HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/18/1985 Adjourned Meeting •
•
MARCH 18, 1985
•
ADJOURNED MEETING •
URBAN AREA PLAN AND ZONING ORDINANCE .
The City Council and County Commissioners met in session on this date at
7:30 p.m. in the Yakima Center for the purpose of holding a public hearing
on the Yakima Urban Area Zoning Ordinance and proposed amendment to the
Urban Area Plan. County Conmissioners•present were Chuck Klarich, Graham
Tollefson and Jim Whiteside. County staff members present were Director of
Planning, Dick Anderwald, and Assistant Director, Mark Hinthorne. City
Council members present were Mayor Clarence Barnett, Henry Beauchamp, Pat
Berndt, Lynn Buchanan, Lynn Carmichael, Jerry Foy and Jack Sparling. City
Manager Zais, Assistant.City Manager Stouder, City Attorney Andrews, Glenn
Rice, Director of Community and Economic Development, Associate Planners
Judd Black and Don Skone, and City Clerk Roberts were also present.
Mark Hinthorne read into the record the following map change requests which
have been received by the County Planning Department since the last hearing:
1) Evelyne Searl, two parcels along the Moxee Canal near Butterfield Rd.,
from M-1 to R -1, (BOCC 23) ; 2) Marvin Mayhak, two parcels on West Washington •
.Avenue, just west of Cornell, from R -2 to M-1 (BOCC 24): 3) Joseph Horrall,
Burlington Northern Railroad, 160 acres south of the cemetery in Terrace
Heights,' from SR to M -1 (BOCC 25); 4) Verna Beggs, entire Fairview /Sumac
area, from R -2 to CBD support, map change request supported by the following
property owners: Charles Hurst, Betty Stanford, Willy Owens, Virgil Wahl,
• Paul Jallof, Peter Thomas, Robert Riedt, Lois Canham, Cecil Dye, Juanita
Stitt, Lloyd Hallsmar, Robert Jones, Mary Stanford, and Gary Ballen (BOCC
26): and'D. D. Kuehl, 1207 So. 33rd Avenue, from R -1 to R -3.
Judd Black read the following map change requests received by the City
Planning Division since the last hearing: 1) James Humbard, P. 0. Box 9696,
Yakima, from R -2 to B -3 (CC 74); Michelsen Packaging Company, 202 No. 2nd
Avenue, CBD to M-1 (CC75); Robert Milner, 211 So. 6th Street, R -2 to R -3 (CC
76); .Sig Carlson, 3104 W. Nob Hill Blvd., from R -2 to B -2 (CC 77): Jim
Nelson, 15036 Aurora N., Seattle, from R -1 . to B -1 for property at 12th
Avenue & Chestnut (CC 78).; Everett D.. Olson, 210 So. 6th Street, from R -2 to
remain R -3 (CC 79): and Fred Marshall, 1605 So. 14th Avenue, from R -2 to R -3
for property at 18th Avenue & Willow (CC 80). Don Skone read into the record
a letter received from Herman Seipp, regarding 5.8 acres off Nob Hill
Boulevard and 24th Avenue, requesting B-1, B -2, or Small Convenience Center
zoning (Exhibit No. 41). Mayor Barnett stated he received a memo from Larry
Mathews, 805 So. 17th Avenue, (Exhibit No. 42), which was distributed prior
to this hearing, regarding public notification of hearings on the Yakima
Urban Area Zoning Ordinance and map change requests.
Mayor Barnett stated the purpose of this hearing is to consider adoption of
a common Zoning Ordinance for the Yakima Urban Area and'a proposed amendment
to the Yakima Urban Area Plan, which would increase the density in the Low
Density Residential Category from 5 to 6 units per net residential acre.
Mark Hinthorne reviewed the staff report using flip charts to explain a
proposed option on the section in the proposed Urban Areq.Zoning Ordinance
regarding replacement of a damaged or destroyed nonconforming use or
structure. He stated the difference between the current proposal and the
proposed option is that nonconforming uses destroyed beyond a certain,
benchmark (to be determined by the City Council and County Commissioners)
would not automatically be eliminated. The option . would allow for a public .
hearing so each situation could be evaluated on a case -by -case basis. He
stated that staff is recommending that 75% of the assessed valuation be the
threshold, for two reasons; it is a matter of public record and the source
of the valuation is clear. He stated staff is also recommending that the 757.
of assessed valuation be adjusted according to the Marshall and Swift
Valuation Manual.• In response to another issue in which concern was expressed .
by the public, Mr. Hinthorne stated .an option has been prepared for
replacement of damaged or destroyed nonconforming structure housing on
existing permitted use. Under this option; a benchmark figure would be
established (7570 assessed valuation is recommended by staff) and those
. structures destroyed or damaged beyond that benchmark would have to be
rebuilt in conformance with the development standards of the ordinance. •
However, any structure damaged less than that certain benchmark would be
permitted to be rebuilt in the same form that existed prior to destruction..
Following the staff report, Mayor Barnett opened. the discussion for public
•
a
•
•
testimony.
•
• Homer Splawn, 201 Observation Drive, spoke in favor of the two proposed
options regarding replacement of damaged or destroyed nonconforming
structures. There being no other citizen present wishing to speak to this
issue, and the proper policy adoption procedure having been discussed, it
was the general consensus of the City. Council and the County Commissioners
to direct staff to prepare the appropriate language changes to incorporate
the proposed option regarding replacement of, damaged or destroyed
nonconforming uses or structures, into the proposed Urban .Area Zoning
Ordinance. Council member Sparling expressed his concern that the scope of
this project•may be too large and that this ordinance is being forced upon
the public without their wanting it.
Judd, Black reviewed the proposed option on-,.the residential density and
minimum lot size, written in'response to concerns expressed by the public.
The proposed option would permit a density of 7 dwelling units per net
residential acre in the R -1 District, rather than 6 dwelling units per net
residential acre, as written in the proposed ordinance. The second part of
this proposed option would be to.reduce' the minimum lot size to 7,000 square
feet for duplexes in the R -2 zone,.' however, the minimum lot sizes for all
other residential uses would be retained as proposed in the ordinance. The
minimum lot size for duplexes in the. R -2- zone, as written in the proposed
ordinance is 8,000 square feet. Council member Carmichael expressed concern
that by reducing the minimum lot size, the environmental quality of life and
the open space for detached living may be impacted. She questioned if the
open space requirements would also be reduced. Mr. Black assured her that
• part of this poposal is to keep the minimum lot size for single family as •
proposed in the proposed zoning ordinance. He further stated that it is not
proposed to decrease the open space requirements for each lot. Mayor Barnett
• asked what kind of impact this proposed option would have on the sewer and
other utilities. Mr. Skone `responded - that:it was staff's belief that the
growth would occur anyway; the only difference would be where the growth may
occur. Mayor Barnett opened the discussion for public testimony.
Larry Mathews, 805 So. 17th Avenue;`' stated the rationale that was used
originally in creating the down zoning 'of R -2 to R -1 in the southeast area
was that it was based on the density being the same as R -1, which was five
units per dwelling acre. He stated that by increasing the density, it would
appear that virtually all of. the R -2 zoning could become R -1. If you follow
this through, then everything north -of Nob Hill Boulevard should be changed
from R -2 to R -1 zoning. If density is a major factor of whether it is R -1
zone or R -2, then you confuse the rationale for those original down zones.
•
Commissioner Whiteside expressed his•'concern that there isn't sufficient •
sewer capacity now to serve the entire. urban area as future development is
envisioned, and increasing the density would make that situation worse. He
stated that perhaps we should limit residential density to 6 dwelling units
per residential acre, so we can provide more urban area property owners with �.
sewer service. He asked that the issue of increasing the density and the
minimum lot•size be considered separately. Commissioner Klarich spoke in
support•of both options A and ,B (densit} and lot size), stating that only
607 of the urban area can be served now on a first come, first serve basis.
• Council member'Carmichael concurred with the.Mayor and Commissioner Whiteside
on this issue. Council member Foy commented that a contributing factor of
insufficient sewer capacity is the,-,condition of the sewer lines, allowing
infiltration of water into the line. Mayor Barnett inquired if there was a
consensus to accept Option - B of the staff report and the response from
Commissioners and Council members was.in the affirmative.
•
Pam Alymer, Preferred Realtors, spoke'in favor of the reduced lot size for
duplexes in an R -2 zone and for the increased density in the R -1 zone.
Council member Carmichael requested that Ms. Alymer present documentation
that people are now wanting smaller lots. Ms. Alymer commented that
approximately 85% of the market. is for housing under $85,000 (percentage of
Yakima residential market sales: under. $25,000 - 9.27; $25,000 - $40,000 - 25 %;
$40,000- $55,000 - 24 7 ; $55,000- $70,000 - 18.9%; $70,000 - $85,000 - 11.6 %;
$85,000- $100,000 - 5 7; $100,000- $125 ;000 - 3.5 %, $125,000- $150,000 - 1.5% and
above $150,000 - 1.3 %) and stated she would be happy to provide the necessary
documentation.
Joe Krieger, Krieger & Associates, commented that not all developments will
be built at the 7 dwellings per net residential density, however, he
believes the developer should havethat option since the demand is towards
8- 3
•
smaller lots. Y. 7
•
Don Skone reviewed the proposed option on Nob Hill Boulevard, which was _
prepared in response to the significant amount of public testimony and the
number of map change requests received. He stated that with this option, 24
of the 34 requests are being viewed favorably and' of the ten remaining
requests, five -would be partially satisfied. Mayor Barnett commented that
the letter sent to some of the people along Nob Hill Boulevard did not go
out until March 13 .& 14 and copies of the zone changes were not to be
available until today and wondered if everyone has had an opportunity to
study this option. Mr. Skone reported that three' telephone calls were
received today and three citizens came to the office to view. the map.
Following a suggestion made by Council member Foy, it was the general
consensus of the Council to defer a decision on this to the next meeting and
direct staff to notify these same people that this issue will be discussed
at that meeting. Mayor Barnett opened the«-discussion for general public
testimony.
Jay Akers, 1019 So. 26th Avenue, spoke in support of the Nob Hill Boulevard
option. He stated he is aware of several people located east of him that
would agree with this option also.
Bernie Anson, 102 Sky Vista Place, requested the hearing procedure be
changed to allow for additional public testimony following discussion of an
issue by the legislative bodies so the public may ask questions which might
arise from listening to. the Council's and Commissi.oner'.s comments. Mayor
Barnett assured him that the public is free to discuss any matter with the
Council and Commissioners.
Larry Mathews spoke briefly to..,the issue of the lot coverage requirements,
giving the calculations of six and dwellings per net residential acre,
based upon a 60' lot, indicating that at seven dwellings per net residential
acre in an R -1 zone and in an R -2 at the 7,000 sq.,ft. allowable, the lots
are just large enough to meet the lot coverage requirements. He briefly
highlighted a few points from his memo which he sutxnitted.tonight prior to
his testimony, regarding public notification. of hearings on the zoning
ordinance and map change requests. He stated that adjudicatory hearings have
been held, rather than legislative, and recommended the City and County go
back to the org.inal• intent of the urban ordinance, which was to reduce
problems of outside utility hookups by merging'City /County regulations, and
that the zoning ordinance be adopted in stages, starting with the problem
areas.
. Ines Rice, 4409 Arlington, stated she has not received an answer to her
.question about the constitutionality of this process. She further commented
that small lots are not always appreciated by the neighbors when children
play on the neighbor's lawns and the on- street parking is congested. She
questioned who this ordinance would benefit and stated she does not want to
pay for another sewer reconstruction which benefits County residents. She
commented if another sewer plant is needed, the County should build it.
Commissioner Klarich informed Mrs. Rice that he has some information at his
office regarding the constitutionality is however, he was unable to make
contact with her earlier.
Bill Hamilton, 615 So. 32nd Avenue; questioned what the zoning is of the
City's property on Nob Hill Boulevard. Don Skone stated that property is
presently zoned B-1 and is proposed to remain B -1.
Bob Seward, 205 No. 4th Avenue, commented that it sounds like the Council •
and Commissioners are limiting the growth of Yakima to the amount of sewage
that can be treated, which is not really intended. He stated the developers
should be given the flexibility of 7 dwellings per net residential acre,
which also gives people choices about where and how they wish to live. He
stated the Comprehensive Plan calls for us to conserve our, land in the
future and this 7 units per acre will allow us to do that.
Gordon Wonder, 718 No. 56th Avenue, expressed his concern about the broad
authority given to the Hearings Examiner, as indicated in Chapters 9, 10 &
• 14, to authorize adjustments in basic design standards in a Class (2) review.
Geraldine Mattson, 2506 W. •Mead, questioned what she can do with her five
acres which is proposed to be zoned residential /agriculture. She stated she
had thought to build.a studio with a guest room above it, and in the future
sell the front acreage for development purposes, but now, it seems that
•
•
•
•
•
• neither of these possibilities will be allowed in this zone. (Council member
Berndt temporarily absent at 8:55 p.m.).
There being no other'citizen present wishing to come forward with testimony,
discussion followed regarding a date to continue this hearing. It was MOVED
by Buchanan, seconded by Foy, to continue this hearing to 2:00 p.m. on
Wednesday, April 17, 1985 in the Yakima City Hall Council Chambers...
Unanimously carried by voice vote. Berndt absent. It was MOVED by Klarich,
seconded by Whiteside, to adjourn at the hour of 9:00 p.m. and to continue
the hearing to 2:00 p.m., April 17, 1985, in the Yakima City Hall Council
Chambers. Unanimously carried by oice vot-.
O
READ AND CERTIFIED ACCURATE B
Y146A-) i DATE 4
COUNCIL MEMBER
•
// .440f DATE , gS(
• ' CIL MEMBER
ATTEST:
(//1;&e.,,,,„-e -
CITY CLERK MAYOR
•
•
•
•
•
•
•