Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-12-18 YPC Packet111011119 M DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Joan Davenport, AICP, Director 11 %Xk� uu:�; Dui k wi PlOTY I° YAKIIMA anning Joseph Calhoun, Manager 129 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 December 12, 2018 3:00 p.m. - 5:00 p.m. YPC MPmhPrc- Chairwoman Patricia Byers, Vice -Chair Al Rose, Bill Cook, Jacob Liddicoat, Robert McCormick, Leanne Hughes -Mickel, and Philip Ostriem Council Liaison: Jason White (District 2) City Planning Staff: Joan Davenport (Community Development Director), Joseph Calhoun (Planning Manager), Eric Crowell (Associate Planner), Trevor Martin (Associate Planner), Colleda Monick (Assistant Planner), Rosalinda Ibarra (Administrative Assistant), and Lisa Maxey (Planning Specialist) AGENDA I. Call to Order II. Roll Call III. Staff Announcements IV. Audience Participation V. Approval of Meeting Minutes of November 14, 2018 VI. Recap of Planning Commission Items from 2018 VII. Other Business VIII. Adjourn Next Meeting. January 9, 2019 (December 26, 2018 meeting is cancelled MIS 094 'dWs M K % w1b, SIMIL Am RILIk " rCITYorb• Y%AK" AA lanEdS.I �-I S:� ��T" e i n City of Yakima Planning Commission City Hall Council Chambers Wednesday December 12, 2018 Beginning at 3:00 p.m. Public Meeting 'PLEASE WRITE LEGIBLY' .._....__..... ._._............................................ ..... _........................ Pae 1 12/12/2018 ----------- g YPC Public Meeting City of Yakima Planning Commission (YPC) Meeting Minutes City Hall Council Chambers November 14, 2018 Call to Order Chairwoman Patricia Byers called the meeting to order at 3:00 p.m. Roll Call YPC Members Present: Chairwoman Patricia Byers, Vice -Chair Al Rose, Jacob Liddicoat, Leanne Hughes -Mickel, Philip Ostriem YPC Members Absent: Bill Cook, Robert McCormick (both excused) Staff Present: Joseph Calhoun, Planning Manager; Lisa Maxey, Planning Specialist Council Liaison: Jason White, District 2 (absent) Others: Sign -in sheet in file Staff Announcements — None noted. Audience Participation - None noted. Approval of Meeting Minutes of October 10, 2018 - It was motioned by Commissioner Liddicoat and seconded by Commissioner Hughes -Mickel to approve the meeting minutes of October 10, 2018. The motion carried unanimously. Recap of the November 6, 2018 City Council Meeting — Planning Manager Joseph Calhoun announced that City Council held public hearings and approved all 7 of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA) and concurrent rezone proposals for this year. He further explained that ordinances for 6 of the 7 CPAs and rezones will be recorded November 16th and become effective in mid-December, while the ordinance for the proposal next to the Wastewater Treatment Plant will go before Council on December 4th for approval due to the land needing to be surveyed to obtain a new legal description for the subject property to be included in the ordinance. Discussion took place on the manner in which the Planning Commission's recommendation on the Comprehensive Plan and rezone proposal for land near the Wastewater Treatment Plant was presented to Council in contrast to how staff's recommendation was presented. Chairwoman Byers and Vice -Chair Rose expressed that they would have wanted staff to clearly verbalize to Council the reasons for the Commission recommending approval of the CPA but rejection of the rezone. Calhoun replied that the reason provided was that the Commission desired more time to review a site plan in conjunction with the rezone. Calhoun reported that the rezone on the southeast corner of 56th Ave and Summitview Ave, as well as the proposed text amendments (including the hotel/motel and extended stay hotel/motel text amendment), were approved by Council on November 13th and will be effective in mid- December. Discussion on Upcomina/Potential Items for Review by Plannina Commission — Calhoun reminded the Commission that during the Comprehensive Plan 2040 Update process, potential changes to the code were mentioned that the Commission may want to consider looking into further, including items related to affordable housing strategies, changes to Table 4-1 Permitted Land Uses, and new development regulations. He clarified that per the Yakima Municipal Code, one of the powers of the Planning Commission is to investigate and make recommendations on text amendments on its own initiative. -1- Chairwoman Byers informed the Commission that in a conversation with the Mayor, Mayor Coffey indicated to her that a member of the Planning Commission may participate in the Ad Hoc Committee for Temporary Worker Housing. Commission members expressed their desire for those in the public to consult them with their land use -related ideas to discuss how they may be able to accomplish their goals through an amendment to the code if it's not currently allowable or feasible. They commended members of the public who came forward concerning their desire to have changes made to the accessory dwelling unit regulations, as well as the owner of a local taxicab company who asked if the code could be changed to allow him to operate his business out of his home. Other Business — The Commission had consensus to cancel the December 26th Planning Commission meeting. Commissioner Hughes -Mickel reminded all of previous conversations about communicating and collaborating with surrounding jurisdictions on planning -related issues. Calhoun responded that he exchanged emails with the contact person for the Yakima County Planning Commission but ultimately a date for a joint meeting was not decided on. He assured that he can make another attempt to coordinate with them in the coming year. Calhoun added that at the start of a comprehensive plan update several years ago, Yakima County staff had regular meetings with staff from surrounding jurisdictions while developing its long-range projections. He indicated he would ask County staff if they're interested in having joint meetings periodically. Adjourn - A motion to adjourn to November 28, 2018 was passed with unanimous vote. This meeting adjourned at 3:27 p.m. Chairwoman Byers Date This meeting was filmed by YPAC. Minutes for this meeting submitted by: Lisa Maxey, Planning Specialist. -2- lrlr I I I a I What Does Affordable • • Mean? Housing is defined as "affordable" if the costs do not exceed 30 percent of a family income. ,�, Families who spend more than 30 percent of their income are considered cost burdened and may have difficulty affording necessities such as food, clothing, transportation and medical care. %% Families that spend 50 percent of their annual income on housing are considered severely cost burdened. .'- Statewide, over 511 of renters are cost -burdened and nearly 234,000 households are severely cost -burdened today. A family with one full-time worker earning the minimum wage cannot afford the local fair -market rent for a two-bedroom apartment anywhere in the United States (2015 Washington State Housing Needs Assessment). Yakima Housing Facti m Vacancy Rates, especially for rentals, is very low. Available rentals in Yakima have been reported to drop from 7.8% to 1.7% vacancy rate between 2014 and 2016 -," Home Ownership remains out of reach for many. Approximately 44% of our City families cannot afford to purchase home at the area Median Homerice. To afford the purchase of a median value home in Yakima, a family would need to make at least $38,500 annually (3,200 monthly). 4- Many households are cost burdened. In the City of Yakima, 32% of renters are cost burdened and 49% of home owners are cost burdened. There is a current need for 3,300 more affordable housing units in Yakima. *'gym New construction, especially of multi -family units has not kept up with demand. Between 2009 and September 2018 a total of 1,793 housing units were issued building permits in the City of Yakima, or an average of 180 permits per year. To meet our population growth projections, we need about 330 new housing starts every year. Smaller Household size. Over half the Yakima households are one or two people with no children. In 2015, 29 percent of Yakima's 33,074 households were single persons and 24 percent of the households were couples with no children. m Housing choices for low to moderate income families in Yakima is severely limited. The Median Family Income in the City of Yakima is $43,089 (2016 ACS data) which is 27% lower than the Washington State Median Family Income. An estimated 22.5% of our residents live below the Federal Poverty level. Wage Distribution in Yakima County (Central)--GreaterYakim a City Puma 1;i ua l Af , � """'? JI,f,'j, :)(, jj�01,1, 1)V(",j 25% Median Family Income in Yakima is $43,089 in 2016 20% 15% 10% I , 5% T V, Avec age Sa I a ry .. . ... . . . ....... . . .. ... 0 0 � 0 DATAUSA. Maps i i ES R i I a• •it iles l llaps for R foodft:.ulo Ie [iptisv,ng V 1, i I,i , r � , < ( ) ,, � i, of : , u ��_.V .-, i. � ��a��r G�s.�r.aF,'di� � E��i ff"Ir �Ff4@�,7 � r.,�,. � �, , r� �,, , d,.. .,�r��m� • 0 0 UO,,n fap What is the "bottom line"? (JTYCY"AKIHMA IT[:DS' TC), �: NC, -0 L) RAG' E HOUSII' GSTAF',B! Over the last 10 years, we have had an average of 180 housing units permitted each year. 111'.'*To meet our GMA goal, we need to have 330 housing units started each year. -m) We need partners to help in this effort and need to be creative. ABC1UT HNUF. OF.­I"Ffl'.'o NEW FROUSHqG UNVSIL S S 11 1 IIJ � D B E CO N ST R, L) CT E D f�D f� LOW TO H11KCAdE �°AVIH IIES. I 1111:1P ,We need to encourage multi -family units and rentals of all types. -.'-There is an interest in development of town house type construction. ,1111*e The construction market will not likely be able to build quality units for affordable housing without assistance. III! iiiill pill ANN M Does the have adequate supply of land zoned for housing,including alternatives tosingle �. Are there local regulatorybarriers that inhibit affordable housing development? Are there regulatory incentives xvecan offer toencourage housing construction? 3, Are construction costs & permittingtimne|inesintheYaWnoaAreaconsistentvvithother communities? Can they beimproved? 4' Frontage Improvements and Utility Costs associated with new or infill development. 5. What programs has the State of Washington enabled that the city might want to take advantage ofand what steps are necessary tmimplement the programs? Should the city ofYakima consider maintenance Code toassure that existing rental housing is Question 1: Do we have enough land zoned for Affordable Housing? Zoning and land use analysis from the Comprehensive Plan 2040 indicates yes. Availability and market price of land might be a different story. The Growth Management Act (GMA) population projections for the City of Yakima indicate a need for approximately 6,600 new housing units by 2040. Half of those units should be available to low or moderate income families. 11:41NHL.�Iift 3 14. ZoWng ai'A Cajji�:::idtv for GiiwAith 1!�y 11111111strillO Source: Yakima County 2015, BERK (omulting ZOI/ Buildable Excluding Critical Areas jVacant, Agriculture, Infill, Und rutilized) zoning I z 3 4 5 6 7 UtVwidee SUbUrban Re5idendal 2.3 6L9 493 14A 66.1 0.6 194.6 Singlo famflyRosidentW 7.1 5�9 19�. 2 6.7 82.4 2"4 895.8 ly C:S i d1criti al 9.2 35.6 40.2 5.9 29.9 61.3 0 MO I I i (At I Wy 114-IJ(14-f I I: iA 111 21 10.0 4.2 29.6 133 173.5 2458 Professiona� Business DFstricl 2.8 - 10.6 7.5 5.2 17 IB. 2 48.0 Local Busirwss District 0.3 OA 5.7 1.2 1.3 2.0 9.4 20.2 HiStOriC,11 BLAI:Sinc5� Di5trict 0.2 0.2 0.3 Stimll Conertience Center - LIS - 3.2 12.8 - 26.7 44.3 IAIgf- - - 0.7 - 8.5 1.0 2.2 12.4 Contral I-)NtOrt 3.0 1,2 is�9 - - 201 General Commercial 17.5 5Z.6 5,7,6 10.1 20'S - 442.4 U ght I n du st ria 1 12.9 28.2 1 " 0005 ... M, '01 mg 1 1.7 581.1 Heavy � ndu5tri al 9�0 83 17.3 Regional Development 64,3 232.2 A i r i �in T I Sm t pp ort 1.0 1-0 Totals 236 263 318 921- 329 434 1,670 3,331 Source: Yakima County 2015, BERK (omulting ZOI/ Question 2r t r l ry incentives or barriers to the construction of affordable T housingi Iii x1111 The City has implemented a variety of incentives: ^m^Zoning Code Amendments to streamline construction of "Accessory Dwelling Units" (or ADU's). These are housing units which are built on lots that already have a house or other structure. -o-Zoning Code Amendments to allow clustering of housing units around a common amenity in order to promote tiny home villages. ,*, New construction of housing is permitted in nearly all other zoning districts and locations. ,*eThe City of Yakima has not imposed any Impact Fees (as allowed under RCW 82.02) on any construction projects. ,,,The City of Yakima offers a free Development Service learn project review. A follow up review is available for $100. If a developer takes advantage of these programs, the actual project review can be shortened because they have a better understanding of the Codes and requirements. On-line payments and filing pb-mitted. romp Multi-family Tax Exemption program (MFTE) provides an exemption of property tax increases for up to 12 years based upon qualified improvements of the project and is governed by YMC 11.63.040 Currently applies in the CBD. Should this area be expanded? e,The City of Yakn na is an Entitlement Community forthe HUD HOME program used to support many partnerships and resulted in the construction of over 250 new housing units in the last ten years. Partners include Habitat for Humanity, Yakima Housing Authority, Next Step Housing„ Catholic; Charities and others. Things we can do better — promote smaller lots and smaller units in walkable neighborhoods. Other incentives to consider w may encourage •`w=e w••r•e housing • • -,"'-,Encourage infill of vacant land and buildings with residential uses that have been successful in other communities. Many of the existing buildings in the Central Business District were constructed with boarding house, hotels or other residential uses on the upper floors. These buildings often do not have fire suppression sprinkler systems or elevators. The City could examine code options related to these public safety measures to encourage redevelopment of these buildings with new residential units. °a, -The State legislature adopted amendments to RCW 19.27.060(2) which allows for local government to reduce the minimum dimensions of habitable spaces in single family housing units in an effort to promote smaller homes. °m�,Promote accessory dwelling units in a wider range throughout the City. - Examine "Inclusionary" zoning that requires a percent of new units to be below market rate. Question 3: Is Yakima competitive in construction costs and permitting? A 2018 report on housing construction costs in five markets in Eastern Washington (Wenatchee/East Wenatchee, Yakima, Spokane, Ellensburg and Tri-Cities/Benton County). indicates that construction of single family housing in the City of Yakima is competitive with the other four markets. Yakima is one of the two least expensive markets for development costs in Median Value per square foot, Total Sales Prices, Total Cost of Framing materials and Total permitting fees. One area in which the Yakima market was high was the Land Cost. Permitting time is average for Eastern Washington - Can it be streamlined more'.F- AUoxvmore housing construction tmbepermitted Class 1Uses which dnnot require neighborhood review. Under Washington State Environmental Policy Act (SEP4), review is necessary for any project thathmsrnonethan2Uhousingunits.[Jneoptionthe City might consider istomake any SEPAexempt housing project a permitted land use. Consider an option to pay an additional fee for expedited reviews. In other communities certain types of land uses are given an expedited review if the use is something the community wants to encourage. Can vvereduce some ofthe NIMBY delays without hurting existing neighborhoods? Aop88|s can add up to a year to the review process. The City could review options to reduce the NIMBY effect, including community education and engagement. One solution may involve multiple Question 4: Do street improvements and utility costs deter affordable housing projects? Public water and fire flow —Public water is available from either the City of Yakima or Nob Hill W � ifer systems, -- and depending ----" on location. No new wells in City Limits for drinking water are permitted, although there are still neighborhoods where public water is not currently available. The City recently extended public water to a mobile home park on Fruitvale Boulevard due to a failed water system. Public sewer — One of the most expensive items for new development is the common need to extend a public sewer line to the site. Currently, the City has approximately 20% of the neighborhoods and areas where no public sewer is available. The Yakima Health District does not recommend allowing any new septic systems inside the City of Yakima if public sewer can be made available. The City of Yakima does not have a robust Capital fund to finance the extensions of public sewer to all the regions of the City where no sewer lines exist or the capacity of the lines are not adequate. To reduce frontage and utility costs, locations that already are served by public utilities and complete streets should be prioritized for affordable housing projects. nd Traffic Impacts Street Frontage Costs �, The City has adopted the policy of "complete streets" that considers all users, including walking, biking and transit. This is most important in walk t chool neighborhoods and safe rout locations, The City policy is for sidewalks on both sides of the street. N On street parking can increase the width of a street and is often desired in a new development, but not required. Traffic calming is allowed on neighborhood streets, but not on busy arterial streets. Infill lots could be exempted from some of the requirements to upgrade streets. n^ Requirements for street frontage improvements must have a "nexus" to support the need for physical improvements. tPo- A traffic study is required for large projects to determine if "off-site" street improvements are necessary. The authority for the traffic study is most often the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). Question 5: Are there other State Programs the City could adopt to encourage Affordable Housing? Affordable „i fousirig l�oncl Salc s_Gar�d UseT ax increase. The State of Washin �xton enacted an optional sales aaracl ease tax increase of one -.tenth ot'1 oa"resat for Griiii6s and Cities in 20 a f 11 ."�r+/ T32.14'.530) ttolae3 used exclusively fear aftcarclaiale housing proTsrct,s and rraeratal heaCt,h programs. 11ae: cities cif f Ileo�stai, and til�rrupia have adopted programs to impose this sales tax iur roase. I lie city of Fllensburg anticap aces it will raise approxirna7tely rt50,000 to 5�500,t19() annUaally, City of (Olympia anticipates close to $2 million a year in revenuer. Mire program requires a baRot measure for adoption. Affordable l lou§,Jgg: New in June of 2018 local governments rraay dispose of its surplus D, is osn o.. Sur _us tavc � nruerat I ra r ri at 7 ,isrr�unt for property at no or low cost to d'eve lope. s to construct afTearafablaffasaeasing'. Where are requirements gas to the affordability period and other restrictions as to tl"ae arse of the property associated with the disposal. This program could streamline transactions of idle city owned land to housing agencies and developers who will build qualified affordable housing units. AP )wwnI,,faur Srnaller R sidences The legislature amended the state building code and related lalanning statutes to allow local governments to reduce the rinnrmum dimensions of halarxafale spaces iso snitt 3e family re»sick>rrtial units below the standards set for5m in the state building code. This hill is intended to enable they development of sinaller, more afforcmable homes, sometimes called JnV ih mnv i. The City of Yakirna has riot adopted an arnendnaent to the building code that allows this reduction in gross floor area requirernernts. txeintiting Certain ,Prcrp r ty Intended for; Low-income Housing from Property„ N"axes. a ,ev 14 3 exempts. real property owned by a nonprofit entity frons state and ocafproperty taxes wfaen thaC lased is bi>rng risen for devdlnpin or rceievelnpang low income residential housing. Mn particular, this larw extends the exemption to rranT)r ynr ,A larial mr si,!, where the land remains in the ownership of the nonprofit but is leased to low-incorne households, There is no community land trust in yakim«r. Increased, Funding for Affordable. Housing and Homelessness: I he legislature rnade permanent the $40 recording fee surcharge intended to f raise funds fear honrclRessness and affordable housing, It -1-1 1- ins ra ased the surchaarge amount to $tat. A portion of the surcharge isprovirle=,d to counties to r�tat toward their horneless housing program and a portion foes to the statea to kae 5 Faosited iii the, Florae Sr.c.urityy' Fuad Account. I be funds must be used for specific purposes, and data coilection requirements ararmetrics are incorporaterT'to detesraraine whether t,hc-s fur'acls are adc%ressiragg' 'the homelessness problem. The Of of y-aklirna is considering a recluest to Yakima County that would reserve this increases in the filing fee for the capital project financing anal operations oF' a permanent low barne.r homeless housing project, and /or homeless shelter'. Question • Should Yakima Minimum Maintenance Code? Preservation of the existing, housing stock in the City of Yakima is critical to meeting the demand for affordable housing, The City of Ya kit as an Entitlement Comrvaunity, expends approximately TiCTf, of the Corriirnunity Tlevelcaharne�°rt Block Grant (C[1IiC1) resources in the repairs fear safet and health items in the hoes of senior citizens and disabled persons each year. This, prograrn has em,,ibled rtrldredS srl a,�lrJm E�rly fan�allies to "�a� e ria place", delay entry into an assn steel lMna situation, or �,4npIy experience safety r, wairs that other wise were riot affordable.1 he City Councal has strongly supported this prograrn but it is limited by availablefunding. Much of the City of Yakirria housing stock is old, with over 50% of the housing units constructed more than 40 years a��=o. There is a strong correlation between housing age anti housing condition. The percentage of housing units that lack either a kitchen or plur-Aing varies by Census tract between zero wind 11.,76 percent, with the hr g. ha rate of no plumbing is found eaast. of 16"1 avenue, Other condition issues have not been recently documented. The City of Yakima has ado ted Munici aal; Codes for Chronic Nuisance properties (YMC 1.1.45), Dangerous Buildings (YMC '�11 46) and Apartment Flouse�/Hotel Safety .odes (YMC 11,13) bu,it we have not adopted the optional Minimurn Property Standard's (MPS). The City of Yakima does not have a rental registry roram, like Seattle noes that rewires inspection of recital units on a routine to«asls. At this I•irne, the City cannot dernan ,an inspection of a recital unit,which impairs the aabil"ity to write citations for unsanitary or , otentially dangerous corrditioris, While there are many positive reasons to support a �Minimurn Maintenaant:c f car or prograrn, one significant negative affect would be the potential to displace low int;rame persons from housing withoutany other housing resources to provide shelter. "'rhe City tioes not maintain a vacant residential building program at this time. The City Council has started a discussion of the goals and intended outcomes that may result from ai vacant building programa, If the City of Yakima adopts and enforces minirnurn maintenance standards, some housing units will be upgraded especially with public safety improvements. However, some housing units will likely be abandoned and some tenants may be displaced. City Council Options %%The City Council may choose to have a study session on the complex issues covered in this briefing paper. Community partners could be invited to attend and discuss their recommendations, concerns and future plans. -The Council may direct the Healthy Community and Neighborhood Building Committee (HCNB) to review this report and prioritize action steps for the full Council. .*-Some of the programs noted in this report require review by the Yakima Planning Commission for amendments to the Zoning Ordinance. 11* *Any change to utility policies and street improvements should involve a broad community review, including the City of Yakima Bicycle and Pedestrian Committee. %% Consideration of the adoption of the minimum maintenance code and a rental registry could involve review by a variety of stakeholders, including but not limited to, tenant rights organizations, health industry professionals and landlord organizations.