HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/17/1985 Adjourned Meeting 50 --- J.
MINUTES
YAKIMA CITY COUNCIL
BOARD OF YAKIMA COUNTY COMMISSIONERS •
April 17, 1985
City Council Members Present Council Members Absent
Mayor Clarence Barnett. Jack Sparling
Assistant Mayor Henry Beauchamp Lynn Carmichael
Jerry Foy
Lynn Buchanan •
Pat Berndt
. County Commissioners Present
Graham Tollefson, Chairman
:. ,
Jim Whiteside
Chuck Klarich
City and County Staff Present .
From the'City: City Manager Zais, City Attorney Andrews, Glenn Rice •
Director of Community and Economic Development, Associate Planner Judd
Black, Associate Planner Don Skone and, from the County: Assistant County
Planning Director Mark Hinthorne. .
The meeting was called to order by Mayor Clarence Barnett at 2:00 p.m.
in the Yakima City Council Chambers, Yakima City Hall. He explained that
the hearing is a continuation from January 28, February 6, February 20, and
March 18, 1985.
Mayor Barnett stated the purpose of this hearing,is to consider adoption of a
common zoning. ordinance for the Yakima Urban Area and an amendment to the .
Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan which would increase the density in the .
low density residential category from 5 to 6 units per net residential acre.
He,said this hearing is an opportunity for citizens to make comments regarding
the: (1) Zoning ordinance; (2) zoning map; (3) comprehensive plan amendment;
and (4) environmental impact statement that was prepared for the ordinance.
Mayor Barnett opened the public hearing and asked staff to read correspondence
into the record.
Mark Hinthorne said the following trap change requests in the unincorporated
urban area have been received by the county since the last public hearing:
Exhibit No. BOCC 28- George Krieger, S.E. corner of 3rd and Whatcom, proposed
. zoning Two - Family Residential (R2), requested zoning Multi - Family Residential
(R3); BOCC 29 - -Ray Martin, S.E. corner of Beech and 15th St., Two - Family
Residential (R2) to Multi - Family Residential (R3) - -BOCC 30-- Barbara Hallauer,
1209 Powerhouse Road, Suburban Residential (SR) to. Small Convenience Center -
(SCC); BOCC 31- -Janet Brown, who owns the parcel just.north of the Hallauer
property, Suburban Residential (SR) to Professional Office (B1); and BOCC 31 --
Bill Avery, S.E. corner of 18th Street and Sliger Road,•Two- Family Residential
(R2) to Stall Convenience Center (SCC). .
Don Skone read the following map change requests .within the city limits
• into the record: CC 83 - -Noel Canning Corporation, Glenwood Shopping Center
at 48th and Tieton, Local Business (B2) to Small Convenience Center (SCC),
the Coca -Cola Company at 6th and Walnut, and the Pepsi -Cola property on South
First Street, Central Business District Support (CBDS) to Light Industrial
(M1); and the Fenton Street area in S.E. Yakima, Single- Family Residential
(R1) to Multi- Family Residential (R3).; CC 84- -Larry Lenz, Tieton and 36th •
Avenue, Single- Family Residential (R1) to Small'Convenience Center (SCC);
CC 85 - -Jack Humphries, Tieton and 35th Avenue, Two - Family Residential (R2)
..to Local Business (B2).
•
5 0 -- x'
Don Skone then read a letter from Larry Marvin (Exhibit No. 46) expressing
concern about the nonconforming use provisions in the proposed ordinance. A
letter from Ormund Fluegge (Exhibit No. 47 B) supporting the proposed extension
of commercial zoning along West Nob Hill Blvd. and requesting that no change be
made in the existing B3 zoning of his property was also read into the record.
Mayor Barnett announced that the city and county will accept map change requests
until May 1, 1985. The council and commissioners established this deadline
so they can consider the remaining map changes during their May public hearing.
He said that it has been nearly a year since the first propsosed zoning map
was published in the paper and that it is now time to begin finalizing the map.
The mayor explained that the primary purpose of today's hearing was to consider:
(a) lot sizes and density in the residential districts, (b) extending commercial
zoning along West Nob Hill Blvd. and East Nob Hill Blvd., (c) expansion of the
industrial district south of Terrace Heights Drive and east of. Keys Road,
(d) map change requests for S.E. Yakima, and (e) proposed text amendments for
the nonconforming use chapter. He said that after these issu have be co
sidered there will'be the opportunity for any other general test imony on en the n -
proposed ordinance and map.
Judd Black presented the staff report, No. 3B (Exhibit No. 47 B) on lot sizes
and density in the residential districts. He said that during the March 18th
public hearing on the proposed Zoning Ordinance, the Yakima City Council and
Board of Yakima County Commissioners considered the following options regarding
residential density and minimum lot size:
1. Amend the Zoning Ordinance to allow 7 dwelling units per net residential
acre in the R -1 (Single Family Residential) District;
2. Reduce the minimum lot size for duplexes in the R -2 District from
8,000 to 7,000 square feet; and,
3. Retain the minimum lot sizes for all other residential uses.
At that hearing, the council and commissioners agreed to Items 2 and 3. However,
action still needs to be taken on Item 1.
Judd Black also explained that the proposed amendment to the Yakima Urban Area
Comprehensive Plan to increase the density in the Low Density Residential
category from 1 -5 dwelling units per net - residential acre to 1 -6 or 1 -7 du /nra
is yet to be resolved. The staff recommendation presented during the
March 12th Study Session (Report No. 3) was to amend the Plan to 1 -6 du /nra.
Mayor Barnett asked the audience if there was any public testimony regarding
density and lot sizes in the residential district.
,Pam Alymer -- Representing the Yakima Board of Realtors, spoke in favor of in-
creasing the density in the R1 District to 7 dwelling units per net residential
acre. Mrs. Alymer said that large lots are not a universal solution to the
nation's housing demands. Mrs. Alymer distributed copies of a pamphlet (Exhibit
No. 53) describing a high density residential subdivision (7 units per acre)
that was built in Lacey, Washington. Homes in this subdivision are selling
for $45,000 to $50,000. By comparison, new homes in Yakima cost between
$65,000 and $70,000. Mrs. Alymer said these homes are too expensive for many
Yakima residents. She explained that a family would need an annual income of
$21,000 to afford a $50,000 house. The same family would need to make nearly
$27,000 a year to buy a $60,000 house. She felt that increasing density would
hlep reduce housing costs since land value accounts for nearly 25% of the
cost of a new home. Mrs. Alymer also said that higher density reduces the
per -unit cost to provide water, sewer, streets and other public services.
-2-
50- 3
MOTION by Chuck Klarich to amend the proposed zoning ordinance by increasing
the maximum number of dwelling units permitted per net residential acre
(du /nra) in the Rl District from 6 to 7, and to amend the Yakima Urban Area
Comprehensive Plan by increasing the density in the low density residential
category from 1 -5 (du /nra) to 1 -7 du /nra. Commissioner Klarich said that
this change will help reduce housing costs by providing the flexibility to
develop higher density subdivisions.
Graham Tollefson and Henry Beauchamp arrived.
Commissioner Whiteside disagreed, saying that providing sewer service to as
much as the unincorporated urban area as possible was one of the primary
objectives of the County in participating in the urban area planning process.
Increasing the density of the R1 District will reduce the area that can be
served by public sewer.
Graham Tollefson seconded and voted in favor of Commissioner Klarich's motion.
He felt that increasing the density from 6 to 7 du /nra in the R1 zone would not
change the overall density in the district, but would provide the flexibility
■ to encourage the construction of a variety of housing types with a range of
prices. Motion Carried 2 -1.
The City Council then took action on the proposed plan and text amendment.
Motion by Councilman Foy, seconded by Councilwoman Berndt; to amend the proposed
zoning ordinance by increasing the maximum number of dwelling units permitted
per net residential acre (du /nra) in the R1 District from 6 to 7, and to
amend the Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan by increasing the density in
the low density residential category from 1 -5 du /nra to 1 -7 du /nra. Motion
carried 4 -1 with Lynn Buchanan voting no.
Don Skone presented the staff report, No. 4b (Exhibit No. 48) on proposed
zoning along West Nob Hill Blvd. Skone explained that during the first three
public hearings on the proposed Zoning Ordinance the City Council heard a
significant amount of public testimony and received 34 map change requests for further
commercial zoning along West Nob Hill Blvd. In response to this public
testimony, the Council is considering the option of recognizing West Nob
Hill Blvd. as a developing commercial arterial street and, providing additional
B -1, B -2 and SCC zoning along the street to accommodate its transition to
commercial use. The map attached to Exhibit No. 48 shows the extent of the
additional B -1, B -2 and SCC zoning being considered along West Nob Hill Blvd.
The Yakima City Council studied this map during a public study session on
March 12, 1985 and again during the March 18 public hearing. He explained the
Council delayed action on the proposed map changes until today in order to give
affected property owners more time to study the proposal. Don said that property
owners along West Nob Hill Blvd. who had submitted map change requests were
notified that the Council would be considering action on changing the zoning
along West Nob Hill during today's hearing. If adopted, this option would
have the following effect upon the map change requests shown on Exhibit 48
and listed below:
Exhibit No. Name Parcel # Request Option
CC -7 C.D. Brandt 181326 -24022 R -3 R -3
24023 R -3 R -3
24024 R -3 R -3
24025 R -3 R -3
CC -12 Jess Walker 181325 -42430 SCC B-2*
CC -13 Don Sublett 131326 -13070 B -2 B -2
Steve Gaub 13071 B -2 B -2
Paul Hammerstad 13072 B -2 B -2
CC -15 Kathlyn McGuire 191330 -32480 SCC R -1*
CC -22 Clara Voelker 181325 -13473 B -2 B -2
CC -23 Clara Voelker 181325 -42431 SCC B -2*
-3-
50 -4
Exhibit No. Name Parcel # Request Option
CC -24 Orville Voelker 181325 -13472 B -2 B -2
CC -30 William Dye 181325 -13430 SCC B- 2/R -2*
CC -32 Jay Akers 181326 -24442 B -2 B -2
CC -37 Morris Stotsenberg 181326 -24019 B -2 B -2
CC -38 Gerold Sessions 181325 -42493 SCC B -2*
CC -39 Marquerite Hackett 181325 -13431 B -2 /SCC SCC
• 42451 B -2 /SCC SCC
42452 B -2 /SCC SCC
42454 B -2 /SCC SCC
CC -40 Joe Krieger 181327 -13014 B -2 B -2 '
CC -42 United Builders 181326 -13035 B -2 B -2
13034 B -2 B -2
CC -46 Marvin Swainson 181327 - 24027 B -2 B -1*
CC -48 Herman Seipp 181326 -42020 B -1 R -1*
42021 B -1 R -1*
CC -59 Marilyn Patterson 181326 -24019 B -2 B -2
■, CC -61 Ormund Fluegge 181325 -41019 B -3 SCC
41494 B -3 SCC
41534 B -3 SCC
41537 B -3 SCC
CC -62 Marge Roark 181325 -31440 B -2. B -2
CC -63 Marquerite Hackett 181325 -13431 SCC /B -2 B- 2/R -2*
CC -77 Sig Carlson 181326 -32040 B -2 B- 2 /R -1*
He said that requests marked with an asterisk ( *) would not be satisfied by the
proposed map change.
Mayor Barnett asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to
on proposed map changes being considered by the Council.
Steve Gaub, 2103 West Nob Hill Blvd., spoke in favor of the proposed change.
He said that heavy traffic on Nob Hill Blvd. makes adjoining property unsuitable
for residential use. The proposed widening of Nob Hill will make this problem
even worse.
Fred Halverson, 415 North 3rd Street, representing Marguerite Hackett, supported
the proposed map change as it applies tohis client, with one exception. The
south half of the parcel at 711 West Nob Hill (131325 - 13431) is proposed for
B2, while the north half is zoned R2. Mrs. Hackett requested B2 zoning for the
entire parcel and feels it will be difficult to provide adequate access to the
portion of the lot zoned R2.
William Dye, 713 West Nob Hill, said he owns the property west of Mrs. Hackett
and agrees that access to the back 150' of his lot would be difficult. He also
requested that his entire parcel be zoned B2.
MOTION by Councilman Foy to approve map change request CC 63 (Hackett) and
CC 30 (Dye) so that both parcels are zoned entirely B2, not B2 and R2, as
recommended in the staff report. After discussion, the motion was withdrawn by
III Councilman Foy to allow further public testimony on the proposed Nob Hill
rezoning.
Mr. Halverson said that a third lot adjacent to the lot owned. by Mr. Dye is
already proposed to be zoned B2.
Herman Seipp, 5201 Richie Road, asked that his request for B1 (CC 48) be approved
as part of the West Nob Hill rezone. His property is between 22nd and 24th
Avenue and just south of some commercial uses along Nob Hill. The City Office
of Community and Economic Development and Regional Planning Commission recommended
that his property remain zoned R2. Mr. Seipp complained that the only interest
in his property has been for commercial use, nobody wants to but it for
residential development.
-4-
5 O-
There being no further public testimony, Mayor Barnett asked for a motion
regarding the proposed extension of commercial zoning along West Nob Hill.
MOTION by Councilman Foy, second by Councilman Beauchamp to adopt the map changes
along West Nob Hill Blvd. recommended in Exhibit 48 with the exception that
the individual map change requests of Marguerite Hackett (CC 63) and William
Dye (CC 30) be approved so that the entire parcel covered by each request is
zoned B2, Motion Carried 5 -0.
Mayor Barnett asked if the Council wished to take action on Mr. Seipp's request
to change the proposed zoning of his property from R -2 to Bl. Councilman
Beauchamp expressed concern about changing the entire parcel to B1. No action
._ was taken.
Mark Hinthorne presented staff report No. 5 (Exhibit No. 49) recommending that
additional commercial zoning be provided along East Nob Hill Blvd. between 1st
� Street and 1 -82. He said that most of the property along. East Nob Hill is
zoned and developed for commercial and industrial uses. The major exceptions
are between 6th Street and 10th Street and from 18th Street east of the freeway.
These blocks are primarily residential in character and are zoned R2. The
City Office of Community and Economic Development and Yakima County Planning
Department are recommending that the proposed Central Business District Support
(CBDS) bordering Nob Hill be expanded to include existing R2 areas along the
arterial (see Figure 2, Exhibit 49). CBDS is the recommended commercial
district because its purpose is to accommodate wholesale and retail activities
near the CBD and along major arterials leading to the CBD.
Councilman. Henry Beauchamp, saying that he owns property in the area being
discussed, removed himself from consideration of this proposal and left the
hearing room.
Chairman Tollefson asked for public testimony regarding the proposed map changes
along East Nob Hill Blvd. There being none, MOTION by Chuck Klarich, seconded
by Jim Whiteside to amend the proposed zoning map by extending the CBDS zoning
along East Nob Hill between 1st Street and the freeway as shown in Figure 2
on page 3 of Exhibit 49. Motion Carried 3 -0.
J.W. Henderson, 1907 E. Nob Hill Blvd., asked if two or more parcels could
be combined into one large commercial project. Graham explained that by
approving additional CBDS zoning along E. Nob Hill, the Commissioners have made
a policy decision that it is a commercial arterial and should be zoned to .
accommodate future commercial development.
MOTION by Councilman Foy, seconded by Councilman Buchanan to amend the proposed
zoning map by extending the CBDS along E. Nob Hill between 1st and the freeway
as shown in Figure 2 on page 3 of Exhibit 49 Motion Carried 4 -0.. Henry
Beauchamp was not present and abstained from the voting because of a possible
conflict of interest.
Hinthorne presented the staff report (Exhibit 50) on a request by Mr. Horral/
Burlington Northern Railroad (BOCC 25) to change the proposed zoning of approxi-
mately 190 acres south of Terrace Heights Drive and west of the Union Gap
Canal from Suburban Residential (SR) to Light Industrial (M1). He explained
: that the property is currently in pasture. The exsting land use to the west is
pasture and light industrial uses including Snokist, Frenzel Construction,
Brader Hauling and a junkyard. Further west, along Keys Road, are a number of
single family dwellings. To the north, across Terrace Heights Drive, is Terrace
Heights Memorial Park. To the east are a series of single family dwellings on a
plateau overlooking the site. The area to the south is primarily undeveloped.
Hinthorne said that the Yakima County Planning Department is recouuuending
approval of the proposed map change because:
-5-
50 -6
1. • The area east of Keys Road has been transitioning to Light Industrial
over the last few years,
2. The site is served by a designated truck route and has easy access
to: I -82,
3. The property is served the railroad; and .
4. A change to light industrial would be consistent with the development
and compatibility criteria adopted in the Urban Area Plan.
Chairman Tollefson - asked.'if anyonein the audience would like to testify .
- on..the proposed map•change from SR to Mi.'
. Kara Kondo, 3601 Hillcroft Way, opposed the proposed map change because of
the•potential impact•of future light industrial development on the single
family dwellings to the east and because community water and sewer are not
{ available in the area.
,Gene Luisi, P.O.. Box H, Milton - Freewater, Oregon, said.that he has talked with
many people on the west of Keys Road who would'like to be zoned Light
Industrial. He said he will be presenting a petition signed. by many west .
side property. owners requesting that the proposed zoning for the property .
on the west side of Keys be changed from Suburban Residential (SR) to Light
. Industrial (M1).
Chairman Tollefson asked if there was anyone else who wished to speak on this
•proposed map change. There being no one, he went on to add that he agreed with
the points raised by Mrs. Kondo. The property may be well suited for future
industrial development, but in the absence of a public inquiry into potential
water and drainage problems, it would be premature to change the zoning to '
• light industrial at this'time. Commissioner Whiteside agreed.
Joe Horral. - Representing Burlington Northern, spoke in favor of the change.
He said Burlington Northern has used that site to try to attract new industry
to the area. One reason they have not been successful to date is that the
property is not properly zoned for industrial development.
• Tollefson said that this change would be a logical extension of the light
industrial district and that he is not opposed to light industrial development .
of the property. However, without a specific proposal, it is difficult to
evaluate the potential impacts of future light industrial development on water,
sewer, drainage, and neighboring land uses. Commissioners Klarich and Whiteside
agreed.
MOTION by Commissioner Whiteside, seconded by Commissioner Klarich, that map
change .request BOCC 25 be denied.' Motion Carried 3 -0.
Mayor Barnett relinquished the chair to Vice Mayor Beauchamp so he could take '
an active role in the consideration of zoning for S.E. Yakima.
Don Skone presented the staff report No. 7 on the proposed R1 zoning for S.E.
Yakima (Exhibit No. 51). Skone explained that the proposed R1 zoning was
recommended by the Regional Planning Commission to provide a clear opportunity
for the residents of the neighborhood to express their desire to, and support
of, a more restrictive residential zoning classification.
He said the proposed zoning for the southeast neighborhood reflects existing
land use and density and willmaintain the existing character of the neighborhood
rather than encourage increased density. The City Office of'Community and
Economic Development concurs with the proposed R1 zoning recommended by the
Regional Planning Commission because:
•
-6-
- - A similar zoning proposal for R -1 was initiated by the S.E. neighborhood
in 1979. (This proposal failed in Superior Court due to a procedural
error);
- - Area residents, through the S.E. Neighborhood Association, supported the
proposed R -1 zoning during public hearings by the Regional Planning
Commission;
j
- - The residents would like to maintain the character of the neighborhood
and create an opportunity for neighborhood input on future development
proposals.
-- The City of Yakima has invested approximately $5 million of CDBG funds
in the neighborhood for housing rehabilitation, street and utility
I improvements, recreational facilities and S.E. Community Center.
Skone added that three map change requests have been received within the proposed
rezone area:
1) Exhibit No. Name Parcel No. Request Proposed
CC -76 Robert Miller 191319 -13470 R -3 R -2
13471 R -3 R -2
13472
CC -79 Everett Olson 191319 -13587 R -3 R -2
13588 R -3 R - 2
13589 R -3 R -2
CC -83 Noel Corp. 191319 -14019 R -3 R -1
In light of the general consistency of the proposed R -1 zoning with existing
land use and density and the neighborhood support, the staff recommends that
the proposed zoning of the neighborhood not change and that the map change
requests, CC -76, 79 & 83 not be granted.
Motion by Councilman Foy, seconded by Mayor Barnett, that CC 83 be approved and
the proposed zoning for the area covered by the request be changed from R1 to
R3. Mr. Foy recommended this change because the property is boarded by R3
zoning on the east and south..
Someone from the audience said that the location of CC 83, as mapped in
Exhibit 51, was in error. Councilman Foy withdrew his motion.
Barbara Edwards, 1210 W. Washington, owns the Walnut East Apartments. She
was concerned because the proposed zoning map showed her property as R1, yet
the Regional Planning Commission had recommended that her land remain zoned
R -3. Don explained that the proposed zoning map is in error in this case and
that her property would be zoned R -3 on the final zoning map.
She also said that the Noel property is immediately west of the area marked
CC 83 on the map in Exhibit
III Margaret Grow, 103 South 6th Street, opposed a 12 unit apartment complex
being proposed in S.E. Yakima. Councilman Foy explained that the purpose of
the hearing was to consider the proposed urban area zoning ordinance and not
evaluate any special project.
Vice Mayor Beauchamp asked if anyone else wished to speak regarding map change
requests CC 76, CC 79 and CC 83 or the proposed R1 zoning for S.E. Yakima.
MOTION by Councilman Foy, seconded by Mayor Barnett that the Council adopt
the zoning for S.E. Yakima proposed in Staff Report No. 7 (Exhibit 51), except
for CC 83 which is referred back to staff for futher review because there is a
question about the location of the property being considered. (Map change requests
CC 76 and CC 79 are denied). Motion Carried 5 -0.
-7-
5O -8
Mayor Barnett asked the Council to consider changing the proposed zoning of 1 1/2
blocks in S.E. Yakima from R3 to R1. The area requested for change has the
following boundaries: North -- Chestnut Street, south -- Walnut Street, east - -.
Eighth Street, west - -the alley between 6th Street and 7th Street. Mayor
Barnett said the existing land use of the area is single- family except for one
duplex and two multi- family dwellings. MOTION by Mayor Barnett, seconded by
Councilman Foy, to change the proposed zoning of the area from R3 to Rl.
Acting Chairman Beauchamp asked if there was any public testimony concerning
the map change proposed in this motion. There being none, he called for the
vote and the Motion Carried 5 -0.
Councilman Beauchamp returned the gavel to Mayor Barnett.
Chairman Tollefson asked for the Staff Report No. 6 on proposed text changes
to the nonconforming use section (Exhibit No. 52).
Hinthorne said that at the March 18th public hearing, the Board of County
Commissioners and Yakima City Council agreed that Chapter 18-- Nonconforming Uses
should be amended to reflect the following policies:
That any nonconforming use and structure damaged less than 75% of
its adjusted assessed valuation could be rebuilt as it was before.
That nonconforming uses and structures demaged or destroyed beyond 75%
of adjusted assessed valuation would be evaluated on a case -by -case
basis during a public hearing by the hearings examiner. A nonconforming
use that was compatible with its neighbors would be allowed to rebuild
while a nonconforming use that was not compatible could not. The hearings
examiner's decision would be supported by findings of fact.
That any existing use, including an existing Class (2) or (3) use,
that is damaged or destroyed may be replaced as it was immediately prior
to the damage after review by the building official.
- That when a nonconforming structure used by an existing use is damaged
beyond 75% of its assessed valuation that any restoration shall occur in
accordance with the development standards of the iistrict. .
He explained that the text changes in Exhibit 52 were prepared by the Yakima
County Planning Department and the City Office of Community and Economic
Development to implement these policies. The Planning Departments are also
recommending that Chapter 18, Nonconforming Uses and Existing Uses and Development
be divided into two chapters. Chapter 18 is titled (and would address)
Existing Uses and Development. Chapter 19 would deal exclusively with nonconforming
uses and structures. Hinthorne said that this should help eliminate some of
the confusion between existing uses (like a duplex in the R1 zone) and.noncon-
forming uses.
Chairman Tollefson asked if there was any public testimony on the proposed
text changes to the nonconforming use chapter. After brief discussion MOTION
by Commissioner Whiteside, seconded by Commissioner Klarich that the County
Commissioners adopt the text changes to the nonconforming use chapter recommended
in Staff Report No. 6 (Exhibit No. 52). Motion Carried 3 -0. MOTION by
Buchanan, seconded by Berndt, that the City Council adopt the text changes
to the nonconforming use chapter recommended in Staff Report No. 6 (Exhibit
52). Motion Carried 5 -0.
Chairman Tollefson asked if there was anyone present who wished to offer
testimony or comment on any other matter relating to the text or map of the
proposed zoning ordinance.
-8-
•
®
. �'9
•
•
Marvin Bales, Route 1, Wapato, owns two.lots south of Nob Hill and west of 1st
Street. The existing zoning is R2, the proposed zoning is R1. He asked
the Council if any action had been taken to 'change the proposed zoning for
this area to R2. Don Skone explained that there will be a staff report on
the proposed zoning for this area at the next public hearing on May 13.
The Council will probably take action on the proposed zoning for this area at
that time.
•
Stan Shelton, P.O. Box 73, Yakima, asked the status of map change request
BOCC 22. Hinthorne explained that the county commissioners will consider that
map change request, along with a number of others, during their next public
hearing on May 13th. Mr. Shelton said that existing light industrial zoning .
suits his needs just fine. (In the existing county zoning ordinance commercial
uses are permitted in the light industrial district). However, he submitted a
map change request for large convenience center (LCC) because under the
proposed zoning ordinance most commercial uses.are no longer allowed in the
industrial districts.
Helen White, 914 Pitcher Street, asked what the status was of her map change
request for CBDS zoning. Don explained that the Council will consider her map
at the next public hearing on May 13th.
Commissioner Klarich said he would like to review the penalty provisions
proposed in the ordinance (Section 23.070 and 24.020) at the next study session.
He asked the staff to prepare a report on these two sections only, not all
of Chapters 22 and 23, for review during their next study session, and con -
sideration at the next public hearing. Mayor Barnett agreed with this request.
MOTION by Buchanan, seconded by Berndt, that the City Council continue the
public hearing to Monday, May 13, 1985, at 3:30 p.m. in Room 232 of the Yakima
County Courthouse. Motion Carried 5 -0. MOTION by Commissioner Klarich,
seconded by Commissioner Whiteside that the Board of County Commissioners
continue the public hearing to Monday, May 13, 1985, at 3:00 p.m. in Room
232 of the Yakima County Courthouse. Motion Carried 3 -0. There being no
further business, meeting adjourned at 4:20.
READ AND CERTIFIED ACCURATE BY C_? 0- Date - -ll — �
ouncil Member
Date . ( [ ..-..._Y.5
✓ Council Member
Attest:
•
- 11011P %r
City Clerk - Mayor
•
•
k
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
-9-
I