HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-27-16 YPC Packetbii ECORD/ F1 I I IIS'+;,
Affs Zvi %k% DEPARTMENT
mOF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Joan Davenport, AICP, Director
C 4 , Y 0 F A�', � M A 129 North Second Street, 2"d 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 July 27, 2016
3:00 p.m. - 5:00 p.m.
YPC Members:
Chairman Scott Clark, Vice -Chair Patricia Byers,
Al Rose, Bill Cook, Peter Marinace, Gavin Keefe, Tom Trepanier
Council Liaison: Mayor Avina Gutierrez
City Planning Staff -
Joan Davenport (Community Development Director/Planning Manager); Jeff Peters
(Supervising Planner); Valerie Smith (Senior Planner); Trevor Martin (Associate Planner);
Eric Crowell (Assistant Planner); Rosalinda Ibarra (Administrative Assistant); and Lisa
Maxey (Department Assistant)
Agenda
I. Call to Order
II. Roll Call
III. New YPC Member Introduction
IV. Staff Announcements
V. Audience Participation
VI. Approval of Meeting Minutes of July 13, 2016
VII. Workshop on Land Use & Request for Consideration Proposals
VIII. Other Business
IX. Adjourn
Next Meeting: August 10, 2016
cla
M
City of Yakima Planning Commission (YPC) City Hall Council Chambers
Meeting Minutes of July 27, 2016
Call to Order
Chairman Scott Clark called the meeting to order at 3:00 p.m.
Roll Call
YPC Members Present: Chairman Scott Clark, Vice -Chair Patricia Byers, Al Rose,
Bill Cook, Gavin Keefe, Peter Marinace
YPC Members Absent: Tom Trepanier (unexcused)
Staff Present: Valerie Smith, Senior Planner; Joan Davenport, Planning
Manager; Lisa Maxey, Department Assistant
Others: Sign -in sheet in file
New YPC Member Introduction
Chairman Clark pointed out that Tom Trepanier, the new member of the Commission,
was not in attendance at this meeting so the Commission will welcome him at the next
meeting.
Staff Announcements
None noted.
Audience Participation
Shannon Bird expressed her interest in the topic of outdoor displays of merchandise,
which the Planning Commission will be addressing at a future meeting.
Mike Shinn of Halverson Northwest Law Group, representing Congdon Development,
articulated that he would like to present a proposal to be included in the Comprehensive
Plan 2040 Update. Chairman Clark responded that he can present his request to the
Commission once they have reviewed the other Request for Consideration proposals that
have been submitted.
Approval of Meeting Minutes of July 13th, 2016
Commissioner Rose moved to approve the meeting minutes of July 13tII, 2016. The motion
was seconded and carried unanimously.
Workshop on Land Use and lie uest for Consideration Proposals
Senior Planner Valerie Smith announced what the Commission members have received
in their packets in relation to this agenda item. She then introduced Bob Bengford from
MAKERS Architecture. Bengford presented a PowerPoint to the Commission consisting
of an overview of suggested land use designation changes and map updates.
*Commissioner Byers left at approximately 3:17 p.m.
Smith explained the Request for Consideration process and briefly described the 17
requests received (designated letters A through Q). Questions and comments from the
Commission and from Bob Bengford were incorporated into the overview of the requests.
The Commission then provided opportunity for applicants to address the Commission
regarding their Request for Consideration proposals.
Bill Hordan of Hordan Planning Services, representing applicant Jeff Baker for Request
"G", explained the reasoning for this request and how the 2006 updated Comprehensive
-1-
Plan posed challenges for businesses in the vicinity of this request (18f Street and Nob
Hill Boulevard). Jeff Baker commented on his concerns with the change in zoning and
permitted land uses in the area.
Bill Hordan, representing Jay Sentz for Request "H, described the future plans for this
piece of property, adding that there's no immediate need to rezone the parcel. Jay Sentz
added on to Hordari s comments and included that there have been no complaints
concerning the ambulance service that is currently operating there.
Bill Hordan, representing TM Rentals for Request "I", spoke about past attempts to
rezone this property to commercial. He explained how they have changed their request
to keep it residential but increase the intensity. He explained a possible approach for
distributing the density level on the parcel in a way that complies with floodplain
regulations.
Bill Hordan, representing Gail Buchanan for Request "J", communicated the history of
the parcel, detailing the past financial struggles and water and sewer extension issues.
Jimmy Buchanan also expanded on the history of the property and added that future
development plans may include triplexes.
Bill Hordan, representing Super Cold Storage LLC for Request "K", explained the reason
for the request in relation to expanding the current business.
Bill Beerman, applicant for Request "M" and "N", informed the Commission on the
history of the properties in the request and of the ongoing struggles with some land uses
being restricted. Beerman answered questions from the Commission regarding the
number of parking spaces available.
Kerry Martin of SOZO Sports, applicant for Request "O", educated the Commission on
the SOZO sports complex that is being built and the high interest that has been shown in
using those fields. He described future expansion plans and explained how rezoning to
commercial will help support this business and the teams using the sports complex.
Martin went into detail on future road expansions in the area. Dr. Lloyd Butler spoke in
support of the rezone, highlighting the way other sport complexes around the country
have been able to draw in commercial uses to their locations.
Mike Shinn of Halverson Northwest, representing Congdon Development, spoke in favor
of the SOZO rezone request and presented Congdon s request to the Commission for
changing the future land use map designation for parcels 181334-42004 and 181334-44001
from Industrial to Commercial. He explained how in the future Congdon Development
could capitalize on the SOZO development and help support it with their properties to
the north and east of the complex. Commissioner Cook and Chairman Clark expressed
their willingness to consider this request with the other Request for Consideration
proposals that have been received and documented.
Valerie Smith dictated that environmental review is required for the entire
Comprehensive Plan update as a whole.
Planning Manager Joan Davenport spoke on the possibility of shifting land use
categories, emphasizing that there will be more opportunities in the future to discuss that
-2-
possibility as well as the requests reviewed today. Smith clarified that the decision on
each Request for Consideration proposal likely won't be solidified until late October or
early November, and that the final plan needs to be adopted by June of 2017.
Other Business
Chairman Clark thanked Valerie Smith for her service to the City and her assistance to
the Planning Commission.
Adjourn
A motion to adjourn to August 10, 2016 was passed with unanimous vote. This meeting
adjourned at 5:03 p.m.
"'elle,0Z
Chairman Scott Clark Date
This meeting was filmed by YPAC. Minutes for this meeting submitted by: Lisa Maxey, Department Assistant II
-3-
Aare .SAM RALE
�� �
A � � l
CgIY CLQ N11,1A P;,9"IY OF YAKI'MMAk
M SIGN-IN SHEET f arming
City of Yakima Planning Commission
City Hall Council Chambers
Wednesday July 27, 2016
Beginning at 3:00 p.m.
Public Meeting
*PLEASE WRITE LEGIBLY',
mom Sm
01 i 5
.................... _.
_-
i
i
_.._..... ................ ............... ............
.. .... . ........... M ..........
N� U&F /'46,a,
/4AO tj��- -14� \,A-;(-j1;X ?�-9 �2
............. --- ..... ............
. ...... .....
Page 1 07/27/2016 YPC Meeting
Dear Commission Members:
Please accept these written remarks on behalf of Congdon Development Company, LLC
and Congdon Orchards, Inc, with which it is affiliated (hereinafter "Congdon"). Congdon
holds fee title to two parcels of land near the Yakima Airport and the SOZO Sports
Complex. The two parcels, assessor's Tax Parcel Nos. 181334-42002 (31.2 acres) and
181334-44001 (39.79 acres) are depicted on the map attached hereto as Exhibit "A".
Congdon has recently become involved in negotiations with representatives for the City
of Yakima and for SOZO with regard to parcel 181334-42002 and its utilization in
connection with the City of Yakima and SOZO's Sports Complex and the replacement of
soccer fields at Chesterly Park.
In this vein, Congdon first wishes to endorse the SOZO development project and its
request for changing the future land use map designations on seven of its parcels along
Sorenson Road, two from Industrial/M-1, and five from Low Density Residential/SR to
commercial use. As SOZO's application request details, the anticipated success of the
SOZO project has significant revenue generating opportunities for the City of Yakima,
with projections of over 115,000 spectators and 61,600 participants to this area of Yakima
that has previously seen little, if any, development. And as a supporter of the project and
neighbor, Congdon also believes that its nearby properties can provide further support
for this new development. Whether SOZO had Congdon in mind at the time of its
application is not known, but Congdon is indeed one of the "adjacent landholders ...
interested in developing properties that can capitalize on the new destination sports park."
See SOZO 2040 Update Process Request for. Consideration, Part IV, paragraph D. And,
therefore, Congdon seeks Planning's consideration of a companion request to SOZO's,
namely, to consider a future land use map modification from Industrial/M-1 to Commercial
for the frontage of its parcels 181334-42002 and 181334-44001, as depicted on the
attached map, Exhibit "A". While there are no immediate plans for development by
Congdon, the former parcel being vacant and the latter parcel entirely devoted to hop
production, nevertheless, over the planning horizon for which the comprehensive plan is
being updated, the possibility and opportunity for commercial development would appear
halversonNW.com
ALVER � NORTHWEST LAW GROUP P.C.
Yakima Office: 405 E. Lincoln Avenue I PO Box 22550 I Yakima, WA 98907 I P) 509.248.6030 I f) 509.453.688o
Sunnyside Office: 9io Franklin Avenue, Suite i I PO Box 210 I Sunnyside, WA 98944 I P) 509.837.5302 I f) 509.837.2465 Submitted:
A Meeh 727&
Raymond G Alexander
HALVERSONNORTHWEST
Adam K. Anderson
Alan D. Campbell
�V t "' '� (J
f dl°,I .:J I'
J. Jay Carroll
Paul C. Dempsey -
James S. Elliott
July 27 2016
Robert N. Faber
Mark E. Fickes
Carter L. FJeld
Frederick N. Halverson+
Paul E. Hart+
Planning Commission
Kellen J. Holgate
129 N. 2"dStreet
Lawrence
aJ nathan
G. Rue'
Yakima, WA 98901
Terry C, Schmalz+
Linda A. Sellers
Michael F. Shinn
Re; City of Yakima Comprehensive Plan Update 2040;
Juliana Van Wingerden
Congdon Development Company, LLC's Request for
Stephen R. Winfree
Consideration Concerning Future Land Use Map
Also OR Bar Member
Also State Bar of CA Member
+Of Counsel
Dear Commission Members:
Please accept these written remarks on behalf of Congdon Development Company, LLC
and Congdon Orchards, Inc, with which it is affiliated (hereinafter "Congdon"). Congdon
holds fee title to two parcels of land near the Yakima Airport and the SOZO Sports
Complex. The two parcels, assessor's Tax Parcel Nos. 181334-42002 (31.2 acres) and
181334-44001 (39.79 acres) are depicted on the map attached hereto as Exhibit "A".
Congdon has recently become involved in negotiations with representatives for the City
of Yakima and for SOZO with regard to parcel 181334-42002 and its utilization in
connection with the City of Yakima and SOZO's Sports Complex and the replacement of
soccer fields at Chesterly Park.
In this vein, Congdon first wishes to endorse the SOZO development project and its
request for changing the future land use map designations on seven of its parcels along
Sorenson Road, two from Industrial/M-1, and five from Low Density Residential/SR to
commercial use. As SOZO's application request details, the anticipated success of the
SOZO project has significant revenue generating opportunities for the City of Yakima,
with projections of over 115,000 spectators and 61,600 participants to this area of Yakima
that has previously seen little, if any, development. And as a supporter of the project and
neighbor, Congdon also believes that its nearby properties can provide further support
for this new development. Whether SOZO had Congdon in mind at the time of its
application is not known, but Congdon is indeed one of the "adjacent landholders ...
interested in developing properties that can capitalize on the new destination sports park."
See SOZO 2040 Update Process Request for. Consideration, Part IV, paragraph D. And,
therefore, Congdon seeks Planning's consideration of a companion request to SOZO's,
namely, to consider a future land use map modification from Industrial/M-1 to Commercial
for the frontage of its parcels 181334-42002 and 181334-44001, as depicted on the
attached map, Exhibit "A". While there are no immediate plans for development by
Congdon, the former parcel being vacant and the latter parcel entirely devoted to hop
production, nevertheless, over the planning horizon for which the comprehensive plan is
being updated, the possibility and opportunity for commercial development would appear
halversonNW.com
ALVER � NORTHWEST LAW GROUP P.C.
Yakima Office: 405 E. Lincoln Avenue I PO Box 22550 I Yakima, WA 98907 I P) 509.248.6030 I f) 509.453.688o
Sunnyside Office: 9io Franklin Avenue, Suite i I PO Box 210 I Sunnyside, WA 98944 I P) 509.837.5302 I f) 509.837.2465 Submitted:
A Meeh 727&
July 27, 2016
Page 2
to be a natural outgrowth of the SOZO project to service the needs of the visitors and
participants anticipated.
The recently modified Airport Safety Overlay, Yakima Municipal Code Chapter 15.30,
places the two Congdon parcels in question, primarily in Zones 5 and 6 and Appendix F
of the Airports and Compatible Land Use Guidebook indicates that future commercial
development for uses such as motels, hotels, and restaurants in these zones is
compatible and permitted in connection with airport operations. (See YMC 15.30.060 and
Appendix of the WSDOT Airports and Compatible Land Use Guidebook, Table F-2).
In the May 2016 draft of the comprehensive plan, page 5-98 recognizes that Yakima
County wide planning policies instruct that local economic development plans should be
consistent with the comprehensive land use and capital facilities plan and should
"evaluate existing and potential industrial and commercial land sites to determine short
and long term potential for accommodating new and existing businesses" and "identify
and target prime sites, determine costs and benefits of specific land development options
and develop specific capital improvement strategies for the desired option." The SOZO
site and those around it are now identified prime targets for commercial development in
anticipation of the infrastructure improvements and visitors to the parks and recreational
opportunities SOZO affords. Not all of Congdon's parcels, referenced, are intended for
future land use map modification, just the frontage and just to a depth of 320 feet.
Development here would not be generating new trips as much as capitalizing on the
audience generated by the sporting activities and park amenities Yakima so desperately
needs, being supplied by SOZO.
Congdon is, indeed, seeking to benefit sometime in the future from the success of the
SOZO. But Congdon's benefits can also be benefits in revenue to the City of Yakima and
in services to the greater Yakima community and visitors to the SOZO Sports Complex.
Congdon respectfully requests that the Commissioners view favorably Congdon's request
along with SOZO's, promoting future commercial development and to enable that through
modification of the future land use map in this location of Yakima.
Sincerely,
GAHA ConflictedWF&CONGDON DEVELOPMENT CO-18353\Ltr to Planning Commission 7.27.16,docx
Yakima County GIS Exhibit "A" Page I of I
Yakima County GIS - Washington
Land Information Portal h ai"°w` 01 0 1 117"1
I I f j A j I , A I
http','/%V%AAV,), A i III -,,I P, C(1) MI/Ser v ll k."th:,O I -In a (,, s n unap, Fsriniap'lriamc, )"A,(J IN SA 1&('rnd -- N 4it� , , 7/27/20 16
Yakima County (AS Page I oft
Exhibit "A"
Yakima County GIS - Washington
Land Information Portal
WWW YAPOMAP COM
Yakima County GIS
128 N 2nd Street
Yakima WA 9'80901
(509);74-2992
Oro Inch m 900 Fad
F" 500 lam
7/"�O 6
SOZO Sports
Comprehensive Plan
2040 Update Process
Request for Consideration
The property owned by Cleat City, LLC is the site of the new Sozo Sports Complex. We own a
total of 7 parcels totaling 80 acres. 2 parcels (20 acres) are zoned M1- light industrial, and 5
parcels (60 acres) are zoned SR -low density. We are applying for a change to General
Commercial for all 7 parcels.
Development of the 2 M1 parcels (20 acres) to the east is well under way. In the 2 years since
our initial conversation with the city we have annexed the property, short platted the property,
completed the SEPA, started construction, and in 2 weeks will host the first tournament with
130 teams. Once complete, this 20 acres will include a 65,000 sf building, support structures
for team use and storage, 2 turf fields, and 2 grass fields. These improvements will be
completed in 2017.
As soon as the first 58 acres of the sports complex is complete we will immediately move to the
remaining 5 parcels to the west. There are additional land use applications to be filed, but we
have received requests for lease space from the following groups:
o Ice Hockey
o Team Yakima Volleyball
Little League
o The First Tee of Yakima / Golf
Sports Fitness
Sports Retail
These 5 parcels are currently zoned SR — low density. We are applying for a change to General
Commercial zone in order to fit the zoning with the future use of the property. As
demonstrated in our current SEPA application and site plan we have the fields on the north as a
significant buffer to the neighbors, with development of parking areas and buildings south of
the fields on the 5 parcels to the west will follow the same plan. The three parcels to the south
adjacent to the new Sorenson Road/Occidental Extension will have buildings with courts and
services, while the two parcels to the north include fields as buffers the neighbors.
Submitted:
The Economic Impact Study commissioned by the city for just the first 58 acres of the complex
came back with the following results per year:
12+ Tournaments
61,617 participants
115,366 spectators
Total spending over $10 million
$6.5 million of direct spending
45,723 room nights
The creation of 110 jobs
A single development that generates this much interest and revenue will be a magnet for
additional businesses in the surrounding area.
The city has committed to an improvement of Spring Creek Road and 36th Avenue. And the
county has added the extension of Sorenson as a 5 lane road to 52nd Avenue within their 6 year
road improvement plan. It is readily apparent that both the city and county are preparing this
area for development using the Sozo Sports Complex as a catalyst. This project has met with
overwhelming support, and is already elevating the image of the city and county. The
tournament I mentioned that starts in 2 weeks — we have more west side teams registered than
when the same tournament was held in Western Washington. We know this new sports
complex works for Yakima!
This Comprehensive Plan 2040 Update Process is a projection of land use in the next 20 years.
By 2040 Sozo Sports will be 25 years into a 40 year agreement with the city on the 58 acres.
Everything Cleat City and Sozo Sports is planning is well within the next 5 years. We are asking
for your approval of our application.
WSinc-rely,
Kerry Martin, President
Sozo Sports of Central Washington
(,,VMF'KtHtNJlVt FLAN 1U4U UrUAIt rKVC;tJJ ® SITE PLAN
REQUEST FOR CONSIDERATION 7 PARCELS SCALE'-`
PRWARM WMOUT BWWR OF SURVEY
SUBJECT TO VERIFICATION
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 2040 UPDATE IJH(-)UFSS p 51 I E -FLAN
REQUEST FOR CONSIDERATION 7 PARCELS SCALE 1 -4-00--
FRE11RED-0 � BFNEUTYEF SURVEY
S_YER
Submitted:
City ®f Yakima Comprehensive Plan Update
Suggested Land Use Changes
& Considerations
Planning Commission Meeting . July 27, 2016
I , B!" � � � � N ' '':n''
2040
A. Combine Rename the following resignations
Yakima Future Land Use
TS?7
Medium Density Residential
High DensityResidential Mixed Residential
Prolesalonal Office
NelghborhoW Commercial Neighborhood Mixed -Use
, Community Cornrywerciall
General Commercial Commercial Mixed -Use
IFCBD Core Comrnerdal
on Regional Commercial
rj
111 Industrial
Ya
Institutional
qq FEMA 100 YR FLOOD PLAIN: Revised 11/18/09
Rivers
„mrv, YAKIMA URBAN AREA
C3 YAKIMA CITY UMrrS
Why?
• Current designations nearly mirror
zoning — which creates need for
frequent plan amendments
• Consolidation allows greater
flexibility along with opportunity to
refine designation purpose &
implementing zoning direction
• Update names to place greater
emphasis on mixed-use
4
A. Adapt updated land use designation table
(de.°,aw.uno"pm),—, ond poipa:, se ot eoch a evgrin Bonn)
EN n LAND USE DIESII NATIIONS
II)II'aft 1I MY fly 2016
wIlp, Isuvoas p f m 24146
TlhI. d.11olo, I, irao,anni o, o Ua y Maimncrrr,4 to Nnk the, hind use aHusllginat11ann-rdfllh duirogulu umioouP.Oilo(iz zoimllinig.
The
oil-ad uses and rctl—ker nmed herein, are Intercdcd ac a suvn�ooarg olf key proWsk,vos uo guide
isnIJY�errieIndin¢ .uiriilfp, o.odc!
Mi,,d gesidenllal
psdBsf; TMs deslgnallon protides for areas Mth a mhrture, of houslig types Ills Od-2, Uta
Intended forareas now thara edeed by a mMlure of housing types and/or appropriate for
mialure of housing types due to close prai miry to commeroal san cea, Vansil access,
a�l,ameuw�ih� a»,a�rnrouv��,w��r��h
"I vu,r,�:riy�nwTe awauf aaa�ary
&;-111caluuu� :'v'!n
Il...._.........._own�w,nnmw,«.a._.__aa�um�nvu'zuuo'wr ..........----^.,.
'huar9
'i aanTm,ma„.....n+wuaa�oay�hmua� rra�unrwuiium -
I.���aw.maw'���arv�..mn��lW��umr'm�nuµu�amGu
ow✓`.7pavaavaue�arruuowamiw.unuou umromuflpummuramuuo,. i
uurrrrvw nu
POP KA—ri.,.•,
'eo.. d n oww,wV^umgn— MalI."
0-4V . 4dyv rawmwttry'flHl?uawilwduuawl
,JV, ahwr.&uE� nuuwgirw�re am ldaA,m nma �.
h E Yd .. rPo
a,'rcr+wnrvnl+M➢4�d TM a�pucry«,nrrar.HnM .n
Am Adapt updated land use designation table
Why?
• Provide greater clarity on the
purpose of each designation
• Include locational criteria — which
will be critical in evaluating future
land use designation changes
• ID implementing zone(s)
• Provide direction on principle uses
and density (enough information to provide
guidance, but not too much that limit flexibility)
ILAND USDESIGNATIONS
DrAR d ),IS Ill, 2016
u.1U�NID USE IDES AT110 NS
I>ra t lluaVp; 1 RQWAuti�
r a.
xwwr.WWY44wo-:.i, �,„n, r., v, urw
,awn
�nw
Low Density Res.
• For established low density res. areas;
and
• Other areas less suitable for higher
density res. development
• ID base max density of 4 gross
du/acre (now about 5)
• Allow density bonus up to 6 gross
du/acre
Implementing zones:
SR & R-1 zones
Mixed Residential
• Allow for a greater mixture of housing types
• For established now containing mix of
housing types; and
• Other areas appropriate for mixture of
housing types
• ID base max density of 6-10 gross du/acre
(now variable)
• No density limit for developments
complying with new site & building design
standards
Implementing zones:
R-2 & R-3 zones
8
W �aAfNJ, Pwy / Rb+V N^M NN�'�o PAk�wh ef:;wsq �F✓rv,rl4ba
M,n �S & WfWW � U
wwwl m� pdrn
olmlololollloll�lmllolmlmmm�olllllllololommmlm�ll•ololo�olllllllllllllllom�llolllllmomolololllllll�mmlllllllllololololololololrmmmmmmllllllllmmro
, WI
�.
Fv
aan.: �ry rs J zm WWmp� s✓whwd 0r,�« �W,warwu re
"°# ';""' 110�"°�"' N) A "'; _...
wrmmkNnlr+�§�um,
:au+��parin4r�uAwrrr wa r� �, wr�N w'wr+kwmt rrdro ro arr rtr�;,ro'o6 i'"
'"
�!�Nu Nfur Wo���o roWPbywµ:n�v NM4w"��Wr+ N1 �bdUa51 %'w„+4 awr �%
nw ,�ro�r „a,w.�„
u.1U�NID USE IDES AT110 NS
I>ra t lluaVp; 1 RQWAuti�
r a.
xwwr.WWY44wo-:.i, �,„n, r., v, urw
,awn
�nw
Low Density Res.
• For established low density res. areas;
and
• Other areas less suitable for higher
density res. development
• ID base max density of 4 gross
du/acre (now about 5)
• Allow density bonus up to 6 gross
du/acre
Implementing zones:
SR & R-1 zones
Mixed Residential
• Allow for a greater mixture of housing types
• For established now containing mix of
housing types; and
• Other areas appropriate for mixture of
housing types
• ID base max density of 6-10 gross du/acre
(now variable)
• No density limit for developments
complying with new site & building design
standards
Implementing zones:
R-2 & R-3 zones
8
MID , RE GINAIN "16
We is l, ,rlrrmi
Neighborhood Mixed -Use
• Mix of neighborhood scaled retail, commercial
service, office & residential
• For neighborhood center areas, some arterial
k Commercial Mixed -Use
corridors, and transitional areas
• ID base max density of 6-10 gross du/acre
(now variable)
• No density limit for developments complying
r
• No max density, but integrate a minimum
with new site & building design standards
a
Implementing zones:
B-1 & B-2 zones, SCC, HB, R-3
k Commercial Mixed -Use
• Allows a broad mix of retail and service
commercial plus residential
• Existing and planned commercial centers
(except for the CBD) and major corridors
• No max density, but integrate a minimum
density supportive of transit use (generally >
12-15du/acre)
• Design standards for gateway commercial and
other strategic areas
Implementing zones:
�'
LCC &GC
CBD
���„ o�,.'�,.w,. �rvaa�� - • Reinforce downtown as the center of
commercial, civic & cultural activities
"�" ` • Expected to accommodate new development
I,MNIMd N bryVWrvN+ ✓M .Fi(+w;yl N 6 M✓ N' rt M
6w 1 n N �� {9�p{µ M'� CNS fy PY�MWV f J� M,rkfa
while reinforcing &enhancing its historic
�.,.�
pedestrian -friendly character & scale
• No max density, but integrate a minimum
m o,
density supportive of transit use (generally >
12-15du/acre)
��� "�� w"� """ • Design standards are vital
r annVm rmr.�ro✓� ,� w.w w;✓��w�ywrN„�,mw
ate �����ro��r ��
"". ` �'� Implementing zones:
w CBD
Reg' '
Iona Commercial
�rip
• Med+ large scale mix of retail, service & business,
,J„
and tourism/ recreational establishments and
complementary multifamily
�d�� r��
• High visibility sites near Interstate 82 and US
wmwwi�ry �+rnx w w; p,w+ �fira a�: �,w w
Route 12
r >
• No max density, but integrate a minimum density
supportive of transit use (generally > 12-
15du/acre)
'� ouu�uuuuum�im�i oipi�u
��
�.. w..�R�
• Coordinated infrastructure development & design
rq Y x �tabr wi fi+u an �h'D'ri�➢!Y w
.,
IVfI VA eJb1V1J1)RP&6 N wY wi+
standards are vital
«�
Implementing zones:
CBD
12
Jd
Industrial
,... ..,
��
• Manufacturing and closely related uses
o„
�4
• Areas with existing industrial uses or other
J waw
areas with suitable land and transportation
;µwwmpw wrrrr wn mti�w,+wo a �Maswv
access that are buffered from residential
and other uses that are likely to complain
about industrial activities.
Implementing zones:
M1 & M2
✓r�. wrt�ilw,o�a, wa
13
m DOWNTOWN
Retain existing zoning boundaries
Strategic permitted use list updates
• Retail streets
• Residential uses on upper floors & all
floors for non -retail streets
• Design standards are vital
• Reinforce desired pedestrian -oriented
character
• Balance predictability with flexibility
H I SITE REDEVELOPMENT
• Integrate policy language to support
ongoing infrastructure development &
planning efforts
Continue to accommodate flexibility
on uses — but emphasize importance
of character & design
• Integrate with & support surrounding
NE Yakima Neighborhood
YXIMMIA4 D1:4WN"n'C:1WN IMA1x1C'li::R PLAIN
September 2013
City of 1'aFina
C—d.11 A— W., PC
F
ah
,
& Pare
K,qw�yud I „m d I:I ewii
YAKIM
1L:1 Fin
3
Z
F
�1
Urbanadd conceptual illustration
16
* City making streetscape improvement
investments
Suggest some minimum design
standards to complement city's
investment and enhance character of
high visibility corridor
* No zoning boundary changes
(generally)
B4 NORTH OF
FAIRGROUNDS
AREA
ei Change from GC to
Regional Mixed Use and
Mixed -Residential
Change from GC to
Regional Mixed -Use
n�i� IIII!IPu"
Change from GC t0 " Keep -Prof Office becomes
Mixed Residential Neighborhood Mixed -Use in new
concept
N
:e
AIN
z
WXh&ii
PACS
n�i� IIII!IPu"
Change from GC t0 " Keep -Prof Office becomes
Mixed Residential Neighborhood Mixed -Use in new
concept
N
:e
Why?
• Regional Mixed -Use designation is more appropriate
for highly visible interchange/gateway sites such as
area north of Kiwanis Park
• South of Kiwanis Park — GC is a poor match for the
established residential area with small lots. Area has
poor visibility ill suited to commercial and hasn't
resulted in economic growth since rezone. GC may
also be discouraging investment in existing residential
properties. Mixed Residential is a better match given
current use and allows for much needed multifamily
redevelopment, where desired/possible.
WASHINGTON FRUIT
PRODUCE PACKING PLANT
Change
designation to
match the
current use
m
Why?
Current Regional Commercial designation is ill suited to current use and though it is adjacent to
other RC designated land, it is surrounded by Industrial lands, has poor visibility, and would
require a significant amount of infrastructure and context changes that appear unlikely to happen
soon (Mill site is a much better candidate with better visibility, site availability and momentum)
On the Other Hand........
If the long term viability of packing plant operations here and to the north are in doubt and
property owners are in collaboration about alternative futures, a switch to Regional Mixed Use in
the future might be a reasonable consideration.
w
M
ii The IOCiF lerr,, v.cb iiil)` Ul ppckin�,. ,)!ani oFe-c,';IOris h,;re cu rl fi 'i0 ;nc h B(F in OoubJ circ
!r, oao,"a11O": 2k)oui 2,i'lerriFim,e 'u Cu reS c c itr. �,I C; rj Rr1)x,
e j e EasonPa 1,E .onsloc_raiion
Advantages (if consolidated)
• Large consolidated property with freeway visibility and access
• Property nearly an open slate — provides a rare opportunity to master plan to create high
amenity environment if done right.
Challenges
• Consolidation of land between Highway 12, 6th, River & 16th appears essential to make it work
• Requires substantial infrastructure investment
• Are there any site remediation needs?
• Surrounding industrial context is likely to continue to be a visual liability
• With nearby mill -site redevelopment, it's reasonable to question if there is enough market
demand and private/public capability to both plan, prepare (the site for redevelopment), and
finance such a massive redevelopment
IE
3
i
Cl ELKS PARK AREA
CL
N
rh
Park and environs are designated and zoned Industrial
* Considerable legacy residential uses — now (legal) non -conforming
p
Elks Park Area - Issues/Challenges
More residential development surrounding the park would be
complementary — in terms of safety and access to recreational amenity
However
* Though some industrial properties appear under utilized or vacant, active
industrial uses complicate any changes that encourage new residential
development
Industrial activities create a poor visual and physical context that
discourage residential development
* Railroad is somewhat of a barrier between park and residential properties
to north
27
Limited street and sidewalk connectivity in area is a big safety challenge for
new residential
Any changes that allow new residential development could negatively
impact industrial activities in the area
28
Elks Park Area - Conclusions
• Staying the course is probably the most logical action in the near term.
Conversations with applicable property owners in area would be helpful
— to discuss issues and hear about their situation — current and long
term.
• If land use/zoning changes to allow more housing are desired:
• Conduct more intensive outreach to applicable property owners
• Consider a new mixed-use zone or overlay that allows industrial uses to
stay/expand if needed (Bozeman MT has a notable mixed use zone that allows industrial and residential:
YaCP6'k5:' /w wv? rnaeralu tt arp'r ktblaU/mEL"dw, SIA0AmY"1')f)
• Add design standards to address property edges (along streets and adjacent
residential development)
• Make area a high priority for new sidewalks and street connectivity
improvements
29
1123 =I1 I
Similar context and situation as the Elks Park — but a transition to allow
residential (if desired) would be less problematic than Elks Park area
Old Fruitvale Drive in Site/Area - Conclusions
Again - conversations with property owners in area would be helpful
If land use/zoning changes to allow more housing are desired:
• Conduct more intensive outreach to applicable property owners
• Consider the Neighborhood Mixed -Use designationsAt least for Drive -In site and
existing residential properties - Consider a new mixed-use zone or overlay that
allows industrial uses to stay/expand if needed
• Add design standards to address property edges (along streets and adjacent
residential development)
• Make area a high priority for new sidewalks and street connectivity
improvements
33
11iii'' Ji 71
i
Yakima has a significant amount of vacant and underutilized
commercial and industrial land — most of which is scattered along the
First Avenue/Railroad and other arterial corridors.
* Similar to the Fruitvale corridor areas, these zones often bleed into
former residential areas and thus feature conflicting mixes of uses.
• They also often have poor roadway and sidewalk infrastructure and
lack visual and physical amenities that might otherwise encourage
investment
Some of these areas were pointed out at the May 25, 2016 Planning
Commission workshop (Infrastructure Poor Neighborhoods) — 3 slides
from that workshop are copied below.
34
f
Conclusions
- No other specific map changes are proposed at this time.
- Focus on updating descriptions, purpose statements, locational
criteria, and use/density/design parameters of Yakima's land use
designations.
Encourage corresponding update of zoning code and development of
strategic design standards for key areas (most notably downtown,
high visibility areas, and multifamily development)
If other map changes are sought — outreach to applicable property
owners and area residents and consider whether other actions (such
as public investments) may be needed to coincide with map changes.
35
Infrastructure Poor Neighborhoods
Issue Presented at May 25 Meeting — no new suggestions
w/
tr
r
A
A
0,
W13/3 W/1
n�
VF,
I(K W,
T/ .. .........
e � ��� �4time ��_.
J
........... ...
............ .
Infrastructure r Neighborhoods
Considerations
* Identify priorities
* Strategic public investment
* Land use changes to promote stabilization & investment
Add strategic design standards:
• Compatible zone edges
• Screening outdoor storage
• New multifamily & commercial development
Neighborhood upkeep efforts
r,,
DESIGNATIONS
'We (Vic yC&&na Draft I July
,
1 2016
This table is recommended as a key element to link the land use designations with implementing zoning.
The allowed uses and densities noted herein are intended as a summary of key provisions to guide
implementing zoning codes.
Implementing
and Use DegnatioZoning Designation
n,..
-....-w . .......
Low Density Residential SR, R-1
Purpose: designation provides for low density residential development in established low
density residential communities and in other parts of the City that are inappropriate for
more intensive urban development due to topography or other land suitability challenges
and/or the desire to create a lower intensity transitional area between the city and the
surrounding unincorporated rural pasture, foothills, and agricultural land.
mal & 0gost SIW0jAM$iy, detaiche dwelH $e are the p�red0minpnt d?welli
type. theudwellfnjj Ryp9os wtll b, allo eaq untRer cpr"ai'n clrcuNrn' sTarepces, such aiia4, S�sory
dwellings and cottage housing. The permitted base maximum density is up to four gross
dwelling unit per acre,, of ity fionusex.allow k,% up ro,5ix gross gw e!ling omit mayo'be
,r P
allowed on large sites subject to rorlforman' ce with traditional neighborhood design
concepts.
Mixed Residential
Purpose: This designation provides for areas with a mixture of housing types. It is R-2, R-3
intended for areas now characterized by a mixture of housing types and/or appropriate for
a mixture of housing types due to close proximity to commercial services, transit access,
and/or parks and other public recreational amenities. This designation often creates a
transition from commercial and mixed-use areas to low density residential areas.
allowed d n 6 A mixture of single and multifamily dwelling units. The permitted
base maximum density is six to ten gross dwelling unit per acre. For developments
electing to conform to site and building design standards promoting pedestrian -oriented
development, density is primarily limited by allowable building height, integration of
required/desired parking, market conditions, and conformance with applicable site and
building design provisions. Specifying the maximum number of dwelling units in one
building may be appropriate in some areas to ensure compatibility and to limit building
massing and density.
Neighborhood Mixed -Use
B-1
Purpose: This designation is intended to allow for a mixture of neighborhood scaled retail,
B-2
commercial service, office, and residential uses depending on the area's context. This
SCC
includes neighborhood center areas, sites along key arterials, and transitional areas'
HB
between residential areas and downtown or other mixed-use centers.
R-3 -
1eg & dao- pgljy� A mixture of retail, commercial service, office, and residential
uses depending on the area's context. Corridors and neighborhood centers can
accommodate a greater mixture of retail and commercial service uses while some
transitional areas near the edge of residential neighborhoods are more appropriate for a
mix of office and residential uses. The permitted base maximum residential density is six
to ten gross dwelling unit per acre. For developments electing to conform to site and
building design standards promoting pedestrian -oriented development, density is
primarily limited by allowable building height, integration of required/desired parking,
market conditions, and conformance with applicable site and building design provisions,.
Specifying the maximum number of dwelling units in one building may be appropriate in
YAKIMA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - DRAFT LAND USE DESIGNATION TABLE
Fwm'fU "III"ff
R:EIt 1111) ,.t:PFI IIF
Comment [bl]: This is intended to ID the
primary uses but not everything. Forexample
-schools, parks and other public facilities will
be allowed to some extent in nearly most zones.
Comment [b2]: R-1 now allows 6k sf lots -
7.26/acre net = about 5 units/acre gross. But lots
as small as 4k sf are allowed with common
wall/zero lot line - which equates to 10 du/acre
net and 6-7 units/acre gross,
Comment [b3]: New proposal to encourage
traditional neighborhood design concepts
(narrow streets, sidewalks with planting strips,
porches and covered entries, deemphasized
garages, some alleys, small blocks, and
integration of>neighborhood open space),.
Comment [b4]: Again - very notable�W- _..m.
suggestions. Concept makes conformance with
design standards optional -and opens up
greater density potential. More details on
applicable types of standards to follow in
policies.
some areas to ensure a neighborhood -friendly scale of development.
Commercial Mixed -Use LCC
Purpose: This designation applies to existing and planned commercial centers (except for GC
the CBD) and major corridors. This designation promotes the greater integration of mixed
uses to offer greater development choices to property owners, increase housing options,
strengthen commercial retail areas, and promote lively pedestrian -oriented development.
Design standards apply to the gateway commercial and other strategic commercial mixed-
use areas to reinforce the existing or desired pedestrian -oriented character:,
6lfnwed oasesA denpsitVP A wide range of retail and general service uses plus residential
uses on upper floors on key retail -focused streets and single purpose residential on other
streets. This includes a mixture of apartments, townhouses, and assisted living facilities.
New residential uses feature densities supportive to transit use.
CBD Commercial Core
Purpose: This designation is applied to Yakima's Central Business District. The purpose of CBD
the district is to reinforce downtown as the center of commercial, civic, and cultural
activities within the city. Downtown is expected to accommodate new development while
reinforcing and enhancing its historic pedestrian -friendly character and scale.
A broad mix of commercial, retail, professional office, civic and
cultural, and multifamily residential uses. Active uses are required on the ground floor
along Yakima Avenue and key side streets.Multi story buildings and a mixture of uses are
encouraged, New residential uses must feature transit -supportive densities (at least 15
units/acre).
Regional Commercial RD
Purpose: This designation is intended to promote a medium to large scale mix of retail,
service and business, and tourism/recreational establishments and complementary
multifamily on high visibility sites near Interstate 82 and US Route 12. Coordinated
infrastructure development and site and building design standards are critical elements to
emphasize quality development that enhances the character, identity, and economic
vitality of Yakima.
All wed uses & densitw„ A wide range of retail, service and business, tourism, and
recreational establishments. Multifamily and townhouses are allowed as a secondary use
to complement and support other commercial and recreational uses and promote a
healthy pedestrian friendly environment. New residential uses feature densities
supportive to transit use (at least 12 units/acre).
Industrial -
Purpose: This designation provides for manufacturing and closely related uses in areas - Ml
with existing industrial uses or other areas with suitable land and transportation access M2
that are buffered from residential and other uses that are likely to complain about
industrial activities.
jV nse�r n 1 , Industrial, research and development, repair, construction
business, warehouse, and distribution terminals that minimize external impacts to
adjacent districts, and accessory uses.
Institutional Overlay (10)
Purpose: This applies to existing and planned large scale institutional uses, This is an
overlay designation applies in addition to the underlying land use designation. These
institutions are likely to continue to grow and evolve over time, but since they reside
within established in existing in residential and/or mixed-use neighborhood contexts, their
expansion activities warrant special review that balance expansion needs with
neighborhood mitigation.
Allowed use5& usedensity Hospitals, educational facilities and their accessory uses are the
primary uses.
YAKIMA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - DRAFT LAND USE DESIGNATION TABLE
Com�[b5l:S�ech hereon
densin standards
confo
Comment [b6] Policy update
Comment [b7] An assumption that they
would be placed in CBD and key gateway
'.. oriented sites at rrurumum.
Comment [b8]: This equates to 12-15 m1n
gross units per acre density - which seems
appropriate in these areas.
Comment [b9] This was- __..,. .
added from curre^'
language. _,,„
Comment [b10]: Again - if we allow
residential -a minimum density is appropriate
to make sure low density development doesn't
take over these sites so critical to Yakima's long
term economic future.
Proposed Map Update: (Also see slideshow: Yakima—LU—Pro+Considerations-070116) for more details,
proposals, and discussion items.
1. Combine designations as noted in slideshow.
Luw Density ResWenbW
fvhxl uy: ow any RevdcnbM
w iqh ¢ nti rjsAy ResWent,A Mixed Residential
NEENEIMMEM
Neqflr0 I"w uA Neighborhood I fixed -Use
amunRy Onlgm(?Waf
�r wa« rr w�ka: Rnura�� w wfi � Commercial Maxed -Use
CSO y: mtw urnri w
%% iiArowa�i;gFar,;np
�� ��� Inowasdrr„�^oW
2-5. See slideshow presentation materials for specific map change suggestions and considerations.
YAKIMA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN — DRAFT LAND USE DESIGNATION TABLE
FO THE
RECORD / 111,E
Listed in order
received:
Applicant:
MARTA DE CEJA�
Site Address:
802 Wilson Lane
Parcel(s):
19133041441; .56 acres
Request:
Medium Density Residential/R-2 to Commercial for an Auto Body Shop
Applicant:
ARTURO BAEZA
Site Address:
815 North 16th Ave; .55 acres
Parcel(s):
18131332554
Request:
High Density Residential/R-3 to Commercial for an Auto Sales
Applicant:
CHRIS WADDLE D/BIA DATAL PROPERTIES, LLC
Site Address:
115 N. 56th Ave
Parcel(s):
18132142537; .42 acres
Request:
Low Density Residential/R-1 to Commercial for retail use
Applicant:
JAY L. GLENN
Site Address:
203 & 207 Oak Street
Parcel(s):
181313-11429, & -11427; .55 acres
Request:
Industrial/M-1 to Multi family residential/Commercial for mini -storage
Applicant:
GLEN A. RADKE
Site Address:
8910 Tieton Drive
Parcel(s):
18133021432; 7.07 acres
Request:
Split zoning Medium Density Residential/R-2 and Neighborhood Commercial/B-2
request to make the whole parcel Neighborhood Commercial/B-2
Applicant:
LARRY BRADER
Site Address:
Vicinity of Powerhouse Rd & Pecks Canyon
Parcel(s):
18131033009; 2.38 acres
Request:
Neighborhood Commercial/SCC to Industrial/M-1
Applicant:
JEFF BAKER
Site Address
Vicinity of 18th Street and Nob Hill Blvd (Fairgrounds)
Parcel(s):
Area Wide Request for approx. 68 parcels; 12.43 acres
Request:
Regional Commercial/RD to General Commercial/GC
Applicant:
JAY STENTZ
Site Address:
4201 Summitview Ave
Parcel(s):
18132224445; .27 acres
Request:
Low Density Residential/R-1 to Commercial use
Revised July 20th, 2016 for YPC workshop packet
Revised July 20th, 2016 for YPC workshop packet
Applicant:
TM RENTALS
Site Address:
3804 West Logan Ave
Parcel(s):
181327-43492, -43493, -43494; 7.55 acres
Request:
Low Density Residential/R-1 to Medium Density Residential
Applicant:
GAIL BUCHANAN
Site Address:
408 S 881h Ave
Parcel(s):
18131934010; 1.78 acres
Request:
Low Density Residential/R-1 to High Density Residential/R-3
Applicant:
SUPERCOLD STORAGE, LLC
Address:
1415 River Rd
KSite
Parcel(s):
18131322010; 1.96 acres
,
Request:
Regional Commercial/LCC to Industrial/M-1
Applicant:
JERRY HAND
Site Address:
1406 S Fair Ave & 909 LaFollette
L
ParceI(s):
191330-41485, & -41486;.33 acres
Request:
Medium Density Residential/R-2 to Commercial use
Applicant:
WILLIAM AND LINDA BEERMAN
Site Address:
419S.16 th Ave
Parcel(s):
18132433509; .14 acres
Request:
...� _ .....
Low Density Residential/R-1 to Neighborhood Commercial/B-2
..-.-...... _ ....................
Applicant:
WILLIAM AND LINDA BEERMAN
Site Address:
1513 Tieton Drive & 421 S 16" Ave
ParceI(s):
181324-33510, & -33511;.28 acres
Request:
Low Density Residential/ HB to Neighborhood Commercial/B-2
Applicant:
SOZO SPORTS OF CENTRAL WASHINGTON
Site Address:
2200 S 36th Ave, 4201 Sorenson Rd, 4501 Sorenson Rd, 4601
Sorenson Rd, 4701 Sorenson Rd, 4209 Sorenson Rd.
Parcel(s):
Area Wide Request for 8 parcels; 77.57 acres
Request:
Two parcels from Industrial/M-1 and five parcels from Low Density
Residential/SR to Commercial use and parks for the proposed SOZO sports
complex
Applicant:
GARY DELANEY
ovftk
Site Address:
1414 S. 2nd Ave.
ParceI(s):
191330-33022; .11 acres
Request:
Medium Density Residential/R-2 to Commercial/SCC
Applicant:
MARK HOFFMANN
Site Address:
3109 W. Washington Ave.
Parcel(s):
181335-22015; 2.14 acres
Request:
Industrial/M-1 to Low Density Residential/R-1
Revised July 20th, 2016 for YPC workshop packet
O R "I"l:[E
oft
Kequest A,
Description of Request:
802 Wilson Lane; 1 parcel, .56 acres
Change from Medium Density Residential (R-2) to
Commercial designation for an Auto Body Shop
.k A I I .
Description of Request: 815 North 16th Ave; 1 parcel, .55 acres
Change from High Density Residential (R-3) to
Commercial designation for Auto Sales
Description of Request: 115 N. 56th Ave; 1 parcel, .42 acres
Change from Low Density Residential (R-1) to
Commercial designation for retail use
IM
� tni L; ula
Description of Request:
206 & 207 Oak Street; 2 parcels, .55 acres
Change from Industrial (M-1) to
Commercial designation for mini -storage
a a 6 a
Description of Request: 8910 Tieton Drive; 1 parcel, 7.07acres
Change split zoning from Medium Residential Density (R-2) to
Neighborhood Commercial designation to make whole
La=
Description of Request: Vicinity of Pecks Canyon & Powerhouse Rd; 1 parcel, 2.38acres
Change from Neighborhood Commercial (SCC) to Industrial
Description of Request: Vicinity of 18th Street & Nob Hill Blvd; 68 parcels, 2,f-3 �acire
Change from Regional Commercial (RD) to General Commercial
Aerial Section 1
Aerial Section 2
Aerial Section 3
=0 -
Description of Request: 4201 Summitview Ave; 1 parcel, .27 acres
Change from Low Density Residential (R-1) to Commercial
a a
Ia
Description of Request: 3804 West Logan Ave; 1 parcel, 7.55 acres
Change from Low Density (R-1) to Medium Density (R-2)
9 4 y
Description of Request: 408 S 88th Ave; 1 parcel, 1.78 acres
Change from Low Density (R-1) to High Density (R-3)
Description of Request: 1415 River Rd; 1 parcel, 1.96 acres
Change from Regional Commercial (LCC) to Industrial
Description of Request: 1406 S FairAve; 2 parcels, .33 acres
Change from Medium Density Residential (R-2) to Commercial
Irl 'rw "a
i
Description of Request: 419 S 16th Ave; 1 parcel, .14 acres
Change from Low Density Residential (R-1) to Commercial (B-2)
Description of Request: 419 S 16th Ave; 1 parcel, .28 acres
Change from Historic Business (HB) to Commercial (B-2)
e ut 0
Description of Request: Vicinity of S 36th, Sorenson Rd, North of Ahtanum; 8 parcels
.28 acres Change from combination of industrial and low density
residential to Commercial to support new regional sports complex)
.� ����i�i� Muo t rrvrmro'aro+rnmasw�w,xtN�
NI
in n�mmim nnmmm �wiwww wmwmM1�mmmm�m xowwwwww
WP a s 0
Description of Request: 1414 S 2nd Ave; 1 parcel, .11 acres
Change from Medium Density Residential (R-2) to Commercial (SCC)
V
tQSAFf . �� ' rIAL to ,
1 1 ' �
Description of Request: 3109 W opo Ave; 1 parcel, 2.14 acres
Change from Industrial to Low Density Residential (R-1)
nIi
Weaw'11, ;
coov p ch o M"::e 1°)I on 2040
W,'i� a t is flIh e IIP',,"" r o p o s M ?
CITY OF YAKI A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
Environmental Review I Outreach Update
The City of Yakima is updating its Comprehensive Plan by June
2017 in accordance with Growth Management Act (GMA). An
updated Comprehensive Plan and policies will mean more
housing choices, new places to work, better connected roads
and parks, new recreation opportunities, and improved public
services. As part of the process, it is anticipated that the land
use and zoning map will be amended to reflect alternative land
use patterns. Some of these changes may include:
0 Consolidated plan designations with few categories and
greater allowance to change underlying zoning
designations if appropriate,
New policies or map changes to ensure neighborhoods
have appropriately defined mixed use commercial
centers and a range of housing types, and
Potentially some zoning changes to better match current
land use patterns or alternatively advance the refreshed
Comprehensive Plan vision.
I ii a°II' is An I'''"',IVIS' '
An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is a document
prepared under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) that
provides City decision makers with information about the
potential physical impacts to the natural and built
environment as a result of projects and future development
allowed by plans and policies (non -project actions). The EIS also
provides a way for residents, businesses, and other
government agencies to comment on the proposal. Contents
of an EIS include:
Proposed actions and alternatives
Existing conditions of the study area
+� Impacts that may occur if an alternative were
implemented
Mitigation measures to reduce or eliminate impacts, and
* Impacts that are significant, unavoidable, and adverse
')roiext Irrfolli, ung tlo
More information about the project
can be found at the following site:
h t www akir?nar a gpv rvices
�Plann i 9-g/com orehensive lan-
date
l:rrr°:Jeq:t J°"fontac
Joan Davenport, Director of
Community Development
Joan, Daven ort Yaki!mnA, ov
(509) 576-6417
July 2016 Prepared by BERK Consulting 1
CITY OF YAKIMA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
SEPA MEMO
The Yakima Comprehensive Plan Update SEPA process will include an amended Plan Appendix A (EIS),
which will contain environmental analysis of potential impacts up to the level of an EIS. A SEPA Scoping
Notice will be prepared and distributed (see schedule) prior to preparation of the Draft EIS to obtain
comments on the scope of the analysis and alternatives. Following the Draft EIS issuance and a public
comment period, a Final EIS will be completed that responds to comments and corrects or updates the
analysis.
What millre �Clm beIirt Ills ufari iiI la11ti°igI"atamd
GMA and SEPA have similar requirements to inventory current conditions and test the implications of
future growth, as well as consider ways to protect the environment. An integrated Plan and EIS is allowed
by SEPA Rules (WAC 197-11-210 to 235). Benefits of the Integrated Plan/EIS include:
* Combined Comprehensive Plan Update and SEPA processes, analysis, and documents
• Reducing duplicated efforts through preparing the Plan and EIS together
• Efficient use of resources through the combined effort
The Integrated Plan/EIS will offer a fresh analysis and integration with the public review process. The Draft
Plan and EIS will be issued concurrently and be available to the Planning Commission, while the Final Plan
and Final EIS will go to the City Council. A 60 -day comment period is required and will provide the
opportunity for Yakima residents and business owners, stakeholders, and agencies to give input on the
Draft Plan and its impacts. Mitigation may include amended policies or codes.
Wttat iiis t ie i Milos Say° Ill iedWe and. bil!a6l a cti iiitl ?
The SEPA process takes place parallel to the Comprehensive Plan update and adoption processes. In the
second half of 2016, the Draft Plan and Draft EIS will be developed. A workshop on the Draft Elements will
take place in the fall, and an open house on the proposed Draft Plan will occur before the end of 2016,
following the issuance of the Draft EIS. A 60 -day comment period will occur into January 2017. The
Comprehensive Plan Update will move through the Planning Commission and Council in the first half of
2017. Final Adoption is targeted for June 30, 2017.
Q1
Visioning 6m
Existing Conditions &
District Profiles
Plan Development
Environmental Review
Plan Adoption
Outreach Events
2016 2017
fJlli'lllllllll���l1JJJilhiffli'�(;li(@'lCi;�!" i�1f'�`ll �'1JlJl',n
I��1111111��9 �
July 2016 Prepared by BERK Consulting
I
lim