Cashmere council tables Crunch Pak overhead pipeline proposal, seeks design and agreement revisions

CASHMERE — On Jan. 12, the Cashmere City Council voted to table a proposal from Crunch Pak that would allow the company to build an overhead pipeline across a city right-of-way, saying members want the project’s design and its long-term agreement with the city reworked before considering approval.

The project would allow Crunch Pak to move apple byproduct between facilities using an overhead pipe rather than moving the material back and forth across the street with forklifts, a change the company says would reduce vehicle traffic and improve efficiency at the site.

Director of Operations Steve Croci told the council that routing the line underground had been ruled out because of depth and utility conflicts, making an overhead structure the only practical option. “To get under everything that’s already there, they’d have to go so deep it just doesn’t pencil out,” Croci said. “This is really the only feasible way to do it.”

While councilmembers said they were supportive of Crunch Pak and understood the operational benefits, much of the discussion focused on what the structure would look like in a highly visible part of town and how it would affect the city’s streetscape.

“If we’re going to put something like this in a public space, it needs to look intentional,” Councilmember Jeff Johnson said. “It can’t just be a piece of industrial equipment hanging over the street.”

Several members said they would like to see design elements added to make the structure feel like a planned part of the corridor rather than a purely functional installation. Suggestions during the discussion ranged from architectural treatments to lighting or other features that would help the structure blend into the area.

Johnson also raised concerns about language in the proposed agreement that would allow the structure to remain in place indefinitely. “Very few things the city agrees to should be in perpetuity,” he said. “There should be a term, and there should be a chance for a future council to take another look at it.”

Councilmembers also questioned whether any support columns would be placed on city property and, if so, whether the agreement should include compensation or additional conditions for use of the public right-of-way.

Johnson emphasized that the council is not trying to block the project. “This is a good company and a good project,” he said. “We just need to make sure that whatever goes in our right-of-way meets our standards, both in how it looks and how it’s handled long-term.”

Members said they would like to see clearer visual renderings of the proposal, more detail about materials and finishes, and revisions to the agreement that address both aesthetics and the length of time the structure would be allowed to remain in place.

By a unanimous vote, the council agreed to table the proposal and ask staff and the company to return with a revised version that reflects the concerns raised during the discussion.

Andrew Simpson: 509-433-7626 or andrew@ward.media