HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-09-16 YPC PacketFOR. T ui 1 E
,,s�� DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
R[ann�ng I.)i.visuon
al 1% ft, Joan Davenport, AICP, Director
s
)f YAKIMA9129 North Second Street, 2nd Floor, Yakima, WA 98901
ask.planning@yakimawa.gov • www.yakimawa.gov/services/planning
City of Yakima Planning Commission
PUBLIC MEETING
City Hall Council Chambers
Wednesday March 9, 2016
3:00 p.m. - 5:00 p.m.
YPC Members:
Chairman Scott Clark, Vice -Chair Patricia Byers, Al Rose,
Bill Cook, Dave Fonfara, Ron Anderson
City Planning Staff•
Joan Davenport (Community Development Director/Planning Manager); Jeff Peters
(Supervising Planner); Valerie Smith (Senior Planner); Trevor Martin (Associate Planner);
Rosalinda Ibarra (Administrative Assistant); and Lisa Maxey (Department Assistant)
Age da
I. Call to Order
II. Roll Call
III. Staff Announcements
IV. Audience Participation
V. Approval of Meeting Minutes
0 October 29, 2015 and November 4, 2015
VI. Comprehensive Plan 2040 Update Visioning Open House & Council Meeting Debrief
VII. Final Staff Edits to Notice Procedures in Title 15 - Urban Area Zoning Ordinance, and Title
16 - Administration of Development Permit Regulations
VIII. Other Business
IX. Adjourn
Next Meeting: March 23, 2016
0 �
City of Yakima Planning Commission (YPC) City Hall Council Chambers
Meeting Minutes of March 9, 2016
Call to Order
Vice -Chair Patricia Byers called the meeting to order at 3:00 p.m.
Roll Call
YPC Members Present: Vice -Chair Patricia Byers, Al Rose, Ron Anderson, Bill Cook
YPC Members Absent: Chairman Scott Clark (excused)
Staff Present: Jeff Peters, Supervising Planner; Valerie Smith, Senior
Planner; Lisa Maxey, Department Assistant II
Others: Mayor Avina Gutierrez, Council Liaison
Staff Announcements
Supervising Planner Jeff Peters announced that Commissioner Fonfara resigned from the
Planning Commission on March 461, effective immediately. The Commissioners
commended his work.
Audience Participation
None noted.
Approval of Meeting Minutes of October 29 2015 and November 4 2015
Commissioner Rose made a motion to approve the meeting minutes of October 29, 2015
and November 4, 2015 as written. The motion was seconded and carried unanimously.
Comprehensive Plan 2040 Update Visioning Oen House & Council Meeting Debrief
Senior Planner Valerie Smith asked if there were any comments or concerns related to the
presentation that the consulting group provided to the Council. Commissioners made
general comments about the presentation going well. Smith provided the Commission
with a portfolio that the consulting group created, titled, "We Are Yakima'. She spoke to
the positive turn out at the open house and provided the Commission with a draft "Open
House Summary" packet. Commissioners shared their feedback and the comments they
heard at the event. Commissioner Rose mentioned a concern that a member of the public
had related to the permitting process for their business. Rose also shared that additional
signage directing people to the conference room where the event was held may be helpful
in the future. Discussion ensued regarding the various activities at the event.
Mayor Avina Gutierrez joined the meeting at approximately 3:20 p.m. Jeff Peters
announced to the Commission that she is the new council liaison for this commission.
Valerie Smith reminded the Commission that the community visioning survey closes on
March 31St. She added that future meetings for focus groups have yet to be scheduled.
Final Staff Edits to Notice Procedures in Title 15 and Title 16
Peters provided an introduction explaining why changes are being made to the code. He
then summarized concerns expressed by commission members at previous meetings
related to land use signs not being removed in a timely manner. Discussion ensued
regarding the option of taking a deposit from the applicant when they borrow signs from
the Planning Division. Mayor Gutierrez contributed the idea of having the applicant pay
the cost of the time and services for the City to remove the signs for them after the
deadline has passed for taking them down. Discussion took place regarding the necessity
-1-
of modifying the land use installation certificate. Lisa Maxey, Department Assistant,
described changes made to the draft notice requirements table since the last meeting.
Peters informed the Commission that a public hearing on the text amendments can be
held in May. The Commission had consensus for staff to move forward with the
amendments in preparation for the public hearing.
Other Business
Commissioner Cook asked for clarification on what a quorum is for the Planning
Commission. Peters explained that 4 commissioners would qualify as quorum.
Commissioner Rose stated that he has applied to serve another term on the Commission.
Valerie Smith reiterated the purpose of the Request for Consideration form for changes
to the Comprehensive Plan. She specified that the last business day in April is the
deadline to turn in this form. Commissioner Cook suggested that staff speak with the
Home Builders Association in regards to this process.
Mayor Gutierrez commended Valerie on the visioning open house that was held for the
Comprehensive Plan Update.
Adjourn
A motion to adjourn to March 23, 2016 was passed with unanimous vote. This meeting
adjourned at 4:14 p.m.
Chairman Scott Clark Date
This meeting was filmed by YPAC. Minutes for this meeting submitted by: Lisa Maxey, Department Assistant II
-2-
„,Imw a a a IL WV4,.. ,wu kid”S a a ""k:.
%%
V , ill
a. a � r r�^� �. fl heti " a., r Yip F; Y MA
��i SIGH IN SHS" P�'���
City of Yakima Planning Commission
City Hall Council Chambers
Wednesday March 9, 2016
Beginning at 3:00 p.m.
Public Meeting
*PLEASE WRITE LEGIBLY'
....................
. �................_........
..._..................� .. .........,....�.�....�. ._........
g _.....__._.....
............ ......
Pae 1 03/09/2016 YPC Meeting
F0iiia. T I I E
OPEN HOUSE SUMMARY
DRAFT I MARCH, 2016
lVe, tue, Vet&tna
plar"i 20,40
1.0 Introduction........................................................ ......... ....... ......„ , ..,,.., ................. .,..,,.,,.2
2.0 Open House Marketing ................................. ......... ............... ........ ....... ..................... .,,.,,,.2
3.0 Live, Shop, Play Map ...................................... ....... .....,.., , , ,,,,., ....,.,. ,...,..,, ..,....., ,....,....5
4.0 Do -it -Yourself Station................................................................................ ....„,.,,...,.......,,..,,,,... 5
5.0 Visioning........................................................... ....,.,,...,„,.,,,,,,,,., .,...,,, „,...,..,,..,,,.,,.,.5
6.0 Downtown And Historic Character ................ ,,.,,,..... ,,..... ...,.,,. ,.,...,,...,,....,,, ...,.,...,..,..,.,,.,.8
7.0 Park, Streetscape, and Amenity Images.....,,.., ..,....... ......... 10
8.0 Parks and Open Space ................................... ......... ......... ... ..... ......... ...............................13
9.0 Downtown Yakima Visual Preference Survey Results........... .......................14
10.0 Housing Type / Community Design Survey Results ............. ,,.,17
11.0 Transportation.............................................................. .w.,...,,...,...,......,.,.....,...,...,,....... ......... ,.,,20
The Visioning Open House was held at the
Yakima Valley Technical Skills Center from 6 -
8 PM on Tuesday, February 23,4,11,6 016. 62
people signed in for the event and an
estimated 100 people were present, including
City Council and Planning Commission
members and staff. The Open House was held
with the purpose of introducing the
Comprehensive Plan Update project to the
public, provide awareness about the project,
and gather feedback from attendees on a
variety of topics using specially designed and
topical exercises.
During the Open House, a short presentation
(see attached appendix) was given outlining
the project background, project timeline, and
next steps. All boards used during the open
house are in the attached appendix.
C"iTY OF YXC-N]A COMPU(EHE';1151VPLAN 1JPDA7le
Vl510NINNG 0Pf,"A' X10 SJJM M RY
The following summary will cover the Exhibit 1. Open House Attendees Listen to Presentation
marketing effort surrounding the open house
event, as well as descriptions and results from each of the stations. All stations had city staff or a
consultant team staff member available to help answer nuestinns anri guiriP the PxarrisPs- Alsn in
attendance were representatives from the Parks and Recreation Department, the Economic Development
Department and Downtown Yakima Association, and Yakima Transit.
2a0 ®PEN HOUSE MARKETING
Marketing 0ver vies;,;
In order to ensure that the Open House was well -advertised and open to all Yakima stakeholders hoping
to participate, a variety of materials were created and multiple methods were used to market the event.
A special logo and marketing theme were created for the project and;t-w ill c un"u!e_ used
consistently on these materials in order to create an identity around the Yakima Comprehensive Plan 40..
Update.
Marketing Approach
The City of Yakima used the following methods of advertising the project and, specifically, the event on
February 23 d, to the public:
• TV and Radio Interviews
• Facebook page posting
• Noticing
• Posters
• Postcards
2
iD AF..i.. March, 2016
CITE' OF YA,KIMA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE
VISIONiNG OPEN HOUSE SUMMARY
Materials
A single -sided English postcard (see Uflbit 2Exh,ib t ;) was sent out to over 300 people and stacks of
postcards were given to the Council members to hand out. A card handout was created with event details,
providing an English version of the postcard on one side and a Spanish version on the other side (see
Exhibit 3).
Exhibit 2. Yakima Open House Postcard — Front and Back
£,Q 4 0d 9'9 q' 6fi d?1 UOM 2040
(.X.')i' VAUN "' m �0ul OPEN p K:A)S
w,Tora `f p ;'n�i F 1PplJ(IF Ij ",
v1 ., fi 'Wp"'
VV6,n4n,rOuly, n&"kilp,�,",iri,:n�.
Exhibit 3. Yakima Postcard — Spanish Version
SOW/od V171~. -I
�T7np 1
wo4111Ii100A
f; r"j1 nP .
iEst Bs ! v@ 1
CASA AWERIA I11")"ARA LA'�,dSRON lDllkll CdlMU11l1141' AD
UDOa 23 de febrero, 2016 de �as 6 px m — 8 p.m .w)k' fla AW 6:30,am
DONDE: Y4drra Wey TechnicW rkilb C Ler- 1120 S. 18th Sip, Y@Jdme
Pram informocion an o"noi iirne W ntimero ("-) 575-6183
3
IRM, ..p I March, 2016
CITY OF YAKIMA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN U?DATE
VISIONING OPEN HOUSE SUMMARY
Posters were also created and hung around the City in both English and Spanish. shows
the English version of the poster.
Exhibit 4. Yakima Open House Poster
Ave. aNz "
(-- ( )rnprehensiv
YOU'RE INVITED!
COMMUNITY VISS OINI OPEN 1 1 JSII��
V " F T , �' ' P ': " , , , ,
wileirr
Where; Ycflkm,'Adl(ey fechnka1 S�6lIs 1120 S. l Ski S1 '(aWma, WA 9890 1
-111k, ()Ijpera Fjot,Kv� os a ch<«ince" ideas atx)ut 1(cA4n<)'s !Dest fuf�ure.
lk'4p UF, Ya6Tm's An updded �,'Acrnanrid pohdG?,scaru
FVW"'(JIQ u liK-, hous� J". "d n
011:� 11 � P'h
and 4n;:)roved pubse�Vuces'
TO gel orwolved, aliend the 0"Fren liouse, em b'hare ycwr kh-.'uO qo cynrw ho P(Jk(--,
our survey and reald abou, the ["J�:Aotre;
littps://www,yakini(iwa,.g()ip/ser�Mces/i.-Aanrirng/4�oi,rip�-oi,)oinsiy�e plan -update/
Clonkxt� Vak,,6e Suyflfli, 11'irolecl Manr.igeir 509�5756111 "
F'4i�� r! 11 I i 'g
4
DRAF March, 2016
CITY OF YAKIMA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE
VISIONING OPEN HOOSE SUMMARY
3.0 LIVE, SHOP, PLAY MAP
Exercise
The Live, Shop, Play mapping exercise was based on an exercise previously used by the City planning
department to get a feel for where people live and where they go to recreate and shop. During the open
house, attendees were asked to mark where they live, shop, and play at the entry table as they signed in.
Results
The Live, Shop, Play map received 45 new entries. The average shopping trip was 1.86 miles, with the
longest shopping trip being 7.23 miles away from home. Participants traveled an average of 2.9 miles to
play or recreate. The longest recreational trip was 8.66 miles long.
Results Summary
Mapping participants who attended the open house lived all over the City of Yakima and the areas just
outside the city. About 12 people indicated that they shop in the area of the Fred Meyer near Fruitvale
Boulevard and 40th Avenue, and 9 people shop at the shopping center near Summitview Avenue and 56th
Avenue. Other areas within the City had smaller concentrations of shoppers within the respondent group.
10 people indicated that they play and recreate downtown, with some pointing to areas along Yakima
Avenue, others to areas just north of the downtown core. About 7 people showed that they recreate along
the Naches River and the Yakima wwlw„,wiwuwyjyon the north side of the city. About 17 people go to Yakima
Parks, including Franklin Park, Fisher Golf Course, Randall Park, Sarg Hubbard Park, Kiwanis Park, and
Chesterley Park.
4.0 DO-IT-YOURSELF STATION
Exercise
A station was set up with laptops and printers to allow open house attendees to view their property or
other places of interest close-up on the map, with the option to apply various different map layers
zoay„f..f shy” riQ iVQ�w� i 1rQQa& ouuu a°mv�i. If desired, participants
could request a printed version of the map being viewed.
5.0 VISIONING
The visioning station included a board describing what a comprehensive plan vision is used for•~ rrid-why
theCA*isfin vis (,*t 15,..43 4 0g, 111 fWiAed, what the existing plan's vision is, n ml�y th �xi ,�i�� yj irai m I!-
!, pdgjgjj. The board also included questions prompting viewers to think about a vision for 2040.
Exercise
The visioning exercise asked participants to draw, write, or describe their vision for Yakima's future.
Results
Exhibit 5 shows the comments made on the visioning board exercise.
B'. R AFIF I March, 2016
CITY OF YAKIMA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE
VISIONING OPEN HOUSE SUMMARY
Exhibit S. Visioning Exercise
The following ideas were shared during the visioning exercise:
Economic development through better designed communities and streetscapes!
Yakima is a city, surrounded by agriculture. As a city it needs the amenities to attract the best. To
support its surrounding areas it needs to do the same. Compromise is not acceptable.
Yakima is the best place in the world to live, to do business, to be educated!
Keep the vision simple so all will remember!!
Vibrant downtown core with unique shops, restaurants — outside. Continue great work with flowers
and downtown ambassadors. Act on the Yakima Central Plaza. Be inviting to new manufacturing &
businesses and millennials.
Culturally and racially integrated. Public spaces, neighborhoods, stores where white, Latinos, and
everyone else hang out together.
Thriving downtown - Attractive and pleasant to walk around. Hip and popular but not expensive!
Affordable, not gentrified.
Diverse economy - Get more tech and professional jobs here but not too much! No amazon, don't
want to get crowded like the west side.
We need to emphasize our wonderful natural setting. We could be the "Sonoma" of Washington.
Use of old Nursing Home by Target? Is it abandoned?
Why all wine/beer over family events? Have been tents.
6
DRAFT I March, 2016
• Tech jobs — high wages/no environmental effects, computer company. No more strip malls —takes
away from downtown — ugly.
• Money needs to be spent on sidewalks, bike trails BEFORE plaza.
• My vision is that Yakima be a place of health, vibrancy and I'ongevity. Leveraging our abundant
sunshine and plethora of fresh produce Yakima has the potential to become a blue zone where
people can age with grace and joy eating healthy food, staying active and maintaining meaningful
connections with friends and neighbors.
• Focus on Mill Site. Take plaza money and get Mill Site cleaned up. Fix city roads, they are pitiful.
Synchronize traffic lights.
• I like mixed neighborhoods; no high density; plenty of green space for children, adults and older
folks; arts; plaza.
• Plaza is a must. Solar energy. Electric vehicle stations. Arts/Entertainment. Good Schools. View
sheds. Keep hills free. Yakima River is heart — keep it clean and green.
• Yakima will be a location of choice for businesses and workers to locate.
• Emphasis on sustainable development and environmentally minded growth (expanded recycling
options). Walkability across Yakima! Cultural development & incorporation of arts in revitalization
plans. Love the plaza ideas!
I feel the downtown area would benefit greatly by limiting/removing semi -trucks — also limit traffic
by reducing Yakima Ave to 3 lanes — one each way with a left turn lane. This would allow for
additional parking, bike lanes and wider sidewalks making room for outdoor seating. Lincoln & MLK
were made one way to move traffic off Yakima Ave. Establish business routes for trucks around
community, not through it.
• A dynamic and vibrant downtown. Lots of shops, lots of community events —take advantage of our
history and our gateway and at jumping off point to the Yakima Valley.
• Market value, downtown living, nationally recognized medical community, Increased opportunity
(recreational) youth hand seniors.
• In 2040, 1 will be 47 so of course I would like to see more outdoor/recreational activities to partake
in by then. More physical activities to get our youth staying active and too busy to focuses too much
on technology.
w Inclusion, access, safety, vibrancy.
• Yakima is an agricultural community that cares for its land and people for generations to come by
helping them thrive, grow and live.
• Greenspace. Less vehicles. More pedestrians and bikes.
• My vision is to decrease vehicles (private) travelling through core. Public transportation through
vintage trolleys, historic looking buses, bike lanes. Would slow people down to enjoy the historic
buildings, socialize, shop, enjoy special events, and attract tourists! Also, educate people/tourists
about our history. Water park—Yes!
• Family friendly venue. Waterpark. Plaza needs to happen. Retail — needed.
• 1 envision Yakima as a place people want to bring their families. Great weather, fresh fruit & veggies..
Capture out of towners to want to come visit & enjoy our area. Water parks, entertainment venues,
safety on walking & greenways, etc.
DRAFT I March, 2016
VISIONING OPEN MOUSE SUMMARY
• To eat fish from the Yakima River without fear of health issues.
• 1 would like to see Yakima as a place where people from all over the state come for a weekend
getaway to wine taste, beer taste, or come for sporting events.
• I wish all the empty storefronts could be occupied. My vision for downtown: a long string of
boutiques and shops for people to walk and wander on. Cute clothes, ice cream, toy shop, etc. I also
hope one day Yakima can solve gang and crime issues. I feel safe but I know we've got a lot of work
to do! Also — can people quit complaining about parking already? There's plenty. — Peace &
blessings.
• Livelier patio scene downtown with street festivities in the summer. Safe. More encouraging bike
lanes/culture downtown.
Summary of Results
Participants provided feedback on a variety of topics when thinking about their vision for Yakima in 2040.
Some themes that came out in particular include a vision for:
• A thriving and vibrant city.
• Yakima as a place where tourists and visitors want to stop to wine taste, shop, eat and enjoy
downtown and the City of Yakima as a gateway to the Yakima Valley.
• A place that is framed by natural beauty and agricultural vistas.
• A city that is family friendly with good public spaces and quality education for children.
• A place that provides many ways to be active and healthy as young or old residents, including
walking, biking, entertainment, greenways, fishing, access to healthy food, etc.
• A city with a more diverse economy with job opportunities in a variety of industries, including tech.
• A downtown with more retail shops, restaurants, and the Yakima Central Plaza.
• Streetscapes and public areas that are historic, revitalized, and attractive.
• A city that is inclusive to all types of residents with different cultures and backgrounds.
6.0 DOWNTOWN AND HISTORIC CHARACTER
Exercise
This station provided a board with an aerial of Downtown Yakima. The Downtown and Historic Character
exercise asked participants to provide input on what they would like to see in downtown Yakima, either
through adding to the map of downtown or by providing comments.
Results
Exhibit 6 lists the comments on the Downtown and Historic Character Board and the additional dots
placed by other participants and showing additional support for the comments. Those comments with a
1 next to them were written by an open house attendee, while those with a number higher than 1 show
that additional supportfor the comment was indicated by an attendee adding dots to, or "voting for," the
comment (see Exhibit 7).
8
DRAFT I March, 2016
Exhibit 6. Downtown and Historic Character Comments
Producers Mail, business incubator, co -working
'�~~__' _
l |
K8onelocal non fax�foodHEALTHY dining /
2
Grocery store/Trader Joe's or similar
4
_
Mercado —Mexican Restaurant
1
Bike Lanes
1
� Mexican Music
1
� All people,friendly envnt
�
Children's art museum/art galleries & co-ops
2
'
'Premier xconcert/live events arena
� Rock dimbing/bouldern0wall
4
Plaza
------- -- — --- ---------'--'— -------- -------------r----�------'
13 �
� Green space'
1
Trolley down Yakima Avenue — tracks are underneath asphalt — no laying of new tracks
l
Downtown Public Year Round Market
Two lane Yakima Avenue Downtown
9
DRAFT I March, 2016
CITY OF YAKIMA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE
VISIONING OPEN 'HOUSE SUMMARY
Exhibit 7. Downtown and Historic Character Exercise
Summary of Results
Participants indicated a desire for a variety of different activities and amenities that they would like to see
in Yakima's downtown. In particular, the Plaza got a lot of support from participants, with notable support
for a rock climbing/bouldering wall and a grocery store such as Trader Joe's or something similar.
7.0 PARK, STREETSCAPE, AND AMENITY IMAGES
Exercise
The Park, Streetscape, and Amenity Images board asked participants to "vote", using dots, on the images
and features that they would most like to see in Yakima. Exhibit 8 shows the board after the exercise was
completed.
10
I° MAF IC" 1 March, 2016
CITY Of YAKIMA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE
VISIONING OPEN HOUSE SUMMARY
Exhibit 8. Park, Streetscape, and Amenity Images Exercise
PkX0 dq>fs inext to the °imaqesjeatures You would YhOsst like to See in Yakima. Also, you can also
Ocl(e o17111(lges on simis on the City MaP where You would most l,ihe to soca a specific feature
U09 park 40
'P qV'%, 4p 'f
ej(
(JA Decoralive curb exfens9ops
"Nu p,
41111
M'J- bQckr CP""14 WNW Street
18W, 'Iffil 140 10 (001 411),
Note: Dots, red or green, indicate support for a feature. The variation in color does not indicate a difference in the meaning
behind the vote.
11
DIRAF "I"r I March, 2016
Results
Exhibit 9 shows the results of the exercise:
Exhibit 9. Park, Streetscae and Amenity image Exercise Results
Summary of Results
This exercise showed a strong desire for commercial and sidewalk dining in Yakima, with play water
features, multi -use pathways, and nature trails receiving a notable amount of votes as well. Amenities
such as sports courts, children's play areas, decorative curb extensions, major public art elements, and
neighborhood commons/greens were popular as well. More discussion on the specific locations where
residents would like to see these amenities is provided in Section 8.0.
12
DRAFT I March, 2016
34
27
23
17
14
14
12 €
.
1
1.0
9
....
9
�
i
6 I
6
r
6 r
6
This exercise showed a strong desire for commercial and sidewalk dining in Yakima, with play water
features, multi -use pathways, and nature trails receiving a notable amount of votes as well. Amenities
such as sports courts, children's play areas, decorative curb extensions, major public art elements, and
neighborhood commons/greens were popular as well. More discussion on the specific locations where
residents would like to see these amenities is provided in Section 8.0.
12
DRAFT I March, 2016
CITY OF YAKIMA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE
VISIONING OPEN HOUSE SUMMARY
8.0 PARKS AND OPEN SPACE
Exercise
The Parks and Open Space exercise asked participants to comment on parks and recreation in Yakima
using words, drawings, and suggestions from provided example images (the same images used for the
voting exercise summarized in Section 7.0). The board displayed a large map of Yakima's non -motorized
transportation networks, as well as Yakima's major parks (see Exhibit 10).
Results
Participants used examples of parks and open space types and placed them on the map in the places
where they would like to see those items. Exhibit 10 shows the results of the exercise, where items were
placed on the map and comments were made to the right.
Exhibit 10. Parks and Open Space Exercise
DIRECTIOMS se cornment using r s, drowings, and suggestions fry nn the provided examples
Participants provided the following comments:
I am interested in the plaza
100% in support of the Yakima Central Plaza
Love the Plaza!
Yeah!! Plaza!!
The Plaza! O
• When you build a school put the sidewalk on the same side of the street so the children don't have
to cross twice to have a sidewalk that gets to school
• Constructed beach along the river
13
[)RA1f F I March, 2016
CITE' OF YAKIMA COMPREHEWVE PLAN UPDATE
V1SION1NG OPEN HOUSE SUMMARY
Summary of Results
Residents indicated that the plaza is a public amenity that is highly desired in Yakima's downtown. In
addition to comments on the plaza, a desire for a constructed beach along the Yakima River to the north
of the City was identified as well as a general desire for dog parks. The park and streetscape amenities
that were placed on the map included:
m Low impact design streetscapes in downtown, south of downtown near Mead Avenue and Raymond
Park, and along 16th Avenue
* Nature trails, dog parks, and public display gardens west of 401h Avenue
Public art elements, commercial and sidewalk dining, water feature, children's play area, and a
neighborhood commons/green in downtown and the surrounding area
Sports courts north of downtown
9.0 DOWNTOWN YAKIMA VISUAL PREFERENCE SURVEY RESULTS
Exercise
This exercise invited open house participants to identify the types of buildings and developments that
would be desirable and undesirable in Downtown, based on a visual preference survey that provided a
variety of photo examples from other communities. The intent was to see what the community's priorities
are on uses and building design issues associated with future development activity in Downtown. Each
example was ranked between four categories from best to worst ("Great example! (use & design should
be Encouraged)", OK (pretty good), Not great (lots of room for improvement but tolerable), and Not
acceptable (at least one component of the example should be prohibited).
Results
In total, 29 surveys were received, with the categories assigned the following values:
e 4: "Great example! (use & design should be encouraged)"
3: OK (pretty good)
0 2: Not great (lots of room for improvement but tolerable)
1: Not acceptable (at least one component of the example should be prohibited)
The results of each photo example were added up, and then divided by the number of responses for each
example in order to obtain an average score. Exhibit 11 provides a table of the results, with all written
responses by meeting attendees provided in the right-hand column.
Exhibit 11. Downtown Visual Referencing Survev Results
Example I Average Score IL What do you like or dislike about
❑ Great Example! Looks like strip mall (2); Downtown needs to be accessible
❑ OK from the street; Too cookie cutter, no character, but clean
looking; Eyesore, not warm, welcoming; Employment and
RI Not great family businesses; Dislike the lack of character, but like that
it's simple, clean, and modern; Lack of visions (visibility)
❑Not acceptable when driving/looking for business; Corporate garbage; Not
Average Score: enough windows;
2.19
14
DU M1' I March, 2016
CI FY OF YAKI 01A CONIPWR IENSIVE PLAN UPDATE
VISID,NiNiG OPENN H01iSE 5UMI MARY
Example ^
. Average Score
What do you like or dislike about example?
• 2
❑ Great Example!
Enough fast food choices outside downtown core — use space
for people walking, spending, enjoying; Strip mall —
❑ OK
predictable — horrible; Space in downtown is limited and a
0 Not great
drive thru window is not a high value use for this space;
Corporate takeover :p; Vehicle drive through city; Too "Box
❑Not acceptable
store'; This is an oversized building & parking lot for
all
Average Score:
downtown, but it has a good layout; It's OK, but local
2.00
business of better quality franchises should be the target;
Corporate garbage; Too much parking; Some outdoor
seating, trees, bike rack; Too commercial; Parking & places
for bikes, nice outside presentation
3 ?„JJ
0 Great Example!
Historic look—welcoming; Is parking an issue?; Old-
❑ OK
fashioned architecture great!; Mixed use (live/work) is good;
Good for new construction; Utilizes vertical growth (up
'
❑ Not great
instead of out) open to the street and accessible; Love it —
modern with a traditional feel; Warm, welcoming; Use of
❑Not acceptable
space ✓; Employment and family businesses; Inviting,
Average Score:
historic character, cute!; Love the appeal of businesses
3.75
standing out; Love the look; Similar to example 1, but
seems more interesting; Looks cohesive and classic
❑ Great Example!
Looks too modern/rich/"unapproachable'; Downtown needs
to grow more before this will work well; OK but not the best
aF v
OOK
use of ground floor downtown space; Looks safe and happy,
El Not great
would raise a family here; Possibilities; Too crowded;
Opportunity to own, pride; more affordable than standard
r
❑Not acceptable
home; Not the best for a downtown/shopping/restaurant
a ,s
Average Score:
area, but this type of housing nearby is needed; Keep homes
2.63
safe and out of busy downtowns; Nice residential, Nice
street scene with trees; A bit too urban; Too close together
❑ Great Example!
We have Ike to represent modern architecture — would not
flow with historic flavor of Downtown; As long as parking is
0 OK
underground and there is a lot of open space; Unique
❑ Not great
architecture adds character to the downtown; A bit too cold
for me, but not bad!; Possibilities; Aesthetically Nice;
❑Not acceptable
Good use of space; prevent sprawl!; Love different
Average Score:
architecture of buildings, makes downtowns unique; Don't
2.92
know; Interesting building, don't know how it looks in
neighborhood; A tad too modern
6
❑ Great Example!
I like these businesses; No greenery or public "urban space;
/V
El
Downtown should have windows onround level; Boring;
g 9,
OK
Needs work; -Looks like Detroit; Very boring, looks like a
0 Not great
prison; Hotels are good for visitors to accommodate for, but
don't overpopulate them; Rather stark; More outside
❑Not acceptable
displays, trees, flowers
Average Score:
2.04
❑ Great Example!
Strip malls are ugly and undesired (4); Space is limited
downtown and parking can be located above or below ground
❑ OK
level; Leave this look in the 80s, pls. Looks grungy; Eyesore
m Not great
— not where you want to be/stay; Looks cheap, not inviting,
Y Y% P, 9,
poor layout; These plazas look more lower end and better
❑Not acceptable
suited for the mall area; Need more parking in existing strip
Average Score:
malls; Boring, but serves a purpose
1.61
15
DRAT >f I March, 2016
CITE' OF YAKIMA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE
VISIONING OPEN HOUSE SUMMARY
Example
Average Score
What do you like or dislike about example?
❑ Great Example!
Not the best use of downtown ground floor space; Good use
0 OK
of space — somewhere you might want to live; It has more
o
)
green; -Love the green space and high density living — great
'
❑ Not great
use of space; Just don't overdo it in the center of town;
Looks lovely with walk/trees; Looks like a nice community
❑Not acceptable
feel
Average Score:
3.09
9
0 Great Example!
Multi use retail and services and business on ground floor and
❑ OK
living space above; Love the brick; Good use of space —
somewhere you might want to live; Good use of land; Hard
❑ Not great
sell; Love character and mixed use building & high density
housing — Great use of space; Looks good in a downtown
❑Not acceptable
environment; Looks like businesses on 1St floor w/residences
Average Score:
upper building —I like that; Interesting
3.48
❑ Great Example!
................................ ...................... ...... .
Strip malls take away beauty, are ugly (2); Parking could be
located above or below ground level; Nice, but cookie cutter;
❑ OK
Not a downtown. A place to pickup something; Better for
0 Not great
the 'burbs, not for downtown; These plazas are more unique
and could fit well; Better than Example 7; A bit too
❑Not acceptable
i commercial
Average Score:
2.00
0 Great Example!
Brick plus windows— lot of sun for lighting; Allows housing
LJ OK
and business use theme; Better use of space than Example
"
10 in that it goes vertical but parking could be located
❑ Notreat
g
elsewhere; Again, love the brick & windows; Better without
❑Not acceptable
the cars; Looks like Seattle; Hard sell; Decent character
but
others have better design. Could be taller, These
Average Score:
buildings appeal to me and make a city stand out; Need
3.52
more parking in existing strip malls; Trees nice; The options
to have housing above a business is a good idea.
12
❑ Great Example!
No greenery; Too spread out for downtown housing; Pretty
standard, pretty neutral on this one; A place you don't
❑ OK
choose to be; Use of land; We should promote home
0 Not great
ownership; Not for downtown. Perfect for just outside the
core area — Love green space & community feel of large
❑Not acceptable
apartment complexes; Great, but not for downtown area;
Average Score:
May be better when the trees grow up
2.09
Summary of Results
Generally, there was a preference for places with landscaping/greenery (Examples #3, 4, 6*, 8, 11, 12*)
and which exhibited more character (whether it was more historic, or more welcoming) (Examples #1, 3,
4, 5, etc.). Participants showed a preference for high quality materials and construction, and high visual
interest (Examples # 3, 5, 9, 11). Feedback was mixed for buildings that were seen as "modern" and
"clean" (Examples #1, 4, 5 in that they were seen as "unapproachable" or "cold", or that participants were
unsure of whether the buildings might be too modern, and would not fit into the context of the
neighborhood. Auto -oriented corporate and strip commercial examples generally were not preferred
(Examples #1, 2, 7, 10) and there was a stated a preference against low quality materials and construction,
and low visual interest (boring) (Examples #3, 6, 7, 10, 12).
16
DRAIF I March, 2016
CITY OF YA10MIA rOMPRI EHENS8VE PLAN UPDATE
VISIONING OPEN HOUSE SUMMARY
Other ideas that resonated with participants included:
• Good/efficient use of space/land
• Preference for small/family businesses
• There are visual qualities that are inappropriate for a downtown character that may have a place
elsewhere in the city.
• What are good uses of downtown ground floor spaces?
*Participants identified a distinct lack of greenery/open space, and stated a request for more outside
displays, trees, flowers
10.0 HOUSING TYPE / COMMUNITY DESIGN SURVEY RESULTS
Exercise
This exercise asked open house participants to identify which housing types were the most important,
and where in Yakima these housing types would be most appropriate, in terms of filling the City's needs.
Images of six housing types were ranked from 1-10, with 10 being the most important. Comments could
also be included for each housing type. In addition, there were three questions related to design
standards for new commercial and multifamily development to gauge interest in various design elements
(block frontages, pedestrian connections, building design). These were also ranked from 1-10, with 10
being the most important. An additional area was provided to collect any additional comments.
Results
In total, 22 surveys were received. The score for each response was tallied up, and then divided by the
number of responses for each example in order to obtain an average score (not all surveys were fully
completed). Exhibit 12 shows the results of the survey.
Exhibit 12.
Housing Type and
Community Design Survey
Results
Housing Type
Importance (i-
Where is it most
Comments (what's good or bad
10, va being best)
appropriate?
about them)
Accessory Dwelling Unit
Average Score:
• Outer ring
Energy use; Infill*; If the lot
�
5.65
• Available to everyone
size supports it, free standing is
• East side
more appealing; Affordable
• Larger lots; do not
housing for younger people /
remove large old trees
i families with access to
r
• Immediately around
downtown; Not a necessity!
the downtown core in
established
neighborhoods
• Country
• West Valley
17
DRAFT I March, 2016
18
DlfRAIF.I I March, 2016
CITY OF YAKIMA COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN UPDATE
V150NING
OPEN HOUSE SUMMARY
..
Small Lot Detached
Average Score:
`
... ...
Near schools
— mm�m
We alreadyhavetons of these
Single Family Homes
6.32
• Outer g (3)
already (3); Energy and space
• Available to everyone
use; Most houses there are
East side, downtown
old and outdated — time for an
area
upgrade; Traditional homes
that most aspire to
ua,
Cottage Housing
Average Score:
Quieter/Secluded areas
Older/retirement community
7.43
(2)
(3) —1 think we have a lot of
• No specific location
people who retire here and
• East side, downtown
need winter homes; Love this
area
look (2); Less good for energy
� �?lN;
�
• Suburbs of town —
and space use, but good for
City
gardens, small families; Most
houses there are old and
outdated — time for an
upgrade; Shared outdoor
spaces foster community; Not
my favorite
Housing Type
..........
Importance o-
Where is it most
_
Comments (what'sgoodor
is to being best)
appropriate?
bad about them)
Townhouses
��—
Average Score:
• Near or in Downtown
n
For younger professionals/1'
6.80
areas (5)
time homebuyer (2); Efficient
'
• Near Yakima Valley
use of space; personal dwelling;
n�,
Community College
Good use of space; It will be a
* No specific location
while before these make sense;
• Redevelopments near
Downtown core needs to
urban core
expand; Not appealing—too
,
• Outskirts of City
big for singles, too small for
• West Valley, East Valley
families—thumbs down;
Affordable homes close to main
................
............................
...._.
town center
Walk up apartments
Average Score:
......_.�......
• Redeveloped areas
Around or near a common
��
7.13
near or in the
downtown core (3)
space; Great use of space, for
variety of income levels &
• Near Yakima Valley
family Blah; We
i rn
ey
structures;
Community College (2)
need more apt complexes! The
• No specific location
vacancy rates for 1 bdrm
"
• Everywhere in
decent apt are absurd; Castle
residential
creek and University place are
neighborhoods
great examples of what we
• West Valley, East Valley
need more of; Provides
affordable housing for people
working near town center.
18
DlfRAIF.I I March, 2016
19
C' RAR I March, 2016
CITY OF YAKIMA COMP EHE,NSIVE PLAN UPDATE
VISIONING OPEN HOUSE SUMMARY
Low-Midrise Housing
Average Score:
• Near or in Downtown Parks need to be within
(mixed-use or sing/epurpose)
7.39
areas (7) walking distance; We need
• Good for downtown! more apt complexes! The
Most urban parts of vacancy rates for 1 bdrm
town decent apt are absurd; Castle
• Multi-use downtown creek and University place are
West Valley, East Valley great examples of what we
need more of,• Make sure to
have a mixture of affordable
units and others; For those
who live and work downtown;
Keep away from outskirts;
Love mixed-use housing close
to all the amenities
COMMERCIAL & MULTIFAMILY
DESIGN STANDARDS
Please indicate your interest
on a scale of 1-10 in
establishing design standards in Yakima associated with new
commercial & multifamily development.
Feature
Importance
Comments (what's good or bad about them)
(1-10, IO be/ng
best)
Design of Block
Average Score:
Likely best would be "do nots"; Yakima needs these!; A
Frontages in Downtown
8.69
beautiful downtown is something to take pride in — people
and other key areas
would cultivate and maintain it; Should be attractive —
make downtown pleasant to walk; As an investor I would
want to know there is a standard of quality that has to be
maintained in the areas I am investing in. This protects my
investment and ensures a common look and feel for the
overall development; Need green & open space; Keeping
most/all building's facades similar like Leavenworth. Would
look better
.............................
Standards for the
Average Score:
Would improve walkability (3) — (Greater ability to walk to
location and design of
8.47
stores, schools, and encourage neighbors to know each
internal pedestrian
other); Sidewalks NEED to exist AND connect; Yakima
connections in large
needs these!; Over-reliance on cars (2) - maybe more
new developments
connections would help; As an investor I would want to
know there is a standard of quality that has to be maintained
in the areas I am investing in. This protects my investment
and ensures a common look and feel for the overall
development
Building design
Average Score:
Not sure; Yakima needs these!; Yakima is full of character,
standards related to:
7.91
lets reflect it in our facades; As an investor I would want to
Fa4ade massing &
know there is a standard of quality that has to be maintained
articulation
in the areas I am investing in. This protects my investment and
o Integrating some
ensures a common look and feel for the overall development;
facade details
19
C' RAR I March, 2016
CITY OF YA iMA COMPREHENSVE PLAN UPDATE
VISIONING OPEN HOUSE SUMMARY
Keep signs to minimum; Keeping most/all building's facades
similar like Leavenworth. Would look better
Summary of Results
Several housing types had a consistent preference in terms of location and uses. Small lot detached single
family homes were seen most appropriate on the periphery of town (outer ring/outskirts). Cottage
housine was seen as a eood choice in nuieter areas- for tha ratiramant rnmmnnity Walk nn anartmantc
- - - ,.- - - -- , - -- -- --------- - --- ----......_..._ .._.
were seen as appropriate near the Yakima Valley Community College and near the downtown core. In
almost all the written responses, downtown was identified as a good location for low-midrise housing.
Generally, the concept of design standards was well-received, with an average score of 8.36. Comments
reflected a desire to have an attractive and beautiful downtown with decreased dependence on cars, and
increased walkability and connectivity for pedestrians.
11.0 TRANSPORTATION
The Transportation Plan is being updated in coordination with the Comprehensive Plan 2040 and will
include a Transportation Element that is part of the Comprehensive Plan. The transportation station
included boards that summarized key findings from the existing conditions review of the City's
transportation system.
Exercise
Residents were invited to share their vision for transportation in Yakima. Participants were given 5
"dollars" to distribute among 10 different buckets of transportation priorities (e.g. improve safety, reduce
congestion, complete non -motorized connections). Exhibit 13 shows a meeting attendee participating in
the Transportation exercise.
20
DRAFT I March, 2016
CITY Of YAK] MACOMIP-REIrl ENS IVF PLAN UPDATE
VISMININCI OPEC] HOUSE SU,"YINIARY
Exhibit 13. Yakima residents participate in the transportation priorities exercise.
`transportation Results
Exhibit 14 shows the results gathered from the transportation exercise and Exhibit 15 provides a chart
depicting the information summarized in Exhibit 14.
Exhibit 14. Transoortation Exercise Results
Maintain and Upgrading Existing Roads
47
20%
Pedestrian and Bicycle Connections
45
19%
Supporting Economic Development Plans
30
13%
Reducing Impacts on the Environment
21
9%
Improving Safety for all Users
19
8%
Security and Emergency Response
17
7%
Transit, Ridesharing, and other Alternatives
17
7%
Enhance Movement of Freight & Goods
14
6%
Reduce Congestion
13
6%
Supporting Adopted Regional and Local Land Use Plans
12
5%
Total
235
100%
21
RAFT I March, 2016
CITY OF YAKIMA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE
VISIONING OPEN MOUSE SUMMARY
Exhibit 15. Transportation Exercise Results Chart
a Supporting Adopted
Regional and Local
Land Use Plans
Reduce Co^^^�+'^^
Enhance Move
of Freight & Gc
�� Transit, Ridesharing,
and other
Alternatives
Securityand
Emergency
Response
Wj Improving Safety
all Users
a Maintain and
"---- ' i ng Existing
IN Reducing Impacts
on the Environment
�» �uNNui u�ig
Economic
Development Plans
Summary of Transportation Results
47 meeting attendees participated in the transportation priorities exercise.
Is Pedestrian and
Bicycle Connections
Maintain and upgrading existing roads and pedestrian and bicycle connections received the most
votes.
Enhance Movement of Freight & Goods, Reduce Congestion, and Supporting Adopted Regional and
Local Land Use Plans received the fewest votes.
22
DIRMq [ March, 2016
F()IIS" "i1,VUIE
What ilii prep Wawa II�,�liiri
The comprehensive plan guides Yakima's physical development over 20 or
more years, addresses community values, activities or functions, and provides a
statement of policy guiding how Yakima's desires for growth and character are to
be achieved. Yakima's Comprehensive Plan is more than 10 years old and needs
updating.
How ill Otis plan affect ,,,
An updated Comprehensive Plan and policies can mean more housing choices, new
places to work, better connected roads and parks, new recreation opportunities,
and improved public services. This plan can help our neighborhoods revitalize.
Plan Vision
Yakima's current Vision, which guides policies and regulations, states:
The vision of Yakima as a vital, prosperous community with a healthy economy
and quality of life for all citizens depends upon cooperation and common goals.
This Plan identifies the strategies and challenges to guide future development
in the Yakima Urban Growth Area. This Plan identifies current trends, choices
and preferred alternatives to achieve our common vision. This vision will serve
as a foundation for all subsequent planning efforts in the Yakima Urban Area.
How have we changed? What should Yakima's vision for 2040 be? We need
your ideas!
How mudli growth I min
By 2040, Yakima is expected to have a population of 110,387.
This would mean 17,300 new residents, or about 7,400 more
households than in 2015. We need to plan for our community
today and tomorrow. The regional growth estimates and other
trends will be reviewed.
The p • ,. ill on n, i , io, t .
Address• •changes,
improve readability and graphics,
and update technical
• ..
Update land use and zoning
to reflect evolving conditions and
changing community values
Ensure Yakima is planning for future
Protect Yakima's natural
Update the utilities element about
energy & communication
1
Ensure transportation planning is
consistent with existing needs and the
current funding outlook
Plan T®r capital aci 'iti s on -a' ensure
services are provided at levels set by
adopted standard
Yakima>> Ensure is meetingdemands• parks and
recreationopportunities
• •- historic preservationand
economic development goals for
downtown • . other areas
Public Meetings » Online Survey
Open Houses » Comment on the Plan
Visilt the o
.AL- - .. ..
Project Contact: Valerie Smith, Project Manager at 509-575-61LL-1j"
Created: February 201 i
Yakima Municipal Code Page 129/284
Chapter 15,11 GENERAL APPLICATION
REQUIREMENTS
_�. bwc, CIln..n A Mwnnu out ra ii—
RNn®+a:a- - lWlfs�aNnqu�afionu..
illi Q V tiXi ,X.ryurnn aa6 My Xaxu nununn;x;w IlunFCYu'�aw°¢^,!Eaukw¢uuni*�) 118a 0111112
I!7mwvr,La_a uunum;paW
D nuiwu f 1v i VII Ynuar✓nl by Ft
nNlrrmnr.- Pdrn�erMu,iw�t+o�tiMubd`duNe.d
Ilanritrl1,A ....�.�W
IW1.n iliup�fM°ullnhanl:ti✓uIM V sfrui,a-
si L�,Hsf l "Il o Dflyf, IPP iris X _"& X
to V'ubli ,ricin
„
......-- NOT X A W) F1 L^ P401`" i Ift"Vrd V�.-7 ao Xt "4_
II to n7�� lbPioyr yOwiwr Il
rN-Iliin... RQl)Ildinff>u [M'V.a MY 116,6tiCd IIS-IL"PlPIa.Y Ilan
✓I,wdlrr,..y 4ldf} IP r W X it ,, ,tM:,Gla it uln+ai i- yr X. yi: X
X';axmrul
10 Gens +IndIce iia llfi,.w: r rulalli �.eo i,ry r �,„,.
IX sw+rfnwlnn+F
llni V +�uiiprluauo�.ra volt b VIC NX:
II u,7r�in ➢F!a FRC)(F)ft PllhV IraW,rle `
I'Iy }li, iY1'r1•S a�h1h*{bail ., rrrw,✓�r1}3kV"Uhk aM 9ikfillil�,kp2N°PaM1rylod'MdiAC4✓4kM1':-i"NY68CIV. -Cwd N R"4--op"N`,v
Y1hwiAcs d„"Nrav✓,V,#1 xla^.nr�l✓R„V,hP4,aa„pPHIWrv9b-d"Xu,.M¢a MMnpnsd,y-imftir, Jr�y;unyf e�NP4�,r uweiurra ducriar,.re+auirWiiw+✓,OnnB„Yrlarrr,Lt,r,<w$VYr4illrrrra e�fr "lmas'a✓..
tl
wid7f,11e YD,
t��� INnNd�{I,PdqiL. ✓h &1dPY r. a_^efl[:is �,vbl ry kdti7. M���MAvn QTY { VIYt �L-4 }IkhNIOFyV'M 1YdYY'p4 r'V tlNANN I.ip I: �R',rvN u9901Y�P �.y° "b M44dk4",WbtlIXY k`d, w6Vn.M 'SPb 111 YY EI'�Iltllbfh hhL6 rr'M y Cid ���iina ✓ u rf4a It � (��'6<�.
i%rrw,nrMar>yMiraoe�rliw, Irna,Or.rr7aupt^ visa+i iMw°HMnai@pm�; ,tl@paw�Crvrwrii uurnor. �wNyuixxeareaat gMaeonn9,nmlla Ynroa/ [r,it-�fsl1 rnt�ewt4,
B. Responsibility for Notice. The department and, /or kqW t rM Y l,i ,I^1a_ shall provide all notice requiring first-class
mailing or legal publication, When required, the applicant shall post the property in accordance with subsection C of
this section,
C. Posting Notice.
ae he4a F,c atued, t i'he applicant . ..
P. 6�i,padrap,�„,aaN,saMldlt,d„t,,fgdylya,Fgy q shall post the subject property with signs Formatted: Indent: Left: 0'
provided thede artmentidru N aw I Rtvww,,'v”✓aro✓gade,ICrrmar aural lilttai &rt"Ifi,air Ma ul raA,, aq al and t _ _ ..__— ._.
p y p �.,.,.�.lm,�..I , r i����. t.t �.® I �( �.t ),..,a�=�L
tFLrlgerMialuwvumu llaldcFsald„aMu rcaelauaPorer tut<(aov�rrah,MaarayaplPolicy Act RCIVWt'mg3tlwHrda;dt�y�zzruw"Pet,'#"MMfl�..I,O,.
Signs shall be posted on the subject property so as to be clearly seen from each right-of-way providing primary
vehicular access to the subject property. The time of posting shall F,avaXjAy witls 4,lie dpna,Fvisions fW F aIFW
2(,,i ciid lal,9dor w mwkmce fW ilmicq r,(rapplrv1aF w,an,,0 as, rAht✓rayi5 pa apl�arti� lav k'ivl(' d i k I e, 16.
.m „s, wtf t 1 m ,
t~ve nov all pat rosGc I Ppoiw fiv,�aMdawvaal a+t ae (a#, rr+.plica N hd. ai mroVMrararB dor 7R d7 aclt ani vat i „tlFlrtl FF nluar�� ai,ll
Bana9, MrXG as ruraaa,vut,ap , ftori;i fl *;kth ku t i)ypjXsr;i,y Mgkriit j d aw„ Iprblra,Mla tlpant, o av u ancc o I e in"'IV aYw d o,sthlt ap,c,
ac6outafipudc,sIannar"up n,,,.La,d,awrrCFMaba111^rrMFgIt .
)pr i,Pwy, r .ry1 FaO" iaiMMi�r 9');I�rarMuri�M; 6'Yavm�uer)a,
D, Mailing Notice. For purposes of providing legal notice to adjoining property owners, the person or persons
shown as the owner on the official records of the Yakima County assessor's office shall be considered the property
owner The notice of application will follow the provisions of Yakima Municipal Code Chapter 16 05 (Ord.
2010-31 § 4, 2010: Ord 2008-46 § 1 (part), 2008: Ord. 93-81 (part), 1993: Ord, 2947 § I (part), 1986).
15.11.1000 90 Fee schedule and administration.
The legislative bodies hereby adopt and maintain a current schedule of fees and charges for actions pertaining to this
title,
The Yakima Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 2015-031, passed November 3, 2015,
Formatted: Normal, Space After: 10 pt, Numbered +
Level: 1 + Numbering Style: 1, 2, 3, ,.. + Start at: 1 +
Alignment: Left + Aligned at: 0" + Indent at: 0.25",
Don't adjust space between Latin and Asian text, Don't
between Asian text and numbers
Formatted: English (United States)
Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.25"�����������
Yakima Municipal Code
Chapter 15 16 APPEALS
Page 146/284
da du'rH ijgt of',1ppf,vfl Cumtfl'& fklbloj h,UIg 1ni N)i llt, tr0430 I MWSU sieC3' oll is, MentW. upat , 41pl �, I I d paj l it°s
cua4ild:<d 1u puaipra �,uC, elpc,,,drt r„vitt,' N u ,; V phm ,4J l f4 =w ru:wGl td lCzist Ito &q1'�y_
gr ilia daarip„per tans nun a�wp ar act ad alaha�cf ugaulra°u'.
Prijgr ui the hk!u VIII&
6 l G rsd tart.
-;aw �� "� r,w,yadalrlb�l "�oaAka+.a ,un au�aalua ,sal rntouur+,8 srrcl id�p<� ua9"d�oied-u'Islaup ar uh�lxrdnrr a , lua�inror rr � ra Huai rat tau
days pro ot-tcrrise 9ma�,ra=aurvc: lar¢�rvdedt^ep •lltup[-kiu Ihe, r+eyicwv'w.ri asduo ,,iourof d w adrpsuruaasrartrva o dicwl m ade-
ondec d j,po Q) us:^rutiwa Ow a oI ire rau,a;riP'ao 1 Gari I Njpw (2) revite v ao- ider I hkt ufle
•
ri ' 11 rut Ufsura_r.the.
cerinvu u,_ ros)u rrrrgr t�,r ��ualaau, alio ar+u acp� rwuuGc pray,NB,pcupalsv ald,dlrugud,,
s
m `I I l Ilion oracnon on gi„r„y.,uuaalcp),trr�g
� it d is X4c;Ercarpolplpl,ac:aplrio n cls �il�tnaik gay ,a � al lc,Jdnl a ii t oras, id uarlc„lu4i uuu�Rgalln tie ira kiliaua.d laa fl1.e-;, liiy i(
"fendesnopaa F"�,Irratian�,ll�y�aL,ouwrr„„
Transfer of Record. The officer from whom the appeal is being taken shall forthwith transmit to the
hearing examiner all the records pertaining to the decision being appealed from, together with such additional
written report as he deems pertinent.
1 VtI1,,Report 6 );gd) xtlgtuJ.fu,.Il;l�h Ypc prppit! cad und ft ilSoicttcd to t he, cxkuEnt; 5Noi (jug, a!'jilh j r r. yltG pl -
icco d ncp, with YMC k 11 08.020,(C)
ua C i V Action by the Hearing Examiner. Testimony given during the appeal shall be limited to those points
cited in the appeal application, d a7r.*lap -IM- aalrlx alsOf ud4,6^roaaauN, of ihe,utrlmurai FirTn add uaimkr'yl)e (2)-
Ua vrcWaw int wIllichatrase tlaa a(apti uG dp+nit d;ara uHe iatrewaiu. The hearing examiner shall render a written decision on the
appeal within ten working days from the conclusion of the hearing, unless a longer period is mutually agreed to by
the applicant and the examiner, The hearing examiner may affirm or reverse, wholly or in part, or modify the order,
requirement, decision, or determination, and to that end shall have all the powers of the officer from whom the
appeal is taken, The department shall send copies of the hearing examiner's decision to the appellant, the parties of
record, and the official whose decision was appealed, not later than three working days following the issuance of the
final decision,
d G 6 Decisions by the Hearing Examiner Shall Be Final Unless Appealed. Except as otherwise provided,
all appeal decisions by the hearing examiner shall be final and conclusive on all parties unless appealed to the
legislative body under YMC U x 16 040§ ➢ 6 08 030 (Ord. 2008-46 § 1 (part), 2008: Ord. 3019 §§ 53, 54, 1987; Ord.
2947 § 1 (part), 1986).
15.16.0400:50 Appeal of the hearing examiner's decision.
A. Appeals. The lirraA-decision of the hearing examini-4kwins"li-Aed ilia YMc ` 1 s ;afl aPn'ddd/L)(i ), notl
on aupai eah; rn', lsc rauwduT # Irak:-1- v R 6.k)30 shall be final and conclusive unless lid is appealed to the legislative body by
a person aggrieved, or by any agency of the citylw anunty, affected by the decision in the following manner:
_h ihq q I aouriclf. all kea,qAnja P,l lr)talld air- ia,,a„oa,hy1Cic draarasurfmra: gruasrart,cgir,prp ngpuhalac arrrutaral," t
of dinrrR,fd Vts dlrwpwl. ty/u uzar rlylutl aartl dvjpyl , igminent_
&2, The appealing party must file a complete written notice of appeal with the planning department upon forms
prescribed by the department and accompanied by the appeal fee within fourteen days from the date of
mailing ofthe examiner's final decision
V3. 2 The notice of appeal shall specify the claimed error(s) and issue(s) that the legislative body is asked
to consider on appeal and shall specifically state all grounds for such appeal, Issues or grounds of appeal
that are not so identified need not be considered by the legislative body,.
Appeal Procedures,
1. Nolra c M l uin,ul Mdala al The planning department shall notify the parties of record acral aaa�p(Tai is that an t
appeal has been filed and that copies of the notice of appeal and any written argument or memorandum of
authorities accompanying the notice of appeal may be obtained from the department.
The Yakima Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 2015-031, passed November 3, 2015.
Formatted: Font color: Black,
Formatted: Font color: Black,
Formatted: English (United States)
Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.25", Space After: 12 pt,
Numbered + Level: 2 + Numbering Style: a, b, c, ...
Start at: 1 + Alignment: Left + Aligned at: 0.75" +
Indent at: 1", Font Aliqnment: Baseline
�
Format...,..--------
....... � ted
Formatted Indent: Left 025"
-------------
Yakima Municipal Code
Chapter 16.10 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
AMENDMENT PROCEDURES
Page 23/24
(a) Not later than twenty days prior to the ioiwa. city council and °(sqkwin.ua-Conn Iy emnnlis iomG s' public
hearing date, a legal +.uhl-;i ns phxy rad notice will be placed in the local newspaper of general circulation
announcing the yaniut-city council md Y allAw`1i a Cou.ray public hearing;
(b) AFttara iomir,ement wilt i rfu on ywPdam p ubhc ai'=idrs aa'gau-smq ("I,I C) edectiiom c bultvAi M-bmTQ] wwl lalei-
Pharr IUucrtaaan d ay4, 4am;tt"o thea ryoint city c,<murrrcit and Yakl m a C'ouwy Q,mrrsunarirssumugem" p ubiP o I emirq- dato Urntll-
tluwm w(gr[,. qwt=ikyge loot a,aa-lo,aargaruaMil zuoami "mgBtilaam�ra-("urorwrgtly,to mqumua.,°egaarrwmm.r plthhee htgac ng,,,
(b) The planning staff will notify local media outlets regarding poui[t 91he_city council arrml Yakma County -
m rtq iQarar>qs' public hearing through a prepared press release; and
(mOl'i_u) The planning staff will place the j mut city council aaad Yuu 4r ,iiq pobbc hearing
notice on the city of Yakima's website. (Ord. 2010-22 § 13, 2010m'(3rd 2003.19 § 1 (part), 2003).
16.10,0flh ulualuo. e(14 ity council m ul-"Viakinin foemqumugycmwar�rcemgar.rhtugk as�apwtbll�karawaimgg.
At a rycmau nmecting, of the city council a�mul yra asautgc'uataru4y um�rt'at➢ Rt,,ri�agtryac, the Wyo clicttegl bodyacs will review the
city planning commission recommendations regarding any 4kkcted comprehensiive plan amendments and hold a
public hearing to provide citizens, interested parties and "5( %ntpgg agencies an opportunjty to comment on the
recommendations,
(1) The notice of the joint public hearing of the city counci6itkd y"alo wya qJ otmnty on the
recommendations of the city planning commission will be protnti)gotctll;by the city clerk pursuant 110 the process for
regular business meetings of the city council„and.ywill include the fogowin&
(a) The time, location, and date of IN, John clAy councd and Yakio6a County commissioners' public hearing;
(b) A copy of the agenda rtr ni� and
(c) A list of all c9nip1r6hOwsive plan amen dnmellls to be considdred at the hearing,
(2) An open record publrod”aearingwilllbeeonductWby'Rieµojwc-itercc,uitmculwaadYarP«wa&t;aaggmy-
rumiainw;sroi aw.mate p,w,fy 4.ulquv9 H lrgrar test(( loim,y regardinge claamendment under consideration.
(3) At the ponckuu, joo of llte hearing, fame 61), council shalhdirect planning staffto prepare legislation to approve,
approve With conditions, or kuy etrch`a'nwridment undct consideration and shall identify findings of fact to support
each dc6lYr )n based on the al3ptoval criteria,set forth in Y`M (,' t6 10.040.
(4) At a sltb„5,cqucn't city councllwrtlawetwng, the cgy council shall enact an ordinance adopting their decision
reached at the barna, m'40y--cou ncwl amiYtalmgwmmaa t.awsiga� r v�oaggwrny gwmgmrrN pubtl%c. hearing. Following city council action,
notification of the^y'4inance shall be Accomplished in the following manner:
aO The planning stop,6"shall provide a complete and accurate copy of the adopted comprehensive plan
amendment(s) to the
4phpggmCtfia,4awtmaDepartmentofy mon+cixiiuufl"iew,uu,armalI� inanar#e—
DoV014ulgrrw nl(',tjuinuri,a + shirt t days after final adoption; and
(b) The city clerk shall have a si mvymi,yr y(('the approved comprehensive plan amendment ordinance
published in the local newspaper of general circulation;
(c) The city clerk shall post the ordinance to the city's website as an ordinance amending the Yakima
Municipal Code 4addiw um, Pie pkflnn, , tllw ro+nlaga.lwiasma,cuor11111-Elie c ly' -
uvc^,TSu= elar�rer,,trFd,a+WOA'OIhtIiiiCk'lrYf i
Ldp he aprplicant or lmaq�,r,pptty uaau�uypa ylrall; rerwurvc all ltl,pwd raga ase@tlgnro 'iign., frQm dhu, sikbjpa,a @mt,np410y,y pylygyga 40
days frown tlwr, (ate, p( r>N.ap411 .c of llye I"final alep.;rswuwwu ut aarptoyzwt pail thaw; aararie(l.yhp, y;argyl,.lwsak sgyaytha alg9'
signage which is aro good condition shall be returned to the. Crty oaf 'Yakima Pl anninf., Divisicrrr. (Ord. 2010-22 §
14, 2010: Ord. 2003-19 § 1 (part), 2003).
The Yakima Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 2015-031, passed November 3, 2015..
Yakima Municipal Code
Chapter 16.08 APPEALS
Chapter 16.08
APPEALS
Sections:
16,08.010
Consolidated appeals.
16.08.020
Open record appeals subject to review by hearing examiner.
16.08.030
Closed record appeal subject to review by the city council.
16.08.040
Judicial appeals.
16.08.010 Consolidated appeals.
A. All appeals of project permit application decisions, other
significance, shall be considered together in a consolidated app
matters of the application.
B. Appeals of Determinations of Significance under
chapter in an open record hearing. The purpose of this c'
environmental impact statement (EIS) and to permit adr
EIS. (Ord, 98-66 § 1 (part), 1998).
16.08.020 Open irecord appeals su
A. The hearing examiner shall hear
B.. Notice of an appeal hearing shall be
property and published notice.
by
Page 15/24
of SEPA determination of
t be separated from the substantive
:hapter 6.88 YMC`,,, 0)l proceed as provided in that
separate appeal heaardos* ;, to resolve the need for an
sM
ve and judicial review p40, 1p preparation of an
kng
led to r oik,' ;rqf the decision, including posting of
[Form
atted Indent: Left -0.06 No bullets or
numbering
ED. A staffpg9p shall be 14*4 9o"i !(4
described r)r�q� ordulatPo�Lct iij
have ten g days to a,p tlecksi,on the
to the k rwunc$I. (Ord 98 -ti q parpr" �}
W
16.08.030 O*,d record apprk?sij b, ttd
A, The ckty u y gpil shall hear apj'Ols of all d
limited hearing tod ptipt of oral lcgdt'xgumenl
to
sr, and hearing conducted in the manner
ing,ton State law. The hearing examiner shall
of the hearing examiner are subject to appeal
by the city council.
rs by the hearing examiner during a public meeting or a
B. A complete appeaf'olication tput be submitted prior to the scheduling of the council meeting or limited
hearing.
C. The closed record appeal" ill"be on the record before the city council, and no new evidence shall be
presented. The record shall include all materials received in evidence at any previous stage of the review,
audio/visual tapes of the prior hearing(s), and the final order being appealed, and argument by the parties at the
examiner's hearing.
D. The appellants and any respondents to the appeal shall have the opportunity to present oral and written
argument. Oral argument shall be confined to the prior established hearing examiner record and to any alleged errors
in the decision.
E. Following the closed record appeal hearing, the council may affirm the decision of the examiner, remand the
matter back to the hcaring examiner with appropriate directions, or may reverse or modify the hearing examiner
decision. The council shall adopt its own written findings and conclusions in support of its decision. Ifthe council
determines there is no error in the examiner's decision, it may adopt the findings of the examiner and accept the
decision of the hearing examiner, (Ord'., 98.66 § 1 (part), 1998).
The Yakima Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 2015-031, passed November 3, 2015.
Table 11-1. Notice Requirements
Revised 03/08/2016
Notice of Application
Notice of Hearing Examiner or
Notice of ,,
City Council Hearing
Yakima Planning Commission
Recomini t
Public Hearing
ontae ision
Type (1) Review
I (Not Required)
'(Not Required)
Notice of Decision
(Not Required)
-- Applicant
Type (2) Review
•Applicant
(Not Required)
-notice of Decision ;
; (Not Required)
F • Property owners within 300 -foot
• arties/agencids o, received the
radius
_ Notre of Applicatioh
• City In-house Distribution List
? Any additional parties -6 cord
Type (3) Review
• Applicant
(at least 20 days prior to hearing)
s 'notice of Decision (ma 3 davvss
(Not Required)
• Parties of Record
• Applicant
after it is rendered)
• Property owners within 300 -foot
• Partiesfagcncies who receiv=ed the',--:-*
Certified mail to applicant
radius
Notice of-?(ication
-,,-Regular mail to parties and
• City In-house Distribution List
• Any additt rl ��es of record
��hqi who received the Notice
• Posting is required prior to issuance
• Localfedi
of -1i
of notice
• Hearing Examiner or Yikitk� -
• Ani` additional parties of record
Planning Commission_"
. Publish legal ad'in the newspaper
Appeals
Notice of Appeal of Administr tive
e _Notiice of Applipation
Notice of Hearing Examiner's
• City Clerk will publish
For SEPA appeal see
Official's Derision & Publtoffering
Decision
legal ad and send notice
s YMC Ch. 6.88
•Appellant
• Certified mail to applicant
to the following:
• The official whose decision is bet n
• Regular mail to parties and
- Appellant
appealed l
agencies who received the
- Official whose
• Parties'agenciwfit��i� the
Notice of Application
decision is being
Notice oApplication
• Any additional parties of record
appealed
• Pasting ropeny and publis ri
-Hearing Examiner
legal ark t equred
- Parties and agencies
who received the
Notice ofAppeai nfHearing
Notice of
Examiner's Deci�sn:,
_fit
Application 1
• Appellant
- Any additional
• The official whose deion is being,
parties of record
appealed
• Parties and agencies who received
the Notice of Application
E
Revised 03/08/2016
Cell Tower
Planned
Development
Rezone
Comprehensive
Plan Amendment
Right -of -Way
Vacation
SEPA
Shoreline
Subdivisions
See YMC 15.29.040 Table 29-1
• Applicant
• Property owners within 300 -foot
radius
• City In-house Distribution List
• Posting is required prior to issuance
of notice
• Applicant
• Property owners within 300 -foot
radius
• City In-house Distribution List
• Posting is required prior to issuance
of notice
See YMC Ch. 16.10
See RCW 35.79
See YMC Ch. 6.88
(at least 20 days prior to hearing)
• Applicant
• Parties/agencies who received the
Notice of Application
• Any additional parties of record
• Local Media
• Hearing Examiner or Yakima;
Planning Commission
• Publish legal ad in the aspaper
(at least 20 days priortb;ing
• Applicant
• Parties/agencies who receives
Notice of Application
• Any additional parties of record
• Local M4-,'_,_
Hearing Exammeror.. Yakima
Planning Commis§i rt
• Publish legal'ad in the spa e
See YMC Ch. 17.13 and WAC 173-27-110
See YMC Title 14 and RCW 58.17
Notice requirements for master applicaticirt_Will vary. In
set forth in Title 15 and Title 16 shall aDVI
Revised 03/08/2016
• Certd mail to applicant
• Regular mail to parties of record
otice of Recomrnendidi-'
Certified mail to applicant
Regular mail to parties of record
int receives cover letter
finance if approved or
's findings if denied.
• City Clerk will publish
legal ad and send notice
to the following:
- Applicant
- Parties/agencies who
received the Notice
of Application
- Any additional
parties of record
• City Clerk will publish
legal ad in the newspaper
and send notice to the
following:
- Applicant
- Parties/agencies who
received the Notice
of Application
- Any additional
parties of record
conflict between the provisions in this table and the provisions in Title 15 and Title 16, the requirements
March 4, 2016
Joan Davenport
Planning Manager
City of Yakima
129 North 2"d St.
Yakima, WA 98909
Dear Joan:
Dave Fonfara
8708 Cameo Court
Yakima, WA 98903
(509) 972-7913
Please accept this letter of resignation as a member of the City of Yakima Planning Commission. It's time
for me to move on to other endeavors and give our newly elected Mayor and Council the opportunity
to seek new and diverse leadership.
I have truly enjoyed my three year tenure as a member of the Commission and am most appreciative of
the appointment by former Mayor, Micah Cawley and subsequent confirmation by the Yakima City
Council. It has been a pleasure working with all of the Planning Department staff and the Planning
Commission members. The staff has consistently maintained a high level of professionalism and
provided excellent service to the citizens of the Yakima community. It has also been my privilege to
serve on a Commission with such a dedicated group of citizen volunteers. These individuals play a very
important role in city government by working as an advisory body to the City Council on long range
planning, land use, and zoning matters. They do a great job of providing citizens with the opportunity to
provide input at public hearings, study sessions and other community meetings where the voice of the
people should be heard.
Sincerely,
to&A,,� I- V-V�.
Dave Fonfara