The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About03/31/1998 Adjourned Meeting / Study Session 95 CITY OF YAKIMA, WASHINGTON MARCH 31, 1998 ADJOURNED MEETING - STUDY SESSION The City Council met in session on this date at 7:30 a.m., at the Wastewater Maintenance Facility, 204 West Pine Street, Yakima, Washington, Mayor John Puccinelli, presiding. Council Members Clarence Barnett, Henry Beauchamp (present after 7:40 a.m.), Lynn Buchanan, (present after 7:35 a.m.), John Klingele, (present after 7:50 a.m.), Mary Place, and Bernard Sims present on roll call. City Manager Zais, City Attorney Paolella, and Deputy .City Clerk Skovald also present. 1. GMA REGULATION UPDATE (continued from 3/17/98): A. YAKIMA URBAN AREA ZONING MAP AND ORDINANCE CHANGES B. TRANSPORTATION CONCURRENCY ORDINANCE C. CITY OF YAKIMA SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE D. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS E. REGULATORY REFORM /1724 F. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS AND PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE G. STATE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT (SEPA) RULE AMENDMENTS AND LOCAL ORDINANCE REVISION Mayor Puccinelli called the meeting to order and invited questions from the Council. Yakima Urban Area Zoning Map and Ordinance Changes Council Member Barnett directed attention to the March 20, 1998 memorandum from Joan Davenport, Supervising Associate Planner, to the Regional Planning Commission (RPC) reflecting proposed changes to the Nonconforming Uses and Structures provisions of the UAZO. These changes appear to take care of the issues that he raised during the March 17, 1998 Study Session, but there are some additional issues raised. Those issues are the County's changes and are contained in the last two paragraphs of Chapter 15A.9.100, Discontinuance of a Nonconforming Use or Structure; these may require discussion. He asked if the County's version would be enforced in the City or would the City's ordinance be enforced. Don Skone, Planning Manager, I/ explained the County's is titled 15A; the City's is 15, and each version would be enforced in each respective jurisdiction. In the • Urban Area, there would be equal enforcement of existing language. No one has proposed any changes. Mayor Puccinelli expressed concern and disagreed with the last paragraph in that section. Joan Davenport listed several ways that a non - conforming use can cease to exist. She asked for Council direction concerning the existing language. She noted that no other changes have been proposed within the City's provision, except elimination of the 75% damage clause as requested by Council Member Barnett. Then Ms. Davenport outlined the County's 96 MARCH 31, 1998 proposed changes to the Nonconforming Uses provisions of UAZO 15A.19. As indicated in Dick Anderwald's letter of March 5, 1998, the 75% damage reconstruction language would be retained for nonconforming uses and eliminated for nonconforming structures. Also pertaining to nonconforming structures, the County recommends adding an extended time limitation of 3 years to submit an application to rebuild or replace, instead of requiring application for reestablishment within six months. There was continued discussion concerning what constitutes a non - conforming use and the differences between nonconforming structures provisions and nonconforming use provisions. City of Yakima Subdivision Ordinance Council Member Barnett disagreed with trying to change the sidewalk width requirements. He referred to a previous Bicycle /Pedestrian Committee and Homebuilders meeting which resulted in a mutual understanding of this issue. He noted that the width requirements are 4 feet wide for sidewalks on residential streets, 7 feet wide for sidewalks next to arterials and collectors, and 12 feet wide for sidewalks next to commercial developments. The topic of discussion turned to page 28 of the Draft Subdivision Ordinance, 4 - 1, Other planning features that assure safe walking conditions for students who only walk to and from school. This section pertains to safe walking feature provisions for schools and school grounds. There was discussion about what satisfying state law might mean as it relates to safe conditions. City Manager Zais suggested inquiring at the state level as to what is meant and what is the intent of the state law requiring safe walking features. Bev Luby Bartz requested that the phrase "for students who walk to and from school" be removed from line 4 -1. Council Member Beauchamp feels it is hazardous to have children walk close to traffic particularly on streets with fast moving traffic. Council Member Barnett also raised some questions and requested clarification about American Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements, i.e., that sidewalks be five feet wide to accommodate two wheelchairs to pass. Larry Peterson, Assistant City Attorney, explained the legislative intent of RCW 58.17 is to be broadly interpreted to address a list of concerns that have risen over time. Phil Lamb, Hearing Examiner for the City and County of Yakima, agreed with Larry Peterson's summary that appropriate provisions are for the local government to determine. Shelley Willson, Supervising Traffic Engineer, pointed out that several of the urban school districts depend on school buses. Over the past few years, the funding for buses has dramatically decreased, and they discovered sidewalks are needed. Now funding is available for safe school routes, and that is why this language came about. The language is also aimed at the school districts. 2 97 . MARCH 31, 1998 On page 27 of the Draft Subdivision Ordinance, Council Member Barnett requested that the word potable be removed from line 4 -f. He suggested that line 4 read "irrigation and other water supplies." Directing attention to the potable water issue, Phil Lamb provided examples of-previous experiences where numerous domestic wells were in use in an area and they were requested to hook to city water and cap the well. The issue of wanting to keep a well active might become controversial. There was discussion about the provisions in state law where the delegation of authority is provided to the Hearing Examiner. Jerry Foy, representing the Homebuilders Association, expressed concern about the cost for right -of -way to provide sidewalks. He feels it will make housing costs more expensive. Council Member .Buchanan pointed out that the proposed subdivision must make appropriate provisions for right -of -way and sidewalks should be included in the subdivision plan. City Manager Zais directed attention to page 25 of the Draft Subdivision Ordinance where it requires right -of -way be shown in the preliminary plat. Council Member Barnett reiterated his inquiry as to what the American Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements are for sidewalks and what special sidewalk provisions are required in what areas. Development Standards Chris Waarvick, Acting Public Works Director, explained that curvilinear requirements for manhole placement pertain to sewer lines that have a curve in them. Doug Mayo, Supervising Sanitation Engineer, explained the limited ability to bend the equipment is called the allowable horizontal deflection. Council Member Barnett feels that existing subdivision standards should be retained, and no additional standards need to be created. Don Skone explained there are substantial changes in the text to implement new policies created in the City's Urban Area Comprehensive Plan required under the Growth Management Act. Council Member Barnett pointed out that Class 52 ductile iron, at a minimum of 8 feet, is a requirement for fire hydrants. Although fire hydrants are not part of the water distribution system, Dueane Calvin, Water and Irrigation Superintendent explained that ductile iron is so I/ much more durable than PVC pipe. The likelihood of problems with ductile iron is not as great as with PVC. Past studies have shown that ductile iron is the material of choice for water main systems. In a related matter, Mr. Calvin explained that dead -end water lines have been basically eliminated during the last 20 years. Council Member Klingele requested that the words Portland Cement be added to line 2 of Section 12.05.020, Location, Thickness and Width (Sidewalks). 3 98 • MARCH 31, 1998 Council Member Barnett referred to Section 12.150, Bonds, and asked if two of the requirements are being eliminated - the Deeds of Trust and the security deposit provisions. Larry Peterson explained that this section was drafted to provide a variety of means to enable the City to complete a job if the contractor cannot complete it. Dick Zais pointed out that a letter of credit could be used and can be added to the choices that are available. It was the consensus of the Council to adjourn this meeting to Tuesday, April 7, 1998 to discuss linear manholes and to answer the question on ADA requirements as it relates to sidewalks. It was MOVED BY KLINGELE, SECONDED BY BEAUCHAMP, TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 9:05 A.M. Council Member Sims requested that the issue of sidewalks on both sides of the street be included in the discussion at the next study session. City Manager Zais noted that the next study session would be scheduled for April 7, 1998, to discuss the draft Planned Development Ordinance and the SEPA Rule Amendments. The question was called for a vote on the motion. The motion carried by unanimous voice vote. READ AND CERTIFIED ACCURATE BY: -/e } /is & qt COUNCIL MEMBE�� DATE AAK _ COUNCi/ MEMBER DATE ATTEST: ��`� �� i b• r /' CITY CLERK JOHN PUCCINELLI, MAYOR Minutes prepared by Deputy City Clerk Skovald. An audiotape of this meeting is available in the City Clerk's Office 4