The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About02-11-2026 YPC PacketThe meeting will also be recorded and posted on the Y-PAC website. Visit the Yakima Planning Commission webpage for more information, including agenda packets and minutes. DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Bill Preston, P.E., Director Trevor Martin, AICP, Manager Planning Division 129 North Second Street, 2nd Floor Yakima, Washington 98901 Phone (509) 575-6183 • Fax (509) 575-6105 • Email: ask.planning@yakimawa.gov CITY OF YAKIMA PLANNING COMMISSION Yakima City Hall Council Chambers 129 N 2nd Street, Yakima, WA 98901 February 11, 2026 3:00 p.m. – 5:00 p.m. YPC MEMBERS: Chair Mary Place, Vice-Chair Anne Knapp, Jeff Baker, Roy Gondo, Charles Hitchcock, Leanne Hughes-Mickel, Colleda Monick, Philip Ostriem, Kevin Rangel, Frieda Stephens, and Shelley White City Council Liaison: Matt Brown, Felisa Gonzalez CITY PLANNING STAFF: Bill Preston (Community Development Director), Lisa Maxey (Admin. Assistant), Trevor Martin (Planning Manager), Eric Crowell (Senior Planner), Jason Radtke (Senior Planner), Connor Kennedy (Associate Planner), Eva Rivera (Planning Technician), Irene Linos (Department Assistant) AGENDA I.Call to Order II.Roll Call III.Staff Announcements IV.Approval of Minutes – January 28, 2026, Meeting V.Public Comment VI.Review Housing Element (without BERK) VII.Other Business VIII.Meeting Recap IX.Adjourn Next Meeting: February 25, 2026 - 1 - 01/28/2026 YPC Minutes City of Yakima Planning Commission (YPC) Meeting Minutes January 28, 2026 Call to Order Chair Place called the meeting to order at 3:04 p.m. Roll Call YPC Members Present: Vice-Chair Charles Hitchcock, Jeff Baker, Roy Gondo, Leanne Hughes-Mickel, Anne Knapp, Colleda Monick, Kevin Rangel, Shelley White YPC Members Absent: Chair Mary Place, Frieda Stephens, Philip Ostriem Staff Present: Trevor Martin; Planning Manager, Jason Radtke; Senior Planner, Eva Rivera; Planning Technician City Council Liaison: Matt Brown, Felisa Gonzalez Vice‑Chair Hitchcock welcomed Councilwoman Gonzalez to her first Planning Commission meeting. Approval of Minutes from December 10, 2025, and January 14, 2026- Commissioner Hughes- Mickel moved to approve the meeting minutes from December 10, 2025, Commissioner Baker seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. Commissioner Gondo moved to approve the meeting minutes from January 14, 2026, Commissioner Rangel seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. Staff Announcements – - Trevor announced that BERK consultants would be joining virtually today Public Comment – None Public Hearing TXT#003-25- Trevor reviewed the staff report on the text amendments. The commission held a discussion on the recommended changes. Commissioner Baker moved to classify maintenance and repair shops in the RD zoning district as a Type 1 use. Commissioner Rangel seconded the motion. Following discussion, Commissioner Knapp moved to amend the motion to include paint and body repair shops as Type 1 uses. Commissioner Baker seconded. The commission entered further discussion. Roll Call Vote – Amendment A roll call vote was conducted on the amendment to add paint and body repair shops to Commissioner Baker’s motion: White - Yes Rangel - Yes Monick - No Knapp – Yes Hughes-Mickel - Yes Gondo – No Baker – Yes Hitchcock - Yes Totals - Yes: 6 - No: 2 Outcome The amendment passed. 2 of 138 - 2 - 01/28/2026 YPC Minutes Roll Call Vote – Amended Motion A roll call vote was conducted on the amended motion to classify maintenance and repair shops, as well as paint and body repair shops, as Type 1 uses in the RD zoning district. White – Yes Rangel – Yes Knapp – Yes Hughes-Mickel – Yes Monick – No Gondo - No Baker – Yes Hitchcock – Yes Totals - Yes: 6 - No: 2 Outcome The amended motion passed. Discussion continued over the recommended changes. Commissioner White read a statement she wrote. Commissioner Monick moved based on the testimony and evidence presented during this afternoon’s public hearing, that the City of Yakima Planning staff modify the draft language to include the changes noted in the minutes of this afternoon’s public hearing, and with these changes move that the Planning Commission draft findings of fact and forward a recommendation of approval to the Yakima City Council. Commissioner Baker second. Roll Call Vote White – Yes Rangel – Yes Monick – Yes Knapp – Yes Hughes- Mickel – No Gondo – No Baker – Yes Hitchcock – Yes Totals - Yes: 6 - No: 2 Outcome The motion passed. Draft Housing Chapter – Consultants presented a PowerPoint outlining the changes made to the Housing Chapter. Discussion followed regarding the proposed revisions in the draft Housing Chapter. Due to time constraints, the Commission was unable to review all of the proposed changes, and the remaining items will be reviewed at a future meeting. 3 of 138 - 3 - 01/28/2026 YPC Minutes Due to time constraints, the remaining items on the agenda were not taken up. Other Business – Commissioner Monick distributed a handout from the Department of Commerce to the Commission. The handout was entered into the record. Vice-Chair Hitchcock motion to schedule a future study session focused more specifically on possibilities and limitations and options available within the RD section. Commissioner Gondo second. The motion carried unanimously. Meeting Recap – Action Items & Decisions: • Remaining portions of the draft chapters in the packet will be reviewed at a future meeting • Establish a method for capturing and tracking action items • Request for improved proofreading for Comp Plan draft from BERK • The Land Capacity Analysis currently under review by the Transpo group will be provided as soon as it’s ready. Outstanding Action Items • Transit ridership information will be provided • An EV charging station policy will be integrated into the Comprehensive Plan. • The elements of the Comp Plan rough drafts will be reviewed in January or February • Implementation measures in the Comp Plan. • Alphabetize Table 4.1 by category • Pg. 23 parking space extend to 9ft • A link of the survey will be emailed • The commission will go through the comprehensive plan page by page • The Land Capacity Analysis currently under review by the Transpo group will be provided • A new section for congregant living will be added to the code and reviewed by the commission. Future Items • Staff will notify and update the Commission when the countywide policies are completed. • Downtown Action Plan - staff will determine if the Planning Commission will be involved • Staff will coordinate a future roundtable with experts to discuss design standards A motion to adjourn to February 11, 2026, was passed with a unanimous vote. The meeting adjourned at approximately 4:58 p.m. Chair Place Date This meeting was filmed by YPAC. Minutes for this meeting submitted by: Eva Rivera, Planning Technician. 4 of 138 City of Yakima Comprehensive Plan 2050 DRAFT January 2026 5 of 138 City of Yakima Comprehensive Plan 2050 Housing DRAFT January 21, 2026 3-2 3 Housing 3.1 Introduction The future demand for housing is Housing affordability is a growing challenge in Yakima. aA crucial element of this plan is There is need to accommodating the current and future housing needs of Yakima’s population, including demands needs in for a variety of housing types and affordability levels. This Housing Element contains the goals, policies, and implementation actions that will help Yakima achieve high quality, affordable, and equitable housing for today’s generations forward. The City of Yakima acknowledges that the marketplace will generally provide adequate housing to meet demand for those in the upper economic brackets, but that some combination of appropriately zoned land, regulatory incentives, housing funding and rehabilitation programs, and innovative planning techniques will be necessary to meet the needs of middle- and lower-income residents. Understanding this challenge, and the current housing trends, helps the City plan for the future. New State Laws under GMA Since Yakima’s previous comprehensive plan update in 2017, the Washington State Legislature adopted several significant changes to the GMA goals and requirements for housing. Exhibit 3-1 summarizes the major legislative changes that apply to Yakima. The City is addressing each requirement in this plan and in its development regulations. See the Technical Analysis for a details. Housing Goal- Growth Management Act Plan for and accommodate housing Encourage the availability of affordable housing to all economic segments of the population of this state, promote a variety of residential densities and housing types, and encourage preservation of existing housing stock. (RCW 36.70A.020 (4)) 6 of 138 City of Yakima Comprehensive Plan 2050 Housing DRAFT January 21, 2026 3-3 Exhibit 3-13-13-1. New GMA Requirements Related to Housing that Apply to Yakima Legislation (Year) Summary of New Requirements HB 1220 (2021)Affordable Housing, Displacement, and Racially Disparate Impacts. Requires local jurisdictions to plan for and accommodate housing affordable to all economic segments of the population, including moderate, low, very low, and extremely low income, as well as emergency shelters and permanent supportive housing. Mandates that comprehensive plans identify land use capacity, barriers, and programs to address housing shortage. Requires jurisdictions to assess and address racially disparate impacts, displacement, and exclusion in housing, identify areas at high risk of displacement, and establish anti- displacement policies. HB 1337 (2023) ADUs. At least two ADUs (both attached, both detached, or one attached and one detached) per lot must be allowed in residential zones in urban growth areas (UGAs) within all zones in urban growth areas where single family homes are permitted. Applicable standards for Yakima include: Two ADUs are allowed per lot ADUs do not require owner occupancy ADUs allow separate sale Parking requirements Maximum size limit shall be no less than 1,000 sq-ft Setback should not be more restrictive than the that of primary units (can be on lot lines in certain circumstances). Height limit at least 24 ft. ESHB 1293 (2023) Design Review. May not impose aesthetic standards or requirements for design review that are more restrictive for ADUs than those for principal units. Coordinated development concept exampleHow are GMA requirements addressed in Yakima’s Comprehensive Plan? Includes a focal point, a connected circulation system, careful siting of parking areas, and a mix of uses.See the Introduction chapter in Volume 2 for a more detailed summary of all new GMA requirements and corresponding updates to Yakima’s Comprehensive Plan and development code. 7 of 138 City of Yakima Comprehensive Plan 2050 Housing DRAFT January 21, 2026 3-4 HB 1110 (2023) Middle Housing. Requires cities to allow a broader range of housing types in areas that previously allowed predominantly detached homes. For Yakima (a Tier 1 City of at least 75,00) must include: At least six of the nine middle housing types (duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes, fiveplexes, sixplexes, townhouses, stacked flats, courtyard apartments, cottage housing.) 4 units per lot (6 units per lot near major transit) HB 1998 (2024)Co-housing. Requires communities to allow co-living on any lot located within a UGA that allows at least six multifamily residential units, including mixed use zoning. This includes any lots required to allow six middle housing units. SB 5258 (2023) & SB 5559 (2025) Unit Lot Subdivision. SB 5258 requires local governments incorporate provisions related to “unit lot subdivisions” into their short plat regulations. SB 5559 clarified that only cities and town in counties planning under the GMA must adopt the new unit lot subdivision regulations. HB 1754 (2020)Limitations on Regulating Temporary Housing Provided by Religious Organizations. Places new limitations on the ability of jurisdictions to regulate temporary housing for unhoused individuals on religious organization property. Allows jurisdictions to require a religious organization hosting the homeless and the agency managing the hosting to enter into a memorandum of understanding to protect the public health and safety of residents. HB 1377 (2019)Density Bonus for Affordable Housing for Religious Organizations. Require fully planning cities and counties provide a density bonus for low-income affordable housing on properties owned by religious organizations. A density bonus is a zoning tool that allows a developer to build higher, more units, or with more floor space than normally permitted in that area SB 6015 (2024)Residential Parking. Establishes new rules for residential parking standards, including limitations on what can be required to meet minimum parking requirements. It provides various ways to count parking such as enclosed of unenclosed, tandem, grass block paved surface etc. 8 of 138 City of Yakima Comprehensive Plan 2050 Housing DRAFT January 21, 2026 3-5 SB 5184 (2025)Parking Reform. Reduces or eliminates parking requirements for certain residential uses and commercial spaces in cities with a population of 30,000 or more. Yakima must adopt this by January 2027. 3.2 Housing Today and Tomorrow Conditions and Trends Most of Yakima’s Housing Stock is Detached Single Family Homes There were 38,584 housing units in Yakima in 2024. Around 61 percent of these units were single-family detached homes, as shown in Exhibit 3-2. Around 60 percent of structures in 2015 were single family detached units, and another 4 percent of structures were single-family attached units. Only 7.4 percent of structures had 20 or more units (ACS, 2015). Yakima’s housing structures are predominantly one to four bedroom units, with a combined 78.3 percent of units falling into these categories. Between 2000 and 2015, total units in Yakima grew by around 23.5% from 28,643 to 35,376 (ACS, 2015). Overall growth in units in Yakima between 2000 and 2016 included an increase in 7.29 square miles (4,813 acres) from annexation. , Small multifamily structures like duplexes, triplexes, and quad-plexes make up about 16 percent of the housing stock, while larger multifamily structures like apartment buildings make up 18 percent. About two thirds of all housing units have either two or three bedrooms (U.S. Census Bureau, 2022). 9 of 138 City of Yakima Comprehensive Plan 2050 Housing DRAFT January 21, 2026 3-6 Exhibit 3-23-3-3-1. Housing Inventory by Type in City of Yakima, 2024 Source: Washington Office of Financial Management, 2024; BERK Consulting, 2025.About Half of Yakima’s Residents Are Renters In 2014, an estimated 54 percent of units were owner-occupied, while 46 percent of units were renter occupied. Based on Vacancy Rates, Yakima’s Housing Supply is Low Vacancy rates, as an indicator of housing markets, can provide information about how supply and demand are interacting and how the market and prices may react. In 2014, vacancy in Yakima was around 4.9 percent for renters and 2.0 percent for owners. More recent 2016 data showed a tightening of vacancy rates, particularly for renters, of 2.0 percent. Several unit types (1 and 2 bedroom) show a vacancy rate of 1 percent. (Runstad Center for Real Estate Studies / University of Washington, spring 2016) Yakima Needs more Housing Diversity Coordinated development concept exampleWhere are different housing types located? Includes a focal point, a connected circulation system, careful siting of parking areas, and a mix of uses.See the Land Use chapter in Volume 2 for detailed maps of existing land uses within each council district. These maps show the location of parcels with single family homes and multifamily homes. 10 of 138 City of Yakima Comprehensive Plan 2050 Housing DRAFT January 21, 2026 3-7 Over 60% of all housing in the City of Yakima are single-family homes. Not all households require, or can afford, that much space. For example, 30% of all households in Yakima are individuals living alone. Yet only 6% of housing units in Yakima are studios and only 11% have just one bedroom. Increasing the diversity of housing options available will increase housing supply and provide more choices for residents seeking more affordable housing that meets their current needs. Most of Yakima’s Housing Stock is Old In 2014, only 10 percent As of 2025, about 20 percent of residential structures had been were built after since 2000, and 50.1 percent nearly two-thirds (63.1 percent) of units were built 40 or more years ago,.Since housing units generally have a functional life of around 40 years, those units older than 40 years require additional investments. Preserving existing housing is important to maintain affordability. A map of structure age (both residential and commercial) is shown in Exhibit 3-2; the vast majority of structures in the city are residential with older stock focused in eastern Yakima. 11 of 138 City of Yakima Comprehensive Plan 2050 Housing DRAFT January 21, 2026 3-8 Exhibit 3-33-33-33-2. Year Structure Built for Residential Structures Map Source: City of Yakima GIS 20162025; BERK, 2025. The overall age of housing structures is indicative of structure quality, supported by national research that shows a negative correlation between the age of a unit and its condition. In addition, the older housing in Yakima is generally not aligned well with the current and trending household needs in terms of household size, the high number of households without children, relatively low income levels, and the age demographics of the city. Alternately, Yakima’s current population indicates an increasing need for more small houses, townhouses, multifamily, and accessory dwelling units. 12 of 138 City of Yakima Comprehensive Plan 2050 Housing DRAFT January 21, 2026 3-9 Low Average Household Size Within Yakima city limits, average household sizes in 2015 were an estimated 2.68 persons per household, and average family sizes were an estimated 3.30 person per family (ACS, 2015). Yakima has among the lowest average household sizes in the county (see chart to the right). Yakima is a Community for the Young and Old Population The City’s population is getting older on average, with more retirees than any other community in Yakima County. Yet, the City is also seeing an increasing number of children, particularly in east Yakima. Both seniors and children grew by 5 percent between 2000 and 2010 citywide. The City needs to address housing and services for older generations such as aging in place, health, and mobility. The City also needs to address needs of younger residents such as education and recreation. The median age in Yakima in 2015 was 33.2, which has increased slightly over the previous 15 years. An estimated 30.6 percent of the population in 2014 was under 20 years of age, and an estimated 13.8 percent was 65 and older. Yakima Has Many Young Residents but the Majority of Yakima Households Have No Children As of 2014, the City of Yakima contained approximately 33,074 households. About 29 percent of households consist of single persons, and another 24 percent of householders are married with no children at home; this means over half of the City’s households have single or coupled adults and no children. About 19 percent of households consist of married persons with children, and another 14 percent are households with single men or single women with children at home. Last, 14 percent of households are classified as other households (e.g. non- married households without children). Future housing opportunities would need to address both small units for those living alone as well as larger houses for families with children. 13 of 138 City of Yakima Comprehensive Plan 2050 Housing DRAFT January 21, 2026 3-10 Exhibit 3-1 City of Yakima Household Characteristics: 2014 Source: U.S. Census 5-Year ACS, 2014; BERK Consulting 2016 Population by Age (ACS, 2014) Age Category Percent Under 20 yrs 30.6% 20-64 yrs 55.8% 65 and older 13.8% 14 of 138 City of Yakima Comprehensive Plan 2050 Housing DRAFT January 21, 2026 3-11 Most New Housing Units Produced are in Multifamily Buildings Recent development in Yakima is helping to increase housing diversity. Between 2019 and 2024, Yakima added 2,341 units through new housing construction. About 70 percent of these new units were in multifamily structures, from duplexes up to larger apartment buildings (OFM, 2024). This new housing is expanding the range of housing options in Yakima. Yakima has a Shortage of Housing Compared to Demand Vacancy rates, as an indicator of housing markets, can provide information about how supply and demand interact and how the market and prices may react. As of 2024, only 2.4% of rental housing units in Yakima were vacant, which is lower than what is considered a healthy rate of 5% to 6%. The supply of ownership housing is also constrained. When vacancy rates and supply are low, people looking for homes have fewer options, increasing competition for the limited units available. This drives up both rents and housing prices. Housing prices are rising faster than incomes Between 2014 and 2022, tThe typical home value in Yakima has risenincreased by 99%, from $163,074XXX,XXX to $324,075XXX,XXX nearly doubling, between 2014 to 2022. Over the same period, the median family income only increased by 43% (from $47,369XX,XXX to $67,644XX,XXX). This indicates homeownership is getting further out of reach for many prospective buyers. See Exhibit 3-4. 15 of 138 City of Yakima Comprehensive Plan 2050 Housing DRAFT January 21, 2026 3-12 Exhibit 3-43-43-3-3. Percent Change since 2014 in Typical Home Value and Median Family Income (MFI) 16 of 138 City of Yakima Comprehensive Plan 2050 Housing DRAFT January 21, 2026 3-13 Coordinated development concept exampleHow affordable is homeownership in Yakima? As of 2025 a household would need an annual income of about $112,000 to afford the average single family home. New homes are even more expensive. Includes a focal point, a connected circulation system, careful siting of parking areas, and a mix of uses.See the Housing chapter in Volume 2 17 of 138 City of Yakima Comprehensive Plan 2050 Housing DRAFT January 21, 2026 3-14 Note: Historic MFI and home value data are not adjusted for inflation. Almost a Quarter of Yakima’s Population Lives Below the Poverty Level About 22.8 percent of the City’s population earns incomes below the federal poverty level. This is higher than the state as a whole (13.5%). It is within the range of communities in Yakima County. Because the City has the largest population in the County, the City’s total persons in poverty is greater than other communities. Affordable housing options are critical for this population. Percent of Population below Federal Poverty Level – Yakima County and Communities: 2014 18 of 138 City of Yakima Comprehensive Plan 2050 Housing DRAFT January 21, 2026 3-15 Source: Yakima County, 2016; U.S. Yakima Needs more Housing Diversity Over 60% of all housing in the City of Yakima are single-family homes. Not all households require, or can afford, that much space. For example, 30% of all households in Yakima are individuals living alone. Yet only 6% of housing units in Yakima are studios and only 11% have just one bedroom. Increasing the diversity of housing options available will increase housing supply and provide more choices for residents seeking more affordable housing that meets their current needs. Most New Housing Units Produced are in Multifamily Buildings Recent development in Yakima is helping to increase housing diversity. Between 2019 and 2024, Yakima added 2,341 units through new housing construction. About 70 percent of these new units were in multifamily structures, from duplexes up to larger apartment buildings (OFM, 2024). This new housing is expanding the range of housing options in Yakima. Between 2017 and 2021, 32% of all households in Yakima were cost burdened. Ensuring there are opportunities to develop a variety of housing types and densities affordable to different income levels can help to address current and future households and their cost 19 of 138 City of Yakima Comprehensive Plan 2050 Housing DRAFT January 21, 2026 3-16 Many Households in Yakima are Cost-burdened Between 2017 and 2021, 32% of all households in Yakima were cost burdened. Nearly half (44%) of renter households, and just under a quarter (23%) of owner households, were cost- burdened. Cost-burdened households spend a large portion (over 30%) of their available income on housing costs. This leaves less money available for other vital needs like food, transportation, healthcare, and education. Housing Needs are Greatest among Low-income Households About 75% of all households with incomes below 50% of the Area Median Income (AMI) are cost-burdened. Over half of these households are severely cost-burdened, meaning they spend over 50% of their income on housing costs. While there are low-income households living in neighborhoods across the city, the greatest concentration of low-income households is in eastern Yakima, and many of these households are of Hispanic/Latino ethnicity. There is Considerable Need among Elderly Residents There are 3,405 cost-burdened elderly households in Yakima. About a third of these households are elderly persons (age 62+) living alone, and nearly all have incomes well below the county median (HUD, 2024). These residents are spending more than 30% of their income on housing costs and often have fixed incomes that don’t keep pace with rising housing costs over time. Demand for Special Needs Housing and Programs Several populations may have special housing needs or supportive services, including the homeless, residents with disabilities, single parents, seasonal and year-round farmworkers, and the elderly. According to the Homeless Network of Yakima County, in 2015 homelessness had decreased by over 44 percent since 2006. Homelessness still affects families with children, couples, and single persons. According to the Department of Commerce’s Snapshot of Homelessness in Washington State for July 2024, there were 11,971 persons 20 of 138 City of Yakima Comprehensive Plan 2050 Housing DRAFT January 21, 2026 3-17 who were homeless or unstably housed in Yakima County (Commerce, 2024). This was approximately 5% of the county population. Among these people, 9,906 were considered homeless (Commerce, 2024). As of 2014, the City of Yakima has the most persons with a disability in the county, and the second highest share of the population at 15.3 percent, behind Union Gap. Single parent households, particularly female headed households, are more likely to have lower incomes and potentially have cost burdens. As of 2014, over 10 percent of city households are female headed and another almost 4 percent are male-headed with children. As described above, the elderly make up almost 1416 percent of the city’s population in 2014 2022 (U.S. Census Bureau, 2022). The elderly often have disabilities including self- care or independent living limitations – about 46 percent – requiring universal housing designs that meet ambulatory needs. Continuum of care housing and services allowing aging in place are other considerations over the planning period. The City of Yakima is located at the heart of Yakima County, which employs many farmworkers at the farms, orchards, and livestock operations throughout the County. Many of these workers struggle to find stable housing. The City of Yakima and other non-profit agencies offer a number of services that address maintaining and attaining housing to meet the needs of low-income households, disabled persons, and senior citizens in the community. Single parent households, particularly female headed households, are more likely to have lower incomes and potentially have cost burdens. As of 2014, over 10 percent of city households are female headed and another almost 4 percent are male- headed with children. The City of Yakima and other non-profit agencies offer several services that address maintaining and attaining housing to meet the needs of low-income households, disabled persons, and senior citizens in the community. Environmental Hazards and Impacts to Housing Stock Older houses, which are common throughout the City of Yakima are not as resilience to extreme heat and other environmental impacts that are expected to increase in severity and 21 of 138 City of Yakima Comprehensive Plan 2050 Housing DRAFT January 21, 2026 3-18 frequency in Yakima. Retrofitting older homes with efficient heating and cooling bears a considerable upfront cost that low-income households or older households on a fixed income may be unable to bear. Additionally, detached single family homes may be at higher risk for damage from wildfires and extreme precipitation, and land uses related to low-density housing development may exacerbate these concerns due to the increased impervious pavement leading to urban flooding from storms and increased wildland urban interface. See the Climate Vulnerability Assessment Memo in Appendix A for further analysis. Affordable Appreciation rates have been above average for the last 10 years, at an annual average of 2.5 percent. Home sales prices have jumped by $20,000 in the last year. The median priced home is attainable to half of the City’s residents. However, in 2014, nearly half of Yakima’s homeowners were cost burdened and nearly one third of renters are cost burdened. Rental Costs The Runstad Center for Real Estate Research has noted that in 2016 that in the previous year “…Yakima County has recorded the greatest decrease in vacancy rate with a considerable drop of 5.8 percent (from 7.8% to 1.7%).” If supply does not keep up with demand, it is likely that rental rates will increase. In the City there is a gap of over 3,300 units affordable to those earning lower incomes. Many households have to pay more than they can afford for the units that are available. As of 20212, 3244% of city renters are were cost burdened and 4921% of owners are were cost burdened. Ensuring there are opportunities to develop a variety of housing types and densities affordable to different income levels can help to support housing affordability for more residentsaddress current and future households and their cost burden. 22 of 138 City of Yakima Comprehensive Plan 2050 Housing DRAFT January 21, 2026 3-19 Homeowner Costs As of 2015, the County’s housing supply showed it was relatively affordable for a metropolitan area and that there was a large share of homes for sale below the median home price. Recent price increases were leading the state in 2015. In 2016, around 56% of households can afford a median home price, with homeownership less attainable for the remaining 46% of the population. To purchase a single family home at the current median selling price a household would need to earn $38,477 annually or $3,206 monthly. There are an estimated 18,402 households in Yakima with incomes greater than $35,000, or 56% of the population that can afford the median home price in Yakima. Challenges and Opportunities Compared to other areas in Washington, Yakima currently still provides relatively lower-cost housing, the majority of which are single family homes. The City has additional capacity for housing with a large share of land that is developable, particularly to the west, and a good portion of the City that provides an opportunity for infill development and redevelopment. Low vacancy rates in Yakima contribute to pressure on housing supply as the population grows and the housing stock ages. New housing will be needed to replace units that have reached the end of their useful life and to house new residents. In addition, a diversity of housing types will be needed in order to provide units that fit the needs of large and small households, young and first-time home buyers, special needs populations, those aging in place, and a diversifying population multi-generational households. Yakima has a vision of being a place that provides affordable and quality housing equally to all residents across the city. 23 of 138 City of Yakima Comprehensive Plan 2050 Housing DRAFT January 21, 2026 3-20 The City has sufficient capacity to meet future housing growth targets for 20402046. Yakima’s strategy is to focus on infill housing downtown, in mixed use centers, and throughout the City, with compatible transitions to ground-related townhomes and single family dwellings. The capacity in Downtown Yakima and mixed use nodes will create an increased supply of smaller units in multifamily or mixed use residential structures while the undeveloped land capacity to the west will result in added single family units. Future Needs The GMA requires cities to accommodate future housing needs by affordability level. Yakima received its allocation of countywide housing from Yakima County, as shown in Exhibit 3-4. The City must make accommodations to enable housing growth to meet these needs through the year 2046. Exhibit 3-5Exhibit 3-5. Projected Housing Needs, Yakima County (2020-2046) shows the allocation and projected housings needs for the City and UGA. Meeting these needs will require increasing the rate of new housing development, with a focus on multifamily housing and lower-cost ownership options such as townhomes and condominiums. Exhibit 3-53-53-3-4. Projected Housing Needs, Yakima County (2020-2046) Total Affordability Level (% of Area Median Income) Emergency Housing/ Shelter Beds 0-30% 30-50% 50-80% 80-100% 100-120% 120%+ Emergency Housing/ Shelter Beds Non-PSH PSH Total Future Housing Needed (2046)** Estimated Housing 24 of 138 City of Yakima Comprehensive Plan 2050 Housing DRAFT January 21, 2026 3-21 Net New Housing Needed (2020-2046) 25,057 3,910 4,267 5,478 3,028 1,789 1,212 5,373 1,379 PSH = Permanent Supportive Housing. * 2020 supply excludes homes in recreational use. Supply of PSH in 2020 is beds. However, projections of Net New Housing Needed (2020-2046) are in housing units. ** Total Future Housing Needed (2046) excludes 2020 homes in recreational use. Source: WA State Department of Commerce, Growth Management Services Housing For All Planning Tool (HAPT). Calculations are based on the Yakima County 2046 Population Projections and Allocations. Exhibit 3-63-63-3-5. City of Yakima and UGA Combined Allocation of Projected Housing Needs, 2020-2046 Total Units Allocated Affordability Level (% of Area Median Income) Emergency Housing/ Shelter Beds 0-30% 30-50% 50-80% 80-100% 100-120% 120%+ Jurisdiction Non-PSH PSH City of Yakima + UGA 10,648 1,750 1,911 2,450 1,286 760 514 1,977 617 25 of 138 City of Yakima Comprehensive Plan 2050 Housing DRAFT January 21, 2026 3-22 Source: WA Department of Commerce, 2025; BERK, 2025. 3.3 Our Housing Plan Yakima’s plan to accommodate its current and future housing needs builds upon its land use plan. Through revisions to zoning and development regulations the city will reduce barriers to the production of new housing, with a focus on multifamily housing, townhomes, cottage housing, accessory dwelling units, and manufactured homes. Actions include providing for greater flexibility with regards to density limits, lot sizes, building heights, and parking standards. The Planning and Building divisions should coordinate code and policy changes, prioritizing reducing barriers for the development of housingThe city can also align its building code with development code, including allowance for townhomes in the zoning code. Another way to reduce barriers is streamlining the city’s permit application process and increasing SEPA thresholds. Targeted infrastructure investments to enable higher density infill development will also support this plan. To encourage and support income-restricted affordable housing projects for lower-income residents, the City can provide incentives such as an expanded multifamily tax exemption (MFTE) program, or the donation of public land. 3.33.4 Goals and Policies GOAL 3.1 ENCOURAGE DIVERSE AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING CHOICES. Policy 3.1.1 Monitor market rate and affordable housing needs. Review and adjust land capacity for housing development and redevelopment based on housing needs. Policy 3.1.2 Promote the preservation, improvement, and development of middle housing and single family homes in Yakima. Policy 3.1.3 Encourage mixed use infill development, particularly Downtown and in commercial nodes. Coordinated development concept exampleDoes Yakima’s zoning and land capacity allow for enough new development to meet all projected housing needs? Yes, it does. Includes a focal point, a connected circulation system, careful siting of parking areas, and a mix of uses.See the Housing chapter in Volume 2 for an analysis of Yakima’s buildable land capacity compared to housing needs. 26 of 138 City of Yakima Comprehensive Plan 2050 Housing DRAFT January 21, 2026 3-23 Policy 3.1.4 Facilitate small lot sizes, condominiums, townhomes, accessory dwelling units, clustering, and other middle housing options that increase the supply of affordable homeownership options and the diversity of housing that meet the needs of aging, young professional, and small and large households. Policy 3.1.5 Allow accessory dwelling units in single family zones to increase the supply of affordable housing units and to help existing homeowners remain in their homes. Policy 3.1.6 Allow manufactured homes on individual lots in residential zones in accordance with the provisions of state and federal law. Apply development and design standards equally to manufactured housing and other residences. Policy 3.1.7 Promote the improvement of existing mobile home parks to meet health and safety standards and quality of life needs of residents. Policy 3.1.8 Encourage and incentivize affordable housing development for moderate, low, very low, and extremely low-income households. Policy 3.1.9 Support proposals for affordable assisted and market rate housing based on the following criteria: Dispersion of affordable housing throughout the City Convenient access to transit A range of unit types including middle housing Ownership housing when possible Long-term affordability Policy 3.1.10 Remove barriers to development of affordable and market rate housing. Maintain a zoning system that allows a wide range of housing types and densities. 27 of 138 City of Yakima Comprehensive Plan 2050 Housing DRAFT January 21, 2026 3-24 Use creative SEPA tools such as exemption thresholds, infill and mixed use exemptions, or planned actions to encourage housing and streamline permitting. Ensure that City fees and permitting time are set at reasonable levels so they do not adversely affect the cost of housing. Policy 3.1.11 Encourage a range of affordable homeownership options and provide access to education for first time buyers. Policy 3.1.12 Participate in efforts to secure land available for affordable housing. Policy 3.1.13 Allow for well-designed farmworker housing recognizing the City of Yakima’s role as the primary city in the agricultural Yakima valley with the greatest range of housing opportunities, urban infrastructure, and public services. GOAL 3.2 PRESERVE AND IMPROVE EXISTING RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS. Policy 3.2.1 Invest in and Iimprove quality of life in existing neighborhoods through various programs and investments such as street light maintenance, sidewalk improvements, safe route to school, bike and non-motorized mobility improvements etc. Policy 3.2.2 Support programs that improve and preserve Yakima’s existing housing stock such as, various capital improvements in the neighborhoods. Policy 3.2.3 Seek alternatives, when feasible, to demolition and removal of units from housing stockPrevent demolition of housing structures when possible, by providing resources for periodic maintenance and upgrade and using various funding sources for maintenance in certain neighborhoodsbased on need. Policy 3.2.4 Encourage maintenance and preservation of existing housing. Maintain the City’s Housing Repair Assistance Program for low- and moderate-income homeowners 28 of 138 City of Yakima Comprehensive Plan 2050 Housing DRAFT January 21, 2026 3-25 Policy 3.2.5 Encourage cooling retrofits and passive cooling measures for existing housing to ensure effective cooling in case of extreme heat. Policy 3.2.6 Encourage energy efficiency and water efficiency retrofits for existing homes to lower utility demand during and leading up to natural hazard events. GOAL 3.3 ENSURE AN ADEQUATE SUPPLY OF HOUSING FOR ALL INCOME GROUPS AND PERSONS WITH SPECIAL NEEDS. Policy 3.3.1 Prioritize the provision of fair share housing opportunities to all economic segments of the population and including those with special needs.as allocated through the regional allocation process. Policy 3.3.2 Support development of new units and the operation of existing units for housing persons with special needs such as the disabled and elderly. Promote universal design principles in new and rehabilitated housing to ensure housing is designed for all persons and abilities to age in place as their housing needs change. Policy 3.3.3 Support programs that offer assistance to homeless individuals and families. Policy 3.3.4 Support programs and housing options that allow the senior population to age in place as their housing needs change. Policy 3.3.5 Support programs to ensure that individuals and families vulnerable to natural hazard impacts have adequate housing options. Vulnerable communities include the following: older adults and children those with pre-existing health conditions including pulmonary conditions individuals with mobility challenges low- and extremely low-income individuals pregnant people 29 of 138 City of Yakima Comprehensive Plan 2050 Housing DRAFT January 21, 2026 3-26 people with limited literacy people who speak English as a second language GOAL 3.4 ENCOURAGE DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION, AND MAINTENANCE OF HIGH QUALITY HOUSING WITHOUT MAKING UNITS COST PROHIBITIVE.. Policy 3.4.1 Promote sustainable development practices in housing development such as the use of energy efficient and durable building material, maintenance of indoor air quality, protection of natural environment, provision of walkability, and others. Policy 3.4.2 Ensure Use transitional densities, design and landscape standards to promoteensure housing is compatible with existing character and planned goals. Policy 3.4.3 Encourage development of well-designed new housing in coordination with population growth, employment growth, and transportation goals. Policy 3.4.4 Coordinate future housing development with capital planning and investment. Policy 3.4.5 Implement utility standards that encourage infill development and middle housing. Policy 3.4.6 Encourage or incentivize residential development standards which increase resiliency to natural hazards such as extreme heat, severe storms, drought, and wildfire smoke through cross-ventilation, passive cooling window coverings, and energy efficiency upgrades Policy 3.4.76 Ensure multimodal public and private transportation options are available for new and redeveloped housing. Policy 3.4.87 Promote complete streets and trails to interconnect Yakima’s neighborhoods and promote walkability. Policy 3.4.98 Promote safe, energy efficient, and healthy housing attainable to very low-, low-, and moderate income households. Explore measures to improve 30 of 138 City of Yakima Comprehensive Plan 2050 Housing DRAFT January 21, 2026 3-27 indoor air quality and foster construction methods that reduce dust, mold, and air toxics concentrations in the homes. GOAL 3.5 FOSTER A CARING COMMUNITY THAT NURTURES AND SUPPORTS INDIVIDUALS, CHILDREN, AND THEIR FAMILIES. Policy 3.5.1 Make human services more inclusive and accessible to the Yakima community, especially to marginalized populations to prevent them from being displaced from their community. Policy 3.5.2 Identify opportunities and dDevelop strategies that result in human services involvements are proactive and preventative of marginalized populations being displaced or homeless in their approach to human services needs. Policy 3.5.3 Allocate City general funds and seek federal and state funds to offer human services that the City can best provide to address a spectrum of community needs. Policy 3.5.4 Consider human services objectives in developing City regulations and codes. Ensure code enforcement does not result in displacement or homelessness. For example: enforcing code abatement may mean making people homeless,Ensuring there are community resources to assist these residents, before they are abated, is critical. Policy 3.5.5 Cooperate with school districts and non-profit human service providers to identify needs and effective delivery of services to individuals, children, and families Policy 3.5.6 Educate the community about and promote affordable and special needs housing and human services facilities and programs. Conduct early and ongoing public outreach and communication during program or project review and apply appropriate conditions of approval that address community concerns such as traffic congestion, public service provision, or environmental quality. 31 of 138 City of Yakima Comprehensive Plan 2050 Housing DRAFT January 21, 2026 3-28 Policy 3.5.7 Connect with isolated community groups to ensure effective human service delivery and ensure people and homes are safe in the event of emergencies. Policy 3.5.8 Evaluate services, service delivery, and community-based resources as they relate to making individuals, children, and families more resilient to natural hazards of extreme heat, flooding, wildfires, and drought events. GOAL 3.6 PREVENT DISCRIMINATION, AND DISPLACEMENT IN THE DEVELOPMENT AND MAINTENANCE OF HOUSING. Policy 3.6.1 Collaborate with community groups, organizations, non-profits, and businesses to help vulnerable groups obtain and maintain housing. Policy 3.6.2 Evaluate the potential for displacement on lands proposed for rezone or redevelopment for public use. Policy 3.6.3 Collaborate to understand the drivers of displacement through involvement of community groups, organizations, and institutions in affected areas. 3.43.5 Implementation Yakima’s Housing Element is implemented through the actions and investments made by the City with the support of its residents and stakeholders. Some of these actions include regulatory changes, partnerships, coordination, administrative acts, policy changes, human service programs, and capital investments. The following implementation items aid in this process. Exhibit 3-73-73-73-6. Housing Implementation Implementation Item Action Type Desired Result Adequate Provisions Action Items (2026) The Comprehensive Plan Volume 2 Technical Analysis includes a list of action items related to affordable housing incentives, development regulation changes, and permit Reduce barriers to new housing development that can accommodate housing needs at all income levels 32 of 138 City of Yakima Comprehensive Plan 2050 Housing DRAFT January 21, 2026 3-29 Implementation Item Action Type Desired Result process improvements. There are some overlaps between this list of actions and prior studies, such as the Housing Action Plan. City of Yakima Housing Action Plan (HAP) (2021) This plan identified six objectives for promoting affordable housing options for all community members across all neighborhoods. To achieve these objectives, it identifies 37 strategies. While some strategies would be pursued in partnership with other organizations, the following high priority strategies can be implemented by the City: Update city regulations to remove barriers to innovative housing types. Make strategic investments in infrastructure. Encourage rent-to-own opportunities and sweat equity programs. Expand and update down payment assistance programs. Develop, acquire, or sell surplus or under- utilized city property. Incentivize landlords to improve the quality and maintenance of housing. Encourage diverse housing development within existing neighborhoods. Create and preserve affordable homes. Create homeownership opportunities for low- and moderate- income households. Support housing options that meet the diverse needs of older adults. Address the needs of those struggling with homelessness. Protect against displacement and poor housing conditions City of Yakima Consolidated Plan (2025- 2029) Strategic plan, updated periodically, that provides an assessment of current and projected housing needs, housing market trends, inventory conditions, barriers to providing affordable housing, a list of current providers, and a five-year strategy for providing affordable housing. Many of the Provide decent housing Create a sustainable living environment Expand opportunities for Low- and Middle-Income Yakima Residents  33 of 138 City of Yakima Comprehensive Plan 2050 Housing DRAFT January 21, 2026 3-30 Implementation Item Action Type Desired Result housing affordability are mirrored in the HAP. This plan also addresses needs for supportive services and poverty reduction. City of Yakima Consolidated Plan (2025- 2029) Strategic plan, updated periodically, that provides an assessment of current and projected housing needs, housing market trends, inventory conditions, barriers to providing affordable housing, a list of current providers, and a five-year strategy for providing affordable housing. Many of the actions identified in this plan to support housing affordability are mirrored in the HAP. This plan also addresses needs for supportive services and poverty reduction. Data on housing inventory and needs Inventory of affordable housing providers Increase in affordable housing Yakima County’s 5-Year Plan to Address Homelessness 2019-2024 The Yakima County 5-Year Homelessness Housing Strategic Plan serves three critical purposes: Establishing a strategy to address homelessness in Yakima County. Setting clear, measurable goals to achieve that strategy, and to hold stakeholders within the system accountable to their roles. Creating concise objectives generated by local experts that can be used in making funding decisions for Yakima County. Reducing homelessness in Yakima County so that it is brief, rare and one-time through an efficient and effective homeless response system that prioritizes and focuses first on putting people into stable housing. A Ten-Year Plan to End Homelessness: A Five Year Update Report on local efforts and strategies.Data on homelessness Decrease homelessness Annual Action Plan for CDBG and HOME Investment Partnership Funds, 202416 This plan includes the strategies, goals, and objectives established in the FY 2020‐2024 Consolidated Plan and is the basis for the annual funding application for the CDBG and Investment in affordable housing needs and community development needs 34 of 138 City of Yakima Comprehensive Plan 2050 Housing DRAFT January 21, 2026 3-31 Implementation Item Action Type Desired Result HOME programs.Plan for use of federal funds, updated annually Yakima County Farmworker Housing Action Plan, 2011 – 2016 Strategic plan for approaching issues related to farmworker housing Housing needs data for seasonal and year-round farmworkers Increased housing stability for farmworkers Zoning Code, YMC Title 15 Regulatory law on housing development, amended as needed Ensure code aligns with goals and needs in the community Remove barriers to affordable housing Senior/Disabled Persons Home Repair Program City housing program administered through the Office of Neighborhood Development to those who qualify (income and asset restrictions) Increased investment in neighborhoods Aesthetic improvements Exterior Paint Program City housing program administered through the Office of Neighborhood Development to those who qualify (age and disability restrictions) Increased investment in neighborhoods Aesthetic improvements Homeownership Through New Construction City housing program administered through the Office of Neighborhood Development to those who qualify (income restrictions) Increased homeownership Tenant/Landlord Counseling Office of Neighborhood Development Services program to assist either tenants or landlords with disputes and advice on reaching agreements or seeking legal support. Improved tenant/landlord relationships Education on legal support for those in need Lot Acquisition Program A City program within the Yakima Target Area that provides funds to purchase lots for residential development projects. Lots must New housing stock Neighborhood revitalization New infill development 35 of 138 City of Yakima Comprehensive Plan 2050 Housing DRAFT January 21, 2026 3-32 Implementation Item Action Type Desired Result substandard buildings, and be developed within 12 months of purchase. Downtown Redevelopment Tax Incentive Program (YMC 11.63) A City program designed to provide increased residential opportunities. This program is intended to stimulate new multi- family housing and the rehabilitation of vacant and underutilized buildings for multi- family housing. Special valuations for eligible improvements in residentially deficient urban centers. 36 of 138 DRAFT February 6, 2026 i City of Yakima Comprehensive Plan Technical Analysis DRAFT December 2025 Prepared by BERK Consulting 37 of 138 ii Contents 1. Introduction ....................................................................................................................................................... 1-1 1.1. Planning Framework ............................................................................................................................... 1-1 1.2. Context ...................................................................................................................................................... 1-3 2. Land Use ............................................................................................................................................................. 2-1 2.1. Overview ................................................................................................................................................... 2-1 2.2. Land Use Patterns and Growth ............................................................................................................. 2-1 2.3. Future Land Use ..................................................................................................................................... 2-17 2.4. Planning and Regulatory Context ....................................................................................................... 2-28 3. Housing Analysis .............................................................................................................................................. 3-1 3.1. Overview ................................................................................................................................................... 3-1 3.2. Summary of Key Findings ...................................................................................................................... 3-1 3.3. Community Profile................................................................................................................................... 3-3 3.4. Housing Inventory ................................................................................................................................. 3-22 3.5. Housing Programs ................................................................................................................................. 3-30 3.6. Displacement & Displacement Risk ................................................................................................... 3-31 3.7. Racially Disparate Impacts ................................................................................................................... 3-34 3.8. Projected Housing Needs .................................................................................................................... 3-48 3.9. Adequate Provisions ............................................................................................................................. 3-53 4. Historic Preservation ........................................................................................ Error! Bookmark not defined. 4.1. Overview .................................................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. 5. Economic Development ................................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. 5.1. Overview .................................................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. 5.2. Downtown Revitalizations ...................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. 6. Transportation ................................................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. 6.1. Overview .................................................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. 6.2. Transportation Network.......................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. 6.3. Transportation Performance .................................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined. 6.4. Vehicular Operations ............................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. 6.5. Transit Operations .................................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. 38 of 138 iii 6.6. Bike and Trail Operations ....................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. 7. Capital Facilities ................................................................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined. 7.1. Overview .................................................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. 7.2. Analysis ....................................................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. 8. Utilities................................................................................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined. 8.1. Overview .................................................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. 8.2. Analysis ....................................................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. 9. Natural Environment ........................................................................................ Error! Bookmark not defined. 9.1. Overview .................................................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. 9.2. Analysis ....................................................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. 10. Glossary ......................................................................................................................................................... 4-1 Exhibits Exhibit 1-1. 4th Street from a 1940s Postcard ......................................................................... 1-3 Exhibit 1-2. East Yakima Avenue from a 1900s Postcard ...................................................... 1-3 39 of 138 iv Exhibit 2-1. Existing Land Use Map ............................................................................................................................................................ 2-2 Exhibit 2-2.Existing Land Use within the City Limits and Unincorporated UGA ............... 2-3 Exhibit 2-3. Size of Council Districts in the City Limits (Acres), 2025 ................................. 2-3 Exhibit 2-4. Current Land Use– District 1 ................................................................................. 2-4 Exhibit 2-5. Land Use Acres – District 1 .................................................................................... 2-5 Exhibit 2-6. Current Land Use– District 2 ................................................................................. 2-6 Exhibit 2-7. Land Use Acres – District 2 .................................................................................... 2-7 Exhibit 2-8. Current Land Use– District 3 ................................................................................. 2-8 Exhibit 2-9. Land Use Acres – District 3 .................................................................................... 2-9 Exhibit 2-10. Current Land Use– District 4 ............................................................................. 2-10 40 of 138 v Exhibit 2-11. Land Use Acres – District 4 ................................................................................ 2-11 Exhibit 2-12. Current Land Use– District 5 ............................................................................. 2-12 Exhibit 2-13. Land Use Acres – District 5 ................................................................................ 2-13 Exhibit 2-14. Current Land Use– District 6 ............................................................................. 2-14 Exhibit 2-15. Land Use Acres – District 6 ................................................................................ 2-15 Exhibit 2-16. Current Land Use– District 7 ............................................................................. 2-16 Exhibit 2-17. Land Use Acres – District 7 ................................................................................ 2-17 Exhibit 2-18. Future Land Use Map ......................................................................................... 2-18 Exhibit 2-19. Future Land Use in Acres ................................................................................... 2-19 Exhibit 2-20. Future Land Use Areas by Council District ..................................................... 2-19 Exhibit 2-21. Critical Area & Other Deductions ..................................................................... 2-20 Exhibit 2-22. Parcel Development Status Definitions ........................................................... 2-21 Exhibit 2-23. Developable Land Area in the Yakima UGA by Zone ................................... 2-23 Exhibit 2-24. Density and Mixed-Use Split Assumptions by Zone in the Yakima UGA . 2-23 Exhibit 2-25. New ADU Capacity by Zone .............................................................................. 2-25 Exhibit 2-26. Net New Housing Units by Zone ...................................................................... 2-26 Exhibit 2-27. Square Feet per Job Assumptions .................................................................... 2-26 Exhibit 2-28 Job Capacity by Zone ........................................................................................... 2-27 Exhibit 2-29 Use Classes for Permitting .................................................................................. 2-28 Exhibit 3-1. Population Growth in City of Yakima and Peer Cities, 2014-2024 ............... 3-3 Exhibit 3-2. Age Distribution in City of Yakima and Yakima County, 2022 ....................... 3-4 Exhibit 3-3. Areas with Large Percentages of Senior or Minor Residents, City of Yakima, 2022 3-4 Exhibit 3-4. Percentage of Population by Race and Ethnicity in City of Yakima and Comparison Geographies, 2017 and 2022 ....................................................................................................... 3-5 Exhibit 3-5. Languages Spoken at Home in City of Yakima and Washington State, 2017 and 2022 3-6 Exhibit 3-6. Percent of Residents that Identify as Hispanic or Latino, City of Yakima, 20223-7 Exhibit 3-7. Household Size by Tenure in City of Yakima, 2018-2022 ............................... 3-8 Exhibit 3-8. Percentage of Households by Income Level in City of Yakima, 2021 ........... 3-9 Exhibit 3-9. Median Household Income by Ethnicity in City of Yakima and Washington State, 2022 ............................................................................................................................................................ 3-9 Exhibit 3-10. Median Household Income by Census Tract in City of Yakima, 2022 ...... 3-10 Exhibit 3-11. Cost Burden Status by Income Level of Households, City of Yakima, 2017-2021 3-11 Exhibit 3-12. Total Cost-Burdened Households by Income Level, City of Yakima, 2017-2021 3-11 41 of 138 vi Exhibit 3-13. Household Tenure by Cost Burden in City of Yakima, 2017-2021 ........... 3-12 Exhibit 3-14. Cost-Burdened Renter Households by Household Type and Income Level, City of Yakima, 2017-2021 ..................................................................................................................................... 3-12 Exhibit 3-15. Homeless System Project Entries by Project Type, Yakima County, SFY 2024 3-14 Exhibit 3-16. Top Reasons Cited as Cause of Homelessness, Yakima County, 2024..... 3-15 Exhibit 3-17. Renter Households by Disability Status and Income Level in City of Yakima, 2021 3-16 Exhibit 3-18. Elderly, Cost-Burdened Households by Household Type and Income Level, City of Yakima, 2017-2021 ..................................................................................................................................... 3-16 Exhibit 3-19. Projected Population by Age Range, Yakima County ................................... 3-17 Exhibit 3-20. Farmworker Employment Counts, Yakima County, 2023 ........................... 3-18 Exhibit 3-21. Housing Affordability in Yakima for a Full-Time Minimum-Wage Worker, 2024 3-19 Exhibit 3-22. Employment Density in the City of Yakima, 2022 ........................................ 3-20 Exhibit 3-23. Total Jobs in the City of Yakima, 2012-2022 ................................................. 3-21 Exhibit 3-24. Commute Distance for Workers, City of Yakima, 2022 ............................... 3-21 Exhibit 3-25. Housing Inventory by Type in City of Yakima, 2024 .................................... 3-22 Exhibit 3-26. Percentage of Housing Unit Sizes Compared to Household Sizes, City of Yakima, 2022 .......................................................................................................................................................... 3-23 Exhibit 3-27. Residential Properties by Year Built, City of Yakima, 2025 ......................... 3-24 Exhibit 3-28. Household Tenure, City of Yakima, 2022 ....................................................... 3-24 Exhibit 3-29. Housing Tenure by Race and Ethnicity, City of Yakima, 2021 ................... 3-25 Exhibit 3-30. Percent Change since 2014 in Typical Home Value and Median Family Income (MFI) .......................................................................................................................................................... 3-25 Exhibit 3-31. Home Ownership Affordability in City of Yakima, 2025 ............................. 3-26 Exhibit 3-32. Yakima County* Rental Rates and Affordability, 2024 ................................ 3-27 Exhibit 3-33. Yakima County Apartment Rents and Vacancy, 2014-2024 ...................... 3-28 Exhibit 3-34. Count of Permitted Dwelling Units by Project Type in City of Yakima, 2010-2014 3-29 Exhibit 3-35. Subsidized Rental Housing Units by Number of Bedrooms, City of Yakima, 2023 3-30 Exhibit 3-36. City of Yakima Housing Program ...................................................................... 3-30 Exhibit 3-37. Race & Ethnicity in the City of Yakima, Yakima County, and Statewide, 2017 & 2022 .......................................................................................................................................................... 3-32 Exhibit 3-38. Displacement Risk in the City of Yakima, 2020 ............................................. 3-33 Exhibit 3-39. Social Vulnerability in the City of Yakima, 2020 ............................................ 3-33 Exhibit 3-40. Demographic Change in the City of Yakima, 2020 ....................................... 3-34 Exhibit 3-41. Dissimilarity Index for the City of Yakima and Comparison Geographies 3-36 42 of 138 vii Exhibit 3-42. Location Quotient for Residents Identifying as White Alone, City of Yakima, 2020 3-37 Exhibit 3-43. Location Quotient for Residents Identifying as Hispanic or Latino, City of Yakima, 2020 .......................................................................................................................................................... 3-37 Exhibit 3-44. Location Quotient for Residents Identifying as Black, Indigenous, or a Person of Color, City of Yakima, 2020 ............................................................................................................................ 3-38 Exhibit 3-45. PM2.5 Concentration, City of Yakima, 2014-2017 Average ...................... 3-39 Exhibit 3-46. Environmental Health Disparities Map Score, City of Yakima, 2022 ........ 3-40 Exhibit 3-47. Transportation Noise Levels, City of Yakima, 2020 ...................................... 3-41 Exhibit 3-48. Urban Heat Island Severity, City of Yakima, 2023 ........................................ 3-43 Exhibit 3-49. Tree Canopy Coverage, City of Yakima, 2021 ............................................... 3-43 Exhibit 3-50 Racially Disparate Impacts – Housing Policy Analysis and Audit Summary3-45 Exhibit 3-51. Project Housing Needs, Yakima County (2020-2046) ................................. 3-48 Exhibit 3-52. Allocation of Projected Housing Needs to Jurisdictions and UGAs, 2020-2046 3-49 Exhibit 3-53. City of Yakima and UGA Combined Allocation of Projected Housing Needs, 2020-2046 .......................................................................................................................................................... 3-50 Exhibit 3-54. Housing Types and Potential Income Levels Served .................................... 3-50 Exhibit 3-55. Capacity for Housing Compared to Projected Housing Need, City of Yakima3-51 Exhibit 3-56. Capacity for Housing Compared to Projected Housing Need, City of Yakima and Unincorporated UGA Combined ............................................................................................... 3-52 Exhibit 3-57: Proposed Changes to Development Standards by Zone ............................. 3-55 Exhibit 3-58. Minimum Required Parking Spaces Per Unit by Housing Type in City of Yakima, Current Zoning and New State Requirements ....................................................................................... 3-57 Exhibit 10-1. HUD Income Limits by Household Size (Number of Persons in Household), 2025 4-2 43 of 138 1-1 1. Introduction 1.1. Planning Framework The Comprehensive Plan (Plan) guides Yakima’s long term physical development for 20 or more years, addresses community values, activities or functions, and provides policies guiding how Yakima’s desires for growth and character are to be achieved. The City of Yakima needs to update its 2017 Plan consistent with the updated Growth Management Act (GMA) requirements. GMA requires each Washington city and county planning under GMA periodically review and, if needed, revise its Plan and development regulations as part of a periodic review cycle (RCW 36.70A.130). Less extensive revisions and updates are incorporated into the Plan on an annual basis. The Plan Update addresses the following elements: land use, housing, economic development, historic preservation, transportation, parks and recreation, natural environment and shorelines, capital facilities, utilities, and energy. A new climate resilience element, as required by the GMA, is integrated in multiple elements and in the goals and policies. The focus of the Plan and development regulations is the Yakima incorporated city limits. Yakima County is planning for the Yakima unincorporated urban growth areas (UGA) in consultation with the City of Yakima. 1.1.1. Growth Management Act (GMA) The GMA) contains 15 planning goals (RCW 36.70A.020) that guide local jurisdictions as they determine their vision for the future, develop plans, write or amend regulations, and implement programs and budgets that help realize the community’s vision. The 15 goals are summarized below: Guide growth in urban areas Reduce sprawl Encourage an efficient multi-modal transportation system Encourage a variety of housing types including affordable housing Promote economic development Recognize property rights Ensure timely and fair permit procedures Protect agricultural, forest and mineral lands Retain and enhance open space, protect habitat, and develop parks and recreation facilities Protect the environment Foster citizen participation Ensure adequate public facilities and services Encourage historic preservation Adapt to and mitigate the effects of a changing climate Integrate shoreline master program (SMP) goals and policies 1.1.2. Countywide Planning Policies  The City of Yakima’s Plan, along with other jurisdictions’ plans in the County are to be guided by the Yakima County-wide Planning Policy (CWPP) established in accordance with the GMA. The revised Formatted: Font: Not Bold Formatted: Normal 44 of 138 1-2 CWPP creates a framework that provides an overall direction for development of jurisdictional comprehensive plans. The updated CWPP will be included with this Comprehensive Plan as Appendix B. Commented [FO1]: Check with the City - when the updated CWPP will be available 45 of 138 1-3 1.2. Context Located in central Washington, on the banks of the Yakima River, the City of Yakima is the largest city in Yakima County and the county seat. The cities of Selah and Union Gap lie immediately to the north and south respectively of Yakima. In addition, the unincorporated suburban areas of West Valley and Terrace Heights are considered part of greater Yakima. Yakima is comprised of numerous neighborhoods. Older neighborhoods cover the east side of the city, from the Yakima River to approximately 16th Avenue. This area includes the original city and the growth occurring prior to World War II. This area also contains some of the more architecturally-significant, historical neighborhoods in the city, including portions of northeast and southeast Yakima. Growth in Yakima has been largely westward from Downtown, despite a limited east-west street network and pedestrian-oriented infrastructure. Newer housing in the west provides residents with fewer opportunities to walk to destinations or amenities. Coupled with the long distance from employment centers in the east, this creates greater dependence on cars to access jobs, services, and amenities. Exhibit 1-1. 4th Street from a 1940s Postcard Source: HistoryLink, 2020. Exhibit 1-2. East Yakima Avenue from a 1900s Postcard Source: HistoryLink, 2020. 46 of 138 2-1 2. Land Use 2.1. Overview This Land Use analysis provides information on the current land use planning framework in the study area that consists of the city limits and the unincorporated urban growth area (UGA), including adopted land use plans, existing land uses, and future land use designations and zoning applied by the City Yakima and Yakima County. This chapter also characterizes neighborhood features. This inventory relies primarily on information from the City of Yakima, Yakima County, and the Yakima Valley Conference of Governments. Additional data sources include population and housing estimates from the Washington State Office of Financial Management (OFM), data from the United States (US) Census Bureau and the American Community Survey (ACS). 2.2. Land Use Patterns and Growth 2.2.1. Existing Land Use Yakima’s current land use pattern is dominated by single family residential uses, both in the city limits and the UGA. Exhibit 2-1 provides a map of existing land use in the City of Yakima. Exhibit 2-3 shows the total acreage in each of the seven Council Districts. Sections followed by these exhibits include detailed breakdown of land uses and maps by each Council District. 47 of 138 2-2 Exhibit 2-1. Existing Land Use Map Source: City of Yakima, Yakima County Assessor, BERK, 2025. 48 of 138 2-3 Exhibit 2-2.Existing Land Use within the City Limits and Unincorporated UGA Existing Land Use Incorporated City (acres) Share (%) City + UGA (acres)Share (%) Single-family Residential 5,547 38%9,787 38.5% Multi-family Residential 1,009 7%1,144 4.5% Professional Offices or Services 1,133 8%1,487 5.9% Retail Commercial 1,370 9%1,760 6.9% Industrial 1,675 11%2,024 8.0% Government, Education, Utility, etc. 766 5%1,071 4.2% Parks, Recreation, Cultural 263 2%265 1.0% Agricultural 1,298 9%3,570 14.1% Vacant 1,629 11%4,298 16.9% Total 14,692 25,408 Note: Acreages listed here are derived from parcel-level data and do not include right-of-way space. Total existing land use acreage shown here is slightly lower than the total land area of Yakima and its UGA. Source: City of Yakima, 2025; Yakima County Assessor’s Office, 2025; BERK, 2025 Exhibit 2-3. Size of Council Districts in the City Limits (Acres), 2025 Source: City of Yakima, 2025; Yakima County Assessor’s Office, 2025; BERK, 2025 Formatted Table Formatted: Right Formatted: Right Formatted: Right Formatted: Right Formatted: Right Formatted: Right Formatted: Right Formatted: Right Formatted: Right Formatted: Right Formatted: Right Formatted: Source 49 of 138 2-4 2.2.2. District 1 District 1 is primarily comprised of single family residential and vacant/undeveloped/open space lands. Exhibit 2-4 shows District 1 map with various existing land uses. Exhibit 2-5 provides the existing acres and shares for each existing land use groups. Exhibit 2-4. Current Land Use– District 1 Source: City of Yakima, 2025; Yakima County Assessor’s Office, 2025; BERK, 2025 50 of 138 2-5 Exhibit 2-5. Land Use Acres – District 1 Existing Land Use Groups Acres Percent Single-family Residential 300.0 24.3% Multi-family Residential 127.0 10.3% Professional Offices or Services 100.0 8.1% Retail Commercial 187.0 15.1% Industrial 177.0 14.3% Government, Education, Utility, etc. 43.0 3.5% Parks, Recreation, Cultural 14.5 1.2% Agricultural 9.1 0.7% Vacant 278.0 22.5% Total 1,235.6 100% Source: City of Yakima, 2025; Yakima County Assessor’s Office, 2025; BERK, 2025 2.2.3. District 2 District 2 predominantly includes single family residential and retail commercial. Exhibit 2-6 shows District 2 map with various existing land uses. Exhibit 2-7 provides the existing acres and shares for each existing land use group. Formatted Table Formatted: Right Formatted: Right Formatted: Right Formatted: Right Formatted: Right Formatted: Right Formatted: Right Formatted: Right Formatted: Right Formatted: Right Formatted: Right 51 of 138 2-6 Exhibit 2-6. Current Land Use– District 2 Source: City of Yakima, 2025; Yakima County Assessor’s Office, 2025; BERK, 2025 52 of 138 2-7 Exhibit 2-7. Land Use Acres – District 2 Existing Land Use Groups Acres Percent Single-family Residential 433.0 20.3% Multi-family Residential 171.0 8.0% Professional Offices or Services 216.0 10.1% Retail Commercial 472.0 22.1% Industrial 372.0 17.4% Government, Education, Utility, etc. 200.0 9.4% Parks, Recreation, Cultural 65.0 3.0% Agricultural 0.1 0.0% Vacant 207.0 9.7% Total 2,136.1 100% Source: City of Yakima, 2025; Yakima County Assessor’s Office, 2025; BERK, 2025 2.2.4. District 3 District 3 is primarily comprised of single family residential. It also comprises of a major share of industrial land with the airport use. Exhibit 2-8 shows a District 3 map with various existing land uses. Exhibit 2-9 provides the existing acres and shares for each existing land use group. Formatted Table Formatted: Right Formatted: Right Formatted: Right Formatted: Right Formatted: Right Formatted: Right Formatted: Right Formatted: Right Formatted: Right Formatted: Right Formatted: Right 53 of 138 2-8 Exhibit 2-8. Current Land Use– District 3 Source: City of Yakima, 2025; Yakima County Assessor’s Office, 2025; BERK, 2025 54 of 138 2-9 Exhibit 2-9. Land Use Acres – District 3 Existing Land Use Groups Acres Percent Single-family Residential 897.0 34.3% Multi-family Residential 85.0 3.2% Professional Offices or Services 202.0 7.7% Retail Commercial 198.0 7.6% Industrial 620.0 23.7% Government, Education, Utility, etc. 109.0 4.2% Parks, Recreation, Cultural 36.0 1.4% Agricultural 69.0 2.6% Vacant 402.0 15.4% Total 2,618.0 100% Source: City of Yakima, 2025; Yakima County Assessor’s Office, 2025; BERK, 2025 2.2.5. District 4 Almost half of District 4 is comprised of single family residential (48.8%). Other uses such as multifamily residential, professional office, industrial, and government, education & utility have almost equal shares of land. Exhibit 2-10 shows the District 4 map with various existing land uses. Exhibit 2-11 provides the existing acres and shares for each existing land use group. Formatted Table Formatted: Right Formatted: Right Formatted: Right Formatted: Right Formatted: Right Formatted: Right Formatted: Right Formatted: Right Formatted: Right Formatted: Right Formatted: Right 55 of 138 2-10 Exhibit 2-10. Current Land Use– District 4 Source: City of Yakima, 2025; Yakima County Assessor’s Office, 2025; BERK, 2025 56 of 138 2-11 Exhibit 2-11. Land Use Acres – District 4 Existing Land Use Groups Acres Percent Single-family Residential 472.0 48.8% Multi-family Residential 103.0 10.7% Professional Offices or Services 110.0 11.4% Retail Commercial 43.0 4.4% Industrial 101.0 10.5% Government, Education, Utility, etc. 98.0 10.1% Parks, Recreation, Cultural 23.0 2.4% Agricultural 0.0 0.0% Vacant 16.4 1.7% Total 966.4 100% Source: City of Yakima, 2025; Yakima County Assessor’s Office, 2025; BERK, 2025 Formatted Table Formatted: Right Formatted: Right Formatted: Right Formatted: Right Formatted: Right Formatted: Right Formatted: Right Formatted: Right Formatted: Right Formatted: Right Formatted: Right 57 of 138 2-12 2.2.6. District 5 District 5 is primarily single family residential (34.9%) and industrial (15.5%). Exhibit 2-12 shows District 5 map with various existing land uses. Exhibit 2-13 provides the existing acres and shares for each existing land use group. Exhibit 2-12. Current Land Use– District 5 Source: City of Yakima, 2025; Yakima County Assessor’s Office, 2025; BERK, 2025 58 of 138 2-13 Exhibit 2-13. Land Use Acres – District 5 Existing Land Use Groups Acres Percent Single-family Residential 794.0 34.9% Multi-family Residential 206.0 9.1% Professional Offices or Services 289.0 12.7% Retail Commercial 126.0 5.5% Industrial 353.0 15.5% Government, Education, Utility, etc. 117.0 5.1% Parks, Recreation, Cultural 45.0 2.0% Agricultural 62.0 2.7% Vacant 281.0 12.4% Total 2,273.0 100% Source: City of Yakima, 2025; Yakima County Assessor’s Office, 2025; BERK, 2025 Formatted Table Formatted: Right Formatted: Right Formatted: Right Formatted: Right Formatted: Right Formatted: Right Formatted: Right Formatted: Right Formatted: Right Formatted: Right Formatted: Right 59 of 138 2-14 2.2.7. District 6 District 6 is mostly sSingle fFamily rResidential (68.9%). Exhibit 2-14 shows District 6 map with various existing land uses. Exhibit 2-15 provides the existing acres and shares for each existing land use group. Exhibit 2-14. Current Land Use– District 6 Source: City of Yakima, 2025; Yakima County Assessor’s Office, 2025; BERK, 2025 60 of 138 2-15 Exhibit 2-15. Land Use Acres – District 6 Existing Land Use Groups Acres Percent Single-family Residential 1,435.0 68.9% Multi-family Residential 113.0 5.4% Professional Offices or Services 149.0 7.2% Retail Commercial 55.0 2.6% Industrial 13.7 0.7% Government, Education, Utility, etc. 58.0 2.8% Parks, Recreation, Cultural 15.3 0.7% Agricultural 62.0 3.0% Vacant 181.0 8.7% Total 2,082.0 100% Source: City of Yakima, 2025; Yakima County Assessor’s Office, 2025; BERK, 2025 Formatted Table Formatted: Right Formatted: Right Formatted: Right Formatted: Right Formatted: Right Formatted: Right Formatted: Right Formatted: Right Formatted: Right Formatted: Right Formatted: Right 61 of 138 2-16 2.2.8. District 7 Single fFamily rResidential (36%) and aAgricultural (32.4%) are two predominant uses in District 7. Exhibit 2-16 shows District 6 map with various existing land uses. Exhibit 2-17 provides the existing acres and shares for each existing land use group. Exhibit 2-16. Current Land Use– District 7 Source: City of Yakima, 2025; Yakima County Assessor’s Office, 2025; BERK, 2025 62 of 138 2-17 Exhibit 2-17. Land Use Acres – District 7 Existing Land Use Groups Acres Percent Single-family Residential 1,216.0 36.0% Multi-family Residential 204.0 6.0% Professional Offices or Services 67.0 2.0% Retail Commercial 289.0 8.5% Industrial 39.0 1.2% Government, Education, Utility, etc. 141.0 4.2% Parks, Recreation, Cultural 65.0 1.9% Agricultural 1,096.0 32.4% Vacant 264.0 7.8% Total 3,381.0 100% Source: City of Yakima, 2025; Yakima County Assessor’s Office, 2025; BERK, 2025 2.3. Future Land Use Yakima’s land use map designates Low Density Residential as a predominant land use constituting about 53% of the total. Exhibit 2-18 shows the future land use map with Council Districts. See land within the City and UGA. See Exhibit 2-19 for the acreages within the city limits and the UGA . 63 of 138 2-18 Exhibit 2-18. Future Land Use Map Source: City of Yakima, 2025; Yakima County Assessor’s Office, 2025; BERK, 2025 Formatted: Width: 11", Height: 8.5" Formatted: Source 64 of 138 2-19 Exhibit 2-19. Future Land Use in Acres Future Land Use City (acres) Unincorporated UGA (acres) Total (acres) Share (%) Industrial 2,104 1,199 3,303 11.6% CBD Commercial Core 254 0 254 0.9% Regional Commercial 516 0 516 1.8% General Commercial 1,792 273 2,066 7.3% Neighborhood Commercial 598 52 650 2.3% High Density Residential 1,255 115 1,369 4.8% Medium Density Residential 2,194 553 2,747 9.7% Low Density Residential 6,910 8,022 14,932 52.5% Open Space 403 0 403 1.4% Public Facilities 1,797 422 2,219 7.8% Exhibit 2-20. Future Land Use Areas by Council District Future Land Use #1 Council District #2 Council District #3 Council District #4 Council District #5 #6 #7 Industrial 190 461 331 184 665 17 257 CBD Commercial Core 140 63 0 51 0 0 0 Regional Commercial 294 222 0 0 0 0 0 General Commercial 212 674 155 92 247 53 361 Neighborhood Commercial 59 4 113 100 109 82 129 High Density Residential 176 92 85 78 342 133 391 Medium Density Residential 71 374 438 459 257 184 455 Low Density Residential 474 383 878 261 898 2,053 2,039 Open Space 14 142 92 20 54 15 67 Public Facilities 148 247 952 72 208 48 137 Formatted Table Formatted: Right Formatted: Right Formatted: Right Formatted: Right Formatted: Right Formatted: Right Formatted: Right Formatted: Right Formatted: Right Formatted: Right Formatted: Right 65 of 138 2-20 2.3.1. Land Capacity Analysis As part of the Yakima Comprehensive Plan process, BERK Consulting, Inc. (BERK) conducted a Land Capacity Analysis (LCA) to determine the capacity for housing units and jobs within the City and surrounding unincorporated Urban Growth Area (UGA). This analysis estimated the total amount of new development that could occur on vacant or underutilized residential, commercial, and industrial lands over the planning period (2026-2046). Capacity is determined by several factors, including available land area, zoning regulations, critical areas identified by the city code, and market factors. BERK’s analysis examined individual parcels and deducted mapped critical areas in accordance with the existing Yakima Municipal Code (Chapter 15.27). The base point-in-time in which capacity was measured is May 2025, and the study area includes the entire city limits and UGA, both incorporated and unincorporated areas. Parcel data was retrieved from the Yakima County Assessor’s publicly available records. Critical area data was obtained as listed in Exhibit 2-21. For each critical area type, BERK applied a spatial buffer according to the City of Yakima development regulation requirements. Exhibit 2-21. Critical Area & Other Deductions Sources: City of Yakima Municipal Code Chapter 15.27; BERK, 2025. Once critical areas and their respective buffers were removed from the parcel land area, certain parcels were selected to be excluded from subsequent analysis based on the assumption that they are unlikely Category Definition Method/Assumption Data Source(s) Wetlands All as determined by the National Wetland Inventory. Category IV: 40’ All other categories: 150’ National Wetland Inventory Washington Department of Ecology City of Yakima Streams, lakes, and ponds All, with attributes for fish-bearing streams. Streams and lakes:  Type 1:  Streams: 100’  Lakes: 50’  Type 2: 100’  Type 3: 50’  Washington Department of Natural Resources Flood zones 100-yr flood zones. No buffer FEMA Geologic hazards & steep slopes High risk geologic hazards and slopes >40% across at least 10 feet. No buffer City & University of Washington Digital Elevation Models Formatted: Source 66 of 138 2-21 to see new development over the planning period. These parcels were selected based on present use information from the Yakima County Assessor’s Office. The specific use types considered not developable during the planning period, include:  Schools  Police & fire stations  Utilities  Open spaces & preserves  State or federally owned land  Churches & places of worship  Community centers After flagging those parcels for removal, the remaining parcels were assigned a current developable status. Exhibit 2-22 defines each parcel development status. Vacant, Agricultural, Partially-used, and Redevelopable parcels are assumed to have capacity for future development. Developed parcels are assumed to not have capacity for additional growth during the planning period. Exhibit 2-22. Parcel Development Status Definitions Status Type Definition Method/Assumption Data Source(s) Vacant Residential-zoned parcels on which no significant development has occurred. Improvement value <$10,000 County Assessor’s Office, City zoning Agricultural Residential-zoned parcels with agriculture as current use. Privately-owned land with agricultural current use County Assessor’s Office, City zoning Partially-used Residential-zoned parcels with existing housing units but capacity to add additional units. Single-family parcels in SR and R1 zones with single-family current use and greater than 0.5 acres. County Assessor’s Office, City zoning Redevelopable Parcels with existing structures (residential, commercial, or industrial) and a likelihood of redevelopment. (Not SR or R1 zones) Commercial, multi- family residential, or industrial zoned parcels with single-family current use and/or the ratio of improvement value to land value is <1 County Assessor’s Office, City zoning 67 of 138 2-22 Sources: City of Yakima, Yakima County Assessor, BERK, 2025. Next, BERK summed the buildable areas of developable parcels by zone. Additional deductions were then applied to this aggregated developable area to account for future right of way and market factors – the assumption that not all properties would change in the planning period such as due to property owner preferences. The amount deducted was dependent on the parcel status. For example, space needed for future rights-of-way to serve new development was deducted from all parcels, but Vacant and Agricultural parcels had higher deductions for future rights-of-way as they are less likely to already be served by that infrastructure than Partially-used or Redevelopable parcels. The deductions applied were:  2.5% deduction for future public or semi-public uses  Vacant or Agricultural parcels:  15% deduction for future rights-of-way  15% deduction for market factors  Partially-used or Redevelopable parcels:  10% deduction for future rights-of-way  25% deduction for market factors The output is the total developable area for the entire UGA within the planning period. Tagging parcels by their zoning designation and whether they are within the incorporated city illustrates developable area by zone and jurisdiction. Exhibit 2-23 presents the total developable area by zone in acres as determined by this LCA model. Status Type Definition Method/Assumption Data Source(s) Developed Already developed and not expected to see new development during the planning period. All parcels not included in any of the above categories. 68 of 138 2-23 Exhibit 2-23. Developable Land Area in the Yakima UGA by Zone Zone Incorporated City (acres) UGA (acres)Full UGA (acres) SR 128 790 918 R-1 933 2,368 3,302 R-2 948 283 1,231 R-3 264 39 303 B-1 35 0 36 B-2 68 17 85 HB 0 0 0 SCC 71 53 124 LCC 10 0 10 CBD 33 0 33 GC 330 30 360 M-1 437 282 720 M-2 17 0 17 RD 94 0 94 AS 40 0 40 Total 3,409 3,863 7,272 Sources: City of Yakima, Yakima County Assessor, BERK, 2025. Zone-specific density assumptions were then applied to the developable area outputs to determine the capacity for new housing units and jobs within the planning period. Assumptions were largely carried over from analysis completed during the previous City of Yakima Housing Needs Assessment in 2017. These values were the result of the analysis of achieved and potential densities per zone within Yakima. For mixed-use zones, the total developable acreage of that zone was split between commercial and residential uses. Exhibit 2-25 shows density and mixed use split assumptions. Exhibit 2-24. Density and Mixed-Use Split Assumptions by Zone in the Yakima UGA Zone Units per Acre Floor Area Ratio Square Feet per Job Split (Residential/ Non- Residential) Residential: SR (single- family) 4 N/A N/A 100% / 0% Residential: R-1 (single- family) 7 N/A N/A 100% / 0% 69 of 138 2-24 Residential: R-2 (two- family) 12 N/A N/A 100% / 0% Residential: R-3 (multi- family) 18 N/A N/A 100% / 0% Mixed-use: B-1 15 0.26 500 50% / 50% Mixed-use: B-2 15 0.26 500 50% / 50% Mixed-use: SCC 15 0.26 500 50% / 50% Mixed-use: LCC 15 0.26 500 50% / 50% Mixed-use: CBD 15 2.0 500 50% / 50% Mixed-use: GC 15 0.26 500 33% / 67% Mixed-use: HB N/A 1.0 500 50% / 50% Industrial: M-1 N/A 0.45 1,000 0% / 100% Industrial: M-2 N/A 0.45 1,000 0% / 100% Mixed-use: RD 15 0.35 500 50% / 50% Airport: AS N/A N/A 1,000 0% / 100% To calculate capacity for net new housing units, a zoning designation’s total developable acreage (after deductions) was first multiplied by its residential split (e.g. if in a mixed use zone a share would be residential and a share would be commercial) then by its assumed units per acre. For partially-used and redevelopable parcels, existing units were then deducted from the total capacity to achieve a net new unit capacity. Next, we estimated capacity for accessory dwelling units (ADUs). Our analysis estimates the number of net new housing units that could be built in the form of ADUs on parcels that are already developed with a detached single unit home. To identify parcels that could add an ADU, we used the following criteria:  Residential parcels that have only one unit as of 2025  Zoning allows for ADUs  Sufficient additional lLot size beyond the minimum required to support the existing single-family structure but no larger than half an acre, as those parcels would be candidates for subdivision.. 70 of 138 2-25 Following guidance from the Washington State Department of Commerce, we assumed that 10% of parcels identified as having potential to add an ADU would choose add a single new ADU within the planning horizon.1 Presents the capacity of new ADUs for the city of Yakima. The majority of ADU capacity exists in areas zoned R-1. Exhibit 2-25. New ADU Capacity by Zone Zone ADU City) ADU Capacity (Unincorporated UGA) ADU Capacity (Full UGA) SR 10 6 15 R-1 1,213 198 1,412 R-2 449 2 451 R-3 104 4 109 B-1 9 0 9 B-2 8 1 9 HB 0 0 0 SCC 2 0 2 LCC 0 0 0 CBD 0 0 0 GC 36 0 36 M-1 0 0 0 M-2 0 0 0 RD 2 0 2 AS 0 0 0 Total 1,832 211 2,043 Exhibit 2-25 shows the net new housing unit capacity per zone, including ADUs, as determined by this Land Capacity Analysis. 1 While 10% is the high end of the participate rate range offered in the Commerce guidance, we think it is justified due to changes in Yakima’s ADU regulations required by state law. These changes require the City and County to allow for up to two ADUs on any residential parcel within a UGA and allow for the sale of the ADUs as independent units. These changes have potential to make ADU production more feasible in Yakima. Additionally, our methodology does not consider the potential for ADUs to be included in new housing development, which adds even more capacity. Formatted: Indent: Left: 0", Hanging: 0.06", Keep linestogether 71 of 138 2-26 Exhibit 2-26. Net New Housing Units by Zone Zone City) Unit Capacity (Unincorporated UGA) Unit Capacity (Full UGA) SR 665 3,710 4,375 R-1 7,095 15,776 22,871 R-2 6,944 3,327 10,271 R-3 3,273 617 3,890 B-1 186 1 187 B-2 426 116 541 HB 0 0 0 SCC 516 396 912 LCC 74 0 74 CBD 187 0 187 GC 1,301 145 1,445 M-1 0 0 0 M-2 0 0 0 RD 1,062 0 1,062 AS 0 0 0 Total 21,728 24,087 45,815 Finally, to arrive at total job capacity, buildable square footage capacity was calculated as the developable acreage multiplied by an assumed Floor Area Ratio (FAR) and converted into square feet. The product was then multiplied by the assumed Square Feet per Job value respective of zoning (shown in Exhibit 2-26). The final job capacity outputs from the model are shown in Exhibit 2-27. Exhibit 2-27. Square Feet per Job Assumptions Zone Square Feet per Job SR N/A R-1 N/A R-2 N/A R-3 N/A B-1 500 B-2 500 72 of 138 2-27 HB 500 SCC 500 LCC 500 CBD 500 GC 500 M-1 1,000 M-2 1,000 RD 500 AS 1,000 Exhibit 2-28 Job Capacity by Zone Zone New Jobs Capacity (Incorporated City) UGA) New Jobs Capacity (Full UGA) SR 0 0 0 R-1 0 0 0 R-2 0 0 0 R-3 0 0 0 B-1 374 3 377 B-2 648 173 821 HB 11 0 11 SCC 600 592 1,192 LCC 56 0 56 CBD 2,558 0 2,558 GC 4,224 406 4,631 M-1 8,337 6,313 14,650 M-2 334 0 334 RD 1,997 0 1,997 AS 0 0 0 Total 19,140 7,487 26,627 73 of 138 2-28 2.4. Planning and Regulatory Context Beyond the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element, Regulations and Plans shaping the design of the built environment include the City’s zoning ordinance and a series of functional plans guiding infrastructure. Each is addressed below. 2.4.1. Title 15 – Yakima Urban Area Zoning Ordinance Title 15 of the Yakima Municipal Code provides standards for the various zoning districts and permitted uses throughout the City. Key provisions affecting the design of development include: Permitted uses (Chapter 15.04) and associated land use classification system. While nearly all cities contain lists of permitted outright, conditional, and permitted uses, Yakima has a system of review approvals from Class 1 to 3. Exhibit 2-28 shows difference use classifications. Exhibit 2-29 Use Classes for Permitting Class Type Description Example of uses in zones Class 1 Permitted subject to administrative approval Attached or residential uses in R-1 or R-2 zones Class 2 Permitted uses also subject to administrative approval, but allows the administrative official to add conditions to mitigate impacts or require Class 2 uses to undergo a Class 3 review if certain conditions are present. Since there are very little design related standards in Title 15, this system adds a level of uncertainty and unpredictability to the review of uses that can be challenging both to applicants and the administrative official. Parts and Accessories (tires, batteries, etc.) uses in B2 zone. Class 3 Uses are generally not permitted in a district, but may be approved by the hearing examiner after Type III review and a public hearing. The hearing examiner may impose conditions to an approval. As with Class 2 approvals, without the benefit of design standards within Title 15, this procedure can add a level of uncertainty and unpredictability to the review of such uses. Office Contractor Building and Trade (Plumbing, Heating, Electrical, and Painting) in R-3 zone. Site design and improvement standards (Chapter 15.05) address the following aspects. These standards implement various land use policies of the Plan:  Maximum lot coverage (percentage of land area covered by structure and other impervious areas)  Minimum front, side, and rear setbacks (which vary depending on adjacent street classification)  Maximum height  Fence and wall height standards Formatted: BERK bold Formatted: Heading 3 74 of 138 2-29  Access requirement (frontage by a public road or acceptable access easement)  Sidewalks are required on one side of the street (except for single family structures). If no sidewalks existing within 200 feet of the use, no sidewalks are required.  Maximum density calculations (dwelling unit/acre)  Minimum lot size and width (which varies depending on housing type and zone)  Other development standards in Title 15 of the Yakima Municipal Code. This includes:  Off-street parking and loading (Chapter 15.06), which addresses minimum parking requirements, driveway locations, parking lot landscaping and lighting, and off street loading requirements.  Site screening standards (Chapter 15.07), which requires 3-10-feet of landscape screening or fencing for uses along edges of zoning districts.  Sign standards (Chapter 15.08)  Special development standards (Chapter 15.09) for specific uses  Critical areas provisions (Chapter 15.27)  Master planned development overlay provisions (Chapter 15.28)  Wireless communication facilities provisions (Chapter 15.29)  Overlay zone provisions (Chapters 15.28, 15.30, and 15.31 regarding master planned development, airport safety, and institutional overlays) 2.4.1. 2.4.2. Adopted Plans and Projects Yakima Housing Action Plan 2021 The Housing Action Plan developed objectives and strategies for Yakima to promote affordable housing. Objectives were set to increase housing supply and affordability, increase home ownership, and prevent displacement. It set priorities for various strategies for implementation to be led by the City or its partners. Yakima Parks and Recreation Comprehensive Plan 2022-2027 The Parks and Recreation Comprehensive Plan, adopted in 2022, is the required six-year park plan update, which includes an inventory of park and recreational facilities, needs inventory, opportunities, goals and objectives, industry standards, demands, and needs, and a capital improvement program. Historic Preservation Element (July 15, 2016) The Yakima Historic Preservation Commission completed this Element consistent with the GMA. It was incorporated with the 2040 Comprehensive Plan in 2017. YMC 11.62, Historic Preservation Ordinance for Special Evaluation provides implementation code for this element. 2040 Transportation System Plan (adopted in 2017) The Transportation System Plan is intended to serve as a guide for making transportation decisions to address both short and long term needs. To meet Growth Management Act (GMA) requirements, the Formatted: Default Paragraph Font, Font: (Default)+Headings (Libre Baskerville), 12 pt, Underline, Fontcolor: Accent 1 Formatted: Default Paragraph Font, Font: (Default)+Headings (Libre Baskerville), 12 pt, Underline, Fontcolor: Accent 1 Formatted: Default Paragraph Font Formatted: Default Paragraph Font, Font: (Default)+Headings (Libre Baskerville), 12 pt, Underline, Fontcolor: Accent 1 Formatted: Default Paragraph Font, Font: (Default)+Headings (Libre Baskerville), 12 pt, Underline, Fontcolor: Accent 1 75 of 138 2-30 Transportation Systems Plan must identify existing transportation system characteristics, establish standards for levels of service, and identify existing and future deficiencies based on land use growth projections. Six Year Transportation Improvement Plan (From 2025 to 2030) The Transportation Improvement Plan identifies major projects and funding sources for a six-year time frame. Yakima’s Transportation Element will be updated as part of the Comprehensive Plan, in coordination with Yakima Valley Regional Council’s (YVCOG) data. Downtown Master Plan In November of 2013, the City Council approved an Action Plan of steps to be taken to accomplish this priority. The Action Plan was a summary of the Yakima Downtown Master Plan Report prepared in 2013 by Crandall Arambula for the City Council. The Plan provided several action recommendations. Some of the actions have been completed such as a parking plan, and Chestnut Avenue improvement. The City is considering a new strategic plan in 2026 to identify goals and actions for Yakima’s downtown. Wastewater Collection System Master Plan This master plan was prepared in 2023 and describes the City’s wastewater collection system, the planning area characteristics, hydraulic criteria, and the hydraulic model development. The prioritized capital improvement program accounts for growth through the Yakima Urban Growth Area and includes suggested construction triggers for the orderly expansion of the wastewater collection system. Yakima Waste Water Treatment Plant Facility Master Plan, 2022 The purpose of this Plan is to review the overall condition of the treatment plan facility and its capability to meet capacity needs and regulatory requirements through the planning period. The primary factors that will drive WWTP improvements are generally conditions, capacity, and/or regulatory based. This plan identifies existing and future needs or deficiencies of the WWTP and recommends improvements to remedy these items. The Treatment Plan is projected to serve 147,090 people by 2040, identify gaps and includes recommendations. Yakima 2017 Water System Plan The City’s water system plan was developed in 2017 to analyze the service area, water system and forecast water demand. This plan identifies policies for providing services such as annexation requirements, performance standards etc. The City aims to connect underserved areas to northeast and south-central areas in the City where utility services currently do not exist. Formatted: Default Paragraph Font, Font: (Default)+Headings (Libre Baskerville), 12 pt, Underline, Fontcolor: Accent 1 Formatted: Default Paragraph Font, Font: (Default)+Headings (Libre Baskerville), 12 pt, Underline, Fontcolor: Accent 1 Formatted: Default Paragraph Font, Font: (Default)+Headings (Libre Baskerville), 12 pt, Underline, Fontcolor: Accent 1 Formatted: Heading 5 Formatted: Default Paragraph Font, Font: Bold 76 of 138 3-1 3. Housing Analysis 3.1. Overview The City of Yakima’s Housing Element provides a framework for the City to support and encourage housing supply that meets local housing needs. The Housing Element will plan to increase housing choice and affordability for Yakima residents and workers of all income levels. This Housing Existing Conditions Report will serve as an appendix to the Housing Element. The purpose of this report is to provide an understanding of the Yakima community and its housing conditions. Overall, this report answers the following questions:  Who lives and works in Yakima and what are their socioeconomic characteristics?  What types of housing are available in Yakima? This report includes a Community Profile and Housing Inventory. The Community Profile analyzes Yakima’s population trends and projections, and includes data on age, race and ethnicity, household size, residents with special housing needs such as homelessness, disability status, farm workers, and employment. The Housing Inventory summarizes characteristics of Yakima’s housing stock, including housing types, location, tenure, unit sizes, conditions, and affordability for both rental and owned housing. Based on this understanding, we conduct analysis to assess future housing needs. 3.2. Summary of Key Findings  There is a housing shortage in Yakima. Only 2.4% of rental housing units in Yakima are vacant, which is lower than what is considered a healthy rate of 5% to 6%. The supply of ownership housing is also constrained. When vacancy rates and supply are low, people looking for homes have fewer options, increasing competition for the limited units available. This drives up both rents and housing prices.  Housing prices are rising faster than incomes. The typical home value in Yakima has risen by 99%, nearly doubling, between 2014 to 2022. Over the same period, the median family income only increased by 43%. This indicates homeownership is getting further out of reach for many prospective buyers.  Many households in Yakima are cost-burdened. Between 2017 and 2021, 32% of all households in Yakima were cost burdened. Nearly half (44%) of renter households, and just under a quarter (23%) of owner households, were cost-burdened. Cost-burdened households spend a large portion (over 30%) of their available income on housing costs. This leaves less money available for other vital needs like food, transportation, healthcare, and education.  Needs are greatest among low-income households. About 75% of all households with incomes below 50% of the Area Median Income (AMI) are cost-burdened. Over half of these households are severely cost-burdened, meaning they spend over 50% of their income on housing costs. While 77 of 138 3-2 there are low-income households living in neighborhoods across the city, the greatest concentration of low-income households is in eastern Yakima, and many of these households are of Hispanic/Latino ethnicity.  There is considerable need among elderly residents. There are 3,405 cost-burdened elderly households in Yakima. About a third of these households are elderly persons (age 62+) living alone, and nearly all have incomes well below the county median. These residents are spending more than 30% of their income on housing costs and often have fixed incomes that don’t keep pace with rising housing costs over time.  Yakima needs more housing diversity. Over 60% of all housing in the City of Yakima are single- family homes. Not all households require, or can afford, that much space. For example, 30% of all households in Yakima are individuals living alone. Yet only 6% of housing units in Yakima are studios and only 11% have just one bedroom. Increasing the diversity of housing options available will increase housing supply and provide more choices for residents seeking more affordable housing that meets their current needs. 78 of 138 3-3 3.3. Community Profile 3.3.1. Population During the last ten years, Yakima County had an annual average population growth rate of about 0.6%, which was less than half Washington’s statewide growth rate of 1.4%. Yakima County’s population was estimated to be 263,200 in 2024, up from the 248,229 county residents in 2014. As the county’s largest population center, the City of Yakima has also grown steadily in recent years. In 2024, the city had an estimated population of 99,370 residents. While Yakima has grown at a steady rate, the city slower growth than most peer cities in eastern and central Washington, as shown in Exhibit 3-1. Population Growth in City of Yakima and Peer Cities, 2016-2024. Exhibit 3-1. Population Growth in City of Yakima and Peer Cities, 2014-2024 Sources: Washington Office of Financial Management, 2024; BERK, 2025. 3.3.2. Age of Population The City of Yakima’s age distribution aligns closely with Yakima County, with a slightly smaller proportion of younger residents (0 – 24 years old) and a slightly larger proportion of older residents (70+ years old) than the county, as shown in Exhibit 3-2. Age Distribution in City of Yakima and Yakima County, 2022. The City of Yakima has a large population of children, with 29,558 aged 19 years old or younger (31% of the total population). Yakima: 6.0% To t a l P o p u l a t i o n G r o w t h Year 79 of 138 3-4 Exhibit 3-2. Age Distribution in City of Yakima and Yakima County, 2022 Sources: US Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Yr Estimates, 2018-2022; BERK, 2025. Demographic patterns across Yakima vary by geography. As shown in Exhibit 3-3, residents aged 65 or older are more typically located in the north central and western parts of the city. This aligns with the locations of local retirement communities and assisted living facilities such as The Terraces at Summitview and Fieldstone. Residents under 18 are more typically located in the south central and eastern parts of the city. Many of the areas with larger youth populations have larger proportions of Hispanic or Latino residents, as shown later in Exhibit 3-6. Exhibit 3-3. Areas with Large Percentages of Senior or Minor Residents, City of Yakima, 2022 Sources: US Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Yr Estimates, 2018-2022; BERK, 2025. 80 of 138 3-5 3.3.3. Race and Ethnicity Yakima is ethnically diverse. The City of Yakima’s Hispanic or Latino population comprises 47% of the total population, the largest of any reported comparison geographies besides Yakima County. The share of people who identify as Non-Hispanic People of Color grew from 5% in 2017 to 8% in 2022. A comparison of Yakima’s Hispanic or Latino population to comparable communities is shown in Exhibit 3-4. Percentage of Population by Race and Ethnicity in City of Yakima and Comparison Geographies, 2017 and 2022. The Non-Hispanic People of Color group includes those who identify as American Indian or Alaska Native, which makes up 1% of the city’s population, as well as other races. This percentage likely reflects the nearby presence of the Yakama Nation in Yakima County. Exhibit 3-4. Percentage of Population by Race and Ethnicity in City of Yakima and Comparison Geographies, 2017 and 2022 Sources: US Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Yr Estimates, 2018-2022; BERK, 2025. 81 of 138 3-6 Reflecting its ethnic diversity, Yakima has a high proportion of residents (38%) who speak a language other than English at home compared to 21% statewide, shown in Exhibit 3-5. Spanish is the most common language among non-English speakers, with 36% of the city’s total population speaking it at home. Exhibit 3-5. Languages Spoken at Home in City of Yakima and Washington State, 2017 and 2022 Sources: US Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Yr Estimates, 2018-2022; BERK, 2025. Areas on the east half of the city and near downtown have larger proportions of residents of Hispanic or Latino origin than areas on the west half of the city, as shown in Exhibit 3-6. Comparing to the age HISTORY OF THE LATINO COMMUNITY IN YAKIMA COUNTY The large number of Latino and Hispanic residents in the city reflects historical patterns of migration and employment, tied mostly to the local agricultural industry. While the city has been a destination for migrant Hispanic farmworkers over the years, growing numbers of Hispanic farmworkers began permanently settling in the area from the 1930s to 1980s due to changes in the agricultural industry and immigration reforms. Yakima’s population grew from roughly 3,200 residents in 1900, steadily increasing decade after decade, to 45,500 in 1960. These population increases were in part due to the arrival of Mexican American farmworkers from Texas in the early 1930s. During World War II, the U.S. government established the Bracero program, which allowed Mexican citizens to come to the Yakima Valley to work. While these workers did not settle in the Valley, this established the Yakima Valley as a destination for Latinx farmworkers. By the 1980s many former seasonal workers settled permanently in the Yakima Valley due to changes in immigration policies. By the 1980s, Yakima County's Hispanic population was 14.8%, and by the 2000 census, 33% of the residents of Yakima County were of Hispanic or Latino origin, compared to 7.5% in the state. In 2022, 51% of Yakima County’s population identified as Hispanic, nearly four times the statewide percentage of 13.1% 82 of 138 3-7 distribution map shown in Exhibit 3-3 reveals that there are larger populations of residents under 18 in areas that have large proportions of Hispanic or Latino residents. Exhibit 3-6. Percent of Residents that Identify as Hispanic or Latino, City of Yakima, 2022 Source: US Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2018-2022; BERK Consulting, 2025. 3.3.4. Households A household is a group of people who live in a single dwelling unit, such as a house or apartment. Households can have one member or many members. They can be families or unrelated people living together. As of 2022, there are an estimated 34,830 total households in the City of Yakima. Understanding the makeup of the households in the city across age, race, and family sizes helps us to better understand the diversity of household types and sizes which can help support affordable housing strategies. 3.3.5. Household Size The average household size in Yakima is 2.61 people, down slightly from 2017’s average size of 2.71. More than half (59%) of the city’s residents live in single or two-member households. Exhibit 3-7 shows the breakdown of households by size by tenure. 83 of 138 3-8 Exhibit 3-7. Household Size by Tenure in City of Yakima, 2018-2022 Sources: US Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Yr Estimates, 2018-2022; BERK, 2025. 3.3.6. Household Income When summarizing housing affordability by income level, households are typically grouped relative to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Area Median Family Income (also known as “AMI”). The 2025 AMI for Yakima County is $82,300. However much of the data in this section reflects conditions as of 2021, when AMI was $60,294. HUD also applies adjustments for household size when determining the income level of a household. This is to reflect the fact that it requires more income to affordably support a larger family compared to just one or two household members. Exhibit 3-8 breaks down renter- and owner-occupied households in the City of Yakima by income level relative to AMI. It shows a significant difference between owner-occupied and renter- occupied households, with owner households much more likely to have incomes above 100% AMI.2 Only 20% of renter households had income at or above AMI, compared to 54% of owner households. Close to a fifth of renter households have extremely low incomes, compared to 8% of owner households. 2 Note that when grouping households by income level, HUD adjusts income thresholds based on household size to reflect the fact that the living expenses for a one-person household are significantly less than those of a family of four. These adjustments are based on HUD's published household Income Limits needed to qualify for income-restricted affordable housing that is set aside for households at a specified income level or below. Washington State Housing Finance Commission publishes an expanded version of these income limits for each county in Washington State. 84 of 138 3-9 Exhibit 3-8. Percentage of Households by Income Level in City of Yakima, 2021 Sources: US HUD Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy, 2017-2021; BERK, 2025. Median household incomes vary by ethnicity as well, as shown in Exhibit 3-9. The median Hispanic or Latino household has an income about 9% lower than median Non-Hispanic White households. Exhibit 3-9. Median Household Income by Ethnicity in City of Yakima and Washington State, 2022 Sources: US Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Yr Estimates, 2018-2022; BERK, 2025. A map showing disparities in income by neighborhood is provided in Exhibit 3-10. Areas with lower incomes are concentrated near the urban core of Yakima, while areas with higher incomes above AMI are typically found on the outskirts of the city, or in the west half. 85 of 138 3-10 Exhibit 3-10. Median Household Income by Census Tract in City of Yakima, 2022 Source: US Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Yr Estimates, 2018-2022; BERK, 2025. 3.3.7. Cost-Burdened Households One of the most common indicators of affordable housing needs is the number of households that are "cost-burdened" or spending a large share of their income on housing. These households have limited resources left over to pay for other life necessities such as food, medical care, transportation, and education. They are also at higher risk of displacement when housing costs rise, or life circumstances change. HUD considers housing to be affordable if it costs no more than 30% of a household’s income. Households paying more than 30% of their income for housing are considered cost-burdened, and households paying more than 50% are considered severely cost-burdened. In 2021, at least 32% of all households in Yakima were cost-burdened, as shown in Exhibit 3-11. Households with lower incomes are more likely to be cost-burdened. Exhibit 3-11 and Exhibit 3-12 present estimates of total households by income level and cost-burdened status. It differentiates households that are moderately cost-burdened (spending 30-50% of their income on housing) from those that are severely cost-burdened (spending more than 50% of their income on housing). While there are cost-burdened households across the income spectrum, severe cost-burden is most prevalent among the lowest income groups. This includes slightly under 3,000 households with extremely low incomes (less than 30% AMI), roughly 1,400 households with very low incomes (30 – 50% AMI), and 700 households with low incomes (50-80% AMI). 86 of 138 3-11 Exhibit 3-11. Cost Burden Status by Income Level of Households, City of Yakima, 2017-2021 Sources: US HUD Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy, 2017-2021; BERK, 2025. Exhibit 3-12. Total Cost-Burdened Households by Income Level, City of Yakima, 2017-2021 Sources: US HUD Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy, 2017-2021; BERK, 2025. As shown in Exhibit 3-13, renters are more likely to be cost-burdened than owners, with nearly half (44%) of renter households cost-burdened, compared to just under a quarter (23%) of owner households. Renters are also more severely cost-burdened than owners, with 23% of renter households severely cost-burdened compared to 8% of owner households. 87 of 138 3-12 Exhibit 3-13. Household Tenure by Cost Burden in City of Yakima, 2017-2021 Sources: US HUD Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy, 2017-2021; BERK, 2025. Renter households are most vulnerable to the impacts of rising housing costs. Exhibit 3-14 shows estimated counts of cost-burdened renter-occupied households by household type and income level. While there are households struggling with housing costs across the entire income spectrum, the greatest number are among household types with incomes below 50% of AMI. The greatest need is among Small Family, Elderly Non-Family, and Other (non-family) households, which are typically people living alone or with unrelated housemates. Exhibit 3-14. Cost-Burdened Renter Households by Household Type and Income Level, City of Yakima, 2017-2021 Household Type Description Family household A household that includes two or more people related by birth marriage or adoption. (Definition applies to all household types that include “family.”) Small Family Two persons, neither aged 62 or older, or 3 or 4 persons Large Family Five or more persons Elderly Family Two persons, with either or both aged 62 or older 88 of 138 3-13 Elderly Non-Family One or two unrelated people with either aged 62 or older Other Non-family, non-elderly households (includes those living alone or with housemates) Note: AMI = HUD Area Median Family Income Sources: US HUD Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy, 2017-2021; BERK, 2025. 3.3.8. Residents with Special Housing Needs Several groups may have special housing needs or need supportive services, such as residents experiencing homelessness, residents with disabilities, and older residents. Given the city’s proximity to agricultural areas with significant seasonal workforce needs, farmworker housing needs also merit consideration. 3.3.9. Residents Experiencing Homelessness According to the Department of Commerce’s Snapshot of Homelessness in Washington State for July 2024, there were 11,971 persons who were homeless or unstably housed in Yakima County.3 This was approximately 5% of the county population. Among these people, 9,906 were considered homeless.4 During the same year, 2,894 individuals countywide accessed homelessness services, according to the Commerce Homeless System Performance County Report Card. Entries are broken down by project type, with nearly half (49%) of entries occurring at Emergency Shelters. A summary of the results is shown in Exhibit 3-15. 3 Commerce extracted housing status data from ProviderOne, the Automated Client Eligibility System (ACES), and the Homeless Management Information System (HMIS). "Homeless or Unstably Housed" refers to all clients or households experiencing homelessness or housing instability (e.g., they are literally homeless/unsheltered, receiving housing services that indicate housing instability, residing in transitional housing, or couch surfing). (Commerce, 2024). 4 “Homeless Only" is a subset of the "Homeless or Unstably Housed" population and includes unsheltered clients/households who lack a fixed nighttime residence, are living outside or in a shelter not fit for human habitation, or are living in emergency shelter. (Commerce, 2024). 89 of 138 3-14 Exhibit 3-15. Homeless System Project Entries by Project Type, Yakima County, SFY 2024 Sources: Department of Commerce, 2024; BERK, 2025. The 2024 Yakima County Homeless Point-in-Time (PIT) Count surveyed individuals on causes of homelessness. The top reasons included eviction, alcohol/substance use, and family crisis. However, there are often a combination of factors that contribute to housing insecurity and homelessness. Exhibit 3-16 ranks the reasons cited by survey respondents. Research consistently indicates that the primary driver of homelessness is a lack of affordable housing supply.5 So while these individuals may have had life circumstances that made them more vulnerable to becoming homeless, the root challenge is housing affordability. 5 See Homelessness is a Housing Problem (Colburn and Aldern, 2022) 90 of 138 3-15 Exhibit 3-16. Top Reasons Cited as Cause of Homelessness, Yakima County, 2024 Note: Participants could select more than one cause. Source: Yakima County Point-in-Time Community Report, 2024; BERK, 2025. While conditions may have changed since its report, Yakima County’s Five-Year Plan to End Homelessness (2018) identified the following population as needing specific attention with regards to homelessness care:  Individuals experiencing chronic homelessness,  Unaccompanied youth,  Veterans,  Families with children (including victims of domestic violence), and  Individuals over the age of 62. 3.3.10. Households with Disabilities Exhibit 3-17 shows renter households in Yakima by disability status and income. While there are households with disabilities across the entire income spectrum, lower income households are more likely to have a disability than higher income households. Of the disabilities listed, the most common conditions include ambulatory limitations and hearing or vision impairments. People with disabilities often have special housing needs, and benefit from accessible layouts, supportive design, and proximity to healthcare services. 91 of 138 3-16 Exhibit 3-17. Renter Households by Disability Status and Income Level in City of Yakima, 2021 Note: AMI = HUD Area Median Family Income Sources: US HUD Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy, 2017-2021; BERK, 2025. 3.3.11. Older Residents 15,250 residents in Yakima are aged 65 or older, or about 16% of the population.6 While older residents have a range of housing preferences, many need affordable, accessible housing in age-friendly neighborhoods with close links to healthcare and other supports. Some of these households in Yakima have the financial means to afford appropriate housing and services. Many others do not. Exhibit 3-18 shows the prevalence of cost burden among elderly households across income ranges. The greatest need is among Non-Family elderly households (typically people living alone) with incomes below 30% AMI. Exhibit 3-18. Elderly, Cost-Burdened Households by Household Type and Income Level, City of Yakima, 2017-2021 Note: AMI = HUD Area Median Family Income Sources: US HUD Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy, 2017-2021; BERK, 2025. Washington State Office of Financial Management (OFM) projects that the population of elderly households in Yakima County will increase faster than younger age groups. Exhibit 3-19 shows that by 6 Source: American Community Survey 5-year Estimates, 2018-2022 92 of 138 3-17 the year 2050, 20% of the population will be over age 65, up from 15% in 2022. This indicates the need for housing appropriate for elderly households will increase in the years ahead. Exhibit 3-19. Projected Population by Age Range, Yakima County Source: OFM, 2022; BERK, 2025. 93 of 138 3-18 3.3.12. Farmworkers Yakima County is the biggest county in Washington for agriculture, measured both by number of workers and by number of farms.7 In 2023, there were 28,603 farmworker jobs in Yakima County, seasonally adjusted.8 However, as shown in Exhibit 3-20 there are more workers in the summer months than in the remainder of the year. This is due to the demand for seasonal farmworkers during the harvest months. Many of these seasonal workers are migrants who need temporary housing. A 2022 study by the Department of Commerce found that the number of beds available in seasonal farmworker housing in Yakima does not nearly accommodate all the demand for seasonal housing, resulting in a gap of over 8,000 seasonal beds.9 The remainder of these seasonal workers must compete for housing with other renter households in Yakima. The average year-round agricultural employee in this region is estimated to earn $39,750 annually in wages, significantly less than the median household income. While a household with this income can afford an average 1-bedroom apartment, it is far less than needed to afford a family sized rental or homeownership. Exhibit 3-20. Farmworker Employment Counts, Yakima County, 2023 Source: Washington State Employment Security Department, 2023; BERK, 2025. 7 Washington State Employment Security Department, Agricultural Workforce Statistics, 2023 8 Seasonal adjustment is a statistical technique that accounts for predictable seasonal patterns in agricultural employment. It is calculated by taking the average of monthly employment counts across the entire year. 9 Washington State Employment Security Department, Agricultural Workforce Statistics, 2023 94 of 138 3-19 3.3.13. Employment 3.3.14. Countywide Employment Yakima County had a total covered employment of 116,064 in 2023. The average annual wage was $49,831, or 57.2% of the state average of $87,091.10 The agricultural sector accounted for 25% of jobs (28,695 in total). The next largest employment sectors are Government with 16% (18,379 jobs), Health Care and Social Assistance at 15% (17,853 jobs), and Retail trade with 10% (11,509 jobs). 3.3.15. Citywide Employment According to the Census, as of 2022 there were 50,087 jobs in the City of Yakima. Between 2017 and 2022, the city gained about 2,799 jobs, averaging ~1.2% growth (560 jobs) per year.11 Top sectors in the city include agriculture, health care, retail, and manufacturing. The City of Yakima's agricultural and manufacturing employers are diverse and include fruit packers, beef processors, and canneries. The jobs in the health sector reflect the city’s role as a regional medical center, with a hospital and the nearby Pacific Northwest University of Health Sciences (in Terrace Heights). The highest concentration of jobs in Yakima are Downtown and in the eastern part of the city. About 1 in 7 (14%) primary jobs in Yakima paid less than $1,250 per month in 2022 (equivalent to $15,000 annually). However, not all these jobs are full-time. In 2022, a full-time minimum wage worker earned $2,511 a month. About a third (35%) of the jobs in Yakima paid between $1,250 and $3,333 per month. Many of those working these jobs would be cost-burdened by a one-bedroom rental without working multiple jobs, or rooming or cohabitating with others. The annual minimum wage increased annually to $16.28 per hour, or $2,821 per month for a full-time worker in 2024.12 Exhibit 3-21 shows that the average 1-bedroom rental in Yakima requires slightly more than 30% of monthly earnings for a full-time minimum wage worker. Exhibit 3-21. Housing Affordability in Yakima for a Full-Time Minimum-Wage Worker, 2024 Sources: Washington Department of Labor & Industries, 2024; Washington Center for Real Estate Research, 2024; BERK, 2025. Exhibit 3-22 presents employment density within the City of Yakima in 2022. Employment is most dense around the downtown core near the east side of the city. A few other points of dense employment exist in Yakima, including one at the MultiCare Yakima medical campus in central Yakima. There is also a smaller concentration of industrial and commercial jobs along Fruitvale Blvd in northern Yakima. Job density is lowest in aeras predominated by residential development. 10 Sources: WA Employment Security Department, Yakima County Profile, 2025; BERK, 2025. 11 Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, Center for Economic Studies, 2017 & 2022; BERK, 2025. 12 Source: Washington Department of Labor and Industries, 2025. Monthly Earnings for Full-Time Minimum Wage Worker Average 1-Bedroom Rental Cost Share of Earnings Spent on Housing $2,821 $896 32% 95 of 138 3-20 Exhibit 3-22. Employment Density in the City of Yakima, 2022 Source: US Census Bureau, Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics, 2022; BERK, 2025. 3.3.16. Employment Trends Employment growth between 2012 and 2022 has been mostly healthy: an average of +2.1% growth per year during the period. This period includes the COVID-19 pandemic, which impacted employment and job growth. By 2022, employment recovered to levels seen before the pandemic, as shown in Exhibit 3-23. Many lower-paying employment sectors, such as healthcare support (nursing/medical assistants or home health aides), retail, and the food service industry, are currently in demand.13 13 WA Employment Security Department, Occupations in Demand List, 2025. 96 of 138 3-21 Exhibit 3-23. Total Jobs in the City of Yakima, 2012-2022 Sources: US Census Bureau, Center for Economic Studies, 2012-2022; BERK, 2025. 3.3.17. Worker Residential Locations Many who work within the city of Yakima live elsewhere. Often, a lack of affordable housing in an economic center leads workers to search for living arrangements outside of their place of work. These workers have longer commutes, spend more of their income on gas and vehicle maintenance, and often live further from services. Exhibit 3-24 shows the commute distances for people who work within the city of Yakima. While most workers live within 10 miles of the city, a large share (almost 40%, or nearly 20,000 jobs) commute more than 10 miles. More than 12,000 workers commute more than 50 miles, bringing in people from places such as the Tri-Cities to the east or Wenatchee to the north. Exhibit 3-24. Commute Distance for Workers, City of Yakima, 2022 Commute Distance Count Share Less than 10 miles 30,370 61% 10 to 24 miles 4,652 9% 25 to 50 miles 2,907 6% Greater than 50 miles 12,158 24% Source: US Census Bureau, Center for Economic Studies, 2022; BERK, 2025. 97 of 138 3-22 3.4. Housing Inventory 3.4.1. Housing Supply Characteristics 3.4.2. Housing Units by Type There is a total of 38,584 housing units in Yakima, shown in Exhibit 3-25. Well over half (61%) of these units are single family homes and 18% are multi-family buildings of 5+ units. Another 7% of units are smaller multi-family structures such as triplex and quadplex buildings, while duplexes account for 9%. Mobile and manufactured homes make up 5% of the housing inventory. Exhibit 3-25. Housing Inventory by Type in City of Yakima, 2024 Source: Washington Office of Financial Management, 2024; BERK Consulting, 2025. 3.4.3. Unit Size Exhibit 3-26 shows the Yakima housing supply by number of bedrooms and the share of households by household size. While roughly 17% of housing units are studios or 1-bedroom units 30% of households have one-person. This indicates a potential undersupply of smaller units compared to need. 98 of 138 3-23 Exhibit 3-26. Percentage of Housing Unit Sizes Compared to Household Sizes, City of Yakima, 2022 Source: US Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Yr Estimates, 2018-2022; BERK, 2025. 3.4.4. Housing Condition According to the Yakima County Assessor’s Office as of April 2025, about 20% of the city’s residential parcels had primary structures that were built since 2000, and nearly two-thirds (63%) of units were built 40 or more years ago. These older units may represent lower quality housing stock that may require additional investments for upkeep. Older housing may also need modifications to ensure they are accessible for older residents, differently-abled residents, and families. While some older units may need maintenance or accessibility improvements, older housing stock may be the more affordable housing available in the city. Exhibit 3-27 maps the geographical distribution of residential structure by year built. It shows that much of the older housing stock in the city is located in central and eastern Yakima, in areas that are typically close to amenities, services, and jobs. Preservation and support for home maintenance in these areas can contribute to sustaining this relatively affordable component of Yakima’s market housing supply. 99 of 138 3-24 Exhibit 3-27. Residential Properties by Year Built, City of Yakima, 2025 Source: Yakima County Assessor’s Office, 2025; BERK, 2025. 3.4.5. Housing Tenure In Yakima, just over half (54%) of housing units are owner-occupied (32% with a mortgage and 22% without) while 46% are renter-occupied, as shown in Exhibit 3-28. There are major disparities in homeownership by race and ethnicity. Exhibit 3-29 shows that 62% of White, Non-Hispanic households own their homes, compared to only 42% of Hispanic or Latino households. Exhibit 3-28. Household Tenure, City of Yakima, 2022 Source: US Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Yr Estimates, 2018-2022; BERK, 2025. 100 of 138 3-25 Exhibit 3-29. Housing Tenure by Race and Ethnicity, City of Yakima, 2021 Note: Households of color includes Hispanic or Latino households as well as households of a race other than White alone. Sources: US HUD Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy, 2017-2021; BERK, 2025. 3.4.6. Home Ownership Homeownership is the primary way most American families accumulate wealth. Homeownership in advantaged neighborhoods also provides access to higher performing school districts, amenities, and social capital that can lead to better opportunities. In 2021, there was a total of 18,500 owner-occupied housing units in Yakima. Exhibit 3-30 shows change in housing values over time in the city of Yakima compared to median family incomes in Yakima County. The separation between home value and income has grown between 2014 and 2022. In that period, the typical home value in Yakima rose by 99%, nearly doubling. Over the same period, the median family income only increased by 43%. This indicates homeownership is getting further out of reach for many prospective home buyers. Exhibit 3-30. Percent Change since 2014 in Typical Home Value and Median Family Income (MFI) Note: Historic MFI and home value data are not adjusted for inflation. Sources: Zillow, 2025; US Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Yr Estimates, 2018-2022; BERK, 2025. 101 of 138 3-26 One reason home values have increased so rapidly is the shortage of homes for sale. As of March 2025, there was just 2.3 months of supply.14 This supply measure compares the number of homes listed for sale to the rate at which homes are purchased. A healthy housing market has at least four months of supply available for home buyers. When the supply is limited, competition among homebuyers drives up sales prices. 3.4.7. Homeownership Affordability Exhibit 3-31 estimates the income needed to afford purchasing home in the City of Yakima, assuming the household has 3.5% down payment in savings available. Unfortunately, data about household savings is not available, so it is impossible to estimate how many households have accumulated the savings necessary for the assumed downpayment. The majority of home sales in Yakima are detached single family homes. In many areas, townhomes provide a slightly lower cost option for homeownership. However, available data about townhome sales in Yakima indicates the costs of these homes are on par with the average home shown in Exhibit 3-31.15 Exhibit 3-31. Home Ownership Affordability in City of Yakima, 2025 Home price 3.5% Down Payment Annual income needed to afford (Assuming 3.5% down payment) New home $498,317 $17,441 $161,625 (196% of AMI for 3-person HH) Average home $345,114 $12,079 $111,935 (136% of AMI for 3-person HH) “Bottom- tier” home $246,581 $8,630 $79,976 (97% of AMI for 3-person HH) Notes: New home price is estimated based on Zillow “top tier” home value, which is the weighted average of all homes in the top third of home values in the region. Average home price corresponds to Zillow’s weighted average of the middle third of all home values in the region. “Bottom-tier” home corresponds to Zillow’s weighted average of the bottom third of all home values in the region. Source: Zillow, 2025; BERK, 2025. 3.4.8. Rental Housing There are a total of 15,780 occupied rental housing units in Yakima 16. Nearly half (49%) of these units are rented by Non-Hispanic White residents, meaning 51% of rental units in Yakima are occupied by people of color. Of the residents in Yakima who identify as Hispanic or Latino, more than half (58%) are renters. 3.4.9. Rental Housing Costs and Vacancy 14 Source: Redfin Monthly Housing Market Data, 2025. 15 Source: Redfin Monthly Housing Market Data, 2025. 16 Sources: US HUD Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy, 2017-2021; BERK, 2025. Formatted: Heading 4 Formatted: Font: 14 pt 102 of 138 3-27 Exhibit 3-32 shows average apartment rents as of 2024 as well as the household income level needed to afford the unit as a percentage of AMI. Households with incomes at 50% of AMI can still afford average market rents for 1- and 2-bedroom apartments. Those with lower incomes cannot. This helps to explain the fact that so many lower-income households in Yakima are cost-burdened. Exhibit 3-32. Yakima County* Rental Rates and Affordability, 2024 1-bedroom 2-bedroom Average monthly rent $896 $1,094 Annual income needed to afford $35,840 $43,760 % AMI needed to afford (adjusted for assumed household size)** 50% 50% Notes: *Most apartment buildings surveyed for these county-wide estimates are assumed to be in the City of Yakima. ** Percent AMI calculations reflect adjustments by HUD, including adjustments for assumed household size. Source: Washington Center for Real Estate Research, 2024; WSHFC, 2025; BERK, 2025. Rents in Yakima are also rising at a faster rate than incomes. Between 2014 and 2024, the average monthly rent for a 2-bedroom apartment has risen by nearly 60%. During the same period median family income increased by only 34%. One likely reason for the continued increase in rent is extremely low vacancy rates, as shown in Exhibit 3-33. From 2014 to 2021, the vacancy rate in apartment buildings remained under 2%, while rents increased. In 2022, the county experienced a sharp increase in vacancy rate up to nearly 6%, likely due to impacts from the COVID-19 pandemic. The rate has decreased since then to just over 2%. A healthy housing market has a vacancy rate of around 5%. When vacancy rates sink much below 5%, there are fewer options on the market for households seeking to move. This increases competition for the limited supply of available units and results in upward pressure on market rents. 103 of 138 3-28 Exhibit 3-33. Yakima County Apartment Rents and Vacancy, 2014-2024 Note: Average rent does not adjust for inflation. Source: Washington Center for Real Estate Research, 2014-2024; BERK, 2025. 3.4.9. 3.4.10. Housing Production Single family homes have been developed at a steady pace over the past several years in Yakima, as shown in Exhibit 3-34. Recent years have seen a decrease in permitting for duplexes with an increase in units in other multi-family structures. Housing production has increased considerably since 2019 compared to the preceding 10 years. Overall, 2,341 units of new housing units have been permitted in Yakima since 2019, with units in duplexes or multi-family buildings making up nearly 70%. These new units are adding diversity to the local housing stock, which provides more options at more affordability levels. 104 of 138 3-29 Exhibit 3-34. Count of Permitted Dwelling Units by Project Type in City of Yakima, 2010-2014 Sources: Washington Office of Financial Management, 2024; BERK, 2020. 3.4.10. 3.4.11. Subsidized Affordable Housing As of 2023, Yakima had 5,064 units of subsidized rental affordable housing, as summarized in Exhibit 3-35. These housing units are typically available at below market rents to households that meet income eligibility standards. Subsidies can come either from local, state, or federal agencies. Funding sources include the Washington State Housing Finance Commission (which manages federal Low Income Housing Tax Credits), Washington State Department of Commerce programs (including the Housing Trust Fund), US Department of Agriculture’s Rural Housing Service programs, and HUD’s project-based Section 8 and other multi-family programs. Exhibit 3-35 shows the count of subsidized rental housing units in city of Yakima by unit size (number of bedrooms). Among units with known unit size, there is a relatively equal number of subsidized units that have between one to three bedrooms, with much less availability in studio units or units with four or more bedrooms. 105 of 138 3-30 Exhibit 3-35. Subsidized Rental Housing Units by Number of Bedrooms, City of Yakima, 2023 Source: Washington Center for Real Estate Research, 2023; BERK, 2025. 3.5. Housing Programs The City of Yakima operates the following programs to support housing stability and affordability. Exhibit 3-36. City of Yakima Housing Program Program Description Desired Outcome Senior/Disabled Persons Home Repair Program City housing program to support home repairs for senior and disabled residents administered through the Office of Neighborhood Development to those who qualify (income and asset restrictions)  Increased investment in neighborhoods  Aesthetic improvements Single-Family Emergency Repair Program City housing program to support home repairs for low-income residents administered through the Office of Neighborhood Development to those who qualify (income and asset restrictions)  Support housing and financial stability for low- income homeowners Exterior Paint Program City housing program administered through the Office of Neighborhood Development to those who qualify (age and disability restrictions)  Increased investment in neighborhoods  Aesthetic improvements Homeownership Through New Construction City housing program administered through the Office of Neighborhood Development to those who qualify (income restrictions)  Increased homeownership Tenant/Landlord Counseling Office of Neighborhood Development Services program to assist either tenants or landlords with disputes and advice on reaching agreements or seeking legal support.  Improved tenant/landlord relationships  Education on legal support for those in need Lot Acquisition Program A City program within the Yakima Target Area that provides funds to purchase lots for residential  New housing stock Commented [KR2]: Are these the same programs? I can only find the later on the City website. Commented [KR3]: City to confirm if this program still exists. 106 of 138 3-31 Program Description Desired Outcome development projects. Lots must be residentially zoned, have vacant or substandard buildings, and be developed within 12 months of purchase.  Neighborhood revitalization  New infill development Downtown Redevelopment Tax Incentive Program (YMC 11.63) A City program that provides a tax incentive to stimulate new multi-family housing and the rehabilitation of vacant and underutilized buildings for multi-family housing.  Increased housing options in residentially deficient urban centers. 3.6. Displacement & Displacement Risk Policy guidance from Washington State Department of Commerce (Commerce) calls for comprehensive plans to study displacement and establish anti-displacement policies. Displacement refers to instances when a household is forced or pressured to move from their home against their will. Displacement can be physical, economic, or cultural. Direct, physical displacement occurs in cases of eviction, the termination of a tenant’s lease, or public land claims through eminent domain. Physical displacement can also occur when a property owner decides to renovate units to appeal to higher-income tenants or when buildings are sold for redevelopment. Another cause might be the expiration of an affordability covenant and resulting conversion of the unit to market rate housing. Economic displacement occurs when a household relocates due to the financial pressure of rising housing costs. Renters are more vulnerable to economic displacement, particularly those who are low-income, although some homeowners can experience this as well with significant increases to property tax bills. Cultural displacement is the result of fractured social fabrics. When physical and/or economic displacement affects community businesses, social institutions, and a concentration of racial or ethnic households, other households who affiliate with the affected cultural group may begin to feel increased pressure or desire to relocate. While it is not possible to directly quantify the number of households displaced in a given year, we can analyze indicators of displacement to identify communities that may face displacement pressure. One indicator of potential displacement is a reduction in households of a particular racial or ethnic group over time. As presented below in Exhibit 3-37, the proportion of Yakima’s population that identifies as non-Hispanic White decreased from 2017 to 2022, while the proportion of those who identify as Hispanic or Latino or non-Hispanic persons who identify as two or more races increased. This reflects trends countywide and statewide and does not provide evidence of displacement of BIPOC communities overall in the city of Yakima. However, this finding does not tell us whether there is evidence of displacement at the neighborhood scale. Displacement risk and displacement that may have already occurred within Yakima are discussed in more detail below. 107 of 138 3-32 Exhibit 3-37. Race & Ethnicity in the City of Yakima, Yakima County, and Statewide, 2017 & 2022 Source: US Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-yr Estimates, 2017-2022; BERK, 2025. 3.6.1. Displacement Risk Mapping Commerce provides a displacement risk mapping tool that identifies areas where residents are at greater risk of displacement. This tool evaluates relative displacement risk on a Census tract-level with a focus on three core categories: (1) social vulnerability; (2) demographic change; and (3) market trends:  Social vulnerability: Calculates the share of BIPOC residents, the share of renter households, and median household income at a tract level. Each indicator is assigned a score (1-5) based on its level compared to the same measurement at the broader county level. Cumulative scores of 10 or more constitute higher social vulnerability.  Demographic change: Calculates the change in the BIPOC population and lower income households between 2010 and 2020 (BIPOC) or 2021 (low-income households). Each characteristic is assigned a score based on its change relative to the countywide change, and the combination of these two indicators produces a demographic change score of “gentrification,” “disinvestment,” or “no change.”  Market trends: Calculates 2015 rent levels for each tract, relative to the broader county, and also evaluates rental appreciation rates from 2010 to 2021 relative to the county. The combination of these two indicators produces a market trend of “Appreciated,” “Accelerating,” or “Stable.” Exhibit 3-38 maps the displacement risk assessment for every Census tract overlapping the city. The tool shows variation in displacement risk throughout Yakima, with areas of high and moderate displacement risk concentrated on the eastern side of the city (including Downtown and areas toward Interstate 82). Downtown and the areas surrounding it are considered socially vulnerable (e.g., there is a higher share of BIPOC residents, renter households, and median household income is ≤80% of AMI). These mostly include areas within the city near Interstate 82 and along the industrial corridor created by the BNSF railway. The pattern follows for Demographic Change (Exhibit 3-40), with nearly all of Council District 1 at the northeast of the city having experienced gentrification. 108 of 138 3-33 Displacement risk is low in the western parts of the city. Some areas within Council District 3 and 5 are considered at moderate risk of displacement, with districts 6 and 7 having no areas at risk of displacement according to the Commerce tool. The entirety of Council District 4 is identified as socially vulnerable, with most of 1, 2, and 5 vulnerable as well. Again, districts 6 and 7 are not identified by the tool to be considerably vulnerable. Note that Census tracts are often larger than neighborhoods experiencing gentrification and displacement. Yakima can use census tract data to monitor trends and review displacement risks in each Council district. Exhibit 3-38. Displacement Risk in the City of Yakima, 2020 Source: WA State Department of Commerce, 2023; BERK, 2025. Exhibit 3-39. Social Vulnerability in the City of Yakima, 2020 Source: WA State Department of Commerce, 2023; BERK, 2025. 109 of 138 3-34 Exhibit 3-40. Demographic Change in the City of Yakima, 2020 Source: WA State Department of Commerce, 2023; BERK, 2025. 3.7. Racially Disparate Impacts New State and County requirements call for cities to assess whether racially disparate housing impacts are happening in their community, and to address them through policy and regulatory change. The requirements are not a charge against current communities in which there are racially disparate outcomes in housing, but an acknowledgement of the role land use policy has played in creating and institutionalizing race-based advantages and disadvantages.17 The statute uses the term “racially disparate” but does not identify protected groups based on race. Racially disparate impacts occur when policies, practices, rules, or other systems result in a disproportionate effect on one or more racial groups. Disparities in housing measures among different racial and ethnic groups are evidence of racially disparate impacts. A community’s current housing situation is the product of many forces including historical factors, policy, regulations, macroeconomic changes, lending practices, cost of development, and individual preference. City governments cannot control all of these factors, but they can change local land use policies and regulations. Local land use policies and regulations have a significant impact on accessibility of housing for different households. As such, they are a key tool the City can use to address racially disparate impacts. The City and consultant team used several measures to explore whether racially disparate impacts exist in Yakima. Some of these measures were covered earlier in this document, such as rates of homeownership, household income, and cost-burdened status by racial and ethnic groups. Those measures show evidence of racially disparate impacts. Homeownership rates are lower among Hispanic or Latino households (Exhibit 3-29). Median household income is also lower for Hispanic or Latino households than it is for non-Hispanic White households ($53,505 versus $58,231; Exhibit 3-9) and 17 See Commerce’s Racially Disparte Impacts guidance at https://www.commerce.wa.gov/serving-communities/growth- management/growth-management-topics/planning-for-housing/updating-gma-housing-elements/. 110 of 138 3-35 Census block groups with median household incomes below the citywide median correspond with greater concentrations of Hispanic or Latino populations (Exhibit 3-10 and Exhibit 3-6). The team also explored displacement risk with the mapping tool provided by Commerce, as discussed in the prior section. The tool highlights areas of high and moderate displacement risk in and around Downtown and the eastern side of the city. It also indicates that displacement may already be occurring or have already occurred in primarily residential areas along Interstate 82. Additional measures the team used to explore exclusion and racially disparate impacts in Yakima are described in the following section, including a dissimilarity index and location quotient. These show evidence of segregation impacts the City should consider as it updates its housing policies. 3.7.1. Segregation Measures The team used two measures to help understand whether racial and ethnic segregation is happening in the city of Yakima to assess possible exclusion in housing: a dissimilarity index and a location quotient. These measures explore whether certain populations are excluded from housing within a specified area, in a manner that may be intentional or unintentional, but which nevertheless leads to non-inclusive impacts. The dissimilarity index compares the city of Yakima to itself and considers segregation citywide for various populations. The location quotient compares each Census block group in the city of Yakima to Yakima County. 3.7.2. Dissimilarity Index A dissimilarity index is a statistical method for measuring segregation based on the demographic composition of an area and smaller geographic units within that area. One way of understanding the index is that it indicates how evenly two demographic groups are distributed throughout an area: if the composition of both groups in each geographic unit (e.g., Census block group) is the same as in the area as a whole (e.g., countywide), then the dissimilarity index score for that count will be 0 (suggesting no segregation). By contrast, if one population is clustered entirely within one Census block group, the dissimilarity index score for the county will be 1 (complete segregation). The higher the dissimilarity index value, the higher the level of segregation in an area. Generally, areas with a dissimilarity index score above 0.4 are considered more highly segregated. Scores between 0.3 and 0.39 are associated with moderate segregation, and scores below 0.3 are considered to have a low level of segregation. This methodology, as applied here, evaluates some of the largest non-White groups relative to the White population in Yakima. The scores therefore only represent the level of segregation between each group (Hispanic or Latino, Black, Asian, and all BIPOC) and the non-Hispanic White population. A similar analysis could be done to compare non-White groups to each other (e.g., Hispanic/Latino to American Indian or Alaska Native alone) to understand other dynamics; however, given the history of exclusionary housing practices in many places along with current residential trends, using the non-Hispanic White population as a point of comparison for understand relative segregation is often a useful starting point for evaluating disparate impacts related to housing. Exhibit 3-41 shows dissimilarity indices for Yakima as well as the cities of Kennewick, Richland, West Richland, and Pasco along with Benton and Franklin counties for comparisons. Based on this data, the city of Yakima has a high level of segregation (0.44) within the city for Hispanic/Latino residents (who make up approximately 47% of the city population; Exhibit 3-37), and moderate segregation for the 111 of 138 3-36 Black and All BIPOC populations. This suggests a moderate-to-high level of segregation within Yakima, which is consistent with mapping presented earlier in this report showing White, non-Hispanic populations are more prevalent in western areas of the city, while populations who identify as Hispanic or Latino (of any race) are more concentrated in and around Downtown and the areas surrounding it, especially to the southeast. Exhibit 3-41. Dissimilarity Index for the City of Yakima and Comparison Geographies Hispanic or Latino Black Asian All BIPOC Yakima 0.44 0.37 0.27 0.39 Kennewick 0.34 0.34 0.25 0.27 Richland 0.22 0.24 0.28 0.13 West Richland 0.21 0.17 0.24 0.14 Pasco 0.48 0.29 0.24 0.44 Yakima County 0.48 0.34 0.30 0.39 Source: US Census Bureau, Decennial Census, 2020; BERK, 2025. 3.7.3. Location Quotient A location quotient is a helpful complement to other disparate impact measures and can reveal some trends that may otherwise be obscured. More specifically, it shows the concentration of communities in smaller areas within the city of Yakima (e.g., a Census block group) compared to Yakima County as a whole. Unlike the above application of the dissimilarity index, which compares the city to itself and considers segregation citywide for various populations, this use of the location quotient provides a more granular view, helping to show whether there are specific areas within Yakima that have disproportionately high or low populations of certain communities relative to countywide trends. The methodology assigns a block-group level score for each community. For example, if 7% of the UGA population is Black, and 7% of a particular block group population is Black, then the location quotient for the Black community within that block group is 1. A block group where 14% of residents are Black would have a location quotient of 2. And a block group where only 3.5% of residents are Black would have a location quotient of 0.5. In other words, block groups with high location quotient scores have a greater share of that population compared to the rest of the urban growth area. Exhibit 3-42, Exhibit 3-43Exhibit 3-44 show the location quotient for three race/ethnic groups in Yakima: White alone, Hispanic or Latino, and All BIPOC. They are based on block group population calculations. All areas with location quotients above 1.0 (green block groups) have a higher share of that particular group than the UGA as a whole. Areas with scores below 1.0 (purple block groups) have a lower share than the UGA. As shown, people identifying as White alone more consistently reside on the western half of the city, with very low quotient values within the Downtown area. There is a higher concentration of Hispanic or Latino populations in and around Downtown, especially to the southeast along Interstate 82. Examining the distribution of all BIPOC peoples (those identifying as any race other than White or a combination of two or more races) shows a point of concentration in the east near the edge of Downtown and around the Washington Park neighborhood, with most of the western half of the city and all of the unincorporated UGA having disproportionally less people identifying as BIPOC. 112 of 138 3-37 Exhibit 3-42. Location Quotient for Residents Identifying as White Alone, City of Yakima, 2020 Source: US Census Bureau, Decennial Census, 2020; BERK, 2025. Exhibit 3-43. Location Quotient for Residents Identifying as Hispanic or Latino, City of Yakima, 2020 Source: US Census Bureau, Decennial Census, 2020; BERK, 2025. 113 of 138 3-38 Exhibit 3-44. Location Quotient for Residents Identifying as Black, Indigenous, or a Person of Color, City of Yakima, 2020 Source: US Census Bureau, Decennial Bureau, 2020; BERK, 2025. 3.7.4. Environmental Health Disparities Environmental justice is concerned with the right of all people to enjoy a safe, clean, and healthy environment, and with fairness across racial, social, and economic groups in the siting and operation of infrastructure, facilities, or other large land uses. This section considers whether there are concentrations of racial groups in certain areas of the city with increased exposure to environmental health hazards or with limited access to transit, parks, or other services. Placing additional growth near high-volume roadways could expose future residents or workers to diminished air quality and heightened noise affecting quality of life and land use compatibility. It is particularly important to understand the health-related impacts of various land use patterns on spaces used by vulnerable populations, such as schools, daycares, elder care facilities, and medical centers. Roadway users and adjacent neighborhoods experience air pollution from vehicle exhaust and brake/tire/road wear. Pollutant particle size, topography, and wind patterns affect the geographic extent of concern, with the greatest impacts immediately adjacent to and downwind of major freeways. Roadway traffic, especially larger vehicles (i.e., trucks and buses) also produce noise, and urban heat is generally of greatest concern where most of the ground area is covered by pavement, buildings, and other surfaces that absorb and retain heat. Environmental exposure is affected by pollutants from both natural and manmade sources. Air quality and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are generally the greatest environmental exposure concerns in Yakima. These are areawide issues that are often discussed at a regional or even state level but there can be distinct differences between urbanized, populated areas and rural and undeveloped areas. Vehicles and equipment that burn fossil fuels are typically among the largest contributors to transportation-related emissions and can contribute to regional and localized concentrations of state and federally regulated pollutants. High concentrations of PM2.5 and other air pollutants contribute to respiratory problems, long-term health challenges, and increased healthcare costs. Exhibit 3-45 maps PM2.5 concentration levels in Yakima with an observed 2014-2017 average. Concentrations of PM2.5 114 of 138 3-39 are highest in the east and northeast portions of the city, including Downtown and industrial areas, where many Hispanic or Latino residents live. Exhibit 3-45. PM2.5 Concentration, City of Yakima, 2014-2017 Average Source: WA Department of Health, Environmental Health Disparities Map, 2022; BERK, 2025. The Washington State Department of Health (DOH) also produces an Environmental Health Disparities Map to evaluate environmental health risk factors in communities across Washington. The Environmental Health Disparities Map provides an index of environmental exposures (e.g., diesel emissions and proximity to traffic and hazardous waste sites) and socioeconomic and health factors (e.g., poverty and cardiovascular disease prevalence). Health disparities generally rank higher in the eastern portions of the city in and around Downtown where Hispanic or Latino populations are more concentrated. A higher health disparity ranking represents an outsized burden of exposure and sensitivity to environmental harm. Prevailing socioeconomic characteristics and health factors—such as rates of poverty, chronic disease (like asthma) or low birthweight, limited English proficiency, race/ethnicity, or transportation expenses—can lead to worse health outcomes in some parts of the city than others despite varying levels of environmental exposures throughout the city. Environmental exposures include the levels of certain pollutants that residents and workers come into contact with, including airborne pollutants (e.g., diesel emissions, O3, and PM2.5) and proximity to traffic density or hazardous waste sites. Environmental exposure occurs when pollution sources get into the environment and affect individuals or populations. Prolonged exposure to pollutants may lead to poor health outcomes. Sensitive or vulnerable populations—including older adults, households living in poverty, disabled individuals, those without health insurance, households without access to a vehicle or other transportation options, and those experiencing homelessness—are at increased risk. 115 of 138 3-40 Exhibit 3-46. Environmental Health Disparities Map Score, City of Yakima, 2022 Source: WA Department of Health, Environmental Health Disparities Map, 2022; BERK, 2025. Noise levels in Yakima are highest along major arterials, near the railway, and under the flight path of the Yakima Air Terminal/McAllister Field. Most other areas within Yakima are below the 45 dBA threshold measured by the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) Noise Map as shown in Exhibit 3-47. Health impacts from noise include hypertension, heart disease, and likely poor school performance among children. Additionally, noise can affect quality of life and cause vibrations that impact hospitals and health care facilities. Direct effects of noise that indirectly affect health include: • Speech interference • Sleep disturbance • Task interference • Impairment of classroom learning • Non-auditory health effects • Aversive effects on emotion and tranquility 116 of 138 3-41 Exhibit 3-47. Transportation Noise Levels, City of Yakima, 2020 Source: USDOT, 2020; BERK, 2025. Extreme heat is among the most pervasive weather-related hazards in the United States, and Washington’s summers are becoming increasingly hotter and longer. The city of Yakima and surrounding region are expected to see warmer year-round temperatures, higher maximum summer temperatures, and more frequent and severe heat waves. (University of Washington Climate Impacts Group, 2025) Extreme heat is expected to be an increasingly prevalent hazard in Yakima, with a projected increase of at least 8 additional days of extreme heat (over 100o F) by 2079 in Yakima Couty. Per the City of Yakima Climate Impacts Summary and subsequent Vulnerability Assessment Memo, key risks associated with extreme heat include:  More extreme heat days puts residents in the Yakima at risk of heat-related illness and death. Prolonged exposure to high temperatures stresses the body and contributes to heat exhaustion and heat stroke. Individuals with chronic health conditions, people without adequate shelter, such as unhoused individuals are more at risk of injury and death from extreme heat. Additionally, older residents (those above age 65) are more likely to have existing health conditions (e.g., diabetes or heart disease) that worsen with significant heat stress.  Worse air quality due to increasing ground-level ozone formation—a phenomenon known as the "smog effect"—which can aggravate respiratory conditions like asthma and chronic bronchitis (Zhang & Wang, 2016; Fann et al., 2016). This air quality impact especially impacts older residents, younger residents, and individuals who work outside.  Heightened risk to people who work outside are also at of health issues related to extreme heat. Extreme heat events that put residents at risk of heat-related illnesses can also increase the need for emergency response, straining already strained emergency departments including fire, police, EMS, and hospital systems.  Disruption to important ecosystems and critical areas through rising surface water temperatures, range shifts, and subsequent competition with invasive species. For example, warming air and water temperatures have contributed to algal blooms and allowed non-native species to thrive throughout Yakima’s wetlands including the Yakima River and Naches River. These invasive species, coupled Formatted: Not Highlight Formatted: Not Highlight Formatted: Not Highlight Formatted: Not Highlight Formatted: Not Highlight Formatted: Not Highlight 117 of 138 3-42 with heat stress from rising stream temperatures may strain important native species like the several fish and bird species that traverse and spawn in the Lower Yakima River Basin. Summer maximum temperatures are expected to increase and worsen these conditions. Warm winter temperatures can also negatively impact snowpack, stream flow, and increase pest populations.  Increased cooling demands and place additional stress on older buildings and HVAC systems. Increasing use of air conditioning depends on a stable, affordable electric supply. Rising electricity costs from climate-induced grid strain could further burden low-income households and rural communities. The region's growing population and aging infrastructure increase pressure on existing grid capacity.  Infrastructure damage as high heat causes roads to warp and buckle, damages bridge joints, and increases deterioration of pavement (Sen, Li, & Khazanovich, 2022). This occurred throughout Washington State during the 2021 heat wave as a result of prolonged exposure to temperatures above 100 Degrees Fahrenheit. Certain land use decisions may worsen the impacts of extreme heat on these critical assets. "Urban heat islands" contribute to this and occur when natural land cover is replaced by large amounts of pavement, buildings, and other surfaces that absorb and retain heat. Structures such as buildings, roads, and other infrastructure absorb and re-emit the sun’s heat more than natural landscapes such as forests and water bodies. Urban areas, where greenery is limited, become “islands” of higher temperatures relative to outlying areas. This effect increases energy costs (e.g., for air conditioning), air pollution levels, and heat- related illness and mortality and can further exacerbate heat exposure from climate change and the impacts of naturally occurring heat waves. Heat islands are also riskier for sensitive populations, including older adults, young children, populations with low-income, outdoor workers, and people in poor health. High pavement and rooftop surface temperatures can also heat up stormwater runoff, which drains into storm sewers and raises water temperatures as it is released into streams, rivers, ponds, and lakes. Exhibit 3-48 maps urban heat islands as modeled from satellite-derived information during the summer of 2023. Areas with a lower urban heat island effect are shown in white, while those with a greater effect are shown in deeper color. While all of Yakima is exposed during a heat event, certain areas will be hotter than others due to this effect, including eastern and southeastern portions of the city where Hispanic and Latino population are more prevalent. Parts of the city with more paved surfaces and less tree canopy and other vegetation tend to experience more heat, generally the more commercial and industrial areas of the city (tree canopy coverage is mapped in Exhibit 3-49). Industrial areas along the BNSF railway and in and around Downtown are especially susceptible to extreme heat. The ability to keep cool as temperatures rise during the summer is important especially in areas where heat severity is higher and tree canopy coverage is lower. Keeping cool is a function of surrounding tree canopy as well as how well insulated the building structures are, the presence or capacity of mechanical and/or natural cooling systems, and the ability of the structure to reflect heat during the summer and absorb it during the winter. 118 of 138 3-43 Exhibit 3-48. Urban Heat Island Severity, City of Yakima, 2023 Source: Trust for Public Land, 2023; BERK, 2025. Exhibit 3-49. Tree Canopy Coverage, City of Yakima, 2021 Source: US Geological Survey, National Land Cover Dataset, 2021; BERK, 2025. 3.7.5. Engagement Housing focused engagement was conducted as part of the Comprehensive Plan Periodic Update to better understand contributing factors to racially disparate impacts, displacement, exclusions in housing, and future displacement risk. Strategies include open houses, and feedback from a Comprehensive Plan Steering Committee. See Comprehensive Plan Draft Appendix XX for a summary of engagement conducted to date, including the following key themes:  Expand housing typologies and supply: a common theme heard across various engagement strategies is a desire to see more affordable housing options in Yakima, particularly for first time Commented [BH4]: 119 of 138 3-44 home buyers. Community members also expressed a desire to see more affordable housing typologies, such as middle housing, Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU’s), and more  Incentivize housing through capital improvements: One of the biggest challenges noted with housing was around infrastructure. It was noted that developers are a critical player in expanding infrastructure capacity in Yakima. However, more city-led infrastructure projects and incentives could help reduce housing costs, and incentivize more residential development  Consistent design and land use patterns: To balance the potential increase of middle housing, several community members noted that land use patterns should ensure a smooth transition of zones, and building typologies. For Multifamily housing, providing open space with new development was highlighted as a key need. Design standards should offer consistency of residential urban design, and aesthetics.  Prioritize new housing along key transit and commercial corridors: When asked where there should be more housing, the majority of responses noted a desire for more housing along transit lines, and commercial nodes/corridors. People noted the development of new commercial centers in West Yakima, and agreement to see more multifamily housing in those areas. S 16th Ave was also mentioned as a key neighborhood for additional residential development. In addition, residential development in the UGA was noted as another potential area for additional housing. Commented [LG5]: Is it worth mentioning that the new housing could be designed to address noise and 120 of 138 3-45 3.7.6. Policy Review A full list of the goals and policies related to housing in the City of Yakima can be found in the body of the Comprehensive Plan Housing Element. Exhibit 3-50 is a summary of updates made to the Housing Element of the Comprehensive Plan as part of the periodic update with the specific objective of lowering racially disparate impacts in housing. These policy changes are meant to address impacts such as hazard resiliency, affordability, access to services, and isolation from community. Enacting these policies is not the only step that needs to be taken to address racially disparate impacts of housing but these changes lay the groundwork for future efforts. Exhibit 3-50 Racially Disparate Impacts – Housing Policy Analysis and Audit Summary Goal and Policy # Previously Adopted Housing Goals and Policies RDI Related Edits/ Additions made as part of 2026 Periodic Update to Comprehensive Plan 3.1.2. Promote the preservation, improvement, and development of single family homes in Yakima. Promote the preservation, improvement, and development of middle housing and single family homes in Yakima. 3.1.4. Facilitate small lot sizes, condominiums, clustering and other options that increase the supply of affordable homeownership options and the diversity of housing that meet the needs of aging, young professional, and small and large households. Facilitate small lot sizes, condominiums, townhomes, accessory dwelling units, clustering and other middle housing options that increase the supply of affordable housing that meet the needs of aging, young professional, and small and large households. 3.1.8. Encourage and incentivize affordable housing development. Encourage and incentivize affordable housing development for moderate, low, very low and extremely low income households. 3.1.9. Support proposals for affordable assisted and market rate housing based on the following criteria: Dispersion of affordable housing throughout the City Convenient access to transit A range of unit types Ownership housing when possible Long-term affordability Support proposals for affordable assisted and market rate housing based on the following criteria: Dispersion of affordable housing throughout the City Convenient access to transit A range of unit types including middle housing Ownership housing when possible Long-term affordability Commented [KR6]: 121 of 138 3-46 GOAL 3.3. ENSURE AN ADEQUATE SUPPLY OF HOUSING FOR PERSONS WITH SPECIAL NEEDS. ENSURE AN ADEQUATE SUPPLY OF HOUSING FOR ALL INCOME GROUPS INCLUDING PERSONS WITH SPECIAL NEEDS. 3.3.1. Prioritize the provision of fair share housing opportunities to all economic segments of the population and those with special needs. Prioritize the provision of fair share housing opportunities to all economic segments of the population and those with special needs as allocated through the regional allocation process. 3.3.5 [NEW] Support programs to ensure that individuals and families vulnerable to natural hazard impacts have adequate housing options. Vulnerable communities include the following: older adults and children those with pre-existing health conditions including pulmonary conditions individuals with mobility challenges low- and extremely low-income individuals pregnant people people with limited literacy people who speak English as a second language GOAL 3.4. ENCOURAGE DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION, AND MAINTENANCE OF HIGH QUALITY HOUSING. ENCOURAGE DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION, AND MAINTENANCE OF HIGH QUALITY HOUSING WITHOUT MAKING UNITS COST PROHIBITIVE. 3.4.5. Implement utility standards that encourage infill development. Implement utility standards that encourage infill development and middle housing. 3.4.6 [NEW] development standards which increase resiliency to natural hazards such as extreme heat, severe storms, drought, and wildfire smoke through cross-ventilation, passive cooling window coverings, and 122 of 138 3-47 3.5.4. Consider human services objectives in developing City regulations and codes. For example, enforcing code abatement may mean making people homeless. Ensuring there are community resources to assist these residents, before they are abated, is critical. developing City regulations and codes. For example, Ensure code enforcement does not result in displacement or homelessness enforcing code abatement may mean making people homeless. Ensuring there are community resources to assist these residents, before they are abated, is critical. 3.5.7. [NEW] ensure effective human service delivery and ensure people and homes are safe in the event of emergencies 3.5.8. [NEW] community-based resources as they relate to making individuals, children, and families more resilient to natural hazards of extreme heat, flooding, wildfires, and drought events GOAL 3.6. [NEW] Prevent discrimination, and displacement in the development and maintenance of housing. 3.6.1 [NEW] Collaborate with community groups, organizations, non-profits, and businesses to help vulnerable groups obtain and maintain housing. 3.6.2 [NEW] Evaluate the potential for displacement on lands proposed for rezone or redevelopment for public use. 3.6.3 [NEW] Collaborate to understand the drivers of displacement through involvement of community groups, organizations, and institutions in affected areas. 123 of 138 3-48 3.8. Projected Housing Needs Consistent with new requirements under the Growth Management Act (GMA), Washington State Department of Commerce (Commerce) provides guidance for determining countywide projected housing needs by affordability level, including permanent supportive housing (PSH) and emergency housing. This work involves coordination between a county and each of its constituent jurisdictions. The City of Yakima, in coordination with Yakima County, completed analysis consistent with Commerce guidance. A summary of the process follows. 3.8.1. Population Growth Projection Yakima County conducted an analysis of countywide population growth trends to derive an average annual growth rate (AAGR) used to project future growth. Using this method, it projects the countywide population will be 297,319 in the year 2024, an increase of 40,591 compared to the population in 2020. This is slightly higher than the Washington State Office of Financial Management (OFM) “Medium” population projection for Yakima County, but significantly less than OFM’s “High” projection. 3.8.2. Projected Countywide Housing Needs Yakima County used Commerce’s Housing for All Planning Tool (HAPT) to calculate the total countywide housing needs by affordability level associated with the county’s projected population growth.18 The results are shown in Exhibit 3-. Exhibit 3-51. Project Housing Needs, Yakima County (2020-2046) Total Affordability Level (% of Area Median Income) Emergency Housing/ Shelter Beds 0-30% 30-50% 50-80% 80-100% 100-120% 120%+ Non-PSH PSH Total Future Housing Needed (2046)** 114,482 8,261 4,495 25,742 36,353 12,706 8,282 18,643 1,951 Estimated Housing Supply (2020)* 89,425 4,351 228 20,264 33,325 10,917 7,070 13,270 572 Net New Housing Needed (2020-2046) 25,057 3,910 4,267 5,478 3,028 1,789 1,212 5,373 1,379 * 2020 supply excludes homes in recreational use. Supply of PSH in 2020 is beds. However, projections of Net New Housing Needed (2020-2046) are in housing units. ** Total Future Housing Needed (2046) excludes 2020 homes in recreational use. Source: WA State Department of Commerce, Growth Management Services Housing For All Planning Tool (HAPT). Calculations are based on the Yakima County 2046 Population Projections and Allocations. 18 See Yakima County 2046 Housing Allocations, published 6/6/2025. 124 of 138 3-49 3.8.3. Allocation of Projected Housing Needs to Jurisdictions To allocate countywide Net New Housing Needed to individual jurisdictions, the HAPT requires assumptions for the percentage of growth to allocate to each jurisdiction. The County developed assumption for growth by considering a number of factors, including historic population growth and development patterns, infrastructure capacity, and land capacity for future growth. They also considered existing disparities in affordability, housing supply, and proximity to employment. The results of this analysis are shown in Exhibit 3-. Exhibit 3-52. Allocation of Projected Housing Needs to Jurisdictions and UGAs, 2020-2046 Source: WA State Department of Commerce, Growth Management Services Housing For All Planning Tool (HAPT). Calculations are based on the Yakima County 2046 Population Projections and Allocations. Exhibit 3- shows the combined allocation for the City of Yakima and its UGA, including the allocation of countywide emergency housing needs. 125 of 138 3-50 Exhibit 3-53. City of Yakima and UGA Combined Allocation of Projected Housing Needs, 2020-2046 Total Units Allocated Affordability Level (% of Area Median Income) Emergency Housing/ Shelter Beds 0-30% 30-50% 50-80% 80-100% 100-120% 120%+ Jurisdiction Non-PSH PSH City of Yakima + UGA 10,648 1,750 1,911 2,450 1,286 760 514 1,977 617 Source: WA Department of Commerce, 2025; BERK, 2025. 3.8.4. Capacity for Projected Housing Needs Under GMA, Yakima is required to plan for and accommodate future housing production to meet these housing need allocations at each income level. This includes demonstrating sufficient buildable land capacity for housing types appropriate to meeting these needs. Not all housing types are appropriate for meeting all housing needs. Due to differences in land and construction costs per unit, the affordability of new housing depends in part on housing type. For instance, a new single-family home on a large lot is the most expensive type of home to produce per unit. New homes often require an income of over 150% AMI to afford. Multifamily homes, such as apartment buildings, can be produced at a much lower cost per unit. Exhibit 3- presents seven different housing types that could be built in Yakima, as well as the lowest level of income that can be served assuming the new housing is either market-rate or a subsidized affordable housing project. These housing types and affordability assumptions are consistent with Commerce guidance for updating housing elements and BERK’s assessment of local housing costs. Exhibit 3-54. Housing Types and Potential Income Levels Served Housing Type Definition New Market Rate Housing Subsidized Affordable Housing Assumed Affordability Level for Capacity Analysis Low-Rise Multifamily Walk up apartment buildings or condominiums (up to 3 floors). >80-120% AMI 0-80% AMI Low-Income (0-80% AMI) Mid-Rise Multifamily Apartments or condominium buildings with 4-8 floors. >80-120% AMI 0-80% AMI Low-Income (0-80% AMI) Moderate Density Also known as “middle housing”. Inclues townhomes, duplexes, triplexes, quadplexes. >80-120% AMI & >120% AMI Not typically feasible at scale Moderate-Income (>80-120% AMI) ADUs Accessory Dwelling Units >50-80% AMI Not typically feasible at scale >50-80% AMI 126 of 138 3-51 Manufactured Homes Homes that are constructed in a factory and then assembled at the building site in modular sections >80-120% AMI as primary unit on lot Not typically feasible at scale Moderate-Income (>80-120% AMI) Low Density Detached single family homes. >120% AMI Not typically feasible at scale Higher Income (>120% AMI) Sources: Washington Department of Commerce Guidance for Updating Your Housing Element, 2023; Benton County, 2025; BERK, 2025. BERK conducted a buildable land capacity analysis to quantify the number of new housing units that can be produced in the City of Yakima by housing type. See Section 2.3.1. Land Capacity Analysis for a technical description of the analysis. The results are summarized in Exhibit 3-. It shows the City alone has capacity for over 21,000 net new housing units. Moreover, it shows there is sufficient capacity by assumed income level served to accommodate Yakima’s projected housing needs by income level. However, there is limited surplus capacity for low-rise multifamily development compared to the need for 0-50% AMI housing. If much of this capacity is consumed by market rate housing development that doesn’t serve these households, there could be limited remaining capacity to meet those 0-50% AMI housing needs. Exhibit 3-55. Capacity for Housing Compared to Projected Housing Need, City of Yakima Housing Type Assumed Income Level Served Net Housing Unit Capacity Projected Housing Need Capacity Surplus or Deficit Low Density (Detached Single Family) High (>120% AMI) 6,537 1,977 4,560 Moderate (>80-120% AMI) 6,494 1,274 5,220 >50-80% AMI 1,832 1,286 546 Low (0-50% AMI)* 6,863 6,111 752 * Low-rise multifamily buildings, such as apartments, could also accommodate housing needs from 50-120% AMI in this analysis if there is a surplus. Source: BERK, 2025. Yakima’s allocation of countywide housing needs is intended for both the City of Yakima and its unincorporated UGA combined. Therefore, BERK also evaluated land capacity within the unincorporated UGA adjoining the City of Yakima. Exhibit 3- presents the combined capacity of both the City of Yakima and UGA, with comparison to projected housing need. The total capacity (44,066 housing units) is over double the capacity within city limits. Most of this additional capacity is for low density, detached single family housing production. However, the UGA also includes additional capacity for low-rise multifamily housing which helps to address the limited surplus of capacity available in the city alone. 127 of 138 3-52 Exhibit 3-56. Capacity for Housing Compared to Projected Housing Need, City of Yakima and Unincorporated UGA Combined Housing Type Assumed Income Level Served Net Housing Unit Capacity Projected Housing Need Capacity Surplus or Deficit Low Density (Detached Single Family) High (>120% AMI) 25,819 1,977 23,842 Moderate Density Moderate (>80-120% AMI) 9,820 1,274 8,546 ADUs >50-80% AMI 2,043 1,286 757 Low-Rise Multifamily Low (0-50% AMI)* 8,133 6,111 2,022 44,066 10,648 35,167 * Low-rise multifamily buildings, such as apartments, could also accommodate housing needs from 50-120% AMI in this analysis if there is a surplus. Source: BERK, 2025. 128 of 138 3-53 3.9. Adequate Provisions GMA requires that communities ensure that their Comprehensive Plan policies and regulations are designed to achieve housing availability for all community members at all income levels. Specifically, under RCW 36.70A.070(2)(d), City of Yakima must prepare a Housing Element that “[m]akes adequate provisions for existing and projected needs of all economic segments of the community.” These provisions include “[d]ocumenting programs and actions needed to achieve housing availability including gaps in local funding, barriers such as development regulations, and other limitations. They also include “consideration of housing locations in relation to employment location” as well as “role of accessory dwelling units in meeting housing needs.” 3.9.1. Gaps in Local Funding Creating or preserving housing affordable to households with incomes of 0-50% AMI requires public subsidies. However, there is a lack of public funding needed to address all current and future needs in Yakima. Over the past X years, there have been X subsidized affordable housing units built in Yakima. If this rate of production continues, there will be a shortage of XXX units affordable by the year 2046. Given the current estimated construction cost per unit in Yakima, Yakima has a $XXX,XXX,XXX gap in funding to meet all housing needs.19 Much of the funding for affordable housing comes from federal and state sources. However, local governments in Washington have some local option tools for supporting affordable housing production. These include revenue sources as well as incentives to reduce costs for affordable housing developers. Yakima currently uses the following tools:  Housing and related services sales tax (RCW 82.14.530). This tax has accumulated about $1 Million in revenue since its inception. As of December 2025, the City was preparing an application for funding of a new affordable housing project with 10 or more units.  Multifamily Tax Exemption (MFTE) (RCW 84.14). The Downtown Redevelopment Tax Incentive Program provides an incentive for all multifamily housing development in a designated area of the city. While this program has no affordability requirements, it does lower the cost of building new affordable housing projects, which tend to be apartment buildings. To address the gaps in local funding, the city is considering the following additional tools. However, these tools alone will not be enough to close the gap.  Expanding the MFTE program to all areas of Yakima that allow for multifamily development.  Waiving or reducing permit and utility connection fees for affordable housing projects.  XXX 3.9.2. Barriers to Housing Production 19 Insert footnote with citation Commerce guidance noting that we inflated 2022 construction costs per unit in Yakima County using a construction cost index. Commented [KR7]: will likely be asking jurisdictions to actually quantify the funding gap. I’ll know soon if they’re moving forward with this. It will take a little more analysis, but its not quite as complicated as it sounds. Commerce has Commented [KR8R7]: updated with new analysis if we decide to keep this Commented [KR9]: to help quantify this? Do you track permits with Commented [KR10]: Commented [KR11]: 129 of 138 3-54 While the City of Yakima has seen an increase in multifamily housing production in recent years (see Exhibit 3-34), there are nonetheless important barriers to the production of new multifamily housing sufficient to meet all low-income housing needs by the year 2046. To help identify barriers, the City reviewed its development regulations, permit process, and environmental constraints with the assistance of checklists provided by the Washington State Department of Commerce. 3.9.3. Development Regulations The City reviewed its development regulations for barriers to housing production using checklists provided by the Washington State Department of Commerce. Through that process, it identified several changes to its development regulations to simplify its standards and increase flexibility for housing development. These changes are summarized by zone in Exhibit 3-57. Among these changes are off-street parking requirements. Yakima’s development code requires builders of housing to provide a minimum number of parking spaces per residential unit. These requirements, if set too high, can both increase the cost and limit the density of new housing construction. In 2025 the Washington State Legislature passed SB 5184, which limits the number of minimum parking spaces a city can require. Yakima will need to update its development regulations to comply with this new law by January 2027. Exhibit 3-58 compares the current parking requirements in Yakima to those in SB 5184. It shows the city will need to significantly reduce its requirements compared to current standards. These changes have potential to reduce the cost of new housing development and increase the achievable density due to the reduced land area required for parking. This reduces barriers to new housing construction by improving the developer’s financial return on investment. 3.9.4. Process Obstacles The City also reviewed its permitting process and fees for barriers to housing production using checklists provided by the Washington State Department of Commerce. This review identified the following actions for implementation:  Allow for full online permit application submittal. This will create efficiencies and address a bottleneck in capacity to process building application due to short-staffed planning and building department.  Establish SEPA threshold exemptions consistent with WAC 197-11-800 (1)(c) to encourage development (up to 30-100 single family units in the city and up to 200 multifamily). 130 of 138 3-55 Exhibit 3-57: Proposed Changes to Development Standards by Zone SR R-1 R-2 R-3 HB B-1 B-2 SCC LCC GC CBD RD Code Lot size (minimum) SF detached 6,000 sq-ft 6,000 sq-ft 6000 5,000 sq- ft 6000 4,000 sq-ft 6000 sq-ft where permitte dNo change of existing use 6000 sq-ft where permitted (Do not allow single family residential) Table 5-2 (YMC 15.05.030) SF attached/ zero lot line/ townhomes/ common wall 4,000 sq-ft 4,000 sq-ft 3,500 sq- ft 3,500 3,000 sq-ft Two-Family Dwelling/ duplex 8,000 6,000 sq-ft 7,000 6,000 sq-ft 6,0005,0 00 sq-ft 6,0004,0 00 sq-ft Multifamily Dwelling/ PD Residential Density May Not Exceed Maximum Number of Dwelling Units Permitted per Net Residential Acre. Density (minimum) 1 DU/5 acres4 DU/NRA 4 DU/NRA 78 DU/NRA 12 13 DU/NRA 13 DU/NRA 13 DU/NRA 13 DU/NRA 13 DU/NRA 13 DU/NRA 13 DU/NRA 13 DU/NRA YMC 15.03.020; Table 4-1 (YMC 15.04.030) Density (Maximum) 7 DU/NRA DU/NRA (no change) 12 DU/NRA No Max Commented [KR12]: @Ferdouse Oneza should we include in this table changes that are required for Commented [KR13]: presented in the plan as “proposed changes” or 131 of 138 3-56 SR R-1 R-2 R-3 HB B-1 B-2 SCC LCC GC CBD RD Code Sections Lot Coverage 60% 60% 60% 70% 80% 85% 90% 100% (YMC 15.05.030) Building Height 35 ft 35 ft 35 ft 50 ft 35 ft 35 ft 35 ft 35 50 ft 50 ft 50 ft NA 50 ft Setback (front) 2015 ft 20 15 ft 20 15 ft 20 15 ft Setback (rear) 15 ft 15 ft 15 10 ft 15 10 ft 20 ft 20 ft 20 ft 20 ft 20 ft 20 ft 20 ft 20 ft Parking Apply SB 5184. 1 parking spot per detached single family home; 0.5 parking spots per multifamily housing unit. No minimum parking requirement for ADUs. (YMC 15.06.035) Cottage Housing 10,000 sq-ft 10,000 sq-ft 10,000 sq-ft 15.09.035 and Table 5-2, (YMC 15.05.030). Commented [FO14]: Commented [FO15]: 132 of 138 3-57 Exhibit 3-58. Minimum Required Parking Spaces Per Unit by Housing Type in City of Yakima, Current Zoning and New State Requirements Housing Type Current Zoning New statewide requirement under SB 5184 ADU 1 0 if under 1,200 sq ft Sindle-detached home 2 1 Duplex 2 0.5 Multifamily building with fewer than 10 units 2 (or 1.5 in CBD) 0.5 Multifamily building with greater than 10 units 1.5 (or 1 in CBD) 0.5 Source: ESSB 5184; YMC 15.06.040, Off-street parking standards, Table 6-1. CBD = Central Business District. 3.9.5. Housing Locations in Relation to Employment Locations Section 3.3.13. details employment trends and patterns in Yakima. There are over 50,000 jobs located in Yakima, and many of them are concentrated in the downtown area, as shown in Exhibit 3-22. Yakima’s Future Land Use Map, shown in Exhibit 2-18, allows for high- and medium-density residential development, as well as mixed use development, in close proximity to this job center. The land capacity analysis shows significant capacity for new housing in these areas through redevelopment and infill. By facilitating this kind of development, the City can increase the supply of housing and diversity of housing options close to job opportunities. 3.9.6. Consideration for the Role of ADUs Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) have potential to increase the diversity of housing options within areas where detached single-family homes predominate to include smaller and lower cost units. ADUs can be attached or detached from a primary residence on a shared lot. Depending on the context, ADUs can be an affordable housing option for Low-Income (50-80% MFI), Moderate-Income (80-120% MFI) households, or higher-income households. Consistent with new GMA requirements, City of Yakima will be updating land use regulations to allow two ADUs per in all residential zones, as well as several other changes that can reduce barriers to ADU production. These changes have the potential to increase the production of ADUs and diversify the housing supply in Yakima. 133 of 138 3-1 134 of 138 3-1 135 of 138 4-1 4. Glossary This report uses some terminology, acronyms, or data sources that may be unfamiliar. Here are some definitions. Affordable Housing The United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) considers housing to be affordable if the household is spending no more than 30% of its income on housing costs. A healthy housing market includes a variety of housing types that are aﬀordable to a range of diﬀerent household income levels. However, the term “aﬀordable housing” is often used to describe income-restricted housing available only to qualifying low-income households. Income-restricted housing can be located in public, nonprofit, or for-profit housing developments. It can also include households using vouchers to help pay for market-rate housing (see “Vouchers” below for more details). 4.1.1. American Community Survey (ACS) This is an ongoing nationwide survey conducted by the U.S. Census Bureau. It designed to provide communities with current data about how they are changing. The ACS collects information such as age, race, income, commute time to work, home value, veteran status, and other important data from U.S. households. We use data from the ACS throughout this needs assessment. 4.1.2. Area Median Income (AMI) This is a term that commonly refers to the area-wide calculation provided by the HUD for a county or metropolitan region.20 Income limits to qualify for affordable housing are typically set relative to AMI. In this report, unless otherwise indicated, AMI refers to the HUD Area Median Family Income (HAMFI). In 2025, AMI for a 4-person household in Yakima County is $82,300. 4.1.3. Cost Burden When a household pays more than 30% of their gross income on housing, including utilities, they are considered “cost-burdened.” When a household pays more than 50% of their gross income on housing, including utilities, they are considered “severely cost-burdened.” Cost-burdened households have less money available for other essentials, like food, transportation, and medical care. 4.1.4. Household A household is a group of people living within the same housing unit.21 The people can be related, such as a family. A person living alone in a housing unit or a group of unrelated people sharing a housing unit 20 Note that HUD sometimes refers to HUD Area Median Family Income as just Median Family Income, or MFI. See https://www.huduser.gov/portal/datasets/il.html 21 The Census sometimes refers to "occupied housing units" and considers all persons living in an occupied housing unit to be a single household. So, Census estimates of occupied housing units and households should be equivalent. Commented [FO16]: 136 of 138 4-2 are also counted as households. Group quarters population, such as those living in a college dormitory, military barrack, or nursing home, are not considered to be living in households. 4.1.5. Household Income The US Census Bureau defines household income as the sum of the income of all people 15 years and older living together in a household. 4.1.6. Income-Restricted Housing This term refers to housing units that are only available to households with incomes at or below a set income limit and are oﬀered for rent or sale at below-market rates. Some income-restricted rental housing is owned by a city or housing authority, while others may be privately owned. In the latter case the owners typically receive a subsidy in the form of a tax credit or property tax exemption. As a condition of their subsidy, these owners must oﬀer a set percentage of all units as income-restricted and aﬀordable to households at a designated income level. 4.1.7. Low-Income (HUD Income Limits) Households that are designated as Low-Income may qualify for income-subsidized housing units. HUD categorizes families as Low-Income, Very Low-Income, or Extremely Low-Income relative to AMI, with adjustment for family size. Exhibit 10-1 shows the income thresholds as published by HUD. While these definitions are expressed as a percentage of AMI, HUD includes additional adjustments in Yakima County to increase the income thresholds. Exhibit 10-1. HUD Income Limits by Household Size (Number of Persons in Household), 2025 Income Category Household Income Level 1 2 3 4 5 6 Extremely Low- Income 30% of AMI $19,950 $22,800 $26,650 $32,150 $37,650 $43,150 Very Low- Income 50% of AMI $33,200 $37,950 $42,700 $47,400 $51,200 $55,000 Low-Income 80% of AMI $53,100 $60,700 $68,300 $75,850 $81,950 $88,000 Source: US HUD, 2020; BERK, 2025. 4.1.8. Median Family Income (MFI) The median income of all family households in an area. Family households are those that have two or more members who are related. Median income of non-family households is typically lower than for family households, as family households are more likely to have more than one income-earner. Data 137 of 138 5-3 about median family income comes from the Census American Community Survey (ACS). However, HUD publishes current year MFI estimates for counties and metropolitan regions. These HUD MFI estimates are also known as AMI. Analyses of housing aﬀordability typically group all households by income level relative to AMI. 4.1.9. Vouchers (Tenant-based and Project-based) HUD provides housing vouchers to qualifying low-income households. These are typically distributed by local housing authorities. Vouchers can be “tenant-based”, meaning the household can use the vouchers to help pay for market-rate housing in the location of their choice. Or they can be “project-based”, meaning they are assigned to a specific building.22 4.1.10. Universal Design Universal design is “the design and composition of an environment so that it can be accessed, understood and used to the greatest extent possible by all people regardless of their age, size, or ability.”23 When integrated into the built environment, universal design principles ensure that residents who are aging or who have a disability are not blocked from accessing housing and services. 5. References Commerce. (2024). Snapshot of Homelessness in Washington State for July 2024. Retrieved from https://deptofcommerce.app.box.com/s/xonalo6msygtcjt0hr7ci7qjg8lug7rc/file/19313447493 10 Fann et al. (2016). Ch. 3: Air Quality Impacts. The Impacts of Climate Change on Human Health in the United States: A Scientific Assessment. U.S. Global Change Research Program. Sen, S., Li, H., & Khazanovich, L. (2022). Effect of climate change and urban heat islands on the deterioration of concrete roads. University of Pittsburgh,, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering,. Pittsburgh, PA, USA: Engineering. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rineng.2022.100736. University of Washington Climate Impacts Group. (2025). Climate Mapping for a Resilient Washington. Retrieved from https://cig.uw.edu/resources/analysis-tools/climate-mapping-for-a-resilient- washington/ Zhang, Y., & Wang, Y. (2016). Climate-driven ground-level ozone extreme in the fall over the Southeast United States. 22 See https://www.hud.gov/program_offices/public_indian_housing/programs/hcv/tenant and https://www.hud.gov/program_offices/public_indian_housing/programs/hcv/project for more details. 23 http://universaldesign.ie/What-is-Universal-Design/ 138 of 138