HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/12/2022 02 Affordable Housing Y�'1114'+
BUSINESS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
YAKIMA, WASHINGTON
AGENDA STATEM ENT
Item No. 2.
For Meeting of: March 12, 2019
ITEM TITLE: Affordable Housing
SUBMITTED BY: Joan Davenport, Community Development Director
SUMMARY EXPLANATION:
The City of Yakima is exploring the local challenges to encourage housing development. New
housing starts have lagged behind demand. We are now experiencing a very low vacancy rates,
especially for rental housing. The lack of affordable housing, especially for low to moderate
income families, is a growing concern. This session will cover the following topics:
1. Does the City have an adequate supply of vacant land zoned for housing?
2. Are there regulatory barriers that inhibit housing development? What incentives we can
bring to the table?
3. Are construction costs and permitting timelines consistent with other communities in Central
Washington?
4. To what extent does street frontage improvements and utility costs impact housing costs
5. Are there programs enabled by the State of Washington or Federal government that we
should be implementing to encourage affordable housing?
6. Should the City consider a maintenance code to assure existing rental housing is
preserved and in safe condition?
ITEM BUDGETED:
STRATEGIC PRIORITY: Neighborhood and Community Building
APPROVED FOR
SUBMITTAL: City Manager
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
BOARD/COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION:
2
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Upload Date Type
D Affordable Housing ReportBW 3/6/2019 Cotter Memo
D Affordable Housing Presentation_BW 3/6/2019 Presentation
3
City of Yakima Department of Community Development
Affordable Housing White Paper
City Council Study Session March 12, 2019
Summary
Like most communities in Washington State, and indeed throughout the nation, the City of Yakima does
not have an adequate supply of affordable housing to meet the needs of our community. Housing is
defined as "affordable" if the costs do not exceed 30 percent of a family income. Families who spend
more than 30 percent of their income are considered cost burdened and may have difficulty affording
necessities such as food, clothing, transportation and medical care.
Families that spend 50 percent of their annual income on housing are considered severely cost
burdened. Statewide, over 51% of renters are cost-burdened and nearly 234,000 households are
severely cost-burdened today. A family with one full-time worker earning the minimum wage cannot
afford the local fair-market rent for a two-bedroom apartment anywhere in the United States (2015
Washington State Housing Needs Assessment). In order to reduce the cost burden to families, there is
a gap (need) of 3,300 housing units affordable to those earning lower incomes in the City, according to
the 2015 Washington State Housing Needs Assessment. This is the estimated measure of families
(10% of families) that are currently struggling to cover housing related costs in our community.
Yakima Housing Facts
The City of Yakima currently has approximately 35,980 housing units for 94,190 persons. Average
persons per housing unit is 2.66 persons. In 2014, 54 % of all housing units were owner-occupied and
46% rentals. Vacancy rates for existing housing units is very tight. Less than 2% of the rental units are
vacant at any particular time. Single family homes on individual lots are the dominant housing type in
Yakima.
Findings
• Vacancy Rates, especially for rentals, is very low. Available rentals in Yakima have been
reported to drop from 7.8% to 1.7% vacancy rate between 2014 and 2016 (Runstad Center for
Real Estate Research). Today's vacancy rate for rentals in Yakima is estimates at about 1%.
• Home Ownership remains out of reach for many. Approximately 44% of our City families
cannot afford to purchase home at the area Median Home price. Median single family home
values (June 2016) in Yakima was $156,500 (compared to $275,600 in Wenatchee, $183,300 in
Spokane and $216,300 in Tri-Cities). To afford the purchase of a median value home in Yakima,
a family would need to make at least $38,500 annually ($3,200 monthly).
• Many households are cost burdened. In the City of Yakima, 32% of renters are cost
burdened and 49% of home owners are cost burdened (2012 study).
• New construction of multi-family units has not kept up with demand. Between 2009 and
September 2018 a total of 916 new single family homes were permitted for construction. In that
same time period, only 281 housing units in duplex structures were built and 596 units of
multifamily type buildings (more than 3 units per structure). Over this ten year period, a total of
1,793 housing units were issued building permits in the City of Yakima, or an average of 180
permits per year. In 2018, we had 265 new housing units created.
• Smaller Household size. Over half the Yakima households are one or two people with no
children. In 2015, 29 percent of Yakima's 33,074 households were single persons and 24
percent of the households were couples with no children. These population demographics may
Wage
4
be indicators of a market demand for smaller homes, with smaller lots in a walkable setting.
Townhouse type development and other moderate density to higher density settings may be
responsive to this market.
• Housing choices for low to moderate income families in Yakima is severely limited. The
Median Family Income in the City of Yakima is $43,089 (2016 ACS data) which is 27% lower
than the Washington State Median Family Income. An estimated 22.5% of our residents live
below the Federal Poverty level. The illustration below shows the distribution of household
income by employees in the Yakima Urban Area. Yakima is shown in the orange color bar, the
Nation as a whole is shown in gray. Median family income is noted by the black bar.
Wage Distribution in Yakima County (Central)--Greater Yakima City Puma
For an nymity,the AC51-year estimate groups oc upations by broad parent groupings.
25%
20%
5°A
0%
Oh
o Y `oJ` 6, S o o o o a'e
Average Salary
a :ea e .E_t,mate DATA USA.
New Housing Units Permitted Since 2010
Type/Year 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Total
Single-Family 91 66 64 73 78 113 107 90 144 826
Duplex 18 18 30 18 40 24 40 32 70 290
Multi-Family (3+ units) 277 96 72 30 21 3 0 3 51 553
Total New Housing 386 180 166 121 139 140 147 125 265 1669
Units:
Population Growth to Housing Starts
2010
0s 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 New
Totals
City 91,196 91,630 91,930 92,620 93,080 93,220 93,410 93,900 94,190
Population
New Pop 925 434 300 690 460 140 190 490 290 3,919
Avg. new
families 355.8 166.9 115.4 265.4 176.9 53.8 73.1 188.5 111.5 1,507
(2.6
people)
New
Housing 386 180 166 121 139 140 147 125 265 1,669
Starts
2IPage
5
Existing City of Yakima Housing Inventory
Housing Type 2017 Percent
SF 22,303 61.98%
Duplex 3,078 8.55%
3-4 units 2,383 6.62%
5+units 6,216 17.27%
Mobile Homes in parks 2,003 5.57%
Total housing units 35,983 100.00%
Strategies for the City of Yakima
There are a number of issues the City of Yakima may want to consider in order to promote the
construction of affordable housing. This report will summarize the following issues:
1. Does the City have adequate supply of land zoned for housing, including alternatives to single
family homes?What zoning districts encourage rental housing development?
2. Are there local regulatory barriers that inhibit affordable housing development? Are there
regulatory incentives we can offer to encourage housing construction?
3. Are construction costs & permitting timelines in the Yakima Area consistent with other
communities? Can they be improved?
4. Frontage Improvements and Utility Costs associated with new or infill development.
5. What programs has the State of Washington enabled that the city might want to take advantage
of and what steps are necessary to implement the programs?
6. Should the city of Yakima consider tools to address blight, such as those properties identified in
the Vacant Housing list? One tool may be an Urban Renewal District which requires designation
of Blighted areas.
7. Should the city of Yakima consider a maintenance Code to assure that existing rental housing is
preserved as well as descent and safe?What are the disadvantages to this approach?
3IPage
6
I. Supply of Land Zoned for Housing
Based on population projections and guidelines issued by the Growth Management Act, the Yakima
Comprehensive Plan 2040 identified the need to provide for 17,167 additional persons in the Yakima
Urban Area by 2040 and 8,556 new jobs. The 17,167 new residents would need 6,602 new housing
units over the 20+ year time or approximately 330 new housing starts every year. As stated in the
Housing Facts section of this report, there is a significant need for more affordable housing. To the
extent possible, a goal of the City of Yakima should be to promote approximately half of the new
housing starts (3,300 housing units) as affordable to our moderate and lower income residents. The
target of 330 new housing starts every year is significantly higher than the 180 average housing starts
we have experienced in the last 10 years.
CITY OF YAKIMA—2015 While it is true we will need housing for
inventory Total Acres Vacant Acres all income groups, the most significant
AS,Airport Support 815.91 1.0 need is to encourage the construction of
B 1, Professional Business 382.00 48.0 housing that is affordable to low and
B 2, Local Business 225.20 20.2 moderate income family rental housing,
which has a very low vacancy rate (less
CBD,Central Business District 282.40 20.1 than 2%).The 2015 Vacant Land Study,
GC, General Commercial 1,349.71 442.4 a background document for the
LCC, Large Convenience Center 195.69 12.4 Comprehensive Plan found the City had
RD, Regional Development 548.31 232.2 an adequate supply of vacant land
SCC, Small Convenience Center 304.79 44.3 which could accommodate 44,817 new
M 1, Light Industrial 1,953.14 851.1 housing units. However, a suitable
M 2, Heavy Industrial 118.92 17.3 tract of land for new housing has been
identified as one of the main obstacles
R-1, Single Family Residential 6,813.31 895.8 in getting new projects started. Housing
R-2, Two Family Residential 2,230.29 575.1 can be built in most zoning districts, but
R-3, Multi-Family Residential 1,146.23 245.8 land zoned R-3, Multi-family is limited.
SR, Suburban Residential 1,565.26 194.6 The City could benefit from more R-3
Grand Total 17,934.12 3,331 zoned land. A new process for minor
Sq. Miles 28.02 4.84 rezones was adopted with the 2040
Comprehensive Plan which generalized
the Future Land Use category for Mixed Residential to include R-2 and R-3 zones. The Yakima
Planning Commission could be tasked with identification of specific areas or zoning district uses to
encourage housing.
To assist the public in finding property for potential development, the City IT staff created a Dashboard
for searching and information. This dashboard can be utilized at:
https:lyakima.maps arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/d0d0f868918e4684b7ae977386b0b991
II. Regulatory Barriers or Incentives for Affordable Housing
The City needs to encourage construction of all housing types but particularly affordable housing. Some
steps to implement this goal have been taken while other options should be reviewed for future action.
Already Implemented:
4IPage
7
✓ The City Council modified the zoning code in 2018 to streamline construction of"Accessory
Dwelling Units" (or ADU's). These are housing units which are built on lots that already have a
house or other structure.
✓ The City amended the zoning code in 2017 to allow clustering of housing units around a
common amenity in order to promote tiny home villages.
✓ With the exception of the Industrial zoning districts, new construction of housing is permitted in
nearly all other zoning districts and locations. The process for multi-family construction requires
notice to neighborhood residents within 300 feet in all districts except R-3 and projects with
more than 20 units require review under State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) in most
situations. Neighborhood concerns ("Not in my Backyard — NIMBY") continues to be a challenge
for some affordable housing projects.
✓ The City of Yakima has not imposed any Impact Fees (as allowed under RCW 82.02) on any
construction projects.
✓ The City of Yakima offers a free Development Service Team project review. A follow up review
is available for $100. If a developer takes advantage of these programs, the actual project
review can be shortened because they have a better understanding of the Codes and
requirements.
✓ Multi-family Tax Exemption program (MFTE). This tax exemption provides an incentive to
construct multi-family housing in a targeted area of Yakima. This area has been defined as the
Central Business district and several properties have been constructed using the exemption
including the Lofts, the One Chestnut and the Nordstrom/Mills building. The program provides
an exemption of property tax increases for up to 12 years based upon qualified improvements of
the project and is governed by YMC 11.63.040. Should this area be expanded?
✓ The City of Yakima is an Entitlement Community for the HUD HOME program. Funds received
under this program must be utilized to create new housing units. HOME funds have been used
by the City of Yakima to support many partnerships and resulted in the construction of over 250
new housing units in the last ten years. Partners include Habitat for Humanity, Yakima Housing
Authority, Next Step Housing, Catholic Charities and others. The City Council recently approved
investing HOME funds to the 80 unit Bicycle Apartment project on North 5Ot" Avenue and will be
working with the Yakima Housing Authority later this year for approximately 36 housing units at
the Armory development.
Future Options:
o The City of Yakima could review smaller lot sizes as a tool to encourage more diversity and
density of new homes.
o The Central Washington State Homebuilders indicated the preference of many clients for more
townhouse type homes. The Zoning Code could be reviewed specifically for techniques to
encourage this type of development in Yakima, especially located on individual lots.
o The City of Yakima could analyze the Municipal Code to determine if there are other options to
encourage infill of vacant land and buildings with residential uses that have been successful in
other communities.
o Many of the existing buildings in the Central Business District were constructed with boarding
house, hotels or other residential uses on the upper floors. These buildings often do not have
fire suppression sprinkler systems or elevators. The City could examine code options related to
these public safety measures to encourage redevelopment of these buildings with new
residential units.
5IPage
8
o The State legislature adopted amendments to RCW 19.27.060(2) which allows for local
government to reduce the minimum dimensions of habitable spaces in single family housing
units in an effort to promote smaller homes.
o Promote accessory dwelling units in a wider range throughout the City.
o Examine "Inclusionary" zoning that requires a percent of new units to be below market rate.
III. Construction Costs and Permitting in the City of Yakima
The City of Yakima was invited to participate in a 2017 survey of five markets in Eastern Washington to
study housing costs. The five markets included Wenatchee/East Wenatchee, Yakima, Spokane,
Ellensburg and Tri-Cities/Benton County. The 8-page report was issued in March 2018 and indicates
that construction of single family housing in the City of Yakima is competitive with the other four
markets. In some measures, Yakima is one of the two least expensive markets for development costs.
Areas where Yakima was most competitive was Median Value per square foot, total Sales Prices, total
Cost of Framing materials and total permitting fees. One area in which the Yakima market was high
was the Land Cost.
One area where Yakima fell in the middle of the group was the length of time for development
approvals. If the length of review time is perceived as excessive, this can be viewed as a potential
disincentive for development. Some options to reduce processing time include:
1. The zoning code could be examined for land use types where the review level is changed to
make more affordable housing type "permitted" Class 1 review projects, rather than requiring a
class 2 or Class 3 review. Under Washington State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), review is
necessary for any project that has more than 20 housing units. One option the City might
consider is to make any SEPA exempt housing project a permitted land use.
2. In some Washington State communities,there is an option to pay an additional fee for expedited
reviews. In other communities certain types of land uses are given an expedited review if the
use is something the community wants to encourage.
3. As noted earlier in this paper some recent affordable housing developments in Yakima have
experienced active neighborhood opposition, which has added up to a year to the review
process. The NIMBY problem is a natural reaction to a project that might introduce diversity or
increased housing density into an area. The City could review options to reduce the N IMBY
effect, including community education and engagement. One solution may involve multiple
smaller projects spread broadly in the City, rather than a project of 30 or more housing units.
This could reduce the NIMBY opposition and streamline development of small scale projects.
There are some grant opportunities for assistance in financing the construction of housing for low to
moderate income families. One of the most significant challenges is to fund operational costs for
these developments.
IV. Frontage Improvements and Necessary Public Utility Costs
The cost of providing public utilities to new development has been noted as a concern for new projects
in Yakima. Public water and sewer are enterprise funds, primarily operating on the rates paid by
existing customers. Therefore, an adequate reserve fund for public financing of area wide
improvements or line extensions does not exist in either of these programs. Some grant funds have
been used in the past to assist in the extension of utilities into some areas. This funding is significantly
constrained. Yakima Municipal Code Title 12 directs many of the policy issues related to these
6IPage
9
elements. To reduce frontage and utility costs, locations that already are served by public
utilities and complete streets should be prioritized for affordable housing projects.
Public water and fire flow— Public water is available from either the City of Yakima or Nob Hill Water
systems, depending on location. No new wells in City Limits for drinking water are permitted, although
there are still neighborhoods where public water is not currently available. The City recently extended
public water to a mobile home park on Fruitvale Boulevard due to a failed water system.
Public sewer—One of the most expensive items for new development is the common need to extend a
public sewer line to the site. Currently, the City has approximately 20% of the neighborhoods and areas
where no public sewer is available. The Yakima Health District does not recommend allowing any new
septic systems inside the City of Yakima if public sewer can be made available. The City of Yakima
does not have a robust Capital fund to finance the extensions of public sewer to all the regions of the
City where no sewer lines exist or the capacity of the lines are not adequate.
Developers cite the "to and through" policy requirement as adding expense burdens to projects, yet this
remains one of the principle methods of equitably extending sewer lines to adjacent properties. Late
comer agreements for sewer reimbursement are not popular, because the payback time is uncertain. In
some of our older neighborhoods, the cost of sewer connections is a financial burden to families in
existing homes that have old or failing septic systems. An alternative financing tool is the Local
Improvement District (LID). In some neighborhoods, property owners may not be able to afford to
participate in the LID or even afford the connection charges.
Street frontage improvements - Construction of new streets, or improvement to existing streets to
support a new development is a basic element of a project. There are many factors that impact the
nature of the street improvement necessary to support a new development. The City has adopted the
policy of "complete streets" that considers all users, including walking, biking and transit. This is most
important in walk to school neighborhoods and safe routes locations. On street parking is often desired
in a new development, but not required. Traffic calming is allowed on neighborhood streets, but not on
busy arterial streets. The City policy is for sidewalks on both sides of the street. Infill lots may be
exempt from some of the requirements to upgrade streets. Requirements for street frontage
improvements must have a "nexus" to support the need for physical improvements. A traffic study is
required for large projects to determine if"off-site" street improvements are necessary. The authority for
the traffic study is most often the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA).
V. Washington State Legislative Affordable Housing Optional Programs
Several programs have been enacted by the State to encourage affordable housing.
• Affordable Housing Fund Sales and Use Tax increase. The State of Washington enacted an optional
sales and use tax increase of one-tenth of 1 percent for Counties and Cities in 2015 (RCW 82.14.530)
to be used exclusively for affordable housing projects and mental health programs. The cities of
Ellensburg and Olympia have adopted programs to impose this sales tax increase. The city of
Ellensburg anticipates it will raise approximately$450,000 to $500,000 per year from this program. The
City of Olympia anticipates close to $2 million a year in revenue. The program requires a ballot
measure for adoption. Both Ellensburg and Olympia conducted community workshops and studies to
get support to pass these ballot measures. If the city council is interested in this program, a study
session on implementation steps should be scheduled.
• Disposal of Surplus Government Property at a Discount for Affordable Housing:
7IPage
1d
Effective June 7, 2018, RCW 39.33.015(8)(a) enables state agencies and local governments to dispose
of its surplus property at no or low cost to developers to construct affordable housing. There are
requirements as to the affordability period and other restrictions as to the use of the property associated
with the disposal. Municipalities must typically receive fair market value for surplus properties. Allowing
the sale of surplus property at a discounted rate will open up more land for development of affordable
housing. This program could streamline transactions of idle city owned land to housing agencies and
developers who will build qualified affordable housing units.
• Allowing for Smaller Residences:
In HB 1085, the legislature amended the state building code and related planning statutes to allow local
governments to reduce the minimum dimensions of habitable spaces in single-family residential units
below the standards set forth in the state building code. This bill is intended to enable the development
of smaller, more affordable homes, sometimes called tiny homes. RCW 19.27.060(2) now reads, in
relevant part:
The legislative body of a county or city... may adopt amendments [to its local regulations
implementing the state building code] that eliminate any minimum gross floor area requirement
for single-family detached dwellings or that provide a minimum gross floor area requirement
below the minimum performance standards and objectives contained in the state building code.
The City of Yakima has not adopted an amendment to the building code that allows this reduction in
gross floor area requirements.
• Exempting Certain Property Intended for Low-Income Housing from Property Taxes: ESSB
5143 exempts real property owned by a nonprofit entity from state and local property taxes when that
land is being used for developing or redeveloping low-income residential housing. In particular, this law
extends the exemption to community land trusts where the land remains in the ownership of the
nonprofit but is leased to low-income households. There is no community land trust in Yakima.
• Increased Funding Available for Affordable Housing and Homelessness:
The legislature made permanent the $40 recording fee surcharge intended to raise funds for
homelessness and affordable housing. It also increased the surcharge amount to $62. A portion of the
surcharge is provided to counties to put toward their homeless housing program and a portion goes to
the state to be deposited in the Home Security Fund Account. The funds must be used for specific
purposes, and data collection requirements and metrics are incorporated to determine whether the
funds are addressing the homelessness problem. The City of Yakima is considering a request to
Yakima County that would reserve this increase in the filing fee for the capital project financing and
operations of a permanent low-barrier homeless housing project and for homeless shelter.
VI. Maintaining Housing Stock
Preservation of the existing housing stock in the City of Yakima is critical to meeting the demand for
affordable housing. The condition of housing (both rental and home ownership) is essential to quality
life in the community. The City of Yakima, as an Entitlement Community, expends approximately 60%
of the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) resources in the repairs for safety and health
items in the homes of senior citizens and disabled persons each year. This program has enabled
hundreds of elderly families to "age in place", delay entry into an assisted living situation, or simply
experience safety repairs that otherwise were not affordable. The City Council has strongly supported
this program but it is limited by available funding.
Much of the City of Yakima housing stock is old, with over 50% of the housing units constructed more
than 40 years ago. There is a strong correlation between housing age and housing condition. The
percentage of housing units that lack either a kitchen or plumbing varies by Census Tract between zero
8IPage
11
and 11.26 percent, with the high rate of no plumbing is found east of 16th Avenue. Other condition
issues have not been recently documented. The City of Yakima has adopted Municipal; Codes for
Chronic Nuisance properties (YMC 11.45), Dangerous Buildings (YMC 11.46) and Apartment
House/Hotel Safety Codes (YMC 11.13) but we have not adopted the optional Minimum Property
Standards (MPS).
Some community conversation has occurred related to whether the City should promote short term
rental housing such as those utilized as "Air Bed and Breakfasts (ABNB) or Vacation Rental
Businesses (VRBO). The Yakima Planning Commission will be holding Zoning Text Amendment
hearings in 2019 and will consider this topic along with other related short term rental issues. Some
communities in Washington State have experienced a negative effect of short term rentals on the
available housing market, as the vacation business removes units from the rental market.
The City of Yakima does not have a rental registry program, like Seattle does that requires inspection of
rental units on a routine basis. At this time, the City cannot demand an inspection of a rental unit, which
impairs the ability to write citations for unsanitary or potentially dangerous conditions. While there are
many positive reasons to support a Minimum Maintenance Code or program, one significant negative
affect would be the potential to displace low income persons from housing without any other housing
resources to provide shelter. The City does not maintain a vacant residential building program at this
time. The City Council has started a discussion of the goals and intended outcomes that may result
from a vacant building program. If the City of Yakima adopts and enforces minimum maintenance
standards, some housing units will be upgraded especially with public safety improvements. However,
some housing units will likely be abandoned and some tenants may be displaced.
City Council Action Steps
This Study Session was intended to summarize the role of the City in Affordable Housing, and identify
action steps to encourage housing starts, especially those that may be below market rates. The City of
Yakima has many partners in this community that have broad expertise in housing issues who could
assist in providing recommendations or insight to the Council.
Action Steps for the City of Yakima:
1. Refer items to the Yakima Planning Commission related to zoning and regulatory innovation for
broad community discussion about potential amendments. The City Council reviews all
recommendations of the Planning Commission.
a. Review options for zoning of additional land for multi-family construction.
b. Analyze the Zoning Ordinance (YMC 15) & Subdivision Ordinance (YMC 14) for
regulatory strategies to encourage multi-family construction.
c. Analyze the R-1 Zoning District to determine if more density should be allowed in the R1
Zone?
d. Review techniques used in other cities, especially in the state of Washington to
encourage new housing of all types.
e. Review the concept of Inclusionary Housing Ordinances that require set-asides for
affordable housing or payments into a fund for affordable housing. Seattle and Portland
have similar ordinances with mixed results.
f. Review short term rental zoning and licensing regulations (ABNB or VRBO).
2. Direct the Healthy Community and Neighborhood Building Committee (HCNB) to review this
report and prioritize policy options for the full Council, including:
a. Review methods to encourage below market rate construction of multi-family housing.
b. Work with Yakima Housing Authority to bring more rent vouchers to Yakima from HUD.
9IPage
12
c. Explore potential rehabilitation incentives the City could offer existing building owners to
develop mixed use projects with commercial/office on ground floors and housing units on
upper floors.
3. The full City Council should evaluate some of the crucial policy issues related to encouraging
new housing starts.
a. The City has adopted the Multi-Family Housing Tax Credit Program, authorized in YMC
11.63.040. The program is limited to CBD zones. Should it be expanded?
b. If the council decides to review development standards, such as changes to utility
policies or street frontage improvements, a broad community discussion should be
convened and include organizations like the City of Yakima Bicycle and Pedestrian
Committee. The ability to offer any incentives or discounts from the City Water Division
or Sewer Division is ultimately a rate payer and City Council policy decision.
c. Consideration of the adoption of the minimum maintenance code and a rental registry
could involve review by a variety of stakeholders, including but not limited to, tenant
rights organizations, health industry professionals and landlord organizations.
d. The Council may want to discuss strategies to address vacant and abandoned buildings,
like the Community Renewal District.
e. CDBG and HOME Entitlement funds from HUD have been spent cautiously and
strategically invested. However, there is broad authority to modify program investment. If
the City would like to be briefed on these program options, a Study Session may be
appropriate.
Submitted by Joan Davenport, Director
14IPage
Affordable H_______
_ .• .. .__ _
• •
may .tea s "..ram S ' . z...
. _ _.
`�, _ -nw ��� f z- 7- _a. . ..- T.w.• .X •_. * ...
_.
i. 3
•
- it •_ - _. _. _ w- _, . • .•. +- .. _ '}`s' ut _-
,� . TY OF YAKIMA WHITE PAPER , MA H 122 2019' , s � � -
is
ry
f. —'-'—-- -21. ~ -- t' _-:r :6.29$ "` s �,- -.w- .. _ •;7f _ _=r Lam.
What Does Affordable Housing Mean ?
Housing is defined as "affordable" if the costs do not exceed 30 percent of a family income.
• Families who spend more than 30 percent of their income are considered cost burdened and
may have difficulty affording necessities such as food, clothing, transportation and medical care.
• Families that spend 50 percent of their annual income on housing are considered severely cost
burdened.
• Statewide, over 51% of renters are cost-burdened and nearly 234,000 households are severely
cost-burdened today. A family with one full-time worker earning the minimum wage cannot
afford the local fair-market rent for a two-bedroom apartment anywhere in the United States
(2015 Washington State Housing Needs Assessment).
Yakima Housing Facts
• Vacancy Rates, especially for rentals, is very low. Available rentals in Yakima have been reported to drop from 7.8% to
1.7% vacancy rate between 2014 and 2016
❖ Home Ownership remains out of reach for many. Approximately 44% of our City families cannot afford to purchase
home at the area Median Home price. To afford the purchase of a median value home in Yakima, a family would need to
make at least $38,500 annually ($3,200 monthly).
❖ Many households are cost burdened. In the City of Yakima, 32% of renters are cost burdened and 49% of home
owners are cost burdened. There is a current need for 3,300 more affordable housing units in Yakima.
+ New construction, especially of multi-family units has not kept up with demand. Between 2009 and September 2018
a total of 1,793 housing units were issued building permits in the City of Yakima, or an average of 180 permits per year.
To meet our population growth projections, we need about 330 new housing starts every year.
• Smaller Household size. Over half the Yakima households are one or two people with no children. In 2015, 29 percent
of Yakima's 33,074 households were single persons and 24 percent of the households were couples with no children.
❖Housing choices for low to moderate income families in Yakima is severely limited. The Median Family Income in the
City of Yakima is $43,089 (2016 ACS data) which is 27% lower than the Washington State Median Family Income. An
estimated 22.5% of our residents live below the Federal Poverty level.
Wage Distribution in Yakima County (Central)--Greater Yakima City Puma
For anonymity,the ACS 1-year estimate groups occupations by broad parent groupings.
25% Median Family Income in
Yakima is $43,089 in 2016
20%
15%
a•
`m
N
10%
5%
Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y O O
m O N O n y N Y
ON O OONw OO O O O O O O O O NYO
O O O m N vs, N. co O
N A T. t� LI R R +
O0 N N N N iA LI ,f
N N
Average Salary
Dataset ACS BUMS 1-year Estimate DATA U SA.
Source:Census Bureau
Maps — New Public Policy Maps from
ESRI available free to all communities
Maps for Affordable Housing
it, . „.
•
e . Ya4Y�. , H 19M1n 4o.mcm. a _ \\ -
1110 is' .=,----II •
v
/\
„. A
1 - I
Al
—
11ii�
Terrace
USA Census Renter Occupied Housing , a # eights
State Boundary Summitview i
'west Vane;
I
ill .
County Boundary
Illk Ilki ' Buchfiold
South A
Percent of renter housing by block group Broadway 1
. Very High(More than 47.3%) 'Union( apt
iimallil
Bir I
. High(36.3% 47.3%) III
II Average(25.3% 36.2%) ,
Renter Occupied Housing
f • _
2010 Owner occupied Housing Units
MM.
2010 Renter occupied Housing Units INFIN • • ,
• •
h 2010 Vacant Housing Units • • • •
crrr cc
• • Yakima+ I If:(11,V
ih tied •
a •
• • •
°6 of total • • • A • • •
•
• •o • d
< 34 •
L a
ii
vi
Housing Demographics in the 2010 • C'
' Census - Block Group - Counts • Union Gpry� .
• 2010 Owner occup ed Hous ._, „ ". •
(U.S.Census) i,
l
2010 Renter occupied Housing Units '
,
enta an Ownership rates
Predominant category
• Monthly Owner Costs< 10%of Income
• Monthly Owner Costs 10 14.9%of •
Income •
•
• Monthly Owner Costs 15 19.9%of Terrace
Income Yakima Heights
Monthly Owner Costs 20 24.9%of
Income
MIOr
III
Monthly Owner Costs 25 29.9%of
Income
Monthly Owner Costs 30 34.9%of •
•
Income
• Monthly Owner Costs 35 39.9%of
Income •
• Monthly Owner Costs 40 49.9%of I Union
Income / \_ ,.— - `.. ---.,1
• Monthly Owner Costs 50+%of Income
Homeownership costs as a percent of income
What is the " bottom line" ?
THE CITY OF YAKIMA NEEDS TO ENCOURAGE ABOUT HALF OF THE NEW HOUSING UNITS
CONSTRUCTION OF MORE HOUSING STARTS! SHOULD BE CONSTRUCTED FOR LOW TO
MODERATE INCOME FAMILIES.
+Over the last 10 years, we have had an +We need to encourage multi-family units and
average of 180 housing units permitted each rentals of all types.
year. In 2018, we had 265 housing starts.
+There is an interest in development of town
+To meet our GMA goal, we need to have 330 house type construction.
housing units started each year.
The construction market will not likely be
+:+We need partners to help in this effort and able to build quality units for affordable
need to be creative. housing without assistance.
Strategies to be Reviewed
1. Does the City have adequate supply of land zoned for housing, including alternatives to single
family homes? What zoning districts encourage rental housing development?
2. Are there local regulatory barriers that inhibit affordable housing development? Are there
regulatory incentives we can offer to encourage housing construction?
3. Are construction costs & permitting timelines in the Yakima Area consistent with other
communities? Can they be improved?
4. Frontage Improvements and Utility Costs associated with new or infill development.
5. What programs has the State of Washington enabled that the city might want to take advantage
of and what steps are necessary to implement the programs?
6. Should the City of Yakima consider an Urban Renewal District to address blight issues?
7. Should the city of Yakima consider a Maintenance Code to assure that existing rental housing is
preserved as well as descent and safe? What are the disadvantages to this approach?
Question 1 : Do we have enough land
zoned for Affordable Housing ?
Zoning and land use analysis from the Comprehensive Plan 2040 indicates yes.
Location, availability and market price of land might be a different story.
The Growth Management Act (GMA) population projections for the City of Yakima indicate a
need for approximately 6,600 new housing units by 2040. Half of those units should be available
to low or moderate income families.
Exhibit 3-14. Zoning and Capacity for Growth by District
Buildable Excluding Critical Areas (Vacant,Agriculture, Infill, Underutilized)
Zoning 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Citywide
Suburban Residential 2.3 61.9 49.3 - 14.4 66.1 0.6 I 194.6
Single-Family Residential 7.1 5.9 19.2 6.7 82.4 284.4 la 895.8
Two-Family Residential 9.2 35.6 40.2 5.9 29.9 61.3 393.0 575.1
Multifamily Residential 13.1 2.1 10.0 4.2 29.6 13.3 173.5 245.8
Professional Business District 2.8 - 10.6 7.5 5.2 3.7 18.2 48.0
Local Business District 0.3 0.4 5.7 1.1 1.3 2.0 9.4 20.2
Historical Business District 0.2 - - 0.1 - - - 0.3
Small Conenience Center - 1.6 - 3.2 12.8 - 26.7 44.3
Large Convenience Center - - 0.7 - 8.5 1.0 2.2 12.4
Central Business District 3.0 1.2 - 15.9 - - - 20.1
General Commercial 17.5 52.6 57.6 10.1 20.5 - 442.4
Light Industrial 12.9 28.1 125.0 18.8 123.7 1.7 581.1
Heavy Industrial - 9.0 - 8.3 - - - 17.3
Regional Development 167.4 64.3 - - - - - 232.2
Airport Support - - - - - - 1.0 1.0
Totals 236 263 318 82 328 434 1,670 3,331
Source: Yakima County 2015, BERK Consulting 2017
as orrl.w Team eon v.r+.wan I S. . \,. �..1�(\ �11
us.u.pori sr,p9on .u.91 se/ a \ Its :1� _ \:_ IN ill.. �!/ 11 \ II riff zoning
61 vrdeu wul puYrrss 3RAp )7.16 _tis
6}foul Wurrea, IIS.N 11/ �� , 1� \ _ I, _6
CBO Cent/AA Buf4vY WUtl }D.00 6]0 . -
c`J ke i /%%i'
L9B a0 ..M■j'i, ` .� -�. !% c\, ~`� _ �cep
LCC.Urge Convenience Center 1$® 9LOS i,� 1 !
SCCS,nllCnewb. Center
rI /I.21.12 1 . 1 b+ .� i1 / �.
SC(,SmtCenrenelrce QMn 3511 SM1/ �` -�~`•r1 \ l / � � 4 ` L.� _
MA OEM nnu,Yr L9slu 1 -��9. `1� ��,, __ imi
M3.XewY Industrial 11d93 Sr:}99 �1■—�I:'��,r"'. ` t$,5 ,..•,1,�`�\ .- i_ . ,'` i LC
LCC
B- L 4f•mrl M,geMIY 661131 9'AA.53 i1 L1 Pas n:•e�■■• •-
•
.-2 TWOFlinty llemenrL.l 1330A A&€ a•- lag:a• �,' 1I���;Ir .�,�:. ! - -�`•Cx -µ
P1 suba.RLe.enus L 3.,.3 3HY NI:;in• ■ c, Imp -- /• •� / ` .-, �
SYBYman.fSIn RendY 1BSM 1LS11 emcee •mulls
• , / / 11■µ2
na,er- �n .. r •• .r!i Imp ♦ , '?�/. - / / I f �l. •�� R.1
,I • ,a •
■1111111R.��7 . 1 ■�I : ■lil—in 'ILui 1 1� !.,�•:�. _R3
■�
`C - 'II t • Fe
/i, IadB ■n r�111,: 1: SI I. ,r _. . .. --•. _ ___ _ _ �`l:` t.- l�
rSR
1i
111•111:1-ggillg I ...1 i',. • • - ,,,, - E' .41 T 1 ...........\ L
sone
111291111CP 111111 Lijz ' • ille-9,? !, P0 • I - - r- E • • - . ' ' \ ,,.
.� :11p�,/_..=TI I cif._- I',ii'��• a 1 ' "
r . II tr—Iiaa u. IiliC I�pl —' ��C ;;
,
lar
41
ter■ ■. � �'
i
\,
"�IIIIII �■be` -F,... =51p11�e m ♦�, 1
m'kills. �� 3i_ �. .I ::un_la:: �e.r a d
:I LJruwnu1:,-m1a._. I. : •1 a.- �/__///I `<• I :'i�
�Lr��K w �an4l• L I�III�II��'6 1:�! ___ 71 'gii/ �• ■'t ]♦ �'
!I/ I 1 I. Lrll. . I�u7 •1a.. =ee�:,:��IIG�II
- i111. III L V u.l. `IVn: ■■
••r. �11F__ I iie_J•aaa mc__ _ °ea—, • 1 IrQ rani'a=a nlmml 'B•C 1 d- . A
S Vacant lands were identified using the Yakima County Assessor property records.A parcel was determined to be"vacant"if it has C I t y of Yakima
a building (or improvement)value less than$7,500. Lands that are owned by the City of Yakima,Yakima County,the Greenway
NORTH Foundation, Yakima School District or a Washington State Department were not considered vacant for the purpose of Vacant Land Analysis
1 iIM=3,000 feet development.
City of Yakima Plannng Division,December 2011 b Zonin • Districts
Property Development Explorer _
A Dashboard to explore Properties in the City of Yakima.WA
Property Filters o. p i= 9 21 Property List Sorted by Acres
Boo ( 1 18131922005.406N 92ND AVE I
Refine by Improvement S Value \ BRIAN DAHL
® N. rt�'
WI— f\ 14.53 Acre(s)Zoning:Ri
I. At m Market Land S233,0001mpry SO
Refine by Property Acreage IIDMIDI
ailicf . • „v - _ - r.e'I I
\ Flata4 18132843402-UNASSIGNED
�N ' 1+I �• 5 Z • F ,� I� �! •� CONGDON ORCHARDSINC
111411 yeavg- r • • J r Y� s 'rlti , , • ••k 1 14.43 t Lrand)Zoning:R-2
pit i • .7 •'t �•• 7IL ' \ •, •' I' Market lend 5314,400 Impry SO
' rem
■ . 5.• 7'I �of- , Ng9AC Print Property MaP
Use the'Improvement'Value of the parcel 9 ! ,�- •� • I ,1 :�•'••- s \Yakima _ „ 1 4 View Assessor Information
•
to review parcels with no improvements •
(vacant)or with limited structures that may ram• ••� ' ' •• r 4 18131421425PACKI 2405 RIVER RD
V ` ` • • • y .. ' ' k`a• FROSTY PACKING CO LLC
be suitable for redevelopment.Use the I - _ V' - 1
filter slider bars above to refine the display �"""wh'lew ,7 •• - -„:y� 14A2 Acre(s)Zoning:MT
of potential properties on the ma either l' - • \ . -•` RI/�I , Market land 51,269,000 Impry SO
Po p pe p •( ..f f �• i j- . •.
by improvement value or size of parcel. n .•f• veue1 • •
- - •\ \. I 1 ....- Vie Property Map
r- - : • _ ,r- r c.,..-,. Yew Assessor informal',.
Low improvement values may provide ��• ••I ` • - } - ••• a\ '.-=+ u.l.n,�. 18131233006-1007 RIVER RD
IL
potential(or affordable housing or other - •1 � - P • - 7 I �• • - �` — PLYMOUTH RANCH LLC
development projects.Select an -- iir
i - Y�I 1 - S. •h l • 14.06 Acre(s)Zoning:M.i
appropriate range for your project.You . — , -. r • Land-
canaisosetaminimumandmazimum a 1 - - ' ,fir,-', .i• , fladatFnint opert Sy Ma2P 4.9001mpry 50
ranges for acreage for your project.
I - rai • 'a. _�> a •� Ira BbzhR, View Assessor Information
,You can also dick On the zoning Or II • I f a- AIL 1l - 18133143405.OCCIDENTAL RD/S 88TH
floodplain chart to refine the displayed I 4 r 1- AVE
property selection by zoning districts or ` ' A / I J APPLE TREE RESORT DEVELOPMENT CO
floodplain properties.Use the zoning chart UR _ + kill13.9 Acre(s)Zoning:R-1
to select one or more zoning categories. ix
• •'me' • South e s.away Ili Markel land S310.800 Impry SO
Click just outside of the categories in the �I• •- • NM Print Pope'ty Man
chart to vow all zoning categories.The NM I k�I Pk + Vie...Assessor Informatio^ •
map display property list and property ` m +_'count and acreage update as you refine • .,- Property Statistics in Current Map View
your selection.Unfortunately,at this time,
we cannot export the property list from this
dashboard
tool. Property1 ,/'�92
Count by Zoning Category In or Out of Floodplain Y
Zooming and re-centering the map will sk 2k
also adjust thentscard,list zoningeart Property Count Representing:annd total amounts card. Find yoourrarea of <J°
interest and see what potential properties scc 1 373 1s •
meet your selection.This toolbox does not 1 ,543 ac
imply the property owners are interested in zti 1n •, -
.. n9 or development projects. — - I — — - -- $140.9M
City of Yakima,WA-GIS
https://yakima.maps.a rcgis.com/apps/opsdashboa rd/index.html#/d0d0f868918e4684b7ae977386b0b991
Question 2 :
Are there regulatory incentives or barriers to the
� v
construction of affordable housing in Yakima ?
The City has implemented a variety of incentives:
❖"Accessory Dwelling Units" (or ADU's).
❖clustering of housing units around a common amenity in order to promote tiny home
villages.
❖housing is permitted in nearly all other zoning districts
❖No Impact Fees.
❖Free Development Service Team project review.
❖Multi-family Tax Exemption program (MFTE)
❖HUD HOME funds assisted in 250 new housing units in the last ten years.
Things we can do better — promote smaller lots
and smaller units in walkable neighborhoods .
9 BEEN
0
___---,___-_-70 \_ ________
ui; 4 `4144 y iti
.a
(PI al: .
Other incentives to consider that may
encourage affordable housing construction
+:+Encourage infill of vacant land and buildings with residential uses
+Existing buildings in the Central Business District were constructed with boarding house, hotels or other
residential uses on the upper floors. These buildings often do not have fire suppression sprinkler systems
or elevators. The City could examine code options related to these public safety measures to encourage
redevelopment of these buildings with new residential units.
+:+The State legislature adopted amendments to RCW 19.27.060(2) which allows for local government to
reduce the minimum dimensions of habitable spaces in single family housing units in an effort to promote
smaller homes.
+Promote accessory dwelling units in a wider range throughout the City.
+Examine "Inclusionary" zoning that requires a percent of new units to be below market rate.
Question 3 : Is Yakima competitive in
construction costs and perm itti ng ?
A 2018 report on housing construction costs in five markets in Eastern Washington (Wenatchee/East
Wenatchee, Yakima, Spokane, Ellensburg and Tri-Cities/Benton County). indicates that construction of single
family housing in the City of Yakima is competitive with the other four markets.
Yakima is one of the two least expensive markets for development costs in
• Median Value per square foot,
• Total Sales Prices,
• Total Cost of Framing materials and
• Total permitting fees.
One area in which the Yakima market was high was the Land Cost.
Permitting time is average for Eastern
Washington - Can it be streamlined more ?
+Allow more housing construction as Class 1 Uses which do not require neighborhood review.
•:•Under Washington State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), review is necessary for any project that
has more than 20 housing units. One option the City might consider is to make any SEPA exempt
housing project a permitted land use.
+Consider an option to pay an additional fee for expedited reviews. In other communities certain
types of land uses are given an expedited review if the use is something the community wants to
encourage.
+Can we reduce some of the NIMBY delays without hurting existing neighborhoods? Appeals can
add up to a year to the review process. The City could review options to reduce the NIMBY effect,
including community education and engagement. One solution may involve multiple smaller projects
spread broadly in the City, rather than a project of 30 or more housing units.
Question 4 : Do street improvements and
utilitycosts deter affordable housing
Public water and fire flow — Public water is available from either the City of Yakima or Nob Hill Water
systems, depending on location. No new wells in City Limits for drinking water are permitted, although there
are still neighborhoods where public water is not currently available. The City recently extended public water
to a mobile home park on Fruitvale Boulevard due to a failed water system.
Public sewer — One of the most expensive items for new development is the common need to extend a
public sewer line to the site. Currently, the City has approximately 20% of the neighborhoods and areas
where no public sewer is available. The Yakima Health District does not recommend allowing any new septic
systems inside the City of Yakima if public sewer can be made available. The City of Yakima does not have a
robust Capital fund to finance the extensions of public sewer to all the regions of the City where no sewer
lines exist or the capacity of the lines are not adequate.
To reduce frontage and utility costs, locations that already are served by
public utilities and complete streets could be prioritized for affordable
housing projects.
Street Frontage Costs and Traffic Impacts
• The City has adopted the policy of "complete streets" that considers all users, including
walking, biking and transit. This is most important in walk to school neighborhoods and safe
route locations. The City policy is for sidewalks on both sides of the street.
• On street parking can increase the width of a street and is often desired in a new
development, but not required.
• Traffic calming is allowed on neighborhood streets, but not on busy arterial streets.
• Infill lots could be exempted from some of the requirements to upgrade streets.
• Requirements for street frontage improvements must have a "nexus" to support the need for
physical improvements.
• A traffic study is required for large projects to determine if "off-site" street improvements are
necessary. The authority for the traffic study is most often the State Environmental Policy Act
(SEPA}.
Question 5 : Are there other State Programs
the City could adopt to encourage Affordable
Housing ?
❖Affordable Housing Fund Sales and Use Tax increase.
❖ Disposal of Surplus Government Property at a Discount for Affordable Housing.
❖ Allowing for Smaller Residences: sometimes called tiny homes.
❖Exempting Certain Property Intended for Low-Income Housing from Property
Taxes: ESSB 5143.
❖ Increased Funding Available for Affordable Housing and Homelessness: The
legislature made permanent the $40 recording fee surcharge intended to raise
funds for homelessness and affordable housing. It also increased the surcharge
amount to $62.
Question 6 : How can Yakima encourage
housing retention ?
•:•Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) senior citizens and disabled persons each year. This
program has enabled hundreds of elderly families to "age in place"
+The City of Yakima has adopted Municipal; Codes for Chronic Nuisance properties (YMC 11.45),
Dangerous Buildings (YMC 11.46) and Apartment House/Hotel Safety Codes (YMC 11.13) but we
have not adopted the optional Minimum Property Standards (MPS).
The City of Yakima does not have a rental registry program, like Seattle does that requires
inspection of rental units on a routine basis. If the City of Yakima adopts and enforces minimum
maintenance standards, some housing units will be upgraded especially with public safety
improvements. However, some housing units will likely be abandoned and some tenants may be
displaced.
City Council Action Steps
Refer items to the Yakima Planning Commission such as additional R-3 land options and
strategies to encourage multi-family construction; Analyze R-1 density limitations; review
innovative techniques and ordinances in other cities.
+Refer to the Healthy Communities and Neighborhood Committee such as incentives to
encourage below market rate construction of MF, how to encourage more rent vouchers, and
mixed use building code options.
+Full Council should discuss crucial policy issues to encourage new housing starts such as the
MFHTC and boundaries, development standards, maintenance of existing housing units vacant
or abandoned building strategies and uses of CDBG and HOME funds.