create a group “B” water
system to serve a proposed 7 lot subdivision located near Grove Road and Elgin Road in Cascade
Valley.
The approved policy states to apply for a group “B” water system within the city retail service area
the applicant shall provide a written request to the Municipal Services Director. The applicant has
provided the written request and included all the required information for a complete application.
Fiscal and Policy Implications
New Group B public water systems are allowed to be created in the City's RSA if they meet all the
following criteria:
Page 2 of 2
A. The parcel is designated as residential on the Future Land Use Map in the City's Comprehensive
Plan.
B. The parcel is more than 1,000 feet from the City limits, except for that portion of Cascade Valley
located south of the east-west center section lines of Sections 16 and 17, Township 19 North,
Range 28 East.
C. The parcel is more than 1,320 feet from for the nearest City water main.
D. There are adequate water rights available; or the applicant owns a legal exempt well sufficient
to serve the proposed use, as determined by the City; and E. The proposed Group B water system
will meet all the Grant County Health District and Department of Health's regulations.
F. The property owner(s) signs an extra territorial agreement.
G. The property owner signs a covenant to extend the city water main.to and through the property
and connect to the city water main when the city water system is extended to within 660 feet of
the original property boundary.
Council Packet Attachments
A. Group “B” Water Policy
B. Application Letter
C. Site Map
Finance Committee Review – N-A
Legal Review N-A
Options
Option Results
• Authorize as presented Applicant will be allowed to create a group “B”
water system in the city “RSA”.
• Provide staff with changes Staff will make the requested changes and
represent the staff report to council.
• Take no action. The applicant will not be allowed to operate a
group “B” water system in the city “RSA”.
Action Requested
Staff recommends Council authorize the creation of group “B” water system to serve a proposed
7 lot subdivision located near Grove Road and Elgin Road in Cascade Valley.
Page 1 of 2
STAFF REPORT
To: Allison Williams, City Manager
From: Cindy Jensen, Finance Director
Date: July 21, 2021
Proceeding Type: New Business
Subject: Lakeshore Drive Covenant Payment Arrangement
Legislative History:
• First Presentation: July 27, 2021
• Second Presentation:
• Action: Motion
Overview
The City called the covenants due to improve Lakeshore Drive. We sent out letters to the
participating property owners in February, 2019, however, it was determined that the payments
would not be due until the project was completed. We are now sending letters to notify the
property owners that the covenant is due in full. When the letters were first mailed out, we were
asked if the City would make payment arrangements, and Council directed that we research that
issue. The attached payment arrangement contract is a draft of the form that we will have
available if requested.
We are proposing to set the interest rate at Prime plus 2% (currently a total of 5.25%), which is
typical for this type of loan. For ease of processing, we are fixing the interest rate on the date the
agreement is signed, so the payments will remain the same, and there will not be interest rate risk
for the property owners. This agreement offers the choice to pay monthly or annually over 10
years, with no pre-payment penalty. Two out of the original fifteen property owners have already
paid their assessment in full, so the payment request is going out to the remaining thirteen
property owners. The covenants range in amount from a low of $3,217 to a high of $12,621.
Fiscal and Policy Implications
Even though the amounts of the potential payment contracts are within the City Manager’s
approval authority limit, we feel it is important that Council approves the program.
Council Packet Attachments
A. Payment Agreement Template
Page 2 of 2
Finance Committee Review – n/a
Legal Review
Type of Document Title of Document Date Reviewed
Covenant Lakeshore Drive Street
Improvements
July 20, 2021
Options
Option Results
• Authorize as presented Action would allow Finance to process
payment arrangements.
• Provide staff with changes
• Take no action The covenants would be due in full, and
Finance would follow-up any non-payment
with appropriate collection action.
Action Requested
Staff recommends Council authorize staff to execute Lakeshore Drive payment arrangements as
requested by property owners using the template as to form.
STREET IMPROVEMENT COVENANT REPAYMENT AGREEMENT Page 1 of 2
AGREEMENT FOR TIME PAYMENTS BETWEEN CITY OF MOSES LAKE, WASHINGTON,
AND ______________________________, OWNER(S) OF REAL PROPERTY SUBJECT
TO LAKESHORE DRIVE STREET IMPROVEMENT COVENANTS
1. Preamble. THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into by and between The City of Moses
Lake, a municipal corporation of the State of Washington, herein known as “City,”
and____________, owner of the real property identified below, herein known as “Owner.”
2. Recitals.
2.1 Owner owns the following real property within the City which is the subject of
recorded covenants for future Lakeshore Drive street improvements:
[insert legal description]
2.2 A covenant running with the land for the ______________Plat was executed by the
developer and recorded with the Grant County Auditor. The covenant is for future Lakeshore
Drive street improvements in lieu of making these improvements prior to filing the plat.
2.3 The City Council authorized staff to call in the covenant at the February 24, 2019, City
Council meeting. In March 2019, letters were sent to all affected property owners advising them
of their impending obligation to pay for the street improvements.
2.4 The City has completed the street improvements from 2019-2021, and the project was
accepted as complete by City Council at their April 13, 2021, meeting.
2.5 The Owner is responsible for paying to the City a total amount of $______________.
3. Agreement. In consideration of the mutual benefits described herein, the parties agree as
follows:
3.1 Purpose. The purpose of this Agreement is to permit the Owner to pay the City over
time for Owner’s share of the street improvement costs.
3.2 Payment Plan. The Owner will make yearly (monthly) payments over a 10-year period
and the outstanding balance will bear interest at a rate of the Wall Street Journal Prime Rate as of
the date of contract execution plus 2% per annum. The total yearly (monthly) payment is
$_____________.
Each monthly payment is due by the first of the month. The first payment being due and
payable on or before ___________, 20__, and subsequent payments due and payable on the first
day of each following month until the entire past due balance is retired. A late fee of $30 will be
added to the following monthly billing whenever the City does not receive the payment within 30
days after the due date.
Each yearly payment is due to the City by July 1st of each year following the execution of
this Agreement until the total amount is paid. A late fee of $30 will be added to the yearly
STREET IMPROVEMENT COVENANT REPAYMENT AGREEMENT Page 2 of 2
payment that is due whenever the City does not receive the payment within 30 days after the
due date.
Owner may prepay without penalty.
In the event the City does not receive a scheduled payment within two months after its
due date, then this Agreement shall automatically terminate without further notice and shall be
null and void. The entire remaining amount, including late fees, will then be immediately due
and owing to the City. The City may pursue any remedies available at law to collect the
outstanding balance.
3.3 Term of Agreement. This Agreement and all obligations contained herein shall
terminate upon payment in full of the entire amount due to the City.
3.4 Collection Costs. Owner shall bear all costs and expenses incurred by the City in
enforcing the terms of this agreement or in the collection of the amounts due hereunder,
including reasonable attorney’s fees.
3.5 Entire Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the
Customer and the City with respect to the subject matter hereof and supersedes any and all prior
agreements and understandings, oral or written, with respect to such subject matter. Any
alteration or amendment or modification of this Agreement shall be valid only if set forth in
writing and signed by both parties hereto.
3.6 Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by laws of the State of Washington
and venue of any action shall be in Grant County, Washington.
3.7 Severability. In the event any portion of this Agreement is determined to be void or
unenforceable, such provision shall not be severable and will affect the validity of the remaining
portion of this Agreement.
3.8 Time. Time is of the essence with respect to this Agreement.
The parties below execute this Agreement, which shall become effective on the last date
entered below.
CITY OF MOSES LAKE
By:
(signature)
Print Name: __________________
Its: Finance Director
DATE: _______________, 2021.
OWNER
By:
(signature)
_______________________________
Print Name
By:____________________________
(signature)
_______________________________
Print Name
DATE: _______________, 2021.
Page 1 of 2
STAFF REPORT
To: Allison Williams, City Manager
From: Cindy Jensen, Finance Director
Date: July 22, 2021
Proceeding Type: New Business
Subject: Accepting the State Auditor’s Office Report on the 2019 Financial
Statements
Legislative History:
• First Presentation: July 27, 2021
• Second Presentation:
• Action: Motion
Overview
Attached for Council’s information is the Washington State Auditor’s Office (SAO) report regarding
their examination (audit) of the City of Moses Lake for the period January 1 through December 31,
2019. SAO issued one report on Financial Statements, which includes two areas of review and
corresponding two “reports”, as noted below:
1. Financial Reporting, with respect to:
(a) Evaluation of internal controls
(b) Compliance with laws and regulations
2. Financial Statements (and related disclosures and internal controls)
SAO also performs an Accountability Audit bi-annually which would result in a separate report.
Because of staffing shortages 2019 was postponed, so this report was not prepared.
We did not receive a finding in this report, which was the first time in several years. This report
includes our response to the prior year finding, and the auditors agreed that we had made enough
improvement to consider the finding “fully corrected”.
As stated in the enclosed auditor’s reports, the Auditor gave the City’s Financial Statements an
Unmodified Opinion (i.e.: clean opinion with no qualifications – the highest possible rating).
Due to the size and complexity of documents included in the audit report, only the auditors written
reports and comments have been included in the Council packet; however, the entire report –
including the financial statements themselves and the related footnotes, Management Discussion
Page 2 of 2
and Analysis and supplemental information - may be found on the State Auditor’s website. This is
the direct link to the full report:
https://portal.sao.wa.gov/ReportSearch/Home/ViewReportFile?isFinding=false&arn=1028803
If you are searching the website, go into sao.wa.gov, Click the tab “Audit Reports” then enter “City
of Moses Lake” and simply select “Search Audit Reports” towards the bottom of the screen.
(Additionally, the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) is posted on the City’s website. To
access the CAFR on-line, go to “www.cityofml.com”; then go to “ Departments” at the top of the
page and click on “Finance”; on the Left-hand side click on “Financial Reports”, and then either
“Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports” for the full CAFR, or “Audited Financial Statements” for
the SAO report.)
The Finance Department would like to thank the SAO for their assistance in reviewing the
operations of the City - we value their insight and appreciate their comments and
recommendations for improvement.
Fiscal and Policy Implications
It is a requirement of our bond issues that we report our financial condition. This report has been
published for the investment community on the Electronic Municipal Market Access (EMMA)
website.
Council Packet Attachments
A. Audit Report
Finance Committee Review
July 13, 2021
Legal Review N-A
Options
Option Results
• Accept as presented Council is acknowledging receipt of the SAO
audit report.
• Take no action The report would be unchanged.
Action Requested
Staff recommends that City Council move to accept the Financial Statements Audit Report for the
City of Moses Lake for the year-ended December 31, 2019.