HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-11-2026 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
March 11, 2026
3:00 p.m. – 5:00 p.m.
YPC MEMBERS:
Chair Mary Place, Vice-Chair Charles Hitchcock, Jeff Baker, Roy Gondo,
Leanne Hughes-Mickel, Anne Knapp, 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)
AGENDA
I.Call to Order
II.Roll Call
III.Staff Announcements
IV.Approval of Minutes – February 25, 2026, Meeting
V.Public Comment
VI.Review of Critical Areas Ordinance
VII.January & February 2026 Building Permit Reports
VIII.Other Business
IX.Meeting Recap
X.Adjourn
Next Meeting: March 25, 2026
- 1 -
02/25/2026 YPC Minutes
City of Yakima Planning Commission (YPC) Meeting Minutes
February 25, 2026
Call to Order
Chair Place called the meeting to order at 3:00 p.m.
Roll Call
YPC Members Present: Chair Mary Place, Vice-Chair Charles Hitchcock, Roy Gondo,
Anne Knapp, Colleda Monick, Philip Ostriem, Frieda Stephens,
Shelley White
YPC Members Absent: Jeff Baker, Kevin Rangel, Leanne Hughes-Mickel (all excused)
Staff Present: Trevor Martin; Planning Manager
City Council Liaison: Matt Brown
Staff Announcements –
Trevor talked about how the first monthly Coffee with Codes event went at Northtown Coffee
House.
Approval of Minutes from January 28 & February 11, 2026- Commissioner Gondo moved to
approve the meeting minutes from January 28, 2026, Commissioner Hitchcock seconded the
motion. Chair Place abstained from voting. The motion carried unanimously. Commissioner
Gondo moved to approve the meeting minutes from February 11, 2026, Commissioner Knapp
seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously.
Public Comment – None
Review Housing Data with BERK – Kevin Ramsey and Oneyza, consultants from BERK,
joined virtually and reviewed the Housing Element with the Commission.
January 2026 Building Permit Statistics- Because the meeting ran out of time, the
Commission did not review the Building Permit Report for January. The item will be carried
forward to a future agenda
Other Business – None
Meeting Recap – Action Items & Decisions:
• Right of way assessments for vacant buildings will be explored.
• Study session on road standards will be held.
• Capacity analysis and setbacks will be reviewed without BERK’s participation.
Outstanding Action Items
• Establish a method for capturing and tracking 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 extends to 9 feet.
2 of 83
- 2 -
02/25/2026 YPC Minutes
• 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 March 11, 2026, was passed with a unanimous vote. The meeting
adjourned at approximately 4:59 p.m.
Chair Place Date
This meeting was filmed by YPAC. Minutes for this meeting submitted by: Eva Rivera, Planning Technician.
3 of 83
perteet.com
2707 COLBY AVENUE, SUITE 900
EVERETT, WA 98201
425.252.7700
YAKIMA CRITICAL AREAS ORDINANCE (COA) PERIODIC UPDATE
GAP ANALYSIS &
BEST AVAILABLE SCIENCE REVIEW
Submitted to
City of Yakima, WA
October 2025
4 of 83
OCTOBER 2025 | COA GAP ANALYSIS & BAS MEMO
1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................... 3
1.1 CORRELATION TO SMP & RIPARIAN PROTECTION AREAS .............................................................................. 3
2.0 CRITICAL AREAS - OVERALL REQUIREMENTS ........................................................................................ 4
2.1 APPLICABILITY ............................................................................................................................................... 4
2.2 DESIGNATION ............................................................................................................................................... 4
2.3 DEFINITIONS ................................................................................................................................................. 5
2.4 PROTECTION ................................................................................................................................................ 5
2.5 BEST AVAILABLE SCIENCE .............................................................................................................................. 6
2.6 NO NET LOSS ............................................................................................................................................... 6
2.7 REASONABLE USE EXCEPTION ........................................................................................................................ 7
3.0 FREQUENTLY FLOODED AREAS ................................................................................................................ 7
3.1 DEFINITION & CLASSIFICATION ....................................................................................................................... 7
3.2 PROTECTION ................................................................................................................................................. 7
3.3 FREEBOARDING ............................................................................................................................................. 8
3.4 FLOODWAY FRINGE / FLOODWAY USES ........................................................................................................ 8
4.0 FISH & WILDLIFE HABITAT AREAS ............................................................................................................. 9
4.1 CLASSIFICATION ........................................................................................................................................... 9
4.1.1 DEFINITIONS ......................................................................................................................................... 9
4.1.2 DESIGNATIONS .................................................................................................................................... 10
4.2 FEDERAL, STATE, & LOCAL ........................................................................................................................... 11
4.3 PROTECTION ................................................................................................................................................ 11
4.3.1 BUFFERS & SETBACKS .......................................................................................................................... 11
4.3.2 RIPARIAN MANAGEMENT ZONE ............................................................................................................. 11
4.3.3 ANADROMOUS FISHERIES .................................................................................................................... 12
4.3.4 SHRUB-STEPPE .................................................................................................................................... 13
4.3.5 FOREST PRACTICES ............................................................................................................................. 13
4.3.6 HAZARDOUS TREE REMOVAL .............................................................................................................. 14
5.0 WETLANDS ................................................................................................................................................... 14
5.1 DEFINITION & CLASSIFICATION .................................................................................................................... 14
5.2 DELINEATION & RATINGS ............................................................................................................................. 15
6.0 GEOLOGICALLY HAZARDOUS AREAS ................................................................................................... 15
6.1 DESIGNATION & CLASSIFICATION ................................................................................................................. 16
6.2 PROTECTION & REPORTING ......................................................................................................................... 17
6.3 MAPPING ..................................................................................................................................................... 17
7.0 CRITICAL AQUIFER RECHARGE AREAS ................................................................................................... 17
7.1 DEFINITION, CLASSIFICATION, & PROTECTION .............................................................................................. 17
7.2 QUALITY & QUANTITY ................................................................................................................................ 17
5 of 83
OCTOBER 2025 | COA GAP ANALYSIS & BAS MEMO
2
7.3 WELL HEAD PROTECTION AREAS .................................................................................................................. 17
7.4 MAPPING & REPORTING ............................................................................................................................... 17
8.0 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................................................ 17
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE 1. YAKIMA CAO, CHAPTER 15.27 CONTENTS........................................................................................................ 3
TABLE 2. OVERALL RECOMMENDATIONS. ....................................................................................................................... 4
TABLE 3. FLOOD HAZARD AREA RECOMMENDATIONS...................................................................................................... 7
TABLE 4. FWHCA RECOMMENDATIONS. ....................................................................................................................... 9
TABLE 5. WETLAND RECOMMENDATIONS. ..................................................................................................................... 14
TABLE 6. GEOLOGICALLY HAZARDOUS AREAS RECOMMENDATIONS. ............................................................................. 15
TABLE 7. CARA RECOMMENDATIONS. .......................................................................................................................... 17
LIST OF APPENDICES
APPENDIX A WA Dept. of Commerce Critical Areas Checklist
APPENDIX B WDFW Riparian Management Zone Checklist
6 of 83
OCTOBER 2025 | COA GAP ANALYSIS & BAS MEMO
3
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Pursuant to the Growth Management Act (GMA) and the Revised Code of Washington (RCW) 36.70A.170,
local jurisdictions must establish a critical areas ordinance incorporating the designation and protections of
critical areas, including wetlands, critical aquifer recharge areas, fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas,
frequently flooded areas, and geologically hazardous areas (RCW 36.70A.030(12). Other natural resource
lands as noted in RCW 36.70A.170 are intermittently discussed in this report to ensure compliance.
This report addresses gaps and inconsistencies that call for updates to the City of Yakima’s Critical Area
Ordinance (CAO) to comply with the required GMA’s process for the 2026 Comprehensive Plan Periodic Update
cycle. The report also incorporates Best Available Science (BAS) guidance as directed by RCW 36.70A.172.
The Department of Commerce (Commerce) Critical Area Checklist (May 2024) is attached to this report for
reference as Appendix A. On the Critical Area Checklist applicable code sections of the City of Yakima’s CAO
are referenced and are also referenced throughout this report. Recommendations made as a result of this Gap
Analysis are shown in tables under each section.
Table 1. Yakima CAO , Chapter 15.27 Contents
Chapter Part Code Sections
Part One. General Provisions 15.27.100 – 15.27.170
Part Two. Definitions 15.27.200
Part Three. Application and Review Procedures 15.27.300 – 15.27.321
Part Four. Flood Hazard Areas 15.27.400 – 15.27.437
Part Five. Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas 15.27.500 – 15.27.517
Part Six. Wetlands 15.27.600 – 15.27.605
Part Seven. Geologically Hazardous Areas 15.27.700 – 15.27.704
1.1 Correlation to Shoreline Master Program (SMP) & Ripa rian Protection Areas
Pursuant to WAC 173-26-221(1) and effective through the establishment of the Washington State Shoreline
Management Act (SMA), Shoreline Management Programs (SMP) are required to contain policies and
regulations for the management of critical areas, as designated in RCW 36.70A.170(1)(d), that are located with
shorelines of the state. The resulting SMP policies and regulations are provided to ensure no net loss of ecological
function or value within the shorelines of the state. For continuity, references to the City of Yakima’s SMP are also
included on the attached Critical Areas Checklist (Appendix A).
A comprehensive compliance review of the City of Yakima’s SMP is not included in the current periodic updated
efforts regarding the Yakima’s Comprehensive Plan and Critical Areas Ordinance. Alternatively, a comparative
review of the Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife’s (WDFW) Riparian Management Zone Checklist was
made to support of continuity between the subject COA gap analysis and future compliance review efforts of the
City to Yakima’s SMP. Additionally, a separate technical memorandum will be drafted in relation to the
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) riparian management guidance, specifically Riparian
Management Zones (RMZs) and Site Potential Tree Height (SPTH), including consideration of alternatives used
by other local jurisdictions where implementation of BAS warrant a flexible approach. For more details, see the
7 of 83
OCTOBER 2025 | COA GAP ANALYSIS & BAS MEMO
4
WDFW Riparian Management Zone (RMZ) Checklist attached as Appendix B, as well as the separately issued
technical memorandum for WDFW Riparian Management Guidance.
2.0 CRITICAL AREAS – OVERALL REQUIREMENTS
Table 2. Overall Recommendations
Code Section Reason/Consistency Recommendation
15.27.150(B) –
Applicability Consistency & Clarity
Consider revising ‘relevant regulations’ to
include “as amended”.
15.27.200 – Definitions
Generally. Consistency & Clarity
Consider moving the definition for
Geologically Hazardous Areas from YMC
15.27.700(A) – Purpose and intent, to YMC
15.27.200.
15.27.314 – Critical Area
Report Requirements
Consistency with WAC 365-195-
915(c)
Consider adding language that proclaims
required criteria for departing from science-
based recommendations.
15.27.314(J) – Critical Area
Report Requirements WAC 197-11-768
Consider adding language noting that critical
area reporting and analysis must utilize
mitigation sequencing as shown in YMC
15.27.307 (Mitigation Requirements).
15.27.315 – Supplemental
report requirements for
specific critical areas. Clarity and Continuity
Consider splitting and moving supplemental
requirements into their respective critical area
subsections.
15.27.605 –
Compensatory mitigation Clarity & Reduce Repetitiveness
Consider removing mitigation sequencing
language in YMC 15.27.605 (Compensatory
Mitigation.) and referencing back to existing
YMC 15.27.307 (Mitigation Requirements.)
2.1 Applicability
Applicability of Chapter 15.27 in the Yakima Municipal Code (YMC) is adequately addressed, but it is unclear to
the average reader if amended versions of the critical areas ordinance and flood hazard ordinance are also
applicable. While each of these ordinances have legally binding adoption and/or effective dates, the removal of
specific dates of ordinances under ‘relevant regulations’ (YMC 15.27.150(B) supports consistency and continuity.
Recommendation: Consider clarifying under YMC 15.27.150(B) that amended versions of the listed ordinances
are applicable (“as amended”).
2.2 Designation
The designation of Critical Areas within the Yakima Municipal Code (YMC) is adequately addressed in Chapter
15.27 – Part One General Provisions, where the City of Yakima’s authority, purpose, intent, and applicability is
expressed in accordance with RCW 36.70A.060.
8 of 83
OCTOBER 2025 | COA GAP ANALYSIS & BAS MEMO
5
2.3 Definitions
The YMC 15.27.200 contains applicable designated critical area definitions for Wetlands, Critical Aquifer
Recharge Area, Fish & Wildlife Habitat Conservation, and Special Flood Hazard Area. For consistency and
consolidation, consider moving the definition for Geologically Hazardous Areas from YMC 15.27.700(A) –
Purpose and intent, to YMC 15.27.200.
YMC 15.27.200:
• “Wetland” means areas that are inundated or saturated by surface water or groundwater at a frequency
and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of
vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps,
marshes, bogs, and similar areas. Wetlands do not include those artificial wetlands intentionally created
from nonwetland sites, including, but not limited to, irrigation and drainage ditches, grass-lined swales,
canals, detention facilities, wastewater treatment facilities, farm ponds, and landscape amenities, or
those wetlands created after July 1, 1990, that were unintentionally created as a result of the construction
of a road, street, or highway. Wetlands may include those artificial wetlands intentionally created from
nonwetland areas created to mitigate conversion of wetlands.
• “Critical aquifer recharge area” means an area with a critical recharging effect on an aquifer(s) used for
potable water or areas where a drinking water aquifer is vulnerable to contamination that would affect
the potability of the water.
• “Fish and wildlife habitat conservation” means land management for maintaining populations of species
in suitable habitats within their natural geographic distribution so that the habitat available is sufficient
to support viable populations over the long term and isolated subpopulations are not created. This does
not mean maintaining all individuals of all species at all times, but it does mean not degrading or
reducing populations or habitats so that they are no longer viable over the long term. Counties and cities
should engage in cooperative planning and coordination to help assure long-term population viability.
• “Special flood hazard area” means the land in the floodplain identified by the Federal Emergency
Management Agency that is subject to a one percent or greater chance of flooding in any given year,
commonly known as the one-hundred-year floodplain.
YMC 15.27.700:
• “A. Geologically hazardous areas include those areas susceptible to erosion, sliding, earthquake, or
other geological events. These areas pose a threat to the health and safety of the city of Yakima’s citizens
when incompatible development is sited in significantly hazardous areas. When mitigation is not feasible,
development within geologically hazardous areas should be avoided.”
2.4 Protection
General protective measures for critical areas are expressed in YMC 15.27.321, with additional protective
measures also expressed in each corresponding critical area’s Part subsection of the YMC Chapter 15.27 as
follows:
• Part Four. Flood Hazard Areas – Article II. Flood Hazard Protection Standards,
o YMC 15.27.407-15.27.408,
• Part Five. Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas – Article I. Introduction,
o YMC 15.27.501,
• Part Six. Wetlands,
o YMC 15.27.602,
• Part Seven. Geologically Hazardous Areas,
9 of 83
OCTOBER 2025 | COA GAP ANALYSIS & BAS MEMO
6
o YMC 15.27.702,
• Part Eight. Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas (CARA),
o YMC 15.27.820.
Critical Area Reports are a founded methods of ensuring protective measures are considered, assessed, and/or
implemented according to the purposes and standards for the Chapter.
Recommendation: To support clarity and continuity, consider splitting and moving YMC 15.27.315
(Supplemental report requirements for specific critical areas.) to their respective and associated critical areas
section within the Chapter.
2.5 Best Available Science
The inclusion of BAS consistency is appropriately referenced in YMC 15.27.150 – Science and Protection of
Anadromous Fish. Additional locations within the CAO include:
• Qualified professional to prepare the report consistent with BAS,
o YMC 15.27.314(B) – Critical areas report requirements,
• Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas,
o YMC 15.27.500(A), and YMC 15.27.501(2),
• Wetland Buffer Requirements and Alternative Mitigation Plans,
o YMC 15.27.604(A), and YMC 15.27.605(I)(7).
Recommendation: In accordance with WAC 365-195-915(c), consider adding language that proclaims required
decision criteria for any non-science-based information used as a basis for recommending protection of critical
area functions and values, and for departing from science-based critical area policies and regulations.
2.6 No Net Loss
‘No Net Loss’ provisions ensure ecological function remains unchanged over time, preventing new adverse
impacts from development. When impacts are proposed, mitigation sequencing should be implemented to ensure
corrective measures, monitoring, and compensatory mitigation measures offset when/where critical area
functions and values are harmed or impacted by development activity. Accordingly, YMC 15.27.130 addresses the
allowance of development options within designated critical areas where no net loss of function and value are
obtainable, and no incompatibilities are present.
The YMC sections 15.27.314 through 15.27.321 address the avoidance of potential adverse impacts through
critical area reporting criteria, performance measures for site delineation and mitigation plans, and declaration of
the administrative official’s authority to reject or request revisions in reporting when critical area impacts are
incomplete, inaccurate, or not fully addressed. Mitigation sequencing is mentioned in YMC 15.27.315(B)(4)(b)
(Supplemental report requirements for specific critical areas.) regarding wetland critical area reporting, YMC
15.27.317(C)(3) (Adjustments) regarding vegetative buffer averaging, YMC 15.27.509(N) (General policies and
standards.) regarding activity within a FWHCA, and then fully repeated and referenced under YMC 15.27.605
(Compensatory Mitigation). Although reporting criteria, performance measures, mitigation sequencing, and
authority to require reassessment of impacts are mentioned, existing language under YMC 15.27.314 does not
clearly depict the use of mitigation sequencing when mitigation is required for all critical areas (Ecology, 2022)
10 of 83
OCTOBER 2025 | COA GAP ANALYSIS & BAS MEMO
7
Recommendation: Consider adding language in YMC 15.27.314 (Critical area report requirements.) that all
critical area reporting should present mitigation sequencing in accordance with YMC 15.27.307 (Mitigation
requirements.) when mitigation is required.
Recommendation: Consider removing mitigation sequencing language in YMC 15.27.605 (Compensatory
Mitigation.) and referencing back to existing YMC 15.27.307 (Mitigation Requirements.)
2.7 Reasonable Use Exception
In cases where adverse impacts to critical areas would presume no reasonable use of a property, a Reasonable
Use Exception permit review process is noted in YMC 15.27.318.
3.0 FREQUENTLY FLOODED AREAS
Table 3. Floodplains Recommendations
Code Section Reason/Consistency Recommendation
YMC 15.27.315(D) &
YMC 15.27.418(H)
WA State Model Ordinance
(Ecology, 2021)
Consider adding provisions requiring an
elevation Certificate for projects that may
affect the floodplain or require a
hydrologic and hydraulic (no-rise) study
YMC 15.27.408(A) –
Specific Standards
Federal Flood Risk Management
Standards, Exec. Order # 13690
Consider increasing freeboarding to a
two-foot above BFE for new or
substantially improved residential
structures
Article III – Floodway
Fringe Uses & Article IV –
Floodway Uses
WA State Model Ordinance
(Ecology, 2021)
Consider re-evaluation of floodway fringe
uses and floodway uses according to the
WA State Model Ordinance and FEMA
regulations
3.1 Definition & Classification
Special Flood Hazard Areas are defined and designated through YMC 15.27.200, with a supplemental reporting
requirements provision in YMC 15.27.315 noting an engineering report to be prepared by a licensed engineer for
establishing any new flood elevations.
3.2 Protection
The City updated YMC 15.27 Part Four (Flood Hazard Areas) in 2021 (Ord. 2021-021), amending and adding
sections related to the identification and establishment of flood hazard areas (YMC 15.27.400), Methods of
Reducing Flood Losses (YMC 15.27.403), and amending sections related to Penalties, Liabilities, Variances, New
Construction, General Standards for Construction Techniques, Floodproofing Certificates, Storage of Materials,
Critical Facilities, Livestock Sanctuary Areas, and Specific Standards for Residential and Nonresidential
Construction, Manufactured Homes, Enclosed Areas, areas with or without established base flood elevations /
floodways, Shallow Flooding Areas, Structure Drainage, Recreational Vehicles, and Permit Application / Review
Process.
11 of 83
OCTOBER 2025 | COA GAP ANALYSIS & BAS MEMO
8
Yakima County adopted The Upper Yakima River Comprehensive Flood Hazard Management Plan in 1998, as
amended in 2007 and 2018, in which the study area includes the majority of the City of Yakima’s jurisdiction. The
City of Yakima has also adopted the City of Yakima Hazard Mitigation Plan in 2015 as an attachment to the
Yakima County Multi-jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan. The adoption and attachment of the city-specific
hazard mitigation plan supports the city’s continued effort to be part of the National Flood Insurance Program
allowing for federal funding eligibility. The city also provides funding for community outreach and education
through the Yakima County Flood Control District.
3.3 Freeboard ing
Integrated Floodplain Management is an approach method for acknowledging collaboration based on shared
values across the many types of ecological and economic benefits of managing floodplains. Most commonly
notable, this approach supports the combined effort in reduction of flood damage, support for riparian habitats,
and the preservation of agriculture and open spaces. Resiliency practices further support this effort through
minimizing encroachments within floodways and floodplains, as well as bolstering design standards to maximize
structural integrity during and after a flood event.
Recommendation: Consider increasing freeboarding to a two-foot above BFE for new or substantially improved
residential structures, providing for added resilience during future flood conditions or extreme weather events.
(YMC 15.27.408(A) – Specific Standards).
3.4 Flood way Fringe / Floodway Uses
Portions of the floodplain that are inundated by floodwater but no within a defined floodway are considered
temporary storage for floodwaters and referred to as floodway fringe areas. These areas are predominantly
identified through the use of BFEs, as depicted in city GIS databases. Areas identified with BFEs must
demonstrate that the cumulative effects of the proposed development combined with other existing and
anticipated development cannot increase the base flood by more than one foot anywhere within the community.
Articles III & IV of Part Four of the YMC Chapter 15.27 reference permitted and prohibited uses regarding
floodway fringe areas and floodways. The language in both articles is very similar to each other but suggest
opposing protective measures not aligned with the WA State Model Ordinance for floodplain management
(Ecology, 2021). Article III does not permit substantial residential improvements when located in the floodway
fringe area without a hydrologic and hydraulic (no-rise) study, while this is commonly applied as floodway
regulations. Article IV permits mining, utility lines, roads, and water dependent utilities within the floodway
without a hydrologic and hydraulic (no-rise) study, when these studies are a primary protective measure for these
uses within the floodway.
Recommendation: Consider re-evaluation of floodway fringe uses and floodway uses according to the WA State
Model Ordinance and FEMA regulations for applicability permitted and prohibited development activity.
Recommendation: Consider adding provisions requiring an elevation certificate for projects that may affect the
floodplain or require a hydrologic and hydraulic (no-rise) study (YMC 15.27.315(D) & YMC 15.27.418(H).
12 of 83
OCTOBER 2025 | COA GAP ANALYSIS & BAS MEMO
9
4.0 FISH & WILDLIFE HABITAT CONSERVATION AREAS (FWHCAS)
Table 4. FWHCA Recommendations
Code Section Reason/Consistency Recommendation
15.27.150 – Science and
Protection of Anadromous
Fish Clarity
Consider adding reference to consultation of
federal, state, and regional salmon recovery
plans.
15.27.315(A)(1) –
Supplemental Report
Requirements for Specific
Critical Areas Update Terminology
Consider revising ‘habitat and native
vegetation conservation strategy’ to Habitat
Management Plan.
15.27.502(3) –
Designation Clarity
Consider specifying when a Critical Area
Report is required under this critical area
designation.
15.27.502 – Designation Clarity
Consider noting Sensitive Fish Species listed in
the Natural Environment Element of the
Comprehensive Plan.
15.27.505 –
Water Typing System WAC 222-16-030
Update from current Interim Water Typing
System classifications (WAC 222-16-031) to
Permanent Water Typing System
classifications (WAC 222-16-030).
15.27.507 – Mapping Clarity
Consider revising GIS geodatabase
nomenclature from ‘wildlife priority habitats’
to Priority Habitat Species.
15.27.507(B) – Mapping Clarity
Consider including a reference to WDFW PHS
informational maps.
Article V. Land
Modification Development
Standards RCW 36.70A.570
Consider addressing forest practices by
providing protection measures for forested
ecosystems in relations to land-disturbing
activities.
4.1 Classification
FWHCAs provide resources and habitat sufficient to support viable fish and wildlife populations over the long
term (WAC 365-190-130). These areas are critical for preserving biodiversity, maintaining ecological
connectivity, and supporting salmonid survival across all life stages. Functions provided by riparian habitats
include shade and temperature regulation, large woody material recruitment, nutrient cycling, bank stabilization,
water quality protection, and wildlife movement corridors.
4.1.1 Definitions
YMC 15.27.200:
• “Priority habitat” means a habitat type with unique or significant value to one or more species. An area
classified and mapped as priority habitat must have one or more of the following attributes:
comparatively high fish or wildlife density, comparatively high fish or wildlife species diversity, fish
spawning habitat, important wildlife habitat, important fish or wildlife seasonal range, important fish or
13 of 83
OCTOBER 2025 | COA GAP ANALYSIS & BAS MEMO
10
wildlife movement corridor, rearing and foraging habitat, refuge, limited availability, high vulnerability to
habitat alteration, unique or dependent species, or shellfish bed. A priority habitat may be described by a
unique vegetation type or by a dominant plant species that is of primary importance to fish and wildlife.
A priority habitat may also be described by a successional stage. Alternatively, a priority habitat may
consist of a specific habitat element (such as talus slopes, caves, or snags) of key value to fish and
wildlife. A priority habitat may contain priority and/or nonpriority fish and wildlife.
• “Priority species” means species requiring protective measures and/or management guidelines to ensure
their persistence at genetically viable population levels. Priority species are those that meet any of the
criteria listed below:
A. Washington State (State) Listed or State-Proposed Species. State-listed species are those native fish
and wildlife species legally designated as endangered (WAC 232-12-014), threatened (WAC 232-12-
011), or sensitive (WAC 232-12-011). State-proposed species are those fish and wildlife species that will be
reviewed by WDFW (POL-M-6001) for possible listing as endangered, threatened, or sensitive
according to the process and criteria defined in WAC 232-12-297.
B. Vulnerable Aggregations. Vulnerable aggregations include those species or groups of animals
susceptible to significant population declines, within a specific area or statewide, by virtue of their
inclination to congregate.
C. Species of Recreational, Commercial, and/or Tribal Importance. Native and nonnative fish, shellfish,
and wildlife species of recreational or commercial importance and recognized species used for tribal
ceremonial and subsistence purposes that are vulnerable to habitat loss or degradation.
D. Species listed under the federal Endangered Species Act as either proposed, threatened, or
endangered.
• “Riparian vegetation” means the terrestrial vegetation that grows beside rivers, streams, and other
freshwater bodies and that depends on these water sources for soil moisture greater than would
otherwise be available from local precipitation.
• “Species of local importance” are those species that are of local concern due to their population status or
their sensitivity to habitat alteration or that are game species.
• “Stream” means water contained within a channel either perennial, intermittent, or ephemeral. Streams
include both natural watercourses or those modified by man (example: stream flow manipulation,
channelization, and relocation of the channel). They do not include irrigation ditches, wasteways, drains,
outfalls, operational spillways, canals, stormwater runoff facilities, or other artificial watercourses except
those that are located within existing wetland or streams.
• “Vegetative buffer” or “buffer” means an area extending landward from the ordinary high water mark of
a lake or stream and/or from the edge of a wetland which is maintained or otherwise allowed to provide
support for the performance of the basic functional properties of a fish and wildlife habitat conservation
area and wetlands as set forth in YMC 15.27.504 and 15.27.603.
• “Wildlife habitat” means an area of climate, soils, vegetation, relationship to water, location and/or
other physical properties which are identified as having a critical importance to the maintenance of
wildlife species.
4.1.2 Designations
The YMC 15.27.502 includes designation of FWHCAs in accordance with WAC 365-190-130, with the exception
of marine related habitats.
14 of 83
OCTOBER 2025 | COA GAP ANALYSIS & BAS MEMO
11
4.2 Federal, State, & Local
YMC 15.27.502 note designations of FWHCAs based on locations identified by federal, state, and local
authorities, including but not limited to Federally endangered/threatened/sensitive species, Federal Emergency
Management Agency mapped floodplains, WDFW’s Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) program, Waters of the
State, government or tribal stocked aquatic features, and ‘Habitats of Local Importance’.
4.3 Protection
The protection of fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas are expressed in YMC 15.27.501 (Protection
Approach) and designated through YMC 15.27.502 (Designation) and YMC 15.27.507 (Maps).
Recommendation: Consider specifically noting the requirement of a Critical Area Report based on listed
designation listed within YMC 15.27.502.
Recommendation: Consider revising terminology used in YMC 15.27.315(A)(1) to require a Habitat Management
Plan (HMP) instead of a ‘habitat and native vegetation conservation strategy.’
4.3.1 Buffers & Setbacks
Yakima Municipal Code (YMC 15.27, Part Five) regulates FWHCAs by establishing fixed buffer widths measured
horizontally from the ordinary high-water mark (OHWM), varying by stream type. The code (YMC 15.27.505)
still references the interim water typing system (Types 1–5), which has been replaced by the permanent water
system (Type S, F, Np, and Ns classifications) under WAC 222-16-030.
Recommendation: Consider updating stream typing according to WAC 222-16-030 Water Typing Systems,
which applies Type S, F, Np/s, and subsequently updating references to Designated Type 2 Stream Corridors in
Appendix B.
4.3.2 Riparian Management Zone
The WDFW has published multiple BAS resources and guidance related to RMZs, including but not limited to:
• Riparian Ecosystems Vol. 1 (Quinn, 2020): Identifies BAS regarding ecological functions of riparian
areas and management measures necessary to maintain them.
o Riparian Ecosystems Vol. 2 (Rentz et al., 2020): Identifies recommendations for how local
governments can include BAS in protecting riparian ecosystems and associated aquatic
habitats.
• Site Potential Tree Height Guidelines (2025): Recommends implementation of riparian management
zones (RMZ) through utilizing arboreal species-specific site-potential tree heights (SPTH200) or the
extent of native riparian vegetation, whichever is greater, along with a 100-foot minimum to ensure
pollutant-removal functions.
• Riparian Management Zone Checklist (2023): Details performance measures and additional
protective measures for CAO updates.
While the provisions for stream buffering/setbacks and channel migration zones provide a baseline level of
protection, they do not align with WDFW’s 2020 Riparian Ecosystems BAS (Quinn, 2020), the 2020 Site
Potential Tree Height (SPTH) guidance (WDFW, 2025), or the 2023 RMZ Checklist.
15 of 83
OCTOBER 2025 | COA GAP ANALYSIS & BAS MEMO
12
Recent WDFW guidance on SPTH (WDFW, 2025) recommends that additional protections to designate riparian
ecosystems should be considered based on associated arboreal/forested systems and WDFW RMZ
recommendations (Rentz et al., 2020). Designation of riparian ecosystems/habitats as a FWHCA through the
use of RMZs ensures protection of the ecological functions of aquatic habitats, further supporting both fish-
bearing riparian habitats (anadromous fish habitats) and non-fish-bearing habitats. Protection of these habitats
support temperature regulation, nutrient cycling, pollution prevention, bank stabilization, water quality
protection, terrestrial wildlife movement corridors, and climate resilience.
The functional properties listed in YMC 15.27.504 support RMZs related to site specific circumstances where the
protection of riparian function and values necessitate a larger buffer as a protective measure, such as poor soil
conditions, steep slopes or stormwater runoff that can contribute to and deposit pollutants within riverine
habitats.
WDFW’s Riparian Ecosystems guidance, Vol. 2, Section 2.3.5 (Rentz et al., 2020) indicates that while site-
potential tree height (SPTH) may apply in the limited areas of the Columbia Plateau where tall riparian trees
occur, this condition is uncommon. In most dryland settings, riparian management zones are more appropriately
delineated based on the extent of riparian vegetation and the pollution-removal functions they provide, with a
minimum 100-foot width generally cited as necessary to achieve effective pollutant reduction.
In Yakima, FWHCAs occur in a semi-arid shrub-steppe landscapes characteristic of the Columbia Plateau.
Riparian systems along the Yakima River, Naches River, and tributaries provide essential functions even in the
absence of tall coniferous forests. This setting requires a regulatory framework that predominantly emphasizes
pollutant removal, water quality protection, and habitat connectivity over tree-height–based metrics that are not
ecologically applicable in shrub-steppe habitats due to a lack of tall forested systems.
Specifically, standard SPTH buffers at a minimum of 200-feet, with the arboreal species-specific tree heights
ranging from 123 to 300-feet , may not be a suitable measure for the riparian habitats of the semi-arid shrub-
steppe landscape of the Columbia Plateau. Alternatively, the absence of tall forested systems along Yakima’s
riparian areas could be supported by the designation of FWHCA RMZs based on WDFW recommendations
(Rentz et all., 2020).
Comprehensively, these guidance documents establish that while SPTH is the preferred scientific measure, BAS
supports a flexible approach where ecological conditions (e.g., shrub-steppe) make implementation of SPTH
standard buffers inapplicable.
Due to the unique complexities of Yakima’s regional and localized ecosystems as well as potential socioeconomic
impacts within the City of Yakima, a separate technical memorandum will be drafted specifically addressing
impacts resulting from the implementation of RMZs according to recent WDFW BAS as well as supporting case
studies alternatives.
4.3.3 Anadromous Fisheries
The protection of anadromous fish is noted in YMC 15.27.150 with references to GMA required BAS designations
and procedural criteria. Additional references to anadromous fish are only found in YMC 15.27.603 (Wetlands
functions and rating.).
16 of 83
OCTOBER 2025 | COA GAP ANALYSIS & BAS MEMO
13
Recommendation: For clarity, consider adding language in YMC 15.27.502 specifically noting the ‘Sensitive Fish
Species Identified in the City’s Streams and Rivers’ listed in the Natural Environment Element of the Yakima
Comprehensive Plan.
Recommendation: Consider including a reference to YMC 15.27.150 regarding consultation with federal, state,
and regional salmon recovery plans as recommended by WAC 365-190-130(4).
4.3.4 Shrub s teppe
Since the previous periodic review and update of Yakima’s COA, shrub-steppe habitats areas as designated by
WDFW have changed geospatially as well as in classification. The Washington Shrubsteppe Restoration and
Resiliency Initiative (WSRRI) issued a Long-Term Strategy for 2024-2054 (WDFW-Shrubsteppe, 2024). The
extent of the Shrubsteppe habitat has varied historically and in order to defend, grow, and connect the habitat
areas for the future, the WSRRI’s strategy has derived spatial priority classifications for reaching conservation
targets regarding dry (xeric) and wet (mesic) habitats as well as the greater sage-grouse, a species of highest
conservation concern. These spatial priority areas are mapped online for reference.
While WDFW PHS designations are available online and also designated as FWHCAs through YMC 15.27.502,
it is important to note both, the changes recently made in WDFW PHS designation of shrubsteppe areas, as well
as the above referenced strategy plan related to shrubsteppe habitats. Shrubsteppe habitats are no longer
identified as close to city limits boundaries as they previously were, but Yakima still plays a role in habitat
connectivity as an applicable function of the adjacent priority habitats. Alternatively, much of the area previously
designated as shrubsteppe has changed to Urban Natural Open Space, and WSRRI’s strategic plans further
identifies spatial priority areas for dry (xeric) habitat priorities partially within and surrounding the City of Yakima.
WSRRI xeric habitat priority classifications nearest the City of Yakima include xeric habitat core, xeric habitat
corridors, and other xeric habitats.
Recommendation: To create consistency, consider revising ‘wildlife priority habitats’ as referenced by the city’s
GIS geodatabase nomenclature to more clearly be identify with WDFW PHS terminology.
Recommendation: Consider including a reference in YMC 15.27.507(B) to WDFW PHS maps and supplemental
WDFW informational maps.
4.3.5 Forest Practices
While references to forest practices are included in Chapters 7.82 (Construction Stormwater Runoff) and 7.83
(Post-construction stormwater runoff), the addition and inclusion of forest practices regulations as required by
RCW 76.09.240 and related to critical area functions and values should be included in the city’s CAO under
Chapter 15.27. Existing references support acknowledgement of land disturbing activities including Class IV
general forest practices in relation with stormwater management in the event of new development, but these
chapters also express that forest practices regulated under Title 222 of the Washington Administrative Code
(WAC) are exempted from applicability of the chapters.
Recommendation: Consider addressing forest practices as required under RCW 36.70A.570 and as stipulated
by RCW 76.09.240, by addressing protection of public resources, appropriate approvals for conversion of
forestlands, guided by planning goals in RCW 36.70A.202, and are consistent with or supplement development
regulations that protect critical areas.
17 of 83
OCTOBER 2025 | COA GAP ANALYSIS & BAS MEMO
14
Additionally, due to the city recent efforts in establishing an Urban Foresty Management Plan that was
“…designed to guide the City’s efforts in nurturing and expanding its green infrastructure…”, this action could be
referenced as addressing protection of public resources. Provisions related to forest practices already existing
within the city’s SMP regulations, similar provisions would support habitat functions and values across habitats
not already covered by the SMP.
4.3.6 Hazardous Tree Removal
Hazard trees can pose public safety concerns, both for the jurisdiction in and around publicly accessible areas,
and for private property owners in proximity to or at the edge of habitat buffers. Dead trees and snags also
provide habitat functions for wildlife and should be preserved if not hazardous.
Chapter 8.77 (Public Tree Ordinance) of the YMC addresses public tree management as part of the city’s urban
tree program. Provisions of this Chapter also cover ‘dead and diseased tree removal on private property’ and also
defines ‘hazard tree’ according to tree hazard evaluation standards by the International Society of Arboriculture.
This Chapter does not contain provisions for addressing hazard trees in relation to critical areas in general nor
riparian habitat areas.
Recommendation: Consider addressing hazard tree removal within riparian habitats in consideration of Forest
Practice Rules (WAC 222-21-010[4]) for both public and private benefits, along with provisions that prevent
damage to remaining trees and vegetation within riparian habitats.
5.0 WETLANDS
Table 5 . We tl and Recommendations
Code Section Reason/Consistency Recommendation
15.27.603 –
Wetland Functions &
Rating
WA Ecology, Wetland Guidance
for CAP Updates: Western &
Eastern Washington (Ecology,
2022)
Consider incorporating references to
climate-mitigation and resiliency.
15.27.603 –
Wetland Functions &
Rating
WA Ecology, Wetland Guidance
for CAP Updates: Western &
Eastern Washington (Ecology,
2022)
Consider incorporating language
regarding disconnected buffers.
5.1 Definition, & Classification
Wetlands provide water-quality improvement (nutrient, sediment, metals/toxics retention and transformation),
hydrologic regulation (flood attenuation, erosion reduction, groundwater recharge), and habitat functions (for
invertebrates, amphibians, fish, birds, mammals). In Yakima, wetlands occur along riverine corridors,
springs/seeps, seasonal depressions, and areas influenced by shallow groundwater or irrigation return flows, and
they interconnect with other critical areas (FWHCAs, frequently flooded areas).
Under the Growth Management Act and SEPA, wetland protection is grounded in federal and state definitions
and Best Available Science (BAS). Ecology emphasizes that wetland loss/degradation increases flood risk,
degrades water quality, and reduces ecosystem services that carry real public and private costs.
18 of 83
OCTOBER 2025 | COA GAP ANALYSIS & BAS MEMO
15
5.2 Delin eation & Ratings
The YMC 15.27.600–.605 establishes purpose and intent, designation/delineation (use of the 1987 Corps
Manual + Regional Supplements), functions and rating (Ecology 2014 Eastern WA rating system), buffers
(category- and habitat-score–based tables with required impact minimization measures and corridor provisions),
buffer averaging, and compensatory mitigation (sequencing, banks/ILF, and credit/debit option for Eastern WA).
Buffers must be vegetated with native plant communities; wider if overlapping buffers applies; signs/fencing and
long-term stewardship are addressed. Overall, YMC Chapter 15.27 – Part Six Wetlands, already tracks closely
with Ecology’s model guidance for Eastern Washington and is substantially aligned with GMA requirements and
other BAS guidance.
The 2022 Guidance for CAO Updates clarifies buffer approaches for Eastern Washington (Appendix D),
updates minimization measures, and incorporates climate change considerations (e.g., carbon sequestration) .
The guidance emphasizes watershed-based planning and use of updated rating systems.
Recommendation: Consider incorporating climate-mitigation and resiliency (carbon Sequestration).
Recommendation: Consider incorporating language regarding disconnected buffer as recommended by
Ecology’s Wetland Guidance for CAP Updates: Western & Eastern Washington (Ecology, 2022).
6.0 GEOLOGICALLY HAZARDOUS AREAS
Table 6. Geologically Hazardous Areas Recommendations
Code Section Reason/Consistency Recommendation
15.27.701 –
Mapping and Designation WAC 365-190-120(4)
Consider assessing geologically
hazardous areas based on three
classifications; Known/Suspect, No
Known, Unknown.
15.27.701 –
Mapping and Designation WAC 365-190-120(5)
Consider including references to US Dept.
of Ag. NRSC soil type classifications for
identification and assessment of erosion
hazard areas.
15.27.701 –
Mapping and Designation
WAC 365-190-120(6)
(a) through (h)
Consider referencing the combination of
potential geological, topographical, and
hydrologic factors for identification and
assessment of landslide hazard areas.
15.27.701 –
Mapping and Designation WAC 365-190-120(7)
Consider referencing the combination of
historical evidence, settlement, faulting,
and liquefication susceptibility for
identification and assessment of seismic
hazard areas.
15.27.701 –
Mapping and Designation Clarity
Consider updating references to city maps
sources generally to allow for updates and
additions.
19 of 83
OCTOBER 2025 | COA GAP ANALYSIS & BAS MEMO
16
15.27.701 –
Mapping and Designation Clarity
Consider referencing the Dept. of Natural
Resource Geologic Information Portal as a
source for geological, topographical, and
hydrological information.
6.1 Designation & Classification
Geologically Hazardous Areas are defined and designated through YMC 15.27.701, with an added provision
noting lands located outside of mapped designations are not implied without risk. Fourteen additional sub-
classifications are designated through city mapping mechanisms with the exception of Volcanic hazard areas due
to geologic limitations.
• Landslide Hazard Areas
o LS3, LS2, and Low Risk
• Oversteepened Slope Hazard Area
o OS3, OS2, and Low Risk
• Alluvial Fan/Flash Flooding hazard Areas (AF)
• Avalanche Risk Hazard Areas (AR)
• Stream Undercutting Hazard Areas
o SU3, SU2, and SU1
• Earthquake Activity Hazard Area (EA)
• Suspect Geological Hazard Areas (SUS)
• Risk Unknown Hazard Areas (UNK)
Recommendation: Pursuant to WAC 365-190-120(4) consider assessing geologically hazardous areas based on
three risk classifications; Known or suspected risk, No known risk, or Risk Unknown.
Recommendation: Pursuant to WAC 365-190-120(5), consider including references to the US Department of
Agriculture Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRSC) regarding soil type classification to help
administrators identify and classify potential erosion hazards areas.
Recommendation: Consider directly referencing the combination of potential geologic, topographic, and
hydrologic factors as listed in WAC 365-190-120(6)(a) through (h), to be used in assessing landslide hazard
areas.
Recommendation: Consider directly referencing the combination of historical earthquake damage, underlain
settlement, surface faulting and soil liquefaction susceptibility factors as listed in WAC 365-190-120(7), to be
used in assessing seismic hazard areas.
Importantly, in order to ensure the risk classification as previously recommended (known or suspected risk, no
known risk, or risk unknown) are appropriately designated geospatially, a professionally licensed Geologist
and/or Hydrogeologist should be consulted prior to designating specific areas. A licensed Geologist and/or
Hydrogeologist should also be consulted on designating erosion, landslide, or seismic hazards as recommended
above. The above recommendations can be sought in addition to the existing designations as geospatially
identified in existing city mapping mechanisms.
20 of 83
OCTOBER 2025 | COA GAP ANALYSIS & BAS MEMO
17
6.2 Protection & Reporting
Avoiding disturbance of geologic hazards areas is the predominant protective approach, but WAC 365-190-
080(4) notes that some geological hazard can be mitigated through engineering, design, modified construction
and mining practices resulting in acceptable risks to health and safety. The YMC 15.27.702 supplements
protective measures for erosion hazards areas through implementation of regulatory standards aligned with the
best management practices (BMPs) in the Stormwater Management Manual for Eastern Washington (Ecology,
No. 04-10-076). Stream Undercutting Hazard Areas are also supplemented with provisions requiring critical
area review in context with flood hazards and streams. Development review procedures help to minimize risks
through requiring critical are development authorizations and Geological Hazard Reports as required by the
administrative official.
6.3 Mapping
While YMC 15.27.701 references the city’s “Erosion Hazards Areas of the City of Yakima” and “Geologically
Hazardous Areas of the City of Yakima”, these maps are were not found to be available online. Alternatively, the
city provides an online webmap with a geological Hazards layer available for reviewing five of the fourteen
mentioned geological hazard classification; Landslide Intermediate Risk (LS2), Landslide High Risk (LS3),
Oversteepend Slopes Intermediate Risk (OS2), Oversteepend Slopes High Risk (OS3), and Other.
Recommendation: For clarity and to avoid referring to outdated maps, consider revising YMC 15.27.701
(Mapping and designation) to generally reference city maps as available to allow for updates and/or additions to
mapped geological hazard areas.
Recommendation: Pursuant to WAC 365-190-120(6), consider referencing the Department of Natural
Resource’s Geologic Information Portal as a source for assessing landslide seismic hazards areas based on
geological, topographic, and hydrologic factors.
7.0 CRITICAL AQUIFER RECHARGE AREAS
Table 7. CARA Recommendations
Code Section Reason/Consistency Recommendation
15.27.200 –
Definitions generally. WAC 365-190-030
Consider including reference to
susceptibility to reduced recharge to
definition.
15.27.315(E)(2) –
Supplemental report
requirements for specific
critical areas. RCW 36.70A.142
Consider including the siting of organic
material management facilities to require
Level Two Hydrological Assessment
requirement.
15.27.810(C) –
Guidance Documents Clarity
Consider revising reference to include
specific website addresses.
7.1 Definition , Classification , & Protection
CARAs are defined in YMC 15.27. 200 according to WAC 365-190-030 but is missing the reference to the
‘susceptibility to reduced recharge’. Wellhead protection zones are appropriately classified according to the
21 of 83
OCTOBER 2025 | COA GAP ANALYSIS & BAS MEMO
18
Washington Department of Health (DOH) Wellhead Protection Program, Washington Office of Drinking Water,
and Source Water Assessment Program (SWAP) Mapping Application. Specific prohibited activities are listed in
YMC 15.27.820(B), and extensive performance standards are noted in YMC 15.27.820(C) including but not
limited to secondary containment, vehicle fueling, stormwater infiltration, construction practices, fill materials,
protection wells, and underground hydraulic systems.
Recommendation: Consider revising the definition for CARAs to include the referencing drinking water source
susceptibility to reduced recharge.
7.2 Quality & Quantity
The city’s Part Eight of YMC Chapter 15.27 is found to address the protective measures used for characterizing
groundwater resources by identification, susceptibility, inventorying, classification, designation, contamination
protection, implementation of BMPS, and management of groundwater withdrawals.
7.3 Wellhead Protection Areas
The DOH administers the wellhead protection program, with requirements applying to all Group A and Group B
water systems. The city owns and operates 4 wells for the Water Resources Division treatment plant. Each
wellhead protection area contains a unique analytically derived area of influence. In addition to Part Eight of
YMC Chapter 15.27, the city supports protection of these critical areas with the City of Yakima 2017 Water
System Plan.
7.5 Mapping & Reporting
Supplemental report requirements for CARAs are noted in YMC 15.27.315, with provisions requiring a licensed
geologist, hydrogeologist, or engineer to prepare a CARA report including surface reconnaissance, safety and
appropriateness of proposed activities, construction practices, monitoring, mitigation, as well as requiring
coordinated assessment with other potentially associated critical areas. Two levels of hydrological assessment are
noted, with each level directly related to the proposed use’s level of influence and potential for impact.
Pursuant to RCW 36.70A.142, County’s must regulate the siting of organic materials management facilities to
ensure their establishment of organic materials management volumetric capacities. While this state requirement
is applicable specifically to County’s, it would benefit the City of Yakima to address the same topic as a
preventative measure for minimizing incompatible uses and potential impacts to residential areas.
Recommendation: Consider including a reference to the siting of organic materials management facilities under
YMC 15.27.315(E)(2) (Level Two Hydrological Assessment) as a proposed activity qualifying for additional
reporting requirements.
Recommendation : Consider revising YMC 15.27.810(C) (Guidance Documents) to not include specific website
addresses, instead general reference these resources so that updates or reissuance does not warrant amendments
to the code section.
8.0 REFERENCES
8.1 Critical Areas – Overall Requirements
22 of 83
OCTOBER 2025 | COA GAP ANALYSIS & BAS MEMO
19
City of Yakima, WA. Yakima Municipal Code, Chapter 15.27 – Critical Areas Ordinance. First accessed February
2025 at : https://www.codepublishing.com/WA/Yakima/#!/YakimaNT.html (Yakima Municipal Code).
Department of Commerce. 2018. Summary of Critical Areas WAC Amendments. December 2018. Washington
Department of Commerce. Olympia, WA.
Department of Commerce. 2023. Critical Areas Handbook, A Handbook for Reviewing Critical Areas
Regulations, Version 3. Washington Department of Commerce. Olympia, WA.
Department of Commerce. 2024. Critical Area Checklist, A Technical Assistance Tool from Growth
Management Services. Updated May 2024. Washington Department of Commerce. Olympia, WA.
Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2023. Riparian Management Zone Checklist for Critical Areas Ordinances.
Olympia, WA.
8.2 Frequently Flood ed Areas
Ecology. 2021. (Ecology, 2021)WA State Model Ordinance, Version 2/24/2021, Evaluation Sheet. Washington
State Department of Ecology. Olympia, WA
Ecology. 2021. (Ecology, 2021-B)Comprehensive Planning for Flood Hazard management: A Guidebook.
Washington State Department of Ecology. Publication #21-06-019. Olympia, WA
8.3 Fish & Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas
WDFW. 2025. (WDFW, 2025) Guidelines for Determining Site Potential Tree Height from Field Measurements.
Olympia, WA.
WDFW. 2025. PHS on the Web, Online webmap. Olympia, WA. First accessed August 2025 at:
https://geodataservices.wdfw.wa.gov/hp/phs/ (PHS on the Web).
WDFW. 2008. Priority Habitat and Species List, Updated June 2023. Olympia, WA. 291pp.
WDFW. 2020. (Quinn, 2020) Riparian Ecosystems, Volume 1: Science synthesis and management implications.
Timothy Quinn, George Wilhere and Kirk Krueger, (Managing Editors). A Priority Habitat and Species Document
of the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Olympia, Washington.
WDFW. 2020. (Rentz et al., 2020) Riparian Ecosystems, Volume 2: Management Recommendations. Amy
Windrope, Timothy Quinn, Keith Folkerts, and Terra Rentz. A Priority Habitat and Species Document of the
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Olympia, Washington.
WDFW (Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Washington State Department of Natural Resources,
Washington State Conservation Commission). (WDFW-Shrubsteppe, 2024). March 2024. Washington
Shrubsteppe Restoration and Resiliency Initiative: Long-Term Strategy 2024-2054. Olympia, Washington.
23 of 83
OCTOBER 2025 | COA GAP ANALYSIS & BAS MEMO
20
8.4 Wetlands
Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual. Technical Report Y-87-1.
Environmental Laboratory, Department of the Army, Corps Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS.
Granger, Terri, Thomas Hruby, Andy McMillan, D. Peters, J. Rubey, Dianne Sheldon, S. Stanley, E. Stockdale.
April 2005. Wetlands in Washington State - Volume 2: Guidance for Protecting and Managing Wetlands.
Washington State Department of Ecology. Publication #05-06-008. Olympia, WA.
Hruby, T. 2012. Calculating Credits and Debits for Compensatory Mitigation in Western Washington – Final
Report. Washington Department of Ecology. Publication #10-06-011. Olympia, WA. 110 pp + App.
Hruby, Thomas, Donna Bunten, Amy Yahnke and Jerry Franklin. 2017. Characterizing Wetland Buffer in
Washington State. Washington Department of Ecology. Publication #17-06-008. Olympia, WA. 118 pp + App.
Hruby, T., K. Harper, and S. Stanley. 2017. Selecting Wetland Mitigation Sites Using a Watershed Approach
(Western Washington). Washington Department of Ecology. Publication #09-06-032. Olympia, WA. 34 pp +
App.
Hruby, Thomas. 2014. Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington: 2014 Update.
Washington Department of Ecology. Publication #14-06-029. Olympia, WA. 118 pp + App.
Hruby, Thomas. 2014. Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington: 2023 Update.
Washington Department of Ecology. Publication #23-06-009. Olympia, WA. 147 pp + App.
Hruby, Thomas. 2013. Update on Wetland Buffers: The State of the Science, Final Report. Washington
Department of Ecology. Publication #13-06-011. Olympia, WA. 33 pp.
Johnson, Patricia, Dana L. Mock, Andy McMillan, Lauren Driscoll, Tom Hruby. February 2002. Washington State
Wetland Mitigation Evaluation Study – Phase 2: Evaluating Success. Washington State Department of Ecology.
Publication #02-06-009. Olympia, WA.
Sheldon, Dyanne, Tom Hruby, Patricia Johnson, Kim harper, Andy McMillam, Teri Granger, Stephen Stanley, Erik
Stockdale. March 2005. Wetlands in Washington State - Volume 1. A Synthesis of the Science. Washington State
Department of Ecology. Publication #05-06-006. Olympia, WA.
US Army Corps of Engineers (Army Corps 2010). 2010. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland
Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region (Version 2.0). US Army Engineer Research
and Development Center Environmental Laboratory. Vicksburg, MS. Publication # ERDC/EL TR-10-3 [May
2010].
Washington State Department of Ecology. 2022. Wetland Guidance for Critical Area Ordinance (COA)
Updates: Western and Eastern Washington, Publication No. 22-06-014. October 2022. Shorelands and
Environmental Assistance Program, Olympia, WA. 36 pp + App.
Washington State Department of Ecology, US Army Corps of Engineers Seattle District, and US Environmental
Protection Agency Region 10. 2021. Wetland Mitigation in Washington State – Part 1: Agency Policies and
24 of 83
OCTOBER 2025 | COA GAP ANALYSIS & BAS MEMO
21
Guidance (Version 2). April 2021. Washington State Department of Ecology Publication #21-06-003. Olympia,
WA.
Washington State Department of Ecology, US Army Corps of Engineers Seattle District, and US Environmental
Protection Agency Region 10. March 2006. Wetland Mitigation in Washington State – Part 2: Developing
Mitigation Plans (Version 1). Washington State Department of Ecology Publication #06-06-011b. Olympia, WA.
8.5 Geologically Hazardous Areas
WADNR, Washington Geologic Survey. Washington Geologic Information Portal, online webmap. First accessed
February 2025 at: https://geologyportal.dnr.wa.gov/2d-view#wigm?-14404025,-
12535292,5509193,6538952?Surface_Geology,500k_Surface_Geology,Map_Units, (Washington Geologic
Information Portal).
8.6 Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas (CARA)
City of Yakima, WA. 2017. City of Yakima 2017 Water System Plan, System Number 991509. Yakima County,
Washington.
Washington State Department of Ecology. 2021. Critical Aquifer Recharge Area Guidance. Revised March 2021.
Washington State Department of Ecology Publication #05-10-028. Olympia, WA.
Washington State Department of Ecology. 2005. Implementation Guidance for Ground Water Quality
Standards. October 2005. Washington State Department of Ecology Publication #96-02. Olympia, WA.
Washington State Department of Health, Office of Drinking Water. 2017. Wellhead Protection Program
Guidance Document. January 2017. Washington State Department of Health Publication #DOH 331-018.
Olympia, WA.
25 of 83
OCTOBER 2025 | COA GAP ANALYSIS & BAS MEMO
22
APPENDIX A
WA Dept. of Commerce Critical Areas Checklist
26 of 83
Page 1 – Updated through laws of 2023
Note: Bold items and checkboxes are a requirement of the GMA.
Other items are other state or federal laws or examples of best practices. Underlined items are links to Internet sites.
V3.0
Critical Areas Checklist
A Technical Assistance Tool from Growth Management Services – updated May 2024
Name of city or county: City of Yakima, WA
Staff contact, phone, and e-mail address: Trevor Martin, 509-575-6183, Ask.Planning@YakimaWA.gov
INSTRUCTIONS
This checklist is intended to help local governments update their
development regulations, pursuant to the schedule in RCW 36.70A.130(5).
We strongly encourage but do not require jurisdictions to complete the
checklist and return it to Growth Management Services (GMS), along with
their updates. However, If the jurisdiction is using a portion of their
Periodic Update Grant (PUG) to update the Critical Areas Ordinance, this
checklist is required.
This checklist may be used by all jurisdictions, including those local
governments planning for resource lands and critical areas only. For
general information on update requirements, refer to A Guide to the
Periodic Update Process Under the Growth Management Act – Fully
Planning Counties & Cities, 2022 and WAC 365-196-610 .
For additional information, resources, and general checklists pertaining to
comprehensive plan and development regulation periodic updates please
visit Commerce’s Growth Management Act Periodic Update webpage.
Bold items are a GMA requirement or may be related requirements of
other state or federal laws. Underlined items are links to Internet sites and
may include best practices or other ideas to consider.
Commerce WAC provisions are advisory under Commerce’s statutory
mandate to provide technical assistance, RCW 43.330.120 which states
that the Department of Commerce “…shall help local officials interpret and
implement the different requirements of the act through workshops, model
ordinances, and information materials.” If you have questions, call GMS at
(360) 725-3066.
How to fill out the checklist
Using the current version of your critical areas regulations, fill out each
item in the checklist. Select the check box or type in text fields, answering
the following question:
Is this item addressed in your current Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO)? If
YES, fill in the form with citation(s) to where in the plan or code the item is
addressed. We recommend using citations rather than page numbers
because they stay the same regardless of how the document is printed. If
you have questions about the requirement, follow the hyperlinks to the
relevant statutory provision or rules. If you still have questions, visit the
Commerce Growth Management Services Web page or contact one of the
Commerce planners assigned to your region.
CONTENTS
Instructions………..………….….1
Overall Requirements………..2
Wetlands…………………………….3
Critical Aquifer Recharge
Areas…………………………….……5
Frequently Flooded Areas….6
Geologically Hazardous
Areas…………………………………. 7
Fish and Wildlife Habitat
Conservation Areas….………..8
Designating and Protecting
Waters of the State……..….....9
Anadromous
Fisheries………………………….....10
Reasonable Use
Exceptions…………………….…….10
Agricultural Activities…….…..11
Forest Practices
Regulations……………………....11
Good Ideas…….……..……….….12
LOCAL GOVERNMENT DIVISION 27 of 83
Page 2 – Updated through laws of 2023
Note: Bold items and checkboxes are a requirement of the GMA.
Other items are other state or federal laws or examples of best practices. Underlined items are links to Internet sites.
V3.0
CRITICAL AREAS
Regulations protecting critical areas are required by RCW 36.70A.060(2) and RCW 36.70A.172(1). WAC
365-195-900 through 925 provide guidelines. Guidance can also be found in Commerce’s Critical Areas
Handbook (2022); the Minimum Guidelines WAC 365-190-080 through 130; Best Available Science WAC
365-195; and Procedural Criteria, WAC 365-196-485 and WAC 365-196-830, and on Growth Management’s
Critical Areas webpage.
Regulations required to protect critical areas
Addressed in
current plan or
regulations? If yes,
note where
OVERALL REQUIREMENTS
The CAO includes best available science to clearly designate and protect all
critical areas that might be found within the jurisdiction.
1. Designation of Critical Areas
RCW 36.70A.170(1)(d) requires all counties and cities to designate critical areas.
RCW 36.70A.170(2) requires that counties and cities consider the Commerce
Minimum Guidelines pursuant to RCW 36.70A.050.
RCW 36.70A.050 directs Commerce to adopt the Minimum Guidelines to classify
critical areas. WAC 365-190-080 through 130 provide guidance on defining or
“designating” each of the five critical areas.
WAC 365-190-040 outlines the process to classify and designate natural resource
lands and critical areas.
2. Definition of Critical Areas
RCW 36.70A.030(11) provides definitions for critical areas. Sections (20)
regarding geologically hazardous areas; and (48) regarding wetlands were updated
in 2010.
WAC 365-190-030 provides definitions in the Minimum Guidelines.
3. Protection of Critical Areas
RCW 36.70A.060(2) requires counties and cities to adopt development regulations
that protect the critical areas required to be designated under RCW 36.70A.170.
RCW 36.70A.172(1) requires the inclusion of best available science in developing
policies and development regulations to protect the functions and values of critical
areas. In addition, counties and cities must give special consideration to
conservation or protection measures necessary to preserve or enhance
anadromous fisheries.
WAC 365-196-830 provides guidance on protection of critical areas.
Was BAS documented
in the record for the
review and updates to
the critical areas
regulations?
☒ Yes
☐ No
Location in Text:
1. Designation
YMC Chapter 15.27
Part One & YMC
Chapter 17.09 (SMP)
2. Definitions
YMC 15.27.200, YMC
15.27.700, & YMC
17.01.090 (SMP)
3. Protection
YMC Chapter 15.27
Article IV-Permit
Review Critieria, YMC
15.27.321, YMC
15.27.407-15.27.408,
YMC 15.27.501, YMC
15.27.602, YMC
15.27.702, YMC
15.27.820, & YMC
Chapter 17.09
4. Best Available
Science
YMC 15.27.150, YMC
15.27.314(B), YMC
15.27.500(A), YMC
15.27.501(2), YMC
15.27.604(A), YMC
15.27.605(I)(7), YMC
17.01.090 (SMP),
28 of 83
Page 3 – Updated through laws of 2023
Note: Bold items and checkboxes are a requirement of the GMA.
Other items are other state or federal laws or examples of best practices. Underlined items are links to Internet sites.
V3.0
4. Inclusion of Best Available Science
RCW 36.70A.172(1) requires inclusion of the best available science (BAS).
WAC 365-195-900 through 925 outlines recommended criteria for determining
which information is the BAS, for obtaining the BAS, for including BAS in policies
and regulations, for addressing inadequate scientific information, and for
demonstrating “special consideration” to conservation or protection measures
necessary to preserve or enhance anadromous fisheries.
WAC 365-195-915 provides criteria for including BAS in the record.
5. No net loss of critical area functions and values is a requirement for
development regulations in WAC 365-196-830(4). If development regulations
allow harm to critical areas, they must require compensatory mitigation of the
harm.
YMC 17.03.090
(SMP), YMC
17.05.020 (SMP),
YMC 17.07.120
(SMP), YMC
17.09.010(P), (I)(4)
(SMP), & YMC
17.09.030-17.09.040
Note: The code
sections of the SMP
(Title 17) referenced
above utilized the
terms “scientific
evidence” or
“scientific and
technical
information” instead
of “best available
science”.
Do your regulations
address no net loss
and require
compensatory
mitigation?
☒ Yes
☐ No
Location in Text:
YMC 15.27.130, YMC
15.27.314-15.27.321,
YMC 15.27.605, YMC
17.01.030(H) (SMP),
YMC 17.01.040(K)
(SMP), YMC 17.03.030-
17.03.060 (SMP), YMC
17.05.020-17.05.060
(SMP), YMC 17.07.050
(SMP), YMC 17.07.070
(SMP), YMC 17.07.090
(SMP), YMC 17.07.130
(SMP), YMC 17.07.160-
17.07.170 (SMP), YMC
29 of 83
Page 4 – Updated through laws of 2023
Note: Bold items and checkboxes are a requirement of the GMA.
Other items are other state or federal laws or examples of best practices. Underlined items are links to Internet sites.
V3.0
17.09.010(B)(1) and (Q)
(SMP), YMC
17.09.050(C) (SMP),
YMC 17.13.160 (SMP)
WETLANDS DEFINITION
The definition of wetlands is consistent with RCW 36.70A.030(48).
Is the wetland
definition consistent
with
RCW 36.70A.030(48)?
☒ Yes
☐ No
☐ N/A
Location in Text:
YMC 15.27.200
Definitions, & YMC
17.01.090 Definitions
(SMP)
WETLANDS DELINEATION
Wetlands are delineated using the approved federal wetland delineation manual
and applicable regional supplements in accordance with WAC 173-22-035.
See Ecology’s Wetland Delineation page and WAC 365-190-090 for additional
assistance.
Are wetlands
delineated using the
approved Federal
Wetland Delineation
Manual and Regional
Supplements?
☒ Yes
☐ No
☐ N/A
Location in Text:
YMC 15.27.601, & YMC
17.09.040(B)(1) (SMP)
30 of 83
Page 5 – Updated through laws of 2023
Note: Bold items and checkboxes are a requirement of the GMA.
Other items are other state or federal laws or examples of best practices. Underlined items are links to Internet sites.
V3.0
WETLANDS PROTECTION
Policies and regulations protect the functions and values of wetlands. RCW
36.70A.172(1).
Counties and cities are encouraged to make their actions consistent with the intent
and goals of “protection of wetlands”, Executive Order 89-10 as it existed on
September 1, 1990.
WAC 365-190-090(3) recommends using a wetlands rating system that evaluates
the existing wetland functions and values to determine what functions must be
protected. Ecology updated its recommended wetlands rating systems effective
January 2015. For information on the rating system, including the July 2018
adjustments to ranges for habitat scores, see:
• 2014 Updates to the Washington State Wetland Rating Systems
• Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington
• Washington State Wetland Rating System for Eastern Washington
For other resources and guidance on protecting wetlands, go to Ecology’s Local
Wetland Regulations: Growth Management Act technical assistance and see:
• Wetland Guidance for Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO) Updates: Western and
Eastern Washington (2022)
Do the regulations use
a rating system to
determine wetlands
protection?
☒ Yes
☐ No
☐ N/A
Location in Text:
YMC 15.27.603, & YMC
17.09.040(D)(2) (SMP)
CRITICAL AQUIFER RECHARGE AREAS
Policies and regulations protect the functions and values of critical aquifer
recharge areas. RCW 36.70A.172(1).
Policies and regulations protect the quality and quantity of groundwater used for
public water supplies. RCW 36.70A.070(1) and WAC 365-196-485(1)(d).
The following references also relate to protection of groundwater resources:
• RCW 90.44 – Regulation of Public Groundwaters
• RCW 90.48 – Water Pollution Control
• RCW 90.54 – Water Resources Act of 1971
• RCW 36.36.020 - Creation of aquifer protection area (1985)
• WAC 365-190-100 Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas 2023
• WAC 173-100 Groundwater Management Areas and Programs (1988)
• WAC 173-200 Water Quality Standards for Groundwaters of the State of
Washington (1990)
• WAC 365-196-735 Consideration of state and regional planning provisions
(list) (2010)
The Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas Guidance Document (2021) provides
information on protecting functions and values of critical aquifer recharge areas,
best available science, how to work with state and local regulations and adaptive
management.
Also, consider the following:
If groundwater is used
for potable water, do
regulations protect the
quality and quantity of
ground water?
☒ Yes
☐ No
☐ N/A
Location in text:
YMC 15.27.800 & YMC
17.09.060 (SMP)
31 of 83
Page 6 – Updated through laws of 2023
Note: Bold items and checkboxes are a requirement of the GMA.
Other items are other state or federal laws or examples of best practices. Underlined items are links to Internet sites.
V3.0
CRITICAL AQUIFER RECHARGE AREAS
• Prohibiting or strictly regulating hazardous uses in critical aquifer recharge
areas (CARAs) and designating and protecting wellhead areas. See Ecology’s
guidance on Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas.
• Limiting impervious surfaces to reduce stormwater runoff, as required under
Phase I and II municipal stormwater permits. Ecology’s Stormwater Manual for
Western Washington (2012) includes low impact development (LID) related
definitions, requirements, and an LID performance standard. See Stormwater
Management and Design Manuals on Ecology’s web page.
• For additional guidance on LID resources, see Commerce’s Incentivizing low-
impact development guidebook.
Are the critical aquifer
recharge regulations
consistent with
current mapping of
these critical areas?
☒ Yes
☐ No
☐ N/A
Location in text:
YMC 15.27.800-
15.27.820 & YMC
17.09.060(B) (SMP)
FREQUENTLY FLOODED AREAS
Regulations protect the functions and values of frequently flooded areas and
safeguard the public from hazards to health and safety. RCW 36.70A.172(1).
WAC 365-196-830 provides: "’Protection‘ in this context means preservation of the
functions and values of the natural environment, or to safeguard the public from
hazards to health and safety.”
WAC 365-190-110 directs counties and cities to consider the following when
designating and classifying frequently flooded areas:
(a) Effects of flooding on human health and safety, and to public facilities and
services;
(b) Available documentation including federal, state, and local laws, regulations,
and programs, local studies and maps, and federal flood insurance
programs, including the provisions for urban growth areas in RCW
36.70A.110;
(c) The future flow flood plain, defined as the channel of the stream and that
portion of the adjoining flood plain that is necessary to contain and
discharge the base flood flow at build out;
(d) The potential effects of tsunami, high tides with strong winds, sea level rise,
and extreme weather events, including those potentially resulting from
global climate change;
(e) Greater surface runoff caused by increasing impervious surfaces.
Classification of and regulations for frequently flooded areas should not conflict
with the FEMA requirements for the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). See
Ecology’s Frequently Flooded areas: Critical Areas Ordinance webpage and 44 CFR
60.
Communities that are located on Puget Sound or the Strait of Juan de Fuca, or
have lakes, rivers or streams that directly or indirectly drain to those water bodies,
are subject to the NFIP Biological Opinion (BiOp) for Puget Sound. The biological
opinion required changes to the implementation of the NFIP in order to meet the
Are frequently flooded
areas designated and
regulated using FEMA
and Ecology
guidance?
☒ Yes
☐ No
☐ N/A
Location in Text:
YMC 15.27 Part Four –
Flood Hazard Areas; The
City updated YMC 15.27
Part Four in 2021 (Ord.
2021-021), amending
and adding sections
related to the
identification and
establishment of flood
hazard areas (YMC
15.27.400), Methods of
Reducing Flood Losses
(YMC 15.27.403), and
amending sections
related to Penalties,
Liabilities, Variances,
New Construction,
General Standards for
Construction
32 of 83
Page 7 – Updated through laws of 2023
Note: Bold items and checkboxes are a requirement of the GMA.
Other items are other state or federal laws or examples of best practices. Underlined items are links to Internet sites.
V3.0
FREQUENTLY FLOODED AREAS
requirements of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) in the Puget Sound watershed.
FEMA Region X has developed an implementation plan that allows communities to
apply the performance standards contained in the Biological Opinion by
implementing:
1) a model ordinance;
2) a programmatic Checklist; or
3) on a permit by permit basis as long as it can be demonstrated that there
is no adverse effect to listed species. Communities have the option of
utilizing their CAOs as part of a programmatic response to address the
requirements of the biological opinion. FEMA must approve a community’s
biological opinion compliance strategy.
Additional resources:
RCW 86.12 Flood Control by Counties
RCW 86.16 Floodplain Management
RCW 86.26 State Participation in Flood Control Maintenance
RCW 86.16.041 Floodplain Management Ordinance and Amendments
WAC 173-158-070 Requirements for construction in Special Flood Hazard Areas
Techniques,
Floodproofing
Certificates, Storage of
Materials, Critical
Facilities, Livestock
Sanctuary Areas, and
Specific Standards for
Residential and
Nonresidential
Construction,
Manufactured Homes,
Enclosed Areas, areas
with or without
established base flood
elevations / floodways,
Shallow Flooding Areas,
Structure Drainage,
Recreational Vehicles,
and Permit Application /
Review Process.
YMC 17.03.010 &
17.05.060 through the
establishment of the
Floodway/Channel
Migration Zone (CMZ)
within shoreline
environmentally
designated areas, also
supports the protection
of overflow channels
and preservation of
natural hydraulic,
geologic, and biological
functions.
33 of 83
Page 8 – Updated through laws of 2023
Note: Bold items and checkboxes are a requirement of the GMA.
Other items are other state or federal laws or examples of best practices. Underlined items are links to Internet sites.
V3.0
FREQUENTLY FLOODED AREAS
Are you utilizing your
CAO as part of a
programmatic
response to the BiOp?
☐ Yes
☐ No
☒ N/A
Location in Text:
Not Applicable; Only
applies to communities
with watersheds directly
or indirectly draining
into the Puget Sound or
the Strait of Juann Fuca.
DEFINITION OF GEOLOGICALLY HAZARDOUS AREAS
The definition of geologically hazardous areas is consistent with RCW
36.70A.030(20) and WAC 365-190-120(1).
“Geologically hazardous areas" means areas that because of their susceptibility to
erosion, sliding, earthquake, or other geological events, are not suited to the siting
of commercial, residential, or industrial development consistent with public health
or safety concerns.
Is the geologically
hazardous areas
definition consistent
with
RCW 36.70A.030(20)?
☒ Yes
☐ No
☐ N/A
Location in Text:
YMC 15.27.700(A); The
definition is uniquely
listed within YMC 15.27
Part Seven and not
within the preliminary
Definitions section (YMC
15.27.200). The critical
area is also defined in
YMC 17.09.050(A)(1)
(SMP).
34 of 83
Page 9 – Updated through laws of 2023
Note: Bold items and checkboxes are a requirement of the GMA.
Other items are other state or federal laws or examples of best practices. Underlined items are links to Internet sites.
V3.0
PROTECTION OF GEOLOGICALLY HAZARDOUS AREAS
Regulations protect the functions and values of geologically hazardous areas and
safeguard the public from hazards to health and safety. RCW 36.70A.172(1).
WAC 365-196-830 provides: “’Protection’" in this context means preservation of the
functions and values of the natural environment, or to safeguard the public from
hazards to health and safety.”
Geologically hazardous areas are designated, and their use is regulated or limited
consistent with public health and safety concerns. RCW 36.70A.030(20)
WAC 365-190-120 describes the different types of hazardous areas:
• Geologically hazardous areas include:
• Erosion hazards
• Landslide hazards
• seismic hazards
• tsunami hazards
• volcanic hazards
• channel migration zones
• areas subject to other geological events such as coal mine hazards
including: mass wasting, debris flows, rock falls, and differential
settlement.
The Department of Natural Resource’s Washington Geological Survey Geologic
Hazards and the Environment website includes information on earthquakes and
faults, landslides, volcanoes and lahars, tsunamis, hazardous minerals, emergency
preparedness, historic mines and includes geologic hazard maps that can be
accessed from the Geologic Information Portal.
Are uses in
geologically
hazardous areas
designated and
regulated or limited
consistent with public
health and safety?
☒ Yes
☐ No
☐ N/A
Location in Text:
YMC 15.27 Part Seven &
YMC 17.09.050 (SMP)
DEFINITION OF FISH AND WILDLIFE HABITAT AND CONSERVATION AREAS
The definition of fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas is consistent with
WAC 365-190-030(6). The definition of fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas
was amended to state that they do not include: “such artificial features or
constructs as irrigation delivery systems, irrigation infrastructure, irrigation canals,
or drainage ditches that lie within the boundaries of and are maintained by a port
district or an irrigation district or company”.
Is the FWHCA
definition consistent
with WAC 365-190-
030(6)?
☒ Yes
☐ No
☐ N/A
Location in Text:
YMC 15.27.200 & YMC
17.01.090 (SMP)
35 of 83
Page 10 – Updated through laws of 2023
Note: Bold items and checkboxes are a requirement of the GMA.
Other items are other state or federal laws or examples of best practices. Underlined items are links to Internet sites.
V3.0
PROTECTION OF FISH AND WILDLIFE HABITAT AND CONSERVATION AREAS
Policies and regulations protect the functions and values of fish and wildlife
habitat conservation areas. RCW 36.70A.172(1) and WAC 365-190-030(6).
WAC 365-190-130(4) says local jurisdictions must consult current information on
priority habitats and species identified by WDFW. Additional information that must
be consulted is available from DNR’s natural heritage program and aquatic
resources program. BAS regarding biodiversity areas and corridors has advanced
significantly. Recent updates and resources include:
• Aquatic Habitat Guidelines
• Priority Habitat and Species maps
• Priority Habitats and Species List (updated June 2023)
• Priority Habitats and Species: Management recommendations:
• Landscape Planning for Washington’s Wildlife (2009)
• Land Use Planning for Salmon, Steelhead and Trout (2009)
• Riparian Ecosystems, Volume 1: Science Synthesis and
Management Implications (2020)
• Riparian Ecosystems, Volume 2: Management Recommendations
(2020)
• Riparian Management Zone Checklist for CAOs (2023)
• Shrub-Steppe Management Recommendations (2020)
• Oregon White Oak Woodlands Ecosystems Management
Recommendations (1998)
• Management recommendations for Washington's Priority Species
(by taxa)
• Puget Sound Kelp Conservation and Recovery Plan (2020)
• Stream Habitat Restoration Guidelines (2012)
• Water Crossing Design Guidelines (2013)
“Areas where endangered, threatened, and sensitive species have a primary
association” must be considered per WAC 365-190-130(2)(a). Consult WDFW’s
Threatened and Endangered Species list and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s
Information for Planning and Consultation resources for up to date information on
all state and federal listed species.
Also see the Puget Sound Partnership’s Salmon Recovery website for Water
Resource Inventory Area (WRIA) Plans in Puget Sound.
Have you reviewed
your regulations
regarding any
applicable changes in
management
recommendations for
priority habitats and
species?
☒ Yes
☐ No
☐ N/A
Location in Text
YMC 15.27 Part Five,
YMC 17.09.010(D)(3)
and (Q) (SMP);
Have you reviewed
your regulations
regarding any changes
in species listings?
☒ Yes
☐ No
☐ N/A
Location in Text
YMC 15.27.502-507 &
YMC 17.09.030(C) and
(D) (SMP)
36 of 83
Page 11 – Updated through laws of 2023
Note: Bold items and checkboxes are a requirement of the GMA.
Other items are other state or federal laws or examples of best practices. Underlined items are links to Internet sites.
V3.0
DESIGNATING AND PROTECTING WATERS OF THE STATE
RCW 90.48.020 defines waters of the state, which include all surface waters, salt
waters, groundwater and all other water courses in Washington. WAC 365-190-
130(2)(f) recommends designating all waters of the state as fish and wildlife
habitat conservation areas (FWHCAs).
Stream types are classified in WAC 222-16-030 with field verification, or an
alternate system that considers factors listed in WAC 365-190-130(4)(f)(iii). See
http://www.dnr.wa.gov/forest-practices-water-typing to use Washington State
Department of Natural Resources (DNR)’s stream typing system.
Establish riparian management zones to maintain no net loss of riparian
ecosystem functions and values.
Designate areas that risk contaminating or harming shoreline resources including
tidelands and bedland suitable for shellfish harvest, kelp and eelgrass beds and
forage fish spawning areas.
Do you designate
waters of the state as
FWHCAs?
☒ Yes
☐ No
☐ N/A
Location in Text:
YMC 15.27.502(A)(4) &
YMC 17.09.030(C)(4)
(SMP)
Do your regulations
protect waters of the
state?
☒ Yes
☐ No
☐ N/A
Location in Text:
YMC 15.27 Part Five &
YMC 17.09.030(H)
through (P)
37 of 83
Page 12 – Updated through laws of 2023
Note: Bold items and checkboxes are a requirement of the GMA.
Other items are other state or federal laws or examples of best practices. Underlined items are links to Internet sites.
V3.0
ANADROMOUS FISHERIES
Policies and regulations for protecting critical areas give special consideration to
conservation or protection measures necessary to preserve or enhance
anadromous fisheries. RCW 36.70A.172(1) is the requirement and WAC 365-195-
925 lists criteria involved. This requirement applies to all five types of critical areas.
WAC 365-190-130(4)(i) recommends sources and methods for protecting fish and
wildlife habitat conservation areas, including salmonid habitat. Counties and cities
may use information prepared by the United States Department of the Interior Fish
and Wildlife Service, National Marine Fisheries Service, the Washington State
Department of Fish and Wildlife, the State Recreation and Conservation Office, and
the Puget Sound Partnership to designate, protect and restore salmonid habitat.
Counties and cities should consider recommendations found in the regional and
watershed specific salmon recovery plans (see the Governor's Salmon Recovery
Office webpage and the Puget Sound Partnership’s Salmon Recovery webpage).
Land Use Planning for Salmon, Steelhead and Trout: A land use planner’s guide to
salmonid habitat protection and recovery (October 2009) is an excellent resource.
Do your regulations
give special
consideration to
anadromous
fisheries?
☒ Yes
☐ No
☐ N/A
Location in Text:
YMC 15.27.150 & YMC
17.09.030
REASONABLE USE EXCEPTIONS
The Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO) allows for “reasonable use” if the CAO would
otherwise deny all reasonable use of property. Reasonable use provisions should
limit intrusions into critical areas to the greatest extent possible and apply the
mitigation sequence as needed for no net loss of ecosystem functions and values
RCW 36.70A.370. Common exemptions include emergencies, remodels that do
not further extend into critical areas, surveying, walking, and development that has
already been completed with critical areas review under a previous permit. See
Critical Areas Handbook, Chapter 3: Structuring Critical Areas Regulations, p.10
(Updated 2022).
Do you have
reasonable use
provisions?
☒ Yes
☐ No
Location in Text:
YMC 15.27.318;
SMP “Variance
Provisions” are provided
in YMC 17.13.080
38 of 83
Page 13 – Updated through laws of 2023
Note: Bold items and checkboxes are a requirement of the GMA.
Other items are other state or federal laws or examples of best practices. Underlined items are links to Internet sites.
V3.0
AGRICULTURAL ACTIVITIES (COUNTIES ONLY)
Non-VSP Counties
Critical areas regulations as they specifically apply to agricultural activities in
counties or watersheds not participating in the Voluntary Stewardship Program
(VSP) have been reviewed, and if needed, revised pursuant to RCW 36.70A.130.
RCW 36.70A.710(6)
"Agricultural activities" means all agricultural uses and practices as defined in RCW
90.58.065.
VSP Counties
After watershed work plan approval, VSP counties are encouraged to reference and
describe their participation in the program within their critical areas development
regulations (WAC 365-196-832). See Critical Areas Handbook, Chapter 5:
Protecting Critical Areas in Natural Resource Lands (2022).
Did you review your
regulations as they
apply to agricultural
activities?
☐ Yes
☐ No
☒ N/A
Location in Text:
Not Applicable to the
City of Yakima (Counties
Only)
FOREST PRACTICES APPLICATION REGULATIONS
If applicable, regulations for forest practices have been adopted: RCW
36.70A.570.
RCW 76.09.240, requires many counties over 100,000 in population, and the cities
and towns within those counties to adopt regulations for forest practices. These
are often included in clearing and grading ordinances.
Have you adopted
forest practices
regulations?
☐ Yes
☒ No
☐ N/A
Location in Text:
Related provisions
related to Forest
Practices are included in:
YMC 7.82.010
Definitions.
(Stormwater) – New
Development, YMC
7.82.090.4 Exemptions.
(Construction
Stormwater Runoff),
YMC
7.83.020 Definitions.
(Stormwater) – New
Development, YMC
7.83.040.1.a Exemptions.
(Post-Construction
Stormwater Runoff),
YMC
39 of 83
Page 14 – Updated through laws of 2023
Note: Bold items and checkboxes are a requirement of the GMA.
Other items are other state or federal laws or examples of best practices. Underlined items are links to Internet sites.
V3.0
17.01.090 Definitions.
(SMP) – Forest land, &
YMC
17.01.090 Definitions.
(SMP) – Forest practices
GOOD IDEAS
Non-regulatory measures to protect or enhance functions and values of critical
areas may be used to complement regulatory methods. These may include:
• public education
• stewardship programs
• pursuing grant opportunities
• water conservation
• joint planning with other jurisdictions and non-profit organizations
• stream and wetland restoration activities
• transfer of development rights
Monitoring and adaptive management is encouraged in WAC 365-195-905(6) to
improve implementation of your regulations. See Commerce’s Monitoring and
Adaptive Management chapter in the Critical Areas Handbook, Chapter 7:
Monitoring and Adaptive Management of Critical Areas (2022).
Are you using non-
regulatory measures
to protect critical
areas?
☒ Yes
☐ No
Location in Text:
Joint Planning with
Yakima County, WA
Dept. of Ecology, WA
Dept. of Fish & Wildlife,
& Yakama Nation.
Do you have a
monitoring and
adaptive management
program for your
CAO?
☐ Yes
☒ No
Location in Text:
Monitoring provisions
are located throughout
YMC 15.27, but adaptive
management
mechanism is not
present.
40 of 83
OCTOBER 2025 | COA GAP ANALYSIS & BAS MEMO
23
APPENDIX B
WA Dept. of Fish & Wildlife Riparian Management Zone Checklist
41 of 83
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife 1
Riparian Management Zone Checklist for Critical Areas Ordinances
A Technical Assistance Tool – April 2023
Purpose
The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) has developed guidance to support local jurisdictions
as they designate and protect riparian ecosystems as critical areas (i.e., Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation
Areas, FWHCAs1) consistent with the goals of the Growth Management Act and Shoreline Management Act.
Volume 1: Science Synthesis and Management Implications (Quinn et al. 2020) is a source of Best Available
Science (BAS) that describes how riparian areas and surrounding watersheds affect ecological functions and
aquatic habitats. Volume 1 is intended to inform policies related to management of riparian areas. Volume 2:
Management Recommendations (Rentz et al. 2020) provides guidance to assist cities and counties with the
protection and restoration of healthy, intact, and fully functioning riparian ecosystems, which are fundamental
for clean water, healthy salmon populations, and climate-resilient watersheds. This guidance supports
compliance with state statute 2, which calls for BAS to be included in developing policies and development
regulations to protect the functions and values of critical areas.
This checklist is designed to help local planners translate BAS-based recommendations into Critical Areas
Ordinance (CAO) amendments (reference Addendum for examples). If you need help updating your CAO and/or
completing this checklist, use WDFW's appropriate Land Use Planning Contact Email for technical assistance.
Instructions
This checklist is a voluntary tool that supplements Commerce’s Critical Areas Checklist, specifically the section
on Protection of Fish and Wildlife Habitat and Conservation Areas.
1. Column 1 provides a list of WDFW’s key Riparian Management Recommendations (RMR) in the form of
CAO-related questions.
2. Column 2 indicates the location in Volume 2 where further detail about each RMR can be found.
Definitions of terms can be found in the glossary of Volume 2.
3. In column 3, check the appropriate box and where appropriate, cite the section in your CAO where the
RMR is addressed. Your response to this question may change as your CAO is amended.
4. In column 4, describe how your CAO addresses or does not address the RMR or why the RMR may not
apply (“N/A”).
5. If sections of your CAO do not yet address the RMR, please refer to the location cited in Volume 2 and
any additional BAS-based guidance to update your CAO language (and revise columns 3 and 4
accordingly). This is meant to be an iterative process through which your CAO can better designate and
protect riparian areas the more boxes are checked “Y.” Rows that remain checked “N” after all CAO
amendments have been proposed may represent departures from BAS that must be documented and
explained 3.
PREPARED FOR (Jurisdiction Name):
PREPARED BY (Name, Title, email): DATE:
1 WAC 365-190-130
2 RCW 36.70A.172(1)
3 WAC 365-195-915
WashingtonDepartment ofFISH & WILDLIFE
42 of 83
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife 2
Riparian Management Recommendation (RMR) Location in
RMR Vol. 2
Citation in CAO How Addressed in CAO
(or why not addressed in CAO)
A. Does your CAO intend to protect all key riparian ecosystem
functions (i.e., shade, root strength, nutrient input, wood
input, and pollution control)?
Section 2.2.2 ☐ Yes
☐ No
☐ N/A
Citation:
B. Depending on your ecoregion(s), do your FWHCAs utilize
the appropriate methodology (whichever width is greater)
for delineating riparian management zones (RMZs) for all
stream types?
• the Site-Potential Tree Height (at age 200 years,
SPTH200),
• the extent of native riparian vegetation, or
• the minimum pollution removal distance of 100 feet
Section 2.3
and Fig. 2.4
☐ Yes
☐ No
☐ N/A
Citation:
C. If your jurisdiction does not delineate RMZs consistent with
the methodologies listed in question B, do your FWHCAs
meet the intent of the RMR in Vol. 2 (or are they otherwise
consistent with the BAS in Vol. 1) with regards to riparian
functions? If protection varies by stream type, please
address how and why protections vary by each type in your
response.
Section 2.3
and Fig. 2.4
☐ Yes
☐ No
☐ N/A
Citation:
D. Where a channel migration zone (CMZ) is present, does the
RMZ begin on the outer edge of the CMZ to the extent
practicable (meaning, include areas having the potential to
provide riparian functions and exclude functionally
disconnected areas)?
Section
2.3.3(B)
☐ Yes
☐ No
☐ N/A
Citation:
E. Is the RMZ width extended beyond a 100-foot minimum
where needed to provide adequate pollution removal
functions from upland adjacent land uses (i.e., especially at
sites with steep slopes or poorly drained soils or where
upland uses contribute nitrogen based on expert
assessment)?
Section 2.3.5,
step 3
☐ Yes
☐ No
☐ N/A
Citation:
43 of 83
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife 3
Riparian Management Recommendation (RMR) Location in
RMR Vol. 2
Citation in CAO How Addressed in CAO
(or why not addressed in CAO)
F. In locations where riverine wetlands are present, do the
RMZs incorporate them using the appropriate wetland
delineation, assessment methodology, and protection (per
Ecology)?
Section 2.3.5,
step 2
Section 3.2.2,
#2
☐ Yes
☐ No
☐ N/A
Citation:
G. Does FWHCA designation also support terrestrial species,
habitat connectivity, and Priority Habitats within and
adjacent to RMZs?
Section 3.2.2,
#2
☐ Yes
☐ No
☐ N/A
Citation:
H. Does your CAO apply the mitigation sequence to ensure no
net loss of riparian ecological functions and values due to
permitted activities within RMZs delineated consistent with
question B (or equivalent methods)?
Section 3.2.1 ☐ Yes
☐ No
☐ N/A
Citation:
I. Does your CAO require that applicants provide a Critical
Areas Report prepared by a qualified professional for
projects in or near known or suspected FWHCAs, and
require that a Habitat Management Plan be provided if
FWHCAs are found to be present and/or impacted by the
project?
Section 3.2.2 ☐ Yes
☐ No
☐ N/A
Citation:
J. Does your CAO require that On-Site Sewage Systems are
located outside of RMZs?
Section 3.2.1,
#1
☐ Yes
☐ No
☐ N/A
Citation:
K. Does your CAO prohibit new development that requires
bank protection/hardening now or in the future (taking into
consideration channel migration, wind and wave action, and
climate change)?
Section 3.2.1,
#2
☐ Yes
☐ No
☐ N/A
Citation:
44 of 83
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife 4
Riparian Management Recommendation (RMR) Location in
RMR Vol. 2
Citation in CAO How Addressed in CAO
(or why not addressed in CAO)
L. Could other regulations conflict with your CAO and
inadvertently impact riparian functions (e.g., clearing,
grading, and filling ordinances)? If so, does your code
include a provision that the regulation which provides
greater protection to critical areas shall apply?
Section 3.2.1,
#3
CA Handbook,
Ch. 4
☐ Yes
☐ No
☐ N/A
Citation:
M. Does the issuance of an exemption letter or permit for
invasive and/or noxious plant removal require that impacts
to fish, wildlife, and habitat are minimized (e.g., hand
weeding with light equipment, use only Ecology-approved
aquatic herbicides and adjuvants, avoid use of hazardous
substances, and avoid soil compaction)?
Section 3.2.1,
#4
☐ Yes
☐ No
☐ N/A
Citation:
N. Does your CAO include all of the following provisions?
• define a “hazard tree” as a threat to life, property, or
public safety,
• require that the method of hazard tree removal not
adversely affect riparian ecosystem functions to the
extent practicable,
• encourage the creation of snags (Priority Habitat
features) rather than complete tree removal,
• involve an avoidance and minimization of damage to
remaining trees and vegetation within the RMZ, and
• require a qualified arborist to evaluate requests for
hazard tree removal
Section 3.2.1,
#7
☐ Yes
☐ No
☐ N/A
Citation:
O. Does your CAO incorporate a pathway to mitigate or
compensate for impacts to RMZs arising from emergency
activities (e.g., bank stabilization to address imminent
threats to homes)?
Section 3.2.1,
#9
☐ Yes
☐ No
☐ N/A
Citation:
P. Does your CAO require that impacts and disturbances from
recreational trails and interpretive facilities are minimized
to the extent practicable, informed by Priority Habitats and
Species data and management recommendations?
Section 3.2.1,
#10
☐ Yes
☐ No
☐ N/A
Citation:
45 of 83
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife 5
Riparian Management Recommendation (RMR) Location in
RMR Vol. 2
Citation in CAO How Addressed in CAO
(or why not addressed in CAO)
Q. Does your CAO include watershed–scale management
considerations such as protecting and restoring watershed
processes (e.g., channel movement, sediment transport);
stormwater management; land management for stream
temperatures; and protecting and restoring longitudinal,
lateral, and vertical connectivity?
Section 3.4 ☐ Yes
☐ No
☐ N/A
Citation:
R. Does the CAO include measures for bolstering climate
resilience within critical areas (i.e., increase habitat
connectivity, plan for a wider range of stream flows, and
increase stream shading)?
Section 1.4, #6
Section 3.4.1,
GMA Climate
Guidance
☐ Yes
☐ No
☐ N/A
Citation:
S. Is there a stated goal or intent in your CAO to retain and
restore CMZs and RMZs to the extent practicable to
maximize riparian function over time?
Section 4.2 ☐ Yes
☐ No
☐ N/A
Citation:
T. Does your CAO promote incentives and include a
streamlined review process for riparian restoration or
enhancement projects to help facilitate projects that go
“above and beyond” minimum regulatory requirements?
Section 4.3 ☐ Yes
☐ No
☐ N/A
Citation:
U. Does your CAO establish a monitoring and adaptive
management program designed to:
• collect information on CAO effectiveness,
• evaluate the potential for exemptions and variances to
cumulatively affect riparian functions across your
jurisdiction, and
• improve permit implementation?
Section 3.2,
Chapter 5; CA
Handbook, Ch.
7
☐ Yes
☐ No
☐ N/A
Citation:
46 of 83
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife 1
Riparian Management Zone Checklist for Critical Areas Ordinances
A Technical Assistance Tool – April 2023
Purpose
The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) has developed guidance to support local jurisdictions
as they designate and protect riparian ecosystems as critical areas (i.e., Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation
Areas, FWHCAs1) consistent with the goals of the Growth Management Act and Shoreline Management Act.
Volume 1: Science Synthesis and Management Implications (Quinn et al. 2020) is a source of Best Available
Science (BAS) that describes how riparian areas and surrounding watersheds affect ecological functions and
aquatic habitats. Volume 1 is intended to inform policies related to management of riparian areas. Volume 2:
Management Recommendations (Rentz et al. 2020) provides guidance to assist cities and counties with the
protection and restoration of healthy, intact, and fully functioning riparian ecosystems, which are fundamental
for clean water, healthy salmon populations, and climate-resilient watersheds. This guidance supports
compliance with state statute 2, which calls for BAS to be included in developing policies and development
regulations to protect the functions and values of critical areas.
This checklist is designed to help local planners translate BAS-based recommendations into Critical Areas
Ordinance (CAO) amendments (reference Addendum for examples). If you need help updating your CAO and/or
completing this checklist, use WDFW's appropriate Land Use Planning Contact Email for technical assistance.
Instructions
This checklist is a voluntary tool that supplements Commerce’s Critical Areas Checklist, specifically the section
on Protection of Fish and Wildlife Habitat and Conservation Areas.
1. Column 1 provides a list of WDFW’s key Riparian Management Recommendations (RMR) in the form of
CAO-related questions.
2. Column 2 indicates the location in Volume 2 where further detail about each RMR can be found.
Definitions of terms can be found in the glossary of Volume 2.
3. In column 3, check the appropriate box and where appropriate, cite the section in your CAO where the
RMR is addressed. Your response to this question may change as your CAO is amended.
4. In column 4, describe how your CAO addresses or does not address the RMR or why the RMR may not
apply (“N/A”).
5. If sections of your CAO do not yet address the RMR, please refer to the location cited in Volume 2 and
any additional BAS-based guidance to update your CAO language (and revise columns 3 and 4
accordingly). This is meant to be an iterative process through which your CAO can better designate and
protect riparian areas the more boxes are checked “Y.” Rows that remain checked “N” after all CAO
amendments have been proposed may represent departures from BAS that must be documented and
explained 3.
PREPARED FOR (Jurisdiction Name):
PREPARED BY (Name, Title, email): DATE:
1 WAC 365-190-130
2 RCW 36.70A.172(1)
3 WAC 365-195-915
WashingtonDepartment ofFISH & WILDLIFE
47 of 83
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife 2
Riparian Management Recommendation (RMR) Location in
RMR Vol. 2
Citation in CAO How Addressed in CAO
(or why not addressed in CAO)
A. Does your CAO intend to protect all key riparian ecosystem
functions (i.e., shade, root strength, nutrient input, wood
input, and pollution control)?
Section 2.2.2 ☐ Yes
☐ No
☐ N/A
Citation:
B. Depending on your ecoregion(s), do your FWHCAs utilize
the appropriate methodology (whichever width is greater)
for delineating riparian management zones (RMZs) for all
stream types?
• the Site-Potential Tree Height (at age 200 years,
SPTH200),
• the extent of native riparian vegetation, or
• the minimum pollution removal distance of 100 feet
Section 2.3
and Fig. 2.4
☐ Yes
☐ No
☐ N/A
Citation:
C. If your jurisdiction does not delineate RMZs consistent with
the methodologies listed in question B, do your FWHCAs
meet the intent of the RMR in Vol. 2 (or are they otherwise
consistent with the BAS in Vol. 1) with regards to riparian
functions? If protection varies by stream type, please
address how and why protections vary by each type in your
response.
Section 2.3
and Fig. 2.4
☐ Yes
☐ No
☐ N/A
Citation:
D. Where a channel migration zone (CMZ) is present, does the
RMZ begin on the outer edge of the CMZ to the extent
practicable (meaning, include areas having the potential to
provide riparian functions and exclude functionally
disconnected areas)?
Section
2.3.3(B)
☐ Yes
☐ No
☐ N/A
Citation:
E. Is the RMZ width extended beyond a 100-foot minimum
where needed to provide adequate pollution removal
functions from upland adjacent land uses (i.e., especially at
sites with steep slopes or poorly drained soils or where
upland uses contribute nitrogen based on expert
assessment)?
Section 2.3.5,
step 3
☐ Yes
☐ No
☐ N/A
Citation:
48 of 83
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife 3
Riparian Management Recommendation (RMR) Location in
RMR Vol. 2
Citation in CAO How Addressed in CAO
(or why not addressed in CAO)
F. In locations where riverine wetlands are present, do the
RMZs incorporate them using the appropriate wetland
delineation, assessment methodology, and protection (per
Ecology)?
Section 2.3.5,
step 2
Section 3.2.2,
#2
☐ Yes
☐ No
☐ N/A
Citation:
G. Does FWHCA designation also support terrestrial species,
habitat connectivity, and Priority Habitats within and
adjacent to RMZs?
Section 3.2.2,
#2
☐ Yes
☐ No
☐ N/A
Citation:
H. Does your CAO apply the mitigation sequence to ensure no
net loss of riparian ecological functions and values due to
permitted activities within RMZs delineated consistent with
question B (or equivalent methods)?
Section 3.2.1 ☐ Yes
☐ No
☐ N/A
Citation:
I. Does your CAO require that applicants provide a Critical
Areas Report prepared by a qualified professional for
projects in or near known or suspected FWHCAs, and
require that a Habitat Management Plan be provided if
FWHCAs are found to be present and/or impacted by the
project?
Section 3.2.2 ☐ Yes
☐ No
☐ N/A
Citation:
J. Does your CAO require that On-Site Sewage Systems are
located outside of RMZs?
Section 3.2.1,
#1
☐ Yes
☐ No
☐ N/A
Citation:
K. Does your CAO prohibit new development that requires
bank protection/hardening now or in the future (taking into
consideration channel migration, wind and wave action, and
climate change)?
Section 3.2.1,
#2
☐ Yes
☐ No
☐ N/A
Citation:
49 of 83
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife 4
Riparian Management Recommendation (RMR) Location in
RMR Vol. 2
Citation in CAO How Addressed in CAO
(or why not addressed in CAO)
L. Could other regulations conflict with your CAO and
inadvertently impact riparian functions (e.g., clearing,
grading, and filling ordinances)? If so, does your code
include a provision that the regulation which provides
greater protection to critical areas shall apply?
Section 3.2.1,
#3
CA Handbook,
Ch. 4
☐ Yes
☐ No
☐ N/A
Citation:
M. Does the issuance of an exemption letter or permit for
invasive and/or noxious plant removal require that impacts
to fish, wildlife, and habitat are minimized (e.g., hand
weeding with light equipment, use only Ecology-approved
aquatic herbicides and adjuvants, avoid use of hazardous
substances, and avoid soil compaction)?
Section 3.2.1,
#4
☐ Yes
☐ No
☐ N/A
Citation:
N. Does your CAO include all of the following provisions?
• define a “hazard tree” as a threat to life, property, or
public safety,
• require that the method of hazard tree removal not
adversely affect riparian ecosystem functions to the
extent practicable,
• encourage the creation of snags (Priority Habitat
features) rather than complete tree removal,
• involve an avoidance and minimization of damage to
remaining trees and vegetation within the RMZ, and
• require a qualified arborist to evaluate requests for
hazard tree removal
Section 3.2.1,
#7
☐ Yes
☐ No
☐ N/A
Citation:
O. Does your CAO incorporate a pathway to mitigate or
compensate for impacts to RMZs arising from emergency
activities (e.g., bank stabilization to address imminent
threats to homes)?
Section 3.2.1,
#9
☐ Yes
☐ No
☐ N/A
Citation:
P. Does your CAO require that impacts and disturbances from
recreational trails and interpretive facilities are minimized
to the extent practicable, informed by Priority Habitats and
Species data and management recommendations?
Section 3.2.1,
#10
☐ Yes
☐ No
☐ N/A
Citation:
50 of 83
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife 5
Riparian Management Recommendation (RMR) Location in
RMR Vol. 2
Citation in CAO How Addressed in CAO
(or why not addressed in CAO)
Q. Does your CAO include watershed–scale management
considerations such as protecting and restoring watershed
processes (e.g., channel movement, sediment transport);
stormwater management; land management for stream
temperatures; and protecting and restoring longitudinal,
lateral, and vertical connectivity?
Section 3.4 ☐ Yes
☐ No
☐ N/A
Citation:
R. Does the CAO include measures for bolstering climate
resilience within critical areas (i.e., increase habitat
connectivity, plan for a wider range of stream flows, and
increase stream shading)?
Section 1.4, #6
Section 3.4.1,
GMA Climate
Guidance
☐ Yes
☐ No
☐ N/A
Citation:
S. Is there a stated goal or intent in your CAO to retain and
restore CMZs and RMZs to the extent practicable to
maximize riparian function over time?
Section 4.2 ☐ Yes
☐ No
☐ N/A
Citation:
T. Does your CAO promote incentives and include a
streamlined review process for riparian restoration or
enhancement projects to help facilitate projects that go
“above and beyond” minimum regulatory requirements?
Section 4.3 ☐ Yes
☐ No
☐ N/A
Citation:
U. Does your CAO establish a monitoring and adaptive
management program designed to:
• collect information on CAO effectiveness,
• evaluate the potential for exemptions and variances to
cumulatively affect riparian functions across your
jurisdiction, and
• improve permit implementation?
Section 3.2,
Chapter 5; CA
Handbook, Ch.
7
☐ Yes
☐ No
☐ N/A
Citation:
51 of 83
Page 1 – Updated through laws of 2023
Note: Bold items and checkboxes are a requirement of the GMA.
Other items are other state or federal laws or examples of best practices. Underlined items are links to Internet sites.
V3.0
Critical Areas Checklist
A Technical Assistance Tool from Growth Management Services – updated May 2024
Name of city or county: City of Yakima, WA
Staff contact, phone, and e-mail address: Trevor Martin, 509-575-6183, Ask.Planning@YakimaWA.gov
INSTRUCTIONS
This checklist is intended to help local governments update their
development regulations, pursuant to the schedule in RCW 36.70A.130(5).
We strongly encourage but do not require jurisdictions to complete the
checklist and return it to Growth Management Services (GMS), along with
their updates. However, If the jurisdiction is using a portion of their
Periodic Update Grant (PUG) to update the Critical Areas Ordinance, this
checklist is required.
This checklist may be used by all jurisdictions, including those local
governments planning for resource lands and critical areas only. For
general information on update requirements, refer to A Guide to the
Periodic Update Process Under the Growth Management Act – Fully
Planning Counties & Cities, 2022 and WAC 365-196-610 .
For additional information, resources, and general checklists pertaining to
comprehensive plan and development regulation periodic updates please
visit Commerce’s Growth Management Act Periodic Update webpage.
Bold items are a GMA requirement or may be related requirements of
other state or federal laws. Underlined items are links to Internet sites and
may include best practices or other ideas to consider.
Commerce WAC provisions are advisory under Commerce’s statutory
mandate to provide technical assistance, RCW 43.330.120 which states
that the Department of Commerce “…shall help local officials interpret and
implement the different requirements of the act through workshops, model
ordinances, and information materials.” If you have questions, call GMS at
(360) 725-3066.
How to fill out the checklist
Using the current version of your critical areas regulations, fill out each
item in the checklist. Select the check box or type in text fields, answering
the following question:
Is this item addressed in your current Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO)? If
YES, fill in the form with citation(s) to where in the plan or code the item is
addressed. We recommend using citations rather than page numbers
because they stay the same regardless of how the document is printed. If
you have questions about the requirement, follow the hyperlinks to the
relevant statutory provision or rules. If you still have questions, visit the
Commerce Growth Management Services Web page or contact one of the
Commerce planners assigned to your region.
CONTENTS
Instructions………..………….….1
Overall Requirements………..2
Wetlands…………………………….3
Critical Aquifer Recharge
Areas…………………………….……5
Frequently Flooded Areas….6
Geologically Hazardous
Areas…………………………………. 7
Fish and Wildlife Habitat
Conservation Areas….………..8
Designating and Protecting
Waters of the State……..….....9
Anadromous
Fisheries………………………….....10
Reasonable Use
Exceptions…………………….…….10
Agricultural Activities…….…..11
Forest Practices
Regulations……………………....11
Good Ideas…….……..……….….12
LOCAL GOVERNMENT DIVISION 52 of 83
Page 2 – Updated through laws of 2023
Note: Bold items and checkboxes are a requirement of the GMA.
Other items are other state or federal laws or examples of best practices. Underlined items are links to Internet sites.
V3.0
CRITICAL AREAS
Regulations protecting critical areas are required by RCW 36.70A.060(2) and RCW 36.70A.172(1). WAC
365-195-900 through 925 provide guidelines. Guidance can also be found in Commerce’s Critical Areas
Handbook (2022); the Minimum Guidelines WAC 365-190-080 through 130; Best Available Science WAC
365-195; and Procedural Criteria, WAC 365-196-485 and WAC 365-196-830, and on Growth Management’s
Critical Areas webpage.
Regulations required to protect critical areas
Addressed in
current plan or
regulations? If yes,
note where
OVERALL REQUIREMENTS
The CAO includes best available science to clearly designate and protect all
critical areas that might be found within the jurisdiction.
1. Designation of Critical Areas
RCW 36.70A.170(1)(d) requires all counties and cities to designate critical areas.
RCW 36.70A.170(2) requires that counties and cities consider the Commerce
Minimum Guidelines pursuant to RCW 36.70A.050.
RCW 36.70A.050 directs Commerce to adopt the Minimum Guidelines to classify
critical areas. WAC 365-190-080 through 130 provide guidance on defining or
“designating” each of the five critical areas.
WAC 365-190-040 outlines the process to classify and designate natural resource
lands and critical areas.
2. Definition of Critical Areas
RCW 36.70A.030(11) provides definitions for critical areas. Sections (20)
regarding geologically hazardous areas; and (48) regarding wetlands were updated
in 2010.
WAC 365-190-030 provides definitions in the Minimum Guidelines.
3. Protection of Critical Areas
RCW 36.70A.060(2) requires counties and cities to adopt development regulations
that protect the critical areas required to be designated under RCW 36.70A.170.
RCW 36.70A.172(1) requires the inclusion of best available science in developing
policies and development regulations to protect the functions and values of critical
areas. In addition, counties and cities must give special consideration to
conservation or protection measures necessary to preserve or enhance
anadromous fisheries.
WAC 365-196-830 provides guidance on protection of critical areas.
Was BAS documented
in the record for the
review and updates to
the critical areas
regulations?
☒ Yes
☐ No
Location in Text:
1. Designation
YMC Chapter 15.27
Part One & YMC
Chapter 17.09 (SMP)
2. Definitions
YMC 15.27.200, YMC
15.27.700, & YMC
17.01.090 (SMP)
3. Protection
YMC Chapter 15.27
Article IV-Permit
Review Critieria, YMC
15.27.321, YMC
15.27.407-15.27.408,
YMC 15.27.501, YMC
15.27.602, YMC
15.27.702, YMC
15.27.820, & YMC
Chapter 17.09
4. Best Available
Science
YMC 15.27.150, YMC
15.27.314(B), YMC
15.27.500(A), YMC
15.27.501(2), YMC
15.27.604(A), YMC
15.27.605(I)(7), YMC
17.01.090 (SMP),
53 of 83
Page 3 – Updated through laws of 2023
Note: Bold items and checkboxes are a requirement of the GMA.
Other items are other state or federal laws or examples of best practices. Underlined items are links to Internet sites.
V3.0
4. Inclusion of Best Available Science
RCW 36.70A.172(1) requires inclusion of the best available science (BAS).
WAC 365-195-900 through 925 outlines recommended criteria for determining
which information is the BAS, for obtaining the BAS, for including BAS in policies
and regulations, for addressing inadequate scientific information, and for
demonstrating “special consideration” to conservation or protection measures
necessary to preserve or enhance anadromous fisheries.
WAC 365-195-915 provides criteria for including BAS in the record.
5. No net loss of critical area functions and values is a requirement for
development regulations in WAC 365-196-830(4). If development regulations
allow harm to critical areas, they must require compensatory mitigation of the
harm.
YMC 17.03.090
(SMP), YMC
17.05.020 (SMP),
YMC 17.07.120
(SMP), YMC
17.09.010(P), (I)(4)
(SMP), & YMC
17.09.030-17.09.040
Note: The code
sections of the SMP
(Title 17) referenced
above utilized the
terms “scientific
evidence” or
“scientific and
technical
information” instead
of “best available
science”.
Do your regulations
address no net loss
and require
compensatory
mitigation?
☒ Yes
☐ No
Location in Text:
YMC 15.27.130, YMC
15.27.314-15.27.321,
YMC 15.27.605, YMC
17.01.030(H) (SMP),
YMC 17.01.040(K)
(SMP), YMC 17.03.030-
17.03.060 (SMP), YMC
17.05.020-17.05.060
(SMP), YMC 17.07.050
(SMP), YMC 17.07.070
(SMP), YMC 17.07.090
(SMP), YMC 17.07.130
(SMP), YMC 17.07.160-
17.07.170 (SMP), YMC
54 of 83
Page 4 – Updated through laws of 2023
Note: Bold items and checkboxes are a requirement of the GMA.
Other items are other state or federal laws or examples of best practices. Underlined items are links to Internet sites.
V3.0
17.09.010(B)(1) and (Q)
(SMP), YMC
17.09.050(C) (SMP),
YMC 17.13.160 (SMP)
WETLANDS DEFINITION
The definition of wetlands is consistent with RCW 36.70A.030(48).
Is the wetland
definition consistent
with
RCW 36.70A.030(48)?
☒ Yes
☐ No
☐ N/A
Location in Text:
YMC 15.27.200
Definitions, & YMC
17.01.090 Definitions
(SMP)
WETLANDS DELINEATION
Wetlands are delineated using the approved federal wetland delineation manual
and applicable regional supplements in accordance with WAC 173-22-035.
See Ecology’s Wetland Delineation page and WAC 365-190-090 for additional
assistance.
Are wetlands
delineated using the
approved Federal
Wetland Delineation
Manual and Regional
Supplements?
☒ Yes
☐ No
☐ N/A
Location in Text:
YMC 15.27.601, & YMC
17.09.040(B)(1) (SMP)
55 of 83
Page 5 – Updated through laws of 2023
Note: Bold items and checkboxes are a requirement of the GMA.
Other items are other state or federal laws or examples of best practices. Underlined items are links to Internet sites.
V3.0
WETLANDS PROTECTION
Policies and regulations protect the functions and values of wetlands. RCW
36.70A.172(1).
Counties and cities are encouraged to make their actions consistent with the intent
and goals of “protection of wetlands”, Executive Order 89-10 as it existed on
September 1, 1990.
WAC 365-190-090(3) recommends using a wetlands rating system that evaluates
the existing wetland functions and values to determine what functions must be
protected. Ecology updated its recommended wetlands rating systems effective
January 2015. For information on the rating system, including the July 2018
adjustments to ranges for habitat scores, see:
• 2014 Updates to the Washington State Wetland Rating Systems
• Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington
• Washington State Wetland Rating System for Eastern Washington
For other resources and guidance on protecting wetlands, go to Ecology’s Local
Wetland Regulations: Growth Management Act technical assistance and see:
• Wetland Guidance for Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO) Updates: Western and
Eastern Washington (2022)
Do the regulations use
a rating system to
determine wetlands
protection?
☒ Yes
☐ No
☐ N/A
Location in Text:
YMC 15.27.603, & YMC
17.09.040(D)(2) (SMP)
CRITICAL AQUIFER RECHARGE AREAS
Policies and regulations protect the functions and values of critical aquifer
recharge areas. RCW 36.70A.172(1).
Policies and regulations protect the quality and quantity of groundwater used for
public water supplies. RCW 36.70A.070(1) and WAC 365-196-485(1)(d).
The following references also relate to protection of groundwater resources:
• RCW 90.44 – Regulation of Public Groundwaters
• RCW 90.48 – Water Pollution Control
• RCW 90.54 – Water Resources Act of 1971
• RCW 36.36.020 - Creation of aquifer protection area (1985)
• WAC 365-190-100 Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas 2023
• WAC 173-100 Groundwater Management Areas and Programs (1988)
• WAC 173-200 Water Quality Standards for Groundwaters of the State of
Washington (1990)
• WAC 365-196-735 Consideration of state and regional planning provisions
(list) (2010)
The Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas Guidance Document (2021) provides
information on protecting functions and values of critical aquifer recharge areas,
best available science, how to work with state and local regulations and adaptive
management.
Also, consider the following:
If groundwater is used
for potable water, do
regulations protect the
quality and quantity of
ground water?
☒ Yes
☐ No
☐ N/A
Location in text:
YMC 15.27.800 & YMC
17.09.060 (SMP)
56 of 83
Page 6 – Updated through laws of 2023
Note: Bold items and checkboxes are a requirement of the GMA.
Other items are other state or federal laws or examples of best practices. Underlined items are links to Internet sites.
V3.0
CRITICAL AQUIFER RECHARGE AREAS
• Prohibiting or strictly regulating hazardous uses in critical aquifer recharge
areas (CARAs) and designating and protecting wellhead areas. See Ecology’s
guidance on Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas.
• Limiting impervious surfaces to reduce stormwater runoff, as required under
Phase I and II municipal stormwater permits. Ecology’s Stormwater Manual for
Western Washington (2012) includes low impact development (LID) related
definitions, requirements, and an LID performance standard. See Stormwater
Management and Design Manuals on Ecology’s web page.
• For additional guidance on LID resources, see Commerce’s Incentivizing low-
impact development guidebook.
Are the critical aquifer
recharge regulations
consistent with
current mapping of
these critical areas?
☒ Yes
☐ No
☐ N/A
Location in text:
YMC 15.27.800-
15.27.820 & YMC
17.09.060(B) (SMP)
FREQUENTLY FLOODED AREAS
Regulations protect the functions and values of frequently flooded areas and
safeguard the public from hazards to health and safety. RCW 36.70A.172(1).
WAC 365-196-830 provides: "’Protection‘ in this context means preservation of the
functions and values of the natural environment, or to safeguard the public from
hazards to health and safety.”
WAC 365-190-110 directs counties and cities to consider the following when
designating and classifying frequently flooded areas:
(a) Effects of flooding on human health and safety, and to public facilities and
services;
(b) Available documentation including federal, state, and local laws, regulations,
and programs, local studies and maps, and federal flood insurance
programs, including the provisions for urban growth areas in RCW
36.70A.110;
(c) The future flow flood plain, defined as the channel of the stream and that
portion of the adjoining flood plain that is necessary to contain and
discharge the base flood flow at build out;
(d) The potential effects of tsunami, high tides with strong winds, sea level rise,
and extreme weather events, including those potentially resulting from
global climate change;
(e) Greater surface runoff caused by increasing impervious surfaces.
Classification of and regulations for frequently flooded areas should not conflict
with the FEMA requirements for the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). See
Ecology’s Frequently Flooded areas: Critical Areas Ordinance webpage and 44 CFR
60.
Communities that are located on Puget Sound or the Strait of Juan de Fuca, or
have lakes, rivers or streams that directly or indirectly drain to those water bodies,
are subject to the NFIP Biological Opinion (BiOp) for Puget Sound. The biological
opinion required changes to the implementation of the NFIP in order to meet the
Are frequently flooded
areas designated and
regulated using FEMA
and Ecology
guidance?
☒ Yes
☐ No
☐ N/A
Location in Text:
YMC 15.27 Part Four –
Flood Hazard Areas; The
City updated YMC 15.27
Part Four in 2021 (Ord.
2021-021), amending
and adding sections
related to the
identification and
establishment of flood
hazard areas (YMC
15.27.400), Methods of
Reducing Flood Losses
(YMC 15.27.403), and
amending sections
related to Penalties,
Liabilities, Variances,
New Construction,
General Standards for
Construction
57 of 83
Page 7 – Updated through laws of 2023
Note: Bold items and checkboxes are a requirement of the GMA.
Other items are other state or federal laws or examples of best practices. Underlined items are links to Internet sites.
V3.0
FREQUENTLY FLOODED AREAS
requirements of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) in the Puget Sound watershed.
FEMA Region X has developed an implementation plan that allows communities to
apply the performance standards contained in the Biological Opinion by
implementing:
1) a model ordinance;
2) a programmatic Checklist; or
3) on a permit by permit basis as long as it can be demonstrated that there
is no adverse effect to listed species. Communities have the option of
utilizing their CAOs as part of a programmatic response to address the
requirements of the biological opinion. FEMA must approve a community’s
biological opinion compliance strategy.
Additional resources:
RCW 86.12 Flood Control by Counties
RCW 86.16 Floodplain Management
RCW 86.26 State Participation in Flood Control Maintenance
RCW 86.16.041 Floodplain Management Ordinance and Amendments
WAC 173-158-070 Requirements for construction in Special Flood Hazard Areas
Techniques,
Floodproofing
Certificates, Storage of
Materials, Critical
Facilities, Livestock
Sanctuary Areas, and
Specific Standards for
Residential and
Nonresidential
Construction,
Manufactured Homes,
Enclosed Areas, areas
with or without
established base flood
elevations / floodways,
Shallow Flooding Areas,
Structure Drainage,
Recreational Vehicles,
and Permit Application /
Review Process.
YMC 17.03.010 &
17.05.060 through the
establishment of the
Floodway/Channel
Migration Zone (CMZ)
within shoreline
environmentally
designated areas, also
supports the protection
of overflow channels
and preservation of
natural hydraulic,
geologic, and biological
functions.
58 of 83
Page 8 – Updated through laws of 2023
Note: Bold items and checkboxes are a requirement of the GMA.
Other items are other state or federal laws or examples of best practices. Underlined items are links to Internet sites.
V3.0
FREQUENTLY FLOODED AREAS
Are you utilizing your
CAO as part of a
programmatic
response to the BiOp?
☐ Yes
☐ No
☒ N/A
Location in Text:
Not Applicable; Only
applies to communities
with watersheds directly
or indirectly draining
into the Puget Sound or
the Strait of Juann Fuca.
DEFINITION OF GEOLOGICALLY HAZARDOUS AREAS
The definition of geologically hazardous areas is consistent with RCW
36.70A.030(20) and WAC 365-190-120(1).
“Geologically hazardous areas" means areas that because of their susceptibility to
erosion, sliding, earthquake, or other geological events, are not suited to the siting
of commercial, residential, or industrial development consistent with public health
or safety concerns.
Is the geologically
hazardous areas
definition consistent
with
RCW 36.70A.030(20)?
☒ Yes
☐ No
☐ N/A
Location in Text:
YMC 15.27.700(A); The
definition is uniquely
listed within YMC 15.27
Part Seven and not
within the preliminary
Definitions section (YMC
15.27.200). The critical
area is also defined in
YMC 17.09.050(A)(1)
(SMP).
59 of 83
Page 9 – Updated through laws of 2023
Note: Bold items and checkboxes are a requirement of the GMA.
Other items are other state or federal laws or examples of best practices. Underlined items are links to Internet sites.
V3.0
PROTECTION OF GEOLOGICALLY HAZARDOUS AREAS
Regulations protect the functions and values of geologically hazardous areas and
safeguard the public from hazards to health and safety. RCW 36.70A.172(1).
WAC 365-196-830 provides: “’Protection’" in this context means preservation of the
functions and values of the natural environment, or to safeguard the public from
hazards to health and safety.”
Geologically hazardous areas are designated, and their use is regulated or limited
consistent with public health and safety concerns. RCW 36.70A.030(20)
WAC 365-190-120 describes the different types of hazardous areas:
• Geologically hazardous areas include:
• Erosion hazards
• Landslide hazards
• seismic hazards
• tsunami hazards
• volcanic hazards
• channel migration zones
• areas subject to other geological events such as coal mine hazards
including: mass wasting, debris flows, rock falls, and differential
settlement.
The Department of Natural Resource’s Washington Geological Survey Geologic
Hazards and the Environment website includes information on earthquakes and
faults, landslides, volcanoes and lahars, tsunamis, hazardous minerals, emergency
preparedness, historic mines and includes geologic hazard maps that can be
accessed from the Geologic Information Portal.
Are uses in
geologically
hazardous areas
designated and
regulated or limited
consistent with public
health and safety?
☒ Yes
☐ No
☐ N/A
Location in Text:
YMC 15.27 Part Seven &
YMC 17.09.050 (SMP)
DEFINITION OF FISH AND WILDLIFE HABITAT AND CONSERVATION AREAS
The definition of fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas is consistent with
WAC 365-190-030(6). The definition of fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas
was amended to state that they do not include: “such artificial features or
constructs as irrigation delivery systems, irrigation infrastructure, irrigation canals,
or drainage ditches that lie within the boundaries of and are maintained by a port
district or an irrigation district or company”.
Is the FWHCA
definition consistent
with WAC 365-190-
030(6)?
☒ Yes
☐ No
☐ N/A
Location in Text:
YMC 15.27.200 & YMC
17.01.090 (SMP)
60 of 83
Page 10 – Updated through laws of 2023
Note: Bold items and checkboxes are a requirement of the GMA.
Other items are other state or federal laws or examples of best practices. Underlined items are links to Internet sites.
V3.0
PROTECTION OF FISH AND WILDLIFE HABITAT AND CONSERVATION AREAS
Policies and regulations protect the functions and values of fish and wildlife
habitat conservation areas. RCW 36.70A.172(1) and WAC 365-190-030(6).
WAC 365-190-130(4) says local jurisdictions must consult current information on
priority habitats and species identified by WDFW. Additional information that must
be consulted is available from DNR’s natural heritage program and aquatic
resources program. BAS regarding biodiversity areas and corridors has advanced
significantly. Recent updates and resources include:
• Aquatic Habitat Guidelines
• Priority Habitat and Species maps
• Priority Habitats and Species List (updated June 2023)
• Priority Habitats and Species: Management recommendations:
• Landscape Planning for Washington’s Wildlife (2009)
• Land Use Planning for Salmon, Steelhead and Trout (2009)
• Riparian Ecosystems, Volume 1: Science Synthesis and
Management Implications (2020)
• Riparian Ecosystems, Volume 2: Management Recommendations
(2020)
• Riparian Management Zone Checklist for CAOs (2023)
• Shrub-Steppe Management Recommendations (2020)
• Oregon White Oak Woodlands Ecosystems Management
Recommendations (1998)
• Management recommendations for Washington's Priority Species
(by taxa)
• Puget Sound Kelp Conservation and Recovery Plan (2020)
• Stream Habitat Restoration Guidelines (2012)
• Water Crossing Design Guidelines (2013)
“Areas where endangered, threatened, and sensitive species have a primary
association” must be considered per WAC 365-190-130(2)(a). Consult WDFW’s
Threatened and Endangered Species list and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s
Information for Planning and Consultation resources for up to date information on
all state and federal listed species.
Also see the Puget Sound Partnership’s Salmon Recovery website for Water
Resource Inventory Area (WRIA) Plans in Puget Sound.
Have you reviewed
your regulations
regarding any
applicable changes in
management
recommendations for
priority habitats and
species?
☒ Yes
☐ No
☐ N/A
Location in Text
YMC 15.27 Part Five,
YMC 17.09.010(D)(3)
and (Q) (SMP);
Have you reviewed
your regulations
regarding any changes
in species listings?
☒ Yes
☐ No
☐ N/A
Location in Text
YMC 15.27.502-507 &
YMC 17.09.030(C) and
(D) (SMP)
61 of 83
Page 11 – Updated through laws of 2023
Note: Bold items and checkboxes are a requirement of the GMA.
Other items are other state or federal laws or examples of best practices. Underlined items are links to Internet sites.
V3.0
DESIGNATING AND PROTECTING WATERS OF THE STATE
RCW 90.48.020 defines waters of the state, which include all surface waters, salt
waters, groundwater and all other water courses in Washington. WAC 365-190-
130(2)(f) recommends designating all waters of the state as fish and wildlife
habitat conservation areas (FWHCAs).
Stream types are classified in WAC 222-16-030 with field verification, or an
alternate system that considers factors listed in WAC 365-190-130(4)(f)(iii). See
http://www.dnr.wa.gov/forest-practices-water-typing to use Washington State
Department of Natural Resources (DNR)’s stream typing system.
Establish riparian management zones to maintain no net loss of riparian
ecosystem functions and values.
Designate areas that risk contaminating or harming shoreline resources including
tidelands and bedland suitable for shellfish harvest, kelp and eelgrass beds and
forage fish spawning areas.
Do you designate
waters of the state as
FWHCAs?
☒ Yes
☐ No
☐ N/A
Location in Text:
YMC 15.27.502(A)(4) &
YMC 17.09.030(C)(4)
(SMP)
Do your regulations
protect waters of the
state?
☒ Yes
☐ No
☐ N/A
Location in Text:
YMC 15.27 Part Five &
YMC 17.09.030(H)
through (P)
62 of 83
Page 12 – Updated through laws of 2023
Note: Bold items and checkboxes are a requirement of the GMA.
Other items are other state or federal laws or examples of best practices. Underlined items are links to Internet sites.
V3.0
ANADROMOUS FISHERIES
Policies and regulations for protecting critical areas give special consideration to
conservation or protection measures necessary to preserve or enhance
anadromous fisheries. RCW 36.70A.172(1) is the requirement and WAC 365-195-
925 lists criteria involved. This requirement applies to all five types of critical areas.
WAC 365-190-130(4)(i) recommends sources and methods for protecting fish and
wildlife habitat conservation areas, including salmonid habitat. Counties and cities
may use information prepared by the United States Department of the Interior Fish
and Wildlife Service, National Marine Fisheries Service, the Washington State
Department of Fish and Wildlife, the State Recreation and Conservation Office, and
the Puget Sound Partnership to designate, protect and restore salmonid habitat.
Counties and cities should consider recommendations found in the regional and
watershed specific salmon recovery plans (see the Governor's Salmon Recovery
Office webpage and the Puget Sound Partnership’s Salmon Recovery webpage).
Land Use Planning for Salmon, Steelhead and Trout: A land use planner’s guide to
salmonid habitat protection and recovery (October 2009) is an excellent resource.
Do your regulations
give special
consideration to
anadromous
fisheries?
☒ Yes
☐ No
☐ N/A
Location in Text:
YMC 15.27.150 & YMC
17.09.030
REASONABLE USE EXCEPTIONS
The Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO) allows for “reasonable use” if the CAO would
otherwise deny all reasonable use of property. Reasonable use provisions should
limit intrusions into critical areas to the greatest extent possible and apply the
mitigation sequence as needed for no net loss of ecosystem functions and values
RCW 36.70A.370. Common exemptions include emergencies, remodels that do
not further extend into critical areas, surveying, walking, and development that has
already been completed with critical areas review under a previous permit. See
Critical Areas Handbook, Chapter 3: Structuring Critical Areas Regulations, p.10
(Updated 2022).
Do you have
reasonable use
provisions?
☒ Yes
☐ No
Location in Text:
YMC 15.27.318;
SMP “Variance
Provisions” are provided
in YMC 17.13.080
63 of 83
Page 13 – Updated through laws of 2023
Note: Bold items and checkboxes are a requirement of the GMA.
Other items are other state or federal laws or examples of best practices. Underlined items are links to Internet sites.
V3.0
AGRICULTURAL ACTIVITIES (COUNTIES ONLY)
Non-VSP Counties
Critical areas regulations as they specifically apply to agricultural activities in
counties or watersheds not participating in the Voluntary Stewardship Program
(VSP) have been reviewed, and if needed, revised pursuant to RCW 36.70A.130.
RCW 36.70A.710(6)
"Agricultural activities" means all agricultural uses and practices as defined in RCW
90.58.065.
VSP Counties
After watershed work plan approval, VSP counties are encouraged to reference and
describe their participation in the program within their critical areas development
regulations (WAC 365-196-832). See Critical Areas Handbook, Chapter 5:
Protecting Critical Areas in Natural Resource Lands (2022).
Did you review your
regulations as they
apply to agricultural
activities?
☐ Yes
☐ No
☒ N/A
Location in Text:
Not Applicable to the
City of Yakima (Counties
Only)
FOREST PRACTICES APPLICATION REGULATIONS
If applicable, regulations for forest practices have been adopted: RCW
36.70A.570.
RCW 76.09.240, requires many counties over 100,000 in population, and the cities
and towns within those counties to adopt regulations for forest practices. These
are often included in clearing and grading ordinances.
Have you adopted
forest practices
regulations?
☐ Yes
☒ No
☐ N/A
Location in Text:
Related provisions
related to Forest
Practices are included in:
YMC 7.82.010
Definitions.
(Stormwater) – New
Development, YMC
7.82.090.4 Exemptions.
(Construction
Stormwater Runoff),
YMC
7.83.020 Definitions.
(Stormwater) – New
Development, YMC
7.83.040.1.a Exemptions.
(Post-Construction
Stormwater Runoff),
YMC
64 of 83
Page 14 – Updated through laws of 2023
Note: Bold items and checkboxes are a requirement of the GMA.
Other items are other state or federal laws or examples of best practices. Underlined items are links to Internet sites.
V3.0
17.01.090 Definitions.
(SMP) – Forest land, &
YMC
17.01.090 Definitions.
(SMP) – Forest practices
GOOD IDEAS
Non-regulatory measures to protect or enhance functions and values of critical
areas may be used to complement regulatory methods. These may include:
• public education
• stewardship programs
• pursuing grant opportunities
• water conservation
• joint planning with other jurisdictions and non-profit organizations
• stream and wetland restoration activities
• transfer of development rights
Monitoring and adaptive management is encouraged in WAC 365-195-905(6) to
improve implementation of your regulations. See Commerce’s Monitoring and
Adaptive Management chapter in the Critical Areas Handbook, Chapter 7:
Monitoring and Adaptive Management of Critical Areas (2022).
Are you using non-
regulatory measures
to protect critical
areas?
☒ Yes
☐ No
Location in Text:
Joint Planning with
Yakima County, WA
Dept. of Ecology, WA
Dept. of Fish & Wildlife,
& Yakama Nation.
Do you have a
monitoring and
adaptive management
program for your
CAO?
☐ Yes
☒ No
Location in Text:
Monitoring provisions
are located throughout
YMC 15.27, but adaptive
management
mechanism is not
present.
65 of 83
MEMORANDUM
2707 Colby Avenue, Suite 900, Everett, WA 98201 P 425.252.7700
To: Trevor Martin, Planning Manager, City of Yakima, WA
From: Jennifer Groos, Environmental Planner III, Perteet, Inc.
Andrea Bachman, Senior Environmental Scientist, Perteet, Inc.
Oneza Ferdouse, Associate Principal, BERK Consulting
Date: December 22, 2025
Re: Yakima Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO) Periodic Update
Recommended Datasets are Underlined.
Figure 1 - Yakima 2040 Comp Plan Exhibit 10-6
• City of Yakima
o The existing city dataset contains three classifications (Figure 2):
High Risk – Landslide, Intermediate Risk – Oversteepened Slopes, and High Risk –
Oversteepened Slopes
o Supplemental Data Review:
In addition to the City of Yakima–sourced Geologically Hazardous Areas and Underlying
Geology datasets, publicly available Washington State Department of Natural Resources (WA
DNR) landslide inventory and landslide susceptibility mapping were reviewed for context (WA
DNR Geology Portal). The WA DNR mapping generally aligns with the City’s mapped high-risk
landslide and oversteepened slope areas and does not indicate materially different hazard
extents within the City limits. Consistent with Comp Plan mapping practices, the City-adopted
datasets remain the primary reference for regulatory and policy purposes.
66 of 83
o Questions:
When might an update to the GeoHaz dataset be performed related to Surfacewater
Department’s remote sensing efforts? Before June 2026? If not, we can use the existing
(Figure 2).
Would the City’s GIS Department be willing to deduce a new dataset formatted
according to the recommended Known/Suspect-No Known-Unknown classifications?
A dataset and matching graphic reflecting these classifications are not required, but
may be a future consideration for Comm. Dev. and GIS Departments if/when code
amendments are adopted.
Has there been an Administrative presendence established internally in which specific
soil types require Critical Area Report based on that soil types geologically functions
and values? Alternatively, is the Underlying Geology dataset used in manner to
evaluate area with potential hazards based on soil type?
Figure 2 - Yakima Existing Dataset - Geologically Hazardous Areas
Figure 3 - Yakima Existing Dataset – Underlying Geology
Due to recommendations made in the CAO Gap Analysis for the reclassification of Geologically Hazardous
Areas utilizing Known/Suspect, No Known, and Unknown classifications, consideration should be given to the
67 of 83
following datasets. The following are suggestions for managing public-facing map graphics and stored city-
datasets:
a. A publicly shared dataset utilizing the Known/Suspect-No Known-Unknown classification format is a
great thematic map for residents to evaluate whether or not their property could require critical areas
review process related to development activity.
b. To support the creation of the above Known/Suspect-No Known-Unknown formatted map the following
datasets could be used to derive area classifications.
1. Remote-sensing (created by PW-Surfacewater Dept.?) – identifies areas with steep slopes.
2. USDA National Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) Soil Types – underlying geology with
soil type identified as known/suspect to contribute to landslides.
3. WA Dept. of Natural Resources (DNR) Liquefication Susceptibility (Figure 4, below)
4. WA DNR Seismic Site Class (Figure 5, below)
c. If (a) and (b) are not likely to be assessed or considered at this time, it would be beneficial to show (1),
(3), and (4) datasets listed in (b) above as well as the existing City-sourced Underlying Geology.
• WA DNR
o Figure 4 - Liquefaction Susceptibility
o Figure 5 - NEHRP Seismic Site Classification
68 of 83
• USDA NRCS
o Figure 6 – Soil Typing
Figure 7 - Yakima 2040 Comp Plan Exhibit 10-2
• City of Yakima
o The existing city dataset contains three classifications (Figure 2). The same classifications will be
referenced in the Comp Plan.
Zone AE, Zone A, and Floodway Areas
o Question:
When comparing recent FEMA datasets with the map graphic currently in the Comp
Plan, an small area near Fruitvale Blvd is no longer identified as Zone AE Floodplain.
Does this correctly align with any recent floodplain management projects in that area?
69 of 83
• Figure 7a – Highlighted Fruitvale Blvd Area with existing City-dataset:
• Figure 7b – Highlighted Fruitvale Blvd Area with current FEMA dataset:
Figure 8 – FEMA Floodplains & Floodways
70 of 83
Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas :
Figure 9 - Yakima 2040 Comp Plan Exhibit 10-7
• City of Yakima
o The existing city dataset contains three classifications (Figure 2). The same classifications will be
represented in the Comp Plan.
Wellhead 10-Year Protection Area, Moderate, High, and Extreme
o Data Source Clarification:
City-sourced Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas (CARA) and Aquifer High Vulnerability Areas
were used for Comp Plan mapping. County-level CARA mapping was also reviewed for
comparison purposes and is generally consistent with the City’s compiled datasets. For clarity,
the City-sourced CARA and Aquifer High Vulnerability datasets are retained as the primary
mapping layers, with the Washington Department of Health Wellhead Protection Area (10-year
travel time) dataset updated to reflect the most current available information.
o Questions:
None
Figure 10 – Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas
In Figure 10, above, the same existing city-sourced datasets for Aquifer High Vulnerability Areas, and Critical
Aquifer Recharge Areas are utilized, and the latest Washington Department of Health dataset for Wellhead
Protections Areas with a 10yr Travel Time has been updated (shown in green dot-dash lines).
71 of 83
Wetlands & Streams:
Figure 11 - Yakima 2040 Comp Plan Exhibit 10-7
• City of Yakima
o The existing city dataset contains three classifications (Figure 2),
Freshwater Emergent Wetland, Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland, Freshwater Pond,
Lake, Riverine, and Streams
o Question:
WADNR dataset notes Lateral L to be a ‘canal/ditch’. It is suggested that this segment
be removed from the existing city dataset for ‘Creeks & Streams’. Would you concur
and find this revision acceptable for reference in the Comp Plan?
• Figure 11a – Highlighted Lateral L Area per City
• Figure 11b – Highlighted Lateral L Area per WADNR
72 of 83
Figure 12 – NWI Wetlands
Figure 13 – Streams
73 of 83
Fish & Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas :
Figure 14 - Yakima 2040 Comp Plan Exhibit 10-4
• City of Yakima
o The existing city dataset contains three classifications (Figure 2). Updated classifications
according to WDFW will be included in the Comp Plan.
Bald Eagle, Riparian Zones, Shrub-Steppe, Waterfowl Concentrations, and Wood
Duck
o Questions:
None
Figure 15 – WDFW Priority Habitat Species
74 of 83
Building Permits Issued - Previous Month
Permit
Number
Date
Issued
Primary Parcel
Number Site Address Permit Type Project Description Applicant Total
Valuations
B251061 01/02/2026 18132543418 906 W VIOLA AVE BLD-RES-ADD covered attached patio on existing concrete slab ALFREDO & PETRA VEGA $7,704.00
B251251 01/02/2026 18132924427 912 S 75TH AVE BLD-RES-SOLAR 10.660kw PV roof mount- solar Freedom Forever WA LLC -
Leann Malloy $22,000.00
B251261 01/02/2026 19133013442 1216 S 6TH ST #B BLD-RES-DEMO
Demolish the little house behind the main house on the
same property to make room for a new restaurant in the
future
AR 509 CONSTRUCTION LLC $3,000.00
B251269 01/02/2026 18132224429 4302 AVALANCHE AVE BLD-RES-SOLAR 11.070 kw pv solar roof mount, solar and service Freedom Forever WA LLC -
Leann Malloy $25,000.00
B251283 01/02/2026 19131843537 202 N 8TH ST BLD-RES-SOLAR 6.560kw PV roof mount -solar and service Freedom Forever WA LLC -
Leann Malloy $17,000.00
B251147 01/05/2026 18131432003 3005 CASTLEVALE RD,
# 9B
BLD-MFH-IN A
COURT
placement of a new manufactured home, 2026
MARLETE/CLAYTON HOMES, MODEL TEMPO, 24X56 CASTLEVALE COURT LLC $100,000.00
B251148 01/05/2026 18131432003 3005 CASTLEVALE RD,
#10
BLD-MFH-IN A
COURT
placement of a new manufactured home, 2026
MARLETE/CLAYTON HOMES, MODEL TEMPO, 24X56 CASTLEVALE COURT LLC $100,000.00
B241076 01/07/2026 19131942480 414 S 6TH ST BLD-RES-ADU Convert garage into ADU M & B CONSTRUCTION -
MARCELINO BADILLO $99,402.00
B251289 01/07/2026 18132421539 1204 CHERRY AVE BLD-RES-MISC-ALT
interior remodel, relocate kitchen, create two bedrooms,
remove storage area to create a hallway, bathroom
cosmetic remodel and install exhaust fans.
MUIRA MORALES, SAUL
FERNANDO $8,000.00
B260002 01/07/2026 18132013402 206 N 70TH AVE BLD-RES-SOLAR 12.04 PV SOLAR ROOF MOUNT Freedom Forever WA LLC -
Leann Malloy $24,500.00
B260012 01/07/2026 18131332448 918 N 15TH AVE BLD-RES-ROOF Complete tear off and re-roof SUPERIOR ROOFING LLC $9,000.00
B251170 01/08/2026 18132012435 415 SNOW MASS LN BLD-RES-GARAGE Building a residential detached shop 40x30 10' ft tall, no
plumbing Dobens & Scott Const LLC $77,820.00
B260016 01/09/2026 19131832491 605 N 3RD ST BLD-RES-ROOF-P Repair and upgrade roofing as needed.MARK ROVETTO $3,298.00
B250351 01/12/2026 18133531001 2300 W WASHINGTON
AVE BLD-COM-REN
REMODEL OF NORTHEASTERLY PORTION OF AIR
TERMINAL: RECONFIGURE BAGGAGE HANDLING
AREA, MINOR EXTERIOR WALL ALTERATIONS TO
ACCOMMODATE NEW
BAGGAGE HANDLING EQUIPMENT. DEMOLISH (3) THREE
INTERIOR OFFICES AND JANITOR AREA. REMODEL
EXISTING MEN'S AND WOMEN'S RESTROOMS. CREATING
A SINGLE-USER, FAMILY RESTROOM. CREATING A FAMILY
LOBBY.
ADDING A DOUBLE DOOR EXIT TO THE EAST WALL AS AN
ALTERNATE METHOD TO MITIGATE THE OCCUPANT LOAD
FOR THIS AREA.
MWA ARCHITECTS-VON
BARGEN ROOT, JEAN $2,289,518.00
B260021 01/12/2026 18132314520 1612 MONROE AVE BLD-RES-ROOF-P roof replacement A W ROOFING OF YAKIMA LLC $8,900.00
B251246 01/13/2026 18132631488 2412 W NOB HILL
BLVD #102 BLD-COM-TI
Change of use tenant build out of a 1,650 sq ft ground
floor suite in an existing tenant build. Formerly an AT&T
store intended use is for an outpatient physical therapy.
See attached document
Blanco Construction LLC $170,000.00
75 of 83
Building Permits Issued - Previous Month
Permit
Number
Date
Issued
Primary Parcel
Number Site Address Permit Type Project Description Applicant Total
Valuations
B260017 01/13/2026 18132431519 11 N 11TH AVE # 101 BLD-COM-TI
tennant improvement, from a dental lab to a professional
office, removing dental sinks, creating office space, and
adding one interior door, making existing exterior 24"door
larger to 36", and sheet rock repairs where the plumbing
and electrical work was previously done and ceiling was re-
done
CRITCHLOW, TYLER $1,500.00
B260025 01/13/2026 18132912005 620 S 70TH AVE BLD-RES-MISC-ALT
Replace 7 2x6 rafters like for like. New sheeting and roofing
replace bottom cords and sheetrock on the ceiling. Add
interconnected smoke detectors and co2 all same for same
due to tree fall/wind damage
AJR LIONS CONSTRUCTION
LLC- Juan Manuel Nava Gallo $22,000.00
B251156 01/13/2026 18131924470 9102 HAWTHORNE DR BLD-MSTR-SFR New single-family residence COLUMBIA RIDGE HOMES LLC
- HELLEM, JUSTIN $389,103.96
B251009 01/13/2026 18131434494 707 N 28TH AVE #1-2 BLD-RES-DUP New 2176 duplex VICTOR J & PATRICIA
PADILLA $364,710.72
B251264 01/15/2026 18133421905 4000 CREEKSIDE
LOOP BLD-COM-REN existing half walls to be framed to full height on the second
floor of the building JACOB LIDDICOAT $100,000.00
B251279 01/15/2026 18132043445 203 S 68TH AVE BLD-RES-MISC-ALT
INTERIOR REMODEL, CURRENT LAUNDRY ROOM WILL BE
A LARGER BATHROOM, AND THE LAUNDRY ROOM IS
BEING RELOCATED TO THE BASEMENT, NEW FULL
BATHROOM IN BASEMENT AS WELL.
GALBREATH, JACOB $600.00
B260008 01/15/2026 18132324024 2701 SUMMITVIEW
AVE BLD-RES-MISC-ALT Install trusses on a garage (existing structure) that was
damaged by a tree falling on the roof.
Baxter Construction - Crause,
Ryan $15,000.00
B260019 01/15/2026 18131643453 5413 ENGLEWOOD
AVE BLD-RES-SOLAR 7.2 KW ROOF MOUNTED SOLAR ARRAY ELLENSBURG SOLAR LLC -
REGAN MORRIS $12,425.00
B260028 01/15/2026 18132631470 1215 S 26TH AVE BLD-RES-ROOF-P REMOVE AND REPLACE ROOFING COLUMBIA PLATEAU
ROOFING $38,954.00
B260030 01/15/2026 18132321034 2604 POWERHOUSE
RD BLD-RES-ROOF-P Replacing whole house roof with 11SQ of CertainTeed
Landmark; excluding detached garage/shed.Adamson, Missy $16,740.00
B260035 01/16/2026 18132641457 1208 S 18TH AVE BLD-RES-ROOF replacement of sheathing and shingles on residential home AJR LIONS CONSTRUCTION
LLC- Juan Manuel Nava Gallo $11,000.00
B260038 01/16/2026 19132943413 1903 SIMPSON LN BLD-RES-ROOF-P Re roof and fix plywood madrigal, gustavo $4,000.00
B260039 01/19/2026 19131832401 804 N 3RD ST BLD-RES-ROOF-P leticia roof Kendra Zazueta $16,516.67
B251267 01/20/2026 18132431416 111 S 11TH AVE STE
205 & 210 BLD-COM-TI
This project will be a demolition of a suite in an existing
building in anticipation of a future tenant improvement
project (office to office)
STEPHENS BEN $100,000.00
B260033 01/20/2026 19133023421 811 S 3RD AVE BLD-RES-DEMO Demo of shop only at this location GABBARD, RAY $2,000.00
B251006 01/20/2026 19131834400 509 N 4TH ST BLD-COM-TI
Hope Market and Salvation Army food bank new location.
Hope Market will provide food and daily necessities to all
people.
BORA ARCHITECTURE PLLC -
SHEEBA JOHN $150,000.00
B260027 01/21/2026 18132641047 1902 W NOB HILL
BLVD BLD-COM-REN Doing a residing on the front of the building (Sport store) JJ Rojas Carpentry $5,800.00
B260006 01/22/2026 18132521409 605 QUEEN AVE BLD-RES-MISC-ALT Fire damage repair. Replace drywall, insulation, interior
finishes, doors. Repair damaged wall framing.ALFA CONSTRUCTION CORP $78,400.00
B251079 01/22/2026 18133413002 3202 W WASHINGTON
AVE BLD-COM-NEW Proposal to build one aircraft hangar building in the AS
zoning district.
MCCORMICK AIRCRAFT
HANGARS LLC $1,071,924.00
B251270 01/22/2026 18131924480 307 N 91ST AVE BLD-MSTR-SFR COLUMBIA RIDGE HOMES LLC $492,124.25
B250242 01/23/2026 19132032479 508 S 12TH ST #2 BLD-RES-ADU Converting the detached garage into an ADU RODOLFO RODRIGUEZ PEREZ $15,346.12
76 of 83
Building Permits Issued - Previous Month
Permit
Number
Date
Issued
Primary Parcel
Number Site Address Permit Type Project Description Applicant Total
Valuations
B251262 01/23/2026 18120423470 5704 W LARCH AVE BLD-RES-SFR NEW 1692 SQ FT HAYDEN HOMES LLC -
GALINDO, JAVIER $314,893.89
B260050 01/23/2026 18132223402 4405 SUMMITVIEW
AVE BLD-RES-ROOF Complete tear off and re-roof for the garage RICHARD E JR FOREST $4,000.00
B260054 01/25/2026 18132641468 1802 W PRASCH AVE BLD-RES-ROOF-P Complete re-roof (like for like)Hohmann, Tobias $10,000.00
B251107 01/26/2026 19131923461
114 E STAFF SGT
PENDLETON WAY
MOH
BLD-COM-TI cosmetic interior renovation, tenant improvement, going
from bakery to restaurant.FOSTER, RON E $56,000.00
B251285 01/27/2026 18132442504 510 W CHESTNUT
AVE BLD-COM-REN
REMODEL EXISTING RESTROOM INTO ADA UNISEX
COMPLIANT. ADD AN ADJACENT ADDITIONAL UNISEX
NON-ADA RESTROOM, APPLY AN ADDITIONAL LAYER OF
5/8'" DRYWALL TO APPROX 1200 SQ FT OF CEILING, apply
r22 inslutaion and 5/8" drywall to west wall (550swq ft)
LARRY DAY CONSTRUCTION $17,500.00
B260010 01/27/2026 18132511500 716 S 4TH AVE BLD-RES-SOLAR 8.20 kw PV roof Mount- Solar Freedom Forever WA LLC -
Leann Malloy $16,500.00
B260011 01/27/2026 18132741479 3202 CAROL AVE BLD-RES-SOLAR
10.660kw PV Roof mount - Solar
Revision: slight change on modules and layout of roof
mount panels. 2/6/2026
Freedom Forever WA LLC -
Leann Malloy $21,000.00
B260013 01/27/2026 18131934444 209 S 89TH AVE BLD-RES-SOLAR 6.15 km PV Roof Mount- Solar Freedom Forever WA LLC -
Leann Malloy $12,500.00
B260023 01/27/2026 18132434404 309 S 10TH AVE BLD-RES-SOLAR 8.20 kw pv SOLAR ROOF MOUNT Freedom Forever WA LLC -
Leann Malloy $16,500.00
B260024 01/27/2026 18132732465 4701 W PRASCH AVE BLD-RES-ADD re-build existing deck and add to it for a total of 480 sq ft Dobens & Scott Const LLC $15,408.00
B260046 01/27/2026 18133511438 1515 S 18TH AVE BLD-RES-SOLAR Install roof mount 8.36kw DC solar system
ARIZONA SOLAR SOLUTIONS
DBA SUNTRIA - ANTENETTE
SPENCER
$30,461.56
B260051 01/27/2026 18132121406 416 N 56TH AVE BLD-RES-SOLAR 9.840 kw pv solar roof mount Freedom Forever WA LLC -
Leann Malloy $20,000.00
B260053 01/27/2026 18132533495 1317 S 14TH AVE BLD-RES-SOLAR
install roof mount 11kw dc solar system, line side tap, temp
powerkill required
Revisions made 2/11/2026, Plans match install array layout,
Equipment elevation has been updated.
ARIZONA SOLAR SOLUTIONS
DBA SUNTRIA - ANTENETTE
SPENCER
$50,259.46
B250584 01/28/2026 18132441443 108 S 3RD AVE BLD-COM-TI change of use, from a garage to a second daycare facility
with a restroom
LP ARCHITECTURE - KYLE
LEPPER $5,000.00
B251224 01/28/2026 18131734459 7407 PLATEAU PLACE BLD-RES-GARAGE 1024 sq ft non-heated, unfinished RV storage garage, no
plumbing HIMSL DOUGLAS $66,406.40
B260060 01/28/2026 18132323024 3001 SUMMITVIEW
AVE BLD-RES-ROOF-P Reroof of the home Nava, Juan $8,900.00
B260058 01/28/2026 18131931425 8806 W BARGE ST BLD-RES-ROOF-P Reroof whole house with 2500 Squares of CertainTeed
Patriot XL Adamson, Missy $32,000.00
B251168 01/29/2026 18132444427 515 S 5th Ave BLD-COM-REN
INSTALLATION OF ROLL FORM STEEL PALLET RACKING
UNDER PARTIALLY COVERED AREA.
Multiple pallets of: Stakes, Tie wire, Expansion, Plastic
rolls, J bolts, Plywood, MDO plywood, SST bolts, and
miscellaneous
NORTHWEST HANDLING
SYSTEMS - MARTIN CARSTEN $22,000.00
77 of 83
Building Permits Issued - Previous Month
Permit
Number
Date
Issued
Primary Parcel
Number Site Address Permit Type Project Description Applicant Total
Valuations
B260015 01/29/2026 18132443517 402 S 9th Ave BLD-RES-ADU
NEW 1000 SQ FT TWO-LEVEL ACCESSORY DWELLING
UNIT ATTACHED TO AN 801 SQ FT SHOP GARAGE, WITH
A 364 SQ FT STORAGE AREA ABOVE THE GARAGE, (319
SQ FT ADU ON THE FIRST FLOOR AND 681 SQ FT ADU ON
THE SECOND FLOOR); STORAGE AREA IS PART OF THE
GARAGE, NOT THE LIVING SPACE.
RAKEL RIVERA & EFREN
ZAMORA $242,920.25
B260037 01/29/2026 18132134014 5601 TIETON DR BLD-COM-DEMO
remove brick building in preparation for building a new
commercial building. new building design has not been
determined yet. sewer services will be re used
TIETON PLAZA LLC- DJ HENN $20,000.00
B260059 01/29/2026 18132734437 1402 S 42ND AVE BLD-RES-SOLAR INSTALL ROOF MOUNT 14.96KW DC SOLAR SYSTEM, LINE
SIDE TAP, TEMPORARY POWERKILL REQUIRED
ARIZONA SOLAR SOLUTIONS
DBA SUNTRIA - ANTENETTE
SPENCER
$52,270.45
B251263 01/30/2026 18120423450 5701 WOOLSEY RD BLD-RES-SFR New construction build 1408 sqft SFR HAYDEN HOMES LLC -
GALINDO, JAVIER $280,999.31
B251291 01/30/2026 18120413441 4809 W LARCH AVE BLD-RES-SFR New Construction build 2046 sq ft HAYDEN HOMES LLC -
STOKES, KRIS $397,002.42
B251293 01/30/2026 18120413439 4805 W LARCH AVE BLD-RES-SFR New construction buils SFR 1574 sq ft HAYDEN HOMES LLC $301,185.53
B251294 01/30/2026 18120413440 4807 W LARCH AVE BLD-RES-SFR New construction build SFR 1574 sq ft HAYDEN HOMES LLC -
STOKES, KRIS $314,072.63
B260055 01/30/2026 18132234487 4002 W CHESTNUT
AVE BLD-RES-SOLAR installing 14 solar panels roof mounted and one solar
battery
Campbell Cool Electric
Plumbing Corporation -
Reynaga, Bella
$41,637.40
63 Total
Permits
78 of 83
Building Permits Issued - Previous Month
Permit
Number
Date
Issued
Primary Parcel
Number Site Address Permit Type Project Description Applicant Total
Valuations
B251215 02/02/2026 18120413492 4602 W LARCH AVE BLD-MSTR-SFR new sfr 1735 sq ft LUIS VILLALOBOS $339,979.65
B260014 02/02/2026 18132434582 1111 W SPRUCE ST
#30 BLD-COM-REN
Removing interior walls, non-bearing and bearing, also
constructing (3) new walls. Installing a beam where the
bearing walls will be removed.
Blair, Lance $10,000.00
B260029 02/02/2026 18132033503 207 S 78TH AVE BLD-RES-ADD ADD A SECOND LEVEL TO HOME, ONE BEDROOM WITH
FAMILY ROOM HUNTER, TRAVIS $60,253.20
B251175 02/03/2026 18133133425 2105 S 96TH AVE BLD-RES-SFR New SFR APPLE TREE CONSTRUCTION
CO - HILL, STAN $614,665.74
B260074 02/03/2026 18132221414 4106 RICHEY RD BLD-RES-SOLAR INSTALL ROOF MOUNT 6.36KW DC SOLAR SYSTEM, LINE
SIDE TAP, TEMPORARY POWERKILL REQUIRED
ARIZONA SOLAR SOLUTIONS
DBA SUNTRIA - ANTENETTE
SPENCER
$21,836.04
B260075 02/03/2026 18132541477 1212 S 6TH AVE BLD-RES-SOLAR INSTALL ROOF MOUNT 11KW DC SOLAR SYSTEM WITH
MAIN PANEL UPGRADE
ARIZONA SOLAR SOLUTIONS
DBA SUNTRIA - ANTENETTE
SPENCER
$45,203.89
B260080 02/03/2026 18131944460 231 JOYCE PL BLD-RES-ROOF shingle roof replacement DAMPIER, ROGER E $8,000.00
B260079 02/03/2026 18133013518 8503 WESTBROOK
AVE BLD-RES-ROOF-P roof replacement A W ROOFING OF YAKIMA LLC $12,300.00
B260064 02/04/2026 18132811425 812 S 50TH AVE BLD-RES-SOLAR INSTALL ROOF MOUNT 9.24 KW DC SOLAR SYSTEM, LINE
SIDE TAP AND TEMPORARY POWERKILL REQUIRED.
ARIZONA SOLAR SOLUTIONS
DBA SUNTRIA - ANTENETTE
SPENCER
$32,403.79
B260076 02/04/2026 19133012441 1006 S 6TH ST BLD-RES-SOLAR INSTALL ROOF MOUNT 7.48KW DC SOLAR SYSTEM W
ARIZONA SOLAR SOLUTIONS
DBA SUNTRIA - ANTENETTE
SPENCER
$28,509.40
B251136 02/05/2026 18131333093 1407 CHERRY AVE BLD-RES-DEMO 18'x20' garage demolition. Garage is falling apart need it
gone for safety purposes PEREZ, JESUS $5,000.00
B260077 02/05/2026 18132543443 904 W LOGAN AVE BLD-RES-SOLAR install roof mount 7.92kw dc solar system with main panel/
meter upgrade
ARIZONA SOLAR SOLUTIONS
DBA SUNTRIA - ANTENETTE
SPENCER
$36,546.20
B260087 02/05/2026 18132731454 1111 S 42ND AVE BLD-RES-SOLAR install roof mount 8.8kw dc solar system, main panel/meter
upgrade
ARIZONA SOLAR SOLUTIONS
DBA SUNTRIA - ANTENETTE
SPENCER
$31,672.54
B260088 02/05/2026 18132621493 709 S 25TH AVE BLD-RES-SOLAR install roof mount 8.36kw DC solar system; sistering a 2 x 6
to all rafters in the area supporting the solar panels
ARIZONA SOLAR SOLUTIONS
DBA SUNTRIA - ANTENETTE
SPENCER
$33,479.89
B260092 02/06/2026 18132414506 202 W YAKIMA AVE BLD-COM-ROOF
Remove and disposal of existing roof system. Removal and
re-installation of excising coping metal. Replace damage
plywood roof sheeting. 6 mil visqueen vapor barrier over
plywood sheathing. 1/4 coverboard mech attached & 60 mil
PTO membrane roof system fully adhered.
LESLIE & CAMPBELL INC -
CHRISTINA GONZALES $370,470.00
B260093 02/06/2026 19133032423 1204 S 1ST AVE BLD-RES-ROOF REPLACE ROOF WITH SHEATING PEDRO F ALONZO $7,200.00
B260094 02/06/2026 18132422442 507 N 16TH AVE BLD-RES-ROOF replacement from 3 tab shingles to metal roofing THOMAS P CARLSON $4,000.00
B260090 02/06/2026 18132844416 4809 W VIOLA AVE BLD-RES-ROOF-P Tear off existing roof and plywood. Install new 7/16" OSB,
insulation board and TPO roof membrane.Brandon Woodcock $36,000.00
B260009 02/09/2026 19132933476 1125 Simpson Ln, #1-
2 BLD-RES-DUP NEW DUPLEX SILVANO ROMAN MONTES DE
OCHOA $322,891.20
B260031 02/09/2026 18132033470 349 S 76TH AVE BLD-RES-ADD 11'X18' PATIO COVER HILLS, JEFF $6,355.80
79 of 83
Building Permits Issued - Previous Month
Permit
Number
Date
Issued
Primary Parcel
Number Site Address Permit Type Project Description Applicant Total
Valuations
B260101 02/09/2026 18132321034 2604 POWERHOUSE
RD BLD-RES-SIDING-P Tear off and install with Ascend 14Squares Adamson, Missy $33,738.18
B260096 02/09/2026 18132811404 4806 BRISTOL WY BLD-RES-ROOF-P Reroof for 4806 Bristol WY, Yakima, WA.salas, sergy $8,000.00
B251132 02/09/2026 18133333494 5912 CRESTFIELDS
RD BLD-RES-SFR New single-family residence Value Added LLC - Bader,
Bruce $267,155.14
B251133 02/09/2026 18133333495 5914 CRESTFIELDS
RD BLD-RES-SFR New single-family residence Value Added LLC - Bader,
Bruce $267,155.14
B251125 02/09/2026 18133214664 6501 W WASHINGTON
AVE BLD-CELL-TWR
ATC TO INSTALL A 20'-0" EXTENSION AND
MODIFICATIONS TO THE MONOPOLE FOR T MOBILE
PROPOSED LOCATION
VINH DINH - TEP FOR T-
MOBILE $40,000.00
B260007 02/10/2026 18132741414 3510 W NOB HILL
BLVD BLD-COM-DEMO Removal of 95' ft awning on the front of the building RALPH & SONS $1,500.00
B260104 02/10/2026 19133032003 1208 ROCK AVE BLD-RES-ROOF Doing a tear off and re-roof on unit# 1 only on a duplex VELAZQUEZ-ORTIZ
AMBROSIO $10,000.00
B260102 02/10/2026 18132042476 6802 W YAKIMA AVE BLD-RES-ROOF-P Residential Tear-Off and Re-Roof Kearby, Don $23,630.00
B251254 02/10/2026 18133014498 8200 ANNALISA LN BLD-RES-SFR New single-family residence.GIBBS, TIM $431,255.08
B250729 02/11/2026 19131913466 210 S 7TH ST BLD-RES-ADD
Constructing exterior stairs, second floor deck, and
attached cover. Correcting the expiration of the original
permit for the stairs and deck. Removing some of the
concrete on the property to bring the property into
compliance with lot coverage requirements.
FLORES FRANCO
HERMENGILDO $2,953.20
B260095 02/11/2026 18132623460 921 S 28TH AVE BLD-RES-SOLAR install solar roof mount system, 4.4kw pv ARIZONA SOLAR SOLUTIONS
- Emily Stipp $15,756.08
B260106 02/11/2026 18133212524 1534 S 67TH AVE BLD-RES-ROOF Complete tear off and re-roof SUPERIOR ROOFING LLC $16,000.00
B251166 02/12/2026 18131434025 2404 JEROME AVE BLD-RES-SFR-FND PUTTING NEW FOUNDATION, NON-PREVIOUS VALENCIA, HERIBERTO $5,000.00
B251167 02/12/2026 18131434025 2404 JEROME AVE BLD-RES-MISC-ALT
REMODEL INTERIOR OF HOME: remodeling kitchen, new
applicances, new kitchen island. Enlarging and enclosing
laundry room area. remodeling and expanding bathroom,
changing the door going into the bathroom, from bedroom
to living room. enlarging the closets inside both bedrooms.
VALENCIA, HERIBERTO $5,000.00
B260072 02/12/2026 18132642049 1105 S 24TH AVE BLD-COM-DEMO
Remove and dispose of the fire damaged materials as
required. Area will be cleared and made ready for
restoration work.
Willy's Construction LLC $7,000.00
B260107 02/12/2026 18132633459 1403 S 32ND AVE BLD-RES-ROOF replace roof shingles STOUT CHRIS $7,200.00
B251131 02/12/2026 18133214664 6501 W WASHINGTON
AVE BLD-CELL-TWR
t-mobile proposes a collocation at an existing wireless
facility and tower per plans. new antenna array consisting
of antennas, radios, and associated cables. At ground level,
new 10'x20' equipment leased area in existing storage area
with two equipment cabinets and electrical connections.
VINH DINH - TEP FOR T-
MOBILE $40,000.00
B260061 02/13/2026 19131923471 6 S 2ND ST BLD-COM-REN
REPAIRS SAME FOR SAME, DUE TO WATER DAMAGE, 40 0'
INSULLATION, AND 200 O'
DRYWALL INSTALL
#1002, 10TH FLOOR
CLEAN IMAGE SERVICES -
ANTHONY LENBERG $5,000.00
B260063 02/13/2026 18133523401 3003 W WASHINGTON
AVE BLD-COM-DEMO remove billboard and structure LAMAR ADVERTISING CO OF
SPOKANE $1,000.00
80 of 83
Building Permits Issued - Previous Month
Permit
Number
Date
Issued
Primary Parcel
Number Site Address Permit Type Project Description Applicant Total
Valuations
B260108 02/13/2026 19133014492 1311 S 8TH ST BLD-RES-ROOF Tearing off old roof and doing a re-roof on a SFR
SAGRADO ROOFING LLC -
FRANCISCO SANTIAGO
GUZMAN
$12,443.00
B260109 02/13/2026 19133033494 1303 LANDON AVE BLD-RES-ROOF Residential re-roof
SAGRADO ROOFING LLC -
FRANCISCO SANTIAGO
GUZMAN
$9,446.00
B260111 02/13/2026 19131913507 107 S 7TH ST BLD-RES-MISC-ALT Re-siding the single-family residence.VICTOR CRUZ CUENCA $5,000.00
B260071 02/17/2026 18132942428 1103 S 72ND AVE STE
200 BLD-COM-TI tenant improvement for new restaurant. To go only. wall
framing, and new commercial kitchen.
HOME UNITED
CONSTRUCTION LLC $87,000.00
B260099 02/17/2026 18132312468 2104 ENGLEWOOD
AVE BLD-RES-MISC-ALT
Repairs due to Fire damage on single family, replace
trusses, siding, insulation (R13 for walls, blown in for attic),
Sheetrock (5/8" for ceiling and 1/2" for walls), replacing
windows, same for same
mechanical and plumbing will be applied for by
subcontractors within a week.
Baxter Construction LLC -
Lambert, Rodney $59,755.00
B260069 02/17/2026 18131924472 402 N 91ST AVE BLD-MSTR-SFR New single-family residence.COLUMBIA RIDGE HOMES LLC
- HELLEM, JUSTIN $492,124.25
B260070 02/17/2026 18131924470 9102 HAWTHORNE DR BLD-RES-ADD Constructing a 206 sq. ft. covered patio in the rear.COLUMBIA RIDGE HOMES LLC
- HELLEM, JUSTIN $6,612.60
B260068 02/17/2026 18131924473 404 N 91ST AVE BLD-MSTR-SFR New single-family residence.COLUMBIA RIDGE HOMES LLC
- HELLEM, JUSTIN $470,473.00
B260065 02/18/2026 18132543495 1306 S 7TH AVE BLD-RES-SOLAR 6.150 KW PV ROOF MOUNT- SOLAR Freedom Forever WA LLC -
Leann Malloy $12,000.00
B260086 02/18/2026 18133132404 2011 GALA AVE BLD-RES-SFR New SFR 1859 SQ FT, 1 STORY, 3 BEDROOM, 2
BATHROOM
APPLE TREE CONSTRUCTION
CO - HILL, STAN $356,851.48
B260089 02/18/2026 18132542480 1215 S 8TH AVE BLD-RES-SOLAR 9.840kw pv roof mount solar Freedom Forever WA LLC -
Leann Malloy $20,000.00
B260020 02/18/2026 18132642053 2204 W NOB HILL
BLVD BLD-COM-NEW
Install new theft deterrent rails with automated
entrance/exit gates (Electrical work to be permitted
separately by another contractor)
Williams, Kathy $45,000.00
B260034 02/18/2026 18131434496 705 N 28TH AVE #1-2 BLD-MSTR-DUP New 2176 duplex VICTOR J & PATRICIA
PADILLA $364,710.72
B260078 02/19/2026 18133524402 2500 RACQUET LANE BLD-COM-REN
remodel for an existing clean supply room, for the
Ridgeview Ambulatory Surgery Center to bring it into
compliance with DOH standards, and to bring the room
under the hospital license.
KDA Architecture - Dodge, Erik $108,096.37
B260091 02/19/2026 18132713475 1015 S 40TH AVE BLD-COM-REN Remove (1) non-bearing wall and constructing new interior
walls to create patient rooms Hammered LLC $16,000.00
B251217 02/19/2026 18132143412 5301 TIETON DR BLD-COM-NEW
Installation of new playground 58'x93' with a 40X35 fabric
shade over playground
the playground is going where the old playground was
NORTHWEST PLAYGROUND
EQUIP - CHRIS BRUMMETT $210,000.00
B260120 02/19/2026 18132223441 4705 AVALANCHE AVE BLD-RES-ROOF-P roof replacement A W ROOFING OF YAKIMA LLC $12,400.00
B260001 02/20/2026 18120423423 5604 WOOLSEY RD BLD-RES-SFR New single-family residence.HAYDEN HOMES LLC -
GALINDO, JAVIER $401,014.92
B260057 02/20/2026 18132712010 3808 TIETON DR BLD-COM-REN installing interior 2x4 sheetrock wall 15ft wide 7.5 high in
addition to installing door on same wall MAXWELL JOHN $400.00
81 of 83
Building Permits Issued - Previous Month
Permit
Number
Date
Issued
Primary Parcel
Number Site Address Permit Type Project Description Applicant Total
Valuations
B260066 02/20/2026 18120423422 5605 WOOLSEY RD BLD-RES-SFR NEW SFR 2046 SQ FT HAYDEN HOMES LLC -
GALINDO, JAVIER $388,701.62
B260121 02/20/2026 19131911468 904 PITCHER ST BLD-RES-ROOF-P repairing leak that morphed into a reroof Juan Pinon $6,275.00
B260113 02/23/2026 18132031009 100 N 72ND AVE BLD-COM-ROOF replacement roof, over existing layer, shingles, no tear off,
30-year TIM LACY $30,000.00
B260124 02/23/2026 18132543463 1318 S CORNELL AVE BLD-RES-ROOF Doing complete tear off and re-roof on a SFR SAGRADO ROOFING LLC $10,500.00
B260081 02/24/2026 18132531425 1212 QUEEN AVE BLD-RES-MISC-ALT
add interior walls and egress windows to create 2
additional bedrooms in basement, no plumbing, no
mechanical
DOCKINS, BRADLEY W $16,000.00
B260130 02/24/2026 18132124412 310 N 57TH AVE BLD-RES-ROOF-P we are doing a reroof including tear-off of old shingles and
installing with new asphalt shingles D-1 Roofing LLC $11,000.00
B260114 02/25/2026 181332-32428 7700 W WHATCOM
AVE BLD-RES-SOLAR 8.8 kW roof mounted solar array ELLENSBURG SOLAR LLC -
REGAN MORRIS $10,692.00
B260129 02/25/2026 19132242456 613 FERNCREST DR BLD-RES-ROOF-P tear off and reroof asphalt shingles CASTILLON ROOFING $22,000.00
B231422 02/26/2026 19132032473 520 S 12TH ST BLD-RES-ADD
Remove front enclosed porch and the carport that was
converted to a garage without permits; remove and replace
second floor; replace roof with new trusses; repair/correct
first floor framing that was modified without permits;
correcting framing and finish on alterations made to
residence without permit, including sunroom added to rear.
ANTONIA & EVAN OCHOA $35,873.28
B260022 02/26/2026 19132913448 1205 S 18TH ST BLD-CELL-TWR
TOWER WORK: REMOVE 12 RRU'S. AND 6 (1-5/8") COAXX
CABLES. INSTALL 3 ANTENNAS, 3 RRUS, 2 OVPS, AND 3
6X12 (1.25"/31.8MM) HYBRIFLEX CABLES. EXISTING 12
ANTENANAS TO REMAIN. GROUNDWORK TO INSTALL 2 -
12 OVPS
CRAFTON COMMUNICATIONS
- COURTNEY DAVIS $25,000.00
B260122 02/26/2026 18132714068 1015 S 33RD AVE BLD-RES-MISC-ALT
Remove (1) interior non-bearing wall between (2)
bedrooms to combine them. Constructing (3) new interior
walls to create a new bathroom and closet out of the old
bedroom space.
Mercy, Christopher $435.65
B260128 02/26/2026 19133014483 1206 S FAIR AVE BLD-RES-MISC-ALT
UPDATING INTERIOR OF WHOLE HOME, FINISHES AND
FIXTURES. SAME LOCATIONS FOR ALL WALLS AND
FIXTURES. THE 2 X 4 WALLS WILL BE INSULATED WITH
R-15 AND 1/2" SHEETROCK, THE CEILING WILL HAVE 5/8"
SHEETROCK, BLOWN IN INSULATION FOR ATTIC, R-60.
PLUMBING AND MECHANICAL. ALL FIXTURES BEING
REPLACED SAME FOR SAME. APPROVED WITHOUT PLANS
PROVIDED NOTHING IS RELOCATED AND NO STRUCTURE
IS ALTERED.
Mejia Property Investments
LLC - Mejia, Pablo $7,800.00
B260137 02/26/2026 18132323401 2802 W LINCOLN AVE BLD-RES-ROOF Doing a complete tear off and re-roof on SFR BALCON ROOFING LLC -
JESUS MENDEZ $10,000.00
B251152 02/27/2026 19132931475 1419 S 14TH ST BLD-RES-GARAGE NEW GARAGE SHOP 1200 SQ FT PLUS AN ATTACHED
COVERED CARPORT 400 SQ FT (No plumbing or heating)M A T CONST & RMDLNG LLC $90,660.00
B260052 02/27/2026 18132034489 120 S 72ND AVE #104 BLD-COM-TI Constructing interior walls for the new nail salon Tony's Home Improvement $77,000.00
B260125 02/27/2026 18132312418 523 N 24TH AVE BLD-RES-MISC-ALT
Replace and install new trusses, sheeting roofing along with
drywall replacement (1/2 house and ceiling). Replace 6
windows (same for same) due to fire damage
CLEAN IMAGE SERVICES -
ANTHONY LENBERG $60,000.00
82 of 83
Building Permits Issued - Previous Month
Permit
Number
Date
Issued
Primary Parcel
Number Site Address Permit Type Project Description Applicant Total
Valuations
B260126 02/27/2026 18133333466 2206 S 61ST AVE BLD-RES-SOLAR ROOFTOP SOLAR INSTALLATION WITH BATTERY BACKUP REVOLUSUN MOUNTAIN
STATES - Ziegler, Jeremy $48,708.29
75 Total
Permits
83 of 83