HomeMy WebLinkAbout122018 EDC packetCouncil Economic Development
Corrinliftee
YAKIMA REGIONAL AIRPORT: 2rld Floor Conference Room
PARKING: PLEASE PRINT THE ATTACHED PERMIT AND PLACE IN YOUR
VEHICLE
DECEMBER 20, 2018
1:30 p.m.
Members: Staff: Others:
Chairman White Ana Cortez, City Manager
Councilmember Gutierrez Gaily Price, Assistant to the City Manager
Councilmember Cousens
1. Minute Approval
a. Review draft minutes
2. Discussion
a. Strategic Priorities per Plan
i. Main arterial development- Nothing to report
ii. Downtown plaza: Introduction by Finance Department- Review of
Downtown Master Plan
b. Economic Development Plan
i. Community Pride- Nothing to report
c. Competitiveness
i. Private sites- Nothing to report
ii. City sites- Nothing to report
iii. Mill sites- Nothing to report
iv. Public Port Authority- February
v. Incentives- Nothing to report
vi. Education Alignment- Nothing to report
vii. YKM- January
viii. Convention Center- Nothing to report
d. Traded Sector
i. YKM- Nothing to report
ii. Clusters- Nothing to report
e. Council policy requests
i. Vacant Building Ordinance- Report/Mall
ii. Central Washington State Fair Report on Goals to Increase Use of
Sundome
3. Staff and Partner Announcements/Reports
a. Utility Pole Use for Cell Facility- Refer item to Planning Commission
4. Future Agenda Items
a. Shipping Container Ordinance Proposal
5. Audience Participation
NGV,
.SNE
Yakima Air Terminal -
McAllister Field
Main Terminal
Parking Pass
Economic Development Co
Meeting
December 20, 2018
ttee
Members:
Council member White
Council member Gutierrez
Council member Cousens
White called the meeting
Committee
2nd Floor Conference Room
City Hall
November 15, 2018
1:30 p.m.
Staff:
Ana Cortez, Assistant City Manager
Cally Price, Assistant to the City Manager
Executive i n tes
Others:
Luz Gutierrez
John Cooper
Andrew Holt
Verlynn Best
Jonathan Smith
Maria Rodriguez
Joe Morrier
Jerry Mallen
1. Review draft minutes from September 27, 2018 meeting:
The September 27, 2018 meeting minutes were reviewed. Gutierrez motioned to accept
the minutes as presented and White seconded the motion. The minutes were approved as
presented.
2. Discussions:
a. Strategic Priorities per Plan
i. Main arterial development
White suggested that this go back to the full Council for discussion
during the Strategic Planning study session in January. Gutierrez
stated that the Council needs to identify the standards and who will
maintain them.
ii. Downtown Plaza
Cortez asked for direction from the Committee members on how to
create a more dynamic downtown without a plaza.
b. Economic Development Plan
White asked that staff present the Economic Development Plan with the Committee.
He would like to see the findings that warranted the plaza and incubator projects be
moved forward. Participants thought the City had a good plan and conducted a
thorough process with a lot of time commitment; therefore, they would like Council to
support the Plan and keep moving it forward.
Mann stated that there is plenty of parking in downtown but that it isn't being used
adequately and suggested that Council revisit parking enforcement.
Morrier stated that people miss things to do. The Convention Center is vital to the
community and attendees want some where to go for shopping and entertainment.
Holt added that a key element of the Plan is to make downtown more walkable.
Best would like to see traffic on Yakima Avenue slowed down.
Committee member Gutierrez would like to see the following things:
-Solicit new ideas — replace the plaza
- Different approach to port district marketing
- New or modified parking regulations
- Shared ride pick up spots on Yakima Avenue
- Curb cuts for emergency vehicles
- Restrict the number of banks on Yakima Avenue
- Incentives for the former mall site
i. Community Pride
1. Cinco de Mayo
Committee members discussed whether the Cinco de Mayo
event should be added to the Master Plan. Committee member
Gutierrez doesn't think it should be added to the Master Plan
without full Council support and public input.
2. Image: Creative District
Committee member Gutierrez believes there needs to be a
more thorough assessment of the Creative District concept and
should not be included in the Master Plan. She moved that the
Creative District discussion be moved to the full Council for
discussion as part of the strategic planning session in January.
White seconded the motion. The motion passed.
Competitiveness
i. Private sites
ii. City sites
iii. Mill site
iv. Public Port Authority
Committee member Gutierrez would like to begin working on a Port
District in 2019 with the goal of moving it forward to the voters in 2020.
v. Incentives
vi. Education Alignment
vii. YKM
Partners need to support this asset.
viii. Convention Center
c.
d. Traded Sector
i. YKM
White asked staff to provide an analysis of how to use a port district,
potentially Yakima Airport as a centerpiece.
ii. Clusters
This concept needs to be emphasized with the Airport.
e. Council policy requests
i. Vacant Building Ordinance
Cortez shared what she believed was Holly's ideas about vacant
buildings. White would like to see an inventory of all vacant
businesses.
3. Staff and Partner Announcements
White asked staff to research if hotel/motel funds can be used for Airport marketing.
Committee member Gutierrez asked about the City's partnership with the Sundome and
what it would take to appropriately promote the venue to Tri -Cities.
There was discussion about the restaurant at the Airport and its usability.
Gutierrez believes the Cinco de Mayo event should be added to the Strategic Plan.
Smith reminded everyone of the Enterprise Challenge that will be starting. The first year 20
participants participated and in 2017 there were 34. Opportunity Zones and tax incentive
guidelines will be out in November.
Mann reported that the Light Parade will be December 2 at 6:00 p.m. The tree has been
secured and will be decorated in time for the parade.
4. Future agenda items
The next meeting will be December 20 at 1:30 at the Yakima Airport. CWSF
representatives will be invited to the meeting so they can share their ideas of how to
increase events at the Sundome.
a. Agenda items:
i. Vacant building ordinance
ii. Review Economic Development Plan and Downtown Master Plan
iii. CWSF presentation
iv. Tour airport property
5. Audience Participation
Jason White, Chair
0
.
0
• Describe how downtown will become a vibrant destination.
To
a)
U
V)
a--+
tan
U
a -J
>
c co
o La°
•
Articulate a retail strategy for downtown.
Reflect input of diverse stakeholders.
STUDY AREA & STUDY INFLUENCE AREAS
U
z
0
U
a
N
4
Q
C
J
FUNDAMENTAL CONCEPT
MLK Jr Boulevard
Walnut Street
;aai}s 4;46!3
v
to v
U �
� N
d C
4n
;aaa;S y;x!S
}aaa;S sayae!sj
}00J}5 y;ino j
1aa45 P'!yl
}aaa;s puoaas
;aaJ}S }sa! j
;aa„S;uoaj
anuany;sJH
anuany puoaaS
anuany
anuany y;ino j
anuany y}ui j
anuany y;xis
anuany y;uanas
YAKIMA DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN
CITY CENTER CONCEPT
LULL
<
Chestnut Avenue
46.14$ fgt,q:dittil
;awn 44111°4,
1.ea.14s puols'.
issi.v..14 0, 1
OtZ 'r.1.7' 4
torero mit tow, ow so so Ink ma on SU *It NM IOW Alit as rot IN nu at
()aonneweid 61..quo!useid ile408) 3N9Z Alle1018d HOIH
7 t I
0 Public Market
0 'Chestnut Main Street'
ett
0
Ct.
0
rt1 Cr)
C
212 L."
0_
CO 4.,
c:5)
3
cu 0
co
>- Z
New Development
0)
0_
Z >
W <
< 4."
do
ooJ
40a.ns puopeS
4,904S 4,s,11.4
vuo)A
YAKIMA DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN I 13
0
u
0
M040444,44,..
::,*404,4040,,44444S1,41U
1
0
isow*unnommea4s,p-wwis
-o
0
0
4
,IMZUMM.YAMV4,1,1,,,,V.V4MTAM5S1,761 0,47110YMAA,VTAtTAMPAWA:,,,K.P.,,,R,,,M4.
••
4011U AVI FkU 03,0 5
IIu
YAKIMA DOWNTOWN MASTER ELAN
GAME -CHANGER & ESSENTIAL PROJECTS
4)
3w
3, 6
4004S LIWIN
14;
t
4
41.45!3
uce Street
a
laaJZS
eaij saLPPN
laa.gs 44 4nod
4"115
}aaJ45 puo3aS
laans IsA!A
°
anuenv Livqs
anuenv
'!anuanv puo3as
anuanVP414414
anuanv 44.inoJ
anuanv 411Pd
nun'' glx!S
anueAv 4wanas
Essential Projects
0
+4,
0
O
u
c
0
0
N
CO
0
05
(.7
0)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
(.4
c
0
00
0
0)
0
0
0)
a a)
4),)
0
C
CL
ir)
> cci
o .9
>'
o
• .>
O 0 o...
4-J
cf)
c
a-,
0
4-,
0
LL
11)
0
0
Public Market
Yakima Avenue
YAKIMA DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN
SCHEDULE
0
-0 0
J
O 0_
c
0
'n
(f)
• C
CD 03
a a)
0 o
0 03
c c
a) 3
o
-
—
co 3
0
o
E (1)
cts
c
E • b
a a)
>,
ce
c 0
00
44.
C
0 4,
14.4 C
U 0
EE
vu
c o
o p
Yakima Plaza
'Retail Main Street'
Public Market **
Yakima Avenue
u..) 0
co Lo
o..)
o
or- ED
a V,
co u
c
O�j
a
c
or) 7
0
c
0
— -0
c
u_
C -5
in
0 +.,0
u 0 .- ,
E E `an) .ci)
.L. =
LI
Cs ra
o ▪ N
a) as
+4. 0, ci-
s-
a) 0 a)
,4--
1.▪ . 00
4,
in
0
c E
o a_
O 0
7• 15
• >
c
eeeeeeeoe®
IMPLEMENTATION
;w�.�NIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII10�
ew ev u1 CO CO
Q 2 N eN N N N
0
it
E
V
E
0 0 0 0
ty ev ey
2010
C.
d n " m
n cr
U. ` A W ` fl LLJLi RI M qj
to
Q. Q. V1 0 0 > 0 0
4 4h via E t7 E
0cca0..= ou0
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiMV
w,�:.. µ.
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
What does the City want to accomplish by passing the ordinance?
Is the primary goal to increase revenue to the City?
To72
0)
• Mean
in
L
Co
To
.®
0
L
atiE
E
0
0
V)
L
73
13
CO
CO
L
L
o
2
Is it a goal to put properties into productive use?
Do we want to link CCP to this new ordinance?
Should the program be self-sufficient ($)?
' Lai Ili
0
w
0
W
U
z
w
Can we legally impose a monthly fee for buildings?
0 co
_C CU
C
O Q
N 0
U0
cv
72.O▪ o
04
0 °
4-v
oD
E ca
CO 0
CO
+.N
i Ca
CU
CO
•
CU N
(1349 -13
bira
ca �
CO
t
U cn
cn'
1-
56.
-
N i
a_, H
0'�
O=
C'S
• C
>
Can we do such for abandoned homes?
cri v 0 0
vs c 73 N >�
0 ca C
co 0
E . .0 > IA
a0 U N
'C a) i
0 ,v
+aQ
al ®
+J
a=, a0 c
� s co
fa
+,-:3 •Wc >
C0J o°
°— a
) U
C
O co "c$
Cly c U®
Cd1
+, O
M1. 4) QJ i
+0 C ® a)
IA 0 hn
0 °c ca
. 0 -0 T2 U tai
s... pin 0 O C
c -ow
v COC
" 8 O0 cv _
L. C1)
.03
(0 5 1=.0 i
®cn —'
C.N
. hA
E- °O 0
= i C
ca
-C O bA
. > .�
O
v
—CU a
..0 0 °") E 0 c V)
▪ 0 oto 0)
•vs >. '0 �0 C
0 (...) C
cn
+J 0 co ..-
- I-0 Q0
i ke
o
co a) 0
U
°) a o a
0_u0
CO
4 v
O djC
® 0 cr► V)
co 2 u w''5
ov
N O
Ll +,-CvcO
vs (") -O
0
co C 0 0
CO
L 1
a) 0 0
N
O o°C
CON
a)C (3) O
a U Chi
0.
O
0_
co
O
QJ
GJ
I
rt
v
0
C
ca co
QJ 0
co
L.)
CU co
✓ +'
L
O
C
CC, Q1
U-0
0
C C o
0
o
LITTCYA
uburn • r• in. n
a)
u
03
0
0)
u
co
0
4-1
Ql
Ql
W
•o ane Ordinanc-
Foreclosure Abandonment of Residential
o
I �
a)
a
a
0
a
e
1
Real Property—Nuisance Abatement
Residential properties in foreclosure
N 0 `
s L 10 v o
a W 0 -
i3 0 y o a
t
o c c L
`' 4
a. a c
N J3 '.N. ye
u C
a sNaLa+ .2 (.5
c a0Cv aa
..-aOL 0 u > >
N yda y u >
4-1 C ° a a 1w0.0?ccZ 130 0 0 •
0 4. utll
C
L N
A3 5 y ( c Q 4-,
• f0
7 .0 ^`/910.0N a 0a,+a
N 0 ..
'� C w 07 CO aa++
} o
Z Z N N M
A
C
ac+ A R 0
v ` C
9 C 0
a
✓ a 4.
a c °° °' a usi, 7 C 0.
a s m A f0 ` C -0 E u 6
o '9
7 '0 > y r .0,. _07
a C u m L
.Z a c
� c c u` E s > 1.° u o m
a a o 0
• VI 1A O
0.` 0.` Z Y i0/} iM!► ei N M
TO u
e • a N
• C = a 'o0
L a 9 0 7 a°+
O u C
aE • `o a E o a
c u N.0 190 c E
a ° OyC ur
aE 2
oc 0 T a v 0)A
C 7. :. g C C
o cm u CO 111
1.. 0. s yZ1a+ E ac N e v w
10 00 '1p N N
Jo al 4cc a o >.
cc ezz A N
E
E
u°
C
Y
01 E
04.)
C C
Ca+
e
e $
A a
H
eaE
a`
..oG
A
•
a)
5)
O
u
a
°
Commercial
Residential or Commercial
ordinance provisions
a
V
N C
a 01
7 a
a 0
0 m N c m
v N ( • o O` N • .a C_
a a i .: ° a 110 E v
0 a, a, + • Z" 3 0 7 0
T N m M C N 9 J M E_ r .,.
V
e C C C .0 •0) 3 a •C a a g
m 0 1O L E o E E E C
m �p A ,> .a, r r c` i u 'w
a a a N C C '7 ro 0 7 'a
:~ y_ °_ co V 0 O a V `.- • a `Q O
8ppb8 E2 E a W L W C.
O O W N 1!1 N .1
Z } in. in L} V! _I IV M ei
YI
}
8
C
N Y11
131 00
T iA
ri
N
m
rom .1t1Tt•77:HIM=
ffert irin
►.okane Ordinanc•
1
Abate nuisances once affidavit is received
m a
u a
2
a
0 a
o
Wu 0
a 0
m « a
.0 a=
CO c m
o f0 y
c E
c o
a N
(J N C
L C r E
r
aa
E a .
a a
O Y
ti w0 m
c
7 0 0 0 > w a u
CO
d C m O E.a N 0 « C
a' n a a a N L O a O u
C O Z' E W E :'
a, v o,o a«0 m d d c a a 0 ++ c
3 0
41 O d 2 !� C y L. Y p L a C O c t••' m
v Y = o a c m �a L." o o= .- y a E
•a CO > a aa•. V Y4- N .... aa+ '" i" p '� Q O
aa. .O CO x 7 0 c C c 0 7 2 m a. C
ma w ma a M to ii ti 4= 0.0.s a._
.4 N IYI
information
r all vacant commercial
.; ni wi a 11i id
c
cu
Z a c c 0 �. ° '" C a c
a ... O L ',7)a U N
a �rp
a a0 a Z7 L N L a a«.. co) a r 7
a g @! c a0 a mL. a a a c c
c n a .- 0 a a
.. o.ae �'p n'" 2.ccv_m y a +4a u
" T./ a. �p
E.' > f0 E a 00 00 2 yi N 'm Z", m w0
cae .2 a2 '2 f. 22 Ea o .3L. 0e
N M
N
1C
MEMORANDUM
TO: Economic Development Committee Chair and Members
FROM: Sara Watkins, Senior Assistant City Attorney
DATE: November 5, 2018
SUBJ: Vacant building ordinances
During the 2019 budget meetings, Council asked for further discussion on the details of a City
vacant building registry ordinance at the Economic Development Committee.
1. Policy Framework
Cities are addressing vacant and abandoned buildings in a number of ways, one of which is
through vacant building ordinances. It will be important for Council to provide input to staff of
the underlying policy direction to make sure it satisfies the Council's goals. Some policy
questions that will need to be resolved before determining what ordinance will address Council's
concerns are as follows:
a. What does the City want to accomplish by passing this ordinance?
b. Is the primary goal to increase revenue to the City?
c. Should the ordinance address commercial and/or residential properties?
d. Is it a goal to put properties into productive use?
e. Do we want to link CCP to this new ordinance?
f. Should the program be self-sufficient ($)?
2. Summary of Spokane's Ordinance
To get an idea of the practical workings of such an ordinance, I contacted the City of Spokane to
ask some questions about their ordinance. Spokane's vacant building registry ordinance only
covers residential properties that are currently in foreclosure. It requires that properties that are
in foreclosure (residential) register and pay a $350.00 yearly fee. The City contracts with a third
party vendor (Community Champions) to maintain the registry and database of contact
information. The City also contracts with a third party to monitor the properties on the registry
with monthly site visits, photographs and reports of conditions. This inspector can upload
information in an app directly to Community Champions and the City. If there are nuisance
conditions, a City code enforcement officer will go to the property to confirm the nuisance and
contact Community Champions, which then contacts the lender/mortgage company of the
property in foreclosure to abate the nuisance.
Nuisances are not always abated, so there are times where the property still must follow the
code compliance process or RCW 7.100 process to abate nuisances, which requires code
enforcement officer time.
1
I contacted Spokane to better understand its fee structure. Of the $350.00, $100.00 of the fee
goes directly to Community Champions to cover the costs of the registry and database work.
The site inspector charges approximately $10.00 per month per property to monitor the
properties and provide updated conditions. So approximately $120.00 of the fee goes to the
site inspector. That leaves $130.00 per property per year going to the City which helps cover
costs of code enforcement visits to properties the site inspector determines may violate local
ordinances. As stated above, code enforcement officers are required to confirm that properties
are in violation of local codes so there are costs to the City associated with these properties.
Spokane currently has approximately 450 homes on the registry.
The registry does not cover commercial buildings, or vacant buildings that are not at some point
in the foreclosure process. As such, not every abandoned or vacant building must register and
pay the fee.
The City has strategies to address blighted properties in addition to the registry, including the
use of a legal procedure called receivership to bring vacant and abandoned residential
properties back into productive use. I can provide additional information on this legal
proceeding if the Council desires.
3. Conclusion
Staff will proposed a vacant building ordinance once Council has provided a policy framework
for said ordinance.
2
TO
MEMORANDUM
Members of the Economic Development Committee
Chairman Jason White
Councilwoman Holly Cousens
Councilwoman Dulce Gutierrez
FROM: Sara Watkins, Senior Assistant City Attorney
Eric Crowell, Associate Planner
DATE: December 4, 2018
SUBJ: Amendments to YMC 15.29: Wireless Communications Facilities
Members of the Economic Development Committee:
The City was contacted by New Cingular Wireless and Mobilitie last year to
inquire about placing small cell wireless facilities within the City, specifically on
power poles and other utility poles owned by third parties (such as CenturyLink
or PPL). These companies also inquired as to what it would require to place
small cell facilities on City -owned utility poles at that time.
Small cell wireless facilities are used to enhance broadband coverage in areas to
enhance coverage. Attached is a page from the Small Cell Wireless Technology
pamphlet published by the National League of Cities. As you can see, small cell
infrastructure generally can attach to currently -existing utility poles and light
poles. These facilities can be used to increase broadband coverage and
network capacity, and improve service. Many cities have enacted regulations
regarding the use of utility poles for such facilities.
The federal government has also been very active in this area. The FCC
recently passed a Preemption Order which requires that cities process small cell
applications in an expedited manner, limit application fees, and limits aesthetic
requirements to those that are reasonable and published in advance. Some of
these limitations should be indicated in an amended ordinance adding small cell
facility regulations to the municipal code.
The Yakima Municipal Code does not specifically address small cell facilities, or
the use of utility poles in the right-of-way for small cell wireless facilities. Small
cell wireless facilities are not precluded by the code's current language, but the
code's language makes it difficult for small cell facilities to locate within rights-of-
way.
1
The municipal code "reserved," or acknowledged a need but did not create any
code language, the rules and regulations for placing wireless facilities on utility
poles. Due to the increased interest from wireless providers in small cell
technology, the upcoming 5G systems, and the federal government's
determination that cities should accommodate these facilities, the Planning
Department is requesting that the Economic Development Committee refer this
matter to the Planning Commission for research and public input. The Planning
Commission will then provide a recommendation as to appropriate language
changes to the municipal code to accommodate the use of utility poles for small
cell wireless facilities in the future.
Staff would also like to note that the license agreement for the use of the City's
rights-of-way between the City and New Cingular Wireless will be on the full City
Council's agenda in January. The agreement will provide permission to operate
within the City's rights-of-way (for a yearly fee). it also outlines some parameters
with regards to the use of the City's utility poles (all of which must be approved
by the Public Works Director). New Cingular will still need to apply for wireless
permits at each location when those locations are determined. Staff has been
told that the majority, if not all, of the locations currently being evaluated are third
party poles.
Action Item for today: Approve sending the Planning Commission a directive to
evaluate amendments to Chapter 15.29: Wireless Communications Facilities, to
evaluate rules and regulations regarding placement of small cell wireless
facilities on utility poles and within the City of Yakima. Further, the Planning
Commission should be directed to provide a recommendation to the full City
Council after their evaluation.
2