Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/30/2007 Adjourned Meeting / Study Session 296 YAKIMA CITY COUNCIL ADJOURNED MEETING /STUDY SESSION JANUARY 30, 2007 - 8:00 A.M. — 9:30 A.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS — YAKIMA CITY HALL 1. Roll CaII Present: Council: Mayor Pro Tem Neil McClure, presiding, Council Members Ron Bonlender, Micah Cawley (absent after 9:00 a.m.), Bill Lover, and Susan Whitman Staff: City Manager Zais, Doug Maples, City Attorney Paolella and City Clerk Moore Absent: Dave Edler, Norm Johnson (excused) 2. Study Session regarding updating the City of Yakima's Development Regulations A. Staff overview of 2007 work plan to update development regulations B. Required updates Doug Maples, Planning and Code Administration Manager, introduced the 2007 work plan to update the 2007 development regulations as the result of the Comprehensive Plan update. Planned areas of work are: • Correct the Zoning Code and the Comprehensive Plan (currently not in sync) • Complete the Critical Areas Ordinance (mandated by year end) • Airport overlay • Institutional overlay • Remap new designations in the Comprehensive Plan • Align zoning components to correspond with the Comp Plan designations for zoning districts Bruce Benson, Planning Supervisor, presented an idea of looking at commercial zoning definitions and designations in the same manner as residential, e.g. C -1 through C -6 similar to R -1, R -2, R -3. The downtown area would be the highest level of zoning. As commercial development moves closer and closer to residential areas, with the Comprehensive Plan as the driving force, how do they blend? Mr. Benson gave some history of zoning, e.g. it started 3,000 years ago in Egypt and, in the United States, grew out of tenement laws. In 1916, New York City adopted the first zoning ordinances which were under constant attack by the courts until it reached the Supreme Court in 1926. Euclidian zoning came from the Euclid versus Amber decision, where you create a district, define boundaries and then permit certain uses within those boundaries. Since the early 1990's there has been a new form of zoning, form -based zoning, used particularly on the east coast. It moves away from delineation of lines on a map, and is based on the desired look of the community. The basis is, as long as things seem to blend together, it doesn't matter what goes on inside of the building. It doesn't restrict uses, but rather restricts what they look like. Staff is looking at our old Euclidean zoning to see if we can arrive at what Council is looking for in the city. 297 ADJOURNED MEETING — DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS JANUARY 30, 2007 C. Council discussion of other development regulation update opportunities Seven questions were reviewed with Council to obtain guidance and define Council philosophy: 1. Is the city too densely developed? Council Member Bonlender: As a whole, no, but in the downtown area where • there are grand old houses mixed in with 8- 10- 15 -plex apartment complexes, yes. The overall look that could be expected on an arterial is to be anchored by a 20 -plex, but as you go into the neighborhood, you shouldn't see them. Council Member McClure: The question of being too densely populated is not the way to judge, but ask if the density is supported. It is having the standards wrapped around that density that is important. Council Member Lover: Density of population and density of development are two different things, we do have population densities that shouldn't be there. Population is not necessarily indicative of development. How much illegal development is going on in these areas? 2. Does the City of Yakima allow too much activity /development within individual zoning districts? Council Member McClure: Within our districts, we allow a wide level of standards so a neighbor may not know what his neighborhood is going to look like; how a development is going to impact him. There are many decisions made by the Hearing Examiner who is reviewing it on a case -by -case basis. If a neighbor hadn't noticed this was coming and hadn't gone in front of the Hearing Examiner, there may not be strong mitigation measures against that development. Yet where someone has paid attention, it could be highly mitigated, causing a wide variety of quality. I would rather see the activity within a zoning district better understood at the beginning to avoid the need for strong mitigation to make it work. As it exists now, we allow too much variance within the same zoning without necessarily good mitigation. Mr. Maples expounded on that point, noting that if you are in an R -1 zone there are many different land uses that can be authorized; under a Class 2 review a duplex can be put into a single family neighborhood, or under Class 3, multi- family can be put in that same neighborhood. He questioned whether we should maintain that level of flexibility. Discussion continued on the distinction between zoning and development standards. Ken Harper, Land Use Attorney, noted that the more predictable you make a zoning district, the more difficult it is for other developers to achieve flexibility. 2 298 ADJOURNED MEETING — DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS JANUARY 30, 2007 3. Does the city's current zoning ordinance provide too much administrative discretion or not enough? Currently, there are three levels of review. If something is a Class 1 use it is permitted outright, unless it has an overlay like airport, greenway, etc. Otherwise, for the most part, the plans are reviewed and there is no opportunity for public comment. ,A Class 2 use has an administrative review with the final decision made by the Code Administration /Planning Manager. Class 3 is the highest level review and requires Hearing Examiner review and a public hearing. Council commented that predictability is critical yet if it's too rigid, it impacts development. Council Member McClure would like to move to a little more predictability. 4. Does the City of Yakima require too much or not enough review for new development? Council Member McClure: Review is critically important if we allow too much flexibility. If we're really flexible, some will say there is never enough review. Yet if it is totally predictable, you don't need as much review, except for the developer. 5. Do current City of Yakima regulations encourage /require safe and attractive new development? Council Member Bonlender: This refers to standards and everyone prospers from a higher standard. Our regulations should encourage safety. Currently we don't have enough. Council Member McClure: We get in trouble with this because we don't have regulations that would make for better development. Some of our R -2 and R -3 development is horrid and detracts from our neighborhoods. If we had strong development regulations, we could have effective multi - family housing abutting R -1 and R -2. I would like to see stronger development regulations in our commercial and multi - family categories, making it much more predictable. Council Member Whitman: I would like to see improvement in this area. Council Member Lover: Suggested that the developers should be involved in this discussion. 6. Is the cost of new development in Yakima higher than it should be due to regulations? • A lengthy discussion covered the components that make up the cost of development. Impact fees were also discussed in detail. 3 299 ADJOURNED MEETING — DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS JANUARY 30, 2007 7. Are there examples of development regulations in other jurisdictions that the City Council would like to see in Yakima? Generally, the answer was yes. It would be beneficial to review what has and has not worked for other cities. Council Member McClure asked for examples of "form- based" regulations. Council Member Whitman asked to review letters and forms used by Codes to ensure the City's processes are clear. D. Next steps Staff will take the Council's comments and look at our regulations, primarily around zoning districts, titles, and definitions. They will also look at the mapping with the Regional Planning Commission (RPC). It will go through a public hearing with the RPC in July and their recommendations will be brought before a joint meeting with City /County officials. 3. Audience comments (9:15 a.m. — 9:30 a.m.) Lynne Kittleson said she would submit her comments in writing. 4. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 9:20 a.m. READ AND CERTIFIED ACCURATE BY: ?/q/ , COUNCIL MEMBER DATE 9 NCI EMBER DATE ATTEST: O CITY CLERK NEIL McCLU - `MAYOR . PRO TEM Minutes prepared by Linda Watkins. An audio of this meeting is available in the City Clerk's Office 4