Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/16/1981 Adjourned Meeting J 9 8 ADJOURNED MEETING APRIL 16, 1981 The City Council met in session on this date at 1:00 P.M. in the Confer- ence Room at City Hall, Yakima, Washington. Council members present were Mayor Betty L. Edmondson, Lynn Buchanan, Lynn Carmichael, Bruce Crest, Shirley Doty and Don Hinman. Council member Henry Beauchamp present after 1 :30 P.M. Council members discussed the twelve unresolved Urban Area Plan Issues and the following is the criteria staff will use to prepare the reply to the Yakima County Commissioners. Issue One -- Whether new developments receiving sewer service from the City should annex for that purpose. It was the general consensus of the Council that the answer is "yes ", using references to the Wastewater Agreement, Page 9 and 12, and delete the word "immediately" from Page 9 of the Urban Area Plan. Issue Two -- Whether already developed areas, where potential health hazards from well contamination exist must annex immediately for sewer service from the City. It was the general consensus of the Council that the answer is "no ", but an Outside Utility Agreement must be signed, with reference to the same references listed in the reply to Issue One. Issue Three -- Whether annexation policies should be included in the Yakima Urban Area Plan. Discussion followed regarding the references this issue had and the various agreements and plans. Don Skone, Associ- ate Planner, stated that these references were used because it would vest the Regional Planning_ Commission with powers and one power would be to recommend annexations and their guideline would be the Urban Area Plan. It was MOVED by Hinman, seconded by Carmichael to develop a policy statement in our response that Council reaffirms their stand on annexation and it isn't really a negotiable item as to whether we have it or not. Unanimously carried by voice vote. The answer would be "yes ", with reference to the Urban Area Growth Policy, Page 4 and 5, and the Regional Planning Agreement, Page 1, 2, 16 and 17. Issue Four -- Shall the Wastewater Allocation Plan be adopted by all signers of the Wastewater Agreement? It was the general consensus of the Council that the answer be that the City is following the Allocation Plan as adopted by all three entities and upon completion of the Plan and after a period of time lapse, the City would be willing to sit down and evaluate and consider the allocation plan. The references would be the Wastewater Agreement, Page 1, 2, 3, 12, and 13, and the Wastewater • Facilities Planning Study, Table 11-3 and inside cover, and the Urban Area Plan, Page UT -9. Issue Five -- Shall an Urban Area Sewer Stud be jointl .re•ared b the City and County? It was the general consensus of the Council that'this issue be answered by advising the County that this has already been done jointly by all three entities, and approved by EPA and DOE. The refer- ences used are the same as listed in Issue Four reply. Issue Six -- Shall the Urban Planning Boundary be reduced to the Urban Service Boundary? It was the general consensus of the Council that the answer be that maybe the present planning boundary could be changed, but this item should be discussed by all three entities. Issue Seven -- Whether the Regional Planning Commission, or the separate City and County Planning Commissions should administer the Regional Plan and Zoning Ordinance. It was the general consensus of the Council that the answer be to reaffirm the City's position, however, the City is open for discussion with all three entities. The reference used is the Regional Planning Agreement, Pages 1, 2, 5 and 6. Issue Eight -- Whether membership on the Regional Planning Commission should be changed. It was the general consensus of the Council that the response be that this was based on population criteria and ask if the County has a different criteria to suggest. The reference used is the Regional Planning Agreement, Pages 2 and 3. ADJOURNED MEETING . 379 APRIL 16, 1981 Issue Nine -- Whether a joint regional staff or a separate City/County staff should provide administration of the Regional Planning Process. It was the general consensus of the Council that the City still prefers a joint regional staff. The references used are the Regional Planning Agreement, Page 12; Wastewater Agreement, Page 12; and Urban Area Growth Policy, Page 5. . It was the general consensus of the Council that the answers for Issues Ten, Eleven and Twelve be answered in the order of Twelve, Ten and Eleven. Council member Hinman was temporarily absent between 2:40 P.M. and 3:10 P.M. l ssue Twelve -- Whether Urban Area Zoning could be accomplished by (1) Coordinating the existing City and County Zoning Ordinances, or (2) preparing a new Intensity Zoning Ordinance. It was MOVED by Hinman, seconded by Crest that the City favors the implementation of the Urban Area Zoning which would be be accomplished by preparing a new Intensity Zoning Ordinance. Unanimously carried by voice vote. Council member Buchanan suggested deleting the word, "new". Issue Ten -- Whether mobile homes locating in the Urban Service Boundary shall be required to meet Uniform Building Code. Issue Eleven -- Whether sidewalks, street lights, and other urban devel- opment standards will be required within the Urban Service Boundary. The answer to Issues Ten and Eleven is that the issues will be resolved during the preparation of the Intensity Ordinance. Council then prioritized the issues in the order to be discussed: (1) allocation of wastewater resources issues; (2) development of standards issues; (3) administration issues; and (4) annexation. It was the general consensus of the Council that some time be reserved on the next study session to review the reply prepared by staff. The reply will be delivered to the County Commissioners and Council members on Wednesday, April 22, 1981. It was MOVED by Buchanan, second -c " oy Beaucha . that this meeting be adjourned at the hour of 3:40 P nanimou, "y carries by voice vot 4)0 READ AND CERTIFIED ACCURATE 4k „ ,., , DATE . - / 70 COUNCIL MEMBER 4 11■ fWJ 0AxwjkagDATE 61/P-181 - QOUNCIL MEMBER ATTEST: Atr Arit__ eeage /74PC14-Gre,/ CITY CLEV f f.YOR III