Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011-010 West Valley Neighborhood Plan; Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan; YMC Amendment; Zoning Map ChangeAN ORDINANCE ORDINANCE NO. 2011-10 to amend the Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan to adopt the West Valley Neighborhood Plan using the procedures described in YMC 16.10.035; and', amending the official zoning map for the City of Yakima as established by YMC 15.03.030 WHEREAS, the Growth Management Act (GMA) requires cities and counties to adopt comprehensive plans for land use under their jurisdiction; and WHEREAS, in April 1997 the City of Yakima (City) and Yakima County (County) adopted the Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan (YUACP) as the comprehensive plan for the Yakima UGA; and WHEREAS, the YUACP, upon adoption, did not include detailed land use and related planning for the western portion of the UGA then known as the West Valley Urban Reserve and now known as the West Valley Planning Area; and WHEREAS, the YUACP stated that land use planning within the West Valley Planning Area would be conducted in the future, as a coordinated effort by Yakima County, the Cities of Yakima and Union Gap, and area residents; and WHEREAS, Policy G10.9 of the YUACP tasked Yakima County with establishing "a mechanism for designating zoning categories within the urban reserve area, to allow for an appropriate transition to urban area zoning"; and WHEREAS, the YUACP was updated in 2006 and anticipated the adoption of the West Valley Neighborhood Plan; and WHEREAS, concurrent adoption of an area -wide rezone should occur with the adoption of the WVNP because the GMA requires development regulations to be consistent with and to implement comprehensive plans; now therefore, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY OF YAKIMA: Section 1. Findings. The Yakima City Council hereby finds as follows: 1. The Board of County Commissioners and Yakima City Council conducted two joint study sessions on September 28, 2010 and October 12, 2010 to review the findings and recommendation of the Yakima Urban Area Regional Planning Commission (RPC), which provides the Reasons for Action, Findings of Fact, Factors Considered at and After the Hearing, Analysis of Findings Considered to be Controlling, and Recommendation; 2. The Board of County Commissioners and Yakima City Council held a joint public hearing on October 26, 2010 to receive public comments on the RPC's recommended West Valley Neighborhood Plan and Area -Wide Rezone, and a staff -recommended proposal for Urban Area Street Standards; 3. The Board of County Commissioners and Yakima City Council conducted joint deliberations on November 22, 2010 and December 13, 2010 concerning the RPC's recommended West Valley Neighborhood Plan and Area -Wide Rezone, and a staff -recommended proposal for Urban Area Street Standards; 4. Following said joint deliberations the Board of County Commissioners and Yakima City Council directed the preparation of an ordinance to adopt the West Valley Neighborhood Plan, February 2011 Draft and Area -Wide Rezone. 5. The City of Yakima Municipal Code (YMC 16.10) contains provisions for amending the Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan. All notice and procedural requirements have been complied with for the adoption of the West Valley Neighborhood Plan. Section 2. Adopting the West Valley Neighborhood Plan. The Yakima Municipal Code Section 1.42.070 is hereby amended as follows: 1.42.070 Yakima urban area comprehensive plan—Adoption and amendment procedures. A. Plan Adoption. The Yakima urban area comprehensive plan ("the plan") shall consist of Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan 2025, adopted by Ordinance No. 2006-62 on December 15, 2006, the Terrace Heights Neighborhood Plan adopted on June 4, 1999 and the West Valley Neighborhood Plan, as adopted. The plan and its elements and plans including those incorporated by reference are hereby adopted as the official comprehensive land use plan for the city of Yakima, as required by Chapter 36.70A RCW. Section 3. Adopting the West Valley Area -Wide Rezone. The Official Zoning Map for the City of Yakima adopted pursuant to City of Yakima Municipal Code Section 15.03.030, is hereby amended in accordance with the "Proposed Zoning" map, attached hereto as Exhibit A; provided that no amendment is hereby made to the Floodplain Overlay District. Section 4. Severability. If any rezone, section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance or the West Valley Neighborhood Plan should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by any body or court with authority and jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other rezone, section, clause or phrase of this ordinance or the adopted West Valley Neighborhood Plan. Section 5. Effective Date This ordinance shall be in full force and effect 30 days after its passage, approval, and publication as provided by law and by the City Charter. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL, at a regular meeting and signed and approved this 15th day of February, 2011. ATTEST: `712,41 - City Clerk Publication Date: Februa 18 2011 Effective Date: March 20, 2011 Exhibits to be attached: A – "Proposed Zoning" map ("Adopted February 2011" ) Micah Cawl , Mayor • BUSINESS OF THE CITY COUNCIL YAKIMA, WASHINGTON AGENDA STATEMENT Item No. /(2 For Meeting of February 15, 2011 ITEM TITLE: Consideration of an ordinance to amend the Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan to adopt the West Valley Neighborhood Plan using the procedures described in YMC 16.10.035; and amending the official zoning map for the City of Yakima established by YMC 15.03.030 SUBMITTED BY: Joan Davenport, Acting Director of Community and Economic Development CONTACT PERSON/TELEPHONE: Joan Davenport (576-6417) SUMMARY EXPLANATION: The Board of County Commissioners and Yakima City Council held a joint public hearing on October 26, 2010 to receive public comments on the RPC's recommended West Valley Neighborhood. Plan and Area -Wide Rezone. Following the hearing the Board of County Commissioners and Yakima City Council conducted joint deliberations on November 22, 2010 .and December 13, 2010 to review testimony and make final recommendations. As a result of these measures, the Yakima City Council directed the preparation of an ordinance to adopt the West Valley Neighborhood Plan and Area -Wide Rezone. Resolution Ordinance X Other (Specify) WVNP Zoning Map Mail to (name and address): Phone: Funding Source APPROVED FOR SUBMITTAL: Acting City Manager STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Ordinance BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: The City Council held a joint public hearing with the County Commissions and directed legislation to be prepared to adopt the West Valley Neighborhood Plan and the area -wide rezone. COUNCIL ACTION: Orchard A z ill tiec 1111 -■SIA.,....� id MI . a 1 ■ om Illltr.'E Occidental Rtl erili_.m. Pal ���II $ �� tip im��rr 7�� %/I �.d 1 '♦ 41W�v-r111/wle: �ti,` �'S� �� : / lil,"; t �.1 �T. Ir 1r IIMIMI 11 ---/ •� .u'iitia•�r�l'�q/ ■11p :��r �A �1. %' IIn e.--rt-E=ril lb?" id, -.04011111101 10 7 -or tJ��� -�� ►/'''�' P. X111=-�i� �_ �M�■� SIJ L1 .�� �' %%i/ r- ����.Nolgi // %%Iti4i !lIr* 1,10/P ..��T IUIIIS- ■..q r fire: i_-. — Union Gap UGA 04- . ilei.wri. tom 11110�•��r /�.hsono. • •iI :rte � West Valley Neighborhood Pian Proposed Zoning (Yakima Urban Area Zoning Ordinance) (YCC Title 15A, YMC Title 15) Yakima Urban Area Zoning Districts SR Suburban Residential R-1 Single Family Residential R-2 Two Family Residential R-3 Multi -Family Residential B-2 Local Business SCC Small Convenience Center M-1 Light Industrial Floodplain & Floodway * Yakima Primary ASO City Limits Tax Lots — — • Urban Growth Boundary All Roads *Floodplain & Floodway shown for Wide Hollow, Shaw, and Cottonwood Creeks depict FEMA's Preliminary maps dated August 9, 2010. *Floodplain & Floodway shown for Ahtanum, Bachelor, Hatton, and Spring Creeks depict FEMA's Draft maps, dated August 9, 2010. *Floodplain & Floodway shown for Cowiche Creek and the Naches River depict the FEMA maps currently in effect. Exhibit A 875 1,750 3,500 5,250 7,000 Adopted • February 2011 Feet West Valley Neighborhood Plan A Subarea Plan of the Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan 2025 Adopted February 2011 West Valley Neighborhood Plan • Adopted • February 2011 • Page 2 West Valley Neighborhood Plan A Subarea Plan of the Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan 2025 Yakima City Council Micah Cawley, Mayor Kathy Coffey, Assistant Mayor Maureen Adkison Dave Edler Rick Ensey Dave Ettl Bill Lover Richard A. Zais, City Manager Board of Yakima County Commissioners Kevin J. Bouchey, Chairman J. Rand Elliott Michael D. Leita Yakima Urban Area Regional Planning Commission John Hodkinson, Jr., Chair (City of Union Gap) Bernie Kline, Vice Chair (Yakima County) Jerry Craig (Yakima County) John Crawford (City of Yakima) John Gehlsen (City of Yakima) Rockey Marshall (City of Yakima) West Valley Neighborhood Plan • Adopted • February 2011 • Page 3 West Valley Neighborhood Plan • Adopted • February 2011 • Page 4 WEST VALLEY NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN Acknowledgments The following citizens, organizations, and staff were instrumental in the development of the West Valley Neighborhood Plan: WEST VALLEY NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN - 2000 TASK FORCE Lou Arend George "Skip" Buckler Richard Carmody Denise Clement Jerry K. Craig Lyle Erlewine Ron Fortier Betty French Barbara Gilbert Bill Hordan James Murphy Nancy Nulph Diana Posada Mark Reeves Julian/Patricia Steenbergen 2000 Guests and Advisors: Gary Platt, Asst. Superintendent Ron Rutherford, Chief West Valley School District West Valley Fire District WEST VALLEY NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN - 2006 WORK GROUP Ron Anderson George "Skip" Buckler Brad Card Bill Almon, Sr. Almon Commercial Real Estate Jerry Craig Lyle Erlewine Doug Hughes Michael Noble 2008 Advisors: Diana Posada Steve Strosahl Joe Walsh Merle Warehime Bill Moultray Heritage-Moultray Real Estate Services WEST VALLEY NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING STAFF Yakima County Public Services Department Vern Redifer, P.E., Director Steve Erickson, Planning Director Phil Hoge, Project Planner (project manager) City of Yakima Community & Economic Development Department Michael Morales, Director Joan Davenport, AICP, Planning Manager Bruce Benson, Supervising Planner Jeff Peters, Associate Planner West Valley Neighborhood Plan • Adopted • February 2011 • Page 5 Table of Contents Acknowledgements 5 Table of Contents 6 List of Tables and Maps 7 Sections L Introduction 9 II. Land Use & Housing Element 13 III. Transportation Element 27 IV. Parks, Open Space, & Natural Environment Element 45 V. Capital Facilities & Utilities Element 55 Appendix 1 65 Goals, Objectives, & Policies from City of Yakima's Parks & Recreation Comprehensive Plan 2006-2011 most applicable to the Planning Area. Appendix 2 67 Policies from the Parks & Open Space Chapter of Yakima County's Comprehensive Plan, Plan 2015, most applicable to the Planning Area Appendix 3 68 Illustration from the Yakima Greenway Master Plan Update 1995 showing the loop trail connection using 66th Avenue between Ahtanum Road and the Cowiche Canyon. Maps 69 West Valley Neighborhood Plan • Adopted • February 2011 • Page 6 List of Tables and Maps Tables Table 1: West Valley Population Projections 13 Table 2: Cost Estimates for Improving Streets in the West Valley Area 31 Table 3: Truck Route Classifications 35 Table 4: 6 -Year TIP Projects Located in the Planning Area 38 Table 5: Estimate of the Amount of Park Land Needed 52 Maps 69 Map 1: Planning Area Map 2: Current Land Use Map 3: Current Zoning Map 4: Future Land Use Map 5: Existing Functional Classification Map 5A: Proposed Functional Classification of Streets Map 6: Street Connections Plan Map 7: Proposed Truck Route Map Map 8: Sidewalk and Pathway Facilities Map 9: Bicycle Facilities Plan Map 10: 6 -Year Transportation Improvement Program Map 11: Parks and Trails Map 12: Streams and Floodplains Map 13: Streams, Wetlands, and Drainage Improvement Districts Map 14: Water Utilities Map 15: Waste Water Utilities West Valley Neighborhood Plan • Adopted • February 2011 • Page 7 West Valley Neighborhood Plan • Adopted • February 2011 • Page 8 I. Introduction Background on the West Valley Neighborhood Plan In 1997, the Board of Yakima County Commissioners adopted Plan 2015 (the Yakima County Comprehensive Plan), which established Urban Growth Areas (UGAs) for each of the 14 cities and towns in Yakima County. Pursuant to the Growth Management Act (GMA), the 14 cities and towns have also adopted comprehensive plans for their respective urban growth areas. Pursuant to the 1977 Regional Planning Agreement', the Yakinia Urban Area Comprehensive Plan was adopted jointly for Yakima's UGA by the City of Yakima and Yakima County in 1997. However, the 1997 Yakinia Urban Area Comprehensive Plan did not include detailed planning for the west and southwest portion of the Yakima UGA, an area depicted by Map 1 and now known as the West Valley Neighborhood Planning Areae. The Planning Area consists of West Valley lands that were not included in the "Yakima Urban Area" designated in the mid-1970s in conjunction with the planning for the regional wastewater system. As such, the Planning Area represents additional West Valley lands designated in and after 1997 for future urban growth3. The 1997 Yakinia Urban Area Comprehensive Plan contemplated that a neighborhood plan would be developed for the Planning Area at a later date through a joint process involving Yakima County, the cities of Yakima and Union Gap, and West Valley residents. The West Valley Neighborhood Plan is the fulfillment of that intention. The Planning Process for the West Valley Neighborhood Plan In March 2000, the Board of Yakima County Commissioners appointed a 15 -person Task Force, consisting primarily of West Valley residents, to work with staff and affected agencies in developing the West Valley Neighborhood Plan. The Task Force met ten times between March and June 2000 to study issues and formulate a preliminary draft plan. On June 8, 2000 an Open House was held at the West Valley Middle School to present the preliminary plan concepts to the greater West Valley community and gather public comments on these concepts. Subsequently, the West Valley sub -area planning effort was suspended due to several conflicting processes, including: efforts to establish a West Valley sewer district; attempts to incorporate a city of West Valley; and, lawsuits challenging the state's petition method of annexation that were appealed to and ultimately resolved by the state Supreme Court in 2004. 1 The Regional Planning Agreement was signed by Yakima, Union Gap and Yakima County in 1977 and called for the establishment of a common plan and common regulatory ordinances for the Yakima Urban Area. As a result, Yakima and Yakima County jointly adopted the first Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan in 1981 and the Yakima Urban Area Zoning Ordinance in 1986. The 1997 Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan referred to the West Valley Neighborhood Planning Area as the "Urban Reserve." However, in December 2006 the Board of Yakima County Commissioners and the Yakima City Council adopted an updated plan for the Yakima UGA entitled Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan 2025. Because the update eliminated all references to the "Urban Reserve," the West Valley Neighborhood Plan will refer to this area as the "West Valley Neighborhood Planning Area" or simply, the "Planning Area.- ' The Board of County Commissioners expanded the Yakima UGA in 2003 by adding the "Apple Tree" area, and again in 2007 by adding the "Dazet" and "Scenic" areas, which are now included in the WVNP Planning Area. West Valley Neighborhood Plan • Adopted • February 2011 • Page 9 In early 2005, the West Valley Neighborhood sub -area planning process was reactivated with a new emphasis on mobility, housing and parks & open space. With these three areas of emphasis in mind, work went forward to provide a framework that would guide a renewed effort. The West Valley Neighborhood Plan Work Group was formed in early 2006 to review the preliminary framework and to establish additional policies that would bring the preliminary draft plan up to date. Two additional open houses were held on April 21, 2005, and July 24, 2006, at the West Valley Middle School to present planning concepts to the public and receive their comments. In December 2006, the Board of Yakima County Commissioners and Yakima City Council adopted the Yakinia Urban Area Comprehensive Plan 2025, which updated and replaced the plan adopted in 1997. In July 2007, a draft WVNP, reflecting the updated Yakinia Urban Area Comprehensive Plan 2025 and incorporating the Work Group's efforts, was circulated to City and County staff for review and comment. In response to the comments received, further discussions occurred in an effort to resolve the concerns that were expressed. The completion of these discussions was interrupted by the GMA-required update of comprehensive plans and development regulations, and the appeals that followed. On October 28, 2009, the Yakima County Planning Division published a draft West Valley Neighborhood Plan for review by the public and the Yakima Urban Area Regional Planning Commission. The draft plan was available on the web, and open houses were held during the evenings of November 18 and December 2, 2009 at the Harman Senior Center where the public could discuss the draft with the staff planners in an informal setting. Approximately 100 members of the public attended the open houses. Subsequently, at 7:00 pm on December 2, 2009, the RPC held a public hearing at the Harman Senior Center and received verbal and written comments from all members of the public desiring to offer comments. Twenty members of the public signed the hearing sign -in sheet, 15 members testified verbally, and 11 written comments were submitted. The hearing was video -recorded by Y -PAC (Yakima Public Affairs Cable) and re- cablecast several times after the hearing date. At several meetings between December 2009 and June 2010, the RPC reviewed the draft plan, considered all comments received from the public and agencies, and requested and received additional comments and information (particularly about revised flood plain maps in the planning area). The Regional Planning Commission adopted Findings and issued its recommended West Valley Neighborhood Plan on June 23, 2010, which recommended changes to the October 28, 2009 staff draft. In accordance with the Growth Management Act (GMA), Yakima County and the City of Yakima provided joint "60 -day notice" on July 8, 2010 to the Department of Commerce of the pending adoption of the RPC -recommended WLNP and Area -Wide Rezone. Pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), Yakima County conducted environmental review of the RPC -recommended draft WVNP and Area -Wide Rezone, culminating in the issuance of a Determination of Nonsignificance on September 23, 2010. West Valley Neighborhood Plan • Adopted • February 2011 • Page 10 On September 28 and October 12, 2010, the Board of Yakima County Commissioners and the Yakima City Council met in joint study sessions to review the RPC - recommended WVNP and Area -Wide Rezone. On October 26, 2010, the Board of Yakima County Commissioners and the Yakima City Council held a joint public hearing at the Yakima Convention Center to hear the public's comments on the proposed WVNP and Area -Wide Rezone. Subsequently, on November 22 and December 13, 2010, the Board of Yakima County Commissioners and the Yakima City Council conducted joint deliberations on the WVNP and Area -Wide Rezone. Changes to the RPC -recommended WVNP were made jointly by the two elected bodies, and are incorporated into this adopted version. Goals and Policies The goals and policies established in Yakinia Urban Area Comprehensive Plan 2025 apply to the entire Yakima Urban Growth Area, including the West Valley Neighborhood Planning Area. In addition, Plan 2015 (the Yakima County Comprehensive Plan) is a regional plan that establishes the County's perspective on urban policy and the transitioning of land from rural and resource uses to urban uses. The West Valley Neighborhood Plan endeavors to apply the goals and policies of both plans to provide policy direction for the future development of the Planning Area. Where gaps and potential inconsistencies between Plan 2015 and the YUACP 2025 might exist, the WVNP attempts to bridge the differences after considering both plans. The goals and policies in the West Valley Neighborhood Plan are established to provide more specific policy direction to address the particular issues identified by the planning process. In some cases, these goals and policies recommend new policy for development in the Planning Area that would appropriately be applied to the entire Yakima UGA. Such goals and policies should be considered for incorporating into the YUACP 2025 during future comprehensive plan amendment cycles. West Valley Neighborhood Plan • Adopted • February 2011 • Page 11 West Valley Neighborhood Plan • Adopted • February 2011 • Page 12 II. Land Use & Housing Element Introduction The Land Use & Housing Element expresses the community's preferences for the future location of various types of land uses in the Planning Area. In 2006, approximately 74% of the Planning Area was vacant or undeveloped, but urban development is rapidly occurring. This element provides guidance for locating housing of various densities, commercial uses, and industrial uses. Population The Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan 2025, adopted in December of 2006, projects the population for the Planning Area through the year 2025. Table 1 summarizes those population projections for the Planning Area. The table projects "High" and "Intermediate" figures from 2010-2025 at 5 -year intervals. These projections indicate that the Planning Area will likely need to accommodate an additional 7,998 (intermediate figure) to 12,166 (high figure) people by 2025. This would mean 3,041 to 4,626 additional dwelling units will be needed. Table 1: West Valley Population Projections4 Area 2010 2015 2020 2025 Change 2010-25 Additional Dwelling Units Needed West Valley Planning Area -intermediate projection: 7,219 10,115 12,723 15,217 7,998 3,041 -high projection: 10,347 14,527 18,522 22,513 12,166 4,626 Existing Land Uses Map 2 shows existing land uses in the Planning Area, primarily as identified by the County Assessor's land use codes. Agriculture is still a predominant use on many of the larger parcels indicated as vacant or residential. Commercial and industrial uses are located in the communities of Ahtanum and Wiley City, while limited commercial uses also exist at the intersections of Tieton Drive/S. 96th Avenue and Ahtanum Road/S. 64th Avenue. Warehouses exist along Ahtanum Road just east of 64th Avenue and at the intersection of Wide Hollow Rd./S. 80th Avenue. There are no public parks, although play fields and playgrounds are available at the Planning Area's three public schools (Cottonwood Elementary on S. 96th Avenue, Ahtanum Valley Elementary on South Wiley Road, and West Valley High School on Zier Road). Increasingly, as the supply of developable lands to the east has become more and more scarce, residential subdivisions are being developed within the Planning Area. 4 The 2010-2025 projections in Table 1 come from Tables III -4 and III -5 of Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan 2025, page III -4 & III -5. Based on the 2000 Census that found 2.63 people per dwelling unit in Yakima West Valley Neighborhood Plan • Adopted • February 2011 • Page 13 Apple Tree Resort A prominent existing land use in the Planning Area is the Apple Tree Resort. It is a 136 - acre resort development, located in the vicinity of Occidental Road and S. 86th Avenue, consisting of a tournament -quality golf course with a proposed resort oriented commercial center with a 422 residential -unit community including single-family homes, condominiums, apartments, and recreational condominiums. The golf course/resort development application was initially submitted to Yakima County in 1985 by the Hull family, and was called the "Hull Ranches Planned Development." The development is now owned and operated by Apple Tree Development, the Hull Family, and other private investors and companies. The golf course itself has grown into one of the Pacific Northwest's premier golf courses, with high-end homes lining the outside of the course. Having been developed with the resort, some of the subdivisions within Apple Tree's development area utilize reduced setbacks, private streets, and other reductions in site design standards as approved through the Planned Development rezone process. Landscaping is provided by Apple Tree Resort under an association agreement, which creates a uniform and professional look for the neighborhood. The Resort draws a variety of people including retirees from both inside and outside the Yakima community. New businesses are encouraged to locate in Yakima, because of the Resort's recreational aspect; and recreational users/tourists come to the community for golfing, wine tasting, weddings, and business trips. Because of Apple Tree, other developers have completed residential subdivisions in that area. Future development within the Apple Tree Resort will likely include a commercial center that will include: a lodge with restaurant, condominiums, and a golf/sports shop. The proposed future land use designations depicted on the Future Land Use Map, Map 4, will allow the commercial and higher density uses previously mentioned as part of the Apple Tree Resort. Current Zoning Map 3 shows the Planning Area's current zoning, which was applied in February 2000 when the County's new zoning ordinance went into effect to implement Plan 2015. This zoning was applied as an interim measure until adoption of the West Valley Neighborhood Plan would provide the rationale for long-term zoning. Most land was zoned "Single -Family Residential" (R-1) as a low -intensity place -holder. The only other zones currently in the Planning Area are "Industrial" (I) applied to two warehouses, and "Rural Settlement" (RS) applied to the unincorporated communities of Ahtanum and Wiley City. The zoning in the unincorporated portion of the Planning Area prior to adoption of the WVNP is under Yakima County's Zoning Ordinance (YCZO), which is Yakima County Code (YCC) Title 15, while the portion within the city limits of Yakima is under the City of Yakima's Urban Area Zoning Ordinance (UAZO), which is Yakima Municipal Code (YMC) Title 15. The intent statements of the zoning districts that currently apply in the Planning Area are described below: West Valley Neighborhood Plan • Adopted • February 2011 • Page 14 One -Family Residential, R-1 (YCZO, YCC Title 15) - This zone is to provide for lower urban density land development for single family residential purposes where urban governmental services are either available or can be provided without excessive public cost or where those uses can function on interim utility systems until municipal utility services are extended. Minimum sizes for new lots are 7,200 sq. ft. where such utility services are exist. When such utility services are not provided, new lots must be at least 21/2 acres. Single -Family Residential, R-1 (UAZO, YMC Title 15) — This zone is intended to: 1. Establish new residential neighborhoods for detached single-family dwellings free from other uses except those which are compatible with, and serve the residents of this district, which may include common -wall and zero lot lines if established during the subdivision process; 2. Preserve existing residential neighborhoods for detached single-family dwellings free from other uses to ensure the preservation of the existing residential character, and serve the residents of, this district; and, 3. Locate moderate -density residential development, up to seven DU/NRA (Dwelling Units per Net Residential Acre), in areas served by public water and sewer system. Detached single-family dwellings are the primary use in this district. The district is characterized by forty-five percent lot coverage; access to individual lots by local access streets; large front, rear and side yard setbacks; and one and two story structures. The density in the district is generally seven DU/NRA or less. This zone is intended to afford single-family neighborhoods the highest level of protection from encroachment by potentially incompatible non-residential land uses or impacts. Nonresidential uses within these zones are not allowed, except for public or quasi -public uses, which will be required to undergo extensive public review and will have all necessary performance or design standards assigned to them as necessary to mitigate potential impacts to adjacent residences. Development exceeding seven DU/NRA may be allowed in accordance with Table 4-1 [in the Urban Area Zoning Ordinance]. Industrial, I (YCZO, YCC Title 15) - This zone is established to preserve areas for industrial and related uses that do not create serious problems of compatibility with nearby land uses. Rural Settlement, RS (YCZO, YCC Title 15) - This zone is applied to several unincorporated communities throughout the County and was first applied to Wiley City and Ahtanum in the early 1980s. It allows a mixture of land uses (i.e., commercial, industrial, and low -to -moderate density residential) in order to provide convenience goods and services to the surrounding area. However, it is classified as a rural zone and is applied within UGA as a legacy zone until urban zoning is applied to implement the WVNP. West Valley Neighborhood Plan • Adopted • February 2011 • Page 15 Land Use and Housing Issues The following land use and housing issues are identified by the planning process: Agriculture & Animal Husbandry — The WVNP is a subarea plan for lands that have historically been used for rural and agricultural purposes rather than urban uses. As land transitions from a rural setting to an urban environment, there will likely be conflicts between the rural uses and urban uses. An example is having a few horses, goats, or other farm animals. This is a traditional rural residential use in areas with larger lots, but may cause conflicts when smaller urban -sized lots are created on adjacent lands. A large portion of the Planning Area is currently used for agricultural purposes, mainly for fruit crops. As time goes by, these crops will be removed for residential and commercial development. Many of the new housing developments should be accompanied with smaller commercial developments that can support the residential developments. The several agricultural warehouses and processing facilities that exist in the Planning Area are currently zoned either One -Family Residential (R-1), Rural Settlement, or Industrial. How to zone these existing uses in the future is an issue because: (1) The Rural Settlement zone is a rural zone and must be replaced by urban zoning to implement Map 4 (Future Land Use); (2) These existing agricultural uses are classified as legal non- conforming uses in the R-1 zone, which allows for their continuance but can adversely impact the owner's financing because expansion and re -building opportunities are not permitted outright; and (3) These existing agricultural uses are allowed as a Class 1 use in the Industrial zone, but the wide range of industrial uses allowed in the Industrial zone would be incompatible with the urbanizing uses in some neighborhoods. If encouraging continued operations, expansions, or modernizations of these existing agricultural warehouses and processing facilities is desired in neighborhoods where the Industrial zone is not desired, an alternative strategy is to use the Suburban Residential zone, which allows such uses as Class 3 permitted uses by YCC Title 15A and as Class 2 permitted uses by YMC Title 15. In addition to applying appropriate zoning to these existing agricultural uses when new zoning is applied to the Planning Area, consideration should be given to amending the zoning ordinances to allow the adaptive re -use of their structures to other uses that are compatible with the neighborhoods in which they are located. Flooding — The Planning Area has portions that are significantly prone to flooding due to its unique topography. The Ahtanum and Wide Hollow basins have been designated "Flood Prone" by the County Engineer. Floods in the late 1990s showed that the current National Flood Insurance Maps produced by FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency) in 1985 did not represent the full extent of the flooding in West Valley. These two basins were selected for re -studies to upgrade the maps as part of the FEMA Map Modernization Program providing digital Flood Insurance Rate Maps. The FEMA Work Maps are scheduled to be available to the communities by the end of 2009. Initial results indicate much broader areas of flooding than the current FEMA maps. West Valley Neighborhood Plan • Adopted • February 2011 • Page 16 As a consequence of the 1990's floods and citizen concerns, the Yakima County -wide Flood Control Zone District (YCFCZD) is developing a Comprehensive Flood Hazard Management Plan (CHIMP) for the Ahtanum and Wide Hollow basins from their confluences with the Yakima River upstream through the urban growth areas and beyond to the headwaters of the basins. The planning process utilizes an advisory committee of citizens and government representatives, including the municipalities and habitat agencies. The plan, which is anticipated for submission to the communities in late 2010 for adoption, identifies existing problematic flooding areas, areas where development should be "tailored," and recommendations on potential planning options. Special care and inter jurisdictional coordination must be taken in the planning, development, and annexation processes so that flood damage can be minimized or prevented during flood events. The YCFCZD, which has been extensively involved with inter jurisdictional and citizen groups regarding floodplains in the Planning Area, should be involved in the infrastructure and land use decisions within the floodplains in order to utilize this information. For example, the YCFCZD has identified several types of soils located in association with floodplains that have severe limitations for development. Open space — To minimize flood damage, consideration should be given to permanently retaining open spaces along creeks as urbanization occurs. Trails and parks are some of the preferred uses along creeks and streams. Future Residential Development — A large portion of land designated for future residential development will be for low density (4-7 DUs/acre), which will be implemented by the R-1 (Single -/One -Family Residential) and SR (Suburban Residential) zoning districts. However, diversity of housing is a goal of the Yakinia Urban Area Comprehensive Plan 2025 and of the Growth Management Act. Both Yakima County and the City of Yakima recognize a need to designate land for higher residential densities in the Future Land Use Map to allow the market to provide more housing choices for residents. The density of multi -family housing allowed in the R-3 zones is currently limited only by site requirements such as setbacks from property lines, number of required parking spaces, and maximum lot coverage. This situation has limited the acceptance of R-3 zoning by neighborhoods. Many communities in the country have adopted design standards for multi -family housing that allow innovative and attractive structures that are compatible with neighborhoods. Design standards for multi -family housing should be considered in order to allow more housing choices for residents. The Urban Area Zoning Ordinance and Yakima County Zoning Ordinance limit the impervious coverage of parcels in the R-1 and R-2 zones to 45% and 50% respectively. In recent years, however, the market has changed to prefer smaller yards and larger homes. Consideration should be given to amending the zoning ordinances to allow slightly higher lot coverages in the R-1 and R-2 zoning districts. Many communities around the country, including the state of Washington, are using Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) programs to simultaneously maintain rural, agricultural, or environmentally sensitive areas while increasing urban development in urbanizing areas, especially when coupled with density incentives in the urbanizing areas. These programs work by establishing "sending areas," where low densities are to be West Valley Neighborhood Plan • Adopted • February 2011 • Page 17 preserved, and "receiving areas," where development is to be encouraged. This versatile tool could also be used to protect critical areas or to deal with impacts related to airport safety overlay designations. Flood prone areas should be considered for the lowest residential densities in order to minimize flood damage. For example, the density of seven units per net residential acre in floodplains will expose more properties to risk given the relatively unpredictable flow paths. The lots and their fences or fill have the ability to redirect flows, as has been evidenced by recent development in the Planning Area. Focused Public Investment Corridors - Current plans call for designating and prioritizing Focused Public Investment Corridors inside the urban reserve area to facilitate coordinated and collaborative public infrastructure investment. An example of this was the construction of 96th Avenue south of Summitview Ave. several years ago wherein the City paid for the installation of a dry sewer line simultaneously with the County's construction of the street. By focusing public investments, an area could be managed to grow in a desirable way that makes good use of public and private dollars. Land Use and Housing Goals & Policies The Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan 2025 establishes goals and policies pertaining to the Yakima UGA, including the Planning Area. The following goals and policies for Land Use and Housing are intended to guide the application of the YUACP 2025 goals and policies to the Planning Area and address the issues identified by the planning process. GOAL 2.1: Provide a wide variety of housing types that offer choices to the entire community. Policies: 2.1.1 Apply the Yakima Urban Area Zoning Ordinance (YCC Title 15A and YMC Title 15) to the West Valley Neighborhood Planning Area as a legislative rezone in conjunction with the adoption of the WVNP. 2.1.2 Update the Yakima Urban Area Zoning Ordinance and Yakima County Zoning Ordinance to facilitate common development standards within the Yakima UGA and to incorporate desired urban features. 2.1.3 Through land use controls, prevent conversion of land in the Urban Growth Area to uses/densities that cannot be urbanized. Where public sewer or water is not available, provide that new lots be at least 5 acres unless interim community utilities with clustering are provided. 2.1.4 Plan to accommodate the area's expected population growth in a sustainable manner that maintains or improves the community's character, environmental quality, and quality of life. 2.1.5 Provide density incentives to developers for the inclusion of a percentage of affordable housing units. 2.1.6 Allow for smaller single-family residential lot sizes and higher lot coverage allowances, and provide incentives for developers to create them. 2.1.7 Slightly increase the lot coverages allowed in the residential zones, and allow even higher coverage when common open spaces are provided in conjunction with a planned development. West Valley Neighborhood Plan • Adopted • February 2011 • Page 18 2.1.8 Ensure that infill development or subdivisions are compatible with existing neighborhoods. Lots proposed for new residential subdivisions and adjacent to existing urban neighborhoods should be compatible with existing residential lots (pursuant to YUACP 2025, Goal 3.3 and its Policies). 2.1.9 Allow for adequate areas zoned for high and medium density residential to provide a wide variety of housing options and affordability. 2.1.10 Investigate TDR (Transferable Development Rights) programs in other communities by the next update required by RCW 36.70A.130(5) prior to considering such a program in Yakima. GOAL 2.2: Provide a variety of housing, retail, and commercial centered on key intersections, in a pattern that encourages walking and bicycling. Policies: 2.2.1 Establish criteria for potential neighborhood villages that allow for a pleasant living, shopping, and working environment; pedestrian accessibility; a sense of community; adequate, well located open spaces; an attractive , well connected and designed street system; and a balance of retail, office, multi -family, single-family, and public uses. 2.2.2 Establish parking requirements for land uses located in neighborhood villages that reflect their pedestrian and transit orientation (e.g., reduce 10 to 15 percent below the requirements for areas without such pedestrian orientation). 2.2.3 Designate areas suitable for commercial and retail use. Cluster commercial/retail land uses around key intersections, rather than as strips along arterials and collectors. 2.2.4 Provide for small scale commercial services in existing communities and at selected intersections of arterial and collector streets. • Locate, orient, and design uses likely to attract a substantial number of people from outside of the local community (e.g., supermarkets) so that they do not significantly detract from local pedestrian -oriented character. • Encourage additional landscaping in connection with commercial and retail development. 2.2.5 Encourage medium or high density residential in areas adjacent to and between commercial or retail zoned property along major arterials and collectors. 2.2.6 Review key intersections for flood risk. GOAL 2.3: Provide for the continued viability of agricultural warehouses and processing facilities and allow for their adaptive conversion to other uses compatible with the neighborhood. Policies: 2.3.1 Apply zoning districts to agricultural warehouses and processing facilities that will make them permitted uses. 2.3.2 Amend the zoning ordinances to allow agricultural warehouses and processing facilities located in non -industrial zones to convert to other uses that are compatible with the neighborhood. West Valley Neighborhood Plan • Adopted • February 2011 • Page 19 GOAL 2.4: Provide Protection for Developments in Flood prone areas. General Policies: 2.4.1 Maintain and restore open space buffers along rivers and creeks and identified floodplain overflow areas for flood storage, priority habitat species, and passive recreation. 2.4.2 Support development by the Yakima County -wide Flood Control Zone District of a management plan for the West Valley area to reduce or prevent flood damage and improve natural habitat along creeks. 2.4.3 The building envelope for any existing lot which extends within the 100 -year floodplain should be located outside the floodplain boundary whenever possible. 2.4.4 Encourage the use of low -impact development such as permeable materials for parking and pedestrian surfaces. 2.4.5 Consider incorporating the recommendations of the Ahtanum-Wide Hollow Comprehensive Flood Hazard Management Plan into the Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan and Yakima County Comprehensive Plan. 2.4.6 Focus flood control on economic development and public safety. 2.4.7 Provide future development patterns that ensure flood risk is minimized. 2.4.8 Prevent new development from increasing flooding on adjacent lands through un - modeled fill in the floodplain and through the preservation of existing channels, both mapped and unmapped by FEMA. 2.4.9 Provide incentives to developers to provide for community open space and to cluster away from critical areas. 2.4.10 Consult the YCFCZD concerning land use and infrastructure issues within flood - prone areas. 2.4.11 Follow the development requirements in the new stormwater ordinances. Residential Policies: 2.4.12 Do not allow medium or high density zoning within the 100 -year floodplain unless clustering away from the floodplain is required. 2.4.13 Encourage lower maximum density for new subdivisions and short plats being proposed within the 100 -year floodplain. 2.4.14 Offer a density bonus above the allowed density in the underlying zone for development to set back from the 100 -year floodplain. 2.4.15 Review fill in the floodplain to avoid flow redirection onto neighbors. 2.4.16 Allow floodplain areas to count as open space for proposed new development. 2.4.17 Wherever possible, use the 100 -year floodplain to provide a natural buffer between commercial and residential development. GOAL 2.5: Protect residential areas from the glaring lights of major light generators such as commercial uses, schools, sports facilities, and churches. West Valley Neighborhood Plan • Adopted • February 2011 • Page 20 Future Land Use Map 4 (Future Land Use) shows the preferred land uses for the Planning Area as it urbanizes over the next several decades. This map will guide the future zoning and development of the West Valley Planning Area. An underlying concept of the Future Land Use Map is to provide commercial and higher density residential uses at key intersections. This is intended to allow options for non- traditional housing types (such as cottages, well-designed multi -family ("garden apartments" and condominiums) that will create walkable neighborhoods served by transit stops. The land use designations listed below are established by and described in the Yakinia Urban Area Comprehensive Plan 2025. The considerations for applying them in the West Valley Planning Area are described below: Low Density Residential (LDR) — Priniarily free-standing single-family residences. Residential density is less than 7 dwelling units per acre. This is considered the lowest possible residential density that can efficiently support public services. The Low Density Residential properties west of 48th Avenue within the Urban Growth Boundary consist of 7,736 acres. As previously mentioned, many of these properties took on a LDR designation when they were annexed into the City or included in the Urban Growth Area. Historically, most of the housing built in Yakima has expanded westward as single-family homes on individual lots, which is predominately built as three-bedroom, two -bath homes for individuals, couples, and small families. Development has also been sporadically spread on larger than urban lots; making redevelopment to urban densities difficult. The conceptual considerations for Low Density Residential in the Planning Area are: • This is the most extensive land use designation in the Planning Area and located where other designations are not appropriate; • Usually located in areas that are already characterized by smaller, developed parcels. Medium Density Residential (MDR) — Characterized by a mixture of single-family detached residences and duplexes, with a variety of other housing types at a residential density ranging between 7 and 11 dwelling units per acre. The West Valley Neighborhood Plan reflects the need to provide more opportunity for medium -density residential (MDR) developments in the Urban Growth Area. In making this determination, the densities in the High and Medium Density Residential future land use designations were calculated for the area west of 48th Avenue and east of the Planning Area. The MDR properties west of 48th Avenue consist of 483 acres (299 acres Congdon -owned). The vacant non -Congdon owned property totals 14.4% of the undeveloped MDR properties west of 48th Avenue. All of the 299 acres owned by Congdon are undeveloped. Those 299 MDR acres make up 62% of all of the MDR properties, which is 85.5% of the total undeveloped MDR properties. A diverse ownership of this vacant land would more than likely keep the price of the higher density development affordable and accessible. However, in this situation where 14% of the West Valley Neighborhood Plan • Adopted • February 2011 • Page 21 vacant non -Congdon MDR property is still developable, there is more of an opportunity to develop vacant land than properties designated HDR. Because the bulk of the undeveloped land is under the control of one developer, more MDR property is provided in the Future Land Use Map, Map 4. Twenty eight percent of the existing MDR land has been developed into duplex, triplex, four-plex, and townhouse/condo developments, as well as single-family residential subdivisions. The density for the MDR properties is 6.36 DU/NRA (dwelling units per net residential acre), which is within the density levels of the LDR designation. The Yakinia Urban Area Comprehensive Plan 2025, Table III -11, sets the average density levels for the MDR at 10 DU/NRA. Part of the reason why low density levels exist within the Medium and High Density property designations is that when they were rezoned, previously developed, small -lot properties were included, leaving redevelopment as the only option to achieve higher densities. Also, some developers opted for mixed housing developments and created covenants restricting certain higher density lots to single-family dwellings. Cottonwood Grove Phases 5-7 is one such example. Areas designated MDR should be considered to become "receiving areas" for a transferable development rights (TDR) program. Such programs simultaneously conserve resource and open space lands (known as "sending areas") and boost the development intensity in desired places (known as "receiving areas"). The conceptual considerations for Medium Density Residential in the Planning Area are: • Intended to provide for higher lot coverages in single family developments as requested by the market (50% instead of 45%); • Located in the center of the Planning Area where it can promote more walking to schools and reduce the cost of school bussing; • Intended to provide an incentive for non-traditional housing types (such as cottages, townhouses, condominiums, duplexes, and garden apartments) to create affordable housing for "empty -nesters," young singles, seniors, and other small household sizes. • Located adjacent to high density residential and commercial to buffer these more intense land uses from low density residential. • Intended to provide an incentive to cluster development on parcels away from floodplains so that floods may be accommodated and "green spaces" can be maintained. • Located on large undeveloped parcels to enable quality layout/housing designs; • Requested by the community for higher densities to enable affordable housing options; • Along Zier Road between 80th and 96th Avenues, parcels have been designated as Medium Density Residential. These parcels were selected because they are all located: 1. on one or more arterial streets (96th Avenue, 80th Avenue, and Zier Road), where access does not need to pass through low density developments; 2. within close proximity to the West Valley High School, West Valley Middle School, and Cottonwood Elementary School, where it would reduce the cost West Valley Neighborhood Plan • Adopted • February 2011 • Page 22 of busing children to the nearby schools and promote the healthy physical activity of walking to schools; 3. on sloped terrain where it would be more cost effective to build apartments, townhouses, and condos rather than single-family dwellings; and, 4. where the dwelling units per acre could be higher and more consistent with density levels desired. High Density Residential (HDR) — Multi family residential development may include apartments, condominiums, and townhouses, containing 12 or more dwelling units per acre. A limited range of other niixed land uses may be perniitted, such as some professional offices and community services. Currently, there is a need to provide more opportunity for High Density Residential (HDR) developments in the Urban Growth Area for the area west of 48th Avenue. The HDR properties west of 48th consist of 286 acres, with 129 undeveloped acres (96% of the property is owned by Congdon Development Co. "Congdon"). Those undeveloped 129 acres make up 45% of the total HDR property east of the Planning Area. Of the non - Congdon owned property, there is only 3.7% of the HDR designated property left to be developed west of 48th Avenue. A diverse ownership of HDR properties would more than likely keep the price of the HDR development affordable and accessible. A large majority of the property east of the Planning Area designated HDR has been developed into manufactured home parks, duplex, triplex, four-plex, townhouse/condo, and a few multi -family developments. The developed HDR densities equal 9.8 DU/NRA (dwelling units per net residential acre). The HDR developments include: Castle Creek, St. Andrews Place, Rose of Mary Terrace, and Cornerstone Apartments. Without those four developments, the density levels of the HDR designation drop to 7.4 DU/NRA, which is consistent with the MDR designation. The Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan 2006, Table III -11, sets the average density levels for the HDR at 20 DU/NRA. The 20 DU/NRA may seem high, but considering that the density levels of the four apartment complexes west of 48th Avenue average 21.67 DU/NRA, one could assume that it was anticipated that all HDR would be developed as apartment complexes or similar high density developments. The conceptual considerations for High Density Residential in the Planning Area are: • Primarily located adjacent to commercial areas to form walkable neighborhood centers around transit stops; • This designation west of S. 38th Avenue is intended to buffer the adjacent single- family neighborhood from the industrial area to the north; • Accommodates the Apple Tree Resort's Master Planned Development; • Requests from the community for higher densities to enable affordable housing; Professional Office — A wide range of office uses, such as financial institutions, real estate, insurance, engineering, legal, medical offices and other similar business uses, specifically perniitted by the applicable zoning district. The conceptual considerations for Professional Office in the Planning Area are: West Valley Neighborhood Plan • Adopted • February 2011 • Page 23 • Although no locations are initially identified by this subarea plan, appropriate locations may be designated in the future, such as along arterials. Institutions — Institutions include existing and new large-scale institutional facilities such as hospitals and higher educational facilities that niay have significant rnlpacts to the surrounding land uses. 6 The conceptual considerations for Institutions in the Planning Area are: • No locations are identified as being suitable for this designation. Neighborhood Commercial (NC) — Small scale, neighborhood convenience coniniercial uses and services primarily for residences of adjacent neighborhoods. These areas are typically located along a mirror arterial, or at the intersection of a mirror arterial and a collector arterial street. The conceptual considerations for Neighborhood Commercial in the Planning Area are: • Recognize the existing commercial areas in the communities of Ahtanum and Wiley City, but does not expand their extent due to flooding. An additional commercial area is provided in Wiley City outside of flooded areas; • New areas are primarily located at intersections and adjacent to higher density housing so that this housing provides a buffer to low density residential; • 96th Avenue and Tieton Drive - For the housing areas around the commercially designated property at the intersection of 96th Avenue and Tieton Drive, development would include walking and biking trails to nearby commercial developments. The concept is to create a community -oriented center, focused on serving the immediate neighborhood while providing for flood hazard reduction and public safety. • S. 64t1i Avenue and Ahtanum Road are major arterials and their intersection is a natural spot for a commercial node; • The southeast corner of W. Washington and S. 64th Avenues is just outside the Planning Area and zoned Small Convenience Center. The designation at the southwest corner is intended to compliment the existing zoning so as to form a commercial intersection. • Neighborhood Commercial is designated along Occidental to accommodate the commercial uses in Apple Tree Resort's Master Planned Development. Community Commercial (CC) — Community Commercial provides medium scale coniniercial uses that serve multiple neighborhoods and residential areas in the community. These areas are typically located along a principal arterial, or selected niinor arterial, or at the intersection of a principal arterial and a niinor arterial street. The conceptual considerations for Community Commercial in the Planning Area are: • The primary commercial area in the Planning Area is proposed northwest of the intersection of Wide Hollow Road and S. 96th Avenue. The area south of the intersection is almost entirely within the floodplain to the southern valley wall in 6 Refer to YUI4C'P 2025 for the complete description of the Institutions plan designation. People in the local commercial development industry advise clustering commercial areas around major intersections and not letting them spread out between such intersections. West Valley Neighborhood Plan • Adopted • February 2011 • Page 24 the new FEMA Work Maps and should not be considered for commercial development. • The 2000 Task Force indicated support for a mixed-use center along Wide Hollow Road near/at the intersection with S. 96th Avenue; • This mixed-use center is envisioned as a "Village Center" that would incorporate commercial uses, 2nd story or adjacent high and medium density housing; utilization of Wide Hollow Creek as a public gathering place/park while accommodating floods; and utilization of the City's trolley corridor along Wide Hollow Road as a trail that connects to nearby parks, schools, and other trail systems; • Nearby medium density housing will promote this "Village" area as a walkable neighborhood; • A focused public investment corridor along 96th Avenue between Zier and Tieton Drive could enhance the pedestrian environment of the "Village," by including trails through the floodplains. General Commercial (GC) — General Coniniercial provides a wide variety of coniniercial retail and services that are heavily dependent on convenient vehicle access along major travel routes. General Coniniercial land uses may include those uses identified in Neighborhood Coniniercial or Community Coniniercial, but do not serve only the adjacent neighborhoods. General Coniniercial includes uses such as fast food restaurants, auto -oriented services and other coniniercial services. The City has designated these areas with the intent that undesirable strip coniniercial developnient is avoided8. The conceptual considerations for General Commercial in the Planning Area are: • The GC designation allows a wide variety of uses that are heavily dependent on convenient vehicle access. No locations are identified as being suitable for this designation. Regional Commercial (RC) — The Regional Coniniercial designation is intended to provide the community with a niix of retail service and business establishnients on a medium to large scale. Coniniercial firnis span a wide range of activities such as retail stores, business and professional services, hotel niotel operations, restaurants, theaters and gas stations. Generally, regional coniniercial uses are the source of consumer goods and services for the community and the traveling public. Their locational, market area and site requirements tend to be as diverse as the niix of activities. In common, these firms are generally dependent upon visibility for customer attraction, and prefer locations with heavy traffic flows. The typical size of a regional coniniercial developnient is 10-60 acres and serves a population of 100,000-200,000 people. The conceptual considerations for Regional Commercial in the Planning Area are: 8 The description of General Commercial in YU4C'P 2025 continues with the following parenthetical language: ("Strip Commercial" development is usually described as commercial properties developed along a street in linear fashion (as opposed to the downtown or malls), where individual driveways, separated parking lots, different building designs and access points, can lead to problems including traffic safety, shopper confusion, higher failure rates among businesses, poor aesthetics, etc.) West Valley Neighborhood Plan • Adopted • February 2011 • Page 25 • No locations are identified as being suitable for this designation. Central Business District Core Commercial (CBD) — Central Business District Core Coniniercial designation is a wide variety of intense retail, office, institutional and high-density residential land uses with the broadest range of niixed uses and flexibility. Land uses to be encourages in this area are those new developnients that foster the unique, regional nature of the Yakima Central Business District. The conceptual considerations for Central Business District Core Commercial in the Planning Area are: • No locations are identified as being suitable for this designation. Industrial (I) — The Industrial designation is a range of activities, including construction businesses, manufacturing, transportation, coninwnication, utilities, and wholesale and warehouse activities, which niay include some accessory office and retail use The conceptual considerations for Industrial in the Planning Area are: • Except for the Powerhouse Rd. area, the Planning Area is generally located beyond the reach of major roads and other industrial infrastructure, so is not suited for designation as a major industrial area; • Existing fruit packing and warehouses are designated Low Density Residential rather than Industrial because the wide range of industrial uses allowed by the Industrial zone would not be compatible with the neighborhoods. The LDR designation allows them to be zoned SR, which allows fruit packing and warehouses as permitted uses rather than as non -conforming uses. Currently the City's Urban Area Zoning Ordinance allows these uses in the SR zone as Class (2) permitted uses, and the County's Urban Area Zoning Ordinance allows them in the SR zone as Class (3) permitted uses. Parks & Recreation (P&R) — Includes all existing public parks, playgrounds, recreation areas, greenways, pathways, golf courses, conservancy and designated open spaces. This designation niay also include land that is preserved by Yakama Nation, State and or Federal agencies and private entities. The conceptual considerations for Parks & Recreation in the Planning Area are: • While listed and described in YUACP 2025, this designation is not applied on its future land use map. Therefore, to be consistent with the future land use map in YUACP 2025, it is not appropriate to show this designation on Map 4 (Future Land Use) of the West Valley Neighborhood Plan. • To be consistent with YUACP 2025, Parks and Recreation areas in the West Valley Planning Area are more appropriately shown on Map 11 (Parks and Trails) rather than on Map 4 (Future Land Use). West Valley Neighborhood Plan • Adopted • February 2011 • Page 26 III. Transportation Element 1. OVERVIEW This Transportation Element is a guide for street improvement needs, as well as for the rights of way for bicycles, pedestrians, public transit, freight and utility corridors in the West Valley Neighborhood Planning Area. The goals and policies of the Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan Update, 2005- 2025 apply to the entire Yakima Urban Growth Area, which includes the Planning Area. This Sub -Area Plan applies those goals and policies to the Planning Area and recommends additional policies and goals that should be considered for incorporating in the YUACP 2025. • The Transportation and Capital Facilities Elements of Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan 2025 contain detailed financing and project information for improvements in the UGA. This section provides supplementary information for the Planning Area. • Future land use assumptions for the Planning Area indicate the area will be predominately Low Density Residential with small commercial nodes and limited opportunities for Medium & High Density Residential where indicated on Map #4 (Future Land Use). Existing mixed-use communities in the vicinity of Ahtanum and Wiley City are recognized but not proposed for expansion due to flooding constraints. • The Planning Area is nearly 8.3 square miles in size, consisting of over 1920 parcels. Approximately 7,200 people currently live in the area. Over 2,300 acres (48%) of the area is vacant or undeveloped. Growth assumptions for Future Land Use include the potential for an additional 8,000 to 15,300 people or 3,000 to 4,600 new homes by 2025 in this area. 2. LOCAL STREETS In 2008, the Planning Area had approximately 20 linear miles of Local Access streets. The Planning Area has over 2,300 acres of vacant land or land currently in agricultural use that may be converted to other land uses in the future. Development of up to 6,000 new homes will add approximately 50 miles of new or additional local streets (using a ratio of one new mile of local streets for each 30 acres of converted land). Since these streets are not classified as Arterial or Collector Streets, no State or Federal funds are available maintenance and improvement, leaving Yakima County or the City of Yakima solely responsible for their maintenance. West Valley Neighborhood Plan • Adopted • February 2011 • Page 27 Issues • A schedule of planned maintenance for local streets will need to be established to include filling potholes, crack -filling, chip -sealing, and related repairs. Average cost of these maintenance activities is $15,000 per mile. A 12 -year cycle or less is desirable for maintenance. Funding for local street maintenance will need to be identified, possibly from REET (real estate excise tax). • To promote neighborhood safety, clear sight envelopes (also known as sight distance triangles) must be maintained at street intersections • Traffic speed and volume have become a concern on many neighborhood streets. The introduction of traffic calming designs in new subdivisions when they are initially planned and constructed could reduce the need to retrofit neighborhoods with traffic calming measures in the future. • As neighborhoods are constructed through the subdivision platting process, continuation of the street grid between developments is encouraged by the YUACP 2025, Policy 6.1.2, to promote traffic circulation and reduce the congestion and turning movements on the Arterial Streets. Map 6 shows the recommended street connections that will be used to guide the location of future local access and classified streets as land is short -platted and subdivided. • New Local Access streets are constructed primarily with the subdivision of land by private developers. Local housing providers have requested more flexibility in design standards, including street width and the use of Low Impact Development standards to reduce stormwater runoff. Revised standards need to be developed to incorporate such concerns along with others as called for in YUACP 2025 (such as Goal 6.6 to improve pedestrian use and safety; Goal 6.12 to improve the quality of streets; and Policy 6.26.1 to implement the Yakima Urban Area Transportation Plan Update, 2025). 3. PEDESTRIANS AND THE WALKING ENVIRONMENT Because the Planning Area was historically a rural and agricultural area, many arterials and collector streets were not constructed with sidewalks. Consequently, the sidewalk and path system is mostly non-existent or discontinuous, which often forces pedestrians to walk on the travel lane or in a drainage ditch along the shoulder. The City and County officially added the Planning Area to the Yakima Urban Growth Area in 1997; and in 2003 the state and federal departments of transportation expanded their "urban area" so that virtually all of the Planning Area was included. Newly built major streets include sidewalks, such as 96th Avenue, Tieton Drive, Summitview Avenue, and portions of Occidental Road. Likewise, new developments are constructing sidewalk facilities along newly built Local Access Streets. West Valley Neighborhood Plan • Adopted • February 2011 • Page 28 Future considerations include: • No sidewalk system exists to connect Cottonwood Elementary to the neighborhood to the east, nor along Zier Road to serve West Valley High School. • West Valley School District has a one -mile "Walk to School" zone, which includes most of the Planning Area. While many children are regularly transported to school by parents or family, these zones remain pedestrian corridors. • Marked crosswalks will be installed at appropriate locations, such as school crossing areas and signalized intersections. • In some instances, a standard concrete sidewalk is not practical - an asphalt path or paved, striped shoulder may be a viable temporary alternative to the concrete sidewalk requirements. • When existing public streets are re -built or new sidewalks are constructed, ADA accessible sidewalk ramps are required. • Pathway systems can supplement sidewalks and provide a connection between schools parks and other areas of activity. Irrigation canals and the creek system offer some location opportunities for future pathways. In addition, the Cowiche Canyon trail, the William 0. Douglas Path, irrigation canals, and the Yakima Valley Trolley corridor offer the potential for trail and pathway development, as shown on Maps 8 and 11. 4. BICYCLES AND OTHER PEOPLE -POWERED VEHICLES A bicycle -friendly transportation system was supported by citizens at open houses and the WVNP Task Force during the planning process. The YUACP 2025 identifies these levels of improvements for bicycle facilities along public streets: • Level 1 (Type 1) facilities include a dedicated bicycle lane, minimum of 5 -feet in width, on both sides of streets, such as Tieton Drive, S. 96th Avenue, and West Powerhouse Road. • Level 2 (Type 2) facilities include shared outside lanes, typically 14 feet in width, often with a marked BIKE symbol to indicate sharing between motorists and cyclists, such as Washington Avenue. • Level 3 (Type 3) facilities include signed bike routes, with no specified area for cyclists. While none currently exist in the Planning Area, example elsewhere in the Yakima UGA include N. 6th Avenue, West Chestnut Avenue, and 37th138th Avenues. West Valley Neighborhood Plan • Adopted • February 2011 • Page 29 • Pathway facilities are off-street systems that can provide both pedestrian and bicycle routes. While none currently exist in the Planning Area, the Cowiche Canyon, Cowiche Uplands, and West Valley Community Park pathways are adjacent. Opportunities for creating an interconnecting system of pathway are provided by former trolley and rail corridors, by canal corridors, and stream sides, as depicted by Maps 8 and 11. The YUACP 2025 recommends dedicated 5 -foot bike lanes (Level 1) on streets where volumes (planned or future) exceed 20,000 Average Daily Trips. It recommends 14 -foot wide outside curb lanes (Level 2) on other classified streets to accommodate shared cyclists -motorists use. Map 9 shows the current and recommended bicycle facilities on existing and proposed streets and potential pathway corridors. 5. ARTERIAL AND COLLECTOR STREET SYSTEM Connectivity Few roads and streets run the length and breadth of the Planning Area, which results in many jogs and turns while traveling in and through the area. To promote connectivity, safety and reduce response time for emergency vehicle access, a number of existing main streets are recommended to be extended, as shown on Map 6. The costs for improving particular streets in the West Valley area have been estimated by the City of Yakima and Yakima County as shown in Table 2. These are rough estimates. Actual costs in the future will depend on the applicable development standards and the engineering design, which will determine attributes such as the number of lanes and the right-of-way width needed for particular segments. Several of the north -south connectors will either be inundated during the 100 -year and higher frequency floods, or act as raised dams. Design of these streets must consider impacts to future development and in some cases may not be appropriate to build. West Valley Neighborhood Plan • Adopted • February 2011 • Page 30 Table 2: Cost Estimates for ImnrovinStreets in the West Valley Area Road Name From To Length (Ft) Lanes' Lane Miles 2008 Improve - ment Cost (street only)'o 2008 Total Cost" 2020 Total Cost12 42nd Ave., S. Coolidge Rd. Ahtanum Rd. 3706 2 1.40 $1,400,000 72nd Ave., S. Washington Ave. Coolidge Rd. 1373 $780,000 $1,098,059 72nd Ave., S. Coolidge Rd. Occidental Rd. 1370 $778,409 $1,095,820 72nd Ave., S. Occidental Rd. Ahtanum Rd. 2000 $1,136,364 $1,599,737 72nd Ave., S. Coolidge Rd. Ahtanum Rd. 3518 3 2.00 $1,998,761 80th Ave. S. Zier Rd. Coolidge Rd. 2656 3 1.51 $1,509,199 80th Ave., S. Tieton Dr Nob Hill Blvd 2693 $1,147,500 $1,615,414 80th Ave., S. Nob Hill Blvd Zier Rd 3907 $1,665,000 $2,343,934 80th Ave., S. Zier Rd Washington Ave. 1400 $596,591 $839,862 80th Ave., S. Washington Ave. Coolidge Rd. 1267 $540,000 $760,195 86th Ave. S. Occidental Rd. Zier Rd. 8038 2 3.04 $3,044,621 86th Ave., S. Nob Hill Blvd Wide Hollow Rd. 1301 $492,803 $693,752 86th Ave., S. Wide Hollow Rd. Zier Rd 2700 $1,022,727 $1,439,763 86th Ave., S. Zier Rd Washington Ave. 1500 $568,182 $799,868 86th Ave., S. Washington Ave. Coolidge Rd. 2534 $960,000 $1,351,457 86th Ave., S. Coolidge Rd. Occidental Rd. 1360 $515,152 $725,214 86th Ave., S. Occidental Rd. Ahtanum Rd. 2053 $777,652 $1,094,753 88th Ave., S. Midvale Rd. Zier Rd. 10984 2 4.16 $4,160,682 96th Ave., S. Zier Rd. Coolidge Rd. 2672 3 1.52 $1,518,301 96th Ave., S. End of WV School Coolidge Rd. 2000 $852,273 $1,199,802 Coolidge Rd 72nd Ave. 80th Ave. 2640 $1,000,000 $1,407,768 Coolidge Rd 80th Ave. 88th Ave. 2670 $1,011,364 $1,423,766 Coolidge Rd 88th Ave. 96th Ave. 2675 $1,013,258 $1,426,432 Coolidge Rd. 64th Ave., S. Dazet Rd. 3882 2 1.47 $1,470,367 Mead-Plath Ave. W. 80th Ave., S. Dazet Rd. 7970 2 3.02 $3,020,000 Nob Hill Blvd., W. 80th Ave. 88th Ave. 2488 $1,413,636 $1,990,072 Nob Hill Blvd., W. 88th Ave. Wide Hollow Rd. 1775 $1,008,750 $1,420,086 Occidental Rd 64th Ave. 86th Ave. 7445 $2,820,000 $3,969,906 Occidental Rd 96th Ave. Dazet Rd. 2638 $999,242 $1,406,702 Occidental Rd. 38th Ave., S. 64th Ave., S. 4008 2 1.52 $1,518,330 Ridgeway Rd. Ahtanum Rd. Draper Rd., S. 3165 2 1.20 $1,198,879 Washington Ave., W. 73rd Ave., S. Dazet Rd. 9881 2 3.74 $3,742,845 Washington Ave., W. 72nd Ave. 88th Ave. 5328 $2,270,455 $3,196,274 Washington Ave., W. 88th Ave. 96th Ave. 2750 $1,171,960 $1,649,848 Washington Ave., W. 96th Ave. Dazet Rd. 2621 $1,116,903 $1,572,341 Wellington Dr. (56th Ave., S.) Washington Ave., W. Ahtanum Rd. 3396 2 1.29 $1,286,155 Wide Hollow Rd 91st Vicinity (Nob Hill) Dazet Rd. 4330 $1,640,000 $2,308,740 Total Costs $37,722,958 $27,298,220 $38,429,565 9 The number of lanes is estimated in Table 2 in order to calculate improvement costs. The actual number of lanes may be different, and will be based on engineering analyses. 10 Primarily estimated by City 11 Estimated by County 12 Estimated by County West Valley Neighborhood Plan • Adopted • February 2011 • Page 31 Functional Classifications The Revised Code of Washington (RCW 47.05.021) provides definitions of the hierarchy of the Classified Street system. Definitions from the RCW related to the Urban street system include: a. The "Minor Arterial system" shall, in conjunction with the principal arterial system through urban areas form an integrated network providing interstate and interregional service; and b. The "Collector system" shall consist of routes which primarily collect traffic from the system of local access roads and convey it to the arterial system, and on which, regardless of traffic volume, the predominant travel distances are shorter than on arterial routes. As shown in Map 5, the Planning Area has 16.3 miles of Classified Streets including 9.81 miles of Minor Arterials (Ackley Rd., Summitview Ave., Tieton Dr., Wide Hollow Rd., Occidental Rd., Ahtanum Rd, 96th Ave, and 64th Ave.) and 6.48 miles of Collector Arterials (Powerhouse Rd., Summitview Extension, Zier Rd, Coolidge Rd., Gilbert Rd., Meadowbrook Rd., Wiley Rd., Draper Rd., Dazet Rd., Pear Rd., S. 79th Ave., and S. 52nd Ave). No Principal Arterials are currently classified in the Planning Area. The classifications of streets are made by the federal highway administration in collaboration with the state department of transportation and local governments. A process to review the classifications normally occurs during the three years following the decennial census. YUACP 2025 is recommending that the classifications for several streets in the UGA be changed. When these are reviewed after the census, the classifications of the existing and proposed street extensions in the Planning Area should also be reviewed as proposed in Map 5A (Proposed Functional Classification of Streets). Level of Service Ensuring adequate capacity exists on public streets to support new development and provide for community needs is one of the key components of the Washington State Growth Management Act (RCW 36.70A.070). All streets within the Planning Area currently have acceptable LOS related to congestion. Level of service (LOS) measures congestion and is a quality measure, generally in terms of such service measures as speed and travel time, freedom to maneuver, traffic interruptions, comfort and convenience a given LOS (A, B, C, D, E, F) comprises or describes a range of conditions or values always given from the perspective of the facility user (Highway Capacity Manual, 2000). The minimum acceptable Level -of -Service within the City of Yakima is "D" (defined as volume -to -capacity ratio of between 0.80 and 0.89). This threshold implies that any street segment that has a lower volume -to -capacity than 0.89 does not meet the West Valley Neighborhood Plan • Adopted • February 2011 • Page 32 Level -of -Service standard for the Yakima Urban Area. Yakima County utilizes Level -of Service "C" as the minimum acceptable level for congestion. Projections of future traffic in the Planning Area indicate all Arterial and Collector streets will have acceptable LOS capacity through 2025. However, the addition of center left turn lanes or other improvements may be necessary for safety and efficiency of the system. Yakima County uses a Condition LOS model13 in addition to the capacity LOS system. Under the County's model, points are assigned to roadway segments that are deficient in meeting a set of desired criteria within four categories (safety, mobility, economic development, and alternative modes). For example, if a road has a high accident rate, the assigned points will reflect this deficiency, and deficiency points will be compiled in the "safety" category. The Condition LOS model determines the relative deficiencies of all road segments in the county. The model indicates road segments in need of improvement and thus informs the formulation of the County's 6 -year Transportation Improvement Program. Safety Safety Needs of the Arterial Streets are determined largely from reviewing Police/Sheriff accident records, which provide useful data on the location, type of collision, time of day, injuries, and other contributing factors that can be analyzed, as well as the number and severity of injuries for persons involved in the collision. Safety projects are often targeted to intersections. Access Management techniques can be applied to Arterial streets and near intersections to reduce traffic hazards and improve street capacity. Access management principals may be necessary in the vicinity of planned commercial nodes within the Planning Area. Maintenance and Road Improvements All streets require routine maintenance in order to preserve the integrity of the pavement, prevent water damage and extend the life of the asphalt. The County maintains its standard maintenance operation activities for all classified and non- classified road in the Planning Area. As annexations occur, the City will need to develop a program of regular planned maintenance for the 16+ miles of Arterial streets in the Planning Area, which will include chip -sealing, grind and overlay, or total reconstruction. The Arterial Plan will include the selection of the appropriate treatment, schedule, and financing method. The creeks within the Planning Area have considerable floodplain and floodway channels. New roads and road improvement project must be designed to reduce or avoid flood hazards. 13 Yakima County's condition LOS model is fully described in Plan 2015, i 'ol. 2, Chapter XI (the Transportation Element). West Valley Neighborhood Plan • Adopted • February 2011 • Page 33 6. SIGNALIZED AND OTHER MAJOR INTERSECTIONS The Planning Area has few existing or planned signalized intersections. Future traffic volumes and safety data will dictate where additional or revised traffic control is necessary. Alternatives to signalized intersections such as roundabouts will be considered. 7. FREIGHT TRANSPORT, AIRPORT, AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Streets The transition from agriculture to urban land uses in the Planning Area will be an on- going process. Fruit and other agricultural products will continue to require transport and storage for the economic vitality of Yakima County. Freight trucks add stress to pavement surfaces and require enhanced radius construction at intersections, which may conflict with pedestrian -friendliness. Over half the trucks hauling agricultural products have a payload of 20 to 25 tons, with 6% weighing 30 tons or more. County roads are designed and constructed to a condition that can withstand the heavier truck loads in all seasons and that can accommodate the wider widths and turning movements needed for truck travel. Access to and from the State Highway system is the most critical traffic flow issue for the local freight system. The Yakima Urban Area Transportation Plan Update 2025 identifies three categories of truck routes as depicted on Map 7 (Proposed Truck Route Map) and described in Table 3. Plan 2015 uses a classification system developed by the WSDOT, which is based on the amount of freight hauled on each road. Plan 2015's classification system is also described in Table 3. Map 7 also proposes the extensions of the truck route designations in the Yakima Urban Area Transportation Plan 2025 into the Planning Area. Due to the dispersed nature of industrial and agricultural service land uses in the Planning Area, truck traffic must travel the classified street system to reach packing facilities, warehouses, freeways, airport, or rail service. Freight movement could be encouraged to use Arterial Streets by adding advisory signs. Economic Development and tourism rely upon a connected and well-maintained street system. Adequate street signage and street lighting enhance the ability of visitors to find facilities as well as promote a safe environment. West Valley Neighborhood Plan • Adopted • February 2011 • Page 34 Table 3: Truck Route Classifications Yakima County (Source: Plan 2015, Table XI -3) Classification Annual Gross Tonnage 40 ton (Gross) Truck Equivalent Yakima County Arterial Miles T-1 Over 10,000,000 Over 120 trucks/hour* 0.00 miles T-2 5,000,000 to 10,000,000 60 to 120 trucks/hour* 0.00 miles T-3 300,000 to 5,000,000 3.6 to 60 trucks/hour* 37.37 miles T-4 100,000 to 300,000 1.2 to 3.6 trucks/hour* 164.04 miles T-5 Over 20,000 in 60 days Over 1 truck/hour** 353.55 miles City of Yakima (Source: YUATP Update 2025, Chapter 7, pages 6-9) Classification Designation Criteria Examples Through Truck Routes Roadways that provide for the most efficient movement of goods and services. The State Highway System of I-82 and SR12. Primary Truck Routes Roadways that link the City roadway system to the regional Through Truck Routes, which are largely Principal Arterial Streets. 1st Street, 16th Ave., 40th Ave., Terrace Heights Dr., Fruitvale Blvd., Nob Hill Blvd., Washington Ave., Valley Mall Blvd. Secondary Truck Routes Roadways that link the industrial centers of the City to the Primary and Through Tmck Routes and represent those roadways that are better suited to accommodate frequent truck movements. Summitview Ave., Tieton Dr., 48th Ave., 64th Ave 72nd Ave. *10 ton trucks with 30 ton payload running 8 hours/day, Monday -Friday. **10 ton trucks with 30 ton payload running 8 hours/day, 7 days/week, for 60 days. Airport The importance of aviation as a vital transportation element is essential to the economic health of the region. The Yakima Air Terminal is part of the regional and national aviation system called the National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems, or "NPIAS." In the NPIAS, capacity development (such as runway extensions) is recommended when an activity approaches certain defined levels. The adopted airport layout plan provides for extending Runways 9/27 in both directions in the future. The Yakima Air Terminal is approximately 825 acres in size and has a runway 7,604 feet long. Most business aircraft can conduct normal operations on a field of this length. Larger commercial jets, however, may have to limit fuel loads on takeoff during hot weather. The Airport passenger terminal building is a two (2) level structure with ground level enplaning and deplaning operation. Because the Yakima Air Terminal has a tower, the airspace above it is classified as Air Traffic Control Tower Airspace. For the Yakima Air Terminal, the airspace is classified as Control Zone Airspace. The airspace has a radius of approximately five West Valley Neighborhood Plan • Adopted • February 2011 • Page 35 (5) miles with extensions at the approach and departure paths. This airspace borders a Restricted Area associated with the Army's Yakima Training Center. Ensuring that new development in the vicinity of the Yakima Air Terminal McAllister Field is compatible with airport operations is important to the future long- term viability of the airport. A separate interjurisdictional planning process is addressing this issue. The airport's management believes that noise and the safety of people and property in the air and on the ground should particularly be considered in defining compatible development in the vicinity of the airport. 8. PUBLIC TRANSIT Yakima Transit provides public transportation services within the Yakima Urban Area. This service is preformed primarily through the scheduling and routing of regular fixed -route bus service that includes Yakima, Selah, and Terrace Heights. Union Gap has its own fixed -route system that connects with Yakima transit. Both systems have access to the Lower Valley via People for People's "Community C onnector." Although the Planning Area is not currently fully served by Yakima Transit, extensions of transit routes will occur as residential density and public/commercial land uses create sufficient demand for services and the ability to provide fixed -route service occurs. Yakima Transit is planning to develop a West Side Transit Center within the next several years. The City's 6 -year Transportation Improvement Program includes funding for a placement study for the facility. The YUATP 2025 lists a new Westside transfer location in the vicinity of 72nd Avenue as one of Yakima Transit's near- and mid-term implementation tasks. • The Future Land Use Map (Map 4) includes the concept for transit -oriented development ("TOD") in and around the intersection of Wide Hollow Road and 96t1i Avenue. Consideration for locating the bus -transfer station near this intersection is recommended. • Bus -pullouts, shelters, and other transit amenities along arterial streets will need to be developed as routes are established and the needs arise. Significant new developments should coordinate with these transit improvements. 9. STATE AND REGIONAL STREET SYSTEM The only state or regional street system within the Planning Area is SR 12 at Ackley Rd. West Valley Neighborhood Plan • Adopted • February 2011 • Page 36 10. IMPLEMENTATION AND FINANCING Every year the City and County each adopt Transportation Improvement Programs (TIP) that list their planned expenditures for transportation improvements over the ensuing six years. The projects on the most recent TIPS that are located in or adjacent to the Planning Area are shown on Map 10 and listed in the following table: West Valley Neighborhood Plan • Adopted • February 2011 • Page 37 Table 4: 6 -Year Transportation Improvement Projects Located in the Planning Area (Locations are shown on Map 10) Street Name Location Project Description Year Cost City of Yakima (adopted August 3, 2010, Resolution No. R-2010-98) S. 80th Ave. Tieton Dr. to Zier Rd. Preliminary engineering, R/W acquisition, & construction: Major widening, curb, gutter, sidewalk. 2012-16 $2,519,000 S. 72"d Ave. & W. Washington Ave. Intersection Preliminary engineering, R/W acquisition, & constmction: Intersection improvement, possible roundabout. 2012-16 840,000 William 0 Douglas Pathway Cowiche Canyon (project is both inside and outside of the Planning Area) Preliminary engineering & construction: Pathway improvements, connections, and signage to Cowiche Canyon Trail. 2011 $138,000 Citywide Pathway Connections (see next column: project is both inside and outside of the Planning Area) Preliminary engineering, R/W acquisition, & constmction: Cowiche Canyon Trail, Powerhouse Rd. pathway, east side canal paths, WOD Trail, Greenway including Naches Rail Spur, signage and amenities. 2012-16 $3,339,000 YVT Pathway YVT Rail Corridor (project is both inside and outside of the Planning Area) Preliminary engineering & construction: Development pathway in West Valley area including 53rd Ave., Wide Hollow, 64th Ave., Ahtanum including all utilities and signage. 2014-16 $1,424,000 W Yakima North/South Connector to West Valley Unknown Road. Preliminary engineering for City & County joint project to build/extend roadways. 2014-16 $137,000 West Side Transit Center Unknown. Preliminary engineering: Locate and acquire property for the placement of a West Side Transit Center Operation. 2011 $500,000 West Side Transit Center Unknown. Preliminary engineering: Construct a West Side Transit Center (Park & Ride facility). 2013-16 $1,600,000 Coolidge Road 80th Ave. to 88th Ave. Construction: Widen roadway and pave with curb and gutter. 2011 $754,000 Occidental Road �8t11 Ave. to 64th Ave. Preliminary engineering: Construct roadway. 2014-16 $100,000 86th Ave. Occidental to Coolidge Preliminary engineering: Construct roadway. 2014-16 $100,000 64th Ave. Washington Ave. to Nob Hill Blvd. (intersection with Washington Ave. is within Planning Area) Preliminary engineering, R/W acquisition, & construction: Widen roadway, curb, gutter, sidewalks, lighting, & drainage. 2012-13 $2,081,000 West Valley Neighborhood Plan • Adopted • February 2011 • Page 38 Street Name Location Project Description Year Cost Yakima County (adopted November 23, 2010, Resolution No. 469-2010) Ahtanum Rd. S. 66t11 Ave. vicinity to S. 90th Ave. vicinity Preliminary engineering & R/W acquisition: Reconstruct to 5 lanes with curbs, gutters, sidewalks, lighting, bike lanes, and channelization. 2014-16 $600,000 Ahtanum Rd. S. 26th Ave. vicinity to S. 52"d Ave. vicinity Preliminary engineering: Reconstruct to 4 lanes w/ curbs, gutters, sidewalks, lighting, bike lanes, and channelization. 2014-16 $150,000 Wide Hollow Rd. S. 80th Ave. to S. 96th Ave. Preliminary engineering and R/W acquisition: Reconstruct to 4 lanes w/ curbs, gutters, sidewalks, lighting, and channelization. 2014-16 $500,000 W. Powerhouse Rd. Yakima city limits to S. Naches Rd. Preliminary engineering & R/W acquisition: Reconstruct roadway to 40' wide, w/2 12' lanes and 8' shoulders. 2014-16 $190,000 Hennessy Rd. Tieton Dr. to end of road Preliminary engineering, R/W acquisition, and construction: Reconstruct gravel road to standard 30' paved roadway. 2011 $445,000 Sources of Street Improvement Revenues: • Gas Tax — A portion of gas tax receipts are allocated to cities and counties for street and road system maintenance and improvements. • Real Estate Excise Tax 1 (REET 1)14 — RCW 82.46.010 authorizes cities and counties to levy a quarter percent (0.25%) excise tax on the sale price of real estate. Cities and counties with a population of 5,000 or more that are planning under GMA may spend these funds only on capital projects listed in the capital facilities plan element of their comprehensive plans. RCW 82.46.010(6) defines "capital projects" as: "...those public works projects of a local government for planning, acquisition, construction, reconstruction, repair, replacement, rehabilitation, or improvement of streets; roads; highways; sidewalks; street and road lighting systems; traffic signals; bridges; domestic water systems; storm and sanitary sewer systems; parks; recreational facilities; law enforcement facilities; fire protection facilities; trails; libraries; administrative and judicial facilities..." • Real Estate Excise Tax 2 (REET 2)15 - Cities and counties that are required to or choose to plan under the Growth Management Act may levy a second quarter 14 Information provided by the Municipal Research Services Center of Washington state: http://www. mrsc. org/Subjects/finance/reet/reetweb. asps#que stionl 1' ditto West Valley Neighborhood Plan • Adopted • February 2011 • Page 39 percent (0.25%) excise tax on the sale price of real estate. For this quarter percent of the real estate excise tax, "capital project" means those: "...public works projects of a local government for planning, acquisition, construction, reconstruction, repair, replacement, rehabilitation, or improvement of streets, roads, highways, sidewalks, street and road lighting systems, traffic signals, bridges, domestic water systems, storm and sanitary sewer systems, and planning, construction, reconstruction, repair, rehabilitation, or improvement of parks. RCW 82.46.035(5). Note that acquisition of land for parks is not a permitted use of REET 2 receipts, although it is a permitted use for street, water, and sewer projects. In 2004, the Yakima City Council authorized the second quarter Real Estate Excise Tax. The City uses these funds for to purchase materials for crack filling and chip sealing local access streets. The revenues have also been used for street maintenance and repair purposes, as well as other projects listed on the Capital Facilities Plan. • Property Tax - Property tax funds the day-to-day operations of the City's street and traffic operations division. This includes utilities such as power for streetlights and signals. Materials such as paint, sign plates, rock, salt, anti -icing chemicals, oil, and lamps that are required for programs such as lane line striping, street light repairs, signal repair and operation, snow and ice control, mowing, and street maintenance and preservation. Programs may be mandated, provide for the safety of the citizens, or are good stewardship programs that protect the $250 million investment that the public has made to the existing transportation system. • Grants - Both Yakima County and the City of Yakima actively seeks grant funds for capital projects. In the past, funding sources have included Transportation Improvement Board, Washington Traffic Safety Commission, Hazard Elimination, Freight Mobility, Congestion Management and Air Quality, Surface Transportation Program, County Road Administration Board (CRAB), Urban Arterial Trust Account (UATA), Transportation Improvement Account (TIA), Bridge Replacement (BR), County Arterial Preservation Program (CAPP), and Rural Arterial Program (RAP). • Latecomers Agreements — An agreement between the developer of a particular property and the local government that allows the developer to recoup some of his/her costs of constructing a public road/improvement from future users of the improvement. The sewer line serving Apple Tree is an example. • Proportional Share Contributions - Private developers have contributed funds toward capital projects based on a pro -rata share of new, site -generated traffic volumes as a share of the total project cost and total future traffic toward projects contained in the Six -Year Transportation Plan list. Rates are based on a formula that assesses a proportionate share of the total project cost relative to the trip rate. West Valley Neighborhood Plan • Adopted • February 2011 • Page 40 • County Road Tax — A tax assessed on property in unincorporated areas that is dedicated exclusively for transportation improvements. • Federal Forest Payments — Much of western Yakima County is federally owned forest property that is not assessed for the County's road levy or property taxes. The federal government makes Federal Forest payments to the County for use in funding transportation improvements to compensate for this loss of revenue and to account for the impact that forest management activities have on the County's road system. • Miscellaneous Local Revenue — Yakima County receives local revenues from miscellaneous sources. These include mitigation payments and transfers of funds from other jurisdictions for reimbursable work. • Road Improvement Districts RIDs — can be used to finance a wide range of public improvements, such as upgrading substandard residential streets. RIDS involve the issuance of special assessment bonds with a pledge of repayment by the benefited property owners or developers. The County can partially offset the cost of RIDS by contributing a staff person to help organize and promote the RIDS and by paying some of the preliminary engineering design work for determining the types and cost of improvements needed. RIDS are typically not a funding source for general transportation improvements. • Local Option Fees and Taxes — Establishment of the Local Option Vehicle License Fee for general transportation purposes could generate additional revenue to be used for targeted areas such as the focused public investment areas, safety projects, paving gravel roads, & alternative mode improvements. A local option fuel tax is another potential revenue source. • Congressional Direct Appropriations — Federal appropriation bills may include funding for particular local or state transportation projects. Transportation Issues The following transportation issues are identified by the planning process: 1. Few major roads run the length and breadth of the Planning Area, which makes travel within and through the area difficult, confusing, and time-consuming for emergency services. The north/south roads are particularly discontinuous, but many east/west roads are as well. This subarea plan considers designating roads that could be extended to improve east -west and north -south through routes. 2. Historically, new subdivisions have been built without providing for direct road connections between them. Connecting neighborhoods promotes alternative modes of travel and limits congestion on major streets. Traffic calming methods may be considered on local access roads that are connected together to promote their desirability in the neighborhoods they serve. 3. A proliferation of driveways along major streets as land is developed in the future will reduce their capacity to carry traffic. Standards for access management West Valley Neighborhood Plan • Adopted • February 2011 • Page 41 should be developed to protect the function of these roads to carry high volumes of traffic safely. 4. Other communities have gained increased environmental benefits and reduced costs by revising standards for new access roads. Currently, design standards are marginally different between the City and County and should be consistent. 5. Newer north -south and east -west arterial roads located in the floodplains in the Planning Area have both redirected flood flows and increased flooding from ponding. Careful consideration in the future is needed to alleviate this situation. 6. Consider traffic patterns and safety, especially at schools. 7. There is interest in identifying opportunities for trails systems and ensuring that future street improvements provide for alternative travel modes. 8. Focused Public Investment Corridors offer an approach that would provide fully - served areas for future development. The Yakinia Urban Area Comprehensive Plan 2025 defines Focused Investment Areas or Corridors as: "[a]reas or corridors within an urban growth area where the City, Yakinia County and other urban service providers (Nob Hill Water Association, West Valley Fire District, East Valley Fire District, Terrace Heights Sewer District, City of Union Gap, Irrigation Districts) strategically coordinate finance and extension of infrastructure and services." Similarly, Focused Public Investment, as defined by Plan 2015: "targets capital improvements expenditures in public investment areas to produce "frilly -served land" for developnient. Focused public iin'estnient maximizes the use of limited public funds by coordinating government expenditures and focusing developnient first in some areas, then in others. The targeted public iin'estnient is an incentive to developnient to occur where the public 's capital iin'estnient is focused. In order for public investment to be focused to produce fully -served land, the County and other service providers will need to resolve the following issues: (1) what criteria should be used to prioritize public investnients, and (2) how should areas be selected for targeted investnient? Previous comprehensive plan policies16 called for designating and prioritizing Focused Public Investment Corridors inside the Planning Area and the UGA to facilitate coordinated and collaborative public infrastructure investment. However, rather than designating them in the WVNP, such corridors will be partnerships that develop over time. 9. The Planning Area will primarily be a residential area with limited commercial nodes. As such, the visual clutter of billboards is not appropriate. Transportation Goals and Policies The Yakinia Urban Area Comprehensive Plan 2025 establishes goals and policies pertaining to the Yakima UGA, including the Planning Area. The following goals and policies for Transportation are intended to guide the application of the YUACP 2025 16 For example, Policy G10.2 of the Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan (adopted 1997) stated: "Designate and prioritize Focused Public Investment Areas or Corridors inside the urban service area and or the urban reserve area to facilitate coordinated and collaborative public infrastructure investment." West Valley Neighborhood Plan • Adopted • February 2011 • Page 42 goals and policies to the Planning Area and address the issues identified by the planning process. GOAL 3.1: Ensure that West Valley's street system is designed to provide multiple connections to reduce traffic congestion on major arterials and improve mobility. Policies: 3.1.1 Designate east -west and north -south through -connections to reserve corridors for the future improvement of local access and classified streets as indicated on Map 6 (Street Connections Plan). • The several connections shown between Nob Hill Blvd. and Wide Hollow Road indicate possible options rather than the determined connections. 3.1.2 Ensure the continuation of the street grid network as new developments are approved and roads are constructed, except where flooding makes this undesirable. 3.1.3 Design new streets and street improvements to avoid increased flooding by accommodating flooding channels, both mapped and unmapped by FEMA. 3.1.4 Ensure consistency of road standards between the City and County. 3.1.5 Provide road connections between new subdivisions. 3.1.6 Establish and implement access road design standards that calm traffic. 3.1.7 Design arterial streets to accommodate transit. 3.1.8 Review new development to ensure adequate street connectivity that provides for multiple means of ingress and egress where feasible. 3.1.9 Encourage the use of street patterns within new development that provide for neighborhood safety, and prevent non-resident through traffic, while allowing for optimum traffic flow. 3.1.10 Develop low -impact ("green") residential street design standards that not only reduce stormwater runoff and infrastructure and maintenance costs, but help lower the cost of development associated with new road infrastructure. 3.1.11 Provide for multiple residential street design options that allow for flexibility in new development. 3.1.12 Designate Focused Public Investment Corridors as an approach to provide fully - served areas for future development. Such corridors could facilitate coordinated and collaborative infrastructure investment by coordinating investments of the various public agencies and private developers. 3.1.13 Establish a collaborative city/county Transportation Improvement Program process through the Intergovernmental Committee. GOAL 3.2: Ensure that West Valley is pedestrian and bicycle friendly. Policies: 3.2.1 Designate a system of streets with bicycle lanes or wide curb lanes on arterials that is coordinated with the trail and road system of adjacent jurisdictions. See Map 9 (Bicycle Facilities Plan). 3.2.2 Consider use of floodplains to facilitate east -west trail connectivity. Some north - south connectivity can be provided by use of irrigation canals. West Valley Neighborhood Plan • Adopted • February 2011 • Page 43 3.2.3 Develop new residential street design standards that increase walkability by utilizing traffic calming techniques to help maintain a close-knit feel to the community. 3.2.4 Develop effective pedestrian -friendly subdivision design standards that connect new developments with access to transit and adjacent land uses with sidewalks or footpaths where feasible. 3.2.5 Introduce traffic calming designs in new subdivisions when they are initially planned and constructed. 3.2.6 As an interim measure prior to completion of the sidewalk system, stripe wide shoulders where appropriate to increase pedestrian and bicycle safety. GOAL 3.3: Provide for street and parking standards in commercial and retail areas that maximize safety and provide a more pleasing environment. Policies: 3.3.1 Provide incentives for establishing shared parking lots and access to them. 3.3.2 Establish minimum parking standards for commercial and retail uses. 3.3.3 Develop a road access management plan to minimize new driveways onto collector and arterial streets. GOAL 3.4: Promote aesthetically -pleasing streetscapes. Policies: 3.4.1 Apply zoning in the Planning Area that prohibits billboards. 3.4.2 Adopt a definition for billboards in the Yakima Urban Area Zoning Ordinance that distinguishes large leased commercial signs. West Valley Neighborhood Plan • Adopted • February 2011 • Page 44 IV. Parks, Open Space, & Natural Environment Element Introduction Plan 2015, the Yakima County comprehensive plan, frames a major challenge for this element: "... the need for urban parks, particularly in areas outside current city limits but within urban growth boundaries was identified In areas such as West Valley...little or no parkland has been preserved. Since most future developnient will occur within urban areas, the location of parks and open space within ...them will beconie particularly important. Unless park and open space lands are acquired and preserved in the very near future, area residents will not enjoy the convenience of nearby parks and recreational facilities... [PJublic officials planning for the long term must be aware of the consequences of not providing additional parks and recreational opportunities as the area grows. If an acquisition and developnient program is not impleniented, the costs of recreation will eventually beconie prohibitive as land options diniinish. ,,With no land available, the opportunity to build new parks will be lost forever."' Current Parks, Open Space, & Natural Environment Policy Policies from several existing planning documents that currently apply to the Planning Area are summarized below. Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan 2025 The Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan 2025 was adopted by the Board of County Commissioners and City Council in December 2006. That plan adopts, by reference, the City of Yakima's Parks and Recreation Comprehensive Plan 2006-2011, which provides the policy direction for the entire Yakima UGA. The goals, objectives, and policies that are most applicable to the Planning Area are summarized below18: 1. Establish a Parks Fund dedicated to the acquisition of land for future neighborhood and community parks within the City of Yakima; 2. Develop and maintain an up-to-date park land acquisition plan that targets and sets priorities for future park acquisition; 3. Plan for a series of neighborhood parks in Yakima's UGA; 4. Develop new neighborhood and community parks west of 40th Avenue; 17 Plan 2015, Vol. 1, Parks & Open Space chapter, Major Issues section. 18 The full text of goals, objectives, and policies that are most applicable to the West Valley Planning Area are in Appendix 1. West Valley Neighborhood Plan • Adopted • February 2011 • Page 45 5. Develop greenbelts and pathways within the City, using existing irrigation canal rights-of-way and Yakima Valley Trolley corridors for pathways that link bicycle routes, major parks, the Greenway, and pathways that extend beyond the UGA; 6. Incorporate pathways into all future residential, commercial, and industrial developments; 7. Develop innovative approaches to creating new park facilities. Plan 2015 Plan 2015, the Yakima County Comprehensive Plan, also provides policy direction to Yakima County concerning parks. The policies that are most applicable to managing growth in the Planning Area are summarized below19: 1. Encourage and assist the City in developing parks to meet the needs of city residents and facilitate connections with nearby recreation opportunities; 2. Consider regulations requiring developers to meet a minimum standard for on-site recreational facilities or equivalent alternative provisions; 3. Pursue funding sources; 4. Investigate innovative methods to finance facility development, maintenance, and operations; 5. Facilitate a county -wide network of open space and greenbelts; and 6. Develop trails to accommodate multiple uses. Open Space Tax Program The Washington State Open Space Tax Act (RCW 84.34) offers reduced real estate taxes to landowners as an incentive to keep their land in open space. Two programs apply in the Planning Area: 1. Current Use Program — Agricultural lands meeting the statutory criteria may qualify for the current use program, whereby the property is assessed at its current use value rather than its market value. Applications for this program are made to and decided by the County Assessor. 2. Open Space Program — Lands having particular resources (such as floodplains, scenic vistas, etc.) may qualify for a reduction in their assessed values under Yakima County's Public Benefit and Rating System. This system awards points based on resource characteristics, public access availability, and other attributes. More points result in lower taxes for the property owner20. Applications for this program are made to the County Planning Division, with the decision on the reduction made by the Board of County Commissioners after recommendation by the Yakima County Planning Commission. However, applications concerning land within the city limits are decided by a granting authority composed of three members of the Board of County Commissioners and three members of the City Council . 19 The full text of policies that are most applicable to the West Valley Planning Area are included in Appendix 2. - No change in revenue results to taxing districts because the losses are made up by other property owners in the districts. West Valley Neighborhood Plan • Adopted • February 2011 • Page 46 Shoreline Master Program The Naches River and Cowiche Creek are under the jurisdiction of the state's Shoreline Management Act and thus are under the jurisdiction of the City's and County's Shoreline Master Programs (SMPs). The SMPs promote conservation of, and public access to, these shoreline resources. Critical Areas Ordinances The Critical Area Ordinances (CAO) of the County and City are intended to protect five types of environmentally sensitive areas, namely: critical aquifer recharge areas for potable water, frequently flooded areas, fish and wildlife habitat, wetlands, and geological hazards. For instance, developments in FEMA -designated floodplains are subject to development standards intended to minimize damage during flood events. Similarly, vegetative buffers along creeks, rivers, and wetlands are established to protect the values and function of wetlands and streams, such as floodwater storage, stream bank and shoreline stabilization, erosion prevention, and migratory corridors for wildlife. Map 13 identifies the locations of potential steams and wetlands that might be subject to development standards. Flood Hazard Areas Of particular note within the West Valley Planning Area, the Naches River and Cowiche, Spring, Bachelor, Hatton, Shaw, and Wide Hollow Creeks, and their tributary streams have the potential to threaten public health, infrastructure, and safety during floods. Minor flooding occurs on a regular basis with periodic major floods. Flooding characteristics differ somewhat between the drainages depending in part on how much flow they receive from snow melt. All of these streams - except Shaw Creek - have associated floodplains mapped by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) as depicted in Map 12. (However, a current remapping project will designate a FEMA floodplain for Shaw Creek, as described below.) There are also overland floodplains identified as flowing between Spring, Bachelor, and Ahtanum Creeks in several locations. FEMA, with the assistance of the Yakima County -wide Flood Control District (YCFCZD), is currently remapping the floodplains of Wide Hollow Creek and Ahtanum Creek and their tributaries, which includes mapping the Shaw Creek floodplain for the first time. The YCFCZD also recently completed remapping the floodplain for a portion of the Naches River, including the portion located in the Planning Area. These revised floodplain designations will be incorporated into the FEMA flood maps upon adoption by FEMA. The YCFCZD, in partnership with local jurisdictions, property owners and stakeholders, is creating the Ahtanum-Wide Hollow Comprehensive Flood Hazard Management Plan (CFHMP) to indicate historic problem areas, recommend guidance on development, and identify potential flood hazard mitigations for existing development. The lower Naches River is included in the Upper Yakima River CFHMP, adopted in 2007. The Cowiche Creek portion of the Planning Area is not currently included in a CFHMP. In addition to FEMA floodplain requirements, Yakima County and the City of Yakima's Shoreline Master Program and Critical Area Ordinance regulations for floodplains help to ensure that development in or near these areas does not increase the flood risk to upstream or downstream neighbors and to maintain natural functions of the floodplains. West Valley Neighborhood Plan • Adopted • February 2011 • Page 47 Natural Environment As stated in the Yakinia Urban Area Comprehensive Plan 2025 (YUACP), "The natural environment is composed of air, water, soil, minerals, and living organisms, such as plants, animals, people, fish, birds, insects, and microorganisms. How well these components interact with each other, as well as good stewardship of the environment, determines to a large extent the health of the environment." (YUACP, p. X-1) The Planning Area's natural environment is typical of an Eastern Washington urbanizing area. A brief description of the components of the Planning Area's natural environment and the challenges to preserving it and mitigating potential adverse impacts follow: Topography and Hydrology Yakima Valley can be viewed as part of a larger geological system underlain with folded layers of a thick flow sequence of Yakima basalt. The upper layer is composed of sedimentary rocks called the Ellensburg formation. The majority of the Planning Area is in the Wide Hollow and Ahtanum Creek drainage basins, while a small portion of the Planning Area is in the drainage basins of Cowiche Creek and the Naches River. The long-term floodplains of the Ahtanum and Wide Hollow basins have been filled in by dense, poorly draining Missoula flood deposits. In addition, the valleys from the Yakima River to Tampico have been tilted by the rising ridges to the north and south that bound the watersheds. The result is low channel capacity and multiple overflow paths during floods. The Wide Hollow drainage basin includes Wide Hollow, Cottonwood Canyon, and Shaw Creeks. Wide Hollow Creek within the Planning Area between Hennessey and 80th Avenues can be described as a dissected plateau of the Ellensburg and Thorp formations, which consists of weakly cemented gravel. As a small stream, Wide Hollow Creek has a relatively broad flat floodplain in the "hollows" of the upper watershed. This area's stream channels generally consist of a low gradient with low banks and are composed of gravel, sand, and silt with floodplains composed of shallow silt deposits. The natural flow of Wide Hollow Creek is mainly a result of snow runoff from Pine and Cowiche mountains. After spring snowmelt, flow rapidly drops during late spring. East of 48th Avenue, Wide Hollow Creek flows through an area of high groundwater, which supplies a stable flow to the Creek year-round. The Ahtanum Drainage Basin includes Ahtanum, Hatton, and Bachelor Creeks. Bachelor Creek within the Planning Area from approximately Stanton Road to S. 99th Avenue can be described as a slightly incised and very sinuous stream. In the lower third of Bachelor Creek, there is contact with shallow groundwater, which maintains stream flow through the summer. The banks of the stream are composed of wetland soils with expansive floodplains. The Ahtanum Irrigation District withdraws irrigation water from Ahtanum Creek and routes water down both Bachelor and Hatton Creeks. The flows in these creeks are reduced or eliminated after July 10th when diversions from Ahtanum Creek are required to cease by a 1936 Court Decree that gives the Wapato Irrigation District the right to the entire flow of Ahtanum Creek. West Valley Neighborhood Plan • Adopted • February 2011 • Page 48 The Cowiche Creek Drainage Basin, which includes the North Fork and South Fork of Cowiche Creek, drains into the Naches River near Ackley Road. Fish Habitat The Ahtanum, Wide Hollow, and Cowiche Creek Basins have historically contained fish of ecological and cultural significance. However, within these basins, users upstream use the streams for recreational uses, and remove water from these streams for irrigation. Threatened or Endangered Species (Steelhead and Bull Trout) within the Wide Hollow, Ahtanum Creek, and Cowiche Creek basins continue to be the subject of protection and enhancement programs implemented by the Yakama Nation, the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife, North Yakima Conservation District, Cowiche Canyon Conservancy, and other interested agencies and organizations. Water Quality The Washington State Department of Ecology (DOE) is responsible for determining appropriate water quality standards and classifying water bodies. Surface water quality standards are intended to protect beneficial uses of the waters of the state. Water quality standards establish water quality goals for lakes, rivers, marine waters, and groundwater. Under Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act [33 USC 1313] and based on the 2002/2004 Water Quality Assessment for Yakima County, the DOE has listed Wide Hollow Creek as not meeting the minimum water quality standards because it contains Dieldrin, Endosulfan, and fecal coliform above the levels allowed. It also violates the water quality standards for maximum temperature. Cowiche Creek does not meet water quality standards for temperature, fecal coliform, and instream flows. Air Quality As defined in the Yakinia Urban Area Comprehensive Plan 2025, "an airshed is defined as a volume of air, bounded by geographical and/or meteorological constraints, within which activities discharge contaminants." The Environmental Protection Agency defines the Yakima Basin as the airshed for the City of Yakima and its Urban Area. (YUACP 2025, page X-3) Parks, Open Space, & Natural Environment Issues The following parks, open space, and natural environment issues are identified by the planning process: 1. Flooding is a major concern along Shaw, Wide Hollow, Bachelor, and Hatton Creeks. Development standards established by the CAO (YCC Titles 16A and 16C and YMC Chapter 15.27) and International Building Code (YCC Title 13 and YMC Title 11) are intended to minimize flood damage and apply to developments within the areas mapped as floodplains by FEMA. The Yakima County -wide Flood Control Zone District (YCFCZD) is currently remapping these floodplains for this area and mapping Shaw Creek's floodplain for the first time. This will increase the accuracy of the floodplains' locations and improve the application of the development standards. West Valley Neighborhood Plan • Adopted • February 2011 • Page 49 The latest draft floodplain re -mapping is shown in Map 12 (Streams and Floodplains). It shows that the Shaw Creek floodplain covers developed and potentially developable lands east and south east of Cottonwood School. A study being prepared under the direction of the YCFCZD is in the process of identifying possible ways to reduce the extent of that portion of the floodplain through alternative configurations for the development of a relocation channel or a high- flow bypass channel for Shaw Creek. The YCFCZD, in partnership with local jurisdictions, property owners and stakeholders, is creating the Ahtanum-Wide Hollow Comprehensive Flood Hazard Management Plan (CHIMP) to indicate historic problem areas, provide recommendations for guiding development, and identify potential flood hazard mitigations for existing development. The final draft of the plan will be completed by the end of 2009 for community discussion and adoption. The lower Naches River is included in the Upper Yakima River CHIMP, adopted in 2007. The YCFCZD recently completed remapping the floodplain of the Naches River, including the portion occurring in the Planning Area. The County is negotiating with property owners for arrangements that will permanently reduce the potential for flood damage along this portion of the Naches River. Capital improvements or property acquisitions identified by the CFHMPs should be considered for inclusion on the City's and County's capital facilities plans. Capital facilities plans should also reflect areas where urban service extensions may not be recommended in areas subject to flooding or where planned development density is too low to support such services. Any regulatory changes recommended by the CFHMPs should be considered for inclusion in the appropriate development regulations of the City and County. It is important to ensure that areas prone to flooding are developed in a manner that allows flood waters to flow through while causing minimal damage. Natural drainage courses should be preserved as opposed to filled in through site grading. One tool that will assist with this objective is the Yakima Urban Area Zoning Ordinance's requirement that new lots located in FEMA -designated floodplains be at least one acre in size21. The Yakima County Zoning Ordinance, which currently applies to the unincorporated portion of the Planning Area, does not currently have such a provision. The application of Yakima Urban Area Zoning to the Planning Area and the incorporation of such urban policies into the Yakima County Zoning Ordinance, as contemplated by the WVNP, will help minimize flood damage. 2. No provisions are being made to ensure parks in the Planning Area. Currently, there are no public parks or trails in the Planning Area. However, existing recreation and open space locations, shown in Map 11 (Parks and Trails), include: 21 YCC 15A.05.030(c) and YMC 15.05.030C. (Lots smaller than one acre may be allowed if they have a buildable area outside the floodplain and a plat restriction prohibits development in the floodplain.) West Valley Neighborhood Plan • Adopted • February 2011 • Page 50 • Public schools, Tampico Saddle Club's grounds in Wiley City, and Apple Tree Resort's golf course. • County -owned parcels along the Naches River that were acquired in 2009 to accommodate flooding are shown. • The floodplain along Wide Hollow Creek is indicated to envision that this corridor should functionally accommodate flooding while publicly -owned portions also offering the possibility of a green gathering place that should be incorporated into the design of the "Village Center" at the intersection of S. 9e Avenue and Wide Hollow Road. • City- and County -owned rail corridors are indicated for future trails. These include the City -owned trolley and Cowiche rail corridors, and the County - owned Naches rail corridor. • The 2000 WVNP Task Force recommended a system of trails for the Planning Area. Such a potential trail system is indicated on Map 11 (Parks and Trails) showing how a trails network could be developed using rail, irrigation, and drainage corridors together with a few key on -street connections. Such a network would connect existing trails, parks, schools, and potential trail corridors, including trails of the Yakima Greenway Foundation, Cowiche Canyon Conservancy, and William O. Douglas Trails Foundation, as discussed elsewhere in Section IV (Parks, Open Space, & Natural Environment Element). Neither the County nor the City of Yakima has specific plans for parks, nor do the municipalities have a strategy for ensuring that parks will exist in the future. The consequence of continuing to have no strategy will likely result in the Planning Area accommodating a build -out population of 36,000 people22 with few or no parks. The existing policies in the YUACP 2025 recognize the need for parks, but no mechanisms for ensuring their creation are currently being employed. One potential mechanism is the state's subdivision 1aw23, which requires cities and counties to determine if "appropriate provisions are made for... open spaces, drainage ways,...parks and recreation, playgrounds..." when considering applications for subdividing land. If a proposed subdivision does not provide adequately for parks, the application can not be approved24. A review of recent approvals of subdivisions by the City and County found that both jurisdictions are making findings that adequate parks and recreation are being provided based on, for example: the potential for playground areas on the single-family sized lots being created; the proximity of a park three miles away; the existence of playgrounds at schools that children within the proposed plats would be attending; and findings that parks are not deemed necessary or that the 5% dedication for parks is not typically invoked25. 22 City of Yakima ri astewrater Facility Plan, February 2004 draft, page 3-2. 23 RCW 58.17.110(2) 2 4 RCW 58.17.110 (2). YCC 14.28.070 provides that the BOCC may require plats to designate up to 5% of their land area as either private or public parks and recreational areas and provides that, as an alternative to dedication, the developer may be required to contribute to the county for park purposes to benefit the area up to 5% of the developed value of the lots to be sold in the plat. However, case law and RCW 82.02.020 require that such West Valley Neighborhood Plan • Adopted • February 2011 • Page 51 To estimate the amount of future park land that will be needed in the Planning Area at build -out, the County Planning Division used the population and existing amount of park land within the City of Yakima in 2005 to create a local standard26. For the Planning Area to have the same level of public park land that currently exists in Yakima, the following amount of land for parks would need to be provided: Table 5: Estimate of the Amount of Park Land Needed Park Type Typical Park Size Need in Planning Area at build -out Estimated cost of land acquisition in 200527 Mini Parks28 < 3 acres 2.3 acres $67,500 Neighborhood Parks29 3+ acres 22.5 acres $144,250 Community Parks3° 20+ acres 83.3 acres $742,200 Total - 108.1 acres $953,950 Potential strategies for providing park land: The Municipal Research and Services Center of Washington (MRSC) lists and provides information on the following funding options for park and open space acquisition by local governments: a. Impact fees b. Real estate excise tax c. Conservation futures tax d. General obligation bonds e. Fee -in -lieu of dedication of parks and open space f. Grants g. Purchase of development rights program The MRSC also lists and provides information on the following non -monetary options for park and open space acquisition: dedications can only be made as reasonably necessary as a direct result of the subdivision. Payments in lieu of dedication must be based on the value of the particular land that would otherwise be dedicated. Without a clear and consistent policy directive to do so, such dedications or fees in lieu are not likely to be utilized 26 To arrive at a conservative local standard, the acreage of the following parks & green spaces were not included: golf courses, cemeteries, Yakima Greenway Foundation lands (such as Sarg Hubbard and Sherman Parks), the Arboretum, Harman Senior Center at Gailleon Park, Central Business District Parks, and parkways (such as Naches Ave. parkway, Powerhouse Canal Pathway, Walter Ortman parkway, Fairbrook Addition, N. 44th Ave. parkway, and S. 6t'' Ave. parkway). ,' Based on 2005 assessed values of representative vacant parcels of appropriate sizes in the Planning Area. 28 The Mini park standard is based on the total acreage of the following parks divided by Yakima's 2005 population of 79,480: Cherry, McGuinness, Portia, Rosalma Garden Club, South 21K1 Ave., Summitview, and Tieton Terrace. 29 The Neighborhood park standard is based on the total acreage of the following parks divided by Yakima's 2005 population of 79,480: Larson, Eisenhower, Gardner, Gilbert, Lions, Martin Luther King, Miller, Milroy, Raymond, and Southeast Community. 31 The Community park standard is based on the total acreage of the following parks divided by Yakima's 2005 population of 79,480: Chesterley, Elks, Franklin, Kiwanis, Randall, Kissel, West Valley, and Perry Soccer Complex. West Valley Neighborhood Plan • Adopted • February 2011 • Page 52 a. Parks and/or open space dedication requirements as part of subdivision b. Density bonus or clustering for preservation of open space c. Density transfer d. Development agreements (not involving fee -in -lieu dedication) e. Transfer of development rights program f. Less than fee simple - purchase of development rights; conservation easements Parks, Open Space, and Natural Environment Goals and Policies The Yak/nia Urban Area Comprehensive Plan 2025 establishes goals and policies pertaining to the Yakima UGA, including the Planning Area. The following goals and policies for Parks, Open Space, and Natural Environment are intended to guide the application of the YUACP 2025 goals and policies to the Planning Area and address the issues identified by the planning process. GOAL 4.1: Provide for a system of trails Policies: 4.1.1 Designate an interconnecting pathway system along corridors (trolley and rail corridors, canals, and creeks) that connects with adjacent jurisdictions. See Map 11 (Parks and Trails). GOAL 4.2: Provide for an adequate level of Parks & Open Space Policies: 4.2.1 Establish a task force and/or work with the City's Park & Recreation Commission to make recommendations concerning: • Establishing a standard for neighborhood and community park acreage and indicate general locations for new parks. • Identifying possible tools for acquiring, developing and maintaining new parks/open space, such as fee in lieu of providing land for parks. • Establishing an upper Yakima County park and recreation district or metropolitan park district. • Establishing a City/County partnership to finance and acquire park land before vacant land is scarce and expensive. 4.2.2 Give high priority to lowlands for parks/open space to provide dual function as flood storage and habitat protection. 4.2.3 Ensure that large developments provide adequate recreation space. 4.2.4 Define "Community Open Space" to include any parcel or area of land or water essentially unimproved and set aside, dedicated, designated, or reserved for public or private use, enjoyment, as well as the use and enjoyment of owners, occupants, and their guests of land adjoining or neighboring such open spaces. Community open space may include neighborhood and community parks, commons, plazas, community green or lawn, landscaped buffers, or other areas, decorative West Valley Neighborhood Plan • Adopted • February 2011 • Page 53 plantings, formal and informal gardens, pedestrian walkways or paths, and active or passive recreation areas (swimming pools, tennis courts, playgrounds, etc.). Community open space shall not include street rights-of-way or any area within a residential lot. 4.2.5 Provide incentives to developers that allow for additional lot coverage and/or additional density in exchange for community open space. Allow non -developable critical areas to count as a portion of the required community open space area when proposed in exchange for additional density or lot coverage. 4.2.6 Designated critical areas and dedicated community open space located within a proposed subdivision should be included in density calculations. GOAL 4.3: Maximize the benefit and protection of Critical Areas Policies: 4.3.1 Maintain/restore open space buffers along rivers and creeks for priority species and habitat, passive recreation, and flood storage. 4.3.2 Support implementation of recommendations of the YCFCZD's Ahtanum/Wide Hollow Comprehensive Flood Hazard Management Plan. 4.3.3 Develop a programmatic CAO/SMP/SEPA approach for selected reaches of flood prone creeks and streams to improve conveyance capacity of channels consistent with CAO and SMP requirements. West Valley Neighborhood Plan • Adopted • February 2011 • Page 54 V. Capital Facilities & Utilities Element Introduction The Growth Management Act (RCW 36.70A) requires local comprehensive plans to include a Capital Facilities Element that: (1) inventories existing capital facilities owned by public entities, (2) forecasts the future needs for such capital facilities, (3) indicates the proposed locations and capacities of any future facilities, and (4) includes a financial plan for at least six years identifying sources of public money for financing improvements. The capital facilities element must be coordinated and consistent with the land use element, consistent with adjacent local jurisdictions' plans, and integrated with relevant County -wide planning policies. Where the GMA requires, or local government opts to have, certain capital facilities in place with development, the concept known as concurrency (also called "adequate public facilities") applies. If the costs exceed the revenue in circumstances where concurrency is required, the local government must reduce its level of service, reduce costs, or modify the land use element to bring development into balance with available or affordable facilities. The Growth Management Act and the Yakinia Urban Area Comprehensive Plan 2025 require concurrency only for transportation facilities. Plan 2015 establishes concurrency requirements for transportation, wastewater collection and treatment, water supply and delivery, and stormwater management. The Growth Management Act also requires local comprehensive plans to include a Utilities Element that indicates the general location, proposed location, and capacity of all existing and proposed utilities. The Yakinia Urban Area Comprehensive Plan 2025 provides this information for the entire urban growth area. This element summarizes information concerning utilities within the Planning Area. Current Conditions The Yakinia Urban Area Comprehensive Plan 2025 includes a Capital Facilities Plan for 2007-2012 that depicts the existing capital facilities and associated services provided by the City of Yakima, and presents a financing plan for future capital and operating needs. Likewise, Plan 2015 includes a capital facilities element that includes the current plan for County -provided capital facilities in the Planning Area. A detailed description of the analysis, criteria, and results for the County's capital facilities plan is found in Plan 2015. A summary of capital facilities and utilities concerning the Planning Area is presented below. West Valley Neighborhood Plan • Adopted • February 2011 • Page 55 Wastewater (Sanitary Sewer) The Regional Wastewater System31 currently provides sanitary sewer services to portions of the Planning Area. The City of Yakima operates the Regional Sewage Treatment Plant and collection system within the Yakima UGA west of the Yakima River. In 2004 the City adopted a wastewater facilities plan that includes extending service to the entire Planning Area. Map 15 shows the location of existing sewer lines as well as the proposed major lines that will be built to serve the several drainage basins in the Planning Area. The sewer service area is coterminous with the Urban Growth Area (UGA), and adjusts automatically whenever the UGA is amended. In the spring of 2010 the City initiated a planning process to update its 2004 Wastewater Facilities Plan. This planning will consider stormwater sewers as well as sanitary sewers. The initial planning by staff and a consultant consider such issues as system capacity, line locations, etc., and is expected to take 18-24 months. Following this technical analysis, the public involvement process will occur. Land within the Planning Area is expected to eventually become part of the City and be served by the sewer system. However, on-site septic systems can be used in the interim for properties that are not currently near a sewer line. For existing parcels, the Washington State Department of Health (DOH) regulations allow the Yakima Health District (YHD) to permit such systems when the parcel is more than 200 feet from a sewer line or within 200 feet when the cost of connecting to the sewer line is cost prohibitive. On-site septic systems discharging up to 3,500 gpd are permitted by YHD and large on-site septic systems discharging 3,500 to 100,000 gpd are permitted by DOH. Many residents are concerned about existing homes on failing septic systems that would be required to connect to the regional sewer system rather than being able to install a replacement septic system. Meanwhile, other residents, notably in the community of Ahtanum, are hopeful for having sewer service extended to their neighborhood and have worked with the County and City to procure a Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) to make the cost of extending the service affordable. In 2007, Yakima County submitted a CDBG application to the state for a sewage collection system in Ahtanum. However, it was not funded because additional funding sources were needed to make the project ready to proceed. A subsequent change in the CDBG program that allows a higher grant amount per home may make a re-application more likely to be funded. When creating new lots within the Planning Area, the Yakima County Zoning Ordinance (YCZO, YCC Title 15) allows individual septic systems to be used on parcels 2.5 acres and larger, subject to Yakima Health District (YHD) approval. Interim on-site community sewer systems, which would allow lots as small as 7,200 sq. ft., are possible by using the clustering option of the Yakima County Zoning Ordinance. The clustering option allows half the parcel to be developed with interim community sewer if the other 31 The Regional Wastewater System was created in 1976 by an interlocal agreement among City of Yakima Yakima County, Terrace Heights Sewer District, and Town of Union Gap. Entitled "Agreement for Wastewater Treatment and Disposal Service" (also known as the "Four Party Agreement'), this agreement establishes the responsibilities of the parties for sewage collection and treatment, including financial arrangements, within the Urban Growth Areas of Yakima and Union Gap. The Agreement continues in effect for a period of years established by the treatment and disposal facility bonds, and may be renewed thereafter by mutual agreement. West Valley Neighborhood Plan • Adopted • February 2011 • Page 56 half remains undeveloped. On-site community systems must be owned and operated by a public entity and Yakima County is currently the only provider of such service. Yakima County currently operates one such wastewater collection and treatment system32 in the Planning Area and developers may propose this arrangement when subdividing other properties. When creating new lots within the Urban Growth Area, the Urban Area Zoning Ordinance (UAZO, YCC Title 15A and YMC Title 15) allows new lots served by individual septic systems to be created as small as approximately one-third acre (14,500 sq. ft.), subject to YHD approval. On-site interim community sewer systems (which could allow new lots to be created as small as new lots connected to the regional sewer system) are not as easily accomplished under the UAZO as under the YCZO. This interim community systems feature of the Yakima County Zoning Ordinance should be considered for incorporation into the Urban Area Zoning Ordinance, so that it can continue to be utilized after the UAZO is applied to the Planning Area. Potable Water Supply The City of Yakima provides potable and fire -fighting water to the SR 12 and lower Powerhouse Road areas. Information about the City's water system may be found in its most recent Water System Plan, which was adopted by the City Council in 2004. Its next WSP is scheduled for adoption in 2010. The balance of the Planning Area is served by the Nob Hill Water Association, a private non-profit organization. Map 14 (Water Utilities) depicts the location of Nob Hill Water Association's and Yakima's water lines. Written agreements between the City and Nob Hill Water establish their respective service areas (also shown on Map 14), although these agreements have required clarification in the past. Currently, the parties have verbally agreed to maintain the status quo. Nob Hill Water has a designated service area that includes almost the entire Planning Area. However, one small area within the Planning Area, located west of Wiley City and south of Ahtanum Road, is outside of the service area of Nob Hill Water. Nob Hill's system includes five operational wells and a sixth well that has been drilled but not yet producing water pending a water right certificate. Hydrants and storage that allow for fire protection are available throughout the system. Water is chlorinated at each well site. The policy of Nob Hill Water is to extend its lines only where developers are willing to pay for them. Nob Hill Water's most recent 6 -year Water System Plan (WSP) was prepared in accordance with the requirements of the Department of Health and adopted in 2008. Highlights of the WSP include: • To ensure ability to meet Maximum Day Demand, Nob Hill was equipping one well and plans to either upgrade another well or drill a new well within the 6- year planning period. • Nob Hill has sufficient water rights for the 20 -year planning period. 32 Mountain Shadow Estates, located northwest of Summitview Avenue and Pear Avenue, is an 11 -lot subdivision served by a community sewer system. Built by the developer, the system was conveyed to Yakima County for perpetual maintenance, which is paid for by fees from the property owners. The system is designed to be able to connect to and become part of the regional system when the trunk lines are extended. West Valley Neighborhood Plan • Adopted • February 2011 • Page 57 • Nob Hill has sufficient storage to meet 6 -year planning requirements. Improvements to existing reservoirs are planned for the 20 -year planning period. • With recent improvements, including tablet chlorinators at each well site and the installation of a new telemetry system, Nob Hill Water reports no deficiencies for providing service for the foreseeable future. • Other improvements contemplated during the 6 -year planning period include retasking an existing Booster Pump Station, installing a new Booster Pump Station, up-sizing and extending distribution mains, and replacing aging infrastructure as finances allow. • Nob Hill's 6 -year Capital Improvements Program in the WSP totals $3,050,000. Financing these improvements will primarily come from rates, membership fees, developers, and loans from private lending institutions. Further information on the City of Yakima's or Nob Hill Water Association's water systems may be found in their most recent Water System Plans. Irrigation Water Yakima-Tieton Irrigation District (Y-TID) serves the northern and western portions of the Planning Area and the Ahtanum Irrigation District (AID) serves the southern portion. A large portion in the middle of the Planning Area is not located within an irrigation district, but is served by the private Yakima Valley Canal Company (Congdon Canal). As urban development converts land uses in agricultural and rural areas, there is a shift in the usage of irrigation water. Retention of these irrigation waters for use in developed landscapes will reduce the need for potable water supplies and facilities. In recognition of this, a Memorandum of Understanding was entered into in 2008 by Y-TID, Yakima Valley Canal Company, Nob Hill Water Association, City of Yakima, and Yakima County to require that determinations concerning irrigation water be made when developments are proposed. The MOU requires the parties, by consensus, to determine: • the irrigation water needs for a development; • the water sources available for irrigation use; • which water resource is best suited to provide the development's needs; • the most cost effective method to deliver water to the development; • the scope of work necessary to deliver irrigation water, and • the feasibility of installing a separate irrigation delivery system. Flood Hazard Management There was extensive flooding in the Planning Area in 1974, 1995, and 1996. The flooded areas included the communities of Ahtanum, Wiley City, the south side of the intersection at Wide Hollow Rd. and S. 96th Ave., and the intersection at Wide Hollow Rd. and S. 80th Ave. The Yakima County -wide Flood Control Zone District (YCFCZD), in partnership with local jurisdictions, property owners, government agencies, and stakeholders, is creating the Ahtanum-Wide Hollow Comprehensive Flood Hazard Management Plan (CFHMP) to indicate historic problem areas, recommend guidance on development, and identify potential flood hazard mitigations for existing development. A citizen advisory group has met over the last three years to develop the plan. The draft of this plan will be completed in late 2009 for community discussion and adoption. Recommendations from the West Valley Neighborhood Plan • Adopted • February 2011 • Page 58 CFHMP will include non-structural measures, including zoning preferences in the floodplains. The CFHMP includes the WVNP Planning Area, except for northern -most areas that drain into Cowiche Creek and the Naches River. A portion of the Planning Area is located adjacent to the Naches River, which was included in the Upper Yakima River CFHMP adopted in 2007. The Cowiche Creek portion of the Planning Area is not currently included in a CFHMP. Storm Water Management and Drainage Improvement Districts The Yakima Urban Growth Area, as well as particular adjacent lands, recently fell under the jurisdiction of a National Pollution Discharge Elimination System Permit that requires compliance with state and federal laws. The permit requires regulatory measures, including ordinances, to ensure compliance. The preference for these areas is to reduce costs by retaining stormwater on site. This approach, where followed, will reduce stormwater impacts and flooding levels. Due to inundation, this approach will be less effective within the floodplains. Drainage Improvement Districts (DIDs) were installed in agricultural areas where irrigation water was applied to allow surface and subsurface drainage. The poorly draining soils were assisted by subsurface French drains that travelled continuously through the area and drained the waters to Wide Hollow and Ahtanum Creeks and tributaries. With the urbanization of this area they are now carrying stormwater drainage through direct interconnections. They were not designed to convey the capacity required by surface flows during floods. As they were located along the lowest portions of the valley, the old surface channels that would convey floods have been filled in through farming practices, leaving future urban redevelopment susceptible to high frequency flooding without re-establishment of the conveyances. Also of concern are illicit connections to the DIDs, including sanitary connections that transmit pollutants to creeks. The location of future sanitary sewers next to the drains will transmit sanitary flows to the creeks and must be avoided. Minimum distances between sanitary sewers and surface channels should be established. Solid Waste Residents and businesses in the Planning Area are served by Yakima Waste Systems, Inc., which has a franchise from the County to provide curbside collections of solid waste. As the City annexes property, it may assume collection services after a 7 -year period. Yakima Waste Systems provides limited recycling services for a fee within the City of Yakima and within the UGA. Fire Protection and Emergency Medical Services The Planning Area is served by three rural fire districts and the City of Yakima. Gleed Fire District provides service in the Ackley Road area and along the Naches River. Fruitvale Fire District contracts with the City of Yakima to provide service to the area in the vicinity of Powerhouse Road, Cowiche Canyon Road, and Peck's Canyon Road. West Valley Fire District provides service to the majority of the Planning Area from five fire stations at the following locations: West Valley Neighborhood Plan • Adopted • February 2011 • Page 59 Station #1 — 7707 Tieton Drive (shared with the City of Yakima Fire Department) Station #2 — 9102 Ahtanum Road Station #3 — 14901 Tieton Drive Station #4 — Tampico Station #5 — 10000 Zier Road (District Headquarters) Stations #2 and #5 are located within the Planning Area. Station #5 is the headquarters for the West Valley Fire District with paid staff and volunteers. As Yakima expands through annexation, it assumes the obligation to provide fire protection and emergency medical services and receives the property tax revenues that were formerly collected by the fire district for such services. Law Enforcement The County Sheriff's Precinct 2 serves the Planning Area in addition to the remainder of northwest Yakima, Tampico, Naches, Tieton, and Cowiche. As the City of Yakima expands into the Planning Area through annexations, it assumes the primary obligation of providing police services. Schools Small portions of the Planning Area along the Naches River and Cowiche Canyon Road are within the Yakima School District and Naches School District. The majority of the Planning Area is within the West Valley School District, which completed construction of a new high school in 2009. Replacement of some elementary schools is planned but first needs voter approval to implement. Yakima Valley Regional Library The Yakima Valley Regional Library Board operates or supports 19 library branches in Yakima County. None are located in the Planning Area. However, several are located nearby. The Summitview Branch is the closest, located within the Yakima city limits at 5709 Summitview Ave. The next nearest branches are located within the City of Union Gap, the Town of Tieton, and in downtown Yakima. Electricity Pacific Power provides electrical service within Yakima County, and service is generally available throughout the Yakima Urban Growth Area. The provision of new services is provided according to the policies of Pacific Power. Under the terms of PP&L's franchise agreement with the County and City, distribution lines are not required to be put underground. Natural Gas Cascade Natural Gas Corp provides service to portions of the Planning Area and has its own policies for extending new service to unserved areas. Telecommunications Qwest provides landline and cellular telephone, Internet access, and satellite TV services within the Planning Area. Telecommunications regulations require that Qwest provide adequate telecommunication services on demand. Therefore, construction planning and growth is driven by customer need. As communities grow, facilities are upgraded to West Valley Neighborhood Plan • Adopted • February 2011 • Page 60 ensure adequate service levels. Facilities are also upgraded with new technology to make additional/enhanced services available. Other companies providing cellular phone and/or wireless Internet access include Sprint, Nextel, Verizon, AT&T, T -Mobile, US Cellular, CREDO Mobile, Clearwire, and Cricket. Cable TV Charter Communications provides cable TV, Internet access, and telephone services within the Planning Area. Satellite cable is provided by DISH Network and DIRECTV. Increasingly, "TV programs" are also available through broadband Internet connections. Capital Facilities and Utilities Issues The following capital facilities and utilities issues are identified by the planning process: General 1. The Growth Management Act (GMA) requires that development regulations be consistent with and implement comprehensive plans. Therefore, an area -wide rezone of the entire Planning Area that is consistent with and implements Map 4 (Future Land Use) is recommended concurrently with the adoption of the West Valley Neighborhood Plan. The GMA also states33 that urban growth should be located: • first in areas already characterized by urban growth that have adequate existing public facility and service capacities to serve such development; • second in areas already characterized by urban growth that will be served adequately by a combination of both existing public facilities and services and any additional needed public facilities and services that are provided by either public or private sources; and • third in the remaining portions of urban growth areas. It must be noted that the planning for all capital facilities and utilities required to support the WVNP has not yet been updated. This situation could result in developments being proposed prior to the availability of adequate capital facilities and services. When such developments are proposed, they will be handled in accordance with adopted plans and policies of the city, county, and service provider. Wastewater 2. Failing septic tanks in the community of Ahtanum have galvanized some residents to seek a Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) to make connections to the regional sewer system affordable. Other funding sources and areas could also be considered for such assistance. 3. The rules of the Yakima Urban Area Zoning Ordinance (YCC Title 15A and YMC Title 15) allowing individual septic systems on lots as small as one-third acre do not promote extensions of area -wide sewer service and should be modified. The rules in the Yakima County Zoning Ordinance (YCC Title 15) have a similar effect. 33 RCW 36.70A.110(3) West Valley Neighborhood Plan • Adopted • February 2011 • Page 61 4. The 1976 "Agreement for Wastewater Treatment and Disposal Service" ("Four Party Agreement") may need to be renewed when the time period established by the facility bonds has elapsed. Fire Protection 5. Without adequate coordination, large annexations by the City of Yakima could have a disruptive effect on the budget of the West Valley Fire District. Potable Water 6. One small area south of Ahtanum Road and west of Wiley City is adjacent to but outside of the Nob Hill Water Association's service area. Utility Wires 7. Above -ground utility wires are unaesthetic and interfere with tree growth. They are not currently required to be installed underground, but would be preferred. Focused Public Investment Corridors 8. The County's capital facilities plan provides for public facilities in various locations in the County. "Focused public investment" targets capital improvements expenditures in designated public investment areas to produce "fully -served land" for development. Focused public investment maximizes the use of limited public funds by coordinating government expenditures and focusing development first in some areas, then in others. Such targeted pubic investment is an incentive for development to occur where the public's capital investments are focused. In order for public investment to be focused, the County and other service providers will need to jointly determine: (1) what criteria should be used to prioritize public investments, and (2) the areas to be selected for targeted investment. Public Schools 9. The majority of the Planning Area is within the West Valley School District34, in which elementary schools are currently approximately one mile apart. Based on experiences reported by the West Valley School District, as urbanization occurs schools have had to be located 1/2 mile apart. Site acquisitions by the school district may need to occur soon before sites with the required minimum acreage are no longer available. 34 The Naches School District serves the portion of the Planning Area adjacent to Cowiche Canyon Road and SR 12. A small portion of the Planning Area adjacent to the Naches River lies within the Yakima School District but has no residents. West Valley Neighborhood Plan • Adopted • February 2011 • Page 62 Capital Facilities & Utilities Goals The Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan 2025 establishes goals and policies pertaining to the Yakima UGA, including the Planning Area. The following goals and policies for Capital Facilities and Utilities are intended to guide the application of the YUACP 2025 goals and policies to the Planning Area and address the issues identified by the planning process. GOAL 5.1: Provide adequate capital facilities and utilities as the Planning Area is developed. Policies General 5.1.1 When development is proposed in areas where adequate capital facilities and services are not yet provided: • The city and county should first discourage proposed new development until adequate services and facilities are available; • The city and county will approve such developments only when property developers provide the capital facilities, including streets & utilities, in a manner consistent with adopted plans and policies. For example, water and sewer lines may need to be designed and installed to enable future service to lands in the vicinity, rather than to serve only the proposed development. This may require, for example, over -sizing the lines and/or installing them at greater depths. 5.1.2 Ensure that providing capital facilities and utilities for proposed developments is done at the expense of the property developers, when done prior to the service providers' plans to do so. Provide for cost recapture (such as latecomers agreements) and for interim systems (such as when clustering is proposed). Wastewater 5.1.3 Promote the formation of LIDS and the utilization of Community Development Block Grants and other funding sources to finance area -wide extensions and connections to the regional sewer system, especially in situations where the lack of such services pose a risk to public health. 5.1.4 Amend the Yakima Urban Area Zoning Ordinance and Yakima County Zoning Ordinance to provide for minimum 5 -acre lots in areas not served by regional sewer and to allow new smaller lots only with clustering and interim community sewer systems. Fire Protection 5.1.5 Ensure on-going dialog between the City of Yakima and the West Valley Fire District to address budget impacts of future annexations. Potable Water 5.1.6 Nob Hill Water Association should consider expanding its water service area to include the area west of Wiley City that is within the Planning Area. West Valley Neighborhood Plan • Adopted • February 2011 • Page 63 Utility Wires 5.1.7 Install new utilities lines underground where feasible. Flood Control and Storm Water Management 5.1.8 Implement appropriate recommendations from the Yakima County -wide Flood Control Zone District's planning process for the Ahtanum/Wide Hollow Comprehensive Flood Hazard Management Plan. 5.1.9 Establish minimum distances between sanitary sewers and surface channels to minimize the transmission of pollution to creeks. Focused Public Investment Corridors 5.1.10 Determine the appropriate locations for Focused Public Investment Corridors. West Valley Neighborhood Plan • Adopted • February 2011 • Page 64 Appendix 1 Goals, Objectives, & Policies from City of Yakima's Parks & Recreation Comprehensive Plan 2006-2011 most applicable to the Planning Area. Goal: Establish and implement a long-range plan for the development of parks, open space, green belts and pathways within the City of Yakima and the greater Urban growth area. Objective: Establish a priority for future land acquisition and park development based on neighborhood as well as the overall City's needs. Policy: Draft a city standard for public open and green space. Policy: Develop and maintain an up-to-date park land acquisition plan that targets and sets priorities for future park acquisitions. Policy: Identify potential sites and plan for a series of neighborhood parks in Yakima's Urban Growth Area. Policy: Establish a Parks Fund dedicated to the acquisition of land for future neighborhood and community parks within the City of Yakima. Objective: Create a unique and positive image for the City through establishment and development of green belts and pathways within the City of Yakima. Policy: Work with the Bicycle and Pedestrian Pathway Committee to use existing irrigation canal rights-of-way and Yakima Valley Transportation (YVT) corridors for pathways. Policy: Develop interpretive signage, trailheads and connections to pathways and trails extending beyond the urban area. Policy: Incorporate, whenever possible, greenbelts and pathways into all future residential, commercial and industrial developments and keep these trails, as much as possible, separate from streets and arterials. Objective: Develop innovative approaches to creating new park facilities. Policy: Promote private, public and private non-profit partnerships for capital improvements to parks. Objective: Create and implement a long-range plan and program for the preservation of prime open space areas in or adjacent to the City of Yakima. Policy: Advocate incorporation of greenbelts into future residential, commercial, and industrial development to minimize the impacts of locating less than incompatible land uses next to one another. West Valley Neighborhood Plan • Adopted • February 2011 • Page 65 Policy: Preserve open space though means other than ownership, such as transfer of development rights, tax obligation relief and land donations to non-profit open space preservation organizations. Long Range Objectives: Facilities Objective: Develop New Mini -Parks • Size: up to three acres. • Locations throughout the city but particularly in areas where population density is the greatest. Objective: Develop New Neighborhood Parks • Minimum size: three acres. Recommendation: three to five acres. • Locations north central, south central, northeast and west Yakima. Objective: Develop New Community Parks • Size: 20 acres or more. • Potential locations: west of 40th Avenue, south of Nob Hill, Terrace Heights, north of Barge -Lincoln School, south of Washington Avenue Objective: Bike and Walking Pathways — Abandoned Yakima Valley Transportation (YVT) corridors, as well as recently covered irrigation canals, provide a natural system for development of pathways throughout the City with the following objectives: • Linking new pathways with existing city bike routes. • Linking major city parks where possible. • Beginning or ending city pathways with links to the Greenway. • Establishing greenbelts in conjunction with city pathways. • Connecting with trails and pathways that extend beyond the urban growth area. West Valley Neighborhood Plan • Adopted • February 2011 • Page 66 Appendix 2 Policies from the Parks & Open Space Chapter of Yakima County's Comprehensive Plan, Plan 2015, most applicable to the Planning Area. POS -PA 2.3 Encourage and assist local communities in their development of park and recreation services to meet incorporated populations' needs and facilitate connections with nearby recreation opportunities. POS -PA 2.6 Consider regulations that require developers to meet a minimum standard for on-site recreational facilities or equivalent alternative provisions. POS -PA 2.10 Be active in pursuing alternative funding sources, bequests and endowments. POS -PA 2.11 Investigate new and innovative methods of financing facility development, maintenance and operating needs. POS -RF 3.4 Facilitate a County -wide network of open space and greenbelts to protect sensitive lands (such as stream corridors, wetlands, steep slopes, etc.) to serve as urban connectors and dividers, to retain some wildlife habitat, and for passive recreation (where compatible). POS -RF 3.7 Develop trails to accommodate multiple uses and sign accordingly. West Valley Neighborhood Plan • Adopted • February 2011 • Page 67 Appendix 3 Illustration from the Yakima Greenivay Master Plan Update 1995 (adopted by reference in the Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan 2025) showing the loop trail connection using 66th Avenue between Ahtanum Road and the Cowiche Canyon. This trail alignment would also use Prospect Way, North & South 65th Avenue, and South 64th Avenue, which is located in the West Valley Neighborhood Planning Area. YAKIMA GREENWAY 7 Recreational Trail An eXtension of the Greenway along the Naches River could lead to a reaTeationat trait through a portion of the Cowiche Canyon. A turn south at 666 Avenue and east along Ahtanum Road would complete an outer circulation Loop. West Valley Neighborhood Plan • Adopted • February 2011 • Page 68 Maps West Valley Neighborhood Plan • Adopted • February 2011 • Page 69 lin 7 Emu ����• IIS�ti•i1I= 4-1. iISIW.ZMOIRE 7.I..'—; •I-- CE .-' 1 Emno ....1 is 'II111 I PIMIGI !::: 1111111 I, .MO1 =RA End -- .. _■ . riff Mai mum MU■L7.1 _UlI='iso. NE IINLIZIni-miallig 4 _mE issiatosio in i m`I A ! ! iiiimposuaraimvarammormneije murimermin1. ...i ,.111. s II I _1111 !Num.� •FS'll' �I�.� �� !En. • •■ MOM M ematinall11=4_ ■ -IIIA=-t =1=■Jill. Fir 4 w JII/ii;rl _ ,T11.. ■.■IFI ido dfi1I1111,� 1r�=_ . 11 1= ��.�...■�, III 1 1-1111 ;.pimp 'ZZ EWE p - shorimoilimm-mni mural,/ 11E•ms MM�OII■ ■■■■.. sq • Ewa cq.NNEC4 �IIII �'1 ..mina __ 0 West Valley Neighborhood Plan Planning Area West Valley Neighborhood Planning Area City Limits Tax Lots Urban Growth Boundary A/ All Roads 0.4 N A 0.8 1.2 1.6 Miles Adopted • February 2011 MAP 1 slakes..r -;lariche Ave a.IIIN IIIIIIIRR ■q ®e_. ,..■II■ler !,! 1111111 _ ■ NI nidi - III" Emma ■■__ - .�� r.:::.,E! imp; =nag •�� Ik IBM! 11 EMEN ---■ -1411111111111n ups - -- SII BE West VaIIey Neighborhood Plan Current Land Use Current Land Use Low Density Residential Medium Density Residential High Density Residential Commercial Utilities/Industrial Recreation Agriculture Education/Governmental Semi -Public Vacant West VaIIey Neighborhood Planning Area City Limits Tax Lots ----- Urban Growth Boundary All Roads A 0 0.375 0.75 1.5 Adopted • February 2011 Miles MAP 2 ■■FCL•L�■11 1 ..! ■■11111111 ri1i11iir i i I�NiI:`1i� Union GapzUGA 1 r1 1 Emma Ln Canter Ln Meadowbrook Rd Meadowbrook Rd Meadowbrook Rd McCullough Rd West Valley Neighborhood Plan Current Zoning County Zoning (YCC Title 15 within Planning Area & outside UGA, YCC Title 15A elsewhere outside City Limits) AG Agriculture MOP VR Valley Rural RT Rural Transitional ME RS Rural Settlement MIN Mining SR- Suburban Residential R-1 Single -Family Residential B-2 Local Business I Industrial M-1 Light Industrial Federal Land/Tribal Trust City of Yakima Zoning (YMC Title 15 within City Limits) SR Suburban Residential R-1 Single Family R-2 Two Family R-3 Multi -Family B-1 Professional Business ■ B-2 Local Business SCC Small Convenience Center LCC Large Convenience Center GC General Commercial M-1 Light Industrial AS Airport Support West Valley Neighborhood Planning Area ON City Limits Tax Lots Urban Growth Boundary All Roads 0 0.25 0.5 A Adopted • February 2011 1 1.5 Miles MAP 3 Inset Map e PP 1Iiu!llllu —111IlrZM I1■. t! 1111 ! ■�= '���111�.��1 1� , � ■= w ill ■ril . I , � .1 ■_1■ ■ 1. '• ....,. � _2.,•:*,,,,.. ..matatimmtrimmt r,,,,.... Aimr.f.„ r-rliter 1,9Ns.4011 iir-Mtetl; Ar r -drill- 41CaM- — i-ilirPPIL11.101PRIENnialr I Imiul m..„1,...-:,��. 61i��__ ���css.■ ■ ■ n�■ 11 11.11. ■■■■ii 111111ifigki Row GL' aN; + West Valley Neighborhood Plan Future Land Use Future Land Use Low Density Residential Med Density Residential High Density Residential Professional Office Neighborhood Commercial Mi Community Commercial General Commercial Industrial Parks & Recreation, Open Space Floodplain & Floodway * 0 West Valley Neighborhood Planning Area 0 City Limits Tax Lots ••� •Urban Growth Boundary /\/ All Roads /\/ Perennial Stream *Floodplain & Floodway shown for Wide Hollow, Shaw, and Cottonwood Creeks depict FEMA's Preliminary maps, dated August 9, 2010. *Floodplain & Floodway shown for Ahtanum, Bachelor, Hatton, and Spring Creeks depict FEMA's Draft maps, dated August 9, 2010. *Floodplain & Floodway shown for Cowiche Creek and the Naches River depict the FEMA maps currently in effect. This map extends the designations in Map III -2 of the Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan 2025 into the West Valley Planning Area and amends "MAP #1: Future Land Use: 2010 Addendum" and "MAP #3: West Valley Neighborhood Future Land Use: 2010 Addendum" within the West Valley Neighborhood Planning Area as depicted on this map. 0 0.5 Adopted • February 2011 A 1 1.5 Miles MAP 4 • IMRE• milml, wpmUlF H'it'i 0 I Fr: E... ... 1 plifti Adam 7'rRd 1U• M gi• HU i I III II Ilrelain I 214 &MN 1 11 Ria NM 'WEE. Illia •ME rin TINI311111111(a is. -........„..„ ...I .MI..,,,„,,,,,,,.....„,,,,.::,,:,,,. _..........,..rd, 1-47'• - °Qv!' ri,MITL211111111111Miliq • ::::::.:.:.:.•• ••••••••,,,,,,. ' : '''' . . . . .......:::::::::::::.:::::::, rk.., .•:::,.:.:.... :450Ce,.., Ammo „,1 1 ii ...... , _,.,. .,.....,. .z.--tm....-01719,11.11-1 .. 1=Hri emit. EraEhlmLt1""19111 m" EMI - _ El ;; ImITm __ . II IIM• Era EP -._ffl iNi 1111 imims RENE num art.11101 - • min deimimu -.--111M11- -410.1111111P.19..- II 1.91.11M111911 -11 1 West Valley Neighborhood Plan Existing Functional Classification Functional Classification URBAN Urban Highway Principal Arterial Minor Arterial Collector Arterial Urban Access RURAL Major Collector Minor Collector Rural Access A/ All Roads **** Urban Growth Boundary West Valley Neighborhood Planning Area M City Limits Tax Lots 0.5 1 N A 1.5 Adopted • February 2011 2 Miles MAP 5 Dr Orchard A R _eendon Ave4 AAa�e Rd x z Summitview E# i�ia EN All Ilii II IP Ems11���rliMIP'-': ' ' �'. EE. 111■ �J ��. � IIIIM+ ■M -nn I!111 '„IUuulilE:::: :• :::::':` ' . MINIMUM lull PIIllI■■I•rt■■.i i''':.: ii iii■L ` UI■A iia :::....:. �!Ei!iII11 ■ NM, Wile% 'IlX11■■■■■�- � 1 � •••••.� ..1■..11 ,. 1 Flintetcne Rd 8 2 = N W Stu 11■■ �a :✓IllrNomm i'� mini . 1 JIIE a..1 E ! NIL NEE �imma` -aN t 1BEm!.5-1,1111i BOA 'WI11 11111! 1111 Imon 71 I Qom �Y I����r ■�!g .a6.'R!Rn,. , , 161flfoilf o ar.d4 !PAM end �:._....as: >.�1:� •a�� ■.:::::::..'IBI" ._ ■ i1Jl/i r1 I 111''= ate' ' 41 .c ''•'••''•'''''•'•' 7- 1111'iR'�i tarkma !Pl!:lig:FM' rn■■iAN ■t■FJ _■_��■ 1�iiiiiiii■ am—hid ■ _ Baaaerly Dr ■ .... .. hill■P! GJII.. . ■.._� iII■_II West Valley Neighborhood Plan Proposed Functional Classification of Streets Functional Classification At Urban Highway A/ Primary Arterial Ai Minor Arterial Collector Arterial a/c/ Neighborhood Collector Urban Access Minor Arterial - New Road • •1 • Collector Arterial - New Road • 0 West Valley Neighborhood Planning Area City Limits Tax Lots ##%; Urban Growth Boundary All Roads This map extends the proposed functional classifications in Map VI -4 of the Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan 2025 into the West Valley Planning Area. 0.5 N A 1 1.5 2 Miles Adopted • February 2011 MAP 5A `Ri'4174(41P6'eb. ve,. lah..0 ooki Canyon `r 11110111hali ORM IIII MI!IMITI z Py IC Summilvi Orchard Avg 2 2 rch Rd Barrett Rd N CSI_ Nam itesmraromerg InmeW P■■■ J —■■ X11■ •.. �■IIGI E::: ■■11lwL palummmili =_;1;id 1: x: Cpl ���-- ■■ !w` < mi,, ja I■ii ••■■EM mom �■r. ■! !i ■■uI/� u -.■.1■■■`e ... 1.i r I'V Iid1 �' . 15 2 to N FlintetQn■..gd_ — W Zier Rd W Stumo Rd N m n NI =IP ri��c c; aa...... . A® ._.... _14:..{p_n• ,••••• : ea MO lfliEi ' " r o F7N..11ele0:%L.5'�sA `SIIN 102E lolr,'I!"7e 11W011 ■ 1• •1• .. ,l .......................... iugll: n 1 II �r u!rI nl • 'I ,:imo:.1. '' ' dY..._ LLI1■—t d IIIIMIAm •,■ o Rd AIM ■■■gr ��■�■ 11= e IIiIii!ii1Om N ImmleriE 1 ■ Er. --1— r -arrr-i■>a ..pie INIIIIMI MIME um_ n_P d Dr � y r Union Gap UGA 1 McCulbu.h Rd adowbrook Rd West Valley Neighborhood Plan Street Connections Plan /\S Proposed Streets Existing Major Streets A/ All Roads ,''s♦ Urban Growth Boundary 0 West Valley Neighborhood Planning Area City Limits Tax Lots 0.4 0.8 N A 1.2 1.6 Miles Adopted • February 2011 MAP 6 Rippee Ln W Klendon Ave y Marble Rd Marble Rd W Msrrb x Z > Summitview Ext J 0 E 0 0) N Tieton Dr Barrett Rd P m N Barrett Rd Z Naches H ghts Rd I 1 — ----J — Orchard Ave -C s aW:Barge St f -I-Scenic ¢> Q m 0 0 S Naches -1 Lookout Point Dr •• Lwinell Dry `�•_, S:elah UGA I 1 i[ ���"n• 10r1119006.444 r.1 --- ertner Drl. Scenic Dr -o �•• American G. c � 3 y:••I�n Dr 9 Kail Drs: ¢ ai • Z (-6.04'5 0) Q Q > ¢ 0 s co 00 N z z a s C N. or z Summitview Ave s z Alpine Wy 1..:: CO z • •M.rilane St \'0.9.Fechter REt C) U, ,y: Surrey Ln' m w . D � ..i.....: S. > arden � G MadetaWy ¢ Park vv w e91„ '� ,.tee a > ®®:taclervuy� �:� � rn z: Richey Rd v �' �' E - :: - 7 Lrrico n Ave.. "' z � " >" :.BItt -rt6 t Wy Uplands Wy e(, •z Haven Wy - v a - z Avalanche Ave cMo ¢ Snowmountain Rd 0 ern R Castlevale:Rd Z Fairbanks Ave Willow St- . _ •z Swan Ave $ cG o Jerome �erh Fairbanks Ave Ditter Dr 460 Ponderosa PI �0' Q a y McKinley Ave: t1 - a a N . mzz N -> N N W Lincoln:Ave' ' w— t.. 11 :�FQ v-0,aa s 5 L r L L N >> i .. ,�hinook Dr t s W Yakima Ave in > W +� HSth t''de d � a i —• ‹4 Q > s ¢ ¢ ¢ W L = 0) 0) Wide Hollow Rd a Douglas Rd 0 0) a 0 a CO z u) c :cot N 52nd Ave iV ats R :Midvale re 0) ted Pt: :e):::: Ave Ga 1413. Cottonwood Canyon IR( Flintstone R Sara Lp W Zier Rd IY W Stump Rd w IY ✓ Church R IY Y 0) S Carlson Rd WNe d Gilbert Rd A upp N a 0 1 1 1 zs 0 1 I 1 S tokaneSt Q 0) 0) oo 0) Zier Rd W rleY • WArlington St>' :..> w ¢ QQ Q ▪ L -C LO 7 a '71- Z z zz z 0 a) ai . Z Z rn > ¢'¢ < Dvl �MLO w .tn : 0 t Q: :Q: z ¢¢>aw t a v) z m m m N a z z z. a) 0) N :.Z C c?.., N W N c0 L z¢¢ ..ic.._ .: • Z• Z Z Z Z N N t I Barge St - 0 r`i • :::::iwYWkt aAve..?` • 4) •'I1lIVAngton S lel Viola hAve 'wen PI W Clad A akima: U . W Nob Hill m . .. ¢ .Clinton Wy n..._...t ::oa Carol Ave 0 rn e cp '� W Viola Ave Lila Ave M°�' Gregory Ave °� cn W Logan Ave Q: o W Logan Ave > �.... moi. Q L. �� ....�. WKtngSt pF4c�iC::: - ::Y�:I:::.. 0. Q ¢> Horne Dr . ((pp 'C/tlIN"'ialnutSt, • L M Qw.: ... .. M V7 ste r Ave aim :: 0 W'Adington St. ! ¢ '. iQ ¢ In :s . y o .. roQ au) s a)s .. O -2 y c cr m o m m 0 >0 0) F m Fy ,5@ebwtn S -P • prem Coolidge Rd Sall Rd • Tahoma Ave .......,,.Racquet;Ln..........- ...- .. W Washington A CDo :Coolidge Rd ■ - a: Crestfiekls Rd Easy St: 7:- = - ',Ila -Walla St ::: Sjiddgsr:eeR Rd W Whatddm Ave WWhibtan St Occidental Rd • in 4 ti rr .. 1-/4pe:r :: 2 v Rdgeway-Rd Mu sterman Rd Rd ¢ a) 1 0 ¢ 1 a IY m in Meadowbrook Rd 0) Marion St Tess Rd Bather - Dr ---- m Canter Ln Carlson 91)r Meadowbrook Rd a n SkYvle Columbus St LyonsLp 51 co Ct Baggerly Dr Meadowbrook Rd co W Larch Ave CO 00 Sorenson Oak AveA L. Airfair Wy AirPOR Rd Airport Ln Oak Ave Emma Ln (0 Union Gap UGA se McCullough Rd West Valley Neighborhood Plan Proposed Truck Route Map Proposed Truck Routes (Yakima Urban Area Transportation Plan 2025, Map 7-1) CICCO Through Truck Routes _1 Primary Truck Routes Secondary Truck Routes Indicates New Road West Valley Neighborhood Planning Area City Limits Tax Lots Urban Growth Boundary All Roads This map extends the proposed truck routes on Map 7-1 of the Yakima Urban Area Transportation Plan 2025 into the West Valley Planning Area. 0 0.2 0.4 Adopted • February 2011 Miles MAP 7 1 dokriaf poinEAr'•'•'•.•. •'•.•.•.•.•. • • Orchard A 'Pa 2 z zwan NE 4... 1 ift*.ririv itannimm— I ini.‘t.„.„ ...obi. 1.0 ,,r,,,FradEN AEPIO __ mil_ � now, E�11� �nn� 1!iiu. .h!!I�I�IIGI !::I •IIIUIL11,11/ E l ll lIIII■U N -:... 2 P,1 2 a MENEMPN ■nmP1! -u 1 • • ••n1114 il hutch Rd 2 2 - Wage 1111 EIRrj 1:1■1= �� I 1 UGAI • • • • • .• • • • • • • 1 a •••� �.•- 7 I al 4. • . . r� .� 0 w.•.•••••• ..•........•• i West Valley Neighborhood Plan Sidewalk and Pathway Facilities Parks & Trails Existing Paths M Future Paths Al Existing Sidewalks A/ All Roads ••♦ Urban Growth Boundary West Valley Neighborhood Planning Area City Limits 1 Tax Lots This map extends the facilities indicated by Map VI - 1, of the Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan 2025 into the West Valley Planning Area. A 0.5 1 1.5 Adopted • February 2011 2 Miles MAP 8 ]Oen. on Ave • •• d z 2 N a z w iii ■�►i L 11�: ■k] -= ■11� " .ivo■■---v�,n�, Atin ,..,......... IWI rr Pi1IIIIl1II Flints :Y�vr-a�cr. a �rz [[muss r•o�toam0mlc[]11[N^3: X11 ilii®.:::::• :••� IM 11 -i ....:.:.:.:.... r�����■■ 1 ■_;ill IMEgs..:: ..•�: hili/■■: ► I III I ■ IBM _3 L'.:r:!'::IIII!!11■I�1 ■! Ila�i riiiii�l■ •"Eminwr,Imikr a .1■ _ •■_I■ 1111= N■I■ RHIN II-'••IIIWa z N • • • • • • • • • • • • • • u, . Rd • • • 1 1 1 I 1 N dp,r l► •,•••••••• 1 w S �•••••t•••, •• `rye ,•• ••,-L • ••••••• • ()GA N adowbrook Rd West Valley Neighborhood Plan Bicycle Facilities Plan Bicycle Facilities On Existing Streets N On Proposed Streets • �w Type 1 Facility (5' striped lane) • • Type 2 Facility (wide curb lanes) • Type 3 Facility (signed routes) .• Trails N Existing Paths •�• Future Paths All Roads ***♦ Urban Growth Boundary 0 West Valley Neighborhood Planning Area City Limits Tax Lots This map extends the facilities planned by Map VI - 2 of the Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan 2025 into the West Valley Planning Area. 0.4 0.8 N A 1.2 1.6 Miles Adopted • February 2011 MAP 9 It �t` on Ra SPP II -01E AmrI,Tom ANEW Odin Klendon Avg and A :erred Rd g co Flints Zier Rd :Y�vr-a�cr. 2 a N 1in nin ripeas'42 L'!.eir 1111!91■ N ,%%, 111 Alii! ' nl 1= ��/ i�-1111 J,"n• .� ijIII•:u ji h.�iI uI� LIIiII�IL �9� = limn��i�1�� IIIIII o- i nai ii■i�i�= ��I N rcu�o ■11a ■■111 ,_ ill11II.inm ME11111011 ter Ln N in Carl co Meadowbrook Rd 1 co adowbrook Rd 5 McCullough Rd West Valley Neighborhood Plan 6 -Year Transportation Improvement Program County 6 -Year TIP (2011-2016) 2011 2014-2016 City of Yakima 6 -Year TIP (2011-2016) Projects Intersection Projects Locations not known or shown: - West Side Transit Center - West Yakima North/South Connector West Valley Neighborhood Planning Area City Limits Tax Lots i*s♦ Urban Growth Boundary A/ All Roads 0 0.5 Adopted • February 2011 N A 1 1.5 Miles MAP 10 3;_ . ma 91110w, unilm- -1I�■gj ---■■E711■�.I1.0 l■ 14 iT111. N'lrkIla_:: i.. 1 WW1 BIM !■ ■n5117lig }}:•:•:•'• ■I . �' ��.{Z"r Parks & Trails N Existing Trails Potential Trails (Conceptual) higLi Eire i M■' IMSliIA AEai 1111111MMENNErint moirmapin :■1;1111 y .1 1:- a64tn,Rli1 IMPINEMPT. MK■a0id_ i_,,! i- lism Ili,::. .6.* 'Eau - '::::¢: iinamplu 1 JILL Irillsr- L. mV " ni ui i ill-' ' I ■ 11■■1rL , ■ -err ■■��II VIII II ■ i��J� ri X11 P ii1I'a i��l�:� jig; ��Mi1� �I� �T ,lam `� r iall a n_�_l .i.. !�■ � ll� - ' ■�■ i :_■■I■ 1■� 1I'.�■1 -nuns _ lllrNili� :�.W■■ ■■ Iii' ■ Union Gap UGA E • L' �■ TA•ftlii "' "'�'1/• - y g A � y �IIII�II�'�� ■1 Ij � ■��■ . ■ ill ■�IllllYL 1E � 1l11111b�'ii�. SOA .'.1111;31111 gimmilarm_ Ox:, gip_ �- ....�� .-- .� ,� Virg a West Valley Neighborhood Plan Streams and Floodplains FEMA 100 Year FLOODWAY for Cowiche Creek & Naches River Floodway FEMA 100 Year FLOODPLAIN for Cowiche Creek & Naches River Zone A l Zone AE FEMA Preliminary 100 Year FLOODWAY for Wide Hollow, Shaw, and Cottonwood Creeks, August 9, 2010; and FEMA Draft 100 Year FLOODWAY for Ahtanum, Bachelor, Hatton, and Spring Creeks, August 9, 2010 Floodway FEMA Preliminary 100 Year FLOODPLAIN for Wide Hollow, Shaw, and Cottonwood Creeks, August 9, 2010; and FEMA Draft 100 Year FLOODPLAIN for Ahtanum, Bachelor, Hatton, and Spring Creeks, August 9, 2010 Zone AE ("100 -year floodplain") Perennial Stream **** Urban Growth Boundary A/ All Roads West Valley Neighborhood Planning Area City Limits Tax Lots 0.5 1 N A 1.5 2 Miles Adopted • February 2011 MAP 12 • X • -1 Cowiehe Creek • J • t i 1 J t r MEI Mdlllllll ,,tea Asia■ �r— ■�Ilf■ 111I11.. Min ,1 1I1`1,i .. - mums �� a ■Il��♦i '�i� moi■ re cnN Hatton Creek n Dr Meadowbrook Rd West Valley Neighborhood Plan Streams, Wetlands, and Drainage Improvement Districts 0 Stream Type - 2006 CAO N1 ,v 2 4 4or5 Undetermined icy 5 Man-made 7.11 Local Wetland Inventory Potential Wetlands West Valley Neighborhood Planning Area City Limits Tax Lots A/ All Roads Urban Growth Boundary DID D D D D D 4 38 39 40 41 48 0.4 0.8 N A 1.2 1.6 Miles Adopted • February 2011 MAP 13 o....o: 1IITiEH 1 -- ppppp� s fWillr,AI!e®s\�`:��.J• Crest -Ids Rd .•: -yy- e,w•1r�gca c •r,Z• ��,' Wall Waalla6t.•. • 1l1 4 1I1ii!i IifHrII , _ -,.111 �1,1, IIIIIi1'''a.�.�I'.0 �� I ■��=■111M11100 OAK? 11 olimmi 22 gir 1m -!E : M■!i IN I 111111m EIMII6311 11:1110 ,■ ,F�.•Eil� u1J i 11`1ii i i ,jEl, ui I__ . 1M Irgin • lin mu 1 ■■I,I,E71 —l�11 West Valley Neighborhood Plan Water Utilities Nob Hill Water Unknown 2" or 4" 6" 8" 12" • Proposed City of Yakima Water �0-12 v 12-24 24-36 A? 36 - 48 #s * Urban Growth Boundary *#s,* �/ All Roads Nob Hill Water Service Boundary West Valley Neighborhood Planning Area Tax Lots •..• •:: City Limits 0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 Miles Adopted • February 2011 MAP 14 lIIiil. &IP ■., 411111p,'1 °:' .. MI iriiritt =ii'i .......... ...„...m. ,�.• R •• ■ 101111111''1 ��� ��•1 �■■� ■ Sn oen nni ■III■1- � -�I e, ;a�;: ilii„■®1. u I i: Board of Yakima County Commissioners Ordinance No. 5-2011 IN THE MATTERS OF AMENDING THE YAKIMA URBAN AREA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ADOPTED BY YCC 15A.00; AMENDING THE YAKIMA URBAN AREA BOUNDARY DEFINED BY YCC 15A.01.020(b); AND AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP FOR THE YAKIMA URBAN AREA ESTABLISHED BY YCC 15A.03.040 WHEREAS, the Growth Management Act (GMA) requires cities and counties to adopt comprehensive plans for land use under their jurisdiction; and WHEREAS, in April 1997 the City of Yakima (City) and Yakima County (County) adopted the Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan (YUACP) as the comprehensive plan for the Yakima UGA; and WHEREAS, the YUACP, upon adoption, did not include detailed land use and related planning for the western portion of the UGA then known as the West Valley Urban Reserve and now known as the West Valley Planning Area; and WHEREAS, the YUACP stated that land use planning within the West Valley Planning Area would be conducted in the future as a coordinated effort by Yakima County, the Cities of Yakima and Union Gap, and area residents; and WHEREAS. Policy G10.9 of the YUACP tasked Yakima County with establishing "a mechanism for designating zoning categories within the urban reserve area, to allow for an appropriate transition to urban area zoning"; and WHEREAS, the YUACP was updated in 2006 and anticipates the adoption of the West Valley Neighborhood Plan; and WHEREAS, concurrent adoption of an area -wide rezone should occur with the adoption of the WVNP because the GMA requires development regulations to be consistent with and to implement comprehensive plans; now therefore BE IT HEREBY ORDAINED by the Board of Yakima County Commissioners: Section 1. Findings. The Board hereby finds as follows: . The Board and Yakima City Council conducted two joint study sessions on September 28, 2010 and October 12, 2010 to review the findings and recommendation of the Yakima Urban Area Regional Planning Commission (RPC), attached hereto as Exhibit A, which provides the Reasons for Action, Findings of Fact, Factors Considered at and After the Hearing, Analysis of Findings Considered to be Controlling, and Recommendation; Ordinance No.5-201 I Adopting West Valley Neighborhood Plan and Area -Wide Rezone Page 1 of 4 2. The Board and Yakima City Council held a joint public hearing on October 26, 2010 to receive public comments on the RPC's recommended West Valley Neighborhood Plan and Area -Wide Rezone, and a staff - recommended proposal for Urban Area Street Standards; 3. The Board and Yakima City Council conducted joint deliberations on November 22, 2010 and December 13, 2010 concerning the RPC's recommended West Volley Neighborhood Plan and Area -Wide Rezone, and a staff -recommended proposal for Urban Area Street Standards; 4. Said joint deliberations considered all comments presented at said public hearing and the documents listed on "Exhibit List" attached hereto as Exhibit 5. The Board hereby adopts by reference paragraphs #1 through #54 of the Regional Planning Commission's June 23, 2010 findings and recommendations, attached hereto as Exhibit A; 6. During said joint deliberations the Board arid Yakima City Council made the decisions described in "Summary of Decisions", attached hereto as Exhibit C, concerning the RPC's recommended West Valley Neighborhood Plan and Area -Wide Rezone, and a staff -recommended proposal for Urban Area Street Standards. Section 2. Adopting the West Valley Neighborhood Pion. Yakima County Code Section 15A.00.010 is hereby amended as follows: 15A.00.010 Plan Adoption. The 1997 Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan* No. 2 1997 shall consist of the Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan 2025, adopted by Ordinance No. 9-2006 on December 19, 2006, the Terrace Heights Neighborhood Plan, adopted by Ordinance No. 8-1999 on July 27, 1999, and the West Valley Neighborhood Pian, adopted by Ordinance No. 5-2011 on February 15, 2011 and attached thereto as Exhibit D, all as subsequently amended by ordinance.Novembor, 1996 Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan Draft, as modified by the Yakima Urban Aroa Joint Board Recommendod Changes. The plan shall be the official comprehensive land use plan for the Yakima Urban Growth Area, as required by RCW 36.70A. (Ord. 2-1997 § 1, 1997). * Editor's Note: A copy of the 1997 Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan is on file and may be referred to in the offices of the Yakima County panning Public Services elDepartment. Ordinance No.5-2011 Adopting Wesi Valley Neighborhood Plan and Area -Wide Rezone Page 2 of 4 Section 3. Expanding the Jurisdiction of the Yakima Urban Area Zoning Ordinance. Yakima County Code Section 15A.01.020 is hereby amended as follows: 15A.01.020 Jurisdiction. (1) Generally. This title is enacted and administered separately by the city of Yakima and Yakima County for lands and uses within the Yakima urban area. The ordinance adopted and enacted by the city of Yakima applies to all land and uses located within the city limits of the city of Yakima. The ordinance adopted and enacted by the county of Yakima applies to the unincorporated portions of the Yakima urban area. (2) Yakima Urban Area Boundary. Official Boundary and Description. For purposes of this title, the Yakima urban area is officially declared to be that area bounded and doscribod: (a) designated as the Yakima Urban Growth Area by the Yakima County Comprehensive Plan (Plan 2015) as adopted by Ordinance No. 4-1997 on May 20, 1997 and as subsequently amended, plus on the official (b) all additional area in the Yakima urban area legal description attached to this title as Appendix A and adopted by reference and declared to be a part of this title. In cases of conflict betwoon the official zoning maps and the official legal description, the official legal doscription shall control. (3) Existing Ordinance Superseded. The provisions of this title shall be and are declared to supersede and replace all existing and future provisions of Title 15 of this code within the unincorporated areas of the GCounty located within the Yakima urban area as officially described and adopted in subsection (2) of this section. The provisions of Title 15 of this code shall, however, continue and remain in full force and effect in the unincorporated areas of the GCounty located outside the officially adopted Yakima urban area. The provisions of this title shall and aro doclarod to supersede and replace tho existing provisions of Title 12 of this code. (4) Terminology. Unless the context clearly implies some other meaning, references to county/city, county (city) or similar terms in this title refer either to the city of Yakima or Yakima County, whichever entity has jurisdiction over the particular land use proposal or other item involved or affected. in no event shall such references be construed to require, directly or indirectly, action by both entities or their respective officials or agencies. References to legislative body, administrative official, planning department, hearing examiner or other official or agency under this title shall mean those officials or agencies of the city of Yakima or of Yakima County, whichever entity has jurisdiction. (Ord. 10-1985 § 1 (part), 1986). teem. Section 4. Adopting the West Valley Area -Wide Rezone. The Official Zoning Map for the Yakima Urban Area, adopted pursuant to Yakima County Code Section 15A.03.040, is hereby amended in accordance with the "Proposed Zoning" map, attached hereto as Exhibit E; provided that no amendment is hereby made to the Floodplain Overlay District. Ordinance No.5-2011 Adopting West Valley Neighborhood Plan and Area -Wide Rezone Page 3 of 4 Section 5. Severability. If any rezone, section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance or the West Valley Neighborhood Plan should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by any body or court with authority and jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other rezone, section, clause or phrase of this ordinance or the adopted West Valley Neighborhood Plan. Section 6. Effective Date. This ordinance shall be effective at 12:01 AM on February 28, 2011. Dated this 151h day of February, 2011. hey, Chairman d Elliott, Commissioner Attest: Tiera L. Girard, Clerk of the Board Deputy puty Fr.secting A torney Michael D. Leita, Commissioner Constituting the Board of County Commissioners for Yakima County, Washington \\N\ ':• • ‘••••• Exhibits attached: A - RPC findings and recommendation document (6-23-10) B - "Exhibit List" C - "Summary of Decisions" D - "West Valley Neighborhood Plan" E - "Proposed Zoning" map Ordinance No.5-2011 Adopting West Valley Neighborhood Plan and Area -Wide Rezone Page 4 of 4